Litanic Verse I: Origines, Iberia, Slavia et Europa Media (Literary and Cultural Theory) 9783631663509, 9783653057515, 9783631694473, 9783631694480, 3631663501

Citation preview

Literar y and Cultural Theor y

Witold Sadowski / Magdalena Kowalska / Magdalena Maria Kubas (eds.)

Litanic Verse I Origines, Iberia, Slavia et Europa Media

The book contains comparative analyses of the development of litanic verse in European poetry, from medieval to modern times. Litanic verse is based on different syntactic devices, such as enumeration, parallelism, anaphora and epiphora. However, it is not to be seen merely as a convention of versification as the popularity of different variants of the verse in Europe reflects the religious, intellectual, social and political history of various European regions. The essays in the first volume focus on the origins of the Litany (the Near East, Greece, Byzantium, Rome), as well as the emergence of litanic verse in the Iberian languages (Castilian, Catalan, Galician, Portuguese) and Slavic and Central European literatures (Bulgarian, Croatian, Czech, Hungarian, Polish, Serbian, Russian).

Witold Sadowski heads the Section for the Poetics of Verse at the University of Warsaw. He specialises in the theory of verse and the history of literary genres. Magdalena Kowalska obtained her Ph.D. from the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun´. She specialises in the history of the romantic period and Polish-French literary relations. Magdalena Maria Kubas obtained her Ph.D. from the University for Foreigners of Siena. She specialises in the twentieth-century Italian literature and the relations between poetry and music.

Litanic Verse I

LITERARY AND CULTURAL THEORY General Editor: Wojciech H. Kalaga

VOLUME 45

Witold Sadowski / Magdalena Kowalska / Magdalena Maria Kubas (eds.)

Litanic Verse I Origines, Iberia, Slavia et Europa Media

Bibliographic Information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data isavailable in the internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de. This publication is financially supported by the grant from The National Science Centre of Poland (decision No. DEC-2012/07/E/HS2/00665).

Reviewed by: Małgorzata Grzegorzewska and Władysław Witalisz Edited by: Ann Cardwell (Pedagogical University of Cracow) and David Schauffler (University of Silesia) Assistant editor: Katarzyna Jaworska Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Sadowski, Witold, editor. | Kowalska, Magdalena, editor. | Kubas, Magdalena Maria, editor. Title: Litanic verse I : Origines, Iberia, Slavia et Europa media / Witold Sadowski, Magdalena Kowalska, Magdalena Maria Kubas (eds.). Description: Frankfurt am Main ; New York : Peter Lang, 2016. | Series: Literary and cultural theory ; 45 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2016023371 | ISBN 9783631663509 Subjects: LCSH: Litanies--History and criticism. | Religious poetry--History and criticism. | European poetry--History and criticism. | Poetics. | Prayer in literature. | Religion and poetry. Classification: LCC PN1077 .L58 2016 | DDC 809.1/9382--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016023371 ISSN 1434-0313 ISBN 978-3-631-66350-9 (Print) E-ISBN 978-3-653-05751-5 (E-PDF) E-ISBN 978-3-631-69447-3 (EPUB) E-ISBN 978-3-631-69448-0 (MOBI) DOI 10.3726/978-3-653-05751-5 © Peter Lang GmbH Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften Frankfurt am Main 2016 All rights reserved. Peter Lang Edition is an Imprint of Peter Lang GmbH. Peter Lang – Frankfurt am Main · Bern · Bruxelles · New York · Oxford · Warszawa · Wien All parts of this publication are protected by copyright. Any utilisation outside the strict limits of the copyright law, without the permission of the publisher, is forbidden and liable to prosecution. This applies in particular to reproductions, translations, microfilming, and storage and processing in electronic retrieval systems. This publication has been peer reviewed. www.peterlang.com

Contents Witold Sadowski Some Necessary Preliminaries.....................................................................................9 Origines Łukasz Toboła In principio erat enumeratio: The Origins of Litanic Patterns in the Ancient Near East.............................................................................15 Łukasz Toboła Looking for the Origins of Biblical Litanies: The Hymn of the Three Youths in Daniel 3:52–90deut.................................................................29 Łukasz Toboła Three Short Litany-Like Texts from Ugarit: Translation and Commentary........41 Lesław Bogdan Łesyk Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns.............................................51 Lesław Bogdan Łesyk Byzantine Liturgical Litany........................................................................................73 Elżbieta Chrulska Litanic Verse in Latin..................................................................................................91 Iberia Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz Religious Poetry, Religio Amoris and Panegyric Poetry in Spain before the End of the Fifteenth Century................................................ 129 Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz Castilian Poetry and Autos Sacramentales during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.................................................................... 143

6

Contents

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz Praise, Litany and Cantigas: Catalonian, Galician-Portuguese, and Portuguese Poetry up to the End of the Seventeenth Century................... 157 Maria Judyta Woźniak The Iberian Peninsula from the Eighteenth Century till the 1930s: Opening Remarks.................................................................................. 169 Maria Judyta Woźniak “Thou, the most beautiful; thou, in whom the pink morning star shines”: Castilian Poetry in the Eighteenth Century.................................... 171 Maria Judyta Woźniak “I do not know the name”: Castilian Poetry from the Nineteenth Century to the 1930s........................................................................... 183 Maria Judyta Woźniak On the Trail of Litany in Catalan, Galician, and Portuguese Poetry from the Eighteenth Century to the 1930s............................................... 197 Slavia Meridionalis et Orientalis Emilian Prałat Southern Slavs: At the Meeting Point of Traditions............................................. 207 Emilian Prałat “From besmeared lips, from hating heart, from unclean tongue”: Writing and Rewriting of the Canon in Serbia..................................................... 221 Emilian Prałat “The Word that feeds hungry human souls, the Word that gives power to your mind and heart”: Bulgaria from Clement of Ohrid to the “September Literature” Circle...................................................... 235 Emilian Prałat “Oh the blessed one, oh the most holy one, oh elevated above all the blessed ones”: Litanic Patterns and Folk Inspirations in Croatian Poetry........ 251

Contents

7

Jacek Głażewski A Separate World. Russian Poetry Between the Native and the Universal....... 265 Europa Media Małgorzata Gorczyńska “Krleš! Krleš! Krleš!” Litany and its Derivatives in Czech Literature to the 1930s............................................................................................. 285 Ágnes Czövek “I gave night music to my heart from which deep litanies pealed”: Hungarian Poetry...................................................................................... 303 Witold Sadowski Polish Litanic Verse until 1939. An Outside Perspective..................................... 323 Subject Index............................................................................................................. 347 Index of Names......................................................................................................... 351

Witold Sadowski University of Warsaw

Some Necessary Preliminaries With these first two volumes on litanic verse, a research project on this PanEuropean literary phenomenon is being launched. As the title indicates, the papers in this collection are devoted to this verse convention, which has over the centuries left its distinctive and easily recognizable traces on European poetry from the Middle Ages to the present day. Thus, the issues in question may be termed the history of verse. It may at first be surprising that none of the foremost metrical systems that are of great importance for national versifications have been selected for this comparative analysis. What is being analyzed here is not iambic pentameter, nor hendecasyllable, nor alexandrine, namely forms that are so closely related to the specific and hard-to-follow features within particular languages or language families. Instead, the subject of study here is litanic verse, which can hardly be called a verse system. Yet, the chosen form allows scholars to avoid to a certain extent a comparison of national prosodic structures which it would in reality be difficult to compare. The advantage of litanic verse over systems widely discussed in textbooks on the theory of verse is that it is less burdened with peculiarities of pronunciation, since its segmental repeatability is achieved on a syntactical rather than phonological level. This obviously does not mean that syllabic or accentual rhythm are of no importance, nor were the issues related to recitation or singing excluded from the analyses. In fact, the contrary is true. Yet the following observation appears to be instructive: the fact that all the European languages have syntactic structures and rhythmical units which fit well with the litanic convention allowed this ancient form to spread throughout Europe easily and in a way to move across linguistic borders. The differing manner in which the litanic matrix was assimilated by the poetry of various European nations, as well as the direction of its adaption from one type to another, are thereby scrutinized herein. The first – and indeed most basic – step is to understand the huge body of available research material, which has not been categorized to any extent by earlier

10

Witold Sadowski

scholars. The sole exception is Polish poetry1. Additionally, it may come as somewhat of a surprise that the litanic pattern is both recognizable and unrecognized. In this situation, it is necessary to pose certain basic questions concerning the reasons for either the interest in litany or the lack thereof in given cultural, political and religious milieux. Since European litanic verse has not been studied before, it is vital that certain parts of these books be devoted to the basic operations, and thus an initial estimation of the quantity of litanic poems, which differs considerably depending on the nation, country and region, is essential. As a consequence, the metrical analyses are in most cases limited to specific examples, since a more detailed discussion would require six books instead of two. The challenges of the research, which is pioneering in several ways, have also made us focus on the most central issues as well as determine which aspects are more complex, which require more in-depth analysis etc.— these aspects without doubt will need to have more space devoted to them. Thus, the present volumes end with the 1930s, which means that the overwhelming popularity of litanyshaped enumerations that over the last century have pervaded both the most sophisticated poetry and pop lyrics, such as Enya’s famous “Only Time,” must be left for future research. For the same reason, two great European literatures do not appear in the present books. The impressive and rich bodies of material – that is, F r e n c h  a n d  I t a l i a n  p o e t r y,  which were in fact two of the main seedbeds of the litanic convention as well as a source of inspiration for other countries – are to be the subject of the n e x t  t w o  v o l u m e s  to be published. The two present volumes, together with those to be devoted to French and Italian poetry, should provide a wide-ranging overview of the different national and regional histories of the form in question. In  t h e  f i f t h  v o l u m e, the results of the previous studies will be collected and collated in an attempt at a comprehensive history of  E u r o p e a n  l i t a n i c  v e r s e  from the Middle Ages until the 1930s – and there will also be a discussion of the characteristics of its theoretical rules and philosophical foundations. It is hoped that a good understanding of the past will in some way allow us to understand the inclination among contemporary poets to use the litany. The authors of some of the papers included here refer to a study by Witold Sadowski on poetic litany in Polish literature. Since this essay was published only in Polish, it is necessary to briefly explain several terms. 1 Cf. Witold Sadowski, Litania i poezja. Na materiale literatury polskiej od XI do XXI wieku [Litany and Poetry. On the Body of Material of Polish Literature from the Eleventh to the Twenty-First Century] (Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2011).

Some Necessary Preliminaries

11

In Sadowski’s book, litanic verse is very closely linked to the genre of litany, considered to be a heterogeneous phenomenon which comprises certain basic patterns, namely genes.2 These probably betray the archaic past of litany, as they might be constituents of specific archaic genres that existed before Antiquity and that, perhaps, were combined to create the new genre with which we are dealing. Apart from their complicated and indeed unclear history, these generic components are today visible as three sets of rules that can be hold responsible for the differences in the semantic and emotional character of a litany in prayer or poetry. The following genes may thus be distinguished: C h a i r e t i s m i c  g e n e  derives its name from the chaire-list in the Byzantine Akathist Hymn. It is responsible for the anaphoric benedictions and greetings, as well as other forms of laudation or acclamation, which are formulated either in apostrophe or in a poetical description of an individual, who seems to be the hidden addressee of a poem. E k t e n i a l  g e n e  derives its name from the Byzantine and Orthodox prayer called ektene. This gene, as a component of litany, appears in supplications and deprecations, which tend to form a responsorial dialogue. One part is reserved for the priest, the corypheus or the poet, who recites the series of requests on behalf of the congregation or suggests the theme on which to meditate. The other part belongs to the choir, who with short responses upholds the subsequent apostrophes to God or replies to the poet with an elliptic refrain. The characteristics of the ektenial gene are thus of an epiphoric rather than anaphoric order. Certain well-known formulae, such as Kyrie eleison, Miserere nobis, Exaudi nos, Libera nos Domine, are typical of this gene. P o l y o n y m i c  g e n e  derives its name from the Greek word for the “manynamedness” of God. It is responsible for enumerative lists of an individual’s titles that form a lengthy invocation, which may be either overt and direct or hidden and indirect. The titles of the addressee are in fact antonomasias, which may also be recognized as a kind of description. Anaphora and epiphora are not required, though they are frequently used to facilitate the rhythm. Parallelism appears by definition. These genes may support a poem either separately or together. In the litany genre, the presence of at least one is obligatory; however, it is not a given set of formal means that plays the key role but rather a definite  g e n e r i c  w o r l d v i e w, as a result of which these means still constitute the same repertoire as they have

2 Witold Sadowski, “Geneza litanii w aspekcie formalno-kompozycyjnym,” [“The Genesis of Litany from the Formal and Compositional Perspective”] in Litania i poezja, 25–59.

12

Witold Sadowski

through the ages. Therefore, the study of litany requires a two-pronged investigation. On the one hand, it relies upon specifying the poetical rules on which the litanic poem is built, but on the other, it uses the same poem to reconstruct the semantic background of the genre. As the articles collected in the present books show, the genre of litany has acquired very different positions and, as a consequence, has played somewhat different roles in specific European regions, with regard both to prayer books and to religious and non-religious poetry. Accordingly, in the present research, instead of presupposing that it is always the same genre with which we are dealing, a more restrained approach has been chosen. Strictly speaking, it is not so much the litany genre responsible for the composition of an entire poem that is analyzed here, as its rhythmical layer, which may constitute a versification of either the whole text or a part of it, or even appear as a peripheral component subordinated to other formal elements derived from different genres. Litanic verse has been as it were taken out of litany, an operation which is believed to facilitate scholars in their study of the multi-directional, multi-causal, and multi-aimed wanderings of this unusual form of versification, wanderings that led to its presence varying considerably across the European regions.

Origines

Łukasz Toboła Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

In principio erat enumeratio: The Origins of Litanic Patterns in the Ancient Near East Introduction The article discusses the litanic patterns, which can be discerned in early Mesopotamian literature (mainly Sumerian). The key objectives of the study are: i. an indication of the possible origins of litanic patterns in Ancient Near Eastern literature; ii. an examination of the various contexts in which they appear; iii. a description of their rhetoric and artistic functions. The paper proposes that the origins of Ancient Near Eastern litanies can be found in the rich tradition of Mesopotamian lexical lists. However, additionally the issue of a secondary use of litanic patterns as an artistic form of expression in historiographical narratives and poetic texts will be addressed. The linguistic aspect of litanic patterns will also be analyzed.

Early Mesopotamian Scribal Culture Manfred Krebernik1 has already emphasized certain connections between lexical lists and the poetic, ritual or mythological texts based on the Early Dynastic sources of Fara and Abu Salabikh. He has suggested that the main reason for this lies in their common didactic function within the scribal schools. By the end of the fourth millennium BC, the Mesopotamian kingdoms had implemented a sophisticated literate system in order to control and to manage of their assets and labour force. Consequently, a new social class emerged, namely scribes, who were neither economically productive nor politically influential, but

1 Manfred Krebernik, “Die Texte aus Fara und Tell Abu Salabih,” in: Josef Bauer, Robert K. Englund, and Manfred Krebernik, eds., Mesopotamien: Späturuk-Zeit und Frühdynastische Zeit (Freiburg: Universitätsverlag, 1998), 313–314.

16

Łukasz Toboła

whose role was to write lists of various goods (either bought or sold) and lists of employees, as well as to note charges and payments, etc.2 During their education3, scribes copied and memorized many thematic lists of proper nouns that contained terms denoting textiles, wooden and metal objects; fish, birds, and other animals; names of professions and administrative titles; names of cities and countries. While the thematic range of these early word lists clearly reflects the officials’ needs (for instance, there are no lists of gods or wild animals), their lexical range is much wider: they record many words that in practice were never used by the bureaucrats, as far as we know. For much of the third millennium BC the political structure of the Mesopotamian states remained stable. However, individual towns tended to retain their own identities and cult of local divine patrons, while sharing a common culture and management structure. Writing accrued new powers as it was adopted for a variety of purposes, from recording legal documents to documenting political events4. Scribal training itself continued to rely on much the same types of exercise as before. Scribes still worked with traditional lists of words — even if some of them were no longer in use5. At the same time, new lists were also added, such as 2 Eleanor Robson, “Numeracy, literacy, and the state in early Mesopotamia,” in: Kathryn Lomas, Ruth Whitehouse, and John B. Wilkins, eds., Literacy and the State in the Ancient Mediterranean (London: Accordia Research Institute, 2007), 43. 3 For the ancient Mesopotamian scribal curriculum cf. Andrew George, “In search of the é.dub.ba.a: The ancient Mesopotamian school in literature and reality,” in: Yitzhak Sefati, ed., “An Experienced Scribe who Neglects Nothing,” Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Jacob Klein (Bethesda: CDL Press, 2005), 127–137; Laurie E. Pearce, “The Scribes and Scholars of Ancient Mesopotamia,” in: Jack Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. 4. (New York: Scribner, 1995), 2270–2271; Eleanor Robson, “The Tablet House: A Scribal School in Old Babylonian Nippur,” Revue d’Assyriologie et D’Archeologie Orientale 95 (2001): 39–66; Herman L. J. Vanstiphout, “How Did They Learn Sumerian?,” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 31 (1979): 118–126. 4 Jerrold S. Cooper, “Babylonian Beginnings: The Origin of Cuneiform Writing System in Comparative Perspective,” in: S. D. Houston, ed., The First Writing: Script Invention as History and Process (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 71–99. 5 Piotr Michalowski, “An Early Dynastic tablet of ED Lu A from Tell Brak (Nagar),”Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 3 (2003), accessed November 11, 2014, http://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/CDLJ/2003/CDLJ2003_003.html. This practice occurs even later, cf. Niek Veldhuis, “Guardians of Tradition: Early Dynastic Lexical Texts in Old Babylonian Copies,” in: Heather D. Baker, Eleanor Robson, and Gábor Zólyomi, eds., Your Praise is Sweet. A Memorial Volume for Jeremy Black from Students, Colleagues and Friends (London: British Institute for the Study of Iraq, 2010), 379–400; Niek Veldhuis, “Continuity and Change in the Mesopotamian Lexical Tradition,” in: Bert

The Origins of Litanic Patterns in the Ancient Near East

17

lists of gods6 or rulers7, out of which innovations a new function of writing was instigated that can be termed “literary” (poetic and mythological texts).

Possible Archetypes for Early Litanic Texts The historical, cultural, and epistemological importance of Mesopotamian lexical lists has been underlined by many scholars (under the term Listenwissenschaft).8 Some of the earliest literary texts in Sumerian belong to an obscure genre somewhere between the practical lexical lists and artistic texts. The so-called “Tribute list” (alternatively named “Word List C”)9 is attested by about sixty copies and fragments from the Uruk III period, several Early Dynastic tablets from Fara, Ebla, and Abu Salabikh, an unpublished Ur III fragment from Nippur, and two versions in Old Babylonian. The idea that the Sumerian “Word List C” represents the earliest evidence of a literary text was first proposed by Robert K. Englund10 and is based on the fact that a considerable portion of the text, namely that containing the list of commodities, is repeated in its entirety. As Englund observed, such a repetition seems meaningless from a practical point of view. At the same time, the repetition of

Roest, Herman Vanstiphout, eds., Aspects of Genre and Type in Pre-Modern Literary Cultures (Groningen: Styx, 1999), 101–118. 6 Amedeo Alberti, “A Reconstruction of the Abu Salabikh God List,” Studi Epigrafici e Linguistici sul Vicino Oriente Antico 2 (1985): 3–23. 7 Alfonso Archi, “The King-Lists from Ebla,” in: Tzvi Abusch, ed., Historiography in the Cuneiform World (Bethesda: CDL Press, 2001), 1–13. 8 Intended originally as a deprecating label, as opposed to the allegedly more empirical nature of Hellenic scientific reflection. Cf. Wolfram von Soden, “Leistung und Grenzesumerischer und babylonischer Wissenschaft,” Die Welt als Geschichte 2 (1936): 411–464, 509–557. About the controversies connected with the usage of this term cf. Tamás Visi: “A Science of Lists? Medieval Jewish Philosophers as Makers of Lists,” in: Lucie Doležalová, ed., The Charm of a List (New Castle: Cambridge Scholars Press, 2009), 12–14. 9 Niek Veldhuis, “How did they Learn Cuneiform? ‘Tribute/Word List C’ as an Elementary Exercise,” in: Piotr Michalowski, Niek Veldhuis, eds., Approaches to Sumerian Literature: Studies in Honour of Stip (H. L. J. Vanstiphout) (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 181–200. 10 Robert K. Englund, “Texts from the Late Uruk Period,” in: Josef Bauer, Robert K. Englund, and Manfred Krebernik, eds., Mesopotamien: Späturuk-Zeit und Frühdynastische Zeit (Freiburg: Universitätsverlag, 1998), 99.

18

Łukasz Toboła

particular parts of a text is an important characteristic of certain narratives and hymns.11 Another archaic, para-litanic composition is represented by three variant tablets from Ebla12. The text seems to be a scribal exercise based on a list of similarly constructed phrases (perhaps personal names?)13 with the lexeme LUGAL (“king”), which have been expanded into elaborate sentences about a “king” and can thus be interpreted as a self-praise litany: lugal-inim-kal lugal-he2-gal2 lugal-nam-nir lugal-nam-nir-sum lugal-mu-da-kuš2 lugal-me-am14 [The King of Mighty Words / The King of Abundance / The King of High Esteem / The King who has been awarded with High Esteem / The King Concerned Himself with Me / I am (this) King!]

At this point, a text resembling an onomastic litany à rebours from the Old Babylonian temple school at Nippur that records evidently derogatory names such as Di-biir-A-bi, Di-bi-ir-A-ḫi, Di-bi-ir-Mu-ti15, should be mentioned. The lexeme dibir in this instance replaces a supposedly divine name. Consequently, I. J. Gelb links this with the root dwr (“to turn around” or to “dwell”), and interprets it as Diwir (presumably, 11 In a narrative, repetition may be used to relate a dream, followed by the dream itself (“The Death of Gilgamesh”), or to give instructions to a messenger, followed by the messenger actually delivering the message (“Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta”). 12 Manfred Krebernik, “Zur Interpretation von ARET 5, 24–26,” in: BeatePongratzLeisten, ed., Ana šadî Labnāni lū allik. Beiträge zu altorientalischen und mittelmeerischen Kulturen. Festschrift für Wolfgang Röllig (Neukirchener: Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1997), 185–192. 13 Cf. analogical examples cited in: Daniel A. Foxvog, “Aspects of Name-Giving in Presargonic Lagash,” in: Wolfgang Heimpel, Gabriella Frantz-Szabó, eds., Strings and Threads. A Celebration of the Work of Anne Draffkorn Kilmer (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns), 81–85. 14 For a transcription and photographs of this tablet see, Ebla Digital Archives. A Project of Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, accessed October 2, 2014 — the site requires logging in, http://virgo.unive.it/eblaonline/cgi-bin/home.cgi. English translations of the Sumerian and Akkadian texts presented in this paper are provided by the author of the article. 15 Edward Chiera, List of Personal Names from the Temple School of Nippur. A Syllabary of Personal Names (Philadelphia: University Museum, 1916), 55.

The Origins of Litanic Patterns in the Ancient Near East

19

“the One, who dwells [in a temple]”16). However, such a divine name seems to be unattested in the ancient sources. Instead, the Akkadian noun dibru (“misfortune”) could serve equally well in the creation of artificial personal names in a scribal exercise:17 “Misfortune is my father, misfortune is my brother, misfortune is my husband.”

Zami Hymns and Other Early Litanies Amongst the earliest literary works which can without doubt be identified as litanic compositions is the cycle of so-called zami18 hymns (more precisely, zamilitany) from twenty-fifth-century Abu Salabikh.19 The list-like character of this text and its affinity to lexical lists has already been noted.20 The first fourteen lines of this unique composition seems to constitute a prologue: 1. uru an-da mu2 2. an-da gu2-la2 3. dingir nibru.ki 4. dur.an.ki d 5. en.lil2 kur.gal d 6. en.lil2 en nu: 7. nam.nir 8. en dug2-ga 9. nu-gi2-gi2 10. LAK 809 nu-LAK 809 d 11. en.lil2 a.nun 12. ki mu-gar-gar 13. dingir gal-gal 14. za3-mi3 mu-du11 [1. City, grown together with heaven, /2. embracing heaven, /3. god of Nippur,/ 4. Bond of heaven and earth /5. Enlil — Great Mountain, /6. Enlil — Lord / 7. Nunamnir, /8. whose

16 Ignace J. Gelb, Computer-aided Analysis of Amorite (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980), 18, 126, 291, 575. 17 Edward Lipiński, Resheph. A Syro-Canaanite Deity (Leuven: Peeters, 2009), 242–243. 18 The word za3-mi3 can be translated as the noun “praise.” 19 Robert D. Biggs, Inscriptions from Tell Abu Salabikh (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1974), 45–56 (transliteration and commentary). 20 Gonzalo Rubio, “Early Sumerian Literature. Enumerating the Whole,” in: Antonino González Blanco, Juan Pablo Vita Barra, and José Ángel Zamora López, eds., De la Tablilla a la Inteligencia Artificial. Homenaje al Prof. Jesús-Luis Cunchillos en su 65 aniversario (Zaragoza: Instituto de Estudios Islámicos y del Próximo Oriente Antiguo, 2003), vol. I, 203–205.

20

Łukasz Toboła command /9. is irrevocable /10. (the meaning uncertain)/ 11. Enlil who placed the Anunna gods /12. below earth, /13. the great gods /14. may be praised!]

The zami-litany comprises about seventy sequences, each of which begins with a place name and ends with the name of the deity of that place followed by the formula “Divine Name + za3-mi3” — “God / Goddess (such-and-such), may be praised!” This phrase gives structure to the text and seems to demarcate each strophe: 117. gir2-su 118. e2 gir2-nunš

119.

Nin-gir2-su za3-mi321

d

[117. Girsu, /118. home of the precious dagger: / 119. Praise to (god) Ningirsu!]

This composition is little more than an enumeration of geographical and divine names, embellished with a number of adjectives and short commentaries. All the invocations begin with the name of a specific place and end with the name of its divine patron followed by the formula za3-mi3 (“be praised”). The zami-litany is perhaps the clearest example of a process that moves from lexical lists to more sophisticated, rhetorically enriched enumerations. The enumeration of elements in a lexical set is a well-attested aspect of Sumerian poetry and appears to be the structuring principle in several poems such as “Nanše and the Birds”22 or “Home of the Fish”.23 Each of these compositions is constructed around a lexical enumeration (the names of birds or the names of fish, respectively) and proceeds by describing the individual items, which are then framed by a repeated formula. For example, “Home of the Fish” is a first-person speech to fish, inviting them to enter a house in which there are plenty of victuals. The first part of the composition contains the invitation in general terms, and also promises an enjoyable feast. This is followed by a section in which various species of fish are specifically invited: 70. sun4? sag9-sag9 u2-lal3 gu7 71. ku6-ğu10 suḫur-gal ku6-u10 he2-ga-me-da-an-ku4-ku424

21 Transliteration after Robert. D. Biggs, Inscriptions from Tell Abu Salabikh, 49. 22 Niek Veldhuis, Religion, Literature, and Scholarship: The Sumerian Composition “Nanše and the Birds” (Leiden: Brill, 2004). 23 Miguel Civil, “The Home of the Fish. A New Sumerian Literary Composition,” Iraq 23 (1961): 154–175. 24 The transliteration is based on the Electronic Corpus of Sumerian Literature, accessed November 2, 2014, http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/section5/c591.htm.

The Origins of Litanic Patterns in the Ancient Near East

21

[70. (The fish) with beautiful barbels, who feeds on the honey plant, / 71. O, my suḫur-gal fish: may he also enter with you, my fish!]

Other compositions similarly use the enumeration of a lexical set, though without making it the main structural element. For example, the hymn dedicated to the divine warden, the goddess Nungal, contains a para-litanic section that describes the gates of the Netherworld’s prison (lines 12–21): 12. e2 uš ki ğar-ra-bi ni2 gal im-da-ri 13. ka2-bi u2-sa11-an sig7-ga su-zi il2-la-am3 14. kun4-bi ušumgal ka duh-a lu2-še3 nu2-a 15. zag-du8-bi ğir2 mah a2 2-bi lu2-erim2 sur-sur-ru-de3 16. a-sal bar-bi ğir2 sahar-ta im2-ma ka ša-an-ša5-ša5-dam 17. dub-la2 zag-ed2-bi piriğ su-ba sağ nu-ğa2-ğa2-dam 18. nir-gam-ma-bi dtir-an-na-gin7 ni2 huš im-da-an-ri ğiš 19. nu-kuš2-u3-bi hu-ri2-inmušen umbin-bi niğ2šu tiğ4-a ğiš 20. ig-bi hur-sağ gal lu2 erim2-ra ğal2 nu-un-ta-da13-da13 21. lu2zid šu-ba la-ba-ni-in-ku4-ku4 ğal2 mu-un-ta-da13-da1325 [12. The House, whose foundations are laden with tremendous majesty! / 13. Its gate is shining bright in the evening, exuding radiance. / 14. Its stairs are a big dragon with an open mouth, who lies in wait for men. / 15. Its door jamb is a great blade, whose two edges […] the evil man. / 16. Its lintel is a scorpion which quickly dashes from the dust; it overpowers everything. / 17. Its pilasters are lions; no one dares to rush into their grasp. / 18. Its vault is a rainbow, filled with terrific awe. / 19. Its hinges are an eagle whose claws grasp everything. / 20. Its door is a great mountain which does not open for the wicked, / 21. but does open for the virtuous man, who was not brought in through its power.]

Similar rhetorical structures can also be detected in a variety of other Sumerian compositions, giving rise to the concept of the so-called “enumeration literature”.26 In such a context, lexical lists and poetic or narrative texts should not be considered as antithetical but as complementary and mutually productive artefacts of scribal culture. The link between the lists and the more elaborate texts lies in a common rhetorical pattern — enumeration; and the many

25 The transliteration is based on the Electronic Corpus of Sumerian Literature, accessed November 2, 2014, http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/section4/c4281.htm. 26 Miguel Civil, “Feeding Dumuzi’s Sheep: The Lexicon as a Source of Literary Inspiration,” in: Francesca Rochberg-Halton, ed., Language, Literature, and History: Philological and Historical Studies Presented to Erica Reiner (New Haven: American Oriental Society), 37–38.

22

Łukasz Toboła

compositions of early Sumerian literature are centered on this device.27 Such enumerations can be inserted into a narrative or laudatory frame, but can also constitute autonomic compositions.28

Litanic Patterns in Historiographical Texts In the final centuries of the third millennium BC, city alliances began to coalesce into more formal territorial kingdoms ruled by powerful kings who united their people through personal authority and/or force. Rulers such as Sargon of Agade (2334–2279 BC) or Shulgi of Ur (2094–2047 BC) held together large empires through political maneuvering, military strategy, and fortuitously long reigns. To promote and concretize this personality-orientated kingship a new form of praise literature was created and subsequently developed to exalt the ruler’s competences and splendor.29 For instance, in the opening lines of a praise-poem dedicated to king Shulgi (probably written to commemorate the seventh year of his reign) a catalogue of his virtues (each line ends with the phrase: me-en, “I am”) is followed immediately by a list of his divine patrons: 1. lugal-me-en šag4-ta ur-sağ-me-en d 2. šul-gi-me-en ba-tu-ud-de3-en-na-ta nita kalag-ga-me-en 3. piriğ igi huš ušumgal-e tud-da-me-en 4. lugal an ub-da 4-ba-me-en 5. na-gada sipad sağ gig2-ga-me-en 6. nir-ğal2 diğir kur-kur-ra-me-en 7. dumu u3-tud-da dnin-sun2-kam-me-en 8. šag4-ge pad3-da an kug-ga-me-en 9. lu2 nam tar-ra den-lil2-la2-me-en d 10. šul-gi ki ağ2 dnin-lil2-la2-me-en 11. mi2 zid dug4-ga dnin-tu-ra-me-en 12. ğeštug2 šum2-ma den-ki-kam-me-en 13. lugal kalag-ga dnanna-a-me-en

27 Gonzalo Rubio, “Early Sumerian Literature. Enumerating the Whole,” in: Antonino González Blanco, Juan Pablo Vita Barra, and José Ángel Zamora López, eds., De la Tablilla a la Inteligencia Artificial. Homenaje al Prof. Jesús-Luis Cunchillos en su 65 aniversario (Zaragoza: Instituto de Estudios Islámicos y del Próximo Oriente Antiguo, 2003), vol. 1, 201. 28 Miguel Civil, “Feeding Dumuzi’s Sheep: The Lexicon as a Source of Literary Inspiration,” 37. 29 About Sumerian royal poetry cf. William W. Hallo, The world’s oldest literature: studies in Sumerian belles-lettres (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 175–186.

The Origins of Litanic Patterns in the Ancient Near East 14.

piriğ ka du8-a dutu-u3-me-en

15.

d

23

šul-gi hi-li-a pad3-da dinana-me-en30

[1. I am the king, who was already a hero in the womb; / 2. I am divine Shulgi, who was born to be a mighty warrior; / 3. I am a fierce-looking lion, begotten by a dragon; / 4. I am the king of four regions; / 5. I am the herdsman and shepherd of the black-headed people; / 6. I am the respected one, the god of all the lands; / 7. I am a son born of Ninsumun; / 8. I am the choice of holy An’s heart; / 9. I am the man whose fate was decided by Enlil; / 10. I am divine Shulgi, the beloved of Ninlil; / 11. I am the one who is cherished by Nintur; / 12. I am he who was gifted with wisdom by Enki; / 13. I am the mighty king of Nanna; / 14. I am the roaring lion of Utu; / 15. I am divine Shulgi, who has been chosen by Inana for his handsomeness].

This particular praise poem was not only recited at the royal court but also found its way into the scribal schools, where it retained a central place in the students’ curriculum at least until the reign of Hammurabi’s successor, Samsu-iluna (1749– 1712 BC).31 Another historiographical text, the Chronicle from Tummal, is a short composition (thirty-two lines) that has long been the subject of scholarly attention because it mentions Gilgamesh, the legendary king of Uruk32. This composition is a list of cult places and their royal founders, which in most instances are unattested in other sources: Enmebaragesi, a legendary king of Kish, and his heir, Agga; Mesannepada, the historical king of Ur — a few inscriptions are preserved; then Gilgamesh, Nanne and his son Meskiag-Nanna; and finally the Ur III kings — Ur-Namma and Shulgi: 1. En-me-barag-ge4-e-si lugal-e 2. iri-na-nam e2 dEn-lil2-la2 in-du3 3. Ag-ga dumu En-me-barag-ge4-e-si-ke4 4. Tum-ma-alki-e pa bi2-i-ed2 d 5. Nin-lil2 Tum-ma-alki-še3 in-tumu3 6. a-ra2 1-a-kam Tum-ma-alki ba-šub m 7. Mes-an-ne2-pad3-da Bur-šu2-šu2-a e2 dEn-lil2-la2 in-du3 m 8. Mes-ki-ağ2-nun-na dumu Mes-an-ne2-pad3-da-ke4

30 The transliteration is based on the Electronic Corpus of Sumerian Literature, accessed November 2, 2014, http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/section2/c24201.htm. 31 Steve J. Tinney, “On the curricular setting of Sumerian literature,” Iraq 61 (1999): 159–172. 32 Jean-Jacques Glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004), 42, 44, 75–76, 156–159.

24

Łukasz Toboła 9. Tum-ma-alki-e pa bi2-i-ed2 d 10. Nin-lil2 Tum-ma-alki-še3 in-tumu3 11. a-ra2 2-a-kam Tum-ma-alki ba-šub d 12. Gilgameš 3-e numun2-bur-ra e2 dEn-lil2-la2 in-du3 m 13. Ur-lugal dumu dGilgameš 3-ke4 14. Tum-ma-alki-e pa bi2-i-ed2 d 15. Nin-lil2 Tum-ma-alki-še3 in-tumu3 16. a-ra2 3-a-kam Tum-ma-alki ba-šub 17. na-an-ni ğiškiri6 mah e2 dEn-lil2-la2 in-du3 m 18. Mes-ki-ağ2-dnanna dumu Na-an-ni-ke4 19. Tum-ma-alki-e pa bi2-i-ed2 d 20. Nn-lil2 Tum-ma-alki-š e3 in-tumu3 21. a-ra2 4-a-kam Tum-ma-alki ba-šub d 22. Ur-dNamma-ke4 e2-kur in-du3 23. Šul-gi dumu dUr-dNamma-ke4 24. Tum-ma-alki-e pa bi2-i-ed2 d 25. Nin-lil2 Tum-ma-alki-še3 in-tumu3 26. a-ra2 5-a-kam Tum-ma-alki ba-šub 27. mu dAmar-dSuen-ka-ta 28. en-na mu di-bi2-dSuen lugal-e 29. En-am-gal-an-na en dInana Unugki-ga maš 2-e in-pad-de3 d 30. Nin-lil2 Tum-ma-alki-še3 i-ğen-ğen33 [1.–5. Enmen-baragesi, the king, built “The City itself,” Enlil’s temple; Aka, son of Enmenbaragesi, made (city) Tummal resplendent, he introduced Ninlil to Tummal. / 6.–10. For the first time Tummal was abandoned. Mesannepada, the king, built Buršušua, Enlil’s temple; Mes-ki’ag-nuna, the son of Mesannepada, made Tummal resplendent, he introduced Ninlil to Tummal. / 11.–15. For the second time, Tummal was abandoned. Gilgamesh built Dunumunbura, Enlil’s throne-dais; Ur-lugal, the son of Gilgamesh, made Tummal resplendent, he introduced Ninlil to Tummal. / 16.–20. For the third time, Tummal was abandoned. Nanne designed the ornamental garden of Enlil’s temple; Mes-ki’ag-Nanna, the son of Nanne, made Tummal resplendent, he introduced Ninlil to Tummal. / 21.–25. For the fourth time, Tummal was abandoned. Ur-Nammu built the House like a Mountain; Šulgi the son of Ur-Nammu, made Tummal resplendent, he introduced Ninlil to Tummal. /26.–30. For the fifth time, Tummal was abandoned. From the year Amar-Suen became king until the year of Ibbi-Sin, the king, during which En-amgal-ana, the en-priest of Inanna of Uruk, was chosen by the oracular lamb, Ninlil went repeatedly to Tummal].

33 The transliteration is based on the Electronic Corpus of Sumerian Literature, accessed November 2, 2014, http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/section2/c213.htm.

The Origins of Litanic Patterns in the Ancient Near East

25

Each of the kings mentioned in this text (both fictional and historical) builds a cultic place connected with the temple of Enlil, is responsible for Tummal flourishing, and takes a statue of the goddess Ninlil to Tummal. After each episode, Tummal is said to have been abandoned. This highly schematic construction suggests that it is not a historical document, but rather a litanic scribal exercise, which emphasizes the legitimacy of the kings through erudite enumeration.34 The Sumerian King List35 can be interpreted in a similar manner. This text includes both legendary kings as well as historical kings for whom there are dated royal inscriptions and documents. Immediately after the antediluvian kings and before the historical kings, names familiar from Sumerian myths are found: Enmerkar, Lugalbanda, and Gilgamesh. The famous section on Gilgamesh reads as follows: 110. 111. 112.

gilgameš3 ab-ba-ni lil2-la2 en kul-la-ba-ke4 d

113. mu 126 i3-ak

[110. (divine) Gilgamesh, / 111. whose father was a nobody, / 112.Kullaba’s governor, / 113. reigned for 126 years]

Each section lists kings from a particular city during a specific period. Since Mesopotamia was never a political unit, a synchronistic order of dynasties might have been predicted. On the contrary, different formulae are used to denote the change from section to section, or rather from city to city and dynasty to dynasty. The Sumerian King List can then be interpreted as a poetic work that resembles a litanic pattern, used in a scribal setting as both a practical tool (scribal training) and an ideological argumentation articulated as a historiographical discourse on kingship.

Some Interpretational Problems However, most early texts that bear a resemblance to a litanic pattern are quite difficult to interpret. In fact, the boundaries between the simple early Mesopotamian lists and the more sophisticated texts with artistic ambition are very difficult to

34 Piotr Michalowski, “The Strange History of Tumal,” in: Piotr Michalowski, Niek Veldhuis, eds., Approaches to Sumerian Literature: Studies in Honour of Stip (H. L. J. Vanstiphout), 145–165, especially 162–163. 35 Jean-Jacques Glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles, 55–70, 117–126; Thorkild Jacobsen, The Sumerian King List (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1939).

26

Łukasz Toboła

determine. This difficulty means it is possible for a single text to be regarded as a list by one scholar, whereas another can interpret it as a narrative or “poetic” text.36 For example, the composition called the “Fields of Ninurta”37 by scholars at first glance can be regarded as a simple list of the fields belonging to this deity.38 Moreover, several names of the fields enumerated in this text also occur in the ordinary administrative lists of field names, which certainly cannot be interpreted as hymns or narratives.39 It is only the quasi-mythological incipit (u4-ri2-[a] u4 sudr[i2-a], “in those days, in those distant days”) that somehow suggests the possible non-utilitarian character of this text. Moreover, scribes at that time did not yet employ all the grammatical elements of the Sumerian language, which on occasion makes it difficult for modern readers to determine the intention of the speaker. Miguel Civil argues that many written Sumerian texts were in fact abbreviated versions of oral compositions. The written text was merely a learning tool, recording the essentials of a performance which might be longer and more detailed than the score or skeleton written on the tablet40. Regarding the aforementioned zami hymns, Joachim Krecher41 proposed that the doxology (za3-mi3, “praise!”) could be a scribal abbreviation of the two-sentence refrain, as appears in the prologue: d 11. en.lil2 a.nun 12. ki mu-gar-gar 13. dingir gal-gal 14. za3-mi3 mu-du11

[11. Enlil who placed the Anunna gods / 12. below earth, / 13. the great gods /14. may be praised!]

Consequently, it is possible that some of the early texts discussed above represent the score of longer literary compositions whose layout was determined by lexical lists.

36 Gonzalo Rubio, “Early Sumerian Literature. Enumerating the Whole,” 205. 37 Miguel Civil, The Farmer’s Instructions: A Sumerian Agricultural Manual (Barcelona: AUSA, 1994), 98. 38 The god Ninurta, who is the son of Nippur’s chief god Enlil, is depicted as the divinity in charge of all the fields in the Nippur area. 39 For example the HAR-ra = hubullu 20. 40 Miguel Civil, “Reading Gilgameš,” Aula Orientalis 17–18 (1999–2000): 188. 41 Joachim Krecher, “UD.GAL.NUN versus ‘normal’ Sumerian: Two literatures or one?,” in: Pelio Fronzaroli, ed., Literature and literary language at Ebla (Florence: Università di Firenze, 1992), 293.

The Origins of Litanic Patterns in the Ancient Near East

27

Conclusions From the evidence reviewed thus far, it emerges that certain Sumerian “poetic” texts are genetically related to lexical lists, which thus constitute a web of intertextual dependencies. On the one hand, lexical lists could inspire the composition of hymns and litanies — such as “zami-litany” based on enumerations of place names and divine names. On the other hand, sometimes litanies and other ritual texts seem to have served as an inspiration for lexical lists. This is proven by the inclusion of several rhetorical passages that contain enumerations in lexical lists, as is the case in a fragment of the hymn of Inanna (In-nin ša3-gur-ra) or a section of “Dumuzi’s dream,” both of which are included in the Erim-huš=anantu lexical list.42 Also the colophons that were written on some of the Early Dynastic tablets show a close connection between the lexical lists and certain texts that were not merely of a practical character (some of the texts in each category were written by the same scribe).43 Literary enumerations serve both as a common device and as a compositional pattern in Sumerian literature. In compositions like “zami-litany,” a lexical template has been expanded and embellished with adjectives and repetitions, which created a more elaborate form. Consequently, it is safe to say that several Ancient Near Eastern “litanies” show a very strong affinity to lexical lists and seem to be an integral part of the written culture of ancient Mesopotamia from its inception.

42 Piotr Michalowski, “Literature as a source of lexical inspiration: Some notes on a hymn to the goddess Inanna,” in: Jan Braun, ed., Written on clay and stone: Ancient Near Eastern studies presented to Krystyna Szarzyńska (Warsaw: Agade, 1998), 65–73. 43 Manfred Krebernik, “Die Texte aus Fara und Tell Abu Salabih,” 313–315.

Łukasz Toboła Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

Looking for the Origins of Biblical Litanies: The Hymn of the Three Youths in Daniel 3:52–90deut This paper proposes that biblical litanies can be linked with the tradition of ancient Near Eastern pantheon lists. In the ancient religion of the Israelites these lists were radically demythologized. As part of the religious rhetoric concentrated on Yahweh, perceived as the unique and universal divine patron of the Israelites, these texts became the inspiration for biblical litanies, in which the whole of creation glorifies the God of Israel. The present study refers primarily to the deuterocanonical hymn Daniel 3:52– 90deut as one of the most representative examples of the biblical litanic pattern. This poem is widely known in its Greek translations (Septuagint and Theodotion), but there is also an Aramaic version of this text found in the medieval Chronicle of Jerahmeel that is asserted by Moses Gaster to be the vorlage of Theodotion’s translation1. Although this text was dismissed by subsequent scholars as a simple retroversion from Theodotion to Aramaic, more recently Klaus Koch has argued that at times the Chronicle is closer to the Old Greek than to Theodotion and thus the Aramaic text represents a vorlage of the later Greek and Syriac translations2. Consequently, the majority of the suggestions presented in this paper refers to this hypothetic original version. Firstly, the hymn Daniel 3:52–90deut will be analyzed in order to determine its structure, rhetoric and the specificity of its content. Secondly, it will be compared with certain examples of the ancient Near Eastern god-lists. Finally, a number of common features that are discernible in these sources shall be highlighted in an attempt to determine a general literary-theological model characteristic of them all.

1 Moses Gaster, “The Unknown Aramaic Original of Theodotion’s Additions to the Book of Daniel,” Proceedings of the Society for Biblical Archaeology 16 (1894): 280–317; 17 (1895): 75–91. 2 Klaus Koch, Deuterokanonische Zusätze zum Danielbuch: Entstehung und Textgeschichte (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1987), 22–26; cf. also John J. Collins, Daniel (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 202.

30

Łukasz Toboła

The Possible Historical Context of Daniel 3 Due to the fact that the author of Daniel 3 makes no mention of the prophet Daniel, it can thus be assumed that the story about the Three Youths originally functioned independently.3 The historical context of this legend can be related to the religious reform of Nabonidus, the last king of Babylon, who restored the temple of the moon-god Sin at Harran.4 There was a great ceremony for the dedication of the temple to which all the representatives of the Babylonian empire were summoned. The historiographical text, called by contemporary scholars the Verse Account of Nabonidus, mentions the veneration of Sin’s statue by the king himself.5 Thus, this historical incident can be perceived as a point of departure for the formation of the biblical tale. Although execution by fire was not a standard form of punishment in Babylonia, certain juridical documents from ancient Mesopotamia seem to suggest that it was on occasion used.6 A number of biblical accounts also suggest its usage. For example, Jeremiah 29:22 refers to the prophets “Zedekiah and […] Ahab, whom the king of Babylon roasted in the fire.” Later, in 2 Maccabees 13:4–6, we read about the Jerusalemite high priest Menelaus, who was executed by being pushed into a tower “full of ashes.” Neither of these examples provides an exact model for Daniel 3, but the concept of the fiery furnace was undoubtedly known to biblical authors. It is possible that the hymn Daniel 3:52–90deut, which was incorporated into the biblical story about the Three Youths, originally had a different setting than the narrative itself. It is only in line 88 that Hananiah, Azariah and Mishael mention their presence in the midst of a fire and their deliverance from the fiery furnace. Indeed, flames and a furnace are only mentioned in the introductory line of Daniel 3 and in the first line of the hymn itself (line 51). As the hymn’s celebration of God and the Creation does not deal extensively with the story of the Three Youths, these two fragments can be regarded as harmonizing insertions made by 3 John Joseph Collins, Daniel: with an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1984), 57–59. 4 Jean-Jacques Glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004), 232–239; Cyril John Gadd, “The Harran Inscriptions of Nabonidus,” Anatolian Studies 8 (1958): 35–92. 5 Sidney Smith, Babylonian Historical Texts, Relating to the Capture and Downfall of Babylon (London: Methuen & Co., 1924), 83–91; Julius Lewy, “The Late Assyro-Babylonian Cult of the Moon and Its Culmination at the Time of Nabonidus,” Hebrew Union College Annual 19 (1946): 405–489. 6 Tawny L. Holm, “The Fiery Furnace in the Book of Daniel and the Ancient Near East,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 128 (2008): 85–104.

Looking for the Origins of Biblical Litanies

31

a biblical editor. The laudatory timbre of the poem was possibly the motivation for its addition to the prose narrative. As the Temple at this point still seems to be functioning (compare references to priests and cultic personnel in the concluding parts of the hymn) and there is no evidence of Seleucid’s persecutions, the text may have been composed in the third century BC or even earlier.7

The Presentation of the Poem The Hymn of the Three Youths is a song of praise, which begins with the declarative phrases, bryk yhwh ’lh’, “blessed is Yahweh, the God,” or bryk ’t “blessed art Thou” (both using the passive participle) and then proceeds to enumerate elements of the Creation in order to bless the Lord using masculine plural imperatives (brykw). The hymn can be divided into two parts, the first consisting of lines 52–56 (the glorification of God) and the second of lines 57–90 (the exhortations addressed to the whole of the Creation). It seems unlikely that these were not originally two separate compositions. The second fragment (lines 57–90) lists the personified elements of the Creation and invites them to join in praising Yahweh, an act which also occurs in other parts of the Bible, particularly in Second Isaiah and in the Psalter.8 There is a clear attempt to describe the Creation as comprehensively as possible, as the Song of the Three Youths is subdivided into four sections: i. heavens and heavenly bodies, ii. meteorological elements, iii. earth and terrestrial objects, iv. human beings (in cultic context). The order enumerated in the text varies in different ancient manuscripts and translations. Having said that, the confusion disappears when it is compared with the order in the Aramaic text in the Chronicle of Jerahmeel.9 In this text initially 7 For chronological problems concerning the various traditions compiled in the Book of Daniel cf. Łukasz Toboła, “‘In the Citadel of Susa in the Province of Elam’: The Chronological Significance of the Topographical Annotation in Daniel 8:2,” Polish Journal of Biblical Research 12 (2013): 71–81; Zdravko Stefanovic, The Aramaic of Daniel in the Light of Old Aramaic (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992). 8 Isa. 44:23; Isa. 49:13; Isa. 55:12b; Ps. 66:1; Ps. 69:35; Ps. 89:6,13; Ps. 96:11–12; Ps. 97:1; Ps. 98:7–8; Ps. 103:20–22; Ps 117:1. 9 Moses Gaster, “The Unknown Aramaic Original of Theodotion’s Additions to the Book of Daniel,” Proceedings of the Society for Biblical Archaeology 16 (1894): 280–317.

32

Łukasz Toboła

God is addressed, then the heavenly bodies, followed by the phenomena of the air, such as rain, dew, snow, frost and clouds. Subsequently, the land, sea and birds are listed, before finally the human beings. However, the fragment Daniel 3:64–70deut has a more systematic and harmonious appearance, in that initially heat and cold in an abstract sense are enumerated. In turn these are followed by thunder and lightning, ice, frost and snow, fog and clouds, and finally day and night.10 All these are phenomena that occur in the air; the earth and its elements follow naturally. The final section concerns human worshippers. It begins with an exhortation to all those on Earth, but then immediately moves its focus to various communities among the people of Israel: the priests, the servants of Yahweh (that is the cultic personnel), the righteous ones and those who are holy and humble of heart. This categorization seems to be determined strictly by cultic principles.

The Literary and Religious Background to the Hymn of the Three Youths The fragment Daniel 3:57–90deut can be described as an elaborate list, containing personified elements of the world and a sequence of invitations for these elements to join in praising Yahweh. Certain literary counterparts of this text can be found in biblical poetry: similar invitations frequently occur at the beginning of several Psalms and are addressed to various elements of the Creation. The closest parallel to the Hymn of the Three Youths is Psalm 148.11 On the one hand, the sequence of personifications in Daniel 3:57–90deut suggests a link with a tradition in which all the elements of the world were perceived as divine beings. In this context it brings to mind Babylonian, Assyrian and Egyptian prayers in which individual deities or living creatures of the universe are called to praise a particular goddess or god. To exemplify this the Babylonian hymn to Ishtar can be compared with the Egyptian prayer to Amun-Re from the Amarna period:

10 Moses Gaster, “The Unknown Aramaic Original of Theodotion’s Additions to the Book of Daniel,” Proceedings of the Society for Biblical Archaeology 16 (1894): 288. Cf. verses 39–43 of his translation in the same journal: 17 (1895): 91. 11 Cf. also Pss. 98, 100, 136, 150. Biblical hymns often deal with the divine Creator’s greatness (for example Pss. 8, 29 and 104).

Looking for the Origins of Biblical Litanies

33

Hymn to Ishtar At the thought of your name heaven and Earth tremble, the gods grow dizzy, the Anunnaki tremble. Humankind praises your awesome name12. Prayer to Amun-Re You are the One who created all beings, The One Alone, who created what is… ‘Greetings to you’, cry all the wild beasts, ‘Jubilation’ cries every foreign land… The gods bow down before your majesty13.

On the other hand, these biblical poems can be also linked with the ancient Near Eastern tradition of the “science of lists” (Listenwissenschaft), especially the socalled pantheon lists14. From the early periods of this era, Near Eastern scribes collected words that were written with a divine determinative dingir(gods, deified monarchs, and divinized objects) and produced in the form of lists, which included divinities from all the corners of the universe. From the formal standpoint, these lists can be compared to analogical lexical lists that contained the names of trees and wooden objects (all the words with the determinative giš) or the names of birds (the determinative mušen). There are two principles behind such arrangements, and these can be applied to all the god-lists from ancient Mesopotamia, namely lexical and theological.

12 Delbert R. Hillers, “A Study of Psalm 148,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 40 (1978): 332. 13 Frank Lothar Hossfeld, Erich Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101–150 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2011), 633. 14 For the Near Eastern “pantheon” lists cf. Wilfred George Lambert, “Ancient Mesopotamian Gods. Superstition, philosophy, theology,” Revue de l’histoire des religions 207 (1990): 115–130; Daisuke Shibata, “An Old Babylonian manuscript of the Weidner god-list from Tell Taban,” Iraq 71 (2009): 33–42; Peeter Espak, “Some Early Developments in Sumerian God-Lists and Pantheon,” in Identities and Societies in the Ancient East-Mediterranean Regions, ed. Thomas R. Kämmerer (Münster: Ugarit Verlag, 2011), 47–57; Gonzalo Rubio, “Gods and Scholars: Mapping the Pantheon in Early Mesopotamia,” in Reconsidering the Concept of Revolutionary Monotheism, ed. Beate PongratzLeisten (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2011), 91–116.

34

Łukasz Toboła

In the case of lexical ordering the entries are arranged in accordance with three sets of criteria: i. entries that share the same cuneiform-signs; ii. entries that exhibit a certain phonetic resemblance; iii. entries that share a basic conceptual or semantic association. The first criterion usually overlaps with the other two, to the point that it could be argued that the graphic variable constitutes the basic organizational pattern in these early god-lists. For instance, two fragments from the Early Dynastic god-lists from Fara and Abu Salabikh can be compared: Abu Salabikh [nin]-šušinak nin-GANA2 d nin-uru4 d nin-šubur d nin-gal d nin-urugal215 d d

Fara nergalx (KIŠ.UNUG) KIŠ:PIRIG (= dtidnum) d pirig-tur d pirig-kal d pirig-sag?-kal d UD.KA d UD-sag-kal16 d d

In the Abu Salabikh list, there is a section containing certain divine names that start with the sign NIN, which correspond either to the Sumerian word “lord” or “lady”. In the Fara list, an analogical criterion can be discerned: divine names beginning with the aurochs-head-like signs KIŠ17 and PIRIG — both of which look quite similar in the Early Dynastic script — appear consecutively, as do names with UD, and the transitions from one group to the other seem to be connected

15 Amedeo Alberti, “A Reconstruction of the Abu Salabikh God List,” Studi Epigrafici e Linguistici 2 (1985): 8. 16 Anton Deimel, Schultexte aus Fara (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1923), Autograph No. 1 obv. column vii, lines 19–25. 17 Piotr Steinkeller, “Studies in Third Millennium Paleography, 4: Sign KIŠ,” Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 94 (2004): 175–185.

Looking for the Origins of Biblical Litanies

35

with the last sign in the previous entry (PIRIG, KAL)18. The form of the name thus determines this grouping. In the case of theological ordering the entries are arranged in accordance with two principles: i. divine hierarchy; ii. cosmological hierarchy. The first type of ordering is based on the conception of a pantheon organized like a divine family or divine clan. Deities are listed in sequences that depend on their perceived hierarchy within the pantheon, their relationships with their spouses and relatives, and their interaction with other gods and goddesses as determined in the mythological texts. The older members normally have precedence, and so are first in the lists. Thus, the Fara list begins with An and Enlil, with other major deities following in the next lines.19 The cosmological model seems to organize deities hierarchically according to their competences in the universe. The most prominent examples of such cosmologically oriented lists of gods come from Ugarit,20 and indeed these texts seem rather a good analogy for biblical poetic enumerations such as Daniel 3:52–90deut. However, the origin of these texts is still uncertain. The fact that for all these lists ritual counterparts are attested seems to suggest that they had a cultic function. Despite this, it would be unwise to conclude that they are simply abstracts of more elaborate sacrificial records. Of course, the texts could have functioned merely as records of sacrifices or lists of deities worshipped during a particular ritual, but they also seem to have a meaning that transcends their practical usage. This is suggested by the relatively large number of copies that were made and their translation into Akkadian, which led to a process of systematization that combines a profession of faith in the divine persons with an invocation of their names. The principal or canonical version of the Ugaritic list of deities can be reconstructed on the basis of three fragmentary tablets. The basic text is KTU 1.118 — a simple list of divine names written in Ugaritic. Sadly, the list of offerings KTU 18 The graphemic criterion was also the main rationale behind the arrangement of other early lexical lists, such as the list of toponyms known as the Geographical List that was attested at Ebla and Abu Salabikh. 19 Cf. Deimel, Schultexte aus Fara, Autograph No. 1 vs. column I, lines 1–2. 20 For the Ugaritic “pantheon” lists cf. Gregorio del Olmo Lete, “The Offering Lists and the Gods Lists,” in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies, eds. Wilfred G.E. Watson, Nicolas Wyatt (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 307–326; John F. Healey, “The ‘Pantheon’ of Ugarit: Further Notes,” Studi Epigrafici e Linguistici 5 (1988): 103–112.

36

Łukasz Toboła

1.47, which is headed by the label ’il ṣpn “god(s?) of Saphon,” is very damaged, but more fortunately the Akkadian text RS 20.24, which is probably a translation of the Ugaritic original, is quite well preserved.21 The other text, a ritual tablet KTU 1.148, confirms the fixed character of this canonical order in the cultic domain.22 Its first nine lines resemble the listing of the gods on KTU 1.118, followed by the sacrifices allotted to them. The list seems to begin with a triad of divine patriarchs: ’il’ib “God the Father,” ’il “Ilu” and dgn “Dagan.” It is possible that this sequence presupposes a mythological development of the god Ilu’s competences as “the father” of the whole divine family and is an attempt at combining local versions of the pantheon, as reflected in the “Cycle of Baal,”23 which portrays the god Baal as the “son of Dagan,” yet considers Ilu to be his “father” at the same time24. However, another interpretation can also be proposed. Two of the three Ugaritic exemplars of the “pantheon” list have an additional opening line, namely ’il ṣpn “god(s) of Saphon.”25 This could be interpreted as being a collective name for the entire list of deities — “(all) the gods of Saphon.” In a similar manner, Ilu and Dagan may also have their own precise category, ’il’ib, “God-fathers, divine Patriarchs.” which is followed by their own proper names. The phrase b‘l ṣpn “Baal of Saphon” follows, which serves both as a caption for the b‘lm section and probably as one of the b‘lm themselves. This god has been perceived as the protector of the Ugarit (b‘l ’ugrt), and is defined by his residence on Mount Saphon, as specified in the Akkadian version as dIM be-el HUR.SAG. ḫa-zi “Haddu (the storm god), the governor of Mountain Hazi.”26 His sevenfold titulature (or sixfold, if the phrase “Haddu, the governor of Mountain Hazi” is

21 Cf. John F. Healey, “The Akkadian ‘Pantheon’ List from Ugarit,” Studi Epigrafici e Linguistici 2 (1985): 115–125. 22 Cf. Nicolas Wyatt, Religious Texts from Ugarit (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 427–429; Denis Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002), 44–49. The Ugaritic sacrificial texts containing sacrificial rites that correspond to the deity lists have the following headings for each rite: dbḥ ṣpn (“the sacrifices of Saphon”) in line 1, corresponds to the heading ’il ṣpn (“the gods of Saphon”) of KTU 1.47. 23 Cf. Łukasz Toboła, Cykl Baala z Ugarit (Kraków: The Enigma Press, 2008). 24 Cf. Noga Ayali-Darshan, “Baal, Son of Dagan: In Search of Baal’s Double Paternity,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 133 (2013): 651–657. 25 Mount Saphon (modern-day Jebel Aqra), a 2000m massif around 40 km north of Ugarit, was considered by the Ugaritians as an abode of their gods (cf. Greek Olympus). 26 Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit, 14.

Looking for the Origins of Biblical Litanies

37

interpreted as a mere label)27 seems to reflect his local cults and various hypostases (b‘l ’ugrt “ba‘al of Ugarit,” b‘l hlb “ba‘al of Aleppo…”).28 The sequence invoking various hypostases of the storm god Haddu is followed by a group of six deities, headed by the label ’arṣ w šmm “Earth and Heaven.” This contains various stellar andterrestrial gods and goddesses: ktrt (Kosharatu — the seven divine midwives); yrḫ (Yarih — the lunar god); ‘ttr (Ashtar — a stellar male deity, the god of irrigation), ṣpn (Mount Saphon); ktr (Koshar — a divine craftsman); pdry (Pidray, literally: “the fatty one” — the goddess of fertility). The next group is headed by the caption ģrm w ‘mqt “Mountains and Valleys.” This comprises six goddesses: Ashirat — the mother-goddess; Anat — the warriorgoddess; Shapsh — the solar goddess; Arsay — the goddess of the Earth; Ushara — the chthonic goddess; Ashtarte — the goddess of hunting. They are arranged hierarchically and seem to be related to several male gods from the previous groups. The subsequent group is different in each of the existing variants. The most complete list is provided by KTU 1.118 and its Akkadian translation, whereas the other versions omit different elements. This series is introduced by the phrase ’il t‘drb‘l, “deities (who) help Baal” and contains two divine names: ršp (Resheph — “the Redoubtable One,” the divine royal patron, the god of war and pestilence),29 ddmš (Dadmish — the healing goddess?30). After this sequence the last composite title occurs, namely pḫr ’ilm “the assembly of the gods.” In all the variants, this last group is somewhat of an appendix and perhaps contains some later additions. It seems to reflect the process of “divinizing” certain cultic objects such as ’utḫt “an incense altar” and knr, “a lyre” or particular types of sacrifices (mlkm “burnt offerings,”31 šlm “a peace offering”). The final result is a list containing about thirty-three invocations, headed by the title preserved only in KTU 1.118 and KTU 1.148: ’il ṣpn. However, it should not be thought that the hierarchy of the Creation reflected in these texts was

27 The numbering of b‘lm in lines 5 to 10 in the Akkadian version (cf. ibid. 14) seems to be rather unusual. There are also three other texts (KTU 1.47, 1.118, 1.148) written in Ugaritic that contain almost exactly the same list in the same order and these also repeat the title b‘l six times after it is first mentioned (b‘lṣ pn in the Ugaritic texts) but they do not include the numbers. 28 Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit, 276–277. 29 For the characteristics of Resheph cf. Edward Lipiński, Resheph:A Syro-Canaanite Deity (Leuven: Peeters, 2009). 30 Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit, 277. 31 For the lexeme mlk as a term denoting burnt sacrifice cf. Edward Lipiński, Dieux et déesses de l’univers phénicien et punique (Leuven: Peeters, 1995), 476–483.

38

Łukasz Toboła

forgotten in the first millennium BC. Philo of Byblos knew perfectly well at the time of the Roman Empire that the hierarchy of the ancient Semitic gods reflected the cosmological speculations regarding the order of the universe. Indeed, this seems to be confirmed by a comparison of the Ugaritic “pantheon” lists with his genealogy of the Creation, in the Phoenician History:32 Table 1. KTU 1.47:2–3

KTU 1.148: 23–45

Philo of Byblos

’il’ib

’il’ib

Elioûn

’arṣ w šmm

Gê, Ouranos

’Il

’Il

Elos = Cronus

ktrt

seven daughters

dgn

dgn

Dagōn

In this context it seems possible that the cosmological principles which can be discerned in the composition of the Ugaritic “pantheon” lists also influenced other texts, even much later texts, such as the Hymn of the Three Youths in Daniel 3:52–90deut. Thus, it may be instructive to highlight that the Ugaritic god-lists and the Song of the Three Youths constructed their picture of the Creation in a similar way: Table 2. The Ugaritic god lists

The Hymn of the Three Youths

Divine patriarchs

The Heavens

Haddu’s hypostases

Meteorological phenomena

Terrestrial deities

The Earth

Divinized cultic objects

The cultic sphere

Conclusion The order of deities listed in the Ugaritic god-lists and the character of the particular labels (“divine Patriarchs,” “Earth and Heaven,” “Mountains and Valleys” etc.) 32 For the text of Philo of Byblos, cf. Harold W. Attridge, Robert A. Oden: Philo of Byblos, the Phoenician History: Introduction, Critical Text, Translation, Notes (Washington: The Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1981), 46–55.

Looking for the Origins of Biblical Litanies

39

correspond remarkably closely to the order of the poetic enumerations in Daniel 3:52–90deut. This suggests that the analyzed fragment from the Book of Daniel can be linked with the tradition of ancient Near Eastern “pantheon” lists, especially with their Ugaritic variant. Such polytheistic origins of the biblical exhortations seem to be quite convincing, even if in later parts of the Old Testament, such as Daniel 3:52–90deut, monotheism clearly prevails. In the frame of monotheistic rhetoric such archaic god-lists became an inspiration for various litanic texts, in which the Creation in its entirety (originally independent deities embodying various aspects of nature) adores Yahweh — the only God of Israel.

Łukasz Toboła Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

Three Short Litany-Like Texts from Ugarit: Translation and Commentary This paper discusses three ritual texts from Ugarit (Rash Shamra), which, because of their specific structure and content, can be classified asbeing similar to litany. The study includes a translation and commentary on the following texts:1 i. KTU 1.65 — a litany to the god El; ii. KTU 1.123 — a prayer for prosperity formulated as a litany to the Ugaritic pantheon; iii. KTU 1.113 — a litany to the deified kings (or their divine patrons).2 After the presentation of these texts, the author will investigate their literary and theological peculiarities. Then their cultural setting and their role in the Ugaritic religion will be examined (especially their liturgical origins). The formal peculiarities of their notation, which can suggest antiphonal performance will be also discussed. The author also takes up the question of the hypothetical relations between 1 The transcription of the original texts is based on the excellent photos of Ugaritic tablets published in Gregorio del Olmo Lete, Canaanite Religion according to the liturgical texts of Ugarit. Photographic Archive (Münster: Ugarit Verlag, 2014). All these texts can be dated to XIV–XIII BC. 2 Sometimes the reverseside of KTU 1.102 is also interpreted as a litany addressed to royal ancestors. The obverse and loweredge (lines1–14) record the names of sixteen deities most known from other Ugaritic ritual and narrative texts. The reverse of the tablet and upperedge (lines 15–28) contain fourteen additional theophoric names. Del Olmo Lete holds that these are divine throne names of deceased kings of Ugarit, cf. Gregorio del Olmo Lete, “Los nombres ‘divinos’ de los reyes de Ugarit,” Aula Orientalis 5 (1987): 39–69. Gregorio del Olmo Lete, “Once again on the ‘Divine Names’ of the Ugaritic Kings. A Reply,” Aula Orientalis 14 (1996): 11–16. However, Pardee holds that these divine names are hypostases of the gods mentioned in each phrase. Cf. Dennis Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002), 19–21. Cf. also Brian B. Schmidt, Israel’s Beneficent Dead: The Origin and Character of Israelite Ancestor Cults and Necromancy (Oxford: University of Oxford, 1991), 122. Others hold thatthe names here are not even those of gods but rather of humans bringing offerings to the temple. Cf. Johann Jakob Stamm, “Erwägungen zu RS 24.246,” Ugarit Forschungen 11 (1979): 753–758. Consequently, this text has been omitted in this presentation.

42

Łukasz Toboła

Ugaritic litanies and analogical compositions which belong to the ancient Israelite religious heritage. The question about the signification of the Ugaritic tradition for the development of ancient Near Eastern litanic poetry will also be discussed.

KTU 1.65 This text is a liturgical prayer addressed to the Ugaritic pantheon, invoking in a particular way god Ilu and seeking divine favor for the protection of the Ugaritic kingdom. I. Introductory invocations: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

’il bn ’il dr bn ’il mpḫrt bn ’il trmn w šnm ’il w ’atrt

[Conjuration of El’s sons / Circle of El’s sons, / Assembly of El’s sons. / Sharuman and Shanima, / Ilu and Ashiratu.]

II. Supplications: 6. 7. 8. 9.

ḫnn ’il nṣbt ’il šlm ’il ’il ḫš,’il ’add

[Be merciful, El, / Be helpful, El, / El, give peace! / El hasten, Ilu succour!]

III. Litanic invocations: 10. bgd ṣpn kl 11. ’ugrt 12. b mrḥ ’il 13. b n’it ’il 14. b ṣmd ’il 15. b dtn ’il 16. b šrp ’il 17. b knt ’il 18. b ģdyn ’il 19. [b] -n|d [’i]l

Three Short Litany-Like Texts from Ugarit

43

[By the fortune of Saphon3 — the all Ugarit! / By the spear of El — (the all Ugarit!) / By the axe of El — (the all Ugarit!) / By the mace of El — (the all Ugarit!) / By the thresher? of El — (the all Ugarit!)4/ By the burnt offering of El — (the all Ugarit!) / By the perpetual offering of El — (the all Ugarit!) / By the morning sacrifice? of El — (the all Ugarit!) / By the…. ?]

The preposition b introducing lines 10–11 and every line thereafter makes it all but a certainty that, from line 10 to the end of the text, we have before us a contextual and literary unit. Without difficulty one can recognize the syntactic connection of this passage with the line immediately following: 10. 11. 12.

bgd ṣpn kl ’ugrt b mrḥ ’il

The first line seems to be evidently longer than similar invocations which occur after it. We are dealing here with a hymnal liturgy which, it is safe to assume, must have been alive, as part of the cult practiced at the temple of Ugarit, long before it was finally written. In this aspect we can look for guidance to the biblical literature, especially to the antiphonal elements frequently occurring in Hebrew psalmody, which can be interpreted as indicative of the manner in which a given composition had been performed when used for its original purpose of accompanying the various forms of cult. When such a psalm came to be committed to writing, the scribes appear to have sometimes felt it unnecessary to repeat the antiphonal refrain just as many times as was the case in cultic recital, especially when the refrain remained unchanged throughout the liturgy. For example, in Psalm 136 we have a hymn consisting of twenty-six distiches so construed that their first halves correspond to one another by a more or less rigid parallelism, while the second half of each distich is represented by the identical refrain: “for His mercy lasts forever” — obviously to be chanted by the congregation in antiphonal response to the first halves sung by the clergy. As it happens, part of this hymnal psalm recurs in the other cultic poem, namely Psalm 135; here, however, the refrain appears to have been omitted, probably as a result of scribal economy.

3 The Ugaritic holy mountain, throne of gods. See, Nick Wyatt, “The significance of ṢPN in West Semitic Thought: A Contribution to the History of a Mythological Motif,” in Nick Wyatt, The Mythic Mind: Essays on Cosmology and Religion in Ugaritic and Old Testament Literature (London: Equinox, 2005), 102–124. 4 For a detailed analysis of the fragment listing El’s weapons, cf. Gregorio del Olmo Lete, “The Divine Panoply (KTU 1.65:12–14),” Aula Orientalis 10 (1992): 254–256.

44

Łukasz Toboła

Analogically, we can therefore assume that in practice, when used as oral liturgy, line 12 of KTU 1.65 and each of the following lines was followed by the refrain kl ’ugrt, which in the written text was generally omitted in all but the first verse. If so, the abridged form of our litany would differ even less from the full oral form than Psalm 135:10–12 differs from Psalm 136:17–22.5

KTU 1.123 KTU 1.123 is a prayer in which the supplicant appeals to a variety of deities for šlm (well-being). The general structure of the text is modeled on a pantheon list. However, most of deities mentioned in this text are listed as pairs: 1. [šlm]’ab . w ’ilm 2. [w]šlm . šlm ’i[l] 3. [š]lm . ’il šr 4. dgn . w b‘l 5. tṭ w kmt 6. yrḫ w ksa’ 7. yrḫm kty 8. tkmn w šnm 9. ktr w ḫss 10. ‘ttr ‘ttpr 11. šḥr w šlm 12. ngh w srr 13. ‘d w šr 14. ṣdq mšr 15. ḥnbn ’il dn[…] 16. [k]bd w nr[…] 17. [..]n?r[…] 18. [..]ṣp ’il[…] 19. [ģ]lmt mrd[…] 20. qdš mlk -[…] 21. kbd d ’il gb[…] 22. mr mnmn 23. brrn ’aryn 24. ’aẓḥn tlyn

5 A similar interpretation has been proposed in Nissim Amzallag and Shamir Yona, “The Unusual Mode of Editing of KTU 1.65,” Ugarit Forschungen 45 (2014): 35–48. According to them, the text of KTU 1.65 is edited as two separated texts (the obverse and the reverse) corresponding to the two voices singing antiphonally. This mode of editing, already attested in Biblical poetry and defined as complex antiphony, is identified here for the first time in Ugaritic poetry.

Three Short Litany-Like Texts from Ugarit 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33.

45

’atdb w tr qdš w ’amrr tḫr w bd ktr ḫss šlm šlm ’il bt šlm ’il ḫšt[…] ršp ’inš ’i[lm] drm ’ilm w ’ilm šlm

[[Give well-being], o Father and the (rest of) gods! / [Yea], give well-being, give well-being, E[l!] / [Gi]ve well-being, El, the prince! / (Give well-being) Dagan and Baal! / (Give wellbeing) Shizzu and Chamash! / (Give well-being) Yarih and Kasa’! / (Give well-being) O Yarih of Kassites! / (Give well-being) Shukamuna and Shunamuna! / (Give well-being) Kothar-wa-Hasis! / (Give well-being) Ashtar and Ashtapil! / (Give well-being) Shahar and Shalim! / (Give well-being) The Dawn and the Sunset! / (Give well-being) Witness and the Prince! / (Give well-being) Righteous One (and) Just One! / (Give well-being) The Compassionate One, the divine Judge! […] / (Give well-being) [Gl]ory and Brightness?![…] / (unclear text) / [ ] god[ ] / (Give well-being) [the D]ark One (goddess), shroud […] / (Give well-being) the Holy One, the king […] / (Give well-being) Glory of the god […] / (Give well-being) Son of Nobody / (Give well-being) the Brilliant One, the Kin / (Give well-being) AẓḥnTlyn / (Give well-being) Atdb and Aurochs? / (Give well-being) The Holy One and the Blessed One / (Give well-being) Tḫr w Bd / Koshar Hasis, give well-being! / Give well-being, god of the dynasty! / Give well-being, god of mausoleum! / (Give well-being) Resheph, (and) the Divine Governor! / (Give well-being) families of gods! / Truly o gods, give (us) well-being!]

The listing by twos finds its parallel in some Ugaritic incantations,6 where the gods who usually were named singly are grouped by pairs in various more or less artificial combinations. The precise meaning of such a rhetorical device remains unknown.7 This text seems to be a comprehensive overview of the various gods worshiped at Ugarit who were considered to be descendants of El (Ugaritic God Father), whatever their geographical spread. Several of these couples are already known from Ugaritic religious tradition but others still need to be studied more closely to explain their meaning. Some of the theonyms listed here are of undoubtedly 6 Cf. KTU 1.107, being an incantation against snakebite. Cf. Georgio del Olmo Lete, “KTU 1.107: A miscellany of incantations against snakebite,” in Ritual, religion and reason: studies in the ancientworld in honour of Paolo Xella, eds. Oswald Loretz, Sergio Ribichini, and Wilfred G.E. Watson (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2013), 193–204. 7 Perhaps the use of double invocations has cultic presuppositions. Their repetitive sequence can exhibit a fixed structure of curse-prayer with possibly a magical meaning.

46

Łukasz Toboła

foreign provenance (‘ttpr, ’aẓḥn tlyn, tḫr). These divine names are otherwise unknown, and consequently very difficult to translate.8 This text seems to be a reflection of popular religion, functioning outside the official cultic arrangement. Especially interesting is the invocation contained in verse 22 —mr mnmn, literally: “son of nobody,” which seems to anticipate the Saint Paul’s dictum about “unknown god” (Acts of the Apostles 17:22–23). However, it can be also interpreted as a technical expression, denoting invocation to someone’s personal god, which can be changed according to the individual needs and sympathies of a particular participant of ritual (“son of nobody” — “god x being the divine patron of human being y”). The expression ’inš ’ilm, which occurs in line 31, suggests the very long history of this simple text. It seems to be a Sumerian loanword derived from the title ensi2 gal dEn-lil2, “Great Governor of Enlil,” attributed to warlike god Ninurta in one of the Sumerian hymns and in the date formula king Shulgi’s year 21.9 The word šlm which occurs irregularly in the lines 1–3 and 28–33 seems to be a repeated imperative (“give wellbeing!”) addressed to all the invoked gods. One can assume that it was repeated after of each of the invocations. However, in most of the verses it has been omitted by the scribe, probably for practical reasons.

KTU 1.113 KTU 1.113 contains the list of the Ugaritic monarchs. The text on the obverse of the tablet is divided into paragraphs by horizontal lines, but no line is complete. [mt] w rm tph […]l’umm l n‘m […]w rm tlbm […]pr l n‘m […]mt w rm tph […]ḥb l n‘m […]ymģy […]rm tlbm […l n]‘m […y]h n‘m

8 Pardee left most of them untranslated, cf. Dennis Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002), 150–153. 9 Edward Lipiński, Resheph. A Syro-Canaanite Deity (Leuven: Peeters 2009), 101 (with bibliography).

Three Short Litany-Like Texts from Ugarit

47

[[who has died] and loud was the sound of his (funeral) drum / […] the people for the Gracious One / [… ] and loud was the sound of double pipes / […] heifer? for the Gracious One / […] and loud was the sound of his (funeral) drum / […] ḥb for the Gracious One / […] he will come / […]loud was the sound of double pipes / […] for Gracious One / […] the Gracious One is coming!]

The lists of kings10, written in two columns on the reverse of the tablet, was probably used in a litanic way, in which the text written in the verse was applied to each royal ancestor in turn, throughout the whole list. [’il n]qmp‘ [’il ‘m]ttmr ’il ‘m]ttmr [’il n]qmp‘ ’il mpḥ ’il ’ibrn ’il y‘drd ’il nqmp‘ ’il ’ibrn ’il‘mrp’i ’il nqmp‘ ’il’ibrn ’il nqmp‘ ’il’ibrn ’il nqmd ’il yqr [Niqmepa of [blessed memory], / Ammishtamru of [blessed memory], / Ammittamru of [blessed memory], / Niqmepa of [blessed memory], / Mapḥu of blessed memory, / Ibiranu of blessed memory, / Yadurraddu of blessed memory, / Niqmepa of blessed memory, / Ibbiranu of blessed memory, / Ammurapi of blessed memory, / Niqmepa of blessed memory, / Ibiranu of blessed memory, / Niqmepa of blessed memory, / Ibiranu of blessed memory, / Niqmaddu of blessed memory, / Yaqaru of blessed memory]

10 Jordi Vidal, “King Lists and Oral Transmission: From History to Memory,” Ugarit Forschungen 32 (2000): 555–566.

48

Łukasz Toboła

This list of Ugaritic royal names has additionally its syllabic variant written in Akkadian (RS 94. 2518).11 It seems to be quite probable that such lists of royal names circulated independently and were used in many different rituals.12 The whole text KTU 1.113 can be interpreted as a scenario of a ritual in which the deceased rulers of Ugarit were invoked to the accompaniment of drums and double pipes. It can be interpreted as a celebration of the monarchs’ arrival in the Underworld. The fragment preserved on the obverse of the tablet (containing some repetitive phrases) can be defined as a refrain, which occurs regularly after the names of successive rulers. It is uncertain who is the n‘m “Gracious One” in this litanic refrain. However, the idea that the reference may be to a dead king seems to be attractive. If there was on the original tablet a notice that verses were to be repeated, the repetition could have been for each of the kings, and each in turn would have been titled the “Gracious One.” The list of kings is written on the reverse of the tablet in two columns separated by a vertical line. The repeated element ’il (literally “god”) preceding royal names is a technical term meaning that the invoked king is dead13 (something like the common phrase “of blessed memory”).14

11 Dennis Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature 2002), 203–204. 12 For example, the list of royal ancestors being invoked in KTU 1.161 (Ugaritic royal funeral liturgy) seems to be surprisingly short (five names of mythical rulers and two of historical ones versus about sixteen names preserved in KTU 1.113). However, it is quite possible, that the complete listing of the ancestors—all of whom we would expect to be called for such an occasion— was recorded on a separate tablet. In order for the priest and king who were reciting the incantations to know at which point the list was to be given, only a small part of it was inserted. This would explain the shortness of the enumeration in KTU 1.161, and it would also explain the fact that the second time the list is given (two mythical names in lines 23–26), it is even more shortened. The genealogy list would then be made up separately and recited at the appropriate time. 13 Cf.a later Hebrew usage as at 1 Samuel 28:23, in which the term ’lhym denotes the ghost of the deceased Samuel. 14 Alternatively, it can be interpreted as references to the divine patrons of successive monarchs—cf. Brian B. Schmidt, Israel’s Beneficent Dead: The Origin and Character of Israelite Ancestor Cults and Necromancy, 115–123.

Three Short Litany-Like Texts from Ugarit

49

Conclusions The preserved sources confirm that several ritual texts from Ugarit can be classified as litaniae ante litteram. These compositions can be differentiated from other Ugaritic religious compositions because of their specific structure. These texts contain elements of enumerations and repetitions. The axis of the composition is usually constituted by the list of gods, local rulers or their divine patrons. Such enumerations are accompanied by repeated laudations, supplications or exhortations. The length of such a refrain can vary from a single word to several sentences. Ugaritic liturgical practice can be then compared with the ritual customs known from the biblical environment. We are dealing with the antiphonal performance, with mutual participation of local clergy and the laity. We do not know anything for sure about any musical setting of the texts being discussed, but some allusions to musical instruments suggest that these compositions were sung to the accompaniment of flutes and drums. An interesting feature of these compositions is the form of notation. It clearly indicates the existence of divisions between the litanic invocations and refrain. The refrain is usually precisely highlighted by irregularity of the verse or by the placing of the refrain on one side of the tablet, when the litanic enumerations are placed on the other side. The refrain is also usually written only once and its subsequent repetitions have been omitted in the notation (but usually can be easily reconstructed). A similar phenomenon can be observed in biblical Psalms. This manner of notation reveals, that we are dealing with something like a shorthand scenario for celebrant. Therefore, the analyzed texts can be seen as an interesting testimony of the Ugaritic liturgical practice.

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns Introduction The Orphic Hymns (Ὀρφέως ὕμνοι, further called the Orph. H.) constitute a certain collection, but, at the same time, they are only a part of the vast literature which is referred to as the “Orphic.”1 What does this substantive adjective mean? A religious movement, an organized religion sensu stricto,2 a stage in the development of Greek religious activity, a sect, offshoot beliefs associated with Dionysos, Orphic church — these are just a few terms for Orphism which have been proposed by scholars since Christian A. Lobeck and his work Aglaophamus of 1829. Radcliff Edmonds believes that this issue should be referred to as the “Orphic Controversy.”3 Nevertheless, in Alberto Bernabé Pajares’ opinion, “Orphism” — as a term used in the literary and religious context4 — constitutes movimientos

1 Gabriella Ricciardelli, “Los himnos órficos,” in Orfeo y la tradición órfica: un reecuentro, ed. Albert Bernabé and Francesc Casadesús (Madrid: Akal, 2008), 325–48; Caroline López-Ruiz, “Greek and Near Eastern Mythology: A Story of Mediterranean Encounters,” in Approaches to Greek Myth, edited by Lowell Edmunds (Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989), 72; Miguel Herrero de Jáuregui, Orphism and Christianity in Late Antiquity, Sozomena 7 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010), 36; Katarzyna Kołakowska, “Orphic Motives in ‘Orpheus’ Lithika,’” Littera Antiqua, 3 (2011): 104–17; Katarzyna Kołakowska, “Orficki charakter poematu Empedoklesa,” in Orfizm i jego recepcja w literaturze, sztuce i filozofii (Kraków–Lublin: Wydawnictwo Homini– Wydawnictwo KUL, 2011), 7–23; Katarzyna Kołakowska, Orfizm i jego recepcja w literaturze, sztuce i filozofii (Kraków–Lublin: Wydawnictwo Homini–Wydawnictwo KUL, 2011); cf. information about International Symposium “Colloquia Orphica” in Nieborów. Miguel Herrero de Jáuregui, Orphism and Christianity in Late Antiquity, Sozomena 7 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010), 36. 2 Cf. Ana Isabel Jiménez San Cristobal, “Tratti orfici nella ornitogonia degli Ucelli di Aristofane,” Chaos e Kosmos 5 (2004): 3. 3 Cf. Radcliffe G. Edmonds, Myths of the Underworld Journey Plato, Aristophanes, and the “Orphic” Gold Tablets (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 37. 4 Cf. Fritz Graf, “Serious Singing: The Orphic Hymns as Religious Texts,” Kernos 22 (2009): 169–82; Menelaos Christopoulos, “The Spell of Orpheus,” Mètis. Anthropologie des Mondes Grecs Anciens 6, 1–2 (1991): 215–7.

52

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

alternativos to the Greek religion.5 It should be noted that Orphism definitely fits the complexity of the religious world of ancient Greeks, which appears, especially to contemporary people, to have been a combination of various (chthonian, Dionysian, and Olympic) religions.6 Orphism is known only from such literature, as it inspired itself.7 As far as the mysteries are concerned, they were connected — indirectly or directly — with the person of Orpheus.8 We do not know whether he was a mythical9 or rather a historical10 figure. The debate is still on. What we know for certain is that Greeks perceived him not only as a poet and musician playing the lyre in a marvellous way, or as the son of the muse Calliope, whose singing had a power over living and non-living beings (see “Orpheus and the Beasts” by the Dutch painter Sebastian Vranca of the Rome Galleria Borghese).11 He was also a person whose character and teaching influenced the minds of ancient Greeks of the classical period and

5 Alberto Bernabé, “Religión,” in Veinte años de filología griega, 1984–2004, ed. Francisco R. Adrados et al., Manuales y anejos de «Emerita», XLIX (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2008), 620. It seems that this term was previously used by Jan N. Bremmer, Greek Religion, GREECE & ROME. New Surveys in the Classics, vol. 24 (Cambridge: University Press, 1994), 86; Christopoulos, “The Spell of Orpheus,” 205, 215. 6 Cf. William K.Ch. Guthrie, “Orfeusz i religia starożytnych Greków,” trans. Marcin Rychter and Mikołaj Wiśniewski, Kronos 4 (2011): 81; Jon Mikalson, “Greece,” in Ancient Religions, ed. Sarah Iles Johnston (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2007), 210. 7 Cf. Elias Bikerman, “The Orphic Blessing,” Journal of the Warburg Institute 2, 4 (1939): 369. 8 George E. Mylonas, Eleusis and the Eleusinian Mysteries (Elefsina: Cyceon Tales, 2010), 266–7; Herrero de Jáuregui, Orphism and Christianity in Late Antiquity, 21; ed. John Warden, Orpheus: Metamorphosis of a Myth (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1982). 9 A reference to the rich source literature about the Orpheus myth can be found: Alberto Bernabé, “Orfeo, una «biografía» compleja,” in Orfeo y la tradición órfica: un reencuentro, ed. Albert Bernabé and Francesc Casadesús, vol. I (Madrid: Akal, 2008), 15, 3 and 15–32. 10 Cf. Jennifer Larson, Greek Nymphs: Myth, Cult, Lore, 1 edition (Oxford University Press, 2001), 169; Guthrie, “Orfeusz i religia starożytnych Greków,” 80–81. 11 Cf. Francisco Molina Moreno, “La música de Orfeo,” in Orfeo y la tradición órfica: un reencuentro, 149–50; Marcos Martínez, “Música y palabra en Orfeo (sobre OF 960),” in Tracing Orpheus: Studies of Orphic Fragments: In Honour of Alberto Bernabé, ed. Miguel Herrero de Jáuregui and Alberto Bernabé Pajares (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011), 317–22.

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns

53

the whole of their heritage, namely literature, philosophy and art. What is very interesting is that this phenomenon has lasted up to the present day.12 Apart from being artistically gifted, Orpheus was acquainted with the secret Dionysian rites,13 particularly with those associated with salvation of the soul after death, and he taught them in the form of mysteries.14 Well known is the legend of his descent to the underworld to fetch his wife Eurydike.15 Numerous mythical descriptions were widespread in the ancient world.16 At the same time, they were inspirations for many authors to create new theogonic17 and cosmological poems which have survived to our times only in small fragments.18 It was the eighth century BC when – in all probability even before Homer – there existed songs about Orpheus,19 probably in different oral traditions.20 As early as the sixth century BC,

12 Bernabé, “Orfeo, una «biografía» compleja,” 16: “Su figura sirvió de inspiración a numerosos poetas griegos y latinos, pero trascendió el marco de la Antigüedad, de forma que hallamos escenas protagonizadas por este curioso personaje en muy diversas obras pictóricas, escultóricas, poéticas, teatrales, musicales, e incluso cinematográficas, hasta nuestros días.” Cf. Helen Morales, Classical Mythology: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: University Press, 2007), 5–18. 13 Cf. Ed. Daniel Ogden, A Companion to Greek Religion (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 341. Walter Wili, “The Orphic Mysteries and the Greek Spirit,” in Papers from the Eranos Yearbooks, ed. Joseph Campbell (Princeton: University Press, 1978), 64–92; Christopoulos, “The Spell of Orpheus,” 208, 216–217; Noel Robertson, “Orphic Mysteries and Dionysiac Ritual,” in Greek Mysteries: The Archaeology of Ancient Greek Secret Cults, ed. Michael B. Cosmopoulos (London: Routledge, 2003), 222–9; Martin P. Nilsson, A History of Greek Religion (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1949), 213–223. 14 Cf. Wili, “The Orphic Mysteries and the Greek Spirit,” 64–92. 15 Cf. Ogden, A Companion to Greek Religion, 94–96; Adam Krokiewicz, Studia orfickie. Moralność Homera i etyka Hezjoda (Warszawa: Aletheia, 2000), 49. 16 Cf. Robertson, “Orphic Mysteries and Dionysiac Ritual,” 222–229. 17 Cf. Pierris, Mystery and Philosophy, 17. 18 Cf. Macías Otero, “Orfeo y el orfismo en Euripides,” 452–518. Bernabé and Casadesús, Orfeo y la tradición órfica: un reencuentro, 291–324; Bremmer, Greek Religion, 87. 19 Cf. Krokiewicz, Studia orfickie, 74. 20 Cf. Apostolos Athanassakis and Benjamin M. Wolkow, eds. and trans., The Orphic Hymns (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013), Introduction. All English translations of Orph. H. from this edition.

54

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

his followers, in turn,21 formulated their doctrine,22 according to which human destiny totally depends on the quality of one’s life on the earth.23 At the same time, a so-called βίος Ὀρφικός (Orphic lifestyle) was mentioned.24

21 Jan N. Bremmer, The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife. The 1995 Read-Tuckwell Lectures at the University of Bristol (London: Routledge, 2002), 15: “Unfortunately, the founders of this ‘sect’ remain totally invisible, since they ‘published’ only their views under the name of the mythical poet Orpheus.” 22 According to Bernabé, Orphism could not be a unified system with relation to the doctrine, especially because the Orphic corpus (dating from different periods) is not unified and distinct, cf. Alberto P. Bernabé, “The Gods in Later Orphism,” in The Gods of Ancient Greece: Identities and Transformations, ed. Jan N. Bremmer and Andrew Erskine, Edinburgh Leventis Studies 5 (Edinburgh: University Press, 2010), 422–423. However, Miguel Herrero De Jáuregui holds a different opinion, “Orphic God(s): Theogonies and Hymns as Vehicles of Monotheism,” in Monotheism between Pagans and Christians in Late Antiquity, eds. Stephen Mitchell and Peter van Nuffelen, Interdisciplinary Studies in Ancient Culture and Religion 12 (Leuven, MA: Peeters, 2010), 78: “Believers in Orphism postulate a unified religious movement which produced communities of Orphics, whose followers took Orphic poems as authoritative texts containing a fairly uniform set of doctrines.” Cf. also Bremmer, The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife, 16; Nilsson, A History of Greek Religion, 28–30. 23 Cf. Bikerman, “The Orphic Blessing,” 368. Christopoulos, “The Spell of Orpheus,” 219; Leslaw B. Lesyk, “Reminiscences of Orphic Hymns in Byzantine Liturgy,” Littera Antiqua, 8 (2014): 75. 24 Cf. Walter Burkert, Greek Religion (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985), 301; Walter Burkert, Antike Mysterien: Funktionen und Gehalt, 4th ed. (München: C.H. Beck, 2003), 49–50. Edmonds says: “Plato refers to this kind of lifelong protest as the ‘Orphic life,’ βίος Ὀρφικός. This Orphic life replicates the way of life described in the traditional tales of the golden age: ‘Men abstained from flesh on the grounds that it was impious to eat it or to stain the altars of the gods with blood. It was a kind of Orphic life, as it is called, that was led by those of our kind who were alive at that time, taking freely of all things that had no life, but abstaining from all that had life’ (Laws 782c; cp. Aristophanes’ Frogs 1032, where Orpheus is listed among the culture heroes as the one who taught men to abstain from bloodshed). The Orphic life is a rejection of the ordinary way of living governed by the customs and hierarchies of the polis society in favor of living in accordance with the ideal of the golden age, free from violence and bloodshed” (cf. Edmonds, Myths of the Underworld Journey, 44.) Cf. Macías Otero, “Orfeo y el orfismo en Euripides,” 161–221; Alberto Nodar Domínguez, “Theophrastus, Characters 16.12: Orphism or Rhetoric? (OF 654),” in Tracing Orpheus: Studies of Orphic Fragments: In Honour of Alberto Bernabé, 276; Claude Calame, “Qu’est-ce qui est orphique dans les Orphica? Une mise au point introductive,” Revue de l’histoire des religions 219, 4 (2002): 393; Christopoulos, “The Spell of Orpheus,” 219–20; Martin P.

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns

55

Litany is a literary phenomenon which — although it generally refers to Christianity — can be observed in ancient religious literature as well. Elements of a litany were implemented during collective worship, and facilitated by the presence of certain repetitive features. The purpose of this article is to answer the question to what extent litany elements are present in the Orph. H. and to describe their features.

Orphic Hymns – Characteristics, Analysis Hans Färber described hymn (Greek ὁ ὕμνος) in a quite general way as: πάντα τὰ εἰς θεούς (all issues directed to a deity).25 A certain difficulty lies in the fact that a hymn was often an ambiguous literary form in relation to how its name was used. Sometimes the term precisely described a genre (e.g. a paean or encomium hymn), and in other cases it simply meant “any poetic writing.”26 Laurent Pernot claims: A hymn—defined, in the ancient sense, as a eulogy to a god, accompanied by an invocation and an address—offers a second example of the connection between rhetoric and religion.27 The Orph. H. collection28 dates back to the Neoplatonic period (second-third century C.E.)29 and constitutes merely a compilation of genetically non-Orphic ideas.30 It consists of eighty-seven Greek poems composed in hexameters.31 The anthology has a total of 1071 lines. An attempt to compare the Orph. H. to the chronologically earlier Homeric Hymns indicates a large disparity in respect of verse forms. Whereas the Orph. H. collection ranges from six (Orph. H. 6; 20; 47;

Nilsson, “Early Orphism and Kindred Religious Movements,” The Harvard Theological Review 28, 3 (1935): 205–207. 25 Cf. Hans Färber, Die Lyrik in der Kunsttheorie der Antike (München: Neuer FilserVerlag, 1936), 29. 26 Cf. Jerzy Danielewicz, Morfologia hymnu antycznego: na materiale greckich zbiorów hymnicznych (Poznań, 1976), 3. 27 Laurent Pernot, “The Rhetoric of Religion,” Rhetorica 24, 3 (2006): 242. 28 Cf. Jennifer Larson, Greek Nymphs: Myth, Cult, Lore, 1 edition (Oxford: University Press, 2001), 268–270. 29 Cf. Gabriella Ricciardelli, Inni orfici, 3rd ed., Scrittori greci e latini (Roma-Milano: Fondazione Lorenzo Valla–Arnoldo Mondadori, 2012), XXXI: “La raccolta si colloca verosimilmente tra il II e il III secolo d.C., età in cui il dionisismo era particolarmente vivo nell’ Asia Minore occidentale e nelle isole vicine.” Cf. Wilhelm Quandt, “Bemerkungen zu den orphischen Hymnen,” Hermes 81, 1 (1953): 124. 30 Cf. Bikerman, “The Orphic Blessing,” 369. 31 Cf. Ogden, ed., A Companion to Greek Religion, 129.

