ΩΡΟΛΟΓΙΟΝ

This pdf is a digital offprint of your contribution in
B. GROEN, D. GALADZA, N. GLIBETIC & G. RADLE

(eds), Rites and Rituals of the Christian East, Eastern
Christian Studies 22, ISBN 978-90-429-3080-3
The copyright on this publication belongs to Peeters

Publishers.
As author you are licensed to make printed copies of the

pdf or to send the unaltered pdf file to up to 50 relations.
You may not publish this pdf on the World Wide Web –
including websites such as academia.edu and open-access
repositories – until three years after publication. Please
ensure that anyone receiving an offprint from you
observes these rules as well.
If you wish to publish your article immediately on open-

access sites, please contact the publisher with regard to
the payment of the article processing fee.
For queries about offprints, copyright and republication

of your article, please contact the publisher via
peeters@peeters-leuven.be
EASTERN CHRISTIAN STUDIES 22
RITES AND RITUALS OF

THE CHRISTIAN EAST
Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress
of the Society of Oriental Liturgy
Lebanon, 10-15 July 2012
Edited by
Bert Groen, Daniel Galadza,
Nina Glibetic and Gabriel Radle
PEETERS
LEUVEN – PARIS – WALPOLE, MA
2014
CONTENTS
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V
Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX
List of Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XI
Peter GALADZA, New Frontiers in Eastern Christian Liturgy:

StudyingtheWholeofWorship . . . . . . . . . . 1
Robert J. DALY,BeforeEastandWest:EarlyLiturgicalHistory 21
Diliana ATANASSOVA, The Primary Sources of Southern Egyptian

Liturgy:RetrospectandProspect . . . . . . . . . 47
Emmanuel FRITSCH, The Preparation of the Gifts and the Pre-
Anaphora in the Ethiopian Eucharistic Liturgy in around
A.D.1100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
HABTEMICHAEL-KIDANE,ANoteontheAspectsoftheEpiclesisof
theGə’əzAnaphoraofJamesofSərug. . . . . . . . 153
Daniel GALADZA,TheJerusalemLectionaryandtheByzantineRite 181
Stig Simeon R. FRØYSHOV,ErlangenUniversityLibraryA2,A.D.1025:

AStudyoftheOldestDatedGreekHorologion . . . 201
Nino SAKVARELIDZE, Some Aspects of the Byzantinization of

theGeorgianLiturgy:TheExampleoftheMenaion . . . 255
André LOSSKY, Le Typicon de Saint Sabas Sinaiticus Graecus

1096(douzièmesiècle):Présentationd’unprojetd’édition 293
Gabriel Isaac RADLE, The Nuptial Rites in Two Rediscovered

First-MillenniumSinaiEuchologies. . . . . . . . . 303
Steven HAWKES-TEEPLES, The Prothesis of the Byzantine Divine

Liturgy:WhatHasBeenDoneandWhatRemains . . . . 317
VIII CONTENTS
Nina GLIBETIC, The Byzantine Enarxis Psalmody on the Balkans

(Thirteenth-FourteenthCentury). . . . . . . . . . 329
Šimon MARINČÁK, Shaping Elements of Early Slavic Christian

Music . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339
Thomas POTT, ‘Mais qui dites-vous que je suis?’ Sondages dans
lamémoirechristologiqueduFormelgutliturgiquebyzantin 355
Stefanos ALEXOPOULOS,WhenArt,CanonLawandLiturgyMeet:
TheCaseoftheLiturgicalPyxides . . . . . . . . . 377
Bert GROEN,CurativeHolyWaterandtheSmallWaterBlessingin
theOrthodoxChurchofGreece . . . . . . . . . . 387
Brian A. BUTCHER, Figuring Liturgically: A Ricoeurian Analysis

oftheByzantine-Rite‘GreatBlessingofWater’ . . . . . 405
Chrysostom NASSIS,CallingHimbyNamewiththeVoiceofStran-
gers:TheCommemorationofaCivilRulerBeyondHisRealm
asObservedinEasternOrthodoxLiturgicalPractice. . . 423
Jose KOCHUPARAMPIL, Redemptive Economy in the Third East

SyrianAnaphoraattributedtoMarNestorius. . . . . . 445
Edward J. ALAM,‘DestroythisTemple’:SomeBriefandGeneral
ReflectionsonMaroniteChurchArchitecture. . . . . . 463
Abdo BADWI, The Evolution of Maronite Sacred Iconography:

AnExampleofLiturgicalReform . . . . . . . . . 469
ERLANGEN UNIVERSITY LIBRARY A2, A.D. 1025:
A STUDY OF THE OLDEST DATED GREEK HOROLOGION1
Stig Simeon R. FRØYSHOV
Introduction
The study of the Palestino-Byzantine Horologion is still in its early

stage.2 The advance of this field requires both general comprehension of
the total source material and in-depth knowledge of significant manu-
script sources.3 In another essay4 I try to work out a first overview of the
history and typology of the Horologion; here I shall study a single wit-
ness of considerable interest.
1
I extend my great gratitude to Fr. Andrew Wade for his correction and improvement
of the English of this article.
2
Abbreviations:
H = (Day) Hour; 1H = First Hour, etc.
NH = Night Hour
MH = Mid-Hour
> = a sequence (for instance: ‘Trisagion > OF’ = ‘Trisagion – All-holy Trinity – GNE
– OF’; does not concern psalms)
GNE = Glory to the Father …, now and ever … (separated: G = Glory to the Father
…, NE = Now and ever …)
KE = Κύριε, ἐλέησον
OF = Our Father
EisHagios = ‘One is holy’ at the Typika or the Liturgy of Presanctified Gifts
Ainoi = The section Pss 148-150 at Matins
GrDox = The Great Doxology
KyrEk = The Κύριε, ἐκέκραξα, ‘Lord, I have cried’ section of Vespers
MethHêmôn = Μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν ὁ Θεός, ‘God is with us’, element of Compline
PRES = The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts
HagPRES = The Hagiopolite Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts
Additional abbreviations of Horologion witnesses are found in the section ‘Other Hor-
ologia’ below.
3
For publications and studies of single witnesses, see the list of other Horologia below
(for an extensive list of Horologion witnesses with references, see my article referred to
in the following note).
4
Stig Simeon R. Frøyshov, ‘The Palestino-Byzantine Horologion: A first attempt at his-
torical overview and typology’, in the Acta of the two expert meetings of the Catalogue of
Byzantine Manuscripts (= CBM) project, Athens, 2010 and 2013 (forthcoming in CBM Sub-
sidia Series). The reader will profit from reading the present article together with that article.
I refer to the overview article for a presentation of previous research on the Horologion.
202 S.R. FRØYSHOV
A major point of the typology offered in my overview article is the

distinction between two basic Horologion types:
1. ‘Palestinian type’: traditions of grosso modo the second half of the
first millennium; diversity of subtypes and considerable evolution;
three types of initial psalmody (monopsalmic, tripsalmic or polyp-
salmic); cathisma 18 at Vespers; single night offices;5 if MH: monop-
salmic ones of the 24 Hour cursus; most often no final prayers;6
originating from the Resurrection cathedral of Jerusalem; part of a
Palestinian rite or, in peripheries of Palestine, the Byzantine rite.
2. ‘Byzantine type’: a quite homogenous group gathering various
closely related traditions from grosso modo the turn of the second
millennium onwards; tripsalmic initial psalmody; very rarely
cathisma 18 at Vespers; composite night offices; tripsalmic MH of
the Hours7 (rarely the 24 Hour cursus); final prayers; part of the
Byzantine rite.
The manuscript ErlangenUniversityLibraryA2(olim96), dated 1025
(ERL),8 belongs to the fairly small group of witnesses to the Palestinian
Horologion type.9 It is at present the most recent of these known to me
but at the same time the oldest dated Greek Horologion. After three
Greek Horologion witnesses datable to the ninth century, SinaiGreek863
(SAB), Sinai Greek 864 (SIN), and Turin BN Universitaria B.VII.30
(TUR), and none datable to the tenth century, the Erlangen Horologion
is the fourth oldest Greek Horologion, the earliest dated one and one of
some five Greek Horologia datable to the eleventh century.10
The Erlangen Horologion has received a certain amount of scholarly
attention for its rare, so-called ‘katastichon’ hymnody, edited by Maas
5
Night offices here comprise Compline, Midnight (rare in this type), Nocturns, Matins.
6
Exceptions are GEO and GEO-Con.
7
As in the liturgical books themselves, the term ‘Hour’ here denotes 1-3-6-9H. I avoid
the terms ‘Major Hour’ and ‘Minor Hour’ that are inadequate for the Byzantine rite. In this
rite, even though the title Horologion employs ‘ὥρα’, the generic term of the daily offices
is ‘ἀκολουθία’, which we may translate ‘office’. For Vespers and Matins I use the expres-
sion ‘Major Office’. See my article ‘The Palestino-Byzantine Horologion’ (see n. 4) for a
fuller explanation of my choice of terminology.
8
‘ERL’ denotes only the Horologion part of the codex.
9
In my article ‘The Palestino-Byzantine Horologion’ (see n. 4) I count just over ten
codices and fragments of this type. Several of them have not yet been studied or have been
insufficiently studied.
10
In addition there are of course several significant first millennium non-Greek Horo-
logia: two Georgian ones (GEO, GEO-Con) and several Syriac ones (SCHØY; for the
others see my article ‘The Palestino-Byzantine Horologion’ (see n. 4)).
ERLANGEN UNIVERSITY LIBRARY A2, A.D. 1025 203
back in 1909.11 Katastichon hymns are also found in two of the ninth-
century Horologia just mentioned, SIN and TUR.
The main aim of this paper, through a detailed description of the con-
tent of ERL, office by office, and comparison with relevant sources avail-
able at present, is to identify the liturgical tradition or traditions it repre-
sents and situate it in the larger history and evolution of the Horologion.
Short Description of the Codex and the Horologion
The manuscript has been described in detail by H. Thurn in the 1980

catalogue of the Erlangen Library.12 As far as the Horologion is concerned,
Thurn’s description amounts to an edition of that which is not standard text.
The codex is quite small, consisting originally of ten gatherings and some
seventy-eight folios, today of sixty folios. The nine gatherings are mostly
quaternia; the exceptions are gatherings seven (terion) and nine (binion).
At the end come a single folio by the same hand (feast of the Exaltation)
that does not seem to represent the beginning of a new gathering, and also
a folio taken from another manuscript. There are several lacunae: a whole
gathering between the present gatherings two and three (originally the
third), two folios of gathering three, and a certain number (see discussion
below) of folios of gathering five. The latter lacuna concerns us here, since
it embraces the original beginning of the acephalous Horologion.
The codex does not only contain the Horologion (fol. 32r-58r) but also
constitutes a kind of liturgical manual with three major parts: a mini-
Euchology, a mini-Lectionary, and a Horologion. The overall codex
order is the following:
1. (Lectionary) Holy Saturday, Easter Sunday
2. (Euchology) Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (without end)
[Onegatheringislacking(3rd)]
3. (Lectionary) Common readings for apostles, martyrs, hierarchs,
women martyrs, the dead
4. (Euchology) Sacrament of holy unction
11
Paul Maas, ‘Gleichzeilige Hymnen in der byzantinischen Liturgie’, Byzantinische
Zeitschrift 18 (1909), pp. 309-323. For further references to publications on this hymnody,
see Livre d’heures du Sinaï (Sinaiticus graecus 864), eds. Maxime (Leila) Ajjoub and
Joseph Paramelle, SC, 486 (Paris, 2004), pp. 111-119 and bibliography.
12
Hans Thurn, Die griechischen Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Erlangen
(Wiesbaden, 1980), pp. 19-22. Online: http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0004/
bsb00046217/images/
204 S.R. FRØYSHOV
5. (Lectionary) Ascension, Pentecost, Nativity of St. John the Baptist

[Sixfoliosarelacking(4thgathering)]
6. Horologion (acephalous, fol. 32r-58r)
7. Greek translation of the common preface of the Roman mass; colo-
phon (fol. 58v)
8. (Lectionary) Exaltation of the Cross (1 fol.)
9. Fragment (1 fol.) from another manuscript of the Divine Liturgy of
St. John Chrysostom.13
The distribution of these parts seems arbitrary, but does not result from
a disordering of the codex, and thus represents the original make-up of
the codex. The scribe, monk Klêmentos, is the same for the whole codex
(except the last, additional folio). His colophon (fol. 58v) has a strange
design; if it is read in continuous lines, as does Thurn in his catalogue
description, it makes no sense (‘Remember, Lord, the servant monk priest
of the monastery of the holy Gregory Theodosius the Great, Cenobi-
arch’). It can hardly be meaningfully read in another way than the fol-
lowing: ‘Μνήσθητι Κύριε τοῦ δούλου μοναχοῦ Γρηγορίου ἱερέως
τῆς μονῆς τοῦ ἁγίου Θεοδοσίου τοῦ μεγάλου κηνωβιάρχου’
(‘Remember, Lord, the servant, monk Gregory, priest of the monastery
of St. Theodosius the Great, Cenobiarch’).14 The colophon tells us that
the scribe, working in Southern Italy, has some connection with the Pal-
estinian cenobion of St. Theodosios.15 This personal connection goes
with the liturgical connection that we shall suggest in this essay.
I find no reason to doubt Elena Velkovska’s conclusion that the prov-
enance of the codex is Southern Italy, probably the northern part of its
Greek-inhabited area: ‘All these particularities of a liturgical nature, rein-
forced by a number of notes and interlinear Latin glosses, permit us to
locate the origins of the manuscript in Campania’.16 We therefore assume
that the Horologion of Erlangen A2 belongs to a liturgical tradition of the
Byzantine rite in Southern Italy.
13
Edited and studied in Elena Velkovska, ‘A Liturgical Fragment in Majuscule in
Codex A2 in Erlangen’, Byzantinoslavica56 (1995), pp. 483-492,
14
Velkovska gives her rendition of the colophon (p. 484). She erroneously reads ὁσίου
instead of ἁγίου; further, she reads an abbreviation of καὶ in connection with the abbrevia-
tion of μοναχοῦ and gets a slightly different word order: δούλου Γρηγορίου μοναχοῦ καὶ
ἱερέως. Ι think there is no καὶ here, but the meaning is the same in both cases. The point
is that there is a priest-monk Gregory attached to the monastery of St. Theodosius.
15
There are no grounds for claiming that ERL was written for the monastery itself, as
do Maas, ‘Gleichzeilige Hymnen’ (see n. 12), p. 310, n. 1, and Alphonse Raes, ‘Les Com-
plies dans les Rites orientaux’, OCP 17 (1951), p. 135.
16
Velkovska, ‘A Liturgical Fragment’ (see n. 13), p. 485.
The daily cursus and prominent features of ERL are the following:
1. Lacuna [Probable original beginning: Matins]
2. 1H (lacks beginning), monopsalmic
3. 3H, monopsalmic
4. 6H, monopsalmic
5. Typika (after 9H in Lent)
6. 9H, monopsalmic, in Great Lent only
7. Vespers, with cathisma 18
8. Compline, in Great Lent only, with katastichon hymnody
Notable elements absent from ERL: Midnight Office, MH, final prayers.
Other Horologia Consulted
The following other Horologia, all of the Palestinian type except when
indicated, have been consulted for comparative and contextual purposes
(in alphabetical order):17
ARM = The Armenian Horologion (Žamagirk’).18
BYZ = the Horologion of the present Byzantine rite. Byzantine type.19
17
I refer to my article ‘The Palestino-Byzantine Horologion’ (see n. 4) for more infor-
mation about these Horologia, their character and the traditions they represent.
18
A Latin translation of the present Armenian Horologion is Breviarium armenium
(Venice, 1908). F. C. Conybeare, Ritualearmenorum (Oxford, 1905), pp. 443-488, gives an
English translation of one of the oldest witnesses with detailed information about five other
codices. The relationship of the Armenian daily office to that of Jerusalem remains to be
thoroughly studied. A major problem for such a study is that the history of the Žamagirk’
itself has been insufficiently studied, with its concrete and partly differing manuscripts. This
is to a considerable degree compensated by the excellent study of the eighth-c. commentary
on the daily office by Michael Daniel Findikyan, TheCommentaryontheArmenianDaily
OfficebyBishopStep’anosSiwnec’i(d.735):CriticalEditionandTranslationwithTextual
and Liturgical Analysis, OCA, 270 (Rome, 2004). The similarity between Armenian and
Palestinian offices makes it likely that the Armenian daily office originated through the
adoption of the daily office of the Resurrection cathedral, perhaps in the early-fifth c. like
the Lectionary. This origin of the Armenian Horologion is supported by the Armenian Psal-
ter, which, as I show in a forthcoming article (‘The Jerusalem Psalter and its Diffusion:
Investigations of Early Liturgical Psalter Divisions of the Syro-Palestinian Sphere’), most
probably represents an early stage of the Hagiopolite Psalter. However, prudence is needed,
since there are also non-Hagiopolite elements in the Armenian daily office. See discussion
in Findikyan, TheCommentaryontheArmenianDailyOffice, pp. 511-515.
19
BYZ is mostly a fixed entity, but a certain variation is still seen among (printed)
Horologia today (see for instance below, n. 68). I am using here Ὡρολόγιον τὸ μέγα
(Athens: Ἀποστολικὴ διακονία, 121995).
206 S.R. FRØYSHOV
GEO = Sinai Georgian O.34 (copied mid-tenth century, content

