Lietuvos did iojo kunigaik io Algirdo graiki kas lai kas Bizantijos epistolografijos kontekste. A letter in Greek of Grand Duke of Lithuania Algirdas in the context of Byzantine epistolography

In 1371, Grand Duke of Lithuania Algirdas wrote to Patriarch Philotheus of Constantinople a letter in Greek. Translated from Greek into Lithuanian by Marcelinas Ro ka, the letter was first published only after the scientist‘s death, in 1996; by then, there had been translations of the letter from Russian. Describing the style of the letter, the scientist emphasized only a very distant link of Algirdas‘letter with the so-called Byzantine humanism of the first half of the 14th century. This article aims at determining whether this letter is indeed exceptional in the context of abundant Byzantine epistolography and whether it can be overall compared to Byzantine letters.The article starts with a concise review of the tradition of Byzantine letter: its‘structure, types, style and topics. After having determined the type of the Greek letter of Grand Duke of Lithuania Algirdas, this letter is compared to Byzantine letters of analogous type by examining its‘ composition and stylistic features. In this section, the most attention is given to the greeting in the letter: in the translation of M. Ro ka the first sentence is missing; here it is presented and all the components of the greeting are discussed. The orthography of the duke‘s name and the lexical variation of his title in Greek texts is analysed, considering the usage of lexemes ξ/ γα , κρ λη , βασιλε , α θ ντη , in accordance with Acta patriarchatus Constantinopolitani MCCCXV–MCCCCII, ed. Franciscus Miklosich, Iosephus Müller, Vindobodae: 1860. Such comparison allows to affirm that the Greek letter of Grand Duke of Lithuania Algirdas meets the requirements of the late Byzantine business correspondence both concerning its‘ structure and its‘ stylistic features.In the end, after having discussed the features of an oath that is given to the duke when kissing the cross and that is described in the letter, as well as having familiarized with the manuscripts of M. Ro ka, some comments on the translation are presented and different translation of several points is suggested.