Greek paleographer John Sakkelion and his catalog of Patmos manuscripts

? κατὰ τὴν νῆσον Πάτμον γεραρ ᾶ ς και βασιλικῆς μονῆς τοῦ ἁ γ ί ου ἀποστ ό λου καὶ εὐαγγελιστοῦ Ἰ ωάννου τοῦ Θεολ ό γου ? Ι. Ζακκελ ί ωνος , νῦν δὲ φιλολογικοῦ συλλ ό γου Παρνασσοῦ ἐκδιδομένη, ῆ ̓ ς ἐν τέλει προσετέθησαν κα ί ἑπτὰ π ί νακες ί δων γραφῆς. Ἀθ ή ν ῃ σιν 1890. The book, the full title of which we wrote out above, can be called the beginning of its author’s literary fame and the completion or crown of his fruitful many years of scientific activity. We do not see many similar works to which the words we have just spoken would be applicable. What has been said will be clear if we briefly outline the historical fate of this capital work and the life of its author, full of hardships and tireless assiduous labors, which ended after short suffering on July 30 last 1891. The head of the department of manuscripts at the national library of the University of Athens, John Sakkelion, was born on the island of Naxos on April 15, 1815. His father was a parish priest on this island. Mr. Sakkelion's initial education was insignificant and was limited to one local gymnasium, after leaving which he had to continue his self-education privately at home. In his 18th year, as a volunteer, he entered the garrison of the Athenian army, from where two years later he was assigned as a scribe to the office of the War Ministry. At the end of his military service he was assigned to the ministry as a ministerial scribe and remained here in the service until 1839, when failing health prompted him to seek another kind of service. Having retired with honor and the highest gratitude of the late King Otto I, Mr. Sakkelion went to the island of Kos and became secretary to the merchant Constantine Hippocrates, the Dutch consul, with whom he visited the island of Patmos for the first time in 1841. In 1848 Sakkelion himself becomes a consular agent on the island of Kos, and in 1850, at the call of the monks of the St. John the Theological Monastery on the island. Patmos, he takes on the duties of a teacher at the once famous Patmos Academy there. From that time on, Mr. Sakkelion forever left the anxiety-filled clerical and diplomatic service and devoted himself to peaceful academic desk studies, which did not stop until the last hour of almost over 76 years of his life. Extremely modest in character and having some kind of natural attraction to peaceful library activities (see the excellent obituary of Mr. Sakkelion in the Constantinople newspaper Νεολόγοσ Αριθ No. 6615, August 15, 1891, σελ 3) he found complete satisfaction for himself here, on Patmos. The poor monastery shelter and peaceful monastic environment did not in the least interfere with his studies, and the extensive, little-known and inaccessible monastery library took up all the time he had free from his direct duties at school. I. Sakkelion began zealously to bring it into the same, comparatively, for example, with the Sinai and some Athenian libraries, exemplary order in which we found it when we were on the island. Patmos. But the humble worker did not stop there, but decided to start describing it, which this library was in dire need of. He did not start the planned business alone, but attracted to him the educated hieromonk of the St. John the Theological Monastery of Patmos, Hierotheos Floridis, who for some time was also a teacher at the Patmos Academy we mentioned, and until last year was in charge of the monastery library after Sakkelion. From visiting German and French scientists they became acquainted with scientific techniques for similar work and tried, as far as possible, to apply them to their own work. The fruit of these studies appeared in 1863 “Πατμιακὴ βιβλιοθήκη”, which was submitted in manuscript to the approval of the professors of the University of Athens. In this work, 471 manuscripts were described by the late Sakkelion, and 264 by his comrade, Hieromonk I. Floridis. But although the university gave an excellent review of this manuscript and recommended it to the attention of the Ministry of Church Affairs and Public Education, at that time there were no free funds for its printing, and it lay idle until 1890, when the funds for its publication were given by the Athenian philological syllogos “Paranasos”, who wanted to commemorate its 25th anniversary with some useful work. “Πατμιακὴ βιβλιοθήκη” was thus born exactly a year before the death of its editor-in-chief, who, already in Athens and having scientific means at hand, corrected a