Славянская гимнография IX–XIII вв. в изданиях и исследованиях 1985–2004 гг. / Slavic hymnography of the 9th-12th cc. in the publications of 1985-2004 (original) (raw)
Related papers
Церковнославянская гимнография в Польско-Литовском государстве XVII вв
Fontes Slaviae Orthodoxae
The article presents an outline of hymnographic works created before 1596 and is focused on works created in Greek Catholic and Orthodox communities in the 17th century. Among other things, there will be discussed the office for Josaphat Kuncevych, a series of texts written by Peter Mohyla and a pamphlet on Meletius Smotrytsky, which can be considered as a crossing point between the old and the new stage of hymnographic production in the Polish-Lithuanian state.
2020
Based on the inhomogeneity of the texts in the first printed Octoechos (Schweipolt Fiol, Krakow 1491), the study focuses on the text's most archaic layer, which contains Old Bulgarian works by Cyrillo-Methodian disciples and was written in Bulgaria at the end of the 9th and the beginning of the 10th century. The article examines three original (non-translated) canons that form parts of the Sunday and weekday Octoechos offices. Two of them are considered to have been written by St. Clement of Ohrid: Canon to St John the Baptist (Tuesday, 2nd Tone) and Canon to Theotokos (Wednesday, 3rd Tone), both of which were very common until the 14th century in Slavic manuscripts of various origins. The third one, Canon to the Holy Trinity (Midnight Office for Sunday, 2nd Tone), is anonymous and has so far only been discovered in a single Serbian Octoechos, Gilf. 26, the National Library of Russia (14th century), while in Eastern Slavic literature it is only found in the codex under review. The specificities in the texts of Fiol’s Octoechos as well as its particular position in the written tradition of these hymnographic works are described in comparison to copies of various origins. Textological data are interpreted mostly in search of the protograph of the printed version. The collation of the texts shows that the archaic layer of the Krakow incunabulum is most probably based on at least two protographs (or antigraphs) which are indirectly related to the earliest core of the Old Bulgarian Octoechos. One was used for the Tuesday and Wednesday offices (probably through an Eastern Slavic medium), and the other (of possible South Slavic origin) was used as the source of the canon to the Holy Trinity (2nd Tone) in the Sunday office.
Аржакова Л. М. Славистика в Санкт-Петербургском университете// Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana. № 2(22). 2017. С. 172-184.
The study of the history of University education in Russia is one of the most important and actively developing direction in modern Russian historiography. Special importance in the context of this kind of research have the works of L. P. Lapteva (2005 and 2012), dedicated to the history of Slavonic studies in Russia in the 19th – the first third of the 20th century. The specific of the Slavic specialization in the University educational process and the history of Slavonic studies in Russia analyzed by researcher in detail. However, a number of issues that are of direct relevance to the teaching and research activities of the St. Petersburg Slavic scholars, requires more detailed study. The important fact to note is that the state of historiography and archival collections testifies to the insufficiency of elaboration of the creative heritage of Slavic scholars such as P. I. Preuss or V. I. Lamansky. Besides that still out of sight of historians are, for example, the printed works of N. I. Kareev, devoted to Polish history, which can not be analyzed outside the context of Russian-Polish scientific contacts. When setting problems in the study of the history of the St. Petersburg Slavic studies separately should be said about the necessity for special study of works created by members of the interdepartmental Slavic sector, which successfully operated on the historical faculty of Leningrad University since the late 1950s. Among other things, the priority tasks of modern Slavic studies, including the history of Slavonic studies, should include the revision / rethinking of some key concepts that the Slavist and historian of Slavonic studies currently operate, without which there is hardly possible a more adequate understanding of past and present Slavonic studies. ***** Изучение истории университетского образования в России является одним из важных и активно развивающихся направлений в современной отечественной