Itineraries of medieval Slavic legal texts: byzantine "farmer’s law" in ms. slav 466 from Hilandar monastery 1

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

14

Itineraries of medieval Slavic legal texts: byzantine “farmer's law” in ms. slav 466 from Hilandar monastery ¹

Аннотация

Маршруты средневековых славянских юридических текстов: византийский земледельческий закон в ms. slav. 466 из Хиландарского монастыря

Марияна Цибранска-Костова

Автор ставит своей целью обобщить, проанализировать и дополнить знания о славянском списке Византийского земледельческого закона в рукописи № 466 из Хиландарского монастыря, вторая четверть XV века. Он давно находится в центре внимания сербской филологии и истории права. Наблюдения относятся к следующим сферам: отношения между текстом и рукописью; аксиологическое значение прецедентных текстов в культуре; важность этого списка для византийско-славянских взаимодействий в правовой системе; непрерывная культурная роль монастырей Святой Горы для восточно-христианской культуры.

Славянский список Земледельческого закона в Хил. 466 уникален по структуре и особенностям. Рукопись свидетельствует о единственно известном сочетании Земледельческого закона и Прохирона в южнославянской традиции. Высказано предположение, что такое сочетание было сознательным выбором составителей сборника под влиянием тенденций в поствизантийской традиции. Это соответствовало сильной антиеретической линии всей рукописи, унаследованной от борьбы с ересями на Афоне в XIV веке.

Рукопись представляет собой типичный монастырский сборник. В языковом характере Земледельческого закона обнаруживается его несомненный южнославянский характер, без русификации, с сильным влиянием греческого протографа. Списки перевода, вероятно, имеют близкую хронологию. Благодаря тому что это прецедентный текст, славянский список с XV в. занимает особое место в попытках реконструкции этапов и процессов рецепции византийского правового наследия у южных славян, установления географическо-пространственного покрытия и культурных маршрутов распространения рассматриваемого текста.

Ключевые слова: славянские переводы Византийского земледельческого закона, славянские юридические рукописи, правовая культура.

Introduction

The notion of itinerary in medieval literary tradition denotes not only the space movement of texts and manuscripts, but the cultural exchange between communities and peoples.

Both translated canon and secular law texts of Slavia Orhodoxa emerge as an independent sphere of Greek-Slavic interaction with a wide geographical and chronological scope.

They were of great importance with regard to the adoption of Byzantine political theory in Orthodox Slavic states, the creation of Christian identity, and the building of new social perceptions.

Among them, the precedential texts and phenomena take a special place. Precedence here is understood primarily as one of the parameters that define the multifaceted term: the axiological significance of a text embodying such recognizable sociocultural concepts for a society, which imposes it as a benchmark, reproduced and renewed long after its creation. Our purposefully synthesized definition is based merely on selected works on the topic [29, pp. 28-30; 26, p. 204].

The Byzantine “Nopog уєюруїкод” (mid - 8^th century), a monument of early Byzantine law, is justly considered a unique source of knowledge on the history of Byzantine rural communities [6, esp. p. 45].

The Byzantine manuscript tradition of this monument has been the topic of multiple past and contemporary studies [33; 5; 38]. This also holds true for its Slavic reception under the general designation “Farmer's Law” (hereafter FL).

The precedential feature of the work is its agricultural theme, which is not similarly developed in any other monument; we notice a particularity in the work's chronology and territorial dissemination - in other words, in the history of the book and the geographical-cultural trajectory of its manuscript copies. The original Byzantine monument consists of 85 cases (articles) regulating agricultural production, the norms of ownership and use of agricultural land in the free rural community, the workforce, livestock and farming equipment, the distribution of harvests, and multiple legal aspects related to all these. In the time of the First Bulgarian Empire, conditions for its translation first appeared in the 10^th century, but no early copies are extant.

It was only in the 15^th century that the two lines of dissemination of FL first appeared; in terms of degree of completeness of translation from the Greek original, we should consider these to be the most significant trails of reception among the Slavs in the manuscript's history. These lines of dissemination correspond to two different translations [27, p. 16]:

1. The Russian translation, included in the so-called “Knigi Zakonnye” («Книги законные», or “Law Books”); it may have had a South Slavic protograph. It was published with commentaries by A.S. Pavlov [25], and later reproduced from this edition in what has been the fullest study, to date, of the Greek and accompanying Russian tradition of the monument [5, pp. 233-256]. In academic literature, the designation “Knigi Zakonnye” refers to the compilation of Byzantine secular legislation in four parts: 1. FL; 2. The 39^th title of the “Prochiron” (see farther) on punishments; 3. The 11^th title of the “Prochiron” on prohibited marriages; 4. The 27^th title of the “Prochiron” on witnesses; 5. The excerpts in the 14^th title of the “Ecloga”. All these where united in an integral whole through a revised and abridged version of the Foreword to the “Ecloga”. The compilation “Knigi Zakonnye” was disseminated in manuscript copies starting from the 15^th century; all the copies derive from a common archetype.

2. The South Slavic (Serbian) translation extant in a single, partially preserved copy, consisting of five leaves, in collection № 466 of the Hilandar Monastery of Mount Athos; the copy dates from the second quarter of the 15^th century (hereafter Hil. 466). Due to loss and damage of leaves, only 71 numbered articles are preserved in the text, standing in various relations to the Greek original.

In the present article, we shall touch upon a specific aspect in the history of this late copy of FL - the relation between the text and the manuscript. As to FL in Hil. 466, its digitalized text is available at [19]. Today this option is taken for freely accessible to scholars, and henceforth we are able to analyze it de visu and to try to surmount obstacles for limits of our observations to what can be gleaned from the information available thus far. This way the precedent copy of the FL can be placed in its historical and literary context, as well as to stimulate the further research of the relationship between the legal and dogmatic part of the Hilandar manuscript.

