Theodora Antonopoulou. A Kanon on Saint Nicholas by Manuel Philes. Revue des études byzantines,...

8/3/2019 Theodora Antonopoulou. A Kanon on Saint Nicholas by Manuel Philes. Revue des tudes byzantines, tome 62, 200

1/18

Theodora Antonopoulou

A Kanon on Saint Nicholas by Manuel PhilesIn: Revue des tudes byzantines, tome 62, 2004. pp. 197-213.

RsumREB 62 2004 p. 197-213Theodora Antonopoulou, A Kanon on Saint Nicholas by Manuel Philes. L'auteur prsente l'editio princeps d'une picehymnographique unique, compose par Manuel Phils, le pote byzantin bien connu, qui a galement compos le canon ddi

Saint Nicolas, dans lequel le pote remercie le saint pour donn fin une longue priode de sa vie pleine de msavantures.L'dition est prcde de l'tude dtaille de diffrents aspects concernant ce texte, y compris ceux de la tradition manuscrite, dela date de sa rdaction, des raisons qui ont pouss Phils composer ce canon et du mtre de celui-ci ; elle est accompagned'un apparat de sources.

AbstractThe author presents the editio princeps of a unique piece of hymnography by the well- known late Byzantine poet Manuel Philes,who composed the kanon on St Nicholas in thanksgiving for the end of a long period of misfortunes in his life. The edition ispreceded by a detailed study of the various aspects of the text, including its manuscript tradition, date, reasons for itscomposition, and metre, and is accompanied by an apparatus fontium.

Citer ce document / Cite this document :

Antonopoulou Theodora. A Kanon on Saint Nicholas by Manuel Philes. In: Revue des tudes byzantines, tome 62, 2004. pp.197-213.

http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rebyz_0766-5598_2004_num_62_1_2291
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/author/auteur_rebyz_386http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rebyz_0766-5598_2004_num_62_1_2291http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rebyz_0766-5598_2004_num_62_1_2291http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/author/auteur_rebyz_386


2/18

A K A N O N O N S A I N T N I C H O L A SB Y M A N U E L P H I L E S

Theodora A N TO N O P O U L O U

Manuel Philes(ca. 1270-after1332) is a well-knownand prolificpoet of thePaleologan era.1 His kanonon SaintNicholas,which is editedand commenteduponhere for the first time, is found in its integrity in five manuscripts,whileasixth onepreservestwo stanzasof it:2

V = Vat. Pal. gr. 138 (paper[ff. 346-353 oriental],200/2 136/9, 14th cent,[mostly1340-1350 on the basisof the watermarks;ff. 16-69later additionsdatingfrom beg. 15th-beg.16thcent.],ff. V+356 [ff. 354-356 rear fly-leaves],16-3711.),ff. 299v-301r(31-32 11.);hymnographicandliturgicalcollectionconsistingof variouspartswrittenat different dates,andoriginally intendedfor privateuse.Philes'kanonis part of a seriesof kanonson St. Nicholas (ff. 258-304).3

1. ForliteratureonPhilesseeT. Antonopoulou,Commentingona Homily:APoembyManuelPhiles,MOCXOBIA2 (forthcoming).2. C.mereau,Hymnographi Byzantini,EO23,1924,p.408,mentionsthe attributionof the

kanonto Philesin cod.V (referredto as "Pal.gr.69").Subsequently,E.Follieri,InitiahymnorumEcclesiaeGraecae,vol.5.1,VaticanCity1966,p. 292,basedherreferenceto thekanonandits poetonmereau'snote.CodicesandSwerefirstidentified byS.Eustratiades, ,' 39, 1940,.421,where,however,the kanonis anonymous.G.Sticklerincludedthe kanonin Philes'workson thebasisof codicesS, L,andV;seehisManuelPhilesundseine Psalmenm etaphrase,DissertationenderUniversittWien 229, Vienna1992,p. 231,236,238respectively.Thekanonandall of its codicesapartfromL are listedin E. Papailiopoulou-Photopoulou,. ,Athens1996,. 120-121,333(with noreferenceto Stickler).

I wouldliketo thankthe VaticanLibraryfor permissionto consultcodicesV andL insitu,thePatriarchalInstituteofPatristicStudiesforproviding mewithcopiesof andK,the NationalLibraryofFrancefor copiesofP, andthe Instituteof ByzantineandModernGreekStudiesof the UniversityofViennaforaccessto its collectionofmicrofilmsin orderto consult S.

