Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • With Elena Velkovska A Thirteenth Centur

    Uploaded by

    Qaramah Mihail
    15 views22 pages

    Original Title

    With Elena Velkovska a Thirteenth Centur

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    15 views22 pages

    With Elena Velkovska A Thirteenth Centur

    Uploaded by

    Qaramah Mihail

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 22
    BOLLETTINO DELLA BADIA GRECA DI GROTTAFERRATA ( IN Jo SIGLE thiopistische Forschungen rchiv fr Liturgiewissenschaft naphorae Orientales naphorae Syriacae oletino della Badia Greca di Grotaferrata elfast Byzantine Texts and Translations, Belfast 1991 ss. bliotheca Ephemerides ltergicae, Subsidia etige2urhistorischen Theologie ulltin de l'Institut Historique Belge de Rome edi Kartisa Thomas — A. Hero (et), Byzantine Monastic. Foundation Documents. A Complete Traxslaion of the Surviving Founder! ‘Typika and Testanents, 5 voll. (DOS 35), Washington, D. C. 2000 syzantnische Zeitschrift ‘orpus Christianorum ‘opus Christianorum, series Graeea orpus Christianorum, series Latina avis patrum Graecorun, 5 voll, edd. M. Geerar, F. Glorie; vol. 3A ced. J, Noret; Supplementum, edd. M. Geerard, J. Nore, J Desmet (CO), Turmhout 1974-2008 ‘onpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium ompus Scriptorum Ecclesiaticorum Latinorum ‘opus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinac ictionnaire d'ArchSologie Chrétiene et de Litugie Dmitrievskij, Onueanie aumypeuveenier> —pyxonucei spansugeca 6% Gubzuomexare npasocsacnaeo Bocnoxa, |, Turur, Kiev 1899; I, Bizo’éyta, Kiev 1901, Ill, Petropnd 1917 (iesheim 1965) DOS = Dumbarton Oaks Studies neyclopaedta Aethiopica 1-2, ed. by S. Uhl 2003, 2005 iphemerides Liturgicae ithiopian Manuscript Microfilm Library, Collegeville / Adis ‘Ababa BO = Ecclesia Orans Wiesbaden Goar= J. Goar, EizoAdytov sive Ritwale Gaecorm, Venezia 1730° (Graz. 1960) eek, Roman and Byzantine Studies leiliger Dienst JOB = Jahrbuch der Ostereichischen Byzantinistik ISS= Journal of Semitic Studies KL= Keineva Aettoupyuriig LC= Liturgia Condenda LJ= Liturgisches Jahrbuch LQ= Liturgiewissenschatiliche Quellen LOF= Liturgiewissenschatiliche Quellen und Forschungen LTK = Lexikon fir Theologie und Kirche Mus= Le Muséon NPNF=A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, ed. Ph, Schaff, Grand Rapids Michigan, series 2, 1952 (OC= Oriens Christianus OCA = Orientalia Christiana Analecta Orientalia Christiana Oricntalia Christiana Periodiea ODB = The Oxjord Dictionary of Byzantium, edd, A. Kazhdan et alii, 3 voll, New York/Oxford 1991 Ostkirchliche Studien ox: L’Orient Syrien P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Grucca, 1-161, Paris 1857-1866 ontificio Istituto Orientale, Roma -P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina, 1-221, Paris 1844-1865 Patristische Texte und Untersuchtitge ‘Questions Liturgiques Revue des Enudes Byzantines Sources Cheétiennes Subsidia Hagiographica Studia Litugica Studi e Testi ‘Theotogische Quartalschritt ‘Toyni Ornena npemiepyccko teperypy Zeitscbrit fir Semitistik 7 A THIRTEENTH CENTURY MANUSCRIPT OF THE CONSTANTINOPOLITAN EUCHOLOGY: GROTTAFERRATA IB. I, ALIAS OF CARDINAL BESSARION* Stefano Parenti - Elena Velkovska In the Library of Grottaferrata, under pressmark or call n° TB. I, is conserved a manuscript well known to liturgical scholars, as one of the witnesses of the textual tradition of the “constantinopolitan euchology”!. On the front cover of the 19" century binding there is printed in golden characters: Euchologium / Graecorum / quo usi sunt / in 8. Concilio / Fl lorentino and on the lower: Donum / Card. Bessarionis / Monasterio S. M. / Cryptae Ferratae2, From this it is clear that in the second part of the 19" monastic community continued to adhere to the 17" connecting the fortunes of the ms to the Council cardinal Bessarion of Nicea, commendatarius of 1462 to 14723. We shall try in this study to deter and chronology of this tradition based on some n the beginning and the end of the codex, and to o! on the date of the euchology. Let us begin with the flyleaf added at the end of the ms (now f. 154), where three commemorations are found [fig. 1]. The most ancient one, located in the centre of the page, is a note of possession, damaged in the middle by a patch; it reads as follows: century the century oral tradition il of Florence and to the monastery from rmine the authenticity ‘otes on the flyleaves at ffer some considerations unfortunately Istum librum dof... Jsbytero Cardinali Presbyter Georg(ius) Vari, * We owe our gratitude to Proff. Robert F. Taft, S} and Ephrem Carr, OSB, For reviewing the English of this paper. ' The codex has been published under ths title by M. Arranz, LBucologio costantinopolitano agli inizi del secolo XI. Hagiasmatarion & Archieratikon (Rituale & Pontificale) con Taggiunta del Leiturgikon (Messale), Rome 1996, 2 The binding dates from the period of the Abbot Cozza-Luzi (1879-1882), as late Fr Marco Petta informed me. 3M, Petta, L‘eucologio e altri cimeli del Cardinale Bessarione nell’Abbazia di Grottaferrata, Miscellanea Francescana 73 (1973), 367-370, reprinted in I! Cardinale Bessarione nel V centenario della morte (1472-1972), Rome 1974, 125-128. BBGG III s. 4 (2007), 175-196 178 ‘STEFANO PARENTI - ELENA VELKOVSKA January 1608'2, Among the Libri della libraria prima filara da Capo in the 18" position is registrated an Opera del'Imperatore Emanuele dato dalla B(eat)a mem(ori)a del'Ill.mo Sig(no)r Cardinale Bisarione monaco N(ost/ro e Protettore, and, further on, in the thirty-ninth place, un'altra Regula mano scritta dal Cardinale Bisarione"8, that cortespond to the actual manuscripts Z.a. II of Grottaferrata and to Messina gr. 113. The first, as many times noted, has an