lot in it and significantly supplemented it with new scientists and curious details and notes. We will not be telling a lie if we now note that the Patmos library was a school for Mr. Sakkelion, who at the end of his life, thanks to his continuous studies of manuscripts, acquired the reputation of a remarkable, and in Greece even the only, expert paleographer and bibliographer, surprising with his subtle observations of manuscripts and a remarkable memory of all bibliographic references for which they usually turned to the deceased Sakkelion. The delay regarding the publication of “Πατμιακὴ βιβλιοθήκη” was of no small importance for his scholarly reputation. Having become thoroughly familiar with the contents of the Patmos manuscripts during their description, Mr. Sakkelion, for more than thirty years, filled numerous Constantinople, Athens and Smyrna periodicals of philological and archaeological publications with new materials from the Patmos manuscripts, providing them with his own, sometimes very extensive, critical and scholarly notes. Based on his small paleographic works, Mr. Sakkelion always believed the words spoken by the Savior to his disciples: “gather up the excess of the ukrukh, so that nothing will perish” (John 6:12). An extensive list of all these numerous editions was compiled by the son of the late I. Sakkelion, although, as we know, far from complete, published in “Δελτίον τῆς ἱτορικῆς κα ί ἐθνολογικῆς ἑταιρ ί ας τῆς Ἑ λλάδος "for the month of July 1891. All of Sakkelion’s works were of a novelty nature, introduced people involved in Byzantine history and Byzantine antiquities to the riches of the inaccessible Patmos library and therefore were valued not only in Greece, but even abroad. Shortly before his death, when Mr. Sakkelion began compiling a catalog of manuscripts that had been received by order of the Greek government from the Meteora monasteries to the library of the University of Athens, his works on the manuscripts of this new library began to appear. But even in this position as custodian of manuscripts in the library of the University of Athens, he continued to settle scores with his beloved Patmos library. In 1890, he published in the third volume of the famous edition of the Viennese scientists Miklosic and Müller under the title “Acta et diplomata monasterion ecclesiarium orientis” all the acts and documents related to the history of the Patmos Monastery of St. John the Theologian and previously stored in the Pamos library. The publishers of the acts did not take from Mr. Sakkelion his extensive scholarly notes to these acts, which would amount to a volume no less than the acts themselves and remained unpublished after his death. In 1890, he finished printing his “Πατμιακὴ βιβλιοθήκη”, which had long been awaited for publication by everyone who was interested in this kind of work and was received very sympathetically in Greece and abroad. The rich and highly diverse scientific content of this work was very thoroughly introduced to Russian scientists by G. S. Destunis in his critical-bibliographic article on this book, published in the April book of the last 1891 “Journal of the Ministry of Public Education”, so we send those interested there, and we take upon ourselves the task of filling in the incompleteness of the catalog that we noticed, pointing out some inaccuracies and errors in the description of the most manuscripts and draw the attention of our readers to the peculiarities of the composition of the library of Fr. Patmos, which has deep scientific interest. When I was on about. Patmos, upon closer acquaintance with the manuscript repositories of the Patmos library, we noticed that the published “Πατμιακὴ βιβλιοθήκη” does not cover the entire number of manuscripts there. So, for example, in a side room (not the main one) of manuscripts, among the paper trash, we found the following manuscripts, completely undescribed: 1) a collection of words in 8 parts of a sheet, 261 sheets, written in 17th century cursive; 2) a manuscript of 4 lobes, 191 sheets, written in 14th–15th century handwriting. under the title “Θεοδωρ ί του, ἐπισκ ό που Κύρου εις τὰ ζητούμενα ἄπορα τῆς "; 3) a collection of words for Lent up to the week of the 18th century in 8 beats, 263 sheets; 4) Colored Triodion from the Sabbath of Righteous Lazarus, 15th century, in sheets, 281 sheets; 5) a mixed collection of words from the 18th century in 4 parts of a sheet, 266 words; 6) Ευχολόγιον 15th century. in 4 parts of the sheet, 253 sheets, without beginning and end, it