Before the Cyrillic alphabet there was a Glagolitic alphabet. Two Slavic alphabets (Cyrillic and Glagolitic)
Following this conviction, they believe that the Cyrillic alphabet tradition was established later, after the death of Cyril, and not even among the first students, but after them - among writers and scribes who worked in the Bulgarian kingdom in the 10th century. Through them, as is known, the Cyrillic alphabet was transferred to Rus'.
It would seem that if the authoritative majority gives primacy to the Glagolitic alphabet, then why not calm down and return to an outdated issue? However, the old topic comes up again and again. Moreover, these impulses most often come from Glagolitic lawyers. You might think that they intend to polish some of their almost absolute results to a shine. Or that they are still not very calm in their souls, and they are expecting some unexpected daring attacks on their system of evidence.
After all, it would seem that everything in their arguments is very clear: the Cyrillic alphabet replaced the Glagolitic alphabet, and the displacement took place in rather crude forms. There is even a date indicated from which it is proposed to count the forceful elimination of the Glagolitic alphabet and its replacement with the Cyrillic alphabet. For example, according to the conviction of the Slovenian scientist Franz Grevs, it is recommended to consider the period 893-894 as such a date, when the Bulgarian state was headed by Prince Simeon, himself half-Greek by origin, who received an excellent Greek education and therefore immediately began to advocate for the establishment of an alphabet within the country, its alphabetic graphics vividly echo, and for the most part coincide with, the Greek letter.
Both politics and personal whim supposedly interfered with cultural creativity at the same time, and this looked like a disaster. Entire parchment books in a short period of time, mainly dating back to the 10th century, were hastily cleared of Glagolitic writing, and on the washed sheets a secondary record appeared everywhere, already written in Cyrillic statutory handwriting. Monumental, solemn, imperial.
Letter historians call rewritten books palimpsests. Translated from Greek: something freshly written on a scraped or washed sheet. For clarity, you can recall the usual blots in a school notebook, hastily erased with an eraser before entering a word or letter in the corrected form.
Abundant scrapings and washes of Glagolitic books seem to be the most eloquent of all and confirm the seniority of the Glagolitic alphabet. But this, we note, is the only documentary evidence of the forceful replacement of one Slavic alphabet with another. The most ancient written sources did not preserve any other reliable evidence of the cataclysm. Neither the closest disciples of Cyril and Methodius, nor their successors, nor the same Prince Simeon, nor any other contemporaries of such a notable incident considered it necessary to speak out about it anywhere. That is, nothing: no complaints, no prohibitory decree. But the persistent adherence to Glagolitic writing in the atmosphere of polemics of those days could easily have raised accusations of heretical deviation. But - silence. There is, however, an argument (it was persistently put forward by the same F. Grevs) that the Slavic writer of the early 10th century, Chernorizets the Brave, acted as a brave defender of the Glagolitic alphabet in his famous apology for the alphabet created by Cyril. True, for some reason the Brave himself does not say a word or a hint about the existence of an elementary conflict. We will definitely turn to an analysis of the main provisions of his apology, but later.
In the meantime, it doesn’t hurt to once again record the widespread opinion: the Cyrillic alphabet was given preference only for reasons of political and cultural etiquette, since in most alphabetic spellings it, we repeat, obediently followed the graphics of the Greek alphabet, and, therefore, did not represent any extraordinary challenge to the written tradition Byzantine ecumene. The secondary, openly pro-Greek alphabet was supposedly the people who established its priority, named in memory of Cyril the Philosopher.
This strange research discrepancy, we agree, greatly devalues the arguments of supporters of the Glagolitic alphabet as the absolute and only brainchild of Cyril the Philosopher. And yet, the existence of palimpsests has forced and will force everyone who touches the topic of the primal Slavic alphabet to check the logic of their evidence again and again. The initial letters of the parchment books, which were not completely cleaned, can still be recognized, if not read. No matter how much the parchment sheets are washed, traces of the Glagolitic alphabet still appear. And behind them, it means, either crime appears, or some kind of forced necessity of that distant time.
Fortunately, the existence of the Glagolitic alphabet today is evidenced not only by palimpsests. In different countries, a whole corpus of ancient written monuments of Glagolitic alphabetic graphics has been preserved. These books or their fragments have long been known in science and have been thoroughly studied. Among them, first of all, it is necessary to mention the Kyiv sheets of the 10th – 11th centuries. (the monument is kept in the Central Scientific Library of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv), Assemani Gospel of the 10th – 11th centuries. (in the Slavic department of the Vatican Library), Zograf Gospel of the 10th – 11th centuries. (in the Russian National Library, St. Petersburg), Mariinsky Gospel of the X – XI centuries. (in the Russian State Library, Moscow), Klotsiev collection of the 11th century. (Trieste, Innsbruck), Sinai Psalter of the 11th century. (in the Library of the Monastery of St. Catherine in Sinai), Sinai Breviary of the 11th century. (ibid.).Let us limit ourselves to at least these, the most ancient and authoritative ones. All of them, as we see, do not belong to firmly dated monuments, since none of them preserved records with an exact indication of the year of creation of the manuscript. But even rounded, “floating” dates, without saying a word, confirm: all manuscripts arose after the death of the founders of Slavic writing. That is, at a time when, according to the supporters of the “glagolic primacy,” the tradition of this letter was intensively supplanted by adherents of the pro-Greek alphabet, which allegedly prevailed contrary to the intentions of the “glagolitic” Cyril.
The conclusion that inexorably suggests itself: the dating of the oldest Glagolitic sources in themselves does not allow us to overdramatize the picture of the confrontation between the first two Slavic alphabets. Note that several of the oldest Cyrillic manuscripts of Ancient Rus' also date back to the 11th century: these are the world-famous Reims Gospel of the first half of the century, the Ostromir Gospel of 1056-1057, the Izbornik of Svyatoslav of 1073, the Izbornik of Svyatoslav of 1076, the Archangel Gospel of 1092, Savina’s book, - everything, by the way, is on clean sheets, without traces of washing.
So excessive dramatization is also inappropriate in the issue of palimpsests. For example, a careful study of the pages of the Glagolitic Zograf Gospel repeatedly reveals traces of washing or erasing of the old text and new writings in their place. But what’s on the pages washed clean of the Glagolitic alphabet? Glagolitic again! Moreover, the largest of these restorations (we are talking about an entire notebook from the Gospel of Matthew) dates back not to the 10th – 11th centuries, but to the 12th century.
This manuscript also contains Cyrillic text. But he modestly appears only on the pages of its additional part (the synaxarion). This section dates back to the 13th century and the text is written on clean sheets, not washed from the Glagolitic alphabet. In an article devoted to the Zograf Gospel (Kirilo-Metodievskaya Encyclopedia volume 1, Sofia, 1985), Bulgarian researcher Ivan Dobrev mentions that in 1879 the Glagolitic, that is, the oldest part of the monument was published in Cyrillic transliteration. This created the basis for a more careful scientific analysis of the two alphabets. Acquaintance with the original was also simplified for readers who were deprived of the opportunity to read the Glagolitic alphabet, forgotten over the past centuries. In any case, this method of accessing an ancient source cannot be confused with washing or scraping.
Of the surviving ancient manuscripts, perhaps only the only one can be classified as completely washed out of the Glagolitic alphabet. This is the Cyrillic Boyana Gospel of the 11th century. It inevitably acquired somewhat odious fame, as clear evidence of the harsh displacement of one tradition in favor of another. But all the oldest monuments of Glagolitic writing listed above testify to something else - the peaceful coexistence of two alphabetic traditions at the time of building a single literary language of the Slavs.
As if in fulfillment of the oral covenant of their teachers, the successors of the work of Cyril and Methodius came to an unspoken agreement. Let’s try to boil it down to the following: since the Slavs, unlike other inhabitants of the earth, are so lucky that their written language is created using two alphabets at once, then there is no need to get too excited; let these ABCs try their best, proving their abilities, their best properties, their ability to be remembered more easily and reliably, to enter the depths of human consciousness, to cling more firmly to visible things and invisible meanings. It took several decades, and it began to emerge that competition was not an idyll after all. It cannot go on equal terms for too long.
Yes, Glagolitic writing, having achieved considerable success at the first stage
the construction of a new literary language, having initially struck the imagination of many with its freshness, unprecedentedness, bright and exotic novelty, its mysterious appearance, the clear correspondence of each individual sound to a certain letter, gradually began to lose ground. In the Glagolitic syznachal there was the quality of a deliberate, deliberately closed object, suitable for a narrow circle of initiates, owners of almost secret writing. In the appearance of its letters, some kind of playfulness and curliness appeared every now and then, simple manipulations flashed every now and then: turned it up in circles - one letter, down in circles - another, in circles to the side - a third, added a similar side next to it - a fourth... But the alphabet as such in the life of the people who use it cannot be the subject of a joke. Children feel this especially deeply, as they complete the first letters and syllables in their notebooks with great attention and almost prayerful effort of all their strength. The ABC is too closely connected with the main meanings of life, with its sacred heights, to wink at the reader. An illiterate shepherd or farmer, or warrior, stopping at a cemetery slab with large incomprehensible letters, despite his ignorance, still read: something most important is expressed here about the fate of a person unknown to him.
Another reason why there is still no peace around the issue of the Glagolitic alphabet is that the further we go, the more the prospect of the very origin of the phenomenal alphabetic doctrine begins to waver. Its appearance still excites the imagination of researchers. Competitive activity in finding more and more evidence-based guesses does not dry out. It is pretentiously called the sacred code, the matrix of universal sound, to which it is necessary, as to a great sanctuary, to open both the Cyrillic alphabet and other European alphabets. Who will have the honor of finally revealing the pedigree of the outlandish guest at the feast of letters?
The tangle of scientific, and more recently amateur, hypotheses is growing before our eyes. Their volume today has become such that experts on the issue, it seems, are already becoming dismayed at the sight of the non-stop chain reaction of version creation. And many people wonder: isn’t it time to finally stop and agree on one thing? Otherwise, the topic of the genesis of the Glagolitic alphabet will one day choke in the funnel of evil infinity. Last but not least, it is confusing that in the confusion and confusion of disputes about the origin of names, not very attractive methods of disputing authorities are often discovered.
Clearly, science is not dispassionate. In the heat of intellectual battles, there is no shame in insisting on your own to the end. But it is awkward to observe how other people’s arguments are deliberately forgotten and generally known written sources or dates are ignored. Just one example. A modern author, describing in a popular scientific work the Reims Gospel, taken by the daughter of Prince Yaroslav the Wise Anna to France, calls it a Glagolitic monument. And for greater persuasiveness, he places an image of a passage written in Croatian handwriting in the style of the Gothic Glagolitic alphabet. But the manuscript of the Reims Gospel, as is well known in the scientific world, consists of two parts that are very unequal in age. The first, oldest, dates back to the 11th century and is made in Cyrillic writing. The second, Glagolitic, was written and added to the first only in the 14th century. At the beginning of the 18th century, when Peter the Great was visiting France, the manuscript, as a precious relic, on which the French kings swore allegiance, was shown to him, and the Russian Tsar immediately began to read aloud the Cyrillic verses of the gospel, but was puzzled when it came to the Glagolitic part.
The 20th century Bulgarian scientist Emil Georgiev once set out to compile an inventory of the variants of the origin of the Glagolitic alphabet existing in Slavic studies. It turned out that different authors at different times offered the most unexpected sources as a model for it: archaic Slavic runes, Etruscan writing, Latin, Aramaic, Phoenician, Palmyra, Syriac, Hebrew, Samaritan, Armenian, Ethiopian, Old Albanian, Greek alphabetic systems...
This extreme geographical dispersion alone is puzzling. But Georgiev’s inventory of half a century ago, as is now obvious, needs additions. It does not include references to several more new or old, but half-forgotten investigations. Thus, it was proposed to consider the Germanic runic writing as the most reliable source. The model for the Glagolitic alphabet could, in another opinion, be the alphabetic production of Celtic missionary monks. Recently, the arrow of search from the west again sharply deviated to the east: Russian researcher Geliy Prokhorov considers the Glagolitic alphabet to be a Middle Eastern missionary alphabet, and its author is the mysterious Constantine the Cappadocian, the namesake of our Constantine-Cyril. Reviving the ancient tradition of the Dalmatian Slavs, as the sole creator of the Glagolitic alphabet, they again started talking about Blessed Jerome of Stridon, the famous translator and systematizer of the Latin “Vulgate”. Versions of the emergence of the Glagolitic alphabet under the influence of the graphics of the Georgian or Coptic alphabets have been proposed.
