St. Tikhon’s University Review . Series III: Philology

The paper attempts to interpret the poem «Metel’» (‘Snowstorm’) by B. Pasternak on the ground of the immanent analysis of the poetic world. Special attention is paid to the image of the herald as a dynamic centre of the poem. The technique of the analysis, conditioned by structural features of the text, establishes a correlation between the dynamics of the form and dynamics of the content, with the following comprehension of the semantic tension emerging within this correlation. The paper therefore establishes horizontal and vertical axes of the poem. The factual basis of the interpretation is constituted by the predicativity of the poetic world, which is taken as the invariant and in which the unmade statement of the character about the posad (‘trading quarter outside the city walls’) plays the plot-forming role. Proceeding from the inference about the bifurcating space, the paper deals with the image of the window as a boundary between the worlds and establishes a special quality of the herald, namely his ability to freely transcend this boundary. This quality makes possible the interaction between the herald and the lyrical hero, the clue to which, according to the author of the paper, is the image of the mysterious her, who has sent the herald. The author of the paper makes assumptions about the nature of the «female» image proceeding from characteristic features of the herald-leaf, its colour and metaphoric size («whiter than linen») and making a case for the openness of the image, which is represented in the poem only by a pronoun. In the interpretation of the finale of the poem, an emphasis is placed on the presence of an optimistic tendency in the outcome of the situation with the hero, who has «gone astray». This assumption is made on the basis of the interrelationship between the images of the hero and the herald. This interrelationship allows us to believe that in search of the addressee of the unnamed message, both the hero and the herald will somehow or other reach their goal.

immanent analysis, poetic world, invariant, vertical axis, dynamics of form, horizontal axis, dynamics of content.

1. Skljarov O. N. 2016 “V kraju «dushegubov»: drama prostranstva v «Meteli» B. Pasternaka“ (In Land of “Murderers”: Drama of Space in “Snowstorm” of B. Pasternak”), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija Sh: Filologija, 2016, vol. 1/46, pp. 24–36.
2. Smirnov I. P. B. 1983 “Pasternak. Metel'” (Pasternak. Snowstorm), in Fridlender G. M. (ed.) Pojeticheskij stroj russkoj liriki, Leningrad, 1973, pp. 236—253.
3. Sokolov M. N. 1988 “Okno” (Window), in Tokarev S. A. (ed.) Mify narodov mira, vol. 2, Moscow, 1988.

Vasil'eva Natal'ia

The paper deals with literary subtexts of the poem Метель (‘Snowstorm’) by Boris Pasternak. It puts forward a hypothesis that among these subtexts there are two narratives from the Tale of Bygone Years. In the collection Поверх барьеров: Стихи разных лет (1929), the Snowstorm was published untitled as the first poem in a diptych to which the title Snowstorm went over. The second poem came to be Все в крестиках двери, как в Варфоломееву... The two poems are drawn together not only by the motif of snowstorm and snowfall but also by the motif of conspiracy and massacre in the city. What is more, a concrete historical event is directly mentioned, namely St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre. There is conclusive evidence that in the first poem of the diptych a similar event, i.e. a perfidious crime, is also encrypted. However, taking into account the Old Russian colour of the style of the Snowstorm with its посад, ворожея, шлея, this event may go back to the distant Russian past and may be the blinding of Vasil’ko Rostislavich, Prince of Terebovl’, by his relatives Davyd Igorevich, Prince of Volyn’, and the Kievan ruler Sviatopolk Iziaslavich. This event was described in the so-called Story of the blinding of Vasil’ko of Terebovl’, which is included in the Tale of Bygone Years under the year 6605/1097. The coinciding points of the poem and the Tale are as follows: 1) The victim Prince is being brought in a cart (узложиша и на кола), while the Snowstorm mentions breeching (part of horse harness); 2) Vasil’ko regains consciousness after crossing Zdvizhensky bridge, while Pasternak’s poem mentions Замостье (‘area beyond the bridge’); 3) It seems to the priest’s wife that Vasil’ko is dead, and, in fact, before he drinks some water, Vasil’ko seems to be really dead (and only afterwards въступи во нь душа, i.e. the soul returned to his body). In the Snowstorm the motif of death is manifested through the metaphor как убитые, спят снега (‘as if dead, the snows sleep’) and through the mention of душегубы ‘impious murderers’. The motif of treachery is dominant in the Tale (Vasil’ko is perfidiously lured to a feast and then blinded). In the poem this motif is seen in the reference to the aspen, Judas’ tree. The eternal darkness, into which Pasternak’s Posad is immersed, is associated with the loss of sight and the blinding that the miserable Prince suff ers. There is one more parallel to the Tale of Bygone Years. Pasternak’s Posad is infested with semi-infernal душегубы, who are not entirely humans, or rather are not humans at all. It had been mentioned that ‘no foot has trodden the Posad’, and at the end of the poem it is said that ‘no biped has been here’. The Tale of Bygone Years contains a fragment which mentions murders committed by non-human evil spirits (the living dead, according to town residents) in Polotsk in the year 6600/1092, however not in reality but in a vision. Coincidences with the poem by Pasternak are striking: evil spirits act primarily in the city; they are murderers but not humans; the city seems to be empty (its residents hide in their homes, while the ghouls are invisible); murderers in Polotsk are not bipeds, they (or their horses) leave no hoof traces. This subtext of the Tale may explain the dread that the newcomer feels in front of the poem character: he probably suspects that the latter is a ghoul. The theme of evil spirits is clearly visible in the Snowstorm. One of its main subtexts is Бесы by Pushkin, as I. P. Smirnov observed. The lexeme душегубы may with equal reason refer both to murdering robbers (which is its literal dictionary meaning), as well as to evil spirits who try to destroy the soul. Cf. Christ’s words: «And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell» (Matthew 10:28). Mythopoetical or potentially mythopoetical fragments from legends found in chronicles are manifested in the avant-garde poem by Pasternak, creating its subtext and appearing to be the key to its understanding.

literary subtext, interpretation, Tale of Bygone Years, motifs, detail in fiction, poetics of space, poetics of time.

