I Byzantine apocalyptic reactions to the fall of Constantinople (1453)

The fifteenth through seventeenth centuries saw an unprecedented proliferation of Byzantine apocalyptic literature. This can be seen from the stark increase in manuscript copies containing prophecies in Greek prose and verse.Footnote ¹ The Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453 and subsequent Ottoman expansionism into Central Europe provoked a heightened interest in divinatory and oracular literature, not least because of the age-old tenet that the destruction of the Roman dominion would trigger the end of the world. For more than a millennium, the apocalyptic tradition in Byzantium had revolved around an imperial eschatology that saw the Eastern Roman Empire in general and Constantinople in particular as the katechon (2 Thess 2:6–8), the withholding force that inhibits the arrival of the Antichrist, who would be the last political figure on earth prior to the Second Coming of Christ.Footnote ² Byzantine imperial eschatology was exceedingly influential throughout the Mediterranean, so much so that the fall of the City was understood as an apocalyptic event not only by Orthodox Christians but also by Jewish and Ottoman communities.Footnote ³ The prestige of apocalyptic literature written in Greek climaxed during the two-hundred-year period between the mid-fifteenth and the mid-seventeenth century. Scholars and scribes gathered all the Greek prophetic material they could lay their hands on and compiled it into oracular collections, which were, at times, lavishly illuminated.Footnote ⁴ During this wave of manuscript production, Byzantine prophecies were not only collected, updated, and arranged into sequence but also supplemented with new compositions.

In the aftermath of the conquest of Constantinople, three notable prophecies were composed. They all concur on the irredentist claim that Constantinople will be recaptured from the Ottomans with the help of Latin forces. They also agree that naval forces would be needed in the fight against the Ottomans. These prophecies are the De expugnatione Constantinopolis ab Ismaelitis (or On the conquest of Constantinople from the Ishmaelites; BHG 2036e), the Interpretatio litterarum Gennadii Scholarii (or Oracular interpretation of Gennadios Scholarios), and the Visio Danielis de septem collibus (or Vision of Daniel on the Seven-Hilled City; BHG 1875).Footnote ⁵ All three texts drew upon a long tradition of apocalyptic irredentism epitomized by the Apocalypsis Methodii (or Apocalypse of Ps-Methodios), which envisaged the reversal of the Arab conquests of the seventh century. The theme of recovering lost lands came to be applied to Constantinople in the early thirteenth century in response to the Latin sack and occupation of Constantinople in 1204. The paradigm text prophesying that the Eastern Romans would retake the City in the last days was the Ultima visio Danielis (or Last Vision of Daniel; CAVT 255). This prophecy embeds the eschatological recovery of Constantinople in a larger narrative that predicts an ensuing civil war among Christian factions, in which the saviour-emperor (or last emperor) is revealed, who in turn defeats all opponents and ushers in a time of ultimate prosperity. With at least 39 manuscript copies, the Ultima visio Danielis was a much sought-after text.Footnote ⁶ Its grand narrative was adopted by the aforementioned three post-1453 prophecies, which supplemented it with the expectation – reflecting fifteenth-century realities – that a large fleet would be instrumental in defeating the Ottoman Turks.

Irredentist hopes and messianic expectations continued unabated even after the apocalyptically significant year 1492 had passed.Footnote ⁷ The production of new prophecies peaked during the Ottoman conquest of Cyprus in the early 1570s. A large number of manuscripts copied in the last quarter of the sixteenth century contain prophecies that relate (fictional and factual) events taking place on Crete and Cyprus.Footnote ⁸ Anxieties about Ottoman expansionism ran high in Eastern Mediterranean islands, spurring the production of new prophetic compositions. A prominent example of such a new composition is the Vaticinium de restitutione Constantinopoleos (or Prophecy on the restoration of Constantinople; hereafter: VatResCon); it may also be called the Prophecy of (Ps-)Laskaris. The aim of this study is to edit, translate, and comment on this hitherto unpublished post-Byzantine prophecy, which comes down in two recensions and in at least twelve manuscripts. A critical edition of both recensions will be given below, accompanied by an English translation and a commentary that discusses the title, date of composition, content, main sources, and significance of the text.

Although the prophecy has remained unedited, occasional references have been made to it. Spyridōn Lambros transcribed its incipit and explicit in his survey of the Marcianus codex (G).Footnote ⁹ François Halkin included the prophecy in the supplements to the BHG, listing it under BHG 1875b and giving reference to the Vindobonenses codices (C, F).Footnote ¹⁰ This reference has been integrated into the Pinakes database.Footnote ¹¹ In addition, Lorenzo DiTommaso drew attention to Halkin's entry and called for more research on the text.Footnote ¹² Furthermore, Dean Sakel referred to the six manuscripts that contain the second recension of VatResCon in his survey of late sixteenth-century oracular collections.Footnote ¹³ In his dissertation, Tamás Kiss quoted an excerpt of the translation that I had drafted from the codex Meteorensis (H).Footnote ¹⁴ I myself have referred to the manuscript witness from Meteōra in a recent publication.Footnote ¹⁵ Finally, Nikos Kastrinakēs mentions the prophecy in his stupendous work on the illuminated manuscripts containing the Oracula Leonis. His study identifies five manuscripts that hold the prophecy.Footnote ¹⁶

