DOI 10.1515/bz-2020-0038 BZ 2020; 113(3): 879–904 Krystina Kubina Eight unedited poems to his friends and patrons by Manuel Philes Abstract: This article presents the critical edition of eight hitherto unpublished poems by Manuel Philes together with a translation and a commentary. The poems are verse letters addressed to various high-ranking individuals. Poem 1 is addressed to the emperor, whose power is emphasised in a request to help Philes escape from his misery. Poem 2 is a fragment likewise addressed to the emperor. Poem 3 is a consolatory poem for a father whose son has died. In poem 4, Philes addresses a patron whose wife hurried to Constantinople after she had become the object of hostility of unknown people. Poem 5 is addressed to the month of August and deals with the return of a benefactor of Philes to Constantinople. In poem 6, Philes writes on behalf of an unnamed banker and asks the megas dioiketes Kabasilas to judge the latter justly. Poems 7 and 8 are tetrasticha including a request for wine. Adresse: Dr. Krystina Kubina, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Institut für Mittelalterforschung, Abteilung Byzanzforschung, Hollandstraße 11 – 13, A-1020 Wien; Krystina.Kubina@oeaw.ac.at Manuel Philes (c. 1270–after 1332) suffers from a paradoxical fate. Philes was the most important and most prolific poet of the final 300 years of the Byzantine empire; yet the greater part of his oeuvre still languishes in outdated and uncritical editions from the 19th century.¹ There are even some poems that are still unedited I dearly thank Andreas Rhoby, Marc Lauxtermann and Nathanael Aschenbrenner for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper. I am also grateful to Zachary Rothstein-Dowden whose help with my English translations by far exceeded a language proof. They all saved me from some blatant errors. My thanks are extended to the two anonymous reviewers whose suggestions greatly improved the quality of this paper. It goes without saying that all remaining mistakes are my own. This article was written as part of the project: “Late Byzantine Poetry from the Fourth Crusade until the End of the Empire”, funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF project no. T–G).  After long years of neglect, Manuel Philes has lately begun to arouse more interest. Cf. most recently K. Kubina. Die enkomiastische Dichtung des Manuel Philes. Form und Funktion des literarischen Lobes in der frühen Palaiologenzeit. Byzantinisches Archiv, . Berlin/Boston , with an overview of the editions and the state-of-the-art research on p.  – . Only few other 880 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung entirely, scattered across several manuscripts. Among these are some religious epigrams, the main part of his metaphrasis of the psalms² and a number of poems addressed to friends and patrons. This article aims to rectify this absence of scholarly editions of his works by providing a critical edition of the latter group – the poems to patrons and friends – together with a translation and a short commentary.³ These poems show how Philes used his poetic craft in order to establish and secure his social standing and how he positioned himself as a social actor: as a suppliant, friend, correspondent, and advocate. Philes maintained contact with many high ranking members of Byzantine society. From his extant works, about 150 donors and addressees can be identified by name. Among those he addressed, we find emperors (Andronikos II, Andronikos III and the co-emperor Michael IX), the patriarch Niphon I, high-ranking bureaucrats like the protostrator Michael Tarchaneiotes and his wife, the tax official Theodoros Patrikiotes, the cleric and historian Nikephoros Kallistu Xanmonographs have been published on Philes, namely E. Braounou-Pietsch, Beseelte Bilder. Epigramme des Manuel Philes auf bildliche Darstellungen. Veröffentlichungen zur Byzanzforschung, . Wien ; G. Stickler. Manuel Philes und seine Psalmenmetaphrase. Dissertationen der Universität Wien, . Wien ; and N. Papadogiannakis. Studien zu den Epitaphien des Manuel Philes. PhD thesis, Freie Universität Berlin . The most important editions of Philes are those of Miller, Martini and Gedeon. I cite Philes’ poems from these editions using the following sigla: Manuelis Philae carmina ex codicibus Escurialensibus, Florentinis, Parisinis et Vaticanis, ed. E. Miller,  vols. Paris  –  – sigla E, F, P, V, App.; Manuelis Philae carmina inedita, ed. E. Martini. Torino  – siglum M; M. Gedeon, Μανουὴλ τοῦ Φιλῆ ἱστορικὰ ποιήματα. Ekklesiastike aletheia  (/),  – ,  – ,  –  – siglum G.  Approximately one third of the metaphrasis was edited by Stickler, Psalmenmetaphrase. In a recent research project hosted at the Austrian Academy of Sciences and the University of Ghent (“The Legacy of the Psalms in Byzantine poetry. Book epigrams and metrical paraphrases”, project leaders Kristoffel Demoen and Andreas Rhoby), Anna Gioffreda prepares a complete edition of the text. For first results see A. Gioffreda / A. Rhoby, Die metrische Psalmenmetaphrase des Manuel Philes. Präliminarien zu einer kritischen Edition. MEG  (),  – .  The information about the unedited poems and the manuscripts in which they are included is mainly taken from the manuscript list of Stickler, Psalmenmetaphrase  – . Apart from the poems presented here, Stickler lists another poem addressed to a donor with the incipit ᾿Aγρὸς φορητός, transmitted in the important manuscript Vat. gr.  (V), f. v (see  and ). However, the text is a passage from P. –  with few variants: v.  λιβὰς πεπεγμένη V: λιβὰς ὑφασμένη P.; v.  is a combination of the first hemistich of P. and the second hemistich of P.; v.  ἐμοὶ βασιλεῦ V: πεινῶντι Φιλῇ P.; v.  τῷ χρυσῷ V: ἐξ ἁφῆς P.; v. , ὡς δοῦλος οἰκτρὸς τάδε τολμήσας ἔφην, is not present in P, but similar lines are found in other poems by Philes (e. g. P., P., P.). P is most likely the original poem, whereas the text transmitted in V is an excerpt. In verse  the scribe confused two distinct verses and merged them into one – a common scribal error. Furthermore, the reading ἐξ ἁφῆς in P. should be preferred over τῷ χρυσῷ as the former is better fitted to the metaphor of heat. The last line in V is added as an end to the text thus producing an alone standing poem. K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 881 thopulos and many more. For these figures he wrote poems on commission,⁴ such as epigrams (i. e., metrical inscriptions), but he also addressed them directly in his numerous verse letters.⁵ These letters have largely been neglected in scholarship mainly in favour of his epigrams, but internal markers as well as their content identify these poems as letters. Philes’ surviving corpus includes about 320 such poems which give witness to the wide epistolary network that Philes possessed, and how versifying remained the medium through which he operated that network. The poems edited below are, in all likelihood, verse letters. As such, they largely share the themes, rhetorical practices and functions with their prose counterparts written by other 14th-century intellextuals. The main difference between them is the form: while prose letters were often rhythmical in language, these letters are written in verse, mostly dodecasyllable. Letters both in prose and in verse are thus both pieces of art and a means of communication. Poem 1 forms an address to the emperor Andronikos II requesting that the author be saved from his misery and his creditors. Poem 2 also addresses an emperor, but the fragmentary state of the text makes it impossible to grasp its meaning. Poem 3 is a consolation poem for a father who has lost his son. In poem 4, Philes addresses a patron whose wife hurried to Constantinople after she had become the object of hostility of unknown people in an unknown provincial town. Poem 5 is a witty text addressed to the month of August but dealing with the felicitous return of one of Philes’ benefactors to Constantinople. In poem 6, Philes writes on behalf of an unnamed banker and asks the megas dioiketes Kabasilas, presumably Theodoros Kabasilas, elsewhere attested as financial and judicial officer, to judge the banker’s suit justly. Poems 7 and 8 are tetrasticha including a request for wine much like many others in Philes’ oeuvre.  