1. Baevskij V. S., Pasternak E. V. 2003 “Primechanija” (Notices), in Pasternak B. Polnoe sobranie stihotvorenij i pojem, Saint-Petersburg, 2003.
2. Ilovajskij D. I. Stanovlenie Rusi (Formation Rus’), Moscow, 2005.
3. Karamzin N. M. Istorija gosudarstva Rossijskogo (History of Russian State), Moscow, 1991, vol. 2–3.
4. Pautkin A. A. 2014 “«Povest' ob osleplenii Vasil'ka Terebovol'skogo»: kul'turno-istoricheskij kontekst i struktura letopisnoj stat'i 6605 goda” (“Narration about Dazzle of Vasilek Terebol’skij”: Cultural-Historical Context and Structure of Chronicle’s Article of 6605), in Germenevtika drevnerusskoj literatury, Moscow, 2014, vol. 16–17, pp. 797–827.
5. Propp V. Ja. Istoricheskie korni volshebnoj skazki (Historical Roots of Fairy Tail), Saint-Petersburg, 1996.
6. Ronen O. Pojetika Osipa Mandel'shtama (Poetics of Osip Mandel’shtam), Saint-Petersburg, 2002.
7. Smirnov I. P. B. 1983 “Pasternak. Metel'” (Pasternak. Snowstorm), in Fridlender G. M. (ed.) Pojeticheskij stroj russkoj liriki, Leningrad, 1973, pp. 236—253.
8. Solov'ev S. M. Istorija Rossii s drevnejshih vremen (History of Russia from Oldest Times), Moscow, 1959, vol. 1/1–2.
9. Russkij jazyk i vnejazykovaja dejstvitel'nost' (Russian Language and Out-Language Reality), Moscow, 2002.

Ranchin Andrei

The paper attempts to give an integrated interpretation of the poem basing on the analysis of the semantic structure of the text. Special attention is directed to those textual elements which constitute the spatial world of the poem. The research takes into account the multifaceted character and insufficient explication of this world in the lyrical plot of the «Metel’» (‘Snowstorm’). The paper draws a conclusion about oblique and predicative character of distinctive features of the space. These appear to compensate for the predicative gap in the range of events encompassed in the poem. The vicissitudes forming the plot and being related to the poetic space and its transformations are considered in a close link with the vicissitudes that the self-consciousness of the lyrical subject goes through and in a number of cases are explained as a metaphoric projection of the drama that takes place in the soul of the character. The essence of this drama приводящее автора-героя к начальной точке, находит подтверждение в постоянном возвращении к зачину стихотворения» (с. 247). remains, in the main, a mystery for the reader. The analysis and observations given in the paper allow us to show the affinity between the emotional condition of the lyrical subject and the mysterious and formidable environment, the relationship to which in the text is characterised by ambivalence. The analysis takes into account the irrational nature of the majority of the characters of the poem, which conditions a high degree of the semantic vagueness. The fragmentary and chaotic utterances of the lyrical subject are regarded as an important part of poetic strategy, which determines the poetics and style of the poem. Besides, a definite distinction is drawn between the «author’s utterance» and «character’s utterance», i.e. we distinguish the creative act of the author, which is accomplished and purposeful, and the narrative of the lyrical subject, which is incomplete and semantically disjointed. The immanent analysis of the text is complemented by the analysis of intertextual «junctions» of the Snowstorm with thematically adjacent writings by Pasternak himself, as well as with writings by his predecessors and contemporaries. The poem in question is being placed into a broad narrational and thematic context, which encompasses numerous texts devoted to elements of nature and, in particular, to the snowstorm as one of the representations of the «elemental» chronotope.

early Pasternak, lyrical subject, literary character, recipient, space, event, predicativity, element of nature, ambivalence, intertext

1. Kac B. A. Muzykal'nye kljuchi k literaturnym proizvedenijam (Musical Keys to Literary Works), Moscow, 1997.
2. Smirnov I. P. B. 1983 “Pasternak. Metel'” (Pasternak. Snowstorm), in Fridlender G. M. (ed.) Pojeticheskij stroj russkoj liriki, Leningrad, 1973, pp. 236—253.
3. Cvetaeva M. Ob iskusstve (About Art), Moscow, 1991.

