VL: To begin, this is Viviana Lu. I'm the summer intern in Byzantine Studies Oral History, and I'm here with Nadezhda Kavrus-Hoffmann and Nikos Kontogiannis, who is the Director of Byzantine Studies. So thank you so much both for being here. My first question is, when was the first time that you heard of Dumbarton Oaks? And what were your initial impressions of the institution?
NKH: The first time, it was so long ago. I don't remember exactly precisely when it was, but definitely like 50 years ago, when I was still in Russia, in the Soviet Union, and studied Classics. But when I decided to go into manuscript studies then, of course, I was catapulted to the Byzantine studies rather than Classics, and that's when I heard about Dumbarton Oaks. But in the Soviet Union it was just a dream. They won't let us go anywhere abroad, let alone the United States. So it was like a myth existed there somewhere [laughing].
I first visited Dumbarton Oaks in 1992 when I first arrived in the United States, thanks to my husband, Erik Hoffmann, who brought me here to this country. So he had a friend, George Majeska. They met at graduate studies, and George Majeska offered to show me around Dumbarton Oaks. So we went to Washington, and I was so nervous going to Dumbarton Oaks. It was for me like something surreal, but it was very nice. He showed me around the gardens, the library, and the new library didn’t exist back then, so it was all in the main building. The Fellows, the library, and it was very crowded. But very nice, very nice. Those are my first memories. Of course I knew [Alexander] Kazhdan.
NK: From Russia.
NKH: Yes. But it was the first time I've seen him in many, many years after he immigrated. So that was really nice. The second question, I think, is the most important, of course. In what ways did you make use of Dumbarton Oaks resources? I think the most important statement is that without Dumbarton Oaks resources and library, my project of cataloging Greek manuscripts in the United States would not have been possible at all because I needed a lot of books, paleographic albums, albums of watermarks, all kinds of journals, obscure journals where paleographers publish their articles. Books, texts, Clavis Patrum Graecorum, you name it. Basically, Dumbarton Oaks was a major contribution to my research.
NK: I always wanted to ask, Nadia, how did you start with this project? How did you channel your energy to manuscripts and the catalogue?
NKH: Well, that's a good question. When I came here in 1992, I was already like 45 years old. So to start a new career here was very difficult for me, and most importantly, that my credentials were not quite the same as in the United States because my diploma was from Classics but I had PhD in Byzantine history. But here in the United States, paleography is in Classics. It’s a philological discipline, not historical. So it was a conflict there, I had to have probably an American PhD that is in Classics or in history to have a full career here. And also my husband was teaching at State University of New York in Albany. That place had a Classics department of two people, and they were archaeologists. They didn't even teach Latin and Greek, they taught archaeology. So basically, to find a career for me was difficult, if not impossible. So then my husband said, “You know, you like researching manuscripts. Do what you enjoy doing.” We can survive on one salary. And that’s what I did. And then I realized that there is no catalogue of Greek manuscripts in the United States. So you go to De Ricci, which was a Census of medieval and Renaissance manuscripts. Greek manuscripts there were interspersed with those in many other languages. To find a Greek manuscript, you have to go through all other manuscripts. Also, it’s not a catalogue, it’s just a census. And of course dating and contents, everything was outdated.
And Dumbarton Oaks, I talked to Alice-Mary [Talbot]. My first fellowship at Dumbarton Oaks was in 1993, a summer one. And I talked to Alice-Mary, and she just basically was very supportive of my project to create a catalogue. So I got some grants, small at first. Some libraries have fellowships. So slowly but surely, I started publishing in the journal Manuscripta, one collection after another. Starting with Columbia University.
NK: I’m sorry, which one?
NKH: Starting with Columbia University.
NK: Oh, Columbia. Yes.
NKH: And then I published several installments. I realized that the University of Michigan has so many manuscripts, and they don't have fellowships. So I applied for a National Endowment for the Humanities grant, and I received it for two years. So that was really helpful. A Dumbarton Oaks Fellowship in 2007 helped a lot, too. Basically by now, I have published 10 or 11 installments of different libraries, and the first volume of the University of Michigan Catalogue, and now I am working on the second volume. And I was very close to finishing until they found 25 new ones.
NK: Which is a lovely surprise.
NKH: Surprise, no. It was a total shock [laughing] Nobody expected that.
NK: What is your vision? What is after the second?
NKH: Oh, after the second volume? I still have a few small collections that I didn't publish. But the big prize may be Duke University, which also has more than 100 manuscripts.
NK: You?
NKH: Duke.
NK: Duke, I’m so sorry.
NKH: Well, it's probably my bad pronunciation [laughing].
NK: No, it’s not. It’s not. I’m so sorry.
NKH: As you remember, in April I went there because they invited me and Pablo Alvarez, who is curator of Greek manuscripts here at Michigan, because they liked our first volume so much they decided that they want to catalog their manuscripts, too. They invited us to talk about our catalogue, and,most importantly, about the provenance of manuscripts, because it's now a very big issue in this country because many manuscripts were either stolen or of unknown sort of provenance. The libraries are now very, very careful about that. So it was a discussion. And basically they said that they want me to do their catalogue. But first, I have to finish the Michigan one. Second, they probably have to find money [laughing]. So that’s it. And then of course, maybe I will retire, to work on some other projects.
NK: I’m sure there is a manuscript somewhere around. Tell us a little bit about the work with the DO manuscripts over the years, which you are, unofficially, our manuscript person for everything. And we always take it for granted, but it’s a great help.
NKH: Yes, thank you very much for that. My first summer fellowship, that's when I worked with the first three DO manuscripts and published the first article describing them. And then the second time, I worked mostly on other projects. The Morgan Library at that time, I think, Morgan Library and Museum. Jan Ziolkowski was Director of Dumbarton Oaks when I was a Fellow the second in time in 2007. And I made a presentation about my project like all Fellows do, and I remember Alice-Mary was very concerned because she thought that nobody’s interested in Greek manuscripts, it will be boring. She said, “Let me read your paper, your presentation,” [laughing] and I said, “No, I’ll just do it.” And apparently my presentation really was interesting to everybody for some reason. I think the reason was that manuscript studies, it’s like investigative research.
NK: Of course.
NKH: You identify the scribe, you can identify the location, maybe, where it was written. And so it takes a lot of, you know, this kind of work, explorative and investigating. And some discoveries were really exciting, and everyone was impressed, I think, including Jan Ziolkowski. Thanks to Gudrun, Gudrun Bühl, who was Director of the Museum, she decided that it would be nice to buy a few more manuscripts for the Dumbarton Oaks collection. Luckily then came along three really outstanding manuscripts: Dumbarton Oaks 5, illuminated one, and then Dumbarton Oaks 6, and Dumbarton Oaks 7. That’s when Jan decided to invite me for each one to do research and publish my findings. So DO MS 5 is already published, and Dumbarton Oaks manuscripts 6 and 7 manuscripts will be published this year. I think it's in the volume for this year.
NK: I know, because I'm reading them on the other side. But it is very important also all this work that goes in, you are totally right. And now I understand how also it affects the Pre-Columbian, because they also have manuscripts, and there are a lot of people in the Pre-Columbian studies who are working on manuscripts. And they have very similar questions about things. So I always want to say, all the manuscripts of Dumbarton Oaks are all illuminated manuscripts?
NKH: Except the DO MS 7. MS 7 is not illuminated, but it’s just very important, because it’s a 9th century manuscript and the earliest of this text of Chrysostom. It’s just a very interesting manuscript.
NK: Were you also consulting at the time when they were buying them? Were you also seeing them before?
NKH: No, I hadn’t seen them physically. But before they bought them, Gudrun and Jan contacted me for advice. Should they buy them?
NK: Of course. To have a preliminary evaluation.
NKH: They had seen the auction descriptions. But, you know, they wanted my input, too. I think the important thing is, in the Dumbarton Oaks collection we now have progression of development of the Byzantine scripts. So you have 9th century manuscript, 10th century manuscript, and 11. And the manuscript 7, it had restoration done on that manuscript, because apparently it lost the beginning and the end. At the end of the 13th or beginning of the 14th century it was restored in a different script. Basically one can see how scripts are developed and how one can actually date the manuscript just looking at the script. I think in terms of educational value, this collection is very important. I’m not an art historian, but of course most of them are beautiful [laughing].
NK: That’s true, but it’s also the codicology. Art historians will look only at the pages, at the images, like if they are cut off from the book. And the literature people look only at the text, usually transcribed. They don't see the script. So this, this little niche which has the script, the paper, the binding, the different parts that are from different texts, this is amazing to see and to study.
NKH: I agree [laughing].
NK: This collection, that's the interesting thing. I’m so sorry, I’m talking. Viviana, the next question.
VL: Oh, no. Our next question, as you know, was asking have you attended many symposia or colloquia at DO? And can you remember any that stand out in particular in your memory?
NKH: I attended as many as I could, and I didn't really count them, and participated in only one — New Testament in Byzantium. So that's when I gave the presentation, and it's published in the book as a chapter. But I attended as many as I could, even if it was not exactly about manuscripts. And sure enough, it's sometimes just serendipity, but it helps in my research. I don't remember what year it was, what exactly the subject of the symposium was. I remember a woman, a scholar from Canada, was describing a silver tray from Hermitage.
NK: Silver tray?
NKH: Silver tray. Yeah, round, with decorations. I looked at the screen, and suddenly it clicked for me. It depicted the scene of dogs chasing rabbits, a hunt scene. And one of the Michigan manuscripts had this, exactly the same scene, in a headpiece. Exactly the same position of rabbits and dogs. And I was surprised when I studied it here in Michigan, because no other manuscript has it. And suddenly it occurred to me that it was produced in the same region as the Hermitage tray, and this was during the time of the Ayyubid dynasty in Syro-Palestine region. So that hunt scene helped me to connect the manuscript to the tray. And, as I say, it was complete serendipity. You have to attend those symposiums because you never know what you will learn or what you will discover, how it may be connected to your own research. So I would urge everybody to attend them, because they are very magnificent symposia.
NK: It’s like classes, I see them, like condensed classes. You learn too many things immediately about the it's subject which otherwise you wouldn't find them all in one place.
NKH: Right, right.
NK: Here, there is the one place in Dumbarton Oaks — that's what I find very interesting — that we have also many of the Russian sources. Many of the Russian journals. Was there something that you are missing over the years? Was there something that you wanted us to have more? I’m always afraid that we are not getting many of the books that are being published in Russia. Are you still keeping in touch with what is being published?
NKH: Yes, I actually recommended quite a few and usually what I recommend, they buy. But basically, I’m familiar with my colleagues who study the manuscripts. Not exactly with Byzantine history per se. Maybe I missed some publications. But there were other scholars who were Fellows here, like Sergey Ivanov. He’s probably more knowledgeable about publications in history. So maybe somehow bibliographer or Joshua can contact him and ask to help with this, because it’s very important. And nowadays it’s very easy to translate it through Google.
NK: Yes, true. So can you tell us a little bit about your daily life when you are in Dumbarton Oaks. So I know the one I'm seeing, but in the previous years, or how was your day going on?
NKH: Yeah, the difference is big between how it was in 1993, there were not even Fellows’ buildings, only what is now the Guest House. They were renting some buildings on Wisconsin Avenue farther up, I think near the Russian Embassy, that’s where I stayed for the first time in the room. Second time, they already had La Quercia, still not this new building on Wisconsin Ave. I will say that it was a little more Spartan. We didn’t really have time for any social life. I mean, sure, we did have some reception, but we rarely got together because everybody was trying to maximize the time. You are supposed to be 9 to 5 in the library, in your office. But I always stayed until 10 in the evening, 9am to 10pm. And I think most scholars were trying to do the same. So I can't really say it was like student years, more relaxed, and more parties. So everybody here is for a limited time, and that's what I remember, at least.
VL: And who are some of the scholars that you interacted with and what was the social life like back then interspersed between those visits to the library?
NKH: No, again, as I say, there was no social life. But definitely professional connections. So I made a lot of friends and colleagues who helped me a lot because working with Greek manuscripts, you deal with many, many different contents, and you can’t be a specialist on everything. Like liturgical manuscripts, there are a lot of them, very different. Euchologia, Menaia, Anastasimataria, musical manuscripts, horologia, nomocanons, and you can’t be specialists in everything. So a lot of scholars whom I met helped me and are still helping to identify precisely the contents and terminology. To name a name, from the Russian side, it’s actually Yuri Pyatnitsky. We were fellows together in the same year, and he’s an art historian. So he helped a lot to understand this.
NK: Yuri, you said?
NKH: Yuri Pyatnitsky. He's a curator of Byzantine art in the Hermitage Museum. Specialist in icons.
So then Steve Froyshov, I think that’s how it’s pronounced, a scholar from Norway, who specializes in Horologia. Those are very difficult texts, and he helped me a lot to understand what they are. Yelena Velkovska, who is a specialist in Euchologia. So these kinds of interactions are very important, of course. But they are of course on a professional level, and I still communicate with all of them.
NK: In the first years there were no research reports like in your last visit, isn’t it?
NKH: Yeah, it’s a very good tradition.
NK: Yes, to share their research and to learn what the other people are doing. I think that's always very helpful.
NKH: That’s my favorite, maybe you can call it social interaction, because after the presentation there is discussion. And then, you never know what you're learning, or what the people will give me advice on.
NK: So any anecdotes or any stories that happened over the year that you would like us to remember, or you would like to share?
NKH: I don’t know any [laughing].
NK: The one with the tray and the manuscript was a wonderful story about how new things are happening by chance when you are next to people.
NKH: Yeah, that’s a story, of course, or could go into a story. So what else is there? I already talked about Jan Ziolkowski. I think he was a magnificent director, he really understood the scholarship. I liked him a lot. And he liked me personally for some reason. Gudrun Bühl was also a magnificent director. She left.
NK: You also mentioned Alice-Mary, who is always the spirit of the place.
NKH: Yeah, Alice-Mary was really very good at what she was doing in your position [laughing]. She established the tradition of those presentations of scholars. Maybe I’m mistaken, but I think it was her. I went through several administrations. My first year, it was Angeliki Laiou in 1993 and Henry Maguire was Director of Byzantine Studies. And then was Alice-Mary, and then it was Margaret Mullett. That’s when I was studying manuscripts, not a Fellow. And now you.
NK: Most of the people, they were close to the manuscripts. I mean, we all are. This is the base of Byzantine studies in the end. I know that Margaret is doing the text and Henry is doing the iconography. So I’m sure you had profitable discussions with all of them over the years.
NKH: Definitely.
VL: Our next question, our final question actually, was asking how would you describe Dumbarton Oaks’ role in the international context of Byzantine studies and especially paleography and codicology, which is what you study? And how has this changed over the years?
NK: and you have seen. I'm sort of able to be on the all you would like to do.
NKH:: Yeah, I think you can’t overestimate the importance of Dumbarton Oaks in the international community of Byzantinists. So it's the only institute that exists of this kind. Fellowships are extremely important. And as I said many times, it brings scholars together and they meet each other, they interact, and they help each other. So you can't overestimate the importance of this center. And symposia of course, you invite international scholars from all the countries, and again, there is a tremendous interaction and you help each other. So connections are established, and some scholars make joint publications. I had two joint publications with Yuri Pyatnitsky about two illuminated manuscripts and eventually with other scholars, too. So I don’t know what else to say.
NK: I also feel that codicology is one of the topics that over the years I haven't seen many people working on.
NKH: That's true. I think the manuscript studies, paleography and codicology, were a little underestimated.
NK: True
NKH: But on the other hand there’s not that many specialists.
NK: Also true. But also it’s somewhere there. People say paleography and then codicology like it’s the same thing. But very different.
NKH: It’s a physical description of the manuscript, and paleography, you know, script, writing styles.
NK: Do they happen anywhere, Nadia? That was also always my question. For example you where did you — was there someone who taught you paleography and codicology?
NKH: Oh, yes. It was Boris Fonkich. I don't know if you’ve heard the name.
NK: No, no, I don't know him.
NKH: He was actually a great paleographer, one of the best in the world. And he also studied a lot of Russian-Greek connections in the seventeenth century, for example. So he has a book, I think it's only in Russian, about Russian and Greek connections, or ties, during the seventeenth century. He actually received the Phoenix medal from the Greek government.
NK: Ah, the Phoenix.
NKH: Yes, Phoenix. Yeah, just before his death, for his contribution to Russian and Greek studies. So it happened, I was studying Classics, and we had to take the course of paleography. And he was teaching as an adjunct professor because he was a curator of manuscripts in the University Library. He was so enthusiastic about manuscripts. He was just really contagious. And he said, “What do you do with Classics? I mean, every word is studied and in terms of publications, there is nothing new to discover. But here we have five hundred manuscripts and a historical museum, and nobody really studied them well.” So he took us there just to show actual manuscripts. And the first one was a large volume of Chrysostom from the early tenth century, and so beautiful, a thousand years old, that I just immediately fell in love [laughing]. I started writing my papers for him, and Master’s degree, and eventually a PhD.
Also, some stories that may be not related to Dumbarton Oaks. When I was about to defend my PhD, Fonkich was persecuted by the Soviet authorities because he was really independent minded and also because his son emigrated. Basically, he told me, you can’t defend your PhD with my name as your advisor on it. We asked Professor Gennady Litavrin, who was in Slavic and Balkan Studies Institute of the Academy of Sciences, to be my sort of fake advisor, and use his name. And that’s how it worked. And I had to defend the dissertation in St. Petersburg, not in Moscow, because [Zinaida] Udaltsova was the head of the Byzantine division in the Academy of Sciences, and she said, “You will defend this dissertation only over my corpse.”
NK: A lot of passion. How about in this country? Are there people who are doing manuscript studies and codicology?
NKH: Unfortunately, no. I think the most specialists are in Italy, actually. Italy, and some in Greece. But Greeks mostly interested in, again, text and history, and fewer in paleography. Italians, I think, are more specialized in paleography. And there were some Germans, but I don’t know any young ones now. It’s not really a popular field because if you specialize in something so narrow, it’s hard to find a job. Basically, those skills, I’m afraid, are disappearing. And to be a good paleographer, you really have to look at as many manuscripts as you can. Because the more you look, the more you study, the more you develop this kind of eye for the script. And the older you get, actually, the better you get [laughing].
NK: Of course. It was always peculiar to me, because there are manuscripts. All these collections you are studying, they are there. And people could do the practicing. But I haven’t seen them from all the applications that we had over the years. I haven’t seen any. I don’t remember a case where someone was specializing in the fabrication of the book, in the paper, in the practices.
NKH: Right.
NK: So you are really one of a kind.
NKH: Thank you [laughing].
NK: A unique person and resource.
NKH: Thank you. This field, it has to be transferred from person to person. It's like you can't learn it from the books. So I'll be happy if you bring some students to look at the manuscripts, I'll be happy to sometimes talk to them, or show. Maybe somebody will get interested.
NK: True. Or at least to get some knowledge, get them interested in codicology.
NKH: Right.
VL: Thank you so much for sharing all that. Is there anything else you wanted to add before we end our interview?
NKH: No, I think that’s everything. Thank you for inviting me. And I apologize that I really didn’t put much time to do it in a more convenient time for you.
VL: No, not at all.
NK: It’s wonderful, Nadia. And thank you very much for finding the time, also, because you are doing something very intense. And I understand that you cannot have breaks from what you do. It’s a great opportunity to finish the catalogue, and it’s a huge task.
Awesome good. So everybody soon.
NKH: Thank you. So I'll see you at the end of October when I come back to Dumbarton Oaks.