Berg ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 ISSN 2159-3159 Article copyright held by the author(s) and made available under the Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Twelfth-Century Scholars on the Moral Exemplarity of Ancient Poetry Baukje van den Berg ORAL EXEMPLARITY is a conspicuous element in Byz- antine thought and literature across multiple genres and contexts. Hagiographical accounts typically pre- sent their holy protagonists as models of exemplary virtue to be emulated by monastics and laypeople alike;1 imperial orations and panegyric poetry frequently compare contemporary em- perors with exemplary rulers from the early Byzantine past or Old Testament kings, such as David and Solomon;2 and the 1 See for example Theodoret of Cyrus, Religious History 30.7 Canivet and Leroy-Molinghen: saints’ lives offer “models of philosophy” (ἀρχέτυπα φιλο- σοφίας); Life of Mary of Egypt 41 (PG 87.3 3725B): for generations monks passed on the story of the saint as a model (ὑπόδειγµα) that would benefit the listeners; Gregory the Cellarer, Life of St. Lazaros of Mt. Galesion 1 Delehaye: stories of saints are like living icons or mirrors for later generations. Cf. Life of Basil 1.17–18 Ševčenko: the portrait of Basil serves as “the standard of vir- tue, a statue, and a model for imitation” (ὁ πρὸς ἀρετὴν κανών τε καὶ ἀνδρίας καὶ τὸ ἀρχέτυπον τῆς µιµήσεως). Some Lives stress that the saint was already a model for others during his/her lifetime: e.g. Ignatios the Deacon, Life of the Patriarch Tarasios 20 Efthymiadis. On female saints as models for both men and women see C. Rapp, “Figures of Female Sanctity: Byzantine Edifying Manuscripts and their Audience,” DOP 50 (1996) 313–344. 2 See esp. C. Rapp, “Old Testament Models for Emperors in Early Byzantium,” in P. Magdalino et al. (eds.), The Old Testament in Byzantium (Washington 2010) 175–197. On David in particular see V. Tsamakda, “König David als Typos des byzantinischen Kaisers,” in F. Daim et al. (eds.) Byzanz: Das Römerreich im Mittelalter (Mainz 2010) 24–54; R. Ricceri, “David as Model for the Emperor and His Poet: Theodore Prodromos and M 104 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 prefaces to various historiographical works emphasize the moral value of history and the valuable lessons that historical examples may impart.3 As a mode of reading and evaluating the past, moral exemplarity also informed Byzantine interpretations of ancient Greek poetry: for Byzantine scholars the gods and heroes of the pagan past served as positive or negative role models for contemporary readers. The fourth-century Church Fathers justified the central position that Byzantine education afforded to ancient literature on the grounds of its literary and moral exemplarity. In his Address to Young Men on Reading Greek Literature, for instance, Basil of Caesarea famously likened the selective extraction of moral lessons from examples of virtuous behavior in ancient Greek literature to plucking roses while taking care to avoid the thorns (i.e., to ignore or discard any potentially harmful material).4 Throughout the essay Basil demonstrates this proposed approach by identifying the moral benefit to be derived from selected passages of ancient literature. For many centuries after Basil’s lifetime, moral exemplarity remained a central tenet in attitudes toward the ancient literary legacy, assuming various forms that ranged ___ John II Komnenos,” in B. van den Berg et al. (eds.), Poetry in Byzantine Literature and Society (1081–1204): New Texts, New Approaches (Cambridge forthcoming). 3 E.g. Niketas Choniates, History 1.5–2.11 Van Dieten: historiography brings back to life and places before the eyes of readers both virtuous and immoral figures of the past for the (moral) benefit of mankind. For Byzan- tine ideas on the moral value of history see also L. Neville, “Why Did the Byzantines Write History?” in Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress of Byzantine Studies (Belgrade 2016) 265–276, esp. 268–269. 4 Basil, Address to Young Men 4 Naldini; see N. G. Wilson, Saint Basil on the Value of Greek Literature (London 1975), for commentary and introduction. For ancient Greek literature in the early centuries of Christianity see e.g. P. Lemerle, Le premier humanisme byzantin (Paris 1971) 43–73; A. Kaldellis, Hel- lenism in Byzantium (Cambridge 2007) 120–172. BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 105 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 from moralizing allegorical interpretations of Greek poetry (predominantly Homer) to collections of edifying maxims drawn from the literature of the past.5 This article explores moral readings of ancient poetry in key twelfth-century scholarly texts that were intended to educate the empire’s future political and cultural elite. I shall focus on the monumental commentaries on Homer produced by the rhetorician and court orator Eustathios of Thessalonike (ca. 1115–1185), whose sustained reading of the Iliad and Odyssey devotes considerable attention to both their rhetorical and their moral qualities.6 Reflections on the moral value of ancient poetry may also be found in various didactic works by the grammarian John Tzetzes (ca. 1110–1170), in particular his verse treatises on ancient poetry,7 and the collection of 5 For examples of moralizing allegory in John Malalas and Tzetzes see A. J. Goldwyn, “John Malalas and the Origins of Allegorical and Novelistic Traditions of the Trojan War in Byzantium,” Troianalexandria 15 (2015) 23– 49. For the moral reading of the Odyssey by Manuel Gabalas in Late Byzantium see R. Browning, “A Fourteenth-Century Prose Version of the Odyssey,” DOP 46 (1992) 27–36; L. Silvano, “Perché leggere Omero: il pro- logo all’Odissea di Manuele Gabala nelle due redazioni autografe,” JÖB 67 (2017) 217–237. For maxims collected from ancient authors see e.g. the Corpus Parisinum, ed. D. M. Searby (Lewiston 2007). 6 M. van der Valk, Eustathii Archiepiscopi Thessalonicensis commentarii ad Homeri Iliadem (Leiden 1971–1987); E. Cullhed, Eustathios of Thessalonike: Com- mentary on Homer’s Odyssey I (Uppsala 2016, for Books 1–2); J. G. Stallbaum, Eustathii Archiepiscopi Thessalonicensis Commentarii ad Homeri Odysseam (Leipzig 1825–1826). The latter will soon be replaced by the new digital edition by E. Cullhed and S. Douglas Olson (https://scholarlyeditions.brill. com/eooc). On Eustathios’ life and works see P. Cesaretti and S. Ronchey, Eustathii Thessalonicensis Exegesis in canonem iambicum pentecostalem (Berlin 2014) 7*–30*, with further bibliography. 7 For the treatises On the Differences between Poets, On Comedy, On Tragedy, along with two redactions of prose prolegomena on comedy, see W. J. W. Koster, Scholia in Aristophanem 1A (Groningen 1975). I am currently pre- paring a volume with English translations of, and commentary on, these texts (along with the introductory essay of Tzetzes’ Exegesis of the Iliad). For 106 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 progymnasmata (rhetorical exercises) by the courtier and rhetori- cian Nikephoros Basilakes (ca. 1115–after 1182), a collection that likely originated from Basilakes’ activities as a teacher of rhetoric.8 The first part of this article will explore how these scholars make exemplarity a central element of ancient poetry’s moral value. The second part will adopt a close perspective on Eustathios’ reading of Homer and examine how his com- mentaries frame the Iliad and Odyssey as vehicles for ethical reflection and moral education. The final part will explore Eu- stathios’ ideas on precisely how exemplary figures can influence the behavior of moral agents. Overall, this paper aims to eluci- date the Byzantine practice of interpreting ancient literature through a moral lens while simultaneously exploring moral exemplarity as a mode of reading, writing, and thinking in Byzantium. The moral value of ancient poetry Byzantine discussions of ancient drama include several particularly elaborate reflections on the moral value of ancient poetry. Although ancient plays were no longer performed, ancient comedy and tragedy were still central elements in Byzantine education, and several commentaries and other didactic resources were produced accordingly to assist teachers and their students in understanding the texts.9 In addition to ___ an introduction on Tzetzes as a scholar see F. Pontani, “Scholarship in the Byzantine Empire (529–1453),” in F. Montanari (ed.), History of Ancient Greek Scholarship: From the Beginnings to the End of the Byzantine Age (Leiden 2020) 452– 459. 