before ca. 700).20 Originally the second Horologion of the
now acephalous codex. Original cursus: 1>24H. Present cur-
sus: Vespers, PRES, Compline, Midnight, 3>5NH, Noc-
turns, 6>11NH, Matins.21
GEO-Rev = the second, revised layer of GEO, reflecting tenth-century
practice, presumably of the Georgian Sabaite community.
GEO-Con = SinaiGeorgianN.23 (A.D. 985, Constantinople). Acepha-
lous. Original cursus: 1>24H. Present cursus: 1>3NH,
Compline, Midnight, Matins, 7>11 NH.22
GROTT.V= Grottaferrata Γ.α. V. (twelfth or thirteenth c., Southern
Italy). Cursus: Matins, 1-3-6H with MH, Typika, 9H with
MH, Vespers, Compline. Composite Compline (incl. Pan-
nychis). Byzantine type.23
SAB = Sinai Greek 863 (ninth c.). Lacunary at the end. Cursus:
1-3-6-9H, Typika, Vespers, Compline, [Nocturns+Matins].
Polypsalmic. Cathisma 18 at Vespers.24
20
I have not yet opted for a definitive dating. In my doctoral thesis I dated GEO to
before ca. 700; in Stig Simeon R. Frøyshov, ‘The Georgian witness to the Jerusalem lit-
urgy: new sources and studies’, in InquiriesintoEasternChristianWorship:Actsofthe
SecondInternationalCongressoftheSocietyofOrientalLiturgy,Rome,17–21Septem-
ber 2008, eds. Bert Groen, Steven Hawkes-Teeples, and Stefanos Alexopoulos, Eastern
Christian Studies, 12 (Leuven, 2012), pp. 227-267, I joined the general dating to the sixth
c. of the corpus of Georgian Hagiopolite books. GEO is the outcome of a quite significant
and expansive reform of the Hagiopolite Horologion, and I do not think such a reform
would have taken place after the Persian and Arabic invasion of the seventh century. In
that case GEO could reflect the daily office of the Resurrection cathedral at the period
from late-sixth to early-seventh century. The question will be further examined.
21
Stig R. Frøyshov, L’Horologe«géorgien»duSinaiticus ibericus34:Edition,traduc-
tion et commentaire, University of Paris-Sorbonne (Paris IV, 2003; corrected redaction,
2004). The publication of the Horologion is in preparation for the CSCO. See a short pres-
entation of GEO (incl. cursus) in my article ‘The Georgian Witness’ (see n. 20), pp. 249-253.
22
Zaza Aleksidze et al., CatalogueofGeorgianmanuscriptsdiscoveredin1975atSt.
Catherine’sMonasteryonMountSinai, English trans. Mzekala Shanidze (Athens, 2005),
pp. 396-397. GEO-Con constitutes a more recent redaction of GEO, preserving its basic
features, and will be significant for the publication of GEO. I plan a separate presentation
of GEO-Con, made possible thanks to Daniel Galadza’s having extremely generously
shared a digital copy with me, for which I thank him wholeheartedly.
23
Similar, contemporary South Italian Horologia are those of STUD.GROUPc.
24
Ed. Juan Mateos, ‘Un Horologion inédit de Saint-Sabas. Le Codex sinaïtique grec
863 (IXe siècle)’, in Mélanges E. Tisserant, vol. III, 1 (Vatican City, 1964), pp. 47-76.
The ms, mutilated at the end, is now to be supplemented by the fragment Sinai, Chest 1,
no. 58, discovered and described by Georgi Parpulov — in his unpublished thesis, Towards
aHistoryofByzantinePsalters (University of Chicago, 2004), pp. 61-62, n. 36 —, then
edited and commented by Stefano Parenti, ‘Un fascicolo ritrovato dell’horologion Sinai
gr. 863 (IX secolo)’, OCP 75 (2009), pp. 343-358.
SAB-Geo = St. Petersburg RNL N.S. 16/1, f. 21v (orginally the first
Horologion in codex Sinai Georgian O.34. Original cur-
sus: 1>24H. Present cursus: 1>5H (i.e., 1-3H with MH).
Polypsalmic with monopsalmic MH.25
SCHØY = SchøyenMS575 (Syriac, tenth c.). Cursus: Vespers, Com-
pline, Canon (Nocturns+Matins), 1-3-6-9H. Probably
polypsalmic.26 Cathisma 18 at Vespers.27
SIN = SinaiGreek864 (ninth c.). Acephalous (begins with two of
the twelve day psalms, before 9H). Original cursus: 1-3-6-
9H with twelve day psalms, twelve night psalms, Midnight
with Katastichon hymns. Polypsalmic.28
SYRO-P = BerlinStaatsbibliothekOr.oct.1019 (Syro-Palestinian, A.D.
1187, Jerusalem). Cursus: Matins, 1-3-6H with MH, Typika,
9H with MH, Vespers, Compline, Midnight. Byzantine type.29
TUR = TurinUniversityLibraryB.VII.30 (ninth c., Southern Italy).
Cursus: 1-3-6-9H, Typika, Compline with katastichon hym-
nody. Monopsalmic.30 The comparison of ERL and TUR, two
close Southern Italian Horologia separated by some 150
years, will be important in this study.31
STUD.GROUP. I also make some use of witnesses belonging to a

broad Studite group within the Byzantine Horologion
25
Edited in Frøyshov, L’Horologe ‘géorgien’ (see n. 21); publication intended, in
separate monograph on the Palaeo-Sabaite daily office. See short presentation in Frøyshov,
‘The Georgian witness’ (see n. 20), p. 256.
26
This will be clarified in the publication.
27
Close to SAB. For a short description of SchøyenMS575, see http://www.schoy-
encollection.com/patristic.html#575, with a photograph of fol. 6v containing the end of
1H and the beginning of 3H. The publication of SCHØY is in preparation by Paul Géhin
and the present author.
28
Ajjoub and Paramelle, Livred’heuresduSinaï(Sinaiticusgraecus864) (see n. 11). See
study of this Horologion in Stig Simeon R. Frøyshov, ‘Livre de prière quotidienne sans offices
majeures: étude sur l’Horologe du Sinaï grec 864 (9e siècle), récemment édité’ (forthcoming
in Moscow). A Russian translation of this article has appeared in two parts in Bogoslovskie
trudy; the first half is ‘Часослов без последований Больших Часов (вечерни и
утрени): Исследование недавно изданного Часослова Sin. gr. 864 (IX в.)’, Bogoslovs-
kieTrudy 43-44 (2012), pp. 381-400. The second half is 45 (2013), pp. 272-307.
29
Edition and English translation in Matthew Black, A Christian Palestinian Syriac
Horologion (Cambridge, 1954).
30
Edition announced in Stefano Parenti, ‘Nota sul salterio-horologion del IX secolo,
Torino, Biblioteca Universitaria B.VI1. 30’, BBGG, III s., 4 (2007), pp. 275-287. In ‘Un
fascicolo’ (see n. 24), p. 352, Parenti dates TUR to the end of the ninth century. I obtained
a photocopy of this Horologion in 2001 and a microfilm a couple of years later. TUR was
to some degree examined in my article ‘Livre de prière quotidienne sans offices majeures’
(see n. 28).
208 S.R. FRØYSHOV
type, including both ‘pure’ Studite and ‘Studite-

derived’ traditions:
STUD.GROUPa = ‘Pure’ Studite Horologia: Group of fourteenth-cen-
tury Russian Horologia.32 Cursus: Matins, 1-3-6-9H,
Typika, Vespers, Compline. Without MH.
STUD.GROUPb = Athonite-Studite: JerusalemGeorgian127 (twelfth-
thirteenth c.).33 Cursus: Matins, 1-3-6-9H, Typika,
Vespers, Compline, Night Hours, Midnight, MH.
STUD.GROUPc = Southern Italian Studite: GROTT.V, Grottaferrata
Γ.α.VIII (twelfth c.), and MunichBayerischeStaats-
bibl.Greek320 (thirteenth c.). Cursus: Matins, 1-3-
6H with MH, Typika, 9H with MH, Vespers, Com-
pline (incl. Pannychis).
In addition to the Horologia I shall make use of the so-called ‘Anasta-
sis Typikon’ since it provides some information about the daily office at
the Resurrection cathedral:
AnTyp = JerusalemHolySepulchre43 (A.D. 1122),34 anthology for the
two weeks from Palm Sunday until the end of Bright Week.
Fixed Prayers at the Beginning and at the End
Before studying each office in turn, we shall start with a comparative

examination of two places of fixed prayers: the office beginning and, at or
towards the end, the Trisagion, often followed by other prayers, including
OF. Before starting we must address a problem of rubric conventions that
31
It must be emphasised that TUR, because of its poor condition caused by a fire in
1904, is difficult — sometimes impossible — to read. Any study of TUR is preliminary
before its edition by Parenti, which will no doubt reveal textual elements illegible on the
microfilm and induce new interpretations. However, much of the reading of it from micro-
film and indeed the overall content are sure, and I consider it legitimate to make use of
my copy and my research of this manuscript, begun in 2001.
32
Altogether thirteen witnesses are presented in Evgenij Ê. Sliva, ‘Часословы
студийской традиции в славянских списках XIII–XV веков (классификация по
особенностям состава)’, Trudy otdeladrevnerusskojliteratury 51 (1999), pp. 91-106.
Of these it seems that the following Horologia are the most ancient and ‘pure’ Studite
(I shall here only refer to Sliva’s list of codices): nos. 3-6 (p. 92), nos. 4-5 (p. 93).
33
See Shota Gugushvili, ‘Богослужение Грузинской Православной Церкви. XI-
XVI вв’, Православная энциклопедия, vol. 13 (2006), pp. 243-248, on p. 245. There
are several other Georgian witnesses of the Athonite-Studite Horologion.
34
Edited in Ἀνάλεκτα ἱεροσολυμιτικῆς σταχυολογίας, vol. 2, ed. A. Papadopoulos-
Kerameus (Saint Petersburg, 1894), pp. 1-254.
we encounter in both SAB and TUR. In both these sources, 1H has more
extensive office endings than 3-6-9H; in SAB this is the case also with the
office beginning. The question is whether 1H functions as pattern for the
other Hours, which then would have the same, more extensive fixed prayers,
or whether 1H is particular. The answer to this question is no doubt to be
found in the fixed prayers at the end: given that OF must be the oldest office
ending it is unlikely that the rubric ‘Trisagion’ in these cases would not
signify also the rest as prescribed in 1H. We can therefore assume that the
office beginnings and endings of 1H in SAB and TUR, the first of the series
of Hours, are the regular ones, not particularly expanded ones.
Table 1: Comparative table of office beginnings
GEO, TUR (all ERL, 3H, ERL, 6H ERL, ERL, GEO-Rev SAB
2NH35 Hours) 9H Vespers Compline 7NH SAB-Geo,
1H
[3-6-9H]
Blessed is Blessed is Blessed is Glory Glory
our God our God our God
Trisagion
GNE
All-holy
Trinity
KE 2
GNE
Come let OF OF OF OF OF
us worship
Come let Come let OF Come let Come let Come let Come let Come let
us worship us worship us worship us worship us worship us worship us worship
The comparative table allows us to make some deductions concerning

office beginnings. One suspects at the outset that ‘Come, let us worship’,
the simplest of these office beginnings, is the oldest and this is con-
firmed by its figuring in some earlier sources (GEO, TUR; also SAB
Compline). ERL does not have this simple office beginning but a variety
of others. OF has generally been added before ‘Come, let us worship’,
as in tenth-century Georgian Sabaite Horologia (GEO-Rev, SAB,36
35
This is one of the few original office beginnings that were left untouched by a later
revision.
36
Among the day offices, only 1H has any explicit beginning before the initial psalm-
ody. Probably one should presuppose the same beginning when nothing is said; such a
rubric convention will be taken to be probable below for the office ending of the same
manuscript. The same difference of office beginnings is observed in SAB-Geo.
210 S.R. FRØYSHOV
SAB-Geo).37 At the very beginning of all offices except 6H, ERL has
‘Blessed is our God’; this pattern is identical to what is found in BYZ.
The more extended beginning of Vespers corresponds to BYZ, but with
the beginning of Vespers and not 9H,38 except that BYZ has in addition
‘Glory to you, O God’ and ‘Heavenly King’ before the Trisagion, three
(not two) KE and a single KE before ‘Come, let us worship’.
The second place of fixed prayers to be examined here is at the end of the
offices. In ERL the sequence Trisagion > OF, followed by forty KE, is found
in all offices except Typika and Compline. The office ending is a liturgical ‘soft
spot’ which tends to grow with time, as is clearly seen in the following table.
Table 2: Comparative table of the ‘Trisagion > OF’ prayers TUR, 1H (fol. 140 Ar, 141 Bv)
GEO-Con, Compline (fol. 20r)
Armenian Hours39 and GEO,
GEO, Compline (1st part)
ERL, 9H (fol. 38rv)

ERL, 1H (fol. 32v)
ERL, 3H (fol. 33v)
ERL, 6H (fol. 34v)

SAB, 1H [3-6-9H]
[3-6-9H]40 = BYZ
GEO, Compline
ERL, Vespers
Nocturns
Trisagion + + + + + + +
GNE Creed + + +41 + +
All-holy + + + + + +
Trinity
KE 3 + KE 242 Trisa- Trisa- +
gion[!] gion[!]
GNE + +
OF + + + + + + + + +
KE 40 + + + + +
37
In ERL, 3H and 9H, there is the opposite order: ‘Come, let us worship – OF’. This
looks like an aberration from ERL’s own order, but since there is another commonality
between the office beginnings of 3H and 9H (blessing), it might be intended.
38
The reason for this is no doubt that ERL prescribes 9H only for Lent while, in the
practice of BYZ, Vespers is immediately preceded by 9H, which is therefore given the
extended opening.
39
Breviariumarmenium (see n. 18), pp. 182 (3H), 192 (6H) and 203 (9H).
40
At 3-6-9H only the Trisagion is noted (respectively on fol. 142 Bv, XIV Av and XIII Ar).
41
The term δοξάζειν in ERL signifies the full GNE.
42
Manuscript: Κύριε, ἐλέησον· Κύριε, ἐλ. This is probably not an abbreviation of
the triple KE, since ERL has a double KE for exactly the same element at the beginning
of Vespers.
On the basis of these data one may propose the following interpreta-
tion of the historical evolution: initially, the Palestinian office ended with
simply Our Father,43 as is the case with the Armenian Hours as well as
GEO’s Nocturns (6NH) and the first part of its Compline (1NH; see
below, section on Compline). At a next stage OF was preceded by the
Trisagion and a varying number of elements in between. A variant series
found in certain offices of both GEO and SAB is ‘Trisagion – Creed –
OF’.
Once again it is striking to see that TUR is the same as BYZ, with the
little exception of KE 2 (!) instead of 3, providing another indication of
the existence of a continuous line present in some tradition. And, once
again, we should consider variations between ERL offices as local aber-
rations or scribal inaccuracy. ERL basically follows the same regular
pattern, but has both systematic and non-systematic variations. A system-
atic variation, aberrational I think, is the absence of ‘KE 3 – GNE’ before
OF (except KE 3 at Vespers). One could have interpreted it as just
incomplete rubrics but the replacement of ‘KE 3 – GNE’ by the unheard-
of repetition of the Trisagion at 1H and 6H suggests that it is intended.
Other non-systematic variations are the absence of the first GNE at 1H
and of KE 40 at Vespers, as well as slight alterations of the ‘All-holy
Trinity’ prayer:
TUR (1H, fol. 141r) = BYZ ERL (1H, fol. 32v)

Παναγία Τριάς, ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς. Παναγία Τριάς, ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς.44
Κύριε, ἱλάσθητι ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις Κύριε, ἱλάσθητι ταῖς ἀνομίαις ἡμῶν.
ἡμῶν. Δέσποτα, συγχώρησον τὰς Δέσποτα, συγχώρησον ταῖςἁμαρτίαις
ἀνομίας ἡμῖν. Ἅγιε, ἐπίσκεψαι καὶ ἡμῖν.45 Ἅγιε Κύριε, ἐπίσκεψαι καὶ
ἴασαι τὰς ἀσθενείας ἡμῶν, ἕνεκεν ἴασαι τὰς ἀσθενείας ἡμῶν, ἕνεκεν
τοῦ ὀνόματός σου. τοῦ ὀνόματός σου.
The particularities of the redaction in ERL (in italics above) are the
exchange of the expressions ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις and τὰς ἀνομίας and the
addition of Κύριε. Again, since TUR’s redaction of ‘All-holy Trinity’ is
identical to that of BYZ, and TUR is older than ERL, it is logical to infer
that the redaction of ERL is a local variant. This is confirmed by the error
43
This is indeed, according to Didache, the only content of prayer at 3-6-9H.
44
Ninth Hour has another (fol. 38r): Παναγία Τριάς, ὁΘεόςἡμῶν. Κύριε, …
45
This phrase is lacking in 6H.
212 S.R. FRØYSHOV
of Greek grammar created when the dative of ταῖςἁμαρτίαις is kept in

the new position, instead of being changed to the accusative. This error
also suggests that knowledge of Greek may have been defective among
the users of ERL.
The Hours
The four Hours, 1-3-6-9H, are important for determining the character
and tradition of the Erlangen Horologion. As a case study for in-depth
comparison we shall choose the Ninth Hour, which offers the advantage
of being able to use the edited office of TUR. We shall first compare the
four Hours of ERL, then 9H specifically.
Table 3: Structure of the Hours of ERL
1H (fol. 32rv) 3H (fol. 32v-33v) 6H (fol. 33v-34v) 9H (see separate study

below)
(Lacuna) Blessed is our God Blessed is our God
Come, let us worship OF Come, let us worship
OF Come, let us worship OF
Ps 5 Ps 50 Ps 90 Ps 85
Ps verse repeated Ps verse repeated
(5:3) (50:3)
GNE
Troparion of the Hour
with psalm verses
GNE (δοξάζει) GNE (δοξάζει) GNE (δοξάζει) GNE (δοξάζει)
[Theotokion:] Τί σε [Theotokion:] [Theotokion:] Ὅτι [Theotokion:] Ὁ δι᾽
καλέσωμεν Θεοτόκε, σὺ εἶ ἡ οὐκ ἔχομεν ἡμᾶς γεννηθεὶς
ἄμπελος ἡ ἀληθινὴ παρρησίαν
If fast day (ἡμέρα Selected psalm
νηστείας): Selected verses: Dan. 3:34-35
psalm verses:
118:133-135, 70:8
Trisagion Trisagion Trisagion Trisagion
All-holy Trinity GNE GNE (δοξάζει) GNE
Trisagion All-holy Trinity All-holy Trinity All-holy Trinity
Trisagion
OF OF OF OF
KE 40 KE 40 KE 40 KE 40
The monopsalm of the Hours constitutes a particular type of initial