contains morning and evening prayers, apostolic and gospel readings, the rites of tonsure into monasticism and the rite of blessing of oil; 7) a memorial of the 16th century, containing interesting information and chronological dates for the history of the St. John the Theologian Monastery on the island. Patmos. With a more careful review of the mentioned book rubbish, other manuscripts will undoubtedly be found that are not included in the published catalog of Mr. Sakkelion. The Patmos typica remains completely undescribed, containing many manuscripts, some of which, with their signatures, have important historical significance for the monastery. Here are the manuscripts available in this typica: 1) ?? 1448, in 4 parts of a sheet, 212 sheets, purchased at the expense of the abbot of the monastery Theodulus. This typikon represents a list from the Athos charters (Εἴδησις τοῦ Ἄ θων (ος) ἤ γουν τοῦ ἁ γίου ὄρους Μἀρκου ; 2) an exact list of this typikon, made in 1640 by Hieromonk Iakovos at the request of the abbot of the monastery Sava Kalogeras; 3) a modern (special in composition) burial rite for the Patmos hieromonks; 4) Θεοτοκάριον, written in 1754 by Ecclesiarch Hieromonk Athanasius, in 8 parts, 296 sheets; 5) a collection of words written in 1793 by Macarius, a Corinthian bishop, for the Patmos monastery, in sheets, 86 sheets; 6) Synaxarist in sheets, 299 sheets, written in 1790 by a certain Daniel, a native of the island of Kos, commissioned by the monk Nikephoros and hieromonk Herman for the Patmos monastery; 7) Synaxarion from March to August, sheet, 341 sheets, written in 1495 and donated to the monastery by its abbot Theodulus; 8) The Synaxarion, written in 1731, was donated by the hieromonk brothers Sophrony and Simeon and their nephew the priest Gabriel; 9) Synaxarion, written on April 15, 1767; 10) Collection of the 18th–19th centuries, in 16 volumes of sheets, 36 sheets, containing the magnification of the Great Saturday, the troparia “Cathedral of Angels”, the canon of Easter and the Evening Gospel for Easter; 11) a collection of services: a) in honor of the Bishop of Pergamon Antipas, compiled by the Patmos teacher in 1789 Daniel Keramey; b) in honor of the Patmos school teacher Gerasim Byzantios, compiled in 1780. the teacher of the Jerusalem hieromonk John the Cephalonian and c) in honor of the Russian martyr Pachomius, compiled in 1730 by the famous first Patmos teacher Macarius; 12) Triodion Colored, sheet, 217 sheets, written in 1522, donated to the monastery by Hieromonk Herman and Monk Matthew; 13) The rite of minor blessing of water with the canon of St. to the Apostle Thomas, written in 1884 by Archimandrite Seraphim Panagiotaki; 14) a collection of the 19th century, containing the election of the abbot and a description of the monastic meetings of the patriarch, metropolitan, bishop, Turkish officials and high-ranking officials of the Christian faith; 15) The rite of washing the feet, performed on Maundy Thursday on Fr. Patmos, manuscript 19th century; 16) service of St. Leontius, Archbishop of Jerusalem, compiled by confessor Nicodemus Kappa at the request of Hierotheus Floridis and written in 1883. Archimandrite Seraphim Panagiotaki; 17) Menaion January, in sheet, 169 sheets, written in 1737 by the monk Cosmos, who, in addition, wrote the same format 18) Menaion September in 168 sheets and 19) Menaion October in 173 sheets; 20) Menaea February, half sheet, 202 sheets, written by Nektarios the monk and priest Nikita Pankala, in whose handwriting another 22) Menaea Augustus, 21 sheets were written; 23) Menaion November, in 246 sheets and 24) Menaion December in 237 sheets; 25) Menaea April in the 8th beat, 205 sheets; 26) Menaia May, 297 sheets; 27) Menaion June, in 217 sheets and 28) Menaion July, in 255 sheets, judging by the handwriting similar to Theotokary, written by the same scribe, i.e. Hieromonk Athanasius in 1754. The list of liturgical books lacks the Tsvetnaya Triodion, and with a more thorough review of the Patmos typicarium, perhaps other interesting manuscripts will be found. We turn to the very description of the Patmos manuscripts and find directly incorrect definitions of the time of writing the manuscripts. Obviously, the describers paid more attention to the external paleographic features than to the internal content of the manuscripts they described. Parchment Ilitharium, no. 730, as defined by Sakkelion of the 14th century (p. 278), but in fact it was written no later than the beginning of the second half of the 13th