Skliarov Oleg

V. M. Tolmatchoff offers a new reading of the first book edition of Boris Pasternak’s poem «Metel’» (1916). Contrary to Igor P. Smirnov, who introduced an understanding of «Metel’» in 1973 as an impossibility of choice in the hostile world, V. M. Tolmatchoff views «Metel’» in terms of awakening of a night lyrical activity of the lyrical hero. Оn the one hand, Pasternak uses a traditional poetical material (from Pushkin’s «The Devils» to Alexandr Blok’s lyrics from «The Snow Mask»), topics of a night traveler who is tempted in a snow-storm by the demonic powers or by his «other self», — by agents of a ruthless world which are interested in a hero’s destruction, his eternal sleep. On the other, Pasternak transforms this pattern as well as a paradigm of circle drawn by a diabolic power (access to this world near the Kremlin walls is given only to «“onelegged» and «vorozhei», or a sorcerer) into something unusual. Pasternak’s poem has a circular, or taking into consideration the falling snows, a vortical composition. Although «posad» figures both in the first and the last stanzas the poem is ending not in a vein it is starting. From a principle of closed space, of a dimension where the powers of sleep, rest are reigning “posad” becomes its own opposition, a carrier of a movement unknown before. The lyrical hero, first positioned as immovable, speechless, impersonal, is awakening and finally acquires an individuality of «I» and even two faces which are in confl ict. «Obrivok shalnoj shlei» is defi nitely a kind of audio and poetical signal which activates a lyrical activity. It possesses a distinct Dionysian quality. “Okno” in this sense is a metaphor of a poet’s inner vision. «Dushegub» also refers to those who are drunk with verbal energy and have soul on one’s lips. «Sbilsia s dorogi» continues this logic in two ways. It refers to a drunkard (or a poet) and to a human being, which lost a right direction. The last can mean relations with a woman who is not a pair to a wanderer. This suggestion is nor arbitrary in the light of the described space. It is obvious enough the lyrical hero identifies his awakening with a signal of love — actually an implied muse and nature in a state «above the barriers» are inseparable. When the topography of Moscow is added («Zamostie») it becomes clear the hero is willing to cross the Moscow River by the Bolshoj kamennij bridge (Pasternak lived in a building at its foot for a certain time) and find himself in the district of Zamoskvorechie, in the area of Polianka street. It helps to identify an addressee of the poem, Nadezhda Mikhailovna Sin’akova (1889–1975, her maiden name is Urechina — literally near river in Russian; this name phonetically corresponds to the implied Zamoskvorechie), who lived on Malaja Polianka street with her family, and also an exact time «Metel’» was created. The climax of Pasternak’s relations with Sinyakova goes back to the spring of 1915. It seems not improbable that Pasternak changed the dating of his poem (from 1915 to 1914) when this love story had been long over and he as a family man was inclined to master a revised contours of his poetical biography.

Boris Pasternak, «Metel’», analysis of poetics, metaphor of movement, strophic analysis, interpretation of topographical images and details, lyrical hero as poet, poetical transfiguration of reality, poet’s dialogue with himself and his doppelgange

1. Ivanov Vjach. Vs. Pasternak: Vospominanija. Issledovanija. Stat'i (Pasternak: Memories, Studies, Articels), Moscow, 2015.
2. Pasternak E. Materialy dlja biografii (Materials for Biography), Moscow, 1989.
3. Sergeeva-Kljatis A. Pasternak, Moscow, 2015.
4. Smirnov I. P. B. 1983 “Pasternak. Metel'” (Pasternak. Snowstorm), in Fridlender G. M. (ed.) Pojeticheskij stroj russkoj liriki, Leningrad, 1973, pp. 236—253.
5. Titar' V. P., Paramonov A. F., Fefelova L. I. Sestry Sinjakovy — har'kovskie muzy futurizma (Sisters Sinjakovy — Har’kov Muses of Futurism), in http://colovrat.at.ua/publ/1/1/8-1-0-234.
6. Jas'kov V. G. 2004 “Hlebnikov. Kosarev. Har'kov“, in DvuRech'e: Har'kov — Sankt-Peterburg. Literaturno-hudozhestvennyj al'manah, Har'kov, 2004, pp. 183–202.

Tolmachev Vasilii

The paper answers the question why the Fourth Gospel does not cite the parables. The fi rst part presents a brief survey of the Gospels' parables and history of their studies. Some of them are discussed, namely that of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16. 19–31), the talents (Mt 25. 14–30, Lk 19. 11–26), the dishonest steward (Lk 16. 1–13), the lost sheep, coin and son (Lk 15. 3–7, 8–10, 11–32). These and the other parables of the same kind truly refl ect Jesus' missionary role. The combine the ordinary life situations and high ethical demands. However, the inner contradiction, typical of them, completely agrees with what is known of the Historical Jesus’ mission: «I came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance» (Mk 2. 17). In the second part a thorough analysis of the usage of words and phrases such as μονή ‘dwelling place’ (14. 2, 23), τόπος ‘place’ (11. 48), Îδός ‘way, path’ (14. 4), Èρχου κα¸ Ìδε ‘go and see’ (1. 46), Àργάζεται ‘to work’ (5. 17), Èργον ‘work’ (6. 29), as well as πίστις ‘belief’, àνάστασις ‘resurrection’ in the Fourth Gospel is carried out. The episodes of the Cleansing of the Temple (2. 13–23) and Footwashing (13. 2–5) are identifi ed as basic for realization of the special meaning of these words and phrases. It is stressed that the wording, from one side, is not motivated by the contexts in its full volume and lacks, from the other side, of the required comments from the part of the author. It means the usage in question is a part and parcel of the author’s language behavior and not of Jesus himself. Through comparison with Rabbinic language of the epoch based on the modern scholarly researches these observations lead to the conclusion that the Gospel’s author was close to the heikhalot philosophy presented in I and II Enoch and apocalyptic tendencies of Jewish Literature of the Second Temple epoch. Neither aggada, nor midrash attracted the author, since not ethics but religious gnosis determined the centre of his interest.

