Forma Chrikʃtima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas

ILIJA LEMEŠKIN Institute of the Lithuanian Language ORCID id: orcid.org/0000-0002-7095-231X Research areas: Baltic studies, Slavic studies, ancient Baltic literature and writing, folklore. DOI: doi.org/10.35321/all91-02 FORMA CHRIKŠTIMA (1559) IN FORMAL TERMS. THE ACROSTIC OF THE PRIEST M. MAŽVYDAS Forma Chrikštima (1559) from a formal perspective. Acrostic by priest M. Mažvydas ABSTRACT Comparison is the principal research tool, but a comparative procedure must be consistently stratified. When examining the 1559 acrostic, it must be compared with: 1) other acrostics by Martynas Mažvydas; 2) earlier acrostics representing the same written tradition; 3) identical and similar devices of combinatorial poetics realized in a broader historical and cultural context. This in itself defines expanding fields of comparative analysis: indirect means of expression used in the 1547 catechism, the acrostics of Pranciškus Skorina, and acrostics left by European intellectuals from other countries in the 16th century. Despite the national prominence accorded to M. Mažvydas in Lithuania, the acrostics he created have not yet been the subject of a thorough (comparative) study. This article seeks to clarify the role (form and content) of the acrostic in the 1559 publication Forma Chrikštima, reveal its interaction with translated sources, and discern a possible connection (of shared features) with P. Skorina’s acrostics. KEYWORDS: M. Mažvydas, P. Skorina, acrostic, Catechism, Forma Chrikštima, akathist, paratext. Straipsniai / Articles 39 ILJA LEMEŠKIN ANNOTATION Comparison is the main research tool, but the comparative procedure must be consistently stratified. When we examine the 1559 acrostic, we must compare it with (1) other acrostics by Mažvydas; (2) earlier acrostics that represent the same literary tradition; and (3) identical and similar tools of combinatorial poetics that were realised in a broader historical-cultural context. This in itself sets out the expanding fields of comparative analysis: the indirect means of expression used in the Catechism of 1547, the acrostics of Francis Scorina, and the acrostics created in the 16th century by European intellectuals from other countries. Despite the national prominence of Mažvydas in Lithuania, his acrostics have not been the subject of in-depth (comparative) research. This article aims to clarify the role (form and content) of the acrostic in the 1559 publication Forma Chrikštima, to reveal its interaction with the translated sources, and to identify a possible connection (in terms of identical features) with the acrostics of P. Skorina. KEYWORDS: M. Mažvydas, F. Skorina, acrostic, Catechism, Forma Chrikštima, akathist, paratext. 1. M. MAŽVYDAS: HIS BOOKS AND ACROSTICS Corpus Mosvidianum comprises: books prepared for printing by M. Mažvydas himself (1547; 1549; 1559) and manuscript sources remaining after his death (†1563), known to us today through the later printed editions of Baltramiejus Vilentas (1566; 1570) and Jonas Bretkūnas (1589). The following three rare books belong to the first group of authentic publications by M. Mažvydas: 1. [Martynas Mažvydas,] CATECHISMVSA PRAḟty S̄zadei, Mak̄las fkai-tima rafchta yr giėfmes del krikščianiftes bei del berneliu iaunu nau̇ey fuguldi-tas KARALIAVCZVI VIII. dena Menefes Saufia, Metu vłgimima Diewa. M. D. XLVII. [1547] Soli Deo gloria; 2. Martynas Mažvydas, Giefme S. Ambraßeijaus, bey S. Auguḟtina, kurę wa-din: Te Deu laudamus. Su geḟmemis ape ißch numir̄uiu priekelima Iefaus Chriftaus, Ißchgulditas per M. Moḟuida Waitkuna [et]c. For the benefit of the Ragainė Church and 40 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chriſtima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas and so on. [In the colophon:] Printed in Königsberg by Jan Weinreich. The twentieth day of the month of April. In the year of God. 1549; 3. [Martynas Mažvydas,] Forma Chriſtima. How the Church’s ordinances are observed in the Duchy of Prussia and other lands. Printed in Königsberg by Iona Daubmana. In the year of Christ M. D. L I X. [1559]. M. Mažvydas presented (formulated) the 1547 catechism and the 1559 agenda as anonymous works. He revealed his authorship as translator and compiler with the aid of acrostics; for this reason, the author is indicated in square brackets. The second group comprises: 1.1. [Baltramiejus Vilentas,] Geſmes Chriſtʒoniſkas gedomas Baβnicʒofu per Aduenta ir Kaledas ik Gramnicʒu. Printed in Königsberg by Iona Daubmana, in the year of God / M. D. LXVI. [1566]; 1.2. [Baltramiejus Vilentas,] GESMES Chriſtʒoniſkas gedomas baβnicʒofu per Welikas ir Sekminias ik Aduenta. Printed in Königsberg by Iona Daubmana. In the year of God / M. D. LXX. [1570] Soli Deo Gloria; 2. [Jonas Bretkūnas,] PARAPHRASIS, permanentina poteraus malda / translated by Martina Moſwida, included in Jonas Bretkūnas’s publication Gieſmes Duchau­nas / translated from German into Lithuanian by certain pastors of the Duchy of Prussia. Printed in Königsberg by Iurgi Oſterbergera in 1589. The two-volume Geſmes Chriſtʒoniſkas was prepared for printing by M. Mažvydas’s relative, B. Vilentas. On the basis of another inherited manuscript, in 1572 and/or 1574 he may also have published his cousin’s PARAPHRASIS (no copies of these possible editions have yet been discovered); in that case, Jonas Bretkūnas in 1589 probably used not the author’s authentic manuscript but B. Vilentas’s edition. When discussing the body of M. Mažvydas’s books, it is important to bear in mind that a book (text) is a subtle artifact—a genre-strictly determined, highest-level linguistic sign whose author addresses the reader in an appropriate manner and at an appropriate time according to the current communicative situation. A text published without the author’s intervention and knowledge is by no means equivalent to a book published by the author himself; therefore, both the hymnal and the PARAPHRASIS should be regarded as works of B. Vilentas and J. Bretkūnas. In the first volume of Geſmes Chriſtʒoniſkas, B. Vilentas included a preface REVERENDIS PASTORIBVS ET MINISTRIS ECCLESIARVM LITVANICARVM. The formula MARTINVS MOSVID, GRATIAM & peace Straipsniai / Articles 41 ILJA LEMEŠKIN Deo Patre, & D. N. Jefu Chrifte, provided at the end of the preface’s title, firmly associates the book with Mažvydas’s name; however, it is unknown whether this is merely an innovation by the publisher, who had to arrange the deceased man’s manuscripts. This preface may—and apparently should—have been anonymous. M. Mažvydas acted in this way in 1547, concealing the authorship of the corresponding Latin introductory text, “Pastoribus et ministris ecclesiarum in Lituania gratiam et pacem.” He was prompted to do so by the medieval precept of avoiding self-identification and mention of his own “lowly” name. The author of the hymnal’s preface clearly says that the name of the book’s