General historical-archeographic information

FL in Hil. 466 has long been in the focus of Serbian philology and history of law. The greatest credit for introducing the work to the scientific community should go to Dj.Sp. Radojicic: in 1955 he published the text contained in the Hilandar miscellany, dating it to the period 1426-1432 [27]. He made broadranging contributions, especially by clarifying the relation between Hil. 466 and the so-called «Law of Tsar Justinian” ² (created after a Greek model), which contains excerpts from FL; he also discovered a third redaction, different from the two mentioned above, which has a specific history and lexical content. The compilation entitled “Law of Tsar justinian” was disseminated together with the “Zakonik” [Code] of the Serbian tsar Stefan Dusan (1331-1355) ³ and the Serbian abridged versions of Matthew Vlastar's “Syntagma”. As is known, one of the most valuable copies of the full redaction is preserved in Bulgaria - the miscellany “Sudats”, dating from the second half of the 17^th century, manuscript № 293, from the National Library in Sofia [20]. This witness, discovered in Kratovo, is an example of South Slavic compilations of customary law from the time of Late Middle Age. It is noteworthy that, within the sources of this compilation, parts of both FL and the “Law for Judging People”) ⁴ are to be found [20, p. 9]. The text of the monument has an independent history and the excerpts from FL are secondary, i.e., they were most probably reproduced from a specific Byzantine source in which the loan from FL had already been made.

M. Blagojevic published a new edition of the original text together with its translation into Serbian and a comprehensive study on FL in Hil. 466 [4]. The study is entirely devoted to the contents of the text but the author has added a first- of-its-kind lexical register of the Slavic copy of FL. Heal so comments on a number of terms in the irrelation to Serbian customary law, to the study of which M. Blagojevic has notably contributed. Now a number of legal and philological studies have been devoted to Serbian manuscript, of which we cite only a small share here [10; 11]. G. Trifunovic translated the work into modern Serbian [31]. Research on Hil. 466 has a long history. Old descriptions refer to it as a miscellany. Sava Hilendarets supports this designation (dating the manuscript to the 16^th century), and so does archimandrite Leonid [43, p. 55; 21, p. 17]. Its description is more complete in D. Bogdanovic's fundamental inventory of Slavic manuscripts in the Hilandar Monastery, where it is given a more comprehensive description [3, p. 178]. The English-language description given in P. Matejic and H. Thomas has also been unquestionably important for the manuscript's popularization [40, p. 556]. There, it is once again presented as a collection of legal and dogmatic-polemical works, comprising 358 leaves in semi-uncial writing and with a mixed Raska- Resava orthography. On the official site of the Hilandar Research Library in Ohio, we find the most comprehensive to date description of the text units, which thus give a fuller picture of the manuscript ⁵. Scholars are unanimous in dating the Hil. 466 copy to the second quarter of the 15^th century. Some date-defining terms occur in the text. For instance, the monetary term динарь in article 59 in Hil. 466, as opposed to грошь in articles 21 and 59 of “Knigi Zakonnye”, corresponding to the Greek “фбТАц” (“follis”; the bronze coin “follis” is a division of the nomisma) [38, p. 34, 67]. This is one of the indications that date the translation in Hil. 466 «пре пада Срби^ под власт Турака 1459 г.» (“before the fall of Serbia under the power of the Turks”) [2, p. 150] or, very generally, to the second quarter of the 15^th century. There are no data permitting to define localization of this translation. The metadata contained in the manuscript themselves are very meager. All scholars repeat the information that there is an undated note on leaf 356: Си законикь Михаила ієромонаха [27, p. 19; 2, p. 10]. The term is more rarely used for ecclesiastical regulations (for instance, Словеса изьвранна тть законика стыхъ тць [37, p. 125]), because it is associated with foundational monuments of secular law among the Slavs, such as the 1349 “Zakonik” of Stefan Dusan. The Dusan Code was sanctioned at council of the Orthodox Church, in which high- ranking clergy took part; and a clear distinction is made in its provisions between the prerogatives of secular and ecclesiastic courts. Hence, Hil. 466 comprises both secular and canonical norms, with a preponderance of the former. The marginal note is not relevant to the translation, but reveals how the old legal texts were perceived by later users or owners. Another late note in Hil. 466 abounds in geographic designations and ethnonyms, mostly referring to Serbia and the West Balkans. The last note on leaf 358 recalls that St. Theodore Stratelates was tortured in Heracleia Pontica. This is the eastern most location mentioned, and it connects the other references to the Black Sea and Nessebar, where the saint's relics were long kept before being transferred to Venice by the Crusades. The fact that the manuscript is kept in the Hilandar monastery does not categorically indicate its place of origin, but its localization in Mount Athos remains, for now, a possible assumption. The linguistic data cannot resolve this question, but can only mark the indisputable South Slavic origin of FL. It combines an Old South Slavic lexical stratum with a sustained agricultural and domestic vocabulary consisting of colloquial idiomatic terms used in Late Medieval Serbian and Bulgarian. By these features, FL in Hil. 466 differs sharply from the work's Russian copies in the compilation “Knigi Zakonnye”. The most frequent terms used by various authors regarding the translation of FL in Hil. 466 are “Serbian text” («српски текст»), “Slovenian translation” («словенски превод»), “Old Serbian text” («старосрпски превод»), “Serbian-Slovenian translation” («српско-словенски превод»); the translator is considered to be a Serb [27, p. 15; 2, p. 178; 31, pp. 225-226].