56

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

48; 80; 81) to thirty-four lines (Orph. H. 10), the other might have even more than five hundred lines, as for example the Hymn to Apollon (545 lines). The explanation is stricte semantic, i.e. the Orph. H. lack “a sacred tale,” that is, ἱερὸς λόγος (hieros logos), a story about the actions of a God or deity and establishment of it’s own cult.32 It should also be emphasized that the theogony and cosmogony33 that emerge from the multiplicity of epithets in hymns also determine the very structure of the Orphic anthology,34 which begins with a general invocation to all gods whose names are listed. Then, each hymn is addressed to a particular god. Some of them are specifically Orphic (Phanes-Protogonos), whereas others belong to the Greek pantheon35 (such as Poseidon or Hipta).36 In the theory of rhetoric, there are four main acts of worship.37 These are: i. narration of the god’s deeds; ii. eulogy of his powers; iii. preaching; iv. naming and designation. The first two forms of god-talk are of discursive nature, which was widespread in the ancient rhetoric (Gorgias, Aristotle). What counts here however is any form of deliberation, that is, both parenetic and protreptic. It seems that preaching is omitted in the Orph. H due to the purpose of the hymn. As the collection is definitely directed to a god, there is no need for encouraging aspect. Naming the gods allows one to get to know them better and thus, enter into a closer relationship and maybe even influence them.38 Here, even the divine name itself has a certain value and all terms used in reference to deities, divine qualifiers, epithets, and invocations define the origins of gods, their functions and roles, as well as their power. As was concluded by Laurent Pernot: “Thus naming the gods has not 32 Cf. Albert Henrichs, “‘Hieroi Logoi’ and ‘Hierai Bibloi’: The (Un)Written Margins of the Sacred in Ancient Greece,” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 101 (2003): 207–266; Emilia Żybert, Hymny orfickie, Bibliotheca Curiosa 6 (Wrocław: Oficyna Wydawnicza “Atut”–Wrocławskie Wydawnictwo Oświatowe, 2012), 7. 33 Cf. Bremmer, The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife, 20–24. 34 Cf. Athanassakis and Wolkow, trans., The Orphic Hymns, 17, 40–42, 221. 35 Cf. Александър Фол, Orphica magica (София: Университетско издателство “Св. Кл. Охридски,” 2004), 202. 36 For more about the gods’ appearance order in the structure of Orph. H. see Żybert, Hymny orfickie, 12–17; West, The Orphic Poems, 42–45. 37 Cf. Ake Strandberg, Orphic Voice: T.S. Elliot & the Mallarmean Quest for Meaning (Uppsala: Coronet Books Inc., 2002), 113–115. 38 Cf. Herrero de Jáuregui, Orphism and Christianity in Late Antiquity, 47.

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns

57

only cultural and philosophical value, but also rhetorical value.”39 It is this act of worship that is the most extensive in Orph. H. and that shall be analyzed in detail. The structure of an ancient Greek prayer clearly shows a three-stage construction. The first part, an address or invocation (invocatio), has a characteristic form, the essence of which is reflected by vocative forms as well as numerous verbs. However, the second part of the structure of a hymn prayer includes arguments in support of the request (sanctio/argumentum). It directly precedes the last part, namely the request (praeces ipsae).40 Pernot observes that: Three-part prayer represents the implementation of a rhetorical structure, which is logical and constructed for its purpose, and which is particularly concerned with argumentation and persuasion in support of the request.41 Orph. H. 68 (to Hygeia), as an example of an interesting literary solution, begins with an invocation in voc. sg. It reads as follows: Ἱμερόεσσ’, ἐρατή, πολυθάλμιε, παμβασίλεια, κλῦθι, μάκαιρ’ Ὑγίεια, […]. [Charming queen of all, lovely and blooming, / blessed Hygeia […] hear me […]].42

While generally an invocation in the Orph. H. takes 1–2 lines, has a simple construction and the praying person addresses his words to a god through verbi praedicandi, hymn 68 is different. Its divergence from other hymns lies in the accumulation of adjectives in the first part which define the subject, which is θεά (goddess). These adjectives refer in brief to her various characteristic names and attributes and there are numerous periphrastic terms relating to the goddess. The hymn definitely has a parenetic construction. It begins and ends with a description of Hygeia’s attributes. The twelve first lines out of the total of fourteen lines describe exactly these qualities, while the parenthesis closing the hymn constitutes a call for an epiphany together with the last description of the goddess’s actions directed at humans. Only on the grounds of this single hymn, it can be said that, on the one hand, in terms of the literary aspect, adjectives are a euphemistic description of the goddess and her character, whereas on the other hand, they act as a form of praise. In the same hymn 68, we can note two emphasized and extensive elements of the acts of worship, namely narration of the god’s deeds and eulogy of her powers. 39 Pernot, “The Rhetoric of Religion,” 238. 40 Cf. Carl Ausfeld, De Graecorum precationibus quaestiones (Lipsiae: B.G. Teubnerus, 1903), 514. 41 Cf. Pernot, “The Rhetoric of Religion,” 240. 42 Cf. Athanassakis and Wolkow, The Orphic Hymns, 188.

58

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

Each hymn is addressed to a particular god. Sixteen of the eighty-seven hymns begin with a direct invocation in voc. sg. These invocations can be divided into the following types: i. individual, i.e. directly addressing a god by his or her name;43 ii. genealogical, by defining the function of a god in the theogonic genealogy;44 iii. both individual and genealogical.45 Verbs perform an essential role in an invocation (sometimes in an address). In the Orph. H. they can be divided into different semantic categories. The first group would comprise verbs referring to the subject and description of actions performed in relation to a god. These would be: “I invoke,” “I call upon,” “I summon.” Along with them, there are two more verbs which indicate rather a function of praising a god during the mysteries, namely, those associated with singing: “I shall sing,” “I sing.” The first category comprises synonymous verbs from the point of view of communication. They are supposed to expose the main topic of the hymn.46 These are two main verbs: καλέω (I invoke) and κικλήσκω (I call upon). Καλέω appears thirteen times in the hymns.47 It appears thrice in the contracted form καλῶ,48 and once as καλέσωμεν (we call).49 Additionally, a very rare verb form, ἀγκαλέω (I summon), appears once50 and the form part. praes. act. καλέων also occurs once. The forms καλέω and ἀγκαλέω, with exception of the prooimion, occur only in the verses of the first indicated hymns.51 Κικλήσκω, in turn, appears in the hymns nineteen times:52 twice in the prooimion, and twelve times in the first verse, which constitutes 63,16% of the total occurrence, and twice in the form part. praes. act. κικλήσκων.53 The use of these 43 Orph. H. 4.1; 12.1; 14.1.8; 15.1 (2x).6.10; 24.1; 26.1; 35.1; 40.1; 41.1; 43.1; 66.1; 67.1. 44 Orph. H. 13.11. Cf. Dirk Obbink, “Orphism, Cosmogony, and Genealogy (Mus. Fr. 14),” in Tracing Orpheus: Studies of Orphic Fragments: In Honour of Alberto Bernabé, 351–353. 45 Orph. H. 19.1; 84.1. 46 Cf. Danielewicz, Morfologia hymnu antycznego, 68. 47 Orph. H. P. 24, 6.1, 22.1, 33.1, 42.1, 53.1, 64.1, 71.1, 72.1, 74.1, 77.1, 79.1, 83.1. 48 Orph. H. 11.1, 50.10, 55.28. 49 Orph. H. 3.2. 50 Orph. H. 18.19. 51 Orph. H. 44.11. 52 Orph. H. P. 15 and 40, 6.8, 20.1, 24.9, 25.1, 30.1, 37.7, 39.1, 44.1, 46.1, 47.1, 49.1, 52.1, 58.1, 70.11, 73.1, 75.3, 86.1. 53 Orph. H. 5.6, 7.2.

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns

59

verb forms in 1. sg. is certainly predominant, and is supposed to emphasize the request submitted to a god.54 The verbs καλέω and κικλήσκω valency require a grammatical combination. It is usually done with the pronoun (σε, ὑμᾶς — you for 1. sg. and pl.), noun (δία — god, βασιλήα — king), adjective (μάκαρ — blessed, πολυώνυμε — manynamed, μαινόλα — frenzied) or god’s name55 (Ἑκάτην — Hekate,56 Περικιόνιον — Perikionios, Δαίμονα — Daimon). Another verb which is a part of a hymn invocation is the synonymous term κλῄζω (I invoke, I summon, I call upon) appearing in the hymns three times.57 Furthermore, there are also: μέλπω (I sing),58 ἐκπροκαλοῦμαι (I call forth),59 τιθέμεσθα (we lay),60 ἀείσομαι (I shall sing).61 The verb λίτομαί [σε] (I bessech [you]),62 which has a strong emotional meaning, is really worth mentioning. Each time the verb is used, the request focuses on the god’s goodwill: νῦν σέ, θεά, λίτομαι […] αἰεὶ μύσταισιν ὑπάρχειν63 [now I entreat you, goddess, […] I call upon you to be always gentle-minded toward the initiates]

54 Cf. Lesyk, “Reminiscences of Orphic Hymns in Byzantine Liturgy,” 84. 55 Cf. Anne-France Morand, “Etymologies of divine names in Orphic Texts,” in Orfeo y el Orfismo. Nuevas perspectivas, eds. Francesc Casadesús Bordoy, Alberto Bernabé, and Marco Antonio Santamaría (Alicante: Biblioteca Virtual Miguel de Cervantes, 2010), 157–176. 56 Cf. Sarah Iles Johnston, “Hecate, Leto’s Daughter, in OF 317,” in Tracing Orpheus: Studies of Orphic Fragments: In Honour of Alberto Bernabé, 123–125; Giulio Gianelli, Culti e miti della Magna Grecia. Contributo alla storia piu antica delle colonie greche in Occidente (Firenze: Sansoni Editore, 1963), 32; Arthur Darby Nock, “Orphism or Popular Philosophy?,” Harvard Theological Review 33, 4 (1940): 301.304–7. 57 Orph. H. 1.1, 61.1, 66.10. 58 Orph. H. 62.1: Ὄμμα Δίκης μέλπω πανδερκέος… (“I sing of the all-seeing eye…”). 59 Orph. H. 7.1: Ἄστερων οὐρανίων ἱερὸν σέλας ἐκπροκαλοῦμαι… (“I call forth the sacred light of the heavenly Stars…”). 60 Orph. H. 15.2: Ζεῦ πολύτιμε, μέγας, Ζεῦ ἄφθιτε, τήνδε τοι ἡμεῖς μαρτυρίαν τιθέμεσθα λυτήριον ἠδὲ πρόσευξιν (“Much-honored Zeus, great god, indestructible Zeus, we lay before you in prayer redeeming testimony”). 61 Orph. H. 3.1: Νύκτα θεῶν γενέτειραν ἀείσομαι ἠδὲ καὶ ἀνδρῶν (“I shall sing of Night, mother of gods and men”). 62 Orph. H. 5.6, 10.33, 41.9, 71.10, 72.9, 85.9, 86.16. 63 Orph. H. 44.10–11.

60

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk ἀλλὰ, μάκαρ, λίτομαί σε κεκραμένον ἡδὺν ἱκάνειν σώζοντ’ εὐμενέως μύστας θείοισιν ἐπ’ ἔργοις64 [But, O blessed one, I beseech you to come sweet-tempered / to be kindly savior of the initiates, that they may serve the gods] ἀλλὰ, μάκαρ, λίτομαί σε θεῶν μηνύματα φράζειν, ῶς ἄν ἀεὶ γνώμαις ὸρθαῖς κατὰ πάντα πελάζῃς μηδὲν ἐπ’ ἀλλακότοισι κακῶν σημεῖα προφαῖνων65 [But, O blessed one, I beg you, show me the behests of the gods, / in all things bring me close to the path that is straight, / do not through weird apparitions show me evil signs]

Directing his prayer to a god, a μύστης (mystēs) often tries to appeal to him (argumentatio). The role of epithets is to emphasize individual traits of a god, as well as to separate them by linguistic unambiguity. Jerzy Danielewicz claims that the accumulation of these grammatical forms is the major distinguishing feature of hymn style.66 As Miguel Herrero de Jáuregui emphasizes, the epithets in the Orph. H. were strictly connected with the aspects of hierarchization and syncretism which played an essential part in the Greek pantheon.67 Emilia Żybert in turn draws attention to their accumulation. In her opinion, there is a similarity to magic hymns in which listing as many epithets as possible allowed one to win the favour of a god, and was even possibly in fulfilment of the mystēs’s duties.68 From a grammatical point of view, noun and adjective epithets definitely predominate in the Orph. H. Neither is their choice accidental nor is it merely a chaotic accumulation, but reflects a long literary tradition dating back as far as Homer and Hesiod. The epithets in our hymns can be divided into particular types, taking into consideration certain thematic groups. The most common are theogonic epithets which are additionally described by concepts originating from genealogy.69 Thus, gods are named as τέκνα (child),70 θύγατερ (daughter),71 υἱέ (son),72 ἔκγονε (child,

64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72

Orph. H. 85.9–10. Orph. H. 86.16–18. Cf. Danielewicz, Morfologia hymnu antycznego, 68. Cf. Herrero De Jáuregui, “Orphic God(s): Theogonies and Hymns as Vehicles of Monotheism,” 77. Cf. Żybert, Hymny orfickie, 9. Cf. Obbink, “Orphism, Cosmogony, and Genealogy (Mus. Fr. 14),” 351–353. Orph. H. P. 21; 4.8; 7.3; 23.3; 29.7; 30.7; 35.3; 37.1; 40.13; 40.16; 59.1; 77.2. Orph. H. 14.1; 29.1; 43.1; 51.1; 60.2; 70.2; 84.1. Orph. H. 7.2; 7.12; 11.22; 24.11; 28.1; 41.10; 42.3; 44.9; 48.1; 50.3; 50.8; 52.6; 53.10; 57.8; 66.10; 71.12; 75.3; 77.10; 79.12.

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns

61

whether son or daughter),73 γένος (kin),74 γένεθλον (offspring),75 κούρη (Kouret),76 θάλος (scion, child),77 σπέρμα (seed),78 βλάστημα (offspring, offshoot).79 Orph. H. 37 may serve as an example: Τιτῆνες, Γαίης τε καὶ Οὐρανοῦ ἀγλαὰ τέκνα, ἡμετέρων πρόγονοι πατέρων, γαίης ὑπένερθεν οἴκοις ταρταρίοισι μυχῷ χθονὸς ἐνναίοντες.80 [Titans, glorious children of Sky and Earth, / ancestors of our fathers, you dwell down below / in Tartarean homes, in the bowels of the earth.]

Another type of epithet is those which include the indications of offspring. In this way there appear such phrases as: θύγατερ Πρωτογόνοιο (daughter of Protogonos),81 μῆτερ Ζηνός (mother of Zeus),82 μὴτηρ Νεφέων ἐρεβεννῶν (mother of dark clouds),83 Μαιάδος υἱέ (son of Maia).84 The above analysis allows one to conclude that the elements of theogony in the epithets are extremely important in the structure of the Orph. H. On the one hand, they allow us to explore the Orphic issues,85 to get to know the history and genealogy of gods especially when there is no ἱερὸς λόγος (hieros logos);86 on the other hand, it is possible to admire the 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85

86

Orph. H. 32.1. Orph. H. 27.7; 55.15; 59.6; 78.7. Orph. H. 4.2; 14.8; 15.7; 16.4; 57.3; 58.6. Orph. H. P.20; P. 38; 1.9; 9.10; 9.12; 10.12; 14.3; 26.4; 29.7; 31.1; 36.1; 38.1; 38.7; 38.20; 39.3; 44.1; 44.10; 49.1; 56.4; 57.4; 70.3; 79.2; 79.12. Orph. H. 29.5; 36.11; 50.3; 56.4; 56.8; 67.6. Orph. H. 6.4, 42.2, 50.2. Orph. H. 5.5, 12.9, 13.6, 79.2. Orph. H. 37.1–3. Orph. H. 14.1. Orph. H. 14.4. Orph. H. 22.7. Orph. H. 28.1. Herrero De Jáuregui, “Orphic God(s): Theogonies and Hymns as Vehicles of Monotheism,” 90: “[…] invocations consisting in strings of epithets which describe the attributes of the god in question and address him by all the names he might want to be called, in accordance with the principle of polyonymia. That a god could have many names and deserve different epithets was a common principle of Greek religion from at least the time of Homer.” André-Jean Festugière in his paper from 1949 about cult of the Egyptian goddess Isis, showed a process of development in paganism of the long mythological narration, which characterized epic hymns (like Homeric Hymns), to the form of abstract description of the power of god, which manifests through his actions and his good deeds, cf.

62

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

beauty of the Orphic imagery,87 its richness and thematic depth. The theogonic epithets appear in more than half of the hymns, and sometimes even several times in one poem (for example Orph. H. 26 — to Earth). Another type of epithet which semantically constitutes the Orph. H. may be defined as “potestatic” as they refer to the description of a god’s power and the extent of his cult. Often these are collective adjectives. Example are as follows: ἀγλαόφημοι (renowned),88 μεγαλώνυμος (sublime, of great renown),89 πολύλλιστος-πολύλλιτος (many pray to you, to whom many offer their prayer),90 πολύυμνος (praised in many hymns),91 πολυτίμητος-πολύτιμος (much-honoured),92 ἀγλαότιμος (illustrious).93 In many cases it is easy to distinguish prefixes here: πᾶς, πᾶσα, πᾶν (all) oraz πολύς, πολλή, πολύ (many, much).94 The power of gods is also expressed by collective adjectives and nouns consisting of a prefix: παν(υ)-, παντο-. Heracles is described as παντοδυνάστης (allconquering) in Orph. H. 12.4, and in 45.2, Earth is παντολέτειρα (destroyer of all)

87

88 89

90 91 92 93 94

André-Jean Festugière, “A propos des arétalogies d’Isis,” Harvard Theological Review 42 (1949): 220–228. Cf. Pernot, “The Rhetoric of Religion,” 238: “The difficulty of using human language to speak about a subject that is beyond the human was highlighted from the first Greek poets and philosophers onwards. It appears, for example, in an important sentence in Plato’s Timaeus (28c): ’To discover the creator and father of the universe is a difficult task. But once we have found him, to express him to everybody else will be impossible.’ This is the idea of the ineffable. To remedy the theoretical impossibility of speaking about the divine, many solutions were found. One was metaphor, which allows things to be said without saying them, and to approach that which cannot be reached in plain words. A passage of the neoPlatonic philosopher Plotinus is especially relevant, as it explains that it is impossible to talk about the Supreme Good in proper terms with exact words (Enneads 6.8.13): all that can be said about the Good can only be approximate, in the form ‘like’ or ‘in a certain way’ (hoion). Religious rhetoric, effectively, is often of the hoion type.” To the Kouretes (Orph. H. 31.4) and Muses (76.2). To: Nereus (Orph. H. 23.3), Athene (32.3), Artemis (36.2), Graces (60.1), Eumenides (70.1), Tyche (72.3), Muses (76.2). In one case only (prooimion 11) does the adjective not refer to a god but to the gifts of the goddess Aphrodite (μεγαλώνυμα δῶρα — sublime gifts), cf. Ricciardelli, Inni orfici, 492–493. To Heracles (Orph. H. 12.4), Athene (32.17), Leto (35.2), Mother Antaia (41.9). To Aphrodite (55.1). To Zeus (Orph. H. 15.1) and Persephone (29.3). To Heracles (Orph. H. 12.8). Cf. Danielewicz, Morfologia hymnu antycznego, 74; Lesyk, “Reminiscences of Orphic Hymns in Byzantine Liturgy,” 84.

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns

63

in Orph. H. 26.2. Physis is παντοκράτειρα (ever-honored),95 Pan — παντοφυής (present in all growth).96 Other combinations are: ἀτειρής (Sky — 4.1, Stars — 7.9, Fates — 59.17), μεγασθενής (Heracles — 12.1, Cronus — 13.2, Lysios — 50.5, Ares — 65.1, Hephaistos — 66.1), κοσμοκράτωρ (Sun — 8.11, Pan — 11.11), ἀδάμαστος (Sky — 4.7, Physis — 10.3, Heracles —12.2, Ares — 65.2). It is possible to distinguish a group of collective adjectives which semantically refer to the appearance of a god. And thus Selene (Orph. H. 9.1) is φαεσφόρος (light-bringing), like Pan (11.11) and Persephone (29.9). Leto (35.4) is ἰοχέαιρα (arrow-pouring). Often the terms used to describe gods contain a reference to a bull or its horns. Persephone κερόεσσα also has horns on her head (29.11); Dionysos (30.3), Apollon (34.25) and Adonis (56.6) have two horns — δίκερως (56.6), and Selene has precisely horns of a bull — ταυρόκερως (9.2); Hekate, in turn, is a bullfighter — ταυροπόλος (1.7). One more adjective is worth mentioning as it plays an important role in the Orph. H. and this is due not only to the fact that it appears as many as fourteen times but to the function it performs. It is the adjective πολυώνυμος (manynamed).97 It can be already found in the Homeric Hymns. For ancient people the concept of “many-names” was something very desirable.98 Gods were bestowed names; they were addressed using numerous terms reflecting in this way their nature and character. An interesting literary device is the use of opposites. However, these do not merely serve as an element of linguistic artistry, but possess strong philosophical connotations, i.e. they reflect the philosophy of Orphism.99 We can find the following antonymous juxtapositions in the Orph. H.:

95 E.g. Orph. H. 10.4, 29.10. 96 E.g. Orph. H. 11.10. 97 The book by Wojciech Wrotkowski of 2008 is a very interesting work. The author analyses Heraclitus preaching focusing on the presence of the almighty although manynamed god, and minor gods subordinated to Him, cf. Wojciech Wrotkowski, Jeden wieloimienny: bóg Heraklita z Efezu (Nowa Wieś – Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Rolewski – Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydział Filozofii i Socjologii, 2008); Aryeh Finkelberg, “On the Unity of Orphic and Milesian Thought,” The Harvard Theological Review 79, 4 (1986): 325. 98 Cf. Gabriella Ricciardelli, “Un dio dai molti nomi (OF 540),” in Tracing Orpheus: Studies of Orphic Fragments: In Honour of Alberto Bernabé, 249–252. 99 Cf. Nock, “Orphism or Popular Philosophy?,” 306.

64

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

i. “Ἀρχὴ τ’ ἠδὲ Πέρας” (“Beginning and End”),100 ii. “ἀρχὴ πάντων τε τελευτή” (“beginning of all and end”),101 and a similar one with a repeated adjective: “ἀρχὴ πάντων πάντων τε τελευτή” (“beginning of all and end of all”),102 iii. “χθονία ἠδ’ οὐρανία (“terrestrial, and then again terrestrial”),103 iv. “δεξιὲ μὲν γενέτωρ…, εὐώνυμε νυκτός” (“on the right you beget dawn, on the left you beget night”),104 v. “πικρὰ μὲν φαύλοισι, γλυκεῖα δὲ πειθομένοισι” (“bitter to the vulgar, sweet to those who obey you”),105 vi. “φέρβεις γὰρ ἀεὶ καὶ πάντα φονεὺεις” (“you nourish all, always, and kill them, too”).106 On the lexical plane a group of verbs stand out that indicate the purpose of the supplication made by the mystēs. The vast majority of these words occur in the imperative mood. Semantically, they ask a god to come, descend, so that his epiphany can be brought about. We can distinguish three sets of expressions here, depending on which of three verbs —ἔρχομαι (to come), βλάσκω (to go or to come) and βαίνω (to walk, to step, to depart) — is being employed: I.  forms from ἔρχομαι (to come) i. ἔλθοις,107 εὐμενέων μύσταις κεχαρημένος αἰεί108 [come, grant favor, grant grace to the initiates]

ii.  ἐλθέ (most frequent),109 ἐλθέ, μάκαιρ’, εὔφρων, εὐάστερε, φέγγεϊ τῷ σῷ λαμπομένη, σώζουσα νέους ἱκέτας σέο, κούρη110

Orph. H. P. 42. Orph. H. 4.2. Orph. H. 15.7. Orph. H. 3.8. Cf. Athanassakis and Wolkow, The Orphic Hymns, 79. Orph. H. 8.4. Orph. H. 10.16. Orph. H. 29.16. Orph. H. 33.8, 79.11, 83.8. Orph. H. 83.8. Orph. H. 9.12, 11.4, 12.14, 29.1, 34.1, 36.13, 40.18, 45.1.7, 46.1.8, 47.6, 52.13, 55.7, 56.13, 61.10, 67.8. 110 Orph. H. 9.11–12.

100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns [come, o blessed and gentle lady, lady of the stars, through your own light / shine and save, o maiden, your new initiates]

iii. ἔλθετε,111 ἔλθετ’ ἐπ’ εὐφήμους τελετὰς ὁσίας νεομύσταισ εὐκάρπους καιρῶν γενέσεις ἐπάγουσαι ἀμεμφῶς112 [Come to the new initiates and their holy and reverent rites, / bring perfect seasons for the growth of a good fruit]

iv. ἔλθοιτε,113 ἔλθοιτ’ εὐμενέοντες ἐπ’ εὐφήμοισι λόγοισι, βουκόλῳ εὐάντητοι ἀεὶ κεχαρξότι θυμῷ114 [Kindly visit the people who praise you with words, / with joyous heart be gracious to the oxherd]

v. ἔρχεο,115 ἔρχεο γηθόσυνος, κεχαρημένη εὐσεβίῃσιν116 [joyously and graciously visit our deeds of piety]

II.  forms from βλάσκω (to go or to come) i.  μόλε or μόλετε,117 πάτερ, μόλε μυστιπόλοις118 [visit, Father, the mystic initiates]

ii. μολεῖν,119 ἵλαον ἀγκαλέω σε μολεῖν κεχαρηότα μύσταις [I summon you, come with favor, come with joy to the initiates]

111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119

Orph. H. 7.12, 43.11, 51.18. Orph. H. 43.10–11. Orph. H. 31.6, 60.7, 81.5. Orph. H. 31.6–7. Orph. H. 27.14, 49.7. Orph. H. 27.14. Orph. H. 25.12 / 59.16. Orph. H. 25.10. Orph. H. 18.19.

65

66

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

iii.  μόλοις ἐοῦσα,120 ἀλλά, θεὰ δέσποινα, μόλοις ἐπαρωγὸς ἐοῦσα νηυσὶν ἐπ’ εὐσέλμοις σωτήριος εὔφρονι βουλῇ […] [O divine lady, come to the aid of well-benched ships, / do kindly save them […]]

iv. μόλοιτε,121 ἀλλὰ μόλοιτε, θεαί, μύσταις, πολυποίκιλοι, ἁγναί [Do come to the initiates, o goddesses, in your manifold holiness]

III.

forms from βαίνω (to walk, to step, to depart) i. βαῖνε,122

ἀλλά, μάκαρ, πολύμητι, πολύσπορε, βαῖνε γεγηθὼς ἐς τελετὴν ἁγίαν πολυποίκιλον ὀργιοφάνταις123 [O blessed one of the many counsels and of the many seeds, come joyfully / to the celebrants of this holy rite, of this very intricate rite]

The prayer at the end of a hymn addressed to the god contains primarily a request for hearing which is always conveyed in the imperative mood. The Orph. H. contain 33 calls to a god. In terms of terminology, it should be noted that a form derived from the verb ἀκούω (to listen, to hear) was used only in one case, namely: i. ἀκούσατε,124 ἀκούσατ’ ἐμοῦ ὁσίων λοιβῶν τε καὶ εὐχῶν [hear my prayers, receive my libations]

In other cases ἀκούσατε was replaced by grammatical derivatives from the verb κλύω (to hear, to give ear, to attend): i. κλῦθι,125 κλῦθι, μάκαιρα θεά, κυαναυγής, ἀστεροφεγγής126 [Hear, o blessed goddess, jet-black and starlit]

120 121 122 123 124 125 126

Orph. H. 74.8. Orph. H. 76.11. Orph. H. 11.23, 35.6, 53.9. Orph. H. 6.10–11. Orph. H. 59.19. Orph. H. 3.3, 4.9, 8.1, 9.1, 17.1, 29.17, 34.27, 39.9, 48.1, 63.12, 66.10, 68.2, 74.3, 78.1. Orph. H. 3.3.

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns

67

ii.  κλῦθί μοι,127 κλῦθί μοι, ὦ πολύσεμνε θεά, πολυώνυμε δαῖμον [Hear me, o revered goddess, o many-named divinity]

iii.  κλῦθί μου,128 κλῦθί μου, αἰολόμορφε […]129 [Hear me, the many-faced […]]

iv.  κλῦθί μευ,130 κλῦθί μευ, ὃς πάντων θνητῶν οἴηκα κρατύνεις […] [Hear me, you who steer the path of all mortals […]

v. κλύων,131 κλύων ἱκετηρίδα φωνὴν πέμποις εὔολβον βιότου τέλος αἰὲν ἄμεμπτον [hear my voice, / and to a good life bring a blameless end]

vi. κλῦτε,132 Κλύτε, θεαὶ πάντιμοι […] [Hear, revered goddesses […]]

vii.  κλῦτέ μοι,133 Κλῦτέ μοι, ὦ Χάριτες μεγαλώνυμοι […] [Hear me, o illustrious, o renowned Graces […]]

viii.  κλῦτέ μου,134 Κλῦτέ μου, Εὐμενίδες μεγαλώνυμοι […] [Hear me and be gracious, o renowned Eumenides […]]

Semantics indicates a subtle distinction between these two terms, ἀκούω and κλύω. The first term refers to the general idea of listening as simply giving ear to 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134

Orph. H. 2.1. Orph. H. 15.10, 36.1, 54.1. Orph. H. 15.10. Orph. H. 87.1. Orph. H. 13.9–10. Orph. H. 69.1. Orph. H. 60.1. Orph. H. 70.1.

68

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

something, while the second rather has a religious connotation. This is indicated by the literary tradition since the times of Homer.135 This second kind of listening refers to the particular prayer that is addressed to the god. It seems that it is this diversification that may explain such a great disparity in the literary use of those forms in our hymns. The grammatical terms ἀκούω and κλύω need yet another explanation, which involves who the request for hearing is addressed to. The hymns provide various possibilities. As addressee names there appear the nouns (θεά — goddess, γενέτειραν — mother, νύμφην — bride), gods’ names (Ὑπερίων — Hyperion, Σελήνη — Selene), adjectives describing a god (πολύσεμνε — foster father, μάκαιρα — blessed one, ἁγνή — pure), personal pronouns as a direct object (μοι, μου, μευ) and other forms of the direct object (λόγων — words, φωνῆς — voice, ἱκετηρίδα φωνὴν — suppliant’s voice). There is also an enigmatic phrase which occurs four times as “κλῦθί μου εὐχομένου” (“hear [you] me as I pray or hear [you] my prayer”),136 and one more time in a slightly different form: “κλῦτέ μου εὐχομένου” (“hear [they] my prayer”).137 In total, thirty-four of 1071 lines contain an invocation addressed to a god with the verbs above, which constitutes 3.18%. The most common verb phrase is κλῦθι, which is used in almost 50% of the invocative verses.

The Nature of Requests The final part of the prayer in the Orph. H. is the request (praeces ipsae).138 In his paper, Pernot recalls a series of commonplaces from the argumentation of prayer. This topic includes ascertainments which are distinctive for the Orph. H.: da quia dedisti (give because you have given) and da quia hoc dare tuum est (give because to give this is in your power).139 In addition we can distinguish the following categories of requests: for salvation (Orph. H. 2.14), rescue (17.9–10, 22.10, 66.12, 68.13, 74.9–10, 75.5, 85.10), mercy (10.33, 71.10); ii. for good advice (59.21) and fair judgments which shall protect the supplicant from destruction (86, 17–18); i.

135 Cf. Henry George Liddell et al., A Greek-English Lexicon: With a revised supplement (Oxford: Clarendon press, 1996), s.v. κλύω. 136 Orph. H. 32.15, 34.10, 49.4, 56.1. 137 Orph. H. 28.11. 138 Cf. Ausfeld, De Graecorum precationibus quaestiones, 514. 139 Cf. Pernot, “The Rhetoric of Religion,” 240.

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns

69

iii. for sanctity of life (4.9, 84.3; ζωὴν ὁσίαν); iv. for the favor of the gods (5.7, 32.16, 60.7, 71.12, 72.9–10, 84.4; κόρον ἠδ’ Ὑγίειαν ἐπ’ εὐόλβοισιν ἐν ὥραις) and happiness in life (8.21, 24.9, 29.18; ἡδὺν βίον); v. for health (32.15), good offspring (2.13; δίδου γονὰς) and the soothing of heartaches (65.6); vi. for material prosperity, e.g. good harvest, crops, rain (21.7, 26.10–11, 29.18, 36.15, 43.11, 51.19, 80.5–6, 82.5–6); vii. for a good end of life (11.24, 20.6, 25.12, 28.11, 29.20, 35.7, 67.8, 73.10; βιοτῆς τέλος ἐσθλὸν ὀπάζων); viii. for memory of ourselves (64.13; μνήμην σέο), reliable memory and grace necessary for speech (28.12; μνημοσύνῃσιν), as well as for the memory of sacred rites to be awoken (77.9–10; μνήμην ἐπέγειρε εὐιέρου τελετῆς); ix. for spiritual values (30.11, 42.11, 54.9.11–12), such as noble consideration (61.11; ἀγαθὴν διάνοιαν), glory and inspiration (76.11–12; εὔκλειαν ζῆλόν τ’ ἐρατὸν) or divine bright (78.3). The list may also be supplemented by a peculiar group of requests for averting some events or phenomena. Thus there appear requests for protection: i.

against impious, arrogant and base counsels (61.11–12; παύουσα πανεχθεῖς γνώμας οὐχ ὁσίας, πανυπέρφρονας, ἀλλοπροσάλλας) or unlawful mad desires (58.10; φαύλους δ’ ἐκτοπίους θ’ ὁρμὰς ἀπὸ τῶνδ’ ἀπόπεμπε); ii. against fear (3.14, 11.25; φόβους δ’ ἀπόπεμπε), fancy fears (39.10; ψυχῆς ἐκπλήκτου ἀνάγκας), a mad soul’s fears (71.11; ψυχῆς ἐκπέμπειν οἴστρον); iii. against diseases (36.16–17; κεφαλὰς νούσους τε καὶ ἄλγη), disasters (12.15– 16; ἐξέλασον δὲ κακὰς ἄτας κλάδον); iv. against anger (39.9; χαλεπήν) and mad savage conflict (65.6); v. against lethargic rest (77.10; λήθην). The register above suggests a prevalence of requests of a positive nature (salvation, health, peace, general appeals to hear and to come) over negative ones (averting, sending away fears, disasters, etc.).140 As Danielewicz concludes, Generally, the prayer supplications are not closely connected with the hymn addressee: the same appeals are often directed to gods of quite different characters.141

140 Cf. Burkert, Antike Mysterien, 25. 141 Danielewicz, Morfologia hymnu antycznego, 80.

70

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

Nevertheless, there are also exceptions, as e.g. the request to Boreas is about blowing the clouds (Orph. H. 80), and Earth is asked to increase fruits (Orph. H. 26). Participants in these rites were usually referred to as μύσται (mystai),142 that is, “initiated in mysteries.”143 These were persons who had already completed the rite of mystery.144 Apart from them, there were also νεομύσται (new mystai)145 and μύστὴς νεοφάντης (a newly initiated mystēs),146 as well as νέος ἱκέτης (young suppliant).147 The rite was celebrated by μυστιπόλος (rite celebrant) and ὀργιοφάντης (celebrant of this very intricate rite),148 that is, a priest initiating into orgies as secret rites.149 Emilia Żybert makes the suggestion that the singing150 of hymns was preceded by an act of initiation which each participant of the communal prayer had to go through during the first meeting.151 The point of such initiation was probably the desire for, on the one hand, prosperity, health, long life and peace, and on the other hand, material goods. This is borne out by the content of the hymns in question. They constitute a wonderful testimony to the ancient Greeks’ devotion and to their sense of taste, which is reflected by the beauty of the language and numerous epithets.152 They were to bring the god closer to the believer, thanks to which they were intended to establish a special relationship.

Conclusions The analysis of the Orph. H. allows us to draw a number of conclusions. It should be noted that elements typical of litany occur here very often, especially in the

142 Orph. H. 4,9; 8,20; 18,18; 18,19; 23,7; 24,9; 25,10; 34,27; 36,13; 41,10; 42,6; 43,10; 44,9; 44,11; 48,6; 49,2; 50,10; 52,13; 56,12; 57,12; 58,9; 59,20; 60,7; 61,10; 68,12; 71,12; 74,10; 75,5; 76,7; 76,11; 77,9; 78,13; 79,10; 79,12; 83,8; 84,3; 85,10. Cf. Raquel Martín Hernández, “El orfismo y la magia,” (Madrid: Universidad Complutense, 2007), 165; Larson, Greek Nymphs, 268. 143 Cf. Bremmer, The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife, 17–19. 144 Cf. Bruce M. Metzger, “Considerations of Methodology in the Study of the Mystery Religions and Early Christianity,” Harvard Theological Review 48, 1 (1955): 1–20. 145 Orph. H. 43.10. 146 Orph. H. 4.9. 147 Orph. H. 9.12. 148 Orph. H. 6.11. 149 Eds. Albert Bernabé and Francesc Casadesús, Orfeo y la tradición órfica: un reencuentro (Madrid: Akal, 2008), 265–359; Bremmer, Greek Religion, 38–50.84. 150 Athanassakis and Wolkow, The Orphic Hymns, 16–17. 151 Cf. Żybert, Hymny orfickie, 29. 152 Cf. Burkert, Antike Mysterien, 75.

Litanic Elements in Ancient Greece: Orphic Hymns

71

numerous epithets referring to the listed gods.153 Although in terms of the content the hymns consist of separate units, they have a number of common features which substantiate the litany nature of the whole anthology. Each poem begins with invocations addressed to a god.154 There appear apostrophes and attributes which on the one hand are of mnemotechnical nature, and on the other, allow the mystai to focus on the key aspects of a prayer. The presence of so many repetitions, apostrophes, and enumerations allows us to draw the conclusion that the Orph. H. constitute abundant evidence of the emotional energy that accompanied the mysteries. Only when the text analysis is considered together with the whole performance,155 i.e. singing, dancing, shouting, and incense, do we realize how much this literature appealed to the senses of participants of the religious cult. Later, the Christianity tried to adopt some of these elements, changing only the addressee of the prayer and replacing the stricte pagan motifs with the Christian spirit.156 Nevertheless, the Orph. H. still constitute an interesting trace of ancient devotion and religiousness.157

153 Jacek Dziubiński, “Hymny orfickie. Świadectwo, dokument i przedmiot analizy hermeneutycznej,” in Hymny orfickie: Prawda, prehistoria pojęcia (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 1993), 4; Michael Tierney, “A New Ritual of the Orphic Mysteries,” The Classical Quarterly 16, 2 (1922): 79. 154 Cf. Ricciardelli, Inni orfici, XXXI–XXXIV. 155 Cf. Vanda Papaefthymiou, “Der Altar des Asklepieions von Athen,” in Aspects of Ancient Greek Cult: Context, Ritual and Iconography, ed. George Hinge et al., (Aarhus: University Press, 2009), 203. 156 Cf. Lesyk, “Reminiscences of Orphic Hymns in Byzantine Liturgy,” 91. 157 Cf. Strandberg, Orphic Voice, 26–43.

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin

Byzantine Liturgical Litany George T. Dennis in his paper reminds us that: […] the central act of the Eucharistic liturgy is the anamnesis or remembrance of Christ by the priest doing what Christ did, that is, taking bread and wine and saying: «This is my body [… ]. This is my blood».1

During the Last Supper, Christ said to his disciples: “This do in remembrance of Me” (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24–25), but He failed to specify how it should be done.2 As a result, many local Churches appeared in the early days of Christianity, Churches which differed from one another regarding the outer forms of worship, but at the same time remained as a unity in terms of the doctrine, or in other words, the common profession of faith. Edward J. Kilmartin comments on this: The variety of forms of Christian liturgy of the several liturgical traditions are intended to express, in the manner peculiar to symbolic language, verbal and gestural, to totality of the life of faith.3

Shaped by these Churches, the individual traditions predominantly comprised liturgical customs and rituals, as a result of which in the East five liturgical traditions are currently accepted: Alexandrian, Antiochian (also called West-Syrian), Assyrian (or East Syrian), Armenian and Byzantine.4 Due to the fact that Constantinople was the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire, it was the Byzantine

1 Cf. George T. Dennis, “Popular Religious Attitudes and Practices in Byzantium,” in The Christian East, Its Institutions & Its Thought: A Critical Reflection: Papers of the International Scholary Congress for the 75th Anniversary of the Pontifical Oriental Institute, Rome, 30 May–5 June 1993, ed. Robert F. Taft, Orientalia Christiana Analecta 251 (Roma: Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 1996), 247. 2 Cf. Robert F. Taft, “The Frequency of the Celebration of the Eucharist throughout History,” in Between Memory and Hope: Readings on the Liturgical Year, ed. Maxwell E. Johnson (Collegeville, Minn: Pueblo Books, 2000), 77. 3 Edward J. Kilmartin, Christian Liturgy: Theology and Practice: Systematic Theology and Liturgy (Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1988), 91. 4 Cf. Robert F. Taft, The Byzantine Rite: A Short History (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1992), 24–25.

74

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

tradition that after some time became dominant.5 The Church of the bishop in Constantinople was the centre of all liturgical life, with symbols and ceremonies, and obviously the chant, being of great importance.6 The semantic field of the liturgical tradition in the East comprises a daily cycle of services in which the celebration of the Eucharist is the most important part (an eastern equivalent of the Mass is the expression ἡ Θεία Λειτουργία — the Divine Liturgy) although the Liturgy of the Hours should also be mentioned (ἑσπερινός — Vespers, ἀπόδειπνον — Compline, μεσονυκτικόν — Midnight Office, πρῶτη — τρίτη — ἕκτη — ἐννάτη ὥρα, meaning: First – Third — Sixth — Ninth Hour, ὄρθρος — Matins). When discussing the definition of the Divine Liturgy in Byzantium “the exercise of the life of faith,” the realization of the communion between God and the participants, as well as the union between the participants themselves must all be emphasized.7 Although the Divine Liturgy is the mystery of Christian faith and the salvation of humanity, we see that in its structure it resembles an ancient Greek drama: thus it may be said that there are three categories of actors, that is a priest celebrating the liturgy, a deacon acting as a herald and the faithful. Each of the participants is obliged to take an active part in the service which is constructed according to the principle of a sung (chanted) dialogue.8 The action of the drama is supervised by the priest, the main celebrant, who is assisted by the deacon and a choir. There is a barrier between the actors which, at the same time, indicates the “different degrees of access to the supernatural world.”9 The priest remains inside the sanctuary, and the deacon — as a messenger — instructs the worshippers throughout the development of the liturgical action. Litanies are common in all the Eastern Divine Liturgies, that is those of John Chrysostom, Basil the Great, the Presanctified Gifts and the apostle James, the Lord’s brother. The purpose of this article is to present and characterize this

5 Cf. Robert F. Taft, The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: The Origins of the Divine Office and Its Meaning for Today (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1986), 31–56; Taft, The Byzantine Rite, 16–18. 6 Cf. Ibid., especially 32 and 48. 7 Ibid., 77 and 88: “[…] liturgy makes its (Church) unique because it is the communal celebration of the life of faith.” 8 Ibid., 76: “In order to maintain this partnership intact, there must be a real, active, and continuous communication. This is a presupposition for all communities.” 9 Cf. Janusz Czerski, “Mistagogiczna Interpretacja Liturgii Bizantyjskiej,” in Liturgia w świecie widowisk, eds. Helmut J. Sobeczko and Zbigniew W. Solski (Opole: Redakcja Wydawnictw Wydziału Teologicznego Uniwersytetu Opolskiego, 2005), 77.

Byzantine Liturgical Litany

75

literary genre within the Byzantine liturgical litany as being an essential part of Eastern Christian Church services. Due to the extent of the Litany of peace a semantic analysis will be undertaken, whereas any references to other types of litanies will only be made providing they can be perceived as novum in relation to the Great Litany.

The Divine Liturgy in Byzantium The original version of the Divine Liturgy was shorter than the present version, however, over time it was continually supplemented, with new sections being added. An important event which influenced it significantly was the Council of Nicaea in 325. Paprocki notes that centres such as Alexandria, Rome and Antioch, which were officially sanctioned by the Council at that time, started to organize the Office and the Mass carefully, and as a result “fixed texts for prayers appeared and liturgical forms were unified.”10 This process led to a division of the Eastern Eucharist into three parts: the first is the Preparation,11 when the gifts necessary for the liturgy are prepared by the priest; the second is the Liturgy of the Catechumens, which is of an educational nature and constitutes a preparation of sorts for the faithful, and indeed potential believers who are discovering the faith; it consists of litanies, psalms, daily liturgical celebrations, processions, scriptural readings and homilies, although the catechumens do not participate in the third part, as they leave before the Liturgy of the Faithful, during which only the faithful say the creed.

A Liturgical Litany in the Liturgy – its Meaning and Nature A litany in the Byzantine tradition has special significance. It is a sequence of essentially fixed petitions and invocations which a deacon (if there are a number of them involved in the liturgy, then the “roles of διακονικά” are divided among specific deacons) addresses God on behalf of the faithful (not only those who are gathered at the time and are participating in the prayer). The deacon intones the melody, literally intones the church prayers. And music, according to Vaticanum II: necessariam vel integralem liturgiae sollemnis partem efficit.12 From the beginning, 10 Henryk Paprocki, Liturgie Kościoła prawosławnego (Kraków: Wydawnictwo “M,” 2003), 29. 11 Greek ἡ προσκομιδή (from προσκομίζω — carry or convey to a place, bring up), other: ἡ πρόθεσις, εως — offering. 12 “Constitutio de Sacra Liturgia: Sacrosanctum Concilium,” bk. 112, accessed March 24, 2015, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/ vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_lt.html.

76

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

in general the Church tradition implemented two versions of a community prayer meeting, centred around singing and concelebration. The first version was a celebration with a small group, in which the original pattern of Christian liturgy was familial (domestic). The second, a ceremonial form of celebration, was supervised by a bishop. Johann Wagner emphasizes that both forms existed side by side, and were sung and concelebrated by many priests. Indeed the singing, as underlined by Philipp Harnoncourt, was always the personal, communicative and vocal expression of a liturgy.13 As Kilmartin notes “the Church is a community of three partners: God, the individual, and the community.”14 The Church as a community is represented or even personalized by the deacon, who prays on behalf of the faithful to God, the direct addressee. Nevertheless, the faithful gathered during the liturgical celebration are not passive participants but are engaged in repeating the responses. The deacon says a litany standing on the ambo in front of the open “Beautiful Gates,”15 facing the front of the altar. He holds the end of the orarion16 with three fingers of his raised right hand to symbolize the wing of an angel, who summons the people to common prayer.17

13 Филип Гарнонкур, В мирі Господу помолімся. До богослов’я Літургії та християнської єдності, ed. Олег Турій, trans. Олег Конкевич (Львів: Свічадо, 2004), 51, 53. Handbuch der Musikgeschichte, ed. Guido Adler, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1930), 126: “Die kirchliche Musik des Orients war gänzlich auf Gesang ohne Instrumentalbegleitung beschränkt, da immer die Gefahr zu verhüten war, durch die Mitwirkung von Instrumenten die Menge der Gläubigen in eine Ekstase geraten zu lassen, die zu ähnlichen orgiastischen Stimmungen hätte verleiten können, wie bei heidnischen religiösen Übungen. Daher wollten einzelne, besonders strenge Eiferer den Gesang gänzlich ausgeschlossen wissen. Die offiziellen Kirchen der östlichen Christenheit wiesen dem Gesang im Gottesdienst und bei religiösen Festen einen großen Raum ein.” Cf. ibid., 128–132. 14 Kilmartin, Christian Liturgy, 75–76. 15 The central doors in the iconostasis. 16 A long, narrow strip of cloth which a deacon wears on his left shoulder (on the dalmatic). 17 It is also interesting that the deacon celebrates the Liturgy using words and gestures cf. Witold Sadowski, Litania i poezja. Na materiale literatury polskiej od XI do XXI wieku [Litany and Poetry. On the Body of Material of Polish Literature from the Eleventh to the Twenty-First Century] (Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2011), 33.

Byzantine Liturgical Litany

77

The word litany, a noun, comes from a Greek word, ἡ λιτή.18 Another term used in the same context is ἐκτενῶς, a derivative of the Greek verb, ἐκτείνω.19 In the texts of the New Testament this meaning of the term is only found in the Acts of the Apostles (12:5), where the community continuously pray to God for Peter (“Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him”20). Ektene is a separate type of common prayer which differs from the others, both in form and specific tone.21 This means that each of the liturgical traditions of Byzantium (those in Greece, Serbia, Ukraine, and Moscow) have different and varied melodies in this part of the Liturgy. Its form may be recognized in Divine Liturgy of the Copts, Armenians, Chaldeans, Ethiopians, and Syrians, as well as in the Latin litanies. Anton Baumstark (1872–1948) in his work Die Messe im Morgenland claimed that ektenes originate in Asia Minor and West-Syria and additionally were rooted in pagan cults.22 There are also traces of an Eastern litany in ancient Christian literature. Clement of Rome lists a number of petitions for a variety of purposes in his letter to the community of Corinth, as seen in the prayers below: τὸν ἀριθμὸν τὸν κατηριθμημένον τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν αὐτοῦ ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ διαφυλάξῃ ἄθραυστον [(the Creator) may guard intact unto the end the number that hath been numbered of His elect throughout the whole world]

and: βοηθὸν γενέσθαι καὶ ἀντιλήπτορα ἡμῶν· τοὺς ἐν θλίψει ἡμῶν σῶσον, τοὺς πεπτωκότας ἔγειρον, τοῖς δεομένοις ἐπιφάνηθι, τοὺς ἀσθενεῖς ἴασαι, τοὺς πλανωμένους τοῦ λαοῦ σου ἐπίστρεψον· χόρτασον τοὺς πεινῶντας, λύτρωσαι τοὺς δεσμίους ἡμῶν, ἐξανάστησον τοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας, παρακάλεσον τοὺς ὀλιγοψυχοῦντας [ […] to be our help and succor. Save those who are in tribulation; have mercy on the lowly; lift up the fallen; show Thyself unto the needy; heal the ungodly; convert the

18 ἡ λιτή (also ἡ λιτανεία) — prayer, entreaty; cf. John F. Baldovin, The Urban Character of Christian Worship: The Origins, Development, and Meaning of Stational Liturgy (Roma: Pont. Inst. Studiorum Orientalium, 1987), 206–209. 19 Context: stretch, prolong, lengthen; Henry George Liddell et al., A Greek-English Lexicon: With a Revised Supplement (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), s.v. ἐκτείνω. 20 ὁ μὲν οὖν Πέτρος ἐτηρεῖτο ἐν τῂ φυλακῇ· προσευχὴ δὲ ἦν  ἐ κ τ ε ν ῶ ς  γινομένη ὑπὸ τῆς ἐκκλησίας πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν περὶ αὺτού – author’s emphasis. 21 Further comments on litany as a poetic genre, cf. Sadowski, Litania i poezja, 10. 22 Anton Baumstark, Die Messe im Morgenland (Kempten: Josef Kösel, 1906), 14.

78

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk wanderers of Thy people; feed the hungry; release the prisoners; raise up the weak; comfort the fainthearted]23

However, as the form of this prayer differs somewhat from a standard litany, it might also be a part of the Eucharistic Prayer. Similar references can be also found in Justin and Theologian Hippolytus, and clear evidence of the use of such prayers are seen in the writings of Basil the Great, John Chrysostom, and in Egeria’s Itinerarium from the fourth century. Egeria, a pilgrim from the Iberian Peninsula, provides descriptions of the forms of worship in Jerusalem, mentioning a litany which was recited by a deacon, during which the gathered responded with a brief sentence: “Κύριε ἐλέησον” (“Lord, have mercy”). The earliest evidence of litanic texts and formulae are in Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum, as well as in a similar liturgical document entitled Testamentum Domini nostri Jesu Christi from approximately the same period. The Apostolic Constitutions, a lengthy church order written in Greek in Syria, describes in Book VIII the daily synaxes, together with litanies for the various categories of the faithful (ἐνεργοῦμενοι, φωτιζόμενοι) and penitents.24 “At the end of the litany the bishop says the collect, praying in a similar manner for a peaceful evening and night, without sin, and for eternal life.” This is followed by a deacon’s invocation “Κλἰνατε τῇ χειροθεσίᾳ” (“Bow down for the imposition of hands”), which ends with the bishop’s Prayer of Inclination or his final blessing over the faithful who bow their heads at this point. At this moment the deacon dismisses the congregation “Προέλθετε ἑν εἰρήνῃ” (“Depart in peace”).25 Michael Kunzler highlights that the papal document Deprecatio Gelasii from the fifth century also contains a clear example of litany, the form of which closely resembles the contemporary layout of the petitions borrowed from the Byzantine tradition.26 This text contains eighteen invocations, although for six centuries they were shortened to Κύριε (Lord), which was uttered only by the congregation. Over time, this phrase was supplemented with ἐλέησον, which is a second person singular form of imperativus aoristi activi from the verb ἐλεέω, that can be rendered as “to have pity, mercy on, to show mercy.” The liturgy of Constantinople seems to be a synthesis of a variety of components rather than an original and innovative work. Due to this, liturgical texts only

23 1 Clem 59. 2,4; 60. 1–4; 61. 3. 24 ConsAp VIII, 37, 4–7. 25 Cf. Taft, The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 46–47. 26 Cf. Міхаель Кунцлер, Літургія Церкви, trans. Монахиня Софія, (Львів: Свічадо, 2001), 208.

Byzantine Liturgical Litany

79

explicitly mention litany in the eleventh century which is surprisingly late. This can be explained by the fact that older manuscripts (before the eleventh century) merely contained lists of prayers said by a presbyter, or a priest’s ordo, rather than those intended for a deacon. It was not until the twelfth century that ektenias were included in liturgical books, thanks to a broad reform that combined texts with prayers and functions from both the diakonikon and the liturgikon.27 A textual and formal analysis of the Divine Liturgy allows eight types of liturgical litanies from the Byzantine tradition to be determined. In most Eastern Daily Offices (Vespers and Matins), the Divine Liturgy and the celebration of the sacraments commence with the Great Litany, also known as ἡ συναπτὴ μεγάλη. For a considerable period of time this proceeded the Trisagion Hymn, and hence was often referred to as the Litany of the Trisagion.28 The Little Litany (ἡ αἴτησις29 or ἡ συναπτὴ μικρή) is a shortened version of the former, consisting of the last three invocations of the Great Litany which contain the most important thematic components of any prayer, namely peace and mercy. A further litany is the Litany of Fervent Supplication which expresses the needs of the whole community, with the congregation repeating Κύριε ἐλέησον (“Lord, have mercy”) three times after each supplication. The Litany of the Catechumens is also very important, and is followed by two further Litanies of the Faithful. The Litany of the Petitions starts with the deacon’s invocation “Πληρώσωμεν τὴν δέησιν ἡμῶν τῷ Κυρίῳ” (“Let us complete our prayer to the Lord”) and is followed by four responses said by the faithful Κύριε ἐλέησον (“Lord, have mercy”) and Παράσχου Κύριε (“Grant this, O Lord”). The litany continues after the liturgical anaphora30 “Πάντων τῶν ἁγίων μνημονεύσαντες…” (“Having remembered all the saints…”), with four invocations “Κύριε ἐλέησον” (“Lord, have mercy”) and “Παράσχου Κύριε” (“Grant this,

27 A Byzantine equivalent of the Latin Missal. 28 Cf. Paprocki, Liturgie Kościoła prawosławnego, 39. The Trisagion Hymn — this is a liturgical laud addressed to the Holy Trinity: “Holy God, Holy and Mighty, Holy and Immortal One, have mercy on us.” In the Byzantine tradition this follows the so-called “small entrance” — a procession with the Evangeliarium in front of the “Beautiful Gates” before the reading of the Apostles’ letters. 29 Cf. ἡ αἴτησις, εως — request, demand. 30 In the Byzantine Rite the anaphora is the most solemn and salient part of the Liturgy in which the offerings of bread and wine are consecrated as the body and blood of Christ. Cf. Enzo Lodi, “The Oriental Anaphoras,” in Handbook for Liturgical Studies: The Eucharist, ed. Anscar J. Chupungco (Collegeville, Minn: Liturgical Press, 1999), 77–101.

80

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

o Lord”). The final two litanies are the Litany of Thanksgiving (after Holy Communion) and the Litany for the deceased which is used in funeral celebrations.

Textual Analysis of the Byzantine Liturgical Litany The initial invocation made by the priest in the Divine Liturgy is: Εὐλογημένη ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ Ἁγίου Πνεύματος, νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων· [Blessed is the kingdom of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and forever and to the ages of ages.]

to which the congregation respond “Amen.” This is then followed by the Great Litany (in Greek ἡ συναπτὴ μεγάλη — great concatenation, uniting, binding)31, but also defined in Slavic texts as ектнїя мирная (Greek ἡ εἰρηνικά, the Litany of Peace), because it begins with a petition for peace. The theological aspect of this part is demonstrated by the statement that God will not hear our prayers if we fail to live in peace ourselves, so it is a prayer by the whole Church for all men regardless of where they live. According to Eastern theology, this initial invocation suggests, and at the same time shows, what a Christian prayer should be like, in that it should be accompanied by purity and an innocence of the heart. The Great Litany (of Peace) encompasses twelve short petitions that have a characteristic form. The first invocation is as follows: Ἐν εἰρήνῃ τοῦ Κυρίου δεηθῶμεν· [In peace, let us pray to the Lord.]

The Byzantine liturgical litany manifests no narrative in terms of subject matter but merely constitutes a certain fixed scheme of invocations. It involves all the supplications for all the needs of the Church, the world and the community, as well as individuals. In this context we can also speak of a certain plan of action, or order of events, which are manifested in the transition from more general issues to specific details, since the content-related scope of the prayer narrows. Each of the petitions raised by the deacon constitutes a closed unity, a structure in itself.

31 “Εὐχὴ συναπτή — ‘continuous prayer,’ a not unnatural designation for a litany in which petitions are joined together (συνάπτονται), and follow one another in uninterrupted sequence […].” Cf. Anselm Strittmatter, “Notes on the Byzantine Synapte,” Traditio 10 (1954): 51.

Byzantine Liturgical Litany

81

The subsequent petitions explicitly refer to peace: Ὑπὲρ τῆς ἄνωθεν εἰρήνης… [For the peace from on high […]]

With this example being more descriptive: Ὑπὲρ τῆς εἰρήνης τοῦ σύμπαντος κόσμου, εὐσταθείας τῶν ἁγίων τοῦ Θεοῦ Ἐκκλησιῶν καὶ τῆς τῶν πάντων ἑνώσεως… [For peace in the whole world, for the well-being of the holy Churches of God and for the union of all […]]

The fourth petition commences a series of petitions relating to human existence in the world, as well as to all the local churches and all the faithful, even those who are nameless or absent. Nevertheless, it is still liturgical, and is cantered around Christ’s peace. An entreaty for a good harvest and good weather follows, as the liturgy remembers that man lives in the world and that his existence depends to a great extent on environmental conditions. The Great Litany finishes with an invocation for the Lord’s mercy, yet the final appeal to believers is to address Mary. The theology behind this part of the liturgy refers to the spiritual state of those who are praying. The point is that man is not spiritually immaculate and lacks a heavenly life, which is why the deacon summons the congregation to petition for the intercession of those who are able to pray more successfully than themselves. In this way a summons is seen “ἑαυτοὺς καὶ ἀλλήλους […] Χριστῷ τῷ Θεῷ παραθώμεθα” (“Let us commend ourselves and one another […] to Christ, our God”), together with the invocation “Σοὶ Κύριε” (“To thee, o Lord”). The Great Litany is concluded with the Trinitarian doxology intoned by the priest to God “δόξα, τιμή, προσκύνησις” (“glory, honour, worship”), to which the people respond “Amen.”

Litany Formulae in the Liturgical Litany The semantic analysis of a litany allows a range of verb forms to be distinguished: ἀντιλαμβάνω (help, take part with, assist), σῴζω (save, keep alive, rescue, preserve), ἐλεέω (have pity on, show mercy to), διαφυλάσσω (watch closely, guard carefully), ἐπακούω (hear, give an ear to, listen), ἐπιβλέπω (look upon, look attentively, look closely at, observe), ποιέω (make), προσδέω (bind on or to, attach), προσφέρω (bring to or upon, apply to, add, present, offer), ἱκανόω (make sufficient, qualify), καθαρίζω (cleanse, make pure, make acceptable to God), δήω (find, meet with), δίδωμι (give, grant, allow, bring), χαρίζω (give graciously or cheerfully),

82

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

προσάγω (bring to or upon, put to, add), καταξιόω (deem worthy, hold in honour), ἐπισκηνόω (quartered in), ἀντικαταπέμπω (send down), ὀρθοτομέω (cut in a straight line, teach correctly), φρουρέω (watch, guard, observe). The compound prefixes προς- and ἐπι- are frequently observed, which emphasize, on the one hand, direction “towards a man,” but on the other hand, “affecting” a man. However, in relation to those praying, there are forms with either an indicative or conditional mood in 1. pl.: αἰτησώμεθα (we ask, we beg), δεηθῶμεν and δεώμεθα (we remain in need of, we want)32, παρακαλοῦμέν σε (we call You), εἴπωμεν (we say, affirm, assert), ἱκετεύομεν (we supplicate, beseech), ἀναπέμπωμεν (we send up), εὐχαριστήσωμεν and εὐχαριστοῦμεν (we are thankful, we return thanks), προσπίπτομεν (we come in, fall down before, supplicate) as well as παρακατατιθέμεθα (we deposit our own property with another, entrust it to their keeping, give it to them in trust). The meaning is without doubt both invocative and supplicatory, although the former predominates. The terminological analysis allows a certain group of expressions with strong biblical roots to be highlighted and it was in this context that these expressions were used in the text of the liturgy. The word σῴζω (to save from death, keep alive, preserve) seems to be central. In the Septuagint this word is a translation of the Hebrew ‫( ישע‬conjug. hif`il), as well as ‫( םלת‬conjug. nif`al), and ‫( נצל‬conjug. nif`al).33 The semantic range of σῴζω includes the notion of being saved from danger, harm or suffering.34 In classical Greek literature this term has a long history, as it can be found in the writing of Homer,35 Alcaeus of Mitylene,36 Plato,37 Lysias,38 and Theognis of Megara.39 It appears eleven times in the New Testament (most frequently in Luke — three examples) and refers explicitly to salvation from spiritual ailments or death (Matthew 9:21, Romans 5:9, Ephesians 2:8). While in the biblical texts there is often a combination of the verb σῴζω with the prepositions ἐκ (e.g. John 12:37; Jude 5) and ἀπό (Matthew 1:21;

32 Cf. Czerski, “Mistagogiczna interpretacja Liturgii Bizantyjskiej,” 112. 33 Cf. George Abbott-Smith, Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, 6th edition (Edinburgh: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2000), 436. 34 Cf. Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, Second Edition, ed. Frederick William Danker, and F. Wilbur Gingrich (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), 195. 35 Od. 9.430; 22.358; Il. 9.78; 21.238; 21.611. 36 PLG 73. 37 Tht. 176d. 38 Fragm. 16.16. 39 Elegiacus 68.235.

Byzantine Liturgical Litany

83

Acts of the Apostles 2:40),40 in the text of the Liturgy this verb is followed by dativus instrumentalis: σῶσον… ἡµᾶς ὁ Θεὸς  τ ῇ  σ ῇ  χ ά ρ ι τ ι  (“Save … us, o God,  b y  Y o u r  g r a c e”). A substantival derivative ὁ σωτήρ (Saviour) comes from this verb, which in the New Testament refers to Jesus of Nazareth in seventy-five instances. Historically, this term can be found in Herodotus (τῆς Ἐλλάδος: saviour of Greece) and Euripides (σωτὴρ νόσου, κακῶν: a preserver from disease, ills). Pindar uses this term as an epithet for the protection of the gods, especially of Ζεύς Σωτήρ, and a proverb was also quoted by Plato “τὸ τρίτον τῷ σωτῆρι,” the third (i.e. lucky) time. In the Byzantine liturgy the term ὁ σωτήρ is found in the first antiphon, in which the mediation of the Mother of God is invoked “ταῖς πρεσβείαις τῆς Θεοτόκου” (“Through the intercessions of Theotokos”) we beg “Σῶτερ, σῶσον ἡµᾶς” (“Saviour, save us”). An important and frequently used verb in the text of the Liturgy is ἐλεέω (to have pity on, to show mercy to; Hebr. ‫ תנן‬and µjr), with a later form being ἐλεάω. In the texts of the New Testament this verb appears twenty-nine times (most frequently in Matthew (eight times), but also in Paul’s texts, for example, in Romans 9:16 and Jude 23). The use of this verb, as well as the frequently encountered noun form ὁ ἔλεος explicitly indicates God. While in the Old Testament this term is evidently attributed to Him (especially when referring to a gracious action that demonstrates God’s compassion, mercy, love, kindness, or faithfulness),41 in the New Testament an emphasis is placed on human relationships, in that man should follow the example of God and show mercy and compassion to others. Indeed man should act and be like God. The Byzantine liturgy seems to reminder of this. If the essence of God is mercy, compassion and more broadly goodness, then it is the liturgy that has to transform man. Thus, numerous petitions to the merciful God ask Him to grant man His mercy and indeed make man merciful in turn. The verb ἱκανόω (make sufficient, qualify, authorize) can be found twice in Paul (2 Corinthians 3:6 and Colossians 1:12). In both cases God is shown as the one that can make man worthy to receive His grace and be included among the Saints. As part of this semantic range, the verb ἱκανόω also appears in the liturgy. In his silent prayers, the priest appeals to God with the following words:

40 Cf. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, ed. Joseph H. Thayer (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1977), s.v. σῴζω. 41 Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, ed. Timothy Friberg, Barbara Friberg, and Neva F. Miller (Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Academic, 2000), s.v. ἔλεος.

84

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk ἱκάνωσον ἡμᾶς προσενεγκεῖν σοι δῶρα τε καὶ θυσίας πνευματικὰς [enable us to bring before You gifts and spiritual sacrifices]

and: ἱκάνωσόν µε τῇ δυνάµει τοῦ Ἁγίου Σου Πνεύµατος, ἐνδεδυµένον τὴν τῆς Ἱερατείας χάριν, παραστῆναι τῇ ἁγίᾳ Σου ταύτῃ τραπέζῃ καὶ ἱερουργῆσαι τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἄχραντόν Σου Σῶµα καὶ τὸ τίµιον Αἷµα∙ [enable me by the power of Your Holy Spirit so that, vested with the grace of priesthood, I may stand before Your holy Table and celebrate the mystery of Your holy and pure Body and Your precious Blood.]

Thus, initially the priest prays to God in the hope that He will accept the offering made to Him by the assembled crowd, yet in the second instance, the prayer is strictly apologetic, so that God will not reject the offering, even though it is made by a sinful priest. A term synonymous to ἱκανόω is the verb καταξιόω (deem worthy, hold in honour),42 which can be found in the New Testament three times, particularly in the writing of Luke (Luke 20:35; Acts of the Apostles 5:41; 2 Thessalonians 1:5) The prefix κατα- clearly indicates the idea of rising, or ascending to God. Of interest are the following prayers as they demonstrate the use of this verb: καταξίωσον ἡμᾶς εὑρεῖν χάριν ἐνώπιόν σου, τοῦ γενέσθαι σοι εὐπρόσδεκτον τὴν θυσίαν ἡμῶν, καὶ ἐπισκηνῶσαι τὸ Πνεῦμα τῆς  χάριτός σου τὸ ἀγαθόν ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα καὶ ἐπὶ πάντα ταὸν λαόν σου [make us worthy to find grace in Your presence so that our sacrifice may be pleasing to You and that Your good and gracious Spirit may abide with us, with the gifts here presented, and with all Your people]

and: καταξίωσον ἡμᾶς μεταλαβεῖν τῶν ἐπουρανίων σου καὶ φρικτῶν μυστηρίων ταύτης τῆς ἱερᾶς καὶ πνευματικῆς τραπέζης∙ [make us worthy to partake of Your heavenly and awesome Mysteries from this holy and spiritual Table.]

This aspect of God’s mercy, compassion and kindness to man is best revealed in the Gospel according to Luke, who was a doctor by profession, and who presents Jesus 42 Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, ed. Johannes Louw and Eugene A. Nida (New York, NY, USA: American Bible Society, 1988), s.v. καταξιόω; Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, eds. Johan Lust, Erik Eynikel, and Katrin Hauspie, (Stuttgart: Hendrickson Pub., 2003), para. 65.18.

Byzantine Liturgical Litany

85

Christ as a doctor healing human ailments, but above all, hearts and souls. This is also manifested in the language, as it is Luke who most frequently (seven times in the Gospel and three times in the Acts of the Apostles) uses the term καθαρίζω (cleanse, make pure, make acceptable to God), a term which is also often found in the prayers of the Byzantine liturgy. In the Cherubic Hymn, the priest asks God in an apologetic prayer “καθάρισόν µου τὴν ψυχὴν καὶ τὴν καρδίαν ἀπὸ συνειδήσεως πονηρᾶς” (“cleanse my soul and heart from evil consciousness”), which is in a way a continuation of the petitions to God to accept the offerings made by a sinful priest. This is why several invocations for cleansing: “καθαρίσῃς ἡµῶν τὰς ψυχὰς καὶ τὰ σώµατα ἀπὸ παντὸς µολυσµοῦ σαρκὸς καὶ πνεύµατος” (“cleanse our souls and bodies from every defilement of flesh and spirit”); “καθάρισον, Κύριε, τὸν ῥύπον τῆς ψυχῆς µου” (”Lord, cleanse the mud, the muck from my soul”); “καθάρισον σῆ  ε ὐ σ π λ α γ χ ν ί ᾳ”43 (“cleanse me by Your compassion”) can be found. Supplications in the Byzantine liturgical litany involve two aspects, namely the heavenly reality and earthly dimensions. The former can be seen, for example, in invocations such as: Ὑπέρ τῆς ἄνωθεν εἰρήνης, καί τῆς σωτηρίας τῶν ψυχῶν ἡμῶν […]. [For peace from on high, and for the salvation of our souls, let us pray to the Lord […].]

or Ὑπέρ τῆς εἰρήνης τοῦ σύμπαντος κόσμου, εὐσταθείας τῶν ἁγίων τοῦ Θεοῦ Ἐκκλησιῶν, καί τῆς τῶν πάντων ἑνώσεως […]. [For peace in the whole world, for the well-being of the holy Churches of God and for the union of all […]]

However, the earthly dimension is more frequent and the following invocations may serve as examples: Ὑπέρ τοῦ ἁγίου οἴκου τούτου, καί τῶν μετὰ πίστεως, εὐλαβείας, καὶ φόβου Θεοῦ εἰσιόντων ἐν αὐτῷ […]. [For this holy church and for all who enter it with faith, reverence and the fear of God […].] Ὑπέρ τῆς πόλεως ταύτης, πάσης πόλεως καὶ χώρας καί τῶν πίστει οἰκούντων ἐν αὐταῖς […]. [For these cities, for every city and country, and for all-living therein with faith […].]

43 Dativus instrumentalis.

86

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk Ὑπὲρ εὐκρασίας ἀέρων, εὐφορίας τῶν καρπῶν τῆς γῆς καὶ καιρῶν εἰρηνικῶν […]. [For good weather, for an abundance of the fruits of the earth, and for peaceful times […].] Ὑπὲρ πλεόντων, ὁδοιπορούντων, νοσούντων, καμνόντων, αἰχμαλώτων καί τῆς σωτηρίας αὐτῶν […]. [For those who travel by sea, air, and on land, for the sick, the suffering, the captive, and for their safety and salvation […].] Ὑπέρ τοῦ ῥυσθῆναι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης θλίψεως, ὀργῆς, κινδύνου καὶ ἀνάγκης […]. [That we may be delivered from all affliction, wrath, and need […].]

The addressee of the prayer is God within the Holy Trinity. Hence the appeal to God the Father and to Christ. In contrast, the Holy Spirit is only mentioned as a source of gifts, i.e. in a petition for Him to descend upon man and stay in his life forever. A characteristic feature of the Byzantine liturgical litany is the multiplicity of names that are used with reference to God: ὁ Κύριος (Lord), Χριστός ὁ Θεός (Christ our God), ὁ Θεός τῶν Πατέρων ἡμῶν (God of our fathers), ὁ μόνος ἅγιος (alone holy), φιλάνθρωπος Θεός (loving God), ὁ ἁγιασμὸς ἡμῶν (our sanctification), Κύριος παντοκράτωρ (Lord Almighty), Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν (Lord our God), Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ (Lord, our Almighty God), ὁ βασιλεῦς (King). In many instances, apart from God’s name being used in the Voc. sg.: Κύριε (Lord), Θεός (God), Δέσποτα (Master), βασιλεῦ (King), ὁ Θεός ὁ Δέσποτα (God our Master), αὐτὸς Δέσποτα (O Master), ἀγαθὲ καὶ φιλάνθρωπε (good and loving God), Δέσποτα φιλάνθρωπε (loving Master), antonomasia are used, apparently interchangeably: holy, our sanctification, good and loving God, merciful Master, with an epithet to indicate His nature: loving, good, almighty, holy, great, invisible, living, or merciful. These different terms used with reference to God are crucial in a terminological analysis of the Byzantine liturgy. The most common and important noun is ὁ κύριος (lord, master) derived from the Pindaric expression “ὁ ἔχων κῦρος” (the one who has supreme power, authority).44 The basic verb form is κυριεύω (to be lord/master of, to rule) and it appears in the work of both Xenophon and Aristotle. The adjective form (κύριος, κυρία, κύριον) could be translated as follows: having power, having legal power, lawful, valid, authorized, competent, or empowered, but also as: important, decisive, or principal. Such a meaning can be found, for example, in Isthmian Odes (5.53): “Ζεὺς ὁ πάντων κύριος” or in Plutarch.45 The 44 Liddell et al., A Greek-English Lexicon, s.v. κῦρος. 45 Arist. 6 (I, 322b).

Byzantine Liturgical Litany

87

latter lists three feelings which are aroused in man in relation to the idea of divinity: “ζῆλος, φόβος, τιμή, […] ἐκπλήττεσθαι δὲ καὶ δεδιέναι κατὰ τὸ κύριον καὶ δυνατόν” (“jealousy, fear, respect, […] to be afraid and fearful in the presence of authority or power”).46 In the biblical meaning this word is very important, because a version of it, ὁ Κύριος is a translation of terms that in the Old Testament are only connected with God, namely, ‫אדוני‬, ‫אלוהים‬, ‫ יהוה‬and ‫יח‬, direct examples of a formulation of the Greek expression ὁ κύριος that can be found in Genesis 31:35, and most importantly, in the revelation of God to Moses (Exodus 21:29). Apart from that, this term is often contrasted with the word ὁ δοῦλος (slave), as, for example, in Judges 19:11. In the New Testament it is used in relation to Jesus of Nazareth (e.g. Matthew 21:3; Mark 11:3; Luke 1:43; 20:44). More crucially, however, the term ὁ Κύριος emphasizes the divine element of Jesus, with the apostles using it to address Jesus when He had risen from the dead (Acts of the Apostles 10:33; Romans 14:8; 1 Corinthians 7:22; Ephesians 4:5 et al.). It is a reference, therefore, to the divine prerogatives of Jesus as the Son of God, which is itself a direct reference to the Old Testament theophanies from Exodus. These biblical terminological allusions are commonplace in the Eastern Liturgy. “Ὁ κύριος” is the One to whom a deacon offers his prayer: “[…] τοῦ Κυρίου δεηθῶμεν” (“[…] let us pray to the Lord”); He is the One to whom prayers are addressed: “[…] παρά τοῦ Κυρίου αἰτησώμεθα” (“[…] let us ask the Lord”); and finally, He is the One to be thanked for His participation in the  “H o l y  M y s t e r i e s”  (“µετέχειν  τ ῶ ν  ἁ γ ί ω ν  Μ υ σ τ η ρ ί ω ν”): “[…] ἀξίως εὐχαριστήσωμεν τῷ Κυρίῳ” (“[…] let us worthily give thanks to the Lord”). Before Σύμβολον τῆς πίστεως (The Creed) the priest bows three times in front of the altar, professing his devotion to God: “Ἀγαπήσω σε, Κύριε” (“I will love thee, O Lord”), calling Him: “ἡ ἰσχύς µου, Κύριος στερέωµά µου, καὶ καταφυγή µου καὶ ῥύστης µου” (“my strength, the Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer”). In his silent prayers, the priest often addresses God in the Voc. sg.: Κύριε, in which case other additional definitions might be the expressions: παντοκράτορ (O Almighty), ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν (our God), ἅγιος (holy), Σαβαώθ (“of angelic hosts”). The vast majority of the litanic formulae in Eastern Church services have uncomplicated grammatical structures. The sequences of petitions are simple sentences starting with a preposition, ὑπέρ (for), which requires an object, and which is followed by the epistrophe “τοῦ Κυρίου δεηθῶμεν” (Let us pray to the 46 Cf. Abbott-Smith, Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, 261–262.

88

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

Lord). The litany of fervent supplication contains, in turn, a structure consisting of a preposition, παρά, (in this context it means: for), and again the invocation ends with the epistrophe “τοῦ Κυρίου αἰτησώμεθα” (“Let us ask the Lord”). Further examples of litanic formulae are as follows: Κύριε ἐλέησον· [Lord, have mercy.] Παράσχου Κύριε· [Grant this, O Lord.] Σοί, Κύριε· (being a conclusion to the prayer said silently by the priest) [To thee, O Lord.]

A deacon performs a crucial role in Byzantine services. Not only does he offer up a prayer to God on behalf of the people, but he also summons-invites-exhorts them to join in the celebration. This is manifested by the following expressions which do not strictly constitute individual petitions but are a prelude of sorts to the separate litanies: Ἔ τ ι  κ α ὶ  ἔ τ ι  ἐν εἰρήνῃ τοῦ Κυρίου δεηθῶμεν· [In peace let us  a g a i n  pray to the Lord.]47 Εἴπωμεν πάντες ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς διανοίας ἡμῶν εἴπωμεν· [Let us all say with our whole soul, and with our whole mind, let us say.]48 Πληρώσωμεν τὴν δέησιν ἡμῶν τῷ Κυρίῳ· [Let us complete our prayer to the Lord.]49 Ἔτι δεώμεθα ὑπέρ […]. [Again we pray […].] Ὀρθοί· [Let us be attentive.]50

47 Invocation at the beginning of the Little Litany. In the Greek version the word “ἔτι” (again) is repeated. 48 Introduction to the Litany of Fervent Supplication. 49 Commences the Litany of Petitions. 50 Calls upon people to pray after the Holy Communion.

Byzantine Liturgical Litany

89

ἀξίως εὐχαριστήσωμεν τῷ Κυρίῳ· [Let us worthily give thanks to the Lord.]51

There are two invocations that are constantly repeated in the Little Litanies. They appear in the Divine Liturgy but and also in other Eastern services. The first is an appeal to God: Ἀντιλαβοῦ, σῶσον, ἐλέησον καὶ διαφύλαξον ἡμᾶς, ὁ Θεός, τῇ σῇ χάριτι· [Help us, save us, have mercy upon us, and protect us, o God, by Your grace],

while the other is the final invocation which is addressed to the Mother of God: Τῆς Παναγίας, ἀχράντου, ὑπερευλογημένης, ἐνδόξου, Δεσποίνης ἡμῶν Θεοτόκου καὶ ἀειπαρθένου Μαρίας, μετὰ πάντων τῶν Ἁγίων μνημονεύσαντες, ἑαυτοὺς καὶ ἀλλήλους καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν ζωὴν ἡμῶν, Χριστῷ τῷ Θεῷ παραθώμεθα· [Remembering our most holy, most pure, most-blessed and glorious Lady, the Mother of God and ever-Virgin Mary, with all the saints, let us commend ourselves and one another, and our whole life, to Christ, our God].

Conclusions When analyzing the text of the Great Litany, a number of characteristic features can be observed. Firstly, the truly catholic, i.e. universal, nature of the litany can be perceived, as it encompasses the entire range of human wishes and petitions — both general and individual, as well as those which are specific to different groups. The Great Litany reminds us that in spite of personal needs, man should also remember the important issues and the basic requirements of the whole Church, and indeed the whole world. Our duty is to pray for those who are both known and unknown, with Kilmartin reminding us that at this moment the Liturgy is fundamental to the mobilization of life, the transformation of society, and the new ethical life of the participants.52 The medieval manuscripts that have been preserved provide information regarding the fact that on occasions an individual ektene did not end with a prayer and the priest’s ecphonesis of a doxological nature, as today.53 The most important 51 The term that reflects the nature of the prayer after Holy Communion. 52 Cf. Kilmartin, Christian Liturgy, 71–89. In chapter 5 (The Liturgy and Activities of the Church) a certain Jesuit highlights the influence of the Liturgy in the everyday life of Christians. 53 Cf. Czerski, “Mistagogiczna interpretacja Liturgii Bizantyjskiej,” 85.

90

Lesław Bogdan Łesyk

part was the response of the faithful. Arranz believes that this was connected with the nature of the whole prayer.54 The call “Lord, have mercy” did not replace the deacon’s prayer, indeed quite the reverse. The deacon’s ektene was supposed to help ordinary Christians pray in a more exact manner. Indeed, Syrian texts from the seventh century emphasize the invitations uttered by the deacon, for example, “Let us pray” or also “Let us ask,” but in fact it is the congregation that prays. The priest appeals to God to hear the believers’ supplications but he does not replace their prayer. It seems that a liturgical litany was designed to make it easy for the faithful to express a series of supplications in a simple literary form, yet at the same time it facilitated the clarity of expression through its rhythm and special arrangement.

54 Cf. Михаель Арранц, Евхаристия Востока u Запада: Переработка oпыта “Историческое pазвитие Божественной Литургии,” (Рим, 1996), 95–96.

Elżbieta Chrulska Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń

Litanic Verse in Latin Until the Seventh Century1 In the first centuries of the Church, the Greek word ἡ λιτανία, as well as its Latin counterparts litania, laetania or letania, referred to all the prayers of a deprecatory nature (psalmodies, hymns, preces, precationes), used both communally and privately.2 However, the syntactic parallelism resulted from the rhetorical principles — characteristic of both artistic prose and poetry — borrowed from classical writing and the Christian precatio that was grounded in pagan magical rituals. Therefore, it is worthwhile looking at the history of litanic verse in Latin by initially considering in more detail the two factors that created a situation in which the development of litany was favoured.

Pagan Sources of the Latin Precatio The Greek ἡ ἀρά was both a prayer and a curse, in a manner similar to that of the Latin preces, which remained closely associated with the word imprecatio (swearing)3. This dual semantics of the basic religious term also reveals its magical connotations that are visible in examples from both literature and liturgy. Magical thinking was also accompanied by a certain fondness for a repetition of the

1 Abrevations: AH: Analecta hymnica medii aevi, ed. Guido Maria Dreves, Clemens Blume, Henry Marriott Bannister, 55 vols. (Leipzig: Fues’s Verlag, 1886–1922). CCSL: Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina (Turnhout–Paris: Brepols–Cerf, 1953–). MGH: Monumenta Germaniae Historica inde ab a. c. 500 usque ad a. 1500 (Hanover– Berlin: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 1826–). PL: Patrologia cursus completus. Series Latina, ed. Jacques-Paul Migne, 221 vols. (Paris: Garnier Fratres, 1844–1855 and 1862–1864). 2 Aegidio Forcellini, Totius Latinitatis lexicon (London: Baldwin and Cradock, 1854), 3: 779–780; cf. also: Lucius Paleotimus, Antiquitatum, sive Originum ecclesiasticarum summa (Venetiis: Balleoniana, 1754), 6–8. 3 Joannes Scapula, Lexicon Graeco-Latinum (Oxford: Typographeo Clarendoniano, 1820), 170; Samuel König, Etymologicon Helleno-Hebraeum (Francfort: Johann Jacob Haug, 1722), 36.

92

Elżbieta Chrulska

semantic formulae, the syntactic structure and the rhythm of the sentences,4 with adjuration, which is related to the sphere of medicine, particularly full of such linguistic strategies. As far as the magical formulae that still survive today are concerned, a fragment of a work by Marcellus Empiricus from the fourth/fifth century (De Medicamentis) is worth mentioning: Praecantabis ieiunus ieiunium tenens locum, qui erit in causa, digitis tribus id est pollice, medio et medicinali, residuis duobus elevatis dices: exi hodie nata si ante nata, si hodie creata si ante creata, hanc pestem, hanc pestilentiam, hunc tumorem, hunc ruborem, has toles, has tosillas, hunc panum, has paniculas, hanc strumam, hanc strumellam, hac religione evoco, educo, excanto de istis membris, medullis.5 [Whoever shall find himself in need, let him pray, fasting and without food, pressing the affected area with three fingers, i.e. the thumb, the middle finger and the ring finger, so that two fingers protrude:6 / Be gone, whether born today or earlier, whether created today or earley: / with this formula I call out, lead out, and sing out / from the limbs and morrow of this person here / this disease, plague, pain, polyp, redness, goiters, tonsils, inflammation, / growths, tumor, and swelling.]7

The composition of this magical formula, which accompanied therapeutic actions, shows clear evidence of parallelism on many levels of the textual organization. In 4 Robert Yelle, Semiotics of Religion: Signs of the Sacred in History (London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2013), 30–37; Amina Kropp, “How Does Magical Language Work? The Spells and Formulae of the Latin defixionum tabellae,” in Magical Practice in the Latin West: Papers from the International Conference Held at the University of Zaragoza, 30 Sept.–1st Oct. 2005, eds. Richard Lindsay Gordon, and Francisco Marco Simón (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 357–380. 5 Marcellus Empiricus, “De medicamentis,” in Incantamenta magica graeca et latina, ed. Richard Heim, in Fleckeisens Jahrbiicher fur classische Philologie Suppl. 19 (1893): 476–477. Division into lines: Hildegard Temporini and Wolfgang Haase, Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Rise and decline of the Roman world (Berlin: Arthur Collgnon GmbH, 1993): 2 (37), 173. 6 Unless otherwise indicated, trans. by Aleksandra Lewandowska and Elżbieta Chrulska. 7 Anthony Corbeill, Controlling Laughter: Political Humor in the Late Roman Republic (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1996), 70–71.

Litanic Verse in Latin

93

the first two-lined part, which follows the instruction, there is a conjunction (si ante, si hodie) that is based on anaphora and completed by a rhyme (nata–creata). In the second, polysyndetic, part of the lengthened sentence a further parallelism arises from the use of an anaphoric construction, which, in this case, is in the form of an inflected pronoun combined with a noun, accompanied by a series of puns (paronomasias: pestem–pestilentiam, tumorem–ruborem, toles–tosillas, panum– paniculas, strumam–strumellam). The formula ends with an alliterative phrase which resembles the litanic deprecations: “evoco, educo, excanto.” The rhythm of those lines is achieved by a caesura of sorts and rhyme (both external and internal), which was also characteristic of medieval poetry that was often based on complex systems of rhymes. The Latin incantations called lorica are an excellent example of magical formulae that contain elements of litany as used in the Christian liturgy, and can be observed in a prayer dedicated to the purification of women from the Leiden Lorica manuscript (from the ninth or tenth century). Its recitation was in all probability accompanied by the repetition of a psalm, over and over again (usque in finem). Despite the varying number of syllables per line, the text appears to keep to the rhythm of the song.8 An enumeration of all the parts of the body to be purified during the liturgy follows the magical formula: Desscendat meus amor super illam: exscrutentur omnia membra illius pro amore meo, aexscrutentur omnia membra illius pro amore meo […]. [Let my love descend upon her. / May all her parts be scrutinized for the sake of my love.] 9

A recollection of the heavenly hierarchy of angels, with a refrain accompanying each invocation, which is typical of the Litany of the Saints, follows: Adiuro vos, omnes archangeli, pro amore meo, ut evacuatis cor illius pro amore meo, evacuat Gabriel cor N pro amore meo, aevacuat Michaael cor N pro amore meo […].

8 Peter Dronke, Latin and Vernacular Poets of the Middle Ages (Vermont: Aldershot and Brookfield, 1991), 64. 9 This and the next quotations are from: Michael W. Herren, “The Hisperica famina II: Related Poems,” in Studies and Texts 85 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval, 1987), 90–91. The only copy of the manuscript is in Leiden, University Library, MS Vossius Q.2, fol. 60.

94

Elżbieta Chrulska [I adjure you, all you archangels, for my love’s sake, / to take her heart from her, for my love’s sake: / may Gabriel take her for my love’s sake, / may Michael take her heart from her for my love’s sake […].]10

The subsequent part mentions patriarchae, confessores, apostoles, martires, throni, seraphini, dominationes, and herubini, as well as saints and natural forces, in a manner that is reminiscent of the Hymn of the Three Youths from Daniel. Peter Dronke suggests that in fact in this example we are dealing with a love spell and he quotes a passage from a Greek papyrus in which a female voice summons twelve elements of the sky and twenty-four elements of the universe.11 Finally, there is an example in which the magical formula is an integral part of the poetic prayer. This is seen in the poem “Precatio Terrae Matris”12 from the third century E.C.13 The meter distinguishes it from the previous preces, as the opus is written in iambic senarius. The praise for Mother Earth,14 in the spirit of the Homeric Hymns, contains onomata and numerous antonomasias, as well as phrases beginning with a pronoun or a preposition, for example, tu, per, or in. After the laudatory part there is a deprecation with the characteristic phrase, “me rite exaudi,” which is the beginning of a number of requests addressed to the divine (diva) Mother, probably the Roman Ceres. Similar content and form was found in the mithraeum frescoes of St. Prisca’s Church in Rome. According to researchers, these are the first lines of the hymn. The members of the community would recite the remainder by heart.15 It is worth mentioning that magical rituals not only accompanied the Latin precatio and its pagan sources16 in poems. With reference to the purifying ceremony, the unhappy hero of Apuleius’s Metamorphoses (from the second century E.C.) prays to Isis as follows:

10 Peter Dronke, Latin and Vernacular Poets of the Middle Ages (Vermont: Aldershot and Brookfield, 1991), 64 11 Ibid., 70. Similar enchantment and love refrains can be found in the satirical Idylls by Theocritus. 12 Incantamenta, 504–505. 13 John I. McEnerney, “The Precatio terrae and Precatio omnium herbarum,” Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, 126 (1983): 175–187. 14 Maarten J. Vermaseren, Carel C. Van Essen, The Excavations in the Mithraeum of the Church of Santa Prisca in Rome (Leiden: Brill, 1965), 188. 15 Ibid., 191. 16 Eds. Richard Lindsay Gordon, Francisco Marco Simón, Magical Practice in the Latin West: Papers from the International Conference (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 334.

Litanic Verse in Latin

95

Regina caeli, — sive tu Ceres alma frugum parens originalis […], seu tu caelestis Venus […], seu Phoebi soror […], seu nocturnis ululatibus horrenda Proserpina triformi […], quoquo nomine, quoquo ritu, quaqua facie te fas est invocare: tu meis iam nunc extremis aerumnis subsiste, tu fortunam collapsam adfirma, tu saevis exanclatis casibus pausam pacemque tribue; sit satis laborum, sit satis periculorum. Depelle quadripedis diram faciem, redde me conspectui meorum, redde me meo Lucio, ac si quod offensum numen inexorabili me saevitia premit, mori saltem liceat, si non licet vivere. [O queen of heaven—whether you are bountiful Ceres, the primal mother of crops […], or heavenly Venus […], or Phoebus’ sister […] or dreaded Proserpina of the nocturnal howls, who in triple form […] by whatever name, with whatever rite, in whatever image it is meet to invoke you: defend me now in the uttermost extremes of tribulation, strengthen my fallen fortune, grant me rest and peace from the cruel mischances I have endured. Let this be enough toil, enough danger. Rid me of this dreadful four-footed form, restore me to the sight of my own people, restore me to the Lucius I was. But if some divine power that I have offended is harassing me with inexorable savagery, at least let me die, if I may not live.] 17

The precatio is divided into two parts. The first consists of numerous and complex antonomasias of Isis, with the second comprising specific requests and invocations.18 Apuleius uses anaphora (sive tu/seu tu; quoquo/quaqua; tu; sit satis; redde me), paronomasia, and rhyme (callapsam–pausam; laborum–periculorum). In addition, rhetorical figures (verbis coniunctis) responsible for the literary ornamentation arrange the words at the beginning and end of clauses into regular patterns.19 Thus, metric repeatability in the form of quantitative rhythm also appears in the phrases. Although Apuleius’s novel was not well known in the early days of Christianity, it captures perfectly the atmosphere of religious eclecticism in the first centuries of the new era and employs certain literary conventions that were soon used in prayers with a rhetorical style (i.e. actio).20

17 Apuleius, Metamorphoses (The Golden Ass), ed. and transl. J. Arthur Hanson, (Harvard: Loeb, 1996), 1: 240. 18 Perhaps it is the influence of the Egyptian litany called “Hymn to Isis” (Cair, Cairo Museum, Pap. Oxy. XI., 1380); Cf. Louis Vico Žabkar, Hymns to Isis in her Temple at Philae (University Press of New England: Hannover, 1988), 146. 19 For more about the rhetorical style of Apuleius cf.: Apuleius. Rhetorical Works, transl. and introd. Stephen Harrison, Vincent Hunink, and John Hilton (Oxford: Press, 2001), 2: 134–135; Eduard Norden, Kunstprosa (Leipzig: Teubner, 1898), 582–587. 20 For more about the relationship of religion and rhetoric cf.: Laurent Pernot, “The Rhetoric of Religion,” A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, 24, 3 (2006): 235–254;

96

Elżbieta Chrulska

Instability of Meter: Enumeration and Anaphora Writers from Africa also played a significant role in creating a new rhetorical style (the so-called Asiatic style of oratory), which influenced many Christian authors (i.e. Tertullian, Augustine, Fulgentius).21 Rhetorical figures such as alliteration, repetition, colometric rhythm and predefinite phraseology were often used in their prosaic prayers, as can be seen in this short passage from the Sermons of Augustine: Eo nascente superi novo honore claruerunt, quo moriente inferi novo timore tremuerunt, quo resurgente discipuli novo amore exarserunt, quo ascendente coeli novo obsequio patuerunt […]. (PL 38 1028) [At His birth, the heavens became bright with new lustre; at His death, the lower regions trembled with new fear; at His Resurrection, the disciples burned with new love; at His Ascension, the heavens opened in a new act of homage.]22

The greatest change that they introduced was the increasing use and importance of accentual rhythm (cursus).23 However, the Confessiones of Augustine is an example of cursus mixtus and conforms neither to the quantitative, nor to the accentual patterns preferred by ancient and medieval writers.24 This demonstrates how difficult it is to classify the changes in Latin prosody which took place at that time. The growing influence of rhetorical prose and the progressive reduction in quantity had an impact on Latin poetry — including works written in hexameter. The same language strategies may also be found in the Christian poetry of

21 22 23

24

Eduard Norden, Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen zur Formengeschichte religiöser Rede (Leipzig–Berlin: Teubner, 1913). Benjamin B. Warfield, “Africa and the Beginnings of Christian Latin Literature,” The American Journal of Theology, 11, 1 (1907): 103–105. The Fathers of the Church. Saint Augustine Sermons on the Liturgical Seasons, trans. Sister Mary Sarah Muldowney, R.S.M. (Washington: The Catholic University od America Press, 1984), 62. Gudrun Lindholm, Studien zum mittellateinischen Prosarhythmus: Seine Entwicklung und sein Abklingen in der Briefliteratur Italiens (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1963), 39–54; Steven M. Oberhelman, Ralph G. Hall, “A New Statistical Analysis of Accentual Prose Rhythms in Imperial Latin Authors,” Classical Philology, 79, 2 (1984): 127–130; Lancelot P. Wilkinson, Golden Latin Artistry (Cambridge: University Press, 1963); Henry B. Dewing, “The Origin of the Accentual Prose Rhythm in Greek,” The American Journal of Philology, 31, 3 (1910): 312–313. Mary Borromeo Carroll, The Clausulae in the Confessions of St. Augustine (Washington: The Catholic University of America Press, 1940).

