#  Selected Draft Translations of Primary Written Sources for Plague Outbreaks 

 



###   
**Inscription commemorating death of bishop Varus of plague on a church in Zora (Azra'a or Izra’), Syria, 543-4**

This inscription was raised by the town elders over the entrance to a church in Zora (mod. Azra’a or Izra’, Syria = Pleiades: Zoraa/Zerabene 32.873194, 36.25657) in year 437 of the era of Arabia, i.e., March 22, 542-March 21, 543, in commemoration of bishop Varus of the local metropolis, “on whom God brought the doom of the bubo and t armpit.” Zora or Zorava was apparently subordinated to the town of Neue (mod. Nawa), which probably lay on the Roman road between Gerasa and Damascus: (Koder 1995); (Kislinger and Stathakopoulos 1999), 93; (Stathakopoulos 2004), 281, no. 106; (Restle and Koder 2012), 48; (Feissel 2006), 267. After the Letters of Barsanuphius and John and <a>Justinian’s Edict 7</a>[\[1\]](#_msocom_1) , this appears to be the surviving record whose composition was the closest chronologically to the pandemic itself.

 M. McC.

SortTranslationCommentsGreek text+ The inhabitants of Zorava with their own resources built a church of the prophet Elias with the zealous efforts of deacon John the son of Menneas, in the year 437 under the bishop Varus, most beloved by God, to whom God brought the doom of bubo and armpit.

437: year of the province of Arabia, or Bostra, March 22, 542-March 21, 543

“doom”: *potmon.* Poetic term going back to Homer.

“bubo”: *bonbon. A* a well-documented variant form of *boubon*, (Restle and Koder 2012), 52. *Page ref need to be check*



\+ Οἱ ἀπὸ Ζορ(ουηνῶν) ἐξ ἰδίων ναὸν ‘Ηλίου προφήτου / σπουδῇ ᾿Ιωαννου Μεννέου διακ(όνου) ἐν ἔτει υλζ’ἔκτισαν ἐπὶ Οὐραυ θεοφ(ιλεστάτου) ἐπισκόπου / ᾧ ἐπήγαγεν ὁ θεὸς πότμον βονβῶνος (καὶ) μάλῃς

*\*filled in rest from Koder 1995: check against Restle and Koder 2012*







### **Procopius of Caesarea**

Procopius states that he was himself present in Constantinople when the plague arrived in the spring of 542 (*Wars*[ 2.22.9](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.2s8eyo1)); he offers one of the two most important historical accounts of the pandemic’s initial outbreak in his history of Justinian’s wars; it was written within a decade of the event.[\[1\]](#_ftn1) His account is generally precise, skeptical and highly reliable; he supplies complementary details in various books of the Wars and the Secret History. His otherwise veiled hatred of emperor Justinian and Theodora is palpable in his comments in the unpublished (and extremely dangerous) diatribe against them, the *Secret History.*

Procopius \[Prokopios\] was born ca. 500 in Caesarea Maritima (mod. Caesarea/Qesarya, Haifa District, Israel). He trained as a lawyer (*advocatus*), and served as legal advisor (*assessor*) to the east Roman general Belisarius, whom he accompanied on military campaigns in northern Syria (527-531) and in North Africa, Sicily, and Italy (533-ca. 540). Three of his works survive: a history of the emperor Justinian’s *Wars* in seven books, completed by 551, with an eighth book added later (ca. 553); a panegyric for Justinian’s building projects, completed ca. 553-555; and a polemical *Secret History* (*Anekdota*) criticizing Justinian and his court, likely written ca. 550 but unpublished in Procopius’ lifetime.   
  
