Apostle of Manoil (Description)

General name: Apostle. Specific name: Full praxapostolos. Individual name: Маноилов апостол. Individual name: Apostle of Manoil. Individual name: Маноилов (Мануиловский) апостол.

Six fragments belonging to an once big codex have been identified by Tixomirov (Шмидт 1984: 340). They are now housed in three libraries.

Physical description

Material: Parchment, rough and uneven Folia: 22 ff.
Collation:

The succession of folios among the different repositories and collections is as follows: lacuna+ 1 (f. 3, НБКМ 499) + 1 (Сырку 15) + 9 (lacuna + f. 4 + lacuna + f. 5 + lacuna + ff. 6–10 + lacuna + f.11–12, НБКМ 499) + lacuna + 1 (Григ. 15.III, 1r/v) + 4 (BAN 24.4.7) + 1 (Григ. 15.III.2r/v) +lacuna + 1 (НБКМ 500)+ 2 (ff. 1–2, НБКМ 499) + 1 (BAN 4.5.24)

There are no quire signatures preserved.
Condition: The manuscript is badly damaged. Only some fragments are preserved.
Layout: 1 col., 31–34 lines per page;
Ink: Black, on the folia of the third quire is more dark than on those of the second quire
Decoration

1 headpiece, 1 tailpiece and 61 initials of various kinds and types, at each reading. Specific for the manuscript are the teratological initials and the black dots decorating many of the initials. The teratological initials representing figure of an animal find analogues by type but not by style in the Bologna Psalter of 1230–1240 and Orbele Triodion (RNB F.п.I.102, Вяз. F.124/4, Вяз. F.124/10) of the second half of the thirteenth century; for the initials with an animal figure tied to the letter’s stem a parallel is found in the Orbele Triodion RNB F.п.I.102, f. 3r. The initials combining the ‘head on a stem’ motif (Бабић 1995) and an interlaced bow utilize a pattern similar to some initials in the Grigorović Psalter (RGB Григ. 4) of the second half of the thirteenth century, at a different style. The type definition is ambiguous as the structure of such initials may be also classified as interlaced. The same ambiguity holds true for initials with a geometric, straight stem but with interlaced bow. For the interlaced initial in НБКМ 499.f. 9r a close parallel is the initial on f. 5v in the thirteenth century Veles Gospel (НБКМ 18). The undulating contour of the initial’s bow on f. 1r finds closest parallels in a few initials in the miscellany ÖNB Cod. slav. 12 of the second quarter of the thirteenth century (Проловић 1986: table ІV). For the joint-shaped initial with inscribed human face a close analogue, except for the script and style, is the initial С on f. 29v in the Grigorović Psalter, as well as some more joint-shaped initials С and О in the same manuscript. The human image has no illustrative function.

The outlines of the initials are red, colouring is in yellow, lemon-yellow, ochre, green and dark blue-green in various combinations, comparable to the Orbele Triodion, Pogodin Psalter RNB Pogod. 8, Jagić Zlatoust. In some places a later hand drew over the outlines with black ink. For some Б initials is characteristic setting the bow under the letter’s stem; the same construction at a completely different style is used in the apostolos НБКМ 498 + 881 of the late thirteenth century. The interlaced initial on f. 12r is unusual.

  • (НБКМ 499.1r ) .
  • (НБКМ 499. 11r, menologion – August) . Divider, band-shaped and framed; with inscribed two-stalk interlace, making a “thorny stalk” pattern, a variant of the “rope” pattern; this is surrounded from above and below by an outlined winding stem; the interlace endings are somewhat harsh and large half leaves of various shapes; black dots decorate the white stem.

  • (НБКМ 499.f. 7r, Pentecost) . A divider, interlaced, of the “rope” pattern, filling the end of the line; with black interstices and beads on the outlines.