Litanic Verse in Latin

97

Dracontius (from the fifth/sixth century), who was born and educated in Africa (Carthage) during the reign of the Vandals.25 In Hexameron he describes the creation of the world: Prima dies lux est terris, mors una tenebris, Lux datur ante polum, lux clari causa diei, Lux iubar aethereum, lux noctis limes et umbrae, Lux facies rebus cunctis, et lux elementis, Lux genitis factisque calor, lux gratia solis, Lux decus astrorum, lux aurea cornua lunae, Lux fulgor coeli, lux et primordia mundi, Lux splendor flammae, lux magni temporis index, Lux opus auctoris primum, candorque pudoris, Lux honor agricolis, requies lux omnibus aegris, Lux aevi meta, lux quae dat tempora metis, Qua bene constructa mundi primordia lucent. (PL 87 371) [Light is primal Day, the sole death of Darkness, / Light, sent ere the sky. Light, the cause of Day, / Light, ether’s brilliance, Night’s limit, Light, / Light, aspect of elements and all things, / Light, the vigour of all. Light, the Sun’s glory. / Light, the stars’ grace, Light, the Moon’s golden horn, / Light, splendour of Heav’n, Light, the World’s first Law, / Light, flash of Flame, Light, Dial of great Time, / Light, prize of Tillage, Light, rest of the Sick, / Light, first act of God, Light, candour of Souls, / Light, bound of seasons, Light, boundless, eternal, / Which first the world’s well-builded order showed.]26

The composition of the passage is based on the use of anaphora. The monosyllabic word lux also plays an important role from a metrical perspective, as when a new foot is begun in hexameter (arsis), it was pronounced with more force. Hexameron combines the influences of the Holy Scripture27 (Dan. 3:52–87) with the tradition of pagan poetry (precatio). The poem is also enriched by requests: Te Seraphim, Cherubimque Deum, Dominumque precantur, Te chorus angelicus laudat, exercitus orat, Thronus in excelsis humili te voce precatur, agmina te astrorum, te signa et sidera laudant auctorem confessa suum, te fulmen adorat,

25 For more about the deficiencies in the meter of Dracontius cf.: Willy Schetter, Kaiserzeit und Spätantike (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1994), 334. 26 Sedulius. The Easter Song: Being the First Epic of Christendom. ed. George Sigerson (London: Forgotten Books, 2013), 176. 27 Cf. Michael Roberts, Biblical Epic and Rhetorical Paraphrase in Late Antiquity (Liverpool: Cairns, 1985).

98

Elżbieta Chrulska Te tonitrus hiemesque tremunt, te grando, procellae, Te glacies nimbique pavent, te spiritus omnis personat, imber, hiems, pelagus, nix, frigus et aura. Te tellus fecunda vocat, te suspicit aer, unda super coelos tibi supplicat et polus omnis, flumina te metuunt et fontes, stagna, paludes voce sua laudant, te nubila crassa coruscant, Te lux alba dies, te nox obscura tenebris Te bona temperies, te tempora cuncta precantur, ver, aestas, autumnus hiems redeuntibus annis. (PL 60 787B) [To you, Lord and God, the Seraphim and Cherubim pray. / To you the angel choir offers its supplications, the army entreats / The thrones to pray to you with a humble voice, / hosts of celestial bodies and signs and stars praise you, / The lightning worships you, confessing you are the Lord, / The thunder and the frost are afraid of you and the hail and the storm, / the ice and the rain fear you, all spirits praise you, / the downpour, the chill, the sea water, the snow, the cold and the gusts of wind. / The fertile land calls you, the air supports you, / the water above the sky and the entire sky prays to you, / the rivers and the springs fear you, / the ponds and the marshes worship you with their voices, the thick clouds move for you, / the bright sunshine and the dark night of darkness, / the mild climate and all the seasons call you, / spring, summer, autumn, winter, with each recurring year.]

In a similar manner Paulinus, a Latin poet from the forth/fifth century, a letterwriter and the bishop of Nola, developed the rhetorical enumeratio28 into a list of epithets: Christe apud aeternum placabilis assere Patrem Salvator, Deus ac Dominus, mens, gloria, Verbum, Filius et vero verum de lumine lumen, Aeterno cum Patre manens in secula regnans […]. (PL 61 442) [Christ, protect us in the presence of the eternal Father, / For you are the Saviour, God and Lord, the mind, the glory, the Word, / The Son and the true light from the true light, / with the eternal Father lasting and forever ruling.]

Less sophisticated, but more dynamic, was the enumeration used by Ennodius (from the fifth/sixth century) that paraphrases words of Jerome (“Commentaria in Ezechielem,” PL 25 462C):29

28 Cf. “Hymnus V” “lluminans Altissimus/ Micantium astrorum globos,/ Pax, vita, lumen, veritas,/ Jesu fave precantibus.” (PL 16 1411); This quote is a paraphrase of the words from Scripture (John 14: 6). 29 Cf. John Owen, The Person of Christ (Mulberry: Sovereign Grace Publishers, 2001), 17.

Litanic Verse in Latin

99

Fons, via, dextra, lapis, vitulus, leo, lucifer, agnus, ianua, spes, virtus, verbum, sapientia, vates, hostia, virgultum, pastor, mons, rete, columba, flamma, gigas, aquila, sponsus, patientia, vermis, Filius excelsus, Dominus, Deus, omnia Christus. Nunc precor ut dictis adsit […].30 [Source, way, right, rock, lion, light-bearer, lamb; / door, hope, virtue, word, wisdom, prophet, / victim, scion, shepherd, mountain, snare, dove; / flame, giant, eagle, spouse, patience, worm, / Son of the Most High, the Lord, God, everything is Christ. / Now I pray that he was present in these words.]

The latter example clearly demonstrates how difficult it is to determine whether we are dealing with a rhetorical strategy alone, or with influences either from the original magical formula or from a biblical inspiration. Another explanation could be the increasing difficulty in formulating the metric feet. The use of enumeratio helped to create a regular hexameter line,31 yet this textual configuration also highlights the litanic rhythm.32 Anaphora is another rhetorical figure associated with the development of repeatability in Latin verse. Although it was obviously known that not all anaphoras create rhythm, those which are accumulated (copia) in the metrical scheme certainly do. In the work of Paulinus of Nola, there is at least one extended passus that exemplifies this requirement: Non his numinibus tibi me patriaeque reduces. Q u o d  datur, in nihilum (sine Numine nomina Musas surda vocas, et nulla rogas) levis auferet aura, irrita ventosae rapiunt haec vota procellae, q u a e  non missa Deo vacuis in nubibus haerent nec penetrant superi stellantem Regis in aulam. Si tibi cura mei reditus, illum aspice et ora q u i  tonitru summi quatit ignea culmina coeli, q u i  trifido igne micat nec inania murmura miscet, q u i q u e  satis coelo soles largitur et imbres,

30 “Praefatio to Dictio Quae Habita Est in Natali Sancti ac Beatissimi Papae Epiphanii Annum XXX Sacerdotii” (PL 63 323C). 31 Cf. Seppo Heikkinen, The Christianisation of Latin Metre: A Study of Bede’s De arte metrica (Unigrafia, Helsinki, 2012), 18–19, accessed May 20, 2015, https://helda. helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/30099/thechris.pdf?sequence=1,. 32 However, in the quoted passage the boundary of the foot does not coincide with the end of the words and the metrical arrangements only help to preserve repeatability at the end of the verses (dactyl + spondee).

100

Elżbieta Chrulska

q u i  super omne, q u o d  e s t,  vel in omnia totus ubique omnibus infusus rebus regit omnia Christus, q u i  mentes tenet atque movet,  q u i  tempora nostra et loca disponit;  q u o d  si contraria votis constituat nostris, prece deflectendus in illa est q u a e  volumus:  q u i d  me accusas? Si displicet actus q u e m  gero agente Deo, prius est si fas reus autor, c u i  placet aut formare meos, aut vertere sensus. Nam mea si reputes  q u a e  pristina,  q u a e  tibi nota […]. (PL 61 455B–455C; 113–131; emphasis added) [These deities will not help you achive my return to you and to my native land. Your call, you request, is addressed to deaf nobodies, the Muses, a light breeze will bear it away, by windy gusts. It is not sent to God, so it cleaves to the insubstantial clouds, and does not enter the starry hall of the King above.33 If you care about my return, pray respectfully to the One who moves the fiery peaks of the highest skies with thunder, who flickers in the triple fire and does not utter empty murmurs, and endows generously with rain and moderately with heat from the sky, who is above everything that is or in everything and everywhere embedded into all things, Christ reigns over everything, stops and moves thoughts, to whom our time and space are subjected, if he destines what is contrary to our prayers, he will yield to our will through supplication. What do you condemn me for? Does the action I undertake towards the acting God arouse objections before it comes to accuse the author who likes to shape or change my thoughts.34]

In the quoted passage the presence of anaphora is influenced by the use of artistic prose.35 Paulinus was one of the most talented poets of the early Christian era, and in his youth his education was overseen by an outstanding teacher, namely Ausonius of Bordeaux (from the fourth century). The bishop of Nola was wellversed in the classical principles of rhetoric (he wrote many sophisticated letters) as well as in Latin metrica. His works are generally written in hexameter, but also in many cases in an iambic dimeter inspired by the hymns of Ambrose.36 33 Anders Cullhed, The Shadow of Creusa: Negotiating Fictionality in Late Antique Latin Literature (Berlin and Boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH), 487. 34 The remaining part of the text trans. by A. Lewandowska and E. Chrulska. 35 In a similar manner a rhetorical period was constructed by Augustine: Cf. Sermo, 199, 2, ad fin. (PL 38 1028). For the pronoun atque as an anaphora in the rhythmic prose of Augustine see: Otto Zwierlein, “Augustins quantitierender Klauselrhythmus,” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 138 (2002): 43–70. 36 See the fragment of metric mixus (iambic trimeter and dimeter): “Hic veritatis lumen est, vitae via, / Vis, mens, manus, virtus Patris, / Sol aequitatis, fons bonorum, flos Dei. / Natus Deo, mundi sator, / Mortalitatis vita nostrae, et mors necis. Magister hic virtutum […],” (vv. 47–52; PL 61 454).

Litanic Verse in Latin

101

Litanic Verse and the Beginning of Latin Hymnody According to Augustine, the Western Church followed the example of the Eastern Church in introducing the practice of collective singing, both of psalms and hymns, which was supposed to strengthen the faithful during religious turmoil.37 The bishop of Hippo, however, failed to mention that among Christians the habit of collective singing was an innovation inspired by the Arians. No codes of the hymns sung by the followers of this early Christian heresy have survived to the present day, so that it is only from other sources that we know song was used as a tool in doctrinal rivalry.38 Ambrose, the bishop of Milan, together with numerous more or less talented imitators, wrote his hymns in this spirit. The iambic dimeter proved attractive both from a liturgical and a literary standpoint. It was also a practical (mnemonic) instrument for promoting the doctrine of the Holy Trinity among worshippers, as – for example – in “Hymn XI”: O Lux beata Trinitas et principalis unitas, iam sol recedit igneus, infunde lumen cordibus. Te mane laudum carmine, Te deprecamur vespere, Te nostra supplex gloria per cuncta laudet saecula. (PL 16 1412) [O Trinity of blessed Light, / O Unity of sovereign might, / as now the fiery sun departs, shed Thou / Thy beams within our hearts. / To Thee our morning song of praise, / to Thee our evening prayer we raise; / Thee may our glory evermore / in lowly reverence adore.]39

It is worth noting that in the prayer Ambrose follows a laudatory genre and also refers to a pre-existing pagan supplicatory tradition (“te deprecamur”), by replacing the community with an individual supplicant.40 He uses not only classical rhetorical 37 Aug. Conff. IX 7. 38 Cf. Théodore Gérold, Les pères de l’Église et la musique (Paris: Alcan, 1931), 25. 39 “Preces-latinae.org,” trans. J.M. Neale, accessed March 8, 2016, http://www.preceslatinae.org/thesaurus/Hymni/OLuxBeata.html 40 Paulinus of Nola openly appropriates phrases of the pagan precationes: “Omnipotens Genitor rerum, cui summa potestas, / Exaudi si justa precor, ne sit mihi tristis / Ulla dies, placidam nox rumpat nulla quietem. / Nec placeant aliena mihi, quin et mea prosint / Supplicibus, nullusque habeat mihi vota nocendi.”(“Ad Deum Matutina Precatio” PL 61 439C, vv. 1–5). Cf. also: “Oratio (Carmen V)” of Ennodius (AH 50 48).

102

Elżbieta Chrulska

figures (anaphora “te”), but introduces — probably following the example of the Arians — an exact plain rhyme in the most important (from the doctrinal point of view) couplet that opens the hymn (Trinitas — unitas). This is not the only example that suggests the influence of Arian services. “Hymn VIII” was associated with the cult of martyrs which was popular in this circle. When the incipits of his first hymns (“Hymn I”: “Aeterna rerum conditor, / Noctem diemque qui regis;”“Hymn II”: “Deus creator omnium”), which are also accompanied by a subtle beseeching formula (“Hymn II”: “Fove precantes Trinitas,” PL 16 1409–1410), are analyzed in more detail, it becomes clear that this is an obvious example in which the phrases of the pagan precationes, addressed to various deities of heaven and earth,41 were appropriated. The metrical structure of the hymns is also worth discussing. Every line should consist of four regular iambic feet, but many Ambrosian lines are not strictly quantitative.42 Moreover, on reading the texts with prose accents, as medieval priests and monks most probably did, we can observe that these accents fall on places indicated by the iambic pattern.43 Ambrose did not slavishly imitate Horace’s iambic works,44 but tried to create a new formula for Christian poetry, where the simplicity of the words and the rhythm are the most important as they serve a mnemonic function that is necessary during collective singing.45 Probably around the same time, Augustine wrote his “Psalmus contra partem Donati,” a work that

41 The same meter was used in “Precatio Terris Mater” as mentioned previously. 42 Bede (from the seventh/eight century), in his De arte metrica, wrote about the hymns of Ambrose and the transformation from a metrical to a rhythmical structure. Cf. also: Richard L. Crocker, “Musica Rhythmica and Musica Metrica in Antique and Medieval Theory,” Journal of Music Theory, 2, 1 (April 1958): 9. 43 Dag Norberg demonstrated these possibilities using the following lines as an example: 1. “aetérne rérum cónditor,” 2. “spléndor patérnae glóriae,” 3. “sólvit pólum calígine,” 4. “si réspicis lápsus cádunt,” cf.: Dag Norberg, Les vers latins iambiques et trochaïques au Moyen Age et leurs répliques rythmiques (Stockholm: Almqvist Wiksell International, 1988), 13–16. 44 Jan den Boeft, “Delight and Imagination: Ambrose’s Hymns,” Vigiliae Christianae, 62, 5 (2008): 427. On the other hand, non-metric rhythm can be found in the works of Ennius, cf.: James B. Greenough, “Accentual Rhythm in Latin,” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 4(1893): 113–114. 45 See also the hymns of: Hilary of Poitiers (“Hymnus Tertius,” AH 50 8–9), Prudentius (“De Sancto Vincentio,” “Hymnus Beati Vincentii Martyriis,” AH 35–36), Ennodius (Hymn 55 and 57, AH 50 62–63), Eugenius II of Toledo (“Oratio ad Deum,” “Oratio pro Rege,” AH 50 94–95).

Litanic Verse in Latin

103

oscillates between poetry and prose46 and one of the first non-quantitative, isosyllabic and roughly trochaic (instar metri) Latin poems with a rhyme:47 […] Custos noster, Deus magne, tu nos potes liberare A pseudoprophetis istis, qui nos quaerunt devorare. Maledictum cor lupinum contegunt ovina pelle: Qui noverunt Scripturas, hos solent circumvenire. Audiunt enim traditores et nesciunt quod gestum est ante. Quibus si dicam, Probate, non habent quid respondere. Suis se dicunt credidisse; dico ego mentitos esse: Quia et nos credimus nostris, qui eos dicunt tradidisse. Vis nosse qui dicant falsum? Qui non sunt in unitate. Olim iam causa finita est, quod vos non statis in pace. Omnes qui gaudetis de pace, modo verum iudicate. […] (PL 43 24–26) [Our Guardian, our great God, you can save us from these pseudo-prophets who wish to devour us. Move away the reviling heart of wolves in sheep’s clothing, who change the Sacred Scriptures, the sense of which they are accustomed to twist. For they listen to intermediaries and know not what was done before. If I tell them, give me proof, they know not what to say. They claim they believe their witnesses and I claim that they are liars, for we, too, believe ours who claim that they informed them. Do you want to know who lies? Those who do not abide in unity. The case has been closed long ago, for you do not abide in peace. All of you who enjoy peace, judge fairly.]

The quoted passage, as with the previous examples of metric poetry, is characterized by a syntactic parallelism (anaphora and other forms of repetition).48 In addition, the verses contain a strong caesura that divides each line into two hemistichs of

46 It is worth noticing that Augustine was inspired in this case by Hebrew psalms, which were intended to be sung. Therefore, most probably he chose the rhythmic, rather than the metric, formula as Ambrose had. Cf. Vincent Hunink, Singing Together in Church: Augustine’s Psalm against the Donatists, accessed May 20, 2015, http://www.vincent hunink.nl/documents/AUG_PSALMUS_ORALITY.pdf. 47 Jörgen Leonhardt, Dimensio syllaborum. Studiem zur lateinischen Prosodie- und Verslehre von der Spätantike bis zur frühen Renaissance (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1989); Cf. Roland G. Kent, “The Alleged Conflict of the Accents in Latin Verse,” Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 51(1920): 26–28. 48 Cf.: Psalmus contra Vandalos Arrianos written by his follower Fulgentius: Fulgentius Ruspensis, Psalmus contra vandalos arrianos, ed. and trans. Antonio Isola (Turin: Società Editrice Internazionale, 1983).

104

Elżbieta Chrulska

eight syllables. It also has a rhyme49 and a refrain, which will subsequently be developed in medieval poetry, especially that written in order to be sung. However, well before the time of Augustine, Marius Victorinus (active in the fourth century) wrote three rhythmical hymns that adapted the pagan “Hymn to Zeus” to the “Christian doctrinal polemic.”50 Marius, a rhetorician and Neoplatonic philosopher born and educated in Africa, moved to Rome and was converted to Christianity.51 In different sections of the text there are three different examples of how litanic verse is composed. “Hymn I” starts with a laudatory repetition: Adesto, lumen verum, pater omnipotens Deus. Adesto, lumen luminis, mysterium et virtus Dei. Adesto, sancte Spiritus, patris et filii copula. Tu cum quiescis pater es, cum procedis, filius. In unum qui cuncta nectis, tu es Spiritus sanctus. Unum primum, unum a se ortum, unum ante unum Deus. (PL 8 1140) [Be present, the true light, almighty God and Father. / Be present, the light of light, the mystery and virtue of God. / Be present, the Holy Spirit, the bond between Father and Son. / When you rest, you are the Father, when you appear, you are the Son. / Part of the one, who binds together, you are the Holy Spirit. / There is one first, the one born of themselves, the one before the one God.]

“Hymn II” contains certain ektenial features: Miserere, Domine, miserere, Christe, miserere, Domine, quia credidi in te, miserere, Domine, quia misericordia tua cognovi te. Miserere, Domine, miserere, Christe: tu spiritus mei λόγος es, tu animae meae λόγος es, tu carnis meae λόγος es. Miserere, Domine, miserere, Christe: vivit Deus et semper vivit Deus, et quia ante ipsum nihil est, a se vivit Deus. Miserere, Domine, miserere, Christe: vivit Christus, et quia Deus ei generando dedit, ut a semet ipso vivat Christus, quia a semet vivit, semper vivit Christus […]. (PL 8 1142C– 1142D) [Have mercy, Lord, have mercy, Christ, have mercy, Lord, for I have trusted in You, have mercy, Lord, for I have known You in Thy mercy. / Have mercy, Lord, have mercy, Christ,

49 Subtle rhymes were also used by classical authors (Virgil, Ovid), cf. Roland G. Austin, “Virgilian Assonance,” The Classical Quarterly, 23, 1 (1929): 46–55. 50 Medieval Latin: An Introduction and Bibliographical Guide, ed. Frank Anthony Carl Mantello and Arthur George Rigg (Washington: CUA Press, 1996), 598–599. 51 Frederick Fyvie Bruce, “Marius Victorinus and his Works,” The Evangelical Quarterly 18(1946): 132–153; Alan Hudson–Williams, “Notes on Claudius Marius Victor,” The Classical Quarterly, New Series, 14, 2 (1964): 296–310.

Litanic Verse in Latin

105

You are the λόγος of my spirit, you are the λόγος of my soul, you are the λόγος of my body. / Have mercy, Lord, have mercy, Christ: God is alive and God is always living, and since there is nothing before Him, God lives of Himself. / Have mercy, Lord, have mercy, Christ: Christ is alive and since God allowed Him, the begotten, that Christ live of Himself, since He lives of himself, Christ is always living.]

Finally, the polyonymic “Hymn III” has a refrain at the end of each line: Deus Dominus, sanctus Spiritus: o beata Trinitas. Pater, Filius, Paracletus: o beata Trinitas. Praestator, minister, divisor: o beata Trinitas. Spiritus operationum, Spiritus ministeriorum, Spiritus gratiarum: o beata Trinitas. Unum principium et alterum cum altero et semper alterum cum altero: o beata Trinitas. (PL 8 1143C) [Lord God, Holy Spirit, oh, Holy Trinity. / Father, Son, Paraclete: oh, Holy Trinity. / The Guarantor, the Servant, the Giver: oh, Holy Trinity. / The Spirit of actions, the Spirit of servants, the Spirit of graces: oh, Holy Trinity. / One beginning and the other with the other and always the other with the other: oh, Holy Trinity.]

Vicorinus was regarded as a difficult writer, both due to his rhetorical style (Asiatic) and the neo-Platonic threads that were ubiquitous in his works. However, other relevant examples are difficult to find. Certain similarities can be seen in the well-known hymn “Te Deum laudamus,”52 which is sometimes attributed to Ambrose and has a non-metric structure. The work was used in the holiday liturgy and largely resembles the composition of the Eastern Litany of the Saints. This association is evident both in the order of the heavenly hierarchy,53 which is quoted in the first part of the poem, and in the accompanying acclamation (“Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus”). It is also visible in a series of antonomasias glorifying Christ in the second part and in the final requests that require a response 52 The author is probably Nicetas of Remesiana (from the fourth/fifth century), who also influenced the popularity of hymn singing in the Church. For more about “Te Deum Laudamus” cf. Margot E. Fassler, Robert S. Tangeman, The Divine Office in the Latin Middle Ages: Methodology and Source Studies, Regional Developments, Hagiography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 122–124; Older but important works: Francis Pott, The Hymn Te Deum Laudamus (Norhill: Rivingtons 1884); See also a study from the 1897: Ebenezer Thomson, A Vindication of the Hymn Te Deum laudamus (London: John Russell Smith, 1858), Elizabeth Rundle Charles, Te Deum Laudamus: Christian Life in Song, the Song and the Singers (Whitefisch: Kessinger Publishing, 2006). 53 One exception is the appearance of the Trinity not at the beginning, but at the end of the first part of the hymn, which was probably meant to emphasize the importance of the doctrine.

106

Elżbieta Chrulska

from the worshipers. The repetitive element in the structure of the hymn is the anaphoric use of the inflected pronoun tu, which opens each new invocation of worship. Having said that, the level of independence in this hymn in comparison to the supplicatory Latin tradition previously discussed should be emphasized. “Te Deum laudamus” is in fact a strictly liturgical text, whose most important source was the Eastern canon.

Gregory the Great The most important studies on the origins of the Litany of the Saints mention the so-called deacon litany, or the supplication prayer recited during Mass in the early Christian era. After each request the congregation responded with “Kyrie eleison.”54 The phrase was introduced for the first time to the Roman liturgy by Gregory the Great, who then added the second part, “Christe eleison”55 in an attempt to distance the prayer from the Greek tradition. In many places, however, the Eastern patterns were literally imitated. In the antiphon “Sanctae Mariae Purificatio (ad Processionem)”56 both the Latin and the Greek invocations appear collaterally, as they were known not only from the biblical message (Luke 1:28–38) but also from the Akathist Hymn (“Χαῖρε κεχαριτωμένη, Ave gratia plena, θεοτόκε παρθένε, Dei genitrix Virgo […] ὁ ἤλιος τῆς δικαιοσύνης, Sol iustitiae”). A series of nine calls, “benedictus es,” which is a paraphrase of the biblical Hymn of the Three Youths,57 albeit with several additions (“Et laudabilis gloriosus et al saecula”), ends with the Trisagion prayer: Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritui sancto; et laus et honor et potestas et imperium. Sicut erat in principio et nunc et semper et in saecula saeculorum. Amen. Et laus et honor et potestas et imperium. [Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit / and glory and honour and power and authority. / As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen. / And glory and honour and power and authority.]58

54 That is suggested by the oldest Greek liturgical texts from Antioch (from the fourth century) — the Liturgy of St. James, cf. Edward Dickinson, Music in the History of the Western Church (London: Ardent Media, 1968), 49–51. 55 Ibid. 56 PL 78 653B; Compare the set of antiphons arranged by Gregory the Great for a litanic procession: PL 78 682C–684D. 57 Antiphon “Sabbato in XII lectionibus,” PL 78 644B–644C. 58 Trans. A. Lewandowska and E. Chrulska.

Litanic Verse in Latin

107

The entire prayer has a strongly rhetoric character that is manifested in the parallelism at multiple levels in the organization of the text (anaphora and epiphora, the chorus, equal units of sentences, cursus).59 All this ultimately determines the litanic nature of the prayer. This formula was shaped both by the Eastern liturgical tradition and by Latin military language, which later became the source for a separate type of Western litany called laudes regiae.60 The most significant attempt by Gregory the Great to Christianize the pagan customs was the appropriation of a procession in honour of the pagan god (or goddess), Robigus, which was subsequently called the Greater Litany (litania maior) and celebrated on April 25th (the Feast of Mark the Evangelist) with the singing of psalms and preces. It is impossible to ignore the native context, which had a great influence on the development of the custom of celebrating a Christian procession and also on the form of the invocations (the presence of certain characteristic formulae: “adiuva,” “libera”). Having said that, its dependence on Arian traditions necessitates considerable reflection.61 Moreover, many sources mention not Rome, but Vienna as its place of origin to distinguish it from the Roman litany.62 Reading through the antiphons sung during the Greater Litany in the time of Gregory the Great it is easy to identify the direct references to the cult of saints in Jerusalem.63 Gregory was keen to transform Rome according to

59 In a similar way Gregory the Great also uses rhetorical figures and accentual clausulae in other texts. The most common are polysyndetic structures. Kathleen Brazzel, The Clausulae in the Works of St. Gregory the Great (Washington: Catholic University of America, 1939). 60 For more about the history and evolution of laudes regiae see: Ernst Hartwig Kantorowicz, Laudes Regiae: A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Mediaeval Ruler Worship. With a Study of the Music of the Laudes and Musical Transcriptions (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1958). 61 Eds. Guido M. Berndt, Roland Steinacher, Arianism: Roman Heresy and Barbarian Creed (Burlington: Ashgate, 2014), 220–238. 62 Joyce Hill, “The litaniae maiores and minores in Rome, France and Anglo-Saxon England: Terminology, Texts and Tradition,” Early Medieval Europe 9/2 (2000): 211–246. 63 “De Ierusalem exeunt reliquiae, et salvatio de monte Sion; propterea protectio erit huic civitati, et salvabitur propter David famulum eius, allel. / Ambulate, sancti, viam quam elegistis, festinate ad locum qui vobis praeparatus est; nos in terra canimus, sanctorum laudes dicimus; nos sanctos portamus, in coelis gaudent angeli, alleluia.” (PL 78 682D)

108

Elżbieta Chrulska

the Christian vision, and the processions (especially litaniae septiformis) enabled him to organize the world based on the divine hierarchy.64

Litany (Procession) and Religious Latin Poetry This form of worship soon became an inspiration for later Christian poets whose works often contained the term “ad processionem” in their titles. One such poet was Venantius Fortunatus (from the turn of the sixth and seventh century), the bishop of Poitiers, who in his youth was associated with the court of the Merovingians.65 His works abound in chairetismic apostrophes, emphasizing the solemnity of the day (eg. “Salve, festa dies” in “In Ascensione Domini — ad processionem”66), but he also praises the qualities of saints (St. Peter, St. Florian, St. Mary Magdalene).67 A special place in his work, however, was devoted to the Virgin Mary,68 to whom his hymns were addressed. In the hymn “De sancta Maria” the poet draws directly on the formulae known from the Akathist Hymn, combining them with elements of preces (solve, profer, pelle, posce), which are a part of the trochaic rhythm: Ave, maris stella, Dei Mater alma atque semper virgo, felix coeli porta. Solve vincla reis, profer lumen caecis,

64 Jacob Latham, “The Making of a Papal Rome: Gregory I and the letania septiformis,” in The Power of Religion in Late Antiquity, eds. Andrew Cain, Noel Lenski, (Burlington: Ashgate, 2009), 294–295. 65 For more about his poetic works: Judith George, Venantius Fortunatus: A Latin Poet in Merovingian Gaul (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), 4–34; Abbe D. Tardi, Fortunat: Etude sur un dernier représentant de la poésie latine dans la Gaule Mérovingienne (Paris: Boivin & Cie, 1927). 66 AH 50 80; These calls also adopt a form of compositional clamp (“Dominica Paschae” AH 50 83–85). 67 E.g. Fortunatus enumerates the qualities of the body: “Vincis aromaticas mentis odore comas, / Chara, benigna, micans, pia, sancta, verenda, venusta, / Flos, decus, ara, nitor, palma, corona, pudor.” (“In laudem sanctae Mariae Virginis et matri Domini,” PL 88 284A). 68 For more about the growing cult of the Virgin at the end of the sixth century see: Averil Cameron, “A Nativity Poem of the Sixth Century A.D.,” Classical Philology, 74, 3 (1979), 222–232.

Litanic Verse in Latin

109

mala nostra pelle, bona cuncta posce. (PL 86 265D–266A) [Hail, Star of the Sea, / Loving Mother of God, / And Virgin immortal, / Haven’s blissful portal! // Break the chains of sinners, / Bring light to the blind, / Drive away our evils / Ans ask for all good things.]69

His poetic works show a wide range of the diverse literary conventions discussed in this article, moving from the rhetorical style, which was characteristic of the poems written in hexameter,70 towards the simplicity of the gradually developing Latin rhythmic lines.71

From the Seventh to the Tenth Century As has been noted, the invocations kyrie eleison, ora pro nobis, miserere nobis or intercede pro nobis were to be found already in the liturgical texts of Gregory the Great (e.g. in Liber responsalis). Further developments in the responsorial elements of the liturgy were seen in the emergence of the Litany of the Saints with its emphasis on lists of names. More importantly, however, the liturgy in the temple was accompanied by a further expansion of this particular form of worship, that is, the processions (litaniae), during which different prayers were recited, including litanies in their various forms (e.g. the General Litany, as well as Gallic, Italic and Roman).72 Another important development was the creation of a praiseful lauda (in the late eighth century Frankish Montpellier Psalter MS 409), which was a combination of the Litany of the Saints with an initial invocation “Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat” (tricolon). These were recited during the processions organized by the Gallo-Frankish Church, and it is worth highlighting that the rhythm of the acclamation imitated military rhythms.73

69 Ron Jeffers, Translations and Annotations of Choral Repertoire (Corvallis, Oregon: Earthsongs, 1988), vol. 1, 102. 70 For a detailed analysis of rhetorical strategies (asyndetones, polyptoton, anominatio, alliteration), together with examples see: Guido Maria Dreves, Hymnologische Studien zu Venantius Fortunatus und Rabanus Maurus (Munchen: J. J. Lentner, 1908), 17–26. 71 Wim Verbaal, Yanick Maes, and Jan Papy, The Continuity of Latin Literature, vol. I of Latinitas Perennis (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 158–161. 72 According to Angilbert of Saint-Riquier († 814) in his Institutio de Diversitate Officiorum; Ed. Ferdinand Lot, Hariulf: Chronique de l’Abbaye de Saint-Riquier (Paris: A. Picard et fils, 1894), 296–302. 73 Ernst Hartwig Kantorowicz, Laudes Regiae, 14–53.

110

Elżbieta Chrulska

Many litanic texts are preserved in manuscripts (psalters, breviaries, offices) from both the late Carolingian Renaissance and the following two centuries (that is, from the eighth to the eleventh centuries),74 a period in which the development of the liturgical canon was at its most intense. What unites the most important aspects of the litanic texts, apart from the list of saints (enumeratio), are the responsories taken from the liturgy, i.e. the presence of both the anaphoric ab, a, ut, per and the epiphoric invocations (supplications and deprecations): tu illum / illam / illos adiuva (lauda), libera nos, Domine, miserere nobis, intercede pro nobis (litania italica), miserere nobis / concede Domine; intercede pro nobis; these rogamus audi nos; ora pro nobis (litania gallica), as well as the fact that a prayer was specifically ended with a tricolon structure. A further shared feature was the minimalistic language,75 which is found in tandem with syntactic parallelism. Before discussing paraliturgical forms, it is worth mentioning the phenomenon of paraphrasing poetic passages from the Holy Scripture,76 especially the case of the Hymn of the Three Youths (Dan. 3:57–88) and the Psalms (e.g. Ps. 103) with their parallel structure of the lines.77 Some paraphrases became part of the public worship — as, for example, in the works of the most important poet of the Carolingian age, Alcuin (735–804).78 Alcuin was also the author of Litania seu precatio ad Christum (PL 101 649C; MGH 24 303) which contained allusions to the litany such as the anaphoric phrase “miserere, Domine, miserere, Christe”79 and the epiphora te or in te. A parallelism in the sentence construction (the clear division into three segments) aims at obtaining syllabic equivalence within a group of lines. An invocation to the Holy Trinity with periphrases close the text, although 74 A separate MGH volume is devoted to the litanies of the Carolingian Renaissance: Astrid Krüger, Litanei-Handschriften der Karolingerzeit, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Hilfmittel, vol. 24. (Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 2007); about litanies in the collections of the Vatican Library cf. Pierre Salmon, Les manuscrits liturgiques latins de la Bibliotheque Vaticane (Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1968), 1 (251). 75 Outside Rome Latin was not so well known (“barbaram Romanam linguam,” see note to Litaniae Carolinae, PL 138 885). 76 A literary trend in paraphrasing the Psalms will return in the Renaissance, see: Johannes Gaertner, “Latin Verse Translations of the Psalms: 1500–1620,” The Harvard Theological Review, 49, 4 (1956): 271–305. 77 See the epigrammata of Ratpert from St. Gallen (from the ninth/tenth century): “Item de Veteri Testamento” (PL 87 40D) and Florus’ opuses (810–860): AH 50 161, 162, 164, 165. 78 Cf. Alcuin: Selected Poems, ed. Gordon Jackson (Lincoln: Asgill, 1998), Karl Pomeroy Harrington, Joseph Michael Pucci, Medieval Latin: Second Edition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), 217–228. 79 Cf. “Litanei” 57, 4–30 and “Oratio De Agnitione indulgentia delictorum” (MGH 24 57).

Litanic Verse in Latin

111

the entreating tone of the work that is suggested by the title, and achieved through the invocations (names), harks back to St. Ambrose’s hymns and rhythmic excerpts from St. Augustine.80 The distinctive compositional elements of litany are used by Alcuin in other liturgical texts as well, a number of which were for his personal use.81 In De usu Psalmorum (PL 101 476C) both the names of saints (PL 101 478) and the elements of laudation are accompanied by a deprecation formula (exaudi me, libera me), repeated in a manner that renders the verse similar to rhetoric prose or beseeching poetry: Auxiliatrix sit mihi sancta Trinitas, exaudi me, Domine qui es Deus meus vivus et virtus mea, iudex iustus. Tu medicus potentissimus. Tu es sacerdos in aeternum. Tu dux ad patriam. Tu lux mea vera. Tu dulcedo mea sancta. Tu sapientia mea clara. Tu simplicitas mea pura. Tu anima mea catholica. Tu concordia mea pacifica. Tu custodia mea tota. Tu perfectio mea tota. Tu salus mea sempiterna. Tu misericordia mea magna. Tu vita mea immaculata. Tu patientia robustissima. Tu redemptio mea facta. Tu resurrectio mea sancta. Tu vita perpetua. Te rogo, te deprecor ut per te ambulem, ad te perveniam, in te requiescam et ad te resurgam. Exaudi me, Domine. (PL 101 477D) [May the Holy Trinity be my help, save me, Lord, you are my living God and my virtue, the righteous judge. You are the best physician. You are the eternal high priest. You are the chief in the homeland. You are my true light. You are my sacred sweetness. You are my noble wisdom. You are my pure simplicity. You are my Catholic soul. You are my peaceful concord. You are my whole protection. You are my whole perfection. You are my eternal safety. You are my great mercy. You are my immaculate life. You have the greatest patience. You are my accomplished redemption. You are my sacred resurrection. You are eternal life. I ask you, I beg you that I may, thanks to you, pursue, reach and rest in you and rise from the dead for you. Save me, Lord.]

Syntactic parallelism, including the anaphora tu as well as the prepositional phrases ut per te, ad te, in te, are strengthened by rhymes.82

80 Analogously in other works by Alcuin: “De fide S. Trinitatis” (PL 101 56B); “Oratio sancti Augustini” (PL 101 543B); “Feria III ad speciales orationes faciendas” (PL 101 537B). 81 Libellus precum sacrorum, which is attributed to Alcuin, for example, can be found in a prayer to be said before a journey (“Oratio pro iter agentibus” PL 101 1414C) with an invocation from the litany Te rogamus. Elements of litanic patterns (enumeratio, deprecations) also appear in Latin acrostics (Bernovini carmina, e.g. “Deus Miserere” MGH 1 416, 420). 82 Cf. an example of another laudatio: “O beata Trinitas” in “Ad Laudem Dei oratio pura” (PL 101 1409C); “Oratio ante laetaniam”–“Litanei” 25a, 6–9 (MGH 24 25a); deprecation: “miserere me” in the “Oratio pro agnitione Dei et pro Indulgentia delictorum et péremption diversarum tribulationum” (PL 101 497B), supplication after Psalm 39: “libera,

112

Elżbieta Chrulska

However, in that epoch the most ambitious Latin poetry was created in order to imitate the classical models. Hence the most common pattern was still the hexameter, although because of its irregular formula with regard to the number of syllables per line, it also became a major constraint in the development of poetic litanies. Having said that, a litany written in hexameter is found in Monumenta Liturgica, a collection from the tenth century (PL 138 1082–1083). There were also interesting developments with respect to the work of monks from St. Gallen (from the eighth to the tenth century) – a fact which is all the more fascinating given that the oldest manuscript of the Litany of the Saints, which dates back to the late eighth century, was found in this monastery.83 The works of certain monks, namely Ratpert (PL 87 39B), Hartmann (PL 87 31, PL 87 32B), and Notker (PL 87 42B), were originally written for monastic use only, although as time passed they became popular throughout Europe and entered the liturgical canon in the thirteenth century (PL 138 1081C and 1082C). Notker wrote, for example, rhythmic litanies (PL 87 42B) with the supplicatory formulae “te rogamus,” “audi nos,” and these were accompanied in the manuscripts by musical notes to support the singing. Indeed perhaps their very nature was influenced by the sequences of Gregory the Great84 or the versus ad sequentias by an anonymous monk from Jumièges.85 At the Carolingian court metric verses that compositionally mimic litany were also created by a student of Alcuin, Rabanus Maurus (780–856) (e.g. “Versus more litaniae facti” PL 112 1629B). In “Oratio ad Deum” (PL 112 1591) a parallel structure of sentences with an anaphoric tu follows the example of early beseeching poetry. While the internal differentiation of the meter (a different arrangement of dactyls and spondees) does not help a reader to recognize the measure, the rhythmic effect in the poem is achieved by syntactic repetitions. In the same way

Domine, animam” (PL 101 552C) and somewhat later liturgical Adhémar de Chabannes’ prayers (from the tenth/eleventh century) with chairetismic ave (CCSL 245 62). 83 Paris, Bibl. Nat., The Sacramentary of Gellone, Bibl. Nat. Lat. 12048; Cf. Lapidge, AngloSaxon Litanies of the Saints (London: Boydell Press, 1991), 33–34. 84 Edward Nowacki, “The Gregorian Office Antiphons and the Comparative Method,” The Journal of Musicology, vol. 4, 3 (1985/1986): 243–275. 85 Ibidem, 48; Susan Rankin, “The Earliest Sources of Notker’s Sequences: St. Gallen, Vadiana 317, and Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale Lat. 10587,” Early Music History 10 (1991): 201–233; Ruth Ellis Messenger, “Whence the Ninth Century Hymnal?,” Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 69 (1938): 446–464.

Litanic Verse in Latin

113

in the poetry of a deacon from Lyon, Florus (from the ninth century) a significant role in the composition of the opus is played by anaphora:86 Quorum purpureus de sanguine praemicat orbis, Quorum florigeris praefulgent astra coronis, Quorum casta Dei decorantur templa sepulcris, Quorum tota micant insignia tempora festis, Quorum cuncta sacris cedunt incommoda votis. […] (PL 119 258B) [It is by their blood that the purple world gleams. / It is by their floral wreaths that the stars shine. / It is by their tombs that the pure temples of God are ornamented. / It is their insignia that all shine during feasts. / It is by their holy prayers that all adversities are vanquished.]

Rabanus Maurus is also the author of “Hymnus de Christo” (AH 50 157) and “Versus de annuntiatione Mariae,” (PL 112 1665B) which ends with the following laudation: Psallite summo, psallite regi, psallite Iesu, psallite Christo, psallite vivo, psallite vero. [sing to the Almighty, / sing to the King, / sing to Jesus, / sing to Christ, / sing to the living one, / sing to the true one.]

The rhythmicity is achieved in a simple way, that is, by the use of a combination of anaphora with two-syllable apposition.87 The syntactic parallelism that is based on

86 Similarly AH 50 164 and 165, also in the works of Alcuin that were written in hexameter and elegiac couplet, pronouns and conjunctions functioning as anaphora (qui, ut, et) played an important role, see: Elegiacum carmen (PL 101 647B). Compare also the works of the monks of St. Gallen (PL 87 35A–36B, 42B–43A, 57B–58A, 49A–49D). 87 This is also the case in the next two stanzas of Hosanna and Gloria. Cf. the endings in “Litanei” 31, 457–461: “Filius Dei defende nos. / Filius Dei protege nos. / Filius Dei adiuva nos. / Filius Dei libera nos. / Filius Dei salva nos.” (MGH 24 31), as well as in “Linaei” 32, 9–11 i 33, 9–11 (MGH 24 32, 33) and certain hymns (AH 50 46): “Christus est natus / Christus est passus / Christus in cruce / Christus secessit / Christus in sepulchro / Christus resurrexit.” Cf. also Oratio ad Christum Prima written by Godescalc (from tenth century): “Erve servum, / Valde misellum, / Pelle piaclum, / Tolle reatum, / Dirige gressum, / Redde paratum.” (AH 50 166), analogously his Oratio ad Christum altera (AH 50 167).

114

Elżbieta Chrulska

a system of repetitions also occurs in a well-known hymn from the ninth century, “Veni, Sancte Spiritus.”88 At the same time, however, non-religious examples of litanic patterns from this period are also worth mentioning. Certain litanic schemes quickly began to be used in secular Latin literature, especially in commemorative literature that praised or mourned a wealthy patron. The elegiac poem addressed to Pepin that was written in the eight/ninth century by Angilbert Abbot of Saint-Riquier, a student of Alcuin, is a laudation that mimics Psalm 136: Quid Chrodthrudis agat, quid Berta et regia fari exspectans poterit, gaudia tanta ferens? Quid Gis [F., Gisla] et Teodrada simul cum prole retractant, caetera regali quas tuus agit amor. Quid Gisla egregii sponsa praepulchra Tonantis, quid Luitgardis ovans Regis amore luat. Quid Hildibaldus praecellens ordine vatis, quidve duces, comites, quid puer atque senes.89 [What would Chrodthrudis accomplish and what, awaiting the royal possessions, could Berta say, having such honour? What would Gis[la] and Teodrada remember, together with the other royal offspring your love has begotten? How would Gisla, the beautiful wife of the great Tonant and Luitgardis, enjoying the love of the king, make amends? What would the excellent Hildibaldus in the poet’s retinue and the chiefs, the members of the retinue, the boy and the old man do?]

The same elements, such as anaphora or enumeration, which are used to emphasize the uniqueness of the king, can also be found in poems of a religious nature (cf. Florus’ elegy). Certain specific litanic features also appear in poems of mourning,

88 “Veni, pater pauperum, / Veni, dator munerum, / Veni, lumen cordium. […] In labore requies, / In aestu temperies, / In fletu solatium.” (AH 54 234); cf. Ruth Ellis Messenger, “Hymns and Sequences of the Sarum Use: An Approach to the Study of Medieval Hymnology,” Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 59 (1928): 99–129; Daniel Joseph Donohue, “The Sacred Songs of the Middle Ages,” The Catholic Historical Review, 9, 2 (1923): 217–235; Anselm Hughes, “Music in the Chapel of King Henry VI,” Proceedings of the Musical Association 60 (1933–1934): 27–37. 89 “Carmen ad Pippinum” (PL 99 851D–852D).

Litanic Verse in Latin

115

complaint and lamentation.90 In a rhythmic dirge91 by Columban of St. Trond (from the ninth century), written after the death of Charlemagne, the work has a responsorial character and repeated lamentations92 accompany the enumeratio: A solis ortu usque ad occidua littora maris planctus pulsat pectora, heu mihi misero! Ultra Marina agmina tristitia tetigit ingens cum moerore nimio. Heu mihi misero! Franci, Romani atque cuncti creduli luctu punguntur et magna molestia. Heu mihi misero! Infantes, senes, gloriosi praesules, matronae plangunt detrimentum Caesaris. Heu mihi misero! […] (PL 106 1257C; MGH 1 434–436) [From the rising sun to the western shores of the sea, lamentation makes the hearts of men throb. Overwhelming sorrow has covered with excessive grief our armies beyond the sea. Alas, I lament in my grief ! Franks, Romans, and all true believers, infants, aged, renowned princes, feel the pangs of sorrow and a great calamity. For the earth cries out the loss of Caeser. Alas, miserable me!]93

As a consequence, the grief over the loss of the king is amplified and his death is mourned by the whole world, which is somewhat similar to the complaints after the death of King Louis the Pious (“Querela de divisione post mortem Ludovici Pii”) written by Florus of Lyon: Omnia concrepitant divinis cincta flagellis, omnia vastantur horrendae cladis erumnis, omne bonum pacis odiis laniatur acerbis, omne decus regni furiis fuscatur iniquis. (PL 119 249B)

90 Poésies Populaires Latines Du Moyen Age, ed. Edélestand Du Méril (Paris: A. Franck, 1847), 36–38; Cf. Poeseos popularis ante saeculum duodecimum latine decantatae Reliquias (Paris: Brockhaus et Avenarium, 1843), 294–298. 91 The song consists of twenty three-line strophes, each with a distich of two 12-syllable lines, cf. Peter Godman, Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press 1985), 207. 92 Cf. “Confessio et oratio sancti Augustini de libris confessionum eius” (PL 101 1402B). 93 Anne Faulkner Oberndorfer, What We Hear in Music: A Course of Study in Music History and Appreciation, (Camden: Educational Department, Victor Talking Machine Company, 1921), 282. In this text and translation instead of name „Ceaser” is „Charles” (Charlemagne.)

116

Elżbieta Chrulska

[Everything together creaks, bound by scourges, / everything is ruined from the misfortunes of a horrible plague, / all the benefits of peace are torn by the blades of hate, / all the glory of the kingdom is overshadowed by unjust feuds.]

From the Eleventh to the Thirteenth Century Despite the expansion of rhythmic verse, which was in part associated with the development of medieval, liturgical music,94 at the beginning of the second millennium metric poetry that drew on classical patterns was still being created95 and hexameter as well as elegiac couplet were frequently used. Indeed works which imitated liturgical forms were at times of considerable importance. For example, in “Ad Christum precatio” (AH 50 255) by Alphanus of Salerno (1020–1085) each distich (with the exception of the final two which close the prayer) begins with an invocation to Christ, followed by onomata (sometimes repeated). The prayer ends with a somewhat elaborated enumeration, which conjures up the Latin beseeching tradition: Pax mea, laus mea, spes mea, res mea, lux mea, Christe glorifico, veneror te, benedico, colo. Te solum laetor, te solum gaudeo, solum amplector, cupio, diligo, quaero, sequor. [My peace, my glory, my hope, my light, Christ / I praise you, I worship you, I bless you and venerate you. / It is only in you that I take delight, it is only because of you that I rejoice, / it is only you that I hold desire, love, seek, it is you I follow.]

In the fragment quoted above the boundaries of the feet generally define the boundaries of the words and the layout of morae coincides with the speech accent. The prevalence of dactyls also affects the regularity of the rhythm in the verses, thus eliminating the differences in a structure typical of metric verse. This “misuse” with respect to classical rules, highlights the changes in literary conventions,96 as well as the parallelism of syntax which is in this case the core of the text. The same

94 John Stevens, Words and Music in the Middle Ages: Song, Narrative, Dance and Drama, 1050–1350 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 48–60, Susan Boynton, “Orality, Literacy, and the Early Notation of the Office Hymns,” Journal of the American Musicological Society, 56, 1 (2003): 99–168. 95 Walter Bradbury Sedgwick, “The Style and Vocabulary of the Latin Arts of Poetry of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries,” Speculum 3, 3 (1928): 349–381; Martin R. P. McGuire, “Mediaeval Humanism,” The Catholic Historical Review 38, 4 (1953): 397–409. 96 Cf. George Duckworth, “Studies in Latin Hexameter Poetry,” Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 97 (1966): 67–113.

Litanic Verse in Latin

117

occurs in moral poetry.97 For example, in the song “Contra indvidum” by Marbodus of Rennes from the eleventh/twelfth century, the phrase “rumpitur invidia,” which appears either as anaphora or epiphora, plays a key role:98 Rumpitur invidia quidam, charissime Iuli. Quod me Roma legit, rumpitur invidia. Rumpitur invidia, quod sim iocosus amicus. Quod conviva frequens, rumpitur invidia. Rumpitur invidia, quod rus mihi dulce sub urbe est. Parvaque in urbe domus, rumpitur invidia. Rumpitur invidia, quod turba semper in omni monstramur digito, rumpitur invidia. Rumpitur invidia, quod amemur atque probamur. Rumpatur quisquis rumpitur invidia. (PL 171 1719D) [Overcome is the hatred, dearest Julius. / Because it is me that Rome has chosen, overcome is the hatred. / Overcome is the hatred, for the playful friend I am. / For the guest is frequent, overcome is the envy. / Overcome is the hatred, for I have a charming village near the town. / And a small house in the town, overcome is the hatred. / Overcome is the hatred, for we love and accept. / May everything be overcome, overcome is the hatred.]

The late Middle Ages was primarily a period in which both planctus and elegiac poetry of mourning were developed. A list of the most important contributors included Baldric of Dol, an eleventh/twelfth century writer who continued the Carolingian tradition.99 In his metric poems, he used the litanic formulae, such as enumeration and onomata, in order to describe the deceased (cf. PL 166 1188, PL 166 1195D), or antiphons, as in a rhythmic planctus written after the death of his teacher (“mors tua mihi dura,” “vae mea vita mihi,” cf. PL 166 1198B). However, in these selected poems the aforementioned elements do not play a key role, since their function is strictly ornamental.

97 Cf. “De mulieribus, quam ad malum pronae” (PL 171 1491B). In another poem by Marbodus (“De lapsu et reparatione hominis,” PL 171 1731C) the main principle behind the composition is enumeration. 98 Marbodus is also the creator of certain rules of poetry (PL 171 1687), in which the first and most important of the artistic measures is based on a system of repetition that starts with conversio (“conversio est, per quam, non ut ante, primum repetimus Verbum sed ad postremum revertimur”) and complexio (“complexio est quae utramque complectitur exornationem et hanc quam modo exposuimus, ut et repetamus idem Verbum saepius et crebro”). 99 Cf. Otto Schumann, “Baudri von Bourgueil als Dichter,” in Studien zur lateinischen Dichtung des Mittelalters (Dresden: Wilhelm und Bertha v. Baensch Stiftung, 1931), 3, 885–896.

118

Elżbieta Chrulska

Both planctus and lamentation significantly influenced moral poetry. In a rhythmic poem on the futility of this world, which was regular, long, and often replicated in medieval manuscripts, there is the following excerpt: Heu, heu! Mundi vita quare me delectas ita? Cum non possis mecum stare, quid me cogis te amare? Heu! Vita fugitiva, omni fera plus nociva! Cum tenere non te queam, cur seducis mentem meam? Heu! Vita, mors vocanda, odienda, non amanda. Cum in te sint nulla bona, cur expecto tua bona?100 [Oh! Oh! The life of the world / why do you bring such joy to me? / Cannot you exist with me / so that you do not make me love you? / Oh! Life passing by, / wild and more dangerous than anything! / If I cannot bear you, / why do you delude my mind? / Oh! Life, death called in the future, / hateful, unloved. / If there is no good in you, / why do I seek thy good?]

Each 8-syllable verse that imitates the trochaic meter is part of a broader composition based on parallel sentence structures (exclamations and interrogatives: Heu!, cum, cur?), which resemble liturgical responsory forms.101 The rhythm of the line is strengthened by both external and internal rhymes as well as paronomasias. This stage in the development of litanic verse coincides with the appearance of the first Marian litanies that were inspired by the Akathist Hymn.102 The invocations characteristic of their Latin translation (ave, salve) appeared earlier in

100 Poesies Populaires, 108–121. Cf. Lamentations about decadence in Poesies Populaires, 136–144. 101 Henry Osborn Taylor, The Mediaeval Mind: A History of the Development of Thought and Emotion (London: Macmillan and Co., 1911), 1, 930. 102 More about the journey of the text from East to West and about its first translations: Gilles Gérard Meersseman, Der Hymnos akathistos im Abendland (Freiburg: Universitätsverlag, 1960), 2, 50–51. About the further development of the Marian litany, especially Litania lauretana: La Civiltà cattolica, 9, 16 (1897): 529–543.

Litanic Verse in Latin

119

the liturgy103 as well as in Latin literature, especially in lauds and hymnology.104 However, the strength of the cult of Mary had already been reflected in the growing popularity of the Hours of the Virgin, which was definitively set by Benedict of Aniane in the eight/ninth century.105 All these sources, which symbolically merged into the first Marian litanies, played a significant role in the creation of rhythmic poetry.106 Chairetismic invocations within the chorus (e.g. “Ave sponsa insponsata,” cf. PL 158 1047) influenced, for example, Adam of St. Victor (1112–1146), a fragment of whose “In Assumptione beatae Virginis” is quoted below: Salve Mater Salvatoris, vas electum, vas honoris, vas coelestis gratiae. Ab aeterno vas provisum, vas insigne, vas excisum manu sapientiae. Salve, Verbi sacra parens, flos de spinis, spina carens, flos, spineti gloria. […] (PL 196 1501B) [Hail, Mother of the Saviour, chosen vessel, vessel of honour, vessel of celestial grace, vessel prepared from eternity, famous vessel, vessel cut by the hand of Wisdom. Hail, sacred Mother of the Word, flower born from thorns, flower without a thorn, flower, glory of the thorn bush […].]107

The trochaic rhythm of each stanza (composed of two 8-syllable and a final 6-syllable line) is strengthened by a repetition of the various names for Mary (vas, flos, spina) which draw on literary traditions (e.g. hymns by Fortunatus) and create euphonic effects.108 103 Cf. The Antiphon of Gregory the Great: “Purificatio sanctae Mariae ad Processionem” (PL 78 653B). 104 Cf. Hymns of Fortunatus (PL 88 265C), Notker (PL 87 40D), Poem “Deus amat puella” (MGH 5 2 553). 105 Roger Wieck, “Prayer for the People: The Book of Hours,” in A History of Prayer: The First to the Fifteenth Century, ed. Roy Hammerling (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 390–391. 106 Some interesting examples can also be observed in metric poetry, e.g. in a panegyric poem written by Baldric and addressed to Cecilia, the daughter of the king of England (PL 166 1203D); Cf. Laudation “De Duce Rotgerio” (PL 166 1204). 107 Brian K. Reynolds, Gateway to Heaven (New York: New City Press, 2012) vol. 1, 222. 108 Cf: “De sancta Cruce et beata Virgine et bono latrone,” (PL 158 939A) “Oratio ad sanctam Virginem Mariam” (PL 158 960B) by Anselm of Canterbury (from the eleventh/twelfth century), “Ad sanctissimam Dei genetricem” (AH 50 323) by Bernard

120

Elżbieta Chrulska

The same phenomenon can be found in Latin poetic prayers, which were written even earlier than the poem quoted above. In the 8-syllable verse by Hildebert of Lavardin from the eleventh/twelfth century each line (or perhaps hemistich) has a trochaic accentuation, yet at the same time it is in fact a semantic whole:109 Me receptet Syon illa, Syon, David urbs tranquilla cuius faber auctor lucis, cuius porte lignum crucis, cuius muri lapis vivus, cuius custos rex festivus. In hac urbe lux solennis, ver aeternum, pax perennis. In hac odor implens coelos, in hac semper festum melos. Non est ibi corruptela, non defectus, non querela, non minuti, non deformes, omnes Christo sunt conformes […].110 [The Heavenly Jerusalem May Sion receive me, Sion, the peaceful city of David, Whose maker is the creator of light, Whose gates are the wood of the cross, Whose keys are Peter’s word, Whose citizens are always happy, Whose walls are a living stone, whose guardian is the ruler of the feast. THis city light is undying, Spring eternal, peace perennial. In this city perfume fills the sky. In this city there is always festal melody. In it there is no corruption, no want, no complaining. No weak, no unsightly, all are like Christ.]111

of Cluny (from the twelfth century), and “De corona Virginis” (PL 96 298A) by Ildephonsus of Toledo (incertus). Similarly in other works not dedicated to Mary: “De sancto Ioanne evangelista” by Adam of St. Victor (PL 196 1427A), and “Tristichon ad sanctam Crucem” by Reginald fitz Jocelin from twelfth century (AH 50 290). 109 About Hildebert see the following works: Jean-Barthélemy Hauréau, Les Mélanges poetiques d’Hildebert de Lavardin (Paris: G. Pedone-Lauriel, 1882); Adolphe Dieudonné, Hildebert de Lavardin, évéque du Mans, archévéque de Tours (1056–1133), sa vie, ses lettres (Paris: G. Pedone–Lauriel, 1898). 110 Sacred Latin Poetry: Chiefly Lyrical, Selected and Arranged for Use, ed. Richard Chenevix Trench (London: Macmillan and Co., 1864), 332; On rhythm in the poem Cf. Poesies Populaires, 426–427. Cf. also analogous, although a less usual example of a pilgrim’s prayer (PL 155 1292A) in Poesies Populaires, 56–58 as well as “Oratio XL Rhythmus ad Deum et omnes Sanctos” of Anselm of Canterbury (PL 158 932D). 111 Frederick Brittain, The Penguin Book of Latin Verse: With Plain Prose Translations of Each Poem (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1962), 191–192.

Litanic Verse in Latin

121

In the late Middle Ages and at the beginning of the Renaissance all the Latin hymnody dedicated to Mary, which was usually anonymous, involved litanic patterns. The latter were mostly related to chairetismic invocations (ave, salve; the invocation o!, e.g. AH 37 54, 86, 76, 78, 87, 90, 91; AH 32 10, 11, 16, 20; AH 15 50–53), onomata taken from traditional literature (e.g. lumen, flos, fons) as well as descriptive phrases (“super omnes,” “inter omnes” AH 32 10; “Tu es” AH 37 73, 86). A special group was the so-called Gaudia Virginis Mariae, that is, poems with a distinctive anaphora gaude, after which the merits attributed to the Mother of God were enumerated (“De gaudiis Mariae” — e.g. AH 31 182–194, AH 32 64–72). The chairetismic expressions and onomata primarily used in Marian hymns also worked perfectly in hymns devoted to the Holy Trinity (AH 21 2; AH 31, 1, 9, 33, 112), as well as to female saints (AH 37 137, 179, 225, 281).112 Due to their musical character, the hymns used to have a regular versification (usually an 8-syllable verse), although there were also irregular verses and prose poems (e.g. AH 31 1, AH 32 161). On the other hand, in academic circles anthems that drew on lauds from the early medieval tradition were created (“Christus vincit” AH 15 31), as well as poems devoted to the Holy Cross (“Crux mihi” AH 15 26), which experimented with different artistic styles, e.g. alliteration (AH 15 63). In the examples so far discussed the relationship between poems and litany formulae as sources of inspiration has clearly been of an emulative character. This association, which was on occasions extremely subtle, did not lower the value of a poem as only certain formal solutions were drawn from the litany, and this enriched the artistic aspects of the poetic work through the use of elements close to the practice of prayer. In parallel, however, Latin literature also abounded with examples of parody, whose subjects were selected from parts of the same litanic compositions.113 In the well-known codex of Carmina Burana, from the eleventh and twelfth centuries,114 there is a song that makes direct reference to the litanic

112 Cf. also, for example, religious poems written in Poland: “Anonymi sequentia de sancta Katharina,” and the hymn “De beata Maria Virgine” by Stanisław Ciołek, Antologia poezji łacińskiej w Polsce [Antology of Latin Poetry in Poland], ed. Kazimierz Liman (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Adama Mickiewicza, 2004), 476, 488. 113 It could be associated with the element of drama in the processional litany, which in the late Middle Ages became a spectacle, with people going to see it but also going to be seen. See: Eckbert of Schönau, Vita S. Elisabeth (PL 195 187C), and Bruno of Segni, Vita S. Leonis IX (PL 165 1117B) from the twelfth century. 114 Codex Buranus: Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, elm 4660; about Carmina Burana: Dieter Schaller, “Carmina Burana,” in Lexikon des Mittelalters (Munich–Zurich: Artemis, 1983), 2, col. 1514.

122

Elżbieta Chrulska

septiformis established at the time of Gregory the Great.115 In the parodic text116 the prayer is replaced by the act of drinking. Each 8-syllable line of the trochaic verse is divided into two equal parts, which are integral to the long enumeration that is subordinate to the anaphoric verb bibit ([he or she] drinks):117 […] Tam pro papa quam pro rege bibunt omnes sine lege. Bibit hera, bibit herus, bibit miles, bibit clerus, bibit ille, bibit illa, bibit servus cum ancilla, bibit velox, bibit piger, bibit albus, bibit niger, bibit constans, bibit vagus, bibit rudis, bibit magus, bibit pauper et aegrotus, bibit exul et ignotus, bibit puer, bibit canus, bibit praesul et decanus, bibit soror, bibit frater, bibit anus, bibit mater, bibit ista, bibit ille, bibunt centum, bibunt mille. […] (fol. 87) [They drink to the pope and king alike, / They drink without restraint. / The mistress drinks, the master drinks, / the soldier drinks, the cleric drinks, / the man drinks, the woman drinks, / the manservant drinks with the serwing maid, / the quick man drinks, the sluggard drinks, / the white man drinks, the black man drinks, / the steady man drinks, the wanderer drinks, / the simpleton drinks, the wiseman drinks. / The poor man drinks, the sick man drinks, / the exile drinks and the unknown, / the boy drinks, the old man drinks, / the bishop drinks and the deacon, / sister drinks and brother drinks, / the old crone drinks, that one drinks, / a hundred drinks, a thousand drinks.]118

115 Jacob Latham, The Making of a Papal Rome, 294–295. 116 See: Helga Schüppert, Kirchenkritik in der lateinischen Lyrik des 12. und 13. Jahrhunderts (München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1972), 185; Rupert Glasgow, Madness, Masks, and Laughter: An Essay on Comedy (London–Toronto: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1995), 77–78. 117 Cf. Bacchanal poem by Alexander Neckam (CCSL 221 195–201). 118 Carl Orff, Carmina burana: cantiones profanae, songs from the Manuscript Collection of Benedictbeuern for solo voices, chorus, and orchestra (New York: Associated Music Publishers, 1953), 9.

Litanic Verse in Latin

123

The Marian litany with its characteristic invocations was also parodied in a similar way, e.g. in “The Song of Wine”: […] Ave! Color vini clari, ave! Sapor sine pari, tua nos inebriari digneris potentia! Ave! Placens in colore, ave! Fragrans in odore, ave! Sapidum in ore, dulcis linguae vinculum! […]119 [Hail! The colour of transparent wine, / Hail! The taste incomparable, / By your power it comes to satisfy us. / Hail! Of good colour, / Hail! Strong smelling. / Hail! Taste on the tongue, / the sweet prison of the tongue.]

The Renaissance It is difficult to find within the Renaissance poems any examples of litanic formulae that correspond to their original purpose, although writers such as Angelo Poliziano (1454–1494)120 or Enea Silvio Piccolomini (1405–1464)121 refer to the litany in their Marian hymns.122 Moreover, the poets who did employ litanic elements, did it within the framework of a literary concept, in which repetitive means were supposed to enthrall the reader and convince the audience of the poetic skills of the writer.123 This was frequently the case in elegiac love poetry, as e.g. in the poem addressed to Celia that was written by Hieronymus Angerianus (1470–1535):

119 Poésies Latines Populaires, 204–205; also a bacchanalian opus with an invocation and a number of calls to Bacchus (Ibid., 203–204). 120 Anaphoras: O, Tu, Ecce in “Hymn I” and “Hymn II”: Angelo Poliziano, Prose volgari inedite e poesie latine e greche edite e inedite, ed. Isidoro Del Lungo (Florence: G. Barbèra, 1867), 277–280. 121 An invocation “Virgo Maria” in “In Virginem Mariam,” Enea Silvio Corsignano Piccolomini, Carmina, ed. A. van Heck (Vatican: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1994), 157–159. 122 In the same way invocations to Mary were used by Bonaiuto da Casentino (from the late thirteenth century) in “Dilatatio laudis super ‘Ave regina celorum’,” “Il «Diversiloquium» di Bonaiuto da Casentino, poeta di curia ai tempi di Bonifacio VIII,” Aevum: Rassegna di scienze storiche, linguistiche e filologiche 75(2001): 381–448. 123 Poeti del cinquecento. Vol. 1. Poeti lirici, burleschi, satirici e didascalici, ed. Guglielmo Gorni, Massimo Danzi and Silvia Longhi (Milano–Napoli: Ricciardi, 2001).

124

Elżbieta Chrulska

Quid mihi, barbaricae si miscent proelia turmae, maeret et ereptis Ausonis ora bonis? Quid mihi si dira descendunt grandine nimbi, ustulat et cultos Sirius acer agros? Quid mihi si pereunt homines, armenta gregesque, Insidet et siccis faucibus atra fames? Quid mihi si regnant reges, laudantur et ipsi, vendit et elatos purpura lata duces?124 [What good does it do me that the barbarian hosts initiate wars and the land of the Ausones grieves for possessions torn away from it? / What good does it do me that the clouds descend with heavy hail, and the stern Sirius scorches the croplands? / What good does it do me that people, cattle and pigs die and a black hunger stays in the dry throats. / What good does it do me that the kings reign and praise themselves and the dignified prince sells the wide crimson.]

Similar litanic formulae were also used in panegyric works,125 for example, in a poem written by Franciscus Natalis: Dandulus iste quis est? Veneti generosa senatus curia quem iactat. Dandulus iste quis est? Dandulus iste quis est? Clarum Chorvatia cuius nomen ad astra vehit. Dandulus iste quis est? Dandulus iste quis est? Praestanter vivida virtus quem superis miscet. Dandulus iste quis est?

124 Girolamo Angeriano, Erotopaegnion, ed. AllanWilson (Nieuwkoop: De Graaf, 1995), 69. Cf. another poem: “De Caelia et Amore,” and “In invidos” written by Antonio Beccadelli detto Panormita (1394–1471) di A[ntonio] Beccadelli detto il Panormita [Antonius Panormita], ed. Roberto Valentini and Adolfo Cinquini (Aosta: Giuseppe Allasia, 1907), 39; Also: “Sonolegia quinta de laudibus Zoaninae,” and “De bocca Zaninae” by Teofilo Folengo (Mantova, 1491–1544), Teofilo Folengo, Opus macaronicum: notis illustratum; cui accessit vocabularium vernaculum, etruscum et latinum; editio omnium locupletissima, vol. 1 (Amstelodami: Braglia, 1768), 12–13. 125 See a hexametric poem written by Convenevole da Prato: “Regia carmina ad Robertum Andecauensem” with the anaphora “laudemus Regem.” Convenevole da Prato, Regia carmina. Dedicati a Roberto d’Angiò Re di Sicilia e di Gerusalemme, ed. Marco Ciatti, Aldo Petri and Cesare Grassi (Milano: Gruppo Bibliofili Pratesi, 1982); poetic fragments (with anaphora: “vale”) from the letters of Petrarca (1304–1374): fam. 11, 4. Francesco Petrarca, Lettere disperse: varie e miscellanee, ed. Alessandro Pancheri (Milano: Fondazione Pietro Bembo, 1994); Cf. El. I 4, II 3 written by Grzegorz of Sambor: Grzegorz z Sambora, Carmina selecta, trans. Elwira Buszewicz, ed. Mieczysław Mejor (Warszawa: Neriton, 2011), 168, 282.

Litanic Verse in Latin

125

Dandulus iste quis est? Splendet clementia cuius, fulget ubique decus. Dandulus iste quis est? Dandulus iste quis est? Sceleratis poena, bonorum.126 [Who is this Dandulus? The one in whom the noble-minded council of the Venetian senate takes pride. Who is this Dandulus? / Who is this Dandulus? The one whose famous name Croatia lifts up to the stars. Who is this Dandulus? / Who is this Dandulus? The one whose powerful nobleness intertwines with the heavens. Who is this Dandulus? / Who is this Dandulus? The one whose gentleness shines and whose virtue shines everywhere. Who is this Dandulus? / Who is this Dandulus? A punishment for those who commit an offence against the good [people].]

At the same time, however, the formulae that drew on litanic patterns could also be observed in popular Renaissance poetry and Baroque bucolic works, in which elements of “magic” appeared:127 Ah, pereant pisces, omnes pereantque volucres. Non o non volucres capiat quae mecum Amaryllis. Squalescant fruges, segetes agrique negarint. Non o non segetes quae ventilet alba Amaryllis. Non mulctralia dent lac, aut pomaria fructus. Non o non fructus comedat quae mecum Amaryllis. Non dent fetum armenta, negent viridaria flores. Non o non flores quae colligat alba Amaryllis. Dispereant fontes, arescant fluminis undae. Non o non undas mihi quae hauriat alba Amaryllis.128 (120–129) [Oh, let the fish perish and let all the birds perish. / No, Amaryllis shall not catch birds with me anymore. / Let the fruit go bad and the fields deny their crops. / No, the white Amaryllis shall not air the crops anymore. / Let the milking pails give no milk, and the gardens give no fruit. / No, Amaryllis shall not eat fruit with me anymore. / Let the sheep give no cheese and the gardens deny us flowers. / No, the bright Amaryllis shall not pick flowers anymore. / Let the springs disappear, let the waters dry in rivers. / No, the bright Amaryllis shall not draw water for me anymore.]

126 Pesme Franja Božičevića Natalisa, ed. Miroslav Marković (Beograd: S.A.N. Naucno delo Bgd., 1958), 121–122. 127 William Leonard Grant, Neo-Latin Literature and the Pastoral (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1965), 202–203; Thomas Hubbard, The Pipes of Pan: Intertextuality and Literary Filiation in the Pastoral Traditions from Theocritus to Milton (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1998). 128 Gerolamo Aleandro Iuniur, Amaryllis, accessed on May 20, 2015, http://mqdq.cab. unipd.it/mqdq/poetiditalia/contesto.jsp?ordinata=pf3101083; cf. also: Kaspar Pridmann, Carmen Hexametrvm Bvcolicvm in natalem Iesu Christi scriptum Ad Magnificum […] Dominum Stephanum Haubtman […] (Viennae: Raphael Hoffhalter, 1560).

126

Elżbieta Chrulska

A certain group of poems that employed wide-ranging repetitiveness, which on occasion brought them close to litany, emerged as a result of the influence of Georg Fabricius, Fridericus Widebramus, and other radical Lutherans, who consciously avoided allusions to antiquity in their works, in order to promote a return to the pure style of the early Christian writers. Fabricius published collections of Latin works from the early centuries of Christianity,129 collections which soon were reflected in the religious poetry written in the second half of the sixteenth and the early seventeenth century.130 A sign of this artistic trend that was easily recognized — and whose aim was the propitiation of God, as in times of religious persecution — was the use of the term precatio or sacra in the titles of the collections and the paraphrases of the Psalms.131 In these poems one of the prominent figures employed were certain well-known words from litanic invocations (Tu, per te) or supplications (precor, deprecamur), as well as enumeratio, yet the authors deliberately avoided traditional litanic formulae, especially those which were characteristic of Catholic piety. However, the writers might also have been hampered by both the metric nature of the verse (mostly hexameter and elegiac couplet) and their fidelity to the ancient patterns that were typical of this group of works.132 In this way the increasing interest in the classical tradition and the growing distance from the medieval forms of piety significantly reduced the influence of litanic forms. Apart from the Latin hymnody and those works written for private devotion, in the late Renaissance and in the Baroque period the litanic formula became a rhetorical ornament that no longer referred to the world of transcendence.

129 Georgius Fabricius, Poëtarum veterum ecclesiasticorum opera Christiana (Basilea: Joannes Oporinus, 1562). 130 Cf. Karl Otto Conrady, Lateinische Dichtungstradition und deutsche Lyrik des 17. Jahrhunderts (Bonn: Bouvier, 1962), 293–299. 131 E.g. Henricus Hoevel, Sacrorum carminum liber (Steinfurti: Theophllus Caesar, 1605); Huldericus Schoberus, In natalem Filii Dei, in eiusdem Poematum libri III, hoc est Charisteriorum cum Propempticis autori scriptis, Sacrorum, Genethlicorum, quibus praemissa sunt Elogia Toruniea Borussorum et Senatus Idemdem urbis (Toruń: Andrzej Koteniusz, 1592). 132 Cf. Walther Ludwig, Christliche Dichtung des 16. Jahrhunderts: die “Poemata sacra” des Georg Fabricius (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001).

Iberia

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz University of Warsaw

Religious Poetry, Religio Amoris and Panegyric Poetry in Spain before the End of the Fifteenth Century In the mid-eighteenth century Manuel Vélez Marín stated that the concept of litany was very broad and included both rogations offered to God in any intention and the supplicatory prayers exomologesis that asked for the pardon of one’s sins. The erasure of the difference between these two ideas occurred in the Visigoth period, as the definition in Isidore of Seville’s Etymologiae demonstrates. According to Vélez Marín, litany was present in the Spanish Church from its very beginning, since it took from the first Christians the custom of praying to God on fasting days for the pardoning of the supplicants’ sins, but the prayers were also said on other days.1 The tradition was very much alive in the Iberian Peninsula even before the conversion of the Visigoths to Catholicism in 589, since the existence of the tradition finds its confirmation in the decrees of the Synod of Gerona in 517. Vélez Marín rejected the thesis about the Byzantine origin of the Spanish Litanies of the Saints, since he noted that the oldest of them, written in the ninth century, do not use the Greek formula “Kyrie eleison.”2 Vélez Marín emphasized the development of the Virgin Mary cult in Visigoth Spain and the institution of a Marian feast day that was celebrated on December, 18th. For those celebrations Ildephonsus of Toledo composed an officium and a Marian litany that consisted of “synonyms and epithets that were taken from the Bible,” which are also present in the Litany of Loreto today.3 Some of the observations made by the priest Vélez Marín were confirmed by later research. Nowadays it is agreed that the early Spanish liturgy4 was notable for its participatory quality and it allowed believers to actively take part in 1 Manuel Vélez Marín, Dissertación sobre las letanías antiguas de la Iglesia de España (Madrid: Domingo Fernández de Arrojo, 1758), 2–8. 2 Ibid., 94–106, 171–172. 3 Ibid., 125. 4 The Spanish liturgy is also known as Visigoth-Mozarab and Spanish-Mozarab liturgy; for the history of this type of liturgy cf. Germán Prado, Historia del rito Mozárabe y Toledano (Burgos: Abadía de Santo Domingo de Silos, 1928).

130

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

religious service. Litanic songs performed interchangeably by the leader and by the congregation produced the effect of active worship. The litanic songs included diaconal litanies, which were formed under the influence of the Byzantine rite and contained the supplicatory formula “Kyrie eleison,”5 and the Lent preces, where in response to any call by the priest there appeared the supplicatory formulae “placare,” “miserere,” or “indulgentia.”6 José María Anguita Jaén and María Concepción Fernández López indicate two possible sources of inspiration for the Spanish preces. These are the Syrian songs madrashe by Ephrem the Syrian, whose work in Latin translation was well known in the south of the Iberian Peninsula in the early Middle Ages, and Augustine’s responsorial psalms Psalmi contra partem Donati, which were based on the Syrian model and distinguished themselves with their rhythmic isosyllabic structure of stanzas and a refrain to be performed by the congregants after each stanza intoned by the cantor. Spanish preces repeat the metric form of Augustine’s psalms: their 16-syllable lines are divided into two equal hemistiches that end with an assonant rhyme. Their structure influenced the Spanish octosyllabic folk poetic form called the romance. The rhythmic structure of preces exerted considerable influence on the symmetric structure of alignment accents in the irregular number of syllables of Cantar de Mio Cid.7

Litanic Form and Litanic Verse Tomás Antonio Sánchez was the first one to note the influence of litany on Castilian medieval poetry. He noted litany’s influence on the song of the Jewish soldiers who guarded Christ’s tomb “Eya velar” from Duelo de la Virgen by Gonzalo de Berceo (1198–1264), which in his opinion was modelled on litany or Psalm 135.8 Daniel Devoto pointed out the similarity between the song’s structure and a diaconal litany’s structure, whose lines are divided into two-stressed hemistiches linked by the internal rhyme. Although the hemistiches of the song have uneven

5 Francisco Presedo Velo, La España bizantina (Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 2003), 116. 6 Jordi Pinell, Liturgia hispánica (Barcelona: Centre de Pastoral Litúrgica, 1998), 116. It is worth noting that preces and diaconal litanies were popular for example in the Apennine Peninsula, too. 7 José María Anguita Jaén and María Concepción Fernández López, “Las preces hispánicas. Puesta al día y novedades,” Exemplaria classica V, 12 (2008): 168–175. 8 Tomás Antonio Sánchez, Colección de poesías castellanas anteriores al siglo XV (Madrid: A. de Sancha. 1790), vol. 4, VIII–IX.

Religious Poetry, Religio Amoris and Panegyric Poetry in Spain

131

number of syllables (8, 9, 10, 11), according to Devoto they were performed in a litanic way thanks to the regular accentual alignment.9 With the above observations in mind, José Fradejas Lebrero coined the concept of forma litánica, which in reference to music consisted in the repetition of the same tune and in versification was observable in the repetition of the same line. He analyzed the circumstances in which it was formed and emphasized the role of antiphonal singing of the Mozarabic preces, Jewish responsorial psalms, and the Muslim tradition of funeral lament.10 In his studies on litanic form in Castilian poetry, Fradejas Lebrero focuses only on the texts’ form and underlines that the refrain repeated after each line suggests a relationship with prayer.11 He does not discuss the topic of using typically litanic prayer formulae in poetry. In what follows I will use the typology of three litanic qualities, ektenial, polyonymic, and chairetismic, which have been distinguished in the genre by Witold Sadowski.12

Imitations of Preces and of Litanies The ektenial quality is rare in medieval Castilian literature. One of its few appearances is the pilgrim song “De Tardajos a Rabé, liberanos, Domine” whose refrain is provided by the Latin supplicatory formula. According to Pedro Calahorra Martínez, it was sung by a chorus in response to the calls intoned by subsequent pilgrims.13 The anonymous villancico 291 from the fifteenth-century Cancionero Musical del Palacio includes another example of this: the author asks God “te rogamus audi nos” on behalf of sinful humanity. The second stanza of the text adopts the form that Fradejas Lebrero calls copla litánica,14 which is a quatrain

9 Daniel Devoto, “Sentido y forma de la cántica “Eya velar,” Bulletin Hispanique, 65, 3–4 (1963): 226–237. 10 José Fradejas Lebrero, “La forma litánica hasta Berceo,” in Actas de las III Jornadas de Estudios Berceanos (Logroño: Instituto de Estudios Riojanos, 1981), 65, 69. 11 José Fradejas Lebrero, La forma litánica en la poesía popular (Madrid: UNED, 1988). 12 Witold Sadowski, Litania i poezja. Na materiale literatury polskiej od XI do XXI wieku [Litany and Poetry. On the Body of Material of Polish Literature from the Eleventh to the Twenty-First Century] (Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2011), 25–68. 13 Pedro Calahorra Martínez, “El canto de los peregrinos de Santiago de Compostela,” in VI Jornadas de Canto Gregoriano. El canto gregoriano y otras monodias medievales. VII Jornadas de Canto Gregoriano. De la monofonía a la polifonía, eds. Luis Prensa, and Pedro Calahorra (Zaragoza: Instituto Fernándo el Católico, 2003), 151. 14 Fradejas Lebrero, 19–29.

132

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

consisting of octosyllables; the odd lines rhyme with each other, while the even lines form a repetitive refrain. “Doled vos de mi, señor Condestable” by Alfonso Álvarez de Villasandino (1340–1424) uses a supplicatory formula and the lines’ parallel structure which is characteristic of litany. The poet complains to his master about the miseries that befell him and asks for help by placing the formula “doledvos de mi” in the onset, which is the Castilian equivalent of “miserere mei.” The anaphoric use of the formula in the poem’s structure indicates a relationship with the Spanish preces, which did not disappear with the Spanish departure from the Mozarabic rite in the eleventh century, since they were also present in the Roman rite and returned to the Iberian Peninsula along with the latter tradition.15 In order to achieve the elevated tone of prayer the poem uses the stanza copla de arte mayor, whose 12-syllable lines, divided into even hemistiches with the symmetric layout of stressed syllables, indicate similarities with the meter of preces.

Litanic Verse in Religious Poetry In medieval Castilian literature it is mainly supplicatory prayers in verse that demonstrate a litanic character. At first they did not function on their own, but were parts of more elaborate texts, such as doña Jimena’s prayer from the twelfthcentury chanson de geste Cantar de Mio Cid; this prayer was firstly called a litany by Ángel Valbuena Prat.16 The text starts with a call modeled on the first line of the Pater Noster, where there appears enumeration of the divine occurrences such as the Creation, the Incarnation, the Nativity, and the Life, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus. It adopts the form of narration in the second person singular and includes verbs at the onset of consecutive lines. The key to the narration’s litanic quality is the distortion of the chronology of events, which takes places when four lines on God’s mercy which was shown during the salvation of Jonas, Daniel, Susanna, and Sebastian are introduced into the narrative of Jesus’s life: (salvest) A Ionás, quando cayó en la mar, salvest a Daniel con los leones en la mala cárçel, salveste dentro en Roma al señor San Sabastián, salvest a Sancta Susanna del falso criminal; […].17

15 Carmen Julia Gutiérrez, “Avatares de un repertorio marginal: las preces de la liturgia hispánica,” Revista de Musicología, XXXV, 2 (2012): 14. 16 Ángel Valbuena Prat, Estudios de literatura religiosa española (Madrid: Afrodisio Aguado, 1964), 11. 17 Poema de mio Cid, ed. Ian Michael (Madrid: Castalia, 1973), 103.

Religious Poetry, Religio Amoris and Panegyric Poetry in Spain

133

The prayer for the dying ones, Ordo Comendationis Animae,18 which is a special type of litany, provided the inspiration for this excerpt.19 The poem’s lines are modeled on Ordo Comendationis Animae and demonstrate parallelism: in the first hemistich the verbal anaphora “salvaste” (“you saved”) precedes the name of the person saved and in the second one the circumstances in which he or she needed God’s assistance are given. Despite the uneven number of syllables in each verse (14–16) and in the hemistich (6–8), they preserve the rhythmic symmetry that is typical of preces, which allows for their litanic performance in one melodic phrase.20 In the thirteenth century, Castilian prayers in verse acquire a new form, cua­ derna vía, a quatrain that consists of 14-syllable alexandrines.21 Their regular meter, the division of lines into even hemistiches, the symmetrical alignment accents, and the assonant rhyme that ends each line give a melodious effect to the whole poem. This may be the reason why Gonzalo de Berceo in “Un parto maravilloso” from the collection Milagros de Nuestra Señora and the anonymous thirteenth-century author of Poema de Fernán González include supplicatory prayers inspired by Ordo Comendationis Animae in cuaderna vía stanzas. Formulae from the prayer for dying persons put into alexandrines are also found in the poem “Jesus Nazarenus Rex Judaeorum” by Juan Ruiz Archpriest of Hita (1284–1351), which is included in the prologue to Libro de buen amor, and in the prayer in verse “Señor Tú no me olvides, ca paso muy penado” from Libro rimado de palacio by Pero López de Ayala (1332–1406). The dissemination of litanic verse in medieval Castilian poetry can be related to the development of prayers that hail the Virgin Mary. The oldest ones are Ildephonsus’ officium, his litany, and the Mozarabic liturgical texts that quote the Book of Judith, Psalms 44, 45, 84, 88, 95, 145 and 147, The Song of Songs, and New Testament prophesies.22 Michael Gerli emphasizes the influence of Mozarabic spirituality on

18 Michael Gerli, “The Ordo Commendationis Animae and the Cid Poet,” Modern Language Notes, 95, 2 (1980): 436–441. 19 Jean Evenou, “Las letanías de invocación. Breve recorrido histórico,” in Las letanías: antología, letanías de los Santos, letanías de invocación al Señor, letanías de invocación a la Virgen (Barcelona: Centro de Pastoral Liturgic, 2007), 10. 20 Antonio Álvarez Tejedor, “La música en la época del Poema de Mío Cid,” in El Cid, poema e historia. Actas del congreso internacional, ed. César Hernández Alonso (Burgos: Ayuntamiento de Burgos, 2000), 285. 21 Unlike French alexandrine the Spanish one comprises 14 syllables. 22 Piotr Roszak, “Mozarabowie — niespokojna mniejszość. Liturgia mozarabska jako projekt duchowości czasów «Bycia w mniejszości» w kontekście Brewiarza Gotyckiego,”

134

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

Castilian Marian poetry and the role of Bernard’s Sermons on the Blessed Virgin Mary.23 The Latin hymns Ave Maris Stella and Salve Regina that were popularized by the Roman liturgy played a role in this, too. Along with the Roman rite there also spread the Cistercian tradition of officia in celebration of the Virgin Mary. The tradition was continued in Spain in the form of officia at the Immaculate Conception on December 8th.24 The original texts of Marian litanies were written as late as the fifteenth century and can be found in the Books of Hours, such as Libro de horas de Soror Constança and the so-called Libro de horas de Isabel la Católica. This fact explains the particular popularity of Marian litanies in verse in the late Middle Ages. From its very beginning in Castilian Marian poetry the polyonymic quality is dominant. It manifests itself in the ten stanzas (32–41) of the introduction to the collection Milagros de Nuestra Señora by Gonzalo Berceo, in which Mary is presented through her Holy Names which derive, among other sources, from Latin hymns (a marine star), Isaiah’s and Ezekiel’s prophesies (a stream, a closed gate, and a twig from the Joshua Tree), and symbols taken from the Book of Exodus and the Book of Judges (Aaron’s staff and Gideon’s fleece).25 The Virgin is not the addressee, but the object of laudatory discourse, hence Berceo does not address her directly, but uses the pronoun “Ella / Ella es” (“She / She is”) as an anaphora. We find a similar device in the fifteenth-century Christmas plays, such as Égloga o farsa del nascimiento de nuestro redemptor Jesucristo by Lucas Fernández (1474–1542), whose characters precede Mary’s qualities with the anaphora “Esta es / es” (“This is / is”). Instead of long alexandrines, Lucas Fernández uses a stanza with octosyllables with the tetrasyllabic line de pie quebrado, which is suitable for reciting or singing on stage. The oldest hail lyrics addressed directly to Mary, such as Gonzalo de Berceo’s Loores de la Virgen, were written in alexandrines. However, already in the fourteenth century authors often use five-, six- and seven-syllable verse that derived from the troubadour tradition or the octosyllabic verse that originated in folk poetry. “Cantigas de loores de Santa María” by Juan Ruiz and cantigas de loor by

[“Mozarabs as an Uneasy Minority: Mozarabic Liturgy as a Spiritual Minority Project in the Context of the Gothic Breviary”] Teologia i Człowiek 13 (2009): 97. 23 Michael Gerli, “Gonzalo de Berceo. La literatura mariana y Los Milagros de Nuestra Señora,” in Los Milagros de Nuestra Señora, ed. Claudio García (Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1992), 19–24. 24 José Antonio Peinado Guzmán, “Origenes y desarrollo de la fiesta de la Inmaculada Concepción: la fiesta de la Concepción de María en España,” Advocaciones Marianas de Gloria (El Escorial: San Lorenzo del Escorial, 2012), 81, 88–90. 25 Alejandro Uli Ballaz, “¿Es original de Berceo la ‘Introducción’ a los Milagros de Nuestra Señora,” Berceo 86 (1974): 100–110.

Religious Poetry, Religio Amoris and Panegyric Poetry in Spain

135

Pero López de Ayala exemplify this change well. López de Ayala’s poetry preserves the structure of cantiga de estribillo with its division into laudatory stanzas and a supplicatory refrain. Cantigas de loor by the first generation of Castilian troubadours repeat this pattern in Cancionero de Baena. We may also note the gradual introduction of folk songs with refrains, such as estribote “Virgen digna de alabança” by Alfonso Álvarez de Villasandino. At the end of the fifteenth century in Marian poetry there appears also the folk villancico, which is used by Juan del Encina (1468–1529) in “Pues que tú, Reina del cielo.” As we can see in the collections Cancionero General de Herán del Castillo and Cancionero castellano del siglo XV, most of the poets from the latter half of the fifteenth century composed poems without a refrain and chose the octosyllabic coplas castellanas or coplas reales instead. They are used by Iñigo López de Mendoza, Marquis of Santillana (1398–1458), in “A nuestra Señora de Guadalupe” and by Gómez Manrique (1412–1490) in “Loores y suplicaciones a Nuestra Señora.” The octosyllabic pattern was used by Juan Álvarez Gato (1440–1510) in the coplas “A Nuestra Señora en el tiempo del rey don Enrique” and by the Franciscan Fray Iñigo de Mendoza (1425–1507) in the prologue to the poem Historia de la Encarnación entitled “Loa a Nuestra Señora.” In their work we observe a distinct tendency to imitate litanic prayer, an elliptic structure of the addresses, enumeration of Marian names and their modification, and compilation of elements taken from traditional antonomasias. Deprecatory formulae that accompany invocations are placed in the lines ending each stanza or in the poem’s last stanzas. The chareitismic quality may be found in all the Joys of Mary poems, which at the beginning include the formula “goza” (“rejoice”). Gonzalo de Berceo is considered to be the first author of such poetry, since in “El premio de la Virgen” from the collection Milagros de Nuestra Señora he gives his literary character a prayer inspired by the antiphon Gaude, Dei Genitrix, Virgo Immaculata.26 Its verses are characterized by the repetition of the “hail” formula in the function of an anaphora and the name of Mary in the first hemistich, while the second one underlines Mary’s active participation in the story of the Incarnation: Gozo ayas, María, que el ángel credist, gozo ayas, María, que Virgo concebist, gozo ayas, María, que a Christo parist27

26 Margherita Morreale, “Los ‘Gozos’ de la Virgen en el Libro de Juan Ruiz (II),” Revista de filología española, 64, 1–2 (1984): 2. 27 Gonzalo de Berceo, Los Milagros de Nuestra Señora, ed. Claudio García Turza, in Obra completa, ed. Isabel Uría (Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1992), 570.

136

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

The fourteenth- and fifteenth-century Joys of Mary, such as “Gozos de Santa María” by Juan Ruiz and “Himno a los gozos de Nuestra Senyora” by Fernán Pérez de Guzmán (1370–1460), rarely use the verbal formula “goza;” instead, they use the noun “gozo” or “alegría” (“joy”) in each stanza. A change in the meter is also observable. In Juan Ruiz’s poetry these are seven-syllable and octosyllable lines that create folk zéjel or sextilla stanzas, which derive from the tradition of Latin hymns.28 Fernán Pérez de Guzmán uses the octosyllabic coplas de arte menor. In “Goços de Nuestra Señora” the Marquis of Santillana uses copla castellana, which is typical of fifteenth-century poetry. Yet, unlike the previously mentioned poets, he returns to the anaphoric formula “goçate” in order to enumerate Marian Holy Names and he introduces citations from the antiphon Gaude, Dei Genitrix and from the hymn Gaude Virgo Mater Christi.29 A separate group of texts is formed by those prayers that include some litanic elements, but only when the elements are intensified do they become more meaningful, which leads to a change in terms of genre. We observe this phenomenon in the cantiga entitled “Del Ave María de Santa María” by Juan Ruiz, which paraphrases Ave Maria. Each stanza is opened by an original line from the prayer, which plays the role of an invocation, after which Marian antonomasias are listed. In “El ‘Ave María’ trobada,” Fernán Pérez de Guzmán paraphrases the Annunciation words in what produces the effect of a combination of chairetismic and polyonymic qualities. The repetitive formula “ave” in the start of each line precedes the litanic list of Mary’s antonomasias. Litanic verse is also present in the laudatory and supplicatory form of prayers to saints in verse. One of the oldest examples of this is the hymn to James that can be found in Book VIII of Codex Calixtinus (1160–1180), which was composed by a certain prelate in gratitude for a miraculous salvation. In Castilian literature the pattern can also be found in the last stanzas (761–774) of the hagiographic poem in alexandrines Vida de Santo Domingo de Silos by Gonzalo de Berceo. The poem includes a plethora of invocations of the saint: from “Señor” (“Lord”) and “Padre” (“Father”) in the onset, through the antonomasias that refer directly to the monk’s good deeds to the antonomasias that employ the formula “You / You, who.” The supplicatory formula “Ruega / Ruega por” (“Pray/ Pray for”) can be found in the four last stanzas. The poet asks for peace, salvation of souls, and protection of the Church against heresy by means of this formula. In the fifteenth century the

28 Margherita Morreale, “Los ‘Gozos’ de la Virgen en el Libro de Juan Ruiz (I),” Revista de filología española, 63, 3–4 (1983): 223–270. 29 Ibid. 36.

Religious Poetry, Religio Amoris and Panegyric Poetry in Spain

137

tradition of verse litanies of the saints is cultivated in a new versification form. In “Hymno de San Dionisio” Fernán Pérez de Guzmán uses coplas de arte menor, while the Marquis of Santillana writes sonnets to celebrate the Archangel Michael, Christopher, Clare of Assisi, and Bernardine of Siena. The polyonymic quality can be found in the verse prayers to the Holy Cross, whose cult was one of the most distinct phenomena within the Spanish rite. Nevertheless, Castilian poets do not resort to Mozarabic liturgical texts, but to the later hymns Salve crux pretiosa, Ecce lignum crucis, and Crux fidelis when searching for inspiration for their invocations of the Holy Cross. This type of verse prayer became particularly popular at the end of the fifteenth century among the poets related to the court of Isabela Catholica, a great worshipper of the Cross: the Franciscan Fray Ambrosio Montesino (1444–1514) with his “Árbol santo de la vida,” Juan Álvarez Gato, the author of “Al crucificio,” and Juan del Encina in his “Al crucifixo.” It was also in the fifteenth century that poetry hailing Jesus developed. It uses the rich theology of the Holy Names of Jesus, which was started by Isidore of Seville and which is also present in the Roman liturgy. The litanic listing of the names of Jesus in the form of invocations occurs in the villancicos from Cancio­ nero musical de Palacio: “Oh escondida verdad” by Alfonso de Troya and in the poem “Adoramoste, Señor” by Francisco de la Torre. In Christmas plays, such as Égloga o farsa del nascimiento de nuestro redemptor Jesucristo by Lucas Fernández and Natividad de Nuestro Salvador by Juan del Encina, the Holy Names of Jesus are preceded by the onset formula “Este es” (“This is”).

Litanic Verse in Love Poetry The source of litanic verse in Castilian medieval poetry can be traced to the Provençal tradition of amour courtois, which made the lady a cult object as a result of idealizing her. The first generation of Castilian troubadours took this image of a lady from the Provençal poetry through its Galician-Portuguese elaboration. At the turn of the fifteenth century they created the concept of religio amoris30 under the influence of the Italian dolce stil nuovo.31 The aim of religio amoris was the elevation of love and the underlining of its intensity by means of images and formulae taken over from religious texts. 30 Otis H. Green, “Country Love in Spanish Cancioneros,” in The Literary Mind of Medieval and Renaissance Spain. Essays by Otis H. Green, ed. John E. Keller (Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1970), 42–46. 31 Michael Gerli, “La religión del amor y el antifeminismo en las letras castellanas del siglo XV,” Hispanic Review 49 (1981): 67.

138

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

Endowing a lady with divine attributes is one of the elements that enable religio amoris to be practiced. Many poets from Cancionero de Baena use it, but the employment of polyonymic quality which allows for full identification of the lady with the Virgin Mary is rare. Alfonso Álvarez de Villasandino achieves this goal in cantiga de loor 50, which is devoted to doña Juana and which uses the litanic names taken, among other sources, from The Song of Songs and Ave Maria. The laudatory and supplicatory character of love litany appears fully in Gómez Manrique’s “Suplicaciones.” The consecutive stanzas are opened with the apostrophe “¡o vos!” (“Oh you”), after which there follows a series of invocations that consist of modified Marian antonomasias: “luz de las prudentes” (“light of the sagacious ones”), “espejo de las fermosas” (“a mirror of the beautiful”), “flor de las donce­ llas” (“a flower of virgins”), “fuente de belleza” (“a stream of beauty”), “morada de discreción” (“a chamber of discretion”), “templo de gran perfecion” (“a temple of great perfection”). The stanzas end with supplications to the addressee to cease being disdainful and to alleviate the pain of the unfortunate lover. The process of adoption of religious images and motives in Castilian fifteenthcentury love poetry led to the complete mixing of love and religious language. María Rosa Lida de Malkiel indicates a relationship between the intensification of the phenomenon and the appearance of converts in the Spanish society, who did not mind the mixing of the sacred and the profane.32 This may be exemplified by the presence of prayer formulae, including litanic formulae, in La Celestina o Tragicomedia de Calixto y Melibea by Fernando de Rojas (1470–1541), a Jewish convert. According to Rosalía Pérez González, the apostrophes that are addressed by Calixto to the procuress Celestina, who helps the young people to meet, demonstrate certain similarities to Marian invocations. Pérez González writes that the character approaches blasphemy and heresy when he characterizes Celestina as a saint or the Virgin Mary à rebours:33 “O salud de mi passión, reparo de mi tormento, regeneración mía, vivificación de mi vida, resurrección de mi muerte;” “O mi señora, mi madre, mi consoladora”34 (“Oh health of my passion, remedy against my torment, my renewal, enlivening of my life, resurrection of my death; Oh my lady, my mother, my comfort!”).