On commissioned poetry in late Byzantium see A. Rhoby, Poetry on commission in late Byzantium (th–th c.), in W. Hörandner / A. Rhoby / N. Zagklas (eds.), A Companion to Byzantine poetry. Brill’s Companions to the Byzantine World, . Leiden/Boston ,  –  and K. Kubina, ‘But a friend must not sleep, when such a man commands him to write’. Motivations for writing poetry in the early Palaiologan period, in N. Gaul / I. Stouraitis / M. Carr (eds.). The post Byzantine world. New approaches and novel directions. Proceedings from the st Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, Edinburgh (forthcoming).  On Philes’ verse letters see K. Kubina, Manuel Philes – a begging poet? Requests, letters, and problems of genre definition, in A. Rhoby / N. Zagklas (eds.), Middle and late Byzantine poetry. Texts and contexts. Studies in Byzantine history and civilization, . Turnhout ,  – . Byzantine verse letters are a widely neglected genre; for a first study of them see K. Kubina / A. Riehle (eds.). Greek epistolary poetry in late antiquity, Byzantium and the Renaissance. London/New York, forthcoming; including on Philes K. Kubina, Functions of letters in verse and prose. A comparison of Manuel Philes and Theodoros Hyrtakenos. 882 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung The editions have been prepared according to the following guidelines. The orthography has been normalised according to the lexicon forms, and all changes are noted in the critical apparatus. Breathings and iota subscripts have been corrected or added and proper names capitalised without comment. Accents have been normalised except in the case of enclitics.⁶ The punctuation has been modernised to facilitate understanding for the modern reader.⁷ The text is followed by a critical apparatus and a short discussion of the manuscript transmission. Poem 1 Θεοῦ βασιλεῦ, πάντα μεστά μοι φόβου· καὶ γῆ με, καὶ θάλασσα, καὶ πᾶσα κτίσις, δοκοῦσιν ὡς κλεῖς ἐμπεδοῦν ἐκ τῆς βίας· τοὺς γὰρ δανειστάς, τοὺς ἐμοὺς ὁδοστάτας, 5 μετὰ δὲ μικρόν, ἢ σφαγεῖς, ἢ δεσπότας, (ἀμφοῖν γὰρ ἓν λέγουσιν αὐτίκα δράσειν, ἂν οὐ τοκισθῇ τοῖς βραβεῦσι τὰ χρέα) πῶς φεύξομαι, πῶς, τοὺς διώκτας, τοὺς Σκύθας, τοὺς αἱμοχαρεῖς, τοὺς θρασεῖς, τοὺς αὐθάδεις, 10 τοὺς καὶ πτερωτούς, καὶ δρομεῖς, καὶ τοξότας, οἷς ἐστιν ἁπλῶς ἡ βολὴ πρὸ τῶν λόγων, ὅταν ὁ θυμὸς τῆς ψυχῆς ὑπεκβράσας,  On this issue cf. M. de Groote, Christophori Mitylenaii versvvm variorvm collectio Cryptensis. Turnhout , LXXIII–XCIV and already J. Noret, Notes de ponctuation et d’accentuation byzantines. Byz  (),  – ,  – .  The decision to modernise the punctuation has been made because many of the poems do not have a coherent punctuation system in the manuscript, providing punctuation marks almost exclusively at the end of the line. For the debate on how to deal with Byzantine punctuation in verse see F. Bernard. Rhythm in the Byzantine dodecasyllable. Practices and perceptions, in Rhoby/ Zagklas. Middle and late Byzantine poetry (as footnote  above),  – ,  – . In general, Byzantine punctuation marks refer to rhythmical rather than syntactical units and thus help the reader to fully understand the literary and stylistic form of a text. In recent years, scholars tend to stick to the punctuation given by the manuscripts in editions of prose texts (cf. e.g. D. R. Reinsch, ed., Michaelis Pselli Chronographia. Millennium-Studien, . Berlin/Boston , XXXIVf.). However, rhythmical units in verse are evident from metrical rules so that punctuation marks are less relevant for the understanding of a poem’s rhythm. On punctuation in general see A. Giannouli / E. Schiffer (eds.). From manuscripts to books / Vom Codex zur Edition. Proceedings of the international workshop on textual criticism and editorial practice for Byzantine texts (Vienna,  –  December ) .Veröffentlichungen zur Byzanzforschung, . Vienna . K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 883 κινῇ πρὸς ὁρμὰς ἀκρατεῖς ἐκ τῆς μέθης; Θεοῦ βασιλεῦ, λύσον ὀψὲ τὸν φόβον, 15 ἢ μᾶλλον αὐτὴν εἰ δοκεῖ τὴν αἰσχύνην· καὶ στῆσον αὐτοῖς τὰς φορὰς καὶ τοὺς δρόμους καὶ τὰς ἀπειλὰς καὶ τὰς ἀδολεσχίας, καὶ τὰς ἐφεξῆς δυσχερεῖς περιστάσεις, εἴργοντα φραγμὸν ἐντιθείς μοι τὴν δόσιν. 20 Εἰ δ’ ἄρα, θαῦμα· τί γὰρ ἐν τούτοις δράσω, πένης θανατῶν, κἂν δοκῶ τάχα πνέειν ἔτι τρεφουσῶν τὴν ψυχὴν τῶν ἐλπίδων; ᾿Aσιτία γὰρ ἡ τροφή μοι πολλάκις, ὡς ἐκλυθῆναι καὶ τὸν ἐν λόγοις τόνον, 25 μὰ τὸν διατρέφοντα τὴν κοινὴν φύσιν· προάγομαι γὰρ ἐξ ἀνάγκης ὀμνύειν, κοινὲ γλυκασμὲ καὶ τροφεῦ τῶν Αὐσόνων. App. crit.: tit. τοῦ αὐτοῦ Ms.: Vat. gr. 1126 (Diktyon no. 67757), ff. 179r–179v. 14th century. The manuscript mainly contains a large collection of Philes’ poems as well as a collection of the poetry of Georgios Pisides.⁸ Although Miller used this codex for his edition, he overlooked this poem. Translation Emperor [by grace] of God, all things fill me with fear. Earth and sea and all of creation seem to shackle me by force like fetters. For how shall I escape my creditors, those highwaymen, [5] who in a short while will be either cutthroats or lords – for they say that they will be one or the other, if the debt is not paid off with interest to the lenders – how on earth shall I escape my pursuers, these Scythians, bloodthirsty, bold, and insolent; [10] the winged and runners and bowmen, whose bolt simply precedes words, whenever their rage, boiling over from their souls, launches uncontrollable attacks out of drunken madness?  See K. Kubina, Enkomiastische Dichtung (as footnote  above),  and ; eadem, Manuel Philes and the Asan family. Two inedited poems and their context in Philes’ oeuvre (including editio princeps). JÖB  (),  – ,  and Stickler, Psalmenmetaphrase (as footnote  above),  – . 884 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung Emperor [by grace] of God, deliver me at long last from my fear, [15] or rather, if you deem fit, my shame. And halt their attacks and pursuits, their threats and idle chatter, and the ensuing difficulties for me, by granting me the donative as a palisade against them. [20] If you could do this, it would be wonderful. For what should I do in such circumstances as a dying pauper even if I seem to breathe while hopes still nourish my soul? For want of food is often my meal, so that even the rhythmical intensity of my words is slackened, [25] I swear by the One who nourishes our common nature! For I am led to this oath out of necessity, O common sweetness and nourisher of the Ausones. Commentary The poem, addressed to the emperor Andronikos II (r. 1282– 1328), belongs to a group of poems that lament Philes’ professional and financial misfortunes at the hands of enemies or slanderers.