Literature in Frankish Greece 311
“telling” and to the audience “listening”; references to “writing” and to “this
book” are much rarer and typically accompanied by references to the narrator
speaking (and/or the audience listening). References to anyone reading the
work are rarest of all.
That the Greek Chronicle was intended above all to be heard is confirmed by
the numerous aspects of its style that are characteristic of a “heard text”—that
is, one which needs to interact with its listeners in particular ways to facilitate
their understanding. Thus, for example, the Chronicle has an episodic character
suitable for presentation in instalments. Reading the work, the links between
episodes soon take on a familiar flavour—“now I’m going to stop talking about
x and I’m going to talk about y”—and the narrator also often refers back to
events already narrated or gives a taste of material to come; such reminders
help keep the listener on course. The Greek Chronicle also relies heavily on
speech acts, a more dramatic way of conveying events that is inherently more
suitable in a spoken performance. Likewise, the narrator has a strong presence
in the Chronicle, frequently stepping in to address his audience, perhaps as
already noted to mark a change of subject, or else to make an appeal to the
audience, or alternatively and rather charmingly to complain of boredom.
Such interventions are common to both the French and Greek versions, while
not always exactly coinciding, and this again shows that they shared a source
with a highly oral character.63
So the Chronicle was clearly originally written as a work which could be
orally performed and as part of this it is full of oral style. The writer is very
familiar with the oral mode and presents his work very much in this context,
while also never pretending to be an oral poet: this does not seem to be a con-
scious attempt to mimic the oral, but rather a written work that is soaked in
orality and knows no other way to tell its tale. Accordingly, the Greek Chronicle
is also a significantly formulaic work. Close analysis of H reveals a high level
of formula use comparable to the French chansons de geste, a level which it is
argued is indicative of an oral context to the work.64 Another aspect of this
63 Changes of subject, for example: H442–3, B25; H1199–1201, B76; H1336–8, B88; H2128–9,
B137; H3043–5, B208; H3138–9, B217; H3173–4, FB220; H3464–6, B254; in Greek version
only, for example 4678–80; in French only, for example 536. Looking back or forward, for
example: H3050, B209; H3179, B221; H3469, 255; in Greek only 7307; in French only 79, 218,
399, 461, 556, 563. Appeals to the audience, for example (in Greek only): H2755, H4769.
Complaints, for example: H1337, B87, H2816–8, B193, H6258–9, B440, H7031–5, B485;
Greek only: H845, H1092–5, H1734, 2923; French only (after close of the Greek version):
826, 999.
64 Michael Jeffreys, “Formulas in the Chronicle of the Morea,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 28
(1975), 142–95; summarised in Jeffreys, “Oral Background,” pp. 518–21.