Malalas’ Sources for the Contemporary Books
Roger Scott

Abstract This paper argues (without claiming to demonstrate) that Malalas, pressured by Justin
and/or Justinian, began his chronicle with Book XVII, exploiting official notices and possibly
as their author. Again under imperial pressure he both began Book XVIII and, to help allay
millennial fears, constructed Books I-XIV relying mainly on a series of chroniclers, listed in his
preface, until he reached the end of Leo’s reign in 474 which marked the end of the chronicle
by Nestorianus, possibly another name for Domninus, the second-last source listed in Malalas’
preface. That required Malalas to turn to Eustathius of Epiphania, the final chronicler listed in
his preface, for Books XV-XVI plus adding the Eudocia story for the first half of Book XIV.
As Eustathius’ chronicle only reached 503 (year 12 of Anastasius), Malalas was then (after 532)
forced to cover the fifteen-year gap to the beginning of Justin’s reign (518), perhaps to his cha-
grin, with what little came to his notice.
My allotted task of writing on Malalas’ sources for the contemporary books requires
an immediate acknowledgement of the work of Elizabeth Jeffreys in particular and of
Brian Croke: Jeffreys for her chapter in Studies in John Malalas entitled simply “Mala-
las’ sources”1 and Croke especially for his chapter there entitled “Malalas, the man
and his work”,2 but also for his contribution to significant sections of Jeffreys’ chapter
which are fully acknowledged in her opening footnote. Prior to Jeffreys’ chapter, the
main study of the sources was that by Bourier in 1899-1900,3 but that was limited
to the first fourteen books and so excludes the contemporary books. Bourier’s work
met with numerous criticisms4 but Jeffreys was still able to show its strengths while
also pointing out that some of its deficiencies arose just because Bourier had confined
himself to those first fourteen books and so was simply unaware when his claims were
plainly contradicted by the evidence of the final four books. Jeffreys’ chapter gives
rather more attention to the earlier rather than the later books but still also covers the
salient evidence of books XV to XVIII. Her detailed analysis of what is known of the
sources whom Malalas mentions and of who were the most likely sources for particu-
lar sections of the chronicle, together with Croke’s discussion of Malalas’life and what
resources were available to him, remain the best account of Malalas’ sources for the
1 Jeffreys (1990c).
2 Croke (1990).
3 Bourier (1899) and (1900).
4 E.g. in the lengthy detailed review by Patzig (1901).