II. The combinationof FL and the “Prochiron” in Hil. 466. No other written evidence for a combination of FL and the “Prochiron” in one and the same body has so far been recorded in the Slavic South Law. This fact increases the special value of Hil. 466. As it is established, “Прохєірод vopog” (“Procheiron Nomos” or “Prochiron”) ⁶ was an official legal code of the Byzantine Macedonian dynasty of 870-879 (from the time of the co-rule of Basil I the Macedonian and his sons Constantine, passed away 879 г., and Leo, the future emperor Leo VI the Wise (886-912). The full Slavonic translation of “Prochiron”, in Slavonic translation named as “Zakon Gradskiy” (“City Law”), appeared with a large gap of about three centuries in the South Slavic “Kormcaja” ⁷ with commentaries (“Nomocanon” of Saint Sava), attested in its earliest Ilovitsa copy from 1262 [18]. FL, in its turn, remained the unique South Slavic copy of the Byzantine prototype. A recorded South Slavic filiation lacks in regards to other juridical texts as well, such as the “Law for juggling people”, and the “Ecloga”. The combination of FL and “Prochiron” in one manuscript body was adequately brought to scholarly attention by Dj.Sp. Radojicic (summarized in [2, pp. 10-11]). After thorough work de visu and upon photos, the outstanding Serbian scholar was the first to point out after that after FL in Hil. 466, the first five chapters, the 55^th and the 56^th from the St. Sava's Nomocanon have been taken. Further contemporary descriptions allow to claim the combination of FL and “Prochiron” a result of a conscious choice, as indeed, after FL on first place (1r-5v), the following textual unities were included: the Heading of the St. Sava's Nomocanon; the Exposition about the Seven ecumenical councils; Interpretations of Lord's Prayer; the Symbol of the Faith, and the Prologue, or Preface to the rules of the St. Orthodox Church in 14 titles with commentaries (6r-42r). Immediately afterwards, “Prochiron” occurs in its full volume of 40 titles (42v-147v), while it takes 55^th chapter of Saint Sava's Nomocanon. Following is the tomos of patriarch Sisinnios II on forbidden marriages up to the seventh degree. It was promulgated on February 21, 997 [39, p. 66]. The date is indicated in the table of contents ofthe Slavic text: W везаконный врац^.... въ,Ка. февроуарїа мца. въ зфе (6505-5508, 147r-156v). The next unity is the disposition of the same council concerning the marriage with the daughter of a second cousin (156v-157v). From then on, dogmatic, anti-heretical (especially anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish and anti-Monothelite) texts, parts of older florilegia, sermons and various speeches of the Holy Fathers make part of the manuscript. They stay apart from our direct observations ⁸. Thus, the collection was given a specific organization. The outlined feature in the composition of Hil. 466 was not accidental. It holds that while “Prochiron” in Hil. 466 was directly borrowed from St. Sava's Nomocanon, the origin and the way of penetration of FL in the manuscript was independent and so far not entirely clarified. The supposition of having been copied upon a previously-made protograph seems much plausible. In the Greek-speaking tradition of FL, which counts more than 120 copies now, one can observe the following regularity. While in the 10^th - 11^th cc. earliest manuscripts, FL was combined with the Byzantine “See Law” (“Nopog NauriKog”) and the Byzantine “Military Law” (“Nopog отратштгкбд”), the unifying with “Prochiron” was attested from the 11^th - 12^th cc. on wards, and became more frequent in the 13^th - 14^th cc. [38, pp. 24-25]. Some well-known manuscripts from the 15^th century reflect the Greek legacy in Mount Athos monasteries Vatopedi and Iviron; in addition to FL and “Prochiron”, they consist of the Syntagma of Matthew Blastares, parts of the “Ecloga”, legal glosses, excerpts from the “Hexabiblos” (“Six Books”) of Constantine Harmenopoulos ⁹, which have never been fully translated into Slavic [42, pp. 10-11, 25]. The active combination of legal secular texts in the Greek tradition has given impetus to the compilations of translated juridical works among South Slavs.

1. Dominant for the Byzantine original of FL is the biblical-Christian understanding of the specific production and moral relationship between farmers. The influence of the Old Testament is strongly felt, concentrated mainly in the excerpts from the book of “Exodus” for the legal responsibility of shepherds in the protection of arable land or the use of working cattle [5, p. 157]. After the leading researches of A. Schminck and P. Pieler the most recent studies confirm those conclusions [38, p. 38]. This suggests the relevance of FL in the early stages of the Christianization of Slavia Orthodoxa, whose cultural center in the 9^th - 10^th cc. was the First Bulgarian Kingdom. In the Byzantine tradition, FL, “Nopog Naurixog” and “Nopog атратгютгкод” take part of private legal collections, (“leges speciales”), as considered not amanifestation of the official imperial law ¹⁰. The Maritime and the Military laws, however, have never been translated into Slavonic. "Detached" from Byzantine texts, with which it marked a positional proximity, FL created its own textual history in Slavic ambiance, and as the “Ecloga”, did not become part of the Old Bulgarian Nomocanon in 14 titles without commentaries [24]. This fact predetermined the flexibility of the textual environment in which it occurred. The gathering of FL, parts of “Prochiron” and “Ecloga” in compositions, similar to such as the Russian “Knigi Zakonnye”, illustrated the later attempts of Slavic compilers to summarize the most important criminal law aspects of the three legal texts. Both lines of FL spreading during the 15^th century kept the traces of a much earlier process of reception. They reveal the attempt to combine the fundamental translated texts of Byzantine secular jurisdiction. The content of Hil. 466 stresses this historical particularity of the Slavonic tradition: FL regulates agrarian issues; “Prochiron” - mainly marital and hereditary. Dj. RadoijciC pointed out the purpose aimed at spiritual circles in order to settle issues concerning church or monastic property [27, p. 19].

