George of Pisidia in his Avar War celebrates the defeat of the Avars during the Avar–Persian attack on Constantinople in 626, and attributes this success to the active intervention of *Mary (Mother of Christ, S00033). Iambic poem in Greek, written in Constantinople in 626, or shortly afterwards.
E08591
Literary - Poems
Greek Anthology
George of Pisidia, Bellum Avaricum (Avar War)
[Title of poem in main MSS and in Pertusi’s edition]:
Εἰς τὴν γενομένην ἔφοδον τῶν βαρβάρων καὶ εἰς τὴν αὐτῶν ἀστοχίαν
'On the onslaught of the barbarians that took place and on their failure'
1–9 The Virgin’s image should be displayed as one of the trophies of battle:
τῶν ζωγράφων τις εἰ θέλει τὰ τῆς μάχης
τρόπαια δεῖξαι, τὴν Τεκοῦσαν ἀσπόρως
μόνην προτάξοι καὶ γράφοι τὴν εἰκόνα·
ἀεὶ γὰρ οἶδε τὴν φύσιν νικᾶν μόνη,
τόκῳ τὸ πρῶτον καί μάχῃ τὸ δεύτερον· 5
ἔδει γὰρ αὐτήν, ὥσπερ ἀσπόρως τότε,
οὕτως ἀόπλως νῦν τεκεῖν σωτηρίαν,
ὅπως δι’ ἀμφοῖν εὑρέθῃ καὶ παρθένος
καὶ πρὸς μάχην ἄτρεπτος ὡς πρὸς τὸν τόκον.
‘If one of the painters wishes to display the battle’s / trophies, let him put forward in the front rank She who alone bore without seed / and depict Her likeness; for She alone always knows how to overcome nature, / in childbirth first and in battle second (5)./ For it was needful that She, as then without seed, / so now without weapons, give birth to salvation, / so that through the two She be found both a virgin, / and immutable in battle as she was in childbirth.’
George dedicates his poem to the patriarch Sergius (10–15).
The Avar threat to Roman territory (16–40). Others have described past events; the poet will focus on those he witnessed (41–48). The tyranny of Phocas (AD 602–610) was ended by his successor Heraclius, but divisions continued to trouble the state (49–62).
The Avar threat: under the old Khagan, the situation was manageable, but his successor pursued a more aggressive policy: how will the poet summon the resources to describe the latter’s devilish activities? (63–93). The emperor Heraclius tried all types of peaceful conciliation, including paying tribute and Orpheus-like persuasion (94–107). The earlier surprise Avar attack on Constantinople (in 623) is too painful to describe (108–124).
Address to and praise of the Patriarch Sergius (AD 610–638) (125–164). The poet is still affected by the recent battle (165–171). Sergius’ prayers and exhortations repulse enemy onslaughts (172–196): he successfully navigated the Scylla and Charybdis of the various nations involved in the attack (197–213). The barbarians attacked the Philoxenus gate with 80,000 men (214–225). Despite Sergius’ wish to pass unnoticed, the poet feels compelled to describe his role, since so many people witnessed it (226–231).
εἶχες γάρ, εἶχες συμφρονοῦσαν Πάρθενον
ἥ σοι τὸ μέλλον τοῦ σκόπου προιστόρει·
ταύτην συνασπίζουσαν ἐξ ἔθους ἔχων
ἀντεστρατήγεις ἐξ ἀύλου καρδίας 235
τοῖς ἀντιτέχνοις τῶς ἀγώνων ὀργάνοις.
‘For you had, yes you had the Virgin thinking with you, / who told you in advance the destined outcome. / With Her as your shield-fellow as always, / you acted as general, using your spiritual heart / against the instruments of contest devised in opposition.’ (236).
Sergius’ hope in God, faith and humility acted as weapons (237–245). The emperor Heraclius assisted, although he had been absent for three years fighting the Persians, by sending letters that gave detailed instructions for the defence of Constantinople and also sent reinforcements (246–287). Everyone rushed to fulfil his instructions on strategy, which saved the situation: the poet will celebrate Heraclius on a suitable future occasion (288–310). It was decided to send an embassy to the Avar khagan and the Persians also sent envoys (311–332). The Avar khagan pitted the two embassies against one another, but this turned against the Avars, since the Greek envoys returned with a knowledge of Persian strategy and could make advance defence of sea routes, so that Avars and Persians suffered equally (333–365). When the day of battle came, Sergius ran to the wall and displayed an icon not made by hands (acheiropoietos), which terrified the enemy (366–379).
ὡς εὖ γέ σοι γένοιτο τοῦ καλοῦ δόλου· 380
κρίνας γὰρ ἐν σοὶ καὶ διαγνοὺς τὴν φύσιν
ὠς μητρὸς οὐδὲν παιδὶ συμπαθέστερον
τὴν τοῦ Δικαστοῦ Μητέρα προσηγάγου
οἶκτῳ, δεήσει, δακρύοις, ἀσιτίᾳ
καὶ τῇ δόσει δὲ τῶν ῥεόντων χρημάτων· 385
ἐκεῖθεν ἔνθεν πολλὰ δοὺς καὶ σκορπίσας
πείθεις ἐκείνην πρῶτον· ἡ δὲ συντόμως
πείθει τὸ Τέκνον καὶ σχεδὸν πρὸ τῆς δίκης
νικῶσαν ἡμῖν ἐξέφωνησε κρίσιν.