историографии. Особое место в контексте такого рода исследований занимают труды Л. П. Лаптевой (2005 и 2012), посвященные истории славяноведения в России в XIX – первой трети XX в., в которых изучение специфики славистической специализации в учебном университетском процессе и история славистических исследований в России нашли подробное освещение. Вместе с тем ряд вопросов, которые имеют непосредственное отношение к преподавательской и научной деятельности петербургских славистов, требует более детального исследования. Важно подчеркнуть, что состояние историографии и архивных фондов свидетельствует о недостаточной разработанности творческого наследия таких славистов, как П. И. Прейс или В. И. Ламанский. В то же время во многом вне поля зрения историографов по-прежнему остаются, например, печатные труды Н. И. Кареева, посвященные польской истории, которые невозможно анализировать вне контекста русско-польских научных контактов. При постановке задач по изучению истории петербургских славянских исследований отдельно следует говорить о необходимости проведения специального исследования трудов, созданных сотрудниками межкафедрального славянского сектора, который успешно действовал на историческом факультете Ленинградского университета с конца 1950-х гг. Кроме всего прочего, к первоочередным задачам современных славянских исследований, включая изучение истории славяноведения, следует отнести пересмотр / переосмысление ряда ключевых понятий, которыми в настоящее время оперирует славист и историк славяноведения, без чего вряд ли возможно более адекватное понимание прошлого и настоящего славистики.
The article provides new data on one of the Byzantine hymnographers named Georgios. The author examines the Old Church Slavonic translation of the hymnographic Canon for the Translation of the Holy Mandylion from Edessa to Constantinople. One of the canons, dedicated to this event, which took place in 944, contains an alphabetic acrostic (from Alpha to Omega) formed by the initial letters of the regular troparia of each ode. Unlike Greek sources of the original text, the Old Church Slavonic Translation of the above-mentioned Canon contains theotokia, which are not preserved in the known Byzantine manuscripts. It has been proved in the article that the Slavonic theotokia go back to the original Greek version of the text and by no means represent a later interpolation. The back-translation from Old Church Slavonic into Old Greek, performed on the base of detailed linguistic analysis, made it possible to reconstruct the name Georgiou, which is formed by the initial letters of the theotokia. This implies that the analyzed Canon contains a double acrostic – the alphabetic one and the one with the author’s name. Such kind of double acrostics has been attested mostly in the canons signed by Georgios. No additional data on this hymnographer have been so far discovered. On the ground of Slavonic translation one could come to the conclusion that the approximate time of Georgios’ life can be established. Since the Translation of the Holy Mandylion took place in 944 and the earliest version of the Slavonic translation is dated back to the middle of the 11th century or even to the second half of the 10th century, the period from the beginning of the 10th century to the beginning of the 11th century should be accepted as the time, when the Byzantine hymnographer, who could be, according to Follieri's assumption, an author of about one hundred hymnographic canons, lived.
Осам векова аутокефалије српске православне цркве II / Eight Centuries of the Autocephaly of the Serbian Orthodox Church II, 2020
До данас сачувани српски преписи литургијских зборника који садрже химнографски материјал настали у 13. веку нису бројни, али имају значајну улогу у проучавању не само рецепције преводне византијске химнографије код православних Словена него чувају и најстарија оригинална дела словенских аутора с краја 9. и првих деценија 10. века (Климента и Наума Охридских, Константина Преславског). Они су, исто тако, и поуздан сведок о обредном животу Српске Цркве у овом раном периоду. У томе се посебно истиче неколико српских минеја (Београд, НБС 647; Београд, САНУ 361; Света Гора, Зограф 53; МОсква, ГИМ Хлудов 156). Током 13. века преписано је и неколико српских триода (РНБ, F п I 68, РНБ, F п I 92), али они нису у довољној мери проучени. Октоиси су сачувани тек од краја 13. века, али садржај рукописа овога типа из тог времена, а и нешто познатијих - из прве половине 14. века - потврђује заступљеност дела ране словенске химнографије и у овим литургијским књигама.