THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR the Evidence of the Nubian Lectionaries*

THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR The Evidence of the Nubian Lectionaries*

1. Introduction

There are still many aspects of Christian culture of the Middle Nile Valley that remain largely understudied. One of them is Nubian liturgy, which belongs to the most difficult fields of research for a Nubiologist. This difficulty stems from the paucity and fragmentation of sources and is reflected in a limited number of publications devoted to the subject. One of these few articles and at the same time the most complete one was published by Heinzgerd Brakmann in the ArchivfürLiturgiewissen- schaft in 20061. In the second paragraph of this excellent text, Brakmann states that to present a general analysis of the Nubian liturgy, a series of detailed researches is required, one of them on the order of the pericopae preserved in Nubian sources. As a matter of fact, the subject was not left untouched, but it has never been presented in a detailed manner. To the best of my knowledge, only three scholars attempted to interpret the earliest-known and

* In my book on the dating systems used in the Middle Nile Valley between the sixth and the fifteenth centuries, I devoted a small chapter to the survey of sources that contain information on different feasts of the Nubian Church (OCHAŁA, ChronologicalSystems, p. 321-324). I, however, did not go into details of the Nubian liturgical calendar, since the subject largely exceeded the scope of the book. In the present article I attempt to present a more adequate analysis of the sources. The present article is a seriously revised version of the text published in Polish in 2013 (OCHAŁA, Kalendarzliturgiczny). A detailed analysis of one text discussed here, “The Qasr Ibrim typikon”, has already been published in HAGEN – OCHAŁA, SaintsandScrip- turesforPhaophi; however, our previous considerations are repeated here to some extent for the sake of completeness of the evidence and discussion. My research on this subject has been generously financed by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Poland (grant no. 0392/IP3/2011/71, title of the project: “Chronological systems of Christian Nubia: liturgical calendar and king’s list”). I wish to thank in this place Diliana Atanassova, Nathalie Bosson, Joost Hagen, Adam Łajtar, Giovanni Ruffini, Jacques van der Vliet, and Ewa Wipszycka for commenting upon various drafts of the present text. Special thanks go to Diliana Atanassova, who has furnished me with information about unpublished typika from the White Monastery and permitted me to use this extremely important comparative material, and to Giovanni Ruffini, who corrected my English. Finally, I would like to express my utmost gratitude to Ugo Zanetti, whose critical review of the text helped me remove bigger and smaller errors that resulted from my lack of experience in the field of liturgiology. 1 BRAKMANN, Defunctus, p. 283-333.

998027.indb8027.indb 1 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 2 G. OCHAŁA

most extensively preserved fragment of a lectionary from the Middle Nile Valley, the so-called “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary”: Hermann Junker in 1906, Francis Griffith in 1913, and Bruce Metzger in 19682. However, all of them limited themselves to more or less laconic but very similar statements that the Nubian order of the readings finds no parallel in lectionaries of other churches3. Both Junker and Griffith took as their point of departure the present-day system of readings of the Coptic Church, which, although it preserves some archaic elements, especially the readings for solemnities4, is a result of centuries of development. Hence, it is hardly surprising that only very few similarities can be found in the Nubian lectionaries. Metzger, on the other hand, took as his basis “Greek and Coptic lectionaries” (without any further specification, regrettably), but he was not able to identify any parallels either. All three scholars had at their disposal only one text; at present, after the discovery and publication of documents from Qasr Ibrim, the number has increased five times. However unimpressive this number still is, the documents deserve a closer look, all the more so since no one has ever paid any particular attention to them and their historical and liturgical analysis is still lacking. In my research I have decided to go beyond Coptic and Greek sources and to verify lectionaries of other Eastern churches as well: Syriac, Geor- gian, and Armenian, according to the availability of sources and their publications5. For the Reader’s convenience, in the “Appendix” placed at the end of the present article I give a full list of sources and publications

2 JUNKER, DieneuentdecktenchristlichenHandschriften, p. 440-441; GRIFFITH, The NubianTexts, p. 25; METZGER, TheChristianizationofNubia, p. 120. Gerald M. Browne, who was the last editor of the text (see below), is not included here, since he conducted only a codicological, grammatical, and linguistic analysis of the source. 3 Interestingly, “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” is occasionally mentioned in scholarly literature on the ancient liturgy. I have managed to locate three such remarks, one in BAUMSTARK, NichtevangelischesyrischePerikopenordnungen, p. 34, and two other in ZANETTI, Les lectionnaires coptes annuels, p. 19-20, and ZANETTI, Les lectionnaires coptes, p. 177. Both scholars, however, mention the Nubian text in connection with Egypt and her liturgical tradition rather than discuss it as a document of the separate Church of Nubia. 4 ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptes, p. 150 and 167. 5 Ethiopia is excluded from this list, because in my research I have not come across any published Ethiopic lectionary. FRITSCH – ZANETTI, Gǝṣṣawe, p. 773-775, note that the Ethiopian liturgical calendar is based on the Egyptian (more probably the Upper Egyptian) one, but no comparative studies of the pericopae have been undertaken so far. To date, only the temporal has been made available to scholars not reading in Ethiopic in FRITSCH, TheLiturgicalYearI: TheTemporal (nonvidi); cf. FRITSCH, TheLiturgicalYear:Intro- duction, p. 71-116. The Ethiopian synaxarium, on the other hand, is known to have been translated in the fourteenth century from Coptic-Arabic sources (COLIN – BAUSI, Sǝnkǝssar, p. 621-623; COQUIN, Synaxarion,Ethiopian, p. 2190-2191).

998027.indb8027.indb 2 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 3

used as comparative material for the Nubian pericopae. The “Appendix” includes both abbreviations of the most frequently used bibliographic references, explanations concerning names, sigla, and inventory numbers appearing throughout the article, and brief descriptions of sources. Unfortunately, the comparative material is rather limited, which in some cases results not from the lack of sources but rather their state of publication. This is especially visible in the case of Byzantine liturgical books, which are abundant but virtually unavailable6. Moreover, until quite recently Greek lectionaries were studied solely from the perspective of the textual criticism of the Scriptures7. Thus, the system of readings of the Byzantine Church is not well known and the compilation produced by Caspar René Gregory more than a hundred years ago is, to the best of my knowledge, the only publication making such information available to scholars. On the other hand, one experiences a lack of sources, especially ancient ones, in the case of Egypt. This situation is particularly frustrating, since Egypt as Nubia’s closest neighbour could be the key to understanding the Nubian liturgy. These two facts, the lack of sources and the lack of publications, make the present-day liturgical calendars of the Greek and Coptic Churches in many cases the only source of analogies. Of course, both calendars are the effect of hundreds of years of evolution, but since we have no access to particular stages of the process, it seems worthwhile to look at the final result, all the more so since both traditions are highly conservative (which, by the way, also finds confirmation in the present article). Thus, the present paper is the first attempt to comprehensively analyse the fragments of the Nubian lectionaries known to date. The article consists of three parts: the presentation of the material, a typological analysis of the sources, remarks on the order of the Liturgy of the Word, and a discussion of the Nubian choice of pericopae. All parts have a value in themselves, mainly thanks to their systematising character. However, they also bring a handful of interesting observations, which, when put together, may bring us a bit closer to a better understanding of the Nubian liturgical calendar in particular and the Nubian liturgy in general. Of course, the sources are too fragmentary to expect from them a full picture, but they are the only witnesses of the Nubian system of pericopae and as such deserve particular attention.

6 A list of manuscripts prepared by Caspar Gregory in 1900 (GREGORY, Textkritik, p. 387-477) includes 1359 New Testament lectionaries, but I have no information how many of them have ever been published. 7 The history of research on this category of sources is presented in JORDAN, TheTex- tualTradition, p. 15-39.

998027.indb8027.indb 3 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 4 G. OCHAŁA

2. Thesources

As mentioned above, there are five fragments of Nubian lectionaries in total. All of them are in different states of preservation and they cover different parts of the liturgical year. Apart from “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” (no. 1), the provenance of which is unknown, all of the remaining pieces (nos. 2-5) were found at the site of Qasr Ibrim, one of the most important cities in Lower Nubia8. Fragment no. 5 is exceptional in this assemblage, because it is written partly in Greek and partly in Coptic, while the remaining four texts are exclusively in the Old Nubian language. None of the fragments contains an annual date; also, no internal (textual) criteria exist for establishing their dating. Therefore, one is forced to esti- mate the age of the pieces only on the grounds of analogies, palaeography, and archaeological context. In the case of the Old Nubian fragments, one can indicate only a rough terminuspostquem in the eleventh century, when the fully blown written form of this language is believed to have been introduced9. The situation is no better in the case of the Greek/Coptic fragment, since the palaeography sets its date to not later than the ninth century. Unfortunately, the archaeological context in which the four Qasr Ibrim texts were found informs us only about the end of the usage of these liturgical books, and one must keep in mind that such books tended to be used for a considerable period. The detailed descriptions of the texts follow below.

2.1. “Griffith’sOldNubianlectionary”10 This name, denoting a fragment of an Old Nubian parchment codex kept in the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin (MS. Or. Quart. 1019)11, was used

8 The city flourished in the Middle Ages and produced an extraordinary number of written sources of all types and in all languages used in Christian Nubia. The excavations, which were carried out by the archaeological mission of the Egypt Exploration Society, are the subject of numerous publications. Two of them are especially worth mentioning, both by William Y. Adams, a longtime field director of the excavations: ADAMS, Qasr Ibrim:TheLateMediaevalPeriod, and ADAMS, QasrIbrim:TheEarlierMedievalPeriod. The texts found at the site have been published in many places, among which the most important are P.QITim., P.QI I-IV, and I.QI (the sigla designating the publications of texts excavated at Qasr Ibrim have been proposed by OCHAŁA – RUFFINI, AGuidetotheTexts). 9 See OCHAŁA, MultilingualisminChristianNubia, p. 30, 36-37, 41-43. As far as we know, the palaeography of Old Nubian texts remained unchanged until the end of the fifteenth century and therefore cannot be an indicator for a more precise dating. 10 In order not to refer to the particular texts by their number in this catalogue or by their inventory number or in another less intuitive way, I have decided to retain the tradi- tional names and sigla of four texts and to give a new name to one. This should make it easier for the Reader to follow the argument. 11 Recently, the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin has made available a set of digital images of the codex; they are available at .

998027.indb8027.indb 4 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 5

for the first time by Gerald Browne in his 1981 republication of this text12. The eponymic use of the name of Francis Griffith was due to the fact that he was the first editor of the lectionary. The text was bought in 1906 in the Egyptian antiquities market by Karl Schmidt13. Soon after the purchase Schmidt together with Heinrich Schäfer published two short articles describing the content of the acquired manuscript14. However, it was only in 1913 that Griffith published the editioprinceps of the text15. The last scholar to concern himself with the lectionary was Browne, who presented five subsequent editions16, as well as a number of corrections published in various places17. This is the best preserved and the most extensively discussed text in the assemblage18. The manuscript consists of a quire of four double leaves (16 pages). The particular leaves are in various states of preservation, but most of them have preserved the upper margin with the ancient pagination. They are numbered from Ⲣ (100) to ⲢⲒⲈ (115). However, the damage is quite extensive, especially in the lower part, which results in a considerable loss to the text, including a few rubrics (on pages 101, 103, 110, 112, and 115). The lectionary provides readings for the period between the 24th and the 30th of Choiak (20-26 December)19, that is Christmastide. The correlation between the dates and the numbers of the pages led Bruce Metzger to the supposition that originally the lectionary began with the reading for the first day of the liturgical year20.

12 BROWNE, Griffith’sOldNubianLectionary (1981). 13 GRIFFITH, TheNubianTexts, p. 4. 14 SCHÄFER – SCHMIDT, DieerstenBruchstücke; SCHÄFER – SCHMIDT, Diealtnubischen christlichenHandschriften. 15 GRIFFITH, TheNubianTexts, p. 24-41. 16 BROWNE, Griffith’sOldNubianLectionary (1981); BROWNE, Griffith’sOldNubian Lectionary (1982); BROWNE, Griffith’sOldNubianLectionary:TheRevision; BROWNE, LiteraryTextsinOldNubian, p. 14-22 (transcription on odd pages, translation on even pages), 84-85 (commentary); BROWNE, OldNubianLiteraryTexts, p. 8-14. 17 BROWNE, NotesonGriffith’sOldNubianLectionary; BROWNE, NotesonOldNubian texts(I-III), p. 29-30; BROWNE, ChrysostomusNubianus, commentary, passim; BROWNE, NotesonOldNubiantexts(IV-V), p. 2-5; BROWNE, StudiesinOldNubian, p. 4-5; BROWNE, NotesonOldNubiantexts(VI-IX), p. 63-67. 18 See above, p. 2 and n. 2-3. 19 Here and throughout the dates of the Egyptian calendar are converted into the Julian calendar. 20 METZGER, TheChristianizationofNubia, p. 120. He suggested 1 September as a probable beginning of the lectionary, taking Greek menologia as a model. This, however, cannot be the case, as the beginning of the liturgical year in Nubia, where the Egyptian calendar was certainly the main calendrical system (OCHAŁA, Chronological Systems, p. 224), must have fallen on Thoth 1 (29 August, or 30 August in leap years).

998027.indb8027.indb 5 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 6 G. OCHAŁA

For each day, the lectionary gives two pericopae, one from the Pauline Epistles, the other from the Gospel. The following table presents the system of the readings21.

22 TABLE 1. Rubrics and readings in “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary”.

Day Rubric Title Reading [Choiak 24 = lacking lacking [Epistle] 20 December] lacking lacking Mt 1:[18]–2522 Choiak 25 = [ⲭⲟ]ⲓ[ⲁⲕⲚ :] ⲕⲉ [:] ⲁⲡⲟⲥ⸌ⲧ⸍ Phil 2:12–18 21 December lacking lacking Mt 5:13–[19] [Choiak 26 = lacking lacking Rom 11:[…25]–[30] 22 December] lacking lacking [Gospel] Choiak 27 = ⲭⲟⲓⲀⲕⲚ : ⲔⲌ : ⲁⲡⲟⲥ⸌ⲧ⸍ Heb 5:4–10 23 December [ⲭ]ⲟⲓⲀⲕⲚ : ⲔⲌ : ⲈⲨ : ⲓⲰⲨ : ⲢⲚⲄ : Jn 16:33–17:26 Choiak 28 = lacking lacking Heb 9:1–5 24 December ⲭⲟⲓⲀⲕⲚ : ⲔⲎ : ⲙⲁ⸌ⲑ⸍ : Ⲅ : Mt 1:18–25 Choiak 29 = ⲭⲟⲓⲀⲕⲚ : ⲔⲐ : ⲁⲡⲟⲥ⸌ⲧ⸍ Ga 4:4–7 25 December lacking lacking Mt 2:1–11 [Choiak 30 = lacking lacking Rom 8:3–[7] 26 December] lacking lacking [Gospel]

The subsequent pericopae are arranged in separate paragraphs. The rubrics, as a rule written in red ink, consist of the month date, the title of the reading, and the Ammonian number23 in the case of the Gospel lections; the Epistle readings are not preceded by any specification. All these elements are separated by colons. The readings are always quoted in extenso, apart from the Gospel pericope for Choiak 28, which is abbreviated to the incipit and explicit

21 Here and in the remaining tables, when the date is placed in square brackets, it means that the rubric was destroyed. On the other hand, when square brackets appear with the verse number, they indicate that this is the preserved beginning or ending of a given lection, with the rest lost in a lacuna. 22 The first preserved verse of this Gospel reading is 22, but since the pericope on Choiak 28, Mt 1:18-25 is cross-referenced with Choiak 24 (see below), one can safely reconstruct it here as well. 23 This name denotes the division of the four Gospels into sections that constitute narrative units. It is believed to have been created by either Ammonius of Alexandria (3rd century) or Eusebius of Cesarea (3rd-4th century).

998027.indb8027.indb 6 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 7

of the fragment. The latter is introduced by the abbreviation ⲧⲉ⸌ⲗ⸍ (in red ink), for the Greek τέλος, “end”, a standard expression in Greek lectionaries. After the final word of the explicit, the following phrase is visible ⲭⲟⲓⲀⲕⲚ : : ⲔⲆ : ⲡⲁⲣ⸌ⲧ⸍, written in black ink. It should most probably be translated “it was written on Choiak 24”24. Fortunately, the manuscript has preserved the Gospel reading for Choiak 24, which happens to be identical. This proves that Browne’s interpretation is true. Analogous phrases are found in Greek lectionaries: προεγράφη εἰς τὰς… τοῦ… μηνός (“this was written above on day… of the month…”)25. A Coptic counterpart of this formula is ⲁⲛⲟⲩⲟ ⲉⲛⲥϩⲁⲓ Ⲙⲙⲟϥ ϩⲓⲡⲁϩⲟⲩ Ⲛ-… (“we have already written this above on…”)26.