2. The translation of FL in Hil. 466 may presumably coincide with the epoch of Serbian despot Stefan Lazarevic (1402-1427). Despite the looming threat of the Ottoman invasion of the Balkans, his rule restored the power of the Serbian state, cultural and political flourishing took place, and a number of models of power were established in literature [30, pp. 184, 230232]. However, there is no data for conscious authorities' endorsement, nor does the content of the manuscript support such a hypothesis. Even the lack of ornamentation speaks to a monastic miscellany. In the 15^th century, the creation of miscellanies was one of the elaborated mechanisms in South Slavic literature to preserve the Orthodox religious identity and the cultural memory [32]. They arose primarily in monastic centers. Monks found additional grounds for interest in agricultural issues. By definition, the labor activity in monasteries was a value. Labor, especially the cultivation of the land, was a pleasing act to God, a form of his glorification; its denial was a manifestation of heresy. The strong anti-heretical line in Hil. 466 might be considered a continuation of the dogmatic controversy and the hesychast struggle against the heresies on Mount Athos in the 14^th century, when Massalians and their new branches were indicated as extremely dangerous, because seemingly for constant prayer sake, and in opposition to true hesychia, they renounced manual labor and land cultivation [45, p. 189]. Hence, the anti-heretical line in Hil. 466 goes toghether with socially significant issues of economic nature, problems of family, inheritance and criminal law. It is not coincidental that on Mount Athos hesychastic and ascetic collections were created during the whole 14^th century. Athonite traditions spread to various parts of the Balkans. In the first quarter of the 15^th c., on Athos, the Slavonic translation of the Second book of “Panoplia Dogmatika” a rose [7]. This is the best example of translated medieval heresiology. In the dramatic moment when the Balkans were threatened by the Ottomans, this translation was the spiritual response of the monastic Brotherhood with outlined contextualization to achieve the consolidation of Orthodoxy through fundamental textual legacy. Legal texts took part in this process too. Areas of strong influence from Mount Athos were formed around Kratovo, Kosovo, Morava, the lands north of Skopje, the monasteries of Resava and Ravanitsa, the dioceses of Ohrid Archbishopric, which defended the Slavic-Byzantine interactions and the influence of Byzantine culture [28].

3. Although its singularity, without a stemma in its written dissemination, FL in Hil. 466 was copied from a photograph, chronologically close to the emergence of the overall codex. The common orthographic features of FL and “Prochiron” require a detailed study on whether they come out from one hand. This subject has not been thoroughly clarified.

A few linguistic examples

Thanks to the abundant research, important linguistic features of FL in Hil. 466 have already been introduced into scholarly circulation.

1. Words of ancient vocabulary layer: делатель, ysrnpyo^; искрьнъ, aLqotov; оуромити, еткМю; пастырь, dysLapto^; соугоувага ц^на, SrnLq лоаотрд; съв^д^тель, paprug, as well as in the typical collocation for the earliest juridical texts достов^рьнъ съв^д^тель, d^pdatoxo^; съв^тъ (“contract”), PouLsuot^, съв^товати сл (“make a contract, negotiate”); чр^да (“herd of similar animals”), dysLq; Formula, spread in Old testimonial texts: животьно за животьно, dvxt(the famous principle of talion);

Etymological figures - д^л^тель долати. Part of lexical data consists of basic vocabulary inherited from Proto-Slavic, as relationship between man and earth is constantly significant. This is one of the reasons for the long lasting written tradition of FL among Slavs in the Balkans, and in Russia. J. Koder found out about 58 terms exclusively specific to the Byzantine original of FL, therefore, the lexical originality was embedded in the prototype itself [38, p. 37]. At the same time, a text related to agricultural practice must be updated by new terms appropriate to the area of emergence and spread.

2. In comparison to “Knigi Zakonnye” Hil. 466 testifies to strong composite word formation and keeping of untranslated grecisms: аравона, appaP&v (art. 15) against «задаток» in “Knigi Zakonnye”; харакосати “to fence with stakes when cultivating vines” (only in art. 11 of Hil. 466), харакою [38, р. 89]; .s. траюрдинь (only in art. 17 of Hil. 466), та єкатрабрЗгуа топ Зпроаюи. The cognitive aspect of this mistake - rather of the translator than of the copyist, has already been clarified. It is about the misunderstanding of the Latin term decomposed into s. траюрдинь господско [2, p. 109].

Regarding the grecisms, it is worth noting that P in Hil. 466 bears the traces of redaction. This issue needs an independent study. In the current research scope, there placement of в^но with прикга (“dowry”), against “лроіЈ,”, in the Greek original, may be given example. In the third chapter of “Prochiron” «Ю дар^хь ювроууЕннга», which consists of 7 paragraphs, the word «в^но» has nine-times appearence in Ilovitsa copy. In the same context, Hil. 466 witnesses to seven replacements of «в^но» with «прикга», and only two uses of «в^но», provided the rest of the text segments are absolutely identical or with slight prefix variations:

Ilovitsa copy, f. 269v: .а. Яще моужь прнкмь в^но. вьсхощеть кже по ювыуаю в^но створнтн свокн ювроууеннцн хотещн ^а нь понтн...;

Hil. 466, f. 46r: .а. Яще моужь прнкмь прикїю. вьсхощеть кже по ювыуаю прикїю творнтн свокн ЮБроууеннцн хотещн^а нь понтн. The word «в^но», recorded as early as in the first Slavonic Nomocanon translated by St. Methodius, is a very ancient borrowing from Balkan Latin. «Прикига» in Hil. 466 is of Greek origin and later substitute. Given its distribution in the Balkan Slavic dialects, it interconnects the presence of untranslated Greek words with a vernacular stream of language. This feature supports the hypothesis of deliberately compiling the collection of ready-made translations.

V. Findings and perspectives. The copy of FL in Hil. 466 appears as part of the chain of the spread of the Byzantine legal model among Slavs, which is much older and longer, than it is evidenced by written facts. It is a typical South Slavonic phenomenon. Its exceptional role as a precedent text does not diminish, but even raises the opportunities for studying the continuity in the stages of the legal culture in the Balkans and in Russia. The South Slavonic language nature of FL in Hil. 466 makes it applicable in a wide Balkan area. Linguistic evidence reveals that a lexical choice has been made, the archaic lexical layer has been upgraded by contemporary phenomena apt to the new translation. The Athonite copy has preserved the traces of an older state of the written tradition of the Byzantine original in a Slavic environment. Its indisputable significance for the Byzantine-Slavic interactions in law turns it into the core of various and numerous research strategies; its combination with the copy of the Slavic translation of the “Procheiron” and with Canon law texts in the Hil. 466 is an expression of the main concept of “symphony” between secular and spiritual power. Though the contributions made to date are so large that every future scholar would be strongly hesitant about what new could say, study on “Farmer's Law” in Ms. Slav. Hilandar 466 should continue. slavic byzantine law legal route

Notes

1. The financial support from the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences under Bilateral grant agreement between BAS and the Romanian Academy is gratefully acknowledged. The author express the deepest thanks to the Hilandar monastic brotherhood for the enormous contributions to the preservation of the Slavic written heritage. Sincere gratitude is also extended to Prof. Predrag Matejic and Dr. Mary-Alan Johnson. Scientific Editor Yu.Ya. Vin.

