228

Roger Scott

To introduce the story of David and Goliath at any stage of an account of the sixth
century is odd. To do so in a book devoted to Justinian before narrating a single thing
that Justinian did is particularly odd. (Remember: all that Malalas has told us about
Justinian so far in Book XVIII is his physical appearance, plus noting his appointment
of a Comes Orientis just before introducing Palmyra).
It is difficult not to believe that Justinian himself was somehow responsible for
Malalas’ stress on David and Goliath at the opening of his narrative on Justinian. I
have tried to explore this elsewhere.23 But in briefl do think it must be connected with
Justinian’s urge to link his reign to the Old Testament’s King David. But whatever
the precise explanation, we must surely see this as Malalas making use of an imperial
source for his information, or (more importantly) the emperor making sure that his
propaganda got recorded in a chronicle. In that case it is surely likely that Justinian
approached Malalas about this, whether directly or through an intermediary, and it
is Malalas who is the author of the propaganda. One should also note another con-
temporary reference to David and Goliath that expresses the wish that the emperor
may be like David in gaining victory over Goliath. This wish occurs in Romanos’
kontakion 54, 18 Maas/Trypanis (23, 18 Koder) on Earthquakes and Fires, probably
first performed in December 53/24 25 and thus close to the time that Malalas produced
his original version of the chronicle. It has been strongly argued that Romanos was
influenced by Justinian to reflect imperial propaganda in his kontakia and particularly
in this particular kontakion23 Justinian’s wish to be linked in some way to David and
his victory over Goliath may well have been a line that the emperor was pushing
precisely when Malalas was composing his Book XVIII, which would then explain
Malalas’unexpected use of the story at the opening of his account of Justinian, as well
as suggesting that Justinian may well have influenced the chronicler.
Here some parallels of Justinian’s involvement with contemporary writers are
worth noting. Justinian did commission John the Lydian to write up his Persian Wars,
possibly in Latin which might explain its failure to survive, after first deeming him
worthy of delivering an encomium in his presence. Justinian thus appears to have
turned to an approved propaganda writer (the chosen author of his encomium) to
record for posterity a history of his military success, as Lydus himself informs us.26
Lydus certainly and Malalas probably were career civil servants, probably middle level
bureaucrats. It is at least plausible that Justinian would have recognised their similar-
23 Scott (forthcoming).
24 Koder (2008), p. 278, following Barkhuizen (1995).
25 Koder (2008), p. 278: “Justinian also realized that the kontakion could serve as the newest and most
up-to-date means of communication” and p. 280: “He commissioned from Romanos a Lenten hymn
that should combine the praise for the emperor and the propaganda of his political agenda with his
religious convictions”. Romanos also introduces the David and Goliath story into two other kontakia (3,
6 and 16, 6 Maas/Trypanis = 7, 6 and 33, 6 Koder). It is notable that in the first of these David inspires
fear, seen as a positive feature, which is comparable to Malalas’ noting of this as a positive aspect of
Justinian: cf. Scott (1985), pp. 103-104.
26 See loannes Lydus, De magistratibus III 28 and (for Justinian’s supposed appreciation of Lydus’prowess
in Latin) De magistratibus III 29.