ex-libris of Bessarion!4, while the second has autograph notes by the same cardinal!5. In the Inventarium delli libri there is, actually, a euchology registered under n° 20 as | euoloion (sic), but, unlike the books just cited, no relation of this | euchology to Bessarion is indicated. In 1626 what will later come to be called the euchology “of Cardinal | Bessarion” emerges from the anonymity of the monastic library and is quoted for the first time in a printed book, the well-known apologetical treatise De Concordia ecclesiae universae of Pietro Arcudi (1563- 1633)'6: | Videmus tempore Clementis VII Pont. Max. Russorum Antistites ad unionem Ecelesiarum properasse, in eoque negocio non parum elaboravimus, Nec tamen de illorum ordinatione, ut minus vera, & legitima, vel minimam suspicionem quisquam habuit. Certe doctissimus Bessarion, & Isidorus Metropolitanus / Chiovensis, ac totius Russiae, ambo dignissimi: Cardinales non iterum a Lati is initiati sunt sacris, cum tamen horum uterque quid illo decreto pro instruendis Armenis statutum ac definitum esset, optime sciret. Immo vero totus coetus Orientalium Patrum in Concilio Florentino iterum ordinandum fuisset, j Neque Rituale, seu Pontificale Graeconim ab eo tempore atque inter illos im- ( mutatum esse, facile intellegi potest, si quis libros antiquissimos consulat ma- nuscriptos, qui eundem prorsus modum praescribunt ordinandis, quem hodie ad unguem servat Graecorum Ecclesia, atque inter illos Euchologium Patriarchale, quod ipsomet Concilio Florentino Georgius Vari Cretensis Presbyter Graecus donavit Juliano Presbytero Cardinali tituli sanctae Sabinae, ut in ejus calce manu 12 The inventarium is published by N. Borgia, La biblioteca della Badia Greca di Grottas Ferrata, Academie ¢ Biblioteche d'ltalia 4 (1930), 144-159; s. also Rocchi, De Coenobio Cryptoferratensi, 241, 9 Grottaferrata, National Archive, Libro Mastro degli Introiti ed Esiti per gli anni 1596- 1600, £. 247°; cf. Borgia, La biblioteca, 154, SCE. the entry of A(ndrea) C(una) in Bessarione e !'Umanesimo, Catalogo della mostra, Napoli 1994, 385, 15M, T. Rodriquez, Addizione d'autore nel Messan, gr. 113, BBGG ns. 55 (2001), 165-170; Ead., Bibliografia det manoscritti greci det fondo SS. Salvatore di Messina (Testi ¢ Studi Bizantino-Neoellenici 12), Rome 2002, 233. 16 Cf. the entry of G. Mykoliw in DBI, IV, 15-17. GROTTAFERRATAT'$.1. 179 ipsiusmet Cardinalis notatum est, & modo asseruatur in Monasterio Cryptae Ferratac!7, In chapter V of book VI, Arcudi defends the validity of the ordina- tions given by the Orthodox Church in which the ordination ritual does not contain the fraditio instrumentorum proper to. the Roman rite and imposed on the Armenians by the Council of Florence!8. Arcudi recalls that after the Union of Brest in 1596 the bishops who signed the Union did not have to be re-ordained, just as during the Florentine council nobody thought to re-ordain Isidor of Kiev or Bessarion of Nicea, both later cardinals, nor any of the other Greek bishops who took part in the council. It is in this apologetical context, seeking to demonstrate the unaltered tradition of the prayers and the ordination rites, that Arcudi mentions the patriarchal euchology of Grottaferrata, citing the autograph note of Cesarini, af that time the only note present on the added front fiyleaf, but introducing at the same time the circumstances of George Vari's donation of the manuscript to Cesarini during the Council of Florence. There is no word, however, about an eventual transfer of the book from Cesarini to Bessarion, nor about Bessarion's later donation of it to the monastery of Grottaferrata. This omission — if indeed it is an omission — is highly suspicious. Arcudi was a Greek Orthodox convert to Catholicism!®, and Bessarion of Nicea was an even more famous precedent of the same, a symbol of enormous importance in the matter of personal religious convictions. If, then, the euchology were at the time in Bessarion's possession, such an omission by the part of Arcudi would not have been unintelligible. Unfortunately, the euchology of Grottaferrata has not been taken into consideration by Leo Allatius (1586-1669), a contemporary of Pietro Arcudi2, in his 1646 work on Greek liturgical books?!, even if the ms is mentioned in the second edition of this work published in Hamburg in 17 petri Arcudi Corcyraei presbyter... Libri VII. De concordia Ecclesiae Occidentalis et Orientalis in septem Sacranentorum administratione, Patis 1626, lib, VI, ¢. V., 445. 18.C, Gugerotti, La liturgia armena delle ordinazioni e Vepoca ciliciana. Esiti rituali di una teologia di comunione tra Chiese (OCA 264), Rome 2001, 167-170, 19 §, the entry of V. Peri, in DBI, I, 15-17. 205, the entry of D. Musti in DBI, If, 467-471. 21, Allatius, De libris et rebus ecclesiasticis graccorum dissertationes et observationes variae, Paris 1646. 180 ‘STEFANO PARENTI - ELENA VELKOVSKA. 17172. There, in note (a) on p. 71, the cuchology is ‘referred as a liturgical book, and a work of Richard Simon?3 regarding, precisely, our manuscript is quoted: Chapitre XI. D'un Livre peu connu publié en 1632. contre la Concorde d'Arcudius sur les Sacrements, par Jean-Baptiste Catumsyritus Gree-Italien, qui défera aux Tribunaux d’Espagne & de Rome, !Ouvrage d’Arcudius, comme étant rempli derreurs & favorisant Theresie de Luther, Catumsyritus accuse des miemes erreurs le Cardinal Bellarmin & quelques Jesuites qui avoient approuvé Ja Concorde d’Arcudius ... Cet Auteur fait mention d'un certain Euchologe Greg de Crypta ferrata proche de Rome, qu’Arcudius cite siu?4, Catumsyritus is Giovanni Battista Catanzariti?5, a 16-17" centu Ttalo-Albanian theologian and author of a polemical treatise that appeared in Venice in 1632 against the above mentioned De Concordia of Arcudi2s; in fact its