Byzantine-Metaphrastic-Hagiography-Among-South-Slavs-A-Quantitative-View - Content File PDF

You have downloaded a document from
The Central and Eastern European Online Library
The joined archive of hundreds of Central-, East- and South-East-European publishers,

research institutes, and various content providers
Source: Byzantinoslavica - Revue internationale des Etudes Byzantines
Byzantinoslavica - Revue internationale des Etudes Byzantines
Location: Czech Republic

Author(s): Marijana Vuković
Title: Byzantine Metaphrastic Hagiography among South Slavs: A Quantitative View
Byzantine Metaphrastic Hagiography among South Slavs: A Quantitative View
Issue: 1-2/2021
Citation Marijana Vuković. "Byzantine Metaphrastic Hagiography among South Slavs: A Quantitative
style: View". Byzantinoslavica - Revue internationale des Etudes Byzantines 1-2:80-101.
https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=1031381
CEEOL copyright 2022
Byzantine Metaphrastic Hagiography

among South Slavs: A Quantitative View
Marijana VUKOVIĆ (Odense)
Symeon Metaphrastes, a Byzantine court official of the tenth century, commenced

a comprehensive literary-religious project, the Metaphrastic Menologion, where
numerous early Christian hagiographies were rewritten according to the standards
that contributed to their stylistic improvement and language adjustment. The lives of
saints reworked in the Metaphrastic Menologion were later widely distributed and
read in the Byzantine world. Considering the reputation that the collection had in
Byzantium, one may find it surprising that only some texts of the Menologion were
transmitted among the South Slavs, and even these quite tardy.
This paper offers a quantitative overview of the metaphrastic transmission in the South
Slavic world, based on the numbers of manuscripts and texts. It further discusses the
saints whose lives the stories describe, primarily from the thirteenth and the fourteenth
century, as well as the types of manuscripts in which they appear. Finally, I consider
the distinctiveness and significance of metaphrastic hagiography within the contents
of the Slavonic manuscript book covers.
Symeon Metaphrastes, a Byzantine court official, who lived in Constantinople

in the second part of the tenth century, initiated an ambitious literary-religious
project of rewriting early Christian hagiographies, according to the criteria that
led to their stylistic improvement and language adjustment.1 Symeon and his
team reworked one-hundred-forty-eight mainly late antique hagiographies. His
enterprise, known as the Metaphrastic Menologion, was widely appreciated and
1 This article sets the stage for my research on the translation of the Metaphrastic Menolo-
gion into Old Slavonic within the project “Retracing Connections: Byzantine Storyworlds
in Greek, Arabic, Georgian, and Old Slavonic (c. 950–c. 1100).” Being the first article in
a row, it inevitably leaves some questions open for further study. I am grateful to Ingela
Nilsson, Christian Høgel, and the Riksbankens Jubileumsfond for the opportunity to conduct
this research. The article could not have been completed without the generous provision
of manuscripts by the Monks of Hilandar Monastery (Mt. Athos, Greece) and the Hilandar
80 Research Library of Ohio State University (Columbus, Ohio, USA).

Byzantine Metaphrastic Hagiography among South Slavs:A Quantitative View
disseminated in many Byzantine manuscripts.2 Seven hundred metaphrastic

codices preserved today represent one-third of all Byzantine hagiographic
manuscripts.3
One of Symeon’s project aims may have been supplanting heretical texts
and purging dubious ideas from the documents included in the collection.4 The
rewritten texts appeared rhetorically strengthened and refreshed by classical ex-
pressions. They aimed to bestow moral and devotional lessons to their readers.5
Symeon’s project meant a great deal for Byzantium’s cultural and religious
life starting from the eleventh century. The Menologion permeated both the
monastery and the court. It reached the lay audience too. The Typikon of the
Evergetis monastery in Constantinople (1054–1070 CE) testified that the
Metaphrastic Menologion was used in the monastery during the liturgy in the
eleventh century.6 The metaphrastic lives continued to be daily recited in the
monasteries during the morning service in the twelfth century.7 The Menologion
was used in the secular context as well. The prominent political and intellectual
figures and court officials of the eleventh century had copies of the Metaphrastic
Menologion for their private use.8
Symeon’s Menologion was a relatively unified collection comprising ten
volumes covering the lives of saints for the entire year.9 The corpus remained
2 On the Metaphrastic Menologion of Symeon Metaphrastes, see C. Høgel, Symeon Meta-

phrastes: Rewriting and Canonization, Copenhagen 2002. C. Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes
and the Metaphrastic movement, in: S. Efthymiadis (ed.), The Ashgate Research Companion
to Byzantine Hagiography II: Genres and Contexts, Farnham 2014, 181–196. C. Høgel,
Hagiography under the Macedonians: The two recensions of the Metaphrastic menologion,
in: P. Magdalino (ed.), Byzantium in the Year 1000, Leiden 2002, 217–232. C. Høgel, Sanc-
tification of Hagiographers in Byzantium: The Canonization of Symeon Metaphrastes, in:
S. Constantinou–C. Høgel (eds.), Metaphrasis: A Byzantine Concept of Rewriting and Its
Hagiographical Products, Leiden 2020, 270–281. S. Papaioannou, Christian Novels from
the Menologion of Symeon Metaphrastes, London 2017. A. Ehrhard, Symeon Metaphrastes
und die griechische Hagiographie, Römische Quartalschrift 11, 1897, 531–553.
3 Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes, op. cit., 11, 16. Papaioannou, Christian Novels, op. cit., viii.
A. Ehrhard, Überlieferung und Bestand der hagiographischen und homiletischen Literatur
der Griechischen Kirche von den Anfängen bis zum Ende des 16. Jahrhunderts I, Leipzig
1937, xvii.
4 Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes, op. cit., 137.
5 Papaioannou, Christian Novels, op. cit., viii, xix–xxi.
6 S. Paschalidis, The Hagiography of the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries, in: S. Efthymiadis
(ed.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography I: Periods and Places,
Burlington 2011, 143–171, 144. R. Jordan, Evergetis: Typikon of Timothy for the Monastery
of the Mother of God Evergetis, in: J. P. Thomas–A. C. Hero (eds.), Byzantine Monastic
Foundation Documents: A Complete Translation of the Surviving Founders’ Typika and
Testaments, Washington, D.C. 2000, 454–506, 454. N. P. Ševčenko, Illustrated Manuscripts
of the Metaphrastian Menologion, Chicago 1990, 3.
7 ODB, II, 1341. R. H. Jordan–R. Morris, The Hypotyposis of the Monastery of the Theotokos
Evergetis, Constantinople (11th–12th Centuries), Farnham 2012, 62, 72, n. 187.
8 Ševčenko, Illustrated Manuscripts, op. cit., 3–4. Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes, op. cit.,
152.
9 Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes, op. cit., 11. 81

