Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Edificatory Prose Between Union of Flore

    Uploaded by

    Mihai
    5 views20 pages

    Original Title

    Edificatory_prose_between_union_of_Flore

    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
    5 views20 pages

    Edificatory Prose Between Union of Flore

    Uploaded by

    Mihai

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 20
    HARVARD UKRAINIAN STUDIES Volume 32-33 2011-2014 DKHMBA Essays Presented in Honor of George G. Grabowicz on His Seventieth Birthday Edited by Roman Koropeckyj, Taras Koznarsky, and Maxim Tarnawsky Part Two Cambridge, Massachusetts Harvard Ukrainian Studies 32-33 (2011-2014): 853-71 Edificatory Prose of the Kyivan Metropolitanate: Between the Union of Florence and the Union of Brest ‘VALERII ZEMA "Tas anricue TRACES the development of edificatory prose in the lands of the Kyivan Metropolitanate, a region of fascinating mutual crosscurrents among adherents of different religions and Christian denominations." The lands of Ukraine and Belarus were traditionally inhabited by various groups: Ashkenazi Jews, Karaites, Poles, Germans, Armenians, and Greeks, with Ruthenians being the most visible on the ethnic map. The focal point of this investigation is the phenomenon of preaching and homiletics from the Middle Ages and Renaissance through the Reformation and Counter-Reformation. In this context, the central events for the Kyivan Metropolitanate were two Church Councils—the universal or ecumenical (in the Catholic view) Union of Florence (1439) and the local Union of Brest (1596)—and the challenges of the Reformation that emerged in the period between these two synods. Whereas the Union of Florence was virtually rejected and then forgotten over time in Ruthenian lands, the Union of Brest had ‘amore vibrant history, and its main result, an attempt to find a union of the Latin and the Byzantine-Slavic cultural and spiritual worlds, reverberates to the present day. During this period, the development of edificatory prose coincided with the development of the local vernacular, which became more influential in chancery usage: for several centuries Ruthenian functioned as the language of governance in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, both in civil administration and jurisprudence. Unlike in Central and Western Europe, where the development of vernacular literary languages was stimulated by the widespread sweep of Biblical transla- tions, in Ruthenian lands the Ostroh Bible of 1581 was translated and published * ‘The nature of medieval and early modem literature and culture on Ukrainian lands was largely determined by exchanges between Latin and Byzantine-Slavonic versions of Christianity, These exchanges and phenomena of intercultural conversation on the Polis Ukrainian borderline have been studied by George G. Grabowicz for decades. This essay is presented in appreciation of his significant contribution to the development of this field. 854 ZEMA not in Ruthenian but in Church Slavonic. Some biblical texts were translated into Ruthenian or had some features of local vernacular, but there was nothing equal to the King James version or Luther’s Bible in Ukrainian lands.' The publication or copying of edificatory prose perhaps served as a bridge between the bookish language of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and the language that evolved in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. These texts were mostly included into such codices as prefaces to homilies and sermons. Gospel quotations and explanations of the Holy Scripture in the vernacular contained in those works played an essential role in the edification of lay people. The differing responses to the Union of Florence in the vast lands of the Kyivan Metropolitanate deserve special emphasis. For almost two centuries, Kyivan metropolitans on Polish and Lithuanian territories sought a kind of church universalism that would secure their independence from the local secular authori- ties. In neighboring Muscovy, on the other hand, the dependence of the church upon the sovereign grew simultaneously with territorial expansion. In Russian historiography this phenomenon has been described as a process of gathering of lands (sobiranie zemel’), with emphasis on claims to the Kyivan heritage.? There, the well-established tradition of secular control over the church perhaps originated in the oriental and despotic origins of local statism. Different attitudes toward the centralization process prevailing in the lands of Muscovy and Novgorod on the one hand, and in the lands of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Polish Crown on the other, brought about a division of the Kyivan Metropolitanate in the mid-fifteenth century. In the lands of Muscovy and Novgorod an autocephalous ‘metropolitanate was established under the powerful influence of the local ruling dynasty and Grand Prince Vasilii Vasil’evich personally. This newly forged church entity severed the traditional connection of the Kyivan Church with Constan- tinople. Numerous texts with strong anti-Catholic sentiments were written in support of this separation, and various versions of anti-Florentine treatises were copied in many miscellanies in the lands of the newly created Muscovite Metro- politanate. At the same time, the absence of anti-Florentine texts in miscellanies produced on the territory of the Kyivan Metropolitanate until the last decades of the sixteenth century perhaps indicates the implicit intentions there to reestablish the Union with Rome. Local religious and cultural developments were manifested through the appear- ance and evolution of different forms of homiletics and edificatory prose. Thus, new forms of communication started to emerge in the lands of Eastern and Central Europe in the first decades of the fifteenth century, around the time that Jan Hus began preaching in the Bethlehem Chapel in Prague. In the present article I trace two interdependent processes: the phenomenon of language emancipation—that is, the process whereby Ruthenian dialects were increasingly utilized in book writing and preaching—and the development of creative writing, when new or substantially modified or renovated texts and miscellanies proliferated throughout EDIFICATORY PROSE OF THE KYIVAN METROPOLITANATE 855 the Kyivan Metropolitanate. Edificatory prose was forged as a tripartite system in the inter-Union period that included (1) traditional Church Slavonic texts; (2) texts of Western origin (both Catholic and Protestant, translated into Ruthenian); and (3) original Ruthenian texts. We can assume that edificatory prose circulated on several levels in Ukrainian society: as monastery readings, as church orations, and as private devotional reading, with the same texts serving different functions. Significant examples of the revival of edificatory works in the Kyivan Metro- politanate were the sermons of Metropolitan Gregory Tsamblak (1364-1419/20, metropolitan in 1414-1419), whose travel to the Council of Constance was described in Western chronicles, Tsamblak, probably, remained under the strong influence of traditional Byzantine-Slavonic heritage. His sermons were included ina traditional miscellany titled Torzhestvennik (Panegyric). A collection of his sermons titled Kniga Tsamblak (Tsamblak Book) was created in the mid-fifteenth century. His works were copied even in Muscovy, despite the fact that this Kyi- van metropolitan was elected in Navahrudak by the Synod of Polish-Lithuanian Orthodox bishops under pressure from Grand Prince Vytautas. The social structure of the medieval and early modern population of Ukraine and Belarus was, as mentioned earlier, multiconfessional and multiethnic in char- acter. Ruthenian and Old Slavonic books or miscellanies reflect only the Ortho- dox segment of this society. Local Jewish, Catholic, Armenian, and Protestant believers existed in their own parallel! worlds, but some of these groups actively influenced Ruthenian life as well. Several Ruthenian scholars, in particular Paulus Ruthenus Crosnensis, were involved in the world of Latin and Neo-Latin literacy during the Renaissance and the Reformation, while one of the founders of Jesuit preaching, Benedykt Herbest from Nove Misto, urged Ruthenians to convert to Catholicism.’ Not all of these Ruthenian authors have yet been identified, since most of the original texts of the inter-Union period were anonymous. However, the emergence of recognized authorship led to the growing reflection of the authors” individual personalities in Ruthenian writings as well. It became even more evi- dent in the second half of the sixteenth century, with the growth of congregations and the development of family professions. For example, Danylo Smotryts’kyi from Podolia was the author and copyist of a miscellany that simultaneously contains texts belonging to traditional bookish Byzantine-Slavonic culture, the Ruthenian “Passion” with its anti-Jewish sentiments, and legends criticizing the Hussite movement (copy held in the National Library of Russia, St. Petersburg {hereafter RNB], Manuscript Division, Pogodin collection, MS 840). Danylo’s son Herasym was the leading authority at the Orthodox Ostroh Academy who wrote and published a number of polemical and theological treatises and pre- pared the Ostroh Bible for publication. This Church Slavonic edition of the Bible became popular among readers far beyond the Ruthenian world, from Russian Old Believers to Orthodox believers in the Balkans, However, Herasym’s son Meletii Smotryts’kyi, the most influential Ruthenian intellectual of the early 856 ZEMA modern period, preferred to use in his writings the Polish translation of the Bible by Szymon Budny, who belonged to the radical branch of Polish-Lithuanian Protestantism, to the Church Slavonic Ostroh Bible of his father. The old Kyivan, pre-Mongolian literary heritage was essential for inter-Union religious life and Orthodox book culture in the Ruthenian lands. For example, the hagiographies and liturgical services dedicated to the sacrae familiae Kijoviensis (Boris, Gleb, and their father Volodimer), the first Kyivan saints who were the symbols of the unity of Kyivan Metropolitanate, had been copied in the different regions of the East Christian world from the Balkan Peninsula to Novgorod. However, specifically Ruthenian copies contain several special features or com- ponents of these texts, shaping their peculiarity in comparison with texts from other regions.* The history of research into this early Ruthenian manuscript legacy has been complicated mainly by two factors. First, the heritage of the Soviet past, when Ukrainian scholarship in the humanities was virtually eradicated. Second, medi- eval and early modern Ruthenian manuscripts were particularly widely dissemi- nated throughout the various countries of Eastern Europe, and the colonial status of Ukraine ensured that a considerable number of these codices were discovered not locally, but in manuscript collections of the capitals and other major centers of the former ruling powers.> Religious life in the inter-Union period in the lands of the Kyivan metropoli- tanate flourished, particularly with exploration of spiritual questions and various mystical practices. On the one hand, it was a time of vigorous literary polem- ics between believers of different Christian confessions, and on the other hand, professional, familial, and personal connections among Catholics, Protestants, Radical Reformers, and Orthodox were widespread. Another crucial factor affect- ing religious development in the Ruthenian lands was simple exhaustion from the numerous military campaigns conducted or instigated by neighboring Muscovy. Additionally, the plundering campaigns of the Crimean khan Mengli Gerai led Kyiv and Volhynia to ruin in the 1480s, whereas the Lithuanian and Livonian wars exhausted the financial and human resources of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the sixteenth century. Two powerful phenomena affecting religious culture in Ukrainian lands of the fifteenth century have yet to be properly studied: the Union of Florence and the Renaissance. Such was the broader context for the religious and linguistic development of the period. The rise of religious preaching in turn coincided with growing language emancipation, as described above, when the local dialects began to influence Ruthenian edificatory prose. The local Ruthenian language began to appear in sacred texts in the lands of old Ukraine—that is, in the areas between the Dnieper and Dniester rivers and their numerous tributaries—already in the first centuries after the Christianization of Kyiv and its surrounding principalities. If the process of the Ruthenian language’s entry into book culture was slow, EDIFICATORY PROSE OF THE KYIVAN METROPOLITANATE 857 the changes in the chancery culture were more rapid. This process of language emancipation is apparent in the civil legislation and chancery record keeping that used Latin documents as a model. Arguably, the Ruthenian language began to function as a vehicle for special terminology already in the fourteenth century. The Czech scholar Josef Maciirek, in his comparative investigation of several Old Bohemian and Ruthenian charters available to him, pointed to what he saw as the essential influence of Old Bohemian on Ruthenian terminology in the four- teenth and fifteenth centuries.* He also noted the phenomenon of the rapid spread of Ruthenian chancery terminology in the territory of neighboring Moldavia. In Mactirek’s view, Old Czech chancery terminology had developed under the influence of foreign legal systems and later came to influence the jurisprudence of Eastern Europe. Inhis dissertation, Hungarian scholar Andras Zoltén disputed Maciirek’s asser- tions about the influence of Old Bohemian on the development of Ruthenian terminology.” According to Zoltan, the similarity of the Old Ukrainian and Czech legal terminology is rooted in their mutual archetype—Latin legal formulations. However, Ruthenian legal acts appeared earlier than the Bohemian, Moreover, Ruthenian terminology affected some Muscovite anti-Union tracts. The stability of Ruthenian language forms, according to Zoltén’s research, can be traced in Muscovite apocryphal texts about the travels of an Orthodox monk to Florence and Ferrara, about the Council itself, and about the rejection of the Florentine Union in Muscovy. Therefore, Zoltan came to the conclusion that Muscovite ecclesiastical diplomacy had used Ruthenian terminology, especially for the description of the Western European, Catholic world. The permeation of local dialects into the language of Kyivan preaching inten- sified in the first decades of the fifteenth century. One of the earliest texts with local language influence is the Zhitie Andreia Iurodivogo (Life of Andrew the Fool-for-Christ). This was a new version of the older legend about the saint, who was born in Scythia and came to live in Constantinople. According to the legend, during one of his prayers the saint had a vision of the Most Holy Mother of God holding her veil. The account has inspired the cult of Pokrova (Holy Protection) that centers on the image of the Mother of God holding her protective mantle, or omophorion, over believers assembled in prayer. The special celebration of this feast on 1 October was first introduced in Constantinople and subsequently transferred to old Kyiv.