Historical View of the Languages and Literature of the Slavic Nations Part 10

The inhabitants of the provincial counties Agram, Kreutz, Varasdin, and the neighbouring districts, called Provincial Croatia, who speak a somewhat different dialect of the Vindish language, but are able to read that version of the Bible, have nevertheless several translations in their own dialect, lying in ma.n.u.script, and only waiting for some Maecenas, or for some favourable conjuncture, in order to make their appearance.

The only portion of the Vindish race among whom the Protestant religion has been kept alive, are about 15,000 Slovenzi in Hungary.

Their dialect approaches in a like measure to that of the Slovaks; and hence serves as the connecting link between the languages of the Eastern and Western Slavic stems. For them the New Testament exists in a translation by Stephen Kuznico; Halle 1771; reprinted at St.

Petersburg, 1818.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1: This portion of the Slavic race was formerly more commonly known under the general appellation of _Illyrians_. With the exception of the Bulgarians, who never have been comprehended under it, this name has alternately been applied to the Southern Slavic nations; sometimes only to the Dalmatians and Slavonians; sometimes to them together with the Croatians and Vindes; by others again to the Turkish Servians and Bosnians, etc. The old Illyrians, i.e. the inhabitants of the Roman province Illyric.u.m, were not Slavi, but a people related to the old Thracians, the forefathers of the present Albanians; see Schaffarik _Gesch_. p. 33, n. 2. _Illyric.u.m Magnum_ comprised in the fourth century nearly all the Roman provinces of eastern Europe. Napoleon affected to renew the names and t.i.tles of the ancient Roman empire, and called the territory ceded to him by Austria in 1809, viz. Carniola and all the country between the Adriatic, the Save, and the Turkish empire, his Illyrian provinces, and their inhabitants Illyrians. In the year 1815 a new kingdom of Illyria was founded as an Austrian province, comprehending Carniola, Carinthia, and Trieste with its territory. It was partly on account of this indefiniteness, that the name of _Illyrians_ had been entirely relinquished by modern philologists; until it was quite recently again token up by some Croatian and Dalmatian writers. In its stead the name of _Servians_, or more properly _Serbians, Serbs,_ has been adopted as a general appellation by the best authorities. See below in -- 1, on the Literature of the Servians of the Greek Church. The word _Srb, Serb, Sorab_, has been alternately derived from _Srp_, scythe; from _Siberi, Sever,_ north; from _Sarmat_; from _Serbulja_, a kind of shoe or sock; from _servus_, servant, etc. The true derivation has not yet been settled. See Dobrovsky's History of the Bohemian Language, 1818; and also his _Inst. Ling. Slav_. 1822.]

[Footnote 2: See above, p. 9 sq. and the preceding note.]

[Footnote 3: The Servians, however, under the government of their own energetic countryman, Prince Milosh, for some years enjoyed a certain degree of freedom, which no doubt has had good results for the mental life of the nation. A good view of their country, const.i.tution, and literature, is given in a modern German work: _Reise nach Serbien im Spatherbst_ 1829, by Otto von Pirch, Berlin 1830. See also _Servia und Belgrade in_ 1843-44, by A.A. Paton, Lond. 1845.]

[Footnote 4: See Schaffarik _Gesch_. p. 217.]

[Footnote 5: These statutes were first printed by Raitch, in his great work on Slavic history (see Note 8); and translated by Engel in his History of Hungary and the adjacent Territories, Vol. 2, p. 293.]

[Footnote 6: See above, in the History of the Old Slavic Language, p.

44.]

[Footnote 7: There is however still another Cyrillic printing office attached to an Armenian convent in Vienna. Since the printing of Vuk's second edition of the Servian popular songs at Leipsic, several other Servian books have also been printed there. The Vladika of Montenegro has also established a printing office at his residence of Tzetinja.

Vuk's "Proverbs" have been printed there.]

[Footnote 8: The complete t.i.tle of this valuable work is: _Istorja raznich Slavenskich narodov nairatchvedshe Chorvatov, Bolgarov, i Srbov_, Vienna 1792-95, 4 vols.]

[Footnote 9: The writings of this very productive philologist and historian are however more remarkable for boldness and singularity of a.s.sertion, than for depth. In his _Rimljani slavenstvovavs.h.i.+_, Buda 1818, he undertakes to derive the entire Latin language from the Slavic. In an earlier work, written 1809, he contends that the German language was a corruption of the Slavic dialects spoken on the Elbe.]

[Footnote 10: The reader will find a more complete catalogue of the Servian writers and their works, in O.v. Birch's Travels; see above, p. 107, n. 3.]

[Footnote 11: _Narodne Serpske Poslovitze_, Zetinya 1836.]

[Footnote 12: See below in --2.b, Dalmatian Literature.]