8 Basilakes’ progymnasmata: A. Pignani, Niceforo Basilace: Progimnasmi e mono- die (Naples 1983); revised version with English translation J. Beneker and C. A. Gibson, The Rhetorical Exercises of Nikephoros Basilakes: Progymnasmata from Twelfth-Century Byzantium (Cambridge [Mass.] 2016); see there vii–viii on his career and activities as teacher, with further bibliography. 9 On ancient drama in Byzantium see esp. P. Marciniak, Greek Drama in Byzantine Times (Katowice 2004), esp. 41–58 for the educational context. BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 107 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 commentaries on Aristophanes and (perhaps) scholia on vari- ous tragic plays, John Tzetzes composed several introductory treatises on ancient comedy and tragedy that explain their history, formal and performative features, and social func- tions.10 In his verse treatise On the Differences among Poets, for instance, Tzetzes argues that both tragedy and comedy were intended to shape the spectators’ lives. In relating the vicis- situdes of various heroes, tragedians cautioned their spectators against the dangers of arrogance; the comic poets’ serious humor, by contrast, sought to deter their audiences from engaging in criminal conduct and other unsavory exploits.11 Tzetzes thus appears to imply that spectators absorbed lessons about moral conduct through witnessing the downfall of tragedy’s hubristic heroes and the ridicule suffered by the protagonists of comedy. Eustathios expresses similar views in a sermon on hypocrisy (ὑπόκρισις) delivered in his capacity as archbishop of Thessalo- 10 For Tzetzes’ scholarship on ancient drama see Pontani, in History of Ancient Greek Scholarship 456–459; for the commentaries on Aristophanes see also F. Benuzzi, “Erudizione, autorità̀ e autorialità̀: l’esegesi antica alla commedia sulla cattedra di Giovanni Tzetze,” Incontri triestini di filologia classica 17 (2017/8) 369–386, and A. Pizzone, “Cultural Appropriation and the Performance of Exegesis in Tzetzes’ Scholia on Aristophanes,” in B. van den Berg et al. (eds.), Byzantine Commentaries on Ancient Greek Texts, 12th–15th Centuries (Cambridge 2022) 100–129. For Tzetzes’ possible work on the tragedians (esp. Euripides) see D. J. Mastronarde, Preliminary Studies on the Scholia to Euripides (Berkeley 2017) 77–89, with further references. 11 Tzetzes, On the Differences between Poets 65–71, with translation and discussion in B. van den Berg, “Playwright, Satirist, Atticist: The Reception of Aristophanes in 12th-Century Byzantium,” in P. Marciniak et al., Satire in the Middle Byzantine Period (Leiden 2021) 227–253, at 232–235. Tzetzes connects the moral function of ancient drama to its alleged origins: see P. Roilos, “Satirical Modulations in 12th-Century Greek Literature,” in Satire 258–259, and van den Berg, “Playwright”; see also P. Roilos, Amphotero- glossia: A Poetics of the Twelfth-Century Medieval Greek Novel (Cambridge [Mass.] 2005) 232. 108 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 nike. The sermon opens with a discussion of ancient hypocrisy in the sense of “acting,” in which Eustathios argues that, unlike the morally reprehensible hypocrisy that pervaded the society in which he lived, ancient “hypocrisy” was a positive force that imparted lessons about moral values. For Eustathios the actors in ancient dramas—tragedy in particular—functioned as “living and speaking history books” (βιβλίον ἱστορίας ζῶν καὶ λαλοῦν) in their ability to bring the past to life on stage.12 In this way, they became teachers of every virtue, presenting audiences with models of both virtue and vice—the former to be emulated and the latter avoided. In the sermon’s opening paragraphs, Eustathios argues that the moral lessons of ancient drama remain relevant for his contemporary readers, thus underscoring the continuing value of ancient poetry in Byzan- tine society.13 Two maxims in Nikephoros Basilakes’ progymnasmata (maxims 2 and 3 Beneker/Gibson, Prog. 25 and 26 Pignani) discuss in greater detail the edifying effects of ancient tragedy. As a sub- category of progymnasmata, γνῶµαι (maxims) consist of detailed examinations and elaborations of sayings that are impersonally expressed—that is, without the indication of a speaker or agent (the presence of which would make them chreiai rather than maxims).14 Like many of the progymnasmata, they were thus an 12 On Hypocrisy 89.32; the text is opusculum 13 in T. L. F. Tafel, Eustathii Metropolitae Thessalonicensis Opuscula (Amsterdam 1832). On the moral value of bringing history to life cf. Niketas Choniates (n.3 above). On the opening paragraphs of Eustathios’ sermon see Roilos, Amphoteroglossia 233–234, 281– 282, and in Satire 264–265; B. van den Berg, “ ‘The Excellent Man Lies Sometimes’: Eustathios of Thessalonike on Good Hypocrisy, Praiseworthy Falsehood, and Rhetorical Plausibility in Ancient Poetry,” Scandinavian Journal of Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 3 (2017) 15–35. 13 On Hypocrisy 88.30–31, 61–65 Tafel. 14 On the difference between chreia and maxim see e.g. Aphthonios, Pro- gymnasmata 4.4 Patillon. BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 109 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 exercise in invention and prose composition.15 Basilakes pro- vides his students with model exercises that develop the often terse instructions in handbooks such as that of Aphthonios—an incidental reminder that rhetorical education also revolved around the emulation of examples. While Basilakes’ progym- nasmata served primarily to instruct young students in different modes of rhetorical composition, they may have simultaneously fulfilled ethical-didactic functions: many progymnasmata were de- signed to inculcate in their young students social values and moral principles alongside rhetorical techniques.16 In each of the relevant maxims, Basilakes praises Sophocles as the most sagacious of poets on the grounds that his works include many wise sayings and are nonpareil in their realiza- tion of tragedy’s didactic purposes.17 The second maxim con- tains his most elaborate reflections on the functions of tragedy 15 On progymnasmata in ancient education see R. Webb, “The Progym- nasmata as Practice,” in Y. L. Too (ed.), Education in Greek and Roman Antiquity (Leiden 2001) 289–316. On progymnasmata in the twelfth century, M. Loukaki, “Training Students in the Art of Discourse in Twelfth-Century Byzantium: Forms of Progymnasmata,” in P. Chiron et al. (eds.), Les Progym- nasmata en pratique, de l’antiquité à nos jours (Paris 2020) 193–202. 