Page:1909historyofdec04gibbuoft.djvu/635

 APPENDIX 567 propitio deo felio(ita)te restituit ; operi iniuncto naviter insudante adq(ue) clemen- tissimi prinoip(is) felioiter deserviente p(rae) coniis ex prosapie Deciorum Caeolina) Mav(ortio?) Basilio Decio v(iro) c(larissirno) et ill(ustri) ex p(rsefecto) u(rbi) ex p(raefeeto) p(raetorio), ex cons(ule) ord(inario) pat(ricio), qui ad perpetuandam tanti domini gloriam per plurimos qui non ante [fuerant suppl. Mommsen] albeoB deducta in mare aqua ignotae atavis et nimis antiquae reddidit 6iccitati. See Corp. Inser. Lat., x. p. 690 sqq. 10. JUSTINIAN'S POSITION IN JUSTIN'S REIGN— (P. 221, 222) Prooopius in his Secret History ascribes to Justinian supreme influence in political affairs during the whole reign of his uncle Justin, and even dates the beginning of Justinian's rule from a.d. 518, as has been shown by Haury (Procopiana, 1891). This fact has been observed by a corruption in the text at the beginning of o. 19 (p. 120, ed. Haury), where Haury has restored 'lovarlvou for 'lovanviavoii, and by an omission of a couple of lines, further on in the same chapter, in the Vatican Ms. on which Alemannus based his edition. These important lines (omitted by the Vatican codex, on account of a homoeoteleuton) are preserved in the Ambrosian and Paris Mss. and appear in Haury's text, p. 121 (attention had already been called to the passage by Krasheninnikov, Vizant. Vremennik, 2, 421). After the words SiawJcria /col Tp«rxtA.ia xp v a.iroXnce'iv. eirl fxevTOi 'lovarlvov Ittj evvia tt)v avroKparopa apx^v %x 0VT0S roinov 'louffTiviavov £vyxvffiv re nat aKoafniav rrj iroKneiq izpoffrpi^a^evov TeTpa/acxiAia KevT-qvapia k.t.a. In connexion with the text of the Secret History, it is also to be noted that there is something wrong in the transition from c. 17 to c. 18. Panohenko (Viz. Vrem. 2, 55, 345) assumes a lacuna at the end of c. 17, but Haury is probably right in supplying 'ov s 'lovcmviavos- tovtou Se fiaffiKevovros . . . 6 2e/8^pos (pdyei els t^v ' AXe^avOpeiav. Does the date refer to the position of Justinian after the death of Vitalian, a.d. 520? In regard to the death of Vitalian, it has been urged for Justinian that his guilt rests on the evidence of the Secret History, Evagrius, and Victor Tonn. ; that Victor does not vouch himself for the charge against Justinian (his words are : Justiniani patricii factione dicitur interfeetus esse), and that Evagrius derived his information from the Secret History ; thus the statements of the Secret History would be practically unsupported. See Loofs, Leontius von Byzanz., p. 259. There is no proof, however, that Evagrius knew the Secret History ; it is certain that Vitalian was slain in Uie Palace (John Malal., p. 412) ; and we may, with Panchenko (Viz. Vrem. iii. p. 102), ascribe some slight weight to the principle cui bono fuerit. 11. THE DEMES OF CONSTANTINOPLE— (P. 235) The view of Gibbon that the popular dissensions of the demes (Srjuoi) or parties {fjiep-q) which distracted Constantinople, Antioch, and other cities of the East in the sixth century had their root and origin in the exuberant licence of the hippo- drome ; that the acts and demonstrations of the Greens and Blues were purely wanton outbreaks of a dissolute populace ; that the four denies had no significance exoept in connexion with the races of the hippodrome ; this view has held its ground till the other day, though it is open to serious and by no means recondite objections. The brilliance of Gibbon's exposition has probably helped to maintain it. The French historian and politician, A. Rambaud, wrote a thesis to prove that the " parties " were merely factions of the hippodrome (to ficpi) nihil nisi hipxneas fuisse factiones, op. cit. infra). But on this view the name Sfjuoi is quite inexplic- able, and the part played by the Blues and Greens (with the Beds and Whites, who were submerged in them respectively as integral subdivisions) in the Ceremonies of