2.2. FragmentP. QII7 Unlike the previous text, which was acquired on the antiquities market, the next four fragments come from regular excavations at the site of Qasr Ibrim. The best preserved among them is an almost complete folio originating from an Old Nubian parchment codex. It preserves the upper margin and one side margin. Although the original lower edge no longer exists, no lines seem to be missing between the verso and the recto. The text was discovered in the 1963/64 season of excavations at the cathedral of Qasr Ibrim among a number of manuscript fragments “scattered over the floor in a thin deposit of airborne dust27”, above the original pavement of the church. Already in the first archaeological report from the site, the deposit was interpreted as remains of a cathedral library, destroyed during the raid of Shams el-Dawla in 117328.

24 BROWNE, Griffith’sOldNubianLectionary (1982), p. 79. The abbreviation ⲡⲁⲣ⸌ⲧ⸍ stands most probably for the Old Nubian ⲡⲁⲣⲧⲁⲕⲓⲥⲓⲛⲁ or ⲡⲁⲣⲧⲁⲕⲟⲛⲁ. These forms are the 2nd person plural of, respectively, the passive indicative of the preterite II and the passive indicative of the preterite I from the Old Nubian verb ⲡⲁⲣ-, “to write” (BROWNE, OldNubianDictionary, s.v.; BROWNE, OldNubianGrammar, p. 48 [for the passive mor- pheme -ⲧⲁⲕ-], 53-54 [for the morphological endings]). 25 E.g. MATEOS, Le Typicon I, p. 96-97: Ἡ δὲ ἀκολουθία προεγράφη εἰς τὰς ς΄ τοῦ σεπτεμβρίου μηνός (“This office was written above on day 6 of the month of September”). 26 E.g. in sa 530L, SCHÜSSLER, Biblia Coptica III/2, p. 63, n. 1: ⲁⲛⲟⲩⲟ ⲉⲛⲥϩⲁⲓ ⲙⲙⲟϥ ϩⲓ ⲡⲁϩⲟⲩ ⲙⲡⲙⲉϩⲥⲛⲁⲩ ⲛϩⲟⲟⲩ ⲙⲡⲁⲣⲭⲁⲅⲅⲉⲗⲟⲥ ⲉⲧⲟⲩⲁⲁⲃ ⲙⲓⲭⲁⲏⲗ (“we have already written this above, on the second day [of the feast] of the holy Archangel Michael”), or n. 2: ⲁⲛⲛⲟⲩⲟ [sic] ⲉⲛⲥϩⲁⲓ ⲙⲙⲟϥ ϩⲓ ⲡⲁϩⲟⲩ ⲛⲥⲟⲩ Ⲑ ⲛϩⲁⲑⲱⲣ (“we have already written this on day 9 of Athyr”). 27 PLUMLEY, QasrIbrim1963-1964, p. 3. 28 PLUMLEY, QasrIbrim1963-1964, loc.cit. See also, “Introduction” to P.QI I, p. 1-2; and FREND – MUIRHEAD, TheGreekManuscripts, p. 43-44.

998027.indb8027.indb 7 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 8 G. OCHAŁA

The editioprinceps of this piece by Gerald Browne and Martin Plumley appeared in 198829. Two subsequent editions, this time by Browne alone, appeared in 1989 and 200430. The folio contains four readings from the Pauline epistles for the first and second Saturday and Sunday of the month of Mesore. The system of readings is as follows.

TABLE 2. Rubrics and readings in P. QI I 7.

Day Rubric Title Reading [Mesore, Saturday 1] lacking lacking 1 Cor 14:[…35]-40 Mesore, Sunday 1 [ⲙ]ⲉⲥⲟⲣⲉ ⲕⲩⲣⲓⲕⲉ ⲁⲁⲡⲟⲥ ⸌ⲧ⸍ Heb 6:7-8 Mesore, Saturday 2 [ⲙ]ⲉⲥⲟⲣⲉ · ⲥⲁⲃ⸌ⲃ⸍ · Ⲃ [ⲁⲡⲟⲥ ⸌ⲧ⸍] 2 Cor 1:2-7 Mesore, Sunday 2 ⲙⲉⲥⲟⲣⲉⲛ · ⲕⲩⲣⲓⲁ⸌ⲕ⸍ ·· Ⲃ ⲁⲡⲟⲥ ⸌ⲧ⸍ 1 Cor 2:6-[11]

The rubrics, always written in red ink, are constructed according to the same pattern as the ones in “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary”, with the date (month + day of the week) and the title of the reading. No further specification of the passage is given. Each rubric begins in a new paragraph, except for the reading for the second Saturday of Mesore, which appears at the end of the last line of the previous reading, after a series of horizontal and vertical strokes; its title must have been written at the beginning of the next line, but it is now lost in a lacuna. Similarly to “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary”, P. QI I 7 includes a note after one reading (Heb 6:7-8) apparently indicating another date appropriate for this pericope. According to the editors the phrase ⲛⲏⲥ⸌ⲧ⸍ · ⲥⲁⲃ⸌ⲃ⸍ · Ⲋ | [. .]ⲡⲉⲥⲉⲥⲱ, should be translated “Fast, Saturday 6. Say (?)”31. Although the interpretation of the final word is uncertain, the meaning of this note seems obvious: the same passage should be read on the sixth Saturday of Lent. This phrase is most probably equivalent to the Greek formula found in the Lectionary of the Great Church from Constantinople τὸ αὐτὸ λέγει καὶ εἰς… (“The same [pericope] is also

29 P.QII 7, p. 28-31 (transcription and translation), 56-57 (commentary), pl. 6. 30 BROWNE, LiteraryTextsinOldNubian, p. 52-55 (transcription on odd pages, translation on even pages), 90 (commentary); BROWNE, OldNubianLiteraryTexts, p. 38- 39 (only transcription). See also BROWNE, StudiesinOldNubian, p. 16-17, for some corrections. 31 The Old Nubian word ⲡⲉⲥⲉⲥⲱ seems to be the imperative of the verb ⲡⲉⲥ-, “to say” (BROWNE, Old Nubian Dictionary, s.v.; BROWNE, Old Nubian Grammar, p. 55).

998027.indb8027.indb 8 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 9

said on…”)32 or τὰ αὐτὰ λέγονται καὶ εἰς… (“The same [pericopae] are also said on…”)33. One should also mention an odd use of the abbreviation ⲧⲉⲗ⸌ⲗ⸍ for τέλος, “end”, in 2 Cor 1:2-734. This word is normally present when only the incipit and explicit of a reading are given; in the present case, however, ⲧⲉⲗ⸌ⲗ⸍ is found just at the beginning of the complete passage, between verses 2 and 3. This can be explained by the fact that ⲧⲉⲗ⸌ⲗ⸍ separates the initial greetings of St Paul and the principal text of his letter, and should by no means be interpreted as marking the explicit of the reading, as in “The Qasr Ibrim typikon”35.

2.3. FragmentP. QI I1 The next piece is also in Old Nubian. It is a fragmentary folio from a paper codex, where only one lower corner of the sheet and a small por- tion of the opposite side margin have been preserved. The text was found in the same deposit as P.QI I 7 and was published in the same volume36. Browne reedited the fragment in 198937, without changes, and in 2004, with a few new reconstructions of the lacunae38. The fragment has preserved only one Psalm reading for the fifth Sun- day of the Lenten Fast. 39 TABLE 3. Rubric and reading in P.QII 1.

Day Rubric Title Reading Fast, Sunday 5 ⲛⲏⲥ⸌ⲧ⸍ : ⲕⲩⲣⲓⲁ⸌ⲕ⸍ · ⲉ · . . [---]ⲟⲩⲗⲅⲣⲉ ⲯⲁⲗ⸌ⲙ⸍ · ⲖⲀ · Ps 31:1-[11]39

32 E.g. MATEOS, Le Typicon I, p. 20: τὸ αὐτὸ λέγει καὶ εἰς τὴν Κοίμησιν (“the same [pericope] is also said on the Dormition”). 33 E.g. MATEOS, LeTypicon I, p. 40: τὰ αὐτὰ λέγονται καὶ εἰς πολλοὺς μάρτυρας (“the same [pericopes] are also said on [the feast of] many martyrs”). I was unable to find a parallel expression in Coptic liturgical books. 34 The form of the abbreviation is somewhat bizarre, with double lambda producing the form τέλλ(ος). However, the gemination of lambda is otherwise well attested in the Med- iterranean (e.g. the form στήλλη for στήλη, “stela”, known from Anatolian epigraphy of the Roman period [personal communication of Adam Łajtar]). In Christian Nubia, on the other hand, one regularly finds σελλένη instead of σηλήνη, “moon”, in lunar dates (see OCHAŁA, ChronologicalSystems, p. 308-309, for analysis and list of attestations). 35 I owe this explanation to Ugo Zanetti. 36 P. QI I 1, p. 8-9 (transcription and translation) and 52 (commentary), pl. 1. 37 BROWNE, LiteraryTextsinOldNubian, p. 44 (translation) and 45 (transcription), 89-90 (commentary). 38 BROWNE, OldNubianLiteraryTexts, p. 31-32 (only transcription). See also BROWNE, StudiesinOldNubian, p. 12-13, for a commentary. 39 Here and elsewhere the Masoretic numbers of the Psalms are given in accordance with their numbering in the analysed fragments.

998027.indb8027.indb 9 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 10 G. OCHAŁA

At first sight, the structure of the rubric seems to be the same as in the three previous examples: the date (here, a standard enumeration of days of the week in subsequent weeks of the Lenten Fast, typical of all Churches)40 and the title of the reading; both elements are written in red ink. A deviation from the standard is the fact that they appear to be separated by a phrase written in black ink, of which only the last word, ⲟⲩⲗⲅⲣⲉ, “Hear!”, has been preserved41. Moreover, the text before the rubric is lost. Therefore, we cannot completely exclude that we are deal- ing here not with a single rubric but with two distinct pieces of information: a note pertaining to the previous reading, similar to the one already seen in P. QI I 7, indicating that what preceded should also have been read on the fifth Sunday of the Lent, and a rubric proper, pertaining to the following reading. As for the Old Nubian ⲟⲩⲗⲅⲣⲉ, its meaning and the use of the imperative form suggests that it could belong to a phrase spoken by a deacon during the liturgy, for example “Whoever has ears, let him hear”, Greek ὁ ἔχων ὦτα ἀκούειν ἀκουέτω, occasionally found in Greek lectionaries in explicits42.

2.4. “TheCopticMuseumlectionary” The last Old Nubian fragment in this assemblage was also found in Qasr Ibrim, but only in 1982, that is some twenty years later than the two previous pieces. According to the excavation’s records, it was unearthed together with two other fragments in the upper rubble fill of house 763, dated to the twelfth-fourteenth century43. The document bears excavation number QI 82.1.19/1444 and is currently kept in the Coptic Museum in Cairo (inv. no. 12042). This is a fragmentary folio from a parchment codex. Its state of preservation is very poor, with large and numerous lacunae; only one side margin is preserved. The editioprinceps was published by Gerald M. Browne in 200145. He repeated the same transcription in his 2004 manuscript46.

40 Cf. an analogous instance in P.QII 7, p. 8, above. 41 This is the imperative of the Old Nubian verb ⲟⲩⲗⲅ(Ⲣ)-, “to hear” (BROWNE, Old NubianDictionary, s.v.). 42 JORDAN, TheTextualTradition, p. 623. 43 ADAMS, QasrIbrim:TheLateMediaevalPeriod, p. 260 (“Appendix B”). 44 BROWNE, AnOldNubianLectionaryFragment, p. 113, gives inv. no. QI 82.1.19/24. The correct number was identified by Giovanni Ruffini on a photograph of the fragment found in Browne’s archive; the photograph, which presents the first side of the text, is available at . 45 BROWNE, AnOldNubianLectionaryFragment. 46 BROWNE, OldNubianLiteraryTexts, p. 62-63. There Browne used for the first time the name “The Coptic Museum lectionary”, adapted in the present article.

998027.indb8027.indb 1010 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 11

The fragment contains two Gospel lections for the beginning of the month of Choiak.

TABLE 4. Rubrics and readings in “The Coptic Museum lectionary”.

Day Rubric Title Reading [Choiak 3 = lacking lacking Jn 7:[…28]-29 29 November] Choiak 4 = ⲭⲟⲓⲁ⸌ⲕ⸍ : Ⲇ : ⲈⲨ : ⲓⲰ[Ⲩ : Ⲍ :] Jn 1:18-[28] 30 November

The only preserved rubric is constructed in an identical way as the rubrics in “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary”. The Ammonian number is entirely reconstructed by Browne, but judging by the size of the lacuna, its inclusion is quite probable. The rubric is written in red ink.

2.5. “TheQasrIbrimtypikon” The last piece presented here differs from the previous ones in two essential respects. Firstly, it belonged not to a lectionary sensustricto, but to a typikon, another kind of liturgical book (see below). Secondly, it is not written in Old Nubian but partly in Greek (rubrics) and partly in Sahidic Coptic (quotations of the Scriptures). The fragment was unearthed in 1966 in tomb T2, one of six tombs cut into the cliff south of the cathedral of Qasr Ibrim, along with many other manuscript fragments and several bishops’ tombstones47. According to the excavators, those texts may have belonged to the cathedral library destroyed by the troops of Shams el-Dawla in 117348. The palaeography of the fragment indicates that it was written not later than the ninth cen- tury49, but the manuscript could have been used much longer. In 2008, during his study visit at the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, Joost Hagen identified “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” in one of the boxes with Coptic texts found at Qasr Ibrim in 1966; its inventory number is K33. The text is a fragmentary folio from a parchment codex. Only small parts of its side margins are preserved. The fragment was published in 2014 by Joost Hagen and myself50.

47 PLUMLEY, QasrIbrim1966, p. 11. Cf. also I.QI, p. 53-54. 48 PLUMLEY, QasrIbrimandIslam, p. 163. Cf. p. 7 and n. 28, above, for the remains of the same library found in the cathedral itself. 49 Personal communication of Jacques van der Vliet. 50 HAGEN – OCHAŁA, SaintsandScripturesforPhaophi, p. 269-290. My discussion of the text herein largely repeats the text included in the editioprinceps, with the exclusion of the analysis of the choice of pericopae, which has been seriously revised.

998027.indb8027.indb 1111 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 12 G. OCHAŁA

The fragment has preserved the readings for four days in the month of Phaophi. For each day the readings from the Psalms, the Pauline Epistles, and the Gospels are provided.

TABLE 5. Rubrics and readings in “The Qasr Ibrim typikon”.

Day Commemoration Rubric Title Reading Phaophi 20 Sts Cyprian and [ⲫⲁⲱⲫⲓ] ⳹ ⲕ ⳹ [ⲯⲁⲗ⸌ⲧ⸍ ⳹ ⲢⲘⲆ] Ps 144 = Justina ⲙ[ⲛ]ⲏ[⸌ⲙ⸍] ⲧ[⸌ⲛ⸍] ⲁ ⲅⲓⲱⲛ ⲕⲩⲡⲣⲓⲁⲛⲟ ⲩ ⲁⲡ[ⲟⲥ⸌ⲧ⸍ ⲧⲓⲙⲟ⸌ⲑ⸍ 1 Tm 1:12-17 17 October [ ] ⳹ Ⲁ ⳹ ⲉⲡⲓⲥ⸌ⲕ⸍ ⳤ ] ⲓⲟⲩ̈ ⲥⲧⲓ[ⲛⲁⲥ ⳹] [ⲉⲩ⸌ⲅ⸍] ⲕⲁ⸌ⲧ⸍ Lk 15:4-7 ⲗⲟⲩ⸌ⲕ⸍ ⳹ Phaophi 21 Luke the [ⲫⲁ]ⲱⲫⲓ ⳹ ⲕⲁ ⳹ [ⲯ]ⲁⲗ[⸌ⲧ⸍] Ps 44 = Evangelist ⲙⲛⲏ⸌ⲙ⸍ ⲧ[ⲟ]ⲩ ⳹ ⲙⲇ ⳹ 18 October ⲁⲡⲟⲥ⸌ⲧ⸍ ⲗⲟ[ⲩ]⸌ⲕ⸍ [ⲁ]ⲡⲟⲥ⸌ⲧ⸍ 2 Tm 4:5-11 ⲧⲓⲙⲟ⸌ⲑ⸍ ⳹ Ⲃ ⳹ ⲉⲩ[⸌ⲅ⸍] ⲕⲁ⸌ⲧ⸍ Lk 10:1-12, ⲗⲟⲩ⸌ⲕ⸍ ⳹ 16-20 [Phaophi 23 St Varus [⳹ ⲕⲅ ⳹ ⲙⲛ]ⲏ[⸌ⲙ⸍] [ⲯⲁⲗ⸌ⲧ⸍] ⲕ ⳹ Ps 20 ⲧ⸌ⲩ⸍ ⲁⲅⲓⲟⲩ ⲟⲩⲁⲣ ⲟⲩ = [ ] ⲁⲡⲟ ⲥ ⸌ⲧ⸍ 20 October] [ ] 2 Tm 2:1-10 [ⲧⲓⲙⲟ⸌ⲑ⸍ ⳹ Ⲃ] ⳹ ⲉⲩ⸌ⲅ⸍ ⲕⲁ⸌ⲧ⸍ Lk 12:2-12 ⲗⲟⲩ⸌ⲕ⸍

Phaophi 24 Sts Aberkios and ⳹ ⲕⲇ ⳹ ⲙⲛⲏ⸌ⲙ⸍ ⲧ⸌ⲛ⸍ ⲯⲁⲗ⸌ⲧ⸍ ⲣⲓⲁ ⳹ Ps 111 ⲁⲅⲓⲱⲛ ⲁⲃⲉⲣⲕⲓⲟⲩ = Hilarion ⲁⲡⲟⲥ⸌ⲧ⸍ ⲉⲃⲣⲁⲓ ⳹ 21 October ⲉⲡⲓⲥ⸌ⲕ⸍ ⳤ Heb 5:1-6 ⲓⲗⲁⲣⲓⲱⲛⲟⲥ̈ ⲁⲛⲁ[⸌ⲭ⸍] [ⲉⲩ⸌ⲅ⸍ ⲕⲁ⸌ⲧ⸍ [Gospel] ⲗⲟ]ⲩ⸌ⲕ⸍ [---]

Although the photograph of the fragment is black and white, it seems that the rubrics were written in the same kind of ink as the remaining text, most probably in black. The structure of the rubrics, composed in Greek, is essentially the same as in the Old Nubian lectionaries, with the date and the title of the reading. Several differences can be observed, however. Firstly, there is an addition of the commemoration of the day after the date, constructed with the abbreviation ⲙⲛⲏ⸌ⲙ⸍, for μνήμη, “commemoration”, and the name of the saint(s) in the genitive. Secondly, the month name appears to be omitted in some cases, but since we have only

998027.indb8027.indb 1212 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 13

four rubrics preserved, it is impossible to say whether any rule governed its adding (or omitting). Thirdly, while “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” repeats the date before each pericope, “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” gives the date only once, before the first reading, namely the Psalm. Fourthly, “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” provides the specification of the Pauline Epistles to be read (First Epistle to Timothy, Second Epistle to Timothy, Epistle to the Hebrews), in contrast to “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” and P. QI I 7, where only the general title “Apostolos” can be found; no Ammonian numbers have been added for the Gospel readings, however. Additionally, one notes the consistent use of ⲧⲉ⸌ⲗ⸍ for τέλος to introduce the explicits of the readings51.