creator cannot equal the Creator’s name: hunc laborem meum non eo fufceptum, neq; ad id profuturum ut meo nomini famam aut celebritatem ullam conciliet (quippe quum neq; appet(o, neq; ex tali re petendam effe scio) verum enimvero ut gloria, laus & honor nominis folius Æterni Dei Patris & D. N. Jefu Chrifti “I undertook this labor not so that it might in the future bring any fame or renown to my name (for I neither desire this nor know that it should be sought from such a work), but so that the glory, praise, and honor of the name of the only Eternal God the Father and Our Lord Jesus Christ might be...” (Koženiauskienė 1990: 76). M. Mažvydas consciously and declaratively avoids making his name famous among people and for precisely this reason tends to reveal his authorship “in the old-fashioned way,” modestly—through an elaborate indirect means of expression that not everyone was able to notice. This also projects importantly onto the catechism. The publisher’s inept addition of MARTINVS MOSVID to the anonymous preface contradicts the stance of 1547 and undermines the clearly expressed position that a servant of God should not glorify, that is, publicize, his own name in a hymnal or a work of a similar nature. The category of anonymous publications, according to M. Mažvydas’s conception, may also have included PARAPHRASIS, permanitina poteraus malda. The extended formulaic note per Martina Mofwida ifchgul dita may have been added to the title by the same B. Vilentas for banal publishing reasons. In this way, the publisher would have disclosed the provenance of the manuscript in his possession and publication. How M. Mažvydas himself might have arranged “his publication” remains unclear. The texts collected by M. Mažvydas and published through the efforts of B. Vilentas and J. Bretkūnas create the impression of complete books (works) by M. Mažvydas, but such a conception is incorrect. After 1563, M. Mažvydas was published not by M. Mažvydas, but by B. Vilentas and J. Bretkūnas. They did so at their own discretion; therefore, when considering the question of the authorial principle (the representation of the author), one must rely on the authentic printed editions of 1547, 1549, and 1559. The 1547 catechism and the 1559 agenda are important dogmatic and instructional works intended for “the shepherds and ministers of the churches.” They arose at the ruler’s (church’s) request and at the state’s expense. As is fitting under such circumstances, M. Mažvydas here acts as a faithful servant of God (the church, 42 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chriʃtima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas (the ruler’s) servant, who quietly—as an anonymous person—performs his duty (task, commission). Of an entirely different nature is the occasional 1549 “Hymn of St. Ambrose...” This is a small collection of several hymns which, by M. Mažvydas’s will, responds to the requests of specific parishioners, that is, townspeople: I understood that the hearers wanted to have the hymn called: Te Deum laudamus. Moreover, the “private” booklet is intended For the benefit of the Ragainė Church and is dedicated to a noble person. This occasional minor printed work, having a dedicator and a dedicatee, could not, by virtue of its generic and functional purpose, be abstractly anonymous. Thus it may be concluded that M. Mažvydas’s books tend toward anonymity. 2. THE SOURCES AND STRUCTURE OF THE PUBLICATION FORMA CHRIʃTIMA When examining the acrostic, it is important to establish a distinction between translated and “own,” “authorial” texts. The latter include not only the small insertions written by M. Mažvydas himself (often introduced to ensure the fluency of the translation) or his larger works, but also portions of texts by other persons (including, for example, biblical quotations) that were absent from the translation’s original. One of the first to express an opinion on the source used by M. Mažvydas was Jurgis Gerulis, who in 1922 pointed to a 1558 publication (VD16 P 4787): Kirchen Ordnung Wie es im Hertzogthumʙ Preuffen / beydes mit Lehr und Ceremonien / ʃampt andern / ʃo ʒu Förderung und Erhaltung des Predig=ampts / Chriʃtlicher Zucht / und guter Ordnung / von nöten / gehalten wird. Anderweit verʃehen / gemehret / und Publicieret. ANNO CHRISTI M. D. LXIII. 25. Nouembris. Der ander Theil dieʃer Kirchenordnung. Von den Ceremonien / und Kirchengebräuchen (Printed at Königsberg in Prussia by Johann Daubman. 1558) (Gerulis 1922: XIX). Vaclovas Biržiška later repeated J. Gerulis’s view (1960: 85). The established view changed only after Christianas S. Stangas published a concise article in the journal Baltistica, “On the Source of M. Mažvydas’s ‘Forma Chrikstima.’” In 1976, no longer having access to the printed sources studied in Königsberg, the Norwegian Balticist—drawing on comparative material systematically collected before the war—reached a firm conclusion: “The true source is not the German Kirchen Ordnung, which was never fully implemented, but a separate chapter on baptism in a publication that appeared in 1559 (the same year as ‘Forma Chrikstima’)” (Stang 1976: 7). The well-founded and absolutely unambiguous results of K. Stang’s research were, unfortunately, ignored by some scholars. Straipsniai / Articles 43 ILIJA LEMEŠKIN Guido Michelinis repeated the old erroneous attribution and accompanied it with a poor assumption: “The text found on pp. 95–128 [Forma Chrikštima – I. L.] was translated from German according to the 1558 Kirchen Ordnung (part 2, pp. 2a–10b). This is mainly a literal translation; the source is departed from especially at the beginning of pp. 118 and 119, where a publication that most likely disappeared during the Second World War was used (see Ch. Stang, ‘On the Source of M. Mažvydas’s “Formos Chrikštima”’, Baltistica XII(1), 1976, pp. 7–8)” (Michelini 2000: 157). It is regrettable that this occurred in a book intended to systematize the sources precisely, namely the 2000 facsimile publication “The Writings of Martynas Mažvydas and Their Sources.” Pietro Umberto Dini removed the unnecessary confusion in 2010 on the basis of a comparative textual analysis of the originals: “In fact, Mažvydas did not rely on the Kirchenordnung text at all—he translated Formą Chrikštymo from the German publication Form der Tauff (1559)”; “The true original of Mažvydas’s Formos Chrikštymo translation is not the German Kirchenordnung (1558), but a separate publication of its chapter on baptism, Form der Tauff, which appeared in 1559. Researchers of the sources of Mažvydas’s writings should take this into account. There is no basis for analyzing Mažvydas’s Formą Chrikštymo on the basis of the 1558 Kirchenordnung text” (Dini 2010: 76, 80). Thus, in preparing the book, M. Mažvydas relied on the publication (VD16 ZV 21274) Form der Tauff. Wie die in der Kirchenordnung des Hertzogthumbs Preuß=sen / und an=dern mehr / verfaßet. Gedruckt zu Königsberg / durch Johann Daubman / Anno Christi / 1559, but for the sake of precision it must be emphasized that, when considering the origin and composition of the publication Formą Chrikštima, one should speak not of a single source but of sources. The 1559 Form der Tauff is the principal, but not the only, text incorporated into the book prepared for printing by M. Mažvydas. Beginning on f. 19r is Giesmė duchawna / ape mufu S. Chrikfhta juguldita nůg D. Mart: Luthera. Chrift vnfer Herr zum Jordan kam. This is a very popular hymn by Martin Luther (EKG 146, EG 202), which, according to the available evidence, was first published as a broadsheet (in plano) in 1541 (it has not survived). Later, in 1543–1544, Josef Klug printed the hymn in Wittenberg (VD16 G 849; VD16 G 850): Geiftliche Lie der zu Wittemberg / Anno 1543. Warnung D. Mart. Luther. Viel falſcher Meiſter itzt Lieder tichten Sihe dich fur vnd lern ſie recht richten Wo Gott hin bawet ſein Kirch vnd ſein wort Da wil der Teufel ſein mit trug vnd motd (Printed at Wittenberg by Joseph Klug, in the year M. D. Liiij)¹. Later, in 1545, the hymn appeared in the collection of the Leipzig publisher Valentin Babst (VD16 G 851), regarded as the last authorial hymnal edition by M. Luther: Geyftliche Lieder. Mit einer newen vorheede / D. Mart. Luth. Warnung D. M. L. Viel falſcher Meiſter itzt Lieder tichten Sihe dich fur, vnd lern ſie recht richten ¹ VD16 G 850; online access: https://digital.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/werkansicht?PPN=PPN817716122&PHYSID=PHYS_0087&DMDID=DMDLOG_0030. 44 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chriſtima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas Where God builds his church and his word, there the Devil will be with deceit and murder. Leipzig (Printed in Leipzig by Valentin Babſt in Ritterstrasse. 1545). When examining the provenance of M. Mažvydas’s writings, G. Michelinis did not provide a source for this part of Forma Chriſtima. As a parallel, he cited the German text and melody, supposedly derived from the 1545 edition: “The German text and melody by M. Luther are presented according to the 1545 Geiſtliche Lieder, hymn no. 18 [= hymn no. 18 in the 1561 edition]; see also the 1561 Gſangbüchlein (part 2, pp. 15a–16a), the 1570 Kirchengeſanng (pp. 36a–37a), and the 1573 Kirchengeſenge (pp. 397b–398b). The text was reprinted in Philip Wackernagel’s anthology (vol. 3, pp. 25–26) and, with the melody, in his book Martin Luthers Geiſtliche Lieder, pp. 72–74. <...> A literal translation from M. Luther’s German text, with only the final stanza added. The melody corresponds to the German source” (Michelini 2000: 191). The last statement, together with the melody provided, introduced further confusion. It was not checked from which source G. Michelinis took the melody, but it does not correspond to the 1543–1544 or 1545 version. There is a difference in the fourth measure: 1543–1544 1545 1559 Michelini 2000: 192 Determining the specific source on which M. Mažvydas relied in 1559 is difficult because of the abundance of theoretically possible German printed sources (published between 1543 and 1559), on the one hand, and the lack of comparative material, on the other. The German text is characterized by its stability across different editions, while M. Mažvydas included in his book only one (the first) line of the German original (Chriſt vnſer Herr zum Jordan kam). Moreover, the translation published by M. Mažvydas has no punctuation marks that would help identify the source. Finally, the staves accompanying the text are of little help either (it would be useful if a music specialist compared them). It remains unclear why G. Michelinis, having indicated an incorrect melody, apparently gave preference to Valentin Babst’s 1545 hymnal. Since it cannot be demonstrated that M. Mažvydas had a specific Wittenberg, Leipzig, or other edition at hand, one must work with the oldest known (available) identical Straipsniai / Articles 45 ILJA LEMEŠKIN printed version of the hymn. For this reason, alongside M. Mažvydas’s translation, the hymn is presented here according to J. Klug’s 1544 edition, which V. Babst also followed consistently in 1545: Geiftliche Lieder zu Wittemberg. Wittenberg: Josef Klug, 1544. Forma Chriſktima. Königsberg: Jonas Daubmanas, 1559. 42[r] A Spiritual Hymn / On our holy Baptism / In which it is briefly summarized / What it is? Who instituted it? What benefit it brings? etc. Dr. Mart. Luther. S ij Chriſt= [19r] Gieſme ducha= wna / ape muſu S. Chrik= chta fuguldita nūg D. Mart: Luthera. Chrift vnſer Herr zum Jordan kam. [natos] CHriftus Jordanop ateiha: Priėme chrikſchta nūg Jana: [natos] Kaip io Tewas noreiha: Pildidams ſawa vreda: C iij Te [42v] [natos] Christ our Lord came to the Jordan, From St. John the Baptism [natos] according to his Father’s will, to fulfill his work and office. [natos] There he wanted to institute for us a bath, To wa=sh us from sins, And to drown us in the bitter death [natos] Through his= [19v] [notes] He strengthens baptism for us: [notes] for the remission of sins: [notes] and the drowning of death [notes] through his blood and wounds: Giving 46 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chriſtima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas Geiſtliche Lieder zu Wittemberg. Wittenberg: Joſef Klug, 1544. Forma Chriſtktima. Königsberg: Jonas Daubmanas, 1559. 43[r] [notes] his blood and wounds; It brought a new life. So listen and mark well What God himself calls baptism. And what a Christian should believe, To avoid the heretic host. God speaks and wills that the water be Yet not merely plain water. His holy Word is also present, With the rich Spirit immeasurably. He is here the Baptizer. F iiij Such [20r] [natos] Dudams mums nauihe giwata. Klauſik bei ſupralk nu koſznas Kū wadin Chriſta Diewas Ką tur tiketi iſmū wernas Jęng Kocerums bus iſchweng=tas Diews liep jeng wandu bus Chrikſtas Bet ne eft wiens wandū praſtas Prieg wandens eft ſzodis ſchwen=tas Jr ſchwents Duchs eft priedū=tas Tas Chriſktitogis eft tikras Tatai Diews ſchwiefiei iſchrei=ke Weidais ir ſzodžieis pamoke C iiij Diewas Straipsniai / Articles 47 ILJA LEMEŠKIN Spiritual songs at Wittenberg. Wittenberg: Joſef Klug, 1544. Forma Chriftkima. Königsberg: Jonas Daubmanas, 1559. [43v] [20v] Thus he made it clear to us, With images and words, The Father’s voice was plainly heard, There at the Jordan. He said: This is my dear Son, In whom I am well pleased. Him I commend to you, That you may hear Him all And follow His teaching. The Son of God himself also stands here In his tender humanity. The Holy Spirit descends, Disguised in the form of a dove. So that we should not doubt it When we are baptized, All three Persons have baptized, Thereby agreeing to dwell With us here on earth. His God the Father called out with his voice in the Jordan, He proclaimed: God the Father said, This is my beloved Son. He is greatly pleasing to me. I have given him to you, That you may obey him And fulfill his words. The Son of God himself was there, In the form of a human being. The Holy Spirit came, Clad in the form of a dove. Thus let us believe with strong faith, As we have now been baptized, That the Trinity has baptized us And here on earth, before us, Must always dwell. Apaſtalus Pons fiuntʒ fawa Mokinti liep wiffa ſwieta Jog 48 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chriſtima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas Geiftliche Lieder zu Wittemberg. Wittenberg: Joſef Klug, 1544. Forma Chriſtima. Königsberg: Jonas Daubmanas, 1559. 