Marijana VUKOVIĆ
unparalleled in the Byzantine tradition. No similar effort to revisit hagiograph-

ical heritage on such a large scale reappeared. S. Papaioannou argued that the
Byzantines considered Symeon a rewriter/author of these previously mostly
anonymous late antique texts, which came under the patronage and protection
of his name.10
The South Slavs rendered the Metaphrastic Menologion, but not in its entire-
ty. The Menologion disintegrated as a collection among the South Slavs. The
Russian scholar M. Speranskij earlier assumed that the complete Metaphrastic
Menologion was translated into Church Slavonic in a massive project, similar
to Symeon’s Byzantine enterprise.11 However, T. Helland later inferred that
the existing corpus of translated metaphrastic manuscripts emerged step-by-
step over a long period. It was not a one-time project envisioned to constitute
a complete set of Church Slavonic reading menologia.12 K. Ivanova stated that
the transmission did not occur “in one single movement, but in phases and not
in one scriptorium.”13
According to the Bibliotheca hagiographica Balcano-Slavica, forty-seven
translated Church Slavonic texts are stored in South Slavic manuscripts from the
thirteenth to the seventeenth century out of one-hundred-forty-eight documents
in Symeon’s corpus.14 It is by no means a concluding number, considering that
hitherto hidden material continues to appear. In 2017, an unknown manuscript
of the Metaphrastic corpus, Hilandar Metaphrast °2, emerged from a private
collection in Greece to be re-acquired by the Hilandar monastery.15 This four-
teenth-century Serbian manuscript turned out to be among a few surviving
artifacts containing solely metaphrastic texts aligned identically as in Symeon’s
collection. It covers the second half of the September Menologion, comprising
twelve texts altogether, out of which ten new metaphrastic texts do not appear
10 S. Papaioannou, Voice, Signature, Mask: The Byzantine Author, in: A. Pizzone (ed.), The
Author in Middle Byzantine Literature: Modes, Functions, and Identities, Berlin 2014, 29,
37.
11 M. N. Speranskij, Slavjanskaja metafrastovskaja mineja chet’ja, Izvestija ORJAS (Известия
отделения русского языка и словесности Академии наук) 9/4, 1904, 173–202.
12 T. Helland, The Greek Archetypes of the Old and Middle Bulgarian Translations of the
Life of Saint Antony the Great, Palaeobulgarica 28/4, 2004, 3–18, 4, 18.
13 K. Ivanova, Agiografskite proizvedenija na Simeon Metafrast v săstava na južnoslavjanskite
kalendarni sbornici, in: L. Taseva (ed.), Prevodite prez XIV stoletie na Balkanite: dokladi ot
meždunarodnata konferencija, Sofia, 26–28 juni 2003, Sofia 2004, 249–267, 256. A. Iva-
nov, The Translation in Church Slavonic of the Metaphrastic Martyr Act of Saint Thecla in
“Hilandar Metaphrast °2”: A Preliminary Analysis, BSl 77, 2019, 144–160, 154.
14 K. Ivanova, Bibliotheca hagiographica Balcano-Slavica, Sofia 2008.
15 J. Čalija, Riznica Hilandara bogatija za jedinstvenu rukopisnu knjigu, Politika Online 2017,
http://www.politika.rs/scc/clanak/371881/Riznica-Hilandara-bogatija-za-jedin-stvenu-ru-
82 kopisnu-knjigu (retrieved 15/01/2021). Ivanov, The Translation, op. cit., 144.

elsewhere in the South Slavic manuscripts.16 The monks of Hilandar monastery

were kind to share the copy of the manuscript Hilandar Metaphrast °2 for the
present study; thus, its manuscript contents are used in what follows.17
The current total amount of translated Slavonic texts (57) nevertheless
comes as a surprise when compared to one-hundred-forty-eight metaphrastic
Greek texts.18 The reason is that the literature transmitted from Greek forms
the most substantial portion of the Orthodox Slavic literary production during
the Middle Ages. Scholars maintain that translated works constitute 80–90% of
Slavonic literature’s entire manuscript literary body.19 Besides, the South Slavs
partook in the shared history and Orthodox Christian faith and practices with
Byzantium. In this light, the absence of many metaphrastic texts in the South
Slavic realm is perplexing since they were broadly disseminated in Byzantium.
The Slavonic metaphrastic translations appear not only sporadically but
also quite late. The earliest South Slavic manuscripts that involve random texts
of the Metaphrastic Menologion are attested starting from the thirteenth and
the fourteenth century. Naturally, the transmission could have occurred earlier
than the material evidence attests. The conclusions here are based on surviving
testimonies. Other hagiographical texts unquestionably circulated between
Byzantium and the South Slavs before the thirteenth and the fourteenth century.
Several Slavonic manuscripts, which contain saints’ lives translated from Greek,
date to an early period, such as the tenth century Suprasl Codex and several
other fragments from the twelfth and the thirteenth century.20 These manuscripts,
however, include non-metaphrastic and pre-metaphrastic saints’ lives.21
The twelfth and the thirteenth century present a significant gap in our knowl-
edge of the Slavic metaphrastic transmission because of the low manuscript
preservation rate. Ivanova attested to the paucity of the surviving evidence
before the thirteenth century.22 It made reconstructing the calendar repertory of
hagiographic and homiletic works difficult. The material is more consistently
preserved only from the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
Scholars have not yet said the final word about the absence of the Meta-
phrastic texts in the South Slavic realm before the thirteenth century. Some
16 Ivanov, The Translation, op. cit., 145–146. Ivanova, Agiografskite proizvedenija, op. cit.,
254, n. 10.
17 The literature on the manuscript Hilandar Metaphrast °2 is quite limited. The codicological
description and the cataloging of the manuscript are yet to be produced. The recovery of
the manuscript contents is based on my observations.
18 Forty-seven texts are counted in Ivanova’s volume (2008), to which we add ten new texts
from Hilandar Metaphrast °2.
19 M. Yovcheva–L. Taseva, Translated Literature in the Bulgarian Middle Ages as a Social
and Cultural Phenomenon, Scripta & e-Scripta 10–11, 2012, 271–323, 271.
20 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 53–54, 171: Manuscripts BRAN24.4.18., 12th century and
ZIIIc19, 13th century.
21 I. Dobrev, Agiografskata reforma na Simeon Metafrast i săstavăt na Suprasălskija sbornik,
Starobălgarska literatura 10, 1981, 16–38, 18–19.
22 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 40. 83

Marijana VUKOVIĆ
argued that the lives in the Metaphrastic Menologion were of a lengthy and
complicated character.23 The size of the Menologion was a crucial obstacle in
the translation process.24 The South Slavs showed a lack of enthusiasm, and
they conceived the collection as irrelevant.25 A. Ivanov further argued:
…in the field of hagiographic studies and (…) Palaeoslavic studies, Metaphrastic
versions have been neglected as such. The reason for this lack of interest can be
explained by the fact that these versions were not translated at the very beginning
of Old Slavonic literacy – as was the case with most translations of Premetaphrastic
Lives and Martyr acts –, and therefore do not contribute to the reconstruction of
the earliest phases of the medieval Slavonic written tradition.26
Other scholars, such as K. Ivanova and D. Atanassova, hold that the South Slavs
had preferences towards early, pre-metaphrastic texts.27 The reason for this
attachment lies, in the words of Atanassova, in the fact that pre-metaphrastic
hagiographies contained an indispensable array of relevant information and
functioned as the commemorative devices in the preservation and mainte-
nance of their Christian identity.28 Symeon Metaphrastes, on the other hand,
transformed the factual layer in them by revising the texts. The texts, however,
needed to be translated accurately.
A view towards the manuscripts indeed manifests, as Atanassova argued, that
pre-metaphrastic texts more numerous in fourteenth-century manuscripts than
metaphrastic documents.29 Even when the South Slavs had the Metaphrastic
Menologion available in the thirteenth and the fourteenth century, the repro-
duction of pre-metaphrastic collections continued, according to Atanassova.30
In her view, it illustrated a search for meaning in a shared past. An intensified
quest for cultural identity support, embodied in copying pre-metaphrastic texts,
compensated for the Balkan social crisis. Be that as it may, any of the arguments
above may have caused the limited transmission of the Metaphrastic corpus
among the South Slavs.
The historical circumstances were not advantageous for the transmission ei-
ther. Bulgaria was included in Byzantium’s territory from the eleventh to the end
23 K. Ivanova, Njakoi momenti na bălgaro-vizantijskite literaturni vrăzki prez XIV v, Staro

bălgarska literatura 14, 1971, 223.
24 Ivanov, The Translation, op. cit., 153.
27 K. Ivanova, Strukturno-tipologična harakteristika na četi-minejnite sbornici v južnoslavjan-
skata i ruskata literatura (XIV–XVII v.), Slavjanska filologija 16, 1978, 70. D. Atanassova,
Četi-minejat i praktikite na četene prez slavjanskoto srednovekovie, in: Love of Learning
and Devotion to God in Orthodox Monasteries. Selected Proceedings. 5th International
Hilandar Conference I, Belgrade/Columbus 2006, 119–124, 122–123.
28 Atanassova, Četi-minejat, op. cit., 123–124.
29 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit.
84 30 Atanassova, Četi-minejat, op. cit., 124.

