BYZANTINISCHE STOFFE

UND MOTIVE
IN DER EUROPÄISCHEN
LITERATUR DES
19. UND 20.
JAHRHUNDERTS

Herausgegeben von
Evangelos Konstantinou

Sonderdruck

1998

PETER LANG
Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften
 Michael Pieris

C.P. Cavafy. The "Byzantine Nobleman" of contemporary European

poetry

The prevailing objective of my essay is to show that the "reception" of Byzan-

tium in Cavafy’s poetry is radically different from any other European or Greek
poet. To my knowledge, Cavafy is really the only authentic «Byzantine» poet in
the sense that he does not passively accept the seductive and false image of
Byzantium created by the Western historical tradition1, an image based on the
concept of an oriental state «apparently filled with intrigues, eunuchs, courtiers
and infinite wealth».2
On the contrary having studied the Byzantine sources and having by
nature a very sharp and strong historical sense, Cavafy succeeded in forming his
own views and attitudes concerning Byzantium. Many of his early writings
demonstrate that his own view was sympathetic and brought him to a critical
dialogue with European historians.
It is known that Cavafy kept a reading note on Bury’s History of Later
Roman Empire from Arcadius to Irene (1899), where he «challenges Bury’s
assertion that "Byzantine is a dangerous word, when it is used in a political
sense" and that "it is improper, and it is therefore not only advisable but
necessary to discard it".»3 I quote Cavafy’s conclusive comment of his note
concerning Bury’s History:

If we wish to write history carefully – noticing the changes

effected by time, and making them evident in our terms –
we should call that [Eastern] section [of what had been the
Roman Empire] the Greek Empire; or then the Byzantine,
which connotes the same meaning, and which is a
designation in use among the Greeks of to-day, who should
be accounted fair authorities on their past by reason ofthat
discrimination capacity which races derive from familiarity
with the trend of their national life.4

253
 It is also indicative that Cavafy’s attitude was in such a degree "anti-
Western" so as to display, for example, in a very critical manner, his disappro-
val of Gibbon’s treatment of Byzantium in his Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire. As has been pointed out by Diana Haas, Cavafy’s divergence with
Gibbon on the subject of Christianity can be partly explained by their contrary
evaluations of Byzantium.5 And as again D. Haas suggested, Cavafy’s article Οι
Βυζαντινοί Ποιηταί (The Byzantine Poets, 1892) «might in itself be considered a
protest against Gibbon’s disparaging remarks on Byzantine poetry.»6 In this
article Cavafy wrote:

The poets of our medieval times were neither of the same

value as our Poets of the Ancient Times, nor of pour
charming poets of the 19th Century. On the other hand,
they do not deserve the contempt they have received so far
by the Wise-men of the West. We, Greeks, have never
despised them; but, at the same time, we have never known
them. It is time for this «bious oblivion» to cease. Our
Byzantine Poets are of the most vivid interest to us,
because they prove that Greek lyre was not only never
broken, but also never stopped to produce sweet sounds.
The Byzantine poets form the link between the glory of our
ancient poets and the gracefulness and golden hopes of our
contemporary poets.

It is known that one of the thematic categories which the poet used to classify
his early poetical work was entitled Βυζαντιναί Ημέραι (Byzantine Days).8
Under this thematic heading Cavafy grouped poems with the following indicate
titles:

1. Ευδοκίας Αύγουστας Έπαινος [Evdokias Augusta’s Praise] (1892)

2. Η επί Ειρήνης αναστήλωσις των εικονών [The Restoration of the
Icons during Erenis’s period] (re-written in 1901)
3. Κάρολος ο Μέγας [Charles the Great] (written before 1891)

254
 4. Αι αξιώσεις τον Πάπα [The Popes’ Claims] (bef. 1891)
5. Η ανάκτησις Κρήτης [The Re-Capture of Crete] (1891)
6. Προ της Ιερουσαλήμ [Towards Jerusalem] (1891)
7. Η άλωσις της Νικαίας [The Capture ofNikaia] (bef. 1891)’
8. Ο καλός [κακός] Ιππότης [The Good [Bad] Knight] (bef. 1891)
9. Ο Χρεμετισμός του Ίππου [The Neighing of the Horse] (bef. 1891)
10. Ο Γραικός Στρατηγός [The Greek General] (bef. 1891)
11. Θέλω θανείν μάλλον ή ζην [I would rather die than live] (bef.
1891)

