The Sisinnios' Legend in Codex Sturdzanus: the Text and the Language

Alekseeva Alina ORCID: 0000-0001-8584-4613 Junior researcher, Vinogradov Russian Language Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences 119019, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, Volkhonka str., 18/2 alevtina.sergeevna@gmail.com Other publications by this author

The complex of plots about a sacred character fighting a demon in female form — the so—called Sisiniev legend (hereinafter SL) - is recorded in oral and written sources of Aramaic, Jewish, Coptic, Ethiopian, Arabic, Syrian, Greek-Byzantine, Modern Greek, Armenian, South Slavic, Romanian and East Slavic traditions. Researchers distinguish two plot types: Michael-type and Sisinnios/Melitene-type (designation by R. Greenfield ^{[12, pp. 83-141]}), which are found both together and separately in the cultures of different peoples. In South Slavia, both types are noted, representing translations of the Greek-Byzantine Michael-type and Sisinnios/Melitene-type — T. A. Agapkina, who prepared the most complete study of these texts, calls them the Prayer of Archangel Michael (MM) and the Prayer of St. Sisin (MS), respectively ^[1].

The subject of this article will be MM (l. 57-63) and MS (l. 123–124) in the Codex Sturdzanus, manuscripts from the Library of the Romanian Academy (Ms. rom. 447), most of the editions of which are in books in Romanian ^{[16, 11, 14, 15]} — A happy exception is the recent the work of M. Mazilu and E. Timotin in a collective work on the history of SL ^[5]. The manuscript was found to have been rewritten between 1580 and 1619 by the priest Grigor from Makhacheni (Transylvania) and is a collection of apocryphal texts, some of them written in Slavic, another in Romanian, and the third in two languages simultaneously. The editions of MM and MS considered in the study by T. A. Agapkina under the sigils Hash281 and Hash284 are written in different handwriting. The first text, translated into Romanian, was rewritten together with the Apocalypse of Paul, the Apocalypse of the Virgin and the funeral sermon between 1590 and 1602 in the north of Hunedoyara, and the second, along with other prayers (including those with the name of Sisin), by another scribe after May 10, 1619 ^{[13, pp. 192, 200]}.

Below we will consider the textual and linguistic features of MM and MS in the Codex Sturdzanus against the background of other South Slavic lists and the archetype reconstructed by us, the description of which will be devoted to a separate work. Quotations from sources are given from manuscripts; in parentheses there are outliers, in square ones — recoverable; the combination j a is used to denote the iotized letter "az".

1. The Prayer of Archangel Michael

The plot is built around the dialogue between Archangel Michael and the South Slavic witch veshtitsa (see for more details in ^{[3, pp. 367-368]}) and her subsequent punishment for attempts to harm women in labor — even the Mother of God herself. Veshtitsa, forced by Archangel Michael, swears an oath not to destroy women and babies and reveals a list of her names, the knowledge of which allows her to be saved.

The first edit, the editor is already in the beginning of the text: it opens parvoline narrative, which replaced treeline narrative archetype. See: AZ argall IIR['ail] go(x) for Gor elenori and BRT[Oh] gizmos name(m) avisou and Ryoko(x) [UOM] T. Yoshie slopsema(n) and proklete V[size] She has more extended her arms from [howl] to Peter ^{[2, l. 123]}. The mentioned edition is the only one that retains the name Aviza in the introduction (Greek: ), in which the Greek diphthong o? is literally transmitted; the letter b (v?schits) appears in place of the digraph "uk" (?) by mistake. As a parallel, we will give the closest edition of MM in the Collection of Pop Dragol (SPD4; 2nd floor of the XIII century): Az sisin descended from the Si?n mountains. That's the way it is. I am living in the land. And ?÷èèè á á..... And tell me who you are. Kamo li ideshi ? ki? li ?si of the country ^{[7, l. 59]}.