16 See C. A. Gibson, “Libanius’ Progymnasmata,” in L. Van Hoof, Libanius: A Critical Introduction (Cambridge 2014) 128–143, at 140; Webb, in Education 303–305. The same applies to declamations as an educational practice closely related to the progymnasmata: R. Penella, “Libanius’ Declamations,” in Libanius: A Critical Introduction 107–127, at 126–127, and “Introduction,” in Rhetorical Exercises from Late Antiquity: A Translation of Choricius of Gaza’s Prelimi- nary Talks and Declamations (Cambridge 2009) 1–32, at 12–13. More broadly on rhetoric and rhetorical education as shaping the social and cultural iden- tities of elite men, see M. Gleason, Making Men: Sophists and Self-Presentation in Ancient Rome (Princeton 1995); Gleason’s influential book concerns the Sec- ond Sophistic, yet much of her discussion also holds true for later periods. 17 Maxims 2.1, 2.4, 3.1 Beneker/Gibson / Prog. 25.1–2, 32–37; 26.1–5 Pignani. On these maxims and Basilakes’ views on Sophocles see also P. Marciniak, “The Executioner and his Drugs: Nikephoros Basilakes on Sophocles,” Listy filologické 144 (2021) 347–364. 110 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 (Maxim 3 Beneker/Gibson / Prog. 26 Pignani), in its discussion of the gnomic lines from Sophocles’ Electra that serve as the title of the exercise: “This just penalty should come immediately to everyone, that whoever wishes to act outside of the laws should be killed, for then there would not be so much wrongdoing.”18 Basilakes explains that tragic performances served to dispel any abomination that infested the state or grew in the minds of its citizens. In watching characters from ancient myths invariably and swiftly being punished for their wicked deeds, spectators would be deterred from criminal acts or immoral proclivities for fear of the potential consequences.19 Expounding the gnomic lines from the Electra, Basilakes likens tragedians to doctors whose tragedies serve as a medicine that has the power to restore a state afflicted by evil to a healthy condition of honor and virtue. Drugs serve either to protect our health and fend off future illness or to restore the body to health when it is already under attack from disease. The “cauterizing iron” of Sophocles’ tragedies works in the same two ways: on the one hand, it prevents our souls from becoming corrupted to begin with; on the other hand, in cautioning that crimes will be punished immediately, tragedy instills in its spectators a fear of wrongdoing, thus restoring justice and order whenever they are threatened by crime and immorality.20 Basilakes has Sophocles summarize the beneficial effects of his tragedies in the first person (Maxim 3.5 Beneker/Gibson / Prog. 26.34–39 Pignani): 18 Ἐχρῆν δ’ εὐθὺς εἶναι τήνδε τοῖς πᾶσιν δίκην, ὅστις πέρα τι τῶν νόµων πράσσειν θέλει κτείνειν· τὸ γὰρ κακοῦργον οὐκ ἂν ἦν πολύ (transl. Beneker/ Gibson). Cf. Soph. Electra 1505–1507. 19 Maxim 3.3 / Prog. 26.20–24 and throughout the same text; Basilakes makes the same point in Maxim 2.1 / Prog. 25.7–13, with a reference to Orestes’ murder of Aegisthus and Clytemnestra. 20 The medical metaphor is found in Maxim 3.1, 3.5–6, 3.8–9 / Prog. 26.1–5, 34–42, 60–72. BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 111 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 Γέµουσι κακῶν αἱ πόλεις καὶ νοσοῦσιν ἀθεράπευτα καὶ κάµνουσι µὴ παυόµενα καὶ δεῖ τοῦ φαρµάκοις στήσοντος τὸ δεινόν. Ἀλλ’ οἶδα τὴν θεραπείαν ἐγώ· πρὸς γὰρ τῆς σοφίας τοῦτο τὸ καλὸν ἀπωνάµην. Κἂν οἱ τῶν πόλεων ἐπιστατοῦντες ἐθέλοιτε µαθεῖν, οὐ φθονήσω τῆς θεραπείας, οὐ καθέξω τὸ φάρ- µακον, ἐγγὺς τὸ παράδειγµα. The cities are full of evils, they suffer from untreated diseases, they are chronically ill and they lack someone to stop their suffering with drugs. But I know the treatment; for by my wisdom I acquired this fine thing. And if you overseers of the cities wish to learn it, I will not deny you the treatment; I will not withhold you the drug; the example is at hand. (transl. Beneker/Gibson) This passage encapsulates the key notion that enables tragedy’s edifying effect, exemplarity. Basilakes’ Sophocles argues that tragedy aims to influence the behavior of moral agents in the present by offering the audience a παράδειγµα, an example of moral or immoral actions and their consequences.21 The example referred to here is the story of Aegisthus and Clytemnestra as recounted in the Electra, in which the former, according to Basilakes (Maxim 3.2 / Prog. 26.14–19), is pun- ished for his adultery and the latter for her hybris when they are killed by the vengeful Orestes. Basilakes has Sophocles himself explain the lessons that this paradeigma imparts: “When Aegis- thus is struck down and Clytemnestra falls, let this be your standard for a just penalty, and consider this the definition of health.”22 In other words, the story of the Electra offers instruct- 21 On paradeigma as a model for moral imitation see K. Demoen, Pagan and Biblical Exempla in Gregory Nazianzen: A Study in Rhetoric and Hermeneutics (Turn- hout 1996) 38; see 77–82 for its application in the works of Gregory, and “A Paradigm for the Analysis of Paradigms: The Rhetorical Exemplum in Ancient and Imperial Greek Theory,” Rhetorica 15 (1997) 125–158, on παρά- δειγµα in ancient rhetorical theory. 22 Maxim 3.6 / Prog. 26.40–42: Βαλλόµενος Αἴγισθος καὶ πίπτουσα Κλυται- µνήστρα, οὗτος ὑµῖν τῆς δίκης ἔστω κανὼν καὶ τοῦτον τῆς ὑγείας ὅρον τίθεσθε. 112 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 tion as to how such criminal acts and wicked behaviors should be dealt with—that is, with immediate and severe punishment to safeguard the community’s moral wellbeing.23 The gnomic lines cited as the title of Basilakes’ rhetorical exercise thus re- flect the moral lessons that he presents as being at the heart of the Electra’s status as an exemplary story. At the end of his discussion (Maxim 3.16 / Prog. 26.139–144), Basilakes further supports his point by listing stories of other mythical figures who, in his view, have similar protreptic properties: Palamedes, Sisyphus, Ixion, Tantalus, and Tityus were all gravely punished for their crimes, and their examples should turn us away from wrongdoing. Maxim 2 / Prog. 25 elaborates on another Sophoclean maxim, in this case a line on kindness from the Ajax.24 Basilakes also begins this text with a discussion of the benefits that tragedy confers through moral exemplarity, although no mention is made here of παράδειγµα or similar terms. Again, he identifies the universal lessons that tragic exemplars impart: the story of Ajax’s madness brings those who are suffering from similar afflictions to their senses; the story of Electra demonstrates that grief is normal but temporary; and Oedipus’ suffering reveals that fortunes change and that we should thus refrain from taking too much pride in our current prosperity (Maxim 2.2–3 / Prog. 25.13–30). Like these brief examples, the tragic stories that Basilakes cites lose most of their complexity in his reading, being reduced to one-dimensional morality lessons. He does 23 Despite Basilakes’ (rhetorical or actual) endorsement of capital punish- ment in this text, the Byzantines seem to have preferred mutilation or exile over the death penalty: G. T. Dennis, “Death in Byzantium,” DOP 71 (2001) 1–7, at 6–7. Dennis suggests that executions, when they happened, may have served as a cautionary example to those who might be thinking of crime or rebellion—not unlike the exemplarity Basilakes posits for the pseudohistorical punishments of ancient tragedy. 