Every lesson begins with an initial, in particular , on 1r (last line, НБКМ 499) Б (drawn in red ink and ornamented with black dots); on f. 2r (НБКМ 499) Б (drawn in red ink with yellow filling) , f. 2v (НБКМ 499) Б (big initial, drawn in red ink), on f. 3r two initials (НБКМ 499) Б a naive drawing in red ink with green filling; on f. 3v (НБКМ 499) Б (a small one, drawn in red), on f. 4r (НБКМ 499) Б (drawn in red ink with green filling) Джурова 1981: 92, f. 4r (НБКМ 499) Б (drawn in red ink with green filling with a teratological head, see Джурова 1981: 92, on f. 4v (НБКМ 499) Б (drawn in red ink); on f. 5r (НБКМ 499) Б (drawn in red ink and ornamentated with black dots); on f. 5r (НБКМ 499) Б (a teratological initial), on f. 5v two geometrical initials Б; on f. 6r Б, a teratological initial drawn in red with green and yellow filling and again on f. 6r (НБКМ 499) Б, small initial drawn in red ink with yellow filling; on f.7r (НБКМ 499) Б (a big initial in red ink and ornamentated with black dots, with geometrical and teratological elements), on f. 9r (НБКМ 499) Е, a beautiful small initial, drawn with red ink with green and yellow filling and black dots; f. 9r (НБКМ 499) Б, drawn with black ink with interlace; f. 9v (НБКМ 499) Б, drawn with red ink with yellow filling and black dots, with teratological elements; f. 10r two initials Б, drawn in red ink with yellow filling, interlace; on f. 10v (НБКМ 499) Б (a big teratological initial with two heads drawn with green and yellow ink); on f. 11r (НБКМ 499) Б (drawn with red ink with yellow filling and black dots), on f. 11v Б (only the lower part of the initial is preserved. It was drawn with red ink and ornamentated with black dots); on f. 12r (НБКМ 499) Б (teratological initial drawn with red ink and ornamentated with black dots); on f. 12 r Б (interlace drawn with red ink, yellow filling and black dots); on f. 12v (НБКМ 499) Б (with a head of a man); on f. 12v (НБКМ 499) Б (big initial drawn with red ink).

In conclusion, there are the following types of initials: teratological initials on f. 5r, 6r, 7v, 9v, 10r, 10v, 12v o НБКМ 499 and on f. 1r НБКМ 500 and on f. 5v of Syrku 15; two initials with a human face drawn in the circles of the letters – on f. 4r and 12v of НБКМ 499; geometrical initials with elements of interlace and different other ornamental elements on f. 1v, 2v, 4r, 5r, 6r, 9r, 10r, 12v of НБКМ 499.1v, 2r, 2v of НБКМ 500.5r of Сырку 15.1r, 1v, 2r, 2v of BAN 24.4.7 (Srezn. 54); outlined geometrical initials of Byzantine (Old-Byzantine) style with joints and floral ornaments with colour filling on f. 1r, 3v, 4v, 5v, 11r, 11v of НБКМ 499.5v of Сырку 15.1v, 3r, 3v, 4r of Срезн. 54, 1v of Сырку 16; interlaced initials on f. 11v, 12r of НБКМ 499.1v of НБКМ 500.2r, 2v of Срезн. 54; thin initials of Byzantine type with floral ornaments on f. 3r of НБКМ 499.4v of Срезн. 54; a simple initial drawn with black ink and colour filling on f. 4r of Срезн. 54).

Scribes

1. scribe
Anonymous
Script: Cyrillic.

The Cyrillic script of MSS НБКМ 499 and НБКМ 500 is similar to that of the manuscripts dating from the end of the 13th and the beginning of the 14th century. This writing seems to be early representative of the type of script attested in the first part of the the Pirdop Apostle (ff. 1–5, НБКМ 497, 13th c.), Menologion BAN 72 (end of the 13th century). The further development of this type could be observed in MSS like Menologion, St. Peterbourg RNL, Pogod. 58 , dated 1339, Paraenesis of Ephrem Syrus (Rila monastery 3/7, second half of the 14th century), Taktikon of Nikon of Montenegro (Rila monastery 1/16, second half of the 14th century). The scribe of НБКМ 499 and НБКМ 500 is believed to have written the other four fragments kept in Russian Libraries. The identification was made by Tixomirov (Шмидт 1984: 340–341). ; see also Куев 1986: 221–223.

Jers: The two letters for jers are used, in Menologion in НБКМ 499 the front jer is much more frequent than in Synaxarion. In word-final position the back jer is preferred. It is preferred also following letters ж, ш, щ, while following ч both jers could be seen. There are many examples of writing of е for the front jer both in roots (e.g. весъ 9r and particularly often in root -шед-) and suffixes (e.g. -енъ, -ець) and also in G. Pl., jo-declension съгрѣшенеи 12r. Still, there are examples with jer, e.g. пришълъци 9r and the variation тъмнѣмъ (1v) темницѫ (4r). In НБКМ 499 and НБКМ 500 only two instances of О for back jer is attested in suffix, e.g. избьітокь (12r) and любовь (5r), but in root and prefixes jer is preserved, e.g. дъждь. Examples with О for back jer in suffix were found by G. Il'inskij in Срезн. 54 and two are quoted by Куев 1986: 221, viz. начѧтокь, любовь. The adversative conjunction appears both as нъ and нѫ. A case of assimilation after the fall of a week jer is attested, тѧжкомь (5v). Further, the spelling дьвери is found. Following letters р and л both jers are used without a pattern.