psalmody.46 While unknown in BYZ, the μονόψαλμος is known from
several Palestinian and Southern Italian liturgical sources until at least
the thirteenth century.47 The monopsalm tradition is stable: Ps 5 (1H),
Ps 50 (3H), Ps 90 (6H), and Ps 85 (9H),48 as found in ERL, TUR,
AnTyp,49 Typika of Palestine and Southern Italy,50 and St. Theodore Stu-
dite (see below). The repetition in ERL of a verse at the end of the
monopsalm is not consistent: it is present in 1H and 3H and absent in 6H
and 9H.51
There are several structural differences between the four Hours that
are worth noting. The differences in the fixed prayers at the beginning
and end were discussed above. The responsorium, with the troparion of
the Hour and psalm verses, is present only in 9H. 1H has selected psalm
verses on Lenten days. In fact, as we shall see below,52 9H is celebrated
only on ‘days of fast’ according to a rubric. BYZ, too, has selected psalm
verses in the Lenten variant only. There is close proximity between 9H
in ERL, celebrated in Lent, and the Lenten variant of 9H in BYZ53 on
the one hand, and between 1-3-6H in ERL and the ordinary54 variant of
these Hours in BYZ on the other.
46
In ‘The Palestino-Byzantine Horologion’ (see n. 4) I discuss the relationship between
the three types of initial psalmody, monopsalm, tripsalm, and polypsalm, and the likeli-
hood of a gradual evolution towards an augmented number of psalms.
47
The Evergetis Synaxarion-Typikon does not prescribe the monopsalm but its speci-
fication of the tripsalm at 1-3-6-9H at the beginning of Great Lent reveals that the monop-
salm was perceived as an alternative. See TheSynaxarionoftheMonasteryoftheTheo-
tokosEvergetis.March-August.TheMovableCycle, ed. Robert H. Jordan (Belfast, 2005),
pp. 358-363.
48
A monopsalmic Compline office also existed. See Parenti, ‘Un fascicolo ritrovato’
(see n. 24), p. 353, n. 36 for reference to three twelfth-century Italo-Greek Typika which
have it.
49
The rubrics are conveniently cited in Parenti, ‘Nota sul Salterio-Horologion’ (see
n. 30), p. 282, n. 36.
50
See SinaiGreek1094 (twelfth-thirteenth c.) in Описаніе, III, p. 10 ff.; SinaiGreek
1096 (thirteenth c.) in Описаніе, III, p. 57 ff.; and the Synaxarion-Typikon of Messina in
Le Typicon du monastère du Saint-Sauveur à Messine: Codex Messinensis gr 115,
A.D.1131, ed. Miguel Arranz, OCA 185 (Rome, 1969), Index, ‘μονόψαλμος’, p. 421.
51
This practice is quite widespread; cf. Ps 103 of BYZ Vespers. It is found already in
GEO: Nocturns (6NH, the three last psalms of the Hexapsalm).
52
In the section ‘Distinction between ordinary and Lenten variants’.
53
Differences: monopsalm vs. tripsalm; BYZ 9H has a much more developed end
from OF onwards; no alleluia at the responsorium.
54
In this article the term ‘ordinary’ is generally used in the sense of ‘non-Lenten’.
Concerning the ambiguous character of the term ‘ordinary’ in this context (what was once
ordinary became Lenten and what was festal became ordinary), cf. the section below,
‘Distinction between ordinary and Lenten variants’.
214 S.R. FRØYSHOV
The absence of the responsorium in 1-3-6H requires a particular com-

mentary. There are two issues here: first, the absence of the responsorium
from the daily (and only) variant of these Hours; second, the absence of an
alternation in which the responsorium figures in the Lenten variant. A survey
of some other sources will shed light on this feature. To the first issue: unlike
ERL, Horologion witnesses of STUD.GROUP have the troparion of the
Hour, with psalm verses, as the only variant; in other words, they do not
even provide for a festal variant without it. To the second issue: some early
Byzantine type Horologia, notably the dated witnesses Athos Vatopediou
1248 (A.D. 1075, implicit date) and HarvardUniversity,HoughtonLibrary,
Greek3 (A.D. 1105), do provide for a festal variant without the responso-
rium (identical, then, to the option in ERL);55 the other, ordinary variant has
it.56 What is quite unusual in ERL is that the only prescribed variant is the
festal one; it is at odds with both the older tradition which only has the ‘full’
responsorium, later to become the Lenten variant, and the newer tradition,
appearing in Horologia from the eleventh century onwards, which installs an
alternation between festal and Lenten variants of the Hours.
Table 4: Comparative table of the Ninth Hour
ERL TUR57 GROTT.V AnTyp SAB SYRO-P

(fol. 37r-39v) (≈Lenten (ed., p. 43) (≈
BYZ) SCHØY)58
Blessed is our Trisagion Bless, Master [GNE?] Trisagion
God All-holy Blessed is the [OF?]59 etc.
Trinity kingdom
OF
Come, let us Come, let us Come, let us Come, let us Come, let us
worship worship worship worship worship
OF
Ps 85 Ps 85 Pss 83, 84, 85 Ps 85 Pss 83, 84, 85 Pss 83, 84, 85
Dan. 3:26-56
55
Athos Vatopediou 1248 prescribes ‘τὸ τῆς ἑορτῆς τῆς ἡμέρας ἢ τοῦ ἁγίου
τροπάριον’, while HarvardUniversity,HoughtonLibrary,Greek3 only speaks of cases
of feast (‘εἰ μεν ἑορτή’).
56
AthosVatopediou1248 labels this like BYZ (‘εἰ δὲ ἀλληλούια’), while Harvard
University,HoughtonLibrary,Greek3 just negates the first rubric (‘Εἰ δ᾽ οὖν’).
57
Parenti, ‘Nota sul Salterio-Horologion’ (see n. 30), pp. 280-281.
58
The text of 9H in SCHØY has not been fully deciphered, but it has basically the
same responsorium as SAB.
59
This opening is found in SAB 1H; as I argued above concerning the Hour endings,
it is probable that the fixed prayers of 1H are to be applied to the other Hours as well.
This applies also to the office endings of TUR and SAB below.
GNE GNE GNE. GNE.

Alleluia Alleluia
[Troparion:] [Troparion:] [Troparion:] [Troparion:] Alleluia Ὁ τὴν
Ὁ ἐν τῇ Ὁ ἐν τῇ Ὁ ἐν τῇ Ὁ ἐν τῇ Ps 22:1-4ab ψυχὴν ἐπὶ
ἐννατῇ ὥρᾳ ἐννατῇ ὥρᾳ ἐννατῇ ὥρᾳ ἐννατῇ ὥρᾳ Alleluia ξύλου
Ps 118:169 Ps 118:169 Ps 118:169 Θεοτόκιον: Ps 22:4c-6 Ps 118:169
Troparion End of Troparion Ὁ δι᾽ ἡμᾶς Ὁ τὴν Troparion
Ps 118:170 troparion Ps 118:170 γεννηθεὶς ψυχὴν ἐπὶ Ps 118:170
Troparion Ps 118:170 Troparion Scripture ξύλου Troparion
GNE End of GNE readings GNE GNE
(δοξαζει) troparion Ὁ δι᾽ ἡμᾶς (section Troparion Ὁ δι᾽ ἡμᾶς
Ὁ δι᾽ ἡμᾶς G γεννηθεὶς particular for acc. to γεννηθεὶς
γεννηθεὶς Ὁ τὴν Holy Week) weekday
ψυχὴν ἐπὶ
ξύλου
[NE?]
Ὁ δι᾽ ἡμᾶς
γεννηθεὶς
Selected Selected Selected Selected Selected Selected
verses: verses: Dan. verses: Dan. verses: Dan. verses: Dan. verses: Dan.
Dan.3:34- 3:34-3:35 3:34-3:35 3:34[-35] 3:34-3:35 3:34-3:35
3:35
Trisagion Trisagion Τrisagion (1H: Trisagion Trisagion
Trisagion)
GNE [All-holy All-holy [Creed?] etc.
All-holy Trinity?] Trinity [OF?]
Trinity [KE, GNE?] OF
OF [OF?]
Troparia Troparia
KE 40 KE 40 KE 40
Prayer Prayer
Our comparative table of the Ninth Hour shows that the office is basi-
cally the same in TUR and ERL. The difference is first of all found in
the beginning and the end, where ERL has been expanded: Opening
blessing; OF after ‘Come, let us worship’; final fixed prayers: ‘GNE –
All-holy Trinity – OF – KE 40’. Other differences are that ERL repeats
the full troparion (like BYZ) while TUR repeats only the ending, and that
TUR includes in its responsorium a second troparion of the Hour after
Glory, Ὁ τὴν ψυχὴν ἐπὶ ξύλου.60 The latter figures as the troparion of
the Hour in SAB, SCHØY and SYRO-P. The only differences between
60
Another Hour that I checked — 6H — has an analogous addition; at the correspond-
ing place of the responsorium TUR includes the troparion of the Hour in SAB, Ὁ ἕκτη
ὥρᾳ τῷ σταυρῷ προσηλωθεὶς (fol. XI Av, XI Ar).
216 S.R. FRØYSHOV
ERL and GROTT.V (which is basically like Lenten BYZ) are found in
the initial psalmody (monopsalmic vs. tripsalmic) and the inclusion in the
latter of troparia after Our Father.
The Ninth Hour of the Anastasis Typikon,61 once the special Holy
Week readings are removed, is also close to the office of TUR, ERL and
GROTT.V.62 It has the ancient features of monopsalm and simple end-
ing.63 The psalm verses, however, have disappeared, so there is no longer
a responsorium. The degree of Hagiopolite identity of this office is dif-
ficult to evaluate, not the least since 1H is rather of Sabaite tradition; it
has two outright Constantinopolitan features: the opening blessing
(‘Blessed is the kingdom’) and the Scripture readings.64
While the South Italian witnesses and AnTyp 9H form a homogenous
group (except for GROTT.V’s tripsalm), SAB, SAB-Geo65 and SCHØY
distinguish themselves from it by their polypsalmic initial psalmody and
responsorium which differs on the level of both psalm verses, refrain (alle-
luia) and hymnody; this concerns all the Hours (but in 3H psalm verses
and hymnody are identical in both groups/traditions). We may consider the
second group to be a Sabaite tradition. SYRO-P represents a mixture of the
two groups: the psalm verses of the first group and the troparion of the
Hour of the second (it concerns all four Hours). TUR mixes the two to a
lesser degree: it only adds the Sabaite troparion of the Hour.
Typika
After the Sixth Hour follows an office without a title. In SAB the same
office has the title ‘Eἰς τὴν μετάλυψιν’, ‘For the Communion’. However,
61
The Hours of Great Week in AnTyp are studied in Caroline Lutzka, Die kleinen
Horen des byzantinischen Stundengebetes und ihre geschichtliche Entwicklung (Berlin,
2007), pp. 53-57. For 9H Lutzka has misunderstood the text to the effect that Ps 85 is
repeated; there is in 9H no responsorium parallel to that of 1H.
62
However, 1H of AnTyp, as Lutzka observes, is of a different tradition, basically
identical to what is found in SAB and other early Sabaite witnesses. See Lutzka, Die
kleinenHoren (see n. 61), p. 55.
63
9H does not even have the Trisagion, but 1H of the same day has it (p. 42, l. 29-30); the
reason why 9H lacks it is probably the direct continuation of 9H into Vespers. I suspect that
‘Trisagion’ in this document actually signifies a series of elements, like the series ‘Trisagion
– All-holy Trinity – OF’ at the end of 9H of Great Friday (p. 155, l. 15-16). In general, the
Anastasis Typikon gives little detail about such regular elements as office openings and endings.
64
Identical to those of the Typikon of the Great Church for Vespers. See Juan Mateos,
LeTypicondelaGrandeÉglise, II, OCA, 166 (Rome, 1963), p. 68, 11-18.
65
Judging from those offices of the fragment SAB-Geo which are also found in SAB,
that is 1H and 3H, SAB-Geo is like SAB except for minor differences.
in TUR we find the title with which this office will be associated:
Ἀκολουθία τῶν Τυπικῶν66 (fol. XIIIa1). ERL is the earliest preserved
witness in which the actual position of the Typika office67 in the Horolo-
gion is ‘after 6H’. In subsequent Horologion history, the position varies
between ‘after 6H’and ‘after 9H’, the former being the more common.68
In addition to positioning the Typika ‘after 6H’ in the continuous text,
ERL gives provisions for the ‘after 9H’ position. Thus, the Typika office
of ERL exists in two variants, varying both in structure and cursus posi-
tion: one for ordinary time celebrated after 6H, one for fast days after
9H.69
The structure of ERL’s two Typika offices is the following, compared
with other relevant Horologia:
Table 5: Comparative table of Typika
ERL, SAB (and Armenian ERL, TUR72 GROTT.V73 SYRO-P

Lenten GEO-Rev)70 Horologion ordinary
variant mss71 variant (fol.
35r-36v)
Ps 102 Ps 102 Ps 102 Ps 102
Ps 145 Ps 145 Ps 145 Ps 145
Onlybeg. Son Onlybeg. Son Onlybeg. Son Onlybeg. Son
Beatitudes Beatitudes Beatitudes, Beatitudes Beatitudes Beatitudes Beatitudes
Mk, Lc, Jn
Χορὸς ὁ Χορὸς ὁ Χορὸς ὁ Χορὸς ὁ
ἐπουράνιος ἐπουράνιος ἐπουράνιος74 ἐπουράνιος
Ps 33:6 Ps 33:6 Ps 33:6
On the microfilm one can read only ‘ΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΙΑ ΤΩΝ …ΚΩΝ’. The illegible
66
space does allow for the letters ‘ΤΥΠΙ’. Given the traditional appellation of this office
I find no reason to reconstruct the original phrase in any other way.
67
On the office of the Typika, see Stefanos Alexopoulos, ThePresanctifiedLiturgyin
the Byzantine Rite: A Comparative Analysis of its Origins, Evolution, and Structural
Components (Leuven, 2009), pp. 80-90.
68
However, even in contemporary publications of the Horologion one encounters the
‘after 9Η’ position: ὩρολόγιοντὸΜέγα (Athens, 2005); Livredesheurescontenantles
officesquotidiensdel’ÉgliseOrthodoxe (Colombes, 2000).
69
Τὰς δὲ ἡμέρας τῶν νηστειῶν – no particular Lenten period is specified. For an
analysis of the rubrics and of the dynamics of the variation of position, see below, section
‘Distinction between festal and ordinary variants’.
70
The corresponding office of GEO-Rev (placed after Vespers as 12H) is close to ‘Eἰς
τὴν μετάλυψιν’ in SAB, notably starting in the same way by the Beatitudes.
71
Conybeare, Ritualearmenorum (see n. 18), pp. 475-477.
72
Fol. XIII Ar, XII Bv, XII Br, XVIII Br, XVIII Ar, XVIII Bv, XVIII Av, XII Av.
73
This variant is close to that of BYZ.
218 S.R. FRØYSHOV
Creed Creed Creed Creed Creed Creed Creed

Litany75 KE Ἄνες, ἄφες
Glory
OF OF OF OF OF76 OF OF
KE 40 KE 3 KE 40 KE 40 Troparion KE 12
KE 40
EisHagios EisHagios EisHagios77 EisHagios
Blessings Blessed be Blessed be
Blessed be the name of the name of
the name the Lord the Lord
of the Lord
[After Ps 33 Ps 33:2 Ps 33 Ps 33 Ps 33
9H:] Pss (verses)
33;
144:13-16
Communion – Trisagion etc.
prayers Troparia
KE 40
Prayer
The Lenten variant of the ERL Typika, ‘monopsalmic’ because it con-

sists of the Beatitudes only,78 is found only in ancient sources (SAB, GEO-
Rev, ERL) and is obviously more ancient. Interestingly, TUR does not
have such a variant. If there was no variation in ninth-century South Italy
between an ordinary and a Lenten variant of Typika, it seems that it must
have been introduced from another region in which there was one.79
It is further of great interest to note that, unlike the present Armenian
Horologion(Žamagirk’), some Žamagirk’ manuscripts80 prescribe an office
74
One folio is lacking; this element is conjectured on the basis of other South Italian
witnesses (GROTT.VIII, München 320, GROTT.VI), which have it but without the psalm
verse (Ps 33:6).
75
Notably, one of the petitions is ‘For forgiveness and remission...’, a phrasing very
close to that of ‘Ἄνες, ἄφες’.
76
Including ‘For yours is the kingdom’. On the microfilm it seems that there is noth-
ing more before KE 40
77
The reading of the rubric Εἶς ἅγιος (as in SAB) is probable on my microfilm of
TUR.
78
It is not uncommon for non-psalmic texts to function as psalms in initial psalmody
(cf., for instance, the Daniel canticle in the initial psalmody of 9H of SAB, and the prayer
of Manasseh and the ferial GrDox of Great Compline of BYZ).
79
Since there are other elements of ERL that suggest a ‘post-TUR’ Palestinian influ-
ence, this could be such a case. But one cannot exclude that there was Lenten – non-
Lenten variation in the Typika of other South Italian Horologia, contemporary with TUR.
80
Of the nine witnesses in which I have recorded the daily cursus, five are reported to
have it.
which is similar to the older Typika variant, Lenten in ERL. In this Arme-
nian office, presented in the above comparative table, the Beatitudes form
only one of four Gospel readings. The Armenian office displays two features
that correspond to each other and both seem ancient.81 First, the four Gospel
pericopes, of which the Beatitudes is that of the first evangelist, indicate that
this was originally a simple scriptural element — and not a ‘psalmodic’ one
as it was later perceived, proof of which is that the Beatitudes were expanded
into the Τυπικὰ tripsalm. The progressive diminution of the scriptural char-
acter of this element contradicts the likelihood of a possible expansion of it
from one to four pericopes. Second, the absence of a responsorium after the
Gospel reading fits well with exactly its scriptural character, since Gospel
readings are not usually followed by a responsorium. The implications for
our purposes of this Armenian ‘Typika’,82 no doubt an early Hagiopolite
Liturgy of the Presanctifed Gifts,83 will be discussed below.84
The ordinary (non-Lenten) Typika office of ERL is basically the same
as that of TUR, SYRO-P and GROTT.V (and BYZ). However, it is char-
acterised by the omission of certain elements (and this concerns both
variants): the responsory of Ps 33:6 with the troparion ‘Χορὸς ὁ
ἐπουράνιος’, and EisHagios. Ps 33 is also absent from the regular
Typika office, but it ‘reappears’ at the end of 9H (fol. 38v-39r) and is
obviously meant to be read in Lenten Typika which follows 9H. The ERL
Typika is therefore a more than usually abbreviated version of the office.
Vespers
As for the previous offices, we shall outline the ERL Vespers in

comparison with a few other Horologia, of which especially SYRO-P is
relevant. But in this case, since TUR does not include the Major Offices
(Matins and Vespers), we cannot use it for comparison and background.
81
The two Žamagirk’ witnesses recorded by Conybeare as having this ‘Typika’ office,
Oxford Bodley Arm. g 8 and London BM, Orient. 4551, also lack the First Hour (the
‘Sunrise’ office), a feature which only reinforces the impression of their ancient character.
See Conybeare, Ritualearmenorum(see n. 18), pp. 464-465.
82
The term is of course inappropriate since the ‘typical’ psalms are constituted by the
tripsalm (102, 145, Beat.).
83
The ‘Typika’ and the HagPRES are close offices. See Alexopoulos, ThePresancti-
fiedLiturgy (see n. 67), p. 87, table 2.4. I presume they constitute consecutive stages of
HagPRES and shall examine this further in the publication of my thesis.
84
In the section ‘The Palestinian tradition represented in ERL: Hagiopolite or Theo-
dosian?’.
220 S.R. FRØYSHOV
Table 6: Comparative table of Vespers
ERL (fol. 39v-47v) SYRO-P SAB GROTT.V85 (≈ BYZ)

