No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Two heroes, two lives in the Grottaferrata Digenes Akrites
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 January 2016
Abstract
The status of Digenes Akrites as hero needs to be reconsidered. For this purpose, a comparison with his father can serve as a starting-point. Father and son are compared in two contexts: the family and the married couple. The differences between them reveal a hero who is not uncontroversial when it comes to family ties: Digenes isolates himself from his family and fails his wife with regard to faithfulness, trust and inseparability. Consequently, he is punished with childlessness. It is only when the oppositions between father and son are considered to be instances of dramatic irony that their true meaning is revealed.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies, University of Birmingham 2007
References
1 See Galatariotou, C., ‘Structural oppositions in the Grottaferrata Digenes Akrites’, BMGS 11 (1987) 29–68 Google Scholar, and Magdalino, P., ‘Honour among Romaioi: the framework of social values in the world of Digenes Akrites and Kekaumenos’, BMGS 13 (1989) 183–218 Google Scholar for the Grottaferrata version, Ekdawi, S., Fann, P., Philokyprou, E., ‘Bold men, fair maids and affronts to their sex: the characterisation and structural roles of men and women in the Escorial Λιγενής Ακριτης ’, BMGS 17 (1993) 25–42 Google Scholar for the Escorial version.
2 See also the appeal of Alexiou, S., ‘Digenes Akrites: Escorial or Grottaferrata? An overview’, in Beaton, R. and Ricks, D. (ed.), Digenes Akrites: New Approaches to Byzantine Heroic Poetry (London 1993) 24 Google Scholar for, among other things, an analysis of the element of irony in Digenes Akrites.
3 C. Galatariotou, ‘The primacy of the Escorial Digenes Akrites: an open and shut case?’ in Beaton and Ricks, Digenes Akrites, 49. See also Jeffreys, E., ‘Digenes and Charos: G and E reconsidered’, in Constantinides, C.N. et al.(ed.), Φιλέλλην. Studies in Honour of Robert Browning (Venice 1996) 117-31Google Scholar for an example of the relative coherence of G.
4 Ricks, D., ‘Is the Escorial Akrites a unitary poem?’ B 59 (1989) 184–207 Google Scholar; idem (ed.), Byzantine Heroic Poetry (Bristol 1990); Alexiou, S. (ed.), Βασίλειος Λιγενής Άκρίτης καί το άσμα τοο Άρμοόρη (Athens 1985)Google Scholar.
5 U. Moennig, ‘Digenes = Alexander? The relationship between Digenes Akrites and the Byzantine Alexander romance in their different versions’, in Beaton and Ricks, Digenes Akrites, 115.
6 R. Beaton, ‘An epic in the making? The early versions of Digenes Akrites’, in Beaton and Ricks, Digenes Akrites, 59.
7 C. Galatariotou, ‘The primacy of the Escorial Digenes Akrites’, in Beaton and Ricks, Digenes Akrites, 50.
8 Some examples: T. Papadopoullos, ‘The akritic hero: socio-cultural status in the light of comparative data’, in Beaton and Ricks, Digenes Akrites, 131-8; P. Mackridge, ‘“None but the brave deserve the fair”: abduction, elopement, seduction and marriage in the Escorial Digenes Akrites and Modern Greek heroic songs’, in Beaton and Ricks, Digenes Akrites, 150-60; Magdalino, ‘Honour among Romaioi’, 190; Beaton, R., ‘Cappadocians at court: Digenes and Timarion’, in Mullett, M. and Smythe, D. (ed.), Alexios I. Komnenos. Papers of the Second Belfast Byzantine International Colloquium (Belfast 1996) 329-38Google Scholar, here at p. 330: ‘an unparallelled hero’; Galatariotou, C., ‘Open space/closed space: the perceived worlds of Kekaumenos and Digenes Akrites’, in Mullett, and Smythe, , Alexios I Komnenos, 303-28, 303 Google Scholar: ‘an idealised, romanticised hero’; Galatariotou, , ‘Structural oppositions’, 39, 65 Google Scholar.
9 Papadopoullos, ‘The akritic hero’, 134; Magdalino, ‘Honour among Romaioi’, 192; Galatariotou, ‘Structural oppositions’, 46.