* The cult of Pokrova flourished in medieval and early modern iconography, especially in Cossack icons. The Western equivalent is the Virgin of Mercy. The oldest Ruthenian version of the Life of Andrew probably appeared in the first decades of the fifteenth century in the Kyivan Caves Monastery (manu- script held at the State Historical Museum, Moscow (hereafter GIM], Synodal Collection, no. 925). This version, in comparison with previously existing Old Slavonic translations, was substantially amended with additional elaborations, 858 ZEMA interpretations, and edifications. This is especially apparent in a fragment from. initial part of the legend that speaks of Andrew's duel with the devil. to Aleksandr Moldovan, some additions testify to the oral and homiletic ch of this version and indicate that the narration of events occurred in the person. Moldovan describes the linguistic features of this text as Old Ukrai he published some examples from the oldest available manuscript. Some copies of the Life of Andrew survived in different miscellanies as well. The phenomenon of translation into Ruthenian became more widespread the division of the old Kyivan Metropolitanate in 1448, when the part Muscovite civil administration was proclaimed to be autocephalous, under nominal control of Iona, the former bishop of Riazan. While over time the Kyiv Metropolitanate became more concerned with developing new forms of edification and Church indoctrination, for the newly established Muscovite Metropol the process of Christianization and Slavonization of the local population more essential. Although translation from Greek and Latin was actively can were conducted mostly by foreigners coming from abroad rather than by lo By contrast, on the territories of present-day Ukraine and Belarus, knowle ‘communities was a prevalent part of their cultural heritage and everyday There are several Ruthenian texts translated from Latin (or possibly Among them is a copy of the Passion, which contains the apocryphal Gospel Nicodemus, found in a miscellany from the former Zalucki collection (RNB, Q.L. 391) dating to the second half of the fifteenth century. Another similar mis lany (GIM, Synodal Collection, no. 367) from the end of fifteenth or the ning of the sixteenth century contains the Povest’ o triokh koroliakh-volh (Tale of the Three Magi Kings)" and Zhitie Alekseia, cheloveka Bozhego (Tale of Alexis, Man of God)." These texts were reproduced in several miscellanies. with the addition of other legends. It should be noted as well that the process: of translating moralistic narrations and liturgical services coincided with the translation of biblical texts. For European countries, the translation of the Bible played a significant role in the theological revival, and the process intensified from the Renaissance to the Counter-Reformation. During the Renaissance there were some attempts at undertaking and publishing Ruthenian translations of various biblical texts. Thus, in 1517/1519 Frantsysk Skaryna published in Prague his own Church Slavonic translation of the Old Testament that had some Ruthenian influence. However, even before this event, the Song of Songs had been translated from the Czech. (GIM, Synodal Collection, no. 558), possibly from the text of the Padetovska Bible (1432-1435). The same Ruthenian manuscript contains the translation of the Marian liturgy.'* Frantisek Mare assumes that the translations were done | eee EDIFICATORY PROSE OF THE KYIVAN METROPOLITANATE —— 859 at the Kleparz Slavonic Monastery of the Holy Cross (in Cracow), where the Croatian liturgical service was conducted from 1390 and until the last decades of the fifteenth century, The monastery may have been founded following the example of the Emmaus Monastery in Prague, where Croatian Benedictine monks had been invited in 1347 by Charles IV (1316-1378), king of Bohemia and Holy Roman emperor, to establish a Slavonic Glagolitic monastery. Charles IV tried to distinguish Bohemia as the country of a great Slavic people; thus the legend of the Slavic origins of St. Jerome, of his creating the Glagolitic alphabet, and the resulting sacral status of the Slavonic written language would have been quite conducive to this project. Julia Verkholantsev, whose research is devoted to Renaissance-era Ruthenian translations, has suggested that those translations were made in a supranational koine, where the orthography of the texts did not distinguish between Old Ukrai- nian and Old Belarusian." One interesting case is the Ruthenian translation of the Visio Trugdali Vision of Tundale), whose Latin original comes from Regensburg, in Bavaria, where it was created in the circle of Irish novice monks in the second half of the twelfth century. The tale, which also influenced Dante Alighieri Divine Comedy, concerns the afterlife journey of the “great sinner” and Irish knight Tnugdalus (Tundalus, Tundale), who died suddenly during a banquet. One Ruthenian translation of this tale is contained in the Svidzinski manuscript, while another antigraph of this translation was found in the codex of the Zamoyski Family Collection (Biblioteka Ordynacji Zamojskie), MS 92) kept at the National Library in Warsaw (the watermarks suggest its dating to around 1495-1505). This codex also contains the Ruthenian Passion and a fragment of the Life of ‘Andrew the Foolefor-Christ.”” textual comparison with the different versions of the Latin Gospel of Nicodemus, fragments of which are contained in this narra tion of the Passion, points to the Bohemian origin of the Ruthenian translation’s Latin prototype."* Yet another notable Ruthenian translation, The Tale of Sibyl the Prophetess contained in the former Svidzinski miscellany (Biblioteka Ordynacji Krasifiskich, MS 402) (this collection of manuscripts was lost in a fire during the Second World War), is based on a Bohemian translation of a Latin original. The translation of this apocalyptic legend was perhaps important to the Ruthenian community in the context of the end of the world expected in 1492. ‘The other movement that had an impact on Ruthenian language emancipation was the translation from Hebrew of numerous theological and mystical works carried out by Jewish thinkers or translators working under the supervision of Kyiv theologians in the second half of the fifteenth century. The supervisor of these translations was likely the Jewish scholar Zakharia ben Aaron ha-Kohen. The idea for the translation of these texts came from the court of the Olelkovich family, inspired probably by the quest for ancient, oriental, and mystical texts characteristic of the Renaissance. This Renaissance fascination with antiquity found expression in numerous translations of biblical and theological treatises, 860 ZEMA cosmologies, calendars, treatises on logic, and preaching and homiletic texts addressed to rulers. However, the most important phenomenon resulting from these translations was the use of the local vernacular, something that was unusual for the Jewish tradition.'” Jewish mystical teachings, especially the Kabbalah, influenced Renaissance and Reformation thought. As late as the end of the six- teenth century Stefan Zyzanii, a Ruthenian Orthodox