3.F. D'Aiuto,UnmanoscrittoinnograficodelsecoloXIV:il VaticanoPalatinogreco138,RSBNn.s.28,1991,p. 149-171providesa lengthydescriptionofthemanuscript,whichbyfar supersedestheolderonebyH.Stevenson, CodicesmanuscriptiPalatinigraeciBibliothecaeVaticanae,Rome1885,p.68-70;seealsoI. PerezMartin,ElPatriarcaGregoriodeChipre(ca.1240-1290)y latransmisionde los textosclsicosen Bizancio, NuevaRoma1, Madrid1996,p.338-340,andF. D'Aiuto,UncanonediGiovanniMauropodein onoredeiss.Cosmae Damiano,RSBNn.s.37,2000(2001),p. 99-157,esp.p. 116-120withn. 48-49.Stickler(above,n. 2),p. 238,placesthecopyingofPhiles'kanonin thesecondhalfof the fourteenthcentury,buttherelevantwatermarkdatesfrom thefifth decadeofthe century;seeD'Aiuto,Un manoscrittoinnografico,p. 152n. 9; PrezMartin,op.cit., p. 339

n. 76.Thefolioscontainingthekanonwerecopiedby theprincipalscribe,themonk Gabriel,whowasalsotheownerof themanuscript;seeD'Aiuto,Un manoscritto innografico,p. 154;PrezMartn,op.cit.,p. 339.

RevuedestudesByzantines62,2004,p. 197-213.


3/18

198 THEODORA ANTONOPOULOU

L = Vat. gr. 375(paper,179x127,mid-14thcent, ff . +236, 21-2311.),f. Ii r;collectionof theologicalexcerpts(ff. If-i:"monitiunculaeet exemplavariaPatrum").4It containsonlytwo stanzasof the kanon:ode4, stz. 3 (vv.81-90),and ode8, stz. 4

(vv. 215-224), whichareprecededby the indication . =Athous,Vatopedi1137(paper,210x140,a. 1419,ff. 270),ff. 63v-69v(18 11.);Menaion of December.5

= Paris,gr. 399(parch.,15thcent, ff. 158),ff . 151r-154v(2511.);"Beatitudineset anthologium".6

= Athous,Konstamonitou31 (paper,8, 15thcent),ff. lr-7r (19 11.);Menaionof December.7

S = Paris.Suppl.gr. 701(paper, a.1549,ff. 448),ff. 64v-69v(19 11.);Menaionof December.8

Of thesecodices S repeatsall the errors of plus the liturgicalindication,andhas moreerrors of its own.It is, therefore, a direct descendantof and willnotappearin the apparatuscriticus.

and providesimilarliturgicalindicationsfor the performanceof the kanonand share a numberof significanterrors againstV and P. Mostnotableamongthem is the omissionof the fourth (penultimate) stanzaof the last odewith theresultingdestructionof the acrostic givingthe poet'sname.Thelast stanzaof thekanonwas originallyalso missingfrom K, but was addedat the bottomof f. 7r bya later scribewho usedan unidentifiedexemplar.The latter did not containthepenultimatestanzaof the kanon,otherwisethe scribewouldmostprobablyhaveaddedthat as well. has no other significanterrors of its own. has a singlepeculiarerror at v. 135.Consequently, was not derivedfrom the incompleteK,whereasthe reverseis notprobableeither, sinceonewouldhaveto acceptthat thescribe of wrote (admittedlyeasily)the correctinstead of (. 135),expandedthe well-knownabbreviatedsentencesat vv. 163, 176-177,183-184and204,and adaptedthe liturgicalindication,but then neglectedto copythe final stanzaof the kanonbeforegoingon to copy other hymnson f 7v. Thetwo codices were, therefore,derivedfrom the sameexemplar.

Each of and V has errors of its own, so that nonecouldhave servedas theexemplarof the other, but they stem from a commonexemplar,which couldbethe archetype.As for P, not only doesit haveerrorspeculiarto it, but it also sharescertain significanterrors with eitherthe earliercodexV (at vv. 118and 207) or

4. Fulldescriptionin R.Devreesse,CodicesVaticanigraeciIII. Codices330-603,VaticanCity1937,p.67-69,includingthecontentsof if. I-XII(= I, Ia-iplustwoblankff.) Thesetwelveleaveswereboundtogether, buthavevaryingprovenance.Ff. Id-ibelongtogether.OnId r-fr twohandsnotedthe Paschaldatesfor 1345-1362and1363-1366respectively.ThestanzasbyPhileswerewrittenby thefirst hand,whichthereforeprovidesan approximatedatingfor theircopying;cf. Stickler(above,n. 2),p. 236:"urn1343".

5.S.Eustratiades- ArcadiosVatopedinos,Catalogueof theGreekManuscriptsintheLibraryoftheMonasteryofVatopedi onMt.Athos, HarvardTheologicalStudies11,Cambridge,Mass.1924,p. 195.

6.H.Omont,Inventairesommaire desmanuscritsgrecsdelaBibliothqueNationaleet desautresbibliothquesdePariset desDpartements,vol.1,Paris1886,p.42.

7. S. Lambros, Catalogueof the GreekManuscriptson Mount Athos, vol.1,Cambridge 1895,repr.Amsterdam 1966,p. 39n468.8.Omont (above,n. 6), vol.3, Paris1888,p.303.


