28ο

Umberto Roberto

to discern the contribution made by Malalas to the depiction of Nero, prior to John of
Antioch’s taking up again the tradition of Cassius Dio (fr. 172, 27). The historiographi-
cal significance of this contribution cannot be sufficiently stressed, for it is in the de-
cision to place the testimonies of Malalas and Cassius Dio alongside one another that
the personality and interests of John of Antioch become evident. To follow Sotiroudis
in thinking that the text of John of Antioch has been interpolated in this instance
would be a mistake, for doing so would reveal only a passing acquaintance with the
working method and aims of the Historic/. Chronike. Contrary to what Sotiroudis sus-
tains, the contamination of two sources that are so different as regards the adolescent
Nero is historiographically intentional, reflecting John of Antioch’s desire to provide
readers with his own personal interpretation of history as realised by the uniting of
sources that differ amongst themselves.20 Before providing a negative description of
Nero that is based on Cassius Dio’s version, John provides his own representation of
the quinquennium felix, emphasising how Nero’s philosophical interests led him to be
deeply interested in the reports concerning Jesus Christ and to have a desire to learn
about his life and deeds. Situated within a reworking of Book LXI of Cassius Dio, the
whole passage clearly derives from a synthesis of Malalas, Chronographic/ X 30,33 and
36. This fact is important for two reasons. First of all, it demonstrates that John Mala-
las was an important source for John of Antioch’s narrative regarding the origins and
spread of early Christianity. Secondly, the decision to insert this episode in the account
of Nero’s life shows that John of Antioch has the same historiographical interests as
John Malalas and the cultural milieu to which Malalas belongs. This is yet another sign
that in terms of culture John of Antioch was close to Antiochene historiography. For
John of Antioch, it was John Malalas who constituted the leading exponent of this
historiographical tradition. It is for this reason that, in his description of the adole-
scent Nero, John of Antioch maintains the tradition about Nero’s interest in Jesus that
was previously to be found in his source John Malalas.21

20 Following Sotiroudis’s mistaken opinion (pp. 49-50: “Fr. 90 Μ. bezieht sich auf Nero. Der erste Teil
("Οτι βασιλεύσαντος ... Παύλον δέ τής κεφαλής απέτεμε) hängt mit der entsprechenden Er-
zählung des Malalas zusammen und ist aus ihm geflossen”), S. Mariev fr. 117 excludes the lines 1-2 of
Excerptum de Virtutibus 26 BW and refused the connection between this first part of Excerptum de
Virtutibus 26 and Suda N 254, Νερών (pp. 455,20-456,15 Adler), as accepted both by C. Müller and Th.
Büttner-Wobst. As a consequence, Mariev fr. 117 presevers only Excerptum de Virtutibus 26 (pp. 182,5-
184,19 BW, which is explicity called EV26, pars secunda). In their attempts to eliminate anything that
comes from Malalas, Sotiroudis and Mariev also eliminate the first two lines of Excerptum de Virtutibus
26 BW, even though these clearly come from Cassius Dio, not from Malalas. Such excision is manifestly
arbitrary and unjustified, both from a philological perspective and from a purely historiographical point
of view.
21 On the historiographical structure of this Excerptum de Virtutibus 26 see Zecchini, “L’immagine di
Nerone”, pp. 216-217; Zecchini suggests that the text from John of Antioch could be excerpted by the
lexicographer from the volume de rebus ecclesiasticis\ he also speaks of a «tradizione locale siriaca filone-
roniana» which is transmitted by John Malalas and John of Antioch (pp. 220-221). On this tradition
about Nero and his interest for Jesus Christ see Dorival, “Un apocryphe” and Meier, “Nero”.