Blessed is our God
Trisagion > OF Trisagion Trisagion > OF
[see table 1]
Come, let us Come, let us Come, let us
worship worship worship
Ps 103 Ps 103 Ps 103 Ps 103
GNE GNE GNE
Alleluia 3 Alleluia 3 Alleluia 3
Pss 119-133 Pss 119-133 Synapte
GNE GNE
Alleluia 3
OF [!]
KyrEk: Pss 140, KyrEk: Pss 140 KyrEk: Pss 140, KyrEk: Pss 140,
141, 129 [141, 129, 116?] 141, 129, 116 141, 129, 116
GNE, theotokion GNE GNE
Phôs hilaron Phôs hilaron Phôs hilaron Phôs hilaron
G, Troparia, NE, Prokeimenon with Prokeimenon
Theotokion alleluia
Kataxioson Kataxioson
Fixed daily Aposticha
‘aposticha’ (no
psalm verses)
Nunc dimittis Nunc dimittis Nunc dimittis Nunc dimittis
Trisagion > OF [see Trisagion Trisagion > OF
table 2]
Θεοτόκε, Παρθένε. Θεοτόκε, Παρθένε. Θεοτόκε, Παρθένε

Βαπτιστὰ τοῦ Βαπτιστὰ τοῦ Βαπτιστὰ τοῦ
Χριστοῦ. Χριστοῦ. Χριστοῦ
Ἱκετεύσατε ὑπὲρ O righteous Fathers Ὑπὸ τὴν σὴν
ἡμῶν Mar Moses and εὐσπλαγχνίαν
KE 3 Aaron, Elijah and KE 40
Elisha Prostrations 15
KE 40
Prostrations 15
Priest: Wisdom Lord, bless us in the
name of the Lord.
Ὁ λαός: Bless, O saints.
Εὐλογείτε, ἅγιοι. Lord, bless
Kύριε, εὐλόγησον
85
Lacks end of Vespers. From the aposticha onwards I am using GROTT.VIII;
München320 has a few additional, secondary elements.
Priest: Ὁ Θεὸς [Final blessing:]

οἰκτειρῆσαι ἡμᾶς We bless you,
O gracious Lord
People: Amen
Στερέωση, ὁ Θεός,
τοὺς βασιλεῖς ἡμῶν
After Ps 103, ERL has cathisma 18 (Pss 119-133), as in present prac-

tice during Great Lent. This element is also found in the three other
presently known Palestinian type Horologia which have Vespers (GEO,
SAB, SCHØY). In the second millennium it is rare: it is found in (at
least) two thirteenth-century Horologia, the Palestinian SinaiGreek904
(A.D. 1210) and in Sinai Arabic 232 (thirteenth c.).86 Cathisma 18 is
generally absent in STUD.GROUP.
The KyrEk section of ERL consists of only three psalms, Pss 140, 141,
and 129, without the fourth psalm (Ps 116) which is found in SAB and
in second millennium witnesses other than ERL. The same tripsalmic
KyrEk is found also in SCHØY (fol. 7r) and is undoubtedly an archaic
feature (GEO does not specify the psalms of KyrEk).
Further particularities of the ERL Vespers are the ending and the surpris-
ing absence of a series of habitual elements: the prokeimenon, the Katax-
ioson, and the aposticha. Interestingly, these features (both the ending and
the absence) are for the most part found also in SYRO-P, which in addition
to lacking the prokeimenon and the Kataxioson has an unusually short
aposticha section.87 The coincidence of these two sources seems to indicate
a common usage and not only an individual or local ‘decadence’.88
ERL and SYRO-P also have common particularities at the end of Ves-
pers. The first is the couple ‘Εὐλογείτε, ἅγιοι. Kύριε, εὐλόγησον’, in
ERL preceded by the rubric ‘ Ὁ λαός’. Robert Taft has gathered many
occurrences of the first part, ‘Εὐλογείτε, ἅγιοι’, in Euchologies and
Typika.89 In the Southern Italian Euchology Vat. Gr. 1833 (tenth c.) the
86
I thank Andrew Wade warmly for sharing with me his preliminary description of
this Horologion, made as part of his ongoing study of this ms.
87
If we may call it aposticha at all: SYRO-P has no psalm verses at this place (before
Nunc dimittis) but only a stanza (sticheron) for each day according to the theme of the day
(notably, the themes are those of the ancient series of Jerusalem, except for Thursday, and not
the Byzantine series). Some of these stichera are found in the aposticha (with psalm verses) of
SinaiArabic232, including the well-known theotokion ‘Ἐπὶ σοὶ χαίρει, Κεχαριτωμένη’.
88
What does seem to be exactly such a decadence is the insertion of OF between
Cathisma 18 and KyrEk.
89
Robert Taft, TheGreatEntrance, OCA, 200 (Rome, 21978), pp. 236-241.
222 S.R. FRØYSHOV
phrase figures in similar sequences to that of the ERL Vespers, but without
Kύριε, εὐλόγησον.90 In addition, the phrase was used in non-liturgical
settings as a monastic greeting or call, as seen in a letter of St. Theodore
Studite answering to a question about the way for a monk to address
another monk91 and at the Evergetis monastery ‘Εὐλογείτε, ἅγιοι’ was
the nightly wake-up call shouted by the one in charge of the clock.92
The second part of the couple, Kύριε, εὐλόγησον, seems to be a
Palestinian pendant to the Byzantine Εὐλόγησον, Δέσποτα. It may fig-
ure at the beginning of offices93 and before blessings in general, perhaps
most often at the final blessing of daily offices. Notably, it is found in
GEO before the main blessing of the meal rite and before the final bless-
ing of Nocturns (6NH).
There is other evidence for the use of the couple ‘Εὐλογείτε, ἅγιοι. Kύριε,
εὐλόγησον’ in Southern Italy, notably the almost contemporary tenth-century
Euchology St.PetersburgGreek226.94 The couple is also found in later Hor-
ologia such as SYRO-P, where it figures before the final blessing of Vespers,
the same place as in ERL, and of 1H, and in the Horologion SinaiArabic232
(thirteenth c.), where it figures at the end of most offices.
As for the additional prayer for the kings at the very end of the
ERL Vespers, ‘Στερέωση, ὁ Θεός, τοὺς βασιλεῖς ἡμῶν’ (‘Strengthen,
O God, our kings’), this is also found in the Palestinian Horologion Lon-
donBMAdd.31214 (twelfth or thirteenth c.), but at the end of Matins.
We conclude for Vespers that ERL, apart from the traditional but, for
the eleventh century, increasingly archaic element of cathisma 18, has
particular features in common with some Palestinian Horologia: the rare
90
André Jacob, HistoireduformulairegrecdelaLiturgiedeSaintJeanChrysostome,
unpublished doctoral dissertation (Louvain, 1968), p. 165; Taft, TheGreatEntrance (see
n. 89), p. 238.
91
Letter 552 in Theodori Studitae epistulae, ed. Georgios Fatouros, vol. 2 (Berlin,
1992), p. 844, l. 102. The present address Εὐλόγησον — see Taft, TheGreatEntrance
(see n. 89), p. 239 — may be a shortened form.
92
Evergetis monastery, according to the foundation typikon – BMFD p. 476; Gautier
l. 216; Messina AP-11
93
One such occurrence is at the beginning of the Agrypnia. See, for instance, Sinai
Gr. 1094 and Sinai Gr. 1096, Описаніе, III, pp. 3, 21. As pointed out by Vassa Larin,
‘The opening formula of the Byzantine Divine Liturgy, “Blessed is the kingdom”, among
other liturgical blessings’, StudiaLiturgica 43 (2013) (in press), the Sunday section of St.
Petersburg Greek 44 starts with Kύριε, εὐλόγησον. Ἐν ὀνόματι but it is difficult to
determine whether the phrase has a liturgical or rather a private function (the phrase fig-
ures on fol. 19r, see photograph in Jean-Baptiste Thibaut, Monuments de la notation
ekphonétiqueetHagiopolitedel’Eglisegrecque (Saint Petersburg, 1913), p. 19). I thank
Sr. Vassa warmly for sending me a pre-publication copy of her article.
94
Jacob, Histoireduformulairegrec (see n. 90), p. 163.
absence of central elements such as the prokeimenon and, to some degree,

aposticha, as well as acclamations and prayers of the ending. These Pal-
estinian Horologia (SYRO-P, SinaiArabic232, LondonBMAdd.31214),
together with several others, belong to a distinct ‘Neo-Palestinian’ group
of twelfth- to fourteenth-century witnesses of the Byzantine type Horolo-
gion, SYRO-P being the earliest preserved member of this group.
A particular phrase might point towards an identification of this group.
The Typikon Sinai Greek 1097 (A.D. 1211), evidently used at Sinai and
classified by Dmitrievskij as ‘Sinaitic’, in one of the headings attaches itself
to the St. Theodosius monastery: ‘Typikon of the ecclesiastical office of our
holy father Theodosius the Cenobiarch’.95 In the Agrypnia which follows
this title — in other words, an Agrypnia according to the Theodosian rule
— Moses, Aaron, and Elisha are commemorated instead of St. Sabas, as in
the Sabaite Typika.96 Now, the same Moses, Aaron, and Elisha (as well as
Elijah) are addressed in a troparion towards the end of the SYRO-P Vespers
(see table). Αs Pentkovskij has pointed out, the early Syriac version of
the ‘Sabaite’ Typikon, Sinai Syriac 136 (thirteenth c.) in a similar way
attaches its Agrypnia service to St. Theodosius the Cenobiarch.97 The ‘Neo-
Palestinian’ group of Horologia, then, might have had some Theodosian
connection.98 When the scribe of ERL, monk Klêmentos, as we have seen,
asks for the remembrance of hieromonk Gregory of St. Theodosius the
Cenobiarch, it seems we are slowly beginning to home in on something.
In any case, the striking correspondence of ERL especially with
SYRO-P suggests that the milieu which used ERL was in constant con-
tact with Palestine and revised its Horologion in accordance with devel-
opments in the Palestinian milieu(x).
After Vespers, ERL has a series of ‘troparia for the dead’ but these
will not be treated here.
Compline
Like the other Palestinian type Horologion witnesses, ERL has a

Compline office consisting of a single unit, unlike the Byzantine type
95
Описаніе, III, p. 403. SinaiGreek1101 (A.D. 1311) is practically identical to Sinai
Greek1097, according to Dmitrievskij (op.cit., p. 419).
96
Описаніе, III, p. 401.
97
Aleksej M. Pentkovskij, ‘Иерусалимский типикон в Константинополе в
Палеологовский период’, ŽurnalMoskovskojPatriarxii (2003:5), pp. 77-87, on p. 78.
98
See my article ‘The Palestino-Byzantine Horologion’ (see n. 4) for further charac-
terisation of this group.
224 S.R. FRØYSHOV
Horologion in which Compline is normally a composite office. This sin-

gle unit is essentially the same as the first part of the BYZ Great Com-
pline (Μέγα Ἀπόδειπνον). According to its title, Ἀπόδειπνα σὺν Θεῷ
τῆς ἁγίας Τεσσαρακοστῆς, the ERL Compline is meant for Great Lent
only. Such a liturgical practice is astonishingly close to that of BYZ,
according to which Great Compline is celebrated only in Lenten periods
and at the Vigils of Christ’s Nativity and Baptism and of the Annuncia-
tion. Does this mean that ERL lacks a Compline service outside Great
Lent? The answer seems strictly speaking to be positive. After setting up
a comparative table of Compline in ERL and other relevant Horologia
we shall discuss the content of Compline, which is more complicated
than for the previous offices.
Table 7: Comparative table of Compline
ERL (fol. TUR99 GROTT.V GEO GEO-Con (fol. SAB SCHØY

48v-57r) (1st part ≈ 8r-21v) (fol. 3r-4r)
SYRO-P,
BYZ)
Blessed is
our God
OF
Come, let Come, let Come, let Come, let Glory to
us worship us worship us worship us worship God in the
Τὴν highest
ἡμέραν
διελθών
Pss 4 Pss 4 Pss 4 Pss 4 Pss 4 Pss 4 Pss 4
6 6 6 6 5 12 12
12 GNE 12100 GNE? 12 12 6 26 G[NE] 26
24 24 24 24 12 30 30
26 30 30 30 30 90 90
30 90 90 60 90 120 120
90 Alleluia 90 120 118:169- 118:
120 120 118:169-176 176 169[-176]
118:169-176 34 118:12
118:12 (3x) Cath. 20 (3x)
G[NE]
Meth- Meth- Meth- MethHêmôn [below] Meth- Preserve
Hêmôn Hêmôn Hêmôn KE 3 Hêmôn me, o God
G [unidenti-
OF fied text]
99
Fol. XII Av, XII Ar, XIII Bv, XIII Br, XIV Bv, XIV Br, XV Av, XV Ar.
100
The ms is damaged between the end of Ps 12 (or more precisely, the repetition of
verses 12,4-5a) and the beginning of Ps 24, but one may calculate some 1,5 lines of space
between them and on the microfilm probably see the words. I suspect that TUR here has
GNE, like ERL.
Pss 45:8,12,11 Pss 12:4, 4:9 Pss 12:4, Ps 12:1

with alleluia with alleluia 4:9 with with
2 hypakoi Φώτισον τοὺς alleluia alleluia
Τῶν ἀοράτων ὀφθαλμούς μου Τῶν Τῶν
ἐχθρῶν μου Τῶν ἀοράτων ἀοράτων ἀοράτων
ἐχθρῶν μου ἐχθρῶν ἐχθρῶν
μου μου
7 selected Meth- Selected
psalm verses Hêmôn psalm
OF verses
Prayer-
(rubric)
Τὴν Τὴν Τὴν Stikaroni Τὴν ἡμέραν (MS breaks
ἡμέραν ἡμέραν ἡμέραν (stanzas, διελθών off)
διελθών διελθών διελθών reminiscent of
Τὴν ἡμέραν
διελθών)
Ἡ Ἡ Ἡ Ἡ ἀσώματος
ἀσώματος ἀσώματος ἀσώματος φύσις
φύσις φύσις φύσις
5 kata
stichon
hymns
Creed Creed
Παναγία Παναγία Παναγία Invocation
Δέσποινα Δέσποινα Δέσποινα Selected psalm
verses
Trisagion Trisagion Trisagion Trisagion [Trisagion
GNE All-holy Creed Creed Creed
All-holy Trinity OF OF OF]
Trinity OF
OF
Τῶν 12 kata Τῶν
ἀοράτων stichon ἀοράτων
ἐχθρῶν hymns ἐχθρῶν
μου μου
KE 40101 30 KE 30 KE
2 final Prayer (= GEO, Prayer
prayers, the 5NH)
first from the
Euchologion
Unlike the monopsalmic Hours, the initial psalmody of Compline in