4/18

AKANONONSAINTNICHOLASBYMANUELPHILES 199

(at vv. 23 and 174,and the incipitof the fourth heirmos; also agreeswith atvv. 179and261). Thus,emergesas the productof contaminationbetweenthe twobranchesof the tradition.Onthe other hand,P's rare agreementin error with V might

be coincidental. and wouldthen havetheir ownhyparchetype,which togetherwithV wouldstemfrom thearchetype. contains twointerestingvariants (atvv. 178and 256).

Finally,L preservestoo smalla sampleto be securelyplaced in the tradition,thoughit certainlycannothaveservedas the exemplarof any of the other codices,whichcontainthe full poem. Moreover,in the two stanzas preservedin it, L hasno errors of its own,and givenits early date, it is possible that it stemsfrom thearchetype.

Thekanontypicallyconsistsof eightodes numbereda and ' to ', sincethesecondodewas,as usual,left out.Each ode consistsof four stanzas exceptfor ode

9, whichhas five. Theheirmoi,or musicalandmetricalmodels of the odes,werenot composed by Philes,but were borrowedfrom a popularResurrection kanonby John the Monk includedin the service-bookof Parakletikeand destinedfor theSundayof the fourth plagalmode.9Thefinal stanzaof each odeis a theotokion,namelya tropariondedicatedto the Theotokos. Allof the theotokiaof the kanonhavea dogmaticcharacter,dealingwith issuesrelatedto the Incarnation.Thereisno acrosticrunning throughthe odes. Onlythe stanzasof the ninth odeare boundtogether by an acrostic givingthe poet's name (), and thus securingitsauthenticity,whichis also attestedby the title of cod.L ( ). Theexistenceof the acrosticis madeclearat the beginningof ode9 in cod.V. Therelevantindication is absentfrom the rest of the codices,the scribesof which didnot recognizeor overlookedthe acrostic.Thecopyistof () evendeemed it more importantto leavethe fourth stanzaof the ninth odeout so as to retain four stanzasin conformity ith the rest of the odes.

The kanonis a laudatorypiece composed in thanksgivingfor St. Nicholas'interventionin favour of the poet.Ode 1 invitesall people to praisethe saint, towhomvariousattributes areapplied.Moststriking isa comparisonof Nicholaswithan eaglethat traversesthe sky in order to protectthosewhobelievein himunderhisoutspread wings. Inode3 Nicholasis the helperpresent bothin heavenandonearth.Hismiraculousinterventionsare exemplifiedin two well-knownstories, the storyof the three generalsand that of the three girls (see the apparatusfontium to thepresentedition).Ode 4 continuesthe precedingodeby stressingNicholas' qualitiesas the healer andprotectornot only of humankindbut of the wholeof natureas well.

9.Theheirmoiarefoundin S.Eustratiades,'(),'9, Chennevires-sur-Marne1932,p. 219-220,kanonsnos314(forallheirmoiapartfromthe sixth)and315(forthe sixthheirmos)underthe namesof Johnthe MonkandJohn ofDamascustheMonkrespectively.However,in theParakletikethe heirmosof ode6 belongsto the first kanon;see,Rome1885,p.624-631;on theproblemof thisheirmosseeE.Follieri,UncanonediGiuseppeInnografoperS.Fantino "ilvecchio"diTauriana,REB19,1961,p. 130-151,esp.p. 132n. 18;cf. Eadem,GiovanniMauropodemetropolitadi Eucaita.OttocanoniparacleticiaN.S.GesCristo(extractedfromArchivioitalianoper la storiadliapiet, vol. 5),Rome1967,p. 40n. 13.Johnthe Monkcannotalwaysbe identifiedwith John ofDamascus;seeE.Wellesz,A HistoryofByzantineMusic andHymnography,Oxford21961,p.237;cf.e.g.E.Follieri,/ calendariinmetroinnograficodi CristoforoMitileneo,SubsidiaHagiographica63,Brussels 1980,vol.1,p.61-62.


5/18

200 THEODORAANTONOPOULOU

In ode 5 the poet's attentionis attractedby the miraculousstoriesof the saint'sbirth and the savingof the sailors.Moreover,the odeunderlinesthe inadequacyof humanlanguage before the magnitudeof Nicholas' holiness.Philescarriesonthe abstractpraiseof the saintin odes6 and7, mainlywith a seriesof comparisonsand hyperboles aswellas with the affirmationthat his famehas reachedthe edgeof the worldandthat no detractorcan harm those who trust in him.

