Новият брой

Кн. 55-56 (2017)

Регина Койчева(София) – Старобългарският канон за опело в ръкопис от Библиотеката на князете Чарториски.11–30THE OLD BULGARIAN FUNERAL CANON IN A MANUSCRIPT FROM THE PRINCES CZARTORYSKI LIBRARY
The main objective of this article is to announce a newly discovered copy of the Old Bulgarian funeral canon in the sixth tone, which was known to scholars previously from one Middle Bulgarian and two Serbian service books (trebnici). The newly found manuscript copy was discovered in a service book from the first half of the 16th century, currently held in The Princes Czartoryski Library in Cracow (Poland) as Czart. 11788, and differs substantially from the previously known copies, since it contains a considerably larger number of troparia. The article provides the incipits of all stanzas of the canon according to the available manuscript witnesses. Based on new information from Czart. 11788, the author offers some reflections on previous attempts to reconstruct the canon’s acrostic, and on possible reasons behind the significant differences among the four copies. Much attention is devoted to searching for a putative Byzantine source of the Old Bulgarian canon, which, despite all the effort invested, has yet to be identified. The article contains a checklist of Greek funeral canons in the sixth tone, derived from printed and handwritten sources.
Сергей Темчин(Вильнюс) – Охридский архиепископ Иоанн Каматир как вероятный автор славянской службы Михаилу Воину из Потуки.31–39THE ARCHBISHOP OF OHRID JOHN KAMATEROS AS A POSSIBLE AUTHOR OF THE SLAVONIC LITURGICAL OFFICE FOR ST MICHAEL, THE SOLDIER OF POTUKA
In a previous publication, the author demonstrated that the Slavonic liturgical Office for St. Michael of Potuka is a translation from а lost Greek original: reverse translation of the canon’s incipits into Greek allowed him to reconstruct, with a relative certainty, a fragment from the original Greek acrostic which contained the saint’s name ΜΙΧΑΗΛ. Using the same method in this publication, he reconstructs another fragment of the Greek acrostic, which, in the last two odes of the Canon, features the Greek name IΩΑΝΝΗΣ—apparently, the author’s name. This person may tentatively be identified as the archbishop of Ohrid John Kamateros (after 1183–1215).
Искра Христова - Шомова(София) – Словото за Въведение Богородично от Теофилакт Български и неговият славянски превод.40–73SERMON ON THE ENTRY OF THE THEOTHOKOS INTO THE TEMPLE
The first part of the article discusses the content and stylistic features of the Sermon. It is strictly catechetic and contains no epideictic rhetorical turns. Its central theme is the journey of humankind toward the temple and the role of the Christian temple in a human life. The article’s second part focuses on the Slavonic translation of the Sermon. Its earliest extant copy is found in MS no. 107 from the Zograph monastery on Mount Athos and dates from the last quarter of the 14th century. The Slavic translator demonstrates excellent linguistic competence and a good stylistic sense. He uses some rare lexemes registrated also in liturgical books that had been revised in the 14th century in accord with the Jerusalem Typicon. The vocabulary of the Sermon’s Slavonic translation is thus representative of texts written in the 14th century in Bulgaria and the Balkans. The article includes a publication of the Slavonic text according to Zograph 107, with a parallel edition of its Greek original.
Иван И. Илиев(София) – Фрагментът О ВИДѣНИИ ѤЖЕ ВИДѣ ПРОРОКЪ ДАНИИЛЪ в славянската ръкописна традиция.74–95THE FRAGMENT О ВИДѢНИИ ѤЖЕ ВИДѢ ПРОРОКЪ ДАНИИЛЪ
The subject of this article is the origin and dissemination of a short fragment containing the name of the Prophet Daniel. The author examines the fragment’s relation to the complete translation of St. Jerome’s Commentary on the Book of Daniel and reviews the reception of this Old Testament book in Eastern Europe together with its use in Slavonic miscellanies as a new source for literary interpretations. The fragment appears in Slavonic manuscripts of Russian, Western Russian, and Moldovian origin from the 13th through the beginning of the 17th century. It even appears in a document from the collection of the Greek-Catholic Chapter in Przemyśl (Poland), which further testifies to its wide dissemination. Comparisons of this fragment with other works reveal not only discrepancies in the Greek sources’ rendering of Biblical verses, but also variations in the language preferences of the different translators. The text illustrates a variety of compilation techniques for creating medieval miscellanies and points to preferred sources for creating new works. It is a compilation of heterogeneous works aimed to satisfy readers’ curiosity and prepare its audience for the arrival of the Antichrist
Камелия Христова(София) – За някои имена на Богородица в Словото за Рождество Богородично от Андрей Критски.96–121NAMES OF THE THEOTOKOS IN THE EULOGY OF THE BIRTH OF MARY, MOTHER OF GOD, BY ANDREW OF CRETE
The article presents the names of the Theotokos in the Eulogy of the Birth of Mary, Mother of God, by Andrew of Crete according to the copy by Mardarius of Rila (RM 4/5) dating from 1483. The names are presented in the order they appear in the Eulogy. The author analyzes the names from a linguistic point of view and points out their usage in other Slavonic texts and their particular interpretation in the context of the Eulogy. The Greek equivalents to the Slavonic names are provided together with their biblical proof texts. Andrew of Crete used biblical symbols of the Theotokos. He combined symbols from the Old Testament and the New Testament, thus demonstrating their continuity. The Slavonic editor translated the names, but also showed his own preferences. He rarely used Greek terms without translation and prefers to find Slavonic equivalents. The Slavonic Eulogy includes some of the most frequently used Theotokian titles as well as some specific designations which rarely appear as symbolic names for the Mother of God.
