V. Petersen on the dependence of St. Roman of the Sweet Singer from St. Ephraim the Syrian

One of the important works of the American researcher is considered, dedicated to identifying the literary and, in some cases, textual dependence of St. Roman the Sweet Singer from the works of St. Ephraim the Syrian. Examples of such dependence discovered by V. Petersen are given. The work of this researcher made it possible to confirm the assumption made by previous scientists about the Syrian origins of the kontakion genre. The author considers a seminal work of the American scholar W. L. Petersen, which seeks to identify the literary and textual dependence of St. Romanus the Melodist upon the works of St. Ephraim the Syrian. Examples of this dependence are offered. The work of this scholar allows us to confirm the previously expressed hypotheses about the Syrian origins of the Kontakion. Considering that two of the materials in this collection are devoted to the translation of the kontakions of St. The novel of the Sweet Singer into Russian, we cannot ignore one interesting publication that is directly related to the two kontakia translated by the authors of the collection. We are talking about the article by V. Petersen “The Dependence of Roman Melod on Ephraim the Syrian.” 1 In the second half of the 20th century, there was a lively discussion on the possible sources of Kondakara poetry in general, etc. Roman Melod as its brightest representative. Some scholars, based on fairly compelling arguments, have proven the dependence of both the kontakion genre and the work of St. A novel from the Syrian literary tradition. First of all, they paid attention to the Syrian origin of Roman, who was born in the city of Emesa (now Homs), and then, before moving to Constantinople, served as a deacon in the church of the city of Berit (now Beirut). The city of Emesa was bilingual; both Syriac and Greek were spoken there. There are facts that testify to the bilingualism of the Venerable himself. Romana. The kontakion, written on the day of his memory, speaks of the Jewish origin of the hymnographer. Further, the Jewish proper names found in kontakia fit into the metrical schemes of Roman’s works precisely in their Hebrew, and not their Greek pronunciation 2 . In addition, Romanus' quotations from the Old Testament follow the Hebrew text or the Syriac Peshitta, rather than the Greek LXX translation. The genre of kontakion, which glorified St. Roman (or, on the contrary: who glorified St. Roman?), was a chanted metered sermon 3. Unlike the quantitative metric of classical Greek verse, in which the meter was based on the length and brevity of syllables, kontakion introduced tonic metric into Greek poetry, which was based on the opposition of syllables according to the principle of stressed - unstressed 4, which is also characteristic of modern poetry. However, the novelty of the kontakion was not only in its metrical originality, but also in introducing a dramatic element into the narrative, emphasizing dialogism, and paying close attention to the psychology (mental experiences) of the characters. The beginning of the scientific study of the work of Roman Melod was laid by Karl Krumbacher, who, in particular, drew attention to the existing parallels in the texts of Roman and the works of St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory of Nyssa, as well as the so-called. "Greek Ephraim" 5. After Krumbacher's death, his student P. Maas continued work on a critical edition of Roman's works. In 1963, Maas, together with his student Trypanis, published the first part of the works of St. Romana considered authentic: Sancti Romani Melodi Cantica. Cantica Genuina, but did not live to see the publication of the second part of this edition of Cantica dubia, containing the supposed works of the Roman. It was Paul Maas who formulated in the most clear form the theory about the Syrian roots of the poetic form of kontakion. Based on the work of researchers of the late ΧΙΧ - early 20th centuries, who discovered certain metrical and morphological correspondences between the kontakia of Roman and Syriac poetry, Maas noted seven features that in one way or another related the kontakia to the three main genres of Syrian poetry: madrash, sogita and memra: 1) acrostic is a Semitic invention and is necessarily present in the sogita; 2) the refrain is obligatory in madrash; 3) dialogue is an integral part of the sogita; 4) in the sogit, biblical themes are revealed in a dramatic manner; 5) memra is a metrical sermon; 6) Syrian sizes are based on the principle of word stress; 7) madrasha has a complex metric structure 6. However, another researcher of creativity, Rev. Roman 7 , publisher and translator of his works 8 , Grodidier de Maton, contrary to the hypothesis about the Syrian roots of the kontakion genre, insisted on the independence of Roman's work from Syrian influence, arguing that the kontakion is the product of the “Greek genius” 9 . Having compared several kontakia of the Roman with the corresponding hymns of St. Ephraim the Syrian, he came to the conclusion that there was no connection between them. In his opinion, the parallels noted by previous scholars between the works of Romanus and the corpus of the Greek Ephrem are quite acceptable, since Romanus wrote in Greek, but Grodidier de Maton denied dependence on the Syriac texts of Ephraim or any other Syrian source. Several works by V. Petersen on this topic made it possible to support with new data the theory about the Syrian influence that the Venerable might have experienced. A novel in his work. In the article Dependence of Roman the Melodist upon the Syriac Ephrem, this scientist, firstly, accuses Grodidier de Maton of some contradictory statements, citing quotes in which he actually recognizes the closeness of the kontakion to the above genres of Syriac Christian literature. Secondly, he points out the following logical error of de Maton: a sign of literary dependence on an author, generally speaking, is not automatic evidence of the origin of a poetic form from the same source 10. Petersen points out that the French researcher did not give any convincing examples of the connection of the kontakion with Greek poetry 11, and also did not refute the seven signs of their similarity with Syrian poetic forms identified by Maas, so the latter’s conclusions remain fully valid. In this situation, proof of the existence of Romanus's literary dependence on Syriac sources would provide confirmation of Maas's observations about the Syriac origins of the poetic form of the kontakion, Petersen concludes and then gives some examples of textual coincidences he discovered in St. Petersburg. Romana, etc. Ephraim the Syrian. All these cases indicate the close acquaintance of St. Roman with commentary by St. Ephraim on the Diatessaron, which is the main exegetical work of Ephraim 12. … immo insuper impossibile erat illi [Joseph] ut non crederet Mariae, quae multa testimonia habebat, nempe silentium Zachariae, et conceptionem Elisabeth … Ephraim the Syrian. Commentary on Diatessaron II.4 (Armenian version) 13 Due to a gap in the Syriac text at this point in the Commentary, the author of the article relies on the Armenian version, which is a translation from the Syriac. St. Ephraim explains why Joseph could not help but believe Mary’s words about a supernatural conception: any doubt on his part should have been excluded by Zechariah’s dumbness and the miraculous conception that occurred with the barren Elizabeth. Now let us turn to the dialogue between Mary and the Archangel Gabriel in the kontakion of St. Romana for the Annunciation (kontakion IX, ikos 8). The Virgin doubts the miraculous conception predicted by the archangel, since she never knew her husband. St. The novel conveys Gabriel’s thoughts at this moment in these words: Ἰδοὺ κωφὸς ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ κυοφόρος ἡ στεῖρα, καὶ Μαρία ἀπιστεῖ μοι 14 So, the priest is mute, and the barren woman is pregnant, and Mary does not believe me... There are three coincidences here: the muteness of Zechariah, the pregnancy of Elizabeth, and the reliance on these two miraculous phenomena as a means of convincing the truth of the angel’s words. ͬ͡͡͠ ͗͐͢ ͐ͬͬͪͥͬ ͕ͦ͗͢͢ ͕͕͐͡ ͬ͐͢͢͢͝ Quia enim ignis qui arsit in Adamo ideo perfossum est latus Adami Secundi, et exiit ex eo fluvius aquarum ad exstinguendum ignem Adami primi. Ephraim the Syrian Commentary on Diatessaron XXI.10 (Syrian version) 15 And in the fifth Easter kontakion (kontakion XLIV, ikos 5) St. Roman Melod puts the following words into Adam’s mouth: δεύτερος Ἀδὰμ δι’ ἐμὲ γενήσεταί μου ὁ Σωτήρ ὃν Χερουβὶμ οὐχ ὁρᾷ τούτου νύξουσι πλευράν καὶ ὕδωρ ἀναβλύσει καὶ τὸν καύσωνά μου σβέσει. 