He left an eyewitness account of the plague’s first outbreak in Constantinople, and a detailed description of its pathology (*Wars* [2.22-23:](#jdnsu46e15t) **1**). He claims that the plague “started” in the Egyptian port city of Pelusium \[Pelousion\] (near mod. Port Said, Egypt, on the Suez Canal), from whence it spread to “the entire earth” (*Wars* [2.22.6](#b88m6w8jbk7j)); he says explicitly (*Wars* [2.22.9](#6s0b9y1denuk)) that he was present in Constantinople when the plague struck the city in “the middle of spring” during its “second year” (no later than March, 542). In keeping with the literary values of his time, Procopius famously but subtly reminds his reader of Thucydides’ celebrated description of the epidemic that struck Pericles’ Athens in such a way as to systematically underscore how different the sixth-century plague was in its symptoms, effects, and scope (see Commentary). We incorporate in our commentary the results of Mischa Meier’s (1999) close analysis of the differences and similarities in the two descriptions. Meier has concluded that in addition to displaying his literary talent in rivalry with his classical model, Procopius sought to show both the greater scope of the Justinianic epidemic and the success of the imperial government in responding to it. He documents that the initial outbreak also reached Atrapatane (mod. Ajerbaijan), where, in 542 or 543, it affected a Persian army poised to invade the Roman Empire (**2**). Procopius draws a connection between the 536 event and the unceasing wars, epidemic, and other mortalities that ensued (**3**), and returns to the initial outbreak in his *Secret History* (**4**). He refers to another epidemic ([loimos](#kix.xbh706bjlts6)) of uncertain but assuredly non-bubonic nature that accompanied a food (*limos*) shortage during the Gothic siege of Rome and the summer heat of 537.[\[2\]](#_ftn1) Procopius died after 553, and probably before 565; some scholars identify him with an official of the same name, who served as urban prefect of Constantinople from 562-3.

Jake C. Ransohoff, Michael McCormick

We have based the standard critical edition of the Greek text of Procopius’ works, ed. Jacob Haury, *Procopii Caesariensis opera omnia,* rev. Gerhard Wirth (Leipzig: Teubner, 1906-1936). The translation is a group effort by Michael McCormick, Polina Ivanova, John Mulhall, *\*Michael? Others?* Jake C. Ransohoff.

*(\*Select bibliography)*

---

[\[1\]](#_ftnref1) Some passages of the first two books of the Persian Wars were clearly written in 545; book 2 ends with events of 549 and shows no awareness of later developments, while Procopius’ opening words of the final, eighth book of the Wars, which treats events from 550 to 553, says that the previous seven books had already gone out to the public when he set to writing this update: Bella, 8.1.1-3, Haury 2.487.1-488.6; see Teuffel, W. S. (1889). Studien und Charakteristiken zur griechischen und römischen Litteraturgeschichte. Leipzig, Teubner., 250-6, with the corrections ofHaury, J. (1891). Procopiana. Augsburg, Druck des Litterarischen Instituts von Haas &amp; Grabherr., 3-9.

\[2\] *Wars* 6.3.1, 6.4.17 and 6.1.1, Haury and Wirth 2.159.19-20, 167.22-168.1; 174.9-16; he also reports in Wars 8.20.46, 2.597.12-17, on the “pestilential (to loimōdes) quality of the airs” of the “island” of “Brittia,” which he locates north of the Frankish kingdom and between Britain and Thule, as well as, in Buildings 3.5.15, 4.95.13-14, the very unhealthy (*loimōdestaton*) situation of Bizana in Mesopotamia.  
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Italics in the translated and original text identify words that are borrowed from and allude to other literary works. See Commentary for details.**

**1. Procopius’ main account of the 541-542 outbreak of the Justinianic Pandemic in the Roman Empire and Constantinople, Wars, 2.22-23.**

SortTranslationCommentaryGreek text, ed. Haury-Wirth 1962-4, *Wars* 2.22-23; 1.249.8-250.12.2.22.1.  
In these years an [epidemic](#kix.xbh706bjlts6) occurred, which, in fact came close to extinguishing the whole human race. For all the things that *strike* from [heaven](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.1y810tw), some [theory of a cause](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.4i7ojhp) *might perhaps be stated by daring men* since [those with specialized knowledge](#kix.o8ztpvzd2p2n) often like [to tell marvelous tales](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.1ci93xb) *about* *causes* that are in no way comprehensible to humans, and to fashion causes which are beyond the bounds of [inquiry into physical nature](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.3whwml4), knowing full well that while they are saying nothing sound, they consider it good enough for them if by chance they persuade some random people, deceiving them with this theory.

*Years: chronous.* The word can be translated as “times” or “years.” For “years” see (Kislinger and Stathakopoulos 1999), 85.

“epidemic:” *loimos.* Procopius uses *loimos* most frequently to refer to the plague of his day, but also in reference to other epidemics.[\[1\]](#_ftn1)

Galen, too, uses *loimos* to refer to epidemics and to the Antonine plague of his own day.[\[2\]](#_ftn2) For the use of the term *loimos* in the Hellenistic period, see also Vivian Nutton, *Ancient Medicine* (London: Routledge, 2004), 147-149.