scribe and crypto-Calvinist, used the Kabbalah as the basis for expressing his anti-Catholic “devil’s number” polemics in the Sermon of St. Cyril of Jerusalem. One of the most visible manifestations of the development of Ruthenian edificatory literature in the last decades of the fifteenth century is the Chet’ia Mineia (Menology for Daily Reading) of 1489. It contains parts from the so-called Jzmaragd (Emerald Book) and the traditional Church Slavonic Menology.” Most of the stories of this 1489 collection have a predominantly apocryphal character, and copies or versions of its various texts were reproduced in many manuscripts throughout the sixteenth century.” There are depictions of lives of saints popular in the Kyivan Christian tradition, such as the Lives of St. Nicholas of Myra in Lycia, St. Paraskeva of Rome, St. Paraskeva of Tarnovo, St. George, and St. John the Merciful, whose relics were delivered as a gift to King Matthias Corvinus in Buda in 1489, However, the texts in the Chet'ia Mineia of 1489 were not just translated from Church Slavonic into Ruthenian, but were rewritten in a rather reconceptualized form, with some significant changes to their content and narrative. Among the texts ascribed to this menology are several original works, including those dedicated to eschatology and premillennialism. One of the tasks still awaiting scholars of old Ukrainian book culture is to describe the available copies of the Chet ‘ia Mineia of 1489 and to investigate the process of its creation. ‘The Chet ‘ia Mineia of 1489 can serve as a starting point in tracing the begin- nings of creative writing in Ruthenian, which coincided with the process of language emancipation, when the vernacular became more prevalent in church practices. The developments in the Ruthenian lands of the Polish Crown and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania reflected a wider phenomenon in Central and Eastern Europe—that is, the process of the vernacular’s entry into sacred literature. An example from a neighboring culture that is, possibly, the closest to the Ruthenian menology is the Polish tract Rozmyslania Przemyskie (Przemys| Meditations), This was an extended tale about the Holy Family, preserved in a sixteenth-century manuscript but which researchers date back to the last decades of the fifteenth century. An essential part of the work is the lamentation of the Virgin Mary under the Holy Cross. However, it is apparent that these dolorous motifs were borrowed from several older medieval texts. The work’s overall textual unity was also achieved under the influence of Passio Christi by Jacob de Vitry, the Vita Rhythmica, as well as the Historia Scholastica by Petrus Comestor. In addition to taking on Western influences, Ruthenian religious culture pre~ served its own ambivalent character by also perpetuating old Orthodox tradition, EDIFICATORY PROSE OF THE KYIVAN METROPOLITANATE 861 even after the center of Eastern Christian culture was largely defeated with the Muslim conquest of Constantinople. This phenomenon of ambivalence can be seen in the aforementioned miscellany of Danylo Smotryts’kyi, dating to the mid-sixteenth century (RNB, Pogodin collection, MS 840).” This codex has the Passion with the Gospel of Nicodemus translated into Ruthenian from the Latin, which contains anti-Jewish sentiments as well. The next text of the Smotryts’kyi miscellany recounts the legend of Jan Hus and the beginnings of Hussite teach- ing. There the author speaks about Hus’s childhood. In his version, as a boy, Hus worked on a farm where he fed geese. Hence, the etymology of his name, according to the legend, derives from his daily work. At some point, thanks to his reading of forbidden books (probably the Old Testament), Hus gained knowledge, which inspired his heretical teachings. The purpose of the narration is not to provide information about the beginning of the Hussite Reformation of the fifteenth century, but rather to reflect on the growing activity of the Czech Brethren, adherents of the Bohemian Reformation, in the lands of the Polish Crown in the sixteenth century. Finally, the Smotryts’kyi codex, in a very large part, is devoted to Church Slavonic preaching that draws on the early heritage of South Balkan Christianity. This edificatory complex of different treatises is important for our recognition of traditional Church Slavonic preaching. The Smotryts’kyi collection includes texts that are apocryphal, edificatory, homiletic, polemical, and hagiological. A similar, even almost identical, complex of preaching material is contained in a miscellany that belonged to the former collection of the Myltsi Monastery in Vol- hynia dating to the end of the sixteenth century (Vernads’kyi National Library of Ukraine, MS 119). This codex was copied in Volhynia by Danylo Smotryts’kyi’s son Herasym for the Lviv bishop and opponent of the Union of Brest, Gedeon Balaban (1569—1607). William Veder, who investigated the composition of the miscellany, concluded that it contained parts derived from the literary heritage of the First and Second Bulgarian empires.” In the course of my own research and manuscript description, I have found several other codices similar to these miscellanies. Eventually, the search takes us back approximately to the fourteenth century. For example, the codex 13.3.36 (held at the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences [hereafter BAN]), which originates from Lutsk and is dated to 1462, contains almost the same collection of sermons in Church Slavonic as do the codices of Herasym Smotryts’kyi and Danylo Smotryts’kyi. This manuscript of 1462 (BAN 13.3.36) also contains a heading (kolontytul) that quite possibly points to its earliest protograph. The inscription states that the book was copied in Kolomyia during the governorship of Khodko and the reign of Andrii and Ley, the princes of Volhynia and Galicia. Since it is known that the duumvirate of these two sons of the Volhynian and Gali- cian king Iurii lasted from 1316 to 1323, one can postulate the possible date of the first protograph of the edificatory miscellany. However, the inscription could also 862 ZEMA be an apocryphal record, an attempt by the Khodkevych family to claim lineage to the governor Khodko. A closely related manuscript (BAN 13.3.21), probably. a variant of the same miscellany, contains an additional text with anti-Jewish sentiments under the title Slovesa sviatykh prorok (Words of the Holy Prophets). Between the first decades of the sixteenth century and the beginning of the seventeenth there appeared several new editions of edificatory miscellanies. One of them was the so-called zmaragd collection, which contains moralistic and, sometimes, patristic texts as well as some legends or stories with anti-Jewish sentiments, This miscellany had proliferated in the Church Slavonic world from. the fourteenth century onward, but it was considerably revised and reconstructed in accordance with sixteenth century requirements. The newly composed /zma- ragd owes its appearance to the efforts of the Kyivan metropolitan losyf Soltan, It was also according to his recommendations that the updated version of the para-liturgical collection Prolog was created in 1512.2° Another miscellany that had appeared at the time was the Tolkovyi Psaltyr (Interpretive Psalter)—a large compendium of scriptural and patristic quotations accompanied by commentaries and notes of numerous theologians and scribes. Some of these manuscripts are in Church Slavonic, while others are in Ruthenian, or have Ruthenian features. Due to its size and comparative rarity, this type of homiletic miscellany requires additional study. These miscellanies had a transitional character and appeared before the onset of the Reformation—a movement that invigorated the Ruthenian | religious community and introduced new types of relations between the laity and priests. One significant literary innovation on the territories of the Kyivan metro- politanate was the so-called Jevanheliie uchytel'noie (Edificatory Gospel)—a homiliary collection of uncertain origin with no obvious Byzantine roots. A_ Slavonic edition was printed under the patronage of the grand hetman Hryhorii Khodkevych in Zabludéw in 1568/69.” It was a precursor, a challenge, and a model for the Ruthenian levanheliie uchytel noie that appeared in the wake of the Reformation and proliferated in many manuscript copies and versions throughout the Kyivan metropolitanate. The first to investigate these later miscellanies were. such prominent scholars as Alexander Brickner, Ivan Franko, and Volodymyr Peretts.”