Juses: Three letters for the nasal vowels are used: big jus, small jus, and rarely jotated small jus following a vowel, most often following small jus or big jus. There are several cases of writing of small jus for the big one following a vowel but this is not a strictly consistent pattern. Small jus is used after letters for the soft consonants р, л, н, ч. Following letters ш, щ the big jus is preferred, while following ч the small jus is written as a rule. Following ц both juses are attested.

Jotated vowels: The jotated ꙗ is regularly used in word-initial position and following a vowel, while after letters н, р, л, ч, ц ѣ is written. Thus, the norm is ша, чѣ, рѣ, лѣ, нѣ, цꙗ, ꙗ. The jotated ѥ also appears in word-initial position and after vowel, but with the same function wide є is also used.

Other letters: The letter ы appears regularly for и in the verb изити. The scribe preserves l-epentheticum in many forms but there examples without it, such as вьзлюбеньіи (1v, 2v), блⷭ҇вениемь (2v). The scribe uses letter ꙃ in its archaic form. Wide ѻ is used mainly in word-initial position and in postvocalic one.

Foreign words: The scribe uses inconsistently izhica with two dots above in Greel loan-words and particularly following the letters for velars. Both и and оу could be found for the Greek ypsilon in Greek loans; cf. variation сумона, сумеона, лоуканьскьі листрѫ. , but regularly егупетьстѣи, куринеискьі. Both еу and ев appear in Greek loans, the latter prevailing in Menologion part. The Greek letters theta and ksi are also used in Greek loans but they are usually combined with Cyrillic letters denoting the sound with which these Greek elements are substituted in Slavic, e.g. евьстѳатиꙗ, маѯсима.

Grammar: The fragments have archaic morphology and use asigmatic Aoristus, but also some typical Middle Bulgarian features appear, such as the ending "-ie" for the Pl. of masculine nouns, e.g. мѫжие 5v , досадителие 10r, свѣдѣтелие 3v. Also in 1 p. Pl. the ending "-my" appears, especially in the v. substantivum, such as сльішахомьі 1v, есмьі 3v, 5r, although the old forms are also used. Pronominal endings for adjectives are also used, even the form творѧщоому 12v is attested.

Lexis: In many cases the fragments preserve the variant readings typical of the archaic Apostoloi reflecting the Cyrillo-Methodian translation. Still, in some places it has Preslavisms which are not consistently used. For instance, the manuscript uses both постити and алкати, етеръ and нѣкъто, съньмище and съборъ. The manuscript uses диꙗволъ Acts 13: 10, 14: 38 instead of неприѣзнь in Archaic Apostoloi, including in the Slepče Apostolos. Also it prefers островъ, старѣишина жрьчьскьі and several other Preslavisms.

Contents

The manuscript consists of 22 leaves from a full Apostolos lectionary. The distribution of readings (lections) coincides with that published by C. R. Gregory for the Greek tradition (Gregory 1900).

Redaction:

The text is a mixture of the First and Second Redactions of the Slavonic apostolos in varying proportions. The fact that readings from both redactions are present indicates that at some stage a text was compiled using multiple antigraphs, at least one from each redaction. This reflects efforts to re-establish a controlled transmission of the text after the restoration of Bulgarian civil and ecclesiastical independence, following a prolonged period of uncontrolled or “wild” copying of the Slavonic text under Byzantine rule. However, in the absence of any textus receptus in the early stages of this process, there was no criterion for preferring one version over another, and mixture of redactions was the result. The same phenomenon may be observed in the Karakallou and Karpinskij Apostoloi, though neither of these displays such a degree of confusion as is found here.

The nature and extent of the mixing varies in different parts of the manuscript. The Acts display a very mixed redaction, which may be illustrated by the comparison of a sample (chapter 20, verses 8–9) with the text of the Karakallou Apostolos (Kk, which at this point has a good First-Redaction text) and of RNB Q.п.I.5 (Б), the principal witness to the Second Redaction.

Бѣшѫ же свѣщѧ многы· вь горници· вь неиже быхомь сьбрані· Сѣдꙙ же е̇динь юноша· и̇менемь евтѵхь· вьꙁдрѣмавсꙙ сьномь тꙙжькомь· глꙙщꙕ павлоу вь мноꙁѣ· прѣклонь сꙙ сьномь сьпаде· ѿ триковника ниꙁь· и̇ вьꙁꙙшѫ ӥ мрьтвь Kk

бѣхѫ же св̋ѣщѫ многы вь гор꙽ници· и҅деже бѣхѫ с꙽брали сѧ̈· сѣде же є҅теръ ю҅ноша· и҅менемь є҅ут̋ихъ· вьꙁⷣрѣмав꙽ же с꙽номъ тѧш꙽комь· гл҃ѧщоу паӱлоу на дл̋ъꙃѣ· прѣклонив сѧ̈ ѿ с꙽на· спаде сѧ ѿ трикровника долоу· и вьꙁѧшѫ и҅ мрътва Man