24 Ajax 522: χάρις χάριν γάρ ἐστιν ἡ τίκτουσ’ ἀεί, “for it is always kindness that begets kindness.” BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 113 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 not mention, for instance, that in most versions of the myth Palamedes was not in fact a traitor but was unjustly killed by the Greek army after being set up by his envious rival Odys- seus.25 Basilakes also ignores the fact that Oedipus achieved his fragile good fortune by (unwittingly) killing his father and enter- ing into an incestuous marriage with his mother. Although Basilakes and his readers were undoubtedly aware of the moral ambiguity of his tragic exemplars, for the sake of the argument the stories are reduced to unproblematic ethical lessons. While it is true that the rhetorical purpose of Basilakes’ exercise may have influenced his reductive reading of tragedy, Byzantine book epigrams reveal that, in fact, such an approach was widespread.26 Various epigrams in the fourteenth-century codex Laur.Plut. 31.08 similarly identify the moral lessons that may be drawn from Aeschylus’ tragedies. The anonymous poet argues, for instance, that the Prometheus teaches us that robbery is bad, that Xerxes’ defeat in the Persians should convince us not to wrong our neighbors, and that the tormented Orestes of the Eumenides admonishes us not to resort to murder.27 Such simplistic interpretations belie the tension that Timothy Hamp- 25 For Tzetzes this is a key aspect of the story and brings him to identify with Palamedes: S. Xenophonthos, “‘A Living Portrait of Cato’: Self- Fashioning and the Classical Past in John Tzetzes’ Chiliades,” Estudios Bizantinos 2 (2014) 187–204, at 197–198; V. F. Lovato, “Portrait de héros, portrait d’érudit: Jean Tzetzès et la tradition des eikonismoi,” MEG 17 (2017) 137–156, at 142–148. 26 Similar moral readings were already part of the ancient and late antique reception of tragedy: R. Webb, “Attitudes toward Tragedy from the Second Sophistic to Late Antiquity,” in V. Liapis et al., Greek Tragedy after the Fifth Century: A Survey from ca. 400 BC to ca. AD 400 (Cambridge 2019) 297– 323, at 304–311; N. Croally, “Tragedy’s Teaching,” in J. Gregory (ed.), A Companion to Greek Tragedy (Oxford 2005) 55–70, with additional references. 27 On these epigrams see M. Tomadaki and E. M. van Opstall, “The Tragedians from a Byzantine Perspective: Book Epigrams on Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides,” MEG 19 (2019) 193–220, at 202–203. 114 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 ton identified in Renaissance readings of ancient texts through the lens of moral exemplarity: while the most ideologically correct and rhetorically powerful exemplar would be morally unambiguous, the veneration of antiquity and the study of ancient texts laid bare the entire narrative of the hero’s life, with all its ambiguities.28 Like their Renaissance counterparts, Byzantine teachers and scholars applied a degree of censorship or filtering to ancient narratives with the aim of countering their inherent ambiguity and moral heterogeneity.29 Both Basilakes and the anonymous epigrammatist(s) offer an un- equivocal interpretation that brings the ὠφέλεια or (moral) usefulness of the old stories into sharp relief for contemporary readers, a usefulness that served to justify the study of ancient literature in the first place.30 Homer as a teacher of moral behavior Byzantine scholars thus continued to subscribe to the age-old notion that drama and poetry in general—not least that of Homer, who was still considered the greatest of all poets—had an inherent moral value.31 In an encomium on the metro- 28 T. Hampton, Writing from History: The Rhetoric of Exemplarity in Renaissance Literature (Ithaca 1990), esp. 27–29. 29 Censorship and filtering: Hampton, Writing from History 27; ch. 2 exam- ines how Budé, Erasmus, and Machiavelli attempted to resolve this tension in their advice treatises. Regarding exempla in ancient Rome, Rebecca Langlands has argued that it was precisely the ambiguities and tensions in the exemplary tales that made them so useful for moral education and reflection: Exemplary Ethics in Ancient Rome (Cambridge 2018) esp. ch. 7 and 12. A more elaborate study of exempla and exemplarity is required to generate more general conclusions about the Byzantine practice. 30 Cf. Basil of Caesarea as discussed above. For ὠφέλεια as central to Byzantine literary culture see I. Toth, “Modern Encounters with Byzantine Texts and their Reading Publics,” in T. Shawcross et al. (eds.), Reading in the Byzantine Empire and Beyond (Cambridge 2018) 37–50, at 42–43. 31 On Homer in Byzantium see most recently M. Mavroudi, “Homer in Greece from the End of Antiquity 1: The Byzantine Reception of Homer BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 115 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 politan of Chonae, for instance, Eustathios’ student Michael Choniates calls Homer “the marvelous and divine herald of virtue, in that he recounts heroic virtues of all kinds.” In his Allegories of the Odyssey Tzetzes likewise emphasizes the moraliz- ing nature of Homeric poetry: “To turn everyone away from unlawful deeds, what did Homer not do, what did he not say, to warn them?”32 Eustathios similarly underscores the edifying properties of Homeric poetry in the prefaces to his commen- taries. He opens his Commentary on the Iliad by praising the ex- tensive merit of Homeric poetry and lists “teaching on moral virtues” (διδασκαλίας τῆς περὶ ἠθικῶν ἀρετῶν) among the many benefits that the Iliad has to offer; moreover, he commends the poet for sharing with historians the ability to educate the souls of his audience and urge them toward virtue, again pointing to the moral value of the past.33 ___ and his Export to Other Cultures,” in O. Pache et al. (eds.), The Cambridge Guide to Homer (Cambridge 2020) 444–472. For the twelfth century in particular see A. Basilikopoulou-Ioannidou, Ἡ ἀναγέννησις τῶν γραμμάτων κατὰ τὸν IB΄ αἰῶνα εἰς τὸ Βυζάντιον καὶ ὁ Ὅμηρος (Athens 1971); see also F. Pontani, Sguardi su Ulisse: la tradizione esegetica greca all’Odissea (Rome 2005) 136–340. 32 Michael Choniates, Oration 2 (I 26.9–11 Lampros): τὸν Ὅµηρον … τὸν δαιµόνιον καὶ θεῖον ἀρετῆς κήρυκα οἷς παντοδαπὰς ἡρώων ἀρετὰς καταλέγει; Tzetzes, Allegories of the Odyssey 12.94–95 Hunger: ἐκτρέπων πάντας Ὅµηρος πράξεων τῶν ἀθέσµων, / τί οὐ ποιεῖ, τί οὐ λαλεῖ κινοῦν εἰς νουθεσίαν (transl. after A. J. Goldwyn and D. Kokkini, John Tzetzes, Allegories of the Odyssey [Cambridge (Mass.) 2019] 177). I owe these examples to Basilikopoulou- Ioannidou, Ἡ ἀναγέννησις τῶν γραμμάτων 113–114. Tzetzes’ Allegories and other commentaries on ancient poetry contain numerous moral readings, which deserve a study of their own. 33 Eustathios, Commentary on the Iliad I 2.7, 10–13 van der Valk. On the moral value of history see n.3 above. According to Eustathios (and his con- temporaries), Homeric poetry had a historical core: see B. van den Berg, Homer the Rhetorician: Eustathios of Thessalonike on the Composition of the Iliad (Ox- ford 2022) 45–46, 63–64; see there 21–34 on the encomiastic opening of the preface and 185–194 for an annotated translation. Cf. Basil of Caesarea, 116 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 In the preface to his Commentary on the Odyssey he introduces in more detail his view that reading Homer may confer moral benefit; he identifies the Odyssey’s key moral lessons (1380.2–5 Cullhed) as follows: Σωφροσύνη δὲ τῆς ποιήσεως ταύτης ὁ κεφαλαιωδέστατος σκο- πός, καὶ φιλανδρίαν δὲ παιδεύει ἔννοµον τὸ βιβλίον τοῦτο, προ- θέµενον τὴν Πηνελόπην εἰς ἀµφοτέρων ἀρχέτυπον. ἤδη δὲ καὶ ἀδικίας ἀπέχεσθαι ὑποτίθησιν, οἷς τοὺς