*episkēptousin*: Procopius uses the word *episkēptō* frequently, often for a storm or event that strikes suddenly out of the blue, evoking lightning. In Attic law it had been used to denounce a person for perjury, and emperor Julian had used it more recently in the sense of blame. Procopius (*Wars*[ 2.24.6](#oxlmv5j6ccz9)) uses the same combination of *episkēptō* with *loimos* when discussing how plague fell upon the Persian army while the Byzantine army was delayed coming to meet them in Mesopotamia:  
“During that march, Constantianus fell ill and much time was spent, and it happened that the epidemic struck the Persians.”

“ἐν δὲ τῇ πορείᾳ ταύτῃ Κωνσταντιανοῦ νοσήσαντος καὶ χρόνου τριβέντος συχνοῦ τὸν λοιμὸν ἐπισκῆψαι Πέρ- (6) σαις ξυνέπεσε.”

*Episkēptō* here evokes Thucydides’ (2.47.3) use of closely related word *engkataskēptō* (ἐγκατασκήπτω) to describe outbreaks of the epidemic disease in the opening sentence of his description of the Athenian plague.

“from heaven”: *ex ouranou*. In his unpublished subversive tract, *Secret History* 6.22-23, Procopius refers explicitly to his account here of the plague, and describes the ruling emperor Justinian as more destructive than the plague pandemic, because he fell upon the whole population like some affliction (*pathos*) from heaven, whereas at least some people escaped the plague. The *Secret History* [7.7 ](#mwo52a2hyr92)further echoes *Histories* [2.23.3](#yzg4mty9bww8), implicitly identifying the hated Justinian with the plague. This configuration of allusions adds special weight to Procopius’ words about “daring men.”

“theory of a cause”: *tis...aitiou logos*. *Logos* is a principle of intelligibility, a word, a story, etc. It could be taken here in a positive sense, e.g., “theory”, or negative, e.g., “story”, “tale.”

Since Procopius is criticizing people with [specialized knowledge](#kix.o8ztpvzd2p2n), we have chosen “theory” but the double-entendre is likely intentional.

*“*Might perhaps *be stated*….about *causes*”*: legoito tis …. hoia philousin…aitias “might perhaps state* …*causes*”: Although his wording differs, Procopius seems to echo and refashion Thucydides’ statement recognizing that physicians or non-specialists had their own theories about the plague (in contrast to the account that each was about to give) in a way that makes obvious the implausibility which Procopius attributes them: Thucydides 2.48.3: “*legetō* peri autou *hekastos* gignōskei kai iatros kai idiōtes…kai tas *aitias*...”

“daring men”: *hup’andrōn tolmētōn*: a cultivated contemporary reader might have recognized the allusion to the words (*tolmētas …andras)* of the satirist Lucian’s dialogue *Icaromenippus or the Sky Man*, 8, about a charlatan who claims to have discovered the nature of the universe by flying through it, and who dismisses previous philosophers and cosmographers as charlatans. Procopius in this way rejects explanations for the plague offered by contemporaries.

“those with specialized knowledge”: *hoi tauta deinoi.* Procopius uses this expression for individuals with specialized knowledge, e.g. geographers (Wars 8.6.2.1) or interpreters of weather omens (Wars 8.15.23.2)

“tell marvelous tales”: *terateuesthai:* Procopius uses the word 7 times, typically with a nuance of falsehood and deception.

“inquiry into physical nature”: *physiologia*.



2.22.1, 1.249.8-17  
Ὑπὸ δὲ τοὺς χρόνους τούτους λοιμὸς γέγονεν, ἐξ οὗ δὴ ἅπαντα ὀλίγου ἐδέησε τὰ ἀνθρώπεια ἐξίτηλα εἶναι. ἅπασι μὲν οὖν τοῖς ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ἐπισκήπτουσιν ἴσως ἂν καὶ *λέγοιτό τις* ὑπ’ ἀνδρῶν τολμητῶν αἰτίου λόγος, οἷα πολλὰ φιλοῦσιν οἱ ταῦτα δεινοὶ *αἰτίας* (5) τερατεύεσθαι οὐδαμῆ ἀνθρώπῳ καταληπτὰς οὔσας, φυσιολογίας τε ἀναπλάσσειν ὑπερορίους, ἐξεπιστάμενοι μὲν ὡς λέγουσιν οὐδὲν ὑγιὲς, ἀποχρῆν δὲ ἡγούμενοι σφίσιν, ἤν γε τῶν ἐντυγχανόντων τινὰς τῷ λόγῳ ἐξαπατήσαντες πείσωσι

2.22.2  
However, for this evil, there is absolutely no way to express in words or to understand with insight any ost

ensible reason except, in fact, to attribute such things to God.