‘So may good come to you [Sergius] for your fair trick (380); / for having judged within yourself and discerned that in nature / nothing has greater affinity than a mother for a son, / you won over the Mother of the Judge / by compassion, entreaty, tears, fasting, / and by donation of streams of money (385). By giving and dispersing much on every side, / you persuade Her first; and she at once / persuades the Son and almost before the trial, pronounced judgement of victory for us.’
Nevertheless the barbarians engaged in battle and the green area outside the walls was destroyed by a great fire (390–395). The Persians on the far side of the Bosphorus knew from the fire that the battle had begun: both sides were eager to burn the ‘holy stones’ (396–403).
ἤδη δὲ λοιπὸν συγκροτοῦντες τὴν μάχην
οἱ βάρβαροι μὲν τοῦ δικαστοῦ τοὺς τόπους
καὶ τοῦ στρατηγοῦ, τῆς ἀτρέπτου Παρθένου, 405
λαβόντες εἶχον ὡσανεὶ τὰς ἀσπίδας,
καί τοὺς παρ’ αὐτῶν δυσσεβῶς ὑβρισμένους
ἔχειν συνεργοὺς εἰς ἀνάγκην ἠξιουν.
‘Already, then, clashing in battle, / the barbarians had taken the places of the judge / and general, the immutable Virgin (405), and were holding them as if they were shields: / those who were impiously outraged by them, they saw fit to hold as assistants in their need.’
The barbarians embarked Slavs and Bulgars on hollowed boats, combining land and sea battle (409–412). The poet too was infected by the confusion of battle and did not know what to describe first (413–416). Individual warriors’ deaths are described: all eventually fell. God directed the missiles accurately (417–435). The sea battle was similarly disastrous (436–439).
Καί μοι πρόσεστι τοῦτο θαυμάσαι πλέον· 440
πῶς τὴν τοσαύτην τῆς θαλάττης οὐσίαν
οἱ βάρβαροι βλέποντες ἐξηπλωμένην,
δοκοῦντες ὥσπερ ἐστενῶσθαι τῷ πλάτει,
ἐκεῖ συνεκλείσθησαν εὐθέως ὅπου
τὸν οἶκον εἶχεν ἡ στρατηγὸς Πάρθενος 445
ἐκεῖ γὰρ ὥσπερ ἐν θαλάττῃ δίκτυον
τὰ γλυπτὰ συζεύξαντες ἥπλωσαν σκάφει.
ἐπεὶ δὲ συννεύσαντες ἀλλήλοις ὅλοι
ἐπῆλθον ἡμῶν σὺν βοῇ ταῖς ὁλκάσιν,
ἑντεῦθεν ἦν ἄδηλος ἡ δήλη μάχη· 450
μόνην γὰρ οἶμαι τὴν Τεκοῦσαν ἀσπόρως
τὰ τόξα τεῖναι καὶ βαλεῖν τὴν ἀσπίδα,
καὶ ταῖς ἀδήλοις συμπλοκαῖς μεμιγμένην
βάλλειν, τιτρώσκειν, ἀντιπέμπειν τὸ ξίφος,
ἀνατρέπειν τε καὶ καλύπτειν τὰ σκάφη 455
δοῦναί τε πᾶσι τὸν βυθὸν κατοικίαν.
ξένον γὰρ οὐδὲν εἰ ⟨προ⟩πολεμεῖ Πάρθενος,
δι’ ἧς παρῆλθεν εἰς τὸ τῆς ψυχῆς σέβας
οὐκ οἶδα πῶς πεμφθεῖσα ῥομφαιά πάλιν·
ὅμως παρῆλθεν ἢ διῆλθεν ὀξέως 460
τρώσασα τὴν ἄτρωτον οὐδαμοῦ φύσιν.
‘And for my part I am more amazed at this, / how the barbarians, looking on so great / a substance of the sea outspread, /seeming as it were to be straitened by its breadth, / were enclosed precisely there, where / the Virgin-general had Her house [= the church of Mary at Blachernai] (445); / for there, like a net upon the sea, / they yoked together and outspread their hollowed boats. / But when all of them in concert with one another, / came down with shouting on our ships, thereupon the visible battle became invisible (450): for I think that She alone who bore without seed / tensed the bows and smote the shield, and mingling invisibly in the engagements, / was striking, wounding, repulsing the sword, /overturning and submerging the boats, / and gave to all the deep for dwelling. /
For it is not at all strange if the Virgin fights for us, / She through whom there came to the majesty of her soul, / I know not how, a sword sent again; / nevertheless it came to or passed through swiftly / in no way wounding Her invulnerable nature (461).’