3. Thetypologyofsources

Although the sources at our disposal are in a mutilated state and only “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” contains the ancient pagination that allows a reconstruction of its place within the manuscript52, the character of the pieces is clear enough to assign them to particular types of lectionaries. It appears from a typological point of view that the Nubian lectionaries belong to standard types of liturgical books known from

51 One should also mention here a few other texts found at Qasr Ibrim that could have had a liturgical use. These are P.QII 2 (fragmentary codex page containing Ps 61:10-13 and Ps 83:2-12 in Greek and Old Nubian), P.QI I 5 (almost complete codex page containing Jn 20:1-9, Jn 13:13-17, and Phil 4:4-9 in Old Nubian), P.QIII 12 (nearly complete codex page containing Ps 26:8-14 and Ps 90:1-5 in Greek and Old Nubian), P. QI II 13 (complete codex page containing Ps 83:13, Ps 86:1-7, and Ps 46:2-6 in Greek and Old Nubian). Although the fragments do not have rubrics, the very fact that they combine passages from different Biblical books and Psalms allows classifying them as liturgical books. As Browne notes, P.QII 2, P. QI II 12, and P.QIII 13 must have belonged to the same manuscript (see his note before the commentary to P.QIII 12 and 13, p. 54). Each of the fragments includes some “marginal jottings” written in debased Greek by a different hand than the main text. They are mostly unintelligible; one discerns only the names of Michael (perhaps Archangel) and Jesus Christ in the bottom margin of the flesh side of P.QIII 12. Additionally, at the bottom of the hair side, there is a note reading ὁ ἅγιος Ἐπιφάνιος Κύπρου ἐπίσκοπος, “St Epiphanios, bishop of Cyprus”, written in the same hand as the whole manuscript (the photograph of P.QIII 12 has never been published, but Joost Hagen has kindly sent me pictures that he obtained from the Qasr Ibrim archive in the British Museum). One is tempted to interpret both kinds of notes as liturgical guidelines, helping the reader/owner of the book to identify the passages with particular celebrations. Another proof of a liturgical use for this manuscript is the addition of the first words of the Gloriapatris doxology at the end of each Psalm (δόξα πατρί in Greek and ⳟⲟⲕⲖ in Old Nubian), a phrase that is traditionally present after the Psalms and hymns sung during the liturgy (BROWNE, OldNubianLiterature, p. 381). 52 See above, p. 5 and n. 20.

998027.indb8027.indb 1313 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 14 G. OCHAŁA

Egypt, which is the main point of reference here, not only because of its immediate proximity to Nubia but also because of the use of the Egyp- tian calendar in the Nubian fragments. The liturgical year is divided into two cycles: movable (Lent and Eas- tertide up to Pentecost) and fixed (the rest of the year). The discussed fragments provide the evidence for the existence of both cycles in Nubia as well. While the fixed cycle is represented in four texts (“Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary”, “The Coptic Museum lectionary”, P. QI I 7, and “The Qasr Ibrim typikon”), the movable cycle is attested in P.QI I 1 and P. QI I 753. From a codicological point of view, the four Old Nubian manuscripts appear to represent three various types of lectionaries, but due to their fragmentary state of preservation their assignment is not unambiguous. According to the classification of the medieval and modern Bohairic liturgical books presented by Ugo Zanetti54, three discussed fragments may have belonged to the so-called “Annual lectionaries”, covering the fixed cycle and consisting of two parts. The first one, called “The days”, gives readings for consecutive days of the whole liturgical year according to the civil calendar; such a structure is found in “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” and “The Coptic Museum lectionary”. The other part is called “Saturdays and Sundays”. It includes pericopae for Saturdays and Sundays of the whole liturgical year, counted within particular months (1st Saturday of the month, 1st Sunday of the month, 2nd Saturday of the month, 2nd Sunday of the month, etc.). In the Nubian material, only fragment P. QI I 7 displays such a construction. In Bohairic “Annual lectionaries”, the “Saturdays and Sundays” section is normally placed after “The days” of a given month55. One can therefore easily imagine that P.QII 7 followed “The days” of Mesore and “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” and “The Coptic Museum lectionary” preceded “Saturdays and Sundays” of Choiak. The movable cycle, on the other hand, is covered in Bohairic practice by three different lectionaries: one for Lent, another for the Holy Week, and the last one for Eastertide. The single Nubian fragment for this period, P. QI I 1, could have belonged to the first type in this classification.

53 See above, p. 8. 54 ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptesannuels, p. 36-41; ZANETTI, BohairicLiturgical Manuscripts, p. 75-77. 55 ZANETTI, Les lectionnaires coptes annuels, p. 36, 133, n. 5; ZANETTI, Bohairic LiturgicalManuscripts, p. 75.

998027.indb8027.indb 1414 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 15

However, the comparison of the Nubian fragments with late Bohairic liturgical books seems rather inadequate in both geographical and chronological terms; it would be much more appropriate to draw analogies from Sahidic sources, since Upper Egypt is known to have exerted significant influence on Christian Nubia in many aspects, most probably also in the sphere of liturgical practices. Regrettably, the comparative material is scarce56. However, the two most completely preserved Sahidic lectionaries, sa 636L and sa 530L, show that the fixed and movable cycles could have been combined in one book: the former codex has preserved the readings for Saturdays and Sundays of Athyr and Mecheir, followed by Saturdays and Sundays of the beginning of the Lent; the latter, on the other hand, gives the readings for the solemnities of the whole fixed cycle, with Saturdays and Sundays of Lent and the Holy Week inserted between Mecheir and Pharmouthi. In fact, this is a characteristic feature of the Sahidic lectionaries, not to be found in other liturgical traditions57. Whether it could also have been the case in Nubia is impossible to assert until better-preserved Nubian examples have been found. The four Old Nubian fragments can be classified as lectionaries sensu stricto, since they present the full text of the readings for particular days. The fifth fragment, the one in Greek and Coptic, belongs to a different type of liturgical books, namely typika. A typikon is a liturgical book containing not the whole passages, but only incipits and sometimes also explicits of liturgical readings (including the Scriptures as well as the patristic literature and various liturgical hymns) for consecutive days of the liturgical year, provided with cross-references allowing a lector to find the full text in another manuscript58. Owing to such a structure, the typika for the whole liturgical year occupy significantly less space than the lectionaries do for the same period. The Upper Egyptian typika known from the White Monastery are normally placed at the beginning of other liturgical books. There are several types of typika, depending on their content. According to the typology presented by Diliana Atanassova, the Qasr Ibrim fragment represents the “directory of pericopae”59.

56 See ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptesannuels, p. 16-20; ZANETTI, Leslectionnaires coptes, p. 174-177. 57 ATANASSOVA, ThePrimarySources, p. 53. 58 This type of liturgical books is referred to as a “typikon”, “index”, or “directory” in scholarly literature. I have adopted the first term, as it seems to be the most widespread one. For a definition of a typikon, see EMMEL, Shenoute’sLiteraryCorpus I, p. 75. See also ATANASSOVA, PaperCodices, p. 2, who expands Emmel’s definition to include also patristic literature and ecclesiastical chants. 59 ATANASSOVA, PaperCodices, p. 9-10.

998027.indb8027.indb 1515 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 16 G. OCHAŁA

Yet another classification of the Nubian lectionary fragments can be presented here, the one depending on the content of the book, not its structure. Thus, we have a Nubian Evangelistarion60, a book containing only the Gospel pericopae (“The Coptic Museum lectionary”), a Praxa- postolos, sometimes called simply Apostolos, providing only the readings from the Acts and the Pauline and Catholic Epistles (P. QI I 7)61, and an Apostoloevangelion, combining the previous two (“Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary”)62. P. QI I 1 may have belonged to a Psalterion, a book containing only the Psalm lections, but the fragment is too small to assert such an identification63.

4. Thestructureoftheliturgyoftheword

Scanty as it is, the Nubian material represents all the major types of lectionaries known from Egypt. Its diversity provides us with a cross- section of liturgical books used in Nubia. Their similarity to the Egyptian lectionaries appears to confirm Ugo Zanetti’s statement that Upper Egypt and Nubia used the same liturgical system, which was manifested in the identical order of the Liturgy of the Word64.

60 Terminology after SCRIVENER, APlainIntroduction,p. 74-75. 61 Note that the Old Nubian (Pseudo-)NiceneCanons employ the term ⲁⲡⲟⲥⲧⲟⲗⲟⲅⲚ for the pericope from the Epistles (p. 29, ll. 4-5; edition in BROWNE, LiteraryTextsinOld Nubian, p. 10-15 [transcription on odd pages, translation on even pages], 83-84 [grammatical commentary]). 62 P.QII 5, preserving two passages from the Gospel of John and a fragment of the Epistle to the Philippians, may have also been a part of an Apostoloevangelion; see n. 51, above. 63 The codex from which P. QI I 2, P. QI II 12, and P. QI II 13 come may have also been a Psalterion; see n. 51 above. 64 ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptes, p. 177. There can be no doubt that the readings preserved in the Nubian liturgical books were destined to be recited during the mass, to which testify both the choice of the New Testament books and the arrangement of the pericopae (see below). The only exception could be P. QI I 1, which has preserved only the Psalm reading that could have well belonged to other offices. Although we have no proof whatsoever of morning or evening services in the Nubian Church, we can assume their existence with a considerably high degree of probability, based on the mere fact of their presence in other Eastern churches, with Egypt as the closest parallel to Nubia. Joost Hagen has informed me about a fragmentary version of the “Letter from Heaven on Sunday Observance” in Sahidic Coptic found at Qasr Ibrim, which prescribes attend- ing morning and evening services as well as the Eucharist. Of course, this information mainly refers to the place of origin of the text outside Nubia, but it is also highly probable that the text conforms to Nubian liturgical habits. Note that, in contrast to the Lower Egyptian practice, morning and evening services were not obligatory in Upper Egypt; they, however, seem to appear on days when the mass was not celebrated (ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptesannuels, p. 20; ZANETTI, Leslection- nairescoptes, p. 178).

998027.indb8027.indb 1616 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 17

Zanetti’s thesis was subsequently complemented by Heinzgerd Brak- mann, who wrote that the choice of two New Testament readings for the mass (one from the Pauline Epistles and the other from the Gospels) and the absence of Old Testament readings “stimmt mit (sekundärem?) kon- stantinopolitanischem Brauch ü berein, aber zugleich mit älterer alexandri- nischer Gewohnheit, die sich anscheinend in der melchitischen Markos- Liturgie erhalten hat und sicher im sahidischen Bereich längere Zeit in der nichtfestiven Form (ordominor) der Messfeier gepflegt wurde”65. The discovery of “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” offers a new perspective, which may further enhance our understanding of the liturgy of the Nubian Church. The text bears a few interesting peculiarities. Firstly, this is the first Nubian liturgical document known to date combining New Testa- ment pericopae with the Psalms. However, the position of the latter at the beginning of the Liturgy of the Word is unusual. The southern Egyptian ordo minor contains only one gradual Psalm, called psalterion (introduced by the abbreviations ⲯⲁⲗ, ⲯⲁⲗⲧ, ⲯⲁⲗⲧⲏ, or ⲯⲁⲗⲧⲏⲣ), chanted before the Gospel reading. The ordo maior, on the other hand, adds another Psalm, called prokeimenon (introduced typically by the abbreviation ⲡⲣⲟⲕ), before the Epistle66. The Lower Egyptian lectionaries provide, in turn, only one Psalm before the Gospel67. Finally, in the Byzantine practice there are two Psalms during the Liturgy of the Word: a prokeimenon (προκείμενον) at the beginning and an alleluia-Psalm (Ἀλληλούια) in the middle68. Thus, “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” does not fit the known patterns and appears to indicate that in Nubia only one Psalm, called psalterion (abbreviated to ⲯⲁⲗ⸌ⲧ⸍), was recited at the beginning of the Liturgy of the Word69. The only parallel to our text is a fragment of a Greek papyrus typikon from Egypt, dated to the sixth-seventh century,

65 BRAKMANN, Defunctus, p. 315; cf. MERCER, TheEthiopicLiturgy, p. 81: “in all its [i.e. Alexandrian rite’s] liturgies except St Mark there are four Lections”. For the disappearance of Old Testament readings in the Greek lectionaries, see JORDAN, TheTextual Tradition, p. 85-86; for Sahidic lectionaries, see ZANETTI, Les lectionnaires coptes annuels, p. 21 (no. 3). 66 For the differences between the ordomaior and ordominor, see BRAKMANN, Neue Funde, p. 591. See also ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptesannuels, p. 179, for the Egyp- tian use of prokeimena and psalteria, and ZANETTI, Leçonsliturgiques, passim, especially p. 282, who interprets the lack of the prokeimenon as a sign of “bohaïricisation”. 67 ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptesannuels, p. 29-30. 68 See, e.g., MATEOS, LeTypicon I, passim; cf. also JORDAN, TheTextualTradition, p. 85. 69 In P. QI I 1 the Psalm is introduced by the abbreviation ⲯⲁⲗ⸌ⲙ⸍ for ψαλμός. Regrettably, this is the only preserved reading on the fragment, hence we have no means of knowing whether the Psalm formed a part of the Liturgy of the Word or was destined for another office. Also, in the present state of our knowledge it is impossible to state whether any differences existed in Nubia between the terms ⲯⲁⲗ⸌ⲧ⸍ and ⲯⲁⲗ⸌ⲙ⸍.

