Through the analysis of the Epitome in this book, I hope to have shed light on some important aspects of this chronicle, which, though a popular and well-known text among the Byzantines, has been little studied by modern scholars. This examination can help us to draw some broader conclusions about Zonaras and the overall character of his historical account.
Zonaras lived and wrote at a time when the Empire was at a critical point. The Komnenian style of rulership had brought about significant changes in government and military administration. At the same time, the establishment of trade treaties between Byzantium and the Italian city states, as well as the Crusades, led to a stream of Westerners arriving in the imperial capital. This background impacted, directly or indirectly, on various aspects of the Epitome: the author’s political and social ideas; the choice of his source material; and the emphasis on particular subjects. Zonaras shows himself to be a man of his time: his selection of source texts echoes current literary preferences and his concerns mirror discussions among his contemporaries. He was brave enough to openly express his political views and condemn what he considered the mismanagement of public affairs by the ruling dynasty. He was versatile as an author, composing texts in various literary genres. His critical and analytical skills can be seen in the way in which he collects, selects, and adapts materials from different sources to create a composite narrative.
A good way of characterizing the Epitome is as a ‘hybrid composition’, a work which combines elements of two different yet interconnected literary traditions: chronicle writing and historiography. The text presents the external features of a chronicle: it starts with the Creation of the world and extends as far as Zonaras’ own days, it makes heavy use of earlier material, and it is written in middlebrow Greek. The author consciously follows conventions typical of chronicles; he does not include lengthy speeches in his narrative, and avoids writing in an erudite and difficult style as a means of displaying his rhetorical training. His goal behind this was to broaden the readership of his work from a narrow audience of highly educated intellectuals to a larger group of relatively cultivated readers.
Nevertheless, the Epitome has qualities that set it apart from other chronicles, such as those by John Malalas, Theophanes, Michael Glykas, and Ephraim of Ainos, for example, bringing Zonaras’ text close to classicizing historiographies. While remaining within the boundaries of middlebrow Greek, Zonaras composes an account in an elevated, sophisticated literary style. In his narrative, we find linguistic features of Attic Greek prose which would certainly appeal to the intellectual elite. Much like authors of historiographies who recounted recent or contemporary events, Zonaras elaborates on the political context of his own time, commenting on and criticizing the reforms of Alexios Komnenos. He also breaks the mould of chronographic tradition by devoting a lengthy part of his narrative to the Roman Republic, a period which almost every other chronicler dealt with in brief. He shows an avid interest in the institutions of the republican form of government and makes it his goal to clarify to his audience the way that Roman political constitutions evolved.
An additional reason why the work can be called a ‘hybrid’ is because it combines two distinct historical accounts: the first is dedicated to Jewish history or, from the Byzantines’ perspective, early Christian history; and the second focuses on the Roman past. Unlike other authors of universal chronicles, who mingle Jewish and Roman materials, Zonaras divides the history of the people of Israel and the antiquities of the Romans into two clearly defined sections. This highlights that, according to Zonaras, the early history of Christianity merits a separate investigation and presentation.
Oddly enough, these final remarks lead us back to the title of the book: ‘A Compendium of Jewish-Roman History’. An idea that is emphasized by the author at the beginning of his text is that of brevity; by abridging his source material, Zonaras sought to compose a narrative which would offer in summary the essentials of early Christian and Roman history. Including only significant information in his narrative, he aimed to produce a useful account for his audience. In this sense, it was a short yet complete ‘guide’ to Christian-Roman history. The accessible linguistic register of the chronicle served this purpose.
In other words, the Epitome is neither a typical chronicle nor a proper high-style historiography, but a creation which seamlessly merges the two traditions. The unique character of Zonaras’ text certainly made the work stand out and helped to endear the text to readers in Byzantium and beyond. This evaluation of the Epitome as a work with its own individual qualities and features, rather than simply a compilation of earlier sources, indicates that some Byzantine chronicles deserve to be investigated in their own right as both literary compositions and historical accounts.