бѣаху же свѣща многꙑ на въсходници· идеже бѣша собранꙑ· сѣдѧ же нѣкои оуноша· именемь єоутухъ· оу дверець въꙁдрѣма сѧ· съномь тѧжькимь· гл҃щю паоулу· на долꙁѣ преклонивъ сѧ ѿ съна· съпаде сѧ ѿ третьꙗго помоста долу· и въꙁдвигъше и мр҃твъ Б

This is fairly typical of the position of the text between the two redactions; the text of Man does not, moreover, show any particular affinity with any individual manuscript or group of manuscripts within either of the redactions. Most passages are closer to the First Redaction, with an admixture of Second-Redaction readings, but there are a few places where the situation is reversed.

The text of the Epistle to the Romans is similar, i.e. predominantly First-Redaction but with Second-Redaction elements, except for the two pericopes in the menology (xi 2–12 and xiv 19–27), which are clearly Second-Redaction. Much the same can be said of the relatively small amounts of text from Galatians, Ephesians and Colossians, and the somewhat more substantial passage from Hebrews. The First Redaction predominates, but the text includes Second-Redaction features, notably at Eph. i 1–9 and Heb. iii 12–14. The Pastoral Epistles veer wildly between the two redactions, presenting a text that alternates in an irregular manner between them, or may be hard to assign to either. The Catholic Epistles, by contrast, present a pure (but by no means perfect) Second-Redaction text.

Not enough remains of the manuscript to attempt to discern any principles governing the distribution, though it may be significant that while most of the text of Romans belongs predominantly to the First Redaction, the two passages in the menology belong to the Second. Nor can one deduce any principles for the selection of variants, apart, perhaps, from a general preference for Slavonic over Greek words (though the latter are not completely eliminated; for example, we find акровьствиѥ repeatedly in Romans iv); this tends to favour Second-Redaction readings.

The other distinguishing feature of the text of this manuscript is that it is remarkably corrupt throughout. Some errors are relatively minor, such as carelessness in use of particles or unmotivated changes to word-order, but even those which are small in extent may be serious in effect, e.g. беꙁаконн̏аꙗ Rom. ii 14 for ꙁаконнаꙗ, or не дѣлаѧщомоу Rom. iv 4 for дѣлаѧщомоу, all of which make complete nonsense of the text. Words may be miscopied with absurd results, such as гн̋ильни II Tim. ii 20 for глиньни, or ненавидницамь Tit. ii 3 for не навадницамь. More extensive defects include haplography (e.g. Acts x 38), dittography (Heb. v 14) or the misplacing of whole sections of text (e.g. part of Rom. iv 14 in the middle of iv 12). It would appear that the scribe had no sense of the meaning of what he was writing, and though competent in forming his letters, wrote them mechanically, paying no attention to the text, which in places is quite incomprehensible.

The purpose of controlled transmission is precisely to avoid and indeed to remedy corruption of this sort, so that these defects must have arisen in the course of uncontrolled copying subsequently to the genesis of the hybrid redaction that the Manuilov Apostol represents, and the manuscript must stand at several removes from its protograph. It is not even certain that it represents a single text-type: the relatively pure (but equally corrupt) Second-Redaction passages towards the end of the manuscript conceivably go back to a different original from the mixed redaction of the rest. However, the manuscript is too incomplete to draw firm conclusions. All that can be said is that it is completely isolated from a text-critical point of view, and unlike any other manuscript that has so far been studied in this context.

