You are on page 1of 212

..

DATED GREEK MINUSCULE MANUSCRIPTS TO THE YEAR 1200

EDITED BY

KIRSOPP LAKE AND SIL VA LAKE

INDICES, VOLUMES I TO X

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, U.S.A.

THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

MDCCCCXLV

I

COPYRIGHT,1945

AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

  • 28 N ewbury Street Boston, Mass.

Made in the United States oj America

COMPOSED

AND

PRINTED

AT

THE

WAVERLY PREsa, INC.

 

BALTIJIlORE , MD.,

U. S.

A.

amico nostro carissimo Carsten Hpeg in rebus nostris palaeographicis et praesertim liturgicis doctissimo

D.D.D.

Editores

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREF

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

Vll

INTRODUCTION ........

'.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

IX

INDICES

I.

Manuscripts Published

...

.

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

. 3

II.

Libraries

 

'

..

19

III. Chronological Order of Manuscripts

 

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

33

IV.

Subjects of the Manuscripts.

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

47

V.

Rulers.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

63

VI.

VII.

SCribes

. Other Persons Mentioned.

....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

..

69

83

VIII.

etc

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

105

IX.

X.

Monasteries, Churches, Cities, Towns, etc

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Ruling Types .................

.

:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

..

115

XI.

Prices of Manuscripts ..........

 

:

135

XII.

Manuscripts Originally Associated with Known

:

Places.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

137

XIII.

Ornamentation

 

..

143

XIV. Manuscripts not yet Included ........................................

 

175

ERRATA •••

••• ...

• •

• • •

• • •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• • • ••

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

.

• •

• • •

 

.

.

.

• •

• •

• •

• •

• ••

183

PREFACE

This collection of manuscript facsimiles was originally suggested by the late E. Byron

Nichols on , Bodley's

Librarian. Many years ago he pointed out to K. Lake that while

any one trained in Latin paleography couId date and localize most minuscules with consider- able accuracy, knowledge of Greek minuscules had lagged far behind.He feh that the fust step in improving this situation must be a study of those Greek minuscules which are de fi nitely dated, and this c ould only be based on as large a collection as of photo-

graphic facsimiles, including the reproduction of the evidence for the dating. Undated manuscripts could then gradually be studied in comparison with this collection. The Curators of the Bodleian, however, did not see the advantage of this idea and since K. Lake was soon called to Leiden the scheme died for a time. Many years later, with the help and encouragement of Prof. Robert P. Blake, the two editors of this series revived it, but limited its immediate scope to the period between the earliest development of minuscule writing and the year 1200. Support for the cost of publication was obtained from the American Academy of Arts and Sciences through Prof. J. M. D. Ford, who was then its president, and from the American Council of Learned Societies, through Dr. J. Waldò Leland. Moreover, Dr. Leland suggested to the Academy that this publication should be made part of a wider scheme, Monumenta Paleographica Vetera, which should be continued indefiniteIy, as suitable material became available. In the prospectus we expressed a hope that we should be ab le to complete the publication of the known dated manuscripts withinour peri od in ten fasciculi, the last of which should also contain the indices. Gradually it became clear that we had underestimated the number of dated manuscripts. We then planned to prepare and publish an eleventh volume in

  • 1940. The war prevented this, for the task of collecting the photographs is stili incomplete

and must wait until it is again possible to work in the libraries of Europe. With the inter- ruption of publication, however, we felt it desirabie to publish the indices of the volumes already completed without further delay and in a more manageable format than it was

possible to use for the plates. This will necessitate another set of indices for the manu- scripts which are stili to come. The desirable prolegomena to the indices will be found in the introduction to this volume, arranged in the same order and under the same headings as the indices themselves. These are followed by a series of "Notes" on points which we did not think appropriate for the descriptions given in the separate fasciculi, or which have been called to our aUention by correspondents and reviewers. A list of errata comes at the end of this volume. In conclusion, we wish to express our deepest thanks to the many friends who, over a long period of years, have improved our work By their criticisms and suggestions; to the librarians of the various collections which we have studied, who have invariably made our task as easy as possible; and especially to Prof. Robert P. Blake and Dr. Milton V. Anastos, who have devoted many tedious hours to reading and checking these indices.

South Pasadena, California September, 1944

vii

KIRSOPp

LAKE

SILVA

LAKE

INTRODUCTION

Before taking up the separ!].te indices it seems appropriate to state our generaI purpose in making this collection of photographic reproductions. We wished to provide a basis for a more systematic and accurate dating and ,localizing of Greek minuscule manuscripts. It iB true that Dr. T. W. Allen, in his magistral Notes on Abbreviations in Greelc Minuscules, often expressed his disapprovaI of 'paleography from photographs'. Nothing, of course, compensates for not seeing an actual manuscript, but it is also true that, for most purposes, a full-sized facsimile is a valuable substitute. It may impossible to pass correct judgment from a photograph as to whether certain marks are imperfect letters or flaws in the parchment, but it is certainly possible to judge whether or not the scribe of one manu- script a180 wrote another. Without photography memory is the only guide on such a point, ---and a poor one.

l.

MANUSCRIPTS

P UB LISHED

This index gives, in the order in which they were printed, the manuscripts already in- cluded in Dated Manuscripts. There is no reason for this order, except that for accidental causes we were able to visit the libraries concerned in that particular sequence. In some cases we were forced, usually by lack of time, to finish our work on a second or third visit and this is reflected in the otherwise irrational order of publication. Our originaI pIan can be seen by combining Index I-what we have completed-with Index XIV-the list of manuscripts which we have not yet published but hope ultimately to include in this series.

  • 2. LIBRARI ES

The most recent lists of catalogues of Greek manuscripts in various libraries those of Otmar Schissel, Kataloge Griech. H8S., and of A. Ehrhard, Uberlieferung und Bestand der hagiographischen und homelitischen Literatur der griechischen Kirche, I Teil, Die I Band, pp. xx-lviii, Leipzig, 1937, (T.U., 50, 5). Another useful generaI list may be found in V. Gardthausen, Sammlungen und Gataloge griechischer Handscriften, By zantinisches Archiv, Beft 3, Leipzig, 1903. Some of the more important of the indi- v idua I catalogues which we have used are listed

Athens, The National Library. The main catalogue is the KaTaÀO')IoO" TWP XELpoì'Pacf>wP TTJO"

EOPL KTJO" BtflÀLOOTJKTJO", by J. and A. Sakkelion, Athens, 1892. It should, however, be noted

tha t many manuscripts have been acquired since tnis date.

They were at first catalogued

as 's upplementary manuscripts', but in recent years the practice of the library has been to assign to them numbers above twenty thousand. For instance, anyone wishing to see our manuscript 32 should ask for manuscript 20,641, not for Suppl. 641.

Mt. Athos. There are now twentyl independent monasteries on this peninsula. The-

  • 1 The ' Laura, Vatopedion, I veron, Chiliandari, Dionysiou, Coutloumousiou, Pantocratoros, Xeropotamou, Zographou, Dochiariou, CaracaIIou, Philotheou, Simonos Petra, PauIou, Stauroniceta, Xenophontos, Gregoriou, Esphigmenou, Panteleemonos, and Costamonitou. Formerly there were more monasteries, which have graduaIIy been absorbed by the greater foundations. Such were, for instance, the monastery of the Amalfitans which was

taken over by the Laura, the monastery of S. Demetrios which was absorbed by Vatopedi, or the monastery oi

S . Basi!,

perhaps also called the monastery of the Calabrians.

More important than some of the actual monasteries was, until recently, the Scete of S. Andrew, near Caryes. This belonged to Vatopedi, which leased it to a body of Russian monks who rebui!t it and gave it a magnificent

ix

x

INTRODUCTION

oreticalIy each has a library, but in practice a great _many are not important. Simopetra

has no library, as it lost alI its books in the fire of 1891, but these lost volumes are included in the generaI Catalogue ofthe Greek Manuscripts on Mt. Athos, by the late Prof. S. Lambros,

Cambridge, 1895 and 1900.

Only the monasteries of the Laura and Vatopedi refused him

permission to include their inanuscripts. These were later catalogued by Chrysostom of the Laura and Arcadios of Vatopedi. After the death of Chrysostom his work was taken over by another Lauriote, Dr. Spyridon. With the help of a generous grant from the late Mr. J. P. Morgan, these catalogues were published in 1924 and 1925, and ' are vols xi and xii of the Harvard Theological Studies. A supplementary catalogue, based partially on the work of Chrysostom, has been published by Sophronios Eustratiades, formerly Archbish9P of LeontopoIis, and gives the hagiographical references omitted by Arcadios and Spyridon. Eustratiades has also published a list of the manuscripts at the Scete of Kausokalybia, prepared by Eulogios Kurilas of the Laura. Speaking generally, anyone who has the catalogues of Lambros, Arcadios, Spyridon, and Eustratiades is adequately equipped for the study of ,manuscripts on Mt. Athos, and each library is welI arranged and pleasant to work in. The chief drawback is at Vatopedi, where Arcadios has quite rightly introduced a new arrangement and numeration of manuscripts but has unfortunately not included the old numbers, so that references made by other authors tomanuscripts in this Iibrary are entireIy useless.

Berlin, Preussische Staatsbibliothek. In listing the manuscripts in this library we have used a double numeration. The first numbers given are those of the catalogue which is in generaI use, Verzeichnis der griech. Bss. d . Kgl. Bibl. zu Berlin, voI. I, 1890, by W. Studemund and L. Cohn; voI. II, 1897, by von C. de Boor. The numbers in parentheses

refer to location on the shelves of the library (e.g. Gr.