10 Mackridge, ‘None but the brave’, 153, 158; Magdalino, ‘Honour among Romaioi’, 190-2; Beaton, ‘Cappadocians’, 330; Galatariotou, ‘Structural oppositions’, 44–51.
11 Mackridge, ‘None but the brave’, 157-8; Magdalino, ‘Honour among Romaioi’, 190-4; Galatariotou, ‘Structural oppositions’, 44–51, 65 except for one occasion: the murder of Maximo.
12 Beaton, ‘Cappadocians’, 330; Ricks, D., ‘The pleasures of the chase: a motif in Digenes Akrites ’, BMGS 13 (1989) 290-4Google Scholar, more specifically 290; Mackridge, ‘None but the brave’, 153-4.
13 Papadopoullos, ‘The akritic hero’, 133-5; Odorico, P., ‘L’Akritis a-t-il bâti un château?’, Bulletin, Association internationale d’études du sud-est Européen 28 (1998-9) 199–204 Google Scholar.
14 Galatariotou, ‘Structural oppositions’, 39.
15 See Oikonomides, N., ‘L’”épopée” de Digénis et la frontière orientale de Byzance aux Xe et Xle siècles’, TM 7 (1979) 375-97Google Scholar; A. Bryer, ‘The historian’s Digenes Akrites’, in Beaton and Ricks, Digenes Akrites, 102; Mackridge, ‘None but the brave’, 151.
16 Mackridge, ‘None but the brave’, 151.
17 D. Ricks, ‘The pleasures of the chase’, 290-4; Mackridge, ‘None but the brave’, 153.
18 G VIII, 64–141. For the edition and translation, see Digenis Akritis: the Grottaferrata and Escorial Versions, ed. Jeffreys, E. [Cambridge Medieval Classics, 7] (Cambridge 1998)Google Scholar.
19 G I, 292-300.
20 E. Jeffreys, ‘The Grottaferrata version of Digenes Akrites: a reassessment’, in Beaton and Ricks, Digenes Akrites, 35.
21 I, 263-90 and IV, 323-5 describe such meetings between families.
22 IV, 50-1. See also Beaton, R., ‘Was Digenes Akrites an oral poem?’, BMGS 7 (1981) 7–27 Google Scholar, 19-21.
23 II, 56-8.
24 Jouanno, C., Digénts Akritas, le héros des frontières: une épopée Byzantine (Turnhout 1998) 89 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Galatariotou, ‘Structural oppositions’, 31-4.
25 I, 80-5; I, 138; II, 98; II, 228-32; III, 16-18.
26 This is considered a great sacrifice and stressed several times: II, 53-5; II, 190; II, 226.
27 II, 60-80.
28 II, 65-74.
29 III, 333: A similar wording in relation to his mother is to be found in III, 226.
30 III, 337-8. See Galatariotou, ‘Structural oppositions’, 37-40, and Magdalino, P., ‘The Byzantine aristocratic oikos’, in Angold, M. (ed.), The Byzantine Aristocracy IX to XIII Centuries (Oxford 1984) 92–111 Google Scholar for the importance of the θΐκος for the aristocratic way of life. For the relation between the nuclear family and the larger group of kinsmen, see Kazhdan, A. and Epstein, A. Wharton, Change in Byzantine Culture in the Eleventh and Twelfth Century (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London 1985) 101 Google Scholar.
31 III, 257: ‘ρωμαίαν’. This clothing may have semi-imperial connotations: Jeffreys, Digenis Akritis, 59.
32 III, 266: ‘ξενιτείας’. See also Jeffreys, E., ‘Akritis and outsiders’, in Smythe, D. (ed.), Strangers to Themselves: the Byzantine Outsider (Aldershot 2000) 189–202 Google Scholar, 193.
33 Examples can be found in II, 30; II, 262-3; III, 126; HI, 247; III, 316. They are called a sign of solidarity by Magdalino, ‘Honour among Romaioi’, 195.
34 See also C. Galatariotou, ‘Open space/closed space’, 303-28.
35 II, 260-85.
36 I, 168.
37 By the narrator: II, 162; by the brothers: II, 149 and II, 156, but they only talk about him, not to him.
38 ‘Σαρακηνέ’, ‘παράνομος’ and ‘έχθρός’ (II, 167-8).