Gospel, parable, temple, apocalyptism, religious gnosis

1. Alekseev A. A. 2013 “Kommunikativnyj konflikt kak stilisticheskij priem v Evangelii ot Ioanna” (Communicative Conflict as Stylistic Method in Gospel of John), in Hristianskij Vostok, Saint-Petersburg, Moscow, 2013, vol. 6/12, pp. 327–336.
2. Alekseev A. A. 1999 “Pritcha o soli (Mf 5.13) i nekotorye drugie” (Parable of Salt (Mt 5.13) and Some Others), in Tradicija i literaturnyj process, Novosibirsk, 1999, pp. 9–12.
3. Alekseev A. A. 2014 “Semeion i doxa v Evangelii ot Ioanna” (Semeion and doxa in Gospel of John), in XLII Mezhdunarodnaja filologicheskaja konferencija. 11–16 marta 2013 g. Izbrannye trudy, Saint-Petersburg, 2014, pp. 6–34.
4. Blomberg K. Interpretacija pritchej (Interpretation of Parables), Moscow, 2005.
5. Luc U. Nagornaja propoved' (Mf 5–7) (Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5–7)), Moscow, 2014.
6. Navtanovich L. M. 1999 “Kniga Enoha” (Book of Enoch), in Biblioteka literatury Drevnej Rusi, Saint-Petersburg, 1999, vol. 3, pp. 204–241, 387–392.
7. Sholem G. Osnovnye techenija v evrejskoj mistike (Main Streams in Jewish Mystic), Moscow, Jerusalem, 2004.
8. Barcklay W. The Parables of Jesus, Louisville, 1970.
9. Brown R. The Gospel According to John, New York, 1985.
10. Bryan S M. 2005 “The Eschatological Temple in John 14”, in Bulletin for Biblical Research, 2005, vol. 15/2, pp. 187–198.
11. Bultmann R. Das Evangelium des Johannes, Göttingen, 1941.
12. Bultmann R. 1954 “Pisteuo“ (Believe), in Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, Stuttgart, 1954, vol. 6, pp. 193–230.
13. Charlesworth J. 2014 “Jesus and the Temple”, in Charlesworth J. (ed.) Jesus and Temple. Textual and Archaeological Explorations, Minneapolis, 2014, pp. 145–182.
14. Congar Y. M.-J. The Mystery of the Temple or The Manner of God’s Presence to His Creatures from Genesis to the Apocalypse, Westminster, Maryland, 1962.
15. Davis E. F. Swallowing the Scroll. Textuality and the Dynamics of Discourse in Ezekiel’s Prophecy, Sheffield, 1989.
16. DeConick A. D. Voices of the Mystics. Early Christian Discourse in the Gospels of John and Thomas and Other Ancient Christian Literature, Sheffield, 2001.
17. DeConick A. D. 2001 “What is Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism?”, in Society of Biblical Literature. Seminar Papers, 2001, vol. 40, pp. 278–304.
18. Dodd C. H. The Parables of the Kingdom, London, 1935.
19. Davila J. R. Hekhalot Literature in Translation. Major Texts of Merkavah Mysticism, Leiden, Boston, 2013.
20. Díez Macho M. Neophyti 1. Targum palestinense. Ms de la Biblioteca Vaticana, Madrid, Barcelona, 1970, vol. 2: Exodo.
21. Elgvin T. 2004 “Temple Mysticism and the Temple of Men”, in Hempel C. (ed.) The Dead Sea Scrolls: Texts and Context, Leiden, 2004, pp. 227–242.
22. Elior R. 2006 “Early forms of Jewish mysticism”, in Katz S. T. (ed.) The Cambridge History of Judaism, Cambridge, 2006, vol. 4: The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period, pp. 749–791.
23. Evans C. A. 2000 “Parables in Early Judaism”, in Longenecker R. N. (ed.) The Challenge of Jesus’ Parables, Grand Rapids, Cambridge, 2000, pp. 51–75.
24. Freed E. D. Old Testament Quotations in the Gospel of John, Leiden, 1965.
25. Friebel K. G. Jeremiah’s and Ezekiel’s Sign-Acts, Sheffield, 1999.
26. Gieschen C. A. 2006 “Baptismal Praxis and Mystical Experience in the Book of Revelation”, in DeConick A. D. (ed.) Paradise Now. Essays on Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism, Atlanta, 2006, pp. 341–354.
27. Grözinger K. E. 1987 “The Names of God and the Сelestial Powers: Their Function and Meaning in the Hekhalot Literature”, in Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, 1987, vol. 6, pp. 53–69.
28. Hengel M. Judaism and Hellenism. Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period, Philadelphia, 1981.
29. Hengel M. The Johannine Question, London, 1989.
30. Hirshman M. 2006 “Aggadic Midrash”, in The Literature of the Sages. Second Part: Midrash and Targum, Liturgy, Poetry, Mysticism, Assen, 2006, pp. 107–131.
31. Ireland D. J. Stewardship and the Kingdom of God: An Historical, Exegetical, and Contextual Study of the Parable of the Unjust Steward in Luke 16:1–13, Leiden, 1992.
32. Isaac E. I. 1983 “Enoch”, in Charlesworth J. H. (ed.) The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, New York et al, 1983, vol. 1, pp. 5–89.
