The Constantinian Excerpts, or Excerpta Constantiniana is the conventional name given to the mid-10th Century Byzantine palace encyclopedia commissioned by the scholar emperor Constantine VII ‘Porphyrogenitus’ (reign 945 to 959). It was a work arranged in 53 thematic topics and compiled from historical materials of 23 Greek historians from classical period to the 9th century. As the Latin title Excerpta suggests, the encyclopedia did not change nor rewrite the materials but rather use the method of excerption, that was, taking a chosen passage out of their original narrative context and put it into a new place according to the intended title of each volume.
As the volumes of texts ranged from virtue and vice to the succession of monarchs, this encyclopedia was important material for the ruling elites to consult on matters from the running of the imperial household to the governance of the empire itself. Moreover, because it contained texts of 23 Greek historians, it also became the only way these works survived through the ages, and thus Excerpta Constantiniana was also important for the study of ancient history, especially Republican and Imperial Rome.
The Excerpta was typically dated to te 940s, but it actually continued after Constantine’s death in 959 to the 980s. While the project itself was dedicated to Constantine VII, and he had an omnipresence in most of the literary projects at the mid-10th Century Byzantine court, the large scale and scope of the Excerpta (53 topics and 23 historians’ works) dictated that it was not a one-man enterprise but rather a work of a team made of court literati who were well-versed in classical literature and scribes trained in copying texts.
A key figure of the project was Basil Lekapenos. He was the illegitimate eunuch son of Emperor Romanos I Lekapenos, who was the co-emperor with Constantine VII until his deposition in 945 CE. Basil served loyally as parakoimomennos (chamberlain) at Constantine’s side. As a prominent member of Constantine’s inner circle, Basil was a major figure in both court politics and military campaigns of that era. Basil was able to keep his political fortune after Consantine’s death during the reign of Nikephoros II, and John I Tzimiskes, as the latter two emperors relied heavily on his administrative skills and political support to maintain their own position. In this way, his continuous and prominent political presence at the court after Constantine’s death probably ensured him enough resources (money and manpower) to support the compilation of Constantine’s projects and he could even commission some for his own leisure. When young Basil II (reign 976 to 1025), the grandson of Constantine VII, became of age and grew tired of endless regency, the old eunuch was exiled in 985 and most of his literary projects were terminated, including Excerpta.
We do not have a comprehensive list of personnel working for Basil Lekapenos. Given the fact that production of Excerpta started in the 940s and was completed in the 980s, we could reasonably infer that Basil’s team was sizeable. A closer look at the prominent court historians who were active during and after Constantine’s reign and involved in the writing of other Constantine’s literary works like De Thematibus, De Administrando Imperio, De Ceremoniis, and Theophanes Continuatus, among others, is therefore necessary. In this case, Joseph Genesius, Leo the Deacon, and Theodore Daphnopates are our best educated guess. Court historians like Joseph Genesius and Leo the Deacon were brought up because their works either made use of some of Constantine’s projects or took a pro-Macedonian stance that Constantine himself promoted, whereas Theodore Daphnopates was considered by some modern scholars as the author of the last part of Theophanes Continuatus, the six-volume official historiography sponsored by Constantine VII and Basil Lekapenos.
Although we do not know any of Excerpta’s compilers save Basil, a certain Theodosios the Younger was named on two of Excerpta manuscripts dated to the 16th century. These two manuscripts, one in Cambridge UK, and another in Brussels, named him as the person who 'compiled' the text. Since we also know that these manuscripts were copied by a different person, it was likely that the name Theodosios the Younger was kept in the lost original 10th-century manuscript. Although there still were many speculations to his roles, if we are to accept, he was indeed part of Constantine’s team, then his tasks mostly shifted from reading and identifying relevant passages from the original materials and excerpting them into the volume he was working on.
The Excerpta project surveyed a wide range of sources for its compilation, from the Greek classical period to the mid 9th century. Some of the most important historians and works cited include Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon (Anabasis and Cyropaedia), Polybius, Flavius Josephus, Arrian of Nicomedia, Appian of Alexandria, Procopius (War and Building), Agathias of Myrina, Menander the Protector, and George the Monk.
These historians’ works were divided into the following themes. Only five volumes survived in full, and they are:
- On Virtues and Vices (Excerpta de Virtutibus et Vitiis).
- On Gnomic Statements (Excerpta de Sententiis).
- On Embassies of Romans (Excerpta de Legationibus).
- On Embassies of Foreigners (Excerpta de Legationibus).
- On Ambushes against Monarchs (Excerpta de Insidiis).
While the rest of the titles were either found in the interference notes of the five surviving volumes or are subject to the speculation of modern scholars, they cover topics like military affairs (On Leading of the Army, On Victory, On Defeat), state politics (On Political Affairs, On Ecclesiastical Matters, On Magistrates), speeches (On Public Speeches), myths (On Pagan Myths, On Oracles), and even festivals (On Feats of Valour).
It was hypothesised by modern scholar that at least two set of manuscripts were commissioned during the compilation process of the Excerpta project. A draft version of the text on which compilers and researchers copied the materials and rearranged them according to different topics. During this process, both scribal mistakes and content misplacements were allowed and later highlighted by an editor and corrected with a red pen. After the draft version was completed, the court proceeded to produce a deluxe version, with illuminated and often gilded capital letter for the title as well as a better spacing and intertextual reference for the main text in miniature letters visually, and precise content under each entry.
