DYCK, ANDREW R., On "Digenis Akritas" Grottaferrata Version Book 5 , Greek, Roman and 
Byzantine Studies, 24:2 (1983:Summer) p.185 

On Digenis Akritas 

Grottaferrata Version Book 5 

Andrew R. Dyck 

O NL Y TWO VERSIONS of the epic Digenis Akritas narrate the 
hero's encounter with the daughter of the Syrian emir Haplor­
rhabdes: Book 5 of the Grottaferrata version (G) and Book 6 

of the version Z which the latest editor, E. Trapp, reconstructs from 
the Trebizond manuscript and the Andros manuscript now in Ath­
ens.I For this material, however, as Trapp notes,2 Z is likely to repre­
sent a contamination of its source, Y, with )" the source of the Grot­
taferrata version; hence the following discussion will be based on the 
more authentic Grottaferrata version alone. The episodic character of 
this material has been previously recognized, but the appropriate 
conclusions have not, I think, as yet been drawn from it. Thus, 
Kyriakidis hypothesizes that the incident was added by the redactor 
of the Grottaferrata version.3 This cannot be true, however, even of 
the redactor of)" since, as Trapp has shown, the Escorial manuscript 
contains two verses from the introduction to this episode.4 I will 
argue that this material is likely to have derived from a separate song 
incorporated not without difficulty into the epic Digenis Akritas.5 

Book 5 of the Grottaferrata version begins with an act of bride­
theft, a popular theme of acritic song6 and a motif which likewise plays 

1 Digenis Akrites. Synoptische Ausgabe der iiltesten Versionen (Vienna 1971) 26-33; on 
Trapp's reconstruction of this version cf the reservations of E. Jeffreys, JHS 92 (1972) 
253-55, and "Digenis Akritas Manuscript Z," Dodoni 4 (1975) 163-201; L. Politis, 
Scriptorium 27 (973) 327-51. 

2 Trapp (supra n.D 63; full stemma, 46. 
3 S. Kyriakidis, "Forschungsbericht zum Akritas-Epos," Berichte zum XI. Internationa­

len Byzantinisten-Kongress II (Munich 1958) 2, 30. 
4 Lines 1081-82-Z 2412-15: Trapp (supra n.}) 31 and 62. 
5 Cf E. Trapp, "Hagiographische Elemente im Digenis-Epos," AnalBolI 94 (976) 

275-87, esp. 277 and 286, who finds parallels between the episode of the daughter of 
Haplorrhabdes and the Life of St Theoktiste of Lesbos composed at the beginning of 
the tenth century by Niketas of Lesbos; he concludes that our episode may have been 
added to the original epic under hagiographical inspiration. 

6 I retain the term simply for the sake of convenience (see R. Beaton, "'Digenis 
Akrites' and Modern Greek Folk Song: a Reassessment," Byzantion 51 [19811 22-43, 
esp. 27 and 43); cf P. Kalonaros, ed., Ba<TiAEw~ At'YEV"j~ 'AKpiTa~, Tei EJ.LJ.U.Tpa KEi­
J.U.va II (Athens 194}) 229ff nos. ta, t/3, L8, u. 

185 



DYCK, ANDREW R., On "Digenis Akritas" Grottaferrata Version Book 5 , Greek, Roman and 
Byzantine Studies, 24:2 (1983:Summer) p.185 

186 DIGENIS AKRITAS, GROTIAFERRATA 5 

an important role in the epic Digenis Akritas. If a social historian were 
to take the content of our epic at face value, he would conclude that 
the normal way for a Byzantine or Arab to marry was to steal a bride.7 

In fact, the Grottaferrata version has no fewer than four instances of 
bride-theft and six of attempted bride-theft, and no other method of 
securing a spouse is so much as mentioned! It is one of the ways a 
hero can display his prowess, whether or not romantic motives are 
involved; thus, Philopappus makes stealing a bride prerequisite to 
joining his a1TEAClTUt (version E 751, Andros 1619). We see the bride­
theft plot in its simplest form in Book 4 of the Grottaferrata version. 
Here young Digenis steals his bride (with the young lady's conniv­
ance) and is pursued by her father, who is a general, and his troops. 
Next the hero proves his prowess in a trial of arms in which he defeats 
and kills his adversaries except for the bride's father and brothers. 
The plot need not take this precise form, however. The test of prow­
ess appears elsewhere as a contest, such as the chariot race by which 
Pelops won the hand of Hippodamia. The test may be won by valor as 
in Digenis' case or by cunning as in some versions of the Pelops saga. 