32 María Rosa Lida, “La hipérbole sagrada en la poesía castellana del siglo XV,” in Estudios sobre la literatura española del siglo XV (Madrid: Porrúa/Turanzas, 1977), 293. 33 Rosalía Pérez González 2013, “¿Cómo rezan los personajes de La Celestina?,” Lemir 17 (2013): 185. 34 Fernando de Rojas, La Celestina, ed. Dorothy S. Severin (Madrid: Cátedra, 1998), 116, 188.

Religious Poetry, Religio Amoris and Panegyric Poetry in Spain

139

Yet another representation of religio amoris is the parody of Christian liturgical texts, including litany, and their conversion into prayers that hail the god of love. This tendency became very popular at the end of the fifteenth century. On the model of the Litany of the Saints Mosén Diego de Valera (1412–1488) wrote “Letanía de amor,” in which the place of Catholic saints was taken over by the “wise confessors”: Homer, Ovid, and Plato, the martyrs of love, Orpheus and Sixtus Tarquin, and beautiful ladies, Semiramis, Helen, and Dido. In his Misa de Amores Juan de Dueñas (1405–1460) paraphrased the litany to the Virgin Mary by addressing the prayer to Venus. It begins with the formula “Salve,” after which there follows a series of traditional Marian invocations: the holy one, Lady, the blessed mother, and the distorted quotation from the antiphon, “Virgo Dei Genitrix.” The identification of the pagan goddess with Mary is completed by presenting her as a parent of “Amor leal estable” (“faithful, stable love”), i.e. Cupid, who is an equivalent of Christ in the alternative Holy Trinity created by the author. The last stanza consists almost exclusively of the distorted “Kyrie eleison” and “Christe eleison” formulae, which appear in order to strengthen the litanic character of the composition.

Litanic Verse in Panegyric Poetry The presence of litanic verse in Castilian panegyric poetry is related to the tradition of laudes regiae, i.e. liturgical hymns that hail Jesus. They were adopted for the coronation ritual of Byzantine emperors and blurred the boundary between the sacred and the profane; they elevated the ruler by associating him with the Saviour, whose governor the ruler was on earth.35 Before this tradition was adopted by the French kings and German emperors, it had been widely known among the Visigoths.36 After the fall of the Visigoth state, the ritual entered into the coronation ceremonies of the kings of Castile. In accordance with the Roman liturgy, litanies that celebrated the cult of Jesus were also used in order to honour Church dignitaries during their visits; they were also recited at religious festivals.37 The stanzas inspired by laudes regiae can be found in Cancionero de Baena. Cantiga 159, which Alfonso Álvarez de Villasandino addresses to the Bishop of Palencia, don Sancho de Rojas, begins with a litanic series of invocations. The 35 Ernst H. Kantorowicz, Laudes regiae: A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Medieval Ruler Worship (Berkley, Los Angeles: University of California, 1958), 1–12. 36 Gonzalo Martínez Díez and Félix Rodríguez, La colección canónica hispana, V. Concilios hispanos: segunda parte (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas Instituto,1992), 73–74. 37 Ernst H. Kantorowicz, 160, 112–146.

140

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

addresses that replace the name of the addressee of the poem are visibly related to the symbols of Jesus: “Arca de mucha çiençia” (“the arc of wisdom”), “Puertas de alta prudençia” (“a gate of great sagacity”). The poet gives the invocations a characteristic form that consists of three elements: a subject, the pronoun “de,” and an attribute that refers to a moral quality. The form uses rhythmical octosyllabic lines with a symmetrical layout of the stressed syllables: Arca de mucha çiençia, Esfuerço de fidalguia, Cámara de loçania, Puertas de alta prudençia38

In “Unas estrenas de Gómez Manrique Al senor Arcobispo de Toledo” Gómez Manrique repeats this structure, but in “Aguinaldo al señor Conde de Paredes, su hermano” he modifies it by using the pronoun “en” within the lines. Furthermore, he replaces the traditional names of Jesus with the names of ancient heroes and underlines the qualities by which they distinguished themselves. In stanzas XXVIII and XXVIII of “Coplas por la muerte de su padre,” the poet’s nephew Jorge Manrique (1440–1479) modifies the structure by enumerating the names of Roman emperors and their virtues, which are references to the moral perfection of his late father. He diversifies the metric structure of the poem by combining octosyllabic lines with tetrasyllables due to the use of the stanza type copla de pie quebrado. The three-element invocations, which are modeled on litanic invocations, are also used in panegyric texts of the laus civitatis type. This can be exemplified by cantigas 28 and 31, which Alfonso Álvarez de Villasandino dedicates to Seville, “a perfect city” with “a pure name.” The poet’s concept is to compare the city to the Virgin Mary, which means following in the footsteps of John the Apostle, who called Mary a holy city and a new Jerusalem in the Apocalypse (21:2). The author develops this association in a series of apostrophes that imitate the Marian Holy Names from Song of Songs and Proverbs: Fuente de grant maravilla Jardin de dulçeolor Morada de Enperador39

38 Alfonso Álvarez de Villasandino, Cancionero de Baena ahora por primera vez dado a luz, con notas y comentarios, ed. Juan Alfonso de Baena (Madrid: M. Rivadeneyra, 1851), 147. 39 Alfonso Álvarez de Villasandino, 31.

Religious Poetry, Religio Amoris and Panegyric Poetry in Spain

141

Analyzing litanic inspirations in Fernando de Rojas’ La Celestina, Rosalía Pérez González indicates the presence of modified Marian invocations in Pleberio’s lament over Melibea, where the lamenting character questions the world order. The lament is an expression of the tragedy of being a convert, which affected the author himself: he lived under the constant threat of accusation by the Inquisition and was unable to find consolation in the new faith.40 In order to express his complaint, Pleberio reverts to Marian symbols and calls the world “laberinto de errores” (“a labyrinth of mistakes”), “un desierto spantable” (“a horrible desert”), “una morada de fieras” (“a chamber of the beasts”), “laguna llena de cieno” (“a pond filled with mud”), “región llena de spinas” (“an area full of thorns”), “monte alto” (“a high mountain”), “campo pedregoso” (“a stony field”), “prado lleno de serpientes” (“a meadow full of snakes”), “huerto florido y sin fruto” (“a blooming garden without fruit”), “fuente de cuydados” (“a source of trouble”), “río de lágrimas” (“river of tears”), “mar de miserias” (“sea of misery”), “dulce ponçoña” (“sweet poison”), “vana esperança” (“vain hope”), “falsa alegría” (“false joy”), and “verdadero dolor” (“real pain”).

Conclusion In Castilian medieval literature, litanic verse appears primarily in religious texts. From the thirteenth century onwards, it is present in verse prayers to the Virgin Mary and the saints, and at the end of the fifteenth century in the texts that hail the Holy Cross and Jesus. Its presence in fifteenth-century love poetry is associated with the development of the religio amoris concept and with parodies of liturgical texts. We also observe it in fifteenth-century panegyric poetry. In the texts of the laudes personae type, litanic verse demonstrates its affinity to laudes regiae hymns and in the texts that deal with the subject matter of laus loci it appears in the form of modified Marian invocations. The polyonymic quality of litanic verse is the most frequent one to occur in Castilian literature. It is observable in religious, love, and panegyric poetry. It appears in many stanzaic forms, from the quatrains of cuaderna vía, through cantigas de estribillo, estribote and villancico that were taken from the folk tradition, to coplas and even sonnets. The chairetismic quality of litanic verse is rare, since it is limited almost exclusively to the Joys of Mary, which were written in cuaderna vía in the thirteenth century, in sextillas and the folk zéjel in the fourteenth century, and in coplas in the fifteenth century. Rare instances of the ektenial

40 Rosalía Pérez González, 190.

142

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

quality of litanic verse can be found in the songs that are related to the structure of Mozarabic preces and in the 12-syllable copla de arte mayor. The parallel structure of lines, which is typical of the litanic form, can be found in chansons de geste, whose hemistichs preserve the rhythmic symmetry that is typical of preces. The tendency is continued in the cuaderna vía stanzas, whose regular meter and symmetrical layout of alignment accents produce the melodious effect of prayer. Translated from Polish by Anna Czarnowus

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz University of Warsaw

Castilian Poetry and Autos Sacramentales during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries The history of Castilian litanies from the first half of the sixteenth century is a topic little examined due to the shortage of historical sources, since most of the Books of Hours from the period were destroyed by order of the Inquisition.1 The prayer books that have been preserved, such as Horas de nuestra señora: segun la orden romana: ordenadas por los tres tiempos del año cada vno por si por tu tie[m]po: con muchas douotas oraciones (1565), contain only the Litany of the Saints that was acknowledged by Curia Romana. Development of original litanic texts that celebrated the Virgin Mary and the Blessed Sacrament started as late as the Counterreformation period. The litanic texts that hailed Mary were created during the great popularity of the Marian litanies of Loreto, which were recited in Jesuit colleges in accordance with the rules designated by Ratio Studiorum, and of the treatises that discussed the attributes and holy names of the Virgin, such as Antonio Navarro’s Abecedario virginal de excelencias del santissimo nombre de María (1604). The cult of Virgo Inmaculada (the Immaculate Virgin) also exerted some influence on Marian invocations. The cult increased at the turn of the seventeenth century, which resulted from the influence of sermons by the Archbishop of Valencia Juan de Ribera (1532–1611) and of numerous theological works,2 and from the institution of the Immaculate Virgin as the patron saint of Spain in 1644. Invocations that refer to the Immaculate Conception by the Virgin, along with the Marian Holy Names from the Old Testament prophesies, The Song of Songs, and medieval antiphons, can be found in Juan de Ribera’s Letanía encomiastica en alabanza de la Reina de los Ángeles María Señora nuestra.3 They are also included 1 Emília Colomer Amat, “Libros de horas impresos en España en el primer tercio del siglo XVI. Reseña de una edición perdida,” Locus amenus 4(1998–1999): 127. 2 Margarita Llorens Herrero and Miguel Ángel Catalá Gorgues, La Inmaculada Concepción en la historia, la literatura y el arte del pueblo valenciano (Valencia: Generalitat Valenciana, 2007), 125–136. 3 Juan Jiménez, Vida del beato Juan de Ribera (Valencia: Joseph de Orga, 1798), 562–566.

144

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

in Litaniae beatae et immaculatae semper virginis Dei genitricis Mariae, which according to the constituciones of the Colegiode Santa María de las Nieves in Salamanca from 1619–1623 were to be recited by the students on Saturdays and on Marian religious festivals.4 Even though Pope Clement VIII’s decree (1601) forbade believers to create new litanies and validated only those of the Saints and the Litanies of Loreto that were officially acknowledged in the breviaries and Roman missals, individual orders did not cease to compose their own litanies, such as litanies to the Blessed Sacrament.5 The Council of Trent decided on this, since it confirmed the dogma of Transubstantiation, which was rejected by the Reformation, and it ordered the faithful to celebrate Corpus Christi in a special manner. Jesuits played an important role in the spreading of the tradition, since they encouraged believers to recite the fourteenth-century litany that started with the words Anima Christi, sanctifica me, Corpus Christi, salva me, Sanguis Christi, inebria me.6 Inspired by the teaching of the Council, Archbishop of Valencia Juan de Ribera created his own Litany to the Blessed Sacrament.7 According to Chapter XXII of the Constituciones of the Cathedral in Valencia, the litany should be recited on each Thursday, except for Holy Week, and also on Corpus Christi. The prayer Letanías del Santísimo Sacramento del Altar, sacadas de varios lugares de la Sagrada Escritura y santos padres by Fray Gregorio Alberto Varage, a Carmelite friar, was also written in the latter half of the seventeenth century in Valencia.8 The Holy Names of Jesus taken from the Bible, which were converted to litanic invocations by the clergy of Valencia, also became the subject matter of theological treatises, such as Fray Luis de León’s De los nombres de Cristo (1585). The Eucharistic hymns Lauda Sion, Verbum supernum, Sacris Solemniis, and Pange Lingua9 which were parts of the Corpus Christi liturgy could form a propitious ground for the litanic enumeration and elaboration of the Holy Names of Jesus,

4 Súplicas letánicas a Santa María (Roma: Curia General OSM, 1987), 56. 5 Jean Evenou, “Las letanías de invocación. Breve recorrido histórico,” in Las letanías: antología, letanías de los Santos, letanías de invocación al Señor, letanías de invocación a la Virgen (Barcelona: Centro de Pastoral Liturgic, 2007), 15–17. 6 Mário Martins, “Ladainhas de Nossa Senhora em Portugal (Idade-Média e séc. XVI),” Lusitania Sacra 5(1960–1961): 135. 7 Juan Jiménez, 433–437, 167–169. 8 Justo Pastor Fuster, Biblioteca valenciana de los escritores que florecieron hasta nuestros días (Valencia: J. Ximeno, 1827), vol. 1, 257. 9 Gerardo Fernández Juárez and Fernando Martínez Gil, La fiesta del Corpus Christi (Cuenca: Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, 2002), 81.

Castilian Poetry during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries

145

since the hymns abound in those names. Performed during the procession and at the moment of the Adoration of the Eucharist, they left a trace in those literary works that discussed the dogma of the Eucharist, such as autos sacramentales.10 Shaped by liturgical texts, litanic verse appears in sixteenth- and seventeenthcentury Spain mainly in religious writing. In the Renaissance, due to humanist fascination with the ancient pagan world, the prayers in verse whose character is litanic may only be found in the works of clerics, such as Teresa de Ávila (1515– 1582), Fray Luis de León (1527–1591), and Fray Luis de Escobar (1475–1551), and in the works of less important lay writers, for example Cristóbal de Castillejo (1490–1550), Jorge de Montemayor (1520–1561), and those lesser-known ones whose work is collected in Romancero y cancionero sagrados (1855), edited by Justo de Sancha. Litanic overtones are also present in the texts of the religious plays of Joan de Timoneda (1518–1583). The reforms of the Council of Trent, one of whose aims was to encourage artists and writers to educate people and make their faith more solid, caused the laudatory and supplicatory prayers in verse to function as independent literary forms that became cultivated by the greatest writers of the period. Litanic excerpts were also placed in epic and dramatic texts by such authors as Miguel de Cervantes (1547–1616), in religious comedies, and, most of all, in the autos sacramentales by Lope de Vega (1562–1635), José de Valdivielso (1565–1638), Antonio Mira de Amescua (1577–1644), Tirso de Molina (1579–1648), and Pedro Calderón de la Barca (1600–1681).

Imitations of Preces and Litanies Auto sacramental is a literary genre which is the closest to liturgical order among the genres practiced in Spain. This is why we can find in it numerous quotations from hymns, antiphons, and litanic preces. Calderón de la Barca introduces such a supplicatory prayer into his plays. In El Sacro Pernaso the prayer is performed by two choruses, the first of which enumerates supplications for assistance in misery, disease, hunger, and death, while the other answers with the supplicatory formula “líbranos, Señor” (“Save us, Lord”). In the last invocation there occurs a peculiar modification of the prayer’s content. The invocation includes a supplication for liberation from the logic of Augustine and the authorship of the supplication is

10 Ignacio Arellano, Autos sacramentales completos de Calderón: Estructuras dramáticas y alegróricas en los autos de Calderón (Pamplona, Kassel: Universidad de Navarra/Edition Reichenberger, 2001), 41.

146

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

attributed to Ambrose in hagiography.11 The humorous supplication does not distort the structure of the prayer, since it repeats the parallel pattern of the previous lines which begin with “de” (from) in the onset. Coro 1: De peste, hambre y mortandad. Coro 2: Líbranos, Señor. Coro 1: De ira, rayo y tempestad. Coro 2: Líbranos, Señor. Coro 1: De toda infelicidad. Coro 2: Líbranos, Señor. Coro 1:Y para que sea mayor siempre tu favor Divino. Música toda: De lógica de Augustino, líbranos, Señor.12

In the auto sacramental entitled La iglesia sitiada, Calderón introduces litanic supplicatory singing, in which God is asked to humiliate the enemies of the Church and endow Christian princes with peace. The author uses the formula “Te rogamos, audi nos.”13 In Antonio Mira de Amescua’s Nuestra Señora de los Remedios the chorus recites a litany to the Lady of Incessant Assistance and repeats “ruega por nosotros”14 (“pray for us”) after each invocation. The use of litanic formulae outside auto sacramental is very rare. It can be found in Fray Luis de Escobar’s “Letrilla Ora pro nobis y Liberanos Domine,” where in order to imitate responsorial liturgical singing the author employs letrilla, a folk form with a refrain. Its stanzas consist of octosyllabic lines and end with the Latin refrain “ora pro nobis” or “liberanos Domine.”15 The same metrical form is used by de Escobar in “Letrilla, glosando El Miserere,” where God is asked to have mercy on sinful humanity, whose overburdening sins are presented in consecutive stanzas.

11 Antonio Cortijo, “Introducción,” in Pedro Calderón de la Barca, El sacro Pernaso, ed. Alberto Rodríguez Ripodas (Pamplona, Kassel: Universidad de Navarra, Edition Reichenberger, 2006), 30. 12 Pedro Calderón de la Barca, El sacro Pernaso, 35. 13 Pedro Calderón de la Barca, La Iglesia sitiada, ed. Beata Baczyńska (Pamplona, Kassel: Universidad de Navarra, Edition Reichenberger, 2009), 34. 14 Antonio Mira de Amescua, Nuestra Señora de los Remedios, ed. Pedro Correa in Teatro completo (Autos religiosos), ed. Agustín de la Granja (Granada: Universidad de GranadaDeputación de Granada, 2007), vol. 7, 447–448. 15 Luis de Escobar, Poetas líricos de los siglos XVI y XVII, ed. Adolfo de Castro (Madrid: M. Rivadeneyra, 1857), 550.

Castilian Poetry during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries

147

Dios eterno, poderoso, Unico Dios y Señor, padre nuestro, Criador, Justiciero y piadoso, Miserere nobis. Los ambiciosos y malos, De soberbia y vicios llenos, Tratando mal a los buenos, Los quieren matar a palos Miserere nobis.16

The satirical letrilla entitled Ya que rompí las cadenas by Luis de Góngora (1561–1627), in which the topic of disappointment in love is humorously treated, is yet another instance of using the litanic supplicatory formula. In the stanzas which begin with the pronoun “de” (“from”), de Góngora lists the dangers that he wants to escape from and in the refrain he repeats the supplications “Dios me libre” (“May God liberate me”) and “Dios me guarde”17 (“May God protect me”).

Litanic Verse in Poetry and Religious Drama Imitation of the prayer patterns of preces resulted in litanic verse in Castilian poetry. José Fradejas Lebrero relates the origin of litanic verse, which was preserved in the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century theatre, to folk songs.18 The songs rarely use the formulae typical of litany, but take up religious topics at times. The song hailing the Mother of God from the Virgen de la Cabeza sanctuary which appears in Lope de Vega’s Tragedia del rey don Sebastián is one of the few instances of litanic formula. Untypically of litany, the text abounds in verbs, which are indispensable for presenting the narrative of Mary and the miraculous healing she performs. José Fradejas Lebrero and Francisco Javier Díez de Revenga emphasize the role of the refrain “¡quién como ella!” (“Who if not her!”), repeated by the chorus after each line. The refrain demonstrates the rhythm that is characteristic of folk litany.19

16 Ibid., 549. 17 Luis de Góngora, Letrillas, ed. Robert Jammes (Madrid: Castalia, 1980), 64–66. 18 José Fradejas Lebrero,“La forma litánica en el teatro. Siglos XVI–XVIII,” Revista de Filología Española LXXXI(2001): 89–135. 19 Ibid. Cf. Francisco Javier Díez de Revenga, Teatro de Lope de Vega y lírica tradicional (Murcia: Editum, 1983), 186.

148

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

La Virgen de la Cabeza —¡quién como ella! — hizo gloria a questa tierra — ¡quién como ella! — Tiene la frente de perlas — ¡quién como ella! — y de oro fino las hebras, — ¡quién como ella! — Parió quedando doncella, — ¡quién como ella! — Sana cuantos van a verla, — ¡quién como ella! — da salud a los que enferman, — ¡quién como ella! — vista al ciego, al mudo lengua, — ¡quién como ella! — La Virgen de la cabeza, — ¡quién como ella! —20

The polyonymic quality of litany predominates in Castilian Marian poetry. It materializes as a litanic rhythm of enumerated attributes of the Virgin. These can be preceded by the verb in the anaphora, as occurs in Gil Vicente’s Auto de los cuatro tiempos, where the seraph delivers a monologue in which he invites shepherds to visit Bethlehem and to pay their respects to the Infant and His Mother. The consecutive lines of the stanza begin with the words “veremos / vamos ver” (“let us see”), after which Marian epithets and antonomasias are listed: “pulcra y decora” (“beautiful”), “clara y luminosa” (“bright”), “Nuestra Señora” (“Our Lady”), “graciosa” (“full of grace”), “desposada” (“a spouse”), “clara silla eternamente guardada en alto grado” (“shining throne eternally set on high”), “sin manzilla” (“without blemish”), “preservada de pecado”21 (“preserved from sin”). As a continuator of the fifteenth-century tradition of Christmas plays, Gil Vincente uses medieval metrical forms, such as copla de pie quebrado, which consists of octosyllables and tetrasyllables. As Lope de Vega proves in the auto sacramental entitled El tirano castigado, the litanic order of the Holy Names of Mary was also known to seventeenth-century poets. Lope de Vega places symbols from the Old Testament in the melodious 20 Lope de Vega, Obras, ed. Marcelino Menéndez y Pelayo (Madrid: Ediciones Atlas, 1969), vol. 25, 153. 21 Gil Vicente, Auto de los cuatro tiempos in Teatro castellano, ed. Manuel Calderón (Barcelona: Crítica, 1996), 54–55.

Castilian Poetry during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries

149

octosyllabic lines that imitate the rhythm of prayer: a queen, an olive tree, a stream, a cedar, a lily, a city, a boat, a tower, paradise, a mirror, a throne, a window, the sun, and the Mother. Litanic invocations may also appear in whole stanzas, as in Elogios a la Santissma Virgen Nuestra Señora by José de Valdivielso. He begins the 114 stanzas of his poem with original antonomasias of the Virgin in the form of apostrophes22 and develops them in the seven hendecasyllable lines of octavas reales. Some of the litanies in verse adopt the laudatory and supplicatory structure that is typical of this prayer: they begin with a series of invocations and place the supplications either at the end of the text or in the last lines of each of its stanzas. The first strategy is used in Feliciana’s song from Miguel de Cervantes’s The Travels of Persiles and Sigismunda, which is sung in the sanctuary of Our Lady of Guadalupe and is written in octavas reales.23 The second strategy can be found in Fray Luis de León’s “Canción a Nuestra Señora,” where the stanza inspired by Italian versification is employed, as in Cervantes. The song alternates between seven-syllable and hendecasyllable lines which produce a structure of the lira type. In Fray Luis de León’s poem enumeration of the Marian Holy Names assumes the form of longer paraphrases, the first of which clearly alludes to “Vergine bella, che di sol vestita” from Petrarch’s Canzone alla Vergine. In Marian poetry the chairetismic quality may be found in the Joys of Mary. José de Valdivielso cultivates this tradition, and in “Canto VIII de la Encarnación del Hijo de Dios” from the cycle Vida, excelencias y muerte del gloriosísimo patriarca San José he uses the anaphoric formula in the third person singular “gozáse”24 (“she rejoices”) and directs the words to the Virgin. Similarly in El Segundo blasón del Austria Calderón opens the first lines of the stanzas with the address “gocese el día en que”25 (“let the day rejoice”), which refers to the mystery of the Incarnation. The chareitismic and polyonymic qualities are present in the paraphrases of Ave Maria through the anaphora “salve” in the onset of successive lines. We observe

22 José de Valdivielso, Elogios al Santissimo Sacramanto, a la Cruz Santissima y a la Purissima Virgen María Nuestra Señora (Madrid: Imprenta del Reyno, 1630), 40–60. 23 Aurora Egido, “Poesía y peregrinación en El Persiles. El templo de la Virgen de Guadalupe,” in Actas del Tercer Congreso Internacional de la Asociación de Cervantistas, ed. Antonio Bernat Vistarini (Palma de Mallorca: Universitat de les Illes Balears,1998), 19–32. 24 José de Valdivielso, Vida, excelencias y muerte del gloriosissimo Patriarca san Joseph (Madrid: Francisco del Hierro, 1727), vol. 2, 265–270. 25 Pedro Calderón de la Barca, El segundo blasón del Austria, ed. Ignacio Arellano, Carmen Pinillos (Pamplona, Kassel: Universidad de Navarra, Edition Reichenberger, 2007), 16–17.

150

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

this phenomenon in “Salutación mariana” by Antonio Escóbar de Mendoza, “A la Virgen Santísima Nuestra Señora” by Francisco de Herrera Maldonado, and in some autos sacramentales, such as Los alimentos del hombre by Calderón de la Barca. In Calderón the content of the original Angelic Salutation is enriched with the traditional Marian symbols, such as a blooming meadow, a hortus conclusus, a rose and a lily. The parallel structure of consecutive stanzas is preserved with “ave” in the onset: Ave, florido vergel, cuya, flor de gracia llena, unirá en él al candor de la azucena lo encarnado del clavel. Ave, jardín cerrado, cuya Primavera hermosa al mismo fin con púrpura de la rosa verá encarnado el jazmín.26

In Marian autos sacramentales the presence of the chairetismic quality is related to the poetic modifications of the antiphons Salve Regina and Ave Maris Stella.27 It happens that the antiphons are quoted in full, as in the pilgrim’s song at the end of Calderón de la Barca’s A María el corazón; the song is a free translation of Ave Maris Stella with the anaphoric address “ave” in the onset of consecutive lines, which determines a change in the text’s genre. Fradejas Lebrero detects litanic verse also in the religious texts that hail Jesus. In Auto tercero by Jorge de Montemayor28 litanic verse appears in the song sung at the adoration of the Infant and tells the story of the Word, the Son of God, born from the Virgin Mother. After each line there is a refrain in the form of the joyous “¡sea bienvenido!” (“let him be welcome”), an equivalent of the Latin formula “salve.” ¡Sea bienvenido, sea, sea bienvenido! el Verbo hijo del padre, ¡sea bienvenido! Hoy nasció de Virgen madre, ¡sea bienvenido!

26 Pedro Calderón de la Barca, Los alimentos del hombre, ed. Miguel Zugasti (Pamplona, Kassel: Universidad de Navarra, Edition Reichenberger, 2009), 21–22. 27 Ignacio Arellano, 41–42. 28 Fradejas Lebrero, 91.

Castilian Poetry during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries

151

el Verbo del padre hijo. ¡sea bienvenido! Hoy nasció con regocijo. ¡sea bienvenido!29

In autos sacramentales, which presented theatrical images of the dogma of the Eucharist, the Holy Names of Jesus frequently adopted the form of a litanic list. In La oveja perdida Joan de Timoneda begins by comparing Jesus to bread and then he develops this by means of paraphrases and epithets: the bread that came from heaven, eternal bread, laudable, live, healthy, enlivening, divine, and lasting. Sosiego: ¡Oh Pan, que del cielo vino! Entendimento: ¡Pan eterno y Pan loable! Joan: ¡Pan vivo, Pan saludable! Sosiego: ¡Pan vivífico y divino! Entendimiento: ¡Pan perdurable!30

The authors of autos sacramentales diversify the monotonous structure of the lines by introducing antonomasias which develop the relation between the Old and the New Testament into a series of litanic enumerations. In Auto sacramental de la jura del príncipe Mira de Amescua provides us with the following list: Ruth’s bread, Abel’s blood, manna, a honeycomb, the fruit of the best tree, and a bunch of grapes from the promised land.31 Cultivation of the chairetismic and polyonymic tradition is associated with the use of the “salve” formula in the onset of the lines that include apotheosis of the Eucharist. It may have its liturgical explanation in the content of the Eucharistic hymn that is sung at the moment of the Elevation.32 In El Segundo blasón del Austria Calderón uses the formula in the monologue of the Archduke Maximilian when the Archduke welcomes the Blessed Sacrament. In the onset, “salve” precedes the attributes of Jesus, which were previously used by Mira de Amescua. Calderón develops the attributes and indicates the Biblical characters with whom they could be linked.33

29 Jorge Montemayor, Poesía completa, ed. Juan Bautista de Avalle-Arce (Madrid: Fundación José Antonio de Castro, 1996), 318. 30 Joan de Timoneda, La oveja perdida, in Autos sacramentales: desde su origen hasta fines del siglo XVII, ed. Eduardo González Pedroso (Madrid: M. Rivadeneyra, 1865), 111. 31 Antonio Mira de Amescua, Auto de la jura del príncipe, ed. José María Bella in Teatro (Madrid: Espasa Calpe, 1972), vol. 3, 197. 32 Gerardo Fernández Juárez and Fernando Martínez Gil, 142. 33 Pedro Calderón de la Barca, El segundo blasón del Austria, 47.

152

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

Litanic verse is also present in prayers to the Holy Cross in verse. In accordance with the medieval tradition, their authors resort to liturgical formulae, such as “the tree of the cross” and “the royal ensign” (Vexilla regis). The octosyllabic verse, which is characteristic of folk poetry, dominates in the metrical structure of such poems as Jorge de Montemayor’s “A la cruz,” Cristóbal de Castillejo’s “Himno a la cruz,” and Teresa de Ávila’s “Loa a la cruz.” José de Valdivielso’s poem Elogios a la Santissima Cruz is exceptional in that it uses octava real. In the dramatic plays about the Holy Cross, Tirso de Molina’s El árbol del mejor fruto and Calderón de la Barca’s Devoción de la cruz, the polyonymic quality finds its shape in octosyllables. As far as the Litany of the Saints is concerned, in Castilian poetry we have Lope de Vega’s sonnet consecrated to Francis of Assisi, “Francisco, cuyo santo humilde celo,”34 and two glosas by Juan López de Úbeda (“A san Martín,” and “Al glorioso apóstol Santiago el Mayor, patrón de España”35), which implement the polyonymic gene of the litany.

Litanic Verse in Love Poetry The presence of litanic verse in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century love poetry testifies to the continuation of amour courtois from chivalric romance, which allows for the identification of the courtly lady with the Virgin Mary. Litanic verse is not a widespread tendency here. It is observable in Gil Vicente’s plays, where he adapts for the stage the plots of such novels as Tragicomedia de Don Duardos. In the play in question, the polyonymic genre can be found in Camilote’s monologue, which consists of apostrophes that are associated with Marian symbols: a star, a flower, a rose, and the sun. An attempt at identifying the lady with the Virgin is confirmed by the statement that Solomon sang the Song of Songs for a lady. Camilote: Oh Maimonda, estrela mía! Oh Maimonda, frol del mundo! Oh rosa pura! Vos sois claridad del día, Vos sois Apolo segundo en hermosura. por vos cantó Salomón el Cantar de los Cantares namorados

34 Ed. Justo de Sancha, Romancero y cancionero sagrados (Madrid: M. Rivadeneyra, 1855), 46. 35 Ibid., 309.

Castilian Poetry during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries

153

sus canciones vuessas son, y vos le diste mil pares de cuidados36

Diego Martínez Torrón emphasizes the rhetoric of religio amoris in El Quijote, which closes out the cycle of Castilian chivalric novels, and the litany performed by the knight-errant for his lady when he sets off in order to undergo love penance in Sierra Morena:37 “Oh Dulcinea del Toboso, día de mi noche, gloria de mi pena, norte de mis caminos, estrella de mi ventura”38 (“Oh, Dulcinea del Toboso, day of my night, glory of my pain, guide of my path, star of my fortune”).39 The preceding invocations may not only be related to Marian symbols such as light, a star, and the North Star, but they also use the three-element structure of litanic invocations. Petrarch’s lyric poetry must have influenced the existence of litanic verse in Castilian love poetry, as Bruce Wardropper suggested. Petrarch finished the collection of sonnets to Laura with a song that hailed the Virgin Mary, which indicated that the same poetic technique could be used to discuss the love for a human and for God.40 Felipe Pedraza claims that Lope de Vega’s Sonnet 155 “Belleza singular, ingenio raro,” which is structured around the apostrophes based on the invocations to Laura, provides a perfect example of love litany.41 We observe a similar strategy in Luis de Góngora’s Sonnet 53 “De pura honestidad templo sagrado,” where the author seems to allude to Marian invocations calling his lady a holy temple: “De pura honestidad templo sagrado, / cuyo bello cimiento y gentil muro / de blanco nácar y alabastro duro / fue por divina mano fabricado.”42 Nonetheless, her full identification with Mary occurs in the last stanza of the sonnet, 36 Gil Vicente, Tragicomedia de Don Duartos in Teatro castellano, 192. 37 Diego Martínez Torrón, “El amor de Don Quijote,” in Sobre Cervantes (Madrid: Estudios Cervantinos, 2003), 58. 38 Miguel de Cervantes, El ingeniosa hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha, eds. Florencio Sevilla Arroyo and Antonio Rey Hazas (Madrid: Centro de Estudios cervantinos, 1994), 246. 39 Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote, trans. John Ormsby, accessed August 12, 2015, http://www.gutenberg.org/files/996/996.txt 40 Bruce Wardropper, Historia de la poesía lírica a lo divino en la Cristiandad Occidental (Madrid: Revista de Occidente, 1958), 257. 41 Felipe B. Pedraza Jiménez, “Introducción,” in Edición crítica de las rimas de Lope de Vega, ed. Felipe B. Pedraza Jiménez (Cuenca: Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, 1993), vol. 1, 61. 42 Luis de Góngora, Sonetos completos, ed. Biruté Ciplijauskaité (Madrid: Castalia, 1988), 118.

154

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

where she appears a beautiful idol worshipped by the poet, celebrated in song, and praised due to its virtues.

Litanic Verse in Panegyric Poetry The litanic character of panegyric poetry is indicated by the formulae borrowed from laudes regiae, which praised rulers and church officials. In the introduction to Auto de Fee Joan de Timoneda presents the three-element structure of the invocation in rhythmic octosyllables. The apostrophes arranged in a litanic list are addressed to the Archbishop of Valencia Juan de Ribera. They have as their source the tradition of the adoration of Jesus, for example “a caring and kind shepherd,” “the guide of Valencia,” “the host of faith,” “a pilot who steers the ship of God,” as well as the Marian tradition, as with “a vessel of great eloquence,” “the essence of clergy,” “a holy shelter,” and “the star of our life.” Ilustrísimo señor vaso de gran elocuencia celebérrimo doctor, cuidadoso y buen pastor guía y norte de Valencia de la fe aposentador cumbre de clerecía refugio santo de nos, luceros de nuestra vía, pilotos por quien se guía aquesta nave de Dios43

The tradition of panegyric hymns praising monarchs, which were based on laudes regiae, lasted in Spain into the modern era and even in the eighteenth century they accompanied the royal couple’s triumphal entries into cities.44 In the poem A la muerte del Rey Filipo Segundo el Prudente, Lope de Vega refers to the hymns by presenting Spain as a character who welcomes the successor to the throne after the death of Philip II. In octosyllabic stanzas after the joyful exclamations of “salve” there come elaborate antonomasias: “the third ruler, (son) of the Second,” “celestial aurora,” “a divine portrait” and “a praiseworthy image of that soul.”

43 Joan de Timoneda, Auto de Fee, in Autos sacramentales: desde su origen hasta fines del siglo XVII, ed. Eduardo González Pedroso (Madrid: M. Rivadeneyra, 1865), 80. 44 Víctor Mínguez, Los reyes solares. iconografía astral de la monarquía hispánica (Castelló de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I, 2001), 185.

Castilian Poetry during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries

155

Salve, tercero monarca del segundo, que en Dios reina, porque para dos tan grandes era la tierra pequeña. Salve, aurora celestial del sol, cuya luz inmensa, para que naciese el tuyo se puso en la noche eterna. Salve, divino retrato, estampa gloriosa, impresa de aquel alma original sobre sus doradas letras45

In contrast to litanic invocations, these addresses do not have a three-element structure and one of them, which relates directly to divine attributes, is a comparison of the king to the sun.

Conclusion In sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Castilian literature litanic verse appears primarily in the poetry devoted to the Virgin Mary, the Blessed Sacrament, the Holy Cross, and individual saints, and also in religious plays, above all those that refer directly to liturgical order. The presence of litanic verse in love poetry and panegyrics is infrequent. This can be related to the continuation of the religio amoris concept and influence of Petrarchism on the one hand, and the living tradition of the laudes regiae hymns on the other. Direct addresses to the formulae and structures of litanic lines in love and panegyric poetry can only be observed in those sixteenth-century authors who are faithful to medieval patterns. The seventeenth-century texts preserve only some litanic qualities, such as the structure of enumeration and the formula of salutation, but the addresses used are only indirect allusions and remote references to divine attributes. Laudatory poems and prayers in verse, which include polyonymic and chairetismic qualities, are characterized by their great wealth of versification forms: from octosyllabic coplas, romances, and villancicos to seven-syllable and hendecasyllable stanzas, such as lira, octava real, and sonnet. The ektenial quality is very rare and

45 Lope de Vega, Rimas humanas y otros versos, ed. Antonio Carreño (Barcelona: Crítica, 1998), 482.

156

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

adopts the form of supplicatory prayers in religious drama and in letrillas, a genre inspired by the folk song with a refrain. The repetitiveness of a refrain after each line, which is characteristic of litany, can also be found in religious folk songs that were included in plays, since their structure is associated with preces. Translated from Polish by Anna Czarnowus

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz University of Warsaw

Praise, Litany and Cantigas: Catalonian, Galician-Portuguese, and Portuguese Poetry up to the End of the Seventeenth Century In Catalonian, Galician-Portuguese, and Portuguese literature litanic verse appears mainly in religious texts. This convention is predominantly used by clergymen who write poetry. With a few exceptions, the laymen who use this type of verse are not among the most renowned poets. The oldest examples of litanic verse in Catalonian literature are the religious poems of Provençal troubadours, such as Guilhem d’Autpol (?–1265/1270), Guiraut Riquier (1230–1292), and Cerverí di Girona (1259–1290). The first author who uses Catalonian in order to write about the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary is the Franciscan Tertiary Ramón Llull (1233–1316), the author of the theological treatises Llibre de contemplació de Déu, Llibre de Sancta María, and Llibre de Benedicta Tu in Mulieribus, poems, and prayers. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries litanic verse is present in the songs and prayers in verse by Pere Bell, Bernat Fenollar, Joan Gamiça, Jaume Gassull, Jeroni Martí, Lluís Munyoç, Pere Vilaespina, and Narcís Vinyoles, who performed their work during poetic contests in Valencia.1 In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries litanic verse is present in the songs and prayers in verse written by Valencian authors Joan Roís de Corella (1435–1497), Miquel Ortigues (who lived in the fifteenth century), and Joanot de Martorell (1413–1468); furthermore, the poets associated with Barcelona used it, of whom we may mention Fra Johan Basset, a monk from the St. Anne Monastery (the fifteenth century), Francí Joan Puculull (the fifteenth century), and Joan Berenguer de Masdovelles (the fifteenth century); the Majorca poets, such as Gabriel Ferruç (the fourteenth century) and the Dominican Pere Martines (?1463), employed it as well. In the Galician-Portuguese lyric, litanic verse is present in the laudatory songs from the cycle Cantigas de Santa María composed by King Alfonso X el Sabio

1 Margarita Llorens Herrero, and Miguel Ángel Catalá Gorgues, La Inmaculada Concepción en la historia, la literatura y el arte del pueblo valenciano (Valencia: Generalitat Valenciana, 2007), 153–156.

158

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

(1221–1284), and the Provençal troubadours and Galician poets who surrounded him. The songs were intended to be performed during religious services in the king’s chapel. Researchers demonstrate what influence the writings of Juan Gil de Zamora, a Franciscan friend of Alfonso, exerted on the subject matter of Cantigas. Juan Gil de Zamora’s books are Liber Mariae2 devoted to the life and miracles of the Virgin Mary, and the Officium Almi flue Virginis, a verse text that contains various Holy Names and attributes of the Virgin taken from the Bible.3 In Portuguese poetry litanic verse appears primarily in the work of clergymen, such as the Bishop of Mégara, André Días (1348–1441), the Capuchin Frei Agostinho da Cruz (1540–1619), the canon from the Viseu cathedral Baltasar Estanço (1570–?), and a Castilian-language author, a female Dominican from the Order of Preachers, Soror Violante do Céu (1601–1693). Among laymen the author who is most notable in this respect is Diogo Bernardes (1520–1605), the author of religious poems collected in Várias rimas ao Bom Jesus. Nevertheless, there are only individual traces of litanic elements in the work of such Renaissance poets as Gil Vicente (1565–1636), Francisco Sá de Miranda (1481–1558), Pêro Andrade Caminha (1520–1589), and Luís Vaz de Camões (1524–1580), and of such Baroque poets as Francisco Manuel de Melo (1608–1666). Representations of litanic verse in the linguistic areas in question will be discussed below.

Litanic Verse in Catalonian Literature The polyonymic quality of litanic verse is the most distinct one in Catalonian religious literature. It is noticeable in hail lyrics addressed to the Virgin Mary, whose structure consists in enumerating the Holy Names of Mary and ending the poems with a supplication. Torbio Fuente Cornejo lists the following examples of alba as songs belonging to this group: “Esperanza de totz ferms esperans” by Guilhem d’Autpol and “Qui velha ses plazer” by Guiraut Riquier.4 The poems by Guiraut Riquier, “Ajssi quon sobronrada” and “Sancta verges, maires pura,” as well as the anonymous fourteenth-century song in Occitan, “Imperayntz de la ciudad

2 Fidel Fita y Colomé, “Cincuenta leyendas por Juan Gil de Zamora, combinadas con las Cantigas de Alfonso el Sabio,” BRAH 7(1885): 54–144. 3 Estrella Pérez Rodríguez, “Cantus in Laudem Virginis: el oficio poético de Juan Gil de Zamora,” Studia Zamorensis 13(2014): 110–123. 4 Toribio Fuente Cornejo, “Canción de alba provenzal,” in Actas de XXIII Congreso Internacional de Lingüística y Filología Románica, ed. Fernando Sánchez Miret (Salamanca: Niemeyer, 2003), vol. 4, 328.

Catalonian, Galician-Portuguese, and Portuguese Poetry

159

joyosa” from the Llivre vermell found in the Montserrat monastery, also have the form of litanies in verse. In Catalonian literature the proliferation of the Holy Names of Mary can be found in the prayer “De nostra dona santa María” in Chapter XVI of Ramón Llull’s Oracions de Ramon. Llull explains there the meaning of the name “Mary” and begins each line with an invocation that derives from hymns and biblical texts, such as “santa mare” (“the Holy Mother”), “alba” (“the dawn”), “estela” (“a star”), “regina de regines” (“queen of queens”), “verge de vergenes” (“virgin of virgins”), “emperadriu” (“the empress”), “font” (“a stream”), and “hort”5 (“a garden”). The collection of fourteenth- and fifteenth-century anonymous texts edited by Barbara Spaggiari includes the litanic lists of the Holy Names of Mary: “Vierge de les viergens, flor de les flors,” “Inperayritz de la ciutat joyosa,” “Mayre de Diu, stiell de l’albe pura,” “Rosa plasent, soleyl de resplendor.”6 In the collection edited by Antoni Ferrando there appear “Lirs virginals, mayres de Deu e filla” and “Mare de Deu, sus los cels subirana.”7 In the collection Els certàmens poetics valencians del segle XIV al XIX, there are many poems whose authors attempt to depart from the traditional structure of litanic invocations and from their content by modifying them and developing them in the form of paraphrases. These are “Clara virtut, mirall de sancta vida” by Pere Bell, “Puix Deu james les gracies nos dona” by Bernat Fenollar, “Mare de Deu esser no merexque” by Jaume Gassull, “Sancta dels sans, excelhens e suprema” by Gabriel Ferruç, and “Verge sens par, de les castes pus casta” by Lluís Munyoç. In Valencia the cult of the Immaculate Conception developed particularly strongly;8 hence in the addresses to her there appear apostrophes related to the dogma. They are introduced, for example, by Joan Roís de Corella in “Oració molt devota de la Concepció de la puríssima Mare de Déu” and by Joanot de Martorell in the prayer of the knight Tirant Lo Blanch in the novel of the same title. The clergy wrote poems that were the closest to litany in terms of structure. This can be exemplified by Fra Johan Basset’s “Senyora valen,” where a list of short elliptical addresses to Mary is presented and then there is a supplication for mercy. 5 Ramón Llull, Obres de Ramon LLull: edició original feta en vista dels millors y més antichs manuscrits, ed. Salvador Gralmés (Palma de Mallorca: Comissió Editora Llulliana, 1935), vol. 18, 343–345. 6 Barbara Spaggiari, “La ‘poesia religiosa anonima’ catalana o occitana,” Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, III, 7(1977): 117–350. 7 Els certàmens poètics valencians del segle XIV al XIX, ed. Antoni Ferrando (València: Institució Alfons el Magnànim, 1983). 8 Margarita Llorens Herrero and Miguel Ángel Catalá Gorgues, 125–169.

160

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

The rhythm of repetitions characteristic of litanic verse is frequently observable in Catalonian poetry. By listing the Holy Names of Mary and her attributes in “Los qui m desiau loar,” Bernat Fenollar begins each stanza with the word “coronada”9 (“the crowned one”). The onsets of consecutive lines may also include similar words, as in Joan Gamiça’s “A tu m’acost, mare del Creador.” We observe a similar structure in the anonymous paraphrases of Ave Maria edited by Marià Aguiló: “Ave, flor inmaculada” and “Ave, inclita Senyora.”10 They not only include a list of apostrophes inspired by the Virgin’s attributes, but furthermore each stanza begins with a separate phrase from the Angelic Salutation which is repeated in the onset of the odd lines. In the forty-six-stanza paraphrase of the antiphon Salve Regina, Pere Vilaespina uses this technique as well. In the first stanza Vilaespina employs the chairetismic quality of litanic verse with the four-fold repetition of “salve” in the onset. In Romanesque literature this usually occurs in the Joys of Mary poems in the form of translations of the Latin formula “gaude.” The Catalonian goigs rarely use this formula, since they include the noun “goig” or “alegria” (“joy”) instead. This can be found for example in the refrain of the oldest anonymous “Ballada dels sets goyts de Nostre Dona en vulgar cathallan” from Llivre vermell, whose structure derives from the Provençal dansa. In later texts the word “goig” or its equivalent appears in practically all stanzas of the work, since each use refers to a specific joy of Mary.11 This can be exemplified by the fifteenth-century anonymous song “Verge, ten beneytfo,” whose stanzas each begin with the words “Verge, gran alegría”12 (“Virgin, great joy”). In “Alegre·t flor virginal incompresa” Joan Berenguer de Masdovelles, departing from the traditional form of song with refrain, uses the imperative formula “alegret”13 (“rejoice”) in the onset in the incipit of the stanzas.

9 Els certàmens poètics valencians del segle XIV al XIX (València: Institució Alfons el Magnánim: 1983), 339. 10 Ed. Marià Aguiló, Cançoneret de les obretes en nostra llengua materna més divulgades durant los segles XIV, XV i XVI (Barcelona: Libreria d’Alvar Verdaguer, 1900), 49–52. 11 Joseph Martos Sánchez, “El género popular de los goigs y Joan Roís de Corella. La vida de la sacratíssima Verge María y la oració,” in Lyra mínima oral: los géneros de la literatura tradicional, ed. Carlos Alvar Ezquerra (Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá, 2001), 88–89. 12 Gemma Avenoza, “Un goig català inèdit de finals del s. XV o inicis s. XVI: Verde, beneït fo,” in Revista de literatura medieval 5 (1993): 37–46. 13 Joan Berenguer de Masdovelles, Cançoner dels Madovelles, ed. Ramon Aramon i Serra (Barcelona: Institut d’Estudis Catalans, 1938), 271.

Catalonian, Galician-Portuguese, and Portuguese Poetry

161

The polyonymic quality may be found in the laudatory poems to God, even though this does not always consist in the enumeration of the holy names. In the song “Un bo vers” Cerverí di Girona lists God’s actions by dint of the formula “Tu qui” (“You who”). In chapters III–VIII of Oracions de Ramon, Ramón Llull lists God’s attributes. The prayers’ respective opening lines include invocations that list Kindness, Greatness, Eternity, Power, Wisdom, and Will as the attributes. They are also used along with 94 other names of God in the poem Les cents noms de Déu. In the verse invocations of the Holy Cross, the polyonymic quality materializes itself in sophisticated poetic comparisons, such as those in Pere Martines’ strikingly unusual “Obra devota de la Creu, feta a requesta de la senyora de Mossén Blanes,” and in the traditional references to the lignum crucis motive, such as Francí Joan Puculull’s “Arbre molt sant, en qual ha be granat.” Puculull begins each stanza with the apostrophe “Arbre molt sant” (“most holy tree”). A tendency to use anaphoras can also be found in the anonymous “Adorte, Creu, verissima e sancta” from Els certàmens poetics valencians del segle XIV al XIX, whose odd lines begin with the confession “Adorte, Creu” (“I adore you, Cross”). Prayers to saints in verse have a laudatory and supplicatory structure. Miquel Ortigues uses the pattern in the prayers that end the hagiographies in Cançoner sagrat de vides de sants. Their ten initial lines contain short invocations that are based on litanies, where the merits and virtues of the saint are emphasized, and the last two lines include a supplication for his care and assistance. In the verse prayers to Christopher from Els certàmens poetics valencians del segle XIV al XIX, we observe various stylistic devices: complex apostrophes that refer to the Biblical symbols in Pere Martines’s “Palma tenant Jhesus alt en la çima,” antonomasias in the function of onset anaphoras in Jeroni Martí’s “Qui pot loar lo grau de vostra fama,” and use of the formula “You who,” which allows Narcí Vinyoles to narrate the saint’s life in his “Vos que portas aquella balarica.”

Litanic Verse in Galician-Portuguese Poetry According to José María Anguita Jaén and María Concepción Fernández López, the rhythmic pattern of preces and responsorial psalms was preserved in the Galician-Portuguese lyric in the form of the folk songs called cantigas de amigo.14 Francisco Nodar Manso cites the “Hymn of Christ” from the apocryphal Life of

14 José María Anguita Jaén and María Concepción Fernández López, “Las preces hispánicas. Puesta al día y novedades,” Exemplaria classica, V, 12(2008): 175.

162

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

John as their inspiration.15 According to Higinio Anglés, the text, which consisted of couplets and of “Amen” after each stanza, could be sung in the form of a responsorial psalm or a dialog between the soloist and the audience.16 Armando López Castro emphasizes the similarity between the text and the liturgical hymn from the seventh-century Breviarium Gothicum with its refrain.17 Pedro Calahorra calls this form litanic or responsorial and indicates its presence in Cantiga 160 “Quen bõa dona querra” from Alfonso X el Sabio’s Cantigas de Nuestra Señora.18 The laudatory song has a narrative character, which is typical of cantigas de amigo. Verb forms are accumulated there and the story of Mary, who has been and will remain a virgin, is told along with her future actions: prayer for believers, gaining pardon for them, and victory over the demon. The address “Santa Maria” is repeated as a refrain and should be performed by the second chorus according to the performance rules of cantigas de amigo, which gives it the rhythm of litany. The music of Cantigas de Santa María is related to the model of responsorial singing, which is based on the dialog between the cantor and the audience, but it does not always find its expression in the form of a cantiga de amigo. Most of Alfonso X’s songs are based on the French virelai, which also derives from liturgy, and on the Spanish folk song zéjel.19 Cantiga 10 “Rosa das rosas e flor das flores” is the first laudatory song and the first one whose quality is polyonymic due to the enumeration of the Holy Names of Mary from the Bible. The quality is noticeable in the refrain “Rosa das rosas e flor das flores, dona das donas, sennor das sennores” (“Rose of roses and flower of flowers, maiden of maidens, lady of ladies”). In Cantiga 280 “Santa Maria beeita seja” Elvira Fidalgo observes the plethora of Marian antonomasias — “espell’ de Santa Eigreja” (“mirror of the Holy Church”), “avogada dos pecadores” (“defender 15 Francisco Nodar Manso, La narratividad de la poesía lírica galaicoportuguesa. Estudio analítico (Kassel: Edition Reichenberger, 1985), 22–26. 16 Higinio Anglés, “Problemas que plantea el canto gregoriano en su historia y en su valor oracional y artístico musical,” Scripta Musicológica (Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1975), vol. 1, 11. 17 Armando López Castro, De las jarchas a Gil Vicente (León: Universidad de León, 2001), 167. 18 Pedro Calahorra Martínez, “Las cantigas de loor de Santa María del rey Alfonso X el Sabio,” in VI Jornadas de Canto Gregoriano. El canto gregoriano y otras monodias medievales. VII Jornadas de Canto Gregoriano. De la monofonía a la polifonía, ed. Luis Prensa and Pedro Calahorra (Zaragoza: Instituto Fernándo el Católico, 2003), 30. 19 Higinio Anglés, La música de las Cantigas de Santa María del Rey Alfonso El Sabio (Barcelona: Diputación Provincial de Barcelona, 1943), 393, 417–426; Armando López Castro, De las jarchas a Gil Vicente, 62–65.

Catalonian, Galician-Portuguese, and Portuguese Poetry

163

of sinners”), “a mellor das santas mellores” (“the kindest of kind saints”), “dos martires é lum’ e corõa” (“light and crown of martyrs”), “das virgêes padrõa” (“patron saint of virgins”) — which directly relate to litanic invocations, such as “the mirror of justice,” “the comforter of the troubled ones,” “the escape of the sinful,” “the queen of believers.”20 Cantiga 340 “Virgen Madre gloriosa” also follows the pattern of litanic verse, since in the first stanza it introduces Mary as a virgin, a mother, a daughter, and the wife of God, and in the six stanzas that follow it develops the formula “Tu es alva” (“You are the dawn”) from the incipit. In Cantiga 40 “Déus te salve, gloriosa” the use in the successive stanzas of the formula salve in the refrain and in the incipit leads Elvira Fidalgo to point to Ave Maria and the antiphon Ave Regina caelorum as the sources of inspiration for this song.21 Nevertheless, its content, i.e. the mysteries of the Annunciation, the Nativity, and the Assumption, causes us to assume that the song is related to the Joys of Mary tradition. This tradition also appears to stand behind Cantiga 420 “Bẽeita és, María.” This presents Mary’s story from her immaculate conception to her death and particularly emphasizes the moments of the Annunciation, the Nativity, the Assumption, and the Coronation of the Virgin Mary. The chairetismic quality is signalled by the adjective “bẽeita/bẽeito” (“blessed”) that appears in the onset of the lines. Through the repeated begging “roga” (“pray for”) the ektenial gene is present in the cantiga 250 “Por nós, Virgen Madre.”

Litanic Verse in Portuguese Literature André Dias, Bishop of Mégara, is an author whose work stands out as far as the number of litanic poems is concerned. His interest in litanic verse has to be linked with the influx of Italian religious literature. During his stay in Florence in 1435 he wrote a free translation of the laudes from Laudário de Piza into Portuguese, which he later propagated through the religious community he founded, the Cofradía de Bom Jesus.22 Its members performed the translation for the general public in St. Dominic’s church in Lisbon. Among the texts collected in the Livro de Laudes e Cantigas Espirituais, the Marian lauda “Esta lauda y cantica aplaz muyto aa Virgem Maria, a quem alouva per esta guisa” has a form which is closest to the litanic one. The similarity manifests itself in the numerous Holy Names of 20 Elvira Fidalgo, As Cantigas de Loor de Santa María (Santiago de Compostela: Centro Ramón Piñeiro para a Investigación en Humanidades, 2003), 27. 21 Elvira Fidalgo, 108. 22 Mário Martins, “Raízes comuns entre o Laudário de Mestre André Dias e o Laudário de Pisa,” Didaskalia, XI (1981): 282–304.

164

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

Mary provided in the text: “madre de Deus vyvente” (“Mother of the living God”), “madre do senhor regente” (“The King’s Mother”), “estrella matutina” (“the morning star”), “rosa do parayso” (“the rose of paradise”), “Benedicta sejas” or “Beenta sejas” (“Be blessed”) preceded by an anaphora, and “O gloriosa domyna” or “O gloriosa dona” (“Oh glorious Lady”) repeated after each line of the refrain. Mário Martins notes that as in litanies or psalms this lauda was probably sung by two choruses, the first of which intoned the lines, while the other one responded with a refrain. Martins indicates the relationship between the Galician-Portuguese tradition of religious songs based on the pattern of cantigas de amigo, whose refrain contains an invocation that hails the Virgin Mary. An example is provided by the song “Blanca estáis, colorada,” which Gil Vicente included in the play Auto da Feira.23 It consists of couplets which discuss the Nativity in Bethlehem and of the refrain in the form of the address “Virgem sagrada” (“the Holy Virgin”). The responsorial character of the song, which is associated with medieval liturgy, allows it to be interchangeably performed by two choruses, which is indicated in the stage directions. The polyonymic quality is the most common one in Portuguese litanic verse. Enumeration of traditional Marian symbols, such as a flower, a rose, light, a star, and a tower, can be found in André Dias’s “Prosa e cantiga muyto devota da gloriosa Virgem Maria.” Dias uses enumeration in the paraphrase of the antiphon Ave Maris Stella entitled “Outra cantica e lauda da Virgem Maria, quando a chamares em no mar aparecerte como estrella,” whose each stanza begins with the invocation “Oo estrella / strella” (“oh star”) in the onset of the first line. In “Outra cantica e lauda, quando quiseres saudar e rogar a Nossa Senhora Virgem gloriosa, Sancta Maria,” which paraphrases Ave Maria, Dias uses the address ave in the incipit of each stanza, which demonstrates the chairetismic quality of the poem. In “Himno a gloriosa Domina resado a versos pelos clerigos á imagem de Nossa Senhora,” Gil Vicente models his poetry on Marian laudes. The form and the content of Petrarch’s “Vergine bella che di sol vestita” provided inspiration for the Marian verse of the Renaissance poets: Francisco Sá de Miranda in “Virgem fermosa que achastes a graça,” Baltasar Estanço in “Virgem do Sol vestida, que figura,” Diogo Bernardes in the sonnet “Fermosa Virgem que do sol vestida,” and Frei Agostinho da Cruz in “Virgem pura, escolhida, honesta, santa.” In the excerpt from Elegy X that begins with “Tu, Virgem pura, santa, Avé Maria” Luís Vaz de Camões also enumerates Marian symbols. Soror Violante do

23 Mário Martins, “Ladainhas de Nossa Senhora em Portugal (Idade-Média e séc. XVI),” Lusitania Sacra 5 (1960–1961): 154.

Catalonian, Galician-Portuguese, and Portuguese Poetry

165

Céu wrote numerous villancicos that addressed Mary as “Nuestara Señora del Socorro” (“Our Lady of Succor”), “Nuestra Señora de las Maravillas” (“Our Lady of Miracles”), “Nuestra Señora del Rosario” (“Our Lady of the Rosary”) and elaborated on the Virgin’s attributes in “Al Santissimo nombre de Maria.” The ektenial quality of litanic verse can rarely be found in Portuguese poetry. André Dias uses the supplicatory formula pattern modeled on ora pro nobis in the supplicatory song to the Virgin Mary, “Se quiseres demandar alguma merçee aa Virgem Maria diras esta oraçom.” In the poem he lists Marian epithets and antonomasias, such as “virgem muy sancta” (“most holy Virgin”), “cortes puella” (“courteous maiden”), “madre de Deus” (“Mother of God”), “que a luna tanto bella” (“beautiful as the moon”), “clara e lympa fontana” (“bright and pure fountain”), “rosa” (“rose”), “fructuosa olyva” (“fruit-bearing olive tree”), and “fermoso lilio” (“beautiful lily”), and inserts the prayer “ave ora de mym merçee,” a supplication in his own intention, as a refrain. Gil Vicente uses the form of a folk song with a refrain in order to introduce the formula te rogamus audi nos, taken from the Litany of the Saints. The poem, addressed to “Senhora Ladainha” (“Lady Litany”), is sung by a witch in the comedy Farsa chamada Auto das Fadas, which makes the text a clear parody of liturgical practices. In O salmo de “Miserere mei, Deus, secundum magnam etc.”, a paraphrase of the psalm, the author uses another deprecatory formula, miserere, as he places it in the onset of successive lines in one of the text’s stanzas. In Portuguese prayers to the saints in verse we can also find instances of the laudatory and supplicatory structure of litany. In Gil Vicente’s work this is the case of a parody of the Litany of the Saints which relates to fifteenth-century Castilian poetry; instead of saints there are martyrs for love, poets from the Cancionero General, aristocrats and ladies of the court, and the parody is recited by a procuress from the comedy O velho da horta. Litanies of the saints in verse begin with a series of apostrophes in the form of short invocations or elaborate paraphrases with the formula “You are,” which is used to underline the addressees’ most important merits. Diogo Bernardes employs this in the sonnets “A S. Lourenço,” “A S. Sebastiaõ,” “A Todos os Santos no seu dia” and the epigram “A Santa Clara;” Frei Agostinho da Cruz uses it in the sonnet “A todos os Santos;” and Francisco Manuel de Melo does so in the sonnet “Ao arcanjo S. Rafael pedindo-lhe dirija sua molesta navegacão.” Soror Violante do Céu uses it as well in the numerous villancicos, for instance those in celebration of John the Baptist, John the Evangelist, Anne, Augustine, and Dominic.

166

Marta Piłat Zuzankiewicz

In fifteenth-century Portuguese prayers to the Holy Cross in verse, the polyonymic quality materializes itself in the traditional invocations: “The Holy Cross,” “the blessed cross,” and “the tree of the cross.” André Dias uses it in “Esta oraçom diras quando vires a Jhesu en na cruz, e em aquel dya maa morte nom morreras” and “Lauda e oraçom da Vera Cruz, e quando a vires saudaa e dy esta oraçom e cantica, com huum Pater Noster, e em aquelles dias nom ajas medo de doença algua.” Later in the period, the original poetic metaphors of the Cross become more popular, including those used in the function of apostrophes. We can find them in Pêro Andrade Caminha’s sonnet “Ao santissimo lenho da Cruz” and in the mote and glosa “Á cruz” by Frei Agostinho da Cruz, in the sonnet “Ó gloriosa cruz, ó victorioso tropheo de despojos rodeado” by Luís Vaz de Camões, and in the villancico “A la Santissima Cruz” by Soror Violante do Céu. In the prayer that finishes Gil Vicente’s Auto da Barca da Gloria we can find an enumeration of the Holy Names of Jesus. We can also find this in Frei Agostinho da Cruz’s sonnets “A Christo na Cruz” and “Como estaes, luz sem luz, vida sem vida,” and in Soror Violante do Céu’s villancicos that celebrate the Nativity and the Resurrection. The latter author, who was a nun, uses both the rich theology of Christ and the symbolic tradition, since in the villancico “Al Nacimiento” she compares him to a bird, a phoenix, a pelican, and a swan. The initial anaphoras that characterize litanic verse are also present in Portuguese Renaissance poetry. The anaphoras are created by the repetition of the word “amor” (“love”) in subsequent lines. This is also what Frei Agostinho da Cruz practices in the sonnets “Voto de ardent amor divino” and “Á Cruz,” in the incipit “Amor trouxe a Jesus da gloria á cruz,” Baltasar Estanço in the sonnet “Ao nascimiento de Jesus,” and Diogo Bernardes in St. Ursula’s prayer from Historia de Sancta Ursula dirigida á infanta Dona Maria that begins with the words “Amor, Divino Amor, Amor suave.” The prayer is imitated by Luís Vaz de Camões in the poem El martirio de santa Ursula. The universality of such litanic verse may be attributed the publication of the anonymous translation of Jacopone da Todi’s laudes in Lisbon in 1567.

Conclusion In Catalonian, Galician-Portuguese, and Portuguese religious literature litanic verse predominantly displays the polyonymic quality. It is present in the prayers to the Virgin Mary and the saints in verse and in the laudatory prayers to God, the Holy Cross, and Jesus. It adopts the form of a litanic list of the Holy Names of God and his attributes and their development with the formulae “You who,” “You who are.” We can most often find instances of the ektenial litanic quality in

Catalonian, Galician-Portuguese, and Portuguese Poetry

167

Galician-Portuguese and Portuguese lyrics in songs with refrains. The chairetismic quality is present in the literatures in question in the songs that derive from the Provençal dansa, the French virelai, and from stanzas without a refrain. Repetitions in the onset of the lines are shared by Catalonian, Galician-Portuguese, and Portuguese religious poems, though they can be found most frequently in Catalonian literature. The couplet with a refrain structure that derives from preces is characteristic of Galician-Portuguese lyric, from which it was adopted into Portuguese poetry. Translated from Polish by Anna Czarnowus

Maria Judyta Woźniak University of Łódź

The Iberian Peninsula from the Eighteenth Century till the 1930s: Opening Remarks The poetry of the Iberian Peninsula is constantly and distinctively shaped by repetitiveness manifested in many ways. Most often it takes the form of syntactic parallelism, anaphora, and exclamations as well as refrain and stanza structures. Their presence in the poetry is natural since it results from its melic origin; however, in the works analyzed here it appears to occur particularly often. Although the litanic poetics is by definition also characterized by repetitions, in the Iberian Peninsula they are surprisingly seldom associated with litany as a genre. Their use is more often accompanied by traces of litany which in this study will be referred to as litanic pattern. Therefore, the main methodological difficulty is to identify where repetitiveness can be called litanic pattern and where it cannot. It requires that we make certain assumptions that will facilitate tracing litanic features in the discussed works. Thus, what will be regarded as litanic is those types of repetitions which recall elements of the litanic generic worldview, as manifested by evoking one of the litanic genes: polyonymy, i.e. naming the same being, notion or thing in various ways; chairetismic series, which is use of equivalents of the Greek “chaire” in a broad sense; or ektenial structure, i.e. a list of propitiations or requests of hearing, the latter being very rare in this poetry.

Maria Judyta Woźniak University of Łódź

“Thou, the most beautiful; thou, in whom the pink morning star shines”: Castilian Poetry in the Eighteenth Century In the Castilian-language literature of the Iberian Peninsula, litany as a separate genre actually did not exist in the eighteenth century. Authors representing that period, particularly those living in the second half of the century, were especially fond of genres deeply embedded in the literary tradition, sometimes quite conventionalized ones, and in their opinion litany was not one of them. The literary output of major Enlightenment representatives includes odes, anacreontics, and sonnets, but not litanies. So, what relations exist between litany and other genres in the eighteenth century?1 In what way is the litanic pattern manifested in them and how does it shape them? And, what is most important, why does litany occur so rarely as a separate genre in that period?

Litanic Verse in the Shadow of the Baroque Let us begin with examples of litanic verse that are most faithful to the genre patterns, although they are not representative for the period. Poems that may undoubtedly be regarded as poetic litanies mainly follow the traditional prayerful pattern of the genre. In Libro primero. Vida ejemplar de la venerable madre Gregoria Francisca de Santa Teresa by Diego de Torres Villarroel (1693–1770), within the prose narration, several examples of such a litany form may be found.2 1 Even if some authors lived also into the first years of the nineteenth century, their works are still discussed in this article which refers to the eighteenth century. I adopt this approach mainly in the case of authors who represent the Enlightenment period, such as e.g. Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos (1744–1811). Let us mention that their poetic works are also included in anthologies of eighteenth-century poetry, e.g. Poesía española del siglo XVIII, ed. Rogelio Reyes (Madrid: Cátedra, 2011). 2 The prodigious literary output of Diego de Torres Villarroel includes drama, prose and poetry; what particularly attracts attention in his poems is the diversity of metrical patterns. The richness of his talent as well as the contradictions that his works were entangled in are presented in several studies, e.g. Emilio Chavarría Vargas, Ascetismo,

172

Maria Judyta Woźniak

In the poem quoted below there appears a repetitive supplication, “Lord, do not scorn my sighs,” which is graphically distinguished and is repeated regularly as the fourth line of each stanza:3 Jesús amoroso, Amante divino, objeto del alma: No desprecies, Señor, mis suspiros. Pastor Soberano, mi dueño, Rey mío, Esposo suave, No desprecies, Señor, mis suspiros. Vida de mi vida, por quien muero y vivo, Dulce prenda mía. No desprecies, Señor, mis suspiros.[…]4

The poem, subject to a strong metrical discipline, includes fourteen stanzas with a structure similar to the one quoted above. There is one person who expresses supplications on his or her own behalf, hence this prayer is not of a choral nature. The first stanzas are filled with polyonymic antonomasias of Jesus, whereas in the following ones there appear moaning and ektenial begging for mercy, while in the later part of the poem the poetic description of pain, experienced by the soul which “lives dying” and is awaiting help from God, gives way to an antonomasia in only one stanza. Let us emphasize that what manifests itself here is the ektenial gene, quite unique in Spanish literature. What is notable in this is the regularity with which the supplication occurs, always in the same unchanged formula. A good example of an expressive use of the polyonymic gene is another poem, or to be exact its first stanzas. In this case no response occurs. The poem consists of nine quatrains and in each of them a seven-syllable verse appears in the first three neoestoicismo y sátira menipea en la obra de Diego de Torres Villaroel (Málaga: Universidad de Málaga, 2009); María Lourdes García–Macho Alonso de Santamaría, “El léxico dialectal y vulgar frente al culto en la obra poética de Diego de Torres Villarroel,” Lexicografía hispánica del siglo XXI, nuevos proyectos y perspectivas: homenaje al profesor Cristóbal Corrales Zumbado (Madrid: Arco Libros, 2012), 285–322. It is interesting that this author of litanic verse became a priest at an age of over fifty years. 3 It is spelled in compliance with the rules of contemporary orthography. The poem, interwoven with the prose narration metre, does not have any title. 4 Diego de Torres Villarroel, Libro primero. Vida ejemplar de la venerable madre Gregoria Francisca de Santa Teresa (Madrid: Imprenta de la Viuda de Ibarra, 1798), vol. XII, 210–211.

Castilian Poetry in the Eighteenth Century

173

lines, whereas the last one follows the pattern of the alexandrine in the French variant. Here God is the light, breeze, sea (in the first five stanzas which may be called litanic); this is where the soul melts and disperses (the other four stanzas of a slightly different composition). The litanic beginning of the poem is as follows: Aquel profundo Abismo del sumo Bien que adoro, donde al alma se engolfa, y es su dicha mayor el irse a fondo. Aquella Luz divina, que en arrebol fogoso ilumina y abrasa, purifica, aniquila y causa gozo […]5

What is interesting is that the prose narration by Torres Villarroel sometimes also presents examples of the litanic form. These are not graphically divided texts; however, from the point of view of their structure and meaning, they are remarkably similar to the litanies quoted above, e.g.: ¡O Dios! en todo infinito, en todo grande, inaccesible, inmenso! Luz, en quien no hay tinieblas; Día, en quien no hay noche; Vida, que carece de muerte; Fuego, que ilumina; Claridad que deleita; Incendio de amor, que suavemente abrasa; Piélago inmenso, donde el alma se engolfa, y perdiéndose se gana.6

Invocations that in a polyonymic way call God through beings for which He is the cause are consistently based on antithesis. A Baroque stylistics is not surprising in the case of a poet who had been born in the previous century: in many aspects Spanish literature of the eighteenth century remained under that influence. Though this excerpt was not presented in verse form, the order of enumerations, supported by punctuation, mimics litanic invocations, full of worship and, at the same time, awareness of the author’s own limited understanding of the divine being. When considering poets who created their works against the background of the Baroque, Eugenio Gerardo Lobo (1679–1750) should be mentioned: the literary output of this soldier who was also a prolific poet achieved enormous popularity among his contemporaries.7 The structural rule of his poems is often

5 Torres Villarroel, Libro primero, 337. 6 Ibid., 210. 7 What critics particularly valued in his poetry was the scholarly trend which was manifested by his sonnets. Let us also mention that his poetic output still remains an object of academic interest, however, not the part that derived from Baroque inspiration but

174

Maria Judyta Woźniak

repetitiveness, which occasionally has a litanic nature. Let us take “Romance místico”8 as an example. […] A ti, Señor, que conoces tu ser y te comunicas en tu propia inteligencia, Eterna Sabiduría. A ti, que amando produces, por espiración activa, tercer Persona, una siempre la que es sustancia indivisa. A ti, cuya mano el mundo contiene; cuya divina voluntad produce, engendra, disminuye, y aniquila. […]9

In this very long poem built of similar stanzas seven are joined by the same anaphora. Not all of them occur one after the other; however, they all appear in close proximity. Usually eight-syllable verses, with assonances in the even lines, indeed resemble romance, as indicated by the author in the poem’s title. The addressee seems to be the Christian God, as it results from the anastomasias such as “Eternal Wisdom” and “Unity of Three Divine Persons.” Let us note that such examples of the litanic structure, evoking the Christian worldview, do not occur frequently in Eugenio Gerardo Lobo, who most often combines Christian and ancient motifs. The generic structure also seems to be heterogeneous. The poem in which the litanic stanzas occur was named romance by the author, and the litanic pattern co-exists in harmony with this form. What conclusions may be drawn from the poems so far analyzed? In the first period of the eighteenth century litany and litanic pattern are associated with the Christian worldview. Litanic lines usually remain subject to firm metrical discipline or follow the principles of parallelism. One may receive the impression that the imposed rigid rules sometimes restrict authors and for this reason they do not take advantage of the creative potential offered by litanic convention.

mostly the satiric and irreverent works. Although the bibliography on his works is perhaps not abundant, it is worth quoting: José María Escribano Escribano, Biografía y obra de Eugenio Gerardo Lobo (Toledo: Instituto Provincial de Investigaciones, 1996). 8 The contemporary spelling is used. 9 Eugenio Gerardo Lobo, Obras poéticas (Madrid: Imprenta de Miguel Escribano, 1769), 59.

Castilian Poetry in the Eighteenth Century

175

Litanic Verse and Dramatic Forms In subsequent years associations of the litanic pattern with various literary forms and genres became even closer. This may be easily established by examining the works of Juan Meléndez Valdés (1754–1817),10 an eminent Enlightenment poet,11 one of the greatest writers of the eighteenth century. The following is a poem from Las bodas de Camacho drama, with parts written out for choruses: Todo el coro. Coro de zagales.

Ven, dulce Amor; de tus zagales oye el clamor. Ven, dulce Amor; Ven, dulce Amor. Tú nos previenes todos los bienes, tú el orbe alientas y le sustentas como señor.12

Then five-line stanzas follow (altogether there are six of them, recited in turns by the female chorus and the male chorus — “coro de zagales” and “coro de zagalas”), interrupted by repeated invocation by “all”: “Come, sweet Love.” It is only the last stanza which is shorter and intensified by another invocation by the male and female choruses. The rhyme scheme in the quoted stanzas also results from the metrical discipline: abaaa ccdda. The persistence of invocation, faith in the addressee’s omnipotence and dignity, laudatory character and enumeration technique are all

10 Many of renowned authors of the eighteenth century were members of the academic and scientific associations that were numerous at that time, such as the Royal Spanish Academy (Real Academia Española); apart from Meléndez Valdés such figures include Nicasio Álvarez de Cienfuegos and Manuel José Quintana, and this reflects the fact that interests of the period were sometimes manifested by a liking for traditional forms of literary expression, especially those taken from the Greek and Latin tradition. 11 The poet was closely connected with the Greek and Latin tradition. Cf. e.g. Antonio Astorgano Abajo, “Meléndez y el helenismo de la Universidad de Salamanca durante la Ilustración,” Cuadernos del Instituto Antonio de Nebrija de Estudios sobre la Universidad 6(2003): 11–87. Another source of the author’s inspiration was English poetry, which is particularly noticeable in the philosophical odes. Cf. Ángeles García Calderón, “La poesía inglesa de la naturaleza en el XVIII y su influencia en Meléndez Valdés,” Revista de literatura, vol. 69, 138(2007): 519–541. 12 Juan Meléndez Valdés, Obras completas, ed. Antonio Astorgano Abajo (Madrid: Cátedra, 2004), 958.

176

Maria Judyta Woźniak

close to litanic forms of expression; nevertheless, to replace God or a saint with “sweet Love,”13 i.e. with the personification of love in the role of the addressee, employs litanic pattern in a way which was typical for the period. The litany was also included in the drama-related sainete, a Spanish form deriving from the folk tradition. The sainetes were created as intermedia placed within the drama. The following example is taken from the collection of sainetes of an author who is already familiar to us, Torres Villarroel. In “Baile de la ronda del uso” we may read: […] TODOS Viva, viva lo nuevo y lo vario, que es lo que deleita, suspende y hechiza. Viva y florezca el imperio del uso, viva, viva. ALCALDE La variedad y mudanza parieron a la alegría, y a variar nos enseña la naturaleza misma. TODOS Viva y florezca, pues son las vejeces, madrastras y suegras las más enemigas de los gustos, agrados, contentos, placeres y risas, Viva y florezca el imperio del uso, viva, viva. […]14

The structure of the litanic fragment arises from the alternating statements of Alcalde and the other persons who form a chorus, which brings to mind litanic invocations and responsories. What also carries litanic connotations is the repeated “viva y florezca” (“let it live and flourish”) in which a distant echo of the Greek “chaire” may be heard.

Litanic Pattern Versus Ode As it has been mentioned, in the period in question the litanic pattern coexists with other genres. Traces of litany may thus be found mainly in odes and sonnets. 13 A further part of the passage does not include any indications to understand Love as a Christian personal God. 14 Diego de Torres Villarroel, Sainetes (Madrid: Taurus, 1969), 152.

Castilian Poetry in the Eighteenth Century

177

In his poetry, which in many aspects may be regarded as neoclassical, Meléndez Valdés, who has already been introduced, often used the ode form.15 The ode had its revival especially in the Spanish Golden Age, and subsequently it was Neoclassicism that took up the genre again.16 The genre deriving from the choral lyrics, which was eagerly picked up by numerous writers of the period, had a laudatory nature and solemn tone. Thus, what may be often found in odes are exclamations full of admiration, invocations, antonomasias referring to the addressee, noun epithets, and repetitions. I mention these obvious characteristic features of the ode in order to stress its certain affinity with litany. These parallels make it particularly difficult to decide unambiguously about the presence of litanic characteristics in a poem. Since the ode’s addressee is, by nature, an extraordinary being, we will try to identify the litanic pattern in an ode when the laudatory tone is manifested by typically litanic laudatory repetitions. These sometimes include

15 Miguel Ángel Lama analyses Meléndez Valdés’s ode XXXIX: the symmetry of composition, distribution of rhymes, and tonal layer. When comparing the original and later versions of the poem, the critic presents the evolution of the poetic language towards abandonment of a too-rigid formal order which is replaced by a freer diction. Therefore, the ode seemed to create a place favourable for this kind of transformation of eighteenth-century poetry, contrary to the conventionality of expression that might have been associated with it. As we shall see, litanic elements in the ode did not fall into fixed forms of expression either. Cf. M. A. Lama Hernández, “La oda XXXIX de Juan Meléndez Valdés,” Anuario de estudios filológicos, 11(1988): 203–214. Cf. also John H. R. Polt, Batilo: Estudios sobre la evolución estilística de Meléndez Valdés (Oviedo: Centro de Estudios del Siglo XVIII, University of California Press, 1987). 16 Scholars often notice various parallels between works of Meléndez Valdés and Greek and Latin tradition, cf. e.g. Carmen Teresa Pabón de Acuña, “El amor en la poesía anacreóntica griega y en la de Meléndez Valdés,” Cuadernos de filología clásica 8(1975): 219–226. The category of sublimity also derives from the ancient tradition that was first described by Pseudo Longinos. In Spain the tradition of his thought was popular mostly owing to translations of Boileau. Concepts of Edmund Burke were also well known. Among contemporary Spanish scholars one may find concepts combining sublimity with dismay, with experiencing one’s death, and with the fear of it. When seen this way, sublimity (“lo sublime”) is rather manifested by e.g. Gothic novels or some collections of poems, not necessarily by the ode. The genre is often described as an “elevado” (elevated) or “solemne” (solemn) genre. Cf. Ana González–Rivas Fernández, “Los clásicos y la estética de lo sublime en España. El diálogo de Edward Young y José Cadalso,” in eds. Francisco García Jurado, Ramiro González Delgado, and Marta González González, La historia de la Literatura Grecolatina en España: de la Ilustración al Liberalismo [1778–1850] (Málaga: Universidad de Málaga, 2013); Guillermo Carnero, La cara oscura del Siglo de las Luces (Madrid: Fundación Juan March/Cátedra, 1983).

178

Maria Judyta Woźniak

formulae characteristic for litany, e.g. the chairetismic “salve” in the ode “Los días de Filis al entrar la primavera” repeated in the course of five lines. In this case it is the beginning of laudation, recited by plants and birds in honour of the main female character: “Salve” — le dicen —, copia peregrina de la beldad eterna; salve, virginal rosa y clavellina; salve, azucena tierna. Salve, y al bajo mundo de tus dones liberal enriquece. […]17

Some parts of odes by José Cadalso (1741–1782), an author with a thorough humanistic education, and who was a guide to many other poets of the period,18 are characterized by the litanic nature, too. As a matter of fact, in this author’s works the litany pattern may also be traced in other genres he practiced, such as anacreontics, letters, letrillas. An example which is characteristic because of the period’s common tastes, is the one taken from the ode “A Venus”: ¡Reina de Chipre, diosa de Citeres! tú que a los dioses y a los hombres mandas, ¿por qué no ablandas a la dura Cloris? ¡mándalo, Venus!19

The stanza, sung by the chorus, is repeated either in the same form or a slightly modified version, however, retaining exactly the same syntactic pattern (the same distribution of sentence types: exclamation, periphrasis, question, request). The metrical discipline as well as mythological references are features of the litanic poetics which are quite common in those times. 17 Juan Meléndez Valdés, Obras completas, 151. 18 José Manuel Pastor Tinoco, Vida y obra poética de Cadalso en el contexto del s. XVIII. Tesis doctoral dirigida por Francisco Abad Nebot (Madrid: Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, 2006) regards him as a neoclassical poet connecting the tradition of the Golden Age with the forthcoming Romanticism. There is also something else that connects Cadalso with Romanticism: it is in his works (Noches lúgubres, 1775, dialogues in prose) that scholars try to find the influence of Edward Young, regarding the category of sublimity as an essential element connecting the Enlightenment with Romanticism. Such an interpretation of sublimity assumes the extraordinariness of history which tells about death and causes dismay. The scholar, understanding the category of sublimity in this particular way, does not associate it with the ode genre. Cf. Ana González–Rivas Fernández, “Los clásicos y la estética de lo sublime.” 19 Ibid., 527.

Castilian Poetry in the Eighteenth Century

179

There are lots of relations between the litanic structure and the ode that may be exemplified. When considering the greatest authors of the period, Manuel José Quintana (1772–1857)20 is the one most worth mentioning. What is often observed in his works are e.g. exclamatory repetitions or antonomasias based on the syntactic pattern “tú que… / tú a quien” etc. (“thou, who / thou, to whom” etc.). In his poem “A Cinthia” the author addresses the main female character in the following way: ¡Oh, Cintia! Tú serías una de ellas también; tú la más bella; tú en la que brilla la rosada aurora; tú la agradable hora […]21

Here the typical features of litany are the laudatory expressions that follow the syntactic parallelism “thou, the most beautiful / thou, in whom the pink morning star shines / thou, a pleasant hour.” What is not typically litanic is the conditional mode. In what way then are the Enlightenment odes shaped by the litanic genre? Litanic passages follow an order based on repetitions, most frequently syntactic parallelism. Since these characteristics are not defining features of the ode as a genre, this form of order may be regarded as a particular influence of the litany. Its pattern emphasizes the solemn character of both the expression and the addressee, evoking religious associations, almost always Christian, which coexist with mythological subjects and the pagan element in a harmonic way.

Poetic Litany Versus Sonnet The same conclusions also apply to the litanic characteristics present in sonnets.22 The structure of the sonnet, determined by tradition and conventionalized,

20 A few years ago a special issue of the magazine Ínsula was published and devoted to the poet: Ínsula: revista de letras y ciencias humanas. Literatura y política: Manuel José Quintana (1772–1857), 744 (2008). 21 Manuel José Quintana, Poesías completas, ed. Albert Dérozier (Madrid: Castalia, 1969), 219. 22 In Spanish literature the sonnet was often taken up as a genre in the Renaissance and Baroque. It was less popular in eighteenth-century Neoclassicism and Romanticism. Even though the sonnet did not arouse such great interest as it had done in the previous period, a lot of examples of the genre were created in Spain in the second part of the eighteenth century. Cf. e.g. Arturo del Hoyo, Antología del soneto español. Siglos XVIII y XIX (Madrid: Aguilar, 1968).

180

Maria Judyta Woźniak

corresponded to literary tastes of the period, and litanic lines, as it may be observed, occurred most frequently in such forms. Nicolás Fernández de Moratín (1737–1780), an author important for the period,23 wrote among others the sonnet “Aplauso a Dorisa”: Bendita sea la hora, el año, el día y la ocasión y el venturoso instante en que rendí mi corazón amante a aquellos ojos donde Febo ardía. Bendito el esperar y la porfía, y el alto empeño de mi fe constante, y las saetas y arco fulminante con que abrasó Cupido el alma mía. Bendita la aflicción que he tolerado en las cadenas de mi dulce sueño, y los suspiros, llantos y esquiveces; los versos que a su gloria he consagrado y han de vencer del duro tiempo el ceño, y ella bendita innumerables veces.24

The benediction formula25 characteristic of litany is repeated thrice. In this case, however, the invocation to saints does not refer to those recognized by the Church. Love is praised through reference to the ancient context. In the works of Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos (1744–1811) we may find the sonnet addressed to his beloved, “A Alcmena,” where the last two stanzas begin with the invocation “dichoso,” (“happy”) expressing happiness with blessing expected in the future. Although this case is also not an example of litany in the strict sense, the persistently repeated blessing refers the reader to the worldview typical for litany. While in Spanish poetry such sonnets that include litanic lines are not particularly numerous, they may be noted as being characteristic for the Enlightenment. Less frequently than the odes, though still in the same way, they

23 Cf. Isabel Visedo Orden, “El lenguaje poético de Nicolás Fernández de Moratín,” Revista de literatura, vol. 42, 84(1980) (Ejemplar dedicado a: Nicolás Fernández de Moratín): 121–134. 24 Los Moratines. Obras completas (Madrid: Cátedra, 2008), vol. 1, 233. 25 Let us note that the formula used at the beginning of the line resembles the sonnet by Petrarch “Benedetto sia,” one of the most often imitated sonnets by the Italian master. What is interesting is that the rhyme pattern in the Spanish sonnet repeats the typical structure of the Italian one: abba abba cde cde.

Castilian Poetry in the Eighteenth Century

181

welcome litanic elements which have not become recognized as a separate genre. By meeting Enlightenment expectations and tastes, litany updated only some of its features, almost entirely giving up any reference to the Christian vision of the world, its prayerful or its ektenial nature.

Conclusions The history of the poetic litany in the eighteenth century is not an extensive chapter in the history of Castilian literature of the Iberian Peninsula. Litany barely functioned as a separate genre. Its rare examples, especially in the first half of the century, were restricted mainly to religious works which added a poetic ornamentation to the pattern of prayer and were subjected to quite rigorous metrical or compositional principles. It is no use trying to find a hundred-percent example of litany in Enlightenment literature. However, we may talk about litanic features that are inseparably related to some literary genres. Enumerations having laudatory tone as well as series of invocations, which evoke a sacred worldview, are mainly present in odes, which were so eagerly created in the Enlightenment period. Why is it that litany could not reveal its creative potential in Spanish literature of that time? It would be difficult to give a firm and clear answer. As far as the first half of the century is concerned, explanation may be sought in the general condition of literature, which was not very vigorous. The Enlightenment heritage, on the other hand, shows that litany was not perceived as a separate poetic genre, since it could not meet expectations of the period when compared to ode or sonnet. The Christian worldview, in many aspects, did not suit the atmosphere and beliefs of the epoch, which preferred to address its invocations to mythological heroes revived from Greek and Latin culture. It required at least one hundred years for the poetic litany to be able to flourish in Castilian literature, at least à rebours, expressing meanings that had not been accepted before.

Maria Judyta Woźniak University of Łódź

“I do not know the name”: Castilian Poetry from the Nineteenth Century to the 1930s As it has already been mentioned in the chapter on eighteenth-century literature, various forms of repetitiveness are rarely phenomena of litanic provenance on the Iberian Peninsula. This is also the case with the writing of the nineteenth century. Those nineteenth-century poems that include litanic elements treat the litanic pattern conventionally, even though they do not always embrace a Christian worldview, and the individual increasingly becomes their subject matter instead of God or the saints. The situation radically changes in the period of modernism.1 From this time onwards the wealth of litanic verse is striking. The most interesting examples of it recreate the pattern in various manners, since the lyrical “I” starts to display its individual qualities by polemically distancing itself from the worldview associated with the litanic tradition. Instead of adopting a ready-made vision of reality and an attitude characterized by humility and modesty, the subject observes the complexity and ambiguity of the world and discusses the obscurity of the nature of things and the problems of determining his or her identity. The new forms of expression reflect the changing worldview, which allows people to question what once seemed to be axiomatic. Litanic verse unexpectedly turns out to be one of the most important tools in this search for a form. It needs to be emphasized that the poems quoted below will be merely a sample of the wealth of texts that relate to the poetics in question, but they illustrate the diversity of directions in which litanic verse evolved. Enumeration of all the titles of poems where litanic elements appear would exceed the space limits of this article. This is the reason for devoting less scope to Romanticism and focusing on the later period instead. Selected examples will demonstrate transformations in terms of the lyrical “I,” the world image, the subject matter, and the poem structure. 1 José Fradejas Lebrero defines “forma litánica” as a poem in which there is a refrain after each line. Even if the elements characteristic of litanic verse that we discuss below are more strictly understood here than in Fradejas’s “forma litánica,” we must agree with his diagnosis of the great importance of litanic elements in twentieth-century poetry. José Fradejas Lebrero, “La forma litánica en la poesía del siglo XX,” Revista de Literatura LVIII 116 (1996): 399.

184

Maria Judyta Woźniak

It needs to be said in the introduction that in the work of some poets litanic elements are frequent, while they are practically absent from the work of other poets. The respective positions of these poets seem to be of no importance; it is rather a question of individual poetic diction. Between the onset of modernism and the 1930s numerous and diverse litanic poems were written by many poets, including the best-known ones. For the sake of clarity and order we will here adopt a predominantly chronological order, which will be accompanied by subject matter analysis in relation to the twentieth century.

Romanticism and Dispersed Litanic Signals In the literature of Spanish Romanticism litanic signals appear in single excerpts and whole litanic poems are rare. The few poets who undertake litanic verse as a frequent means of artistic expression need to be discussed in more detail here. Chronologically speaking, the work of Juan Nicasio Gallego (1777–1853) needs to be analyzed first. The early nineteenth-century poem “A Celmira” includes chairetismic and polyonymic greetings in its three stanzas. To quote one of the stanzas: Salve, Celmira hermosa; Mil veces salve, celestial doncella, Más que la reina de las flores bella. Más que la madre del Amor graciosa.2

Another stanza enumerates the attributes that the addressee is endowed with, for instance the artistic talents that derive from Anacreon or, more mundanely, from a nightingale. The multiplicity of greetings (literarily “salve one thousand times”) and the hailing antonomasias produce the image of an outstanding person, who deserves adoration worthy of a divinity. This is the direction in which litanic verse develops: what was formerly the place of God is taken over by non-divinities and non-saints. In the poetry by José Zorrilla (1817–1893) litany frequently appears in the form of repetitive prayer invocations, chairetismic formulae (“salve”), or the benedicte ones that are linked with periphrases; as in Gallego’s poetry, it mainly occurs in single passages of poems. The poem “Plegaria” distinguishes itself with the anaphora “Maria cuyo nombre” (“Mary, whose name”) which begins most stanzas and gives the poem the quality of a personal hailing and supplicatory prayer, which 2 Juan Nicasio Gallego, Obras poéticas (Madrid: La Real Academia Española, 1854), 69.

Castilian Poetry from the Nineteenth Century to the 1930s

185

expresses dependence and subjection. What is special is that praises are addressed to Mary as a source of poetic inspiration. The poet discusses his poetic technique in litanic verse and such self-discussion may be characterized as a transformation of the litanic convention. The poems that entirely conform to the litanic pattern, i.e. those where litanic elements are related to poetic composition, are rather scarce. Even though a holy person does not have to be their subject, religious contexts are frequently evoked here. This may be exemplified by another poem, “Las torres de la Alhambra,” which is written in hendecasyllable. Yo te adoro, Señor, cuando la admiro dormida en el tapiz de su ancha vega; yo te adoro, Señor, cuando respiro su aura salubre que entre flores juega; yo te adoro, Señor, desde el retiro de esta torre oriental que el Darro riega; y aquí tu omnipotencia revelada, yo te adoro, Señor, sobre Granada.3

The speaking person addresses God in a litanic manner, anaphorically expressing his or her reverence. The laudations do not, however, concern His person directly at all, but indirectly express His greatness through descriptions of a city, the real object of admiration. The person speaking hails God’s omnipotence in the effects of Creation, one of which is the amazing Granada. This litanic strategy had been known in the tradition for ages, but from the orthodox perspective the reflection of God’s omnipotence could be found in His saints, who were addressed in litanic invocations. Here the subject of litanic description belongs to the profane and is generally thought to be a work of humans. An outstanding person may just as well be the subject of such description, as in the excerpts from “Despedida,” a poem devoted to the poet Gertrudis Gómez de Avellaneda; even though the poem is addressed to Allah,4 it consists of periphrases that describe the female poet in question.5

3 José Zorrilla, Obras completas (Valladolid: Librería Santarén, 1943), 1302. 4 Allah is a synonym of God here, which illustrates Arabic influences on the culture of the Iberian Peninsula throughout the ages. 5 For a discussion of Zorrilla’s poetry that signaled the future concerns of modernism cf. Una nueva lectura: actas del Congreso sobre José Zorrilla, Valladolid 18–21 de octubre de 1993, eds. Francisco Javier Blasco Pascual, Ricardo de la Fuente Ballesteros, and Alfredo Mateos Paramio (Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid, 1995).

186

Maria Judyta Woźniak

Litanic verse was not alien to Gertrudis Gómez de Avellaneda (1814–1873), either. Gómez reciprocated Zorilla’s attention by writing a poem that alluded to the same convention and described Zorilla by means of paraphrases (“A mi amigo Zorrilla”). The work of Carolina Coronado (1821–1911) is also characterized by litanic elements in single passages of texts. These are chairetismic addresses at the beginning of “A una golondrina” and in “Espronceda,” and the benedicte formula in “Bendito seas, Alberto.” The litanic elements occur both in religious poems and those devoted to outstanding people. A careful reader will notice that among the writers named above do not appear either Espronceda or Bécquer, two of the more significant Romantic poets. In their work litanic elements may be found, but they are dispersed fragments rather than materializations of the genre; moreover, their content is non-religious. For instance, in “Canto II” from “El diablo mundo” by José de Espronceda (1808–1842) there is a short passage that resembles litany with hailing antonomasias addressed to a woman. In “Rimas” 26 and 35 by Gustavo Adolfo Bécquer (1836–1870) we can find for example paraphrases combined with supplications, but there are no other, more convincing, traces of litanic verse. What needs to be answered is the question how the litanic literary convention materializes itself in Spanish Romantic poetry. It appears in hailing antonomasias that are subject to versification discipline and are not always addressed directly to God. It happens that they describe people and places instead, even if religious references are also present in the poem. Litanic form does not serve utterly free artistic expression, even though at times it is a pretext for self-reflection on writing poetry. This is how the profane slowly becomes subject matter for a genre originating in the sacred, which is the direction of litanic verse development in the period in question.

The Generation 1898 and Litanic Verse: Miguel de Unamuno, Juan Ramón Jiménez, Antonio Machado, and Ramón del Valle-Inclán Litanic pattern turned out to most inspiring for literature from modernism onwards, as we stated earlier. It is difficult to find the most representative examples of this wealth of texts; hence, we will discuss the most diversified ones. The authors representing modernism the most completely have been chosen here.6 6 It has to be noted, however, that modernism and the Generation 1898 are not the same thing; some scholars identify modernism with the Generation 1898, but others treat them as opposing movements.

