Filologija, No. 62, 2014.
Original scientific paper
Correlations between printed Ćirilički dubrovački molitvenik (Cyrillic prayer book from Dubrovnik) and the manuscript of Drugi vatikanski hrvatski molitvenik (Second Vatican Croatian prayer book) written in latin script
Dragica Malić
orcid.org/0000-0003-0981-5831
Abstract
There are five prayer books from Dubrovnik (livres d’heures type) that reach back to the first decades of the 16th century, of which the following two would be most similar to one another: Ćirilički dubrovački molitvenik (Cyrillic prayer book from Dubrovnik), printed in Venice in the 1512th (ĆDM) and Drugi vatikanski hrvatski molitvenik (Second Vatican Croatian prayer book), truncated manuscript written in Latin script (VHM2). The former was published, thoroughly described and linguistically analyzed by Milan Rešetar. The latter was dated to the end of the 15th century by Franjo Fancev. However, Rešetar’s associate Ciro Giannelli assumes (on the basis of many common errors and lacunae in ĆDM and VHM2, and comparisons with the second Cyrillic edition from 1571) that VHM2 was transcribed from the printed Cyrillic text. His assumption goes further to claim that the template for the transcription was not the Cyrillic prayer book printed in 1512, but the unknown one, printed in the period from 1512 until 1571. This paper questions Giannelli’s remarks on these common mistakes and lacunae of both texts as well as correspondences between the VHM2 and the second edition of ĆDM which differ both of them from the ĆDM’s first edition. It has been shown for a number of errors and lacunae that they might be interpreted differently. It is also shown that correspondences between VHM2 and the second edition of ĆDM are not direct in most cases. It is therefore concluded that it is difficult to find enough convincing confirmations of Giannelli’s hypothesis on the existence of an unknown Cyrillic template. Furthermore, typical prayer books’ terms, differences in prayer book compilation »techniques« and the translation differences between ĆDM and VHM2 are analyzed and compared with other texts from Dubrovnik prayer books and psalms. The results of the analysis evidence frequent corrections of errors and lacunae in VHM2 compared to ĆDM. All this shows that the differences among the studied texts are too significant and that there is not nearly enough evidence to claim that one text is even edited on the basis of another, let alone transcribed (copied) from it. However, one might assume their common template.
Keywords
Ćirilički dubrovački molitvenik (Cyrillic prayer book from Dubrovnik), Drugi vatikanski hrvatski molitvenik (Second Vatican Croatian prayer book), Milan Rešetar; Ciro Giannelli, manuscript errors and lacunae, translation and linguistic differences
Hrčak ID:
138395
URI
Publication date:
28.4.2015.
Visits: 1.656 *