E. Georgiev rightly believed that Constantine the Philosopher, by his temperament, could in no way resemble a collector of Slavic alphabetic treasures from the world. But still, the Bulgarian scientist simplified his task by repeatedly stating that Kirill did not borrow anything from anyone, but created a completely original letter, independent of external influences. At the same time, with particular fervor, Georgiev protested the concept of the origin of the Glagolitic alphabet from Greek cursive writing of the 9th century, proposed at the end of the 19th century by the Englishman I. Taylor. As is known, Taylor was soon supported and supplemented by the Russian professor from Kazan University D. Belyaev and one of the largest Slavists in Europe V. Yagich, who formulated the role of Kirill as the creator of the new alphabet extremely succinctly: “der Organisator des glagolischen Alfabets.” Thanks to Yagich’s authority, Georgiev admits, the theory “has gained enormous popularity.” Later, A. M. Selishchev joined the “Greek version” in his capital “Old Slavonic language”. Princeton scholar Bruce M. Metzger, author of the study “Early Translations of the New Testament” (Moscow, 2004), is cautiously inclined towards the same opinion: “Apparently,” he writes, “Cyril took as a basis the intricate Greek minuscule letter of the 9th century. , may have added a few Latin and Hebrew (or Samaritan) letters...". The German Johannes Friedrich speaks in approximately the same way in his “History of Writing”: “... the most probable origin of the Glagolitic alphabet seems to be from the Greek minuscule of the 9th century...”.
One of Taylor's main arguments was that the Slavic world, thanks to its centuries-old connections with Hellenistic culture, had an understandable attraction to Greek writing as a model for its own book structure and did not need to borrow from the alphabets of the eastern version for this. The alphabet proposed by Cyril the Philosopher was supposed to proceed precisely from taking into account this counter-thrust of the Slavic world. There is no need to analyze E. Georgiev’s counter-arguments here. It is enough to recall that the main one has always been unchanged: Konstantin-Kirill created a completely original letter that did not imitate any alphabets.
Complementing Taylor's developments, Yagich also published his own comparative table. On it, Greek cursive and minuscule letters of that era are side by side with Glagolitic alphabet (rounded, so-called “Bulgarian”), Cyrillic alphabet and Greek uncial script.
Looking at Yagich's table, it is easy to notice that the cursive Greek italic (minuscule) located on the left of it, with its smooth curves, now and then echoes the Glagolitic circular signs. The conclusion involuntarily suggests itself about the flow of letter styles of one alphabet into the neighboring one. So this is not true?
Something else is more important. Peering at the Greek cursive of the 11th century, we seem to be half a step closer to Constantine’s desk, we see excited, quick notes on the topic of the future Slavic letter. Yes, these are, most likely, drafts, the first or not the first working estimates, sketches that can be easily erased in order to correct them, like erasing letters from a school wax tablet or from a smoothed surface of damp sand. They are light, airy, cursive. They do not have the solid, intense monumentality that distinguishes the Greek solemn uncial of the same period.
Working Greek italics, as if flying from the pen of the brothers, the creators of the first Slavic literary language, seem to return us again to the setting of a monastic monastery at one of the foothills of Mount Lesser Olympus. We remember this silence of a very special nature. It is filled with meanings that, by the end of the fifties of the 9th century, were first identified in the contradictory, confusing Slavic-Byzantine dialogue. In these senses it was clearly read: the hitherto spontaneous and inconsistent coexistence of two great linguistic cultures - Hellenic and Slavic - was ready to be resolved into something unprecedented. Because, as never before, their long-standing attention to each other, at first childishly curious, and then more and more interested, was now evident.
It has already been partly said that the Greek classical alphabet within the ancient Mediterranean, and then in the wider Euro-Asian area for more than one millennium, represented a cultural phenomenon of a very special attractive force. The Etruscans began to feel attracted to him as a role model. Even if the vocalization of their written characters is still not sufficiently revealed, the Latins, who replaced the Etruscans in the Apennines, successfully imitated two alphabets to create their own writing: both Greek and Etruscan.
There is nothing offensive in such imitations. Not all nations enter the arena of history at the same time. After all, the Greeks, in their laborious, centuries-long efforts to complete their writing, initially used the achievements of the Phoenician alphabetic system. And not only her. But in the end they made a real revolution in the then practice of written speech, for the first time legitimizing separate letters for vowel sounds in their alphabet. Behind all these events, it was not suddenly discovered from the outside that the Greeks were also the creators of grammatical science, which would become a model for all neighboring peoples of Europe and the Middle East.
Finally, in the age of the appearance of Christ to humanity, it was the Greek language, enriched by the experience of translating the Old Testament Septuagint, that took upon itself the responsibility of becoming the first, truly guiding language of the Christian New Testament.
In the great Greek gifts to the world, out of habit, we still keep in first place antiquity, the pagan gods, Hesiod and Homer, Plato and Aristotle, Aeschylus and Pericles. Meanwhile, they themselves have humbly gone into the shadow of the four evangelists, the apostolic epistles, the grandiose vision on Patmos, the liturgical works of John Chrysostom and Basil the Great, the hymnographic masterpieces of John of Damascus and Romanus the Sweet Singer, the theology of Dionysius the Areopagite, Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory Palamas.
Less than a century after the Gospel events, various peoples of the Mediterranean longed to learn the Holy Scriptures in their native languages. This is how early experiments in translating the Gospel and the Apostle into Syriac, Aramaic, and Latin appeared. A little later, the inspired translation impulse was picked up by the Coptic Christians of Egypt, the Armenian and Georgian churches. At the end of the 4th century, a translation for Gothic Christians, made by the Gothic Bishop Wulfila, declared its right to exist.
With the exception of the Syrian-Assyrian manuscripts, executed using the traditional Middle Eastern alphabet series, all the rest in their own way showed respect for the alphabetical structure of the Greek primary sources. In the Coptic alphabet of Christian translations, which replaced the ancient hieroglyphic writing of the Egyptians, 24 letters imitate the Greek uncial in their styles, and the remaining seven were added to record sounds unusual for Greek speech.
A similar picture can be seen in the Gothic Silver Codex, the most complete manuscript source with the text of Wulfila's translation. But here a number of Latin letters are added to the Greek letters, and in addition, signs from Gothic runes are added for sounds external to Greek articulation. Thus, the newly created Gothic and Coptic alphabets each in their own way complemented the Greek letter base - not to its detriment, but not to their own detriment. Thus, in advance, an easier way was provided for many generations in advance to get acquainted - through the accessible appearance of letters - with the very neighboring languages of the common Christian space.
When creating the Armenian and then Georgian alphabets, a different path was chosen. Both of these Caucasian scripts without hesitation adopted the alphabetical sequence of the Greek alphabet as a basis. But at the same time they immediately received new original graphics of an oriental style, outwardly in no way reminiscent of the writing of the Greeks. Academician T. Gamkrelidze, an expert on Caucasian ancient written initiatives, notes about this innovation: “From this point of view, ancient Georgian writing Asomtavruli, ancient Armenian Yerkatagir and Old Slavonic Glagolitic fall under a general typological class, contrasting Coptic and Gothic writing, as well as Slavic Cyrillic, the graphic expression of which reflects the graphics of the contemporary Greek writing system.”
This, of course, is not an assessment, but a calm statement of the obvious. Gamkrelidze speaks more definitely when considering the works of Mesrop Mashtots, the generally recognized author of the Armenian alphabet: “The motive for such free creativity of graphic symbols of ancient Armenian writing and the creation of original written characters, graphically different from the corresponding Greek ones, should have been the desire to hide the dependence of the newly created writing on the written the source used as a model for its creation, in this case from Greek writing. In this way, an outwardly original national writing was created, as if independent from any external influences and connections.”
It is impossible to admit that Cyril the Philosopher and Methodius, representatives of the dominant Greek written culture, did not discuss with each other how Coptic and Gothic books differed in the nature of their alphabetic characters from the same Georgian and Armenian manuscripts. How impossible it is to imagine that the brothers were indifferent to the many examples of the Slavs’ interest not only in Greek oral speech, but also in Greek writing, its alphabetic structure and counting.
What path should they follow? It seems that the answer was implied: to build a new Slavic writing, using the Greek alphabet as a model. But are all Slavs necessarily unanimous in their reverence for the Greek letter? After all, in Chersonese, in 861, the brothers were leafing through a Slavic book, but written in letters that were different from Greek. Maybe the Slavs of other lands already have their own special views, their own wishes and even counter-offers? It is not for nothing that Constantine, two years later, during a conversation with Emperor Michael about the upcoming mission to the Great Moravian Principality, said: “... I will go there with joy, if they have letters for their language.” As we remember, the hagiographer, describing that conversation in the “Life of Cyril,” also cited the basileus’ evasive answer regarding the Slavic letters: “My grandfather, and my father, and many others looked for them and did not find them, how can I find them?” To which came the response of the younger Thessalonian, similar to a sorrowful sigh: “Who can record a conversation on the water?..”
Behind this conversation there is an internal confrontation that greatly confused Konstantin. Is it possible to find a letter for a people who have not yet looked for a letter for themselves? Is it acceptable to set off on a journey with something prepared in advance, but completely unknown to those you are going to? Will such an unsolicited gift offend them? After all, it is known - from the same appeal of Rostislav the Prince to Emperor Michael - that the Romans, the Greeks, and the Germans had already come to preach to the Moravans, but they preached and served services in their own languages, and therefore the people, the “simple children”, involuntarily remained deaf to incomprehensible speeches...
In the lives of the brothers there is no description of the embassy from Moravia itself. Neither its composition nor the duration of its stay in Constantinople is known. It is unclear whether Prince Rostislav's request for help was formalized in the form of a letter and in what language (Greek? Latin?) or whether it was only an oral message. One can only guess that the brothers still had the opportunity to find out in advance from the guests how similar their Slavic speech was to what the Solunians had heard since childhood, and how naive the Moravians were in everything related to communication in writing. Yes, as it turns out, it is quite possible to understand each other’s speech. But such a conversation is like ripples raised by the wind on the water. A church service is a completely different kind of interview. It requires written signs and books that are understandable to the Moravians.
Letters! Writing... What kind of letters, what kind of writing do they know and to what extent? Will the alphabetical and translation warehouse that the brothers and their assistants prepared for several years in a row in the monastery on Lesser Olympus, not yet knowing whether there will be a need for this work of theirs outside the walls of the monastery, will be sufficient for acquaintance of the Moravian Slavs with the holy books of Christianity.
And suddenly it was unexpectedly revealed: such a need is not a dream at all! Don’t worry about the whim of a small handful of monks and the Philosopher who came to them for an extended stay and captivated them with an unprecedented initiative.
But he himself, summoned together with Abbot Methodius to the basileus - what confusion he suddenly fell into! The books on the Small Olympus are already ready, and they read from them, and sing, and he, who worked the hardest, now seemed to back away: “... I’ll go if they have their own letters for writing there...”.
And if not, then we already have it! By himself, the Philosopher, the writings collected into alphabetical order, suitable and attractive for the Slavic ear and eye...
Isn’t it like this with any business: no matter how carefully you prepare, it still seems too early to announce it to people. A whole mountain of reasons is immediately found to delay further! And ill health, and the fear of falling into the sin of arrogance, and the fear of disgrace in an overwhelming task... But did they avoid overwhelming tasks before?