⁹ In Θεοῦ βασιλεῦ, we learn that he was in debt to some ‘Scythians’ who pursued him and circulated rumours about him (vv. 16 – 18). While here Philes does not hint at the reasons for his debts, in other poems to the emperor he speaks in a similar context about a (supposed) ‘failure’ that he had committed. Apparently, this ‘failure’, nowhere fully described, led to the loss of the emperor’s favor. In his poems, we learn only that evil men have denounced him. It is possible this slander was connected to his embassy to the Mongol khan Toqta (c. 1270 – 1312) in 1297 and his return to Constantinople via Bithynia in 1298.¹⁰ In P2, Philes describes this mission and explains that he lost his armed escort – apparently mercenaries – when the Cilician king Het’um II paid them to join his campaign against the Mamluks (cf. vv. 36 – 49). Philes explains that, although he fled from the enemies (presumably the Ottomans) when he was left alone after his escort’s defection, his conduct had been irreproachable. Similarly, in P58, he describes how he suffered all manner of hardship for the emperor on several embassies and had gained nothing but debts and mis-  For an overview of these poems see ibid.,  – .  See already PLP #. Stickler did not draw the connection of Philes’ failure to his embassies. On a different argumentation about the ‘failure’ see M. Menshikova, Мануил Фил и Андроник II. придворный поэт в горе и радости. VV  (),  – , who dates it to  –  by identifying and dating those persons whom Philes asks for help in relation with his failure. K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 885 ery for his trouble.¹¹ Seen in this light, it seems that the verse letter Θεοῦ βασιλεῦ relates to the mercenaries who abandoned Philes in Bithynia when he could not pay them. The poem might have been written soon after the events described as Philes references neither his ‘failure’ nor the disfavour with the emperor which followed. That the ‘failure’ relates to the events in 1298 is confirmed by the poem G1, an epibaterion for Andronikos III, when he victoriously entered Constantinople in 1328 after the end of the civil war. Philes stresses that he is now relieved from his thirty years of misery since the new emperor would certainly be favourably disposed toward him (vv. 169 – 173). If he committed (or not) the supposed ‘failure’ in 1298, the notion that in 1328 he had suffered for thirty years is accurate. In his many poems lamenting his failure, Philes varies in his argumentation: while in some poems, he denies having done anything wrong, in others he acknowledges his errors and asks for forgiveness.¹² vv. 1 and 14: Θεοῦ βασιλεῦ occurs as an address several times in Philes, cf. P56.94, P196.1, 2 and 69. vv. 3 and 19: Philes contrasts locks that constrain him in v. 3 with a “palisade” or “protective fence” that he requests from the emperor in v. 19. v. 7: Βραβεύς in this case does not have its classical meaning “judge, arbitrator, umpire” (see LSJ s.v.), but means “lender” (unattested in this meaning in the lexica, but cf. LBG s.v. βραβεύτρια “Verleiherin”). For the meaning “pay off (with interest)” of τοκίζω cf. P237.52. vv. 8 – 13: The archaising term ‘Scythian’ was applied by the Byzantines to a number of different peoples such as, in the later period, Bulgars, Cumans or Ottomans.¹³ Here, Philes uses the word to characterise his persecutors as especially violent, blood-thirsty, and barbaric. This is probably an allusion to his embassy to the Mongols, which saddled him with debt; in another poem, he also describes his creditors as “Scythians” when speaking about this embassy (P58.75 – 76). Referring to them as Scythians, an ancient steppe people stereotyped in antiquity for their uncivilized practices, also explains the imagery of their speed and their archery. Philes’ accusation that they act “out of drunkenness” recalls another  He also mentions ‘Scythians’ as his creditors elsewhere (cf. P. f.). More concisely, in P Philes describes his misery caused by his debts and his shame (αἰσχύνη, v. ). He also stresses that he put himself in danger in vain (v. ), which might allude to his unsuccessful embassy.  On the ‘failure’ and Philes’ argumentation strategy see Kubina, Enkomiastische Dichtung (as footnote  above),  f. and  – .  See G. Moravcsik. Byzantinoturcica. BBA,  – . Berlin , II  – . On Cumans as mercenaries in the th century see S. Kyriakidis, Warfare in late Byzantium,  – . History of Warfare, . Leiden ,  f. 886 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung aspect of the topos of the uncouth Scythians who, according to literary tradition, drank unmixed wine and thus were notoriously drunken.¹⁴ v. 11: The phrase is rather obscure. I take it to mean that Philes’ pursuers, whose ‘bolt precedes their words’, ‘shoot first and ask questions later’; but one could also read it as a metaphor for ‘assault is beyond reason’. In any case, Philes stresses the cruelty of his creditors and their inclination towards precipitous physical violence. vv. 21– 22: The image of the starving poet who is half-dead and asks his addressee for help is common in Philes’ poems¹⁵ and in pleading poems more generally (most importantly by Ptochoprodromos, Theodoros Prodromos and Manganeios Prodromos).¹⁶ vv. 23 – 24: Philes in an ironic topos of modesty states that hunger had a bad impact on the quality of his verses. The idea is found in other poems by Philes, too, cf. P76.12– 13 and F265.24– 34.¹⁷ Most interesting is poem V17. In an address to the emperor, he states: Φύσις νικῶσα τῶν λόγων τὴν δύναμιν, | ἐκ τῆς μεγάλης τοῦ λιμοῦ κακώσεως | καὶ τῆς ἀδήλου τῶν φρενῶν συγχύσεως,¹⁸ | περιτραπείσης τῆς ἐμῆς δυνάμεως, | μή μοι παρίδῃς τῶν στίχων τὴν ὕφεσιν. (vv. 4– 8, “(You), Nature who conquers the power of words, since out of the great distress of hunger and the opaque confusion of my wits, my literary force is upended, don’t neglect the [cause of the] slackening of my verses”). Philes uses the same metaphor for the quality of his verses in Θεοῦ βασιλεῦ: like a musical instrument, his verses can be tense or slackened like strings on an instrument; accordingly they can be of high or low quality depending on whether they are in tune. In V17 Philes’ verses are, indeed, slackened, insofar as they severely violate the rules of the dodecasyllable. All of the verses end proparoxytonic, while most of them have the caesura after B5. This kind of hemistich (7pp), in this case used in the second part of the dodecasyllable, is common in the first half of the verse. Philes more or less inverts the two hemistichs, performing poetically  The topos was so widespread that there were even two words created in Greek: σκυθίζω and ἐπισκυθίζω, which can both mean ‘to drink immoderately’, see LSJ s.v.  On this topos in Philes, see Kubina, Begging poet (as footnote  above),  with footnote .  Cf. M. Kulhánková, Vaganten in Byzanz, Prodromoi im Westen. Parallellektüre von byzantinischer und lateinischer Betteldichtung des . Jahrhunderts. BSl  (),  – ,  – .  It is also a topos in the so-called ‘begging poetry’, see Kulhánková, ibid.,  – .  Ed. Miller συσχύσεως, but read συγχύσεως, as already suggested by idem, Manuelis Philae carmina II , footnote . K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 887 the disorder of his affairs and life. By performing his bodily distress in this way, he demonstrates his very versatility as an author.¹⁹ v. 27: Philes addresses the emperor as “nourisher of the Ausones”, an address that he also uses in other poems for him (cf. P149.51, V16.14, ekphrasis of the elephant v. 15 and 335).