Elsewhere we see variations on the basic folktale motif of bride­
theft. Thus, when the emir seizes a Greek woman as his bride, her 
brother defeats the emir in a trial by arms (no Greek should come 
out second-best in our poem!). We fully expect that this defeat will 
cost the emir his bride, if not his life. However, attention is diverted 
from the expected outcome by a red herring: the Saracen tells the 
bride's brothers to seek their sister's corpse among the women put to 
death for refusing to submit to the emir's advances (G 194-96). 
Then follows the emir's surprising offer to convert to Christianity. 
The motif omnia vincit amor is invoked to account for his sudden 
volte-face (G 268-69). The plot demands that the hybrid warrior who 
is the hero of the poem should be the son of an Arab and a Greek; 
patriotism demands that the emir should not win the conventional 
trial by arms against a Greek opponent; hence the expedient of con­
version and the motif of love's invincibility as the psychological 
explanation. The basic bride-theft plot is varied again when in Book 2 
the emir's plan to bring his bride back with him to Syria to visit his 
mother is discovered by the bride's brothers and treated by them as 
an instance of bride-stealing. After all, good faith has not yet been 
fully established, and the emir's acceptance as a son-in-law had in the 
first place been contingent on his promise to convert to Christianity 

7 On the motif with particular reference to the Russian version cf W. J. Entwistle. 
"Bride-snatching and the 'Deeds of Digenis. ", Oxford Slavonic Papers 4 (1953) 1-16. 



DYCK, ANDREW R., On "Digenis Akritas" Grottaferrata Version Book 5 , Greek, Roman and 
Byzantine Studies, 24:2 (1983:Summer) p.185 

ANDREW R. DYCK 187 

and live within the Empire. At his wife's intercession, the emir does 
finally succeed in visiting his mother, but alone. Finally, Book 6 of 
the Grottaferrata version consists of a long series of attempts to harm 
or steal Digenis' wife, all of which he successfully repels. 

The metamorphoses of the stolen bride plot in Book 5 can be best 
analyzed against this background. Here a bride is first stolen, next 
abandoned, then rescued by Digenis, raped by him, and finally re­
turned to the man who had stolen and abandoned her in the first 
place. This tale is a reversal of that of the wooing of Digenis' mother 
in that now the abductor is a Greek and the bride the daughter of a 
Syrian emir (G 211 1). She falls in love with the Greek,8 who is being 
held prisoner by her father, and helps him escape with much of the 
family treasure (G 2133, 2251). The plan is that, like the emir who 
sired Digenis, she will convert to Christianity, and they will wed and 
live on Byzantine soil. However, while they are encamped at an oasis 
on their way to the borders of the Empire, he abandons her in the 
middle of the night.9 Thus, the folktale of the stolen bride gives way 
to that of the abandoned bride. 

An abandoned-bride plot may end either happily or in an act of 
vengeance; the two types can be called respectively the Ariadne and 
the Medea pattern. While up to the point of her abandonment the 
bride of Book 5 of the Grottaferrata version resembles Medea, in 
that she renders her paramour decisive help against her father and 
escapes with him only to be abandoned, our heroine harbors no 
thought of vengeance. Thus, in the absence of the vengeance motive, 
we would expect our heroine to become an Ariadne, abandoned by 
her lover only to be rescued by another lover still more desirable, 
namely Digenis. I suggest that this is the original form of the story­
that it was one of several competing versions of Digenis' winning of 
his wife. The poet responsible for combining the Digenis materials 
into a coherent epic preferred the more heroic version of Grottafer­
rata 4, in which Digenis steals his bride and defeats an entire army in 
order to keep her,lO but he did not want to give up the attractive 
story of the meeting at the oasis. However, when he incorporated 
that tale into a context in which Digenis was already married, he did 
not succeed in concealing all the seams in the new plot. 

8 He is the son of a general named Antiochus whom the Arabs had defeated at Zygos 
(c:l Trapp [supra n.ll adG 2304). 

9 The curious detail that when she notices his preparations for departure she dresses 
herself as a man seems to betray dependence on folksong: cf Beaton (supra n.6) 35-
36 and 42. 