Castilian Poetry from the Nineteenth Century to the 1930s

187

Litanic repetitions and enumerations characterize poetry by Miguel de Unamuno (1864–1936), the most influential thinker of the generation, a prose and essay writer, a translator from many languages, a poet, and a playwright. The wellknown and appreciated poem “El Cristo de Velázquez”7 includes unusual examples of litanic verse, where litanic invocations do not have conventional quality and form an original, almost personal, theology: Que eres Cristo, el único Hombre que sucumbió de pleno grado, triunfador de la muerte, que a la vida por Ti quedó encumbrada. Desde entonces por Ti nos vivifica esa tu muerte, por Ti la muerte se ha hecho nuestra madre, por Ti la muerte es el amparo dulce que azucara amargores de la vida;8

“Oración final” from the same poem can be quoted here as well: […] Clamamos a Ti, nuestro Jesús, desde la sima de nuestro abismo de miseria humana, y Tú, de humanidad la blanca cumbre, danos las aguas de tus nieves. Águila blanca que abarcas al volar el cielo, te pedimos tu sangre; a Ti, la viña, el vino que consuela al embriagarnos;9

What links those two poems are supplications and polyonimic enumerations that characterize Christ in a manner alluding to the Bible (and on the margins the author includes numbers that refer to specific passages of the Bible), but Unamuno reworks known phrases and introduces his own. For instance, he calls Christ a vine and asks him for wine “that will console us up to the point of inebriation,” and he prays to Christ in the Holy Communion10 for “bread for our journey to

7 Much criticism on this long eleven-syllable line poem of 2500 lines has been published, even though it certainly did not exhaust the topic; for example Enrique Rivera de Ventosa, “Unamuno ante el Cristo de Velázquez: ¿diálectica o diálogo?,” in Volumenhomenaje a Miguel de Unamuno (Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca, 1986), 655–682. 8 Miguel de Unamuno, Obras completas (Madrid: Fundación José Antonio de Castro, 1999), vol. 4, 462. 9 Ibid., 549. 10 See also litanic antonomasias in the poem “Hostia”.

188

Maria Judyta Woźniak

God.”11 The supplications characteristically start in the middle of the lines, as if versification order did not agree with the spontaneous character of the prayer, or rather with the character that pretends to be spontaneous. The work of Miguel de Unamuno deserves our particular attention in research on litanic verse due to originality and diversity of its realizations, for instance in “Manos,” “Libértate, Señor,” “Perdón!,” and “Teresa.” What characterizes these poems is that even when they touch on religious topics, they express primarily individual religiousness, which does not limit itself to repeating fixed phrases. The Nobel Prize winner Juan Ramón Jiménez (1881–1958) cannot be excluded from our considerations on modernism. Litanic qualities appear both in his poetry and in his prose, for example in the syntactic parallelism when elements of the world are enumerated. This can be exemplified by the poem “Yo no soy yo,” where litanic enumerations express the inner complexity of the lyrical “I”: Yo no soy yo. Soy éste que va a mi lado sin yo verlo; que, a veces, voy a ver, y que, a veces, olvido. El que calla, sereno, cuando hablo, el que perdona, dulce, cuando odio,

11 What particularly interested Uanmuno was questions that resulted from faith, such as the difficult relation between reason and belief. The repeated motif was the desire to be immortal and remain the same person even after death. He could not come to terms with rationalism and considered the explanations that appealed only to reason to be absurd. His philosophy, which manifested itself also in the individual quality of his poetic prayers, led to a personal understanding of faith: he refrained from believing in what one had not seen, which was the traditional understanding of faith, and thought that art should create the object of faith. Such faith relies on imagination and art is a particular expression of this. There were different responses to Unamuno’s ideas, including those that held him to be blasphemous and against the church dogmas; cf. María Dolores García Giménez, (IN)Mortalidad y dimensión poiética de la Fe en Miguel de Unamuno. Tesis doctoral dirigida por Jacinto Choza, Higinio Marín Pedreño (Universidad de Sevilla, 2011); Enrique Rivera de Ventosa, “La experiencia de Dios en Miguel de Unamuno y Xavier Zubiri,” Actas del Congreso Internacional Cincuentenario de Unamuno, ed. María Dolores Gómez Molleda, 1989, 4, 583–590; Enrique Rivera de Ventosa, “El cristianismo de Unamuno,” Cuadernos hispanoamericanos, 440–441(1987) (Ejemplar dedicado a: Miguel de Unamuno (1864–1936)): 205–230.

Castilian Poetry from the Nineteenth Century to the 1930s

189

el que pasea por donde no estoy, el que quedará en pie cuando yo muera.12

Litanic verse has the function of identifying one’s self and of searching for one’s identity, which function cannot be easily and decisively described.13 What has to be noted is a certain similarity to the litanic poems by the Portuguese writer Fernando Pessoa. The unusual element here is the concept of the human: the consciousness of not being able to comprehend oneself, lack of fixed order, and lack of control even over oneself. This stands in opposition to the traditional world image of litany, according to which the individual can trust in God as the guardian of unity and sense.14 The poems “El ocaso alegre,” “Arias tristes” II, “Pastorales” VII and IX, and many other texts provide us with examples of ordering enunciations through antonomasias, parallelisms, and other devices. The well-known poem “Iberia” deserves particular attention, since it combines the lofty tone of antonomasias devoted to the motherland with subjective and sensual contemplation of it. What was characteristic of the poetry written by this generation was patriotic elements, which were noticeable also in the work of Antonio Machado (1875– 1939), for example in the poem CI (“El Dios ibero”). The apostrophe “señor,” which introduces five stanzas, is a twisted laudation of the God of ruin and suffering, the God “con doble faz de amor y de venganza” (“with the double face of love and of vengeance”): “Señor de la ruina, adoro porque aguardo y porque temo: con mi oración se inclina hacia la tierra un corazón blasfemo. ¡Señor, por quien arranco el pan con pena, sé tu poder, conozco mi cadena! ¡Oh dueño de la nube del estío que la campiña arrasa, del seco otoño, del helar tardío, y del bochorno que la mies abrasa! […]”15

12 Juan Ramón Jiménez, Tercera antolojía poética (Madrid: Editorial Biblioteca Nueva, 1970), 380. 13 The constant search for an adequate form of expression resulted from the particularly strong urge to find “pure poetry,” “the right names of things.” Cf. Francisco Javier Blasco, Poética de Juan Ramón (Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca, 1981). 14 When Jiménez was awarded the Nobel Prize, the verdict called his work “spiritual poetry” and hailed its “pure lyric quality.” 15 Antonio Machado, Poesías completas (Madrid: Espasa, 2010), 149.

190

Maria Judyta Woźniak

What is more interesting are the passages that appear in the poetry of Ramón María del Valle-Inclán (1866–1936),16 which is famous for its provocative statements; we may find there litanic verse that modifies the litanic pattern in certain ways. “La rosa panida” from the cycle “Poemas de las rosas” includes many antonomasias: ¡Mística rosa del elogio! ¡Fragancia de la letanía! ¡Luz de Eucologio! ¡Salmo del día! […] ¡Rosa! ¡Divina flor del rito de amar, cantar y adormecer! ¡Amor en grito! ¡Boca de mujer! […]17

What may be observed here is the use of the word “litania” in the text. Calling a rose “the scent of litany” is truly unusual. It is something that confirms the possibility of litanic interpretation. Other references to the religious context are when the rose is called “a psalm of the day” and “a divine flower.” Litanic poetics makes the rose a divine entity. Nevertheless, other phrases are even more important: the rose is also called “love in the crying out” and “a woman’s mouth.” One may even have the impression that the love of a woman means as much as God since both the love and God are subjects of litanic invocations. It is similar in other poems, such as “Rosa métrica,” “Vitrales,” and “Rezo.” They are unorthodox litanies that apparently preserve the poetics of the religious genre and make references to the world of human feelings and passions. Litanic verse in modernism radically departs from traditional litany as a Christian prayer that suggests specific patterns of expression, a specific world vision, and the attitude of the person who believes in God and prays to Him. Even if religious references are explicitly stated, they may also be poetically transformed (Unamuno, del Valle-Inclán). In this respect too poets approach the tradition creatively and with a sense of freedom. Litanic verse adopts the form of an individual

16 Del Valle-Inclán was not only a poet, but also a prose writer and a playwright, which made him similar to Unamuno. In textbooks del Valle-Inclán is described as “el escritor gallego más provocador y universal de toda nuestra historia literaria;” Lina Rodríguez Cacho, Manual de Historia de la Literatura española (Madrid: Castalia Universidad, 2009), vol. 2, 278. 17 Ramón del Valle-Inclán, Obra completa. II Teatro. Poesía. Varia (Madrid: Espasa Libros, 2002), vol. 2, 1243.

Castilian Poetry from the Nineteenth Century to the 1930s

191

rather than collective enunciation. Those qualities characterize litanic verse in the period in question. Other examples illustrate not the evolution of litanic verse, but the diversity of poetic ideas which were created at a specific time.

Litanic Description of the World: Federico García Lorca and Gerardo Diego Federico García Lorca and Gerardo Diego belong to the so-called Generation 27, which, after the Generation 98, was the next to mark their presence in the history of Spanish literature.18 Federico García Lorca (1898–1936) would have had an important place in this history even if he had not been identified as a member of a specific generation. His work is interesting also from the perspective of research on litanic verse, since it is replete with repetitions in the form of anaphoras and short refrains, which in a sense relate to litanic verse. This may be exemplified by “Madrigal,” “Balada de la placeta,” and “Remansos,” which attempt to get to the heart of things through naming; this is something characteristic of the Biblical tradition and of the belief of ancient people that the right name allows one to discover the nature of a thing.19 The poem “Variación” is a perfect example of this, since it includes pleas, invocations, and responsorial phrases; it also includes syntagmatic noun phrases. This is the example of a non-orthodox litany that preserves the poetics of the religious genre by straightforward sacrilizing references to the world of human emotions and passions: El remanso del aire bajo la rama del eco. El remanso del agua bajo fronda de luceros. El remanso de tu boca bajo espesura de besos.20

18 In Spanish literary studies “generation” is both a common and a controversial term. Here it serves the function of better placing an author in the corpus of literary texts, since “generation” is a category generally understood and widely used. 19 Lorca’s poetry was very much inspired by the religious verse of San Juan de la Cruz. This is visible in the choice of motifs, stylistics, and vocabulary. Cf. Juan Matas Caballero, “Federico García Lorca frente a la tradición literaria: voz y eco de San Juan de la Cruz en los Sonetos del amor oscuro,” Contextos, 33–36 (1999–2000): 361–386. 20 Federico García Lorca, Poesía completa (Barcelona: Galaxia Gutenberg, 2013), 132.

192

Maria Judyta Woźniak

Such phrases focused on the noun and its epithets are frequent in Lorca’s poetry. The poem “Limonar” is similar in this respect, since anaphoras that repeat the title are followed by anonomasias that are associated with love lyrics. Other examples of this are such poems as “Canción con movimiento,” “Chopo y torre…,” “Huerto de Marzo,” and “Camino.” They illustrate only one manner of materializing litanic poetics in Lorca’s poetry, but it is the manner most characteristic of this poet.21 The poetry of Gerardo Diego (1896–1987) is similar to Lorca’s in this respect. To quote the poem “Tus manos”: Tus manos son dos peces, déjalas en mi agua. Cómo se me resbalan. Tus manos son dos pájaros, déjalos en mi aire. Cómo se me deshacen […]22

In such poems litanic poetics consists in trying to capture various aspects of one and the same reality through appositions. The aim of careful observation is thoroughly modern in its hermeneutic nature: it is not adoration of the Creator, but an attempt at interpreting the world. The poetry of Luis Cernuda (1902–1963) includes texts that are similar to the ones quoted above in that they are based on enumerations of nouns. These texts are for example “Como leve sonido” and “Te quiero.” Yet another instance of this is Miguel Hernández’s “La guerra, madre.” There also exist poems of Hernández that undermine litanic perspective and such description of the world, hence more scope will be devoted to them here.

21 Observing the world from various perspectives is a manner of poetic narration which goes together with a quality characteristic of Lorca’s poetry: repeatedly there appear specific themes, motifs, and symbols. This is yet another manifestation of the idea that the nature of things cannot be reflected in verse and this nature has to be searched for by naming. This is why the critics claim that Lorca’s poetry cannot be read in a linear manner since it resembles a spiral, in which everything responds to everything else. Cf. Esperanza Ortega, “La obra poética de García Lorca,” in F. García Lorca, Romancero gitano (Madrid: Espasa Calpe, 2004), 27. For more on Lorca’s poetics cf. Alberto Manuel Ruiz Campos, Oralidad, ritmo y poesía: apuntes de retórica poética en Federico García Lorca (Sevilla: Grupo de Investigación, 1991). 22 Gerardo Diego, Obra completa (Madrid: Alfaguara, 1989), 2, 748.

Castilian Poetry from the Nineteenth Century to the 1930s

193

Perfidious Modifications of the Litanic Pattern: Rafael Alberti and Miguel Hernández Generation 27 created some interesting instances of reworking litany and they negated the meanings associated with the genre in previous centuries. In the well-known poem “Con los zapatos puestos tengo que morir,” with the subtitle “Elegía cívica,” Rafael Alberti (1902–1999) employs litanic patterns in a special manner. Let us quote a fragment of the ending: Y la ola primera pasa el epíritu del que me traicionó valiéndose de una gota de lacre y la ola segunda pasa la mano del que me asesinó poniendo como disculpa la cuerda de una guitarra y la ola tercera pasa los dientes del que me llamó hijo de zorra para que al volver la cabeza una bala perdida le permitiera al aire entrar y salir por mis oídos y la ola cuarta pasa los muslos que me oprimieron en el instante de los chancros y las orquitis.[…]23

This is one of Alberti’s most characteristic poems. It is emotionally loaded, rebellious and patriotic in its attack on bourgeoisie, comfort, and routine.24 In the litanic form above the person speaking wishes someone misery and these wishes are similar to curses. Also, in “Retrato del excrementísimo y alcayata señor don Luis de Orduña y del Moral,” Alberti enumerates strings of sophisticated invectives, which have the function of antonomasias, while only the poem’s title indicates the addressee. The antonomasias resemble Baudelaire’s blasphemous “Litanies of Satan.”25 They are not subject to any order of meaning, but they simultaneously have the form of a regular sonnet with virtuoso phonetic instrumentation, as in: 23 Rafael Alberti, Obras completas. Poesía 1920–1938, ed. Luis García Montero (Madrid: Aguilar, 1988), vol. 1, 513. 24 Alberti claimed that he wanted to compose 300 or 400-syllable long lines in order to place them on the walls, which demonstrates his involvement in the social and political situation of the time; cf. Jaime Siles, “El compromiso cívico en la poesía de Rafael Alberti,” in Actas Poesía última, eds. José Ramón Trujillo, Basilio Rodríguez Cañada (Fundación Rafael Alberti: Sobre los ángeles, 2007), 19–30. 25 For the reception of Baudelaire in Spain cf. Glyn M. Hambrook, The Influence of Charles Baudelaire in Spanish Modernismo (Nottingham: Nottingham University, 1985); David Marín Hernández, La recepción y traducción de “Les Fleurs du Mal” en España (Málaga: Miguel Gómez Ediciones, 2007); Encarnación Medina Arjona, “Lectura. Recepción de Baudelaire en España,” Rapsoda. Revista de Literatura 1(2009): 120–134. In 1880 Baudelaire was not read in Spanish yet, but his influence on European literature was noted, even though more interest was taken in the sensational aura, anecdotes, and his attitude to faith than in his poetic works. In 1894 Artificial Paradises was published in

194

Maria Judyta Woźniak

Un gargajo sin sal mal expelido, un esputo esputado de una puta, una tuerca acabada en cagarruta, un pedo consular ya dimitido. […]26

In Alberti’s “ĺndice de familia burguesa española (mis otros tíos; tías; tías y tíos segundos)” there appears an enumeration of names that resembles the Litany of the Saints. Specific descriptions of people are attached to the names. Let us quote a fragment of the ending: Julio, ingeniero, corredor de vinos y poeta de la Virgen. Javier, bello y analfabeto: La P la A y la N, KAN. José María, llamado el triste, beocio, filatélico y habitante en una pajarera.27

Such an employment of litanic pattern constitutes its negation. Even though these texts resort to litany in their poetics through parallel invocations and antonomasias, they express content that is litany’s opposition: disagreement with the world, anger and wrath, inventive against other people, and their caricature. The reader may remember here other famous poets, such as the Nobel Prize winner Vicente Aleixandre (1898–1984), Jorge Guillén (1893–1984), and Pedro Salinas (1892–1951). Generally their poems are not written according to litanic order. For instance, in Aleixandre’s poetry what appears special is the description of the sea in “El mar ligero”: each of the stanzas, which are mostly of four lines, begins with the anaphoric “el mar,” after which there follows the description of the sea, and actions and paraphrases are metaphorically attributed to it. Litanic order clearly characterizes the work of Miguel Hernández (1910–1942), a member of Generación del 36 (Generation 36), the next generation of poets. He wrote poems based on enumerations and repetitive paraphrases, and used syntagmatic noun phrases in a manner similar to that of Lorca, for example in “La palmera levantina,” “Vistas al mediterráneo,” and the sonnet with the incipit “Penas de Andalucía son mis penas…” The poem “No sé el nombre…” provides

Spanish. In 1886 Juan Valera demonstrated more serious interest in Baudelaire. Clarín (Leopoldo Alas) read Baudelaire more insightfully, since he was interested in Christian spirituality and the symbol of evil as that which is hidden the most deeply in human soul. Clarín introduced Juan Ramón Jiménez to the work of Baudelaire. Also other modernists were interested in that poetry, particularly in the theme of a city and in symbolic language (for example Manuel Machado). 26 Ibid., 555. 27 Ibid., 623.

Castilian Poetry from the Nineteenth Century to the 1930s

195

us with an interesting example of litanic verse due to the polemical attitude to the litanic worldview: [2] No sé el nombre de ese pájaro que tan vivaz se ha escondido entre la morena plata de un árbol del paraíso. No sé el nombre de esa flor de un azul de ojos angélicos que en el cristal de un arroyo se está viendo y repitiendo. […] Y el pájaro es un Gayarre plúmeo. Y la flor un aroma jamás aspirado exhala por sus labios. […] …y veo que es un encanto más la anonimia.28

The anaphoric statement “I do not know the name” that opens each initial line demonstrates the impossibility of naming reality. Although from the beginnings of the genre the polyonymic logic of litanic invocations resulted from the impossibility of naming the divine, it was accompanied by an attitude of trust and subjection. Here problems with designation are diagnosed as something that stems from the act of cognition itself. In the other part of the poem the initially adopted litanic pattern breaks up and reveals epistemic helplessness. In the wealth of poems by Hernández the reader may find such litanic poems as “Lección de armonía,” a litany à rebours, which directs words of admiration towards the fear-inspiring divinity. In “Naranjo” the antonomasias combine the mythological inventory with Biblical associations in an original manner. Litanic poems by Alberti and Hernández constitute a specific negation of the tradition of the genre. The nature of the modification lies in the poets’ expressing content that stands in opposition to the litanic worldview, but they do so by means of litanic devices (parallelisms, anaphoras, and apostrophes). This is how litanic tradition becomes less and less frequently subjected to religious beliefs and more

28 Miguel Hernández, Poesía. Obra completa (Madrid: Espasa Calpe, 1992), vol. 1, 117.

196

Maria Judyta Woźniak

and more often serves art, understood as the space for human investigation which stems from individual needs.

Conclusions The history of litanic verse in Castilian literature between the nineteenth century and the 1930s shows the changes that the verse underwent: gradual departure from the world view characteristic of the genre, and the formulae characteristic of it, and likewise departure from regular versification, in favour of a more and more individual perspective on the world and of poetic devices that are also individualized. It needs to be emphasized that litany revealed the whole range of its literary possibilities precisely when it stopped being treated as a form inalienably associated with the models from Christian prayer books. What characterizes the first decades of the twentieth century are modifications of the litanic pattern that concern the image of the lyrical “I” and a world view that becomes increasingly desacralized.

Maria Judyta Woźniak University of Łódź

On the Trail of Litany in Catalan, Galician, and Portuguese Poetry from the Eighteenth Century to the 1930s As with Castilian poetry, various types of repetitiveness are also common devices in the literature of other languages from the Iberian Peninsula, although it is seldom of a litanic nature. Therefore, with regards to literature in the Catalan, Galician and Portuguese languages I will focus on the most expressive examples of litanic verse only, as well as on litanic features in a broader sense, in the works of major authors.1 The literature of these languages has been subject to numerous transformations that were often dependent on non-literary factors, and therefore certain periods particularly abound in significant literary output, whereas to others less attention may be given.

Catalan Literature In Catalonia it was not until the nineteenth2 century that a Renaissance (Renaixenca) of the Catalan language and culture occurred. In the works by Joaquim Rubió i Ors (1818–1899), one of the first early exponents of this approach, it is possible to find occasional fragments that resemble the litany as exemplified in use of anaphoric repetitions at the beginning of consecutive stanzas, e.g. in the form of relative clauses with the “que” (“which”) pronoun or benediction formulae. However, their presence does not mean the litanic pattern is in fact complete. A special case is found in the poem “El comte Borrell II,” in which epiphora appear in the fifth line after each of the four-line stanzas. This is not a responsory, but there is a persistent reminder of the object of the emotions, that is a beloved city, as can 1 The focus of the study are those works written in the aforementioned languages, thus, I omit texts in the Castilian language of bilingual authors e.g. Rosalía de Castro or Joaquim Rubió i Ors. 2 As for previous authors let us recall Joan Ramis i Ramis (1746–1819). What may be regarded as litanic in his poetry are in fact repetitions that praise the beloved in the poem “Però ta bellesa…” which suggests the non-expressiveness of the object of the description.

198

Maria Judyta Woźniak

be observed in the laudatory and lamenting tone. Thus, it may be regarded as an example of the manifestation of certain litanic aspects in the analyzed literature, though it is certainly not the litany in a narrow sense. What is worth particular scrutiny are the apostrophes of the poem “A la ermita de Miramar” that are addressed to various recipients: the place, the people and, finally, God. Laudatory antonomasias, benediction formulae, the syntax “que” (“who”) combined with the calling “come” highlight the uniqueness of the place where humans live in friendship with God, and only at the end of the poem is it transformed into a plea addressed to God. What is interesting is that the desire to sing the numerous names of God is underlined. These expressive manifestations of the litanic pattern, though dispersed, in fact construct the poem, although they do not form a consistently realized poetic litany, mostly because of their diverse and fragmentary nature. The abundant works of a Catalan cleric, who was also the greatest poet of the Renaixenca period, Jacint Verdaguer (1845–1902), provide numerous examples of the connections between poetry and litanic features. The refrain structure and various types of anaphora and epiphora, a frequent, indeed at times constant, characteristic of his poetry, cannot be explicitly classified as a litany, although the refrains themselves quite often refer to the litanic generic worldview, e.g. by means of their laudatory tone or ektenial character. Nevertheless, despite this they often do not build any syntactic connection with other lines and, as they are repeated as the last part of each stanza, create a song-like rather than litanic feature within the poem. Occasionally, though, signs of litanic features (e.g. laudatory antonomasias of the name of Jesus) are repeated, albeit without any regularity. The most convincing example of a realization of the genre appears to be, for instance, the distinctively litanic eight-line stanzaic poem entitled “Al Cor de Jesús.” In the first part of each line various names for the Heart of Jesus are consistently given, whereas the second part, as a syntactic parallelism, includes a plea that differs each time: Cor del meu pare, estimau-me; Cor del meu rei, enriquiu-me; Cor del meu metge, goriu-me; Cor del meu mestre, ensenyau-me; Cor del meu amic, guiau-me; Cor del meu jutge, absoleu-me; Cor del meu espòs, rebeu-me; Cor del meu Déu, emparau-me.3

3 Jacint Verdaguer, Poesia (Barcelona: Proa, 2003), vol. 1, 125.

On the Trail of Litany in Catalan, Galician, and Portuguese Poetry

199

A second litanic example in Verdaguer’s literary output is similar, namely “Día 30. Oració.” There is also the verse “Goigs en llaor de Nostra Senyora de Gràcia…,” in which the glorifying refrain interweaves stanzas that express in an anaphoric way praise for the Virgin Mary (cf. also the ektenial “Espases de dolor”), and “L’Apòstol dels negres,” a similarly constructed poem, albeit with no anaphora. Although its stanzas list the saint’s merits this is in a traditionally narrative manner. In the poem “Cor de Jesús…” the prayerful invocations repeated at the beginning of each of the three four-line and rhymed stanzas, resemble, as far as their theme is concerned, the Litany of the Sacred Heart of Jesus as they develop each of the callings into four lines (cf. also other poems dedicated to the Heart of Jesus). Vardaguer’s contemporary, Ángel Guimerà (1845–1924), wrote pieces on religious subjects that contain anaphoric repetitions and lamentations. Nevertheless, they appear only in fragments of the poems, e.g. at the beginning and the end of a poem, and cannot thus be considered to be compositional factors. A special case is the six-stanza poem “Ball de les arades,” as its stanzas are created of an even number of lines and enumerate animals and objects, dancing on the occasion of sowing, as well as listing those invited to the dance. Despite the long hendecasyllables, the lines develop in a hasty rhythm enhanced by the harmony of sounds and masculine rhymes. The main theme is neither religious nor does the poem evoke religious connotations. However, in these persistent enumerations an attempt to convey the diversity of the world can be observed through the increasing number of new names that are similar in their external shape to the litanic polyonymy. The poet and cleric Miquel Costa i Llobera (1854–1922) often uses exclamations,4 repetitiveness and a refrain structure which mainly seem to perform an expressive function due to the lack of other litanic features. Any manifestations of the litanic genre are infrequent, such as the epiphoric “Ave, Maria” in a fragment of one of his poem (“La visió”) or the refrain-apostrophe to the Mother of God that is repeated after each stanza. Their nature is usually polyonymic or ektenial (“Cançó dels pelegrins de Lluc”). The refrain repetitions (most often two or four lines) that end stanzas are common in the poetic works of Josep Carner (1884–1970) but cannot be considered to be litanic either. There are a few references to the litanic pattern, with e.g. “Albada per a una dormilega” alluding to the alba form, in which the apostrophe 4 In Joan Maragall’s (1860–1911) poetry, as with many writers from the Iberian Peninsula, the cry “ai” reappears and is accompanied by other lamentative expressions, although these are not litanic. The Spanish “ay” and its variants normally reflect pain, thus performing mainly an expressive function, rather than enhancing a plea for mercy or compassion.

200

Maria Judyta Woźniak

“Oh dormilega!,” (“O, Sleepyhead”) repeated every three or four stanzas, does not resemble a responsory.5

Galician Literature The real Renaissance of Galician-language literature, the Rexurdimento, as with Catalonia, only occurred in the nineteenth century, following a long period in which literature was nearly non-existent.6 Repetitions, exclamations, syntactic parallelism and refrain structure are common elements that are found in the poetic works of Rosalía de Castro (1837–1885), works which only occasionally draw on the litanic tradition. While in “Poem III” of Cantares gallegos a benediction formula occurs several times, in “Poem XIII” from the same volume there are repeated callings upon the saints, albeit with no reference to litanic order. “Poem XX” of Follas novas is a complaint addressed to God on behalf of another sufferer, supported by pleas repeated several times, although each is constructed in a different way. In the works by Manuel Curros Enríquez (1851–1908), as in those by Rosalía de Castro, the litany is seldom found (see however a short fragment from the poem “Canto I” that repeats the syntax “ti, que” — “thou who”), whereas apostrophes, repetitions or anaphoric structures often occur. Nevertheless, the enumeration in a fragment of the poem “Na apertura do centro gallego” does not have litanic features. A similar situation may be observed in Eduardo Pondal’s (1835–1917)7 poetry, as in his poems, for instance, polyonymic enumerations demonstrate the indefinite richness of the landscape or imitate the charm as a magical formula (e.g. “Poem 52,” Poemas impresos). Similar conclusions may be drawn when analyzing the poetic works by Luís Amado Carballo (1901–1927) who quite often employed prayer-like callings, which were sometimes even repeated, but did not however form litanic lines. Examples include the laudations in “A trainera” or the first stanza of “Ave Maria,” in which chairetismic structures were developed by the original periphrases. A unique piece is “Panxoliña de Nadal,” a Christmas poem in which, after each

5 The definition proposed by José Fradejas Lebrero is not precise enough; this definition says that the litanic form is that in which a refrain is repeated after each line, thus, identifying, as it seems, the refrain with the responsory. José Fradejas Lebrero, “La forma litánica en la poesía del siglo XX,” Revista de Literatura 116 (1996): 399. 6 The litanic genre does not occur in the poetic works by Francisco Añón Paz (1812–1878), a precursor of the Renaissance in Galicia. 7 As well as in the works by Ramón Cabanillas (1876–1959).

On the Trail of Litany in Catalan, Galician, and Portuguese Poetry

201

four-line stanza, a four-line refrain is repeated, supplemented by antonomasias of Jesus Christ, e.g.: Que viva, que viva, que reine, que reine, o Verbo encarnado que é o rei dos reises. […] Que viva, que viva, que reine, que reine, o noso meniño que é o rei dos reises.8

However, it would be more reasonable to consider this piece to be a song with some litanic features, rather than a realization of litanic poetry in the real sense. Many interesting examples of litanic enumerations may be found in the poetry of Álvaro Cunqueiro (1891–1981): epiphoric callings, repetitions of words at various places in the lines, an inability to name a variety of feelings or forms of reality. In the volume Cantiga nova que se chama riveira the most convincing realization of the genre seems to be the poem I, where polyonymic enumerations of love names indicate the incomprehensibility of its essence: Amor de auga lixeira, muiñeira. Amor de auga tardeira, ribeira. Amor de auga frolida, cantiga. Amor de auga perdida, ña amiga.9

This piece, which is constructed in a similar way to poem 5, may be also regarded as an attempt to interpret and name the impenetrable reality that, eventually, can only be summarized by the somewhat helpless repetition of the key first line, although in this case with no additional images, thus negating the sense and need for litanic repetitiveness.

8 Luís Amado Carballo, Poesía galega completa, ed. Luís Alonso Girgado (Santiago de Compostela: Sotelo Blanco, 1994), 175. 9 Alvaro Cunqueiro, Poesía en gallego completa (Madrid: Visor Libros, 2003), 56.

202

Maria Judyta Woźniak

Portuguese Literature In the poetic works of numerous Portuguese writers various repetitions, refrain structures and callings often occur, but these usually do not have litanic roots. With writers such as Antonio Dinis da Cruz e Silva (1731–1799), a poet of A Arcádia lusitana, examples of anaphoras, chairetismic formulae or epiphoras resembling a refrain can be found in his odes. In the poetic output of Almeida Garrett (1799–1854), the leading poet of the Portuguese Romanticism, it is worth focusing on “Improvisos de Garrett, impressos nos jornaes do tempo,” in which praises were expressed by the use of enumerative epithets referring to the addressee. Nevertheless, once again litanic features are not found throughout the whole poem, or even in most of the work, and remain as just one of its characteristic features. In the poem “Não te amo,” on the other hand, the similarity to the litany is based on something else: “I do not love you” is repeated in the first line of each of the stanzas, except for the last when it is moved to the final line. Although it undergoes modifications, it still constitutes the principle governing verse rhythm: paradoxically, the negation serves as a description of the complexity of the emotion, requiring polyonymy just as a saint addressee in the litany. The subsequent “Ave, Maria!,” with the chairetismic “ave” also appearing in the title, begins with polyonymic callings (“Maria, doce mâe dos desvallidos” — “Mary, sweet mother of those in need,” “piedosa mâe clemente” — “Mother of Mercy and Compassion”) before moving on to more personal content, and finally, being transformed into a plea. These are not litanic forms embedded in the tradition but instead loose modifications. Apart from Garrett, who was a significant author from the Portuguese Romanticism, certain poetic works of Alexandre Herculano (1810–1877) also abound with descriptions that resemble litanic callings thanks to their anaphoric order. Though these texts do not represent the litany genre as a whole, they usually refer to a religious subject (e.g. by the confession of love for the cross). Repetitiveness is also a characteristic feature of the poetry by Antero de Quental (1842–1891). Sometimes anaphoras or callings construct fragments of the poem, based on syntactic parallelism and the religious subject (particularly in the volume Beatrice, e.g. “Cruz tão doce de levar…”). The text which seems to be the most interesting is a cycle of two sonnets alluding to Baudelaire, “O possesso (Comentário às Litanias de Satã),” in which the anaphoric “Nâo creio” (“I do not believe”) preceding the persons of the Holy Trinity who are described by antonomasias, creates a consistent denial of faith, although in this instance it also only refers to a fragment of the poem:

On the Trail of Litany in Catalan, Galician, and Portuguese Poetry

203

Nâo creio em ti, Deus-Padre Omnipotente, Criador desse espaço constelado, Que do Caos e o Nada conglobado Arrancaste o universo refervente; Nâo creio em ti, Deus-Filho, em cuja mente Foi o Bem inefável feito e nado; E nâo creio no Espírito gerado Do eterno Amor, como uma chama ardente…10

A unique case is the poetic work of Fernando Pessoa (1888–1935), in which numerous examples of descriptions of the condition of the emotional “self ” through enumeration are found. The reality, which presents itself as fragmented and paradoxical, and whose essence is unnamed, sometimes encourages the poet to speak in a straightforward manner about the uselessness of antonomasia or to describe himself by repeating “Eu, que” (“Me, who”) before mentioning only his flaws. These litanic influences occur particularly in the poetry written using the heteronym of Álvaro de Campos, which is mostly stichic and irregular, thus imitating spoken language, as for example in the poems “Ode marítima” and “Poema en linha recta”: E eu, tantas vezes reles, tantas vezes porco, tantas vezes vil, Eu tantas vezes irrespondivelmente parasita, Indesculpavelmente sujo, Eu, que tantas vezes nâo tenho tido paciência para tomar banho, Eu, que tantas vezes tenho sido ridículo, absurdo, Que tenho enrolado os pés pùblicamente nos tapetes das etiquetas, Que tenho sido grotesco, mesquinho, submisso e arrogante […]11

Various anaphoras, that is the “ave” and “salve” formulae, and the benedictions referring to one’s own self should also be mentioned. The litanic references in the work of Pessoa, denying or modifying the genre, are expressions of helplessness against the diversity of one’s own visions and feelings, which even leads to replacing the saint addresses with the poet’s own complicated self.

Conclusions In the literature written in the languages and periods in question, poetic litany as a genre is most often non-productive, as it does not function as an independent form. Its individual modifications aim to express various meanings (the 10 Antero de Quental, Poesia completa (Lisboa: Publicaçõnes Dom Quixote, 2001), 634. 11 “Poema en linha recta” in Fernando Pessoa, Poesía completa (Barcelona: Libros Río Nuevo, 1983), vol. 2, 278.

204

Maria Judyta Woźniak

paradoxical nature of the world, the uniqueness of a moment, a place, a feeling, the disintegration of one’s own identity). The most expressive examples of the realization of the genre may be found in the poetry by Verdaguer, whose litanic verses that have a prayer-like nature are in fact the closest to the genre pattern, and in Pessoa’s works that present the paradoxical nature of the world and the disintegration of one’s own identity. The litanic features involved show only some of the genre traits and mainly refer to fragments of texts that are mostly of a polyonymic character, in which individuals and objects are named in various ways, whereas at a rhetorical level they are expressed in anaphoric enumerations or apostrophes. They are present both in religious and non-religious texts. A question remains as to what lies behind such a vague presence with respect to the poetic litany in the literature of the languages in question, in particular Catalan and Galician. However, it is important to mention yet again that in Castilianlanguage literature the poetic litany of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was also not very productive, although from the beginning of Modernism it was a creative inspiration to many poets. The situation of litanic verse in Catalan and Galician poetry was probably caused by the late revival of these literatures, whereas Portuguese literature failed to progress until creative modifications to the genre occurred, i.e. in Pessoa’s works. However, were the Catalan and Galician literatures subsequently able to use, in an artistic way, the litanic tradition? Did the history of litanic verse in the various languages of the Peninsula take a different course in the years that followed?

Slavia Meridionalis et Orientalis

Emilian Prałat Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

Southern Slavs: At the Meeting Point of Traditions The presence of a litanic verse tradition, or rather the lack of such a tradition, in South Slavic literature and art necessitates an introduction to the general characteristics of this geo-cultural area (to a greater or lesser extent considering its ever-changing borders throughout its history). At present this region is inhabited by Slavs, but also by non-Slavic peoples, mostly Albanians. Geographically speaking, it covers the area known as the Balkans: to the west there are the Adriatic and Ionian Seas, to the east the Black and Marmara Seas, to the north the Danube River as far as the mouth of the Sava River, then on to Kupa and Gorski Kotar, and finally the Adriatic coast around Rijeka. To the south of the Balkans there is the Peloponnesian Peninsula. Historically, the lands belonged to Greek, Illyrian, and Avar tribes, before becoming, from the sixth century onwards, the territory of the Slavs and Bulgarians prior to the Turkish conquest. Currently, the Balkan countries include Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Greece, Kosovo, Macedonia, Turkey, Serbia, Croatia, and, due to its political dependence, Slovenia (as it was part of the former Yugoslavia), although historically and culturally they also include Romania. All the countries and their languages belong to the Balkan linguistic league. However, the problems that arose as a result of state relativism, and its nineteenth-century origins, created a situation in which the individual claims of the modern states to the ancient authors, who are considered to be the representatives of different literatures, is an ongoing process in the Balkans. The best examples are the works of Gregory Tsamblak (1360–1419), Konstantin of Kostenets (Constantine the Philosopher, 1380–1431), and Dimitri Kantakuzen (1435–1487), who are regarded by the Serbs, Bulgarians, and Macedonians as representative of the so-called “ethno-national” literature.1 This fact complicates any attempts to clearly attribute authors and their works to various national literatures, literatures in which elements of litanic verse can be found and which should 1 Words of Dimitrije Bogdanović in Dorota Gil, Prawosławie — Historia — Naród. Miejsce kultury duchowej w serbskiej tradycji i współczesności [Orthodox Church, History, and Nation: The Place of Spiritual Culture in Serbian Tradition and Modernity] (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, 2005), 138.

208

Emilian Prałat

belong to one canon. Dorota Gil cites Dimitrije Bogdanović, who highlights the long-lasting, homogeneous nature of South Slavic literature that survived for over four hundred years. This is in fact associated with the reign of Stefan Lazarević2 and his creation of a literary centre, which included the above mentioned authors, with a clearly unifying character; the centre — […] of the new general Balkan Orthodox literature, which is in its ideological aspect simultaneously Serbian, Bulgarian, and even Greek, regardless of the language or the language variant. The writers associated with it represent a new Balkan “spiritual community” in which, throughout nearly four centuries, until the eighteenth century, national borders were definitely erased.3

These words are relevant to all the South Slavic and Bulgarian lands, with the exception of Croatia, whose literature and art followed that of the West. The monolith indicated by Gil mainly relates to the Balkan-Slavic Middle Ages, homogeneous and long-lasting. Its origins can be traced to the Christianization of various ethnic groups (the Serbs from the seventh century until 855, the Croats from 640 until the end of the ninth century, the Bulgarians and Macedonians in 864, and the Slovenes in the eighth century). A critical point for the majority of the Balkan peoples was the Ottoman invasion and the gradual decline of specific countries: Macedonia was conquered by the Turks in 1371, Bulgaria in 1396, Serbia in 1389, and Bosnia in 1463. One of the elements in the Turkish policy towards the Slavs and Bulgarians was the gradual destruction of their cultural heritage and the battle against their religion. The years of occupation resulted in Islamization on the one hand, but on the other in a process of fossilization with regard to the existing heritage, which led to its sanctification, and finally the creation of a permanent cultural canon, including a literary canon. As far as Serbia and Bulgaria were concerned

2 The period in which Lazarević and Branković ruled, which was connected with a gradual shifting of the Serbian ethos to the north, again brought the Serbs closer to a tradition connected with the beginnings of Slavic literature. Its most important centers were the Ohrid Literary School and the legacy of Bulgarian literary and culture. The ever-changing ownership of these lands, which belonged to the Serbian, Bulgarian, and finally Macedonian states, resulted in a common history among the ethnic groups living there. A significant role was played by an area known as the Great Despotovina of the Lazarević as well as by the Serbian-Macedonian-Bulgarian frontier which encouraged not only the best traditions of the Nemanjici dynasty, but also the literary heritage of the Sofia writing school or the Hesychasm literature movement. 3 Dimitrije Bogdanović, Istorija stare srpske književnosti [The History of Old Serbian Literature] (Beograd: Srpska književna zadruga, 1980), 224 in: D. Gil, Prawosławie — Historia — Naród. Miejsce kultury duchowej w serbskiej tradycji i współczesności, 138.

Southern Slavs: At the Meeting Point of Traditions

209

the influence of the monasteries of Hilandar4 and Zograf on the holy mountain, Mount Athos, were obvious. In contrast to the rest of Europe, the Balkan Middle Ages5 continued unchanged until a period of national revival,6 which in the case of Serbia was in 1830 (when Kneževina Srbija became a vassal to the Ottoman Porte), Bulgaria in 1878, and Bosnia in 1875 (when Hercegovina was created). Without doubt within this period there were elements of new cultural and literary trends (Serbian baroque in Vojvodina, the work of the Catholic missions in Bulgaria),7 however, the cultural model which developed in the golden era of each of the Balkan nations (essentially from the twelfth to the fourteenth century) was in a sense preserved and so survived until the mid-nineteenth century. From the point of view of literary research, which is based on making generalizations and determining the scale of individual phenomena in relation to a large homogeneous geo-cultural area,8 the benefits associated with the situation described above founders due to the uneven distribution of accents in each of the “national” literatures. This is connected with the presence of two cultural and literary models: the first, the Serbian model, focused on encouraging the 4 Miloš Blagojević, Srbija Nemanjića i HIlandar [The Nemanjić and HIlandar Serbia] (Beograd–Novi Sad: Nastava istorije, 1989). 5 The basis for such a timescale in the case of Serbia are the two cultural models related to art: the Svetosavsko model and the Kosovo model (mentioned, amongst others, by Predrag Palavestra). The Serbian Middle Ages were symbolically ended by the first seoba in 1690. 6 In this case the category of national revival is to some extent a simplification, as in this period it is difficult to talk about nations in the nineteenth-century meaning. It would be possible, however, to debate the idea of a nation understood as a society linked by a common tradition and religion, since it is closer to the “cultural nation” or the notion of etnia used, amongst others, by Antonina Kłoskowska, Kultury narodowe u korzeni [National Cultures at their Roots] (Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 1996); Anthony D. Smith, National Identity (London: Penguin Books, 1991); Teresa DąbekWirgowa and Andrzej Makowiecki, eds., Kategoria narodu w kulturach słowiańskich [Category of the Nation in Slavic Cultures] (Warszawa: Wydział Polonistyki Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 1993), or the well-known publication by Urs Altermatt, Das Fanal von Sarajevo. Ethnonationalismus in Europa (Paderborn; München; Wien; Zürich: Schöningh, 1996). 7 Wojciech Jóźwiak, Piśmiennictwo polskiej misji unickiej w Bułgarii w drugiej połowie XIX wieku [Writing of the First Unitarian Mission in Bulgaria in the Latter Half of the Nineteenth Century] (Kraków: Alleluja – Wydawnictwo Zmartwychwstańców, 2008). 8 Maria Bobrownicka, ed., Symbioza kultur słowiańskich i niesłowiańskich w Europie Środkowej [Symbiosis of Slavic and Non-Slavic Cultures in Central Europe] (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Universitas, 1996).

210

Emilian Prałat

patriarchal-tsarist tradition, whereas the second model was dominant in Macedonia and Bulgaria and led to a gradual transformation of folk works into a literary canon.9 On the other hand, Slovenia and Croatia both belonged to the Western cultural environment, and indeed for a considerable period of their existence were incorporated into foreign states that tried to impose their primacy through the medium of language. Thus, with increasing independence from Ottoman Turkey, the world of Slavia Orthodoxa turned either towards the West or towards Russia. The emergence of the Slavs on the Balkan Peninsula was associated with an assimilation of the art which had existed long before their arrival in the Balkans. As a result of this process, the interlinked relations (ethnic, religious, and aesthetic) permanently shaped the cultural (and artistic) world of the Balkans. Despite the later polarization into the denominational and geographical division between Slavia Latina and Slavia Orthodoxa, both still felt the effects of their joint GreekRoman (Byzantine) lineage. Dogmatic and ideological disputes were, of course, one of the strongest arguments for the separation of the two cultural spaces. However, in broad terms art, ranging from literature, through architecture, to painting and miniature painting, demonstrated the trans-border character. Old Slavonic literature is characterized by hermetic forms. A template is imposed with redoubled force, similarly to painting templates, seen in the Middle Ages as iconographic programs (podlinniki) and developed by intellectuals skilled both in painting and theology. The great symbolism of all mediaeval art, including literature, and its precise emblematic character originated in the template. Everything, starting with the epithet and the metaphor, to the interiors of temples, monasteries, and architectural complexes could be and was a symbol. It is known that symbolic thinking enables humans to move freely towards different levels of reality, to transform themselves into a symbol. The symbol helps

9 Krzysztof Balcerzak, “Bułgarski mariaż. O związkach folkloru z poezją XIX wieku,” accesed March 26, 2015, http://www.etnologia.pl/europa/teksty/bulgarski-mariaz.php, emphasizes the fact that until the early nineteenth century no poetry in the modern sense of the word existed in the Bulgarian territory that was under the rule of the Ottoman empire. Its role was taken over by folk poetry that was freed from the oppression of the invaders. The poetry by Penczo Sławejkow, Ivan Bogorov clearly demonstrate that their work was derived from oral history. Petyr Dinekov stresses that “the influence of folklore is one of the most important factors affecting both the overall development of Bulgarian literature and the development of particular genres, the formation of numerous writers, and the creation of individual outstanding works of art”: Petyr Dinekov, O bułgarskiej literaturze, folklorze i związkach z Polską [On Bulgarian Literature, Folklore, and Relations with Poland] (Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1977), 450.

Southern Slavs: At the Meeting Point of Traditions

211

to constantly maintain contact with the sacred and reveals the religious human’s need for a constant manifestation of the sacred (hierophany) in the world.10

In fact, this is a problem that can be reduced to an opposition between innovation and inspiration, although this would not be entirely justified, since, and this is especially true in the case of South Slavic literatures, it is difficult (or at least teleologically relative) to create sharp and clear divisions. Thus, the borderline cases are omitted, as well as the fluid nature of the texts created in the Balkans, where the category of limes is most distinctive and is indicative of the unique works created there.11 On the basis of the literature, art, and culture of the Southern Slavs, four main routes of communication (and, therefore, sources of influence) can be determined: via bizantino-balcanica, via franco-balcanica, via italo-balcanica, and via islamicobalcanica. These reflect the major political forces (and correspond to the considerable size of the geographical areas from which the above mentioned corridors began) and the historical events affecting the cultural unification of the Balkan Peninsula and Europe. The route is complementary to evidence of the unifying role of literature and (mostly religious) art, which linked the areas of Slavia Latina and Slavia Orthodoxa. It is once again worth making reference to the confessional aspect in which this culture originated, and its role in shaping South Slavdom. With this ancient lineage, the most important church metropolises in the Balkans were associated with the ecclesiastical and administrative development of individual communities. Generally speaking, the ecumenical councils which formed these metropolises, held together by the “two lungs of Christianity” (i.e. the Roman and Byzantine-Greek traditions), were considered to be shared only until the second Council of Nice, i.e. in 787. Prior to this time the Dalmatian coast alone had been Christianized, with the Serbs and Bulgarians being baptized in the ninth century. A symbolic acknowledgement of the internal divisions led to 10 Aleksander Naumow, Apokryfy w systemie literatury cerkiewnosłowiańskiej [Apocrypha in the System of Old Church Slavonic Literature] (Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1976), 30–31. 11 The category of limes, an important element in shaping the national cultures of the Balkans and the South Slavs, clearly reveals itself in the inability to overcome “the dualism of civilizational tradition,” as indicated by Aleksander Mikołajczak, and in the treatment of Slavia as a geo-cultural border area dividing “the whole of Europe into East and West.” This assumption was confirmed in the specifics of the South Slav cultural model, which is based on a double identity, shaped by the linguistic community and the literary works that were its foundation, but which differed in terms of political orientation, confession, and more broadly civilizational status.

212

Emilian Prałat

the great Eastern Schism, which, however, did not interrupt the artistic exchange, and this included literary exchanges, between East and West. The fall of Bari, and thus the Catepanate of Italy in 1071, completed the loss of Byzantine political influence on the Apennine Peninsula. However, it remained a considerable force in the Balkans, especially on the coast, where the Byzantine Zadar was incorporated into the newly formed state of Petar Krešimir IV in 1069.

Via Byzantino-Balcanica and the Beginnings of ByzantineSlavonic Cultural Oikumene The beginnings of Slavic and Bulgarian literature were clearly influenced by Byzantine culture, which was an expression of political orientation and acquisition based on the Greco-Roman cultural model (Graeco-Roman Slavia): “Close contact with Byzantium, artistic participation in the transnational model of the Church Slavonic literature sets the rhythm for the development of ancient Serbian literature […],” says Naumow.12 One of the manifestations of this assimilation (which was most fully realized amongst Orthodox Slavs) was the adoption of the basic principles of Byzantine aesthetics: the ideas of beauty and usability. As Vatroslav Jagić demonstrated over a hundred years ago, the first translations from Greek into Slavic13 focused on theological meaning and interpretation, rather than the rules of poetics. Later, however, works appeared which duplicated the syllabic verse rules and on occasions the accentuation too.14 A fundamental problem is posed by the fact that in previous studies the lexical material was mostly derived from the Russian-speaking area, with South Slavdom remaining on the margins; after all, Old Church Slavonic as liturgical language was superseded by the national languages. It would be untrue to state that in the period when the literary tradition of the Byzantine Empire was first being replaced by Old Church Slavonic that the Slavs and Bulgarians had no linguistic tradition with which to edit Greco-Byzantine texts. Indeed Euthymius of Tarnovo’s struggle to remove

12 Aleksander Naumow, ed., Dar słowa — ze starej literatury serbskiej [The Gift of Word: From the Old Serbian Literature] (Łódź: Wydawnictwo Łódzkie, 1983), 227. 13 Игнатий В. Ягич, Служебные минеи за сентябрь, октябрь и ноябрь в церковнославянском переводе по русским рукописям 1095–1097г., [Minei for September, October, and November in Old Church Slavonic Translation from the Russian Manuscripts 1095–1097] (Санкт-Петербург: Типографя Импраторской Императорской Академии Наук, 1886), LXXVIII. 14 Antonina Filnov Gove, The Slavic Akathistos Hymn (München: Verlag Otto Sagner, 1988), 44nn.

Southern Slavs: At the Meeting Point of Traditions

213

everyday speech from literary language is an appropriate example. Another problem was that Serbian or Macedonian-Bulgarian texts from this early period during which there were Slavo-Byzantine links are generally few and far between. Later versions are more numerous but have a distinctive domestic language, and, therefore, it is difficult to reconstruct the reception range of the meter or versification. The problem becomes more complicated because there are no texts with specific information on the accentuation, melody, or rules necessary for the performance of particular works, which would indirectly assist in the determination of the Byzantine influences in early South Slavic poetry.15 However, it is possible to discuss the adoption of certain Greek words or the selection of their Slavic counterparts that were able to mimic the overall expression of the poetic meter in the Greek original. However, such assimilations appear to be random.

Akathist as the Most “Litanic” Verse in the Geo-Cultural Area of the Balkan Peninsula Undoubtedly the most influential work within Slavia Orthodoxa was the Akathist Hymn.16 Its Slavic translations largely respected the Byzantine pattern, as indicated by M. E. Kozlov: These are the words of spiritual poetry whose basis is located in a prayer poem originating from Byzantine poetry but in its final form from Biblical poetry. Unlike an ordinary poem it is a prayer poem[…] [which contains] (rhyme, clausula), but also an initial invocation phrase (O, свехвална Мати…), an imperative (Paдуј се…), and a syntactic inversion (Бурю внутрьумея ūoмительных…).17

The fullest and most accurate Slavic translation of the Akathist Hymn, and indeed other Slavic texts used by Antonina Filnov Gove for her discussion of Akathist, dates from a nineteenth-century Russian recension (Archimandrite Amfiloksy’s 1879 compilation). The second document used by Gove is a photocopy of a

15 One of the exceptions is a collection of texts discovered in Lavra monastery, which is discussed by Andrija Jakovljević, Antologija sa neumama iz doba kneza i despota Stefana Lazarevića [Anthology of Nemes from the Times of the Prince and Despotic Ruler Stefana Lazarević] (Kruševac: Narodni muzej, 2004). 16 Aleksandra Jović, “Akatist kao žanr crkvene himnografije,” [“Akathist as a Genre from the Orthodox Church Hymnography”] Zbornik radova Filozofskog fakulteta u Prištini, 43(2013): 701–722. 17 M.E. Kozlov, “Акафист как Жанр Церковных Песнопений,” [“Akathist as a Genre from the Orthodox Church Hymnography”] (1992), accessed March 7, 2014, http:// otechnik.narod.ru/liturgika30.txt.

214

Emilian Prałat

thirteenth-century Bulgarian manuscript, which is currently housed in the National Library in Ljubljana (the so-called Kopitarova Triod). There is also a third source, as the translation was also preserved in Triodion, which was previously kept in the former Yugoslav Academy of Sciences. The translation of the Akathist Hymn was probably produced either in the first half of the tenth century in Bulgaria or at the turn of the eleventh century in Russia, with no Bulgarian or Serbian mediation.18 Having said that, Jagić claims regarding the lack of reference to Greek poetic meter, rhythm, and accentuation in the Slavic translations was questioned by Roman Jakobson.19 It was also queried by researchers who demonstrated the successful imitation of Byzantine hymnography in the Serbian canons and irmoi.20 Velimirović proves that one method by which syllabic and tonal parallelism can be achieved was the use of different time aspects or anastrophe, as a result of which the translation approximated the Greek original, albeit with either a greater or smaller number of syllables.21 Despite these strategies, however, it was difficult to maintain the same number of syllables per line as in the Greek version, yet in individual cases a literal translation mechanically duplicated the original tonal structure. The influence of akathist as a literary genre is less difficult to prove. Zograf Longin, the author of an akathist dedicated to Stephen the First Martyr22 from 1596, is an example of a painter and a writer who is totally familiar with both Byzantine and old Serbian poetics. The poem was written as part of a collection of Byzantine akathists and canons. The Akatist svetome Savi (Akathist to Saint Sava) and the Akatist svetome Stafanu Dečanskom (Akathist to Saint Stefan Dečanski 18 Antonina Filnov Gove, The Slavic Akathistos Hymn, 75–76. 19 Роман Якобсон, “Заметка о древне-болгарском стихосложении,” [“Some Remarks on Old Bulgarian”] in Известия Отделения русского языка и словесности Российской Академии наук, vol. 24, 2 (1919): 351–358. 20 Juraj Pavić, “Staroslavenski pesnički kanon u čast sv. Metodija i njegov autor,” [“Old Slavonic Canon in Tribute to St. Methodius and Its Author”] Bogoslovska smotra vol. 24, 1(1936): 62; Kenneth Levy, “The Earliest Slavic Melismatic Chants,” in Fundamental Problems of Early Slavic Music and Poetry, Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae, Subsidia VI, Copenhagen 1978. 21 Milos M. Velimirović, Byzantine elements in Early Slavonic Chant, Studies on the Fragmenta Chiliandarica Palaeoslavica. I Pars Principalis et Pars Suppletoria, Series: Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae, vol. 4 (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1960), 53nn. 22 Nataša Dragan, “Akatist Svetom apostolu i prvomučeniku Stefanu Zografa Longina (tekst i komentari),” [“Akathist in Tribute to Saint Apostle and the First Christian Martyr Stephan Zograph Longinus”] Zbornik Matice srpske za književnost i jezik 61, 2(2013): 313–346.

Southern Slavs: At the Meeting Point of Traditions

215

[of Dečani]) are both also attributed to Longin. The popularity of this genre is underlined by the fact that numerous akatistnik (books that contain collections of akathists) still exist. Dimitrije Bogdanovic23 lists twenty-three such books from the following collections in South Slavdom: i. Visoki Dečani (texts from the 1420s and 1430s, as well as the 1580s and 1590s); ii. Library of Matica Srpska in Novi Sad (texts written between the sixteenth and the mid to late eighteenth century); iii. Museum of the Serbian Orthodox Church in Belgrade (books written between the 1530s and 1550s, copies from the seventeenth century, and Gruić’s collection from the mid to late sixteenth century); iv. Patriarchal Library in Belgrade (from the 1580s and 1590s, and the late seventeenth century); v. Old Orthodox Church in Sarajevo (from the end of the sixteenth and the early seventeenth century); vi. Savina Monastery in Herceg Novi (from the early seventeenth century); vii. Nikoljac Church in Bijelo Polje (from the 1620s); viii. Holy Trinity Monastery in Pljevlji (from the early seventeenth century); ix. Historical Museum of Croatia (from the early to mid-seventeenth century); x. Archive of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts in Belgrade (between the 1640s and the late seventeenth century); xi. Cetinje Monastery (from a 1633 book); xii. Muzej crkvenih starina in Niš (from the mid to late seventeenth century). This list was supplemented by Radoman Stanković24 (an akathist collection from Nikoljca Monastery in Bijelo Polje), Vladimir Mošin25 (manuscripts from a

23 Dimitrije Bogdanović, Inventar ćirilskih rukopisa u Jugoslaviji (XI-XVII vek) [The Inventory of Cirillic Manuscripts in Yugoslavia (Manuscripts from the Eleventh to the Seventeenth Century)] (Beograd: SANU, 1982), 17–18. Cf. Svetlana Tomin, “Žanrovska struktura akatistnika u srpskoj srednjovjekovnoj književnosti,” [“The Generic Structure of Akatistnik in Mediaeval Serbian Literature”] Zbornik Matice srpske za književnost i jezik 51, 3(2003): 541–551, 553–554. 24 Radoman Stanković, “O zaštiti rukopisnih i starih štampanih knjiga u monastiru Nikoljcu (Bijelo Polje),” [“On the Protection of Manuscripts and Antique Books in the Nikojic Monastery”] Arheografski prilozi 14(1992). 25 Vladimir Mošin, Milan Redeka, “Ćirilski rukopisi u sjevernoj Dalmaciji,” [“Cirillic Manuscripts in North Dalmatia”] Starine JAZU, vol. 48(1958).

216

Emilian Prałat

monastery on Krk Island in northern Dalmatia), and Vaso Ivošević26 (from Banje Monastery in Boka Kotorska). This is in addition to the six akathist collections which were burned in 1941 in the National Library in Belgrade,27 as well as several texts of Serbian provenance currently outside the country, for example, in Arad Eparchy Library (an akathist collection from 155828 and from the late sixteenth century),29 in Hilandar (collections from the mid-sixteenth century,30 from 1625,31 from the mid to late seventeenth century,32 and from the eighteenth century),33 as well as in the Austrian National Library (a collection from the seventeenth century).34 Most of these akathist collections were created in the seventeenth century, although a few are from the following century, a fact perhaps related to the dissolution of the Patriarchate of Peć by the High Porte in 1766. The text that continues the great akathist tradition is the anonymous Akatist svetome Savi. The chaire elements present in the text are complemented by a special kind of anaphora, which refers to the divine illumination (“Rejoice, spiritual light sharer / Rejoice, divine candle, which enlightened the right way for us”)35 carried by Saint Sava (called a bogonosec). The apologetic text was probably written in the second half of the sixteenth century in Peć on the occasion of the renewal of the patriarchate. The Magnificat Canticle is related to the Marian tradition due to its glorification of Mary’s qualities, and which from the Serbian perspective 26 Vaso Ivošević, Biblioteke pravoslavnih manastira u Boku Kotorskoj u Paštrovićima [Libraries of Orthodox Monasteries in Bok Kotorskoj and Paštrovićima] (Cetinje: Centralna narodna biblioteka SR Crne Gore “Dure Crnojevica,” 1989). 27 Dimitrije Bogdanović, Inventar ćirilskih rukopisa u Jugoslaviji (XI-XVII vek) (Beograd: SANU 1982), 191; Ljubomir Stojanović, Katalog Narodne biblioteke u Beogradu. IV Rukopisi i stare štampane knjige [Catalog of the National Library in Belgrad. IV Manuscriots and Antique Books] (Beograd: Srpska akademija nauka i umetnosti, 1982), 99–100. 28 Dimitrije. Bogdanović, “Srpski rukopisi u Biblioteci eparhije aradske,” [“Serbian Manuscripts in the Library of Arad Eparchia”] Zbornik Matice srpske za književnost i jezik, 23, 1(1975): 20–21. 29 Ibidem, 21–22. 30 Dimitrije Bogdanović, Katalog ćirilskih rukopisa manastrira Hilandara (Belgrad: Srpska akademija nauka i umetnosti, 1978), 215. 31 Ibid., 145. 32 Ibid., 142. 33 Ibid., 217. 34 Aleksandr Ivanovič Jacimirski, Opisanie južno-slavjanskih i russkih rukopisei zagraničnih bibliotek, t. 1 [Description of South Slavic and Russian Libraries Abroad] (Vkna–Berlin– Drezden–Mjunhen–Praga–Ljubljana, Petrograd 1921). 35 Aleksander Naumow, ed., Dar słowa – ze starej literatury serbskiej (Łódź: Wydawnictwo Łódzkie, 1983), 75.

Southern Slavs: At the Meeting Point of Traditions

217

resulted in poetic allusions that were reflected in, for instance, Žitije kralja Milutina (Life of Saint Stephen Milutin) written by Archbishop Danilo II (1270–1337).36 Apart from the prose introduction and ending, the text has a verse structure. Five out of the six stanzas begin with the words “I worship” followed by the names of various parts of the body (face, tongue, arms, and legs) and the words “dies natalis of Milutin.” The form of praise is of Byzantine origin, as in Pohvala Ćirilu37 written in 916 by Clement of Ohrid, in which there is an analogous enumeration that is preceded by the “Благосиљам” summon. The work of Danilo, author of the lives of Uroš I, Dragutin, Milutin, Jelenas and several Serbian archbishops, is clearly part of a trend inspired by Byzantine works. These were known to the bishop thanks to the Hilandar hegumen (the head of a monastery) and contact through Simonis Palaiologina (1294–1345), the daughter of emperor Andronicus II and Milutin’s wife, with the culture of the Constantinopolitan royal court.38

Akathist, Folk Rituals and Remains of the Old Meter In the case of the South Slavs, the influence of Orthodox traditions and akathist, primarily on the extensive folk rituals in which litanic elements can be seen, should be mentioned. Their most prominent feature are the processions combined with all manner of magical practices, during which there is a dialogue between the priest, the deacon and the faithful, each corresponding with the canonical texts on the one hand, and the euchological folk songs on the other, as observed by Georgi Minczew.39 At this point the issue of terminology should be clarified, since the pagan processions have often been described as litany,40 with Christianity taking over elements of the existing tradition. The processions developed in particular in the Byzantine-Slavic world due to both natural disasters and invasions. 36 Djordje Trifunović, Proza arhiepiskopa Danila II [The Prose of Archbishop Danilo II] (Beograd: Vuk Karadžić, 1976). 37 Ćirilo i Metodije: žitija, službe, kanoni, pohvale, [Ciril and Methodius: Lives, Services, Canons, Praise] ed. Djordje Trifunović, (Beograd: Srpska književna Zadruga, 1964). 38 Also, Milutin’s son, Uroš III, married Maria Palaiologina, the daughter-in-law of Andronicus III, cf.: Душко Лопандић, Ликови и приче из српског средњег века: у потрази за потомством Немањића [The characters and stories from the Serbian Middle Ages in search of Nemanjics seed] (Београд: Дерета, 2009), 66–75. 39 Georgi Minczew, Święta Księga, Ikona, Obrzęd [The Holy Book, Icon, Ritual] (Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 2013), 21. 40 Jerzy Miziołek, “Przedstawienia procesji w sztuce wczesnochrześcijańskiej,” [“Representations of Procession in Early Christian Art”] Folia Historiae Artium XXI(1985): 5–52.

218

Emilian Prałat

During the imploring processions a number of songs that clearly referred to the poetic tradition of ektene, akathist, or litany were performed. The Great Orthodox Churches Typikon and the New Cards of Euchologium Sinaiticum provide evidence that Russian, Serbian, and Bulgarian copyists faithfully reproduced prayers from the Greek originals and thus perpetuated a system of imploring worship as well as introduced the genre of litany to their own church-literary tradition. Furthermore, in the New Cards the Palestinian provenance of the glagolitic text is evident, which shows not only the compilation character of these documents, but also, at least partially, the lack of a homogeneous Byzantine pattern, which resulted in the individual summons being chosen without any restrictions when the native equivalents were created.41 In the South Slavic and Bulgarian languages the remains of the old meter can be traced, although mainly in folklore works.42 The typical features of the Serbian 10-syllable verse (deseterac) are isosyllabism, syntactic pauses between the lines, breaks which divide a line into two colons (after the fourth or six syllables), “zeugma” at the end of both colons (the fourth and tenth syllables belong to the same “word units” as do the third and ninth syllables respectively), and avoiding the use of a short vowel in the ninth syllable and a long vowel in the seventh and eighth syllables.43 In folklore works, the so-called starinskije pjesma, the seventh and eighth syllables are usually short, the ninth is long (and stressed) or shows greater length then the adjacent syllables (when it is not stressed). The 10-syllable verse is one of the most common verse systems in the poetry of the Southern Slavs, Bulgarians, and Macedonians, although it was not used by the Slovenians. This kind of meter has its origins in heroic epics (epski deseterac), which still exist and are still performed by men to musical accompaniment, as well as in lyrical and epic songs that are performed a capella by women. Epic works exhibit similarities to the works of the Western Slavs with respect to syllabic division, pauses, and zeugma: […] there is a similar tendency to confine the word-anlaut and stress to the odd syllables, and, as a result, [there is] a noticeable preference for word-units of two and four syllables. Finally, the syntactic tripartition of the average line is similar.44

41 G. Minczew, Święta Księga, Ikona, Obrzęd, 41. 42 Roman Jakobson, “Studies in Comparative Slavic Metrics,” Oxford Slavonic Papers, vol. III (1952), 23. 43 Ibid., 25. 44 Ibid., 31.

Southern Slavs: At the Meeting Point of Traditions

219

The lack of rhyme, which is replaced by elements that act as epitheta ornantia, is a phenomenon that is typical of South Slavic folk art. The most important elements include antithesis, questions, and phrases expressing surprise. A sorcerer performing a poem often uses assonance, alliteration, and the so-called “leonian rhyme.”45 След кръсти носиме, Христом Боже Господи помилуй. Богу се молиме. Господи помилуй. Дай ни Воже ситна роса, Господи помилуй. […]46 [We bear the marks of baptism, Christ God / Have mercy, Lord. / We ask God. / Have mercy, Lord. / Bead us God, with light dew, / Have mercy, Lord. / […] ]47 Китки да вият, момци да зимат Кирлересле — Господи помилуй! Cвета тройца слезна оз-горе, Кирлересле — Господи помилуй! Та си влезна в село, Кирлересле — Господи помилуй! Та изкарай кмете, кметице! Кирлересле — Господи помилуй! Куни да носим, Бога да молим: Кирлересле — Господи помилуй! Я дай ни Боже ситна росица Кирлересле — Господи помилуй Кирлересле — Господи помилуй!48 [To tie bunches, to winter boys / Kirleresle — Have mercy, Lord! / The Trinity descended from heaven, / Kirleresle — Have mercy, Lord! / To enter the village / Kirleresle — Have mercy, Lord! / And take the boy, alderman! / Kirleresle — Have mercy, Lord! / To bring martens, I beseech God: / Kirleresle — Have mercy, Lord! / And, God, grant light dew / Kirleresle — Have mercy, Lord! / Kirleresle — Have mercy, Lord!]

45 Đuro Šurmin, Povjest književnosti hrvatske i srpske [History of Croatian and Serbian Poetry](Zagreb: Knjižare Lav. Hartmana, 1898), 19. Михаил Арнаудов, Студии върху българските обреди и легенди [Studies on Bulgarian Rituals and Legends], vol. 2 (София: Българска академия на науките, 1924), 251–252. 46 Михаил Арнаудов, Студии върху българските обреди и легенди [Studies of Bulgarian rites and legends] vol. 2 (София: Българска академия на науките, 1924), 251–252. 47 Translation of all the quoted passages of poetry by Katarzyna Dudek. 48 B. Kaчановский, “Памятники болгарского народногo творчества,” [“Diary of Bulgarian Folk Art”] vol. 30, 1(1882): 109.

220

Emilian Prałat

It may be argued that at least in Serbian and Bulgarian lands litany is an important element of folk rituals; what is more significant is that it is necessary to relate the Orthodox Church traditions to folk Christianity. The fact that in certain nonchurch rites involving a priest (“services” outside the temple) texts inspired by diaconal litanies are performed, and thus repetitive prayers are combined with prayers by invocations, permits the hypothesis that litany in the form of oral literature and folk songs is an element that connects the two previously discussed sources of the tradition. However, as many researchers claim, the two sources are oppositional, even opposite, which is of vital importance for the Balkans and South Slavdom as it is folk art that forms the basis of the literary canon, consolidating the above mentioned geo-cultural area and creating a joint, easily recognizable cultural code shared by Serbs, Bulgarians and Macedonians.

Emilian Prałat Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

“From besmeared lips, from hating heart, from unclean tongue”: Writing and Rewriting of the Canon in Serbia Tradition of Lamentation — Tužbalica and Plač The texts associated with the disaster at Kosovo Field and the death of Lazar Hrebeljanović are particularly rich sources of “litanic” reference.1 In many places in these texts the so-called plač, an equivalent of the western planctus, is present, and they also recall tužbalica, a typical Serbian song suffused with pain, suffering, and grief.2 With respect to tužbalica it is important to note that it is related to the areas in which “[…] the best and the most complete versions of heroic song have also been preserved.”3 Such songs of lament are also present in the Russian area, but in the Balkans two kinds of meter (duži stih and kraći stih) exist. The first, of a more solemn, yet decorative character, has a 12-syllable verse that ends with a

1 Litanic verse, or the akathist which is somewhat closer to the Serbian tradition, does not appear in any academic discussions in the context of its “litanic” character. Such issues are generally discussed in relation to oral works. Cf. Svetozar Matić, Principi srpske versifikacije [Principles of Serbian Versification] (Beograd: Službeni glasnik, 2011); Kiril Taranovski, O srpskom stihu [On Serbian Verse] (Beograd: Službeni glasnik, 2010); Milan Ćurčin, Srpski trohej [Serbian Trochaic Meter] (Beograd: Službeni glasnik, 2010); id., “Jampski stih u srpskom pesništvu,” [“Iambic Verse in Serbian Poetry”] Srpski književni stih 2, 7/8(1993):162–170; Leon Kojen, Studije o srpskom stihu, [Studies on Serbian Verse] (Novi Sad: Izdavačka knjižarnica Zorana Stojanovića, 1996); Radmilo Marojević, “Njegošev deseterac prema desetercu srpskich narodnik pjesama,” [“Njegoš’s 10-syllable and the 10-syllable of Serbian Folk Songs”] Srpski jezik, 18(2013): 63–86; Magdalena Veselinović-Šulc, “Deseterac srpskohrvatske narodne poezije u pesničkom delu M. Verešmatija,” [“The 10-syllable in the Croatian-Serbian Folk Poetry and in M. Verešmatij’s Works”] in Naučni sastanak slavista u Vukove dane 6, vol. 2, (Beograd: Međunarodni slavistički centar, 1977): 425–446; Tomislav Maretić, Metrika narodnik naših pjesama [The Meter of Our Folk Songs] (Zagreb: Dionička tiskara, 1907). 2 Vojislav M. Đurić, Tužbalica u svetskoj književnosti [Tužbalica in Serbian Literature] (Beograd: Privrednik, 1940). 3 Aleksandr Veselovskij, “Die rusische Todtenklagen,“ Russische Revue 3(1878): 488.

222

Emilian Prałat

syntactic pause, and is divided into three tetrasyllabic colons,4 with the final syllables of a colon unaccented. The second, 8-syllable, meter is more frequent and differs from the former due to the lack of a middle colon. Additionally, plač is a genre that can be considered as a versification element in the cultural identification of both Balkan and Russian texts. For both areas “the tripartite ‘longer verse’ with free alternation in the basic thirteen-syllable form, and its twelve-syllable variant, as well as the bipartite ‘shorter’ nine-syllable verse, which sometimes alternates freely with an octosyllabic variant,” are common features.5 A typical feature of plač, which differentiates it from elegy and tužbalica, is the clear attitude of repentance and intimate confession. Indeed Saint Sava is considered to be the author of the first Serbian lamentation, and in Život svetog Simeona (Life of St. Simeon) he included fragments of a funeral text on transience. Subsequently, the first Serbian patriarchs, the successors to Sava, in turn dedicated plačeve to him. Among the authors who should be mentioned are Stephen the First-Crowned, Domentijan, and Teodozije, and a hybridized formula which combines lamentation with praise is a common feature of their works. Danilo II, who was cited in the previous article,6 revitalized plač when he joined the priesthood, and Teodozije Hilendarski7 as well as Jefimija also wrote in a similar style. The defeat of Kosovo enhanced the depth of plač, and increased its production. A perfect example is the lamentation in Pohvalno slovo o knezu Lazaru (Word of Prince Lazarus), a work by Anonymous from Ravanica, which makes reference to psalmic topics. However, the literary legacy of Jemifija has a special role in the context of the Serbian planctus. Jefimija (1349–1405),8 or Jelena Mrnjavčević, is regarded as the first female Serbian poet. She is the author of, amongst others, “Tuga za mladencem Uglješom,” 4 Roman Jakobson, “Studies in Comparative Slavic Meters,” Oxford Slavonic Papers, vol. III (1952), 34. 5 Ibid., 36. 6 Cf. in this tome: Emilian Prałat, “Southern Slavs: At the Meeting Point of Traditions.” 7 Aleksander Naumov, “Teodosije Hilandarac and Sveto Pismo,” Hilandarski zbornik vol. 5(1983): 81–89; Nataša Dragin, Jezik Teodosijevog Žitija Svetog Save u prepisu monaha Marka iz XIV veka [Language of St. Sava’s Life by Teodozij in the Fourteenth-CenturyCopy Made by Mark] (Novi Sad: Tiski cvet, 2007); Nataša Dragin, “Sintaksički grecizmi in Žitijama Teodosija Hilandarca,” [“Syntactic Grecisms in Teodozij of Hilendar’s Life”] Helenske sveske, 2 (2008): 17–30. 8 Ljiljana Juhas-Georgievska,“Književno delo monahinje Jefimije,” [“Monachinia Jefimija’s Literary Work”] Zbornik Matice Srpske za književnost i jezik 50, 1–2(2002): 57–70; Đ Đorđe V. Trifunović, “Zivot i rad Monahinje Jefimije,” [“Monachija Jefimija’s Life and Literary Work”] in Jefimija Monahinja, Književni Radovi (Kruševac: Bagdala, 1983), 21.

Writing and Rewriting of the Canon in Serbia

223

“Moljenje Gospodu Isusu Hristu,” and “Pohvala svetom knezu Lazaru.” The first text belongs to the most significant group of the popular so-called tužbalice, laments that praise the merits of a character and the pain of loss. Their lineage harks back to old funeral rites which were of particular importance during ancient times. Subsequently, they became a literary genre and their practice was assigned to women.9 With the onset of Christianity, and especially during the Byzantine Empire, they became an obvious and inspiring source of literary and artistic creation. Together with the other two works cited above, they belong to a group of prayers that were repeatedly inspired by earlier works, as in the case of “Moljenje,” in which elements from the work of Simeon the New Theologian and Simeon the Metaphrast can be discerned. With regard to Jefimija, the intermediary nature of her work should be emphasized: most of the texts attributed to her were created not on paper, but pictorially (an icon, an embroidered veil,10 or a silver reliquary cover). In the case of the famous Hilandar veil from Athos, its Greek influences are clear, and these are also noticeable in Jefimija’s writing: Od oskvrnjenih usana, od mrskoga srca, od nečistog jezika, od oskvrnjene duše primi moljenje, o Hriste moj, i ne odgurni mene, rabu tvoju, niti me jarošću tvojom, Vladiko, obliči u čas odlaska mojega, niti me gnevom tvojim kazni u dan dolaska tvojega, jer pređe suda tvojega, Gospode, osuđena sam savešću mojom, nijedne nade spasenja mojega nema u meni ako milosrđe tvoje ne pobedi mnoštvo bezakonja mojih. Zato te molim, nezlobivi Gospode, ni malo ovo prinošenje ne odgurni, koje prinosim svetom hramu prečiste tvoje matere i nade moje Bogorodice hilandarske, jer primih veru udovičinu,

9 Leonora Neville, “Lamentation, History, and Female Autorship in Anna Comnena’s Alexiad,” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies vol. 53(2013): 202. 10 The Hilandar veil is a curtain embroidered with gold and silver thread on red velvet. It measures 144 x 118 cm, and covers the tsarist gates of an iconostasis in a katholikon called “The Introduction of Our Lady to the Temple.” It depicts Christ the High Priest surrounded by two Saints, Basil the Great and John Chrysostom.

224

Emilian Prałat

što ti prinese dve cete, Gospode, te tako i ja prinesoh ovo, nedostojna raba tvoja, o Vladičice, Jefimija monahinja, kći gospodina mi ćesara Vojihne, koji leži ovde, negda despotica. I priloži se ova katapetazma hramu presvete Bogorodice hilandarske leta 6907, indikta 8. A ako će je ko odneti od hrama presvete Bogorodice hilandarske, da je odlučen od jedinosušne i nerazdeljive njene Trojice i da mu je suparnica prečista Bogomati hilandarska u dan strašnoga ispita. Amin.11 [From besmeared lips, / from hating heart, / from unclean tongue, / from a defiled soul, accept a supplication / oh, Christ of mine, / and do not reject me, your servant, / nor deign to rage at me, Lord, / at the time of my departure, / nor punish me with your anger / on the day of your coming, / since in your courts, Lord, / I am condemned by my conscience, / there is no hope for my own salvation, / if your mercy does not vanquish the abundance of my dishonesty / This is why I ask you, merciful Lord, / do not cast away this little offering, / which I bring to the holy temple of your most pure mother / and my hope, the Mother of God of Hilandar, / as I have proclaimed the faith of a widow / who offered you two copper coins, Lord, / so I, your unworthy servant, has brought this, / oh Queen, Euphemia the nun, / the daughter of my lord Emperor Vojihny, who is buried here, / a former despot. / And put on the katapetasma / of the Temple of the most holy Mother of God of Hilandar / leta 6907, indiction 8. / And if somebody takes it / from the temple of the most holy Mother of God of Hilandar / convinced of the only right and inseparable Trinity / and that his rival is most pure Mother of God of Hilandar / on the day of the terrible test. / Amen.]

The title “Moljenje Gospodu Isusu Hristu” provides a clear reference to the imploring ektene (Old Slavonic: prositelnaja ektenija). Instead of the typical summons, “Lord, have mercy,” and the final repetition, “Grant this, O Lord,” Jefimija used the votive formulae: “Zato te molim,” (“Receive my supplication”) “i ne odgurni mene,” (“Do not disgard”) “što ti prinese,” (“I bring it to you”) “Do not attack me,” and “With anger do not punish,” which acted as a verbal palladion. The poem ends with a fragment similar to an ecclesial curse, which is commonly used in diverse privileges and indults in the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches. However, while all the ektene that were performed in the Orthodox Church were communal and collective, Jefimija’s text is distinctively personal, individual, and personalized. 11 Jefimija, “Moljenje Gospodu Isusu Hristu,” in Lazar Mirković, Monahinja Jefimja, (Sremski Karlovci: Srpska manastirska štamparija, 1922), 25–26.

Writing and Rewriting of the Canon in Serbia

225

Particular requests are in the first person, the author mentions herself by name, thus emphasizing the votive and imploring nature of the work, as well as the veil, of which it is an organic element. In contrast to a priest or deacon, who usually offer requests to God on behalf of the people, Jefimija exclusively represents herself. In Jefimija’s work references to both wording and inquiries that are typical of ektene are present, but only as an individual form that differs markedly from a tradition of public congregational performance. Additionally, there is no relation to a specific moment in the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, the Liturgy of the catechumens, and the present, the past and the future are also clearly interconnected. Indeed the text begins with an eschatological vision of Parousia that is superior to the following narrative. Against the background of Serbian literature in its entirety, and that of most of South Slavic literature too, Jefimija’s work appears to be idiosyncratic, yet at the same time, it represents a pinnacle of religious writing due to the presence of references to the more broadly understood tradition of litanic verse. Both the prayer nature of Jefimija’s work and the expressions of grief after the death of Lazar continue the tradition of plač. The anonymous “Ispovedna molitva” is written in a similar style. The prosaic text is a paraphrase of both confession and the Eucharistic prayers, with its central focus on the enumeration of sins (collected into groups of similar offenses) and its repeated invocations that implore: “Sgreših, Gospode, oprosti me,” “Izbavi me, Gospode,” “Podari me, Gospode,” “Gospode, pomiluj me.” The anaphoric phrases at the end of the prayer are particularly striking: Gospode, sgreših, oprosti mi, primi me, Gospode, pokajanoga i pomiluj me, Bože, milostiv budi prema meni grešnom i pomiluj me, Bože, očisti me grešnoga i pomiluj me, izbavi me i pomiluj me, bezbrojno zgreših, Gospode, oprosti mi. Ispovedam ti se, Gospode, Bože Nebesa i Zemlje. Sve su to tajne srca mojega toliko zapisano u svetim knjigama, i toliko iskazano na svetom krštenju i toliko u postrigu zaveta monaškog a u sve to nisam popravljiv a u svemu tome obmanuo sam i prestupio. [Lord, I have sinned, forgive me, accept me, the repenting one, my Lord, have mercy on me, my Lord, be merciful to me, a sinner, and have mercy on me, my Lord, Lord, clean me as I am a sinner, and have mercy, save me and have mercy, as I have sinned so much. Forgive me, my Lord, I confess to thee, Lord of heaven and earth, all the secrets of my heart. All the things that were forbidden by the holy books, and all these that I pushed away when baptized and all that was included in the religious vows – I did not listen to all this, I was insincere, I trespassed against all these.]

226

Emilian Prałat

Dimitrije Kantakuzin (1435–1487)12 returned to the topoi of the experience of inner pain, which were included in the formula of prayer.13 His work contained many references to akathist and, indirectly through anaphoras, to the above mentioned “Ispovedna molitva.” Greek by origin, Kantakuzin belongs both to the Bulgarian and to the Serbian literary canons.14 The anaphoric order is a significant feature of his best work and his unique text within the Slavic works, “Molitva Bogorodici” (“Prayer to the Mother of God”) from the second half of the fifteenth century. This text consists of seventy-seven stanzas of four lines each. It represents the accepted Byzantine tradition of texts in which a sinner expresses their repentance. The last stanza borrows the chaire formula from akathist: Raduj se da te svagda radosno zovem, raduj se, višnjim i nižnjim radosti, raduj se, preradosna čista, raduj se da je s tobom Gospod. Amin. [Rejoice that everywhere I call you joyfully, / rejoice the greater and simpler joys / rejoice, most joyful purity / rejoice that the Lord is with you. Amen.]

“Molitva Bogorodici” is written in regular iambic hexameter, and is clearly reminiscent of the Byzantine and Cyrilo-Methodian poetic tradition. The only works with a similar meter are Прогласъ (Proglas) and “Azbučna molitva” (“Alphabetical Prayer”). In both a caesura usually falls after the fifth, but rarely after the seventh, syllable. Kantakuzin was inspired by the hymns of Andrew of Crete, Callistus Ksantopulos, and Simeon the Metaphrast, yet apart from the influences of akathist, the religious canon, and references to plač, in the above text elegiac elements are also visible.

After the Velika Seoba The seventeenth century in Serbia was marked by the great Serbian exodus to Vojvodina (Serbian: Velika Seoba), led by the patriarch, Arsenije III Čarnojević. The

12 Ђорђе Трифуновић, Димитрије Кантакузин [Dimitrije Kantakuzin] (Београд: Нолит, 1963); Дејан Михаиловић, Византијски круг (Мали речник ранохришћанске књижевности на грчком, византијске и старе српске књижевности) [A Byzantine Circle. Small Dictionary of Greek Literature of the Early Christian Time, Byzantine and Old Serbian Literature] (Београд: Завод за уџбенике, 2009), 58–59. 13 Драгиша Бојовић, Антология плача [Anthology of Lament] (Београд: Просвета, 2011), 14. 14 Донка Петканова, Българска средновековна литература [Medieval Bulgarian literature] (ВеликоТърново: Абагар, 2001), 616–628.

Writing and Rewriting of the Canon in Serbia

227

second wave of migration took place in 1739–1740.15 The fact of settling within the Hungarian borders and leaving their own state led to an increased focus on efforts to preserve their ethnic and cultural identity, of which faith was the main determinant and religious literature its material expression. Hence most of the art created in the eighteenth century were copies of older works and sacral-liturgical texts. A feature that typically characterized this period was the replacement of the Serbo-Slavic language with the Russian language. Serbo-Slavic was still developing, however, especially among townspeople, and works in this language were created by Zaharije Orfelin, Pavle Julinac, and Jovan Rajić. At the same time, certain elements meant three periods in the history of eighteenth-century Serbian literature could be distinguished: baroque, classicism, and pre-romanticism. One of the most prominent figures of this generation was Gavril Stefanović Venclović (1680–1749): Beda na vodi, beda od haramija, beda od svoga roda, beda od jezika, beda u gradu, beda u pustinji, beda na moru, beda od lukave braće i među laživim društvom. (I prebeda ovo pišući u opraljenoj knjigi, na zloj hartiji, jakož i vidi se, s neupravnim mastilom!) Od svega ovoga zla i bede, ti nas oslobodi. Oslobodi nas od zla plivajućih u ovih rekah, štono su vode zle, jezičaske i nas progone i našu crkvu rade da potope. I tužimo se na njih pred svetiteljem što se iz Tebe rodio: “Spasi me Bože, jer prodreše vode do duše moje!” I hoće da nas potope te vode. Nego s tvojim predstateljstvom

15 The migration started after the Russian-Austrian-Turkish war 1735–1739.

228

Emilian Prałat

presveta devo, taj će potok preći naša duša ovih krvavih vremena, svegdar punih vojske i boja i svakoga nemira, i ne teku tako vode potočne, kakono što krvave reke teku, kako da se je na nami izvršilo Davidovo proricanje: “Preloži u krv reke njine” i istočnike njihove, zato da se ne imadu odašta napiti. […]16 [Misery on the water, / misery from villains, / misery from every nation, / misery from languages / misery in the city, misery in the desert / misery on the sea, / misery from cunning brothers / and among wicked company / (And great misery writing this / in a bound book, / on unsuitable paper, and, as you see, / with the wrong ink!) / From all this evil and misery / deliver us Lord. / Deliver us from the evil floating / in these rivers, / where the waters are evil, terrifying / and they persecute us / and are eager to drown our church. / And we complain about them to the saviour / who was born of you. / “Deliver me, oh God, because the waters will gush / into my soul!” / And the waters want to drown us. / But with your intercession, / most holy virgin, / this stream will go across our souls / in these bloody times, / armies and fighting everywhere / and all kinds of anxiety, / and streams that do not flow / as these bloody rivers do, / with David’s prophecy / fulfilled by us: / “Turn into blood its rivers” / and its springs, / because they did not have / a place to drink. / […] ]

In his poetry he returned to the mediaeval literary canon, the old poetics, and the former rhythmical patterns. “Molitva protiv krvavih voda” begins with an enumeration of the types of disaster and the “poverty” that plague men and from which they have to be rescued by an expresis verbis yet unnamed God. This brings to mind the catalogue of ektenial requests in the Litany of the Saints, which could be related to Austro-Hungarian influences. These influences intensified after the migrations with regard to both literature and culture. Despite the lack of a direct apostrophe to the Creator, Venclović introduces two quotes from Psalms 68 and 78. Both show on the one hand, the aquatic element that symbolizes the destruction and misery in the poem, and on the other, the soteriological role of God. In the following lines the speaking person once again beseeches the unnamed 16 Gavril Stefanović Venclović, “Molitva protiv krvavih voda,” in Гаврил Стефановић Венцловић, Црни биво у срцу [Red wine in heart] (Београд: Просвета, 1966): 58–60.

Writing and Rewriting of the Canon in Serbia

229

divinity, which seems to be the Mother of God. The lyrical “I” turns to her with an ektenial request for the flood waters to recede. The conventional litanic comparisons, such as “blagoslovena v ženah” (a reference to the “blessed amongst women” as well as the “virgin of virgins”), are also ascribed to her or she is equated with the heavenly rainbow. The lack of a regular meter is partly the result of using ordinary language, which, in contrast to the literature of the Orthodox Church, penetrates into poetry. Repetition and a graphic adaptation of the litanic structure are also present in “Moja noć” by Alexa Šantić (1868–1924): Moja noći, kada ćeš mi proći? — Nikad! Moja zoro, kada ćeš mi doći? — Nikad! Moja srećo, kad ćeš mi se javit? — Nikad! Moje nebo, kad ćeš mi zaplavit? — Nikad! Moja draga, kad će naši svati? — Nikad! Moja suzo, kada ćeš mi stati? — Nikad!17 [My night, when will you pass? / — Never! / My dawn, when will you come? / — Never! / My joy, when will you appear? / — Never! / My sky, when will you clear? / — Never! / My dear, when will we marry? / — Never! / My tear, when will you vanish? / — Never!]

The author of this poem was influenced by the work of Jovan Jovanović Zmaj, Vojislav Ilić, and Heinrich Heine. His poetry was marked by a discussion of the social problems and the martyrdom of the nation. He also referred to folk works, especially the Herzegovinian sevdalinka.18 The poem “Moja noć” is written in 10-syllable verse, a type of meter which was particularly popular during the romantic era.

17 Aleksa Šantić, “Moja noć,” accesed March 25, 2015, http://www.aleksasantic.com/. 18 Kristina Čustonjić, “Elementi stila ženskog pjevanja Žepča i okolice,” [“Elements of the Female Singing Style in Žepč and Its Vicinity”] in Bosna franciscana 21, 39(2013): 25–49; Tamara Beljak Karača, Sevdalinka: melopoetski oblik bosanskohercegovačke gradske sredine: magistarski rad [Sevdalinka: Melopoetic Variety of Bosnian and Herzegovinian Town Community] (Sarajevo: Tama Beljak Karača 2002); Sevdah i sevdalinka: izbor tekstova [Sevdah and Sevdalinka. Collection of Texts] (Sarajevo: Institut sevdaha, Fondacija Omera Pobrića, 2004).

230

Emilian Prałat

One of the greatest poems among the work of the Serbian Romantic Poets is Laza Kostić’s (1841–1910) text, which clearly has a quasi-religious, quasi-litanic component. Milan Kašanin, an eminent scholar of Serbian literature, perceives the poem “Santa Maria della Salute” as the only text (apart from “Luka mikrokozma” by Petar Petrović Njegoš) which is directly derived from the tradition of religious literature and, more specifically, from prayer.19

Revitalization of the Tradition: Laza Kostić and Ivan V. Lalić Опрости, мајко света, опрости, што наших гора пожалих бор, на ком се, устук свакоје злости, блаженој теби подиже двор; презри, небеснице, врело милости, што ти земаљски сагреши створ: Кајан ти љубим пречисте скуте, Santa Maria della Salute. Зар није лепше носит лепоту, сводова твојих постати стуб, него грејући светску грехоту у пепо спалит срце и луб; тонут о броду, трнут у плоту, ђаволу јелу а врагу дуб? Зар није лепше вековат у те, Santa Maria della Salute? Опрости, мајко, много сам страдо, многе сам грехе покајо ја; све што је срце снивало младо, све је то јаве сломио ма’; за чим сам чезно, чему се надо, све је то давно пепо и пра’, на угод живу пакости жуте, Santa Maria della Salute […]20

19 Milan Kašanin, “Prometej (Laza Kostić),” in Vladimir Otović, ed., Laza Kostić, Pesme [Laza Kostić: Poems] (Novi Sad: Matica srpska, 1991), 1, 14. 20 Лаза Костић, “Santa Maria della Salute,” in Миодраг Павловић, Антологија српског песништва [Antology of Serbian Poetry] (Beograd: Srpska književna zadruga, 1997), 198–201.

Writing and Rewriting of the Canon in Serbia

231

[Forgive, holy mother, forgive / That the woods regretted our mountains, / Where in spite of all the evil / For you, the Blessed, a palace is risen; / Do not despise, heavenly lady, the source of grace, / That earthly creatures sin: / I abase and kiss your purest robes / Santa Maria della Salute. // Is not it more beautiful to bring beauty, / to become the pillar of your freedom, / Rather than, by warming the sins of the world, / To burn the heart and bark into ashes; / To sink aground, fade away in flesh, / to offer a pine to the fiend, an oak to the devil? / Is not it more beautiful to have everlasting life in you / Santa Maria della Salute? // Forgive me, mother, I suffer greatly, / I have committed many sins; / all that the young heart was dreaming of, / all that collapsed in reality; / what I missed, what I expected, / has long been turned into ashes and dust, / despite everything, bilious malice still lives, / Santa Maria della Salute. // God of zephyrs, god of storms / The Lord of the sphere of all sounds, / god of nightingales and god of vipers, / the lord of the rumble of thunders: /you, the curse of earthly delusions, / you, the song of heavenly dreams, / bring him, saint John, / the voice of our distress! / […] ]

The invocatory character of the first line, which is also the title of the hymn, together with its replication in the final part of the stanzas, are clearly references to a religious formula, to genres of prayer and confession, as well as to a litanic summons. Kostić’s poem21 seems, however, to be a stylistic and thematic anachronism, which should be analyzed against the background not only of his works, but also of Serbian romanticism in general. “Santa Maria della Salute,” written in iambic pentameter, consists of fifteen stanzas with numerous catalectic and hypercatalectic lines. The final stanza, which is twice as long as those preceding it which are composed of eight lines each, can be considered in two ways, either as a single but extensive section of the text, or as two different units that overlap in a formal, compositional, and logical manner. With regard to rhyme, the Italian tradition of ottava rima (abababcc) dominates throughout the poem, with a clear division into the masculine (b) and the feminine (other) endings.22 However, in the last stanza, which as mentioned previously is twice as long as the other stanzas, the pattern changes from the initial alternate rhyme, to plain rhyme in the middle section, and finally to monorhyme in the final part. This results in close rhyming (“задивићемо светске  к о л у т е, / богове силне, камоли  љ у д е, / звездама ћемо померит  п у т е, / сунцима засут сељенске  с т у д е”), word repetition that evokes singing (“из безњенице у рај, у рај! / У рај, у рај, у њезин загрљај!”), as well as phrases related to heavenly 21 Đorđe Despić, “Pavlovićev ogled o Santa Maria della Salute Laze Kostića,” [“Pavlov’s Remarks on Kostić’s Santa Maria della Salute”] Godišnjak Filozofskog fakulteta, 35, 2(1992): 153–165. 22 Jovan Delić, “Ivan V. Lalić i Laza Kostić,” Zbornik Matice srpske za književnost i jezik 50, 1–2(2002): 298.

232

Emilian Prałat

symbolism, with clear religious connotations. At the same time, in particular stanzas Kostić moves from the form of prayer, through a hymnic development, to elements of love songs at the end of the poem.23 Kostić also wrote a number of poems that in later years influenced many other poets. One of the most important is “Pevačka himna Jovanu Damaskinu”: Bogu zefira, bogu oluja gospodu sfera zvučnoga ma, bogu slavuja i bogu guja, gospodu tutnja gromovima: ti, kletvo zemne omane, ti, pesmo nebnih snova, odnes’ mu, sveti Jovane, i glase naših bola! […]24 [God of zephyrs, god of storms / The Lord of the sphere of all sounds, / god of nightingales and god of vipers, / the lord of the rumble of thunders: / you, the curse of earthly delusions, / you, the song of heavenly dreams, / bring him, saint John, / the voice of our distress! / (…) ]

Kostić’s hymn to honor John of Damascus has five eight-line stanzas (with the first and last stanzas being identical), in which the last four lines form an ektenial chorus. Throughout the poem the lines are not of equal length and different forms of verse were used in the main part of the stanza and in the refrain. In the former, the even (9-syllable) lines are one syllable shorter than the odd (10-syllable) lines; in the latter, the three initial lines consist of eight syllables, whereas the last has only seven syllables. The poet consistently employs the rhyme ababcdcd, which are divided as follows: feminine (a and d), masculine (b), and dactylic (c).25 Constructed in this way, the text indirectly refers to the litanic pattern, with a division into the ektenial-invocatory string of summons and the supplications directed to God or a saint, as well as the imploring collective responses that accompany them. In Kostić’s poem the four initial lines of each stanza are equivalent to the summons, while the section of the refrain that is addressed to the Damascene is an expression of a collective imploring prayer; indeed it could be 23 Ibid. 24 Лаза Костић,“Певачка имна Јовану Дамаскину,” in Миодраг Павловић, Антологија српског песништва [Antology of Serbian Poetry] (Beograd: Srpska književna zadruga, 1997), 196–197. 25 Jovan Delić, “Ivan V. Lalić i Laza Kostić,” Zbornik Matice srpske za književnost i jezik, vol 1, 1(1953): 296.

