Friday 17th March 11:15—12:45, Session 1
| ◀ | | | ▲ | | | ▼ | | | ▶ |
| Overview of programme | ||||||
|
Session: |
Liturgy and Prayers 2 |
|---|---|
|
Place: |
Seminarraum 1 |
|
Moderator: |
Elisabeth Salter |
|
Paper 1: |
Translated? Original? To the Question of Adaptation of Translated Hymns in Russian Hymnography |
|
Paper 2: |
Translation Practice and Music in William Herebert’s Translation of ‘Conditor alme siderum’ |
|
Paper 3: |
Clipeus spiritualis - Szczyt duszny - Tarcza duchowna. On the Latin and Polish Set of Prayers for Polish Kings and Magnates from the Begining of the 16th Century |
Translated? Original? To the Question of Adaptation of Translated Hymns in Russian Hymnography
Victoria Legkikh
The present paper studies two different stories of adaptation of two hymns translated from Greek into Old Slavonic.
The first one is a kontakion to St. Nicholas for his afterfeast. The kontakion of the 8th mode with the beginning “He shone by his bright life as the sun…” This kontakion is a part of he afterfeast to St. Nicholas on the 7th of December and it is known to us from so called “studion” menaions (i.e. following the typikon of Theodor Studith, written by patr. Alexis in 11th century) for December (12th and 13th centuries). The Greek text of the typikon of Theodor Studith is unknown but it exist a Russian - Old Slavonic translation of this text. Before a description of the afterfeast to St. Nicholas in this typikon there is a remark: “so it is celebrated in the Studion monastery but in our monastery it is different”. This remark brought all the later researcher to the idea that this feast and its hymnography was Russian original but the Greek texts of the canon with kontakion exists and was published in Analecta Hymnica Graeca. I compared the description in the Russian typikon with the description of the same date in the Greek typikon of Messina (Italian version of the typikon of Theodor Studith) and found that it has the same remark. So it means, that the mentioned remark was just translated from Greek as a part of the text. It is possible, that at the beginning hymnographers still saw this kontakion as a translated one but in the new typikon of Jerusalem the afterfeast and its hymnography disappears. But the kontakion receives a second life. I found this kontakion in the manuscripts starting from 15th century as a kontakion of the second canon to the Russian feast of the Transfer of the relics of St. Nicholas from Myra to Bari. The text of the canon is rather old: it was most likely created at the end of 11th century, but since it remained only in the manuscripts of the 15th century it is difficult to say if the kontakion already existed that time. In any case, this kontakion was perceived later on as an original one not only by recipients but even by researchers. Even if this kontakion was not widely spread, together with another kontakion to St. Nicholas it became a model for a kontakion to another Russian saint – to St. Philip of Irap, who was canonized at the end the 16th century. So at the end we can say that a translated kontakion to the afterfeast to St. Nicholas became a Russian original hymn.
The second story is devoted to a translated troparion of the canon to St. Martin the Confessor. This troparion was taken by Russian hymnographer of 16th century for a troparion to a canon to a new Russian saint – to St. Alexander Nevsky. Since St. Alexander Nevsky was more venerated in Russia than St. Martin the Confessor, even if this troparion not particularly suited to Russian saint (the first words are “the star arise form the West” which is correct for St. Martin but not for St. Alexander), soon it was receipted as a Russian hymn to St. Alexander. The same hymn was taken as a model for a sticheron to SS. Boris and Gleb (the first Russian martyrs), written bz the same hzmnographer, but this sticheron was not widely spread. At the end this troparion to St. Alexander Nevsky was adaptated for the service to the Transfer of the relics of the Serbian saint St. Stephen of Dechani, losing its last connection with the translated Greek hymn to St. Martin and becoming an original Russian one.
