Olympiodorus of Thebes

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Olympiodorus of Thebes was an Eastern Roman historian of the 5th century. Although only fragments of his historical work have survived , he is counted among the most important late antique historians in research .

Life

All information about Olympiodorus is based on the fragments of his history. His birth or death year is unknown, but he may have been born between 365 and 380; he cannot have died before 425, as this was the end of his history and the work was probably written a few years later (see below). Olympiodoros came from the Egyptian city ​​of Thebes . In this region the lingua franca was Coptic, but Olympiodoros apparently enjoyed a good education; he must have been educated, as evidenced by various allusions in the fragments. He was apparently interested in Neoplatonic philosophy , was acquainted with the philosophers Hierocles of Alexandria and Leontios of Athens and was familiar with Greek literature. Olympiodoros also mastered the Latin language. This was the basic requirement for an activity in the civil service until the 6th century, and this is also shown by the Latin terms (in Greek transliteration) in his history.

Olympiodorus described himself as a poet according to the excerpt from Photios , but, apart from a single verse, none of his poems have survived. He thus belonged initially to the context of that group of relatively numerous Egyptian poets who appeared in late antiquity and who Alan Cameron called " wandering poets ". However, Olympiodoros entered the service of Emperor Theodosius II as a diplomat , to whom he later also dedicated his main work, his histories .

In the diplomatic service of the empire he made numerous trips, which gave him a good knowledge of foreign countries. It is not clear whether he also acted on behalf of the Western Roman or only the Eastern Roman emperor, but everything speaks for the latter assumption. So he will have stayed in Constantinople for some time . In the year 412 he traveled to the Huns in the Danube region, a relevant fragment from his historical work reads (in the summary of Photios):

“He (Olympiodoros) reports about Donatus and about the Huns [...] and about how the historian himself was sent on a mission to them and Donatus. In tragic form he reports about his journey across the sea and about the dangers and how Donatus, deceived by an oath, was illegally murdered; and how Charaton , the first of the kings (the Huns), enraged by murder, was appeased by gifts from the emperor. "

He later stayed in Athens and Egypt, where he negotiated with Blemmyans . There are also many indications that he also traveled to the west of the empire, at least Italy. On his diplomatic travels he took a parrot with him, whose feats such as “imitating people, dancing, singing, cursing and much more” attracted a great deal of attention.

plant

Sometime after 425 (presumably around 440) Olympiodoros wrote a historical work in ancient Greek with the (presumably) title Historical Books ( Greek  Ἱστόρικοι λόγοι , Histórikoi Lógoi ). It covered the period from AD 407 to AD 425 and was divided into 22 books. Only a few fragments of the work have survived, especially a summary in the library of the Middle Byzantine scholar Photios , but even these few extracts contain valuable material. It is not entirely clear why Olympiodorus chose this period for his portrayal. Eunapios of Sardis , who followed the Chronicle of Dexippus , which lasted until 270 AD , had finished his historical work at the beginning of the 5th century, which lasted until 404; Olympiodoros possibly followed it indirectly, especially since he probably went back to the year 405 as an introduction. But it is also conceivable that the Rhine crossing in 406 and the dramatic consequences associated with it made a strong impression on Olympiodoros. The end of the work is the appointment of Emperor Valentinian III. in the western empire. It is believed that Olympiodorus wanted to describe the crisis and resurgence of the Roman West.

The history work was evidently structured in an annalistic manner and dealt with a relatively short period of time that the author himself had witnessed in great detail. Several researchers have suggested that Olympiodorus may have been influenced by the great Latin historical work of Ammianus Marcellinus . Ammianus and Olympiodoros came from similar social backgrounds and from the east of the empire, but above all the work of Ammianus and that of Olympiodoros included numerous excursions; both seem to have had similar religious ideas and, like Olympiodorus, Ammianus treated contemporary history (at least mainly, namely in the surviving books 14 to 31 of his work). Since Ammianus' work was quite popular during his lifetime, it cannot be ruled out that Olympiodoros, who himself was fluent in Latin as well as Greek, read the work and was thereby encouraged to write his own historical work. This should obviously deal with contemporary history in a clear, detailed and objective manner. Olympiodoros - and, due to a completely different representation, less Eunapios - is at the beginning of several important Greek profane historians in the 5th century, above all Priskos and Malchos , whose tradition was continued in the 6th and early 7th centuries (see Prokopios of Caesarea , Agathias and Menander Protector ).

As far as one can see from the preserved fragments, the focus in the portrayal of Olympiodoros was clearly the west of the empire (although he also reported some events in the east), about which he was very likely well informed from his own experience (see above ). Perhaps his aim was to make the eastern public aware of the importance of defending the western empire. In this respect, the end of the work also seems appropriate, especially since Valentinian III. came to the throne through Eastern support. Although the circumstances of the time were threatening to the Empire, Olympiodoros does not seem to have doubted the importance or the future of the Empire. Despite the incursions of the Teutons and Huns into the empire (see Migration of Nations ), which he described in detail and on the basis of reliable information, the empire was able to hold its own.