Writing and Rewriting of the Canon in Serbia

233

said that the prayer functions as a synecdoche for all the Serbs. In addition, the exact repetition of stanzas 1 and 5 is a reference to the litanic opening and closing through the use of the same phrase. On the semantic level, John Damascene appears to be the main intercessor between the collective “we” and God. In fact, the saint embodies the Byzantine tradition and emphasizes the relationship with the monastic legacy of Hilandar. Kostić’s work impacts directly upon the expression in the works of Ivan V. Lalić (1931–1996). In the poem “Šapat Jovana Damaskina” Kostić’s phrase “Oprosti majko sveta, oprosti” from “Santa Maria della Salute” is quoted verbatim, and the main character in the poem is again John of Damascus, one of the greatest writers in the church. Oprosti, majko sveta, oprosti Što skrušeno se obraćam u bdenju, Što utuk sveukupnoj mojoj zlosti U produženom tražim magnovenju Te jedne noći koja svetlost zrači Iz moje senke, iz najgušćeg mraka Jer sve što hoće mrak da obeznači Postane svetlost u znaku tvog znaka; […] Oprosti mi, i učini da sraste Sa svojom košću kost, sa stablom grana; U srebro ću da skujem svoje kraste, Da slava tvoja bude moja rana; Oprosti prestup moje prolaznosti Koja se čudu kao pravdi nada, Oprosti mojoj kosti, mojoj zlosti, Ali učini čudo. Ovde. Sada. Ali učini čudo. Ovde. Sada.26 [Forgive me, holy mother, forgive me / That I turn to you in repentance at a vigil, / Where in this prolonged moment, / I am looking for the antidote to all my anger, / Only at night, when the light radiates / From my shadow, from the total darkness / Since everything that darkness touches / Becomes light, the sign of your presence; / […] / Forgive me and make a bone knit / With a bone, the branch of a tree; / I will forge my scabs into silver, / my wounds will serve for your glory; / Forgive the immorality of my passing / which waits for a miracle as for justice, / Forgive my bone, my anger, / But create a miracle. Here. Now. / But create a miracle. Here. Now.]

26 Ivan V. Lalić, “Šapat Jovana Damaskina,” in Laza Kostić, Pesme (Sremski Karlovci: Kairos, 2009), 241–242.

234

Emilian Prałat

The poem is written in iambic pentameter with an irregular caesura, usually after the fifth syllable. The pattern borrowed from Kostić, however, is not applied consistently. For example, in line 23 the author uses trochaic hexameter,27 which, as Julian Kornhauser points out,28 represents the so-called Serbian alexandrine, one of the more common metric systems in Serbian modernism. A dual system of rhymes is also evident, with the first and fourth stanza incorporating the cross rhymes, ababcdcd, whereas the second and the third use the more complicated pattern, ababcddc.29 By reducing the number of stanzas in his poem to four, Lalić enters into artistic polemics with Kostić. The refrain does not appear, but the poem as a whole is close to the work by Kostić previously discussed in detail. Thus, Lalić’s prayer in four stanzas corresponds to the five stanzas in Kostić’s text.

27 Jovanović Aleksandar, “Sedam Lalićevih pesama — uvod u tumačenja,” [“Seven Poems by Lalić: Introduction to Analysis”] Zbornik Matice srpske za književnost i jezik 52, 2(2004): 364. 28 Julian Kornhauser, “Augustin Ujević a serbska moderna,” [“Augustin Ujević and Serbian Modernism”] in Pejzaże kultury [Landscapes of Culture], ed. Władysław Dynak (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2005), 623–632. 29 Ibid., 299.

Emilian Prałat Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

“The Word that feeds hungry human souls, the Word that gives power to your mind and heart”: Bulgaria from Clement of Ohrid to the “September Literature” Circle While analyzing the problem of litanic verse in the Balkans, even though I am only going to focus on the Slavonic areas, consideration should be given to the complicated political situation, a situation which, however, also translates into the vibrant culture of today. This applies to the ethos of both Bulgaria and Macedonia. The latter, a state which includes all the historical and geographical “Macedonia” (that is present day Epirus), has existed as a separate and fully independent state since 1991. Before that the geocultural area previously known as Macedonia existed within other independent nations (namely the Bulgarian and Serbian tsardoms). Hence, among many researchers Macedonian culture is treated as a variant of that of the Bulgarians. However, its traditions existed from the fall of the Duchy of Vidin in 1396 when it became part of the Ottoman Empire, an empire which was involved in effectively destroying any evidence of the Macedonian high culture. Therefore, the central source in which we search for any “litanic character” is the oral literary tradition, a tradition which was raised to the level of a national canon. One of its features is a predilection for the use of the decasyllable and in the Bulgarian variant the accent in general falls on the third and ninth syllables of a line.1 The existence of such variants in the history of Bulgarian-Macedonian verse may be considered as a continuation of the prosodic division indicated by Jakobson: In the eastern area of the South Slavic languages, where both distinctive (phonemic) pitch and distinctive quantity have disappeared, two different prosodic patterns have arisen — one (and this includes the bulk of the Macedonian dialects) has stabilized the wordaccent on the penult or the antepenult, while the other (which includes the rest of the Macedonian and all the Bulgarian dialects) shows a free, i.e. phonemic, stress (dynamic

1 Roman Jakobson, “Studies in Comparative Slavic Metrics,” Oxford Slavonic Papers 3(1952), 28.

236

Emilian Prałat

accent). In order to simplify terminology we will call the former type ‘Macedonian’, and the latter ‘Bulgarian’.2

In the case of particularly long fragments of texts that were intended to be sung or melodeclamated, for example the lives of saints, or those used in services, the dynamic, free and movable accent of the Bulgarian language allowed for an adjustment in the text to the requirements of the melody. Both languages are characterized by a reduction in the declination forms to nominative, accusative and vocative alone, analytical comparative, postpositive pronouns, and the disappearance of an infinitive.

Oral Literature and Folklore The initial period in which the specifics of the Bulgarian literary tradition were shaped can be related to the numerous Greek translations, and at that time there was a distinct isosyllabic regularity in verses which was characteristic of the age,3 with the most frequent in hymn works being 5-syllable line units. The poems that were to be recited were mostly written in 12-syllable verse, but once the Tarnovo School has been created and the yers gradually disappeared from the end of words, the 11-syllable verse became the dominant metric system. In the fifteenth century the work continued in a similar vein as the so-called golden period, that is the ninth to the twelfth centuries. Atanas Slavov stresses that with respect to meter the poetry of the period was not dissimilar to folk poetry, which in subsequent centuries resulted in a gradual unification of both these forms. A typical feature of a Bulgarian folk poem was the use of an asymmetric 8-syllable line (5+3),4 but this was less popular than the 9-syllable line. The second most popular kind of verse, however, was the symmetric octosyllable, which was characteristic of songs for women, including both ceremonial songs and laments. The songs included elements that gave a rhythmic organization to the text in the form of repetitive formulae, which created a further formal metric pattern, apart from akathist inspirations, to produce a quasi-litanic effect. According to an analysis by Slavov 85% of prosodic words within this corpus of poetry were

2 Ibid., 28 3 Atanas Sławow, Zarys wersyfikacji bułgarskiej [An Overview of Bulgarian verse] (Wrocław–Warszawa–Kraków–Gdańsk: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk, 1974), 9. 4 Рая Тодорова Кунчева, “Българският осмосричник. Метрика и ритмика,” [“Bulgarian Octosyllable Verse: Meter and Rhythm”] Литературна мисъл, 2(1979), 47–71.

Bulgaria from Clement of Ohrid to the “September Literature” Circle

237

two- and four-syllable units, which stands in opposition to everyday language in which this percentage amounts only to 50%.5 A significant change with respect to the history of this verse took place in the nineteenth century when stanzas with an uneven distribution of syllables were gradually introduced. In these poems: “[…] the dominance of end rhymes and rhymes using the same parts of speech inevitably lead to an accumulation of stress in a specific position from the end of the line.”6 At the same time together with the strengthening of the initial stage of the national revival and the emergence of a new generation of artists, the constant conflict between those who were following the vernacular language and those aiming at new verse forms, became more and more apparent. The writer who introduced the iambic tetrameter, which was an unfamiliar element in Bulgarian literature, was Nayden Gerov, and soon after Dobri Chintulov also employed this element. The new system became more popular in the 1860s mostly due to Ivan Vazov, and this is the period in which other accentual-syllabic verse also appear. Slavov indicates that the “5+3 pattern becomes a conjunction of two iambic feet with female endings and one amphibrachic foot […], whereas the 5+5 pattern becomes a dactylo-trochaic verse […].”7 Having said that, the beginning of the twentieth century is clearly marked by Russian artists, and this period is characterized by a return to forms that are not determined by stress.8

Ad fontes The Bulgarian literature in which the so-called litanic elements are the most visible, is the old literature. Indeed in the East the legacy formed during the Great Moravian mission of Cyril and Methodius was preserved and the Slavic language was made the official language. It also led to a flowering of literature in the Bulgarian-Macedonian lands (with literary schools in Pliska and Preslav). After the Byzantine conquest of both the Eastern lands and the Bulgarian tsardom, this literary activity moved to the Macedonian lands and was influenced by ideas from the Adriatic Coast. After reaching the Serbian and Hungarian lands, Bulgarian literature final extended its influence as far as the Kievan Rus. The Renaissance of Bulgarian literature occurred as a result of the Byzantine Hesychasm, hence the presence of complex rhetorical questions, exclamation marks, subtle metaphors, 5 Sławow, Zarys wersyfikacji, 29. 6 Ibid., 57. 7 Ibid., 71. 8 Ibid., 99.

238

Emilian Prałat

and synonymous epithets (the so-called “плетение словес”). After the annexation of Bulgaria by the Ottoman Turks, the monasteries took over the mantle as literary centres, and so the main literary domain was religious works.

The Period of Cyril and Methodius After the Christianization of the Bulgarians through the mission of Cyril and Methodius, the brothers produced the first Slavic translations of Greek works. One of the oldest Bulgarian texts in which elements of the litanic tradition can be seen is “Proglas”9 by Constantine Cyril. It is an introduction to the Gospels, and also the first poem written in Old Church Slavonic. Slyšite slověnьskъ narodъ vьsь, slyšite slovo, otъ Boga prijde, slovo že krъmę člověčьskyję dušę, slovo že krěpę i srьdьce i umъ, slovo se gotovaję Boga poznati. [Hear you, the whole Slavonic nation, / Hear the Word, sent by the Lord / the Word that feeds hungry human souls, / the Word that gives power to your mind and heart, / the Word that will prepare you to accept the Lord.]

Constantine Cyril, to whom this work is assigned (although it seems more appropriate to attribute it to Constantine of Preslav), follows the example of an 9 Алексей Иванович Соболевский, „Черковно-славянските стихотворения от IX-X в. и тяхното значение за изучаването на черковнославянския език,” [“Old Church Slavonic Verse of the Ninth and Tenth Centuries and Their Importance for Old Church Slavonic”] Сборникъ за Народни Умотворения, Наука и Книжнина [A Collection of Folklore, Science and Literature] 16, 17(1900): 314–320; Roman Jakobson, “St. Constantine’s Prologue to the Gospels,” St. Vladimir’s Seminary Quarterly (1954): 10–23; André Vaillant, “La Préface de l’Évangéliaire vieux-slave,” [“Introduction to the Old Slavonic Gospel Book”] Revue des études slaves 24(1948): 5–20, accessed April 10, 2015; Владимир Николаевич Tопоров, “‘Проглас’ Константина Философа как образец старославянской поэзии,” [“‘Proglas’ by Constantine the Philosopher as an Example of Old Slavonic Verse”] in Славянское и балканское языкознание [Slavic and Balkan Linguistics] (Москва: Российская академия наук, 1979), 10–23, 25–44; Донка Петканова, “Литературното дело на Константин-Кирил,” [“The Literary Work of Constantine Cyril”] in Изследвания по кирилометодиевистика [Studies of Cyril and Methodius] ed. Ангелина Игнатова and Красимир Станчев (София: Наука и изкуство, 1985), 110–115; Роман Якобсон, “Проглас към евангелието на свети Константин,” [“Proglas of St. Constantine’s Gospel”] in Езикът на поезията [Language and Poetry] (София: Образование и наука, 2000).

Bulgaria from Clement of Ohrid to the “September Literature” Circle

239

acrostic prayer by Gregory of Nazianzus, and the work is also stylistically and compositionally close to “Ispovedna Molitva” (“Prayer of Confession”). It consists of 100 lines, written in 12-syllable verse, with a caesura after the fifth syllable, but rarely after the seventh. The Byzantine tradition of iambic poetry is clearly visible, as the work manifests the formal rigor and the tonic equivalence associated with the use of alliteration.10 The author of “Proglas” had a number of works dedicated to him, and the influence of Byzantine literature with its predilection for texts rich in anaphora, as well as those composed with few words, hyperbolas,11 puns or polysyndetons can be observed. From this perspective a text that specifically praises and honours Cyril the Philosopher, “Похвала за нашия блажен отец и славянски учител Кирил Философ,” is that by Clement of Ohrid (840–916). The phrase “Blessed father!” present in the introduction clearly indicates that the text was officially used during religious services and was written to commemorate February 14th, the dies natalis of Constantine Cyril. The panegyric speech contains an enumeration of the qualities of the saint’s body: Затова, о, преблажени отче Кириле, аз облажавам твоите устни, от които се изля духовна сладост за моите устни. Облажавам твоя многогласен език, чрез който зарята на троичния безначален Бог, като изгря за моя народ, разпръсна греховния мрак. Облажавам твоето тъй много светло лице, озарено от Светия Дух, чрез което светлината на богопознанието изгря на моето лице, а многобожната заблуда бе изкоренена. Облажавам твоите златозарни очи, чрез които слепотата на незнанието бе премахната от моите очи и засия светлината на богопознанието.

10 Андрей Николаевич Робинсон, У истоков славянской письменности [The Beginnings of Slavonic Literature] (Москва: Издательский Дом “Мyрaвей”, 1984), 2: 376. 11 Лиляна Борисова Грашева, “Някои изобразителни принципи в похвалните слова на Климент Охридски,” [“Selected Pictorial Forms in the Praises of Clement of Ohrid”] in Климент Охридски [Clement of Ohrid] (София: Българска Академия на науките, 1966), 267–278; Маргарита Ивановна Лекомцева, “Семантика некоторых риторических фигур, основанных на тавтологии (на материале ‘Похвального слова Кириллу-Философу’ Климента Охридского),” [“The Semantics of the Selected Rhetorical Figures Based on Tautology (based on “Word of Praise to Cyril the Philosopher’)”] in Структура текста [Structure of Text] (Москва: Наука, 1980), 184–197.

240

Emilian Prałat

Облажавам твоите ангелозрачни зеници, озарени от божествената слава, които ме просветиха с боговдъхновени слова, след като премахнаха сърдечната ми слепота. Облажавам твоите пречестни ръце, чрез които слезе върху моя народ дъждовният облак на богопознанието, който напои с изтичаща от Бога роса нашите сърца, изгорели от греховна суша. Облажавам твоите движени от Бога пръсти, чрез които се написа за моя народ свобода от греховното иго. Облажавам твоята златозарна утроба, от която изтече за моя народ животворна вода, слизаща отгоре чрез твоите молитви. Облажавам твоите светлозарни нозе, с които ти бързо обходи като слънце целия свят, проповядвайки боговдъхновеното учение. Облажавам твоите златозарни стъпки, чрез които насочи нашите заблудени стъпки по правия път. Облажавам твоята пресвета душа, чрез която се излекуваха греховните рани на душата ми и се всади разум в сърцата ни чрез духовните ти слова. Облажавам твоите движени от Бога пръсти, чрез които се написа скритата за мнозина божия премъдрост и които разкриха тайните на богопознанието. Облажавам твоята пречестна църква, в която почива твоето многоразумно и богоречиво тяло.12 [Therefore I worship thy lips, holy father, Cyril, from which to my lips flowed spiritual sweetness. / I adore thy thunderous tongue, by which to my nation a Trinity dawned, which has no beginning, you lit and the darkness of sin you drove away. / I adore thy face, with the radiant glow of the Holy Spirit, through which in front of my face the light of God’s mind flashed, and the pagan lie was eradicated. / I adore thy eyes like a golden dawn, by which the ignorant scales in my eyes were removed and the light of the knowledge of God shone. / I adore thy angel pupils, the shining glory of God, through which the blindness of my heart has been taken away, and erupted in the words of divine inspiration. / I worship thy venerable hands, on which, for my nation descended a cloud of God’s knowledge, sprinkling our hearts dried up and burned in sin with a divine dew. / I worship thy interior, radiant like the dawn, from which the water of life flowed out onto my nation, descending from the heights thanks to your prayers. / I adore thy bright feet, which run the whole world like the sun, preaching the inspired teachings of the Spirit. / I worship thy radiant feet, which directed the path of truth for our stray feet. / I worship thy holy soul, through which the wounds of the sin on my soul were healed, and the spiritual teachings in our hearts adopted a grain of Reason. / I adore thy fingers

12 Климент Охридски, Събрани съчинения [Complete Works] (София: Българска Академия на науките, 1970), 1: 417–442.

Bulgaria from Clement of Ohrid to the “September Literature” Circle

241

directed by God, which wrote the Wisdom of God hidden from many, revealing the mysteries of God. / I adore thy glorious temple where your body rests, which — full of wisdom — proclaimed God.]

The apologetic text in honor of Constantine Cyril derives from the tradition of Passion works that are associated with the celebration of the rites of Christ’s death during Holy Week and with the worship of his tortured body. This text is preserved in two versions, the older, a copy from the thirteenth century, is kept on Mount Athos and has traces of the Glagolitic (Bulgarian recension) original (protograf) of Clement. There are in fact twenty four copies of the later version, the oldest of which dates from the fourteenth century. Explicit references to similar lexical resources, especially the light and astral connotations (the comparisons to dawn, the sun, a star) interspersed with theotokions, can be seen, among others, in an anonymous Liturgy (“služba”) in honor of Cyril. This text has about twenty different editions, the oldest of which dates back to the turn of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Clement, as a representative of the school of Ohrid, was influenced by Greek literature.13 Between the twelfth and fourteenth centuries these Greek influences were intensified due to the political collapse of Bulgaria, which led to greater cultural dependence on Constantinople. A feature of the literature of this period was the predilection to compile and translate (Zakon sudnyj ljudem), to write works inspired by Byzantine chronicles (cf. Simeon’s Zbornik, Sviatoslav’s Izborniki, the Chronicles of both John Malalas and Georgios the Monk). A growing number of local cults — founded as a result of a politically fragmented state — meant an increase in hagiographical-liturgical literature. Mariola Walczak stresses that: The authors of the lives of saints and the panegyrics still followed the Byzantine rhetoric, especially valuing the so-called “interweaving of words.” They used conventional syntax, far removed from the contemporary Bulgarian syntax. The sublime, emotional style full of rhetorical exaggeration meant that the language of the books did not resemble the language used on an everyday basis.14

A feature of this literature is its liturgical and educational nature. Numerous works praising Clement of Ohrid,15 thanks to the ingenious rhetoric and unique ornamentation, were close to the late Byzantine works. Most of these texts — with the

13 Cf. Mariola Walczak, Język piśmiennictwa bułgarskiego. Zarys dziejów [The Language of Bulgarian Literature: An Outline History] (Poznań: Wydawnictwo UAM, 1998), 30. 14 Ibidem, 36. Own translation. 15 Cf. Похвално слово за Св. Димитър Солунски, Похвално слово за Св. Архангели Михаил и Гавриил, Похвално слово за Св. Климент Римски, Похвално слово за

242

Emilian Prałat

influences of Greek hymnography clearly visible — were written in 12-syllable verse, with caesura most frequently found after the fifth syllable. This is particularly noticeable in the recommendations by Euthymius of Tarnovo (1325–1404), which resulted in a return to the language from the time of Cyril and Methodius.16 A section of “Похвала за четиридневния Лазар” (“Words of Praise on the Resurrection of Lasarus”) is extremely interesting. In its structure Clement’s work to a large extent resembles a Marian litany, yet instead of an invocation to the Mother of God or to Christ the name Lazarus is used in the nominative, with an accompanying description. A similar construct can be observed in “Похвала за пророк Илия” (“Word of Praise to the Prophet Elijah”).17 The fundamental difference between what is commonly understood to be litany and the pseudo-litanic character of the passage in question is the fact that direct speech is not used with respect to the addressee, in this case a saint, and instead is replaced by an enumerative listing of the attributes of Lazarus. Yet while emphasizing the qualities of the saint, it manifests the polyonymic gene of litany: Лазар — красива издънка от божията градина! Лазар — медоносна капка от божията мъдрост! Лазар — извор на духовна благодат! Лазар — неувяхващ цвят от райската градина! Лазар — високолетящ орел на висшата премъдрост! Лазар — съкровищница на божието гостоприемство, изпълнена с обич към бедните! Лазар — втори предтеча за тези, които седят в мрак и в смъртна сянка! Лазар — лют посрамител на адовата сила! Лазар — мил любимец на Христа! Лазар — пръв предобраз на възкресението на Христа на третия ден! Лазар — светлозарен съобщник на ангелите! Лазар — строг изобличител на иудеите!18

Йоан Кръстител, Похвално слово за Св. Четиридесет мъченици, Похвала за четиридневния Лазар. 16 Иван Харалампиев, Езикът и езиковата реформа на Евтимий Търновски [Language and Language Reform of Euthymius of Tarnovo] (София: Наука и изкуство, 1990). 17 A reference to the works of Clement is the Word of Praise to Peter, written by Cyprian, in which the name of Lasarus was replaced by that of Peter. The rhythm of the poem was increased by the repetition of the words “всяко” and “с тебе.” 18 Климент Охридски, “Из похвално слово за възкресение Лазарово,” [“From Word of Praise about the Resurrection of Lazarus”] in Светозар Игов, Антология на българската поезия [Anthology of Bulgarian Literature] (Пловдив: Издавателство Христо Ботев, 1995): 52–53.

Bulgaria from Clement of Ohrid to the “September Literature” Circle

243

[Lasarus — beautiful branch in God’s garden! / Lasarus — a drop of honey of Divine wisdom! / Lasarus — source of Divine grace! / Lasarus — unfading flower in the Garden of Eden! / Lasarus — high flying eagle of the highest wisdom! / Lasarus — a treasure trove of divine hospitality, filled with love for the poor! / Lasarus — another predecessor for those, who lie in darkness and the shadow of death! / Lasarus — tenacious tamer of diabolical power! / Lasarus — a lover of Christ! / Lasarus — the prototype for Christ’s resurrection on the third day! / Lasarus — shining companion of angels! / Lasarus — strictly rebuking the Jews.]

The bipartition of each sentence is clearly visible, and the proximity to litany is also seen in the predilection for nominal order. It is worth mentioning that this practice is typical of the Eastern tradition, which seemingly maintained a tendency for syntagmatic division, thanks to which the first part of a sentence was devoted to the subject of the text and the second was complex and descriptive. In Clement’s works it is also possible to observe a clear distinction between two versions of the words of praise. One version consists of words incorporating personal nominative forms that have an invocative function, whereas the second concerns texts with a classical chairetismic motif stemming from the Akathist Hymn. In “Похвално слово за свети Климент Римски” (“Word of Praise to Saint Clement of Rome”) there is the following example: “Радвай се ти, радостна похвала и любим наследник на първенствуващото служение на върховния апостол Петър!” (“Rejoice, joyful praise and beloved successor in the most dignified service of the first among the apostles — Peter!”), and in “Похвално слово за светия и славен Христов мъченик и победоносец Димитър мироточиви” (“Word of Praise to Dimitr Solunskij”): “Радвай се, Димитре, светлозарно слънце, ти, който прогонваш греховния мрак от тия, които с топла обич те почитат!” (“Rejoice Demetrius, luminous and radiant sun, you, who drives away the sinful darkness from those who love you passionately!”). The chairetismic elements of the words of praise, that is those with akathist origins, frequently appear in the works of the writers from the Tarnovo Literary School.

The Tarnovo Literary School When attempting to answer questions concerning the nature, scope, and longevity of the tradition of litanic verse in Bulgarian and Macedonian literature, one should concentrate primarily on the works created by the Tarnovo Literary School (Търновска книжовна школа). The number of works and their style are clearly associated with the Byzantine school of literature, whose works had been translated in Veliko Tarnovo since the time of the Patriarch Euthymius. The founder of the Tarnovo Literary School was Theodosius of Tarnovo (c. 1300–1363), the

244

Emilian Prałat

spiritual son of Gregory of Sinai (1260–1346). He was responsible for the clear links, often hieratically epigenous, between Athos-Byzantine and Bulgarian writing. The ideological connection with the Hesychasm revived the spirituality of the Bulgarians, which was in turn reflected in the number of religious works that emerged. In “Word of Praise to Helena and Constantine,” written by the Patriarch of Tarnovo, the first nine lines are linked with anaphora. These and other words that are repeated constitute elements of the accentual organization of the poem. The rhythm is also provided by adjacent pairs sharing a similar grammatical form that fulfils the function of a rhyme. Imperative and participial forms are often employed as well, adding prayer-like qualities to the works of the Tarnovo School. Such measures form a set of recognizable features that were characteristic of the works by Euthymius and other writers in his circle. An increased focus on melody was used by the Tarnovo writers with regard to the genre of the lives of saints, with a perfect example being the “Житие на Петка Търновска” (“The Life of Petka of Tarnovo”) which was inspired by the Song of songs. Apart from those works whose authors’ names are known, a number anonymous praises have also been preserved, such as “Похвално слово на цар ИванАлександър” (“Word of Praise to Ivan Alexandrov”). The exhortation that functions here as the basis for the composition proves that a certain group of Orthodox works preserved certain aspects of the ancient tripartite hymnographic structure (invocatio — precatio — exhortatio), which highlight the laudatory character of the work with this distinctive paideitic verve. The qualities of the saint listed in the prayer were to be a source for an intensification of one’s own faith. The praise to Ivan Alexandrov includes several recipients in the chairetismic “Радвай се” (Rejoice!). As might be expected, the most important position is reserved for Ivan himself — the king of kings, the chosen one crowned by God, the intercessor for the faithful. Then a “rejoice” is addressed to Tsarina Theodora and their sons, Mikhail Asen, Ivan Stratsimir, and Ivan Asen. The sequence is closed with an invocation to Veliko Tarnovo, the capital of the state. This apologetic work makes use of a semantic and lexical repertoire that is typical of the akathist, and the dynastic glorification suggests that the work was created at the tsar’s court. Another work that was a testament to the assimilation of Greek poetry and had a similar degree of sanctification with regard to the rule of the tsar is “Похвално слово за Йоан Поливотски” (“Word of Praise to Ioan Polivotski”),19

19 Euthymius of Tarnovo, “Похвално слово за Йоан Поливотски,” [“Word of Praise to Ioan Polivotski”] in Климентина Иванова, “Похвалното слова за Йоан Поливотски от Евтимий Търновски,” Starobalgarska Literatura 12(1982): 30–52.

Bulgaria from Clement of Ohrid to the “September Literature” Circle

245

which was written by Euthymius of Tarnovo, the most prominent writer of the time. John, the Bishop of Polivot (an iconodule) was the patron of Tarnovo and the Asenov dynasty, so it is not surprising that a work dedicated to him was created. The praise is based on the concept of comparing the saint to particular ideas that are enumerated, as well as explanations that directly characterized the addressee of the praise. Небе ще го нарека — защото проповядваш небеските тайнства, Слънце — защото осиява с чудеса, както слънцето творението Гръм — защото възгърмя с всякакво дръзновение чрез догматите на благочестието […]. [I will call him sky — because you predict heavenly mysteries, / A sun — because it shines with miracles, like a creative sun, / A lightning — because it struck with all its might (literary: boldness, fearlessness, fortitude) and the dogmas of piety.]

The following are also listed: lightning (мълния), a cloud (облак), an ark (ковчег), treasure (съкровище), a cup (чаша), a river (река) and a pillar (стълб). The rhythm in the first part of the text is provided by the repetitive “because” (“защото”), with the later part consisting largely of synonymous epithets and phrases, clearly expressing the conjunction of the words. The prayer of Petka from the “Живот на Петка Търновска” (“The Life of Petka of Tarnovo”) also shares this poetics. The narrative parts contain short, seven-syllable-long expressions: “Ти си ми наставница! Ти си ми застъпница! Ти си ми закрилница!” (“You are my tutor! You are my advocate! You are my protector!”). There is also “върви,” followed by an exhaustive list of “places and states,” to which she was to go (amongst others ineffable joy, immortality, the peace of the righteous). After this section the enumeration continues, but is divided into two groups: the first is a chairetismic list of qualities and antonomasias which she would enjoy, or more literally, relish, for example, “наслади се,” an expression that forms a variant of the more typical “радвай се.” The terms include amongst others:

cлава т а (fame) красотa т а (beauty)

oбщение т о светлост т а(brightness) (community, oikumene) радост т а (joy)

The four feminine nouns with the post-determiners  т а  are separated by a neutral noun ending with an article, namely  т o. The 3- and 4-syllable words that are accented on the first syllable, end with articles that have a similar sound during the

246

Emilian Prałat

vocal realization, and these are musically fused together when pronounced quickly. These are suddenly stopped by the next verse — “на своя Жених и създател” (“Women and its creator”) — which forms the beginning of the second group of enumerations mentioned above. The latter group is much more extensive, as it is three times the length of the former. The descriptions relate to the qualities of the Creator and are all denominative adjectives. In the context of the Tarnovo Literary School Cyprian, the Metropolitan of Kiev (1336–1406), who introduced Old Church Bulgarian — the Byzantine editorial tradition of Euthymius — into the Russian lands20 should also be mentioned. Gregory Tsamblak dedicated his word of praise to him (“Похвално слово за Киприан”) and this work is an elegy based on rhetorical questions that are supplemented by an enumeration of the bishop’s body parts, or rather those which he lacks.

Litanic Traces in Modern Times The cultural model of Bulgarian literature that was developed in the Middle Ages remained unchanged through the Ottoman era, until the nation’s revival. The different objectives set by the writers in this period, that is the need for patriotic, socially engaged literature, brought new approaches that were based on West European patterns that were now allowed to be used. A testimony to this trend is a work by Khristo Botev (1848–1876) entitled “Моята молитва” (“My Prayer”). This rationalist work is an apologia for heroism and struggle and was influenced, as Henryk Batowski noted, by Pyotr Vyazemsky.21 The poem does not have a litanic structure, but by means of distinct polyonymic enumerations it suggests convergent qualities. The expressions that had a particular depth of meaning were used purposefully, which resulted in outrage on the part of Ivan Vazov. “God” is identified by a series of iconoclastic comparisons, but also by descriptive qualities that fail to identify an omnipotent person. The subject matter and form of the work are an isolated case in the revival literature.

20 Йван Иванов, “Българското книжовно влияние в Русия при митрополит Киприан,” [“Bulgarian Literary Influence in Russia under the Metropolitan Cyprian”] in ead., Избрани произведения [The Collected Translations] (София: Българска академия на науките, 1982), 1: 53–110. 21 Khristo Botev, Wybór pism [Selection of Writings], ed. Henryk Batowski (Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1960), LXXXIV.

Bulgaria from Clement of Ohrid to the “September Literature” Circle

247

О, мой боже, правий боже! Не ти, що си в небесата, а ти, що си в мене, боже — мен в сърцето и в душата… Не ти, комуто се кланят […] не ти, който си направил […] не ти, който си помазал […] не ти, който учиш робът […] не ти, боже на лъжците, на безчестните тирани, не ти, идол на глупците, на човешките душмани! […] А ти, боже, на разумът […] Вдъхни секиму, о, боже! […] Подкрепи и мен ръката, та кога въстане робът, в редовете на борбата да си найда и аз гробът! Не оставяй да изстине буйно сърце на чужбина, и гласът ми да премине тихо като през пустиня!…22 [Oh, my God, the true God! / Not thou, who art in heaven, / And thou, who art within me, God —/ My in heart and soul / Not thou, to whom all bow down […] / Not thou, who created / Not thou, who anointed / Not thou, who teaches the slaves / Not thou, the god of liars, / Shameless tyrants / Not thou, the idol of the fools /The human souls /But thou, the God of wisdom / Inspire all, Oh God! / Support me with thy hands / When the slaves rebel / Fighting in the ranks / So that I could find my grave too! / Do not let my restless heart / To remain in exile / And that my voice is gone / Quietly, like in a wilderness.]

The Modernist Breakthrough The play with form and its new conceptualization revealed itself in the Modernist period. In the poem by Peyo Yavorov (1878–1914) “Ледена стена,” (“The Ice 22 Христо Ботев, “Моята молитва,” in Стефан Елевтеров, Антология на българската поезия [Anthology of Bulgarian poetry] (София: Издателство Наука и Изкуство, 1977): 287–288.

248

Emilian Prałat

Wall”) the use of parallelism allows the text to be considered a litanic poem. Each line is divided into 5-syllable and 6-syllable hemistichs, and in the first four lines the onset hemistichs are filled with attributives related to the wall. Such parallelism supports the expressiveness which is relevant to the Modernist works of Yavorov23 who reinterprets the fin de siècle spirit. He is compared to the Polish poet Stanisław Przybyszewski through his references to the motif of Satan (which was testimony to the fact that Bulgarians were acquainted with Polish literary works), a negation of the absolute, and the transformation of religious genres into the medium of symbolic poetry.24 Ледена стена — под нея съм роден. Стъклена стена — отвред съм обграден. Хладната стена — замръзва моя дих. Вечната стена — с глава я не разбих… Който приближи — стовари черен труп: кой не приближи! — и мъртъвци са куп. Който приближи, затули лъч една: кой не приближи! — и чезна в тъмнина.25 [Ice wall — underneath it I was born. / Glass wall — surrounds me on all sides. / Cold wall — chills my breath / Eternal wall — I did not smash it with my head… / Whoever approaches — turns into a corpse: / Whoever approaches — grows the pile of dead. / Whoever approaches, — extinguish one flame: / Whoever approaches! — also dies / disappears in the darkness.]

A fragment of a poem written by Asen Raztsvetnikov (1897–1951), included in the volume Жертвени клади (Funeral Pyres), also has a Modernist form. The addressee of the poem is Christ, who is elaborately described, with a reference to the motif of Jesus expelling money lenders from the temple meeting its mirror image in modern money lenders expelling Jesus from the temple. The direct expressions such as “You” and ““Jesus” imply an invocative character. Yet the line “Исусе с огромната светла душа” (“Jesus with a huge luminous soul”) appears to be a semantic substitute for “Kyrie eleison.” Ти, който забравен на кръста мълчиш, Исусе със тъжните, сини очи.

23 Симеон Хаджикосев, “Пролегомена за поетиката на П. К. Яворов,” [“Prolegomena to the Poetics of P. K. Yavorov”] Език и литература, 2(1994): 25–38. 24 Encyclopedia of Literary Modernism, ed. Paul Poplawski (Greenwood: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2003), 388. 25 “Slovo.bg,” accessed April 10, 2015, http://www.slovo.bg/showwork.php3?AuID=130& WorkID=3350&Level=3.

Bulgaria from Clement of Ohrid to the “September Literature” Circle

249

Исусе с огромната светла душа. Ти нявга с камшика, разсърден и пламен, търговците срамно изгони из храма. И после възлезе, ранен, на Голгота, със прошка на устни и нежен и кротък. Ти беше забравил вековната мъдрост, наивнико светъл със русите къдри. И днеска ти виждаш и ясно ти става — че има забава, но няма забрава: търговците, що ги изгони ти срамно, изгониха днес пък тебе из храма. А ти не продумваш, ти тъмен мълчиш, Исусе с дълбоките, тъжни очи, Исусе с огромната светла душа.26 [Thou, who hang silent and forgotten on a cross, / Jesus with sad, blue eyes. / Jesus with a huge luminous soul. / Thou with a whip, angry and fiery, drive the money lenders with shame from the temple /And go out, wounded, onto Golgotha / With forgiveness on thy lips, mild and gentle. / Thou forgot the centuries-old wisdom, / Naive, luminous with bright curly hair. / And today I can see thee and it became clear — / That there is time for fun, but there is no forgetting. / The money lenders whom thou expelled with shame from the temple, / Expelled thou from the temple today. / And thou says nothing, thou art dark and silent / Jesus with deep, sad eyes, / Jesus with a huge luminous soul.]

Raztsvetnikow belonged to the “September Literature” circle, together with Angel Karaliychev, Nikola Furnadzhiev, and Georgi Tsanev. Due to the pressure exerted by the Bulgarian Communist Party and the accusations that bourgeois traditions were being cultivated, he subsequently dedicated his literary works to children. However, the poem quoted above belongs to a group of symbolic poetics, a group that is rarely found in the Bulgarian literature created during the communist uprising in 1923. It is related to the repertoire of traditional prayers and has certain litanic elements, which are to some extent blasphemous, thus depriving the divine person of their qualities. The biblical diction and reference to folklore are included both in the title of the volume and in the quoted poem itself:

26 Светозар Игов, Антология на българската поези [Anthology of Bulgarian Poetry] (Пловдив: Издатепство Христо Г. Данов, 1995), 425.

250

Emilian Prałat

[…] the permissivism related to it, […] manifests itself on the lexical level, and in the imaging and versification.27

The pseudo-liturgical, pseudo-sacred poetical form used by the writers from the turn of the century is an accidental phenomenon. In a literature characterized by rapid development, as was the case with Bulgarian literature at that time, artistic research turned to issues of nativity and folklore, in order to avoid Orthodox or religious components. Thus, after 1880 it is not possible to talk about the presence, or indeed the sustainability of litanic elements in Bulgarian literature, which were often identified with akathist’s features. Of course, at the same time the classical genres in the patterns of praise, as in hagiography, were followed in the church works.

27 Wojciech Gałązka, “Prymityw i jego funkcje w poezji bułgarskiej okresu międzywojennego,” [“Primitive and Its Function in the Bulgarian Poetry of the Interwar Period”] in Literatury słowiańskie w okresie awangardowego przełomu [Slavic Literatures at the Breakthrough Avant-Garde Period], ed. Zdzisław Niedziela, (Wrocław– Warszawa–Kraków–Gdańsk: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1979), 26.

Emilian Prałat Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

“Oh the blessed one, oh the most holy one, oh elevated above all the blessed ones”: Litanic Patterns and Folk Inspirations in Croatian Poetry Long before the first Slavs settled in Croatia, the area had been special for its permeation of various traditions and cultures. At the time when the Byzantine Empire still existed it was under the direct influence of Constantinople. This is how Anđelko Badurina comments on it: Umjetnički utjecaj Bizanta u Dalmaciji ne dolazi posredno, preko Balkana ili Venecije, kako se to ponekad hoće, nego direktno, morskim trgovačkim putem, koji ide s juga na sjever prema novim centrami — Akvileji i Veneciji, i to istočnom obalom, zbog povoljnih struja i brojnih prirodnih luka, tako da bizantski utjecaj prije stiže u Dalmaciju nego u samu Veneciju.1

The Dalmatian coast remained in the hands of the Byzantines till the beginning of the thirteenth century, when it was taken over by the crusaders. In the meantime a lot of Eastern artists found refuge there; they escaped from Arab raids or from iconoclasm. Many of them went to Benedictine monasteries, where they contributed to the creation of eclectic works of art, both literary and visual. Between the ninth and the thirteenth centuries numerous Benedictine monasteries were founded there.2 A monastery that deserves particular attention is John the Evangelist in Biograd, which had its liturgy in Glagolites from 1059. The downfall of the monastery in the thirteenth century did not end the tradition, as it was continued 1 Anđelko Badurina, Iluminirani rukopisi u Hrvatskoj [Iluminated Manuscripts in Croatia] (Zagreb: Kršćanska sadašnjost, 1997), 9. 2 The most important monasteries are those in Solina (St. Stephanae et Mariae, founded in 852), Zadar (St. Crisogono, founded in 852), St. Stjepan de Pinis (founded in 1020), Vinkovci, Trilj (Pons Tiluri) between the Duvna and Solin, Trilj in Cetynia, Solunt between Bar and Cavtat, Trst, and Puli. In the area of neighbouring Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina there existed Benedictine monasteries: Banoštor near Dunava, Srem (founded before 1241), Grgurevci, Nađobos (Manđelos), Petrovaradin, Dumlov near Kamenice, S. Petro in Campo in Čivar near Trebinj, Rmanj (Konobi on the river Uni) near Bihać, and Voljica near Gornyj Vakuf.

252

Emilian Prałat

by the newly-founded monastery on Pašman island, which was consecrated to Cosmas and Damian. St. Mary’s Convent in Zadar ordered numerous books to be made.3 Up till the present abundant libraries have been preserved where numerous copies of litanies can be found, mainly edited by Beneventines. In 1396 the University of Zadar was founded, which continued to be active till the beginning of the nineteenth century. The Dominicans’ presence in Croatia for many centuries can be associated with the activity of numerous theologians, whose work illustrates the pan-European cultural model, to mention only the work of Martin of Zadar. The gradually developing reliance on foreign influences, such as Hungarian, German, and Italian, grew weaker only in the nineteenth century with the national revival. What constitutes a purely Croatian phenomenon is the preservation of archaic vocal tradition in the performance of church music, which combines elements of Byzantine music, Gregorian choral, and the folk tradition. The so-called glagoljaško pjevanje is characteristic of the Istria and Likia region, the islands Krk, Cres, Lošinj, Pag, and Dalmatia (especially the middle region, near Split, Zadar, and Šibenik), along with the islands of Hvar, Korčula, Brač, Šolta, and Vis, and as far as Dubrovnik and Kotor. The first references to Glagolite singing were made in 1177. The first collections of texts and the instructions about how they should be performed were written in 1869 by Franjo Kuhač. Litanies could be found among the texts that were taken down by him. Nowadays the old style of singing is continued, especially at important religious festivals.

The Beginnings Litanic elements of Western and Eastern provenance distinctly marked their presence in the period of the so-called “Old Literature.” This lasted from the beginnings 3 1000 godina Samostana Svetog Krševana u Zadru: prilozi sa znanstvenog skupa održanog 11. i 12. prosinca 1986. u Zadru, upovodu 1000. obljetnice Samostana Svetog Krševana i 30. obljetnice Filozofskog Fakulteta u Zadru [One Thousand Years of St. Chrysostom Monastery in Zadar: Proceedings of the Conference in Zadar in Commemoration of the Monastery Millennium Anniversary and the Thirtieth Anniversary of The Philosophy Department in Zadar, 11–12 January 1986], ed. Ivo Petricoli, (Zadar: Narodni list: 1990); Stjepan Antoljak, “O arhivu Samostana Sv. Krševana kroz stoljeća (prilog o postanku arhiva Sv. Krševana i prestanku njegova djelovanja rada),” [“On the Archive of St. Chrysostom Monastery Throughout the Ages: On Its Foundation and the End of Its Activies”] in 1000 godina Samostana Svetog Krševana, 121–131; Maren Freidenberg, “Samostan sv. Krševana i Zadar u X.–XIV. stoljeću,” [“St. Chrysostom Monastery and Zadar from the Tenth to the Fourteenth Centuries”] Radovi Zavoda Jugoslavenske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti u Zadru 27–28(1981): 31–70.

Litanic Patterns and Folk Inspirations in Croatian Poetry

253

of Croatia as a state till the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the Renaissance, which more or less coincided with those epochs in other parts of Europe. The song “O Marija, Božja Mati” (“Oh Mary, God’s Mother”) is one of the most interesting texts from that period and it was intended to be sung at the Assumption. It was inscribed in the Paris Codex from 1384 in Glagolites script, the Latin hymnal from Korčula (end of fourteen century), the 1509 zbornik by Klimantović, and a number of later hymnals (among others, Budljanska and Pavlinska pjesmarica). The text was written in octosyllabic couplets and it remains one of the oldest Marian songs, undoubtedly composed in the Franciscan circles of middle Dalmatia. A rather unsophisticated style and the distinct rhythmical quality of the song demonstrate its folk origin, which was later validated by a written version. The song layout resembles a litanic form: it begins with the initial four-line apostrophe to the Virgin and continues with the four couplets with participles, such as “okrunjena,” (“the crowned one”) and with nouns, such as “pomoćnica” (“helpmate”). The layout is reworked in the five couplets. The last couplet repeats the construction with the direct address “You.” The final “Amen” and the couplet layout may bring to one’s mind a sequence: O Marija, božja mati, svoju milost rači dati. Daj se grěhov pokajati i s an’jeli pored stati. Ti si danas proslavljena i ot Boga okrunjena. Ti si nebeska kraljica, ti si naša pomoćnica. Ti si Boga porodila, Ti si djavla pobědila. Ti si nebo otvorila, gněv si božji ukrotila. Na nebu si uzvišena i vsěh više postavljena. Veseli se kralj nebeski, veseli se dvoran’jelski.4 [Oh, Mary, God’s Mother, / Be so kind as to bestow your grace on us, / Allow us to be sorry for our sins/ And stand close to angels. / You are the one to be hailed today / And crowned by God./ You are the Queen of Heaven, / You are our helpmate. // You gave birth

4 “O Marija, Božja mati,” in Hrvatska književnost srednjega vijeka, eds. Rafo Bogišić, Ivan Dončević et al. (Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 1969), 377–378.

254

Emilian Prałat

to God, / You combated the devil. / You opened heaven / And curbed God’s wrath. // You have been raised to heaven / And placed above everyone. / The King of Heaven rejoices, / The retinue of angels rejoices.]

Another song, “Hrst vskrse iz mrtvih,” (“Christ rose from the dead”) was preserved only in two books: Glagolites fifteenth-century breviary n° 3 from Vrbnik (Vrbnički brevijar) and the first edition of the 1483 Glagolites missal. In the missal the song appears as a sequence intended for the Resurrection Mass. Both its form and place in the liturgy are relics of the Eastern (Byzantine) Cyril and Methodius tradition. The initial stanza has the form of a troparion (“Hrst vskrse…”) and it is repeated at the end of the third and fourth stanzas and paraphrased at the end of the fifth stanza. Some stanzas commence with the semantic equivalent of chairetismic phrases: in the second stanza there twice appears a direct call to rejoicing (“Veselite se nebesa i raduj se zemlja”) and in the fourth stanza the women are called to announce to Zion the joy of Resurrection. 1. Hrst vskrse iz mrtvih, semrtiju na semrt nastupi, grobnim život darova. 2. Veselite se nebesa i raduj se Zemla i vsa jaže sut v njih, ibo vladika Hrst Bog našsašad va adova vrata, jakože sam izvoli, uzi razvrže okovanih, pobědu že imije vskrse iz mrtvih; grobnim život darova. 3. Muronosicam ženam pri grobi pristav an’jel glagolaše: muro mrtvim jest dostojno, Hrst že istlěniju javi se tuj. Na vzapijte vsi pojuće: Hrst vskrse iz mrtvih, semrtiju na semrt nastupi grobnim život darova. 4. Pridite ot viděnija, ženi blagověstnice, Sionu rcite:primi ot nas celovanije, i radost i vskrsenije Gospodnje. Likuj, igraj i veseli se, Jerusolime, cěsara Hrsta Boga uzrěv iz graba ishodeća jako i ženih otčrtoga svojego.

Litanic Patterns and Folk Inspirations in Croatian Poetry

255

I vzapijte vsi pojuće: Hrst vskrse iz mrtvih, semrtiju na semrt nastupi grobnim život dariova. 5. Nad vsěmi drěvi kedar ti jedin prěviši jesi, sveti Križu, na njemže život mira pne, na njemže Hrst pobědi semrt, semrtiju svojeju semrt pobědi. Aleluja, aleluja, aleluja! 6. Križu tvojemu poklanjajem se, Gospodi, i svetoje vskrsenije Tvoje proslavljajem. Pridite pokloněm se Hrstovu vskrseniju. Aleluja, aleluja!5 [Christ rose from the dead, / with his death he trod on death / and gave life to those who were in graves. / Rejoice, heavens, / and rejoice, the earth, / and all those who are in them / as Jesus Christ / stepped down to the antechambers of hell, / in order to set free, / to liberate the ones in bonding, / he gave them victory / he lifted them up from the dead / he gave life to those who were in graves. // Thus spoke the angelic messenger / to the women who were carrying frankincense: / Frankincense is more suitable for the dead, / mortal Christ appears here. / So cry out by singing / Sing together out loud: / Christ rose from the dead, / with his death he trod on death / and gave life to those who were in graves. // Come after seeing him, female messengers, / Tell Zion: accept the greeting from us / joy and Christ’s resurrection, / Rejoice, be merry, be joyful Jerusalem / at the sight of the tsar, Jesus Christ / who comes out of the grave / like a bridegroom from his marital bed. / So cry out by singing / Sing together out loud: / Christ rose from the dead, / with his death he trod on death / and gave life to those who were in graves. // Above all the cedar trees / You are the highest / the Holy Cross / the life of the world hung on it / Christ defeated death on it / he combated death with his death. / Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia! / I bow down to your cross, Lord, / and I hail your resurrection. / Come and bow down to resurrected Christ. / Alleluia, alleluia!]

Traces of the Literary Koine Lament (naricaljka, tužbalica, tužaljka) is a genre that Bulgarian and Serbian literatures share. Most of the texts were written in octosyllables and decasyllables. 5 “Hrst vskrse iz mrtvih,” in Hrvatska književnost srednjega vijeka [Croatian Literature of the Middle Ages], ed. Rafo Bogišić, Ivan Dončević et al. (Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 1969): 362–363.

256

Emilian Prałat

Their subject matter was something that was familiar to the Southern Slavic region, which is why it does not require any discussion, but the melika tradition preserved to this day has to be emphasized, particularly when it is so much alive in Croatia. During the national revival, the interest in lament grew due to the increasing importance of folklore and the Westernizing of Croatian literature. What illustrated this was the employment of the Spanish romanca tradition, which appeared in Croatian literature with the translation of Herder’s Volkslied by Stanko Vraz.6 The reception of romanca did not, however, result from fascination with the genre, but, as Simona Delić demonstrates, it was an attempt at enrichment of the local tradition.7 It appears that the well-established tradition of ballads provided adequate grounds for this, since the ballad was one of the most frequently used genres among Southern Slavs. “Pokri, djevojko, koprinom kose” (“Cover Your Hair, Girl, with Silk”) Pokri, djevojko, koprinom kose da ti od sunca biser ne puca, da ti od sunca ličce ne gori, da te od draga žeja ne mori.8 [Cover your hair, girl, with silk / So that your pearl will not burst from the sun / So that your lovely face will not burn from the sun, / So that the desire for your beloved one will not torture you.]

Up until the eighteenth century numerous instances of a folk epic ballad called bugarštica or bugarščica could be found among Serbians and Croatians.9 The texts 6 John S. Miletich, “Hispanic and South Slavic Traditional Narrative Poetry and Related Forms: A Survey of Comparative Studies (1824–1977),” in Oral Traditional Literature: A Festschrift for Albert Bates Lord, ed. John Miles Foley (Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers), 375–389. 7 Simona Delić, “Španjolske romance iz knjige Volkslieder (1778./1799.) Johanna Gottfrieda Herdera, iz zbirke Silva de romances viejos Jakoba Grimma (1815.) i njihovi međukulturni odjeci u Hrvatskoj,” [“Spanish Romances from Johann Gottfried Herder’s Volkslieder (1778/1799), from Jakob Grimm’s Silva de romances viejos (1815), and Their Intercultural Echoes in Croatia”] Narodna umjetnost vol. 45, 2(2008): 56. 8 The text comes from the early eighteenth-century Korčula in Usmene lirske pjesme [Oral Lyrical Songs], ed. Stipe Botica (Zagreb: Matica hrvastka, 1995), 78. 9 The most up-to-date studies of bugarštica are “The Bugarštica: a Bilingual Anthology of the Earliest Extant South Slavic Folk Narrative Song,” ed. John S. Miletich (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1990) and Maja Bošković-Stulla, “Bugarštice,” Narodna umjetnost: hrvatski časopis za etnologiju i folkloristiku vol. 41, 2(2004): 9–51; ead. “Balladic Forms of the Bugarštica and Epic Songs,” Oral Tradition vol. 6/2, 3(1991): 225–

Litanic Patterns and Folk Inspirations in Croatian Poetry

257

were orally transmitted reports mainly of battles and folk customs and they were put down in fifteen- and sixteen-syllable lines with a caesura after the seventh or eighth syllable. The oldest instances of bugarštica were put down by Petar Hektorović, Juraj Braković, and Jozo Betondić.10 Some scholars indicate the influence of medieval Bulgarian music, which resulted in instances of bugarštica composed in Serbia and Croatia.11 One of those works was “Majka Margarita,” a lyric first published by Juraj Barakovic (1548–1628) in the collection Vila Slovinka in 1614 in Venice.12 The lyric should be situated within the tradition of folk song and it is difficult to notice any influence of litanic tradition in the repetitive phrases that function as a refrain. Songs of this type testify to the well-grounded local Croatian tradition of enumerations written in long verse (pesme dugog stiha). Cvilu to mi cviljaše drobna ptica lastovica, ona mala ptica; cvilu to mi cviljaše drobna ptica lastovica, ona cvilu cviljaše Zadru gradu na pridvratju ona mala ptica. Ona cvilu cviljaše Zadru gradu na pridvratju. Biše mi se cvileći drobna ptica zakasnila, ona mala ptica, Biše mi se cvileći drobna ptica zakasnila, Ter ju biše pustilo žarko sunce na zapadu, onu malu pticu, Ter ju biše pustilo žarko sunce na zapadu, A biše ju zaskočio sjani misec na istoku, onu malu pticu.13 [This lament has been cried to me by a tiny bird, a swallow, / this tiny bird; / This lament has been cried to me by a tiny / bird, a swallow, / It cried the lament for the city of Zadar, at the city walls. / While it cried to me, the tiny bird was late, / The tiny bird, / While it cried to me, the tiny bird was late / Because the hot sun in the west abandoned it, / The

10 11 12 13

238; Josip Kekez, “Bugaršćice: A Unique Type of Archaic Oral Poetry,” Oral Tradition vol. 6/2, 3(1991): 200–224. It was published in 1878 by Valtazar Bogišić, Franz Miklošič, and Alexander Hilferding. Krste Misirkov, Maurice Bowra, Vatroslav Jagić, and Tomo Maretić. Josip Kekez, “Bugaršćice: A Unique Type of Archaic Oral Poetry,” Oral Tradition vol. 6/2, 3(1991): 203. Josip Kekez, Bugaršćice, III. Izmijenjeno izdanje [Bugaršćice, III, Amended edition] (Zagreb: Organizator, 2000), 76–83.

258

Emilian Prałat

tiny bird, / Because the hot sun in the west abandoned it, / And then it was surprised by the shining moon in the east, / This tiny bird.]

The Apennine influence has to be noted here, which is best exemplified by the spreading impact of lauda. “Blagoslov puka” (“The Blessing of the Nation”) is an example of a folk lauda popular in Croatia. It derives from the prayer recited at the most important religious festivals, Easter and Christmas, and it was adopted to the song form under the influence of folk tradition. The largest number of such songs comes from the Dalmatian coast and from the islands. Most of them can be found in the seventeenth-century songbooks (Budljanska pjesmarica from 1640, Bilanovićeva pjesmarica from 1661, Vitasovićeva pjesmarica from 1677 and 1685) and in the collection Cvitu razlika mirisa duhovnoga from 1726.14 We also know about an earlier instance from 1416, mentioned in the eighteenth-century manuscript. The excerpt quoted below is incomplete, modernized in many places, and not preserving the meter of the original: Benedictio super populum Anno Domini MCCCCXVI Blagoslov puka […] Blagoslov’ vas Sveto Trojstvo, Otac, Sin, Duh — to jedinstvo; blagoslov’ vas Božja mati, svoje lice k vam obrati. Da vas ona vik pomože u potribah ka sve može i poda van svoj blagoslov nje jimena i svetih slov. Blagoslov’te vas an’jeli i tukoje arhan’jeli i svi rodi duhov svetih i pomoz’ vas milostju njih. Blagoslov’te vas proroci patriarke, sveti oci, apostoli; van’jeliste blagoslov’ vas totu ki ste. Blagoslov’te vas divice i blažene udovice i svi sveci i svetice ki se v rajskoj slavi diče. […]

14 Tomo Babić, Cvit razlika mirisa duhovnoga [The Flower of Diverse Spiritual Smell] (Zagreb: Narodni list, 1898).

Litanic Patterns and Folk Inspirations in Croatian Poetry

259

Oca papu i cesara čuvaj od ruk silnih cara. Daj bnetaškoj čast gospodi i na suhu i na vodi. Gospodovat mnoga lita u ‚kolišu svega svita; ov grad Zadar, njega puci drž’ u tvojoj, Bože, ruci. […]15 [May the Holy Trinity bless you, / Father, Son, Spirit: this unity; / May the Virgin Mary bless you/ and turn her face towards you. /May she always help you / In need whenever she can / and endow you with her blessing / name and the holy words. / May angels bless you / and the troops of archangels / And all the kinds of holy spirits / And may their mercy be of help to you. / May prophets bless you, / Patriarchs, Holy Fathers, / Apostles, the Evangelists, / May they bless you all present here. / May virgins bless you / And blessed widows / And all the male and female saints / that enjoy the heavenly bliss. / […] / Protect the Holy Father and the Emperor / Against the hands of violent kings. / Give glory to the state of Venice / On land and at sea. / To rule for many years / Surrounded by the whole world; / Hold, God, in your hand, / The city of Zadar and its inhabitants.]

The case of Dubrovnik can be analyzed in reference to the significance and role of music and the vocal arrangement of sacred texts in Croatian religious and literary life. La storia di Raugia16 by Stefano Razzi (1531–1611) reports on the laudes for the municipal authorities, acclamations, and texts performed to celebrate St. Blaise.17 Cithara octochorda, published in Vienna in 1701, 1723, and in Zagreb in 1757 is a much later but very influential collection of religious texts, which include references to litany particularly in the case of Marian lyrics. The collection includes Latin texts, which are divided into the Advent, Christmas, Lent, Easter, Sunday, Marian ones and those that celebrate saints and commemorate the dead, and also their equivalents in the Kajkavci dialect of Croatian. The canon Toma Kovačević (1664–1724) and Franjo Dugan the Elder (1874–1948) edited the collection. The excerpt from “O Marija zlata kruna” (“Oh Mary, the Golden Crown”)

15 “Blagoslov puka,” Hrvatska književnost srednjega vijeka [Croatian Medieval Literature], eds. Rafo Bogišić, Ivan Dončević et al. (Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 1969), 430–433. 16 Serafino Razzi, La storia di Raugia [The History of Dubrovnik] (Lucca: Vincentio Nasdraghi, 1595). 17 Ennio Stipčević, “Dominikanci i glazba u Hrvtatskoj (16.20.-stoljeće),” [“Dominican Brothers and Croatian Music from the Sixteenth to the Twentieth Century”] Croatica Christiana Periodica vol. 35, 67(2011): 80.

260

Emilian Prałat

presented below includes travesties of the Holy Names from the Litany of Loreto and contaminations of popular Marian prayers with the psalter forms: O Maria! zlata kruna, Bosje zkrovnozti: y poszuda szvetoga Duha, puna krepozti. Podeli nam tvu miloschu Deva Maria premiloztivna. [Oh Mary! The golden crown, divine modesty / And vessel for the Holy Spirit, full of grace / Give us your grace, most merciful Virgin Mary]

Croatian Latinism In Croatian literature Latinism18 was not a widespread phenomenon and it did not occur in many texts. It was mostly associated with political relations, the closeness of Western cultural centres, and the numerous group of Croatians who studied at leading academic institutions of Europe. Zadar was one of the centres of Dalmatia where the influence of Latinism was the strongest. Šibenska molitva [The Šibenik Prayer] is the most important text created there. It was published in 1911 by Ivan Milčetić and Joso Milošević.19 The codex where it was found belonged to Paulus de Sibinico (Pavao Šibenčanac), a custodian of the Adriatic Franciscan province. Dragica Malić classifies the text as one of the Marian hail lyrics composed before the composition of the Litany of Loreto.20 Abbot Milošević, who discovered the text, was unable to trace its source in the course of research. It seems that it may be modelled on litanic verse which derives from the litany of the saints. 18 Branimir Glavičić, “Hrvatski latinisti–humanisti na razmeđu XV/XVI. Stoljeća,” [“Croatian Latinist Humanists at the Turn of the Sixteenth Century”] Senjski zbornik vol. 17, 1(1990): 61–68; Petrarca i petrarkizam u hrvatskoj književnosti: zbornik radova s međunarodnog simpozija održanog od 27. do 29. rujna 2004. u Splitu [Petrarch and Petrarchism in Croatian Literature: Proceedings of the International Symposium, Split, 27–29 September 2004], eds. Bratislav Lučin, and Mirko Tomasović (Split: Književni krug, 2006); Rafo Bogošić, Hrvatski petrarkizam [Croatian Petrarchism] (Zagreb, Školska knjiga 2007); Jospi Torbarina, “Naš prilog evropskom petrarkizmu,” [“Our Contribution to European Petrarchism”] Forum 13(1974): 4–7, 577–597; ead. “Petrarca u renesansnom Dubrovniku,” [“Petrarch in Renaissance Dubrovnik”] Forum 13(1974): 825–838; Pavao Pavličić, “Petrarkistički elementi u hrvatskoj baroknoj poemi, melodrami i epu,” [“Petrarchan Elements in Croatian Baroque Poetry, Melodrama, and Epic”] Forum 14(1975): 1–2, 59–72. 19 Ivan Milčetić, Jozo Milošević, “Šibenska molitva (14. vijek),” [“The Šibenik Prayer”] Starine JAZU, 36 (1928): 84–97. 20 Dragica Malić, “Šibenska molitva,” [“The Šibenik Prayer”] Rasprave: Časopis Instituta za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje, vol. 2 no. 1(1973): 83.

Litanic Patterns and Folk Inspirations in Croatian Poetry

261

Šibenska molitva was written in the Middle Dalmatian Chakavian dialect of Croatian, with numerous exceptions from grammatical and spelling rules. F. Francev suggests that the text may be a copy of a text written in Glagolites.21 Ivan Slamnig indicates an important element related to the performance of the text, which in his opinion was a dialogue between a person intonating and a chorus responding.22 In the text there prevails a typical litanic construction, which consists of apostrophes and predicates23 and which was discussed above on the example of the song “O Marija, Božja Mati”: “Oracio pulcra et devota ad beatam virginem Mariam” (Lijepa i pobožna molitva Blaženoj Djevici Mariji) O blažena, o prislavna, o presvitla svrhu vsih blaženih, Bogom živim uzvišena, vsimi božjimi dari urešena. O prislavna prije vsega vika, Bogom živim zbrana, O umiljena divo Marije! Gospoje, ti si blaženih patrijarak ubrožan’je. Gospoje, ti si blaženih prorokov proročastva isplnjen’je. Gospoje, ti si an’jelsko pozdravljen’je. Gospoje, ti si Boga živoga obsijan’je i okripljen’je. Gospoje, ti si svetoga Duha asvećen’je i akripljen’je. Gospoje, ti si sina božja mati i vsemu svitu saznan’je [i] proslavljen’je. Gospoje, ti si vse vere krstjanske kripko udržan’je i okripljen’je. Gospoje, ti si nevere krstjanske potrtan’je. Gospoje, ti si vse moći Luciferove skušen’je. Gospoje, ti si vsega upada an’jelskoga naplnjen’je. Gospoje, ti si blaženih van’jelist pravo naučen’je. Gospoje, ti si blaženih apostolov čisto i jisto skazan’je.24

21 Franjo Francev, “Latinički spomenici hrvatske crkvene književnosti 14 i 15 v. i njihov odnos prema crkvenoslovenskoj književnosti hrvatske glagolske crkve,” [“Latin Landmarks of Croatian Fourteenth- and Fifteenth-Century Church Literature and Their Attitude Towards Church Slavonic Literature of Croatian Glagolitza Church”] Djela JAZU vol. 31(1934): 5. 22 Antologija hrvatske poezje od najstarijih zapisa do kraja XIX stoljeća [Anthology of Croatian Poetry from the Oldest Records till the End of the Nineteenth Century], ed. Ivan Slamnig (Zagreb: Lykos, 1960), 19. 23 Dragica Malić, “Šibenska molitva: filološka monografija,” [“The The Šibenik Prayer: a philological monograph”] Rasprave: Časopis Instituta za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje vol. 2, 1(1973): 149. 24 “Oracio pulcra et devota ad beatam virginem Mariam,” in Hrvatska književnost srednjega vijeka [Croatian Medieval Literature], eds. Rafo Bogišić, Ivan Dončević et al. (Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 1969), 374–376.

262

Emilian Prałat

[Oh the blessed one, oh the most holy one / Elevated above all the blessed ones, / Lifted to God alive, adorned with all the gifts of God. / Oh the most famous one above all the centuries, chosen by the living God, / Oh the most gracious Virgin Mary! / Lady, thou art the blessed patriarchs’ dream. / Lady, thou art the fulfillment of the blessed patriarchs’ prophesies. / Lady, thou art the angel blessing. / Lady, thou art the shining and refreshment of the living God. / Lady, thou art the sanctification and strengthening of the Holy Spirit. / Lady, thou art the Mother to the Son, and sagacity and object of adoration for the whole world. / Lady, thou art the appeasement of Christian anxieties. / Lady, thou hast tamed devilish powers. / Lady, thou hast reversed the original fall. / Lady, thou art the true learning of the blessed Evangelists. / Lady, thou art the pure and true preaching to the blessed apostles […] ]

The poem continues with the excerpt consisting of 25 lines, which hails Mary and discusses the birth of the Son. In contrast to the first part of the poem, this part includes narration. In the part quoted above we can observe careful syntactic order. Enclitics come before the verb, which contributes to the melodious quality and distinguishes vocal realization from everyday performances. Participia presentia in the function of adjectives are elements that derive from the Greek-Latin-Church Slavonic pattern. The presence of possessive pronouns in the place where there usually appears a reflexive pronoun that refers to the subject may be an instance of interference from Latin. Šibenska molitva also distinguishes itself with its use of adjectives and participles in the function of nouns (“O blažena!,” “O prislavna!”). The text above and similar ones employ the tradition established in the Italian laudes by flagellants and disciplinanti. Croatian Latinism is characterized by its distinctly national character, which materializes in a considerable group of local poets, the disputably innovative quality of their verse, and the emphasis of the subject matter frequently related to the fight against the Turks. Yet another characteristic feature is the specific reception of Petrarchan tendencies, which in Croatia do not combine with the tradition of religious verse. The movement focuses on local topics as the ones worth glorifying, which was to lead to demonstrating Croatian uniqueness in the face of the continuous threat of Turkish invasion.25 The republic of Dubrovnik clearly stands out in any discussion of litanic verse in Croatia. Litanic elements can be found in, for instance, the verse written by Marko Marulić (1450–1524), one of the most distinguished poets in the history of Croatian verse, also inspired by Petrarch. The phrases borrowed from the repertoire of classical appellations and Marian epithets most frequently have a litanic quality. The 25 Mirko Tomasović, O hrvatskoj književnosti i romanskoj tradiciji [On Croatian Literature and Romanic Tradition] (Zagreb: Mladost, 1978), 24.

Litanic Patterns and Folk Inspirations in Croatian Poetry

263

poem “Blaženi čas i hip” (“Blessed was the hour and moment”) by Šiško Menčetić (1457–1527) is considered to be the poem that marks the beginning of Petrarchan inspiration in Croatian literature.26 It is an exemplary instance of Dubrovnik love poetry, which is related to the litanic pattern through its graphic layout and the chairetismic “blaženi” (“the blessed one”). In the paraphrases “blaženi” becomes secularized, since it is related to the sensual and erotic import of love poetry. The sonnet inspired such poets as Dživo Bunić Vučić (1591–1658),27 Jeronim Vidulić (?–1499),28 and Marino Držić (1508–1567). In Mavro Vetranović’s (1482– 1576) mystery play entitled Posvetilište Abramovo (Abraham’s Sacrifice), in Act III there appears a paraphrase of Petrarch’s sonnet.29 In Petrarch Laura is the object of adoration, in Menčetić the object is the Virgin Mary, since her qualities are those of a female deity, and Vetranović goes even further by focusing on the relationship between Abraham and Isaac, which is a prefiguration of that between God the Father and the Son. What manifests itself here is the specific quality of Dubrovnik poetry: the dualism that appears in distinctly Christian texts and those whose Neoplatonism is obvious. Also in dramatic texts, such as the shepherd comedy Pripovijes kako se Venera božica užeže u ljubav lijepoga Adona u komediju stavljena (The Tale of the Passionate Love of Venus the Goddess to Adonis Contained in the Form of a Comedy), there appears a paraphrase of Menčetić’s work in the words of nymphs who praise the love goddess’s beauty. “Blažani čas i hip” is a text whose quasi-litanic structure is unique, but it was a source of inspiration for other authors. Blaženi čas i hip najprvo kada sam ja vidil tvoj obraz lip od koga slava sja. Blažena sva mista kada te gdi vidih, dni, noći, godišta koja te ja slidih.

26 Dunja Fališevac, “Petrarkin sonet br. LXI kao citatni predložak hrvatskim ranonovovjekovnim pjesnicima,” [“Petrarch’s Sonnet LXI as a Model for Early Renaissance Croatian Poets”] in Slike starog Dubrovnika. Filološke i književnoantropološke studije (Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 2013): 37. 27 Dživo Bunić Vučić, Izabrane pjesme [Collected Songs], ed. Dunja Fališevac (Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 1998), 33. 28 Vinko Valčić, “Jerolim Vidulić, najstariji hrvatski pjesnik Zadra,” [“Jerolim Vidulić, the Oldest Croatian Poet in Zadar”] in Zbornik Instituta za historijske nauke u Zadru (Zadar: Institut za historijske nauke u Zadru, 1995), 12–18. 29 “Pjesme Mavra Vetranića Čavčića, II,” [“The Songs of Mavra Vetranića Čavčića, II”] in Stari pisci hrvatski, eds. Vatroslav Jagić, Ivan August Kazančić, and Đuro Daničić, vol. 4 (Zagreb: Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti, 1872), ll. 1609–1626.

264

Emilian Prałat

Blažen čas i vrime najprvo kada čuh ljeposti tve ime kojoj dah vas posluh […]30 [Blessed was the hour and moment when / I saw your beautiful face that radiated with light. / Blessed are the places where I saw you / Days, nights, years, and the time when I first heard / Your beautiful name, to which one’s breath remains obedient]

In the seventeenth century Sacer Helikon, a text by Kajetan Vičić from Rijeka, was written. Vičić created the most extensive corpus of Latinist texts in Croatian literature. As a person he remains enigmatic. The second part of his corpus, Montes Mariani, mostly consists of iambic dimeters and anacreontics, with numerous alternating rhymes. A lot of the texts send us directly to litany.31 What also deserves our attention here are the ABC songs (“abecedne pjesme”) by Pavao Ritera Vitezovicia (1652–1713), and particularly Alphabeticum encomii Mariani, which consists of couplets, where both stichs begin with the same letter of the alphabet. The poem is stylized to resemble the Litany of Loreto and contains enumerations of Marian addresses and many references to the Biblical metaphors.32 What affected eighteenth and nineteenth-century poetry was the absolutism of Joseph II and the consequent Germanization and Magyarization of Croatian political and cultural life. In 1806 the republic of Dubrovnik fell. Slovenian culture experienced the aggressive policies of the neighbouring countries even more acutely, which was reflected in the number of texts written, including litanic poems.

Conclusio When one analyzes Serbian, Bulgarian, and Croatian literary heritage from the point of view of litanic verse, a list of conclusions may be drawn. The folklore and the oral poetry of Southern Slavic countries demonstrate the existence of some quasi-litanic forms, which, however, do not have Christian sources, which it is necessary to emphasize here. Consequently, the forms have to be treated as a coexisting tendency, which is competitive in relation to litanic verse as it functioned in the West. This litanic verse has its materializations in Southern Slavic countries, but they are sparse in comparison with the rest of the literary output there. Translated from Polish by Anna Czarnowus 30 Ibid., 37. 31 Gorana Stepanić, Hrvatsko pjesništvo na latinskom u sedemnaestom stoljeću stilske tendencje i žanrovski inventar [Croatian Seventeenth-Century Latinist Poetry: Rhetoric Tendencies and Generic Inventory] (Zagreb: Gorana Stepanić, 2005), 164. 32 Ibid., 209.

Jacek Głażewski University of Warsaw

A Separate World. Russian Poetry Between the Native and the Universal It is indubitable that Russian literature, complex and diverse as it is, for many centuries has remained in a state of tension between native and universal elements. The former were deemed to be the cornerstone of national culture, while the latter provided a framework for the lasting values of Western European culture. The characteristic division into two strands may be noticed in most literary epochs, and it has frequently contributed to the shaping of the writers’ consciousness and to the technique of prose writers, poets, and playwrights. The quintessence of this consciousness is the feeling of uniqueness that is built within the dialectics of isolation: it is the feeling that in Russia everything is different, specifically Russian, and results from certain endemic shape of the culture. Both litany as a type of prayer and litanic verse as a type of text have been present in Russian culture and literature. However, one may argue that litany and litanic verse adopted a very specific form in Russian literature, as the history of older literature shows.

1 Before the eighteenth century, Old Russian literature did not include any poetic forms, literary fiction, or other elements of literariness. In Псалтырь рифмотворная (Rhymed Psalter) Simeon Polotsky (1629–1680) introduced syllabic verse into Russian literature. The Psalter included 30.000 lines, which made up 1.246 texts, and the book was published in the year of its author’s death. Until 1735 it remained the only anthology of poetry in Russian.1 The Old Russian literature that arose and developed in the Eastern Slavonic regions is usually discussed not in terms of aesthetic criteria, which would allow us to see in it the dominant features of the European Middle Ages, Renaissance, baroque age, and classicism, but in terms of political and territorial conditioning. 1 Cf. Bogusław Mucha, Historia literatury rosyjskiej od początków do czasów najnowszych [The History of Russian Literature from Its Beginnings to Modern Times] (Wrocław: Ossolineum, 2002), 70–71.

266

Jacek Głażewski

Its chronology would then include roots in the legacy of Kievian Rus (from the eleventh to the thirteenth century), the period of North-East Russia (the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries), and the period of Muscovite Russia (the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries).2 Obviously the aesthetic criteria are also applicable to Old Russian literature, since we may discuss the baroque and classicism (during the reign of Peter I and in the middle of the eighteenth century), but the texts are related to the question of state control: they illustrate aspirations and political ambitions along with what they lead to. The state control conditioning described above results in the uniqueness of the literature, which is noticeable in a number of elements. The first one is the lack of the Renaissance. We may acknowledge that in the period that in other European countries is termed the Renaissance there lived some writers who were undoubtedly humanists, for instance Maximus the Greek, who in 1518 revised Псалтырь (The Psalter Explained), a prayer book for educated Russians and one of the two extant editions of the Psalms of David, which was written in the eleventh century and included allegorical commentaries to the Book of Psalms. Nevertheless, the writing of the period up to the sixteenth century is all termed “medieval Russian literature.” The second element is of a linguistic and stylistic nature and should be related to the influence of Greek and Byzantine culture on Russia. From the ninth century, when the Bible was translated by Cyril and Methodius, Orthodox Slavonic regions shared the Old Church Slavonic language, which was the language of both liturgy and literature. There also existed the Old Russian language in the Eastern Slavonic regions, which was the language of institutions and politics. From the perspective of the stylistic component of literary discourse one should also note the use of the “interweaving of words” (“плетение словес”). This was a specific style that appeared in Old Russian literature after the Tartar occupation ended. In 1237–1240 Mongols included almost all of Russia in the Golden Horde ruled by Batu Khan, which marked the beginning of almost 250 years of occupation which isolated Russia from Europe and Byzantium.3

2 Cf. Bogusław Mucha, 13–54; Дмитрий Лихачев, Развитие русской литературы Х–XVII вв.: Эпохи и стили [The Development of Russian Literature from the Tenth to the Seventeenth Century: Epochs and Styles] (Ленинград: Наука, 1973), passim. 3 Cf. “Złota Orda i historyczny problem ‘zacofania” Rusi’,” [“The Golden Horde and the Historical Problem of Russia’s ‘Backwardness’”] in Historia powszechna [A World History], ed. Massimo L. Salvadori (Warszawa: Agora, 2007), vol. 8: Od imperium Karola Wielkiego do kryzysu XIV wieku [From Charlemagne’s Empire to the Crisis of the Fourteenth Century], 501–506.

Russian Poetry Between the Native and the Universal

267

In the fourteenth century literary activities started to intensify in Russia. The reinstitution of scholarly and cultural exchange with the Balkans was one of the main incentives. Researchers consider the linguistic and stylistic reform from the so-called Tarnovo School and from the circles of the patriarch Euthymius of Tarnovo to be the most momentous consequence of the reinstitution. A lot of texts were written in accordance with the style of “interweaving of words” (“плетение словес”), for instance the hagiographic texts by Pachomius Logothetes. The period of Muscovite Russia was fundamental for Russian culture, since it had all the qualities of a new start. During the reign of Ivan the Terrible the extant tradition was put together in the form of compilations, such as Великие четьи-минеи (The Great Reading Menaion), which included practically everything: the Bible, Патерики (Pateryky), homilies, Russian hagiographies, the writings of the Church Fathers, travelogues, state documents, and even Flavius Josephus’s Jewish War. Paradoxically, in the wealth of texts it would be difficult to find elements of litany in the precise meaning of the term, since it was considered to be a foreign thing, to be exact a Catholic one.4 The Old Russian uniqueness consisted in focusing on the ektenial prayer, which was present in various rites of the Divine Liturgy. The ektenial quality manifests itself in the prayer dialog of invocations that is exchanged between the deacon and the faithful. In the liturgical literature related to Russian culture one may distinguish the Great Ektene, the Augmented Ektene, the Ektene of Supplication, the Ektene of Thanksgiving, the Ektene of the Catechumens, the Ektene of the Faithful, the Ektene for the Dead, etc. The range of influence exerted by the Akathist Hymn is an important cultural context here.5

2 In Russian language literature one may note the presence of litanic verse, which is not a form of prayer, i.e. it is not litany in the liturgical sense, even though one should be aware of the tension between litany and ektene. Litany would situate itself within the sphere of the influence of:

4 Cf. “Литания,” [“Litany”] in Большая Советская Энциклопедия [The Great Soviet Encyclopaedia], ed. Бориc А. Введенский (Москва: Советская энциклопедия, 1954), vol. 25, 218. 5 Cf. Akathistos. Bizantyjski hymn dziękczynny ku czci matki Bożej z VI wieku [Akathistos: The Sixth-Century Byzantian Supplicatory Hymn Devoted to the Virgin Mary], trans. Mieczysław Bednarz SJ, ed. Andrzej Bober SJ, Znak 131(1965): 636–647.

268

Jacek Głażewski

i. T h e  f a c t o r s  l i n k e d  t o  p o e t i c  c o m p o s i t i o n,  such as formulaic quality, sequencing, and anaphoric quality. This could be exemplified by texts clearly inspired by religion, for instance Слово о погыбели Рускыя земли (The Tale of the Ruin of the Russian Land), a few dozen poems which are really rhythmic prose, devoted to the war demolition from the period of the Mongol raid and to apology of the fauna, flora, territory, and attributes of greatness; hence the sacred symbols of the Russian state. О свътло свътлaя и укрaшенa земля Руськaя! И многыми крaсотaми удивленa єси […]. [Oh, Russian Land full of light and beautifully adorned! There are so many things worthy of admiration in you.]6

Putting aside the value of Old Russian translations of liturgy — such as Missals, the Horologion, and Liturgical Menaions, a books of prayers and songs of Byzantine provenance from 1095–1097, ordered like in a religious service — litanic elements or stylistic traces of such poetics may be found in other state-founding texts (related to state control and politics), such as Слово о законе и благодати (Sermon on the Order and Grace) by Hilarion, Metropolitan of Kiev, Поучение Мономаха (Monomachus’s Instruction), and Похвальное  словo  о Тверском великом князе Борисе Александровиче (The Eulogy of the Grand Prince Boris Aleksandrovich). ii. T h e  f a c t o r s  s e c o n d a r i l y  l i n k e d  t o  p o e t i c  c o m p o s i t i o n,  such as lists of enumerations (of names, attributes, deeds, merits, series of apostrophes). This may be exemplified by Слово о Меркурии Смоленском (The Tale of Mercurius of Smolensk), Степенная книга (The Book of Degrees of the Tsar’s Genealogy), Лицевой летописный свод (The Illustrated Chronicle of Ivan the Terrible). Litanic tropes in the literature of folk origin provide us with a completely different research topic. Here the difficulty lies in the texts being written down as late as the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, which makes them illustrate concatenation or quasi-concatenation. This is the case of an excerpt from Песнь о Щелкане (The Song of Shchelkan):

6 “Rulit.ru,” accessed July 1, 2015, http://www.rulit.me/books/ukraina-ot-mifa-kkatastrofe-read-224556-36.html.

Russian Poetry Between the Native and the Universal

269

У которова денег нет, У тово дитя возьмет; У которова дитя нет, У того жену возьмет; У котораго жены-та нет, Тово самово головой возьмет. [The one who does not have money / Will have his children taken away from him / The one who is deprived of his children, / Will have his wife taken away from him; / The one who no longer has a wife, / Will put down his head.]7

In literary folklore there are various catalogue poems, which could have anaphoric elements or those of a repeatable order that relates primarily to narration, and then they would echo litanic verse or present a tradition coexistent with it. Until the sixteenth century, the number of litanic poems in Russian literature is not large, a circumstance which has to be related to the political context of the time. Literature is increasingly influenced by litanic tradition at a time when isolation decreases or is ended either by choice or due to political and military events. Therefore, the most interesting phenomena related to litanic verse in Russian culture occur almost exclusively at the crossroads of cultures. The seventeenth century is particularly rich in such changes for the reasons given above.

3 From the perspective of politics, again this is not the happiest time in the history of Russia. The so-called “time of troubles” paradoxically contributed to the strengthening of the relationship with religious and spiritual life, which is also observable in Russian culture. To quote Rostysław Radyszewśkyj: The seventeenth century […] is a period of violent changes both in the sociopolitical and in the cultural and literary life. In the intellectual elites of the society at the time there arises the need to safeguard and care about one’s cultural heritage, upon which the idea of Slavonic revival was founded. Simultaneously, numerous outstanding writers and preachers tried to ensure the continuity of Byzantine Orthodox tradition by reforming it in such a manner so that it could coexist with the powerful Catholic tradition.8

7 “Feb-web.ru,” accessed June, 10, 2015, http://feb-web.ru/feb/byliny/texts/kir/kir-024-. htm (ll. 35–40). 8 Rostysław Radyszewśkyj, Polskojęzyczna poezja ukraińska od końca XVI do początku XVIII wieku [The Polish-Language Ukrainian Poetry from the End of the Sixteenth to the Beginning of the Eighteenth Century] (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Oddziału Polskiej Akademii Nauk, 1996), vol. I: Monografia [Monograph], 87.

270

Jacek Głażewski

In seventeenth-century Russian literature there were several ways of propagating European elements. One of them is particularly important. Its nature is educational and didactic and it is associated with the activities of academic schools in Russia, and, to be specific, with the syllabus monopoly of the Mohyla Academy in Kiev. Most of the other didactic institutions were closely related to the college with their teaching faculty and syllabus. This is where the most dynamic transmission of cultural and literary influences occurred, which would produce literary works of distinctly European character in the centuries to come. The key to understanding the transmission process is to comprehend the great role played by translations on the one hand, and on the other hand by the range of exempla from Polish literature that may be found in the poetics textbooks and the syllabi of teaching literature in those institutions.9 As scholars claim: The baroque arrived to Russia from Poland, Ukraine, and Belarus. […] In the seventeenth century it had the function of Renaissance in Russia. The baroque […] introduced elements of enlightenment culture, developed the belief in reason and science, and inspired hope for reform in the state and the society. In its original forms, i.e. in the form creatively reworked in Russia, baroque is milder and more humane.10

We may tentatively state that litanic verse in Russian seventeenth-century poetry did not appear very frequently, even in religious poetry, which may be compared to the crisis concerning its presence in Polish literature and the awareness of the literary importance of the genre.11 There are only dispersed instances of it, but they appear in the poetry of the most renowned poets, such as Simeon Polotsky. The technical dominant may consist in the formulaic nature and anaphoric lists whose character is ektenial; there also occur enumerations and the accumula-

9 Cf. Ryszard Łużny, Pisarze kręgu Akademii Kijowsko-Mohylańskiej a literatura polska. Z dziejów związków literackich polsko-wschodniosłowiańskich [The Writers of the Mohyla Academy in Kiev and Polish Literature: From the History of Polish-Eastern Slavonic Literary Relations] (Kraków: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, 1966), passim and Paulina Lewin, “Wykłady poetyki w szkołach rosyjskich od końca wieku XVII do roku 1774. Stan posiadania i postulaty badawcze,” [“Lectures on Poetics in Russian Schools from the End of the Seventeenth Century to 1774”] Slavia Orientalis 2(1968): 153–157. 10 Вера Лихачева, Дмитрий Лихачев, Художественное наследие Древней Руси и современность [Artistic Heritage of Ancient Rus in Our Time] (Ленинград: Наука, 1971), 75. 11 Cf. Witold Sadowski, Litania i poezja. Na materiale literatury polskiej od XI do XXI wieku [Litany and Poetry. On the Body of Material of Polish Literature from the Eleventh to the Twenty-First Century] (Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2011), 186–193.

Russian Poetry Between the Native and the Universal

271

tion of epithets, which entail alliteration. This may testify to the “dispersal” of the awareness of litanic poetics in contrast to the Biblical order and the literary inspirations grounded in the Old and New Testaments.12 This may be illustrated by the paraphrase of Kochanowski’s Psałterz Dawidów (David’s Psalter) made by Simeon Polotsky, Псалтырь рифмотворная (Rhymed Psalter) (1680). Polotsky’s paraphrase uses poetic devices that occur in the psalms not belonging to the prototype of litanic verse, for example Psalm 34:103, and 145.13 A similar technique can be found in the seventy-line anonymous “Молитва” (“Prayer”) where there are repetitive apostrophes and polyonymic and ektenial elements.14 What is interesting is that this gradual popularizing of litanic verse elements that are related to poetry composition influenced the conceptual shift within the sphere of profane subject matter, which was characteristic of another stage in litanic verse history, i.e. the eighteenth and the nineteenth centuries. The shift is observable in Stefan Yavorsky’s poem about books which was written in the first decade of the eighteenth century: Книги […] Свѣть очїю моею […]! Вы богатство, выслава мнѣ велика, Вы рай, любви радость и сладость колика, Вы мене прославили, вы меня просвѣтіли, Вы мнѣ у лиць высокихь милость приобрѣли. [Books […] the light of my life […]! / You are wealth, you are my great fame / You are paradise, the joy of love, and no minor sweetness / You have made me famous, you have made me enlightened / You have gained me respect of important persons.]15

12 Criticism on the subject indicates the prototypical nature of Psalms 118 and 136 and excerpts from the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (Mt 15:22; Lk 17:13); cf. Jack Myers, Michael Simms, Dictionary and Handbook of Poetry (New York: Longman, 1985), 168, John Anthony Cuddon, A Dictionary of Literary Terms (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1984), 365 and “Litany,” in Encyklopedia katolicka [The Catholic Encyclopaedia] (Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL, 2004), vol. X, 1169. 13 Cf. Симеон Полоцкий, Избранные сочинения [Selected Works], ed. Игорь П. Еремин (Москва–Ленинград, Академия Наук СССР, 1953), 85–92. This edition shows that litanic verse may be found in 5,16% of Simeon Polotsky’s poetry. 14 Cf. Библиотека литературы Древней Руси [The Library of Old Russian Literature], ed. Сергей И. Николаев (Санкт-Петербург: Наука, 2014), vol. 18: XVIII век [The Seventeenth Century], 373–374. 15 Cf. Сергей И. Маслов, Библиотека Стефана Яворского [Stefan Javorsky’s Library] (Киев: Типография Мейнандера, 1914), 136 (ll. 1–2; 9–12); if not marked otherwise, all the translations of excerpts from Russian poetry were made by the translator of this essay in agreement with its author.

272

Jacek Głażewski

4 The eighteenth century, which is also termed the “Bronze Age,” was a fundamental time in the history of Russian literature.16 The social and cultural life was reorganized with a view to modern models and influences, the educational system was reorganized, many spheres of culture developed, and all this produced a situation where Belles lettres lagged behind reality, since they could not register and artistically describe those processes adequately. The fight between the “old” and the “new” took place in the first decades of the eighteenth century and found its reflection in the writing of the time. What shaped the artistic make-up of the writing was a clash between tradition and innovativeness, radicalism and conservatism, and the combination of entirely opposing elements, which mutually excluded each other.17

Antiokh Kantemir, Mikhail Lomonosov, Aleksandr Sumarokov, Vasily Trediakovsky, Aleksandr Radishchev, Denis Fonvizin, Aleksandr Griboyedov, Nikolay Karamzin, and Ivan Krylov are the most renowned writers of this period. It is probably the first moment in the history of Russian literature when writers begin to gain influence and renown outside Russia.18 Russian culture distinctly opens itself to German, French, Italian, and English influences, and turns away from Polish and Ukrainian ones. Perhaps this is the proper context for explaining the increased interest in litanic verse on the part of Russian poets. Rooted in the idea of république des lettres, the universal concept of writing rejected the historicallyconditioned divisions, such as religious ones, and abolished the traditional distance from forms, genres, and techniques that were inherently foreign and associated with cultural domination. The tendency started in the first decades of the eighteenth century, developed in the nineteenth, and reached its culmination in twentieth-century poetry. What could also have influenced this tendency was the regularity characteristic of post-Enlightenment European writing, which was a loosening of rigor in terms of genres, since they became related to literary issues and no longer to the question of how texts were used: The system of genres based on literary issues was adopted in modern times, i.e. in the eighteenth century. In the twentieth century almost each text is a new genre or a variation

16 Cf. Reflections on Russia in the Eighteenth Century, ed. Joachim Klein, Simon Dixon, and Maarten Fraanje, (Köln: Böhlau Verlag, 2001), passim. 17 Bogusław Mucha, Historia literatury rosyjskiej, 81. 18 Cf. Сергей И. Николаев, “Антиох Кантемир в польском журнале XVIII века,” [“Antiokh Kantemir in Polish Eighteenth-Century Writing”] Русская Литература 3(1993): 64–65.

Russian Poetry Between the Native and the Universal

273

on the genre. […] A strict idea of the genre system as something imposed on a text from the outside gradually ceased to exist as a necessary element.19

In other words, the formal elements of distinct poetic expression are more related to the subject of the creative act than to the conditioning of the system. The new individualism of the communicative perspective led to verification and testing of their usefulness in the case of a number of genres, hence the versatility and wealth of genres in the poetry of the period. This may be exemplified by the poetry of Aleksandr Sumarokov, among which one can find songs, madrigals, stanzas, eclogues, sonnets, epigrams, satires, idylls, odes, and psalm paraphrases.20 Sumarokov’s texts include a cycle of poetic prayers (1759) which use the mechanisms of litanic verse, such as invocations consisting of series of apostrophes, syntactic parallelisms, and the formulaic character of addressing the Creator: Отче наш, небесный Царь, Коему подвластна вся на свете тварь, Коему послушна суша, море, реки, Горы и леса, Солнце и луна, звезды, небеса, Да Твое святится, Боже, имя ввеки, Да приидет царствие Твое, И в Твоей да будет воле Все селение сие.21 [Our Father, the tsar of heavens, / To whom each soul is subjected, / Whom droughts, the sea, rivers, mountains, and forests obey, / The sun and the moon, the stars, the skies – / May Your name be holy for ever and ever / May Your kingdom come / And may everything come which is Your will.]

This individual perspective on the pardon of sins, combined with the apology of divine attributes and deeds, needs to be associated with litanic verse, which was inspired by the psalmic tradition.

19 Вера Лихачева, Дмитрий Лихачев, 133. 20 Cf. Historia literatury rosyjskiej [A History of Russian Literature], ed. Marian Jakóbiec (Warszawa: PWN, 1976), vol. I, 221–232 and Кирилл Тарновский, “К характеристике русского четырехстопного ямба XVIII века: Ломоносов, Тредиаковский, Сумароков,” [“A Description of the Eighteenth-Century Iambic Tetrameter: Lomonosov, Trediakovsky, Sumarokov”] in Русские двусложные размеры [Russian Dimeters], eds. Видa Тарановская-Джонсон, Джеймс Бейли, Александр В. Прохоров (Москва: Языки славянской культуры, 2010), 398–444. 21 Молитвы русских поэтов, XI–XIX. Антология [Prayers by Russian Poets: An Anthology], ed. Виктор И. Калугин (Москва: Вече, 2012), 670 (l. 1–9).

274

Jacek Głażewski

5 In nineteenth-century Russian writing the most accomplished texts are those in written in prose and not in verse. This is why in the period identified as the “Golden Age” of Russian literature, litanic verse has to be looked for in the work of lesser-known poets. Gavrila Derzhavin was an author whose poems linked classicism and preromanticism, and which transcended the limitations of traditional poetics. As a versatile poet, Derzhavin excelled as a lyric writer who undertook religious topics and opposed the influence of French Enlightenment materialism. He wrote a number of odes, such as “Бог” (“God”), “Бессмертие души” (“The Eternity of the Soul”), and “Христос” (“Christ”), and other poems where one observes such litanic elements as anaphoric liturgical formulae with ektenial function. The lateeighteenth-century “Молитва” (“Prayer”) and “Покаяние” (“Atonement”), which were published in 1813, exemplify this well: О Боже, душ Творец бессмертных И всех, где существует кто! О Единица числ несметных, Без коей все они – ничто! О Средоточие! Согласье! Все содержащая Любовь! Источник жизни, блага, счастья, И малых и больших миров! [Oh, God, Creator of eternal souls / And everything that exists! / Oh, the unity of what is eternal / Without the eternal there is nothing! / Oh, Harmony! Equilibrium! / The Love that focalizes everything! / The source of life, happiness, and sense, / Of the universe and all that is in it!] Помилуй мя, о Боже! по велицей Мне милости Твоей, По множеству щедрот, Твоей десницей Сгладь грех с души моей;22

22 Молитвы русских поэтов [Prayers by Russian Poets], ed. Виктoр В. Горбунов, Вадим И. Десятерик (Москва: Фонд Сытина, 2005), 29–35 (ll. 1–8; ll. 1–5). On the poetics of Derzhavin’s poems cf. Hаталья Д. Кочеткова, Литература русского сентиментализма. (Эстетические и художественные искания) [The Literature of Russian Sentimentalism. (Aesthetic and Artistic Excursions)] (Санкт Петербург: Наука, 1994) and Юрий И. Минералов, Теория художественной словесности [The Theory of the Artistic Text] (Москва: Владос, 1999).

Russian Poetry Between the Native and the Universal

275

[Have mercy upon me, Lord! / In accordance with your mercy / And diverse attributes, / May your left hand wash away / Sin from my soul!]

The long poems by Sergey Shirinski-Shikhmatov have similar import, for instance “Песнь Сотворившему вся” (“Song of the Creator of Everything”) from 1817, and so do the numerous poems of Fyodor Glinka “Гимн Богу” (“Hymn to God”), “Голос к Всевышнему” (“Appeal to the Highest One”), “Богу Спасителю” (“To the Saviour”), “Праздник души” (“Feast for the Soul”), and “Покаяние” (“Atonement,” from 1819–1820), and poems by Mikhail Dmitriev “Молитва” (“Prayer”) from 1843, “Исповедь” (“Confession”) from 1847, and “Мир всем” (“Peace to All”) from 1848, by Ivan Nikitin “Молитва дитяти” (“Children’s Prayer”) from 1853, by Lev Mey “Молитва” (“Prayer” from 1861), and by Yakov Polonsky “Молитва” (“Prayer”) from 1855. What is interesting is that Aleksandr Pushkin, the greatest poet in the history of Russian literature, who was able to combine the classical, sentimentalist, and pre-romantic tradition in his work and introduce into it a variety of forms, genres, and topics, did not use litanic verse at all. In some of his poems we may only find reverberations of the mechanisms that rule litanic verse poetics, such as anaphoras, more rarely epiphoras, and enumerations along with lists of epithets, to mention only excerpts from “Городок” (“The Town”), the ode “Лицинию” (“To Licinius”), and the poem “Деревня” (“Village”). What needs to be emphasized is the fact that Pushkin uses this technique in secular poetry, for instance in “К р и с т а л,  п о э т о м о б н о в л е н н ы й” (“Glow up, Renewed Crystal”) and “Туча” (“The Cloud”): Последняя туча рассеянной бури! Одна ты несешься по ясной лазури, Одна ты наводишь унылую тень, Одна ты печалишь ликующий день.23 [Oh, the last cloud in the azure of the sky! / You are the only wandering one even though the wind blew away the storm, / You are the only one to throw a somber shadow, / You are the only one to make a jolly day sad.]

What seems to have intensified the presence of litanic elements, which referred to Western European tradition, in nineteenth-century Russian poetry was the criticism by Vissarion Belinsky, particularly in Разделение поэзии на роды и виды (The Division of Poetry into Modes and Genres), 1841, and “Речь о критике” (“A Discourse on Criticism”), 1842, Valerian Maykov Нечто о русской литературе в 23 “Feb-web.ru,” accessed August 22, 2015, http://feb-web.ru/feb/pushkin/texts/push17/ vol03/y03-381-.htm (ll. 1–4).