A few remarks on the edition and translation that follow: each manuscript witness contains various types of mistakes. The following kinds have not been noted separately in the apparatus: iotacism (πολυορκηθείς, κατοιφίας), etacism (μαίγας, ἀνεδεῖς), confusion of ο and ω (βραχίωνι, φονή), use of double consonants (γέννος, νήσσους), use of single consonants (βάλωσι, θαλάσης), iota subscript, nu-ephelkystikon, accentuation, and use of smooth or rough breathings. Mistakes of such kinds are only noted in the apparatus if another distinctive feature prompted a note. All notes in the apparatus give the exact reading as found in the manuscript, without emendation, as they may be of value to linguistic research. The apparatus includes inidivual readings for the same reason. The punctuation follows modern conventions. Regarding the translation, both recensions include occasional shifts in verbal tenses from the future to the present tense. These shifts are characteristic of the apocalyptic genre and have been maintained in the English translation.Footnote ¹⁷ Moreover, verbs also shift from the future indicative to the aorist subjunctive, which was a common phenomenon since the Hellenistic period, given that these verbal forms became phonologically indistinguishable. This development led to different periphrastic constructions to express the future, such as the combination of the auxiliary verb θέλω with the bare subjunctive, as exemplified in the edition below.Footnote ¹⁸ The future indicative, the aorist subjunctive, and the auxiliary verb construction with θέλω equally denote futurity and, thus, have all been translated as the future tense. The following list of manuscripts takes into account the respective manuscript catalogues. For the sake of brevity, references to these catalogues have been omitted.

II Edition and translation

Sigla

< >

addenda

add.

addit

intel.

intellege

om.

omittit

Redactio longior (A) (VatResCon1)

A

= Oxoniensis Bodl. Canon. misc. 521, fols.18r–20r, saec. XVI²

C

= Vindobonensis suppl. gr. 172, fols.31r–33r, saec. XVI²

D

= Hauniensis GKS 2147 4°, fols.3v–5v, saec. XVI²

F

= Vindobonensis suppl. gr. 89, fols.14v–15v, ann. 1646

G

= Venetus Marcianus gr. IV.46 (coll. 1464), pp.324–326, saec. XVII

(H

= Meteorensis Hagiou Stephanou 85, fols.150r–151v, saec. XVI/XVII)Footnote ¹⁹

Redactio brevior (B) (VatResCon2)

M

= Mancunensis gr. 22, fols.272v–273v, ann. 1622

O

= Athonensis Iberensis 686, fols.21v–22v, saec. XVII

P

= Atheniensis 2501, fols.277r–278r, ann. 1626

Q

= Athonensis Koutloumousiou 217, fols.186r–187r, ann. 1623

S

= Atheniensis Universitatis Bibliothēkēs tēs Philosophikēs Scholēs, cod. 14, fol.243r–v, saec. XVII

T

= Parisinus suppl. gr. 467, fols.226v–227v, saec. XVII

ω

= redactio longior

υ

= redactio brevior

Conjunctive errors establish the following manuscript families:

ψ = CDFG

add. καὶ ζωοποιόν (A III,13)

χ = CDF

αὐτούς (A ΙΙΙ,6); λύπη (A ΙΙΙ, 7)

φ = CD

δεκοκτώ (A ΙΙ,11); κατηφυία (A III, 8)

contaminatio: AG

σοι (A I,8); οὕτω (A III,17)

contaminatio: DF

σωθήσεται (A III,2)

τ = OPQST

αὐτούς (B I,2)

σ = OPQ

these codices hold a text that was inserted into the oracular collectionFootnote ²⁰

ρ = OP

παγχνήσουσιν (B I,5); βασιλεῖς νεώτεροι (B V,8)

π = ST

ῥεύσει (B II,6); add. δώσει (B V,12)

Fontes

AenigLeon. =

Aenigmata Leonis; ed. E. Trapp, ‘Vulgärorakel aus Wiener Handschriften’, in J. Koder and E. Trapp (eds.), Ἀκροθίνια. Sodalium Seminarii Byzantini Vindobonensis Herberto Hunger oblata (Vienna 1964) 83–120.

AnastQuaest. =

Anastasii Sinaïtae Quaestiones et responsiones (CPG 7746); ed. M. Richard and J. A. Munitiz, Anastasii Sinaitae Quaestiones et responsiones (Turnhout 2006).

AnonymVitaCon. =

Anonymi Vita Constantini (BHG 364); ed. M. Guidi, ‘Un βίος di Costantino’, Rendiconti della Reale Accademia dei Lincei: classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche Ser. 5, 16 (1907) 304–40, 637–62.

ApcAndr. =

Apocalypsis Andreae Sali (BHG 117d–fd); ed. L. Rydén, The Life of St Andrew the Fool, 2 vols. (Uppsala 1995) II, 258–84.

ApcIoh. =

Apocalypsis Iohannis apocrypha altera (BHG 922i); ed. F. Nau, ‘Une deuxième apocalypse apocryphe grecque de Saint Jean’, Revue Biblique, nouvelle série 11/2 (1914) 209–21 (215–21).

ApcMeth. =

Apocalypsis Methodii graeca (redactio prima) (BHG 2036); ed. W. Aerts and G. Kortekaas, Die Apokalypse des Pseudo-Methodius: Die ältesten griechischen und lateinischen Übersetzungen. I. Einleitung, Texte, Indices Locorum et Nominum (Leuven 1998).

CyprDan. =

Prophetia de insula Cypri (BHG 2036f); ed. J. Vereecken and L. Hadermann-Misguich, Les Oracles de Léon le Sage illustrés par Georges Klontzas. La version Barozzi dans le Codex Bute (Venice 2000) 100–2.

DiegDan. =

Diegesis Danielis (BHG 2036d); ed. K. Berger, Die griechische Daniel-Diegese: Eine altkirchliche Apokalypse. Text, Übersetzung und Kommentar (Leiden 1976) 12–23.

