| 293 Точно неизвестно, когда именно Парфенон был обращен в мечеть. Вероятно, сам Мехмет II обратил церковь Богородицы Спасения, которая была православным кафедральным собором во франкские времена. См.: Sicilianos D. Old and New Athens (transl. R. Liddell). P. 96; Hasluck F. W. C hristianity and Islam under the Sultans. Vol. I. P. 13–16; Vol. II. P. 755. 294 Historia Politica (С. S. Η. В. edition). P. 38–39; Historia Patriarchica (С. S. Η. В. edition). P. 96–101; Ekthesis Chronica/Ed. S. Lampros. P. 36. Более подробная информация содержится в воспоминаниях Феодора Агал–лиана: Patrineli Ch. G. Θεδωρος γαλλιανς κα ο Ανκδοτοι Λγοι του, где приводится дата смерти Исидора (Р. 118). См. также предисловие Пат–ринели. С. 61–68. 295 Historia Politica (С. S. Η. В. edition). P. 29–42; Historia Patriarchica (С. S. Η. В. edition). P. 102–112. 296 Historia Politica (С. S. Η. В. edition). P. 43–44; Historia Patriarchica (С. S. Η. В. edition). P. 113–115; Gedeon M. Op. cit. Σ. 490–491. Stephanidou V. Συμβολα. εις την κκλησιαστικην στοραν και τ Εκκλησιαστικν Δακον. Σ. 104–113. 297 См. ниже, гл. 4. 298 Historia Patriarchica (С. S. Η. В. edition). P. 128–140. См.: Jorga N. Byzance apres Byzance. P. 84–86. Именно благодаря валашскому влиянию Нифонт вернулся на патриарший престол в 1497–1498 гг. В 1502 г. он был снова избран, но опять отстранен. Пахомий I, занявший его место, также пользовался валашской поддержкой. См.: Popescu N. Patriarhii Tarigradului prin terile in veacul al XVIlea. P. 5 ff. 299 В 1504 г. Иоаким I пользовался грузинской поддержкой. См.: Historia Patriarchica (С. S. Η. В. edition). P. 140–141. 300 Максим IV (1491–1497) имел афонскую поддержку, также как позднее Митрофан III (1565–1572, 1579–1580). См.: Jorga N. Byzance apres Byzance. P. 84–85. 301 См. ниже, гл. 10. 302 О Кантакузинах см.: Sorga N. Despre Cantacuzini — Genealogia Cantacuzinilor — Documentele Cantacuzinilor, passim. О Михаиле см.: Ibid. P. XXIIXXXV; idem. Byzance apres Byzance. P. 114–121. О нем постоянно говорится в «Патриаршей истории» и у Герлаха (Op. cit. S. 55, 60, 223 ff.). Герлах считает, что на самом деле он был не членом старой императорской фамилии, но сыном английского купца. Крузий в TurcoGraecia на основании Герлаха также говорит о продаже его книг. |
| u=Bishop Porfiry Uspensky (ed.), Istoriya Athona, vol. 3: " Athon monashesky», part 2 ‘Opravdaniya’, edited posthumously by P. A. Syrku (St. Petersburg, 1892), pp. 797–806. The Philokalia is a well-known collection of spiritual writings by authors ranging in date from the patristic age to the Late Byzantine period. The collection was assembled and edited by Makarios Notaras (1731–1805), bishop of Corinth, and the monk Nikodemos (1749–1809) of Mt. Athos. 194 The Capita 150 of Palamas may have been taken from Lavra 1907 (Ω 95), a manuscript which was associated with a publication project for the complete works of Gregory Palamas. 195 The first edition of the Philokalia was published in Venice, 1782, at the expense of John Maurogordatos of Smyrna. In 1893 a second edition was issued in Athens under the supervision of Panagiotes Tzelates who included in the new edition the Supplementary Chapters by Patriarch Kallistos (or more likely, Kallistos Angelikoudes). Otherwise this was a simple reprint of the Venice edition. More recently a new printing was prepared by Deacon Epiphanios I. Theodoropoulos on the basis of the previous Venice and Athens editions. When Jacques Paul Migne produced his Patrologia graeca he reprinted the Capita 150 of Palamas from the Venice edition of the Philokalia sent to him by the good graces of J. Sgouta. A Latin translation ( " quantus labor») was provided by a learned gentleman named J. Lecomte, the curé of Bannay in the diocese of Orléans. 