Olympiodoros also described the internal circumstances in detail, including the usurpation of Marcus , Gratianus and Constantinus in Britain (406/7, with Olympiodoros apparently serving as the main source of the later Greek historians with regard to this and other events in the West) Jovinus in Gaul in 411 and the rise and fall of John , with which the work also ended. With the appointment of Valentinian III. With the help of Eastern Roman troops, Olympiodoros probably linked the hope of stable conditions. In addition, he also reported on the difficulties of the water supply in Rome after the conquest by the Goths in 410, on the costs of organizing games by aristocratic officials or on the large blocks of houses in Rome ( insulae ). Although Olympiodorus was a pagan, he did not express himself disparagingly about Christianity, unlike, for example, his contemporary Eunapios. His work was dedicated to the Eastern Roman emperor Theodosius II , who appointed Valentinian III. made possible in the west in the first place. Olympiodorus, like several other ancient historians (including Ammianus), seems to have attached some importance to fate (the tyche ).

Due to the ruinous condition of his work, it is hardly possible to draw clear conclusions about the style of Olympiodorus, even though this was criticized by Photios, although (or precisely because) the text seems to have been written in easily understandable language. Olympiodoros avoided the artificial style that Eunapios and other late antique historians preferred. After the summary of the Photios Olympiodoros did not want to write a historical work in the actual sense anyway, but rather a kind of collection of material for a historical work. Nevertheless, it would certainly be wrong to assume that the work of Olympiodorus was only a kind of loose collection of facts; it is also quite possible that Olympiodorus, like several other historians, only wanted to flirt with such a modest statement. In any case, it is clear from the fragments and the reports of later historians who used the work that it offered a closed, fact-rich and probably quite fluid presentation. Speeches and other characteristics of classicist histories were probably not missing either, and there were also numerous digressions in which the author not least let his own experiences flow.

Olympiodorus, who had among other things an interest in geography, apparently oriented himself on the classical models of ancient historiography, Herodotus and Thucydides ; with Herodotus Olympiodorus also connected the knowledge of foreign countries - as long as this is not questioned with Herodotus, as sometimes happened in research. Unlike most other ancient historians, and this is a remarkable peculiarity, Olympiodoros also paid attention to the most precise information possible: His numerical information is usually (although not always) quite accurate; He also reproduced distances and sums of money as precisely as possible. Unlike Eunapios, for example, Olympiodoros had a good knowledge of geography and had excellent information on political events in the West. He also gave important late Roman offices in their Latin names, but in Greek transliteration; this also applies to the names of the Roman provinces. Such details were left out by most ancient historians out of consideration for the composition of their work, but it is precisely these details that determine the value of the fragments.

Which sources Olympiodoros used cannot be completely clarified. But since he wrote contemporary history and had traveled widely, it can be assumed that he wrote down a lot from his own knowledge, supplemented by written sources, including archival material. He also seems to have known and quoted the works (probably the 1000-year history ) of Asinius Quadratus . That he judged Stilicho positively may be due to an informant from his environment. The work will not have been published until 427 at the earliest, but a later date is also possible (the time is often assumed to be around 440).

The history of Olympiodoros was evidently consulted and extensively used by several later historians, such as Zosimos (who initially relied primarily on Eunapios, then primarily on Olympiodoros in books 5 and 6 of his New History ), Sozomenos (book 9 of his Church History ) , Philostorgios and Prokopios of Caesarea (in the brief review in book 3 of his histories , perhaps mediated via an intermediate source). Much of what is reported in these late antique histories about the early 5th century seems to be based largely on the history of Olympiodorus. As a historian he is on a higher level than Eunapios of Sardis or Zosimos, for example. In contrast to these, his description does not seem to have been influenced by bias, especially since Olympiodoros tried not only to provide a detailed, but also to make it as correct as possible. It has a very good reputation in modern research. The loss of his work is regrettable precisely for this reason, especially since otherwise the early 5th century could be assessed much better by modern research. Despite the extensive loss of his work, Olympiodoros can be counted among the most important historians of late antiquity , also because of its reception by later authors .

Editions and translations

Entry in Clavis Historicorum Antiquitatis Posterioris (CHAP) .