Oct.) or to separate colIections (e.g.

6

Ham., referring t o the collection acquired by ,Bismarck from the Duke of Hamilton).

Florence, Biblioteca Laurenziana. The catalogue still in use is that of A. M. Bandini,

Catalogus codd. mss. bibliothecae Mediceae Laurentianae, 1764-1770; supplements by E. Rostagno and N. Festa, Studi italici di filolAJgia classica, VoI I, 1893, pp. 129-232, and by

  • E. Rostagno in the s ame publication, voI. II, 1894, p. 154, and v oI. VI, 1898, pp. 129-166 .

This library consists, in the main, of fOUT collections:

l. The library of Cosimo the Elder, greatly enlarged by Lorenzo the Magnificent who -sent J. Laskaris to Constantinople to colIect manuscripts. After the falI of the Medici

the library passed into the possession of the Convent of S. Marco, but in 1508 Cardinal

  • G. G. dei Medici (later Pope Leo X) recovered the manuscripts and for a time the collection

was ' housed in the Villa Medici in Rome. After his death the volumes were again returned

to Florence and Michelangelo built the beautifullibrary in which they are still to be found. The building was completed and opened in 1571.

2 . 1,'he old library of S. Marco, based on the collection of Nicc olo dei Niccoli.

3.

The 'Conventi Soppressi', consisting of manuscripts turned ove r to this library when

many small c onven ts

disappeared.

church and librar y .

Aft er the revolution a great part of it s library was sold, and some of its best manuscripts '

are now in the collection of MI'. John Garrett in Baltimore.

Valuable information about the monasteries and the absorption of some of the older foundations, especially by the Laura and Vatopedi, is given in To A-ywv Opou, G. Smyrnakes, Atbens, 1903; in H X<PUOV'f/tr()(T TOV A"Ytov Opotr AOovtr, Ko smas VIachos , Volo, lll03; in Les Actes de Laura, Archives de l'Athos, G. Millet, Part I, Paris, 1937; and in the numerous publications of the late Mgr. Louis Petit.

INTRODUCTION

Xl

4. 'Acquisti', acquisitions from various sources, including manuscripts from the collection

of Libri (see Bibliomania, Max Sander, Journal oj Criminal Law and Criminology, xxxiv,

3, 1943, pp. 158 fi.), which had been in the Ashburnham Library.

Grottaferrata, La Badia. This monastery in the Alban Hills is the most northerly point reached by the Greek monks of South Italy, when they were driven from their originaI homes by the Arab invasions of the tenth century and later. Among these monks was Nilus of Rossano, who first went to one of the monasteries in the district of the Mercurion (probably not far north of Seminara on the western slope of the Aspromonte 2 ), then re- turned to Rossano and built or rebuilt the monastery of S. Adriano. Stilliater, about 976, he was driven from this region by fear of the Saracens and led a little body of monks north- ward. He stopped for some time at Vallelucio, a dependency of Capua, on the Rapido not far from Cassino, where the abbot gave him a building for the use of himself and his fol- lowers. The next move was to Serperi, near Gaeta. Finally the group reached Grotta- ferrata, only a few miles south of Rome. 3 The monastery at Grottaferrata, which is now the only remaining Greek monastery in Italy, was founded in 1004. Nilus was its first abbot and thc first af a successian of scribes and scholars to work there. The library of his time, however, has been somewhat scattered. The greater part was first transferred to S. Basilio in Urbe and then to the Vatican Library, forming the col- lection of Codices Cryptenses in the Vatican Library. The same is true for most of the volumes of a second library, collected by Alexander Farnese when he was abbot in commenda. The final and present library of the monastery was for the most part the collection of Pietro

Cardinal Menniti, made in 1696 or shortly thereafter. 4 Notices of the

manuscripts which

remain at Grottaferrata are to be found in A. Rocchi, Codd. Cryptenses, and de Coenobio

Cryptensi.

Jerusalem, Library of the Greek Patriarchate. The present library, since the time of the Patriarch Nicodemus (1883-1890), has been in the monaste!y of the Holy Sepulchre. In addition to the originaI collection of the Patriarchate it includes the libraries of the monasteries of S. Saba, Mar Ibrahim, the Holy Cross in Jerusalem, and the Constanti- nopolitan house of the Holy Sepulchre. It was catalogued by A. Papadopoulo Kerameus, IepouoÀvp,'TLK1) B,{3À'O()1)K1), 7 vols., St. Petersburg, 1891 fi., with a supplement by Koikylides,

Xetpo-ypafjJwll T1)U IepouoÀvp,'TLK1)U B,{3Àw(1)K1JU, Jerusalem, 1899, and another by

  • P. Thomzen, Unbekannte gr. Hss. der Patr. Bibl., zu Jerusalem, B.Z., 22, 1913, pp.

fio

Leningrad, The State Public Library.

Catalogue des manuscripts grecs de la bibl. impériale,

  • E. de Muralt, 1864.

Later additions are noted in the Otcety of the Library.

London, The British Museum.

Catalogue oj Ancient Manuscripts in the Britislt Museum,

  • E. M;. Thompson, London, 1881 fi., and a long series of Catalogues oj Additions to tlte Mss.

Messina, R. Biblioteca Universitaria. '

Catalogues are Catol. dei msS. gr. della bibl. uni-

2.1. T. S., 1903, p. 537.

3 The Greek name of this village is given both as rpovTTa<j>Eppara and KpV1f"Ta<PEppara and it may be suspected that these are attempts to Grecise an ltalian word. For the evidence that there was a village here belore the

foundation of the monastery see J. B. de Rossi, Ricerche arch pp. 195 ff.

. ...

4 J.

T. S., 1904, p.

nel territorio TU8culano, Boll. di arch. crist.,

Xll

lNTRODUCTION

ver8itaria di Me88ina, Studi ital. di filol. class., voI. V, 1897, pp. and Dei codd. gr. del monastero del S. Salvatore, pp. 487-514 of the same publication, both by G. Fraccaroli; and Codices graeci monasterii Messanensis S. Salvatoris, by A. Mancini, Atti della R. Acad- emia xxii, Messina, 1907. Invaluable information about this library is also given by Giovanni Cardinal Mercati, Per la 8toria dei mss. greci, Studi e Te8ti, 68, 1935. The centre of Greek intellectuallife in Sicily was the monastery of S. Salvatore at Mes- sina, founded, or restored, by Bartholomew of Simeri in about at the suggestion of Queen Adelaide. 5 This great library was enriched by that of Constantine Laskaris, who bequeathed his collection to the clergy of Me.ssina. Many of the volumes later passed to other European libraries, but Mancini lists 177 Greek manuscripts as stilI in Messina.

Meteora.

EKOEULU 7raÀaLOì'pacpLKwP KaL TEXPLKWP EPEVPWP EP

ET7j 1908 KaL 1909, N. A. Bees, Athens, 1910.

TaLU p. o paLU

TWP METEWPWP KaTa

Ta

Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana. Catalogus codd. gr. bibl. Ambrosi an ae , 2 by Aem. Martini and Dom. Bassi.

vols., Milan, 1906,

Moscow, The Historical Museum. The majority of the manuscripts now housed in this great museum were once in the library of the Holy Synod. Most of these had been co] - lected at vari ous times by men who went to the Greek monasteries, and especially to those on Mt. Athos. One of the most important of these collectors was Arsenii Suchanof, who was sent to Mt. Athos by the Czar Alexis (1645-1676). The catalogue which we have quoted as 'Vlad' is the Sistematiceskoye opisanie rulconisei Moskovskoi sinodalnoi Bibliotelci,

Cast I, Greceskiya

rakopisi, Moscow, 1894, by the Archin;t and rit e VIadimir. The numbers

in parentheses are those of previous catalogues.

Naples, R. Biblioteca Nazi onale. Th is ]ibrary is the successo r of the Biblioteca Borboni c a, which had a variegated history betweetl 1495 ànd its final establishment in Naples in 1804. The originallibrary of Frederié II was partly destroyed in 1495, partly sent to France and Spain . The present library is the foundation of Pope Paul III (Farnese) in Rome, whence it was taken to Parma, and thence to Capo de Monte; in 1804 it was united with the Bibli- oteca Palatina of Ferdinand II, and the whole was called the Biblioteca Borbonica. The catalogue is that of Salvo CyrilIus, Codices graeci m88. regiae bibl . Borbonicae, II, Naples, Some additions to this are given by V. di Falco, Dei codici Napolitani non compresi nel catalogo di Cirillo, Rivista Indo-Greco-Italica, xiv, pp. 101':'}06, 1930.

Oxford, the BodIeian Library. The manuscripts of most of the colleges have now been deposited in this library, for which three catalogues are useful: A summary catalogue oj

w estern manuscripts in th e Bodleian Library at Oxford, 1895 fI.,

by Falconer Madan and

  • H. H. Craster; Catalogi codicum m8S bibliothecae Bodleianae, 1853

seqq., and Catalogus ' "

codicum m8S qui in collegiis aulisque Oxoniensibus hodie adservantur, both by H. O. Coxe. The catalogue of the Wake collection at Christ Church is by G. W. Kitchin, Dean of Durham, Catalogus codicum m8S qui i n bi blÙJteca Aedis Chr isti apud Oxonienses adservantur,

Oxford, 1867.