39 II, 173.
40 At II, 173 and at II, 225. See also Jeffreys, ‘Akritis and outsiders’, 192-3.
41 According to Kriaias, E., Λεξικό TIJÇ μεσν:ιωνικής δημώδοος γραμματειας 1100-1669 XII (Thessaloniki 1993), 36–43 Google Scholar.
42 II, 226.
43 As a matter of fact, forms of ‘ξέ νος’ were associated with calls for compassion in vernacular literature, according to Kriaras, ibid.
44 Jeffreys, Digenes Akrites, 39 and id., ‘Akritis and outsiders’, 192-3.
45 The brothers in II, 241 and II, 246; the narrator in II, 244, to show that the brothers are addressing the Emir.
46 See Jeffreys, ‘Akritis and outsiders’, 194 for an overview of instances.
47 Magdalino, ‘Honour among Romaioi’, 193–4.
48 IV, 94-9.
49 Jouanno, Digénis Akritas, 53 also believes that Digenes only fights for personal reasons, which contrasts with his title of Akrites.
50 IV, 208-9.
51 I, 152-60; I, 184-90; III, 22; III, 41; III, 61-90; III, 108-15; III, 249-55; III, 262.
52 See Jeffreys, ‘Akritis and outsiders’, 198. She stresses that from a physical, military point of view, the acting alone is praiseworthy.
53 IV, 375: ‘κατ’ ΐδίαν’.
54 IV, 380-95.
55 IV, 743-5.
56 IV, 956; V, 21-2; VI, 279; VI, 563.
57 IV, 1028-30.
58 IV, 1030-84.
59 See especially IV, 1012.
60 VIII, 199-201.
61 VII, 114.
62 VII, 119-46.
63 VII, 156.
64 VIII, 194. See also Jeffreys, ‘Akritis and outsiders’, 192-3.
65 IV, 808-12.
66 V, 225-33.
67 II, 210-15.
68 II, 255-6.
69 III, 290-3.
70 111,319: ‘όρθη άγάπη’.
71 IV, 631-3.
72 VI, 525-38.
73 An exact expression of this idea: IV, 549. Another example is to be found at IV, 1054-79. See Galatariotou, ‘Open space/closed space’, 310-13 for the importance of sight in Digenes Akrites.
74 Galatariotou, ‘Structural oppositions’, 62-3.
75 VIII, 121-3.
76 VIII, 120.
77 II, 247 by the Emir’s brother-in-law. It is used in this verse as a parallel for ‘αίτιον’, which means σφάλμα (mistake, error, fault, inaccuracy), according to Kriaras, Λεξικό της μεσαιωνικής δημώδους γραμματείας, VIII (Thessaloniki 1982), 390-1.
78 V, 254-6.
79 IV, 391.
80 V, 12-20.
81 VI, 600-8.
82 VIII, 118-20.
83 II, 130.
84 III, 22-6; III, 37; III, 53-8; III, 62; III, 252-3.
85 III, 34-6.
86 III, 255.
87 He promises to hurry (II, 257; III, 22-6) and so he does (III, 37; III, 61-4; III, 83-8; III, 108-9; III, 115, III, 262-3).
88 VI, 721.
89 VI, 749-50.
90 VI, 721.
91 Galatariotou, ‘Structural oppositions’, 59-60; U. Moennig, ‘Digenes = Alexander?’ 112.
92 VI, 789-91.
93 VI, 792-8.
94 She acts as a kind of extension of his conscience; Jeffreys, Digenis Akritis, 151.
95 VI, 590-2; VI, 765-6.
96 VI, 593- 5; VI, 756-7.
97 VI, 771.
98 VI, 657-8.
99 In doing so, Digenes also violates his own principle not to slay a defeated enemy (VI, 266; VI, 269).
100 VI, 788.
101 Dyck, A., ‘On Digenes Akrites, Grottaferrata version, Book 6’, GRBS 28 (1987) 349-69Google Scholar, more specifically 365-6, thinks there is a need for some kind of punishment for Maximo, as do Jeffreys, Digenis Akritis, 201 and Jouanno, Digénis Akritas, 183.