... Trying to imagine the internal state of the Thessaloniki brothers on the eve of their departure on a mission to the Great Moravian Principality, I essentially do not deviate from the meager hints on this topic set out in two lives. But clarifying the psychological motivations for this or that action of my heroes is not speculation at all! The need for conjecture, assumption, version arises when clues, even the most meager, are absent from the sources. And I simply need a working conjecture. Because it is lacking on the issue that forms the spring of the entire Slavic alphabet binary. After all, the lives, as already mentioned, are silent about which alphabet Methodius and Constantine took with them on their long journey. And although the prevailing belief today seems to leave no room for dissent, I am more and more inclined to the following: the brothers could not have brought with them what is called today the Glagolitic alphabet. They were carrying their original alphabet. The original one. That is, emanating in its structure from the gifts of the Greek alphabet. The same one that is now called Cyrillic. And they brought not only the alphabet, as such, but also their original books. They carried translation works written in the language of the Slavs using an alphabet modeled on the Greek alphabet, but with the addition of letters from the Slavic scale. The very logic of the formation of Slavic writing, if we are completely honest in relation to its laws, holds, does not allow us to stumble.
Glagolitic? She will make her presence known for the first time a little later. The brothers will deal with her upon arrival in Velehrad, the capital of the Moravian land. And, apparently, this will not happen in the year of arrival, but after the extraordinary events of the next year, 864. It was then that the East Frankish king Louis II the German, having concluded a military alliance with the Bulgarians, would once again attack the Great Moravian city of Devin.
The invasion, unlike the previous one undertaken by the king almost ten years ago, will be successful. This time Louis will force Prince Rostislav to accept humiliating conditions, essentially vassal conditions. From now on, the work of the Greek mission within the Great Moravian state will be under the sign of incessant pressure from Western opponents of Byzantine influence. In the changed circumstances, the brothers could have been helped by the forced development of a different alphabet graphics. One that, with its appearance, neutral in relation to the pro-Greek letter, would remove, at least in part, tensions of a jurisdictional and purely political nature.
No, there is no way to escape the thorny question of the origin of the Glagolitic alphabet. But now we will have to deal with a very small number of hypotheses. There are only two of them, minus the numerous eastern ones, three at most. They, among others, have already been mentioned above.
There are no overwhelming arguments either for or against the assumption that the Glagolitic alphabet came out of a Celtic monastic environment. In connection with this address, they usually refer to the work of the Slavist M. Isachenko “On the question of the Irish mission among the Moravian and Pannonian Slavs.”
Let’s say that a certain “Irish clue” worked for the Philosopher and his older brother. Let's say they found in it the necessary signs for purely Slavic sounds. (This means that both sides are going in the right direction!). And they even discovered that this Irish-style alphabetical sequence generally corresponds to the legal Greek alphabetical sequence. Then they, together with their employees, would quickly learn this letter, albeit an intricate one. And translate into his graphics the Slavic liturgical manuscripts already brought from Constantinople. Let their low-Olympic books, after creating lists from them in a new way, rest a little on the shelves or in the chests. At least there is a reason for a good joke in what happened! What kind of Slavs are these? Lucky for them!.. no one else in the world has ever written a letter in two alphabets at once.
An ancient but enduring legend looks weaker compared to the “Celtic” version: the supposed author of the Glagolitic alphabet is Blessed Jerome of Stridon (344-420). The legend is based on the fact that Jerome, revered throughout the Christian world, grew up in Dalmatia, in a Slavic environment, and himself may have been a Slav. But if Jerome was engaged in alphabetical exercises, then no reliable traces of his educational activities in favor of the Slavs remained. As is known, the work of translating into Latin and systematizing the corpus of the Bible, later called the Vulgate, required a colossal effort of all Jerome’s spiritual and humanitarian abilities.
The brothers knew firsthand the work that took several decades of the hermit’s life. They hardly ignored Jerome’s refined translation skills. This amazing old man could not help but be for them an example of spiritual asceticism, outstanding determination, and a treasure trove of technical translation techniques. If Jerome had left at least some sketch of the alphabet for the Slavs, the brothers would probably have happily begun to study it. But nothing remained except the legend of the blessed worker’s love for Slavism. Yes, they hardly heard the legend itself. Most likely, she was born in a close community of “Glagolish” Catholics, stubborn Dalmatian patriots of Glagolitic writing, much later than the death of Cyril and Methodius.
There remains a third option for the development of events in Great Moravia after the military defeat of Prince Rostislav in 864. I.V. Lyovochkin, a famous researcher of the manuscript heritage of Ancient Rus', writes in his “Fundamentals of Russian Paleography”: “Compiled in the early 60s of the 9th century. Constantine-Kirill the Philosopher, the alphabet well conveyed the phonetic structure of the language of the Slavs, including the Eastern Slavs. Upon arrival in Moravia, the mission of Constantine-Cyril was convinced that there already was a writing based on the Glagolitic alphabet, which was simply impossible to “cancel.” What could Constantine-Kirill the Philosopher do? Nothing but persistently and patiently introduce his new writing system, based on the alphabet he created - the Cyrillic alphabet. Complex in its design features, pretentious, having no basis in the culture of the Slavs, the Glagolitic alphabet, naturally, turned out to be unable to compete with the Cyrillic alphabet, which is brilliant in its simplicity and elegance...”
I would like to fully subscribe to this strong opinion about the determination of the brothers in defending their convictions. But what about the origin of the Glagolitic alphabet itself? The scientist believes that the Glagolitic alphabet and the “Russian letters” that Konstantin analyzed three years ago in Chersonesus are one and the same alphabet. It turns out that the brothers again had to deal with some already very widely spread writings - from Cape Chersonese in Crimea to the Great Moravian Velehrad. But if in Chersonesos Constantine treated the Gospel and Psalter shown to him with respectful attention, then why now, in Great Moravia, did the brothers perceive the Glagolitic alphabet almost with hostility?
Questions, questions... As if under a spell, the Glagolitic alphabet is in no hurry to let it approach its ancestry. Sometimes it seems like he won’t let anyone in anymore.
Is it time to finally call for help the author who wrote under the name Chernorizets Khrabr? After all, he is almost a contemporary of the Thessaloniki brothers. In his apologetic work “Answers about the Writings,” he testifies to himself as an ardent defender of the educational work of the Thessaloniki brothers. Although this author himself, judging by his own admission (it is read in some ancient lists of “Answers...”) did not meet the brothers, he was familiar with people who remembered Methodius and Cyril well.
Small in volume, but surprisingly meaningful, Khrabr’s work has grown to this day with a huge palisade of philological interpretations. This is no coincidence. Chernorizets Khrabr is also a philologist himself, the first philologist from the Slavic environment in the history of Europe. And not just any beginner, but an outstanding expert for his era in both Slavic speech and the history of Greek writing. Judging by the amount of his contribution to the venerable discipline, one can, without exaggeration, consider him the father of Slavic philology. Isn’t it worthy of surprise that such a contribution took place in the very first century of the existence of the first literary language of the Slavs! This is how rapidly the young written language gained strength.
It may be objected: the real father of Slavic philology should be called not Chernorizets Khrabra, but Cyril the Philosopher himself. But all the enormous philological knowledge of the Thessaloniki brothers (with the exception of the dispute with the Venetian trilinguals) is almost completely dissolved in their translation practice. And Brave in every sentence of “Answers” simply shines with the philological equipment of his arguments.
He writes both a treatise and an apology. Precise, even the most accurate for that era, information on the spelling and phonetics of comparable scripts and languages, supported by information from ancient grammars and commentaries on them, alternates under the pen of Brave with enthusiastic assessments of the spiritual and cultural feats of the brothers. This man's speech is in some places similar to a poem. The excited intonations of individual sentences vibrate like a song. In Brave’s speech, even if he goes into detail about the alphabetic structure of the alphabet, there is nothing of the ramblings of a bore scholastic.
Why is this literary monument called “Answers...”? The spiritual revolution carried out by Cyril and Methodius on the common field of two linguistic worlds, Slavic and Greek, one might guess, gave rise to a great many questions among the Slavs in the generation of the monk Brave. So he was about to answer the most persistent of truth seekers. Yes, the events are unprecedented. Their grandfathers are still alive, “simple children,” who had never even heard of Jesus Christ. And today in every church the clear parable of Christ about the sower, about the good shepherd, about the first and last at the feast sounds, and the call of the Son of Man resounds loudly to all who labor and are burdened... How did books suddenly begin to speak to the Slavs that were previously incomprehensible to them?.. Before, the Slavs did not have their own letters, and if anyone had them, then almost no one understood their meaning...
Yes, Brave agrees:
Previously, the Slavs did not have letters,
but they read by the features and cuts,
or they were guessing, being filthy.
Having been baptized,
Roman and Greek letters
tried to write Slavic speech without arrangement...
But not every Slavic sound, notes Khrabr, “can be written well in Greek letters.”
...And so it was for many years,
then God the lover of mankind, ruling over everything
and without leaving the human race without reason,
but bringing everyone to reason and to salvation,
had mercy on the human race,
sent them Saint Constantine the Philosopher,
named Kiril,
a righteous and true husband.
And he created thirty-eight letters for them -
some modeled on Greek letters,
others according to Slavic speech.”
“Following the example of Greek letters,” twenty-four signs were created, clarifies Chernorizets Khrabr. And, having listed them, a little lower he again emphasizes: “similar to Greek letters.” “And fourteen is in Slavic speech.” The insistence with which Brave speaks about the “pattern” and following it, about the sound correspondences and differences between the two letters, convinces: this cause-and-effect side of the matter is extremely important to him. Yes, Kirill the Philosopher took a lot into his alphabet almost for nothing. But he added a lot of important things for the first time, expanding the limited Greek alphabet series in the most daring way. And Brave will list every single letter of Kirill’s inventions that correspond specifically to Slavic articulatory abilities. After all, the Greek, we would add, simply does not know how to pronounce or pronounce very approximately a whole series of sounds that are widespread in the Slavic environment. However, the Slavs, as a rule, do not pronounce some sounds of Greek articulatory instrumentation very clearly (for example, the same “s”, which sounds with some hiss in the Greek). In a word, he gifted and limited everyone in his own way Creator of all kinds.
There is no need to accompany any line of Brave with explanations. His “Answers about Writings” are worthy of independent reading, and such an opportunity will be provided below, immediately after the main text of our story about two Slavic alphabets.
And here it is enough to emphasize: Khrabr honestly and convincingly reproduced the logic of the development of Slavic-Greek spiritual and cultural dialogue in the second half of the 9th century.
It is worthy of regret that some of the defenders of the “glagolic primacy” (especially the same F. Grevs, Doctor of Theology) tried to turn the arguments of the first Slavic philologist, clear as day, upside down. He, they are convinced, acts precisely as a brave supporter of... Glagolitic writing. Even when he talks about the Greek alphabet as an absolute model for Cyril. Because Brave supposedly does not mean the letters of the Greek graphics themselves, but only the sequence of the Greek alphabetical order. But even in the circle of verbatim scientists, there is a murmur about such overzealous manipulations.
Well, it is clear to the naked eye: in our days (as was the case in the 9th century), the question of the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabet, as well as the question of the primacy of the Cyrillic or Latin alphabet in the lands of the Western Slavs, is not only philological, but, involuntarily, both confessional and political. The forced displacement of the Cyrillic script from the Western Slavic environment began in the age of the Thessaloniki brothers, on the very eve of the division of churches into Western and Eastern - Catholic and Orthodox.
The Cyrillic alphabet, as we all see and hear, is still subject to widespread force. It involves not only “eagles” - the organizers of a unipolar world, but also “lambs” - quiet missionaries of the West in the East, and with them “doves” - affectionate humanities-Slavists.
As if no one from this camp realizes that for us, who have lived for more than a thousand years in the expanding space of Cyrillic writing, our dear, beloved Cyrillic alphabet from the first pages of the primer is as sacred as the wall of the altar, like a miraculous icon. There are national and state symbols that it is customary to stand in front of - the Flag, the Coat of Arms, the Anthem. This includes our Letter.
The Slavic Cyrillic alphabet is evidence of the fact that since ancient times the Slavs of the East have been in spiritual kinship with the Byzantine world, with the rich heritage of Greek Christian culture.