998027.indb8027.indb 1717 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 18 G. OCHAŁA

that is before the earliest Coptic lectionaries70. There we find exactly the same order of the readings: Psalm – Pauline Epistle – Gospel. This would constitute proof of the early adoption of Egyptian liturgical practices in the Middle Nile Valley. However, although the order of the reading in Egypt and Nubia appears to be identical, a seemingly important difference can be observed: while in the Egyptian instances of typika, both the early Greek one and the later Coptic ones, the incipits are usually taken from the inside of the Psalms, in the Nubian fragment the preserved Psalm incipits are exclusively their first verses. This suggests that in Nubia Psalms were recited in whole at the beginning of the Liturgy of the Word. Such a hypothesis seems to be confirmed by P. QI I 1, which gives Psalm 31 from its first verse to the last71. Another, indirect proof is the fact that the Psalms in “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” do not have explicits, which are always present for the remaining pericopae72. Interestingly, Ugo Zanetti has made an analogous observation concerning Upper Egyptian typika; he wrote that “un certain nombre de ces ‘prokeimena’ commencent au premier verset d’un Psaume (ce qui est exceptionnel en Basse-Égypte): signe qu’on lisait antérieure- ment tout le Psaume ?”73. The presence of the explicits is the second peculiarity of “The Qasr Ibrim typikon”. Comparing this phenomenon with the Egyptian practice, one observes that the last verses of the readings are always provided in the Bohairic typika74 and are only rarely found in the Sahidic ones75. Also the already-mentioned early Greek papyrus typikon provides only the incipits of the readings. On the other hand, a practice parallel to the one observed in “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” is present in the Byzantine sources76, where

70 MILNE, Early Psalms, p. 278-282 (London, BL Pap. 1849 + 455; TM 65202 = LDAB 6444). The fragment has preserved pericopae for Lent; the Psalms are introduced with the abbreviation ψ. 71 This is doubtless, although verses 4-7 are lost in a lacuna, and only the first letters of verse 11 (the last one) are preserved. One has to remember, however, that this reading does not necessarily belong to the Eucharist (see above, n. 69). The Psalms are also cited inextensoin P.QII 2, P.QIII 12, and P. QI II 13 (see above, n. 51). 72 The explicits of the Psalms are also lacking in the Upper Egyptian sources, but this results from the construction of the gradual Psalm (see ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptes annuels, p. 21). 73 ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptesannuels, p. 20-21. 74 ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptesannuels, p. 73. 75 Pace ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptesannuels, p. 21 (no. 6), where Zanetti writes: “Les index de Haute-Égypte (y compris celui d’Abû-l-Barakât) ne donnent jamais le desinit d’une Lecture ou d’un Psaume: ils se contentent d’en indiquer le début”. So far, I have been able to identify two Upper Egyptian examples of explicits (see below, n. 78). 76 E.g. in the Typikon of the Great Church (MATEOS, Le Typicon I, passim) or the Typikon of the Monastery of Theotokos Evergetis (mentioned by JORDAN, TheTextual Tradition, p. 6). They are also found as a rule in typikaintegrated into continuous text

998027.indb8027.indb 1818 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 19

the explicits are given for the Epistle and Gospel readings and are lacking for the Psalms77. The third observation concerns the languages used in the fragment. As mentioned above, the rubrics in “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” are in Greek, while the Scripture quotations are in Coptic. The most characteristic elements of the rubrics are the words μνήμη τοῦ/τῆς/τῶν, “memory of so-and-so”, used to introduce the commemoration of the day, and τέλος, “end”, used to mark the explicit. Both are normally found in the formulary of the Greek typika from Byzantium. On the other hand, as far as I know, these Greek expressions were never used in the Egyptian Coptic typika. Instead, the Greek noun μνήμη with the genitive is replaced by the Coptic phrase ⲡϣⲁ Ⲛ-/Ⲙ-, “the feast of so-and-so”, and the Greek τέλος by the Coptic preposition ϣⲁ, “until, up to”, or the prepositional phrase ϣⲁ ⲡⲓⲙⲁ, “up to here”78. We have no means of knowing how “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” came into being: was it an original creation on the basis of either continuous text biblical manuscripts or a lectionary with pericopae written in full, or was it a copy of a typikon already in use? We even cannot be sure where it was written: in Egypt or in Nubia. Regrettably, we have no analogous Egyptian lectionaries and typika connecting Greek and Coptic in such a way, all of them are in Coptic; but, if truth be told, we have hardly any liturgical books dated before the ninth century, which is the terminus antequemfor our fragment. However, we can easily imagine that such a mixing of the two languages could have taken place in the early period of the formation of the Egyptian Coptic lectionaries, with Greek being used as the language of technical ecclesiastic terminology, before the introduction of Coptic equivalents. But it is the occurrence of Coptic that is certainly more important in this context. On the one hand, it implies the existence of Coptic continuous text biblical manuscripts in Nubia79, from which complete pericopae

manuscripts; examples are given by JORDAN, TheTextualTradition, p. 325-334, who calls them “lectionary tables”. 77 This, however, is connected with a different way of chanting Psalms during the Divine Office in the Byzantine liturgy. The prokeimena, sung before the Epistle lections, consist of a prokeimenon, a single-verse refrain taken from a Psalm (the term was at some point extended to designate the whole hymn), and stichoi, that is “stanzas”, comprising also single verses (PARRY – MELLING, TheBlackwellDictionary, p. 390, 462-463). 78 ZANETTI, Les lectionnaires coptes annuels, p. 74. I know only two instances of explicits in Sahidic typika: New York, PML M665(20) (DEPUYDT, Catalogue, no. 56), and Cairo, IFAO Copte 291-294 (ZANETTI, Leçonsliturgiques, §3; note, however, the use of three Epistle lections in this codex, pointing to Bohairic influence). 79 There is a number of unpublished fragments of Coptic biblical manuscripts from Qasr Ibrim, for which see PLUMLEY, TheChristianPeriodatQasrIbrim, p. 104, and HAGEN, Progressreport, p. 720. In HAGEN – OCHAŁA, SaintsandScripturesforPhaophi,

998027.indb8027.indb 1919 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 20 G. OCHAŁA

were read during the mass, and on the other, it proves that not all parts of the Nubian liturgy had to be performed in Greek, as is commonly believed. However, the use of Greek in the rubrics, forming the framework of the typikon, may reflect the fact that the liturgical prayers, forming the framework of the Eucharist, were still uttered in Greek, regardless of the language of the pericopae80. Yet, one must not forget that the fragment most probably comes from a cathedral library at Qasr Ibrim, which must have collected all kinds of liturgical books. It is also possible that the cathedral performed rites for different communities, possibly also for Egyptian residents of Qasr Ibrim. Finally, “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” provides us with some pieces of information about the roots and character of the Nubian liturgy. The order of the readings, the presence of the explicits, and the use of the Greek formulary in the rubrics all appear to confirm the Constantinopolitan/ ancient Alexandrian origin of the Nubian liturgy, identified by Brak- mann81. On the other hand, the lack of Old Testament readings and the presence of only one Psalm in the Liturgy of the Word82, which is paral- leled only by the early Greek typikon from Egypt, may hint at the possible moment of adoption of such an order of pericopae in Nubia. This may have happened at a certain stage of development of the eastern liturgy in general, after the disappearance of Old Testament readings in the sixth- eighth century83 and before the introduction of the second Psalm before the Gospel reading84.

n. 24 on p. 280, we wrote: “interestingly, the only New Testament books among them are the Gospels and the Pauline Epistles, no fragments of the Acts, Catholic Epistles, or Revelation have been identified so far, which coincides with the liturgical use attested in the liturgical books.” However, Joost Hagen has recently identified a few Coptic fragments of Revelation in the Qasr Ibrim archive (personal communication), which invalidates our previous argument. 80 Indeed, all fragments of the Nubian liturgical prayers published so far are in Greek (see BRAKMANN, Defunctus, p. 315-320, and HAMMERSTAEDT, Griechische Anaphoren- fragmente, p. 9-13, 102-137, 203-218), but Joost Hagen has been able to identify a small group of various liturgical genres in Coptic (personal communication). 81 See above, p. 17, with n. 65. 82 As Ugo Zanetti has suggested (personal communication), the absence of a second Psalm between the two New Testament readings in “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” does not necessarily mean its total absence from the liturgy: there might have been a kind of a fixed Alleluia-psalm or, simply, the refrain of the psalterion might have been repeated. 83 MILNE, Early Psalms, p. 278; JORDAN, The Textual Tradition, p. 85. See also RAHLFS, DiealttestamentlichenLektionen, and TAFT, WereThereOnceOldTestament Readings. 84 The order of readings in the Byzantine liturgy assumed its final shape most probably in the eighth century, but this pertains only to the New Testament pericopae (AMPHOUX, Leslectionnairesgrecs, p. 33). Unfortunately, nothing can be said of the formation of the Egyptian order of readings.

998027.indb8027.indb 2020 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 21

5. Thechoiceofthereadings

As the following section shows, the choice of the pericopae in the Nubian Church does not find any parallels in liturgical books of other Eastern Churches that could be considered a main source of inspiration for the Nubian liturgical practice, a result already obtained in the three previous attempts at analysis85. This is nothing surprising, indeed, as very little consistency exists between the lectionaries of various Churches as far as the selection of readings is concerned. It frequently happens that there is very little overlap even between lectionaries belonging to the same Church, especially in the fixed cycle, a divergence most certainly depending on local liturgical practices and veneration of different saints86. So why should Nubia be an exception? Indeed, it is impossible to find a sequence of readings identical with the Nubian one. It is not so hopeless, however, as far as particular commemorations and lections are concerned. Below follows a detailed analysis of the cases for which parallels can be indicated87. They are arranged in the chronological order of the Egyptian calendar.

5.1. Phaophi20(17October) “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” has preserved for this day the commemoration of Sts Cyprian and Justina88 with the readings from 1 Tm 1:12-17 and Lk 15:4-7. St Cyprian is commonly venerated in the East, either alone or together with St Justina, but usually on different dates. The Greek89, Syriac90,

85 See above, p. 1-2. 86 For Upper Egyptian lectionaries, see ZANETTI, Abû-l-Barakât, p. 455, and ZANETTI, Les lectionnaires coptes, p. 179; for Lower Egyptian, see ZANETTI, Les lectionnaires coptes, p. 150; for Greek, see AMPHOUX, Leslectionnairesgrecs, p. 28; for Syriac, see ROUWHORST, Leslectionnairessyriaques, p. 125. 87 For the time being, only the New Testament pericopae have been analysed. The choice of the Psalms does not match any known system of readings and deserves a separate study. 88 According to a fourth-century hagiographical romance, Cyprian was a pagan mage who converted to Christianity thanks to a pious Christian woman, Justina. He subsequently became a bishop and was martyred during Diocletian’s persecutions (see, e.g., ZAHN, CyprianvonAntiochienandKRESTAN – HERMANN, CyprianusII). While the original story takes place in Pisidian Antioch in the time of Diocletian, already in antiquity this St Cyprian had been confused with Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, martyred under Valerian about fifty years earlier (see DELEHAYE, Originesducultedesmartyrs, p. 236-237). 89 DELEHAYE,SynaxariumConstantinopolitanum, col. 97-100; MATEOS, LeTypicon I, p. 58-59; GREGORY, Textkritik, p. 368. The commemoration has been preserved in the present-day Greek liturgical calendar. 90 NAU, Unmartyrologe, p. 63 (Paris, BnF Syr. 146 & Vatican, BAV Syr. 69; 15th- 16th c.; cf. ASSEMANI – ASSEMANI, VaticanCatalogue, p. 410), 97 (London, BL Add. MS 14719; 12th-13th c.), 107 (London, BL Add. MS 17261; 13th c.), 113 (London, BL Add. MS 17232; 14th c.)

998027.indb8027.indb 2121 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 22 G. OCHAŁA

and Armenian91 sources prescribe the feast for 2 October, while the standard date in the Coptic Church is Thoth 21 (18 September)92. Interestingly, a handful of Egyptian sources give the same date of the commemoration as in “The Qasr Ibrim typikon”, namely the so-called Calendarof Abuel-Barakat (14th century)93 and two Arabic typika (Vatican, Borgia Ar. 243 and Oxford, Canon. ori. 129, both dated to the 13th century)94. However, the most relevant and most important for the present discussion appears to be the White Monastery Coptic typikon MONB.WD, Vienna, ÖNB, P. Vindob. K 9738 (10th-11th century)95, which not only prescribes the feast of Cyprian for the same day but also gives the identical pericopae, 1 Tm 1:12 and Lk 15:196. It should be noted that both readings are adjusted to the character of the commemoration. St Cyprian was a pagan magician who was converted to Christianity and baptised thanks to St Justina97. And indeed, it is the conversion that is the central motive of both pericopae: while 1 Tm 1:12-17 is Paul’s thanksgiving for the change of heart and God’s mercy on him, Lk 15:4-7 is the parable of the lost sheep. Therefore, it should not be surprising that the same Epistle reading is found in the Greek sources for the feast of St Cyprian on 2 October98.

5.2. Phaophi21(18October) For this day “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” prescribes the commemoration of Luke the Evangelist, in which it conforms with the practice of other Eastern Churches (see table 6)99. The only exception appears to be Egypt,

91 BAYAN, Le synaxaire arménien II, p. 319-322 (13th-century compilation of an 11th-century work). 92 BASSET, Lesynaxairearabejacobite, p. 285-287; see also ZANETTI, Leslectionnaires coptes, p. 114, who mentions a few other manuscripts. The same date has been preserved in the official Coptic liturgical calendar (DE FENOYL, Sanctoral, p. 69-70, Katameros, p. 96-101). The present-day Egyptian tradition follows the confounded version of the story of Sts Cyprian and Justina, but we have no means of knowing whether the confusion was present already in the White Monastery and Qasr Ibrim fragments. 93 TISSERANT, Lecalendrierd’Aboul-Barakat, p. 256. 94 I owe this reference to Ugo Zanetti (personal communication). For Vatican, Borgia 243, see ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptes, p. 229 (Z 5); for Oxford, Canon. ori. 129, see ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptes, p. 239 (Y 243). 95 The manuscript is unpublished. I owe this reference to Diliana Atanassova (personal communication). For the siglum MONB.WD and similar ones appearing throughout the article, see ATANASSOVA, PaperCodices, p. 1-2. 96 The manuscript contains only incipits of the readings. 97 For their story, see, e.g., BAYAN, LesynaxairearménienII, p. 322. 98 GREGORY, Textkritik, p. 368, as well as the present-day Greek liturgical calendar. 99 To the Greek, Syriac, and Georgian sources mentioned in the table, one should add three synaxaria, one Greek (DELEHAYE, SynaxariumConstantinopolitanum, col. 147-148), one Syriac (NAU, Unmartyrologe, p. 113 [London, BL Add. MS 17232; 14th c.]), and

998027.indb8027.indb 2222 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 23

where the evangelist was venerated one day later, on Phaophi 22 (19 Octo- ber). This date, attested for the first time in the tenth-eleventh century, has been preserved in the present-day liturgical calendar of the Coptic Church100. Interestingly, the earliest source witnessing such a practice is the Sahidic Coptic typikon MONB.WA, Vienna, ÖNB, P. Vindob. K 9735101, originating from the White Monastery, the source that is closest to “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” both geographically and chronologically. Thus, con- trary to what might be expected on the basis of the case of Sts Cyprian and Justina (see above), the different dates of St Luke’s commemoration in Nubia and Upper Egypt existing already in the ninth-tenth century point to other sources of influence on the Nubian liturgical practice, notably Syro-Palestine and Constantinople.

TABLE 6. Readings for Phaophi 21/18 October (commemoration of Luke the Evangelist).

Church Language Source Commemoration Epistle Gospel Greek/ “The Qasr Ibrim Luke the Lk 10:1-12, Nubia 2 Tm 4:5-11 Coptic typikon” Evangelist 16-20 Present-day Luke the liturgical calendar Egypt Bohairic Evangelist Col 4:5-18 Lk 10:2-20 of the Coptic (22 Phaophi) Church Jerusalem, Sanctae Col 4:5-9, Lk 10:16-21 Crucis 40 14, 18 Menologion of the Byzantine Col 4:5-18 Lk 10:16-21 Luke the Byzantium Greek Church Evangelist Present-day liturgical calendar Col 4:15-11, Lk 10:16-21 of the Greek 14-18 Orthodox Church Vatican, Luke the Syria Syriac – Lk 10:16-21 BAV Syr. 19 Evangelist

one Armenian (BAYAN, LesynaxairearménienIII, p. 329-336 [13th-century compilation of an 11th-century work]). 100 DE FENOYL, Sanctoral, p. 79, Katameros, p. 127-134. 101 Unpublished; I owe this reference to Diliana Atanassova (personal communication). Regrettably, the manuscript has not preserved readings for this day.

998027.indb8027.indb 2323 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 24 G. OCHAŁA

Church Language Source Commemoration Epistle Gospel Jerusalem, library of the Greek Luke the Orthodox – Lk 10:16-21 Evangelist Patriarchate, inv. no. 28 Jerusalem Georgian Luke the Sinaiticus 74 – Lk 10:16-21 Evangelist Oxford, – – Lk 10:16102 BL Ms. Georg. d 4

The Gospel reading provided for this day in “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” is Lk 10:1-12, 16-20, a passage that relates the sending and returning of the 72 disciples. As can be seen in table 6, the same reading, in longer or shorter versions, is found in the Egyptian103, Greek, Syriac, and Geor- gian lectionaries. Although the Nubian Epistle reading (2 Tm 4:5-11) does not have any direct parallels in other sources, which prescribe a passage from the Epistle to Colossians (Col 4:5-18), the character of the fragment leaves no doubts as to its relevance to the commemoration of St Luke. The passage, coming from the closing verses of the Epistles and containing St Paul’s instructions and personal greetings, explicitly mentions the evangelist in verse 11. Interestingly, the reading 2 Tm 4:5-11 appears also in two Sahidic Coptic sources on Pharmouthi 30 (25 April) for the commemoration of Mark the Evangelist104. In view of the fact that verse 5 of this passage refers to the task of spreading the good news (ἔργον ποίησον εὐαγγελιστοῦ), it is reasonable to believe that the passage belonged to the common liturgy for the four Evangelists in the Egyptian (and Nubian?) tradition105.