µνηστῆρας οὐ δίκαια πληµµελοῦντας ἀπαλλάττεσθαι οὐκ εὖ ἱστορεῖ. ὅσα δὲ καὶ ἄλλα σποράδην ὁ ποιητὴς παιδεύει νόµῳ οἰκείῳ—βιωφελὴς γὰρ πᾶσα ποίησις—τὰ κατὰ µέρος τοῦ βιβλίου διδάξουσιν. The principal aim of this poem is temperance, and the book teaches lawful love of one’s husband, presenting Penelope as a model for both things. It also advises to avoid injustice, in that it narrates how the suitors after committing unjust deeds do not meet a good end. Everything else that the poet teaches here and there according to his own custom—since all poetry is useful for life—will be shown by the sections proceeding part by part through the work. (transl. Cullhed) Eustathios here articulates the assumption that informs his reading of the Iliad and the Odyssey throughout his commen- taries: in his view Homer intentionally wove moral lessons into his poetry through the exempla of his characters. As exegete, Eustathios’ task is to identify and explicate the lessons that are inherent in Homer’s poetry. In reality, Eustathios projects his own didactic program onto the poems and presents the lessons that he wishes to impart as being anticipated by the great poet.34 Eustathios’ reading of Penelope as a model of modera- ___ Address to Young Men 5.26–27 Naldini: Homeric poetry is a praise of every virtue. 34 On this hermeneutic principle see Cullhed, Eustathios of Thessalonike 11*–13*, and van den Berg, Homer the Rhetorician 41–44. For the same principle in ancient commentaries cf. I. Sluiter, “Commentaries and the Di- dactic Tradition,” in G. W. Most (ed.), Commentaries = Kommentare (Göttingen 1999) 173–205, at 173–179. BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 117 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 tion and spousal love and of the suitors’ fate as intended to dissuade us from behaving unjustly has much in common with Basilakes’ approach to tragedy, as discussed above.35 In ac- cordance with Eustathios’ proclamation in the quoted passage, we find numerous examples of such moral lessons throughout the commentaries. He explains, for example, that the narrative of the Cyclops is Homer’s way of cautioning against drunken- ness.36 With the example of Nestor urging Agamemnon in Iliad 14 to take a moment to reflect and make a plan while the battle is raging at the ships, Homer teaches us that one can overcome even the direst circumstances by means of prudence (φρόνη- σις).37 Moreover, the example in Iliad 10 of Agamemnon going himself to wake Nestor rather than sending a servant offers rulers a lesson in simplicity and self-reliance.38 35 On moderation or σωφροσύνη as an important quality for women in Byzantium see e.g. Psellos, Encomium on his Mother 442–444 Criscuolo (his mother), 757–759 (his sister); Anna Komnene, Alexiad 3.8.3 Kambylis/ Reinsch (on her grandmother Anna Dalassena). 36 Commentary on the Odyssey I 350.12–15 Stallbaum on Od. 9.371. On drunkenness in Byzantine satire and social criticism see T. Labuk, “Ari- stophanes in the Service of Niketas Choniates – Gluttony, Drunkenness and Politics in the Χρονικὴ Διήγησις,” JÖB 66 (2016) 127–152, esp. 141–145, 151. 37 Commentary on the Iliad III 577.10–11 on Il. 14.61–63; Eustathios here rephrases scholion bT on Il. 14.61–62 Erbse. For Eustathios’ ideas on the importance of φρόνησις for a good ruler see E. C. Bourbouhakis, Not Composed in a Chance Manner: The Epitaphios for Manuel I Komnenos by Eustathios of Thessalonike (Uppsala 2017) 77*–81*. For phronesis in the imperial oratory of Manuel’s reign more broadly see P. Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos, 1143-1180 (Cambridge 1993) 435, 488. 38 Commentary on the Iliad III 14.14–19 on Il. 10.53–55. For the broader implications of this idea in Eustathios’ work see E. Cullhed, “Achaeans on Crusade,” in F. Pontani et al. (eds.), Reading Eustathios of Thessalonike (Berlin 2017) 285–297. For further examples of moral lessons in the commentary on Iliad 1 see G. Lindberg, “Eustathius on Homer: Some of his Approaches to the Text, Exemplified from his Comments on the First Book of the Iliad,” 118 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 Eustathios does not offer a sustained moral interpretation of the conduct of Homer’s heroes and heroines, but rather selectively points out moral lessons on an ad hoc basis, identifying models not only to imitate but also to avoid. He considers the gods’ behavior equally instructive, as, for in- stance, when he presents Hera as a negative model in his com- ments on Iliad 8. When Poseidon vehemently rejects Hera’s entreaty to assist the Greeks in contravention of Zeus’ wishes (8.205), Eustathios explains (Commentary on the Iliad II 565.10– 14): Ὅτι ἀναιδὴς µὲν κἀνταῦθα συνήθως ἡ Ἥρα, εὐλαβὴς δὲ ὁ Ποσειδῶν, ὃς καὶ κωλύει αὐτὴν θρασύνεσθαι κατὰ Διός, παι- δεύοντος τοῦ ποιητοῦ ἓν µέν, µὴ χρῆναι ἁπλῶς κατὰ ἀρχόντων θρασύνεσθαι, ἕτερον δέ, µὴ κατεπαίρεσθαι γυναῖκα ἀνδρός, καὶ τρίτον, σωφρονίζεσθαι τοὺς ἀφελεστέρους ὑπὸ τῶν κρειττόνων. Here, too, Hera is shameless, as usual, whereas Poseidon, who prevents her from acting insolently against Zeus, is cautious. The poet teaches, first, that in general one should not act in- solently against rulers; second, that a woman should not be arrogant toward a man; and, third, that more brazen people should be chastened by their [moral] superiors. This passage aligns with Eustathios’ general approach to myths in Homeric poetry: he first analyzes the stories as Homer re- lates them from a rhetorical and (as here) ethical perspective; next, he turns to the story’s allegorical meaning, where applic- able.39 The example of the mythical figure of Hera demon- strates that the exemplarity of Homer’s characters is not contingent on their actual existence in the past; fictional tales can serve the same edifying purposes as historical exempla, particularly if supported by a cultural authority as potent as ___ Eranos 83 (1985) 125–140, at 134–136. 39 For Eustathios’ two-stage approach to myth and allegory in Homeric poetry see van den Berg, Homer the Rhetorician 49–54, 142–143, and 175– 178, and references therein. BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 119 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 Homer.40 Aware that the Homeric epics predate Christianity, Eu- stathios does not read Homeric poetry in overtly Christian terms. Given that his overall aim is to reconstruct the poem’s meaning as intended by Homer, he refrains from Christianizing allegorical readings, such as we find in Psellos or John Di- akonos Galenos.41 More subtly, however, Eustathios’ reading nonetheless brings the Iliad and Odyssey in line with a Christian moral framework. For instance, when Achilles prays to Zeus after helping Patroclus prepare for battle in Iliad 16, Eustathios explains that the poet here reinforces the importance of prayer in critical circumstances; moreover, he continues, Homer here demonstrates that the prayer achieves its result through divine power.42 Without Christianizing Homer outright, Eustathios implies that the religious beliefs and practices of the Greeks at Troy share affinities with contemporary Christian praxis and impart behavioral lessons relevant to the Christian reader. In a 40 In the same way, hagiographical tales (and edifying stories) with a large degree of fictionality provide moral lessons and offer their saintly pro- tagonist as a model for imitation, whether or not they actually existed. On the moral value of hagiography see S. Papaioannou, Christian Novels from the Menologion of Symeon Metaphrastes (Cambridge [Mass.] 2017) xviii (cf. xii–xviii on the fictionality of Byzantine hagiography). See also C. Messis, “Fiction and/or Novelisation in Byzantine Hagiography,” in S. Efthymiadis (ed.