As can be seen, Hash281 does not report the fiery eyes of veshtitsa (the reading is present in the archetype, which falls from the Greek-Byzantine version of the prayer), which is an error of the scribe or editor. Describing the hair of the veshtitsa, he replaces the participial form of the imouche, which is an exact translation of the Greek. communion (cf. the gr.: [?] ? ?[? ] [?] [?] [] ‘When Mihai[l] the archangel descended from the [g]ora of Sinai, he met Aviza, whose hair[s] were up to her feet and her eyes [for] burning brightly with fire’ ^{[10, pp. 271-272]}), a form of a plusquamperfect, and from another, less frequent verb to stretch ‘to stretch'. At the same time, the mention of the portrait feature should precede the remark of the archangel Michael, which does not occupy its position. These words seem to have come up from the spell of the archangel (see below), which was facilitated by the introduction of a replica through the verb of speaking speech, the presence of a personal pronoun and the verb being in the form of 2 l. units (cf. Hash281 and SPD4: reko(x) [ei] ti are / and re?èi who are you). On the basis of observations made, we would suggest to reconstruct the entry of text amended as follows: AZ archagly Michael hadihi for her lengste and broh â?ùèö? imenem avisou na Bo BSE cross hair to your pet <the message of the fiery eyes and Ricky ,and cyto you see.

In the edition of Hash281, there is no long story of veshtitsa about her malicious abilities, which can only be explained by spoiling the text in the protograph: for example, the loss of a sheet written on both sides. The heterogeneous narrative also convinces of the mechanical nature of the lacuna: if initially the verb reschi is used in the form of 1 l. units (rekoh ei to you), then further, before the spell of the archangel, the form of 3 l. units (and speech) follows. Archangel Mihai(l) n[e i]ma(m) postiti. If you are not a clan[shi] and you are a member of your own family. and ...), the appearance of which should be motivated in the missing passage:

The following fragment below is a list of names and the end of the oath: the same re(h) I? on(w) my family(m). A? mora. The saleswoman. G? [a]hoha. D? pla(d)nica. E? le(k)ta s?. chilkou[...]ditsa z? polonoshnitsa. I Sveva(l)and ( d[t]and davisa , joyless. A?íèíè[[[...] nowhere is there a (m) bi(l) klnoutis. Archangel[e m]ihai(le). inhabited by the Stoi(t) mlti se unto äîì? BJU or èí? and a íîâ? ìèë? [so!] yes, there is no [e ...]kui, no pestilence, no beauty. The central element of prayer — the oath by the throne of the Lord and the high muscle — is missing, which is also explained by the spoilage of the list. This assumption is confirmed by the particle at the beginning of the passage: in an intact protograph, it must be preceded by the pronoun she. As for the list of names, it is close to a number of other lists — let's give as an example a quote from NBS454 (first. Thursdays. XVIII): a IME Mora u thing g âèç?ñà d was makaila e sijandon ) of Evagelos s íàâàðüä?ëèjand I live GNI , platinize - decodifica a ?çèìà MLA(d)enzimi with milk V prelacy dijandwills ^{[6, p. 46 vol.]}.

Protector of the home, according to this edition, is the presence of prayer in its walls: inhabited by Stoi(t) mlti se unto the house? BJU or in? and a new? mil? [so!] yes, there is no [e ...]kui, no pestilence, no beauty. neither di?vo(l). ideo nor the earth. He is dying. The following words can be considered a separate prayer, merged with MM — here is a fragment of the recording missing from B. Hashdeu's publication: in [so!] Nacho b the word and the word b - BA and by [b]e word se b from time immemorial KB Bo. and in? t?(m) [...]ish and without it is not worth it(chi)so much(s) in that(m) alive(t) [...]R? in tì ñú ñú [ [ [so!] and tyma not ve(t) [so!]. [b]s(C) clkI Ambassador(n) , BA im of emo camping pride [in] light(l)tion [so!]. Yes, you are(l) right(t). ? sv[...]?. Yes, enter the?r? em? im?(t). + and then they [e] on who and (x) wear (t) cleanly with themselves. Then don't be afraid. There is no chance. no other [b]GI(t) GN artir about MIA Savoy [t]e(C) PA(n)docrat OSI Ki )(C) ELS(d) //124 vol.// mountain(x). Get lost(t). Neither in the water[no] nor evil, neither oumre(t) nor(t) fire[t] out(t) nor down [so!] ranou preime(t) n[and co]p¿. Neither a sword nor a sword. Neither one[ina] nor the other rani is always there(t) in the ami(n). The text begins with a quote In 1.1–7, which continued with list of divine names and titles in the Greek and Hebrew languages: artir about MIA Savoy [t]e(C) PA(n)docrat OSIjand Ki ,(C) ELS[Ada](s) — ? gerolymatos (’w??) [?] (’?l ?[ada]y) ‘my Father is Almighty God Almighty Jehovah and the Almighty’. It seems that the choice of a quote from the first chapter of the Gospel of John is due to the fact that it mentions the name of the evangelist himself, and pragmatics (amulet) and a similar model of protection (list of names) contributed to the addition of a short prayer to MM.