ExpugConst. =

De expugnatione Constantinopolis ab Ismaelitis (BHG 2036e); ed. V. Istrin, Откровенıе Мефодıя Патарскаго и апокрифическıя видѣнıя Данıила въ византıйской и славяно-русской литературахъ, 2 vols. (Moscow 1897) II, 151–5.

IntrpGenSch. =

Interpretatio litterarum Gennadii Scholarii; ed. Vereecken and Hadermann-Misguich, Les Oracles de Léon Le Sage, 134–6.

LiturgChrys. =

Divina liturgia sancti Ioannis Chrysostomi; ed. Ἡ θεία λειτουργία τοῦ ἐν ἁγίοις πατρὸς ἡμῶν Ἰωάννου τοῦ Χρυσοστόμου - The Divine Liturgy of our Father among the Saints John Chrysostom (Oxford 1995).

NarrMend. =

Narratio mendici regis; ed. W. Brokkaar et al., The Oracles of the Most Wise Emperor Leo & The Tale of the True Emperor (Amstelodamensis graecus VI E 8) (Amsterdam 2002), 90–100.

OracLeon. =

Oracula Leonis Sapientis; ed. Brokkaar et al., The Oracles of the Most Wise Emperor Leo, 56–88.

SibTibGr. =

Sibylla Tiburtina graeca (CPG 1353); ed. P. Alexander, The Oracle of Baalbek. The Tiburtine Sibyl in Greek Dress (Washington, DC 1967) 9–22.

UltVisDan. =

Ultima visio Danielis (BHG 1873, 1874, 1874c–d); ed. H. Schmoldt, Die Schrift ‘Vom jungen Daniel’ und ‘Daniels letzte Vision’, Ph.D. dissertation (Hamburg 1972) 122–44.

VisDanSepCol. =

Visio Danielis de septem collibus (BHG 1875); ed. Schmoldt, Die Schrift ‘Vom jungen Daniel’, 190–8.

VisioDan. =

Visio Danielis de tempore novissimo et de fine mundi (BHG 1872); ed. Schmoldt, Die Schrift ‘Vom jungen Daniel’, 202–18.

VitaCon. =

Vita Constantini (BHG 361x); ed. F. Winkelmann, Eusebius Werke. Erster Band, erster Teil: Über das Leben des Kaisers Konstantin (Berlin ²1991).

Redactio A (VatResCon1 )

[Vaticinium de restitutione Constantinopoleos]

I. Γένος δὲ τοῦ Ἰσμαὴλ κτίσει ἄνω καὶ κάτω πλησίον τῆς Ἑπταλόφου⋅ καὶ οὐαί σοι, Ἑπτάλοφε, ὅτι αὐτὸς μηνύει σου τὸν ἀφανισμόν⋅ καὶ πολιορκηθῇς καὶ σκυλευθῇς ὑπὸ τῶν Ἀγαρηνῶν. πολλὰς δ’ ἀρχὰς καταβαλεῖ, καὶ πολλαὶ πόλεις ἀφανισθήσονται⋅ πολλὰς νήσους ὁ Ἰσμαὴλ τροπώσει, καὶ παραδοθήσονται ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ. καὶ φοβηθήσονται οἱ ἄρχοντες τῆς θαλάσσης, καὶ κόψονται κοπετὸν μέγαν πάντες οἱ κατοικοῦντες τὰς νήσους⋅ οὐαί σοι, Κύπρος, ὅταν παχνίσῃ, ὁ Ἰσμαὴλ λαμβάνει σε. καὶ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ Αἴγυπτος οὐκ ἔσται εἰς σωτηρίαν.

II. Καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ταραχθήσονται τὰ ξανθὰ ἔθνη ἐξ ἀνατολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν, ταράξουσιν αὐτούς. καὶ συναχθήσονται οἱ Ἀγαρηνοὶ καὶ συνάψουσι πόλεμον⋅ καὶ τὸ ξανθὸν γένος τροπώσει αὐτούς, καὶ ὡς στάχυες πεσοῦνται⋅ καὶ στόλος μυρμηκόστολος κινηθήσεται κατ’ αὐτῶν, καὶ συναχθήσονται ἐν τῇ Ἑπταλόφῳ, καὶ γενήσεται πόλεμος μέγας διὰ ξηρᾶς καὶ θαλάσσης⋅ καὶ διὰ τοῦ Κοντοσκαλίου εἰσέλθωσιν εἰς τὴν Ἑπτάλοφον καὶ συντρίψουσι τοὺς Ἰσμαηλίτας καὶ παραλάβωσιν αὐτήν. οἱ δ’ ἄρχοντες τοῦ στρατοῦ ἔριν βαλοῦσι μέσον αὐτῶν τίς ἄρξει αὐτήν⋅ καὶ κατακοπήσονται ἀλλήλως, ὥστε πάντα τὰ κοιλώματα καὶ πᾶσα ἡ Ἑπτάλοφος αἵματος πληρωθήσεται, ὡς καὶ μόσχος τριετὴς πνιγήσεται, καὶ δραμεῖται τὸ αἷμα ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ στάδια δεκαοκτώ.