44[r] His disciple is called the Lord Christ; Go throughout the world to teach That it is lost in sins And should turn to repentance. Whoever believes and lets himself be baptized Shall thereby be saved; A newborn human being he is called, Who can no longer die But shall inherit the kingdom of heaven. Whoever does not believe this great grace Remains in his sins And is condemned to eternal death, Deep in the depths of hell. His own holiness avails nothing; All his deeds are lost. Original sin renders it worthless, In which he was born; He cannot help himself. S iij Thus [21r] For he is a sinner’s ransom; therefore let him do penance, Whoever receives baptism And shall obtain salvation, He will be new for eternal life, He who cannot die forever Shall receive God’s royal grace. Woe to him who does not believe: He will live forever in sin, He will see eternal death therein, There the fire of hell will burn him. His holiness will not save him, Nor will all his works help him. For original sin is born = from human works and life; A person cannot save himself at all. Our eyes see water Being poured upon the child = Straipsniai / Articles 49 ILJA LEMEŠKIN Finally, it would be necessary to work with one more, that is, a third source in sequence—the “own” texts that M. Mažvydas ingeniously harmonized with the agenda’s Form der Tauff (1559) and the translations of the hymn “Christ, unser Herr, zum Jordan kam.” These include the acrostic MARTINVS S MASWIDAS M, incorporated into M. Luther’s hymn (into its final sixth and seventh stanzas), and M. Mažvydas’s benediction, which extends the acrostic and M. Luther’s work (constituting an “excess” eighth stanza). At the beginning of the publication, we in turn identify other “excess,” that is, added texts by M. Mažvydas as the book’s author (compiler). These are two “epigraphs”², presented between the title page (f. 1r) and the translation of Form der Tauff ² From today’s perspective, the concept epigraph denotes a text entered at the beginning of a work or its parts, by which the author states the work’s main idea or theme. This latter view is not characteristic of M. Mažvydas’s books. In them, an epigraph is a short inscription that, at the beginning of the work, provides certain important information about the time of the work’s creation and about the author; it may be an invocation, acknowledgment, dedication, advertisement, and so on. 50 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chriḱſtima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas at the beginning (f. 2r). Here (f. 1v), the compiler of the publication provided two biblical quotations important to him (and to his publication), one of them in two forms of expression: Ephe. 4. || One Lord, one faith, one || Baptism, One God and Father || of all, who is above all, and through || all, and in us all. || Timothy. 4. || Pietas ad omnia utilis eſt. || Godliness is useful for all things= || ga eſt. || Thus, with regard to its source(s), the 1559 publication Forma Chriſtima is not a homogeneous printed monument. M. Mažvydas’s “own” texts, as compiler and author of the book, surround, as in the 1547 catechism, the translated sources. The book’s title page precisely copies the first and principal German source (i.e. VD16 ZV 21274): After the epigraphs selected for the 1559 publication, which in their position (f. 1v) and purpose correlate with the epigraph of the 1547 catechism, the translation of the agenda Form der Tauff runs from f. 2r to f. 18v. M. Mažvydas omitted the sentence LAVS DEO that concludes the German original. Expanding the publication, he additionally inserted another translated source—M. Luther’s hymn “Christ, unser Herr, zum Jordan kam,” which occupies ff. 19r–21v. At the end of the translated hymn, in the position at the end of the publication, other authorial elements were included: M. Mažvydas’s acrostic and benediction, which are semantically and functionally connected with the epigraphs at the beginning of the book. The “authorial” elements of the book, that is, those closely connected with M. Mažvydas’s person, form a ring composition. Particularly clear authorial traces are found in the final position, and this is natural. The extent of the paratextual parts at the end of the book was determined by the process of typesetting, respectively, by the limitations of the printing form. P. Skorina’s publications illustrate this well: the empty space remaining in the final gathering encouraged the inclusion of Straipsniai / Articles 51 ILJA LEMEŠKIN various decorative elements (not only narrative engravings), additional prayers, concluding words, invocations, and extensive colophons. In 1559, analysis of the publication’s structure reveals the same state of affairs. The book block consists of three gatherings. Their extent and the location where the sewing runs are indicated here: Quire Sheets Stitching location Quire extent A 1–8 4v–5r 4 | 4 B 9–16 12v–13r 4 | 4 C 17–21 19v–20r 3 | 3³ The text of the first and largest translated source (Form der Tauff) ended at the beginning of f. 18v, that is, on only the second leaf of the third quire. If a quire of the usual extent, that is, 4 | 4, had been made, three quarters of a sheet would have remained unused. Therefore, a smaller sheet of paper was used for the ending, while the auxiliary sources (M. Luther’s hymn and M. Mažvydas’s texts) partially “patched up” the remaining free space. 3. M. MAŽVYDO TEKSTAI M. LIUTERIO GIESMĖJE Whatever utilitarian (printing) considerations prompted the inclusion of M. Luther’s hymn in the 1559 publication, its selection was neither accidental nor unsuccessful. In terms of its content, the catechism hymn (on its nature, see Schilling 2019: 171–173) was perfectly suited to the agenda. Forma Chrikſtima is a detailed explanation of how baptismal rites are to be conducted according to church law. Essentially, it is an outline of the service (with precise instructions concerning what, when, and how is to be done), which a priest or a layperson forced to baptize an infant at home was to follow. The authoritative poetic work appended to the end of the publication (the last quire) likewise speaks “about our holy baptism”; in an engaging, easily comprehensible manner, it teaches what baptism is, how it originated, and how baptism works. Because of the first (principal) source, M. Mažvydas shortened the hymn’s title, since it duplicated the agenda’s content: ³ The last leaf of the quire was blank, that is, without text, and was therefore sometimes removed (see, for example, copy: shelfmark: Pol.6.II.4–5, Biblioteka Uniwersytecka w Toruniu). 