²⁰ He purposefully stresses this aspect of Andronikos’ power and responsibility after focussing on his own hunger. Poem 2 Αὐτοκράτορ κράτιστε, τοῦ χάριν κράτους· πρὸς σῆς κρατ*** ἐξερευνῶνται ***, <…> μὴ συμβολικῶς δεικνύῃ σου τὸ κράτος· 5 ὅπως κρατάρξῃ βαρβαροτρόπων ὄχλων. <…> App. crit.: 2 κρατ<…>] reading unclear | 4 δεικνύῃ] δεικνύει ms. Ms.: Cod. Athen. Metochion tou Panaghiou Taphou 190 (Diktyon no. 6587), f. 122r – 122v. 17th century. Miscellaneous manuscript with predominantly religious treatises. Poems 2, 3 and 4 are found in a section containing poems (ff. 98r – 122v) which are transmitted without indication of authorship. Since most of them are written by Philes, as attested in other manuscripts, and since these three all fit his style, one can safely attribute the poems edited here to him.²¹ In the codex, the first letter of poem 2 is executed as a rubricated initial with some decoration, as is common in the section of the manuscript that contains Philes’ poems. Sixty verses follow. This layout led Stickler to incorrectly conclude that the verses belong to the same poem.²² In fact, these are three different texts, namely the poems presented in this article  On the passage, see M. D. Lauxtermann, Byzantine poetry from Pisides to Geometres. Texts and contexts, II. WBS, /. Vienna ,  and Kubina, Enkomiastische Dichtung (as footnote  above),  f. This is not the only poem that uses a metrical experiment in the context of a poetological discussion about writing verses and their futility in terms of the poet’s living expenses, see App.  and P with a discussion in Kubina, ibid.,  – .  Ed. F. S. Lehrs / J. F. Dübner, Poetae bucolici et didactici. Manuelis Philae versus iambici de proprietate animalium. Paris ,  – .  On the manuscript see A. Papadopulos-Kerameus, Ἱεροσολυμιτικὴ Βιβλιοθήκη, . St. Petersburg ,  –; on Philes’ poems in it Stickler, Psalmenmetaphrase (as footnote  above), .  Ibid. 888 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung no. 2 (Αὐτοκράτορ κράτιστε) and no. 3 (Ὁ παμβασιλεύς) as well as a poem addressed to the archangel Michael (inc. Τίς, ταξιάρχα, τίς, ταγματάρχα ξένε, still unedited). No. 3 (Ὁ παμβασιλεύς) and the poem to the archangel begin with an initial in a different ink than the main text which has, however, the same size as the other letters and no decoration. The content of these poems leaves no doubt that they are to be seen as distinct poems. Translation Most powerful emperor, for the sake of your power, from your dominion (?), are examined <…>, that you not show your power symbolically, in order that you rule over the barbaric hordes. Commentary The text is a fragment lacking a coherent argument. The unclear reading and lacuna in v. 2 make its meaning nearly impossible to grasp. v. 2: The reading of the abbreviation at the end of κρατ- is unclear, but there is a circumflex over it. For metrical reasons regarding the dodecasyllable there must be two lacunae of two syllables each, one after κρατ-, the other at the end of the verse. One solution would emend the verse as πρὸς σῆς κρατ<αιᾶς> ἐξερευνῶνται <σπάθης> (as suggested by the anonymous reviewer of this article). More verses may be missing. v. 5: κρατάρξῃ (κρατάρχω) hapax legomenon. The meaning “to rule over” is clear from the root -άρχω; cf. also LBG s.v. κραταρχέω “herrschen, gebieten”. Poem 3 Ὁ παμβασιλεὺς καὶ θεάνθρωπος λόγος τὸ σὸν χαριέστατον ἄντικρυς βρέφος λαβὼν συνηρίθμησεν ἀγγέλων δήμοις, ὅπως σὺν αὐτοῖς ὑπᾴδῃ θεῖον μέλος, 5 καὶ τριαδικὸν ἀνακραυγάζῃ φθέγμα σὺν νηπίοις ἅπασι τοῖς τρισολβίοις, καὶ συγχορευτὴς τῶν ἄνω στρατευμάτων θυμηδίας αἴτημα ἐνδιαθέτου. Μὴ τοίνυν ἔξω δυσφόρου τοῦ μετρίου, K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 889 10 ὦ χαρτοφύλαξ, φιλοκάλων ἀκρότης, ἀλλ’ ὡς κατὰ νοῦν καὶ τὸ τοῦ ψαλμογράφου Δαβὶδ ἐκείνου τοῦ κρατάρχου πανσόφου, ἔχων παραμύθιον εἰς δεῖγμα ξένον, ὃ πρὸς τὸ φίλτατον ἔδρα τεκνίον, 15 δίδου παρηγόρημα τῇ σῇ καρδίᾳ καθὼς ἀπόχρη τοῖς κατὰ σὲ πανσόφοις· καὶ γὰρ λατρείαν ὡς ἀκίβδηλον τόδε ὁ δημιουργὸς δεσπότης προσλαμβάνει, καὶ θυσίαν ἄμωμον οἷς οἶδας τρόποις, 20 ὡς πνευματικοῖς ἐνδιατρίψας λόγοις. App. crit.: 3 συνηρίθμησεν] συνηρίθημσεν ms. | 4 ὑπᾴδῃ] ὑπάδει ms. | 7 συγχορευτὴς] συγχωρευτὰς ms. | 12 πανσόφου] πανσόφως ms. | 14 one syllable missing. Ms.: Cod. Athen. Metochion tou Panaghiou Taphou 190, f. 122r. On the manuscript see above p. 887– 888. Translation The Logos, king of all and both God and man, forthwith took your most graceful babe and numbered him amongst the community of angels so that he might accompany them in divine song [5] and cry out in song a threefold tune together with all the thrice-blessed children and, as a fellow singer amongst the heavenly hosts, [raise] a request for inward delight. And so do not grieve beyond measure, [10] O chartophylax, you paramount lover of beauty, but keep in mind that [example] of the composer of the Psalms, David, the all-wise ruler, and take consolation in the outstanding example, which he provided at [the death of] his most beloved child, [15] and give comfort to your heart, as it suffices for those who are all-wise like you. For the creator of the world, the Lord, receives as service this genuine act and as a blameless sacrifice in the manner which you know, [20] for you have spent time with the spiritual words. Commentary The text is a poem of consolation (paramythetikos) for the loss of the anonymous addressee’s child. 890 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung v. 10: The addressee is a chartophylax, an ecclesiastical official in service of the patriarch. The poem does not offer any information that makes an identification with a known bearer of this office possible. Philes addressed only one other chartophylax, Manuel Kutales (PLP #13617, cf. F56), who had at least two children.²³ However, this does not suffice to prove his identity with the addressee of our poem. vv. 11– 14: King David had Uriah the Hittite killed in order to cover up his seduction of Uriah’s wife Bathsheba resulting in her pregnancy. To avenge this crime God killed this first-born son. After his child’s death David said: “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept, for I said, ‘Who knows whether the Lord will have pity on me and the child will live?’ But now he is dead. Why is this, that I fast? I will not be able to bring it back again, will I? I will go to him, but he shall not return to me” (2 Reigns 12.22– 23).²⁴ Philes alludes to this story, thereby accentuating that excessive grief is inappropriate with regard of the reunion of parents and their children after the resurrection. v. 14: There is a lacuna in the first part of the verse, since it only contains eleven syllables, while the caesura B7 (i. e. after the seventh syllable) has to be placed after φίλτατον. vv. 17– 20: Cf. Psalm 140.2: “Let my prayer succeed as incense before you, a lifting up of my hands be an evening sacrifice”.²⁵ v. 20: The verse refers to the religious education and the ecclesiastical duties of the addressee. Poem 4 Θησαυρὲ τοῖς χρῄζουσι πηγάζων χύδην τὸν ἐν ξένοις πένητα μὴ παραδράμῃς. Σοῦ μὲν γὰρ ἡ ξύνευνος ἡ τρισολβία φοιτᾶν ἐπ’ αὐτὴν ηὐτρεπίσθη τὴν πόλιν, 5 τὸ στρουθίον φέρουσα τῆς σῆς ὀσφύος, ὡς ἂν λάβῃ πτέρωσιν ἀσφαλεστέραν. Σὺ δ’, Αἰγύπτιε, τῷ πτερῷ τῆς ἀνδρίας – τὸ βάρβαρον γὰρ ἀγεληδὸν συγχέεις –  Cf. Michael Gabras, ep. ; ed. G. Fatouros, Die Briefe des Michael Gabras (ca.  – nach ]. WBS, . Wien ).  Translation: A. Pietersma / B.G. Wright (eds.), A new English translation of the Septuagint.  Oxford  (with corrections , online at http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/, retrieved  April ), .  