Only two of these poems have survived, the poem Προ της Ιερουσαλήμ
[Towards Jerusalem] (1891),9 and the last one, re-written in 1903 and again
after 1914 with the title Θεόφιλος Παλαιολόγος. In this latter poem Cavafy
concentrates on the last «five tragic words» uttered by Theophilus Palaeologus
on the eve of the fall of Constantinople. From the titles of the other poems, it is
obvious that Cavafy focuses on some crucial moments of Byzantine History and
we may assume, according to Diana Haas, that Cavafy’s attitude in these poems
towards Byzantium was sympathetic and that this assumption is supported by a
statement Cavafy made to A.G. Politis much later in his poetic career (1930):

In the early stage of his poetic work Cavafy focused on the

Byzantine Period. The greek tradition, the love of the
motherland, and perhaps his origin, attracted him to that
period.10

Another relevant bibliographical element is Cavafy’s article entitled Οι

Βυζαντινοί Ποιηταί (The Byzantine Poets)11 published in 1982, where he deals
with Karl Krumbachers History of Byzantine Literature as reviewed by
Dimitrios Vikelas in the French periodical Revue des deux mondes. In this
article Cavafy appears to be a well-learned scholar of the Byzantine period;
besides his positive comments on many of Krumbacher" s observations as these
were extensively summarized by Vikelas, he also submitted somcof his crucial
disagreements, for example that concerning the starting point of Krumbacher’s
History. I quote:

255
 Krumbacher starts our Medieval literary History since the
time of Justinian. But I share the same opinion with Vikelas
who considers the beginning of this literary period to be
the 4th Century, when Constantinople was erected.12

To turn now to Cavafy’s recognized poetic work, I would like to

emphasize that Cavafy wrote and published six pure Byzantine poems concer-
ning great figures of Byzantine History (like Manuel Comnenos, Anna Comne-
ne, Anna Dalassini and Ioannis Kantakouzinos).13 The relevant bibliography
offers a rich and in some cases sharp commentary on these poems from specia-
lists like Chistides (1958), Savidis (1966), Haas (1987) and Agapitos (1994). So
I have decided to omit them from my survey. I have also decided to omit the so-
called Julian poems of Cavafy, for which there is a detailed and advanced study
by Renata Lavagnini and G.W. Boersock.14
The remaining, therefore, restricted aim of this paper is to present some
ideas concerning the nature of the whole of the Cavafian expression from the
aspect of the presence of a specific ideology; the ideology which presupposes,
directly refers to or derives from what we can determine as a "byzantine view".
What I mean by this, is the way by which Byzantine spirit spread over Cavafy’s
poetic landscape and crystallizes as a cultural, social, political and aesthetic
ideology.
Cavafy’s image of Byzantium is so "byzantine" in concept and
expression that it becomes the expression of a Hellenic ideology radically diffe-
rent from the Helladic "Great Idea" expressed mainly by Kostis Palamas.15
Cavafy poems, indirecly related to the contemporary struggles of the Greek
Nation to re-establish the glorious past, shows that he was aware of the futility
of such an unattainable dream.
For example, in the poem Προς τον Αντίοχον Επιφανή (To Antiochos
Epiphanis), first written probably in November 1911, but re-written and printed
in the year of the Asia Minor Tragedy (1922), Cavafy deliberately juxtaposes
the προσφιλής ελπίς and the απαίσια λήξις (the dearest hope and the terrible
defeat). The reader is somewhat obliged to identify the ancient with the
contemporary historical scene (that is the Macedonians’ hopeless struggle in