III. Μετὰ δὲ τὴν συμφορὰν ταύτην ἐν ᾗ πάντες οἱ ἁμαρτωλοὶ φθαρήσονται καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐξ αὐτῶν σταθήσεται, τότε φωνὴ ἐξ ἀοράτων γενήσεται ὡς βροντὴ λέγουσα ⋅ στῶμεν καλῶς, στῶμεν μετὰ φόβου⋅ ἀρκεῖ μοι ἡ ἐκδίκησις αὕτη. εὐθὺς δ’ ὁ πόλεμος παυθήσεται. ἄνθρωποι δὲ δύο λευκοφόροι φανήσονται, καὶ φῶς λάμψει ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις πάντων, καὶ δρομαίως ἀκολουθήσουσιν αὐτοῖς ὁ ἐναπολειφθεὶς λαὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ⋅ καὶ εὕρωσι τὸν εἰρηνικὸν καὶ ἅγιον βασιλέα ἐν ἐσθῆτι ῥακώδει καὶ λύπης καὶ κατηφείας μεστόν, ὅτι καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ ἦν ἐν μέσῳ αὐτῶν. καὶ ὁ κῆρυξ τρανῶς βοήσει τρίς⋅ οὗτός ἐστι, καὶ λάβετε αὐτὸν βασιλέα. καὶ πᾶς ὁ χριστώνυμος λαὸς προσκυνήσουσιν αὐτὸν βασιλέα καὶ ἄγοντες αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν Ἁγίαν Σοφίαν⋅ ὁ βασιλεὺς δοξάσει τὸν Θεόν. τρεῖς δ’ ἄγγελοι στέψουσιν αὐτὸν βασιλέα, καὶ ὁ τέταρτος ἔχων σκῆπτρον τὸν τίμιον σταυρὸν καὶ ξίφος ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ λέγων⋅ ἐν τοῦτῳ νίκα τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου. τότε ὁ βασιλεὺς ἡμερώσει τὰ ξανθὰ γένη καὶ εἰρηνεύσει τὰ ἑσπέρια ἔθνη. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα καταδιώξει τοὺς Ἰσμαηλίτας ἐν χειρὶ κραταιᾷ καὶ ἐν βραχίονι ὑψηλῷ καὶ εἰς τέλος διαφθείρει αὐτούς. ἐν χρόνοις δὲ τρισὶν ἔσται ἐπὶ τὴν δίωξιν τῶν ἐθνῶν καὶ καταβαλεῖ μυριάδας, καὶ οὕτω στραφήσεται ὁ βασιλεὺς εἰς τὴν ἁγίαν Σιών⋅ καὶ ἐν τῷ ὑποστρέφειν αὐτὸν ἀνοιχθήσονται οἱ θησαυροὶ τῆς γῆς, καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς δώσει κατ’ ἀξίαν πάντας, καὶ ἡ γῆ δώσει τοὺς καρποὺς αὐτῆς⋅ καὶ ἀγαλλίασις ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ γενήσεται, καὶ συναχθήσεται ἕκαστος ἐν τῇ γῇ αὐτοῦ.

IV. Τότε ἐξελεύσεται Γὼγ καὶ Μαγὼγ καὶ ἔθνη πολλὰ μετ’ αὐτῶν ὡσεὶ ἄμμος τῆς γῆς⋅ φόβος δὲ μέγας γενήσεται τῇ οἰκουμένῃ. τότε ὁ βασιλεὺς κλαύσει ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ καταβήσεται πῦρ ἀπ’ οὐρανοῦ καὶ φάγεται αὐτούς. καὶ τότε γενήσεται μεγάλη γαλήνη ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ. καὶ ἀναστήσουσι πόλεις ἠφανισμένας καὶ θυσιαστήρια συντετριμμένα οἰκοδομήσουσιν. καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ ἀδικῶν ἢ ὁ ἀδικούμενος, καὶ ζήσει τὸ σκῆπτρον αὐτοῦ ἔτη λε΄.

Redactio B (VatResCon2 )

Ἕτερος χρησμός

I. Γένος δὲ τῶν Ἰσμαηλιτῶν κτίσει ἄνω καὶ κάτω πλησίον τῆς Ἑπταλόφου, ὅτι αὐτὸς μηνύει σοι τὸν ἀφανισμόν⋅ πολιορκισθεῖσαν καὶ σκυλευθεῖσαν ὑπὸ τῶν Ἀγαρηνῶν⋅ καὶ πολλὰς χώρας ἀφανίσουσι καὶ πολλὰς νήσους ἐρημώσουσι⋅ καὶ οἱ ἄρχοντες θέλουν φοβηθεῖ πολλά. οὐαὶ καὶ σοί, Κύπρος, ὅταν παχνίσουσιν οἱ Ἰσμαηλῖται λαβεῖν σε. καὶ τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ οὐκ ἔστι σωτηρία ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ.

II. Καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ταραχθήσονται τὰ ξανθὰ γένη καὶ ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν καὶ ταράξουσιν αὐτούς. καὶ συναχθήσονται οἱ Ἀγαρηνοὶ καὶ ποιήσουσι πόλεμον, καὶ τὸ ξανθὸν γένος τροπώσει αὐτούς, καὶ ὡς στάχυες πεσοῦνται εἰς τὸ θέρος. καὶ ἀπὸ τὸ Κοντοσκάλι θέλουν πάρει τὴν πόλιν⋅ καὶ συναχθήσονται ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν καὶ δώσουσι πόλεμον μέγαν, καὶ θέλει δράμει τὸ αἷμα ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ στάδια δεκαοκτώ.

III.-IV. Καὶ ὅλοι οἱ ἁμαρτωλοὶ φθαρήσονται. τότε φωνὴ βοήσει⋅ στῆτε, στῆτε μετὰ φόβου. καὶ δύο ἄγγελοι φέρουν τὸν βασιλέα καὶ στέψουν αὐτόν⋅ καὶ ὅλοι προσκυνήσουσιν αὐτὸν διὰ βασιλέα. καὶ θέλει ἡμερώσει τὰ ξανθὰ ἔθνη καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ πάντα⋅ καὶ θέλει διώξει τοὺς Ἀγαρηνοὺς χρόνους τρεῖς⋅ καὶ θέλει γένει εἰρήνη καὶ ἀγάπη εἰς ὅλην τὴν οἰκουμένην. καὶ τότε θέλει ἔλθει εἰς τὴν Ἱερουσαλήμ, εἰς τὴν ἁγίαν Σιών, καὶ δοξάσει τὸν Θεὸν τρίς. καὶ ἀναστήσει τὰς ἐκκλησίας καὶ τὰ μοναστήρια τὰ συντετριμμένα οἰκοδομήσει. καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ ἀδικῶν ἢ ὁ ἀδικούμενος, καὶ ζήσει τὸ σκῆπτρον ἔτη λε΄.