* Several of Peretts’s followers continued his investigations and publica- tion projects, but in the 1930s, their research was banned in Soviet Ukraine, and the researchers themselves were subjected to political persecution. Meanwhile, the scholarly examination of the Jevanheliie uchytel ‘noie continued in Western Ukraine. Research shows that the Ruthenian /evanheliie uchytel noie was influenced by the Polish postils of Mikotaj Rej (1505-1569), who is considered a founder of the Polish literary language and literature. Rej was born in the town of Zhuravno near the Dnister River, a short distance from Halych, which was the old capital of Galicia until the early fourteenth century. He converted to Calvinism in 1542. EDIFICATORY PROSE OF THE KYIVAN METROPOLITANATE 863 Rej came from a noble family with deep roots in Ruthenian life. The same was true of the Catholic bishop of Kyiv Iosyf Vereshchyn’‘kyi [Jézef Wereszezyiiski] (1530-1598), who knew Rej since childhood, and of Stanislaw Orzechowski (1513-1566), one of the most prominent intellectuals and crypto-Calvinists from Przemyél (Peremysh!) and a possible relative of Rej’s. In the course of his research, Jan Janéw concluded that the texts of the Jevanheliie uchytel'noie were constructed on the basis of copies of Church Slavonic sermons, Rej’s postils, and some texts of uncertain origin” Janéw published several sermons from the Ievanheliie uchytel’noie, along with his preliminary observations concerning their borrowings from the Calvinist homilies. A possible author of this homi- letic collection may have been the Ruthenian intellectual Andrii from Jarostaw, since a manuscript of the oldest miscellany dating to 1585 is attributed to him.” There also appeared a work similar to the /evanheliie uchytel’noie under the title Knyha Zertsalo (The Book of the Mirror). As a rule, a levanheliie uchytel'noie miscellany included sermons prefaced by a Gospel quotation with subsequent explanation using exempla and moral teaching. One of the first manuscripts containing early Ruthenian sermons, the Nia- hovo (Nyagovai) Postils (Poucheniia na levanhelie) from Transcarpathia, were published and exhaustively researched for Ruthenian language specificity by Laszlé Dezsé, who has suggested that they were created in the mid-sixteenth century.®® However, the surviving manuscript of the Niahovo Postils, with their crypto-Calvinist content, dates to the mid-eighteenth century. Pandele Olteanu, who investigated one of the first books of postils printed in the Romanian lan- guage (1564), identified the similarity between the Niahovo Postils and Romanian sermons, thus showing the latter to be a translation. However, the translator had made an effort to eliminate the Calvinist motifs of Ruthenian origin. The above observations suggest that the prototype of these homilies was probably created in the mid-sixteenth century. There are about one hundred extant copies of the Jevanheliie uchytel ‘noie. Mihaly Kocsis recently published one of the oldest manuscripts, which records 1588 as the date of its creation and originates from Transcarpathia.** Halyna Chuba also has conducted an intensive study of the corpus of post-Reformation manuscripts of the /evanheliie uchytel ‘noie.** Taking into consideration the diver sity among the numerous copies, she identified and described several groups of this type of homiletic miscellany. Utilizing a textual comparison of the miscel- lanies, of their local peculiarities and linguistic features, Chuba distinguishes four groups that are traceable to the Zhydachiv, Przemysl, Sanok (Sianik), and Podolia regions.” The Transcarpathian copies were identified as belonging to the Galician Przemys| group. Chuba also points out that while constructing their own texts the Ruthenian editors borrowed only partial fragments from Mikolaj Rej’s sermons, and that a number of sermons had an original character. According to her observations, the Sanok group of miscellanies does not contain any borrow- 864 ZEMA ings from Rej at all.” In many cases, a section commemorating the lives of St. Nicholas of Myra in Lycia, St. Paraskeva, and St. George was added to the main part of the miscellany that contained sermons for the movable feast days of the Orthodox calendar. These hagiographies were inscribed into the Chet’ia Mineia of 1489 and its copies as well. The presence of the same group of texts in the Chet ‘ia Mineia and the levanheliie uchytel noie also testifies to the continuity of the local Ruthenian cultural code. Additionally, copies of the Jevanheliie uchytel’noie could contain sermons dedicated to special occasions such as weddings and funerals. These types of orations emerged in Ukrainian lands in the mid-sixteenth century, inspired by the Renaissance influences. Initially they had mostly a civic character influenced by classical literature and were often dedicated to princes or high-ranking persons of Ruthenian society. However, the proliferation of these types of orations and their inclusion in edificatory miscellanies could testify to the adoption of such eulo- gies for wider populations. Kasiian Sakovych, a rector of the Kyiv Brotherhood School, was first in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to publish a textbook for wedding and funeral sermon composition in 1626. After the Union of Brest (1596) the Counter-Reformation inspired intellectuals within the Orthodox Church to search for more effective means of influence over the laity. Thus, a new Ruthenian edition of the old /evanheliie uchytel ‘noie was published by Meletii Smotryts’kyi in Vievis in 1616. As mentioned above, its Gospel quotations were borrowed from the Polish Bible translated by the radical reformer Szymon Budny.