of the twelfth century (1018–1185). The stagnation of translations characterized

this period. On this topic, M. Yovcheva and L. Taseva stated: “The necessity of
maintaining and expanding the official layer in the literature disappeared and
the translation activity almost died out.”31 Further, Byzantium faced a severe
crisis and the displacement of the empire in the thirteenth century. From the
turn of the fourteenth century, the translation activities intensified among the
South Slavs to a more considerable extent.
This article provides an overview of the South Slavic metaphrastic trans-
mission, mainly in numbers. I illustrate the disintegration of the Metaphrastic
Menologion among the South Slavs, expressed by a modest quantity of man-
uscripts and translated texts. Initially reviewing the entire period of the Greek
metaphrastic transmission among the South Slavs from the thirteenth to the sev-
enteenth century (covered by Ivanova and including Hilandar Metaphrast °2),
I further concentrate on the translated hagiographies of the thirteenth- and four-
teenth-century manuscripts. I discuss their subjects, saints, to manifest Slavic
selectivity and the confined choices regarding the metaphrastic texts. Further,
I consider the manuscripts’ contents, in which the translated texts appear, to
show their general disintegration in the form and assortment of documents.
I finally study whether the metaphrastic character of these texts had a special
meaning in the Slavic context. Their significance as the metaphrastic versions
in the South Slavic context is scrutinized in the article’s closing.
Before Klimentina Ivanova’s Bibliotheca hagiographica Balcano-Slavi-
ca, the exact quantity of the metaphrastic transmission has been unknown to
researchers.32 One can never totally grasp the complexity of the quest for the
texts before she published this work. It would likely include taking the same
steps as Ivanova did: visiting the identified manuscript libraries, searching for
manuscripts, reading and enumerating their texts, and comparing Slavonic trans-
lations with their Greek originals. Ivanova arranged hagiographies and homilies
from South Slavic (Bulgarian and Serbian) manuscripts and those copied in
Moldavia and Wallachia.33 She considered collections ordered according to the
church calendar and those with fixed feasts, mainly panegyrics and menologia
(čet’i minei).34 She also included non-calendar manuscripts in which some texts
refer to date. All the associated documents have information about feast days
in their title or a margin. Ivanova does not insist that her volume contains the
entire repertoire of South Slavic hagiography in Cyrillic. Instead, it is a first
attempt to systematize works of this type.35
Relying on her data, I take a quantitative approach in this article. I calcu-
late the manuscripts’ appearance rates by using mathematical proportions.
31 Yovcheva–Taseva, Translated Literature, op. cit., 288.

32 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit.
33 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 38.

Marijana VUKOVIĆ
The article seeks to represent the entire metaphrastic transmission among the
South Slavs in numbers. The chart of the metaphrastic Slavonic translations
from the thirteenth to the seventeenth century, reconstructed from the volume
of K. Ivanova, looks as follows:
12th 13th Total

No. Month Title 14th cent. 15th cent. 16th cent. 17th cent.
cent. cent. number
Martyrdom of Mamas,
1. Sept ZIIIb20 Хил439 2
BHG 1018
Martyrdom of Anthimos,
BHG 135
Martyrdom of Babylas of
3. Sept ZIIIb20 Гилф53 Хил439 3
Antioch, BHG 206
Miracle of Michael at ZIIIb20;
4. Sept Гилф53 Хил439 4
Chonae, BHG 1284 PAH152
Martyrdom of Eudoxios,
Romylos, Zenon, and
Macarios of Mytilene,
BHG 1604
Martyrdom of Sozon,
6. Sept Пл48 ZIIIb20 Хил439 3
BHG 1644
Martyrdom of Severi-
anos, BHG 1627
Martyrdom of Menodora,
ZIIIb20;
8. Sept Metrodora, Nymphodora, Хил439 3
УББЋ30
BHG 1273
Life of Theodora of
Alexandria, BHG 1730
Martyrdom of Autono-
10. Sept mos, bishop of Italy, ZIIIb20 Хил439 2
BHG 198
Martyrdom of Cornelius,
BHG 371
Hilandar
Martyrdom of Euphemia,
12. Sept Meta- 1
BHG 620
phrast °2
Martyrdom of Sophia, Hilandar
13. Sept Pistis, Elpis, and Agape, Meta- 1
BHG 1638 phrast °2
Martyrdom of Trophi- Hilandar
14. Sept mos, Sabbatios, and Meta- 1
Dorymedon, BHG 1854 phrast °2
Martyrdom of Eustathios,
Hilandar
Theopiste, and children
15. Sept Meta- 1
Agapios and Theopistos,
phrast °2
BHG 642
Hilandar
Martyrdom of Phokas,
16. Sept Meta- 1
BHG 1539-40
phrast °2
Hilandar
Martyrdom of Thekla,
17. Sept Meta- 1
BHG 1719
phrast °2
Hilandar
Life of Euphrosyne of
18. Sept Meta- 1
Alexandria, BHG 626
phrast °2
86

12th 13th Total

cent. cent. number
Commentary on the Hilandar
19. Sept Metastasis of John The- Цет50 Meta- 2
ologian, BHG 919/919b phrast °2
Hilandar
Martyrdom of Kallistra-
20. Sept Meta- 1
tos, BHG 291
phrast °2
Hilandar
Life of Chariton, BHG
21. Sept Meta- ZIIIb20 Зогр109 Хил439 4
301
phrast °2
Hilandar
Life of Kyriakos, BHG
22. Sept Meta- 1
464
phrast °2
Hilandar
Life of Gregory of Arme-
23. Sept Meta- 1
nia, BHG 713
phrast °2
Martyrdom of Charitina,
24. Oct Хил440 1
BHG 300
Martyrdom of Eulampios
25. Oct Хил444 1
and Eulampia, BHG 617
Martyrdom of Lukianos
26. Oct Хил440 1
of Antioch, BHG 997
Life of Luke the Evange-
27. Oct РМ4/8 Хил440 2
list, BHG 991
PAH152;
PM4/8;
Martyrdom of Varos, PM4/5; PAH151; Хил440;
28. Oct Хил458 11
BHG 1863 PAH301; Гилф56 Рс59
Хил496;
ЦИАИ182
Life of Ilarion the Great,
29. Oct Хил440 1
BHG 755
Martyrdom of Markianos
30. Oct Хил440 1
and Martyrios, BHG 1029
Martyrdom of Demetrios PM4/8; Хил440;
31. Oct 4
of Thessaloniki, BHG 498 ВязQ279 Хил250
Martyrdom of Anastasia
32. Oct Хил440 1
of Rome, BHG 77
Life of Abramios and Цет20
33. Oct Хил440 2 (1)
Maria, BHG 8 (only title)36
Martyrdom of Zenobios
34. Oct Хил440 1
and Zenobia, BHG 1885
Martyrdom of Epimachos
35. Oct Хил440 1
of Alexandria, BHG 594
36 According to the chart, one may assume that the fourteenth-century manuscript Цет20
contains the metaphrastic Life of Abramios (the title does not mention Maria), the transla-
tion of BHG 8. However, this text is present in the manuscript only by the title. The note
in the manuscript reveals the name of a scribe. However, it does not indicate that this is
a metaphrastic text. This manuscript is not counted among the manuscripts which contain
Slavonic metaphrastic texts because the actual text is not there. Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op.
cit., 276–277. 87