V. Ἐλεύσεται σκῆπτρον ἐν τῇ Ἀρραβίᾳ χρόνον ὡς φασίν. καὶ ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ ἑνωθήσεται τὸ τίμιον ξύλον, τὰ τμήματα, εἰς ἓν νεύσει τοῦ ἀοράτου Θεοῦ καὶ δοθήσεται τῷ βασιλεῖ. καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ γενόμενος ἐν τῷ τόπῳ οὗ ἔστησαν οἱ πόδες ’Iησοῦ Xριστοῦ τοῦ ἀληθινοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν οἰκείαις χερσὶ παραδώσει τὸ τίμιον ξύλον ἅμα καὶ τὴν βασιλείαν⋅ διάδειγμα παραδώσει κυρίῳ τῷ Θεῷ, σὺν τοῖς ἑκατέροις καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ. καὶ τότε ἐν τῇ ἁγίᾳ πόλει Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἀναστήσονται τρεῖς νεώτεροι βασιλεῖς, ἀναιδεῖς καὶ ἀνωφέλετοι, καὶ κρατήσουσιν ἡμέρας ρν΄⋅ καὶ ἀλλήλους δώσουσι πόλεμον ἰσχυρόν⋅ καὶ ὁ πρῶτος ἔλθει εἰς Θεσσαλονίκην. τότε λαλήσει ἡ Θεσσαλονίκη⋅ καύχημα ἁγίων εἶ σύ. καὶ ἐγείρει πόλεμον μέγαν⋅ τοὺς ἱερεῖς καὶ τὸν λαὸν καὶ τοὺς μοναχοὺς <φορέσει> ἄρματα πολλὰ καὶ ἰσχυρά⋅ καὶ ἀπέλθουν ἐν Ῥώμῃ. καὶ στὰς πρὸς τὴν πύλην ἐρεῖ αὐτῇ ⋅ χαίροις πόλις † τρέτιξ †, ἡ μάχαιρά σου ὁξεῖα⋅ καὶ στρατεύσουσι καὶ τὰ ξανθὰ ἔθνη, καὶ ταραχθήσονται τὰ ἔθνη τότε καὶ ὁ λαός⋅ καὶ οἱ ἱερεῖς καὶ μονάζοντες δώσουσι πόλεμον μέγαν καὶ φοβερὸν καὶ κόψουσιν ἀλλήλως αὐτῶν.

Indices

Index nominum

Ἀγαρηνοί

A I,3; A II,2; B I,3; B II,3; B III-IV,5

Γὼγ καὶ Μαγώγ

A IV,1

Ἰσμαήλ

A I,1; A I,5; A I,8

Ἰσμαηλίται

A II,7; A III,15; B I,1; B I,5

ξανθὰ ἔθνη / γένη

A II,1; A III,14; B II,1; B III-IV,4; B V,14

Index locorum

Ἁγία Σοφία

A III,11

Αἴγυπτος

A I,8; B I,6

Ἑπτάλοφος

A I,2; A II,5; A II,7; A II,10; B I,2

Θεσσαλονίκη

B V,10

Ἱερουσαλήμ / Σιών

A III,18; B III-IV,6; B V,3; B V,7

Κοντοσκάλιον

A II,6; B II,4

Κύπρος

A I,7; B I,5

Ῥώμη

B V,12

Recension A (VatResCon1 )

[Prophecy on the restoration of Constantinople]

• I. The race of the Ishmaelites will build above and beneath near the City of Seven Hills; woe to you, City of Seven Hills, for he announces your destruction; you will be besieged and pillaged by the Hagarenes. He [i.e., Ishmael] will overthrow many domains, and many cities will be destroyed; Ishmael will put to flight many islands, and they will be given into his hand. The rulers of the sea will be in fear, and all the inhabitants of the islands will mourn greatly; woe to you, Cyprus, when frost will come, Ishmael captures you. And at that time, Egypt will have no salvation.

• ΙΙ. After these, the blond nations will be stirred up from the East and the West, they will throw them into disorder. And the Hagarenes will gather and wage war; the blond race will put them to flight, and they will fall like ears of corn. A fleet as numerous as ants will be moved against them, and they will gather in the City of Seven Hills, and there will be a great war on land and at sea; they will enter the City of Seven Hills through the Kontoskalion and will crush the Ishmaelites and will take possession of her. But the leaders of the army will quarrel among themselves [about] who will rule over her; they will cut each other down so much that all hollow places and the entire City of Seven Hills will be filled with blood so that even a three-year-old calf will drown, and the blood will run into the sea for eighteen stades.