Paris, Bibli othèque Nati onale. The b asic catalogue f or t h is library is

the Inventaire som-

mai re d es m8S. gr. de la bibl . n at. , H.

Om ont, Pari s , 1886-1888, but the }ists of the

Supple-

6 See K. Lake, J.

T . S., 1904, pp. 'l7 ff.

INTRODUCTION

Xlll

ments Grecs, and of the Nouvelles acquisitions are important. Older catalogues of consider- able value are the Catalogi bibl. regiae pars secunda complectens codices m8S graecos, Paris, 1740; and the Bibliotheca Coisliniana, olim Segueriana, B. de Montfaucon, Paris, 1815. For the origin of the manuscripts in the older collection, a priceless guide is Omont's Missions archéologiques francaises en Orient aux xvii et xviii siécles, Paris, 1902.

Patmos, Monastery of St. John. The catalogue of this Library was made by J. Sakkelion, Bt{lXto8'T/K'T/ IIaTJ.LtaK'T/, Athens, 1890. Additions were published by the deacon Callimachos

in EKKXeUtaUTtKOU Cf>apou, 10-17, 1912-1918.

Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. As are most of the other great libraries, the Vatican collection is made up 'of many groups oI manuscripts which were originalIy in

..

different places and were separately catalogued. Our reproductions include manusc'ripts from eight of these earlier collections, and although alI are now included in the new card catalogue it has seemed to us desirable to enumerate them separately and to give the names of the chief catalogues for each.

  • 1. Codici Vaticani Greci . This collection includes alI the manu s cripts which were in the

Vatican Library beIore 1622and many which were acquired at later dates. Among others it contains the manuscripts oI Fulvio Orsini, oI Cardinal Carafa, of Cardinal SirIeto, and the manuscripts which once Iormed the library of San Basilio in Urbe. These last had been gathered from South ltalian monasteries by Pietro Cardinal Menniti in · 1696 and were acquired for the Vatican Library by Pope Pius VI, 1755-1799. A new edition oI the catalogue of this whole collection, Codices Vaticani Graeci, was begun by G.Mercati and P. Franchi de' Cavalieri, who published the first volume in 1923.

  • 2. Codici Palatin i . This collection was once in Heidelberg. In 1622 it was

given by

Maximilian, first Duke oI Bavaria, to Pope Gregory XV and at a later date Pope Pius VII returned twenty-six of the Greek manuscripts to Heidelberg. The most useful catalogue

is that of H. Stevenson, Sr., Codices m8S Palatin i Graeci, Rome, 1885, pp. xvii-xxvii.

  • 3. Codici Urbinati Gr. This is the collection of the Counts of Urbino, bought in 1658

by Pope Alexander VII. The catalogue is Codd. Urbinates graeci, C. Stornajolo, Rome,

1895, published as a part of the giIt made to Pope Leo XIII on the occasion of his jubilee.

  • 4. Codici Reginensi Gr. This collection includes 190 manuscripts which belonged to

Queen Christina of Sweden and were purchased by Pope Alexander VIII in 1689. The ca talogue is Codd. m8S. graeci Reginae Suecorum et Pii PP II, H. Stevenson, Sr., Rome, 1888.

  • 5. Codici Pii PP Il. Theseare 55 manuscripts which were a part of the private collec-

tion of Pope Pius II (1458-1464). At his death his collection became the property of the

Church oI San Silvestro and those manuscripts now in the Vatican Library were purchased

by Pope Clement XI (1667-1670). They were included with the manuscript s of Queen C hristina in the catalogue by H. Stevenson, Sr., mentioned above. 6 . Codi ci Ottobon i ani . These manuscripts were a part of the collection of Cardinal SirIet o (p os t 1651 ) , purchased by Cardinal Colonna in 1588 and s old by him to t he Duke of Altemps in 1611. Later Pope Alexander VIII (1689-1691 ) b ought these m a nuscripts and placed them in the palace of the Ottoboni. They were finalIy purchased for the Vatican

Library in 1740, by Pope Benedict

XIV. The catalogue is Codd. mss. gr. Ottobon i ani, E.

Feron and F. Bàttaglini, Rome, 1893.

  • 7. Codici Barberini. P ope Pius X added thi s collection to the Va t ican Libra ry in 1902.

The catalogue is L

is t e s ommai re d es mss . grecs d e la bi bl. Bar b., Seym our de Ricci , Revue

des B i blio thèques , v oI. 17, 1907.

XIV

,

INTRODUCTION

8. Codici Chigiani. This collection was purchased by Pope Pius XI in 1922. The cata- logue is CO'dices greci Chisiani et Borgiani, P. Franchi de Cavalieri, Rome, 1927. The pamphlet Bibliothèques Pontificales, by Eugene Cardinal Tisserant, Paris, 1936, re- printed from the Dictionnaire de sociologie is of the greatest assistance for the history of these collections and has a great many references to the more obscure catalogues and to articles in learned periodicals.

Venice, Biblioteca San Marco. The basic catalogue is Bibliotheca 1nSS ad S. Marci Vene- tiarum, G. Valentinelli, Venice, 1868. There are older catalogues by A. M. Zanetti, and

  • A. Bongiovanni in 1740, and by I. A. Mingarelli, Graeci codices manuscr. apud Nanianos

pairicios V enetos asservati, Bologna, 1784.

Vienna, N ationalbibliothek. The catalogue in generaI use is Catalogus sive recensio specialis omnium mss graecorum necnon linguarum orientalium augustiss. bibl. Caesareae Vindob.,

  • D. de NesseI, Vienna and Nuremburg, 1690. A second edition by Fr. Kollar was published

in Vienna in with a supplement in 1790. Another catalogue is that by P. Lambecii Hamburgensis, Commentariorum de augustiss. bibl. Caesarea Vindobonensi, lib. 1- VII, ed. altera, @pera et studio A. Fr. Kollarii, Vienna, 1766-1782.

3.

CHRONOLOGY

The c ol ophons which date our manuscripts usually state the year of the world and many also give one or more of the following details: the year of the indiction, the day of the week, the day of the month, the cycle of the sun, the cycle of the .moon, the date of Easter, the name of the reigning emperor or empress, the name of some other important personage such as a member of the royal family, a patriarch, or a bishop. Finally, some contemporary event may be mentioned of which we already know the date from other sources. Among the manuscripts which we have published the dates are given as follows 5a :

219 give the year of the world and of the indiction

  • 56 have the year of the world, but not of the indiction 4 have the year of the indiction but not of the world

  • 67 have the year of the world, the year of the indiction, the day of the month, and the day of the week 6

  • 42 give other evidence for the date, such as, for example, the point at which in a list of emperors the originaI hand stops and a later hand continues,1 or the first year mentioned in a series of Easter dates.

Christian writers fixed the date of creation as September l, 5508 years before rtte birth of Christ. 8 Thus the subtraction of 5508 from the year given in a manuscript provides the year of our era, with one variation: since the Byzantine year began on September l and ours does not begin until January l, 5509 must be subtracted if the manuscript is dated between September and December. The indiction was a recurrent period of fifteen years, which Diocletian accepted in 297 A. D. as the basis of taxation, but which had been in existence much earlier. 9

s, The rem a inder are not da t ed, but are by scribes who have written other dated ms s .

  • 6 In 6 of these manuseripts the year of the indiction and the year or the world do not agree. the day of the week and month eonfirm the year of the world, in 4 that of the indietion.

    • 7 See for instanee, fase. I, ms. 1.

In !i! instances

  • 8 For the reasoning by which this date was reached see de Pascha computus and the article on Christmas in the Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics.

INTRODUCTION

xv

If both the day of the month and the day of the week are mentioned they are a vaIuable check for the accuracy of the year given, as modern chronoiogicai tabies make it easy to check their congruity.lO The cycle of the sun is the period of twenty-eight years after which the day of the month again falls on the same day of the week that it did in the first year of the cycle. The cycle of the moon is the period of nineteen years after which the full moon recurs on the same day of the month that it did in the first year of the cycle. This Iast was, oi çourse, the lm- portant cycle for the reckoning of Easter and of the other moveable feasts. The date of Easter in a given year is not often stated in manuscript colophons, but many manuscripts, espeeially Psalters, give tables stating the date of Easter in a series of consec- utive years. This we have used to date manuscripts which are not otherwise dated, for it is a fair presumption that the earliest date mentioned is that of the year in or just before which the manuscript was written. Some points of interest may be noted in the chronological distribution of the manuscripts during our period, 835-1200. The production of dated minuscules was relatively smaH untii the second haH of the tenth century, when there was a distinct increase in numbers. This went on, although not with complete consistency, untii the peak was reached in 1070. At this time there was a steep decrease, foHowed by a short increase, another decrease and a second increase. At the end of the tweHth century, however, only a few more were being written than at the end of the tenth and not nearly so many as during the eleventh. This may reflect only a change in the custom of dating manuscripts, not in their pr oduction in generaI, but we are inclined to think that this is not so and we are confirmed in our opinion by recent work on the group of manuscripts of the New Testament known as the Ferrar GrouplOa. There are ten of these and two are dated, one in 1052, and the other, now lost, in 1200 or 1282. Of the eight which are not dated, one, much the latest of all, was copied in England in the fifteenth century. By comparing the remaining seven with our reproduc- tions in Dated Manuscripts we have reached the opinion that at least two were written in the and that none of the others were written after the end of the eleventh. However, it will be found that such accomplished paleographers as C. R. Gregory and F. H. A. Scrivener ascribed most of these manuscripts to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. It is our generaI impression, therefore, that scholars have tended to err on the ' side of con- servatism and the twelfth century has been a "catch-aH" for manuscripts which should have been dated in the eleventh or even in the tenth. Finally, it is to be noted that although the production of manuscripts falls int o periods, these do not exactly coincide with centuries . Thus the most productive peri od , corre- . sponding more or less to the Macedonian era and to the hse of the great monasteries on Mt. Athos, is 970-1070, not 1000- 1100. We also believe that an earlier period of produc- tivity may be discerned, beginning in the last quarter oI the ninth century and ·continu ing to t he middle of the tenth. Dated manuscripts in this period, however, are t oo few to aiford conclusive evidence .