The last two odes have a more personalcharacter, since the poet himselfaddressesthe saint. Philescries out for Nicholas' help in the difficult circumstancesof his life. His desperationis obviouswhenhe states that he can bearthemisfortunesno more, whilehis temporarydisappointment and agonyfind theirexpressionin the question addressedto the saint:"Untilwhenwillyou beasleep?"(ode 8, stz. 1). He evendistinguisheshis audienceinto two groups,those whosuffer like himselfandthosewhohavenot tastedanythingagainsttheir will.Heis convinced,however,that the saint accordseveryone whatis fit (stz.2).In fact,it is stated that the saint had already procured solutionsto what seemedto be animpass.It is Philes' convictionthat he wouldnot be alive,had it not been forNicholas' wise responseto his needs(stz.3). Theplea for help recurs in the ninthodefollowingthe poet's reassuranceas to the saint'sprompthelp (ode 9, stz. 1).It appearsthat as a result of certain difficultiessomecause for concernwas stillpresent in Philes' life, though the worsewas over.The personsto blame remainunspecified,but it is clearthat detractorscontinuedto attackthe poetsecretly(stz.2;cf. ode 7, stz. 2). Thispictureis reversed immediatelyafterwardsand the finalimpressionis that of a panegyricof the saint, who,havingexcelled in his life,provedevengreater thanks to the miracleshe workedin Philes' life (stz.3). Thepoet is now free from all sadness(stz.4).

Theinformationofferedin the last twoodesof the kanon canhelpwith its dating,sinceit is connectedto the misfortunesthat Philessuffered andof whichhe talksin severalof his poems.They includedhis ban from court, loss of propertyandeven incarceration.10The kanonnow informs us that his life was threatenedaswell. Moreover,once again Philestalks ofthe detractorswhopersecutedhim andwere apparentlyinstrumentalin bringingabouthis fall from imperialgrace.11Theendof his miseriesis celebratednot only in the kanon,but alsoin a poemaddressedto EmperorAndronikosIII probablyin 1328after the latter s victoriousthirdentranceinto Constantinople.At the end of the poem Philes speaksof "slavery"( in a metaphoricalsense),unjust suspicions,and poverty, all of whichhad afflictedhim for thirty years but arenow over.12Thekanonwouldfit wellinthis contextanda datecloseto that of the poemcanbe envisaged,which,in addition,wouldbe in accordance with the poet's intenseinterest in spiritualmatters in thelater part of his life.13

10.Stickler(above,n.2),p.34,who,however,rejectsthesuggestionthatPhileswasimprisoned;but seeAntonopoulou(above,n. 1)to the contrary.

11.Onthe mentionof detractorsin therest ofPhiles'poetryseeStickler(above,n. 2),p. 33.12.Seethe editionby M.Gedeon,','

'3, 1882-1883,.215-220,esp.. 220,. 169-173;Stickler(above,n. 2),p. 36,164.In1305-1306Philesstillparticipatedin embassies;seeibid.,p. 29-30.13.Stickler(above,n. 2),p. 36.


6/18


Philesshoweda specialvenerationfor St. Nicholas,whom he deemed hispatronand in whose honourhe composedseveralpoems.14Whetherthere was aspecialreasonfor this is not known.It is, however,a wellestablishedfact that

Nicholas was consideredas helperpar excellence.He acquiredhis reputationthanksto his miraculousactionsin favourof the wronglyaccused,as describedinthe famousstory of the three generals{Praxis de stratelatis).15Accordingto thisaccount,the saint intervenedwith the authoritiesin order to savetwo groupsofinnocentpeople condemnedto death. It was exactly this act of Nicholas thatperfectly suited Philes'case andjustifiedhis plea to the saint. In a broaderperspective, it is noteworthythat Nicholas' alreadypopularcultappearsto haveentereda newcreativephasein the fourteenthcentury, as testified by the developmentofthe paintedcyclesof his life.16

Thekanonon St. Nicholas is a uniquepiece of rhythmotonicecclesiastical

poetry in the immensepoeticalcorpusof Philes,whomainlyusedthe Byzantinedodecasyllableas wellas the fifteen-syllableverse.He provesto be in control ofthe metresof hymnography.In the followingthe metricalpatterns of the odes arepresentedtogetherwith commentson their structureas wellas on the pointswherePhilesdepartsfrom the heirmoi.In fact, a few well-knownmetricalvariationsinrhythmotonicpoetryarealsopresenthere: an accent canbe shifted bytwosyllables(whichmeansthat it can be doubledor replacedby an accenttwo syllablesawayfrom its initialposition);17 following a"dactyl"(- the last accentedsyllableofa versecanbe omitted(onthe latter seethe metricalpatternsof odes1, v. 2; 7, vv. 2and4, andstz.2, v. 7; 8, . 5);18an internalaccentcanbe omitteddueto the particular

engthof a word;19andin accordancewith a well-knownmedievalgrammaticalusagea properispomenon followedby an encliticdoesnot receivethe accentof theenclisis(vv. 116,135;261 ).20Onthe other hand,contraryto what is considereda generalpracticebut is not a rule withoutexceptions,21

14.1havepublishedandcommentedonsucha pieceelsewhere;see above,n. 1.15.On this storyseeG.Anrich,HagiosNikolaos.Der heiligeNikolaosin der griechischen

Kirche.TexteundUntersuchungen,vols.1-2,Leipzig/Berlin1913-1917,esp.vol.2, p. 496-502; alsoN.P. Sevcenko,TheLifeofSaintNicholasinByzantineArt,CentroStudi Bizantini,Bari.Monografie1,Torino 1983,p. 173.