The language of the editorial office according to the Hash281 list differs in the following features. The spelling is two-dimensional (b appears mainly at the end of words, and b in the middle, excluding the writing of prepositions in and out) and two-dimensional, and not only ja (ouzi ja ‘Existing’) is used to denote [ja], but also ? (di?vo(l)). It is possible to note the features characteristic of South Slavic (1) and South and East Slavic (2) languages:

1) transitions *a > [e] (oblique, up to a loop) and [y] > [i] (ti, rani ‘rana’, bi(c)), mixing o / y (in the last example, it is also possible to write the second o under the influence of neighboring syllables), writing a syllabic smooth t[r]t (crani[...]) and the absence of iotation (orthosis),

2) transition *? > [u] (in?p?).

The spelling of the name (m) seems to reflect the reduction of the stressed vowel, which is observed in the Romanian language.  The derivation of the Church Slavonic language can be described as Middle Bulgarian, which corresponds to the linguistic situation of the principalities of Wallachia, Moldavia and Transylvania (for more information, see ^[4]).

2. The Prayer of St. Sisin

In the archetype of the MS translation, three warrior brothers, Saints Sisin, Sinador and Theodore, go to Sister Melentia to save her newborn child from the devil. However, he, who turned into a grain under the hoof of a horse, enters the house and kidnaps the child, which forces the brothers to go in search of them. The trees the brothers encounter either lead them astray, or help them find the devil, who promises to return the children if the warriors spit out their mother's milk. After praying to God, the brothers do what is required — the devil returns the children and takes an oath not to harm people, which includes the names of the devil himself.

The Hash284 list contains a version of the edition, the second list (with some differences) of which is in the Collection of Pop Dragol (SPD1). The main innovation of the editorial board is to reduce the number of heroes to one — St. Cicinho — that is reflected in the title: mlta tho scene , the devil prokleta (Õàø284) and mlitwa STO si[Sina] - evil the (ÑÏÄ1). Both lists, compared with the previous stage of editing, also combine three other updates: a) the angel's words are spread by the phrase ‘so that the Lord exorcises the devil through you’ (the phrase is duplicated when Sisin convinces his sister to open the gate), b) information about cooking dinner is cut off, c) the devil immediately, as soon as he enters the house, runs away with a child. Below we will consider the features of the revision variant in Hash284 in comparison with the archetype of the revision and its other variant — SPD1.

The compiler of the Hash284 variant adds that Sisin, who returned to Arabia from the east, offers a prayer to the Lord, and an angel appears to him in a dream (not hunting, as in SPD1): eg(e) and ml?tv ? tvorashe come back from the sisin ? into the ravine. and right to him(?) ag?gl. d(c)pd? in the morning. Reporting on Melentia, the scribe cuts off information about her life in the square where copper is sold, and the woman herself is named Melentina: meli(n?) is her sister [wm. yours — A. A.] give birth [ext. by mistake — A. A.] create a story. marbled. and she chained the guards here. and then zili ja on [vm. zali ja la]. poe(t?) .in?. ? the onion on the side (w ) is a bra(W ) but for the left . The convergence of the name with its Greek. The variant () is secondary, since Hash284 is far from the archetype, and there are no other traces of using a foreign language version when editing the prayer.