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography II (Farnham 2014) 313–341. 41 On Psellos’ allegorical method see esp. P. Cesaretti, Allegoristi di Omero a Bisanzio: Ricerche ermeneutiche (Milan 1991) 29–59; on Galenos, P. Roilos, “ ‘Unshapely Bodies and Beautifying Embellishments’: The Ancient Epics in Byzantium, Allegorical Hermeneutics, and the Case of Ioannes Diakonos Galenos,” JÖB 64 (2014) 231–246. Psellos’ Christian readings were strongly criticized by Tzetzes, who followed a contextualizing and historicizing ap- proach similar to that of Eustathios: see Cesaretti 127–140; Cullhed, Eu- stathios of Thessalonike 29*–33*; M. Savio, Screditare per valorizzare: Giovanni Tzetze, le sue fonti, i committenti e la concorrenza (Rome 2020) 42–47. 42 Commentary on the Iliad III 837.30–838.1 on Il. 16.218–220. 120 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 similar vein, when Achilles boasts to Aeneas in Iliad 20 about the time he laid waste the city of Lyrnessus with the aid of Athena and Zeus (20.188–194), Eustathios again attributes didactic value to the fact that Achilles does not claim to have captured the city alone but acknowledges that he did so with the help of a god/God (σὺν θεῷ).43 By removing the names of Athena and Zeus and subsuming them under a singular deity, Eustathios translates the Homeric passage into universal terms to highlight its widely applicable moral value.44 These and sim- ilar interpretations in the commentaries are without precedent in the ancient scholia from which Eustathios draws much of his material; rather, they reflect Eustathios’ ability to imbue the ancient poems with new meaning in the context of the twelfth- century Christian worldview. The examples discussed hitherto demonstrate how Eustathios through inductive reasoning draws general moral principles from the behavior and actions of Homer’s gods and heroes and outlines the profile of a virtuous person throughout his com- mentaries. He often points explicitly to the qualities of such a morally excellent (σπουδαῖος) individual: Achilles’ tears at the loss of Briseïs, for instance, suggest that the excellent man should be moderate in his emotions (µετριοπαθής) rather than altogether emotionless (ἀπαθής);45 the examples of Agamemnon 43 Commentary on the Iliad IV 390.22–23. 44 Out of similar practical concerns, Eustathios ‘universalizes’ Homeric verses so that they can be quoted by Byzantine authors: see R. Nünlist, “Homer as Blueprint for Speechwriters: Eustathius’ Commentaries and Rhetoric,” GRBS 52 (2012) 493–509, to be read with Cullhed, Eustathios of Thessalonike 18*–23*. 45 Cοmmentary on the Iliad I 179.29–180.1 on Il. 1.349. The distinction between µετριοπάθεια and ἀπάθεια is debated in late antique philosophical commentaries and emerges in the twelfth century in discussions on the contemplative life as we find them in the commentaries on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics by Eustratios of Nicaea: see M. Trizio, Il neoplatonismo di Eustrazio di Nicea (Bari 2016) 201–223. A detailed discussion of Eustathios’ BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 121 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 in Iliad 2 and of Odysseus at various points throughout the Iliad and the Odyssey reveal that the excellent man may occasionally tell falsehoods, if only for the right reasons.46 Moreover, when Menelaus calls his archenemy Paris “noble” in Iliad 3.353, Homer demonstrates that the excellent man is generally full of praise and does not resort to derogatory remarks unless absolutely necessary.47 Through the historical example of Agamemnon and the mythical example of Zeus Homer teaches that the excellent man—and particularly the good ruler—does not sleep all night but stays awake pondering the best course of action.48 Eustathios’ reading is thus part of the long (transtem- ___ views lies beyond the scope of the present paper. For connections between Eustathios’ Homeric commentaries, the Aristotelian tradition, and twelfth- century debates on the contemplative life/monasticism see B. van den Berg, “Athena Disenchanted: Eustathios of Thessalonike on Ethical and Rhetori- cal Prudence in Homer and Beyond,” in T. Scheijnen et al. (eds.), Enchanted Reception: Religion and the Supernatural in Medieval Troy Narratives (Uppsala forth- coming). 46 Agamemnon: Commentary on the Iliad I 285.22–24, on the Peira; Odys- seus: e.g. Commentary on the Iliad III 95.2. See also van der Valk, Eustathii Archiepiscopi Thessalonicensis I praefatio §119; van den Berg, Scandinavian Journal of Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 3 (2017) 15–35. Eustathios ex- presses a similar idea in the preface to the Commentary on the Odyssey 1379.33– 40 Cullhed, with commentary in F. Pontani, “Il proemio al Commento all’Odissea di Eustazio di Tessalonica,” Bollettino dei Classici 21 (2000) 5–58, at 26. 47 Commentary on the Iliad I 666.1–3. See B. van den Berg, “Eustathios of Thessalonike on Comedy and Ridicule in Homeric Poetry,” in Byzantine Commentaries on Ancient Greek Texts 169–194, esp. 176–188. 48 Commentary on the Iliad I 227.4–9 on Il. 1.545–550. On Zeus and Agamemnon as wakeful plotters in the Iliad see S. Montiglio, The Spell of Hypnos: Sleep and Sleeplessness in Ancient Greek Literature (London 2015) 12–15. In the Palaiologan period, Nikephoros Xanthopoulos Kallistos composed a chreia on Homer’s famous words that counsellors should not sleep all night (Il. 2.24–25), praising the ethical-didactic value of these lines: for the text see J. Glettner, “Die Progymnasmata des Nikephoros Kallistos Xanthopulos,” ByzZeit 33 (1933) 9.65–10.113; for translation and discussion R. F. Hock 122 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 poral and transcultural) tradition of reading Homer’s heroes as models for rulers and, indeed, for human behavior in general.49 To achieve their didactic potential, the lessons that Eu- stathios recognizes in the Iliad and the Odyssey must have resonated with ideas that were already present in the society to which Eustathios’ Homeric exegesis catered.50 The practice of forgoing sleep, for instance, was idealized in various Byzantine contexts: vigils were a staple feature of monastic life, sleep abstinence was central to asceticism, and emperors were frequently praised for their vigilant wakefulness in the service of the community.51 Eustathios praises Emperor Manuel I Kom- nenos for his dutiful vigilance on various occasions, notably in the funerary oration for Manuel, in which he asserts that the late emperor used to toil on the battlefield during the day and stay awake at night to carefully plan the next morning’s fray— not unlike the strategizing rulers of the Iliad, one might argue.52 ___ and E. N. O’Neil, The Chreia and Ancient Rhetoric: Classroom Exercises II (Atlanta 2002) 348–359. 49 For the reception of Homer in (mostly ancient) reflections on good rule, see the papers in J. Klooster et al. (eds.), Homer and the Good Ruler in Antiquity and Beyond (Leiden 2018), with further bibliography. For the exemplarity of Homeric epic in the Early Modern and Modern world, see the papers in A. J. Goldwyn (ed.), The Trojan Wars and the Making of the Modern World (Uppsala 2018). For the idea that exemplary readings are a universal aspect of Homeric reception from antiquity to the present see Goldwyn’s “Introduc- tion: ‘That men to come shall know of it’: Theorizing Aesthetic Innovation, Heroic Ideology, and Political Legitimacy in Trojan War Reception,” 1–13, at 5–7, 12. 