16..SevCenko(above,. 15),esp.p. 172;seealsoibid.,p. 14forliteratureonthecultof thesaint.17.Onthis variationin thepoetryof the kontakiaseeP. Maas- C.A.Trypanis, SanctiRomaniMelodicantica.Canticagenuina,Oxford1963,repr. 1997,p. 512-513;J. Grosdidierde Matons,RomanosleMlodeetlesoriginesdelaposiereligieuseByzance,Paris1977,p. 141-142;K.Mitsakis,. ',Athens21985,. 315-316.TherearenorelevantdataforByzantinekanonsin general,andthesame holdstruefor theproblemsdealtwithin thefollowingnotes, thoughthe samerulesapplymoreor lessto bothgenres;seeFollieri,/ calendari (above,n. 9), vol.1,p. 48.

18.Maas- Trypanis(above,n. 17),p.513;Grosdidier(above,n. 17),p. 134;Mitsakis(above,n. 17),p. 319;Follieri,/ calendari (above,n. 9), vol.1,p. 51.

19.SeeGrosdidier(above,n. 17),p. 147.20.Maas- Trypanis(above,n. 17),p.512;Follieri,GiovanniMauropode(above,n. 9),p.43;

Grosdidier(above,n. 17),p. 144;Mitsakis(above,n. 17),p.305;Follieri,/ calendari (above,n. 9),vol.1,p. 48-49.21.Maas- Trypanis(above,n. 17),p. 512;Grosdidier(above,n. 17),p. 144withn. 89,147;Mitsakis(above,n. 17),p. 303;Follieri,/ calendari (above,n. 9), vol.1,p.49.


7/18

202 THEODORA ANTONOPOULOU

Philes occasionallyplacesmetricalaccentsonpraepositivasuchas articlesand c o njunctions. (In parenthesesthe numberof syllablesof the verse22and the syllablesbearingan accentarenoted.)

Ode11) 1 _:__:__ (12:4-8-10) 5) -----(8:4-6)2) ^--(6 :4) 6 )---- - -- (7 :3 -6)3) 1_:_(6:4-5) 7)_.l_-:__^__(9:2^-7)4)__^_^__(7: 3_5) g)- - (10:1-5-8)

Comments:1)v. 2: thepatternof theheirmosis 7:4-7, butPhileshas altogetheromittedthelast accentedsyllable.

2) v. 3: for theplacementof twoaccentsonenext to theother seealsobelow,ode4, v. 5.233) v. 7: the first twoaccentsare bothpresentonlyonce(stz.4), whereasthe accentpatternis 4-7 in stz.1 and 2, and2-7 in stz.3.

Ode31) 1 -(8:4-8) 5)-- ---(8:2-6)2)_- ,l_(8: 2-7) 6) ----(7:4-6)3)_--l .!___:_ (H; 3_7_io) 7) - - - ------ 9: 1-4-7)

Comments:1)vv.2 and 5: in the heirmosthe first accent isplacedon the fourthsyllable,whichis thecaseonlywith stz. 3 here; in the restof the stanzasthe accenthas beenshiftedby twosyllablesandplacedon the secondsyllable.2)v. 6: in stz.2 the first accentis missingdue to the lengthof the word.

22.I usethe traditional and prevalentterm"verse"insteadof the morecorrect"colon",sinceIhave adoptedthe usualpracticeof printingeachcolonon a separate linewithoutany attemptto jointhe colonstogether intogroups;see,for example,G. Schir(generaleditor),AnalectaHymnicaGraecae codicibuserutaItaliaeinferioris,vol.1-13,Rome1966-1983.Thisis sobecause,contrary

to the situationprevailingin thekontakia andapartfromisolatedcases,in thepoetryof the kanonsthereis no surewayto distinguishunitslarger thanthecolon,suchas verses.Onthe other hand,seeFollieri,/ calendari (above,n. 9),vol.1, p. 51-53,as wellas A. AcconciaLongo,II canonediBartolomeoperlaconsacrazionedella chiesadi S.Mariaa Grottaferrata,BollettinodellaBadiagrecadiGrottaferrata47,1993,p. 133-163,esp.p. 143-144,inwhichpublicationsbothscholarshavetried,mainlyon the basisof the contents,to establishgroupsof colonsin orderto formverses whileacknowledgingthe difficultiesinvolved; seealsoF. D'Aiuto,Trecanonidi GiovanniMauropodeinonoredi santimilitari,BollettinodeiClassici,Supplementi13,Rome1994,esp.p. 69,whofollowsFollieri'sexample.Onthe importanceofthe study ofthepointsseparatingthecolonsin themanuscriptsin orderto establishthe lengthofeach colon("verse"),whichmaydifferfrom theheirmos,seerecentlyG.Bertonire,FourLiturgicalKanonsofEliasIIofJerusalem,in:H.-J.Feulner- E.Velkovska-R. F. Taft (eds.),Crossroadof Cultures.Studiesin Liturgyand Patristicsin Honorof GabrieleWinkler,OCA260,Rome 2000,p. 89-149,esp.p. 96-97.