33. Jastrow M. Dictionary of the Targumim, New York, 1903.
34. Jeremias J. The Parables of Jesus, New York, 1963.
35. Jülicher A. Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, Tübingen, 1888–1889.
36. Keener C. S. The Gospel of John. A Commentary, Grand Rapids, 2003.
37. Koester H. 1969 “Topos” (Place), in Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, Stuttgart, 1969, vol. 8, pp. 186–201.
38. Lampe G.W.H. A Patristic Greek Lexicon, Oxford, 1961.
39. Lidzbarski M. Ginzā: Der Schatz oder Das grosse Buch der Mandäer, Berlin, 1925.
40. Lieber L. 2005 “Piyyut”, in Neusner J., Avery-Peck A. J., Green W. S. (eds.) The Encyclopaedia of Judaism, Leiden, Boston, 2005, vol. 3, pp. 2000–2019.
41. Mathewson D. L. 1995 “The Parable of the Unjust Steward (Luke 16:1-13): A Reexamination of the Traditional View in Light of Recent Challenges”, in Journal of Evangelical Theological Society, 1995, vol. 38/1, pp. 29–39.
42. McCaffrey J. The House with Many Rooms: The Temple Theme of Jn. 14, 2–3, Rome, 1988.
43. McNamara M. Targum and New Testament. Collected Essays, Tübingen, 2011.
44. McNamara M. Targum and Testament Revisited. Aramaic Paraphrases of the Hebrew Bible: A Light on the New Testament, Grand Rapids; Cambridge, 2010.
45. Michel O. 1975 “Faith”, in Brown C. (ed.) The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Grand Rapids, 1975, pp. 593–606.
46. Morray-Jones C. R. A. 1993 “Paradise Revisited (2 Cor 12.1–12): Vol. 1. The Jewish Mystical Background of Paul’s Apostolate. Part 1: The Jewish Sources. Part 2: Paul’s Heavenly Ascent and Its Significance”, in Harvard Theological Review, 1993, vol. 86, pp. 177–217, 265–292.
47. Neusner J. 2002 “Contexts of Comparison: Reciprocally Reading Gospels’ and Rabbis’ Parables”, in Chilton B., Evans C. A. and Neusner J. (ed.) The Missing Jesus. Rabbinic Judaism and the New Testament, Boston, Leiden, 2002, pp. 45–68.
48. Odeberg H. The Fourth Gospel Interpreted in its Relation to Contemporaneous Religious Currents in Palestine and the Hellenistic-Oriental World, Uppsala, 1929.
49. Pelican J. 2005 “Faith”, in Encyclopedia of Religion, 2005, vol. 5, pp. 2948–2959.
50. Rand M. 2005 “The Seder Beriyot in Byzantine-Era Piyyut”, in Jewish Quarterly Review, 2005, vol. 95, pp. 667–683.
51. Rowland C., Morray-Jones C. R. A. The Mystery of God. Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, Leiden, 2009.
52. Ronning J. The Jewish Targums and John’s Logos Theology, Peabody, 2009.
53. Rowland C. “The Temple in the New Testament”, in Day J. (ed.) Temple Worship in Biblical Israel, London, 2007, pp. 469–483.
54. Safrai S. 1987 “Halakha”, in Safrai S. (ed.) The Literature of the Sages, Philadelphia, 1987, vol. 1: Oral Tora, Halakha, Mishna, Tosefta,Talmud, External Tractates, pp. 121–210.
55. Schäfer P. 1984 “New Testament and Hekhalot Literature: The Journey into Heaven in Paul and in Merkavah Mysticism”, in Journal of Jewish Studies, 1984, vol. 35, pp. 19–35.
56. Schäfer P. The Origins of Jewish Mysticism, Tübingen, 2009.
57. Scholem G. Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition, New York, 1965.
58. Schwartz Е. 1907–1908 “Aporien im vierten Evangelium“, in Nachrichten von der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen. Philologisch-historische Klasse, 1907, pp. 342–372; 1908, pp. 115–148, 149–188, 497–560.
59. Strack H. L., Billerbeck P. Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch, München, vol. 6, 1922–1961.
60. Swartz M. D. 2011 “Piyut and Heikhalot: Recent Research and its Implications for the History of Ancient Jewish Liturgy and Mysticism”, in Blank D. R. (ed.) The Experience of Jewish Liturgy. Studies Dedicated to M. Schmelzer, Leiden, Boston, 2011, pp. 263–283.
61. Swartz M. D., Yahalom J. Avodah: Ancient Poems for Yom Kippur, Pennsylvania State University Press, 2005.
62. Wahlde U. C. von. The Gospel and Letters of John, Grand Rapids, 2010.
63. Wahlde U. C. von. 2010 “The Johannine Literature and Gnosticism: New Light on their Relationship?”, in Walters P. (ed.) From Judaism to Christianity: Tradition and Transition. A Festschrift for T. H. Tobin on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, Leiden, Boston, 2010, pp. 221–254.
64. Wald S. G. 2007 “Joshua ben Hananiah”, in Encyclopedia Judaica, 2007, vol. 11, pp. 450–452.
65. Wierzbicka A. What Did Jesus Mean? Explaining the Sermon on the Mount and the Parables in Simple and Universal Human Concepts, Oxford, 2001.