52 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chriſtima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas Geiſtliche Lieder zu Wittemberg. Wittenberg: Joſef Klug, 1544. Forma Chriſktima. Königsberg: Jonas Daubmanas, 1559. A Spiritual Song / About our holy Baptism / In which it is briefly summarized / What it is? Who instituted it? What use it has? etc. D. Mart. Luther. Gieſme ducha= wna / ape muſu S. Chrik= chta fuguldita nũg D. Mart. Luthera. Formally, “a spiritual hymn” is not a constituent part of the baptismal rite. It was attached to the agenda so that priests would sing it and spread the truth about baptism among the faithful. M. Mažvydas’s 1559 translation is literal. Further in the article, the original divided into stanzas and graphically somewhat simplified (according to J. Klug’s edition) and the translation are presented in parallel; the texts entered by M. Mažvydas are distinguished in bold type: 1544 1559 1. Christ our Lord came to the Jordan according to his Father’s will / From St. John he received baptism to fulfill his work and office / There he wished to establish a bath / To wash us from sins / And drown bitter death / Through his own blood and wounds / It brought a new life. 1. Christ came to the Jordan: As his Father desired: He received baptism from John: Fulfilling his office: There he established baptism for us: For the washing away of sins: And the drowning of death With his blood and wounds: Giving us new life. 2. So hear and mark well / What God himself calls baptism. And what a Christian must believe To avoid the throngs of heretics. God speaks and wills that the water be Yet not merely plain water. His holy Word is also there / With the Spirit richly and without measure. He is here the Baptizer. 2. The catechism explains to us here What God calls baptism, What we must believe So that the heretics may be driven out. God says that in the water there is baptism, But it is not merely plain water; Along with the water is the holy Word, And the Holy Spirit is added to it—He is the true Baptizer. Straipsniai / Articles 53 ILJA LEMEŠKIN 1544 1559 3. He clearly demonstrated this to us / With images and words / The Father’s voice was plainly heard / There at the Jordan. He said: This is my dear Son / In whom I am well pleased. HIM I shall commend to you / That you hear HIM all / And follow his teaching. 3. God revealed this clearly, He taught through signs and words; God the Father cried aloud, At the Jordan he was heard. The Father speaks: this is my beloved Son, He is greatly pleasing to me. I entrust him to you, So that you may obey him And follow his words. 4. The Son of God himself also stands here / In his tender humanity. The Holy Spirit descends / Disguised in the form of a dove. So that we should not doubt it / When we are baptized / All three Persons baptize / In order, here on earth / To dwell with us. 4. The Son of God himself was there, Revealed in his human form. The Holy Spirit came down, Taking the form of a dove. Thus they strengthen true faith, When we have been baptized, For the Trinity baptizes us, To dwell with us forever. 5. His disciples the Lord Christ calls / Go into all the world to teach / That it is lost in sins / It should turn to repentance. Whoever believes and lets himself be baptized / Shall thereby be saved / He is called a newborn person / Who can no longer die / He shall inherit the kingdom of heaven. 5. The apostles he sent as his disciples, He commanded them to teach the whole world That it is lost because of sin; Therefore let it do penance. Whoever believes and accepts baptism Shall receive salvation, Shall become a new living person, Who cannot die forever, And shall receive God’s kingdom. 6. Whoever does not believe this great grace / Remains in his sins / And is condemned to eternal death / Deep in the depths of hell. No self-made holiness helps / All his deeds are lost / Original sin renders them nothing / In which he was born / He cannot help himself. 6. Woe to him who does not believe Eternally he will live in sin For he must suffer eternal death He must burn in hell’s fire His holiness cannot save him Nor can his will or deeds help him All inherited sin makes man’s deeds and life worthless To himself man can never be a savior. 54 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chriſt̄ima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas 1544 1559 7. The eye alone sees the water / As people pour water. Faith in the Spirit understands the power / Of the blood of Jesus Christ. And it is for him a red flood / Dyed with Christ’s blood / Which heals all harm / Inherited from Adam / And committed by ourselves. 7. Our eye sees water On the child being poured Man through the Spirit sees this Truly in Christ’s blood He has water that is red blood Divinely sprinkled with Christ’s blood Upon old wounds it brings healing The world which it receives from Adam Us inherited from the old one. 8. Let us give glory to God the Father And worship Jesus Christ, And praise the Holy Spirit, Let us give thanks to the one God, Who instituted baptism, For the washing away of sins And for eternal salvation, Given through Christ; To him be eternal glory. Amen. For comparison, a free translation of M. Luther’s hymn according to the new Lithuanian Lutheran hymnal is added (Krikščioniškos giesmės 2007: 311–312): 1. Christ came to the river Called Jordan, Because dear Christ desired That John should baptize him. Thus he left baptism for our cleansing From sins, And from destruction he dearly redeemed souls With his blood and wounds. 2. Therefore let us understand well What Holy Baptism means— Let us firmly believe in it And avoid the evil path. For Holy Baptism is water, Straipsniai / Articles 55 ILJA LEMEŠKIN Yet the water is not alone—the holy Word is already with it, the Holy Spirit, because God is our true Baptizer. 3. This God showed visibly, And his words resounded; He proclaimed from high heaven— And John heard him— When he said: “This is my Son, I love him dearly, I have appointed him for you To teach you lovingly— Receive his teaching.” 4. Together with the Father, in baptism, In all his holiness, The Holy Spirit also visited him In the form of a dove. Let us believe this in our hearts, Experience it in our souls, That the Trinity baptizes us, The Holy Spirit gives us new birth, Consecrating us to God. 5. [missing] 6. [missing] 7. The eye sees only water, Poured onto the infant, Faith—the salvation Won through holy blood. The water is not ordinary— It has been sanctified by blood; It truly washes away sins, Those begun by Adam, Existing in our hearts. 