256
197 B.C. against Romans and the overzealous Asia Minor expedition in 1922).
Moreover, the historical frame-work, the political stage and the specific
atmosphere recalls the desperate last days of Byzantium with the feeling of
futility toward the expected catastrophe.
I shall comment on some more such themes of the whole of Cavafy’s
poetry related to an ideology which can be connected with what I take as a
Byzantine perspective.
a) The theme of the «Historical Compromise» or in Cavafy’s words the
«flexible policy of judicious integration» («της ποικίλης δράσης των
στομάστικών προσαρμογών»), to quote a line from his well-known poem «In
the year of 200 B.C.». This line refers to the Great Alexander’s pan-Hellenic
expedition which led to the creation of «the great new Hellenic world», accor-
ding to another line of the same poem. An ideology very close to that of the
Byzantine policy, which allowed the Greek language to become the common
language for such an extensive multi-ethnic, multi-lingual and multi-cultural
area.
b) The theme of the «κατ’ οικονομίαν» active, that is the strategy of
coming to decisions and reactions after taking into a serious consideration all the
factors involved in a specific matter, a strategy opposite to any hasty and
absolute, one-sided or fanatical decisions on any kind. Here are the closing lines
of a poem, written in 1928, entitled In a large Greek Colony, 200 B.C.. The date
connects this poem with the poem In the year 200 B.C. and again places the
scenery at the decline of the Hellenistic period, ten years before the battle of
Magnesia.

Maybe the moment hasn’t arrived yet.

Let’s not be too hasty: haste is a dangerous thing.
Untimely measures bring repentance.
Certainly, and unhappily, many things in the Colony are absurd.
But is there anything human without some fault?
And after all, you see, we do move forward.
(Cavafy 1975, 297)

257
 c) The theme of the cultural intermixtures and the display of the mixed
(or hybrid) element as an ideal equal to pure character.
In the poem Εν πόλει της Οσροηνής (In a town of Osroini) written in
1916, we Rave a multi-racial city where «Syrians, Greeks, Armenians and
Medes» are jumbled together in social and sensual experiences. In such a town
Cavafy places the wounded beautiful body of the hybrid Remon, whose mixed
physical appearance suddenly recalls the pure Greek beauty of Plato’s
Charmidis. This bold parallel between the hybrid and thoroughbred ideal
suggests an ideology which can be related to the main Byzantine concept, the
mosaic, based on the reality of a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural state embracing
many and different civilizations.
The same idea occurs in the unpublished poem Επάνοδος από Ελλάδα
(Return home from Greece), written in 1914, where the central theme is the
realization and acceptance of the nature of racial impurity (the amalgamation
between Greekness with «Asiatic tastes and feelings») as a new political and
cultural ideal. As Diana Haas pointed out, «for Cavafy, the oriental "emotional"
element (...) is not incompatible with Greekness and is certainly not to be
confused with barbarism».16

It’s time we admitted the truth:

we’re Greeks also – what else are we? –
but with Asiatic tastes and feelings,
tastes and feelings
sometimes alien to Hellenism.
(Cavafy 1975, 369)

d) Cavafy confronted Hellenism as well as Europe, through the per-

spective of a natural successor of the Byzantine political and cultural ideology.
From this point of view allow me to present at this final stage one of his six pure
Byzantine poems, the one to which I owe the title of this paper. As has been
correctly suggested, the speaker of the poem, this exile Byzantine Nobleman,
with his «dubious humility» and his «latent vanity», is partly Cavafy.17

A Byzantine Nobleman in Exile Composing Verses

258
 The frivolous can call me frivolous.
I’ve always taken important things
extremely seriously. Anal insist that no one knows
the Holy Fathers, or the Scriptures,
or the Canons of the Councils better than I do.
Whenever he was in doubt,
whenever ha had any ecclesiastical problem,
Botaniatis consulted me, me first of all.
But exiled here (may she be cursed, that viper [Βάϊπερ]
Irini Doukaina), and incredibly bored,
it "s not altogether unfitting to amuse myself
writing six-and eight-line verses,
to amuse myself poeticizing myths
of Hermes and Apollo and Dionysus,
or the heroes ofThessaly and the Peloponnese;
and to compose the most strict iambics,
such as - if you’ll allow me to say so -
the scholars of Constantinople don’t know how to compose.
It may be just this strictness that provokes their disapproval.
(Cavafy 1975, 207)