• ΙΙI. After this affliction, in which all sinners will perish and none of them will remain standing, at that moment a voice from among the invisible will emerge, speaking like thunder: ‘Let us stand aright, let us stand with fear; this punishment suffices for me.’ At once, the war will cease. Two white-robed men will appear, and light will shine in everyone's heart, and the remaining people of God will swiftly follow them; they will find the peaceful and holy king in ragged attire and full of sorrow and despair since he, too, was in the war in the midst of them. And the herald will shout thrice clearly: ‘This is him, take him for king!’ And all the people bearing Christ's name will venerate him as king and lead him into Hagia Sophia, [where] the king will praise God. Three angels will crown him king, and the fourth [angel] says, holding as sceptre the precious cross and a sword in his hand: ‘In this sign vanquish your enemies!’ Then the king will tame the blond races and will pacify the Western nations. After these, he will chase the Ishmaelites with mighty hand and outstretched arm and completely wipe them out. For three years he will pursue the nations and will overthrow myriads, and thus the king will turn towards holy Zion; while he turns about, the treasures of the earth will be opened up, and the king will bestow upon everybody according to his worth, and the earth will give her fruits; and joy will be in all the world, and each one will gather in his land.

• ΙV. Then Gog and Magog will come out and many other nations with them [as numerous] as the sand of the earth; there will be great fear in the inhabited world. Then the king will weep before God, and fire will descend from heaven and will devour them. Then great calm will be in the entire inhabited world. They will restore destroyed cities and rebuild demolished shrines; and there is neither wrongdoer nor victim of wrong, and his sceptre will live for thirty-five years.

Recension B (VatResCon2 )

Another oracle

• I. The race of the Ishmaelites will build above and beneath near the City of Seven Hills, for he announces destruction to you; she [i.e., the City] will be besieged and despoiled by the Hagarenes; and they will destroy many lands and will lay waste to many islands; and the rulers will be in great fear. Woe to you, too, Cyprus, when the Ishmaelites will become frosty to take you. And at that time, there is no salvation in Egypt.

• ΙΙ. After these, the blond races will be stirred up from the East as well as the West and will throw them into disorder. And the Hagarenes will gather and make war, and the blond race will put them to flight, and they will fall like ears of corn during the summer (harvest). And from the Kontoskalion they will take the City; they will gather from the East and West and fight a great war, and the blood will run into the sea for eighteen stades.

• ΙΙΙ.–IV. And all the sinners will perish. Then a voice will shout: ‘Halt, halt with fear!’ And two angels will carry the king and will crown him; and all will venerate him as king. He will tame the blond nations and all others; he will chase the Hagarenes for three years; and there will be peace and love throughout all the inhabited world. Then he will go to Jerusalem, to holy Zion, and will praise God thrice. He will restore churches and will rebuild demolished monasteries. And there is neither wrongdoer nor victim of wrong, and (his) sceptre will live for thirty-five years.

• V. A sceptre will go to Arabia for a year, as they say. In his reign the Precious Wood, its pieces, will be united into one at the instigation of the invisible God and be given to the king. And he will go to Jerusalem, to the place where the feet of Jesus Christ, our true God, stood, [and] with his own hands he will surrender the Precious Wood together with his kingdom; he will surrender his splendor (sic) to Lord God [and] with these two also his soul. Then there will arise in the holy city Jerusalem three young kings, shameless and good-for-nothing, and they will rule for 150 days; they will fight a fierce war with each other; and the first will go to Thessaloniki. Then Thessaloniki will speak: ‘You are the pride of the saints.’ And he rouses a great war; <he will equip> priests, the populace, and monks with many fierce weapons of war; and they will go to Rome. Standing before the gate, he will say to her: ‘Hail, City tretix (sic), your sword is sharp!’ And they will also enrol the blond nations, and then the nations as well as the populace will be stirred up. And priests and monks will fight a great and terrible war and will cut each other down.

III Commentary

The original title of VatResCon is unknown. Our best textual witness (A) of VatResCon1 does not give a title. Instead, the heading specifies that: ‘(I think) it needs correction’ (δεῖται (ὡς ἐγᾦμαι) διορθώσεως). Each prophecy copied in A is accompanied by a Latin translation. Unfortunately, the Latin heading of VatResCon1 does not give a title either; it merely reads: ‘Although written in Greek (and) I do not want to, I nevertheless translate it as follows’ (etsi in graecè scripti nonnihil desidero tamen sic interpretor).Footnote ²¹ The two copies made by John Malaxos (C, D) bear the title ‘interpretation of Laskaris’ (ἑρμηνεία τοῦ Λασκάρεως), presumably referring to either Kōnstantinos Laskaris (d. 1501) or Iōannēs (Ryndakēnos) Laskaris (d. 1534), whose scholarship greatly contributed to the spread of Greek letters in fifteenth-/sixteenth-century Italy.Footnote ²² Either of them may have been credited with the prophecy because they were younger contemporaries of Gennadios Scholarios (d. 1473), to whom the above-mentioned oracle (Interpretatio litterarum) had been attributed, which Malaxos placed right before VatResCon1 in C and D. By giving VatResCon1 the title of the ‘interpretation of Laskaris’, Malaxos suggested that it is an explanation of the previous (Ps-)Gennadian prophecy. The attribution to Laskaris was probably intended to lend authority to the vaticinium. The other two copies (F, G) – made in the seventeenth century – give long descriptive headings that summarize the topic of the prophecy.Footnote ²³ F attributes the text to the Church Father Methodios of Patara, who was a standard authority on apocalyptic matters. In short, there is no consistent authorial attribution mentioned in the manuscript transmission. VatResCon2 (M, O, P, Q, S, T) altogether ignores the issue of authorship and gives the vaticinium the laconic heading: ‘Another oracle’ (ἕτερος χρησμός). Due to the absence of a clear title, I have adopted the appellation proposed by E. Mioni in his description of G, namely Vaticinium de restitutione Constantinopoleos.Footnote ²⁴ Alternatively, it may be called the Prophecy of (Ps-)Laskaris.