56 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chriḱtima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas 8. Let us praise God the Father And worship his dearest Son, And let us laud the Holy Spirit, Giving thanks most fervently; He gave us Holy Baptism, He washes away sins, Through him we all receive Salvation, eternal salvation, Glory to the dearest God! It is very interesting that the edition of the hymn supplied through the efforts of the consistory of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Lithuania removes almost a third of M. Luther’s text (omitting stanzas 5 and 6 of the original), while presenting M. Mažvydas as M. Luther, that is, including his 1559 benediction. Its connection with M. Mažvydas was once revealed by the acrostic, which the modern “version” of the hymn disregards. Therefore, only M. Luther is named as the author of the text. Unfortunately. A comparison of the texts from 1544 and 1559 shows that M. Mažvydas consistently followed the original. This applies not only to the accuracy of reproducing the content but also to the strophic structure. Each stanza of the German original and the Lithuanian translation consisted of nine lines. At the end of the hymn, two stanzas formed a scheme of 18 positions (letters) [9 + 9], which shaped the acrostic. Having decided to enter his first and last names in stanzas 6 and 7, M. Mažvydas had to solve a combinatorial problem. The Latin form used in 1547, MASVIDIVS, would have fit neatly into the final stanza, but the name MARTINVS proved too short. The latter would have required dismantling the strophic structure adopted from the German original, because unmotivated letters inserted between the first name and surname could not occur in the acrostic. The author chose another path—he used a shorter form of the surname and thus equalized the length of the first name and surname: In this way, two positions (letters) remained after the personal names, which, according to the conventions of the time, could already be systematically interpreted as an interlinear abbreviation: MARTĮNVS S MASWĮDAS M MARTĮNVS MASWĮDAS SM MARTĮNVS MASWĮDAS SignaMus “[we] Martynas Mažvydas bless.” Straipsniai / Articles 57 ILJA LEMEŠKIN In the book Lithuanica aliter, the abbreviation SM was compared with verb. significare (SM = SignificaMus – Cappelli 1928: 354) and semantically linked to the 1547 acrostic BI TP: Baccalaureus Iuris Titulum Posuit “the bachelor of laws placed the sign of the cross” (Lemeškin 2019: 364–365). Colleague Tomaš Hoskovec proposed an easier explanation (Hoskovec 2021: 127–128). The abbreviation SM is the pres. pl. 1. indic. form of verb. signare “to place the sign of the cross; to sign,” from which (from medieval ecclesiastical Latin) the Lithuanian žegnoti, Czech žehnati, Polish żegnać, German segnen, Old English segnian... are derived. The abbreviation, which corresponds to the predicate of the acrostic, is further developed by the verbal expression of the blesser, that is, a nine-line benediction presented as an additional eighth stanza. Thus, the structure of the acrostic is as follows: MARTĮNV̨S MASWJDAS S[ign­a]M[us]: [text of the benediction] “[the priest]⁴ Martynas Mažvydas blesses: To God the Father let us give glory, And let us worship Jesus Christ, And praise the Holy Spirit, Let us give thanks to the one God, Who instituted baptism, For the washing away of sins And for eternal salvation, Given through Christ; To him be eternal glory.” The modest author, seeking pious anonymity, behaves in the same way in the 1547 catechism and in the agenda Forma Chrikſtima. In both places, the main text or translations are surrounded by authorial texts serving the same purpose, arranged similarly semantically and grammatically. This is the strict, homeland-directed epigraph and the acrostic of the verse preface B[accalaureus]I[uris] MARTĮNV̨S MASWJDAS “bachelor of laws Martynas Mažvydas” at the beginning of the Catechism. At the end of the Catechism, in the place of a colophon, the four-line innovation Skaititaip contains a continuation of the authorial text, or the first acrostic (from the preface) BI TP: Baccalaureus Iuris Titulum Posuit “the bachelor of laws placed the sign of the cross.” In turn, the 1559 publication is opened by two eloquent epigraphs likewise directed toward Greater Lithuania and the reader (one of the epigraphs is presented in Latin and Lithuanian; it will be discussed separately in another ⁴ This information is not verbalized, but it is clear from the context, since not just anyone can bless or make the sign of the cross. 58 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chrik|tima (1559) from a formal perspective. The acrostic of the priest M. Mažvydas article⁵). The main text is closed by the acrostic MARTINVS MASWIDAS S[igna]M[us] “Martynas Mažvydas blesses,” with appropriate words of blessing. Thus, in the publications of 1547 and 1559, the same authorial handwriting can be observed: at the beginning of the books he addresses the reader and introduces himself; at the end of the books M. Mažvydas marks and blesses with the sign of the cross, and once, while making the sign of the cross, he does not forget to add a short prayer with an all-finalizing AMEN. 4. P. SKORINOS IR M. MAŽVYDO AKROSTICHAI P. Skorina and M. Mažvydas represent the same GDL literary tradition; both served—the one at a different time and for a different length of time—the Prussian Duke Albrecht. M. Mažvydas must have been well informed and well acquainted with the works of the pioneer of Lithuanian printing, in which some of the first acrostics in Lithuania also appeared. M. Mažvydas could (and must) potentially have taken them as his model; therefore, it is meaningful to compare the Ruthenian and Lithuanian acrostics and specify their common features. The alphabetical acrostics entered in the Book of Lamentations (КНИЖКА РЕКОМАЯ ПЛАЧЬ ЄРЕМІИНЪ (ОСТАРОМЪ МѢСТЕ ПРАЖСКОМЪ 1519)) and in the akathist to Sts. Peter and Paul (АКАФІСТЪ СВЕТОМУ ВЕРХОВНОМУ АПОСТОЛУ ПЕТРУ И ПАВЛУ И ВСЕМ АПОСТОЛОМЪ) will be left aside, since they are different. Only name acrostics have been selected for comparison. There are two such acrostics in the “Akathist Collection,” which forms part of the Little Travel Book: ПИСАЛ ДОКТОР СКОРИНИЧ ФРАНЦИСКЪС “Doctor Skorinaitis Franciscus wrote” (Akathist to St. John the Baptist – АКАФІСТЪ ЧЕСПОМУ И ВЗЕХВАЛАНОМУ ПРОРОКУ ПРЕДТЕЧИ И КРЕСТИТЕЛЮ ГОСПОДЫНЮ ИОАННУ ПОЕМ) ir ДЕЛАЛ ДОКТОР СКОРИНИЧ ФРАНЦИСКОС “Doctor Skorinaitis Franciscus made” (Akathist to the Most Sweet Name of Jesus – ПОЧИНАЄТСЯ АКАФІСТЪ ПРЕСЛАДКОМУ ІМЕНІ ГДА НАШЕГО ІСА ХРТА ГЛАГОЛЕМЫ ПОСЬЦА ДНИ). ⁵ The article is published in volume 84 of „Knygotyra“, 2025. Straipsniai / Articles 59 ILJA LEMEŠKIN The first words писа “wrote” and дела “made” correspond to the five introductory stanzas of the akathists. The following word groups δωκτορ скоринин францискос and δωκτωρ скоринин францискос comprise the 24 positions customary for an akathist, according to the