The sister does not open Sisin's gate, referring to the danger that lies in wait for her: I do not dare [so!] ti ?vrsty. ja ko(w) is afraid of Varach's enemy (in the Romanian version, the equivalent of reading varach is dracul ‘devil'). In our opinion, Baraha is the word Satan written in secret script. M. N. Speransky describes a similar writing system with letter modification used by the protopsalt from the Romanian Putna monastery, Eustathius (c. 1511) ^{[9, pp. 11-14]}. Below we present samples of the lettering of the letters c, a, t, n from the edition (Fig. 1). As you can see, the first and third correspond to the lettering from the last column, resembling the letters b and p, while the a from the first and second systems resembles the usual Cyrillic a. The shape of the letter h, which could be confused with x, is in the last column: it is least similar to an independent Cyrillic letter, so the desire to "finish" it is understandable — it is enough just to draw another diagonal in order to get the letter X. According to M. N. Speransky, Eustathius really used the mixing of several systems in his notes — though never within the framework of a single word, but the secret spelling in Hash284 may be an exception to the rule. We emphasize that we are talking only about using the type of cryptography — there is no reliable data to recognize the drafting of a version of the editorial board with the personality of Eustathius.

Fig. 1

An indication of the winter storm as the argument to open the door is moved from the first replica in the second Cicinho (tursi mi stype Yes winid? ja(K) Vela e(s) VIN? winter. And there was a big entrance. not (from?) chapters ? to(e)cloniti), making this request more insistent. In the archetype of translation, after the flight of the devil, Sisin and his brothers take up arms and mount a horse exhaling flames, which embodies a person's connection with the supernatural world ^{[8, pp. 590-594]} — due to the fact that the translator removes the indication of the route (in Greek. — The Lebanese Mountains), it can be assumed that the devil takes the warrior with him to another world. In Hash284, this image undergoes another transformation: the horse not only breathes flame, but is all fiery, as is the spear taken into the hands of a warrior (sweat(h?) after (d) the devil(d?). ko(n?) the same e(g?) flame(m) diha (Sh?) you have a flame(x) copy). Cicinho deliberately drives to the willow, and olive, as the editor says, standing at the sea (the olives? PR Mora stoewe) — thanks to the tree contains only the wish to be used in the Church (and si BL(C)governmental and Senna tree bei olives(?). and b ?(de)shi vse(m) tsrkva(m) on the proscription. (a) a little bit(m) in English), while in the archetype of translation and part of the lists, the hero prophesies fertility to the olive tree. Further, the motive of turning into a fish is missing from the list — it is replaced by the phrase about diving into the sea, which contains the Serbism porinutis ? ‘to dive’ (into the sea by (ri)noshase).

Having pulled the devil ashore with the help of a net and a fishing rod, Sisin beats him with 72 clubs: he goes to m(o)ryu and turns his face into the sea. extract(h?) mre? vra(g?) on the s ? ho. And they began to beat him. They fell with iron. In Orthodoxy and popular culture, this number has no symbolic meaning (unless it is a question of translating the Septuagint, which was most likely unknown to the scribe), so it can be assumed that the scribe used a figure denoting only plurality. The warrior clarifies that the devil must vomit up 6 children of Melentia, whose name changes again compared to the protograph: now she is named Melinthiana and Melinthia (yes(f) for mi.s. the children of my sister are my... then (d) and (d)avol izbluva.s. d. meli(N?)ti ja nii).

The order of the lines in the dialogue between Sisin and the devil corresponds to the previous stage of editing, but at the end of the conversation the words ‘swear, devil!’ and his oath is duplicated: and re(H?) and(m) sisi(n?). Live on (W?) nb(s?)s and on earth. do not ima(m) and do not be afraid of the will of the doctor. and start di ja in the(L?) cage(C?). Taco mi si(L?) scary pr(s?)tol. Ideally, you are happy with ja [so!] Glares at them(e) my memory is that the devil will not overtake(t). Live our life on earth. not ima(m) te(b) p ? stiti diawole. If you don't cling to me. and start(t) with the walls of the cage(s). taco (mi) si(L?) of the terrible throne and the temple of the temple[(go)]. and chi(s?)tago po(r)fira ?n't look for (s?)ti? him in(x). and si(l) t(x) .m. Popovi others bstit cherry araseli(m). and MLT? create(t) dni and but(s). IDA(W) mlta sa GLA have your BB(s)pomiane those. This is not the case in any way(t). No way [so!] á[[¿]yu. m(r?). Finally, Sisin sends the devil into darkness, which is an innovation of Hash284: he sends his ambassador to (d) darkness(m). And z(d)e glorifies him and his son. And that's right and wrong [so!] and so on(with?)but also for ever and ever(m) ami(n?).