The stemma codicum of VatResCon1 suggests that the prophecy first appeared in A, where it formed part of a collection of prophecies. The collection starts with the (Ps-)Gennadian oracular interpretation, is followed by the Oracula Leonis and VatResCon1, and concludes with the Narratio mendici regis.Footnote ²⁵ Subsequently, the Oracula Leonis were omitted from the collection: the Interpretatio litterarum Gennadii Scholarii, VatResCon1, and the Narratio mendici regis came to form a stable cluster, which was copied as a unit in C, D, G and complemented with various prophecies and oracles added either beforehand or thereafter. F stands out as the only manuscript that contains VatResCon1 alone, without any other prophecy. A few decades following the original composition, VatResCon1 was first abridged and then extended with an excerpt from the Apocalypsis Andreae Sali. This second recension (VatResCon2) became part of a fixed oracular collection that was copied in M, O, P, Q, S, T. It has been shown that at least three of these manuscripts (i.e., M, P, Q) were copied in the 1620s in the region of Serres.Footnote ²⁶ As there are no earlier manuscripts of the second recension, it is probable that VatResCon2 was redacted at that time.

As for the date of composition of the first recension, the manuscript transmission and internal evidence suggest that VatResCon was originally composed in or shortly after 1571. The earliest manuscripts of VatResCon1 date to the second half of the sixteenth century. A more precise dating is suggested by internal evidence. As any historical apocalypse, VatResCon consists of two parts: a historical review and a prophetic preview. The historical section extends (in both recensions) to §I. The opening line of VatResCon1 starts in medias res; it refers to the construction of the defensive fortifications of the Anadolu Hisarı and Rumeli Hisarı (κτίσει ἄνω καὶ κάτω), which were built on the Asian and European shores of the Bosporus in 1394 and 1452 respectively.Footnote ²⁷ Their purpose was to regulate maritime movement coming from the Black Sea and thus to cut off any potential military assistance from Genoese colonies in the north. VatResCon1 makes clear that these fortifications meant the destruction (τὸν ἀφανισμόν) of Constantinople. The historical review speeds up with generic references to cities and islands being captured or devastated by the Ottomans after 1453. The narrative then slows down and focuses on Cyprus, which is said to be captured by the Ottomans (Ἰσμαηλίται, Ἀγαρηνοί), which took place in the early 1570s. This is the last clearly identifiable historical event, which also gives the approximate date of composition.Footnote ²⁸

The prophetic preview (§II–IV) constitutes the bulk of the text. It foretells that Western forces will defeat the Ottomans on land and at sea, forcing them into a last stand at Constantinople, which the Western allies will capture by taking the Kontoskalion harbour in the southern part of the City.Footnote ²⁹ This section refers to the fourth Ottoman–Venetian War (1570–1573). It is possible that that Battle of Lepanto (October 1571) is alluded to, but the text is too vague to warrant a clear identification. The concurrent expectation that a Western fleet would facilitate the recapture of Constantinople was left unfulfilled and is thus a genuine prophecy. The narrative continues with a civil war breaking out among the victors who vie for control over the City (§II) until heavenly intervention puts an end to the bloodshed (§III). An angelic voice announces the cessation of domestic hostilities and guides the populace to the saviour-emperor, who is crowned emperor (or king) by angels in Hagia Sophia.Footnote ³⁰ After having wiped out the Ottomans and subdued various nations, the saviour-emperor enters Jerusalem, whereupon a period of joy and prosperity ensues (§III). The final section mentions the arrival of the eschatological peoples (Gog and Magog), who are destroyed by divine intervention. The prophecy closes with a vision of rebuilt cities and churches at a time of ultimate peace and quiet (§IV).

As mentioned above, VatResCon2 shortens §I–IV of VatResCon1 and supplements it with an excerpt taken verbatim from the Apocalypsis Andreae Sali (§V).Footnote ³¹ It is remarkable that the compiler of VatResCon2 chose to use a section from this tenth-century hagiographic text, which forcibly argues against the possibility that the Queen of Cities can be conquered.Footnote ³² Although this argument had been falsified by the time VatResCon2 was redacted, the anonymous compiler still drew from this authoritative end-time narrative and adopted its statements concerning the abdication of the last emperor and the gradual disintegration of imperial power. It is noteworthy that the borrowed passage mentions the city of Thessaloniki and that it concludes with priests and monks engaged in a civil war. Could the borrowing of this passage indicate the redactor's interest in the future that monks would face in Macedonia? This textual clue goes well together with the aforementioned observation that the earliest dated manuscripts (M, P, Q) were produced in or around Serres.Footnote ³³ These pieces of evidence suggest that VatResCon2 was produced in the region of Macedonia.

When reading VatResCon2 (§V) against its tenth-century Vorlage, a number of textual idiosyncrasies become intelligible. The term διάδειγμα (B V,6) is a hapax; all six manuscript copies give this term. It may derive from διαδείκνυμι (‘to show plainly’); its cognate is διαδειγματίζω (‘to display shamefully’).Footnote ³⁴ Διάδειγμα may be meant to signify an ostentatious display. However, a comparison with the Apocalypsis Andreae Sali shows that διάδειγμα stands for διάδημα (‘crown’). Therefore, διάδειγμα is either a copying mistake or a scribal emendation whereby a scribe hypercorrected διάδημα to read διάδηγμα with the γ being silent. Likewise, the unknown word τρέτιξ (B V,13) is a textual corruption of τρίρρυμε (three-streets).Footnote ³⁵ Although τρέτιξ may have evoked the similar sounding τέτριξ (‘goose’) or τέττιξ (‘cicada’) in the reader/listener, it is certainly a scribal corruption. I have decided to retain both corrupt words in the edition, as they appear in every manuscript witness and thus constitute an invariable element of the prophecy. In contrast, I chose to rectify the expression εἰ κὶ ἐν χερσὶ to read οἰκείαις χερσὶ (B V,5) since the former is clearly a cacography of the latter. Moreover, I have corrected the middle voice of παραδοθήσεται (B V,5–6) to the active to fit the syntax.