Alekseev Anatolii

This paper continues the series of publications on the morphology of the dialect of Staroshvedskoye (Sw. Gammalsvenskby), which is the only surviving Scandinavian dialect in the territory of the former Soviet Union. The village of Staroshvedskoye is located in the Kherson region, Ukraine. Its Swedish dialect historically belongs to the group of Swedish dialects of Estonia and goes back to the dialect of the island of Dago (Hiiumaa). Due to the lack of studies of the present-day dialect and because of the severe endangerment in which the dialect is currently situated, the most urgent task is to collect, classify, and publish the factual material. This paper introduces comprehensive material on nouns in the conservative variety of the present-day dialect. It lists all masculine nouns of type 2a together with their cognates from Estonian Swedish dialects; comments on the history of the forms are given as well. The sources for the material presented here are interviews with speakers of the conservative variety of the dialect recorded by the author during fieldwork in the village from 2004 to 2013. We plan to publish nouns of other types in later articles.

documentary linguistics, endangered language, field linguistics, Swedish dialectology, East Swedish dialects, Swedish dialects of Estonia, the village of Gammalsvenskby, dialect morphology

1. Man'kov A. E. 2010 “Grammaticheskie kategorii sushhestvitel'nogo v dialekte sela Staroshvedskoe” (Grammatical Categories of Noun in Dialect of Gammalsvenskby), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2010, vol. 2/20, pp. 92‒111.
2. Man'kov A. E. 2011 “Slovoizmenenie sushhestvitel'nyh v dialekte sela Staroshvedskoe” (Inflection of Nouns in Dialect of Gammalsvenskby), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2011, vol. 2/24, pp. 32‒43.
3. Man'kov A. E. 2013 “Suffiksal'noe slovoobrazovanie sushhestvitel'nyh v dialekte sela Staroshvedskoe” (Suffix Word-Forming of Nouns in Dialect of Gammalsvenskby), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2013, vol. 1/31, pp. 21‒31.
4. Man'kov A. E. 2013 “Problema strukturnyh izmenenij v ischezajushhem jazyke“ (Problem of Structural Changes in Vanishing Language), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2013, vol. 2/32, pp. 30–44.
5. Man'kov A. E. 2013 “Skandinavskij ostrov v slavjanskoj jazykovoj srede. Dialekt sela Staroshvedskoe: imja sushhestvitel'noe” (Scandinavian Island in Slavic Language Sphere. Dialect of Gammalsvenskby: Noun), in Slovene. International Journal of Slavic Studies, 2013, vol. 2/1, pp. 60‒110.
6. Freudenthal A. O., Vendell H. A. Ordbok öfver estländsk-svenska dialekterna, Helsingfors, 1886.
7. Danell G. Nuckömålet, Stockholm, 1905–1934.
8. Danell G. Ordbok över Nuckömålet, Uppsala, 1951.
9. Isberg F. Supplement till G. Danells Ordbok över Nuckömålet, Uppsala, 1970.
10. Karlgren A. Gammalsvenskby: Uttal och böjning i Gammalsvenskbymålet, Stockholm, 1953.
11. Mankov A. 2014 “A Scandinavian Island in a Slavonic Linguistic Environment. The Dialect of Gammalsvenskby: Nouns (Paper 2)”, in Slovene, Мoscow, 2014, vol. 3/1, pp. 120‒170.

Man'kov Aleksandr

J. H. O. Djurhuus (1881‒1948), the most signifi cant figure in the history of the Faroese literature, often appealed to the classical heritage in his works. The ways of using it can be as follows: translations of Ancient Greek authors (Plato, Homer, Sapho and others) into Faroese; ancient subjects in original poems; particular ancient motives and topoi in original poems; ancient verse and genres in original poems (as a rule, these are epitaphs). During the time of J. H. O. Djurhuus’ life, classical heritage was not an active part of the Faroese culture (nor is it nowadays). In the beginning of the 20th century, the Faroese language has newly acquired a written form, so the fact that Ancient Greek (and Latin) authors have been translated into it, was of great significance, as it made Faroese equal to the languages of great cultures. Such translating also stimulated the development of the Faroese vocabulary (e.g., translating Plato’s dialogues required philosophical vocabulary, which was absent in the Faroese language by that time). Both in translations and in original poems, antiquity always gets some Faroese colour. Often the ancient and the Faroese realia, concepts, mythological fi gures can occur in the same poem. In many of them, realia from several mythologies can be mixed together: e.g. in the text Hugskot eitt stjørnuklárt oktoberkvøld 1928, Zion, Orion and the Muse of the Faroe Islands (songdís Føroyalands) occur in the same strophe. The striking example of this «faroisation of antiquity» is the poem Atlantis (1917), where the ancient legend, that first has been mentioned in Plato’s dialogues, gets a curious continuation: according to Djurhuus, the Faroe Islands are situated at the same place, where this sunken land once has been, and «the priestess of Atlantis», the main figure of this poem, can still be met at the sea. By means of appealing to the classical realia in Faroese poetry, the Faroe Islands receive a sort of «glorious past», which is of great importance to any young nation during a national-building process. After the national building in the Faroes has come to its end, stressing the continuity with the great cultures of the past was no longer necessary.

1. Markelova O. A. Stanovlenie literatury Farerskih ostrovov i formirovanie farerskogo nacional'nogo samosoznanija (Formation of Literature of Farer Islands and Forming of Farer National Consciousness), Pushkino, 2006.
2. Markelova O. A. 2015 “Stihotvorenija J. H. O. Dzhjurhusa“ (Poems of J. H. O. Dzhjurhus), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija III: Filologija, 2015, vol. 3/43, pp. 121‒131.
3. Dahl Á. Bókmentasøga I, Frá landnámsár til Hammershaimb, Fannir, 1981.
4. Debes H. J. 1993 “Omkring formationen af en nation. Færøerne som unikt og komparabelt eksempel. Et forsøg“, in Fróðрskaparrit, Annales Societiarum Færoensis, Føroya Fróðskaparfelag, Tórshavn, 1993, vol. 4, pp. 17–53.
5. Djurhuus J. H. O. Yrkingar 1898–1948. Savnað, skipað og skrivað viðmerkingar hevur Chr. Matras. Mentunargrunnur Studentafelagsins, 1988.
6. Donsk-føroysk orðabók, in http://www.sprotin.fo/dictionaries_dictionary.php (Date: 15.09.2015)).
7. Isaksen J. Føroyski mentunarpalllurin: greinir og ummæli. Mentunargrunnur Studentafelagsins, 1983.
8. Jensen M. S. 2007 “Scandinavia”, in Kallendorf Craig W. (ed.) Blackwells Companion to the Classical Tradition, 2007, pp. 252–264.
9. Djurhuus. J. H. O. En litterær biografi Kamban H., Odense Universitetsforlag, 2001.
10. Martindale C. 2006 “Introduction”, in Martindale Charles, Thomas Richard F. (eds.) Thinking Through Reception. Classics and the Uses of Reception, Blackwell Publishing, 2006, pp. 1–13.
11. Skard S. The Classical Tradition in Norway, Oslo, Bergen, Tromsø, 1980.
12. Turið Sigurðardóttir. 1997 “Trýggjar týskar týðingar Janusar”, in Varðin, Tórshavn, 1997, vol. 64, pp. 55‒83.

Markelova Ol'ga

According to preliminary estimates, the number of Slavonic manuscripts containing the text of the Ladder of Divine Ascent (either entirely or fragmentarily) and going back to the period from the mid-12th to the end of the 17th century is no fewer than 750, and no fewer than 500 are Russian. At present, Russian manuscripts of the Ladder are kept in no fewer than 62 depositories in at least 20 countries. The earliest Russian manuscripts of the Ladder date from the 12th century. It is a happy coincidence that both of them are kept in N. P. Rumyantsev’s collection (Russian State Library, Moscow) under neighbouring numbers (198, 199). On the whole, the majority of Russian Ladders are kept in libraries of Moscow and Saint Petersburg. Besides, a number of manuscripts are found in Yaroslavl’, Kostroma, Novosibirsk, Samara, Vyazniki, Irkutsk, Kirillov, Novgorod, Ust’-Tsil’ma, Tot’ma. Manuscripts from provincial towns are practically not introduced into the scholarly circulation. This concerns, for instance, the manuscript from Pudozh Museum of local history and culture, Republic of Karelia. The paper mentions a number of books that had disappeared from well-known collections and were later discovered in other libraries. These are manuscripts F.I.234 (Russian National Library, St. Petersburg), Spenser collection, Slavonic MS 3 (New York Public Library), a book from the Collection of single acquisitions № 327 (Russian State Library, Moscow), a manuscript from Martin Schøyen private collection. The paper points to some Russian manuscripts of the Ladder, the fate of which is unknown now, e.g. the manuscript dating from the first half of the 16th century and containing notes with the names of Patriarch Germogen, hegumen of Pavlov Monastery Filaret, hegumen of Kostroma Bogoyavlensky Monastery Arseny. This manuscript was seen by N. P. Rozhdestvensky at Ivanovo Regional Archive in 1954. Another manuscript whose fate is now unknown was written in 1725 by hieromonk Feofan of Transfi guration Pustynnoskel’sky Monastery on commission from hegumen Prokopy Bochkovsky. This book was seen in 1960 by N. F. Bel’chikov and N. P. Rozhdestvensky at Tambov Archive Bureau; now it is missing from Tambov archives. For books that are missing there still remains hope to be discovered, in contrast to those manuscripts which are lost forever. Many books kept in Russian wooden churches were destroyed in fire. The article mentions books that burnt during World War II. These are manuscripts destroyed on 6 April 1941 when a bomb hit the National Library of Serbia. Furthermore, Monastery Žitomislić, where a Russian Ladder was kept, was burnt to ashes during the war. Manuscripts are also destroyed in peacetime because of their keepers’ negligence. On 16 August 1982 a fire broke out in a building of Bogoyavlensky Convent, Kostroma, where reserve collections of Kostroma Regional State Archive were kept. In this fi re at least three manuscripts burnt and three were badly damaged. The actual number of Russian manuscripts of the Ladder was much higher than 500. We consider that the number of manuscripts of the 11th‒17th centuries that contained the Ladder might have been several thousands.

John Climacus, The Ladder of Divine Ascent, old Russian Manuscripts, old Russian Cultural History.

