¹ Cf. Arbesmann, R., ‘The Concept of « Christus Medicus » in St. Augustine,’ Traditio 10 (1954) 1–28. Fr. Arbesmann's introductory paragraph and his bibliographical citations throughout the article provide a rather complete list of pertinent material.Google Scholar

² The kontakion (κοντάκιον) is the verse form employed by Romanos. Its essential characteristics are discussed in Part I of this article. The term ‘kontakion,’ most probably derived from κόντος or κόνταξ: ‘staff’ (i.e. the staff around which the scroll containing the hymn was wrapped), first occurs in the ninth century. Cf. Mioni, E., Romano il Melode (Turin 1937) 10.Google Scholar

³ Krumbacher, K., Geschichte der byzantinischen Litteratur (2nd ed. Munich 1897) 669: ‘… so sicher ist es, dass er [Romanos] an poetischer Begabung, an Feuer der Begeisterung, an Tiefe der Empfindung und Erhabenheit der Sprache alle anderen Meloden weit übertrifft. Die Litteraturgeschichte der Zukunft wird vielleicht den Romanos als den grössten Kirchendichter aller Zeiten feiern.’Google Scholar

⁴ A brief survey of the significant moments and figures in the history of modern Byzantine scholarship as it pertains to the present topic may be found in Wellesz, E., A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography (Oxford 1949) 1–20.Google Scholar

⁵ Pitra, J.-B., Analecta sacra spicilegio Solesmensi parata 1 (Paris 1876).Google Scholar

⁶ Both Krumbacher and Maas have published numerous articles on Romanos in German journals. Many of these studies are cited in this article and a complete bibliography is included in H.-G. Beck, Kirche und theologische Literatur im byzantinischen Reich (Munich 1959) 425–428; cf. Cammelli, G., Romano il Melode (Firenze 1930) 11-30.Google Scholar

⁷ Selected hymns were published by Pitra, op. cit. (note 5 supra) and in his contribution, ‘Sanctus Romanus veterum melodorum princeps,’ Omaggio Giubilare (Rome 1888). Appended to various articles by Krumbacher and Maas are several hymns; there are two volumes of selections: Mioni (note 2 supra) and Cammelli (note 6 supra). Three volumes of a proposed edition of the Romanos corpus have been published by Tomadakes, N. B., Ὕµvoι ‘Pωµαvoῦ τoῦ Mελoδoῦ (Athens 1952, 1955, and 1957). Scholars, however, refuse to acknowledge Tomadakes’ efforts as the critical edition of the Melodist's works. [Cf. Joannou, P.'s review in Byzantinische Zeitschrift (= BZ) 48 (1955) 142-154.] Early in this century Maas, P. collated the available manuscripts and prepared a typescript of the critical edition of Romanos’ kontakia. Unfortunately this work has never been published and is now on deposit in the Bodleian Library in Oxford. (As this article is being written, Prof. Trypanis, C. A. of Oxford is preparing the first volume of a critical edition for the Oxford University Press.) All the Greek texts cited in this article are taken from my microfilm copies of the Maas text. The translations are my own.Google Scholar

⁸ This vita is to be found in the Synaxarium Sirmondianum, cf. Analecta Bollandiana 14 (1895) 396–434. The Greek text has been published in Analecta Bollandiana 13 (1894) 440-442 and in Propylaeum ad Acta Sanctorum, ed. Delehaye, H. (Brussels 1902) 95-96.Google Scholar

⁹ Carpenter, M. interpreted the ‘paper’ as a symbol of the commingling of the Greek and the Syriac traditions in the Melodist's hymns: ‘The Paper That Romanos Swallowed,’ Speculum 7 (1932) 3–22. This interpretation was refuted by Paton, L. A., ibid. 553-555.Google Scholar