The phrase ὅταν παχνίσουσιν οἱ Ἰσμαηλῖται λαβεῖν σε (B I,5) is problematic and deserves a brief discussion. The rarely used verb παχνίζει (‘it is frosty’) is borrowed from the Apocalypsis Methodii (cap. XIII.8: ὅταν γὰρ παχνίσῃ, ὁ Ἰσμαὴλ παραλαμβάνει σε), where it alludes to the harsh winter of the Arab siege of Constantinople in 717–718. The Ps-Methodian phrase associates a severe winter with a Muslim attack. The phrase was adopted verbatim by the author of VatResCon1 (A I,7–8: ὅταν παχνίσῃ, ὁ Ἰσμαὴλ λαμβάνει σε) and was then modified by the redactor of VatResCon2, who may have misunderstood the verb παχνίζει, thereby producing a syntactically awkward sentence. The fact that the Ps-Methodian motif appears in the historical section of VatResCon signifies that the author(s) believed this prophecy to have been fulfilled, which raises the question whether the fall of Cyprus was indeed preceded by an exceptionally cold period. Although a definitive answer cannot be given at this point, one should not dismiss out of hand that changes in climate at the beginning of the so-called Little Ice Age may lie behind this presumable vaticinium ex eventu.Footnote ³⁶

The primary source of VatResCon is the aforementioned De expugnatione Constantinopolis ab Ismaelitis (BHG 2036e).Footnote ³⁷ As this prophecy comes down in at least two manuscripts that predate all copies of VatResCon, it is safe to say that the anonymous author of VatResCon drew upon this earlier text, condensed it, and supplemented it with additional apocalyptic material from the Apocalypsis Methodii and several Ps-Danielic prophecies.

It is significant that VatResCon1 usually appears right before the Narratio mendici regis, with the exception of F and H, while VatResCon2 always appears right after it. The Narratio mendici regis is an originally thirteenth-century compilation of diverse motifs and oracular formulae that specify the origin and whereabouts, physiognomy and character, emergence and deeds of the saviour-emperor. Dozens of copies are known, which testifies to its enduring popularity.Footnote ³⁸ The saviour-emperor also appears prominently at the end of the (Ps-)Gennadian oracular interpretation. Thus, the manuscript environment situates VatResCon in a thematic cluster that promotes the notion of a messianic, Christ-like emperor (or king) who will bring about the restoration of the Eastern Roman βασιλεία.

VatResCon1 presents the motif of the saviour-emperor as a single, unitary topos: the saviour-emperor is said to overcome the Ottomans and the eschatological peoples of the north, to trigger a period of eschatological abundance, and to warrant peace and quiet in the last days. VatResCon2 supplements this motif with the description of the saviour-emperor's abdication in Jerusalem, which is borrowed from the Apocalypsis Andreae Sali.Footnote ³⁹ By slightly changing the text, the anonymous compiler of VatResCon2 suggests that the same protagonist restores the Eastern Roman βασιλεία and ultimately abdicates his imperial dignity. This notion of a single saviour-emperor is closer to the Ps-Methodian prototype than to the Byzantine tradition, which usually presents a series of emperors, among whom the various eschatological tasks are distributed. For example, both the Apocalypsis Andreae Sali and the Ultima visio Danielis fragmented the Ps-Methodian notion of a last Roman emperor.Footnote ⁴⁰ VatResCon departs from this middle Byzantine tendency and advances a unitary motif that echoes the imperial ideologies of the sixteenth-century Habsburg, Ottoman, and Safavid empires, which propagated a single world emperor.Footnote ⁴¹ By adopting this contemporary idiom, VatResCon returns to the original Ps-Methodian model of a singular messianic figure.

Finally, VatResCon can be said to have enjoyed a relatively brief period of circulation. The prophecy does not seem to have been copied after the middle of the seventeenth century (F). The emphasis on Cyprus and the expectation of decisive military aid from the West may have rendered the prophecy quickly out of date.Footnote ⁴² Its dissemination was confined to the period between the late sixteenth and mid-seventeenth centuries, when, however, it was studiously read, copied, and updated. A conspicuous example of its influence comes down in a medical commonplace book that was copied in 1617. Its scribe, Kōnstantinos Rhiziōtēs, supplemented the medical texts with various miscellaneous writings that include two prophecies: the Interpretatio litterarum Gennadii Scholarii and the Ultima visio Danielis. He interpolated the latter prophecy with an expert from VatResCon1, borrowing from §III-IV. No other known copy of the Ultima visio Danielis holds this interpolation. The manuscript is housed today at Princeton University: cod. Bibliothecae Universitatis Princetoniensis gr. 17, fols.199r–201v. The interpolation is on fol.200v; a colophon can be found on fol.229r. In a sense, the grand narrative of apocalyptic irredentism came full circle: the Ultima visio Danielis was the paradigm text for the idea of the eschatological reconquest of Constantinople. It provided the master narrative for new prophecies to be penned in reaction to the fall of the City in 1453. One such new prophecy was VatResCon, which, in the early seventeenth-century, was used to interpolate the original paradigm. In sum, VatResCon was a new compilation of earlier, Byzantine material; its re-use of traditional irredentist and messianic claims gives it the semblance of a typically late Byzantine prophecy. Its purpose was to bring the grand apocalyptic narrative up to date and, concomitantly, to respond to the latest Ottoman threat at the time of the fall of Cyprus.