Marijana VUKOVIĆ
12th 13th Total

cent. cent. number
Life of Ioannikios the
36. Nov HБKM307 Драг700 M3170 3
Great, BHG 937
Life of Matrona of
37. Nov Perge/Constantinople, УББЋ30 1
BHG 1222
Life of John Almsgiver,
38. Nov PM2/23 M3170 2
BHG 888
Life of John Chrysostom, Пог770 PAH308;
39. Nov 3
BHG 875 (fragm.) PM2/23
Deeds of Philip the Apos-
40. Nov Хил441 1
tle, BHG 1527
ЦИАИ182;
Драг706;
Зогр107; PAH164; Гилф56;
Martyrdom of Stephen
PAH302; Хил496; БCP.III.26; Рс59; Пл7;
41. Nov the New confessor, BHG 19
ZIIIc24; PM4/5; Пл11; Хил441
1667
Зогр94 PAN301; M3170
PAH308;
Цет67
Life of Sabas of Jerusa- PM4/8; Пл5;
42. Dec Хил432 5
lem, BHG 1609 MCПЦ91 Хил442
PAH152;
БAН73; Пл42; Пл11;
Враца4;
Драг706; Хил321;
MCПЦ46;
PAN301; УББ1;
Life of Nicholas of Myra, Хил473; Pс59;
43. Dec PM4/5; PAH678; 25
BHG 1349 Зогр94 Хил442;
MCПЦ91; ПБС128;
Хил487;
PAH297; Ник55;
Хил250
Путна65; Хил486
Печ93
Martyrdom of Menas, PM2/23;
44. Dec Hermogenes and Eu- PAH308; Хил442 4
graphos, BHG 1271 Грач36
PAH164;
Зогр107; PAH304;
Martyrdom of Eustratios, Гилф53; Враца4;
Зогр94; Драг706;
Auxentios, Eugenios, УББ1; MCПЦ46;
45. Dec Гилф51; PAH301; 20
Mardarios, and Orestes, БCP.III.26; Рс59;
PAH302; ZIIIa47;
BHG 646 Пл104 Хил442
Хил474 PM4/5;
Путна65
Commentary on Daniel Драг706;
Зогр94; F.I.640ф +
46. Dec and Ananios, Azarios, PM4/5; БУAH201-III 7
Хил473 Хил44237
and Misail, BHG 485 Путна65
Martyrdom of Ignatios,
47. Dec Хил431 1
BHG 815
Life of Theodosios the PAH150; PГАДА91; Драг684;
48. Jan Хил443 7
Great, BHG 1778 Хил471 PM4/8 M3171
37 F.I.640ф is a fragment of a Čet’i-minei for December, dated to 1625. It contains the end of
the Martyrdom of Eleutherius and Antia and the beginning of the Commentary on Daniel.
It is, in fact, a folio from the manuscript Хил442, which Porphirij Uspenski ripped off from
the original manuscript. We cannot count F.I.640ф as a separate manuscript, as it is only
88 a leaf from the manuscript Хил442. Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 165–166.

12th 13th Total

cent. cent. number
Драг684;
HБKM307;
Life of John Kalybites, PAH164; БСР.III.26;
49. Jan Пл48; Хил443 10
BHG 869 PAH297 ПБС282;
Увар510
M3171
PAH297;
Life of Athanasios the PAH150; РГАДА91;
50. Jan M3171 Хил443 8
Great, BHG 183 Хил471 ZIIIa47;
PM4/8
ZIIIb20; Хил431;
Life of Euthymios the PAH150; Хил443;
51. Jan PM4/8; M3171; 10
Great, BHG 649 Зогр90 Пл5
PAH297 УББ1
Гилф56;
PAH156;
PM4/8; ПБС281;
Commentary on the БСР.I.145; УББ1; MСПЦ46;
52. Jun. martyrdom of Peter and PAH153; HБKM443; Хил445; 17
Paul, BHG 1493 PAH305; PAH327; MСПЦ127
Драг791 PAH541;
OЛДПФ421;
MСПЦ106
Martyrdom of Pantelei-
53. Jul. PAH152 Пл42 Хил446 3
mon, BHG 1414
Chart 1. South Slavic metaphrastic translations from Greek in the manuscripts

from the 13th–17th century
According to Ivanova, forty-seven texts are translated from the Greek meta-
phrastic corpus to the South Slavic realm in the designated period (to which
number we add ten new texts from Hilandar Metaphrast °2). However, some
discrepancies exist in Ivanova’s list of texts if we compare it to the records of the
Metaphrastic Greek texts provided by L’Institut de recherche et d’histoire des
textes website (IRHT) and the book by Christian Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes:
Rewriting and Canonization.38 The website and the book provide exhaustive
lists of the Greek texts and manuscripts of the Metaphrastic Menologion. In
four instances, Ivanova’s data do not match with them.
According to Ivanova, the Slavonic Life of Symeon Stylites is the translation
of the Greek text BHG 1685m, while the Greek text in Høgel’s book is marked
as BHG 1686-87; these are different textual versions.39 Further, Ivanova marks
38 Pinakes, Textes et manuscrits grecs, Symeon Metaphrastes, https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/no-

tices/auteur/2607/ (retrieved 13/01/2021). Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes, op. cit., 173–204.
The manuscripts at the IRHT in Paris are updated regularly; therefore, their quantity must
also be taken provisionally.
39 Pinakes, Textes et manuscrits grecs, Symeon Metaphrastes, https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/
notices/oeuvre/17876/ (retrieved 13/01/2021). Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes, op. cit., 173.
Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 181. 89

Marijana VUKOVIĆ
the Slavonic Martyrdom of Niketas the Goth as the translation of BHG 1339.
The Greek text in Høgel’s book is BHG 1340.40 Again, the documents do not
correspond.
12th 13th 14th 15th 16th 17th Total

No. Month Title
cent. cent. cent. cent. cent. cent. number
Life of Symeon Stylites (trans-
1. Sept lation of BHG 1685m or BHG ZIIIb20 Гилф53 Хил439 3
1686-87?)
Martyrdom of Niketas the Goth
ZIIIb20;
2. Sept (translation of BHG 1339 or Цет64 Хил439 4
Драг700
BHG 1340?)
Synaxis of Archangels Michael
and Gabriel, BHG 1284 (Or the
3. Nov Miracle of Michael at Chonae, Хил482 1
BHG 1284?)
Martyrdom of Menas,
Hermogenes, and Eugraphos
4. Nov M3170 1
(translation of BHG 1270 or
BHG 1250?)
Chart 2. South Slavic metaphrastic translations with ambiguous data enlisted

in K. Ivanova’s Bibliotheca
Further, Ivanova identifies the Synaxis of Archangels Michael and Gabriel,

commemorated in November in the manuscript Хил482, as a translation of the
Greek text BHG 1284.41 The Synaxis has the equivalent BHG number (1284)
as the Miracle of Archangel Michael at Chonae, commemorated in September
in the Metaphrastic Menologion. Since the identical versions usually do not
recur in the different monthly volumes of the Metaphrastic Menologion, the
Synaxis is perhaps a translation of a BHG text other than 1284. We have no sure
way of knowing before we consult the manuscripts and examine whether this
text is indeed BHG 1284, copied with other documents about the two saints.
Finally, Ivanova considers that the Martyrdom of Menas, Hermogenes, and
Eugraphos, commemorated in November, is the translation of the Greek BHG
1270.42 In the website and Høgel’s book, we encounter the Greek Martyrdom of
Menas of Egypt, BHG 1250.43 The confusion continues a little later when anoth-
er Martyrdom of Menas, Hermogenes, and Eugraphos appears in Ivanova’s list,
commemorated in December, this time as a translation of the Greek text BHG
40 Pinakes, Textes et manuscrits grecs, Symeon Metaphrastes, https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/

notices/oeuvre/17256/ (retrieved 13/01/2021). Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes, op. cit., 175.
Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 214.
43 Pinakes, Textes et manuscrits grecs, Symeon Metaphrastes, https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/notic-
90 es/oeuvre/17081/ (retrieved 13/01/2021). Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes, op. cit., 185–186.