number of letters in the Greek alphabet. In 1559, M. Mažvydas had to solve the same problems that had concerned P. Skorina much earlier. Because of limitations of form (space), both authors had to select particular forms of particular words. M. Mažvydas was constrained by 18 lines in two stanzas, P. Skorina by 24 positions. When it became necessary to shorten the surname, M. Mažvydas used the shorter Lithuanian form (MASWIDAS in place of MASVIDIVS) (there is no need to perceive here an outburst of Lithuanian consciousness). P. Skorina had to do the opposite—“stretch” his personal names so that, together with the academic title (written out in full as δωκτορ), they would form a chain of 24 letters. Therefore, the publisher Latinizes his first name (ФРАНЦИСКОС), and also chooses a longer Russian patronymic form (скоринин), which stylistically does not fit the Latin name. Under normal circumstances, that is, without the constraints imposed by the acrostics’ extent, P. Skorina and M. Mažvydas would have chosen other, more suitable forms customary in usage and established by convention. M. Mažvydas had the opportunity to expand the acrostic freely in 1547, at the beginning of the verse preface, where, having begun the acrostic with the first letter of the text, he used the customary and mutually well-matched abbreviation of the academic degree (BI) and Latin forms of the personal names (MARTĮNVS MASVĮDVＳ). In the akathists and in the agenda Forma Chrikftima, P. Skorina and M. Mažvydas had to improvise and accept a stylistic dissonance. This was precisely the impression created by the Ruthenian–Latin and Latin–Lithuanian language mixture, but the reader knew that this was an understandable and tolerable tribute to combinatorial poetics. P. Skorina’s and M. Mažvydas’s combinatorial works are close in terms of syntax. This is not a banal anthroponymic label (more widespread) in which the nominative or genitive form of a proper noun indicated a particular person and the ownership of the text (work). The first name and surname together with the academic degree (or indication of social status) function as the subject, which has a predicate. The latter consists of verbs that occupy a secondary, auxiliary position within the acrostics. M. Mažvydas expresses this sentence constituent by abbreviations attached to the forms of his names; P. Skorina does so in additional introductory stanzas: писал – δωκτορ скоринин францискос: … “Doctor Skorinaitis Franciscus wrote: …” делал – δωκτορ скоринин францискос: … “Doctor Skorinaitis Franciscus made: …” 60 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chrikſtima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas BI MARTJNVVS MASVJDIVS – BI [M. Masvidius] TP “bachelor of laws M. Mažvydas” “bachelor of laws placed the sign of the cross” MARTJNVVS MASWJDAS SM: … “[priest] Martynas Mažvydas blesses: …” The similarity is further strengthened by the fact that at the end of the publication, in place of the complement of the grammatical center of the acrostic, “direct speech” is presented, that is, the authors’ own prayer. In P. Skorina’s akathists it occupies much more space than in M. Mažvydas’s, who, constrained by the strophic structure of M. Luther’s hymn, had to fit into nine lines. Compare, for example, the interaction between the acrostic and the prayer in P. Skorina’s Akathist to the Most Sweet Name of Jesus: ДЕЛАЛ ДОКТОРЪ СКОРИНИНЪ СКОРИНИНЪ ФРАНЦИСКОС: МОЛИТВА: ~ ВЛАДЫКО ГДИ ІСЕ ХОТЕ ЦАРЮ СОТВОРИТЕЛЮ И БОЖЕ НАШЪ, ИМА ТВОЕ СВЯТОЕ ПРИЗЫВАЕМЪ, И ТЕБЕ СА МОЛИМЪ ІСЕ СЫНУ ПРЕЧИСТОЕ ДЕВИЦЫ МАРІЕ, ІСЕ ЕДИНОЕ И ПРЕВЕЧНОЕ СЛОВО БОГА ОТЦА. ІСЕ СОВОКУПЛЕНІЕ И ЛЮБОВЬ СВЯТАГО ДУХА. ІСЕ СОЗДАТЕЛЮ АНГЕЛЬСКАГО ЕСТЕСТВА. ІСЕ СПАСИТЕЛЮ РОДУ ЧЕЛОВѢЧЕСКАГО. ІСЕ ПРО- ГОНІТЕЛЮ БЕСОВСТВА ВСЯКОГО. ІСЕ ПОМИЛУЙ МА ПО ВЕЛИЦѢ МИЛОСТИ ТВОЕЙ. ІСЕ ОЧИСТИ БЕЗЗАКОНІЕ МОЕ ПОПРЕМОЖЕНІЕВЪ МЪДРОСТЬ ТВОИХЪ. ІСЕ ОТПУСТИ ВСА ГРЕХИ МОЯ. ІСЕ ПРИИМИ О МЕНЕ МОЛИТВЫ СІЕ. О ПРЕСЛАВНЫЙ ІСЕ. О ПРЕПОДОБНЫЙ ІСЕ. О ПРѢТИХІИ ІСЕ, ТЕБЕ СЛАВУ ВОЗСЫЛАЕМЪ СО ОТЦЕМЪ И ПРЕСВЯТЫМЪ ДУХОМЪ, ВО ВѢКИ ВѢКОМЪ АМИНЬ: ~ The predicates of the compared acrostics are not semantically entirely identical (“wrote / made” – “blesses”), but this is determined by the social difference between the writers. P. Skorina was a highly educated layman, but not a priest. Gifted in literary work, he could write the texts of akathists and other prayers, but he could not bless people with these prayers in his own name. The content of M. Luther’s hymn is also close to P. Skorina’s akathists. Both here and there, the subject is John the Baptist, Jesus’ baptism in the Jordan, and the importance of baptism. The differences concern the genre of the works: P. Skorina worked with the Byzantine form of the akathist; M. Mažvydas improvised with a popular German hymn of a catechetical nature. Finally, attention should be drawn to the publishing dimension. Forma Chrikſtima and the “Akathist Collection” are publications whose title pages conceal information about their compilers (publishers). Both books also lack a colophon finalizing the publication. This missing information had to be found, and an advanced sixteenth-century reader was prepared to do so. The acrostic included at the end of the “Akathist Collection” is of a publishing nature. It identifies the person who ДЕЛАЛ “made” the book. For another hymn, included among the other Strai­psniai / Articles 61 ILJA LEMEŠKIN akathists in the middle of the book, the lexeme писан “wrote” was chosen, identifying the author of this and only this particular sung text. In the position at the end of the book, the acrostic fulfilled and continues to fulfill the function of the publication’s colophon. For this reason, so that it would be noticed and visible, it alone was set using markedly distinctive engraved initials (Lemeškin 2023: 367–368). In the 1559 publication, M. Mažvydas acted similarly: with the acrostic accompanying the hymn about Jesus’ baptism, he revealed at the end (as if it were in a colophon) his contribution to preparing this book. His text, divided among the nine-line stanzas at the end of the book (hymn), was likewise sought and found by practiced readers. Thus, there are many common features between the acrostics of P. Skorina and M. Mažvydas, written (because of spatial constraints) in a mixed and stylistically incompatible language. The authors of the first Ruthenian and Lithuanian books addressed the reader in bipartite sentences: “Doctor Skorinaitis Franciscus made,” “[priest] Martynas Mažvydas blesses.” After the grammatical center, the authors added a complement, that is, their own prayers. This method of creating an acrostic is not common, since when marking authorship it was enough to give the first name and surname. Comparison of the acrostics reveals a strong typological and structural similarity of functions, which encourages the view that M. Mažvydas knew and drew on the works of the pioneer of GDL printing. Analysis of the 1559 