276

Jacek Głażewski

1846 году (A Few Words on Russian Literature in 1846), and Apollon Grigoryev Русская изящная литература в 1851 году (Russian Literature in 1851), and the social and philosophical activities of Pyotr Chaadayev (Философические письмa (Philosophical Letters) from 1829–1831) and Aleksandr Herzen (especially Былое и думы (My Past and Thoughts) from 1852–1868). The tropes that had appeared in the Russian literary corpus of earlier ages returned in the criticism under different names; it was the debate of the so-called westernizers and Slavophiles; there was also emphasis on the religious perspective on intellectual exploration. The latter topic plays an important role in the literature and specifically in twentieth-century poetry, which is visible in the influence exerted by Lev Shestov and Nikolay Berdyayev.24

6 Elements of litanic verse are observable in writers of most movements and poetic schools from the turn of the twentieth century. The “Silver Age” of Russian literature is dated from 1880 to 191725 and includes symbolists, acmeists, futurists, poets of the peasant movement, and centrifugists. In this context the symbolists’ poetry deserves particular attention. They paid close heed to the extremely subjective emotional perspective of artistic expression and often referred to mythological motifs and visual, colour, and sound effects deeply grounded in European literary tradition. The poetry of Konstantin Balmont provides us with a good example of this, since he related his work to litanic verse both in the early poem “Молитва,” (“Prayer”) from the collection Под северным небом (Under the Northern Sky), 1894, and in his later poems: Ты – шелест нежного листка, Ты – ветер, шепчущий украдкой, Ты – свет, бросаемый лампадкой, Где брезжи тсладкая тоска.26

24 Cf. Wiktoria Krzemień, Filozofia w cieniu prawosławia. Rosyjscy myśliciele religijni przełomu XIX i XX wieku [Philosophy in the Shadow of the Orthodox Church: Russian Religious Thinkers at the Turn of the Twentieth Century] (Warszawa: Wydawnictwo PAX, 1979), passim. 25 Cf. Bogusław Mucha, Historia literatury rosyjskiej, 379–380. 26 Поэзия серебряного века [Poetry of the Silver Age], ed. Сергей А. Порецкий (Москва: Фирма СТД, 2011), 173, ll. 1–4. Cf. Hаталья A. Молчанова, Поэзия К. Д. Бальмонта 1890-х–1910-х годов: Проблемы творческой эволюции [Konstantin Balmont’s Poetry Between 1890 and 1910: Problems of Creative Evolution] (Москва: Mосковский педагогический государственный университет, 2002).

Russian Poetry Between the Native and the Universal

277

[You — delicate rustling of a leave, / You — stealthily whispering wind / You — the world by the light of a lamp, /When sweet boredom is flickering.]

Among Russian symbolists who used litanic verse in reference to desacralized reality at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century, there were Nikolay Minsky (“Осенняя песня,” (“The Autumn Song”) from 1896), Vyacheslav Ivanov (“Любовь,” (“Love”) from 1903), Zinaida Gippius (“Ты,” (“You”) from 1905), and Aleksandr Blok (“Aнгел-хранитель,” (“Guardian Angel”) from 1906): Люблю Тебя, Ангел-Хранитель во мгле. Во мгле, что со мною всегда на земле. За то, что ты светлой невестой была, За то, что ты тайну мою отняла. За то, что связала нас тайна и ночь, Что ты мне сестра, и невеста, и дочь. За то, что нам долгая жизнь суждена, О, даже за то, что мы — муж и жена! За цепи мои и заклятья твои. За то, что над нами проклятье семьи. За то, что не любишь того, что люблю. За то, что о нищих и бедных скорблю. За то, что не можем согласно мы жить. За то, что хочу и не смею убить — 27 [Guardian Angel, I love you in the mist. / The mist that trails behind me on the ground. / You were my betrothed in light, / You discovered my secret, / You were bound to me with the night of love, / You are my betrothed, daughter, and sister. / For our being sentenced to living so long, / For the fact of our being — a man and his wife! / For my bounds and your enchantments, / For the curse of relatives that haunts us, / For your not loving what I love, / For my sobbing over beggars and the poor. / For your not understanding me and my not understanding you, / For my intention to kill and for my not being able to —]

27 “StihRus.ru,”accessed August 22, 2015, http://stihrus.ru/stih-3-1406.html (ll. 1–14). Cf. Леонид М. Маллер, “Семантическая оппозиция „дактиль – анапест” в ранней поэзии А. Блока,” [“The Semantic Opposition Dactyl-Anapaest in A. Blok’s Poetry”] in Модели культуры: Mежвузовский сборник научных трудов, посвященный 60-летию профессора Вадимa С. Баевского, [Models of Culture: Studies for Professor V.S. Bayevsky on his Sixtieth Birthday] ed. Гeннaдий С. Меркин (Смоленск: Смоленский государственный педагогический институт имени Карла Маркса, 1992), 65–79.

278

Jacek Głażewski

In the confession made to his beloved wife one may note distinct references to the European love lyric tradition: to Catullus’s poems (“Odi et amo”) and Petrarch’s poetry (the motif of donna angelicata). The formulaic quality and repetitiveness of phrases makes the confession a hectic prayer stretched between two emotional extremes, fascination and aversion, which gradually leads to a change in tone to iconoclastic, sacrilegious, and blasphemous. In this manner the quasi-litanic parallelism of lines in Blok’s prayer metamorphoses into a nearly revolutionary declaration of longing for change in the world order. Unfortunately, the poems above constitute single exempla of litanic verse and such is also the case with outstanding examples of litanic structure poems by Valery Bryusov and Nikolay Dobrolyubov. The praise of agglomeration, which becomes a region of the present-day sacrum, presages the futurist apologetics of modern civilization even though it still uses traditional poetic devices: Стальной, кирпичный и стеклянный, Сетями проволок обвит, Ты — чарователь неустанный, Ты — не слабеющий магнит. Драконом хищным и бескрылым, Засев […]28 [Of steel, glass, and brick, / Clad in the network of quavering rods, / You — never ending wizardry, / You — never weakening magnet. // You – a dragon wingless and rotten […]].

The city inspires both fascination and abhorrence. Its space, structure, and expansiveness are so modern that Bryusov employs naturalistic metaphors and comparisons to explain the nature of this technological marvel and he refers to folk literature (folktales and legends), in which a dragon symbolizes force and evil, but simultaneously guards immeasurable treasure. This contradictory perspective builds up suspense, which culminates with the vision of the imminent destruction of civilization. At the opposite end of this vision there is an observer from Nikolay Dobrolyubov’s poem with the incipit „Мир вам, о горы!” (“Peace be with you, mountains”). The pantheist perspective elevates the sense of belonging to the universe that is expressed by the lyrical “I” and embraces consecutive spheres:

28 “Emsu.ru,” accessed August 22, 2015, http://emsu.ru/um/poetry/brusov.htm (ll. 5–10). Cf. Сергей И. Гиндин, “Вклад Брюсова в изучение теории русской поэтической речи,” [“Bryusov’s Contribution to Research in the Theory of Russian Poetic Discourse”] Русский язык в школе 6(1973): 22–30.

Russian Poetry Between the Native and the Universal

279

Мир вам, о горы! Молчанье ночи — Сила моя. Молитва единая, Имя Единое — Скала моя. Чаща лесная, Где бродят отшельники, — Радость моя. Где прыгают зайцы, Где горные козы, — Земля моя. Сны и виденья — Призраки мира И мир невещественный — Борьба моя.29 [Peace be with you, mountains! / Silence of the night / — My force. // Only a prayer, / Only the name / — My rock // The forest thicket, / Where hermits wade / — My joy. // Where hares leap / And mountain goats jump/ — My soil. // Dreams and visions — / Specters / Of the unreal / — My fight.]

Members of the acmeist movement employed litanic verse in a more sparing manner, which is surprising when one considers the tendencies characteristic of their technique: masterful control of forms, symmetric structure, lucidness of structure and composition, but also a certain sparing quality in the choice of the means of expression. Nevertheless, in the work of the two most interesting acmeist poets, Osip Mandelshtam, “Я пью за военные астры…” (“I will drink for the wartime asters…”) and Nikolay Gumilyov, in excerpts from “Капитаны,” (“Captains”) there appear references to litanic verse.

7 The last group that referred to literary tradition before the outbreak of the Russian revolution, even though they tried to rebuild poetic language and referred to the tradition in an avant garde and sometimes crude manner, was the futurists. Affinity with litanic verse may be found in some poems by the cubist-futurist leader, Velimir Khlebnikov, for instance in such early texts as the poems that begin with „Вечер. Тени” (“Evening. Shadows”) and “заклятие смехом” (“Enchantment with Laughter”) or a much later epigram from 1912: 29 Поэзия серебряного века, 62 (ll. 1–16).

280

Jacek Głażewski

Когда умирают кони — дышат, Когда умирают травы — сохнут, Когда умирают солнца — они гаснут, Когда умирают люди — поют песни.30 [When horses die — they neigh / When grasses die — they go dry, / When suns die — they fade,/ When people die — the songs cry out.]

The death parallelism that dominates in the world of nature, expressed by Khlebnikov by juxtaposing the last moments of animals, plants, and stars, does not find its direct equivalent in human life. What individualizes the poet’s work is the meta-literary conviction about the value of poetry itself; the reason for the existence of the value is precisely the cultural and existential context in which this value appears. The year 1917 sharply separated Russian literature from the Soviet version and writing entered a gloomy and sinister period of its history. The time of trials and writing without hope for publication started, since in political life terror reigned, while in literature there ruled thoughtless social realism. Litanic verse was expelled from the realm of literature.

8 Despite its specificity, Russian literature belongs to the group of great national literatures. Its history provides us with a perfect example of the dialectic of both approaching and distancing oneself from the centres of European culture, and the interminable efforts of writers and thinkers, who tried to put this conditioning to good use. To cite Pyotr Chaadayev: Russia is one whole separate world, obedient to the will, caprice, and fantasy of one man, and it does not matter whether the man’s name is Peter or Ivan […]. This is why it would be useful not only in the interest of other nations, but also in its own interest, to make it take a different path.31

Russian poetry treated litanic verse as a culturally alien element. Nevertheless, it noticed its presence and even spotted the sphere when it appeared; it tried to 30 Ibid., 533, ll. 1–4. For the poetics of Khlebnikov’s poems cf. Илья В. Альтман, “Традиционная семантика метра в поэзии В. Хлебникова: 4-стопной хорей,” [“The Traditional Semantics of Meter in Khlebnikov’s Poetry: Trochaic Tetrameter”] in Язык русской поэзии XX в. [The Language of Twentieth-Century Russian Poetry] (Москва: Институт русского языка имени В. В. Виноградова РАН, 1989), 158–165. 31 Петр Чаадаев, “Неопубликованная статья,” [“Unpublished Article”] Звения 3–4 (1934): 380.

Russian Poetry Between the Native and the Universal

281

conduct a certain intercultural dialog with it and adjust the communication formula to the expectations and competences of the Russian reader. Strictly speaking, the nature of litanic verse in Russian literature has to be limited to versification and poetic form. The “litanic course” as a manner of rhythmicizing a poem appears as early as the Middle Ages and evolves towards more or less conscious references to Western European culture in the successive stages of literary chronology. In terms of versification and poetic form the most important elements identifying litanic verse would be formulaic quality, understood here as the repetitiveness of sequences of words within a stanza; the repetitiveness within lines predominates here.32 The poetic strategy that primarily refers to poetic composition would entail the use of anaphoras, epiphoras, and syntactic parallelism; anaphoras distinctly predominate over other elements. Among the secondary factors relating to poetic composition should be noted a series of apostrophes, along with enumerations of attributes, merits, and epithets. In this manner a litanic poem became both a poem “for the eye” and “for the ear.”33 The subject matter of litanic poems revolves around religious topics. The titles suggest it openly. Poems of the type are “prayers” and “supplications.” At the turn of the nineteenth century a shift towards secular subject matter may be observed, even though the secular quality gains a certain sacred dimension, for example in poems devoted to nature. The import of Russian litanic poems is of chairetismic and ektenial quality. Supplicatory and penitential tones dominate in it, even though they are inscribed in the convention of welcoming, greeting, and hailing, which is strictly associated with the Greek and Byzantine tradition in Old Russian and later Russian culture. From the above observations there results the conclusion that the presence of litanic verse is not inextricably tied to the nature of Russian literature, but is observable in it. What may be suggested in the idea that the literary form in question provides a passage towards Western European literature, hence it is a “gimmick” that allows one to identify a text with a specific visible tradition. Russian poets 32 Yury Lotman noted repetitiveness as a poem’s constructional mechanism; Cf. Юрий Лотман “Ритмические повторы,” [“Rhythmical Repetitions”] in Структура художетвенного текста [The Structure of the Artistic Text] (Санкт-Петербург: Искусство–СПБ, 1998), 178–188. Cf. also Олег И. Федотов, Основы русского стихосложения: Метрика и ритмика [The Basics of Russian Poetry: Meter and Rhythm] (Москва: Издательство «ФЛИНТА», 1997), 228–232. 33 Cf. Михаил Г. Гаспаров, Очерк истории русского стиха [An Outline of the History of Russian Verse] (Москва : Фортуна Лимитед, 2000), 247.

282

Jacek Głażewski

did not however, use this technique too much. This was more explicable in the light of the events that took place in Europe at the turn of the nineteenth century, when Russia, to quote Alain Besançon: […] became part of the koinè of European art. It wanted to be its main center. It became one, which was quickly acknowledged.34

Once again, the literary hierarchies of Europe were radically re-evaluated. Translated from Polish by Anna Czarnowus

34 Alain Besançon, Święta Ruś [Holy Russia], trans. Łukasz Maślanka (Warszawa: Teologia Polityczna, 2012), 115.

Europa Media

Małgorzata Gorczyńska University of Wrocław

“Krleš! Krleš! Krleš!” Litany and its Derivatives in Czech Literature to the 1930s The beginnings of litanic verse in Czech-Moravian culture go back to the Christianization of Great Moravia. Two monuments of old Slavonic literature produced in this period contain litanic forms. Song nine from Hymns for the Feast of Cyril the Philosopher ends with a series of four apostrophes to Cyril (periphrastically called a “sweet teacher,” “quiet speech,” “merciful heart,” and “the wisest thought”1), rounded off with a plea for an intercessory prayer. A longer litanic fragment appears in a prose work entitled Words in Praise of St. Cyril, the Teacher of the Slavic Nation by Clement of Ohrid. The twelve sentences which make up this eulogistic fragment fall into two parts: the first part begins with an anaphoric “I bless” and moves on to enumerate various body parts (lips, tongue, face, the saint’s eyes, etc.), often accompanied by an epithet; the second part, which begins with a relative pronoun, names a blessing given by Cyril to the speaker.2 The personal tone turns the litanic fragment — despite its rhetoric — into a passionate prayer. The preserved fragments of old Slavonic liturgical texts (translated from Greek or Latin), which were produced for the purpose of the Methodian mission in Great Moravia, do not contain church litanies. We may surmise, however, that litanies were translated. It is alleged that the song “Hospodine, pomiluj ny,” dating from the tenth century, may have originated from a lost old Slavonic translation of the Litany of the Saints.3 The hypothesis that the source for “Hospodine, pomiluj ny” was the Latin litany in the form used in Milan in 1311 is based on the analysis of the melodic line and text patterning and was put forward by the musicologist František Mužík. Even though it has been criticized,4 no arguments have been advanced so far to determine whether the song draws upon one of the Latin renditions of the Litany of the Saints, or upon its old Slavonic translation.

1 Josef Vašica, Literární památky epochy velkomoravské 863–885 (Praha: Vyšehrad, 1996), 157. 2 Ibid., 305. 3 Jan Lehár, “Úvod,” in Česká středověká lyrika, ed. Jan Lehár (Praha: Vyšehrad, 1990), 28. 4 Ibid., 19–21.

286

Małgorzata Gorczyńska

Due to such difficulties as well as to problems with determining the original form of the song (the earliest text comes from the 1380s), we can only distinguish general similarities between the text and melody of “Hospodine, pomiluj ny” and the Litany of the Saints. In the old Slavonic song the initial litanic formulae “Κύριε, ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς” and “Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς” are translated into “Hospodine, pomiluj ny” and “Jezu Kriste, pomiluj ny.” The subsequent phrases also have their litanic equivalents, even though the song contains redundant elements: “T y spase v š e h o míra,” “i  uslysiž,” “daj nám  v š e m”  etc. — it is difficult to establish whether they were meant as rhythmic fillers, or whether they are due to a later contamination (e.g. insertions in place of jer vowels), or maybe to a willingness to preserve the syllabic extent of the original formulae. The invocations of the saints were left out and the supplicatory final part is limited to a single prayer for “žízň a mír v zemi.”5 The song closes with a thrice-repeated formula, “Krleš” (in the original version, produced when the jer vowels were still in use, it may have been repeated twice). It is alleged that the formula — which is an abridged and distorted version of Kyrieleison — may have been patterned on the German “Kirleis” and originated earlier than the song: in this case it must have been firmly established in the consciousness of the Moravian Christians.6 Basing our inferences on a notation certified in 1397, we can say that the rough simplicity of the song shows a stylistic affinity with its litanic prototype; when it comes to musical expression, the song does not resemble the complicated melodic line of the “Kyrie” tropes, as noted by Antonín Škarka who quotes the findings of a musicologist, Dobroslav Orel.7 According to Škarka, “Hospodine, pomiluj ny” represents a separate genre of an “abridged litany,” also found in other medieval literatures (e.g. the German Christe keinado). The Kosmas Chronicle refers to the ceremony of royal election in 1055 during which the Czechs sang “Kyrieleison, cantilenam dulcem,” which may testify to the contemporary generic awareness. The chronicler’s “cantilena” with the following epithet is unlikely to refer to works in the tradition of Latin hymnology, as exemplified by the “Kyrie” trope. Since the Latin song cannot have been widely known, Kosmas probably meant a song in the vernacular which employed the Kyrieleison formula. According to the scholar, the case in point is “Hospodine, pomiluj ny” (if another song of this kind existed, it would most probably have been remembered). 5 Ibid., 123. Cf. also R. Jakobson’s and F.V. Mareš’s reconstructions to be found there. 6 Ibid., 22; Antonín Škarka, “Úvod,” in Nejstarší česká duchovní lyrika, ed. Antonín Škarka (Praha: Orbis, 1949), 25. 7 Škarka, “Úvod,” 26.

Litany and its Derivatives in Czech Literature to the 1930s

287

A characteristic feature of the “abridged litany” is its community-forming power. Škarka made a compilation of the fragments from the Kosmas Chronicle in which the people call “Kyrieleison”: this always happens during an elevated moment of church or state import. Thirteenth-century sources testify that it was on such occasions that “Hospodine, pomiluj ny” was sung. It does not point to any closer connection between the “Kyrieleison” calls and the song than a functional similarity: it was the extra-liturgical function of the old Slavonic “Hospodine, pomiluj ny” which defined the position of the song in the Czech tradition. If we admit the existence of the genre of the so-called “abridged litany,” its Czech representative would be the song “Svatý Václave”: a vernacular composition with extra-liturgical functions (as reflected in its terminology: “vévodo české země,” “kněže náš”8). Based on the apostrophe–petition pattern with the closing “Kyrieleison” formula, the song is characterised by stanzaic versification, at times isosyllabic, with an irregular rhyme. The first three stanzas came into existence before the 1280s, although the initial stanza — differing in style and versification — seems older than the next two. The addressee proper is the Holy Spirit, but the petitions are directed via Václav (Wenceslas). The original one- or three-stanza song was extended to a fully litanic form — litanic not in terms of versification, but in terms of verbal patterning. It was a composition in which one address stretches over a few lines or in which a few apostrophic lines are followed by the “Kristeleison” response. In the song’s subsequent renditions, produced probably before the end of the fourteenth century, new stanzas were added. In the shorter version it was a case of two additional stanzas, addressing Mary and again Václav, which altogether made five stanzas. In the longest version, six stanzas were added, addressed to the angels, the Virgin Mary, the saints, and the Czech patrons: the seventh stanza to Wit (Vitus) and Wojciech (Adalbert), the eighth to Sigismund, Prokop and Ludmila. The same version was rounded off with a doxological stanza. The pattern of addresses was not particularly clear; nor did it reflect the order from the Litany of the Saints. Still, the litanic structure remained discernible. The extended version of the song served the same purpose as the original — that of a communal prayer. It was elevated to the status of a symbolic national anthem, which was respected not only by the Catholics (the Calixtines, for instance, had the addresses to Václav inscribed on their shields9). The structure of the Litany of the Saints emerges from the initial (the second to the eighth) stanzas of an anti-Hussite song with the incipit “Všichni poslúchajte”

8 Česká středověká lyrika, ed. Lehár, 124. 9 Škarka, “Úvod,” 38.

288

Małgorzata Gorczyńska

(the original version goes back to 1417). The song is made up of five-line stanzas, typical of contemporary occasional songs, which commence with apostrophes to the Virgin Mary and the Czech patrons. The apostrophe either takes up the whole line or is supplemented with a conventional periphrasis; it is followed by a series of forceful pleas to have the Hussites (called in this text “viglefy”) exiled and the “betlémskú stodolu”10 (the Bethlehem barn), i.e. the chapel where John Hus preached, pulled down. Litanic forms are also to be seen — albeit in a different form — in medieval Czech meditative lyric, aimed at private readers or religious, often female, communities. At the head of this group is the so-called “Kunhutina modlitba,” incorporated at the beginning of the fourteenth century into the breviary of Kunigunde, daughter of Ottokar II of Bohemia and prioress of the Benedictine convent of St. George. The litanic patterning does not apply to the whole poem in equal measure; neither does it intrude into an otherwise coherent structure: one binding element is — among others — the sophisticated, Latin-based versification, characterised by quatrains rhyming aaaa, composed of regular octosyllabic lines 4+4, with a trochaic measure. Most obviously litanic are the opening lines of the lyric: “Vítaj, kralʼu všemohúcí.” The four stanzas are connected by the anaphoric “vítaj” (placed irregularly in the line-initial position), interlaced with the rhetorical figure of polyptoton in the onset (“ve všech,” “všeho” etc.). This creates an alliterative effect and word-final grammatical rhymes which create two series of eight expressions (e.g. “stvořitelʼu – spasitelʼu – přietelʼu – davatelʼu” etc.). The use of a chairetismic anaphora, adopted from the Marian Akathist Hymn, goes hand in hand with the change in the person of the addressee: the lines contain antonomasias for Christ. In the next two sections of the lyric the underlying compositional rule is not litanic. Litanic devices are used in shorter fragments: the whole of stanza five is made of a rhyming enumeration; in stanzas nine and ten, as well as seventeen and eighteen, lines are connected by anaphoras. The final section of the lyric is again patterned on the litany. The stanzas begin with the formulae “(proto) prosím,” “daj” or “rači” and usually contain a few petitions. The supplication is supplemented with three narrative stanzas, in which each line commences with an anaphora and concludes with a gerund: “Pro tvé svaté porozenie / i pro těžké tvé truzenie […].”11 “Kunhutina modlitba” exemplifies a litanic prayer of a more private nature. Even if it was recited or sung chorally (for instance, during a worship service

10 Výbor z české literatury doby husitské, 1, eds. Bohuslav Havránek, Josef Hrabák, and Jiří Daňhelka (Praha: Nakladatelství Československé akademie věd, 1963), 284. 11 Česká středověka lyrika, ed. Lehár, 128.

Litany and its Derivatives in Czech Literature to the 1930s

289

before the Holy Communion), it was most probably within the walls of a monastery: the praying “I / we” stands for a community of individuals rather than to the nation as a whole. During the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries a series of at least seven litanic addresses to the Eucharistic Christ appeared, which are similar to, but not as sophisticated as, their prototype. Some of them adopted whole lines from “Kunhutina modlitba,” others only pairs of rhyming words. Connected with this group is a carol with the incipit “Zdráv bud’, králi anjelský,” as well as a series of works referring to the sequence Veni, sancte Spiritus (from translations to loose paraphrases) — the work in this series which displays the most litanic features is known by its incipit “Zavítaj, Duše svatý” (the fifteenth century). Some litanic characteristics, such as the use of anaphora and invocation, emerge from Marian songs and prayers. A different subgroup includes plaintive appeals to the Virgin Mary, dating from the fourteenth century. The so-called “Vzývání panny Marie” is made up of periphrastic apostrophes to Mary which fill the line (such as a series of more than twenty appeals connected by the “tys” anaphora) or two halflines (“má útěcho, mé vše sbožie”).12 The trance-like rhythm of the appeals builds up an emotional dynamic: the focus is not so much on the contemplation of Mary’s attributes, as on achieving a state of mind reflected in the expression “vzpomeň na mě nebožátko”13 and in references to the sobs and hot tears shed during the prayer. A similar mood is expressed in the so-called “Vzdechnutí k panně Marii.” Here, however, the litanic elements (apostrophes and petitions for intercession) are scattered throughout, creating a background for the penitential monologue. The Czech Middle Ages also saw the appearance of meditative litanies in prose. In the second half of the fourteenth century the preacher Jan Milíč of Kroměříž composed his prayers. They are meditations on the mysteries of faith, frequently interlaced with apostrophes and supplications, which adds to their heavily litanic rhythm. The litanic structure becomes most pronounced in a five-paragraph prayer to the Holy Trinity: the opening and closing paragraphs are devoted to the Persons of the Holy Trinity collectively and the middle ones address them individually. Each paragraph begins with an anaphora on “ó;” the apostrophe is followed by the expression “poněvadž ty […],” which in turn is followed by “proto prosíme tvé svaté milosti, aby račil […].”14 The beginning of the Renaissance is marked by a turning away from litanic forms and from the heavily repetitive diction employed in meditative addresses and

12 Ibid., 172, 173. 13 Ibid., 172. 14 Výbor z české literatury doby husitské, 1, eds. Havránek et al., 54–55.

290

Małgorzata Gorczyńska

complaints. Májový sen, written by a major Renaissance poet, Hynek of Poděbrady, contains only one short fragment based on a series of apostrophes addressed by the speaker to his beloved. The use of periphrasis does not seem related to the litany as this is a staple in the repertoire of erotic poetry. In sixteenth-century Latin poetry, in turn, which was based on the classics, repetitions are scarce. In Georgius Bartholdus’s songs dedicated to Václav and Ludmila apostrophes such as “o pater” or “patrona magna” are employed in a panegyric discourse for rhetorical flourish and certainly do not appear often enough to establish a litanic pattern. Even more frequent apostrophes, which appear in works of a more explicitly personal and expressive character, do not seem indebted to litanic invocations. For instance, the addresses “vale” and “salve,” which appear in Georgius Carolides’s Epitaphium and are directed in turn to Phoebus and the Muses and in turn to the homeland and Christ, do not give full voice to litanic chairetisms. The litanic forms also play a rather insignificant role in Protestant cantionals which started appearing in print at the beginning of the sixteenth century. Member of Jednota bratrská, Jan Blahoslav, for instance, the editor of a collection entitled Písně chval božských (1561) and the author of sixty-eight of its seven hundred and eighty-five songs, did not compose a single work of this kind. Some litanic works would appear later in a cantional compiled by Jan Amos Komenský and published in Amsterdam (1659). Among works of his authorship we can distinguish “Litanie z polské přeložená.” This is an adaptation of the Polish Litany of the Saints, which — in accordance with Protestant theology — is stripped of the catalogue of saints.15 Following the Polish example, Komenský uses decasyllabic couplets, which necessitates inversion, amplification, etc. The remnants of the original litanic pattern are most conspicuously seen in narrative stanzas eleven to fifteen which begin with an anaphora on “pro.”16 In his own oeuvre Komenský resorts to litanic devices; in a song entitled “Plésání duše věřící v Kristu přesladkém jeho jménu Ježíš,” for instance, stanzas 23 to 30 (in a less systematic way also four others) begin with an anaphora on “Ježíš.”17 The Baroque period witnesses a return to the litany, especially in the works of Catholic writers. A Jesuit named Fridrich Bridel was a leading experimenter with a particular predilection for comparisons of various sorts which he copiously 15 Witold Sadowski, Litania i poezja. Na materiale literatury polskiej od XI do XXI wieku [Litany and Poetry. On the Body of Material of Polish Literature from the Eleventh to the Twenty-First Century] (Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2011), 74. 16 Jan Amos Komenský, Kancionál, ed. Olga Settari (Praha: Kalich, 1992), 151. 17 Ibid., 134–136.

Litany and its Derivatives in Czech Literature to the 1930s

291

employed in his works. The series of parallel lines take up most of his poem entitled Co Bůh? člověk? (1659). Some of these series are made up of antonomasias (“Háj jsi bez zastínění”18); others are connected by an anaphora (“Láska boží nejkrasší, / láska boží nejsličnější […]”19). The central concept, however, is antithesis (God– man), which makes the series with their alternating “já” and “ty” anaphoras less overtly litanic: Já jsem kroužek bolesti, ty jsi stalostalá pevnost, já jsem kolo žalosti, ty jsi neskončená radost.20

The work which became a testing ground for litanic possibilities was Život svatého Ivana (1657). It is referred to as a hybrid work, combining hagiographic and fairy tale strands.21 The saint’s life is written in prose with verse interpolations, constructed by means of litanic devices. One of the most strikingly litanic fragments is Ivan’s monologue, “Vítání pustin a hor svatoivanských,” whose structure resembles those of medieval Marian or Eucharistic addresses, but here the apostrophes are directed to elements of landscape: Vítejte, hájové, obydlí májové, vítejte, smrkové, moji příbytkové!22

The change in the person of the addressee, introduced by Bridel, is not to be connected with the rejection of the litanic worldview. On the contrary; the generic worldview occasions the possibility of enlarging the scope of potential addressees to include God’s creation. The litany and poetry most frequently merged together in Baroque song. The poet and composer Adam Michna of Otradovice shows a particular propensity for litanic devices which he uses both in typically litanic works, such as “O svatých Crhovi a Strachotovi, biskupích a patronech českých a moravských” from the collection Svatoroční muzika (1661), with the refrain “orodůjte, / orodůjte za nás, svatí

18 Fridrich Bridel, Básnické dílo, ed. Milan Kopecký (Praha: Torst, 1994), 172. 19 Ibid., 174. 20 Ibid., 165. 21 Milan Kopecký, “V tomto se světle zatmívam,” in Bridel, Básnické dílo, 10. 22 Bridel, Básnické dílo, 48.

292

Małgorzata Gorczyńska

otcove!”23 ending each stanza, and in songs of a different kind which are based on long series of repetitions. An example of the latter is “Svaté lásky labyrint” (Česká mariánská muzika, 1647), in which each couplet is followed by a twice-repeated address “Má lásko, ó Kriste můj,”24 altogether repeated twenty times. A characteristic feature of Michna’s litanic style is his frequent use of diminutives which function antonomastically: they appear not only in carols and lullabies (e.g. “Chtíc, aby spál”), but also in Marian songs. “Mariánské Ave” (Česká mariánská muzika) contains the following address: Hrdličko má, ó ptáčku můj, ach, holubičko, kyž jsem tvůj.25

The Baroque poets displayed a great creativity in their appropriation of liturgical texts such as the popular Litany of Loreto and the Little Hours of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary. A song with the incipit “Ó světa rozkoše vítejte” by Matěj Václav Šteyer (Kancionál český, 1687) is based on amplification — each Marian address is fortified and widened before forming an antonomasia for Christ, e.g. “keř hořící” — “toho kře plamen,” “kořen Jesse” — “proutku kvítek” etc.26 Jan Josef Božan’s song “Zdrávas, Panno nebeská” (Slavíček rájský, 1719), on the other hand, contains fifteen stanzas, each of which is a litany in minature with its own anaphora system: Maria, matko boží, ty jsi chrám milosti, Maria, božské lůže, studnica sladkosti! Maria, má naděje, most, břeh v mé ouzkosti, rač na mne zpomenouti, prosím tvé milosti!27

It can be assumed that the gradual diminishment of interest in the litany — especially within the high culture — can be attributed to a shift in Church-state relations at the end of the eighteenth century. The decrees issued by Emperor Joseph II imposed significant limitations on lay piety based on the cults of Mary 23 Růže, kterouž smrt zavřela. Výbor z české poezie barokní doby, ed. Zdeňka Tichá (Praha: Odeon, 1970), 171–172. 24 Ibid., 87–89. 25 Ibid., 99. 26 Ibid., 235. 27 Ibid., 261.

Litany and its Derivatives in Czech Literature to the 1930s

293

and of the saints.28 Another factor was the changing worldview, namely the attack of Enlightenment rationalism. A third point was the Czech National Revival with its idea of having the life of the nation based on native foundations (hence the interest in folklore, Slavic mythology, etc.). In this new context, the litany came to seem outdated and alien. The changes were reflected in the evolution of poetic forms which began at the end of the eighteenth century. It is enough to have a look at the repetitive structures in poetry (parallelism, anaphoras, series of apostrophes etc.), to notice that in comparison to Baroque literature, their frequency decreases significantly. If they do appear (e.g. in the classicising odes of Antonín Jaroslav Puchmajer or in the folk compositions of František Ladislav Čelakovsky), they serve a different function and are part of a different thematic context. It was the appearance of the Romantic poetics in the third quarter of the nineteenth century that gave the Czech litany a second chance, as anticipated by the poetry of Karel Hynek Mácha. Mácha’s works do not abound in litanic devices. A greater cluster of anaphoras is to be found in one of his German poems, “Meine Freuden.” In two other poems, written in Czech, fragments patterned upon the litany are placed in inverted commas and function as a story within a story: in “Na přichod krále” it is a song beginning with “Sláva Čechům! slunce jim vychází […]”29 (with the exclamatory expression at the beginning of subsequent verses transformed into “pokoj Čechům! […],” “blaho Čechům! […],” “radost Čechům! […],” “slunce Čechů […]”); in the poem “Duše nesmrtelná, která bydlíš […]” it is the angels’ hymn to God. Still it is Mácha who creates a kind of enumerative poem which can be associated with the litany due to its dignified, solemn, but also plaintive tone. A case in point is the poem Máj (1836) with a fragment which appears twice: after the main character’s death and just before the coda. Each hemistich of the six-foot iambic verse contains a phrase made up of a participle, an attributive noun and a monosyllabic noun, placed in an anticipatory order with the logical accent falling on the last syllable of the phrase and with a non-cadential verse contour:

28 Cf. Jan Royt, Obraz a kult v Čechách 17. a 18. století (Praha: Karolinum, 2011), 352–356. 29 Karel Hynek Mácha, “Básně — Dramatické zlomky (1928),” 230, in Česká elektronická knihovna, accessed June 30, 2015, http.//www.ceska-poezie.cz/cek/sbirka/?id=674.

294

Małgorzata Gorczyńska

Zbortěné harfy tón, ztrhané strůny zvuk, Zašlého věku děj, umřelé hvězdy svit, Zašlé bludice pouť, mrtvé milenky cit, Zapomenutý hrob, věčnosti skleslý byt, […].30

The whole enumerative sequence is composed of fifteen elements — enough to support an association with litanic addresses which are themselves nominal phrases. Mácha, however, does not introduce any references to the litanic genre; it is the repetitive enumeration with predictable recurrences, the anxious melody of the phrases and the accent which goes counter to the natural rhythm of the Czech language that create an incantatory effect. The Máchan tradition was taken up by the Neo-Romantic poets. The incantatory repetitions, characteristic of Máj, can be heard in the angels’ songs, albeit in a trochaic measure, in the biblical poem Anděl by Svatopluk Čech (Básně, 1874). In this poem the litanic patterning also applies to the monologue of God regretting the creation of the world — a phrase which is repeated a number of times in the first four stanzas is “Želím chvíle te […]”31 with a different ending. Mořská fantasie, in turn, is framed by two litany-like songs (inc. “O hvězdo mořská, matko milosti”32). The examples provided suffice to show a significant surge of interest in litanic forms. Within this tendency, the achievements of Otokar Březina should be singled out due to the connection he established in his poetry between the litanic patterning and free verse. Březina worked out a series of versification techniques with litanic measures. Some of the techniques were solidified by tradition, others proved to be single-use products. To the former group belong works composed of long, syntactically uniform lines, containing either full-fledged or elliptical sentences and connected by an anaphora. A poem entitled “Lítosť” contains a series of nine lines; the first three of which are as follows: lítosť milence u dveří chrámu v den zasnoubení, lítosť vypovězeného v hučení děl, jež vítá koráby s prapory rozhněvané dálky, lítosť vysíleného hledáním snů za prvních zamodření úsvitů, […].33

30 Ibid., 40, 46, in Česká elektronická knihovna, accessed June 30, 2015, http.//www.ceskapoezie.cz/cek/sbirka/?id=674. 31 Svatopluk Čech, “Básně (1874),” 133–134, in Česká elektronická knihovna, accessed June 30, 2015, http.//www.ceska-poezie.cz /cek/sbirka/?id=1132. 32 Ibid., 7, 17, in Česká elektronická knihovna, accessed June 30, 2015, http.//www.ceskapoezie.cz /cek/sbirka/?id=1132. 33 Otokar Březina, “Tajemné dálky (1899),” 39, in Česká elektronická knihovna, accessed June 30, 2015, http.//www.ceska-poezie.cz /cek/sbirka/?id=54.

Litany and its Derivatives in Czech Literature to the 1930s

295

Another characteristic versification technique used by Březina consists in lines composed of exclamatory nominal sentences which bring to mind litanic addresses. “Dithyramb světů” contains a number of such lines, which come in series: Světy za sebou následující v tajemství času! Gigantská jara věčného trópu! Koberce mystických stupňů!34

The litanic address can also be the principle organizing the free-verse stanza, for the basic building block can be expanded to produce longer segments of verse. This can be illustrated by the following fragment from “Kolozpěv srdcí”: Pro tajemství bolesti, smrti a znovuzrození sladko je žíti! Pro neviditelnou přítomnost velkých a svatých našeho rodu, kteří jdou mezi námi v zahradách světla a z dálky všech věků hovoří k našim duším milostiplní, sladko je žíti!35

Towards the end of the nineteenth century a new kind of litanic verse appeared — the blasphemous litanies. Stanislav Kostka Neumann’s collection Satanová sláva mezi námi (1897) is preceded by an epigraph from Baudelaire’s Les Litanies de Satan. It includes works which make a inverted use of the Marian prayers. In “Ave Satan” the apostrophe to Satan takes the form of a series of antonomasias: Spoutaných příteli, rebelů bratře, milenče prokletých básníků, […].36

Viktor Dyk, on the other hand, in “Litanie k Panně Marii” from a collection entitled A porta inferi (1897) preserves the traditional addressee, but changes the modality of the address; his speaker refuses to worship Mary. A different variation on the poetic strategy is provided by poets who choose an addressee outside of the generic repertoire, but still avoid blasphemous connotations. In Jaroslav Vrchlický’s “Litanie lásky” (from the collection Život a smrt, 34 Březina, “Ruce (1901),” 19, in Česká elektronická knihovna, accessed June 30, 2015, http.//www.ceska-poezie.cz /cek/sbirka/?id=51. 35 Ibid., 16, in Česká elektronická knihovna, accessed June 30, 2015, http.//www.ceskapoezie.cz /cek/sbirka/?id=51. 36 Stanislav Kostka Neumann, Satanova sláva mezi námi (1897), 7, in Česká elektronická knihovna, accessed June 30, 2015, http.//www.ceska-poezie.cz /cek/sbirka/?id=723.

296

Małgorzata Gorczyńska

1892) the addressee is Love, personified and endowed with divine features, but not to be identified with the Christian God. The four-line stanzas are filled with series of metaphoric periphrasis (at times evoking traditional Marian terminology) or equivalent phrases; they appear in pairs and are divided by a caesura (7+5); the effect is enhanced by anaphoras and syntactic parallels. Usually three pairs of invocations are followed by the refrain, which is one iambic foot shorter and which imitates the litanic responsory: Tys růže nevadnoucí, Ty jsi zlatý dům, ze sloně Tys věž skvoucí, čnící k nebesům, Tys perla v škebli světa, jeho zář i jas — ó Lásko, prosíme Tě, uslyš nás!37

A similar mode of expression is used by Jakub Deml in his two volumes of poetic prose. In Moji přátele (1913) litanic invocations are directed to meadow plants. The plant names are capitalized, separated by a graphic break after each apostrophe; each quasi-verset is segmented. All this, together with the occasional supplication (“nezapomeň na mne”) or greeting (“vítám tě”38), clearly evokes the litany. On the intertextual level, the poem contains references to the Song of Songs (cf. expressions such as “milenko má,” “sestro;” micro-quotations from the Bible text or expressions resembling those used in it: “nevidím tě,” “nad tebe se vypínají,” “tvé tělo,”39 etc.) and to Francis of Assisi’s “Canticle of the Sun” with its idea of the brotherhood and sisterhood of all creation. Such references shape our perception of the addressee. The invocations are not cast in a rhetorical mode, as they usually are in the poetic apotheoses of nature (e.g. “Litanie k svaté přírodě,” by a follower of the Czech moderna (The Czech Modern Movement), Emanuel Lešehrad, from his collection Motýl v jantaru, 1939). The plants are not merely personified; on a deeper, mystical plane they appear akin to man — the poet uses the form “we” alongside “I.” Thus, addressing the plants the poet addresses himself. The litanic frame adds an additional sacral dimension to his soliloquy, which becomes an intimate, prayer-like confession. In Miriam (1916) the litanic tone is introduced by the incipit “Ó MIRIAM!” and the subsequent quotation: “Maris stella, ave!” Unlike in Moji přátele, the text is not divided into paragraphs which correspond to litanic versets; it includes,

37 Jaroslav Vrchlický, Život a smrt (1892), 55, in Česká elektronická knihovna, accessed June 30, 2015, http.//www.ceska-poezie.cz /cek/sbirka/?id=1093. 38 Jakub Deml, Miriam, Mojí přátele, ed. Vladimír Binar, (Praha: Odeon, 1990), 161. 39 Ibid., 193, 161–162.

Litany and its Derivatives in Czech Literature to the 1930s

297

however, litanic insertions which come in series of antonomasias (“Skřivánku, obláčku, hvězdo!”40) as well as more extended expressions: Ó svatá sestro má: jsi křídlem orlím myšlenky mé, jsi léčivým vřídlem mojí modlitby, zalidněním samoty mé, mým spánkem a odpočinkém prací mých, útokem a písní mého slova a ve tvé lásce moje mlčení jest jako moudrost balvanů a tichých doubrav.41

The litanic frame embraces the outline of a love story (the degree of the schematic presentation of events brings to mind the Song of Songs; as in the biblical text, also here the erotic mingles with the mystical). Using a litanic mode of expression, the poet tells the story of love between “brother” and “sister,” transposing it onto the plane of contemplation. The whole poem can be read as a single litanic apostrophe. Transformations involving substitution of the addressee continued to be made in the interwar period by avant-garde poets. The early works of František Halas can be called litanic, but only in a very blurred sense. The poems entitled “Amundsen” and “Hřbitov námořníků” from the collection Kohout plaší smrt (1930) show an affinity with the litany in their versification method, based as it is on a juxtaposition of affirmative sentences. “Verše” from the same collection, as well as “Moře” from the collection Tvář (1931), use, in whole or in part, an apostrophic style of address. “Doznání” from the collection Kohout plaší smrt is written in a different style: the odd lines use participial adjectives (“dojat,” “smuten,” “překvapen” etc.) + the expression “vším co je láska,” whereas the even lines describe the speaker’s activities (“přimykám,” “utíkám,” “mlčím”42 etc.); the first stanza additionally includes the second-person pronouns, evoking the addressee. The poem Nikde from the collection Dokořán (1936) represents a more advanced type of litanic arrangement due to its numerous repetitions of the word “Nikde” at the onset (such anaphoras almost become the rule) and after the caesura, sometimes twice or thrice in a row. Also characterised by the use of appositional structures and the vocative, this type of verse includes passages which sound like litanic addresses; they are arranged vertically (“Nikde teskná bráno Nikde zhoubné věno”43) as well as horizontally. It has been noted that Nikde grows out of the Máchan tradition.44 However, the tone of Mácha’s works was based on the syntactic and intonational uniformity of the quasi-addresses; paradoxically,

40 41 42 43 44

Ibid., 11. Ibid., 25. František Halas, Básně (Praha: Československý spisovatel, 1957), 144. Ibid., 246. Jacek Baluch, “Wstęp,” in František Halas, Wybór poezji, ed. Jacek Baluch (Wrocław: Ossolineum, 1975), XXII.

298

Małgorzata Gorczyńska

smoothing out the tensions of the poem released its emotional load. Halas, on the other hand, achieves the effect through dissonance: the litanic rhythm is broken by strong trochees; the constant modifications of the line-arrangement or the turns from hexameter to tetrameter reduce the monotony of repetitions and the cadential falls of the lines. The litanic quality of the poem is continuously constituted only to be undermined; in effect, the eponymous “Nikde” (“Never”) is elevated one moment to the role of an addressee, and the next is degraded to a hollow, constantly repeated sound. The poem Staré ženy (1935) is openly patterned on the Litany of Loreto. The eponymous old women become the addressees of a few series of vertically arranged calls; the poet, however, does not address them directly — the apostrophes refer to their eyes, hands, hair, wombs and faces. Reducing the invocations to an antonomastic catalogue and depriving them of a responsory turns them into descriptive formulae. The content of the addresses is not compatible with the litanic convention: oříšky bez jádra misky bez obětin předsínky mrákot urývky dávné hudby studánky zasypane […].45

Jan Grossman called Staré ženy “a tragic travesty of the litany,”46 which suggests twofold modifications of the generic form: a thematic substitution (the disparaged old women take the place of the adored Virgin Mary) and a stylistic substitution (the change in the antonomastic strategy with negations, oxymorons and negative epithets taking the place of affirmations, positive epithets and superlatives). Even though the poet violates the generic convention to a high degree by changing the type of addressees and the way of speaking about them, the sacralising potential of the litanic form remains untouched. It allows the poet to describe the old women with tenderness, which is intensified by his ironic tone. According to Pavol Winczer, Halas stands in marked opposition to Vítězslav Nezval. Nezval undermines the tenets of the litany, heaping praise on a woman reduced to her bodily functions; he perceives her as an aesthetic object, an object of erotic desire.47 This attitude is expressed in a collection entitled Žena v množném

45 Halas, Básně, 206. 46 Jan Grossman, „Předmluva,” in Halas, Básně, 31. 47 Pavol Winczer, “Litanická forma a Halasové Staré ženy (1935),” in idem, Súvislosti v čase a priestore. Básnická avantgarda, jej prekonávanie a dedičstvo (Čechy, Slovensko, Polsko)

Litany and its Derivatives in Czech Literature to the 1930s

299

čísle (1936), filled with poems whose litanic nature is obvious at first sight and is confirmed by the titles of two poems: “Litanie” and “Píseň písní.” In “Litanie” each line contains a metaphorical periphrasis made up of words with low semantic connectedness. The verse is arranged by means of juxtaposition; the object is named in the first line (“Kolemjdoucí ženo”48), and then becomes “default.” In the final part of the poem the juxtaposition is replaced by apposition: the metaphorical periphrasis follows the anaphoric vocative “Ženo.” When taken literally, Nezval’s periphrases may resemble antonomasias from the Litany of Loreto: the “tower of ivory” becomes a surreal image, like the “rubber tree plant” from “Litanie.” Nezval’s idea of a “multiplied woman” is expressive of the poet’s literal attitude towards the litanic multiplication of names: in this sense, the Virgin Mary is “žena v množném čísle.” The poet brings to the fore the literal meanings and turns them into the centre of his poetic strategy. Nezval’s litanic versification stems partially from the practice of the earlier poets, especially Březina, but it was Nezval who first used it on a larger scale in both free verse and accentual-syllabic verse such as the trochaic hexameter of his Edison (1927).49 Due to his extensive use of easily recognizable litanic devices and patterns, such as sequentially arranged anaphoras, the litany is a constant presence in Nezval’s poetry: litanic devices are used even in those poems which do not follow the litanic pattern and in which they play a merely decorative role; still, the generic association remains. The semantic form is also typical of the genre — it is simplified and permeated with a lofty, sacred aura surrounding the addressee. Combining the aura with a profanum theme (the female body, also descriptions of the city in his later works), Nezval degrades the sacrum, by which he apparently means to achieve a focalizing effect, i.e. to centre the reader’s attention on the object. This may be seen as a vestige of the litanic persistence, marked by numerous repetitions of supplications and invocations. It seems necessary to mention the affirmative — i.e. lacking negative or ironic elements — examples of the litanic genre in the first decades of the twentieth century. In most cases these are examples of Catholic poetry, represented by the so-called Catholic Moderna and also by the writers grouped around Josef Florian. In the first category is Xaver Dvořák. His “Litanie loretánská” from the collection called Kontemplace (1909) follows the most important compositional rules of the (Bratislava: Veda, 2000), 231. 48 Vítězslav Nezval, Básně II, ed. Milan Blahynka (Brno: Host, 2012), 41. 49 For analysis of the poem’s versification cf.: Magdalena van Duijkeren-Hrabová and Miloš Stejskal, “Funkce litanických řad v Nezvalově Edisonu,” in České studie: literatura, jazyk, kultura, ed. Mojmír Grygar (Amsterdam: Atlanta, 1990), 203–227.

300

Małgorzata Gorczyńska

genre; it is not, however, a mere translation of the liturgical litany into rhymed iambic verse. The antonomasias borrowed from the Litany of Loreto, the Little Hours of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the song Ave Maris Stella, etc. are endowed with a different context, enlarging or modifying the original meaning (e.g. “House of gold” becomes a place to which we return; the “Tower of David” becomes a shelter). More complicated relations between the language of the litany and the language of poetry appear in the work of Bohuslav Reynek. In “Růže” from the collection Žízně (1921) instead of direct invocations to the rose — a mystical symbol whose meanings are only apparently enumerated as those meanings themselves become symbols — the poem offers no more than a foretaste of such invocations. The place of the anaphora on “ó,” which was traditionally attached to the litany and followed by an antonomasia in the vocative, is taken by an “o” + locativus. Surprisingly, this is not a sign of distance. The initial line “Rozdvojte se, rty mé, k vděčnému a radostnému pění”50 allows us to read the provisional invocations as illocutionary acts, as a litany incorporated into a lyric. In this way the poet avoids quotation marks and bridges the distance between his own poetic idiom and the universal language of the genre. A similar strategy was adopted by Jan Zahradníček. “Ruce Mariiny” from the collection Žíznivé leto (1935) is also placed in a metatextual frame (“o vás, ó ruce pokojné, / zpívati budu”51), and the litanic invocations, beginning with anaphoras “vy dlaně […],” “vy prsty […],” “vy ruce […]” and used with affirmative verbs, are in the nominative rather than the vocative case. Unlike in Reynek’s poetry, “Ruce Mariiny” lacks a mechanism which would prevent its transformation into a descriptive and reflective enumeration. Zahradníček’s litany operates in the field of rhetoric rather than prayer. Zahradníček’s series Korouhve (1940) displays a litanic quality with a particularly emotional tinge. The poems “Svatý Vojtěch,” “Svatý Prokop,” “Svatý Jan Nepomucký,” and “Svatý Cyril a Metoděj” (as well as “Svatý Václav,” which did not appear in print because of censorship) contain only short litanic fragments (in the form of apostrophes to the titular saints, antonomasias, series of lines connected by anaphora and micro-quotations from litanic texts, especially medieval ones), but the litanic genre underlies the semantics of the whole series, marking its ektenial tone. The title implies that Korouhve was meant as a kind of litanic procession, in

50 Bohuslav Reynek, Básnické spisy, ed. Milada Chlíbcová (Zlín: ARCHA, 2009), 55. 51 Jan Zahradníček, Dílo, I, eds. Mojmír Trávníček and Radovan Zejda (Praha: Československý spisovatel, 1991), 182.

Litany and its Derivatives in Czech Literature to the 1930s

301

which the saints’ banners are carried. It turns out that the poem which chronologically closes the interwar period, characterised by the poets’ fascination with the litanic form, at the same time sums up the litanic story in Czech literature, which stretches from the old Slavonic “Krleš” to the avant-garde. Translated from Polish by Dominika Ruszkiewicz

Ágnes Czövek University of Debrecen

“I gave night music to my heart from which deep litanies pealed”: Hungarian Poetry In the Hungarian discourse of literary studies, there is no exact definition for the genre of litany. Only the Világirodalmi lexikon (Lexicon of World Literature) as well as the Magyar katolikus lexikon (Hungarian Catholic Lexicon) give fairly complete descriptions.1 Reading the research articles and lexicons dealing with early Hungarian literature one can learn that the genre of litany is basically defined by two characteristics: one is the repetitive, and the other is the dialogical character of the text. The present paper is also based on a definition proposed in the work Litania i poezja2 by Witold Sadowski, which deals with Polish literature, but allows one to consider the characteristics of Hungarian literature as well.

Old Hungarian Literature — the Variable Litanic Verse Litany in the Earliest Period of Hungarian Literature Examining the old Hungarian literature3 at the level of texts, it can be established that it evolved from literature written in Latin in the eleventh century. This 1 “Litánia,” in Világirodalmi lexikon [Lexicon of World Literature], ed. Király István, vol. 7. (Budapest: Akadémiai kiadó, 1982), 333–334. “Litánia,” in Magyar katolikus lexikon [Hungarian Catholic Lexicon], accessed May 6, 2014, http://lexikon.katolikus.hi/L/ lit%C3%A1nia.html. 2 Witold Sadowski, Litania i poezja. Na materiale literatury polskiej od XI do XXI wieku [Litany and Poetry. On the Body of Material from Polish Literature from the Eleventh to the Twenty-First Century] (Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2011). The book contains several litany definitions. To sum up the most important characteristics: litany is a form of prayer that is present mainly in the Christian liturgy. It is often integrated in a delimitative framework, it is characterized by the application of anaphora. It uses antonomasias and contains formulae of invocation, laudation, supplication, acclamation or deprecation. It can often be divided into two complement voices, the voice of the choir and the chorus-master (ibid., 16–21). 3 If not stated otherwise the poems from this period are quoted after Répertoire de la poésie hongroise ancienne (RPHA), accessed August 12, 2015, http://rpha.elte.hu/rpha. In the repertoire marked with the name of Iván Horváth a large number of Hungarian

304

Ágnes Czövek

literature is called “Hungarian” only because of the fact that these works were written down in Hungary. Apart from a funeral speech (Pray Codex, 1192–1195) and a planctus-adaptation (Codex of Leuven, thirteenth century), we know complete texts written in the Hungarian language only from the second half of the fifteenth century. Consequently, we can with complete certainty document the three oldest Hungarian litanies to the period between the second half of the fifteenth and the end of the sixteenth century. The so-called “Letanўa,”4 i.e. the Litany of the Saints, written down in the socalled Czech-codex and enclosed in a delimitative frame (between the Kyrie eleison formulae), is very important, since it also invokes the Hungarian saints (King Stephen I, King Leslie I, Prince Emeric). In the Peer-codex5 we can read a litany to Mary that is known under the name of Litany of Loreto. The third litany can be found in the Thewrewk-codex: “Kezdetyk bodogh azon letanyaӱa magyarwl…” In this case we can recognize the text of the Litany of Loreto, yet it differs from the preceding prayer, since the name of Mary always follows her antonomasias, e.g. in lines 38–40: Bölcsességnek széke, Mária, imádj érettünk Mi igazságunknak oka, Mária, imádj érettünk Lelki jóságnak edénye, Mária, imádj érettünk.6 [Chair of wisdom, Mary, pray for us / Reason for our truth, Mary, pray for us, / Cup of spiritual goodness, Mary, pray for us.]

This litany also has a delimitative frame. At the end, there is the Kyrie eleison formula following by the Agnus Dei in Latin.

verses written before 1601 as well as editions printed before 1701 which contain the former can be found. 4 Csilla N. Abaffy, ed., Czech-kódex 1513: A nyelvemlék hasonmása és betűhű átirata bevezetéssel és jegyzetekkel [Czech-codex 1513: Facsimile and letter-perfect transcription of the text with introduction and notes] (Budapest: Magyar Nyelvtudományi Társaság, 1990), 126–136. 5 Andrea Kacskovics-Reményi, Beatrix Oszkó, eds., Peer-kódex 1526: a nyelvemlék hasonmása és betűhű átirata bevezetéssel és jegyzetekkel [Peer-codex 1526: Facsimile and letterperfect transcription of the text with introduction and notes] (Budapest: Argumentum: Magyar Nyelvtudományi Társaság, 2000), 357–362. 6 Judit Balázs, Gabriella Uhl, eds., Thewrewk-kódex 1531: A nyelvemlék hasonmása és betűhű átirata bevezetéssel és jegyzetekkel [Thewrewk-codex 1531: Facsimile and letterperfect transcription of the text with introduction and notes] (Budapest: MTA Nyelvtudományi Intézet, 1995), 35–41.

Hungarian poetry

305

Litanic Verse during the Reformation and Counter-Reformation The Reformation, bearing at first the Lutheran, then the Calvinist doctrines, became known in Hungary very early, due to the fact that several young people had studied at the Universities of Wittenberg and Heidelberg. The new doctrines spread very quickly, because in Hungary, which was divided into three parts and suffering from Turkish oppression, the Catholic Church was also weak. One of the most important goals of the Reformation, beyond religious doctrines, was to consciously involve the mother tongue in religious practice, and it gave an enormous stimulus to the evolution of Hungarian language and literature. The Calvinist trend that grew into the strongest Hungarian Protestant church built the liturgy on puritanical and biblical bases: predication played a more serious role, singing was limited mainly to psalms, and the mass was completely reformed.7 Hungarian Calvinism did not treat the Catholic liturgy malevolently;8 the gist was that the worship should be celebrated in the Hungarian language and the doctrines of the Reformation should be propagated.9 However, most of the litanies were prohibited. The Lutheran trend, which had fewer adherents than the Calvinist one, was less hostile to the Catholic liturgy. For example, the Eperjesi graduál (Eperjes Gradual Book) published in the first half of the seventeenth century also contains litanies: “Litania Maior” and “Litania Minor.”10 The practice of the Protestant churches, though initially designed in opposition to Catholicism, affected the Catholic practice as a catalyst, since the Reformation 7 Cf. Tamás Bódiss, “Kálvin és a zene, avagy a kálvini liturgiai-zenei elvek az újabb adatok és kutatások tükrében” [“Calvin and music, or the Calvinist liturgical-musical principles in the light of new data and researches”], Debreceni Református Egyetem Nagykönyvtára, Elektronikus Könyvtár, accessed November 30, 2008, http://digit.drk.hu/books/ kalvin-500/05_Kalvin_es_zene_avagy_a_kalvini_liturgiai_zenei_elvek_az_ujabb_ adatok_es_kutatasok_tukreben.pdf. 8 For example, the synod of Debrecen in 1562 permitted the singing of litanies, referring to the fact that there were few rituals at services. Cf. Ilona Ferenczi, “Az ének mint imádság. Régi magyar imakönyvek és imádságok,” [“Singing as prayer. Old Hungarian prayer books and prayers”] Pázmány Irodalmi Műhely, Lelkiségtörténeti tanulmányok [Pázmány Literary Workshop, Studies of Spiritual History], Judit Bogár, ed., (Piliscsaba: Pázmány Péter Katolikus Egyetem, 2012), 109. 9 We must add that the final breach with the mass and some of its elements would become important in the eighteenth century, after the expulsion of the Turks from Hungary, when the House of Habsburg strengthened its position in Hungary and the majority of the Protestants were extruded into Transylvania. 10 Ibid.

306

Ágnes Czövek

accelerated the spread of religious literature outside the Liturgy, which was already taking place in the Hungarian language. Cardinal Péter Pázmány (1570–1637), the most important exponent of the Counter-Reformation in Hungary (and at the same time, a prominent author of Hungarian Baroque literature), set an example with his numberless works, of which the most important from our point of view is the Keresztyéni imádságoskönyv, melybe szép, ájtatos könyörgések, hálaadások és tanuságok foglaltatnak (Christian prayer book in which beautiful worshipful supplications, thanksgivings and testimonies are included).11 The collection, consisting of translations, beautifully systematizes the prayers used in the Catholic Church, also putting down their texts. In his work Pázmány publishes six litanies,12 and writes an introduction about their importance. Referring to the Protestant practice of litany, he strongly criticizes some omissions made by Protestants, i.e. lack of respect for the Saints and removal of prayer for the dead. He also rejects their attitude to the Pope, whom they describe as an enemy similar to the Turks. The prayer book by Pázmány is also important from another point of view. We cannot ignore the fact that we are speaking about the period of Hungarian literary history in which music and poetry, text and tune were gradually separating from one another. Pázmány’s book, which contains prayers not to be sung, but declaimed, may be seen as one of the first examples. Certainly, religious texts used outside of church show a different character from texts fixed in liturgy. In the case of litanic verse13 a part of the difference relates to such rhythmical features as the repletion of formulae (e.g. kyrie eleison; pray for us; listen to us, Lord, etc.), anaphora, epiphora, reduplications and syntactic parallelisms, all of which will be hereafter called primary verse-making tools.14 Apart from them, the secondary verse-making tools may be considered too, i.e. attributes, periphrases, enumeration of antonomasias, application of apostrophes.

11 First edition: Graz, 1606; Rita Sz. Bajáki, Emil Hargittay, eds., Imádságos könyv 1631 [Prayer Book 1631] (Budapest: Universitas, 2001). 12 “Litánia az Szentekrül” [“Litany about the Saints”], “Az üdvösséges Jézus nevérül” [“About the name of the redeeming Jesus”], “Az Oltári Szentségrül” [“About the Eucharist”], “Boldog Asszonyrúl” [“About Our Lady”], “Más Litánia Boldog Asszonyrúl” [“Another Litany of Our Lady”], “Litánia a Betegekért, és Keseredtekért” [“Litany for the Ill and the Moaning”]. 13 To describe the relation between litany and litanic verse cf. Sadowski, Litania i poezja, 25–145. 14 The notion of “verse-making tools” in this paper is used after the term “czynniki wierszotwórcze” as introduced by Maria Dłuska, “Wiersz” [“Verse”], Język Polski, no. 4(1962): 241.

Hungarian poetry

307

Although strictly speaking they build rather a poem than a verse, in our texts they result in a second-hand rhythmicity, alliterations, rhymes, etc. and thus have to be included in the analysis. Besides, we can also ask whether a given text has a religious or non-religious topic, since the characteristics of the litany appear, even if not so frequently, in poetry on secular topics as well. Taking into account all these features we obtain three categories of indicators, based on which we can distinguish six groups of litanic verses. In the first group, which comprises the works on religious topics, both the primary and the secondary verse-making tools are employed. As an example we may take a translation-adaptation of a poem meant as a prayer of Mary addressed to Christ. The original title of the source text in Latin is “Jesu Salvator.”15 The poem, full of Marian antonomasias, consists of twenty-two plain-rhymed couplets. After each couplet there follows a part which is repeated in two ways depending on the stanza. After the first, the second and the thirty-first couplet the following invocation can be read: “Te vagy virág szál: O kegyes JESUS, kit MARIA szült, hallgass-meg minket” (“You are a flower: O merciful JESUS who was born by MARY listen to us.”) After the couplets from the third to the thirtieth and after the thirty-second there appears the phrase: “Te vagy virág szál, O kegyes Anya, szép szűz MARIA, könyörögj értünk” (“You are a flower, O merciful Mother, beautiful Virgin MARY pray for us.”).16 The Hungarian version of “Jesu Salvator” maintains these litanic features over the entire poem. Within the first group we can distinguish, however, the works (and there are many more of them) in which the characteristics of litany are not present throughout the whole text. Here we can distinguish two poetic techniques. The first technique, which was not very frequently used, was employed e.g. by Canon Márton Kopcsányi (1579–1638), who inserted litany extracts or parts edited like a litany into his several poems. Such is, for example, his poem entitled “Boldog Asszony nevezetiről”17 (“About the name of Our Lady”). After the motto from Psalms 44:10 the author introduces the eleven-line-long litany, which has alternately ten and eight syllables per line. These eleven lines are filled with antonomasias of the Virgin Mary, either conventional (e.g. “Aaron vesszeje” — “Seed of Aaron,” “Frigy Szekrnyeis” — “Ark of the Covenant,” “Gedeon gyapja” — “Wool of 15 In Béla Holl, ed., Régi magyar költők tára: XVII. század, 7, Katolikus egyházi énekek [Storehouse of old Hungarian poets: Seventeenth century, vol. 7., Catholic church songs 1608–1651] (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1974), 349–350. 16 Another example: “Litania a Christus szenvedeseröl” (“Litany of Christ’s sufferings”), i.e. litany in verses (8a-5b-4b-8c), in Cantus catholici (Kassa, 1674), 290–291. 17 In Régi magyar költők tára, 44.

308

Ágnes Czövek

Gideon”) or created by the author (“Szüzeknek királynéja” — “Queen of virgins,”) always completed by the epiphora “MARIA.” The two final lines, however — as to the form, slightly, but as to the content, completely — intermit the composition of the litany, so that the poem eventually closes with a supplication, which could be even considered a lyrical introduction to a sermon: Ezt meg magyarázom óh szüz Chak legy velem Istennek

MARIA ANNYA.

[This I will explain oh Virgin MARY / only be with me God’s MOTHER.]

The second technique proves to be much more productive than Kopcsányi’s method. It also does not present certain elements of litany isolated, but organically builds these elements in a given work. Here belongs the greater part of litanic verses as well as the pieces which are close to litany, but belong to other genres (hymn, psalm, etc.).18 An eminent example from this subgroup containing many poems is a fairly early Marian hymn: the “Cantilena”19 by András Vásárhelyi, written in 1508. The poem was well-known and popular, and it has been preserved in thirteen different sources (in other codices and printed hymn-books as well).20 Although there is a tune assigned to the topic formula (“Salve Mater Maria”), no foreign pattern has been found so far. In most of monorhymed quatrains the rhythm of syllabic verse 10 (4–6) is supplemented by a syntactic parallelism, which can be clearly seen in the first stanza: Angyeloknak nagyságos asszonya, Úr Jézusnak bódogságos annya, Menyországnak szépséges ajtója: Paradicsomnak vagy széles kapuja! [Majestic Lady of the angels, / Blessed mother of Lord Jesus Christ, / Beautiful door of the Heavens: / You are the wide port of Paradise!]

or in the seventh stanza: Segéljed meg tebenned bizókot, Engeszteld meg az apostolokot.

18 If we want to define the number of the above mentioned cases, then 90% of such works were written with such techniques. 19 In Andrea Kacskovics-Reményi, Beatrix Oszkó, eds., Peer-kódex [Peer-codex], 330–337. 20 Cf. Változatok forrásonként, accessed August 12, 2015, http://rpha.elte.hu/rpha/id/0099.

Hungarian poetry

309

Fordejtsd hozzánk az mártíromokot, Térejtsd hozzánk az confessorokot. [Help those who trust You, / Soften the apostles. / Turn the martyrs to us, / Convert the confessors to us!]

but also in the fifth, eighth, ninth, eleventh, thirteenth, and fifteenth. In the first three lines of the ninth stanza we can find anaphora as well: Emlékezzél angyeli esésről, Emlékezzél Évának vétkéről, Emlékezzél az nagy vízözönről, Nyerj kegyelmet az nagy Úr Istentől. [Remember the fall of the angel, / Remember the sin of Eve, / Remember the great flood, / Be granted mercy by the great Lord]

We can also observe in this work numerous secondary verse-making tools of litanic verse, e.g. antonomasias like: “Mennyországnak szépséges ajtója” (“Beatiful door of Heaven”); “Paradicsomnak vagy széles kapuja” (“You are the wide port of Paradise”); “Úr Jézusnak boldogságos annya” (“Blessed mother of Lord Jesus”); “Törököknek megnyomorítója” (“Crippler of the Turks”) (sic!); “Magyaroknak megoltalmazója” (“Saver of the Hungarians”) and apostrophes: “Neked szólonk” (“To you we are speaking”); “Esedezzél” (“Beg for us”); “Áldott te légy” (“Be you blessed”); “Segéljed” (“Help them”), “Engeszteld” (“Soften”); “Fordejtsd” (“Turn”); etc. Hymns and hymn-adaptations constitute a very large part of litanic verses. Most of them are Marian hymns (as above), but there are also poems invoking Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Characteristically, we can meet them already from the seventeenth century, and these are not only translations. Since Vásárhelyi’s name has been inscribed in an acrostic and the date of writing is visible in the colophon of the sixteenth stanza, we know both date and authorship with complete certainty. Yet we cannot say the same of multiple other works written in the same period. Among several poets whose names are however known are Bálint Balassi (1554–1594), Gergely Vásárhelyi (1561–1623), Ferenc Wathay (15658–1609), Mátyás Nyéki Vörös (1575–1654) and László Listius (1628–1662). Here belong the verse works which elaborate the kyrie trope by repeating the key formula in the whole text of the song as a refrain. They were sung on different holidays (Advent, Easter, New Year’s Eve), and most of them are included in Cantus catholici.21

21 First edition: Lőcse, 1651.

310

Ágnes Czövek

The other litanic verses of this group do not represent the defined genres, because in the majority of cases the frame was dissolved, and the individual invention of the poetic speaker dominates the texts. In these prayers Mary, Christ, Hungarian saints (e.g. “XX. avg. Szent Jstván királyról”22 — “XX. of King Saint Stephen”), apostles (“Mind Szent Apostolokhoz Rithmusokban foglaltatot aӱétatos Imadsag”23 — “Prayer to all the Holy Apostles included in rhythms”), and other saints (e.g. “XIX. mar: Szent Jósefrül”24 — “XIX. Of Saint Joseph”) are invoked. Due to the monotonous repetition of the laudation, the short poem by István Báthory of Ecsed (1555–1605), a Protestant nobleman writing in Mannerist, or sometimes in Baroque style, is a litany-like work, in which the monotony is strengthened by the homonymic rhymes. Dícsértessél Uram Jézus Ki meghalál jó Úr Krisztus Eznap nagypénteken Jézus Eltemettetél Úr Krisztus Miértünk s ezért áldott légy Dícséretes szentséges légy Áldott áldott szentésges légy Mindenek közt Te áldott légy Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen Amen [Be praised Lord Jesus / Who has died oh Lord Christ / On this Good Friday Jesus / You were buried Lord Jesus // For us and for this be blessed / Be praised and be holy / Be blessed blessed and holy / You be blessed among everything // Amen Amen Amen Amen / Amen Amen Amen Amen / Amen Amen Amen Amen / Amen Amen Amen Amen]

The second group of litanic verses comprises the works on religious topics in which the primary verse-making tools play a key role and the secondary versemaking tools are moved to the background or even unobservable. Compared to the first group these works are older, and are translations rather than adaptations, which is why it is easier to define their genres. In the majority of the poems from the second group we recognize hymns whose addressee is mainly the Virgin Mary or Christ. In this set we can distinguish the 22 First printed edition: Cantus catholici, Kassa, 1674. 23 Judit Balázs, Gabriella Uhl, eds., Thewrewk-kódex [Thewrewk-codex], 165–168. 24 First printed edition: Cantus catholici, Kassa, 1674.

Hungarian poetry

311

works including invocations to the body parts of Mary or Christ.25 We can say that without exception the repetitions and the parallelism result from the decision made by the speaking person who tends to build invocations to different body parts using the same formulae. Litany is partly rooted in Hebrew poetry,26 and it is not surprising that psalms also constitute a separate subgroup within the second group. Psalm 136 both in the original and in translation27 is one of the best examples of works in which repetitions cover the entire text. Here belong several biblical translations as well, such as Psalm 28,28 Psalm 117,29 Psalm 10230 and Psalm 14831 extending the praise of God to the whole universe.

25 E.g.: “O boldogságos lábak…” [“Oh, blessed feet…”] (Czech-codex, 102–103), “Boldog asszonyunk minden tagjáról való imádság” [“Prayer of all bodyparts of Our Lady”]; Csilla N. Abaffy, ed., Festetics-kódex: a nyelvemlék hasonmása és betűhű átirata bevezetéssel és jegyzetekkel [Festetics-codex: Facsimile and letter-perfect transcription of the text with introduction and notes] (Budapest: Argumentum Kiadó: Magyar Nyelvtudományi Társaság, 1996), 359–381; “Áldott legyen a te szent méhed” [“Your holy womb be blessed”] (in Lea Haader, Zsuzsanna Papp, eds., Gömöry-kódex 1516: a nyelvemlék hasonmása és betűhű átirata bevezetéssel és jegyzetekkel [Gömöry-codex 1516: Facsimile and letter-perfect transcription of the text with introduction and notes]), (Budapest: MTA Nyelvtud. Int., 2001), 39–43. 26 Cf. Sadowski, Litania i poezja, 29–35. 27 In Csilla Abaffy, Csilla T. Szabó, Edit Madas, eds., Döbrentei-kódex 1508, Halábori Bertalan keze írásával : a nyelvemlékek hasonmása és betűhű átirata bevezetéssel és jegyzetekkel [Döbrentei-codex 1508, manuscript of Bertalan Halábori: Facsimile and letter-perfect transcription of the text with introduction and notes] (Budapest: Argumentum: Magyar Nyelvtudományi Társaság, 1995) 213–214; Lea Haader, ed., Keszthelyi-kódex 1522: a nyelvemlék hasonmása és betűhű átirata bevezetéssel és jegyzetekkel [Keszthelyi-kódex 1522: Facsimile and letter-perfect transcription of the text with introduction and notes] (Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Nyelvtudományi Intézete, 2006), 374–378; Lea Haader, Zsuzsanna Papp, eds., Kulcsár-kódex 1539: a nyelvemlék hasonmása és betűhű átirata bevezetéssel és jegyzetekkel [Kulcsár-kódex 1539: Facsimile and letterperfect transcription of the text with introduction and notes] (Budapest: MTA Nyelvtud. Int., 1999), 340–343; Vizsolyi Biblia (Bible of Vizsoly, first edition: Vizsoly, 1590). 28 Lea Haader, Zsuzsanna Papp, eds., Kulcsár-kódex [Kulcsár-codex], 63. 29 Ibid., 297–300. 30 Lea Haader, ed., Keszthelyi-kódex [Keszthelyi-codex], 269–272. 31 Ibid., 405–409; Lea Haader, Zsuzsanna Papp, eds., Kulcsár-kódex [Kulcsár-codex], 361– 364.

312

Ágnes Czövek

There are some works also belonging to the second group called Te Deum in the Keszthelyi- (48–50.), Festetics- (241–245.), Gömöry- (51–53.) and Kulcsár-codices (50–52.) where the repetition is given by continuous glorification. Although it can be connected to liturgy, a few antiphons and responsories, in which invocation is repeated, were included in the codices (e.g. the Mary-antiphon and responsory in the Festetics-codex; 225., 229., 245., 336.) as well. For example the rhythm of the text entitled “Imádság nyíl ellen”32 (“Prayer against arrow”) written down in prose is given by the repetition of the phrases “ó nyíl állj meg” (“oh arrow stop”) and “miatta” (“because of so. / sth.”). Let us skip here to the fourth group of litanic verses comprising the works in which both the primary and secondary verse-making tools are present in parallel, but the texts are not devoted to religious topics. In order to capture characteristics of this group it will suffice to have a look at the poem “Mars Istenhez békességért”33 (“To god Mars for peace”) by Janus Pannonius (1437–1472). In the first lines the speaker addresses the invocation to the god of war, and then through nearly the whole poem we can read Mars’s antonomasis (in lines 4–7 and 10–11 the pronoun “Te” [“You”] stands as an anaphora). The poem presents the dreadful, but in some sense also grandiose nature of the war. Only in the final line do we find the supplication of the speaker enunciated as follows: “kíméld megfáradt pannon népemet!” (“reprieve my tired Pannonic people!”). Although the poem is addressed to a god with a full repertoire of techniques known to Renaissance literature it does not seem like a religious text. Mars is presented as an allegory of war. Let us turn to the sixth group, in which the secondary verse-making tools are paired with non-religious topics. Our example is a love poem by Bálint Balassi entitled “Júliát hasonlítja a szerelemhez”34 (“He compares Julia to love”). The first six stanzas are the description of Julia, and in the first three of them the lady’s antonomasias are accumulated. In the first two the name of Julia appears as an anaphora in each odd line, and in the following stanza this role is taken by the pronoun “she.” I have passed over the third and the fifth groups. In accordance with the logic of the examination, the third group should contain works in which the secondary verse-making tools appear together with religious topics, whereas the fifth group should include those in which the primary verse-making tools appear and which 32 Andrea Kacskovics-Reményi, Beatrix Oszkó, eds., Peer-kódex [Peer-codex], 252–260. 33 Tibor Klaniczay, ed., Magyarországi humanisták [Humanists in Hungary], trans. Tibor Kardos (Budapest: Szépirodalmi Könyvkiadó, 1982), 66. 34 Balassi Bálint, Balassi Bálint összes művei [All works by Bálint Balassi], ed. Péter Kőszeghy (Budapest: Osiris Kiadó, 2004), 119–120.

Hungarian poetry

313

have non-religious topics. As we have found no such works, the conclusion may be drawn that in an age of marked contrasts the holy and the profane are never interchangeable. The so-called religious poetry nearly obligatorily applied the vocabulary and formulae of liturgy, ensuring their sacral value. On the other hand the secular poetry could not use the figures of sacrality without being involved in the holy sphere. The process was strictly unidirectional: poetry made it possible that the profane become holy (for example as in love poetry), but the holy could not become profane under any circumstances. This situation would change only in the Modern period.

Period of Struggles for Independence Our overview closes down with the Baroque age. The decades after (1670–1750) were the epoch of the so-called struggles for independence, when neither the problem of the expulsion of the Turks nor that of the country, which was divided into three parts, were being considered in the foreground, but rather problems of feudalism or the relationship between Germans and Hungarians.35 At that time there were considerable changes underway in the field of literature and lyric poetry: beside the noble poetry the so-called popular poetry was also evolving. In the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Hungarian literature36 this resulted in groups of well-known and widespread works being used by given communities, independently of aesthetic values. Most of the works belonging to this category were connected to a definite occasion or function, and were not characterized by poetic fiction. They were spread in oral and written form and one text commonly had several variants.37

35 Cf. Gyula Laczházi, Géza Orlovszky, “A függetlenségi küzdelmek kora (1670–1750),” [“Period of struggles for independence (1670–1750)”] in Magyar irodalom [Hungarian literature], ed. Tibor Gintli (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 2010), 249. 36 Ibid., 266. 37 Imola Küllős’s arcticle is referenced in Magyar irodalom [Hungarian literature]: Imola Küllős, “Előszó,” [“Foreword”] Régi Magyar Költők Tára, XVIII. század, IV., Közköltészet I., Mulattatók [Storehouse of Old Hungarian Poets, Eighteenth Century, Vol. IV., Popular Poetry I., Jugglers], quoted in Tibor Gintli, ed., Magyar irodalom [Hungarian literature] (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 2010), 266.

314

Ágnes Czövek

From this age derives however a more valuable work entitled “Siralomének Gróf Zrínyi Miklósról”38 (“Lament for Count Miklós Zrínyi”). The poem lamenting for Zrínyi39 and mocking the German […] is the imitation of a Catholic ritual that is closed down by supplication, versicles and responsories. The unknown author used […] the Stabat Mater dolorosa attributed to Jacopone da Todi as a pattern: the first six stanzas begin with the same words as the Mary-lauda.40

There are also litanic verses from this period that are characteristically connected to Catholic denomination. Such is for example the poem by an unknown author entitled “Ének a Boldogságos Szűzről”41 (“Song of the Blessed Virgin”). The second two lines of its quatrains are repeated as a refrain, and the poem is supplicating the Virgin Mary for the Hungarian people. The characteristics of litanic verses also appear in the case of poems on secular topics, for example, an accumulation of antonomasias can be observed in the love poem by László Amade (1703–1764) “Szívem csöngetője”42 (“The bell of my heart”). Wrapping up this stage of our overview we cannot also overlook some overriding events in the history of the poetry of the age which seem to have been very important in our perspective. In this period we can observe a tendency or wish for the “elimination” of both homonymic rhyme and grammatical rhyme from Hungarian poetry.43 Generally speaking, Hungarian is an agglutinating language in which syntactic parallelisms result in the same affixes and thus homoioteleutons and grammatical rhymes; hence, it is impossible to write poems containing syntactical parallelisms without rhymes in Hungarian.44 However, in sixteenth-century poetry we can observe the propensity for omitting homonymic

38 Imre Varga, ed., A kuruc küzdelmek költészete [The poetry of the Kuruc fights] (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1977), 27–32. 39 Count Miklós Zrínyi (1620–1664) was a military general and poet of Hungarian descent. 40 Cf. “Jegyzetek,” [“Notes”] in A kuruc küzdelmek költészete, 742 — stressed out by me, Á. Cz. 41 Ibid., 639–640. 42 The examined material of this and the following periods derives from a critical edition, cf. Verstár — a magyar líra klasszikusai [Storehouse of poems — the classical works of the Hungarian poetry] (Budapest: Arcanum, Osiris Kiadó, 2001) [on CD]. 43 Cf. Iván Horváth, “Számtalan az soc vala vala vala” — Szenci Molnár Albert a rímről [“Számtalan az soc vala vala vala” — Albert Szenci Molnár on rhymes], accessed August 12, 2015, http://regimagyar.biforium.hu/szovegtar/szenci.rtf. 44 Ibid., 4.

Hungarian poetry

315

and grammatical rhymes. The initiator of this trend was probably Balassi, and it would be characteristic for several poets following his techniques. This period of the history of Hungarian poetry shows that the turning from the forms that seem to be more primordial for us entailed an interest in ancient verse forms, already in the sixteenth, but more prominently in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Perhaps it is not unimaginable that the attractive power of the verse forms of Antiquity was given by their rhymeless and relative parallelismless character.45 The evolution of Hungarian verse in this direction had an effect on the object of our examination, since one of the most poem-organizing principles of the litany is repetition. Possibly this is the reason why there are only a few such works, which could be without a doubt classified as examples of the litany genre in the poetry of that time. In the perspective of litanic verse, the period of nearly 300 years between the birth of Hungarian literature and the age just before its institutionalization can be summarized in the following way: the Reformation, which was very effective in the formation of Hungarian language and literature, was also poorly disposed to litany. As a result, this genre could not be a very productive element in the forming of written poetry46 and was rather integrated into other genres. Another obstacle was the conscious intention to eliminate parallelism as well as homonymic and grammatical rhymes from literature. Despite all of this, litanic verse showed very variable forms of manifestation, and its elements do not appear only in Catholic religious poetry. At the end of this period, however, it was moved into popular works.

Classical Hungarian literature — the Concealing of Litanic Verse (1750–1900) What distinguishes the next period47 from its antecedents is the process of the institutionalization of literature. From the 1770s literature was not only a form of

45 Ibid. 46 Not like the genre of psalm that — because it has evidently ostensible biblical roots — became one of the preferred genres of the Reformation. 47 Cf. Márton Szilágyi, Gábor Vaderna, “A klasszikus magyar irodalom (kb. 1750–kb. 1900). A líra” [“Classical Hungarian literature (approx. 1750–approx. 1900). Lyric poetry”] in Magyar irodalom [Hungarian literature], ed. Tibor Gintli (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 2010), 323–352.

316

Ágnes Czövek

entertainment,48 but started playing an identity-constituting role, whose basis was the national language. According to the first representatives of the Enlightenment in Hungary, György Bessenyei (1747–1811) and his circle, literature (including poetry) was to be a medium via which one can encourage one’s mind to think. Hungarian people should do this in Hungarian. Since the followers of the Enlightenment saw the possibility of national unification in relation to the mother tongue, they did their best to cultivate the Hungarian language. At the same time the conquest of rationalism allowed society to make the first serious steps towards secularization. Turning to the level of texts we will mention only four poems from the period. Though none of them are devoted to religious topics, they all show some characteristics of litanic verse. The first is a work of Gergely Édes (1763–1847), a lesser-known Hungarian poet. Entitled “Nemzeti nyelvünkről” (“About our native language”) the text, which praises the mother tongue, consists of two parts. Of the first seventeen lines of the second part all odd lines start with the anaphora “Édes anyám” (“My dear mother”), while all even lines end with the same phrase, enumerating the “acts” done by the native language which is personalized. The second poem, or strictly speaking hymn, was written by Mihály Csokonai Vitéz (1773–1805), one of the most prominent poets of Hungarian literature. Entitled “A nap innepe” (“The celebration of the sun”) it imitates the text of a ritual worshipping the sun. After the apostrophe (“Idvez légy” — “Hail”) in the first stanza the antonomasias of the sun are accumulated. Then in the second and third stanzas there are enumerated the acts of the addressee, while in the fourth and sixth stanzas the poetic speaker turns to the sun with a request. From the seventh stanza it becomes clear the aim for which the speaker evoked this pagan ritual, as a parallel is built between the Sun bringing so much good to the Inca people and the “Sun of Keszthely,” the benefactor Count Festetics. The poem, which avoids the schemes of occasional poetry, is a really original work. We can also find works imitating liturgical prayer in the popular poetry of the nineteenth century. The “Bakalitánia”49 (“Soldier’s litany”), written at the beginning of the century, asks for help against the difficulties of the soldier’s life, or the “God

48 Márton Szilágyi, Gábor Vaderna, “A bécsi magyar testőrség irodalmi köre” [“Literary circle of Hungarian Guards in Vienna”] in Magyar irodalom [Hungarian literature], ed. Tibor Gintli (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 2010), 330. 49 Zoltán Újváry, “Imádság-travesztiák,” [“Prayer-travesties”] in Zoltán Újváry, Népszokás és népköltészet [Folk custom and folk poetry] (Debrecen: Hajdú-Bihar m. Múz. Ig., 1980), 612.

Hungarian poetry

317

living in Vienna,” and for the intercession of “all brown girls.” The continuously repeated formula (“ments meg uram minket” — “Save us Lord”) invokes the king. While the “Bakalitánia” is a travesty, “a caricature that does not aim at […] the genre becoming anachronistic […] but the content,”50 the litany51 of a woman complaining against her drunken husband, which was also written in this period, may be called a parody of the genre.52 These and similar works (except those belonging to popular poetry) represent an inconspicuous corpus of the texts that can be connected to litany in the classical period of Hungarian literature. Its small size is not so surprising, knowing the background of intellectual history. Modernism will entail a large turn in this field.

Modernism – the Secularized Litanic Verse According to the periodization of Magyar irodalom (Hungarian literature) Modernism began around 1890, and its first sub-period came to an end with World War II.53 A bitter experience with the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century ideologies which had not given modern men satisfactory answers as well as an unfulfilled wish to find God made it possible to restore forms and contents that had been earlier depreciated in literature. Poets rediscovered homonymic and grammatical rhymes, which started to be masterfully used. Parallelism could be observed in some works. The rehabilitation also covered litanic verse. However, though in the period of Modernity the corpus of litanic verses is larger (as for belles-lettres), the litany was still treated as a marginal genre even by the poets consciously referring to the Catholic tradition (like Mihály Babits,1883–1941, and several priest poets). We must separately speak about several poems in which the word “litany” appears in the title, but in which there is no connection with prayer in terms of either form or content, at least seemingly. As we will see, in the case of certain works the reference of the text to what has been indicated in the title creates a 50 Ibid, 279. 51 Imola Küllős, “Elemzések a XVIII–XIX. századi magyar világi közköltészet folklorizálódott műfajairól és témáiról,” [“Analyses of the folklorised genres and topics of the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Hungarian secular popular poetry”] in Imola Küllős, Közköltészet és népköltészet [Popular poetry and folk poetry] (Budapest: L’Harmattan, 2004), 250–251. 52 Ibid., 279. 53 Cf. Tibor Gintli, “A 20. század első felének magyar irodalma,” [“Hungarian literature in the first half of the twentieth century”], in Magyar irodalom [Hungarian literature] ed. Tibor Gintli, (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 2010), 641–646.

318

Ágnes Czövek

transtextual connection, which imposes a new, i.e. modern, reinterpretation on litany as a genre. The following poems may be considered as connected to litany only at the level of their titles: “Éjféli litánia” (“Midnight litany”) by Árpád Tóth (1886–1928), “Mindszenti litánia” (“Litany of All Saints’ Day”) by Frigyes Karinthy (1887–1938) and “A Ziller litániája” (“The litany of the river Ziller” in the volume Sarlósboldogasszony — Visitation, 1928) by Sándor Sík (1889–1963). In all these examples the litanic character of a poem manifests the association with continuous, unstoppable, and permanent repetition. In Árpád Tóth’s poem it is continuously raining, in Sándor Sík’s work the river Ziller is flooding unstoppably, while in Karinthy’s text the poetic speaker is speaking out of himself, with no interruption. The idea of litany in the period of modernity is connected with continuity, monotony and even to the nearly pejorative meanings of redundancy in certain cases. It is really not a novelty, as it was exactly what the Protestants had strongly criticized in prayer already in the eighteenth century.54 Although the modern poets used to employ only a few verse-making tools typical of litany — both primary and secondary — they did it in many poems. The most frequent were figures of verbal repetition: used mainly line by line (especially anaphora, e.g. in the poetry of Gyula Juhász, Endre Ady, Mihály Babits, and Dezső Kosztolányi) or sometimes stanza by stanza (characteristically in the poetry of Endre Ady, Zoltán Somlyó, and Sándor Weöres). We can also see examples for the repetition of the formulae known from the litanies: e.g. in the poem by Dezső Kosztolányi (1885–1936) beginning with the phrase “Légy áldott…” (“Be blessed…”), these two words form anaphora in nearly the whole poem. Among the secondary verse-making tools we can mention the accumulation of periphrases and antonomasias. Here we cannot indicate one single poem as an example, but rather a few interesting phenomena. In several poems by Gyula Juhász (1883– 1937) we can meet the antonomasia “titkos értelmű rózsa” (“rose of secret sense”)55 that is well-known from the Marian litanies. Under his elaboration such formulae are sometimes modified or situated in a different context, yet still recognizable: Ne nézzetek a múló asszonyokra! Örökké ég az Úrnak csipkebokra És  D á v i d  e l e f á n t c s o n t t o r n y a  vár ránk, […].56

54 Cf. Ferenc Papp, “A litánia — egy imádságtípus utóélete,” [“Litany — The afterlife of a type of prayer”] Confessio, no. 3 (2012): 92. 55 E.g. “Gioconda” (1910), “Vigília” (“Vigil”; 1910), “Titkos értelmű rózsa” (“Rose of secret sense”; 1919). 56 “Vigília” (“Vigil”; 1910) — stressed out by me, Á. Cz.

Hungarian poetry

319

[Do not look at the fading women! / The Lord’s thorn is eternally burning / and  D a v i  d’ s  i v o r y  t o w e r  is waiting for us, […].]

or: Tűnt Anna,  a r a n y h á z, Te drága csoda, E l e f á n t c s o n t m í v ű B o l d o g  p a l o t a. Tűnt Anna, te tünde, Te  é d e n i  k e r t, […].57 [Disappeared Anna, g o l d e n  h o u s e, / You dear miracle, / Happy p a l a c e  / M a d e  o f  i v o r y. // Disappeared Anna, you fairy, / you  G a r d e n  o f  E d e n, […].]

Here is an example of the same technique from Endre Ady (1877–1919): Mária a nagy, fehér jégtorony, Mária a zászlóknak szent zászlója, Mária a mennyei paripa, […].58 [Mary the great, white ice tower, / Mary the holy flag of the flags, / Mary, the heavenly horse]

The litanic character of numerous poems is given by the repetition present throughout the whole text. Several works by Dezső Kosztolányi belong here. In “Litánia” (“Litany”) from 1932, which is formally similar to litanies, the odd lines (“Az én koromban” — “In my age”) give the repeating parts of the poem, and the even lines rhyme with one each other, offering plain rhymes. In the “Röpima” (“Prayer leaflet”) from 1935 the name Mary is repeated as epiphora. It is, however, the evident intention of the speaker to evoke this litany in order either to elevate an earthly woman, as in love poems, or to despoil her. The attributes of Mary and the enumeration of her actions move on a wide scale from the sacred (“Ő a sebes fényes láng” — “She is the swift and shining fire,” “lágy mint a hattyú tolla” — “soft as the feather of the swan,” “áldott a földi nők között” — “blessed among earthly women”) towards the profane (“egy lágytojást se főz meg” — “she does not even cook a soft-boiled egg,” “sok altatószert használ” — “she uses a lot of sedatives,” “életem fájdalma” — “pain of my life”). By the end of the poem, when it turns into a kind of parody of litany, the speaking person very well reveals the concept of temporal continuity as implied in this genre:

57 “Profán litánia” (“Profane litany”; 1912) — stressed out by me, Á. Cz. 58 “A pócsi Mária” (“Mary of Pócs;” 1910).

320

Ágnes Czövek

lásd, vége sincs e versnek, Mária, mert mindig újra kezdem, Mária, oly hosszú már ez ének, Mária, mint végtelen szerelmem, Mária. [see, this poem does not end, Mary, / since I always restart it, Mary, / so long is already this song, Mary, / as my endless love, Mary.]

Some poems from the period are based not on verbal repetition, but on accumulating the periphrases and antonomasias of the addressed lover. This is the reason why Margit Kaffka (1880–1918) (“Litánia” — “Litany”) and Gyula Juhász (“Profán litánia” — “Profane litany”) put the word “litánia” in the titles of their poems. In turn the poems “Anyák litániája”59 (“Litany of mothers”) written between 1923–1927 by László Mécs (1895–1975), a priest poet, and “Az utolsó litánia” (“The last litany”) by Jenő Dsida (1907–1938), seem to be the nearest to the tone of litany prayer. The latter quotes the Litany of Loreto: Nézek a finom templom-ködön át a fehér-arcu, néma Máriára és elmondom Neki a legutolsó szép litániát! Titkos értelmü rózsa, Könyörögj érettünk! Dávid királynak tornya, könyörögj érettünk! Elefántcsont-torony, Könyörögj érettünk! Mária aranyház Könyörögj érettünk!… [I am looking through the fine / church-fog to the white-faced, silent Mary / and tell her the last / beautiful litany! // Rose of secret sense, / Pray for us! / Tower of King David, / Pray for us! / Ivory tower, / Pray for us! / Mary golden house, / Pray for us!…]

Mécs’s poem, in turn, is a collective prayer of mothers. In the first five stanzas the beginning of the penultimate lines is repeated: “Mi tudjuk, mi az ember!” (“We know what human is!”). By this the speech becomes justified and the speakers become empowered to repeat the supplication at the end of a stanza: “könyörüljetek méhünk gyümölcsén!” (“reprieve the fruit of our wombs!”). In the sixth stanza the acclamation of the speakers invokes the intercession of the Virgin Mother.

59 László Mécs, Mécs László összes versei 1920–1940 [Complete poems by László Mécs 1920–1940] (Budapest: Athenaeum, 1941), 267.

Hungarian poetry

321

In the period of Modernity — despite the fact that parallelism acquired new life — litanic verse could not have a serious effect on poetic practice. We can associate this fact with the general tendency of Hungarian Modernity, according to which the poet who was always searching for something which was eventually unobtainable, could never set the details together into completeness. Translated from Hungarian by Balázs Kántás

Witold Sadowski University of Warsaw

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939. An Outside Perspective The first monograph devoted entirely to litany in Polish poetry appeared in 2011.1 There is no need to repeat its contents here, but there is one question which still remains unanswered: what is the place of Polish litanic verse in the context of analogous poetry produced in other countries? The perspective adopted to answer this question will not be an inside perspective, i.e. one which examines Polish works within their own logic of literary-historical development, but an outside perspective, i.e. one which sets them against their foreign counterparts. The poetry of the countries which managed to preserve belief in their own cultural integrity over a long period of time — a belief based i.a. on their literary canon — can be compared to a system enclosed in a semiotic frame. As we know, one of the classic categories of semiotics is the perspective — a notion which has been examined by Boris Uspensky. The differentiation he introduces between the internal and the external point of view2 leads us to consider literary works, trends, and styles as systems enclosed by a frame. As such, they can be examined both from the inside, i.e. within the bounds of the frame, and from the outside, i.e. from the perspective of one situated outside the frame. The change in perspective invariably results in a reconfiguration of the individual components. Consequently, the truth about the same work, trend, or style is then revealed from a different point of view, and is as it were put in a new light. Monographs on verse systems and literary genres in vernacular literatures tend to be written from the inside perspective. This can be attributed to the idiomatic nature of culture, which results from the untranslatability of language and unrepeatability of geopolitical events. It is worth remembering that the Nobel prize

1 Cf. Witold Sadowski, Litania i poezja. Na materiale literatury polskiej od XI do XXI wieku [Litany and Poetry. On the Body of Material of Polish Literature from the Eleventh to the Twenty-First Century] (Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2011). The monograph includes a detailed bibliography on research into the works of individual poets. 2 Cf. Boris A. Uspensky, “Structural Isomorphism of Verbal and Visual Art,” Poetics 2(1972), vol. 1: 5–39.

324

Witold Sadowski

in literature has been awarded only to those Polish writers who — to a greater or lesser extent — managed to take a step beyond their idiomatic background — Henryk Sienkiewicz, Władysław Reymont, Czesław Miłosz, and Wisława Szymborska. At the same time the Polish masters of metaphor, such as Julian Przyboś and Krzysztof Kamil Baczyński, have not been appreciated abroad. Neither were the premier-league writers who were deeply engaged in issues of national importance, such as Juliusz Słowacki and Stanisław Wyspiański. Hence, the language employed to discuss the idiomatic conditioning of verse or the literary genre must be the vernacular. However, there are certain aspects of poetic conventions which can only be seen from the outside, and versification is not an exception here. They can be grasped only by those readers who manage to step beyond the frame of their own culture and who make the effort to adopt the outside perspective. The invaluable help provided by foreign researchers needs to be acknowledged at this point.