Sometimes this connection, including the proximity of the Greek and Slavic languages, which has no analogues within Europe, nevertheless receives carefully verified confirmation from the outside. Bruce M. Metzger, in Early Translations of the New Testament, already cited, says: “The formal structures of Church Slavonic and Greek are very similar in all basic features. Parts of speech, in general, are the same: verb (changes according to tenses and moods, person and number differ), names (noun and adjective, including participle, change according to numbers and cases), pronouns (personal, demonstrative, interrogative, relative ; change by gender, case and number), numerals (inflected), prepositions, adverbs, various conjunctions and particles. Parallels are also found in the syntax, and even the rules for constructing words are very similar. These languages are so close that in many cases a literal translation would be quite natural. There are examples of excessive literalism in each manuscript, but on the whole it seems that the translators had a perfect knowledge of both languages and tried to reproduce the spirit and meaning of the Greek text, deviating as little as possible from the original.
“These languages are so close...” For all his academic dispassion, Metzger's assessment of the unique structural similarities of the two linguistic cultures comes at a price. In the entire study, a characteristic of this kind was heard only once. Because the scientist, having examined other old languages of Europe, did not find any basis to say about the same degree of closeness that he noted between Greek and Slavic.
But it’s time to finally return to the essence of the issue about the two Slavic alphabet. As far as a comparison of the oldest written sources of the Church Slavonic language allows, the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabet coexisted quite peacefully, although forcedly, competitively, during the years of missionary work of the Thessalonica brothers in Great Moravia. They coexisted - let's say a modernist comparison - just as two design bureaus with their own original projects compete within the same goal setting. The initial alphabetical plan of the Thessaloniki brothers arose and was realized even before their arrival in the Moravian land. He declared himself in the guise of the first Cyrillic alphabet, compiled with abundant use of the graphics of the Greek alphabet and the addition of a large number of letter correspondences to purely Slavic sounds. The Glagolitic alphabet in relation to this alphabetic structure is an external event. But one that the brothers had to reckon with while in Moravia. Being an alphabet that was defiantly different in appearance from the most authoritative Greek letter in the Christian world at that time, the Glagolitic alphabet quickly began to lose its position. But her appearance was not in vain. The experience of communicating with her letters allowed the brothers and their students to improve their original letter, gradually giving it the appearance of the classical Cyrillic alphabet. It was not for nothing that the philologist Chernorizets Khrabr remarked: “It’s easier to finish something later than to do the first thing.”
And here’s what, many centuries later, the strict, picky and incorruptible writer Leo Tolstoy said about this brainchild of Cyril and Methodius: “The Russian language and the Cyrillic alphabet have a huge advantage and difference over all European languages and alphabets... The advantage of the Russian alphabet is that every the sound is pronounced in it - and it is pronounced as it is, which is not in any language.”
The alphabet (Cyrillic and Glagolitic) is a collection in a certain order of all the signs that express the individual sounds of the language. This system of written symbols developed quite independently in the territory inhabited by ancient peoples. "Glagolitic" was presumably created first. What is the secret of the ancient collection of written signs? What were the Glagolitic and Cyrillic alphabet? What is the meaning of the main symbols? More on this later.
The Mystery of the Written Symbol System
As you know, Cyrillic and Glagolitic are Slavic alphabets. The name of the collection itself was derived from the combination of “az” and “buki”. These symbols stood for the first two letters "A" and "B". A rather interesting historical fact should be noted. Ancient letters were originally scratched on the walls. That is, all the symbols were presented in the form of graffiti. Around the 9th century, the first symbols appeared on the walls of Pereslavl churches. Two centuries later, the Cyrillic alphabet (pictures and interpretations of signs) was inscribed in the St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv.
Russian Cyrillic
It should be said that this collection of ancient written symbols still corresponds well to the phonetic structure of the Russian language. This is primarily due to the fact that the sound composition of modern and ancient vocabulary did not have many differences, and all of them were insignificant. In addition, credit should be given to the compiler of the system, Konstantin. The author carefully took into account the phonemic (sound) composition of the old speech. The Cyrillic alphabet contains only a variety of characters - uppercase and lowercase characters - which were first introduced by Peter in 1710.
Basic signs
The Cyrillic letter "az" was the initial letter. She used the pronoun "I". But the root meaning of this symbol is the word “initially”, “beginning” or “begin”. In some writings you can find “az”, used in the meaning of “one” (as a numeral). The Cyrillic letter "buki" is the second character in the collection of symbols. Unlike "az", it has no numerical value. "Buki" is "to be" or "will be." But, as a rule, this symbol was used in the future tense. For example, “boudi” means “let it be,” and “upcoming or future” means “boudushchy.” The Cyrillic letter "vedi" is considered one of the most interesting of the entire collection. This symbol corresponds to the number 2. “Lead” has several meanings - “to own”, “to know” and “to know”.
The highest part of the written sign system
It should be said that researchers, studying the outlines of the symbols, came to the conclusion that they were quite simple and understandable, which made it possible to widely use them in cursive writing. In addition, any Slav could depict them quite easily, without much difficulty. Many philosophers, meanwhile, see the principle of harmony and triad in the numerical arrangement of symbols. It is precisely this that a person must achieve, striving to know truth, goodness and light.
Constantine's message to descendants
It should be said that the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabet were an invaluable creation. Constantine, together with his brother Methodius, not only structured written signs, but created a unique collection of knowledge that calls for striving for knowledge, improvement, love and wisdom, avoiding enmity, anger, envy, and leaving only the bright in oneself. At one time it was believed that the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabet were created almost simultaneously. However, this turned out not to be the case. According to a number of ancient sources, the Glagolitic alphabet became the first. It was this collection that was first used in the translation of church texts.
Glagolitic and Cyrillic. Comparison. Data
Cyrillic and Glagolitic were created at different times. Several facts indicate this. The Glagolitic alphabet, along with the Greek alphabet, became the basis for the subsequent compilation of the Cyrillic alphabet. When studying the first collection of written characters, scientists note that the style is more archaic (in particular, when studying the “Kyiv Leaflets” of the 10th century). While the Cyrillic alphabet, as mentioned above, is phonetically closer to the modern language. The first records in the form of graphic representations of written symbols are dated 893 and are close to the sound and lexical structure of the language of the southern ancient peoples. The great antiquity of the Glagolitic alphabet is also indicated by palimpsests, which were manuscripts on parchment, where the old text was scraped off and a new one was written on top. The Glagolitic alphabet was scraped off everywhere, and then Cyrillic was written on top of it. In no palimpsest was it the other way around.
Attitude of the Catholic Church
There is information in the literature that the first collection of written symbols was compiled by Constantine the Philosopher on one ancient runic script. It is believed that it could have been used by the Slavs for secular and sacred pagan purposes before Christianity was adopted. But, however, there is no evidence of this, nor, in fact, confirmation of the existence of runic writing. Rimskaya, who opposed holding services in the Slavic language for the Croats, characterized the Glagolitic alphabet as a “Gothic letter.” Some ministers openly opposed the new alphabet, saying that it was invented by the heretic Methodius, who “in that Slavic language wrote many lies against the Catholic religion.”
The appearance of the symbols
The letters of the Glagolitic and Cyrillic alphabet differed from each other in style. In the earlier written system, the appearance of the signs in some points coincides with the khutsuri created before the 9th century, possibly based on the Armenian). The number of letters in both alphabet is the same - 38. Some individual symbols and the entire system of “finishing” small circles at the ends of lines, in general, have a pronounced resemblance to Jewish medieval Kabbalistic fonts and “runic” Icelandic cryptography. All these facts may not be accidental at all, since there is information that Constantine the Philosopher read ancient Jewish texts in the original, that is, he was familiar with Eastern writings (this is stated in his “life”). The style of almost all Glagolitic letters, as a rule, is derived from Greek cursive. For non-Greek characters, the Hebrew system is used. But meanwhile, there are no exact and specific explanations for the outline of forms for almost any symbol.
Similarities and differences
The Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabets in their oldest versions are almost completely identical in composition. Only the forms of the characters are different. When reprinting Glagolitic texts by typography, the characters are replaced with Cyrillic ones. This is primarily due to the fact that today few people can recognize the more ancient mark. But when replacing one alphabet with another, the digital values of the letters do not match. In some cases this leads to misunderstandings. So, for example, in the Glagolitic alphabet the numbers correspond to the order of the letters themselves, and in the Cyrillic alphabet the numbers are tied to those in the Greek alphabet.
The purpose of ancient writing
As a rule, they talk about two types of Glagolitic writing. A distinction is made between the older “round” one, also known as “Bulgarian”, and the later “angular” or “Croatian” (so named because it was used in worship by Croatian Catholics until the very middle of the 20th century). The number of characters in the latter was gradually reduced from 41 to 30 characters. In addition, there was (together with the statutory book) cursive writing. The Glagolitic alphabet was practically not used - in some cases there are separate “interspersions” of Glagolitic text fragments into Cyrillic ones. The ancient letter was primarily intended for the transmission (translation) of church meetings, and the surviving early Russian monuments of everyday writing before the adoption of Christianity (the oldest inscription is considered to be the inscription of the 1st half of the 10th century on a pot found on the Gnezdovo mound) are written in Cyrillic .
Theoretical assumptions about the primacy of the creation of ancient writing
Several facts support the fact that the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabets were created at different times. Moreover, the first was created on the basis of the second. The oldest monument is written in Glagolitic alphabet. Later finds contain more advanced texts. Cyrillic manuscripts, in addition, are copied from Glagolitic ones in a number of ways. In the first, grammar, spelling and syllables are presented in a more perfect form. When analyzing handwritten texts, a direct dependence of the Cyrillic alphabet on the Glagolitic alphabet is visible. Thus, the letters of the latter were replaced by similar ones in sound. When studying more modern texts, chronological errors are observed. This is due to the fact that the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabets assumed a different system of numerical correspondences. The digital values of the first were focused on Greek writing.
What system of written signs did Constantine compose?
According to a number of authors, it was believed that the Philosopher first composed the Glagolitic alphabet, and then, with the help of his brother Methodius, the Cyrillic alphabet. However, there is information that refutes this. Konstantin knew and loved the Greek language very much. In addition, he was a missionary of the Orthodox Eastern Church. At that time, his tasks included attracting the Slavic people to the Greek Church. In this regard, it made no sense for him to create a written system that would alienate nationalities and complicate the perception and understanding of Scripture by those who were already familiar with the Greek language. After the creation of a new, more advanced writing system, it was difficult to imagine that ancient archaic writing would become more popular. The Cyrillic alphabet was more understandable, simple, beautiful and clear. It was convenient for most people. While the Glagolitic alphabet had a narrow focus and was intended for the interpretation of sacred liturgical books. All this indicates that Constantine was engaged in compiling a system based on the Greek language. And subsequently, the Cyrillic alphabet, as a more convenient and simpler system, replaced the Glagolitic alphabet.
Opinions of some researchers
Sreznevsky in 1848 wrote in his writings that, evaluating the features of many Glagolitic symbols, one can conclude: this letter is more archaic, and the Cyrillic alphabet is more perfect. The relationship of these systems can be traced in some letterforms and sounds. But at the same time, the Cyrillic alphabet has become simpler and more convenient. In 1766, Count Klement Grubisich published a book about the origin of written sign systems. In his work, the author claims that the Glagolitic alphabet was created long before Christmas and is therefore a much more ancient collection of characters than the Cyrillic alphabet. Around 1640, Rafail Lenakovich wrote a “dialogue”, where he states almost the same as Grubisich, but almost 125 years earlier. There are also statements by Chernoriz the Brave (early 10th century). In his work “On Writing,” he emphasizes that the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabets have significant differences. In his texts, Chernoriz the Brave testifies to the existing dissatisfaction with the system of written signs created by the brothers Constantine and Methodius. At the same time, the author quite clearly indicates that it was a Cyrillic alphabet, not a Glagolitic alphabet, saying that the first was created before the second. Some researchers, assessing the outline of some characters ("ш", for example), draw conclusions different from those described above. So, according to some authors, the Cyrillic alphabet was created first, and only then the Glagolitic alphabet.
Conclusion
Despite the fairly large number of controversial opinions regarding the appearance of the Glagolitic and Cyrillic alphabet, the significance of the compiled system of written characters is enormous. Thanks to the appearance of a collection of handwritten signs, people were able to read and write. In addition, the work of the brothers Constantine and Methodius was an invaluable source of knowledge. Together with the alphabet, a literary language was formed. Many words are still found today in various related dialects - Russian, Bulgarian, Ukrainian and other languages. Along with the new system of written symbols, the perception of the people of antiquity also changed - after all, the creation of the Slavic alphabet was closely connected with the adoption and spread of the Christian faith and the rejection of ancient primitive cults.