Of particular interest are the linguistic features of Hash284. The spelling is two—line and two-line. The reduced ones are used in accordance with etymology (vystoka, ssa(l?), vne), mixed (vshiti, vnyd ?, voin), lost in a weak position (terrible) or appear in an unethymological position at the end of the reflexive pronoun to oneself (return, eat ‘yourself’). As for Yusov, in the manuscript highlighted several examples of etymological usage (b(d)th to (d)LAN, gets) and Maine (in (d)LAN, Bose ‘fear’), and writing with ( in place [e] < *? (t(x) ‘those’). In some spellings, there is a lack of yotation: velya, tvorashe, zb(l)? va (but there is an excess).

It is possible to note reflexes characteristic of South Slavic (1) and South and East Slavic languages (2). There is also a spelling of c in place of *tj (3), which may be a Polish reflex or, more likely, a typo, since the spelling of c and s differ only in one feature:

1) *? > [e] (standing, procleta), *y> [i] (mishca, bi(c?), but there is also a spelling that preserves the etymological vowel — by(c?)), writing syllabic smooth (st?p ?, grú, prvo, vr(x)), *tj > [?t] (more(t?), more), *dj > [?d] (yes(w)d),

2) *? > [y] (ml?tv ?), *? > [e] (in color(w), running; once the letter b (v) is marked on the spot, which could appear due to an incorrect reading of ? in the protograph),

3) *tj (gl?ce).

In the field of grammar, it should be noted the use of R. P. and V. P. (odush.) with the ending -y (-y) (according to (d) kopito(m) horse, ?trok ? nosesha), as well as R. ed. with the ending -a (mora). There are Serbisms in the field of morphology — the endings of essences. *a-scl.: -and in D. P. (k. sister) and -e in R. ed. (sister), as well as inflection -om in sushch.  the former consonant type, including units (flame(m)).  The form of a woman's name (go sisin to your sister's melin), on the contrary, reflects the disintegration of the declension of nouns — a similar process affects the pronominal declension (the children of my sister are mine).

The lexemes mouse and porphyry change gender to masculine, which is also associated with changes in the nominal declension: taco (mi) si(L?) of the terrible stem and the temple of the temple[(go)]. and chi(s?)tago po(r)fira. In two cases, the spelling te appears, resembling the Bulgarian article mn. ch.: im(e) my name is those, im yours is (c)the name of those. Attention is drawn to the location of the enclitics, characteristic of the Serbian and Bulgarian languages: dokle mi is not klnishi (the union is found in both Bulgarian and Serbian), but not klni(sh?) mi is. As for the vocabulary, it is possible to note the Serbisms of the substitutions of the se ‘to slip, to slip’ (diavo(l?) the same by (d) miche(c?) [letter e ispr. from i — AA] prosenoyu lospoyu by (d) kopito(m) Sisin's horse) and Porinutis? ‘immerse yourself’ (in the sea by (ri)noshase) and the Bulgarisms of losp (cf. with modern luspa ‘husk') and undica (which has its own sea).

Thus, Hash284 reflects phonetic and grammatical features characteristic of the Middle Bulgarian, Serbian and probably Polish versions of the Church Slavonic language.

3. Conclusions

The Codex Sturdzanus manuscript confirms that by the turn of the XVI/XVII centuries. Sisiniev's legend reaches the principalities of Wallachia, Moldavia and Transylvania in two plot types. The source records the only list of the MM editorial board and one of the MS variants, accompanied by a parallel translation into Romanian, which was studied by M. Mazilu and E. Timotin ^{[13, pp. 509-513]}. Both Slavic editions, as the study showed, are stylistic, and the language of prayers can be described as a Middle Bulgarian version of Church Slavonic, used in the Romanian-speaking environment as a written language. However, MM — perhaps due to the fragmentary nature of the text — contains fewer regional features than MS.

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.