The fragments are collected in Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum (edited by Karl Müller , Vol. 4, Paris 1851); The fragment count carried out here is also based on this edition. The new edition with English translation by Roger Blockley offers a different number of fragments than the usual one.

literature

  • Antonio Baldini: Considerazioni sulla cronologia di Olimpiodoro di Tebe . In: Historia 49, 2000, pp. 488-502.
  • Antonio Baldini: Ricerche di tarda storiografia (da Olimpiodoro di Tebe) (= Studi di Storia 9). Pàtron, Bologna 2004, ISBN 88-555-2745-2 .
  • Christopher Chaffin: Olympiodorus of Thebes and the sack of Rome. A Study of the Historikoi logoi, with translated Fragments, Commentary and additional material. Mellen, Lewiston NY et al. 1993, ISBN 0-7734-9321-2 (also contains an English translation of the fragments).
  • Andrew Gillett: The Date and Circumstances of Olympiodorus of Thebes . In: Traditio 48, 1993, pp. 1-29.
  • Herbert Hunger : The high-level profane literature of the Byzantines (= Handbook of Classical Studies . Department 12: Byzantine Handbook. Part 5). Volume 1: Philosophy, Rhetoric, Epistolography, Historiography, Geography. Beck, Munich 1978, ISBN 3-406-01427-5 , pp. 281f.
  • John F. Matthews: Olympiodorus of Thebes and the history of the West (AD 407-425) . In: Journal of Roman Studies . 60, 1970, ISSN  0075-4358 , pp. 79-97 (fundamental article).
  • David Rohrbacher: The Historians of Late Antiquity. Routledge, London et al. 2002, ISBN 0-415-20458-5 , pp. 73ff.
  • Edward A. Thompson : Olympiodorus of Thebes. In: The Classical Quarterly . 38, 1944, pp. 43-52.
  • Timo Stickler : The history of Olympiodorus of Thebes . In: Bruno Bleckmann , Timo Stickler (Hrsg.): Greek profane historians of the fifth century AD. Franz Steiner, Stuttgart 2014, pp. 85-102.
  • Warren Treadgold : The Diplomatic Career and Historical Work of Olympiodorus of Thebes. In: The International History Review. 26, 2004, ISSN  0707-5332 , pp. 709-733.
  • Warren Treadgold: The Early Byzantine Historians. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke et al. 2007, ISBN 978-1-403-93458-1 , pp. 89-96.

Web links

Remarks

  1. ↑ See Treadgold (2004), p. 710.
  2. ↑ See Photios , Bibliotheke , cod. 214.
  3. ↑ Olympiodoros, Frag. 28.
  4. ↑ On his intellectual background, cf. Thompson (1944), pp. 43f. and Treadgold (2004), pp. 711f. (Treadgold also assumes that Olympiodoros studied in Athens).
  5. ^ Alan Cameron: Wandering Poets: A Literary Movement in Byzantine Egypt . In: Historia 14, 1965, p. 470ff.
  6. ↑ See also Treadgold (2004), p. 714.
  7. ↑ Olympiodoros, Frag. 18th
  8. ^ Treadgold (2004), pp. 713ff.
  9. ↑ Olympiodoros, Frag. 1.36 (Edition Müller) or 35.1 (Edition Blockley).
  10. ↑ See Matthews (1970), p. 87.
  11. ↑ For the historical context of this time cf. about Alexander Demandt : The late antiquity. 2nd edition Munich 2007, p. 175ff .; Guy Halsall: Barbarian Migrations and the Roman West, 376-568. Cambridge 2007, 210ff .; Otto Seeck : History of the fall of the ancient world. Vol. 6. Stuttgart 1920, pp. 33ff. (Material-rich representation of political history, but largely out of date in terms of interpretation; online ).
  12. ↑ See, for example, Thompson (1944), p. 52 and John Matthews: The Roman Empire of Ammianus . London-Baltimore 1989, p. 472.
  13. ↑ Ammianus treated in his work the history from 96 to 378 in 31 books, whereby he mainly concentrated on the time he personally experienced. On his work cf. especially John Matthews: The Roman Empire of Ammianus . London-Baltimore 1989.
  14. ↑ See also Thompson (1944), p. 43 and p. 52.
  15. ^ Treadgold (2004), p. 733.
  16. ↑ See Matthews (1970), p. 97.
  17. ↑ Olympiodoros, Frag. 25th
  18. ↑ Olympiodoros, Frag. 44.
  19. ↑ Olympiodoros, Frag. 43.
  20. ↑ See Matthews (1970), p. 96.
  21. ^ Photios, cod. 80.
  22. ↑ See Matthews (1970), p. 87.
  23. ↑ See Matthews (1970), pp. 85ff. and Thompson (1944), pp. 46ff.
  24. ↑ This is what Zosimos 5: 27: 1f. close, since Zosimos drew here from the work of Olympiodorus, who is mentioned in the same passage.
  25. ↑ In general on its possible sources cf. Matthews (1970), pp. 90ff. and Treadgold (2004), pp. 724ff.
  26. ↑ Overview with discussion of the different approaches in Treadgold (2004), p. 727ff.
  27. ↑ See Thompson (1944), more recently Matthews (1970), Blockley (1981), p. 47, Rohrbacher (2002) and Treadgold (2004).
  28. ↑ See Rohrbacher (2002), p. 81.
personal data
SURNAME Olympiodorus of Thebes
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Byzantine historian
DATE OF BIRTH before 407
DATE OF DEATH after 424