opponent wanted to report it to the Inquisition of Spain and Rome. The euchology TB. I, recognizable by the adjectiy, Patriarchale, was the object of several censures, culminating in the severe judgment: sed potius apocryphum esse debet Arcudianum 2 chologium Cryptae Ferratae cui soli innititur Arcuda, pro Eucholog;, Patriarchali, seu Pontifical”. It is obvious that in such a work it woulg be impossible even to mention Cardinal Bessarion. The Vatican codex Borgia lat. 486 has conserved an extended d cumentation regarding the Congregation of Cardinals for the Rome, “correction” of the Greek euchology of the period 1636-164428, In i minutes recording the results of a discussion on the number of the tings 221, Allatius, De Libris ecclesiasticis Graecorum Dissertationes Duae ... ad edit Cramoisianam Paris. MDCXCIV, addlitis notis, supplemento & indice atque clench phabetico Melodorum Graecorum recusae, cura Jo. Alberti Fabricii, Hamburgi, 1717, 23 Bibliotheque critique ou Recueil des diverses pieces critiques, Dont la plipart ne point imprimées, oi ne se trouvent que trés-diffiilement,Publiées par Mr. de Sainjore gor a qjotité quelques notes, Tome Troisiéme, Amsterdam 1708. quiy 24 Ibid, 223, 226. 25.On Catanzariti s. the entry of A. Palmieri in Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique, Wy 2013-2014, Unlike Palmieri, Sofronio Gassisi (Contributo alla storia del rito greco in Hake Note e document, 1. 2° edizione con ritocchi, Grottaferrata 1917, 35), considers Catanzerig not an Italo-Greek, but an Italo-Albanian priest, ue 26 Vera utriusque Ecclesia Sacramentorum concordia, Auctore Johanne Baptista Catumsyrito sacrae Theologiae Doctore Italo-Graeco Rhegino, Venice 1632. : 27 hid, MI, 187. 28 Cf. M. Morseletto, Inventarium Codicum Manu Seriptorum Borgianorum. Borg, Lat, 1- 200, 1965-7, 590, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, sala consultazione manoscritti, n° 423. On the Congregatione cardinalitia deputata s. O. Raquez, La Congrégation pour la Correction des Livres de l'Bglise Orientale (1719-1862), in Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide Memoria Rerum, Il, Rome 1972, 514-534: 517-518. i | GROTTAFERRATAT'. 1. 181 orders one reads: Euchologium tandem ipsum Cryptaferratae anti- quissimum habet ordinationem Acolytis. But after «Cryptaeferrataey a cross in the right margin acts as a reference mark to the notice: fiit Bessarionis”®, thereby becoming the first attribution to Bessarion. as possessing of the codex. A: few years later, in 1647, Jacques Goar,: OP (1601-1653)30 was publishing the famous EvyoAdytov sive Rituale Graecorum*|; in its Proemium while describing the manuscript sources used32, he speaks about our euchology in these terms: Secundum illud idem est, Euchologium Patriarchale, quod ut scribit Arcudius ib. 6. Concordiae cap. 5 in Concilio Florentino Georgius Vari Cretensis Presbyter Graecus Iuliano Presbytero Cardinali $, Sabinae donavit, ut in calce manu ipsiusmet Cardinalis notatum est, quo donatus deinde -Bessarion Cardinalis, Cryptae Ferratae factus Abbas, illud eidem Monasterio post obitum legauit asservandum?3, Having accepted what Arcudi wrote, Goar is the first author to speak about a donation of the euchology to Cardinal Bessarion on the part of Giuliano Cesarini, and then by Bessarion to the Monastery of Grottaferrata: Goar Euchology guo Quem libram id, Julianus Card(inal)is Cesarinus donatus deinde donavit Bessarion Cardinalis, D(omi)no Card(ina)li Bessarioni, Cryptae Ferratae gui cum Cryptae-Ferratae factus Abbas, factus esset Abb(as) illud eidem Comend(atar)ius istum eid. Monasterio mon(aste)rio post obitum legauit asservandum —_post obitum legavit asservandum. It is obvious that the Goar's text has many points in common with the second of the three notes of the euchology, and so it becomes necessary 29 Borgia lat. 486, ff. 95¥-96", 30 On Goar and his work s. R. Coulon, s.v., Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique VU/2, Paris 1925, 1467-1469; Dictionnaire d'Histoire et de Géographie Ecclésiastique XXI, Patis 1986, 355 (recent bibliography). 31 J, Goar, BzoAdytov sive Rituale Greecorum ..., Paris 1647; ... editio secunda expurgata et accuratior, Venice 1730. 32 Goar, Evyokdyoy, ed. Paris 1647, & = Venice 1730, éij; on the identification of the manuscripts s. A. Strittmatter, The “Barberinum $. Marci of Jacques Goar. Barberinianus graecus 336, EL 47 (1933), 329-367: 330-331, note 4. 33 Goar, EvzoAdytoy, ed, Paris 1647, | = Venice 1730, éij 182 ‘STEFANO PARENT - ELENA VELKOVSKA to clarify whether Goar derived his text from the note, or whether Goar's text is itself the source of the note. As Fr Marco Petta writes, “the hand that has written the words citeg above, is found in a leaf of the Inventory of the Possessions of Grottaferrata monastery, prepared by order of Bessarion himself’34, The Inventory in question is the Regestum omnium possessionum compiled in 1462 from Niccold Perotti, Bessarion's procurator for Grottaferrata, ang occupies ff. 1-66 of the manuscript called Grottaferrata Z.6. XIPS, Following the Regestum, some papal documents regarding the monastery have been copied on ff. 68-87 on 20 May 1710 by Abbot Pietro Menniti36, to which have been appended other transcriptions>?. The writing pointed out by Fr Marco Petta is found precisely after this last section (ff. 96'-97'), and can be identified with the anonymous hand why had copied on the flyleaf of the euchology the notice published by }, Goar. The paper with watermark is the same used at Grottaferrata for the transcription of an act in 170738, In this way there should nor be any doubt on the fact that the notes on the last flyleaf of the euchologion go back to the first decade of the 18" century. A third note informs us that Jacques Goar and Cardinal Barberinj (1597-1679) both ordered a copy of the ms. While no trace if left of the copy destined for Goar, we know that the other one, commissioned by Cardinal Barberini, corresponds to the actual ms gr. 488 of the homonymous collection of the Vatican Library, where, however, the historical data are not registered>?, 34 Peta, L'eucologio {note 3 above), 128; s. also the entry in Bessarione e I'Umanesimo, 338. 