Influences and Choices The tool which helps determine the place of a given literature in an international context and to trace the permeability of its borders over centuries is a classic intertextual category, i.e. the notion of influence. When Polish culture is examined as a recipient of foreign inspirations, Polish litanic verse appears to be subject to Western influence, which was in large measure limited to works written in Latin. When seen as the sender rather than the receiver and the promotor of the litany genre abroad, Polish culture turns in the opposite direction and the circle of its influence becomes limited to the East. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the major role in terms of propagating litany prayers across present-day Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia was played by the so-called Uniates, that is, followers of the Orthodox rite, who however decided to keep their ties with Rome. In order for Polish culture to act as a transmission belt, which selectively processed Western inspirations before transferring them onto the eastern ground, it needed to develop a specific state system. From the end of the fourteenth century Poland was in the hands of the Lithuanian Jagiellonian dynasty. Thanks to that, up to the eighteenth century its borders stretched to include among others areas that of the present-day Poland, Lithuania, Belarus and much of Ukraine. The establishment of the Greek Catholic dioceses in eastern Poland dates from the Union of Brest (1596). It was preceded by the vigorous activity of certain humanists, in whom sensitivity towards local languages coexisted with a general orientation towards the West. Franciszek Skoryna, one of the earliest representatives of the Renaissance in Poland, in 1522 released a prayer book written in the Church Slavonic

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

325

language. The publication included not only six akathists translated from Greek, but also his own compositions. The two prayers — one of which is addressed to Jesus and the other to John the Baptist — mark a starting point for the original (rather than translated) akathist compositions in the Church Slavonic language. Due to the religious controversies, they long remained in the hands of the Uniates, but in the nineteenth century — thanks to the support of the Orthodox archbishop, Innocent Borisov — they spread all over Russia.3 The same cannot be said with reference to the inspirations from French, Italian, or English sources. Polish poetry was under almost no influence from litanies written in these languages. Even though Western literature was often read and followed, the imitations avoided compositions modelled on litanic verse. The sixteenth- and seventeenth-century poets, who were known for their enthusiastic reception of Petrarch, remained indifferent to his sonnet number 312, which contains an anaphora on “né” and which was often paraphrased by English and French poets. Felicjan Faleński, for instance, who in the nineteenth century translated all of Petrarch’s songs (1881), leaves out the anaphora in this particular sonnet. The same applies to the reception of other Western poets who composed litanic verse. There is nothing unusual in the fact that different literatures follow different lines of development or that the output of the neighbouring literatures is treated selectively. In a situation, however, when from the tenth century onwards Polish culture saw its future in close relations with Western culture, the complete disregard for an important literary trend popular in Western Europe deserves careful examination. Polish litanic verse seems to follow a different pattern than that upon which similar forms were based in other countries. In the history of English, French, Irish and Italian literatures, litanic verse developed alongside the Church Litany. The monks in the British Isles could not refer to the Litany of the Saints, which was disseminated concurrently with their own poetry. Also the Litany of Loreto could not provide a model for the first Latin chairetismic works, hundreds or even thousands of which were already 3 Cf. Максим Козлов, А[лександр] Н. Стрижев “Акафист,” [“Akathist”] in Православная Энциклопедия [The Orthodox Encyclopaedia], ed. Патриарх Алексий II and Патриарх Кирилл (Москва: Церковно-научный центр РПЦ, 2000), vol. 1, accessed Sep 30, 2015; http://www.pravenc.ru/text/63814.html. Иван П. Давыдов, Православный акафист русским святым (религиоведческий анализ) [The Orthodox Akathist of the Russian Saints] (Благовещенск: АмГУ, 2004); Федор Б. Людоговский, “Церковнославянский акафист как современный гимнографический жанр: структура, адресация, функционирование,” [“The Church-Slavonic Akathist as a Contemporary Hymnic Genre”] Славяноведение 2(2004): 66.

326

Witold Sadowski

in existence before it was first written down. What is important is that in the twelfth century, the literatures in question witnessed a shift from the religious to the secular, with more and more litanic works being produced which centred on amatory and political issues. This trend is not to be observed in Polish medieval literature. Virtually the whole of its poetic output which has been preserved was in a greater or lesser degree produced under the auspices of the Church and as such it was devalued in the sixteenth century when the foundations for modern Polish literature were laid anew in the Renaissance spirit. Most probably it is for this reason that Polish post-medieval litanic verse was not rooted in the earlier achievements of Polish poetry, but up to the modern period developed in close relations to the Church Litany. Even though it frequently involved secular concerns, the poetic litany was so distant from the diction typical of secular poetry that the first poem in which we can discern the Provençal pattern of a litanic love song — “Ciała kobiet” (“Women’s Bodies”) by Edward Leszczyński — was not composed until the twentieth century. The first Polish alba, which is not only a morning song, but also contains litanic enumerations, and the first Polish serenade, which is not only an evening song, but also includes an anaphoric and epiphoric scheme — the diptych Modlitwa na organy (A Prayer for the Organs) by Wacław Rolicz-Lieder — appear not much earlier, i.e. at the very end of the nineteenth century. Such late renditions of the secular litanic verse show that its role in earlier Polish poetry was so negligible that the poets of the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries were not able to revive it. Their rendition of contemporary French literature, which could boast a continuous and independent development of the secular branch of litanic verse, is a sign of the lost hope — the hope for a Romantic revival of the medieval tradition. It seems that the architextual legacy of the erotic poem, the serenade, and the alba had to be approached in terms of a foreign borrowing, whose employment in native literature calls for a pastiche.

The Rejection and Rehabilitation of Litanic Verse Thus, with some reservations, it can be said that the place of the poetic litany in Polish culture bears an affinity with that of litanic verse in countries marked by Protestantism. However, the assumed resemblance seems to be evolutionary in nature, for it traces a development from the stage of analogy to the stage of opposition.

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

327

As a popular proverb has it, “Poland was once a heaven for the nobility, a purgatory for the townspeople, a hell for the peasants, and a paradise for the Jews.”4 At the turn of the seventeenth century the four social classes mentioned in the proverb represented, to simplify matters, four confessions. The townspeople of Gdańsk, Toruń or Królewiec (now Kaliningrad), largely composed of German immigrants, accepted Lutheranism. The peasants remained Catholic. The Jews cultivated their own traditions. The nobility, in turn, went through a tempestuous period of fascination with Calvinism only to return to Rome in the first half of the seventeenth century.5 This indicates that the equation between Poland and Catholicism is far off the mark until the middle of the seventeenth century. More importantly, it shows that cultural processes predating the period occurred in relation to Western Protestantism. The major poets of the Polish Renaissance and Baroque literature, which lasted to the middle of the eighteenth century, show indifference towards the litanic form, with one exception — that of Wespazjan Kochowski. Their disregard mirrors the attitude typical of the literatures of Germany and Scandinavia, which absorbed the negative position of Martin Luther towards litany. It also affects the circle of the Polish elites. As a result of this, during the Baroque period litanic verse is composed only by second- or third-rate poets. Most of them — Walenty Bartoszewski, Stanisław Serafin Jagodyński, Andrzej Malski, Jan Libicki, Anna Marianna Marchocka — use the potential of medieval religious songs. Others, less numerous,

4 Cf. Księga Przysłów, Przypowieści i Wyrażeń Przysłowiowych Polskich [A Book of Proverbs, Parables and Polish Proverbial Expressions], ed. Samuel Adalberg (Warszawa: Druk Emila Skiwskiego, 1894), 419. 5 Religious denominations are not the subject of the present paper; therefore, only a brief outline is provided. The followers of the Eastern rites have not been taken into account; the more complicated choices of the Polish nobility are also omitted. For the religious situation in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Poland cf: Janusz Tazbir, Poland as the Rampart of Christian Europe: Myths and Historical Reality, trans. Chester A. Kisiel (Warszawa: Interpress, 1989). Idem, A State without Stakes: Polish Religious Toleration in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, trans. Alexander T. Jordan (Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, 1973). Norman Davies, “Antemurale: The Bulwark of Christendom (Religion),” in God’s Playground. A History of Poland (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005), vol. 1. Among works written in Polish cf. J. Tazbir, Reformacja — Kontrreformacja — Tolerancja [Reformation — CounterReformation — Tolerance] (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Dolnośląskie, 1996). It should be remembered that at that time Królewiec was not part of the Kingdom of Poland. It was a Polish fief, strongly bound to the Polish Crown by cultural and economic ties, and a leading Protestant centre in the area.

328

Witold Sadowski

try to modernize the formula, drawing upon either the humanist or reformational inspirations, which means that among them we find both Catholics — Kasper Miaskowski, Stanisław Herakliusz Lubomirski and Józef Bartłomiej Zimorowic (the author of Litania — The Litany in ottava rima) — and Protestants. Erazm Otwinowski, who belongs to the second group, five times uses litanic enumeration in his poems, i.a. in the following: Tajemnica, że Słowo tu się Ciałem zstało, bo co o Nim Bóg wyrzekł, w Nim się wykonało. Tajemnica, że się Bóg w tym Ciele objawił, wszytkie narody ziemskie w Nim ubłogosławił. Tajemnica, jak nasze w Nim sprawił zbawienie i jak Żydów z pogany sprawił zjednoczenie. Tajemnica - antychryst, ale nieprawości, i okrutny Babilon, matka wszeteczności. Tajemnica o naszym z martwych obudzeniu i tego złego świata strasznym dokończeniu. Tajemnica, że wszyscy nie za raz pomrzemy, lecz wszyscy w ocemgnieniu będziem przemienieni. [The mystery of the Word here becoming Flesh, / for what God said about Him, in Him was done. / The mystery of God who in the Body appeared, / all earthly nations in Him he blessed. / The mystery of our Salvation in Him / and of the Jews united with heathens. / The mystery – antichrist, but of unrighteousness, / and cruel Babylon, mother of impiousness. / The mystery of our waking from death / and the evil world’s dire end. / The mystery of us not dying anon, / but all of us will be shortly transformed.]6

The litany is fully rehabilitated only in the circle of the Polish Jesuits. Abundant recompense for the low esteem the genre enjoyed in poetry is to be found in litanies intended for publication in prayer books. These were composed by the greatest minds in the contemporary Church: Piotr Skarga, Kasper Drużbicki, Marcin Laterna, Adam Piekarski, Jacynt Przetocki, and Gabriel Andrzej Kasparowicz, as well as by anonymous writers, among them Polish Carmelite Nuns. Their style, which was at times full of flourishes, paradoxes and surprises, and at times deeply rhetoricized, was always individualized; therefore, the prayers were more akin to literary compositions than to the schematic Church Litanies of the Middle Ages. They formed poetic cycles, sometimes including as many as several dozen works. The prayers were combined by their authors according to the same principle of variety that guided the silva rerum books or the volumes of Baroque poetry. In 6 Erazm Otwinowski, “Tajemnice Zbawienne,” [“The Salvation Mysteries”] v. 17–28, in Pisma poetyckie [Poetic Writings], ed. Piotr Wilczek (Warszawa: IBL PAN, 1999), 172.

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

329

consequence, the line between church writings and artistic compositions became blurred as some poetic collections also contained litanic verse. This concerned mainly those volumes of poetry whose titles included the word “ogród” (garden), such as Ogród panieński (The Maiden’s Garden) by Wespazjan Kochowski or Ogród rozkoszny Miłości Bożej (The Delightful Garden of God’s Love) by Adrian Wieszczycki. The period under discussion also saw the appearance of two prayers which were composed for the use of the Church and which deeply influenced the Roman Catholic rite in Poland. The first one, called Officium, albo Godzinki o Niepokalanym Poczęciu Najświętszej Maryi Panny (Officium, or The Little Office of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary), appeared in Cracow probably in 1616 as an anonymous Jesuit translation of Officium Parvum Immaculatae Conceptionis BMV, approved by the Apostolic See only a year before.7 The second one was composed by Wawrzyniec Benik and is known under the incipit Gorzkie żale (Bitter Lamentations); the title of the first edition (1707) is not used. Both prayers are multipart compositions, forming what can be called poeticdevotional cycles. Their popularity may be ascribed to their preference for the forms of syllabic verse, which were most frequently used in Polish poetry, including popular poetry, and therefore were most appreciated by the audience. In the Little Office it is a 13-syllable verse with the caesura after the seventh syllable, used in Polish literature since the Middle Ages, especially in poems on themes of high import. In the Bitter Lamentations it is octosyllabic verse, which in Polish Baroque literature is reserved for works stylized as folk poetry,8 as well as the Sapphic stanza, introduced into Polish poetry by Jan Kochanowski, one of the two greatest poets of the sixteenth century (the other being Mikołaj Rej). Both prayers were patterned upon the litanies. In the Little Office the litanic markers include Marian salutations, introduced by the anaphora on “witaj” or “zawitaj.” Both words share a similar meaning (“hail”) and are purposefully used as equivalents of the Latin ave and — indirectly — also of the Greek chaire. The salutations expanded into numerous Marian antonomasias, derived from the Litany of Loreto and reproduced verbatim or paraphrased (“Ark of the Covenant,” “Gate of the Enclosed Garden,” “Temple of God,” “Comfort of the Afflicted,” “Tower of Strength, of David,” “A Bright Sea Star” and many others). In the Bitter 7 Cf. Roman Mazurkiewicz, Przedziwna Matka Stworzyciela Swego. Antologia dawnej poezji maryjnej [The Strangest of Mothers to Her Creator. An Anthology of Old Marian Poetry] (Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Księży Marianów, 2008), 378. 8 Cf. Lucylla Pszczołowska, Wiersz polski. Zarys historyczny [Polish Verse. An Historical Outline] (Wrocław: Fundacja na rzecz Nauki Polskiej, 1997), 88–89.

330

Witold Sadowski

Lamentations, in turn, litanic verse is used in three “Lamentations on the Suffering Jesus.” Deprived of syllabic regularity, they are connected by the anaphora on “Jesus,” which evokes the Litany to the Holy Name of Jesus. Both compositions became staples of Church services and remain so nowadays. The Little Office are sung weekly, before the first Sunday mass, while in the previous centuries it was also sung before weekday masses. The Bitter Lamentations are used on the Sundays (and occasionally Fridays) of Lent. There are also services based on repeating the Litany every day for a month — May (the Litany of Loreto), June (the Litany of the Sacred Heart of Jesus), and in some churches also July (the Litany of the Precious Blood of Jesus), which shows that since the seventeenth century Catholics in Poland have had a virtually unbroken and very close connection with the Litany. This explains why the poetic litany in Poland develops almost completely independently of the European context. Similarly to Germany, Denmark, Norway and Sweden, litanic verse in Poland is seen in relation to the Catholic Church prayer, but — unlike the countries mentioned — since the second half of the seventeenth century the religious inspiration is no longer downgraded and the beginning of the nineteenth century sees a large-scale return to litanic verse — a process which continues today.

Laforgue vs. Kasprowicz The endogenous anchoring of Polish poetic litany manifests itself i.a. in the following ways. First of all, the growing interest in the litany in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries had little in common with the then popular “Les Litanies de Satan” by Charles Baudelaire. The English response to the French poem in the form of Algernon Charles Swinburne’s blasphemous “Dolores” was not matched by a similar reaction in Poland. The closest we can get to Baudelaire is in Edward Leszczyński’s litany “Mater tenebrarum” with its nihilistic distortion of the three-fold Agnus Dei. Leszczyński was, however, a second-rate poet and moreover, his poem was addressed neither to Satan (as was Baudelaire’s) nor Mary (as was Swinburne’s), but to “Earth, mother,” which shows how pale were the Polish litanies noires. More parallels can be drawn with another French poet — Jules Laforgue, the author of “Les Litanies de Mon Sacre-Coeur.” In Poland some parallels to this poem may be found in Jan Kasprowicz’s dylogy entitled Ginącemu światu (To the Dying World, 1901) and Salve Regina (1902), subsequently published together as Hymny (Hymns). The poem “Dies irae,” which opens the first volume, shows the dissolution of the litanic form by having the formula “Kyrie eleison” scattered

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

331

randomly throughout the text. The titular poem of the second volume is, in turn, an attempt at restoring order by taking up a song inspired by the Little Office. Kasprowicz’s poetic oeuvre is incomparably more extensive and varied than Laforgue’s. Neither is the affinity between the poets based on their religious attitudes. The only unquestionable connection between them is the gift of an unusual sensitivity to the melody of popular rhythms. Both the volume Les Complaintes (1885), which contains the above-mentioned litany, and the works included in the cycle Hymns (e.g. “Święty Boże, Święty Mocny” — “Holy God, Holy Mighty”) were inspired by folk songs. It is enough, however, to compare how the Polish and French poets treat the inspirations behind their works to see the discrepancy between their seemingly similar experiences. Jean-Pierre Richard describes the circumstances that gave rise to Laforgue’s volume in the following way: The origin of Les Complaintes can be dated precisely: “I first came across the idea — Laforgue writes to Kahn — during the opening of Lion de Belfort at the crossroads with Observatoire,” on 20 September 1880. The idea comes to Laforgue, who lives in the district and knows it very well […]. During the festivities which took part in the rain and which shared the gloomy atmosphere of the travelling fair, he heard the poetic genre of the popular romanca, sung or rather “shouted out” by two women in a not completely unsuccessful way. He had not been familiar with the genre before. […] Enchanted by the “lazy” Sunday or overcome by spleen, he was to return regularly to “the sad suburbs to listen to the barrel organ.”9

The origin of the Hymns, in turn, can be summarized in the following way: Leopold Staff recalled that “the motif of supplication has tortured” Kasprowicz “for years, since the Kuyavian times it pressed upon him every time he heard it in church, demanding a shape.” The author himself confessed to his wife: “The motif was with me for many, many years, I tried to capture it a number of times, but I could not find a sufficient form.”10

The juxtaposition of these two accounts reveals two differences, which — like a lens — reflect the discrepancy between the French and Polish approaches to litanic verse. First of all, the earliest known version of Laforgue’s litany was preserved in a manuscript dating from November 15th, 1880. The date is an indication that the poem was most certainly composed as a direct reaction to the event described by Richard. It can even be regarded as a kind of spontaneous improvisation. Such 9 Jean-Pierre Richard, “Le sang de la complainte,” Poétique, 40(1979) : 489. 10 W. Sadowski, Litania i poezja…[Litany and Poetry…], 288. The translation by the author of the present paper.

332

Witold Sadowski

a reading can be justified by the deep changes to which the poem was subject in the following year. In the meantime, Kasprowicz — according to Staff ’s account — retrieved “the motif of supplication” from his deep memory, after a long struggle for its appropriate use, in a way which was thoroughly thought out. The contemplative approach of the Polish poets towards litanic verse will be touched upon in a later part of the present paper. Secondly, and most importantly, what drew Laforgue’s attention to the rhythmic pattern of the Litany of the Sacred Heart of Jesus was urban poetry. Kasprowicz, on the other hand, became familiar with litanic supplications in a country church in the Kuyavian province rather than “on the street corners” of a city. The tradition of the litanic enumerations appealed to him because of a childhood spent among common people, who used to sing Church litanies, rather than due to his exposure to the “genre of the popular romanca.” His ear was alert to popular poetry and he used the popular genre, but for his rhythmic phrases and patterns of emotional incantation he turned to the repertoire of the religious rather than secular litany. Even if his intention was to move in the direction of Laforgue’s poetry, giving up supplication for lament, the model for this kind of poetry would also be found in the church, in the form of the most poignant and peculiarly Polish plaintive texts — the already mentioned Bitter Lamentations.

Facing a New Model of Patriotism If the return to the litanic form in Europe was indeed provoked by Baudelaire, ironically leading to a revival of religious litanic verse in France and England, in Poland this kind of stimulus was neither expected nor needed. In 1832, i.e. a quarter of a century before the publication of Les Fleurs du mal, but also in Paris — there were issued Księgi narodu polskiego i pielgrzymstwa polskiego (Books of the Polish Nation and Pilgrimage) by Adam Mickiewicz, regarded by many as the most distinguished poet in the history of Polish literature. The “Litania pielgrzymska” (“The Pilgrim’s Litany”), which concludes the volume, became a much more significant point of reference for future Polish poets and was subject to countless reworkings and imitations. “The Pilgrim’s Litany” is an important marker of the idiomatic development of Polish litanic verse. It is the main representative of patriotic litanies — a trend which finds abundant manifestation in volumes of poetry as well as in prayer books. The roots of this tradition go back to Antiquity; they are to be found in the custom of celebrating the supplicatory prayers in the face of the barbarian invasions of Constantinople and Rome as well as in the Litanies performed during the wars between European countries at the dawn of the Middle Ages. The

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

333

translation of Die deutsche Litaney, approved by Martin Luther in the face of Turkish aggression in Europe, was frequently printed in sixteenth- and seventeenthcentury Polish hymn books, with individual invocations systematically modified according to the progress of military actions and the current relations between the various religious denominations in Poland. In this way, the Protestants elevated the Litany to the level of an historical document. The tradition was preserved even after Protestantism had ceased to exert influence on religious trends. It was then melted into a new model of patriotism, which began to take root in the second half of the eighteenth century. This new model of Polish patriotism is an esoteric concept, which is difficult to define within the scope of the present paper.11 It will suffice it to mention its most essential features, which are those relevant to our discussion. The model began to take shape in the period of the gradual loss of independence, caused by the three partitions of Poland, which started with the tearing off of parts of the country in 1772 and 1793 until a complete partition was sealed in 1795. The 123-year loss of Poland’s independence, which was to follow, meant subjection to the three neighbouring powers — Austria, Prussia and Russia — the last of which was to have the greatest impact on national feelings among Poles. It was in reaction to the chaotic and repressive system of tsarist autocracy that Polish patriotism took a definite form. The experience of people in the Russian zone was marked by death sentences, torture, mass exile to the hostile climate of Siberia, the collapse of health during long imprisonment, and the confiscation of goods — all this forced the country’s intellectual elite out of Poland and made them seek refuge in Parisian poorhouses. The strenuous search for meaning in the harsh conditions of reality evolved into an openly religious cult of blood sacrifice, which led to rash decisions about undertaking national uprisings, one after another. Their toll resulted in still more deaths and the Poles were trapped in a vicious circle of despair. The society, which had long been attached to the value of liberty, was so shattered by the partitioning experience that its identity was stamped by an extreme oversensitivity to its own pain. The situation required a leader, who — following in the footsteps of the biblical prophets — would help find a deeper justification for the gratuitous suffering. The leader took the form of the poet–seer — a figure which was restored to favour in Poland due to the Romantic predilection for the early medieval period. All the

11 The modern idea of Polish patriotism was successfully explained from the perspective of a British historian by Norman Davies, “Naród: The Growth of the Modern Polish Nation (1772–1945),” in God’s Playground…, vol. 2.

334

Witold Sadowski

main Polish Romantic poets were hailed as seers. Some of them, such as Adam Mickiewicz and Juliusz Słowacki, aspired to the rank of mystics. The great bulk of poetry switched to the religious code. Dramas with national themes took the form of mystery plays (Dziady — Forefathers’ Eve by Mickiewicz, Samuel Zborowski by Słowacki). Poems about the most recent history of Poland (the already mentioned Books by Mickiewicz, Anhelli by Słowacki) were written in prose stylized like the biblical verse. Genres such as the hymn, psalm, and lament grew in popularity. The staple conventions of all literary kinds were prophecy and confession. Apocalyptic motifs were innumerable. A particular system was formed, which was nonverbalized and difficult to untangle — the system of negotiation between poetry, which took over the repertoire of traditional images, motifs, topoi and religious genres, and the Catholic Church, which was torn between its apostolic mission to support the faithful in their suffering and a reaction against the disturbing aspects of Polish Romantic thought, such as the expression of equality between Poland and Christ, uncritical worship of the self-elected seers, praise for revolution with its bloody toll, the sacralisation of death, encouragement of actions that seemed to verge on suicide, the approval for military treachery, Slavonic neo-paganism, etc. The most serious repercussions for the shape of the Polish patriotism came from Pope Gregory XVI’s brief In supremo, which condemned the 1830–1831 uprising. The negotiations between the so-called National Liberation Movement and the Church left a legacy in the form of historical documents, but also in the shape of poetic works, which reflected a particular argumentative strategy. Mickiewicz’s “The Pilgrim’s Litany” is so similar in its first part to the Litany of the Saints and in its second part to the seventeenth-century translational variants of Die Litaney that we can ask what constitutes the poetic layer of the text. Święty Stanisławie, opiekunie Polski. Módl się za nami. Święty Kazimierzu, opiekunie Litwy. Módl się za nami. Święty Józafacie, opiekunie Rusi. Módl się za nami. Wszyscy święci opiekunowie Rzeczypospolitej naszej. Módlcie się za nami. Od niewoli moskiewskiej, austriackiej i pruskiej. Wybaw nas, Panie. Przez męczeństwo trzydziestu tysięcy rycerzy barskich poległych za Wiarę i Wolność. Wybaw nas, Panie. Przez męczeństwo dwudziestu tysięcy obywateli Pragi wyrzniętych za Wiarę i Wolność. Wybaw nas, Panie.

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

335

Przez męczeństwo młodzieńców Litwy zabitych kijami, zmarłych w kopalniach i na wygnaniu. Wybaw nas, Panie. Przez męczeństwo obywateli Oszmiany wyrzniętych w kościołach Pańskich i w domach. Wybaw nas, Panie. Przez męczeństwo żołnierzy zamordowanych w Fischau przez Prusaków. Wybaw nas, Panie. Przez męczeństwo żołnierzy zaknutowanych w Kronstadzie przez Moskali. Wybaw nas, Panie.12 [Saint Stanisław, patron of Poland, / Pray for us. / Saint Kazimierz, patron of Lithuania, / Pray for us. / Saint Jozafat, patron of Ruthenia, / Pray for us. / All ye saints, patrons of our Commonwealth, / Pray for us. / From the slavery of Moscow, of Austria, and of Prussia, / Deliver us, O Lord. / By the martyrdom of the thirty thousand knights of Bar, who fell for Faith and Freedom, / Deliver us, O Lord. / By the martyrdom of the twenty thousand citizens of Praga13, massacred for Faith and Freedom, / Deliver us, O Lord. / By the martyrdom of the young men of Lithuania, slain with rods, dead in mines and in exile, / Deliver us, O Lord. / By the martyrdom of the citizens of Oszmiana, slaughtered in the churches of the Lord and in their houses, / Deliver us, O Lord. / By the martyrdom of the soldiers murdered in Fischau by the Prussians, / Deliver us, O Lord. / By the martyrdom of the soldiers killed with the knout in Kronstadt by the Muscovites, / Deliver us, O Lord.]14

The reception of Mickiewicz’s Books can be summed up as follows: “Everyone learned their Catechism by heart, but none was converted.”15 This does not change the fact, however, that the whole volume, including “The Pilgrim’s Litany,” was meant as a blatant imitation of a prayer book, which was to contain quasi-new biblical books rounded off with a litany. The effect was achieved in part thanks to the publisher of the first edition, whose design of the title page brought to mind the prayer book. More distinctly pinpointed markers of the religious text — the prolonged gestures, to make an acting analogy — were manifested in the great majority of Polish patriotic litanies that followed Mickiewicz’s Books…. Accordingly, from now 12 Adam Mickiewicz, “Litania pielgrzymska,” [“The Pilgrim’s Litany”] 5–15, in Dzieła [Works], ed. Zygmunt Dokurno et al. (Warszawa: Czytelnik, 1996), vol. 5, 60–61. 13 A district of Warsaw. 14 Adam Mickiewicz, “The Pilgrim’s Litany,” trans. Dorothea Prall Radin, in Poems by Adam Mickiewicz, ed. George Rapall (New York: Polish Institute of Arts and Sciences in America, 1944), 414–415. 15 Stanisław Ropelewski, “Wspomnienie o pismiennictwie polskiem w emigracji,” [Reminiscence on Polish Emigration Writing] in ed. Aleksander Jełowicki, Kalendarz Pielgrzymstwa Polskiego na Rok 1840 [Calendar of the Polish Pilgrimage of 1840] (Paryż: J. Marylski, 1840), 42.

336

Witold Sadowski

on each important event in the history of Poland was to be reflected in a litany modelled on Mickiewicz’s poem. Examples of such works include, for instance, Józef Ruffer’s Wtóra litania pielgrzymów (The Pilgrims’ Second Litany), which appeared in print on the eve of Polish independence, two litanies by Kazimiera Iłłakowiczówna, written in reaction to the death of the distinguished statesman Józef Piłsudski in 1935; the anonymous Litania Solidarności (The Litany of Solidarity) from the 1980s and many others. During the partition period attempts to endow poetic texts with the markers of a religious work also concerned stanzaic compositions: they often took the form of a song, like Juliusz Słowacki’s “Tak mi Boże dopomóż” (“So Help Me, God”) and “Hymn” (“A Hymn”), commencing with the words “Smutno mi, Boże!…” (“How sad I am, my Lord!…”). In the works of some poets (e.g., Kornel Ujejski, Bronisława Ostrowska) the title “Suplikacje” (“Supplications”) referred to a stanzaic litany on national themes. The litanic form was also employed in national confessions of faith, such as “Akt wiary” (“The Act of Faith”) by Kornel Ujejski and “Credo” by Maria Konopnicka. Thus, the genre of credo, which in its religious dimension had little to do with the litany, moved in the direction of an emotional rather than intellectual statement — a statement which not so much deepens the awareness of what we believe in as strengthens our determination respecting what we fight for, which is to maintain integrity and the right attitude to life.

Contemplating the Legacy of Prayer The fact that Polish nineteenth-century poets frequently relied on the language of religion explains why their acquaintance with Baudelaire’s poetry did not entail a complete negation of the litany and its generic worldview. Polish post-partition literature does not abound in litanies noires; it rather attempts to revitalize the litanic genre, which is achieved in a twofold way. Some poets dedicated their efforts to a hermeneutic exploration of traditional formulae. Their poems became, accordingly, a record of their contemplation — the contemplation of the Church’s legacy of prayer. Others attempted to reshape the conventions, introducing farreaching changes — changes which were not intended to refute this legacy. The first approach is exemplified by a sophisticated poem by Cyprian Kamil Norwid, “Do Najświętszej Panny Marii” (“To the Holiest Virgin Mary”), subtitled “Litania” (“The Litany”).16 The poem can be perceived in the context of a long 16 Cf. Cyprian Norwid, “Do Najświętszej Panny Marii: Litania,” [“To the Holiest Virgin Mary: The Litany”] in Pisma wszystkie [Complete Writings], ed. Juliusz W. Gomulicki (Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, 1971), vol. 1, 188–199.

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

337

European tradition, stretching back at least to the times of John Donne. The frame of the poem, however, was provided by another text, but it is not the Litany of the Saints, as in Donne’s poetry, but the Litany of Loreto. Norwid’s poem was composed in April 1852 in Paris. The initial part is made up of several dozen lines: it forms a kind of overture, which leads smoothly to the main part of the poem, framed by conventional elements, introducing (with  “K y r i e  e l e i s o n”17) and concluding (with the thrice-repeated “Lamb of God”) the litany. The main part contains a contemplation of the Loretan invocations. Norwid’s analytical attitude towards language serves here the purpose of penetrating the semantic, and at times also the morphological structure of the Marian title. A device frequently used is inversion. Instead of “Seat of Wisdom,” we read  “o f  W i s d o m  t h e  S e a t.”  Instead of “Gate of Heaven,” we read “o f  H e a v e n  t h e  G a t e.”  In this way, the formula becomes an arena where antithetical forces are in operation, where the break points of the inversions are offset by a hyphen which binds together the given formula. Thus, in place of “Health of the Sick,” we read  “t h e  S i c k - H e a l t h;”  in place of “Queen of Angels” —  “t h e  A n g e l s - Q u e e n.” In Polish, whose word order has been described as “lax but not free,” inversion does not fundamentally change the meaning of the sentence; it merely adds an air of elevation. As a result of this, the anxious reader faces a puzzle, in which the canonical word order one remembers from the Church Litanies is disturbed. The text demonstrates the importance of a different meaning than the immediately obvious one. The meaning, however, is not defined in the poem, but rests hidden in the melodic line, which is interrupted by the inversion, and in the graphic sign of the hyphen. In other parts of the poem Norwid achieves the effect of retardation, which consists in splitting the formula with the use of additional words. Parts of wellknown expressions are moved away from each other only to be joined again by means of new logical and semantic connections: “Mother, and I can see,  o f  o u r  S a v i o u r,”  “V e s s e l  you became  o f  D e v o t i o n.”  Introducing such phrases into the structure of the sentences, which are often very complex, the poet moves beyond their regular function of names and attributes, endowing the traditional formulae with an active meaning. The Virgin Mary is no longer a motionless figure depicted in a religious painting, but becomes an active participant in world affairs. The assumption that the litany bears rethinking rather than negating was not peculiar to Norwid and results from earlier history of the genre. The expectations

17 Unless otherwise indicated, original emphasis.

338

Witold Sadowski

with regard to the canonical rendition of litanic formulae, which were spurred by the Church Litanies, were treated by poets as one of the building blocks of the architextual tradition — an element which occasioned the opportunity to play with the reader without the need to steer away from the model. Particularly interesting effects in this respect were achieved in Renaissance and Baroque litanies — those found in prayer books as well as those found in volumes of poetry. A distinguished Polish preacher, Piotr Skarga, the author of the longforgotten prayer book Gospodarstwo duchowne (Ecclesiastical Household, 1601), in his litanies developed a sense of disproportion between the call, which was unusually expanded and personal in tone, and the relatively short and conventional response. In Skarga’s work the anticipation of the possibility to produce the response created a state of intellectual tension, which was analogous to that which emerged from the poems of Walenty Odymalski (“Wizerunk doskonałej świątobliwości…” — “The Image of the Perfect Sanctity,” stanzas 130–141), Józef Bartłomiej Zimorowic (“Litania” — “The Litany”) and Jan Libicki (“Votum do Najświętszej Panny Tuchowskiej” — “A Votum to Our Lady of Tuchów”), where a short response was preceded by a long list of antonomasias.

Reversing without Negating Contemplating the traditional Church formulae, prolonging the process of their comprehension, undertaking efforts to move beyond the frames of linguistic objectification — all this testifies to a respectful treatment of the litany, to an exceptional trust in its melodic line, which — it was believed — will be elevated above the semantics of the text and will guide the reader’s perception further than to the understanding of individual words. However, as has already been pointed out, there is another manifestation of the high position the litany enjoyed in Polish culture: it consists in reworking the conventions in a way which produces the antinomy of the pattern, denies some of its elements and reverses it openly, but which does not negate it. It is worth pointing out that Polish culture showed an astounding creativity in developing numerous techniques to achieve a reversal, but not a negation. For lack of space, only five of them will be discussed; the focus will be on those which best illustrate the poets’ paradoxical attitude towards the litany, shared even by those who seemed to polemicize against the generic tradition. The unexpected effect that is achieved by reversing the convention is particularly characteristic of the first technique — the technique of parody. Even though it always took a bitingly derisive tone, the parody of the genre was not used for the purpose of questioning the litanic form and the generic worldview. On the contrary, one

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

339

could get the feeling that the high position assigned to the genre was needed to achieve the rhetorical effect. The parodies took root in the seventeenth century, maybe even earlier, on the ground prepared by occasional, polemical writings, which were meant as one of the tools in political combat. The struggle took place against the background of denominational conflicts, which may have devalued the litanic genre, at least in the initial period and in the eyes of the Protestants — this assumption, however, cannot be evidenced definitely. On the contrary, the extant material indicates that throughout the eighteenth century the parodies of litanies were composed for patriotic reasons (as declared by the poets). They were aimed at opponents of national and international provenance, at particular groups of people and social strata; accordingly, the object of derision was not the genre itself or the worldview it expressed. In texts which were closest to the Church Litanies the targets of parody included one of the Polish hetmans (the anonymous Inflancka litanija — “Livonian Litany” from the eighteenth century), the Austrian emperor (Litanija do Cesarza Jegomości — “Litany to the Reverend Emperor,” 1733), and the Polish executive council collaborating with Russia (Litania do Rady Nieustającej — Litany to the Perpetual Council, dating from 1788 or the beginning of 1789). In poems, in turn, the parody was directed at the Polish nobility with its aesthetic taste and vices (Adam Naruszewicz’s “Nic nadto” — “Nothing but this”) or at warring monks, as in a mock heroic poem by Ignacy Krasicki: Nowa przyczyna w Karmelu do rady: Ojciec Makary nie życzy wojować, Ojciec Cherubin cytuje przykłady, Ojciec Serafin chce losu probować, Ojciec Pafnucy wysyła na zwiady, Ojciec Zefiryn nie chce i wotować, Ojciec Elijasz wielbi stan spokojny; Starzy się boją, a młodzi chcą wojny. [A new reason in Carmel for council: / Father Makary does not wish to fight, / Father Cherubin quotes examples, / Father Serafin wants to test his plight, / Father Pafnucy is on the lookout, / Father Zefiryn does not wish to vote, / Father Elijasz worships peace; / The old are in fright, and the young want to fight.]18

18 Ignacy Krasicki, Monachomachia [Monachomachy], in Pisma poetyckie [Poetic Writings], ed. Zbigniew Goliński (Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, 1976), vol. 1, 129–136.

340

Witold Sadowski

In all the examples above we can see a typically parodic distance towards the form, i.e. what Mikhail Bakhtin called “distancing the author from language.” It does not entail negating the religious genre itself, approached in its primary, religious context. A similar conclusion can be drawn from a consideration of the other methods used to create the reversal of the litany. Parody was only one of the possible means of switching the tone of the utterance to one which was not ascribed to the genre. The next was the litany in the subjunctive mode, an experiment by a Polish Romantic poet — Zygmunt Krasiński (“Litania” — “Litany”). Another and even more surprising technique was to introduce a series of interrogative sentences. In Polish, similarly to Latin and a number of other European languages, the relative pronoun who (the equivalent of the Latin anaphora qui, known from Litanies) is a homonym of an interrogative pronoun. The fact was used in two very similar poems, one by Elżbieta Drużbacka (“Opisanie czterech części roku” — “A Description of the Four Seasons”) and the other by Maria Konopnicka (the fifth poem from the cycle Z daleka — From Afar), in order to voice a joyful praise of God — a praise which is unusual for it is not based on affirmative sentences, but on a long list of rhetorical questions. In this inventive way, both authors manage to preserve trust in the word as an intermediary on the way to God, expressing at the same time a conviction that the Creator is ultimately indescribable. Among other techniques which aim at reversing the convention without negating its ideological background is that of placing the litanic verse in inverted commas. The prayer then does not occupy the foreground, but is being observed from a different point of view. In theory, this could lead to diminishing the status of God by casting him in the role of a character created by the text. In Polish poetry, however, the depiction of the litany took the form of self-referential introspective observation, conducted by the same speaking voice who prays and who finds within his own inner space the distance necessary to look at things from the opposite end. This kind of a solution, which resembles a soliloquy, was used by Konstancja Benisławska in the second song from the cycle Pozdrowienie anielskie na pieśni rozłożone (The Angelic Greeting into Songs Divided). It was also employed by Norwid in the poem discussed above, in which he not only introduces a verbal self-commentary, but also builds a three-dot ellipsis into his litanic calls. This idiomatic sign, particularly characteristic of the poet, seems to create a peculiar kind of self-commentary, produced by silence. Ja, duch, stanąłem, jak fontanna biała, Odrywająca się z swego zwierciadła — I nucę: K y r i e  E l e j s o n  i  C h r y s t e E l e j s o n… niby krople przezroczyste… …………………………………………

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

341

C h r y s t e,  u s ł y s z  n a s, głos daj, który może Przeniknąć skoro, i stanąć u celu, Chryste wysłuchaj — O j c z e  z  N i e b a  B o ż e, Zmiłuj się — S y n u  n a s z  O d k u p i c i e l u, Zmiłuj się — D u c h u  Ś w i ę t y-T r ó j c o  c a ł a, Zmiłuj się, zmiłuj… Chwała, chwała, chwała… [I, a spirit, stood up, like a white fountain, / Detaching itself from its reflection — / I hum: Kyrie Eleison and Christ / Eleison… like transparent drops… / ………………………………………. / Christ, hear us, give voice, which may / Penetrate soon, and reach the goal, / Christ listen — Father from Heaven God, / Have mercy — Son our Saviour, / Have mercy — Holy Spirit-the whole Trinity, / Have mercy, have… Glory, glory, glory…]19

We shall return now to the vivid presence of the lament in the Polish tradition of singing Litanies in church. The Bitter Lamentations, which were mentioned above, took over the practice, established in the Baroque period, of turning upside down the typical joyful calls characteristic of the litanies in medieval poetry. In the seventeenth century at least two poets composed litanic verse, which involved a reversal of the Song of the Three Youths from Daniel. In the poems of Jacynt Przetocki (“Lament XXIV,” 1647) and Abraham Rożniatowski (“Pobudka do płaczu nad grobem” — “Good Morrow to Tears by the Tomb”), the anaphora on “bless,” which in the biblical text calls upon natural phenomena to worship God, is replaced by an imperative “weep,” which evokes the Passion. Similarly, the Bitter Lamentations conclude with a litanic farewell song, addressed to the dead body of Christ. In the poem the anaphora on “Hail Mary,” a well-known element of the Rosary, gives way to an anaphora on “Good Night.” This seems to be reminiscent of the semantic ambiguity inherent in the Greek “chaire,” as used in the Byzantine Akathist Hymn, and brings to mind the practice of using this imperative in social communication as a term of both greeting and farewell.20 The ways of reworking the generic tradition connected with the Church Litany, which have been described above, such as the parodic tone, the subjunctive, the interrogatory intonation, and direct speech and plaintive tone, are responsible for five different reversals of the form. They show that even texts which seem to overthrow the convention can lead the poetic statement in different semantic directions without negating the generic worldview characteristic of litanic verse. 19 C. Norwid, “Do Najświętszej Panny Marii…,” [“To The Holiest Virgin Mother”] 189. The spacing after the edition. 20 Cf. Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek–English Lexicon, rev. by Henry Stuart Jones et al. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 1969–1970.

342

Witold Sadowski

What is interesting is that Polish literature owes its inventive character to the reliance on its religious orientation — an attitude which grew out of Catholicism, but later became grounded in patriotic poetry; this was connected with the impending and then actual loss of independence. The scope of the genre became an arena where one’s individual voice could be juxtaposed with the Church tradition, being at the same time closely attached to the same tradition. It was within this scope that the Romantic poets saw the potential for poetry on national themes, such as the national liberation struggle. Bearing in mind this context, we can understand why Baudelaire’s and Swinburne’s ideas regarding the litanic verse were not copied in Poland; what is more, why they never had a chance to have any significant influence.

Kazimiera Iłłakowiczówna’s Two Litanies The overstepping of the borders of the Christian worldview in Polish litanic verse was most often connected with an attempt to find justification for the decision in the very sphere which was being overstepped. This phenomenon is illustrated by two litanies composed in the twentieth century by Kazimiera Iłłakowiczówna: they are both dedicated to Marshal Józef Piłsudski, but cast him in sharply antithetical roles. The judgement passed on Piłsudski’s life (1867–1935) has not been unequivocal.21 The Marshal of Poland became an icon for Polish social life in his own time, exerting an influence which might be compared to that of General de Gaulle in France. Even though for most of the Interwar Period he did not hold political office, his portrait decorated the walls of public offices and departments, occupying the place next to the Polish national emblem and the portraits of the President and the Prime Minister. His record of true heroism displayed during the wars for independence (1914–1920) — Piłsudski had been in command of the first Division of the Polish Legions — was later overshadowed by his military seizure of power in a coup d’état in 1926. Piłsudski’s political opponents and historians alike blamed him for introducing an authoritarian regime in Poland. Interestingly enough, the image of a dictator did not oust or replace the earlier impression of Piłsudski the national hero; both sides of the controversial figure still coexist in the national consciousness, despite the wide gap between them. A poetic illustration of the controversial character was provided by Iłłakowiczówna in her two litanies.

21 Cf. Joseph Rothschild, Piłsudski’s Coup d’État (New York: Columbia University Press, 1967).

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

343

The works can be classified as examples of occasional poetry, for they were composed in reaction to the death of the commander in 1935. They are both included in the volume of poetry entitled Słowik litewski (Lithuanian Nightingale), which appeared in 1936. In the first poem, entitled “Lament legionistów i peowiaków” (“The Lamentation of Legionaries and the Members of POW”),22 the speaking voices are those of the legionaries and the members of the Polish Military Organization who fought for Polish independence under the command of Piłsudski. Though it is not revealed by the title, they not only grieve over the loss of their commander, but also say a prayer in which he takes the role of the holy addressee — he is repeatedly evoked in the refrain as “Commander” as if he could be the recipient of religious acclamation. In the second poem, entitled “Litania do Matki Boskiej Ostrobramskiej za Marszałka Piłsudskiego” (“The Litany to Our Lady of the Gate of Dawn for the Soul of Marshal Piłsudski”), the commander’s role is markedly different. The poem’s title brings to mind the seventeenth-century painting of Our Lady of the Gate of Dawn, customarily named after the chapel in the town gate of Vilnius in which it hangs. The proper name of the painting, however, is Our Lady of Mercy. It is the latter title which provides the context for Iłłakowiczówna’s poem, the addressee of which is no longer Piłsudski, but the Virgin Mary. The Marshal himself appears in the poem as a dead man, whose soul is in need of purification — purification which can be achieved through our prayers for God’s mercy. It seems clear that the two litanic prayers correspond to two different periods in one man’s life. Iłłakowiczówna’s poems do not present a coherent picture of an historical figure, nor do they even attempt it. They make use of markedly different antonomasias in place of the Marshal’s name. In the first poem he is referred to as the commander in accordance with the role he played during the wars of independence. In the second poem he appears as the marshal, which underlines his role and rank in the free, but authoritarian, state. Taking into consideration the content of both litanies, instead of one person two people emerge: the holy addressee and a sinner who calls for our intercession. The fact that the poet separated the two periods of Piłsudski’s life and moulded them into two different biographies allowed her to sidestep the risk of a conflict with Catholicism, which could result from her attempt to canonize through poetry a man who — judging by the standards of the Church which takes into account the totality of his actions — does not

22 POW stands for Polska Organizacja Wojskowa — the Polish Military Organization, founded in 1914 by Józef Piłsudski.

344

Witold Sadowski

deserve public recognition as a saint. If the commander was canonized in “The Lament of Legionaries …” it was as a legendary figure, the father of the nation, an icon. In “The Litany to Our Lady of the Gate of Dawn …” Piłsudski is no longer an icon. He becomes afflicted with the typically human problem of fallibility. Instead of the commander, a different national icon appears in the poem in the form of Our Lady of Mercy — the painting particularly revered by the Polish people as one which assists in the prayers for those who are in danger.

Litanic Verse — A Recapitulation Iłłakowiczówna’s oeuvre cannot be treated as a lens reflecting the most prominent features of Polish twentieth-century poetry. Her open identification with Christian values stands in opposition to equivocal, at times even agnostic, tendencies in the works of poets such as Władysław Broniewski, Jarosław Iwaszkiewicz, Jan Lechoń, Bolesław Leśmian, Maria Pawlikowska-Jasnorzewska, Julian Przyboś, Aleksander Wat and others.23 However, the two poems discussed above, especially their mutual relation, clearly illustrates the Polish attitude towards the litanic worldview in recent centuries. From the second half of the nineteenth century, Polish mainstream literature came to include blasphemous compositions which shook up the Christian piety (e.g. works by Stanisław Przybyszewski, Tadeusz Miciński, and Stanisław Ignacy Witkiewicz). They were highly praised artistic phenomena, but too isolated to influence the Polish litanic verse or determine the direction in which it would develop. Imitating Baudelaire’s and Swinburne’s style, which was regarded in terms of a semantic potential in France and England — a potential which paradoxically contributed to a Catholic revival in both countries — in the context of Polish culture, especially during the partition period, would produce a strong, but meaningless and empty gesture. The generic worldview could be questioned; provided, however, that the negation would in fact entail more or less obvious reinforcement. This kind of reinforcement or affirmation can be observed on different levels of the historical-literary process. Its various manifestations will be shown using the example of two phenomena, which may seem antithetical, but are in fact connected.

23 The works of Jerzy Liebert, such as “Litania do Marii Panny” [“Litany to the Virgin Mary”] stand out from the group as inspired by Christian thought. Cf. W. Sadowski, “Prosodic Memory: Claudel — Eliot — Liebert,” trans. Aleksandra Kremer, Prace Filologiczne. Literaturoznawstwo, 3 (6) (2003), vol. 1: 16–17, 23–25.

Polish Litanic Verse until 1939

345

The first phenomenon refers to the influence of the Litany on Polish versification. In terms of poetic rhythm, the poems discussed can be divided into two groups. The first group contains poems composed between the Middle Ages and the seventeenth century, which have the form of a song in syllabic verse, as well as poems written later, also songs or imitations of songs in syllabic or accentualsyllabic verse. The second group would contain poems which take up the rhythm characteristic of Church Litanies with their tendency for a similar number of words in each call, and in consequence a similar number of accents. According to Maria Dłuska, Church Litanies contributed to the creation of a third verse pattern in nineteenth-century Polish poetry, i.e. accentual verse, in which the number of accents per line is not similar, but identical.24 This shows the value that was ascribed to the litanic genre by Polish culture — a culture which from the nineteenth century onward showed a determination to assimilate the litanic convention to an increasing degree. Instead of rejecting, negating or transforming litany we can observe both acknowledgment by scholars of its importance for the development of accentual verse and consideration by poets of the freer rhythm of phrasal accents, characteristic of the Church Litanies, in terms of an artistic convention, and the assignment to it of a rightful place in poetry among the three main verse patterns: syllabic, accentual-syllabic, and accentual verse. At the same time — and this is the second phenomenon — the acknowledgement of the genre’s sacral background does not lead to its greater poetic presence in the period under discussion. The amount of litanic verse composed in Poland up to 1939 is not above the European average. Polish literature cannot boast as many volumes of enumerative poetry as the French or even English or Italian literatures. In Poland the litany was treated primarily as a religious form. Poets respecting the genre’s worldview will not use it randomly and excessively. Those who have certain reservations about this worldview will still refrain from negating the form and will opt for another one. The situation however changed diametrically with the outbreak of World War II, i.e. when Poland became the central battleground, the site of the Nazi crimes, and the victim of the Soviet Empire. It was at that time that the patterns of the patriotic litany, often employed in poetry during the partition period, came back to life. The sudden resurgence of interest in the litany genre, which occurred

24 Cf. Maria Dłuska, “Paralelizmy — ich tonizm i sylabotonizm,” [“Parallelisms — Their Accentual and Accentual-Syllabic Rhythm”] in Studia z historii i teorii wersyfikacji polskiej [Studies in the History and Theory of Polish Versification] (Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1978), vol. 2, 190–197.

346

Witold Sadowski

in the after-war period, has never since waned. This period, however, is beyond the scope of the present paper. Translated from Polish by Dominika Ruszkiewicz

Subject Index A abecedarius  143, 264 Agnus Dei  304, 330, 337 akathist  11, 106, 108, 118, 213–8, 221, 226, 236, 243–4, 250, 267, 288, 325, 341 alba  158, 199, 326 alexandrine  9, 133–4, 136, 173, 234 alliteration  93, 96, 109, 121, 219, 239, 271, 288, 307 anaphora  11, 79, 93, 95–7, 99–100, 102–3, 106–7, 110–14, 117, 121–2, 123–4, 132–6, 148–50, 161, 164, 166, 169, 174, 184, 185, 191–2, 194–5, 197–9, 202–4, 216, 225–6, 239, 244, 268–70, 274–5, 281, 285, 288–94, 296–7, 299–300, 303, 306, 309, 312, 316, 318, 325–6, 329–30, 340–1 antonomasia  11, 87, 94–5, 105, 135–6, 138, 148–9, 151, 154, 162, 165, 172, 177, 179, 184, 186, 187, 189–90, 193–5, 198, 201–3, 245, 288, 291–2, 295, 297–300, 303, 304, 306–7, 309, 312, 314, 316, 318, 320, 329, 338, 343 apostrophe  11, 71, 108, 138, 140, 149, 152–3, 155, 159–61, 165–6, 189, 195, 198–200, 204, 228, 253, 261, 268, 271, 273, 281, 285, 287–91, 293, 295–8, 300, 306, 309, 316 assonance  130, 133, 174, 219 auto sacramental  145–6, 148, 150–1, 154, 164–6 Ave Maria  136, 138, 149–50, 160, 163–4, 200, 340–1 Ave Maris Stella  108, 134, 150, 165, 297, 300

B Ballad  160, 256 Bible  29, 30–3, 35, 39, 43, 49, 82, 87, 99, 106, 129, 144, 151, 158–9, 161–2, 187, 191, 213, 249, 264, 266–7, 271, 294, 296–7, 305, 311, 333, 334, 335, 341 Genesis 87 Exodus  87, 134 Judges  87, 134 Psalms  32, 43–4, 49, 110, 111, 114, 126, 130, 133, 228, 266, 271, 307, 311 Song of Songs  133, 138, 140, 143, 152, 244, 296–7 Isaiah  31, 134 Hymn of the Three Youths  30–2, 38, 94, 106, 110, 341 Matthew  82–3, 87, 271 Mark 87 Luke  73, 82, 84–5, 87, 106, 271 John  82, 98 Romans  82–3, 87 1 Corinthians  73, 87 2 Corinthians  83 Ephesians  82, 87 Colossians 83 Apocalypse  140, 334 blason  149, 151 C catalogue poem  269 chairetismic gene  11, 131, 141, 149, 155, 163–4, 167, 243, 281 chaire, ave, hail, salve, rejoice  11, 106, 108, 109, 112–3, 118–9, 121, 123–4, 132–7, 139, 141, 143, 147, 149–51, 153, 155, 158, 160, 163–5, 169, 176,

348

Subject Index

178, 184–6, 199, 202–3, 216, 226, 243–4, 253–4, 255, 260, 262, 281, 290, 292, 295, 296, 308, 316, 329, 341 charm, spell  92, 94, 200 choir  11, 74, 146, 175, 303 D dialogue  11, 74, 115, 118, 146–7, 162, 176, 183, 185, 187, 190, 217, 261, 267, 296, 300, 303 drama  74, 121, 145, 147–8, 152, 155–6, 164, 171, 175–6, 187, 261, 263, 265, 293, 334 E ektene  11, 77, 79, 89–90, 218, 224–5, 267 ektenial gene  11, 104, 131, 141–2, 155, 163, 165–6, 172, 267, 281 elegy  114, 117, 123, 164, 193, 222, 226, 246 enumeration  10, 11, 20–2, 25, 27, 35, 39, 48–9, 71, 93, 96, 98–9, 110–1, 114–7, 122, 126, 132, 135, 140, 144, 149, 151, 155, 158, 161, 162, 164, 166, 173, 175, 181, 183, 187–8, 192, 194, 199–204, 217, 225, 228, 239, 242, 245–6, 257, 264, 268, 270, 275, 281, 288, 293–4, 300, 306, 316, 319, 326, 328, 332, 345 epiphora  11, 107, 110, 117, 197–9, 201, 202, 275, 281, 306, 308, 319, 326 epithet  56, 60–2, 70–1, 83, 86, 98, 129, 148, 151, 165, 177, 192, 202, 219, 238, 245, 262, 271, 275, 281, 285–6, 298 F formula  11, 20, 25, 46, 78–9, 81, 87–8, 90, 92–4, 99, 102–4, 106–12, 117, 121, 123–6, 129–33, 135–9, 145–7, 149–52, 154–5, 160–1, 163, 165–6, 172, 178, 180, 184, 186, 196–8, 200,

202–3, 219, 222, 224–6, 231, 236, 248, 268, 270, 273–5, 278, 281, 286–8, 298, 303–4, 306, 308–9, 311, 313, 317–8, 330, 336–8, 341 G genealogy  23–5, 38, 48, 53–54, 56, 58, 60–2, 268 gens (definition) 11 H Holy Name of Jesus  137, 140, 144, 151, 157, 166, 198, 330 Homeric Hymns  55, 61, 63, 94 I imperative  31, 46, 64, 66, 78, 160, 213, 244, 341 intercession  81, 83, 109–10, 146, 165, 228, 233, 285, 289, 317, 320, 334–335, 343 interweaving of words (pletene sloves) 238, 241, 266–7 invocation  11, 20, 35, 37, 42–3, 45–6, 49, 55–9, 61, 68, 71, 75, 78–82, 85, 88–9, 93, 95, 106–7, 109–11, 116, 118–9, 121, 123, 126, 133, 135–41, 143–6, 149, 153–5, 159, 161, 163–6, 173, 175–7, 180–1, 184–5, 187, 190– 1, 194–5, 199, 213, 220, 225, 231–2, 242–4, 248, 267, 273, 286, 290, 296, 298–300, 303, 307, 311–2, 333, 337 J joys of Mary  121, 135–6, 141, 149, 160, 163, 199 K Kyrie eleison, Lord have mercy  11, 78–79, 88, 90, 106, 109, 129–30, 139, 219, 224, 248, 286–7, 304, 306, 330, 340–341

Subject Index

L lamentation, plač, tužbalica 115, 118, 131, 141, 198–9, 221–226, 236, 255–257, 314, 329–30, 332, 334, 341, 343–4 lauda  109–10, 119, 121, 163–4, 166, 258–9, 262, 314 laudes regiae  107, 109, 139, 141, 154–5 letrilla  146–7, 156, 178 Listenwissenschaft  17, 33 litania maior  107, 305 litanie à rebours  18, 138, 181, 195 Litany of Loreto  118, 129, 143, 260, 264, 292, 298–300, 304, 320, 325, 329–30, 337 Litany of the Saints  93, 105–6, 109, 112, 139, 143, 152, 165, 194, 228, 260, 285–7, 290, 304, 325, 334, 337 Little Hours  292, 300 lorica 93 M mythical figures  18, 21, 23–6, 32–3, 36–8, 41–45, 48, 51–57, 59, 61–3, 67–8, 70, 83, 94–5, 104, 139, 178, 181, 263, 290, 312 N narration  18, 21–2, 26, 30–31, 41, 56–7, 61, 80, 96, 132, 147, 161–2, 171–3, 192, 199, 225, 245, 256, 262, 269, 288, 290 O ode  86, 171, 175–181, 202–3, 273–5, 293 ora pro nobis, pray for us  109–10, 146, 165, 304, 306–7, 320, 334–5 oxymoron 298 P pantheon list  29, 33–6, 38–9, 44–5 paradox  203–4, 297, 328, 338, 344

349

parallelism  11, 43, 91–3, 103, 107, 110–3, 116, 118, 121, 132–3, 142, 146, 150, 169, 174, 179, 188–9, 194–5, 198, 200, 202, 214, 248, 273, 278, 281, 291, 293, 296, 306, 308, 311, 314–5, 317, 321, 345 parody  121–3, 139, 141, 165, 317, 319, 338–41 patriotic poetry  189, 193–4, 246–7, 290, 313–5, 332–6, 339, 342–3, 345 Pater Noster, Lord’s Prayer  132, 166 polyonymic gene  61, 105, 131, 134, 136–8, 141, 148–9, 151–2, 155, 158, 161–2, 164, 166, 169, 172–3, 184, 195, 199–202, 204, 242, 246, 271 precatio, preces  57, 68, 91, 94–5, 97, 101–2, 107–8, 116, 126, 130–3, 142, 145, 147, 156, 161, 167, 244 procession  75, 79, 106–9, 119, 121, 145, 217–8, 300 psalm  31–3, 43–4, 49, 75, 91, 93, 101–3, 107, 109–11, 114, 126, 130–1, 133, 161–2, 164–5, 190, 222, 228, 260, 265–6, 271, 273, 305, 307–8, 311, 315, 334 R refrain  11, 26, 43–4, 48–9, 93, 94, 104, 105, 130–2, 135, 146–7, 150, 156, 160, 162–5, 167, 169, 183, 191, 198–202, 232, 234, 257, 291, 296, 309, 314, 343, 345 responsory  11, 78–9, 88, 90, 109, 110, 115, 118, 130, 131, 145–8, 150–1 161–2, 164, 172, 176, 191, 197, 200, 219, 229, 230, 296, 298, 304, 306, 310, 312, 314, 320, 334–5 requests  11, 57, 59, 64–70, 75, 77–83, 85–90, 94, 95, 97–8, 100, 102, 104–6, 111, 112, 116, 146–7, 159, 169, 172, 178, 191, 198–200, 225, 228–9, 285, 287–9, 316

350

Subject Index

rhyme  93, 95, 102–4, 111, 118, 130, 132, 133, 175, 177, 180, 199, 213, 219, 231, 232, 234, 237, 244, 264, 287, 288, 300, 307–8, 310, 314–5, 317, 319 S saints, veneration of the  94, 107–11, 121, 136–9, 141, 144, 155, 161, 163, 165–6, 200, 214–7, 223, 232–3, 236, 239–45, 250, 267, 285–7, 291, 300, 304, 306, 310, 334–5 Salve Regina  134, 150, 160, 330 soliloquy  296, 340 sonnet  137, 141, 152, 153-5, 164–6, 171, 173, 176, 179–81, 193–4, 202, 263, 273, 325 supplication  11, 42, 44, 49, 64, 68–9, 79, 80, 82, 85, 88, 90, 101, 106, 110–2, 126, 129–33, 135–6, 138, 145–7, 149, 156, 158–9, 161, 165, 172, 184–8, 224, 232, 267, 281, 286, 288–289, 296, 299, 303, 306, 308, 312, 314, 320, 331–2, 336 stanza  135–6, 141, 149, 155, 167, 169, 237, 287, 336 couplet, elegiac couplet  43, 102, 113, 115, 116–7, 124–6, 162, 164, 167, 253, 264, 277, 290, 292, 307, 328 3-line stanza  115, 119 4-line stanza, quatrain, Sapphic stanza  123, 131–3, 141, 147, 172–4, 194, 199–201, 226, 288, 296, 308–10, 314, 329 5-line stanza  175, 288 6-line stanza  134, 136, 140, 141, 148 7-line stanza  149 8-line stanza, ottava rima 132, 135–7, 142, 149, 152, 155, 198, 230–4, 328, 339 10-line stanza  135

T trope  286, 309 V verse accentual verse  9, 345 accentual-syllabic verse  299, 345 amphibrachic 237 dactylic  116, 237, 277 iambic  9, 226, 231, 234, 237, 239, 264, 273, 293, 296, 300 trochaic  103, 108, 118–20, 122, 234, 237, 280, 288, 294, 298, 299 free verse  294–5, 299 syllabic verse  9, 130, 265, 287, 329, 345 8-syllable  130, 132, 134–6, 140, 146–9, 152, 154–5, 174, 222, 232, 236, 253, 255, 307, 327 9-syllable  222, 232, 236 10-syllable  218, 229, 232, 235, 255, 290, 307–308 11-syllable  9, 147, 149, 155, 185, 187, 199, 236 12-syllable  132, 142, 221, 222, 236, 239, 242, 13-syllable  222, 329 14-syllable  133–4, 136 quantitative verse  94–103, 112, 116–7, 119, 126 dactylic hexameter  55, 96, 97, 99, 100, 109, 112–3, 116, 124–6 iambic meter  94, 100–1 villancico  131, 135, 137, 141, 155, 165–6 W worldview  10, 169, 174, 180, 181, 183, 188, 195, 198, 291, 293, 336, 338–9, 341, 342, 344–5 Z zéjel  136, 141, 162

Index of Names A Abaffy Csilla N.  304, 311 Abbott-Smith George  82, 87 Adalberg Samuel  327 Adam of St. Victor  119, 120 Adhémar de Chabannes  112 Adler Guido  76 Adrados Francisco R.  52 Ady Endre  318, 319 Agostinho da Cruz  158, 164–6 Aguiló Marià  160 Alas Leopoldo  194 Alberti Amedeo  17, 34, Alberti Rafael  193–5 Alcuin of York  110–4 Aleixandre Vicente  194 Alfonso X the Wise, king  157–8, 162 Allasia Giuseppe  124 Alphanus of Salerno  116 Altermatt Urs  209 Alvar Ezquerra Carlos  160 Álvarez de Cienfuegos Nicasio  175 Álvarez de Villasandino Alfonso  132, 135, 138–40 Álvarez Gato Juan  135, 137 Álvarez Tejedor Antonio  133 Amade László  314 Amado Carballo Luís  200–1 Ambrose, bishop of Milan  100–3, 105, 111, 146 Amfiloksy, archimandrite  213 Amzallag Nissim  44 Andrade Caminha Pêro  158, 166 Andrew of Crete  226 Andronicus II  217 Angeriano Girolamo  124 Angilbert of Saint-Riquier  109, 114 Anglés Higinio  162

Anguita Jaén José María  130, 161 Añón Paz Francisco  200 Anselm of Canterbury  119–20 Antoljak Stjepan  252 Apuleius Lucius see Lucius Apuleius Aramon i Serra Ramon  160 Archi Alfonso  17 Arellano Ignacio  145, 149, 150 Aristotle  56, 86 Arranz Miguel  90 Arsenije III Čarnojević 226 Astorgano Abajo Antonio  175 Athanassakis Apostolos  53, 56–7, 64, 70 Attridge Harold  38 Augustine of Hippo  96, 100–4, 111, 130, 145, 165 Ausfeld Carl  57, 68 Ausonius Decimius Magnus  100 Austin Roland  104 Avalle-Arce Juan Bautista de  151 Avenoza Gemma  160 Ayali-Darshan Noga  36 B Babić Tomo  258 Babits Mihály  317–8 Baczyński Krzysztof Kamil  324 Badurina Anđelko 251 Baena Juan Alfonso de  135, 138–40 Bajáki Rita Sz.  306 Bakhtin Mikhail  340 Balassi Bálint  309, 312, 315 Balázs Judit  304, 310, 321 Balcerzak Krzysztof  210 Baldovin John F.  77 Baldric of Dol  117, 119 Balmont Konstantin  276

352

Index of Names

Baluch Jacek  297 Bannister Henry Marriott  91 Barbèra Gaspero  123 Bartholdus Georgius  290 Bartoszewski Walenty  327 Basil the Great  74, 78, 223 Basset Johan  157, 159 Batowski Henryk  246 Batu, khan of the Golden Horde  266 Baudelaire Charles  193–4, 202, 295, 330, 332, 336, 342, 344 Baumstark Anton  77 Bayevsky Vadim  277 Beccadelli Antonio  124 Bécquer Gustavo Adolfo  186 Bede the Venerable  99, 102 Bednarz Mieczysław  267 Belinsky Vissarion  275 Bella José María  151 Bembo Pietro  124 Benedict of Aniane  119 Benik Wawrzyniec  329 Benisławska Konstancja  340 Berceo Gonzalo de  130–1, 133–6 Berdyayev Nikolay  276 Berenguer de Masdovelles Joan  157, 160 Bernabé Pajares Alberto  51–4, 58–9, 63, 70 Bernard of Cluny  119 Bernardes Diogo  158, 164–6 Bernat Vistarini Antonio  149 Berndt Guido  107 Besançon Alain  282 Bessenyei György  316 Betondić Jozo  257 Biggs Robert  19, 20 Bikerman Elias  52, 54–5 Binar Vladimír  296 Blagojević Miloš  209 Blahoslav Jan  290 Blahynka Milan  299

Blasco Pascual Francisco Javier  185, 189 Blok Aleksandr  277–8 Bober Andrzej  267 Bobrownicka Maria  209 Bódiss Tamás  305 Boeft Jan den  102 Bogár Judit  305 Bogdanović Dimitije  207–8, 215–6 Bogišić Rafo  253, 255, 259, 261 Bogišić Valtazar  257 Boileau Nicolas  177 Borisov Innocent  325 Bošković-Stulli Maja  256 Botev Khristo  246 Botica Stipe  256 Bowra Maurice  257 Boynton Susan  116 Božan Jan Josef  292 Braković Juraj  257 Brazzel Kathleen  107 Bremmer Jan N.  52–4, 56, 70 Březina Otokar  294, 295, 299 Bridel Friedrich  290, 291 Broniewski Władysław  344 Bruce Frederick Fyvie  104 Bruno of Segni  121 Bryusov Valery  278 Burke Edmund  177 Burkert Walter  54, 69, 70 Buszewicz Elwira  124 C Cabanillas Ramón  200 Cadalso José  177–8 Cain Andrew  108 Calahorra Martínez Pedro  131, 162 Calame Claude  54 Calderón de la Barca Pedro  145–6, 149–52 Calderón Manuel  148 Callistus Ksantopulos  226

Index of Names

Cameron Averil  108 Campbell Joseph  53 Campos Álvaro de  203 Carner Josep  199 Carnero Guillermo  177 Carolides Georgius  290 Carreño Antonio  155 Carroll Mary Borromeo  96 Casentino Bonaiuto da  123 Castillejo Cristóbal de  145, 152 Castro Adolfo de  146 Castro Rosalía de  197, 200 Catalá Gorgues Miquel Àngel 143, 157–9 Catullus Gaius Valerius  278 Čech Svatopluk  294 Cecilia of Normandy  119 Čelakovský František Ladislav  293 Cernuda Luis  192 Cervantes Miguel de  59, 145, 149, 153 Cerverí di Girona  157, 161 Chaadayev Pyotr  279, 280 Charlemagne, emperor  115, 266 Charles Rundle Elizabeth  105 Chavarría Vargas Emilio  171 Chenevix Trench Richard  120 Chiera Edward  18 Chlíbcová Milada  300 Choza Jacinto  188 Christopoulos Menelaos  51–4 Chrysostom John  74, 78, 223, 252 Chupungco Anscar J.  79 Ciatti Marco  124 Cinquini Adolfo  124 Ciołek Stanisław  121 Civil Miquel  20–2, 26 Clarín see Alas Leopoldo Clement of Ohrid  217, 235, 239, 241–3, 285 Clement VIII, pope  144 Collins John Joseph  29, 30 Colomer Amat Emília  143

353

Columban of St. Trond  115 Comenius John Amos see Komenský Jan Amos Comnena Anna  223 Conrady Karl Otto  126 Constantine the Philosopher see Konstantin of Kostenets Cooper Jerrold  16 Cornejo Toribio Fuente  158 Coronado Carolina  186 Corrales Zumbado Cristóbal  172 Cortijo Antonio  146 Cosmopoulos Michael B.  53 Costa i Llobera Miquel  199 Crocker Richard  102 Cruz e Silva António Dinis da  202 Csokonai Vitéz Mihály  316 Cuddon John Anthony  271 Cunqueiro Alvaro  201 Curros Enríquez Manuel  200 Čustonjić Kristina  229 Cyprian, metropolitan of Kiev  242, 246 Cyril, apostle to the Slavs  237–42, 254, 266, 285, 300 Czerski Janusz  74, 82, 89 D Dabek-Wirgowa Teresa  209 Daňhelka Jiří 288 Daničić Đuro 263 Daniel, prophet  18, 29–32, 35, 38–9, 94, 341 Danielewicz Jerzy  55, 58, 60, 62, 69 Danilo II, archbishop  217, 222 Danker Frederick W.  82 Danzi Massimo  123 Darby Nock Arthur  59 Davies Norman  327, 333 Deimel Anton  34, 35 Delić Jovan  231–2 Delić Simona  256 Deml Jakub  296

354

Index of Names

Dennis George T.  73 Dérozier Albert  179 Derzhavin Gavrila  174 Despić Đorđe 231 Devoto Daniel  130–1 Dewing Henry  96 Días André  158, 163–6 Dickinson Edward  106, 122 Diego Gerardo  191–2 Dieudonné Adolphe  120 Díez de Revenga Francisco Javier  147 Dinekov Petyr  210 Dixon Simon  272 Dłuska Maria  306, 345 Dobrolyubov Nikolay  278 Dokurno Zygmunt  335 Dončević Ivan  253, 255, 259, 261 Donne John  337 Donohue Daniel Joseph  114 Dracontius Blossius Aemilius  97 Dragan Nataša  214 Dragutin Stefan, king  217 Dreves Guido Maria  91, 109 Dronke Peter  93, 94 Drużbacka Elżbieta  340 Drużbicki Kasper  328 Držić Marin  263 Dsida Jenő 320 Duckworth George  116 Dueñas Juan de  139 Dugan Franjo  259 Duijkeren-Hrabová Magdalena van 299 Đurić Vojislav  221 Dvořák Xaver  299 Dyk Viktor  295 Dynak Władysław  234 Dziubiński Jacek  71 E Eckbert of Schönau  121 Ecsedi Báthory István  310

Édes Gergely  316 Edmonds Radcliffe G.  51, 54 Edmunds Lowell  51 Egeria, pilgrim  78 Egido Aurora  149 Encina Juan del  135, 137 Englund Robert  15, 17 Ennius Quintus see Quintus Ennius Ennodius Magnus Felix  98, 101–2 Erskine Andrew  54 Escóbar de Mendoza Antonio  150 Escobar Luis de  145–6 Escribano Escribano José María  174 Espak Peeter  33 Espronceda José de  186 Essen Carel van  94 Estanço Baltasar  158, 164, 166 Eugenius II of Toledo  102 Euripides  53–4, 83 Euthymius of Tarnovo  212, 242–6, 267 Evenou Jean  133, 144 Eynikel Erik  84 F Fabricius Georg  126 Faleński Felicjan  325 Fališevac Dunja  263 Färber Hans  55 Fassler Margot  105 Fenollar Bernat  157, 159–60 Ferenczi Ilona  305 Fernández de Moratín Nicolás  180 Fernández Juárez Gerardo  144, 151 Fernández López María Concepción  130, 134, 161 Fernández Lucas  134, 137 Ferrando Antoni  159 Ferruç Gabriel  157, 159 Festugière André-Jean  61–2 Fidalgo Elvira  162–3 Filnov Gove Antonina  212–4

Index of Names

Finkelberg Aryeh  63 Fita y Colomé Fidel  158 Flavius Josephus  267 Florian Josef  299 Florus of Lyon  110, 113–5 Folengo Teofilo  124 Foley John Miles  256 Fonvizin Denis  272 Forcellini Aegidio  91 Foxvog Daniel  18 Fraanje Maarten  272 Fradejas Lebrero José  131, 147, 150, 183, 200 Frančev Franjo  261 Francis of Assisi  152, 296 Freidenberg Maren  252 Friberg Barbara  83 Friberg Timothy  83 Fuente Ballesteros Ricardo de la  185 Fulgentius Fabius Planciades  96, 103 Furnadzhiev Nikola  249 G Gadd Cyril John  30 Gaertner Johannes  110 Gałązka Wojciech  250 Gallego Juan Nicasio  184 Gamiça Joan  157, 160 García Calderón Ángeles  175 García Claudio  134–5 García Giménez María Dolores  188 García Jurado Francisco  177 García Lorca Federico  191–2, 194 García Montero Luis  193 García-Macho Alonso de Santamaría María Lourdes  172 Garrett Almeida  202 Gassull Jaume  157, 159 Gaster Moses  29, 31–2 Gelb Ignace  18–9 George Andrew  16 George Judith  108

355

Georgios the Monk  241 Gerli Michael  133–4, 137 Gerolamo Aleandro Iuniur  125 Gérold Théodore  101 Gerov Nayden  237 Gianelli Giulio  59 Gil Dorota  207–8 Gilgamesh  18, 23–5 Gingrich Wilbur F.  82 Gintli Tibor  313, 315–7 Gippius Zinaida  277 Glasgow Rupert  122 Glassner Jean-Jacques  23, 25, 30 Glavičić Branimir  260 Glinka Fyodor  275 Godman Peter  115 Goliński Zbigniew  339 Gómez de Avellaneda Gertrudis  185–6 Gómez Molleda María Dolores  188 Gomulicki Juliusz W.  336 Góngora Luis de  147, 153 González Delgado Ramiro  177 González Marta  177 González Pedroso Eduardo  151, 154 González-Rivas Fernández Ana  177–8 Gordon Richard Lindsay  92, 94 Gorgias of Leontini  56 Gorni Guglielmo  123 Graf Fritz  51 Gralmés Salvador  159 Granja Agustín de la  146 Grant William Leonard  125 Grassi Cesare  124 Green Otis H.  137 Greenough James  102 Gregory of Sinai  244 Gregory the Great, pope  106–9, 112, 119, 122, Gregory XVI, pope  334 Griboyedov Aleksandr  272 Grigoryev Apollon  276 Grimm Jacob  256

356 Grimm Wilhelm  256 Grossman Jan  298 Grygar Mojmír  299 Grzegorz of Sambor  124 Guilhem d’Autpol  157–8 Guillén Jorge  194 Guimerà Ángel  199 Gumilyov Nikolay  279 Guthrie William K.Ch.  52 Gutiérrez Carmen Julia  132 H Haader Lea  311 Haase Wolfgang  92 Halas František  297–8 Hall Ralph  96 Hallo William  22 Hambrook Glyn M.  193 Hammerling Roy  119 Hammurabi, king  23 Hanson Arthur  95 Hargittay Emil  306 Harnoncourt Philipp  76 Harrington Karl Pomeroy  110 Harrison Stephen  95 Hartmann of St. Gallen  112 Haug Johann Jacob  91 Hauréau Jean-Barthélemy  120 Hauspie Katrin  84 Havránek Bohuslav  288, 289 Healey John  35–6 Heck Adrian van  123 Heikkinen Seppo  99 Heim Richard  92 Heine Heinrich  229 Hektorović Petar  257 Henrichs Albert  56 Heraclitus of Ephesus  63 Herculano Alexandre  202 Herder Johann Gotffried  256 Hernández Alonso César  133 Hernández Miguel  192–5

Index of Names

Herodotus 83 Herren Michael  93 Herrera Maldonado Francisco de  150 Herrero de Jáuregui Miguel  51–2, 54, 56, 60–1 Herzen Aleksandr  276 Hesiod 60 Hieronymus Angerianus  123 Hilarion of Kiev  268 Hilary of Poitiers  102 Hildebert of Lavardin  120 Hilendarski Teodozije  222 Hill Joyce  107 Hillers Delbert  33 Hilton John  95 Hinge George  71 Hippolytus Theologian  78 Hoevel Henricus  126 Hoffhalter Raphael  125 Holl Béla  307 Holm Tawny  30 Homer  53, 60–1, 68, 82, 139 Horace 102 Horváth Iván  303, 314 Hossfeld Frank Lothar  33 Hoyo Arturo del  179 Hrabák Josef  288 Hubbard Thomas  125 Hudson-Williams Alan  104 Hughes Anselm  114 Hunink Vincent  95, 103 Hus Jan  288 Hynek of Poděbrady  290, 293 I Ildephonsus of Toledo  120, 129, 133 Iles Johnston Sarah  52, 59 Ilić Vojislav  229 Iłłakowiczówna Kazimiera  336, 342–4 Ioan Polivotski  244 Isidore of Seville  129, 137

Index of Names

Isola Antonio  103 Ivan Asen  244 Ivan Stratsimir  244 Ivan the Terrible, tsar  267–8 Ivanov Vyacheslav  277 Iwaszkiewicz Jarosław  344 J Jacimirski Aleksandr Ivanović 216 Jackson Gordon  110 Jacobsen Thorkild  25 Jagic Vatroslav  212, 214, 257, 263 Jagodyński Stanisław Serafin  327 Jakóbiec Marian  273 Jakobson Roman  214, 218, 222, 235, 238, 286 Jakovljević Andrija  213 James, apostle  74, 106, 136 Jammes Robert  147 Jelena see Mrnjavčević Jelena Jełowicki Aleksander  335 Jerome of Stridon  98 Jiménez Juan  143–4 Jiménez Juan Ramón  186, 188–9, 194 Jiménez San Cristobal Ana Isabel  51 John of the Cross  191 Johnson Maxwell E.  73 Jones Henry Stuart  341 Jordan Alexander T.  327 Joseph II, emperor  264, 292 Jovellanos Gaspar Melchor de  171, 180 Jović Aleksandra  213 Jóźwiak Wojciech  209 Juan de la Cruz see John of the Cross Juhas-Georgievska Liljana  222 Juhász Gyula  318, 320 Julinac Pavle  227 Justin Martyr  78 K Kacskovics-Reményi Andrea  304, 308, 312

Kaffka Margit  320 Kahn Gustave  331 Kantakuzen Dimitri  207 Kantemir Antiokh  272 Kantorowicz Ernst Hartwig  107, 109, 139 Karača Tamara Beljak  229 Karaliychev Angel  249 Karamzin Nikolay  272 Kardos Tibor  312 Karinthy Frigyes  318 Kašanin Milan  230 Kasparowicz Gabriel Andrzej  328 Kasprowicz Jan  330–2 Kazančić Ivan August  263 Kekez Josip  257 Keller John E.  137 Kent Roland  103 Khlebnikov Velimir  279–80 Kilmartin Edward J.  73, 76, 89 Király István  303 Kisiel Chester A.  327 Klaniczay Tibor  312 Klein Joachim  272 Kłoskowska Antonina  209 Koch Klaus  29 Kochanowski Jan  271 Kochowski Wespazjan  327, 329 Kołakowska Katarzyna  51 Komenský Jan Amos  290 König Samuel  91 Konopnicka Maria  336, 340 Konstantin of Kostenets  207 Kopcsányi Márton  307, 308 Kopecký Milan  291 Kornhauser Julian  234 Kosmas Pražský 286–7 Kostić Laza  230–4 Kőszeghy Péter  312 Kosztolányi Dezső  318, 319 Kozlov Maksim  213 Koteniusz Andrzej  126

357

358

Index of Names

Kovačević Toma  259 Krasicki Ignacy  339 Krasiński Zygmunt  340 Krebernik Manfred  15, 17–8, 27 Krecher Joachim  26 Krokiewicz Adam  53 Kropp Amina  92 Krüger Astrid  110 Krylov Ivan  272 Krzemień Wiktoria  276 Kuhač Franjo  252 Küllős Imola  313, 317 Kunigunde of Bohemia  288 Kunzler Michael  78 L Laczházi Gyula  313 Laforgue Jules  330–2 Lalić Ivan  230–4 Lama Hernández Miguel Ángel  177 Lambert Wilfred George  33 Lapidge Michael  112 Larson Jennifer  52, 55, 70 Laterna Marcin  328 Latham Jacob  108, 122 Lazarević Stefan  208, 213 Lechoń Jan  344 Lehár Jan  285, 287–8 Lenski Noel  108 León Luis de  144–5, 149 Leonhardt Jörgen  103 Lešehrad Emanuel  296 Leśmian Bolesław  344 Łesyk Lesław B.  51–90 Leszczyński Edward  326, 330 Lewin Paulina  270 Lewy Julius  30 Libicki Jan  327, 338 Lida María Rosa  138 Liddell Henry George  68, 77, 86, 341 Liebert Jerzy  344 Liman Kazimierz  121

Lindholm Gudrun  96 Lipiński Edward  19, 37, 46 Listius László  309 Llorens Herrero Margarita  143, 157, 159 Llull Ramón  157, 159, 161 Lobeck Christian A.  51 Lobo Eugenio Gerardo  173–4 Lodi Enzo  79 Lomonosov Mikhail  272, 273 Longhi Silvia  123 López Castro Armando  162 López de Ayala Pero  133, 135 López de Mendoza Iñigo 135 López de Úbeda Juan  152 López-Ruiz Caroline  51 Lot Ferdinand  109 Lotman Yury  281 Louis the Pious, emperor  115 Louw Johannes  84 Lubomirski Stanisław Herakliusz  328 Lučin Bratislav  260 Lucius Apuleius  94–5 Ludwig Walther  126 Lungo Isidoro del  123 Lust Johan  84 Luther Martin  327, 333 Łużny Ryszard  270 Lysias 82 M Mácha Karel Hynek  293–4, 297 Machado Antonio  186, 189 Machado Manuel  194 Madas Edit  311 Maes Yanick  109 Makowiecki Andrzej  209 Malalas John  241 Malić Dragica  260–1 Malski Andrzej  327 Mandelshtam Osip  279 Manrique Gómez  135, 138, 140

Index of Names

Manrique Jorge  140 Mantello Frank Anthony Carl  104 Maragall Joan  199 Marbodus of Rennes  117 Marcellus Empiricus  92 Marchocka Anna Marianna  327 Mareš František Václav  286 Maretić Tomo  221, 257 Marín Hernández David  193 Marín Pedreño Higinio  188 Marković Miroslav  125 Martí Jeroni  157, 161 Martín Hernández Raquel  70 Martin of Zadar  252 Martines Pere  157, 161 Martínez Díez Gonzalo  139 Martínez Gil Fernando  144, 151 Martínez Marcos  52 Martins Mário  144, 163–4 Martorell Joanot de  157, 159 Marulić Marko  262 Maślanka Łukasz  282 Matas Caballero Juan  191 Mateos Paramio Alfredo  185 Maykov Valerian  275 Mazurkiewicz Roman  329 McEnerney John  94 McGuire Martin  116 Mécs László  320 Medina Arjona Encarnación  193 Meersseman Gilles Gérard  118 Mejor Mieczysław  124 Meléndez Valdés Juan  175, 177–8 Melo Francisco Manuel de  158, 165 Menčetić Šiško  263 Mendoza Iñigo de  135 Menéndez y Pelayo Marcelino  148 Méril Edélestand du  115 Messenger Ruth Ellis  112, 114 Methodius, apostle to the Slavs  214, 217, 237, 238, 242, 254, 266 Metzger Bruce M.  70

359

Mey Lev  275 Miaskowski Kasper  328 Michael Ian  132 Michalowski Piotr  16, 17, 25, 27 Michna of Otradovice Adam  291–2 Miciński Tadeusz  344 Mickiewicz Adam  332, 334–6 Migne Jacques-Paul  91 Mikalson Jon  52 Mikhail Asen  244–5 Miklošic Franz  257 Mikołajczak Aleksander  211 Milčetić Ivan  260 Miletich Joso  260 Milíč of Kroměříž Jan  289 Miller Neva F.  83 Milošević Joso  260 Miłosz Czesław  324 Milton John  125 Milutin see Stefan Uroš II Milutin Minczew Georgi  217–8 Mínguez Víctor  154 Minsky Nikolay  277 Mira de Amescua Antonio  145–6, 151 Mirković Lazar  224 Misirkov Krste  257 Mitchell Stephen  54 Miziołek Jerzy  217 Mohyla Petro  270 Molina Moreno Francisco  52 Montemayor Jorge de  145, 150–2 Montesino Ambrosio  137 Morales Helen  53 Morand Anne-France  59 Morreale Margherita  135–6 Moses, prophet  87 Mošin Vladimir  215 Mrnjavčević Jelena  217, 222 Mucha Bogusław  265–6, 272, 276 Munyoç Lluís  157, 159 Mužík František  285 Myers Jack  271

360

Index of Names

Mylonas George E.  52 N Nabonidus 30 Naruszewicz Adam  339 Natalis Franciscus  124–5 Naumow Aleksander  211–2, 216 Navarro Antonio  143 Neckam Alexander  122 Neumann Stanislav Kostka  295 Neville Leonora  223 Nezval Vítězslav 298–9 Nicetas of Remesiana  105 Nida Eugene A.  84 Niedziela Zdzisław  250 Nikitin Ivan  275 Nilsson Martin P.  53–5 Nodar Domínguez Alberto  54 Nodar Manso Francisco  161–2 Norden Eduard  95–6 Norwid Cyprian Kamil  336–7, 340–1 Notker of St. Gallen  112, 119 Nowacki Edward  112 Nuffelen Peter van  54 Nyéki Vörös Mátyás  309 O Obbink Dirk  58, 60 Oberhelman Steven  96 Oden Robert  38 Odymalski Walenty  338 Ogden Daniel  53, 55 Olmo Lete Gregorio  35, 41, 43, 45 Oporinus Joannes  126 Orel Dobroslav  286 Orfelin Zaharije  227 Orlovszky Géza  313 Ormsby John  153 Ortega Esperanza  192 Ortigues Miquel  157, 161 Ostrowska Bronisława  336 Oszkó Beatrix  304, 308, 312

Otero Macías  53–4 Otović Vladimir  230 Ottokar II of Bohemia  288 Otwinowski Erazm  328 Ovid  104, 139 Owen John  98 P Pabón de Acuña Carmen Teresa  177 Pachomius Logothetes  267 Paleotimus Lucius  91 Pancheri Alessandro  124 Pannonius Janus  312 Papaefthymiou Vanda  71 Papp Ferenc  318 Papp Zsuzsanna  311 Paprocki Henryk  75, 79 Papy Jan  109 Pardee Denis  36–7, 41, 46, 48 Pastor Fuster Justo  144 Pastor Tinoco José Manuel  178 Paul, apostle  46, 83 Paulinus of Nola  98–101 Pavić Juraj  214 Pavličić Pavao  260 Pawlikowska-Jasnorzewska Maria  344 Pázmány Péter  305–6 Pearce Laurie  16 Pedraza Jiménez Felipe B.  153 Pedroso Eduardo González  151, 154 Peinado Guzmán José Antonio  134 Pepin the Short, king  114 Pérez de Guzmán Fernán  136–7 Pérez González Rosalía  138, 141 Pérez Rodríguez Estrella  158 Pernot Laurent  55–7, 62, 68, 95 Pessoa Fernando  189, 203–4 Petar Krešimir  212 Petrarch  149, 153, 164, 180, 260, 262–3, 278, 325 Petri Aldo  124 Petricoli Ivo  252

Index of Names

Petrović Njegoš Petar  230 Philo of Byblos  38 Piccolomini Enea Silvio  123 Piekarski Adam  328 Piłsudski Józef  336, 342–4 Pindar  83, 86 Pinell Jordi  130 Pinillos Carmen  149 Pius II, pope see Piccolomini Enea Silvio Plato  51, 54, 62, 82–3, 105, 139 Plutarch 86 Poliziano Angelo  123 Polonsky Yakov  275 Polotsky Simeon  265, 270–1 Polt John Herman Richard  177 Pondal Eduardo  200 Poplawski Paul  248 Pott Francis  105 Prado Germán  129 Prall Radin Dorothea  335 Prato Convenevole da  124 Prensa Luis  131, 162 Presedo Velo Francisco  130 Pridmann Kaspar  125 Prudentius Aurelius Clemens  102 Przetocki Jacynt  328, 341 Przyboś Julian  324, 344 Przybyszewski Stanisław  248, 344 Pseudo Longinos  177 Pszczołowska Lucylla  329 Pucci Joseph Michael  110 Puchmajer Antonín Jaroslav  293 Puculull Francí Joan  157, 161 Pushkin Aleksandr  275 Q Quandt Wilhelm  55 Quental Antero de  202–3 Quintana Manuel José  175, 179 Quintus Ennius  102

361

R Rabanus Maurus Magnentius  109, 112–3 Radishchev Aleksandr  272 Rajić Jovan  227 Ramis i Ramis Joan  197 Rankin Susan  112 Rapall George  335 Ratpert of St. Gallen  110, 112 Raztsvetnikov Asen  248 Razzi Stefano  259 Reginald fitz Jocelin  120 Rej Mikołaj  329 Rey Hazas Antonio  153 Reyes Rogelio  171 Reymont Władysław  324 Reynek Bohuslav  300 Ribera Juan de  143–4, 154 Ricciardelli Gabriella  51, 55, 62–3, 71 Richard Jean-Pierre  331 Rigg Arthur George  104 Riquier Guiraut  157–8 Rivera de Ventosa Enrique  187–8 Roberts Michael  97 Robertson Noel  53 Robson Eleanor  16 Rodríguez Cacho Lina  190 Rodríguez Cañada Basilio  193 Rodríguez Félix  139 Roís de Corella Joan  157, 159–60 Rojas Fernando de  138–9, 141 Rolicz-Lieder Wacław  362 Ropelewski Stanisław  335 Roszak Piotr  133 Rothschild Joseph  342 Royt Jan  293 Rożniatowski Abraham  341 Rubio Gonzalo  19, 22, 26, 33 Rubió i Ors Joaquim  197 Ruffer Józef  336 Ruiz Campos Alberto Manuel  192

362

Index of Names

Ruiz Juan  133–6 Ruszkiewicz Dominika  301, 346 Rychter Marcin  52 S Sá de Miranda Francisco  158, 164 Sadowski Witold  9–12, 76–7, 131, 270, 290, 303, 306, 311, 323–46 Sagner Otto  212 Saint Paul  46 Salinas Pedro  194 Salmon Pierre  110 Salvadori Massimo L.  266 Samsu-iluna 23 Samuel, prophet  48, 91 Sancha Justo de  145, 152 Sánchez Miret Fernando  158 Sánchez Tomás Antonio  130 Šantić Aleksa  229 Sargon of Agade  22 Sava, Stefan Nemanja  214–6, 222 Schaller Dieter  121 Schetter Willy  97 Schmidt Brian  41, 48 Schoberus Huldericus  126 Schumann Otto  117 Schüppert Helga  122 Scott Robert  341 Sedgwick Walter Bradbury  116 Settari Olga  290 Shestov Lev  276 Shibata Daisuke  33 Shirinski-Shikhmatov Sergey  275 Shulgi of Ur  22–3, 46 Sienkiewicz Henryk  324 Sík Sándor  318 Siles Jaime  193 Simeon the Metaphrast  223, 226 Simeon the New Theologian  222–3 Simms Michael  271 Simón Francisco Marco  92, 94 Simonis Palaiologina  217

Skarga Piotr  328, 338 Škarka Antonín  286–7 Skoryna Franciszek  324 Slamnig Ivan  261 Slavov Atanas  236–7 Słowacki Juliusz  324, 334, 336 Smith Anthony  209 Smith John Russell  105 Smith Sidney  30 Sobeczko Helmut J.  74 Soden Wolfram  17 Solski Zbigniew W.  74 Somlyó Zoltán  318 Spaggiari Barbara  159 Staff Leopold  331–2 Stamm Johann Jakob  41 Stanković Radoman  215 Stefan Uroš II Milutin, king  217 Stefan Uroš III, king  217 Stefanovic Zdravko  31 Steinacher Roland  107 Steiner Franz  97 Steinkeller Piotr  34 Stejskal Miloš  299 Stepanić Gorana  264 Stevens John  116 Šteyer Matěj Václav  292 Stipčević Ennio  259 Strandberg Ake  56, 71 Strittmatter Anselm  80 Sumarokov Aleksandr  272–3 Šurmin Đuro 219 Swinburne Algernon Charles  330, 342, 344 Szabó Csilla T.  18, 311 Szilágyi Márton  315, 316 Szymborska Wisława  324 T Taft Robert F.  73–4, 78 Tangeman Robert  105 Tardi Abbe  108

Index of Names

Taylor Henry Osborn  118 Tazbir Janusz  327 Temporini Hildegard  92 Teresa of Ávila  145, 152 Tertullian 96 Thayer Joseph H.  83 Theocritus  94, 125 Theodotion  29, 31–2 Thomson Ebenezer  105 Tichá Zdeňka 292 Tierney Michael  71 Timoneda Joan de  145, 151, 154 Tinney Steve  23 Tirso de Molina  145, 152 Toboła Łukasz  15–49 Tomasović Mirko  260, 262 Tomin Svetlana  215 Torbarina Josip  260 Torre Francisco de la  137 Torres Villarroel Diego de  171–3, 176 Torrón Diego Martínez  153 Tóth Árpád  318 Trávníček Mojmír  300 Trediakovsky Vasily  272–3 Trifunović Djordje  217, 222 Troya Alfonso de  137 Trujillo José Ramón  193 Tsamblak Gregory  207, 246 Tsanev Georgi  249 U Uhl Gabriella  304, 310 Ujejski Kornel  336 Ujević Augustin  234 Újváry Zoltán  316 Uli Ballaz Alejandro  134 Unamuno Miguel de  186–8, 190 Uroš I, prince  217 Uroš II see Stefan Uroš II Milutin Uroš III see Stefan Uroš III

363

Uspensky Boris  323 V Vaderna Gábor  315–6 Vaillant André  238 Valbuena Prat Angel  132 Valčić Vinko  263 Valdivielso José de  145, 149, 152 Valentini Roberto  124 Valera Juan  194 Valera Mosén Diego de  139 Valle-Inclán Ramón de  186, 190 Varage Gregorio Alberto  144 Varga Imre  314 Vásárhelyi András  308–9 Vásárhelyi Gergely  309 Vašica Josef  285 Vaz de Camões Luís  158, 164, 166 Vazov Ivan  237, 246 Vega Lope de  145, 147–8, 152–5 Veldhuis Niek  16–7, 20, 25 Vélez Marín Manuel  129 Velimirović Miloš  214 Venantius Fortunatus  108–9 Venclović Gavril Stefanović 227–8 Verbaal Wim  109 Verdaguer Jacint  198–9, 204 Vermaseren Maarten  94 Veselovskij Aleksandr  221 Vetranović Mavro  263 Vicente Gil  148, 152–3, 158, 162, 164–6 Vičić Kajetan  264 Victorinus Marius  104 Vidal Jordi  47 Vidulić Jeronim  263 Vilaespina Pere  157, 160 Vinyoles Narcís  157, 161 Violante do Céu  158, 164–6 Visedo Orden Isabel  180 Visi Tamás  17 Vitezović Pavao Riter  264

364

Index of Names

Vranca Sebastian  52 Vrchlický Jaroslav  295–6 Vučić Bunić Dživo  263 Vyazemsky Pyotr  246

Wyspiański Stanisław  324

W Wagner Johann  76 Walczak Mariola  241 Wardropper Bruce  153 Warfield Benjamin  96 Wat Aleksander  344 Wathay Ferenc  309 Weöres Sándor  318 Widebramus Fridericus  126 Wieck Roger  119 Wieszczycki Adrian  329 Wilczek Piotr  328 Wili Walter  53 Wilkinson Lancelot  96 Wilson Allan  124 Winczer Pavol  298 Wiśniewski Mikołaj  52 Witkiewicz Stanisław Ignacy  344 Wolkow Benjamin M.  53, 56–7, 64, 70 Wrotkowski Wojciech  63 Wyatt Nicolas  35–6, 43

Y Yavorov Peyo  247–8 Yavorsky Stefan  271 Yelle Robert  92 Yona Shamir  44 Young Edward  177–8

X Xenophon 86

Z Žabkar Louis Vico  95 Zahradníček Jan  300 Zamora Juan Gil de  158 Zejda Radovan  300 Zimorowic Józef Bartłomiej  328, 338 Zmaj Jovan Jovanović 229 Zograf Longin  209, 214 Zorrilla José  184–6 Zrínyi Miklós  314 Zugasti Miguel  150 Zwierlein Otto  100 Żybert Emilia  56, 60, 70