not always correspond. This discrepancy occurs in !tI of our manuscripts. In lO the year of the world is too early for that of the indiction given, in 11 it is too late, Moreover, in Il! instances the mistake on one side òr the other is only a si.ngle year. It seems to us that this points clearly to the human tendency to date letters written im- mediately after the beginning of the year with the date of the preceding year, though there are probably a few cases where the scribe simply made a slip of the pen as in the four manuscripts (158, 349, 355, 374), in which the addition or omission o f an iota would produce the correct result. IO We have found that for this purpo se the best small guide is Hans /Lietzmann's Chronologische Tafeln.

lO.

K.

an d

S.

l ake ,

Family 13,

St udies and

Documents, vo l. xi, 1941.

XVI

INTRODUCTION

4.

SUBJECT

MATTER

The subjects as we have given them in this index are, ior the most part, seli-explanatory. We were perhaps wrong in deciding against publishing the details of the content of each manuscript, but this series was originally planned for the use of paleographers and for them extensive cataloging seemed unnecessarily expensive both of time and space. We have in generaI neglected orthographical consistency in favor oi English custom and generaI convenience. For instance, we have written Pentecost and Pentecostarion rather than Pentekostarion, Porphyrogennete rather than Porphyrogenitus, and have been con-

sciously and unrepentantly inconsistent in transcribing Greek surnames sometimes by their Latin form s, s ometimes by their English. Only occasionally, in the case oi unfamiliar I name s, h av e we attempted a more correct representation oi the Greek. Thus we h a ve used the forms Gregory, Theodore, Maximus, Peter , Paul, John, and Palaeologue. Chrysostom is in a s omewhat different clas sification. In early manuscripts he is gen- erally descr,ibed as John Archbishop oi Constantinople, the "G olden-mouthed" (Chrysos- tom). "Golden-mouthed" however soon became a proper name and it is surely pedantic to write out t he full t itle. Another name causes special confusion. In the sixth century, in the monastery on Mt. Sinai, a monk named John wrote a book describing the various grades oi Christian progress in virtu e as a ladder of thirty rungs. This book was called "the Ladder", and the author bec ame blOWIi as "John oi the Ladder" (Iw a vv7]<T KX'J.LaKO<T). In Latin the author

became Joh a nnes Climacus,

and this in turn was translated into English as John Climax.u

In add ition to variati ons in the spelling oi names there has been a constant confusion

in older books, especially in catalogues, in the use oi the word "evangelion", which no t

unnaturally was used ior any manuscript oi the Gospels. In mòdern times, ho wever,

the

Greeks have intr 6duced the sound practice oi calling a manuscript or book which gives

the four Gospels as separate units a "tetraevangelion", reserving "evangelion" f or one

divided into the lections used in the Greek Church.

Similarly, "praxapostolos" is used fo r

the straight text of the Acts and Epistles, "apostolos" for the lectionary versio n .

12

With some hesitation we have listed all manuscripts oi lives of saints under the word "bioi", a lth ough in preparing our introductions we oiten copied the term in the catalogue

  • I l we were using and called a manuscript a "menaeon", or a "menologion".1 3 In a few cas e s

  • I we have defined a collection of lives as "Metaphrast", referring to the grea t co llection made by Symeon the Logothete, or Metaphrast. We warn our readers, h owever, not t o t rust this as final evidence that such

manuscripts do not contain some li ves which are not to

be found in Symeon's collection. The chronological dlstribution of manuscripts by subjects has its interest. Very iew are not either theological or monastic in character, and almost all oi these bel ong to the early period: 14

.

  • 11 See Krumbacher, Geschichte der Byzantinischen L i tt eratuT, 2nd ed . , 1897, p. 143, anc;l Migne, PatTo Gr., 88. According to Krumbacher was used as John's name, but we a re doubtful as to whether this was ever true in Greek.

  • 12 Our practice in the lise of th,ese terms is confused by the fact that in our introductions we usually followed the term given in the catalogue. In compiling the index, however, we have attempted to correct th ese incon- sistencies.

  • 13 "Menaeon" should probabl y be used for a collection of lives arranged month b y month and "menologion" for an index of saints days, such as is often found at the end of biblical manUscripts.

    • 14 AlI 01 t hese manuscripts wh ich are dated before 954 formed a part of the library of Arethas of Patras and

Caesarea.

  • A. D. 888

  • A. D. 895

XVIl

5.

INDEX

OF

RULERS

In listing the Byzantine l")llers we have had to choose between the practice of Gibbon and that of later writers such as Bury or Krumbacher. We prefer the former, but since the latter far more widely in use we have followed it. Wherever the variation between the two is confusing we have tried to state the problem in a footnote. For example, there is the question as to who should be called the Emperor Constantine VIII. Gibbon gives this title to Constantine son of Romanus Lecapenus, and the colophon of our ms 137 gives him the imperial title. However, in enumerating the emperors, Buryand Krumbacher have ignored this Constantine; in their system Constantine VIII is Constantine the brother of Basil Bulgaroctonos.

6.

INDEX

OF

SCRIBES

The number of names which are common to many

is ' rather small.

In our list

15 A point of some interest is that manuscripts of the Iectionary are fairly Dumerous in eastern Iibraries, but rare in those in ItaIy. In our Iast four fascicuIes, which primariIy contain manuscripts now found in Rome, Florence, Naples, Messina, and Grottaferrata, there is only one dated Iectionary. 16 The most complete list of known scribes of Greek manuscripts, uncial as weII as minuscuIe, covering the entire period down to the sixteenth century, is the work of Marie Vogel. This wa s later absorbed into the materiaI originaIIy colIected by V. Gardthausen for the 3rd edition of his Handbuch dfJT Griechischen Palaeographic, pub- lished in 1909 as Beih eft 3 3 zum Centralblatt filr Bibli othekawcslm. Some doubt attaches to a part of Dr. Vogel's identifications of manuscripts written by scribes of on e name, since these were made withoutphotographic , help. For instance, she beIieves that our manuscripts and (both written by Athanasius) were the work of the same scribe. To our eyes this is more than doubtfuI, aIthough there is some resembIance between the hands and we believe that the tw o manuscripts may have come from the same scriptorium.

XVIlI

INTRODUCTION

of names only fourteen 17 are found more than six times and onÌy 'five more than ten. Doubtless tbis was a ,matter of fashion. Moreover, it must be remembered that monks often changed from one name to anotber as they progressed tbrough tbe different grades of ecclesiastical or monastic orders. 18 By far the most popular name is "John", and it is common tbroughout our periodo On the otber hand "Theophanes" occurs only in tbe eleventh century; "Bartholomew" only in the twelfth; "Leo" once in the ninth, never in the tenth, and nine times in tbe eleventh and twelftb centuries. Moreover Bartholomew and Leo seem to appear almost exclusively as names of ltalian scribes. The majority of scribes state tbat tbey are monks,19 and most of tbem add expressions of humility or of a sense of sin. These adjectives are unimportant, but a higher value attachs to tbe occasionaI statement of some professional qualification. These are not so common as statements of monastic status, but "notary" or "calligrapher" are found fairly frequently, and another title which may be professional is "musiator".

7.

INDEX

OF

OTHER

PERSONS

In tbis list we have included tbe names of aH persons mentioned in our manuscripts who are not either rulers or scribes. The scribe often mentions in a colophon tbe names of patriarchs , abbots, fellow-monks, patrons or patronesses, or members of his family. Many are names taken , from later notes in manuscripts and these are frequently not mentioned in our descriptions in the introductions . In this index the number of a plate is given only when the name under discussion is to be found on tbat plate.

8.

INDEX

OF MONASTERIES

A series of small problems arose in relation to the names of m onasteries. For example, tbe great Constantinopolitan monastery of St. John tbe Baptist is generaIly caHed "The Studium" and the custom is so well established that it cannot be abandoned advantageously. Its real name, however, is tbe. monastery TWP };TOVOLOV, tbat is to say, tbe monastery of the Studites or "of those of Studius" .20 Otber monasteries present similar difficulties. It is the custom to distinguish among the houses on Mt. Athos by prefixing the phrase TJ a'}'w J,tOPTJ eitber to the name of the founder or of the patron saint of tbe particular monastery, but there are deviations from this rule. For example, the oldest monastery is usuaJJy

17

Athanasius, ' , , , , ' , , ,

 

, , ' , ..

,

,

.

,

'

,

.

'

,

,

,

,

,

,

'

,

'

,

,

,

.

'

,

,

,

,

'

,

,

,

,

'

,

,

9

Bartholomew,

, ,

,

..

