Проблеми при издирването на византийски първообразци на средновековната славянска химнография
Problems in the Search for Byzantine Prototypes of Medieval Slavonic Hymnography

Summary/Abstract: In the first part of the article, some characteristic features of Orthodox hymnography as a macrogenre are highlighted, which need to be taken into account when interpreting medieval church poetry and when looking for Byzantine prototypes of Slavonic hymnographic works. These features are: 1. In Byzantium and among the Slavs, it was a common practice to transfer and rededicate works from one saint to another, through which the hymnographic corpus was updated and supplemented when new memories and holidays appeared. 2. Short hymns (prosomoia stichera, idiomela stichera, kondakia, etc.) are distinguished by great mobility between different services. Their limited length is a prerequisite for their more general and neutral content, in which, often, even the name of the saint is omitted. The transmission of the short hymns is further facilitated by the extensive use of topoi. After being transferred, brief hymns were often adapted more than once to commemorate a new saint. 3. The most mobile of the short hymns are the thetokia (troparia dedicated to the Virgin Mary). Because they always have the same subject matter, they can be transferred easily from one service to another or from one canon to another (as the last troparion of each ode) unchanged. 4. The next most mobile short hymns are the idiomela stichera, probably because they have their own rhythmic structure and melody (μέλος), which allows for greater variability in content and performance. The second part of the article dwells on some problems in the methodology of searching for Byzantine originals of Slavonic hymns. Special attention is paid to the recently popular method of reverse (acrophonic) translation from Slavonic to Greek of the initia of troparia, through which Byzantine acrostichs in the Slavonic canons are discovered and restored. An example of such a translation are the reconstructions of acrostichs in three canons for St John of Rila (the Canon for the 2nd mode from the Service of the saint’s dormition on August 18, the Canon for the 1st mode from the Menaion of Skopje from 1451 and the Canon from the Service in the late-13th century Menaion of Dragan), through which I. Dobrev proved that their author was George Skylitzes. By examining the translation of the initia in the Canon for the 2nd mode, it is found that not all reconstructions of initial letters are accurate and reliable. Therefore, it is emphasized that in such reconstructions of Byzantine acrostichs, literary and historical data and works should also be taken into account as supporting evidence for whether a given hymn is original or not, as well as for its authorship. Some questions are also raised in connection to the acrostich preserved in a Slavonic translation in the 16th century Russian copy (RNB F. 218/144) of the canon from the Menaion of Skopje, where the hymn writer George is named as its author. In fact this particular acrostich prompts Dobrev to try to find a Byzantine acrostich in the canons of St John of Rila and prove that their author was George Skylitzes. Upon careful reading of this translated acrostich, it turns out that the text uses the plural, meaning that the canon it refers to is dedicated to more than one saint. It is also pointed out that in Byzantine hymnography, the poet George is most often identified with George of Nikomedia. This poet used to enter his name in the theotokia of the canons without any other epithet, in contrast to George Skylitzes. In the preserved hymnographic works of the latter he puts either his full name or only his surname in the acrostich. It is also interesting to note, that in the title of his canon for St Demetrios Skylitzes, he is called “philosopher”, a detail of his biography that until now seems to have been overlooked by researchers. Apart from the characteristic way Skylitzes signs his works, the fact that the aforementioned acrostich in a Slavonic translation is transmitted from only one later manuscript from the 16th century creates doubt whether it has any connection with this canon for St John of Rila. Summarising the analysis of the reconstructions of Byzantine acrostichs in the Slavonic canons for St John of Rila, it is emphasized that if such reconstructions are attempted, they must be directed towards the search for the interrelationship between the three canons in question, because the latest research of L. Nenova proved that they are part of an eight-mode composition of eight canons for the saint. In conclusion, when determining whether a Slavonic hymnographic work is original or translated, all available editions and reference books should be used, the collection of facts and materials offered by the history and literary tradition, as well as the distinctive features of the medieval hymnography as a genre should be taken into consideration, in order to make the hypotheses and conclusions consistent and precise from a scientific point of view, rather than mechanical and self-serving constructs. The different nature of the concept of “originality” in medieval literature requires that the goal of the textual analysis of Slavonic (and other) liturgical hymns should not only be limited to establishing their authenticity. Rather, it should also focus on the quality of adaptation to the new memory, on the level of the translator’s skill, and, if possible, on the purpose and reasons for creating, adapting or translating a work.

• Details
• Contents