50 Cf. Langlands, Exemplary Ethics 32. 51 On sleep abstinence in different Byzantine contexts see N. Barkas, Sleep and Sleeplessness in Byzantium (Piscataway 2019). 52 Eustathios, Funeral Oration for Manuel I Komnenos 54, with commentary in Bourbouhakis, Not Composed in a Chance Manner 181. Bourbouhakis points to David as a biblical archetype for the sleepless ruler (Psalms 131:2–6). On the emperor’s vigilance see also Eustathios, Oration 11, 184.82–89, 189.56– 60 Wirth. BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 123 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 Another passage (57) in the same oration states that Sleep was powerless in the face of Manuel’s indefatigable commitment to his imperial duties.53 Notwithstanding its long pedigree, this laudatory portrayal of Manuel as a good ruler must surely reflect values held in contemporary Byzantine society. As Lau- rent Pernot has argued with respect to antiquity, “the principal vocation of epideictic oratory is the reinforcing of the public’s adherence to accepted and recognized values.”54 Byzantine epideictic, too, served to reaffirm commonly held ideals of good rulership and moral behavior, itself offering models for imi- tation.55 The connections between the excellent man of Eu- stathios’ commentaries and the idealized portrait of Manuel as ruler illustrate the extent to which the commentaries are in dialogue with twelfth-century society at large. Eustathios’ read- ing of Homer imbues the ancient stories with new significance by projecting contemporary values onto the heroes of antiquity —values that had a long history, perhaps, but whose relevance nonetheless persisted into the twelfth century. Rivalry and ambition To a certain extent, Eustathios’ focus on exemplarity am- plifies attitudes toward the past that were already present in the Homeric epics themselves, not least in the form of exemplary stories embedded in the Iliad and the Odyssey.56 Eustathios’ 53 Byzantine intellectuals often stress the waking nights they themselves spend in the service of learning, e.g. Tzetzes, Commentary on Aristophanes’ Wealth ad 1098 (35–49 Massa Positano). 54 L. Pernot, Epideictic Rhetoric: Questioning the Stakes of Ancient Praise (Austin 2015) 98. 55 Cf. Pernot, Epideictic Rhetoric 95–98. On the parenetic value of epi- deictic oratory in Late Byzantium see D. Angelov, “Byzantine Imperial Panegyric as Advice Literature (1204–c. 1350),” in E. M. Jeffreys (ed.), Rhetoric in Byzantium (Aldershot 2003) 55–72. 56 On the exemplarity of the past in Homeric poetry see Goldwyn, in The Trojan Wars 3–5; M. Alden, Homer beside Himself: Para-Narratives in the Iliad 124 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 analysis of such stories therefore provides further clues as to precisely how exempla drawn from the past can guide the behavior of moral agents in the present. What psychological and emotional dynamics lead them to imitate or emulate the virtuous deeds of figures so distant as Agamemnon or Achil- les?57 Perhaps the best-known exemplary tale in Homer is the story about Meleager told by Phoenix to Achilles during the embassy scene in Iliad 9; to this we might add Nestor’s tales about his earlier feats, tales about fathers addressed to their sons (e.g. tales told to Telemachus about Odysseus), and the tale of Orestes, twice told to Telemachus in the Odyssey.58 In his comments on the story of Meleager Eustathios dwells par- ticularly on the points of similarity between Meleager and Achilles:59 both are noble and brave men who nurture wrath; while Meleager was the best of the Calydonians, Achilles is the best among the Greeks, and just as the Calydonians suffered defeat without Meleager, so too do the Greeks face destruction if Achilles cannot be persuaded to rejoin the fight. Both heroes are asked to return to battle by people close to them, but both turn a deaf ear to their entreaties. In presenting such a close ___ (Oxford 2000), especially ch. 4 on Nestor offering his own experiences as examples, and ch. 7 on the Meleager story. 57 Similar questions have been central to modern debates on exemplarity and role models: e.g. L. Zagzebski, Exemplarist Moral Theory (Oxford 2017); K. Kristjánnson, “Emotions Targeting Moral Exemplarity: Making Sense of the Logical Geography of Admiration, Emulation and Elevation,” Theory and Research in Education 15 (2017) 20–37. Langlands draws on modern views on the issue in her analysis of the experience of learning from exemplars in ancient Rome: Exemplary Ethics 86–111. A comprehensive analysis of exem- plarity in Byzantium remains a desideratum. 58 Many of these stories are discussed in I. J. F. de Jong, “The Birth of the Princes’ Mirror in the Homeric Epics,” in Homer and the Good Ruler 20–37; see also Alden, Homer beside Himself ch.4 and 7. 59 Eustathios discusses the parallels in Commentary on the Iliad II 786.12– 787.3. BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 125 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 parallel, Eustathios explains, Phoenix hopes to convince Achil- les to prevent his own story from ending in the same way as Meleager’s: Meleager eventually returned to battle but without the gifts that would have been his had he returned earlier. Achilles is urged not to let the situation deteriorate to such a degree: if he yields and rejoins the fray now, he will receive numerous gifts and be held in great honor. In this way, Meleager serves as a negative example or, in Eustathios’ words, as an ἐπιχείρηµα ἐκ τοῦ ἐναντίου, “a proof from the opposite.”60 Eustathios thus reads the Meleager story from the rhetori- cian’s perspective, focusing on its structure and its persuasive purpose. In other instances, however, he identifies the emotions that the stories evoke or are intended to evoke in the hero to whom they are addressed. Nestor’s story in Iliad 7 about a duel he once fought causes the Greek army to feel ashamed (καται- δέσας) for not rising to Hector’s challenge.61 His Pylian epic in Iliad 11 (670–762) similarly serves to put Achilles in absentia to shame (καταιδέσῃ) for disregarding his father’s wish that he strive to be the best: Nestor’s tale recounts how he himself managed to excel even against his father’s will.62 Agamemnon’s words in Iliad 4 about Tydeus’ past feats cause Diomedes to feel ashamed (καταιδέσῃ) that he is not more like his father.63 When Athena similarly compares the hero unfavorably to his father in Iliad 5 (800–813), Eustathios explains the psychological effects of the exemplary tale as follows (II 205.13–16): 60 Commentary on the Iliad II 783.14–15. Elsewhere Eustathios calls the story a παράδειγµα (II 781.18) and a ὑποδιήγησις (II 786.12–13; cf. schol. Τ on Il. 9.529a1 and schol. b on Iliad 9.529a3 Erbse). On παράδειγµα and theories of argument and proof see Demoen, Pagan and Biblical Exempla 37–42. 61 Commentary on the Iliad II 423.3–6 on Il. 7.132–157. 62 Commentary on the Iliad III 296.7–16; cf. schol. bT 11.670–764, which explains in different terms how Nestor’s story aims to spur the listener to action. 63 Commentary on the Iliad I 765.23–26 on Il. 4.370–400. 