There is a touch of humour in this poem and a sense of subtle self-irony which
leads to a sort of concealed self-admiration. This slender self-presentation of
Cavafy as an exiled great master of Art (or as a Lord of creation) obliges us to
examine here three relevant elements concerning this extraordinary snobbish
mentality. It is a feeling and furthermore an artistic behaviour which, I believe,
should be connected to Cavafy’s proud acknowledgement of his Byzantine roots
(as it is also evident in his autobiography). I shall close this survey by
presenting these three elements.
a) The first one occurs in an essay written by Cavafy in 1894 with the
title To τέλος του Οδυσσέως (The End of Odysseus), but published only in 1974
by George Savidis. This text, indicative of «the triple pressure of Homer,

259
Dante and Tennyson on the sensibility and ambitions of Cavafy»,18 closes with
the following remarks:

Where Homer decided to halt and put a full stop, it is difficult

and dangerous for anyone else to wish to continue. But it is in the
difficult and dangerous tasks that the great craftsmen are
successful.19

b) The second evidence occurs in a Cavafy’s reading note on Gibbon’s

Decline and Fall (between 1896 and 1899 according to Diana Haas), concerning
Cavafy’s favourite Saint Symeon Stylites. Cavafy criticizes in Tennyson’s
poem on Symeon and he closes his comments with the following statement. I
quote:

I have met only one poem on Symeon Stylites, but it is in no

way worthy of the subject.
The poem of Tennyson, though it contains some well-made
verses, fails in tone. Its grade defect lies in its form of a
monologue. [...] It was a very difficult task – a task
reserved, perhaps, [and I underline this wily cavafian use
of "perhaps"] for some might King of Art – to find fitting
language for so great a saint, so wonderful a man.20

I just remind you that 17 years after this note Cavafy wrote a poem on Symeon
in the form of a dramatic monologue, that is a poem in a radical different form
from the one written by Tennyson.
c) The third evidence of this extraordinary and to my judgment
snobbish cavafian self-confidence is the text of the so-called «Αυτεγκώμιο»
(self-praise):

Cavafy in my opinion is an ultra-modern poet of future

generations. In addition to his historical, psychological and
philosophical worth, the fastidiousness simplicity of his
style, which at times verges on the laconic, his

260
 measured enthusiasm, which arouses mental excitement, his
correct syntax, the consequence of an aristocratic
[disposition] naturalness, his subtle irony, are elements
that generations of the future will enjoy even more [...] The
rare poets like Cavafy will then take up the first possession
in a world which will be more thoughtful than those of
today.21

Well, my time is over, which happily prevents me from trying to offer you here
some tentative conclusions concerning the function of the Byzantine ideology in
the poetry of Cavafy. Happily, I say, bearing in mind Cavafy’s wise statement in
his first published scholarly commentary, concerning the indirect allusions of
some of the works of Shakespeare to a ancient Greek drama: «I Have no trust in
the absolute value of a logical conclusion».22
Yet before closing, let me underline here the three elements («great
craftsman», «King of art», «rare poet») which reveals that Cavafy had the
consciousness of his artistic genius, and at the same time, as fanariot or as a
«Byzantine Nobleman», he could observe himself through that strange gaze at
the world, it was the consciousness of an artist who had the feeling that he was
the successor of the last authentic Byzantine families.
E. M. Forster notices and describes his strange feature of Cavafy’s
behaviour in the following passage, where he refers, I believe not by chance, to
«the tricky behaviour of the Emperor Alexius Comnenus in 1096», which
reveals Cavafy’s deep familiarity with Byzantine History:

Modern Alexandria is scarcely a city of the soul. Founded upon cotton

with the concurrence of onions and eggs, ill built, ill planned, ill
drained – many hard things can be said against it, and most are said by
its inhabitants. Yet to some of them, as they traverse the streets, a
delightful experience can occur. They hear their own name proclaimed
in firm yet mediative accents – accents that seem not so much to expect
an answer as to pay homage to the fact of individuality. They turn and
see a Greek gentleman in a straw hat, standing absolutely