196 The Venice edition alone counts as an independent witness to the text of the Capita 150. The others are mere reprints with alterations in the punctuation and with the addition of further errors. In his study of Mount Athos Bishop Porfiry Uspensky published a number of Palamite documents. Unfortunately for us these are mostly in the form of extracts. Meyendorff has indicated that Uspensky took these texts from the manuscript Lavra 1945, viz.: no. 26.683–688 Hagioretic Tome; nos. 27–28.688–691 Triads; nos. 33–34.710–713 Eps 1 and 2 Akindynos; nos. 41–43.737–741 Contra Gregoram; no. 47.787–806 Capita 150. 197 This is quite certain for items 27–28 and 41–43, for Uspensky himself noted that he took them from a manuscript of Mavrogordatos in the Athonite Lavra dated 1708. Items 26 and 33–34 bear no indication of origin. For item 47, the Capita 150, Uspensky noted that it was taken from a manuscript of the Great Lavra which was bound together with a printed book containing saints» lives. Lavra 1945 is not, or at least is no longer, bound with such a printed book. Thus it may be that the Capita 150 is derived from some other manuscript. D. Indirect Witnesses |
| Analysis of these prayers is hampered by errors in Roca-Puig’s edition of the papyrus. Erroneous readings in the prayers for the sick were already corrected by the scholars mentioned above; my preliminary reading of the anaphora and thanksgiving prayer appeared in an extensive review of Roca-Puig’s book in the journal Khristiansky Vostok 16 together with Vinogradov’s reading of the acrostic hymn. In the present article I offer my reconstruction of text of the anaphora and the thanksgiving prayer, taking into account the former’s two other fragments, Louvain. Copt. 27 and PVindob. G 41043. Finally, I discuss briefly whether their evidence might shift current scholarly presuppositions about the 4 th -century anaphoral history. I. The Text In the edition of the Barcelona papyrus by Roca-Puig (hereafter: R.-P), the critical edition of the Greek text of the anaphora is preceded by a diplomatic edition of the text that transcribes every letter of the papyrus. Despite the fact that a diplomatic version should decipher the manuscript verbatim, in R.-P diplomatic edition of the anaphora its text is already divided into words. This rash division has unfortunately prejudiced R.-P’s reading of the papyrus. In fact a few of R.-P’s crucial conjectures in his critical edition of the prayers can be avoided just by choosing another word-division of the continuous papyrus text. R.-P substantiates his conjectures by many examples from other liturgical texts, but the clear evidence of the papyrus itself should undoubtedly prevail as the main criterion of its reconstruction. In order to avoid prejudiced readings of the papyrus, I start by providing new diplomatic versions of the anaphora and thanksgiving prayer from the Barcelona papyrus, using the facsimile edition of the papyrus given at the end of R.-P’s book 17 . I.1. Diplomatic Text of the Anaphora and the Thanksgiving Prayer from the Barcelona Papyrus [P.Monts.Roca inv. 154b] ΕΙΣΘΕΟΣΗΣΟΥΣΟΚΥΡΙΟΣ ΕΥΧΑΡΙΣΤΕΙΑΣΠΕΡΙΑΡΤΟΥΚΑΙΠΟΤΗΡΙΟ ΑΝΩΤΑΣΚΑΡΔΙΑΣΗΜΩΝΕΥΞΟΜΕΝΠΡΟΣ |
| Another Muscovite printer, a colleague of Ivan Fedorov, Peter Mstislavets, who fled with him to Lithuania, established himself in Vilno and organized the afterwards well known Vilnian press of Mamonich. The sojourn of the press in Striatin was remarkable, besides other publications, because of the issue of a new type of church book: this was the great Complete Liturgicon of 1604, which had been corrected in accordance with the Venetian Greek edition. Hence, with the production of this Liturgicon begins the history of the “correction” of the Russian liturgical books; here action was first taken to correct the books. The publishers explained what difficulty they had in choosing the original for the printed edition. The manuscript books did not agree with one another, and it was difficult to choose from among them that which, by rights, might be called the best. They had to turn to the Greek edition and make a new translation. The correction was done according to the Venetian edition. It is possible that the Venetian text of the Liturgicon preserved that form of the order of the liturgy which the famous liturgist and churchman Philotheos, Patriarch of Constantinople, gave it in the 14th century. The Striatin edition was in fact on the highest level. The explanatory directions first given in it for the actions of the celebrants have remained almost without alteration until the present day. Thus, a principle was established: instead of local manuscripts that did not agree with one another, the text of the Venetian Greek edition was to be given in the publication of liturgical books. When the work of publishing liturgical books developed in Kiev under metropolitans Job Boretsky and Peter Moghila in the first half of the 16th century, there were no variations in the choice of text: translating committees were organized, and books – horologia, the Octoechos, the sequential Psalter, the Lenten Triodion and the Pentecostarion, etc. – were reproduced according to the Greek printed edition. |
| In the lower apparatus all the textual witnesses (i.e., CPXGASvam) are presumed available, unless otherwise indicated. Because of the fragmentary state of X, its presence or absence is indicated explicitly for every chapter. Textual evidence taken from the testimonia is separated from the evidence of the manuscripts and editions by an oblique slash (/). For the title all the available witnesses are noted. I have departed from the archetypal readings in 4 places in order to correct orthographic errors 3.20, 17.3, 108.7 (twice). Accentuation, punctuation and word division follow the modern norms. In the apparatus I report all readings except the peculiar variations of S. The more significant readings are given in bold type: archetypal errors, hyparchetypal variants and peculiar variations of C. F. Sigla and Abbreviations C Coislin 100 Paris gr. 2381 Chalki, Trinity 138 Iveron 386 Athens 2092 Moscow 249 Lavra 1907 Lavra 1945 Lavra 2150 ms used for v edition Philokalia (Venice, 1782) Philokalia (Athens, 1893) Philokalia (Athens, 1961) Migne, pg 150 Dialogue of an Orthodox and a Barlaamite Homily 31 Reply On Cyril Theophanes ante correctionem addidit caput/capita (viz. Capita 150) fortasse in margine lin./linn. linea/lineae omisit post correctionem rasura uidetur Ø-X (or –G) The manuscript X (or G) is mutilated or illegible 158 J. Meyendorff, Grégoire Palamas. Défense des saints hésychastes, 2nd edition (Spicilegium sacrum 1ovaniense, Études et documents, fasc. 30–31; Louvain, 1973); P. K. Chrestou, Γρηγορου το Παλαμ Συγγρμματα, 3 vols. (Thessalonica, 1962–1970). 159 For Meyendorff’s edition see E. Candal, ocp 27 (1961) 173–176; H.-G., Beck, BZ 55 (1962) 115–117; V. Grumel, reb 18 (1960) 250–254. For the Chrestou edition see B. Schultze, ocp 35 (1969) 265–268: E. Candal, ocp 31 (1965) 414–419; J. Darrouzès, reb 23 (1965) 264–265. 162 The manuscript has been described by R. Devreesse, Bibliothèque nationale. Département des manuscrits. Catalogues des manuscrits grecs II. Le fonds Coislin (Paris, 1945), pp. 87–88. Titles and incipits of the works wert listed by B. de Montfaucon, Bibliotheca Coisliniana, olim Segueriana. (Paris, 1715), pp. 171ff. (=pg 150:833–838). Cf. also Meyendorff, Défense, pp. xlvii-xlviii and Introduction, pp. 332–334. |
