Georgian · Hagiography ·
Anonymous · titus
Work dossier · summary and historical context
This dossier concerns an anonymous Georgian hagiographical text edited by K. Kekelidze, conventionally attributed to the Metaphrastian corpus. The work survives in a single manuscript, with no known variant recensions, limiting textual criticism. Dating relies on paleographic and codicological analysis, not internal historical references. The text was used in Georgian monastic lectionaries for commemorative feasts. The Georgian version may be a later compilation or abridgment of the Greek Metaphrastian original. The edition does not collate the Georgian against the Greek corpus, leaving source relationships unexamined. The narrative includes standard hagiographical topoi: ascetic solitude, angelic visitation, and miraculous guidance by a camel.
This text is significant as a witness to the reception and adaptation of Byzantine hagiography in the Georgian Orthodox tradition. It illustrates how Metaphrastian material was transmitted, possibly abridged, and integrated into local liturgical practice. The work also provides insight into Georgian monastic spirituality and the use of hagiographical topoi. Its study contributes to understanding the cultural and religious exchanges between Greek and Georgian Christian communities in the medieval period.
The text belongs to the Georgian hagiographical tradition, likely produced in a monastic setting, possibly at the Iviron monastery on Mount Athos or in the Georgian monasteries of Palestine (e.g., the Lavra of Mar Saba). The manuscript dates from the medieval period, but precise dating is uncertain due to lack of internal references. The attribution to Symeon Metaphrastes (10th century) is conventional; the Georgian version may have been translated or adapted from the Greek Metaphrastian menologion, which was widely used in Byzantine and Orthodox monastic communities. The text's use in lectionaries indicates its liturgical function during feasts of anchorites. The single-manuscript survival suggests limited circulation, possibly within a specific Georgian monastic network. The absence of collation with Greek sources leaves the relationship between the Georgian and Greek Metaphrastian traditions unclear.
Apparatus · what the pipeline recorded
| Coptic | Rendering | Count | First |
|---|---|---|---|
| no glossary terms recorded | |||