35 Parenti, 17 monastero di Grottaferrata, 465-478; Santa Maria di Grottaferrata e it cardinale Bessarione. Fonti ¢ studi sulla prima Commenda, a cura di M, T. Caciorgna (La Regione Romana 3), Rome 2005, 36E, Follicti, i! crisobollo di Ruggero Il re di Sicilia per la Badia di Grottaferrata (aprile 1131), BBGG nis. 42 (1988), 49-81: 50 = Ead., Byzantina et Italo-graeca. Studi di Filologiae di Paleografia, a cura di A. Acconcia Longo - L. Pertia - A. Luzzi (Storia ¢ Letteratura, Raccolta di Studi, ¢ Testi 195), Rome 1997, 434. On Memniti see G. Breccia, Archivum basilianum. Pietro Menniti e il destino degli archivi monastici italo-greci, Quellen und Forschungen aus Italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 71 (1991), 14-105; A. Ciaralli, Documenti latini medioevali della Badia greca di Grottaferrata. Appunti per la storia di un archivio disperso, in Id., Due saggi di storia della cultura scritta nel Medioevo, Rome 2002, 37-74, 37M. T. Caciorgna ~ G. Falcone ~ L. Pera ~ A. Ruggeri, 1! «Regestum Bessarionis Cardi- nalis Abatis Cryptaeferrataen, in Santa Maria di Grottaferrata e il cardinale Bessarione, 113, ma ef, Ciaralli, Documenti latin’ medioevali, 53, note 35. 38 Grottaferrata, National Archive, Jnsérumenta I, ff. 285-298, 3 Deser, A. Jacob, Les euchologes du fonds Barberini gree de la Bibliotheque Vaticane, Didaskalia 4 (1974), 195. On £. 1" in the upper comer: “Euchologium ¢ Codice Cryptae- GROTTAFERRATAT'B. 1 183 As we can see from the preface to the EdyoAdyiov sive Rituale Graecorum, Goar was in contact with Fr Basilio Falasca (+ 1656), a monk of Grottaferrata born in Frascati and Procurator General of the Order of St Basil, who facilitated Goar's consultation or copying of some manuscripts. That is why it is possible that the false notice of the donation of the euchology of Cesarini to Bessarion, and thus to the community of Grottaferrata could be attributed to Falasca who was used to such ventures, In fact, he had given to Jean-Marie de Suarés, bishop of Vaison-la-Romaine ({ 1677 in Rome) a list of false notices that misled for a long time the research on the Grottaferrata monastery, particularly that of art historians. It is true that from Goar on, the notice about the donation and/or the use of the euchology at the Council of Florence imposed itself in the historiography of the ms up to today. It is fully accepted by such famous historians of liturgy as the Oratorian Jean Morin who wrote in 1655: Codex ille pertinet ad Monasterium Graecum Cryptae Ferratae, octo vel novem nmiilliaribus ab Urbe distans. Inscribitur Euchologium Patriarchale, eo quod Patriarchalis ritus contineat, & pro Patriarcha conscriptus fuerit. [lum in Concilio Florentino olim dedit Tuliano S. Sabinae Cardinali Georgius Vari Cretensis Presbyter, ut in libri calce adnotauit ipse Iulianus Cardinalis. Eo Post modum donatus est Bessarion Cardinalis, & Archiepiscopus Nicaenus, qui factus Abbas Cryptac Ferratae, eum Cryptensibus Monachis concessit*!, seek In the 18" century the legend was enriched by a new element: the notion that the euchology given by George Vari to Cardinal Cesarini during the Council of Florence had been used at the same Council. The first one to spread this information was the hieromonk of Grottaferrata Giacomo Sciémmari in 1728*, followed in 1735 by Gregorio Piacentini, ferratae exscriptum”, The supplement containing the monastic profession is not copied, however. 40 parenti, I monastero di Grottaferrata, 245-246. 4l J, Morinus, Commentarius de Sacris Ecclesie Ordinationibus, Patis 1655, 74. On the actual use of the codex by Morin one can see the correspondence between him and Allaci published in in Antiguitates Ecclesiae Orientalis, Clarissimorum Virorum... Dissertationibus Epistolicis enucleatae, nunc ex ipsis Autographis Editae, quibus praefixa est Jo. Morini Congr. Orat,, Paris. PP. Vita, Londinii 1682, 191-192: EPIST, XX. Jo; Morinus Leoni Allatio, de Libris quos edidit ipse. J. Morinus, de Administratione Sacramenti poenitentiae, & de Antiquissimis ordinandorum Clericorum ritibus &c. ... “Graecos edo septem, sed antiquissimis Latinis posteriores; vetustissimus ¢ Barberino codice exscriptus est, secundus ab co & Cryptae Ferratensis monasterio...”. 42 G, Sciommari, Breve Notizia, e Raccolta della Vita di S. Bartolomeo ..., Rome 1728, 202 says that he donated many presents to the church, but only liturgical vestments. But in the 184 ‘STEFANO PARENTI - ELENA VELKOVSKA another monk of the same brotherhood. The notice is “canonized” by By Filippo Vitali on the front flyleaf: Pagina ultima membranacea perantiqui huius Patriarchalis Euchologii, quo usi fuerunt in Concilio G.nli Oecumenico Florentino, nec non a bo. mem. Cardinalj Bessarione huic Antiquae Nostrae Mansioni dono dat. atque in Bibliotheta servandum post illius obitum, ut ex ultima ipsiusmet voluntate legunt. quae secunt, [at this point follows the’ above-mentioned transcription of the notes on the flyleaf at the end the codex] With such credentials in its portfolio, a brilliant career opened for the euchology. After a century of silence, in 1744 in Rome the work of the Congregation. of the Cardinals for the “correction” of the Greek euchology was beginning once more“, The revised euchology wags published. at the end of 1754, under the editorial supervision of the hieromonk Filippo Vitali*’, and then commented by Pope Benedict XIV's March 1, 1756 encyclical