102 The Greek term to which this adjective refers is the adverb ‘άθλίως’.
103 II, 179; II, 193; II, 272.
104 II, 272-4.
105 II, 272; II 275-9.
106 II, 107-8.
107 II, 109-11.
108 II, 129-30.
109 II, 272.
110 III, 127-9.
111 II, 255.
112 See D. Ricks, ‘Digenes Akrites as literature’, 164-5, for the opposition between monogamy and the ‘conventional’ heroism of the Emir’s male relatives, where a man’s status is measured among other things by the number of girls he captures.
113 IV, 557-61.
114 IV, 571-5.
115 IV, 578-81.
116 Digenes will also use this word as an argument against Maximo’s proposal, but without result: VI, 773.
117 V, 288.
118 Z, 3729-32. Z is quoted here to complete the story, because a folio of G is missing (Jeffreys, Digenis Akritis, 197).
119 II, 49.
120 VII, 179-88.
121 V, 233; V, 288: ‘παράνομον μίξιν’. The adjective used here and in the following quotation denotes anything which is against the law.
122 V, 245: ‘πράξεως παρανόμου.’
123 V, 235; V, 238: ‘άμαρτίαν.’
124 V, 234; V, 248; V, 251-6.
125 V, 248: ‘ψυχής άμελείας.’ Carelessness and lack of control are recurring notions in Digenes Akrites when adultery is mentioned. According to Laiou, A., Mariage, amour et parenté à Byzance aux XIe-XIIIe siècles (Paris 1992) 68–70 Google Scholar, marriage was seen as a means of procreation and control over sexual desire. It is clear that in the case of Digenes, neither of these goals is reached. When the subject of Digenes’ adultery is raised, terms of control are used: see also V, 1-10, cited above.
126 V, 247.
127 V, 283-4. Digenes finds himself guilty (‘συνειδος κατήγορον’) of a sin and castigates himself (‘ταλανίζων’) for his ‘illicit deed’ (‘άθέσμφ πράξει’).
128 V, 286.
129 Sin: Z 3705; the devil is involved in Z 3707; Digenes’ reason is defeated by vile desire: Z 3713; he is ashamed: Z 3714.
130 VI, 772-4.
131 See Littlewood, A., ‘Romantic paradises: the role of the garden in the Byzantine romance’, BMGS 5 (1979) 95–114 Google Scholar, and Barber, C., ‘Reading the garden in Byzantium’, BMGS 16 (1992) 1–19.Google Scholar Digenes’ wife is also placed in such an environment on two occasions: VI, 4-41 and VII, 41. For the setting of Book VI, see A. Dyck, ‘On Digenes Akrites, Grottaferrata version, Book 6’. The girl herself is also described in terms of plants, flowers and fruits: IV, 434; IV, 543; IV, 786; VI, 30-4; VI, 110-11; VIII, 303.
132 See for instance Metochites, Theodore, On Philosophic Irony and Greek History, Miscellanea 8 and 93, ed. Agapitos, P.A., Hult, K. and Smith, O. (Nicosia and Göteborg 1996)Google Scholar.
133 Alexiou, M., ‘Literary subversion and the aristocracy in twelfth-century Byzantium: a stylistic analysis of the Timarion (ch. 6-10)’, BMGS 8 (1982-1983) 29–45 Google Scholar.
134 Muecke, D.C., Irony (London 1970) 10 Google Scholar.
135 Ibid., 48-9.
136 See for example the Schlegel brothers: Muecke, Irony, 18-19.
137 For these terms, see Muecke, , Irony, 28, 49–51 Google Scholar and Kaufer, D., ‘Irony, interpretive form and the theory of meaning’, Poetics Today 4 (1983) 451-64CrossRefGoogle Scholar, more specifically 452-3.
138 For the oral basis of Digenes Akrites, see Beaton, R., ‘Was Digenes Akrites an oral poem?’, 7-27, and Fenik, B., Digenis: Epic and Popular Style in the Escorial Version (Iraklio 1991)Google Scholar.
139 S. Ekdawi et al., ‘Bold men, fair maids and affronts to their sex’, 30-1.
140 II, 289-92.
141 IV, 819-21.
142 Muecke, Irony, 28-9.
143 Galatariotou, ‘Structural oppositions in the Grottaferrata Digenes Akrites’, 29-68.
144 Jouanno, Digénis Akritas, 127-8.