[Footnote 13: See more on Servian popular poetry in Part IV. The t.i.tle of Vuk's collection, a part of which appeared 1814-15 at Vienna, in two small volumes, is _Narodm Srpske pjesme_, Lpzg 1823-24, three volumes. A fourth volume was published at Vienna 1833, with a very instructive preface. Some of these remarkable songs have been made known to the English public in Bowring's Servian Popular Poetry, London 1827. This little collection contains also an able and spirited introduction, which serves to give a clear view not only of the state of the Servians in particular, but also of the relation of the Slavic nations to each other in general; with the exception of some mistakes in respect to cla.s.sification.--In Germany a general interest for Servian national poetry was excited by Goethe; see his _Kunst und Alterthum_, Vol. V. Nos. I and II. German translations are: _Volkslieder der Serben_, by Talvj, 2 vols. Halle 1825-26; from which work Bowring seems chiefly to have translated. _Die Wila_, by Gerhardt, 2 vols. Lpzg. 1828. These two works contain nearly all the songs published by Vuk, in his first three volumes; but only half of those he has collected. _Serbische Volkslieder_, by v. Gotze, St. Pet.

and Lpzg. 1827. _Serbische Hochzeitlieder_, by Eugen Wesely, 1826. A French translation of these songs does not yet exist, although they have excited a deep interest among the literati of France. The work _la Guzla_, published at Paris in 1827 and purporting to contain translations of Dalmatian national songs, is not genuine; it was written by the French poet Merimee, with much talent indeed, but without any knowledge of the Servian language.]

[Footnote 14: That is: Wolf, son of Stephan, belonging to the family of the Karads.h.i.+ans, inhabitants of a certain district or village. The Servians in Servia proper and Bosnia have not yet any family names.

Those who emigrated in early years to other countries mostly adopted their fathers' names with the suffix of _vitch_ as a family name; for instance Markovitch, Gregorovitch, i.q. Markson, Gregorson, etc. The Servian subjects of Turkey, who settle in other parts of the country, still mostly follow this rule. Vuk neglected this; and acquired therefore his literary fame under his Christian name of _Vuk_. But, as a father of a family and an Austrian citizen, he is called _Karads.h.i.+tch_ after his tribe; which for reasons we do not know he seems to have preferred to the name of Stephanovitch.]

[Footnote 15: We must correct here a mistake made by Dr. Henderson in his Biblical Researches, in respect to the Servian New Testament. He says, p. 263, "A version of the (Servian) New Testament was indeed executed some years ago, but its merits were not of such a description as to warrant the committee of the Russian Bible Society to carry it through the press; yet, as they were deeply convinced of the importance of the object, they were induced to engage a native Servian, of the name of Athanasius Stokovitch to make a new translation, the printing of which was completed in the year 1825, but owing to the cessation of the Society's operations, the distribution of the copies has. .h.i.therto been r.e.t.a.r.ded." Dr. Henderson probably received his information at St. Petersburg, and felt himself of course ent.i.tled to depend on it, being very likely not acquainted with the great schism in modern Servian literature above mentioned. If we may confide in our own recollections, the translation, the merits of which the committee of the Russian Bible Society was so little disposed to acknowledge, was made by Vuk Stephanovitch, who knew better than any one else the wants of the Servian people, and who presented in the above mentioned Gospel of St. Luke a specimen to the learned world, which received the approbation of all those Slavic scholars ent.i.tled to judge of the subject. The committee of St. Petersburg, however, was probably composed of gentlemen of the opposite party; as indeed the Russian Servians are, in general, advocates of the mixed Slavo-Servian language, in which for about fifty years all books for the Servians were written, and which we have described above in Schaffarik's words; see p. 108. According to their ideas of the Servian language, the mere use of the common dialect of the people was sufficient to inspire doubts of the competency of the translator; although it was for the people, the unlearned, that the translation was professedly made. They engaged in consequence Professor Stokovitch, the author of several Russian and Slavo-Servian books (see above p. 112), and who had been for more than twenty years in the Russian service, to make a new translation. This person, who, to judge from our personal acquaintance with him, probably on this occasion read the Gospels for the first time in his life with any attention, took the rejected version for his basis; altered it, according to his views of the dignity of the Servian language, into the customary mixed Slavo-Servian Russian idiom; and received the reward from the Society. Whether this is the version afterwards printed at Leipsic and distributed in Servia by the English Bible Society, we are not informed. From private letters we know, that in the year 1827, that Society proposed to Vuk Stephanovitch to allow him 500, if after obtaining appropriate testimonies for the correctness of his version, he would print one thousand copies in Servia; and also authorized its correspondent in Constantinople, Mr. Leeves, to arrange the matter finally with Vuk.

From M. Kopitar's remark however, that the translation for the Dalmatian Roman Catholics needed only to be transcribed with Cyrillic letters to come into use among the eastern Servians, we are ent.i.tled to conclude that the version now circulated, is not such as it ought to be; and a correct one, for that part of the nation, is still a desideratum. It would seem therefore that Vuk Stephanovitch cannot have accepted the offer in question. See Kopitar's Letter to the Editor of the Bibl. Repos. Vol. III. 1833, p. 186.]