Translation Practice and Music in William Herebert’s Translation of ‘Conditor alme siderum’
Peter Loewen
Robin Waugh
An influential argument concerning William Herebert’s Middle English poems, which appear in his Commonplace Book (London, BL, MS Additional 46919, c. 1314), is that they represent only intermittent successes as finished works of art because he frequently stuck so closely to the form of his Latin original that the Middle English results come over as forced and stilted. The problem with this argument is that it is patently untrue. Herebert acquits himself of the charge of pedantic accuracy by reiterating the almost universal dictum of medieval translators that he translates “sense for sense” rather than “word for word.” He then follows this dictum. Moreover he often inserts whole meanings entirely of his own invention into his texts at certain junctures. Although these interventions frequently relate to the original’s meaning only tangentially, they nevertheless tend to produce a finished, and quite complex, effect. In fact, these changes amount to instances of exegesis, and it is clear that this approach to translation supports Herebert’s avocation as a Franciscan preacher, especially when one considers his songs in the context of the preacher’s commonplace book in which they occur.
By exegesis we mean that Herebert actively interprets the text that he is working on through the act of translation, and while engaging the source’s music in his cause. For instance, the idea of the crucifixion as a kind of joust or fight (a standard theme of medieval sermons) recurs as an image in several of Herebert’s poems, even when it does not appear in his chosen original. The most obvious instance of the image occurs when he reconfigures Isaiah 63: 1-8 as a dialogue between angels and Jesus, with the latter as a “lordling that comes from the fight.” However, a more subtle use of the image occurs in his translation of the ninth-century Advent hymn, “Conditor alme siderum.” Where the original only mentions Christ’s redemption of humankind in its first stanza, Herebert’s version beginning adds that this redemption took place “with fight.” The addition suits the translator’s practical needs in terms of both the poem’s meter and its rhyme-scheme, but the addition also introduces knightliness as a theme of this translation. Unlike the original, which conjures up a number of rather abstract images in sequence, the knightly theme runs right through the English poem’s compass so it can act as a unifying force. Herebert, for instance, picks up on images of courtly love in his stanza three, and continues to stress the physical nature of Christ’s heroism. In stanza four, the idea of bowing before Him becomes an overtly physical act that Christ and humankind perform together.
Although Herebert’s Commonplace Book does not include music, codicological evidence strongly suggests that his English poems were sung as “contrafacta,” using the original chant melodies. The Latin incipits that appear in the margins of the manuscript, the precise arrangement of text on the folio, and the lines he draws between rhymes all suggest that Herebert had the music in mind while working out his translations. In fact, these details hold important clues about Herebert’s exegetical program, as he sometimes alters the very fabric of the original chant to produce an English song that bears striking resemblance to the medieval carole. A Franciscan manuscript source of hymns in Oxford’s Bodleian Library (Canon Liturg. 216) includes many of the melodies that may have served as Herebert’s models. Collating these unique English and chant sources, we hope to show that music was an essential ingredient of William Herebert’s preaching.
Clipeus spiritualis - Szczyt duszny - Tarcza duchowna. On the Latin and Polish Set of Prayers for Polish Kings and Magnates from the Begining of the 16th Century
Rafał Wójcik
Clipeus spiritualis is a set of prayers compiled by an anonymous monk at the beginning of the 16th century in Poland. These prayers were written in the prayer-book of Sigismund I the Elder, one of the most important Jagiellonian and Polish king. The same set of prayers, however translated into Polish and known as Sczyt duszny, can be found in another prayer book, made by the same illuminator, Stanisław Samostrzelnik, for Olbracht Gasztołd, Grand Chancellor of Lithuania and Voivode of Vilnius. In the same time another Polish translation of Clipeus spiritualis, known as Tarcza duchowna, was printed in Cracow (Florian Ungler's printing house) in 1533 or 1534 and survived in one copy, which very probably belonged also to Sigismund I the Elder, and now is kept in the Jagiellonian Library. The main issue of my paper will be to discuss why the same set of prayers was in use in the same time in three different versions (one Latin and two Polish translations). Moreover, it seems that these prayers were compiled especially for men who used to reign or to have a power. The last point of paper will be dedicated to three other editions of Clipeus spiritualis which were printed at the turn of the 16th and 17th century, and were dedicated to Sigismund III Waza, a Polish king from another dynasty, whose piety, however, was very close to Jagiellonian tradition.