Radoslava Stankova

The article compares the text of the „Vidin“ service for St. Petka Tărnovska (Paraskevi of Epivates), featuring a canon for the eighth mode, and the text of the Saint’s service known by three Russian copies in 16th–17th-c. manuscripts from the Trinity–Sergius Lavra. The main peculiarities of the 15 known South Slavonic transcripts of the „Vidin“ service (14th–17th cc.) are analyzied and there are underlined the main stages in the development of the text. It is concluded that the Russian copies are closest in composition and structure to the earliest Bulgarian copy in the 14th-c. manuscript Sinai 25, with added stichera and glories, known from Serbian copies from the 15th–16th cc., and a new kondakion. The Russian copies show that the „Vidin“ service was early included in Russian liturgical practice. It can be assumed that it was done by Gregory Tsamblak who introdusted the cult of Petka Tărnovska to the Orthodox Christian population in the northeastern Slavic lands. The Russian edition of the service for the Venerable Paraskevi-Petka from Epivates, preserved in a 1645 printed menaion, again from the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, contains in addition to the canon for the eighth mode a different canon for the sixth mode (instead of the canon for the sixth mode known by the Menaion of Dragan). The new six-mode composition was created in the 17th c. by adding, reworking and adapting other texts, as shown by its distinction from the 16th-17th-c. Cyrillic copies originating from the Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth.

The article examines the current hypotheses about time and place of translation of so-called Simple Prologue (hagiographic Synaxarium) in the Slavonic environment. Special attention is paid to the latest studies in the field. As additional arguments to answer the question are given the data on Russian and South Slavonic (mostly Bulgarian) commemorations in the early version of the Prologue. These data allowed to reject the existing hypotheses and to support the conclusion that the Simple Prologue was translated in the time of Samuil of Bulgaria in Archbishopric of Ohrid at the end of tenth – beginning of eleventh century. The translation was made very soon after the occurrence of Synaxarium in Byzantium and was due to the liturgical necessity.

In the article are presented three South Slavic manuscripts from the Gilferding’s collection located in the Manuscript section of Russian National Library in Saint Petersburg. Two of them really are Gospels – Gilf. 1 (Serbian, from 1284.) and Gilf. 4 (Bulgarian, from the second half of 13th c.), and the third Gilf. 32 is the Gospel Homily’s from the Bulgarian bishop Konstantin of Preslav. The Gilferding’s ex libris is stamped on the inner side of the all three manuscripts and an indication is written that they are brought in 1857 from the Dechany monastery (Old Serbia). The comparison of the data from the three manuscripts gives us a clearer description of the South Slavic 13th century.

В статье в сопоставлении с аналогичными сербскими рукописями рассматривается самая древняя болгарская праздничная минея ХІІІ-го века, находящаяся в Софии (НБКМ, № 522). Сделаны кодикологические и палеографические заметки. Обстоятельственно рассмотрены содержание и состав минеи с точки зрения календаря. Структура служб анализирована с позиции литургической практики ІХ/Х–ХІІІ вв. На основе анализа сделаны следующие выводы: 1) Скопльская праздничная минея содержит ранний состав Константинопольских памятей ІХ–Х вв. и десять оригинальных произведений древнеболгарской книжности. Это свидетельство о времени перевода данного типа богослужебной книги; 2) В рукописи сочетаются елементы кафедрального Константинопольского богослужения с элементами неосавваитской манастырской (вероятно святогорской) богослужебной практики. Кодекс показывает смешивание литургических традиций вне зависимости от календаря.