The paper discusses a medieval South Slavonic text referring to the Book of Daniel in the framewo... more The paper discusses a medieval South Slavonic text referring to the Book of Daniel in the framework of the Chronicle of Johannes Zonaras contained in manuscript No. 105 which is kept in Zograf Monastery. The author believes that this Slavonic version of the Chronicle was compiled by Konstantin Kostenečki. The author compares the version of the Book of Daniel in the Zograf manuscript with older Slavonic translations and versions of the Book of Daniel known to him to highlight the differences and the specific Constantine's approach that is somewhat unique for this book from the Bible. This comparison makes it evident that Zograf 105 preserves a unique version of this biblical book which is not known to medieval Bulgarian and Greek written traditions. The juxtaposition is carried out on structural and lexical levels.
Иван Иванов Илиев Тълкуванието на Книга на пророк Даниил от Иполит Римски в старобългарски превод, 2017
Монографията е посветена на Тълкуванието на Иполит Римски върху Книга на пророк Даниил в старобъл... more Монографията е посветена на Тълкуванието на Иполит Римски върху Книга на пророк Даниил в старобългарски превод (Х век). Изследването-първо по рода си, обхваща историята на ръкописната традиция, езиков анализ на превода и рецепцията му през следващите векове. Приложени са критическо издание по три основни преписа и речник-индекс на пълнозначните лексеми с гръцки съответствия.
The author presents the usage of some of the major Bible quotations in the Slavonic version of De... more The author presents the usage of some of the major Bible quotations in the Slavonic version of De Christo et Antichristo by Hippolytus of Rome. Mainly Old Testament quotations are examined, as well as the longer ones from Revelation. Among them, there are quotes from Genesis, the Book of Isaiah and the Book of Daniel which are compared to the same places in Prophetologium (Grigorovič No. 2 / М.1685, RGB), in the so-called Catena in Prophetas (Saint-Trinity Lavra No. 89, RGB) and where possible with the commentaries of Hippolytus In Danielem, and other early Slavic translations of the Scripture as well. The quotations from Revelation are compared with some later translations of this book in order to underline their importance and usage. The lexical analysis is not the main focus of the conducted study, but it is inevitable when the quotations are compared with biblical manuscripts. Тhe main aim and scope of the article is to highlight how the biblical quotations were approached by the translator. The large-scale comparisons made show how the medieval Slavonic biblical versions vary, depending on the function of the texts translated.
The text transmission of the Slavonic translation of Hippolytus' De Christo et Antichristo presen... more The text transmission of the Slavonic translation of Hippolytus' De Christo et Antichristo presents a stable and well-testified tradition. It gives a base for possible reconstruction of the Greek original from which this translation was made. The article demonstrates some omissions, additions, and reconstructions on the Greek text compared to the Slavonic one. Also, the paper addresses significant problems that occur in the scholars' work on bilingual dictionaries discussing possible approaches and solutions. Still, some questions remain, and it is not easy to suggest a definite answer to them. The author underlines the importance of the fragmentary copy of the Greek text, presented in the manuscript of Meteora 573, bearing in mind its significant correspondence to the Slavonic tradition. Unfortunately, this manuscript preserves only trifling fragments of the whole work by Hippolytus of Rome.
Статията е посветена на старобългарския превод на Слово за Антихриста (CPG 1872) от Иполит Римски... more Статията е посветена на старобългарския превод на Слово за Антихриста (CPG 1872) от Иполит Римски (ок. 170 – ок. 235). Преводът на трактата най-вероятно е бил осъществен в края на IX или началото на X в. заедно с превода на Тълкувание на Книга на пророк Даниил (CPG 1873). Трактатът е един от найранните християнски текстове, които се занимават с въпросите за появата, името и същността на Антихриста, както и с времето му на действие. Поради тази причина трудът на Иполит е важен за догматичната основа на раннохристиянската църква. До момента съществува само едно издание на славянски препис на Словото (Чудов 12 от края на XII в., съхраняван днес в ГИМ, Москва), което е осъществено от Капитон Невоструев през 1868 г., анализирано и допълнено през 1874 г. от Измаил Срезневски. Анализираните думи са подредени по азбучен ред в три категории: 1. редки лексеми, включени в библейски цитати; 2. лексеми, характерни и за други славянски свидетели, но с необичайна употреба; 3. морска терминология. Повечето примери от последната категория показват, че средновековните славяни са имали известен опит с мореплаването.