Анета Димитрова(София) – Как да се издават византийски текстове – един дебат от края на XIX и началото на XX век.122–139HOW TO EDIT BYZANTINE TEXTS – A SCHOLARLY DEBATE FROM THE END OF THE 19TH AND THE BEGINNING OF THE 20TH CENTURY
This article goes back to the dawn of Byzantine Studies and takes a look at several periodicals and prefaces to editions from the years 1892–1904. One of the main objectives of the article is to follow the scholarly debate between Karl Krumbacher (1856–1909) and Ludwig Radermacher (1867–1952) on the methodology of editing Byzantine texts. From Krumbacher’s criticism and Radermacher’s response one can single out the main issues in dealing with Byzantine manuscripts. And since Krumbacher – the founder of modern Byzantine studies – was a prolific and diligent reviewer, his critical reviews and other writings reveal his stand on this topic. This is the other, more general purpose of the paper – to collect and summarize Krumbacher’s editorial principles. They set a standard that is still in use in medieval studies today. At the same time, even 120 years later, new manuals on editing medieval texts keep emerging, addressing practical as well as theoretical problems.
Елисавета Мусакова(София) – Дяк Владко и другите (Ръкописи от Софийския книжовен кръг, XVI в.).140–155DJAK VLADKO AND OTHERS
This paper, initially read as a public lecture required by the procedure for academic promotion, brings into focus the manuscripts of the sixteenth-century scribe djak Vladko. They have been the subject of a long-term study, whose conclusive results have not yet been published, and which raises methodological questions about combining paleographical, codicological, and art historical approaches.
The scribe’s name is registered in a Psalter and two Gospels, written with the same cryptograph in the latter manuscripts. As none of the three sources has a precise or fully reliable date of origin, the established chronological range for them is unrealistically wide: between the first quarter of the 16th century and 1598. Hence, it is of vital importance to investigate the watermarks of the key witness, the Psalter, which contains the name of the scribe, the place of origin (Sofia), and even the date, albeit written by a later hand and hardly readable. Unfortunately, the manuscript is inaccessible to the author, since it is kept in the Monastery Iveron on Mt. Athos. In the course of paleographical, art historical and, to a lesser degree, codicological analyses, it became evident that the signed Pljevlja Gospels cannot be attributed to djak Vladko – the signature is most probably a copy, although the reason for such “mystification” is unclear. The Serbian scholars who have studied the manuscript have somehow overlooked the name of the real scribe, djak Dimitar, and his relation to djak Vladko remains obscure. To make the story even more complicated, a later note in a sixteenth-century Triodion identifies a priest Vladko as one of its scribes, while the handwriting reveals similarities with the Psalter and with four more manuscripts that belong to the same group. A crucial problem arises: the difficulty, if not the impossibility, of deciding at which point a changeable handwriting, as observed even in the copies signed by Vladko, ceases to be an identifying feature. In the final analysis, all new valuable knowledge about the Sofia literary center notwithstanding, djak Vladko’s work, rather than being confirmed, turns into a provocation: how to define who is ‘the one’ and who are ‘the others’.
Симонета Пелузи(Венеция) – Един неизвестен фрагмент от „РАЗЛИЧНЇЕ ПОТРҌБЇИ“ на Яков Крайков във венецианската Biblioteca Marciana и някои проблеми около това издание.156–166https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=588457
Марияна Цибранска - Костова(София) – Vis et Sapientia: Studia in honorem Anisavae Miltenova. Нови извори, интерпретации и подходи в медиевистиката. София: Издателски център „Боян Пенев“, Институт за литература – БАН, 2016. 800 с. ISBN 978-619-7372-00-7.167–173https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=588463
Бойка Мирчева(София) – San Clemente di Ocrida: Allievo e maestro. Nell’undicesimo centenario del beato transito (916–2016). A cura di Krassimir Stantchev e Maurizia Calusio. Milano–Roma: Biblioteca Ambrosiana – Bulzoni Editore, 2017. 268 pр. (Slavica Ambrosiana VII), ISBN 978-88-6897-078-9.173–181https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=589994
Ана Стойкова(София) – Агиославика. Проблеми и подходи в изследването на Станиславовия чети-миней (Доклади от едноименната конференция – 21 май 2013 г.). Съставител Диана Атанасова. София: Университетско издателство „Св. Климент Охридски“, 2016. 239 с. ISBN 978-954-07-3920-5.181–191https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=590001
Петко Петков(София) – Искра Христова-Шомова. Бог бе слово. София: Университетско издателство „Св. Климент Охридски”, 2016. 334 с. ISBN 978-954-07-3901-4.192–198https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=590002
Явор Милтенов(София) – Анета Димитрова. Златоструят в преводаческата дейност на старобългарските книжовници. София: Авалон, 2016. 456 с. ISBN 978-954-9704-36-5.198–201https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=590411
Ваня Мичева(София) – Ивона Карачорова. Боянски псалтир. Среднобългарски ръкопис от ХІІІ в. София: Издателство „Чудомира ЕООД“, 2017. 352 с. ISBN 978-619-90778-5-6202–205https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=590413
Климентина Иванова(София) – Ана Стойкова. Свети Георги Победоносец. Агиографски произведения в южнославянската средновековна традиция. София: Изток‒Запад, 2016. 724 с. ISBN 978-619-152-903-2205–210https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=590428
Димо Чешмеджиев(Пловдив–София) – Проф. Иван Божилов (1940–2016).211–220https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=590430
Аделина Германова(София) – Публикации по старобългарска литература и култура, излезли в България през 2016 г.221–258https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=590437