.
1. (НБКМ 499.1r) . Acts 10: 21–33. Tuesday of the 4th Week of Easter
2. (НБКМ 499.1r/v) . Acts 14: 6–18. Wednesday of the 4th Week of Easter Denoted as Прѣполовление праздника (Mesopentecost)
3. (НБКМ 499.1v + BAN 4. 5. 23 (Syrku 15), 1r) . Acts 10: 34–39, 39–43. Thursday of the 4th Week of Easter The lection starts on НБКМ 499.3v and follows on BAN 4. 5. 23 (Syrku 15), 1r.
4. (Сырку 15.1r/v) . Acts 10: 44–48, 11: 1–10. Friday of the 4th Week of Easter
5. (Сырку 15.1v) . Acts 12: 1–11. Saturday of the 4th Week of Easter
6. (Сырку 15.1v + НБКМ 499.4r) . Acts 11: 19–22, 22–30. Sunday of the Woman of Samaria The original designation of this date of church calendar is in BAN 4. 5. 23. The reading starts on Сырку 15, 1v and follows on НБКМ 499.4r ; the text on НБКМ 499.4r starts with до антиохиѧ.
7. (НБКМ 499.2r) . Acts 12: 12–17. Monday of the 5th Week of Easter
8. (НБКМ 499.2r/v) . Acts 12: 25–13: 12. Tuesday of the 5th Week of Easter
9. (НБКМ 499.2v) . Acts 13: 13–17. Wednesday of the 5th Week of Easter The end of the lection (Act 13: 13–24) is not preserved since the next two folia of the manuscript are missing. The text finishes with из . до неѧ (Аct 13: 17).
10. (НБКМ 499.3r) . Acts 17: 23–27. Tuesday of the 6th Week of Easter The beginning of the lection Act 17: 19–22 is missing since the previous folio of the manuscript is not preserved. begins from (Act 17: 23) Incipit: (...) сего азь проповѣдаѧ вамь
11. (НБКМ 499.3r) . Acts 18: 22–28. Wednesday of the 6th Week of Easter
12. (НБКМ 499.3r) . Liturgical directions and hymnographic incipits. Thursday of the 6th Week of Easter (Assumption) The expected lection Act 1: 1–12 is not given Rubric: ищи на пасхѫ
13. (НБКМ 499.3r/v) . Acts 19: 1–4, 6–8. Friday of the 6th Week of Easter
14. (НБКМ 499.3v) . Acts 20: 7–12. Saturday of the 6th Week of Easter
15. (НБКМ 499.3v) . Acts 20: 16–18, 28–31. 7th Sunday of Easter The end of the lection Act 20: 16–18 and 28–36 is missing. The week begins with Sunday. Explicit: съ слъ. (...)
16. (НБКМ 499.4r) . Acts 23: 9–11. Wednesday of the 7th Week of Easter (Week before Pentecost) The beginning of the original lection Acts 23: 1–11 is missing due to manuscript damage. The text begins with Acts 23: 9 Incipit: (...) бьіс веплъ многъ
17. (НБКМ 499.4r) . Acts 25: 13–19. Thursday of the 7th Week of Easter (Week before Pentecost)
18. (НБКМ 499.4r–5v) . Acts 27: 1–44, 28: 1. Friday of of the 7th Week of Easter (Week before Pentecost)
19. (НБКМ 499.5v/6v) . Acts 28: 1–31. Saturday of the 7th Week of Easter (Week before Pentecost)
20. (НБКМ 499.6v/7r) . Incipits of hymnographic texts, Acts 2: 1–11. Sunday of Pentecost The same as in the Strumica Apostolos
21. (НБКМ 499.7r/v) . Eph 5: 8–19. Monday of the Week after Pentecost

