Jean d’Antioche et ses sources latines

We are here investigating about the latin sources of John of Antioch for the imperial period. While John’s chronicle offers doubtless connexions with the Eutropius’ Breviarium, it seems unacceptable to regard the abbreviator’s latin text as John’s basic source for the reigns of Augustus to Jovian, even if we are lead to suppose that John may have enriched his research by consulting ponctually a latine source close to Eutrope. The idea that the Peanios’s Greek translation of Eutropius’ Breviarium could have been used as a source by John has also to be dropped, whereas the assumption that John could have consulted an other Greek translation should not be rejected. Thus Eutropius’ Breviarium is not a basic source to which John could have been continuoulsy enslaved. The chronicler seems more, on the contrary, to have improved an Eutropian Latin and Greek translation from other sources, especially from Dexippus.

Then we are lead to wonder whether John of Antioch could be Leo Grammaticus’ source and thus deserve to be called Leoquelle. Between John of Antioch and Zonaras — perhaps even before John —, there has existed a greek source wich Zonaras used. This source was partly reproducing informations known by latin historiographs from the last thirty years of the fourth century and which can read in quite a developped forme from Eutropius to Ammianus Marcellinus. Finally, it seems that the attribution of the Excerpta Salmasiana to John of Antioch should be refused.