1271.44 It is difficult to imagine that the two versions of the same martyrdom,
BHG 1270 and 1271, would be translated in two consecutive months in the
Slavonic manuscripts. In Ivanova’s view, they appear to be the same saints.
However, probably the confusion occurred between the Martyrdom of Menas,
Hermogenes, and Eugraphos (BHG 1270-71) and the Martyrdom of Menas
of Egypt (BHG 1250) in the November volume of the Menologion. Again, we
cannot claim anything with confidence before we consult the manuscripts.
Further research will undoubtedly establish the actual state of matters regard-
ing the texts above. Due to the discrepancies, I further disregard the four spec-
ified versions and consider the remaining fifty-three Greek metaphrastic texts
as a total amount of the translated metaphrastic texts. In percentage, fifty-three
metaphrastic texts are 35.8% of the Metaphrastic Menologion transferred to the
South Slavs from the thirteenth to the seventeenth century.
Furthermore, altogether eighty-nine Slavonic manuscripts (from Ivanova’s
volume with the addition of one other manuscript) contain at least one or more
translated metaphrastic texts within their contents from the thirteenth to the
seventeenth century. The earliest and the only manuscript from the thirteenth
century is Цет50, kept in the Cetinje Monastery, Montenegro, originating from
the Monastery of Mileševa, Serbia.45 This manuscript includes one translated
metaphrastic text in its contents, the Commentary of Symeon on the Metas-
tasis of John Theologian (translation of BHG 919/919b). Compared to the
entire amount of Slavonic metaphrastic manuscripts from the thirteenth to the
seventeenth century, the percentage rate of the manuscript appearance in the
thirteenth century is 1.12%. In the fourteenth century, 18% of the metaphrastic
manuscripts appear (16), while the fifteenth century occupies 31.5% (28). The
sixteenth-century metaphrastic transmission is present with the same 31.5%
and twenty-eight manuscripts, while the seventeenth century takes 18% (16).

45 See Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 159–60, for a more extensive bibliography. See also
M. Martinović, Rukopisne knjige manastira Rodjenja Presvete Bogorodice na Cetinju
(The Manuscript Books at the Monastery of the Nativity of Blessed Virgin Mary in Cetinje),
(unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Belgrade), Belgrade 2016, 207–208. I wish to
thank Milena Martinović for allowing me access to her unpublished material and sharing
the manuscripts from Cetinje with me. 91

Marijana VUKOVIĆ
Table 1. South Slavic manuscripts containing translated metaphrastic texts

dated from the 13th–17th century
The peak of manuscript production is in the fifteenth and sixteenth century, as

the most significant number of manuscripts dated to these periods. Naturally,
we reflect on the material that has survived; there is no way of obtaining the
absolute sum of copied manuscripts. Judging by the manuscripts, we can
confirm that the transmission of the Byzantine metaphrastic texts was gradual
among the South Slavs.
As for the appearance of new texts in manuscripts per century, we witness
the emergence of one original version in the thirteenth century, which is 1.88%
of the newly translated transmission. There is 43.4% of the freshly procured
translations in the fourteenth century (23 new texts). In the fifteenth century,
their number is 18 texts, which is 34%. In the sixteenth century, we have 1.88%
(1 new version), while in the seventeenth century, the percentage is 18.9%
(10 texts). According to these statistics, translation activities appear to be at
their highest in the fourteenth century.
92

Table 2. New metaphrastic translations appearing in the manuscripts

from the 13th–17th century
When it comes to Byzantine metaphrastic texts, we know their total amount

(148) and the number of manuscripts they appear in (around 700). However, we
do not have the number of manuscripts in which individual texts appear, their
production according to centuries, regions, and similar. Some texts are broadly
present, while others are not. These tendencies are comparable in both Byzantine
and Slavonic manuscripts. Among the Slavonic texts reproduced in the most
significant number of manuscripts are the Life of Nicholas of Myra (translation
of BHG 1349, 25 Slavonic manuscripts), the Martyrdom of Eustratios, Auxen-
tios, Eugenios, Mardarios, and Orestes (translation of BHG 646, 20 Slavonic
manuscripts), the Martyrdom of Stephen the New Confessor (translation of BHG
1667, 19 Slavonic manuscripts), the Commentary on Martyrdom of Peter and
Paul (translation of BHG 1493, 17 Slavonic manuscripts), and the Martyrdom
of Varos (translation of BHG 1863, 11 Slavonic manuscripts).
The Life of Nicholas of Myra is represented in numerous manuscripts both in
Byzantium and among the Slavs. One-hundred-thirty-seven Greek metaphrastic
manuscripts accommodate this text.46 The Martyrdom of Varos is contained in
sixty-five Greek codices, comparable to the Martyrdom of Zenobios and Zeno-
bia, which appears in sixty-four Greek manuscripts.47 Nevertheless, Zenobios
46 Symeon Metaphrastes, in: Pinakes, Textes et manuscrits grecs, https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/

notices/oeuvre/17276/ (retrieved 13/01/2021).
47 Symeon Metaphrastes, in: Pinakes, Textes et manuscrits grecs, https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.
fr/notices/oeuvre/18169/ (retrieved 13/01/2021) and https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/notices/
oeuvre/18211/ (retrieved 13/01/2021). 93

Marijana VUKOVIĆ
and Zenobia’s Martyrdom appears in only one Slavonic codex, while Varos’
Martyrdom was among the most reproduced texts.48 We draw from this example
that South Slavs had their preferences regarding the metaphrastic versions.
Considering the inclinations per century, based on the extant manuscripts,
the Martyrdom of Eustratios, Auxentios, Eugenios, Mardarios, and Orestes
(BHG 646) is the most copied text in the manuscripts dated to the fourteenth
century. As for the fifteenth century, the Life of Nicholas of Myra (BHG 1349)
is present in the most significant number of codices. In the sixteenth century, the
Commentary on Peter and Paul’s martyrdom (BHG 1493) occupies the highest
number of manuscripts. The Life of Nicholas of Myra (BHG 1349) is reproduced
in the most conspicuous number of manuscripts in the seventeenth century.
Shifting our focus from the overall metaphrastic transmission among the
South Slavs to the thirteenth and the fourteenth centuries, we further scrutinize
the Slavonic preferences towards the transmitted saintly stories’ characters.
What saints’ accounts did the South Slavs read from the metaphrastic corpus in
this period? Altogether twenty-four saints’ lives and martyrdoms have mostly
men as the principal characters of the stories conveyed from the Metaphrastic
corpus into the Slavic realm. More precisely, nineteen stories have men as their
main characters, and five accounts describe the lives and martyrdom of women,
either alone or within families.
The male characters include the following saints: Apostles and Evangelists,
prophets, late antique bishops, archbishops, other religious leaders, martyrs,
soldiers, hermits and ascetics, shepherds, gardeners, monks disguised as beg-
gars, cenobitic monks, founders of monasteries, abbots, confessors, stylites,
and Christian writers. Women include followers of the Apostles, martyrs, nuns,
ascetics, virgins, and cross-dresser saints. Out of twenty-four narratives, and if
we ascribe more than one epithet to the holy figures, 41.6% of the stories are
about martyrs. Further, 33.3% of the accounts are about hermits and ascetics.
We have 25% of the stories about monks and 20.8% of the tales about Christian
leaders, bishops, archbishops, and the like. Also, 20.8% are about soldiers, 8.3%
are about shepherds, Christian writers, and disguised saints, while 4.2% are
about stylites. The supporting male roles in the stories involve fathers, sons,
relatives, fiancés, friends, servants, elders of monasteries, other saints, teachers
and disciples, priests, monks, princes and nobles, torturers and pagans, scribes,
thieves, soldiers, butchers, sailors, ship owners, shepherds, farmers, and some
historical figures. Women are mentioned as sisters, daughters, mothers, wives,
widows, and wealthy Christian women.
The majority of the accounts allow a glimpse at some descriptions of history,
geography, descriptions of landscapes, gender, natural phenomena and disas-
ters, diseases, visions, dreams, healing, other miracles, as well as towards the
different models of holy behavior, different styles of saintly prayers, various
sufferings, and deaths of saints. Regarding history, half of the stories (50%) take
94 48 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 277.

