ARTICLES

Georgi Parpulov (Göttingen, Germany)

Byzantine Book Epigrams

in Medieval Slavonic Manuscripts

‛Book epigrams are poems that are intimately related to the production of literary
texts and manuscripts. The scribe may sign his work after completion, his verses
forming the colophon of the manuscript. The ktetor, on whose behalf the manuscript has
been copied, may record his name and possibly his donation (if he presents the book to a
third party) in a dedicatory book epigram. The author of the text or texts found in the
manuscript may be praised abundantly for his literary talents: such poems are laudatory
book epigrams.’1 A great many Byzantine book epigrams have now been collected in an
online corpus,2 but comparable Slavonic texts have attracted little notice.3 This first
attempt at surveying them is fondly dedicated to Alexander Borisovich’s memory.

I. To start with, I illustrate each of the aforesaid three types with examples from a
Slavonic context.
I.1. First, a scribal colophon. In the year 1411/12, at the Monastery of Chilandari on
Mount Athos, a monk named Gabriel finished translating the catena commentary on the
Book of Job from a Greek exemplar belonging to the nearby Monastery of Esphig-
menou. His work survives in autograph.4 Its longish colophon is preceded by four lines
of Greek minuscule script introduced in the left margin as στίχοι and written in the same
red ink as the rubrics of the book’s principal, Slavonic text:5
† δόξα τῶ ὁδηγοῦντοι εἰς ἀρχῆν καλὸς : καὶ βα|στάσαντοι μέχρη τέλους ἀβλαβὸς : || ὁ
ἔχων τὸν γράψαντα μνήσθοιτη λέγον : | ποῦ ἐστίν ὁ γράψας τῆν πυκτήδαν ταῦτην : ~

1
M. D. Lauxtermann, Byzantine Poetry from Pisides to Geometres: Texts and Contexts, 2 vols
(Vienna 2003-2019) I:197-8.
2
Database of Byzantine Book Epigrams (thereafter DBBE) at www.dbbe.ugent.be. All DBBE
numbers cited below refer to types of book epigrams. Each type corresponds to one or more
separately numbered manuscript occurrences. The database entries list up-to-date bibliography.
3
Two important case studies: Г.М. Прохоров, Памятники переводной и русской литерату-
ры XIV-XV веков (Ленинград 1987) 27-42; Ђ. Трифуновић, ‘Превод стихова Георгија Пам-
фила у Паноплији догматики Јевтимија Зигавина’, Зборник Матице српске за књижев-
ност и -језик 42 (1994) 469-476.
4
Moscow, State Historical Museum (ГИМ), Син. 202. On this manuscript most recently:
И. Христова-Шомова, ‘Двата славянски превода на катената на Книга Йов’, Palaeobulgari-
ca 30.2 (2006) 3-26.
5
ГИМ, Син. 202, ff. 309v-301r. Photograph of the two pages and text of the Slavonic colophon:
Ђ. Трифуновић, ‘Записи инока Гавриила, преводиоца тумачења књиге о Jову’, in Литера-
турознание и фолклористика: в чест на 70-годишнината на акад. Петър Динеков (София
1983) 108-111. The Greek verses are unpublished.

Palaeoslavica XXX/1-2 (2022), pp. 335-344

336 Georgi Parpulov

The quatrain is evidently the translator-scribe’s own work: not a single phrase from it
occurs in another manuscript. Gabriel, who marked each of his verses with a colon,
wrote in a somewhat loose dodecasyllabic meter (I designate stressed syllables with ■,
non-stressed or weakly stressed ones with □, and caesuras with a double space):

■□□□□■ □□□■□■
□□■□□ ■□■□□□■
□■□□■□□ ■□□■□
■□□□■□ □□■□■□

The meter is loose because standard Byzantine verse of this kind has a caesura
(Binnenschluss) after the fifth or seventh syllable – but not after the sixth, as happens in
the beginning and the end here.6 Moreover, it is the eleventh rather than the twelfth syl-
lable of each verse that would be normally stressed.7 Gabriel’s versification is beyond
repair, but his orthography can be improved:

Δόξα τῷ ὁδηγοῦντι εἰς ἀρχὴν καλῶς

καὶ βαστάσαντι μέχρι τέλους ἀβλαβῶς.
Ὁ ἔχων, τὸν γράψαντα μνήσθητι λέγων·
«Ποῦ ἐστὶν ὁ γράψας τὴν πυκτίδα ταύτην;»
Glory to Him who guides well in the beginning
and carried [me] safely to the end.
Owner, remember the scribe, saying:
‘Where is the one who wrote this book?’.

I.2. Second, the record of a ktetor’s name. In 1321/22, an anonymous scribe working
most probably in the Bulgarian capital Turnovo copied a Slavonic Gospel by order of
Tsar George Terter. He marked the book’s end with a colophon written in red. Just
below this, in ink of the same colour, is a cryptographic ex-libris formed of majuscule
Greek letters turned sideways:8
† εὐσεββεστάτου ἄνακτος, γεορ|γίου †
The words form a regular dodecasyllable:
□□□■□ ■□□□□■□
Εὐσεβεστάτου ἄνακτος Γεωργίου.
[Book] of the most pious king George.

6
Lauxtermann, Byzantine Poetry, II:353-359.
7
Ibid., II:320-322.
8
Mt Athos, Chilandari, 18, f. 214r. Photograph, transcription, and discussion of the colophon
most recently in Б. Христова, Д. Караджова, Е. Узунова, Бележки на българските книжовници
Х-ХVIII век, 2 vols (София 2003-2004) I:38, 98, 154-155, 212. The Greek text was not pre-
viously recognized as metrical.
 Byzantine Book Epigrams in Medieval Slavonic Manuscripts 337

This verse, too, is an apparently original composition. The Bulgarian monarch pro-
bably chose to have it penned in Greek because of that language’s prestige as a vehicle
of learning.

I.3. Third, a laudatory epigram. The author praised abundantly for his literary talents
is Saint Gregory of Nazianzus. The eulogist is Saint Constantine-Cyril the Philosopher,
Apostle of the Slavs. The poem, no doubt originally composed in that saint’s native
Greek, was translated by his nameless Slavic biographer more or less as follows:9

, , ћ .
, , ћ .
! ,
" # # $
# % . & ,
# # $ ' ,
# ( # .

The translation is roughly isosyllabic but seems to exhibit no recognisable stress

pattern.10 (One must keep in mind that the position of Old Church Slavonic accents can
only be guessed at, so mine is a very approximate diagram.)

□□■□■□□□■□□□■□■□□
■□■□□□■□□□■□□□■□
■□□□■□□□■□□□□□■□
■□□□■□□□□□■□□□■□□
■□□■□□■□□□■□□□■□
□□■□□□□■□■□□□■□□
□■□□■□□□■□□□□□■□□
Your body, O Gregory, is human, but your soul angelic,
for, being human in body, you appeared as an angel:
your mouth, just like one of the seraphim,
praises God and enlightens the whole world
with instruction about the orthodox faith. Me, too,
who bows to you with love and faith,
receive. Be my teacher and enlightener.

9
All surviving manuscript copies date from the fifteenth century or later. I follow the text
restored by Nikolai Trubetzkoy and by Roman Jacobson and printed most recently in E. Mineva
and I. Polemis, ‘Saint Cyril’s Poem for Saint Gregory the Theologian: A Byzantine Epigram’, in
Cyril and Methodius: Byzantium and the World of the Slavs. 28-30 November 2013 (Thessaloni-
ki 2015) 465-470 at 467. The same article offers an attempt at reconstructing the poem’s lost
Greek original.
10
Cf. Р. Якобсон, ‘Похвала Константина Философа Григорию Богослову’, Slavia 39 (1970)
334-361 at 338-340.
338 Georgi Parpulov

The enjambments in the penultimate sentence are very unusual by Byzantine

standards.11 All in all, it remains unclear if the translator made any effort to replicate the
metrical structure of Saint Cyril’s lost poem.

