On Buildings

...Majorian (I 340, 16), and upon this Majorian dying from intestinal distress (I 342, 9), Nepos obtained the empire (I 342, 11), then Glycerius (I 342, 13), then Augustus (I 342, 15 "after whom Augustus indeed took the imperial power," II 4, 5 "Augustus held the western power, whom the Romans also called Augustulus as a diminutive"). Procopius hallucinates here. For not only Nicephorus, but Euagrius (II 8), Marcellinus Comes (ad a. 461), Hydatius in his Chronica minora minor chronicles II 32 (210), and Isidore in Chronica minora II 297 report that Majorian did not die of dysentery, but was killed by Ricimer; and Nicephorus, Euagrius II 16, Marcellinus Comes (ad a. 474), and the Consularia Italica Italian consular records in Chronica minora I 306 agree that Glycerius was deposed by Nepos, and did not succeed that emperor. Procopius erred most significantly when he said twice that the last Roman emperor was Augustus; a writer of history should have known that Augustus was a title for Roman emperors, the last of whom was publicly called Romulus Augustus, but commonly called Romulus Augustulus out of affection. By Nicephorus (cf. also Euagrius II 16, Theophanes I 119, 17) he is correctly called Romulus Augustulus.

Since these things are so, no one would deny that Euagrius and Nicephorus used better sources than Procopius in the preface of the third book of his history of the wars. And the passages of Theophanes, which I cited on page XIII, since they all agree more with Nicephorus than with Procopius, did not flow from the latter, but from the same writers whom Nicephorus employed: Priscus or Eustathius.

I also judge that fragments of Eustathius exist in the preface of the first book of the histories. Procopius writes much about the siege of Amida. When Euagrius III 37 makes mention of this siege, he adds: "If anyone wishes to know the details of these matters subtly and to go through everything with accuracy, it has been recorded and written by Eustathius most wisely, with much labor and excessive elegance" (cf. Niceph. Call. XVI 37). Since Euagrius, who knew Procopius well, does not praise him but rather Eustathius, I conjecture that Eustathius' explanation was not augmented by Procopius.