** Kyrylo Trankvilion-Stavrovets’kyi also published his version of the Jevanheliie uchytel ‘noie in 1619. His work drew a sharp rebuke from the Muscovite Patriarchate, which deemed it heretical and ordered it to be burned; however, it continued to be copied in Russia until approximately the end of the seventeenth century. The production of Ruthenian printed sermons and homiletic texts continued until the end of the seventeenth century in editions of Toanikii Galiatovs’kyi’s sermons (1659), Lazar Baranovych’s Mech dukhovnyi (The Spiritual Sword, 1666, 1668), and Truby sloves propoviednykh (The Trum- pets of Preaching Words, 1674, 1679). The process of removing Ukrainian sermon collections from local church parishes in Left-Bank Ukraine under Russian rule began in the eighteenth century. However, in spite of the prohibition against these sermon collections after the incorporation of the Kyivan Metropolitanate into the Russian Patriarchate, there was an attempted revival of Ukrainian sermons in the mid-nineteenth century.” The history of Ruthenian edificatory prose is the history of both change and stability. It is also the history of local intellectuals and powerful benefactors. A characteristic feature of the edificatory miscellanies is their ambivalence: Ruthe- nian book culture absorbed and reworked multiple diverse texts of Orthodox, Jewish, Catholic, and Protestant origins showing the multicultural character of local communities and their openness to changes. The creative contribution EDIFICATORY PROSE OF THE KYIVAN METROPOLITANATE — 865 of local authors gradually became more evident beginning in the mid-fifteenth century. Whereas the initial eclectic nature of the literary borrowings utilized in the creation of sermons testifies to a confessional indiscriminateness, the onset of schooling at the turn of the sixteenth century led to a more careful selection of sources. The introduction of systematic theological education necessitated the process of developing new terminology. Thus, for example, translating abstract and theological expressions into the local dialects prepared the way for a Ruthe- nian lexicon of such terms and made them more comprehensible to the native population. This process illustrates the development of the communicative means that Ruthenian communities employed during the inter-Union period and the Reformation. The variegated character of the /evanheliie uchytel ‘noie testifies to the broad cultural horizon of the local populations, even if their predominantly low level of education was in dissonance with the standards of Western school- ing introduced by Jesuit colleges since the end of the sixteenth century. And, of course, the proliferation of Protestant sermons among the traditional confessions had its precedence in Central Europe, where German Catholic priests widely used Protestant homiliary collections until the Counter-Reformation led to the renewal of the Catholic preaching tradition. Scholarship in the field of Ukrainian edificatory prose of the inter-Union period has developed mostly over the course of the last hundred years. Many edificatory miscellanies and texts have been described in catalogues but only several sermons have been published. The next level of research demands diligent investigation and comparison of this type of sermon, searching for its origins and the manner of its creation, compilation, and circulation. NOTES 1. For less studied and quoted codices and catalogues with manuscripts of Ruthenian ori- gin, see Dobrylove levanheliie 1164 roku, ed. tu. V. Osinchuk (Lviv, 2012); levseviieve Ievanheliie 1283 r, ed. V. V. Nimehuk et al. (Kyiv, 2001); Luts ke levanheliie XIV st. (Lutsk, 2011); Zhitie sv. Savvy Osviashchennogo, sostavlennoe sv. Kirillom Skifopol skim v drevnerusskom perevode, ed. 1. Pomialovskii (St. Petersburg, 1890); Mihaly Kocsis, “Upotreblenie omegi v ukrainskikh rukopisiakh XVI veka,” Studia Slavica 52, no. 1-2 (2007): 235-40; Volodymyr Peretts, “Do istorit perekladu Biblif v Zakhidnii Rusy: Knyha Estery v perekladi k. XV v.", in Fil‘ol ogichnyi zbirnyk pamiaty K. Mykhal‘chuka, ed. le, Tymchenko (Kyiv, 1915), 23-45; Petro Buzuk, “Pro movu naidavnishoi ukrains’kot ievanhelit,” Zapysky istorychno-filolohichnoho viddilu VUAN (Kyiv) 12 (1927): 1-11; P. V. Vladimiroy, Obzor iuzhno-russkikh i zapadnorusskikh pamiatnikov pis'‘mennosti ot XI do XVII st. (Kyiv, 1890); a church services Menaion (Mineia sluzheb.) from the twelfth century, held in the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts (RGADA), Synodal Printing House Collection, MS 203; a 866 ZEMA Prolog from the thirteenth—fourteenth centuries, held at the National Library of Russia, St. Petersburg (RNB), Pogodin Collection, MS 60. Volodymyr Peretts mentions a codex with a Ruthenian Gospel fiom the beginning of the sixteenth century which I ‘was now able to find under call no, F..17 at the RNB in St. Petersburg; see Peretts, “Materiialy do istorit ukratns’koT literatumot movy,” Zapysky Naukovoho Tovarystva im, Shevchenka 93, no. | (1910): 5-31, These claims were less compelling than the statements in Galician-Volhynian chronicles about the direct transfer of authority from a declining Kyiv to a rising Galician-Volhynian principality, Benedykt Herbest, Wiary Kosciola Reymskiego wywody y Greckiego niewolstwa Historia (Krakéw, 1586); Anna Werpachowska, Z dziejéw retoryki XVT wieku: Pole- ‘mika Jakuba Gérskiego z Benedyktem Herbestem (Wroclaw, 1987). Codex Hankenstein: Codex Vindobonensis Slavicus 37, ed. Gethardt Birkfellner (Berlin, 2007); Uspenskii sbornik XII-XIII w. (Moscow, 1971); Serhii Buhoslavs’kyi, Ukraino-rus’ki pam iatky XI-XVIII vv, pro kniaziv Borysa i Hliba (Rozvidka i teksty) (Kyiv, 1928), http://izbomyk.org.ua/buhos/bu,htm; D. Abramovich, ed., Zhitila svia- tykh muchenikov Borisa i Gleba i sluzhby im (Petrograd, 1916); Ivan Pan’kevych, “Semyhorods’ke paremiine chytannia pro pimstu laroslava na Sviatopolkovi za ubyttia Borysa i Hliba,” Slavia 19 (1950): 86-99; P. V. Golubovskii, “Sluzhba sviatym muchenikam Borisu i Glebu v Ivanicheskoi minee 1547-79 g..” Chieniia v Istoricheskom obshchestve Nestora-letopistsa (Kyiv), bk. 14 (1900); 124-26 (in sec. 2, “Izsledovaniia”); N. Serebrianskii, Drevne-russkie kniazheskie zhitiia (obzor redakisit i teksty) (Moscow, 1915), 17-21 (in “Prilozheniia”); Valerii Zema, Svitlana Zinchenko, and Vira Frys, eds., Metropolis Kijoviensis: Kataloh i teksty peterburz'kykh zibran’ (Kyiv, 2010), 207-16. Proper historical investigation demands careful research into political events, social relations, culture, and the history of thought, However, for medieval and early mod= em Ukrainian history the essential part of such a study is constrained due to the lack of sources or the low level of archival heuristics. Moreover, many Ukrainian and Belarusian manuscripts were ruined or stolen, although several Russian Old- Believers’ collections containing Ruthenian manuscripts have survived in the libraries of Moscow, St. Petersburg and Saratov. The large collection of Russian Orthodox bishop Pavel (Prokopii Dobrokhotov) was assembled from manuscripts that had been stolen from various monasteries and cathedrals in Western Ukraine and Belarus. This collection was later divided among several St, Petersburg libraries. Overall, the most important collections of Ruthenian manuscripts are located in the Vasyl’ Stefanyk National Academic Library in Lviv, the Andrei Sheptyts’kyi National Museum in Lviv, the National Library of Ukraine, the Lithuanian Academy Library in Vilnius, the National Library in Warsaw, the National Library of Russia (RNB) in St. Petersburg, the Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences (BAN) in St, Petersburg, the Russian State Library in Moscow, the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts (RGADA) in Moscow, the State Historical Museum (GIM) in Moscow, and the National Museum in EDIFICATORY PROSE OF THE KYIVAN METROPOLITANATE 867 Prague. A considerable number of Ruthenian medieval and early modern manuscripts are dispersed throughout the world, which further complicates their study. As well, following the Bolshevik occupation of Ukraine, many historians suffered political persecution. Thus, the humanities section of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences was completely destroyed in the 1930s and most of its projects concerning description and publication of Ruthenian codices were cancelled. This act of cultural genocide arrested scholarly development for decades. While several studies of Ukrainian manuscripts were conducted in Western Ukraine in the interwar period, after the Second World War further historical studies of this kind were constrained under the pretext of maintaining “civilizational unity” between Ukraine and Russia. Josef Maciirek, “Po stopiich spisovné éestiny v jihozipadni Ukrainé koncem 14. a v 1. poloviné 15 stoleti.” in Franku Wolmanovi k sedemdesdtindm: Sbornik praci, ed. . Artur Zévodsky (Prague, 1958), 42-63. Although Maciirek planned to continue his 10, 12 13. 