10 This is a motif with parallels in folksong: cf Beaton (supra n.6) 39. 



DYCK, ANDREW R., On "Digenis Akritas" Grottaferrata Version Book 5 , Greek, Roman and 
Byzantine Studies, 24:2 (1983:Summer) p.185 

188 DIGENIS AKRITAS, GROTIAFERRATA 5 

The first indication that the incident was originally more than a 
casual encounter occurs after the woman has identified herself and 
Digenis describes the effect of her beauty upon him: he thought that 
she was the second part, i.e. the other half, of his souPl-hardly the 
wayan already married man speaks about a woman who will play no 
major role in his life. After the woman has told her story, a band of 
Arabs attacks, and Digenis repels them. Digenis here has an oppor­
tunity to display his prowess and thus prove to both the Arabs and 
the woman his identify as the 'AKpLT'rJ(}.12 The incident also has 
another aspect, however. The motif of intruders who try to separate 
or otherwise interfere with a couple is proper to lovers or spouses. As 
has already been mentioned, a number of variants of it occur in the 
next book of the poem, where the principals are Digenis and his wife. 
Note too that such a victory in battle can take on ex post facto the 
aspect of a victory in a contest to win a bride. Thus, Digenis' defeat 
of Leander and routing of the other (hTEAtlTa£ earns him Maximo's 
respect (G 2987ft) and his second victory over her convinces her that 
he is worthy to be her lover (G 3102). We may suspect that Digenis' 
victory over her Arab countrymen in the original version of our story 
was a surrogate for victory over the kinsmen of a stolen bride. In 
addition, one detail is very difficult to account for unless one assumes 
that the woman at the oasis was to become Digenis' bride, namely 
the fact that she has already received Christian baptism when he 
meets her (G 2270). This is a difficulty, for she has come directly 
from her father's house and has not yet reached the borders of the 
Empire. Moreover, the plot of the poem, as it now stands, does not 
demand the anomaly, since Digenis merely asks that she be willing to 
convert as a condition for restoring her to her former lover (G 2267). 
Her previous conversion, however, would secure a great advantage 
for a poet who intended her to become at once the bride of Digenis 
himself. Moreover, the assumption that Grottaferrata 5 is based on a 
tale in which Digenis marries the woman at the oasis helps to explain 
the most shocking incident of the entire poem, Digenis' rape of a 
defenseless woman on their journey to find her lover.13 The author of 

11 71t/1aro yap f.WV TIj .. t/lvxTi .. 'TO cnroPPTI'ToII KaMo ... Wo-'TE BEV'TEpall TIj .. Ef.LTi .. 'Tav'TT/II 
Elllat IIo,."wat (G 2100-00; for the interpretation cf Digenis Akrites, ed. John Mavro­
gordato (Oxford 1956), note on 2229 of his edition. Cf PI. Symp. 191A6, 1TO(JOVII 
[KaU'TOII 'TO 71f.UO'1J 'TO am-ov UVvrlEt. 

12 Aristotle would have approved of our author's procedure in this regard: 1TauwII 8E 
/3EA'TUr'TT/ allaYllwpwt .. ';' E~ aV'TwII 'Tw,," 1Tpay,."a'TWII . .. (Poet. 1455a16fD. 

13 Cf W. P. Ker, The Dark Ages (Edinburgh/London 1904) 345: "Digenis, however, 
though a great champion, would have been hooted as a felon for some things in his 



DYCK, ANDREW R., On "Digenis Akritas" Grottaferrata Version Book 5 , Greek, Roman and 
Byzantine Studies, 24:2 (1983:Summer) p.185 

ANDREW R. DYCK 189 

the epic has retained the consummation of the relationship from the 
original Ariadne-plot in spite of the resulting disharmony with the 
character of Digenis as presented elsewhere in the poem.14 The awk­
wardness is increased by the necessity, in first-person narrative, of 
Digenis condemning his own misdeed. In the face of these obstacles 
the epic poet would hardly have retained the incident except as a con­
cession to a well-known tradition. 

The attempt of the epic redactor to find an alternative denouement 
to the marriage of the daughter of Haplorrhabdes to Digenis is un­
convincing. Since according to the epic plot Digenis is already mar­
ried, a substitute must be found for Digenis-Dionysus as the bride's 
new husband. The lot falls, surprisingly, to her previous lover, the 
same man who left her to die in the desert ten days before. The 
result is achieved by some rather peculiar feminine psychology and a 
highly implausible shift in the plot. When the woman shows concern 
over the fate of her former lover, who has, as she has heard, en­
countered the notorious highwaymen Mousour, Digenis comments: 
Kat TOTE 1TPWTOV EJ,UX.fJov ayu7T7Jv yvvatKEiav fJEPIJ.-OTEpav KaTa 1TOAV 
imuPXEtV TWV appevwv.15 This poet would revise the old saw to read: 
"Hell hath no fury like a man scorned." Digenis' diagnosis is con­
firmed when she describes herself as still a slave to the love of the 
man who abandoned her (G 2272).16 

There remain, however, two formidable obstacles to reuniting her 
with her lover: (I) the problem of locating him; (2) the question 
whether he will now change his mind and have her as his wife. The 

biography; his betrayal of the damsel in his charge requires the vengeance of Sir Guyon 
or Sir Arthegall, and his repentance is filthy." 