102 Only the incipit of the reading is given. In fact, the manuscript has not preserved the reading for 18 October, only a reference to it in the rubric for 20 August, the feast of Thaddaeus the Apostle (GARITTE, Évangéliaire géorgien, p. 135), indicating that this reading belonged to the common liturgy for the apostles. 103 Unfortunately, the readings for the feast of St Luke have not been preserved in the White Monastery typikon (see n. 101 above); the only source at our disposal is the present-day Coptic liturgical calendar (see n. 100 above). 104 Unpublished White Monastery typikon MONB.AW, Paris, BnF, Copte 120(20) f. 165v + Paris, Louvre, E 9972r, and the lectionary sa 530L (SCHÜSSLER, Biblia Coptica III/2, p. 69; cf. also DEPUYDT, Catalogue, no. 51, and SCHMITZ – MINK, Liste 2/2, p. 1080-1083, sa 15L). I owe these references to Diliana Atanassova (personal communication). 105 This interpretation was presented to me by Diliana Atanassova and subsequently confirmed and strengthened by Ugo Zanetti.

998027.indb8027.indb 2424 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 25

5.3. Phaophi23(20October)

According to “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” Phaophi 23 was devoted to St Varus, a military saint106. No known Eastern liturgical calendars prescribe the same date for this commemoration. The Coptic Church used to venerate him on Phaophi 26 (23 October)107, while the Constantino- politan sources provide his commemoration on 19 or 25 October108. Although the Nubian date of the commemoration is nowhere else attested, the analysis of the pericopae in “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” brings some interesting results. The Epistle reading is taken from the Second Epistle to Timothy, 2 Tm 2:1-10, where the central motive is a description of a “soldier of Christ”. The Gospel, on the other hand, Lk 12:2- 12, is a fragment where Jesus instructs his disciples not to fear those who kill the body and announces to them that the Holy Spirit will help them defend themselves. Such a set of readings not only perfectly fits the character of the commemorated saint but also finds analogies in the lectionaries of other churches. First of all, the typikon of the Great Church at Constantinople prescribes the same Gospel for 25 October, the commemoration of St Varus109. Second, the identical Epistle is provided in Gregory’s menologion for St Artemios110, also a military martyr111. Third, a nearly identical pair of pericopae (2 Tm 2:1-10 and Lk 12:1-12) is provided for the common liturgy of “Holy Martyrs” in the Greek Orthodox Church112. Fourth, the unpublished White Monastery typika in Sahidic Coptic furnish us with a number of examples of both pericopae destined for commemorating military martyrs113. Additionally, the same Epistle pericope (2 Tm 2:3-15) is read during the commemoration of the martyrs

106 He was a soldier martyred in Alexandria at the beginning of the 4th century (WALKER, TheWarriorSaints, p. 256-258). 107 Found, e.g., in TISSERANT, Lecalendrierd’Aboul-Barakat, p. 257, and NAU, Les Ménologes, p. 191, n. 9. St Varus is absent from the present-day Coptic liturgical calendar. 108 DELEHAYE,SynaxariumConstantinopolitanum, col. 149, 162; MATEOS, LeTypicon I, p. 70-71, 76-77. 109 MATEOS, LeTypiconI, p. 76-77. 110 GREGORY, Textkritik, p. 369. Accidentally, his feast fell on 20 October. 111 He was duxAegypti and suffered martyrdom in Antioch during the reign of Julian the Apostate (WALKER, TheWarriorSaints, p. 191-195). 112 TheOrthodoxStudyBible, p. 771-780 (nonvidi; the online version available at , accessed 14 December 2012). 113 Diliana Atanassova has kindly provided me with the following references: 2 Tm 2:3 (only incipit) is found in, e.g., MONB.WA, Paris, BnF, Copte 129(20) (feast of St Merkurios) and MONB.WC, Leiden, RMO, Copte 82A (Insinger 38b) + Paris, BnF, Copte 133(2) (feast of St Christodoros, a soldier); and Lk 12:4 (only incipit) in, e.g., MONB.WC, Leiden, RMO, Copte 82A (Insinger 38b) + Paris, BnF, Copte 133(2) (feast of Apa Sei, a soldier) and MONB.WA, Vienna, ÖNB, P. Vindob. K 9728 (feast of Sts Sergius and Bacchus).

998027.indb8027.indb 2525 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 26 G. OCHAŁA

in the present-day Coptic liturgical calendar114. Taking all of this into consideration, it can be suggested that the Nubian readings preserved for St Varus formed the common liturgy for this category of saints in the region.

5.4. Phaophi24(21October) The last commemoration found in the “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” is that of Sts Aberkios and Hilarion on Phaophi 24115. Unfortunately, the fragment has preserved only the Psalm and the Epistle reading, which do not coincide with any external source. It is important, however, to notice that most lectionaries and synaxaria give the feast of Hilarion on the very same day. It can be found in the Greek, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Georgian traditions116. The Armenian and Greek synaxaria commemorate Aberkios one day later, on 22 October117, but he is apparently absent from the Egyptian calendar. Only in one Georgian-Palestinian source, a calendar dated to the tenth century (Sinaiticus 34), is this bishop mentioned together with Aberkios, but the mention of the latter was added to the manuscript at a later period118. The Epistle reading provided by the Nubian fragment is Heb 5:1-6, in which St Paul speaks about the establishment of an archpriest. Such a choice is completely understandable for St Aberkios, a bishop, but less obvious for the anchorite Hilarion. It can be noted that a shorter version of this pericope (Heb 5:4-6) is found in the common liturgy for bishops in the typikon of the Great Church at Constantinople119, and a longer one in the common liturgy for the Church Fathers in the present-day Coptic liturgy120.

114 DE FENOYL, Sanctoral, p. 31-32 (mass no. 10). 115 For Aberkios, a second-century bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, see, e.g., MERKEL- BACH, Grabepigram; for Hilarion, founder of anchoritic life in Palestine, see KIRSCH, St.Hilarion. 116 Greek: DELEHAYE,SynaxariumConstantinopolitanum, col. 153-154; MATEOS, Le Typicon I, p. 72-73; GREGORY, Textkritik, p. 369 (it has been preserved in the present- day Greek Orthodox liturgical calendar); Coptic: BASSET, Lesynaxairearabejacobite, p. 364-366; NAU, Les Ménologes, p. 191, n. 8 (it has been preserved in the present-day Coptic liturgical calendar: DE FENOYL, Sanctoral, p. 80, Katameros, p. 5, 338-345). Syrian: ASSEMANI – ASSEMANI, VaticanCatalogue, p. 91; NAU, Unmartyrologe, p. 114 (London, BL Add. MS 17232; 14th c.). Armenian: BAYAN, LesynaxairearménienIII, p. 348-353. Georgian: GARITTE, Lecalendrier, p. 363. 117 Armenian: BAYAN, LesynaxairearménienIII, p. 353-360. Greek: cf. GARITTE, Lecalendrier, p. 364. He is still commemorated on this day in the present-day Greek Orthodox liturgical calendar. 118 GARITTE, Lecalendrier, p. 98, cf. commentary on p. 364. 119 MATEOS, LeTypiconII, p. 190-191. 120 DE FENOYL, Sanctoral, p. 39-40 (mass no. 17).

998027.indb8027.indb 2626 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 27

5.5. Choiak3(29November) As for this day in the Nubian liturgical calendar, it is a dissimilarity rather than similarity that draws attention121. “The Coptic Museum lectionary” has preserved only the ending of the Gospel reading, Jn 7:[28]-29. The passage belongs to the lection Jn 7:14-30, which relates the teach- ing of Jesus during the Feast of Tabernacles. It is found, in longer or shorter variants, in lectionaries of other Eastern Churches almost invariably on the fourth Wednesday after Easter (Mid-Pentecost)122. With such a distant analogy it is, of course, impossible to reconstruct a commemoration for this day in the Nubian calendar. Commemorations attested for 29 November in other lectionaries are of no help, either. However, given the extent of Egyptian influence on the Nubian liturgy, it is surprising to find that the Nubian calendar diverges from the Egyp- tian one, which on this day has commemorated the Presentation of Mary in the Temple since at least the eighth century123. It would be highly interesting to know whether the Nubians followed the Byzantine tradition instead, which celebrates this feast on 21 November124, but no Nubian source discovered so far covers this period of the liturgical year.

5.6. Choiak4(30November) For this day “The Coptic Museum lectionary” provides a reading from the Gospel of John, 1:18-[28], a passage in which John the Baptist denies being the Messiah. Unfortunately, the rubric does not include information on the commemoration, and the survey of oriental sources does not reveal any direct parallels for this day and this reading125. It may

121 I thank Ugo Zanetti for drawing my attention to this fact. 122 Greek: MATEOS, LeTypiconII, p. 120-121; GREGORY, Textkritik, p. 345. Syriac: ASSEMANI – ASSEMANI, VaticanCatalogue, p. 74; BURKITT, ESLS, p. 34. Georgian: GARITTE, Indexgéorgien, p. 365 [146]; TARCHNISCHVILI, Legrandlectionnaire I, p. 128 [845a]. For the liturgical significance of the passage in Mid-Pentecost, see, e.g., VAN GOUDOEVER, BiblicalCalendars, p. 130-138, especially 132-135. 123 It is attested in the lectionary sa 570L (SCHÜSSLER, BibliaCoptica III/4, p. 58), in the White Monastery typikon MONB.AW, Vienna, ÖNB, P. Vindob. K 9732 (this unpublished fragment contains only the incipit of the reading; see ZANETTI, IndexduMonastère Blanc, p. 62, n. 13, for the reconstruction of the rubric), and in the present-day Coptic liturgical calendar (DE FENOYL, Sanctoral, p. 17-19 [mass no. 1], Katameros, p. 8). 124 DELEHAYE, Synaxarium Constantinopolitanum, col. 243-244; MATEOS, Le Typi- conI, p. 110-111; it has been preserved in the present-day Greek Orthodox liturgical calendar. 125 Jn 1:18-28 is normally connected with the Eastertide or the period of Epiphany without any specific commemoration: Easter Monday (GREGORY, Textkritik, p. 344; ASSEMANI – ASSEMANI, VaticanCatalogue, p. 72); second Monday after Easter (GARITTE, Évangéliairegéorgien, p. 396 [128]); Epiphany (BURKITT, ESLS, p. 34; TARCHNISCHVILI,

998027.indb8027.indb 2727 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 28 G. OCHAŁA

be noted, however, that for 30 November, the feast of St Andrew the Apostle, two Greek lectionaries and one Syriac prescribe a reading located very close to the Nubian one, Jn 1:35-52 (or 42 in one case), which relates how John the Baptist’s disciples, among them Andrew, joined Christ126. The commemoration of St Andrew is attested in Jerusalem and Egypt, too, but with different readings127. Thus, it cannot be completely excluded that the unpreserved part of the Nubian reading extended as far as verse 42 of the passage, which would place Nubia in the same line of tradition as the whole East128.

5.7. Choiak24(20December) As has already been described above, “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” has not preserved the rubric for this day, but thanks to the note added after the Gospel reading for Choiak 28, the date can be plausibly reconstructed. However, the Nubian Gospel does not fit any known Eastern tradition. Instead, Mt 1:18-25 is commonly attested in the East in connection with Advent. The passage is ascribed to the Sunday before the Nativity in the Egyptian129, Greek130, Palestinian131, and East Syrian sources132. The present-day Greek liturgical calendar, on the other hand, provides this reading on 23 December. The Nubian occurrence of the Matthean pericope on this day may, of course, be explained in terms of local tradition. However, taking into account the construction of lectionaries, another solution can be proposed. Sundays of Advent are normally inserted between other days of Decem- ber. This is most clearly visible in two completely preserved sources,

Legrandlectionnaire I, p. 24 [107]); seventh day after Epiphany (GARITTE, Indexgéorgien, p. 344 [24]). 126 Greek: MATEOS, LeTypiconI, p. 116-119; GREGORY, Textkritik, p. 372 (the same reading and commemoration have been preserved in the present-day Greek Orthodox liturgical calendar). Syriac: ASSEMANI – ASSEMANI, VaticanCatalogue, p. 92. 127 Jerusalem: TARCHNISCHVILI, Le grand lectionnaire I, p. 54. Egypt: DE FENOYL, Sanctoral, p. 23-24 (common liturgy for the Apostles, mass no. 5), Katameros, p. 9, 491- 499; the unpublished White Monastery typikon MONB.WC, Cairo, IFAO Copte 224 also gives this commemoration but, unfortunately, it has not preserved the pericopae (I owe this reference to Diliana Atanassova). 128 Such a long passage seems rather improbable for a liturgical reading, however; but cf. the similar pericope Jn 16:33-17:26 provided for 23 December in “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” (see above). 129 Sa 570L: SCHÜSSLER, BibliaCoptica III/4, p. 58. It is also found in the tradition of the White Monastery (personal communication of Diliana Atanassova). 130 MATEOS, LeTypicon I, p. 136-137 (in an extended version, Mt 1:1-25). 131 ASSEMANI – ASSEMANI, VaticanCatalogue, p. 93. 132 BAUMSTARK, Festbrevier, p. 170; KANNOOKADAN, EastSyrianLectionary, p. 31.

998027.indb8027.indb 2828 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 29

the typikon of the Hagia Sophia, where they are placed between 16 and 17 December, and the Palestinian evangelistarion, where they are found between 22 and 24 December. Thus, one could imagine that at some point in the transmission of the text of our lectionary, a less diligent scribe mistook the rubric for Sunday before the Nativity for an ordinary day of the month of Choiak133. Alternatively, it may be simply connected with the approaching Nativity, as in the Byzantine rite, where 20 December is “the first day before the feast”134. Unfortunately, as the rubric and the preceding part of “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” is lacking, we have no means of verifying these interpretations.

5.8. Choiak28and29(24and25December)

TABLE 7. Readings for Choiak 28/24 December (Eve of the Nativity).

Church Language Source Epistle Gospel Alternative Gospel Old “Griffith’s Old Nubia Heb 9:1-5 Mt 1:18-25 Nubian Nubian lectionary” sa 530L Ga 4:4-12 Lk 2:1-14 Sahidic sa 570L – Lk 2:1-20 Egypt Present-day liturgical calendar Ga 3:15- Bohairic Lk 2:1-20 of the Coptic 4:18 Church Jerusalem, Sanctae Heb 1:1-12 Lk 2:1-20 Crucis 40 Rm 15:7-16 Menologion of the or matins: mass: Byzantine Church Mt 1:18-25 Lk 2:1-20 Byzantium Greek Heb 1:1-12 Present-day liturgical calendar Heb 1:1-12 Lk 2:1-20 of the Greek Orthodox Church

133 Ugo Zanetti has informed me that the Sundays τῶν πατέρων and πρὸ τῶν πατέρων are a late development, probably from the 8th-9th century. This, however, does not seem to contradict the above hypothesis, as “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary” came to existence in the 10th century at the earliest. 134 I owe this suggestion to Ugo Zanetti (personal communication).

998027.indb8027.indb 2929 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 30 G. OCHAŁA

Church Language Source Epistle Gospel Alternative Gospel Vatican, – night office: BAV Syr. 19 Lk 2:1-20 Palestinian Syriac Heb 1:1-12 – lectionary Syria Syriac London, BL Add. Ga 4:1-12 night office: MS 14485-14487 Lk 2:1-20 Lectionary of – vespers: night office: the West Syrian Jn 1:1-17 Lk 2:1-20 Church Sinaiticus 38 – vespers: inmissa135: Lk 2:8-20 Mt 1:18-25 Jerusalem Georgian Lectionary of the Heb 1:1-12 sixth hour: vespers: Church of Lk 2:8-20 Mt 1:18-25 Jerusalem

TABLE 8. Readings for Choiak 29/25 December (Nativity).