ERL is polypsalmic. A monopsalmic Compline, the initial psalmody of
101
Here follows part II of a composite Compline service: ‘Ps 50 – Canon – GrDox
– Trisagion>OF – Apolytikion – Troparia – Prayer’. This is the Pannychis office; about
this office and its Horologion sources, see my article, ‘The Palestino-Byzantine Horolo-
gion’ (see n. 4). GROTT.VIII and München 320 have the same second part, which is
different from the second part of BYZ Compline.
226 S.R. FRØYSHOV
which consisted of Ps 90, did exist in South Italy, according to twelfth-

century local Typika.102 The initial psalmody of Compline in ERL is
more extensive than that in TUR, containing in addition Pss 26 and 120.
Notably, the hexapsalm in TUR is identical to that of the Byzantine type
Horologion, showing that the Compline hexapsalm of the Byzantine
Horologion type existed already in the ninth century. This is another
example showing that TUR stands in the tradition that would prevail.
Looking closer at the initial psalmody in ERL, one sees that, like GEO,
ERL has eight psalms, composed of two tesserapsalms. But while GEO
has a logical construction of the two halves,103 ERL still carries clear
traces of the hexapsalm in TUR: after the first three psalms (the classical
first tripsalm) there is a GNE, indicating the ancient first half. The two
additional psalms of ERL are also found in SAB and SCHØY (and Ps
120 in GEO), and its polypsalm is identical to that of Abû-l-Barakât104
except for the final Ps 118:169-176 of the latter. In fact, ERL (and Abû-
l-Barakât) show traces of two hexapsalms: their polypsalm is nothing but
the fusion of the hexapsalms of TUR and SAB.
After MethHêmôn, unlike other Palestinian type sources (GEO, SAB,
GEO-Con105), TUR and ERL have no alleluia responsorium. The psalm-
ody of the alleluia responsorium of these three witnesses consists of
verses from Pss 12 and 4,106 two of the traditional initial psalms, followed
by the stanza ‘Τῶν ἀοράτων ἐχθρῶν μου’. Since in the Palestinian daily
office there is normally a responsorium after the initial psalmody, the
question arises: did TUR and ERL lose an original responsorium? Or
would not MethHêmôn constitute exactly the post-psalmodic responso-
rium, and in effect their order be more original? Formally this is fully
possible, since MethHêmôn is performed as a responsorium, with the text
divided up into numerous more or less short phrases and MethHêmôn
inserted as a refrain.
102
Besides the Messina codex edited by Arranz, see Parenti, ‘Un fascicolo’ (see n. 24),
p. 353, n. 36 for other Typika.
103
The initial psalmody of Compline in GEO consists of two series with a striking
mathematical composition: Pss 4, 6, 12, 24 grows by six (imperfect, since there is no Ps
0!); Pss 30, 60, 90, 120 grows by 30. At the end of these two tesserapsalms there is the
double addition of verses 169-176 (last Hebrew letter of the acrostichon) from Ps 118 and
a triple 118:12.
104
Ugo Zanetti, ‘La distribution des psaumes dans l’horologion copte’, OCP 56 (1990),
pp. 323-369, on p. 350. The psalm series are conveniently juxtaposed in Parenti, ‘Un
fascicolo’ (see n. 24), p. 353.
105
GEO-Con has MethHêmôn figuring later in the office, thus going directly from the
psalms to the responsorium. SCHØY does not have MethHêmôn at all.
106
Ps 4 is not in SCHØY.
Starting from the assumption that the Armenian Horologion on the

whole was adopted from Jerusalem in the early-fifth century, we shall see
that the Armenian Compline office offers a clue to evaluating the different
Palestinian variants of Compline. The present Armenian Compline has the
following overall structure: initial psalmody, MethHêmôn, supplication,
prayer.107 Of the presently seven initial psalms (plus a little part of another)
the first three, Pss 4, 6, and 12, match the first three of those in TUR, ERL,
and GEO; it seems that this was an early tripsalm of Compline. Now it is
significant that the Armenian structure is to be found in GEO, hidden
within the Compline office: after the initial psalmody and MethHêmôn,
there strangely follows a section of ‘KE 3 – Glory – OF’.108 In light of the
Armenian office, however, it is not strange: since, as we have seen, OF
constitutes the ancient office ending, this could very well have been the
Hagiopolite Compline of the early-fifth century. MethHêmôn constitutes
the post-psalmody responsorium of this office. What seems to have hap-
pened later is that, for some reason,109 this pristine Compline grew at the
end. The first element that follows, in GEO and the Sabaite Horologion
witnesses, is an alleluia responsorium. The alleluia responsorium in general
must be quite ancient; in GEO it is found also in Nocturns at the post-
psalmodic Ps 133 responsorium and, as I have pointed out elsewhere,110
the alleluia refrain is embedded in some of the resurrectional (Sunday)
hymnography of the Ancient Iadgari.111 In general, Renoux dates this body
of hymnography to the fourth century.112 We may therefore assume that by
400 at the Resurrection cathedral there were offices with alleluia respon-
sorium and offices without. The alleluia responsorium is ubiquitous in the
Sabaite tradition (SAB and SCHØY) and it would seem that the common-
ality of this structure results from later uniformisation (sixth c.?).
For the question of the roots of ERL it is of interest to judge which
alleluia responsorium is most ancient, that of GEO or that of the group
107
Findikyan also suggests the Palestinian roots of this office. See his Thecommentary
ontheArmeniandailyoffice(see n. 18), p. 503.
108
The section follows MethHêmôn in GEO-Con, too, but here MethHêmôn has
another position.
109
Was MethHêmôn gradually perceived as a part of the initial psalmody? Was there
a need for a psalmodic element which could include hymnody?
110
Stig Simeon R. Frøyshov, ‘The Resurrection Office of first millennium Jerusalem
liturgy and its adoption by close peripheries. Part II: The Gospel reading and the post-
Gospel section’ (forthcoming in Festschrift Renoux), section ‘Psalm 133 hymnography’.
111
Charles Renoux, tr., Les hymnes de la Résurrection. I, Hymnographie liturgique
géorgienne,textesduSinaï18 (Paris, 2000), pp. 178-179.
112
Renoux, LeshymnesdelaRésurrection(see n. 111), pp. 45-57.
228 S.R. FRØYSHOV
SAB, SCHØY, and GEO-Con. The fixed troparion Τῶν ἀοράτων ἐχθρῶν
μου of the group is found as the ibakoj of the GEO Midnight office (2NH).
What is decisive is that, in fact, Τῶν ἀοράτων ἐχθρῶν μου includes the
phrase ‘ἴνα μὴ ὑπνώσω εἰς θάνατον’, taken from Ps 12:4 with minor
adaptation.113 This shows without doubt that Ps 12 is the original context
of the troparion.114 The integrity of the alleluia responsorium of the group,
as well as the connection of the psalm verses (Pss 12:4, 4:9) with the
initial psalmody, even with what we consider to be the original tripsalm
(Pss 4, 6, 12), clearly suggests that the responsorium of the group is more
ancient than that of GEO. This is not the only case in which the Sabaite
Horologion must be considered more ancient than GEO.
In TUR and ERL after MethHêmôn follow the three stanzas of Τὴν
ἡμέραν διελθών, found also in GEO in a different redaction. The next
element in ERL is the section of six kata stichon hymns. Unlike ERL,
TUR, and the Byzantine type Horologion have only one kata stichon
hymn here, the Ἡ ἀσώματος φύσις. It is noteworthy that exactly this
katastichon hymn is absent in SinaiGreek864, the third ancient Horolo-
gion to have a large series of such hymnody. The separate location in
TUR and the absence in SIN of Ἡ ἀσώματος φύσις suggest that it has
a special place in this body of hymns. In TUR the main part of the kata
stichon hymnody follows at the very end of the office, after ‘Trisagion >
OF’, as a kind of supplement to the office. Given the correspondence
between TUR and the Byzantine type Horologion, we should consider
the inclusion of more katastichon hymns after Ἡ ἀσώματος φύσις to
be a local alteration.
After the katastichon hymns, unlike TUR, GROTT.V, and BYZ, ERL
does not have the Creed. The more original place of the Creed, as shown
by GEO and GEO-Con, is after the Trisagion, but this element, surpris-
ingly, is also absent from ERL, and the expected position would in any
case be that of TUR.
Like TUR, GROTT.V, and BYZ, ERL does have the invocatory unit
‘Παναγία Δέσποινα Θεοτόκε, πρέσβευε’. A less spelled-out unit is
found in GEO-Con, but it includes a similar series of addressees of invo-
cation.
Τhe end of the ERL Compline office consists of a series of nine stan-
zas with the title ‘Στιχηρά ἤχος πλ. δ τῶν ἀποδειπνίων’, ending with
113
μήποτε ὑπνώσω εἰς θάνατον.
114
Τhe same holds true for the troparion ‘Φώτισον τοὑς ὀφθαλμούς μου’ of GEO-
Con and BYZ (same section), taken verbatim from the same v. 12:4.
four theotokia. In view of TUR, considered as an earlier witness to the

same tradition, it would seem that ERL has moved (a reduced body of)
kata stichon hymns from the earlier position and replaced it with the
series starting with Τῶν ἀοράτων ἐχθρῶν μου and including all the five
stanzas of the same section in BYZ (which labels them ‘troparia’).
Compline in SAB breaks off after the selected psalm verses. A com-
parative consideration permits us to assume the rest of the office: at the
Hours, SAB has nothing between these verses and the Trisagion, like GEO-
Con at Compline. Whereas in GEO a variant of Τὴν ἡμέραν διελθών
follows the selected verses, SAB has placed it at the beginning of the
office. We may therefore assume that ninth-century Sabaite Compline went
straight from the selected psalm verses to the Trisagion, probably followed
by the Creed and OF, as also in GEO and GEO-Con. If this is correct,
Sabaite Compline did not have the katastichon hymn Ἡ ἀσώματος φύσις.
In conclusion, we consider the ERL Compline to be a redaction of the
TUR Compline. The difference consists in some additions seemingly
stemming from Sabaite tradition (two more psalms at the initial psalm-
ody, the Τῶν ἀοράτων ἐχθρῶν μου section), as well as the omission of
some regular elements (Creed, Trisagion > OF). The striking closeness
of the TUR Compline to that of BYZ indicates that the tradition repre-
sented by TUR and ERL, in contrast to the Hagiopolite (GEO) and
Sabaite traditions, constitutes a forceful horological tradition that was to
become dominant in Byzantine liturgy. The beginning of Compline in
TUR and ERL, consisting of initial psalmody and its MethHêmôn respon-
sorium, must be very ancient (early-fifth c.?), apart from the fact that the
hexapsalm without doubt constitutes an expansion of the original initial
psalmody.
The Lost Beginning – and the Question of the Missing Office(s) and
Cursus Beginning
While Compline clearly represents the end of the Horologion, the

original beginning of ERL is lost. The present cursus beginning of the
First Hour is identical to the usual beginning of witnesses of the Palestin-
ian type Horologion. It could therefore appear as if ERL were yet another
witness of this type. But since the Horologion is acephalous, we cannot
draw any conclusions without examining the possibility that one or two
other offices may have originally preceded the present first office. What
could one expect to have possibly been another beginning?
230 S.R. FRØYSHOV
Since the cursus beginning with Midnight is found only from the thir-
teenth century onwards, or possibly the twelfth,115 it is very unlikely that
our early-eleventh-century Horologion would have started with this office.
What is likely is that since ERL includes Vespers, it would also have
included the other Major Office, Matins.116 Now, as we shall see, the larger
issue at stake behind the question of ERL’s beginning is the possibility of
Nocturns plus Matins having continuously been a cursus beginning in Pal-
estine and not a new cursus beginning that appears in the eleventh century.
Before starting our discussion about the cursus beginning of ERL we must
be aware that the Matins office of the first millennium constitutes a much
more complicated matter than that of the second millennium. First, what we
call ‘Matins, Ὄρθρος’ corresponds in this period to at least two offices, often
called ‘canon’: Nocturns (GEO 6NH) and the Matins itself (GEO 12NH),
possibly with Small Hours between (GEO 7-11NH); in both SCHØY and
GEO-Con there is one office, but within it one discerns distinct Nocturns and
Matins. Second, the source material is limited: at present we dispose of Noc-
turns plus Matins in five non-Greek witnesses of the first millennium but no
Greek ones.117 In addition, two of these five witnesses are currently unstud-
ied, so a complete examination of first millennium Nocturns plus Matins is
not yet possible. While we need to be aware of this for contextual purposes,
for our space calculation it does not matter whether ERL still had two distinct
offices or just Matins. For the sake of simplicity, let us call it ‘Matins’.
The following codicological data should be taken into consideration.
Since no gathering of the codex is larger than eight folios it is very
unlikely that the original size of gathering five was larger than that. The
two gatherings of less than eight folios come towards the end of the
codex and all other gatherings preceding these are quaternia. The prob-
able original size of gathering five is therefore the quaternion, implying
a probable lacuna of six folios. However, the available space for a pos-
sible Matins is less than six full folios since the lacunary space necessar-
ily included both the end of the preceding text (the Lectionary service of
the Nativity of St. John the Forerunner – end of Gospel)118 and the
115
There are a few Horologia starting with Midnight of which the dating is disputed
but no earlier than the twelfth century; for details see my article ‘The Palestino-Byzantine
Horologion’ (see n. 4).
116
It is very unusual for an Horologion to have only one of the Major Offices, but
occasionally it happens. For instance SinaiGreek62 (thirteenth c.) is a Psalter-Horologion,
which has Matins but no Vespers.
117
SAB has lost it; TUR and SIN are both Horologia without the Major Offices.
118
The codex regularly does not include the koinonikon after the Gospel reading.
beginning of the following text (First Hour – office beginning, Ps 5:1-8).

Theoretically it also could have included another Lectionary service after
the Nativity of St. John the Forerunner, but if so the space definitely does
not suffice for Matins. Even without another Lectionary service there is
really a question whether there is enough space for Matins in the lacuna
of the present fifth gathering of the codex.
For the following computation I shall be using letter counts (signs
including spaces) of the Greek texts in question. The codex regularly has
twenty-five lines per page and I have found the average number of signs
per line to be 40.5. The Gospel pericope of the Nativity of St. John the
Forerunner here is Lk 1:1-25, 57-66a.119 The pericope is necessarily dif-
ferent from that of the Typikon of the Great Church, Lk 1:1-25, 76, 80,120
and is no doubt identical to that of the present Byzantine Lectionary,
which adds v. 57-68 to the Constantinopolitan reading.
The presumed missing end of the pericope (v. 66b-68, 76, 80) contains
about 450 signs with spaces, which represents about eleven lines. If there
were no text between the Nativity of St. John the Baptist and the Horologion,
which is what we shall be presupposing, the latter would have started at
about line 12 of the first missing page (fol. 2r of the original third gathering).
At the other end of the lacuna, Ps 5:1-9a contains about 643 signs
including spaces, which represents about sixteen lines. In addition, there is
the opening of 1H (title + opening blessings/prayers), which would have
occupied a maximum of three lines. This accounts for nineteen lines alto-
gether.121 So we shall calculate that fol. 7v, the last of the lacuna, had six
lines before the beginning of 1H. Between the two pages on which one text
must have ended (Gospel) and the other begun (1H), there are five folios,
representing 250 lines (ten pages x twenty-five lines). The total number of
lines available for the lost Matins office is therefore 14 + 5 + 250 = 269,
which again represents 10,895 signs including spaces.
Now we need to calculate the expected length of Matins. According
to Klêmentos’ scribal habits, psalms would have been written in full, and
since we are at the beginning of the Horologion no psalm could have
been replaced by a reference to a psalm that had already been written out.
But which would be the elements of the Matins office?
119
In Erlangen A2 it ends (end of fol. 31v) with Lk 1:66a ‘πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐν
τῇ καρ/’.
120
Le Typicon de la Grande Église, I, ed. Juan Mateos, OCA, 165 (Rome, 1962),
pp. 318-319.
121
The corresponding space of the other Hours is 1,5 l. for 3H (fol. 32v), 2,5 l. for 6H
(fol. 33v) and 3 l. for 9H (fol. 37r).
232 S.R. FRØYSHOV
The order of the three preserved Nocturns plus Matins offices, those
of GEO, GEO-Con, and SCHØY, is more or less similar: ‘Hexapsalm
– responsorium with Ps 133 – cathisma (hymns) – fixed prayers – prayer
– Ps 50 – odes – exapostilarion – Ainoi – GrDox – aposticha – fixed
prayers – final prayer’. What is absolutely sure is that the space available
in ERL does not suffice for such an office, since the Hexapsalm alone
occupies some 7,370 signs out of the nearly 11,000 signs available. We
must, however, presume that the possible Matins office in ERL was dif-
ferent from the above. As we shall see in the next section, ERL stands in
a tradition different from that of the reformed Hagiopolite (GEO) and
Sabaite (SAB and SCHØY) traditions. We have seen that the ERL Ves-
pers is particular but matched by SYRO-P. For Matins the latter cannot
help us since the office is obviously lacunary at the end, breaking off
after the odes. But we do find Horologion witnesses related in one way
or another to ERL which testify to unusual ‘omissions’ of elements: the
South Italian GrottaferrataΓ.α.VIII (twelfth c.) lacks both Ps 50 and the
odes; in GROTT.V no odes are written but only the rubric ‘canon’; both
the ‘Neo-Palestinian’ Horologia (like SYRO-P) Sinai Greek 904 (A.D.
1211) and SinaiGreek1296 (thirteenth c.) leave out Ps 50.
If we allow for Ainoi (ca. 1,880 signs) and GrDox (ca. 1,550 signs), and
leave out the full text of the odes (a rubric is possible), and Ps 50 (psalms
are not given by rubrics in ERL) like the above related witnesses, we arrive
at 10,800 signs, and if in addition we allow for some rubrics we have
reached the around 11,000 signs available. A Matins office consisting of
‘Hexapsalm – Odes (rubrics) – Ainoi – GrDox – Fixed prayers’ is a bare
minimum, but an admissible one, in my opinion, especially in the light of
the unusually abbreviated Vespers in ERL and the irregular absences of
elements in many Horologia of the tenth-thirteenth centuries with which
ERL may be connected. In conclusion we may state that, given the pres-
ence of Vespers and just sufficient space available for a minimal office, it
is probable that ERL originally had a Matins office, whether formally in
two distinct parts (Nocturns and Matins) or not, and that this single or
double office, therefore, was the cursus beginning in ERL.
Distinction between Ordinary and Lenten Variants
A striking and significant feature of ERL is the distinction between the