| DayJ. «The Daniel of Ugarit and Ezekiel and the Hero of the Book of Daniel.» VT30 (1980): 174184. Dearman, Andrew..Jeremiah/Lamentations. The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002. Delia Vida, G.L. «The Phoenician God Satrapes.» BASOR 87 (1942): 2932. Diamond, A.R., Kathleen M. ÓConnor, and Louis Stulman. Troubling Jeremiah. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1999. Dillard, R.B., and Tremper Longman III. An Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994. Dobbs-Allsopp, F.W. Lamentations. Int. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2002. Dobbs-Allsopp, F.W. «Tragedy, Tradkion, and Theology in the Book of Lamentations.» JSOT 74 (1997): 2960. Dressier, H.H.P. «The Identification of the Ugaritic Dnil with the Daniel of Ezekiel,» FT29 (1979): 152161. Driver, S.R. An Introduction to the Literature ofthe Old Testament. New York: Meridian Books, 1956; a recent printing of the second edition from 1897. Duguid, Iain M. Ezekiel. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000. Duhm, B. Das Buck Jeremia. Tubingen, 1901. Eichrodt, Walter. Ezekiel. OTL. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970. Eissfeldt, Otto. The Old Testament: An Introduction. Trans, by Peter R. Ackroyd. New York: Harper and Row, 1965. Ellison, H.L. Ezekiel: The Man and His Message. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956. Flamming, James. «The New Testament Use of Isaiah.» SwJT 11 (1968). Fox, D.E. «Ben Sira on ОТ Canon Again: The Date of Daniel.» WTJA9 (1987): 333350. Fredenburg, Brandon. Ezekiel. College Press NIV Commentary. Joplin, MO: College Press, 2002. Fretheim, Terence E.Jeremiah. Macon, GA: Smith and Helwys, 2002. Fretheim, Terence E. «The Repentance of God: A Study of Jer. 18:710 .» HAR11 (1987): 8192. Gammie, J.G. «A Journey through Danelic Spaces: The Book of Daniel in the Theology and Piety ofthe Christian Community.»/nr39 (1985): 144156. Ginsberg, H.L. «Aramaic Studies Today. "/AO£ 42 (1942): 229238. Ginsberg, H.L. «The Composition of the Book of Daniel.» VT4 (1954): 246275. Goldingay, John. Isaiah. NIBCOT. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2001. |
| 31 The edition of Philo’s works used is that of F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker (Loeb Classical Library), which largely follows Cohn and Wendland (Berlin, 1896–1915), and the Loeb translation has been used, with occasional modifications. References to individual treatises by section with the Loeb abbreviations of the titles (which are given in vol. x, p. xxxv f.) 33 This idea of God manifested through His rule and bounty reflects a Hellenistic, rather than a biblical, notion of kingship. 35 For this see F. Cumont’s seminal article, ‘Le Mysticisme astral dans l’antiquite’, Bulletin de l’Académie Royale de Belgique (Classe des Lettres) 5 (1909), 256–286, and A.-J. Festugière, La Révélation, II: Le Dieu cosmique and more briefly, Personal Religion, chap. VII: ‘Man and the World’. 37 For this see E. Bréhier, Les Idées philosophiques et religieuses de Philon d’Alexandrie (Paris, 1925), 83–111; J. Daniélou, Philon d’Alexandrie (Paris, 1958), 153–162. There is also a long discussion in H. A. Wolfson, Philo (Cambridge, Mass., 1947), I. 200–294, 325–359. 43 Cf. Bréhier, 196 ff. See also M. Harl’s important introduction to her edition of Quis Her. (Paris, 1966. Vol. 15 of the Lyon edition of Philo). 