“this evil”: “toutō mentoi tō kakōn.” The root meaning of *to kakon* is badness, evil: LSJ s.v.B. Like Thucydides (2.47.4; 2.51.4-5; 2.52.3; 2.54.1), Procopius uses *to kakon* as a rather euphemistic synonym for the disease ([2.22.21](#luocf3k3jobh), [2.22.34](#nyw0mnkm6tln), [2.23.2](#6xzqczgce5bi)), as indeed other contemporaries seem to do (\*hyperlinks to other authors/works?).

2.22.2; 1.249.17-20.

τούτῳ μέντοι τῷ κακῷ πρόφασίν τινα ἢ λόγῳ εἰπεῖν ἢ διανοίᾳ λογίσασθαι μηχανή τις οὐδεμία ἐστὶ, πλήν γε δὴ ὅσα ἐς τὸν θεὸν ἀναφέρεσθαι.



2.22.3  
For it did not occur in [a region of the earth](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.4i7ojhp) or to certain people, nor did it characterize a season of the year, whence clever reasoning might be capable of finding causal relationships. Rather, on the one hand it enveloped the whole earth, and on the other, sparing neither sex nor age, it harmed all walks of human life, even though they were so different and even opposite to one another. 

A leading etiological theory of ancient medicine held that places and environments caused sickness, for instance, fevers from bad air emanating from a marsh. Vivian Nutton, “Did the Greeks have a word for it?” in *Contagion: Perspectives from Pre-modern Societies*, ed. Lawrence Conrad and D. Wujastyk (Burlington: Ashgate, 2000), 137-162, esp. 140-142. Procopius himself was aware of this theory, as evidenced by his use of the term “pestilential air” in *Wars* (8.20.42-46).

2.22.3; 1.249.20-250.3.  
οὐ γὰρ ἐπὶ μέρους τῆς γῆς οὐδὲ ἀνθρώπων τισὶ γέγονεν οὐδέ τινα ὥραν τοῦ ἔτους ἔσχεν, ὅθεν ἂν καὶ σοφίσματα αἰτίας εὑρέσθαι δυνατὰ εἴη,ἀλλὰ περιεβάλλετο μὲν τὴν γῆν ξύμπασαν, βίους δὲ ἀνθρώπων ἅπαντας ἔβλαψε, καίπερ ἀλλήλων ἐς τοὐναντίον παρὰ πολὺ διαλλάσσοντας, οὔτε φύσεώς τινος οὔτε ἡλικίας φεισάμενον.

2.22.4  
In the case of this disease alone differences in no way helped, neither in the location of settlements nor in the pattern of their daily life nor in natural bent nor in their pursuits nor in whatever other way people differ from each other. 

 

2.22.4 250.3-6  
εἴτε γὰρ χωρίων ἐνοικήσει  
εἴτε νόμῳ διαίτης, ἢ φύσεως τρόπῳ, ἢ ἐπιτηδεύ ἰατρὸς μασιν, ἢ ἄλλῳ ὅτῳ ἀνθρώπων ἄνθρωποι διαφέρουσιν, ἐν ταύτῃ δὴ μόνῃ τῇ νόσῳ τὸ διαλλάσσον οὐδὲν ὤνησεν.

2.22.5  
It [struck](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.3j2qqm3) some in the summer, others in winter, and still others during the other seasons. *So let each one speak in whatever way he knows about these things, both* [rhetorician](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.2bn6wsx) *and* [astrologer](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.qsh70q); I for my part will say from where the [diseas](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.3as4poj)e began and in which manner it destroyed human beings. 

*“So let each one speak in whatever way he knows about these things, both* [rhetorician](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.2bn6wsx) *and* [astrologer](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.qsh70q)”:

*“Legetō men oun hōs* pē *hekastos peri aut*ōn *gignōskei kai* sophistēs *kai* meteōrologos, *egō de*…” Here Procopius quotes 12 words almost exactly from Thucydides (2.48.3: *“Legetō men oun hōs* *hekastos peri aut*ōn *gignōskei kai* iatros *kai* idiōtēs, *egō de*…”),[\[5\]](#_ftn1) driving home his earlier and more indirect allusion to this passage (above 2.22. ) and his biting rejection of contemporaries’ efforts to explain the plague. Educated readers would probably have noted that where Thucydides had written “physician,” Procopius substituted “”rhetorician,” surely not meant as praise for the late Roman medical profession and its understanding of the plague; similarly where Thucydides had written “non-specialist,” Procopius wrote “astrologer.”