14 The case of Maximo, who gives consent, is different. What is shocking about the 
Maximo-episode is rather that Digenis murders her so ruthlessly after his wife suspects 
his adultery even though he spared the Amazon's life after defeating her twice in battle 
(c! Ker's complaint [supra n.13] that "the gloating respectability of the Byzantine 
author has spoilt a good passage of old romance ... "). I suspect that, as in Grottafer­
rata 5, the hero's encounter with an Amazon was once a separate song which cul­
minated in Digenis' marriage to the defeated woman and that the unsatisfactory ending 
of the epic version results from the exigencies of a plot in which Digenis is already 
married. 

15 G 2254-55. The following verse (2256, 1>8eipEL S~ ~AAOIJ ageuf..LO<; Kat rrapaIJof..LO<; 
~L<;) is suspect: the thought lacks relevance to this context. 2254-55 present the 
woman's feelings in positive terms (the warmer love of women); the poet has not pre­
sented any evidence for the corrupting effect of illicit intercourse upon this woman 
(unfortunately, corresponding material of Z is here lacking). 

16 On the 'slave of love' motif in ancient literature see most recently R. O. A. M. 
Lyne, "Servitium amoris," CQ N.S. 29 (1979) 117-30; most relevant for our purposes 
are the Greek examples discussed at 118- 20. 



DYCK, ANDREW R., On "Digenis Akritas" Grottaferrata Version Book 5 , Greek, Roman and 
Byzantine Studies, 24:2 (1983:Summer) p.185 

190 DIGENIS AKRITAS, GROTTAFERRATA 5 

first problem is evaded by poetic sleight of hand. Digenis reports that 
he saved her lover from Mousour, whom he killed, and that he left 
him in custody with some friends 17 until his return. He adds: 'Y"W­
UTOll Be '1TaULlI EcP'TIlIa Kat 1TapallOJ,LOlI ,.wAa (G 2307). Now depreca­
tory terms such as 1TapafjaT'TIC; (G 2159, 2215), 0 '1TAallT,O"ac; (2187), 
and 0 1TAalloc; (2200) have been applied to the young man at various 
points in the preceding dialogue by both the abandoned bride and 
Digenis. However, at the time when he saved him from Mousour 
five days ago, Digenis had no way of knowing that the young man 
could be called an outlaw ('1TapallOJ,LOc;).18 It was simply necessary for 
the plot that he be able to be located. The remaining problem of the 
young man's psychology is not dealt with. We are not told why he 
abandoned his bride in the desert. We are left to assume, with the 
victim, that his motives were opportunistic, Nor are we told his 
feelings upon being confronted by Digenis with the bride he aban­
doned. Digenis-or rather the poet-imposes a solution. Digenis ad­
monishes him repeatedly not to abandon the woman again, adds a 
dire threat,19 and leaves. But will he, left to his own devices, be more 
reliable than before? The reader has no reason to believe that he has 
repented his previous behavior. 

Finally, Grottaferrata 5 is only weakly connected to the main thread 
of epic narrative. No attempt is made to bring it into chronological 
relation to the preceding events. On the other hand, the epilogue 
verses 2325-33, though designed for the purpose, provide only a su­
perficial link to the following narrative: we are suddenly informed 
that the events just described bring the calendar to mid-April, a 
convenient, if obvious, way of connecting them with the panegyric of 
May with which Grottaferrata 6 begins. The epilogue also depicts 
Digenis' state of mind-his feelings of guilt and shame at having 
committed adultery and his consequent decision to change his place of 
residence.20 The change of venue is likewise dictated by the desire to 

17 In G 2308-09, Z 2721 provides confirmation of Legrand's UVTWII for the non­
sensical aVTT/" 

18 So already Dennison B. Hull in Digenis Akritas: the Two-Blood Border Lord (Athens 
[Ohio] 1972) 142 (ad 5.263). 

19 The threat (2310-11) is oddly inserted in direct speech without being fully in­
tegrated into context. 

20 ~ ainxvvoJUVO, aVTTW JU'YaA~ a~LK1JUa" JUT' OAL'YOII 'Yap Eooga JUTOLKT/UtV 
7TOtT/UUL (G 2330-31). Note that the following line (2332, ~ul: TO 'YIIWllaL Kat avrY, rY,1I 
7TapaIlOJ.W1I ~LII) has been suspected (by Mavrogordato ad loc.) because it renders the 
antecedent of Tjv in the next line ambiguous (it should refer back to JUTOLKT}O"tV, not 
~LII). The problem is commonly solved, e.g. by Mavrogordato and Trapp, by printing 
2332 in parentheses. This is not an appropriate solution, however, once the poem is 
conceded to have been composed orally (c! Albert B. Lord, The Singer of Tales [Cam-



