Of the Buildings of Justinian — Text and Context

A Catalogue Framed as Panegyric

The text's structure is deceptively simple: Procopius organizes his material by region, moving from Constantinople outward to the provinces. Yet within this framework, he alternates between two distinct modes. One is the bare list, as when he names forts rebuilt or constructed: “Sceminites, Ulpiansus, Episterba, Argus, Aona, Stephaniacum.” The other is a more discursive style, where he explains the strategic rationale behind a project or recounts a historical event that prompted imperial action. For instance, the Huns’ easy capture of Potidæa’s cross-wall becomes an occasion to praise Justinian’s “goodness and magnanimity” in rendering the fortifications “quite impregnable.” This dual register—catalogue and panegyric—means that a first-time reader must navigate between data and encomium, often within the same paragraph.

Geographical Precision and Its Limits

Procopius frequently anchors his descriptions in specific geography, naming rivers, straits, and peninsulas with care. The Euripus strait at Chalcis, for example, is described as “confined between banks which reduce it to the size of a rivulet,” and the island of Eubœa is said to be connected to the mainland by a single beam that the inhabitants lay or remove at will. Such passages give the work a vivid, almost tactile quality. Yet the annotators’ notes—provided by Wilson and Lewis—reveal that many locations are uncertain or have changed names over centuries. The reader is thus confronted with a text that claims exactitude but often depends on inference. The list of forts in Old Epirus, including “Parmus, Olbus, Cionin, Marciana,” is presented as fact, but the annotations may question identifications, reminding us that this is a document filtered through translation and nineteenth-century scholarship.

The Rhetoric of Imperial Restoration

A recurring motif in the excerpts is Justinian’s ability to transform disaster into opportunity. After describing the Huns’ sack of Potidæa, Procopius notes that the emperor “turned the most terrible disasters into a source of good fortune by the magnificent works by which he repaired.” This rhetorical move—presenting restoration as a form of triumph—pervades the text. It is not merely that Justinian builds; he rebuilds, and in doing so, he demonstrates “goodness and magnanimity.” The reader should be alert to this framing: Procopius is writing under imperial patronage, and his account is as much about justifying imperial power as it is about documenting architecture. The descriptions of fortresses and churches are never neutral; they are always evidence of the emperor’s foresight and piety.

Navigating the Lists: A Reader’s Strategy

The most challenging aspect of Of the Buildings of Justinian for a modern reader is the sheer density of proper names. Procopius himself anticipates this difficulty, writing that he will “put them all in the form of a list, so that my narrative may not be confused by the insertion of their names.” Yet the lists themselves can overwhelm. A practical approach is to treat them as reference material rather than continuous prose. The annotations and index provided in this edition are essential tools: they clarify which sites are known, which are obscure, and how the text relates to other historical sources. Readers may also benefit from consulting the accompanying map, which visually anchors the geographical scope of Justinian’s building program. The lists are not meant to be memorized but to convey scale—the impression of an empire actively reshaping its landscape.

This edition of Procopius’s work is best approached as a primary source for Byzantine history and architecture, not as a standalone narrative. The annotations by Wilson and Lewis provide crucial context, identifying locations and correcting errors. Readers should expect to move between text, footnotes, and maps, and to accept that some sites remain unidentified. The value of the book lies less in its literary polish than in its detailed record of a transformative period in the Eastern Roman Empire.