ordinary and Lenten variants of offices. This alternation is not found in
the first millennium Horologia that have been studied so far. We shall
here resume and explore this feature of ERL. At the outset we must point
out a fact which threatens to confuse terminology: what today is (and for
many centuries has been) considered ‘ordinary’ liturgical time — that is,
in practice non-Lenten time — was originally ‘festal’, while what is
today ‘Lenten’ (days of alleluia) was originally ordinary, non-festal.
In ERL this distinction is delicate because this particular Horologion finds
itself in the middle of the transitional process from the earlier to the later.
The explicit ‘fast day’ (ἡμέρα νηστείας) or Lenten (Τεσσαρακοστῆς)
variants of ERL are the following:
a) Lenten, ‘monopsalmic’ form of Typika: this has only the Beatitudes
at the initial psalmody, but is otherwise identical to the non-Lenten
form. The following rubric precedes the office: ‘In this way we must
chant on Saturday and Sunday and all week, after the Sixth Hour, in
order that you may also chant the “Bless the Lord, O my soul and
all [that is within me]” [Ps 102]’.122 After the Typika follows this
rubric: ‘This is the office apart from the days of fast. On the days of
fast we chant also the Ninth Hour and in this way the Beatitudes and
what has been written above’.123
b) In 1H, selected psalm verses are added: Pss 118:133-135, 70:8 (the
traditional ones – with the same ordinary usage in all witnesses as
in the case of 9H studied above).
c) Lenten position of Typika: ‘after 9H’ instead of ‘after 6H’.
d) 9H celebrated only in Lent – according to rubric in b) above; cf. the
structure of 9H which, unlike that of the other Hours, includes a full
responsorium.
e) Compline celebrated only in Great Lent: ‘Ἀπόδειπνα σὺν Θεῷ τῆς
ἁγίας Τεσσαρακοστῆς’.
Concerning the varying position of the Typika, the reason for it
seems to be that reflected in a note of the Synaxarion-Typikon of Ever-
getis:
But it is necessary to realise that the remaining monasteries that observe the
typikon of the very famous monastery of Stoudios do not chant the typika
during the Liturgy, but after the apolysis of the Ninth Hour. They chant the
122
Οὕτως δεῖ ψάλλειν ἡμᾶς ἐν σαβάτῳ καὶ κυριακὴν καὶ τὴν ἑβδομάδα
ὁλόκληρον καὶ μετὰ τὴν ἕκτην ὥραν, ἵνα ψάλλῃς καὶ τὸ Εὐλόγει ἡ ψυχή μου τὸν
Κύριον καὶ πάντ (fol. 34v).
123
Αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἀκολουθεία ἔξω τῶν νηστειῶν αἱ ἑμέραι. Τὰς δὲ ἑμέρας τῶν
νηστειῶν ψάλλωμεν καὶ τὴν θ’ [ἐννάτην] καὶ οὕτως τοὺς μακαρισμοὺς καὶ ὅσα
προεγράφησαν (fol. 36v).
234 S.R. FRØYSHOV
Typika then and receive the antidoron. But because all must partake of the
divine mysteries almost every day, we decided to chant the typika at their
time.124
Here the reason for the position ‘after 6H’ is explained as being the
celebration of the Divine Liturgy. The position of the Typika ‘after 6H’
therefore represents an element of the ‘festalisation’ of the Horologion:
the Divine Liturgy became so frequent that the celebration of the
Typika office before it, after 6H, became the norm in quantitative
terms, after which the practice came to be reflected in the Horologion’s
cursus order.
What exactly is meant in ERL by the term ‘ἡμέρα νηστείας’?
The internal logic, emerging from the two rubrics concerning the
Typika, opposes ‘fast day’ to ‘Saturday and Sunday and all week’.125
In other words, the ‘fast day’ signifies not a weekday (Wednesday,
Friday) but a period. Since ERL for Compline specifies ‘the holy
forty’, ‘fast day’ must be a broader term including the other Lenten
periods.
ERL is characterised by a highly advanced development of ‘festalisa-
tion’: the Lenten variant is limited to Lenten periods. On this point
ERL differs from both Studite and Sabaite traditions which would be
retaining ordinary (‘alleluia’) days outside Lenten periods. The alleluia
days had the same liturgical order and character as Lenten days. The
quantity of alleluia days will be seen in the following comparative table
including the Typikon of Alexis the Studite (TAS),126 thought to reflect
a Greek model of Stoudios from around 1000, the Studite-derived
Typikon of Messina (MESS), before 1149, and the Typikon of St. Sabas
SinaiGreek1096 (early-thirteenth c.), used at the Great Lavra itself.127
The following table compares the feasts of TAS, which does not mark
the alleluia days, with the alleluia days of MESS and SinaiGreek1096,
124
TheSynaxarionofthemonasteryoftheTheotokosEvergetis.MarchtoAugust.The
MovableCycle, ed. and trans. Robert H. Jordan (Belfast, 2005), pp. 690-691.
125
The awkward phrase ‘Saturday and Sunday and all week’ (why not simply
write ‘all week’?) probably betrays a change of liturgical practice. In fact, the Com-
munion service of GEO-Rev has a rubrical phrase which distinguishes between week-
days and Saturday-Sunday: ‘When … you shall commune of the holy mysteries …, if
it is Saturday or Sunday you accomplish the Liturgy …; if you communicate on week-
days …’ (fol. 2v11-14) and the Typika office follows. The addition of ‘and all week’ in
ERL, then, would reflect the ‘festalisation’ and the relegation of the Typika to Lent only.
126
Aleksei M. Pentkovskij, ТипиконпатриархаАлексияСтудитавВизантиии
наРуси (Moscow, 2001).
127
Arranz, Letypicon, and Описаніе,III(for both, see n. 9).
the presupposition being that what is not marked as a feast in TAS is

an alleluia day:
July 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
TAS Feast x x x x x x
MESS Alleluia x x x x x
Sin.1096 Alleluia x x x x x
July 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 TOTAL
TAS Feast x x x x 10 / 21
MESS Alleluia x x x x x 10
Sin.1096 Alleluia x x x x 9
The number of twenty-one non-festal days of TAS seems very high

and the editor, A. Pentkovskij, sought an explanation of the low number
of feast days in order to reconcile it with the Old Russian Menaia, which
have offices for every day.128 But in the above quoted note in the Ever-
getis Synaxarion-Typikon it was remarked that the Stoudios tradition,
unlike Evergetis which had a Divine Liturgy almost every day, often had
the Typika after 9H, in other words often had no Divine Liturgy. In fact
TAS fits perfectly with old Russian Festal Menaia; the twelfth-thirteenth-
century Moscow RGADA, Ф. 318, No. 130 contains offices for exactly
the same days as TAS; this correspondence suggests that the feasts in
TAS were the feasts actually celebrated.129
The quite high number of ten alleluia days in MESS confirms the ten-
dency of the Studite tradition; the ‘higher festalisation’ of MESS in rela-
tion to TAS may result from a century of calendar growth and/or difference
of local tradition. The festal calendar of St. Sabas at around 1200 still has
nine alleluia days, about the same number as MESS. On the whole the
picture is consistent for these three related calendars in that MESS and
SinaiGreek1096 have six common alleluia days and TAS has no feast on
a day which is an alleluia day in MESS or SinaiGreek1096.
The ‘lower festalisation’ of the Studite calendar which here emerges
is confirmed by the affiliation of the hymnographers of the early Office
Menaion, containing offices for each day of the month: they were
128
Pentkovskij, Типикон (see n. 25), p. 116.
129
See Nikolai Trunte, ‘ΑΣΑΤΕ ΤΩ ΚΥΡΙΩ ΑΣΜΑ ΚΑΙΝΟΝ. Vor- und Frühge-
schichte der slavischen Hymnographie’, in: SakraleGrundlagenslavischerLitteraturen,
ed. Hans Rothe (Munich, 2002), p. 27-76, on p. 58.
236 S.R. FRØYSHOV
predominantly non-Studite130 authors such as Joseph the Hymnographer,

Theophanes Graptos, George of Nicomedia, and Clement (not the Stu-
dite).131
While ERL is therefore incompatible with the Studite and Sabaite fes-
tal calendars, it is fully compatible with earlier and contemporary Office
Menaia. As shown by Alexandra Nikiforova, the Office Menaia were
elaborated on the basis of the Tropologion in the second half of the ninth
century.132 A complete set of twelve Office Menaia of South Italian ori-
gin and contemporary (tenth-eleventh c.) with ERL fits perfectly with the
degree of ‘festalisation’ in ERL.133 What is remarkable is that the earlier
South Italian ERL has a higher degree of ‘festalisation’ than the later
South Italian Horologia, the Studite-derived witnesses of the STUD.
GROUPc and their tradition, which arrived in the region from the late-
tenth century onwards.
The daily office profile of ERL emerging from these considerations is
one of a significant variation of cursus:
ORDINARY [Matins] 1H 3H 6H Typika [Divine Vespers
TIME (ordinary Liturgy]
variant)
FAST DAYS [Matins] 1H 3H 6H 9H Typika Vespers Compline
(Lenten) (ordinary (ordinary (Lenten)
variant)134 variant)
Absence of Final Prayers
Apart form the regular fixed prayers of office beginnings and the Tris-
agion (‘Trisagion – All-holy Trinity – OF’), ERL does not contain
130
The only remarkable hymn production of Stoudios concerns the Paschal cycle (the
brothers Theodore and Joseph the Studites).
131
These are the hymnographers of the following edited 11th-c. Menaion: Apostolos
Spanos, Codex LesbiacusLeimonos 11 (Berlin and New York, 2010), pp. 77-86.
132
Alexandra Nikiforova, Из истории Минеи в Византии. На материале
гимнографических памятников VIII–XII вв. из собрания монастыря святой
ЕкатеринынаСинае[From the history of the Menaion in Byzantium: About the mate-
rial of hymnographical monuments of the VIII-XII c. of the collection of the Monastery
of St. Catherine on Sinai] (Moscow, 2012). I thank the author warmly for sending me a
pre-published copy.
133
Roman Krivko, ‘A Typology of Byzantine Office Menaia of the Ninth - Fourteenth
Centuries’, Scrinium 7-8 (2011-2012), pp. 3-68, on p. 26.
134
3H and 6H do not have a Lenten variant. We must therefore assume that the ordi-
nary variant is also used on fast days.
prayers. The prayers that are lacking in ERL compared to BYZ are the
final prayers of the Hours135 and of the various units of Compline and,
compared to GEO, the prayers of Vespers and Matins (if, as I have con-
cluded above, the manuscript once contained Matins). These differences
partly reflect the typological distinction between the Palestinian and
Byzantine Horologion types. A comparative examination will again be
helpful.
GEO contains final prayers, as well as prayers at particular moments
of Vespers and Matins. The prayers of Vespers, Compline (first prayer),
Nocturns and Matins are taken from the Jerusalem Euchologion, as pre-
served in Georgian version.136 These euchological, presbyteral prayers do
not belong to the Horologion book proper and figure in GEO probably
for the sake of convenience. Analogously, the same Horologion contains
some hymns taken from the Hymnal (Iadgari), this time rather for the
sake of exemplification (only the first of the eight modes). However, in
GEO the prayers of the ‘Small’ (or intermediary) Hours,137 as well as the
second of the two prayers of Compline, are taken from a prayer corpus
different from the public Jerusalem Euchology.
In SAB there are no final prayers. However, in SAB-Geo the final
prayers belonging to the Georgian Jerusalem Euchologion are indicated
by rubrics. This rubrical indication shows that the ninth-tenth-century
Sabaite Horologion, too, at least within the Georgian Sabaite community,
was to be used together with the Euchologion. Since the monks normally
would have a Euchology at their disposal, the final prayers of the Hours
did not have to be written out in the Horologion.
Neither TUR nor SIN contains final and/or presbyteral prayers either.
On the basis of our present knowledge of sources, it is clear that Horologia
of the Palestinian type, probably in principle, and for the most part in
practice, did not contain prayers of the Euchologion. Turning to second
millennium Horologia, we regularly find final prayers at most offices, for
example from AthosVatopediou1248 (A.D. 1075), ParisBNGreek331
(eleventh c.), HarvardUniversity,HoughtonLibrary,Greek3 (A.D. 1105),
SYRO-P, GROTT.V, and onwards.
135
On these see Lutzka, DiekleinenHoren (see n. 61), pp. 85-87.
136
Cf. Frøyshov, ‘The Georgian witness’ (see n. 20), p. 244.
137
In two earlier articles I have called these Hours ‘Very Small’: Frøyshov, ‘The
Georgian Witness’ (see n. 20), p. 251, n. 129; Frøyshov, ‘Часослов без последований
Больших Часов’ (see n. 28), p. 389 (‘Cугубо малые Часы’, translating ‘Très petites
heures’). However, since I now use the term ‘Hour’ instead of ‘Minor Hour’ as explained
above (see n. 7), I replace the term ‘Very Small Hour’ by ‘Small Hour’.
238 S.R. FRØYSHOV
When the Palestinian Horologion was employed in the Byzantine rite

and combined with the Euchology of Constantinople, the natural accom-
panying book of prayers, the Euchology of Jerusalem, was eclipsed.
As an Horologion belonging to the Byzantine rite, ERL therefore could
not have been used together with the Jerusalem Euchology. ERL and
other first millennium witnesses show that for a while there was a eucho-
logical vacuum for the Horologia of the Byzantine rite. In the eleventh
century, or possibly earlier, new daily office prayers were written.
Discussion: What Liturgical Tradition(s) Does ERL Represent?
It would be of considerable scholarly interest to be able to identify the

liturgical tradition or traditions that are found in ERL. The phenomenon
of adopting or receiving a ritual tradition is complex and in our case we
must be aware that there is also the possibility of elements having been
added in the periphery posterior to the transition. In the first place, ERL
of course belongs to a South Italian liturgical tradition. But this tradition
is primarily a periphery, in other words a recipient of tradition created at
a centre elsewhere. So our question about the liturgical tradition of ERL
concerns this, or these, centre(s).
HorologicalPeripheries
In a profound sense, the liturgical tradition of ERL may be identified as

Palestinian and even Hagiopolite. The Palestino-Byzantine Horologion
without doubt appeared and was primarily developed at the Resurrection
cathedral of Jerusalem.138 Through the irradiation of this holy shrine, its
Horologion was received, possibly adapted and probably developed in a
number of peripheries. In Palestine itself from the fifth century onwards,
these included the Great Lavra of St. Sabas, founded in 483. I subscribe to
the hypothesis that, in addition to lavriote centres, they also included the
cenobion of St. Theodosius (479) and the cenobion at Mt. Sinai (mid-fifth
c.), the liturgies of which are much less known than that of St. Sabas. More
remote Horologion peripheries appeared both east and west of Jerusalem.
138
This is shown by GEO. I treat this question in my article ‘The Palestino-Byzantine
Horologion’ (see n. 4). However, I do not here have in mind the roots of the Horologion
prior to the fourth century, which is quite another question.
In the East the three Caucasian churches, the Armenian, the Georgian and
the Caucasian-Albanian, adopted the whole or parts of the Jerusalem rite
from the late-fourth century onwards. The Georgian church adopted all of
it and the Armenian adopted most of it, including probably the daily office.
West of Jerusalem, in the Roman Empire, a similar partial adoption of the
Jerusalem rite took place within local Greek rites. The most important of
these was the rite of Constantinople and, through what I call the ‘Early-
Byzantine liturgical synthesis’, the encounter between the rites of Jerusa-
lem and Constantinople produced the Byzantine rite, most probably already
in the seventh century.139 The Horologion was the major Palestinian con-
tribution to this synthesis. In other words, all areas where the Byzantine
rite was observed became Horologion peripheries: Asia Minor (including
Bithynia), Constantinople (including but not limited to Stoudios), Mount
Athos, Thessalonica, and Southern Italy. Some of these peripheries became
new liturgical centres in their own right, which in turn saw the rise of their
own peripheries. The best known of these are the monasteries of St. Sabas
and Stoudios. What seems to have been a third significant periphery trans-
formed into a centre, but to a large extent concealed as such by history
itself, is St. Theodosius. South Italy became a periphery of Mount Athos
when, in the second half of the tenth century at the latest according to
A. Pentkovskij,140 it received the Studite tradition in its Athonite redaction.
So our question about the liturgical tradition of ERL more precisely seeks
to find which of all these centres was at the direct origin, and in a larger
perspective perhaps also at the indirect origin, of ERL.
IsERLoftheStuditeTradition?
If the Athonite-Studite tradition was brought to Italy in the second half

of the tenth century it would be technically possible that ERL represent an
Athonite-Studite Horologion. The latter is so far known only in a Georgian
version translated by Giorgi Mtatsmideli (1009-1065) from a Greek model,
the earliest witness to which is considered to be JerusalemGeorgian127
(twelfth-thirteenth c.). This Horologion is of the Byzantine type, which
means that it has several significant differences from ERL (cf. above). It is
139
The main argument for this dating is the existence from the seventh-eighth c. of
hymnographers writing in Byzantium within Palestinian hymnodic genres. See further
discussion of this argument below, my section ‘The Palestinian tradition represented in
ERL: Hagiopolite or Theodosian?’.
140
Pentkovskij, Типикон(see n. 25), p. 154.
240 S.R. FRØYSHOV
not known at present more exactly when the transition from the Palestinian
to the Byzantine type took place, and theoretically it could have taken place
after the Athonite Horologion was brought to Italy. Nevertheless, our
source material does not permit a precise evaluation.
Two factors speak against the hypothesis of an Athonite-Studite origin
for ERL. First, the general state of ERL does not give the impression of
a liturgical document coming straight from a dynamic monastic centre:
ERL is full of inconsistencies and strange absences and presences, a fact
which points rather towards the idiosyncratic degradation which one may
find in an isolated document of the periphery. Second, according to the
clear conclusion of our above examination of the degree of ‘festalisation’
in ERL, this is incompatible with the Studite tradition: ERL does not
provide for any ordinary (alleluia) days outside Lenten seasons, in con-
trast to the Studite tradition.141
However, if the ‘festalisation’ argument were not sufficient, we would
definitely have to dismiss the Athonite-Studite hypothesis because of
another, exterior factor: TUR and its close connection with ERL. TUR
shows that the liturgical tradition represented in ERL already existed in
South Italy by the ninth century.
If TUR is to be dated to the late-ninth century, which is Parenti’s esti-
mation (before publication of the entire Horologion), there is, strictly
speaking, a possibility that it already represents Studite tradition, rapidly
spread to South Italy. Let us first see whether this is possible on the
contextual level of transmission of monastic tradition. Several scholars
have pointed out the contacts that took place between Southern Italian
and Studite monasticism from the ninth century onwards.142 This is seen
for instance in the fact that a copy of the Studite Hypotyposis was brought
to Calabria at the end of the ninth century or the beginning of the tenth.143
It is not unthinkable that the Horologion would have accompanied such
a central Studite document. In any case, if ERL is of the Studite tradition,
it must be of this early Studite stage, and not of the Athonite-Studite
liturgy of the tenth century onwards.
141
Concerning other differences between ERL and these Athonite-Studite or Italian-
Studite Horologia, such as the tripsalm and the composite Compline, the latter could
strictly speaking be new features introduced exactly during the period after the Athonite-
Studite tradition had been brought to Italy. Therefore these differences cannot be used as
an argument for our purposes.
142
See a summary of such contributions in David Paul Hester, MonasticismandSpir-
itualityoftheItalo-Greeks, Analecta Vlatadon, 55 (Thessalonica, 1992), pp. 129-137.
143
Julien Leroy, ‘La vie quotidienne du moine studite’, Irénikon 27 (1954), p. 24.
On the liturgical level, could TUR be a result of the adoption of the