publication is useful for studying the acrostics of 1547. Their comparative study reveals the importance of abbreviations. M. Mažvydas uses the latter both at the beginning of the catechism to indicate the academic title BI (like P. Skorina, as well as other educated persons), and in the invocation “Skaititapą” at the end of the book: BI TP. The abbreviations used in 1547 and 1559 are synonymous in meaning (T[itulų] P[losuit], “placed the sign of the cross”—S[igna] M[us], “blesses”), but they were chosen with regard to the writer’s social status: as a student of the Königsberg Academy who had not yet attained a degree in theology, M. Mažvydas indicates an academic title received elsewhere and, upon completing the work, places the sign of the cross. In 1559, already the senior priest of the Ragainė district, he blesses people and blesses them with a separate prayer. The first acrostic is “student,” the second “priest.” In 1559, M. Mažvydas’s acrostic is closely intertwined with the second translated source of Forma Chrikštima. Without compromising the accuracy of the translation, the author masterfully wove his text into M. Luther’s hymn. The acrostic’s continuation—the benediction forming an additional eighth stanza—corresponded so well to the content of the translated hymn that over time it became an inseparable component of M. Luther’s work. Two translated sources (in 1559, “Form der Tauff”; M. Luther’s hymn “Christ, unser Herr, zum Jordan kam”) form the foundation of the 1559 publication, but M. Mažvydas’s authorial texts deserve exceptional attention from specialists in Baltic studies. 62 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chrikʃtima (1559) from a formal perspective. The acrostic of the priest M. Mažvydas Besides the acrostic and benediction discussed in this article, the epigraphs of M. Mažvydas’s book await separate study. LITERATŪRA Biržiška Vaclovas 1960: Aleksandrynas: senųjų lietuvių rašytojų, rašiusių prieš 1865 m., biografijos, bibliografijos ir biobibliografijos 1: XVI–XVII amžiai, Čikaga: JAV LB Kultūros Fondas. Cappelli Adriano 1928: Lexicon abbreviaturarum / Wörterbuch lateinischer und italienischer Abkürzungen, Leipzig: Weber. Dini Pietro U. 2010: Martyno Mažvydo Formos Chrikštymo (1559) vertimo originalas – Form der Tauff (1559). – Archivum lithuanicum 12, 71–82. Gerulis Jurgis 1922: Mažvydas. Seniausieji lietuvių kalbos paminklai iki 1570 metams, Kaunas: Švietimo ministerijos leidinys. Hoskovec Tomáš 2021: Lithuanica aliter: visuomeninės filologijos pritaikymas lituanistikoje. – Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 85, 117–140. Koženiauskienė Regina 1990: XVI–XVIII amžiaus prakalbos ir dedikacijos, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1990. Krikščioniškos giesmės 2007: Krikščioniškos giesmės, sud. L. Fetingis, Vilnius: Lietuvos Biblijos Draugija. Lemeškin Ilja 2023: Проблемы изучения Малой подорожной книжки. Полемический экскурс [Problemy izučénija Maloj podorožnoj knižki. Polemičeskij ékskurs]. – Knygotyra 80, 343–385. Lemeškin Ilja 2019: Lithuanica aliter, ser. Billėmai bhe ersinnimai, 2, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Michelini Guido 2000: Martyno Mažvydo raštai ir jų šaltiniai, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. Stang Christian S. 1976: Dėl M. Mažvydo ‘Formos Chrikstima’ šaltinio. – Baltistica 12(1), 7–8. Schilling Johannes 2019: Erläuterungen. – Martin Luther. Geistliche Lieder, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt. Straipsniai / Articles 63 ILJA LEMEŠKIN Forma Chrikštima (1559) from a formal perspective. Acrostic by priest M. Mažvydas SUMMARY In publishing the first Lithuanian books (according to the sovereign’s will and the church’s order), M. Mažvydas followed the medieval concept of authorship. Because the name of the book’s creator is not equal to the name of the Creator, God (M. Mažvydas says this in the preface to the collection of hymns), the author avoided becoming famous among people. This led to the anonymity of the catechism of 1547 and the agenda of 1559, and to the effort to reveal their authorship utilizing sophisticated indirect expressions that not everyone could identify. The Form of Baptism, published in 1559, provides a translation of the German original, the 1559 Form der Tauff (VD16 ZV 21274), into Lithuanian. This source can be considered the main one. In addition to this, the publication included Luther’s hymn Christ, unser Herr, zum Jordan kam. These translated sources are surrounded by texts specially selected and included by the publisher. At the beginning of the book, M. Mažvydas puts two invocations to the readers. The acrostic MARTJNV̄S MASWJDAS M was incorporated into Luther’s hymn (in its last 6 and 7 stanzas). This acrostic and Luther’s work were developed by the prayer of M. Mažvydas (forming the “superfluous” 8th stanza). The structure of the 1559 acrostic of M. Mažvydas can be illustrated as follows: MARTJNV̄S MASWJDAS S[ignal]M[us]: [prayer text] [Priest] Martynas Mažvydas blesses: Diewui Tewui ſchlowe dûkem / Jr Jheſu Chriſtu garbin̄kem / Bei Dwaffe ſchwenta laup̄inkem / Wienam Dievui dekāwokem / Kurs iſtates eſt Chriſch̄tima / Ant ghreku aptſiḡtinima / Bei amſzina iſchganima / Nůg Chriſtaus apſudeta / Jem buk amſziwa garba. The abbreviation SM is pres. pl. 1. indic. form of the verb signare “to make the sign of the cross”, from which (from Church Latin) we derive the Lithuanian žegnoti, the Czech žehnati, the Polish zegnać, the German segnen, the English segnian… The Catechism of 1547 was similarly composed. It begins with a stern homeland-oriented invocation AD MAGNVM DVCATVM LITVANIAE and the acrostic B[accalaureus] I[uris] MARTJNV̄S MASWJDAS “the bachelor of rights Martynas Mažvydas”. At the end of the catechism, in the colophon, in the four-line invocation Skaititiap, there is a continuation of the author’s text in BI TP: Baccalaureus Iuris Titulum Posuit “the bachelor of righteousness has put on the sign of the cross”. A comparison between the acrostics of Scorina and Mažvydas shows that they are written in a mixed and stylistically inconsistent language. There are many common 64 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XCI Forma Chrikštima (1559) formaliuoju požiūriu. Kunigo M. Mažvydo akrostichas features between them. The authors of the first Ruthenian and Lithuanian books addressed the reader in two-member sentences: “Doctor Francis Skorina’s son did”, and “[priest] Martynas Mažvydas blesses”. After the grammatical centre, the authors have added their prayers. This is not a common way of creating acrostics. The juxtaposition of the acrostics reveals a high degree of typological and structural-functional similarity, which suggests that Mažvydas was familiar with the works of his predecessor in printing. Įteikta 2024 m. rugsėjo 6 d. ILIJA LEMEŠKIN Lietuvių kalbos institutas Petro Vile išio g. 5, LT–10308 Vilnius, Lietuva ilija.lemeš[email protected] Straipsniai / Articles 65