'

,

, , , , ,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

, , .. ,

,

,

.

,

,

.

,

,

.

.

'

,

" ,

..

,

'

,

,

,

8

(twelfth century)

 

'

'

'

'

'

'

, "

 

lO

6

Basi!.

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

.

,

,

.

,

.

.

'

'

.

' , , ... '

'

,

.

'

,

,

,

,

,

.

'

,

,

.

.

'

.

,

,

.

.

..

 

,

(eleventh and twelfth centuries)

Constantine, , , , , ..

,

, ..

,

,

,

.

,

,

,

.

,

,

,

.

.

..

,

.

,

,

,

,

.

.

,

,

,

l

••

'

,

,

,

,

John""""""

 

"

",

,

...

 

.

,."""

 

"

,."

 

,

.

• "",

34

Leo """""

"""", . "",."""""

 

"", •• ""

 

••

""

••

""

lO

Luke",

""

 

"

, '", . "

 

",.

"."

 

"

7

 
 

,

   

,. ,

 

"

Nichephorus,

Nicholas,. , . ,

'

".,

.

"".""."" , . . .. , . , , , , ..

, . ,

, ..

.

'

, , , ...

,

.

.

'

 

'

,

,

,

, ...

.

.

.....

'

'

, ..

. , , ....

'

,

.

.

,

,

..

.

..

.

,

,

.

.

.

""

,

,

.

7

7

18

Pau! .......

, .

, , .. ....

, .....

 

, ...

 

,

"

, , ,

,

,

 

,.,

 

7

 

' ..

.

 

'

 

'

'

7

 

. ",.""" ,

, ...........

,

,.

   

,

.

.

,

,

 

,

,

,

.

 

'

 

'

"

Peter , Theodore, ,

.. Theophanes, , , , ,

 

, .... , , , ,

,

.

,

.

,

.

,

,

,

,

,

,

, , .. .

,

, ...

.

, ..

'

,

'

. .

, ..

 

..

(e1eventh

and twelfth centuries)

7 (early eleventh century)

18 This Cact has probably too often been overlooked in tracing m a nuscripts written by one mano

" It is to be remembered that a monk was not necessariIy a dwelIer in a monastery, and that the fact that he

is a monk neitherimplies nor excludes ecclesiastical orders.

A monk might be a priest, but a parish priest was

almost invariably a married man and not a monk. Moreover a monk might live in his own house ratber than in a monastery, regardless of whether he was or was not also a priest. The vows, not tbe re si dence, make tbe monk. 2Q Studius was probably a Roman of the fifth century.

INTRODUCTION

XIX

referred to as

Àalipa

and only rarely as

T}

/J.f:'YLCTTT}

T}

a-yLa l''0''T}

Similarly,

TOIi

a-yLOIi

A8a"aCTLoli.

it is more common to speak of

than of

1'0 BaTo'll"EbLO"

T}

a-yLa /J.0"T}

TOIi

20a

BaTO'll"EbLOIi.

Another tendency

which makes for

confusion is

the

habit

of translating

rather

names,

than of transliterating them.

Thus Battifol refers to 'the monastery

TOIi

LWa""oli

TOIi 8EPLCTTOli

at Stilo as S. Jean le Moissonneur.

We deprecate this custom and have tried to

avoid it.

A manuscript in Paris

(our

160) gives

a list of the

abbots

of Sto

Paul Latro, the mother

house of the

of St.

monastery

John

Patmos.

This

manuscript is

on

dated

1049?.

The

list is

folIows

as

:21

MEÀETLOCT

N

LKT}cpO POCT

AovKaCT

MapKw"

11 LO "VCT LOCT

11T}1" T} T P LOCT

Il

avÀ OCT

XPLCTTOboliÀOCT

. MLXaT}À

lIavÀoCT

r

PT}-Y0PLOCT

NLKoÀaoCT

11a/J.La"oCT

AEO"TLOCT

F4>paL/J.

ra{JpLT}À22

MEÀETLOCT

XPLCTTOOOVÀOCT

lIETpoCT

A"TW"LOCT

It

appropriate

discuss

seems

to

further

point

under

this

one

heading.

It

is

desirable

not only to fix the dates

of manuscripts but the places where they were written.

A distinc-

tion has been perceived

between Constantinopolit.l:!n and provincial hands.

The Index of Monasteries

shows that we have manuseripts

written in several monasteries

in Constantinople, but in most cases there are so few specimens from any one of them that

it is

dangerous to

speak of a

hand peculiar to this

one or that.

The exeeption is

the Stu-

dium.

  • 23 The hands

whieh ean be most clearly

identified with the scribes of this monastery

are the folIowing:

  • (l) A small round very pure minuscule

found in the earliest

dated minuseule

(Leningrad

219,

which

have

published in

fase.

vi, ms

we

234).24

Probably

this

manuseript

not

was

written in the Studium,

but under its influence.

  • 25 The scribe, Nicholas, had

been a monk

at the

Studium

and

may have

been

the

Nicholas

who

abbot

of the

Studium in

was

848.

In 835

the iconoclastie persecution was

at its height, and the Studium

itself was about the

last pIace

where

its former

monks were

likely

be

found.

to

The

eonnection of the

scribe

with the monastery is made clear, however, by the note which gives the order of the deaths

oi

Plato of the

Saecoudion,of Theodore

oI

the

Studium,

and

of Joseph

of Thessalonica.

"'bere

the

manuseript

aetually

written

remains

was

doubtful

and

unimportant,26

but

whether written in exile or not it remains

the

earliest known specimen

of a Studium hand.

Other speeimens of this type of hand seem to us to be our manuscript

  • 331 (Vat.

Gr. 2210,

The be st guide to the Greek

  • 20. names of the monasteries
    1903.

on Mt. Athos is To

G. Smyrnakes, Athens, .

A'Ywv OpOO',

  • 21 This

should be compared with Miklosich

and Mliller,

Acta et Diplomata Graeca Medii Aevi,

4,

pp.

  • 22 AlI are callerl

jJ.ovaxOO' KaL

except Gabriel,

'1'YOIJjJ.EVOO'

who ii; referred to as

jJ.ovaxOO' KT'1TWp KaL

'1'YOIJjJ.EVOO'.

  • 23 In her admirable life of Theodore of the Studium Miss Gardner strongly advocated

the theory that he intro-

duced the use of the Greek

minuscule.

  • 24 Ms

214 has

an upright, angular hand which is quite different from

that of ros. 284 and more Iike

the provin-

çiaI Italian hand described

below

(see p.

xviii) .

There are, however, other detaiIs

which suggest

that ross 2140

and

  • 234 carne

scriptorium

(see

  • p. xix).

same

Is

tbis

an indication of

stilI

different

Studium hand,

a

from which the Ita ·Iian

type derived?

,

  • 25 This was first pointed

out by G . Cereteli in the

Russian

publication of

Paleographische

Studien,

1915, and

was translated and reprinted in the

Byz. Zeit.,

voI.

28, p.

  • 4088. (Cf.

Byz. Zeit.,

IX, p.

649.)

  • 26 There is a possibility that Nicholas spent his exile at St. Saba and that this manuscript remained there unti!

spenski took it to Leningrad.

.

xx

INTRODUCTION

dated earlier than 886) and manuscript 86 (Athos Vatop. 949, dated 948). Another speci- men of the writing of this school (Meteora 591, dated 862) was found and described by Prof. Bees. 27 Again, it was written by a scribe in exile, who describes himself as "Eusta- thios, writing in the monastery of St. Anna situated in the district of Bithynia, during the exile of the patriarch Ignatius". 28 Besides these almost imdoubted specimens of the school, many more manuscripts which may well belong to it can be seen by turning over the pages of our collection.

(2) A quite different hand was also used in the Studium.

This was a large roundish

hand. The scribes who write its later forms seem to have used a rather broad peno Ms 260 (Vat. Gr. 1660, dated 916), ms 216 (Moscow VI. 98, dated 917), ms 334 (Vat. Gr. 1671, by the scribe of ms 260), and ms 275 (Vat. Gr. 1675, dated 1018) are examples of this hand, as is ms 53. 29

(3) It is not too daring to see the continuation of the Studium tradition in the beautiful large manuscripts written in the Laura at the end of the tenth century. Thus the John who ra.ther ostentatiously defines himself as "the sinner" may be regarded as an offshoot of the Studium school. The Studium was in some respects the parent of the great mon- astery of the Laura on Mt. Athos. lt should be remembered that the founder of the Laura, Athanasius, found a number of isolated hermits already living onthe mountain and pro- tected by imperial decrees,30 and the quarrel which ensued was ultimately solved in favor

of Athanasius by. the arbitration

of Euthy.mius oi the Studium. 31

Leaving Constantinople and turning to the problem oi provincial hands, orily those asso- with South ltaly can at present be identified with some certainty. They cannot yet be classified as minutely as can the Studium hands, but their chief characteristic is . angular- ity. This distinctly different school sprang up in the tenth century and the earliest manu- script which belongs to · it which is definitely dated is our ms 15 (Patmos 33, written in Reggio in the year 941). Both the script and the ornamentation of this manuscript are easily distinguishable from anything which can be connected with Constantinople. Where the monks of Reggio carne from is an interesting subject for discussion. Probably

some of them were from Asia Minor and possibly others were exiles frolll other parts oi the I east in the time of the iconoclasts. lt is tolerably certain, however, that at the end of the ninth century there was a large addition to the ranks ai Greek Christians in South ltaly. In fact, there were probably at that time no Latin monks south oi the district of Naples. The next appearance of South Italian scribes is connected with Rossano. 32 From Rossano derived a number of monasteries under the leadership of Nilus who, leaving Rossano, moved

  • 27 The facsimile of this manuscript will appear in fase. xi, either from a photograph stilI to be taken at the Meteora or from a small photograph made by Pro!. Weitzmann. The script is as nearly the same as that or the otber Studium manuscripts as is possible, allowing for the fact that the scribe was not the same person and that there is a difference of twenty years between the Meteora codex and the next in date.