“rhetorician”: *sophistès*; sole occurrence in Procopius.

“astrologer”: *meteōrologos;* cf. Procopius*, Secret History* 37*.*

Thucydides continues by further establishing his personal authority to report the plague, since he himself contracted it and observed others suffering from it, and explains that he is doing so to aid others in case this disease should ever return in the future.. Procopius had stated at the outset that he was present in the capital when the plague broke out. He does not repeat that here, does not follow Thucydides in claiming to have contracted the plague himself, and makes no allusion to the possibility of future outbreaks. We may suspect from this glaring omission that Procopius escaped infection, and that, at the time of his writing, a return of the epidemic perhaps seemed unimaginable.

Disease: nosos



2.22.5, 250.5-12  
ἐπέσκηψε δὲ τοῖς μὲν ὥρᾳ θέρους, τοῖς δὲ χειμῶνι, τοῖς δὲ κατὰ τοὺς ἄλλους καιρούς. *λεγέτω μὲν οὖν ὥς* πη *ἕκαστος περὶ αὐτῶν γινώσκει* *καὶ* σοφιστὴς *καὶ* μετεωρολόγος, *ἐγὼ δὲ* ὅθεν τε ἤρξατο ἡ νόσος ἥδε καὶ τρόπῳ δὴ ὅτῳ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους διέφθειρεν ἐρῶν ἔρχομαι.

2.22.6  
*It started* from *Egyptians* who reside in Pelousion. And separating into two, it went in one direction to Alexandria and the rest of Egypt and, in the other, it came to the Palestinians who share borders with the Egyptians. And from there it reached the entire earth, always advancing [by a route](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.1pxezwc) and traveling at [fitting intervals](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.49x2ik5).

*“It started* from *Egyptians”: Ērxato* men *ex Aiguptiōn.* Procopius echoes the opening words of Thucydides (2.48.1) about the geographic origins of the Athenian plague but drops Thucydides’ qualification of uncertainty (“as they say”) and places the origin at a specific city in Egypt, not in “Ethiopia beyond Egypt: “*Ērxato* de to men proton, hōs legetai, *ex* Aithiopias tēs huper Aiguptou, epeita de kai es *Aigupton*…”.[\[6\]](#_ftn1)

“And separating in two…”. Thucydides, ibid., described how the plague reportedly started from Ethiopia and spread to Egypt and Libya and into the Persian Empire, i.e. northwestward and northeastward. Procopius depicts his plague with greater precision and detail, as moving westward and eastward.

“by a route”: *hodō*. The Greek word means road or route (a ship can follow a *hodos*). The sense is unambiguous. See further on **fitting intervals**.

“fitting intervals”: *chronois...tois kathēkousin*. Procopius uses this expresses in 2 other passages, where it clearly means “at/for the expected times” that is, on the regular schedule: *Wars* 7.6.6, (soldiers not paid on schedule) and *Secret History* 28.9 (an extension in the normal statute of limitations for certain lawsuits from forty to 100 years). The implication is clearly that the infection traveled according to the usual communications routes and on the usual schedules by which people traveled on those routes. Procopius explains this more fully (*gar*, “for”) in the next sentence.



2.22.6, 250.13-18  
Ἤρξατο μὲν ἐξ Αἰγυπτίων οἳ ᾤκηνται ἐν Πηλουσίῳ. γενομένη δὲ δίχα πὴ μὲν ἐπί τε Ἀλεξανδρείας καὶ τῆς ἄλλης Αἰγύπτου ἐχώρησε, πὴ δὲ ἐπὶ Παλαιστίνους τοὺς Αἰγυπτίοις ὁμόρους ἦλθεν, ἐντεῦθέν τε κατέλαβε τὴν γῆν σύμπασαν, ὁδῷ τε ἀεὶ προϊοῦσα καὶ χρόνοις βαδίζουσα τοῖς καθήκουσιν.

2.22.7   
For it seemed to move upon fixed conditions and to stay in each place during a set time, wreaking destruction superficially on none of humankind, even as it spread out in either direction all the way up to the extremities of the inhabited world, as if it feared that some innermost recess of the earth might escape it. 

“upon fixed conditions”: *epi rhētois.* The expression is common in classical Greek and refers to stated and expected conditions. Here is comes close to the meaning of “schedule.”

