310 Page
that production of works in Greek was an important part of literary activity in
the principality and that at some point the Greek vernacular had now become
a valid literary vehicle for the Franks.
This should be seen as just one aspect of the massive changes in the prin-
cipality between around 1260 and 1330, years, which saw a steady decline in
the Frenchness of the Morea. If the first six decades of the principality were
glorious, prosperous and French, then the period to around 1330 saw instead
steady territorial losses, the extinction of many of the original families of the
conquest, and growing Italian influence. As a result, from the early years of
the 14th century the glory days of Villehardouin rule were looked back on with
nostalgia. This is also a period when, for whatever reason, the use of Greek by
the Franks of the Morea became well established and it is the context for the
creation of the Chronicle of the Morea.61
If You Know Letters, Start Reading. But if You Don’t Know How to
Read, then Sit Down Beside Me and Listen
Thus the Greek Chronicle (H 1351–2) shows it knows its potential audience and
offers them a practical choice. Some are literate, and for them, the Chronicle
exists as a book to be picked up and read, perhaps silently, perhaps out loud.
But others have not learnt to read and so the book also exists as the record or
the source of a vocal performance. Perhaps the book is to be read to others
by a literate person; perhaps the book is in some sense a record of a perfor-
mance. Although this discussion will deal principally with the Greek Chronicle,
as being most similar to the original work, it is worth emphasising that the
French B similarly presents itself as a work that was both read and listened to,
and that both Greek and French versions of the Chronicle manifestly shared a
source that had a strong oral flavour.62
It is clear that the Chronicle was composed as a written work—it is simply
too aware of itself as a book and of the act of writing (e.g. H1197–8, 1340–44,
2816, 3298). We can be confident that H was both read and heard but certainly,
of the two options, reading would seem to have been the minority choice.
Throughout the work, the narrative voice repeatedly refers to “speaking” and
61 Christophe Furon, “Entre mythes et histoire: Les origines de la Principauté d’Achaϊe dans
la Chronique de Morée,” Revue des études byzantines 62 (2004), 133–57; Rodrigues, French
Chronique, pp. 51–53; Shawcross, Chronicle, pp. 244–51.
62 For a full account of the Chronicle’s orality across both B and H, see Shawcross, Chronicle,
pp. 113–84.