Съшествие св. духа иже на апостольі

22. (НБКМ 499.7v/8r) . Rom 1: 1–17. Thuesday of the Week after Pentecost The usual lection includes Rom 1: 1–7 and 13–17. Here Rom 1: 8–12 is also included.
23. (НБКМ 499.8r) . Rom 1: 18–24. Wednesday of the Week after Pentecost The usual lection includes Rom 1: 18–27.
24. (НБКМ 499.8r/v) . Rom 1: 28–2: 9. Thursday of the Week after Pentecost
25. (НБКМ 499.8v/9r) . Rom 2: 14–21. Friday of the Week after Pentecost The end of the lection Rom 2: 14–28 is missing because of manuscript damage. себе не оучиши Act Rom 2: 21.
26. (НБКМ 499.9r) . Rom 3: 7–18. Monday of the 2nd Week after Pentecost The beginning of the lection Rom. 2: 28–3: 18. is missing. The text begins with Rom 3: 7 Incipit: (...) вѫ его. что инако и азь грѣшникь
27. (НБКМ 499.9r) . Rom 4: 4–12. Tuesday of the 2nd Week after Pentecost
28. (НБКМ 499.9v) . Rom 4: 13–25. Wednesday of the 2nd Week after Penteocst
29. (НБКМ 299, 9v/10r) . Rom 5: 10–16. Thursday of the 2nd Week after Pentecost
30. (НБКМ 499.10r) . Rom 5: 17–6: 2. Friday of the 2nd Week after Pentencost
31. (НБКМ 499.10r/10v) . Rom 3: 19–26. Saturday of the 2nd Week after Pentecost
32. (НБКМ 499.10v) . Rom 2: 10–16. Second Sunday after Pentecost The week apparently begins with Monday.
33. (НБКМ 499.10v) . Rom 7: 1–7. Monday of the Third Week after Pentecost The end of the lection is missing, as a rule the lection includes Rom 7: 1–13. Apparently the week begins with Monday again. Explicit: грѣха да не бѫдетъ нѫ грѣха. (...)
34. (Григ. 15.III.1r) . 1 Tim 4: 8–16. Friday of the 26th Week after Pentecost In the expected lection for Friday of the 26th Week after Pentecost the lection for the Sunday of the 30th Week (1 Tim 4: 9–15) is inserted. This fact suggests that the protograph/ antigraph was a continuous Apostolos.
35. (Григ. 15.III.1r/v (?)) . Incipit of the lection for Wednesday of the 26th Week after Pentecost. Wednesday of the 26th Week after Pentecost
36. (Григ. 15.III.1v) . Incipit of the lection for Monday of the 27th Week after Pentecost. Monday of the 27th Week after Pentecost
37. (Григ. 15.III.1v) . Incipit of the lection for Wednesday of the 26th Week after Pentecost. Tuesday of the 27th Week after Pentecost
38. (Григ. 15.III.1v and Срезн. 54.1r) . 1 Tim 5: 22–23, 1T 5: 25, 6: 1–2 (?). Wednesday of the 27th Week after Pentecost Usually the lection is 1 Tim 5: 22–6: 11.
39. (Срезн. 54.1r) . 1 Tim 6: 17–21. Thursday of the 27th Week after Pentecost
40. (Срезн. 54.) . 2 Tim 1–9. Friday of of the 27th Week after Pentecost Without end.
41. (Срезн. 54.) . Gal 5: 22–26, 6: 1–2. Saturday of the 27th Week after Pentecost
42. (Срезн. 54.) . Eph 6: 10–17. Sunday of the 27th Week after Pentecost
43. (Срезн. 54.) . 2 Tim 2: 20–26. Monday of the 28th Week after Pentecost
44. (Срезн. 54.) . 2 Tim 3: 16–17, 4: 1–4. Tuesday of the 28th Week after Pentecost
45. (Срезн. 54.) . 2 Tim 4: 9–22. Wednesday of the 28th Week after Pentecost
46. (Срезн. 54.) . Ti 1: 5–16, 2: 1. Thursday of the 28th Week after Pentecost Without beginning. The usual lection is Ti 1: 5–16 and 2: 1. The lection was wrongly denoted as the Epistle to Timothy by the scribe.
47. (Срезн. 54.) . Ti 1: 5–16, 2: 1–10. Friday of the 28th Week after Pentecost The lection was wrongly denoted as Epistle to Timothy.
48. (Срезн. 54.) . Eph 1: 16–23. Saturday of the 28th Week after Pentecost
49. (Срезн. 54.) . Col 1: 12–18. Sunday of the 28th Week after Pentecost
50. (Срезн. 54.) . Heb 3: 15–19. Monday of the 29th Week after Pentecost
51. (Срезн. 54.4) . Heb 4: 1–13. Tuesday of the 29th Week after Pentecost
52. (Срезн. 54.4v and Григ. 15. III, 2r) . Heb 5: 11–14, Heb 5: 14–6: 8. Wednesday of the 29th Week after Pentecost
53. (Григ. 15. III.2r) . Heb 7: 1–6. Thursday of the 29th Week after Pentecost
54. (Григ. 15. III, 2 r/v (?)) . Heb 7: 18–25. Friday of the 29th Week after Pentecost
55. (Григ. 15. III, 2v) . Eph 1: 16–23. Saturday of the 29th Week after Pentecost
56. (Григ. 15. III, 2v) . Col 3: 4–11. Sunday of the 29th Week after Pentecost This lection was wrongly denoted by the scribe as Epistle to the Ephessians.
57. (НБКМ 500.1r, 1–7) . 1 Jn 3: 18–22. Tuesday of the 35th Week after Pentecost The beginning of the lection 1 Jn 3: 9–22 is missing due to manuscript damage. Since the folio was used for binding of another book, most of the text is illegible. The text begins from 1 Jn 3: 18 Incipit: (...) да моꙗ. не любимь
58. (НБКМ 500.1r/1v1) . 1 Jn 3: 21–4: 11. Wednesday of the 35th Week after Pentecost
59. (НБКМ 500.1v) . 1 Jn 4: 20–5: 16. Thursday of the 35th Week after Pentecost The end of the lection 1 Jn 4: 20–5: 16 is missing due to manuscript damage. Explicit: и дастъ емоуже . (...)
60. (НБКМ 500.2r1–19) . Jude 1: 16–25. Thursday of the Week of Tyrophage The beginning of the lection Jude 1: 11–25 is missing. сѧ лицемь оуспѣха дѣлѣ Acts 1: 16
61. (НБКМ 500.2r19–2v1) . Incipits of hymnographic texts, Rom 14: 19–23, 16: 25–27. Saturday of the Week of Tyrophage
62. (НБКМ 500.2v1–17) . Rom 13: 11–14: 4. Sunday of Tyrophage The lection is erroneously named as the Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews.
63. (НБКМ 500.2v) . Incipits of hymnographic texts, Heb 1: 1–6. First Week of Lent The end of the lection Heb 1: 1–12 is missing due to manuscript damage.
64. (НБКМ 499.11r) . Liturgical directions and incipits of hymnographic texts and New testament lections for the immovable feasts in July (26–31) . 26 July 7 July (St. Panteleimon) 28 July (St. Eustasius of Ankyra) 29 July (St. Kallinikos of Gagra) 30 July (St. John the Stratelates) 31 July (St. Julitta, St. Eudokimos the New)

