II¹

2.2. The Names of Abraham and Sarah in the New Testament.

2.2.1. Abraham. The name of Abraham is attested not only in the Old Testament, but in the New Testament as well. In the Four Gospels, namely in the Gospel of Matthew, it appears 7 times (Matt. 1:1, 1:2, 1:17, 3:9´2, 8:11, 22:32), in the Gospel of Mark – once (Mk. 12:26), in the Gospel of Luke – 15 times (Lk. 1:55, 1:73, 3:8´2, 3:34, 13:16, 13:28, 16:22, 16:23, 16:24, 16:25, 16:29, 16:30, 19:9, 20:37) and in the Gospel of John  – 11 times (Jn. 8:33, 8:37, 8:39´3, 8:40, 8:52, 8:53, 8:56, 8:57, 8:58).    

From the two main versions of the pre-Athonite period Georgian translations of the Four Gospels (Opiza/Proto-Vulgate and Adishi²), we faithfully studied the Gospels of Jrutch-Parkhali and Adishi [Shanidze, 1945; Sarjveladze, 2003]. From the versions by Eptvim and George the Athonite (The Georgian Vulgate) of the Athonite period, we studied those manuscripts, which are presented in Imnaishvili’s edition [Imnaishvili, 1979]. Additionally, we considered the situation of the remaining old manuscripts containing the text of the Four Gospels and used the critical text prepared in accordance with all the old manuscripts of the old Georgian translation of the Four Gospels and readings of the ancient lectionaries (at this stage, the texts of Luke’s and John’s Gospels are prepared [Tvaltvadze, 2020]).

If the form Abraham is a norm for the redactions of the pre-Athonite and Athonite periods (the rarest exceptions do not change the general picture³), the Adishi Gospels (897) stands out in this regard as the manuscript containing one of the oldest versions of the Gospels, which follows Greek, gives preference to the variant Abraam and presents the /h/-consonant Abraham only 8 times (Matt. 1:1, Matt. 1:2, Matt. 3:9´2, Matt. 22:32, Lk. 1:55, Lk. 16:29, Lk. 19:9).

 In general, in accordance with the scientific literature, Greek, Armenian and Syriac are considered as the sources of the translation of the version presented in the Adishi Gospels. Kaukhchishvili proved with a number of arguments that the text of the Gospels was translated from the Greek source. However, he fairly noted that “the learned translators could use all the translations they had access to and it is quite natural that the translators, who translated from Greek, could refer to Armenian and Assyrian” [Kaukhchishvili, 1944:101-102]. Z. Sarjveladze also brings a number of additional linguistic arguments related to the technique of translation in order to prove that the text derived from Greek [Sarjveladze, 2003:118-129]. In the study appended to the edition of the Adishi Gospels (2003), S. Sarjveladze suggests the following conclusion: “The version presented in the Adishi Gospels is translated from the Greek original, while the Armenisms patchily attested in it are not editorial in nature. They are lexical and therefore, are secondary and are found in the layer, which the editor of the manuscript corrected according to the Armenian text of the Gospels” [Sarjveladze, 2003:69]. Therefore, it is assumed that the text was corrected according to Armenian and the Armenian vocabulary was included in it by some editor-scribes. Possibly, the replacement of Abraam-type forms with Abraham forms is also related to this process. However, according to Shanidze’s contradictory opinion, “In case of the writing of this name, the Adishi Gospels is corrected according to Greek” [Shanidze, 1964:36]. If we share this opinion, then the reading Abraham, which would have been replaced by the variant Abraam, will be the reflection of the archaic situation.  Nowadays, it is difficult to prove with certainty which variant of the anthroponym should have been presented in the autograph manuscript of the first translator (or translators), what should have been replaced by what and when. The fact is that the text was translated in the ancient times and afterwards, it was repeatedly copied and corrected. This is evidenced by the remains of the khanmetoba and haemetoba that are presented in the Adishi manuscript [Sarjveladze, 2003:71]. It is also a fact that the influence of the Greek and Oriental literary-textual traditions is noticeable in case of the writing of the mentioned anthroponym.

To consider the position of the first translators of the Gospels on the issue of the Georgian translation of the anthroponym of our interest, it is important to take into account the situation of the older manuscript  –  the Khanmeti Gospels  –  which dates back to the 7^th century [Sarjveladze, 1995:128]. The text is preserved in fragments. In the beginning of the Gospel of Matthew it shows similarity with the Adishi Gospels (the main text follows the Proto-Vulgate) and in general, has much in common with it [Kajaia, 1984:304-305]. The Khanmeti Gospels presents the name of Abraham six times (Mk. 12:12, Lk. 3:34, Lk. 13:16, Lk. 16:22, Lk. 19:9, Jn. 8:52) and in all cases with the consonant /h/ (due to the fragmentary nature, the remaining verses of our interest are missing), while in the corresponding passage of the Adishi Gospels, the variant-form Abraam is included. It is clear that for almost all old manuscripts containing the text of the Gospels (except the Adishi Gospels), regardless of their editorial affiliation, the norm is the /h/-consonant form of this name  – Abraham (with very rare exceptions). One gets the impression that this very rule of rendering of the mentioned anthroponym should reflect the ancient situation.

For clarity, we present the verse from the Gospel of John in which the name of Abraham is repeated three times:

ი. 8:39 მიუგეს და ჰრქუეს მას: მამაჲ ჩუენი აბრაამი არს. მიუგო იესუ და ჰრქუა: უკუეთუმცა შვილნი აბრაამისნი იყვენით, საქმეთამცა აბრაამისთა იქმოდეთ  C.