2.22.7, 1.250.\*\*\*  
ἐπὶ ῥητοῖς γὰρ ἐδόκει χωρεῖν καὶ χρόνον τακτὸν ἐν χώρᾳ ἑκάστῃ διατριβὴν ἔχειν, ἐς οὐδένας μὲν ἀνθρώπων παρέργως τῷ φθόρῳ χρωμένη, σκεδαννυμένη δὲ ἐφ’ ἑκάτερα μέχρι ἐς τὰς τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐσχατιὰς, ὥσπερ δεδοικυῖα μή τις αὐτὴν τῆς γῆς διαλάθοι μυχός.

2.22.8  
For it spared no island, cave nor mountain ridge that had human inhabitants. But if somewhere it sidestepped some land or it did not touch the people there or took hold of them with small effect, it returned there at a later time, without affecting at all those living nearby whom it had earlier [struck ](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb40Nnqb3QzyEVuQJ7dEByiDggdx6974/edit#bookmark=id.3j2qqm3)most harshly. But but it did not leave that former place until it rendered correctly and justly the number of dead which it had managed to destroy the previous time among those living nearby.

 

2.22.8, 1.250.\*\*\*  
οὔτε γὰρ νῆσόν τινα ἢ σπήλαιον ἢ ἀκρώρειαν ἐλίπετο ἀνθρώπους οἰκήτορας ἔχουσαν· ἢν δέ πού τινα καὶ παρήλασε χώραν, ἢ μὴ ψαύσασα τῶν ταύτῃ ἀνθρώπων ἢ ἀμωσγέπως αὐτῶν ἁψαμένη, ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ τῷ ὑστέρῳ αὖθις ἐνταῦθα ἐπανιοῦσα τῶν μὲν περιοίκων, οἷς δὴ πικρότατα ἐπέσκηψε πρότερον, οὐδαμῶς ἥψατο, τῆς δὲ χώρας ἐκείνης οὐ πρότερον ἀπέστη ἕως τὸ μέτρον ὀρθῶς καὶ δικαίως τῶν τετελευτηκότων ἀπέδωκεν, ὅπερ καὶ τοῖς ἀμφ’ αὐτὴν ᾠκημένοις χρόνῳ τῷ προτέρῳ διεφθάρθαι τετύχηκεν.

2.22.9   
Starting always from the coast, this disease in just this way would go up into the inland territories. In the second year it came to Byzantium, in the middle of spring, where it happened that I too was staying at that time. 

second year”: In the preceding section, Procopius had just treated the Persian invasion of early spring 542 (Wars 2.20.1-21.34; (Rubin 1960-1995), 1:340). It has been generally and plausibly been assumed that Procopius here means the second year of the plague, but it is unclear how, in this case, Procopius understands the beginning or the end of the year.[\[7\]](#_ftn1)

It seems unlikely that here he is thinking of the emperor’s regnal year (which began on April 1), which he uses frequently in these books of the Wars. This would suit the first outbreak at Pelusium by placing it between April 1, 541 and March 31, 542; however it is hard to reconcile with the transmitted date of Justinian’s Edict 7 hyperlink (March 1, 542), which depicts the plague on that date as new and ongoing, clearly in Constantinople. See however the discussion of that text.

The most reasonable solution is that Procopius is not rigorously consistent in referring to time; here he may well be thinking of years in a Thucydidean-style of long “summers,” (including spring and fall) and short “winters,” i.e., periods suited to military activity or inactivity, respectively ((Gomme, Andrews et al. 1986) 5:365-6; cf. Thomas R. Martin, in (Strassler 1996), 623-5). Procopius’ dating of the end of the second year of the Gothic war to the end of winter in early 537 offers a cogent parallel: Wars 6.2.38.[\[8\]](#_ftn1)

He could also be thinking in terms of the normal fiscal year or indiction of the Roman Empire, which began on September 1, or the old Roman, Julian, calendar and consular year, which began on January 1 (Grumel 1958), 174-6 and 193-203. Either of these ways of reckoning a new year could place the initial outbreak of the plague in Egypt in the late summer 541 and are consonant with the plague reaching Constantinopole in a “second year” which includes spring 542. See also the next comment.

“Byzantium”: Procopius uses the pre-imperial name of Constantinople as a matter of literary archaism.

 “Middle of spring”: *mesountos tou ēros.* If the dating clause of Justinian’s Edict 7, March 1, 542, is correct (see the relevant discussion \*hyperlink), the plague had already broken out in Constantinople by that date, since it caused the financial crisis that the Edict addresses. Procopius may not have a precise date for spring in mind, but simply remembered that spring weather had arrived in the capital where, as he says, he was himself present.[\[9\]](#_ftn2)



2.22.9, 1.251.7-11:  
ἀρξαμένη δὲ ἀεὶ ἐκ τῆς παραλίας ἡ νόσος ἥδε, οὕτω δὴ ἐς τὴν μεσόγειον ἀνέβαινε χώραν. δευτέρῳ δὲ ἔτει ἐς Βυζάντιον μεσοῦντος τοῦ ἦρος ἀφίκετο, ἔνθα καὶ ἐμοὶ ἐπιδημεῖν τηνικαῦτα ξυνέβη.

2.22.10 It came about in this way. Apparitions of demons looking like every kind of human being appeared to many; whoever encountered them perceived that they had been struck by the man they encountered: wherever he hit their body, they immediately contracted the illnessas soon as they saw that apparition.

*Draft commentary: for review by John. ###* Ancient scientific theories of disease left little place for contagion. Nevertheless eyewitnesses of the Justinianic Pandemic came to believe that contagion somehow transmitted the disease, at least in some cases. This passage looks like an early effort to incorporate contagion into the etiology of plague. 

ἐγίνετο δὲ ὧδε. φάσματα δαιμόνων πολλοῖς ἐς πᾶσαν ἀνθρώπου ἰδέαν ὤφθη, ὅσοι τε αὐτοῖς παραπίπτοιεν, παίεσθαι ᾤοντο πρὸς τοῦ ἐντυχόντος ἀνδρὸς, ὅπη παρατύχοι τοῦ σώματος, ἅμα τε τὸ φάσμα τοῦτο ἑώρων καὶ τῇ νόσῳ αὐτίκα ἡλίσκοντο

22.11  
At first, those who encountered them tried to ward them off by pronouncing the most sacred of names and performing other religious rituals as best they could. But they accomplished nothing at all, since most of those who fled were destroyed, even in *shrines*.

Procopius uses *exosioō* ἐξοσιόω of performances of both Persian and Christian religious rituals: e.g. Wars 2.24.2; 3.21.18. “were destroyed, even in shrines” kan tois *hierois*…*diephteironto*: Procopius may echo the thought, but not much of the wording of Thucydides’ observation on the uselessness against dying of religious rituals and oracles during the plague (2.47.4): hosa te pros *hierois* hiketeusan ē maneteiois kai tois toitoutois ekrhēsanto, panta anōphelē ēn, …*teleutōntes*…”[\[10\]](#_ftn1) 

2.22.11, 1.  
\*κατ’ ἀρχὰς μὲν οὖν οἱ παραπεπτωκότες ἀποτρέπεσθαι αὐτὰ ἐπειρῶντο, τῶν τε ὀνομάτων ἀποστοματίζοντες τὰ θειότατα καὶ τὰ ἄλλα ἐξοσιούμενοι, ὡς ἕκαστός πη ἐδύνατο, ἤνυον μέντοι τὸ παράπαν οὐδὲν, ἐπεὶ κἀν τοῖς *ἱεροῖς* οἱ πλεῖστοι καταφεύγοντες *διεφθείροντο*. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 







\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\[3\] Procopius uses *loimos* 17 times, 12 of which refer to or include the initial outbreak of the bubonic pandemic: 4 times in this section, and Wars 2.24.5 and 12, as well as 4.14.6 and Secret History, 4.1; 6.22; 12.17; 18.44 and 23.20; in Wars 6.3.1 and 2, 6.4.16, and 6.6.1, *loimos* refers to a non-plague epidemic during the siege of Rome in 537 (see Stathakopoulos, D. C. (2004). Famine and pestilence in the late Roman and early Byzantine empire: a systematic survey of subsistence crises and epidemics. Aldershot, Ashgate., 270, no. 94) and during operations in Lazica, apparently, in 541: Secret History 2.27.

\[4\] Galen, *Commentary on Hippocrates’ Epidemics* defines *loimos* as a species within the genus of “Epidemics.” A *loimos* is the worst sort of epidemic: “It is thus clear that whatever are the most wicked from the species of epidemic diseases are called pestilential (λοιμώδη/*loimōdē*).” (Galen, *In Hippocratis librum primum epidemiarum commentarii iii.* ed. Wankebach 17a.11 (CMG p. 9): “δῆλον οὖν ὡς ἐκ τοῦ γένους τῶν ἐπιδημίων νοσημάτων, ὅσα κακοηθέστατα γίνεται καὶ λοιμώδη καλεῖται.”) For the Antonine Plague as *loimos*, see Galen, *Methodus medendi*, 5.12, ed. C.G. Kühn, *Claudii Galeni opera omnia*, 10 (Leipzig: Knobloch, 1825).360.18-361.1: “εὕρομεν δὲ μάλιστα τὴν θεραπείαν αὐτῶν ἐνθένδε  
κατὰ τὸν μέγαν τοῦτον λοιμὸν, ὃν εἴη ποτὲ παύσεσθαι, πρῶτον εἰσβάλλοντα.”