century. For this definition, the data is contained in the Ilitaria itself, where between the petitions of the great litany we find the following petition: "" The Patriarch of Antioch mentioned in this petition is none other than Theodosius Prinkens (1261–1283), since we do not know another patriarch with the name Theodosius on the Antiochian throne during the 13th and 14th centuries. The parchment Ilitharium No. 723 was written not in the 15th century, as Mr. Sakkelion claims, but in the 17th century. In the Ilitaria, consisting only of the deacon's petitions of the ordinary Liturgy, we read the following: καὶ πασῶν ὁ δεῖνα τοῦἁ γωτάτου καὶ οὶκουμεικοῦ πατριάρχου ὁ δεῖνα Αλεξανδρείας , ὁ δεῖνα Αντιοχείας , ὁ δεῖνα Ἱεροσολύμον , ὁ δεῖνα Μοσκόβου καὶ πάσης Ῥουσίας τῶν "" The Patriarchate in Russia was established in 1591, and therefore the time of writing this Ilitary can in no way be attributed to earlier than the beginning of the 17th century. It is by no means possible to recognize an accurate determination of the time of writing in the 16th century. (p. 277) for Ilitary No. 719, since both the handwriting of the letter (cursive script) and the special composition of the rite of the Liturgy contained in it with three prosphoras tell us about an earlier time. We have no hesitation in placing it in the 18th century. We attribute Ilitaria No. 712 to the same time and for the same reasons, and not to the 15th century, as Mr. Sakkelion does (p. 276), based on nothing. The possible accuracy of identifying manuscripts based on the time of their writing is also not observed by the describers. For example, Euchologius, No. 104, is attributed by them to the 13th century. (p. 62), although from the existing lunar, starting from 6742 and ending in 6777, i.e. 1234–1269, it can be said with almost certainty that this Euchologium was written around 1234. The number of sheets of manuscripts is indicated incorrectly in many cases. This manuscript has 246 leaves, not 276 as stated in Sakkelion (p. 62). The 141-sheet Euchologium (167 sheets according to Sakkelion) is dated to the 13th century, but this manuscript can be more accurately identified. Among the dead, the litany commemorates the Byzantine emperors Alexius I Komnenos (1081–1118), John II (Kalo-John) Komnenos (1118–1143), Alexius II Komnenos (1180–1183), Manuel Komnenos (1143–1180), who bore the name of Matthew in monasticism, and Alexius III Angelos (1195–1203). Therefore, the manuscript was written in the first quarter of the 13th century. But along with these, so to speak, underestimations of manuscripts or inaccuracies and inaccuracies in determining the time of their writing, we also see, on the contrary, overestimations: manuscripts are determined to be a century or even two higher. For example, the parchment Ilitharium No. 716, according to the letter and according to the presentation contained in it “Διάταξις ’ α τῆς θείας λειτουργίας” can be attributed to the 15th or even to the 16th century, but in no way to 14th century, as determined by Mr. Sakkelion (p. 276). Manuscript No. 634, containing the famous story about the baptism of the Russians “Διήγησις ἀκριβὴς ὅ πως ἐραπτίσθη τό τῶν ῾ Ρώσσων ἐθνος ", with greater right can be attributed to the 16th century than to the 15th century. (p. 254), etc. The description of some manuscripts is not always done with the same completeness and accuracy. The compiled Euchologium of 240 sheets (according to Sakkelion 357 sheets) cannot be attributed to the 15th century (p. 274), and here almost every rank was written by a different hand, and therefore we see handwriting in it starting from the 13th century. up to the 17th century inclusive. Here is the composition of this manuscript: a) incomplete rite of small blessing of water, written by a 16th century hand; b) the full rite of the great blessing of water; c) the sequence of fraternal creation not indicated in Sakkelion in the 15th century; d) the rite of blessing of oil is not complete, written in different handwritings of the 15th, 16th, 17th centuries; f) prayers for various occasions of the 16th century; f) Liturgy of Chrysostom – 15th century; g) several excerpts from the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts of the 15th century. (Sakkelion does not mention them); h) on glassine the complete (in Sakkelion: ἐλλινῆ) rite of the Liturgy of V. the Great of the 14th century. The names of Pope Paul and Patriarch Vissarion are commemorated (l. 128); i) Ἀκολουθία μνήστροις βασιλέων καὶ λοιπῶν 16th century; k) another