letter Ex quo primum. Illustrating the editorial criteria inspiring the new euchology, Pope Benedict wrote: Men of learning are also aware that several manuscript examples of the Greek Euchologion are preserved in the Vatican Library, and that the Library of the Barberini has the famous Euchologium Barberinum S. Marci ... Learned men must also know of the precious codex preserved in the archive of the monastery of Grottaferrata which is called the Euchologium Patriarchale. It was left to the monks by the will of the great Cardinal Bessarion, who was the first Commendatory Abbot of that monastery. ... He (is said to have) received it as a gift from Cardinal Giuliano Cesarini of blessed memory, who had (presumably) in tum been given it at the Council of Florence by the Cretan Priest Georgius Varj, as Arcudius testifies. All these copies of the Euchologion have been examined and critically compared as a guide to accuracy and soundness in the new edition of the Euchologion. The work was done both by the prelate who is appendix at p. XIX at the entry dedicated to the Euchology, he writes: “Inter Euchologia celebre est perantiquum illud, quod adhuc servatur in nostra Bibliotheca Crypto-Ferratensi & nostro Cardinali Bessarione donatum, quodque in Concilio Florentino primae authoritatis pondus habuit, Hujus frequenti lectione Enuditissimus Goar usus est, sicut & alterius diligenti manu nostri Abbatis Falascae Caligraphi exarati”. 43 G. Piacentini, Epitome graecae paleographiae, Rome 1734, 64-65: “..tertia in nobili quodam Buchologio habetur, quo Patres Concilii Florentini usi sunt, quodque ab Eminen- tissimo Bessarione dono datum fuit Monasterio Cryptof. Codex iste membranaceus scriptus est, ut opinor, saec. XI, notaturque lit. C, num, 20”. 44 Raquez, La Congrégation pour la Correction, 520-526. 4 Bbyoadnov obv Oc dyio vewoti petatun@bév Kai werd ndong émpehetag Sop 06év, Rome 1754, The copy I have consulted at the Grottaferrata Library has the following interresting annotation: Librum hunc E.mus Nicolaus Card.lis Antonellins dono dedit cum aliis quinque exemplaribus mihi infrascripto, qui corrigendae prefid editioni. Ego autem dedi D, Flaviano Vanellio Romano: Mense Decembri. 1763. Ego a. Filippus Vitalis Consultor. GROTTAFERRATAT'$.1. 185 Secretary and by other members of the. Congregation who are skilled'in Greek usage*®, In spite of the prudent use of the conditional, the encyclical letter accepts the legend about the euchology and its vicissitudes, and Filippo Vitali, wrongly called there Domenico, annotates carefully on f. A’ of the codex: Hoc exemplari usi fuimus in nova Euchologii Orientalis Edit, typis Congreg, de Propag. fide facta iussu Summi Pontificis Bened, XTV cum Voto Sacr. Cong nis Rit. Orientalium... As usually happens, legends tend to grow rather than shrink, So Cardinal Domenico Bartolini (+ 1887) comes very naturally to attribute to the use of the euchology at the Council of Florence the solution of the debate regarding the Epiclesis*”, At this point of our study one must conclude that of all the notices written on the added flyleaf at the end of the ms the only true one is the first and oldest, attesting to the donation of the euchology to Cardinal Cesarini before 1444, the year of his death. It is more probable that Cardinal Cesarini had given the codex to Pietro Vitale, abbot of the Grottaferrata monastery untill September 1462, rather than to Bes- sarion*®. In the inventory .of books made by order of Niccold Perotti in the context of the transfer of government from Vitale to Bessarion, there is a “Pontificale Chrysostomi copertum”9, The indication can be refered with good probability to our codex; in fact on f. 1" there is this note in Greek: ot 100 ypvoostdpov. The compilator of the list, besides, limits himself to identifying the contents of the books by the meagre indications found on their initial leaves, 46 Butlarium Pontfcium Sacrae Congregations de Propaganda Fide, . il, Romae 1840, p. 393; ef The Vatican andthe Eastern Churches, Papal Encyclicals and Documens eonceming the Eastern Churches, vol. I, Fairfax, Virginia, 1996, $2 (The words in () are added to render better the Latin original). 47 Yotum of E.mo Sig. Cardinale Domenico Bartolini allora Consultore pei Riti Oriental sul Rito Greco di Grottaferrata, Rome 1880, 8. 48 On the circumstances of the changing of the guard in Grottaferrata between Vitale and Bessarion see Parenti, I! monastero di Grottaferrata, 301-503. Pietro Vitale (f 1467) had attended to the Council of Florence and had signed in Greek the Bulla of Union (ibid,, 499- 500). 49 Rocchi, Codices Cryptenses, 267. In the upper margin of the present f. 1" a posterior hand has written: ardty td Xpvaoarsuov, intending to refer to the first prayer, as it is clear from the feminine gender. It is possible that he has not understood correctly the note as referred to the entire codex, given that the extensor does not demonstate a good knowledge of the Greck books in the whole catalogue. 