Если у вас возникли сложности с курсовой, контрольной, дипломной, рефератом, отчетом по практике, научно-исследовательской и любой другой работой - мы готовы помочь.
Предоплата всего
Подписываем
THE SLAVIC LIFE OF ST. THADDAIOS, THE MARTYR OF THE SECOND ICONOCLASM
The second period of the Byzantine Iconoclasm (815-843), knows plenty of confessors, but only one of them can be plausibly called a martyr. It is St. Thaddaios, a Studite monk who was flogged to death on the order of the Emperor Leo V in winter of 815/816 (the exact date will be discussed later). The information on this saint that could be extracted from the available Greek sources, namely, the Letters and Sermons of St. Theodore Studite, his Life written by Michael and the Synaxarion entry on St. Thaddaios himself, is scanty and sometimes contradictory. Hence quite a bit of disagreement in the two publications that specifically deal with St. Thaddaios1. The text published here sheds a new light on this life of the saint and contains some very interesting information on the internal life of the Studite community in the late 8th - early 9th century. But first it must be established whether the data provided by the Slavic Life of St. Thaddaios can be relied upon.
Speaking about the possible date of St. Thaddaios’ martyrdom, J.Pargoire remarks: ”Le 27 fйvrier paraоt devoir кtre йcartй, car il ne s’appuie que sur les tйmoignages fragiles et tardifs”2. These ”fragile and late testimonies” he found in the fundamental work by Archbishop Sergii of Vladimir3. They originated from the Church Slavic menologia which were in use in Russia, the most famous of them being Velikiie Minei Chetii of Metropolitan Makarii. Archbishop Sergii knew that in VMCh as well as in other menologia under February 27 there is a short Life of St. Thaddaios, but since the nature of his work did not allow him to study in depth every unpublished piece of hagiograhy he located in the manuscripts, he limited himself to assigning the memory of the saint to that day. In the absence of any meaningful description of this text, let alone a publication, the judgments like the one quoted above were based upon the well-known fact that the collection of Makarii, compiled in mid-16th century, contained a vast amount of heterogenous material, sometimes relatively recent. The painstaking analysis that would establish the provenance (Slavic or Byzantine) and date of each and every entry of that collection has not been carried out even to this day. However, the text we are dealing with here can be safely dissociated from Makarii’s work and placed within a much more compact and perspicuous context. The earliest known manuscript that contains the Life of St. Thaddaios pre-dates VMCh for more than a century and represents a tradition that can be with a reasonable certitude traced back to easily datable Byzantine prototypes.
The MS in question is a February menologion written in the first half of the 15th century that once belonged to the Trinity Lavra in Sergiev Posad, transferred to the library of Moscow Ecclesiastical Academy in 1747 and is now kept as a part of the Academy’s manuscript fund in the Russian State Library (formerly the Lenin Library). Here is the list of the homiletic and hagiographic material that forms the context of the Life of St. Thaddaios:
1. Feb. 1. Two Martyrdoms of St. Tryphon, p. 1-16 and 16-21.4
2. Feb. 2. Sermon on Hypapante by Cyril of Constantinople [sic], p. 21-27.
3. Idem, by Hesychius of Jerusalem, p. 27-33.
4. Sermon on St. Symeon by Timotheos of Jerusalem, p. 33-38.
5. Sermon on Hypapante by Abraamios of Edessa, p. 38-44.
6. Feb. 5. Martyrdom of St. Theodulia of Anazarbos, p. 44-51.
7. Feb. 4. Life of St. Nicholas the Studite (not BHG 1365!), p. 51-70.
8. Feb. 5. Martyrdom of St. Agatha, p. 70-79.
9. Feb. 5. On St. Abraamios of Arabia (=Arbela), p. 79-80.
10. Feb. 6. Life of Stt. Martha and Mary, p. 80-82.
11. Feb. 6. On Stt. Papas, Iviodoros and Claudianus (=Papias, Diodoros and Claudianus), p. 82-83.
12. Feb. 7. Life of St. Parthenios of Lampsakos, p. 83-95.
13. Feb. 8. Martyrdom of 1003 in Nicomedia, p. 95-97.
14. Feb. 9. Martyrdom of St. Nicephoros of Antioch, p. 97-103.
15. Feb. 10. Martyrdom of St. Charalampios, p. 103-114.
16. Feb. 11. Martyrdom of St. Blasios, p. 114-122.
17. Feb. 12. Sermon on St. Meletios by Gregory of Nyssa (BHG 1243), p. 122-130.
18. Feb. 13. Life of St. Martianos (=Martinianos), p. 130-146.
19. Feb. 14. Life of St. Auxentios, p. 146-179.
20. Feb. 15. Martyrdom of St. Onesimos, p. 179-186.
21. Feb. 16. Martyrdom of St. Pamphilos cum sociis, p. 186-190.
22. Feb. 17. Life of St. Auxibios, p. 190-202.
23. Feb. 18. Life of St. Blasios of Amorion, p. 202-225.
24. Feb. 19. Life of St. Alexander (the Acoimete), p. 225-252.
25. Feb. 21. Life of St. Publius, p. 252-256.
26. Feb. 22. Life of St. Peter the Monk, p. 256-260.
27. Feb. 23. Martyrdom of St. Polycarpos, p. 260-263.
28. Feb. 24. Narration on the Discovery of the Head of St. John the Baptist, p. 263-272.
29. Sermon by St. Theodore Studite on that feast, p. 272-277.
30. Feb. 25. Life of St. Paphnutios, p. 277-281.
31. Feb. 26. Life of St. Porphyrios of Gaza, p. 281-326.
32. Feb. 27. Life and Martyrdom of St. Thaddaios the Studite, p. 326-330.
33. Feb. 28. Life of St. Makedonios, p. 330-336.
34. The first Saturday of Lent. Martyrdom of St. Theodore (Tyro), p. 336-341.
35. Martyrdom of St. Theodore Stratelates, p. 341-349.
36. Sermon by Nektarios of Constantinople on St. Theodore, p. 349-356.
This collection is clearly of enormous interest especially for Byzantinists and requires a comprehensive study, of which the present publication can be regarded as the first step. Two things are obvious from the outset for our purposes here:
There are no lives or even mention of Slavic saints, which makes it possible to assume that the menologion in its entirety was translated from Greek.
This is a pre-Metaphrastic menologion of the type which has not survived in Greek and consequently is not listed by Ehrhard.5
It is also easy to see that the collection originates from the Studite monastery in Constantinople, since it contains at least three texts dedicated to saints who came from that community and were not widely venerated outside it, namely St. Nicholas, St. Thaddaios and St. Blasios of Amorion. If the presence of the Life of St. Nicholas in cod. Paris. Gr. 1452 was sufficient for Ehrhard to suppose that it was copied in the Studiou6, whereas the Sermon on the Discovery of the Head of St. John the Baptist by Theodore Studite in cod. Bodl. Barocc. 238 made the same scholar certain about the Studite provenance of that latter manuscript,7 what can be said about the collection where besides these two texts two more lives of Studite saints are represented?
The time when the Greek prototype of this menologion came to being can also be determined with some degree of probability. The terminus post quem is established by the Life of St. Blasios, who died in 912 at the latest. H. Grйgoire believed that this Life was written around 930-940,8 although he did not specify why it could not have appeared earlier. The terminus ante quem can be extracted, albeit somewhat hypothetically, from the Life of St. Nicholas. This is a much shorter version than BHG 1365 - it lacks rhetorical elaboration and lengthy digressions, including the famous story of the chaste soldier, but has almost all of the factual information. There are only a few significant omissions: the last phrase of ch. 23 with the mention of Theodore Santabarenos is lacking (ajlla; kai;… kratuvnonto") and several personnages and places are not named, albeit mentioned (Thomas the Slav, ch. 17; Eirene, ch. 18; Euarestos, ch. 23; St. Tryphon (the Slavic says just "of the saint martyr", p. 60); Phirmoupolis, ch. 18 and ch. 20). Of these the first case looks like an accidental oversight, probably by the translator, because abbot Sabas who is also introduced in this passage is mentioned later. The name of St. Tryphon is certainly left out by mistake. The rebellion of Thomas is described in the Slavic text as follows: "But then, after a strife broke out in the land of Greeks…" (*ajll je[peita, stavsew" genomevnh" ejn