2. “Law of Tsar Justinian” - it means “Zakon tsara (Constantin) Justinian” (“Закон цара (Константина) Юстинана”). This original Slavic title, which meets the compiled part of the Byzantine secular laws, was distributed along with the original Dusan's codification (see: [20]. More about its place in Stephan Dusan's legislative activity see: [44]).

3. The Code of Tsar Stephan Dusan has been legalized at a Council in Skopje in 1349, and supplemented in Serres in 1354. Dusan's legislation deservedly constitutes an independent area of Byzantine- Slavic relations in law. The editions and studies on Dusan's Code are very numerous, for example: [12; 4]. Here the main literature is pointed. Besides them, it should be especially noted on the facsimile editions of Dusan's Code [13-17].

4. “Law for Judging the People” - the first and most archaic Slavic compilation, based on the title 17^th of the Byzantine “Ecloga”, supplemented by canon law norms. It is believed to have emerged in Great Moravia in the 9^th century. See: [22]. As well see: [8].

5. See HM.SMS.466 [36].

6. See: [41, pp. 114-228]. About the “Procheiros nomos” see: [23, esp. pp. 179-182 etc.; 35, pp. 25-29].

7. About “Kormcaja Kniga” (“The Pilot's Book”) see: [1]. Also see: [35, p. 125].

8. It should be, however, noticed, that the heading «Пр^д^лы сь бмъ различии по пр^данїю и в^р^ стыю сьвюрьные», (ff. 158r-177r), is the same as the title of the first article, having given the name of Vladislav the Grammarian's miscellany “Predeli” (“Limits”) of 1456. The manuscript consists of mostly anti-Catholic texts [9, pp. 33-41]. Therefore, it was about translated works, very popular during the whole 15^th century. The last text is («стезанїе бывшее вькратц^ w в^р'Ь хрстиансц^и и о закон» евреискомь») from the Council in Jerusalem in 634, at the times of patriarch Sophronios.

9. “Hexabiblos” (or “Six Books”) of 1345 - a compilation of secular law, composed by Constantine Harmenopoulos, Byzantine jurist of XIV c. [46] “Hexabiblos” is sometimes thought to be a supplementary legal manual to the “Prochiron”. See: [35, p. 112 etc.; 23, p. 233 etc., 508 etc.].

10. The so named “leges speciales” - a common name for private Law collections in the Byzantine Empire [35, pp. 103-132, esp. p. 109 etc.; 34, pp. 53-64].

Bibliography

1. Белякова, Е. В. Кормчая книга: от рукописной традиции к первому печатному изданию / Е. В. Белякова, Л. В. Мошкова, Т. А. Опарина. - М. ; СПб. : ИРИ РАН, РГАДА, ЦГИ, 2017. - 496 с.

2. Благоjевиh, М. Землораднички закон. Средтовековни рукопис. Извoри српског права XIV / М. БлащевиЬ. - Београд : САНУ, 2007 - 349 с.

3. БогдановиЬ, Д. Каталог Ьирилских ру- кописа манастира Хиландара / Д. БогдановиЬ. - Београд : САНУ, Народна библиотека СР Србще, 1978. - 321 с.

4. Бубало, Дж. Время Законника Стефана Душана / Дж. Бубало // Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 4. История. Регионоведение. Международные отношения. -2015. № 3 (33). - С. 58-78. - DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2015.3.7

5. Византийский земледельческий закон / текст, исслед., коммен. подгот. Е. Э. Липщиц, И. П. Медведев, Е. К. Пиотровская ; под ред. И. П. Медведева. - Л. : Наука, 1984. - 280 с.

6. Вин, Ю. Я. Земледельческий закон - источник правового регулирования и коллективного самосознания сельской общины в средневековой Византии / Ю. Я. Вин // Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 4. История. Регионоведение. Международные отношения. -2015. Т. 21, № 5. - С. 43-54. - DOI: https://doi. org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2016.5.4

7. Гагова, Н. Г. Славянските преводи от гръцки език в светлината на контактите между атонските манастири Ватопед, Хилендар и Пантелеймон в XIV - началото на XV в. / Н. Г. Гагова // Swi^ta Gora Athos w kulturze Europy. Europa w kulturze Athosa / ed. M. Kuczynska. - Gniezno : PAN, 2009.- С. 79-87.

8. Ганев, В. Законъ соудный людьмъ. Правно- исторически и правно-аналитични проучвания / В. Ганев. - София : Издание на БАН, 1959. - VII, 620 с.

9. Данчев, Г. С. Владислав Граматик. Кни- жовник и писател / Г. Данчев. - София : Изд-во на БАН, 1969. - 147 с.

10. Драгин, Н. Землораднички закон у хилан- дарском рукопису из XV века / Н. Драгин // Зборник Матице српске за филологщу и лингвистику. - 2011. - Кт. 54, св. 2. - С. 71-90.

11. Драгин, Н. Лексички сло]еви Землорадничког закона (Хил 466) / Н. Драгин // Српскщезик и тегове норме (дщахроно-синхрони аспекти). Тематски зборник / уред. J. ГрковиЬ- Ме]цор, Вл. РужиЬ. - Нови Сад : Университет у Новом Саду. Филозофски факултет, 2015. - С. 52-63.