  • 28 This patriarch was deposed by the Emperor Michael the Third in 858, but the Studites remained loyal to bim and many of them went into exile with him.

29 Mss 53 and 216

..

,raise

a curious small problem which we hope that some student of Constantinopolitan history

may be able to solve.\ Both appear to say that they were written on the Island of ChaIke, at the church or mon-

astery of Akepsima. Where was there a church or monastery or this name? The suggestion has been made that these manuscripts were dedicated to St. Akepsima, but this does not seem to be what the colophon states. Per- haps inquiry at the Theological School on Chalke might c1ear up the questiono In any case, the Island of Chalke was always c10sely connected with the Studium and a scribe from it may very well have written on ChaIke.

  • 30 See K. Lake, The Early Days oJ Monasticism on Mount Athos, pp. 58 f., 87, and 99.

  • 31 See especially K. Lake, Early Days oJ Monasticism on Mt. Athos, pp. 93 ff.

INTRODUCTION

XXI

steadily northward and finalIy established a monastery of Greek monks at Grottaferrata. On his traveIs Nilus was accompanied by a number of monks and some of them were scribes. 33

9.

INDEX

OF

CITIES

AND

TOWNS

In this index we have given the names of alI places mentioned in the colophons of our

manuscripts, or in notes, except for the names of monasteries.

These are given in the pre-

ceding index. Many of the places cannot be identified, but we hope that further study may Iocate at Ieast some of these.

lO.

INDEX

OF

RULING

TYPES

When we decided to include in our descriptions a mention of the type of ruling of the parchment in each manuscript we hoped that at the conclusion of our work it would be possible to make some generaI remarks which would help in the dating and Iocalizing of other manuscripts. To some extent this has proved true. In generaI, manuscripts with commentaries have more elaborate frames ,and those with considerable marginaI materia}34 are uncommon in the simple unframed types. For example, the I 1-4 and II 1-5 groups have no frames beyond the main writing space and 140 of our manuscripts (more than one third of the totaI) have types of ruling found in one of these two groups. Of theseonly are biblicaI: 4 OId Testaments, 6 Tetraevangelia, 8 Prax- a postoloi, 7 Psalters, and 8 Evangelia. Some of these are early, some later. The remaining are treatises, with a few service books. At the beginning it was necessary to adopt some generaI system of classification, which could be expanded as further types werè discovered. Within the major division into manu- scripts written in one column, in two, or in three, we based this primarily on the number and

arrangement of Iines framing the centraI writing space

This seemed the obvious method;

. . but ii has some disadvantages. Often a type of ruling is closer to one which has been placed in another group than it is to the other members of its own. For example, I 1 f and I lO c agree with many other types in having no guide for the individuaI Iines of writing, but are

unique in having the centraI writing space divided by a single horizontal line. They differ only in that I 1 f has only lines to frame the writing space, while I lO c has also a marginaI frame. The most interesting fact about these two types is that both are found only in the ninth century. Both are in ms dated 885, and I lO c is the ruling type of ms dated 880. 35 The other pattern which occurs only in a ninth century manuscript is II 35 a, found in a martyrology written in 890. Except for the three lines across the top, on which the titles

were written, this is a very simple form,

closely related to the II 4 group.

It is the only

two-column manuscript dated before 900. Other types found in the ninth century are I f (856-897), I 1 c (ante 886?), I a (888),

  • I e (897), Ila and Il h which are both in the same manuscript (899). AlI of these are also found in Iater manuscripts, although only I 1 la and I 1 c are in fàir]y common use throughout our periodo

    • 33 See pp. ix and xxiii f.

    • 34 GospeIs or Iectionaries with Eusebian canons, dates for readings, etc.

    • 35 Mss !l14 a!}d !l34 have many other points of resemblance: they have Iittle or no

are written

in medium-brÒw1 ink, the signatures are in the upper right hand corner of the first recto of each gathering, with

a cross to right and Ieft in the upper margin of the same. the same scriptorium, and the hands are quite different.

This is not conclusive evidence that they come from But it is possible that both are Studium manuscripts.

See above, p. xvii, for the evidence that ms !l34 eame from the Studium.

INTRODUCTION

XXlI

manuseripts whieh

of the

we

three

than

ruling-types reeur in more

Comparatively few

the

When, however,

are

groups

and the majority are found in only one.

have published,

first

the

in

For instanee,

disappears.

largely

of types

isolation

this

as units

eonsidered

Between these two,

at aH eommon.

l c ean be eonsidered as

and I

l

  • l) only I

(I

a

group

of

other member

and

them

between

it is

any

slight,-as

differenee is

the

very

however,

cis the equiva-

a, and I

b exaetly eorrespondsto I l

the type I

In group I

, group IL

c being the most eommon

used, I

  • e. Again they are the types most frequently

l

lent of I

of alI those deseribed.

that they are the simplest

pat-

is

The most notieeable faet about aH the eommon types

with no

these are standard for their type,

are frames

there

When

in their groupS.36 ,

terns

of the page to

inner edge

the

run from

writing always

the

and the lines for

eeeentrieities,

the upright

or from

of the bloek of writing,

right-hand edge

the

u pright whieh marks

the

the

upright

eorres ponding

the

on

of writing

bloek

to

of the

edge

left-hand

the

marking

the

within

pairs

reeurring

of frequently

aH

In

predominates.

eases

former

  • 37 The

right.

In

is the only distinetion between them.

a and c, etc .) this

a and c, I

l

(I

same group

II 4 a b

  • c and

b

(I

e,

of the

members

same group

three

there

eases where

the

are

two

and e) the distinction between two of the three is the one just mentioned and these are more

of the

e extending the lines from the inner to the outer edges

eommon than the third,-I

the writing

and II 4 e having the lines for

at one or both uprights

page instead of stopping

for eaeh

line

ruled

the se eases there is a

alI

In

eolumns.

of the

entirely within eaeh

two

of writing.

line

A few further remarks may be made about eaeh of the more usual types:

first half of

the

in

our period, but are

most eommon

throughout

found

and c

  • I l

are

a

Only

it.

of

end

the

toward

of use

been going

ou t

have

and

seem to

t welfth eentury

the

doubtful.

ofthese types is dated later than 1139, and its date, 1195, is

one of aur manu deripts

  • l b

I

(ms 30, type

Only two

impressiono

this

eonfirm

l

of type I

manuseripts

other

'The

doubtful.

again

seeond is

of the

1090 and the date

  • d) are later than

l

type I

and

m s

'

and tenth eenturies.

Most are af the ninth

the middle of the eleventh

alI of whieh are dated before

e is used in five manuseripts,

  • I fl

the other

one in Monembasia in Greeee in 897 and

Tw o of these ean be laealized:

century.

in Co ns tantinople in

The earliest manuseripts in this group date from

later.

  • I a b c, and f seem to be rather

as folIows, the latest being

included are divided ehronologieally

  • 916 a nd the 44 manuseripts

date d

l

9th eentury-

6

10th eentury-

15

11th eentury-

band c, exeept that the former

As mentioned above I l a and c are exaetly parallei to I

suffieientbasis

is

evidenee

this

therefore,

H,

laUer double.

and the

uprights

single

have

1150,

for a generalization, it would seem to be that single uprights were losing popularity by

(18),

and c

a (4)

(5), I

  • c and e

(lO),

b

(lO), I

and c

(7)

  • l a

are I

occurring frequently

  • 36 The t ypes

(11), II

19 d

(6), II

17 a

(4), II

and e (4), II

(18)

(5), b

a

4 a

(18) , II

f

II l

(5),

ànd c

(6)

140 a

(6),

  • 134 a

(11).

(7), and II 84 e

b

(4), II

b

I

(types

in I

of the page, as

side to side

e

extend from

horizontal lines to

for the

  • 37 In generai the tendency

this characteristic, though differing otherwise)

seems more

II l h, 5 n, 19 g, 40 c share

f, 49

17 a Ilnd b,

9a,

a;

the

and

period

at other times-ten of thirteen manuscripts falling in this

1070 than

  • 969 and

common between

  • 1193 (19 a).

(II 5 b) and

?

11 39

e),

(I

other s being written in 897

INTRODUCTION

XXlli

while double ones were on the increase. A glance at the H 1 group (which also have single . uprights) strengthens this position. They are more predominantIy early than are the I 1 group and only one (1193?) is later than 1126. It may be accident that the eight manuscripts of types I 2 d and e are earlier,-none

later than 1072. I 2 d, in particular, is so dose to I 2 c that it might be counted with it. The H 1 group are noticeably South Italian in origin, so far as they can be localized. II 1 a-e have few examples each, but II ff is found in fourteen manuscripts of which nine- are certainly South Italian, three being by Nilus I. AlI date between c. 902(?) and 1037. This is the simplest type in the II 1 group, with four single uprights and the lines for the writing extending from the inner margin to the outer upright. It is surprising that it is so limited both in date and place. 38

  • I lO a and b recur in four manuscripts, all of the twelfth century, (1111, 1111, 1142, 1149-)

and I 11 a b c, - which are very similar, are found in four more (976(?), 1080, 1197, 1199).