Translation ibid., . K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 891 πρὸς τὴν προπομπὴν εὐσταλὴς εἶ τῶν τρίβων, 10 ὡς ἂν ὁμαλῶς ἡ τρυγὼν ἐπιδράμῃ, τῶν δυσμενῶν φυγοῦσα τὰς ὑποψίας. Ἐγὼ δέ σου πλὴν ζήσομαι πῶς ἐνθάδε, τροφεῦ, προμηθεῦ, τῶν ἐμῶν ἄκος πόνων, εἰ μὴ σύ τι πρόσαρμα διδοὺς τυγχάνεις, 15 ὡς παντοδαπὸς τῶν φίλων παρήγορος; App. crit.: 3 Σοῦ] τοῦ ms. | 5 στρουθίον] στροθίον ms. | 6 πτέρωσιν] πτέρωσην ms. | 7 Αἰγύπτιε] Αἴγυπτε ms. | 8 συγχέεις] συγχέῃς ms. | 14 εἰ] ἡ ms. Ms.: Athen, Metochion tou Panaghiou Taphou 190, f. 121v. On the manuscript see above p. 887– 888. Translation O treasure, gushing forth in abundance for those in need, do not pass over the pauper among the strangers. For your thrice-blessed wife was made ready to repair to the City itself since she carried the little sparrow of your loins [5] in order that it would grow plumage in greater safety. But you, Egyptian, with the wing of fortitude – for you confound the barbarian race in droves – you are wellequipped to escort [your wife] along the paths [10] so that she, the turtledove, might approach the City, fleeing the suspicions of her enemies. Yet, how shall I live here without you, nourisher, caregiver, remedy of my pains, if you do not provide some sustenance [15] as the manifold comforter of your friends? Commentary The addressee is unknown but must have been versed in military campaigns (see v. 9). He seems to be anticipating the birth of his child with his wife outside of Constantinople. Philes suggests the wife was in jeopardy because of the “suspicions” of unnamed “enemies”. It is possible these were rumours about her virtue and the legitimacy of her child, but the precise circumstances of her distress remain obscure. In order to escort his expectant wife to Constantinople, the anonymous addressee leaves the city. Meanwhile, Philes bids him to provide πρόσαρμα, “sustenance”, (be it a gift of food or financial assistance) so that he will not starve during the latter’s absence. 892 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung v. 7: The addressee is called “Egyptian”, a metonymic expression for the river Nile. Philes often calls his donors “Nile”, since the river represented a source of water, fertility, and wealth.²⁶ Additionally, Philes refers to a proverb that he quotes in another poem, F1: Οὐ πολλάκις Αἴγυπτος, ἀλλ’ ὅταν τέκοι, | τὸ τεχθὲν ἐξίστησι, τὴν παροιμίαν (vv. 64 – 65 “Egypt does not often beget children, but when she does so, the child stands out according to the proverb”). The proverb also exists in hexameter form (οὐ πολλοὺς Αἴγυπτος, ἐπὴν δὲ τέκῃ, μέγα τίκτει) and is found in the Vita Pachomii ²⁷ and in Commentaries on Porphyry’s Eisagoge. ²⁸ Its origin is unknown. Seen in this light, the “Egyptian” addressee of the poem Θησαυρὲ τοῖς χρῄζουσι, according to Philes, must have begotten an outstanding child. v. 13: The term προμηθεύς (“caregiver”) is one of Philes’ favourite words to describe his patrons (cf. E191.92, F43.2, F86.3, F98.53, F98.62, F112.21, F118.12, F121.2, P56.58, P58.159, P80.4, P195.6, P207.28, P219.27, M5.24, M11.18, M72.45 and 54, M82.5). Only once is it used as a name of the mythological Prometheus to which the addressee, who is then himself called προμηθεύς, is compared (see F35.1 and 37). Poem 5 Ἔλαυνε, μὴν αὔγουστε, καὶ σφρίγα πλέον, καὶ τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς εὐμαρῶς τέμνε τρίβον· τοῖς μὲν γὰρ ὀκνεῖν καὶ τρυφᾶν εἰθισμένοις, καὶ ζῶσιν ὑγρὸν καὶ δυσαίσθητον βίον, 5 τοὺς τῆς φρίκης ἄνθρακας οἰκτρῶς εἰσφέρεις,  See Kubina, Enkomiastische Dichtung (as footnote  above),  f. with footnote . The motif was already common in late antiquity, see C. Rapp, Hagiography and the cult ofsSaints in the light of epigraphy and acclamations, in D. Sullivan / E. A. Fisher / S. Papaioannou (eds.), Byzantine religious culture. Studies in Honor of Alice-Mary Talbot. The Medieval Mediterranean, . Leiden/Boston ,  – , ; and A. Rhoby, Metaphors of nature in the poetry of Manuel Philes (XIVth Century), in F. Garambois-Vasquez / D. Vallat (eds.), Le lierre et la statue. La nature et son espace littéraire dans l’épigramme gréco-latine tardive. Centre Jean Palerne. Mémoires, . Saint-Étienne ,  – ,  – .  Vita quarta . – ; ed. F. Halkin, Sancti Pachomii Vitae graecae. Subsidia Hagiographica, . Bruxelles .  Pseudo-Elias, Lectures on Porphyry’s isagoge . – ; ed. L.G. Westerink, Pseudo-Elias (Pseudo-David). Lectures on Porphyry’s isagoge. Amsterdam ; and David, In Porphyrii isagogen commentarium .; ed. A. Busse. Davidis prolegomena et in Porphyrii Isagogen commentarium. Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, /. Berlin . K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 893 κυκῶν τὸν ἑσμὸν τῶν χυμῶν πρὸ τοῦ ψύχους. Ἐμοὶ δὲ λαμπρὰς ἐμφυτεύων ἐλπίδας, χρυσῆν ὑπισχνῇ τὴν ἐπὶ τρύγει τρύγην· καὶ τῶν μὲν αἰγῶν ἐκροφεῖς τὰς ἰκμάδας, καὶ τὰς ἀμολγὰς τοῖς νομεῦσιν ἀμβλύνεις, ἐπεὶ τὸ κάλλος τῆς χλόης μαραίνεται· στολῆς δὲ γυμνὰ καὶ τὰ δένδρα δεικνύεις τὰ φύλλα ῥιπτῶν (οὐδὲ γὰρ ἴσχει δρόσον). Ἐμοὶ δὲ παρὼν ἀργυροῦν ὄμβρον βλύσεις, καὶ τῆς ἀμολγῆς τὸ χρυσοῦν δώσεις γάλα· δροσίζεται γὰρ τῇ χλιδῇ τῶν ἐλπίδων ἡ χθές τε καὶ πρὶν ἀχρειῶσα καρδία· ἀναστολιεῖς ἐκ τριχῶν ὑφασμένων, ἃς ἰταλικοῖς ὀργανοῖ τέχνη κρόκοις. Δομέστικος γὰρ ὁ προβατεὺς τῆς Θρᾴκης, ὁ νοῦς ὁ πυκνὸς καὶ πασῶν κρείττων φύσις, τὸ τῶν παρ’ ἡμῖν φιλοτέχνημα κρότων, ὁ παντοδαπός, ὁ χρυσοῦς εὐεργέτης, ἐν σοὶ πρὸς αὐτὴν ἐξιὼν τὴν ἑσπέραν, καὶ συναγαγὼν τὴν σπορὰν τῶν κερμάτων, θρέψει, φίλε, πεινῶντα γυμνὸν ἐν δύσει, λύσει τὸ λοιπόν, φαιδρυνεῖ τὴν καρδίαν· καὶ πρᾶγμα καινὸν καὶ φιλάνθρωπον τρόπον ἐπόψεται γῆ καὶ θεὸς πάντα βλέπων ζυγοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ἡδέως ἀμείψεται. ᾿Aρχὴ μὲν οὖν χειμῶνος ἐκλήθης πάλαι· συστέλλεται γὰρ εἰς τὸ τῆς ῥίζης βάθος σὴν χάριν εὐθὺς τῶν φυτῶν ἡ θερμότης· αἰσθάνεται δὲ τοῦ κρυμοῦ τὸ σαρκίον, καὶ δεινοπαθεῖ καὶ κλονεῖται καὶ τρέμει. Νυνὶ δέ <μοι> χειμῶνος εὑρέθης πέρας, καινοπρεποῦς ἔαρος ἐμφάσεις φέρων, ὡς ἥλιον γὰρ τὸν δομέστικον βλέπω· χρυσῆν ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς ἐκχεεῖ τὴν αἰθρίαν. Ἐγὼ δὲ σοὶ χάριτας εἰδὼς τυγχάνω, ταῖς ἐλπίσι τρέφοντι καὶ τέρποντί με. App. crit.: 8 ὑπισχνῇ] ὑπισχνεῖ ms. | 16 δροσίζεται] δροσίζηται ms. | 17 ἀχρειῶσα] ἀχριῶσα ms. | 19 ἰταλικοῖς] ἰταλικῆς ms. | 19 ὀργανοῖ] ὀργανεῖ ms. | 23 παντοδαπός] παντοδαποῦς ms. | 36 <μοι> metri causa supplevi 894 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung Ms.: Laur. Plut. 59.35 (Diktyon no. 16486), f. 186r. 14th century. The manuscript contains a collection of late antique and Byzantine letters. A second hand added two poems (inc. Εἴπερ δὲ καὶ πρόχειρον and the one edited here, inc. Ἔλαυνε, μὴν αὔγουστε) in a collection of mainly Palaiologan letters.²⁹ The codex does not give an author’s name for both poems, but the attribution to Philes is very probable due to strong similarities with his other poems.