Church Language Source Epistle Gospel Gospel (mass) (matins) Old “Griffith’s Old Nubia Ga 4:4-7 Mt 2:1-12 – Nubian Nubian lectionary” sa 530L Heb 1:1-9 Mt 2:1-12 – sa 570L – Mt 2:1-12 – Sahidic London, BL Ms. – Mt 2:1-12 – Egypt Or. 6801 Present-day liturgical calendar Bohairic Heb 1:1-2:4 Mt 2:1-12 – of the Coptic Church Jerusalem, Sanctae Ga 4:4-7 Mt 2:1-12 Mt 1:18-25 Crucis 40 Menologion of the Ga 4:4-7 Mt 2:1-12 Mt 1:18-25 Byzantine Church Byzantium Greek Present-day liturgical calendar Ga 4:4-7 Mt 2:1-12 – of the Greek Orthodox Church

135 GARITTE, Indexgéorgien, p. 341 (2); this must designate a night office.

998027.indb8027.indb 3030 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 31

Church Language Source Epistle Gospel Gospel (mass) (matins) Heb 1:1-2:4 Mt 1:18-?136 London, BL Add. or or – MS 14528 Ga 4:1- Lk 2:1-20138 5:10137 Vatican, BAV Syr. – Mt 2:112 Mt 1:18-25 19 Palestinian Syriac Ga 3:24-4:7 – – Syria Syriac lectionary Jn 1:1-17 or Lectionary of Mt 2:1-12 or the West Syrian – Mt 2:1-12 Church Mt 1:18- 25139 Lectionary of the East Syrian Ga 3:15-4:7 Lk 2:1-21 – Church Sinaiticus 38 – Mt 2:1-23 Lk 2:1-7

Jerusalem Georgian Lectionary of the Church of Heb 1:1-12 Mt 2:1-23 Lk 2:1-7 Jerusalem

As can be seen in the above tables, the whole East used a limited repertoire of pericopae for the Nativity and its Eve, in different combinations, in longer or shorter versions. This, of course, results from the fact that only

136 Attested in the following Syriac continuous text Gospel manuscripts: London, BL Add. MS 14457 (6th-7th c.), 17115 (6th-7th c.), 17116 (6th c.), 17117 (6th-7th c.), Vatican, BAV Syr. 12 (AD 548; cf. ASSEMANI – ASSEMANI, VaticanCatalogue, p. 28). The reading of Mt 1:18-2:23 is attested as one of possible Gospel lections on Epiphany (BURKITT, ESLS, p. 6). 137 Both Epistle readings attested in the following Syriac continuous text Gospel manuscripts: London, BL Add. MS 14476 (5th-6th c.) and 14477 (6th-7th c.). See also, BAUM- STARK, NichtevangelischesyrischePerikopenordnungen, p. 31 (Ga 3:15-4:7 as the reading for the Nativity in the Nestorian rite) and 125 (Ga 4:1-12 as the reading for the Nativity in the West Syrian rite in the 9th-10th c.); KANNOOKADAN, EastSyrianLectionary, p. 31 and 69 (Ga 3:15-4:7 as common reading in the East Syrian lectionary tradition). 138 Attested in the following Syriac continuous text Gospel manuscripts: London, BL Add. MS 12140 (7th-8th c.), 14450 (7th-8th c.), 14457 (6th-7th c.), 14470 (5th- 6th c.), 17113 (6th-7th c.). This reading is also present in the East Syrian lectionary system (KANNOOKADAN, EastSyrianLectionary, p. 31, 69). 139 According to BAUMSTARK, Festbrevier, p. 176, n. 3, attested in a single manuscript labelled “British Museum 26 (Rich. 7170)”.

998027.indb8027.indb 3131 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 32 G. OCHAŁA

a limited number of passages are suitable for this feast. Therefore, the observation made by Bruce Metzger that both readings for the Nativity preserved in “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary”, Ga 4:4-7 and Mt 2:1- 12, coincide with the pericopae found in the Greek lectionaries140, should be classified as coincidence rather than a Byzantine influence on the Nubian liturgical calendar. As for the liturgical significance of the Nubian pericopae, the selection of the Gospel passages indicates that the Adoration of the Magi was the central motive on 25 December in Nubia, just as it was in Byzan- tium, Georgia, and Jerusalem. The Eve of the Nativity, on the other hand, commemorated the birth of the Messiah in all these Churches141, but the two attested pericopae put emphasis on two distinct aspects of this event: while Luke’s account, known from Egyptian, Constantinopoli- tan, and Syrian sources, focuses on the adoration of the shepherds, the Matthean fragment, attested in Nubian and Georgian (which represent the tradition of Jerusalem) liturgical books, features St Joseph and his doubts. The only problem is that the Nubian Epistle reading for the Eve of the Nativity (Heb 9:1-5) is unlike anything that we know from other Churches. The most common reading for 24 December is Heb 1:1-12, found in the Greek, Georgian, and Syriac lectionaries. In Egypt, on the other hand, one finds a passage from Galatians (longer or shorter, but always including Ga 4:4-7). Nevertheless, the reading is not devoid of analogies. One finds extended versions of Heb 9:1-5 ascribed to different days in lectionaries of other Churches, almost invariably connected with the Virgin Mary, for example: 1. Upper Egypt: – Tybi 21 (16 January), a Marian feast (Heb 9:2-8)142;

140 METZGER, TheChristianizationofNubia, p. 120. They are found in the typikon of the Hagia Sophia (MATEOS, Le Typicon I, p. 158-159) and in Gregory’s menologion (GREGORY, Textkritik, p. 373). The reading has been preserved in the present-day liturgical calendar of the Greek Orthodox Church. 141 In Egypt, 24 December (Choiak 28) is called “the first day of the Nativity” and 25 December (Choiak 29) “the second day of the Nativity” (sa 530L: SCHÜSSLER, Biblia Coptica III/2, p. 64 [ⲡϣⲟⲣⲠ Ⲛϩⲟⲟⲩ Ⲙⲡϩⲟⲩⲙⲓⲍⲉ (sic!) ⲘⲡⲉⲬⲤ and ⲡⲙⲉϩϩⲟⲟⲩ ⲥⲛⲁⲩ Ⲙⲡϩⲟⲩⲙⲓⲍⲉ (sic!) ⲘⲡⲉⲬⲤ, respectively]; cf. BRAKMANN, FragmentaGraeco- Copto-Thebaica, p. 152). Ugo Zanetti has suggested to me that the reason behind this could have been of a “calendrical” nature: because in the Egyptian calendar 25 December fell on Choiak 29 in normal years, and on Choiak 28 in leap years, the celebration of the feast was divided into two days, in order to celebrate the birth of the Messiah always on the same day as the rest of the Christendom. 142 sa 530L: SCHÜSSLER, BibliaCoptica III/2, p. 65.

998027.indb8027.indb 3232 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 33

2. Present-day Coptic liturgical calendar: – common liturgy for the Virgin Mary (mass no. 1), celebrated on various days of the liturgical year (Heb 9:1-12)143; 3. typikon of the Great Church at Constantinople: – on Saturday after the Nativity144; – 2 July, Deposition of the Precious Robe of the Theotokos in Blachernae145; – 31 August, The Placing of the Honourable Sash of the Most Holy Theotokos146.

While both Heb 1:1-12 and Ga 3:15-4:12 pertain to Christ as the Son of God, Heb 9:1-5 and its extended variants present Mary as “the Tem- ple of the Living God”, a theme equally adequate for the celebration of the birth of Christ147. Owing to the lack of analogies, including this passage in the repertoire of the readings on the Eve of the Nativity seems to be a Nubian development, an inclusion that would very well correspond with the highly developed Marian cult in the Middle Nile Valley. The crucial position of Mary in celebrating the Nativity in Nubia seems to be confirmed by the extraordinary size of her depictions in paintings repre- senting the Nativity scene148. Such a tendency is also clearly visible in a Greek acrostich hymn to the Virgin found in Qasr Ibrim, which focuses on her being the Bearer of God, Θεοτόκος149. One may add that both Nubian readings for 24 December form a curious pair, as the Epistle concerns the Virgin Mary and the Gospel St Joseph, the earthly parents of Christ.

143 DE FENOYL, Sanctoral, p. 18-19. 144 MATEOS, LeTypicon I, p. 160-161. 145 MATEOS, LeTypicon I, p. 328-331. 146 MATEOS, LeTypicon I, p. 386-387. 147 This is the most immediate theological interpretation of this passage. In private communication Józef Naumowicz has proposed a more sophisticated explanation. Accord- ing to his opinion, the selection of this reading may be interpreted “as the indication of the importance and role of the Incarnation of Christ and its novelty in comparison to the cult of the Old Covenant, which had only ‘an earthly sanctuary’ (Heb 9:1). Through the Incarnation, the Word of God started to dwell among us; ‘Immanuel – God with us’ (Mt 1:23) comes and he, as indicated by his name Jesus, “will save his people from their sins” (Mt 1:21). Thus, the central motif in Mt 1:18-25 would be Jesus’ name, which points to the nature of the one who is born and comes to the world, rather than Joseph’s fear. The Gospel pericope underlines the significance of the coming of God to the world in respect to the ways of the Old Testament, described in the Epistle pericope” (e-mail received on 15 Septem- ber 2012). 148 SCHOLZ, DasnubischeChristentum, p. 225-228. 149 ŁAJTAR, AGreekHymn.

998027.indb8027.indb 3333 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 34 G. OCHAŁA

These are, regrettably, the only similarities between the Nubian and other Eastern lectionaries that can be pointed out at the present state of our knowledge about the Nubian liturgical calendar. For thirteen days of the liturgical year attested in the Nubian sources, in only eight cases are we able to find parallels in external sources. As for the pericopae for the remaining days, they either appear to be completely different than the ones in the comparative material or they belong to the parts of the liturgical year that are not attested in the available external sources (for example, Sundays and Saturdays of Mesore)150.

6. Conclusion

Scanty though it is, the analysed material allows for several interesting conclusions on the nature of Nubian liturgical practices: 1) Nubian lectionaries are typical representatives of the genre; analogous examples can be found throughout Eastern Christendom. Although we have no early examples thereof, it seems justified to think that the first liturgical books, just like many other types of sources and cultural phe- nomena, came to Nubia in the first decades after the official Christiani- sation151, in the second half of the sixth century and at the beginning of the seventh. The first lectionaries must have been imported to the Middle Nile Valley, but at a certain point the Nubians must have started to pro- duce their own liturgical books, adding local content to the imported framework of the most important feasts. While the origin of “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” is doubtful152, later Old Nubian and Greek/Old Nubian sources were certainly the product of local scriptoria. It is, unfortunately, impossible to assert whether they were translations of liturgical books brought from abroad or original creations. The only thing that can be said with certainty is that their typological classification and internal structure reveal clear external examples. 2) It can be safely assumed that the normal practice of the Nubian Church was lectioselecta, as in the Egyptian sources both Sahidic and Bohairic. This is proven by the choice of readings for the commemorations

150 Ugo Zanetti has kindly informed me that, according to his files, the epistles occur- ring in P.QII 7 as readings for Saturdays and Sundays of Mesore are unattested in Lower Egyptian manuscripts. He notes, however, that the Epistle pericopae are subject to serious variations and that the Epistles for Sundays are very rarely attested. 151 For the most recent discussion on the Christianisation of Nubia, see RICHTER, StudienzurChristianisierungNubiens, and DIJKSTRA, Philae, p. 271-304. 152 See above, p. 19.

998027.indb8027.indb 3434 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 35

preserved in “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” (Sts Cyprian and Justina, Luke the Evangelist, St Varus, and St Hilarion). The apparent trace of lectio continua in the case of the Gospel pericopae for two days of the Nativity should rather be interpreted as two parts of the same feast153. 3) The Nubian system of readings contains elements in common with other churches, especially on the more important feasts, like the Nativity or the commemoration of Luke the Evangelist. These are probably archaic elements, descending from an early lectionary practice154. This would confirm the antiquity of the system, assumed by Heinzgerd Brakmann on the basis of the order of the readings during the Liturgy of the Word. There is no doubt that with the appearance of Christianity as the official religion of the Nubian kingdoms in the mid-sixth century, there appeared also ecclesiastical and liturgical regulations, traditions, and customs. One of them must have been a liturgical calendar and a system of lections. Liturgical books dated to this period are almost non-existent, but fortunately the already-mentioned Greek papyrus with a fragment of the typikon for Lent proves that in sixth/seventh-century Egypt, that is at the time of the Christianisation of Nubia, the order of the readings during the mass (Psalm – Pauline Epistle – Gospel) was exactly the same as in twelfth- century Nubia. Also other factors point to Egypt as the most plausible source of influence on the Nubian liturgical practices: firstly, the Nubian Church performed the liturgy of St Mark adopted from Egypt; secondly, the Nubian liturgical calendar was based on the Egyptian civil calendar; last but not least, Sahidic Coptic was used to compose “The Qasr Ibrim typikon”. And indeed, although the Nubian system of readings lacks direct analogies, enough evidence exists to suggest that it was Egypt, especially Upper Egypt, that exerted the strongest influence on its shape. The most evident case is the feast of Sts Cyprian and Justina, but also the commemorations of Luke the Evangelist and St Varus possess some parallels in the Egyptian material, in the typika from the White Monastery in particular. Apart from this, the Nubian liturgical calendar finds analogies in sources of other eastern churches, most notably Constantinopolitan and Syro-Palestinian. There are also a few elements apparently unique to the

153 I thank Ugo Zanetti for his commentary on this question. 154 For a “law” of liturgical studies stating that the solemnities tend to preserve primi- tive elements of the liturgical calendar, see BAUMSTARK, ComparativeLiturgy, p. 27-30, and TAFT, WereThereOnceOldTestamentReadings, p. 307-309. Cf. ZANETTI, Leslec- tionnairescoptes, p. 150, 167, for Bohairic lectionaries; Zanetti states that the Gospel readings have a lesser tendency to undergo changes, which can also be traced in the Nubian material.

998027.indb8027.indb 3535 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 36 G. OCHAŁA

Nubian sources; they may be either remnants of archaic practices no longer preserved in other parts of the East or local additions adjusted to the needs of the Nubian Church. This is, unfortunately, all that can be said for the time being, as the fragmentary state of liturgical sources from both Nubia and Upper Egypt prevents us from any more detailed considerations. However, the presented material reveals a new interesting perspective for the study of the Egyptian liturgy, which may allow for a reconstruction of the Egyptian liturgical calendar on the basis of the Nubian sources.

4) The existing differences, numerous and very serious, between the Nubian and other Churches can be explained as a result of local traditions. Such a tendency is easily observable in lectionaries from other regions, especially for the fixed cycle155. Unfortunately, since the existing Nubian fragments cover different parts of the liturgical year, we have no means of verifying whether the system of readings was consistent in all Nubian lectionaries. To the limitations resulting from the scarcity and fragmentariness of the material, two more must be added that may distort our understanding of the Nubian liturgy. Firstly, apart from the “Griffith’s Old Nubian lectionary”, all the fragments known to date come from a single site, Qasr Ibrim. This means that the conclusions presented here pertain to the liturgy of this very city and may not necessarily be true for other parts of the Middle Nile Valley. Secondly, one must not forget that at least three Qasr Ibrim fragments may have belonged to the cathedral library and thus may represent the liturgical practices at the highest ecclesiastical level. It is probable that smaller and poorer provincial churches differed from the larger urban ones with respect to the liturgical customs, for example they did not perform masses every day156. Due to all of these restrictions any attempts to present a comprehensive picture of the liturgy of Nubia are doomed to fail. However, a careful analysis and reassessment of long-known material in the light of present- day knowledge can reveal new facts and improve our understanding of Christian Nubian civilisation. Furthermore, as “The Qasr Ibrim typikon” shows, the written sources discovered long ago at this site and still largely unpublished can yield priceless information. Let us then hope that one day missing pieces to this and many more aspects of the history and culture of Christian Nubia will be found.

155 For Egyptian sources, see, e.g., ZANETTI, Les lectionnaires coptes, p. 177; for Greek sources, see SCRIVENER, APlainIntroduction, p. 77. 156 ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptesannuels, p. 172, supposes that small Egyptian churches may have celebrated the Eucharist only on Sundays and major feasts.

998027.indb8027.indb 3636 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 37

Bibliography

Sigla of editions of Nubian texts used in the article:

I. QI = A. ŁAJTAR – J. VAN DER VLIET, Qasr Ibrim. The Greek and Coptic Inscriptions Published on Behalf of the Egypt Exploration Society (The JournalofJuristicPapyrologySupplementSeries, 13), Warsaw, 2010. P. QI I = J.M. PLUMLEY – G.M. BROWNE, OldNubianTextsfromQasrIbrim I (EgyptExplorationSociety.TextsfromExcavations, 9), London, 1988. P. QI II = G.M. BROWNE, OldNubianTextsfromQasrIbrim II (EgyptExplora- tionSociety.TextsfromExcavations, 10), London, 1989. P. QI III = G.M. BROWNE,OldNubianTextsfromQasrIbrim III (EgyptExplo- rationSociety.TextsfromExcavations, 12), London, 1991. P. QI IV = G.R. RUFFINI, The Bishop, the Eparch and the King. Old Nubian TextsfromQasrIbrimIV (TheJournalofJuristicPapyrologySupplement Series,22), Warsaw, 2014. P.QITim. = J.M. PLUMLEY, TheScrollsofBishopTimotheos.TwoDocuments fromMedievalNubia (EgyptExplorationSociety.TextsfromExcavations, 1), London, 1975.

Remaining publications:

ADAMS, QasrIbrim:TheEarlierMedievalPeriod = W.Y. ADAMS, QasrIbrim: The Earlier Medieval Period (Egypt Exploration Society. Excavation Memoir, 89), London, 2011. ADAMS, QasrIbrim:TheLateMediaevalPeriod = W.Y. ADAMS, QasrIbrim: TheLateMediaevalPeriod (EgyptExplorationSociety. ExcavationMemoir, 59), London, 1996. AMPHOUX, Leslectionnairesgrecs = C.-B. AMPHOUX, Leslectionnairesgrecs, in C.-B. AMPHOUX – J.-P. BOUHOT (ed.), LalectureliturgiquedesÉpîtres catholiquesdansl’Égliseancienne (Histoiredutextebiblique, 1), Lausanne, 1996, p. 19-38. ASSEMANI – ASSEMANI, VaticanCatalogue = S.E. ASSEMANI – G.S. ASSEMANI, Bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae Codicum Manuscriptorum Catalogus inTresPartesDistributus, I/2, Paris, 1926. ATANASSOVA, PaperCodices = D. ATANASSOVA, PaperCodiceswithLiturgical TypikafromtheWhiteMonastery, in Coptica,9 (2010), p. 1-23. ATANASSOVA, ThePrimarySources = D. ATANASSOVA, ThePrimarySourcesof Southern Egyptian Liturgy: Retrospect and Prospect, in B. GROEN et al. (ed.), RitualsandRitesoftheChristianEast:ProceedingsoftheFourth InternationalCongressoftheSocietyofOrientalLiturgy,July10th-15th, 2012,Lebanon (EasternChristianStudies, 22), Leuven, 2014, p. 47-96. ATANASSOVA – CHRONZ, ⲥⲩⲛⲁⲝⲓⲥⲕⲁⲑⲟⲗⲓⲕⲏ = D. ATANASSOVA – T. CHRONZ (ed.), ⲥⲩⲛⲁⲝⲓⲥ ⲕⲁⲑⲟⲗⲓⲕⲏ.BeiträgezuGottesdienstundGeschichteder fünfaltkirchlichenPatriarchatefürHeinzgerdBrakmannzum70.Geburts- tag (orientalia–patristica–oecumenica, 6), Münster, 2014. BASSET, Lesynaxairearabejacobite = R. BASSET (ed.), Lesynaxairearabejaco- bite(MoisdeToutetdeBabeh), (PatrologiaOrientalis, 1/3), Paris, 1907. BAUMSTARK, ComparativeLiturgy = A. BAUMSTARK, ComparativeLiturgy, Lon- don, 1958 (2nd English ed.).