The oldest Old Church Slavonic alphabets that have come down to us are written in two alphabets - Glagolitic and Cyrillic. The first one has hardly survived: the last books on it were written in the late 18th century. 10% of the globe uses an alphabet based on the Cyrillic alphabet. This means the Glagolitic alphabet existed before. The Glagolitic alphabet fell out of use and was preserved only in Croatia in church use (until the 17th century it was used there for secular purposes).
The question of the emergence of two Slavic alphabets and their mutual relationship has occupied scientists for a long time. Old Slavonic monuments testify that two alphabets that were very different from each other existed already in ancient times.
It is believed that the Glagolitic alphabet was created by K. It is based (quite primitive graphically) on several alphabets, incl. Greek cursive writing. The Cyrillic alphabet was created as a result of the active work of the students of Kosmet, perhaps in the “golden age” (10) in the southern territory. The fact is that the Cyrillic alphabet is based on the Greek solemn geometric regular letter - the uncial, which is used in the creation of Greek theological books + Khazar, Syrian, Hebrew, Samaritan types of writing.
In 1836, the Slavic philologist V. Kopitar discovered an ancient manuscript written in Glagolitic alphabet in the library of Count Klotz. According to paleographic data, it was much older than those manuscripts that were still known and dated no earlier than the 14th century. This discovery led to a re-examination of the previous point of view on the origin of the Slavic alphabet. V. Kopitar put forward a hypothesis about the comparative antiquity of the Glagolitic alphabet in comparison with the Cyrillic alphabet.
There is a lot of evidence of the antiquity of the Cyrillic alphabet:
1) Glagolitic monuments associated with Moravia (Kyiv Glagolitic leaves, Prague fragments). Also associated with Croatia and Macedonia, where the students of Kosmet worked. Obviously, the Cyrillic alphabet brought to Moravia by K. became established as a specific Slavic alphabet, which scribes continued to use even after the expulsion of the students.
In Bulgaria, closely connected geographically with Byzantium, there has long been a tradition of using Greek letters to write Slavic speech => the Glagolitic alphabet, brought by the students of Kosmet, did not take root, and the students, using the experience of the Glagolitic alphabet, created a Slavic alphabet based on Greek letters, supplementing this Greek alphabet with separate Glagolitic letters denoting actual Slavic sounds.
To date, the position that the Cyrillic alphabet is based on the Greek uncial has not been challenged.
2) Glagolitic monuments are linguistically > archaic (lost grammatical forms).
3) scientists know a number of Cyrillic characters. monuments written from washed out or scraped text (glagolitic). Such monuments are called polympests.
4) the Cyrillic alphabet is perfect in terms of the composition of the letters and graphically the Glagolitic alphabet is very primitive in creating the writing of the letters.
All this gave reason to believe that the more ancient alphabet created by Constantine was Glagolitic. The Cyrillic alphabet arose in eastern Bulgaria during the reign of King Simeon (893-927), i.e. then, when the Christian religion had long been accepted there, but services were performed by Greek priests in Greek. Tsar Simeon wanted to oppose Byzantium not only with state power, but also with cultural power. To protect the independence of Bulgarian culture from unnecessary encroachments by Byzantium, it was necessary to introduce worship in the Slavic language. But the Greek priests had difficulty mastering the Glagolitic alphabet. Therefore, it was necessary to make a compromise solution: replace the Glagolitic alphabet with another alphabet, similar to the Greek one. It is believed that, based on the model of the Greek alphabet, this new Slavic alphabet was compiled by Methodius’s student, Presbyter Constantine. Later, Slavic scribes began to identify the presbyter Constantine with the first teacher Constantine - Cyril, and the alphabet invented by him began to be called by the name of the second - the Cyrillic alphabet.
6. Features of st/sl graphics.
Letters automatically transferred from Greek. alphabet, were used only in writing borrowed words: - xi, psi, fert, fita, omega, izhitsa.
[f] was absent in Slavic phonetics: it was pronounced only in borrowed words in place of Greek. the letters “fi” and in place of “theta”, which denoted a sound similar to aspirated [t]. Fert and fita were written in accordance with Greek usage. But on Slavic soil, the sounds they denoted were transmitted in speech [f], i.e. fert and fita meant, in fact, 1 sound.
Izhitsa is a labialized top vowel in the Greek alphabet. rise, lane p => by Slavic scribes the letter was pronounced as [and] and was used in words such as cypress - borrowed, myro - religious. The letter was also written to designate [in] - Gospel.
Xi and psi were also used in borrowing. words.
Ligatures\digraphs: uk, shta, ery + all iotated, consisting of vowels and the letter izh i (a-ia, ou-yu).
Over time, the Cyrillic Slavic alphabets changed their content and the following letters were completely lost:
- Ъ and ь – super-short reduced letters
- yusy b. and m. – nasal sounds
- yat – the sound that it meant had the widest range of pronunciation, so there is no definite one. In the st/sl language it denoted a sound max close to [‘a] after a soft consonant.
In Glagolitic in accordance with two Cyrillic. only [house] was represented by letters (I and yat).
The shapes of the letters “qi”, “worm”, “izhe”, “uk” have changed over time.
To the glory. Ochva was transferred and the Greek. tradition of denoting numbers using letters of the alphabet. In the Glagolitic alphabet, all letters had a numerical designation. The first 9 letters stood for units, the next 9 for tens, and the next for hundreds.
A letter denoted a letter if it was framed by dots on the letter, and a title (= number) was written above it.
As in the modern numerical system, units were added to tens, tens to hundreds (25, 326). Exception: numbers of the second ten, where the ones come first (one-by-ten). To designate thousands, the letters of the first ten were used with a special diacretic sign (after the first dot, a comma crossed out twice).
The title was written above the word with missing letters (Bg). It was used to refer to the most common words that could easily be recognized, often of a religious nature (Mr., Mother of God - b-a).
To skip reduced letters, a paer (integral sign) was used.
To indicate the softness of consonants, bows (gachek) above letters or apostrophes were used.
Drsh type of letter - charter. In the history of Slavic graphics, it was replaced by semi-character, then cursive. The charter is a clear, geometrically correct continuous flow of letters without word divisions. He discovers the beginnings of punctuation marks in himself - the period was placed in the middle of the line and chaotically, in meaning. Denoted logical sections of text. A combination of dots and dashes (dots in the form of a cross) was placed at the end of chapters, in the middle. chapters. This was rare.
7. The digital value of the letters st\sl of the alphabet.
The Slavs, like other peoples (Greeks), did not have special signs (numbers) to convey numbers, but wrote them down using letters, providing them with special signs. The numerical values of the Cyrillic alphabet correspond to the Greek digits, therefore, on the one hand, the Slavic letters that are absent in the Greek alphabet, for example, b, zh, do not have a numerical value, on the other hand, the Cyrillic alphabet included such Greek signs that originally served among the Slavs only for transmitting numbers (zelo, fita).
az-1, beeches, lead-2, verb-3, good-4, is-5, live, zelo-6, earth-7, izhe-8, izhe-10, herv, kako-20, people-30, thought-40, ours-50, on-70, peace-80, rtsi-100, word-200, tvrdo-300, ouk-400!!!, frit-500, her-600, qi-900, worm-90 , sha, shta, er, ery, er, yat, yu, a yot., e yot., yus small.-900, yus small. yot., yus b., yus b. yot., xi-60, psi-700, fita-9, izhitsa, ot-800
8. Glagolitic monuments of the old/sl language.
The first translations carried out by Kosmet in Moravia were, as is known, destroyed. Texts that have reached us are approximately dated to the end of the 10th - 1st half. 11th century Most likely, they date based on linguistic facts.
With the exception of certain passages, apparently of Moravian origin (Kyiv leaves, found by Sreznevsky at the Kyiv Theological Academy; Prague fragments), everything else was written in Macedonia and are copies of the first translations of very high quality, reflecting the ancient state of the language. The most remarkable of them should be considered the Zograf and Mariinsky Gospels, found by Grigorovich (prof. Novgorod University).
The Zografian Four Gospels (4 evangelists wrote) are kept in St. Petersburg in the Bible. them. Saltykov-Shchedrin in the department of ancient manuscripts. Its name is based on the name of the Athonite mon. Zograf, where it was found. Con. 10-11 centuries, written within Macedonia. Published by Yagich in 1879
Mariinsky Four Gospels - in the state. bib. them. Lenin in Moscow. Name after Mariinsky Monastery. on Mount Athos, from where it was brought in 1845 by Grigorovich. An 11th century monument, written within Macedonia, but with some features of the Serbian language. Published by Yagich in 1883.
Vatican\Assemanian Gospel (kept there). According to them. Patera Assemania, cat. taken from Jerusalem to Italy in 1736. 11th century, written within Macedonia. Published several times.
On the Sinai Peninsula, in the monastery of St. Catherine of Sinai, the Psalter (11th century, written within Macedonia, kept there) and the Sinai Breviary of the 11th century. (main part there, 4 sheets in the St. Petersburg library)
9. Cyrillic monuments st./sl.
Mainly of Eastern/Bulg origin. Many new translations of Greek. originals. But we can’t help but mention other inscriptions that are commonly called graffiti. They were made on the walls of churches, coins, and gravestones.
Dobrudzha inscription. Dobruja - historical. region in Europe in the lower reaches of the Danube. North Good is part of Romania. Dating back to 943, it was found in 1950 in Romania during the construction of the Danube-C canal. sea. Written on stone.
Inscription of the Bulgarian Tsar Samuil. 993 On a family gravestone. Open at the end 19th century, published several times.
BITAL inscription. Bitala - yu\maked. city. 11th century 1956 opened during the demolition of the mosque. For the first time yu\slav. the population is called Bulgarians.
Significant books in Cyrillic.
Savvin's book. According to them. Savva's priest, who is mentioned in the margins of the monument. 11th century Bulgarian origin. Stored in Moscow. state archive.
The Suprasl manuscript was discovered in Supras. monastery, which is located on the territory of Belarus near Bialystok - now the territory of Poland. 11th century Divided into 3 parts - stored in different places: 1) Warsaw to World 2. war, taken out by the Germans; 2) the capital of Slovenia – Ljubljana; 3) Peter, biblical. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Published in the beginning 20th century Found at the beginning 19th century Written within the East. Bulgaria.
Ostromir Gospel. Named after the Novgorod mayor Ostromir, a relative of the Grand Duke. Vladimir, for whom it was rewritten from the Eastern Bolg original in 1056-1057. The only dated monument + copyist's autograph is Deacon Gregory. 294 sheets of parchment written in large charter. Not a monument of writing, but also a general cultural heritage of our people. The afterword is written in other languages, praise to the prince. Stored in the department of ancient manuscripts in St. Petersburg in the library. them. Saltykov-Shchedrin. The Gospel was first published by Vostokov from Greek. interlinear, dictionary, etc. review of the grammar of st. language. Huge scientific value. Reprinted three times.
Miracle Psalter. monument of Russian origin from the 11th century. Stored in the state. ist. museum in Moscow.
Selections of Prince Svyatoslav. 1073, 1076
The question of the origin and development of the Glagolitic alphabet raised in this material is very complex. And not only because practically very few historical monuments and documentary evidence of the use of this font have survived. Looking through the literature, scientific and popular publications that somehow relate to this issue, it should, unfortunately, be noted that there are practically no works that fully cover this topic. At the same time, M.G. Riznik claims that “no other letter has been written as much as about the Glagolitic alphabet and its origin” (Letter and font. Kyiv: Higher School, 1978).
G.A. Ilyinsky at one time counted about eighty works devoted to this issue. About 30 hypotheses have been put forward regarding the origin of the Glagolitic alphabet. Today, it’s enough to go online and see that a lot has actually been written about the Glagolitic alphabet. But basically it’s just a rehash of the same information, opinions and views. One gets the impression of a huge “circulation” of the same information.