Unfortunately, not all the manuscripts are preserved, either due to intermittent fires or major disasters, among which the Fourth Crusade in 1204 and the Fall of Constantinople in 1453 proved to be most devastating for the manuscripts stored at the Eastern Roman imperial library. As a result, only five out of 53 volumes survived in full. Of the surviving manuscripts, two were from the original 10th-century palace production, whereas the rest were the 16th-century copies of the lost 10th century manuscript. The two 10th-century manuscripts were Excerpta de Virtutibus et Vitiis, which is stored in Tours, France as Turonensis 980, and Excerpta de Sententiis, preserved in the Vatican as Vaticanus gr. 73. Then we have Excerpta de Insidiis, survived in two 16th-century manuscripts (Scorialenis Ω.I.11, ff. 74 r–196 v and Parisinus. gr. 1666, ff. 97 r–146 r) copied from the original one in Venice by Iohannes Mauromates from Corfou for Don Diego Hurtado de Mendoz. The original one was presumably taken from the imperial library by the Venetians in 1204. Lastly, we have the original deluxe manuscript for Excerpta de Legationibus, which was stored in Madrid until it was burnt in a fire in 1671. Luckily, several copies of text were made by Andreas Darmarios between 1574 and 1575 for Antonio Augustín, the Archbishop of Tarragona (1517 to 1586). Darmarios’s copies can now be found in Milan, Brussels, Cambridge, Madrid, Munich, Naples, Vatican, and Paris. Aside from Darmarios, a Sophianos Melissenos also participated in manuscript production, as scribe for the Cambridge one at least.
Below are some of the extracts from the Excerpta. This was an identical preface (translated by Andráa Németh) to every volume, and it showed how and why the project was conceived, although it was also important to read in between the lines, and make a distinction between embellishing rhetoric or actual reality. The preface started with glorifying those who wrote history before:
How many people, emperors and laymen of antiquity, now were not drugged or weaken by pleasure, but upheld the nobility of spotless soul by virtues, they persevered themselves by actions, and were immersed in literary activities? Of these, the ones who undertook literary pursuits as a consequence of having been passionate about acquiring knowledge have – each in his own manner – written something remarkable.
Then, it discussed the compilatory method of the book:
Constantine of the purple born…judged that the best thing, the most conducive to the common good and useful for governing conduct is– in the first place– to collect by means of diligent research all manner of books from all over the known world, books teeming with every kind and variety of knowledge. Next, he thought it necessary to divide and distribute their great quantity and extent, which weigh heavily on the understanding and seem to many to be irksome and burdensome, into small sections. Hence, the profit of this fertile material could
In addition, a laudatory poem praising Constantine’s effort to promote and admiring his wisdom is also attached at the very beginning:
Let us crown him with words, as he is fond of words.
In his brilliance he stands out incomparably among rulers,
A luminous Giant shining forth like the sun
with the goodness of his power upon all foes and loyal subjects alike.
Let all voices shout as one to God:
‘Render him another Tithonus in years,
so that he might give the best to our life’
(ibid, 63)
When readers were consulting the main text, there were notes to guide them in case they wanted to look for the original materials or another entry that contained relevant information. For example, every subsection of the volume would start with ‘Historians (name) said’ to make sure the readers knew where the information came from, and there were also marginal notes ‘search in the volume (name)’ which pointed readers to another volume should they want to know more about a certain subject.
The Excerpta project was a powerful testament of the classical heritage of the Eastern Roman Empire. The value of the Excerpta project was twofold. From a contemporary point of view, it was a powerful political message, celebrating Constantine VII’s wisdom and cementing him as a wise and learned ruler in Roman history. In this way, it also greatly reinforced the legitimacy of Constantine VII and his dynasty. Imperial systematisation of the past not only offered a simple way for its reader to navigate the complicated investigation of past events written by other authors but also demonstrated (what they considered) the superiority of the Roman polity and the divine favour it solely enjoyed. Through this public performance of intellectual competence, Constantine distanced and distinguished himself to the previous regime of Romanos I, which failed to preserve proper knowledge and therefore diminished the imperial authority, and demonstrated to his court that his new rule was represented by the public display of an ethos of intellectual learning, thereby confirming the all-powerfulness of the Roman emperorship.
On the other hand, although fragmentary and taken out of context, sometimes the historians and historical works quoted in the Excerpta became the only way these texts survived. There were many texts that would have been lost had they not been cited by the project. This was especially the case for Roman authors such as Polybius, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, and Cassius Dio, whose entire work or most of it survived through the Excerpta project. In addition, late antique historians like Priscus of Panium, Menander the Protector, and Peter the Patrician would have seen their works suffer the same fate of oblivion had the Excerpta project not existed. The Excerpta project’s importance in studying classical, late antique, and early medieval history cannot be stressed enough because of its role as a ‘textual medium’ through which these classical, late antique, and early medieval works, all of which form our very basic understanding of the ancient and medieval world, are transmitted to modern readers.