Probably these examples are too few to be significant.

  • I 40 a is a type which belongs conspicuously to the early twelfth century . Six manu- scripts have it and all date between 1105 and 1153. The remaining I 40 types are all earlier. 39 The distinction in I 40 a is that the lines for the writing run only between the uprights,"- not out to either margino Moreover, the Bartholomew who wrote one of the manuscripts with this type of ruling (ms 305) also wrote mss 303 and 306, and the ruling-

types of these manuscripts (H 19 a and H 17 c) have this same characteristic. H 4 a band c tend to be early. 4 a is the type in five manuscripts dating fr om 970- 1054; 4 b is found in thirteen, of which five are dated in the tenth century, four in the ele'venth and four in the twelfth (but only one later than 1143). 4 c appears in two tenth century manuscripts, one early eleventh, and one late twelfth,-but the date of this last is very doubtful. Few of these are localized. Ms 240 (type H 4 a) is dated 1054 and comes

from South Italy. In type H 4 b ms 53, dated 948, was written

on Chalce; mss 274 and

348, dated 1015 (?) and 1116, are from South Italy; mss 338 and 304, dated c.1086 and 1105, are from Athos. Ms 364, written on Euripos in 943, has type H 4 e.

Type H 17 does not occur until after the middle of the eleventh century. Of the eight

manuscripts dated from 1053(?).o

..

1179

only threeare localized,-one each on Athos, in

Constantinople and in South Italy. This is a type used especially for biblical manuscripts. Two are Prophetologia, two Tetraevangelia, one an evangelion and one a Praxapostolos. The other two are a Basil and a Chrysostom. Another definitely late group is II 19. Twenty-two manuscripts have one of its different

types, H 19 d being the most common, with eleven samples. Eight belong to the peri od between 1056 and 1090, thirteen are dated in the twelfth century. Only one is earlier, -

ms 276, dated 1021 (?) . As to locale, one

wa s, written in Tiberias, two on Athos, s ix are

South Italian. Though therè are more lectionaries than other subjects, the contents are more varied than in the preceding group.

A group which belongs peculiarly to the eleventh century is II 24. AlI but one of the eleven manuscripts which have its types were written between 1007 and 1086. The excep- tion is dated 986. Moreover, this seems a definitely eastem type. Five manuscripts can

be loc a lized: two were written in Constantinople, one Macedonia and one in Asia Minor.

either there or in Jerusalem, one in

38 II 4 b, which is identica l with it except that the outer uprights are double, is found in 13 manuscripts which

date from 939 to 1175. 39 Six manuscripts, dating 990, 1033, 1038, 1059, 1066, 1103 (?).

.

XXIV

INTRODUCTION

Another predominantly eleventh century group is II 34. Types a-d, f, and g only occur

in one manuscript each, but there are eleven samples of II 34 e. The seventeen manuscripts of this group are distributed as follows:

Tenth century-2 Eleventh century-11 Twelfth century-4 (all but one before 1150) This is not a South Italian type. Few of the manuscripts are localized, but one was written ,in the Studium, two others in Constantinople, one at St. Saba, one on Athos, and only one in South Italy. Moreover, on generaI grounds, most of the unlocalized manuscripts are

probably

Constantinbpolitan or Athonite .

. In generaI, scribes seem to have tended to hold to the same or similar patterns in ruling

their parchment. 40 The most interesting proof of this is the way in which we discovered that "John the Sinner", who wrote mss 91,92,93,220, and 222 also wrote ms 33, although

he did not sign it as he had the others. In examining his manuscripts we found that in three of them he had used ruling-type II 12 a (the other two having obviously similar types, 144 a and II 24 a) and that only one other manuscript in our collection had this type,- ms 33. On comparison the hand and ornamentation proved identical with those of the signed John manuscripts. In our experience, therelore, ruling-type II 12 a is peculiar to John the Sinner, whose manuscripts date 986, 990, 991, 992, 993 and 995. In another case two mss were identified as having been written by the same scribe be-

cause they provided the only examples ol one ruling-type, II 43 b.

Because of this fact

we checked the reproductions oI mss 224 and 226 (dated 1022 and 1023) andfound that the hand was the same. We then looked again at the damaged colophon of ms 224 and were able to decipher more than we had seen beIore, including the signature of the scribe, Theophanes. 41

Nilus II of Grottaferrata is another scribe who has a distinctive ruling-type: mss 391

and 394- 5 are I 40 a, while 393 is the very similar I 38 b. I

40 a

is also found in three

other twelfth century manuscripts-305, 317, and 397. The last of these is at Grotta- ferrata and may well hav,e been written there, and 305 is South Italian. I 40 c and d,on the other hand, are found in six earlier manuscripts (990-1103 ?) which seem definitely not Italian. Other examples of the generalization about scribes are as follows: mss 230 and 338 are by the same scribe and have types II 24 band II 4 b; mss 73 and 373 are by one hand

and have the very similar I 34 a and I 26 c; mss 290 and 337 with types II 33 band II 34 e;

another pair, not quite so close, are mss

35 and 343 with types

II 36 a and II 24 d; much

closer are 96 and 223 with II 22 a and b. 42 Just as the same scribe tends to use the same kind of ruling type, so he may vary his patteru slightly. For example I 56 a and I 57 a occur in the same manuscript and a,re two slight variants of a rather peculiar type. An interesting point, which may be coincidence, is that type II 43 a is found only in two manuscripts, both written for Arethas, but by different scribes (Baanes and Stylianos), while the closely related type I 41 a is found only in the other manuscript written by Baanes

for Arethas. It seems desirable to summarize the more definite of the conclusions reached above:

40 Mss 84 and 44, with . types I II 8 c and I !i!4 c. 41 See p. xxix.

35 a

and I

18 a

are an exception, as are

and 385 with the very dissimilar

4l! Thi s would seem to indicate that scribes ruled their own parchment.

INTRODUCTION

xxv

Ruling types characieristic Dj certain 8cribes:

I

II

40 a, Nilus II

(see p. xxii)

l

I, Nilus I

(see p. xxi)

  • II 12 a, John the Sinner (see p. xxii)

  • II 43 b, Theophanes (see p. xxii)

Ruling-types characterist1:c Dj localities:

  • I 40 a, South Italian

(see p. xxii)

  • I 40 c and d, Byzantine (see p. xxii)

  • II l, South ltalian (see p. xxi)

  • II 19, predominantly South Italian (see p. xxi)

  • II 24, Byzantine (see p. xxi)

  • II 34, Byzantine (see p. xxii)

Ruling-types characteristic Dj periods:

  • I Il, ninth century (see p. xix)

  • I 2 a b c and f, predominantly eleventh and twelfth centuries (see p. xx)

  • I 2 d, before 1072 (see p. xxi)

  • I 2 e, before 1050 (see p. xx)

  • I lO a and b, 1111-1149 (see p. xxi)

  • I lO c, ninth century (see p. xxi)

  • I 40 a, 1105-1153 (see p. xxi)

  • II l f; c.902(?)-1037 (see p. xxi)

  • II 4 a, 970-1054 (see p. xxi)

  • II 4 b, tenth to middle twelfth centuries (see p. xxi)

  • II 17, 1053(?)-1179 (see p. xxi)

  • II 19, middle eleventh century through the twelfth (see p. xxi)

  • II 24, eleventh century (see p. xxi)

  • II 34, predominantly eleventh century (see p. xxii)

  • II 35 a, ninth century (see p. xix)

12.

INDEX

OF

LOCALIZED ' MANUSCRIPTS

The purpose of the two lists in this index is to indicate the places where manuscripts are known to have been written, - the first giving those whose location is known, the second giving the names of places of unknown geographical position. In consulting these lists it is important to remember that'the fact that a manuscript was written in a certain pIace does not necessarily mean that it belongs to a school of writing associated with that pIace; for instance, the earliest known dated minuscule was perhaps written in St. Saba, but is certainly a product of the Studium at a time when the monks were disbanded by the iconoclastie persecution. 43 Similarly, two famous South Italian manuscripts 44 were written by the monk Cyriacos in or near Capua, but this is no proof that there was a Capuan script. Cyriacos carne from the village or monastery of Meli near Messina, and was probably one of the group oi monks led by Nilus which slowly migrated northward under the pressure of the Saracen invasion. One of the problems in connection with schools of South Italian writing is that . of this invasion during the tenth and eleventh centuries. Monks from Sicily and Calabria 'were driven gradually northward, travelling 'slowly and stopping at intervals, sometimes for months or evén years. These temporary homes are often mentioned in the colophons and

.

43

...

See p. xvii . Our mss

and

XXVI

INTRODUCTION

in these cases the script of a manuscript is really that of the pIace where the scribe was trained, not of the town or monastery where he was stop ping. 45 It sho uld be remembered that the Greek population oI Southern ltaly at thi s time was not a su rvival from ancient Magna Graecia. This had been absorbed into the Roman world and its Latinized successor wiped out by the Goths and Vandals. Medieval Greek- speaking South ltaly was due to the incursion of the Byzantine world, and Basilian mon- asteries were the inevitable results. These flourished through the Saracen invasion, the tim e oI Norman supremacy in the twelfth century and the second Latinization oI South ern ltaly.