In our opinion, a lot of interesting things can be found in the design of Glagolitic characters if you try to consider them from the point of view of the artistic and figurative expressiveness of this font. Despite the exceptional graphic originality of the letters of the Glagolitic alphabet (not to mention the semantic meaning of each sign), many scientists tried to find prototypes of letter patterns in various alphabets of the world. The basis of the Glagolitic alphabet was most often found in Greek italic. Some see its basis in pre-Christian Cyrillic writing. Others saw its roots in the Iranian-Aramaic script in the East. The emergence of the Glagolitic alphabet was associated with Germanic runes. Safarik P.I. I saw the graphic basis of the Glagolitic alphabet in Hebrew writing. Obolensky M.A. turns to the Khazar script in search of sources of the Glagolitic alphabet. Fortunatov F.F. saw the basis of the Glagolitic alphabet in the Coptic script. Other scientists found the roots of the Glagolitic alphabet in Albanian, Persian, and Latin.
However, the searches listed above by comparing the graphic features of Glagolitic letters with other types were mostly of a formal nature.
The two main types of Slavic writing preserved in history are Glagolitic and Cyrillic. From the school course we know that both types of writing existed in parallel for some time. Later, the Cyrillic alphabet replaced the Glagolitic alphabet. Every schoolchild knows these, now elementary, truths. Information has become so firmly ingrained in our consciousness that it is perceived as an axiom. We know the time of the appearance of the official Slavic alphabet - 863, the 9th century after the Nativity of Christ, which began a new era.
We can judge the Cyrillic alphabet based on its name. Probably its creator was Kirill. Although this is not true to this day. Yes, there is historical information that Cyril invented some kind of alphabet for translating Christian liturgical books onto a Slavic basis.
But there is still no consensus on which alphabet exactly. In the chronicle sources of the 9th-10th centuries there are specific indications that Cyril (Constantine) created the Slavic alphabet, but none of these sources provide examples of the letters of this alphabet.
We know the number of letters included in Cyril’s alphabet, and the list of them that Chernorizets Khrabr gives in his work. He also divides the letters of Cyril’s alphabet into those created “according to the order of Greek letters” and into letters “according to Slovenian speech.” But the number of letters in the Glagolitic and Cyrillic alphabet, as well as their sound meaning, were practically the same. The oldest monuments of the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabet date back to the end of the 9th - beginning of the 10th century. The name of this alphabet is not proof of the creation of the Cyrillic alphabet by Kirill.
In the intense struggle for religious and political influence between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Byzantine Orthodox Churches, these two alphabet played an extremely important role in the formation of the identity of the Slavs. The Glagolitic alphabet was used in liturgical books in Dalmatia. A modified Cyrillic alphabet was used in Bulgaria.
Letters of the “round Glagolitic” alphabet and their meaning
| symbol | Name | numeric value | note | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ⰰ | Az | 1 | ||
| Ⰱ | Beeches | 2 | ||
| Ⰲ | Lead | 3 | ||
| Ⰳ | Verbs | 4 | ||
| Ⰴ | Good | 5 | ||
| Ⰵ | Eat | 6 | ||
| Ⰶ | live | 7 | ||
| Ⰷ | Zelo | 8 | ||
| Ⰸ | Earth | 9 | ||
| Ⰺ, Ⰹ | Izhe (I) | 10 | Which of these letters is called what and how they correspond to the Cyrillic I and I, researchers do not have a consensus. | |
| Ⰻ | I (Izhe) | 20 | ||
| Ⰼ | Gerv | 30 | ||
| Ⰽ | Kako | 40 | ||
| Ⰾ | People | 50 | ||
| Ⰿ | Myslete | 60 | ||
| Ⱀ | Our | 70 | ||
| Ⱁ | He | 80 | ||
| Ⱂ | Peace | 90 | ||
| Ⱃ | Rtsy | 100 | ||
| Ⱄ | Word | 200 | ||
| Ⱅ | Firmly | 300 | ||
| Ⱛ | Ik | - | ||
| Ⱆ | Uk | 400 | ||
| Ⱇ | Firth | 500 | ||
| Ⱈ | Dick | 600 | ||
| Ⱉ | From | 700 | ||
| Ⱊ | Pѣ (Pe) | 800 | A hypothetical letter, the appearance of which is different. | |
| Ⱌ | Tsy | 900 | ||
| Ⱍ | Worm | 1000 | ||
| Ⱎ | Sha | - | ||
| Ⱋ | State | 800 | ||
| Ⱏ | Er | - | ||
| ⰟⰊ | eras | - | ||
| Ⱐ | Er | - | ||
| Ⱑ | Yat | - | ||
| Ⱖ | Hedgehog | - | A hypothetical letter (with the meaning of iotized E or O), included in the ligature - large iotated yus. | |
| Ⱒ | (Хлъмъ?) “Spider-shaped” sign for the sound [x]. Some researchers believe that it was included in the original Glagolitic alphabet as a separate letter. | |||
| Ⱓ | YU | - | ||
| Ⱔ | small us | - | ||
| Ⱗ | small iotized us | - | ||
| Ⱘ | jus big | - | ||
| Ⱙ | jus big iotized | - | ||
| Ⱚ | Fita | - | ||
There are several points of view on the problem of the formation and development of the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabet.
According to one of them, Cyril created the Glagolitic alphabet, and the Cyrillic alphabet arose later as an improvement of the Glagolitic alphabet.
According to another, Cyril created the Glagolitic alphabet, and the Cyrillic alphabet existed among the Slavs earlier, as a modification of the Greek letter.
It is assumed that Cyril created the Cyrillic alphabet, and the Glagolitic alphabet was formed among the Slavs in the pre-Cyrillic period. And it also served as the basis for the construction of the Cyrillic alphabet.
Perhaps Cyril created the Cyrillic alphabet, and the Glagolitic alphabet appeared as a kind of secret writing during the period of persecution of books written in Cyrillic by the Catholic clergy.
There is also a version according to which Glagolitic letters appeared as a result of deliberate complication, adding curls and circles instead of dots in Cyrillic letters, and in some characters due to their inversion.
There is a version that the Cyrillic and Glagolitic alphabet existed among the Slavs even in the pre-Christian period of their development.
All these points of view on the problem of the formation and development of the Glagolitic and Cyrillic alphabet are quite controversial and today have a lot of contradictions and inaccuracies. Modern science and factual material do not yet make it possible to create an accurate picture and chronology of the development of Slavic writing in general.
There are too many doubts and contradictions, and very little factual material on the basis of which these doubts can be dispelled.
Thus, Kirill’s student allegedly improved the alphabet created by the teacher, and thus the Cyrillic alphabet was obtained based on the Glagolitic alphabet and the Greek statutory letter. Most Cyrillic-Glagolic books (palimpsests) have an earlier text - Glagolitic. When rewriting the book, the original text was washed away. This confirms the idea that the Glagolitic alphabet was written before the Cyrillic alphabet.
If we agree that Cyril invented the Glagolitic alphabet, then the question naturally arises: “Why was it necessary to invent complex letter signs in the presence of simple and clear letters of the Greek script, and this despite the fact that it was necessary to strive to ensure Greek influence on the Slavs, in which And what was the political mission of Cyril and Methodius?”
Kirill had no need to create a more complex in outline and less perfect alphabet with letter names containing entire concepts, when it would have been enough to give only the sound meaning of the letter.
“First of all, I didn’t have books, but with features and cuts I read and gataahu, the trash that exists... Then, the lover of mankind... sent an ambassador named after St. Constantine the Philosopher, called Cyril, the husband of the righteous and true, and created for them writings (30) and osm, ova wobo according to the order of the Greek letters, but according to the Slovenian speech...” says in “The Legend of the Letters” by Chernorizets Khrabra. Based on this passage, many researchers
tend to believe that Kirill created the Glagolitic alphabet (L.B. Karpenko, V.I. Grigorovich, P.I. Shafarik). But in the “Legend” it is clearly stated “... twenty-four of them are similar to Greek letters ...”, and a list of letters similar to Greek is given, and then fourteen letters “according to Slavic speech ...” are listed. The word “similar” “similar” corresponds to the Russian word “similar”, “similar”, “similar”. And in this case, we can only speak for sure about the similarity of Cyrillic letters with Greek letters, but not Glagolitic ones. Glagolitic letters are not at all “like” Greek letters. This is the first. Second: the digital values of the Cyrillic letters are more consistent with the digital values of the letters of the Greek alphabet. In the Cyrillic alphabet, the letters B and Z, which are not in the Greek alphabet, lost their digital meaning, and some received a different digital meaning, which precisely indicates that the Cyrillic alphabet was created in the model and likeness of the Greek alphabet. Glagolitic letter styles “according to Slavic speech” were forced to partially change their style, retaining their names. Most likely, this is how two styles of the Slavic alphabet appeared with the same composition and names of letters, but different patterns of letters and, most importantly, purpose. The Cyrillic alphabet was created on the basis of the Glagolitic alphabet and was intended for the translation of church books into the Slavic language.
“The presence of more ancient linguistic features in Glagolitic monuments in comparison with Cyrillic ones, Glagolitic insertions in the form of individual letters and text segments in Cyrillic manuscripts, the presence of palimpsests (texts on recycled parchment), in which the Cyrillic text is written on the washed-out Glagolitic alphabet, indicate the seniority of the Glagolitic alphabet ... The most ancient Glagolitic monuments are connected by their origin either with the territory where the activity of the Thessaloniki brothers took place, or with the territory of western Bulgaria, where the activity of the disciples took place” (L.B. Karpenko).
The totality of historical and linguistic facts based on a comparative analysis of Glagolitic and Cyrillic sources confirms our opinion about the primacy of the Glagolitic alphabet.
The end of the 9th century for the countries of Western Europe means the presence not only of writing, but also of a large number of different types of fonts: Greek, Roman capital square, rustic, old and new uncial, half-uncial, Carolingian minuscule. A huge number of books have been written that have survived to our time. There is written evidence of Greek and ancient temples preserved in stone, mosaic, wood and metal. The origin of various types of writing dates back to the 8th-22nd centuries BC. Mesopotamia and Egypt, Byzantium and Greece, Mayans and North American Indians. Pictography and ideography, wampums and shell writing. Everywhere and among many, but not among the Slavs, for for some reason they could not have written language until Saint Constantine was sent.
But it's hard to believe. It was necessary for all the Slavic tribes at that time to be blind and deaf, so as not to know and not see how other peoples, with whom the Slavs undoubtedly had various kinds of connections, had been using different types of fonts for centuries. The Slavic lands were not an isolated reservation. However, judging by the theory of the development of writing that has developed and exists to this day, the Slavs,
being in close trade, political and cultural contacts with their neighbors, throughout all centuries remained until the 9th century throughout the entire territory of Ancient Rus' a huge “blank spot” on the map of the spread of writing.
This situation is difficult to resolve due to the lack of reliable written sources. This is all the more strange in the presence of an amazing, almost unknown to this day, truly wonderful world of those beliefs, customs, and rituals that our ancestors, the Slavs, or, as they called themselves in ancient times, the Rus, completely indulged in for thousands of years. Just take Russian epics and fairy tales as an example. They didn't happen out of nowhere. And in many of them, the hero, if not a fool, then a simple peasant son, meets at a crossroads or crossroads a stone with certain information indicating where to go and how the trip may end. But the main thing is not what and how is written on the stone, the main thing is that the hero easily reads it all.
The main thing is that he can read. This is common. And for Ancient Rus' there is nothing surprising in this. But in the fairy tales and legends of European and other “written” peoples there is nothing like this. The Slavs have come a very long and difficult historical path. Many nations and their empires fell, but the Slavs remained. That rich oral folk art, fairy tales, epics, songs, and the language itself, numbering more than two hundred and fifty thousand words, could not have appeared by chance. With all this, the practical absence or ignorance of the most ancient written monuments is surprising. Today there are very few monuments of Glagolitic writing.
In the 19th century there was a Psalter dating back to 1222, copied by the monk Nicholas of Arba under the papacy of Honorius in Glagolitic letters from the old Slavic Psalter, written by order and cost of Theodore, the last archbishop of Salona. Salona was destroyed around 640, so it can be argued that the Slavic Glagolitic original dates back to at least the first half of the 7th century. This proves that the Glagolitic alphabet existed at least 200 years before Cyril.
