|
LITERATURE AND POLITICS
Chairs:
Sysse G. Engberg, Ida Toth
Georgios Kalafikis
,
Orationes parallelae
: The Laudations of Q. Aurelius Symmachus and Themistius
to the Brother-Emperors Valentinian I and Valens; Propagating Common Principles
for Governing and Defending Both “partes imperii” ca. 365-370 A.D.
Mattia C. Chiriatti
,
Gregory of Nyssa’s Funeral λόγοι as an Early Model of Byzantine Rhetoric and Imperial
Propaganda
Ryan W. Strickler
,
Wolves and Centaurs in Byzantium:
Dehumanizing the Enemy in the Seventh-Century Byzantine Literature
Oscar Prieto Dominguez
,
Writing during the Iconoclasm: Literature as a Political Weapon
Sysse G. Engberg
,
The Political Use of the
Old Testament
in Byzantium
Dimitrios Georgakopoulos
,
Spaneas
at the Court of the Lusignan
442
Georgios Kalafikis
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece;
gkalaficis@yahoo.gr
Orationes parallelae
: The Laudations of Q. Aurelius Symmachus and Themistius
to the Brother-Emperors Valentinian I and Valens; Propagating Common
Principles for Governing and Defending Both “partes imperii” ca. 365-370 A.D.
This paper focus on five speeches, delivered by the orators Q. Aurelius Symmachus and
Themistius in favour of the two brother-emperors, Valentinian I and Valens. These five orations
can be grouped in three pairs, in relation to their subject. Actually, it seems as if both rhetors tried
to answer to certain questions about how the empire should be governed and defended in the best
possible way ca. 365-370 AD. In chronological order, we deal with Themistius’ “Oration 6 (364 AD):
φιλάδελφοι ἢ περὶ φιλανθρωπίας” and “Oration 7 (367 AD): περὶ τῶν ἠτυχηκότων ἐπὶ Οὐάλεντος”,
Symmachus’ “Laudatio in Valentinianum prior (368/9 AD)” and “Laudatio in Valentinianum altera
(370 AD)” and finally with Themistius’ “Oration 10 (370 AD): ἐπὶ τῆς εἰρήνης Οὐάλεντι”.
All these panegyrics seem to propagate some common principles about the state administration
and the defence of the empire by applying similar motifs. This shouldn’t be regarded as a coincidental
but a deliberate intention. A balanced distribution of imperial power (a), the defence against
the barbarians (b), and the amelioration of the defences by fortifying the frontiers as well as by
reinforcing the troops and strengthening the army in general (c), constitute the three pillars onto
which the two brother-emperors should always base their policy. So, these speeches weren’t only
supposed to praise whatever success the rulers had achieved until then, but maybe also aimed at
instigating further imperial action towards the same triple direction: at first, as a proper response to
the regime instability (a), then as a suitable reaction to the empire’s military troubles (b) and finally
as an appropriate solution to its strategic problems (c)
In summary, Symmachus and Themistius shared similar or complementary opinions in all
the aforesaid issues. When it comes to the imperial system, both orators spoke of a symmetric
imperial order of at least two equally-ranking emperors, because symmetry favoured balance and
balance favoured stability (Themistius, Oration 6, 364 AD. – Symmachus, Laudatio prior, 368/9
AD). Both of them argued as well that the emperors should anyway consider foreign barbarians,
not domestic opponents and usurpers, as the ‘public enemy number one’ (Themistius, Oration 7,
367 AD. – Symmachus, Laudatio prior, 368/9 AD). Having all these in mind, the orators underlined
the commitment of the two brother-emperors towards the task of developing proper military
strategies for tackling with barbarians and for promoting peace and security. So, according to their
panegyrists, Valentinian and Valens shared a common objective: their goal was the containment
– strategically speaking – of all foreign enemies well out of the imperial borders. In line with this
strategy, border fortifications and the reinforcement of the army combined with military campaigns
and peace treaties were seen as a means to an end: an effective defence that would ensure total
protection for the entire empire (Symmachus, Laudatio altera, 370 AD. – Themistius, Oration 10,
370 AD). In this way, all these speeches seemed like “παράλληλοι λόγοι” or “orationes parallelae”,
either in Greek or in Latin.
443
In parallel though, the perception of the frontier(s) (limes-limites) primarily as a ‘demarcation
line’ separating the Greco-Roman world (οἰκουμένη) from the barbarian one (barbaricum), such as
it was normally thought off during the classic Roman imperial era, was transformed into a concept
of a virtually ‘continuous fortified line of defence’ from the very start of the Byzantine period during
Late Antiquity. Thus, a real change in terminology, as well in mentality, is lurking for the Early
Byzantine Empire.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