261
 motionless at a slight angle to the universe. His arms are extended,
possibly. «Oh, Cavafy ...!» Yes, it is Mr. Cavafy, and he is going either
from his flat to the office, or from his office to the flat. If the former, he
Vanishes when seen, with a slight gesture of despair. If the latter, he
many be prevailed upon to begin a sentence - an immense complicated
yet shapely sentence, full of parentheses that never get mixed and of
reservations that really do reserve; a sentence that moves with logic to
its foreseen end, yet to an end that is always more vivid and thrilling
than one foresaw. Sometimes the sentence is finished in the street,
sometimes the traffic murders it, sometimes it lasts into the flat. It deals
with the tricky behaviour of the Emperor Alexius Comnenus in 1096, or
with olives, their possibilities and price, or with the fortunes of friends,
or George Eliot, or the dialects of the interior of Asia Minor. It is
delivered with equal ease in Greek, English, or French. And despite its
intellectual richness and human outlook, despite the matured charity of
its judgments, one feels that it too stands at a slight angle to the
universe: it is the sentence of a poet.23

Notes
1 For the theme of Byzantium in Cavafy’s poetry and Cavafy’s relation to Byzantium, see the
substantial and seminal studies by Diana Haas (1982, 1983a, 1983b, 1996). See also G.P.
Savidis, Cavafy, Gibbon and Byzantium (Savidis 1985, 91-97) and Agapitos 1994.
2 Agapitos 1994,2.
3 Haas 1982, 93.
4 Cavafy 1963a, 80 and Haas 1982,93.
5 Haas 1982,94.
6 As above, 79.
7 Cavafy 1963b, 43-44. The original text is in Greek; the English translation is mine.
8 See Savidis 1966, 106, n. 6 and 137, Savidis 1985, 95 and Haas 1982, 91. For a detailed and
remarkable analysis see Haas 1996,33-70.
9 This poem was lost for many years. It was discovered and published only in 1985 by G.P.
Savidis. See now Cavafy 1993,46-47.
10 Haas 1982,91. See also Savidis 1966,106, n. 6.
11 For an extensive and systematic discussion on this article, see Haas 1996, 71-90.
12 Cavafy 1963b, 47. The original text is in Greek; the English translation is mine.
13 We also know due to Renata Lavagnini’s seminal publication that some more Byzantine
poems are included in the group of the «Unfinished Poems» (See Cavafy 1994).
14 See Lavagnini 1988 and Boersock 1981.

262
15 See Agapitos 1994.
16 Haas 1982, 34.
17 Agapitos 1994, 17
18 Savidis 1987, 189.
19 As above, 181. The original text is in Greek; the English translation is mine.
20 Cavafy 1963a, 73-74.
21 As above, 82-85. The original text is in French; English translation is mine.
22 Savidis l987, 15.
23 Forster 1980, 91-92.

References Cited

Agapitos, Panagiotis
1994 «Byzantium in the Poetry of Kostis Palamas and C.P. Cavafy», Κάμπος,
Cambridge Papers in Modern Greek, 2 (1994), 1-20.
Boersock, G.W.
1981 «The Julian Poems of C.P. Cavafy», Byzantine and Modern Greek
Studies 7 (1981), 89-104.
Cavafy, C.P.
1963a Ανέκδοτα. Edited by M. Peridis. Athens: Fexis.
1963b Πεζά. Edited by G.A. Papoutsakis. Athens: Fexis.
1975 Collected Poems. Translated by Edmund Keeley and Philip Sherrard
and edited by George Savidis. Princeton University Press.
1993 Κρυμμένα ποιήματα 1877-1923. Edited by G.P. Savidis. Athens: Ikaros
1994 Ατελή Ποιήματα 1918-1932. Edited by Lenata Lavagnini. Athens:
Ikaros.
Chistides, B.F.
1958 Ο Καβάφης και το Βυζάντιο. Athens: Biochart.
Forster, EM.
1980 «The Poetry of C.P. Cavafy», Pharos and Pharillon. Berkeley: Creative
Arts (first edition 1923).
Haas, Diana

263
 1982 «Cavafy’s Reading Notes on Gibbon’s "Decline and Fall"», Folia
Neohellenica, IV (1982), 25-96.
1983a «"Αι Αρχαί του Χριστιανισμού: Ένα θεματικό κεφάλαιο του
Καβάφη"» Χάρτης 5/6 (April 1983), 589-608.
1983b «"Στον ένδοξο μας βυζαντινισμό": σημειώσεις για στίχο του
Καβάφη», Διαβάζω 78 (1983) 76-81.
1996 Le problème religieux dans l’ oeuvre de Cavafy. Les années de formation
(1882-1905). Presses de l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne, Paris 1996.
Lavagnini, Renata
1988 «Sette nuove poesie bizantine di Constantino Cavafis», Rivista di Studi
Bizantini e Neoellenici N.S. 25 (1988), 217-81.
Savidis, G.P.
1966 Οι καβαφικές εκδόσεις 1891-1932. Περιγραφή και σχόλιο Athens:
Tachydromos.
1985 Μικρά Καβαφικά, Vol. I. Athens: Ermis.
1987 Μικρά Καβαφικά, Vol. II, Athens: Ermis.