23.Onthe disputedproblemoftwoaccentedsyllablesnexttoeachotherwithinacolonseeMaas- Trypanis(above,n. 17),p.512; Grosdidier(above,n. 17),p. 142-143;Mitsakis(above,n. 17),p. 304,316.


8/18

AKANON ONSAINTNICHOLASBYMANUELPHILES 203

3)v. 7: in stz.1 and4 Phileshasomittedthefirst accent,whereashehas shiftedthe secondaccentby two syllablesandplacedit on the secondinsteadof the fourthsyllable(accentpattern:2-7);cf. below,ode4, v. 2.

Ode4l).i__ .1(4:1-4) 6)------(6:3-5)2)- ^ (9: 1-4-7) 7)-- ---(9:2-7)3)l- l - (4: i_3) 8)-- --(7:2-6)4)1 -i__(7: 1-5) 9)- - - - - - - (7 : 3-6)5) 11 ^(9;4_5_9) 10) ^ ^ (11:3-6-9)

Comments:1)v. 2: theaccentpatternis validfor stz.2, whileit becomes4-7 in stz.4 dueto the lengthof theword,and2-7in stz.1 and3by omittingthefirst accentandshiftingthesecondby twosyllables;cf. above,ode3, v. 7.2)v. 3: the first accentis omittedin stz.4 dueto the lengthof the word.3) . 4: in stz.2 the first accenthas beenshifted bytwo syllablesandplacedon the thirdsyllable.4) v. 5: theaccenton thefifth syllableis omittedin stz.2; for theplacementof twoaccentsonenext to the other seeabove,ode1, v. 3.5)v. 6: in theheirmosthereis only one accent onthefifth syllable.6) v. 7: in stz.4 thefirst accenthas beenshifted bytwo syllablesandplacedon thefourthsyllable.7) v. 10:the patternof the heirmosis erroneouslygivenas 10: 3-5-8in the of Eustratiades;for thecorrecttextsee theParakletike(above,n. 9), p. 626.

Ode5l ) - - - - - - - (7:3-6) 5)__^_l_(6:3-5)2)1 1 I_^__(i3; 1-5-9-11) 6) --(9:4-8)3)------(6: 3-5) 7) ^ ^- (11:3-6-9)4) - - - - - - - - - - - ( l l : 3-6-9)

Comments:1)v. 2: thereis no accenton theninthsyllablein stz.2 dueto the lengthof theword-,whileit is placedonthe eighthsyllablein stz.3.242) v. 3: in stz.3 the accenton the thirdsyllablehas most probablybeen shiftedby twosyllablesandplacedon the first syllable.3)v. 5: in stz.3 the accent onthe thirdsyllablehasprobablybeenshiftedby two syllablesandplacedon the first syllable,whilein stz.4 it has beenomitteddue to the lengthof theword.

24.Cf.Grosdtdier(above,n. 17),p. 145-146, onthe moveof theaccentbyone syllable.


9/18


Ode61)_ l 1 (7;2-7) 5)- - - - - - - (7:2-5)2)-- ^__(9;2-7) 6)- - - - - - (6:3-5)3)_^ 1J:2-7) 7)--- ---(9: 3-7)

Comments:1) v. 2: in stz.3 the accenton the secondsyllablehas been shifted by tw osyllablesandplacedonthe fourthsyllable.2) v. 3: the accentpatternof the heirmosis 47,butPhileshas shiftedthe first accentbytwosyllablesin all stanzas.

Ode7l)_.:__^__(7:2-5) 5) ---------(12:4-7-10)2)- - - - - - - (11:2-4-9) 6) ^--1(7:4-7)3)-------(7:3-6) 7) ----(7:4-7)4) 1 (11:4-9)

Comments:1) vv.2 and4: thepattern oftheheirmosis 12:2^49-12and12:4-9-12 respectively,butPhileshas altogether omittedthe lastaccented syllable.2) v. 2: thereis no accenton the secondsyllablein stz.2 and4 due to the length of thewordsand respectively.3)v. 7: the lastaccentedsyllablehas beenomittedin stz.2.

Ode81) ^_^__(8:4-6) 6) -----(13:5-9-12)2) __. : - - - - - (8:3-6) 7)-- --(7: 2-6)3) 1 ^_I__(i3; 5-9-11) 8)- - - - - - - (7 : 3-6)4)_Z__^__(7;2-5) 9)-- --(7:2-6)5) -!_!__ (8;4-6) 10)-- --(7:2-6)

Comment:v. 5: thepatternof theheirmosis 9:4-6-9,butPhileshasaltogether omittedthelastaccentedsyllable.