th'/ JRwmaivwn cwvra/…), which makes one suspect a learned reconstruction in the extant Greek Life, especially since the expression laoplavnou Qwma' is identical with the one used in the Life of St. Theodore Studite by Michael (Vita B).9 Another passage found in both the Greek Life of St. Nicholas and the Vita B of St. Theodore is also absent from the Slavic Life: [Errevtw fqovno"...10 That might indicate that the Life of St. Theodore was used as an additional source when the prototype of the Slavic Life was being re-written. The two remaining personal names and the place name are connected with Studite metochia of Phirmoupolis and Kokorobion. Now, if the author of the BHG 1365 is indeed the same as that of the Life of Blasios11, he appears to have had some personal attachment at least to Phirmoupolis12. Therefore if he were remodelling the prototype of the Slavic Life and found that the metochion and its original owner, Eirene, figured there unnamed, he would have naturally corrected this. Actually, the name St. Euarestos seems to have been alluded to in the Greek original of the Slavic Life, where we read: "* [Esti de; kai; mevcri th'" shvmeron tai'" aujtou' eujarevstoi" presbeivai"... eujklee;" monasthvrion"13 (p. 65). Speaking from the more general point of view, it seems more likely that a bare-bones factual Life would be refashioned into a piece of learned literature, than that an unpretentious epitomator would carefully eliminate all the rhetorical embellishments together with edifying passages and biblical quotations and allusions. In some cases the Slavic Life is more accurate in reporting historical events. Here is how the two texts describe the famous palace reception by Emperor Leo V in December 814:
|
BHG 1365 (PG 105, ) |
Slavic (p. 55), reverse translation |
|
jEpeidh; ga;r tw'n ajnaktorikw'n e[n tini to;n qei'on tw'n iJerevwn kai; tw'n kaq jhJma'" patevrwn sunaghvgerken o{milon, tw'n strateumavtwn aujtw'/ kuklovqen paristamevnwn aujto;" ejn mevsw/ proujkavqhto, sobarw'/ kai; brevmonti tw'/ fronhvmati katadhmhgorw'n tou;" ajmfi; to;n mevgan iJeravrchn, wJ" ejsfalmevnw" proshkamevnou" tw'n ceptw'n ijndalmavtwn th;n ajnasthvlwsin. Ei\t jejnorw'n eij" au\qi" touvtou" th'/ tou' pneumato;" macaivra/ poikivlw" th;n levschn kat jajmfw tw'n flhnavfwn aujtou' diakovptonta", oujmenou'n pro;" toi'" a[lloi" o{son tou' h{rwo" kai; megavlou patro;" Qeodwvrou kataplhvxa" to; eu[tolmon... |
*Suvnodon ga;r poihsavmeno" e[n tini oi[kw/ tou' palativou, ejkevleuse sunacqh'nai pavnta" tou;" ejpiskovpou", kai; to;n patriarchvn, kai; hJgoumevnou"... JO de; patriavrch", polla; aujtw'/ ejndeixavmeno" ejk tw'n iJerw'n biblivwn peri; tw'n aJgivwn eijkovnwn, ajpevfraxen aujtou' to; flhvnafon stovma. Mavlista de; oJ mevga" path;r hJmw'n Qeovdwro" katevplhxen <ejkei'non> toi'" lovgoi" aujtou'.14 |
Patriarch Nicephoros' central role in the debate is well documented15, and the awkward active participle kataplhvxa" in the passive meaning of "was astonished" could be an oversight of the editor who was changing the subject of the sentence.
The most serious attention, however, deserves the manner in which the two Lives tell the story of Anthony Mauros, the disciple of Nicholas whom the Saint cured posthumously. In the existing Greek text (ch. 35) the narrative in the third person rather abruptly switches to direct speech, with just the word fhsi inserted to indicate the change. It looks a bit strange that no reference is made to the source of the information - e.g., "as he told himself". In Slavic there is a similar change of the narrator, but the concluding phrase puts everything in its place:
|
BHG 1365 (PG 105, ) |
Slavic (p. 70), reverse translation |
|
|
[Ektote ou\n tessarakosto;n e[to" h] kai; pro;" diameivbwn ajparenovclhto" ejgegovnei cavriti Qeou' tou' toiouvtou noshvmato". |
* [Ektote ou\n m v e[th diameivbwn ajparenovclhto" gevgona cavriti Qeou' tou' toiouvtou noshvmato".16 |
With full understanding that the ground is shaky I am tempted to suppose that Anthony Mauros was actually the author of the Greek prototype of the Slavic text. That would explain why he does not mention his source (the author of BHG 1365 then would not mention it either since he would have taken it ready from the earlier Life). Especially remarkable is the addition of h] kai; pro;". If the original Life was re-worked somewhat later, after Anthony's death, these words as well as the Plusquamperfectum ejgegovnei would square in perfectly, whoever the first hagiographer might have been. The terminus ante quem of the initial text can then be determined proceeding from the fact that by 886 the Studiou monastery was already run by Anatolios17, so the miracle with Anthony which happened under Hilarion must have taken place earlier. Consequently, 886+40=926 will be the latest time limit for the original Life of St. Nicholas.