This paper discusses aspects of the early Slavic studies in the 19th century in Europe and contex... more This paper discusses aspects of the early Slavic studies in the 19th century in Europe and contextualizes them in the peak of the Enlightenment in the West. A comparison with Imperial Russia at the time is made. The goals and mission of the Bollandists’ Society are highlighted. Special attention is placed on the lives and works of the two of the most prolific Russian Jesuits, Ivan Gagarin and Ivan Martinov. Their works are presented in the context of the period and their role for the Russian and Western European societies is discussed. Additionally, this paper provides information on the Orthodox-Catholic relations as well as on Gagarin’s attempts to convert Russia into union with the Roman Church. Some new data on Martinov’s work, dealing with the Bulgarian language and history, are marked and revealed to the Bulgarian public for the first time.
The article traces back all early patristic pieces of evidence of the nature and appearance of th... more The article traces back all early patristic pieces of evidence of the nature and appearance of the Antichrist, summarizes out his mentions in the Old Testament and New Testament and gives additional information for the calculation of the number 666. A peculiar Anti-Jewish trace is highlighted, as well as the reasons for its presence in the early Christian literature is discussed. The paper also focuses on De Christo and Antichristo by Hippolytus of Rome and points out its importance for the patristic studies and their connection to the Slavonic manuscript tradition.
Sapere Aude. Сборник в чест на проф. дфн Искра Христова-Шомова , 2019
This paper focuses on the Old Testament Book of Daniel, its earliest translations in Old Church S... more This paper focuses on the Old Testament Book of Daniel, its earliest translations in Old Church Slavonic and reveals several differences among them and tries to suppose the period when these translations were made. Each version contains various translation techniques according to the character of work and for what purpose it was translated. All versions of the book are examined no matter how scattered or fragmentary they are. Special attention is given to the fragments in the First Miscellany of Tsar Simeon (Izbornik of 1073) and their translation and connection with the other Old Bulgarian versions of the Book of Daniel.
The article has two main focuses – first, it follows the most significant and important Antichris... more The article has two main focuses – first, it follows the most significant and important Antichrist myth researches, and secondly, the Greek tradition of De Christo et Antichristo by Hippolytus of Rome and the Slavonic versions of the text. The Slavonic witnesses are examined according to their omissions, additions, grammatical and morphological variations, and also some of the changes in the Bible quotations are highlighted. This work does not pretend to present new information on the Greek sources but to demonstrate how important the Slavonic translation is to the interpretation of the Greek original. The most interesting results are pointed out in the relation with the Greek text itself, where the proximity between the Greek fragment of Meteora Monastery 573 and the Slavonic tradition is presented.