\[5\] Th. 2.48.3 *λεγέτω* μὲν οὖν περὶ αὐτοῦ ὡς ἕκαστος γιγνώσκει καὶ ἰατρὸς καὶ ἰδιώτης, ἀφ’ ὅτου εἰκὸς ἦν γενέσθαι αὐτό, καὶ τὰς *αἰτίας* ἅστινας νομίζει τοσαύτης μεταβολῆς ἱκανὰς εἶναι δύναμιν ἐς τὸ μεταστῆσαι σχεῖν· ἐγὼ δὲ οἷόν τε ἐγίγνετο λέξω,

\[6\] *ἤρξατο* δὲ τὸ μὲν πρῶτον, ὡς λέγεται, *ἐξ* Αἰθιοπίας τῆς ὑπὲρ Αἰγύπτου, ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ ἐς *Αἴγυπτον* καὶ Λιβύην κατέβη καὶ ἐς τὴν βασιλέως γῆν τὴν πολλήν.

\[7\] Procopius appears to be inconsistent in how he dates the beginning of the year: April 1, Justinian’s coronation date as coemperor, would be the beginning of the regnal years that Procopius frequently cites, e.g., Wars, 1.22.17; (which in a few cases, he makes coincide with the Thucydidean formula of the end of winter: see further below) 1.16.10 or 2.5.1; etc.; “the beginning of the year” ceremonies in the new Senate House that Justinian built must refer to the consular celebration of January 1 (Buildings 1.10.7, cf. \*Janin, Guilland?); and a Thucydides-inspired year that ends with “winter” and seems to start somewhere between “winter” and “summer,” the latter including the summer solstice (ca. June 21), which Procopius seems to prefer to Justinian’s regnal years from Book 6 forward: Wars 6.2.38, cf. Thucydides, 5.81.2; Wars 6.12.41, and 6.13.1 for the summer solstice; 6.22.25, etc. According to Justinian’s legislation, Nov. 47.1 (?537\*) legal documents must be dated by the emperor’s regnal year (in his case, April 1), the consulate (January 1), the indiction, which begins on Sept. 1, and the month and day. I have found no evidence that Procopius used indictional dating, although this would be a good explanation of his counting of years of the plague outbreak.

\[8\] Haury and Wirth 2.159.16-18: “τότε δὲ ὅ τε χειμὼν ἔληγε καὶ τὸ δεύτερον ἔτος ἐτελεύτα τῷ πολέμῳ τῷδε, ὃν Προκόπιος ξυνέγραψεν.” “Then winter ended and the second year finished of the war whose history Procopius composed.”

\[9\] A contemporary Constantinopolitan civil servant and literateur defined spring as lasting from February 7 to May 8, which would place mid-spring around March 23: John the Lydian, *De ostentis*, 60, ed. C. Wachsmuth (Leipzig, 1863), 122.14-15; McCormick, M. (1998). Bateaux de vie, bateaux de mort. Maladie, commerce, transports annonaires et le passage économique du Bas-Empire au moyen âge. Morfologie sociali e culturali in Europa fra tarda antichità e alto medioevo. Spoleto. **1:** 35-122., 53n27. On the other hand, Procopius elsewhere places the beginning of spring on Easter, in 536, i.e. March 23 (March 25 in the modern Gregorian calendar) when he refers to an Easter mutiny in 536 as occurring “with the beginning of spring” (Ἅμα δὲ ἦρι ἀρχομένῳ, ὅτε οἱ Χριστιανοὶ ἑορτὴν ἦγον, ἣν δὴ Πασχαλίαν καλοῦσι, στρατιώταις στάσις”: Wars 4.14.7; cf. Rubin 1995, 37.

\[10\] “…ὅσα τε πρὸς ἱεροῖς ἱκέτευσαν ἢ μαντείοις καὶ τοῖς τοιούτοις ἐχρήσαντο, πάντα ἀνωφελῆ ἦν, τελευτῶντές τε αὐτῶν ἀπέστησαν ὑπὸ τοῦ κακοῦ νικώμενοι.”

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_