44 See H. von Arnim, Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (reprinted Stuttgart, 1968) III. 539. In general, on the contrast between the sophos and the prokopton, see J. M. Rist, Stoic Philosophy (Cambridge, 1969), 90 ff. 46 ‘Tradition and Personal Achievement in the Philosophy of Plotinus’, in E. R. Dodds, The Ancient Concept of Progress (Oxford, 1973), 126. 50 Plotinus: The Enneads, translated by S. MacKenna, revised by B. S. Page, preface by E. R. Dodds, introduction by P. Henry, SJ (Faber and Faber, 1969). This is the translation used here (with occasional modifications), of which E. R. Dodds says: ‘His work must in my opinion rank as one of the very few great translations produced in our time’ (see p. xiii). The Greek text used is the critical edition by P. Henry and H.-R. Schwyzer (Paris and Brussels, 1951–1973). |
| Compare with: Book of Rules of the Holy Apostles, Holy Ecumenical and Local Councils and Holy Fathers With Explanatory Notes Compiled by Priest Georgy Grabbe, Parts 2 and 3; Question 14 and the response to it by Timothy, Bishop of Alexandria. Montreal: Publishing House of the Fellowship of St. Job of Pochaev, 1974, p. 255.//For the attitude of the saints to mentally ill people who committed suicide see: The Life of our Holy Father Parthenius, bishop of Lampsacus, Lives of Saints, Book Six, February, Moscow, 1905, p. 128. On the courageous endurance of any life circumstances: The Life of our Holy Father among the Saints Macarius of Egypt, Lives of Saints, Book Five, January, Moscow, 1904, 598-601.// The Life of our Holy Father Ephrem the Syrian; Lives of St. Gury, Archbishop of Kazan and St. Barsanuphius, Bishop of Tver, Lives of Saints, Book Two, October, Moscow, 1904, p. 75-76. On how people committing suicide justify their actions see: Priest. G. Dyachenko, How suicides justify making attempts on their life and how other people justify suicide once it has been committed, Helper and Protector, Examples of Christian consolation for those unhappy and sorrowing, Part One, Moscow, Published by the Holy Dormition Pskovo-Pechersky Monastery, 1993, p. 322-325. The Bases of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church, Moscow, 2001, p. 100.//On the fault of surrounding people in the act of suicide see: the life of Holy Father Pachomius the Great, Lives of Saints, Book Nine, May, Moscow, 1908, p. 497. On religious feeling and belief in God as means of preventing suicide see: Professor A. Smirnov, ‘Suicide and the Christian View on Life’, The military and naval clergy Herald, No. 9, St. Petersburg, 1914, p. 348.//George Sand, Contes d’une grand-mère, St. Petersburg, Publishing House of I.V. Gubinsky, without date, p. 5-6. St. Theophan the Recluse, Letter 583, Collected Letters, Fourth Edition, Moscow, 1899, p. 58-59. See collected volumes: The Works of our Father among the Saints Theophan the Recluse, Collected Letters, Edition III and IV, Published by the Holy Dormition Pskovo-Pechersky Monastery and “Palomnik” publishing house, 1994.//Compare also: St. Theophan the Recluse, Letter 301, Collected Letters, Second Edition, Moscow, 1898, p. 160-161. See collected volumes: The Works of our Father among the Saints Theophan the Recluse, Collected Letters, Edition I and II, Published by the Holy Dormition Pskovo-Pechersky Monastery and the “Palomnik” publishing house, 1994. |