place in the third-fourth century. The fifth-sixth century is covered in 20.8% of

the tales; 16.6% covers the first-second century, while 8.3% describes the icon-
oclastic period. As for geography, the narratives mainly describe the following
lands: Asia Minor, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Jerusalem, Constantinople, Greek
islands, Black Sea, Carthage, Armenia, but also Italy, mainly Rome. In 58.3%
of the stories, we witness various miracles, including healing, and in 25%, the
descriptions of visions and dreams appear.
Moving beyond the texts, we further consider the contents of the thirteenth-
and fourteenth-century South Slavic manuscripts that transmitted metaphrastic
texts, which significantly differ from the Metaphrastic Menologion. The Me-
nologion ordinarily incorporated ten volumes that cover the lives of saints in
the entire year. Individual manuscripts enclosed the months of the year, where
almost every day had a commemoration of a saint. In the South Slavic tradition,
only one codex dated to the fourteenth century (Hilandar Metaphrast °2) and
a few later ones (e.g., ZIIIb20) display the exact contents as in the Metaphrastic
Menologion.
Besides a few of these exceptional manuscripts, the South Slavs commonly
copied up to four metaphrastic texts within manuscripts of different purposes
and contents. They were followed by various other documents, usually not
hagiographies and certainly not metaphrastic hagiographies. The highest
number among the seventeen manuscripts in the case are those, which include
both homilies and hagiographies (58.8%, ten manuscripts). They are usually
called “Collection/Miscellany” or “Sbornik,” sometimes Menaion Panegiric
or Čet’i-minei. The name given to these manuscripts is not as essential as the
actual contents they have within their covers. The assortment of texts implies
manuscripts’ purpose and function, which are different from those with en-
tirely hagiographical material. A significantly lesser number, 17.6%, contains
only hagiography (3 manuscripts). One manuscript out of this number, as was
stressed, contains solely metaphrastic texts (5.9%). Two other codices, 11.8%,
include polemical treatises of Anti-Latin and Hesychast contents. One manu-
script, Увар510, is a Paterikon, with sayings of the fathers and some lives of
saints, among which is one metaphrastic text.49 One codex is a fragment of
unknown provenance.50 The fragment, Пог770, contains a portion of the meta
phrastic Life of John Chrysostom. This text entirely occupies its thirty-eight
folia. Therefore, its contents are not comparable to other collections.


Marijana VUKOVIĆ
Table 3. South Slavic manuscripts dated to the 13th–14th century,

according to their contents
How many manuscripts that contain metaphrastic hagiography are aligned

according to calendar order? Eight manuscripts out of seventeen have either
confused and sporadic calendar order or no order at all (47%). Some calendar
order, which is quite precise in some manuscripts, is visible in an equal num-
ber of manuscripts (47%).51 One manuscript is a fragment, and it cannot be
considered here (5.5%).
Table 4. South Slavic 13th- and 14th-century manuscripts organized according to cal-
endar order
Ivanova stressed that one of the manuscripts’ features was their distinction to
those structured either by the earlier Studite Typikon or the later Jerusalem
51 The calendar arrangement of texts in the manuscripts does not mean that the texts’ openings
96 had dates attached to them because some of these manuscripts did not display dates.

Typikon or mixed.52 The Typikon determined the order of services for each day
of the year and the holidays’ hierarchy.53 Ivanova argued that the collections
structured by the older Studite Typikon were composed before the fourteenth
century, regardless of the dating of a specific manuscript. Those impacted by
the Jerusalem Typikon were produced mainly during and after the fourteenth
century in Tărnovo and Athos.54 This distinction could be the reason why the
texts about certain saints were copied, while the others were not copied in the
manuscripts in case.55 New translations of texts were made due to the Jerusalem
reform and the libraries’ changed requirements regarding the texts.56 Moreover,
some scholars argue that introducing the metaphrastic texts into the South Slavic
realm occurred thanks to the Jerusalem Typikon.57 A more significant number
of the seventeen manuscripts examined here are organized according to the
new Jerusalem Typikon than the old Studite Typikon. As Symeon composed
the Metaphrastic Menologion during the period when the Studite Typikon was
in use, the changes in the Slavonic manuscripts, particularly those regarding
the selection of saints, may have resulted from this transition.
Finally, the manuscript contents, examined in what follows, reveal whether
the texts’ metaphrastic character was considered their significant characteristic
in the thirteenth- and fourteenth-century South Slavic manuscripts. In the four-
teenth-century manuscript ZIIIc24, a Čet’i-minei for the months of September
to November from the Croatian Academy of Sciences, Zagreb, organized ac-
cording to the older Studite Typikon, the order of saints follows quite closely
the sequence in the Metaphrastic Menologion. Ivanova sees this manuscript as
the attempt to compile a collection that corresponds to the September volume
of the Greek Metaphrastic Menologion.58 Indeed, over forty saints in this man-
uscript otherwise have their metaphrastic Greek versions.59 However, only one

53 D. Atanassova – E. Mircheva, Staroizvodnite i novoizvodnite sbornici – prevodi, redakcii,
prerabotki, knižovnoezikovi osobenosti, Sofia 2018 (review), Starobălgarska literatura
57–58, 2018, 304–310, 305.
55 It is one of the arguments of E. Mircheva in her book Mircheva, Staroizvodnite i novoiz-
vodnite sbornici, op. cit.
56 Atanassova, Četi-minejat, op. cit., 122.
57 D. Kenanov linked the emergence of Metaphrastic translations to the Jerusalem Typikon in
the 14th century. D. Kenanov, Simeon Metafrast i Bălgarskijat XIV vek, Tărnovski pismena:
Almanah za Tărnovskata knižovna škola 6, 2014, 264–275, 266. Ivanov, The Translation,
op. cit., 153.
58 Ivanova, Agiografskite priozvedenija, op. cit., 249–267, 252.
59 The manuscript contains: Life of Symeon Stylites (1 Sept); Martyrdom of Mamas (2 Sept);
Martyrdom of Anthimos of Nicomedia (3 Sept); Encomium for Prophet Zacharias and John
Baptist (5 Sept); Miracle of Archangel Michael at Chonae (6 Sept); Protoevangelium of
Jacob (8 Sept); Life of Theodora of Alexandria (11 Sept); 3 Encomia for the Exaltation of
the Cross (14 Sept); Martyrdom of Niketas (15 Sept); Martyrdom of Euphemia (16 Sept);
Martyrdom of Sophia and her daughters (17 Sept); Life of Eustathios and his family (20
Sept); Encomium for martyr Phokas (22 Sept); 3 Encomia for Thekla (24 Sept); Life of 97

