Anthologies and Anthologists 87derives its epigrams from the anthology of Cephalas, was compiled during the
reign of Leo VI (886–912)^14. Moreover, the collection of epigrams at the end of
the B manuscript (AP XV, 28–40) provides an important chronological clue
that has gone unnoticed. The original lemma attached to AP XV, 32 reads: “by
Arethas the Deacon”, to which scribe J added in the late 940s: “who also
became archbishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia”^15. This clearly indicates that
the original lemma was written when Arethas had not yet become archbishop:
that is, before 902. Taken in conjunction, the above data suggest that the
anthology of Cephalas dates from the last decade of the ninth century.
The anthology of Cephalas consisted of the following nine sections: (1)
erotic (AP V), (2) anathematic (AP VI), (3) sepulchral (AP VII), (4) epideictic
(AP IXa), (5) on works of art (AP IXb), (6) protreptic (AP X), (7) bacchic
(APXIa), (8) scoptic (AP XIb) and (9) pederastic (AP XII). It was followed by
a collection of epigrams in unusual metres (AP XIII) and by a collection of
riddles, mathematical problems and oracles (AP XIV). At the beginning of his
anthology Cephalas placed the ancient prefaces in verse attached to the Gar-
land of Meleager, the Garland of Philip and the Cycle of Agathias (AP IV)^16.
The contents of the original Cephalan compilation do not fully correspond
with the modern concept of an “anthology”, a collection of poems put together
with the objective to bring like to like. It is worth noticing that Cephalas did
not restrict his collection merely to epigrams, but also included two long poems
that are certainly not epigrammatic, Nonnos’ Paraphrase and Christodoros of
Thebes’ Ekphrasis (AP II). Likewise, Constantine the Rhodian added non-
epigrammatic material at the end of the Palatine manuscript: John of Gaza’s
Ekphrasis, the Technopaegnia and the Anacreontea. It is not known whether it
was Cephalas or Constantine the Rhodian to whom we owe Paul the Silen-
tiary’s Ekphrasis and Gregory of Nazianzos’ theological poems (found at the
beginning of the Palatine manuscript), but it does not really matter. As I
pointed out in the second chapter (pp. 68–69), Byzantine manuscripts may
contain a hotchpotch of various kinds of poetry, varying from short epigrams
to long poems. The medieval approach to poetry is not as rigid and priggish as
that of the moderns, and it is certainly not based on any considerations of
genre; anything of interest may be copied and, judging by the contents of
Byzantine manuscripts, actually was copied. It is therefore hardly surprising
that we find non-epigrammatic texts before and after the actual anthology.
Cephalas and Constantine the Rhodian simply followed the editorial practice
of their time.
(^14) See CAMERON 1993: 254–256.
(^15) See CAMERON 1993: 313.
(^16) See CAMERON 1993: 121–159.