13.

INDEX

OF

ORNAl"\{ENTATION

In making this index we have tried to provide a guide which would be of some use both lo paleographers and to students of art, although we are painfulIy aware of the limitations of our technical knowledge in the latter field. The collection of photographs published in the preceding volumes was made to provide further material for the study of Greek medieval writing, but some of the ornamentation of t4e manuscripts was necessarily included. As time went on we realized that at least a part of this ornamentation was important to the pale og rapher, - for example the handling of initials and capitals and of the space between sections oi his work. Moreover, when possible, we tried to include in our reproductions at least a sample of any miniatures we foung in a manuscript,46 in the hope that they would

prove useful to the student of art. lt is not our business to discuss these miniatures, noI' are we competent to do so, but we have noted some points in regard to the illuminati o n which may be of use to the paleographer. There has been a tendency to associate the use of different colors with cel'tain localities. To some extent our collection confirms this, but the matter is not so simple. The question of the date of a manuscript seems also to be of importance in the use of color. As will be seen below, the use of carmine was early in the Byzantine Empire and comparatively late in South ltaly while that of is just the reverse. As was to be expected, the manuscripts which have no ornamentation and those which, even though they may be ornamented, use no color are of early date. 47 Very noticeable among these are the manuscripts of the Arethas group-none of which use any color-and those connected with the Studium. 48 These are among the most beautiful manuscripts which we know, written on good parchment and with great care. N or is the lack of illumi-

nati on due to the subject-matter,

for although the Arethas manuscripts are largely secular

and probably intended for study those from the Studium include a Tetraevangelion and Menologia. This does not mean that alI the manuscripts written at the Studium are entirely un- ornamented; some of them are rubicated in carmine or in gold. 49 There is no evidence for the use · of colored wash in any of the manuscripts from the Studium, or even from Con- stantinople. Studium manuscripts, however, have simple division lines, capitals, more elab orate head pieces in miniature style, and some include portraits of the evangelists,

  • 45 The history of this monastic migration from south to north has never been properly written.

P. Battiffol in

L'Abbaye de Rossano made a start, and K. Lake went a little further in four essays published in The Journal ol

Theological Studies, 1903-1904.

See above, pp. xviii

f.

  • 46 It has been our custom in the descriptions to refer to scenes or portraits as "miniatures" and to other forms

of ornamentation as "ilIumination."

  • 47 See pp. 143 f . •• Mss Hl, !l34,

and 334-all of which belong to the ninth and tenth centuries.

INTRODUCTION

XXV Il

Gregory Nazianzene, et cetera. As far as we can see, elaborate capitals are not used in Studium manuscripts. Carmine is found in manuscripts from 897 to the end of our period, but not in any asso- ciated with ltaly until the twelfth century. On the other hand vermilion is not found in any localized manuscript which was not written in South ltaly until 1008, with the single exception of a manuscript written on Chalce in 917. 50 In 1008 vermilion is found in a

manuscript written on Athos

which uses both this color and carmine

in the rubric a

tion.

_

This combination of the two colors recurs in manuscripts written on Athos 'and in Asia Minor, as well as in South Italy, but with the exception mentioned above there is n o evi- dence for the use of vermilion without carmine in any manuscript written outside of Italy before the latter half of the twelfth century. Thus, while it is not true that vermilion is used only in South Italian manuscripts a nd that carmine is not used in manuscripts written in South Italy, it does seem to be true that if a manuscript written before the beginning of the twelfth century is rubricated in carmine it is probably not an Italian manuscript, whereas one rubricated only in vermilion prob- ably is South Italian. With regard to other colors:

Gold, either by itself or in combination with other colors, is found in only one rn,anuscript which can be Iocated in ItaIy.51 Blue, either by itself or in combination with inks of other colors, is found primarily in manuscripts written in Constantinople, although one comes from Albania and another from Asia Minor. It is found in no Italian manuscripts. Green, which is never found by itself but always in combination with other colors, occurs only once in a manuscript which can be located outside Italy.52 Lilac is never found except in Italian manuscripts. A practice which has been considered peculiarly Italian is the use of colored wash. For the most part our manuscripts confirm this opinion, but yellow wash is used in a manu- script written on Chalce in 948, in two from Athos dated 984 and 1l06, and in one from Antigono, one from Albania and one from Chios, aH written in the second half or the ele,v- enth century. Wash of other colors is found only in South Italian manuscripts, with the exception of one written in Asia Minor in 1071. The use of yellow wash runs throughout our peri od, the first occurrence being in a manuscript written in Milan between 856 and 897. Other colors are found only in manuscripts written after 959. None of the manuscripts dated in the ninth century contains scenes or portraits, and these are scarce in tenth century manuscripts. Only three of our manuscripts dated before 1000 have any, and the only one of these which can be localized is the famous Gregory, now on Patmos but written in Calabria in 941. The number of manuscripts with portraits or scenes increases in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, in fact they become fairly common,

but very f{lw of these manuscripts can be definitely localized. None of those in the eleventh century were written in places which we know with certainty. In the twelfth century one comes from Grottaferrata, one from Tiberias, one from Patmos, and two from South ltaly. Ornament in the formaI miniature styIe with many colors, as for exampie in the head pieces to the Gospels, does not begin untii 943 but is then found frequently through the

5 0 This is the earliest evidence for the use of vermilion; the next is in a manuscript dated 9!l4 which canno,t be localized, then it is found in 941 in a Calabrian manuscript. 51 Our ms 383, written at Grottaferrata. 52 This is our ms !l16, written on Chalce in 917, the manuscript which also contains thefirst evidence for vermilion.

XXVIII

INTRODUCTION

remainder of the tenth century, the eleventh and the earIy twelfth. It is noticeable that in the second half of the twelfth century it is again decreasing. None of the manuscripts with this type of ornament can be localized in ltaly. Several are known to have been written on Athos and several in Constantinople. Only one can be localized elsewhere, and that is the earliest of them all-our ms 364, written in Euripos in 943. Almost all the manuscripts which have designs of a rather fantastic type, including human or animaI elements, which can be localized are found to be from South ltaIy or Sicily; but the earliest, a manuscript written in 897 in the Peloponnesus, has an initial epsilon in the shape of a fish and two, written in Durazzo in 1063 and in Constantinople in 1070, have epsilons in the form of a semi-circle with the human hand pointing for the cross piece.

14.

MANUSCRIPTS

NOT

YET

PUBLISHED

The Iist published in Index 14 shows how many manuscripts still ought to be published, but seems more formidabie than it really is. Certain libraries can be eliminated at once. Simopetra. The manuscripts of Simopetra on Mt. Athos perished in the disastrous fire of 1891, which destroyed aH the buildings. It follows that the catalogue published by Lambros, VoI. I ff. 115 ff., has now only archaelogical interest. According to Smyrnakes (To A')'LOV Opos) 250 manuscripts and 750 books perished, but Lambros catalogues 245 as in the Iibrary in 1880. Scete Andreou. The whole collection of manuscripts formerly in this Russian house, close to Caryes on Mt. Athos, has been soldo A part are in possession of Mr. John Garrett in Baltimore, Maryland. Kosinitza. 53 This foundation is said to have lost its library during the war of 1914 to invading Bulgarians. Serres. Aslightly different fate befell the library of the monastery of Iwavvov TOV 7rpoopop.ov, near Serres. 54 The monks say that during the last war a Bulgarian detachment took the ' whole Iibrary into , its 'protection' and removed it to Sofia. After the peace of Versailles it was arranged that this library should be restored to Greece, and it is now for the most part in the National Library in Athens. There is, however,at least one very important manuscript which has dÌsappeared (Prodrom. lO, dated 1200 or 1282, çif;1'j or çif;ç). There is no trace of it in Athens or Sofia, and in Athens there is a note which states oev 7rapeooBTJ. A photograph is published in the New Palaeographical Society, plate 78. This manuscript can easily be identified if found in any collection in Europe or America, for it is a member of the Ferrar Group, a later twin of Cod. Athous, Esphigmenou 25. , Sinai. A more important and lamentable lack in our coHection is the absence 01 manu- scripts from the greàt coHection in the monastery 01 St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai. The monks of Sinai are governed by an Archbishop-Abbot, consecrated by, but independent oi the Patriarch of Jerusalem. The penultimate abbot, Porphyrios II, was a IiberaI-minded man, who encouraged scholars and permitted photography. Uniortunately his administrative gifts did not appeal to the monks. When he died (or retired ?) they insisted on a consi- tutionai change similar to that which established t}te idiorythmic houses on Mt. Athos, and this was accepted by the new Archbishop, Porphyrios III. The new governing body reversed the liberaI policy of Porphyrios II, on the openly expressed ground that il their manuscriptswere photographed the very considerable profit derived from the of scholars and tourists would be diminished.

i.1 This should be spelled EUCO'TI<PoLPto'O'aL and may be a corruption of '1 KOlXTo<Pou, or "blackbird." A picture of

this bird is, or was,at the main door of the monastery.

i' About a two hours ride distant.

'

INTRODUCTION

XXIX

The library at St. Catherine's was catalogued li s hed in Oxford in 1886. There were, however,

by Prof. V. Gardthau sen of Leipzig, pub- some manuscripts which Gardthausen did

not see and V. Benesevic, a Russian scholar, began a new catalogue which he has so far

been unable to