An Unknown Palimpsest Containig the Homilies of Ioane Bolneli (H-1816A)

The study of the palimpsests kept in the National Centre of Manuscripts has considerably enriched nearly all disciplines of the Georgian literature. The new material demonstrated that the liturgical texts are rather diverse and that to some degree they specify or alter our knowledge of the ancient Georgian tradition of the divine worship.
Of particular significance is one short manuscript H-1816a, kept in the National Centre of Manuscripts that represents an Euchologion and is dated to 15-16th cc. The manuscript consists of 28 pages. The text is written in brown ink on a parchment, in Nuskhuri script, upper graphemes in Mtavruli script. The copier and the place of copying is unknown. The manuscript is entirely a palimpsest. In the lower layers of the palimpsest three manuscripts can be identified, two of them are damaged and the text is unverifiable, only few phrases can be made out.
The object of our study is the third palimpsestic manuscript which is preserved in 15 pages. The text is written in the finest script of Nuskhuri, graphemes are slightly tilted to the right, on the final lines the grapheme are elongated. The upper graphemes are written in Asomtavruli, exceed the column and takes up the space between three lines. The copier uses Asomtavruli script at the beginning of each paragraph. This is why Asomtravruli graphemes can be seen on the margins, at the beginning of paragraphs, as well as in the text. In terms of codicology and paleographic analysis the manuscript dates to the end of the 10th century
and the beginning of 11th century.
The palimpsest is rather damaged, only the beginning and final lines are preserved on a number of pages. Using existing technical instruments, our attempt was to identify and read the text. At this point nine pages have been deciphered and identified.
The palimpsest contains the fragments of the fourth, fifth and sixth homilies by Ioane Bolneli. The identification of Ioane Bolneli’s homilies had posed a complex and an interesting question. Firstly, our aim was to identify the nature of the manuscript – what kind of collection could the MS H1816a be?
The fourth and fifth homilies of Ioane Bolneli are kept in O/Sin.geo-44 manuscript, Athos (MS Ivir.geo-11), Parkhali (MS A-95) and Klarjeti (MS A-144) Mravaltavis (Homiliaries). As for Ioane Bolneli’s sixth homily, which represents the translation of the "Prodigal Son" parable from The Gospel of Luke, it has only been preserved in the O/Sin.geo-44 manuscript kept on Mt Sinai and Athos Mravaltavi (Ivir.geo-11), apart from MS H-1816a.
The textological comparison of Ioane Bolneli’s homily kept in MS H-1816a palimpsest with the above mentioned manuscripts revealed the orthographical particularities and instances of (shortening-lengthening) amendments in size. It can be argued that MS H-1816a palimpsest does not reveal direct relations to any specific manuscript. However, we should consider existing differences as variant versions of the text rather than editorial differences.
MS H-1816a palimpsest is unique in that it is neither a part of Mravaltavi, nor of any homiletic collection similar to MS O/Sin.geo-44. It could be said that the MS H-1816a palimpsest is a liturgical collection with a completely different composition. Our suggestion is strengthened by the fact that in MS H-1816a, at the end of the sixth homily of Ioane Bolneli, on the same page, we read the hymn of the third Monday and third Tuesday of Lent from the Oldest Iadgari. The palimpsest has also preserved the fragments of the first Monday and first Tuesday of Lent. Apart from this, MS H-1816a contains a text from the Old Testament – Gen. 4:15-5:5. This part of Genesis is read on the first Monday of Lent in the Jerusalem Lectionary.
Another important detail that was revealed during the study of the palimpsest is related to the arrangement of the Lent weeks. According to the system of Ioane Bolneli’s homilies, the sixth homily (“The Prodigal Son” parable from The Gospel of Luke) is read on the fourth week of Lent. In MS H-1816a palimpsest Ioane Bolneli’s homily is followed by the hymn of the Lent’s third week, in other words it reveals a difference in one week.
It has to be noted here that the work of Ioane Bolneli is dated differently by different scholars (from 6th to 10th century). The decisive factor in the question of dating has to do with the Lent’s eight-week system presented in Bolneli’s preaching; the system which represents 6th-7th-century liturgical practice of Jerusalem and is considered entirely anachronistic for the 10th century.
Considering the above, we can cautiously suggest that the author of the MS H-1816a collection adjusted Ioane Bolneli’s preaching according to the later liturgical practice of Jerusalem. This is why we have one-week difference compared to Bolneli’s eight-week system. The presence of the seven-week system in the palimpsest indicated a later liturgical practice and this is a further argument to date the palimpsest on the 10th-11th cc.
To summarize, it could be argued that MS H-1816a palimpsest represents a unique collection structured according to the Jerusalem practice and it contains full material that describes this practice, including: The Lectionary (texts from the Holy Bible), Iadgari (hymns), and homilies (Bolneli preaching). The existence of such collection was hitherto unknown to the scholarly community, which further emphasizes the significance and the necessity for studying the palimpsests. What could have been the volume of this collection? We think, based on the manuscript’s format, that it only covered Lent and was adjusted to Ioane Bolneli’s preaching.