14, research on this subject, he was censored for his protests against the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 and was unable to publish in his home country until the 1990s. See also Boris Unbegaun, “Deux chartes ukrainiennes de 1502,” Slavia 19, no, 2 (1950): 336-48, in which he notes the differences between Ruthenian and Muscovite chancery terminology. Andras Zoltan, “Zapadnorussko-velikorusskie iazykovye kontakty v oblasti leksiki v XV v. (K voprosu zapadnoi traditsii v delovoi pis’mennosti Moskovskoi Rusi),”” Kandidatskaia diss. (Moscow, 1984). John Wortley, “Hagia Skepe and Pokrov Bogoroditsi: A Curious Coincidence,” Ana- lecta Bollandiana (Brussels) 89 (1971): 149-54. A.M, Moldovan, “Zhitie Andreia lurodivogo” v slavianskoi pis'‘mennosti (Moscow, 2000), A. 1. Sobolevskii, Perevodnaia literatura Moskovskoi Rusi XIV-XVII vekov: Biblio- graficheskie materialy (St. Petersburg, 1903). Some of the manuscripts described in this catalogue were translated in Ruthenian lands or by persons originating from the Kyivan Metropolitanate. See, for example, N. M. Tupikoy, Strasti Khristovy v zapadnorusskom spiske XV st.: S odnim fototipicheskim snimkom, Pamiatniki Drevnei Pis' mennosti i Iskusstva 140 (St. Petersburg, 1901). V.N. Peretts, Povest’ o triokh koroliakh-volkhvakh v zapadnorusskom spiske XV veka, Pamiatniki Drevnei Pis'mennosti i Iskusstva 150 (St. Petersburg, 1903). This edition of the tale about Three Magi Kings was authored by John of Hildesheim in the mid-fourteenth century. This tale was considered as something akin to a novel that brought information about Orient, see Jerzy Kaliszuk, Medrey ze Wschodu: Legenda i kult Trzech Kréli w sredniowieczne Polsce (Warsaw, 2005). P. Viadimiroy, “Zhitie Alekseia, cheloveka Bozhego v zapadnorusskom perevode,” Zhurnal Ministerstva Narodnogo Prosveshchenia 253 (October 1887): 250-61 (in “Otdel nauki”). ‘The liturgical service plays a significant role in church life, and it is the most resistant 868 15, 16. 17, 18, 19. ZEMA to any changes, including linguistic influences. The degree of the vernacular’s penetra- tion into liturgical services is more modest because, usually, this type of conversation is conducted in a sacred language; in our case, Church Slavonic. There were several attempts to overcome this separation between sacred and vernacular languages in the inter-Union period. The service dedicated to the Virgin Mary contained in manuscript no, $58 (GIM, Synodal Collection), translated from Latin into Ruthenian in the fif- teenth century, is one such example. According to the scholar Frantisek Mare8, the translator appears to be familiar with different language traditions (Church Slavonic, Polish, Glagolitic), and knows the Croatian liturgy as well, MareS assumes that the translation comes from the circle of Sof*ia Hal’shanskaia (Lith. Sofija Alseniske; Pol. Zofia Holszatiska) (1405-1461), the fourth wife of Wladyslaw II Jagielo, who converted to Catholicism before her marriage to the king. She was one of the initiators, of the first translation of the Bible into Polish and was buried in the Church of the Holy Trinity of Cracow's Wawel Castle, whose walls were decorated with frescoes in the Ruthenian style (some Bohemian and Ukrainian language features have been noted in Sof"ia’s Bible, see Stanistaw Urbafezyk, “Dzisiejszy stan spordw 0 pochodzenie polskiego jezyka literackiego,” Slavia 20 [1950]: 1-39). See Frantisek Vaclav Mares, ““Moskevska Maridnské mSe (Kontakt chrvatskohlholské a rusko-cirkeynéslovanské kni2ni kultury v stedovékém Polsku),” Slovo: Journal of Old Church Slavonic Insti- tute (Zagreb) 25-26 (1976): 295-362, Julia Verkholantsev discusses the Ruthenian transliteration of Latin prayers in MS 558, see lu. V, Verkholantseva, “Kirillicheskaia apis’ latinskikh molitv i otryvka china messy iz rukopisi Sinodal’nogo sobraniia GIM no. $58,” Drevniaia Rus’, 2010, no. 2 (40), 74-90, Another partial translation of the liturgy, ordination, and sacraments (see BAN, no. 21.4.13) belongs to the circle of Kyiv Metropolitan losyf Soltan of Kyiv (1508-1521). See Julia Verkholantsev, “Cheshskie i khorvatskie glagoliashi-benediktintsy sredi pravoslavnykh Litvy i Pol’shi i latinskie teksty, zapisannyie Didéiosios Kunigaikstystés kalbos, kultiros ir rastijos tradici 81-95. Julia Verkholantsev, Ruthenica Bohemica: Ruthenian Translations from Czech in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Poland, Stavische Sprachgeschichte 3, ed. Michael Moser (Vienna: Berlin, 2008). For a critique of Verkholantseva’s conception by Serge- jus Teméinas, see Sergei Temchin, “Ruthenica Bohemica: Novoie issledovanie 0 perevodakh cheshskikh originalov na rus’ku movu,” Senoji Lietuvos Literatiira, no. 30 (2010): 345-70. Jan Stradomski, “Miedzy historia a mitem—eschatologiczna wizja zaglady Konstan- tynopola w Apokalipsie Andzreja Jurodiwego,” in Zrozumieé stowiariszezyzne: Prace poswiecone profesor Marii Bobrownickiej w dzewigédzesigtg rocenice urodzin, ed. Maria Dabrowska-Partyka (Cracow, 2010), 141-53. Stradomski suggests that the apocalyptic vision of Andrew has some anti-Jewish sentiments, See Zbigniew Izydorezyk and Wieslaw Wydra, eds., A Gospel of Nicodemus Preserved in Poland (Turnhout, 2007). See Robert Romanchuk, “The Reception of the Judaizer Corpus in Ruthenia and (Vilnius, 2009), 20. 21. 22, zi 25. 26. EDIFICATORY PROSE OF THE KYIVAN METROPOLITANATE 869 Muscovy: A Case Study of the Logic of Al-Ghazzali, the *Cifer in Squares,” and the Laodicean Epistle,” UCLA Slavic Studies, n.s., 4 (2005): 144-65. Only some of these texts reached Muscovy, where they provoked the heretical movement of the Judaizers. Works that were translated and copied in Kyiv throughout the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries include the Logical Dictionary or Treatise on Logie by Moses Maimonides (quotations from this text were included in a sixteenth-century Edificatory Miscellany [copies at the Vernads’kyi National Library of Ukraine, Myltsi Monastery Collection, MS 117/Aa1287, and GIM, Synodal Collection, no. 943)), the Secretum secretorum, the Tractatus de Sphera by Johannes de Sacrobosco (1195-1256), and the Six-Wings by Emmanuel Bar-Jacob. The most difficult and complex text ofthis set of translations was The Incoherence of the Philosophers by Al-Ghazali (1058-1111), a work that ‘was never copied in Muscovy by the so-called heretics. The range and sophistication of the entire translation project evidently required significant patronage from the authorities, as the process would have spanned a long period of time. Most likely ‘team of local scribes was involved in the editing and completion of these texts to meet the requirements of Ruthenian readers. For preliminary studies and publications of the Chet'ia Mineia, see M. Karpinskii, “Zapadnorusskaia Chet‘ia 1489 g.,” Russkii filologicheskii vestnik (Warsaw) vol. 21, no. 1 (1889): 56-106; A. 