16 My Savior will become the second Adam for my sake; He Whom the Cherub does not see will have his side pierced, and the water will spring forth and extinguish my heat. 17 This passage is exceptional in its length and the amount of overlap between the texts of Ephraim and Romanus. In addition to two small differences (first: Efrem has fire ͢ ͘ ͪ ͐ , and Roman has heat, heat καύσων; second: for Ephraim, a neutral stream of water will come out ͢ ͦ ͩ ͪ ͕͐͝ ͕̈͡ ͝ ͝ , for Roman - an expressive gushing of water ὕδωρ ἀναβλύσει) the image used in the two fragments is completely the same. ͫͬͩ͘ ͓ͪ͝ ͗͘͢͢ ͩͥ͘͝ ͐̈ͦ͐͟ ͐͟͝ ͕͐͡પ ธททททททททททททททททททททท byทททททททททท by Aut quia damnaverat Eum os hominum, clamavit et iustificavit Eum os (aliarum) creaturarum. Tacuerunt enim isti, et clamaverunt lapides, sicut dixerat. Et velum scidit aures eorum, quae occlusae erant. Ephraim the Syrian Commentary on Diatessaron XXI.5 (Syrian version) 18 Here we see how St. Ephraim the Syrian connects the Savior’s words that “the stones will cry out” (Luke 19:40) with the moment of His death and crucifixion, which is characteristic of him. A similar comparison of St. Ephraim does it again in another place in the Commentary (XVII, 2). We find a similar comparison in St. Roman Melod in the second Easter kontakion (XLI, ikos 19): Εἰ καὶ οἱ τηροῦντες τὸ μνῆμα ἀργύριον ἔλαβον οἱ λίθοι μᾶλλον κράξουσιν 19 If those guarding the tomb take the silver, in order to remain silent voluntarily, then the stones will cry out even more. Of course, Ephraim associates the “crying stones” with the death of the Savior, and Roman – with the Resurrection, but the very idea of ​​such a connection of the words from Luke 19:40 with death/Resurrection is unique. Since there is a relationship between the texts of St. Ephraim, as far as we know, have not been translated into Greek, and the works of St. Roman, one can confidently conclude that the Syrian literary tradition influenced him, which is quite natural, given his Syrian origin. Thus, while earlier researchers mainly studied the relationship between prp. Roman and Greek authors, V. Petersen also drew attention to the existence of numerous parallels between the texts of St. Roman and his great predecessor, St. Ephraim, which, without detracting from the talent and merits of the creator of kontakia, serves as confirmation of the existence of continuity between outstanding Christian hymnographers. 1. Petersen W. Dependence of Roman the Melodist upon the Syriac Ephrem // Patristic and Text-Critical Studies: The Collected Essays of William L. Petersen. /ed. by Jan Krans, Joseph Verheyden. Leiden, Brill: 2012. P. 152–160. 2. Maas P. Das Kontakion. ByZ 19 (1910). P. 290. 3. Grosdidier de Matons. Romanos le Mélode et les origines de la poésie religieuse à Byzance. Paris, 1977. 4. Romanos le Mélode: Hymnes. J. Grosdidier de Maton s // Sources Chrétiennes. Tome II (No. 110, 1965), tome IV (No. 128, 1967). 5. Saint Ephrem. Commentaire de l'Évangile Concordant. Texte syriaque/ed. Leloir L., Dublin, Manuscript Chester Beatty. 1963. 6. Saint Ephrem. Commentaire de l'Évangile concordant. Version armenienne. /ed. Leloir L., Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 145, Louvain. 1964. Petersen W. Dependence of Roman the Melodist upon the Syriac Ephrem. // Patristic and Text-Critical Studies: The Collected Essays of William L. Petersen. /ed. by Jan Krans, Joseph Verheyden. Leiden, Brill: 2012 Maas P., Trypanis C. A. Sancti Romani Melodi Cantica. Oxford, 1963. p. xvi, n. 1 A rather schematic, but generally accepted definition. Greek Meter. Oxford, 1962. pp. 1–5, 17 words. See, for example, Krumbacher K. Miscellen zu Romanos. SBAW.PPH Band XXIV, Abt. III. Munchen, 1909 pp. 82–83, 90. Maas P. Das Kontakion. ByZ 19 (1910) P. 290. Grosdidier de Matons J . Romanos le Mélode et les origines de la poésie religieuse à Byzance. Paris, 1977. Romanos le Mélode: Hymnes. J. Grosdidier de Matons. tome I (No. 99, 1964), tome II (No. 110, 1965), tome III (No. 114, 1965), tome IV (No. 128, 1967), tome V (No. 283, 1981). Grosdidier de Matons J . Romanos le Mélode et les origines... P. 4. This refers, first of all, to the established facts of literary dependence on Greek authors. The only Greek-language work indicated by de Maton as the genetic predecessor of the kontakion - “On Easter” by Melito of Sardinia - is not intended for singing, does not have a refrain, an acrostic, does not consist of stanzas, etc., so in this case it is difficult to talk about its influence on the form of the kontakion. Petersen W. Dependence... P. 155. This is the opinion of L. Leloir, who published the Interpretation of Ephraim the Syrian on the Diatessaron in the original Syriac version and in the Armenian translation. See Saint Éphrem, Commentaire de l'Évangile Concordant. Texte syriaque. /éd. Leloir L. (Manuscript Chester Beatty, Dublin, 1963); Saint Ephrem. Commentaire de l'Évangile concordant. Version armenienne. / Leloir L., ed. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 145 (Louvain, 1964). Leloir L., CSCO 145. P. 18. Romanos le Mélode: Hymnes... t. 2 (SC 110). P. 28. Leloir L., (Manuscript Chester Beatty). P. 214–215. Romanos le Mélode: Hymnes... t. 4 (SC 128). P. 556. See also the translation of this kontakion and the kontakion for the Annunciation (Example 2) in this collection. Leloir L., (Manuscript Chester Beatty). P. 210–211. Romanos le Mélode: Hymnes... t. 4 (SC 128). P. 448.