Marijana VUKOVIĆ
Slavonic metaphrastic text, the Life of Stephen the New Confessor (translation
of BHG 1667), is copied in the manuscript. The other saints may not have had
their metaphrastic Slavonic hagiographies translated and accessible by the
time. Alternatively, pre-metaphrastic versions in this manuscript could have
been considered more popular.60 When it comes to Stephen the New Confes-
sor’s Life, no other hagiographies dedicated to him were rendered in Slavonic,
except for this one. It was the only translated text dedicated to the saint, and
it was metaphrastic. The manuscript was written by a scribe, Drago (note on
folio 170b), and dedicated to an archbishop of Lipljan (Kosovo).61 It was kept
in the monastery of Gračanica (Kosovo) before it was transferred to Lesnovo
(Northern Macedonia). Although the manuscript may have arrived from Athos,
its origin is not evident. In an unlikely scenario in which the manuscript was
copied in Kosovo, we would have a reason to assume that the metaphrastic
versions dedicated to the mentioned saints were not available.62 However, if
the codex was copied in Athos, we must exclude the possibility that texts were
unavailable.
The situation with the manuscript Зогр107, from Zografou, Athos, is similar
as with the previous manuscript. In this codex, among homilies and other lives,
two metaphrastic texts (underlined below) were the sole translated versions
dedicated to these saints in the Slavic realm.63 The other saints mentioned in
Euphrosyne (25 Sept); Life of John Theologian (26 Sept); Martyrdom of Gregory the Illumi-
nator (30 Sept); Martyrdom of Ananias (1 Oct); Life of Justina and Martyrdom of Cyprian
and Justina (2 Oct); Martyrdom of Dionysios Areopagite (3 Oct); Martyrdom of Teoteke (4
Oct); 2 Encomia for Apostle Thomas (6 Oct); Martyrdom of Sergios and Bacchos (7 Oct);
Martyrdom of Pelagia (8 Oct); Martyrdom of Dorotheos (10 Oct); Martyrdom of Probos,
Tarachos, and Andronikos (12 Oct); Martyrdom of Karpos, Papylos, and Agathonike (13
Oct); Martyrdom of Nazarios and companions (14 Oct); Martyrdom of Longinus (16 Oct);
Martyrdom of Glykeria (17 Oct); Life of Luke Evangelist (18 Oct); Life of Hilarion (21
Oct); Martyrdom of Seven Martyrs of Ephesus (22 Oct); Martyrdom of Jacob (23 Oct);
Life of Aberkios (23 Oct); Martyrdom of Arethas (24 Oct); 2 Encomia for Demetrios of
Thessaloniki (26 Oct); Martyrdom of Capitolina and Erotheis (27 Oct); Martyrdom of Ze-
nobios and Zenobia (30 Oct); Martyrdom of Kosmas and Damianos (1 Nov); Martyrdom of
Akindynos and companions (2 Nov); Encomium for Michael and Gabriel (8 Nov); Miracles
of Menas (11 Nov); Life of John Almsgiver (12 Nov); 3 Encomia of John Chrysostom (13
Nov); Martyrdom of Apostle Phillip (14 Nov); Miracles of Gourias, Samonas, and Abibos in
Edessa (15 Nov); Martyrdom of Evangelist Matthew (16 Nov); 2 Encomia for Presentation
of Mary (21 Nov); Life of Gregory of Agrigento (23 Nov); Martyrdom of Anastasia (24
Nov); 2 Encomia for Clement of Rome (25 Nov); Martyrdom of Peter of Alexandria (25
Nov); Martyrdom of Ekaterina (25 Nov); Martyrdom of Jacob of Persia (27 Nov); Life of
Stephen the New (28 Nov); 3 Encomia for Apostle Andrew (30 Nov). Ivanova, Bibliotheca,
op. cit., 174–175.
60 As D. Atanassova generally argued about pre-metaphrastic texts. See footnote 27.
62 There is no evidence that a scriptorium existed, particularly in or around Gračanica in
Kosovo, by this time. See M. Davidović, Srpski skriptoriji od XII do XVII veka, in: Svet
Srpske Rukopisne Knjige (XII–XVII vek), Belgrade 2016, 49–69.
63 The contents are: Homily for the Beginning of Indiction (1 Sept); Cycles for the feasts of
98 Lord and Mary, homilies for the feasts from Jerusalem Typikon, lives, and homilies for

the manuscript must have had their metaphrastic texts accessible in Greek in
different monasteries on Athos at the time. The Slavic translators must have
been available there too. However, in the surviving evidence, we generally do
not detect the extensive efforts to instigate translations aiming to restore the
individual volumes of the Metaphrastic Menologion (except in a few cases).
The examples suggest that the South Slavs at this time have not seen meta-
phrastic texts as a category to be copied separately. They were not reluctant
to use metaphrastic texts and combine them with other texts, as they did not
avoid them altogether. Ten out of twenty-four saintly narratives from the thir-
teenth-fourteenth century do not have versions translated in Slavonic other than
metaphrastic versions.64
In some of the manuscripts, such as PAH152, a composite codex dated to
the fourteenth–fifteenth century, kept in the Neamț Monastery in Romania, the
involved texts relating to dates are dispersed throughout the year loosely and
sporadically.65 Hagiographies – saints’ lives and martyrdoms – cover a few days
in September and October, followed by an entry in December and another in
February. Although they respect the order of the calendar year, significant gaps
ensue. It seems that these texts – metaphrastic or not, regardless – were available
at a specific moment in a place of the manuscript production. We have a similar
impression when looking at PAH150, a more coherent two-month Čet’i-minei,
containing several (available) metaphrastic texts.66
The earliest dated, thirteenth-century manuscript, Цет50, contains a rare text,
the Commentary of Symeon on the Metastasis of John Theologian (translation
of BHG 919/919b). Цет50 is a Menaion Panegyric, which includes selected
saints: Encomium for Synaxis of Archangels Michael and Gabriel, Life of John of Rila,
Life of Paraskevi-Petka, Life of Hilarion. September: 4 encomia for Birth of Mary (8 Sept);
Encomium for Joachim and Anne (9 Sept); 5 encomia for the Exaltation of the Cross (14
Sept); 2 encomia for John Theologian (26 Sept). October: Encomium for Apostle Jacob
(9 Oct); Life of Paraskevi-Petka (14 Oct); Encomium for Luke the Evangelist (18 Oct);
Life of John of Rila (19 Oct); Martyrdom of Artemios (20 Oct); Martyrdom of Demetrios
of Thessaloniki (26 Oct). November: Encomium for the Reconstruction of the Temple of
George in Lyda (3 Nov); 3 encomia for Synaxis of Archangels Michael and Gabriel (8 Nov);
2 encomia for Presentation of Mary (21 Nov); Life of Stephen the New (28 Nov). December:
Martyrdom of Eustratios and companions (13 Dec); Encomium for Sunday before the Birth
of Christ; 2 encomia for the prophet Daniel and his three companions (17 Dec); Encomium
for blessed Philogonius (20 Dec); 9 encomia for the Birth of Christ (25 Dec); Encomium
for the Synaxis of Theotokos (26 Dec); 3 encomia for Stephen the First Martyr (27 Dec);
Encomia for Sunday after the Birth of Christ; 2 encomia for the Newly-weds (29 Dec).
January: 2 encomia for Circumcision of the Lord and Basil the Great (1 Jan); 10 encomia
for the Epiphany (6 Jan); Treatise for the Fathers from Sinai and Raita (14 Jan); Life of
Macarios of Egypt (19 Jan). See Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 74–75.
64 Martyrdom of Sozon, Martyrdom of Varos, Martyrdom of Ioannikios the Great, Martyrdom
of Stephen the New Confessor, Martyrdom of Eustratios, Auxentios, Eugenios, Mardarios,
and Orestes, Martyrdom of Theodosios the Great, Martyrdom of Trophimos, Sabbatios, and
Dorymedon, Martyrdom of Kallistratos, Life of Chariton, and Life of Kyriakos.
65 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 113–115. The openings of the texts do not mention any dates.
66 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 112–113. 99