The object of the current research is Talkovanie na Kniga na propok Daniil – the Slavonic version... more The object of the current research is Talkovanie na Kniga na propok Daniil – the Slavonic version of the Commentaries on the Book of Prophet Daniel (Commentarii in Danielem, CPG 1873) by Hippolytus of Rome (c. 170–235), the earliest and most profound commentaries on this Old Testament book. They were written round 204 and their translation into Old Bulgarian can be counted among the earliest works of Bulgarian literature. The time of the Commentaries’ translation is under discussion, its dating ranging from the last decades of the ninth to the middle of the tenth century. Some linguistic facts of the Commentaries have sporadically been compared with the partial translation of the Book of the Prophet Daniel, included in the Prophetologion. Also, some comparisons have been made between the Slavonic translation of the Commentaries and the so-called Talkovni proroci – a translation of Old Testament books of prophets with commentaries. The analysis is based on a 1519 manuscript of the Commentaries (No. 486 from the Volokolamsk Collection, Russian State Library, Moscow), which follows the tradition of the earlier copies and most profoundly keeps the content of the Commentaries. In addition to morphological particularities, in the text there are many lexical idiosyncrasies, which can facilitate the dating and localization of the translation. Among these lexical markers can be singled out which show more interesting data. Many lexemes can be found which are particular to the early written codices and testify to the antiquity of the translation. For instance, some specific lexemes match with words, used in the Codex Suprasliensis and the First Miscellany of Tsar Simeon (Izbornik of 1073), which shows that the Commentaries are one of the earliest translated works of the Old Bulgarian literature.
The paper discusses a medieval South Slavonic text referring to the Book of Daniel in the framewo... more The paper discusses a medieval South Slavonic text referring to the Book of Daniel in the framework of the Chronicle of Johannes Zonaras contained in manuscript No. 105 which is kept in Zograf Monastery. The author believes that this Slavonic version of the Chronicle was compiled by Konstantin Kostenečki. The author compares the version of the Book of Daniel in the Zograf manuscript with older Slavonic translations and versions of the Book of Daniel known to him to highlight the differences and the specific Constantine's approach that is somewhat unique for this book from the Bible. This comparison makes it evident that Zograf 105 preserves a unique version of this biblical book which is not known to medieval Bulgarian and Greek written traditions. The juxtaposition is carried out on structural and lexical levels.
Иван Иванов Илиев Тълкуванието на Книга на пророк Даниил от Иполит Римски в старобългарски превод, 2017
Монографията е посветена на Тълкуванието на Иполит Римски върху Книга на пророк Даниил в старобъл... more Монографията е посветена на Тълкуванието на Иполит Римски върху Книга на пророк Даниил в старобългарски превод (Х век). Изследването-първо по рода си, обхваща историята на ръкописната традиция, езиков анализ на превода и рецепцията му през следващите векове. Приложени са критическо издание по три основни преписа и речник-индекс на пълнозначните лексеми с гръцки съответствия.
The author presents the usage of some of the major Bible quotations in the Slavonic version of De... more The author presents the usage of some of the major Bible quotations in the Slavonic version of De Christo et Antichristo by Hippolytus of Rome. Mainly Old Testament quotations are examined, as well as the longer ones from Revelation. Among them, there are quotes from Genesis, the Book of Isaiah and the Book of Daniel which are compared to the same places in Prophetologium (Grigorovič No. 2 / М.1685, RGB), in the so-called Catena in Prophetas (Saint-Trinity Lavra No. 89, RGB) and where possible with the commentaries of Hippolytus In Danielem, and other early Slavic translations of the Scripture as well. The quotations from Revelation are compared with some later translations of this book in order to underline their importance and usage. The lexical analysis is not the main focus of the conducted study, but it is inevitable when the quotations are compared with biblical manuscripts. Тhe main aim and scope of the article is to highlight how the biblical quotations were approached by the translator. The large-scale comparisons made show how the medieval Slavonic biblical versions vary, depending on the function of the texts translated.
The text transmission of the Slavonic translation of Hippolytus' De Christo et Antichristo presen... more The text transmission of the Slavonic translation of Hippolytus' De Christo et Antichristo presents a stable and well-testified tradition. It gives a base for possible reconstruction of the Greek original from which this translation was made. The article demonstrates some omissions, additions, and reconstructions on the Greek text compared to the Slavonic one. Also, the paper addresses significant problems that occur in the scholars' work on bilingual dictionaries discussing possible approaches and solutions. Still, some questions remain, and it is not easy to suggest a definite answer to them. The author underlines the importance of the fragmentary copy of the Greek text, presented in the manuscript of Meteora 573, bearing in mind its significant correspondence to the Slavonic tradition. Unfortunately, this manuscript preserves only trifling fragments of the whole work by Hippolytus of Rome.
Статията е посветена на старобългарския превод на Слово за Антихриста (CPG 1872) от Иполит Римски... more Статията е посветена на старобългарския превод на Слово за Антихриста (CPG 1872) от Иполит Римски (ок. 170 – ок. 235). Преводът на трактата най-вероятно е бил осъществен в края на IX или началото на X в. заедно с превода на Тълкувание на Книга на пророк Даниил (CPG 1873). Трактатът е един от найранните християнски текстове, които се занимават с въпросите за появата, името и същността на Антихриста, както и с времето му на действие. Поради тази причина трудът на Иполит е важен за догматичната основа на раннохристиянската църква. До момента съществува само едно издание на славянски препис на Словото (Чудов 12 от края на XII в., съхраняван днес в ГИМ, Москва), което е осъществено от Капитон Невоструев през 1868 г., анализирано и допълнено през 1874 г. от Измаил Срезневски. Анализираните думи са подредени по азбучен ред в три категории: 1. редки лексеми, включени в библейски цитати; 2. лексеми, характерни и за други славянски свидетели, но с необичайна употреба; 3. морска терминология. Повечето примери от последната категория показват, че средновековните славяни са имали известен опит с мореплаването.
This paper discusses aspects of the early Slavic studies in the 19th century in Europe and contex... more This paper discusses aspects of the early Slavic studies in the 19th century in Europe and contextualizes them in the peak of the Enlightenment in the West. A comparison with Imperial Russia at the time is made. The goals and mission of the Bollandists’ Society are highlighted. Special attention is placed on the lives and works of the two of the most prolific Russian Jesuits, Ivan Gagarin and Ivan Martinov. Their works are presented in the context of the period and their role for the Russian and Western European societies is discussed. Additionally, this paper provides information on the Orthodox-Catholic relations as well as on Gagarin’s attempts to convert Russia into union with the Roman Church. Some new data on Martinov’s work, dealing with the Bulgarian language and history, are marked and revealed to the Bulgarian public for the first time.
The article traces back all early patristic pieces of evidence of the nature and appearance of th... more The article traces back all early patristic pieces of evidence of the nature and appearance of the Antichrist, summarizes out his mentions in the Old Testament and New Testament and gives additional information for the calculation of the number 666. A peculiar Anti-Jewish trace is highlighted, as well as the reasons for its presence in the early Christian literature is discussed. The paper also focuses on De Christo and Antichristo by Hippolytus of Rome and points out its importance for the patristic studies and their connection to the Slavonic manuscript tradition.
Sapere Aude. Сборник в чест на проф. дфн Искра Христова-Шомова , 2019
This paper focuses on the Old Testament Book of Daniel, its earliest translations in Old Church S... more This paper focuses on the Old Testament Book of Daniel, its earliest translations in Old Church Slavonic and reveals several differences among them and tries to suppose the period when these translations were made. Each version contains various translation techniques according to the character of work and for what purpose it was translated. All versions of the book are examined no matter how scattered or fragmentary they are. Special attention is given to the fragments in the First Miscellany of Tsar Simeon (Izbornik of 1073) and their translation and connection with the other Old Bulgarian versions of the Book of Daniel.
The article has two main focuses – first, it follows the most significant and important Antichris... more The article has two main focuses – first, it follows the most significant and important Antichrist myth researches, and secondly, the Greek tradition of De Christo et Antichristo by Hippolytus of Rome and the Slavonic versions of the text. The Slavonic witnesses are examined according to their omissions, additions, grammatical and morphological variations, and also some of the changes in the Bible quotations are highlighted. This work does not pretend to present new information on the Greek sources but to demonstrate how important the Slavonic translation is to the interpretation of the Greek original. The most interesting results are pointed out in the relation with the Greek text itself, where the proximity between the Greek fragment of Meteora Monastery 573 and the Slavonic tradition is presented.
