The Four Worlds and
the Two Puzzles of Maxim the Greek,
Paleoslavica XIX/2 (2011) 298-99). In the Greek Psalter (Sankt
Petersburg, RNB, Gr. 78, Sof. 78, fol. 160 v.) Maxim the Greek subscribed the two-language Kontakion
to the Announciation of the Mother of God were also observed the related correspondences.
By such theological-liturgical manner in the personal practice of the inner prayer Maxim
the Greek not only revealed the devout creativity of the first Slavic church poet, Constantine the
239
Philosopher (a brother of Methodius), Who created the similar accordance in Сanon,
Памzть свzтааго
и великааго мученика Христова Дьмитриэ
(R. Jakobson,
Selected Writings. VI. Early Slavic Paths and
Crossroads,
1985, 306), but Maxim also created in the Slavic language an exact poetical equivalent of
the oldest patterns of Christian liturgy as might be found in Greek liturgical manuscripts from the
ninth century.
Maxim the
Greek polished the Old Church Slavic liturgical language to the certain
level that it could serve him as analogous and parallel voice to the Greek language of the Gospels,
focusing on the devotion the Christian God of the Holy Trinity.
Aneta Dimitrova
Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”, Sofia, Bulgaria;
netanette@gmail.com
Which Greek Versions of Chrysostom’s Commentaries on
Acts
and
Epistles
Were Translated for the 10
th
C. Old Bulgarian
Chrysorrhoas
Collection
(
Zlatostruy
)?
The paper discusses the Greek sources of the Old Church Slavonic translations in the so called
Chrysorrhoas collection. This collection of Chrysostomian and pseudo-Chrysostomian homilies
was put together at the beginning of the 10
th
c. presumably in Preslav. The selection of the texts and
the undertaking of the translation was conceived and inspired by the Bulgarian tsar Symeon (893–
927), as it is revealed in the ancient foreword of the book. A large part of the collection consists of
the ethica of John Chrysostom’s New Testament commentaries – several dozens of the homilies
were selected, translated, sometimes abridged and combined in new compilations. Although only
later copies of the open manuscript tradition are extant, they still preserve much of the original
quality of the Old Bulgarian archetype. Each of the texts gives an opportunity for linguistic research
and allows insight into the process and principles of translation, but it also requires an investigation
of the Greek original.
Chrysostom’s commentaries are preserved in hundreds of unedited Greek manuscripts and it
is well known that many of the texts have a “rough” and a “smooth” version besides the numerous
variant readings throughout the manuscript transmission. Yet few of Chrysostom’s works have a
critical edition – the researcher must either be content with Patrologia Graeca, or start a laborious
examination of the manuscripts. The comparison of the Slavonic translations of Chrysostom with
their Greek correspondences as attested in Patrologia Graeca reveals that in some cases there are
significant discrepancies between them as opposed to the otherwise fairly accurate rendition of the
original. This refers especially to the Commentaries on Acts and some of the Epistles. In a number
of cases we are lucky to have access to manuscripts which differ from the edition and give answers to
some of the questions in the Slavonic translation, allowing us to determine which Greek recension
was used by the Old Bulgarian translators. However, many other examples suggest, that there must
have been still other Greek versions, or that the translators treated the original quite creatively.
240
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |