Are Ѧ and Ѫ ſtill being uſed as naſaliſed vowels?
What language might this be?
- Thread starter LVXORD
- Start date
I'm not sure how old you're imagining it to be; I'd put it at late 19th century at the earliest. I don't see anything curious about a Greek Orthodox icon, whatever period it's from, appearing in Italy some time during the 20th century.
Did anyone actually make that observation?
In Old Russian Ѧ and Ѫ lost their nasal quality in the 10th century and began to represent certain front vowel phonemes, which later merged with other phonemes.
Yes, that is underſtood, but I had not meant to aſk about the evolution of the Ruſſian language as such. Perhaps I ſhould have put the queſtion another way: Should the language of this icon be ſeen as that of Cyril and Methodius, or as that of Елизаветинская Библия?
Well, if you want to tell the variety (izvod) probably you should consider e.g. morphology. However, my guess is that this fragment would be the same in all varieties, so basically you can attribute the language as you like. Another option would be to consider the palaegraphy. For example, in a standard Church Slavonic text you expect to encounter diacritics in virtually every word, while in the oldest manuscripts there is nearly no diacritics.
As for pronunciation, you hardly expect natives to pronounce nasal vowels absent from their vernacular. Modern reciting standard of the Orthodox Church do not have nasals. However, it is most likely that the idea of the nasal sound is still existed even in the 14th century (though it's had to say whether it was in the current use), as a grammar text describes the sound of Ѫ as "гласъ гугнивъ и произволенъ" whatever that means (at the same time Ѧ is described as "гласъ внятеленъ", which does not directly suppose nasality).
I don't know how accurately the authentic pronunciation of Cyril and Methodius' time can be reconstructed.
As for pronunciation, you hardly expect natives to pronounce nasal vowels absent from their vernacular. Modern reciting standard of the Orthodox Church do not have nasals. However, it is most likely that the idea of the nasal sound is still existed even in the 14th century (though it's had to say whether it was in the current use), as a grammar text describes the sound of Ѫ as "гласъ гугнивъ и произволенъ" whatever that means (at the same time Ѧ is described as "гласъ внятеленъ", which does not directly suppose nasality).
I don't know how accurately the authentic pronunciation of Cyril and Methodius' time can be reconstructed.
I apologize for not responding to you sooner, Aurifex, but I simply have not visited Latin Discussion for some time.
You noted my statement “As for the observation that the Orthodox Church had a great influence on the Roman Catholic Church, that is something I had never heard” and you asked “Did anyone actually make that observation?” I was referring to your statement on April 22, 2014, that “Not only does Orthodoxy have deep roots in Italy; it has also undoubtedly influenced the faith of a significant number of Italians.”
I would be very glad to hear examples of any such influence. I am aware of the influence of the Western Church on Russian Orthodoxy, particularly through the reforms of the Patriarch Nikon, including the infamous change from the two-fingered Sign of the Cross to the three-fingered Sign of the Cross. These reforms were very significant in the history of the Russian Orthodox Church, as they led to the Old Believers splitting off from the rest of the church, with the two-fingered Sign of the Cross as the symbol of their resistence. However, I have never heard of any reciprocal influence by any of the Eastern Orthodox churches on Roman Catholicism.
You noted my statement “In passing I agree that it is curious that an icon with an inscription in OCS would have made its way to southern Italy, as this one apparently did. Even icons with Greek inscriptions would seem to me to be more likely to have been obtained as war booty than by trade, as so many of the monuments in Venice were.” You commented “I’m not sure how old you’re imagining it to be. I’d put it at the late 19th century at the earliest. I don’t see anything curious about a Greek Orthodox icon, whatever period it’s from, appearing in Italy sometime during the 20th century.”
I agree that the icon, in spite of its archaic style, probably does not go back farther than the 1800s. It was common for icons to be purposely painted in traditional styles, even when more modern styles had come into vogue. The icon is of a type called in Russian “Вседержитеь” and is usually called “Pantokrator” (= “Ruler of Everything”) in English. It is a standard type of icon—indeed, one of Nikon’s reforms was to limit the subjects that could be depicted on icons, even to sending bully-boys through peoples’ houses to take out any icons not complying with Nikon’s standards and burn them in the town square. The Pantokrator shows Jesus from the waist up, his right hand raised in blessing, his left hand holding a book open to Matthew 11, verse 28. Judging simply by the apparent condition of the icon, I would agree that this icon probably is no older than the 1800s. However, I think that it should be pointed out that icon painting was not static and that the choice of an icon in the style like this one, which would have been archaic anytime after the 1700s, would have been an intentional decision, inasmuch as more “modern” styles, with greater realism and more sophisticated artistic elements, were available. I wanted to attach some images of icons of the Pantokrator from various ages to this message, but I cannot figure out how to do it. My knowledge of computers is exceedingly small to begin with, and I am convinced that they are changing the procedures all the time.
That said, I still find it curious that a Russian Orthodox icon should end up in private possession in southern Italy.
By the way, someone asked about the nasals in Russian and was told that they disappeared long ago. It is my understanding that now among the Slavic languages nasals exist only in Polish, but even they are new—which is to say, they are not a continuation of the old nasals, which died out, but are rather a more recent development, and often in different places than the nasals that were in OCS.
You noted my statement “As for the observation that the Orthodox Church had a great influence on the Roman Catholic Church, that is something I had never heard” and you asked “Did anyone actually make that observation?” I was referring to your statement on April 22, 2014, that “Not only does Orthodoxy have deep roots in Italy; it has also undoubtedly influenced the faith of a significant number of Italians.”
I would be very glad to hear examples of any such influence. I am aware of the influence of the Western Church on Russian Orthodoxy, particularly through the reforms of the Patriarch Nikon, including the infamous change from the two-fingered Sign of the Cross to the three-fingered Sign of the Cross. These reforms were very significant in the history of the Russian Orthodox Church, as they led to the Old Believers splitting off from the rest of the church, with the two-fingered Sign of the Cross as the symbol of their resistence. However, I have never heard of any reciprocal influence by any of the Eastern Orthodox churches on Roman Catholicism.
You noted my statement “In passing I agree that it is curious that an icon with an inscription in OCS would have made its way to southern Italy, as this one apparently did. Even icons with Greek inscriptions would seem to me to be more likely to have been obtained as war booty than by trade, as so many of the monuments in Venice were.” You commented “I’m not sure how old you’re imagining it to be. I’d put it at the late 19th century at the earliest. I don’t see anything curious about a Greek Orthodox icon, whatever period it’s from, appearing in Italy sometime during the 20th century.”
I agree that the icon, in spite of its archaic style, probably does not go back farther than the 1800s. It was common for icons to be purposely painted in traditional styles, even when more modern styles had come into vogue. The icon is of a type called in Russian “Вседержитеь” and is usually called “Pantokrator” (= “Ruler of Everything”) in English. It is a standard type of icon—indeed, one of Nikon’s reforms was to limit the subjects that could be depicted on icons, even to sending bully-boys through peoples’ houses to take out any icons not complying with Nikon’s standards and burn them in the town square. The Pantokrator shows Jesus from the waist up, his right hand raised in blessing, his left hand holding a book open to Matthew 11, verse 28. Judging simply by the apparent condition of the icon, I would agree that this icon probably is no older than the 1800s. However, I think that it should be pointed out that icon painting was not static and that the choice of an icon in the style like this one, which would have been archaic anytime after the 1700s, would have been an intentional decision, inasmuch as more “modern” styles, with greater realism and more sophisticated artistic elements, were available. I wanted to attach some images of icons of the Pantokrator from various ages to this message, but I cannot figure out how to do it. My knowledge of computers is exceedingly small to begin with, and I am convinced that they are changing the procedures all the time.
That said, I still find it curious that a Russian Orthodox icon should end up in private possession in southern Italy.
By the way, someone asked about the nasals in Russian and was told that they disappeared long ago. It is my understanding that now among the Slavic languages nasals exist only in Polish, but even they are new—which is to say, they are not a continuation of the old nasals, which died out, but are rather a more recent development, and often in different places than the nasals that were in OCS.