12. Душанов законик / приред. Ъ. Бубало. - Београд : Завод зауцбенике; Служебни гласник, 2010.- 243 с.

13. Законик цара Стефана Душана. Кн. 1 / уред. М. БеговиЬ. - Београд : САНУ, 1975. - [8], 272 с.

14. Законик цара Стефана Душана. Кн. 2 / уред. М. БеговиЬ. - Београд : САНУ, 1981. - 299 с.

15. Законик цара Стефана Душана. Кн. 3 / уред. М. Пешикан и др. - Београд : САНУ, 1997. - XII, 497 с.

16. Законик цара Стефана Душана. Кн. 4, т. 1 / уред. К. Чавошки, Ъ. Бубало. - Београд : САНУ, 2015. - XVIII, 652 с.

17. Законик цара Стефана Душана. Кн. 4, т. 2 / К. Чавошки, Ъ. Бубало. - Београд : САНУ, 2015. - [8], 622 ил.

18. Законоправило или Номоканон Светога Саве, Иловички препис 1262. година. Фототипща / приред. и прил. М. М. ПетровиЬ. - Горти Милановац : Дечjе Новине, 1991. - 800, XLIX [л. 1-400 об., LI] с.

19. Землораднички закон, српски средтовековни превод. XV в. - Электрон. текстовые дан. - Режим доступа: http://www. monumentaserbica.branatomic.com/rukse/ruknew/ rukmain.php?rukopis=zemlj (дата обращения: 25.02.2022). - Загл. с экрана.

20. Кемалова, А. И. Сборникът Судац (Софийски препис, XVII век) в светлината на лексикално- текстологическите проблеми на южнославянските правни паметници / А. И. Кемалова. - Пловдив : УИ «Паисий Хилендарски», 2010. - 330 с.

21. Леонид (Кавелин, Л. А.), архим. Славяносербские книгохранилища на Св. Афонской горе, в монастырях Хиландаре и Св. Павле / Леонид (Л. А. Кавелин), архим. // Чтения в Имп. обществе истории и древностей российских при Московском университете. - 1875. - Кн. 1. - С. 1-80.

22. Максимович, К. А. Законъ соудныи людьмъ. Источниковедческие и лингвистические аспекты исследования славянского юридического памятника / К. А. Максимович. - М. : Древлехранилище, 2004. - 240 с.

23. Медведев, И. П. Правовая культура Византийской империи. - СПБ. : Алетейя, 2001 - 576 с.

24. Найденова, Д. Т. Земеделският, Морският закон и Прохиронът в състава на Ефремовската кормчая / Д. Т. Найденова // Palaeobulgarica. - 2006. - № 1. - С. 39-46.

25. Павлов, А. С. «Книги Законные», содержащие в себе, в древнерусском переводе, византийские законы земледельческие, уголовные, брачные и судебные / А. С. Павлов. - СПб. : Тип. Имп. АН, 1885. - [4], 92 с.

26. Петрова, Р. С. За прецедентните текстове в лингвокултурологията / Р. С. Петрова, Б. А. Денизов // Научни трудове на Русенския университет. - 2014. - Т. 53, № 5.2. - С. 204-210.

27. Радо]ичиЙ, Ъ. Сп. Српски рукопис Зем-ъорадничког закона / Ъ. Сп. Радо]ичиЙ // Збор- ник радова Византолошког института. - 1955 - Кн>. 3. - С. 15-28.

28. СавиЙ, В. Д. Српска редакцща цркве- нословенског _іезика: од Св. Климента, епископа словенског, до Св. Саве, архиепископа српског / В. Д. СавиЙ // Slovene. Intern. Journal of Slavic Studies. - 2016. - № 2.- С. 231- 239.

29. Слышкин, Г. Г. От текста к символу : Лингвокультурные концепты прецедентных текстов в сознании и дискурсе / Г. Г. Слышкин. - М. : Academia, 2000. - 128 с.

30. Трифуновий, Ъ. Ст. Деспот Стефан Лазаревий / Ъ. Ст. Трифуновий. - Београд : Српска книжевна задруга, 1979. - 244 с.

31. Трифуновий, Ъ. Ст. Хиландарски препис Зем-ъорадничког закона / Ъ. Ст. Трифуновий. - Са Светогорских извора. - Београд : JП Службени лист ; СЦГ, 2004. - С. 225-239.

32. Христова, Б. Вл. Българската книжнина и литература през XV в. / Б. Вл. Христова // Литера- турна мисъл. - 1991. - № 2. - С. 184-194.

33. Ashburner, W. The Farmers Law / W. Ashburner // Journal of Hellenic Studies. - 1910. - Vol. 30, pt. 1. - P. 85-108.

34. Burgmann, L. Die Nomoi Stratiotikos, Georgikos und Nautikos / L. Burgmann. - Зборник радова Византолошког института. - 2009. - Кн. 46. - С. 53-64.

35. Chitwood, Z. R. Byzantine Legal Culture and Roman Legal Tradition, 867-1056 / Z. R. Chitwood. - Cambridge : Cambr. Univ. Pr., 2017. - XII, 236 p.

36. Incipitaria of Hilandar Miscellanies. - Electronic text data. - Mode of access: https://library. osu.edu/hrl/incipitaria (date of access: 21.01.2022). - Title from screen.

37. JagiC, V Opisi i izvodi iznekoliko juzno- slovinskih rukopisa / V. Jagic // Starine. - 1874. - Vol. 6. - P. 60-152.

38. Koder, J. Nomos Georgikos. Das byzantinische Landwirtschaftsgesetz. Uberlegungen zur inhaltlichen und zeitlichen Einordnung. Deutsche Ubersetzung / J. Koder. - Wien : Verl. d. OAW. - 2020. - 94 S.