Ode91)_^ 1 ^ (H; 2-6-11) 6) (10:5-10)2) 1 i 1 (11:3-6-9) 7)-- --(7:2-6)3) ^(4:4) 8)-- --(7:2-6)4)1 1 .1(10:1-5-10) 9) ---(10:4-8)5) Z_^__(

Comment:v. 8: in stz.2 thereis no accenton the secondsyllable dueto thelengthof theword-.


10/18


In conclusion,the poem edited here is valuable as first-hand testimony toPhiles' sentimentsin the faceof his misfortunes,as proofof the poet's familiaritywith ecclesiastical poetry andhis ability to compose hymnographyevenon only

one occasion, and finally, as onemore witnessto the widespreadvenerationofSt. Nicholas around1300.Therelativesuccess of the kanonis made evidentby the fact that it enteredthe

liturgicalservices,as testified by the manuscriptcollections,25whichalso containdirectionsas to whenit shouldbe performed.In the fifteenth century the kanonwas sungin the midnightoffice (mesonyktikon),whenthere was no all-nightvigil(agrypnia),accordingto the codices of family,26whereasin cod. it is destinedfor Thursdayvespers,sinceThursdayis dedicatedto theApostlesandSt. Nicholas.

In the presenteditionspellingmistakesand wrong breathingsand accentsofno importanceare not noted in the apparatus.Thekanonprovidesonenew word:(.25),only to be foundin the lexiconof Demetrakos,where,however,no referenceis given (cf. LSJ9). For (. 250) see LBG s.v.(= ).27

It shouldalso be notedwith regard to the apparatusfontium that Philesrefersto events concerningbothNicholas of MyraandNicholas of Sion.28Thisfact doesnot imply that he had in mind allof the relevanttexts and pickedup whatwas ofinterest to him. Conflationof the twopersonsof the samename hadexistedof old,as testifiedby a seriesof texts startingwith the Vita Compilata (ca. A.D. 900).29Thelatter containsindeedall of the eventsreferred to in the kanon.On the otherhand,it is noteworthythat the tenth-century Vitaby SymeonMetaphrastes,whichconstitutedthe norm for posterity and was the most popular Lifeof the saint,30doesnot includethe miracleat Nicholas' birth mentionedby Philesat vv. 101-102.

Theodora AntonopoulouDepartmentof Philology,University of Patras,Greece

25.Thereis a largenumberofkanonson the saint,severalof thempublished;on thelatterseetheoverviewin N.Sevenko(above,n. 15),p.25; for the unpublishedmaterialseePapailiopoulou-Photopoulou(above,n. 2),p. 114-121,nos309-335(n333is thekanonbyPhileseditedhere;seeabove,n. 2);cf. alsotheaccountofa numberofkanonsby Anrich (above,n. 15), vol.2, p. 364-366.Onthe officesof thefeastof Nicholasin theMenaiaseeibid.,vol.2, p. 366-367.

26.OntheseofficesseeR.F. Taft, MountAthos:ALateChapterin theHistoryof the ByzantineRite,DOP42,1988,p. 179-194,esp.p. 186-188withliterature;alsoIdem,TheByzantineRite.AShortHistory,AmericanEssaysin LiturgySeries,Collegeville,Minnesota1992,p. 79-80.

27.E.Trappet alii,Lexikonzurbyzantinischen Grzitt.I. A-K, sterreichischeAkademiederWissenschaften,philos.-hist.Kl.,Denkschriften238, 250, 276,293/ VerffentlichungenderKommissionfrByzantinistikVI/1-4,Vienna2001.

28.AlltextsonNicholasreferredto in theapp.font,wereeditedbyAnrich(above,n. 15), vol.1:VitaNicolaiSionitae,p.2-55;VitaNicolaiMyrensisperMichaelem,p. 111-139;EncomiumMethodii,p. 151-182;VitaCompilata,p. 210-233.On thebasisof Anrich'stexta neweditionof the firstLifehasappeared:I. SevcenkoandN.PattersonSevcenko,TheLifeofSaintNicholasofSion.TextandTranslation,Brookline,Massachusetts1984,p. 20-112.

29.Onthe conflationof thetwosaintsseeAnrich(above,n. 15),vol.2, e.g.p. 15,307-311,498;alsoN.SevCenko(above,n. 15),p. 18-21.Foranotherliturgicalpoemwhichreflectsthisconflationseea kontakionthat hascomedownto us underthe nameof Romanosthe Melodistin P.Maas-C. A.Trypanis,SanctiRomaniMelodicantica. Canticadubia,Berlin1970,p. 121-130,n77(OnNicholasI);cf. Anrich,vol.2, p. 361-364.