¹⁰ These are the opening lines of the famous ‘Christmas Hymn,’ Acrostic 1. The critical text was published by Maas, ‘Das Weihnachtslied des Romanos,’ BZ 24 (1923-1924) 1–13. Other editions, based on the Maas text, are by Trypanis, C. A., Medieval and Modern Greek Poetry (Oxford 1951) 11-19, and by Cammelli, Romano (note 6 supra) 83-119. An earlier version was published by Pitra, Analecta sacra 1 (note 5 supra) 1-11.Google Scholar

¹¹ Cf. Cammelli, op. cit. 11-18.Google Scholar

¹² Maas, ‘Die Chronologie der Hymnen des Romanos,’ BZ 15 (1906) 1–44.Google Scholar

¹³ Maas, , ‘Romanos auf Papyros,’ Byzantion 14 (1939) 381.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Krumbacher, ‘Die Akrostichis in der griechischen Kirchenpoesie,’ Sb. Akad. Munich 1903, 4.561-691. The ‘acrostic numbers’ used by Krumbacher are the standard designations of Romanos’ hymns and are always cited in this article.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Cf. Krumbacher, , ‘Umarbeitungen bei Romanos,’ Sb. Akd. Munich 1899, 2.42ff. and Maas, ‘Chronologie’ (note 12 supra) 32.Google Scholar

¹⁶ A typical acrostic usually includes the poet's name: TOY TAΠEINOY PΩMANOY AINOΣ. Google Scholar

¹⁷ A detailed discussion of the kontakion's formal elements can be found in Maas, ‘Das Kontakion,’ BZ 19 (1910) 285–306. There can be little doubt that various types of Syriac poetry are the sources for many of these formal elements; cf. Wellesz, History Byz. Music (note 4 supra) 157-161 and Baumstark, A., Comparative Liturgy (English ed. Westminster, , Md. 1958) 104-105.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Cf. Wellesz, op. cit. 154-155.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Ibid. 174.Google Scholar

²⁰ I delivered a communication on this topic (‘Typology in the Kontakia of Romanos’) at the Third International Conference on Patristic Studies, Oxford, September 1959. This paper will be published in the Proceedings of the Conference in the series Texte und Untersuchungen. Google Scholar

²¹ Cf. Maas, ‘Chronologie’ (note 12 supra).Google Scholar

²² Cf. Krumbacher, , ‘Miscellen zu Romanos,’ Abh. Munich 24 (1909) 2.105-108. In this article Krumbacher's colleague Maas suggested the following six sub-divisions for the topics of the kontakia of Romanos: Christ (33 hymns), Mary, the Precursor, and the Apostles (9), Old Testament Figures (9), Martyrs and Saints (24), Parables (5), and Miscellaneous (5).Google Scholar

²³ I use the word ‘dramatic’ in the broad sense of the term and I do not wish to suggest that the kontakia were ever theatrically produced. For a discussion of this dramatic aspect of Romanos’ hymns cf. La Piana, G., ‘The Byzantine Theatre,’ Speculum 11 (1936) 174 and 181; Carpenter, M., ‘Romanos and the Mystery Play of the East,’ The Univ. of Missouri Studies 11 (1936) 32ff.; and Baud-Bovy, S., ‘Sur un sacrifice d’Abraham de Romanos et sur l'existence d'un théatre religieux à Byzance,’ Byzantion 13 (1938) 321-334. This last article seems to be the most comprehensive and authoritative discussion of the dramatic dimension in the kontakia of Romanos.Google Scholar

²⁴ The passages illustrating the ‘physician’ motif contain many examples of these tropes and were selected with this purpose in mind.Google Scholar

