International congress of byzantine studies belgrade, 22 27 august 2016

HYMNOGRAPHY
Chairs: 
Stig Frøyshov, Alexandra Nikiforova
Vladimir Vasilik
, 
The Image of St. Constantine the Great in the Unpublished Canon, Saved in Sinaitic Manuscripts
Francesca Potenza
, 
Per l’edizione critica di un canone (Acefalo) per la traslazione delle reliquie di S. Nicola
Stig Frøyshov
,
 
Jerusalem in Constantinople: The Hagiopolite Divine Office in the Imperial City
Dimosthenis Stratigopoulos
, 
Νεόφυτος επίσκοπος Γρεβενού, υμνογράφος, ρήτορας και ανακαινιστής κωδίκων
Dimitrios Skrekas
, 
Neophytos, Bishop of Grevena (15
th
C.), and His Hymnographic Activity
Vladimir Vasilik
, 
The Image of St. Prince Vladimir as a New Constantine in the Old Russian Hymnography
Ketevan Tatishvili
, 
The Hymns of the Georgian Holy Fathers of Mount Athos in the Liturgical Book of the 18
th
Century

---

721
Vladimir Vasilik
St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation; 
[e-mail]
The Image of St. Constantine the Great in the Unpublished Canon, 
Saved in Sinaitic Manuscripts
The author of this article had a possibility to investigate Sinaitic manuscripts, namely 
manuscripts MΓ 5 — an Uncial Tropologion of the second half of the VIII- first half of IX century 
and in Sin. Greek 637, which contain an unpublished canon in honour of St. Constantine. This 
canon presents also in the manuscript of Paris National Library Paris. Graec. 1566 (XII-XII c.).
This canon has a very interesting and intricate textological fate — all three manuscripts 
demonstrate three different redaction. MΓ 5 and Sinaitic Greek 637 are closer to each other, for they 
don’t have Theotokia, but in some features MΓ 5 and Paris. Graecus 1566 are much in common, 
whereas Sinaitic Greek has a very peculiar 8 ode. 
The authorship can be stated according to Parisinus Graecus 1566, where the author is denoted 
as Ιωάννης Μοναχός (F.62). There is a great probability, that it is St. John of Damascus (+754). If it 
is so, the situation with the canon appears to be very interesting, for the author pleads the Lord to 
subdue alien tyrants «to our most faithful Emperor».
ὥσπερ 
σταυροτύποις ἔτρεψας• 
ἐν Σινᾷ παλάμαις ᾿Αμαλὴκ τὸν ἀλλόφυλον,
τους τυράννους τῷ πίστωτάτῳ
βασιλεῖ, Χριστέ, υπόταξον. 
As you turned down Amalek in Sinai
with hands clasped in form of the cross 
So, Christ, subdue the tyrants to the most faithful Emperor.
If we use method of biblical thematic keys, elaborated by Ricardo Pikkio, then the comparison 
of tyrants with Amaleke, the king of people, who tried to stop Jews to their way to the Holy Land 
(Exod.17, 8-14), will lead us to Arabs, concretely to the Arabian Caliphate. 
Ιf the author was really St. John of Damascus, it is very notable, that the former Grand Vizier 
of the сaliph of Damascus prays the God to give victory to the Christian Empire, in spite of the 
fact, that it was governed by heretics iconoclasts. However, the emperor is called “most faithful” -
πιστώτατος, which seems to be impossible to apply to an emperor heretic. There are two possibilities. 
First is that the canon was composed before 726, before iconoclastic persecutions and thus it shows 
a very low level of his loyalty to Caliphs and Moslem power in general. 

---

722
The second possibility is that this canon in the time of revolt of Artavazdos, who proclaimed 
himself to be iconodule. If it is so, then the canon is written in 741-742. To sum up, if the author of 
this canon is really St. John of Damascus, it can be written either before 726, or in 741-742.
Ιf we try to determine the features of image of St. Constantine the Great, the first is that St. 
Constantine is t the only finder of the True Cross:
Ζωοποιόν σταυρόν
ποθήσας
ως• ἀναφαίρετον ἐκ γῆς 
ὠρύξω πλοῦτον ἄναξ
Thou didst desired
the life-giving Cross.
Thou dug it out of the ground,
As unperisheable treasure, o king. 
We know that in reality it was St. Helen, the mother of St. Constantine the Great, who found 
the true Cross in 328. So the question rises – how can we interprete this stroph of the canon?
The first possibility is connected with a peculiar understanding of invention of the Cross. The 
author might understand it so¸ that St. Constantin did it using his mother’s mission and St. Helen 
was just a tool in his hands and the main importance was the order (πρόσταγμα) of St. Constantine. 
But this opinion is opposed by a very high status of St. Helen, who was Augusta and the mother 
of St. Constantine and ἰσαπόστολος (equal to Apostles). Besides the sense of words “Thou dug 
it out of the ground as imperisheable treasure)”(ως• ἀναφαίρετον ἐκ γῆς ὠρύξω πλοῦτον ἄναξ) 
doesn›t allow us to suspect such an abstract mental construction. Then there is another possibility 
for interpretation: a certain legend about invention of the True Cross by St. Constantine himself 
could take place. This legend is of Jerusaleme origine. 
In this stroph we can determine two important features.
At first St. Constantine ardently wishes to find the life-giving Cross (Ζωοποιόν σταυρόν 
ποθήσας). So the author underlines both piety of Constantine and his love to the true life, which 
can be only in Christ.

---

723