186 STEFANO PARENT! - ELENA VELKOVSKA The information that Cesarini had bequeathed the ms to Bessarion goes back to the lifetime of Pietro Arcudi, in 1626, while the news of the donation to the Monastery of Grottaferrata by Bessarion's last will avd testament — information unknown to Arcudi — is spread by Jacqués Goar in 1647. At the end of the 17" century the notice of Goar is copied on the flyleaf added at the end of the ms, and in this way the codex, becomes not the source of its own history, but the recipient of a fancify| history written by others. The use of the euchology in the sessions of the Council of Florence is an even later conjecture that has, though, succeeded in guaranteeing the ms a celebrity in the Roman milieu. Ina recent study dedicated mostly to the possible use of the codex in the debates of the Council of Florence, Miguel Arranz complaints: “Cest cet usage du codex au Concile qui nous intrigue, car aucun des documents connus ne semble parler de cet important document”5°, Our research will try to explain the reason for this. sk The importance given to the ms is due not only to the history of the book we have illustrated until now, but also to its particularity. as a patriarchal euchology. In 1996 Miguel Arranz published the text in its entirety under the title: “L'eucologio costantinopolitano agli inizi del secolo XT”. In the introduction the author explains his editorial method thus: The reconstruction of the Constantinopolitan euchology of the beginning of the 11" century presented here is based chiefly on the comparison of two main mss with partial support from a third one used to complete the lacunae of the second __. The first of them is the famous Cryptensis gr. Gbl (sic) ... The second codex is a Parisinus Coislin gr. (sic!) 213 ... the third codex is the Atheniensis gr. 66271, ‘The Paris euchology has been copied in 1027 for a certain Strategios, presbyter of the Great Church and of its patriarchal chapels; in the summary of its content the ms is subdivided into 142 chapters. This inspired Arranz to formulate the following syllogism: Insofar as its [of Grottaferrata PB, I] content can be subdivided in 128 units or chapters — not numbered in the codex — corresponding almost to the letter to as many chapters of the Strategios euchology [= Paris Coislin 213], one can think that «Bessarion», too, belongs to the same epoch, that is, to the beginning of the 11" century. However a greater succinctness in the rubrics and the lack in Bessarion of some chapters found, on the contrary, in Strategios, could make us 50 Arranz, Circonstances, 422. 51 Arranz, L'Eucologio costantinopolitano, 7. GROTTAFERRATA IB. 1 187 believe that the codex «Bessariom» or at least the original from which it was copied, was even older than Strategios itself52, As Miguel Arranz rightly points out, the ms has no indication either of date or place of origin. In the introduction to our edition of the euchology Barberini gr. 336 we have proposed for Grottaferrata PB I a 13" century date based on palaeographical arguments that we need not repeat here’. It is enough to remember that the scribe used the so-called “imitation style” typical for mss of 13"and 14"centuries [figg. 2-3)54, A secure terminus is given by the added quire at the end of the book, a paper ternion with the Rite of Monastic Profession — not Italo-Greek —- containing marginal references to the euchology [fig. 4). The watermark, a hatchet, corresponds almost exactly to n° 4688 of the repertory of Mosin - Traljié, datable to 1369-13708, Not being professional palaeographers, we must nevertheless emphasize that the “imitation style” is not a fashion or mode but a deliberate choice on the part of the scribes to ressume older graphical’ models in an epoch like the one following the restoration of the Byzantine Empire after the Latin occupation (1204-1261), when it was important to affirm again the values of tradition and continuity5*. The graphical style is called “of imitation” because the scribes betrayed themselves writing here and there alphabetical characters and forms characteristic of their own age. The question now is whether the peculiarities of the writing corre- spond to the contents of the euchology, that is, to see if the textual recension of the prayers and of the rubrics reveals the presence of “younger” texts. seek Among the Opisthambonos Prayers and Prayers for the Deceased the editor of the euchology has copied two Prayers of Incense with the following incipits: 52 Jhid., 7-8. 53 Lteucologio Barberini gr. 336. Seconda edizione riveduta con traduzione in lingua italiana, a cura di S. Parenti ¢ E. Velkovska (BELS 80), Roma 2000, 43. The dating to the 13" century is sustained also by S. Luci, Sullorigine e datazione del Crypt BB. V1 (ff. 1-9). Appunti sulla collezione manoscritta greca di Grottaferrata, in Tra Oriente e Occidente, Scritture ¢ libri agreci fra le regioni orientali di Bisanzio e 'talia, a cura di L. Pertia (Testi ¢ Studi Bizantino- Neoellenici 14), Rome 2003, 145-224: 207. 54G, Prato, J manoscritti greci dei secoli XIII e XIV: note paleografiche, in Studi di Pax Ieografia Greca, Centro Italiano di Studi sull'Alto Medioevo, Spoleto 1994, 115-131. 55 -y, A. Moin —S. M. Traljié, Filigranes des XIIF et XIV ss., M1, Zagreb 1957, t, 525. 36, Prato, Scritture librarie arcaizzanti della prima eté dei Paleologi e loro modelli, in Studi di Paleografia Greca, 73-114. 188 ‘STEFANO PARENTI - ELENA VELKOVSKA Biyh Ovprdparos. 1) Ovpioud or npootépojtev, Xproté 6 Oedg Hav... 2) Zoi 16 nexAnpajéve néong evodiac...7 In the above-mentioned euchology, Paris Coislin 213, there is only one Prayer of the Incense that corresponds to the second one of the Grottaferrata ms, but we are not concerned with it now. It is enough to remember that it is a Middle-Eastern oration known in the oldest Greek witness of the Liturgy of St James, the 9" century roll Vat. gr. 2282, as the “Prayer of Incense before the Gospel”58. The prayer n° 1 can be found in Coislin 213 among the rites of the stational procession®? and appears in a different recension from that of the euchology of Bessarion™, as it is seen in the comparison below: Grottaferrata DB. 1 Paris Coislin 213 Ovpicud cor npoogépouev, — Ovytaps Gor xpoapéponev, Xptoré 6 Bedc Tmav, gic dopiy evadiac cic douy edwdtas, Xpuoté 6 Ged¢ huav' 6 mpoodetdpevoc, etc 10 drepoupdvidv Gov Ovatactiptov, dvtucatémepyov tiv aviKardtepyov obv hiv ‘ay yépw ai yaw 100 Gyiov cov nvetpat0¢, 200 navayiov cov Tvetpwatos. viv Kal dei Kai eig t0¥g. It is immediately obvious that the Grottaferrata CB I recension is later than the one in Coislin 213. The latter recension was still in use in Constantinople in 1173/4, when Leo Tuscan from Pisa translated in Latin the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom®!, as is seen in the comparison with the text of the Paris euchology that follows: 57 Arranz, L'Eucologio costantinopolitano, 308. 