On the parchment sheets of the famous “Klotsov Codex” there are notes in Old German, indicating that the “Klotsov sheets” were written in Croatian, which is a local dialect of the Slavic language. It is possible that the pages of the Klotsov Codex were written by St. himself. Jerome, who was born in 340 in Stridon - in Dalmatia. Thus, St. Jerome back in the 4th century. used the Glagolitic alphabet, he was even considered the author of this alphabet. He was certainly a Slav and reports that he translated the Bible to his fellow countrymen. The sheets of the Klotsov Codex were later framed in silver and gold and divided among the owner’s relatives as the greatest value.
In the 11th century, the Albanians had an alphabet very similar to the Glagolitic alphabet. It is believed that it was introduced during the Christianization of the Albanians. The history of the Glagolitic alphabet, in any case, is completely different from what it is imagined to be. It is too simplified to the point of primitiveness, especially in Soviet literature on the history of type.
The emergence and development of writing in Rus' is canonically associated with its Christianization. Everything that could have been or was before the 9th century was rejected as having no right to exist. Although, according to Cyril himself, he met a Rusyn who had books written in Russian characters.
And this was even before Rurik was called to Novgorod and almost one hundred and thirty years before the baptism of Rus'! Kirill met “and found a man” who spoke “through that conversation”; that is, in Russian. Kirill met a Rusyn, who had two books - the Gospel and the Psalter - in 860 or 861. These books are very complex in their theological content and archaic style, but they existed and were written in Russian letters. This historical fact is cited in all twenty-three copies of the Pannonian Life of Constantine known to science, which confirms the authenticity of this event.
The presence of these books is indisputable evidence that Constantine took the script, which was quite developed by the Rusyns, as the basis for his Cyrillic alphabet. He did not create, but only improved (“by arranging the writing”), he streamlined the East Slavic writing that already existed before him.
One of the messages of Pope John VIII, a contemporary of Cyril and Methodius, clearly states that “Slavic writings” were known before Cyril and he “only found them again, rediscovered them.”
These words give reason to seriously think about their meaning. What does “found again” mean? This clearly indicates that they already existed before, were found earlier. They were used, and then somehow forgotten, lost, or stopped being used? When was this, at what time? There is no clear answer to these questions yet. Kirill “rediscovered” these letters. Didn't come up with it, didn't invent it, but just again
opened. It was the improvement of the Slavic script that was once created by someone that completed the mission of Cyril and Methodius to create a Slavic script.
A number of information about ancient writing in Rus' is available from Arab and European writers and travelers. They testified that the Rus had writings carved on wood, on a “white poplar” pole, “wrote on white tree bark.” The existence of pre-Christian writing in Rus' is also contained in Russian chronicles. There is historical evidence of the Byzantine king and chronicler Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (912-959), who in the treatise “De administrando imperio” (“On State Administration”) wrote that the Croats of 635, after baptism, swore allegiance to the Roman capital and in a charter written “ in their own letter,” they promised to maintain peace with their neighbors.
The Baschanskaya (Boshkanskaya) slab is one of the oldest known Glagolitic monuments. 11th century, Croatia.
The oldest monuments of Glagolitic writing are several inscriptions from the era of Tsar Simeon (892-927), an inscription of a Slavic priest on a letter of 982, found in the Athos monastery, and a tombstone dating back to 993 in a church in Preslav.
An important monument of the Glagolitic writing of the 10th century is the manuscript known as the “Kyiv Glagolitic sheets”, which at one time arrived at the Kiev Church Archaeological Museum from Archimandrite Antonin Kapustin, head of the Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem, and this document is located in the manuscript department of the Central Scientific Library of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, in Kyiv.
Kievan Glagolitic sheets, 10th century.
Among other famous monuments of Glagolitic writing, one should name the “Zograph Gospel” of the 10th-11th centuries, found in the Zograf Monastery on Mount Athos, the “Assemanian Gospel” from the Vatican, dating back to the 11th century, the “Sinaiticus Psalter” from the Monastery of St. Catherine, the “Mariinsky Gospel” from Athos, Klotsov collection (XI century) from the Klots family library (Italy).
There is a lot of debate about the authorship and history of the so-called “Klotsov Code”. There is written evidence that the leaves of the Klotsov Codex were written in Glagolitic alphabet in the own hand of St. Jerome, who was born in 340 in Stridon, in Dalmatia. He was a Slav by origin, as clearly evidenced by his own message that he translated the Bible to his fellow countrymen. In addition, the pages of this codex were at one time the object of religious veneration. They were framed in silver and gold and divided among the relatives of the owner of the codex, so that everyone would receive at least something from this valuable inheritance. Thus, already in the 4th century, Saint Jerome used the Glagolitic alphabet. At one time he was even considered the author of the Glagolitic alphabet, but no historical information on this matter has been preserved.
In 1766, a book by Klement Grubisich, published in Venice, argued that the Glagolitic alphabet existed long before the birth of Christ. Rafail Lenakovich expressed the same opinion back in 1640. All this indicates that the Glagolitic alphabet is centuries older than the Cyrillic alphabet.
In Rus', the beginning of weather records in the Tale of Bygone Years begins in 852, which makes it possible to assume that the chronicler of the 9th century used some earlier records. The texts of the agreements between the Kyiv princes and Byzantium have also been preserved. The texts of the treaties clearly indicate the developed ethics of written documentation of interstate relations already in the 10th century. Probably, the use of writing in Rus' found wide application in addition to church liturgical literature even before the official baptism of Rus'. This opinion is also supported by the existence of two alphabets in Rus' in the 9th century.
At the first stage of the development of writing there was no particular need for it. When something needed to be conveyed, a messenger was sent. There was no particular need for letters, because... everyone lived together, without going anywhere in particular. All basic laws were kept in the memory of the elders of the clan and passed on from one to another, preserved in customs and rituals. Epics and songs were passed on from mouth to mouth. It is known that human memory
capable of storing several thousand verses.
The recorded information was needed to indicate boundaries, boundary posts, roads, and property allocations. Perhaps that is why each sign had not only a graphic form, but also enormous semantic content.
For example, we can recall the fact that in the vast Vedic literature there is no indication of the existence of writing in early Aryan India. There are often indications that written recording had not yet been practiced, and at the same time, references to the real existence of texts, but their existence only in the memory of those who memorized them by heart, are quite common. As for writing, it is not mentioned anywhere. Although there is evidence of children playing with letters, the Buddhist canonical writings praise lekha - “writing”, and the profession of “scribe” is characterized as very good; There is other evidence that suggests the use of writing. All this suggests that in the 6th century BC. Both adults and children mastered the art of writing in India. As Professor Rhys Davide has rightly pointed out, this is one of those rare cases where the absence of written evidence where there is good reason to expect it is in itself useful evidence. By the way, a very interesting fact. In one of the northwestern variants of the Indian Gurmukhi script, the first letter of the alphabet completely repeats the Slavic Glagolitic letter Az...
Yes, today there is very little actual evidence of pre-Christian Slavic writing, and this can be explained by the following:
1. Written monuments on “white bark”, “white poplar”, or on any other tree are simply short-lived. If in Greece or Italy time saved at least a small amount of marble products and mosaics, then Ancient Rus' stood among forests and the fire, raging, did not spare anything - neither human dwellings, nor temples, nor information written on wooden tablets.
2. The Christian dogma of the creation of the Slavic alphabet by Constantine was unshakable for centuries. Could anyone in Orthodox Russia allow themselves to doubt the generally accepted and deeply established version of the acquisition of writing by the Slavs from Saints Cyril and Methodius? The time and circumstances of the creation of the alphabet were known. And for centuries this version was unshakable. In addition, the adoption of Christianity in Rus' was accompanied by the zealous destruction of all traces of pagan, pre-Christian beliefs. And one can only imagine with what zeal all kinds of written sources and even information about them could be destroyed if they did not relate to Christian teaching or, moreover, contradicted
to him.
3. Most of the Slavic scientists of the Soviet era were restricted from traveling abroad, and even if they could go to foreign museums, their limited knowledge of languages, and the temporary timing of their business trips, did not allow them to work fruitfully. In addition, there were practically no specialists who dealt specifically with the emergence and development of Slavic writing, either in Russia or in the USSR. In Russia, everyone specifically adhered to the version of the creation of Slavic writing by Kirill and bowed to the opinion of foreign authorities. And their opinion was unequivocal - the Slavs did not have writing before Cyril. The science in the USSR about the writing and script of the Slavs did not create anything new, copying memorized generally accepted truths from book to book. It is enough to look at the illustrations that wander from book to book to be convinced of this.
4. Foreign scientists practically did not study the issues of Slavic writing. And they didn’t show much interest. Even if they tried to deal with this issue, they did not have the necessary knowledge of Russian, and especially the Old Church Slavonic language. Pyotr Oreshkin, the author of a book on Slavic writing, rightly writes: “The professors of Slavic languages” to whom I sent my work answered me in French,
in German, in English, being unable to write a simple letter in Russian.”
5. The monuments of early Slavic writing that were encountered were either rejected, or dated no earlier than the 9th century, or were simply not noticed. There is a fairly large number of all kinds of inscriptions on rocks, for example in the Kremnica region of Hungary, which then passed to Slovakia, on utensils located in various museums around the world. These inscriptions undoubtedly have Slavic roots, but this additional historical material has not been used or studied at all, just like the Slavic runic inscriptions. If there is no material, there is no one to specialize in it.
6. The situation is still very well developed among scientists when a recognized authority on any issue expresses its opinion, and others (less recognized) share it, not allowing themselves not only to object, but even to doubt such an authoritative opinion.
7. Many published works are not of a research nature, but of a compilation nature, where the same opinions and facts are copied by one author from another without specific work with factual materials.
8. Future specialists who are preparing at universities barely have time to study what was written before them from session to session. And there is no need yet to talk about serious scientific research in the field of the history of Slavic writing in universities.
9. Many researchers simply denied the alphabet of our ancestors the right to an independent path of development. And they can be understood: whoever wants to admit this - after all, the recognition of this situation destroys many pseudo-scientific constructions of scientists of previous centuries, aimed at proving the second-rate and secondary nature of the Slavic alphabet, writing and even language.
Of the two types of Slavic writing that existed together for some time, the Cyrillic alphabet received its further development. The Glagolitic alphabet moved away as a more complex letter in terms of the characters, as the officially accepted version says. But the Glagolitic alphabet could also fall out of use as a letter that ceased to be used, in connection with the introduction of the Cyrillic alphabet, for writing church books. The Glagolitic alphabet that has survived to this day
The letter has 40 letters, 39 of which represent almost the same sounds as in the Cyrillic alphabet.
In many books, articles and publications, Glagolitic letters are described as graphically more complex, “pretentious”, “contrived”. Some even characterize the Glagolitic alphabet as a “chimeric” and artificial alphabet, not similar to any of the currently existing alphabetic systems.
Many researchers looked for the graphic basis of the Glagolitic alphabet in the Cyrillic alphabet, in the Syriac and Palmyra alphabets, in the Khazar script, in the Byzantine cursive script, in the Albanian script, in the Iranian script of the Sassanid era, in Arabic script, in the Armenian and Georgian alphabets, in the Hebrew and Coptic alphabets , in Latin italics, in Greek musical notations, in Greek “spectacled writing”, in
cuneiform, in Greek astronomical, medical and other symbols, in Cypriot syllabary, in magical Greek writing, etc. Philologist G.M. Prokhorov showed the similarities in graphic terms between the letters of the Glagolitic alphabet and the signs of other writing systems.
And no one allowed the idea that the Glagolitic alphabet could have arisen independently, and not as a letter borrowed from someone. There is an opinion that the Glagolitic alphabet is the result of artificial individual work. And the origin of the very name of this alphabet is not entirely clear. Traditionally, the Glagolitic alphabet is understood as a derivative of the word glagoliti - to speak. But there is another version, set out by I. Ganush in a book with characteristic
for its time the name: “On the issue of runes among the Slavs with a special review of the runic antiquities of the Obodrites, as well as the Glagolitic and Cyrillic alphabet. As a contribution to comparative Germanic-Slavic archaeology, the creation of Dr. Ignaz J. Hanusz, full member and librarian of the Imperial Czech Scientific Society in Prague". Ganush offers the following explanation for the Glagolitic name: “It may be that, according to the mass, the singing (reading) Dalmatian priests are called “verbalists,” just like their writings (books) from which they read. The word “verb” even now in Dalmatia serves as a designation for the Slavic liturgy, but the words “verb” and “glagolati” are already alien to today’s Serbo-Slavic dialects.” The Glagolitic alphabet has another name - the initial letter, which “in age surpasses all other names of alphabets,” and it is associated with the idea of “the Glagolitic letter, the beech, the beech line.”