Überblick des Referats von Prof Dr. Michaelis Pieris, Nikosia

"Konstantin Kavafis; der byzantinische Fürst der neueren europäischen

Dichtung"

Das Thema dieses Referats ist das Bild Byzanz’ im dichterischen Oevre
des alexandrinischen Dichters Konstantin P. Kavafis. Die zentrale Idee, die
diese Untersuchung durchdringt, betrifft die vollkommen neue Sicht Kavafis’
aus der er Byzanz betrachtet. Hierin unterscheidet er sich sowohl von der euro-
päischen als auch von den griechischen Dichtern.
Er ist tatsächlich der einzige "byzantinische" Dichter, da er Byzanz nicht
von außen sieht. Deswegen vertritt er darüber nicht die irreführende Meinung,
die sich im europäischen, historischen Denken durchgesetzt hat. Im Gegenteil,
Kavafis hat auf Grund seines profunden Studiums der byzantinischen Quellen
ein sehr starkes historisches Empfinden gewonnen, das ihm zur Bildung seiner
eigenen Ansicht über Byzanz verholfen hat. Daher ist er in der Lage, sich

264
mit Gibbon und dessen Anschauungen zu Byzanz kritisch auseinanderzusetzen.
Kavafis identifiziert sich mit der byzantinischen Denkweise und ist bemüht,
sowohl das Griechentum als auch Europa aus der Perspektive eines wahren
Erben der byzantinischen Kultur zu sehen.
Im ersten Teil des Referats werden kurz alle bibliographischen Indizien
angegeben, die die byzantinische Präsenz im Werk Kavafis’ dokumentieren.
Darüber hinaus werden hier die Ereignisse der philosophischen Forschung und
kritischen Interpretation erwähnt, die die eigentlichen "Byzantinischen
Gedichte" Kavafis’ betreffen. Diese Gedichte, wie z.B. "Anna", "Komnene",
"Anna Dalassene", "Johannes Kantakuzenas triumphiert", "Byzantinischer,
verbannter Fürst dichtet" und andere nehmen ihren Ausgang von bestimmten
historischen Quellen und beleuchten aus seinem bestimmten Blickwinkel einen ι
konkreten Augenblick. Diese Gedichte sind bereits erschöpfend kommentiert ;
und besprochen von den Fachspezialisten wie z.B. Christidis 1958, Savidis
1966, Haas 1987, Agapitos 1994 u.a. Daher brauche ich mich bei diesem
Referat mit den erwähnten Gedichten nicht ausführlich zu befassen.
Das Hauptziel meiner Untersuchung ist, die byzantinische Perspekive,
die das übrige Werk Kavafis’ durchdringt, zu beleuchten, die zur Bildung seiner
kulturellen, sozialen und politischen Ideologie von entscheidender Bedeutung
ist.
Die zentralen Themen der Dichtung Kavafis’ aus der reifen Phase, wie
z.B. das Thema eines nachdenklichen Kompromisses, einer "relativen Auswahl"
beim Verfolgen einer bestimmten Taktik, einer kulturellen Osmose und Hervor-
hebung der Mischkultur u.v.a. sind Themen, die mit dem byzantinischen Hinter-
grund der Dichtung Kavafis’ und seiner Weltanschauung verbunden sind.
Diese Themen wurden in den Gedichten der reifen Phase Kavafis’
behandelt, wie z.B. "Myris", "Alexandria im Jahre 340 n.Chr.", In der Stadt
Osroene 200 v.Chr." u.a. So wird der Versuch unternommen, den byzantini-
schen Blickwinkel Kavafis’ nicht nur in seinen "Byzantinischen Gedichten" zu
beleuchten, sondern in seiner ganzen dichterischen Konzeption.

265