30.Anrich(aboven. 15), vol.2, e.g.p. 311,467.


11/18


. . '

' ' '

5 oi .

10

15 .

, 20 , , .

. 25 ' , , 30 , .

8 cf. 1 Cor.9, 22VBKPL(vv.81/90,215/224)tit.- ]V, L,cett.om . ]V, ,, , ,

, , heirm.' 219,. 314,Joannismonachi ]add. 9 ] om .16VacP 23


12/18


'. ' ' ,

35 , , .

40 ' , , ,,,

45 .

",,

50 , .

. 55 , , ,

60 .

33/35cf.Emped.,31A28et fr. 17,18Diels- Kranz;ex.gr.Greg.Nyss.,Indiemluminum,p. 228, 9-12ed.E.Gebhardt,GregoriiNyssenioperaIX.Sermones,Leiden1967; ,Roma1896,p. 140 47/48Praxisde stratelatis:p.67-91(recensionesI-III)AnriehI; VitaNicolaiMyrensisper Michaelem31-32,p. 129-130ibid.;VitaCompilata36-40,p. 224-227ibid. 49/53Praxisdetribusfiliabus:VitaperMichaelem10-18,p. 118-123AnriehI;VitaCompilata25-27,p. 221-223ibid.

heirm.' EE219,n. 314,Joannismonachi]deestin VP 40]


13/18


' '. ,,

,

65 \

70 .

, ,

75 , ,

80 .

, ,

85 ,, ,,

90 .

.

95

66ex.gr.Praxisdenavibusfrumentariisin portu:VitaperMichaelem37-39,p. 132-133AnriehI;VitaCompilata44,p.228ibid.; Praxisdenavibusfrumentariisinmari:EncomiumMethodii17,p. 160-161ibid.;VitaCompilata34,p. 224ibid. 67/69VitaeNicolaiSionitaeet NicolaiMyrensis,passim.

heirm.' EE219,n. 314,Joannismonachi ,]scripsi,V, ,, 84]om .V 88 97, V


14/18


,

100 .

\ "

,,

105 .

, , ,110

.

115 " ,

120 ;

. ' ,,

125 .

98/100Gen.3 101/102VitaNicolaiSionitae2,p.4, 6-8Anrieh I(22, 8-10Sevcenko);VitaCompilata13,p.217,10-13Anrieh I108/114 Praxisdenautis:VitaperMichaelem34-36,p. 130-132AnriehI;VitaCompilata43,p.228ibid. 1151Cor.13,1 124/128Is.6, 2

heirm.' EE219,n. 314,Joannismonachi ]deestinVP 118] VP


15/18


' '. ' , '

130 , ,, ,, ,

135 .' ,

140 , .

,

145 , ,, .

. 150 ,

155 ,.

' \

,,

160 .

155/156 Gen.3, 16 157/159cf.Ps.18,5; Rom.10, 18162/163ex.gr.2Esdr.7, 27;Dan.3, 26.52

heirm.' EE220,n. 315,JoannismonachiDamasceni,]deestin V ]deestin 135 149] add.Vheirm.' 219,. 314,Joannismonachi 161]praem.V 162/163], . 163deestin V, - deestin B


16/18

AKANONONSAINTNICHOLASBYMANUELPHILES 21 1

165 '

,

170 , .

,,

175 .

. ,,

180 .

'.

185 , , , . , , ,

190 . . ; , .

195 ,

171/175cf. supra101/107;VitaperMichaelem5-8,p. 115-117AnriehI; VitaCompilata14,p. 218ibid. 176/177,183/184supra162/163

168 169 174] , 175V176/177]V, . 177deestin BP 178], V 179]183/184]VP,. 184deestin Bheirm.' 219,. 314,Joannismonachi ]deestinVP 196]


17/18


200 , .

205 ,

210 , .

. 215

220 , .

'. -'

225 , , ,

230 .

203/204Dan.3, 52.57sqq. 215/2162 Regn.22,10;Ps.17,10;Job38,37 217Luc.1,31

204]deestin VBP 206BK 207]VP 212heirm.'EE220,n. 314,Joannismonachi - ]deestinV KP ] deestin - ]om . 230]om.V


18/18

AKANONONSAINTNICHOLASBYMANUEL PHILES 213'

235 , ,

240 .

, ,,

245 ,

250 .

' , ,

255 , ' ,

260 ,,.

. ,

265 .

247/248ex.gr.Ps.50,3;2 Cor.1,3 264/265cf. ex.gr.Ps.17,28; Is.13,11

243 244]add.V 252/260]om .BK 256]post transp.P257 261/269]altramanuin mg.add. 261]

Theodora Antonopoulou. A Kanon on Saint Nicholas by Manuel Philes. Revue des études byzantines,...

Documents

Transcript of Theodora Antonopoulou. A Kanon on Saint Nicholas by Manuel Philes. Revue des études byzantines,...