126 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 Σηµείωσαι δὲ ὅτι καὶ ἐν τούτοις ἡ τῷ Διοµήδει λαλοῦσα Ἀθηνᾶ ἡ φρόνησίς ἐστιν ἡ ἔµφυτος αὐτῷ καὶ ἀεὶ συµπαροµαρτοῦσα, δι’ ἧς ἀναπολεῖ τὰ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ ἐκεῖθεν εἰς µάχην ἐρεθίζεται καὶ µέµφεται ἑαυτόν, ὅτι καὶ βραχὺ γοῦν τι ἀνεπαύσατο. Notice that also here the Athena who speaks to Diomedes is the prudence that is innate to him and always accompanies him, which brings him to go over his father’s deeds again and hence rouse himself to battle and blame himself that he rested even for a brief moment. In Eustathios’ reading, Athena is an allegory of Diomedes’ own intelligence; that is, the hero himself repeatedly recalls the great deeds his father performed as a model of military valor and as a source of motivation to strive to live up to his father’s example.64 Shame and prudence, then, are assumed to ac- company the widespread idea that children should follow the examples of their renowned ancestors. In the Epiphany Oration of 1176, for instance, Eustathios encourages the young Alexios Komnenos, heir to the throne, to imitate his excellent an- cestors, his great-grandfather Alexios I Komnenos, his grand- father John II Komnenos, and his father Manuel I Komnenos. Why, Eustathios asks, should he hark back to ancient examples if recent models of virtue are right at hand?65 Each of the above examples assumes a certain competitive- ness, a desire to surpass others, with the exemplary tales pro- viding incentive for emulation rather than imitation. This notion is crystallized in my final example—the tale of Orestes that Athena, in the guise of Mentes, recounts to Telemachus in the first book of the Odyssey (294–302), to which Eustathios attributes the term παράδειγµα. By telling him how Orestes avenged the death of his father, Athena-Mentes aims to en- courage Telemachus to attend to the dire situation in his palace, overrun by the suitors. Eustathios explains that the 64 On Athena as φρόνησις see van den Berg, in Enchanted Reception. 65 Epiphany Oration of 1176 (Or. 13) 215.42–216.53 Wirth. BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 127 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 example of Orestes is intended to stir the young man’s sense of rivalry and ambition by virtue of the praise it lavishes on a figure that is his peer in age and royal status (Commentary on the Odyssey 1418.45–48 Cullhed): εἶτα καὶ προπαροξύνει ῥητορικῶς ἐν ὁµοιότητι παραδείγµατος καὶ τὸ τοῦ νέου ζηλότυπον καὶ φιλότιµον ἐρεθίζει τῷ ἐπαίνῳ τοῦ ἰσήλικος καὶ βασιλικοῦ παιδὸς Ὀρέστου, λέγουσα· ἢ οὐκ ἀΐεις οἷον κλέος ἔλλαβε δῖος Ὀρέστης πάντας ἐπ’ ἀνθρώπους … Thereafter she rhetorically sharpens the speech by adducing a comparison with an exemplum and rouses the young man’s zeal and ambition by praising a young man who is his equal in age and a prince, Orestes, saying: “Or have you not heard of the fame that noble Orestes acquired among all men …” (transl. Cullhed, slightly modified) Eustathios’ focus on ambition and rivalry among peers resonates with the twelfth-century world, a world rife with social and professional competition.66 While the envy and jealousy that result from rivalry are often evaluated as negative emotions in Byzantine culture,67 in the context of moral exem- plarity they become positive forces that galvanize moral agents to better themselves.68 Again, Eustathios’ reading of the epi- 66 E.g. A. Garzya, “Literarische und rhetorische Polemiken der Kom- nenenzeit,” Byzantinoslavica 34 (1973) 1–14; Av. Cameron, Arguing It Out: Discussion in Twelfth-Century Byzantium (Budapest 2016) 6–9 and passim. 67 See M. Hinterberger, “Zelotypia und Phthonos: Eifersucht in der byzan- tinischen Literatur,” Nea Rhome 6 (2009) 11–36 (with a discussion of the term ζηλοτυπία and cognates at 14–16); for the twelfth century, “Phthonos als treibende Kraft in Prodromos, Manasses und Bryennios,” MEG 11 (2011) 83–106; and his broader discussion of phthonos and related emotions in Byzantium, Phthonos: Mißgunst, Neid und Eifersucht in der byzantinischen Literatur (Wiesbaden 2012). 68 On rivalry as driving aemulatio in Roman exemplarity see Langlands, Exemplary Ethics 87, 93–95. Eustathios attributes similar positive potential to philotimia or ambition as a driving force of authorship: B. van den Berg, “How to Write and Enjoy a Tale of Disaster: Eustathios of Thessalonike on Emotion and Style,” in M. P. de Bakker et al. (eds.), Emotions and Narrative in 128 THE MORAL EXEMPLARITY OF ANCIENT POETRY ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 sode thus reveals the psychological dynamics that he perceives as accompanying exemplary stories and, in this way, contrib- utes to our understanding of how ethical exemplarity worked in other contexts. Conclusion We know that ancient drama and Homeric poetry were read in Byzantine schools, and it seems only natural that teachers would use them to inculcate in young students—mostly boys from wealthy families—not only the rules of Greek grammar and the rhetorical principles of public speaking but also the moral values of the Byzantine civic elite. Scholarly and didactic works by teachers such as Tzetzes, Basilakes, and Eustathios therefore provide us with valuable insights into moral edu- cation in Byzantium and the continuing value of ancient literature in the medieval world. Such moral didacticism par- ticipated in broader ethical frameworks, as well as in broader cultural discourses regarding the exemplary value of the past. By focusing on the ethical usefulness of the ancient past and by reading ancient texts through the lens of moral exemplarity, our twelfth-century scholars transform ancient poetry into a site of moral reflection and redefine its cultural authority in terms relevant to their own time. In so doing, they position themselves within a centuries-long tradition and adopt attitudes toward the past that are encoded in the ancient texts them- selves as their point of departure. Scholarly works on ancient literature simultaneously flesh out the past’s exemplary value in concrete terms. While references to ancient history and mythology in Byzantine literature are abundant, although often brief, works such as Eustathios’ Homeric commentaries demonstrate the hermeneutic prin- ciples, psychological and emotional dynamics, and indeed the ___ Ancient Literature and Beyond: Studies in Honour of Irene de Jong (Leiden 2022) 712–727, at 719–724. BAUKJE VAN DEN BERG 129 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 103–129 specific moral meanings attributed to stories of historical and mythological exemplars. Byzantine scholarship thus enables us to better understand the ethical dimension of these frequent allusions and appreciate them beyond their functions as literary devices, rhetorical ornaments, and displays of erudition.69 More than this, they reflect Byzantine approaches to making sense of history and applying the past to contemporary objec- tives as a “reservoir of models for present action.”70 February, 2023 Department of Medieval Studies Central European University, Vienna VandenBergB@ceu.edu 69 For studies exploring the literary and rhetorical role of exempla, see Demoen, Pagan and Biblical Exempla, for Gregory of Nazianzos; G. Karla, “Die Macht des Exempels: Alexander der Grosse in den Reden des Li- banios,” Rhetorica 35 (2017) 137–160, for Libanios; T. Antonopoulou, “ ‘What Agreement has the Temple of God with Idols?’ Christian Homilies, Ancient Myths, and the ‘Macedonian Renaissance’,” ByzZeit 106 (2013) 595–622, on mythical exempla in homilies from the late ninth and tenth centuries; for Niketas Choniates, S. Efthymiadis, “Greek and Biblical Exempla in the Service of an Artful Writer,” in A. Simpson et al. (eds.), Niketas Choniates: A Historian and a Writer (Geneva 2009) 101–120, who also refers to the edifying role of exempla (see esp. 119). 70 Hampton, Writing from History 8. I thank Adam Goldwyn, the anon- ymous reviewers, and audiences at the Universities of Groningen and Oxford for their feedback on an earlier version of this article.