Marijana VUKOVIĆ
encomia and hagiographies for the entire calendar year, following the calendar
order with gaps between dates. The manuscript arrived at the Cetinje Monastery
from the Monastery of Ostrog (Montenegro).67 Ivanova reports that the codex
originates from the Mileševa monastery (Serbia).68 It was possibly copied either
in Mileševa or Athos; there were tight connections between the two places in
the thirteenth century. Both had their scriptoria.69 The various monasteries in
Athos contain this text in a Greek version. Also, Saint John Theologian has
several other translated Slavonic encomia dedicated to him. Thus, it is unclear
how specifically this text ended in the manuscript and why it did not disseminate
more broadly later (it appeared again only in the fourteenth-century Hilandar
Metaphrast °2).
The manuscript Хил474, from Hilandar, is a thematic compilation of po-
lemical treatises with anti-Latin and Hesychast contents.70 Among the works of
Gregory Palamas, Nilus Cabasilas, excerpts from the Holy Scriptures, disputes
on the Christian faith and Jewish law, Apocalypses, manuals against the La
tins, and other related subjects, the Martyrdom of Eustratios and companions
is probably one of the few texts that relate to date. The date, however, here
probably does not matter. The fact that this story has no version other than
metaphrastic also does not make a difference. This text seems to appear as an
item deliberately selected according to its theme rather than a random choice.
Possibly the text was copied due to its subject. A related situation occurs with
the manuscript Хил458. The Martyrdom of Varos is a sole metaphrastic text
copied in this Ascetic-Hesychast miscellany.71 Likely, the translated text’s trans-
formations or the martyrdom story supported the Hesychast ideas promoted
in the manuscript. The martyrdom does not seem to have been included here
because its version is metaphrastic.
The manuscript Hilandar Metaphrast °2 remains the only fourteenth-cen-
tury codex that displays entirely metaphrastic contents for the second half of
September. This vital discovery shows that the South Slavs were aware of the
metaphrastic structure. The question remains why they did not imitate the form
more frequently. The future findings will hopefully reveal whether this structure
was present in a more significant number of manuscripts.
67 Martinović, Rukopisne knjige, op. cit., 207.

68 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 159–160.
69 Davidović, Srpski skriptoriji, op. cit., 59.
70 I vanova , Bibliotheca, op. cit., 150. The Ohio State University Library Catalog,
Hesychast and anti-Latin collection, https://library.ohio-state.edu/search~S7?/
fSPEC.HM.SMS.474/fspec+hm+sms+474/-3%2C-1%2C0%2CE/frameset&FF=f-
spec+hm+sms+474&1%2C1%2C (retrieved 13/01/2021). See I. Evangelou, The Asceti-
cal–Mystical Literature in the Slavic Miscellanies of Mount Athos in the 14th–18th Century,
https://www.academia.edu/22305001/Ascetical_Mystical_Literature_in_the_Slavic_Mis-
cellanies_of_Mount_Athos, (retrieved 15/01/2021), for the overview and the bibliography
about the dissemination of miscellanies with ascetical-mystical content in the Slavic world.
100 71 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit.,148.

Altogether, the South Slavic tradition attested to a limited, unstructured, and

delayed transmission of texts from the Metaphrastic Menologion of Symeon
Metaphrastes. The complex historical, political, and cultural circumstances be-
tween Byzantium, Bulgaria, and Serbia in the Middle Ages may have triggered
it. The South Slavs could have favored pre-metaphrastic texts. The Jerusalem
Typikon may have caused the segregation of the Metaphrastic Menologion by
promoting new texts and discarding the old ones. However, the low preservation
rate of manuscripts leaves us unsure about the exact dimensions of the trans-
mission. The South Slavic focus on the metaphrastic texts remained limited in
their choice of topics and characters. The metaphrastic versions appeared in
Slavonic manuscripts of irregular calendar order, with various other texts of
different genres and purposes. The Menologion, as we knew it in Byzantium,
very rarely appeared among the South Slavs.
The attitudes towards the randomly copied Slavic metaphrastic texts in the
thirteenth and fourteenth centuries do not seem well-defined. Moreover, neither
was their significance in the Slavic world. These texts were mostly copied due
to their availability, topics, and the absence of other translations about the same
saints. The metaphrastic character of the texts likewise was not considered their
distinctive trait. Nevertheless, the discovery of exceptional manuscripts, such
as Hilandar Metaphrast °2, gives us hope that further copies of the translated
Metaphrastic Menologion, which keep both the integrity of Symeon’s collection
as well as pay him due respect as the author/rewriter, are still possible to find,
regardless of their limited scope and the small number of copies.
Marijana Vuković
University of Southern Denmark (SDU)
Centre for Medieval Literature
Campusvej 55, Odense M, 5230
Denmark
mavuk@sdu.dk
101

Byzantine-Metaphrastic-Hagiography-Among-South-Slavs-A-Quantitative-View - Content File PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Byzantine-Metaphrastic-Hagiography-Among-South-Slavs-A-Quantitative-View - Content File PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You have downloaded a document from

The Central and Eastern European Online Library

The joined archive of hundreds of Central-, East- and South-East-European publishers,

Source: Byzantinoslavica - Revue internationale des Etudes Byzantines

Byzantinoslavica - Revue internationale des Etudes Byzantines

Location: Czech Republic

Byzantine Metaphrastic Hagiography

Marijana VUKOVIĆ (Odense)

Symeon Metaphrastes, a Byzantine court official of the tenth century, commenced

Symeon Metaphrastes, a Byzantine court official, who lived in Constantinople

CEEOL copyright 2022

disseminated in many Byzantine manuscripts.2 Seven hundred metaphrastic

2 On the Metaphrastic Menologion of Symeon Metaphrastes, see C. Høgel, Symeon Meta-

CEEOL copyright 2022

unparalleled in the Byzantine tradition. No similar effort to revisit hagiograph-

CEEOL copyright 2022

elsewhere in the South Slavic manuscripts.16 The monks of Hilandar monastery

CEEOL copyright 2022

23 K. Ivanova, Njakoi momenti na bălgaro-vizantijskite literaturni vrăzki prez XIV v, Staro­

CEEOL copyright 2022

of the twelfth century (1018–1185). The stagnation of translations characterized

31 Yovcheva–Taseva, Translated Literature, op. cit., 288.

CEEOL copyright 2022

12th 13th Total

CEEOL copyright 2022

12th 13th Total

CEEOL copyright 2022

12th 13th Total

CEEOL copyright 2022

12th 13th Total

Chart 1. South Slavic metaphrastic translations from Greek in the manuscripts

38 Pinakes, Textes et manuscrits grecs, Symeon Metaphrastes, https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/no-

CEEOL copyright 2022

12th 13th 14th 15th 16th 17th Total

Chart 2. South Slavic metaphrastic translations with ambiguous data enlisted

Further, Ivanova identifies the Synaxis of Archangels Michael and Gabriel,

40 Pinakes, Textes et manuscrits grecs, Symeon Metaphrastes, https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/

CEEOL copyright 2022

44 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 353.

CEEOL copyright 2022

Table 1. South Slavic manuscripts containing translated metaphrastic texts

The peak of manuscript production is in the fifteenth and sixteenth century, as

CEEOL copyright 2022

Table 2. New metaphrastic translations appearing in the manuscripts

When it comes to Byzantine metaphrastic texts, we know their total amount

46 Symeon Metaphrastes, in: Pinakes, Textes et manuscrits grecs, https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/

CEEOL copyright 2022

94 48 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 277.

CEEOL copyright 2022

place in the third-fourth century. The fifth-sixth century is covered in 20.8% of

49 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 138.

CEEOL copyright 2022

Table 3. South Slavic manuscripts dated to the 13th–14th century,

How many manuscripts that contain metaphrastic hagiography are aligned

CEEOL copyright 2022

52 Ivanova, Bibliotheca, op. cit., 48.

CEEOL copyright 2022

CEEOL copyright 2022

CEEOL copyright 2022

67 Martinović, Rukopisne knjige, op. cit., 207.

CEEOL copyright 2022

Altogether, the South Slavic tradition attested to a limited, unstructured, and

CEEOL copyright 2022

23 K. Ivanova, Njakoi momenti na bălgaro-vizantijskite literaturni vrăzki prez XIV v, Staro