Both types of Glagolitic - rounded (Bulgarian) and angular (Croatian, Ilirian or Dalmatian) - really differ in a certain intricacy of characters in comparison with the Cyrillic alphabet.
It is this intricacy of the Glagolitic signs, together with their names, that forces us to look more carefully and in detail at each sign, its design and try to understand the meaning inherent in it.
The names of the alphabetic characters of the Glagolitic alphabet, later transferred to the Cyrillic alphabet, cause not only surprise, but also admiration. In Chernorizets Khrabra’s essay “On Letters” there is a clear description of the creation of the alphabet and the first letter: “And he created for them thirty-eight letters, some in the order of Greek letters, and others in accordance with Slavic speech. In the likeness of the Greek alphabet, he began his alphabet, they began with alpha, and
he put Az at the beginning. And just as the Greeks followed the Hebrew letter, so he followed the Greek... and following them, Saint Cyril created the first letter Az. But because Az was the first letter given from God to the Slavic race in order to open the letters of the mouth to the knowledge of those who learn, it is proclaimed by a wide parting of the lips, and other letters are pronounced by a smaller parting of the lips.” In the tale of Brave, not all letter names have
description.
The most interesting thing is that no other people and no other writing system have such or even similar letter names. It is very characteristic that not only the names of the Glagolitic alphabetic characters themselves cause surprise, but also their numerical meaning up to and including the letter “Worm”. This letter meant 1000, and the remaining letters of the Glagolitic alphabet no longer had a digital meaning.
Time and many layers and changes today have significantly distorted the original meaning and meaning laid down by the creators of the Slavic alphabet, but even today this alphabet represents something more than a simple letter series.
The greatness of our Glagolitic alphabet lies in the fact that the very shape of the letters, their order and organization, their numerical value, their names are not a random, meaningless set of characters. The Glagolitic alphabet is a unique sign system based on the specific experience of the worldview and worldview of the Slavs. The creators of the Slavic writing system, as many researchers note, undoubtedly proceeded from a religious reflection of the world, from the idea of the sacredness of the alphabet.
In this regard, another question arises: “If Kirill created the Slavic alphabet, then why not end it with omega, following the example of the Greek alphabet?”
“Alpha and Omega” - the Lord calls himself, as the first and last, as the beginning and end of all things. Why shouldn’t Kirill use this expression, which was known at that time, and put omega at the end of the alphabet, thereby emphasizing the religious meaning of the alphabet he created?
The point is probably that he simply gave a different design to the letters, while preserving their existing structure and the established names of the letter styles of the Glagolitic alphabet used centuries before.
And the names of all the signs of the Slavic Glagolitic, and even the Cyrillic alphabet, when read carefully, not only indicate sound, but are also arranged into clearly meaningful phrases and sentences. To denote the letters of the Glagolitic alphabet, Old Church Slavonic words and word forms were used, which today have already lost a lot, but still retained their original meaning. The verbal meaning of the Glagolitic letters up to and including the letter “Worm” is especially pronounced.
Translated into modern Russian, the names of the letters sound like this: az (ya), beeches (letter, letters, literacy), vedi (I know, realize, know), verb (I say, speak), dobro (good, good), is ( exists, exists, is), live (live, live), zelo (very, completely, extremely), earth (world, planet), kako (how), people (children of men, people), think (meditate, think , think), he (one, otherworldly, unearthly), peace (peace, refuge, tranquility), rtsi (speak, say), word (speech, commandment), tvrdo (solid, immutable, true), ouk (teaching, teaching ), fert (elected, selective).
The meaning of the letters “Hera” and “Cherva” is still not resolved. The Cyrillic name of the letter “Hera” in the Orthodox interpretation is an abbreviation of the word “cherub”, borrowed from the Greek language. In principle, this is the only abbreviated name for the letter in the entire Slavic alphabet. Why on earth did Kirill, if he composed it, need to abbreviate this one word, and even with such a meaning? The worm, in the Orthodox interpretation, is a symbol of the most insignificant creation of the Creator. But whether this was their meaning in the Glagolitic alphabet remains a mystery to this day.
When reading the names of the letters of the Glagolitic alphabet, there is a clear, logical connection between the names of all letters and their combinations, up to the letter “Cherv”. When translated into modern language, the names of the letters are formed into the following phrases and sentences: “I know the letters (literacy), “I say (say) good is (exists)”, “live perfectly”, “the earth thinks like people”, “our (unearthly) peace (calm)", "I say
The word (commandment) is firm (true)”, “teaching is chosen”.
There remain four letters with names: “Her”, “Omega”, “Qi”, “Cherv”. If we accept the Orthodox interpretation of these letters, then we can compose and obtain the phrase: “Cherub, or worm.” But then, naturally, questions arise with the letter “Omega”. Why it was included in this series and what it means will probably remain a mystery to us.
The phrase “The earth thinks like people” seems a little strange at first. However, if we take into account the achievements of modern science, we can only be amazed at the knowledge of our ancestors. Only in the middle of the twentieth century did scientists make a grand discovery - fungal mycorrhiza unites the root systems of all plants into a single network. Conventionally, this can be imagined as a huge web that connects the entire vegetation cover of the earth. This is also similar to the Internet that has taken over the entire world today. Due to this mycorrhiza, information is transmitted from plant to plant. All this has been proven by the experiments of modern scientists. But how did the Slavs know about this two thousand years ago, speaking in their alphabet,
that “the earth thinks like people”?
In any case, even what we have seen and already understood suggests that the Slavic Glagolitic alphabet is a unique example of an alphabet that has no analogue on our planet in terms of the conceptual meaning of the signs. It is now difficult to establish by whom and when it was compiled, but the creators of the Glagolitic alphabet undoubtedly had extensive knowledge and sought to reflect this knowledge even in the alphabet, investing in each sign not only conceptual, but also figurative, visual figurative information content. Each sign of the Glagolitic alphabet contains a huge amount of information. But many people need to point this out and decipher it, then everything immediately becomes clear.
Therefore, probably, many easily see in the first letter a hieroglyphic image of a cross, especially if they adhere to the opinion that Kirill developed this alphabet to translate liturgical books onto a Slavic basis. If we accept this version, then it would be possible to come up with many letters with Christian symbolism. However, this is not observed. But in the Glagolitic alphabet, almost every letter graphically reveals its meaning. Most modern writing systems convey only the sound from which the reader derives meaning. At the same time, the sign itself, its graphic design, has practically no meaning, performing only the nominal function of a generally accepted, conventional designation of sound. In the Glagolitic alphabet, almost every sign carries a meaning. This is always characteristic of early forms of writing, when, first of all, they tried to express in each sign the meaning of the message. Below we will try to consider all the letters of the angular and round Glagolitic alphabet from the point of view of the artistic and figurative expressiveness of the sign.
A.V. Platov, N.N. Taranov
Views: 7,978
Glagolitic is an ancient Slavic alphabet, created by the Slavic preacher Saint Constantine (Cyril) the Philosopher and his brother Methodius in 863 at the request of the Moravian Prince Rostislav, to record church texts in the Slavic language. It is believed that Cyrillic alphabet developed by followers Cyril and Methodius based on the Greek uncial letter and charter.
The Glagolitic alphabet is considered an earlier alphabet than the Cyrillic alphabet. The oldest surviving Glagolitic inscription dates back to to 893 and was made in the church of the Bulgarian king Simeon the Great (864-927) in Preslav. The oldest handwritten monuments written in the Glagolitic alphabet in an archaic language - “ Kyiv sheets” dating back to the 10th century.
Glagolitic graffiti in Preslav, Bulgaria
At the beginning of the 10th century, Chernorizets Khrabr, in his treatise “On Writing,” emphasizes the difference in the writing of Greek letters and the Slavic alphabet of Cyril and Methodius, apparently Glagolitic:
« The same Slavic letters have more holiness and honor that a holy man created them, and the Greek ones are filthy Hellenes. If anyone says that they have not completed their work because they are still finishing them, we will say this in response: and the Greeks also completed it many times ».
The Glagolitic and Cyrillic alphabet in their oldest versions almost completely coincide in sound, differing only in the form of writing the letters.
The Glagolitic alphabet differs from the Cyrillic alphabet in the intricate shape of its letters. The construction of letters in the Glagolitic alphabet is based on a circle - a symbol of infinity, and a triangle - a symbol of wisdom.
Bashkan plate, 11th century. Glagolitic
The appearance of the letters of the early (round) Glagolitic alphabet somewhat coincides with the Khutsuri, the Georgian church alphabet created before the 9th century, possibly based on the Armenian alphabet. Number of letters in Georgian Khutsuri - 38, coincides with the number of letters in the Slavic alphabet mentioned by Chernorizets the Brave in his treatise “On Letters”.
Glagolitic writing was common in Slavic Dalmatia and Istria with adjacent islands and in coastal Croatia. Probably under the influence of the charter letter, from the 12th century in Croatia the Glagolitic alphabet became angular. This angular variety of Glagolitic letters has also been fixed in the Croatian printed word.
The new angular spelling of the letters is explained by the fact that the Roman Catholic Church is fighting against services in the Slavic language among the Croats called the Glagolitic alphabet “Gothic letters”.
In 1059 at the Council of Bishops of Dalmatia and Croatia " they said that Gothic letters were invented by a certain heretic Methodius, who in this very Slavic language wrote many false things against the teachings of the Catholic faith; because of this, they say, he was punished by God's court with imminent death».
In the cursive writing tradition, Late Glagolitic contains many script variants suitable for writing continuous words.
The Glagolitic alphabet has 33 letters, which have their own names, names and numerical values, which reflects the principle trinity of word, sign and number.
In the Glagolitic alphabet, the numerical values of the letters are ordered according to the order of the letters. Twenty-nine letters passed from the Glagolitic alphabet to the Cyrillic alphabet, changing its numerical value in accordance with the numerical value of the corresponding letters of the Greek alphabet.
The letters of all the most ancient alphabets were used for counting, in some alphabets they meant individual words.
However, it was in the Glagolitic alphabet that the letters acquired the quality of a moralizing word, the alphabet began to be read as a moral code. By mastering this alphabet, a person not only remembered the letters, but also thought about the meaning inherent in the names of the letters.
The variety of meanings of the Russian alphabet had a fruitful effect on the artistic design of the initial letters. Peering at the letters of the Glagolitic alphabet, we notice its very intricate shapes. Glagolitic signs are often built from two parts located on top of each other.
The intricacy of the letters is noticeable andin artistic decoration 
capital letters of the Cyrillic alphabet.
There are almost no simple round letter shapes; they are all connected by straight lines. Only a few correspond to the modern form of letters letters - w, u, m, h, e.
In further development, the writing of Glagolitic letters was simplified, borrowing many signs from the Cyrillic alphabet.
Glagolitic of the Western Slavs - Czechs, Poles, Croats, Slovaks, Latvians, Lithuanians and other peoples, lasted relatively not for long and was replaced by the Latin letter.
Not all Western Slavs switched to the Latin alphabet; Serbs, Belarusians, Ukrainians and Russians write in Cyrillic.
The Glagolitic alphabet did not disappear completely; before the outbreak of World War II, it was used in the Croatian settlements of Italy. Even newspapers were printed in the Glagolitic alphabet using a printed font.
In Ancient Rus', the Glagolitic alphabet was practically not used; there are only isolated inclusions of Glagolitic letters in texts written in Cyrillic.
The Glagolitic alphabet was used to transmit church texts. The earliest monument of Russian writing is considered to be the inscription on a pot from the Gnezdovo mound, dating back to the first half of the 10th century.
gave the goronots to Yuri, and who in return and yes and...
In the surviving ancient Russian monuments of everyday writing before the baptism of Rus', the Cyrillic alphabet is used. The Glagolitic alphabet is also used as a cryptographic script.