Those in the hollowed boats panicked and tried to escape, but all perished (462–474). So the barbarians were impiously burned for impiously kindling fire (475–479). Messengers were sent to the Khagan reporting the disaster. Disasters converged from all directions, a forest of the dead on land and the sea dyed red with enemy blood, as in the biblical crossing of the Red Sea (480–501).
Let us sing a hymn of joy, harmonised by the instruments of our senses. May God range his angels against the barbarians of darkness, turning the Tigris and the Ister red, like the Nile before (502–530). May God enhance Sergius’ cultivation and may Heraclius’ conquests of the barbarians everywhere give me many more opportunities for celebration (531–534). Now my song is complete. And may this victory be the first of many for Heraclius Constantine (535–541).
Text: Pertusi 1960
Summary and translation: Mary Whitby
Cult building - independent (church)
Use of ImagesPublic display of an image
Non Liturgical ActivitySaint as patron - of a community
MiraclesMiracle after death
Miraculous interventions in war
Miraculous protection - of people and their property
Protagonists in Cult and NarrativesForeigners (including Barbarians)
Ecclesiastics - bishops
Soldiers
Monarchs and their family
Source
George of Pisidia (or George Pisides) was a contemporary of the Emperor Heraclius I (r. 610–641), whom he celebrated in panegyrical poetry. The Avar War (of 541 lines) is one of three extant long poems for Heraclius, the others being the Persian Expedition (Expeditio Persica), which celebrated Heraclius’ initial Persian campaign of 622, and the Heraclias (probably incomplete), which marked the emperor’s final victory over the Persians (628). Two short poems, On Bonus (In Bonum) and On the Resurrection of Christ (In Resurrectionem Christi) are also associated with the 626 siege, which took place while the emperor was absent in the East. There survive in the Greek Anthology two epigrams by George, AP 1.120, 121 (E00568), which celebrate the Virgin’s role in ending the siege; they were inscribed in her church at Blachernae.Discussion
George’s Avar War is one of three complementary eye-witness accounts (in different genres) of the siege, the others being Chronicon Paschale s.a. 626 (716.9–726.10 Dindorf; see E07973, E00568, E07976 and E07977), and a homily by Theodore Syncellus that was delivered soon after the event; the latter is entitled in the manuscripts ‘Concerning the insane move of the godless Avars and Persians against this God-guarded city and their shameful withdrawal by the mercy of God through the Mother of God.’Each has its strengths and problems: the careful record of the Chronicon Paschale has a lacuna at a key point in the narrative, while George and Theodore both write in a highly rhetorical style. The Chronicon Paschale and Theodore Syncellus describe events in chronological order, but George organises his material according to the importance of the honorand in securing victory. Pride of place is given to the Virgin, second comes George’s patron the patriarch Sergius (patriarch 610-638), since it was he who interceded with the Virgin on behalf of the city, while the emperor Heraclius, who is carefully positioned at the centre of George’s poem, provides strategic advice from afar and sends reinforcements. All three accounts give credit for the victory to the Virgin.
Bibliography
Editions and translations:Cosme-Thomas, Alice, Un poème de circonstance entre épopée et panégyrique. Traduction et commentaire du Bellum Avaricum de Georges de Pisidie. Revue des Études Tardo-antiques. Collection Pierre-Louis Malosse III (Nanterre 2025).
Pertusi, A., Giorgio di Pisidia Poemi. I. Panegirici epici. Studia Patristica et Byzantina 7 (Ettal 1960), 176–224.
Tartaglia, L., Carmi di Giorgio di Pisidia (Turin 1998), 155–191.
Whitby, Mary, ‘George of Pisidia’s poem On the Avar War (Bellum Avaricum). Introduction and translation’, in Phil Booth & Mary Whitby (eds.), Mélanges James Howard-Johnston. Travaux et Mémoires 26 (Paris 2022), 517–544.
Further reading:
Howard-Johnston, J.D. ‘The siege of Constantinople in 626’, in Cyril Mango and Gilbert Dagron (eds.), Constantinople and its Hinterland (Aldershot 1995), 131–142.
Howard-Johnston, James, Witnesses to a World Crisis. Historians and Histories of the Middle East in the Seventh Century (Oxford 2010), 16–35.
Howard-Johnston, James, The Last Great War of Antiquity (Oxford 2021), 268–284.
Hurbanič, M., The Avar Siege of Constantinople in 626 History and Legend (London 2019).
Whitby, Michael, Theodore Syncellus: The Homilies ‘On the Robe’ and ‘On the Siege’. Translated Texts for Historians 86 (Liverpool 2024).
Whitby, Mary, ‘The patriarch Sergius and the Theotokos’, Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 70 (2020), 403–425.
Whitby, Michael and Whitby, Mary, Chronicon Paschale 284–628 AD. Translated Texts for Historians 7 (Liverpool 1989).
Mary Whitby
23/06/2025
ID | Name | Name in Source | Identity | S00033 | Mary, Mother of Christ | Certain |
---|
Please quote this record referring to its author, database name, number, and, if possible, stable URL:
Mary Whitby, Cult of Saints, E08591 - http://csla.history.ox.ac.uk/record.php?recid=E08591