Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Procopius De aedificiis 4.2.1––22 on the Thermopylae Frontier

Procopius De aedificiis 4.2.1––22 on the Thermopylae Frontier This article compares topographical and archaeological remains of the Thermopylae frontier with the ancient testimonia of the sixth century historian Procopius of Caesareia ( De aedificiis 4.2.1.––22). It was revealed that: many of the frontier fortifications described were initially built before the sixth century; the fortified κκॕλॉε॓ισσख़ο&uacgr;ύρραα mentioned should be equated with the Dhééma Pass; and the commercial settlement of Myropóóles is best identified with the modern village of Kááto Dhióó Vounáá. Written in Attic prose, this passage represents a rhetorical exercise, the climax of which turned not on the ancient battlefield of Thermopylae, but rather on a mountain pass and it's highway that neutralized the Thermopylae defenses if they were ever controlled by the enemy. We were told that only the Emperor Justinian's wisdom could grasp this critical fact. Additionally, Procopius employed many rhetorical devices in this narrative: ττóóॠπख़οॢς, १χρρóóννख़οॢς, , ἄγγααॕλμμαα, ἔκκ०φρραασσ॓ιॢς, ॠπαανν॑ηγγρρ॓ικκóóॢς and employed imperial propaganda, praise, and exaggeration as well. In short, the passage is a classic example of selective story telling that may have found its inspiration in the Hunnic raid of 539/540 and the Herodotean account of the Persian invasion of 480 BC. While Procopius' account remains our best topographical description of the late antique Thermopylae frontier, one can only say that more archaeological questions were left unanswered than were resolved. In short, as an archaeological source, the De aedificiis is a disappointing and vexing resource filled with equivocations. Finally, one may doubt that Procopius ever did visit the Thermopylae frontier, even though during his career he certainly had ample opportunity to do so. His account, therefore, must have been based upon secondary sources, whether imperial archival material, itineraries, or military staff reports and were not the result of personal autopsy. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Byzantinische Zeitschrift de Gruyter

Procopius De aedificiis 4.2.1––22 on the Thermopylae Frontier

Byzantinische Zeitschrift , Volume 104 (1) – Aug 1, 2011

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/procopius-de-aedificiis-4-2-1-22-on-the-thermopylae-frontier-8rTtG3WbI0
Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
Copyright ? 2011 Walter de Gruyter All rights reserved
Subject
I. ABTEILUNG
ISSN
0007-7704
eISSN
1864-449X
DOI
10.1515/BYZS.2011.005
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This article compares topographical and archaeological remains of the Thermopylae frontier with the ancient testimonia of the sixth century historian Procopius of Caesareia ( De aedificiis 4.2.1.––22). It was revealed that: many of the frontier fortifications described were initially built before the sixth century; the fortified κκॕλॉε॓ισσख़ο&uacgr;ύρραα mentioned should be equated with the Dhééma Pass; and the commercial settlement of Myropóóles is best identified with the modern village of Kááto Dhióó Vounáá. Written in Attic prose, this passage represents a rhetorical exercise, the climax of which turned not on the ancient battlefield of Thermopylae, but rather on a mountain pass and it's highway that neutralized the Thermopylae defenses if they were ever controlled by the enemy. We were told that only the Emperor Justinian's wisdom could grasp this critical fact. Additionally, Procopius employed many rhetorical devices in this narrative: ττóóॠπख़οॢς, १χρρóóννख़οॢς, , ἄγγααॕλμμαα, ἔκκ०φρραασσ॓ιॢς, ॠπαανν॑ηγγρρ॓ικκóóॢς and employed imperial propaganda, praise, and exaggeration as well. In short, the passage is a classic example of selective story telling that may have found its inspiration in the Hunnic raid of 539/540 and the Herodotean account of the Persian invasion of 480 BC. While Procopius' account remains our best topographical description of the late antique Thermopylae frontier, one can only say that more archaeological questions were left unanswered than were resolved. In short, as an archaeological source, the De aedificiis is a disappointing and vexing resource filled with equivocations. Finally, one may doubt that Procopius ever did visit the Thermopylae frontier, even though during his career he certainly had ample opportunity to do so. His account, therefore, must have been based upon secondary sources, whether imperial archival material, itineraries, or military staff reports and were not the result of personal autopsy.

Journal

Byzantinische Zeitschriftde Gruyter

Published: Aug 1, 2011

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$499/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month