³⁰ Translation Come, month of August, be more vigorous and readily shorten your way towards us. For to those accustomed to laziness and luxury, and to those living a languid and insensible life, [5] you introduce in a pitiable manner the embers of chill, confounding the swarm of humours before winter. But you plant bright hopes in me and you promise that harvest upon harvest will be golden. You suck dry the milky juices of sheep [10] and you obviate the need for milking for the herdsmen, as the beauty of green grass withers. You also show the trees denuded of their garb as you cast off their leaves (for they do not retain dew). But on me, when you arrive, you will pour forth a silver rainshower [15] and you will give me the golden milk from the udder, for my heart, which yesterday and even before was useless, is bedewed with the luxury of hope. You will clothe me again with woven wool, which craft adorns with Italian saffron. [20] For the domestikos, the herdsman of Thrace, the sagacious mind and the excellent character surpassing all others, the masterpiece of our applauding verses, the manifold, golden benefactor, in you, [August,] he goes out towards the very land of nightfall, [25] and gathering together the seed of coins he will nourish, my friend, the  On the manuscript see A. Riehle, Theodoros Xanthopulos, Theodoros Metochites und die spätbyzantinische Gelehrtenkultur. Zu einem unbeachteten Brief im Codex Laur. Plut. . und den Xanthopulos-Briefen im Codex Vat. gr. , in A. Berger / S. Mariev / G. Prinzing / A. Riehle (eds.). Koinotaton Doron. Das späte Byzanz zwischen Machtlosigkeit und kultureller Blüte ( – . Byzantinisches Archiv, . Berlin/Boston ,  – ,  – ; and A. M. Bandini, Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Mediceae Laurentianae II. Florence ,  – . The first poem is scarcely comprehensible since it is mutilated at the beginning and there may well be more verses missing. It starts with the words εἴπερ δέ which, however, cannot open a text, δέ being a connective particle pointing to a former argument. It is possible that the scribe copied only every second line of his exemplar, confused by the layout of the verses to be read either in columns or in lines. Since the content of the poem is unclear, it is not edited here in the context of Philes’ poems to his friends and donors.  The attribution has already been suggested by I. Vassis, Initia carminum Byzantinorum. Supplementa Byzantina, . Berlin/New York , . K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 895 one who is hungry and naked in the West. He will resolve what remains, he will cheer my heart. And the earth will look upon a new affair, a turn beloved by mankind, and God the All-Observant [30] will recompense him with good balances. In times of old you were called the beginning of winter; because of you the vital heat of plants is forthwith drawn down into the depth of their roots. The body feels the cold [35] and suffers greatly and trembles and shivers. But now for me you have become the end of winter and you bear the appearance of a new springtime. For I see the domestikos like the sun. He will pour out golden weather upon us. [40] But I am grateful to you, nourishing me with hopes and delighting me. Commentary The poem is addressed to the month of August, which brings burning heat and the end of summer’s fertility. But the month also brings great joy to the speaker because the domestikos, an unnamed imperial official and Philes’ patron, will come back from the East. While the themes and motifs such as harvesting, burning heat, and silver rain are well known from other poems by Philes, the form of a direct address to the personified month of August instead of the very benefactor about whom he speaks is extraordinary. The guiding compositional principle in the poem’s argument is antithesis, a contrasting juxtaposition, which was one of the most important literary patterns in rhetorical texts.³¹ Philes does not create a coherent picture of August, but uses various antithetical settings. He juxtaposes the destructive forces of August which causes diseases in people and withers nature’s verdancy with the bounty of harvest and the showers of silver that he will receive from his benefactor in this month. He also plays with the attribution of August to other seasons instead of summer, namely winter and spring, thus catching the recipient’s attention through these unexpected twists. The comparison of seasons is itself a common rhetorical exercise, as attested by Philes’ older contemporary Maximos Planudes, who wrote a comparison of winter and spring.³² v. 1: Cf. Theodoros Prodromos, Historische Gedichte LXXIV.1: Εὖ γε, χρόνε, πρόκοπτε καὶ σφρίγα πλέον.³³ The parallel is striking and suggests that Philes knew this text, a laudatory poem to patriarch Theodotos II. However, a larger  On antithesis, see H. Hunger, Die Antithese. Zur Verbreitung einer Denkschablone in der byzantinischen Literatur. ZRVI  (),  – .  Ed. M. Treu, Maximi Planudis Comparatio hiemis et veris. Ohlau .  Ed. W. Hörandner, Theodoros Prodromos. Historische Gedichte. WBS, . Vienna . 896 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung study on the knowledge and use of Prodromos and other earlier authors by Philes is still a desideratum.³⁴ v. 1: Philes also wrote a poem on the twelve months, possibly epigrams to accompany images of them (F153), which belongs to the tradition of calendar poems. Best known among calendar poems are the one by Theodoros Prodromos and those inserted in the novels Hysmine and Hysminias by Eustathios Makrembolites and Livistros and Rhodamne, but there are several others both in learned and vernacular Greek.³⁵ They often describe a personified image of each month combined with a medical exhortation.³⁶ August is usually depicted as a man languishing on a bed after a bath while someone fans him. Burning heat that exhausts men is thus the chief characteristic of August. v. 3 – 6: August, according to Philes, confounds the humours and thus caused chill which – as the expression “embers of chill” suggests –occurred together with fever. He refers to the humoral theory popularized by Hippocrates and Galen according to which the humours change with the seasons of the year. Summer was the season in which yellow bile, the humour of aggression and anger, prevailed. The heat of yellow bile warmed the body of men thus causing fevers and chill. This affected especially those inclined to gluttony.³⁷ vv. 9 – 10: When Philes speaks about the goats losing their milk he refers to the fact that the lactation period of sheep and goats ends in August.³⁸ v. 18: ἀναστολιεῖς (ἀναστολίζω) hapax legomenon. v. 19: Saffron, a color derived from the crocus flower, was used as a precious dyestuff in Byzantium and Italian saffron dominated the market.³⁹  For some preliminary observations on Philes’ use of earlier authors see Kubina, Enkomiastische Dichtung (as footnote  above),  – , on Prodromos especially .  On Philes see P. A. Agapitos / M. Hinterberger / E. Mitsi (eds.), Εἰκὼν καὶ λόγος. Ἕξι βυζαντινὲς περιγραφὲς ἔργων τέχνης. Εἰσαγωγικὸ δοκίμιο, μετάφραση καὶ σχολιασμός. Athen ,  – . On the tradition see still B. Keil, Die Monatscyclen der byzantinischen Kunst in spätgriechischer Literatur. Wiener Studien  (),  – ; H. Eideneier, Ein byzantinisches Kalendergedicht in der Volkssprache. Hellenika  (),  – ; and V. Doulavera, Στίχοι για τους δώδεκα μήνες: άγνωστοι μάρτυρες του μυθιστορήματος Λίβιστρος και Ροδάμνη και των Ειδέων των δώδεκα μηνών. Hellenika  (),  – .  There is a similar tradition of metrical church calendars, which, however, does not play a role here.  V. Nutton, Fieber, in: Der Neue Pauly . Stuttgart .  J. K. Campbell. Honour, family and patronage. A study of institutions and moral values in a Greek mountain community. Oxford ,  – . I thank Johannes Preiser-Kapeller for this reference.  