ninth-century Studite Horologion? The ‘festalisation’ argument against
the Athonite-Studite hypothesis is invalid here because the process of
‘festalisation’ was not sufficiently advanced at that time. The Tropolo-
gion of Jerusalem, as seen in the eighth-ninth-century Sinai NE
MΓ56-5,144 and as was undoubtedly the case in lost copies of the periph-
eries,145 did not have a feast for every day. If TUR was a ‘non-festalised’
Horologion, ERL’s ‘festalisation’ could be explained as a local evolution.
The problem is here that no ‘central’ (reflecting the Constantinopolitan
monastery) Studite Horologion codex of the ninth century is known to have
been preserved. However, some information about it may in fact be gleaned
from the writings of St. Theodore the Studite himself (d. 826). Very sig-
nificantly, Julien Leroy in his 1954 study of the daily cursus of Stoudios
highlighted the psalms that, according to Catechesis 119 of St. Theodore,
were to be sung at each office.146 Now, it turns out that these psalms of the
Hours exactly match the traditional monopsalms (Pss 5, 50, 90 and 85).
The coincidence can hardly be arbitrary, as if St. Theodore, out of groups
of tripsalms or polypsalms in all four cases by chance would have
picked out the traditional monopsalm. In other words, we have here
an indication that the Horologion in use at Stoudios in the early-ninth cen-
tury was monopsalmic.147 So TUR and, probably, the ninth-century Studite
144
The content of this Tropologion (NE MΓ 56 plus NE MΓ 5) is described in
Nikiforova, ИзисторииМинеивВизантии (see n. 26), pp. 196-236. A compact list of
its feasts is given in Alexandra Nikiforova, ‘«Сокрытое сокровище». Значение
находок 1975 года на Синае для истории служебной Минеи’, in Гимнология,
vol. 6 (Moscow, 2011), pp. 8-31.
145
St. Theodore the Studite speaks of his Tropologion in his Letter 150 to Naukratios.
See Fatouros, TheodoriStuditaeepistulae(see n. 91), vol. 2, p. 268. If Stoudios has a low
degree of ‘festalisation’ in the eleventh c., it would certainly have had it in the ninth c.
146
Julien Leroy, ‘Le cursus canonique chez saint Théodore Studite’, Ephemerides
Liturgicae 68 (1954), pp. 5-19, on pp. 6-7 (text), 10-11.
147
In the same article, Leroy notes St. Theodore’s mention in Catechesis 14, Book I,
of Ps 89:17 in connection with 1H (‘Le cursus canonique’, pp. 12-13). Leroy suggests that
the verse belongs to some prayer said by the monks after 1H. Lutzka picks this up but
interprets it differently: the mention of this verse would refer to Ps 89 as part of a tripsalm
at the office in question; see Lutzka, DiekleinenHoren(see n. 61), p. 28. This interpreta-
tion is not to be excluded; it is true that St. Theodore knows the Psalter well enough to
fill his catecheses with psalm citations, but it is striking that he here cites a psalm which
is known from the Byzantine type Horologion to figure precisely in 1H. Then, the match
of the four monopsalms referred to above is in my opinion yet stronger; how may we
harmonise the two indications? Was St. Theodore referring to the four monopsalms which
in his mind were influenced by Lenten practice (like for instance the Lenten monopsalms
of the Sabaite Typika of SinaiGreek1094 and SinaiGreek1096), while in non-Lenten
Hours there was a tripsalm? Was there a difference between 1H and 3-6-9H, the first being
242 S.R. FRØYSHOV
Horologion were both monopsalmic. We do not dispose of more informa-

tion about the Studite Horologion of this century. For lack of better sources
we must turn to the early-second-millennium Studite Horologion, here con-
sidered as a global unitary subtype148 (STUD.GROUP) comprising the
various Studite and Studite-derived redactions. Such a wider comparison
of TUR and ERL with this type yields a fruitful result. For each office —
Hours, Typika, Vespers and Compline — we have observed very strong
similarity between TUR, ERL, and GROTT.V. To this one might object
that GROTT.V could be a (Athonite-) Studite Horologion revised accord-
ing to the existing local, South Italian tradition. But GROTT.V and the
other codices of STUD.GROUPc (c for South Italian) are still close to the
other branches of STUD.GROUP. Especially TUR, but also ERL, turn out
to be essentially identical with this type, apart from the typical differences
between the Palestinian and the Byzantine Horologion types enumerated
at the beginning of this article.
Given this global and profound connection between TUR and ERL and
both ninth- (as far as we know them through St. Theodore) and eleventh-
century Studite Horologia, should we necessarily conclude that TUR and
ERL are Early Studite Horologia? Indeed, we need to ask whether there
was actually a separate Studite Horologion at all in the ninth century. As
Leroy has rightly pointed out, the intention of the Studite reform was a
return to the sources.149 With such an attitude it would be logical to adopt
an Horologion without changing it or, rather, to preserve the one
St. Theodore had already been using in Bithynia before moving to Stou-
dios. It would seem, then, that Stoudios in the ninth century still just
belonged to a wide-ranging liturgical periphery of Palestine, without yet
constituting a proper, distinct horological tradition.
Rather than trying to explain the similarities between the horological
traditions of South Italy and Constantinople as an exchange between
them, we should now look for their common origin, of which they would
tripsalmic and the three latter monopsalmic, as we find it in AnTyp (pp. 41, 43 – only 1H
and 9H) and SinaiGreek1094 for Monday-Friday of all Great Lent (Описаніе, III, p. 9)?
The question of initial psalmody types and their development in the first millennium needs
further research. With a little doubt I have opted for the interpretation that the Hours were
monopsalmic at Stoudios at the time of St. Theodore. At the latest by approximately the
middle of the eleventh century, they would certainly have become tripsalmic, as witnessed
by STUD.GROUP.
148
Subtype of the Byzantine Horologion type.
149
Julien Leroy, ‘La réforme studite’, in Ilmonachesimoorientale, OCA, 153 (Rome,
1958), pp. 181-214, on p. 187.
be parallel offsprings. Our analysis directs us then towards the Palestinian

origin of ERL and of what more and more appears to have been the vast
periphery domain of a principal and prevailing Horologion.
FurtherBackintotheRoots:TowardsPalestine
But which Palestinian horological tradition was the centre of which

South Italy and Constantinople/Byzantium were peripheries? I can see
only three options: the traditions of the Resurrection cathedral, the Great
Lavra of St. Sabas, and the cenobion of St. Theodosius. The problem is
of course the lack of sources. We dispose of only minimal sources of
actual Palestinian monastic liturgy during the sixth and seventh centuries.
We can only deduct and conjecture backwards through a minute analysis
of later documents, which in addition are often lacunary.
Let us start by answering the question negatively by applying the elim-
ination method. Our comparative examination of the offices of ERL and
TUR has revealed consistent differences with the Sabaite Horologia, con-
cerning almost all the offices.150 As we know these traditions in the ninth
century, it does not at all look as if the Great Lavra of St. Sabas was the
origin of the South Italian Horologia represented by TUR and ERL. But
regarding the Sabaite Horologion two centuries earlier, is there a possibil-
ity that it had significantly evolved since the seventh century? Some of the
features of the ninth-century Sabaite Horologion which are different from
TUR and ERL seem themselves to be early: alleluia responsorium, Typika,
Compline. There is reason to believe, then, that the Sabaite Horologion
possessed these distinct features already in the seventh century.
Another centre to be excluded is the mother church of the Horolo-
gion, the Resurrection cathedral, that is, in the pre-700 (or perhaps
earlier) stage of its Horologion, as known to us through GEO. It is true
that the points of comparison are limited because of the loss of the first
ten day offices in GEO, but at those points of comparison which do
exist GEO is significantly different from the homogenous group of
TUR, ERL, and STUD.GROUP. GEO has quite different Compline and
Midnight offices and, not the least, a very different cursus (24 Hours,
150
Hours: monopsalmic vs. polypsalmic initial psalmody, completely different respon-
sorium (psalm verses, hymns, alleluia in the Sabaite Horologion); Typika: monopsalm
vs. tripsalm; Vespers (ERL): absence of prokeimenon and following elements in ERL;
Compline: major differences of structure and hymnody.
244 S.R. FRØYSHOV
cursus beginning at 1H, PRES/Typika after Vespers). Of course, there

is an overall congruence between GEO, TUR, and ERL, but the differ-
ences are too extensive for GEO to have been their direct source. Could
a ‘post-GEO’ Hagiopolite Horologion be the source of TUR and ERL?
For the eighth and ninth centuries we do not at the moment know of
Hagiopolite Horologion witnesses. The cursus position of the Hag-
PRES, which both in GEO-Rev, AnTyp, and the Georgian version151 is
‘after Vespers’, seems to indicate that the new, post-vesperal position
of the HagPRES (seen in GEO) was preserved in Hagiopolite tradition
during the centuries following GEO and therefore speaks against a
direct ‘post-GEO’ Hagiopolite origin of TUR and ERL. The tenth-cen-
tury GEO-Con needs to be studied in detail, but if its differences in
relation to GEO reflect changes at the Resurrection cathedral itself (and
not peripheral, Georgian revisions) it also precludes such an origin of
TUR and ERL.
I can now see only two real possibilities for the origin of ERL: the
monastery of St. Theodosius, more or less forgotten in liturgical matters,
and the Resurrection cathedral at a ‘pre-GEO’ stage.
ThePalestinianTraditionRepresentedinERL:Hagiopoliteor
Theodosian?
In order to judge between these two possibilities, the ‘pre-GEO’ Res-

urrection cathedral and St. Theodosius, we need marks of dating. A first
chronological mark is the time of the spreading of Palestinian liturgy,
including the Horologion, westwards to areas of the Byzantine empire.
This ‘exportation’ of Palestinian liturgy is customarily said to have been
significant from the seventh century onwards, in the wake of the Persian
(614) and Arab (630s) invasions, and here we shall accept this date with-
out further inquiries. The transmission of the Palestinian daily office, and
therefore of the Horologion, must have reached South Italy in the seventh
century, as evidenced by the existence of Sicilian hymnographers writing
within Hagiopolite genres, the best known of whom was George Sike-
liôtês (seventh-eighth c.).152
151
GrazUniv.Libr.2058/4, in Liturgiaeibericaeantiquiores, ed. Michael Tarchnišvili,
CSCO, 122 (Louvain, 1950), p. 93; SinaiGeorgianO.12, fol. 7v.
152
See Hans-Georg Beck, KircheundtheologischeLiteraturimbyzantinischenReich
(Munich, 1959), pp. 472-473. See also Stig Simeon R. Frøyshov, ‘Byzantine rite’, The
CanterburyDictionaryofHymnology, http://www.hymnology.co.uk/.
A second chronological mark is the transition in Jerusalem from the

old hymnal, known only in its Georgian version (the Ancient Iadgari) to
the new, known as (the New) Tropologion. As I have argued elsewhere,
the earliest new stage hymnody seems to be that of St. Sophronius
(d. 638),153 but major contributors whose names are known must have
started composing during the last decades of the seventh century: John
of Damascus (ca. 655-ca. 745), Kosmas the Melodist (ca. 675 - 752/754),
Germanus (ca. 655-before 754) and Andrew of Crete (ca. 660-ca. 732).
So the transition to the New stage hymnody may have started already in
the early-seventh century but really accelerated late in the same century;
we may set the year 700 as a convenient date.
Now a chronological mark of liturgical character depends partly on the
date of this transition of hymnals: the date of GEO. Since TUR and ERL
are markedly different from GEO, considered the Horologion of the Resur-
rection cathedral, they can go directly back to this cathedral only if they did
so in a time prior to GEO. A major indication of the terminusantequem of
GEO is the presence of Ancient Iadgari hymnody. But as I have said above
(section ‘Other Horologia consulted’), the dating of GEO is still an unsettled
question and I tend to think that the grandiose and demanding liturgical
arrangement reflected in GEO, resulting from a significant reform of the
Hagiopolite Horologion, appeared around 600 rather than around 700.
This rapid overview of chronological presuppositions shows us, first,
that Hagiopolite liturgy was being transmitted to Byzantine peripheries
during the century which is considered the first major period for such
transmission, and that the Hagiopolite Horologion may or may not have
been a part of it, depending on the date given to GEO.
On the other hand we must try to determine whether there are elements
of the peripheral Horologion that must be considered more recent than
the seventh century, in that case making improbable a transmission from
Palestine of the ‘pre-GEO’ Horologion of Jerusalem.154
Parenti interprets the hexapsalm of the TUR Compline as the result of
‘il processo di riduzione dei Salmi a sei unità sotto influsso
dell’hexapsalmos dell’orthros’.155 This could be an argument for its being
a more recent element, since the polypsalm itself seems fairly late.
153
Frøyshov, ‘The Georgian Witness’ (see n. 20), p. 237. See my entry ‘Sophronius
of Jerusalem,’ in the CanterburyDictionaryofHymnology, http://www.hymnology.co.uk/.
154
There is also the possibility of elements having been added intheperiphery poste-
rior to the transition and in line with developments in Palestine.
155
Parenti, ‘Un fascicolo’ (see n. 24), p. 352.
246 S.R. FRØYSHOV
But I think his interpretation is wrong: the evolution of initial psalmody

seems clearly to have gone gradually from monopsalm via tripsalm to
polypsalm156 (and the hexapsalm is just a double tripsalm).157 In addition,
the Sabaite witnesses SAB and SCHØY also have a hexapsalm.158 It does
seem that polypsalms of GEO and ERL (double tesserapsalms) are
expansions of the hexapsalm.
Another possible late element in TUR is the Typika office and its trip-
salm (Pss 102 and 145, Beatitudes). First, the Typika is interpreted by some
as a development of the HagPRES,159 which would imply a quite recent
dating of the Typika. Stefanos Alexopoulos has proposed to consider the
two as parallel offices created independently of one another on the basis
of the Liturgy of St. James.160 However, as noted above, the variant of the
‘Typika’ office found in Armenian Horologion manuscripts carries sure
traces of being an older redaction, with the implication that the ‘Typika’
represents a pristine HagPRES, celebrated after 9H and not after Vespers.
In conclusion I do not see that there is any element of TUR which must
necessarily be considered more recent than the seventh century.
While the liturgy of the Resurrection cathedral is known from many
sources and has been considerably studied, the same cannot be said about
liturgy of the cenobion of St. Theodosius: apart from a few thirteenth- or
fourteenth-century Typika which, as we have seen, attach themselves to
St. Theodosius the Cenobiarch, very few liturgical documents attach
themselves to St. Theodosius and hardly anything has been written about
this liturgical tradition.161 However, as argued by Bernard Flusin, St. The-
odosius was not only the largest Palestinian monastery but also the most
powerful one, occupying a single archimandritate of the Palestinian
desert from the middle of the sixth century and during the seventh cen-
tury. This was to the detriment of St. Sabas, since St. Sabas had earlier
had its share in a double archimandritate.162 A sign of this position is that
156
Lutzka holds this possibility open in DiekleinenHoren(see n. 61), p. 44.
157
For argumentation, I refer to my article ‘The Palestino-Byzantine Horologion’ (see
n. 4).
158
Like GEO, with a supplement horssérie of verses 169-176 (last Hebrew letter of
the acrostichon) from Ps 118 and a triple verse 12.
159
Robert Taft, ‘Home Communion in the Late Antique East’, in ArsLiturgiae:Wor-
ship,AestheticsandPraxis.EssaysinHonorofNathanD.Mitchell, ed. Clare V. Johnson
(Chicago IL, 2003), pp. 1-25, on p. 10.
160
Alexopoulos, ThePresanctifiedLiturgy (see n. 67), p. 86.
161
I have made a preliminary study of early Theodosian liturgy in Frøyshov,
L’Horologe«géorgien»(see n. 21), p. 375-382.
162
Bernard Flusin, Saint Anastase le Perse et l’histoire de la Palestine au début du
VIIesiècle(Paris, 1992), vol. II, pp. 22-23.
two seventh-century patriarchs of Jerusalem were monks of St. Theodo-

sius: Modestus (632-634) and Sophronius (634-638). In view of such
power constellations in the century when emigration from Palestine accel-
erated because of war and invasion, it would not be surprising if a major
form of Palestinian liturgy spreading with monasticism to peripheries was
that of St. Theodosius rather than that of St. Sabas. St. Theodore acknowl-
edges that it is precisely the Theodosian Diatyposis that lies at the founda-
tion of Studite monasticism.163 One can very well envisage that the Theo-
dosian liturgy would have accompanied this regulation document.
Being a monastery of common life with hundreds of monks, the The-
odosian cenobion no doubt had sufficient resources to sustain a dynamic
and demanding daily office. But what specific information do we possess
about early Theodosian liturgy and is it congruent with TUR, ERL, and
the later Studite Horologion? At this point, I know barely more than a
couple of things that are relevant about early Theodosian liturgy: that
St. Theodosius in the sixth century had a sevenfold daily cursus and that
one of the offices consisted of nightly psalmody of the brotherhood.164
The latter is commonplace in nightly liturgy. The first point permits some
comparative examination. St. Theodore Studite says that his monks have
seven daily offices and he enumerates them.165 We may make the follow-
ing table with the daily cursus of relevant documents:
Table 8: Comparative table of daily cursus
ERL TUR Stoudios, Armenian SAB ‘Sabaite Cell GROTT.V

early 9th c. daily office, Horologion’,
166
A.D. 700 A.D. 960167
[Matins] Nocturns+ Nocturns Matins
Matins
1H 1H 1H Matins 1H 1H 1H + 1MH
3H 3H 3H 3H 3H 3H 3H + 3MH
6H 6H 6H 6H 6H 6H 6H + 6MH
Typika 9H 9H 9H 9H 9H Typika
163
Leroy, ‘La réforme studite’ (see n. 149), p. 209 with references.
164
Theodore of Petra, ‘Vie de Saint Théodose’, in Les moines d’Orient, III/3, Les
moinesdePalestine, ed. A.-J. Festugière (Paris, 1963), p. 45, l. 18-20, and p. 23, l. 9-11.
165
Catechesis 33, Book I. St. Theodore does not mention Typika. See the reference in
Leroy, ‘Le cursus canonique’ (see n. 146), p. 13.
166
As seen in the commentary on the daily office by Stepʻanos Siwnecʻi (d. 735),
cf. Findikyan, TheCommentaryontheArmenianDailyOffice(see n. 18).
167
See Frøyshov, ‘The Georgian witness’ (see n. 20), p. 257.
248 S.R. FRØYSHOV
9H Typika [Typika] Typika 9H + 9MH

