Page:1909historyofdec04gibbuoft.djvu/614

546 APPENDIX chosen to that post when Belisarius was general in Mesopotamia, for the law could hardly have been evaded by the accidental birth of Procopius in Csesarea. Hence he doubts whether Prooopius was an official assessor of Belisarius. The second argu- ment does not carry much weight, and the third depends on a hypothesis — a plaus- ible hypothesis, no doubt. Procopius himself states that when Belisarius was appointed commander of the regiments of Daras in 527 he was chosen as his |u/t- fiovKos (B. P. i. 12) ; and he describes himself as irdpeSpot of Belisarius on his Vandalic expedition (B. V. i. 14). It is usually assumed that both words designate the same official position, £vfxfiovAos corresponding to consiliarius and irdpetipos to assessor. There can, I think, be no question that irdpeSpos is intended to designate an official post (elsewhere Procopius explains it as ancestor) ; and, if Bruckner were right, Procopius would have made a distinctly false statement about his own position. It is otherwise with ^v/j.$ovos, which need not imply an official post. The right inference may be that on the first occasion (in the Persian War) Procopius ac- companied Belisarius as his private secretary and adviser on civil matters ; but that on the second occasion (for the Vandal War) he was appointed official assessor by the Emperor at the wish of Belisarius. It has been well pointed out by Dahn that Procopius is not given to varying his phrases and seeking synonyms but rather to using the same stereotyped expressions for the same things ; and (therefore in absence of other knowledge) the presumption is that £v/j.&ovos does not express the same position as irap^pos- I may be met by the objection that the passive T)'pe9il in B. P. i. 12 (r6re S^; avrov Zv/j.&ovos rjpe9v TlpoKSinos) suggests an official appointment independent of Belisarius (cp.Dahn, Prokopius vonCasarea, p. 16) ; but this is sufficiently explained by the impersonal tone which Procopius affects, in imita- tion of Thucydides. Bruckner seems to be far from hitting the point when he says that Procopius " is not wont to hide his light under a bushel " ; on the contrary, Pro- copius imitates the personal reserve of Thucydides. It is impossible, therefore, to attach importance to the negative argument " dass Prokop so ausserordentlich wenig rechtswissenschaftliche Kenntni6se entwickelt," or that he tells nothing of his own activity as legal assessor. I see no good ground for doubting that in the African and Gothic Wars Procopius was assessor of Belisarius in the full official sense of the term. The dates of the composition of the historian's works have undergone an important revision by the investigation of J. Haury. This scholar has proved from two passages 4 that the greatest part of the Military History, bks. i.-vii., was written in a.d. 545, the year which offered a suitable terminus for the Persian and the Vandalic Wars. 5 The work was not published till a.d. 550, in which year a few additions were made, 6 but no alterations. 7 The Secret History, Haury has shown, was written in a.d. 550, not, as usually supposed, in a.d. 558-9. Had it been written in a.d. 558-9 it is impossible to see why none of the events between a.d. 550 and a.d. 558 are used to support the author's indictment of Justinian's government. The reason for supposing it to have been composed in a.d. 558-9 was the explicit statement that thirty-two years had elapsed since Justinian undertook the administration (<?£ orov av^p 38e Sip/djo-aTo tV iroXireiav). Haury has shown that the author counts not from the accession of Justinian but from that of Justin (a.d. 518), on the principle that Justin was a cipher, and completely in the hands of his nephew. 8 The eighth book of the Military History, usually counted as the fourth of the 4 The date of the imprisonment of John the Cappadocian, B. P. i. 25, vol. i. p. 140, ed. Haury, and the incident of the spear wound of Trajan, B. G. ii. 5, vol. ii. p. 173. 5 By the five years' truce with Chosroes, B. P. ii. 28, and the murder of Gontharis, B. V. ii. 28. A speedy conclusion of the Gothic War was also looked for. 6 To the Fersica, vol. i. p. 284, 1, to end of bk. ii. ; in the Vandalica, ib. p. 550-2 ; in the Gothica, probably (vol. ii.) p. 362, 21, to end of bk. iii. 7 Perhaps because it had been aiez.A.y privately published by recitation in a small circle of friends. 8 The events related from p. 39 to 65 (vol. iii. ed. Haury) fall into the time of Justin, and the f3a<rievs in this section is Justin, not Justinian. This is especially clear on p. 63, where the f)a<Tievs and Justinian act in a contrary sense in regard to Theodotus. Compare below, Appendix 10.