274

Umberto Roberto

tiniana many texts which derive directly from Malalas. In fact, Soutiroudis tried to
remove from the “real” John of Antioch all of these texts which show John Malalas’
Chronographia as a source. However, he forgot the fragment on Tiberianus. In my
opinion, this significant oversight confirms my view that Sotiroudis’ choice is highly
arbitrary; especially as regards the texts which were excerpted and transmitted by the
excerptores Constantimam under the name of John of Antioch.
3. John Malalas as a source for John of Antioch:
the archaiologia
John Malalas was not only a very important source for John of Antioch’s Historia
Chronike, but also furnished a historiographical model for the structure of that work.
This is demonstrated by the sequence which is preserved by the Excerpta Constanti-
niana, both in Excerpta de virtutibus and in Excerpta de insidiis. In fact, Books I-IV of
Malalas’ Chronographia provide a model for John of Antioch’s archaiologia. The method
of constructing a universal history that we find in John of Antioch was taken directly
from Malalas. As is well known, Julius Africanus and Eusebius created a successful
model for the Christian universal chronicle according to which human history begins
with Adam. Thanks to the stories narrated in the Holy Scriptures, which were al-
ready considered by Africanus to be hebraikai historiai, the Hellenistic question of the
adelos chronos - the beginning of history, according to Hellenistic historiography - is
overcome by the Christian chronicle. Africanus and subsequently Eusebius created
a thick web of synchronisms that connected the history of the Jewish people with
those of Greece and the empires of the Near East. It is this pattern of archaiologia
that many late antique and Byzantine chronicles preserve.11 12 John Malalas derives part
of his archaiologia from Julius Africanus, for whom he is an important witness. John
of Antioch derived his archaiologia from John Malalas. Unfortunately, few fragments
from this section are preserved by the Excerpta ConstantinianaE
11 See Julius Africanus, F34,1-11 and T80 (Quotations are from Julius Africanus, Chronographiae, ed. Μ.
Wallraff with U. Roberto). On Africanus’ Chronographiae as a model for Christian universal chronicle
see the papers in Wallraff, Julius Africanus', and Roberto, Le Chronographiae, pp. 67-106.
12 Many fragments are instead preserved from the codex Parisinus 1630 and from the disputed Excerpta
Salmasiana. I would not expand on the subject here. I still consider the Codex Parisinus 1630 an essential
source in the reconstruction of the first section of the Historia Chronike. As for the Excerpta Salmasiana
on the other hand, I would say that following B. Bleckmann’s solid criticism of my analysis I hope in
the future to dedicate a deeper research on the Excerpta Salmasiana, to discuss again their historiogra-
phical derivation from the Historia Chronike — that I think exists nonetheless. See, e.g., Bleckmann,
“Der salmasische Johannes Antiochenus”. As in part already asserted by Boissevain, “Über die dem
loannes Antiochenus”, p. 177,1 consider this derivation certain at least for the first section of the Ex-
cerpta Salmasiana (Urgeschichte and History of the Roman Republic). For Julius Africanus’ Chronogra-
phiae as an important source for Malalas see Jeffreys,’’Malalas’ sources” pp. 172-173; Julius Africanus, ed.
Wallraff, Roberto, pp. XXXVIII-XXXIX. Probably Malalas knew the Chronographiae through an inter-
mediary. However, he is often a very important witness for reconstructing sections of Africanus’ work.