II. I know of three instances where Greek book epigrams and their medieval Slavonic
translation can be directly compared.
ΙΙ.1. In 1347, Stephen Dušan’s consort Elena of Serbia discreetly visited Mount
Athos, then under Serbian rule, sought out a certain monk named Joannicius, and bid
him translate into Slavonic Archbishop Theophylact’s Commentary on the Gospels.12
Elena was aware that the Greek original of this work had been sponsored by another
royal lady, Εmpress Maria, whose patronage was recorded in a dedicatory poem (DBBE
5632):
Τῆς βασιλίσσης ἐννόημα Μαρίας
ψυχῆς ἀληθῶς ἔργον εὐγενεστάτης
ὁ δὲ τρυγήσας τοὺς μελιρρύτους λόγους
Θεοφύλακτος ποιμενάρχης Βουλγάρων.
□□□■□ □■□□□■□
□■□□■ ■□□□□■□
□□□■□ □□□■□■□
□□■□□ □□■□□■□
Joannicius rendered the above verses as follows (Fig. 1):13
Марїе царице благоразумно прошенїе,
душе истинные дѣло благоразумно.
Сьбрави же плоди медоточнныи – чьстныи
Ѳе фїлактъ Бльгар м пастирь прьвоначелныи.
■□□□■□□□□■□□■□□
■□□□■□■□□□□■□
■□□■□□■□□□■□□
□□□■□■□■□□□□■□□
Empress Maria’s benevolent request
[was] the benevolent deed of a truthful soul.
He who gathered the honey-flowing fruit [was] the honourable
Theophylact, chief shepherd of the Bulgarians.

11
Lauxtermann, Byzantine Poetry, II:351-353.
12
Leipzig, Stadtbibliothek, Slav. 8, f. 128r-v. The corresponding part of the manuscript dates
from the early seventeenth century. On it see most recently: M. Убипарин, ‘Трагом књиге пи-
сане за царицу Јелену’, Прилози за књижевност, језик, историју и фоклор 78-79 (2004)
125-133.
13
The translated epigram and an explanatory note (not included here) that follows it in the
manuscripts are printed in А.И. Яцимирский, Описание южнославянских и русских рукопи-
сей заграничных библиотек (Петроград 1921) 540-541.
 Byzantine Book Epigrams in Medieval Slavonic Manuscripts 339

The word чьстныи has no counterpart in the Greek and may have been added for the
sake of isosyllaby. If so, its insertion produced an enjambment. Joannicius’s translation
qualifies, at best, as rhythmic prose.

II.2. In 1371, Isaiah, former abbot of the Panteleimon Monastery on Mount Athos,
finished rendering into Slavonic the works of Dionysius the Areopagite. His text of the
Heavenly Hierarchy (CPG 6600) is preceded by two poems (Fig. 2):14
Гранесїсловїа книзѣ светаго Дї нисїа
т великааго Дїонѵсїа словъ
не убо кто обрѧщет книгу скѫпѣишѫ
въсѣко праведнѣ ниже высочѧишѧѫ
аще сїа высока, сребро и порфїра.
□□■□□□□□■□□■
□□■□■□■□□■□□
■□■□□□□□■□□□
■□■□□■□■□□■□□
Verses about the Book of Saint Dionysius
No one will find a book more valuable (2)
or indeed more sublime (3)
than the words of the great Dionysius, (1)
if these things, silver and purple, be sublime.