²⁵ Cf. Maas, ‘Kontakion’ (note 17 supra) 305; Bickersteth, E., ‘A Source of Romanos’ Contakion on the Hypapante,’ Actes du VI ^e Congrès international d’études byzantines (Paris 1950) 375–381; Carpenter, ‘Paper’ (note 9 supra); and my unpublished Oxford Phil, D. thesis, ‘The Biblical and Patristic Sources of the Christological Kontakia of Romanos,’ which has been deposited in the Bodleian Library. In my opinion the alleged source-connection between the works traditionally assigned to ‘Ephraem Graecus’ and the kontakia of Romanos should not be regarded as definitely established until the Greek writings, both prose and poetry, traditionally attributed to Ephraem have been critically examined. For a different opinion cf. Wehofer, T. M., ‘Untersuchungen zum Lied des Romanos auf die Wiederkunft des Herrn,’ Sb. Akd. Vienna 154 (1907) 5.1-107, and Emereau, C., Saint Ephrem le Syrien (Paris 1919).Google Scholar

²⁶ Other significant motifs employed by Romanos include Light, Fire, Poverty, The Scribe, The Thief, and The Huntsman.Google Scholar

²⁷ Cf. note 22 supra. Google Scholar

²⁸ The critical text of this hymn is in the Maas typescript. When citing references to the Greek text, I shall try to include, wherever possible, information about published texts.Google Scholar

²⁹ Cf. On Earthquakes and Fires, Acrostic 62 [Tomadakes, Ὕµvoι 1 (note 7 supra) 87ff.] stanzas α-ιγ’. Maas demonstrated that this hymn is chiefly historical in content and was most probably composed for the dedication of the rebuilt Hagia Sophia in 537; cf. Maas, ‘Chronologie’ (note 12 supra) 2-7. Moreover, he commented, ‘Die erste Hälfte des Liedes füllen allgemeine Betrachtungen über Gottes Güte und Gottes Strafen …’ ibid. 2. Included in the first twelve and a half stanzas are several invocations to Christ the Physician, another indication of the use and importance of this sermon technique.Google Scholar

³⁰ Maas typescript.Google Scholar

³¹ Cf. Maas, ‘Chronologie’ (note 12 supra) 1-44.Google Scholar

³² Maas typescript.Google Scholar

³³ Cf. note 20 supra. Google Scholar

³⁴ Maas typescript.Google Scholar

³⁵ Cf. Woollcombe, K. J., ‘The Biblical Origins and Patristic Development of Typology,’ Essays on Typology (Studies in Biblical Theology 22; London 1951) 40, for the distinction between typology and allegory.Google Scholar

³⁶ Cf. note 10 supra. Google Scholar

³⁷ Maas typescript and Tomadakes, Ὕµvoι 1.117-146.Google Scholar

³⁸ Maas typescript and Pitra, Analecta sacra 1.141-147,Google Scholar

³⁹ Maas typescript.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Maas typescript.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Maas typescript; Pitra, Analecta sacra 1.101-107; Krumbacher, ‘Akrostichis’ (note 14 supra) 658-674; Cammelli, Romano (note 6 supra) 329-361; and Tomadakes, Ὕµvoι 2.117-139.Google Scholar

⁴² The following is a complete list of the occurrences of the Divine Physician motif and of related medical references in the kontakia of Romanos the Melodist:Google Scholar

• Acrostic 7: κγ’ 5–6.

• Acrostic 17: ιγ’ 1–9.

• Acrostic 57: ϰονϰ.; α’ 1–4.

• Acrostic 62: α’ 1-8; ια’ 5-8; ιβ’ 1–8; ιγ’ 1–2; κ’ 3.

• Acrostic 67: α’ 1–3; β’ 1–8.

• Acrostic 70: γ’ 2; η’ 1–2.

• Acrostic 74: ιθ’ 2–3.

• Acrostic 76: δ’ 9–10; ζ’ 1–3.

• Acrostic 78: ϰονϰ.; a’ 4–6; γ‘ 3–4; δ‘ 1–2; ε‘ 1–9; ς’ 1–9; ζ‘ 1–2; ιζ’ 1–4.

• Acrostic 83: ε’ 1–10; ζ‘ 1–2.

• Acrostic 84: α’ 1–9; β‘ 1–9.

• Acrostic 202: ιζ’ 1–9; ιη’ 1–6.