See J. B. Friedman / K. M. Figg (eds.), Trade, travel, and exploration in the middle ages. An encyclopedia. New York , s.v. ‘saffron’ at  – . K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 897 v. 20 – 23: Philes states that his benefactor, a domestikos, will soon come to help him. As the latter is called “herdsman of Thrace”, he might have been a domestikos ton dytikon thematon, but his identity remains unknown. In his other poems, Philes addresses a number of people who bore the title domestikos, e. g. Michael Atzymes, domestikos ton anatolikon thematon (App.57, F78, E212, E217, E257, F78, F240, M52, M60, P141, P212, P213, P240), the megas domestikos Ioannes Kantakuzenos (F1, M76, M79, M80), or unnamed domestikoi (E207, F65, P98, P122, P209), but among them no domestikos ton dytikon thematon. On the other hand, Theodoros Patrikiotes, one of Philes’ most important donors, is called προβατεὺς τῶν Θρᾳκῶν, but there is no evidence that he was a domestikos. ⁴⁰ v. 22: The word κρότοι ([rhythmical] ‘beats’) refers especially to (laudatory) verses and is often used by Philes in reference to his own verses (see e. g. F95.196, F112.19, P31.25, G1.173, F1.944, M76.275).⁴¹ Philes here states that his addressee is himself a masterpiece, the subject of Philes’ poetic celebration. He suggests that he could adorn nothing more beautiful and magnificent with his verses than the domestikos v. 25: The image of gathering up the seeds – inverting the classic image of the harvest, in which the produce is collected – is rather obscure. It may be that the domestikos will gather the seeds of the plants that will be necessary for the planting of the next year. In this sense, the seed would be a metonymy for the harvest. The metaphorical meaning, however, is clear: the domestikos will gather coins and distribute them to Philes. v. 30: The balance scales refer to the common image that the soul of a person will be weighed at his or her death in order to decide over his fate in eternal life.⁴² God, Philes states, will grant the domestikos a worthy reward for his generosity. v. 31: August customarily marked the end of both the summer (cf. Geoponika I.1.4)⁴³ and the calendar year, of which September 1 was the first day of the new  On Theodoros Patrikiotes and Philes see Kubina, Enkomiastische Dichtung (as footnote  above),  –  and C. Messis. The fortune of Lucian in Byzantium, in P. Marciniak / I. Nilsson (eds.), A Golden Age of laughter? Satire in the middle Byzantine period. Explorations in Medieval Culture (forthcoming).  On the use of the term krotoi in Philes see Kubina, Enkomiastische Dichtung (as footnote  above),  – , on the term in general V. Valiavitcharska, Rhetoric and rhythm in Byzantium. The sound of persuasion. Cambridge ,  and M. D. Lauxtermann, The velocity of pure iambs. Byzantine observations on the metre and rhythm of the dodecasyllable. JÖB  (),  – ,  – .  See ODB s.v. balance scales and psychomachia.  Ed. H. Beckh, Geoponica sive Cassiani Bassi scholastici de re rustica eclogae. Leipzig . 898 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung indiction. Philes refers to the division of the year into only two seasons: summer and winter. He suggests that the saying ‘August is the beginning of winter’ was proverbial, yet there seems to be no parallel attested in Byzantine paroimographical collections or elsewhere.⁴⁴ v. 36: One syllable in the first part of the verse is missing to fill the dodecasyllable. Ι propose νυνὶ δέ <μοι>, which has a parallel in P107.19, and contrasts August’s significance to others (the turn toward winter), with its special meaning to him (the return of his patron). v. 40 – 41: The concluding lines are again addressed to the month of August. Poem 6 Τοῦ Φιλῆ εἰς τὸν μέγαν διοικητὴν Καβάσιλαν Ἐπεί σε ποιεῖ καὶ πρὸ τῆς ἡλικίας λαμπρὸν δικαστὴν ἡ βασιλέως κρίσις, πρεσβυτέρων κρίνοντα σωφρόνων μέσον, ὦ νοῦ διοικῶν εὐγενῶς τὸ συμφέρον, 5 κἀνταῦθα σαυτὸν ἀσφαλῆ καθιστάνων τραπεζίτην δίκασον ὑπόπτην μέσον. Ὀξυβολεῖς γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν προκειμένων ἐπὶ τὰ μὴ πρόδηλα χωρῶν εὐστόχως, καὶ προβλέπεις τὸ μέλλον ἐκ τῶν εἰκότων 10 τῷ τῶν λόγων πόρρωθεν εἰσδύνων βάθει· σκοπεῖς δὲ τὴν γῆν μειδιῶν εἴ τις δόλος καὶ τοὺς ἀνακύπτοντας ἀθροίζεις λόγους ἐξ ὧν τἀληθὲς τῇ δίκῃ γνωρίζεται. Τίς δ’ ἄρα νοῦς γόνιμος ἢ γλώττης δρόμος 15 τῇ σῇ φύσει πρέποντας ἁρμόσει κρότους, ὅταν τὰ πολλὰ δεξιῶς παρατρέχων τὴν ψῆφον ἡμῖν ἀγνοοῦσιν ἐξάγῃς; App. crit.: 17 ἐξάγῃς] ἐξάγοις ms.  A. Mommsen (ed.), Griechische Jahreszeiten. Schleswig , I  – , records that the proverb existed in modern Greece. If there is any connection to Byzantine times, however, is unclear. K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 899 Ms.: Vat. Urb. gr. 125 (Diktyon no. 66592), f. 308v. 13th/14th century. Collection of rhetorical texts, mainly letters and some epigrams at the end. A second hand inserted poem 6 among various other short texts.⁴⁵ Translation By Philes, to the megas dioiketes Kabasilas Since the emperor’s judgement appoints you at a young age as an illustrious judge, dispensing justice in the midst of the prudent older men, O mind nobly administering the common interest, [5] rendering yourself infallible also in this case, judge the suspicious banker. For you fire the piercing arrows of your judgement from the evidence, moving in a well-aimed manner towards what is not manifest, and you foresee the future from what is reasonable [10] entering the depth of words from afar. You survey the land smiling in the case of deception, and you collect the emerging speeches, from which the truth is made known during the trial. Yet, which fertile mind or turn of the tongue [15] will join rhythmical applause fitting your nature when you, sagely passing by many affairs, bring forth to us ignorant people the judicial decision? Commentary The addressee is the megas dioketes Kabasilas, most likely Theodoros Kabasilas (PLP #10090).⁴⁶ Philes addressed a second poem to a certain Kabasilas, F150 (PLP #10069). However, the rubric indicates that that poem is addressed to his teacher (γραμματικός). It is thus unlikely that the two dedicatees are the same person. In the poem edited above Philes asks Kabasilas to rightly adjudicate an unnamed banker (τραπεζίτης), combining this plea with abundant praise of the magistrate’s judgement. vv. 1– 3: Apparently, the emperor had made Kabasilas a judge at an unusually young age.  On the manuscript see C. Stornajolo, Codices Urbinati graeci Bibliothecae Vaticanae. Rome ,  – .  On his life see S. Kourouses, Ὁ μέγας διοικητὴς Θεόδωρος Καβάσιλας καὶ ἡ εἰς Ανδρόνικον Βʹ († ) μονῳδία αὐτοῦ. EEBS  ( – ),  – . 900 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung v. 4: The word διοικῶν plays on the title of the addressee, megas dioiketes, an office with fiscal and judicial duties. However, nothing specific is known about the dioiketai in the late period.⁴⁷ v. 6: The word μέσον might be a scribal error taking up the same word at the end of v. 3, since it is hard to make sense of it in v. 6. v. 7: ὀξυβολέω “to shoot sharply”, hapax legomenon, used in the sense of directing the mind or judgement with precision. v. 10: εἰσδύνω is used, somewhat unusually, with dative instead of accusative; cf. LBG s.v. εἰσδύω. vv. 10 and 12: The λόγοι most likely refer to the speeches given before the court. v. 11: Kabasilas is described as smiling when he notices any deceit. Smiling was considered to be a sign of a tranquil and noble mind not led by passions and is often attributed to saints.⁴⁸ It thus fits a sensible judge. vv. 14– 17: The topos of ineffability to which the passage alludes is ubiquitous in Philes’ encomiastic poems.