Images de page

ii. Manuscripts.

A. MESSINA, Library of the University. Graec. 177. The roll described above (p. xlix, A) verso, twelfth cent. A considerable fragment of S. Mark. Printed in Swainson, pp. 3-69 (3rd col.). On the ms. see above. Its text as now mutilated corresponds to pp. 113. 2-14, 130. 28-140. 15b below. It is of the same type as the textus receptus. The intercessions are wanting, and there is nothing to indicate its source.



B. ROME, Biblioth. Vaticana. Vat. gr. 1970, thirteenth cent.: described above (p. 1, B). The source of the textus receptus: 10 printed in Swainson pp. 2-72 (1st col.: codex rossanensis) on the basis of a new collation: reproduced below from Swainson, with additions.

On the ms. see above, and the correspondence between Sirleto and Jo. a S. Andrea prefixed to the editio princeps and in Renaudot i, pp. 149-151.

C. ROME, Biblioth. Vaticana. Vat. gr. 2281. A parchment roll, A. D. 1207: marginal notes in arabic. Printed in Swainson pp. 2-73 (2nd col.: rotulus vaticanus).

On the ms. see Swainson pp. xix sq. Its text is marked by the effects of a double influence, that of S. James and of the Byzantine, to which latter it is 20 largely assimilated, especially by the insertion of diakovikά and èxpwvýoeis. Both the patriarch and an archbishop are commemorated (Swainson p. 42: Dr. Swainson has not noticed this, p. xx), but otherwise there is nothing to indicate its origin.

D. SINAI, Library of the Monastery of S. Katharine. A 25 parchment roll, twelfth or thirteenth cent.: arabic version in the margin. A fragment. Unpublished.

The fragment corresponds to pp. 124. 6-134. 17 below, or more accurately Swainson, 2nd col., p. 26 Meyaλúvare-56 fin. The text is substantially identical with that of C. My knowledge of this ms. is derived from a photograph taken 30 by Mrs. Lewis and Mrs. Gibson.

E. CAIRO, Library of the Orthodox Patriarchate. Paper, sixteenth cent. Unpublished.

According to a note written by Amphilochius bishop of Pelusium, dated 1870, this ms. was written by the patriarch Meletius Pegas in 1585-6, and was 35 rescued from his papers and bound by the writer of the note. Its text is

substantially that of C, except in so far as the assimilation to the Byzantine rite is carried further and the additions are given in fuller form. Only the patriarch is commemorated, and there seems to be nothing to indicate the origin of

the text.

[ocr errors]

2. The Anaphoras of S. BASIL and S. GREGORY

i. Printed texts.

Renaudot Lit. or. coll. i, pp. 57-85 [Aerovpyia Toû áyiov Βασιλείου].

Renaudot Lit. or. coll. i, pp. 85-115 'H Beía Xeirovpyia Toù 5 ἐν ἁγίοις πατρὸς ἡμῶν Γρηγορίου.

Accompanied by a Latin translation. Text and translation reprinted in Assemani Cod. lit. vii, Romae 1754, PP. 45-133. S. Basil in English in Brett, pp. 71-80.

ii. Manuscript.

PARIS, Biblioth. Nationale. Graec. 325. Paper, fourteenth cent. arabic version in the margin.

The printed text is derived from this ms. Two or three leaves are wanting at the beginning and one in the body of the book. On the ms. see Omont Inventaire i, p. 33: Renaudot i, p. xcii: Montfaucon Palaeographia graeca 15 Paris 1708, p. 314.

3. History &c. of the Greek rite

(1) In Appendix J notices of the liturgy are collected from Egyptian writers, mostly of the fourth and fifth centuries. The evidence might no doubt be indefinitely extended.


Comp. Probst Liturgie d. vierten Jahrhunderts u. deren Reform pp. 106-124, to which some of the references to S. Athanasius are due.


