This article presents eighteen glosses and emendations borrowed from Turkic dialects into the Slavonic-Russian Pentateuch edited according to the Hebrew Masoretic Text (in manuscripts from the 15th–16th centuries). The first group of these words — including proper names — has Arabic or Persian origins; they came into East Slavonic with obvious Turkic mediation (Skandryja ‘Alexandria’, Bagadad ‘Baghdad’, Misurʹ ‘Egypt’, Šam ‘Damascus’, Isup ‘Joseph’, sturlabʹ ‘astrolabe’, soltan ‘sultan’, olmas ‘diamond’, ambar ‘ambergris’, and brynec ‘rice’). The second group is proper Turkic: saigak ‘saiga antelope’, ošak ‘donkey’, katyrʹ ‘mule’, kirpič ‘brick’, talmač ‘interpreter’, čalma ‘turban’, and saranča ‘locust’. The author agrees with the hypothesis that this glossing/emendation was made for the East Slavonic Judaizers. Furthermore, the author suggests that there was participation of a group of merchants interested in a new and mysterious knowledge promulgated by learned rabbis.
The paper is a case-study discussing the role of imago and historia in the Istanbul Antiphonal, a Hungarian 14th-century illuminated manuscript recently discovered and published in a facsimile edition. On the one hand, the two types ipso facto play different roles in the codex: imagines are usually connected to saints (therefore they culminate in the sanctorale part) while historiae are to be found mainly in the temporale. On the other hand, examples of both of the image types can be found in both parts, sometimes mixing the two genres. There is a tendency to give more and more place to the narrative, still, keeping important positions for the imago(e.g. at the beginning and the end of the cycles). Finally, there are cases when both of them are used for the same feast in different size, revealing that (at least in some cases) imago is hierarchically lower than historia.
The manuscript Ms. 2372 of the Jagiellonian Library in Kraków contains a notated fragment of an early 12th-century Hungarian antiphoner as a flyleaf. The text written with late Caroline Minuscule is accompanied by two types of music notation. The recitative and formulaic chants appearing in the rubrics (responsoria brevia and versicles of the horae minores) are notated with diastematic neumes. The main text containing the antiphons and responsoria prolixa is written with what is probably the earliest example of the medieval Hungarian (Strigonian) chant notation. The fragment is also remarkable because of its unique content. While the recto contains the standard repertory of the office for St Michael, the verso includes chants from the historia Perennis patrie regis of St Demetrius of Thessaloniki venerated in medieval Hungary as one of its patron-saints. The Cracovian fragment represents the oldest testimonial of the historia discovered so far.
In Ms 29 of the National and University Library in Ljubljana (Slovenia) — an early 13th-century copy of Dialogorum libri IV by Gregory the Great — there are two musical insertions: the sequence Celi solem imitantes and the hymn Jam lucis orto sidere. Written in Hungarian notation they were inserted onto blank pages in the completed manuscript in the span of time from the late 13th to the mid-14th century. Ms 29 bears a marginal inscription referring to Augustinus Cazottus (Kažotić), Bishop of Zagreb in the early 14th century. It was obviously in his possession. Presumably, the sequence and the hymn were inserted into Ms 29 somewhere in the Diocese of Zagreb, by someone skilled in Hungarian notation.
This essay tackles some aspects related to the attitude of the Romanian officials after George Enescu left his country definitively (in 1946). For example, recent research through the archives of the former secret police shows that Enescu was under the close supervision of Securitate during his last years in Paris. Enescu did not generate a compositional school during his lifetime, like for instance Arnold Schoenberg did. His contemporaries admired him, but each followed their own path and had to adapt differently to an inter-war, then to a post-war, Communist Romania. I will therefore sketch the approach of younger composers in relation to Enescu (after 1955): some of them attempted to complete unfinished manuscripts; others were influenced by ideas of Enescu's music. The posthumous reception of Enescu means also an intense debate in the Romanian milieu about his “national” and “universal” output.
During a tour of Austria-Hungary in December 1910, Debussy met a young Hungarian Francophile composer, Géza Vilmos Zágon (1889–1918). The latter sent him the manuscript of the Pierrot lunaire, a cycle of six melodies from the collection of the Belgian poet Albert Giraud. Debussy reviews the vocal line, emphasizing that the corrections he has made almost all concern “prosodic accents.” This rereading of a work by a young composer is a unique case for Debussy and testifies not only to his openness to young composers, but also to his interest in Giraud's poems, as André Schaeffner had so rightly anticipated in 1953 in his article “Variations Schoenberg.” It also reveals Debussy's deep sensitivity to the French language verse and rhythm.
This paper identifies three manuscript fragments from Turfan as an Old Uyghur version of the story of Shunzi 舜子, a medieval Chinese narrative about Emperor Shun acting as a filial son. In China, the story was part of the lore of filial sons (xiaozi 孝子), popular throughout most of the dynastic period. Early versions of the Chinese story survive in Japan and Dunhuang, and these display obvious parallels with the Uyghur text. While this allows a positive identification of the content of the three Turfan fragments, the differences reveal that none of the known Chinese versions could have served as the source text for the translation. The Old Uyghur version, therefore, represents an otherwise unattested version of the story, which may have developed among the Uyghurs.