The object of the current research is Talkovanie na Kniga na propok Daniil – the Slavonic version... more The object of the current research is Talkovanie na Kniga na propok Daniil – the Slavonic version of the Commentaries on the Book of Prophet Daniel (Commentarii in Danielem, CPG 1873) by Hippolytus of Rome (c. 170–235), the earliest and most profound commentaries on this Old Testament book. They were written round 204 and their translation into Old Bulgarian can be counted among the earliest works of Bulgarian literature. The time of the Commentaries’ translation is under discussion, its dating ranging from the last decades of the ninth to the middle of the tenth century. Some linguistic facts of the Commentaries have sporadically been compared with the partial translation of the Book of the Prophet Daniel, included in the Prophetologion. Also, some comparisons have been made between the Slavonic translation of the Commentaries and the so-called Talkovni proroci – a translation of Old Testament books of prophets with commentaries. The analysis is based on a 1519 manuscript of the Commentaries (No. 486 from the Volokolamsk Collection, Russian State Library, Moscow), which follows the tradition of the earlier copies and most profoundly keeps the content of the Commentaries. In addition to morphological particularities, in the text there are many lexical idiosyncrasies, which can facilitate the dating and localization of the translation. Among these lexical markers can be singled out which show more interesting data. Many lexemes can be found which are particular to the early written codices and testify to the antiquity of the translation. For instance, some specific lexemes match with words, used in the Codex Suprasliensis and the First Miscellany of Tsar Simeon (Izbornik of 1073), which shows that the Commentaries are one of the earliest translated works of the Old Bulgarian literature.
This book is dedicated to two vitae that were originally composed by the last Bulgarian patriarch... more This book is dedicated to two vitae that were originally composed by the last Bulgarian patriarch before the Ottoman occupation, St. Patriarch Euthymios (ca. 1325 – ca. 1403) and later published in revised versions from which translations to Latin were produced. First, the Vita of St. Petka of Tărnovo (Parasceve of Epibatai) was translated to Latin by the Catholic priest Rafael Levaković, a Croatian missionary, who probably got the idea for a translation in Latin from his colleague and an associate Peter Bogdan (Petrus Deodatus) from Chiprovtsi. In 1854 the seventeenth-century translation to Latin was published by the Société des Bollandistes. In this book, the translation choices are discussed. Also, the book concerns questions of the Balkan old printed books and gives new information for an unstudied copy of the printed Slavonic Vita, found in the National Library in Plovdiv. Further, this book contains diplomatic copies of the original text and the translated text and also dictionaries of lexis: Slavonic – Latin, and Latin – Slavonic. In the second part of the book, there is an overview of the writings of Ivan Martynov, a Russian born Jesuit-priest, who discovered and published numerous Catholic and Orthodox Vitae of saints and dealt with many church questions, especially on matters of the Church union. The Vita of John of Rila and its place in old-printed books in Russia are also examined, as well as the versions of this Vita in the following centuries. Ivan Martynov’s translation of the Vita of John of Rila to Latin is analyzed.
Uploads
Papers by Иван И . Илиев
известен опит с мореплаването.
известен опит с мореплаването.
Vita, found in the National Library in Plovdiv. Further, this book contains diplomatic copies of the original text and the translated text and also dictionaries of lexis: Slavonic – Latin, and Latin – Slavonic. In the second part of the book, there is an overview of the writings of Ivan Martynov, a Russian born Jesuit-priest, who discovered and published numerous Catholic and Orthodox Vitae of saints and dealt with many church questions, especially on matters of the Church union. The Vita of John of Rila and its place in old-printed books in Russia are also examined, as well as the versions of this Vita in the following centuries. Ivan Martynov’s translation of the Vita of John of Rila to Latin is analyzed.