Ukrajinsko jezično naslojavanje u hrvatskoglagoljskim bogoslužnim tekstovima
Authors:   , Kliček Domagoj 
Published: July 2022

All the research about redacting the language of Croatian Glagolitic texts and liturgical books during the 17th century indicates that this process interrupted the spontaneous development of Croatian Church Slavonic texts, which subsequently resulted in the fact that neither the common folk nor the clergy understood the liturgy well anymore. However, the scientists, depending on the period and the location, have called that process by different names. Therefore, the subject of research in this thesis are Croatian Glagolitic texts and liturgical books that were published during the 17th century and were edited and printed in Rome in the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith while the chief editor was a Croatian, born in Jastrebarsko, the Franciscan Rafael Levaković. The Roman Curia soon appointed an assistant to Levaković, the Ukrainian bishop Methodius Terleckyj, who was, in their opinion, very knowledgeable about the Church Slavonic language norm. A gaping void which this research attempts to fill is the fact that the aforementioned texts are inspected from the perspective of Ukrainian philology and Paleoslavistics for the first time, considering the fact that similar analyses have not been done before. Furthermore, the aim of this research is to reassess former interpretation of redaction of Croatian Glagolitic texts during the 17th century, in which the proces referred to above was most often called Russification, and lately also East-Slavicization or East-Slavonization. The dissertation points out the importance and the work of Ukrainian Greek Catholics in the process, and it especially reviews the attitude towards Church Slavonic grammar books (Zizanyj's and Smotricki's) as exclusively East Slavic grammars, because the belief in the authenticity of the Church Slavonic language of Greek Catholic books was at the time a generally accepted doctrine which was only challenged by Slavists Dobrovsky and Kopitar. The whole process of Croatian Glagolitic texts was viewed differently by the language scholars. Some considered the process an unfortunate page in the history of the Croatian Glagolitic tradition, and others believed that it only facilitated the process of deterioration and suppression of the Glagolitic script, which would have happened even if it had not been for the intervention during the printing preparation in Rome. Although it was not an issue at any moment that the Ukrainian language stratification in Croatian Glagolitic texts was detrimental to the natural development of the Croatian Church Slavonic language, that process should be accepted as a part of the Croatian Glagolitic tradition and diversity of Croatian cultural heritage. The doctoral thesis consists of introduction, three chapters, a conclusion and the list of references. After the introduction and the diachronic review of previous research, in the first chapter the circumstances from Church's history are presented, which encouraged the emergence of a new direction that the Croatian Glagolitic tradition was taking, especially the attempts to form a union between the Eastern and the Roman Church. The first attempt was the formation of the Council of Florence in 1439, which was destined to fail from the beginning due to the fact that it caused opposition among the Byzantine clergy. A century and a half later, the second attempt at reconciliation of Eastern Orthodox and Catholic traditions was more successful after the formation of the Union of Brest-Litovsk in Eastern Europe, in the multinational and multiconfessional Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. It was a period following the Council of Trent and the appointment of the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith as an institution which took care of printing liturgical books both for Latin and Glagolitic rite. The dissertation places special emphasis on Ukraine, that is, the historical timeframe within which the Greek Catholic Church is formed, and Methodius Terleckyj, the Chelm bishop whom the pope invites to Rome to assist Rafael Levaković, the Croatian Franciscan, in editing new liturgical books for Croatian Glagolitic monks. Furthermore, Methodius Terleckyj's connection to Croatia is accentuated, especially with Uskoks, the Orthodox defectors from the lands under Ottoman rule, who also accepted the union with Rome and became Greek Catholics. The third bond of Methodius Terleckyj to Croatia is his acquaintance with Juraj Križanić, a versatile Croatian clergyman, linguist and polymath whom Terleckyj intended to help reach Muscovy. The second chapter is dedicated to the overview of the Old Slavonic language periodization with a (Paleo)Slavic-theoretical framework, and certain scientists' overviews of the division of Church Slavonic language redactions. In that regard, special attention is given to the characteristics of the Ukrainian redaction, and they are also observed in detail in the context of the Ukrainian literary language and the Ukrainian Church Slavonic tradition during the 17th century. The thesis shows the influence of Ukrainian characteristics of the Church Slavonic language on the Moscow literary Church Slavonic norm. The above mentioned characteristics appear during the 17th century and the reform of Moscow patriarch Nikon (1605- 1681), who sought to reform Russian Orthodoxy in the spirit of the Byzantine tradition. In addition, the lives and work of the two aforementioned Ukrainian grammarians, Lavrentyj Zizanyj and Meletius Smotrytsky, are discussed, as well as their grammar books which had an important role in the process of redacting Croatian Glagolitic liturgic books in Rome during the 17th century. Since both grammars, Zizanyj's „Grammatika slovenska“ (1596) and Smotrytsky's „Grammatiki slavenskija pravylnoe syntagma“ (1619) are most often characterized as East Slavic in Croatian Paleoslavic science, this research, referring to academic literature, defines them more closely as literary monuments of the Ukrainian redaction of Church Slavonic. That is one of the main arguments supporting the thesis that certain linguistic layers in Croatian Glagolitic texts published by Levaković can be characterized as Ukrainian linguistic layering, in view of the grammars being singled out as essential in Croatian Glagolitic liturgic books redaction. The third chapter gives a comparative linguistic analysis of selected paragraphs from the Psalter. The linguistic analysis was conducted on the examples of psalms written in Croatian Slavonic and taken from the breviary, prepared for publication by Nikola (Mikula) Brozić, a Croatian clergyman, according to an older Croatian text. His breviary was published in Venice in 1561 and it is traditionally referred to in Croatian Paleoslavistic literature as the last example of Croatian Slavonic's natural development. The psalms are compared to the identical texts in Levaković's publication from 1648 as well as to the Ostrog Bible, the first complete Slavic Bible, printed in the Ukrainian town of Ostrog in 1581. The comparative linguistic analysis has shown that in a large number of cases similarities and identical language structures were detected in Levaković's edition from 1648 and the Ostrog Bible from 1581, while simultaneously noting the differences from typically Croatian language structures which can be found in Nikola Brozić's breviary from 1561. Lastly, the resulting findings are compiled in the conclusion, and, in the context of the Ukrainian redaction of the Church Slavonic language and the comparative analysis of Levaković's paragraphs and the Ostrog Bible, the basic hypothesis is confirmed – the EastSlavic language elements in the aforementioned Croatian Glagolitic texts during the 17th century can be defined more precisely as Ukrainian language stratification. At the end of the dissertation a list of references can be found, where the authors are listed in alphabetical order to facilitate the identification of sources cited and consulted in writing the thesis.