39. Macrides, R. J. Nomos and Kanon on Paper and in Court / R. J. Macrides // Macrides R. J. Kinship and Justice in Byzantium, 11^th - 15^th Centuries / R. J. Macrides. - Aldershot, Hmps. ; Brookfield, Vt. : Ashgate / Variorum; Routledge, 1999. - P. 61-86.

40. Matejic, P. Catalog. Manuscripts on Microform of the Hilandar Research Library (The Ohio State University). - Vol. 1 / P. Matejic, H. Thomas. - Columbus , Ohio : The Ohio State University. Resource Center for Medieval Slavic Studies ; “Ivan Dujchev” Research Centre for Slavo-Byzantine Studies (Sofia, Bulgaria), 1992. - XXIX, 572 p.

41. Procheiron Nomos // Jus Graecoromanum. In 8 vols. Vol. 2 : Leges imperatorum Isaurorum et Macedonum / cura J. Zepos, P. Zepos. - Ed. altera. - [Repr. A0^va : Гєюрую? Фє^п?, 1931]. - Aalen : Scientia, 1962. - P. 107-228.

42. Repertorium der Handschriften des byzantinischen Rechts / hg. v. L. M. Burgmann et al. In 3. T. T. 1 : Die Handschriften des weltlichen Rechts (Nr. 1-327) / hg. v. L. Burgmann, M. Th. Fogen, A. Schminck, D. Simon - Frankfurt a/M. : Lowen- Gesselschaft, 1995. - XXVIII, 466 S.

43. Sava Chilandarec (Breuer, Sl.). Rukopisy a starotisky Chilandarske / Sava Chilandarec (Sl. Breuer) ; nvod uprav. a ukazt. opatr. Fr. Pastrnek // Vestmk Kralovske ceske spolecnosti nauk. Tnda filosoficko-historicko-jazykozpytna. - 1897. - Roc. 1896. - S. 1-98.

44. Soulis, G. Ch. The Serbs and Byzantium during the Reign of Emperor Stephen Dusan (13311355) and His Successors / G. Ch. Soulis, - Washington, D.C. : Dumbarton Oaks Library and Collection, 1984. - XXVI, 353 p.

45. Wolski, J. M. Kultura monastyczna w poznosredniowiecznej Bulgarii / J. M. Wolski. - Lodz : Wydanictwo Universytetu Lodzkiego, 2018. - 225, [6 ] s.

46. KravoToevuvon AppevononXou Прохєіро? vopo? ^ 'Е^аРфХо? / єп. К. Г. Пітсакп?. - A0^vai : AraSravi, 1971. - рф', 426 с.

References

1. Belyakova E.V, Moshkova L.V., Oparina T.A. Kormchaya kniga, ot rukopisnoy traditsii k pervomu pechatnomu izdaniyu [Kormchaia Book. From the Manuscript Tradition to the First Printed Edition]. Moscow, St. Petersburg, IRI RAN, RGADA, TsGI, 2017.496 p.

2. Blagojevic M. Zemljoradnichki zakon. Srednjovekovni rukopis. Izvori srpskog prava XIV v[The Agricultural Law. The Medieval Manuscript. Sources of Serbian Law in XIV Century]. Beograd, SANU, 2007. 349 p.

3. Bogdanovic D. Katalog cirilskikh rukopisa manastira Khilandara [The Catalog of Cyrillic Manuscripts of Hilandar Monastery]. Beograd, SANU, Narodna biblioteka SR Srbije, 1978. 321 p.

4. Bubalo B. Vremya Zakonnika Stefana Dushana [The Era of Dusan's Code]. Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 4. Istoriya. Regionovedenie. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya [Science Journal of Volgograd State University. History. Area Studies. International Relations], 2015, no. 3 (3), pp. 58-78. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15688/ jvolsu4.2015.3.7

5. Lipshits E.E., Medvedev I.P., Piotrovskaya E.K., eds. Vizantiyskiy zemledelcheskiy zakon [The Byzantine Farmer's Law]. Leningrad, Nauka Publ., 1984. 280 p.

6. Vin Yu.Ya. Zemledel'cheskiy zakon - istochnik pravovogo regulirovaniya i kollektivnogo samosoznaniya sel'skoy obshchiny v srednevekovoy Vizantii [The Farmer's Law (Nomos Georgikos) - Source of Law Regulation and Collective Self Consciousness of Rural Community in Medieval Byzantium]. Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 4. Istoriya. Regionovedenie. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya [Science Journal of Volgograd State University. History. Area Studies. International Relations], 2016, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 43-54. DOI: https://doi. org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2016.5.4

7. Gagova N.G. Slavyanskite prevodi na gratski ezik v svetlinata na kontaktite mezhdu atonskite manastiri Vatoped, Hilendar i Panteleymon v XIV v. - nachalotona XV v. [Slavic Translations from Greek in the Light of Contacts Between Athonite Monasteries Vatopedi, Hilandar and Panteleymon in 14^th - the beginning of 15^th Centuries]. M. Kuczynska, ed. Swigta Gora Athos w kulturze Europy. Europa w kulturze Athosa. Gniezno, PAN, 2009, pp. 79-87.

8. Ganev V Zakon soudnyy lyudem. Pravno-istoricheski i prvno-analitichni prouchvaniya [The Law for Judging the People. The Legal-Historical and Juridical-Analytical Studies]. Sofia, BAN, 1959. VII, 620 p.

9. Danchev G.S. Vladislav Grammatik. Knizhovnik i pisatel [Vladislav the Grammarian. Man of Letters and Writer]. Sofia, BAN, 1969. 147 p.

10. Dragin N. Zemljoradnichki zakon u khilandarskom rukopisu iz XV veka [The Agricultural Law in Hilandar Manuscript of 15^th Century]. Zbornik Matice srpske za filologiju i lingvistiku [Collection of Matica Srpska for Philology and Linguistics], 2011, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 71-90.

