Procopius, The Secret History (Constantinople: Tattler Press, 553). Reviewed by Maria of Tramelia.
In his latest tell-all book, famed scholar Procopius of Caesarea offers an uncharacteristically harsh condemnation of the general Belisarius and the reign of Justinian and his empress Theodora. Procopius is widely known for his multi-volume official accounts of both military and building projects for the Byzantine court, such as the History of the Wars and On Building. He also served as the legal advisor and secretary of Belisarius during his military conquests. This "secret history" stands in stark contrast to the positive tone of his previous works. While he once praised the benevolence and wisdom of the Emperor, Procopius here chooses to condemn almost all of Justinian’s decisions. This work reveals a deeply disgruntled and disillusioned employee. Ever the traditionalist, Procopius seems outraged by the actions of Belisarius, as well as the private and public lives of the Emperor and Empress.
Procopius’ intimate knowledge of the regime lends credibility to his criticisms of Justinian's finances and military, as well as the legal revisions that have occurred under the reign of Justinian and his predecessor Justin. Indeed, if Procopius had included only these political criticisms, one may have been tempted to agree with him about the failings of our government. However, Procopius betrays his own agenda with outlandish claims against his patrons.
In The Secret History, Procopius chooses to portray Belisarius and Justinian, both honorable men, as incompetent. Their actions are controlled and influenced almost entirely by the weaker sex, namely their wives. These women are portrayed as lacking any morals or inhibitions. His descriptions of the young Empress Theodora are exceedingly vulgar. While it is true that she does not possess the fine breeding of previous empresses, Procopius seems to take this a step further. Whether or not his claims can be substantiated is another story. One particularly lurid account of Theodora, detailing a salacious performance on stage with a swan, seems exceedingly doubtful. Has Procopius given himself over entirely to gossip fit only for taverns?
Are we as educated men expected to accept the accusation that our Emperor Justinian is in fact a demon sent to ruin us? Procopius even goes as far as to accuse the Emperor of having a vanishing head! Such superstition may be believed by the lower classes, but we would be foolish to take his words at face value. Should we choose to accept this judgment against our leaders, we must also accept Procopius’ condemnation of the aristocracy. If our leadership is a reflection of ourselves, then Procopius believes that the upper class must be morally bankrupt for having allowed such men and women to remain in power. Procopius thinks himself wiser and more moral than the very leaders of our country.
While Procopius might have some logic behind his arguments, it is a shame that he has chosen to turn his back on Belisarius and our Emperor Justinian. While The Secret History may provide a degree of entertainment, its near treasonous nature will earn it the enmity of many men. Procopius was wise to delay its publication. It is doubtful that he would have kept the patronage of such wealthy and powerful men had they seen what he had to say of them. Procopius was fearful that his criticisms would be dismissed as propaganda, but his own superstition severely diminishes the credibility of his thoughts. I would warn Byzantium citizens against reading such an account without a grain of salt, lest they be grouped with Procopius and considered superstitious gossipers.
Procopius’ intimate knowledge of the regime lends credibility to his criticisms of Justinian's finances and military, as well as the legal revisions that have occurred under the reign of Justinian and his predecessor Justin. Indeed, if Procopius had included only these political criticisms, one may have been tempted to agree with him about the failings of our government. However, Procopius betrays his own agenda with outlandish claims against his patrons.
In The Secret History, Procopius chooses to portray Belisarius and Justinian, both honorable men, as incompetent. Their actions are controlled and influenced almost entirely by the weaker sex, namely their wives. These women are portrayed as lacking any morals or inhibitions. His descriptions of the young Empress Theodora are exceedingly vulgar. While it is true that she does not possess the fine breeding of previous empresses, Procopius seems to take this a step further. Whether or not his claims can be substantiated is another story. One particularly lurid account of Theodora, detailing a salacious performance on stage with a swan, seems exceedingly doubtful. Has Procopius given himself over entirely to gossip fit only for taverns?
Are we as educated men expected to accept the accusation that our Emperor Justinian is in fact a demon sent to ruin us? Procopius even goes as far as to accuse the Emperor of having a vanishing head! Such superstition may be believed by the lower classes, but we would be foolish to take his words at face value. Should we choose to accept this judgment against our leaders, we must also accept Procopius’ condemnation of the aristocracy. If our leadership is a reflection of ourselves, then Procopius believes that the upper class must be morally bankrupt for having allowed such men and women to remain in power. Procopius thinks himself wiser and more moral than the very leaders of our country.
While Procopius might have some logic behind his arguments, it is a shame that he has chosen to turn his back on Belisarius and our Emperor Justinian. While The Secret History may provide a degree of entertainment, its near treasonous nature will earn it the enmity of many men. Procopius was wise to delay its publication. It is doubtful that he would have kept the patronage of such wealthy and powerful men had they seen what he had to say of them. Procopius was fearful that his criticisms would be dismissed as propaganda, but his own superstition severely diminishes the credibility of his thoughts. I would warn Byzantium citizens against reading such an account without a grain of salt, lest they be grouped with Procopius and considered superstitious gossipers.
No comments:
Post a Comment