(2) An outline of the liturgy from the Arabic Didaskalia is given below in Appendix K. This Didaskalia, of unknown date, is for the most part (chaps. 1-22, 24-34) derived from Ap. 25 Const. i-vi. Chaps. 23 and 35-39 are additional to the general scheme, though in part derived from Ap. Const. ii and viii. The paragraph of ch. 38 which contains the liturgy, already in part described in ch. 23, attaches itself to no source: it is in fact a sketch of the Egyptian liturgy at a stage of development 30 implied in the present Coptic form. In the latter, while the prothesis has been carried further back (pp. 145 sq.), the prayer of prothesis (p. 148) is still in the position occupied by the whole prothesis in the Didaskalia. Since the arabic is apparently derived from a greek text, it may be assumed that this outline 35


represents a stage in the growth of the Greek liturgy as well as of the Coptic.

On the Didaskalia see Funk pp. 215-42: contents pp. 222-4: german translation of the preface pp. 217-21, and of the last five chapters pp. 226-36, where 5 sources are indicated in the notes. In App. K the text of Bodl. Huntingt. 31, f. 121 (A. D. 1680) has been followed, compared with Brit. Mus. Rich. 7211, f. 108 (A.D. 1682). On the other mss. see Funk p. 215 (in Bodl. Huntingt. 458, f. 171, ch. 38 with the liturgy is reduced to a very small compass). Ch. 23 contains, with some verbal variations, ll. 5-23 from the Psalms, omitting 11 from 10 the book-18 of the left-hand column below. On the signs of a greek original see Funk p. 237.

(3) The Presanctified Liturgy of S. Mark (τà πpoŋyiaoμéva toû ἀποστόλου Μάρκου) is mentioned in a rubric of the greek Egyptian S. Basil, in which the prayer of inclination before communion is 15 described as derived from it: but it is otherwise unknown.


See Renaudot i. p. 76, and note on p. 321. The prayer is common to the greek with the coptic S. Basil (Ren. i, p. 21) and it is obviously related to the Byzantine "Hvvotai Kaì TETÉλeotaι (pp. 344, 411 below).

(4) There is no external history of the Greek S. Mark, and 20 it does not seem to be referred to until the last days of its observance, when, like S. James, it is a subject of correspondence between Theodore Balsamon and Mark of Alexandria (Migne P. G. cxxxviii. 953), and is alluded to by the former in his comment on the 32nd Trullan canon (ib. cxxxvii. 621).

Some of the inscriptions in Revillout's article Les prières pour les morts dans l'épigraphie égyptienne in Revue égyptologique vol. iv, 1885, are greek and illustrate liturgical language. The seventh century writer quoted by Palmer Origines i, ed. 4, p. 88 (from Spelman Concilia i. 177) is referring to the divine office and not to the liturgy; and both his account and the allusion of Nicolas of Methone 30 (de corpore et sanguine Domini in Migne P. G. cxxxv. 513 d) seem to depend

not upon any known formula attributed to S. Mark, but only on the belief or assumption that the apostles initiated the liturgical traditions of the several churches. S. Mark does not seem to have been quoted in the controversy between the Latins and the Greeks in the fifteenth century: neither Mark of 35 Ephesus nor Bessarion uses it.

(5) Of modern writers see Renaudot's dissertation and notes on S. Mark, S. Basil and S. Gregory, Lit. or. coll. i, pp. lxxxiii sqq., 116 sqq., 313-42: Palmer Origines i, pp. 82-105: Daniel iv, pp. 134-36 and notes to pp. 137-170.

As in the case of S. James, the question of authenticity is discussed by the earlier of the modern writers: see Bona R. L. i. 8 § 2 and Sala in loc. 4, Le Nourry Apparat. ad biblioth. patrum i, cc. 30-34, Benedict XIV de ss. missae sacr. ii. 3 § 13. Neale's argument for N. T. quotations from S. James is equally applicable, or inapplicable, to S. Mark.


The ritual books necessary for the Liturgy are (a) the Khūlāji (evxodóyiov) the priest's book: (B) the Ķutmārus (Copt, kataméros i. e. κaтà μéρos oг kabŋμépios) the Lectionary, containing the four lections and the psalm before the Gospel (p. 156): (7) the Synaxār (ovva§ápiov) containing the legends of the 10 saints, sometimes substituted for the lection from the Acts (cp. p. 155.9): (8) the manual of the deacon and the choir containing the diakonika, the responses, and the hymns fixed and variable. Service books whether printed or in ms. generally have a marginal arabic version of the text of the prayers &c.: the rubrics in mss. are generally short and in a mixture of greek and coptic, with 15 marginal arabic and with occasional longer passages (e.g. p. 165. 24 sqq. below) in arabic only: on printed editions see below.