St. John the Stratelates is called воиникъ and not воинъ

65. (НБКМ 499.11r–12v + Сырку 16) . Liturgical directions, incipits of hymnographic texts and Apostolos lections for the immovable feasts in August (1–29) . 1 August (St. Maccabees, St. Eleazar, St. Solomonia (and 7 children in the text) 2 August (Translation (възвращение in the text) of the relics of St. Stephen the First Martyr from Jerusalem to Constantinople in 428) 3 August (St. Dalmatos, St. Faustos, St. Isakios) 4 August (St. Eleutherios) 6 August (Transfiguration) with a lection 7 August (Commemoration of the victorious battle against the Avars and Persians in 626 (emperor Heraclios); the service is metioned to be conducted in Vlacherna) August 8 (St. Aemilianos) 9 August (St. Matthias the Apostle) August 10 (St. Laurence et al.) August 11 (St. Euplos the Deacon; rather диꙗкона is considered to be another saint since евпла. диꙗкона is preceded by мч҃никъ G. Pl.) 12 August (St. Photios and St. Aniketos) 14 August ( St. Malachi Prophet in the source -- obviously a mistake for Micah Prophet, with a lection) 15 August (Dormition of the Theotokos) 16 August (Commemoration of the victorious battle against the Saracenes (Ἐπέλευσης τῶν σαρακηνών) after they beleaguered Constantinople for an year, emperor Leon the Third (717/718), and Commemoration of an eathcake (in the period of Justinian 552/554?) -- with a lection 17 August (St. Paul and his sister Juliania) The cycle August 1–17 is located in НБКМ 499.1r/v (examined de visu) and the cycle for August 18–29 is located in Сырку 16.
65.1. (НБКМ 499 11r/v) . 2 Pt 1: 10–19. Transfiguration of Christ (August 6)
65.2. (НБКМ 499.12r/v) . Rom 11: 3–??. Micah Prophet (August 14) In the source wrongly given as Malachias Prophet.
65.3. (НБКМ 499.12v) . Eph 1: 3–12.
65.4. (Сырку 16.1r/v) . Ti 1: 4–5, 3: 1–2, 12–15. St. Titus (August 25)
65.5. (Сырку 16.1v) . Acts 13: 25–29. Beheading of St. John Baptist (August 29) Only the first part of the usual reading Act 13: 25 is preserved on the extant folio.
History
Origin date: 13th c., second half. Origin place: Probably written in North-Eastern Bulgaria. Provenance: On the history of the fragments, see Шмидт 1984: 340–341, and Куев 1986: 221–223. .
Additional data
Bibliography

Fragment

Fragment НБКМ 499. Country: Bulgaria. Place: Sofia. Repository: SS Cyril and Methodius National Library . Shelfmark: 499. Цонев 1923: 34 Union catalogue: 31. Христова и др. 1982: No. 29 Former shelfmark: 38.

Physical description

Material: Dimensions: 275, 280 x 185, 190 mm (folia); Dimensions: 225 x 145 mm (text)
Foliation: The modern foliation with Arabic numerals in the middle of the upper margins was made in the 20th century with pencil.
Collation:

3 quires. The order of the quires described by Conev is wrong. His first quire is actually the third one. His second and third quires were located in the first part of the manuscirpt, while his first quire, containing a Menologion for the end of July and the beginning of August was located close to the end of then big codex. Therefore, the correct order is as follows: The missing 3rd folio of the first quire (Conev's II quire) is kept as a fragment Сырку 15; therefore, the first preserved quire of the Manuilev Apostolos has the following structure: I: 8 (-1-5-6-8). I: 8 (-1-3-5-6-8) [= B. Conev's II ] + II : 8 (-6) [= B. Conev's III ] + III: 8 (-1-2-3-6-7-8) [= B.Conev's I ]

Condition: Water was poured on the first folio of НБКМ 499 and the right upper corner has been turn off.
Additional data
Copies

A digital copy of the fragment with brief description at the digital library of SS Cyril and Methodius National Library

Bibliography

Fragment

Fragment НБКМ 500. Country: Bulgaria. Place: Sofia. Repository: SS Cyril and Methodius National Library. Shelfmark: 500. Цонев 1923: 35 Union catalogue: 32. Христова и др. 1982: 30 Former shelfmark: 184.