Надписанїе въ блаженнаго Дїонѵсїа

Аггьльскыия прѣмѫдрости свѣтлости мн гыя разумѣвъ
чловек м ‫ش‬вилъ еси видѣти умосъставнѫѧ ѕвѣздѫ.
□□■□□□□■□■□□■□□□□■
□■□□■□□□■□□□□■□□■□
Epigram on the Blessed Dionysius
Having comprehended many radiances of angelic wisdom
you made humans see a mentally formed star.
The Greek originals of these two poems (DBBE 3106 and 1863) are composed,
respectively, in dodecasyllable and in dactylic hexameter.
Τῶν τοῦ μεγίστου Διονυσίου λόγων
οὐκ ἄν τις εὕροι βίβλον ἀκριβεστέραν
οὐκοῦν δικαίως οὐδὲ κομπωδεστέραν
εἰ ταῦτα κόμπος, ἄργυρος καὶ πορφύρα.15
14
These two translations are edited, together with their Greek originals, by Prokhorov, Памят-
ники, 28-32. Prokhorov also publishes Isaiah’s Slavonic versions (not discussed here) of DBBE
2385 and 2003: ibid, 32-35.
15
Prokhorov rightly points out that this epigram was originally composed for a codex written in
silver ink upon purple-died parchment: Памятники, 28.
340 Georgi Parpulov

□□□■□ □□□■□■□
□■□■□ ■□□□□■□
□■□■□ □■□□□■□
□■□■□ ■□□□□■□

Ἐπίγραμμα εἰς τὸν μακάριον Διονύσιον

Ἀγγελικῆς σοφίης ἀμαρύγματα πολλὰ κιχήσας
ἀνθρώποις ἀνέφηνας ἰδεῖν νοοσύνθετον ἄστρον.
–◡◡–◡◡–◡◡–◡◡–◡◡––
– – –◡◡–◡◡–◡◡–◡◡––

It is hard to say whether Isaiah was at all aware of the prosody in the second poem
and whether he attempted to reproduce it. His translations are isosyllabic but, as far as I
can see, not metrical. 16

II.3. In the early fifteenth century, an anonymous translator rendered Euthymius

Zigabenus’s Dogmatic Panoply into Slavonic. Part of his work survives in an autograph
copy which carries marginal notes such as this one: ‘Insert before the preface to Title
Fifteen three passages by John of Damascus which the Greek exemplar (извод) from
which I had translated this book did not have. When I thought that I had finished, I took
[a copy] of the same book from Vatopedi, went through what I had written before, and
found countless defects.’17 By lucky chance, that exact book from Vatopedi has survived
and contains, alone among Greek copies of the Panoply, two marginal poems (DBBE
30051 and 30052) that our translator added to his text, too.18
Τοῦ Παμφίλου
Τίς οὗτος; Εὐθύμιος, οὗ κλέος μέγα
ἐν ὀρθοδόξοις καὶ σοφοῖς μονοτρόποις,
ὁ Ζιγαβηνός, τήνδε τὴν Πανοπλίαν
ὁ συντεταχὼς εὐφυῶς τῶν Δογμάτων.

16
Prokhorov maintains that the first translation is iambic and the second prosodic: Памятники,
29 and 32. His hypothetical distribution of ‘intonational’ (as opposed to ‘grammatical’) accents
and of vowel lengths seems arbitrary to me.
17
Bucharest, Biblioteca Academiei Române, Slav. 296, f. 193v, early fifteenth century. I have
not seen this manuscript. Slavonic text of the note and discussion of the manuscript: Н. Гагова,
Владетели и книги: Участието на южнославянския владетел в производството и упо-
требата на книги през Средновековието (София 2010) 128-138, esp. 134.
18
Mt Athos, Vatopedi, 162, f. 149r, early twelfth century: G. Parpulov and H. Kusabu, ‘The
Publication Date of Euthymius Zigabenus’s Dogmatic Panoply’, Revue d’histoire des textes
II.14 (2019) 63-67 at 65-66. The Slavonic translations are edited by M. Tsibranska-Kostova,
‘Encomia in the Slavonic Copies of Euthymius Zigabenus’s Panoplia Dogmatike’, Bulgarian
Historical Review 44.3-4 (2017) 3-23 at 16-17. I have had no opportunity to check her printed
text against the Bucharest manuscript.
 Byzantine Book Epigrams in Medieval Slavonic Manuscripts 341