11. Dragin N. Leksichki slojevi Zemljoradnichkog zakona (Khil 466) [Lexical Strata of the Agricultural Law (Hil 466)]. Srpski ezik i njegove norme (dijakhrono- sinkhroni aspekti). Tematski zbornik [Serbian Language and its Norms (Diachronic Synchronic Aspects)]. Novi Sad, Universitet u Novom Sadu, Filozofski fakultet, 2015, pp. 52-63.

12. Bubalo P, ed. Dushanov zakonik [The Dusan's Law Code]. Beograd, Zavod za udhbenike, Sluzhbeni glasnik Publ., 2010. 243 p.

13. Begovic M., ed. Zakonnik tsara Stefana Dushana. Kn. 1 [The Code of Tsara Stephan Dusan. Book 1]. Beograd, SANU, 1975. [8], 272 p.

14. Begovic M., ed. Zakonik tsara Stefana Dushana. Kn. 2 [The Code of Tsara Stephan Dusan. Book 2]. Beograd, SANU, 1981. 299 p.

15. Peshikan M. et al., eds. Zakonik tsara Stefana Dushana. Kn. 3 [The Code of Tsar Stefan Dusan. Book 3]. Vol. 3. Beograd, SANU, 1997. XII, 497 p.

16. Cavoski K., Bubalo B., eds. Zakonik tsara Stefana Dushana. Kn. 4, T1 [The Code of Tsar Stefan Dusan. Book 4. Vol. 1]. Beograd, SANU, 2015. XVIII, 652 p.

17. Cavoski K., Bubalo B., eds. Zakonik tsara Stefana Dushana. Kn. 4, T. 2 [The Code of Tsar Stefan Dusan. Book 4, Vol. 2]. Beograd, SANU, 2015. [8],

622 p.

18. Petrovic M., ed. Zakonopravilo ili Nomokanon Svetoga Save, Ilovichkiprepis 1262. godina. Fototipiya. [“Zakonopravilo” or Nomocanon of St. Sava. Ilovichki Copy of 1262. Phototype]. Gornji Milanovats, Dechje Novine Publ., 1991. 800, XLIX [Ll. 1-400 r., LI] p.

19. Zemljoradnichki zakon, srpski srednjovekovni prevod. XV c. [The Agricultural Law, Serbian Mediaeval Translation. 15^th Century]. URL: http:// www.monumentaserbica.branatomic.com/rukse/ ruknew/rukmain.php?rukopis=zemlj (accessed 25 February 2022).

20. Kemalova A.I. Sbornik at Sudats (Sofijski prepis, XVII vek) vsvetlinata na leksikalno-tekstologicheskite problemi najuzhnoslavjanskite pravnipametnitsi [Sudats Miscellany (Sofia Copy, 17^th Century) in the Light of Lexical-Textological Problems of South-Slavic Legal Monuments]. Plovdiv, UI «Paisij Hilendarski», 2010. 330 p.

21. Leonid (Kavelin, L.A.), archim. Slavyano- serbskie knigokhranilishcha na Sv. Afonskoy gore, v monastyryakh Khilandare i Sv. Pavle [Slavic-Serbian Book Depositories on St. Mount Athos, in the Hilandar and St. Paul Monasteries]. ChteniyavImp. Obshchtve istorii i drevnostey rossiyskikh pri Moskovskom universitete [The Proceeding in Society of Russian History and Antiquities at Moscow University], 1875, book 1, pp. 1-80.

22. Maksimovich K.A. Zakon soudnyi lyudem. Istochnikovedcheskie i lingvisticheskie aspekty issledovaniya slavyanskogo yuridicheskogo pamyatnika [The Law for Judging the People. The Sources and Linguistic Aspects of Study of Slavic Legal Monument]. Moscow, Drevlekhranilishche Publ., 2004. 240 p.

23. Medvedev I.P. Pravovaya kultura Vizantiyskoy imperii [The Law Culture of the Byzantine Empire]. St. Petersburg, Aletheia Publ., 2001. 576 p.

24. Naydenova D.T. Zemedelkiyat, Morskiyat zakon i Prohironat v sastava na Efremovskata kormchaya [Farmer's Law, Maritime Law and Prohiron in Efrem's Kormcaja Book]. Palaeobulgarica, 2006, no. 1, pp. 39-46.

25. Pavlov A.S. «Knigi Zakonnye», soderzhashchie v sebe, v drevnerusskom perevode, vizantiyskie zakony zemledelcheskie, ugolovnye, brachnye i sudebnye [“The Law Books”, Which Contain Themselves, in the Old Russian Translation, the Agricultural, Criminal, Conjugal and Judicial Laws of Byzantium]. St. Petersburg, Tip. Imp. AN, 1885. [4], 92 p.

26. Petrova R. S., Denizov B.A. Za pretsedentnite tekstove v lingvokulturologiyata [About the Precedent Texts in Linguoculturology]. Nauchni trudove na Rusenskiya Universitet [The Proceedings of Ruse University], 2014, vol. 53, no. 5.2, pp. 204-210.

27. Radoyichic C. Sp. Srpski rukopis Zemljoradnichkog zakon [Serbian Manuscripts of Agricultural Law]. Zbornik radova Vizantoloshkog instituta [Proceedings of the Byzantological Institute], 1955, vol. 3, pp. 15-28.

28. Savic VD. Srpska redaktsija tsrkvenoslovenskog jezika: od Sv. Klimenta, episkopa slovenskog, do Sv. Save, arhiepiskopa srpskog [The Serbian Redaction of the Church Slavonic Language, from St. Clement, the Bishop of the Slavs, to St. Sava, the Serbian Archbishop]. Slovene. Intern. Journal of Slavic Studies, 2016, no. 2, pp. 231-239.

29. Slyshkin G.G. Ot teksta k simvolu : Lingvokulturnye kontsepty pretsedentnykh tekstov v soznanii i diskurse [From Text to Symbol: Linguocultural Concepts of Precedent Texts in Consciousness and Discourse]. Moscow, Academiya Publ., 2000. 128 p.