| J. Thackeray, published in the Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England: Harvard University Press, 1993 reprint of the 1926 edition), pp. 224225. Some defenders of the watch Tower Society’s chronology claim that there is a textual problem with the “fifty years,” pointing out that some manuscripts have “seven years” instead of “fifty” at I, 21, which some earlier scholars felt could be a corruption for “seventy” Modern textual critics, however, have demonstrated that this conclusion is wrong. It has been shown that all extant Greek manuscripts of Against Apion are later copies of a Greek manuscript from the twelfth century CE., Laurentianus 69, 22. That the figure “seven” in these manuscripts is corrupt is agreed upon by all modern scholars. Further, it is universally held by all modem textual critics that the best and most reliable witnesses to the original text of Against Apion are found in the quotations by the church fathers, especially by Eusebius, who quotes extensively and usually literally and faithfully from Josephus’ works. Against Apion I, 21 is quoted in two of Eusebius’ works: (1) in his Preparation for the Gospel, I, 550, 1822, and (2) in his Chronicle (preserved only in an Armenian version), 24, 2925, 5. Both of these works have “50 years” at I, 21. The most important of the two works is the first, of which a number of manuscripts have been preserved from the tenth centuiy C.E. onwards. All modern critical editions of the Greek text of Against Apion have “fifty” (Greek, pentekonta) at Against Apion 1, 21, including those of B. Niese (1889), S. A. Naber (1896), H. St. J. Thackeray (1926), and T. Reinach 8s L. Blum (1930). Niese’ s critical edition of the Greek text of Against Apion is still regarded as the standard edition, and all later editions are based on–and improvements of–his text. A new critical textual edition of all the works of Josephus is presently being prepared by Dr. Heintz Schreckenberg, but it will probably take many years still before it is ready for publication. |
| 415 Clifford R. J. Second Isaiah/Anchor Bible Dictionary. 6 volumes. N. Y, 1992. CD ROM electronic edition: Logos Library System 2.1 f, 1996. 418 France R. Т. Servant of the Lord/New Bible Dictionary. Ed. J. D. Douglas. 2nd ed. Wheaton, IL, 1982, xviii + 1326 p. CD ROM edition, Logos Library System 2.1 f, 1996. Живые и убедительные рассуждения об органичном вхождении четвёртой песни ( Ис. 52:13–53:12 ) в контекст соседних глав книги Исаии см. у И. Орфанитского в его работе: Орфанитский И. А. Пророчество Исаии о страданиях и прославлении Раба Иеговы ( Uc. LII, 13 – LIII, 12 )//Христианское чтение, 1881, 11–12, 599–682 сс.; с. 606–607. 419 См., напр.: Gitay Y. Isaiah, the Book of/Harper’s Bible dictionary. General editor P .J. Achtemeier. 1st ed. San Francisco, 1985, xxii+ 1178 + 16 p.+ 8 p. CD ROM edition: Logos Library System 2.1f, 1996. А. К. Волнин придерживается другого разделения песен: 1) 42:1–7; 2) 49:1–9; 3) 50:4–9; 4) 52:13–53:12 и добавляет сюда ещё 61:1–3 и 63:1–6. (Волнин А. К., с. 331). И. Ф. Григорьев в работе по мессианизму в книге пророка Исаии (Григорьев И. Ф. Пророчества Исаии о Мессии и Его Царстве. Казань, 1901, 332 с.) рассматривает четыре песни Слуги Ягве следующим образом: 1) Ис. 42:1–9 ; 2 ) Ис. 49:1–9; 3 ) Ис. 50:4–11; 4 ) Ис. 52:13–53:12 . В качестве мессианских мест второй и третьей части книги Исаии, говорящих о деятельности Мессии, он, подобно А. К. Волнину, выделяет ещё 61:1–3 и 63:1–6. 420 Lennox R. The Servant of Yahweh in the Old Testament//Theology Today, 1958, Vol. 15, #3, October, p. 315. 424 Систематизация приводится по работе: France R. Т. Servant of the Lord, там же. Более подробный обзор современных мнений и концепций относительно личности Слуги Господня см: Goergen D. J. A Theology of Jesus. Vol. 2. The Death and Resurrection of Jesus. Part One: The Death of Jesus. 2. Jesus, Servant of The Lord. 1988. Electronic edition: http://www.op.org/don/resurr/res2.htm. Различные концепции разбираемого понятия изложены в книге Zimmerli W., JeremiasJ. The Servant of God. Naperville, 1957. |
|
|