Physical description

Material: Dimensions: 285 x 200 mm (folia); Dimensions: 220 x 145 mm (text)
Foliation: The modern foliation with Arabic numerals in the middle of the upper margins was made in the 20th century with pencil.
Collation:

A bifolio of НБКМ 500 seems to be the outer leaves of a quire of 8 folia if we consider the text, herefore probably I:8 (-2-3-4-5-6-7)

Additions
  • (2v) . Late note: Асъ самъ коренъ попскы родомъ прости Спасивановъ.
Additional data
Copies

A digital copy of the fragment with brief description at the digital library of SS Cyril and Methodius National Library

Bibliography

Fragment

Fragment Сырку 15. Country: Russia. Place: St. Peterbourg. Repository: Library of the Academy of Sciences. Collection: П. А. Сырку Shelfmark: Сырку 15. Ильинский 1908: 351–352 Former shelfmark: 4.5.23. Union catalogue: 421. Шмидт 1984: 340 Former shelfmark: Сырку 10. Срезневский, Покровский I: : 30–31

Physical description

Material: Dimensions: 282 x 200 mm (folia);
Collation:

3The missing 3rd folio of the first quire of НБКМ 499 (Conev's II quire) is the 1st folio in Сырку 15 There are no quire signatures preserved.

Additions
  • (1r, right margin) . P. A. Syrku has left a note in pencil that this fragment had been acquired from the school library in Plovdiv: Из Пловдивск. училищной библиотеки.
Additional data
Copies

Digital copy of the fragment with brief description at the digital library of Russian Academy of Science

Bibliography

Fragment

Fragment Сырку 16. Country: Russia. Place: St. Peterbourg, . Repository: Library of the Academy of Sciences. Collection: П. А. Сырку Former shelfmark: 4.5.24. Shelfmark in collection: Сырку 9. Shelfmark in collection: Сырку 6. Срезневский, Покровский I: 30 Union catalogue: 422. Шмидт 1984: 340

Physical description

Material: Dimensions: 282 x 200 mm (folia);
Additions
  • (1r, bottom margin) . P. A. Syrku wrote in pencil Пловдивъ.
Additional data
Copies

Digital copy of the fragment with brief description at the digital library of Russian Academy of Science

Bibliography

Fragment

Fragment Срезн. 54. Country: Russia. Place: St. Peterbourg. Repository: Library of the Academy of Sciences. Collection: И. И. Срезневский Former shelfmark: 24.4.7. Union catalogue: 423. Шмидт 1984: 340

Physical description

Material: Dimensions: 282 x 200 mm (folia);
Collation:

4 folia are part of quire which previously consisted of 8 folia. The disposition of leaves could be expressed as (-1-2-7-8). The other two leaves are in the collection of Grigorović in the Russian State Library (Григ. 15.III).

Additions
  • (2v) . A note by I. I. Sreznevskij informs that there was a note containing the name of priest Manoil after whom the manuscript was named: Тут было написано слабо ПОПЪ МАНОИЛЪ по нарезу вдоль границы. Я хотел восстановить и смыл.
Additional data
Bibliography

Fragment

Fragment Григ. 15.III. Country: Russia. Place: Moscow. Repository: Russian State Library. Former shelfmark: M.1697.III. Union catalogue: 424 . Шмидт 1984: 341 Collection: В. И. Григорович Shelfmark in collection: 15.III. Викторов 1879: 12;

Physical description

Material: Dimensions: 284, 280 x 197, 201 mm (folia);
Collation: These two leaves are part of the same quire the rest of which is now kept in BAN 24.4.7 (Sreznevskij 54). It has the following quire structure : 8 (-1-8).
Additions
  • (1r) . A note from V. I. Grigorović: С Балкан. Богоев
  • (1r) . A note from A. E. Viktorov: К № 1697 В. Григоровича
Additional data
Copies

Digital copy of the fragment with brief description at the digital library of Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius

Bibliography

How to quote

Margaret Dimitrova, Elissaveta Mussakova, Ralph Cleminson, Andrej Bojadžiev 'Apostle of Manoil (Description)' (2019–2022), in Apostle of Manoil – Electronic edition, URL: https://www.slav.uni-sofia.bg/exist/apps/manap/pages/show.html?document=desc__man_ap.xml