58B.-Ch, Mercier, La Liturgie de saint Jacques. Edition critique du texte grec avec tra- duction latine (PO 26.2), Paris 1946, 168-170. 59 Arranz, L'Eucologio costantinopolitano, 131 rt. 28-30. 60 Joid,, 308. 614. Jacob, La traduction de la Liturgie de saint Jean Chrysostome par Léon Toscan. Edition critique, OCP 32 (1966), 111-162. With regard of the dating we follow M. Coll i Alentorn, Un catala promotor de la traduccio de la Liturgia de sant Joan Crisostom, in Miscel.lania liturgica catalana, Barcellona 1978, 49-52. | GROTTAFERRATA F'8. 1. 189 Paris Coislin 213 Version of Leo Tuscan Ovpiapd cor mpoogéponey, —_ Incensum tibi offerimus, gic domi evodiac, Christe deus, Xproté 6 eds jav: in odorem suauitatis spiritualis, aviiKkaténepyov obv hiv Mitte nobis Thy xapw gratiam 208 navayiov cov nvesuaroc, — spititus sancti, nunc et semper®2, So we think it is correct to date the Grottaferrata IB. I recension of the Prayer of Incense to least after 1174. The lack of intermediate wit- nesses usefull for our study — we have to dismiss Middle-Eastern and Italo-Greek euchologies — does not allow us to know when ‘the recen- sion of the prayer in the “Bessarion” euchology first appears. It is found, however, in the ms Athens EBE 662, ‘another Constantinopolitan euchology written in the “imitation style”, and dated by its editor Panagiotis Kalaitzidis of the end of the 13" century®, Still later we find it on Mount Athos in the Diataxis of the Liturgy composed by Philotheos Kokkinos between 1342 and 13456, a clear sign that this recension was the one destinated to spread, while the one of Coislin 213 had ceased to be diffused by the second half of the 13" centuryS, We are well aware that it is not correct to create a theory based on a single prayer, so let us offer another example. In the section on the rites for Holy Thursday in the Grottaferrata euchology we find “Prayers for the Holy Footwashing as celebrated in the Monasteries”®, In the index of the contents of Paris Coislin 213 there are two rites for this celebration: the “Rite of the Footwashing” (Tdéig h 100 vuntiipoc) and “Another Service of the Footwashing in the Monasteries” CArco- © Jacob, Léon Toscan, 136. 3p. Laz. Kalaitzidé, 7 tr’ dor, 662, xeIpdypago - etyoadyto tis 'EOvixiic ByBhiobif- ng tig EhAdéoc, Excerpta ex Dissertatione ad Doctoratum, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, Roma 2004. 4 Ed, P. Trempelas, Ai tpeig Aevtoupyiat xard tous év'AOjvaig Koidixag (Texte und Forschungen zur byzantinisch-neugriechischen Philologie 15), Athens 1935, 4, right column, On the Diataxis, of Philotheos Kokkinos see A. Rentel, The Origins of the 14 Century Patriarchal Liturgical Diataxis of Dimitrios Gemistos, OCP 71 (2005), 363-385: 368-370. S58, Velkovska, Una preghiera dell'ncenso nell’Eucologio slavo del Sinai, EL 110 (1996), 257-261. 66 Arranz, L'Eucologio costantinopolitano, 222-224, 190 ‘STEFANO PARENT! - ELENA VELKOVSKA Rovdia Etépa tod vinthipos, yrvonévn Ev tis povacmpiotc)s?. This second one has the same title as in the one in the “Bessarion” eucho- logy®8, In this source there is no non-monastic rite of the Footwashing, while both rites mentioned in the index of Coislin 213 are lacking because of a missing quire. Fortunately, some prayers of the monastic rite have been copied in Coislin 2/3 within the Rite of the Monastic Profession of Nuns, where a footwashing of the neo-professed is pro- vided, although it lacks the first leaf®. In this case, too, the recension of the Grottaferrata euchology is dif- ferent from that of the Paris euchology. The text of Coislin 213 agrees with the roll Sinai gr. 956 from the second half of the 10" century”, Sinai gr. 962 (11-12"c.)”, with pontifical euchologies of the Italo-Greek periphery like Vat. gr. 19707, Vat. gr. 187273 and Naples II.C.21, from the 12% and 13® centuries respectively’, the monastic euchology Grottaferrata IB. VIII (12" ¢.) and Torino, Bibl. Univ. C.HL.17 (AD 1173), the typikon of the monastery of S. Nicolas of Casole near Otranto. The recension of Grottaferrata I°f. I agrees, instead, with the ms Jerusalem, Sabas 312 (AD 1201), typikon of the monastery of St John the Baptist on Jordan’, with the typikon of the Constantinopolitan monastery of Evergetis’® and, once more with that of Athens, EBE 662 67 The index of the first hundred folios of Paris Coislin 213 is published in an offset-edition by J. Duncan, Coislin 213. Euchologe de-la Grande Eglise. Dissertatio ad Lauream, Bontifico Istituto Orientale, Rome 1983, 1 ‘Arranz, L'Eucologio costantinopolitano, 222; evyat 100 éryiov virtiipos yivonévat gv wig povaompiors, Paris Coislin 213, f 192%, inc. [ounu d]norimwow compion tanewweoees, Kai sobc tv paOnIGY cov mMivous REdUg dxpavrors Gov xepoiv éxoviyas.... cf Dmitr Il, 1036. 70M, L. Agati, La minuscola «bouletée» (Littera Antiqua 9,1-2), Vatican City 1992, 1, 301, U tav. 217; the content is described and partially edited by Dmitr Il, 12-19. 71 Cf Dmitr Il, 66. 72 Vat, gr. 1970, ff. 7'-8", described by A. Jacob, L’euchologe de Sancte-Marie du Patir et ses sources, in Atti del Congresso internazionale su S, Nilo di Rossano (28 settembre - 1 ottobre 1986), Rossano - Grottaferrata 1989, 75-118: 87. 7B Yat. gr. 1872, ff. 85-89", described by P. Canart, Bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae Codices manu scripti ... Codices Vaticani graeci: codices 1745-1962, tomus I: Codicum ‘enarrationes, Citt2 del Vaticano 1970, 422-426. 74Cf the entry of A. Jacob in Codici greci dell'lalia meridionale, a cura di P. Canart ¢ S. Luc’, Rome 2000, 115. 75 Dmitr Il, 68-70, but cf. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, ‘Avdidexta 'lepooodynectniig orazvohoyiag, It, St. Peterburg 1894 (Bruxelles 1963), 441-444 and the table following page 442, 16 The Synaxarion of the Monastery of the Theotokos Evergetis, Il: March - August. The Movable Cycle, Text and translation by R, H. Jordan (Belfast Byzantine Texts and Trans- GROTTAFERRATA TB. 1 191 from the end of the 13" century’, Thus, the dating of the text of the prayers as a whole, and not that of the codex, has to be put at the beginning of the 13" century. kK We come now to our conclusions. 1) For the history of the “Bessarion” codex the only reliable notice comes from the autograph note of Cardinal Giuliano Cesarini datable before 1444, the year of his death, where he attests that the book was given to him by the priest George Vari from Candia. 2) The notice that the donation was made during the Council of Florence — hence before 1439 — goes back to the De Concordia ec- clesiae universae of Pietro Arcudi, published in 1626. 3) The information about Cardinal Cesarini's donation of the eu- chology to Bessarion of Nicea, and Bessarion's willing it to the Grot- taferrata monastery, dates from the years after 1626 and before 1647. 4) The notice about the employment of the ms during the Council of Florence for solving liturgical problems dates only from 1728, This last notice (4) is the most implausible of all. It is hard to un- derstand why the Greeks at Florence would have needed to use an anonymous 13" century ms like Grottaferrata IB I. On June 17, during the conciliar discussions on the Epiclesis, Byzantine Emperor Constantine XI Paleologus could assert that the Epiclesis text in question could be found in two thousand copies spread all over the Eastern churches’8, All there vicissitudes can be resumed in few words: the fabulous history of the euchology Grottaferrata If. I has grown according to the needs of the epoch. The private gift of a Greek priest to a cardinal becomes an instrument of propaganda at the service of 17-18" century ecclesiastical policy accustomed to seeing in the Council of Florence the lations 6.5/6), Belfast 2005, 480-483. According to P, Gautier, Le typikon de la Théotokos Evergétes, REB 40 (1982), 5-101:13 the codex has been dated by Otto Kresten to the 14" century (“il s'agit d'une écriture archaisante de la premiére mioitié da 14° siécle, voire du premier quart [vers 1310}). B. Crostini Lappin, Structure and Dating of Codex Atheniensis Graccus 788, Typikon of the Monastery of the Theotokos Evergetis (founded in 1049), Seriptorium 52/2 (1998), 330-349, proposes the 12" century instead. But the recension of the text of the prayers seems to support rather the opinion of Kresten, 77 Athens, EBE 662, ff. 97°-99', 78 Les “Mémoires” du Grand Ecclésiarque de TEglise de Constantinople Sylvestre Syro- poulos sur le concile de Florence (1438-1439), ed. V. Laurent (Concilium Florentinum Documenta et Scriptores 9), Rome 1971, 476 192 ‘STEFANO PARENTI - ELENA VELKOVSKA. only crucial point to heal the division of the Eastern and the Western Church. The problem becomes even more complex for the history of the Constantinopolitan euchology and thus of the Byzantine rite. The com- parison, based on some examples, between the text of the euchology Grottaferrata T°B. I and other sources shows that the scribe, in spite of the archaizing taste of his epoch betrayed himself by yielding to con- temporary sources of the 13" century. The Grottaferrata euchology, like the rolls of the same epoch, copies one prayer after another without furnishing almost any rubrics. Experience has taught that with such witnesses is difficult to built the history of a text — always identical to itself— and it is practically impossible to write the history of the rite. For the history and the establishment of the text of the Constantino- politan euchology of the 11" century and related liturgical practice there are no valid reasons to reject, as Miguel Arranz has done, the ms Paris Coislin 213, copied in Costantinople in 1027, which gives us an extremely vivid and detailed picture of the liturgical live of the time, in favor of an “erudite” euchology like that of Grottaferrata If. I. At the bottom of all this is a misunderstanding, certainly not warranted, between a history of the prayers and of their manuscript editions, and a history of the liturgical tradition contained in the cuchology. A euchology is by definition an anthology of prayers. But already in the 8” century it is not only that: for we already find rubrics and diakonika too. To give preference to the Grottaferrata euchology means to submit to the same temptation as its scribe: that of archaizing. A serious study of the Constantinopolitan euchology needs at least a prior effort to find all chief witnesses from the period when it is still possible to speak in proper and organic sense of a Constantinopolitan tradition, hence from the end of the 8" century until the Fall of Con- stantinople in 1453. Furthermore, a division into geographical families is needed to clarify the diffusion of the tradition throughout the Byzantine Commonwealth, taking as its point of departure not this or that rite, but the euchology as such, considerating every copy as a single and real edition come from the hands of the scribe. These are methods and proceedings needed to study any document of the Medieval Christian culture as it makes its way through a manuscript tradition. There is nothing new in all this, but it is necessary to put the theory into practice. GROTTAFERRATA PB. 193 Loic ctchily fa PG Aaniuebef ce Sih : je wtenatel ee PE Gabe ‘er ales ( a ie Moll rite furs Mbay: ee Goan? Sy se Sock a a

    You might also like