998027.indb8027.indb 3737 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 38 G. OCHAŁA

BAUMSTARK, Festbrevier = A. BAUMSTARK, Festbrevier und Kirchenjahr der syrischenJakobiten.EineliturgiegeschichtlicheVorarbeitaufGrundhslicher StudieninJerusalemundDamaskus,dersyrischenHsskatalogevonBerlin, Cambridge, London, Oxford, Paris und Rom und des unierten Mossuler Festbrevierdruckes (StudienzurGeschichteundKulturdesAltertums, 3), Paderborn, 1910. BAUMSTARK, NichtevangelischesyrischePerikopenordnungen = A. BAUMSTARK, Nichtevangelische syrische Perikopenordnungen des ersten Jahrtausends (Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen, 15), Münster, 1972 (2nd ed.). BAYAN, LesynaxairearménienII = G. BAYAN (ed.), Lesynaxairearméniende TerIsraêl,II:MoisdeHori (PatrologiaOrientalis, 6/2), Paris, 1911. BAYAN, LesynaxairearménienIII = G. BAYAN (ed.), Lesynaxairearméniende TerIsraêl,III:MoisdeSahmi (PatrologiaOrientalis, 15/3), Paris, 1927. BRAKMANN, Defunctus = H. BRAKMANN, Defunctusadhucloquitur.Gottesdienst undGebetsliteraturderuntergegangenenKircheinNubien, in Archivfür Liturgiewissenschaft, 48 (2006), p. 283-333. BRAKMANN, Fragmenta Graeco-Copto-Thebaica = H. BRAKMANN, Fragmenta Graeco-Copto-Thebaica.ZuJuttaHennersVeröffentlichungalterundneuer DokumentesüdägyptischerLiturgie, in OriensChristianus, 88 (2004), p. 117- 172. BRAKMANN, NeueFunde = H. BRAKMANN, NeueFundeundForschungenzur LiturgiederKopten(1996-2000), in M. IMMERZEEL – J. VAN DER VLIET (ed.), CopticStudiesontheThresholdofaNewMillennium.Proceedings oftheSeventhInternationalCongressofCopticStudiesLeiden,27August– 2 September 2000 (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 133), Leuven – Paris – Dudley, MA, 2004, p. 575-606. BROWNE, AnOldNubianLectionaryFragment = G.M. BROWNE, AnOldNubian LectionaryFragment, in Orientalia, 70 (2001), p. 113-116. BROWNE, Chrysostomus Nubianus = G.M. BROWNE, Chrysostomus Nubianus: AnOldNubianVersionofPs.Chrysostom,Invenerabilemcrucemsermo (PapyrologicaCastroctaviana, 10), Rome – Barcelona, 1984. BROWNE, Griffith’sOldNubianLectionary (1981) = G.M. BROWNE, Griffith’s Old Nubian Lectionary, in Nilo-Saharan: Proceedings of the First Nilo- SaharanLinguisticColloquium,Leiden,September8-10,1980, Dordrecht, 1981, p. 145-150. BROWNE, Griffith’sOldNubianLectionary (1982) = G.M. BROWNE, Griffith’s OldNubianLectionary (PapyrologicaCastroctaviana, 8), Rome – Barce- lona, 1982. BROWNE, Griffith’s Old Nubian Lectionary: The Revision = G.M. BROWNE, Griffith’sOldNubianLectionary:TheRevisionRevised, in TheBulletinof theAmericanSocietyofPapyrologists, 24 (1987), p. 75-92. BROWNE, LiteraryTextsinOldNubian = G.M. BROWNE, LiteraryTextsinOld Nubian (BeiträgezurSudanforschung,Beiheft, 5), Vienna, 1989. BROWNE, Notes on Griffith’s Old Nubian Lectionary = G.M. BROWNE, Notes on Griffith’s Old Nubian Lectionary, in Sudan Texts Bulletin, 4 (1982), p. 11-13. BROWNE, Notes on Old Nubian texts (I-III) = G.M. BROWNE, Notes on Old Nubiantexts(I-III), in SudanTextsBulletin, 6 (1984), p. 26-36.

998027.indb8027.indb 3838 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 39

BROWNE, Notes on Old Nubian texts (IV-V) = G.M. BROWNE, Notes on Old Nubiantexts(IV-V), in SudanTextsBulletin, 7 (1985), p. 1-5. BROWNE, Notes on Old Nubian texts (VI-IX) = G.M. BROWNE, Notes on Old Nubiantexts(VI-IX), in BeiträgezurSudanforschung, 4 (1989), p. 63-74. BROWNE, Old Nubian Dictionary = G.M. BROWNE, Old Nubian Dictionary (CSCO, 556; Subsidia, 90), Leuven, 1996. BROWNE, OldNubianGrammar = G.M. BROWNE, OldNubianGrammar(Lan- guagesoftheWorld/Materials, 330), Munich, 2002. BROWNE, OldNubianLiteraryTexts = G.M. BROWNE, OldNubianLiteraryTexts, unpublished manuscript held in the Rare Books and Manuscripts Library of the University of Illinois – Urbana Champaign, 2004 (available online at ). BROWNE, Old Nubian Literature = G.M. BROWNE, Old Nubian Literature, in C. BONNET (ed.), Étudesnubiennes.ConférencedeGenève,Actesdu VIIe Congrès international d’études nubiennes, 3-8 septembre 1990, I: Communicationsprincipales, Geneva, 1992, p. 379-387. BROWNE, StudiesinOldNubian = G.M. BROWNE, StudiesinOldNubian(Beiträge zurSudanforschung,Beiheft, 3), Vienna – Mödling, 1988. BUDGE, MiscellaneousTexts = E.A.W. BUDGE, MiscellaneousTextsintheDia- lectofUpperEgypt, London, 1915. BURKITT, ESLS = F.C. BURKITT, TheEarlySyriacLectionarySystem (Proceedings oftheBritishAcademy, 11), London, 1923. COLIN – BAUSI, Sǝnkǝssar = G. COLIN – A. BAUSI, Sǝnkǝssar, in S. UHLIG (ed.), EncyclopaediaAethiopica, vol. IV, Wiesbaden, 2010, p. 621-623. COQUIN, Synaxarion, Ethiopian = R.-G. COQUIN, Synaxarion, Ethiopian, in A. ATIYA (ed.), TheCopticEncyclopedia, vol. VII, New York, NY, 1991, p. 2190-2192. CSCO = CorpusScriptorumChristianorumOrientalium. DE FENOYL, Sanctoral = M. DE FENOYL, Le Sanctoral copte (Recherches publiéessousladirectiondel’InstitutdeLettresOrientalesdeBeyrouth, 15), Beyrouth, 1960. DELEHAYE, Originesducultedesmartyrs = H. DELEHAYE, Originesducultedes martyrs, Bruxelles, 1912. DELEHAYE, Synaxarium Constantinopolitanum = H. DELEHAYE, Synaxarium Ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae e codice Sirmondiano, nunc Berolinensi, adiectis synaxariis selectis (Propylaeum ad Acta Sanctorum Novembris), Bruxelles, 1902. DEPUYDT, Catalogue = L. DEPUYDT, Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts in the PierpontMorganLibrary, 2 vols. (CorpusofIlluminatedManuscripts, 4-5; OrientalSeries, 1-2), Leuven, 1993. DIJKSTRA, Philae = J.H.F. DIJKSTRA, Philae and the End of Ancient Egyptian Religion. A Regional Study of Religious Transformation (298-642 CE), (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 173), Leuven – Paris – Dudley, MA, 2008. EMMEL, Shenoute’sLiteraryCorpus I = S. EMMEL, Shenoute’sLiteraryCorpus, I (CSCO, 599; Subsidia, 111), Leuven, 2004. FREND – MUIRHEAD, TheGreekManuscripts = W.H.C. FREND – I.A. MUIRHEAD, TheGreekManuscriptsfromtheCathedralofQasrIbrim, in LeMuséon, 89 (1976), p. 43-49.

998027.indb8027.indb 3939 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 40 G. OCHAŁA

FRITSCH, TheLiturgicalYearI: TheTemporal = E. FRITSCH, TheLiturgicalYear oftheEthiopianChurch,I. TheTemporal: SeasonsandSundays (Ethiopian reviewofcultures, 9-10), Adis Abeba, 2001. FRITSCH, TheLiturgicalYear:Introduction = E. FRITSCH, TheLiturgicalYear andtheLectionaryoftheEthiopianChurch:IntroductiontotheTemporal, in WarszawskieStudiaTeologiczne[WarsawTheologicalStudies], 12 (1999), p. 71-116 (available online at , accessed 9 January 2015). FRITSCH – ZANETTI, Gǝṣṣawe = E. FRITSCH – U. ZANETTI, Gǝṣṣawe, in S. UHLIG (ed.), EncyclopaediaAethiopica, vol. II, Wiesbaden, 2005, p. 773-775. GARITTE, Évangéliaire géorgien = G. GARITTE, Un fragment d’évangéliaire géorgienàlaBodléienne, in LeMuséon, 85 (1972), p. 107-146. GARITTE, Indexgéorgien = G. GARITTE, Unindexgéorgiendeslecturesévan- géliquesselonl’ancienritedeJérusalem, in LeMuséon, 85 (1972), p. 337- 398. GARITTE, Lecalendrier = G. GARITTE, Lecalendrierpalestino-géorgienduSinaiti- cus34(10esiècle), (SubsidiaHagiographica, 30), Bruxelles, 1958. GREGORY, Textkritik = C.R. GREGORY, Textkritik des Neuen Testamentes, I, Leipzig, 1900. GRIFFITH, TheNubianTexts = F.L. GRIFFITH, TheNubianTextsoftheChristian Period (Abhandlungen der Königlichen-Preußischen Akademie der Wis- senschaften,Jahrgang1913.Philosophisch-historischeKlasse, 8), Berlin, 1913. HAGEN, Progressreport = J.L. HAGEN, “ACityThatIsSetonanHillCannot BeHid.”ProgressReportontheCopticManuscriptsfromQasrIbrim, in W. GODLEWSKI – A. ŁAJTAR (ed.), BetweentheCataracts.Proceedingsof the11thConferenceforNubianStudies,WarsawUniversity,27August– 2September2006, II.2 (PolishArchaeologyintheMediterranean Supple- mentSeries, 2.2/2), Warsaw, 2010, p. 719-726. HAGEN – OCHAŁA, SaintsandScripturesforPhaophi = J.L. HAGEN – G. OCHAŁA, SaintsandScripturesforPhaophi:PreliminaryEditionofandCommen- taryonaTypikonFragmentfromQasrIbrim, in ATANASSOVA – CHRONZ, ⲥⲩⲛⲁⲝⲓⲥ ⲕⲁⲑⲟⲗⲓⲕⲏ, p. 269-290. HAMMERSTAEDT, GriechischeAnaphorenfragmente= J. HAMMERSTAEDT (ed./tr.), GriechischeAnaphorenfragmenteausÄgyptenundNubien (Abhandlungen der Nordrhein-Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Sonderreihe PapyrologicaColoniensia, 28), Opladen, 1999. HEIMING, Doppellektionar = O. HEIMING, EinjakobitischesDoppellektionardes Jahres824ausHarranindenHandschriftenBritishMuseumAdd.14485 bis14487, in P. GRANFIELD – J.A. JUNGMANN (ed.), Kyriakon:Festschrift JohannesQuasten, Münster, 1970, p. 768-799. JORDAN, TheTextualTradition = C.R.D. JORDAN, TheTextualTraditionofthe GospelofJohninGreekGospelLectionariesfromtheMiddleByzantine Period (8th-11th Century), unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Birmingham, 2009 (available online at , accessed 27 November 2012). JUNKER, DieneuentdecktenchristlichenHandschriften = H. JUNKER, Dieneuent- deckten christlichen Handschriften in mittelnubischer Sprache, in Oriens Christianus, 6 (1906), p. 437-442.

998027.indb8027.indb 4040 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 41

KANNOOKADAN, East Syrian Lectionary = P. KANNOOKADAN, The East Syrian Lectionary:AnHistorico-LiturgicalStudy, Rome, 1991. Katameros = TheKatamerosoftheDays.ReadingsforWeekDaysandFeasts, Ottawa, 1998, available online at . KIRSCH, St.Hilarion = J.P. KIRSCH, St.Hilarion, in TheCatholicEncyclopedia, 7, New York, 1910 (available online at , accessed 27 May 2013). KRESTAN – HERMANN, CyprianusII = A. KRESTAN – A. HERMANN, CyprianusII (Magier), in T. KLAUSER (ed.), ReallexikonfürAntikeundChristentum, Bd.III, Stuttgart, 1957, p. 467-477. ŁAJTAR, AGreekHymn = A. ŁAJTAR, AGreekHymntotheVirginwithAlpha- betic Acrostics Found at Qasr Ibrim, Egyptian Nubia, in ATANASSOVA – CHRONZ, ⲥⲩⲛⲁⲝⲓⲥ ⲕⲁⲑⲟⲗⲓⲕⲏ, p. 391-408. MATEOS, LeTypiconI = J. MATEOS, LeTypicondelaGrandeÉglise:Ms.Sainte- Croixnº40,Xesiècle, vol.I: Lecycledesdouzemois (OrientaliaChris- tianaAnalecta,165), Rome, 1962. MATEOS, LeTypiconII = J. MATEOS, LeTypicondelaGrandeÉglise:Ms.Sainte- Croixnº40,Xesiècle, vol. II: Lecycledesfêtesmobiles (OrientaliaChris- tianaAnalecta,166), Rome, 1963. MERCER, TheEthiopicLiturgy = S.A.B. MERCER, TheEthiopicLiturgy:ItsSources, Development,andPresentForm (HaleLectures1914-15), Milwaukee, WI – London, 1915. MERKELBACH, Grabepigram = R. MERKELBACH, Grabepigram und Vita des Bischofs Aberkios von Hierapolis, in Epigraphica Anatolica, 28 (1997), p. 125-139. MERRAS, TheDateoftheEarliestSyriacLectionary = M. MERRAS, TheDateof theEarliestSyriacLectionaryBr.M.Add.14528, in R. LAVENANT (ed.), Symposium Syriacum VII: Uppsala University, Department of Asian and African Languages, 11-14 August 1996 (Orientalia Christiana Analecta, 256), Rome, 1998, p. 575-585. METZGER, TheChristianizationofNubia = B.M. METZGER, TheChristianiza- tion of Nubia and the Old Nubian Version of the New Testament, in B.M. METZGER (ed.), HistoricalandLiteraryStudies:Pagan,Jewish,and Christian (NewTestamentToolsandStudies, 8), Leiden, 1968, p. 111-122. MILNE, EarlyPsalms = H.J.M. MILNE, EarlyPsalmsandLectionsforLent, in TheJournalofEgyptianArchaeology, 10 (1924), p. 278-282. NAU, LesMénologes = F. NAU (ed.), LesMénologesdesÉvangéliairescoptes- arabes (PatrologiaOrientalis, 47 [10/2]), Paris, 1915. NAU, Un martyrologe = F. NAU (ed.), Un martyrologe et douze Ménologes syriaques (PatrologiaOrientalis, 46 [10/1]), Paris, 1915. OCHAŁA, Chronological Systems = G. OCHAŁA, Chronological Systems of ChristianNubia (TheJournalofJuristicPapyrologySupplementSeries, 16), Warsaw, 2011. OCHAŁA, Kalendarz liturgiczny = G. OCHAŁA, Kalendarz liturgiczny Kościoła nubijskiego w świetle zachowanych fragmentów nubijskich lekcjonarzy [LiturgicalCalendaroftheNubianChurch:TheEvidenceofNubianLectio- naryFragments], in Uschyłkustarożytności–Studiaźródłoznawcze [Late Antiquity–StudiesinSourceCriticism], 12 (2013), p. 183-232.