Next to the button "post reply", there is "upload a file". You click it and then normally you will immediately be able to browse your files and upload any image you have on your computer by just double-clicking it.
You've again misunderstood my remarks. I was saying nothing about influences at Church level, and especially not about influences such as might lead to reforms or divisions in the Church as a whole or even at a local level. I was referring to the inevitable influences that contact or even just passing acquaintance with another faith has on the beliefs of individuals of a different faith.
I personally know several people from different backgrounds and different countries who were raised as Catholics and yet grew up either to embrace aspects of Orthodoxy and incorporate these into their own faith, or else converted wholeheartedly to Orthodoxy later in life. In all cases these people's faith was influenced chiefly not by things going on at official levels, but rather by their own individual experiences of Catholicism and Orthodoxy and their individual responses to those experiences. Is it not reasonable to suppose that these sorts of experiences have the potential to happen anywhere where there is evidence of different faiths coming into contact with one another?
As for your continuing to find it curious "that a Russian Orthodox icon should end up in private possession in southern Italy", I can only assume that you have scant awareness of the extent to which artefacts of all kinds travel and always have travelled to far flung corners of the world. If a Maori or Australian Aboriginal artefact were found to have arrived in Italy during the 15th century, then, yes, I would find it curious, but the fact that a Russian Orthodox icon made the relatively short journey to Italy probably in the early part of the 20th century at the earliest is so unremarkable it's hardly worth a second thought. This is assuming, of course, that the icon was not painted in Italy in the first place, which is not beyond the bounds of possibility.
The former, at leaſt, would certainly apply to me.
Thank you very much, Pacis Puella, for the instructions on how to attach pictures to a message! As you can see, I was able to put the icon pictures into this message.
Pantokrator 12 is a Byzantine icon from the 6th century. It is from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. Pantokrator 82 is a 19th century Russian icon in an "evolved" style. While not painted by a great artist, it has the realistic shading, body proportions, and folds in the garments that started in Russian art after Peter the Great opened his "window to the West" and Russian artists took up European influences. By contract, Pantokrator 87 is also a Russian icon from the 19th century, but was intentionally painted in the traditional style of the 16th century. The hands are disproportionally small, the highlights and shadows on the face are a stereotype, and the folds of the garments are stylized.
Thank you, Aurifex, for the explanation of your remarks. I certainly would not disagree with the proposition that individuals may find that aspects of the religion they were brought up in are not as agreeable as the principles of another religion.
The idea that a family in southern Italy would have a Russian Orthodox icon in their home as the result of a philosophical affinity with the Russian Orthodox religion still seems pretty tenuous to me. Perhaps LUXFORD can tell us something about his family's history that explains it.
Pantokrator 12 is a Byzantine icon from the 6th century. It is from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. Pantokrator 82 is a 19th century Russian icon in an "evolved" style. While not painted by a great artist, it has the realistic shading, body proportions, and folds in the garments that started in Russian art after Peter the Great opened his "window to the West" and Russian artists took up European influences. By contract, Pantokrator 87 is also a Russian icon from the 19th century, but was intentionally painted in the traditional style of the 16th century. The hands are disproportionally small, the highlights and shadows on the face are a stereotype, and the folds of the garments are stylized.
Thank you, Aurifex, for the explanation of your remarks. I certainly would not disagree with the proposition that individuals may find that aspects of the religion they were brought up in are not as agreeable as the principles of another religion.
The idea that a family in southern Italy would have a Russian Orthodox icon in their home as the result of a philosophical affinity with the Russian Orthodox religion still seems pretty tenuous to me. Perhaps LUXFORD can tell us something about his family's history that explains it.
Attachments
It's not quite Southern Italy. This part of family comes from Central Italy but emigrated to Australia in 1950s like a lot of people did. Personally, I have not clue why there would be anything connected to the Russian Orthodox church in my grandmother's house (as you probably figured out, she is a Catholic).
I'd have to ask her.
I'd have to ask her.