DYCK, ANDREW R., On "Digenis Akritas" Grottaferrata Version Book 5 , Greek, Roman and 
Byzantine Studies, 24:2 (1983:Summer) p.185 

ANDREW R. DYCK 191 

forge a link with the following book, in which the borderer and his 
wife are encamped in a meadow. Though originally the encampment 
in the meadow was not motivated by a change from one dwelling to 
another,21 it is so interpreted by the epic redactor. How this change of 
location is supposed to help the hero's psychological state is, how­
ever, never explained. 

In the usually straightforward epic Digenis Akritas, Book 5 of the 
Grottaferrata version stands apart with its strange twistings of plot and 
deformations of character. These fall into place, however, if one be­
gins from the assumption that the poet was struggling to integrate 
recalcitrant originally autonomous materials into a very different over­
all scheme. The resources that the epic poet had at his disposal for the 
task were modest: the slave-of-Iove motif is invoked to account for 
the woman's continued affection for the man who abandoned her~ the 
cliche of youthful passion appears in the prologue as a partial excuse 
for the hero's behavior; and no psychological background at all is 
provided for the young man who first abandons and then accepts back 
his bride. The poet, then, tries to satisfy the demands both of his 
large-scale plot and of a tale in which Digenis wins a bride under 
different circumstances, without being able to bridge the gap com­
pletely. 

Karl Lachmann's theory of epic composition from individual lays is 
no Ipnger given much credence for the Homeric poems with their 
considerably greater internal unity.22 The theory is much more plau­
sible, however, as applied to Digenis Akritas. We have seen that 
Grottaferrata Books 5 and 6 are connected to the main narrative by 
the thinnest and most superficial of tissue. The earliest stage in the 
formation of the saga is likely to have been a series of songs on the 

bridge (Mass.) 1960] 207-20; C. A. Trypanis, Gnomon 45 [1973] 615-16 and Greek 
Poetry from Homer to Seferis [London/Boston 1981] 499ft"; R. Beaton, "Was Digenis 
Akrites an Oral Poem?" BMGS 7 (981) 7-27, argues that the poem is a conflation of 
learned and oral traditions), since in an oral poem no graphic convention can dis­
ambiguate the text. The suspect line cannot be dispensed with, however, since it is 
needed to explain 2330: why should Digenis feel ashamed in her presence if she does 
not know? Order can be restored merely by transposing 2331 and 2332. 

21 Rather, we have a version of the 'bower of love' motif so common in romance: cf 
A. R. Littlewood, "Romantic Paradises: The Role of the Garden in Byzantine Ro­
mance," BMGS 5 (1979) 95-114 at 97ft" (on our scene see 101). Note that it is only at 
the very end of Grottaferrata 6 (the epic redactor!) that Digenis decides that he wishes 
to live on the Euphrates. 

22 Salvatore Impellizzeri, II Digenis Akritas. L 'epopea di Bisanzio (Florence 1940), 
rightly recognizes the primacy of the Einzellied in Digenis Akritas (though without 
reference to Book 5: see 25ft) but adds an unfortunate attempt to revive the application 
of Lachmann's theory to the Homeric epics as well (102ft). 



DYCK, ANDREW R., On "Digenis Akritas" Grottaferrata Version Book 5 , Greek, Roman and 
Byzantine Studies, 24:2 (1983:Summer) p.185 

192 DIGENIS AKRITAS, GROTTAFERRATA 5 

"Deeds of Digenis" narrating his encounters with various a1TEMrat. 
These will have spawned in turn set-pieces on such themes as "Di­
genis' winning of his bride," "Digenis' meeting with the emperor," 
"Digenis' house," and "Digenis' death." At a later stage a "Lay of 
the Emir" will have been added to account for the origin and name 
of so brilliant a hero. In any case, it is clear that in Digenis Akritas the 
individual song is primary, the combination of songs into a connected 
narrative secondary and superficia1.23 

THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT Los ANGELES 

December, 1982 

23 This paper was delivered 15 October 1982 at the Byzantine Studies Conference in 
Chicago. I am grateful to various participants for their interest and encouragement, as 
well as to Professors Erich Trapp and David Blank for reading a version in typescript 
and giving me the benefit of their comments.