998027.indb8027.indb 4141 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 42 G. OCHAŁA

OCHAŁA, Multilingualism in Christian Nubia = G. OCHAŁA, Multilingualism inChristianNubia:QualitativeandQuantitativeApproaches, in Dotawo: AJournalofNubianStudies, 1 (2014), p. 1-50. OCHAŁA – RUFFINI, AGuidetotheTexts = G. OCHAŁA – G.R. RUFFINI, AGuide totheTextsofMedievalNubia, available online at . TheOrthodoxStudyBible = TheOrthodoxStudyBible, Nashville, TN, 1993. PARRY – MELLING, TheBlackwellDictionary = K. PARRY – D. MELLING (ed.), TheBlackwellDictionaryofEasternChristianity, Malden, MA, 1999. PLUMLEY, Qasr Ibrim 1963-1964 = J.M. PLUMLEY, Qasr Ibrim 1963-1964, in TheJournalofEgyptianArchaeology, 50 (1964), p. 3-5. PLUMLEY, QasrIbrim1966 = J.M. PLUMLEY, QasrIbrim1966, in TheJournal ofEgyptianArchaeology, 52 (1966), p. 9-12. PLUMLEY, Qasr Ibrim and Islam = J.M. PLUMLEY, Qasr Ibrim and Islam, in Étudesettravaux, 12 (1983), p. 158-170. PLUMLEY, TheChristianPeriodatQasrIbrim = J.M. PLUMLEY, TheChristianPeriod at Qasr Ibrim. Some Notes on the MSS Finds, in K. MICHAŁOWSKI (ed.), Nubia:Récentesrecherches.Actesducolloquenubiologiqueinternationalau MuséeNationaldeVarsovie,19-22juin1972, Warsaw, 1975, p. 101-107. RAHLFS, DiealttestamentlichenLektionen = A. RAHLFS, Diealttestamentlichen Lektionen der griechischen Kirche, in Nachrichten von der Königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen. Philologisch-historische KlasseausdemJahre1915,(1916), p. 28-136. RICHTER, StudienzurChristianisierungNubiens = S. RICHTER, StudienzurChris- tianisierungNubiens (SprachenundKulturendeschristlichenOrients, 11), Wiesbaden, 2002. ROUWHORST, Les lectionnaires syriaques = G. ROUWHORST, Les lectionnaires syriaques, in C.-B. AMPHOUX – J.-P. BOUHOT (ed.), La lecture liturgique desÉpîtrescatholiquesdansl‘Égliseancienne (Histoiredutextebiblique, 1), Lausanne, 1996, p. 105-140. SCHÄFER – SCHMIDT, DiealtnubischenchristlichenHandschriften = H. SCHÄFER – K. SCHMIDT, DiealtnubischenchristlichenHandschriftenderKöniglichen BibliothekzuBerlin, in SitzungsberichtederKöniglich-PreußischenAka- demiederWissenschaften.Philosophisch-historischeKlasse, Berlin, 1907, p. 602-613. SCHÄFER – SCHMIDT, Die ersten Bruchstücke = H. SCHÄFER – K. SCHMIDT, Die ersten Bruchstücke christlicher Literatur in altnubischer Sprache, in SitzungsberichtederKöniglich-PreußischenAkademiederWissenschaften. Philosophisch-historischeKlasse, Berlin, 1906, p. 774-785. SCHMITZ – MINK, Liste 2/2 = F.-J. SCHMITZ – G. MINK, Liste der koptischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments, I: Die sahidischen Handschriften der Evangelien 2/2 (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung, 15), Berlin – New York, NY, 1991. SCHOLZ, Das nubische Christentum = P.O. SCHOLZ, Das nubische Christentum undseineWandmalereien, in S. JAKOBIELSKI – P.O. SCHOLZ (ed.), Dongola- Studien:35JahrepolnischerForschungenimZentrumdesmakuritischen Reiches (BibliothecaNubicaetÆthiopica, 7), Warsaw, 2001, p. 177-251. SCHÜSSLER, Biblia Coptica = K. SCHÜSSLER, Biblia Coptica. Die koptischen Bibeltexte.VollständigesVerzeichnismitStandorten, III/2, Wiesbaden, 2003; III/4, Wiesbaden, 2006; IV/2, Wiesbaden, 2009.

998027.indb8027.indb 4242 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 43

SCRIVENER, APlainIntroduction = F.H.A. SCRIVENER, APlainIntroductiontothe CriticismoftheNewTestamentfortheUseofBiblicalStudents, London, 1894 (4th ed.). SMITH LEWIS, Palestinian Syriac Lectionary = A. SMITH LEWIS, A Palestinian SyriacLectionary ContainingLessonsfromthePentateuch,Job,Proverbs, Prophets,Acts,andEpistles, London, 1897. TAFT, Were There Once Old Testament Readings = R.F. TAFT, Were There OnceOldTestamentReadingsintheByzantineDivineLiturgy?Apropos ofanArticlebySysseGudrungEngberg, in BollettinodellaBadiaGreca diGrottaferrata, III/8 (2011), p. 271-311. TARCHNISCHVILI, Legrandlectionnaire = M. TARCHNISCHVILI, Legrandlection- naire de l’Église de Jérusalem (Ve-VIIIe siècle), vol. I (CSCO, 188-189; ScriptoresIberici, 9-10), Leuven, 1959; vol. II (CSCO, 204-205; Scriptores Iberici, 13-14), Leuven, 1960. TISSERANT, Lecalendrierd’Aboul-Barakat = E. TISSERANT (ed.), Lecalendrier d’Aboul-Barakat:textearabe(PatrologiaOrientalis, 10/3), Paris, 1915. VAN GOUDOEVER, BiblicalCalendars = J. VAN GOUDOEVER, BiblicalCalendars, Leiden, 1961. WALKER, The Warrior Saints = C. WALKER, The Warrior Saints in Byzantine ArtandTradition, Aldershot – Burlington, VT, 2003. ZAHN, CyprianvonAntiochien = T. ZAHN, CyprianvonAntiochienunddiedeut- scheFaustsage, Erlangen, 1882. ZANETTI, Abû-l-Barakât = U. ZANETTI, Abû-l-Barakât et les lectionnaires de Haute-Égypte, in M. RASSART-DEBERGH – J. RIES (ed.), ActesduIVeCongrès copte. Louvain-la-Neuve, 5-10 septembre 1988, II: De la linguistique au gnosticisme (Publicationsdel’InstitutOrientalistedeLouvain, 41), Louvain- la-Neuve, 1992, p. 450-462. ZANETTI, Bohairic Liturgical Manuscripts = U. ZANETTI, Bohairic Liturgical Manuscripts, in OrientaliaChristianaPeriodica, 61 (1995), p. 65-94. ZANETTI, Index du Monastère Blanc = U. ZANETTI, Un index liturgique du MonastèreBlanc, in Christianismed’Égypte. HommagesàRené-Georges Coquin (Cahiersdelabibliothèquecopte,9), Leuven, 1995, p. 55-75. ZANETTI, Leçons liturgiques = U. ZANETTI, Leçons liturgiques au Monastère Blanc:Sixtypika, in BulletindelaSociétéd’archéologiecopte, 46 (2007), p. 231-304. ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptes = U. ZANETTI, Leslectionnairescoptes,avec uneannexesurleslectionnairesarabes, in C.-B. AMPHOUX – J.-P. BOUHOT (ed.), LalectureliturgiquedesÉpîtrescatholiquesdansl’Égliseancienne (Histoiredutextebiblique, 1), Lausanne, 1996, p. 141-196. ZANETTI, Les lectionnaires coptes annuels = U. ZANETTI, Les lectionnaires coptes annuels: Basse-Égypte (Publications de l’Institut Orientaliste de Louvain, 33), Louvain-la-Neuve, 1985.

Department of Papyrology Grzegorz OCHAŁA Institute of Archaeology University of Warsaw Krakowskie Przedmieście 26/28 00-927 Warszawa, Poland [email protected]

998027.indb8027.indb 4343 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 44 G. OCHAŁA

Abstract—Christian Nubia is little known to the scholarly milieu, although different aspects of its culture are derived from or modelled on Mediterranean patterns. Many enigmas of the history of the Middle Nile Valley still remain to be solved, among them the question of the litugical practices of the Nubian Church. The present article aims at analysing from two different perspectives (typological and liturgical) the scant remnants of Nubian liturgical books, which, although some of them have been known for a long time, have not been treated in a detailed manner so far. The comparative study of the pericopae, that is liturgical readings, preserved in the Nubian material and the ones found in lectionaries of other East- ern Churches of that period provides an interesting perspective on links between the Christian kingdoms of the Nile valley and the rest of Eastern Christendom. Analogies to the Nubian sources can be found not only in neighbouring Egypt and influential Constantinople, but also in Syro-Palestine and Georgia, which proves that the cultural landscape of the Middle Nile Valley is more complex than is usually perceived.

APPENDIX

COPTIC SOURCES

1. sa 530L (New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, M573) Provenance: Hamuli, Fayum Date: 9th-10th c. Description: annual lectionary in Sahidic Coptic Coverage: The manuscript covers roughly the whole liturgical year, but it provides only the major feasts in the months of Thoth, Athyr, Choiak, Tybi, Mecheir, Pharmouthi, Payni, and Epeiph; additionally, between Mecheir and Payni the feasts of the movable cycle (Lenten Fast, Eastertide, Pente- cost) are inserted. Publication: SCHÜSSLER, BibliaCoptica III/2, p. 55-71. 2. sa 570L (Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Library, 4942 + Freiburg, Univer- sitätsbibliothek, 615 + New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, M615) Provenance: unknown, perhaps Fayum Date: 8th-11th c. Description: bilingual (Greek/Sahidic Coptic) annual lectionary Coverage: The manuscript covers roughly the whole liturgical year, but it provides only the solemnities in the months of Thoth, Phaophi, Athyr, Choiak, Tybi, Pharmouthi, Pachon, and Epeiph; additionally, between Tybi and Pharmouthi the feasts of the movable cycle (Lenten Fast and Eastertide) are inserted. Publication: SCHÜSSLER, BibliaCoptica III/4, p. 46-64. 3. sa 636L (Oxford, Bodleian Library, Ms. Huntington 3) Provenance: unknown Date: 12th-13th c. Description: part of a Saturday and Sunday lectionary in Sahidic Coptic Coverage: The manuscript has preserved only the readings for Athyr, Mecheir, and the beginning of the Lenten Fast. Publication: SCHÜSSLER, BibliaCoptica IV/2, p. 81-93.

998027.indb8027.indb 4444 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 45

4. White Monastery typika – a collection of unpublished typika, used by the monastic community157: codex MONB.AW: Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Copte 120(20) + Paris, Louvre, E 9972r; Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Copte 129(20); Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, P. Vindob. K 9732, P. Vindob. K 9728, & P. Vindob. K 9735 codex MONB.WC: Cairo, Institut français d’archéologie orientale, Copte 224; Leiden, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Ms. Copte 82A (Insinger 38b) + Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Copte 133(2) codex MONB.WD, Leiden, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Ms. Copte 81 (Insinger 38a); Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, P. Vindob. K 9738 Provenance: White Monastery, Sohag Date: 10th-11th c.158 5. London, British Library, Ms. Or. 6801 Provenance: Esna Date: AD 996-1004 Description: Sahidic Coptic manuscript containing “The Martyrdom of St Mercurius Stratelates” Coverage: “Appended” to the story of St Mercurius is a selection of biblical readings for the days connected with the cult of the saint: Athyr 25/21 November (commemoration of St Mercurius), Choiak 29/25 December (Nativity), Tybi 11/6 January (eve of the commemoration of St Mercurius)159. Publication: BUDGE, MiscellaneousTexts, p. cxiii-cxviii (summary), 230-255 (transcription), 809-827 (translation); appendix transcribed on p. 249-255. 6. Present-day liturgical calendar of the Coptic Church Publication: DE FENOYL, Sanctoral, and Katameros.

GREEK SOURCES

1. Jerusalem, Sanctae Crucis 40 Provenance: Jerusalem Date: 10th c. Description: Greek synaxarion and typikon of the Hagia Sophia church in Constantinople Coverage: The manuscript covers the whole liturgical year from 1 September until 31 August, both fixed and movable cycles. Publication: MATEOS, LeTypicon.

157 Used here with kind permission of Diliana Atanassova. 158 See EMMEL, Shenoute’sLiteraryCorpus I, p. 85, n. 137. 159 Similar appendices are found at the end of two other manuscripts: London, BL Ms. Or. 7029, with the “Life of apa Aaron”, providing the pericopae for the commemoration of St Aaron on 2 May (BUDGE, MiscellaneousTexts, p. 496-502 [transcription]), and London, BL Ms. Or. 6781, with “The Encomium on Saint Michael” by Theodosius, bishop of Alexandria, providing the readings for the commemoration of Michael on 8 October (BUDGE, MiscellaneousTexts, p. 424-431 [transcription]). They, however, do not overlap with the Nubian material.

998027.indb8027.indb 4545 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 46 G. OCHAŁA

2. Menologion of the Byzantine Church Description: compilation created on the basis of numerous manuscripts Publication: GREGORY, Textkritik. 3. Present-day liturgical calendar of the Greek Orthodox Church Available online at , accessed 20 Feb- ruary 2014.

SYRIAC SOURCES

1. Palestinian Syriac lectionary Provenance: Palestine Date: not earlier than 2nd half of 9th c.160 Description: lectionary in the Palestinian dialect of Syriac containing lections from the Old Testament, Acts, and Epistles Coverage: The manuscript covers the solemnities of the whole liturgical year, beginning with the 17th Sunday before the Nativity and ending with Pentecost. Publication: SMITH LEWIS, PalestinianSyriacLectionary. 2. Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Syr. 19 Provenance: Antioch Date: AD 1030 Description: annual lectionary in the Palestinian dialect of Syriac containing lections from the Gospels Coverage: The manuscript covers the whole liturgical year, first the movable cycle from Easter onwards, then the fixed cycle from September to August, and finally a few commons. Publication: ASSEMANI – ASSEMANI, VaticanCatalogue, p. 70-103. 3. London, British Library, Add. MS 14528 Provenance: unknown Date: 6th c.161 Description: early Syriac lectionary reconstructed on the basis of a typikon from codex BL Add. MS 14528 and several biblical manuscripts Coverage: The lectionary covers only the solemnities of both the fixed and movable cycles, beginning with the Nativity and ending with Pentecost; it also contains a few commons. Publication: BURKITT, ESLS. 4. London, British Library, Add. MS 14485-14487 Provenance: Harran Date: before 9th c. Description: double lectionary of the West Syrian Church Coverage: The manuscript covers Sundays and solemnities of the whole liturgical year. Publication: HEIMING, Doppellektionar.

160 BAUMSTARK, NichtevangelischesyrischePerikopenordnungen, p. 135. 161 MERRAS, The Date of the Earliest Syriac Lectionary, suggests that the system of readings contained in this manuscript is much earlier, dating back to the second half of the fourth century.

998027.indb8027.indb 4646 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 THE NUBIAN LITURGICAL CALENDAR 47

5. Lectionary of the West Syrian Church Provenance: Syria Date: the earliest manuscript is dated to the 9th c. Description: system of readings reconstructed on the basis of various manuscripts Publication: BAUMSTARK, Festbrevier. 6. Lectionary of the East Syrian Church Date: The system dates back to the 2nd half of the 7th c. Description: early system of readings reconstructed on the basis of extant eastern Syriac manuscripts Publication: KANNOOKADAN, EastSyrianLectionary.

GEORGIAN SOURCES

1. Sinaiticus 38 Provenance: Monastery of St Catherine, Sinai Date: 10th c. Description: manuscript containing the Gospels of Luke and John with appended typikon of the Gospel pericopae Coverage: The codex covers the whole liturgical year, from the Nativity until Advent, but only the solemnities, including the movable cycle; it contains also some commons. Publication: GARITTE, Indexgéorgien. 2. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Ms. Georg. d 4 Provenance: unknown Date: 13th c. Description: fragment of evangelistarion Coverage: The manuscript covers a part of the fixed cycle, from January to August. Publication: GARITTE, Évangéliairegéorgien. 3. Sinaiticus 74 Provenance: Monastery of St Catherine, Sinai Date: 11th-12th c. Description: codex containing lectionary Coverage: The manuscript covers both the fixed and movable cycles. Publication: unpublished; cf. GARITTE, Évangéliaire géorgien, p. 111, n. 14. 4. Jerusalem, library of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate, inv. no. 28 Provenance: Jerusalem Date: 12th-13th c. Description: part of manuscript with lectionary Publication: unpublished; cf. GARITTE, Évangéliaire géorgien, p. 111, n. 13. 5. Lectionary of the Church of Jerusalem Provenance: Jerusalem Date: 5th-8th c. Description: lectionary reconstructed on the basis of four 10th-century Geor- gian manuscripts

998027.indb8027.indb 4747 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52 48 G. OCHAŁA

Coverage: The lectionary covers all days of the liturgical year, from the Eve of the Nativity until 23 December; the movable cycle is inserted between March and April; commons are placed at the end. Publication: TARCHNISCHVILI, Legrandlectionnaire.

998027.indb8027.indb 4848 44/06/15/06/15 111:521:52