1. Kirpichnikoy, “Uspenie Bogoroditsy v legende i v iskusstve,” in Trudy VI Arkheologicheskogo s"ezda v Odesse (1884 g,), vol. 2 (Odesa, 1888), 191-235; V. N. Peretts, “K izucheniiu Chet’i 1489 g.,” in Issledovaniia i ‘materialy po istorii starinnoi ukrainskoi literatury XVI—XVII vekov (Leningrad, 1928), 1-107. ‘See, for example, the manuscript collection of the priest Pavlo Dziunevs’kyi left as an inheritance to his son and daughter (BAN, no. 31,6.26). Some texts from this codex were published in Zema, Zinchenko, and Frys, Metropolis Kijoviensis, 140-73, lurii Begunov rediscovered the Danylo Smotryts’kyi miscellany, described it, and published some of its fragments concerning the Jan Hus legend. See Iu. K. Begunov, “Ian Hus i vostochnoe slavianstvo (Po materialam novonaidennogo istochnika),” Trudy Otdela drevnerusskoi literatury 49 (1996): 356-75. Uil'iam R. Feder [William R. Veder], “Meletskii sbornik i istoriia drevnebolgarskoi literatury.” Palaeobulgarica’Starobiilgaristica 6, no. 3 (1982): 154-65. See publication of this work in I. B. Evseev, “Slovesa sviatykh prorok—protivo- iiudeiskii pamiatnik po rukopisi XV v..” Drevnosti: Trudy slavianskoi komissit imperatorskogo Moskovskogo arkheologicheskogo obshchestva 4, no. 1 (1907): 153-200. See Marina Chistiakova, * K voprosu o strukture i istochnikakh 3-i redaktsii Isma- ragda,” Senoji Lietuvos Literatiira, no. 26 (2008): 123-24; S. Iu, Temehin, “Matvei Desiatyi i sostavlenie tretei (litoyskoi) redaktsii Izmaragda,” Slavica Vilnensis, 2008-2009; Kalbotyra $4 (2): 169-78. In the Kyivan Metropolitanate two calendar systems were used in celebrating and commemorating the events of sacred history and saints. The first calendar (which began in September and ended in August of the following year) established fixed 870 21. 28. 29. ZEMA celebration dates, whereas in the other calendar these dates were movable, depending on the date for the celebration of Easter, Most Church Slavonic sermons in the Jev- ‘anhelite uchytel noie were tied to the movable calendar. This older, Church Slavonic Jevanheltie uchytel noie is still seldom studied by scholars in the field of old Slavonic book heritage. Prefaces to the editions usually mention the mid-fourteenth century Constantinople patriarch Kallistos I (1350-1353, 1355-63) as their assumed author. However, a careful investigation of the Greek writings by the patriarch and their possible translations into Church Slavonic has demonstrated the lack of any common features between the patriarch’s original texts and this Slavonic miscellany. Instead, ‘a considerable part of the miscellany coincides with the sermons of another Con- stantinople patriarch—John IX Agapetos (1111-1134). As a rule, these miscellanies cite two dates of their translation: 1343 and 1407. Dimitrios Gonis believes that the translator correlated the first date with the time of Patriarch Kallistos” governance, The translators used a homiliarium titled “Patriarchal” and possibly erroneously attributed this manuscript to Kallistos. Curiously, in several manuscripts the homiliarium was ascribed to Balkan Slavonic intellectual Constantine of Kostenets (ca. 1380~d, after 1431), This work was republished in Vilnius in 1580 and 1595. A fourth edition appeared in Krylos, Galicia, in 1606 after some corrections were made to the translation; once again, its authorship was attributed to Patriarch Kallistos. The scholar G. Logran claimed erroneously that the Kyiv edition of the /evanheliie wchytel noie, published in 1637 under the supervision of Orthodox metropolitan Petro Mohyla, was a genuine translation of Patriarch Kallistos’s texts. However, a comparison of the codex with the patriarch’s original texts, which are preserved in the Hilandar Monastery (MS 8), shows that Mohyla’s edition does not correspond with the original. Overall, questions about the Church Slavonic edificatory Gospels, their authorship, translations, and publications are still very much relevant to students of the medieval and early modern Easter European book culture, See D. Gonis, “Tsarigradskiiat patriarkh Kalist Ii “Uchitelnoto evangelie,”” Palaeobulgarica/Starobiilgaristika 6, no, 2 (1982): 41-55; Celica Milanovié, “Uditeljno jevandelje patrijarha Kalista u slovenskoji vizantijskoi knjizevnosti,” Zbornik radova Vizantoloskog instituta (Belgrade), no. 22 (1983): 149-63, See V. Peretts, Oichet o zaniatiiakh vo vremia zagranichnoi komandirovki letom 1912-go g. (Kyiv, 1913), 15-17; Mykola Petroy, “Ukrains’kyi zbimyk XVIU-XVIIL st.” Zapysky Ukrains‘koho Naukovoho Tovarystva u Kyivi, 1908, no. 2, 105-16; S. Shevchenko, “lelifereva redaktsiia ‘Skazaniia o 12 p'iatnytsiakh,”” Zapysky Ukrains‘koho Naukovoho Tovarystva u Kyivi, 1908, no. 2, 142-72; Ivan Franko, “Karpatorus’ka literatura XVI-XVIII viku,” Zapysky Naukovoho Tovarystva im. Shevchenka 37 (1900): 1-161. An essential contribution to the research of early modern sermons was made by Jan Janéw, who discovered the textual base of the new, Ruthenian fevanheliie uchytel noie that proliferated from the last decades of the sixteenth century and about a hundred 30. 31. 32, 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. EDIFICATORY PROSE OF THE KYIVAN METROPOLITANATE 871. copies of which have survived to the present time, Jandw advanced a rather compli- cated theory of the miscellany’s origins, concluding that most of the sermons in the Ruthenian collections were created on the basis of the Protestant sermons of Mikolaj Rej on the one hand, and the Catholic sermons of the Jesuit Jakub Wujek on the other. However, citing Wujek’s sermons as a source for the Ruthenian editors led Janow astray; the sermons were based mostly on Rej’s postils, See J. Jandw, “Przyezynek do érddet Ewangeliarza popa Andrzeja z Jarostawia (przeklad ruski pasji z Postylli M. Reja).” Prace Filologiczne 15, no, 2 (1931): 119-62. According to the foreword, this copy of the Jevenheliie uchytel ‘note was transcribed by Andrii from Jaroslaw and he may well have been the author of at least some part of it. The manuscript now held at the Vasyl’ Stefanyk National Academic Library in Lviv, Anton Petrushevych Collection, MS 5. Acopy of the Knyha zertsalo can be found within a levanheliie Uchytel’noie manu- script dating from the end of the sixteenth-beginning of the seventeenth century (ols. 111-29). Andrei Sheptyts’kyi National Museum in Lviv, MS 611. A Nyagovai Posztilla: Alekszej Petrov szévegkiaddsdnak fakszimiléje / Niagovskie poucheniia: Faksimil ‘noe vosproizvedenie teksta po izdantiu A. L. Petrova / The Niagovo Postilla: Facsimile of the Alexei L. Petrov 8 [sic] edition, ed. Andras Zoltn, intro. Laszlé Dezsé (Nyiregyhiza, 2006), Ixii-txi Pandele Olteanu, ““Postilla de Naegovo" in lumina ‘Cazaniei I’ a Diaconului Coresi (cea. 1564),” Romanoslavica 13, (1966): 105-31. Mihai Kochish [Mihily Kocsis], ed., Skotars ke Uchytel'ne levanheltie—ukratns ky homiliar 1588 roku (Szombathely, 1997). Halyna Chuba, Ukrains ‘ki rukopysni uchytel'ni levanheliia (Lviv, 2011). G. Chuba [Halyna Chuba}, “Tekstologicheskaia klassifikatsiia ukrainskikh Uchitel’- nykh levangelii vtoroi poloviny XVI veka,” Slavianovedenie, 2002, no. 2, 82-97. Halyna Chuba, “Zi studit nad ukratns‘kymy Uchytel’nymy levanheliiamy druhot polovyny XVI-XVIII stolit” (Heneza ta osoblyvosti stylistychnot orhanizatsif tekstiv propovidei),” in Do dzherel: Zbirnyk naukovykh prats’ na poshanu Oleha Kupchyns‘koho z nahody ioho 70-richchia, ed. thor Hyrych et al. (Kyiv, 2004), 1:59- 79; Chuba, “Tekstolohichne dostidzhennia ukrains’kykh Uchytel‘nykh levanhelii

    You might also like