1. Barsov E. V. Opisanie rukopisej i knig, hranjashhihsja v Vygoleksinskoj biblioteke (Description of Manuscripts, Keeping in Vygoleksinskaja Library), Saint-Petersburg, 1874.
2. Bel'chikov N. F., Rozhdestvenskij N. P. 1960 “Sobranie rukopisej byvshego Tambovskogo gubernskogo arhivnogo bjuro” (Collection of Manuscripts of Former Province Archive Office of Tambov), in TODRL, Moscow, Leningrad, 1960, vol. 16, pp. 561–566.
3. Vzdornov G. I. Iskusstvo knigi v Drevnej Rusi. Rukopisnaja kniga Severo-Vostochnoj Rusi XII — nachala XV vekov (Book Art in Old Rus’. Manuscript Tradition of North-East Rus’ of XII — Begin of XV Centuries), Moscow, 1980.
4. Viktorov A. E. Opisi rukopisnyh sobranij v knigohranilishhah Severnoj Rossii (List of Manuscript Collections in Book Storages of North Russia), Saint-Petersburg, 1890.
5. Georgievskij V. Florishheva pustyn': istoriko-arheograficheskoe opisanie s risunkami (Florisheva Monastery: Historical-Archaeographical Description with Pictures), Vjazniki, 1896.
6. Evseev I. E. Opisanie rukopisej, hranjashhihsja v orlovskih drevlehranilishhah (Description of Manuscripts from Antiquities Storages of Orel), Orel, 1909, vol. 3.
7. Zhukovskaja L. P. 1977 “Izbornik 1073 g.: sud'ba knigi, sostojanie i zadachi izuchenija” (Izbornik of 1073: Destiny of Book, Status and Means of Study), in Izbornik Svjatoslava 1073 g.: Sbornik statej, Moscow, 1977, pp. 5–30.
8. Istoricheskoe opisanie Serpuhovskogo Vladychnogo obshhezhitel'nogo devich'ego monastyrja. M., 1866.
9. Kukushkina M. V. Monastyrskie biblioteki Russkogo Severa (Monastery Libraries of Russian North), Leningrad, 1977.
10. Licevye rukopisi XI–XIX vv. Katalog rukopisej Tret'jakovskoj galerei (Illustrated Manuscripts of XI–XIX Cent. Catalogue of Manuscripts of Tretjakov Gallery), Moscow, 2010, vol. 1: Licevye rukopisi XI–XVII vv. (Illustrated Manuscripts of XI–XVII Cent.)
11. Dmitrieva R. P. 1991 “Opisi knig Iosifo-Volokolamskogo monastyrja 1573 i 1579 gg.” (Description of Books of Iosifo-Volokolamskij Monastery of 1573 and 1579), in Knizhnye centry Drevnej Rusi. Iosifo-Volokolamskij monastyr', Leningrad, 1991, pp. 42–99.
12. Pozdeeva I. V., Troickij A. N. Russkaja rukopisnaja i staropechatnaja kniga v lichnyh sobranijah Moskvy i Podmoskov'ja. Katalog vystavki (Moskva, 9 dekabrja 1983 — 15 janvarja 1984) (Russian Manuscript and Old Print Book in Private Collectons of Moscow and Moscow Region. Exhibition Catalogue (Moscow, 9th December 1983 — 15th Januar 1984)), Moscow, 1983.
13. Popova O. S. 1962 “Novgorodskaja rukopis' 1270 g. (Miniatjury i ornament)” (Novgorod Manuscript of 1270 (Miniatures and Ornament)), in Zapiski Otdela rukopisej GBL, Moscow, 1962, vol. 25, pp. 184–219.
14. Rogov A. I. Svedenija o nebol'shih sobranijah slavjano-russkih rukopisej v SSSR (Information of Small Collections of Slavic-Russian Manuscripts in USSR), Moscow, 1962.
15. Rozhdestvenskij N. P. 1954 “Otchet ob arheograficheskoj komandirovke v g. Ivanovo” (Report about Archaeographical Trip in Ivanovo), in TODRL, Moscow, Leningrad, 1954, vol. 10, pp. 485–492.
16. Rukopisnye sobranija Gosudarstvennoj biblioteki SSSR imeni V.I. Lenina. Ukazatel' (Manuscript Collections of the V. I. Lenin State Library of USSR. Index), Moscow, 1996, vol. 1/3 (1948–1979).
17. Smirnova Je. S. Licevye rukopisi Velikogo Novgoroda. XV vek (Illustrated Manuscripts of Great Novgorod. XV Century), Moscow, 1994.
18. Sreznevskij V. I. 1903 “Otchet otdeleniju russkogo jazyka i slovesnosti Imperatorskoj akademii nauk o poezdke v Oloneckuju, Vologodskuju i Permskuju guberniju (ijun' 1902)” (Report to Section of Russian Language and Literature of Imperial Academy of Sciences about Trip to Oloneckaja, Vologodskaja and Permskaja Regions (June 1902)), in Izvestija ORJaS, Saint-Petersburg, 1903, vol. 8/3/4, pp. 126–189.
19. Sreznevskij V. I. 1904 “Poezdka v Petrozavodsk i Zaonezh'e” (Trip to Zaonezh'e), in Izvestija ORJaS, Saint-Petersburg, 1904, vol. 9/3/4, pp. 19–36.
20. Subotin-Golubovich T. 1999 “Srpsko rukopisno nasleche od 1557. godine do sredine XVII veka” (Serbian Manuscript Heritage from 1557 till Middle of XVII Century), in Srpska Akademija nauka i umetnosti, Beograd, 1999, vol. 640/51.
21. Turilov A. A. 2002 “«Oto knjazja ot Jaropolka» (K istorii dvuh drevnejshih russkih spiskov Lestvicy)” (“From Prince Jaropolk” (To History of Two Oldest Russian Copies of Climax)), in Russkij jazyk v nauchnom osveshhenii, 2002, vol. 3, pp. 204–210.
22. Shhapov Ja. N. Makar'evsko-Unzhenskij monastyr' (rukopisi). XV–XIX vv. (Makar'evsko-Unzhenskij Monastery (Manuscripts). XV–XIX Cent.), Kostroma, 1967.
23. Popova T. G. Die «Leiter zum Paradies» des Johannes Klimakos. Katalog der slavischen Handschriften, Köln, Böhlau-Verlag, 2012.
24. Slavic Manuscripts from the Fekula Collection: a Description, Columbus, Ohio, 1983.

Popova Tat'iana

Davydenkova Mariia

In this paper we continue to publish materials for the dictionary of the present-day dialect of Staroshvedkoye (Gammalsvenskby), which is the only surviving Scandinavian dialect in the territory of the former Soviet Union. The present-day state of this dialect has not been described in linguistic literature. In connection with this, the only source of the factual material is oral interviews with speakers of the dialect recorded by the author during his trips to the village. The main objective of this work is to present material recorded in the interviews in the most complete way and to show the real state of the vocabulary and inflection of the dialect. The entries include the following information: type of inflection; translation; phrases, sentences or short texts illustrating the usage (with initials of the informants). In many cases full paradigms are given as well. They include all phonetic and morphological forms that have occurred in the interviews.

language documentation, documentary linguistics, field linguistics, endangered language, present-day Swedish dialects, Swedish dialects of Estonia, Gammalsvenskby, dialect dictionary

Man'kov Aleksandr