If this hypothesis is correct, the period when the original menologion could have been compiled may be reduced to just a couple of decades. As the extant Greek Life was written under abbot Anatolios, attested in 916,18 and probably replaced the first text (the prototype of the Slavic version) from that time on, the collection must have been put together after late 910s but while Anatolios was still alive, that is, somewhere between 915 and 940, most likely in 920s.
Thus the Greek Life of St. Thaddaios is attested by what is arguably an early hagiographic collection, and cannot be dismissed as a later fabrication such as, e.g., the Life of the Patriarch Germanos. It would be therefore reasonable to look for the chronological criteria within the text itself. Fortunately, they are easy to come by. The author namely says in the concluding prayer: "Calm down the heretical storm to the tranquillity of the right faith", which makes a strong argument for the date before the restoration of Orthodoxy in 843. The time span may be narrowed if we take into account the following curious circumstance: the abbot who granted St. Thaddaios permission to become a recluse can be no other but St. Theodore Studite. Yet not only he is not named, there is no title (like "our holy father") or laudatory epithet attached. It would have been hardly possible if St. Theodore were by that time dead and venerated as saint. So our Life was probably written between 817 and 826. Since any regular celebrations of St. Thaddaios' memory became possible only from early 821, the years 821-826 appear as the most likely date of our Life. The authorship of Theodore himself cannot be excluded completely, particularly if the striking similarities between our text and some of Theodore's letters are taken into account (see below). However, it does not seem very probable that the abbot's name would disappear from the title of a work that circulated within Studiou monastery itself.
The comparison of our Life with the Synaxarion notice on St. Thaddaios19 reveals some very serious discrepancies. When the information can be checked with the help of independent sources, the Synaxarion turns out to be wrong virtually on every single count. Thus, St. Thaddaios suffered under Leo V, and not under Michael II and Theophilos. He did not go to the palace together with Theodore, since the abbot had by that time been exiled20. The story about the icon that St. Thaddaios was allegedly forced to trample upon looks extremely suspicious, while our Life's account, according to which the Studite monks were only required to take communion from Iconoclast clerics, is consistent with the information provided by contemporary sources, such as the Life of St. Nicetas of Medikion and works of St. Theodore Studite. Nowhere in these works, despite numerous mentions of St. Thaddaios, there is a slightest hint at his being a former slave of Theodore's, as Synaxarion reports21. All this is sufficient, in my opinion, to discard the Synaxarion information altogether as extremely unreliable. That should also apply to the date of St. Thaddaios martyrdom. Since the quality of all the other sources which indicate the day of the saint's memory is apparently inferior to that of the Life published here, there is no reason why February 27 should not be accepted as the day of St. Thaddaios' death. As for the year, Pargoire and Dobroklonskii22 proved convincingly on the basis of Theodore's writings that St. Thaddaios suffered in the winter of 816/817. The change of the date from November 22 or December 29, 816 to February 27, 817 does not create any chronological problems. So now we can proceed to the reconstruction of St. Thaddaios' biography.
By the time of his death St. Thaddaios was certainly not a young man. He had been a monk for "many years" before he received permission to become a recluse and was given a separate cell. In the Studiou monastery with its strict discipline and the emphasis on coenobitic practices this kind of privilege could not be granted to a person who had not proved himself worthy by a long monastic exercise. Theodore himself was 57 in 816, and St. Thaddaios whom he normally calls tevknon23 was hardly older than the abbot but could very well be in his early fifties or late forties. The future martyr was born in Bulgaria or somewhere in the Balkans24 and was of Slavic origin. He was captured and enslaved when he was in his teens, because on the one hand his Life says that he was "beardless" at the time when he was freed, and on the other, that he kept his foreign accent for the rest of his life.25