118 Part One: Texts and Contexts
the Technopaegnia, the Anacreontea, a number of poems by Gregory of Nazian-
zos as well as the collection of epigrams I just mentioned. Constantine the
Rhodian had nothing to do with AP XV, 28–40 (copied some twenty years
earlier by scribe B^3 ) or with AP XV, 41–51 (copied some two centuries later by
scribe Sp). There is no book AP XV. It is to be hoped that future editors will
take this into consideration and future scholars will stop referring to AP XV as
a separate book^119.
**
*
Byzantine Classicism and Modernism
Although the anthology of Cephalas was widely read in tenth-century
Byzantium, and probably also in later periods^120 , it had barely any impact on
Byzantine poets and did not significantly influence the course of Byzantine
poetry. Only few Byzantine poems display the epigrammatic concinnity, the
sense of poetic closure, the elegant technique of the elegiac and all the other
fine qualities that make the classical epigram what it is: grand poetry in
miniature. Only rarely does one stumble upon obvious literary reminiscences
and only rarely can one identify an ancient epigram as the direct literary model
for a Byzantine poem. Cameron pointed out that Geometres borrowed the
word 4eisma (Cr. 281, 17) from Gregory of Nazianzos (AP VIII, 9. 1 and 113. 1),
imitated a pythian oracle in Cr. 281, 14, and adapted an epigram by Palladas
(AP XI, 386) in Cr. 331, 6^121. To this list of literary reminiscences one may add
the following poems. The elegiac poem, no. Cr. 340, 25, which deals with the
unlucky fate of a fawn that was hunted down, jumped into the sea and died
there in fishing nets, obviously imitates an epigram by Tiberius Illustris
(APIX, 370). The satirical poem on a eunuch, Cr. 293, 2, imitates a well-known
(^119) Laur. XXXII 16 (a. 1280–83) contains two collections of epigrams: on fols. 3–6 and 381–
384 (see CAMERON 1993: 201–216). The first collection ultimately derives from the Pala-
tine manuscript, as shown by the following series of epigrams: AP XV, 9; epitaph to the
wife of emperor Maurice; AP XV, 29. XV, 9 was added to Cephalas’ anthology by scribe
J; XV, 29 was copied by scribe B. The surprising combination of XV, 9 and 29 in Laur.
XXXII 16 points in the direction of the Palatine manuscript as the most likely source.
(^120) For the text history of the Greek Anthology in the twelfth century, see CAMERON 1993:
128–129 and 340–341. It should also be borne in mind that Planudes and other Palae-
ologan scholars may well have found their tenth-century sources in manuscripts of the
eleventh or twelfth century.
(^121) See CAMERON 1993: 337–339. Geometres adapted Palladas’ epigram also in his Dispute:
ed. GRAUX 1880: 278 (no. 6).