[Footnote 16: The _Serbianka_ of Milutinovitch was published at Leipsic, 1826; his History at the same place, 1837.]

[Footnote 17: _Pjevanija Tzernogorska i Herzegovatshka etc. izdana Josifom Milowukom,_ Ofen 1833--_Pjevanija Tzernogorska i Herzegovatshka sabrana i izdana Tshubrom Tshoikovitckom, etc_. Leipz.

1839.]

[Footnote 16: _Montenegro_, properly _Montenero,_ is the Italian translation of _Tzernagora,_ Black Mountain, a name which is applied to these ranges on account of the dark colour of the rocks and woods.]

[Footnote 17: More on the Vladika and on Montenegro in general, see in the recent work of Sir J.G. Wilkinson, _Dalmatia and Montenegro_, 2 vols.

Lond. 1848. Also an article in the _British and Foreign Review_, July 1840, by Count Krasinski. A full and very interesting account of the country and people, is found in the little work of Vuk Stephanovitch Karads.h.i.+ch, _Montenegro und die Montenegriner_, 8vo. Stuttg. u. Tub.

1837; published in Cotta's "Reisen u. Landerbeschreibungen der altern u. neuern Zeit."]

[Footnote 18: See above, p. 37 sq.]

[Footnote 19: Kopitar, _Glagolita Clozia.n.u.s_, Vindob. 1836.]

[Footnote 20: See above, p. 41.]

[Footnote 21: On the still earlier Glagolitie ma.n.u.script discovered at Trent, there was also found a note written by one of its former n.o.ble owners, that "dises puech hat Sant Jeronimuss mit aigner hant geschriben in krabatischer sprach."]

[Footnote 22: A fine copy of the above splendid work is now on sale by the publisher of this volume.]

[Footnote 23: _Razgovor uG.o.dni naroda slavinskoga_, Venice 1759. A new edition appeared in the year 1811.]

[Footnote 24: Letter of Kopitar to the Editor, Bibl. Repos. 1833, p.

136.]

[Footnote 25: F. Verantii _Dictionarium quinque n.o.biliss. Eur. Ling.

Lat. Ital. Germ. Dalm. et Ung_. Venice 1595. Micalia _Thesaurus linguae Illyricae_, etc. Ancona 1651. Delia Bella _Dizionario It. Lat.

Illyr_. Venice 1728; later edit. Ragusa 1785. Voltiggi _Riesosbronik illyriesiskoga, ital. i nimacsk_, Vienna 1803. Stulli _Lexicon Lat.

Ital. Illyr_. etc, Buda and Ragusa 1801-10, 6 vols. Prefixed to the four last works, are also grammars. Other Dalmatian grammars are: Ca.s.sii _Inst.i.tutiones linguae Illyricae_, Rome, 1604. Appendini _Grammatik der illyrischen Sprache_, Ragusa 1608. Starchsevich _Nuova Gramm. Illyrica_, Trieste 1012. Babukich _Illyrische Grammatik_, Wien 1839.]

[Footnote 26: See above, p. 116, 117.]

[Footnote 27: See above in -- 1. p. 108.]

[Footnote 28: See p. 128 above.]

[Footnote 29: See p. 131.--As dictionaries and grammars of this dialect are to be mentioned: Relcovich _Deutsch illyrisches and illyr.

deutsches Worterb._ Vienna 1796. By the same: _Neue Slawonisch-deutche Grammatik_, Agram 1767. Vienna 1774. Buda 1789. Lanossovich _Einleitung zur Slav. Sprache,_ several editions from 1778-1795.]

[Footnote 30: See the second volume of Engel's _History of Hungary_ etc. Katanesich _Specimen phil. et geogr. Pannon._ etc. 1795.

Schaffarik's _Geschichte_, etc. p. 226-31, 235, 265.]

[Footnote 31: These two divisions of Military and Provincial Croatia const.i.tute the modern Austrian kingdom of Croatia, which is united with that of Hungary. See For. Quart. Review, Vol. VII. p. 423 sq.]

[Footnote 32: See p. 128 above.]

[Footnote 33: Croatian philological works are: _Einleitung zur croat.

Spracklehre,_ Varasdin 1783. Kornig's _Croat. Sprachlehre,_ Agram 1795. Gyurkovshky's _Croat. Grammatik,_ 1825. Rukevina v. Liebstadt _Kroatische Sprachformen,_ etc. Trieste 1843. Habdelich _Dictionarium croat. lat_. Gratz 1670. Belloszlenecz _Gazophylacium s.

Latino-Illyricor._ etc. Agram 1740. Jambressich's _Lex. Lat. interpr.

illyrica, germ_. etc. Agram 1742.]

[Footnote 34: See Engel, etc. III p. 469.]

[Footnote 35: See the _Wiener Jahrbucher_, 1822, Vol. XVII. See too the _Glagolita Clozia.n.u.s_, and the article "On the Pannonian Origin of the Slavic Liturgy." See above, pp. 28, 39.]