Vespers Vespers Vespers Vespers Vespers Vespers
Compline Compline Compline Compline Compline Compline Compline
[Nocturns]
[Matins] Matins
If we do not count the Typika office, as was seemingly not done at the
time either,168 most of the compared sources have a sevenfold daily cur-
sus. The difference between the older documents of the table is the
absence or presence of 1H. I suspect that when 1H was introduced, Noc-
turns and Matins began to be counted as one single office (‘canon’),
which was in any case no doubt celebrated without interruption, in order
to retain the scriptural number (cf. Ps 118:164). We may conclude that
a Theodosian sevenfold daily cursus is fully compatible with the periph-
eral Horologion (TUR, etc.).
However, the sevenfold cursus is also fully compatible with — indeed
most probably identical to — what we may assume was the Hagiopolite
daily cursus around the turn of the fifth century. The Armenian daily
cursus of around 700, with its absence of 1H and a Nocturns office dis-
tinct from Matins, seems ancient. It is not impossible that this daily round
of seven offices had remained unchanged from the fifth century and, if
the Armenians received it from Jerusalem, is identical to what was the
daily cursus of the Resurrection cathedral at that time.
Given the scarceness of sources and the present state of research, it is
not possible to judge definitively whether it was a Hagiopolite or a The-
odosian Horologion that lay behind the dominant Horologion of the vast
peripheral domain of which ERL is a late witness. First, our evaluation
depends on a still uncertain dating of GEO. If only GEO is dated to the
late-sixth / early-seventh century, the ‘pre-GEO’ Hagiopolite Horologion
would be too early for it to be the direct source of the great peripheral
Horologion tradition and in that case the direct source would have to be
the Theodosian Horologion. We know that many monks were among the
emigrants from Palestine and they would have brought with them the
Theodosian (or the Sabaite) Horologion rather than the Hagiopolite
Horologion. What does suggest a Theodosian origin to the South Italian
tradition represented by TUR and ERL is the composition of TUR: as
168
The two literary documents of the table, St. Theodore and ‘Sabaite Cell Horolo-
gion’, do not mention the Typika but it is to be conjectured that the Typika was observed.
I have argued elsewhere,169 the absence of the Major Offices in TUR

does not fit with a cathedral or parish use, in which these offices would
absolutely have been present together with the Hours and Compline, but
it does correspond to a type of monasticism in which the Major Offices
were celebrated in common and the rest of the offices not. Such a monas-
ticism could only be cenobitic and TUR would therefore represent a cell
Horologion of cenobitic tradition, of which St. Theodosius was the fore-
most representative in Palestine.
For our discernment between Hagiopolite and Theodosian Horologia
as the direct source of TUR and ERL there is yet another essential factor:
the relationship between these two Palestinian daily offices. Above we
have hypothetically presented the Theodosian cenobion as a periphery of
the cathedral. On the basis of our knowledge about the relationship
between the liturgies of cathedrals and monasteries,170 I would expect the
cenobion of St. Theodosius to have adopted the Hagiopolite Horologion
and have resources to implement it. The fact that St. Theodosius himself
had been a Spoudaite (Σπουδαῖος) ascetic at the cathedral for a while,
perhaps about a year,171 does not speak against this view.
However, while the Resurrection cathedral saw a dynamic liturgical
evolution during these centuries of Byzantine rule, did the Theodosian
monks follow the cathedral evolution or did they more or less preserve
what they had received in 479? Here we touch a very complex question
which surely cannot be resolved here. There are some four liturgical
peripheries that are perceived to have adopted the Horologion of the
cathedral during the fifth century: the Armenian church, the Georgian
church, St. Theodosius (479), and St. Sabas (483). Any theory of what
was the nature of the Hagiopolite daily office and the daily office of the
peripheries will have to show compatibility with all existing sources. One
cannot speak about one without at the same time speaking about the oth-
ers. Most probably, these four peripheries related differently to the centre.
Since GEO is to be dated at least a century after the Georgians’ reception
of Hagiopolite liturgy, the Georgian witness to the Jerusalem liturgy
offers an intriguing case of an ‘updated’ periphery. Visibly, some, if not
169
Frøyshov, ‘Livre de prière quotidienne sans offices majeures’, part 2 in the Russian
translation (see n. 28).
170
See Stig Simeon R. Frøyshov, ‘The Cathedral-Monastic Distinction. Part I: Was
Egyptian Desert Liturgy a Pure Monastic Office?’, StudiaLiturgica 37 (2007), pp. 198-
216 and ‘The Cathedral-Monastic Distinction, part II’ (in preparation for StudiaLiturgica).
171
On the biography of St. Theodosius, see Frøyshov, L’Horologe «géorgien» (see
n. 21), pp. 375-377.
250 S.R. FRØYSHOV
all, Georgians replaced the Horologion they had received in the fifth
century with GEO. The Armenians, perhaps because of reduced ecclesial
contact with Jerusalem, seem to have been more conservative. St. Sabas
also appears to have been a conservative periphery of the cathedral, even
though it must have followed the cathedral at some point after 483 in the
reorganization of the cursus to make 1H its beginning instead of Matins.
In any case, if both St. Theodosius and St. Sabas received their Horolo-
gion from the same Resurrection cathedral at the same time, and the three
have a different daily office a century later, at least two out of these three
must have undergone a liturgical evolution.
Conclusion
As the oldest dated Greek Horologion, ErlangenA2 (A.D. 1025) is an

important witness for our knowledge of the development of the Horolo-
gion book. ERL is one of the last preserved witnesses, if not the last, of
the earlier, Palestinian Horologion type. This type, which embraces var-
ious Palestinian subtypes of the second half of the first millennium, is
known from manuscript sources of Palestinian and South Italian prove-
nance only. In addition to ERL, another South Italian Horologion witness
of the Palestinian type is found in the ninth-century TUR.
In accordance with the general characteristics of the Palestinian type
Horologion, ERL has cathisma 18 at Vespers, a simple Compline office,
and no final prayers. The two South Italian witnesses are the only pres-
ently known Horologia to have monopsalmic initial psalmody consist-
ently at the Hours. They are also distinguished by their inclusion of a
series of kata stichon hymns (and not only Ἡ ἀσώματος φύσις). The
ERL Vespers has the archaic feature of a tripsalmic KyrEk at Vespers,
without the now habitual Ps 116 at the end.
There are also differences between ERL and TUR. While TUR lacks the
Major Offices, ERL has Vespers — and probably had Matins where there
is now a lacuna. Unlike TUR, ERL established a distinction between ordi-
nary and Lenten time, but this distinction is not quite as systematic as in
BYZ; for some offices there is only one variant, either ordinary or Lenten.
ERL has acquired more extensive office beginnings than TUR. In ordinary,
non-Lenten time, ERL, like BYZ, lacks the responsorium at 1-3-6H.
As an individual Horologion, ERL gives a certain impression of reduc-
tionism and decay. In ordinary time ERL prescribes neither 9H nor
Compline. The Typika office is unusually meagre. Throughout the series
of offices there are strange absences and presences and rubrical incon-
sistencies, as well as alterations of standard texts. One of these alterations
entails an error in the Greek, suggesting that the level of Greek in ERL’s
community had declined.
If my conclusion about Matins is correct, ERL is the only witness of
the Palestinian Horologion type having a daily cursus beginning with
Matins or, to be more correct for this period, the double office of Noc-
turns and Matins. With the corroboration of the Armenian Horologion,
the roots of which are probably the same as those of ERL, I further hold
that the sevenfold daily cursus starting with Nocturns-Matins, present in
ERL must have been the Hagiopolite daily cursus of the fifth-sixth cen-
turies. In that case ERL, unlike the other witnesses of the Palestinian
Horologion type whose cursus begins with 1H, has preserved a pristine
feature of the Hagiopolite Horologion.
The two South Italian witnesses are strikingly close to BYZ and to the
particular tradition that, out of the diversity of Horologion groups and
types, was to prevail and become the Byzantine Horologion. However,
TUR and ERL relate somewhat differently to this tradition. While TUR
in some respects172 stands closer to BYZ than ERL does, ERL has strik-
ing similarities with second millennium witnesses (especially SYRO-P)
belonging to a ‘Neo-Palestinian’ subtype of the Byzantine Horologion
type, particularly through absences and the ending of Vespers.173 These
similarities imply that ERL, or rather the liturgical milieu to which it
belonged, must have been in contact with some Palestinian Horologion
tradition which influenced it away from TUR and BYZ. This tradition
could possibly be that of (later) St. Theodosius, since there are signs
pointing to a connection between the ‘Neo-Palestinian’ group and the
cenobia of Mount Sinai and St. Theodosius, the latter being the monas-
tery of the hieromonk whom the scribe of ERL asks the reader to remem-
ber. Since TUR is close to the great and prevailing tradition and ERL less
so, and since ERL is in contact with the cenobion which, as we suggest
below, was at the roots or close to the roots of the tradition of TUR and
ERL, the implication is that it was the Byzantine continuation of early
Hagiopolite or Theodosian daily office that was to prevail in the Byzantine
world, and not the local, Palestinian continuation of these offices itself.
172
It has a very similar Compline, incl. the hexapsalm and Hours like the Lenten
variant in BYZ.
173
To this one may perhaps add the Lenten variant of Typika in ERL, which is absent
in TUR.
252 S.R. FRØYSHOV
Studite liturgy of the second millennium does not seem to have been
in any direct relation to ERL. In particular, ERL has a much higher
degree of ‘festalisation’ than what is compatible with the relatively low
extent of feasts in the early-eleventh-century Studite rite. Unlike the Stu-
dite rite, ERL presupposes the complete Office Menaion appearing in the
late-ninth century in connection with, among others, the South Italian
Joseph the Hymnographer and the Palestinian Theophanes Graptos.
Our very partial knowledge of ninth-century Studite liturgy seems to
suggest that TUR is compatible with this tradition. However, our study
does not suggest a direct influence from Stoudios on TUR, even though
it is not completely excluded. Rather, it is more fruitful to consider first
millennium South Italian and Studite Horologia as equal parts of a larger
and quite homogenous periphery of a certain Palestinian tradition. This
tradition was neither that of St. Sabas, as we know it from sources of the
ninth and tenth centuries,174 nor the Hagiopolite horological tradition, as
we know it from GEO (before 700). Further, the tradition which is
reflected in TUR and ERL, and which was to prevail in Byzantium, is
presently not found in any first millennium Horologion witness of Pales-
tinian provenance. In other words, TUR and ERL are most probably
recipients of a Palestinian Horologion that was exported to the periphery
during the seventh century but then either was more or less eclipsed in
Palestine itself or did not leave any trace surviving until our times.
The question arises: which Palestinian Horologion tradition was trans-
mitted to South Italy and destined to prevail in Byzantium? One would
a priori expect it to have been that of the source itself, the Resurrection
cathedral. But, depending on the dating of GEO, it may have been
through the intermediary of the cenobion of St. Theodosius: if GEO is
essentially to be dated to around 700 it could very well have been
exported in the seventh century, but if it dates from a century earlier it is
only in the sixth century that a ‘pre-reform’ Hagiopolite Horologion com-
patible with TUR and ERL could have been transmitted.
While it is at present impossible to judge whether the Palestinian source
of ERL is the cathedral itself or St. Theodosius, even though the latter
seems the more probable, it might not make a significant difference. Most
probably, I would say, the seventh-century Theodosian daily office would
not have differed essentially from the Hagiopolite daily office of the previ-
ous century. In all probability, therefore, our Horologion Erlangen A2,
174
It is therefore incorrect to state, as is often done, that the Studite tradition adopted
the Sabaite Horologion.
copied in 1025 in South Italy, is fairly close, and TUR even closer, to the
Horologion of the Resurrection cathedral of the sixth century.
This also implies that it was some early Hagiopolite Horologion,
observed and preserved in a non-Studite Byzantine, probably monastic,
milieu that became the dominant horological tradition of the Byzantine
rite right up until our own days. In this way the Erlangen Horologion
helps us to realise the high extent to which the present Byzantine Horolo-
gion is a faithful heir to the daily office of the Resurrection cathedral at
its height in Late Antiquity.

ΩΡΟΛΟΓΙΟΝ

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

ΩΡΟΛΟΓΙΟΝ

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

This pdf is a digital offprint of your contribution in

B. GROEN, D. GALADZA, N. GLIBETIC & G. RADLE

The copyright on this publication belongs to Peeters

As author you are licensed to make printed copies of the

If you wish to publish your article immediately on open-

For queries about offprints, copyright and republication

RITES AND RITUALS OF

Peter GALADZA, New Frontiers in Eastern Christian Liturgy:

Diliana ATANASSOVA, The Primary Sources of Southern Egyptian

Daniel GALADZA,TheJerusalemLectionaryandtheByzantineRite 181

Stig Simeon R. FRØYSHOV,ErlangenUniversityLibraryA2,A.D.1025:

Nino SAKVARELIDZE, Some Aspects of the Byzantinization of

André LOSSKY, Le Typicon de Saint Sabas Sinaiticus Graecus

Gabriel Isaac RADLE, The Nuptial Rites in Two Rediscovered

Steven HAWKES-TEEPLES, The Prothesis of the Byzantine Divine

Nina GLIBETIC, The Byzantine Enarxis Psalmody on the Balkans

Šimon MARINČÁK, Shaping Elements of Early Slavic Christian

Brian A. BUTCHER, Figuring Liturgically: A Ricoeurian Analysis

Jose KOCHUPARAMPIL, Redemptive Economy in the Third East

Abdo BADWI, The Evolution of Maronite Sacred Iconography:

Stig Simeon R. FRØYSHOV

The study of the Palestino-Byzantine Horologion is still in its early

A major point of the typology offered in my overview article is the

Short Description of the Codex and the Horologion

The manuscript has been described in detail by H. Thurn in the 1980

5. (Lectionary) Ascension, Pentecost, Nativity of St. John the Baptist

Other Horologia Consulted

GEO = Sinai Georgian O.34 (copied mid-tenth century, content

STUD.GROUP. I also make some use of witnesses belonging to a

type, including both ‘pure’ Studite and ‘Studite-

Fixed Prayers at the Beginning and at the End

Before studying each office in turn, we shall start with a comparative

Table 1: Comparative table of office beginnings

The comparative table allows us to make some deductions concerning

GEO, Compline (1st part)

ERL, 9H (fol. 38rv)

ERL, 3H (fol. 33v)

ERL, 6H (fol. 34v)

TUR (1H, fol. 141r) = BYZ ERL (1H, fol. 32v)

of Greek grammar created when the dative of ταῖςἁμαρτίαις is kept in

Table 3: Structure of the Hours of ERL

1H (fol. 32rv) 3H (fol. 32v-33v) 6H (fol. 33v-34v) 9H (see separate study

The monopsalm of the Hours constitutes a particular type of initial

The absence of the responsorium in 1-3-6H requires a particular com-

Table 4: Comparative table of the Ninth Hour

ERL TUR57 GROTT.V AnTyp SAB SYRO-P

GNE GNE GNE. GNE.

Table 5: Comparative table of Typika

ERL, SAB (and Armenian ERL, TUR72 GROTT.V73 SYRO-P

Creed Creed Creed Creed Creed Creed Creed

The Lenten variant of the ERL Typika, ‘monopsalmic’ because it con-

As for the previous offices, we shall outline the ERL Vespers in

Table 6: Comparative table of Vespers

ERL (fol. 39v-47v) SYRO-P SAB GROTT.V85 (≈ BYZ)

Θεοτόκε, Παρθένε. Θεοτόκε, Παρθένε. Θεοτόκε, Παρθένε

Priest: Ὁ Θεὸς [Final blessing:]

After Ps 103, ERL has cathisma 18 (Pss 119-133), as in present prac-

absence of central elements such as the prokeimenon and, to some degree,

Like the other Palestinian type Horologion witnesses, ERL has a

Horologion in which Compline is normally a composite office. This sin-

Table 7: Comparative table of Compline

ERL (fol. TUR99 GROTT.V GEO GEO-Con (fol. SAB SCHØY

Pss 45:8,12,11 Pss 12:4, 4:9 Pss 12:4, Ps 12:1

Unlike the monopsalmic Hours, the initial psalmody of Compline in