□■□□■□□ □■□■□
□□□■□ □□■□□■□
□□□□■ ■□□□□■□
□□□□■ □□■□□■□
Τοῦ Ζιγαβηνοῦ
Ποῖον κλέος; Πέπαυσο, μὴ γίνου κόλαξ.
■□■□■□□ □■□■□

Стïхове Памфïла кь Зïгавину

Кто сьи? Еѵѳѵмïе,
егоже похвала вь православнiх многа
и вь прѣмудрости сущихь единонравних,
Зïгавинь же убо
сьчетавыи сïу велѣнïомь книгу
иже и Паноплïy
благоразумнѣ sѣло и строумнѣ.
■□□□■□□
□■□■□□□□□□■□■□
□□■□□■□□■□□□
□■□□□■
□■□□□■□■□□■□
□□□□□■□
□□■□□■□□□□■□
Pamphilus’s Verses to Zigabenus
Who is this [man]? Euthymius,
who is much praised among the Orthodox
and among those who in wisdom lead a solitary life;
Zigabenus, who by command compiled this book
most benevolently and cleverly.

Зïгавеновь сïи кь Памфïлïу твѣть

Каа похвала? Прѣстани уже!
Не бываѥт т му ласкателству ни.
□■■□□□■□□■
□□■□□■□■□□□
This is Zigabenus’s Reply to Pamphilus
What praise? Stop already!
Such flatterer is not permissible.
The word ‘command’ does not match the Greek original and probably refers to
Emperor Alexis Comnenus, who is praised as patron of the Panoply in three longish
342 Georgi Parpulov

Greek poems (DBBE 2344, 2265, and 2571) which also form part of our anonymous
translation. 19 Their Slavonic versions are decidedly non-metrical. 20
Small and selective as it may be, the aforegoing florilegium probably permits a
couple of general remarks. It is well known that Slavic translators would reduce to prose
versified Greek works such as the Dioptra or Manasses’s History. 21 Being short and
metrically less challenging, epigrams could, in principle, have been treated differently.
But this did not happen: while most of the Slavonic renditions quoted above are not
excessively literal, none exhibits a recognizable tonic pattern. At the same time, some
translators expressly labelled epigrams as verse (гранесїсловїа, стïхове), and at least
one was able to compose relatively correct Greek dodecasyllable. It seems, then, that
medieval Orthodox Slavs were not ‘deaf’ to Greek metre but just did not deem it
necessary – or feasible – to match the metrical form of Greek poetic texts. This is one
more, as yet little noted, aspect of their reception of Byzantine culture.22

Göttingen Academy of Sciences and Humanities

19
Slavonic text in Tsibranska-Kostova, ‘Encomia’, 7-9. This article also includes the Slavonic
translations (not discussed here) of DBBE 3696, 3698, and 3700: ibid., 10.
20
Трифуновић, ‘Превод стихова’.
21
H. Miklas and J. Fischbauer, Die kirchenslavische Übersetzung der Dioptra des Philippos
Monotropos (Vienna 2013-); И. Дуйчев and М.А. Салмина, Среднеболгарский перевод Хро-
ники Константина Манассии в славянских литературах (София 1988).
22
I thank Mary MacRobert and Marc Lauxtermann for their critical comments on this article. All
mistakes are mine.
Byzantine Book Epigrams in Medieval Slavonic Manuscripts 343

Fig. 1. Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek (deposit of the Stadtbibliothek Leipzig),

Slav. 8, f. 149r, early seventeenth century (photo: library)
344 Georgi Parpulov

Fig. 2. Moscow, State Library of Russia (РГБ), ф. 173/I №144, f. 7v,

early fifteenth century (photo: library)