             მიუგეს და ჰრქუეს მას: მამაჲ ჩუენი აბრაჰამი არს. ჰრქუა მათ იესუ: უკუეთუმცა შვილნი აბრაჰამისნი იყვენით, საქმესამცა აბრაჰამისსა იქმოდეთ A^dODERPBTLAFmGihScw. აბრაამისნი A^d. აბრაჰადამისნი i#. აბრაამისთა A^d. აბრაჰამისთა P. აბრაამისსა Di. აბრაჰამისა Ah.

Abraami, Abraamisni, Abraamista C. Abrahami, Abrahamisni, Abrahamissa A^dODERPBTLAFmGihScw. Abraamisni A^d. Abrahadamisni i#. Abraamista A^d. Abrahamista P. Abraamissa Di. Abrahamisa Ah. 

Jn. 8:39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. (KJV)

       Although after the formation of George the Athonite’s text (The Georgian Vulgate), the new edition of the Gospels was not created, we still found it interesting to observe the explanatory text of the Gospel (Kimen) presented in the exegetical works of the ultra-Hellinophile period. For this purpose, we studied the Georgian texts of Theophylact of Bulgaria’s commentaries of the Gospels of Luke and John.

It turned out that K and partly J manuscripts of the 12^th-13^th centuries present (not always) the Greek attitude towards the issue of rendering of the name of Abraham in the Georgian version of Theophylact of Bulgaria’s explanations of the Gospel of Luke. Both manuscripts reveal the tendency of presenting the form Abraam in Kimen and in the commentaries, while the later AB manuscripts (the 18^th century) give preference to the form Abraham and support the already established tradition. 

The Georgian translation of Theophylact of Bulgaria’s commentary on the Gospel of John made in the ultra-Hellenophile style and preserved in the single manuscript (A 52, the 12^th-13^th  centuries) reveals the following tendency: both forms – Abraham (8:33, 8:37, 8:39´3, 8:40) and Abraam (8:53, 8:56, 8:57, 8:58)   –  are attested in Kimen. Several verses successively present the forms with /h/-consonant, while the following verses, also successively, consist of the forms without it. In Kimen we attested the single form Avraam with the spirantized reading of the plosive consonant that characterizes Byzantine Greek [Jn. 8:52]. It is interesting that if Kimen   presents the Abraham-type form, the commentary consists of this name with the consonant /h/. If the Abraam-type form is presented, the commentary includes the same form, but if the reading Avraam is revealed only once in Kimen, forms of this type are more common in the commentaries (114:14, 25; 115:25, 34; 116:11, 12, 14).

Although the Acts of the Apostles were probably translated into Georgian in the 4^th-5^th centuries, they have come down to us as the manuscripts of the 10^th century and later periods. The text is published according to nine manuscripts of the 10^th -14^th centuries [Abuladze, 1950]. The name of Abraham is attested 7 times in the Acts of the Apostles (3:13, 3:25, 7:2, 7:16, 7:17, 7:32, 13:26). From four versions identified by Abuladze, two are the versions of George the Hagiorite (Ⴂ) and Ephrem Mtsire (Ⴃ). Nevertheless, the manuscripts containing the text of the Acts of the Apostles are notable for the /h/-consonant form of Abraham and in this respect, differ from Greek.

In the Catholic Epistles, namely, in the manuscripts of the old (ႠႡ) and new (George the Hagiorite’s and Ephrem Mtsire’s (ႢႣ)) versions, the anthroponym of our interest occurs only once as the /h/-consonant form: Abrahams [1 Peter 3:6 ALEFGHJ] [Lortkipanidze, 1956]. It is also presented with the /h/ consonant in the ancient Sinai manuscripts, the difference being only the addition of the emphatic vowel: Abrahamsa MN.

In the Book of Paul's Epistles, published as four versions (according to twelve manuscripts of the 10^th-14^th  centuries [Dzotsenidze... 1974]), two of which are ancient (A, B), while two are later ones (C of George the Athonite and D of Ephrem Mtsire), the name Abraham is attested with the following frequency: Romans – 8 times, 2 Corinthians – once, Galatians – 9 times, Hebrews – 10 times. In all cases, this anthroponym consists of the consonant /h/. There is one exception – Abrams [Heb. 7:11 z]. Cf. Abrahams vHTik – which is presented in the 11^th century manuscript of George the Athonite’s version.

2.2.2. Sarah, as the wife of Abraham, is mentioned four times in the New Testament (once in the First Epistle of Peter, three times in Paul’s Epistles):

I პეტრე 3:6 ვითარცა-იგი სარა ერჩდა აბრაჰამს (აბრაჰამსა MN) და უფლით ხადინ (ხადოდა MN, ჰხადინ A) მას... LMN. სარრა AEFGHJ. Sara LMN. Sarra AEFGHJ.

I Peter 3:6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: (KJV).

ჰრომ. 4:19... რამეთუ მკუდარ იყვნეს ჴორცნი მისნი, ას წლის სადამე იყო,– და უძლურებაჲ იგი საშოჲსა სარაჲსი ABvz. სარრაჲსი Htik. Saraysi ABvz. Sarraysi Htik.  

Rom. 4:19 … when he was about a hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb: (KJV)

ჰრომ. 9:9   ... ჟამსავე ოდენ ამას მოვიდე და ესუას სარას ძჱ AB. სარრას CD. Saras AB. Sarras CD.

Rom. 9:9 … At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son (KJV).

ებრ. 11:11 სარწმუნოებით იგიცა სარრა, ბერწ ღათუ იყო, ძალი მოიღო შესაწყნარებელად... ABCD. სარა bgde.  Sarra ABCD. Sara bgde.  

Hebrews 11:11 Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed… (KJV).

As we can see, in the New Testament the name Sarah is attested in two forms: with the single as well as with the geminated consonant /r/. The form Sarah – characteristic of Syriac-Hebrew – is not seen.

2.3. The Names of Abraham and Sarah in the Ancient Georgian Lectionaries. The data of the manuscripts containing the Old Georgian Lectionary are also important for considering the ancient situation. It is known that in the 5^th-10^th centuries the Jerusalem rule of church service prevailed in the Georgian Church. The ancient Jerusalem Canon was created in Jerusalem in the Greek language in the 4^th century (this text is lost). It is supposed that it had been translated into Georgian by the 5^th century. This fact is confirmed by the structure of the Khanmeti Lectionary (the 2^nd half of the 7^th century [Shanidze, 1944]), which was copied relatively late. Unfortunately, the fragments of the Khanmeti and Haemeti (the 2^nd half of the 8^th century, H-1329 [Shanidze, 1923]) Lectionaries that have come down to us do not contain the readings presenting the names of Abraham and Sarah.

In the 7^th century, the extensive Greek Lectionary was created on the basis of the expansion and completion of the existing Jerusalem Canon. Over time, the ancient Georgian translation of the Jerusalem Canon was also expanded. The next stage of the Old Georgian Lectionary (when the Iadgari was separated from the lectionary  –  from the 70s of the 6^th  century to the middle of the 7^th  century [Metreveli... 1980:685-688]) is illustrated by the Latali (L¹, the 10^th  century), Kala/Lagurka (L^K, the 10^th  century), Sinai (L^S, 982) and Paris (L^P, the turn of the 10^th-11^th centuries) Lectionaries. Among them, only the Sinai manuscript is a selected lectionary (derived from the complete lectionary, containing only the texts of four feasts). The remaining manuscripts contain the text of the extensive/complete lectionary (although it is not available in its entirety).

It is known that the text of the readings of the biblical books included in the Paris Lectionary is an independent translation. For creating a somewhat complete picture of the biblical readings included in the Georgian Lectionary, Part II of the edition of the Paris manuscript of the Georgian Lectionary consists of the appendix – the readings of the Latali, Kala//Lagurka and Sinai manuscripts that are not presented in the Paris Lectionary [Danelia... 1997:3]. Besides the edition of the Paris Lectionary, we used the text prepared for publication by N. Melikishvili for conducting a better analysis of the readings of the Pentateuch in the Paris, Latali, Kala and Sinai manuscripts [Melikishvili, 1974]. For the readings of the New Testament, we used the critical text of the old Georgian translation of the Gospels of Luke and John [Tvaltvadze, 2020], which considers the situation of the lectionaries.

2.3.1. The Readings of the Old Testament. The verses of the Pentateuch, which attract our interest, are not presented in all the manuscripts (L^P, L^L, L^K, L^S). For example, the Paris Lectionary includes 26 readings from the Genesis, the Latali Lectionary – 14, Kala – 10, Sinai – 4. The reason is the damage done to the manuscripts, because all the manuscripts of the Old Georgian Lectionary reflect the Jerusalem liturgical practice and as a rule, should include the same readings (except the Sinai Lectionary, which does not contain readings for the whole year, but only for five feasts) [Melikishvili, 1974:10].

2.3.1.1. Abraham. The readings of the Kala and Sinai Lectionaries do not contain the verses in which, as a rule, the original name of Abraham should appear, only the Latali consists of several verses. This passage is most fully presented in the Paris Lectionary. In both lectionaries, the form Abraham is indicated as the original name of Abraham. However, only the L^P and L^L manuscripts contain Genesis 17:5. This verse of the Paris Lectionary presents Abraam as the original name and Abraham as the name given by the Lord (“Neither shall thy name any more be called Abraam, but thy name shall be Abraham” [Gen. 17:5 L^P]). The Latali Lectionary presents the opposition Abram – Abraham [Gen. 17:5 L^L]. In all other cases, four lectionaries of the Pentateuch present the form Abraham (there are quite many examples of this). Abraam is presented once in the Paris manuscript [Gen. 22:19 L^P]. Generally, in L^P, except mentioned two cases, only the form Abraham is used (more than 100 cases), even as the original name of Abraham.

Accordingly, only the reading Abraham is characteristic for all these manuscripts of the Old Georgian Lectionary (in the part that have come down to us) and there is no need to contrast two forms of the name Abraham (the need for this is only in Gen. 17:5). In this respect, the situation of the Old Georgian Lectionary reveals its closeness to the earliest Oshki Bible, which presents the books of the Old Testament more or less completely.

2.3.1.2. Sarah. In the readings of the Pentateuch of the Old Georgian Lectionary (in the part that have come down to us), the reading Sarra is presented only once in the episode, where the Lord changes the name: „სარას, ცოლსა შენსა, არღარა ეწოდოს სახელი მისი სარა, არამედ სარრა იყოს სახელი მისი“  ] “As for Sara your wife, you are no longer to call her Sara; her name will be Sarra” [Gen. 17:15 L^P]. In other cases, all the manuscripts containing the lectionary offer only the reading Sara as the original (L^P) and new names of Abraham’s wife (L^P, L^L, L^K, L^S). Accordingly, the manuscripts containing the Old Georgian Lectionary, present only the form Sara and reveal closeness to the Oshki Bible in terms of rendering of this anthroponym.

2.3.2. The Readings of the New Testament. Mainly, the form Abraham appears (36 times) in the readings of the New Testament of the Paris Lectionary. The same tendency is evident in the rest of the manuscripts of the Lectionary. According to the available material, only several cases of the usage of this anthroponym without the consonant /h/ can be confirmed: მე ვარ ღმერთი აბრამისი.../ I am God of Abram...  [Matt. 22:32 L^p]; რამეთუ შემძლებელ არს ღმერთი აღდგინებად ქვათაგან შვილად აბრაამისა/ that God is able to raise up children to Abraam from these stones [Lk. 3:8 L^p]. Cf.: Abrahamisad L^s. Abrahamisa L^z [Tvaltvadze, 2020].

The forms Sara [I Pet. 3:6] and Sarra [Heb. 11:11] are presented once in the Paris manuscript.

3. The Forms Abram//Abraam//Abraham and Sara//Sarra in the Texts of Old and Middle Georgian. To create a general picture of the research topic, we carried out the research based on the corpus. We were interested in the frequency of usage of the variants of these anthroponyms (taking into account era, genre of a text and style of translation), their purpose; these names as eponyms, their role in the onomastic processes, etc. We will try to briefly summarize the results of the research, which was based on the corpus:

1. In general, the /h/-consonant variant Abraham is given a clear advantage among the forms of the name of Abraham in old literary Georgian. Statistically, its usage as the name of the biblical father far exceeds Abraam and especially, Abram forms. The variant Abram is attested very rarely in the old texts. The old Georgian writing, both translated and original, in fact, presents the form Abraham. This applies to all branches of old Georgian ecclesiastical writing: hagiography and hymnography, exegesis, liturgy, ascetic-mysticism, homiletics (we have already discussed the bibliology in detail). The form Abraham is attested in “The Martyrdom of Eustathius of Mtskheta”, “The Conversion of Kartli”, “The Martyrdom of Abo of Tiflis”, “The Martyrdom of Konstanti Kakhi”, “The Life of Ioane of Zedazen”, “The Life of Gregory of Khandzta” and others. We will cite a few examples:

და განმრავლდეს ნათესავნი აბრაჰამისნი დიდად ფრიად... ] And may the descendants of Abraham multiply greatly... [Eust. 37:6].

ნეტარმან აბრაჰამ თჳსთა ნაშობთაგანი შეგიწყნარა ] Blessed Abraham had mercy on his offspring [Abo 77:26].

... ვითარცა აკურთხე სახლი ნოვე მართლისაჲ და აბრაჰამ მამათ-მთავრისაჲ ] ... As you have blessed the house of righteous Noah and father Abraham [Khan. 259:33].

The form Abraham is also attested in the ultra-Hellenophile texts, for example, in Ioane Petritsi’s “Commentaries of Platonic Philosophy and Proclus Diadochus” and in Theophylact of Bulgaria’s commentaries of the Gospels of Luke and John (as we indicated in the appropriate passage, the variant Abraam is also attested in this case).

The form Abraam lags behind the /h/-consonant variant in terms of frequency of usage. This in fact is attested in all types of texts, although the original hagiography still gives preference to the variant Abraham. It seems that in ancient Georgia the /h/-consonant forms of this anthroponym were more widespread (firstly, this refers to the translated biblical books and lectionaries). Therefore, the authors of the original texts used the form to which their ears were accustomed. The exception in this regard is “The Life of Ioane of Zedazen” that often presents the form Abraam.

2. When producing derivatives (mainly, the nouns of possession formed by the suffix -ean//-ian), the language gives preference to the form Abram: Abrameanni [Hymnog. 25:24], Abramianta [The life of Kart. II, 21:10], Abramianebrta [Hag. VI, 322:19] (the latter is derived by adding the suffix -ebr to the noun of possession) ... Derivatives are also formed from the variant Abraam (Abraamiani [The Mon. II, 376:18], Abraamianebad [Gabashv.59:25]...). However, we also found the form Abrahamiani (which derived from the anthroponym Abraham) in old Georgian: Abrahamiani [Gabriel Mtsire, 119:21], Abrahamianita [Pseudobasil. 163:2].

3. In the Old Georgian translated texts, several cases of the usage of the Hellenized form (with the Hellenized endings) [Tov, 1999:176] of the anthroponym Abram were revealed, for instance: Amba Abramios [The Life of the Fath., 252:15], Abramos [Flavius, 89:16], Avramoysgan [Flavius, 19:4], etc.

4. In Middle Georgian, Abraham is rarely attested, mostly in texts of the early period. Several forms were found in the texts of Georgian law and compositions of historical and travel genres.  Teimuraz I, Archil, Vakhtang VI used the form Abram as the name of the biblical father. We also found the variant Abraam in Teimuraz I’s works. Abram is used as the name of the characters in “Amiran-Darejaniani” and Sargis Tmogveli’s “Dilariani”, while Abraam is presented in “Rusudaniani”.

5. Abram must have been a spread proper name in the Middle Ages. It is attested in “The Life of Kartli” and quite often in “The Monuments of Georgian Law”. It appears as the name of clergymen (Catholicos Abram, Priest Abram, Abbot Abram, Deacon Abram...) and laymen (Kurukhulo Abram, Ilauri Abram, Regional Governor Abram, Abram Mtchedlidze’s...). “The Monuments of Georgian Law” attests the -a (¬ -ak) suffixed forms of this anthroponym (peasant Abrama Shalaberidze, Jew Kobiashvili Abrama...), mainly as the proper names of representatives of the lower social strata. We have also found the anthroponym Abramela (Abramela Medzmariashvili, Abramela’s son Zalika) [Georg. Law. VIII, 930:20; 930:15].

Abraham does not seem to be such a common form of the name as Abram. According to “The Life of Kartli” and “The Monuments of Georgian Law”, Abraham appears only as a name of clergymen (Catholicos Abraham, Father Abraham, Abraham - Deacon of Alaverdi) and not as a name of laymen. From the compositions of the ascetic genre, the following characters are known: Father Abraham, Abraham the Egyptian, Monk Abraham [Gabidzashvili, 2006:83]. In “The Life of Kartli” it was found as the name of Emir: Emir Abraham [The Life of Kartli I, 257:7]. In this case, the use of the /h/-consonant variant of the anthroponym was more expected, since in the Quran this name is attested in the form of Ibrahim.

The Abraam variant of the name does not seem to be common as well. It was mainly attested as a name of clergymen (Abraam - Abbot of Alaverdi, Catholicos Abraam…). It must have been rare in this form as a name of laymen (Emir Abraam, Lieutenant-colonel Mirza Abraam Enakolopov).

6. In Ioane Bagrationi’s “Description of Kartl-Kakheti”, we attested the toponym derived from the eponym Abram, namely the village Abrameti (“Osheti, Amlivi, Abrameti, Ghoristavi…”) [Bagrat. 32:21a].

7. In “The Monuments of Georgian Law” the following surnames derived from the anthroponym Abram are attested: Abramasshvili, Abramashvili, Abramisshvili, Abramishvili, Abramisdze, Abramidze, Abramiani. The corpus research revealed the surname Abramov of non-Georgian origin. The forms Abraham, Abraam do not appear in the surnames.

Factually, the situation is similar today: the surnames are derived from the Abram variant of the aforementioned anthroponym. According to the book “Surnames and Names in Georgia” published in 1997, the most common surname derived from the anthroponym Abram is Abramishvili (5590). It is followed by: Abramiani (1508), Abramidze (1185), Abramov (651), Abramashvili (580), Abramia (411), Abramaladze (125) [Silagadze... 1997:16]. The variant Abraham does not appear in surnames, although, in our opinion, this form should be assumed as the origin of the surname Abrakhamia (90) ¬  Abrahamia.

8. The Sarra variant of the anthroponym is attested only as the name of Abraham’s wife. In addition to the biblical books discussed above, this form is also presented in the Georgian translations of John Chrysostom’s, Gregory of Nazianzus’ and Josephus’ compositions. The form Sara is more frequently used. It appears as a name of the wife of biblical Abraham as well as of other historical persons and characters (for example, according to the Book of Tobit, Sara was a name of Tobias' wife), including males (“Sara and Gregory, brothers of Pkhov” [The Life. I, 269:10]). In “The Conversion of Kartli” both forms of the anthroponym are presented as the name of the same person: Sara//Sarra of Bethlehem. Middle Georgian prefers the variant Sara (for example, this form is attested as a name of the biblical father's wife in “The Monuments of Georgian Law”, in Archil’s composition), although it does not seem to have been used frequently. We could not attest it as a female name in the Georgian law or historical documents. Therefore, we cannot say anything about its spread in medieval Georgia.

4. The Names of Abraham and Sarah in the Modern Georgian Translations of the Bible. The translation of individual books (the Old Testament) of the Bible from the original language  –  Hebrew  –  into modern Georgian started in the beginning of the 20^th century. The translation of the complete collection of the Bible (the Old and New Testaments) from the original languages ​​(Hebrew, Greek) into the new Georgian language was published by the Patriarchate of Georgia in 1989 [The Bible... 1989]. In this edition, the Hebrew names of our interest are presented as Abram – Abraam (אַבְרָהָ֔ם¬  אַבְרָ֑ם) and Sarai – Sara (שָׂרָ֖ה¬(שָׂרָ֑י. It is noteworthy that in the source language (אַבְרָהָ֔ם¬  אַבְרָ֑ם) the consonant ב (be) is presented without the dagesh and accordingly, the correct reading of the name is Avram//Avraham and not Abram//Abraam as in Georgian. The primary forms of the names exactly repeat the situation of the original, but with one difference: the anthroponym Abram is presented not with the consonant /v/, but with the consonant /b/, apparently, under the influence of our scribal tradition, since in Georgian it was the /b/-consonant form that was perceived as a real equivalent of the Hebrew anthroponym. As we have already seen in the appropriate place, under the influence of Byzantine Greek, the reading Avraam formed by the spirantization of /b/ appeared only later, quite rarely, in the translations of the ultra-Hellenophile period. At the same time, the Hebrew consonant ה (he) indicating theophory is not visible in the secondary forms of anthroponyms (we do not see the expected forms Avraham and Sarah) and the difference between these two forms of the name is based on the different principle: the doubling of the vowel /a/ (Abraam) and the removal of the final /i/ (Sara): 

დაბადება 17:5 აღარ გერქვას ამიერიდან სახელად აბრამი, არამედ აბრაამი იყოს შენი        სახელი, რადგან უამრავ ხალხთა მამად გაქცევ.

Genesis 17:5. No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraam, for I will make you the father of a multitude of nations.

დაბადება 17:15 უთხრა ღმერთმა აბრაამს: სარაის, შენს ცოლს, აღარ ერქვას სახელად სარაი, არამედ სარა იყოს მისი სახელი.

Genesis 17:15 God also said to Abraham: As for Sarai your wife, she no longer be called Sarai; her name will be Sara.

 Accordingly, before changing the name, the relevant verses of the books of the Old and New Testaments published by the Patriarchate of Georgia, presented the analyzed anthroponyms as Abram and Sarai. After changing, the latter were replaced by the variants Abraam and Sara.

In terms of rendering of the anthroponyms of our interest into Georgian, several editions of the Bible translated into the new Georgian language should be distinguished. One of them is the Books  of the Old and New Testaments [Bible... 2001] published by the Georgian Bible Society in 2001. The translation of Genesis repeats the forms of the names given in the Bible published by the Patriarchate with one addition – Abraham’s original and changed names are accompanied by the commentaties explaining the meanings in the verse itself (the translation omits the following part of the original sentence: וְהָיָ֤ה שִׁמְךָ֙ (and let your name be)):

დაბადება 17:5 და აღარ გერქმევა შენ სახელად აბრამი (ამაღლებული მამა), არამედ აბრაამი (მრავალთა მამა), რადგან მრავალი ხალხის  მამად გაქცევ.

 Genesis 17:5 And no longer shall your name be called Abram (exalted father), but your name shall be Abraam (father of a multitude), for I will make you the father of many nations.

დაბადება 17:15 უთხრა ღმერთმა აბრაამს: „და აღარ უწოდო შენს ცოლს სარაი,  არამედ სარა იყოს სახელი  მისი“.

Genesis 17:15 God also said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you are no longer to call her Sarai; her name will be Sara”.

In 2012 Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani University published the Pentateuch as a separate book [The Pentateuch... 2012] in which the verses of our interest not only accurately follow the translation of the verses of the Bible published by the Patriarchate, but also exactly repeat the forms of the anthroponyms: Abram//Abraam, Sarai//Sara.

In terms of the translation of the mentioned anthroponyms, the edition of the Bible (2015) [The Bible... 2015] attracts attention. It presents Abraham as the name given to Abraham by the Lord and accordingly, maintains the element of the original theophory. The edition indicates Abram as the original name of the father.

We should also mention the translation of the Torah (the Pentateuch) into the new Georgian language. It was published in Israel in 1988. The translators of the book are Abram Mamistvalov, Tamar Mamistvalov-Kezerashvili and Gershon Ben Oren (Tsitsuashvili). The book was reprinted in 1995 [The Torah, 1995]. As the translators indicate in the preface, the second edition of the Pentateuch was published due to two reasons: the great demand for the book and the desire to correct the inaccuracies of the first edition. The editors of the second edition are Abram Mamistvalov and Tamar Mamistvalov-Kezerashvili. In case of the names given by the Lord to the father and his wife, the edition presents the theophoric element /h/ only in the form of the name of Abraham:

ბერეშით 17:5 და შენ აღარ გერქმევა აბრამი, არამედ შენი სახელი იქნება აბრაჰამი,  რამეთუ უამრავ ხალხთა მამად გაქცევ შენ.

 Bereshit 17:5 And no longer shall your name be Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I will make you the father of many nations.

ბერეშით 17:15 და უთხრა ღმერთმა აბრაჰამს: სარაის, შენს ცოლს, აღარ დაუძახო სახელად სარაი, არამედ მისი სახელი იქნება სარა.

Bereshit 17:15 And God said to Abraham: As for Sarai your wife, you are no longer to call her Sarai; her name will be Sara.

Accordingly, in the translations of the Bible from the original language into the new Georgian language, two “linguistic situations” of rendering of the anthroponyms אַבְרָהָ֔ם¬  אַבְרָ֑ם,  שָׂרָ֖ה¬ שָׂרָ֑י   are noticeable – there is the opposition between the forms Abram – Abraam, Sarai – Sara and between the variants Abram – Abraham, Sarai – Sara. If there is no uniform picture in the rendering of Abraham’s secondary name in the mentioned editions, there is a complete agreement in case of the name of Sarah: none of the translations shows the equivalent – the form Sarah – expected by the transliteration of the Hebrew anthroponym (שָׂרָ֖ה), which is not supported by the Georgian literary tradition.

5. Conclusion. Therefore, the old Georgian versions of the biblical books or the lectionaries containing the Jerusalem Canon can be conditionally divided into two groups in terms of the rendering of the names of Abraham and Sarah: a) the texts in which there is no tendency of opposition between the original and God-given names of these biblical persons; b) such a tendency, despite the violations, is still noticeable. In both cases, we mean the texts that contain the Book of Genesis up to 17:5 or 17:15 (before the change of the names of Abraham and Sarah), at least in fragments.

The first group includes the Oshki//Athonite Bible (978 AD) containing the oldest translation of the books of the Old Testament and the manuscripts depicting the Old Georgian Lectionary (Paris (the 10^th-11^th  centuries) and Latali (the 10^th  century)) that present one form of the names of these biblical persons – Abraham and Sara. However, even in these manuscripts, in the episodes of the change of the name, the original and God-given forms of the anthroponym are opposed to each other: Abraam – Abraham (OL^p), Abram – Abraham (L^l), Sara – Sarra (OL^p). As we have indicated in the appropriate passage, this opposition is presented throughout the Hebrew and Greek versions. According to our observation, it is also systemic in Armenian and Syriac. The only exception in this regard is Georgian.

The tendency not to distinguish between two forms of the name Sarah is not fully presented in the Oshki Bible – after the change of the name, the original form Sara is included in the certain passages (Gen. 17:19-20:2). After that (taking into account the shortcomings of the manuscript), the change of the scribe’s position in favor of the variant Sarra is observed.

The second group includes the ultra-Hellenophile translation type manuscript C – A 179 (1669), the printed Bakar Bible (B – A 455, 1743); also A – H 1207 (the 18^th century) and the Saba or Mtskheta Bible (the 17^th-18^th centuries).

It is obvious that the opposition between two forms of the names of Abraham and Sarah is not seen in the old manuscripts. The need for this appears only in the later manuscripts of the biblical books, presumably, on the basis of the comparison with Greek. As a result, not only the necessity of distinguishing between the original and new forms of the name becomes apparent, but the form Abraham, reflecting the Eastern textual tradition, is to some extent replaced by the reading Abraam, which is in opposition to the form Abram and characterizers Greek. This process is more visible in the translations of the ultra-Hellenophile type (C, G), since it seems that the reading Abraham, supported by the tradition, still seriously competes with the Hellenic version of the anthroponym. In the episode of the change of the name, all types of texts offer only the form Abraham (O L^p L^l C B A S) as the new name of Abraham, which is opposed to the forms Abraam (OL^p) or Abram (L^l C B A S).

The synthesis of the above-mentioned two (Eastern and Greek) literary-textual traditions must be one of the main reasons for the variegation that is observed in the issue of the presentation of the mentioned anthroponym.

The process Sara ® Sarra should also be explained by the influence of Greek, since the geminated consonant, which is presented in the spelling of this anthroponym, is not found in Syriac or Armenian (although it can be said that in Armenian the principle is Greek-like) or Hebrew. It seems that Georgian adopted the Hellenic form Sarra more easily (although even in this case there is no uniformity) than Abraam (in addition to the tradition of using the form Abraham, one of the reasons might be the fact that in the old manuscripts Abraam was considered as the original name of the father (Gen. 17: 5 OL^p)).

It is obvious that the manuscripts containing the ancient Georgian translations of the biblical books and lectionaries that have come down to us give more preference to the Eastern literary-textual tradition (Armenian, Syriac, Hebrew) in case of rendering and transliterating of the name of Abraham, while in case of the name of  Sarah, the preference is not given to Syriac-Hebrew, but to Greek, which is principally followed by Armenian.

For almost all old manuscripts containing the New Testament (except the Adishi Gospels (897 AD), which gives preference to the variant Abraam, but several times reveals the reading Abraham), regardless of their editorial affiliation, the /h/-consonant form Abraham of this name is the norm (the rarest exceptions do not change the general picture). One gets the impression that this very rule of rendering of the anthroponym must reflect the ancient situation.

It seems plausible to assume that, if not the entire Bible, at least a certain part of it must have been translated into Georgian at the turn of the 4^th-5^th  centuries or by the middle of the 5^th  century [Danelia, 1977:67], mostly from Greek [Danelia, 1983:128; Gigineishvili, 1989:54; Uttie, 2009:232, etc.]. The ancient Georgian Lectionary could also exist at the end of the 5^th century or in the beginning of the 6^th century [Iadgari, 1980:684]. The source of the Georgian Lectionary is considered to be Greek, since the oldest Jerusalem Canon was compiled in Jerusalem (the 4^th century) in Greek [Melikishvili, 1974:1-2]. In case of the existence of the Greek original, the preference to the form Abraham made in the ancient manuscripts of the Georgian translations that reached us can be explained in the following way: the ancient Georgian translations of the Bible have come down to us not through the autograph manuscripts of the first translators or through the manuscripts from a chronologically close period, but through the later manuscripts that are quite distant from them (by several centuries). Therefore, even if we consider Greek as a primary source and assume that the form of the aforementioned Hebrew anthroponym already rendered into Greek in the Septuagint was accurately and changelessly copied (Greek Αβρααμ – Georgian აბრაამ) during the process of the transmission of the text, after going through the stages of multiple comparisons with Armenian, Syriac, Hebrew and Greek [Gigineishvili, 1989:54], this anthroponym could not come down in the form in which it might have existed in the first translators’ autograph manuscripts. Accordingly, we know nothing about the first translators’ position on the issue of copying this anthroponym. Today it is difficult to determine with certainty if the situation presented in the Oshki Bible on the issue of rendering of the name of Abraham reflects the ancient stage and is attributed to the first translator (or translators), or is the result of the change made by the editor-transcriber in the process of the transmission of the text.

In case of considering Greek as a source, it is known that the first translators of the Bible knew and took into account the situation of other sources (Armenian, Syriac, Hebrew). Therefore, it is not excluded that the first translators rendered the mentioned Hebrew anthroponym not only in the transliterated form (in accordance with the phonological system of Greek), but in the /h/-consonant form Abraham (via considering the situation of the original and the non-Greek, Eastern literary-textual tradition). Another circumstance could contribute to this choice: it is known from the scientific literature that while selecting the equivalents for the anthroponyms, the ancient translators of the Septuagint, might not always be guided by the data of the Hebrew source, might dissociate from it and use the form of the name to which they were accustomed, which was widespread (was an actual name in their collective) in their environment. In short, when rendering the proper names, they gave preference to the familiar equivalents [Tov, 2022]. Possibly, the Abraham variant of the name was such a familiar equivalent for the Georgians. It must have been widespread in the Armenian or Jewish communities, whose existence has been assumed on the territory of Georgia since ancient times.

As we have already mentioned, according to the ancient manuscripts that have come down to us, while rendering and transliterating the name of Sarah, Georgian dissociates from the Syriac-Hebrew literary-textual tradition (the variant Sarah characteristic of Hebrew and Syriac is not found in Georgian. In general, old Georgian is not characterized by /h/ in auslauts of stems of names) and presents the form Sara or rarely the form Sarra – which is characteristic of Greek and is obtained through the gemination of rho – as the name given by God. In case of rendering of the name of Sarah, Georgian reveals proximity to Armenian, which also dissociates from Syriac-Hebrew, does not use the /h/-consonant variant Sarah and forms the modified name of the father's wife according to the Greek principle – in the new form, the hard /r/, which replaces the soft /r/ (Սարա – Սառա), is the equivalent of the Greek geminated rho. The tendency of presenting only one form, Sara, as the original or the name given by the Lord, revealed in the manuscripts containing the Oshki Bible and the Old Georgian Lectionary, may also be explained by the influence of Armenian, because the opposition Սարա – Սառա, based on the alternation of the soft and hard r-s, could be rendered in Georgian only in one form – Sara, without a proper understanding of the above presented principle of equivalence.

In our opinion, if we discuss complexly the issue of transliteration-transcription of both anthroponyms into Georgian, we should initially consider Armenian, while talking about the influence of the Eastern literary-textual tradition on the ancient Georgian translations of the biblical books and lectionaries.

It is known that the biblical books were more often changed in order to get closer to the Greek source (even before the Athonite period). Therefore, the ancient form of the text should be presented in the ancient Georgian lectionaries to which the Oshki Bible reveals its proximity. Based on the above mentioned, it is possible that the lectionaries and the Oshki version containing the old Georgian translation of the biblical books reflect the ancient situation regarding the issue of rendering of the names of Abraham and Sarah into Georgian. The reading of Abraam as the name given by God is not revealed by the lectionaries, but by the later manuscripts, containing the Georgian versions of the Bible and the reason for this must be the closeness to the Greek source.

In general, in old literary Georgian, from the forms of the proper name of Abraham, the obvious preference is given to the /h/-consonant variant Abraham. The original hagiography demonstrably prefers the form Abraham. In Middle Georgian Abraham is rarely attested, mostly in the texts of the early period. In the texts of the later period of the same stage of the language development, the Abraham//Abraam variant of the name is not often found. It is mainly attested as the name of clergymen. Instead, Abram must have been a widespread proper name during this period. It appears as the name of both clergymen and laymen. The Abram variant of the mentioned anthroponym is preferred in the derived surnames (Abramishvili, Abramidze...).

Accordingly, in the translations of the Bible from the original language into the new Georgian language, two “linguistic situations” of rendering of the studied anthroponyms are noticeable – there is the opposition between the forms Abram – Abraam, Sarai – Sara and between the variants Abram – Abraham, Sarai – Sara. If there is no uniform picture in the rendering of Abraham’s secondary name in the mentioned editions, there is a complete agreement in case of Sarah’s name: none of the translations shows the equivalent – the form Sarah – expected by the transliteration of the Hebrew anthroponym (שָׂרָ֖ה), which is not supported by the Georgian literary tradition.

The Main Conventional Signs

A –  H 1207 (the 18^th century)

B – A 455 (The Bakar Bible, printed version, 1743)

C –   A 179 (1669)

O – Ivir. Geo. #1 (The Oshki Bible, 978)

S – A 51 (the Mtskheta manuscript or Saba Bible, preserved in Korneli Kekelidze Georgian National Centre of Manuscripts in Tbilisi, the 17^th -18^th centuries)

C – S.I.E.M. 22, the Adishi Gospels (897)

D – H 1660, the Jrutchi Gospels (936)

E – A 1453, the Parkhali Gospels (973)

F – The Urbnisi Gospels (the 11^th century)

G – The Palestinian Gospels (1048)

H – A 1335, the Vani Gospels (the 12^th-13^th centuries)

I – The Etchmiadzin Gospels (the 12^th-13^th centuries)

K – Q 908, the Gelati Gospels (the 12^th-13^th centuries)

L^s – Sin 37. The Lectionary of Jerusalem, known as the Sinai Lectionary. It is preserved on Mount Sinai, in the Monastery of St. Catherine. The selected manuscript of the Jerusalem Canon (982 AD)

L^k  – Q 1653. The Lectionary of Kala (Lagurka), preserved in Tbilisi, in the National Center of Manuscripts (the 10^th century)

L^l  – The Lectionary of Latali, preserved in Mestia, in the Museum of History and Ethnography of Svaneti (the 10^th century)

L^P – Geo. 36. The Lectionary of Paris, preserved in the Oriental Fund of the National Library of Paris (the turn of the 10^th-11^th centuries)