There is a Coptic Uniat, whose slightly modified rite is represented by the edition of Tuki and its derivatives noted below.

i. Printed texts.

John marquess of Bute The Coptic morning service for the Lord's day Lond. 1882, pp. 35 sqq.

a. Ordo communis.

R. Tuki Missale coptice et arabice Romae 1736.

The monophysite names are omitted and that of Chalcedon is inserted in the commemorations &c., and the Filioque is added in the creed. Additional rubrics are given, in arabic only. Reprinted, with rubrics in latin only, in J. A. 25 Assemani Codex liturg. vii: missale alexandrinum, pars 2, Romae 1754, pp. 1 sqq.


(Euchologion) Cairo, at the El-Watan office, in the year of the martyrs 1603 (A. D. 1887), pp. 1 sqq.


This is derived with some additions from Tuki's text. Modifications in present practice are pointed out in the notes. The original is given only of 30 what is audible: the rest with the rubrics is in english. The volume contains also the office of the morning Incense and an appendix on the Divine Office.

الخدمة والتراتيل


of what is incumbent upon the deacons in respect of the readings in the service and the chantings) Cairo, at the El-Watan office, same date.

35 Book) کتاب ما يجب على الشمامسة من القراءة في

These are service books, the former edited by Philotheos hegumen of the patriarchal church of S. Mark in Cairo. The former contains the prayers of the celebrant, the latter the diakonika, the responses and the hymns, fixed and variable, all in coptic and arabic with arabic rubrics.


Translations: Latin in Victor Scialach Liturgiae Basilii magni, Gregorii theologi, Cyrilli alexandrini ex arabico conversae Aug. Vind. 1604 (reprinted in Magna biblioth. patr. Paris 1654, t. vi): Renaudot i, pp. 1 sqq. (from a Paris ms.): Assemani u. s. English in S. C. Malan Orig. documents of the Coptic church v: the divine evxoλoyɩov Lond. 1875, pp. 1 sqq. ('from an old ms.'): Bute u.s.: Neale 10 History: introd. pp. 381 sqq. (from Ren.'s latin): Rodwell The liturgies of S. Basil, S. Gregory and S. Cyril from a coptic manuscript of the thirteenth century (Occasional papers of the eastern church association, no. xii) Lond. 1870, pp. 25 sqq. (from a ms. now in the library of Lord Crawford).



B. The Anaphoras.

(1) S. BASIL, S. GREGORY and S. CYRIL or S. MARK are contained in R. Tuki Missale coptice et arabice Romae 1736.

The Cairo manual contains the common diakonika and hymns.

Translations: Latin in Scialach and Magna biblioth. patr. u.s.: Renaudot i. pp. 9-51: English in Rodwell u. s., Malan Original documents i, v, vi, Lond. 20 1872-5 (very inaccurate).

(2) S. BASIL is also contained in

J. A. Assemani Cod. lit. vii, pars. 2, Romae 1754, pp. 47-90 (from Tuki: rubrics in latin).

John marquess of Bute The Coptic morning service for the 25 Lord's day Lond. 1882, pp. 77-117 (from Tuki?). Cairo 1887, pp. 78–116.


Translations: Latin in Assemani u. s.: English in Neale History: introd. pp. 532-702 (from Renaudot's latin), Bute u. s.

(3) S. GREGORY is also contained in

Cairo 1887, pp. 167–76.

Mittheilungen aus d. Sammlung d. Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer, erst. Jahrg. 3-4, Wien 1887, p. 71.

The latter is a fragment in sahidic.

Translations: Latin in Assemani pp. 134-56 (from Tuki's text). A latin 35 translation of a sahidic fragment is given in Hyvernat Canon-Fragmente d. altkoptischen Liturgie Rom 1888, pp. 10 sq. from a Borgian ms. (Zoega Catal. cod. copt. Romae 1810, no. c) of about the tenth century.

(4) S. CYRIL or S. MARK.

No separate text is published.

« PrécédentContinuer »