Authors:Federico Dragoni, Niels Schoubben, and Michaël Peyrot
Building on collaborative work with Stefan Baums, Ching Chao-jung, Hannes Fellner and Georges-Jean Pinault during a workshop at Leiden University in September 2019, tentative readings are presented from a manuscript folio (T II T 48) from the Northern Tarim Basin in Northwest China written in the thus far undeciphered Formal Kharoṣṭhī script. Unlike earlier scholarly proposals, the language of this folio cannot be Tocharian, nor can it be Sanskrit or Middle Indic (Gāndhārī). Instead, it is proposed that the folio is written in an Iranian language of the Khotanese-Tumšuqese type. Several readings are proposed, but a full transcription, let alone a full translation, is not possible at this point, and the results must consequently remain provisional.
The first written evidence that is usually connected to the statue of the Virgin Mary in the Franciscan church of Csíksomlyó (Șumuleu Ciuc, Schomlenberg) dates from 1624, when an inventory mentions a sculpture of the Virgin and Child on a secondary altarpiece dedicated to the Holy Virgin. The identification with the present figure is however only hypothetic. Sure is, that the statue was placed on the new high altarpiece, executed by joiner János Nyerges/Hannes Sadler from Brassó (Kronstadt, Braşov) in 1664. Nothing is known on the figure previous to these dates and we have no information on its original provenance. The dimensions (of 210 cm without her baroque crown) and the way the backside is carved suggest, that the figure surely belonged to an important altarpiece of quite large dimensions, with a shrine probably higher than 3 - 3,50 meters.
The Franciscan manuscripts from the 17th-18th centuries never mention that the figure would have ever belonged to the (high) altarpiece of the Csíksomlyó monastery church, instead they repeat that its provenance is unknown, only explained by legends. One of these legends, which has a certain probability though, noted by Leonard Losteiner in his manuscript dedicated to the sculpture of the Virgin Mary and her miracles, says that the statue could have been brought from the village of Höltövény (Heldsdorf, Hălchiu), a church which even today preserves its notably large winged altarpiece, with a shrine of 361 cm, which would perfectly fit the figure in point. Also the local historical literature knows of some devotional figures having been once moved from Höltövény to Csíksomlyó. However, the idea remains a hypothesis until it can be proved. Sure is, that only the workshops of the Transylvanian Saxon towns were prepared to produce at the beginning of the 16th century sculptures of such dimensions.
A detailed observation of the statue shows that a number of its characteristics differ a lot from the style known at the beginning of the sixteenth century. The figure was most probably slightly remodelled, renewed, repaired perhaps with the occasion of its placement to the high altarpiece in 1664, but later interventions are also possible.
The fact, that the figure was brought to Csíksomlyó and placed on the high altarpiece of the church in a new function of a cult image could have to do with the introduction of the Pentacost pilgrimage, the first mention of which dates to 1649. The first miracles of the statue are documented right after its placement on the high altar and these have probably contributed to the spread of the new pilgrimage and through this to the renewal of the monastery itself, almost completely depopulated by the second half of the sixteenth century.
The Vienna Hours, illuminated by the artist known as the “Master of Mary of Burgundy”, was originally commissioned by Margaret of York. The later parts of the manuscript commemorate the love and marriage between Mary of Burgundy and Maximilian of Habsburg, and their (newborn or expected) child.
The miniatures and texts in question convey the same idea expressed on several occasions by the official historian, Jean Molinet: in the Burgundian court, the duchess was venerated as the Virgin Mary (and in consequence of this, Maximilian – and Philip – came to be revered as the Saviour, and Frederick III, Holy Roman Emperor, as the Father). Underlying the tendency to identify Mary of Burgundy with the Virgin Mary was the situation of Burgundy and its heiress, which was understood by means of salvation-historical analogies. In the book of hours, the figures of the two Marys are conflated several times in a variety of ways (fols. 14v, 19v, 43v, 94v, 99v). The hymn in praise of the heavenly joys of the Virgin Mary, which is organically related to the frontispiece image, is thus (also) a chanted sequence for the eternal beatitude of the young bride. The painter conjured up the imaginary figure of Maximilian in the foreground of the two miniatures with window scenes, while the jewels in the border around the image of the Crucifixion scene allude to Margaret of York. These miniatures have a playful tone (as evidenced by the role-swapping between the Marys, the book-within-a-book, picture-within-a-picture, vision-within-a-vision, trompe l’oeil solutions, and the complex dialogue between objects, materials and locations).
There are a number of factors supporting the argument that the miniatures, hitherto attributed to the Master of Mary of Burgundy, were illuminated by Hugo van der Goes, who was a resident of the Red Cloister at the time, and that he was commissioned by the Austrian Archduke. The date of 1478 is rendered likely by stylistic and biographical factors (the paintings Hugo made in the cloister, both before and after, his later illness, the visit of Maximilian, the birth of Philip the Handsome). It was also at this time that Jean Molinet wrote Le Chappellet des dames, which makes multiple comparisons between the duchess and the Virgin Mary, and whose imagery is often echoed in the folios of the Vienna Hours. It is possible that the first (co-)owner of the manuscript was Maximilian of Habsburg.