⁴⁹ v. 15: On the term κρότοι ([rhythmical] ‘applause’) referring to verses see p. 897. Poem 7 Στίχοι τοῦ σοφωτάτου Φιλῆ πρὸς τινὰ Κομνηνὸν περὶ οἴνου Πέμπε πρὸς ἡμᾶς μὴ δριμὺν μήδ’ ὀξώδη, μηδὲ βραχὺν τὸν οἶνον, ὁ γλυκὺς φίλος· πολὺς γαρ εἶ σύ, καὶ φρενῶν βότρυν φέρεις, αἳ τὰς ῥάγας φέρουσι τῆς εὐστοργίας. App. crit.: 1 δριμὺν] δριμήν ms. | 1 ὀξώδη] ὀξόδη ms. | 3 βότρυν] βότρυς ms. | 4 αἳ] οἶ ms.  R. Macrides / J. Munitiz / D. Angelov, Pseudo-Kodinos and the Constantinopolitan court. Offices and ceremonies. Birmingham Byzantine and Ottoman Studies, . Farnham ,  footnote .  M. Hinterberger, ‘Messages of the soul’. Tears, smiles, laughter and emotions expressed by them in Byzantine literature, in M. Alexiou / D. Cairns (eds.). Greek laughter and tears. Antiquity and after. Edinburgh Leventis Studies, . Edinburgh ,  – ,  – .  Kubina, Enkomiastische Dichtung (as footnote  above),  – . K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 901 Ms.: Leiden, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, Voss. gr. Q° 52 (Diktyon no. 38159), f. 4v. 15th–16th century. Poem 7 is followed by poem 8. Poetry by Michael Psellos and Philes, Planudes’ translation of the Dicta Catonis, grammatical texts by Herodianos and Manuel Chrysolaras.⁵⁰ Translation Verses of the most wise Philes to one Komnenos about wine Send us wine neither bitter nor sour nor scant, sweet friend. For you are great and you bear the grapes of mind, which bring along the fruit of tender affection. Commentary The poem is a short verse letter to a certain Komnenos, a (semi‐)humourous request for good wine. Philes playfully blurs the distinction between the actual beverage and a literary reply, pressed from the “grapes” of the addressee’s “mind”, i. e. his wisdom and its manifestations.⁵¹ Similar tetrasticha concerning various requested goods are found abundantly in Philes’ oeuvre, cf. e. g. E200, E233, P106, F235 about wine. vv. 3 – 4: The description of the prudence and love of the addressee is combined with metaphors from wine. This goes well with Philes’ custom of using metaphors to describe his addressee that refer to the good that he requests.⁵² Poem 8 Τῷ αὐτῷ [i. e. Κομνηνῷ τινι] περὶ τοῦ οἴνου Ἔπεμψα τὸν μείρακα τοῦ γλεύκους χάριν, ὑφ’ οὗ ποτιεῖς ἐκτακέντα τὸν φίλον  K. A. de Meyier, Bibliotheca Universitatis Leidensis codices manuscripti, VI. Codices Vossiani Graeci et Miscellanei. Leiden ,  – .  On wine in Philes’ poetry see the annotated anthology by E. Anagnostakes, Ὁ οἶνος στὴν ποίηση. . Οἶνος ὁ Βυζαντινός. Ἡ ἄμπελος καὶ ὁ οἶνος στὴ βυζαντινὴ ποίηση καὶ ὑμνογραφία. Athens ,  – .  Cf. e. g. in the context of wine Ε.; F.; F.; M.; M. and ; P.. 902 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung καὶ πᾶν τέως ἄθυμον ἐκλείψεις πάθος, οἶνε κατὰ νοῦν, ἀμπελῶνος ἐργάτα. App. crit.: 3 τέως] τέος ms. | 3 ἐκλείψεις] ἐκλίψις ms. | 4 κατὰ νοῦν] κατανοῦν ms. Ms.: Leiden, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, Voss. gr. Q° 52 (Diktyon no. 38159), f. 4v. On the manuscript see above p. 901. Translation To the same [i. e. one Komnenos] concerning wine I sent you the boy to fetch sweet new wine, which you will give to your friend who has wasted away and then you will put an end to all despondent passion for a time, O reasonable wine, labourer of the vineyard. Commentary The poem is another short verse letter about wine like poem no. 7. v. 1: Philes sent a child as a messenger to his addressee. Such references to messengers are common in verse letters and point to the practical function of the texts.⁵³ v. 3: On the benefits of a gift of wine, which lifts up the receiver’s faintheartedness cf. P106.4.⁵⁴ See also Proverbs 31.6 – 7: δίδοτε μέθην τοῖς ἐν λύπαις καὶ οἶνον πίνειν τοῖς ἐν ὀδύναις, ἵνα ἐπιλάθωνται τῆς πενίας καὶ τῶν πόνων μὴ μνησθῶσιν ἔτι (“Give strong drink to those who are in pain and wine to drink to those in sorrow, that they may forget their poverty and not remember their labour any more”).⁵⁵ v. 4: The use of the epithet “reasonable wine” for the addressee is unusual. Firstly, nowhere else does Philes call anyone “wine.” Secondly the description as wine κατὰ νοῦν refers to the ambivalent nature of wine, which, on the one hand, was seen as refreshing drink, while, on the other hand, it could cause drunkenness through overindulgence. The expression that wine reveals the mind of a  See Kubina, Begging poet (as footnote  above),  – .  On P see M. Bazzani, The art of requesting in the poetry of Manuel Philes, in Rhoby/Zagklas, Middle and late Byzantine poetry (as footnote  above),  – ,  – .  Translation Pietersma/Wright, New English translation (as footnote  above), . K. Kubina, Eight unedited poems by Manuel Philes 903 man goes back to Theognis (Elegiae I.500), and appears frequently in Byzantine authors.⁵⁶ Philes alludes to this tradition by stressing the sensible character of his addressee. Furthermore, the second syllable is short, going against the prosodic rules of the dodecasyllable. Such severe mistakes do not occur in Philes’ poetry.⁵⁷ There are three possible interpretations: 1) A less skilful author than Philes composed the poem. But there is no corroborating evidence to support this interpretation and the poem is very similar to other tetrasticha by Philes. 2) The transmitted text is corrupt. 3) Philes used this deviation to the metrical scheme to play on the confounding qualities of wine, just the way he plays with meter in V17 (see above p. 886 – 887). I prefer the latter interpretation. v. 4: Reference to the parable of the workers in the vineyard (Mt. 20.1– 6). Cf. also Philes’ poem on the grape, v. 199, for the same way to address a benefactor.⁵⁸ The eight poems edited here offer a representative cross section of a large part of Philes’ oeuvre: poems addressed to his friends and patrons.⁵⁹ Philes creates a picture of himself and his addressees that varies greatly from poem to poem. While in some poems he presents himself as a half-dead pauper and vividly asks for help (poem 1 and 4), in others he accentuates the friendship between himself and the recipient of his letter, a gift which obligates the friend to reciprocate with a present of his own (poems 7 and 8). In poem 5, he expresses his certainty to receive help from his benefactor. Far from being only a supplicant, in poem 6 Philes uses his influence to help an anonymous banker thus acting as an advocate for the latter. In the paramythetic poem 3 the poet exhorts his addressee not to grieve excessively since his son is now with God. Themes and motifs in these poems range from friendly advice over abundant praise to overt pleading. The literary devices he uses – such as metaphors, rhetorical figures, proverbs, antithetic settings, the reference to the Bible (to name but a few) – are manifold and testify to the great skills of this poet. Philes’ poems thus show how deeply embedded rhetorical writing and verse composition in particular was in society and how he used poetry as a means to shape and mediate his relationship with others.  See with further references E. L. von Leutsch / F.W. Schneidewin, Corpus Paroemiographorum Graecorum, II. Göttingen ,  (Apostolii Centuria VII. m).  P. Maas, Der byzantinische Zwölfsilber. BZ  (),  – , . Counter examples can be found in verses that have text-critical or editorial problems, cf. e. g. F. ed. Miller Ὧδε, βασιλεῦ, where the manuscript correctly reads Ὦ δὴ βασιλεῦ (Cod. Laur. Plut. ., f. v).  Ed. Lehrs/Dübner, Poetae (as footnote  above), , v. .  For a detailed analysis of Philes’ relationship with his addressees and the literary devices he uses to create them see Kubina, Enkomiastische Dichtung (as fotnote  above),  – .