incomplete wedding ceremony on glassine from the 13th century. (it is not mentioned in Sakkelion), etc.: Ilitary of the 13th century, No. 731, contains only one rite of the Liturgy of St. I. Chrysostom and nothing else (p. 278); manuscript from the 15th–16th centuries, not fully described. The rite, for example, of the great consecration of water has no beginning, and the end is attributed later in a different hand. The rite of small blessing of water is not mentioned. In addition to one rank of the minor schema, the manuscript contains a very interesting one with the title “ἑτέρα ἀκολουθία τοῦ ἁ γίου καὶ σχήματος μικροῦ” (comp. Sakkel. p. 270). But all the shortcomings we have indicated are almost inevitable in such extensive publications as “Πατμιακὴ βιβλιοθήκη”, and cannot in any way detract from their scientific significance. We pointed out these shortcomings so that our Russian scientists, who will have to use this work of Mr. Sakkelion, keep them in mind when necessary. For our part, we gladly welcome the publication of this book, which has been eagerly awaited for almost thirty years. People of science will also use this book with pleasure, since in the catalog and in the extensive scientific notes to it 1, written with remarkable scientific conscientiousness and knowledge of the matter, they will find a lot of new and highly interesting scientific data. The peculiarity of the catalog of Mr. Sakkelion, which did not attract the attention of the venerable G. S. Destunis, in comparison with other similar catalogs, is that here: a) a lot of educational manuals used in the 18th century are described. in what was flourishing at that time on the island. Patmos Academy and attracted students from all over the Orthodox East to its hospitable walls; b) a lot of handwritten information was reported about the first and best teachers of this academy: about Macarius the hierodeacon (pp. 142, 161, 175, 244, etc.), Vasily (pp. 230, 237) and Daniel Keramsos (pp. 181, 198, 20 and 245) and others; c) there is a lot of other interesting information, one way or another related to the same academy. Future historian Fr. Patmos and his academy will thank Mr. Sakkelion for all this precious information. G. Sakkelion died, one might say, with a pen in his hands, leaving behind his wife and young children without any means of living, without even earning a pension. But they left an important legacy to the friends of science, about which we consider it worthwhile to inform the readers of Bibliographic Notes. In addition to the above-mentioned extensive notes on the acts of the Patmos monastery, after the city of Sakkelion, curious and numerous materials for the biographies of the didaskals of the Patmos Academy and a completed new catalog of manuscripts, now stored in the national library of the University of Athens, remained in the papers. The Greek government has provided funds for the printing of this catalogue, which, according to information we have from Athens, will appear in the coming summer. The printing is carried out under the supervision of the son of the late Sakkelion Alcibiades, who temporarily took his father’s place in the library. The late Sakkelion, during his many years of life, managed to compile an interesting and quite extensive library, containing publications of the 16th century. classics, rare and valuable pamphlets in Latin and Greek and complete collections of Greek periodicals in Greece, Constantinople, Smyrna and abroad (in Paris and London), many of which are bibliographic rarities in Greece itself. The articles written for these magazines by the late scientist are covered in the margins and on pasted sheets of paper with extensive notes and corrections, which he thought to use in his subsequent publications. The heirs of this interesting library intend to sell it for a relatively negligible price. It would be a great pity if, upon sale, it were split into parts or became the property of a private person. Always modest, Mr. Sakkelion in one of his notes, albeit in hindsight, made an impressive remark to the Leipzig professor, the famous paleographer V. Hardhausen, that in his “Catalog of Sinaitic Manuscripts” (1886, Oxon), using his “Πατμ. βιβλ.”, not yet published, for his “Spicilegium patmiacum” did not mention a single word about the source from which he got his information (ἁ λλ ’ ὅ μως ἄξιον ἕ κρινε σιγ ῇ τὸ p. 90, p. 90, note 1). Here Mr. Sakkelion also corrects one big paleographic error made by a patented German paleographer. You might be interested in: