STUDIA MYTHOLOGICA SLAVICA ISSN 1408-6271 wwwISSN 1581-128x Uredniški svet / Natka Badurina (Universitŕ degli Studi di Udine), Nikos Causidis (Univerzitet Consiglio di redazione / Sv. Kiril i Metodi, Skopje), Larisa Fialkova (University of Haifa), Mare Kva Advisory Board (Estonian Instituteof Folklore, Tartu), MonikaKropejTelban (Inštitutzaslovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana), Janina Kursďte (Univerza v Rigi), Nijole Laurinkiene(Lietuviuliteraturos irtautosakos institutas,Vilnius),MirjamMencej (Univerza v Ljubljani), Vlado Nartnik (Inštitut za slovenski jezik Frana Ramovša, ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana), Andrej Pleterski (Inštitut za arheologijo, ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana), Ljubinko Radenkovic (SANU, Beograd), Svetlana Tolstaja (Institut slavjanovedenija Rossijskoj Akademii Nauk, Moskva) Uredništvo / Saša Babic (odgovorna urednica/co-direttrice/Editor-in-Chief), ZRC SAZU, Inštitut Redazione / za slovensko narodopisje, Novi trg 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija/Slovenia, E-mail: Editorial Board Sasa.Babic@zrc-sazu.si KatjaHrobat Virloget(odgovornaurednica/co-direttrice/Editor-in-Chief), Univerzana Primorskem, Fakulteta za humanisticne študije, Oddelek za antropologijo in kulturne študije, Titov trg 5, 6000 Koper, Slovenija/Slovenia, E-mail: katja.hrobat@fhs.upr.si Roberto Dapit, Universitŕ degli Studi di Udine, Dipartimento di Lingue e Letterature, Comunicazione, Formazione e Societŕ, Via Tarcisio Petracco 8, 33100 Udine, Italija/Italia, E-mail: roberto.dapit@uniud.it Izdajata / Znanstvenoraziskovalni center Slovenske akademije znanosti in umetnosti, Inštitut Pubblicato da /za slovensko narodopisje, Ljubljana, Slovenija Published by in / e / and Universitŕ degli Studi di Udine, Dipartimento di Lingue e Letterature, Comunicazione, Formazione e Societŕ, Udine, Italia Založnik / Casa editrice / Založba ZRC / ZRC Publishing, ZRC SAZU Publishing house Spletna stran / http://sms.zrc-sazu.si/ Sito internet / Website http://ojs.zrc-sazu.si/sms/ Prispevki so recenzirani / Gli articoli sono sottoposti a referaggio / The articles are externally peer-reviewed Izhaja s podporo Agencije za raziskovalno dejavnost RS / Pubblicato con il sostegno finanziario deli‘ Agenzia per laricercascientificadellaRepubblicadiSlovenia/PublishedwiththesupportoftheSlovenianResearchAgency Studia mythologica Slavica is included in the following databases: MLA Bibliography; SCOPUS, Sachkatalog der Bibliothek - RGK des DAI; IBZ; FRANCIS; HJG (The History Journals Guide); OCLE; INTUTE: Arts and Humanities UK, EBSCO, ERIH plus, ANVUR. Slika na ovitku / Fotografia sul copertina / Cover photo: Pinax in terracotta dall’acropoli (Brauronion?) con filatrice. 490-480 a. C. ca. Atene, Museo dell’acropoli (per gentile concessione del Ministero della Cultura e dello Sport, Museo dell’Acropoli. Acr. 13055. © Acropolis Museum, 2011. Photo: Vangelis Tsiamis). Naklada / Tiratura / Imprint 300 Tisk / Stampato da / Printed by Collegium Graphicum, d. o. o. © ZRC SAZU, Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje 24 2021 ZNANSTVENORAZISKOVALNI CENTER SLOVENSKE AKADEMIJE ZNANOSTI IN UMETNOSTI INŠTITUT ZA SLOVENSKO NARODOPISJE, LJUBLJANA, SLOVENIJA UNIVERSITŔ DEGLI STUDI DI UDINE DIPARTIMENTO DI LINGUE E LETTERATURE, COMUNICAZIONE, FORMAZIONE E SOCIETŔ, UDINE, ITALIA Ljubljana 2021 Vsebina / Indice 5 In Memoriam Haya Bar-Itzhak..............................................................................................................................................5 Pavel Medvešcek............................................................................................................................................7 11 Razprave Studi Larisa Fialkova: Rus, Russia, and Ukraine in Alternative Slavic Fantasy by English-Language Writers ..................................................................................................................................13 Goran Đurdevic, Suzana Marjanic: What is It Like To Be a Bat in the Time of Covid-19, or How Many Pandemics Could We Have?.....................................................................................33 Maria Palleiro: The “Cairé” and “The Ghost of Komat”: Textual Landscapes and Cultural Heritage in Argentinean and Slovenian Folktales...........................................................61 ..... .. ........: .............. ........ (.).... / .... . ........ ...... ........ . ........ . .............. ......................................................79 ....... .......: .............. .......: «....... .. .....»...........................................101 Sara Orzechowska: Plants, Women, Magic. Contemporary Polish (Kuyavian) Folklore Based on Herbal Medicine. ...............................................................................................................141 Marjeta Pisk, Katarina Šrimpf Vendramin: Vecjezicne kratke folklorne oblike: primeri iz Goriških brd .....................................................................................................................................161 ....... .. ...........: ........ ........... ....... . ......... .................. ............ ......... ......................................................................179 Oleg V. Kutarev: Dazhbog: The Ancient Slavic Pagan Deity of the Shining Sky........................195 Martina Olcese: ...e .e...s.µa. a.e.. Uno sguardo sull’arktéia attraverso Phrasikleia ............219 255 Razvoj raziskovalnih metod in diskusija Sviluppo dei metodi di ricerca e discussione Andrej Pleterski: Tudi stari Slovani so poznali gnomone..................................................................257 265 Recenzije in porocila o knjigah Recensioni di libri Éva Pócs (Ed.), Body, Soul, Spirits and Supernatural Communication (Monika Kropej Telban)...................................................................................................................................................267 Éva Ps (Ed.), Charms and Charming. Studies on Magic in Everyday Life (Monika Kropej Telban).....................................................................................................................................268 Arktická teia o našom pode (Lenka Mihová) ...............................................................................270 Jaroslav Otcenášek (ed.), Ceské lidové pohádky: 1. Zvírecí pohádky a bayky, 2/I. Kouzelné pohádky [Czech Folktales: 1. Animal Tales and Fables, 2/I. Tales of Magic] (Monika Kropej Telban)......................................................................................................272 Contents 5 In Memoriam Haya Bar-Itzhak..............................................................................................................................................5 Pavel Medvešcek............................................................................................................................................7 11 Articles Larisa Fialkova: Rus, Russia, and Ukraine in Alternative Slavic Fantasy by English-Language Writers ..................................................................................................................................13 Goran Đurdevic, Suzana Marjanic: What is It Like To Be a Bat in the Time of Covid-19, or How Many Pandemics Could We Have?.....................................................................................33 Maria Palleiro: The “Cairé” and “The Ghost of Komat”: Textual Landscapes and Cultural Heritage in Argentinean and Slovenian Folktales...........................................................61 Marija V. Jasinskaja: Supernatural Being Named (Z)mora / Mara in the Southern Podlasie Tradition, Viewed on Polish and All-Slavic Background.............................................79 Bogumil Gasanov: Aetiological notes: “The Story of Ivan”..............................................................101 Sara Orzechowska: Plants, Women, Magic. Contemporary Polish (Kuyavian) Folklore Based on Herbal Medicine. ...............................................................................................................141 Multilingual Short Folklore Forms: Examples From the Gorica Hills ............................................161 Ludmila N. Vinogradova: Folk Demonology of Polesye in the Context of East-Slavic Tradicional Beliefs..............................................................................................................................179 Oleg V. Kutarev: Dazhbog: The Ancient Slavic Pagan Deity of the Shining Sky........................195 Martina Olcese: ...e .e...s.µa. a.e.. A look at arktéia through phrasikleia..............................219 255 Development of Research Methods and Discussion Andrej Pleterski: The ancient Slavs also knew gnomons...................................................................261 265 Book reviews Éva Pócs (Ed.), Body, Soul, Spirits and Supernatural Communication (Monika Kropej Telban)...................................................................................................................................................267 Éva Ps (Ed.), Charms and Charming. Studies on Magic in Everyday Life (Monika Kropej Telban).....................................................................................................................................268 Arktická teia o našom pode (Lenka Mihová) ...............................................................................270 Jaroslav Otcenášek (ed.), Ceské lidové pohádky: 1. Zvírecí pohádky a bayky, 2/I. Kouzelné pohádky [Czech Folktales: 1. Animal Tales and Fables, 2/I. Tales of Magic] (Monika Kropej Telban)......................................................................................................272 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 5 – 6 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212401 IN MEMORIAM HAYA BAR-ITZHAK (17. 8. 1946–26. 10. 2020) Haya Bar-Itzhak, Ljubljana, June 16, 2010 Haya Bar-Itzhak, Israeli folklorist and long-time professor at the University of Haifa, was born in Berlin as Alla Goldman to Menucha (Manya) Pundik and Yosef Goldman. Her father, whose first wife and a son perished in the Holocaust, was conscripted and served in the Polish Army and then in the Red Army. In 1946, after Wladyslaw Gomulka came to power, the family immigrated from Poland to Israel. At that time, Haya was 10 and already a devoted reader of Adam Mickiewicz’s Pan Tadeusz. She received her bachelor’s and master’sdegreesfrom the University of Haifa and finished her PhDin 1987 at Hebrew University of Jerusalem with a dissertation on “The ‘Saints’ Legend’ as a Genre in Jewish Folk Literature”, under the supervision of Professor Dov Noy. Starting in 1992, Bar-Itzhak served with several intervals as chair of the Department of Hebrew and Comparative Literature and permanent Head of Folklore Studies at the University of Haifa, Israel, until her retirement. Since 1994, she also served as academic head of the Israel Folktale Archives (IFA), where she focused her research on the comparative computerized study of the folk narrative and made great effort to computerize all the IFA tales. Haya Bar-Izhak researched the folklore of Jews from various countries, including Morocco and Yemen and not just folklore from Eastern Europe. She was the editor of the first Encyclopedia of Jewish Folklore and Traditions in two volumes (London, England: M.E. Sharpe, 2013). However, for Slavic folklorists, it is her research on East European Jewish folklore and folklore studies that is of utmost importance. Bar-Itzhak showed alternative Jewish perception of Polish geography and history. The geography of Poland becomes the geography of the Jewish imagination and its landscape the landscapes of Jewish desire, for example, trees with the leaves from the Gemara prescribing Po-Lin (“Poland”; in Hebrew “lodge here”). The alternative Jewish history of Poland accentuates the Jewish wife/mistress of King Casimir and the alleged Jewish upbringing of King Jan Sobieski. The perception of Israeli space in the stories of immigration told by the Polish Jews also acquires poetic reconstruction – from alienated and inhabited by monsters to do­mesticated and loved. Haya Bar-Itzhak contributed to the research on Jewish women as cultural heroes and practically completed her last manuscript on female narratives from Eastern Europe. Among her honours is being selected as an International Fellow of the American Folklore Society, the Lerner Foundation for Yiddish Culture Award, and the National Jewish Book Award. We extend deepest condolences to Prof. Bar-Itzhak’s family, colleagues, and students. Here are the most relevant publications. BOOKS: 2001. Jewish Poland--Legends of Origin. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. 2005. Israeli Folk Narratives: Settlement, Immigration, Ethnicity. Detroit: Wayne State University, 2005. 2010. Pioneers of Jewish Ethnography and Folkloristics in Eastern Europe. Ljubljana: Scientific Research Center of the Academy of Science and Arts. PAPERS: 1998. Les Juif Polonais Face au ‘Monstre’ Israélien: Récits d’aliya en Israël des Juifs Polonais. Cahiers de Litérature Oral, 44:191–206. 2004. Folklore as Expression of Intercultural Communication between Jews and Poles – King Jan III Sobieski in Jewish Legends. In: Studia Mythologica Slavica, 7: 91–106. 2007.Cross-CulturalNarration intheNineteenthCentury:JewishFolktales TranscribedbyaPolish Author. Studia Mythologica Slavica, 10: 239–259. 2009. The Legend of the Jewish Holy Virgin: A Folkloristic Perspective. Journal of Folklore Research, 46(3): 269-291. 2009. Women in Holocaust – A Folkloristic Perspective. Fabula, 50(1/2): 67–78. 2012. Women and Blood Libel: The Legend of Adil Kikinesh of Drohobycz. Western Folklore, 71(3/4): 279–291. Larisa Fialkova Prof. Dr. Larisa Fialkova, Department of Hebrew and Comparative Liter­ature, University of Haifa, Abba Khoushy Ave 199, Haifa, Israel, lara@ research.haifa.ac.il 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 7 – 9 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212402 IN MEMORIAM PAVEL MEDVEŠCEK (8. 8. 1933–22. 10. 2020) Na predpremieri filma Jadrana Sterleta Med hribi kacjih glav sem se prvic srecal sPavlom Medvešckom. Poznal sem že njegovo knjigo Skrivnost in svetost kamna ter vedel, da je naprej in nazaj prehodil Posocje. In ker me je tedaj vznemirjal vpadljivi kamen Paciuauc sredi poliškega polja na Cerkljanskem, sem vprašal Medvešcka, ce je pri svojih obhodih izvedel kaj o tem kamnu. Obljubil je, da bo pregledal svoje zapiske in mi nato cez nekaj casa poslal list s cistopisom, ki ga je sam natipkal na pisalni stroj. Ko sem ga zacel brati, se je zgodilo nekaj, kar privošcim vsakomur, ki raziskuje preteklost. Verjamem, da bi vsak dal nekaj let življenja za možnost, da samo za nekaj minut vstopi v to preteklost in se preprica, kaj so ugibanja in kaj je resnica. Medvešckovo pismo me je prestavilo v preteklost za 15 minut. Obcutka popolne srece, ki sem ga pri temdoživel, ne bom nikoli pozabil. In kaj ga je sprožilo? Šlo je za opis trocana kot nacina življenja, ki je bil nato objavljen v knjigi Let v lunino senco in je v popolnosti neodvisno potrdil moje dolgoletne raziskave. To je bil zacetek najinega sodelovanja. Opisani dogodek pa je predvsem osvetli življenjski dosežek Pavla Medvešcka, ker ga brez tega dosežka ne bi bilo. Posrecil se mu je vstop v skrivni vzporedni svet posoških starovercev. Kako, kaj mu je vanj odprlo vrata? V duhu trocanov gre za tri stvari, ki so bile vse enako pomembne in so se dopolnjevale. Prva je bila iskrena Medvešckova ra­dovednost, ki je bila povezana s popolno predanostjo Posocju. Pripovedoval mi je, kako zelo je pri šolanju v Ljubljani pogrešal rodno Anhovo, ker ga je tuja Ljubljana preprosto dušila. Znane so sorodne pripovedi o Bohinjcih, ki so zunaj rodnega Bohinja zbolevali in umirali. Ce uporabimo besede posoških starovercev, gre za to, kje najdemo svoj stik s tretjo in peto mocjo. Najlažje je to pac doma. Gre za duševno in telesno povezanost z nekim prostorom. Medvešcek jo je premogel in se zato znal pravilno obnašati, da je pri­dobilzaupanjeJanezaStrgarja, tedanjegavoditeljastarovercev nadesnembregu Soce. Tu je nastopila druga okolnost, ki je bila v prid odpiranju vrat. Staroverska skupnost je bila že pred izumrtjem, ki se ga je Strgar dobro zavedal. Iz slovanske preteklosti je znamenit primer vaškega župana Johanna Paruma Schultzeja, ki je v nekem trenutku zacutil, da je med zadnjimi pripadniki ljudi slovanskega jezika v okolici Hannovra in se zavedal, da po smrti njega in še treh v vasi nihcene bo vedel, kako se rece psu po (polabsko) slovansko. Tako je leta 1725 zacel pisati kroniko, ki je vsebovala popis domacih (polabsko) slovanskih besed, da bi z njimi seznanil bodoci svet. In taka nuja, da bi zapustil vednost o svetu, ki je skrivno obstajal s svojim etosom in izginjal, je mucila tudi Janeza Strgarja. Njegova stiska je bila še toliko vecja, ker bi pri tem moral prelomiti prisego molcecnosti. Zato je zaprosil za znamenje volje Nikrmane in bil preprican, da je soglasje dobil, kar je bila tretja potrebna stvar. To je bil trenutek, ko so se vrata Medvešcku odprla in se pozneje tudi zaprla, ko je Strgar umrl v nenavadnih okolišcinah, ki so jih staroverci razumeli kot kazen za prelom molcecnosti. Kakorkoli, Medvešcek je cas odprtih vrat izkoristil, kot je le najbolje mogel. Kar je videl in slišal, je zapisoval, risal, ker fotografirati ni smel, ter zbiral predmete, ki so dokazovali obstoj skrivnega sveta, in ki smo jih lahko pred leti obcudovali na razstavi Staroverstvo in staroverci. Varovalka, ki jo je postavil Strgar, je bila oglarska prisega, s katero je Medvešcek obljubil, da njunih pogovorov ne bo objavil pred letom 2007, ko bo Mesec obrnjen z obema rogljema navzdol. Treba je bilo pocakati do marca 2007, da smo videli, da je imel Strgar v mislih Mesecev mrk posebnega videza, Medvešcek pa je lahko zacel pripravljati objavo pogovorov, ki jih je imel s staroverci. Bilo jih je vec, kot smo pricakovali. Njihov prvi del je izšel leta 2015 v knjigi Iz nevidne strani neba, drugi del je Medvešcek pripravljal do svojega zadnjega delovnega dne in še caka na objavo. Ce sedaj skušamo razumeti, kaj nam je Medvešcek prinesel iz skritega sveta, se mo-ramo kratko ozreti v zgodovino raziskav slovanske mitologije. Beseda mitologija ima dvapomena, ker po enistranioznacujeskupek mitov kotvir proucevanja, po drugistrani pa tudi vedo, ki to gradivo proucuje. Pri tem se je treba zavedati, da je poimenovanje slovanska mitologija predvsem tehnicne narave, kajti neenotna poimenovanja, ki segajo od mitopoeticnega izrocila, preko duhovne kulture, religiozno-mitoloških predstav, praslovanske kulture, polidoksije, predkršcanske religije do poganstva, starosvetnosti, starodavnosti in drugih izrazov niso posledica preprostega nestrinjanja pri poimenovanju istega, ampak predvsemkažejo, dasirazlicniavtorjirazlicno predstavljajo predmetsvoje obravnave. Razlicnost teh predstav je posledica razlicnih virov informacij, ki jih avtorji uporabljajo, in dejstva, da se je vse doslej zdelo, da preucujemo nekaj, kar je odmrlo in poznamo samo po redkih in nepovezanih preostankih ter zato ne moremo dobro vedeti, s cim imamo opraviti. Kot da bi morali po redkih in pokvarjenih ostankih na smetišcu sklepali o življenju v hiši, iz katere izvirajo. Medvešcek pa nam je prinesel živ opis hiše inživljenjavnjej!Posoškistarovercinisouporabljaliimenbožanskihsil,kotjihpoznamo iz srednjeveškihspisov, a zelo dobro so opisovali kompleksnost svojega življenja in do-kazali, dasvojo veroizpricujejopredvsemskozinacinsvojegaživljenja. Topajepovsem nekaj drugega kot miselni kalup, ki so ga sestavili srednjeveški kršcanski duhovniki s svojimi opisi tega, kar so poniževalno imenovali slovansko poganstvo. Njegovo jedro so videli v malikovanju sestavin narave in se posmehovali Slovanom, da cestijo tisto, kar je ustvaril kršcanski bog, namesto, da bi cestili stvaritelja samega ter jim zato ocitali nespamet. Medvešckovi zapiski kažejo, kako zelo so ti duhovniki udarili mimo in niso razumeli nicesar. Niso razumeli povezanosti cloveka in narave, ki je posebej obcutna na nekaterih mestih, in niso razumeli ljudi, ki so to povezanost živeli od zibeli do groba v vsakem trenutku svojega bivanja. Medvešcek je tako zapisal številne informacijske kljuce, ki nam odpirajo doslej zaprte sobe skritega sveta. Moj prvi je bil izrocilo o trocanih, drugi bodo našli druge kljuce. Preprican sem, da jih že najdevajo, sajsicer ne bibilo treba pripravitiže tretjega ponatisa knjige Iz nevidne strani neba. Kljuci, ki jih je skoval Pavel Medvešcek, ostajajo z nami. Andrej Pleterski Andrej Pleterski, red. prof. dddr., upokojeni sodelavec ZRC SAZU, Novi trg 2, SI–1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, andrej.pleterski@zrc-sazu.si Razprave Studi Articles 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 13 – 32 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212403 Rus, Russia, and Ukraine in Alternative Slavic Fantasy by English-Language Writers* PART 1. MEDIEVAL RUS Larisa Fialkova Alternativna slovanska fantazija je tu opre­deljena kot fantastika (spekulativna fikcija), ki so jo avtorji angleškega jezika ustvarili na podlagi resnicne ali domnevne slovanske folklore, locene od slovanske fantazije same po sebi. V prispevku je poudarek na logiki interakcije med slovanskimi ljudskimi zapleti in liki z rusko in ukrajinsko zgodovino. Prvi del govori o srednjeveški Rusi v trilogijah Petra Morwooda in Katherine Arden. Drugi del, kigovorio Rusijiin Ukrajiniv 19. in 20. stoletju, bo objavljen v naslednji številki revije. KLJUCNE BESEDE: Peter Morwood, Kath­erine Arden, alternativna in kripto zgodovina, fantazija Alternative Slavic fantasy is defined here as fantastika (speculative fiction) created by English-language writers on the basis of real or assumed Slavic folklore, separate from Slavic fantasy per se. The focus of the current paper is the logic of interaction be­tween Slavic folk plots and characters with Russian and Ukrainian history. The first part addresses Medieval Rus in Peter Morwood’s and Katherine Arden’s trilogies. The second part, which addresses Russia and Ukraine in the 19th-20th centuries will be published in the next issue of the journal. KEYWORDS: Peter Morwood, Katherine Arden, alternative and crypto history, fantasy INTRODUCTION Alternative Slavic fantasy is defined here as fantastika (speculative fiction) created by English-language writers based on real or assumed Slavic folklore, separate from Slavic fantasy per se. Starting in 1989 with the publication of Rusalka, the first part of Carolyn Janice Cherryh’s The Russian trilogy, it is still underway (Cherryh 1989). This Slavic trend in English-language fantasy is under-researched. Karlijn Kitzen is the first to have explored it from a comparative perspective. Her MA thesis focuses on four female * In 2017-18, two of my Hebrew-speaking Israeli students, Aleksis Bar Gefen and Sharon Kashro, alerted me to English-language novels based on Slavic folklore. In 2019, I received important advice from Serbian colleague Tijana Tropin, whom I met at the conference Slavic Folklore and Slavic Fantastika http://rastko.rs/ rastko/delo/16029 following my presentation. I am grateful to them all. authors: Leigh Bardugo, whom she mistakenly considers the founder of the trend, Kath­ erine Arden, Evelyn Skye, and Emily A. Duncan. Kitzen defines the main reason for the emergence of this trend in fantastika as a need for diversity (gender, linguistic, geographic and more) among the young adults who constitute its target audience. While remaining largely unknown and mysterious, Russia’s proliferation in global politics makes it a good alternative to the European Middle Ages, the traditional setting for fantasy. She addresses plots and various ways of representing Russianness, including names, language, food, clothes, folklore and history (Kitzen 2019: 13–17, 79–80). She does not, however, consult historical or folklore sources outside the novels and consequently does not address ways of manipulating history and folklore. Recently, Bogdan Trocha has addressed novels by Gaiman, Valente and Arden mainly from a rhetorical perspective. He shows different types of re-narration (e.g., partial, hybrid, didactic etc.) with a gradual pass from ornamentation to genuine interest in the content of Slavic folklore. Trocha points to combining fairy tales with history but does not address its mechanism (Trocha 2020). Manipulation with fairy tales is not in his focus either. This paper is the continuation of my project on alternative Slavic fantasy, which was initially limited to American writers of fantastika (Fialkova 2020). Here, however, I expand it to bring in Irish fantast Peter Morwood. In the first paper of this series, I addressed the channels through which these authors know about Slavic folklore (including formal and informal education, work experience and occasionally family stories) and how they use this knowledge in their novels. The study encompassed 18 novels by 10 writers, focusing on those by four of them: Carolyn Janice Cherryh, Leigh Bardugo, Emily A. Duncan and Naomi Novik. I chose their novels because they have one important thing in common: their imaginary worlds, sometimes with imaginary maps, have no direct links to Slavic history. Although some of their to-ponyms are identical to those in the real world (e.g., Kiev in Cherryh’s trilogy, Kerch in that of Leigh Bardugo’s trilogies, and Kalyazin in Emily Duncan’s book), their literary embodiments are new. Thus, Kalyazin is featured not as a town, but as a country, a var­iant of Russia itself. Other toponyms, although slightly changed, remain recognisable, like Polnya and Rosya in Naomi Novik’s novel. Alternatively, there are those which are completely new, such as Ravka for Russia in Bardugo’s writings and Tranavia for Poland in those by Duncan. The enemies and allies in these novels are also fictional. All contain signs of estranged Slavic worlds, from the representation of language, coats of arms, architecture and personal names to clothes, food, folk characters and/or beliefs. Inaccurate representations may signal not so much a lack of knowledge as the authors’ choice (Fialkova 2020: 445–447, 450, 452). In future of this series, I will discuss novels in which Slavic folk characters meet Americans, whether on Slavic or American soil. The focus of the current paper is the logic of interaction between Slavic folk plots and characters and Russian (and, to a lesser extent, Ukrainian) history. Relevant material is abundant in the novels of Katherine Arden (2017, 2018, 2019), Orson Scott Card (Card 1999), Peter Morwood (Morwood 2016, 2016a, 2016b), Evelyn Skye (2016, 2017) and Catherynne Valente (2011). My main research questions are: (1) Which historical peri­ods, events, and personalities do English-language writers choose for their alternative Slavic historical fantasy? (2) How does space correspond to time? (3) Which folk plots and characters appear in these historical fantasies, and how do they influence alternative Russian and/or Ukrainian history? These questions are addressed in each novel. The novels are discussed according to the chronology of the historical periods and events around which their plots are built. PETER MORWOOD’S RUS/RUSSIA Peter Morwood was born Robert Peter Smyth in Northern Ireland in 1956. Morwood was his mother’s maiden name, which he legally adopted in the 1980s. Unfortunately, my attempts to learn what enticed him to Russian folklore and Russian history met without success. Morwood’s trilogy copyright dates to 1988, preceding all other English-language fantasy based on Slavic folklore, but Cherryh’s first novel outstrips him in publication date. Parts of Morwood’s trilogy were first published by Legend Paperbacks in 1990, 1992, and 1993 (the last was revised in 2015). There is talk of his turning his trilogy into a tetralogy with a fourth book, entitled The Blue Kremlin, but it has yet to materialise. I used electronic editions of his books, which allow me to cite exact locations for specific words and sentences rather than simply page numbers. Morwood creates his historical fantasy by grafting history to fairy tales or vice versa. The main stories he uses are Maria Morevna,1 The Tale of Ivan Tsarevich, The Bird of Light and The Grey Wolf 2 (Afanasev 1916: 78–91, 192–203; Afanasiev 1984: 300–305, 331–343; Zheleznova 1966). His choice of genre is notable, because fairy tale is far more distant from history than bylina – Russian epic poetry, but it would be a mistake to assume this choice is a sign of ignorance. Fairy tales, comical and risqué novelistic tales and byliny (sometimes spelt as byliniy3) are addressed, recollected and contested in the text. Either this is general (Morwood 2016: 492, 1835, 2208, 2492, 3870, 3886, 3999, 2016a: 1536, 4223–4225, 4267–4280, 2016b: 454), or specific; for example, bylina about bogatyr Svyatogor who closed himself in a coffin, or confusion between Ivan and the epic bogatyr Il’ya Muromets made by some characters (Bailey, Ivanova 1998: 12–80; Morwood 2016b: 1989–1995, 5091). Folklore for Morwood is not just a warehouse of plots and motifs but a source comparable with ancient chronicles. Both types of sources may be ascertained as right or wrong. Folktales and byliny are among 1,001 items (clear allusion to The Arabian Nights), which constitute education not only for any Tsar’s son,but even for the Grey Wolf (Morwood 2016: 258, 407–408, 2016a: 1536). 1 Maria Morevna AT 552A (birds or animals as brothers-in-law, + 4001 + 554 grateful animals help to fulfill difficult tasks + 3022 (Death of Koshchei from a horse). Some names and motifs Morwood borrowed from the fairy tale KoshcheiBessmertnyi (Koshchei the Deathless; Morwood calls him Koshchei the Undying) (Afanasiev 1984: 295–300), AT 3021 + 4001 + 516 (faithful servant). 2 AT 550 (A Firebird and The Grey Wolf). ‘Grey’ is the popular spelling of the color in the UK and Ireland, while in the USA ‘gray’ prevails. Zhar-ptitsa is more often translated as ‘the Firebird’ rather than ‘the Bird of Light.’ I use Firebird, as does Morwood. 3 I use italics when following Morwood’s transliteration. Morwood’s Rus, which he uses interchangeably with Russia, comprises many prin­cipalities (that of Kiev, Novgorod, Ryazan and more) with princes, whose names readers may remember from history textbooks. However, it also contains an entirely fictional state, the Independent Tsardom of Khorlov, ruled by Tsar Alexandr Andreyevich and Tsaritsa Ludmila Ivanovna. The tsardom and not the principality is important because only the Tsar’s son can be a Tsarevich and thus combine within himself the famous fairy tale character Ivan Tsarevich and the quasi-historical Tsarevich Ivan. To make him more real, Morwood always uses the title ‘Tsarevich’ before the name and never after it, according to the historical norm rather than the folk formula. The title on the cover of the trilogy’s first book is, however, Prince Ivan, and in the text ‘Prince’ is used interchangeably with ‘Tsarevich’ (Morwood 2016: 58, 72, 187, 210, 232 etc.). In the final book of the trilogy, Tatars call Ivan ‘Prince’ or a ‘Great Prince,’ although by this time he is already Tsar (Morwood 2016b: 2506–2508). The title ‘Prince’ thus becomes inferior. At a time of feudal fragmentation, the small Tsardom of Khorlov, which in many ways resembles Chernigov (Morwood 2016b: 3590–3591), is vulnerable and depends heavily on strategic marriages for Tsar’s three daughters, Ekaterina, Yelizaveta, and Yelena, and especially for Tsarevich Ivan, who must produce a legal heir. The Tsar’s daughters are rather independent, which makes finding them husbands more problematic (Morwood 2016: 432–437), but the royal intermarriages do take place. The chosen bridegrooms are not, however, from Kievan Rus but from the magic lands. Mirroring the Russian fairy tale Maria Morevna, the bridegrooms appear as birds (a falcon, an eagle, and a raven) and turn into men. They are Fenist Charodeyevich Sokolov, Prince of the High Mountains, Vasiliy Charodeyevich Orlov, Prince of the Wide Steppes and Mikhail Charodeyevich Voronov, Prince of the Dark Forests. Ivan marries Mar’ya Koldunovna Morevna, a woman warrior and ruler of the Independent Principality of Koldunov. Although Morwood does not translate their names, their possible English equivalents are Fenist Magicianovich Falconov, Vasiliy Magicianovich Eaglov, and Mikhail Magicianovich Ravenov. Importantly, while the fairy tale characters have nei­ther patronymics nor surnames, Sokolov, Orlov, and Voronov are all popular Russian surnames, alluding to birds rather than fairy tales. The Grey Wolf is often referred to as Volk Volkovich, which can be translated as Wolf Wolfovich. Mar’ya Koldunovna Morevna, in my translation, becomes Maria Sorcererovna Morevna from the Independent Principality of Sorcererov. In the fairy tale, she has no patronymic, similarly to the birds. Morevna is part of her name, although its grammatical form is typical of the patronymic.4 In Morwood’s trilogy, where her patronymic is Koldunovna, Morevna, is like a surname. It is important to note that patronymics are a clear indication of constructed Russianness in Cherryh’s and Duncan’s alternative Slavic fantasies, as well as Morwood’s (Fialkova 2020: 443, 450, Morwood 2016: 202, 560, 1114, 1375). In other words, Morwood’s Rus/ Russia borders on a timeless, fairytale-like world, whose rulers have dynastic ties with the royal family of the Tsardom of Khorlov. The Internet has unscholarly explanations of Morevna as a patronymic, e.g., a daughter of More (Sea) or Mor (Epidemy), but these are not sufficiently based. The Rus/Russia of Morwood’s novels exists in quasi-historical time. While fairy tale time is dominant in the first part of the trilogy, quasi-historical time, present from the beginning, becomes more prominent in subsequent books. It manifests in various ways, including implicit or explicit dates and events, but is not limited to them. The plot begins fifty years after the Christianisation of Novgorod (Morwood 2016: 4216). Because this was in 990-991, we may assume that Morwood’s starting date is 1040 AD. It would, however, be wrong to seek consistency. Morwood’s Rus/Russia mixes people and events from different periods. Prince Yuriy Vladimirovich of Kiev,5 for example, coexists with Manguyu Temir6 of the Golden Horde, the princely retinue of the Kievan Rus (i.e., dru­zhinya7) coincides with the Cossacks from Don, Kuban, Terek and Zaporozh’ye,8 as well as with officers of the Russian gvardia guard — guard-captain Akimov, who is Ivan’s military instructor,9 is an example (Morwood 2016: 178, 328, 835-836, 1187, 4176, 4799). In the trilogy’s first book, most of the adversaries are supernatural (for example, Koshchey the Undying and Baba Yaga), and Ivan must face them largely in the fairy tale world (Morwood, 2016: 1396, 3742–3744). In the next two, however, many of his enemies are human and related to historical or, rather, to quasi-historical events. In the second book, they are Teutonic Knights who, according to Morwood, prepare for a Crusade against Rus in 1234 and ingloriously perish, falling through cracked ice on the river Nemen10 in 1235. In the third book, they are Tatars in general, and the Great Khan Ogotai and Batu Khan in particular, who, in 1237, brings destruction to Ryazan and by 1243 to most of Rus. Despite this apparent spatiotemporal concreteness, the events and characters in Mor­wood’s books differ considerablyfrom their historical prototypes. The Crusade, referred to as either Northern, Livonian or Baltic, was launched by the Livonian Brothers of the Sword (or Sword Brothers), not the Teutonic Knights. The battle, in which the heavily armed knights drown with their horses through the melting ice, in reality took place not in 1235 on the River Nemen, but in 1234 on the River Emaj.gi11 (Selart 2015: 135). The alliance between the Sword Brothers and the Teutonic knights did not occur until 1237, three years after the former were defeated on the Emaj.gi (Krivosheev, Sokolov 2012: 276). In Morwood’s book, the Russian troops are led by Maria Morevna and Tsarevich Ivan.Theirvictoryis won withthehelp,first, ofaGreyWolf,whichsaves Ivananddrives the Russians from the ice in the nick of time (Morwood 2016a: 5807–5826), and then of a Firebird, which melts the ice under the opposing army (Morwood 2016a: 5829–5839). 5 We may assume this is Yuri Dolgorukii (1090s-1157). He was the Prince of Rostov in 1125-1157 (Martin 2007: 110). 6 Mengu -Timur, khan at Sarai 1266-67-1281 (Martin 2007: 185). 7 This is Morwood’s spelling of druzhina. Italics are Morwood’s. The starting-point of druzhina varies ac­cording to different historical theories, from the 5/6th to the 9th centuries, to the late 12th-early 13th centuries. 8 This is Morwood’s spelling of Zaporozhian (Russian) or Zaporizhian (Ukrainian) Cossacks. Longworth starts Russian and Ukrainian Cossacks history from the 15th century (Longworth 1970: 8). 9 Russian Imperial Guard or Leib Guard was founded by Peter the Great in 1683 (Dubeniuk 2019). 10 Nemen is Morwood’s spelling. This hydronym has different forms — Neman, but also Nemunas, Nio-man, Nyoman, NiemenandMemel. 11 Emaj.gi is its name in Estonian. In Russian, it is Omovzha, and in German, Embach. All the glory, however, goes to the unpleasant if pragmatic prince Alexandr Nevskiy,12 who performs no heroic deeds at all. He not only brings his own chronicler to Nemen to ensure only his exaltation, but later orders the Lavrent’skiy and Novgorod chronicles13 changed to eliminate all mention of the Firebird’s role in melting the ice — and, in fact, all mention of anyone other than himself. He even changes the date of the battle to imply that his nickname ‘Nevskiy’ comes from a battle honour rather than a birthplace (Morwood 2016a: 5906–5907, 2016b: 4980–4987). In other words, Morwood deliberately uses the notorious manipulation, omissions, and additions of old Russian chronicles (Selart 2015: 10) as rationalisation for his historical fantasy. He doubtless knows that Prince Iaroslav Vsevolodovich led the Russian troops in 1234, whereas his 14-year-old son Alexander, although present at Omovzha/ Emaj.gi/Embach, performed no heroic deeds in this battle. Morwood’s ironic reference to Alexander’s sobriquet ‘Nevsky’, and to the change of dates in the chronicles hint at Alexander’s future triumph over the Swedes in the battle on the River Neva in 1240, the true source of his nickname. It also implicitly points to Alexander Nevsky’s victory over the Teutonic Knights in Ledovoe poboishche, the Battle on the Ice on Lake Peipus in 1242.14 In 1242, however, unlike in the 1234 battle, the ice did not crack, and the knights did not drown. In other words, by changing Sword Brothers to Teutonic knights, Iaroslav Vsevolodovich to Alexandr Nevskiy and juggling the dates, Morwood combines malen’koe ledovoe poboishche, the Small Battle on the Ice of 1234 (Krivosheev, Sokolov 2012: 274) with the famous Ledovoe poboishche, the 1242 Battle on the Ice on Lake Peipus. Another major change isMorwood’s replacement of the miraculous helper. Instead of it being God, as in Novgorodskaia pervaia letopis (1950: 73), the Firebird causes the ice to melt. Supernatural help is characteristic in old chronicles. Alexander’s victory over the Teutonic Knights in 1242, for example, was won with the help of God, St. Sofia, and St. Martyrs Boris and Gleb (ibid: 78). Morwood simply replaces Christian miracles with fabulous wonders. Manipulation of the chronicles has another major impact on the trilogy: Batu Khan destroys the parchment relating the story of Ivan, thus erasing the Independent Tsardom of Khorlov and Principality of Koldunov from Russian history and sending them into fairytale land (Morwood 2016b: 6133–6139, 6178). The symbiosis of paganism and Christianity, addressed in my paper on alternative Slavic fantasy’s mythological trend (Fialkova 2020: 446, 450–451, 452–453), is evident in historical fantasy, as well. In this latter case, however, it is incessantly contested by Christian priests, both Catholic and Orthodox, who may either try to supplant wizards and witches or mobilise them in a joint endeavour. 12 St. Alexandr or Alexander Nevsky (1221-1263). 13 It is Morwood’s spelling of Laurentian chronicle or codex, 1377, which contains Zhitie — Life of Alexan­ der Nevsky. http://expositions.nlr.ru/LaurentianCodex/_Project/page_Show.php?list=341&n=388. Laurential and the 1st Novgorod chronicles https://bookree.org/reader?file=762235&pg=70 are the earliest sources about Alexander Nevsky (last accessed 12.09.2020). 14 The lake is known in Russian as Chudskoe or Pskovsko-Chudskoye ozero and, in Estonian as Peipsi-Pihva j.rv. Serving the Tsardom of Khorlov are both the Metropolitan Archbishop Levon Pop-ovich and the First Minister and Court Wizard and ‘long-liver’15 Dmitriy Vasil’yevich Strel’tsin, who teaches Ivan theory of government and magic skills, both perceived as obligatory for a future Tsar (Morwood 2016: 113, 264–265). Despite ongoing opposition to magic in general and to sorcerers as husbands for Ivan’s sisters in particular, Levon Popovich is obliged to perform their Christian marriages (Morwood 2016: 242–247, 579–583, 1125–1128). More than that, he later has to accept, much against his will, Ivan and his sorceress wife Mar’ya Morevna as Khorlov’s Tsar and Tsaritsa (Morwood 2016b: 535–590). Strel’tsin’s magic of small things is in counterpoint to the high magic of the necromancer Koshchey the Undying (Morwood 2016: 104, 1475, 1483) as positive to negative, similarly to that between different types of magic in alternative Slavic myth­ological novels by Carolyn Cherryh and Leigh Bardugo. Education in magic includes responsibility and strictly defined wishes as precautionary measures. Loosely formulated, impolite, or excessive wishes may have unexpected and unwanted consequences, among them the cruel death of the wisher. The use of high/evil magic by positive characters is always regarded as problematic although sometimes inevitable (Fialkova 2020: 444, 446, 448; Morwood 2016: 3378–3390, 2016a: 3858–3890, 2016b: 597–598, 5800–5810). Christianity is accepted not only in the Tsardom of Khorlov but even in Mar’ya Mor­evna’s Independent Principality of Koldunov. Her Orthodox chaplain, the Kanonarch Protodeacon Sergey Strigunov gives up all attempts to reconcile Christianity with her magic (Morwood 2016a: 591–595). The bird-husbands of Ivan’s sisters cross themselves and pray in different situations, notably when resurrecting Ivan from the dead necessitates their performing high magic/necromancy (Morwood 2016: 3361, 3390, 3469–3474, 3484). Magic also finds its way into the citadel of Catholicism. According to Morwood, ‘the papal attitude to sorcery is one of guarded approval’, but in Rus it is practised without papal consent and serves as the pretext for the Crusade. Hermann von Salza, Grand Master of the Teutonic Order,16 is not only sufficiently skilled in magic to have a coffer of freely changeable size but agrees to seek help from the traitorous Baba Yaga herself. The Teuton defeat in battle is, in fact, to a large extent the result of Baba Yaga’s misbehaviour with the Firebird. The Firebird takes revenge by eagerly helping Mar’ya Morevna and Ivan in cruelly eliminating Baba Yaga (Morwood 2016a: 212, 360, 1378–1389, 2062–2186, 3207–3213, 3840–3873, 4747, 5218–5230). Magic is acquired not only through formal lessons but also through self-education — reading. Brochures, manuscripts, books and libraries, therefore, feature prominently not only in the mythological trend of alternative Slavic fantasy (Fialkova 2020: 452–453), but in Morwood’s historical fantasy as well. They constitute important items that can be given, inherited, stolen, fought for, resumed and/or found through intuition. Their languages and scripts require linguistic proficiency in their readers. Mar’ya Morevna’s late father thus 15 Long life is also characteristic of witches and wizards in mythological alternative Slavic fantasy, e.g., in the novels of Cherryh, Bardugo and Novik (Fialkova 2020: 444, 448, 453). 16 Hermann von Salza (1179-1239) was indeed a Grand Master of the Teutonic Order. Unlike in Morwood’s plot, however, he had no part in the 1234 Battle on the Ice (Seward 1995: 97-102). makes especially important notations in Norse runes. Another book in her library, On the Summoning of Demons, which Ivan reads on her recommendation, is oxymoronically written in supposedly ancient Hungarian penned in Old Slavonic Cyrillic script (Morwood 2016:2792–2804,2016a:492–510).Ivanis alsoproficientinreadingLatinmanuscripts but cannot decipher Homer’s Il’yad17 either in its original Greek or in High Church Slavonic old Glagolitic script and must rely on a Russian translation made by his late father-in-law. The Iliad, as a source of empowerment, is depicted, with an aura of irony, as akin to magic books. In its verses, Ivan finds a description of the drink of heroes: wine mixed with resin and salt (if not directly with seawater). Surmising that only a true hero would regularly drink so disgusting a concoction, Ivan develops a taste for it, and it is this drink that he proposes to his so-called guest, Batu Khan’s representative Amragan Tarkhan (noble), who is in Khorlov to demand submission to Tatars. Ivan’s plan to confound Amragan with the drink fails, however, as the Tatar is clearly accustomed to it. Since this drink of heroes is, in fact, a cocktail, I suggest it is inspired by cyceon (also kykeon), the only cocktail in the Iliad, which Hecamede prepares for Nestor and Eurydemon.18 Morwood directly compares the Tsardom of Khorlov with Troy and makes use of the ethos of drinking in Homer’s world, which sometimes involves doing so with the enemy, as did Achilles and Priam (Morwood 2016b: 2759–2803; Papakonstantonou 2009: 4, 13). Allusion to the Iliad is similar to that of the old chronicles, as discussed above: hinted facts overcome major alterations. Remarkably, in this quasi-Slavic historical fantasy, Morwood prefers referencing Homer’s epic than he does byliny, although feasts and alcohol consumption are also prominent there (Harkins 1976). Morwood’s characters need polyglot skills not only for reading but also for oral comprehension, which is especially important in diplomacy and in the eavesdropping of scouts. The Grey Wolf (Volk Volkovich) speaks some Farsi but is helpless with Ui­ghur and Turku-Mongol dialects (Morwood 2016b: 2117–2118). His acquaintance with Turkish and Mongol mythology is, however, sufficient for understanding its importance in magic, and he disguises himself as the Blue She-Wolf, considered sacred by Turks and Tatars, connected to the god Tengri, the Blue Sky, and ancestor of the Chinggisid lineage. Evidently, the invaders do not dare question their ‘sacred ancestor’s’ clumsy Farsi, which helps Volk Volkovich successfully scout (Dalkesen 2017: 195; Morwood 2016b: 1296–1300, 2116–2118; Shcherbak 1993: 204, 206, 209). Full proficiency in languages and magic is given solely to Mar’ya Morevna. She not only understands dualism (Chernobog, the Black God, versus Belobog, the White God; Erlik Khan versus Tengri as evil versus good, which some readers may also know19) but 17 This is Morwood’s spelling of the Iliad. 18 ‘Therein the woman, like to the goddesses, mixed a potion for them with Pramnian wine, and on this she grated cheese of goat’s milk with a brazen grater, and sprinkled thereover white barley meal; and she bade them drink, when she had made ready the potion’ (Homer, XI: 618–643). 19 Chernobog is very popular in alternative Slavic fantasy (Fialkova 2020: 443, 454). However, not all scholars agree that Belobog and Chernobog actually were Slavic gods and perceive them as artificial reconstructions on the basis of toponymical data and literary reminiscences (Tolstoi 1995: 151). Similarly, the dualism of Erlik Khan and Tengri is contested by many experts in ancient Turkish religion (Alici 2011: 148-151). espouses what I can only define as an alternative vision of gods. She denies the Russianness of Chernobog and the Turkishness of Erlik Khan, asserting that they are the same evil force. Similarly, she declares that Belobog, Othinn, Thorr,20 Tengri and Archangel Mikhail are simply different names for the same force of good (Morwood 2016b: 5882–5885, 6046–6049). Inborn skill in sorcery, correct upbringing by her father Koldun and serious education help Mar’ya Morevna in many areas, from acquiring help from the Firebird to mitigating the disastrous consequences of misuse of magic by the Tatars and reckless Russian amateurs. Despite all her knowledge and power, however, she is not omnipotent. While easily slaying thousands of Tatars in battle single-handedly, she cannot win the war against them or even prevent displacement of the Independent Principality of Koldunov and the Independent Tsardom of Khorlov from Rus to the Summer country in fairy tale land. Ivan’s surmise that it will be the western knights rather than the Russian princes who end their quarrels in the face of invasion and unite (Morwood 2016b: 1706–1712) points to two important issues: the return to history and Morwood as an outsider. The perception of Rus as the shield of Europe, whether or not correct, is deeply etched into the collective Russian psyche. In Morwood’s world, it does not exist. FROM IVAN KALITA TO DMITRY DONSKOI: KATHERINE ARDEN’S RUSSIAN HISTORICAL FANTASY Katherine Arden has a BA in Russian studies from Middlebury College in Vermont and spent more than a year studying in Moscow. There is additional material to each book of her Winternight Trilogy (i.e., interviews, author’s notes on transliteration and her treating of history, reader’s guides and glossaries) indicating the educational orientation of the author and publisher. In this material, Arden details some of her sources for Russian history and culture, including Afanasyev’s collection of folktales, Linda Ivanits’s Russian Folk Belief, the Domostroi, and Janet Martin’s Medieval Russia (2017: 326, 327, 329, 2018: 349–350). Contrary to Morwood, Arden does not mix different periods and events of Russian history but concentrates on the 14th century. Following Janet Martin’s textbook, she addresses rules of succession and their role in political legitimacy, the importance of the Orthodox Church in political decision-making, and Rus’s relations with the Golden Horde (Martin 2007: 221). The temporal borders of her plot start under Prince Ivan Kalita’s (?-1340)21 rule in Moscow in the 1330s and end after the victory of his grandson, Prince Dmitrii Ivanovich (1350-1389), over the armies of the Golden Horde in the Battle of Kulikovo (Snipes’ Field) near the River Don in 1380, a battle that gave him sobriquet Donskoi. Arden claims to have striven for accuracy, a claim which, in many aspects, can be accepted. 20 Othinn and Thorr are Morwood’s spelling of Odin, supreme god in the Germanic and Northern pantheon and his son, Thor. 21 Kalita means ‘the money-bag’ in English (Martin 2007: 208). Various sources give different years for his birth — 1284, 1288, 1304 etc. (Borisov 2005: 61; Ekzempliarskii 1889: 71). She addresses the devastating plague. She knows that the Russians were forced to pay Tatars silver tribute, a shortage of which they suffered in the years preceding the Battle of Kulikovo. She is aware that rivers were used as routes to bring tribute to the Tatars and that these routes were often unsafe. Dmitrii tried to deliver tribute to Mamai in 1378-1380 but was unable to do so because of confrontations with Tatars (Arden 2019: 130–132; Martin 2007: 236–237). Arden even indicates changes she made for dramatic reasons, for example, making Prince Vladimir Andreevich of Serpukhov (1353-1410) older than Dmitrii Ivanovich, although he was, in fact, younger, and marrying him to a girl named Olga Petrovna22 (Arden 2017: 314, 2018: 349–350; Kitzen 2019: 44–46). She does not, however, address certain other, more blatant changes. Thus, Prince Oleg of Ryazan, who eventually supported Mamai in the Battle of Kulikovo, fights on the Russian side against Tatars in Arden’s version of history (Arden 2019: 344–346; Martin 2007: 236). Like Morwood, Arden combines Russian history with fairy tales, and Christianity with paganism, but in quite different ways. The Church’s struggle against the old gods, whom it perceives as chyerti23 (devils), lead to their decline. Pagan spirits starve with­ out offerings. In their enfeebled form, they fade away, unable to defend Rus from the Tatars. For Rus to survive, there must be peace, unity and a pooling of power between Christianity and paganism. Again, unlike Morwood, characters who originate in fairy tales (both folk and literary) are interwoven with the genealogy of historical Russian princes. An example is the family tree of Vasilisa Petrovna, the trilogy’s protagonist, usually known by the gender-neutral diminutive Vasya, which signals her androgynous character, or sometimes by feminine diminutive Vasochka. Her great-grandmother is the folktale character Baba Yaga, usually portrayed as a villain or, more often, a donor. Her great grandfather is Chernomor, a pos­itive sea-related character from Pushkin’s The Tale of Tsar Saltan (Arden 2019: 368-369; Propp 2012: 156–162; Pushkin 1978 [1831]24). Their daughter, Vasya’s grandmother 22 Vladimir Andreyevich the Bold, Prince of Serpukhov and Ivan Kalita’s grandson, was married to Elena. However, his wife’s patronymic, Olgerdovna, is phonetically close to Olga http://100.histrf.ru/commanders/ serpukhovskoy-vladimir-andreevich/ (last accessed 22.03.2021). 23 Arden feels free to spell Russian names and other words as she likes. It is important to her that the words ‘retain a bit of exotic flavor’, be ‘reasonably pronounceable and aesthetically pleasing to speakers of English’ (Arden 2017: 313), although she uses them without any graphic signals, e.g., molodets, devochka, medved, domovoi, vodianoy, chyerti, Bashnya Kostei, etc. (Arden 2017: 10, 24–25, 82, 113; Arden 2018: 298). I have put Arden’s spelling of Russian words in italics. 24 ‘Lo! The ocean swells in thunder, Surges with a mighty roar, Overflows a barren shore, Leaving, wonderful to see, Thirty stalwart knights and three, All in mail a-gleaming bright, Marching proudly left and right; Each one brave beyond compare, Tall of stature, young and fair, All alike beyond belief, Led by Chernomor, their chief.’ Each book or the trilogy starts with an epigraph from Pushkin. Tamara, is devastated by a love affair with the fairy tale villain Kaschei,25 and marries the widowed Grand Prince (Duke) of Moscow, Ivan Kalita. Unfortunately, there is no reliable information about Ivan Kalita’s real-life second wife, Uliana, who gave birth to either one daughter (Ekzempliarskii 1889: 79–8026) or two daughters (Borisov 2005: 218–219). Arden replaces Uliana and her anonymous progeny with the fictional Tamara, her daughter Marinaandfivegrandchildren, providing themwithbiographies of her choice. Although Marina has no magic ability, she is given in marriage to a boyar, Pyotr Vladimirovich, and lives in a remote estate in the woods, thus ridding the Great Prince’s palace of a witch’s daughter. Marina dies giving birth to her fifth child, Vasilisa, who, as she mysteriously knows, will inherit her grandmother Tamara’s magic power. Several years after Marina’s death, Ivan Kalita’s son, Great Prince Ivan Krasnii (1326-1359),27 relying on the advice of Aleksei, Metropolitan of Moscow (1293-1378),28 arranges two marriages. First, is that of Olga, eldest daughter of Pyotr and Marina, to Prince Vladimir Andreevich of Serpukhov. Its purpose is to prevent Vladimir from making a more polit­ically advantageous marriage and thus neutralise his probable aspirations to rival Dmitrii Ivanovich. The second is marrying Pyotr Vladimirovich to his daughter from his first marriage, Anna. This young girl of Arden’s creation is not only hated by her mother-in-law but can see chyerti (devils), thus potentially damaging the reputation of Ivan Krasnii’s other children and especially that of his heir. It should be noted that Vladimir Andreevich, Dmitrii Ivanovich and Anna Ivanovna, along with Pyotr and Marina’s five children, are all Ivan Kalita’s grandchildren, and thus cousins, making Arden’s trilogy a family saga (Arden 2017: 44–46, 55–57).29 Whereas Morwood’s characters often read fairy tales and byliny as part of their magic education, Arden’s characters learn them in the traditional way, by hearing them, from old Marina’s and her children’s nanny Dunya and, later, from Vasya. Among these stories are Finist the Falcon,30 Ivan and the Gray Wolf, Firebird, Marya Morevna and especially the story of Frost or Morozko, which Dunya tells in full at the beginning of the trilogy. Dunya’s story is, in fact, a combination of two of Afanasyev’s versions, to which Arden makes several changes. A poor, half-orphaned girl Marfusha is sent to the winter forest by her father’s wife to marry Morozko (Frost). Instead of freezing to death, as the wicked stepmother intends, she returns home with a large dowry for a human 25 Cf. his name in Arden’s trilogy, Kaschei the Deathless, who ‘can never die’ (Arden 2017: 20; 2018: 267, 323), with its version in Morwood’s trilogy discussed above - Koshchei the Undying. 26 Information in the note continues on page 80 after the item on Ivan Kalita. 27 Ivan Krasnyi or Ivan II Ivanovich the Fair, had two sons, Dmitrii and Ivan, and a daughter, whose name is unknown (Ekzempliarskii 1889: 92). Arden calls the daughter Anna and gives her a fictional biography. 28 Metropolitan Aleksii or Alexis was Ivan Kalita’s godson. He became Ivan Krasnyi’s adviser and, after his death, regent to his heir Dmitrii, who was still a child. Aleksii was canonised by the Russian Orthodox Church in 1448 (Martin 2007: 231; Prokhorov 1988). 29 Martin, whose book is the main source of Arden’s historical knowledge, mentions Vladimir Andreevich’s importance, as well as neutralising possible rivals through intra-dynastic marriages, a practice which Kalita’s descendants regularly implemented (2007: 211–213, 231). 30 Differently from Morwood, Arden uses the transliteration Finist and not Fenist, Gray and not Grey (Arden 2017: 4). husband. The stepmother’s own daughter then tries to get herself a dowry in the same way but dies in the attempt. In Dunya’s story, mother and daughter are named Darya and Liza and both die. After Dunya finishes the tale, little Olga, the future princess of Serpukhov, wonders whether Marfusha indeed marries King Frost, which Dunya denies (Arden 2017: 4–9; Afanasiev 1984: 113–117; Zheleznova 196631). Taking into account Morozko’s prominent place in Arden’s trilogy and his union with Vasilisa by its end, it is easy to make a mistake and to perceive this fairy tale as the main source for the plot (Kitzen 2019: 50, 87–89). Some Morozko-related motifs in Arden’s trilogy do not, however, correspond to Afanasyev’s folktales. The two most prominent are: (1) Anna Ivanovna’s command to Vasya in the first book to bring podsnezhniki — snowdrops from the winter forest; and (2) Vasya’s sexual liaison with Morozko and their prospective union in the third book. The sources of both are easily identified: Samuil Marshak’s play, Twelve Months, written in 1942–1943 (Marshak 1958).32 Prior to Marshak, the same motif of flowers in winter, though with violets in place of snowdrops, is found in the Czech folktale recorded by Božena Nemcová in 1857-1858, and in its Russian retelling by Nikolai Leskov in 1863. Whereas Marshak cites Slavic folk poetry as a source of his inspiration (Marshak 1958: 351), Katia Senne suggests this is mere camouflage for hisfamiliarity with Nikolai Lesk­ov’s retelling of Nemcová (Senne 2017: 230).33 In both the Czech folktale and Leskov’s retelling, the young woman marries a mortal man (a farmer or peasant), who will look after the house, cow and field that she inherits from her stepmother and stepsister. In Marshak’s play, however, after the month of April gives her the snowdrops, she accepts his magic ring, unaware of its association with marriage (Marshak 1958: 398–400). In Arden’s book, in contrast to those by Nemcová, Leskov, and Marshak, Morozko is not a month but the King of Frost and the spirit of Death Karachun.34 He cannot change places 31 The current English translation lacks the motif of marriage to Morozko as the formal pretext for the girl’s banishment. 32 It also became the basis for cartoons (Ivanov-Vano 1956) and a movie (Granik 1972), both of which were very popular. Marshak’s play was translated into English, and cartoons and a movie with English subtitles can befoundon YouTube(Marshak2000).A moviewith subtitles is at:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gbei­ OMN0RMs, cartoons with subtitles are at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cy_omhxRhM (last accessed 12.10.2020). 33 In Nemcová’s version of the story, a cruel step-sister, Holena, supported by her mother, sends orphaned Maruška three times to the wood in cold January weather to bring her, in turn, violets, strawberries and apples. Maruška finds twelve brother-months near a big bonfire. Taking pity on the sweet, unfortunate girl the broth­ers help her. So she can get what she needs, January temporarily changes place with March, then June, then September, each providing her with things they rule. Nothing, however, satisfies the greedy Holena. She puts on her fur coat and goes to the woods to find more apples, even if they are guarded in hell by the devil. Her offensive behavior irritates January, who freezes her to death. Holena’s mother runs to the wood in search of her daughter, where she, too, dies. Maruška inherits their property and soon marries a nice, handsome young farmer (Nemcová No Year). Leskov’s version is close to the original (Leskov, No Year). 34 Although Arden cites Ivanits’s book as her source about Russian mythology, its subject index has neither Karachun nor Korochun (Ivanits 1989: 248). According to Valentsova, karachun/korochun/kerechun has dif­ferent meanings connected to Christmas rites and beliefs, including death, unexpected death and evil spirits (Valentsova 1999: 468–469). Korochun, however, which is similar to Arden’s Morozko/Karachun is, to my mind,ofliteraryorigin,forexample, fromAlekseiRemizov’s eponymous storyfirstpublishedin1906 (Remizov 2000), which promoted the appearance of this character in Russian fantasy. with March or April, even briefly, as they are not part of the plot. His twinbrother is the Bear, a devilish devourer who rules in Summer. To find the snowdrops, Morozko goes to the edge of his realm, which is in thaw. The situation mirrors that of Anna Ivanovna coming to the woods, led by the Bear-possessed Orthodox priest Konstantin. Before killing Anna, the Bear gives her snowdrops from the thawed earth (Arden 2017: 260, 277, 287–288). The division between Winter and Summer, Morozko and Bear contributes tension with these twins forming a unity of opposites, whose struggle is eternal. Trocha even compares them with Belobog and Chernobog (Trocha 2020: 411). Another example of the mirroring of characters is that of Vasya and Anna Ivanovna, young, half-orphaned cousins who see chyerti. Both are perceived as witches, hated by their stepmothers, and have no interest in a dowry. The fate of both is with mythical be­ings: Anna as the Bear’s victim, and Vasya as Morozko’s lover/intimate life companion. This twinship also finds its roots in Marshak’s play. Although the wicked stepmother sends the girl into the winter forest for snowdrops, the idea is not hers but that of a ca­pricious teenage orphan queen, who promises to pay in gold for the flowers. Once she has them, it is the queen who insists on going to the wood for more. The stepdaughter refuses to show her where to find the snowdrops. The stepsister gives the queen April’s wedding ring, stolen from the poor girl. The angry queen flings the ring into an icehole. At this moment of high drama, the heroine says the magic poem that April has given her for times of need. The poem functions as a charm. The ring brings them all to the clearing where the snowdrops grow and to a bear, which has just awoken. Although the stepdaughter has many fur coats from the brother-months, her bridegroom April has no need of her dowry. Needless to say, the idea of dowry never bothers the repentant queen either (Marshak 1958: 446–477). In Anna, who is Ivan Krasnii’s daughter, Arden combines the teenage orphan queen with both stepmother and stepsister. The motive of theft is bestowed on Anna Ivanovna. The object she takes from her stepdaughter is not, however, Morozko’s necklace, but the wooden cross madebytheBear-possessedpriestKonstantinto subdueVasya. Naturally, the priest brings Anna to the Bear. The twinning of sister and stepmother is also reflected in Olga’s belief in the words of the Bear-possessed priest. Because of this, she attempts to marry Vasya to Kasyan/Kaschei, thus banishing her witch-sister from the palace and saving her own daughter, Marya. However, the priest, who earlier took Anna to the Bear, brings Olga’s Marya to Kaschei (Arden 2017: 143, 286–288, 2018: 276–277, 285–286, 314–315, 324). Not only the Marshak-inspired characters but even the magical ring find twins in Ar­den’s trilogy. Instead of a ring, which binds the innocent girl to April, there are magical necklaces that do the same. Arden’s gender ideas, however, differ from those of Marshak. Although Morozko gives his necklace to Vasya while she is still a child, she later destroys it. Her liaison with him thus becomes her free choice. As with Morwood’s characters, this is a union between two independent subjects each ruler of his/her own realm. They do not, however, wed: not because of Church refusal to perform a marriage ceremony, but because Vasya and Morozko perceive it as irrelevant. To make Vasya Morozko’s equal, Arden elevates her as Baba Yaga’s heir and reveals previously hidden familial relations to Chernomor, the sea-king, making him her great grandfather. Chernomor’s blue necklace, which Vasya receives via Morozko, is simply a non-binding gift from her ancestor (Arden 2018: 291–293, 2019: 149–152, 158, 248–249, 326–327, 353–354). Other necklaces are put on women by the evil Kasyan/Kaschei to enslave them. Vasya not only manages to avoid and destroy her bridal gift from Kaschei; she also destroys that of her niece, Marya and of the ghost of her grandmother Tamara, thereby liberating both. Kaschei’s necklaces are, in fact, analogues of the egg which guards Kashchei’s death in Russian fairy tales. This is almost explicitly stated by comparing Tamara’s jewel with the eggshell. Their multiplicity is, however, reminiscent of Voldemort’s Horcruxes from J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series (Arden 2018: 267, 273–275, 326–330). Arden stresses that Vasya’s unconventional gender behaviour is in direct opposition to medieval Rus’s social norms, which prescribe ultimate submission of women, either in marriage or a convent. Burning witches and wizards alive, as attempted by Dmitrii with Vasya, was part of old-Russian legislation (Lukyanov 2017: 65). Fantasy here is not in burning but in rescue. The only other woman in the trilogy, who succeeds in escaping marriage and a nunnery, is Varvara, Tamara’s non-magical twin-sister. Knowledgeable but without magical powers, she nevertheless inherits from her father Chernomor an inhumanly long lifespan, which in alternative Slavic fantasy signals wizardry (Fialkova 2020: 444, 453). Age is what differentiates her from Rowling’s squibs (a non-magical person born to at least one magical parent),35 whom she otherwise resembles. Varvara chooses life as a maidservant in the home of her kin, because low status gives a woman more freedom than married life as a noble lady. Inheritance of magical power is not only uneven in Arden’s trilogy but also has con­trasting centres of attraction. For Vasya these are chyerti — devils, or more precisely, pagan spirits. They are both traditional (e.g., domovoi (house spirit), dvorovoi (dooryard spirit), polevik (field spirit) and bannik (bathhouse spirit)) and invented, such as the bagiennik (swamp spirit) and vazila36 (horse guardian spirit) (Arden 2017: 47, 85–86, 88, 90; 2019: 112). Vasya’s brother, Sasha, devotes himself to Christianity and the Christian God. This divergence results not in animosity between them but rather in a pooling of the two resources to defend Rus against Mamai. Sasha becomes a monk-warrior and the hero of single combat with the Tatar warrior Chelubey37 before the Battle of Kulikovo. Although it results in the instant death of both, Russians choose to perceive it as a good omen. Sasha’s full name as a monk, Alexander Peresvet (Lightbringer), is well known from the historical records, for example, Skazanie o Mamaevom poboishche [The Tale of the Rout of Mamai] from the first quarter of the 15th century (Skazanie 1981: 175–177, 184–185). Alexander Peresvet was later canonised by the Russian Orthodox Church 35 Squib https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Squib (last accessed 12.11.2020). 36 Vazila was invented by P.M. Shpilevskii who signed his paper with the pen-name Drevlianskii (Toporkov 2002: 247). It is unclear whether Arden was aware about their quasi-folklore characters or took them for granted. Transliterated Russian words are not italicised in the text. – L.F. 37 The Mongol-Tatar combatant’s real name was Temir-Murza or Tavrulum, but Arden calls him Chelubey, as typical in Russian sources (Galeotti 2019: 60). (Andronik 2007: 532–533).38 Although Arden’s choice of making Vasya/Vasilisa a witch and Sasha/Alexander a monk is historically possible, it is one that is more typical of Western than Russian perception of gender role distribution. Contrary to Western countries, where witchcraft was mostly in the female domain, in Russia male wizards formed a majority (Kivelson 2013: 83, 124, 126).39 Arden prefers leaving the main events and actors of Russian history unaltered. The changes, when they occur, result from existing but aggravated facts and tendencies. A good case in point is the controversial figure of Prince Oleg of Ryazan.While many historical sources (especially those of Moscovite origin) perceive him as a traitor who supported Mamai in the Battle of Kulikovo, others (especially those originating from Ryazan and laterhistorians) find himguiltless (Galeotti2019:22;Denisova2012:1–2).An important source here is Zadonshchina, the late 14th-century Russian literary monument, and its account of seventy Ryazan boyars who perished in battle fighting for the Russians. The mere fact that this is a larger number than from any other principality cited indicates they at least could have Oleg’s permission to fight on Dmitrii’s side (Zadonshchina 1981: 110–111). Arden goes further. Although her Oleg is initially in Mamai’s camp, he not only saves Vasya from Chelubey but lets her convince him to fight under Dmitrii (Arden 2019: 297-298, 344–345). Another example concerns Alexander Peresvet. While the Russians simply chose to perceive him as the victor, Arden grants Sasha the final lunge of his dagger into Chelubey’s throat (Arden 2019: 335; Galeotti 2019: 60). Arden’s main strategy, however, is adding layers that are ‘missing in written records’. In her book, Moscovites suffer from plague as they did in reality; however, Arden’s plague is unleashed by the Bear, who deliberately infects the cathedral’s vast congrega­tion when he makes them kiss the icon he uses for the dead (Arden 2019: 181–182). The battle with Mamai is indeed a consequence of unpaid tribute to Tatars, but, in Arden’s version, Vladimir Andreevich fails to deliver the silver because vodyanoy sinks it into the water, on the Bear’s instructions (Arden 2019: 128–132). Alexander Peresvet, about whom nothing is known other than that he is a monk of boyar origin and an adherent of Sergius of Radonezh (Radonezhsky),40 acquires a number of ancestors and relatives, including the folklore and literary characters Baba Yaga and Chernomor. The Russians win the battle but, to do so, they need not only unite their troops and rely on God’s help but also ensure the coexistence of Christianity with pagan sprits. It is this treaty that Vasya succeeds in getting from Dmitrii and Father Sergei Radonezhsky of Trinity Lavra (Arden 2019: 186–187, 303–304). In The Tale of the Rout of Mamai, the boyar warrior Dmitrii 38 In Lada Lusina’s Kiev’s Witches, three female protagonists must prove they descend either from witches or from saints in order to survive. To my mind, both types of ancestor may be found even within one family (Fialkova 2012: 215–216). 39 Although Kivelson addresses the later period (the 17th century) her analyses are also applicable to earlier Russian history. 40 Saint Sergius of Radonezh, born as Barfolomey (1314-1392), founded Trinity Lavra (https://www.britanni­ ca.com/biography/Saint-Sergius-of-Radonezh (last accessed 12.12.2020). He prayed for a Russian victory in the Battle of Kulikovo and sent Dmitrii his blessings. Arden usually calls him Sergei, Father Sergei or Sergei Radonezhsky, although she is acquainted with the form Sergius used by the Church (Arden 2017: 41, 2019: 186, 191, 202, 359; Skazanie o Mamaevom poboishche, 173). Bobrok Volhynian uses paganism to predict the outcome of the Battle of Kulikovo. He listens to the earth and hears wolves and swans, rumbling mountains and the wailing of Tatar women. As, according historical sources, Nature itself participates in the battle, why not believe that it included its supernatural lords: the Bear and Morozko? (Skazanie 1981: 167–171; Arden 2019: 311). Most of what Arden’s characters do connects with the hidden supernatural mechanism of history without impacting known, actual outcomes of events. Her fantasy can thus be defined as crypto-history rather than alternative history. TO BE CONTINUED IN STUDIA MYTHOLOGICAL SLAVICA, 2022 MEDIEVAL SOURCES: Lavrentievskaia letopis’. Polnoe sobranie russkikh letopisei. T. 1. 1926–1928. Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Akademii nauk SSSR., 332–334. Novgorodskaia pervaia letopis’ mladshego izvoda. Polnoe sobranie russkikh letopisei. T. 3. 1950. Moskva-Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Akademii auk SSSR. http://yakov.works/acts/12/pvl/ novg24.htm (last accessed 12. 09. 2020). Skazanie o Mamaevom poboishche. 1981[first quarter of the 15th century]: In” L.A. Dmitriev, D.S. Likhachev (Eds.) Pamiatniki literatury drevnei Rusi. XIV-seredina XV veka. Moskva: Khudozhestvennaia literature, 132-189. Zadonshchina, 1981 [end of the14th Century] In: Dmitriev, L.A., Likhachev, D.S. (Eds.) Pamiatniki literatury drevnei Rusi. XIV- seredina XV veka. Moskva: Khudozhestvennaia literature, 96–111. BIBLIOGRAPHY Afanasev,A.N.,1916:Russian Folk-Tales. Translated from Russian Leonard A. Magnus. London: E.P. Dutton and Co, 78–91, 192–203. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/62509/62509-h/62509-h. htm (last accessed 25.09.2020). Afanasiev, A.N., 1984: Russkie narodnye skazki v 3-kh tomakh. T.1. Moskva: Nauka. Alici, Mustafa, 2011: The Idea of God in Ancient Turkish Religion According to Raffaele Pettaz­zoni. SMSR 77(1), 137–154. Andronik, igumen. 2007: Aleksandr (Peresvet) I Andrei (Osliabia) Radonezhskie. Pravoslavnaia entsiklopedia, T.1, 532–533. https://www.pravenc.ru/text/64384.html (last accessed 15.11.2020). Arden, Katherine, 2017: The Bear and the Nightingale. New York: Del Rey. Arden, Katherine, 2018: The Girl in the Tower. New York: Del Rey. Arden, Katherine, 2019: The Winter of the Witch. New York: Del Rey. Bailey, James, Ivanova,Tatiana, 1998: An Anthology of Russian Folk Epics. New York: Routledge. Borisov, Nikolai, 2005: Ivan Kalita. Moskva: Molodaia gvardia. https://royallib.com/read/bor­ isov_nikolay/ivan_kalita.html#1101269 (last accessed 10.10.2020). Card, Orson Scott, 1999: Enchantment. New York: The Ballantine Publishing Group. Cherryh, C.J., 1989: Rusalka. New York: Del Rey. Dalkesen, Nilgün, 2017: Cult of Alan-Gho’a and the Unique Position of Women in the Chinggisid Dynasties. AVRASYA Uluslararasi Arastirmalar Dergisi, 5(10), 191–201. Denisova, I.V. 2012: Letopisnyi mif ob Olege Riazanskom (“Povest’ o nashestvii Tokhtamysha”). Vestnik riazanskogo universiteta 4(37), 1–8. Dubeniuk, Nikolai. 2019: Voinskaia elita: istoria russkoi gvardii. Istoria.RF. https://histrf.ru/bibli­ oteka/b/voinskaia-elita-istoriia-russkoi-ghvardii (last accessed 23.03.2021). Ekzempliarskii, A.V., 1889: Ivan Danilovich Kalita. In: A.V. Ekzempliarskii. Velikie i udel’nye kniazia Severnoi Rusi v Tatarskii period s 1238 po 1505 g., T. 1. Sank-Peterburg: Tipografia ImperatorskoiAkademiiNauk,71–79.https://runivers.ru/bookreader/book9597/#page/83/ mode/1up (last accessed 10.10.2020). Fialkova, Larisa, 2012: Printsipy sozdania fantasticheskogo obraza v romannom seriale Lady Luzinoi “Kievskie ved’my”. In: Dejan Ajdacic (ed.), Slov’ians’ka fantastika: zbirnyk naukovykh prats’. Kyiv: Kyivs’kyi universytet, 210–220. Fialkova, Larisa, 2020: Al’ternativnoe slavianskoe fentezi amerikanskikh pisatelei. In: ..... ......., ..... ........ (........). ......... ...... ............., VIII. ....... ....... ......... ....... . ........ ........... ....... – .....: ........ ........... ......, ........ .. ............. ............ ........ ........, 439–459. Galeotti, Mark, 2019: Kulikovo 1380: The Battle that made Russia. Bloomsbury Publishing. Granik, Anatolii, 1972: Dvenadtsat’mesiatsev. Dvukhseriinyi tsvetnoi televizionnyi fil’m-skazka. Kinostudia “Lenfil’m”. Harkins, William E., 1976: Boasting in the Russian Byliny. Journal of the Folklore Institute 13(2): 155–171. Homer. No Year. Iliad, Book 11. https://www.theoi.com/Text/HomerIliad11.html (last accessed 29.09.2020). Ivanits, Linda, 1992: Russian Folk Belief. Armonk, New York, London: M.E. Sharp, Inc. Ivanov-Vano, Ivan, 1956: Dvenadtsat’mesiatsev. Soizmul’tfilm. Vosstanovlen in 1987 na kinos­tudii im. A.M. Gor’kogo. English subtitles. https://www.culture.ru/movies/8223/dvenad­ cat-mesyacev (last accessed 12.10.2010). Kitzen, Karlijn, 2019: Taking the Reader “Someplace a Little Different”: Russian-ness in Young Adult Fantasy. MA Thesis European Literature. Radboud University Nijmegen. https:// clck.ru/MGWxL (last accessed 21.02.2020). Kivelson, Valerie Ann, 2013: Desperate Magic: The Moral Economy of Witchcraft in Seventeenth Century Russia. Ithaca, London: Cornell University Press. Krivosheev,Yu.V.,Sokolov, R.A., 2012:PolitikaAleksandraNevskogovBaltiisko-Skandinavskom regione. Trudy kafedry istorii Rossii s drevneishikh vremien do XX veka: kafedra istorii Rossii i sovremennaia nauka. Sankt-Peterburg: Sankt-Peterburgskii universitet, 265–295. Leskov, Nikolai. No Year: O dvenadtsati mesiatsakh: clavianskoe predanie iz okrestnostei trenchinskikh Bozhiny Nemstovoi. https://www.litmir.me/br/?b=114021&p=1 (last accessed 5.12.2020). Longworth, Philip. 1970: The Cossacks. New York, Chicago, San Francisco: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Lukyanov, Sergey A., 2017: Koldovstvo kak vid religioznogo prestuplenia v drevnerusskom zakonodatel’stve. Sotsial’no-politicheskie nauki 4, 64–69. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/ koldovstvo-kak-vid-religioznogo-prestupleniya-v-drevnerusskom-zakonodatelstve/viewer (last accessed 31.10.2020). Marshak, Samuil, 1958: Dvenadtsat’ mesiatsev. In: Samuil Marshak, Sochinenia v chetyriekh to-makh. T. 2. Lirika, povesti v stikhakh, satira, piesy. Moskva: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo izdatel’stva khudozhestvennoi literatury, 351–480. Marshak, Samuil, 2000: Twelve Months: A Fairy Tale. Fredonia Books. Martin, Janet, 2007: Medieval Russia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Morwood, Peter, 2016: Prince Ivan. Tales of Old Russia. No place: Venture Press. Morwood, Peter, 2016a: Firebird. Tales of Old Russia. Book Two. No place: Venture Press. Morwood, Peter, 2016b: TheGolden Hord. Tales ofOld Russia. BookThree. No place:VenturePress. Nemcová,Božena, No Year: The Twelve Months. MuseumBoženy Nemcovéhttps://www.muzeumbn. cz/en-work-twelve-months/ (last accessed 12.10.2020). Papakonstantonou, Zinon, 2009: Wine and Wine-drinking in the Homeric World. L’Antiquité Classique 78: 1–24. https://www.persee.fr/doc/antiq_0770-2817_2009_num_78_1_3735 (last accessed 29.09.2020). Prokhorov, G.M., 1988: Aleksei (Aleksii), mitropolit vseia Rusi. Slovar’ knizhnikov i knizhnosti Drevnei Rusi. Vyp. 2, Ch. 1. Leningrad. https://clck.ru/RL9rw (last accessed 11.10.2020). Propp, Vladimir, 2012: The Russian Folktale. Editor and Translator Sibelan Forrester. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. Pushkin, Alexander, 1978 [1831]: The Tale of Tsar Saltan, of His Son the Glorious and Mighty Knight Prince Gvidon Saltanovich, and the Fair Sawn-Princess. Translated by Louis Zellikoff. Moscow: Progress Publishers. https://ruverses.com/alexander-pushkin/the-tale­ of-tsar-saltan/7696/ (last accessed 12.10.2020). Remizov, Aleksei, 2000: Korochun. In: Aleksei Remizov, Sobranie sochinenii v 10-ti tomakh. Tom 2. Moskva: Russkaia kniga. Moskva: Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenia.. https://ruslit. traumlibrary.net/book/remizov-ss10-02/remizov-ss10-02.html#s001001005001 (last accessed 15.10.2020). Shcherbak, A.M., 1993: On the Chief Totem of the Ancient Turks. Türk Dilleri Arastirmalari 3: 203–211. Selart, Anti, 2015: Livonia, Rus’ and the Baltic Crusades in the Thirteenth Century. Translated by Fiona Robb. Leiden, Boston: Brill. Senne, Katia, 2017: Staraia novaia skazka: mifopoeticheskii podtekst piesy-skazki S. Marshaka “Dvenadtsat’ mesiatsev”. Detskie chtenia https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/staraya-no­ vaya-skazka-mifopoeticheskiy-podtekst-piesy-skazki-s-marshaka-dvenadtsat-mesyatsev/ viewer (last accessed 19.03.2021). Seward, Desmond, 1995: The Crusade on the Baltic. In: Desmond Seward, The Monks of War: The Military Religious Orders. Penguin Books, 95–109. Skye, Evelyn, 2016: The Crown’s Game. New York: Balzer + Bray, An Imprint of HarperCollins Publishers. Skye, Evelyn, 2017: The Crown’s Fate. Balzer + Bray, An Imprint of HarperCollins Publishers. Tolstoi, N.I., 1995: Belyi bog. In: N.I. Tolstoi (Ed.) Slavianskie drevnosti: etnolingvisticheskii slovar’. T. 1. Moskva: Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenia. Toporkov, A.L., 2002: O “Belorusskikh narodnykh predaniakh i ikh avtore. In: A.L. Toporkov et al. (ed.), Russkaia potaennaia literature: rukopisi, kotorykh ne bylo. Moskva: Ladomir, 245–254. Trocha, Bogdan, 2020:RenarracjeSlowianskich motywów Ludowych wewspólczesnejfantastyce. ..... ......., ..... ........ (...). ......... ...... ............., VIII. ....... ....... ......... ....... . ........ ........... ....... – .....: ........ ........... ......, ........ .. ............. ............ ........ ........, 401–417. Valente, Catherynne M., 2011: Deathless. New York: A Tom Doherty Associates Book. http://www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/65r.pdf (last checked 11.10.2020). Valentsova, Marina M., 1999: Karachun. In: N.I. Tolstoi (ed.), Slavianskie drevnosti: etnolingvis­ticheskii slovar’, T. 2. Moskva: Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenia. 468–469. Zheleznova, Irina (ed.), 1966: Father Frost. In Vasilisa the Beautiful. Russian Fairy Tales. Translated by Irina Zheleznova Moscow: Progress publishers. ...., ...... . ....... . .............. .......... ....... ............ .......... ..... 1. ............. ..... ...... ........ ...... .............. .......... .......... .......... ............ ......., ...... ........ ........... . .......... ... ............... ....... .. .... ........... ... ................ .......... . ....... .. ...... .......... ...... .. .... .... (2020), . ....... .... ... . ............... ....... . .............. ............, ......... ...... ........... ...... ........ ............ ........ ...... ..... ......... ......... ............. .. ........ .... .. ........... ..... . ......... ...... ....... . ...... ...... . ..... ......... .................... ......... .............. . ........... ....­... . ......... ......, ........... . ............. ........ ........ ...... ........... .........., - .. .......... .......... . ....... . .. ............ ...... ........... . ...... ...... ............. ........... . ............ ......... ... ............ ............, ......... ......... ........... ........., ...... .. ....... ....­...... ..... ...... ......... ............. ......... ............ ......., ........, ..... ....... ....... 1234 .... . ....... ...... 1240-.. .... . ....... ........ 1242-.. ..... ........... ....... ........ ...... ............ ... – .... ..., ......, ...... ...... . ....., .......... . ........., ..... .......... ....... ......... .......... – ...-..... . ...... ...... . ......... ........ .... ......... ............ ..... ............ . ............., ......... ......... . .................., . ........., ........, ..... ......., ..... .......... ........ ............ . ....... .. ......., ..... . ..... ....... ............ ...... .. ......... – .......... ".....", ..... ......... . .......... .....­..... . .......... "........." ....... ... ... .... ........ ....... ........., ..... ........ ........ .... ............................ .....,.......... ......................................,.......­.... ....... .. ....... ........ ....... .......... . ........... ..... ...... . ......... .... .......... ........., .......... ......... . ........ ..... ........... ......, ............ .................. .......... ......... ....... ......... ........ ... ......... . .... ..., ...... ...... . ...... ......-..... ........... ...... ......... ....... .......... . ........ ......... .......... .......... ......­...... . ......... ..., ........... ... ...... .... . ........... ..... . . .......... .............. ....... ........., ........ ....., .. ...... .. .......... ......., . .... ............ .. ....... ........ .... .... ......... ................ ......., ....... . ...... ........ ...... ..... ......, ........... ....... ...... . ......... ......., ..... ............ . ......... ...... ........ Prof. Dr. Larisa Fialkova, Department of Hebrew and Comparative Literature, University of Haifa, Abba Khoushy Ave 199, Haifa, Israel, lara@research.haifa.ac.il 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 33 – 60 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212404 What Is It Like To Be a Bat in the Time of Covid-19, or How Many Pandemics Could We Have? Goran Đurdevic, Suzana Marjanic V zadnjih dveh letih (2020–2021) je ves svet prizadela pandemija Covid-19, zaradi cesar so se pojavile razlicnedomneve, alternativna dejstva in lažne novice. Med temi so najbolj prevladovale novice o netopirjih kot krivcih za širjenje virusa in posredno o kitajski prehrani kot glavnem vzroku. Vendar ni dokazov, da te povezave v trikotniku netopir-virus-clovek veljajo, vir okužbe pa ni bil ugotovljen. Poleg netopirjev so tivirusi prisotnitudi pri drugih živalih, kot so kamele, luskavci in ljudje. Zato posamezni znanstveniki obracajo situacijo tako, da predstavljajo možnost prenosa virusa z ljudi na živali. Kljub temu pa je postalo demoniziranje netopirjev »sprejemljivo«. V zvezi s tem nas razlicni avtorji opozarjajo na dolocene zgodovinske kontekste pojmovanja in dojemanja netopirjev ter na podobnosti in razlike teh pojmovanj v casu pandemije, pri cemer se nanje sklicujejo predvsem v kontekstu Hrvaške in sveta. Na koncu clanek prikaže zgodbe o netopirjih kot pokazatelja reprezentacijDrugostiterkrepitvebinarnein hierarhicne delitve na »nas« in »njih«. KLJUCNEBESEDE: koronavirusna pandemi­ja, netopir, sinofobija, (kriticne) študije živali, primerjalna mitologija, popularna kultura In these paired years (2020–2021), the whole world has been impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic, which has resulted in the emer­ gence of different presumptions, alternative facts, and fake news. Among those, the most dominant news was about bats as the culprits of expansion of the virus and, indirectly, the Chinese diet as the root cause. However, there is no proof that the links in the triangle of bat-virus-human are valid; and the source of infection has not been identified. In addi­tion to bats, these viruses can be found in other animals, such as camels, pangolins, and humans. Therefore, individual scientists are reversing the situation by presenting the possibility of transmitting the virus from hu­ mans to animals. Nevertheless, ithas become ultimately ‘acceptable’ to demonise the bat. In this respect, various authors remind us of certain historical contexts of notions and perceptions of the bats, as well as the simi­ larities and differences of those perceptions during the pandemic, referring to it mainly in the context of Croatia and the world. In the end, the article’s conclusion is that the story about the bats is, actually, a great indicator of the representations of Otherness and the strengthening of a binary and hierarchical division of ‘us’ and ‘them’. KEYWORDS: coronavirus pandemic, bat, sinophobia, (critical) animal studies, com­parative mythology, popular culture Bats are considered even today one of the most victimised and least studied animals.1 THE BAT IN THE POPULAR CULTURE AND THE MYTHOLOGY BEFORE COVID-19 Bats2 are only flying mammals. Their Latin name is Chiroptera, which comes from ancient Greek .e.. + pte... and means ‘hand wings’. Physically, they are small hairy animals with patagium, a large mouth, strong jaws, and claws. These nocturnal animals live in colonies, rest by roosting (hanging upside-down, using their wings), spend winters in hibernation; most of them communicate by echolo­cation. There are currently more than 1300 species of bats generally divided into small and large bats. Around 30 of those species live in Europe (Hrvatska agencija za okoliš i prirodu 2020). Their diet consists of fruits, mammal’s blood (mostly cattle’s),3 and insects (most of the bat species are preying on insects) (Hrvatska enciklopedija 2020). Batsare a significant part of the world’secosystems– they are an important segment in the natural renewal of the tropical forests, in the pollination of a series of night-blooming plants, in the control of the number of nocturnal insects, and that makes them the indicator of the environmental health. They are one of the most persecuted and least studied animal species. (Hrvatska agencija za okoliš i prirodu 2020). Bats are essential partakers of different mythologies, among which Asian, Pacific, and Central American mythology should be highlighted. When it comes to the first-men­tioned – Asian myths within Chinese mythology – bats were associated with longevity and luck since the Han dynasty. The connection remained in the Chinese tradition in the laterdynasties, so the bats’ artistic depictions can be found in different works of art, such as vases, where they are represented together with other motifs, including plants, animals, and clouds. Along with symbolic similarities between the bats and the blessings, particular interpretations associate bats with a less known, almost mythological world in which their sudden appearances are seen as luck or prosperity which comes out of nowhere (Kunz 1984: 394; Voon 2017). In Japanese mythology, bats are highlighted as positive tropes transferred from China and they represented luck. Bats have been represented on various artefacts (Osaka 2020). Hindu mythology recognises bats in a positive light, as they have served as iconographies 1 https://fws.gov/midwest/news/ImportanceOfBats.html 2 Important noticesand ideas for bats in mythology and popular culture have been given by Dr Zlatko Bukac from Zadar, Dr Emiliano Gallaga from Mexico City, Robert Kresina from Požega, Jana Krpina from Beijing, and Dr Jelena Kupsjak from Zadar. The English version have been proofread by Adriana Nelson from Cleve­land. We are grateful for their contributions. 3 These examples are located in South America and just a few species from 1300 species have been observed consuming cattle’s blood. in various locations and time frameworks. In contemporary times, bats were called ‘In­ dian flying foxes’, or fruit-eating bats have been sacred animals in some parts of India, such as Tamil Nadu. They are protected from by because, according to superstitions, these animals are related to the local deity Muniyandi, who was an anthropomorphic representation of a tree. This god will punish anyone who hurt bats. Therefore, local people do not disturb or relocate bats; instead, they protect them. Punishments are often related to personal and financial loss or death. After these penalties, a social ritual with fruits such as banana, coconut and sweet rice has been established to recover and receive forgiveness (Amirthalingam 2005: 130). Furthermore, bats’ roleis also positivein thePacificmythology, wherethey arelinked with Samoan princess married in Tonga, and later with goddess Leutogi. As a part of a peace treaty between the two islands, the princess came to Tonga to save a baby bat. The princess was soon accused of witchcraft and burned. However, bats saved her by urinatingonthefirewhereshewas thentransferredtoanisolatedanduninhabitedisland. Bats further assisted her by bringing her food and keeping her company, which made the uninhabited island populated and suitable for life so that Leutogi would become the goddess of the bats and fertility (Barnes, Hunt 2005: 237 and 259; Leutogi 2020; Mageo 2002: 493–520). Other positive views of bats derive from the Nandi and Lugen communities from northern and western parts of Kenya, where these mammals are lucky signs and brought fortune, reproduction and long life (Bats 2020). Bats have been referenced in Native American mythology. Specifically, in the religious system of Navajo indigenous com­munities, the bat is related to the night as a messenger of Talking God, while Big Fly has a similar purpose in the daylight. Bats have represented free will and are positive beings acting as guardians of the sky located in the east (Renfro 2020). Folktales from South America in the pre-Columbian era have depicted bats as positive creatures. According to a tale from the Gran Chaco part of Argentina, the first hero was both bat and human. He shared his in-depth knowledge with the people to improve their lives. A similar depiction of bats as human helpers can be seen in the tradition of Ge in Brazil, where bats lead lost tribes in seeking light (Benson 2020; Benson 1987: 165–190). In contrast, in Central American Maya mythology, the bat has a vital role in the world of the dead, and that is highlighted by the very name of Camazotz coming from kame, meaning ‘death’, and sotz, carrying the meaning ‘bat’. According to Popol Vuh, the sacred text narrating the mythology of the Kiche people – one of Maya peoples, the twins and heroes Hunahpu and Xbalanque come across bat-like creatures in the Bat House while they are on their way to the Underworld. They are hiding in the empty gun barrel, but Hunahpu peeks for a moment in order to see if the Sun has risen and pays the price for that: gods, and the bat-like creatures Camazotzes use his head as a ball for the ballgame they are playing (Laird 2018: 76–77; Miller, Taube 1997: 44; Read and Gonzalez 2000: 133; Camazotz 2020). It seems strange for bats to be related to the negative parts of life mostly representing death in Mesoamerican cultures. In her analysis of bats, Laird wrote an exciting quote for these issues: […] the Maya and other Meso-American cultures had more reason to fear or at least respect bats. These are the regions where not only vampire bats are found, but the largest bat of the Americas, the spectral bat, a carnivore which snatches sleeping birds and rodents by night, dragging them back to its lair full of bones, feathers and other remains (Laird 2018: 77).4 In Greco-Roman culture, bats are represented as dual animals – mice and birds, or as creatures that avoid the light. The duality of the bats is presented in Plato’s Republic in the parable about a man that is not a man, a stone that is not a stone, a tree that is not a tree, and a bird that is not a bird. The latter is interpreted as an inscription about the bat (Bats, 2020; Plat. Rep. 5.479). Aesop wrote a fable about a bat and a weasel, in which the bat is falling, and the weasel that wants to eat him as a bird catches him. The bat says that it is a mouse, and the weasel lets him go. Soon after, a similar situation occurs: another weasel wants to eat him as a bird, but the bat again successfully avoids its fate by claim­ing to be a mouse (Bats, 2020; Aesop 2007: 26). Another of Aesop’s fable discusses the bat’s duality between the mouse and the bird; at first, the bat does not want to participate in a war between the birds and the beasts. Later, he becomes a turncoat, which results in its rejection from both parties. This causes it to hide in the darkness, act at night, and live in caves (Aesop 2007: 275; Sax 2001: 21).5 Similar avoidance is depicted in Ovid’s Metamorphoses, and the myth about Minyades – the three princesses who refused to worship Dionysus – so he punished them by making them crazy and transforming them into nocturnal birds and bats (Bats, 2020; Ovid. Met. IV, 1–40; Sax 2001: 22). The most important source for bats according to Roman writer and official Pliny the Elder was written in his famous encyclopaedia of the ancient world titled Natural History (Naturalis Historia), describing bats as: Among the winged animals, the only one that is viviparous is the bat; it is the only one, too, that has wings formed of a membrane. This is, also, the only winged creature that feeds its young with milk from the breast. The mother clasps her two young ones as she flies, and so carries them along with her. This animal, too, is said to have but one joint in the haunch, and to be particularly fond of gnats (NH, 10.81). The Plinian method has been applied to bats, which also used his own words within encyclopaedic knowledge to take information from various Greek and Roman sourc­es, including lost works. Except for the description of bats, his research on them was 4 Among others, it is valuable to mention Australian scholar Tessa Laird from the University of Melbourne, who wrote an interesting and excellent book about bats. Her book is a cross-disciplinary approach and interdis­ciplinary perspective to the bats, which is realised as a combination of biological, cultural and social analysis of bats. This unique book to the bats put them in the world avoiding speciesism and an anthropocentric perspective. 5 Boria Sax in his book Mythical Zoo: Animals inLife,Legend,and Literature gave an encyclopedic overview of bats, their role in human history and culture. He founded the NILAS (Nature in Legend and Story) in 1989, where participants investigate the relationship between different forms of life represented in literature and folklore (cf. Marjanic, 2017: 126–127). dedicated to pharmacology, as he has mentioned the magical and medical role of these creatures, including their use of body and blood (NH, 29.26–27; NH, 29.29; NH, 30.46; NH, 30.48–49; comments by Riccucci 2012). His word affected perception of these flying animals in Late Antiquity and the Medieval era. The bats’ negative image continues to exist through the Christian Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages,6 as well as the works of Church Fathers such as Eusebius of Caesarea, Saint Ambrose from Milan, and Saint Jerome. The peak of this negativity is represented in Dante’s Divine Comedy in which the Devil is depicted as an enormous bat with three faces (Dante, Inf. XXXIV). The short way from supernatural beliefs to real-life events was Lady Jacaume of Bayonne’s death, in France in 1332. The reason was that bats were flyingaroundher houseandyard.This connectionofbats and devils was materialisedinto a 14th century painting called The Fall of the Rebel Angels, produced by an anonymous artist from the Sienese circle (Laird 2018: 45–46). In the Middle Age bestiaries, the bat (lat. Vespertilio) is described as a bird lacking the feature of nobility because, in com­parison to the rest of the birds, it gives live birth to its offspring rather than laying eggs, and it has teeth. The mentioned bestiary explanations, as well as iconographic records in which it is marked as a mouse with wings, are dated from the inscription of Pliny the Elder (Naturalis Historia, 10.81), and Isidore of Seville (Etymologies, 12, 7:36).7 Other reasons for prejudice in Medieval times could be due to the taboo against homosexual behaviour; contemporary research shows at least 22 species of bat with same-sex behaviour. The reasons for this could be alloparental care, excitement, social play, and heterosexual copulation (Riccucci 2011: 139–147). In Slavic mythology, bats have been represented negatively (related to negative spirits or blood, witches, vampires), positively (relation with abilities for fortune, apotropaic) and in duality as a hybrid animal – flying mammals between miceand birds. In tradition­al Russian beliefs, bats are mentioned as ambivalent according to situations similar to Aesop’s tale. In Bulgarian legend and belief narrative, God created bats from fugitives, which further serves as an explanation for nocturnal activities. A transformation from ordinary seven-year-old mice to bat is discussed in Polish folktales. Various taboos are linked with bats caught in human hair. Moreover, based on their blindness, bats have amulet usage and could serve as an addition to clothes for protection and nearby houses. Similar purposes were served in magic and health (Gura 2001: 497–498).8 The Serbian Mythological Dictionary (Srpski mitološki recnik 1970) states that no living being suffers because of its name (in Serbian slepi miš) like the naive bat does. The bat is used in love magic in the Serbian ethno-tradition because of his name, which 6 In Cvijet krijeposti, the Flowers of Virtue, the Old Croatian translation of the famous Italian work Fiore di virt, a bat (šišmiš, netopir, ljiljak, lilik) has been described as an ugly and shameful creature who symbolizes lust, passion, concupiscence, fornication and sexual sins and ‘androgyny which is highlighted in the text in the description of his same-sex relationships’ (Zaradija Kiš, Šimic 2020: 108). 7 ‘Bat’. http://bestiary.ca/beasts/beast250.htm 8 Russian folklorist Aleksandar V. Gura, the author of the first systematic research of the symbolism of animals in Slavic folk tradition (as the title of his book suggests – Symbolism of Animals in the Slavic Folk Tradition, 1997), is a writer of lexicon article on the role of a bat in Slavic ethnotradition (Gura 2001). means blind mouse. The definition of blind is not literal; in contrast, the animal is blinded in daylight and it symbolised the person in love as bewitched. As a consequence, the bats were caught, and the lovesick person attempts to get to bats’ wings and bones; then dried, crushed to a powder, and placed in the food and drink of the person to be loved, so that that person would blindly fall in love with the one who applied the magic or the one for whom the magic is intended. In addition, an enamoured human wore a bat’s wing as an amulet (Petrovic 1970: 268), as noted by Aleksandar Gura (2001) for Bulgarian and Macedonian beliefs. Early modern travellers, explorers and colonists of the New World referenced bats in a negative perspective. In his visits to Latin America, Girolamo Benzoni described these animals by writing about his experience with bats biting his extremities (legs, feet, arms, hands). A similar negative reference described Australian bats as devils by early Europeans from James Cook’s crew (Laird 2018). Folklore stories from North America have been conducting bats in different sources. In Nova Scotia, bats are described as a vision of death, and when the bats fly around in the house a female from the house will die. If a bat lands, a male will pass away. Similar folktales are found from parts of the United States of America. In Illinois, a bat will bring death in the house if s/he stays a longer time. If s/he stays is shorter, some relative will die while in New Mexico, the death in the Midwest will be in a few days or month/six months, and in Washington the death will be within a year. The child’s death is foretold in Californian superstition in which the child will pass away if his pregnant mother watches a bat. Furthermore, as Gary F. McCraken pointed out, in other American areas, dreaming of these animals flying around house in combination with dog’s howling represents a premonition of death within a person’s home, relative or a friend (Bats 2020). One of the stereotypes about bats has been related to stealing food, particularly bacon and ham. These ideas spread throughout Europe and America during early and modern periods. According to Allan’s research from 1939, he further exemplifies this point by: ‘describing experiments conducted in Germany in the early nineteenth century in which captive bats were offered a diet of bacon, but the bats often refused it and starved to death’ (Bats 2020; Laird 2018: 80). In the later popular culture, bats were linked with vampires, Halloween, and the popular comic hero Batman, which is the result of Bram Stoker’s Gothic horror novel Dracula (1897) and his introduction of correlation between bats and vampires in the context of the political situation at the end of the 19th century.9 The representation of bats as bloodsuckers arose with Bram Stoker’s Draculaalong with a film version played by Bela Lugosi (Fenton, Ratcliffe 2010). This depiction has been raised in Francis Ford Coppola’s movie titled Bram Stoker’s Dracula, in which the main character, performed by Gary Oldman, appears in a demonic form of a bat which has been finalised into an evil demon who escaped from the dead body of Dracula (Laird 2018: 58–59). Simultaneously, bats are depicted as beings The most important element for Stoker’s fantasy is contagion (Peric, Pletenac 2015). Boris Peric and Tomislav Pletenac discussed Stoker’s novel’s political background and detect the Eastern (Balkan) Question as the critical factor for British foreign policy and politics at that time. The main issues were integrating and regulating of post-Ottoman Balkan into new political entities (Peric, Pletenac 2015: 19). on the border of worldly and otherworldly, which are shown trespassing this border on Halloween night (Kunz 1984). Ultimately, the comic and movie hero Bruce Wayne, known as Batman, chose the bat for his trademark after being prompted by his childhood trauma of falling among bats, highlighted in the film Batman Begins, from 2005, by Christopher Nolan. With the iconographic use of the bat, the dark cave, and the nocturnal life through which the hero Batman additionally attempts to make the villains even more fearful. This depiction of a hybrid human and bat in the form of a superhero could be analysed on three levels. The first level is psychological, dedicated to fear and trauma, which acts as a symbol of fear translated to personal strength. This transformation of fear could depict Jungian psychoanalysis, along with Jung’s remarks about the shadow. This term can be defined as unconscious, relating to the different positive and negative hidden aspects of personality and life. As Jung wrote: ‘Everyone carries a shadow and the less it is em­bodied in the individual’s conscious life, the blacker and denser it is’ (Jung 1938: 131). Following this quote about bats in Bruce Wayne’s context, his fear of bats became the primary source for his power because he enlightened his shadow and removed anxieties and false beliefs about himself. The second part is the social perception of bats, one that recognises these creatures as strange, dark, and scary creatures. Instincts, according to Jung’s research, relate to the animalistic part of human personality, and it is critical to understand bats in the context of basic instincts. This combination of instincts and defensive mechanism, particularly the sublimation of his revenge and aggressive behaviour to useful social appearance, have made Bruce Wayne a unique character who came from the dark and saved the world as a superhero (Kiatpattananon 2017). The uniqueness is comparable to bats. which are the only mammals capable of flying. Thefinalpieceis thepotentialsubversive,becausenon-heroicanimal–bats –represent Batman as the hero and this would improve the status of bats in society and culture.10 Rather than causing harm, bats became powerful and visually linked with Batman, Gotham City’s protector. Contemporary artists have used bats in their installations, stage performances, or artworks. The most valuable group to mention here are Samoans: writer Albert Wendt with his story Flying Fox in a Freedom Tree, photographers Greg Semu and Yuki Ki-hara, painter and poet Dan Taulapapa McMullin, artists Lin Onus, Robin White, Julian Hooper, Kathy Holowko and Helen Pynor. These artists are mostly from Australia and Oceania, and their works are a combination of local myths and traditions in the context of contemporary art. Artists from other parts of the world, such as American artists Tim Hawkinson, and Brits Marvin Chetwynd Gaye and Jeremy Deller, have experimented with depictions of bats (Laird 2018). 10 At the moment, it is valuable just to mention potential subversive role of bats in context of Batman and sug­ gest further social and psychological research on these topic, although we need to have at least two part in the minds: a) representation of Batman and bats is not linear in the history of this fictional character and changed during time and social context; b) comparison on the line Batman – bats could be Spiderman – spiderman which could open similar research issues; c) correlation between popular male characters such as Batman, Spiderman with females like Catwoman. The most controversial performance was Ozzy Osbourne eating or biting a bat on the stage in 1982 during a concert as he ate the head of (probably) a live bat (Andrews 2019, 2020; Laird 2018). In his autobiography I am Ozzy, he wrote a detailed story about this event (Osbourne 2010: 153–154). Although media speculations have been challenging the idea of live animals and Mark Neal, a seventeen-year-old fan who brought the bat to the concert and threw s/he to the stage, reported that the mammal was dead before a concert, Ozzy denied this and continued to speak about a live bat (Andrews 2019: 2020). The concert sparked considerable media interest around world and a great deal of controversy. Sev­eral protests emerged, organised by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and fans began bringing various strange items to the stage. Two main ideas could be understood from this unusual situation: medical ideas about rabies from bats which could make some kind of narrative in contemporary society, and Ozzy’s attitude to animals, which is unacceptable and even a crime. The former will be discussed later and understood from the experiments and testing bats to rabies. The latter is related to animals in performance art as shocking and provocative items, because the bat is not realised as being or animal and has rather been present as an artefact or item. An exciting approach to bats is written in the book Raising Archie with the subtitle ‘The story of Richard Morecroft and his Flying Fox’ by Australian journalist Richard Morecroft, which has been recorded as a short documentary in which Morecroft spoke about his experience with an orphaned bat, Archie. His advocacy of promoting wildlife and saving the threatened animals, such as bats, could be positioned within Native Aus­tralians or Aborigine cultures and their relation to the flying mammals. The stories about bats and Aborigines are highly complex because bats have been presented both positively and negatively. One side of the story is related to the Balayang and Tjimin. In the first side, bats are the opposite of the owl and are part of the soul. The second – Tjimin - is related to the Great Rainbow Serpent and humanity’s ancestors. Other tales expressed more negative approaches. The story of Naradan was of a half man-half bat who lived in Dreamtime (analogous to Heaven in Western interpretations). One day, his wife went to the forest to buy honey for him. When her arm became stuck in a tree, he came, cut her arm off, and she died. A similar story happened to his other wife, and he was thrown into a great fire where he became a bat and disappeared into the dark. Naradan lives as shamed being – a bat – and hides during the day. A different gloomy tale about bats can be related to a handsome man punished by gods in which he transforms into a creature – a rat with wings - and sleeps under the bridge with his head down11 (Grenoble 2020). These links between humans and animals have been described by Deborah Bird Rose as the ‘entangled mutuality’ that Aborigines have in their interactions with bats. Today, Indigenous Australian communities of theNorthern Territory haverejected these interactions (Laird 2018). The ties between humans and bats in various relationships and 11 It is valuable to mention the source for these stories, which is a children book produced in France and written as a dialogue between a Native Australian person named Bunna and a journalist (Grenoble 2020). combinations of positive and negative approaches take steps in building integrating views to nature and environmental justice that have been immanent to Aborigines, people of pre-colonial Australia. These traditions should be re-invented through contemporary con­servationists in Australia and the story of how Morecroft and Archie could bridge this gap. The following table is a comprehensive review of the bats in the world mythology, and the bat is analysed as a representation of certain feelings, events, or beings which could be matched with Lévi-Strauss and his idea of species of animal or plant which have been identified with certain groups in the context of totemism (Lévi-Strauss 1963). From the table below, it is possible to understand different political entities and geographical areas where a bat is related to mainly positive emotions, events and thoughts. These terms have been related to the mythological perception of bats and understanding these flying animals in ancient people’s worldview. Table 1. Representation/symbolisation and meanings of bats Culture Representation Meaning Chinese luck positive Japanese luck positive Hindu sacred animals positive Pacific fertility positive African – Kenya luck positive South American help, sharing of knowledge positive Native America - Navajo speech, god helpers positive Mesoamerican death negative Greco-Roman duality negative Late Antiquity evil negative Medieval evil negative Slavic evil spirit, amulets, fortune ambivalent Early Modern travellers evil, annoying negative Modern Western death negative Halloween border animals negative Dracula vampire negative Batman fear subversive Native Australians/Aborigines fertility, death, shame, punishment, isolation ambivalent After all, the mythological and the popular culture representations of the bat could be summarised in a few common parameters: a) night and avoidance of the light and sun­light, b) fear, uneasiness, and punishment in European, American and Central American depictions, c) luck, longevity, and helpfulness in stories and legends of Chinese, Indian, Japanese and Pacific origin, d) duality of the beings – as mice, and as birds. The last part is important because modern science has rejected bats as mice or birds and rather classifies these creatures in other classification while fruit bats have been considered the same as flying foxes. The terminology for these mammals still derives from the com­bination of bird and/or mice, which is used in a plethora of languages, including South Slavic Croatian terms šišmiš (netopir, netopijer, liljak),12 the Slovenian word netopir, or Serbian slepi miš for a bat. It seems that in the Eastern and the Western world, as we call them, the variety of approaches towards the bats can be explained with the idea of contemporary philosopher Ji Xianlin about the diversity of opinions, where the Eastern would be synthetic – meaning intriguing, including nature, and all the matter (based on Confucian and Taoist perceptions of the world), while the Western opinion would be analytic – meaning disambiguating, violent and aggressive towards nature (Ji Xianlin 1997: 82–84). Applying this knowledge, it is clear that the bat in the West is presented as the Other, while in the East (in Polyne­sia, India, Japan as well as China) s/he is depicted as a part of nature, and consequently, as a part of the human world. The potential biological reason could be in echolocation, which is not used by fruit bats, based in East Asia. Also, these animals are extremely important for seeding dispersal and agriculture in Asian cultures. These elements would affect cultural depictions, and this could be a way for understanding positive myths about bats in some parts of the world. The Chinese word for bat is fu (. ) and it has similar pronunciation as the word for happiness (also fu, but different character . ) that could be matched by Ji Xianlian’s idea of synthesis and ancient Chinese link bat with luck which affect perception and recognition of these flying mammals. These ideas could be matched for the Western world with the concept of hypersepara­tion, which is developed by Val Plumwood. This idea is understood as a binary opposition between two entities divided by strong and separate borders, improving differences and binarity instead of similarity. As a consequence of mentioned thoughts that started in the Enlightenment period, there is a decline in animal ethics and the potential rise of violence against animals and others (Miller 2016; Plumwood 1993). Comparative thoughts and ideas to Plumwood analysis were expressed by Branislava Vicar and her concept of the animal world as transcendental otherness, then Claude Lévi-Strauss and his conclusion about totems as part of the distinction between culture and nature and finally, Philip Armstrong and Laurence Simmons with terms such as ‘humanness, inhumanity, compassion, sentiment and beastliness’ in contrasting humans and others (Vicar 2013: 40; Simmons, Armstrong 2007: 1–2; Lévi-Strauss 1963). The basics of these binaries could be developed as humans and bats. The former could be presented as positive while the latter would be defined as negative, and can be applied to modern popular culture, such as Dracula and Batman. In the context of bats in mythology, these concepts of hyperseparation with a combination of synthetic and analytic perceptions of the world could be a way of understanding bats in historical and mythic perspectives that will contribute to the modern ideas about bats. 12 On bat etymology in Croatian language, cf. Tvrtkovic 2017: 10–12. Nowadays, perceptions about the bats are handled in an interesting article written by the Slovak researchers Pavel Prokop, Jana Francovicova, and Milan Kubiatko, published in 2009. They conducted research using their questionnaire Bat Attitude Questionnaire (BAQ) among Slovak students (Prokop, Franchovichova, Kubiatko 2009). Their claims (the connection of knowledge and beliefs in the narratives about bats) concur with re­flections of Matchett and Davey, who categorise bats as repulsive animals together with cockroaches, spiders, and rats, in order to develop a hypothesis about the avoidance of infection, which is based on (1) fear of animals linked to infection, such as mice, rats, bats, and even a pigeon (2) fear of animals linked to mucus or faeces, for instance, snakes, worms, or snails, (3) fear of animals related to dust, disease, or infection, such as spiders (Matchett, Davey 1991, c.f. Prokop, Franchovichova, Kubiatko 2009: 20; Nagy, Johnson II 2013: 10).13 An additional reason for the fear of bats is the media representation that caused an ingrained belief according to which bats are rabid, even though the testing conducted by Whitaker and Douglas, when they tested 8262 bats, showed that only 5.4 % tested positive for rabies (Whitaker, Douglas 2006: 1569–1573 c.f. Prokop, Francho­vichova, Kubiatko 2009: 20). Moreover, Friedrike Mayen determined that only three out of more than one thousand species of bats feed with blood; therefore, they do not represent a threat to humans (Mayen, 2003, c.f. Prokop, Franchovichova, Kubi­atko 2009: 20). In contrast to bats as animals with a plethora of diseases, traditional medicine, as mentioned in the ancient world such as Papyrus Ebers from 1500 BC in ancient Egypt, has used bats as curators and sources for medical treatments developed in India and China. The medical text Papyrus Ebers has mentioned bats’ blood to recuperate skin, hair and eye diseases. Different medical usage of bats has been recorded in texts from Roman and medieval Egypt, Algeria, Senegal, Benin to early modern states of Italy, England, Sweden, Switzerland and various North, South American and Asian countries. As a voice of re-usage for tradi­tional medicine, Marco Riccucci promotes sustainable using bats for chitin and chitosan (Riccucci 2012: 249–270). Fig. 1. Shouxing, Chinese god of longevity, together with two bats (source: https://www.ebay.com/itm/ Old-Chinese-Bronze-Cloisonne-Enamel-Shou-Xing­ Bat-Bijou-Jewelry-Casket-Box-/254346795985). The pair of bats is a sign of deity for longevity Shouxing and symbolised positive and good wishes (Cooper 1986: 151). In East Asia, particularly in China, the word for bat (. ) shared pronunciation with the word for happiness (. ), and it is fu. The five bats represent Five Fortunes (wu fu,.. ): wealth, longevity, peace, health, and positive death (Chevalier, Gheerbrant 1987: 677). 13 In the book Trash Animals, Kelsi Nagy and Phillip David Johnson II (2013) analysed different cultural identities of animals that affect their representations even if humans, as Thomas Nagel pointed out, have not understood real animal experiences. The main question is the lack of empathy towards these animals. The explanation of the issue lies in ignorance about their anatomy, behaviour, and habits, which creates narratives, myths and, in the end, fear that leads to the decrease of the bat population in the world. Bats are one of the most endangered species in the contemporary world, resulting from usage in traditional medicine and food in the East and demonisation in the West. Goran Đurdevic OF FICTITIOUS AND ENDANGERED BATS, ALLEGED CATALYSTS AND CARRIERS OF THE CORONAVIRUS FROM WUHAN, OR, WHAT IS IT LIKE TO BE A BAT DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC?14 The scientific version of the story about the bats related to the Covid-19 disease, according to Mirjana Žagar-Petrovic, MD, claims that ‘the new coronavirus named 2019-nCoV was discovered in humans, in China, for the first time by the end of the last year. It causes a disease similar to SARS, and the disease it causes is called Covid-19 (CO – corona, VI – virus, D – disease, 19 – year 2019). Scientists still cannot confirm which animal was the catalyst and the carrier of the coronavirus from Wuhan’ (Žagar-Petrovic 2020). However, it is presumed that it could be the bat. Most coronaviruses affect animals; nevertheless, zoonosis, as a disease, is passed from animals to humans. Recent epidemics caused by that virus were Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) from 2003, and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) from 2012. The research showed that humans were infected with MERS after being in contact with camels, while SARS was brought to humans by viverrids. […] The principal hosts and transmitters of the coronavirus are bats, which can carry the virus to other animals, such as Chinese ferret-badgers, racoons, and viverrids. It is believed that the infection originated at Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market – a live animal and seafood market, after consumption of the food at the market, and after handshakes, which led to the commence of human-to-human transmission (HHT) (Žagar-Petrovic 2020). Therefore, we should not overlook the evidence that the early cases of Covid-19 oc­curred outside of Wuhan in China, and that they did not have a clear connection with the city’s wet market, which is considered the place of its onset (Nunez 2020; Hayes 2020). It is noticeable how this ‘infectious’ story is not bringing along deeply environmental narrative concerning the alleged process in which a Chinese bat in the metonymic Chinese soup becomes the cause and the transmitter of the coronavirus from Wuhan. This deeply 14 The second part of the text, written by S. Marjanic, is part of the project Cultural animal studies: interdisci­plinary starting-points and traditional practice – ANIMAL (IP-2019-04-5621), Croatian Science Foundation. environmental story is similar to the plot of Steven Soderbergh’s film Contagion from 2011,15 which concerns the spread of a lethal virus that causes a global pandemic in a matter of weeks. The film’s final sequence reveals the culprit of the origin. In the context of the fictitious virus from Soderbergh’s film, which is considerably more dangerous, and cannot be related to Covid-19, I would like to put emphasis on Wilson’s concept of the unity of knowledge that is indispensable in a comparative analysis of the mass media information, and so called, kynical conspiracy theories that undermine the cynicism of power in government – in Sloterdijk’s denotation of kynicism, as well as in the denota­tion of political scientists. As the World Wildlife Fund’s research demonstrates,16 the first step in causing a pandemic is deforestation, after that comes live animals trade, and then there comes the wet market17 where different species come in contact. That would be a concise journey of the pandemic, which is not mentioned in the mass media since it is an ecocentric, biocentric story that contradicts the global speciecist neoliberal economy. In that regard, we can end with the prediction of the GMO prophet of apocalypse, Árpád Pusztai, who says that the ‘world will not be destroyed by terrorists, but by scientists’ (cf. Pusztai 2011). Regarding the already mentioned zoo-partaker as the claimed catalyst and transmitter of the pandemic, I would mention the research of Leonard Schild and his associates, who affirmed that the Covid-19 is encouraging online Sinophobia,18 and that the sharing of the Sinophobic content is a multiple phenomena on social media: it can be found in marginal online communities, as well as on politically incorrect platform 4chan, and up to a certain degree on common platforms, such as Twitter (Schild 2020: 1). In contrast, the statements of senior officials, such as American President Donald Trump, about the Chinese virus, or the statement of French President Emanuel Macron regarding Chinese and Russian authoritarian regimes and Western democracy, as well as the statements of famous researchers such as American sinologist Jeffery Wasserstrom who, back in De­cember, wrote about hiding the first cases of infection, later on, the statements of British think tank Henry Jackson Society that wrote about concealing and falsifying information, only to, at the peak of those occurrences, find their place in the mass media, such as The Guardian, The New York Times, Sky News Australia, and many others (Zhang Yunpeng & Fang Xu 2020: 211–223). Such politicians’, scientists’, and journalists’ demeanour and false, unfounded statements in the form of fake news and post-truths contributed to the rise of Sinophobia during the coronavirus pandemic. 15 Kevin C. Moore points out that, in addition to being an example of the perennial outbreak narrative, ‘Con­tagion also represents the 21st century media logic of what Grusin (2010) calls “premediation” or “medial pre-emption” that developed in the post-9/11 moment, of which Contagion is most certainly apart’ (Moore 2020: 3). 16 Source: https://www.wwfadria.org/hr/novosti/covid_19_i_bioraznolikost/ 17 They are called ‘wet’ since vendors often slaughter animals in front of customers. It is noticeable that the first news about Covid-19 was fake news about the wet market in Wuhan being the cause of the pandemic (Cohen, 2020). 18 During the Covid-19 pandemic, the Chinese influencer Wang Mengyun had to apologise for the bat soup she was eating in Palau, in Micronesia three years before the start of the pandemic, which was a photo segment for her vlog, cf. O’Neil. Sinophobia and influencer Wang Mengyun’s apology descended from the ecocentric, zoocentric perspective to the bat’s experience, not only in the Chinese soup in which it ended up as a meat victim, but as a demonised media victim in the infectious Covid-19 story. In the context of the previously mentioned, I will refer to the book Being a Beast from 2016, written by British veterinarian and philosopher Charles Foster, in which he wanted to know what it is like to be a wild animal. The book is a representation of his intention to live in a cave in Wales, as a badger, for six weeks. The experience of being an animal is marked by nudity and cold; he is eating insects, worms, and road kill (Svendsen 2019: 93). In 1974, American philosopher Thomas Nagel, wrote an article on ‘bat phenomenology’ in which he wondered what it is like to be a bat; he claims that neuroscience will never bring us closer to the comprehension of the mentioned experi­ence, and that applies to all the other external research of animals. Nagel’s influential article What Is It Like to Be a Bat? (1974) goes to the essence of the problem, and that is the question of the consciousness (qualia). Namely, as much as we research, even if we have all the information about bat’s brain architecture, we cannot know what the bat experiences in the times of pandemic.19 On April 14th 2020, the association Animal Friends Croatia, published on their webpage the following news20 about a group called NOVID-50 that commenced with around 20 people who tried to create a solution for Covid-19 crises, on Global Hack – an online event where teams from all over the world are bringing forth practical solutions in a 48h timespan. NOVID-50 deals with the cause of pandemics caused by diseases transmitted by animals, but the emphasis is on intense animal exploitation (for instance, Charles Patterson claims the industrial strategy to be a holocaust). They are appealing to the United Nations to create a strategy for termination of work for industrial animal farms, live animal markets, as well as the overall exploitation of animals. To summarise, the association highlighted the deeply environmental catalyst of the pandemics, among which we have the meat diet – or as Melanie Joy would say – the ideology of carnism. It is noticeable how the information that certain animals are detrimental to human health came along with the pandemic: the so-called wet markets were linked with Covid-19, the emphasis was put on swine flu, bird flu, MERS (camel as the demonised catalyst), mad cow disease (cf. Gellatley 2001: 89), and SARS (bats and reptiles as the 19 Cf. the reflection on Nagel’s bat text/essay, ‘which is one of the most oft-quoted works on the problem of consciousness, particularly within the field of human-animal relations’, in J. M. Coetzee’s The Lives of Animals (Coetzee 2004; Laird 2018: 143–144). Wendy Doniger, as one of four real-life respondents to Coetzee’s academic novel, suggests ‘that Nagel probably chose a bat rather than a horse “to make the point of non-communication more dramatic, because we don’t love bats”’ (cf. Laird 2018: 144). Personally, we dare say – along the lines of Nagel’s definition, due to which he takes the bat into consideration as regards consciousness – perhaps we may not deal with Wendy Doniger’s definition, but rather with a specific ‘bat phenomenology’; it is the only flying mammal, and communicates by echolocation (sonar) – i.e., it creates a spatial image in-flight by listening and analysing the rebound sound (echo), and assumes a reverse, suspended position when resting – it hangs upside down. Specifically, Elizabeth Costello, who is considered J. M. Coetzee’s fictitious alter ego in the novel The Lives of Animals, defines Nagel’s essay What Is It Like to Be a Bat? (1974) as tragically restrictive due to the lack of the domain of zoo-ethics (Coetzee 2004: 36, cf. Mulhall 2008: 23–24, 33–34). 20 Cf. Petition against animal exploitation; http://www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/arhiva.php/?id=5985 demonised catalysts), wherein PETA proclaimed its vegan billboard about meatless diet, metonymical tofu, which never caused a pandemic.21 Merlin D. Tuttle, a scientist and the founder of Bat Conservation International, the manager of Merlin Tuttle’s Bat Conservation, in his article Give Bats a Break from 2017, emphasises that the search for new viruses in bats probably would not significantly contrib­ute to the human health, but it could seriously jeopardise bats’ future. The summary of the mentioned article: the idea that the bats could be responsible for the transmission of the new lethal infection to humans, started in 2002 with the discovery of the new coronavirus that caused serious respiratory infections named SARS. Coronaviruses are widespread among animals; they cause colds; however, in 2002, SARS was the cause of death of around 800 people. Three years later, an article in Science, called Bats are natural reservoirs of SARS-like coronaviruses, announced a public lynching for bats, considering the fact that the scientific proclamation was that bats are a global threat to public health. From that point on, the so- called virus hunters have conducted an intense search after the dangerous bat viruses. In the context of that chapter, the author raises the key question about whether we should start to worry about our conduct towards bats on behalf of science and public health. Tuttle further claims from the point of his ecocentric view that it is impossible that the bats partici­pated in the infection emergence, considering the fact that for most of human history, we lived in caves, then in straw huts and shacks, and that implied living with bats. However, in recent centuries, the trend reversed. Due to the industrialisation, the bat population decreased, and modern people started to live in buildings that exclude bats from their habitat. Bearing in mind the long history of our close connection, it is comprehensible that we developed an extraordinary resistance towards each other regarding diseases. That might be the explanation of why it was so difficult to document bats as the sources of infections among people, and why is it cru­cial to eradicate the demonisation of the bats (Tuttle 2017: 44). In that respect, I consider Tuttle’s zoocentric article the finest response to Nagel’s philosophicalandrhetoricalquestion from the perspective of 1974. 21 Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/peta-coronavirus-billboard-tofu-pandemic-an­imal-rights-iowa-a9532716.html APPENDIX: BATS ON DISPLAY IN ZAGREB In his book Animal Theology, Andrew Linzey notes that the United Kingdom’s Wildlife and Countryside Act of 1981 accords the bat specific legal protection and stresses that ‘[w]hat is interesting about this legislation is that not only are bat rights upheld by law, but also even in competing situations with human rights, the bat is to be given preferential treatment’ (Linzey, 1994: 42). However, the aforementioned UK act, according to which bats are given more rights than humans, is evidently an isolated case in terms of its delib­erations regarding bats, which are considered even today one of the most victimised and least studied animals. Specifically, contemporary infectiology papers mostly point out that the uncharted territory of the bat’s role in the occurrence of certain diseases has only just begun to be studied (Calisher 2006: 149–155). Thereby the role of the human factor (e.g., the aforementioned deforestation) is not accentuated, while the fact that bats are extremely usefulanimals is frequently omitted, as pointed outby, for example, SnježanaVujcic-Karlo, Senior Curator and Head of the Natural History Department of the National Museum in Zadar. Apart from eating insects (mosquitos, flies) in the ecological chain, which helps prevent malaria in numerous parts of the world, bats are also pollinators of some plants. Let us present in more detail two exhibitions on bats, organised in Zagreb in 2019 and 2020. The exhibition Technologies in Biology: Bats (Tehnologije u biologiji: Šišmiši; Zagreb, Nikola Tesla Technical Museum, 2019)22 featured technologies disclosing the hitherto unknown experiences of bats, nearly in the sense of Nagel’s paper What Is It Like to Be a Bat? The exhibition is the result of a two-year research on bats on the island of Lokrum near Dubrovnik (Public Institution Lokrum Reserve)23 with particular regard to two species of bats (i.e., Plecotus kolombatovici and Rhinolophus hipposideros). The exhibition linked the world of bats and the technology (bat detector, telemetry) used for studying the former with specific objects (e.g., the reproduction of da Vinci’s drawings that elaborated the idea with which he conceived a human flight apparatus by studying the wings and flight of bats; Slavoljub Penkala’s model of another, subsequent variant of a plane – TMNT 1852; the small Italian submarine CB–20, produced in Milan, Italy, in 1943 – TMNT 332) from the permanent collection of the Nikola Tesla Technical Museum in Zagreb.24 The exhibition placed special emphasis on echolocation, same as Nagel with his paper that poses the question ‘What is it like to be a bat?’ from the philosophical niche. As stated by the exhibition authors, ‘echolocation enables bats to orientate themselves in space with the help of rebound echoes from their calls. A device which enables the confirmation of the presence of bats by converting their sounds, i.e., 22 Theexhibitionwas authoredbyKatarinaIvanišin-KardumfromtheNikolaTeslaTechnicalMuseum,Marija Crncevic from the Public Institution Lokrum Reserve, Daniela Hamidovic from the Croatian Biospeleological Society, Henry Schofield and the Vincent Wildlife Trust from the United Kingdom, and Dina Rnjak from Geonatura, d.o.o. 23 For more details on the exhibition, cf. the exhibition catalogue and https://www.lokrum.hr/blog/vijesti/ tehnologije-u-biologiji-sismisi-2/#. I retrieved all data on the exhibition from the two aforementioned sources. 24 The study of bats on Lokrum by using contemporary technologies such as the application of the bat detector and telemetry has been documented in film, i.e., Boris Krstinic’s on-site film. I would like to acknowledge Mr Krstinic for enabling me to see his film again. echolocation, into sound that a human can hear, is called an ultrasound detector or bat detector.’25 In that sense, we can say that the bat detector enabled a partial answer to Nagel’s question ‘What is it like to be a bat?’ The second research study on telemetry was conducted with tiny radio transmitters attached to individual bats during the research, which the bats shed after approximately ten days. Within this period, the researchers (equipped with radio receivers and direc­tional aerials) can track bats and determine their position in nature. The collected data are processed, and the bats’ movements are mapped, as also shown by the map displayed at the exhibition. As mentioned above, the exhibition also showed the manner in which the flight of bats was used by certain scientists in their research. By studying the bats’ flight and wings, Leonardo da Vinci was thus the first to elaborate the laws of flight (Viskovic 1996: 255–256).26 Reproductions of da Vinci’s drawings elaborating this idea are found in the permanent collection of the Transportation Department of the Nikola Tesla Technical Museum.27 Furthermore, the studying of bats and their orientation in space via echolocation also contributed to the development of radar and sonar. Just as bats produce sound that spreads as a wave, these devices (as we could learn from the exhibition captions) transmit and receive reflecting waves, on the basis of which it is possible to calculate the distance and velocity of objects such as submarines, airplanes, and similar. Itis a well-known fact that Nikola Tesla also contributed to the invention of the radar. Thesecond Zagrebian exhibition thatfeatured bats as zoo-actants, entitled Open – Living Beings andTheir Dangerous Liaisons (Otvoreno– Živabicainjihoveopasneveze), presented works produced within the European network EMAP – European Media Art Platform that brings together European organisations and institutions dedicated to new media art, and was organised within the framework of Touch Me Festival (Nikola Tesla Technical Museum in Zagreb; KONTEJNER curatorial team, Tereza Teklic and Olga Majcen Linn).28 At the aforementioned exhibition, Daniela Mitterberger and Tiziano Derme (MAEID Büro für Architektur und transmediale Kunst) presented their work The Eye of the Other III ‘On Flowers’ – Interspecies Communication Human/Bats (immersive audio/visual surface, multimodal sculpture, 2019–2020). To quote the artists themselves, The Eye of the Other ‘is a project that explores non-verbal communication between humans and bats through studying and translating the bats’ sensorial systems. The work translates the perceptual world of nectar bats into perceptual patterns that a human can understand – from echolocation to oursenses suchas hearing,seeing,andtouching.’Specifically,thenectar-feedingbats find flowers bysortingtheenvironmentwithvisualandsonarinformation.Theycanrecognise the geometry of an individual flower by producing so-called ‘echo-imprints’. The project The Eye of the Other III ‘On Flowers’ translates these imprints into auditory frequencies 25 The bat detector is a device used for detecting the presence of bats by converting their ultrasound signals into sound frequencies. 26 Leonardo da Vinci’s flying machines and ships are early examples of drawing from nature in engineering and as a forerunner of contemporary bionics or biologically inspired engineering (Viskovic 1996: 255–256). 27 Cf. http://museums.hr/en/exhibition/details/7638/tehnologije-u-biologiji-sismisi 28 Touch Me Festival (Zagreb, Croatia) is organised by the curatorial team KONTEJNER. https://www.kon­tejner.org/projekti/touch-me/-7-doticemo-nove-buducnosti/ and visual, sensory patterns that are understandable by human senses; briefly put, they translate the experience of bats into that of humans. The artists-scientists thereby refer to the theoretical concepts of Jacques Derrida in The Animal That Therefore I Am (2002), Giorgio Agamben in The Open: Man and Animal (2004), French sociologist and science studies scholar Bruno Latour and, naturally, to Nagel’s philosophical deliberation ‘What is it like to be a bat?’. They defined the encounter with the world of these flying mammals in the following manner: ‘Within this space we lose our individuality, we do not count as species but as agents placed in resonance within the environment. Perhaps these types of experience are a direct invitation to question our position as species among the many on Earth, what Latour defines as “terrestrials” or the earthbound’ (Derme, Mitterberger 2020). The term ‘earthbound people’ was a theoretical idea proposed by Bruno Latour during his 2013 Gifford Lectures, Facing Gaia: Six Lectures on the Political Theology of Nature and in Facing Gaia: Eight Lectures on the New Climatic Regime (2017); the term was used by the Institute for Earthbound Studies.29 For the installation, they produced 3D-printed artificial flowers using the discovered patterns of reflections. They also used synthetic pollen to fill the flower with food for the bat.30 The scientists/artists register the sound frequencies of the bats and translate them into visual information visible to the human eye. Moreover, while the first exhibition mentioned above scientifically documented echolocation, the aforementioned science and art piece on interspecies communication transferred echolocation into the visual, auditory and tactual segment that is inherent to human communication and thereby segmented its research to a single bat species – the nectar-feeding bats, who have a unique system of sensory compensation that allows them to forage in cluttered spaces such as rain forests, so as to find the tiniest of flowers.31 The artists thereby highlighted the roleof theaforementioned artand science project within the context of biosonar technology: ‘Biosonar technologies are found in nature in mainly two groups of animals: bats and moths use aerial biosonar, whereas whales and dolphins use aquatic biosonar’. Alongside the biosonar technology matrix, the aforementioned artists also stress the role of sensory ecology (Derme, Mitterberger 2020), which studies the manner in which organisms acquire and respond to information about their environment, and cite as an example the sensory system of the bats’ echolocation. Furthermore, while the aforementioned artists point out that ‘[t]he field of empathy and emotion does not really have space within the realm of science, very much in the sense of “what you cannot name, cannot exist”’ (Derme, Mitterberger 2020), I would like to note that in her book Estetika kibersvijeta i ucinci derealizacije (Aesthetics of the Cyberworld and the Effects of De-Realisation), in the chapter on artificial life and terminal positioning, Marina Gržinic states that the highlight of mechanical simulation in the 18th century was de Vaucanson’s mechanical duck ‘that drank, ate, quacked… and 29 Cf. https://www.earthboundpeople.com/earthbound-people/ 30 For more details on the project, cf. http://emare.eu/artist/maeid-%E2%80%93-tizian-derme-daniela-mitter­ berger 31 I use the pronoun who instead of which/that so as to avoid speciesist language, along the lines of Joan Dunayer’s book on speciesism. digested food just like a living duck’. The aforementioned production of artificial life comprises an introduction into the author’s deliberation on artistic strategies of genetic engineering, within which Oron Catts, Ionat Zurr and Guy Ben-Ary (The Tissue Culture & Art Project) cultivate living fibrous microorganisms as living sculptures; the author thereby conveys a bioethical query-suspicion: ‘We must ask ourselves, however, as to what happens with a living sculpture once its value on the art market decreases’. Even though they are primarily scientists, on their webpage Daniela Mitterberger and Tiziano Derme also underline the artistic matrix of their research – ‘media artists and architects Daniela Mitterberger and Tiziano Derme are the co-founders and directors of MAEID / BürofürArchitektur undtransmedialeKunst,aninterdisciplinarydesignstudiocreatedto locate critically new technologies within novel human-animal-machine entanglements.’32 In terms of context, I would also like to mention the first ethnozoological exhibition in Croatia, which also accentuated the animal rights matrix – Of Animals and Humans (O životinjama i ljudima, Zagreb, Ethnographic Museum, 22 April – 12 November 2017, curators: Željka Petrovic Osmak, Tea Rittig Šiško, Gordana Viljetic), for the catalogue of which curator Aida Brenko wrote on multispecies ethnography, presented some years earlier by anthropologists Eben Kirksey and Stefan Helmreich, who in turn agree with anthropologist Eduard Kohn’s statement that that multispecies ethnography acknowledges the interconnectedness and inseparability of humans and other life forms, and thus seeks to extend ethnography beyond the solely human realm and anthropocentrism (cf. Kirksey, Helmreich 2010: 562–563, Brenko 2017: 180). The author also notes the project The Mul­tispecies Salon (ed. Eben Kirksey, Duke University Press Books, 2014), in which plants, animals, fungi, microbes and viruses write natural and cultural history together with humans. Briefly put, The Multispecies Salon is a project in which anthropologists collaborate with artists and biologists, thus demonstrating how the lives of different organisms intertwine in political, economic and cultural contexts, implementing new approaches to the ways of being and ‘becoming’ in the world (ibid.). As opposed to the human-animal studies or traditional animal studies, the emphasis is placed on the fact that multispecies ethnography expands its research (as underlined above) to fungi, microbes, viruses and the plant world, and also fosters cooperation with ecoart and bioart (Kirksey, Schuetze, Helmreich 2014: 2). Here we should point out the intrinsic value of bats. Not only their benefit for people (e.g., eating mosquitoes, pollination, etc.) but rather the worth of bats for themselves. In the aforementioned context, the project The Eye of the Other can be defined as an example of an ‘interspecies salon’, even though the artists themselves do not refer to the aforementioned project. Finally, I find the link between the two aforementioned exhibitions – the scientific one, Technologies in Biology: Bats, and the science and art exhibition project The Eye of the Other (even though emphasis is placed on the scientific segment – since the authors point out two scientific niches (i.e., biosonar technologies and sensory ecology)) in their application of animal communication to the scientific sphere, hence, in the anthropolog­ical dimension. While the first exhibition accentuated the manner in which echolocation and flight of bats were applied to certain scientific discoveries (e.g., Leonardo’s research 32 Cf. http://emare.eu/artist/maeid-%E2%80%93-tizian-derme-daniela-mitterberger of bat flight and its application to human flight, the application of echolocation to the inventions of radar and sonar), the exhibition The Eye of the Other equally applies the aforementioned bat-experiences to contemporary scientific discoveries. The installation The Eye of the Other uses bat behaviour and their echo-sounding influence research into technologies such as self-driving cars. Bats, by themselves, are considered a top-level order within mammals, due to their highly ecological and evolutionary success. Specifically, the study of their biosonar system is currently making crucial advancement for technologies applied to radar and computer vision devices. These applications use sonar to facilitate and interpret representations of three-dimensional geometry in the output signal (computer vision). Self-driving cars are currently using sonar technologies to manoeuvre the vehicles in the event of fog detection and low visibility situations. Furthermore, since the sound propagates across different media, the use of sonar is still the best technology for interpreting special environmental circumstances (Derme, Mitterberger 2020). Finally, I would like to note a series of smaller-scale popular science exhibitions in­tended for children, which took place in several cities in Croatia to mark the International Bat Night. For example, Osijek marked the 9th Bat Night (29–30 August) in 2020 at the Zoo33 under the programmatic motto ‘Bats aren’t to blame for the coronavirus, but could help Osijek get rid of mosquitos’ as an appeal to revoke the demonisation of bats, which culminated in 2020 due to the alleged correlation between the demonised Chinese bat and the pandemic. The demonisation of the aforementioned only flying mammal began in 2003, when SARS killed approximately 800 persons due to the virus that probably originated from a bat species found in a Yunnan cave.34 Another story, however, connects SARS with this 2020 pandemic, and may have come from Professor Shi Zhengli from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), also known as the Bat Woman, who gained international recognition for her discovery of SARS. Suzana Marjanic 33 As speciesist places for animals, zoos often serve today as spaces at which popular and expert programmes for children are held, which is one of the signs of contemporary schizophrenia of our attitude towards animals. Furthermore, the art project The Eye of the Other did not conduct an on-site research in the habitat of the nectar-feeding bats, but rather ‘only in the captive environment of the Vienna Zoo – one of the few places in Europe where it is currently possible to observe a colony of nectar-feeding bats. Doing fieldwork allowed us to realise the relational fragility of working with animals.’ The project was thereby not conceived within the framework of the zoo-ethical niche, since – as the artists stress further in the interview – ‘The fear of animal rights groups surrounded the project, not necessarily aimed at us, but it was here whenever we were interested in collaborating with research facilities’ (Derme, Mitterberger 2020). 34 Index Vijesti: ‘Znanstvenicu iz Wuhana optužuju za širenje korone iz laboratorija, sad je progovorila.’ https:// www.index.hr/vijesti/clanak/znanstvenicu-iz-wuhana-optuzuju-za-sirenje-korone-iz-laboratorija-sad-je-progov­ orila/2241084.aspx; Qui, Jane: ‘How China’s “Bat Woman” Hunted Down Viruses from SARS to the New Coronavirus’,”https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-chinas-bat-woman-hunted-down-viruses-from­ sars-to-the-new-coronavirus1/ Fig. 8. Bat Detector; from the exhibition catalogue Technologies in Biology: Bats (Tehnologije u biologiji: Šišmiši, Zagreb, Nikola Tesla Technical Museum, 2019). Fig. 9. The Eye of the Other – Flower echo patterns database generation using machine learning algorithms, 2019 © MAEID. Taken from the website of this art and science project (source: https:// www.makery.info/en/2020/11/18/la-chauve-souris-que-donc-je-suis-the-eye-of-the-other-de-daniela­ mitterberger-tiziano-derme/). TO CONCLUDE: BATS DO NOT SPREAD COVID-19* To also conclude along the lines of the book Invitation to Terror: The Expanding Empire of the Unknown (2007) by sociologist Frank Furedi: the states that the dangers ahead of us (i.e., terrorism, global warming and viral epidemics) are increasingly interpreted and perceived as threats that are much worse than we could ever imagine – ‘They are also represented as threats of which we, in fact, know very little, and we are in no position to know very much thereof’ (Furedi 2009: 104, emphasis added). Or, as sensibly stated by Didier Raoult, a microbiologist specialised in infectious diseases and Head of the University Hospital Institute for Infectious Diseases in Marseille, the largest of its kind in France (anthrax, chikungunya, Ebola, bird flu, H1N1, Zika, coronaviruses SARS and MERS35) all of these epidemics were expected to cause a million deaths, but none of them occurred to a pandemic extent. The media are very well aware of the fact that the manipulation of fear sells newspapers and increases viewing ratings, and when they (now powered by the 5G network, introduced during the very pandemic lockdown) are joined by politicians, what we have is a well-known convergence of large-scale capital and politics, which generates wars, in this case, biological ones. Here we can refer to Rüdi­ger Safranski, who indicated that globality has ceased to be the concept of unspeakable expanses and became a prison and site of hysteria and the inability to act. Or, as Ludwig Wittgenstein stated in his 1921 book Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus: ‘From current events we cannot conclude what the events will be in the future’. Translated by Marta Pticar, Mirta Jurilj and Goran Đurdevic. BIBLIOGRAPHY Aesop (author), George Fyler Townsend (translator), 2007: Aesop’s Fables. College Town: Penn­sylvania State University. Alighieri, Dante (author), Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (translator), 2007: Divine Comedy, Long­ fellow’s Translation, Hell. Ebook Gutenberg project. Internet: https://www.gutenberg.org/ files/1001/1001-h/1001-h.htm#CantoXXXIV (12. 10. 2020). Amirthalingam, 2005: Sacred animals of Tamilnadu. In: Krishna, Nanditha (ed.), Ecological tra­ ditions of Tamilnadu. Chennai: C.P.R. Environmental Education Centre, 126–135. Andrews, Travis, 2019: Ozzy Osbourne bit the head off a bat 37 years ago, and, for some reason, now a toy commemorates it. Washington Post, January 23, 2019. 35 Didier Raoult thus states that ‘if we compare the millions of people who die worldwide with those who have died of conditions such as cow madness, bird flu no. 1, bird flu no. 2, the H1N1 flu, MERS, SARS, Ebola, chikungunya or Zika, i.e., if we consider the small number of deaths from these infectious diseases in relation to the large number of people who died of other causes, we will be taken aback’ (Raoult 2020: 100). * The text is a variant of the presentation at the scientific conference “Covid-19 in a humanistic perspective: mutations of fear and cultural change” organized by Institute of Ethnology and Folklore Research in Zagreb, 28 – 30 September 2020. The first, shorter and quite different version of text has been published on interactive website Political Lexicon of Pandemics edited by Zlatko Bukac, Biljana Kašic, Jelena Kupsjak, Atila Lukic and Gordan Maslov from Centre for Research in Social Sciences and Humanities in Zadar. Armstrong, Philip, Simmons, Laurence, 2007: Bestiary: an introduction. In Simmons, Laurence, Armstrong, Philip (eds.), Knowing Animals. Leiden: Brill, 1–26. Barnes, Shawn S., Hunt, Terry L., 2005: Samoa’s Pre-contact Connections in West Polynesia and Beyond. The Journal of the Polynesian Society, 114/3, 227–266. Bats in Greco-Roman Antiquity. Bats magazine, 29/2, Internet: https://www.batcon.org/article/ bats-in-greco-roman-antiquity/ (25. 11. 2020). Benson, Elizabeth P, 1987: Bats in South American Iconography. Andean Past 1, 165–190. Benson, Elizabeth P.: Bats have fascinated people for thousands of years— especially in the New World tropics where more kinds of bats live than anywhere else in the world… Bats magazine, 9/1. Internet: https://www.batcon.org/article/bats-in-south-american-folklore-and-ancient-art/ (10. 11. 2020). Brenko, Aida. 2017: Religije i životinje. In: Željka Petrovic Osmak (ed.),O životinjama i ljudima. Zagreb: Etnografski muzej, 165–216. Calisher, Charles H, 2006: Recent Recognition of Bats as Reservoir Hosts of Emerging Viruses. Infektološki glasnik, Croatian Journal of Infection, 26/5, 149–155. Camazotz. Internet: English Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camazotz (12. 9. 2020). Cohen, Jon, 2020: Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally. Internet: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/wuhan-seafood-market-may-not-be­ source-novel-virus-spreading-globally (29. 10. 2020). Chevalier, Jean, Gheerbrant, Alain, 1983: Rjecniksimbola.Mitovi, sni, obicaji, geste, oblici, likovi, boje, brojevi. Zagreb: Nakladni zavod MH. Coetzee, John Maxwell, 2004: Život životinjâ. Zagreb: AGM. Cooper, Jean Campbell. 1986: Ilustrovana enciklopedija tradicionalnih simbola. Beograd: Prosve­ ta – Nolit. Derme, Tiziano, Mitterberger, Daniela, 2020: The Bat That Therefore I Am – Exploring the Eye of the Other. Interviewed by Rob La Frenais. Internet: https://www.makery.info/en/2020/11/18/ la-chauve-souris-que-donc-je-suis-the-eye-of-the-other-de-daniela-mitterberger-tiziano­ derme/ (29. 10. 2020) Fenton, M. Brock, Ratcliffe, John M., 2010: Bats. Current Biology, 20/24, 1060–1062. Furedi, Frank. 2009: Poziv na teror: rastuce carstvo nepoznatog. Zagreb: Naklada Ljevak. Gellatley, Juliet, 2001: Kako postati, biti i ostati vegetarijanac ili vegan? Zagreb: Udruga Prijatelji životinja. Grenoble, 2020. TheLand Down Under seen through theeyes ofBunna, anativeAustralian. Inter­net: https://anglais-pedagogie.web.ac-grenoble.fr/sites/anglais-pedagogie.web.ac-grenoble. fr/files/the_land_down_under.pdf (30. 11. 2020). Gura, Aleksandar, 2001: Slepi miš. In: Tolstoj, Svetlana, Radenkovic, Ljubinko (eds.), Slovenska mitologija – enciklopedijski recnik. Beograd: Zepter Book World, 497-498. Hayes, Polly, 2020: Here’s how scientists know the coronavirus came from bats and wasn’t made in a lab. The Conversation Internet: https://theconversation.com/heres-how-scientists­ know-the-coronavirus-came-from-bats-and-wasnt-made-in-a-lab-141850 (29. 10. 2020). Hrvatska agencija za okoliši prirodu. Šišmiši. Internet: http://www.haop.hr/hr/tematska-podrucja/ prirodne-vrijednosti-stanje-i-ocuvanje/bioraznolikost/sismisi (5. 11. 2020). Ivanišin-Kardum, Katarina, Crncevic, Marija, Hamidovic, Daniela, Henry Schofield and the Vincent Wildlife Trust, Rnjak, Dina, 2019: Technologies in Biology: Bats (Tehnologije u biologiji: Šišmiši). Zagreb: Technical Museum Nikola Tesla. Ji Xianlin, 1997: New Interpretation of the Unity of Heaven and Man. In: Ji Xianlin and Zhang Guanglin (eds.), Essays on Eastern and Western Cultures, 2 vols. Beijing: Economics Daily Press. Jung, Carl Gustav, 1938: Psychology and Religion. In Psychology and Religion: West and East, Collected Works of C.G. Jung. New Haven: Yale University Press. Kiatpattananon, Suppasit, 2017: Defense Mechanisms of Batman or Bruce Wayne in Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight Trilogy”. Thesis, Chiang Mai University. Kirksey, Eben, Craig Schuetze and Stefan Helmreich, 2014: Tactics of Multispecies Ethnography. In: Eben, Kirksey (ed.), Multispecies Salon. Durham, London: Dunke University Press, 1–24. Kunz, Thomas, 1984: Halloween Treat: Bat Facts and Folklore. The American Biology Teacher, 46/7, 394–399. Laird, Tessa, 2018: Bat. London: Reaktion Books. Leutogi. English Wikipedia. Internet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leutogi (3. 11. 2020). Lévi-Strauss, Claude, 1964: Totemism. Boston: Beacon Press. Linzey, Andrew, 1994: Animal Theology. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Mageo, Jeanette, 2002: Myth, Cultural Identity, and Ethnopolitics: Samoa and the Tongan “Empire”. Journal of Anthropological Research 58/4, 493–520. Marimuthu, Ganapathy: A few privileged colonies of flying foxes are protected by time-honored tradition. Bats magazine, 6/2. Internet: https://www.batcon.org/article/the-sacred-flying­ fox-of-india/ (10. 10. 2020). Marjanic, Suzana: 2017: The Anthropology of Animals – Paradox and/or Necessity. In: Golež Kaucic, Marjetka (ed.), What to Do with Folklore? New Perspectives on Folklore Research. Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier, BASIS, Volume 9, 123–139. Matchett, George and Davey, Graham C. L., 1991: A test of a disease-avoidance model of animal phobias. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 29, 91–94. Mayen, Friederike, 2003: Haematophagous bats in Brazil, their role in rabies transmission, impact on public health, livestock industry and alternatives to an indiscriminate reduction of bat population. Journal of Veterinary Medicine, Ser. B—Infectious Diseases and Veterinary Public Health, 50, 469–472. McCraken, Gary F.: The multiple uses of bats in magic and folk medicine are clear testament to the fertility of the human imagination… Bats magazine, 10/3. Internet: https://www.batcon. org/article/bats-in-magic-potions-and-medicinal-preparations/ (20. 10. 2020). McCraken, Gary F.: Folklore about bats in buildings most often portends doom – a reflection, perhaps, on the way many cultures have viewed bats through the centuries… Bats magazine, 10/4. Internet: https://www.batcon.org/article/bats-in-belfries-and-other-places/ (20. 10. 2020). McCraken, Gary F.: Throughout the world, folklore is rich with tales speculating on how creatures as mysterious as bats came to be … Bats magazine, 11/4. Internet: https://www.batcon. org/article/folklore-and-the-origin-of-bats/ (26. 10. 2020). Miller, Jill Flaningam, 2016: Animal Geography and Wildlife Interpretation of Urban Bats. MA thesis, San Francisco State University. Miller, Mary, Taube, Karl, 1997: An Illustrated Dictionary of the Gods and Symbols of Ancient Mexico and the Maya. London: Thames Hudson. Moore, Kevin C. 2020: Readapting Pandemic Premediation and Propaganda: Soderbergh’s Contagion amid COVID-19 (Program in Writing and Rhetoric, Stanford University, 590 Escondido Mall, Stanford, CA 94305-3069, USA; kcmoore@stanford.edu).“ www.mdpi. com (18. 10. 2020). Morecroft, Richard, 1991: Raising Archie: The Story of Richard Morecroft and his Flying Fox. East Roseville, NSW: Simon&Schuster. Mulhall, Stephen, 2008: The Wounded Animal: J.M. Coetzee & the Difficulty of Reality in Literature and Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Nagy, Kelsi, Johnson II, Phillip David, 2013: Introduction. In: Nagy, Kelsi, Johnson II, Phillip David (eds.), Trash Animals - how welivewith nature’s Filthy, feral, invasive, and unwanted species. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1–30. Netopiri, 2020: Hrvatska enciklopedija, mrežno izdanje. Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleža. Internet: http://www.enciklopedija.hr/Natuknica.aspx?ID=43510 (23. 10. 2020). O’Neill, Marnie, 2020: Chinese influencer Wang Mengyun, aka ‘Bat soup girl’breaks silence. Internet:https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/food/food-warnings/chinese-influencer-wang­ mengyun-aka-bat-soup-girl-breaks-silence/news-story/63ef0cec5b6d448d1843e2e1bcadb14d (17. 10. 2020). Nunez, Kirtsen. 2020: What’s ‘Bat Soup,’ and Did It Cause the New Coronavirus? Healthline, Internet: https://www.healthline.com/health/bat-soup-coronavirus (6. 11. 2020). Osaka, Keiko: Bat myths in Japan. Bats magazine, 34/4. Internet: https://www.batcon.org/article/ bat-myths-of-japan/ (10. 11. 2020.) Osbourne, Ozzy, 2010: I am Ozzy. New York: Grand Central Publishing. Ovid, 1958: Metamorphoses, rev. ed. F. J. Miller (ed.), Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Internet: https://www.theoi.com/Text/OvidMetamorphoses1. html (3. 11. 2020). Peric, Boris, Tomislav Pletenac. 2015: Zemlja iza šume. Vampirski mit u književnosti i na filmu. Zagreb: TIM press. Petrovic, Petar Ž. 1970: Slepi miš. In: Kulišic, Špiro, Petrovic, Petar Ž., Pantelic, Nikola (eds.), Srpski mitološki recnik. Beograd: Nolit, 268. Plato, 1969: Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vols. 5 & 6. Translated by Shorey, Paul. Cambridge, MA/ London: Harvard University Press; William Heinemann Ltd. Internet: http://www.perseus. tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg030.perseus-eng1:5.479(11.11.2020). Pliny the Elder, 1855: The Natural History. Bostock, John (ed.). London: Taylor and Francis. Internet: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3A­ book%3D33%3Achapter%3D45 (7. 11. 2020). Plumwood, Val, 1993: Feminism and the Mastery of Nature. London: Routledge. Prokop, Pavol, Francovicova, Jana and Kubiatko, Milan, 2009: Vampires are still alive: Slovakian students’ attitudes towards bats. Anthropozos, 22/1, 19–30. Pusztai, A. S. Bardocz, 2011: Potential Health Effects of Foods Derived from Genetically Modified Plants What are the Issues? Third World Network. Raoult, Didier, 2020: Epidemije: stvarna opasnost i lažne uzbune. Od pticje gripe do bolesti COVID-19. Zagreb. Read, Kay Almere, González, Jason, 2000: Handbook of Mesoamerican Mythology. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC Clio. Renfro, Stan: Several North American Indian tribes include bats in their traditional folklore. For the Navajo, the bat holds a special significance. Bats magazine, 6/1. Internet: https://www. batcon.org/article/the-bat-in-navajo-lore/ (8. 10. 2020). Riccucci, Marco, 2011: Same-sex behavior in bats. Hystrix It. J. Mamm. (n.s.) 22/1, 139–147. Riccucci, Marco, 2012: Bats as materia medica: an ethnomedical review and implications for conservation. Vespertilio, 16, 249–270. Safranski, Rüdiger. 2008: Koliko globalizacije covjek može podnijeti? Zagreb: Naklada Ljevak. Sax, Boria, 2001: The Mythical Zoo: An Encyclopedia of Animals in World Myth, Legend and Literature. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC Clio. Schild,Leonard, Chen Ling, Jeremy Blackburn, GianlucaStringhini, YangZhang, Savvas Zannettou, 2020. “Go eat a bat, Chang!”: An Early Look on the Emergence of Sinophobic Behavior on Web Communities in the Face of COVID-19. Internet: https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/340523411_Go_eat_a_bat_Chang_An_Early_Look_on_the_Emergence_of_Sin­ ophobic_Behavior_on_Web_Communities_in_the_Face_of_COVID-19 (27. 9. 2020). Sumic Miletic, Tea, 2020: Ako smo koronavirusdobili od šišmiša, stanje bi uskoro moglo biti puno gore: uništavanjemšuma životinje stižu medu ljude, a s njima ivirusi. Slobodna Dalmacija, 27. ožujka 2020. Internet: https://slobodnadalmacija.hr/vijesti/svijet/ako-smo-koronavi-rus-dobili-od-sismisa-stanje-bi-uskoro-moglo-biti-puno-gore-unistavanjem-suma-zivotin­ je-stizu-medu-ljude-a-s-njima-i-virusi-1012250 (27. 9. 2020). Svendsen, Lars Fr. H., 2019: Razumijemo li životinje?Filozofski pristup. Zagreb: TIM press. Tuttle, Merlin D., 2017: Give Bats a Break. Issues in Science and Technology 33/3, 41–50. Tvrtkovic, Nikola, 2017: Šišmiši Hrvatske: kratka povijest istraživanja i prirucnik za odredivanje = Short Research History and Identification Key = Bats of Croatia. Rijeka/Zagreb: Priro­doslovni muzej Rijeka; Hrvatski prirodoslovni muzej. Vicar, Branislava, 2013: “Si kdaj videl svobodnega konja?” Filozofski kontekst animalisticne etike v poeziji Jureta Detele in Miklavža Komelja. In: Bjelcevic, Aleksander (ed.), Etika v slovenskem jeziku, literaturi in kulturi: zbornik predavanj / 49. seminar slovenske­ga jezika, literature in kulture, Ljubljana, 1. julij - 12. julij 2013. Ljubljana: Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete, 35–45. Viskovic, Nikola, 1996: Životinja i covjek: prilog kulturnoj zoologiji. Split: Književni krug Split. Voon, Claire, 2017: Why Chinese Art Is Swarming with Colonies of Tiny Bats. Internet: https:// hyperallergic.com/406164/why-chinese-art-is-swarming-with-colonies-of-tiny-bats/ (29. 9. 2020). Whitaker, John O. and Douglas, Louis R, 2006: Bat Rabies in Indiana. Journal of Wildlife Man­agement, 70, 1569–1573. Zaradija Kiš, Antonija, Marinka Šimic. 2020. Cvijet kreposti ili o naravi ljudskoj kroz narav životinjsku Zagreb: Institut za etnologiju i folkloristiku, Hrvatska sveucilišna naklada. Zhang, Yunpeng, and Fang Xu, 2020: Ignorance, Orientalism and Sinophobia in Knowledge Pro­duction on COVID-19. Tijdschriftvoor economischeen socialegeografie111/3, 211–223. Žagar-Petrovic, Mirjana, 2020: Covid-19 – nova bolest i novi virus koji su promijenili svijet. Internet: https://www.zdravobudi.hr/clanak/1770/novi-koronavirus-sars-cov-2-i-bolest­ covid-19 (4. 10. 2020). KAKO JE TO BITI ŠIŠMIŠ U DOBA COVIDA-19? ILI KOLIKO PANDEMIJE MOŽEMO PODNIJETI Goran ĐurĐevic, Suzana Marjanic Ovih je blizanackih godina (2020–2021) kompletan svijet zapao u globalnu pande­miju Covid-19 koja je dovela do razvijanja razlicitih pretpostavki, neutemeljenih vijesti, post-istina i lažnih vijesti. Medu takvima su prednjacile vijesti o šišmišu kao krivcu za širenje ovog virusa te posredno kineskoj prehrani kao uzroku svega. Iako još nije dokazana poveznica unutar trokuta šišmiš – virus – covjek niti je odreden nulti zaraženi (osim u Wuhanu, postoje indicije o ranijim zaraženima u Italiji i SAD-u) kao ni izvor zaraze (osim šišmiša, ovi se virusi javljaju kod dru­gih životinja kao što su deve, ljuskavci i ljudi, pa, primjerice, neki znanstvenici obrcu situaciju i pokazuju mogucnost prijenosa s covjeka na životinju), bilo je posve „prihvatljivo“ demonizirati šišmiša. U ovom kontekstu autori podsjecaju na odredene povijesne kontekste predodžbi i doživljaja šišmiša te slicnostima i razlikama unutar pandemije, posebno se osvrcuci na hrvatski i globalni kontekst. Završno, u kontekstu knjige Koliko globalizacije možemo podnijeti? R. Safranskog i u kontekstu demoniziranoga kineskoga šišmiša koji se u doba pan-demije Covid-19 pojavljivao na brojnim internetskim portalima kao zoo-simbol digitalnoga folklora o kineskoj juhi, podsjetit cemo na Nagelovo predavanje koji u svom utjecajnom clanku „Kako je to biti šišmiš“ (“What is It Like to Be a Bat”, 1974) pogada u suštinu problema, a to je pitanje svijesti (qualia). Naime, koliko god istraživali, cak i imajuci sve informacije o arhitekturi šišmiševog moždanog sklopa, ne možemo znati kakvo je njegovo iskustvo u doba pandemije. U konacnici, autori zakljucuju kako je prica o šišmišima zapravo izvrstan pokazateljreprezentacijaDrugostiijacanjabinarneihijerarhiziranepodjele„mi“ i „oni“. Goran Đurdevic, Ph.D., Beijing Foreign Studies University, goran.djurdjevich@ gmail.com Suzana Marjanic, Ph.D., Institute of Ethnology and Folklore Research,Šubiceva ul. 42, HR-10000 Zagreb, suzana@ief.hr 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 61 – 77 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212405 The “Cairé” and “The Ghost of Komat” Textual Landscapes and Cultural Heritage in Argentinean and Slovenian Folktales Maria Palleiro Prispevek s stališca fiktivne konstrukcije mitskih krajin primerjalno obravnava ar­gentinske in slovenske pravljice, ki imajo tematske znacilnosti z ATU 326 (“Mladina, ki se je želela nauciti, kaj je strah”). Primer-java je usmerjena k prepoznavanju podobnih pripovednih vzorcev, ki so povezani ne le s tematskimi vrstami pravljic, temvec tudi s strukturnimi in slogovnimi znacilnostmi in drugimi spremenljivimi podrobnostmi. Te-matske, strukturne in slogovne znacilnosti, ki so skupne razlicnim variantam, ustrezajo pripovedni matrici, ki deluje kot pretveza za poustvarjanje v razlicnih pripovednih konte­kstih. Spreminjajoce se podrobnosti dajejo nov pomen univerzalnim vzorcem, poveza­ nim s kulturno dedišcino razlicnih lokalnih kontekstov, kot sta argentinski in slovenski. KLJUCNE BESEDE: povedke, Argentina, Slovenija, bajcnepripovedi, mitskepokrajine, nesnovna kulturna dedišcina The present article proposes a comparative approach to Argentinean and Slovenian tales that share thematic features with ATU 326 (“The youth who wanted to learn what fear is”) from the standpoint of the fictional con­struction of verbal landscapes. The comparison is oriented to identifying similar narrative patterns dealing not only with thematic tale types but also with structural and stylistic features, along with changing details. The thematic, structural, and stylistic features common to different versions conform to a narrative matrix, which acts as a pretext to be recreated in diverse narrative contexts. The changing details give new meanings to universal pattern connected with the cultural heritageofdifferentlocalcontexts,suchas the Argentinean and the Slovenian ones. KEYWORDS: folktales, Argentina, Slovenia, belief narratives, textual landscapes, intangible cultural heritage INTRODUCTION Folk narratives provide a verbal construction of cultural landscapes. Such construction of “textual landscapes” (Venturoli 2004) can be seen in Argentinean and Slovenian folk narratives, such as those analysed through a comparative approach. These narratives share thematic features with ATU 326, “The youth who wanted to learn what fear is”. The Argentinean ones are also connected with ATU 330A, “The smith and the Devil”. As will be explained, the comparison between Slovenian and Argentinean versions reveals not only thematic but also structural and rhetorical similarities along with changing details. Such details, considered by Mukarovský (1977) to be basic semantic units in folk art, are linked with contextual transformations of (pre-)textual common patterns, which express the differential identity of local cultures. THE CAIRÉ: A TEXTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF ARGENTINEAN VERNACULAR LANDSCAPE The Argentinean version, whose narrator is Cesar Soria, aged sixteen, is located in “a small ranch” of “La Maravilla” in the northwestern province of La Rioja. The Argen­tinean northwest is a geographic and cultural region near the Andes mountains, where indigenous vernacular cultures such as Diaguitas and Incas have settled their domains. The Incas, who spoke the Quichua language, established the Tawantinsuyu Inca domain, which left cultural traces such as a track system called Quapaq Ńam (literally “Great Way”), also known as “the Inca track”. The province of La Rioja is located in this zone, whose geographical and cultural landscape corresponds to the Argentinean part of the Qhapaq Ńam, declared in 2014 by UNESCO as World Cultural Heritage, under the category “Cultural Itineraries”. The landscapes of the Inca track – involving six South American countries: Ecuador, Colombia, Per Bolivia, Argentina and Chile – comprise ranches where it is said that Inca treasures, such as the one mentioned in the Argentinean version, have been hidden. During the early 16th century, the Spaniards conquered South America, and indigenous peoplesuffered a demographic decline. From this period until the 18th century, there was a consolidation of Spanish power, and the beginning of the 19th century found the Créole society – a blend of indigenous and Spanish cultures – mature enough to face the War of Independence, which ended in 1816. Since that independent period, other waves of immigration from the European world took place. Spaniards, Italians, along with Jewish and even Slovenian immigrants, settled in northwestern Argentinean provinces, such as Mendoza, and also in the mesopothamian and southern regions (Palleiro & Peltzer, in print). As a consequence of this historical development, indigenous cultures have a strong influence in the Argentinean northwest. The Quichua language is still spoken by Créole populations whose indigenous ancestors were indoctrinated by Catholic missionaries who used vernacular languages in catechisms. Thus, this region shows the blend of indigenous vernacular cultures with the heritage of Spanish conquerors and European immigrants in a heterogeneous landscape reflected in the narrative versions. LEGENDS AS INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE ISSUES Both the Slovenian and Argentinean versions have been presented as “legends” and “real cases.” As characterised by Tangherlini (1990: 385), a legend is a traditional historically grounded narrative discourse, with short episodes, performed in a conversational format, which reflects symbolic representations of collective experiences and commonly held values such as the ones expressed in the Argentinean and Slovenian versions. Connected to the historicised nature of legend is the relationship with folk beliefs (Dégh, Vázsonyi 1976), reflected in the narrative texts, whose contextualisation processes involve the construction of textual landscapes (Venturoli 2004). Since 2003, UNESCO has underlined the relevance of safeguarding patrimonial intangible heritage (PCI), which involves social practices that intervene in the processes of production of material and symbolic manifestations. As a folklore genre that reacti­vates the collective memory, the legend is part of this intangible heritage, referred to as knowledge transmitted from generation to generation by vernacular narrators like the Argentinean and Slovenian ones who recreate symbolic expressions of local cultures in legendary formats. TALE TYPES, NARRATIVE MATRICES, AND RHETORIC OF BELIEVING IN LEGENDARY DISCOURSE The distinctive feature of the legend as a folklore genre is the double connection with the semanticdomainof belief and with fictionaldiscourse, anchoredbothin reality andin the out of the ordinary world (Cook 2008: 13–16). Such a liminar domain is linked with the invention of traditions, actualising the past in the present (Fine 1989) and transmitting collective cultural values. The legends analysed here share the same narrative matrix, understood as a set of thematic, structural and stylistic features, which can also be found in folktales (Palleiro 2004, 2018), whose contextual transformations and changing details (Mukarovsky 1977) givenew meanings to auniversalpattern, expressing thedifferentialidentity ofeach social group (Bauman 1972). When studying traditional storytelling, Dégh (1995: 259) affirms that, from the narrator’s viewpoint, belief and credibility play an important part, as well as respect for tradition. Belief narratives are part both of individual and social memory, in an intertwining of universal patterns and local cultures, as can be seen in the texts here considered, whose discursive construction seeks credibility through argumentative resources. From a semiotic perspective, belief is a modal expression of truth, in which the true value of discourse depends on a social consensus (Greimas & Courtčs 1982; Palleiro 2008). As Valk (2019) wisely affirms, a legend may appear to be a historical narrative because of reference to verifiable geographic features and culturally credible characters. Simply because it is often performed as true, the narrative content itself is not always an actual reflection of a historical event (Tangherlini 1990). In this sense, Oring (2012) underscores that these narratives draw not necessarily on truth but on a rhetoric of truth and on a rhetoric of believing (Palleiro 2008). The context and the social performance are relevant aspects of legendary discourse (Abrahams 1976), and contextual variations transform narrative matrices into expressions of vernacular identities, as can be seen in Argentinean and Slovenian versions. The narrative patterns textualised in matrices are also anchored in festivals and rituals, which give meaning to the daily life of towns, cities, and other local spaces, becoming expressions of vernacular cultures. This is how, for instance, the distinctive features of the northwestern Argentinean culture are recreated in legends, rites, and festivals, such as the Salamanca one, bound both to indigenous Quichua-Diaguita and Spanish heritage. According to the vernacular narrator Marino Cordoba, the Salamanca is a ritual ceremony whose climax is the moment in which a “deal with the Devil” is achieved (Cordoba 2016: 54–58). The deal with the devil is also an ATU tale type, classified under number 330, “The smith and the Devil”, and it can also be considered as a narrative matrix whose sequential structure is organised into different episodes, such as the meeting of a man or a woman with the Devil personified, the accomplishment of the deal, the benefits ob­tained or the punishments for having refused it, with variants like the ones in which the man or the woman outwits the devil by trickery.1 The rhetoric structure is based both on the personification of evil forces and the antithesis between devilish powers and human cunningness. This universal pattern, common to different contexts, can also be found, for instance, in local Estonian folklore, as a folktale and a religious rite, associated with vernacular beliefs (Valk 2001). To summarise, legendary discourse, historically grounded, deals with the rhetoric of believing in a tension between universal patterns and contextual variations. Thus, the same narrative matrices, such as haunted houses and the deal with the devil, express vernacular identities in different contexts, such as the Argentinean and Slovenian ones. HAUNTED HOUSES IN ARGENTINEAN FOLK NARRATIVE The Argentinean version, whose title, given by the young narrator César Soria, is “The ‘Cairé’. It is about a gaucho (horseman) fighting with the Devil in La Maravilla” and was collected in fieldwork in the northwestern region in 1986, along with other narra­tives dealing with haunted houses. In previous works, this text has been studied from the standpoint of vernacular religion (Palleiro 2012: 211–229) and classification issues (Palleiro 2020). Here, the analytical perspective is that of the rhetorical construction of culturallandscapes. As stated,this narrative(classified by thenarratorbothas a“legend” and as a “case”) is close to the “memorate” since it refers to an event told to the narrator as a personal experience by a member of his family and shares thematic features with ATU tale type 326: “The youth who wanted to learn what fear is”.2 The protagonist is a gaucho who enters a haunted ranch of La Maravilla, where a treasure was hidden. Once inside, he decides to remain there overnight and, at midnight, different pieces of a corpse begin falling from the ceiling, one by one, until all of them are shaped into a devilish body. As soon as this happened, the “gaucho” begins fighting with the Devil personified until he obtains wins. This thematic plot has the structure of an oral version of personal 1 Such narrative matrix acts as well as a pre-text for fictional tales such as the one by José Corso (Palleiro 1990: 47–51) “Pedro Ordimán and the Devil” that follows this sequential structure with an alternative itinerary, according to which the trickster Pedro Ordimán manages to outwit the devil after having made a deal with him. 2 From the ATU tale type, this itinerary develops into itinerary dealing with motif E 281 “A youth spends the night in a haunted castle” in this variant. experience (Labov, Waletzky 1967), with an initial abstract in which the narrator orients the audience to the plot’s theme, space and time (at La Maravilla, when his grandfather was a little child), followed by a problem, caused by the ghostly apparition of a strange creature falling from the ceiling, which provokes a fight. This main sequence is followed by an evaluative clause that gives the narrative its significance by pointing out the rela­tionship of this creature with the supernatural, expressed in the phrase “That it was the Devil, who fell down from the ceiling” (Palleiro 1990a: 51). The resolution, coinciding with the victory of the courageous man over the devilish creature, is followed by a coda, which is the most important clause of this version since it mentions the deal with the Devil, whose thematic elements correspond to ATU type 330, “The smith and the Devil”. The basis of the rhetoric structure is the synecdochic fragmentation of the devilish body and the antithesis between good and evil, symbolised in the metaphor of the combat, in which the gaucho, a vernacular character, obtains the victory. The devilish creature is personified as a human being, and such personification is connected with collective beliefs in anthropomorphic representations of the supernatural. The narrator also uses argumentative resources such as the allusion to eyewitnesses to convince the audience about the believability of the plot. Such thematic, structural, and rhetoric features constitute the narrative matrix, which serves as a pretext for different textualisations, including the Slovenian and Argentinean ones. In the Argentinean version, the rhetoric construction of the landscape is connected with the setting of the narrative plot. Thus, the ranch of La Maravilla is presented as a haunting landscape, where “no one could enter, since it had been occupied by a devilish being, whose ghostly apparition frightened any visitor” (Palleiro 1990a: 53). The uni­verse of vernacular beliefs connects the pre-textual matrix with a local anecdote dealing with haunted houses inhabited by the Aguirres, who made a deal with the Devil and hid a treasure in a “ranch”: My grandfather Pablo told me that, when he was a little boy, a gaucho, an Argentinean horseman, has gone to a little ranch. And that at night, suddenly, he has heard a voice saying: - Should I fall or should I not fall? - So! Come and fall, once and for all! - he said […] That it is said that the Aguirres had made a deal with the Devil. That a treasure had been hidden for years, in that small ranch. And that a sort of curse was made. And, from that moment on, people who dare to enter that ranch are scared by such devilish beings (Palleiro 1990: 53–54). Since the times of the Spanish conquerors, legends regarding hidden treasures of aboriginal people have been circulating in rural areas like this one of La Maravilla, in La Rioja province. Thus, the text shows the blending process of the folk matrix and the legend with a local case, dealing with the members of a family who existed. The narrator includes allusions to ghostly apparitions as metaphoric representations of devilish forces, which arepartoftheculturallandscapeofLaRioja.Inasynecdochicidentification,suchghostly apparitions that scare people at night are called “Scares”, presented in Soria’s narrative not only as ghosts but also as concrete beings that protect the ranch against invaders, in a personification process (“And that is why there are ‘Scares’ at the Aguirre’s, there, in that small ranch of La Maravilla”) (Palleiro 1990a: 54). These hidden treasures protected by ghostly beings can be interpreted not only as material possessions but also as symbolic representations of local cultures. It is also worth noticing that the one who managed to outwit the Devil is a vernacular gaucho and not a foreign invader. The allusions to real people serve as argumentative strategies oriented to convince the audience about the tale’s believability, as are the modalising clauses, such as “This is true” (Palleiro 1990a: 54). These stylistic issues are linked with the aforesaid rhetoric of truth, referred not only to the empirical validation of an event but also to a set of cultural values. The version is thus presented as a belief narrative, whose veracity is supported by a communitarian consensus. In this way, the community’s voice, introduced in the clause “it is said in La Maravilla” operates as a source of social endorsement, reinforced by deictic clauses related to the local context, confirming the narrative’s collective dimension. CONTACTS WITH THE SUPERNATURAL IN THE VOICE OF AN ARGENTINEAN VERNACULAR NARRATOR The metaphoric condensation of human beings and supernatural forces can also be found in the Salamanca ritual in which, as stated, a deal with the Devil takes place. As mentioned above, when the Spanish conquerors arrived in South America imposing a Catholic worldview with a series of conceptions regarding God and the Devil, alien to vernacular cultures, a transculturation process of European heritage took place. This ritual is an example of such transculturation, reflecting social beliefs resulting from a blend of different elements, no longer Spanish nor indigenous but créole (Palleiro, Peltzer, in print). The narrative development of the Salamanca has been referred by the craftsman Ma­rino Cordoba in a personal interview held in his atelier in 1987. The artist created a series of pottery pieces representing different episodes of this rite, nowadays exhibited in the Folklore Museum of La Rioja and in the Museum of the Devil of Kaunas, Lithuania. As a rite, the Salamanca consists of a sequential repetition of actions, with a performative intention of achieving effects on the context (Rappaport 1992; Palleiro 2008), whose climax is the sequence in which, as aforesaid, “a man or a woman sell their soul to the Devil” (Cordoba 2016: 54–58). Cordoba referred to the different steps while showing the statuettes, in sequential order, and his narrative discourse reflected both symbolic representations of folk beliefs in a psychological level, as well as collective experiences that affirm commonly held values associated with a rhetoric of truth, which are distinctive features of legendary discourse (Tangherlini 1990). The narrative’s starting point was the statuette representing the devil under the zoomorphic appearance of a goat. The Salamanca is the encounter with the Devil in the shape of a black goat, or a pig, a dog, any animal. The craftsman shows a statue of the Devil represented in the form of a goat (Cordoba 2016: 54). The rhetoric axis of Cordoba’s discourse has been the metaphoric condensation of animals and human features in the figure of different characters, whose counterpart is the synecdochic processes of fragmentation reinforced by descriptive strategies, similar to the ones of Soria’s version. The initial sequence of the “Encounter with the Devil” coincides with an opening clause explaining the global significance of the Salamanca through the allusion to zoomorphic metamorphosis, which constitutes not only the metaphoric expression of the whole rite but also the image of a worldview that underlines the relationship of reality with the supernatural. As explained below, such a relationship can also be found in Slovenian folklore, in which wandering souls have the power to take both the form of an animal and of a human being (Kropej et al.2010: 88). It is noteworthy that the nomination of the Devil as Zupay (linked to the Quichua culture) along with the allusion to the “Master of the Salamanca” (Cordoba 2016: 54–55), associated with the famous Spanish University and, thus, with a learning situation. In this way, the ceremony is presented as an initiation rite led by a supernatural devilish teacher.This plural reference to the Devil reflects the cultural syncretism of the whole community, which is part of the northwestern Argentinean landscape. As referred in Cordoba’s narrative, before achieving the deal with the Devil, the par­ticipants of the ceremony or salamanqueros must follow different ritual steps, such as to trample and spit the Holy Cross, to bear snakes crawling out of the body, to walk over hot embers and to enter a pool of ice water. Those who do not fulfil these tasks are seriously punished; these ritual punishments are narrated by Cordoba in a final macro-sequence, which develops the topic of zoomorphic transformations, with one of the toads whose vernacular name is the guacacho, presented by Cordoba as a punished singer: And that there are also the ‘punished’ ones: the toad, the guacacho [...] The toad has been a singer who has gone to the Salamanca […] He hid inside a guitar, and he did not follow all the ritual steps, so then, the Devil punished him, and he turned him into a toad, full of stains (Cordoba 2016: 57). Such ritual practices have been documented in communities of the Argentinean northwest by the psychiatrist Fernando Pagés Larraya in research regarding collective hallucinations, which has revealed the impact of social beliefs in collective mental health (Palleiro 2016: 228). Furthermore, these ritual punishments can be considered “impossi­ble tasks”, which acquire the performative meaning of an act of blasphemy against God, symbolised in the initial task of rejection of the Holy Cross, as a sign of the Hispanic Catholic culture. The thematic motif of the “impossible tasks” appears in ATU tale type 330, “The smith and the Devil”. Regarding the connection between rite and the tale types, it is worth considering a metanarrative clause in which Cordoba makes a distinction between the rite and the fictional discourse, affirming the ontological dimension of beliefs: “All that happens in the Salamanca is true, it is a rite which must be accomplished. But from this rite, people find inspiration to tell histories and [fictional] tales.” (Cordoba 2016: 58). Thus, the nar­rator underscores the difference between the semantic domain of fictional discourse in which he places the folktales, and the semantic domain of the rite, associated with “true” actions. In this way, he considers both “histories” and “tales” (comprising “legends”) as fictional discourses, associated with the “rhetoric of believing” (Palleiro 2008), in an implicit allusion to the poetic recreation of history (White 1973). To convince the audience about the veracity of his discourse, Cordoba intersperses a local “case” regarding a rascal who once went to a Salamanca by chance when he was returning home at night, and he heard music near a canyon. Then, he was invited to enter a cave, where he met a musician who was an old, toad-faced, ugly creature. And he danced and ate some tasty food […] And when he was about to return home, they gave him a parcel, to take it to his mother. The day after, when he woke up [he opened the package and] he realised that the tasty stuff had been changed into waste, somewhat like donkey dung. And he told this to his friends, and his friends asked him: ‘Do you know where have you been? In a Salamanca!’ (Cordoba in Palleiro 2016: 56–57). The semantic axis of this local “case”, or strange event happened to a community member. It includes the antithesis between a beautiful appearance and an evil essence, represented by the contrast: tasty food turned into donkey dung. This memorate, inter­spersed in the sequential development of the rite, is structured, in the same way as Soria’s version, as a narrative of personal experience (Labov, Waletzky 1967), with an orientation clause that locates the action in a real space and time and a thematic point, which is the metamorphosis of the delicacies into rubbish, within the dynamic of transformations of the Salamanca. This narrative of personal experience serves the function of an argumentative proof of the believability of discourse endorsed by the community’s voice. As it will be explained below, the Slovenian version also refers to a local anecdote (or memorate) connected with the supernatural, dealing with a ghostly apparition in the town of Komat. THE MUSEUM AS A FRAME FOR CULTURAL LANDSCAPES A symbolic space of legitimation of Cordoba’s artistic work dealing with the Salamanca as local cultural heritage is the Folklore Museum of La Rioja, placed almost at the end of the Inca track, in the confluence of the Quichua and diaguita cultures. Such location influenced the genesis of the craftsman’s work, conceived as a set of pieces to be exhibited in a museum setting. The disposition of the statuettes in the Folklore Museum has been documented in two different periods, in 1994 and 2001. In 1994, such statuettes were exhibited in a room, in non-sequential order, with a few explanatory paratexts, sharing the space with indigenous objects such as arrowheads and vessels, catalogued as samples of vernacular material culture and tangible heritage. The classification of “material cul­ture”, used by the Folklore Museum as a qualifying parameter, implied the reference to a collectionist paradigm of folklore, related to the accumulation of objects from the past for the rescue of a cultural memory, according to the sense of the term “folklore” given by Thoms (1846). In the second period, the statuettes were displayed in sequential order, in concentric circles over wooden trunks, around a central statuette, which corresponds to the deal with the Devil, in a specific room devoted to the Salamanca, in which they are still placed. Such location underlines the authorship of Marino Cordoba as an individual artist who managed to recreate the cultural heritage of his community. Moreover, the museum provides visitors explanatory sheets suggesting a narrative tour, which proposes an order of the statuettes that emphasises the ritual sequences of initiation, impossible tasks and punishment. Such paratextual explanations highlight the connection of these vernacular social beliefs with the indigenous cultures of the Qhapaq Ńam, where their most important traces can be found. As stated, the ritual transformations of the Salamanca reflect a dynamic worldview that mixes elements of vernacular cultures juxtaposed with Catholic mythology. Such a mixture is also the main principle of folklore composition, characterised by Mukarovský (1977) as a mosaic-like structure, formed from the juxtaposition of heterogeneous semantic units. Thus, the Folklore Museum of La Rioja acts as a symbolic space whose function is both to preserve local collective cultural heritage and to encourage individual artistic expressions such as Cordoba’s one. Furthermore, the Museum of the Devil of Kaunas in Lituania provides framing issues (Goffman 1992, Lotman 1978) to the aesthetic pro­duction of Cordoba, proposing a reception of his artistic work as part of the Argentinean cultural landscape. THE SALAMANCA FESTIVAL Another artistic expression of this rite is the Salamanca festival. This event, lasting five nights, spreads music and local culture in Santiago del Estero Argentinean province, located in the area of the Inca track. The festival also serves to help needy communities, since part of the earnings is distributed among assistance centres and local schools (Palleiro and Peltzer, in print). Like in La Rioja, also in Santiago del Estero, the Salamanca is part of the vernacular living culture, based on the legend, which acts as a narrative pretext of the festival. In Santiago del Estero, it is said that the Salamanca is a difficult-to-access cave located in the deepest part of a mountain, and whoever enters there manages to earn much money without any effort, as well as to display extraordinary abilities in playing musical instruments, seducing women, and enjoying all pleasures. In order to achieve this goal, the salamanquero – that is to say, the participant of the Salamanca rite – signs a contract with Zupay, the vernacular Devil, who grants his wishes in exchange for his life and soul. The festival was held for the first time in 1992 at the Club Sarmiento of La Banda, a few kilometres from the capital of Santiago del Estero and, since the very beginning, it has been a communitarian event held with the support of social centres that contributed in the fundraising and organisation. The festival offers the local public food, such as catfish and other specialities. Year after year, the event grows among both locals and tourists. Concerts of prominent national and international musicians take place in the festival, including a musical contest, the Taki Mosoj (“New Year songs”, in Quechua language) for emerging artists. Regarding the stage effects, in each edition of the festival, held regularly during February, every night a large poster with the letters LA SALAMANCA is prepared with red icons simulating the salamanquero fire (Palleiro & Peltzer, in print). In this festival, folklore and fakelore (Dorson 1976, Bendix 1997) are mixed, in a process of invention of traditions connected with the tourism industry. This event combines theatrical and ritual performances, displaying relevant aspects of social life and collective identities3 connected with the cultural heritage of northwestern Argentinean culture. “THE GHOST OF KOMAT”: GHOSTLY CREATURES IN THE SLOVENIAN CONTEXT The narrative matrix of “A ghostly apparition” can also be identified in the Slovenian tale “The ghost of Komat” (Kropej et al., 2015: 100) which is associated with local beliefs regarding “wandering souls”. In this tale, the soul of a cheating neighbour has to return from the other world to the land named Komat as a ghost carrying a boundary stone on his shoulder each night because he shifted such a stone to get the land that belonged to his neighbour. In Slovenia, the appearances of so-called “punished souls” for such a sin were widespread in folk belief. Such ghosts or “cursed souls” were named meraš (the one measuring), džiler (engineer) or preklesa (cursed), and they had to carry their burden until someone saved them (Kropej 2012: 186–187). This was explained by the editors of this tale in an introductory note regarding Slovenian vernacular be­liefs about such terrifying phantoms of the souls of deceased people who have to pay for their sins appear in the form of an animal (bird, dog, wolf, cat, mouse, dormouse, snake, toat, horse, bull, deer, bear) or in the form of a human being (Kropej, Šmitek, Dapit 2015: 88). The comparison of the Argentinean version with the Slovenian one shows interesting similarities, along with contextual differences. In both of them, the action is grounded in a specific location: at “La Maravilla, La Rioja” in Argentina and in the field named Komat, between the villages Male Lašce and Poinvke, in the Slovenian one. The antagonist is a supernatural creature, presented as a ghost in the Slovenian version, and as a ghostly appa­rition, named “the Cairé”4 in the Argentinean one. The ghostly apparition isa personified being who asks a similar question employing a similar modal form, which is “Should I fall or not?” in the Argentinean version, and “Where should I put it?” in the Slovenian narrative. In both cases, such modalisation places the narratives in the arenas of belief. The versions dealing with the semantic domain of fear associated with the supernatural and the answer from the earthly world tends to restore a broken order expressed through a synecdochic counterpoint. The two narratives reflect a quest for sense, expressed in a final explanation: the Slovenian version refers to the fact that the protagonist attempted 3 It is worth remembering the characterization of “performance” given by Schechner (2004) who, following Turner, considers that this concept comprises both theatrical representations, rituals and everyday life events such as sports, dance and ceremonies. 4 The Spanish idiom “Cairé” means “I will fall”. to guess what the ghostly voice meant, and the Argentinean one affirms that the voice belongs to a devilish being who has been protecting a hidden treasure. Both narratives connect the ghostly apparition with conflicts for the possession of the land. In the Slovenian tale, there is a conflict between the two neighbours quarrelling endlessly over a piece of land. One of them was moving the boundary markers. For this sin, he is punished and appears in the nights as a ghost carrying the boundary stone. In contrast, the Argentinean tale alludes to a “small ranch” where a hidden treasure is protected against invaders by supernatural forces. It is worth noting that this relationship between ghostly possessions and living conflicts dealing with ownership of land has also been documented by Valk (2006) in contemporary Estonian folk narratives. Furthermore, the Slovenian version is presented by the narrator as a recollection from his childhood that resemantises the past from the present. Also, the Argentinean narrator presents his narrative as a remembering of his grandfather’s childhood projected towards the present times, in which the consequences of a “deal with the devil” are still being experienced. Thus, the space becomes a cultural landscape, enriched by vernacular beliefs that turn both the Argentinean ranch and the field of Komat into haunting places. Moreo­ver, the explanatory note of the Slovenian collection, which alludes to souls that take the form of an animal or a human, introduces a description of supernatural forces similar to the one mentioned by the Argentinean narrator Marino Cordoba who, as stated, affirms that, in the Salamanca ceremony, the Devil appears in the shape of different animals (Cordoba 2016: 54). In the Argentinean narrative, the haunting presence is associated with a deal with the Devil mentioned by the narrator Soria in the final coda, in which he alludes to a wandering soul with whom the vernacular “gaucho” held combat. In this way, both narratives reconstruct cultural landscapes connected with vernacular beliefs. Such local landscapes are in Argentina reframed in tourist festivals performed in places connected with touristic itineraries as the Qhapaq Ńam – the Inca track – declared by the UNESCO as part of the World Cultural Heritage. Tourists are encouraged to follow this track visiting different places bound to vernacular traditions, highlighted in folk narratives. In this way, Qhapaq Ńam becomes not only part of the tangible heritage but also of the intangible heritage contained in narrative messages. This connection between tangible and intangible heritage can also be recognised in Slovenian versions bound to existing local places, such as Komat. Thus, both the Slovenian and the Argentinean narratives draw textual landscapes that are part of the intangible cultural heritage, connected with local beliefs anchored in tangible places, such as the field named Komat, the ranch of the Aguirres, or even the Folklore Museum of La Rioja where the statuettes of La Salamanca are exhibited. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS Legends constitute the intangible cultural heritage of different local groups, such as Slovenian and Argentinean ones. Each new version gives contextual meanings to folk narrative matrices, creating cultural landscapes. Thus it happens with versions regarding the Cairé and the deal with the devil in northwestern Argentinean communities and with the ones regarding the ghost of Komat and other wandering souls in Slovenia. In the Argentinean context, topics like the one of the deal with the Devil make room for visual representations, such as the la Salamanca pottery series by Marino Cordoba in the Folklore Museum of La Rioja, which is part of the local cultural heritage, and to performative events such as La Salamanca festival, showing a blend of European and indigenous cultures. These narratives show the relevance of social beliefs regarding the supernaturalin everyday life, as reflected in anecdotes of realpersons who participated in a Salamanca. Such narratives also include hidden treasures protected by ghostly beings, which can be considered metaphors of living conflicts. All these artistic expressions serve as touristic attractions to incentivise people to visit historic places that keep indexical traces of vernacular cultures. Oral narratives express symbolic representations of the supernatural in ongoing so­cieties such as Argentinean and Slovenian ones, referring to both intimate experiences regarding supernatural contacts with the dead and collective experiences regarding social life, such as the ownership of vital space threatened by foreign invasions. The contexts in which these aesthetic expressions are displayed show the connection between tangible and intangible heritage. Thus, oral versions dealing with la Salamanca act as pre-texts both of iconic statuettes exhibited in museums and of performative musical events, such as La Salamanca festival, which is not only a folklore expression but also a tourist attraction connected with fakelore and invention of traditions. Museums act as symbolic spaces that favour the patrimonialisation process of collective memories, creating institutional narratives, such as the one of the Salamanca provided to the visitors of the Folklore Museum of La Rioja.5 To summarise, narratives regarding haunted places show how the supernatural is represented in contexts such as the Slovenian field named Komat or the Andean world, whose geographic and cultural landscapes are part of the Qhapaq Ńam, declared by UN­ESCO to be part of the World Cultural Heritage. The complexity of cultural landscapes makes necessary the arbitration of mechanisms of identification and protection for the development of tourist circuits. Through such forms of tourism, people can experience the fashions and lifestyles which these places involve (Palleiro & Peltzer, in print). The concepts of tangible and intangible heritage are closely intertwined, as shown in the narratives analysed here, connected with the way of considering haunting spaces as a part of local identities, which are affirmed in the difference. For further research, it is worth comparing other Argentinian and Slovenian super­natural beings such as the krivopeta and the Cai Pora, which are supernatural (female) beings with reversed feet that are said to be found beyond national boundaries such as the north-eastern South American zone of the one of the guaranytical area between Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina, and in the border area of Slavia veneta and the region of the ZgornjaSoška dolina/Alto Isontino (Upper Soca river valley) between Slovenia and Italy. “Institutional narratives” are the ones provided by cultural institutions such as the Folklore Museum that reconstructs traditional rites and other folk beliefs in a didactic register, oriented to explain it to the visitors. The revival of krivopetas as alocaltradition has been recently studied by BarbaraIvancic Kutin (2016; 2017), not only in belief narratives but also in public storytelling events, theatre productions, reproductions in contemporary poetry, prose, music, the arts, edu­cation, tourism and other economic/business activities and services of the 21st century. Narratives regarding the Cai Pora and other mythical vernacular creatures have also been reframed in the present times in the Argentinian context in different oral, didactic and media discourses, as a result of a cultural policy of incentivising vernacular cultural heritage. REFERENCES Aarne, Antti; Thompson, Stith, 1961: The Types of the Folktale: A Classification and Bibliog­raphy. Second Revision (Folklore Fellows Communications 184). Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica. Abrahams, Roger, 1976: The complex relations of simple forms. In: Ben-Amos, Dan (ed.), Folklore Genres. Austin: The University of Texas Press, 193–214. ATU: Uther, Hans- Jg, 2004. The Types of International Folktales: A Classification and Bib­liography. Based on the System of Antti Aarne and Stith Thompson. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica (Folklore Fellows Communications 284, 285, 286) Bauman, Richard, 1972: Differential identity and the social base of Folklore. In: Paredes, Americo; Bauman, Richard (eds.), Toward New Perspectives in Folklore, Austin and London: The University of Texas Press, 31–41. Bendix, Regina, 1997: From Fakelore to the Politics of Culture. The Changing Contours of Amer­ican Folkloristics. In: Bendix, Regina (ed.), In Search of Authenticity. The Formation of Folklore Studies. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 188–218 Cook, Ryan, 2008: Prologue. In: Palleiro, Maria (ed.), Yo creo, vos żsabés?Retóricas del creer en los discursos sociales. Buenos Aires: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras de la Universidad de Buenos Aires, 261–263. Cordoba, Marino, 2016: La Salamanca y otras creencias. In: Palleiro, Maria (ed.), El cuento folk-lórico riojano: una aproximación a la narrativa oral. Buenos Aires: La Bicicleta, 54–58. Dégh, Linda; Vázsonyi, Andrew, 1976: Legend and belief. In: Ben-Amos, Dan (ed.), Folklore Genres. Austin: The University of Texas Press, 93–123. Dégh, Linda, 1995. Narratives in Society: A Performer-centered Study of Narration. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia / Academia Scientiarum Fennica. Dorson, Richard, 1976: Folklore and Fakelore. Essays Toward a Discipline of Folk Studies. Har­vard: Harvard University Press Fine, Gary, 1989: The process of tradition: cultural models of change and content. Comparative Social Research 11, 263–277. Georges, Robert; Owen Jones, Michael, 1995: Folkloristics. An Introduction. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Goffman, Erwin, 1992: Ritual de la interacción. Buenos Aires: Tiempo Contemporáneo. Greimas, Algirdas; Courtčs, Joseph, 1982: Semiótica. Diccionario razonado de la teoría del len­ guaje. Madrid: Gredos. Ivancic Kutin, Barbara, 2016: Krivopete: Wild Women with Backward-facing Feet in Slovenian Folk Narrative Tradition. Folklore 127/2, 173–195. Ivancic Kutin, Barbara, 2017. Transformacije (Slovstvene) Folklore v Sodobni Kulturi. Krivopete v Zgornjem Posocju in v Beneciji. Traditiones 46/1–2, 37–54 Kropej, Monika, 2012:SupernaturalBeings from Slovenian Myth and Folktales (Studia mythologica Slavica – Supplementa 6). Ljubljana: Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU Kropej, Monika; Šmitek, Zmago; Dapit, Roberto, 2010: A Treasury of Slovenian Folklore: 101 Folktales from Slovenia. Radovljica: Didakta. Labov, William;Waletzky,Joshua,1967:Narrativeanalysis:oralversions of personalexperience. In: Helm, Jane (ed.), Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts. Seattle and London: The Uni­versity of Washington Press, 12–44. Lotman, Jurij Mijailovich, 1978: Semiótica de la cultura. Madrid: Cátedra. Mukarovský, Jan, 1977: Detail as the Basic Semantic Unit in Folk Art. In: Burbank, John; Stein­er, Peter (eds.), The Word and Verbal Art: Selected Essays. New Haven: Yale University Press, 180–204. Oring, Elliot, 2012: JustFolklore: Analysis, Interpretation, Critique. Long Beach: Cantilever Press. Palleiro, Maria, 1990: Estudios de Narrativa Folklórica. Buenos Aires: Filofalsía. Palleiro, Maria, 2004: Fue una historia real. Itinerarios de un archivo. Buenos Aires: Instituto de Filología y Literaturas Hispánicas de la Universidad de Buenos Aires. Palleiro, Maria, 2008: Yo creo, vos żsabés? Retóricas del creer en los discursos sociales. Buenos Aires: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras de la Universidad de Buenos Aires. Palleiro, Maria, 2012: Haunted houses and haunting girls: life and death in Contemporary Argentineanfolk narrative. In: Bowman, Marian; Valk, Ülo (eds.), Vernacular Religion in Everyday Life: Expressions of Belief. New York & London: Routledge, 211–229. Palleiro, Maria, 2016: El cuento folklórico riojano: una aproximación a la narrativa oral. Buenos Aires: La Bicicleta. Palleiro, Maria, 2018: La dama fantasma. Los laberintos de la memoria en el relato folklórico. Buenos Aires: La Bicicleta. Palleiro, Maria, 2020: Argentinean and Slovenian folk narratives: classification criteria and com­parative approach. In: Palleiro, Maria (ed.), Argentinean and Slovenian Folk Narrative Archives Archivos de Narrativa Folklórica Argentina y Eslovena Buenos Aires: INILFI “Manuel Alvar” Universidad Nacional de San Juan, 71–90. Palleiro, Maria; Peltzer, Eugenia, in print: Meaning and symbolism of the Salamanca rite in Ar­gentinean popular culture. In: Merriman, Kelly (ed.), The thrill of the Dark: Heritages of Fear, Fascination and Fantasy. Birmingham: Ironbridge Internationa Institute for Cultural Heritage. Rappaport, Roy, 1992: Ritual. In: Bauman, Richard (ed.), Folklore, Cultural Performance and Popular Entertainments. A Communications-centered Handbook. New York: Oxford University Press, 249–260. Schechner, Richard, 2004: Performance Theory. London: Taylor and Francis. Tangherlini, Timothy, 1990: It happened not too far from here. A Survey of Legend Theory and Characterization. Western Folklore 49/4, 371–390. Thompson, Stith, 1955-1958: Motif-Index of Folk-literature. Copenhagen and Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Thompson, Stith, 1993. Motif-Index of Folk Literature. New Enlarged and Revised Edition. Co­penhagen and Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Thoms, William, 1991: La palabra ‘Folklore’. Reimpresi de la carta a El Ateneo, 1846. In: Magrassi, Guillermo; Rocca, Manuel (eds.), Introducción al Folklore. Buenos Aires: Centro Editor de América Latina, 37–64. Valk, Ülo, 2001: The Black Gentleman. Manifestations of the Devil in Estonian Folk Religion. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica (Folklore Fellows Communications 276). Valk, Ülo, 2006: Ghostly Possession and Real Estate: The Dead in Contemporary Estonian Folklore. Journal of Folklore Research 43/ 1, Indiana, 31–51. Valk, Ülo, 2019: Call for papers to the Guwahati Conference- Online document. https://net­ works.h-net.org/node/73374/announcements/1984055/conference-belief-narratives-folk-lore-studies-narrating- Venturoli, Sofia, 2004: Il paessaggio come testo. La costruzione di un’identitŕ tra territorio e memoria nell’ area andina. Bologna: Clueb. White, Hayden, 1973: Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-century Europe. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press. “IL CAIRÉ” E “IL FANTASMA DI KOMAT”: PAESAGGI TESTUALI E PATRIMONIO CULTURALE NEI RACCONTI POPOLARI ARGENTINI E SLOVENI Maria Palleiro In questo articolo propongo un approccio comparativo a due racconti popolari, uno sloveno ed uno argentino, il cui contenuto semantico esprime identitŕ cultu­rali locali. Entrambi condividono caratteristiche tematiche con ATU 326, “The youth who wanted to learn what fear is” (“Il giovane che voleva imparare cos’č la paura”), e quello argentino aggiunge anche elementi di ATU 330A, “The smith and the Devil” (“Il fabbro e il diavolo”). La versione argentina, registrata in una ricerca sul campo in 1986, é stata riferita dal giovane narratore Cesar Soria, di anni sedici, nella provincia di La Rioja (Palleiro 1990a: 53–54), e la versione slovena é stata registrata da Kropej, Šmitek and Dapit (2015: 100). L’approccio comparativo é orientato ad individuare similitudini tematici, strutturali e stilistiche simili, insieme a differenze di dettagli. Ogni insieme di caratteristiche tematiche, strutturali e stilistiche comuni viene concepito come una matrice narrativa, che funge da pre-testi da ricreare in contesti narrativi diversi. I dettagli, considerati come unitŕ semantiche di base del discorso narrativo, danno ad ogni matrice nuovi significati, connessi con le identitŕ locali. La trama dei racconti é articolata attorno a queste matrici, e il suo contenuto semantico riflette i conflitti della vita quotidiana di ogni popolo. I racconti popolari costituiscono un patrimonio culturale immateriale di diversi gruppi locali, come quelli dei contesti sloveni e argentini. Ogni nuova versione conferisce significati contestuali alle matrici narrative, creando paesaggi culturali che diventano in ogni racconto paessagi testuali. Cosě accade con la versione ar­gentina riguardanti il giovane senza paura, nominato “Il Cairé” – associata anche con il patto con il diavolo- e con quella riguardante “Il fantasma di Komat” e altre anime erranti slovene. La versione slovena riferisce che l’anima di un vicino traditore deve ritornare dall’ altro mondo alla terra chiamata “Komat” come un fantasmacheportalapietradiconfinesullasuaspallaogninotteperchéhaspostato la pietra miliare per ottenere la terra che apparteneva ad un altro vicino, e quindi riporta un conflitto riguardante alla possesione della terra, proiettato ad un livelo sopranaturale associato con credenze sociali del contesto. Nel contesto argentino, la matrice narrativa ha anche una manifestazione rituale nella cerimonia della “Salamanca”, nella quale si celebra un patto con il diavolo. Questa cerimonia rituale é stata rappresentata dall’artista locale Marino Cordoba in statuette di ceramica, che fanno parte del patrimonio culturale locale, esposte nel Museo Folcloristico di La Rioja. Marino Cordoba ha anche raccontato lo sviluppo sequenziale di questo rito locale, cui racconto verbale viene utilizzato in questo articolo come intertesto per fare un paragone con il testo del giovane narratore Soria. Questa comparazione intertestuale ha mostrato che le convinzioni sociali e le credenze della comunitŕ messe in atto nel rito gravitano anche nello spazio del racconto, presentato sia come una leggenda che come un caso reale. La “Salamanca” serve anche da ispirazione ad eventi performativi come il “festival della Salamanca”, che mostra una miscela di culture europee e indigene. Queste espressioni artistiche che mostrano la rilevanza delle credenze sociali e che rivelano la presenza del soprannaturale nella vita quotidiana servono anche come attrazioni turistiche per incentivare la visita ai luoghi storici che conservano tracce delle culture locali. Sia l’analisi testuale che il percorso intertestuale dei racconti rivelano che le narrazioni orali esprimono rappresentazioni simboliche del soprannaturale nelle diverse culture, e queste rappresentazioni riguardano non solo le esperienze perso­nali ma anche quelle della vita sociale di ogni comunitá, come quelle argentine e slovene. In questo modo, le versioni orali riferite al patto con il diavolo compiuto nel rito della Salamanca fungono da pre-testi sia di statuette iconiche esposte in un museo che di eventi musicali performativi come il festival della Salamanca, che non č solo un’espressione folcliristica ma anche un’attrazione turistica collegata all’ invenzione di tradizioni. Le narrazioni mostrano come il soprannaturale sia rappresentato in contesti comeilmondoandino,icuipaesaggigeograficieculturalifannopartedelQuapaq Ńam, il sentiero degli Inca, dichiarato Patrimonio Culturale dell’Umanitá dall’ UNESCO. La complessitá dei paesaggi culturali come quegli del mondo andino rende necessario arbitrare meccanismi di tutela per lo sviluppo dei circuiti turistici. Attraverso tali forme di turismo, le persone possono sperimentare gli stili di vita che questi luoghi coinvolgono. I concetti di patrimonio tangibile e immateriale sono strettamente intrecciati, come mostrato nelle narrazioni qui analizzate, che ricreano spazi testuali in cui si respecchiano le identitá locali come quelle slovene e argentine, affermate attraverso le differenze. Maria Palleiro, Ph.D., Ricercatrice di Ruolo, Universitá di Buenos Aires, Consiglio Nazionale per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica (CONICET), Argentina, marinespalleiro@gmail.com 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 79 – 99 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212406 .............. ........ (.).... / .... . ........ ...... ........ . ........ . .............. ...........* ..... .. ........ Avtorica analizira terensko gradivo, zbrano med njeno terensko odpravo na južno Podlasje (regijaLuków-Siedlce-Garwolin naPoljskem) leta2017,terosvetlilokalnorazliciconadna­ravnega bitja pod imenom »zmora«.Na tem ozemlju imazmora funkcijo, kini znacilnaza druge poljske lokalne tradicije, tj. da plete in zapleta grivo konj, pri cemer so informatorji zanemarili tradicionalno zmorovo funkcijo (tj. zadušiti specega) ali pa je ne omenjajo. Zmora iz južnega Podlasja je obravnavana v širšem poljskem in vseslovanskem pogledu. Avtorica preucielementeobravnavaneganadnaravnega bitja, kot so ime in izvor nadnaravnega bitja, njegov videz, vedenje, cas dejavnosti, njegove funkcije ter amulete in preventivne ukrepe, ki se izvajajo proti njemu. Avtorica zakljucuje, da je na preucenem slovanskem arhaicnem obmocju zmoradelno prevzelafunkcijehišnih duhov, kar se odraža v celotnem sistemu mitoloških likov, povezanih z domaco in gospodarsko (govedorejsko) dejavnostjo. KLJUCNEBESEDE:ljudskademonologija, zmora, kobila, hišni duh, Južno Podlasje, terenske raziskave, slovanska etnolingvistika, Poljska The author analyzes the field materials col­lected during her expedition to the Southern Podlasie (Luków-Siedlce-Garwolin region in Poland) in 2017 and sheds light on the local version of the supernatural being under the name “zmora”. In this territory zmora is endowed with a function (not typical in other Polish local traditions) to tangle and braid the horses’ manes. Meanwhile the inform­ants put aside zmora’s traditional function (that is to suffocate a sleeping person) or do not mention it at all. Zmora from Southern Podlasie is regarded in a wider Polish and all-Slavic perspective. Such parameters as the supernatural being’s name, its origin, appearance, behavior, time of the activity, its functions as well as the amulets and preven­tive measures used against this evil spirit are examined. The author concludes that in the studied Slavic archaic area zmora has partially taken over the functions of the house spirits, that is reflected in the entire fragment of the mythological characters’ system associated linked to the domestic and economic (cat­tle-breeding) sphere. KEYWORDS: folk demonology, zmora, mare, house spirits, Southern Podlasie, field research, Slavic ethnolinguistics, Poland * ......... ...... ......... ............ ..., ...... «.......... ........... .... ............. ......: ................... ............», . 17-18-01373 (............ – ..... .... .......). ........ ... ........ ............ ........ ... ... .... ........ ...... ........ ...... .....e... ........ ........... ... ..... .. ........ ........... .... ........ ......... . ......... ..... ................ ....... ............ ......... ... ........ ......... ............, ...... ......... ..........­.., ...... ......... .............. ......... ............. ............ ............ . ........... . ........ ........ ........... . .......... .... .. ..... ..... ..... .. ..... .......... ........ .... / ..... / ...., ...... ......... ..... . ........ ........, . ..... ... ........... .... – ........, . ........ ...... (... cauchemar, ..... nightmare, .... mara, mahr, mare, .... tachtmerrie, .... moroi (Seso 2016, 58)), ..........., ...... ....., ... .....­......... ....... .......; . ....... .... ... ............... . ........ . ......... (.... 1997, 110). ....... ....... ............ .............. .........., ... ............ ........ ..... *mor-/ *mar-, ......... .......... ..... ........ ... . ..............., ... . . ............... (...............) .........., ...... ...... .... ... .. .. ..... ......... ......... .......... . ................... ....... «.......... .........» .. ....... ... ......, ........... .............. .......... . ...... .......... – ... ...... «.....» . «....», ..... ......., .. .........­...., ........ ...... ........ .......... ........., ..... ... ... ...... ...., .. .. ......, .......... ..... ... .............. ......., ............. ........., .......... . .......... .... ..... ..... .....-..... ...... ....­..... . ..... ...... .. ......... . ......., .. ...... ......... ............ .......... .... ........ .......... (... . .......... ....., ... ...... ...... .......... «..... ................... ........, ....... ......... ....... ......... ..... ....., ......... .. ........, ..... ..... . ...... . ....... . ....... .....» (......... 1908: 409)). ...... . .............. ......., ...... ........ ..... ........ ........ .............. .......... . .... ......­... .. .......... .. ......, . ......... (......), .......... .... ..... (.... . ....), ....... (.... ....... . ........ ... ......), ..... ............... . .......... ............. . ...... (........, . .......... ......... .... – ........ ........). ..... ......... ... ............. ....... . ...... (... .... ...), ...... ......... ... .......... .. ...... ... .........., .. . ... ...... ............... ......: ... ... cauchemar.. ...-... .aucher‘......’ . mare ‘...... ..........’. ......... .............. . ....... ...... .......... ..... ...... . ............ ....... ......., ...... .........., .... .. .... . ...... .............. ........, ....... ......... .......... ........, ... .. . ......... .........., ....... ....... ...... ........ ... ............ ...... .......... ......... ......, .. ......... .... .. ..... ......, . ..... .. .... .......... .. ..... .... . ...... .......... ......, ........ ... ..., ... ..... ..... .. ..... ......... ..... .......... .. ...... (......., .........., ... ........ ..... ..... ...... . .......... .........). ...... .. .. ..... .. ...... ... ........., ... .. ........ ...­................ ..........,....... ............ ........., .......... .....? .......... .. «.......» ..... ........., ........... .......... .............. ........., . ..... ........ ..... ....... .............. ..... .. ...... .......... ......... .......... ........ ... ............ ........ .. .... .......... .........., ... ........ ...... ......... ... .. .......... ..... . ..., ... ....... . ... ............... ......... .. ....... .......... .........., ........, «...... ..... ..... <...> ........­.... <...> .. ............ ....... ......., .. ....... .... ..... .... ...... ....... ...., ........... ..... ..... ............... .... .. .... ............ ......., ...... .. [......] ........ ................ . ........ . ..... ........... ....... .. ...... ......... <...> ......... ................ ........ ..... ....... .. .......... .............. .............. ...... ......-...... ......, ........, ... ........... ........, .... . ......... ....... ... .. ............... .....; ..... .. ....... ........ .......... ...........» (Moszynski 1934, 607–608). ...... . ........: ...... . .... .. ...... . ...... ......... ......... ..... ............. ......... .......: .... ..... ............, ...... ......... .. ...... ...., ......... ........­........ .... .. ... ....... .... ........... ...... .. ............. .... ......., .., .. ....... ...., .......... .......... ........ .. ....... ...... ........ ............... ........., ... ..... (....) . ......... ........ ...... ......... ....... . ...... . ......... ...... .... ...... . ........., ............ . ....... «......­.... .........» ... ..... (....... ...... .... ...... ............ . ........ ......... ........ . ......... ......... ......). ....... . 2017 .. . .......... . ..... ........ .. ...... ... «.......... ........... .... . ............ ......: ................... ......»1, .. ........ ....... . .............. ........ . ...... ....... ...... ...... . ...... .......... ....... ..... – ....... – ........, .... ........... 16 ... . ........, ........ ........ . 25 ............ . 1924 .. 1964 ... ........ (..... .................. 32 ....). . ............... ........ .. .............. ...................... . ....... ............ ......... ....... .......... ......... .............. ... ...... ...... .. .. .... . .... ...... .. .. ......... ......... .. .......... ...: .... 2017; ........ 2017. . «.......» ... . ........ ......... .. ............... .......... ........ .. ............ .............. ......... . ....... ..... .. .......... .........., ..... .. . ...... ............... ......... ............. ........ . ......... ........ ............... ........., ............. . ....... «.......... .........» ... ....., ... . ...... ...... .. ..... .... .......... .... .... ... .. ...... . ..... .......... ........... (...... . .....), ........... ....... ...... (...... .... .......... «........» ... «.........»). ........... . ....... «.......... .........» ........ ..... (...., ....) ............ ... ....., ........ ....... ........ – ...... . ...... ....... ........, ..­......... ... ..... .. ...... .. ........ . ........ . ..... ......, ....... . ... ........... ..... . ........ .......... . ........ ........ . ......­............ ........ .............. ....., .......... ..... *mor-/ *mar-, .......... ....... ....... . ...... ....... ......... (........, ........, ........ ........ ....... ......... ........, ....... ..... .. .....). . ......... ...... ...... ....... ............. ........, . ...... – ........ (....... ..., ............ .. ............ ......). . ............... ...­...... . ...... .... ..... ....... ....., ... ........ . ......... ........ (...., ...., .......). .. ........... .. ......., ................. .......... ................ ......., ......... ........, ... ............. . ...... .... ....... . ........... .........., . ...... . ......... ............ ......., ........... .... ....., ..... ....... ..... .. ...... ... ............, ... ............. . ......., ....... ..... .. ..., ........... . ......... .. ..... .... ........... . ............... ...... ..... ..... ..... ................. ......... ............. ... .........., . ..... ............. ............. . ............ ....... ........ (...... 2015, 62). ......... ........ ...... ......... ....... ......... . .......... ...... ........ ..... *mor-/ *mar-: ..-.... ...á, ...., ...á, ......, .... zmora, mora, mara, .... mura, ....-.... morawa, ..... mora, morina(........), ...... ....‘......, ........ ...’, ....... mora. ...... ........ . ...... ........ ....... ........., ... ............ ........ ........... ........ ..... ...... – ......, ...... ........: gnieciuch, gniotek (........), gnotek, dusiciel, dusiolek (..... ......), ....... truta ... trota-mora (.. .... treten «........., .......», ... ..... .... Trut, Drude «......, ........», «....»); ........... .. ....: siodlo, siodelko (..........,........,........ ....);.........:kripijavka (.........piti kri «.... .....»); ........ ..........: nocny diabel, nocnica, nocula (..... ......), nocnica (.......); ....... .....: ...... ..... (‘....’ ......). ........... . .............. ........ .... koszmar (......... ....), šnjava, skišnjava (....... .. skušnjava «.........») (Kropej 2008, 301). ............. ... .......... ...... *mor-/ *mar-, ... . .. ....... ..... ...... ........ ..........., ....... . ..... *mor-.......... . ........ *mor. ‘......’ (.... 19, 214). .. ...... ......, ... ........ . ..... *m.r- ‘........., ......’ (Skok 2, 454). ..... . ......*mar-.. .......... . ........ *mor. ‘......’ (.... 19, 206), .. ........... . ........ *man. ‘......, ........, ..........’ (...... 2, 571). .. ... ... .. .......... ....... ......, ..... .. ......... ..... mor . mar, ... .. ... ........ . ...... ....... . . ...... ...... (..­....... 2013, 52). .. ....... . .. .... ........... ....... ......... .... .............. ...... .........., ....... ......... . ............... ...­....., ........ ........ .. ..... ............ ......... . ....... ....... . ........... ........ ......... . ...... ........ ............ ............., ... «......... ........ ....... ...... .. ..... .... ........ .......... ....... .........», .......... . ........ ...... *mer-(‘.......’ .. ........ ‘........’, ................ . ........), . ..... ‘........’, ‘......’, ‘........’ (......., .... 2013, 71). .. ........., ....... .......... ............. . .... (....), ........ . ......, ... ... «.............. ............ ......­... ........, ............ ....., .............. .. ..., ....... (.......) ....., ..... .......... . ....... ........ ./... ........ ..... ......... ......... ........ ........... . ............: ‘.......’, . ... ..... ‘....... .....’; ‘......’, ..... . ........ ‘...... .......’, ‘...... ......’; ‘....... ...’; ‘.... ......... “.........” .........’, ‘......’» (......... 2013, 54). . ..... ..... ........: . ...... ......... ........ ........ ...., ....... ..... ............ . ..... ... ....; ......, ....... ..... ............ . ....., .... ... .....; . ......... mora ‘.... ....., ....... .. ...’; ‘....’. . .......... ...... . ........ ..... ........ ....... ..... ........ mora. . ....... ........ . .... .. ...... ........ ........ ........ – ......., .......... .. ..... . ......, ........., ........, ......... (......), ....... .... (...... 2015, 52). . ..... ........ ...................... ....... ...................... ............. ........ . ...... mor-. ........ . ...... mar-, ..... ......... ...... .. ......... .........., ....... ... ........... (......... 2013, 56). ... ........ ......... ..... ......, ...... ........ .. ........., ........ .. .. ..... . .. ............: . .......... .......... 75 % ............ ..... ....... ...... ... ...... zmora, 14,8 – mora, ..... .. ....... ........... . ....... . . ........... ....... . ........ .., ........, ..... ...... .....­........ .... mara. . .......... ........... ....... gniotek, gnietek (68 %) ...... 6,7 % zmora (Czyzewski 1993, 64; Baranowski 1981, 65–66; Pelka 1987, 157; ... .....: Budziszewska 1991, 17–18). ........ ..... .............. ......, . ..... ........ .............. ........ ......... .... ..... zmora ... mora, .... ........... ............ mara. ....... ............... ......... .......... «.......» ............... ......... . ......... ......... ......... .......... ............ ............ ..... ..... .............. ... ..... ......... (......... . .... ......... . ......., ........), ... . «........», ........ .........., ........ ..... ......, ... .. ......... ... ........ .............., ............ ........ ..... ..... ......... ...... «........» .......... ... ....... ...... ......... . ...... ....... ........, ... ..... ..... ...... .. ......., ... ..... ..... .... ......... ...... ...... (........... 1999, 342). . ..... ........ . ........ ...... ............. . ..., ... ..... ..... ............ .............: .. .... ... ..... ......., .......... ...... ........... . .......... ............. ........ .............. ..... ...... ............. ... ........... .....­........ ..... .... .........: .. .......... ....... .. ..... ....... .... .. .... (.... ....) . ...... ....... . ..., ... ..... .......... ....... ....... . ....., ........ ..... . ......., ......... . . ...... ....... ...... . .. ...... (Kropej 2008, 301). Tylko takie bylo powiedzenie, ze siódme kolejne dziecko, to jest nie dziecko, kolejna plec chyba jak sie urodzila, to wtedy to mówili ze to zmora… siódme kolejne dziecko, albo siódmy chlopiec albo siódma dziewczyna, zmora mówili… Kasikowa, co na koncu jest, ona jest… ich bylo chyba dziewiecioro czy dziesiecioro, i wlasnie siedem dziewczyn bylo i tak mówili ze jedna z nich zmora (TD, Grezówka). Kiedys to tak mówily, ze jak siedem dziewczyn w rodzinie, niema chlopaka, tylko siedem dziewczyn, ze siódma bedzie zmoru, bedzie chodzic tak jak lunatyk, nie pójdzie spac, tylko wszystkie spio una wychodzi i idzie gdzies, siódma dziewczyna, siódma w rodzinie… (MS, Adam). Tylko zawsze mówily: w którym domu jest siedem dziewczyn, siódma chodzi na zmory w nocy, nie dobudzi jej… tam jej duch widac, ze nie dobudzi jej – ze siódma dziewucha w rodzinie idzie na zmory, jak spia… (MB, Wola Korycka Gna). ... ....... ......... ..... . ..... .. ....... . .. ............-....­........: To jak bylo siedem pannów. To juz ta uostatnio miala mara. No, ale tam chto widziol, ze ona mara byla? Niewidoczna byla ta mara (Gielczew, gm. Wysokie) (Michalec, Niebrzegowska-Bartminska 2019, 239). ............ .... ....... ...... . ...... .......... ......... ......: .. ..... ......... . ... ............. ....... ........, . ... ........... .. .... (...... ..... .... ... ......., ... . .......). . ............... .... .............. ......... . ..... .............. .....-....... ....... . .......... ......., ..... . ......... ........ .....-......., ........­..... . ....... ......... .... ........... . . ........ ........ (Seso 2016, 62). ...... ....... ......... ..... ...... ............, ........, morus’. . .......(........... 1999, 342). ..... ..... ........... . ........ ... ....­..., ......... .. ......-.... (... ......., .. ........ ..........). .. ..... ....... .......... ............... .... .. ............... .. ............... .......... ........ . ...... .............., ... ....... ............. ..... .......... ...... ........ ...... ......, ... ...... ..... ..... .... ......., ....... .. ..... ............ ...... ..... ..... ....... ............ ...... ........... ...., .......... . ...... (.... ......), .......... . ........ ... ..... «.......» (....., .......), . ...... ...... ........... ......., .......... . ........ «.......», . ... ......, .... ........ ...... «.......» .. ..... ...... ..... ..... ...., ........ ....... ........ ........... ....... . ............ ... (....... . ......... ... .. ..... ........ – .....). .. ........ . .......... ........, ..... – .... ...­...., ... ........ ...... .. ....., ..... .......... ........, . ..... ...... ............. . ......... .... ...... – ... ... ........, ........ ......., ....... ..... ........... ..... ... ......... . .... ......... (Kropej 2008, 301). ........ .......... .... . ..... ........ .........., ...... ..... .......... ......., .. ..... ........ ........ ........ ... ......... .....­..... ...... „wiary” „mary”2: To podobnie, ze jak sie do chrztu podaje dziecko i sie nie powie, jak ksiadz tego potrzebuje „z wiary”, a ze jak chrzesny nie powiedzo „wiary”, tylko „mary”, i ze to dziecko pózniej sie robi maro (FS, Trzciniec). A to zmora to mówili kiedys, opowiadali, ze te zmory to byly kiedys duzo, jak dzieci chrzcili, nie powiedzieli „wiary”, tylko „mary”, i to dziecko pózniej bylo taka mara <…> Tylko mówie ze nie powiedzial przy chrzcie tego dziecka „wiary”, tylko „mary”, kiedys ludzi nie wymawiali jak to teraz juz… (BC, Rudzienko). ........... ......... ........ . .. ............... ..........: .... ........ ........ .. ...... .......... „Czy chcesz wiary” ....... „Chce mary”, .. ......... ...... ...... ... . ........ ........., ....... ..... ......., ..... .......... ......., ... ........ ...... .. ... . ....... ........., ... ....... ....... ..... (......... 1878, 196). . ...... ....... .......... ...... .. ..... ....... . ............. ..­............. ........., ......... ... ... ......... .... ..., .. ......... . ...... ......, ........, .... .... .. . ...... ......... (.... ....), . . ........ .. ...... ......... ......... ...... ............... ......... ............. .. .... ....... ........... ......., ... ... ........ ....... ......... .... ... ........... . ..... .......... ........... ......... . ..... ........... .. .. ..... ........... ........... ......, ..... .. ....... ..... «.......­.....»3 .. ......... ........... .. ........... ....... .. ..... ... ........, 2 . ........ ..... ..... mary ........ ‘......., .. ....... ...... .........’; ‘.........., .. ....... ........ .... . ..........’ (SJP, s.v. mary). https://sjp.pwn.pl/szukaj/mary.html 3 . ..........-............ ... .........: ..........., .......... 1999; ......... 2016. . .... ........ ... .......... .... .......... .. ........... ........ .. ....... ...... .... . ..... .......... ...... ..... ..... ............ ... ... ......... .......... ..... ...., ... ... ..... .. .... ...... (...., ....­....) ...., ....... . ....... ..... ......... . .... ........, ..... .. ....... ...... ............ .«................».... ..................... ..... ...... ................ . ...... ...... ...... ........ ... ........ ... ...... ........... ..... ........ .... ....... ........ . ....... .. ..... ........ .. . .......... ....... ..........., ...... ... ..-... ......, ..­... ......., ....... ... .... ........, . ....... ......... ....., ..... .... .......... ..., ......... .... – «...., ....... ....... .. .... ....... . .... ...... ... ....., .... – . .... ....., ...., ......., ...., ...... ....... ... ............,. ..........,........,............... . ................ ....., ...... .. ... ......, ...... .. ....... ..........., . .......... ... .. ........, ...... ......., ......... ....... ......., ......, ....... ....... .........» (Sychta 3, 102–106). . ........ ...... .... ..... ........ ...... .... ....... .... (Seso 2016, 68–69). . ..... .......... ...... ........ .. .., . .... ...... ........ «.....» ....., ..........., ...... .... ......... ...­.......... ...., ... .. ..... ............ . .... ....... (... ....). . ....... ...... ........ ........ ......., ... . ... ......, ..... ..... ....., ........ .......... ..........: nie dobudzi sie jej… tam jej duch widac, ze nie dobudzi sie jej (MB, Wola Korycka Górna). ...... .... ..... ........... ... ......... ............. . ...... ...., ... . ........-..... ...-.... .... ..... ...... ... ...., ..... .......... ... ........., .......... ............... ........ . ..........., ....... ..., .. .. ......, . ...... .... ......... ... ........ ..... ........... ....., .......... .. .. ....... (..... ....... ........ ... ...... ....). . ....... .. ........, ....... ...... ..... ......, ..... ...... ...... ... ...... . ......... ..... ........... ..... .............. ..... ..... . ..... . ..... .........: Ona w nocy wstaje po ksiezycu, jak ksiezyc wejdzie w okno, to wychodzi, przychodzi i nie wie o tym, po prostu sen taki ma, ale to nikt tego nie sprawdzil (TD, Grezówka). Bedzie chodzic tak jak lunatyk, nie pójdzie spac, tylko wszystkie spio una wychodzi i idzie gdzies (MS, Adam). ..... ..... .... ..... ... ........, ... ........ ... ....... ...., ... ...... ..... ...­.. ...... .. ...... ............. ........ – ......, ..........., ........., ....... .... . .... (....), . ........ ..... – ....... .. .... ..... . ......­... ........ ..... ..... ....... ... (... ...... ....... ... ........ ....), ........., . .... ........ ..... ......... ... ...... ........ ...., ....... . ....... ....... (........... 1999, 342). . ........ .... ........ ...... ..... .......-...... ..... ...... ......... ...... . ......... .... – ....... . ........ ....... . ........ ........ ..... ........... ......., ... ..... ......................., ..... ......... ......... ....... ... ......(...., .....), . ..... ........... ........ (....... ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ......). ..... ..... ............ . ......... ........: ...... ... ....., ...........(......), ........., ........... . ....... ...., .............. (......). .. ............. ....... ...... ........, ..... ........, ... ...., ... .. ......... . ........ ....... ......... .... (... .... ........... ........ .......... ........ ....... .... – carownica (SGP 1994, 14)): Jest taka brzydka, to byla zaba, w ksztalcie zaby prawdopodobniez… znacie te czarownice, takie wielkie zaby, czy nie… (TD, Grezówka). ..... .............. ..... ........... . .............. ......... . ..., ... .......... ....., . ...... .......... ..... .. .... ........, .. ....... .........., ... ...... .. . .... .....: To kiedys tak mówili, ze na weselu, jak konmi jezdzili, wozami, i konie byly na klepisku staly bo to zima byla, tak kiedys mówili tak… i tam spali tez mezczyzni który tam… no i te konie to tak sie dokuczaly ze po prostu, ze po prostu no niemozliwe, i ten, jak sie którys tam przebudzil, wzial bata i batem tego konia co to sie dzieje… a pózniej, jak poszli na wesele, mialchlop przeciete… no bylwlasnieta zmora, ion dusikoniedlatego, przewaznie konie… (BC, Rudzienko). ...... ..... ...... ........ .... ......... ........... ..... .......... ... . ......... . ...... (....... ......, .........): . .... ........ .........­...4 .... ........ ....... . ..., ... .... (morá) .......... ....., .. ........, ......... .. ..., . .. ......... .... . ...... ..... . .... .... ....... .... ........ ....... ... ... .... ......... ...., ........... ....... ........ ..... ......... ....... ....... ......... ........ .. ........ .......... .........: ....., ....., .....(.... dusi, dlawi, gniecie; ... ....... tlaci, pešta, sesa). ..... ....... ......., ... ..... .... ..... . ....... ........, . ...... ..... .. ...... ...... (.. ..... ........ ... .......... . ........... ........ ........ – .............., .......). ..... ...... ....... ........, ......... .... .... ... . ..., . .......... .... .. ........ ........... .... ......., ... .......... ......... .............. ....: .... ................ .. ....... . ....... ....., .............., ...... ..... ..... . ........ .... ....., ............­...... .. ........ ........ (........ 1953, 229), .... ....., ....... ...... .... .... . ..... (Sychta 4, 102). . ......... ......... ......... ..... ..... ............. ....... ....... ....... (Diakowska CA PAE). ........., ... ....... «...... ....... ........» ........... .. .........­.. ..... . ..... ......... .... ...... .......... ........ .. . ........ ......, ...... . ..... ................ – ...... ..... .... . ......., ...... ..... . ......... . ... ........ ......... .. .......... ...: ........., ........ 2018. [Nie mówili kiedys ze niby jest jakas mara, czy zmora?]Tak, mówili kiedys ze plecie warkocze <…> kobyle na tej grzywie… [A kto to jest zmora?] No to ja wiem?! Jakis duch… cos takiego co atakowalo te zwierzeta… (JG, Wojcieszków). [A nie mówili, ze koniom ktos zaplata grzywy?] Oj to u nas to bylo jak przyszlam tu… jak do meza przyszlam tu do jego. I przyszedl tescio rano: „wychodzta ci pokaze… wychodze i widze jak zmora napletla warkocze kobyle” <…> Poszlam – to jeden przy drugim warkoczyk pozaplatany w nocy. To jest taka zwana zmora, a co to jest zmora mysmy nie wiedzieli i ja do dzis nie wiem (MB, Wola Korycka Gna). Warkocze sa. Pózniej, ale ja pózniej nie widzialam, koniesmy mieli, bo jak maz zyw to po dwa konie bylo, po trzy, nie widzialam, jak zyje, zmory, a kiedys ojciec powiedzial, ze przychodzila… zmora robila, ze naplótla i tak, mówie, bylo, jak by klejem sklejone te wlosy i skrecone te grzywa, grzywa u konia, na ogonie nie, to zmora, ze to bylo takie… [Dla konia to jest zle?]No zle! Bo póznie nie mozna rozczesac ja, rozrzezac, bo to takie… ojciec mówil, ze takie bylo jakby, jakby kto slinami zlepil, jakies, cos jak, jak skleil… (MS, Adam). Koniom tak, u nas kobyla zawsze z nocy byla tak zmordowana i wszystko miala poplecione takie (BC, Rudzienko). Siadala do kunia i tak i… ten kón zawse byl mokry, do stajni poszedl mezczyzna – zawsze byl mokry (MR, Rudzienko). No to mówie, ze takie powiedzenie bylo, ta zmora na koniach warkocze plotla, to bylo prawdziwe, to bylo zle, bo mordowala konia, jezdzila po koniu, meczyla… kon piana na nim w stajnie byla… grzywe splotla, ze trudno bylo roz…tego… (TD, Grezówka). [A niemówili,zekoniowiktos warkoczykiplecie?]SM:Marychodzili,mary… HM: Mary… bylam taka mala, tak sie balam, mówie „Boze”! Trzymalismy konia, a tata mówi tak: „No juz przyszla ta, ta cholera juz naplatala wlosów koniowi”, ale to mysmy maly byli, nie wiedzielismy o co chodzi, a pózniej mówi, ze taka mara przychodzila… nikt jej nie widzi… (SM, HM, Chromin). [A takie opowiesci, ze koniowi ktos splata grzywe?] Tak, mara. To bylo niedobrze, bo jak ta mara przychodzila, mówili, ze wlasnie meczy tego konia, bo tam ten kon taki niewypoczety jest, ale czy to byla prawda, czy to… ale to… powiem Panu szczerze ze ten przesad to jeszcze i do teraz. Czasami starszy osoby tak… kon mial grzywe taka dluga i taka mial nieraz poplatana: aj bo to mara mu poplotla. A moze to sie tak grzywa sama ukrecila (HG, Starogr). .... .............. ...... .............. ..... ........... .. ...... ............ ..... ....-........... . ......., ............... .. ..­..... . .. ............-............, ...... ...... .......... .. .... .. ...... ......: Zmory. To plecie warkocze u koni. U nas tez tak bylo, duzo razy plotla. Ten dawny kon jak byl, to zawsze mial naplecione warkoczy takich. A obcinac nie wolno bylo tych warkoczy, bo mówili, ze na nowo bedo naplecione, ze to jest gorzej (Ulan-Majorat). To kedys koni, to mówili, ze zmora dusi, bo na tej grzywie to take, take, pani, grzywa mieli spleciono, jak sie, zeby clowiek nie ukrecil tak wlosów ladnie. Pokrecane warkoce, tak poplecione maja To mówily, ze to zmora. [I rano sie zajdzie do stajni, to kon] spocony. Ze to zmora dusila. Ate grzywo to ma splecione, jakby warkoców naplecione, ze tego nie rozedrze, tak splecione jest (Grezówka Nowa, gm. Luków). ......... .......... ........... ......... . ....... ....... . ........, ..... ..... . .... ........... ....... ..-.. ...., ... .... ....... ... ........ (..., ......., .. ........ ....... . ...... ....... ..... ............... .............): No, to bylo, no przewaznie na zmory to mówili, ze jak grzywa skrecona u koni, to zmora dusi. Ale to zadna, nie zadna zmora, tylko jesc sie chcialo koniowi <…> i mówi zmora. Bo dobry kon nie mial zmory, tylko jak biedny kon, to grzywa byla skrecona, no zmora (Motycz, gm. Konopnica) (Michalec, Niebrzegowska-Bartminska 2019, 239–240). ... ..... ......... . ...... ........, .............. .......... ......... ..... ........... . ........... ..... ........... .........: Kunie mialy warkocze popleciune w stajni, kiedys tutej we dworze wyprowadzily, to co maju te grzywy, to mialy warkocze popleciune takie, a to ogony im poplotly jakos [J.L., Danisz, 2009]; Kunie jak dlugie grzywy mialy [wtedy mialy warkocze], bo jak miol krótku, to tylko potargane. To tyz moze nie byla zmora, tylko kun sie pocil i sie tar, tar i tak sie robilo, bo czego teraz tak nima? [Jan L., Danisz, 2009]; Jo to nie wierze, ze zmorów nie bylo, bo to byl normalnie w trzy pasymka upleciuny warkocz, albo takie loki poklecone byly [A. P., Jelonek, 2009] (Lasota 2011). ....... . ..., ... ......... ..... ..... . ...... .. .. ..... ..... .... .......,...................................... . ....... .............­... ........, ...... ............. .... ............ ... .. ........ ....... (....... 2019, 306). ....... ...... ..... ..... .......... ... .... (mary) ..... . ........... . ......... ...... ........ ........., ...... ... .... ...... ..... .......­........ ........ . .... ..... (....... . .......), ....... ...... . ...... .. ..... .... (.... 1997, 226–227). ........., ... .. ... ......, ... ...... .... . ......... ... ....., .... .... .. ........... ........, ... .... .......... ...... ........, ...... .... ........, ... ... ....... .......... ....... ......, . ....... ......... ....... ............. ....., ...... ... ..... .... ............., ........... . .......... ............ ............ .........­.... . ..., ... ..... ......... ..... ....., ........ ..... . ........ ....... (........... 1999, 343). . ............... .......... ........... ....... . ....., .......... ...... ........, ............... .. ...... ......, . ...­......-......... .......... (.........) (Czyzewski 1998, 141). ..... ...... ....... ........ . .......: . ......., ....... ..... ....... ..........., ......., ... .. ...... .... (mora d.š.la) (Sychta 4, 102–105). .. ...... ..... ...... ............ ........... ....... ..... ....... ..... .. ..., . ... .......... .. ... .........., ...... ... ....... ....­.... ......... ............ .. ....., ......... . ..... ........... ........ ....... ...... ... .... .......... ... .. ....: HM: A czasami tez pamietam to i ludzie meczyla… dusila ludzi. SM: Przebudzil sie czlowiek caly spocony i czul na sobie… HM: Siadala tutaj na klatce piersiowej… SM: Na klatce piersiowej, to z opowiesci, bo ja na sobie tego nie stwierdzilam, no ale kiedys moja babcia wlasnie Wysocka mówila: „Juz mara u mnie byla”. Obudzila sie cala ona mokra, mozna bylo wszystko zdjac i wyzac, bo to bylo calo mokre, mówila tak ciezko… HM: To jak czlowiek na wznak lezal, jak na boku to nie… SM: Babcia opowiedziala i to widzialam na wlasne oczy, ze ona obudzila sie cala spocona… ona sie przebudzila i podniosla sie i obudzila mame i mówi: „Marysiu, mówi, poszukaj mi jakiejs koszuli, bo, mówi, ja jestem cala mokra, juz ta mara u mnie byla” (SM, HM, Chromin). A ile razy czlowieka dusi, mnie ile razy dusila… [Dusila?] Oczywiscie! Nie mozna slowa zlapac, nie mozna sie ruszyc… tego sie nie widzi, tylko czuje… Jeszcze taki byl, ja wam opowiem, taki byl dzien, maz poszedl na… to juz bylo kupe lat temu, poszedl na wies, a ja tem jeszcze w tym mieszkaniu w drugim, potem ono nam sie spalilo, tak sobie spalam na lózku i mialam taka… i tam zawsze sobie kladlam rózaniec, i tam byla nocna lampka i ona sie swiecila… i ja poszlam ukladlam sie spac i w tym czasie od nogów to zaczyna…Od nogów ciezko jakby sie ktosna ciebie ogromny polozyl i cie dusi: ani zlapac dchu ani czego… no mówie juz tera juz umre, nie dam rady… to niejak jakby we snie, bo to pólsen-póljawa… i uslyszalam jak maz idzie tu <…> i przyszedl i chlapnal dzwiami, a ja [.....] mówie: „Dobrze zes przyszedl, chyba ba mnie udusila”… tych zmor to bylo! (MB, Wola Korycka Górna). .. .. ..... ........... .........., ... . ....... ....... ..... ..... .... ........ ......... ...... ..... .........: Ona pomalu nikogo nie udusila, tylkozmeczy, zmeczy prawie do ostatniego dchu… a ile razy o kobiety na wsi jak rano wstaly, to sasiadka do sasiadki: „Oj, dzis jak me dzis zmora dusila, to juz myslalam ze juz nie wytrzymum”… ......... ...... ....... ..... . ........... ....... ........... ...., ... .. ....... ........ ....... . ..., ... .... ..... .......... ....... ...­... ........, . ......, ....... . ......... ........., ... .... ..... ..... ........ ............... .. ......... ....... ......, ......., ....... . ....... ..... ...... ..... ....., ......... ...... ........ ......, ... ... ............... ........ .. ..... ......, ..., . ... ..... ...... . ........ ........ ........, ... ... ..... ...... .. ........., ...... . ... ......... ..... (Kropej 2008, 301). . ...... .... ..... ..... ........ ....... ........ . .......... .. ........... ....... ......, ...... . ........ .. .... .......... ...... ..... . ............ (. ...... ......– ......... ........, ....... .... ..... ......, ........ .. .... ...... – ...... 2015, 52). ......., . ....... ..... ...., ..... ........ ....., . .... ....... ....., .. ....... ....... ...... (.....). ........... ...... ............., ... . ...... ......., ........ ..... ....., .. ........ .. ........ . ......... .. ........, .... .. ... ........ .....,..........................,..... ...... .............(........... 1999, 343; Czyzewski 1998, 139). . ..... . ........ ...... .......... ......., ... ..... ......... . ....­..... ..... ..... .... ..... ......... ......... (........, ..... ........ ........) (....., ....,......,....), ................(....), ............... ..... ..... (.....). ........ ........ ........, ... ........ . .. ...., ... .... «......... ......», .. .... ....... ......... ...... ..... ............. . ......, .. ....., .. ...... .. ....., ........, .......... .. ...... ... . ....... . ..... ....... (...., ......), ...... .. ..... (....) ... .. .... ............ . ...... (......) (........... 1999, 343). . ..... .......... ........ ........ ..... .. .... ........, ...... ........... ............., ... ..... ........ ............ ...... .. ........ . ......., ....... ... ......, ........... .........: ono [dziecko] chodzilo po suficie gdzie tylko, i ono nie spadlo, nie daj Boze zebysieodezwactylko do niego(BronislawaCzajka, Rudzienko). .................... (. ..., ... ..... ...... .. .....) ........... ..... . .......... .. ....... . .. ............-............: To byla, to sie mara nazywala, to óna chodzila po dachu. Wysla na dach, chodzila i nie zleciala (Gielczew, gm. Wysokie) (Michalec, Niebrzegowska-Bartminska 2019, 242). ....... .. ..... ........ ..... .......... .. ...... ........, ..... .. .........-........ .. ........-..... .... ...., .......... ....... .....: U nas kobyla zawsze z nocy byla tak zmordowana i wszystko miala poplecione takie, to maz kose kladl w okienko tym ostrym do góry, jak bedzie szedl, sie skaleczy i nie przyjdzie… (BC, Rudzienko). To ludzie przy drzwiach kosy sobie zakladaly, zeby ten nie przyszedl, zeby nie naplótl tych warkoczyków, bo kon pózniej na cos chorowal (AW, Wrle Wargocin). . ........ ....... ....... .... .......... ........ ......., ....... ........ . ..... . ....., ..... ..... ....... .... . ...... .. .......... ... ........ ............ ..., ... ..... ......... ........, ... ..... .......... .... ....: I wtedy mówi do mnie tescio tak: „Sluchoj, jutro jo ide te warkociki rozplete i tu poratuje, ale jutro juz nie psyjdzie”. „A co tatus zrobie?” „Lusterko postawie”. Wzial z domu lusterko, zwierciadelko, zaniósl tam co stala kobyla, na scianie przybil, oparl… ona jak przyjdzie i sie przejrzy… i wiecej nie przyszla… jak sie przejrzy w lusterku ta zmora cala… (MB, Wola Korycka Gna). Abyl sposób, ze trzeba bylo lusterko koniu w stajni postawic, to tez bylo sprawdzone, tylko gdzies tak zeby kon nie dostal, przejrzala sie ze jest taka brzydka, to byla zaba, w ksztalcie zaby prawdopodobniez… przejrzala sie ze taki potwór jest, znacie te czarownice – takie wielkie zaby czynie… i jak sieprzejrzala, to odeszla, bo bardzo na siebie nie mogla patrzec – taka byla brzydka, takie byly zwyczaje, ale pózniej jednak juz nie wrócila… (TD, Grezówka). ....... . .... ....... .. ..... ........... . . .......... .. ....... . ............-............,.........,.................................. .......... ..... ..., ... ...... ..... ..... ......... ............, ....... ..... ......: Jakos tera przestalo byc i zmorów nie ma. Teraz moze, moze zmory to za duzo jest tych przejrzystych rzeczy w mieszkaniu, bo i lustra sa i wejdzie sie tylko, to wszedzie lustra, to moze sie ona i boi, ta zmora. Ja tak sobie mysle (Wólka Katna, gm. Markuszów) (Michalec, Niebrzegowska-Bartminska 2019, 241). ....... . ........ ....... .. ..... ........ ..... . ...... (........... 1999, 343), ......... (Kropej 2008, 302). ..... . ........ ....... ............ ........... ...... ......: obrazie czepialo sie,obraziebyly,takiewizerunkiMatkiBoskiejczyPanaJezusa… (MR, Rudzienko). ...... . ....., ........ . ...... . ...... ........ ..... ............. ....... .. ....., ...: ... (...., .....), ...... (....), ..... (....), ...... (.....), .... ...... ...... (.....), .......... (.......), .... (....), ...... ...., ....­...... ....., ..... .. ......, ......... . ... .. ..... ........ ... . ..... .. ..... . ...... ... ...... ......... ........ ....., ..... ....... ..... (.......) (........... 1999, 343). ........ ........ .. ......, ...... ....... ... ........ ........ ..........., ............. ...... ... ........... ..... (morino znamenje, morina pedla, morina taca, morska taca, morska noga, bezova taca, bezova roka, goreca roka, Salomonov križ) (Kropej 2008, 302). ...... ........ ......... .... ... . .... ............. ...... ....... ..... ..... .......... ..... ....., ...... .... .. ..... . ..... ...... ......­... ...... ....... . .... ..... (....., ....., ...., ....). ........ ........, . ....... .... ........ ....., ........, ....... ...., ...... ...... .... ...... ....... . ......... ....... (.....). ..... ......... ..... .......... . ..................... ....................... ......(.......)........ . ........ ........, ... .......... ..... ..... .... .. ..... ......... ....­..: ..... ......... .......... «....... .........!», ... ..... ..... ...... . ...... (...... ..... ............. . ......... ........ . ............. ..... . ....... «......... .........»: .... ...... .. ..... ........ .. ..... .............. ...... .......... ..........., ..... ....... ....... ...., ... ... ..... ...... . ...... ...... . ......). ...... ................. .................... ....., ......... ........ ........ ....., ........ ....... ...... . ..... (...., ......), ......... ...... .... . ....... .... ...... ... ........ ...... ...., ... ...... .... ....... ..... ........ .......... ........ ....., ......... ...... ..... .... ...... ..... ......... ...... . ...... .... ..... . ..... . ...... .. ...... ...... ..................... ....., ....... .... ...., . .... ...... ... .........., ... ..., . ..... ...: «. .. ......, . .... ..... ... .....». ..... ... ..... ..­... ......., .... ........ .. ........ (........ 1958, 567). ...... ......, ... .... ....... ..... . ....... .. ......., ... ...... ..... . ..... ............ ......, ....... .., ... .. ........., ..... . ...... .. ..... .......... ............ .... ..... ....... .. .... ......, .... ......... ............ ..... ......., ..­......... . ......, .... ...... .. ..... ....... ......... . ... ..... ......, ........ ............. .. ........ .... ....... ........ . ........ ......., ..... ......, ... ..... ......... . ...... ....... .. ..... .... . ........, ... ....... ....... . ........ ........ .... ....., ..... .......... .. ..... ......, ...... ....-.. ... ....-.. .........., ... ... ....., ..... .... ...... ... ....., ....... . ... ...., . ....... ...... .. ....... (.....) (........... 1999, 344). . ..... ......... .. ........... ........ .............. ........... .... ...... ........, ... ........... ..., ... . ...... ....... ........... .............. ................... . .....................,. .......,.. ....... ....... ..... .......... ......, .............. ... ..... .......­..., ... .......... .....-.... ....... ......... ... ........ ........ ...... ........-..... .. .......... .. ..... ........... ......., .... .......... ........, ... ... ....... ..... .... . .. ..... . ..., ... .. ....., .... ... ......... ....., ..... .. ....: to wychodzi, przychodzi i nie wie o tym, po prostu sen taki ma (TD, Grezówka). ......... . ....... ............... ........... ... ......., ............. ..... . ... ... .... ......., .. ......... ... ....... ......... – . ...... ........ ... .. ....... ..... ......... ...... ....... ........, ..... ..... ............. ....... ....... ..... (. .... ... .......... . ........, ......., .........). ..... . ...... ..... ........ ........... ..... . ..... ....... .. ................ ..., ............... ........ ....... ...... ....... ........ ............. ......... ..... ..... ....... ..... . ............. (..... .... .. .... .. ..... ...), . ....... (..............). ....... .......... ..... ........ ..... . ......, ......., «........», ........, .........-............., . ......... . ...... ...... ....... ............. .......(......), . ........ – ....., . ....... ........ ......... ......., ... .... .......... ....... (.... 1997, 226–227). ........... ..... ......... ..... .......: . ........ ....... ....., ........... ..... ...., ..... ......... ..... ..... (............ ....., ........), . ... .. ....... ....., ........ ..... ........ ... ...., ........ . ...... ..... (.-. ...... ...........), .. ...... ........ ........, ..... .......... . ...... ...... ... .... .... ........ «......... .....» ..... ........... ... ....­........, ... . ............ (....... ..... ....... . ....... ........., .... .... ..........), ...... . ... ......., ..... ..... ......... .............. .............,................................................:...... .... .......... ............, ... ..... ...... ...., ...... ..., .. .... ... ....... ......., . ...., . ...... ......... ..... ........ . ....... .......... ...... .. .... ..........., ........ ..... .. ...... ........ ............ ..... ........ ...... ......... ....... ....... ......... ......... ...... ....... . ......., .. .............. .... ..... ........ ........ ..... (........ . .. ........... . ....... «.......... .........») ...... ......... ....... ........ .. ..., .. . ..... ........ .. ...... .... ......... ....... .....­..... ..... ..... – ... ..... ..... ......... ....... ..... .. .... ....... ........-....., ... .......... .. .... ......... ....... .............. ...­......., .................. . ............. (..............) ....... .....­....., ... . ...... ....... ............. . ....... ..... .... ............. .. ...., . ......... ......., ......... . ......, ........... (... .... .... .......... .. ............. .. . ....... .....). ....., . ....... .. ....., ........ .......... ..... ............, ...... ......., . .. ..... (........ ......,.......... .... ....)........................................... .......... ........... ........... ............. ..... (....), . .... .... ........... .. ...... . ..., ... ......... ....., ........, ... ... ...... ..... (GL, Lomnica). .............. ......... ....... .......... ........ .....­... .... .... . ..... .......... «......... ........ . .......... ........ ........». ... ....... ............. ..... .. ...... . ................., ... ............ ........... . ......... ...... .......... ....... .. .......... ...... . ........ ..... . ....... (....... ......... .. ............, ..... . ........ .....), ........ ... ..... .. ...... – . ........ ....... (.... 1997, 225–226), ...... . .........., ............ ...., ...... .............. ..... .......... ........ ....... ....., ........... .......... . ...-....... .. ....... (..... ......, ....... . .........), ... .............. ....... ..­.... ........ ............ . ............... ....... .......... ........... .............. ..... ............. ......... ........ ...............: ... ..... ............ ....... . .............. .. ..... ... ...., . ... ... ..... (... ....... ... .... ..... . .. ........... .. ....). ... ..., ... ........ .... ..... ......... . .... ..... ........... ...... . ..... (........ .... ........... . .... .. 16 .......... ....... – ....... . .......... (HG)), ...­.... ..... . .... . .......... ..... ..............., . ... ............... ...., ... . ......... . ............. ..... .......... ............ mara (........ .. ..... ........ .......... ..... wiara . mara), ... .......... .. ....... ............. ......., . ...... ...... .......... ......... ......... . ......... ....... .....: ........ zmora ..... .................. . mara ... ............ .......... ..... wiara (... ..... .............. «.......­...» .......... ..... mara ......... ......... . ........ mary ‘......., .. ....... ...... .........’). . ..... ............ ... .... .........., . .. ......... ......... .........., ............. ........ . ............... ........... ...... ... ............ ...... ...... ....... ...... .......... .............. ........ ............ .........., .......... . ........... ............ .........., ....... ... .. ........... ........ ............. .......... (...... ...... .......... ... ....). ........... ... ........ ............ ......... ......... ...... .....– ..... ..........­..... ., ...., .......... ....... ........... .............– .............. ............. .......... ............ . ........ .. .............. ...... . ........... ....... ................ .. ...... ..., .. . ....... ......, .......... ....... ......... .......: ... .......... ........, ....... ..­... ....... ........? ... .......... ........, ....... ...... ....... . ..... . ......... ..... . .......? ..... ....... ...... ..... / ....? ... ............ ......... ......... ....... . ..... ............. ...­........... ..... ........ ............... ........., ............. ... ....... «.......... .........»: ........ ....... . ......... .........; ... .............; ........... ........; ........, .. ....... . ...... ....... .......... ........... ........; ....... ...........; ........ .......... ...... .. ..... ...... ...... ........ .. ....... .. .... ......., ..... ..... ........ ...... ....... ......... ......... ....... ............... .......... ......................,............................. ...... ........... .......... . .......... .............. ........, ..... ......... ......., ............. ..... ........., ........, . ..... ........ .......­...., ........, ....... .. ..... «...................» ........., ........ .. ........ . ...... ........., ....... ......... ......, ... . ...... ...­...... .........., ....... .......... .... .... ........ .............. (., ...., ...............) ........ ....... ............... ........., ... .............. ...... .............. .......... FS – ...., 1938 ...., Trzciniec, woj. Mazowieckie (Siedleckie), pow. Siedlecki, gm. Skórzec; TD – ...., 1937 ...., Grezówka, woj. Lubielskie (Siedleckie), pow. Lukowki, gm. Luków; JG – ...., 1940 ...., Wojcieszków, woj. Lubielskie (Siedleckie), pow. Lukowki, gm. Wojcieszków; MS – ...., 1933 ...., Adamów, woj. Lubielskie (Siedleckie), pow. Lukowki, gm. Adamów; AW – ...., 1941 ...., Wróble-Wargocin, woj. Mazowieckie (Siedleckie), pow. Garwolinski, gm. Maciejowice; MB – ...., 1943 ...., Wola Korycka Górna, woj. Mazowieckie (Siedleckie), pow. Garwolinski, gm. Trojanów; GL – ...., 1937 ...., Lomnica, woj. Mazowieckie (Siedleckie), pow. Garwolinski, gm. Zelechów; SM – ...., 1941 ...., Chromin, woj. Mazowieckie (Siedleckie), pow. Garwolinski, gm. Borowe; HM – ...., 1957 ...., Chromin, woj. Mazowieckie (Siedleckie), pow. Garwolinski, gm. Borowe; HG – ...., 1942 ...., Starogród, woj. Mazowieckie (Siedleckie), pow. Minski, gm. Siennica; BC – ...., 1938 ...., Rudzienko, woj. Mazowieckie (Siedleckie), pow. Otwocki, gm. Kolbiel; MR – ...., 1932 ...., Rudzienko, woj. Mazowieckie (Siedleckie), pow. Otwocki, gm. Kolbiel; BS – ...., 1942 ...., Kalen, woj. Lubielskie, pow. Pulawski, gm. Markuszów. .......... ......., ..... ...., ........., 2013: ..., ......, ...... (.......... ... ...... *mora, *mara): Slavica Svetlanica: .... . ....... ..... ... . ...... .. .. ........ ..: ......, 56–75. [Bjeletic, Marta, Loma Aleksander, 2013: Son, smert’, sud’ba (nabliude­niia nad prasl. *mora, *mara): Slavica Svetlanica: Iazyk i kartina mira. Sb. k iubileiu S. M. Tolstoi. Moskva: Indrik, 56–75]. ........., ...... .., 2013: ................... ........... . .......... .... .... . .....:Etymology: An old disciplinein new contexts. Praha:NakladatelstvíLidovénoviny, 85–99. [Valentsova, Marina M., 2013: Etnolingvisticheskii kommentarii k etimologii slov mara i upyr': Etymology: An old discipline in new contexts. Praha: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny, 85–99]. ........., ...... .., 2016: .............. ....: .......... ....... . ............: Antropologiczno-jezykowe wizerunki duszy w perspektywie miedzykulturowej. Dusza w oczach swiata. Pod red. Ewy Maslowskiej, Doroty Pazio-Wlazlowskiej. T. 1. Warszawa: Instytut Slawistyki PAN, 487–499. [Valentsova, Marina M., 2016: Mul’tiplikatsiia dushi: slavianskie pover’ia o dvoedushnikakh: Antropologiczno-jezykowe wizerunki duszy w per-spektywie miedzykulturowej. Dusza w oczach swiata. Pod red. Ewy Maslowskiej, Doroty Pazio-Wlazlowskiej. T. 1. Warszawa: Instytut Slawistyki PAN, 487–499]. ........., ..... .., 1908: ....... ........... ....., ......... ......... ....... «........ .......». ............, . ........... ........... .........., .. ............ .. II (.–.). ....: ..... ......... .......... .. .. ......-........... [Grinchenko, Boris D., 1908: Slovar’ ukrainskogo iazyka, sobrannyi redaktsiei zhurnala “Kievskaia starina”. Redaktiroval, s dobavleniem sobstvennykh materialov, Grinchenko, B.D. T. II (Z–N). Kiev: drukarnia aktsiinogo tovaristva N.T. Korchak-Novits’kogo]. ...., ......... .., 2017: .......... . ..... ........: ......... ........, 2017, 3–4, 449–462. [Gura, Aleksander V., 2017: Ekspeditsiia v Iuzhnoe Podlias’e: Slaviankii al’manakh, 2017, 3–4, 449–462]. ......, ..., 2015: ............ ....... . .......... ...... ..: ....... [Dukova, Ute, 2015: Naimenovaniia demonov v bolgarskom iazyke. Moskva: Indrik]. ........, ....... .., 1953: ...... . ..... .... . ..... ....... ........ . ........ ....... (..... ... 67). [Đordevic, Tihomir R., 1953: Vampir i druga bica u nashem narodom verovanju i predanju. Beograd (SEZb. Knj. 67)]. ........, ........, 1958: ..... . .....j. ....... . ..........j ....... ....... (..... ... 70). [Đordevic, Dragutin, 1958: Zhivot i obichaji narodni u Leskovachkoj Moravi. Beograd, 1958 (SEZb. Knj. 70)]. ..........., ..... .., 1999: .....: .......... .......... ................... ........ ... .... .... .. .. ......... .. 2. ..: ............. ........., 341–344. [Levk­ievskaya, Elena E., 1999: Zmora: Slavianskie drevnosti. Etnolingvisticheskii slovar’. Pod obshch. red. N. I. Tolstogo. T. 2. Moskva: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia, 341–344]. ..........., ..... .., 2004: ....: .......... .......... ................... ........ ... .... .... .. .. ......... .. 3. ..: ............. ........., 178–179. [Levkievskaya, Elena E., 2004: Mara: Slavianskie drevnosti. Etnolingvisticheskii slovar’. Pod obshch. red. N. I. Tolstogo. T. 3. Moskva: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia, 178–179]. ..........., ..... .., .........., .... .., 1999: ...........: .......... .......... ................... ........ ... .... .... .... ......... .. 2. ..: ............. ........., 29–31. [Levkievskaya,Elena E., Plotnikova, Anna A., 1999: Dvoedushniki: Slavianskie drevnosti. Etnolingvisticheskii slovar’. Pod obshch. red. N.I. Tolstogo. T. 2. Moskva: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia, 29–31]. ........., .... .., ........, ..... .., 2018: .......... . ......... . ......: .............., 2018, 1, 106–111. [Pilipenko, Gleb P., Jasinskaja, Marija V., 2018: Ekspeditsiia k sloventsam v Italii: Slavianovedenie, 2018, 1, 106–111]. ......., ...... .., 1990: ..........: .............. ........ ... .... .... .. .. ............. ..: ......... ............, 77. [Tolstoi, Nikita I., 1990: Dvoe­dushnik: Mifologicheskii slovar’. Pod obshch. red. E.M. Meletinskogo. Moskva: Sovetskaia entsiklopediia, 77]. ......., ..... .., 2017: . ............ ........ ........ .......... ......: ....... .... . ........ ........ ............. .......... ............ ........... ..:... ..., 270–311. [Uzeniova, Elena S., 2017: O traditsionnoi narodnoi kul’ture staroverov Pol’shi: Russkii iazyk i narodnaia traditsiia staroobriadtsev zarubezh’ia. Koll­ektivnaia monografiia. Moskva: ISl RAN, 270–311]. ......, ...., 1986–1987: ............... ....... ........ ...... .... . .... . .... .. .. .......... .... 2. .. 1–4. ..: ......... [Vasmer, Max, 1986–1987: Etimolog­icheskii slovar’russkogo iazyka. Transl.from germ. and add. O.N. Trubacheva. Izdanie 2. T. 1–4. Moskva: Progress]. ........., ..... .., 1872–1878: ..... ..............-.............. .......... . .......-....... ...., ........... ............. ....... .............. .........: ...-........ ...... ......... . ............, ......... .. ... .............. .. 1–7. .. 1. .... 1: ......... . ......... ....: .... .. ........... . .....[Chubinskii,PavelP.,1872–1878:Trudyetnografichesko-statisticheskoiekspeditsii v Zapadno-Russkii krai, snariazhennoi Imperatorskim Russkim geograficheskim obshchest­vom: Iugo-Zapadnyi otdel. Materialy i issledovaniia, sobrannye d. chl. P.P. Chubinskim. T. 1–7. T. 1. Vyp. 1: Verovaniia i sueveriia. Sankt-Peterburg: Tip. V. Bezobrazova i Komp.]. ...., 1974–: ............... ....... .......... ....... ... .... .... .............. .... 1–. ..: ...... [ESSJa, 1974–: Etimologicheskii slovar’slavianskikh iazykov. Pod obshch. red. O.N. Trubacheva. Vyp. 1–. Moskva: Nauka]. ...., .... .., 1997: ....: ........... ..... ............. . 2 .. ... .... ............. .. 2. .–.. ..: ....... ...-.. «....... .......... ............», 110. [Yusim, Mark A., 1997: Mara: Mify narodov mira. Entsiklopediia. V 2 t. Pod red. S.A. Tokareva. T. 2. K–Ia. Moskva: Nauchnoe izdatel’stvo “Bol’shaia Rossiiskaia entsiklopediia”, 110]. ........,.......,2017:.............................. .......... ........... ..... ........: .......... ... . ....... ...........: .........., ................, ............... .......... ............ ....... ..........., ......... . ...-......... ....... .... .... .... ........ ..: ... ..., 498–505. [Jasinskaja, Marija V., 2017: Etnolingvisticheskaia ekspeditsiia v slavianskii arkhaicheskii areal Pod­ lias’e: Slavianskii mirv tret’emtysiacheletii: Etnicheskie, konfessional’nye, sotsiokul’turnye komponenty identichnosti narodov Tsentral’noi, Vostochnoi i Iugo-Vostochnoi Evropy. Otv. red. E.S. Uzeneva. Moskva: ISl RAN, 498–505]. Baranowski, Bohdan, 1981: W kregu upiorów i wilkolaków. Lódz: Wydawnictwo Lódzkie. Budziszewska, Wanda, 1991: Polskie nazwy zmór i niektóre wierzenia z nimi zwiazane: Studia z filologii polskiej i slowianskiej, XXVII, 1991, 17–23. Czyzewski, Feliks, 1993: „Zmora”: Profilowanie pojec. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS, 64–74. Czyzewski, Feliks, 1998: ‘Zmora’: Etnolingwistyka, 1, 133–143. Diakowska, Edyta: “Nazwa demona, którego funkcja poboczna jest porywanie lub odmienianie dzieci, I / Name of the fairy whose secondary occupation was to abductor swap children, I (mapa 10) [na podstawie badan PAE z lat 1969-1976],” Cyfrowe Archiwum Polskiego Atlasu Etnograficznego. http://www.archiwumpae.us.edu.pl/items/show/10706. Ogledano 19.10. 2020. Kropej, Monika, 2008: Od ajda do zlatoroga. Slovenska bajeslovna bitja. Celovec – Ljubljana – Dunaj: Mohorjeva založba. Lasota, Piotr, 2011: Zmora w polskiej demonologii ludowej na podstawie relacji z terenu wschod­niego Mazowsza i Lubelszczyzny: Pismo folkowe (Gadki z chatki), 96. Pazdziernik, 2011. Wersjaelektroniczna:https://pismofolkowe.pl/artykul/zmora-4042. Ogledano 19.10. 2020. Michalec, Anna, Niebrzegowska-Bartminska, Stanislawa, 2019: Jak chlop u diabla pieniadze pozyczal. Polska demonologia ludowa w przekazach ustnych. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Sklodowskiej. Moszynski, Kazimierz, 1934: Kultura ludowa Slowian. T. 2. Kultura duchowa. Krak: Polska Akademja Umiejetnosci. Pelka, Leonard J., 1987: Polska demonologia ludowa. Wroclaw: Iskry. Seso, Luka, 2016: Živjeti s nadnaravnim bicima: Vukodlaci, vile i vještice hrvatskih tradicijskih vjerovanja. Zagreb: Naklada Jesenski i Turk. Skok, Petar, 1971–1974: Etimologijski rjecnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika. Knj. 1–4. Zagreb: Jugoslavenska Akademija Znanosti i Umjetnosti. SGP, 1994: Slownik gwar polskich. Pod red. J. Reichana, S. Urbanczyka. T. V. Z. 1 (13). Czarny– Czupiradlo. Kraków: Instytut jezyka polskiego. SJP: Slownik jezyka polskiego. https://sjp.pwn.pl. Ogledano 19.04. 2021. Sychta, Bernard, 1967–1976: Slownik gwar kaszubskich na tle kultury ludowej. T. 1–7. Wroclaw; Warszawa; Kraków; Gdansk: Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk. SUPERNATURAL BEING NAMED (Z)MORA / MARA IN THE SOUTHERN PODLASIE TRADITION, VIEWED ON POLISH AND ALL-SLAVIC BACKGROUND Marijav. jaSinSkaja The study of supernatural beings under the names derived from the roots *mor - / *mar- has received much attention in both ethnographic and linguistic (etymo­logical) research. However, this topic cannot be considered abundantly studied. Any supernatural being can not be regarded as a fixed, unchangeable set of beliefs alluded to a name. On the contrary, it consists of a group of motives and functions that often have a bias to a lofolk tradition. Depending on the tradition, different functions can be assigned to the same evil spirit (just as the same function can be attributed to different supernatural beings). Some functions dominate, other ones step aside and become secondary. The author analyzes the structure of the supernatural being named “zmora” (“mara”), using the field materials of Southern Podlasie in Poland. During the field research in 2017 it became clear that this region presents a local version of the studied evil spirit, whose main difference is the non-typical function of “tangling and braiding horses’ manes “. In different parts of the Slavic world this function can be assigned to various evil spirits: a weasel (lat. Mustela nivalis), a house spirit (domovoy), a “khokhlik”, a “boginka”, dwarfs-“krasnoludek”. The Slovenes in Italy attribute this function to “shkrat’s” (dwarves). In Dalmatia this activity is attributed to the female evil spirits “vilas”. A single folk narrative, registered in Polesie (Byelorussia), says that this is done by a mermaid. Zmora of Southern Podlasie partly takes upon herself the func­tions of a house spirit, a kind of weasel (lat. Mustela nivalis), that is reflected in the entire fragment of the mythological characters’ system associated with the domestic and economic (cattle-breeding) sphere. It is significant that we have not recorded any account of house spirits in this region, but we have noticed that some beliefs similar to those of the house spirits are ascribed to the weasel, though the informants themselves did not identify it with a house spirit. The zmora of South Podlasie is characterized by some signs of a creature with two souls: the second one can leave the body. It has a human nature and becomes active during the sleep of the person in whom it lives (while the person may not be aware of this). This supernatural being is most often referred to as zmora (the name mara was found in two of the 16 settlements), though the terms zmora and mara are documented in narratives as identical ones. The local version of the mythological character from Southern Podlasie is analyzed in a wider Polish and all-Slavic perspective. Dr. MarijaV. Jasinskaja, znanstvenasodelavka, Oddelekzaetnolingvistiko in folkloro, Inštitut za slavistiko Ruske Akademije Znanosti, Moskva, Leninskij prospekt, 32A, marusiaya@gmail.com 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 101 – 140 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212407 .............. .......: «....... .. .....» ....... ....... Clanek obravnava ukrajinska obscena folk-loran besedila, ki jih je objavil Fedor Vovk. Vkljucena je tudi njegova možna povezava s pravljico A. S. Puškina »Car Nikita in njegovih štirideset hcera«. Elementi besedila imajo slovanske folklorne vzporednice, kar vodi k sklepu o ljudskem izvoru avtorskega umetniškega besedila. Postavlja se naslednje vprašanje, ali je raziskovano besedilo lahko oddaljen odmev slovanskega etiološkega mita o tem, kako so ženskepridobivalegenitalije. Ceprav imajo takšni miti poganske korenine, domnevamo, da so poganski bogovi prototipi glavnih likov v ukrajinskem besedilu. Tako besedilo, posneto kot nespodobna šala, lahko dopolni zbirko etioloških mitov in legend o tem, kako so prvotniljudjepridobiligenitalije. KLJUCNE BESEDE: Ukrajina, Baba jaga, žaba, spolovila, etiološki mit, eroticna folklora This article represents research on an obscene Ukrainian folklore text published by Fedor. Vovk. Its possible relation to the verse fairy tale, “Nikita the Tzar, and his Forty Daughters”, by Aleksandr S. Pushkin is considered. The elements of the text are given Slavic folklore parallels, which enables making a conclusion about the clearly folk origin of the creative product. The following question is raised: can the text under research possibly be a distant reverberation of the Slavic etiological myth about how women acquired genitals? While such myths might have pagan roots, a suggestion is made that pagan gods were the prototypes of the main characters in the Ukrainian text. Thus, the text, recorded as an obscene joke, can supplement the collection of aetiological myths and legends about how the original people acquired genitals. KEYWORDS: Ukraine, Baba Yaga, frog, genitals, etiological myth, erotic folklore ......... . ........ ............ ........., ............., .....-......., ...... .......... ........-......... ........., .......... ... ........... . .... ........ ............ .... ................, ........ . ....... ........... ......... ..... ....., ... «Das Geschliechtleben des ukrainischen bauernvolkes folkloristische erhebungen aus der russischen Ukraina» .. ....... (1909), «....... ........... ........» (1995), «.... . ....... . ....... ............ ........» (1996), «........... ........... ........» (2006), «......... .....­...» (1993–1999), «........ . ...... . ......... ......» .. .......... (2001), «....... .......» .. ....... (2002), «........ ....... ..... ......» .... ....... (2009), «........ ........» .... ....... (1999), Erotske narodne pjesme (1984), «. .... ...... ....... ....... .....» .... ......... (1987), «........ ....... ...... .. ... ......» .... .......... (1997) . «........ ......» .... ........ (1996), «. .. ..... ........… ......, ....... . ........... ..... . ................ ......» (1999), «....... ...... ..... ...... . ............ .............» .. ...... (2011), «.... . ........... . ....... ........» (1999), «....-... ....... ......... ..... ......... ..........» (1996), . ......... ....... .. ..........., ............ ......... ... .............. ..... ........ .........., .......... .... ........... . ..., ... ........... .. ..... .... ............... ............., ... ...... ............. ... ....... .......... . ..... ......, . .. .............., ... . ......... ...... .......­..... ..... .......... . ........, ......... ......... ... ...... ........ ..-.. ...... ......... ...... ...... ............. ..... ...., ..... ....... . . ..., ... ......... ....... ............ ...... .. ........... ....... . ............ ...... ....... . 1898 .... . ......... ....... ......... (vol. V) .. .... ........... ........ ....... ........... ............ ......... – ..., ......... ... ....., ... .... ... ........ ........., ... ., . ....... ......, .......... ......­..... ..... . ........ ...... ....... .. ......... 175–176 .. .......... ..... . .. ........... ........ .......... ....., ..... .... ............ ..... ... ..... ...... (. .................. ..........) . ........... ....... ...... .. ....., ... ......... ........... ..... ......... . ........... (.......i. ...... ..... 2018: 66). ..... ........, . ...... ..........., ......... .......: «... ...i I... ........-.............., ..... ..... ...., .. .... . .... .i. ....., .. ..i ... ...... . .. .i...., .. ......i.... .... .... .......i. ....­........i.. .i... .. ... I... ........-.............., ..... ..... ...., .... ........: «....... ...., .... .......i. ............i.!» – «........., I.... .........-.............., ..... ..... .....!» – «...... ...i ....!» – ..... .i... .... . ......., .. ....... .... .i...: «...i..., I.... .........-.......­......., ..... ..... .....!» .i. ...... ...i .i.: ...., ....., .... i ....., ... ... .........., . .... ... .... . ...... .. ........ ....... I... ........ ......, ...... ..... .. .i. – ....... ..... i ..... .....; ..i. ...... .........., . .i.... ......... «.., ....., I.... .........-.............., ..... ..... ....., .. .. .... .i.. .. ........., .. . . .... .. ...i ...i.....!» .. I... ......... .. .. .i. ......i. . ..i. . ..... ........1 .........». ..... .... .......... .. ........., ......... ......... ..........., ... ......., ........ .. .....­... ....., . ...... . ......2. . ..... ...... .......: «....(......) ...(.....) 1 .. ........... ........ ....... .......... ... clitoris «......». ....... .... .. ..... – ..... (.......i. ...... ..... 2018, 292; ........ 2001, 52). ...... .... ..... ..... ......... «......» (..... 1992, 172). . .......... ......... ..... ............ ........ ..... . .....: ..... – ..... (Hnatjuk, . 32). .... ....., ........ ......... .. ....... ........ (. ... ....., ........... ..........) ....... ...... «........» ... ... ..... .......? 2 «..... ....... ............ i ..... ... ....... ......, . .... ........: «...-.. . ........, .....(......) .(....), .(.......) .....i...» (.......i. ...... ..... 2018: 290). ... ........... ........ ....... .... ..... «....... .. .....». ..... «....... .. .....» ....... ............. .. .............. .... .......(1799–1837)«.... ....... ...............»(....1822):.......... ......., .. ....... .........; .. ...... .. .......... ..... . ......, ....­... . ....; ..... ..... .... . «......», .......... .. ......, .. ........... ........., . ... «......» ...........; ...... .... ....., ... .. ......., ... ........ ....... ....; «......» ...... ........ (...... 1947: 248–254). .....­.... ............ ......: .. ..... .. ....................... . .....-...... ...... ....... .. ......., . ..... . ...... ........ .... ........ ... ....­........... ............? .... ........ ... ......, .. ..... .........., ... ...... . ... – .... ........ ..... .............: . ....... ....... ...... ... ......... ....... ........., .. .... ..... «.......». ........ .. ....... ....... . .......... ...... ... ........ ....., ........., .... ....... .. .... (..... ...... ..... .. .... .......?), ...... ..... .........., ....... ......, .... .... . ......., .......... ......... ........ ..... . ...... ......., ............ ......... «.........». ..... ...., ....... ..... ............ ............ . ................ ..........., . ........... ...... .........­.. ............ ............. ......., .........., . ........ ....... ........ ........ ... ..., . ........... ........... ......... ........ ............ .......... .. ............. ....... ........ .. ........... ........, ... ... ...... ......., .... . . ..... ......., . .... ....... .. ......, .... . ......... .. ..... ... ........., .... .. ...... ....... .......... ........ ....... ...... .... ....... ........, ... .... ........... ... ........ ..... ............ ........... ........ . .... ............. ........ ........ . ............. . .... ...... .............. ......... . ...... .. ........ ..... ........ (Burkhart 2000: 541). . ....... ....., .. ...... ......, ..... ............. ......... ......... .......: «. .... ...... ....... – // ...... .... . .... .......». ... ............. ......... . ..... ........ ........: «... ........ ........ . ....... ........, // .. ...... ...... – .. ........, // ........ ...... – .. ........, // ..... ... ........, ..... .......... // . .... .. .. ........ ........, // . ....... .. ........ .. .......» (....... ........... ........ 1995: 36). .... .......­... ........., ... ...... ............ ....... «........ ..... ....... . ....... ........ .........», . .....: «.... ......... ..... .......... .......-......... . .....-.... ........ ....... .......... .. ......., ...... ... .... .. ....», – .. .... .........., .. . ..i ..........». ..... .... ........, ... ..... «......» ... .. ........ .... .... .......... ......., . ........... .. ... ..... ..... ..... .... ......, ... ......... ...................... ........ «.........» ....... ...... ... ....., ........, ........ .. ......... ........., .. ............ ........... .... ....... ......... .. ........... . ........... .................:....1997:180–184. ......... .... ...... (........ .............. ...) .. ...... . ...... .......... ....... .. ...... .. ..... .......... .......-........... .......» (.......­... 1956: 101, 113). ......, ... ... – .. ..... ........., . ...... ........... ......, .............. .. ....... ... ...... .... ......... ... . 1991 .... ............... .... .......... . .... ........ (........ et al. 1991: 30). . .. ...... .............. . ... «....... .. .....» ........ ..... ........., . .......... ........; ............. .... ........ ........ . .........., ... ........ .......... ........ ....... .......... .......... ............. . ........ ... ......... ... ...... .. ....., .. . ........... ........... ..­...... ..... ... ... ..... ... .. ........... ........, ....... ...., ....... ...... .......... ........ . .. ........... ........... ........, ...... .....-.. ....... .......... ....... .. .... ......., .. ....... ......... (. ............ . ........ ... .... . ..... .. ...., . ............ ............ ........), ., ................. .., ........... ... ...... ... ......... ..... ..... ...... .. ............ ........... .......... .......... I. ........, .. ......... ...... ............. . ..... 40, ........ .. .. ..... ........ ......... .. ..... ....... ...., ... .... ........ .......... . ......... ......., .. ..... ........ . .., ... ..... ......... ..... ..... ......... ......, ... ......... .. ... ........., .......... ..... ........ ........... ....., ....... ...... . .................. ....... ........ ................. ....... ..........., . ........., . ...: «. .... .... ......, – ....... ....-..., ......... . ....... ...... . ...... ......... ......»(......... 1957, . 105: 167), «... ... ......, ....-... .... ...... . ... ..... .......» (....... ...... ..... 1997: 40). ....... ...... ........... ....... ..... ....... ........ ....: «. ........ .. ..... ..... .. .. .......» (............ ...... 1978, . 36). .... ............. ........... ...... . ............ ....... ........ . .... .............. ...... ......., ....... ...... ............. ............. ......., .......... . ..... ........... .... ...... ............ ......., ........., ........................ ........, ...... ....., .. ........ ........ . ...,......... ....... ............ ....... . ....................... ...... ... ..... ...... ............., . ...... .. ... ..... ............ ...­....... .. .........: 1) ........ ....... . «....... .. .....» ............ ........... ............ ., ... ....., ... .......... ......... .. . .....­....., . . ....... ......... ..........; 2) ................ ........ ........ .. «........» ......, ............ . ..... ...... ....... ............... .........., ......... . .......... . ...... ..... (......) ....... ........ 1.1. ........... .....-....... . .......... ......... ..... – ...... ......, ............. ...............(..1562G). ............ ... ..........­...... .. ....: ......., .-...-.(......... 1997: 225, 265). .. .... ... ......., ... . ....... ........ ....., ....... . ..., ... ...... . «....... .. .....»: ......, ......, ....., .....-......., .....-....-....., ..-.....-....., ....­....., ........(.........1997: 214, 216, 217, 218, 455, 457), ......., ........ (......., . 72), ...…....., .…........., ............ (.......-........ 2001: 11), Dyrzy chuja w rukach, Pyzda miz nohamy (Hnatjuk 1909, 360), . .......­....... ......... ... ..... Kurac (...) . Picka (.....), Hujo (....), Ebeš (.....) . .... (...... 2009: 274-276). .. ........ .... ......... ......... ........ . ....... ........, ... ........... ....... ..........., ......, .........., ....... (....... 2003: 97; .. .. ... .... . ...... 1993, . 296; ....... .....­...... ........ 1995: 446). ... ... ... ....... ........... .... «....... .. .....» ... ........... ......... .......... ........... .. .............. ......... ..... ...., ............ ......... ......i... .. «.......» ..... ......... ........... ............: «........ .. . ....-.......... .. ..... .......» (......... 1997: 458). .................. .... ........ ..... I... ........ ......... .. ....., ........ ... .........: «.... – ......» (...... 2005: 188), «.... – ......» (...... 2001: 231), .... «I... – .......» (..i.... ........ 2006: 215), ... .. ........ . ..... . ..... .......i. ............i.. ........ ..... ...... ...... ........ ............ .......... ........., ..... ............. .........: ........, .......i., ........, ........... ......, .......... ..... ........ ... .... ......., ... ......., ... ..... ......... ....... ........ .......«.....». ........-.............. ...... .. ..... «..........», ... ......-..........., ....-........... ... ...-..­.......................... ................................. «.....», .. ........ – .......– ............. ........ .......... ....... ......3. . ... .., .... .. ........... ...... . ....... ........... ...... . ........­... ....... ... ..... ...... .......... ....... ........ . .... .. ...... .......... . ...... ............. ........ ........... ...... ... ....., ... .......... ......., ... ......... ......... ............ ......... . ..... ......... ..... ........ .......... ....... ..., ..........., .......... ...... ....... ............ ..... .. 1678 .., ........, ... .. .. .....: «..­....... ....... .. ........ ..-.. ........... ........» (........... 1970: 302). ....... .. 31 ....... 1767 .. «. .............. ......, ........, ....., ...... . ...... ......, ........... ... ......... . .................. ..­........» ..............: «........... ... ......... ......., ....., ..... . ...... ....... ... .......... ............., . ........ ........, . ....­... ...... . ...... ...... ..... ........, ........ .. ....... ........, ... ......... ..... ......... ...... .. ............, ..... ..... .. ..... ... ... .. ...............» (...... ........ ....... .......... ....... 1830: 376).. ...... .... ........ ......... 67 ........ ................. ......­..., ........... .............. .. ........... ............ XV – XVI ... ....... ..... ........... ........ ........ ........ .......... . ...... .... ......... (......... 2010: 151–152). ........ ...... ........ .......... «.. ... ...... ..i., .. ...... . ..... ....... ... ..... .. ... ....? .. .... .i..... .... .i. i ...... ...., . ......... ..... I ........ .. .i. ..i. ....... ....i. ..., .. .....i. ........., . .... ..i.. ... ... ......., .......: .... ....! ...i. . ....i, . ... ... ....... .i. (...) ... ...... .. ...., ..... ... ......! I .. .i.... .....i.. . ..., .. .. ...., .. .. ....., .. .. ... ..i...., .. . .... ....... ...: (.........i, .......i, ......i.)» (........, . 369). ....., ....... ............ ............ ........ . .......... .. «....... .. .....»: ........, ......., ......... (....... 1999: 557). . ............. ....... ... ........ .........., .... ........ .... ........ . ........ .... ...........«.............. ....»........... ............... ........ – .... ......., .... ......, ........ ...... (........... 1977: 255). ......, ... . ... .. «............» .... ....... .... ........ ...... ............, ....... ........ .... . ....... .. ...... . ........ ......... .. ........ .......... .......... .......... ...... .....-..... .........., ......... ..............: ......., ......, ...... (....... 1903: 48, 300), ........ (......... 2010: 417). .... .. ........ . .............. . ........... .. ....... ...... ........... 1.2. ............ ..... . «.......» ....... .......... ........., .. – «..... ..... ....». ... ...... ..... .......... . ...... .......... ......... . ..... ........... .......... . ......, ....... ..... ............ ... .... ...... . .......... ....... ........ ..... ....... ............... .... . ...... ... ......... «....-....», «...i-....», ......... . ..... ... slepá baba, hra na slepou babu, kuca baba, . ....... ... slepa babka, ciuciu babka (....... 1865: 92). .......... .....– «........, ....... .....», ............., .... .... . ....... (.......), .......... ...... .. .. ......., ........ .. ....... ... . .......... ........ . ...., ............. «...... / ........ ....», ..... ............ ... ... ...... (....... 1865: 94). ... ........... ..... .......... ..... ....... . ........ ...... . .... .... (jedzach), ... ..... ...... ...., ... ...­... . ....: .... (..... Kuc.) (Kolberg 1881: 13). .. .... ... ..... ......... ....., ........ ....... .... . «......» ....... (........ ...., .......... .-.): «...., ...., ....., // ....... .....…» (........ 2018, 61). . ........... ...... «....... .. .....» ..... .... ..... .......... . ..... ............. ....., ... ....... .. ... ...., . .. .......... ...... ....., ...... ........... .. ..... ................. ......... . ......... ...... (. ....... .....), .. . ........ ............ ........ .. ....... ......... 1.3. .... ......... ....... .. ......, ... . ....... ........... ......... ...... ...... ......... ... ....... ... ......... ...... ......: .... (...... ........, ........) ...... ........, .......... ... ..... .. ..... .... – .... ..... ... ......., ... ......... .. .... ............ ..... ...... ... .... ..... ...... .. .........., ..... .......... ...... ....-.... .. .......... .............. ............ . ........ .. .... ........ ..... ..., .......... ........ ........ .......... .. ..... ......... ...... – ..., ...... .....­.... ..... ... ... ...... .....: «.. ......... ......, . .......... ......., .. ........ ..... ..... ....-...»(........., . 159: 379); ..... ........... ..... .....: «.. ....... ....., . ....-... ... ....... ... ....» (........ ...... ............ .... 2002: 212). ........ ..... . ..... «.......» .. ........ ... ....... ...... ............ . .... ........ .... 1.4. ...... .... ......... ....... . ...... ...... ....... .... ......... ........... ........... ..... .i...: «.......-....... ....... ...... ....... ... ............ .. 16 .. 26 .. . ...... ..... ............ ..... ... ....... .. .... ..... ........ ...... ......, . . ........ ............ – ......// .......... ...... ..... .................. ...... ........... ........ ....., ..... .. ..» (...................... 1973:746). . ..... ......... .... .... . ........ . ....... ... ........ ...... ..... ..... ..... ............ ..... ........, ........ ........... ... ...... ..... ......... ...... ............. ..... «.i...» . ..... .........., ..........., ...... ., . ........ ....., ...... . ............ . ...... ........ ........ ....., ......... ...... ..... . ...­.......... . ......., ........... ..... .......... ......... ....... ....... ......, ..,............. ............... .... .........,.. ............., ... . ......... ........... ..... ......., ....... ......., ....... ...... . .... ......., ... .............. ... ............... ........... ....... ........ . ..... .... ..... ... ....., ........... .........., .... ..... ...­....... ...... . .... ..... ...... ....... ........... .........: «.. .. .. ..... ....., ..... ...... . ... ....» (......... 1997: 496). ....... ...... .. ....... . ..., ... .... ... ...... ...... .... ......... ....... ......... ....... . ....., .. ..... ..... .... ...., .. . ... ......... ...... .......... ............ .. .....-.. .........., ..... ..... ....., «...­... ........ ......», ....... .......... ..... .... ...... .. ............ .... ........ ........, ...... ...... ...... .. ....... ... .............. ... ....... ...... ....... ........... ........., ... ..... ........., ... . ............... .........., ............... ....... . ........... ......­... ..... ........., ... ....... .... «...... ..... . .i..... /…/ . i. .. ... ........ .....» (........... ........... ........ 2006: 174), ..... ..... ........, ... «... ...... ..........», ... .. ...... ...... ............. ........ ........... ..... .... .......... .. ............ «......» .... ........: «...., ....., .... i .....». 1.5. ....... ...... ... ....... .... ........ . .... ........ ... ..... .. ......... ......, ......... . ........... ........... «....... .. ...­..», .. ...... ............ ...... .... .....-....... ......... ......... ............ . .................. ........... .......... ....... ....... ......, ..... «......» ...... ... .... (......... 1997: 54); .... . ....., .... ..... ..... .. ..... (........ 2001: 58); .... ........ ...... ....... ....., ..... ...... ...... (....... ........... ........ 1995: 508); ..... ....... .. ...... «........ ......» (......... 1997: 73; .......i. ...... ..... 2018, 60–62; Hnatjuk 1909: 340–342); .. ..... ..... ...... ..... – ....... ........., .. ...... ...... . .... ............. (....... ........... ........ 1995: 88); ...... ...... ...... . .... . ..... ........ ..... (....... ........... ....­.... 1995: 519); ...... .. ........ ..... .... «.....» . ......., ..... ........ ............ ......... (.......-........ 2001: 16). ..... ... ............. ........... (. ... ..... ......... . .......... «....... / ...... .....»): .... «.. ..... . .. ..... // .. .. .......i., // .. ..... . .... ....... // .. ... ........i.. // ...............,//..i............, // ... ...... ........, // . . i ... ......» (........... ........... ........ 2006, 163), .... «..................i– //.........»(.......i............ 2018: 85; ....: .........i .....i...i .i..i 2003: 86, 87), «...........i. ..... // .......: .. .........?»(........2001:14;....:........2001, 76). ........, . ........... ............., ...... . ....., .......... ....... ..., . ....­... .... .... . «....... .. .....»: .... «.... ..... ...., // ...... .. ..... // ..... ........, // ....... ........; // .. ....... ........., // ........... ..........» (.........i .....i...i .i..i 2003: 126), .... «... ........, ... ........ // ............, .. ...., .. ....» (........... ........... ........ 2006: 184). ..... ......... .. ........... ....... ........ . ..... .. ........ ..... ........ ... ..... – ... . ........: «. ... .. ...... ..... ......., // ........ ......, .. ...........», «... ....... ....... . ........ ...... // – . .... . ... ......? // – ..... ......, .. ..... .....!» (....... .......­.... ........ 1995: 34, 35). .... .....-....... .. ........ ...... . . ....... ........ («. ... ....., . . ... .....», «.. ..... ......... ..... .........»). ......., ......... ..... ..... . ...... ........, ... . ...... ......... ....... ........: «... .. ........ ....... // ........ ... ..... ......., // ........ .. .... – // .. ... ....... ...» (....... ........ 1995: 52). .... .. ......... ...., ... ....... ...... ..... .. ..... .........., ....... . ........ ....... .......... ...... .......: .... ....... .......... ...... ... ......... ...... ....., ...... – .......... ........ ........., ............ .. ......... (Hnatjuk1909:344, 353). .... ................... ......, ... ......... ........, ... ..... ........ . ......... ........... ........ .. ........ ..... .......... ..... ......... . ........... ..... ........ ......... .............................. ............ . .....­........,........................,....... ................... ...... .... (....... 1993: 65). .... ........, ... ........ ..... ...... ........ .. .............. ....... «.... ......», ... ....... ........ ...... ....... ...... ............. ....-........ ... ...... ...... ........ 1.6. ............ . «....... .. .....» ........... ......: 40, 7, 8. ..... ..... . .... ............ .......... ............ ........ ...... . ..... ....... ........ ........ . ....... ......... .... ....... (.....­... 2016: 329), ..., .. ...., ....... ..... «.........». .............. . ..... ..............., ..........., ............, ............ ................ 40 ....-....; ....... . ..... «..... ....... . ..... ...... .....»(..... ...... 1985: 31) ....... .. . ........ ..... .....; . ........... ........., ......... ..... ......: «.. .. .., ... ........., ....... ....., ..... ...., ........ ...... ......, ...... ....... ......, ....-........ .....» (....... 1849: 329), «..... ...., ...... ...., ........ ...... ......, ...... ....... ......, .... ....... .....» (....... ......... ...... ...... 1981: 62), .......... ....... – ..... ........... .......... ........... . ..... ......, ... ..... 40......................:....«.......... //.(...).(.).......»(....... ................... 1995: 340), .... «. ......i ......i... // ..... ........i ...., // ..... ....... ....i... // I .....i .......» (........... ........... ........ 2006: 290). .. ..... ......... ..... ..... . ..... ......... – ... ......... ....., ........... .. .., ... . ... .. ....... ....., ..... ....... ...... ..... ......... ..........., ... ..... .. ..... ...... ....., ... ........ ............., ... ...... ........ ............ ........ ....... «....... .. .....» .............. ....... ........ ....... ....... ..... ............. ......... . ......., ...... . ........ .......... ......., ....... ...... ......: «......... ........, .......... . ..... . ..... ........ ........ . ..... . ..... ........» (....... 2003: 260), «. ......... ......., . ......... ........... . ..... ...... .... .... ......., .... ......, ... . ... .... – ........ .... .......... ...., ... ... ......» (....... ...... . ..... . ...... 2000: 88), «. .... ........ .... .... ......., // ...... .........» (.......... 1918: 73), .... «. .... ..... ........ .i. ..... ..............» (......... 1878: 195). ....... ... ........................... .........,.......................... ...... ......... ...... ............., ... ..... .. ............ ............ . . ........, ........... ......... .. .... ..... .. .... ..... (... .... + 1) – ......... ..... . ..... ....... ......... (...... . ........ .......): «. ........ ..... ...........-....... ....... ......... ....... (......) ......, . ............, ... ... ......., ... .. ...., ... ....... ...., ...... ... .... .. ....., ........ ..... . .... ........, .......... ................., ...... ...... . .. ..... «.... ........» (Vile ladarice), .. .... .. ...... ..... ......... .... (.. .... ............ ....), .... ........ .... ..... . ............ .. ........ ... . ...... .. ... ... ...... .... . .... ........ ... .......... ......., . ...... .... .. ..-.. ....... .. .....» (Kukuljevic 1851: 88); «............. .. .... ......, .... ......... . ...., . ...... ......, .... .......... ... ...... ....., .. .......... . .. ........ .......: .. .... ............, ....-.. ........, . ... .......... (............). «., – ......., – ..... .....»; ..... .. ....... ...... .. ......... .. ....: «.......... – ... . .... ... ....!»»(... 2010: 160). .......... ........ . «....... .. .....» .... ..... .................... ..........................:............. «........ .... .. .... ......, // ......-.. ..... .. .. ........»(....... ...­........ ........ 1995: 154–155). ...... ...... ..... ....... ........ ... .., ... .... ......... ......... ....... ......... ....... (..... 2011: 32), .... . ......... ...... ..... .... .......... .... .......... .... ....... – ..... ........... ....-........... ....., .., .... ....., .............. ... ... ........ ......... ..... ..... ..... ............, ... .. ................ . .......... .... .............. ..... ....... ......4 ....... ..... ... . ...... ........... ......... .. .. ... .. ......... . ....... ........, ....... ........: .... .... ....; .... ...... ....; .... .... / ...., . «.........» .. ............ . .. .........-............ (1650 ..): .... ......Pleiades; ..... Babeczki, ...... .ab., Bábď, Bĺbki, ....., ......, ......, ......., ......, ......... Babki / Bapki, ......., ....... Baby, ...... Bapske gvozdy; .... Báby; .-.... Baby, Babky, ..-.... .abki. .... .. ..... ...... .anny «....». ..... .......... ... «............» (... 2003: 532): .... ........(........... I: 294–295), .... ........ (... 1987: 33)? ........ ..... ......... .. ...... ........., .. . .......... ......... . ...... .......... ...... – .... ...... ............. ., ... ........., ........., . . .... ....... ......... .. ... ......., ........... . ......... ........... ....... ...... ....... ....... .......: .... «. ..... .i....... // .. ...........i. ...... // ...... ....... ....i..., // . ....... – ..­.....» (........... ........... ........ 2006: 279). . ........... ........... ......, ........... .. ......., ........ ......... .......: «.........-....­....i... // . ..... .. i........, // ..i... .......... // . . ... ......... ... ... .. ........., // ....... ........ ....i.., // ...... .. ..... ....i..», «.... .... ........., // ... ....... ......? // .... ....... ....., // ... .i.. ......... // ... .i.. ........, // ....... ....i..... // ........ ........ ....i., // .... ... .. ..... ....i.», «... ......, ... ...... // ... .... .. ......., // . ....... . ........., // ... ... .. ..... .......» (........... ........... ........ 2006: 161, 174, 195). ......., ... ..... ......, ..... .... .......... ........­.. – ....... ...., ... ... ....... . «....... .. .....». ......... . ..... 8, ........... .. .. .......... «........», ....... . .......... .............. ....... .. ..... . ..., .......... ............. ......, .. ....... ....: «.... .... ...i, ......... .. ..i. i .... .i. ...i. i .i.i. ....... ...., .. .. ..i., .... .... i. ....... ..., .. .... .. ....... ..i.. .. ... ..i., .. . ..... .. .. . .... ...... .. .... .... i .... .... ....... i .... .i... .. .i. ... ....... ..i ..i...i .i....., .. .... .. .....» (....... .. ........ 1985: 47). ....... ....... ........... ......, ..... ....., . ... ............ . ........ ... ... . .. .......... 1.7. ...... ...... ...... ......... .. .... . ........ ......... ....... ....... ......... . ....... ........ ........, ... .......... ........ .... . .... . ....... ............. ....... ......... ...... ..... .. ... ........ . .... .........: 1. «......... ....... ........ . ........... .........»: «.. ..... .., ......., // . ... ..... – ......: // .. ..... .... .. ... ..... – // .........., .......»;2. «...... ......:...... ..... .. ...» (......-..... 2: .. 99). .............. ....... . ..... ........ ..... ...... .. .... ..., . .......... ..... ....... .......... ........ ............. ....... ..... ......... .. ... ....., . ...... ...... ............. .......: .... «....... ..... // ...... .… . ...... // ...i........i // ... ....: . ...» (.......i. ...... ..... 2018: 257). . .......... ........ ..... ..................... ..........:«..... ........ .. ......, // ..... ........ (........) .. ......» (....... ........... ........ 1995: 233). ...... ..... ........ ..... .. ...... ........ ...., ... ............. .........................:....«......,......,..... ...., // ..................... // .. .... . .. ... . ....... ....., // . .... . .. ... . ........., // ....... ..... .... ........» (........... ........... ........ 2006: 180), . ..... ..... ...... .... ........ ....: «. ....... .. .., // ..... .. ....... .....», «. ....-.. .. ......... // ......-...., ......, // .. ......, ........ // ..............» (....... ........... ........ 1995: 96, 514). . .......... .............. ....... .. ....... ........... ........ . ...... ........ ...., ..... ... .......... ......... ......... .. ... . ...... .....: «.. .. .. ... ........ ..... – . ....... ...... – . ..... ...... .... ........ .. ..... ... ..... .......... .. .... ..., .. .......» (........ 1928: 2). . ....... .......... .............. ....... ... ...... . ......... .........., ... .......... ......:«.... .. ......... .. ..., ...... .. .....­...» (......... ........ 1993: 135). ..... ......., ........... .......... .......... ........ ......... ..., . .......... ......... . ........ .... ........... .......... ............ ............. . .......... ........ ....... .... ....... ........ .... ......... . .... ...... . .... .......... ... ... .....: «..... .... .. ... ..........: «....... ......... .. .. ...!» – «.. .. ...! – ...... ....... ....... – ... ........., . .. .... ..... ... ...... ..... .......... ......» (...... 2009: 342). ........ ......... .....­....-........, .... ..... (F17. ......... .. .. .....) ...... ............. . ........ .. ....... ............ . ...... (..... . ......) . ........ ......­... ....... ............ ............ ............... ..... ......... .. .. .....: «.... ..... .. ...-.. ........, .. ... ...., ..... .. ......., ..... ... .......: /…/ «.… .. .. ....!» (...... .... .. ...!)» (..j.....h 1909: 419). . .......... ........ .. ...... (........... ....) .. .. ....... ......... . ......., ............ . ...... ......, ......, ... ........ ............: «....... (.......?) .... .. .... // . ..... .. ....!» (.......... 2003: 46). ....., «........ ......... . ............ ........, ...... ..... ......... .. ... . ......., .... .. ......... ...... ... .......» (....... 1995: 495), .... .......... ..... ............ . «....... .. .....», ............., ...... ...... ....... ..... ... .... ..............: . ......., . ..... .... – .. .. ....., ... .......... .......... .........., .. .. ..... ...., ... ....... ... ........ . .......... ....... ........ ........ ..... . ............ ....... .........: .... ....(.) ... .. ... .....! (......-..... 1: 119). ........ ........ – ..... ......... ...... . .......... ........: .., ... ...... .... ...... ........, .......­.... ............ .. ..... ...... . ............ .. .... ...... – .... ... .... ........, ..... ...... ........ ......... ... ......... ........... ...... . ........ ....... .. .... . ....... ... ..... ..... ......... ....... ......., ....... ... ........ .....: ...... ...... «..... ....... . ......, ....... . ......., .. ....... ..... ......, .. ... ...... .....» (....... 2002: 42). ......: ...... ...... .......... ......., «.. ... ...... ........, .. ....... ...... .....» (......... 1957, . 285: 380), «.. ....... ..... ....­......, . . ....... ....... ....., . .. ... ....... ........» (........ 1999: 242). ......: ... ........ ...... .......... ....... – «. .. .. ...... ....... ... . ... ........ ......» (......... 1957: . 564, 340), «..... .... ........ . ....... ... . .... . .... . ............ ...... .. ...-..: ...... ... . .....» (....... 2002: 61). . ...... .. ....... ... ......... ......... ...... ..... ............ ......... ...... .... .......... .. ............ ...... – ...­.................. .«............»,.......................,........ ........: .......... .. .... ......... .......... ... ............ ......., . ...... ....... ........... .......... .. ..... (......... 1994). ... .. ...... ..... ............ . ..... ...... ......., ............ ...... ....­........ ............. ... .. ..... . ........... .. ...... ...... ........ ......... ....... . .......... ............. ..........., ........ . 1635 .. ......... ....... I: «.. .... .... ........ ...... ........ . ........... . ............. .,....... ....................,..............,. ....... ..... ............ . ...... ........ ............. . ........... ....... ...…» (.... ............ 1841: 96). ..... ........, ... ..... .. .......... ... . ......., ... . ....... ..........: .......... ....... .. (.......... 1780: 8), . ... ......... ............, ... .. ..... ...... ....... ..... ...­...... ........ ......... ..... ...... ..... «.......» .. «.........» ................ ...., ... . . ......., ........... ........... .... ................, ....... ..... . .... .. ..... ... ...... ...... ............... .... ...., ................... ........., .............. ...... .....a ........... ......, . ...... ........ ......... ......................... .......,....... . .........................., ........... .... ......... ..., ........ .......... .... ...... ... ....... ......., ...... ........... ........, ........ ... .......... ......... – ....., ..... ......... ................. ......... . ......: «...... . ......, ... ..... . ....., // ... ......., ..... .........» (....... ........... ........ 1995: 38), . . ..........: «.... ... ......., .... ..... .........» (......... 1997: 494), «.... ... ......., .... ..... . .....», «... ....... – ..... .........» (......-..... 2: 168, 186). . ...... ..... ......... ....... ......., .... ..... . ...., ... .. ......... ........... .......... ........ ......., . ...... ..... ......, ... .... ........... . ...... ....... ............ ........, . ...... ........ .. ..... .......... ....... ........... ........ .... ......... «....... .. .....», ..... ....... ...... ............ ..... . .......... ........ .. .............. .............., ... ........... . ...... ...... ............ ............ .. «.........» ...... ..... ..... ..... . .............. .... . ......... . ..... ....... ........ ...., ........... ............. ................ .......... ... ......... . ............ ....., ., ........, .......... ....., ... ........... ............. . ........ ....... .......... ....... ..... ... ........... ...... ........... ........... «.... ......» . ... ........... ......, ....... «....... .. .....», .... ........ . .... ...... .....: «. .. .. ....., ... ............ ......... ............ . ....... ........, . .........,...... ............... (...............) ........ ......... ...­... (....... – ... ....... ......., ..... ... ........ ........) ... ....... ....... ......., ............... ....... ............ .........., . ... ..... ...........» (........ et al. 1991: .. 32). ...... ......... ....... .. ........ .......... ........ .... .............. ......., . .... .... ...... ........... ..... ..... ......... ......... ......... .... ....... 2.1. ...., .. ..... .. .............. ...... ............ ...... ....... ............ ........ ........... ...... . ....... .............. ........ . ......... . ...... ..... ........., .......... . ............. ........ «... ........ ......... ........ .. ... ..... ..., . ......... ......., ..... .. .... ........... .........-.., ....., ..... .... ...... ... .... ..., ......, ...... .... ....... /…/ ... ...... ........., ....... ..... . .... .. . ....: «.... ..., ........, ......-.. .. .....-... .... ..... ..... .. ......: ...... ...., ........ ......». .., ... ........-.., ... . ......... . ...... .... .. ........... . ........ ... .... ... .... ....... ......., .. ... ...... .. ...... ...... .... ........... .......... . ....: «...... ........, ....... ... ..... .......». ..... ..., ........., ........., .. ...... ....... ........ .. ......... ..... .. ..... .. . .......: «......... ..... ...., ....... ..... .....»» (.......... ...... 2007: 45–46). ... ...... .... .. ........ . ......... ...... ......... ........... . ..... ....... ...... ...... .......­...... ................ .... ... ...... ...... ....... . .......... ....... ....... .... ........ ......, .. .......... .. ....... ... ...... ......: «..... .... .......... ..... . ............. ....., ...... ......-....... . ........, ..... ... ......... ... ........ ... .. ...... ....... . ...... ..... .......» (...... 2009: 342). ..... ............ . . ........... ........, ........... ....... ...., ...... . ...... ......... ...... .....: «...i.. ... (....... ....... ............ .... ......) … ......., ......., ...... ............ .... ....... .. .......... – . ... ..... .......... – ... .. ... (..... ...) i ......... . .. ... ....... ...i.. ....i ....... i ... ... ..­...... .. ........ ..... ............., ......., .i... ......... ........., .i....., . ...... ....-.... ........, ......., ....i.i..... ..... ........» (........... ......... ........ ......... 6/2: 604). .. ....., ........, ...­...... ....... ........, ....... ......... .. ........ ......... ....: «... ..... .......: // .. .. ..... ........, // . ........ ........: // ... ... ..... ........!»(...... 1999: 232). ...................... ......... ..... ....... ........, ..... .... ......... ....... . ... ......... .......... .. .......­.... .... ......... .......: .... «... ...... ......... ....... ......» (......... 1997: 507), .... «.. .., ....., ..i. ...... ...... ......... .. .. ...., ...... ......, .......... .. ...., ....i.... i....... ....i. .i.»(Hnatjuk 1909: 17). ......... ........ .............. . ........ ......: «.. .., ....... ............! // .......... ............», «... ... ... ............, // . .... ..... ........., // ......... .............» (....... ........... ........ 1995: 64, 127). ..... .......... ...... ..... .... ....... ................ ............... .......... ..... . ....... .......... ......... .... ..... ..... ......... ...... ....../..... . ......, ... ....... ........ ....... («........») ...... .. ..... ... ..., ........ .. .. ....: «... ..... ... ..... .. ............. (sic!) //....... .. ......, .. .. ........»(........ etal. 1991: 30), «....... . ......., // . .......... // .......-.. ......, // .. .. ........; // .......-.. ......, // .. .. ........», «........ ..... . ...., // ....... .. ......, // .. ........» (....... ........... ........ 1995: 100), «. ........ .... ..., // ........... ...... // ..... ... ........ – // ........ ........» (.......... 1993: 166). . ...... ....... ........ . ........ ..........., .......... ......, ....­...... ..... .. .......... .... ...., ... . ............. ......: .... «......., i..i ..... ...... ....... i ........ /…/ . .... ...., .... .... ......i. – .... . ............ /…/ ..... ..... ...... .... i. .... i ....i. ... «..........i.». . ...............,i............ .....,...........,..........I.....i...» (........2008:98). .... ...:.... ...... «..... ... ..... ....... .... ........, .. .... ....... ..... ........ . ........ .. ... ..... ....... ..., ... ......, ..... ... ...... ........., . ..., ... ...., – ...... ..... ........ ....» (....... 1996: 449). . ........... .......... ........ ... ......... .....: «... ............ ....... ..... ..... ........ . ....., ....... ...... ... .... . ............ ....... ......, ....... . .......... ......., ....... ........, ... .........., .. .. ........ ....... . ...... ..... ........, . . ....... – ........» (...... 2002: 20–21). .............. ......... . .....­... ......... .. ....... .... ............ ......... ....... ........ . ..., ... ... .... . ..... ... ..... . ....... ........... ..... ....., ...... .... ...............: «. ..... ........ ....... /…/ ... ....... ........ . ..... ....... ....... . ........ ..... /…/ .. ...... .... ... ...... . ..... ..... ....», ..... ........ .. ..... ............ ........., ....... . «....... ....... ....... . ..... ...., . ... ...... ........ ...... . .... .. ......» (......... ........ ........ 1962: 72). . .... ........... .... ........... .............. ........ ........... ......, ... ..... ......., ....... .......... ........, ..... .... .......... ......... ....... .......: «...i.. ... (....... ....... ............ .... ......)… ......., ......., ...... ............ .... ......»(........... ......... ........ ......... 6/2:604). «......., i..i..... ...... ....... i ...­....»(........ 2008: 98). . «....... .. .....» .. ............. .i... ......i..., .... ........... ...... .... .... ......... ... ... .... . ........... .... ............. . ... .......... ............. ....... ........... .. ....­...... ........ .... .. ....... ......, ............ ...... .. ............ .... . ..... .....: «... ...... ...... ..... ...... .......... ...... . .... .... ....... ..... ......, ... ......, ... . .... ... ....» (........ 2011: 55). . ......... ..... ..... ..... ......... ....... ......... ....... «. ..­......... ...... ......... ....... ... . 30-. .... ....... ....... . ....., .......... .......... ....... .. ......, .......... «.........» («...... ........»). «..... .. ........., «....» ......, ........... . ........... ..... ... ......., «....» ....... ..... . ............ .. .. ...... ........... ........... ......, ... ... .... ...... ..........., ..... ..........., ... ............ (....... ....... .... ......... ........). ....... ..... .. ....., .. ...., «....» ........ .. ..... . ........ ...... ..... ... (.....­.., ....... ........ ........... ....... .. ....., . ..... ...., ......... .. ........ .. . ... ...). .. .......... ....... ...., ..... ... ......... ..­......... ............ ..... .... «.....» ..... ....... .. .... . ......... ......, ..... .... .........; ...... ........ . .... ....... ....... .. .... ......., ............ ..... ............, ............ .. ....., .........: «......., ....... .......!» – . ....... ....... . ..... ........... ....., «....» ............ .. ......... ......... – . ... ... ....» (....... et al. 1996: 287). ...... ....., ... ....... ................. .. .... ...... ...... «...... .....», ............. . ......... ... ....... ........, .. ......., .......... .. ...... ...., ........ ... ........ ............... ........ ........ «..... .......» ...... ......... ......... ... ............ ........ ....., . .......... ..... ... ........, «...... – ... .......... ..... ..... ....... ......... . ......., .. ......... ....... . ....» (........ 2018: 119), «..... .......... ... .. ............ ...., . ... ......... ... .......... ... ....................... ......, ... ............» (....... 1980:235). ....., .............. . ...... ...... . ...... ...., ...... ........ ........... . ........... . ...... ......, .......... ............. .. ....... ...... ...­..., ..... ............. ...... ......... ..... ......... ....... ... ...... ......, ...... ....... «.....», ......... ......... .... ...... . ........., ........ ..... ... ...... ......... ........ ......... ........, ... ..... .. ............ ....... ......... ........ . .. ......... ........... ..... . ............. ........ .........-....­.... .... ......... .... ....... ... ....... F6. «............ ......». 19.20.23.52.54.-.59.62.63.68 («(......) ....... ...... .. ..... ....... ...... .. ...... .. ....., ........, .... . ...»). ..... ......... . ........ .......­....... ......... ........ ....,......................-.........,...... ....... ............... .... .......... .............. .........: ....... (.... Mautikitiki ........ ... ........ .........; .. ........ .. ...... ......, ..... ........, ............ . ......) (........ et al. 2019). ..... . ..... – ....... ........... ... ......... ........., ....... ....... ........... ......... ........ .... . ........ ......, ...... . .............. ........ .............. ....... ......... ...... . ....... ....... ..........-....­....., ....... ............ .........., ... ........ ......... ........... ........... .......: .... ...... ..... .... ......... ........ .........­.., .. ... ............. ..... .......... . ....... .. (......, ............). . .............. .............. ..... ..... ........... ........ .......... ........ ......... ....... ..... .. ........... .... ......... ......., ..... ....... ....., .... ........ ......., ..... .... ....., ..... ......, ..... ..... ......, ... ..., .... ......, ..... . ... .. .... ..., .. ...... ........ ..... (......... ........ 1993: .. 135–136); ......... .... ......, ..... .... ......., .... – ........., ..... .... ......, ..... – ... ... ........ (...... 2002: 19); ..... .... ..... .........., ..... ....... ...... ... ...... ......, ....... – ......, ..... ...... .. .... ....... (...... 2009: .. 342). .........., .. .., .. ...., ......., ... . . «....... .. .....», ...... . ...­........ ........... ....., ...... ......... .......... . ........ ......­.... ......, ........... .. ....... (..... ........ . ......): «.... .. . ...., // ........ .... // I ....i. .........i – // .i..i. ...i..i – // I ....... .....i... (. ........: «.....i....i») // .. .......i. ....i .i...» (.......i. ...... ..... 2018, 98), «.. ......i ...., i.. i ...i, // I ....... .....i..., // .. .......i. .i.­..», «.. .... . . ...., // .. ...i... .... // . ....... .....i..., // ... .......i. .i...» (........ 2001: 66, 81). ... ..... – ......... ......... ......, .... ... ...... ........., ....... . ......., ... ........ ........... ......., ..... ........ ..... ....... . .......... . .... ..... ... («.... ..»), .., .. ...., .. ...... . ...., .. . . ... ....... . ... ............, ... ........ . .....­.... .......... ..... .. «.......» . .......... ... ....... ....... . ..... «...... .......», . ... ........... – ..., ... ........ . ...... .......... ... ......... ............ ......, ... .... ........., ... ........ ....., ..... .... ....... ......., . .... ..... ... ... ......... ........ ....... .....­... .... . ........... . ...... ... ............., .., ......... .. .... .... ........ ........ ........ ......., ... ....... ........ ........ ... ...... ......................... (.....–....., ...... –.........5 )..... ........ .. .............. ............6. ... ... ..... ..... ....... ..-......, ....... ............. (......., .........., ...........,..........),....... «....... .......»,..-......, ... ....... ..... .......... .....,.........., ........ .. .......... ....... .......... ....... .......... ....... ........... ... «.......». ..... ......., . ... .... ......... ......... ....... «....... .. .....» ........ ............... ..... 2.2. .., ... .............. ... .. .....-.. ..... ...... ......... ...... ..... .......... ....., ....... ......... ... ..... ........... ..... ....­... – ............. ....... .......... ... ............... ........ ..... ... .. .. ........ .......... ......... .. .... .. .. ............ . ...... ....... ... ............ ........., ........ ... . ....... ., ............, ............. .....7. ............ . .... .... ..... . ...., ... . ......... ......... ..... ..... ......... .......... ..... .......:..... ... ... .... ..... ... ......., . «........ ..... ..... ........ ............ .. ............ 5 «. ....... .........., . .... ........ ........! ...... ........!» (......... 1997: . 132). 6 ....... ....., ... ...... «... ............», .............. ......... . ....... ...., ....... .. ......... ........... ....., ............ . ........: .... «...... .....i..., // I....... ... .i...: // .... .........., // ..... .........., // .. ....., .. ....., // . ..... ........» (... 2003: .. 88). .......... .. ........ ......... ............... .... ..... ............. . ........ ................ 7 «...........,... ...... ..................... ................-..........(........... .. ... ...., ..-........, .. ............) – ............ . ...... .... ........ ........ ....... ....... .. ....... ........» (......... 1994). ....... . ............ .............» (..... 1999: 255). .... ... ............ . .... . ............ – ..... .. ................. ...., ......... «.arodia sacra .......... .. ...... .......... ........., ... ... .... ........ ..... .. ..., .. ......... ......... ............ ... .... ........» (...... 1996: 26). .... ...... .....: «.. .... ...... ....., ......., ........., ....... .. ........ .. ........... ............ .. ... ..... .......... ........ ......, ......., ........ ........, .............. .......... ............ ...... /…/, ........... ...... ...... ............ ........» (...... 1965: 437). ....... .. .... ........... ...... . ......... .... ........ ........ ..... ................. ........... ...., ..... ..........., .... ..... ... .........., ........ .............. .... ......., ........ .. .......... . ........ ...... ..... .......... ......... ..... ... ........, . .....-.., ..... ........ .........., . ........ ..... ............ ...... ......­.... ....... «...» ......... .... ........, ............ . ............, ... ..., . .... – ............ . .................... ...... ........... ... ........... ............... .... . ............ ...... ............ .. .......... ... .... ......... ......... ...... ...., ..... . ......., .........., ...... .... ....., . . ..... ....... ............. ... .. ... ..... ........., .. ... ........ ......., ...., . .., ... ...... ....... ... ..­........ ......, . .... .......... .......... ........ ......... ......... ... ......, . ............... ....... ......... 2.3. ............ . ........ ......... – ........ ............ .... «....... .......».. ..... .......,.........– .......-...........–..... ........ ............. ....... ........... ......... ... ......... . ...... ......., ........ ...... ............... ...., ....... ............, ... .......... ..... ... ...-...... ........ ............... ......, ......... ........ ...... ...., ....... . ... ..... ......... ...-.. ..... .... ... ... ........,......,..................................................­........... ....., ... ............. ........ ...... ............., – ........ ............. .. ... ..... ...... .............. ....... .............: «. ............ ......... ......, . . .. ........ .. .......... ............ . ........ . ........., ....... .... ..... ........... /…/. .... . ..., ... .. .. ..... ...... . ......... . ....... ............ ........., .... ..... .... .... ...... ..... ..... .. .............. ....... ..... ....... .... ... ........ . . ..... ........., . . ......... ........... .......... ......... .. ...... ......... .. ............ ...... . ... ......., ..... . .......... .... ......... ..... .......... ............ ........., ..... .. .... .... ...... . .............. ......... ...., ......... . ............ ....... .. .........» (....... 2010: 201–202). .. ...... .......... . ............ ....... ...... ........... . ...... ............ ....... .. ...... ........­..... ........, ............ . .......... .............. ...... ........ ..... . ........ .. ........., ............ ...... .............. ......., ......., ...... ...., ....... ............... . ..... (........ . ..... . ......, .... ... ....... .... . ......., .... . ...... . ......-......... ........., ... .. ..... ........... . «....... ....»). ........ ....... ... .. ........ ...... .... ....., ... . .............. ...... ......... ....., ...... ........, ....... ........ ....... ... ....­....... ........... ... ....... ...... ......... ... ........... ......­... – . ........... .......... . . ............ ........., – ....... ...... ......... ..... ...... ..... ..... ....... ....... ........... .......... ........, ......... . ......... .......... . .......... .........., ...... ........... ......... ............... ....... ......... . ............. ........ ........ . .... .......... ........... ........... ..... .... . ....., ... ......... ......-.........., .........., . ........ ............ ....... ...., ..... . ...., ......... . ....... ............ ...... ....... (.. VI.46.3; VIII.19.32), ..... . ...... . ....... ......, ........ ......... ...........-..... – .............. ....... . ............. .... . .....­.. ......... .......... ........., .... .. ... .........., ..... ... .. ..... ........... ....., ......... ....... ............ . ........... .. ....... . .... .......... . ............ ................ . ........... ........ ........... ........... ......... . «..... ... ........» (......... . .....­... .I – XIV ...), ... .......... ............ ......... ........ ......... ......: «............. .....(... ..............) . ......... .... ...... ...........» (........... 1913:23). ................... ........, ........, ........ ......... . ....... ......... .......... ...... ........ ...... ...­...: «..... ..... .. ...... // .. ..... ....... ....., // . ... ... ........: // – .. ...... ......!», «..., ........., // .. ... .......? // – ..... ..... .. ...... // ........ .....!» (...... 1999: 176, 562). ....... ........ ........ .. ....., ...... ........ ........ ........­.......... ........ ...........: «...... . ........ ........... ......... . ....... ........ «......». ...... .. .... ......., .. ........ .. ....., ......... .......... ....., ....... ........ . ..., ... ...... . ......... ... . ......... ....... ....., .............. ....... . ............. ... ................» (........ 1839: 55), «..... ............ ......... ......... ......... ........ ......, ............. . ...... ...... .... . ....... .. ........ ...., ..... .. .......... ...... ........ .. ..... ....... .......­... ...... .. ..... ... ............. ....... . ..... .. ....» (......... 1848: 100), «. ...... ........... XX .. . ........... ..... ........... ........ ... ... ... ...... . ......... «......... ....... .....». ... .... ..... ...... .. ..... ...... «.....» . .... ........ . ............. .......... ....... ....»(...........1997:128)...................................... ...... .............. ....../........ ....... (....... ... .......) .. ....., ..... ... .. ....., ..... ............. ........... ....., ....... ...... . ......, .......... . ....... (.......... .. ...... ......., ...........), «............ ....... ..... – ............ ....... ....... ««...., ..... ........., ...... ........ ....: ... ...... ......, .... ....... ... ....., . ..... ......... ...., .... ....... ... ....» (...............)» (........ et al. 1995: 499). ........ .. ....... ........ ..... .......... . ........ . ......: «....... ...... ..-.. ....... ......, ..... .... ....., ...... ..... ......» (...... et al. 1974: 213), «..... ...... .. ...... ......., .... .... .....: .. ......, .. ......, ....... ....... .... .. ...., .. ...... .....» (....... et al. 1995: 407). ...... ............., ... . ......... .... «.. ...... .... ..........., ... .. ..... ....., ........ ... ........, ... ........ (.... ......... ..... .. ........... ....): «.., ....., ...... ..... .......»» (...... et al. 1974: 213). ..... ....... .... .... . ....... ..... ............ .... ... ....... ..... ........ ......... ........ . ........­..... «........ ...... ....., ... ........ .... ......... ..... ..... ....­.......... ... ......... ....», . ... «............. ......... (... ........ *jar. ... .... ...... ........, .. .. ........ ......)» (...... et al. 1974: 214), ...... ... ..... ........ . ........ (...... et al. 1974: 184; ....... 1987: 420). «.........» ...... «.....», .... ........, ....... . ... ............... ...... ......................................,...................... ......, .......... .......... .............. ............. . ........... ....... ............. .......... ..... . ..... . ........ «...»: «........-.. «......» ......... «.....»-.., ......., ..-.......... ... ..., ... ..... . ...., ..... – ... ........ ........» (............ ........ ............ ........ 2012: 621). . .. .......... . ......... ...... (.. ........, 1975 ..) ... ..... ............ ...... ....... «......»: «..... ...... .. .......» (....... .......... ....... 2001: 196). ... ........... ......... ......... ............. . ....... ....... ..... (... .........), ... ...... .. ......... ....... .......... .............. ........ ...., ....... ........ ............. ............... ...., ........... .... ... ............ ....... . ........., .... .. ....., . ..... .............. . ............. ........ ...... ........... ............... ........, ..... .......... . ..... ........ ...... ....... . ........ ... .......... ...... ..... «............ ......... ....... ....», ... «......... (........) .....» ...... ........... . .........., ......... .. ........... .......­............. ..... «.... ........-..............». ..... ....... ... .. ....... ....... ................ ..........., ... .... . .. ........ ....... ......... . ......, .. ... .. ............... (....... . .... .... .......; ........ . ...... .......). ...... ..... ............ ... .... ......, ..... .............. ...... ........ .. ....., ......, .... ...... ..... .......... ..... ........ ... ................ ........ ..... ........ ..... .. ...­........... ......, .. ..... .. ... .... ... .. ............. 2.4. ...... ........... .... . ...... – ........ ............ .... ......­... ............... ... – ..... ............. ........ ....... .. ...... ..., ..................... ............... ........... ... .......... ........ ..... ..... – ...... (........ ....... «.........»), – ..., .........., ....­........ .............. ......: ....... ...., ... ...... ..... ........... ......µe(..) «..........», .et.a...µe(..) «..............», .......µe(..) «............», . .... – «............» (.............-......, .II.6.47). ....... .......... ....... ....... . ......... – ....... .... .. ......., ... . ...... ................ ................ ......... ...... .... . ....... ......... ....... ................ .............: ........... .... .......... (......., ........., ......), ......... .........., ....... (....), ......... (...), .......... (....- . .......... .......) . ...... ......... ......., ............ ..... ..... . ......... .........-............., . ..... ......, ...... ..........(......... .....................XII......... ........ «.......... . ..........»), ........... ...... . .... ......... ........... . .... ..., ... ......... ........ . ....... ....... .. .......... .......... ......, ...... ......... .. ....... . ......... .......... .......... ........ ..... ........ ........ – ..... .. ................. – .........: «. . ..... ....... .. ... . ....., // . . ..... ....... .......... ....: // ...... ....., ....... ....., // .. ....... ....., ... ....... ....., // ..... . ....., . ........... ...» (....... ........... ........ 1995: 37), «.. .. ...... ........ // .. ...... ... ..... // .. ..... ..... .........: // ...... ....., ... .....» (....... ........ 1995: 87). ....... ........ ....... ............ ........ . ......... . «.........-........» (I.62) ......... . ........ ......., .......... .. ........, . ....... .. ...... ..... .... .... yoni. ..... ........ ....., ... ........... ......... ..... .......... . .....-....... ....... ..., .... .. ...... .... ...... ...... – Yoni-mudra «................-...... ....»(.......... ...... ......,.982).....­.... .............. ......... .. «....... .. .....» . ...., ..... ......... ..... . ................ ..... ..... .............. ........ . ......... ...... ..... . ..... .. ...... ....... . .... .... ............. ....., .. ..... .. ......, .......... .. ............ ......... (...... 2002: 35), .. ......... ......... ......... ....... ........... ....... ....... – ... ...... .. ......... . ...... . ....., ..... .......... . ....... ........ ..... (..........., ......., .........). ..., .........., ..........................«....... .......»–........................ ..... ....... ..... ..., ........... ... ........... ............. ..... ... – ..... .... ....... ........... ........ ...., . ... . ........ ......... .. ....... . ..... ........, ......... . ...... .......... .. ...... 2.5. ...... ............... ..... . ... .... (... .....?) ..... .... ........, ....... ... .. ........ ....... .. ..., ... .. ..... ..., .. ...... .. ...... . ....-.., ... ........ .... .... ... ..... .. ....... .............. ......, ... ... ......... ......... . ...... ...... ........ ......, ........ ... ... .. ............ ............., .........– ......... ..............., . ...... ......, ....... .. .........., .. ........... ......, ........., .... ....., . .............. ...... ..... .......... ....., ............ . .. ......... ... ........., ........, ..... ..... .. ........ . ....... . .......... . ...... ... .......... ................, . ....... ....... .......... ... ....... ...... ... ........., ......... ....., ........ ..... .....-.. .. ......... ...... ...... (......... 1982: 137), ....... ...., ... . ...... ... ......... (.......) «....... ......... .............. ..... ...... ......» (....... 2009: 383). ......... ........ .......... ....... ....................... ...... . ............. ........................,......... .............. ...... ..... .......: «.. .. ........ . .. ..... . . ........ ...... ......., ...... . ....., . ..... . ...... ...., .... . ...., . ...... ........, ........, ........, . ........., . ........., ... .. ........ ... ....... . ... ........., . ..... .. ............ ..... ...........; ... .. ............ .......... . ..... . . ....... ....... .... .. ......, . ..... .. ......, . ...... .. ...., . ....... .. ........., . .... ............ ........... .... ......., ..... ............. .......» (........ ....... 21). ..... ... ......... (.. ..... ..astas.. «...........») . ........ ........... ...... ...... ... ............ ...... ... ...... (.............. ........... ...), ...... .......... ...... .. .......... .....: .. .............. ......., «...... – .. ..... ....» (...... 2004: 391, 392). ..... .... ..... ......... – ......... ...... ..... ...... .......... ... .........., ... ... ...... – ............... ....... .... . ....... ...... ... ...... (.........) ......... ........... – ...... ............ ...... .......... . ..., ... .. ...., ... ......... ....... ...... ..... . ......... ......, .......... ....... ........, ..... ........ svatá Nedelka – .... ... ...... ...... . ........... ...., . ..... .......... ...., . ..... ... .. . ........ ....... ..... ....., ........... .. .....: .... Ihned telo namazala nejprve mrtvou vodou a potom je složila, polila vodou živou, a Víta z kosi zívnula vstal živ a zdráv (Božena Nemcová. Slovenské pohádky a povesti. . Vítazkovi). ...... .. ........ ......... ...... ........ . «........ .. .....», ... ......... ........ ..... ....... (...., . ........ ....., ........). ... .., ... ....­.... ...... .. ....... ...... . ........... – ........... .. ...., ... ...... ........ .......: «............ . .... ....... ...... ... .... .........» (........ ...... 2004: 95), ............ . ..... .... ... .........: «... . ..... ...... . ..... ....., ....: «......, ......, – ...., – ........, ......»» (....... 1985: 68). .... ....... ..........: . ........... ........ . .....­.., ....... . ..........., ........ ... ....... . ..... .. .... ...., ..... .. .. ..., . ..... ... ...., «. ... ........ ........ ....... .. . ....... ... ........» (Federowski 1897: 139). .... .. ..... ... ............. ......... ...., ........ .. . .............. ...., ............. .. .. ....: «...... ...... ......., ... ... ...... .. ..., ... .. ......., . ...... .. ......, . ...­...... .. .... .......... ....; ......... .. .... ... .......... .... ..... ...., ........ .. ......... ........, . ......., ... ... ... ... ...... .. .... .......» (Rulikowski 1853: 168), .... «........, ........ ... ........, i . .. ......, .., .... .i...» (........... ......... ........ ......... 4/2: .. 471), «..... .......... ..... ... . ...... . ...... ........ .. ........ .. .... ..... ......... ... ...... . .......... .... .... .. ..... ..... ........, ........, ......... ........, ....... .........., ....... ........, ..... ..­....» – «.... .... ............ .... ......, .. .. ...., ......., .. .......» (Federowski1897:138).......................,.........,..........:«...... ...... .... . ....., ......, .......», «... . ..... ......», «. ....., ......, .......»(....... 1985: 68), .... «........ ..... . ....» (Federowski 1897: 139), ..... «...... ...... – ....... . ...... . ...... .... ..... ... ......, ... ..... .. ........... ... ..... .. ........, ... ......., .......... . .....» (Lovretic 1902: 141). ........... ........ . ........ «......» (...... et al. 1978: 126) ......... ......... ...... ... ...... . ....... ..... .. ........ ....... .. ..... ...... . .......... ..... .............. . ......... .........-..­.... . ....... ............... .... .......... . ....... .......... ......... ... ...... . .... ......... .... ..., ......... . ....... ...... . ....... ........ ....., ............ ....... . ....... ..... .......... . ..... ............... .. ......., ........ .. ........ .. ....... ......., .. ..... . ...-.... .. ....., .. ........ ... .......... . ....... . .... ..... .., . ...... ...... ..... ....., ....... ..­.... ......-............... ............. ........ .. . ......... ......., ........... ....... .....8, . . ........ ......., ........... ......... ....... ......... ....., ..... ............ . ............. . ............ ....... ......., ........ ................ ....... ......... . ..... ........ ..., .... ....... ...... . ....... ....... . .............. ............. ..., . ....... ........... ........... ....... ......: «.. ....... ......... ....-... ....... ...., .... ......, .…......»(....... 1996, . 8), «..... ....-... ........ ...., .. .... . ...., ...... ..... ...... .....» (......... 1957, . 224). ........... . ... ..... ....... ... ...... .. .... ....., .. ...... ...........: «........ ........ – .... .........; ....... – ... ....­....; .. ....... ..... – ......... .......; ........ ........ – ....., ..... ........; .….. ...... – ....... ....»(....... ...... . ..... . ...... 2000: 333), «......., ......., ..... ......... . ..............., . ......... ........» (........ 1999: 565), «... ...... .…... – .... .........., .….. – .... ........, .... ....... . ..... ......, ........ ........ . ....... ........, ..... ....... . ..... ......» (....... 1997: 98), «....-... .....­.., .... .........., ......., ... ........, .. ...... ......, ....... ......., ..... ...... ..... .... ... ........... ............... ......, ... . ..... ....., .............. . ......: «.......... ......... ......... ..... .... ................ ...... ...... .. .............. ........... ... .. .. .............. ........., .. ..... ... .......... .. ......... ......... . ......... ......... ........... .........., . ..... .......... ......... ..... .. ............ . ........... . ...............» (........... 1998, 17). . ...... ..... ...... .... ........... ....... ... «............ ........... ........... ..... ..... . .......» . «........... . .............. ........ ...., . ........ ............... ......... ......» (........... 1995, 56). ..... ..... ........ .......... ............ .... ......, .......... ... .......: «..... ..... ...... .... ..., . ....... ...... .... .......... ........ – ... . ....... ............ . ......» (..... 1998: 227). ........ ........, ...... ........» (...... ........... .... 1995: 30)9. .. .... ...... .......... (.... .. .. ........): «..... ....-... – .... .... . .. .. ....., . ..... .. ......» (....... 1997, . 67), «. ...... ..... ....-... ........ ....; .... .. ....., ... . ......., .... .... . ...... ...., . ...... . .....»(......... 1957, . 225). .... .. ...... ................. ....... .... – ....... .......... ... ........ . ... ....... ........ . ....... (.....­...., . 102:155), . ................, ......... ..................... ..., ......... .. .. ......... . ....... ...... ......: «........ ....-... – .... .. ...... ... ......., .... ............ .......» (....... ................ ....... 1995: 30). ... ..., ... ... ...... ...... .......... . ..... *mok.s «........», ... .... makstýti «......», mčksti «......» (...... et al. 1990: 367; ............... ....... .......... ...... 1992: 133). .......... . ..... ... . ...... ...: (Becer 1990: 114–140). ....... ......, ............... .... ...., ... .., ... ... ............ .. ........... ............ ............ ...... (Sheela na Gig), ....... .. ....... ........: «. ........ .. .........., ......... ........ . .. .....­..... ...... ............ .......... ........ ....... . ...... . ....... .. ........ ... ....... ....... ........ . .... ........ . ........... ...... . ......... . ............... . ....... ....... .......... ..... ......... ..... .. ..... ........... ....... H..y............. ........ ......... ...... .. .......... .............. ......., .. .......... ........... . ......­.... ......, .. ... ... ..... .., ..., ........ .. ... ......... ..........., .. .. ...... ....... ..... .......... ...... .......... ...... – ........ .......» (....... 1987: 477). ........ «........» (.. ............ .. .. ........), .............., .... .............................., ......... . .............. ........ .. ......... ........., . ..... ..... ..... ..... ........., .., .........., .......... ... .......... ....... . .... ...., . . ........... ........... ............. ...... ........ ........... . ...... .......... ....... ...... ...... . ..... ................. ..... .. ........ . ..., ... ....... ....... .... ........ ............... ...... . .....10, ..... ........., ... ............ . ....... .......... .... ...... .... ........ ......... .... ...... ......... ......... ....... ........... . ........... ...... ............... ......, ........ ........... ....... ......., ..... ........ . ....... ........... ........ ...... ............ ........., .. ....... .... ......... ........... ....... 2.6. . ......... ..... .......... ....... ......... ......, .... .. ....., .... («...., .... i .....»). .. ... ....... ..... «.i...». .......... ........ 9 ... .......... . . ......... ........... ..........: «. ....... . ...... // ... ...... . .....: // ....... .... ....., // ..... ........ .....» (... 1996: 494), «....., ... ....., // ....... – ......., // ..... ... – ......., // ..... ..........» (...... 1999: 328). 10 ......., ........ ..........: .... «I.. ......... ..... ...i, i.. ....., .... ....i . ....., ....... .. ... ....... i ......: «.... i..., ..... ...i?» – «I.. .. ..... ..... .....i, ...... .........i, .. .... ..... .......» (..... 2009: 136). ..... .. .. ..... ............... ........., . ........ .. ...... ..... ..... .........................................,..........,................ ....... .... . ......... . ........ ....... ............ ............ ..... ........., ....... ......... . ........ .....11. ......... .. ..... ...... ........ .... ....... ..... ........... ....... ......... .......­.... (...., .......)12, ... ....... . .............. .......... ....... . ... . .......-....... .......... ..., ..... ........ ............. ........... ...... ........... ...., ....., ..... (........h 2001: 13, 14). ......... . ........... ........ . .........: «. ........, ... ......., // ......, .....­...» (...... 1999: 154). . ..... .......... . ........ .....: «. ........... .... ...... ...., ..... ..... ....., ....... . ...... ....... ., ........, ......... ....... .. ... . ....... ..... .....» (.... 1997: 382). . .......... . .......... ........ ....... .. ......... ....... .. ...... .......... ....: «. . ...... . ... . ....., – .......... ..... – ... ....., ..... . .....!», «...., ........ ... ....., ...... ......... .... . ... . .....» (...... 2009: 346, 347). . ........... ....... ....., .......... . ......... ......... ...­.... ........ ............. .... . .... .......: .... «.. .... . ......, ... .... . ....., // ..... ...., ..... ..... – .... ......» (....... 1885: 246), .... «.. .... . ......, // .. .... . .....: // .... ..... ...... .... – // .... . ..... ......!» (Folklore de Ukraine 1898: 126–127), ....... Anicka konope mocila, // Žaba jej do picky skocila, // Neboli konope, lež boli len, // Vyskoc mi, žabicka, z picky ven (Krekovicova 2000, 387). ... .. ..... ........... . . ........... ....... ........: «. .......... ...... // ....... ........: // .......-.., ........., // ... ... .. .......?» (...... 2007: 168). ........... ............. ........ . ...... ............... ........ .. ........ ........, ... .. .. .. .......­.... ......... ......, ... .... ........ ......... ............. .... ..... ............, ... .. ........., ... . .. ......., ........., ....... . ..... ......., ... .... ............... ... ........ ...... ... .. ...... ...... . .... . «............. ....», .......... . ................ . .....-....... .........., . ..... . ........... .......... ......... . ...... ......... ..... ... ........, ......... ......... .. .... ............ . ....... ...... (Gimbutas 1989: 251). .. ......... ........, «..... . ...... .... ....., . .... .......» (........ 1911: 187), «. ....... ....... ......, ... . .... ..­...... ......... ........, ......... ...., ....... ........ ....... . ....... 11 . ............. ....... ........: .... ......, ....., ......., ........, ......., ......., ....... (...... 1999: 746–748), ......, ......., ....., ...... (..., 466), .... ........, ....., ........, ....., ......, ......., ........, ......., ..... .... (........... ........... ........ 2006: 365–366), .... ........ (..., . 175), ....., ....... (.......i. ...... ..... 2018: 99, 106), ....., ...... (........ 2001: 31, 82), ..... ....., ..j.., ......«......», ........., ......, ...., ......., ..... «.....», ......, ..... «.........», ...., ....... «........», ...., ......, ....., ........, ..... «.....» (........h 2001, 13), ..... štuka «....», šaran «....» (...... 2009: 418), ..... ..... «.....», ....... «......», ........ «.......» (......... .. ......... .... 2008: 23). 12 ..... ........ . ....... .......... ....... ...., ......., ......... ............, ..... ......... .. ...... ...... ......., ... «. ...... ........ – ... .......... .... – ..... ....., .. ........... ....... ........ ... ......... ... ..... – ... .... – ...... ...., . ..... ........ ....... ........ ............. ... ......... .. ...... ..... ..........., ........... ...... ...... ............ ........ . ....... ....... .. ........ .......» (Biegileisen 1929: 7). ......... ....., ... ............ .. .. ........, ......... ............. ......... «.... – ......»: «. .... .... .... ....... ...., .... ... ............... // ......... ..... ........ ...., ..... ... ...., // ..... ... ...., ....., ... (...)....»(........ 2002: 185). . ....... ......, ... «..... . .... .... ........ ... ... ....... .. ..... ..., ..... ..........» (..... 1995: 263). .... .. ........ ......... ........ ............. . ........... ....... / ...., ........... ...... ........, ... ........ . ......... .... .... ..... / ....., .... .... ......«.. ........­.......-.... ..............., .......», ..... .... .. ....... . .......«.. ....... . ......», . ....., ........, ............ .... ........ (.........., ..........) ........ . .....: .... .... .... «......» (....... ............ ........ ......... ...... 1969: 162), .... «......., ....... ........., .......; .....», ...... ...... «....... ......», ..... «....... .....», ....... ...... «....... (.....?)», ..... ..... «.......... ..... . ......... ........ ...», «.......... .....», «....... .. ..., ....» (C...... ....... ........ ....... 1972: 49, 50), .... ......, ...... .... «......» (....... 1891: 88), «....... .. ..... . ......» (Varlyha 1970: 171), ...... .... ..... «......», .... ...... «.........» (......i. 1929: 92), ..... «.......... ......... ........ ... . .........» (.....i. ....... ........... ...... .......i 1990: 131), ...... ....... .... «......... ......., ...........» (..... 2014: 70), .... .... «......», ...... ....«......... .......» (....... ........... .... 1971: 500), ........ ...., ...., ....«......... .......» (....... ............ ...i... 2005: 107), ..... zaba «......», «........», «....... .....», zabka «....... (. .....)»,«....... ......» (Slownik gwar polskich 1911:431,432), ...... žaba«..­.......», «.......... ....», «........ .... ........ .....» (Sychta 1973: 262), ..-..... žabice «......», «..........», .... «........», «........», «....... .. ....» (...... ............... ......... . ........ ...... 1968: 269), ...... «......», ..... ......, ........«....... ... ......, ....... .....» (.....­... 2005: 608). . ..... ....... ...... .............. .........: Žabo, žabice, krokvo, krokvice, jsi-li z zrídla, vyjdi z hrdla, jsi-li z vody, vyjdi z huby, jsi-li z studnice, sejdi z sanice «...., ......., ........, ........, .... .. .. ........., ..... .. ....., .... .. .. ...., ..... .. ..., .... .. .. ......., ..... .. (......) .......» (.......... 2004, . 37). ............. ... . ...... ... ......... ............ ....... .......­.......... ... . ........... ........... .........: «........... ..... . ......... . .......... .........., ............ ..... . ..... ....... ..... . «........ ....», ... ........ ............. ..... .......... ......., ..... . ......... ....... ........ .... . ....» (.... 1996: .. 465), ... . . ........ . ...... .......... ........ .......... ......... . ... ...... ....... ... ......... ......... – ........ . .......... .. ....... ....... ... (..... 1995: 263). ...... ........... ........ . ......, . ........ . ..­... ...... (........, ........, ......) (.......... 1995: 443). ..., . ...... .......... ....... ........ ........ ......, .......... ........., ...... (......, ......... ...........) ............ .... (........h 1933: 99). .... ......... ........: «. ....... ............. ........, ........, .........­.... ........... ..... . .... ...., . ....... ....... ...... ...... ....... ........ ........» (......... 1995: 162). ........ ...... .. ... ........., . ....... ......... ......... ....... / ...... ............ ....., . .... ..­..... .. .... ......... ..... .......... .......... – ... ..... ...... ...... .......... ...... ........ ....(....................) . .... ........... ....... ..... ... ... ...... ......: «.... .......... ....... ..... ........ . ......... .. ....... . ........ ........ ... ..... . .......... ..... .... ...... . .... . ..... ..... ......; ...... ..... ..... .. ..... .......... ... ....., . ...... .... ...... ...-... .. .... ......... ........ ...... ........ ...... . ....... ......: «...... .. ...... ........ ..... ... ..­.....». .........., ....... ..., ......... . ......», «.....: .. ..... ..... ................, ...... ............. ....., ..... ...... /.../ .... ......... ..... ......... ......... ......, . ........ ...... .. ..... . ..... ........ ... ...... ....... ... ..., ....... ........ . ..... . ........ ....., . ..... ..... ..... ......., ... ....... .... .... .. ....... ...... .... .... . ....... ..... ...... ......; ... ... ....... .. .......... ........ ... ..... /.../ ........ .. ..........: «... .. .. ......, ... .. ...... ......?» .. ..... .. ... ...... . ..... . ... ... .........», «....... ......, ..... ......., . ..... ..... ...... «....» ... .... ......... .. .... .. ........ ........... ... ........., . .. ..... .....» (........ 1994: 185, 186), «..... ......... ....... ....., ... ...... .... ..... ...... . ..... ... ......... ..... ...... ...... ...... .... . ....., ............. ... . ..... .......»(..­............ ........ . ....... .............. ........ 2010: 219). ...... ..... .......... ..... ..... ........ . ....... (..., ... .......): .... «.. ... ....... – .... .....!»(........ et al. 2007: 75), .... «..... .. ... ....., .. ...... ...... .. ....» (....... 1908: 273), . ...... .......... ......., «... . ....... ..... ...., .... .. ..... ....» (..jmakovic 1974: 81). ................... ......... ...... ........ ....... .............. ........, ....... ............ ...... . ..... ........, .......... . ...­........ ..........: 1) . ..... ......... (........ 1992: 114–118), ........ ........... ............., 3) ..... . .............. ..... ......., . ........ ........ ......... ...... .. ..... ............ . ...... .... .... ..... .. ....... ....... ..., .............. ......... ......... ... ...... ........ . ... ......., ........ .......... ...... (........) «.. .....»: «. ..... .. .... .......» (.......... 1979: 269), «....... ......... . ..... /…/ ...... ....... ......-.....: . ......., . ...., . ......., . ...» (....... 1994: 104), «... ... .... – .... . ......» (........ ............. ..... 2007: 222), «. .... . ....-... ....... .., .... ..» (............. ......: 74), «..... ......... ....... ........ ...... ...... .. ..... . ...... ......» (......... 1961, 147), «.... . ....! . ...... ...... . .... ..... .....!» ... . ..... . ..... ..... ....., ... . ... . .... ...... ......., ......., ..... . ...... .........»(....... 2001: 57), «....-... . .......: «...... .... ....., ......». ... ..... .., . ...... ......... . ... ......., ........, ......» (......... 2005: 63-64), «... ......, . ........., .... ....... (.......) .. ........ (.......)» (....... 1996: 274), «....... .... .... ........ . ...­....: «..-.., ..... .... .......». ....... .... ........ . ..... . ........ .. .. ....., . ... .... .....: ......, ...... . ... ........ ........» (...... ........ 1985: 85). ..., ... ....., .......... ......., . .... ...... ........ ..... ........, .. ....... ........... .. .... ........ .... .. ..... ....­...... ............. . ..., ... ....... . ........ ...... ... ..... ....... . ........ ........., ... .......... .....:«. ......, ......., ....... . ...... . ....... ..... .......-..... (.....). . ...... ...... .. ..., . ..... .. ....... ...... ..! ......., ..... ........., ......, . .... ..., ........ ...... – ........ .......» (............ 2013: 121). . ..... .... . ....... ...... .... ........ .......... (.....): «.. .. ... ......., .... ...... ....... (...... .... .............)» (..... 1979: 159), «... ..... ...-.. ....., ... ... . ........, . ........ . ... ... .. ................. ....... ... ......., .. . ... ....... ... ... . ....... ......... ....» (.............. ........ . ....... .............. ........ 2010: 135). ..... ... . .........., . .... ....... ............ ..... ........, ......... ....................,............. ...................,............. .... ...... ......, ..... ........ . ..... ............ .. ............., ....... ........... ... .......... ....... ... ..... .... ......... ... ........ ............ .... ....... ....., ........... ... ................ ......... ......, ... ..... . ......... ..... ...... .... .... ...... . ... ...­..... ..... ... .. .......... ........... .......... ..... ... ..... ........ 2.7. ......., ... .... ............. ...... ......, ...... ......... . ...... ............... ........ «....... .. .....». ........... ...... ...­.., .. ... .. ..... .. .. ....... .... ... . ......., .. ...., ... .. .. ........ ....... . ..... ........ ....? ...... ....... ........, .... .. ...... . ........, ........... .......... . ... ...... .. ............ .....? ...... .... .......... ..... ...... ... .... ... ...., ..... .... ... ...... ....... ........, ... .. .. ...... ... . ......., .. . ....... .. .... ......, ......... ..... .... ....... ........ ...... ........, ... ......... ............. ....... ......... (... . ...., ... . ....: . ....... .... 2014, . 1: 15). ....­.. ..... – ...... ....... .. ..... ....., ......... ......... – .........., ........... ....... .. .. ... ....... .. «.. ...... ...... . .......», . .......... .... ........ .......... . .......... ........ ....... .. ........ ......., ......... ......... ..... ....... . .......... .. ...... ...... ......... ........ ... ............ ......., ........... ...... .........., ..... ....... ............. «....... .. .....» ... ......... ............... ...., ............. . ................ .............. ....... ... ......... ....... ......... ... .......... ..... ....... ........... .......... ............. . ....­.... ............... .......... .............. ......... – ....-........ («... /…/ ........ ........: // ... ... ..... ........!») . ....... ......, .............. . .......... ......... .... . ..... ..... .... ..... ....­........ ......... ..... ...... .... . .. ......... ....... (...?) ....... (.........) ...... ...... . ......, .. . ... ... ....... ....... (..... ...­....... ............ ...). ........... ... ....... .. .......... .... ....... . ......... ......, ...... .. ..... ....... .... .. . ......... ....... ... ....... ..................-.................... ................ ...... (......... ......-......), . .. ....... ..., ... ...... ........ (........, ...... ........ ........... .......). . ... ... .... ..... ............. ........ ... ...... .... .... ......: ..... .... ......... .... ..... ...... ......? ... ... .. . ....: ....... ..... .... . ....... ...... .... ....... ... .... .. .. ...... . ........ . «......» ....... ..... . ..., .......... ... .... (....... .......... 1985:47). «....... .......», ..........., ............., ... ............ ......., ............... . .... .... ....... ...... ..... ............, ... ......... ....., ... ... ... ........., . ....... .... ....... .......... ......, . ....... ..... ......., .. ...... ....., ............... ....... ..., ......., .. ....... . ........ ........ ......, .. .......... .. ....... ... .. ..... . .............. . .... ........., ..... .... ..... ... ............–............,..... .........,..................,......... ..... ..., ....... . ...... ........ ..... .. ...... .......... ........ ...... ............ ...., 2002: ....... . .... ......, ..... 2, .......: ........... ............... .............. ......... [Narodnaja poezija Arzam­asskogo kraja, 2002: Skazki. V dvuh knigah, Kniga 2. Arzamas: Arzamasskij gosudarst­vennyj pedagogiceskij institut.] ........., .. .., 1995. ........ ......... ....... . «........ .............» . ....... ..... ........ ....... . ........ .. 151–169. ......: ............ «.....». [Ar­nautova, Ju. E., 1995: Cudesnye iscelenija svjatymi i «narodnaja religioznost'» v srednie veka. Odissej. Celovek v istorii, P. 151-169. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka».] ........., .. .., 1957: ........ ....... ......, T. 1–3 ......: ............... ............ .............. ........... [Afanas’ev, A.N. , 1957: Narodnye russkie skazki, .. 1–3. Moskva: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel'stvo hudožestvennoj literatury.] ........., A. H., 1997: ........ ....... ...... .. ... ......, ........ ......... . .......... ......: ......-............ ..... «.......». [Afanas’ev, A. N., 1997: Narodnye russkie skazki ne dlja pecati, zavetnyje poslovicy i pogovorki. Moskva: Naucno-izdatel'skij centr «Ladomir».] .... ............, 1841. .. 3. . 92, .....-.........: . .......... II-.. ......... ........... .. .. .. ........... [Akty istoriceskie, 1841. T. 3, . 92, Sankt-Peterburg: V Tipografii II-go Otdelenija Sobstvennoj E. I. Velicestva Kanceljarii.] ............. ......, 2002: .. .......... ........... ......... .......... ............. ........... .... ........... ...........: ................................... ..... .. .. ........... [Arhangel'skie skazki. Iz materialov laboratorii fol'klora Pomor­skogo universiteta, 2002. Edit.N.V.Drannikova. Arhangel'sk:Pomorskijgosudarstvennyj universitet im. M. B. Lomonosova.] .........., .., 1979: ........ ............. ........ .. II. ....-...: ....... [Bagizbaeva, M., 1979: Fol'klor semirecenskih kazakov. C. II. Alma-Ata: Mektep.] ......... .........i .....i...i .i..i, 2001. ....: ..i.... [Bandurka. Ukrajin'ski soromic'ki pisni, 2001. Kijev: Dnipro.] ....., .. .., 1979: ..... ...... ...... . ...... ......-........... ........ ....... ...... ............ ....... ........ .... 6. ...: ............ ........... ................ ............. [Barag, L. G., 1979: Novaja zapis' skazki o svjatom Nikole-porucitile. Fol'klor narodov RSFSR. Mežvuzovskij naucnyj sbornik. Vyp. 6. Ufa: Izdatel'stvo Baškirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta.] ......, .. .., 1965: .......... ....... ..... . ........ ........ ............. . ........... ......: ............ «.............. ..........». [Bahtin, M. M., 1965: Tvorcestvo Fransua Rable i narodnaja kul'tura Srednevekov'ja i Renessansa. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Hudožestvenn.j. literatur..] ......, .. .. ...... (........), 2004:.......... .......... ................... ........ .. 3 (.... – .........), ......: ............. .......... [Belova, O. B. Nedelja (personaž), 2004: Slavjanskie drevnosti. Etnolingvisticeskij slovar'. T. 3 (Krug – Perepelka). Moskva: Meždunarodnye otnošenija.] ........, .. .., ......., .. .., 2019: ............ ............. . ............. ..........-.............. ....... .. ........ ............. ....... (http:// www.ruthenia.ru/folklore/berezkin/intro.html). [Berezkin, Ju. E, Duvakin, E. N., 2019: Tematiceskaja klassifikacija i raspredelenije fol'klorno-mifologiceskih motivov po arealam. Analiticeskij catalog (http://www.ruthenia.ru/folklore/berezkin/intro.html).] ........., .. .., 2010: ....... ......... . ................... ........ ............... ..... ............. ......: ............ «......». [Berezovic, E. L., 2010: Russkaja toponimija v etnolingvisticeskom aspekte. Mifopoeticeskij obraz prostranstva, Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Indrik».] ......, .., 2007: ........ ..........: ......., ........, ..........., ........ ......: ......... [Bobrov, A., 2007: Castuška moskovskaja: bytovaja, eroticeskaja, ozornaja. Moskva: Algoritm.] ........, .., 2008: ........... .......-.......... ......... .........: ........., ........, ......... (.. ......... ....... . .......... .... . ...... .....). .............. . ......... .... . ............ ........ ......... ......: ............... ............... ..... ........ .......... [Boganeva, E., 2008: Sovremennyje narodno-biblejskie narrativy belorusov: bytovanie, kontekst, paralleli (Na materialsjužetov o sotvoreniimiraipervyhljudej).Fol'kloristika vkontekstenauko tradi­cionnoj duhonoj kul'ture. Moskva: Gosudarstvennyj respublikanskij centr russkogo fol'klora.] ....., .., 2009: ....-........ . .........-.......... ........ .........: ... ......... . ........... ....: I....... ................., .............. .. .......i. i.. ........... [Borjak, O., 2009: Baba-povytuha v kul'turno-istorycnij tradyciji ukrajinciv: miž profannym i sakral'nym Kijev: Institut mystectvoznavstva, fol'klorystyky ta etnologiji im. Ryl's'kogo.] ........... ........... ........, 2006 (..... .. .. ........, .. .. .......). ......: ......-............ ..... «.......». [Belorusskij eroticeskij fol'klor, 2006 (eds. T. V. Volodina, A. S. Fjadosik). Moskva: Naucno-izdatel'skij centr «Ladomir».] .........., .. .., 2004: ....... ......... ............ . ....... ......: ............ «......». [Velmezova, E. V., 2004: Cešskie zagovory. Issledovanija i teksty. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Indrik».] ..........., .. .., 1977: .... ......... .... (1644–1661 ...). ......: ............ «.....». [Veselovskij, S. B., 1977: Akty piscovogo dela (1644–1661 gg.). Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka».] ......, .. .., 1999:................ .. ............ ........ .2 .. .. 1. ........... ......... ......: ......-............ ..... «.......». [Volkov, A. D., 1999: Zavetnyje castuški iz sobranija A.D. Volkova. V 2 t. T. 1. Eroticeskie castuški. Moskva: Naucno-izdatel'skij centr «Ladomir».) ..........., .. .., 1970: ........... .... . XVII .. (. ....... ........ .........). ........ ....... ............ ...... ..... .......: ........... ............... .............. ......... [Volodarskij, Ja. E., 1970:Vologodskijuezd v XVII v. (K istorii sel'skih poselenij). Agrarnaja istorija Evropejskogo Severa SSSR. Vologda: Vologodskij gosudarstvennyj pedegogiceskij institut.] ..........., .. .. , 1913: ...... ............ . ......... ......... . ....... ..... .. 2. ......: ....... .. .. ........... [Gal'kovskij, N. M., 1913: Bor'ba hristianstva s ostatkami jazycestva v Drevnej Rusi. T. 2. Moskva: Pecat'nja A. I. Snegirevoj.] ...., .. .., 1997: ......... ........ . .......... ........ ......... ......: ............ «......». [Gura, A. V., 1997: Simvolika životnyh v slavjanskoj narodnoj tradicii. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Indrik».] ........, .. .., 2011: ....... .......... ...... ........: ............ [Gurjakova, L. G, 2011: Rodniki Kiržacskoj zemli. Vladimir: Kalejdoskop.] .............-....... ..... ........... (....... . ........., ........... . ........... .. .. .........), 2011. ...........: ........ ....... [Devibhagavata-purana. Kniga dvenadcataja (Perevod s sanskrita, predislovie i kommentarij A. A. Ignat'eva), 2011. Kaliningrad: Sanatana dharma.] .......... .. .. (.....), 1993: . ........ ..... ..... ........: ....... [Deriglazov, R. A. (ed.), 1993: Ja castušek mnogo znaju. Novgorod: Litera.] ..i.... ......... .....i. ........... .........., 2006. .i...: ........i ......... .......i... ..i....i... i.. ....i.. ...... [Dzicjacy fal'klor. Zbornik fal'klornyh ma-teryjalav, 2006. Minsk:Belaruskidzjaržavny pedegagicny universitetimjaMaximaTanka.] .........., .. .., 1956: .............. ...... .. .. ........ ...... ....... ............. ................ ............... .......... ... 1. ........-.............. .......... .... 1. ........: ............ ............... .............. ......... [Žavoronkov, A. Z., 1956: Anekdoticeskaja skazka A. S. Puškina. Ucenye zapiski Novgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogiceskogo instituta. T. 1. Istoriko-filologiceskij fakul'tet. Vypusk 1. Novgorod: Novgorodskij gosudarstvennyj pedegogiceskij institut.] ..... ....... ....... ......., ......... . ........., ......... .. .. ........, 1985. .........: .....-........ ....... ............. [Živoj rodnik. Donskie zagadki, poslovicy i pogovorki, sobrannye S. N. Zemcovym, 1985. Volgograd: Nižne-Volžskoe knižnoe izdatel'stvo.] ........, .. .., 2016: ........ ........ ......: ............ ... .... [Žuravlev, A. F., 2016. Evoljucija smyslov. Moskva: Izdatel'skij dom JASK.] ........,.. .., 2005:..... .... ............... ........... ........ ............ «........... ......... ...... .. .......». ......: ............ «......». [Žuravljev, A. F., 2005: Jazyk i mif. Lingvisticeskij kommentarij k trudu A. N. Afanas'eva «Poeticeskie vozzrenija slavjan na prirodu». Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Indrik».] ......., .. .., 1997:............. ...... ........ ......... .....-.........: ............ «....... .......». [Zelenin, D. K., 1997: Velikorusskie skazki Permskoj gubernii. Sankt-Peterburg: Izdatel'stvo «Dmitrij Bulanin».) ......., .. .., 2002: ............. ...... ....... ......... .....-.........: ..... ......... [Zelenin, D. K., 2002: Velikorusskie skazki Vjatskoj gubernii. Sankt-Peterburg: Tropa Trojanova.] ........h, .., 2001: ........ . ...... . ......... ....... .....: ..... [Zlatkovic, D., 2001: Sramotno i pogano u pirotskom govoru. Sofija: Dios.] ......, .... ..., ......., .. .., 1974: ............ . ....... .......... ..........: ............ ....................... ............. ........ ......:............ «.....». [Ivanov, Vjac. Vs., Toporov, V. N., 1974: Issledovanija v oblasti slavjanskih drevnostej: Leksiceskie i frazeologiceskie voprosy rekonstrukcii tekstov.Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka».] ......, .... ....., ......., .. .., 1990: ....... .............. ....... (.... .. .. ...........). ......:...................... [Ivanov,Vjac. Vs., Toporov, V. N., 1990: Mokoš'. Mifologiceskijslovar'(ed.E.M.Meletinskij).Moskva:Sovetskajaenciklopedija.] ........, .. .., 2018: ........... ...... ........ ..... ........ ........ ......: ........ ......... ............. ......... [Ivašcenko, K. L., 2018: Kalendarnye obrjady Verhnego Dona. Lipeckaja oblast'. Lipeck: Lipeckoe oblastnoe kraevedceskoe obšcestvo.] ........, .. .., ........, .. .., 1995: ....... .......... .......... ................... ........ .. 1 (.–.). ......:............. .......... [Kabakova, G. I., Sedakova, I. A., 1995: German. Slavjanskie drevnosti. Etnolingvisticeskij slovar'. T. 1 (A–G), Moskva: Meždunarodnye otnošenija.] .........., .., 2003: ......... ......... ......... .......... .. .......... ....... .....: ........... [Kableškova, R., 2003: Narodnata medicina. Etnoložko izsledvane na Plovdivska oblast. Sofija: Multiprint.] ......., .. .., 2001: ........ ..... . ... . ..... ............ .......: .. ......... ....... . ............. ......... . .......... ...................... ............ ......: ...., .......... [Kaspina, M. M., 2001: Sjužety ob Adame i Eve v svete is-toriceskoj poetiki: na materiale drevnej i srednevekovoj evrejskoj i slavjanskoj knižnosti. Kandidatskaja dissertacija. Moskva: RGGU, filologija.] ....., ......... .. .. ........... ..... ...... .... II, ..... 1, 1918. ......: ....... .. .. ........... [Pesni, sobrannye P.V. Kireevskim. Novaja serija. Vyp. II, cast' 1, 1918. Moskva: Pecat'nja A. I. Snegirevoj.] ......, .. .., 2009: ........ ....... ..... ....... .. 2. ......: ......-............ ..... «.......». [Krauss, F. S., 2009: Zavetnye istorii južnyh slavjan. T. 2. Moskva: Naucno-izdatel'skij centr «Ladomir».] .......i. ...... .....: .......... .....i....... ........i. ............. .. ...i .I. – .. ....i.., 2018. ....: ........ [Kryptadiji Fedora Vovka: vynajdennja soromic'kogo. Etnografija seksual'nosty na meži .I. – .. stolit', 2018. Kijev: Krytyka.] ........, ..., 2018: .... ..... ......: ............ ... «.....». [Kempbell, Dž., 2018: Sila mifa. Moskva: Izdatel'skij dom «Piter».] ........., .. .., 2010: ....... ............. ...... ...., ....... . ......... ......... ......-........ .... XV – XVII ... .....-.........: ............ «....... .......». [Kjuršunova, I. A., 2010: Slovar' nekalendarnyh licnyh imen, prozvišc i famil'nyh prozvanij Severo-Zapadnoj Rusi XV – XVII vv. Sankt-Peterburg: Izdatel'stvo «Dmitrij Bulanin».] ...... .... ...... ......, 2018. ... ......-............ ......: Ridero. [Tysjaca imen Bogini Lality, 2018. Šri Lalita-sahasranama. Moskva: Ridero.] ......... ........ ......... ........., 1962. ....: ............ ........ H... .......... .... [Latyšskie narodnye predanija. Izbrannoe, 1962. Riga: Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk Latvijskoj SSR.] ........,.. .., ......,.. .., 1991 :«... ...... ..– ....…»: . ............ . ........... .......... ...... .. ......... «.... ...... . 40... .......». ............ ......... 1991 . 11. 28–35 [Levinton, G. A., Ohotin, N. G., 1991: «Cto za delo im – hocu…» O literaturnyh i fol'klornyh istocnikah skazki A. S. Puškina «Car' Nikita i 40 ego docerej». Literaturnoe obozrenie 1991 . 11. 28–35.] ........, M., 1928: ..... .. ....i..... . ...i.... . ....... 1850–1860-. pp. .... I–II. ..i.: . .......i .............. ......i. .... [Levcenko, M., 1928: Kazky ta opovi­dannja z Podillja. Vzapysah 1850–1860-h rr. Vyp. I-II. Kijev: Z drukarni vseukraijins'koj Akademiji Nauk.] ......., .. .., 1996: ......... .. ............ ......... ....... ......... .... . ....... . ....... ............ ........ (..... .. .. ........). ......: ......­............ ..... «.......». [Loginov, K. K., 1996: Materialy po sersual'nomu povedeniju russkih Zaonežja. Seks i erotika v russkoj tradicionnoj kul'ture (ed.). Moskva: Naucno-izdatel'skij centr «Ladomir».] ......, .. .., 2001: ....... ....... ........ . ....... .......... ............ . ....... ............: .......... ............... .............. ............ [Lojter, S. M., 2001: Russkij detskij fol'klor i detskaja mifologija. Issledovanie i teksty. Petrozavodsk: Karel'skij gosudarstvennyj pedegogiceskij universitet.] ....... .. ........ (.......... ....... ..........),1985. ....: ....... ...... [Legendy ta perekazy (Ukrajins'ka narodna tvorcist'.), 1985. Kiev: Naukova dumka.] ..........., .. .., 1995: ....... ..... ......: ............ ..... «......... ..........» .... [Meletinskij, E. M., 1995: Poetika mifa. Moskva: Izdatel'skaja firma «Vostocnaja literatura».] ..........., .. .., 1998: ... . ............ ....... .......... ......... ....... ............. ......: .......... ............... ............ ............ [Meletinskij, E. M., 1998: Mif i istoriceskaja poetika fol'klora. Izbrannye stat'i. Vospomi­nanija. Moskva: Rossijskij gosudarstvennyj gumanitrnyj universitet.] ..j.....h, .. .., 1909: ....... ........ .... ...... . ..... . .....h.. ...... ........... ....... (...... .... .. .......h), ... XIII. .......: ........ . .......j ........j. ......... ....j.. [Mijatovic, S. M., 1909: Narodna medicina srba seljaka u Levcu i Temnicu. Srpski etnografski zbornik (ed.Tih. R. Džordževic), knj. XIII. Beograd: Šctampano u Državnoj šcampariji Kral'evine Srbije.] ......, ., 2002: ....... ........ .....: ........... [Mil'ov, S., 2002: Skrišen folkor. Sofija: Ogledaloto.] ......., .. .., ......, .. .., 1995: ....... .. ............ ...... .... ....... ........... ........ (..... .. .. ........). ......: ......-............ ..... «.......». [Minenok, E. V., Kapica, F. S., 1995: Zagadki iz fol'klornogo arhiva MGU. Russkij eroticeskij fol'klor (ed. A. L. Toporkov). Moskva: Naucno-izdatel'skij centr «Ladomir».] ....., .., 2011: ....... ...... .... . ...... . .... ........ .............. ......: ..... ............ .......... [Moroz, E., 2011: Veselaja Erata. Seks i ljubov' v mire russkogo Srednevekov'ja. Moskva: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie.] .......,....,........,....,1996:................(............................ ..... . ......... ....... .......). .... . ....... . ....... ............ ........ (..... .. .. ........). ......: ......-............ ..... «.......». [Morozov, I. A., Slepcova, I. S., 1996: Svidanie s predkom (Perežitocnye formy ritual'nogo braka v svjatocnyhzabavah rjaženyh). Seks i erotica v russkoj tradicionnoj kul'ture (ed. A. L. Toporkov). Moskva: Naucno-izdatel'skij centr «Ladomir».] ........, .., ......., .., 2007: ...... ......... ........ .......... ........ .....: ............ HUMA. [Morozova, N., Novikov. Ju., 2007: Cudnoe Pricud'e. Fol'klor staroverov Estonii. Tartu: Izdatel'stvo HUMA.] . ......... ........ ...... ....... ...., 1994. (........... .. .. .......). ...... ........: ............ «....». [V nekotorom carstve. Skazki rodnogo kraja, 1994. (Sostavitel' V. N. Morohin). Nižnij Novgorod: Izdatel'stvo «Fora».] ......, .. .., 2005: «....... ........…» ........... ....... ....... ........ ......... ......: .......... ........ ......., ..... . .......... ... .... [Mutina, A. S., 2005: «Katitsja izjuminka…» Sovremennyjrusskijdetskijfol'klor Udmurtii, Iževsk: Udmurtskij institut istorii, jazyka i literatury UrO RAN.] .............. ........ . ....... .............. ........, 2007. .....-.........: ..... ......... [Mifologiceskie rasskazy i pover'ja Nižegorodskogo Povolž'ja, 2007. Sankt-Peterburg: Tropa Trojanova.] ........... ......... ................... ......, 2008. .....:..................... «..... ..... ......». [Mitologija na coveškoto tjalo. Antropologicen recnik, 2008. Sofija: Akademicno izdatelstvo «Prof. Marin Drinov».] ......., .. .., 1999: «...........» . .......... ...... XV–XVI ... «. .. ..... ...., ........…». ......, ....... . ........... ..... . ................ ...... (X – ...... ........ XIX ..). ......: ......-............ ..... «.......». [Nazarov, V. D., 1999: «Sramoslovie» v toponimike Rossii XV–XVI vv. «Ase grehi zlye, smertnye…». Ljubov', erotica i seksual'naja etika v doindustrial'noj Rossii (X – pervaja polovina XIX v.). Moskva: Naucno-izdatel'skij centr «Ladomir».] ........, .. .., 1994: . ....... . ....... ......... ....... .........., ........., ........... .....-.........: ............ «......». [Nikitina, N. A., 1994: K vo­prosu o russkih koldunah. Russkoe koldovstvo, vedovstvo, znaharstvo. Sankt-Peterburg: Izdatel'stvo «Litera».] .........,....,1961:...........................,.........:.................... .... ..... [Nikiforov, A. I., 1961: Severnorusskie skazki. Moskva, Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR.] ............ ......, 1978 (.... .. .. ......., .. .. .........). .........: ............ «.....». [Novgorodskie byliny, 1978. (ed. Ju. I. Smirnov, V. G. Smolickij, Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka»] «........ ......»: .................. .............. ......., 2004. ......: ............ «......». [«Narodnaja biblija»: Vostocnoslavjanskie etiologiceskie legendy, 2004. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Indrik».] ......., .., 1993: ........... . .......... . ........ ....... ......... ......... .. I. (.... .. ..........). .....: ...........-.......... .... «...». [Ovcarov, D., 1993: Seksualnoto i sakralnototo v kulturen aspect. Folkloren erotikon. T. I. (ed. F. Bada­ lanova). Sofija: Impresarsko-izdatelska kešca «ROD».] ............... («. ..........»), 1995. .....-.........: ............ «....» [Ozornye castuški («s kartinkami»), 1995. Sankt-Peterburg: Izdatel'stvo «Atos»]. ........ ...... .. ........ .. .. ........, 1996. ......: ......-............ ..... «.......». [Zavetnye skazki iz sobranija N. E. Oncukova, 1996. Moskva: Naucno-iz­datel'skij centr «Ladomir».] ......., .. .., 1985: ..... . ....... . ..... . .......... ........., ...... .......... ....... . ........ ....... ......: ............ «.....». [Pavlova, M. R.: Sreda i pjatnica v svjazi s prjzdeniem. Etnogenez, rannjaja etniceskaja istorija i kul'tura slavjan, 1985. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka».] ........, .., 1911 ......... .. ........ ........ ......... ..... ........ .... 2, .....-.......... 168–218. [Petkevic, G., 1911: Materialy po narodnoj medicine litovcev. Živaja starina. Vyp. 2. Sankt-Peterburg. 168-218.] ....., .., 1995: ....... . ............... . ............. (. 3 .. .. 1). ........., .....: ...... [Ploss, G., 1995: Ženšcina v estestvovedenii i narodovedenii (v 3 t. T. 1). Syktyvkar, Kirov: Vjatka]. .........., .. .., 1995: ..... .......... .......... ................... ........ .. 1 (.–.). ......:....................... [Plotnikova, A. A., 1995:Vosk. Slavjanskie drevnosti. Etnolingvisticeskij slovar'. T. 1 (.–G). Moskva: Meždunarodnye otnošenija. ......-....., .., 2001: ....... ....... ........ ..... .. 1. .....-.........: ...... ...... [Plucer-Sarno, A., 2001: Bol'šoj slovar' russkogo mata. T. 1. Sankt-Peterburg: Limbus Press.] ......-....., .., 2005: ......... . ....... ........ ..... .. 2. .....-........., ......: ...... ...... [Plucer-Sarno, A., 2005: Materialy k slovarju russkogo mata. T. 2. Sankt-Peterburg, Moskva: Limbus Press.) . .... . ..... ....... . ........ .......... ......, .........., ........, ......., ....., ........ (.... .. ......., .. ........), 2001. .....: ....... [I smeh i greh. Erotika v permskom fol'klore. Skazki, byval'šciny, zagovory, zagadki, pesni, castuški. (Sob. I. Podjukov, S. Horobryh), 2001. Perm': PRILIT.] ...... ........ ....... .......... ........ ........ ....... . 1649 .. 12 ....... 1825 ..... .. 18: 1767–1769, 1830. .....-.........: ........ . .......... II ......... ........... ... .............. .......... ........... [Polnoe Sobranie Zakonov Rossijskoj Imperii. Sobranie pervoe. S 1649 gj 12 dekabrja 1825 goda. T. 18: 1767–1769, 1830. Sankt-Peterburg: Pecatano v Tipografii II Otdelenija Sobstvennoj E. I. Velicestva Kanceljarii.] ..........., .. .., 1975:....... ......... .........., . 3. 127–130. ......:............ «.....». [Pomeranceva, E. V., 1975: Jarilki. Sovetskaja etnografija, . 3, 127–130. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka».] ......., .. .., 1865: . .......... ........ ......... ....... . ........ ......: . ............... ........... [Potebnja, A. A., 1865: O mificeskom znacenii nekotoryh obrjadov i poverij, Moskva: V Universitetskoj tipografii.] ....., .. .., 1998: ....... .......... ......: ......... [Propp, V. Ja., 1998: Poetika fol'klora. Moskva: Labirint.] ......, .. .., 1947: ...... ........ .......... . 16 .. .. 2, ... 1. ............., 1817–1825........................ ..........................,.........: ............ ........ .... ..... [Puškin, A. S., 1947: Polnoe sobranie socinenij. V 16 t. T. 2, kn. 1. Stihotvorenija. 1817–1825. Licejskie stihotvorenija v pozdnejših redakcijah. Moskva, Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR.] ....., .., 1999 ......... ............ ..... .................. ........ . ............. .. .. .... . .. .. ........ .....-.........: ........ [Radin, P., 1999 Trikster. Issle­dovanie mifov severoamerikanskih indejcev s kommentarijami K. G. Junga i K. K. Keren'i. Sankt-Peterburg: Evrazija.] ......, .. .., 1996. ........ ........ ........: ....... ............. . ............ ......: .......... ............... ............ ............ [Reutin, M. Ju., 1996: Narodnaja kul'turaGermanii: Pozdneesrednevekov'eiVozroždenie. Moskva: Rossi- jskij gosudarstvennyj gumanitrnyj universitet.] ...... ............... ......... . ........ ....... ... V, 1968. .......: ........ .. .............. ...... [Recnik srpskohrvtskog književnog i narodnog jezika. Knj. V, 1968. Beograd: Institut za srpskohrvatski jezik.] ......., .. .., 1885: ........... ........ .... 1–2. ....., ........., ........ ....: .......... .. .. .......... [Romanov, E. R., 1885: Belorusskij sbornik. Vyp. 1–2. Pesni, poslovicy, zagadki. Kiev: Tipografija S. V. Kul'ženko.] ......., .. .., 1891: ........... ........ .... 5. ........, ........ . ........ ...... .......: ....-.......... .. .. ........ [Romanov, E. R., 1891: Belorusskij sbornik. Vyp. 5. Zagovory, apokrify i duhovnye stihi. Vitebsk: Tipo-lotografija G. G. Malkina.] ..., .. .., 1987: ....... ........ ........... ..........: ......... ............... ............ [Rut, M. E., 1987: Russkaja narodnaja astronimija. Sverdlovsk: Ural'skij gosudarstvennyj universitet.] ..., .. .., 2003: ........ ............... ... . .............. .............. ........... ...... – 2003. ......... IV....... ........... .. ........ ........ ........ ........ ....... ............: .....-.......... «....». [Rut, M. E., 2003: Severnyj astronimiceskij tip v severnorusskoj interpretacii. Rjabininskie ctenija – 2003. Materialy IV naucnoj konferencii po izuceniju narodnoj kul'tury Russkogo Severa. Petrozavodsk: Muzej-zapovednik «Kiži».] ..., .. .., 2010: ....... ........... ........ .... ..-....... ......: ...-...... [Rut, M. E., 2010: Slovar' astronimov. Zvezdnoe nebo po-russki. Moskva: AST-PRESS.] ....... ......... ...... ......, 1981. ...........: ............ «.....». ......... .......... [Russkie volšebnye skazki Sibiri, 1981. Novosibirsk: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka». Sibirskoe otdelenie.] ....... ................ ....... (........... .. .. .........), 1995. .....-.........: ............. ......... [Russkij demonologiceskij slovar' (ed. T. A. Novickova). Sankt-Peterburg: Peterburgskij pisatel'.] ....... ...... . ..... . ....... ....... ............. ......... ........-.......... ...... .............. ........ ............... ........ .. .........., 2000. .....-.........: ..... ......... [Russkie skazki i pesni v Sibiri. Zapiski Krasnojar­skogo podotdela Vostocno-Sibirskogo otdela Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficeskogo Obšcestva po etnografii, 2000. Sankt-Peterburg: Tropa Trojanova.] ....... ...... ..... (.. ...... ............. .......... .... .........), 1997. ............: ...... [Russkie skazki Urala (Iz fondov Sverdlovskogo oblastnogo Doma fol'klora), 1997. Ekaterinburg: Sfera.] «.. .. ... .... . .........» ....... ........ ... ......., 1993. ......: ..... [«Ty ne žmi menja k breeze…» Russkie castuški bez cenzury, 1993. Moskva: LINF.] ....... ........... ......... ....., ...... . ......... ........, ........ ....., ........, ......., ........, 1995. ......:......-............ ..... «.......». [Russkij eroticeskij fol'klor. Pesni, obrjady i obrjadovyj fol'klor, narodnyj teatr, zagovory, zagadki, castuški, 1995. Moskva: Naucno-izdatel'skij centr «Ladomir».] ......., .. .., 1987: ......... ....... ..... ......: ............ «.....». [Rybakov, B. A., 1987: Jazycestvo Drevnej Rusi. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka».] ........, .. .., 2002: .... ......... . ......... ........ ......... ......: ............ «......». [Ryžakova, S. I., 2002: Jazyk ornamenta v latyšskoj narodnoj kul'ture, Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Indrik».] ......... . ........... ........... ...... .... . ............ .. .........., 1780. ......: . ............... .......... . .. ........,. [Gorodskaja i derevenskaja povival'naja babka. Per. s francuzskogo D. Samojlovic, 1780. Moskva: V universitetskoj tipografii u N. Novikova.] ........ ........ ......, ......... .. .. .......... .. 2, ... 7, 1849. .....-.........: . .......... ......... [Skazanija russkogo naroda, sobrannye I. P.Saharovym. T. 2, kn. 7, 1849. Sankt-Peterburg: V tipografii Saharova.] ...... ........(........... .. .. .......), 1985. ............: ........ [Skazki Zaonežja (Sostavitel' N. F. Onegina), 1985. Petrozavodsk: Karelija.] ................... ...... ........ ............... ......... ......... .. ......... ..... 2, 2003. .....-.........: ..... ......... [Velikorusskie skazki arhiva Russkogo Geograficeskogo Obšcestva. Sbornik A. M. Smirnova. Kniga 2, 2003. Sankt-Peterburg: Tropa Trojanova.] ...... . ..... ............ ..... ....... .. . .. .........: . 2 ... ..... 1, 1999. .....-.........: ..... ......... [Skazki i pesni Belozerskogo kraja. Sbornik B. i Ju. Sokolovyh: V 2 knigah. Kniga 1, 1999. Sankt-Peterburg: Tropa Trojanova.] C...... ....... ........ ........ .... 9 (....... – ...........), 1972. .........: ............ «.....». ............. .......... [Slovar' russkih narodnyh govorov. Vyp. 9 (Erepenja – Zaglazet'sja), 1972. Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka». Leningradskoe otdelenie] ....... ............ ........ ......... ...... (.. ....... .......... ...... ......... .......), 1969. ......: ............ «.....». [Slovar' sovremennogo russkogo narodnogo govora (d. Deulino Rjazanskogo rajona Rjazanskoj oblasti), 1969. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka».] ......... .. .. . ... (....), 2001: ....... .......... ....... (........ . ............ ........). ......: ............ ........... ................ ............ ..... .. .. .......... [Piskunova, S. V. i dr. (eds.), 2001: Slovar' tambovskih govorov (duhovnaja i material'naja kul'tura).Tambov: Izdatel'stvo Tambovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni G. R. Deržavina.] ........ .. .. (.... ....), 2005: ....... ............ ...i.... ....i..i: ..... [Gujvanjuk N. V. (ed.), 2005: Slovnyk bukovyns'kyh govirok. Cernivci: Ruta.] .....i. ....... ........... ...... .......i. . 2 .. .. 1 (.–.), 1990. .i...: ..i....i....... [Slovnik gavorak central'nyh rajonav Belarusi. U 2 t. T. 1 (A–P), 1990. Minsk: Universiteckae.] ....... ........... ..... . 11 .. .. 2 (.–.), 1971. .i..: ....... ...... [Slovnyk ukrajns'skoj movy. V 11 t. T. 2 (G–Ž), 1971. Kijev: Naukova dumka.] ....... ........... ..... . 11 .. .. 4 (I–M), 1973. .i..: ....... ...... [Slovnyk ukrajns'skoj movy. V 11 t. T. 2 (I–M), 1973. Kijev: Naukova dumka.] ........, .., 1839: ....... .............. ......... . ......... ....... .. 4. ......: . ............... ........... [Snegirev, I. 1839: Russkie prostonarodnye prazdniki i suevernye obrjady. C. 4. Moskva: V Universitetskoj tipografii.] ......, .. .., ......, .. .., 1978: . ............. ...... ......... .... . .....-.......... ........... (........ «.... . .... ...........»). ................... .....­.......... ........ . ......... . ........ ......: ............ «.....». [Sud­nik, T. N., Civjan, T. V., 1978: K rekonstrukcii sjužeta osnovnogo mifa v balto-slavjanskojperspective (fragment «Žena i deti Gromoveržca»). Etnolingvisticeskie balto-slavjanskie kontakty v nastojašcem i prošlom, Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka».] ........., .., 1848: ... ........ ....... .. 5. .....-.........: . .......... ......­....... .......... [Terešcenko, A., 1848: Byt russkogo naroda. C. 5. Sankt-Peterburg: V tipografii voenno-ucebnyh zavedenij.] ......., .. .., 1980: ...... . ..... .... ....... ....: ............. .. 2. ......: ............ «......... ............». [Tokarev, S. A., 1980: Obrjady i mify. Mify narodov mira: Enciklopedija. T. 2, Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Sovetskaja enciklopedija».] ......., .. .., 1995: .......... .......... .......... ................... ........ .. 1 (.–.).......: ............. .......... [Tolstoj, N. I. 1995: Genitalii. Slavjanskie drevnosti. Etnolingvisticeskij slovar'. T. 1 (A–G). Moskva: Meždunarodnye otnošenija.] ......., .. .., 2009: ........ .......... .......... ................... ........ .. 4 (......... – ....). ......: ............. .......... [Tolstaja, S. M., 2009: Pjatnica. Slavjanskiedrevnosti. Etnolingvisticeskijslovar'. T. 4 (Pereprava – Sito) Moskva: Meždunarodnye otnošenija.] ........, .. .., 1992: ........... ..... . ........ . ....... ......... ....... ........ . ............... ................. .....-.........: ...... .-............. .......... [Toporkov, A. L., 1992: Perepekanie detej v ritualah i skazkah vostocnyh slavjan. Fol'klor ietnograficeskaja dejstvitel'nost'. Sankt-Peterburg:Izdatel'stvo «Nauka». S-Peterburgskoe otdelenie.] ............ ........ ............ ......... .............. ........ . 2 .. .. 2, 2012. ......: ............ «......». [Tradicionnaja kul'tura Ul'janovskogo Prisur'ja. Etnidialektnyj slovar'. V 2 t. T. 2, 2012. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Indrik».] ........... ......... ........ .......... . 6 .a.... .. 4. ........ ........ ... 2, 2009; .. 6. .......... ....... i ........... ... 2, 2013. .i...: ........ ...... [Tradycyjnaja mastackaja kul'tura belarusav. U 6 tamah. T. 4. Bresckae Palesse. Kn. 2, 2009; T. 6. Gomel'skae Palesse i Padnjaprove. Kn. 2, 2013. Minsk: Vyšejšaja škola.] ......., .. .., 2003: ....... .......... . ........:....... .............., .........: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing. [Trykova, O. Ju., 2003: Detskaja literatura ifol'klor: aspekty vzaimodejstvija. Jaroslavl': LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing]. ......., .. .., 1903: ....... ............. ...... ..... .....-.........: .......... .... ............ [Tupikov,N. .., 1903:Slovar' drevnerusskih licnyhimen. Sankt-Pe­terburg: Tipografija I. N. Skorohodova.] . ....... ....: ....... .............. ...... . ....... (c.... . ........ .. .. ......., .............),2014.......:.....;.......[U istokovmira:Russkieetiologiceskie skazki i legendy (eds. O. V. Belovoj, G. I. Kabakovoj), 2014. Moskva: Forum, Neolit.] ........., .. .., 1982: .............. .......... . ....... .......... ........... ......: ............ ........... ............. [Uspenskij, B. A., 1982 Filologiceskie razys­kanija v oblasti slavjanskih drevnostej. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo Mokovskogo universiteta.] ......... .. .., 1994: «........ ......» .. .. ........... ......... .. .. ......... ...... .. 2, ......: ....... [Uspenskij, B.A. 1994: «Zavetnyje skazki» A.N. Afanas'eva in: Uspenskij, B.A. Izbrannye trudy. T. 2, Moskva: Gnozis.] .........i .....i...i .i..i, 2003. .....i.: ...i. [Ukrajn'ski soromic'ki pisni, 2003. Har'kiv: Folio.] ........h, .. .., 1933: ......... ...... .. ...... ....... ............ ....j. . ......... ... 8. .......: ....... .......... ......... ............ [Filipovic, M. S., 1933: Slavonski votive od voska. Glasnik Etnografskog Muzeja u Beogradu. Knj. 8. Beograd: Državna šcamparija Kral'evine Jugoslavije.] ......... ......... .. I. (c.... .. ..........), 1993. .....: ...........-.......... .... «...». [Folkloren erotikon. T. I. (sost. F. Badalanova), 1993. Sofija: Impresar-sko-izdatelska kešca «ROD».] ........ ............. ...... . 3 .. .. 1. ....... .......... ......., 2007. .......: Vilniaus pedagoginis universitetas. [Fol'klor staroobrjadcev Litvy. V 3 t. T. 1. Skazki. Poslovicy. Zagadki 2007. Vil'njus: Vilniaus pedagoginis universitetas.] ...., .., 1996: ....... ....... . ........ . .......... ......: ....-...... [Holl, D., 1996: Slovar' sjužetov i simvolov v iskusstve. Moskva: Kron-press.] ............, .., 2013:...... ...................... . ......... ......... ......: .......... ............... ............ ............ [Hristoforova, O., 2013: Ikota. Mifologiceskij personaž v lokal'noj tradicii. Moskva: Rossijskij gosudarstvennyj gumanitrnyj universitet.] ......., .. .., 2001: ............. ....... ............. ........ .....-.........: ..... ......... [Hudjakov, I. A., 2001: Velikorusskie skazki. Velikorusskie zagadki. Sankt-Peterburg: Tropa Trojanova.] ....., .. .., 1992: ...... . ............ .......... ........... ....: .......-........... ...... ........: ............ [Hukka, V. S., 1992: Žargon i abbreviatura tatuirovok prestupnogo mira: slovar'-spravocnik. Nižnij Novgorod: Nižpoligraf.] ....., .., 2014: ...... ........ ..... . ....i.... ........ .......i... ............. ...... .......: ............ .i..i...... [Cyhun, A., 2014: Skarby narodnaj movy. Z leksicnajspadcyny nasel'mikav Garadzenskagarajonu. Garodhja:Garadzenskajabiblijateka.] ........., .. .., 1878: ..... ..............-.............. .......... . .......­....... ..... .. 2. ........... ....... .........: .......... . ............... .. ......... [Cjubinskij, P. P., 1878: Trudy etnograficesko-statisticeskoj ekspedicii v Zapadno-Russkij kraj. T. 2. Malorusskie skazki. Peterburg: Tipigrafija i hromolitografija A. Tranšcelja.] ...... ........... .... (c......... . ...........: .. ........, .. ........), 1995. ........: ....... ........... ............. [Skazki Šadrinskogo kraja (edit: V. Beketova, V. Timofeev), 1995. Šadrinsk: Izdanie Šcadrinskogo pedinstituta.] ......i., .., 1929: ...... .....i. ............ .....: ........ .......... ......ii ...... [Šaternik, M., 1929: Krajovy slovnik Cervenšcyny. M.nsk: Vydan'ne Belaruskae Akademii Navuk.] ......., .., 1908: ........... .. 5. ...i.: . «......... ........». [Šuhevic, V., 1908: Gucul'šcina. C. 5, L'viv: Z «Zagal'noj drukarni».] .......... ......, .......... . ....... (........... . .......... .. .. ......), 2007. ..... ......., . 1, .. 42–46. ......: ............... ............... ..... ........ .......... [Ust'janskie skazki, byval'šciny i legendy (Predislovie ipublikacija V.I. Šcipina), 2007. Živaja starina, . 1, S. 42–46. Moskva: Gosudarstvennyj respublikanskij centr russkogo fol'klora.] ......, .., 2002: ....... .... . ........... ..... .. III. ......: .......... [Eliade, M., 2002: Istorija very i riligioznyh idej. T. III. Moskva: Kriterion.] ........ ......, ......... ......... .......... ....... .. .. .........., 2005. .....­.........: ..... ......... [Narodnye skazki, sobrannye sel'skimi uciteljami. Sbornik A.A. Erlenvejna, 2005. Sankt-Peterburg: Tropa Trojanova.] ............... ....... .......... ....... ............. ........... ..... .... 19, 1992. ......: ............ «.....». [Etimologiceskij slovar' slavjanskih jazykov. Praslavjanskij leksiceskij fond. Vyp. 19, 1992. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo «Nauka».] Becker, R., 1990: Die weibliche initiation im ostslawischen Zaubermärchen: ein Beitrag zur Funk-tion und Symbolik des weiblichen Aspektes im Märchen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Figur der Baba-Jaga. Berlin: Wiesbaden by Harrassowitz. Biegileisen, H., 1929: Lecznictwo ludu polskiego. Kraków: Polska Akademja Umiejetnosci. Burkhart,D.,2000:ErotskatradicijauRusiji:PuškininjegovapricaustihovimaCarNikitainjego­ vih cetrdeset kceri. Erotsko u folklore slovena (ed. D. Ajdacic). Beograd: Stubovi kulture. Federowski, M., 1897: Lud bialoruski na Rusi Litewskiej. T. I. Krakow: Nakladem Akademji Umiejetnosci. Folklore de Ukraine: Usages, contes et legendes, chansons, proverbs etjurons, 1898. Kryptadia. Vol. 5. Paris: Imprimirie G. Uschmann a Weimar. Gimbutas, M., 1989: The Language of the Goddess. London: Harper & Row. Hnatjuk, V., 1909: Das Geschliechtleben des ukrainischen bauernvolkes folkloristische erhebun-gen aus der russischen Ukraina. Aufzeichnungen von Pavlo Tarasevkyj, einleitung und parallelennachweise tos Volodymir Hnatjuk (Biewerke zum stadium der Anthropophyteia. Band III). Liepzig: Deutsche Verlagaktiengesellschaft. ..jmakovic R., 1974: Semberija. Etnološka monografija. Sarajevo: Posebni otisak iz glasnika zemaljskog muzeja Bosni i Gercegovine u Sarajevu. Kolberg, O., 1881: Dziela wszistkie. T. .IV. Poznanskie. Cz. VI. Krak: W drukarni Uniwersytetu Jagiellonskiego. Krekovicova,E.,2000:Erotskimotiviuslovackimnarodnimpesmama.Erotsko u folklore slovena (ed. D. Ajdacic). Beograd: Stubovi kulture. Kukuljevic, I. Vile, 1851: Arkiv za povestnicu jugoslavensku. Knj. I. Zagreb: Izdano troškom Družtva za jugoslavensku povestnicu i starine. Lovretic, J., 1902: Otok. Narodni život i obicaji. Zbornik za narodni život i obicaje južnih slavena, Kn. VII, Sv. 1. Zagreb: Knižara Jugoslavenske Akademije. Rulikowski, E., 1853: Opis powiatu Wasylkowskiego pod wzgledem historycznym, obyczajowym i statystycznym. Warszawa: W drukarni S. Orgelbranda. Slownik gwar polskich. T. VI (U–Z). Ulozil J. Karlowicz, 1911. Krak: Drukarnia Uniwersytetu Jagiellonskiego. Sychta, B., 1973: Slownikgwar kaszubskich na tlekulturyludowej. T. VI (U–Ž). Wroclaw, Warsza­wa, Kraków, Gdansk: Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk. Varlyha, A., 1970: Krajovy slounik Lahojšcyny. New York: Vydannie ZARANKA. AETIOLOGICAL NOTES: “THE STORY OF IVAN” BoGuMil GaSanov Among the Ukrainian folk erotic texts published by Fedor Vovk in vol. 5 of his book ........., (Paris,1898), one tale differs dramatically because of its plot: Ivan, a father of seven daughters without vaginas, goes to a woman called Anastasia, buys from her the missing parts, cuts some space in their bodies with an axe, and inserts the vaginas. Anastasia also gives him an extra vagina, which threatens to stay on Ivan’s nose. Ivan cuts it into pieces with the axe and makes clitorises for his daughters. The plot similarities of this text, titled “The Story about Ivan”, with Pushkin’s “Tsar Nikita and his forty daughters” makes us consider their possible connecti­on. The retelling of Pushkin’s work seems impossible due to the mismatches of many important details. It only remains to assume a common source for both texts: Pushkin heard a similar version of “The Story” and processed it creatively. Analysis of the elements in “The Story about Ivan” supports the conclusion that this text has a folk character. Almost all of its parts have analogies in East Slavonic folklore; typical motifs are used. In the Slavonic tradition, there are etiological legends close to “The Story about Ivan”. They concern the appearance of genitalia in the first humans (or only females). The figures of Ivan and Anastasia from the analysed text might go back to the images of the pagan deities (Rod and Mokosh?), personages of the myth about creating genitals. The text itself is probably an echo of an etiological legend, preserved in the form of an obscene story that lost its “explanatory part”. Bogumil Gasanov, independent researcher, Russia, Rjazan, 390026, st. Leninskogo komsomola, 101-128, bogumil13@mail.ru 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 141 – 160 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212408 Plants, Women, Magic. Contemporary Polish (Kuyavian) Folklore Based on Herbal Medicine Sara Orzechowska Danes se je zanimanje za fitoterapijo in et-nobotaniko povecalo. Ta pojav je bil povod za kulturni projekt »Etnopanterija dežele Dobrzyn«. Na dogodku so udeleženci razi­skovali znanje o zelišcarstvu in etnografiji, vkljucno z vraževerji, verovanji in z vlogo rastlin v folklornih besedilih, hkrati pa so posredovali informacije o zgodbah, praksah in nacinih uporabe zelišc v kraju svojega bi-vanja, med starejšo generacijo ali na podlagi lastnih izkušenj. Rezultat prenosa znanja med ucitelji in udeleženci je bila velika kolicina zbranega folklornegagradiva. Clanek jepos­kus povzemanja zbranih podatkov in njihove analize z antropološkega vidika. KLJUCNE BESEDE: ženske, rastline, zelišca, medicina, folklora, kuhinja, ver­ovanja, vraževerja Nowadays, interest in phytotherapy and eth­nobotanics has increased. This phenomenon was the reason for the cultural project “Ethno-pantry of Dobrzyn Land”. During the event, the participants explored the knowledge of herbal medicine and ethnography, including superstitions, beliefs, and the role of plants in folklore texts, while simultaneously pro­viding information about stories, practices, and methods of using herbs in their place of residence, among the older generation or relying on their own experiences. The transfer of knowledge between the instructors and participants resulted in a large amount of folklore material. The article is an attempt to summarise the collected data and to analyse them from an anthropological perspective. KEYWORDS: women, herbs, plants, medi­cine, folklore, cuisine, beliefs, superstitions INTRODUCTION This article is devoted to the cultivation of herbal traditions in Poland and activities aimed atmaintaining themin theDobrzyn Land, as wellas juxtaposing themwith ethnographic data from the area occupied by the Polish population from the 18th to the 20th centuries. In the case of Poland, these so-called “Slavic antiquities” are treated as the legacy of old, pagan culture, whose relics have been preserved in the form of folklore content, oral literature, superstitions, and rituals. The analysis of the material serves to indicate the relics of old culture functioning in the consciousness, memory and practices of contemporary Polish women, to distinguish those that have been changed or have become incomprehensible and those referring to the structures of longue dureé according to Fernando Braudel’s concept (1971). It assumes the existence of thought structures within a given culture, influencing behaviours and phenomena observable in the present time. In the process of enculturation, these structures are encoded into us; they influence our perception of reality, of which we are often not aware and do not consider, because they seem “normal” and “obvious” to us. Many of the structures of longue dureé can be observed in the use of plants or folk medicine in modern life. Currently, in Poland, there is a great interest in both herbalism and folk tradition (ethnobotany) or, more broadly, in magical cultures. Herbal treatment and its use for ritual purposes are not appropriate only for folk cultures. Ludwik Stomma lists the main features of the Polish peasant lifestyle, characterised by, among other factors, geographical and consciousness isolation, agricultural life, Catholic religiosity with magical and ritualistic influences, oral transmission, respect for the elderly and tradition, treated as sacred, inviolable and eternal order and the existence of binary oppositions shaping the peasant worldview (Stomma 1979: 131–142). For the purposes of this article, I define magic cultures as those in which the prevailing paradigm is the belief that we have the means to influence the course of events, the behaviour of nature or other beings at a distance by making certain gestures or uttering certain words (Bailey 2006: 1–2); for example, when we place objects that the burglar leaves behind on aspen, the thief will start shaking like that tree (Marczewska 2002: 178). The first section of this article presents a brief overview of the literature that inspired the project, the methodological approach used in this investigation, the aims of the pro­ject, and the cultural background. The second section of the paper will be devoted to contemporary folklore texts and their anthropological analysis. ETHNOPANTRY OF DOBRZYN LAND: THE PROJECT RATIONALE AND RESEARCH METHODS The study of human-plant interaction and folk medicine has always been a research interest for ethnographers and anthropologists. In the article Ethnobotany-its scope and various subdisciplines (1995), Jain lists four main areas of ethnobotanical research. In the present article, I focused mainly on the first two: “1. work among the present day aboriginal or primitive societies and recording surviving folklore about plants. 2. Scrutiny of literature, such as on ethnobiology, traditional medicine, old administrative reports, ethnologies, floras, archaeology, etc. for data of ethnobotanical interest” (p. 8). Polish literature on this subject abounds in references to herbal treatment, but what is missing is a broadly based insightful analysis that would take into consideration the physiological properties of plants, their chemistry and their influence on human health, on the one hand, and the understanding of plants in a symbolic and ritualistic dimension, on the other. Interesting elaborations about the synthesis of ritual, magic, and healing properties of plants can be found in Richard Miller’s research (The magical and ritual use of aphrodisiacs, 1993; The magical and ritual use of herbs, 1979), but he is focused on exotic plants. The particular elements of folk customs reported here illustrate that, within the traditional rural community, there was a specific way of reasoning, rationality that had its roots in the knowledge of natural cycles, animal behaviour, the influence of herbs on the body, as well as the understanding of the world as an arena where many phenomena are the result of supernatural forces, for example, the activity of demons or casting spells. The simultaneity of these two types of reasoning is characteristic of folk culture. The source material for this paper is based on traditional messages as well as informa­tion from 19th-century ethnographic journals: Wisla, Zbiór Wiadomosci do Antropologii Krajowej, Materialy Antropologiczno-Archeologiczne i Etnograficzne. The works collected by Oskar Kolberg and contemporary ethnographic studies in the field of folk medicine and ethnobotany, by Valeria Kolosova, Zbigniew Libera, Adam Paluch, and Marzena Marczewska, among others, were also taken into account. Studies of the Ethnolinguistic School of Lublin are also a valuable source for my work, in particular Slownik stereo-typów i symboli ludowych, T. 2 Rosliny (2017-2019). Extensive information about plant superstition can be found in the works of Polish ethnobotanist Adam Fisher (1889-1943), for example, Rosliny w wierzeniach i zwyczajach ludowych. Slownik Adama Fischera (Luczaj et al. 2016) but also in the everyday practices of Polish people. The role and symbolic image of women in traditional culture constitute an essential element of my research upon which I relied, for example, the study Wizerunek kobiety i mezczyzny w jezykowym obrazie swiata ludnosci wiejskiej (na przykladzie gminy Zakliczyn nad Dunajcem) (Piechnik 2009), Ludowe mity o stworzeniu czlowieka (Tomicki 1980) or the book O hultajach, wiedzmach i wszetecznicach. Szkice z obyczajów XVII i XVIII wieku (Baranowski 1988). I must note the scientist Michael Ostling, working on Polish historical and folklore material. One of his papers, Witches’ Herbs on Trial (2014), is devoted to the witch figure as a herbalist and the plants listed during trials against such women. Traditional thinking about women and wild plants indicate a specific “relationship” between them. Contem­porary material from field research includes information collected from the participants of the cultural project “Ethnopantry of Dobrzyn Land”, carried out from June to October 2019 by theemployees fromDomMuzin Torun (amunicipalculturalinstitution) and the Association for the Heritage of Indigenous Culture, of which I am a member. Throughout Europe, an increasing interest in ethnobotany (in the field of science and as a hobby) can be observed; for example, studies on current and bygone herbal remedies in England were recounted in the book Country remedies: Traditional East Anglian plant remedies in the 20th century (Hatfield 1994), in which the author published previously unknown ethnographic material, drawing an interesting picture of the evolution of herbal treatment in eastern England. Ten years later, she published Encyclopedia of folk medicine: old world and new world traditions (2004). Ain Raal and Renata Skand (2005), in an article devoted to an overview of previous research in Estonian ethnobotany, indicate: Findings of this research will lead not only to new potent medicines (a noble goalin its own), butfirstand foremostto new theories of recipedevelopment and the interpretation of new (medical) information within the framework of old beliefs. This may help us to understand the influence that popular books and Internet resources have exerted on medicinal herbs today (p. 195). I fully agree with that point of view; this article and previous cultural projects can contribute to the development of Polish and European ethnobotany. Theproject“Ethnopantry of Dobrzyn Land”owes its nameto theactivities carried out in the historical land on the Vistula River, because one of its assumptions was regional education and local community activities. Its participants are residents of the region; however, it should be emphasised that not all of them come from the Dobrzyn Land and, unfortunately, the following materials cannot be treated as documentation of the tradition of the whole region. I also supplement the collected material with statements made by the participants of other herbal classes, which I have been conducting since 2017. Dur­ing that time, I have often been asked about the effectiveness of magic treatments with plants (e.g., Should one think before and after harvesting them about the intention, spell, request for herbs to make a treatment more effective? Is it true that plants collected on Midsummer’s Eve have more power? etc.). The project “Ethnopantry of Dobrzyn Land” consisted of several workshops, during which twenty women from the Dobrzyn Land region obtained knowledge about phyto-therapy, the practical use of plants in modern and folk medicine, and their application in peasant culture. The workshop aimed to provide knowledge about folk herbalism, to obtain ethnographic material about it from the participants of the project, as well as to examine how much this heritage is still alive. I applied an experimental method of collecting ethnographic material. After each class, participants were given a “homework assignment” consisting of collecting ethnographic data, such as proverbs, legends, fairy tales, sayings, beliefs, the use of plants in medicine and cuisine, rituals related to plants, gardening, kitchen superstitions, and similar, known to them from their homes and family oral tradition. They were asked to interview women from their family and their neighbours who could possess and pass on such knowledge. Some participants did not provide any material, explaining it by the lack of informants or the disappearance of knowledge on thesubjectintheirenvironment,whileothers wereveryactiveinsearchingfortraditional records. Although the project is completed, I continue to receive some new valuable data from the participants. The activity proposed to the workshop participants was aimed at drawing attention to the texts of folklore as a source of knowledge about the culture. The attendees were also given instructions on what to ask the representatives of the older generation, what to pay special attention to (for example, the age of the interlocutor, regional names, information on how the plants were obtained, in what situations they were used, and how the relationship between the woman and nature and the activities of the housewife were treated). It turned out that a large group of beliefs and superstitions functions nowadays not as a historical curiosity but as a living manifestation of continuity of thinking known from Polish folklore. Superstitions that the participants catalogued during interviews with representatives of the older generation were often respected by them. The outcome of this method was extensive source material, some of which was included in the post-project publication. Moreover, I also had the opportunity to become acquainted with the people who provided information on herbs and medicinal plants and their use in healing. Only one of them was educated in herbal medicine (she took a course in herbal remedies); others relied solely on family traditions and their own experience in this respect. They decided to take part in the project because of the opportunity to participate in practical activities, the willingness to acquire herbal knowledge and learn about the culture of their grand­mothers, while at the same time combining the cognitive and entertaining aspects (i.e., a pleasant time spent in a female group). Thefirstclasses concernedmethods ofethnographicmaterialcollection.Theparticipants were prepared to search for information about plants in cooking, medicine, and beliefs. They were solving exercises consisting of the description of proverbs and customs and their interpretation in an attempt to explain what is hidden in these short sentences and what image of culture can be read from them. In Poland, a well-known proverb, “stolen does not make you fat”, means that eating stolen products does not result in fattening. It was an example showing the changing economic conditions in the Polish countryside and the accompanying worldview. Nowadays, it is used as a humorous excuse for minor acts of theft, because now we prefer foods that do not contribute to weight gain. In the past, when food was often scarce, “fattening” was desirable. In this short expression, the participants noticed the informational layer of the old culture – the deficiency and the resulting respect for food, as well as the moralistic one – the theft of food (an evil deed) – would not lead to the feeling of satiety; the food obtained through thievery would lose its properties that satisfy hunger. As historical data indicate, the lack of food was at the centre of everyday worries and the main existential experience of European peasants. Trials and tribulations of the folk fairy tale protagonists also suggest that this was the reason why “third sons” or orphans under the care of an evil stepmother had to go beyond “orbis interior”, where they experienced various adventures (Darnton 2012: 39–59). They often shared the last piece of bread with the needy, who turned out to be a benefactor, a fairy, a magician or a Christian saint, rewarding them for a noble gesture with a magical object. It was truly a great sacrifice, worthy of the highest praise. I conducted the next classes in the field, teaching women to recognise medicinal species often found in Kuyavia; I talked about their use in old and modern medicine, household and the most common beliefs. The plants I talked about whose names and uses were known to some of the participants were: walnut (Juglans regia) used to alleviate diarrhoea and abdominal pain; common soapwort (Saponariaofficinalis), a natural deter­gent; black elderberry (Sambucus nigra) as a resistance enhancer against demons. Some ladies have also encountered the custom of pouring water after bathing newborn babies under an elderberry bush, hanging strongly aromatic herbs by the window and the front door of the house: common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare), grand wormwood (Artemisiaab­synthium), mugwort (Artemisia vulgaris) used to deter insects and, in the past, to protect the house from demons and evil. Magical use of Artemisias was common throughout Europe: “[…] mugwort puts away madness, and in whatever house it is no evil crafts can have power, and evil eyes will be turned away. The roots used to be collected on St. John’s Day.” (Black 1883: 201). The next two meetings were devoted to the processing of herbal raw material: the processes of producing natural vinegars, tinctures, macerates, cosmetics, medicinal oint­ments and their use in phytotherapy. We used those raw materials that were also available Fig. 1. The common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare), a photo taken during fieldwork (photo by Joanna Chmielewska). in previous centuries: beeswax, ethanol, lanolin, wine vinegar. This method resulted in bringing the participants closer to the old ways of producing galenical preparations and to creating conditions in which the participants recalled the home remedies of their grandmothers and mothers. Field classes in “wild cuisine” were conducted by botanists, who presented edible species, such as the white goosefoot (Chenopodium album), parsnip (Pastinaca sativa), wood avens (Geum urbanum), nettle (Urtica dioica), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), which were then used to prepare meals, including the popular springtime brejka and soups of wild plants with the addition of groats. The participants also had classes at the Ethnographic Museum in Torun, where they learned methods of engaging with the public and organising meetings for local communities on the region’s cultural heritage and art classes under the supervision of the artist Anna Pilewicz, using dried plants. It was decided that only women would be involved in the project. We were interested in the knowledge of their female ancestors. The culture in which they grew up set quite clear boundaries between the “male” and “female” worlds. The significant influence of this type of opposition in ethno-linguistic research on Slavic culture was emphasised by Ivanov and Toporov (1965), for example, right-left, top-bottom, house – forest, we – they, male-female, inside-outside, life-death, and similar. (Rudenka, Zukosky’s 2014: 19). The collection of herbs and kitchen duties belonged to women in the Polish countryside. A man was symbolically connected with a cultivated field-domesticated plants, a tame space created by human action, where the known principles of the human “orbis interior” Fig. 2. A collection of edible species during “wild cuisine” classes (photo by Joanna Chmielewska). Fig. 3. Preparation of galena preparations during classes (photo by Joanna Chmielewska). functioned. The women, in contrast, were more connected with wildlife, the spaces away from the house, from which medicinal plants were obtained, and in the image of peasants, the farther area, the greater the dangers it hid. This belief was linked with the existence of the borderline dividing the world in which peasants lived into their own (tame, as well as foreign) wild and unbridled space, and at the same time one in which the source of various powerful magical, divine and devilish powers have their source (Grochowski 2009: 38–52, Stomma 1986, 1979; Tomicki & Tomicka 1975). These can be used, for example, for healing purposes or harming others; therefore, quacks or folk healers (folk doctors) were perceived as ambiguous people. On the one hand, they strongly emphasised the help of God and the saints during the act of healing; on the other hand, they were suspected of contact with the devil’s forces because their knowledge and skills were not “human” possibilities and were a potential danger, regardless of whether the gift came from God or the devil (Libera 2003). Thus, both women and treatment were close to each other not only from a household point of view (domestic treatment was almost exclusively provided by women) but also from a symbolic point of view. The household, whose heart was the kitchen and its oven, was also the kingdom of women because they were responsible for preparing food, preserves, drying herbs, which served as a handy first aid kit (Paluch 1984: 223, 305). It was mainly housewives who created herbal and cuisine heritage. Women’s work, if done by men, would condemn them to ridicule and misunderstanding; such a situation is even unimaginable because of the “qualitative” otherness and traditionally understood “inferiority” of a woman (Tomicki, 1980: 57–64). Some information remained available only within one gender; therefore, only women were involved in the project, as it was easier for them to obtain the material, especially from the older generation, but also be­cause traces of the stereotypical division of activities into female and male remain very visible in contemporary Polish culture. It should be added that in these areas associated with the female element, many men not only could not but were also afraid to enter because they did not understand the sphere. All the above-mentioned gender-related phenomena of traditional culture are secondary to the biologicaldifferences between a man and a woman, the fact that a woman has the ability to give life; her giving birth is the borderline between life and death, and her set of “dangerous” characteristics has its epicentre in her womb. In light of previous findings, cyclical bleeding had a strong connection with that world (the strange world, the world of death, chaos), and the monthly secretions were perceived as unclean and with magical potential. Sickness in peasant culture was treated as a “little death”, and the sick person as a person in the zone between life and death, and thus he or she should be treated by someone who feels more comfortable in this zone – a woman. HERBAL AND CUISINE TRADITIONS The folklore texts understood as oral literature are an invaluable source of knowledge about the history and culture of rural life. A written form of expression was not a popular method of collecting information, as wisdom was transmitted through proverbs or songs. Research in oral literature reveals how the perception of the real world was constructed by previous generations. Superstitions and beliefs permeated with magic or religion are frequently present in folklore texts. In this part of the article, I will focus on this kind of discourse related to plants and cuisine customs. Each of the issues has been chosen to outline the broadest possible picture of cultural continuity, manifested in ways of dealing with illness or relationships with nature. I com­pare the data obtained with healing-magical practices known from folklore and attempt to analyse them in terms of mental structures in culture, ordering given behaviours or superstitions. One of the superstitions, catalogued by the participants and subject to lively discussions, is the ban on making preserves during menstruation, which is quite common throughout Poland (Marczewska 2012: 212 – footnote 271, Paluch 1984: 306): My grandmother, when I asked her about it, said it was a custom from the old times, and it was simply because of hygiene. She told me that women had skirts to the ground and that menstrual blood just flowed on their legs; sometimes, they wore rags tied to the belt, but some slobs did nothing. As far as seasoning is concerned, the grandmother said that they hadn’t cared as much about washing hands when making preserves; as this blood flowed, there were more bacteria and seasoning fermented. I also heard from one lady from the Kamionki area that when she was young (in the 1920s) she did not talk to men about female matters, and at the same time, it was believed that sex, or often even touching a woman at that time, was the dirtiness of a man, even if he was her husband. So women wore either a red ribbon or a flower in their hair at that time, and men avoided them. (Anna Zoladz, 2019) The participants emphasised that they complied with this rule because sometimes the jars “did not pasteurise” or the seasoning spoiled in the short time they were prepared during their menstruation. The rest of the statement also points to the unpragmatic dimen­sion of the superstition. It is a clear signal that up to a century ago, women were treated as unclean beings, especially during menstruation. This impurity, apart from obvious consequences in the patriarchal culture, such as the lower social status of women, resulted in their engaging in herbalism, because plants could be used as medicines (white magic) but also dangerous poisons (black magic). The knowledge of their properties and use was dangerous, powerful, often tantamount to making a pact with the devil, because it gave the possibility to restore and take away health, to manoeuvre on the border of life and death. A woman felt much better in this mediation sphere than a man did – deprived of the element of impurity and power from outside our world. This case has shown that the female body has special magical connections. The 28-day female hormonal cycle and lunar month are also why women are symbolically connected with the moon. The faith in the influence of the lunar month is reflected in Polish folklore. Pickled cucumbers should only be seasoned when the moon is D-shaped,. when it “waxes”. Then the cucumbers are full; none is empty. And that works. I used to pickle cucumbers “from the same source” at the D-shaped moon, and another time at the C-shaped moon. At “C”, half was empty, and those at “D” were all full. (Marta Cwiklinska, 2019) It also refers to the period of treatment or collection of herbs (Libera 1995: 45–46). Nowadays, many beliefs concern the influence of the moon on growth or wealth. Espe­cially among women, the habit of cutting hair right after the new moon is alive so that it regenerates quickly, growing beautiful and lush. The participants also mentioned the superstition that flowers should be replanted when the moon “grows”; otherwise, they may not take root and die before the moon is in the right position. Plants are treated in a magical way, which is confirmed by the second statement of the participant: You don’t give potted flowers, grafts to somebody, and once you get them, you can’t thank for them. The flowers don’t grow then. So you should steal them. My mother’s neighbour, when she likes a flower, asks my mother to put it on the staircase, then she will steal a twig and graft the flower. (Milena Krajewska, 2019) Superstition seems to be quite archaic if we look at its mythical layer. It indicates the magical treatment of words, as well as the magical, mediatorial properties of theft. As myths, fairy tales or healing formulas state, an object found by chance or stolen is more powerful (Wasilewski 1979: 80-81). In the case of a plant, this magical property can simply be understood as vitality, bloom. A preserved superstition can be a relic of older beliefs, an expression of the mythical plane of folk culture. It can also be interpreted in the mythical-biological dimension, associated with the growth of the plant. A plant is a living organism growing in a given space; moved from one place to another, from one house to another, it may die (it is worth noting that this applies to so-called grafts, or offshoots from the main plant and flowers living but not cut), especially when the transaction is sealed with an exchange of the words “please” and “thank you”. Then we symbolically close the situation that has definitively been concluded. The graft handed over in this way we cut from the matrix using these words; there is no longer any con­nection with it. The plant, in order to live, bloom, and multiply further in another place, must remain in the situation of an open, symbolic connection with its source, in a way deceived, deceitfully transferred. It is also worth noting the folklore principle of “a gift for a favour”, which is still alive. In 2017, I asked a herbalist (about 80 years old) to bring me a seedling of garden angelica (Archangelica officinalis); the plant was already quite sizable at the time. When asked about the price, the saleswoman said that I should give as much as I thought ap­propriate, even one zloty, but I must give something, or the plant will die. She also said that this principle was written in the Bible. This is another example of the remnants of the specificity of folk culture, as its members believed that the principles which determine the order that prevails in their communities are the only right ones, established by God himself, thus inviolable. It should be mentioned that representatives of traditional culture generally did not read the Scriptures, and some of its contents were only known from the sermons of the Church. The principles were created by people on the basis of their ideas, and only secondarily were they attributed to God. It is now necessary to explain another form of obtaining a plant. It is a “theft”, but in this case it is done in a specific way because the person who is “robbed” knows about it; only the plant is “cheated”. The second peasant principle – “what’s found, is not sto­ len” (finders keepers) makes the found object become the property of the finder, frees him or her from a rematch, as well as from saying the word “thank you” crowning the transaction. In one statement only, the numerous principles of extensive peasant magic logic have been preserved, allowing the graft to be passed on without any gestures that would symbolically seal the transaction and deprive it of its connection with its original place of growth. The above example illustrates the thought structures according to which the growth of a plant depends at the same time on the provision of convenient soil conditions, access to light, water, but also magical behaviour, in this case, verbal magic and mediatorial activities. The magic treatment with plants, indicated by one of the participants, is throwing peas: When I was a kid, I had some warts on my skin. When my grandmother saw it, she told me to take as many peas as warts and go to the river, turn my back on it, throw them away and come back without turning back. Soon all the warts fell off. (Mirella Górzynska, 2019) The method described above is well known in Polish folk medicine of the 18th cen­ tury (Luczaj et al. 2016: 156–157, Paluch 1984: 121–122). Peas were used for healing purposes because of their appearance, according to the principles of sympathetic magic in which “the similar will cause the similar”. Its tiny seeds resembled spherical growths sticking out on the skin, having many names: warts, scrofulas, papillomatosis, milia, paps, and similar. A patient suffering from various dermatological diseases, including smallpox, manifested by skin lesions, was said to have “a body covered with peas”. No wonder that in order to get rid of unpleasant lumps from the skin, it was enough to throw this “pea” behind. Mirella Górzynska mentioned that other ways to remove the warts were also tried, but they were ineffective, only the grandmother, having heard about the problem, gave the effective “prescription” known to her. All the elements of the healing ritual mentioned by the informant are important. The number of peas must correspond to the number of warts. The second condition is to throw them behind your back, standing with one’s back towards to the river, which, when flowing, will take all the growths with it and move them to another place, making it impossible for them to return to your skin. The last condition is to leave the place without turning back. Between our world, in front of our eyes, and our backs, behind which another, magical and dangerous dimension sits, we become a border. We and our skin, which is to feel the effects of the magic treatment. It has been accepted to say that the border separates something, leaving aside the fact that when talking about it, we always point to the existence of two areas which, paradoxically, however, merge. Because our own body forms this border, it can be healed. Peas travel from the front, through the border, behind us. Moving peas from the front to the back, we carry this disease behind us, exactly where it belongs, into the space of chaos, the unknown, where it came from (Marczewska 2012: 113–150). Turning around, we would shake the order of two spheres: eyes would turn to chaos, back to the order and health. Mixing the space would make it impossible for scrofulas to remain in the area “beyond us”. Nobody explained to the girl who was a few years old at the time how this treatment was supposed to work, but one can guess that going to the river and remembering her grandmother’s words meticulously, she was convinced of the power of those healing method. You might also think that just after she threw the peas behind, she left the place quickly. The ban on turning around could have caused fear, forcing the child to leave the dangerous place, contaminated with the act of ritual healing, as soon as possible. Feeling the fear of something behind our backs seems to be something completely natural, especially when this “something” will never be well known, because it cannot be seen by us. One important piece of information is that the girl got rid of troublesome warts after the procedure. Among other ways to cure the ailment, a poultice of greater celandine (Chelidonium maius) juice was mentioned. Its orange, thick milk is rich in alkaloids with strong bactericidal, fungicidal, virucidal, and anthelmintic properties. Raw or dis­solved in alcohol, administered orally, is a strong poison, and in small quantities, it has an anthelmintic effect. When applied to the skin with lesions (e.g., warts) causes them to die and fall off. Chelidonium maius and its healing properties are very popular in folk medicine also in other European countries, for example, Belarus (Skand et al. 2017: 34, 39). Folk methods of treating diseases were also based on the famous principle of Paracelsus (Dosis facit venenum), as many dangerous and easy to overdose plants and fungi, for example, jimson weed (Datura stramonium), lily of the valley (Convallaria majalis), or ergot (Claviceps purpurea) were mentioned in ethnographic writings as means used in folk medicine. A mentioned principle that traditional peasant regiments are perceived as a God’s order is also illustrated in a valuable statement by Agata McCaughey. It perfectly exemplifies the interpenetration of the mythical and pragmatic sphere in the treatment by plants, as well as the already mentioned tendency to argue the validity of certain behaviours with God’s intervention: The mother of my colleague from Gniezno comes from a family where women have been using herbs and prayers to cure diseases for years. And so, when Zofia discovered nodules in her armpits and breasts, she imme­diately picked up the broadleaf plantain’s leaves for compresses. Day and night, she wore fresh leaves in her bra, believing in the story that women in her family pass on from generation to generation. A woman, suffering terrible pain in her breasts, prayerfully asked God what to do to recover. In response, she heard to give her sore breasts to be licked by a lamb, and the pain will disappear. Trusting in God’s will, the woman plucked broadleaf plantain leaves, which were called the lamb’s tongue in her region, believ­ ing that in this way the Word would be fulfilled and she would be missed by the painful “nodding of the sheep’s head”. She was changing leaves dutifully, wrapping her breast with a fresh compress. The pain subsided, and the woman recovered. Zofia has also recovered and is doing great. (Agata McCaughey, 2019) This case supports the view that the source from which the prescription for the pain­ful breast was obtained is a natural healing tradition combined with faith and magical thinking. It was supposed to be the words of God that indicated the exact treatment. Interestingly, the woman did not follow God’s instructions, despite the trust she placed in the words of the Creator heard during the prayer. Instead of immediately following the command, she preferred to interpret it in a way that could also be applied to the sym­pathetic magic, since licking her breasts with a lamb’s tongue has been replaced by a compress of broadleaf plantain (Plantago lanceolata), a plant that had the same regional name, probably because of the shape of the leaves or a slightly “rough” inflorescence. The above behaviour indicates a utilitarian treatment of God’s words in healing, which can be properly interpreted, modified, or even improved, because this way has proved painless, in contrast to the recommendations heard in prayer. The way Zofia was treated has been known for generations. Broadleaf plantain’s leaves in traditional medicine were applied to wounds, contusions, inflammation and swelling (Paluch 1984: 71; The author also mentions folk names, including jerzecki, jezyczki, jezyczki polne). During the herbal workshops, the participants mentioned on various occasions that when they were children, grandmothers or mothers (men doing similar treatments were never mentioned) applied rubbed broadleaf plantain leaves to them to reduce swelling and bleeding and to accelerate healing of broken knees or torn elbows after an unfortunate fall. Phytopharmacological studies indicate that this plant, very frequently mentioned on the pages of ethnographic journals, has astringent and an-ti-inflammatory properties that may have been most effective in treating painful nodules (Parus, Grys 2010: 162–165). The belief that the method was passed on to the ancestor in a miraculous way, through the lips of God himself during prayer, indicates that healing in this way is not only a medical but also a religious activity. Thus, the family tale of God’s words, modified by their recipient by the power of sympathetic magic, has estab­lished a belief in the effectiveness of the broadleaf plantain in similar ailments, and we can be almost certain that the tale of the miracle during prayer is much younger than the treatment by the broadleaf plantain. Traditional cultures knew many ways of dealing with pain; the following example is surprising with its ingenuity. Among the younger participants, it aroused a lively interest; to the older ones, it comes as no surprise because most of them knew it from their childhood: Canvas, such as a handkerchief, was put on the anthill. After some time, ants that attacked it were flicked, so the handkerchief was soaked in for­mic acid. The handkerchief was put to the nose and inhaled to clear the airways. It was applied to the joints, soothing inflammation. (Grazyna Kasprowicz, 2019) During the workshop, it was also reported that if someone suffered from rheumatism, they placed ants on their knees in order to obtain acid contained in their venom. Also, ointments were prepared from the ant venom. Formic acid applied to sore joints reduces pain and accelerates treatment. It is also present in parts of many medicinal plants, includ­ing nettle. A well-known and often repeated way of treating rheumatic pains is to cover yourself with fresh, stinging nettle leaves. During my workshops intended for families with children, I have frequently witnessed a situation when parents kept children from crying, explaining to them that if they are burnt with nettles now it will prevent them from joint pain in the future. During the workshop meetings, I had the opportunity not only to collect material, but also to participate in conversations focused around herbalism, folk culture, according to many, unfortunately already gone, to hear the longing for the old respect for nature and the fruits of the earth, but also human relations and the oral transmission: My grandmother had extensive knowledge about herbs which she received from her mother, but unfortunately my grandmother was not willing to share this knowledge with my mother, which means that I am deprived of it”, reports one of the participants, “I have to learn everything again.” (Maria Nowak, 2019) The author of these words gave such information: I read this advice somewhere on an Internet forum, when the forums, not Facebook, were still fashionable. The idea was that instead of giving the children garlic to eat, it should be rubbed into their feet/heels, because in this way, it will work as well. Kids don’t like to eat garlic, so it’s a cool way to apply it. Crush/finely chop a clove of garlic, apply it on the heels, put socks on it and go sleep. (Maria Nowak, 2019) The lack of a link between grandmother and granddaughter, which is a link between generations of knowledge transfer, resulted in searching for it on the Internet. The in­formant found there the content having its source in folk medicine: “Sometimes, also in these ailments [rhinitis and cough], it is used externally, such as in Radomsko, Kalisz or Lublin regions, where the pulse, hands and heels are lubricated with rubbed garlic” (Paluch 1984: 30). This indicates that the Internet is now an area of research for old traditions and treatment methods practised by past generations. However, the folk threads that appear in the forums, are usually out of context, incomplete, devoid of the value that traditional healing used to have, in which, apart from the action of the plant, healing was made as a ritual, legible and accepted by the community in which it took place. The method, known in folk culture, refers rather to the apotropic properties of garlic (strongly irritating smell) and the concept of disease as a demon invading our body. Garlic as an apotropaion is popular in European cultures (Hand 1980: 323), for example, in England and Balkans, also in pop-culture, where is responsible for warding off vampires. The protection of the above-mentioned places was to deter the disease and not to affect nasal inflammation or coughing viruses through the healing skin. According to the information provided by Paluch, this method was supposed to be helpful in treating the common cold. The person who posted this advice on the forum used the folk method only on the pragmatic level. The cause (the placement of garlic on the heels, was to have the effect) to get rid of the cold. While garlic administered orally has such a healing effect, it can only have a ritualistic effect when applied to the feet. The fact isthat someone who believesin the effectiveness of this method could feel much better, but in the given case, it was applied to a child who was not aware of the plant’s pragmatic or symbolic influence. The phrase “I read it on the Internet” can be heard frequently among people interested in folk herbalism and try to use herbs today as an effective treatment. The example above illustrates clearly that folk medicine is not treated as an integral part of peasant culture, remaining in relation to the supernatural world, but as an isolated procedure, which often results in the use of methods that have no explanation in real life. CONCLUSION The inspiration for the project “Ethnopantry of Dobrzyn Land” was mainly the desire to learn about herbalism and culinary heritage, based on wild edible plants, in its practical dimension. The result of the project is a great deal of material included in the article. The need to present all the findings originates from a conviction that the durable character of customs and traditions related to natural herbal treatments and culinary recipes of the inhabitants of the Dobrzyn Land region are worth analysing and documenting. Nowadays, it is possible to observe a shift towards the ancestors’ knowledge about health care through natural means. Initial observations suggest that there are two main attitudes to folk medicine. On the one hand, it is considered to be a group of unwarranted practices damaging to our body. On the other hand, it is regarded as an infallible book of wisdom, the secret of longevity and ideal life in symbiosis with nature. As is the case with extreme attitudes, the truth is somewhere in the middle, and each of the extremes is harmful. In addition, folk medicine is not only about prescriptions for particular ailments; it is largely the answer to the question: How did our ancestors think? The results of eth­ nographic research conducted during the project, as well as time spent on interviews and workshops, indicate that this is also the answer to the question of how it is commonly perceived. How far have we gone from our roots if we are often so gracefully able to combine an advanced level of chemical knowledge with the conviction of the miraculous power of the moon, the astronomical seasons, or feelings and intuition? The present article is merely a contribution to further research and reflection on this subject. It is an outline on the basis of which it is possible to construct a broader interpretation of con­temporary Polish and European culture and its transformations from an anthropological perspective. Another possible area for further research would be to investigate netlore, a new form of knowledge transmission, especially in folk medicine, in which changes in social attitudes can be observed. REFERENCES Bailey, Michael, 2006: The Meanings of Magic. In: Bailey Michael, Copenhaver Brian (eds.), Magic, Ritual, and Witchcraft 1, Philadelphia, 1–23. Baranowski, Bohdan, 1988: O hultajach, wiedzmach i wszetecznicach. Szkice z obyczajów XVII i XVIII wieku. [Rogues, witches and harlots: sketches from the customs of the 17th and 18th centuries]. Lódz: Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Krzewienia Kultury Swieckiej. Bartminski, Jerzy (ed.), 2017-2020: Slownik stereotypów i symboli ludowych, T. 2 Rosliny. [Diction­ary of stereotypes and folk symbols. Vol. 2, Plants]. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Sklodowskiej. Biegeleisen, Henryk, 1929: Lecznictwo ludu polskiego: (z 100 rycinami z klinik uniw. Lwow.). [Treatment of the Polish people: (with 100 drawings from the Universityof Lviv clinics.)]. Kraków: Polska Akademia Umiejetnosci. Black, William, 1883: Folk-medicine: a chapter in the history of culture. Londyn: The Folk-lore Society by E. Stock. Braudel, Fernand, 1971: Historia i trwanie. [On history], trans. Geremek, Bronislaw. Warszawa: Czytelnik. Darnton, Robert, 2012: Wielka masakra kotów i inne epizody francuskiej historii kulturowej. [Great Cat Massacre and Other Episodes in French Cultural History], trans. Guzowska, Dorota. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. Grochowski, Piotr, 2009: Dziady– rzecz o wedrownych zebrakach iich piesniach. [Dziady- about wandering beggars and their songs]. Torun: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Mikolaja Kopernika. Hand, Wayland, 1980: Magical Medicine The Folkloric Component of Medicine in the Folk Be­lief, Custom, and Ritual of the Peoples of Europe and America. California: University of California Press. Hatfield, Gabrielle, 1994: Country remedies: traditional East Anglian plant remedies in the 20 century. Woodbridge: Boydell Press. Hatfield, Gabrielle, 2004: Encyclopedia of folk medicine: old world and new world traditions. Denver: ABC-CLIO. Ivanov, Vyacheslav, Vsevolodovich; Toporov, Vladimir, Nikolayevich, 1965: The Proto-Slav Religious Systems as Semiotic Models of the Universe. Moscow: Nauka. Jain, Sudhanshu, Kumar, 1995: Ethnobotany, its scope and various subdisciplines. In: Jain, SK (ed.), A Manual of Ethnobotany. Jodhpur: Scientific Publishers, 1–11. 13. Jaric, Snežana, et al., 2014: Plant resources used in Serbian medieval medicine. Ethnobotany and Ethnomedicine. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 61, 1359–1379. Kolosova, Valeria, 2005: Name – Text – Ritual: The Role of Plant Characteristics in Slavic Folk Medicine. Folklorica 1, 44 – 61. Luczaj, Lukasz, et. al., 2016: Rosliny w wierzeniach i zwyczajach ludowych. Slownik Adama Fis­chera. [Plants in folk beliefs and customs. Adam Fischer’s Dictionary]. Wroclaw: Polskie Towarzystwo Ludoznawcze. Libera, Zbigniew, 1995: Medycyna ludowa. Chlopski rozsadek czy gminna fantazja? [Folk medicine. Peasant sense or communal fantasy?]. Wroclaw: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wroclawskiego. Libera, Zbigniew, 2003: Znachor w tradycjach ludowych i popularnych XIX-XX wieku. [Quacker in folk and popular traditions of the 19th-20th centuries]. Wroclaw: Towarzystwo Przy­jaciól Ossolineum. Marczewska, Marzena, 2002: Drzewa w jezyku i kulturze. [Trees in language and culture]. Kielce: Wydawnictwo Akademii Swietokrzyskiej. Marczewska, Marzena, 2012: Ja cie zamawiam, ja cie wypedzam… Choroba. Studium jezykowo – kulturowe. [I order you, I drive you away ... Illness. Linguistic and cultural study]. Kielce: Wydawnictwo UJK. Miller, Richard, Alan, 1993: Themagicaland ritualuseofaphrodisiacs. Rochester: Destiny Books. Miller, Richard, Alan, 1979: The magical and ritual use of herbs. Rochester: Destiny Books. Niebrzegowska, Stanislawa, 2000: Przestrach od przestrachu: rosliny w ludowych przekazach ustnych. [Fear herb for fear: plants in folk oral accounts]. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniw­ ersytetu Marii-Curie Sklodowskiej. Ostling, Michael, 2014: Witches’ Herbs on Trial. Folklore (electronic journal of folkore) 2, 179–201. Paluch, Adam, 1984: Swiatroslin w tradycyjnych praktykach leczniczych wsipolskiej. [Theworld of plants in traditional healing practices of the Polish countryside]. Wroclaw:Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wroclawskiego. Paluch, Adam, 1989: “Zerwij ziele z dziewieciu miedz” ...: ziololecznictwo ludowe w Polsce w XIX i poczatku XX wieku. [“Pick the herb from nine balks” ...: folk herbalism in Poland in the 19th and early 20th centuries]. Wroclaw: Polskie Towarzystwo Ludoznawcze. Parus, Anna; Grys, Anna, 2010: Babka lancetowata (Plantago lanceolata L.) - wlasciwosci lecznicze. [Plantain lanceolata (Plantago lanceolata L.) - healing properties]. Postepy Fitoterapii 3, 162 – 165. Piechnik, Anna, 2009: Wizerunek kobiety i mezczyzny w jezykowych obrazie swiata ludnosci wiejskiej (na przykladzie gminy Zakliczyn nad Dunajcem). [A woman and a man in the linguistic image of the world of the rural population (on the example of the Zakliczyn nad Dunajcem commune)]. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellonskiego. Rudenka, Alena; Zukosky’s Michael, 2014: Traditional Culture as a Discourse. In: Mattisson Jane, Bäcke Maria (eds.), Text Analysis Culture, Framework & Teaching. Kristianstad: Kristianstad University Press. Stomma, Ludwik, 1986: Antropologia kultury wsi polskiej XIX w. [Anthropology of the culture of the Polish countryside in the 19th century]. Warszawa: Instytut Wydawniczy Pax. Stomma, Ludwik, 1979: Determinanty Polskiej Kultury LudowejXIX wieku. [Determinants of the Polish Folk Culture of the 19th century]. Polska Sztuka Ludowa - Konteksty 3/33, 131–142. Skand, Renata; Raal Ain, 2005: 2005, Plants in Estonian Folk Medicine: Collection, Formation and Overview of Previous Research, Folklore: Electronic Journal of Folklore, Estonia, 173–200. Skand, Renata, et al., 2017: Multi-functionality of the few: current and past uses of wild plants for food and healing in Liuban region, Belarus. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 13:10. doi: 10,1186/s13002-017-0183-6. https://ethnobiomed.biomedcentral.com/track/ pdf/10.1186/s13002-017-0139-x.pdf Szczesniak, Krystyna, 2008: Swiat roslin swiatem ludzi na pograniczu wschodniej i zachodniej slowianszczyzny.[Theworld ofplants is theworld ofpeople on theborder between Eastern and Western Slavs]. Gdansk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdanskiego. Szychowska – Boebel, Barbara, 1972: Lecznictwo ludowe na Kujawach. [Folk medicine in Kuy­avia]. Torun: Muzeum Etnograficzne w Toruniu. Tomicki, Ryszard, 1980: Ludowe mity o stworzeniu czlowieka. [Folk myths about the creation of man]. Etnografia Polska 24, 49–119. Tomicki, Ryszard; Tomicka, Joanna, 1975: Drzewo zycia: ludowa wizja swiata i czlowieka.[Tree of Life: APeople’s Vision oftheWorld and Man].Warszawa:LudowaSpóldzielniaWydawnicza. Wasilewski, Jerzy Slawomir, 1979: Po smierci wedrowac: szkic z zakresu etnologii swiata znaczen (II). [To Wander After Death: A Sketch on the Ethnology of the World of Mean­ings]. Teksty: teoria literatury, krytyka, interpretacja 4, 58 – 84. Wrlewska, Violetta, 2019: Slownik polskiej bajki ludowej t. 1-3. [Dictionary of Polish folk tales vol. 1-3]. Torun: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Mikolaja Kopernika Zguta, Russell, 1978: Witchcraft and Medicine in Pre-Petrine Russia. The Russian Review 37, 438–448. SOURCES 1. Data collected during project “Ethnopantry of Dobrzyn Land”. 2. “Materialy Antropologiczno-Archeologiczne i Etnograficzne” 1896 – 1919, Kraków, vol. 1–14. 3. Kolberg, Oskar, 1865-1890: Lud, jego zwyczaje, sposób zycia, mowa, podania, przyslowia, obrzedy, gusla, zabawy, piesni, muzyka i tance, Krak. 4. „Zbiór Wiadomosci do Antropologii Krajowej” 1877-1895, Kraków, vol. 1–18. ROSLINY, KOBIETY, MAGIA. POLSKI (KUJAWSKI) FOLKLOR WSPÓLCZESNY ZWIAZANY Z TRADYCJAMI ZIELARSKIMI. Sara orzechowSka Zagadnienia zwiazane z naturalnym leczeniem i uzytkowaniem roslin w kuchni orazgospodarstwiedomowymstanowiaogromnyzasób wiedzykazdejcywilizacji. Poziom tejwiedzy czesto decydowal o kierunkach i mozliwosciach rozwoju etnosu, bowiemod niej zalezala ilosc pozywienia czy mozliwosciopanowania zakaznych chorób. Swiadomosc zaleznosci ludzkiego zycia od warunków przyrodniczych, urodzaju, wykorzystania potencjalu flory, powodowala, iz kwestie te powierzano nietylko zdrowemu rozsadkowiiempirii, aletakzesilomnadprzyrodzonym– bo­gom, duchom przodków, dzialaniom magicznym. Synteza tych dwóch systemów postrzegania rzeczywistosci zaowocowala niezliczona iloscia przesadów na temat roslin, form ich wykorzystania i wierzen z nimi zwiazanych w polskim folklorze. Traktujemy je jako niematerialne dziedzictwo kulturowe, a zainteresowanie etno­botaniczna spuscizna w ciagu ostatnich lat zdaje sie nieustannie rosnac. Zapotrzebowanie na wiedze o naturalnych sposobach leczenia wiaze sie z poszukiwaniem jej w tradycyjnych praktykach medycyny ludowej, zarówno na kartach pism etnograficznych, jak i wsród osób, posiadajacych dana wiedze, która zostala im przekazana od starszego pokolenia w sposób ustny. Powyzsze zjawisko bylo przyczyna powstania projektu kulturalnego „Etnospizarnia ziemi dobrzynskiej”, podczas którego organizowane byly warsztaty o tematyce etno­botanicznej. W trakcie jego trwania przekazywalam uczestniczkom zajec wiedze z zakresu fitoterapii i etnografii i jednoczesnie pozyskiwalam od nich material folklorystyczny (opowiesci, porzekadla, przesady, zwyczaje, praktyki zwiazane z roslinami), którego poszukiwaly wsród rodziny, sasiadów i wlasnej pamieci (wiek uczestniczek byl rózny, wiele starszych kobiet siegalo pamiecia do ich dzieciecych lat i praktyk ich mam, babc). Artykul jest forma podsumowania i refleksji nad danymipozyskanymi w trakcie projektu. Zestawienie ich z informacjami zobsza­rów zajmowanych przez ludnosc polska w XVIII – XX wieku sluzy wskazaniu reliktów dawnej kultury, funkcjonujacych w swiadomosci i przekazie ustnym, a takze przykladówtransformacji tradycji. Wskazana cezura czasowa to moment w historii, gdy zaczeto gromadzic i spisywac ustne teksty folkloru wraz z ich kon­tekstem wykonawczym oraz opisywac codzienne i sakralne czynnosci chlopów slowianskich. Badania nad przestrzenia kulturowa i literatura ustna pozwalaja na ujecie specyficznego sposobu postrzegania roslin przez uczestnika kultury typu ludowego, jako syntezy wiedzy przyrodniczej i religijnosci katolickiej z wplywami magiczno-rytualnymi. Rosliny bowiem zajmowaly kluczowe miejsce nie tylko w lecznictwie, ale takze w praktykach magicznych, obrzedowych i religijnych. Pierwsza czesc tekstu jest przedstawieniem literatury przedmiotu i metod badawczych wykorzystanych w realizacji projektu, opisem zalozen projektu, trendu kulturowego, oraz opisem zielarstwa w kulturze ludowej z perspektywy antropologicznej. Istotne jest takze okreslenie statusu kobiety w spolecznosci, który predestynowal ja do zajmowania sie czynnosciami zwiazanymi z leczeniem i roslinami (z pominieciem roslin uprawnych, zbóz, które stanowily przestrzen wplywów meskich). Silnie zarysowany podzial na zajecia kobiece i meskie w Polsce utrwalany byl przez stulecia i utrzymuje sie w wielu miejscach do dzis. Wiedze, która chcialam pozyskac w tracie projektu, posiadaly glównie kobiety w podeszlym wieku. Tabu kulturowe, w którym zostaly wychowane, nie pozwalalo na rozmowy z mezczyznami na niektóre tematy, totez zaangazowanie w projekt jedynie kobiet pozwalalo na dotarcie do szerokiej gamy materialów. Jednoczesnie projekt pozwalal na zawiazanie specyficznych damskich relacji, których poszu­kiwaly uczestniczki i co niejednokrotnie podkreslaly. Analiza materialu tradycyjnego i wspólczesnego, podjeta w drugiej czesci artykulu, jest ujeciem dziedzictwa zielarskiego w kategoriach okreslonych przez Fernanda Braudela jako struktury dlugiego trwania (long dureé), co przedstawiam na przykladach poszczególnych wypowiedzi uczestników projektu, konkretnych zachowan, wierzen, powiedzen. Na podstawie zebranego materialu wyodrebniam przykladytradycyjnego myslenia, którego trwaniemoznaodnalezcwspólczesnie, transformacje pogladów dotyczacych roslin i nowych trendów w podejsciu do kultury zielarskiej w Polsce. Sara Orzechowska, MA., Ph.D. student, Academia Artium Humaniorum - Doctoral School of Humanities, Theology and Art, University of Nicolaus Copernicus in Torun, email: sara_orzechowska@o2.pl 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 161 – 178 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212409 Vecjezicne kratke folklorne oblike: primeri iz Goriških brd Marjeta Pisk, Katarina Šrimpf Vendramin Prispevek obravnava kratke folklorne oblike, zabeležene v Goriških brdih v 20. in zacetku 21. stoletja, ki jih lahko analiziramo z vidika nejezikovnih ali neeticno vezanih folklornih znacilnosti. Jezik teh folklornih oblik je mešanica narecnih oblik kontaktnih jezikov (slovenšcina, italijanšcina, delno furlanšcina). Na primerih zbranega gradiva analiziramo, v katerih zvrsteh kratkih folklornih oblik se pojavlja vecjezicnost, kakšno funkcijo ima in kako se v njih odražajo znacilnosti ozemlja. Primerjamo vire ali vzporednice v objavljenem slovenskem in italijanskem gradivu ter ga analiziramo v okviru raziskav otroškefolklorenaSlovenskem.Preucevanje dvojezicnihinvecjezicnihfolklornihoblikiz Goriških brd se osredinja na vprašanje, ali in zakaj je vecjezicnost najbolje ohranjena v kratkih folklornih oblikah in predvsem v otroški folklori. KLJUCNE BESEDE: Goriška brda, kratke folklorne oblike, jezikovno stikanje, dvoje-zicnost, vecjezikovne folklorne oblike, mejna obmocja, otroška folklora The article focuses on short folklore forms recorded in the Gorica Hills (slv. Goriška brda) in the 20th and early 21st centuries, which can be considered as non-linguistic or non-ethnically bound folklore features. The language of these folklore forms is a mixture of the dialectal forms of the contact languages (Slovene, Italian, partly Friulian). Using the examples of the collected material, we analyse in which genres of the short folklore forms multilingualism appears, what function it has and how the characteristics of the territory are reflected in them. We compare sources or parallels in published Slovenian and Italian material, and analyse the material in the context of research on literary children’s folklore in Slovenia. The study of bilingual and multilingual folklore forms from Goriška brda focuses on the question of whether and why multilingualism is best preserved in short folklore forms and especially in children’s folklore. KEYWORDS: Gorica Hills, short folklore forms, multilinguality, languages in contact, bilingualism, multilingual folklore forms, border areas, children’s folklore 1. UVOD Jezik ni le instrument za sporazumevanje, temvec je mocno prepleten s kulturo, družbo, naravnimi danostmi itd. (Vygotski 1967; Babic 2019: 21), torej z okoljem, v katerem posamezni govorec jezika živi. Kontekstualna pogojenost jezika se odraža tudi v folklor­nem gradivu obmejnih obmocij (Pisk 2018; Šrimpf Vendramin 2021), ki jih zaznamuje jezikovno mešanje in prepletanje. V teh prostorih jezik lahko povezuje ali locuje pre­bivalce, odlocitev za posamezni jezik pa odseva širše družbene in kulturne kontekste (Golež Kaucic 2020: 108), hibridne oblike – standardnih ali dialektalnih variant – jezika pa izkazujejo specificne dinamike tega prostora.1 Goriška brda2 je pokrajina ob slovensko-italijanski meji, na obrobjih katere se historicno prepletajo trije jeziki, slovenski, furlanski in italijanski. Razlicno govoreci prebivalci so do razmejitve po drugi svetovni vojni živeli v istih državnih tvorbah, zato so bili vsakodnevni odnosi med njimi obicajni ne glede na jezikovne razlike med njimi. Furlanski zemljiški zakupniki, t. i. koloni, so naseljevali proste ‘kolonije’ v Brdih, slo­venski pa med furlansko govoreco vecino; skupaj so služili v vojaških enotah, npr. v 97. tržaškemu pešpolku avstrijske armade, manj premožni so iskali delo kot hlapci in dekle pri samostojnih kmetih ne glede na jezikovno in etnicno pripadnost. Medsebojna razmerja so se na politicni ravni zacela zaostrovati v drugi polovici 19. stoletja, ko je koncept etnic­nosti postal osrednji organizacijski in mobilizacijski koncept družbe in je jezikovna meja med slovansko in romansko govorecimi etnijami postala pomembna družbena locnica. Meja med novoustanovljeno Kraljevino Italijo in avstrijsko monarhijo je po letu 1861 še dodatno zaostrila politicne napetosti med slovensko in italijansko etnicno skupnostjo v Pokneženi grofiji Goriško-Gradišcanski, kamor so Brda spadala. Na željo po javnem manifestiranju etnicne pripadnosti v Brdih je vplival tudi referendum l. 1866, po katerem je sosednja Beneška Slovenija postala del Kraljevine Italije. Ob etnizirajocih in nacionalizirajocih diskurzih, ki so po letu 1848 prežemali javne razprave v vecjem delu avstroogrskega imperija, kamor je spadalo tudi obravnavano obmocje, so sobivale nenacionalizirajoce oz. ‘vmesne’ prakse (Bjork 2008; Zahra 2010; Judson 2016; Van Ginderachter,Fox 2019). Mednje lahko uvršcamo tudi jezikovno he-terogene folklorne prakse, na primer petje v »nenacionalnem« jeziku, petje dvojezicnih pesmi ter uporabo jezikovno mešanih kratkih folklornih oblik. Josip Tominšek, tajnik Odbora za slovensko narodno pesem v okviru akcije Das Volkslied in Österreich, je leta 1911 porocal, da se ljudstvo na Goriškem »zelo oklepa nedomacih pesmi« (Murko 1929: 42), nad cimer so se pritoževali tudi casopisni dopi­sniki, ki so npr. porocali, da briška dekleta pojejo pesmi, ki so »furlansko-italijanska godlja brez barve in okusa« (Soca, 16. 9. 1875). Poleg ljubezenskih pesmi, v katerih so eroticne teme pogosto zakrili z uporabo nenacionalnega jezika, da bi jih otroci ne razu­meli (Pisk 2018, 2020), so se druge pesmi v nenacionalnem jeziku širile predvsem med vojaki in pozneje, ko so Brda po prvi svetovni vojni pripadla Kraljevini Italiji, v šolah z italijanskim ucnim jezikom. Jezikovna heterogenost obravnavanega obmocja se kaže tudi v nekaterih kratkih fol-klornih formah, zbranih v Goriških brdih, v katerih se prepletajo kombinacije dialektnih oblik furlanskega, italijanskega in slovenskega jezika z dialektno prevzetimi besedami in njihovimimodifikacijami.Pregledgradivajepokazal,dasejezikovnaheterogenostnajbolj kaže v otroških kratkih folklornih formah, in sicer v zbadljivkah, izštevankah, obrazcih iger 1 Raziskava je nastala v okviru projekta Pesemski odsevi medkulturnega sobivanja (J6-9369) in programov Dedišcina na obrobjih: novi pogledi na dedišcino in identiteto znotraj in onkraj nacionalnega (P5-0408) in Etnološke in folkloristicne raziskave kulturnih prostorov in praks (P6-0088), ki jih sofinancira Javna agencija za raziskovalno dejavnost Republike Slovenije (ARSS). 2 Goriška brda ali krajše Brda so v furlanšcini poimenovana Cuei, italijansko pa Collio. in uspavankah. Te kratke folklorne forme so navadno ritmizirane, v ospredju pa ni njihova pripovedna plat, pac pa funkcija, npr. uspavanje, izštevanje, zbadanje, igra itd., a kljub temu jasno odsevajo vecjezicnost ljudi, ki so v preteklosti živeli na obravnavanem obmocju (Makuc 2011; 2021) in ki se do neke mere ohranja še danes (Novak Lukanovic 2011). Prispevek se tako osredinja na vecjezicne kratke folklorne oblike, zapisane predvsem kot del otroške folklore v Goriških brdih od prve polovice 20. stoletja pa do zadnjih let. Na primerih arhivskega in objavljenega gradiva analizirava, v katerih žanrih kratkih folklornih oblik se pojavlja vecjezicnost, kakšna je njegova funkcija in kako se v otro­ški folklori zrcalijo znacilnosti obmocja. Analiziranim primerom skušava najti vire oz. vzporednice v objavljenem slovenskem in italijanskem gradivu obmejnega obmocja, hkrati pa gradivo umešcava tudi v raziskave otroške slovstvene folklore na Slovenskem. V središce raziskave dvo- ali vecjezicnih folklornih oblik iz Goriških brd postavljava vprašanje, ce in zakaj se je vecjezicnost najbolj ohranila v kratkih folklornih oblikah in še posebej v otroški folklori. 2. OTROŠKA SLOVSTVENA FOLKLORA V GORIŠKIH BRDIH Kljub navidezni spregledanosti raziskav otrok in otroštva ter otroških folklornih oblik, raziskovalci v slovenskem prostoru tega vprašanja niso zanemarjali (Turk Niskac 2020: 29–30). Nekatera dela se eksplicitno opirajo na otroke in njihovo kulturo (npr. Kuret 1959; Puhar 2004; Turk Niskac 2020), v drugih so tej tematiki posvecena le posamezna poglavja ali pa o življenju otrok beremo zgolj med vrsticami. Etnologinja Mojca Ramšak je ugotavljala, da so raziskovalci najraje preucevali otroško ustno in materialno izrocilo skozi analizo razlicnih virov (npr. dnevnikov, avtobiografij, etnografskih porocilih, fotografij itn.), ki pa so jih vecinoma napisali ali uredili odrasli (2007: 33). Folkloristi so bili med prvimi, takoj za zbiralci »ljudskega blaga« iz prve polovice 20. stoletja, ki so se zavedali, da je treba podatke pridobivati tudi od otrok samih (Turk Niskac 2020: 29–30). S tem so jim dali veljavo aktivnih subjektov, ki »sami odlocajo in odlocijo, kaj ostane v mreži njihovega zanimanja in kaj pade skoznjo v skorajšnjo pozabo« (Stanonik 1984: 86). Tako je že od osemdesetih let 20. stoletja Marija Stanonik s pomocjo šolskih glasil, krožkov, terenskega dela otrok ter poljudnoznanstvenih revij za otroke (npr. Pio­nir, Pionirski list) zbirala razlicne žanre slovstvene folklore, od povedk, krajevnih imen, anekdot, pesmic, izštevank, do zbadljivk ipd., ter jih urejene in s komentarji objavljala (npr. Stanonik 1995). Istocasno je spodbujala in mentorirala tudi številne zbiratelje otroške slovstvene folklore (npr. Gašperin 1990, 1998, po Ramšak 2007: 36). V Goriških brdih se je zbiranje otroške folklore zacelo dokaj zgodaj. Že pred drugo svetovno vojno, ko je to obmocje spadalo pod Kraljevino Italijo, je Milko Maticetov spodbudil zbiranje folklornega gradiva med svojimi sošolci in sogojenci goriškega semenišca (Pisk 2021). V ohranjenih zvezkih prepisov prinesenega mu gradiva so tudi zapisi iz Goriških brd. Izmed dijakov in študentov iz Brd, ki so Maticetovemu predali folklorna izrocila svojih rodnih krajev, sta mlada Ladko Lenardic in Albin Sirk prispevala tudi nekaj kratkih folklornih oblik, vendar iz Maticetovih zvezkov ni jasno razvidno, ali sta mu folklorne obrazce povedala iz lastne izkušnje ali sta jih zapisala med svojimi rojaki (glej Arhivski vir 1). Zbiranje folklornega gradiva se je nadaljevalo s sistematicnima akcijama t. i. Orlovih ekip leta 1953 in ekipe Goriškega muzeja leta 1958. V osemdesetih letih 20. stoletja so pod vplivom Janeza Dolenca, profesorja na tolminskem uciteljišcu in strastnega zbiratelja slovstvene folklore, na Osnovni šoli Briško-beneški odred Dobrovo ucitelji zaceli z zbira­teljsko akcijo briške folklore (vec o Dolencevem delu med dijaki v Ivancic Kutin 2017: 74; 2018a). Njihov cilj je bil zbrati cim vec ljudskih pesmi, ki so se pele med prebivalci Brd, pa tudi drugih oblik folklore, npr. otroške igre, izštevanke, zbadljivke, povedke, spomine in drugo »ljudsko blago«. Zbiranje je potekalo tako, da so ucenci med svojimi sorodniki in sosedi zapisali pesmi, ucitelji pa so gradivo uredili za objavo v ciklostirani publikaciji Drobci iz kulturne dedišcine Goriških brd(Sirk idr. 1980), vse objavljene pesmi pa so bile uvršcene tudi v katalog Glasbenonarodopisnega inštituta ZRC SAZU (GNI R 22.208–GNI R 22.248). Pozneje so izdali še Otroške igrice in preštevanke (Sirk in Stres b. l.), ki so uvršcene v katalog GNI R pod številke 22.249–22.292 (Pisk 2018: 117). Zbiranja so se nekajkrat lotili tudi v novem tisocletju, gradivo pa objavili v priložnostnih publikacijah, kot sta Življenje v Brdih nekoc (Kobal idr. 2003) in Kulturna dedišcina Brd (Markocic idr. 2019). Že omenjeni iniciator zanimanja za folklorne oblike med ucitelji na dobrovski šoli, Janez Dolenc, je leta 1999 objavil popis in drobce gradiva, ki so ga pod njegovim vodstvom zbrali dijaki iz Brd (Dolenc 1999). Nekaj gradiva, predvsem izštevanke in zba­dljivke, povzetega tudi po šolskih raziskovalnih akcijah, pa je leta 2009 objavila upokojena uciteljica Darinka Sirk v knjigi Ivanov venec. Gradivo, ki se navezuje na širše obravnavano obmocje, jebilo zbrano in izdano tudiv okviru projektaLjudsko izrocilo v besediin glasbi, sofinanciranega znotraj programa Interreg IIIA Italija-Slovenija (2000–2006). 3. ANALIZA VECJEZICNIH KRATKIH FOLKLORNIH OBLIK Predhodne raziskave so se posvecale pesemskemu izrocilu obravnavanega prostora (Pisk 2018, 2020), zato se v tej raziskavi osredinjava na druge folklorne oblike. Ob pregledu virov se je pokazalo, da se je tudi v otroških folklornih oblikah izražala jezikovna hete­rogenost obmocja, zato sva pregledali zgoraj navedene vire ter nekaj dodatnih virov iz širšegaraziskovalnegaobmocja.Evidentiranihjebilopribližno50enotvecjezicnih kratkih folklornih form. Ceprav krožijo med odraslimi in otroki razlicne folklorne forme, pa se je ob pregledu dostopnega gradiva, ki obravnava otroške folklorne obrazce, pokazalo, da se vecjezicnost najveckrat pojavlja med izštevankami, obrazci iger in uspavankami, torej med kratkimi folklornimi oblikami, katerih primarna funkcija je sicer igra. To ni nenavadno, saj je otroška folklora pogosto relikt drugih folklornih oblik oz. se v njej znajdejo košcki pozabljenih besedil, ki se ohranijo samo v delckih izven izvorne funkcije in konteksta (Klobcar 2009; Ivancic Kutin 2018b: 212). Omenjenim in nekaterim drugim kratkim otroškim folklornim formam je skupna rima, saj njen zven in ritem še posebej privlacita majhne otroke. Rima ima zato v otroški folklori razlicne funkcije; tako se razlikujejo rime v uspavankah, besednih igrah, ki jih odrasli govorijo otrokom (npr. Križ kraž Kralj Matjaž, Dici dici …), in v rimanih besedilih, ki krožijo med otroki samimi. Otroci uživajo v ponavljanju besed, v vzorcih rime in privlacnem ritmu, ki jih spodbudi, da zacnejo recitirati rime s starši ter jih pozneje, ko so pripravljeni, pripovedujejo sami (Tucker 2019: 176; Freeman Davidson 2006: 35–36). Rime so torej pogost jezikovni element otroške slovstvene folklore, ki se pojavljajo v razlicnih oblikah in funkcijah: nekatere so del besedil iger, izštevank, zbadljivk ali kratkih besedil, v drugih je edini namen zabava. Rima pa je tudi tisti jezikovni element, ki je med najbolj znacilnimi za vecjezicne oblike zbranih primerov otroške folklore. Otroci tako uporabljajo kratke folklorne oblike, v katerih je mogoce zaznati preplet vec jezikov, v našem primeru slovenskega in italijanskega, ceprav morda drugega jezika sicer ne znajo, razumejo in ne uporabljajo. Tako so ti jezikovni elementi pogosto uporabljeni zgolj zaradi ritma in rime oz. kot ostanki izvornih oblik. Zbrano gradivo kljub temu pritrjuje ugotovitvam etnografskih raziskav številnih antropologov, da so otroci opazovalci, imitatorji, igralci in pomocniki, ki avtonomno in samovodeno prevzemajo bit kulture (Turk Niskac 2020: 27). Po ugotovitvah Camille Morelli (2011) so otroci nagnjeni k spontanemu, aktivnemu, prakticnemu ucenju, ki jim služi predvsem pri ucenju lastne kulture, vendar ne toliko od staršev kot od drugih otrok, zato se v njihovi folklori ohranjajo tudi delcki, ki niso povsem razumljivi. Prek analize razumevanja sveta otroka lahko pridobimo vpogled v širše razumevanje kulture in družbe (Briggs 1992; Turk Niskac 2020: 25). Tako lahko odsev heterogenih jezikovnih praks Goriških brd opazujemo tudi prek folklornih oblik, ki si jih otroci pripovedujejo oziroma jih uporabljajo med igro, torej prek izštevank, zbadljivk, besednih obrazcev iger in uspavank, saj le te pricajo o otrokovem dojemanju sveta in ucenju kulture okolice. 3. 1. izštevanke Med zbranimi vecjezicnimi folklornimi enotami iz Goriških brd so najštevilcneje za­stopane izštevanke. To so kratka, vecinoma ritmizirana besedila, katerih funkcija je izbrati nekoga, ki bo imel vodilno vlogo v naslednji igri (npr. lovljenje, skrivanje ali kaj podobnega). Nekateri raziskovalci, še posebej v 19. stoletju, so izvor izštevank povezo­vali z žrtvenimi obredi, in sicer naj bi služile za izbor žrtev (Tucker 2019: 175). Tako naj bi bile izštevanke »carobne forme, ki se v casu, ko so opravljale primarno funkcijo, zaradi obrednega pomena niso smele spreminjati. A to prvotno funkcijo so izgubile, prenašanje od ust do ust pa je omogocalo dokaj svobodno spreminjanje teksta« (Knific 2006: 38). Folkloristi pa so že v 20. stoletju pomen in smisel izštevank prepoznavali v družbeni dinamiki otrok in diskurzu igre (Tucker 2019: 175). Toda izštevanke so ohranile relativno stabilnost besedilne strukture, saj bi spreminjanje besedila vodilo do tega, da bi bila izbrana druga oseba. Stalna struktura je pomembna tudi zaradi priklica besedila, saj se otroci, še posebej predšolski, zanašajo na to stalnost, ki jim pomaga pri zapomnitvi besedila (Rubin idr. 1997: 421). Analiza rim angleških izštevank je pokazala, da dobesednega priklica besedila ni mogoce pridobiti s pomnjenjem na pamet (Rubin 1995), ampak pripomnjenju pomagajo pravila/strukturažanra, kiimajo vecomejitev.3 To je s shemo usmerjeni priklic (angl. schema-driven recall), pri katerem shema vkljucuje tudi ritmicno in poeticno strukturo ter pomen. Poetika izštevank je subtilna in izcrpna, vecina besed vsebuje ponavljajoc se zvocni vzorec, ki se doseže s ponavljanjem besed, rim ali aliteracije, vse besede, ki niso vkljucene v pomen, pa so vkljucene v enega od teh pesniških postopkov (Rubin idr. 1997: 421). Jezikoslovec John Widdowson je to poimenoval alternativni »trije R« otroške slovstvene folklore – rima, ritem in ponavlja­nje (angl. rhyme, rhythm and repetition).4 Raziskava ameriškega folklorista Kennetha S. Goldsteinajepokazala,daotroci,kljubrelativnistalnostižanra,znamenomizbiretistega, ki ga želijo, prilagajajo sicer ustaljena besedila, tako da dodajajo ponovitve, nove besede, zavlacujejo izgovorjavo itn. (Goldstein 1971; Tucker 2008: 27). Sicer pa se spremembe in variacije besedil najpogosteje pojavijo znotraj rim na nacin, ki ohranja rimo, ali tam, kjer ne kršijo omejitev (Rubin idr. 1997: 422). V vecini izštevank sta ritem in rima, torej zvocna podoba, pomembnejši od pomena, zaradi cesar imajo lahko mnogo besedilnih variant, tudi takih, ki vkljucujejo tujejezicne izraze. Vsi opisani elementi se kažejo tudi v zbranem gradivu. V izštevankah iz Brd se pre­pletajo predvsem elementi lokalnih govorov slovenskega in italijanskega jezika, pa tudi onomatopejske in nesemanticne besedne oblike, ki se pojavljajo predvsem zaradi rime. Težko razumljivo mešanico italijanskih in slovenskih, pa tudi furlanskih narecnih besed je bilo težko zapisati. V vecini primerov so zapisovalci neslovenske besede zapisovali foneticno na razlicne poenostavljene nacine, v skladu z njihovo usposobljenostjo. Obravnavane izštevanke, ki so sestavljene iz prvin vec jezikov, sva glede na foneticno sorodnost uvodnih formul in ritmicne strukture razdelili v tipe z vec variantami. 3.1.1 Tip Antele bantele Najvec variant ima tip s stalnim uvodnim besedilom Antele bantele pepere oz. z njegovimi manjšimi zvocnimi variantami. 3.1.1.1 Antele bantele / pepele / venti kvatro / venti tre / ara bara specarija / venti kvatro / venti vija. (Kobal idr. 2003) 3.1.1.2. Engele bengele peperč, / vince quatro, vince tre, / eris beris špecerija, / vija vaja mularija. (Šmartno) (Sirk 2009: 184) 3.1.1.3. Angelebangelepepere/vincekvatro vincetre/eris beris špecarija/vijavaja mularija. (Imenje) (Sirk idr. b. l.: št. 42) 3 Raziskava angleških izštevank je pokazala, da obstajajo omejitve v njihovi variabilnosti z namenom, da si jih otroci lažje zapomnijo ter da se do neke mere ohranja pravicen izbor, kateremu so izštevanke namenjene. Spremembe besedila izštevank se tako najveckrat pojavljajo znotraj rime na nacin, ki ohranja rimo ali na drugih mestih, kjer ne kršijo drugih omejitev. Sicer pa so raziskovalci ugotavljali, da ima žanr shemo, ki vkljucuje vsaj ponovitev, rimo, aliteracije, obliko štirivrsticnice, vkljucevanje nesmiselnih besede za celotno rimo ali celo vrstico ter koncno stalno besedilo formulo (Rubin idr. 1997). 4 https://www.bl.uk/playtimes/articles/counting-out-games#. 3.1.1.4. Angele, bangele pepere, / vince, kvatre, vince tre, / eris, beris špecerija / vija vaja mularija. (Dolenc 1999: 419) 3.1.1.5 Angule bangule, / vendi Roma, / ke sonjava la korona, / la korona vinci tre, / ke sonjava venti tre. (Sirk 2009: 182) 3.1.1.6. Ara bara ripa re / vince kvatro vince tre / eri šperi špecarija / vija vaja la mularija. (Imenje) (Sirk idr. b. l.: št. 32) 3.1.1.7. Ara bere ripare, / vince quatro, vince tre, / eri šperi špicerija, / vija vaja la mularija. (Kožbana) (Sirk 2009: 184) Variante 3.1.1.1 do 3.1.1.5 so modifikacije izštevanke, zapisane v italijanskem jeziku npr. v Fojdi/Faedis: Andolo bandolo vien di Roma / costodi la mia corona / la corona del re/chesonava ventitré/ventitrédispesiaria /ciapelaemarcela via. (Ciceri in D'Orlandi 1960: 16; podobno Gri 1990: 119). V vecini variant, z izjemo 3.1.1.5, ki izštevalnega dela nima, je bila zakljucna izštevalna formula v italijanšcini zamenjana s slovensko »vija vaja mularija«. Ob relativno stabilnem uvodnem delu je zakljucni del najbolj podvržen podomacenju, saj mora biti funkcija izštevanja razumljiva vsem udeleženim. Varianti 3.1.1.6 in 3.1.1.7 sta uvodni vrstici povzeli po varianti istega tipa italijanske izštevanke, zapisane npr. v Poulétu/Paulęt/Povoletto, katere zacetek se glasi: Are bare / vin di Rome … (Ciceri 1960: 15, podobno tudi Mirmina 1960: 21). Izštevanke s podobno uvodno vrstico, vendar povsem drugacnim nadaljevanjem, so bile zapisane tudi zunaj obravnavanega obmocja (npr. Gašperin 1988: 37, 43), kar nakazuje na razširjenost uvodne formule Angele bangele (Engule bengule) tako na slovenskem ozemlju kot sorodne Aneghe Taneghe na italijansko govorecem ozemlju. Iz kontekstualnih zapisov o informatorjih, objavljenih v zgoraj navedenih furlanskih in italijanskih revijah, je razvidno, da so bile te izštevanke precej razširjene vsaj od konca 19. stoletja dalje. 3.1.2 Tip Angele pangele perkurcin Podobna foneticna zacetna formula je v izštevankah tipa Angele pangele perkurcin, katerih nadaljevanje pa se od prej navedenega tipa razlikuje. 3.1.2.1 Angeli pangeli / pirkucin / cici bici / A.mperin / dula vila / vajdi spaka ..n. (Arhivski vir 2, str. 72) 3.1.2.2 Angele, pangele, perkurcin / cici bici temperin / Jera, Spaka, Aula / pojdi ven. (Kojsko) (Arhivski vir 1, št. 223, str. 84). 3.1.2.3 Angele pangele perkucici / cici bici tampurici / cika caka / .mies b.raka / tuna vuna / r.k u šp.k. (Kojsko) (Arhivski vir 1, št. 226, str. 85) 3.1.2.4 Angele pangele / pirkucincici bin / cika caka / vmes koraka / tume vuna/ r.k u šp.k. (Na Kalehih, Kojsko) (Arhivski vir 1, št. 422, str. 152) Variante, ki so bile zapisane vecinoma v Kojskem, so v osrednjem delu sorodne izštevanki, zapisani v Vidmu/Udine: Cici bici temperěn / ciche ciachemi sbarache / an te vile nomi spache / fori e cerca. (Ciceri in D'Orlandi 1960: 15), ki je bila v prvi polovici 20. stoletja popularna tudi na širšem italijanskem podrocju, npr. v Beneciji/ Basso Veneto.5 Po zapisih Ivana Kokošarja, skladatelja in zbiratelja pesemskega izrocila goriške dežele, so to izštevanko uporabljali pri igri »toc«. Otroci so se postavili v krog in ob tapkanju po dlaneh recitirali izštevanko, preden pa je bila izrecena njena zadnja izšte­valna beseda, so se razkropili v teku, otrok, ki ni uspel predati »toca« naprej, pa je lovil (Arhivski vir 3, št. 673). 3.1.3 Tip Aj baj kome staj V primeru izštevanke Aj baj kome staj, katere zacetek ritmicno spominja na v širšem slovenskem prostoru znano izštevanko An ban pet podgan (npr. Knific 2006: 38), gre za foneticno modificirano italijansko izštevanko. Podobno kot v italijanskih izštevankah, v katerih je osnovni pomen besed podrejen rimi, ritmu in funkciji, tudi obravnavana izštevanka, ki se sicer zacne z italijansko vljudnostno frazo »Come stai?« (slv. Kako si?), vsebuje le malo pomenskih besed (Cantarutti 1956: 28). Modifikacije in medjezikovna prepletanja so najbolj vidna v zakljucnem delu, v katerem se stalne izštevalne formule lahko smiselno zamenjujejo. 3.1.3.1. Aj baj kome staj, / ije bije kompanije, / cimu rakum tikum takum, / aj baje ej bumf. (Sirk 2009: 182) 3.1.3.2 Aj baj, kome staj? / Ija bija, kompanija. / Ciribakul, tikul takul. / Vija, vaja, ven. (Kobal idr. 2003) 3.1.3. 3 Aj baj kome staj / ije bije kompanije / cimu raku tike taku / aj bej ej bumf. (Sirk idr. b. l.: št. 25) 3.1.3. 4 An baj / kome staj? / Ari mari / muš ti ven. (Markocic idr. 2019) Primera 3.1.3.1 in 3.1.3.3 neposredno izhajata iz italijanske izštevanke, razširjene v sosednji Furlaniji Julijski krajini, npr. Ai bai / come stai, / tie mie / compagnie, / sami­raco / tico taco, / ai bai / buf (Cantarutti 1956: 28), ki pa je bila v nespremenjeni obliki zapisana tudi v Ankaranu (Gašperin 1988: 33). Varianta 3.1.3.2 je v zakljucku prevzela splošno slovensko izštevalno formulo »vija, vaja, ven«. Variante s splošno znanim Conte, tiritere e filastrocche del territorio del Basso Veneto, anni “30–50”. https://issuu.com/emozionando/ docs/pite_pite_coche_tiritere__filastrocche_e_tradizion slovenskim zakljuckom »Vija, vaja, ven« lahko razumemo kot najmlajšo fazo razvoja oz. kot kontaminacijo starejšega lokalnega izrocila s splošno slovenskim, priucenim skozi izobraževalni proces ali razlicne medije. Podobno, tj. jasno izštevalno funkcijo, ima tudi slovenski zakljucek primera 3.1.3.4, ki je sicer krajša in modificirana oblika druge variante navedene izštevanke, ki se v italijanšcini glasi: Ai bai / tu mi stai / tie mie / compagnie / San Miracco / ticco-tacco / ai bai bin buf / ari mari mus.6 3.1.4 Tip Ana bana V naslednjih izštevankah se pojavlja uvodna formula, znana tudi v izštevankah iz furlansko-italijanskega prostora, npr. Ane bane! tiche tane / sie mie / compagnie / uz buz! laudi struz. (Querzola 1991: 25). 3.1.4.1 Ana bana / tuta bana / v prvi klopici sedi / ima torbico pri sebi / pojdi ven ti! (Sirk idr. b. l.: št. 4) 3.1.4.2 Ana bana dindarana / štruklja kuha dindaranen / bana ti pa pojdi ven. (Sirk idr. b. l.: št. 8) 3.1.4.3 Ana bana, tuta bana / erne ša, erne va / štirka fajfa trla ton / tista baba pojde von! (Sirk idr. b. l.: št. 27) 3.1.5 Druge vecjezicne izštevanke V sledecih izštevankah, zapisanih v Brdih, prepoznamo nekatere italijanske ali furlan­ske besede ali besedne zveze, vendar zaenkrat neposredni izvor v dolocenih italijanskih ali furlanskih izštevankah ni bil prepoznan. 3.1.5.1 On tron tronta si, / si vi kompari, / al baraka tika taka, / vija vaja ven. (Sirk 2009: 183) 3.1.5.2 Ine one u / kapitale u / cika bela u / trimf tram trum. (Sirk idr. b. l.: št. 30) 3.1.5.3 Oneri doneri / krispa le / si kipa kapa / šubla sabla / Jermen termen / Hrast. (Arhivski vir 2; str. 21) Zapisanapajebilatudiizštevanka,kijevsebovalasestavineiztreh jezikov:razširjeno nemško uvodno formulo »Ajns, cvaj, draj« (»En, dva, tri«), slovensko osrednje besedilo in italijanski izraz za placilno sredstvo »cinkve šoldi« (»pet denarjev«). Besedilo izštevanke odseva podobe življenja v habsburški monarhiji, ko se je v Gorici in celotni deželi poleg italijanskega in slovenskega jezika uporabljal tudi uradni jezik nemšcina. https://www.filastrocche.it/nostalgici/cont/aibai.htm. 3.1.5.4 Ajns cvaj draj, / po cesti gre tramvaj. / Smo dali cinkve šoldi / ne dajo vec nazaj. (Markocic in drugi 2019) 3.2. zBadljivke Zbadljivkeso folklorne oblike, katerih primarninamen je zbadanje, zasmehovanje, provo­kacija ali norcevanje iz duhovnih, socialnih in družbenih pomanjkljivosti posameznikov. Zbadljivke se sicer lahko pojavijo v vec razlicnih oblikah. Po dolžini so lahko daljše ali krajše, po jezikovni plati pa so lahko v prozni ali ritmizirani obliki (npr. šaljive zgodbe, šale, daljše in krajše šaljive pesmi, kratke ritmizirane paremioške enote in vzdevki) (Šrimpf Vendramin 2019; 2021). Zbadljivke so na Slovenskem zbirali in analizirali predvsem ob raziskovanju otroške folklore (glej Merhar 1956: 108; Knific 2006: 38; Stanonik 1999: 94; 2006: 259), vendar zbadljivke niso (bile) izkljucna domena otrok. Kljub temu dasezbadljivkepooblikiindolžinimocnorazlikujejo, pajevsemskupna funkcija zbadanja, smešenja, zasmehovanja, lahko tudi žaljenja ali zmerjanja. Nekatere zbadljivke, ki se navezujejo na medsosedske odnose ali na dolocene znacilnosti ali oseb­nostne lastnosti prebivalcev, kot npr. »mešcani, hudobni psi, lažnivci, jokci« (Tschinkel 2004:187-188),so(bile)delotroškefolklore,asobilinjihoviavtorjiingovorcivecinoma odrasli (Terseglav 1990: XIV), otroci pa so jih le ponavljali (Šrimpf Vendramin 2019). Podobno smemo domnevati tudi za kratke oblike zbadljivk, zapisanih v Brdih: 3.2.1 Italjan madža pan, mandža repa, dopo krepa.7 3.2.2 Ai un bel sorizo, ma nim.š ne paštu ne rizo. (Zuljan Kumer 1999: 45) 3.2.3 Polenta kontenta / formadi per grata / Pina ricota / Bepi soldat. (Markocic in drugi 2019) 3.2.4 Tona bona / cul de fjar / la prasica / sub brjar / la prasica / šcampafur / Tona bona / kur da ur. (Sirk in drugi b. l.; št. 37) Zbadljivki 3.2.1 in 3.2.2 bi lahko sodili v polje politicne satire: prva odraža obdobje mednacionalnih sporov med Slovenci in Italijani za dosego politicnih pravic, druga pa sega v cas po drugi svetovni vojni, ko so se uveljavljala dolocila pariške mirovne pogodbe in je bil na slovenski strani uveden vojaški nadzor Jugoslovanske ljudske armade nad novo zacrtano mejo. Ta zbadljivka, ki je izražala nezadovoljstvo dela lokalnega prebivalstva, je bila naslovljena predvsem na neslovensko govorece predstavnike nove oblasti, ki niso razumeli lokalnega govora, pomešanega z italijanskimi frazami.8 Zbadljivka 3.2.4 pa sodi v tip zbadljivk osebne narave, ki z vkljucevanjem furlanskih izrazov zakriva zbadanje posameznih deklet in njihovega domnevnega pocetja med plesom na brjajih.9 7 Povedal Branko Marušic, 2020. Prost prevod: »Italijan je kruh, je repo, potem pa crkne.« 8 Intervju Golo Brdo; 10. 11. 2007. Prost prevod: »Imaš lep nasmeh, ampak nimaš ne testenin ne riža.« 9 Leseno plesišce, ki so ga Brici vecinoma najemali v Furlaniji. 3.3. BeSedilni oBrazci iGer Folklorni besedilni obrazci so tudi del iger, kot na primer iger lovljenja ali tekanja (npr. Kdo seboji crnegamoža?, gnilo jajceipd.). Tako so bilivecjezicnifolklorniobrazci zabeleženi tudi kot del nekaterihotroških iger, ki so se jih igrali otroci v Goriških brdih. Ena od takšnih iger je igra korakanja, kjer dva otroka, ki se držita tesno skupaj, korakata in ob tem izgovarjata besedilni obrazec, ob koncu besedila pa spreminjata smer. 3.3.1 Sipuli si / sipuki sa / Anca špara / džiro di kva. (Sirk idr b. l.: št. 45) 3.3.2 Sipuku si, / supuku sa, / vojna špada, džiro di qua. (Sirk 2009: 183) Primera domnevno izhajata iz plesov na priljubljeno skladbo Magic Moments10, ki je po izidu leta 1957 v italijanski razlicici postala popularna med briškimi mladimi plesalci.11 Ta je vkljucevala tudi parlando Sun chi de per mě / in d’la vasca da bagn / cul bigul a gala. // Me giri de chi, / me giri de la, / (ahi!) me schisci una bala, ki se je v okrajšani in modificirani obliki ohranil kot osnova otroške igre. Drugo ohranjeno besedilo igre, ki po uvodu spominja na znano rajalno igro Ringa ringa raja, ki pa v nadaljevanju preide v lokalne govore italijanskega jezika: Ringa ringa raja / Martina šu la paja / paja pajuca / Peter kukuluca.(Arhivski vir 2; str. 21) Tukaj gre najverjetneje za prilagojeno besedilo za otroško igro, ki so jo otroci igrali tako, da je glavni igralec v svojo pest ob koncu besedila igre poskušal ujeti cim vec kazalcev drugih otrok, ki niso uspeli pravocasno umakniti prsta (Budal 1950: 360). Igra je bila znana tudi med otroki v okolici Gorice, kjer so ob izvajanju govorili sledece besede: »Ghiri, ghiri, gaia / San Martin di paia (paglia) / paia, paiuzza (paglia, pagliuzza) / ciappi la Mariuzza!« (Budal 1950: 360). 3.4. uSPavanke Katarina Juvancic, ki se je v slovenskem prostoru prva poglobljeno ukvarjala s preuce­vanjemuspavank,jeugotavljala, dagrepritemfolklornemžanru za»'prave' pesmialipa za improvizirano skladanje besedil, napevov, ritmicnih verzov ali melodicnega govora, ki nastaja v danem položaju« (Juvancic 2009: 277). Kot uspavanka je tako lahko razumljena vsaka pesem oziroma glasba, ki je uporabljena v namen pomirjanja in uspavanja otroka (aliodraslega). V tanamen so sein sešeuporabljajo zelo raznovrstnepesmi:tako ljudske (npr. balade, ljubezenske pesmi, žalostinke, ženitne pesmi, celo napitnice) ali popularne pesmi (domace ali tuje) kakor tudi instrumentalna glasba (Juvancic 2009: 277). Ker je glavna funkcija uspavank to, da otrok cimprej zaspi, sta pomembna predvsem njena 10 Glasba Burt Bacharach, besedilo Hal David, izvajalec Perry Como. 11 Informacije pridobljene med terensko raziskavo Marjete Pisk v Goriških brdih (2007). monotona ritem in melodija. Semanticna plat je v uspavankah drugotna, zato so pogosto uporabljene stalne nesemanticne fraze, npr. nina nana, aja tutaja ipd. Uspavanke pa tako, kot ostali folklorni žanri, ki jih spoznavamo v otroštvu, odsevajo med drugim tudi proces inkulturacije v skupnost, v katero smo rojeni. Tako jih lahko razumemo kot »kulturni kod, napolnjen s »sekundarnimi« konotacijami in pomeni (spol­nimi, ideološkimi, politicnimi, zgodovinskimi ipd.), odvisno od okolišcin, v katerih jih dokumentiramo, in okolišcin posameznikovega življenja (Juvancic 2009: 281). Zato ne preseneca, da so se v Brdih pele tudi povsem italijanske uspavanke. 3.4.1 Nina nana / levin pinpin / e la mama / qua vicin. / Il papa že anda lontan / ma non viene fin doman. (Arhivski vir 2) 3.4.2Din don kampanon,/kjesikosu, kjesijow?/Dolp.r tetiTinci/in botriKaterinci,/ kjer belo moko sejejo, / velike hlebe delajo. / Je p.ršla botra mati, / me je tela poko­pati. (Devetak 2007: 155) 3.4.3 »Din, don, šjor beron! / Ki si kuosu, ki si jaw?« / »Štir g.lobce s.m pojaw. / J. pršla buotra mati, / m je tiela oklofati. / S.m teku po ni ciesti, / so me tieli p.si sniesti, / s.m skocnu cez en zid, / s.m najdu u karti bonc z.vit.« (Devetak 2007: 156) Uspavanka 3.4.1, ki jo je etnomuzikolog Radoslav Hrovatin med terenskim raziskovanjem t. i. Orlovih ekip v Brdih poleti 1953 zapisal (z manjšimi nedoslednostmi) v italijanskem pravopisu, v italijansko besedilo pomensko smiselno vkljuci slovenski izraz 'že'. Modifikacija je verjetno nastala zaradipozabljenega aline povsemrazumljivega italijanskega besedilain potrebe, da se zgodba smiselno nadaljuje. Podobna uspavanka, ki ima z zapisano verjetno skupni vir, je bila znana v širšem italijansko govorecem okolju, tudi v Dalmaciji.12 Varianti 3.4.2 in 3.4.3 sta nastopali v vec funkcijah, npr. kot uspavanki, otroški rimi ter oponašanje zvonov in sta v mnogoterih variantah znani v slovenskih, furlanskih in italijanskih dialektih širšega obravnavanegaobmocja (npr. Cararra 1935: 196; Querzola 1991: 120). Preprosta in poudarjena ritmicna shema omogoca, da besedilo, ki se v vseh jezikovnih variantah zacne podobno »Din-dňn, campanňn«, v nadaljevanju variira v številne variante, ki pa v primeru, ko se pojejo kot uspavanke, le malo modificirajo enostavno melodijo. 4. SKLEPNE UGOTOVITVE – OTROŠKA FOLKLORA KOT ODSEV (VECJEZICNEGA) SVETA Analiza kratkih folklornih oblik s sestavinami vec jezikov, zapisanih v Goriških brdih, je pokazala, dasenajvecod njih uvršcamed otroško folkloro. To nepreseneca, sajsedolocene 12 Nanŕ, nanŕ, nanetta / mi mama no la ghé / la xe a messa. / Nanŕ, nanŕ, nanetta / papŕ le xe lontan / nanŕ, nanetta. / Nana mio bambin / tu sei piccinin / nana mio bambin. (Dalmacija. Zapisal Giorgio Nataletti, harmo­niziral Antonio Ferdinandi), https://dinamico2.unibg.it/mabg/ninnananna1934.pdf folklorne zvrsti in oblike pogosto znajdejo med otroško folkloro na zadnji stopnji, preden izginejo iz kolektivnega spomina in rabe. Izumiranje dolocene šege ali izgubljanje ritual-nega pomena vodi namrec v tipološka prehajanja (Klobcar 2009: 178), zato so nekatere oblike folklore dejansko sodobne modifikacije preteklih oblik in žanrov. Poleg tega so te folklorne oblike, ce so se ohranile med otroki, raziskovalci uvrstili v polje otroške folklore (prim. Ramovš 1991) ne glede na njihovo siceršnjo pojavnost in razširjenost. Tako kot jezik je tudi folklora ogledalo kulture in vkljucuje v razlicnih oblikah, tudi v slovstveni folklori, drobce verovanj, prepricanj, obredov, družbenih struktur in teh­nologij ter opise življenja posamezne družbene skupine (Bascom 1954: 337). Folklora odraža nacine življenja skupnosti, otroška folklora pa odraža tudi družbo odraslih, njihove skrbi, pomembne dogodke lokalne skupnosti, kot tudi širše družbeno dogajanje. Tako so raziskovalci v zadnjih desetletjih ugotavljali, da otroci odmeve velikih dogodkov, ki zaznamujejo njihovo skupnost, prenesejo tudi v lastno igro in folkloro (Tucker 2008: 7–9). Otroška folklora dolocenega obmocja razkriva ne samo specifike sodobne družbe, ampak posredno, preko izrocila, tudinjene izumrle ali pozabljene šege in folklorne oblike. Otroška igra in folklora namrec odsevata svet odraslih, družbene strukture in vrednote (Turk Niskac 2020: 38), saj otroci preigravajo tisto, kar lahko opazujejo v svojem vsakdanjiku, a hkrati elemente spreminjajo ter jim dajejo svoje pomene in interpretacije. Zato otroška igra in folklora nista nikdar enostavna in mehanska reprodukcija dejavnosti odraslih, ampak vedno domišljijska konstrukcija, osnovana na temah iz odraslega življenja in življenja starejših otrok (Meyer Fortes 1938: 59). Otroško igro moramo zato razumeti kot dvosmerni proces, kajti »v otroški igri se odražajo družbeno okolje in njegovi vplivi, hkrati pa otroci z igro to družbeno okolje raziskujejo, spreminjajo in preoblikujejo« (Turk Niskac 2020: 39), kar lahko opazujemo tudi v kratkih otroških folklornih oblikah, zapisanih v Goriških brdih. Otroške folklorne oblike, zapisane v Goriških brdih, torej jasno kažejo na jezikovne prakse obmejnega obmocja, ki so bila in so še vedno obmocja posebnih dinamik (Haller, Donnan 2000; Wilson, Donnan 2012; Wilson 2012; Lechevalier, Wielgohs 2013; Ktlin 2017), pa tudi heterogenih ljudskih tradicij. Tako tudi predstavljeni primeri (otroških) vecjezicnih kratkihfolklornihoblik, zabeleženihvGoriških brdih,kažejo naheterogenost kulturnihpraks inpovezanostobmocja,kipreseganacionalnemejeinsejasnoodražatudi vfolklori,kotnaprimermešanjeslovenskihinitalijanskihbesed (pogostovmodificirani obliki) v zbadljivkah, razširjenost italijanskih zacetnih formul izštevank med briškimi otroki, petje italijanskih uspavank itn. Te heterogenosti kulturnih praks na obmejnem obmocju so se zavedali že raziskoval­ci, združeni v neformalno delovno skupnost narodopiscev vzhodnoalpskih dežel Alpes Orientales, ki je delovala v desetletjih po drugi svetovni vojni ter je nastala kot odmev na spoznanje Milka Maticetovega, da je ljudska kultura tega obmocja sorodna mimo geograf­skih, upravnih in politicnih meja (Fikfak in Kuret 2008: 77; Pisk 2017: 111) in zato ne more biti raziskovana samo znotraj posameznih nacionalnih in jezikovnih meja, ampak širše. Kljub drugacni naravnanosti narodnih aktivistov in zbiralcev »narodnega blaga« v 19. stoletju pa se je izkazalo, da v obmejnih podrocjih, posebej pri žanrih, ki niso nacionalno reprezentativni, vprašanje jezika ni osrednjegapomena za nosilcefolklornih tradicij, pac pa se ti funkcijsko doloceni žanri stapljajo z lokalno zvocno krajino (Pisk 2020). Ce se besedila ljudskih pesmi, ki so sinkreticna celota melodije in besedila, skupaj z ritmicno shemo bolj nagibajo h knjižnemu jeziku (Golež Kaucic 2020: 109), pa je pri dvo- ali vecjezicnih folklornih oblikah, zapisanih v Goriških brdih, drugace. V njihovo strukturo se knjižne oblike (tako slovenskega kot italijanskega jezika) le redko inkorporirajo, pac pa vecina besednih oblik ostaja znotraj koda lokalnih govorov in onomatopije. Posamezne ustaljeneslovenskeoblike, npr. v izštevankah, paso semed otrokioblikovalein ohranile predvsem pod vplivom raznih knjižnih objav, ki so povezane z vzgojnimi in ucnimi pro-grami v vrtcih in osnovnih šolah (Knific 2006: 38). V procesu spreminjanja družbenih in kulturnih razmer se spreminjajo tudi oblike otroške folklore, prisotne v Goriških brdih. Kljub nacionalizirajocim poskusom folklornega diskurza, ki je v dolocenih obdobjih 19. in20. stoletjapoudarjalo jezikovnocistostfolklornih oblik(Pisk2013),paso – predvsem v otroški folklori – še vedno prisotne tudi jezikovno heterogene kratke folklorne oblike, ki odsevajo tesno prepletenost sveta in ljudi ob jezikovni in državni meji. VIRI IN LITERATURA Babic, Saša, 2019: Obravnava folklornih obrazcev v osnovnošolskih berilih in revijah. Jezik in slovstvo 64 (2), 19–30, 115. Bascom, William R., 1954: Four Functions of Folklore. The Journal of American Folklore 67 (266), 333–349. Bjork James E., 2008: Neither German nor Pol: Catholicism and National Indifference in a Cen­tral European Borderland. Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press. DOI: 10.3998/ mpub.217738 Budal, A., 1950: Iz otroškega življenja v Štandrežu pri Gorici. Slovenski etnograf. 3/4, 358-360. Briggs, Jean L. 1992: Mazes of meaning: How a child and a culture create each other. New di­rections for child development 58, 25–49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219925804 Cantarutti, Novella, 1956: Filastrocche e cantilene. Sot la nape 8 (5–6), 27–29. Carrara, Dolfo, 1935: Filastrocche infantili goriziane. Bollettino della Societŕ filologica friulana Ce fastu? 11 (7–10), 196–198. Ciceri, Andreina in Lea D'Orlandi, 1960: »Conte« per giochi infantili. Sot la nape 12 (2), 11–16. Devetak, Viljena (ur.), 2007: Je žalostna, ma je liepa ta pesem. Ljudsko izrocilo v besedi in glasbi. Gorica: Kulturni center Lojze Bratuž. Dolenc, Janez, 1999: Briški dijaki v Tolminu – zapisovalci briških ljudskih izrocil. Briški zbornik 1999, 418–432. Fikfak, Jurij in Niko Kuret, 2008 (1985): Pogovor. V: Ingrid Slavec Gradišnik in Helena Ložar Podlogar (ur.), Car izrocila: Zapušcina Nika Kureta (1906–1995). Ljubljana: Založba ZRC, 69–80. Fortes, Meyer, 1938: Social and psychological aspects of education in Taleland. Africa 11 (S4), 5–64. Freeman Davidson, JaneIlene, 2006:Languageand Play:NaturalPartners. Doris Pronin Fromberg in Doris Bergen (ur.), Play from Birth to Twelve: Contexts, Perspectives, and Meanings. New York: Routledge, 31–40. Gašperin, Roman, 1990: Enci benci na kamenci: slovensko otroško izrocilo. Lesce: Osnovna šola F. S. Finžgarja. Gašperin, Roman, 1998: Enci benci na kamenci 2: slovensko otroško izrocilo. Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga. Goldstein, Kenneth S., 1971: Strategy in Counting-Out: An Ethnographic Folklore Field Study. Elliott M. Avedon and Brian Sutton-Smith (ur.), The Study of Games, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 167–178. Golež Kaucic, Marjetka, 2020: Singing the other: singing in two languages and code-switching/ stitching. Tautosakos darbai 59, 100–119. Gri, Pier Giorgio, 1990: Gli informatori e i folkloristi: Pia De Luca e Lea D'Orlandi. Ce fastu?66 (1), 99–126. Haller Dieter, Hastings Donnan, 2000: Borders and Borderlands: An Anthropological Perspective. Ethnologia Europaea 30 (2). Ivancic Kutin, Barbara, 2017: Motivne znacilnosti pripovedi o izginulih jezerih na Tolminskem. Glasnik SED 57 (1/2), 74–85. Ivancic Kutin, Barbara, 2018a: Pomen dijaškega arhiva Janeza Dolenca za folkloristicne in druge domoznanske raziskave. Goriški letnik 42, 303–310. Ivancic Kutin, Barbara, 2018b: Zagovori v terenskih zapisih iz Benecije. Slovenistika in slavistika v zamejstvu. Videm: [Slovenski slavisticni kongres, Videm, 27.–29. september 2018], 207–220. Ivancic Kutin, Barbara., 2015: Molitvice, ki jih danes še najdemo v Beneciji (Prosnid, Viškorša, Dreka, Kraj). Trinkov koledar za Beneške Slovence za leto 2015, 164–173. Judson, Pieter M., 2016: Nationalism and Indifference. Johannes Feichtinger, Heidemarie Uhl (ur.), Habsburg neu denken. Vielfalt und Ambivalenz in Zentraleuropa. 30 kulturwissenschaftliche Stichworte. Wien: Blau, 148–155. Juvancic, Katarina, 2009: Ko se prebudijo »nine nane« in »aje tutaje«: etnomuzikološke raziskave uspavank. Traditiones 38 (1), 275–286. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/Traditio2009380118 Klobcar, Marija, 2009: Christmas songs and constructing identities. Traditiones 38 (1), 173–188. Knific, Bojan, 2006: Izštevanke in zbadljivke. Folklornik 5, 38–42. Kobal Uroš et al., 2003: Življenje v Brdih nekoc: priložnostno glasilo ucencev 2.a in 2.b devetletne osnovne šole. OŠ Dobrovo: Dobrovo. Ktlin, Konrad, 2017: Vanishing Borders and the Rise of Culture(s). Ethnologia Europaea 47 (1), https://doi.org/10.16995/ee.1226. Kuret, Niko, 1959: Igra in igraca v predšolski in šolski dobi. Maribor: Obzorja. Lancy, David F., 2016: Teaching: Natural or Cultural? David C. Geary, Berch, Daniel B. (eds.), EvolutionaryPerspectives onChildDevelopmentandEducation.Cham: Springer Interna­ tional Publishing, 33–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29986-0_2 Lechevalier Arnaud, Wielgohs Jan (ur.), 2013: Borders and Border Regions: Changes, Challenges and Chances, Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag, https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv1fxhcq. Makuc, Neva, 2011: Historiografija in mentaliteta v novoveški Furlaniji in Goriški. Ljubljana: Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU. Makuc,Neva,2021:Border Identities in the Early Modern Period: Venetian Friuli and the Habsburg County of Gorizia mirrored in contemporary historiography. Berlin: P. Lang, cop. Markocic, Helena et. al., 2019: Kulturna dedišcina Brd. Raziskovalna naloga, šolsko leto 2018/2019. OŠ Alojza Gradnika Brda. Merhar, Boris, 1956: Ljudska pesem. Lino Legiša in Alfonz Gspan (ur.), Zgodovina slovenskega slovstva. Ljubljana: Slovenska matica, 31–114. Mirmina, Emilia, 1960: Contis infantili raccolte a Paularo. Sot la nape 12 (1), 21. Morelli, Camilla, 2012: Teaching in the rainforest: Exploring Matses children’s affective engagement and multisensory experiences in the classroom environment. Teaching Anthropology 2, 53–65. Murko, Matija, 1929: Velika zbirka slovenskih narodnih pesmi z melodijami. Etnolog 3, 5–54. Novak Lukanovic, Sonja, 2011: Language diversity in border regions: Some research data on the perception among the pupils of two secondary schools. Annales 21 (1), 79–92. Pisk, Marjeta, 2013: Nacionalizacija ljudske pesemske tradicije Goriških brd = Nationalizing the folksong tradition of Goriška brda. Prostor v literaturi in literatura v prostoru = Space in literature and literature in space 60 (3), 483–498, 499–515. Pisk, Marjeta, 2017: Družbene mreže v folkloristicnem raziskovanju. Traditiones 46 (3),103–121. Pisk, Marjeta, 2018: Vi cuvarji ste obmejni: pesemska ustvarjalnost Goriških brd v procesih na­cionalizacije kulture. Ljubljana: Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU. Pisk, Marjeta, 2020: Language switching in (folk) songs along the Slovenian-Italian border. Tau- tosakos darbai = Folklore studies 60, 79–93. Pisk, Marjeta, 2021: Predvojni zapisi ljudskih pesmi Milka Ukmarja (Maticetovega). [v tisku]. Puhar, Alenka, 2004: Prvotno besedilo življenja. Ljubljana: Studia humanitatis. Querzola, Rita, 1991: Filastrocche raccolte nella valle del B. Ce fastu? 67 (1), 117–128. Ramšak, Mojca, 2007: Etnološko preucevanje otrok v slovenski etnologiji in folkloristiki. Etnolog 17=68, 31–41. Ramovš, Mirko, 1991: Otroške igre z odvzemanjem in privzemanjem na Slovenskem. Traditiones 20, 127–142. Rubin, David C., 1995: Memory in oral traditions: The cognitive psychology of epic, ballads, and counting-out rhymes. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rubin, David C., Violeta Ciobanu, William Langston, 1997: Children's memory for counting-out rhymes: A cross-language comparison. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 4, 421–424. Sirk, Darinka, 2009: Ivánov venec: briške šege in navade. Dobrovo: samozaložba. Sirk, Darinka, Peter Stres (ur.), [b. l.]: Otroške igrice in preštevanke. Goriška Brda: raziskovalna naloga. Dobrovo: OŠ Briško – Beneški odred. Stanonik, Marija, 1995: Slovstvena folklora v oceh današnjih mladoletnikov: analiza nalog s tekmovanja za Cankarjevo priznanje za leto 1993. France Novak, Kranjc Simona (ur.), Zborovanje slavistov, Celje, 1993. Ljubljana: Zavod Republike Slovenije za šolstvo in šport. (Zbornik Slavisticnega društva Slovenije; 4), 107–123. Šrimpf Vendramin, Katarina, 2019: »Medanc podklanc je figo zagledal, je mislil, da je žganc«: oblike, vsebina in funkcija medkrajevnega zbadanja na Slovenskem. Glasnik Slovenskega etnološkega društva 59 (2), 92–102. Šrimpf Vendramin, Katarina, 2021: Zgodbe in prostor: Ustno izrocilo in kolektivni spomin v zgornjem Obsotelju. Ljubljana: Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU Stanonik, Marija, 1999: Slovenska slovstvena folklora. Ljubljana: DZS (Zbirka Klasje). Stanonik, Marija, 2006: Procesualnost slovstvene folklore: Slovenska nesnovna kulturna dedišcina. Ljubljana: Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU. Terseglav, Marko, 1990: Reškova zbirka šaljivih pesmic. Dušan Rešek (ur.), Strijc so strino: Šaljive in eroticne ljudske pesmi iz Prekmurja. Murska Sobota: Pomurska založba, 1990, IX–XVIII. Tschinkel, Wilhelm, 2004: Kocevarska folklora: Všegah, navadah, pravljicah, povedkah, legendah in drugih folklornih izrocilih. Ljubljana: Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU. Tucker, Elizabeth, 2008: Children's Folklore: A Handbook. Greenwood Publishing Group. Tucker, Elizabeth, 2019: American Folk Poetry. Simon J. Bronner (ur.), The Oxford Handbook of American Folklore and Folklife Studies. New York: Oxford University Press, 176–189. Turk Niskac, Barbara, 2021: O igri in delu: antropologija zgodnjega otroštva. Ljubljana: Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU. Van Ginderachter Maarten, Fox Jon (ur.), 2019: National Indifference and the History of Nation­alism in Modern Europe. New York: Routledge. Vygotski, Lev Semenovitch, 1967: Thought and language. Cambridge: The M. I. T. Press. Wilson Thomas M. 2012. The Europe of Regions and Borderlands. Ullrich Kockel, Máiréad Nic Craith, Jonas Frykman, Malden (ur.): ACompanion to the Anthropology of Europe. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell, 163–180. Wilson Thomas M., Hastings Donnan (ur.), 2012: ACompanion to Border Studies, Malden, MA, Oxford, UK: Wiley Blackwell. Zahra Tara, 2010: Imagined Noncommunities: National Indifference as a Category of Analysis, Slavic Review 69 (1), 93–119. Zuljan Kumer, Danila, 1999: Govor Golega Brda. Briški casnik 4 (14), 45. ARHIVSKI VIRI: Vir 1: Arhiv GNI ZRC SAZU, Štrekljeva zapušcina 98. Milko Maticetov: Narodne pesmi 1. Vir 2: Arhiv GNI ZRC SAZU, Terenski zvezek III., Brda, R. Hrovatin. Vir 3: Arhiv GNI ZRC SAZU, Kokošarjeva zapušcina, Kokošar 12, mapa 2. MULTILINGUAL SHORT FOLKLORE FORMS: EXAMPLES FROM THE GORICA HILLS Marjeta PiSk, katarina šriMPf vendraMin Language is not only a tool for communication, but it is strongly interwoven with culture, society, natural resources, and the environment in which an individual language speaker lives. The contextual conditionality of language is also reflected in the folklore material of the borderlands, which is characterized by linguistic mixing and interweaving. Goriška brda (Gorica Hills), a region along the Slo­venian-Italian border, is an area where three languages, Slovenian, Friulian and Italian, have historically intertwined. Until the border was drawn after the Second World War, Slovene-speaking and Friulian-speaking inhabitants lived in the same state, so everyday relations between them were normal, regardless of the linguistic differences between them. The multilingual practices of the inhabitants are also reflected in folklore genres. The article focuses on multilingual short folklore forms, written down mainly as a part of children’s folklore in Goriška brda, from the first half of the 20th century until recent years. On the basis of the examples of the collected mate­rial, it is presented in which genres of the short folklore forms multilingualism appears, what function it has and how the peculiarities of the area are reflected in the children’s play. The review of the existing material has shown that most bilingual or even trilingual units of literary folklore from Goriška brda are to be found among chil­dren’s folklore, among counting-out rimes, jears and play texts, i.e. among short folklore forms whose main function is play. Numerous anthropologists have found, on the basis of ethnographic research, that children are observers, imitators, actors and helpers who acquire the essence of culture independently and automatically. Folklore forms that children narrate or use during play also show us something about the child’s perception of the world and learning about the surrounding culture. Many forms of children’s folklore have rhyme, as its sound and rhythm are particularly attractive to young children. Rhymes are therefore a common linguistic element of children’s folklore and occur in a variety of forms and functions. Some rhymes are part of play, counting, games, teasing, while others are used solely for entertainment. Rhyme is also the linguistic element that is among the most charac­teristic of the multilingual forms of the collected examples of children’s folklore. Among the collected multilingual folklore units from Goriška brda, the most numerous are the counting-out rymes. They clearly show the linguistic heterogeneity of the area, as in individual units variants of both Slovenian and Italian variants are interwoven (e.g. in introductory formulations or in the concluding, counting part), or they consist of a linguistic mixture of words otherwise characteristic of the area. The texts of children’s games, jears, teasers and lullabies are also short folklore forms in which multilingualism occurs. The analysis of bilingual short folklore forms recorded in the Goriška brda showed that most of them belong to children’s folklore. This is not surprising, since certain folklore genres and forms are often found in children’s folklore as the last stages before disappearing from collective memory. Thus, the children’s folklore of a given area reveals the specifics of the society and, indirectly, its extinct or forgotten customs and folklore forms. Children’s play and folklore also reflect the adult world, social structure and values. Thus, the presented examples of (children’s) multilingual short folklore forms recorded in Goriška brda show the heterogeneity of the area’s cultural practices and the area’s interconnectedness, which crossesnational bordersand isclearly reflected in folklore. Marjeta Pisk, Ph.D., Research Fellow, ZRC SAZU, Institute of Ethnomu­sicology, Novi trg 2, SI–1000 Ljubljana, marjeta.pisk@zrc-sazu.si Katarina Šrimpf Vendramin, Ph.D., Research Fellow, ZRC SAZU, Institute of Slovenian Ethnology, Novi trg 2, SI–1000 Ljubljana, katarina.srimpf@ zrc-sazu.si 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 179 – 193 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212410 ........ ........... ....... . ......... .................. ............ ......... .... ........ . ......... ........ ......-.........* .. ..... .. ........... Clanek obravnava folklorna demonološka prepricanja, razširjena na ozemlju Polesja, ki leži na meji Ukrajine, Belorusije in Rusije. Tradicionalna kultura te regije je zelo zanimiva za etnologe najširšega profila, saj ohranja številne arhaicne elemente vseslovanskega pomena. V prvem delu študije sta obravna­vana dva bloka regionalnega mitološkega sistema: duhovi domacih in naravnih lokusov ter skupina bitij, ki izvirajo iz pokojnih duš. Drugi del obravnava dve skupini mitoloških likov: duhovi, ki niso dodeljeni dolocenemu lokusu (hudic, duhovi bolezni, poosebljenje smrti, liki za ustrahovanje otrok), in razlicne kategorije živih ljudi z nadnaravnimi mocmi (carovnice, carovniki, zdravilci, volkodlaki).Študija temelji na podatkih vzhodnoslovanske demonologije. KLJUCNE BESEDE: vzhodnoslovanska nižja mitologija, ljudskademonologija,tradicionalna verovanja Polesja This article studies folk demonological beliefs that are widespread on the territory of Polesye, located on the border of Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia. The traditional culture of this region is of great interest for ethnologists of the broadest profile, since it preserves many archaic elements of all-Slavic significance. In the first part of the study, two blocks of the regional mythological system were con­sidered: spirits of domestic and natural loci, and a group of characters originated from the souls of deceased. The second part of the work considers two groups of mythological characters: spirits not assigned to a specific locus (the devil, spirits of diseases, personi­ fication of death, characters for intimidation of children) and different categories of living people endowed with supernatural knowledge (witches, sorcerers, healers, werewolves). The study is based on data from the East-Slavic demonology. KEYWORDS: East Slavic lower mythology, folk demonology, traditional beliefs of Polesye .......... .......... ....... ... ............... ..... ...... .........­......... ....... .. ........ ........... ..........., ..-......, ...... .............. ........ ......., .............. .. .......... .... ........ * .................. .......... .................... ........ ......... (..... . 20-012­00300) «...... ......... ......: ..... ...... . ....... . ............». . .............. ....... (..........., ............ . ........), . .. ...... .............. . ........... ....... ..-......, ........ ............ ........ ...... .......... . .... ....... ........ ........., ............ .......... . .......... ............. (..., ........, .......... . ......­.... ......... .............. ... «......... .....»). .-......., ..... ..... ............ ....... ............ ........, ........... ...... ........ . ........ ........... ....... ....... ... .............. . ........-............... ...... .......... ........ .........., .......... ..... . ........... ...... ......... . .......... ........; ........ . ........... ...... ........., ........., ........... . ............ ........, ........ ..... ........ . .......; . ..... ...-..... ........ . ......... ......... ........... ... .... .......... . ....... .......-.......... ........., .................. . ........... .. ....... ....... .................. ........... ...... ...... ............ .............. ..... . ..... .......... ............ ..... ....... ......­..... .......: ...................... ............. ........... .........; ............. ........ ....... ........ ... ........ .. ....... ...... . ......; .......... ...... ......... . ............. ......... ..... ...., .......... ....... ............... ....... ............. ... ......, ...... ........­... . .......... ......... (....... 1983: 6). ... ... ......... ............. ........ .............. .. .................... . ....................... ........ ......... ......, ........... ........ ........ ........ .. ............ ............. .......... ..... ............. ....,.. .... ............... ............. ............................. ........ ......... ........, ....... .......... ........... ...... ... ... ........ ....... ........., ............. ............ ........, ....... .............. ....... . ......., ........... ......., .......... ......., .......... ........ . ........... . .... ...... ... ........ ............ ...­....., ............... . ..........-.............. ....... .. ............. .. ............ .. .... .......... ......... ..... ............... ....... ............ . .... ....... ......... ............ ....... ............ ...­............ .......... ........ ........ ...... .. ... ........ ........... .............. .......................... ............, ......., ......, ........... ....... .. ........ . ......... ...... ... ..... ..... ......... ......... . ........ .......... ...... . ...... . ........., . .. ............ .. ....... .............. ....... .......... ......... – .........., .....­......., ..............., ................ ........ ....... ... ............ ............... .............. ...­... ..... .................. ............, ....... ....... ....... ..... ... ........ ........., .. ....... ......., . ..... ......., .......... .. ......... .......... . ........... ........, . . ......, ......... .. ...... .... .......... ............................. ..........., ... .......... ..... .......... ......... ............ . ........... ................ .. ... .. ..... ..... .......: ..... – ......, .... .. .....: .......–.......–...... (....... 1968: 9–11). ........... ......... ......., ........ .. ..... .................. . ................. ......, ......... .......... ............. ...........­.... . ..........-............... ............ . ....... ........... ...­.......: .. ...... . ........, .. ... . .......-.........., .. ......-....... . ........-............, .. ....... . .......-.......... .. ........... .............., ......... ...... ...... . .......... .. .... ......... ...... . ...... ........ . .......... ...., ............. . ... .. ..... . ......­...... ........... ....... ........-.........-......... .........., ......, ......., ......-...... ............... ...... (.......1997: 262–263). ... ... ........... ......... ............ ........ ....... ............. ....... ... ............ ......... ............ (. ........... ................... .........) . .............. ............ ... ...... ........ .. ....... .......... . ............. ....... ..... ......... ........ ....... .... ....... . ............ . ........ ........ ......... ... ....... ... .. ...... XIX–XX..... (...... .. ........., .... ......-..........., .... .............. . ...), .. ...... .......... ..... ..... ....... ..... .. ...... .... . ...... XX .... .. ........ .....: «...­...... .......: ............... ......... .. ......... ..... .......... . ......... .......» .......... ......... ......... .. ........... (Moszynski 1928) . «........ .......» .. ......... (Pietkiewicz 1938). ... ...... ........ – ...... . ....... ................ ........... – ........ . ................ ..........: . ....., ......., ........ ...., ....... ........... . .......­..., ......, ............ ............ ........ ........ ..... ....... .... ..... ......... .........., . .... . 60-. ... ............ ....... .......... . .......... . ......... ............; ... .. .... ......... (....... 1968: 5–17). ....... . ........ ........ ........ ....... .. ..... ..... ........ ...... ........ «.......... .................... ......», .......... . ....­.... 70-. ... .... ........ ... ... .......... ............ ..... ........ ....... ........, ........... ........ ........... ................., .. . . ........ ............... ......... .. ................. .... ...... ...... .........-......... . ..........-................ ......... ............. . ............... ................... ..........., .......... ... ............ .... ........ . 1980 .. 1985 ... ........... .. ...... ...... .......... .... ......... ..... ......... .............. .... ......... .................. ..... ... ......... .......... ...... ..­....... ............... ......... .. ..... ......, ....... ....... ......... .... . ......... ..........., .. ....... ........ ......... ........... ....... . 1980 ...., ... ....... ...... ...... .. ...... ........., ....... ................... ..............; ... ............ ......... . (....... (....) 1983: 21–46). .... .. .. ........ ........ ..... .......... .. ...... ......... . ........ ...... ............ ..... .......: ....... . ...... ......... ......; .......; ....-.........; ....; ....., .......; ........., ........ .......... .....; ....... . ...... . .....; ......, ....... .., ..... ...., ....... ................ .............. .......... . ...... ............ ..........: ........ . ......., ........ ........., ............, ........., ........ ............ (....... . .....) . ... ... ..... ...... ....... ..... ....... . .......... ... ....... ......... ...... ......... .............. ........... .................. .......: ......, ......, ......., «.......» ....-.............; ........; ...... ......... ....... .....: .......... ...., ......., .... ........., ....... .........; ................... ....­... . ......... (....., ....., ......., ......); ........., ........ .......... .....; ........., ............ .. ......... ....../........; .... ......... ............; .... .......... ............ (......., ......, ....... ....); .................. ....; ..... ......... ........... .......... ............... ..........«........ ........... .......», ........ . ...... (..........., ........... 2010, 2012, 2016, 2019), . ........... ............ ......., .......... ....... ........ .. ......... . .......... ........ (.... 2009; .... 2013). ..... .. ........ ....... ... ........ . ........ ............ .. ...... .......... ............ ........ ........ ........... ......... ...­.......... ... ........... ........... ... ......... ......... ............. ................... .........., .......... ..... .... .. ...... – ......./ ........ ..-......, .... ...... ............ ... ........... .... ........­....... ........... ....., .......... ........ ........ .....: .......... ....... (.......... ...... ....); ........ .. . ....., ......... ........... . ..... ............ ........ . ......... ...... .. ............ . .......... ..-......, .... .. ........ . ........ . ........... ....... ....... ..... .......... ....... ........, .............. .. ..... . .... .... .-......., ............... .. ...... ....... .... .. ...... ..... ............ ........ ...-..........., ........ ....... . .... «.......» .... .... ............ ...­........ ......., .-........., .......... ......... ........ ......... ..... . ........ .... ......, ... ............ ........ ..... ........... ........ ..... ........ ........ ............... ............. ......... ........ ....... ............... . .......... ......... ...... ........ .. ........­...... .......... ..... ........ .......... .. ...... . ....... .. ......., . ..... ..... ............ . ........... ............ ........ ........ ..... .. .... ......... .......... .... ...... .........: .......... ...... ....; ...-...........; ........ ..; ...... ..... ........ ... ....... . ........... .... ...............­......... . ........ ....... ....... ... .. ......... ....... ......., . ..... . .......... ....... . .. ...... ............. ..... ............. ........ .............../......./......, . ..... ....... . ..., ... ............ ...... ....... . ...... .... . ... ... .... ............. .... .. ...... ........ .... ... ........ .............. . .... ....... ... ....... . ......., .. ..... ......... ........ ......... ... .... .......... ........ . ... ........ ............ ...... .......... ........ ...... .... .... ..... ........ ....... ..... ...... (.. ......., ..... ...... .....), .... – ...... ..... ..... . ........ ........ ........ ... ..... ......... .............. ......... . ....... ......... .........: .. ....... .......... . ......... .... ... ...... .., . ........... .. ........... ... ............. ......... ..... . ............ .... . .....; .... ........../.......... ........ ......... .... ............ ... ......./......... . .......... ....; . ...... ............ .. ...... ..... ....... ....... – ....., ......, ......., ....... ......., ............;.............................,........,..................., ....... ....... «.....». ........ ........ . .............. ..... ......... ..... ........ ... ......... .. ......... . ......... .....: .. ......... . ........, ...... .., ......, .... ....... ........ ... «. .....»; ........ .. ...., ...... ..... ....., .... ... ... «.. . .....» ... .... .. .. .......... . ........... ......... ...... .. ......... . ........ .......... .......... ....... ..., ........... . .... ......, .. .... ... ........ .......... ... ....­.... ......... ...... ......... ...... ........... ........ ...... ...... .............. ......... . .......... .... ...... ........ ...... ....­... ......... .............., .... ........... ........ ......... ...., .. ............ ... ........ ...., ............ ......... . ........ .... ........... ............. . ... ......... . ....... ... ......... ........ ................. . ................. ........., . ....... ....... ....... ........ ..... ....-..........., ........... «........ ......», «.........», «........»; ........., ... .. .......... .... .. ... .......... ....., .... ... ..... ....... .. ........... ..... ............ ......... ..... .... . ...... ....... ................ ......... (........... ... ........... . .................. ....-...........) . ......... ........... .. ............., .. ......... ........ ... .... ....... . ...... ...... ...... ............ . ........ ........ ............ ........ ...... .. ..... ....... ........ . ..........., ... ....... ..... .. . ...... ...., . ...... . «.......» ....., ......... . ........ ..... («... . .... .. .....», «... ..... ........»), . ... ..... .... ........ .... .... .. ............ ............. ........... .......... .... ........... . .... ..... .........: .... ......., ... ... ....., .... .. «.........» . ...., ... ... .... ........, . ...... – ... .. .... .... ...... . .......... .......... ... ........ .... .........: ..... ......., ........ . ...... ........ .....; ..­..... . ......... ......, . ....., . ....... . ........ ..........; .... ... ........ .......... ..... ....... ............ ................... ....... .... . ........... .... ....., . ......... . ......... . ...... .. .........., ........ ... ............. ............. ........ . .... ..... ... «........» ........, .... ........, ... .. ....., ..... ....... ........., ....... .....­.... ....., .... ...... ..... .... .. ......... . .... ............ ......... .. ........... ........ ........, .... ............ ....... ........ ...­..... ... ......... ...... .. ......... ...., ..... . ... .. .......... «... .......». ..... ....... ....... . ...... ......... .......... .. ...... ..­....... .....-........., ..... .. ....... ........... ............ ....... ... .... ... ........ ..... ........... ........ .................. ........ – ... . ....., – ......... . ..... ... .. ..... ........ ........ .. ....... – ............ ............ ......... ...... .. ......... . ..... .......... ... .............. ...... ........ . ......... ..... ....... ..... ...... .............. ....... . ..... ... ............... .....; ........... ..... ......... . ....... ........... .......... .. ......... .......... .... ................................ ..........:.. ..... ........ . .......... ........ ........, . ..... .......: ...... ..... ... ........ .... .. ...., ......, ......., ...... ....., ........... .... ........ ....... ............­.. . .... ....... ......... .......... ............ ........ ............. ........, ............ ...... ...... ... ............ . ......... ........ ..... .......... ............. . ........ ... ... . ...., .............. ......... .......... ........ ......... ... .... ........ ......, ......., ...-......, ....... .. ..... ........, ........... ... .. ........... . .... .......... ........... ...... .. .......... ...... ........., ... .. .......... ...... ...... .... ...... . ..... .. ...., . ...... .. ..... ...... .... ....... ...... .......... ...... ....... .... ........ ......, ............ .. .... .......... . ......., .....­........ ... ... .......... ... ..... ........, ....... . .......... ........ ........., ..... ...... . ......... ........ ...... .. ..... ..... ........ ..... ...... ........... . ...... ... ..... ............. ........... ..... ......... .... .... ............ ....... ...., .... ........... ........... ........., . ........... .. ......... ...... ....... ............., .....­..., .......... . ....... ....... .. ......... .....: ....... ............ .. ..... ....... .... ... . ......... .. .. ...... .....; .. ........ ... .. ......... .... .. . ..... . ......; ..... .. ....... .......... .... .. ....... ....., .. ...... .......... ....., ..... .... .. .......... (..........., ........... 2019: 268–275). . ...... ...... ................ ........., ............. . ....... ........ ....., ......... ......... .............. .............. ...... ........., ... ........ ....-..........., .... ........ ....... .. ............ ...... ............. . ... ............. ............... . ..­... .......... ........ ........., ... ...... ........... ......... ..... ....... ....... .. ........ ... .............. .......... ....;... ..... .. . ..... ........ . .....; ... ... .......... ....... ...... ......... ..... .... ...., ..... .. ........ . ... .......... ......... ........ . ........ ..... ........... ... ......... . ......: .. ......... ........ ... ... ....., .. ...... ...... ........ ..... ............ ..... ......., . ..... ...... ........... ............. ............. . ........ ....., .......... ....... ..... ............. ... ........ ....­...... ...., . ....... .............. ... ........ ......: 1) ......... ....., ... ....... ........... .. ............ ... ...... . ........... .... . ..... (.... .......... ....... ....... ............. . .......); 2) ........ ....., . ....... ......... ........... ........ ........ . ................. ........ (... ........ ................... ... ....-...........); 3) ........... ....., . ....... ........ . ......... ......... ............. .... .. ....., ....... .......... ....... ............. .............. .... [..........., .....­...... 2019: 10]. ... .. ........ ........... . ... .. ..... ........ ..... ..... (..... .......... . ....... .......), .. ......... ........ ............. ..... ....... . ........ ‘....... ........’ ...... . ........ ........ ...... .......... ........ .... .... (...................... . .................. .......) ..... ................. . ........ .... .............. ..........: . ..... ......., ....... . ..., ... ....... ...... .... .......... ........ .....-........... (.......), . . ...... ......., ............... . ..., ... ....... ..... ..... ..... .. ..... ............ . .... .... ............. ..... ....... .... . ......... . ..... ......... ....­...: . ....... ... .... .. ........ ..... ............. ...... ............ ..........., .............. .............. ...... .......... ....... . ..­.......... . ..... .............. ........ ............ ....... ........ ..... ........ ........ . ......., . ........ ..... . ....... ... ..........., ........, . ........ ......... ........ ........., ....... ..... ............ ......... .......,.......(.................................)... ..... ..., .......´..., ...´...... (............... ........ .......), .. ...... . .... ........... ............ ... ........... ........ .... ........ ........ ....: ........, ..... ..., ......., ......, ...., . .....: ....... ..... .. ...... ...... «... .......... ........ ...., ......... . ..../......» ........... .......... ........... ........: «....... ...., ... . ...... ...., .. .... ....» (..........., ........... 2019: 530), «.. ....., ... ...... ...... – .. .... . .... .....» (..........., ........... 2019: 319). ..... ......... ........ ........ .... ........ .... (......., ......., ............. .....) .......­.... ..... ........ . ......... ......, . .........., «.... . ........», – ... ........ . ......... ......... ..... ............... ...... ...... ......... .... .... .......... (....... – ....) ..... ......... ..... .......... ... ...... ..... ........ ..... (......, ......), – ... ..... .......... ... ...... ...... ....... ........ .............. ....... ......../........... ...... ......... . ............... ................ ..... .........: .. ......... ......, .. .......... ........ . ....; ..... ..... .. ..... .. .......; ..... ... ..... ...... .. ..........., .. ..... ... ......; .............. ..... . ........; .......... ..........; ......... . ........... ... .... ......, .......... .... ..... .. ...... . .... (....... .............: «...... ´ ...., . ........ ... ...!», ..... .... .......... ..... ...... . ..... . ....). ........... ......... ........... . ....... ........... ........ ........ .... ... «.......» ....... . ...... ......., ........ .. ............. (.... ..... ........ .......... . ....... .............. .....). ................ . ....... ....... ............. .................... ....... . ...... ..... . ........ ....... ... ...... ........... ... ........ ..... .......... ....., ........ ............. ....... ...... ..........: ...... ....., .......... .. .. ............... ......... ....., ....... . ..... .. ...... . ..... ...... ......... ... ........: «. .... ...... ......»; «. .... .... ....»; «..... . .... ..........». .... .. ....... ....... (.........., ........ ......., ...... ............) ....... ........... ............. . ...... .... ... ........ .. ............ .........: ......., ......., .......; ........ ... ......., ......... ...... .... .... . ........ .. .........; ........ ... ... ............. ... ............; ........ .... .... . .... .. ........... . ....... .., ... ......, . ........... ...... ........... ......... ........... . ......... ......... ...... ....... ..... – ........ . .......... . ...... .. ... ........ .... .., ... .. ...... ........... «.......» (.......... ..... .......) . ...... .... ... «......­..» (............ ....... . ........ ....). ..... ...., ............ ..... . ...... ........... ........ . ......... .....: ....... .... . .... ...; .... ........ ..., ......, ... ... ... .. ....... (.......... ....); .... ...... ...­... ..... ........: «.. ........ ...., ... . .... .. .... . ....», – . ....... ..., ..... .... ......... ...... . ...... (..........., ........... 2019: 359). ... ........ ........., .. .... ....... . ......... ....... ........... ....­.. . ........... ......., .. .. ... .......... ............ .............. ....... (.. ............ ................. .........) – ........ ........ .. ........... ... ........, ... ................. ...... ... ....... . ....... ... ........... ... .... ................... .......... .... ....... . ......... ..... ......... ....... ..... .... ........ ...... .................. ...., ... ... ... ......... . ......... ..­........ . ... ........ ...... ........ .. ..... .............. ........, . ............ ... ....... ................ ......... ......... ........ ...... «.......» ......... ........ ...... ............ ..... . ..... .....­.... ......... .......... ... ........... . ...... ......... ........: . ...... (... ....) .... ...., .......... .......... ........ ......., ....... ..... ........ ........ .......; . ..., ... . ...., ....... ..... .. ..... . ....... .... ..., ......... ......; . .......... ........ .... .... .. ....... . .... ........... . ... ... ............... .. .......... ........... ....... .............. ....­......... . ........ ....-........., ....... ........ ......, ......... .. ...... ........ ... .............. ...., ...... .. .... ... ...... ....­... .. ....... .... ........ ... ..... ... ........ ......, ............. .......; . ... .. ......... ..... ...... ...... ............ ......... .... . ........ ........... ... ........... ... ...: ... ......, ......, ......... ..... .......... .. ........... ........., .. ........ ............ ..... ..... .. ......, ......... ......, . .... .......... ..... ..... ........... .... .......: «... .. ...?», .... ........: «....!» ... ...... ... ....... ....... ....., ... .. .......... ........ .... ....... .. .... ............... ..... ......., ... ........ ....... . ....., ...­......... .. ....... .....,........ ........ .......... ......... ........., – . ... ........ .. .. ...... .................. ......... ......­..... . ...... ......... .... ............ ......... ......... . .......... ........ ....... ............. ... ......... ... ........... .......... ... ....... ....... ......... .... ............ ...... .. ......... ........ ... .. .... ....... ........... ... ....... ..... . ............ ........ ......... . .................... .... ......... ...... ...... ............ .......... ... ............ ...... .............. ........... ..... ....­..... .............. . .... ..... .......... ........ .. ........ «......./ .........» ...... ......... ......., .... .. ....... ........... ... ....­........ .......... .... ............., .......... ...... (.............. ... .. .......... . ...... ........... .......), . ...... – ... ....... ... ....., ........... .......... ......... . ......... ......... ...... ....... ............... .......... . .......: ....... .......... .....; .........; ....... ........... ............ ...... ............ ........ ........ ......... . .... .. ...... .......-.......... ....... .............. .......... – ......., ....... ..... ............... ... ......... ....... ............ ............. .. ..... ..... ........... «............... ........ ........» – «....­........ ........» ............. ....... .. ....... .......... ...... . .............. ....... ....... ...... ......... ....... ........ ...... ............ ........... ..., – ... ........ .. .. ....... ..........., ....­.. .. .......... . ...... ........ .............. .......... .... ...... ...... ....... «............» ......... .......... ..... .... ........ ....­.. ...... (.. ......... . ................. . .............. ..........): ... .... .. ........ ............. ............ .............; ........... ........... ........ .. .. ....... .... (........., ... .. .. ..... . ...... .......); .. ............. ........... ..... .......; .... . ... ......... .. ... . ........... ......., . ... . ................ ........., ....... .. .... ........., .. ........... .. ... ........, .. ..... ....... .. ... ..... ....... ............... ......... ....... .......... ..... . ......... ....... ......... .. ........... . ......... ........... .......... ........ – .... ...., ..... .... ......... . .... .....: «.... ........ ...... ......» ...... ............. . ........ . ........... ......., . ... ......... ....... ..... ......... .. ..... ....... – ..... – ....... (..........., ........... 2012:239). . ........ ............ ........... ....... .... .......... ......... .. ........... ...... ...... ........ ......., ......, ......., .......... ...... ..... .............. ............. .......... ..... .......... .......... ......... ..... .. ......... . .... ..´..... ..... .... ......... .. .... ..... ........ .. ........... ......: «....... ..... ... .... .... ......., ....... ........................... .......: “...... ....... – .... ...., .... ....... – .... ...”». ...... ......... ..... .......... ..... ......, ..... .......... ....., ....... ...... ............... ..... «......» – .... ..... ......., ....... ...... ........ ........ . ...... ........ ......... ...... «.........» ........ ........... . ....... .......... .......... ..... .. ......... ........ ... .. ... ........ ........ ...... .............. . ....... ............. . ..., ... ...., ....... ..........., .......... .......... ..... ....... ................ ........ (. ..´..... ........ .............) .......... . ......... ....... .......... . .... ..... ......... .. ..... ....... ............. ... ......... .... ... .... ........ .... .... . ...... ..... .... ..... ......, ... ... .. ..... ...... ... .....: .. ...­........... ........, .... ........ ....... ...... ...... .......; ....... ... ....... ............ .. ........... ...... ...... . ...... ..........; ....... ... ........ . ...., ..... ...... .. . ............. ...... .. .... .. ......... ...... .... ............ .......... ... . ...... .... ...... ............. .......... ............, .. ....... .. ............. ....­....... ........... ........ ......., ........... ....... ......... . .... ...., .......­...... .......... ......... .......: .......... ..... «......» .., ... ... ..... .... ..... . ........ ..... (....... . ......); ... .... ...... ........­.... .. ... ........ ..... ..... (.. ..... ...... ....); ... .......... . .... .... .......... ........... . ....... . ........ ......; ... ... ......... . .......... ............. ......; . ..... .., .. ... ....... ..... ....... . ...... ............. .............. ............... .............. ..., ... ..............., ........................., .... ............ .......... .. ... ........ ....... .. ............... ........ ....... . ........ ........ ......... ......... .......... ......... ....... ..........: ... ...... .......... ....... ....... (......, ...... .....­... ......., ...... . .... . ....., ........ ...... .....); ..... ...... .....; ....... ..... ......... (............ ....., .............. ......, ......... ....., ......... .... .. .....; ...... ........... .. .... ..... . .....); ...... .. ..... ........ .... .. ..... ..... ........ .......... . ......... ....... ........ ... .. .............. ........ «........». ........, ... . ...... ........ ........ .... (....), . ....... .. .., ... .... ....... .. ........... ... ....., .. .. ...... .......... . .... . ...... ..­...... ........ ...; .......... ....... ... ..... .......... ........ .....; ....... ..... . .... .......... .....; ........ . .... .... ........-....... . .... ............. ........ ......... ...... ..... «........» ......... . ....... ......... .....: ... ......... ...... ......... ....... ........ ....... ... .....-...... .......... ........, ........ .........., ... . .... ......... ....... ..... . ....... ... .... . ...... . ..... ....... ........ ............... . ......... ......... .. ... ....... .....-.........., ........ .... ..... ......, . ... .... ....... ...........,....... ................... .............................. ............... ..... ...... . ......... . ......... «.......» ......... ......... ..... .........., ........­.... . .......... ........ ...., ... ... . ............ .. ............ ..... .. ... ......... . ........... ....... ............... ......... .... ..­..... .............. .............. ........., ... ... .... ...... .. ...... ... .. ............., .. . ... ..... .... . ....., ... ... ... ........ ...... .. ........... ........: ........ ...... ... ........ .....; ............. ............. ...... ...., ........, ....... ...... .......... ..... .......... ......... . ........... . ..... ........ . ............. .... .. ........... .... . ........... ....... ......... ........... ..­...... ..... .......,. ....................... ....... .............., . ..... ......., ..... ............ ..... . ........ ......, . . ...... – ..... ......... ...., ............. . ...... ............ .. ........ (.........) ......, .......... . ........ ...., .......... .......... .. ....... ....­......... ....... ....... ...... ...... . ............ ............. ... ..........: ......., ......., ......... . .... ..... ................................................. ....... ....­................ ......................... ..... ........ ... ........... ...... ..... . ....... .. ...... . ............. ..... .......... ........., ... ......... .......... ....... .......... ....; .... .. ........ .. ....... .......; .... ... .... .......-..........; .... .... ..., ... ....... . .... .. ......... ...... . .... .. ......, ...... ....... ......., ........ ......­.... .... ......: «........ .. ....., . ........», «..... ......... ...... ............ .. .... ....., . ......». .... ............ ...... ........... . ............. . ....... .... .......: ... .... ..... ........ ... ....... ....... . ............ ......., . ........ . ......... ......, – .... ..., ... .. ....... ....... ........ .......... ......., ......... .. ............. ........ ...... .. ......... ......... .. .... ......... ........ .. ...... ......... ....... .. ....... .............. ... ........ .......... .. ...: ....... ........ . ..... ......, ....... .. .. .., ... .. .. ........... ........­.... ..... .... .......... .... .. . ... ......, ..... .. ... ......; .... ... ........ ...... .. .., ... .. ....... ..... .......... .......; .... .. .., ... ........ ... ......... ...... ...... ......... .. ...., . ... .......... .. ................... .... ............... . ........-.................. .............. ....... . ..., ... ............ . .... .. ......... ...... ....... ........ .. ...... . .... ... ......., ....... ..... . .... .... ..... . .......... ..... ..., ........ ..... .. ....... ...., . ..... ... ........ .. ......... ......... ....... ............ .............. .... .... .......: «.... . ....... ....... .... ........»; «.... . ... ...., ... ....»; «...... . .... ..., ...... ... . ....» (..........., ........... 2012: 619–623). ......... . .... .......... ... . ..... ....... ............. .......­.... ..... . ........... ......... ..... .. ......... ......: ......, ......­...... .......... ......., .......... ... ... .. ..... ......; ......... .. ..... .... .. .......: «........., ...... .. ... ....... [.... ......... . ... ..........]!»; ......... ....... .. ........ ......, ..... .. ......... ..... .......-....... . .... (..........., ........... 2012: 673–675). .. ........ .......... ..... .............. ........ ....., ....... .. ........... ........., .......... ...................... .. .... .........­......... .............. ........ ...... . ....... (. ........ .. ........) ............ ...... .... ............... ......., ..... ............ ..­.......: «.. ..... .... ... .......!», «.. ...... .... .. .......!», «.. ..... .... .. ....!» . ... ..´..... ..... .. ........... ........ ............ ..., ... .... ........ ......., ............ ... ......... ......: ..... .. ....... ..... . ...., ..., . ........; .. ............. .. .... ...... ........ ..... (.......... ....., ......, ........... .... . ....). ..... ........... .......­...... ...... ....... ............, ......, ...., ........ .. ......, ..... ........ . .... . ....... .... ....... .. ......., ....., ......... ......... ..... ........ .. ........... ........ ..... ......... ......... ......... ..... ...... ..... ........ ... ........ ....... ............ ............. ........., ....... ............. ... ... ........ ...... .... ....... . ........ ........ ............. . ... ... . ....... ........ ....., ............ .. ..... . ...... ........ ........ ........ .......... .. . .... . ...... ... ........ ... ......... – ... .... .. ..... .......... ......... ..... ........., .... . ....... ............. . .....­........... ............. . ........... ....... . ......... ...... ..... ........... . ....... ........ .......... . ...... ...... ....... ........ . ..... .. ......... ....... ......... ......... ........: ... ..... ........ .. ...... ........ ... .. ......., .. ........ ........; .......... .......... ......, ...., ......., ..... ........, .... ..... .. .... . ....... ........­... .. ........ . ....... ..... ............ ..... ........ (..... ......... ... ........ «...........» .........). ..... .. ........ ......... ... ..... ....... ...... . ........ ...... ....... . .......... .............. ............ «...........» ......... ....... ........ ........... . ................ «........ .......», ............. . .......... ... ......... ......, ..... ......., ... ........., ............ .. ... ....; ... .. .... ......... . (........... 2000: 166–181) . ....... ....... ........... . ....... . .. ......... . ...... ........ ..... .... . ........ ......, ....... ... ............ ..... ..... .. ...... . ............. ..... ......... . ........ ...... .. ........... ...... ...... ... ............ ... ....., ........ . ........ ....: ........ .. ..., ....., ......., .... ......, ....... ... ...... ....., ...... .. ....., ........ . .... ........., ... . ... .... ......... ......., . .... ...-...... .. ..... ........... ....(....... ... ......),.................................. ....... ......., ....... ...... ........... .. ...... . ....... .. .......-..­....., .......-....... ......... ...., .... .. ....... ........., ....... .. .......... .. ........., ... ...... ......... ... ......... ......... ..... ......., ............. . ...... ..... ...... ... ............ ..... (.... ......... ............, .... .......... ............ . ......... .. ..... ....... .....) ......... .............. ............... ...... . ............ ......... ...... ......... ........ . ..... .. ............. ............ ..... ....... .......... .......... ...... ..... ........ ..... .. ..... ....... (... ..............., ... . ........... ....) ., ..... ...., .......... ... ...... .................. ........ ............. ..... ....... .. ......... . .......-........... ........ ....... . ..... ...­...... ....... (. ....., ......., ........) ........... ...... ............, ......., .......... ..............., – ... ........... ........ ......... ........... .. ............... ., ........, ............. . .......-.....­..... ........ ........... ......., ........ ............., ............ .......... .......... ....... .............. ........ . .. ...... .......... . ....... . ....... .. ...... .... ....... . ........, . ... .... ........ ..­........ ...... .........., ....... ...... ....... .. .......... «........ ...... ....», .......... .......-........... XIX ..... .. ...... ..... ....... ..... ........... ... ... ....... ...... .....­..... ............................: ..-......, ...... .......... ......., ............. ..................(...., .............. ......, .... .....­..., .........-........... . ........ ........... .....) ., ..-......, ...... ......... ....., .......... ............ (......, ......., ......., ........, .... .................... .......). .......... ..........., ....... .., 2000: ........ ........... . ....-.......... ........ ....... ......: ....... [Vinogradova Ludmila N. Narodnaya demonologiya i mifo-ritual’naya tradiciya slav’an. Moskva: Indrik]. ..........., ....... .., ..........., ..... .., 2012: ........ ........... ....... (.......... ....... . ....... 80-90-. ..... XX ....). ...........: .. .. ..........., .. .. ............ .. 2. ............... ....... ...... ......: .......... ......... ....... ..... [Vinogradova, L’udmila N.; Levkievskaya, Elena E., 2012: Narodnaya demonologia Polesia (Publikacia tekstov v zapis’akh 80-90 godov). Sostaviteli: L. N. Vinogradova, E.E. Levkievskaya. T. 2. Demonologizacia umiershykh l’udej. Moskva: Rukopisnye pam’atniki Drevnej Rusi]. ..........., ....... .., ..........., ..... .., 2019: ........ ........... ....... (.......... ....... . ....... 80-90-. ..... XX ....). ...........: .. .. ..........., .. .. ............ .. 4. .... ......... . .......... ............. ................ ................:............ .......[Vinogradova,L’udmilaN.;Levkievskaya, Elena E., 2019: Narodnaya demonologia Polesia (Publikacia tekstov v zapis’akh 80-90 godov). Sostaviteli: L. N. Vinogradova, E. E. Levkievskaya. T. 4. Dukhi domashnego i prirodnogo prostranstva. N’elocalizovannyje persoyazhy. Moskva: Izdatel’skiy dom JaSK]. ......., ...... .., 1968: . ............... ........ ........ ....... (............ ........... ..........). ......: ...... .. 5–17. [Tolstoy, Nikita I., 1968: O linvis­ticheskom izuchenii Polesya. Polesye (Lingvistika. Arkheologiya. Toponimika). Moskva: Nauka. S. 5–17]. ......., ...... .. (....), 1983: ......... ................... ........ ......... . ............. .... .... .. .......... ......: ...... [Tolstoy, Nikita I. (ed.), 1983: Polesskij etnolingvisticheskij sbornik. Materialy i issledovaniya. Otv. red. N. I. Tolstoy. Moskva: Nauka]. ......., ...... .., 1983: ....... . ... ........ ... .......... .......... ....... . ......... ....... ............... ......... . ...... ............ ......: ...... .. 6–8. [Tolstoy, Nikita I., 1983: Polesye i yego znachenie dla slav’anskoy arealogii. Polesye i etnogenez slav’an. Predvaritel’nye materialy i tezisy konferencii. Moskva: Nauka]. ......., ...... .., 1997: ....... ...... ...... ......... ...... .. 1. .......... ............ . ............. ......: ..... ....... ......... [Tolstoy, Nikita I., 1997: Tolstoy Nikita Il’ich. Izbrannye trudy. T. 1. Slav’anskaya leksikologia i semaseologia. Moskva: Jazyki russkoy kul’tury]. Moszynski, Kazimierz, 1928: Polesie Wschodnie. Materialy etnograficzne z wschodniej czesci b. powiatu mozyrskiego oraz z powiatu rzeczyckiego. Warszawa. Pietkiewicz, Czeslaw, 1938: Kultura duchowa Polesia Rzeczyckiego. Warszawa: Towarzystwo naukowe Warszawskie. FOLK DEMONOLOGY OF POLESYE IN THE CONTEXT OF EAST­SLAVIC TRADICIONAL BELIEFS: PART 1. SPIRITS OF DOMESTIC AND NATURAL LOCI; DEMONS-DECEASED LudMila n. vinoGradova The folk demonology of Polesye as an independent part within the East Slavic essays is explained, firstly, by the special geographical status of Polesye, located on the border of three linguistic and ethnocultural areas (Ukrainian, Belarusian, and Russian), and in the west adjacent to the territory of Poland. Secondly, it is explained by the relatively large amount of field material collected in this region (Polessky Archive stored in the Institute of Slavic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow), which makes it possible to start comprehensive research. Thirdly, the interest in Polesye is explained by several peculiar features of the local traditional culture, which retain many elements in the most archaic forms. Experts include among the unique features of this region: the historically established autochthony of the majority of the population; the continuity of the development of local culture during the transition from the old ethnic group to the new; the lack of direct contacts with non-Slavic peoples. In addition, the territory of Polesye is consideredby many experts as a region closely adjacent to the Slavic ancestral home. All this allows us to consider Polesye as a top priority for research, as to the ethno-cultural studies of Eastern Slavia, which preserve deep archaic character. This research is published in two parts, devoted to different thematic blocks: 1. Spirits of natural and domestic loci; demonologization of the deceased. 2. Non-localized mythological characters; people with demonic properties. The three thematic blocks considered in the first part of the article (spirits of home space, spirits of natural space, and demonic characters from among the de­ ceased) enable us to formulate preliminary conclusions about the regional specifics of the Polessian lower mythology. Its distinctive features include the combination of several different types of house spirits named domovik (both anthropomorphic and zoomorphic) and, in addition, the use of this term in relation to demons-de­ceased, which is not typical for other East Slavic traditions. The complex of beliefs about the spirits of natural loci (the wood, water and field goblins; leshy, vodyanoy, polevik, respectively) is represented by scant, isolated evidence. That fact significantlydistinguishes the Polesian demonology from the North Russian one. In contrast, the beliefs about demons-deceased form an extremely rich, detailed mythological system, provided by a multitude of dialectical texts. It also includes in Polesye a vast reach of beliefs about rusalka, and this character is endowed with features that are far removed from the literary stereotype of the ‘enchanting water maiden’ created by the 19th century romantic poets. In the second part of the article, two more large groups of characters from the Polesian folk demonology will be considered: firstly, a group of mythical creatures not tied to specific loci (devil, personification of Death, spirits of diseases, intimi­dating characters in the formulas for frightening children) and, secondly, different categories of people endowed with supernatural knowledge (witches, sorcerers, healers, werewolves, people of narrow professional occupations). Ludmila N. Vinogradova, Ph.D., Senior Research Advisor, Department of Ethnolinguistics and Folklore, Institute of Slavic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Leninsky prospect, 32-A. E-mail: lnv36@yandex.ru 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 195 – 217 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212411 Dazhbog: The Ancient Slavic Pagan Deity of the Shining Sky Oleg V. Kutarev Prispevek podrobno obravnavaenega najbolj znanih in pogosto omenjenih slovanskih po­ganskihbožanstev,tj.Dažbog(aliDaž(d)bog). Obravnava izpostavlja in problematizira do­locene zgodovinopisne stereotipe, ki so polni nasprotij in težav. Na primer: 1) opredelitev Dažboga kot božanstva sonca; 2) njegova bližina drugemu soncnemu božanstvu, Horsu, in nejasnost, zakaj naj bi obstajali dve soncni božanstvi; 3) Dažbogov odnos do božanstva Svaroga oz. Svarožica; 4) Dažbogova pripa­dnost samo vzhodnoslovanskemu obmocju; 5) etimologija njegovega imena kot »daja­nje božanstva«. V tem prispevku je podan alternativni, pogosto spregledan pogled na Dažboga, ki lahko reši te težave. KLJUCNE BESEDE: slovansko poganstvo, Dažbog, Svarog, Dabog, Hors, indoevropska mitologija The paper is concerned with a detailed con­sideration of one of the most well-known and frequently mentioned Slavic pagan deities: Dazhbog (or Daž(d)bog). Historiographic stereotypes full of contradictions and problems have been fixed in research concerned with the deity, for example, defining Dazhbog as the deity of the sun; its proximity to another solar deity (Chors) and vagueness, why are there two solar deities; Dazhbog’s relation to the deity Svarog/Svarozhich; Dazhbog’s belonging only to the East Slavic area; the etymology of his name as a “giving deity”. An alternative view on Dazhbog (overlooked rather than new) that can solve these problems is given in this paper. KEYWORDS: Slavic paganism, Dazhbog, Svarog, Dabog, Chors, Indo-European my­thology INTRODUCTION This paper is a revision of my two earlier papers published in Russian in 2015–2016 (....... 2015; ....... 2016b);1 both of them are publicly available in electronic form (see References). In the first article, I have considered earlier insufficiently explored aspects of the sources of the South Slavic origin on the Slavic pagan deity Dazhbog and the character of Serbian folklore Dabog. In the second one, I have carefully proposed a theory, according to which Dazhbog could functionally be not so much a deity of the sun (as he is usually treated) as more likely an evolution of the Indo-European image of I would like to express my gratitude for assistance in translation of this article into English to Ksenia Alieva. the Sky Deity. In the course of the subsequent discussions and further work, I have been convinced of the high probability of such an approach, and now I am drawing up this paper in a polemical manner, generally objecting to the fixed view on Dazhbog as the deity of the sun. Some other historiographic stereotypes are also objectionable. When considering the textual sources on the Slavic paganism (at least those relating to the higher mythology), one may notice that all of them were well-known to scholars as far back as the second half of the 19th century2 (....... 2014: 37). Therefore, it is also necessary to turn to other fields of knowledge, which can provide new facts to aid in becoming acquainted with Slavic culture. Along with archaeology, folklore, and ethnog­raphy, comparative religious studies and linguistics are also of the greatest importance in this context. At the same time, it seems that the potentialities of textual analysis of the ancient sources are also by no means exhausted. DAZHBOG IN ANCIENT SOURCES Dazhbog has been mentioned in independent medieval sources only among the texts of the Old Russian literature (see below). The development of this literature started soon after the Christianization of the Rus in 988. The “Primary Chronicle”, the earliest extant Old Russian chronicle, was completed ca. 1118 (although its origins go back to the second half of the 11th century). Today it is known for two main editions, of which the earliest records have named the Laurentian Codex (the second half of the 14th century) and the Hypatian Codex (early in the 15th century). The difference between the editions is not great but has significant for researching Dazhbog. In the extract concerned with the events of 980,3 the Primary Chronicle reports4 that prince “Vladimir began to reign in Kiev alone, and put the idols on the hill behind the palace yard: wooden Perun with a silver head and golden moustache, and Chors, and Dazhbog, and Stribog, and Semargl, and Mokosh. And sacrifices were made to them, with calling them the deities” (.... 2000: 126–127; ..... 1926: .... 79; ..... 1908: 2 Perhaps only individual records and editions of the texts previously known belong to the number of new findings. Although the authors Slupecki and Zaroff, who supposed that they had discovered the previously unknown source on the Slavic paganism, the brief article on fortune-telling in West Slavic Lutici tribe (Slu­pecki, Zaroff 1999: 9), have disputed against this thesis in the second volume of Studia Mythologica Slavica, in fact, as far back as 1872 Kotliarevsky researched this data of William of Malmesbury “discovered” by them (........... 1885: 62 ..... 1). 3 The Byzantine era, “Constantinople era”, prevailed in Rus until 1700, the era having counted the years “from the creation of the world” (according to the biblical mythology). The first year of that era was 5508 B.C., thus, 980 is marked as 6488 (5508+980) in the original of the chronicle, etc. Only the contemporary era will be used below for convenience. 4 Herein English translation of the Primary Chronicle is based on Tvorogov’s translation from Old Russian into modern Russian according to the edition (.... 2000). However, I remove the spelling “Dazhdbog” (con­taining two letters “d”) from this translation, since it is almost always “........” (“Dazhbog”) in the original of the Primary Chronicle. Each quotation from the Primary Chronicle is also accompanied by the references to the original Old Russian text according to the editions and text markup in the academic series “Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles” (..... 1926; ..... 1908). .... 67).5 The reader can see the description of the most important religious sanctuary of pre-Christian Rus in its then capital Kiev and, correspondingly, its most significant deities (with some reservations, though, which go beyond the research into Dazhbog). Unfortunately, the ecclesiastical author has not thought of describing the deities mentioned in more detail, although in his time, the Russian reader certainly still knew them rather. In 988, when christening Rus, same Vladimir “ordered to throw down the idols: some of them to chop, and others to burn down”,6 and after the descriptions of ritual desecration and expulsion of Perun idol (.... 2000: 130–131, 160–163; ..... 1926: .... 82–83, 116–117; ..... 1908: .... 69–70, 101–102) the Primary Chronicle does not refer to any of the deities mentioned any more, except for Dazhbog.7 He quite unexpectedly appears with his father Svarog in the record on the year 1114 in the Hypatian Codex (there is nothing of the kind in the Laurentian Codex).8 Here, following the information about the rains of the glass beads and even of squirrels and deer, the author, foreseeing the reader’s scepticism, adds: “if someone does not believe in it, let him/her read the Chronograph”. Then a mythological plot is recited about the fact as during the reign of Pheosta in Egypt (a corrupt name of the Greek blacksmith god Hephaestus) “that was called Svarog by the Egyptians”, the smith tongs fell from the heavens, which resulted in the origin of metallurgy. Pheosta-Svarog had also introduced monogamy: a law under which a man could have only one wife, and a woman could have only one husband; “if anyone violates this law, let him/her be thrown into a fiery furnace”. “The Sun-king, Svarog’s son, or Dazhbog” ruled after him, who, having heard of one woman’s betrayals, caught her in the act. When he beheaded the man who was with her and started to take her “over the Egyptian land to shame” (note that no throwing into a furnace takes place), a good time came to the country, and “everybody praised him”9 (.... 2000: 308–311; ..... 1908: .... 277–279). In fact, the sudden appearance of Slavic deities among the Egyptian rulers is not a paradox. After Christianization, the following conceptions appeared in Roman and Greek 5 Original(Hypatian Codex):“........... ................. ...... . ....... ............... ... ..... .......... ...... ......... . ...... ... .......... . .... ....... . ....... . ......... . ......... . .......... . ....... . ...... .... ........ ....”. 6 Original (Hypatian Codex): “...... ...... ........... ... ...... . ...... ...... .......”. 7 Certainly, paganism did not vanish in Rus in 988 in a moment; dvoeverie (“two beliefs”: “... ....”, paganism and Christianity) remained here until the 13th-14th centuries, and this period Christianity, on the one hand, struggled against, and, on the other hand, adopted the elements of paganism that generally continued to vanish. It is most significant that in the same 1110s, when the Primary Chronicle was being created, the Vyatichi pagans (one of the East Slavic tribes) murdered Kupsha, better known as Kuksha of the Kiev Caves, for preaching Christianity. However, the author of the chronicle ideologically aimed at not referring to the paganism after its official leaving (....... 2016a: 136). 8 See the article (Kutarev 2021) for the most detailed analysis of this extract from the Primary Chronicle, as well as all its sources in the original and in translation into English, in fact representing the appendix to this paper and being available in electronic form. It is important that it also discusses the mistakes of frequently used historiography, for example, those of Mansikka. 9 Original: “... .. ... .... .... .. ...... .. ....... .......... […] ...... .... . ......... ........ ........ […]. ... .. ... ........... .. ........ . . .... ....... .... .... ........ . .......... […] ...... .... .... .......... ... .... ........ .. .. .... ....... […] ..... . ...... .. ..... . ........ […] . ..... ..... ..... .. .... ...... ............ . ....... ......”. literature:firstly, theold pagan deities widely known by myths and popular legends were merely outstanding people (sometimes magicians) of antiquity;10 secondly, these people were frequently descended from ancient biblical characters. The Byzantine author John Malala also worked in this way in the 6th century, before whom a task was set to create a united world history, taking into account Graeco-Roman and biblical mythological her­itage. In his work “Chronographia” (created ca. 560s) about Hephaestus’s rule in Egypt and Helios-Sun after him, he gave them the roles of cultural heroes but reducing them from gods to people. Then, shortly after the Christianization of South Slavs (Bulgarians and Macedonians), in the 9th to 10th centuries, these peoples began to translate the Byz­antine works from Greek into Slavic, including the historical ones. Thus, “probably, as far back as X century”, “by I. I. Sreznevsky’s hypothesis, [Malala’s “Chronographia”] turned out to be translated [into Old Slavonic from Greek] in Bulgaria”11 (........ 1987: 472). However, this and many other translations were not preserved in Bulgaria or other South Slavic countries; we are aware of them only because these Old Slavonic sources were brought or copied in Russian cloisters after the Christianization of the Rus. It is this text that the author of the Primary Chronicle had in the 12th or 13th centuries, and it is this text that he mentioned: “let him/her read Chronograph”. This refers to the Old Russian compilation comprised of Byzantine sources (among which also was Malala’s “Chronographia”) translated into Slavic and setting forth the ancient history (........, 1983; ...... 1994: 14–15). Several such compilations-chronographs are extant. It is highly significant that “contrary to diffused opinion” (.... 2000: 523–524), “identification of Hephaestus with Svarog, and Helios (Sun) with Dazhdbog”, which we are interested in, “does not belong to the author of the compiled Russian chronograph […], never mind the chronicler, who had included the extract from Malala’s Chronographia in the annalistic article of 1114 […], but it goes back to some ancient (if not the original) version of the translation of Malala’s Chronographia” (........, 1983: 191), which made in Bulgaria. Indeed, although, for example, a prominent researcher of Slavic paganism (and theMiddleAges in general) Lowmianski frankly and convincingly wrotethat, in this case, we could see the source “relating to the higher mythology of the South Slavs (rather than theEastSlavs as itis almosteverywherecommonly believed)”(.......... 2003: 75); this opinion not infrequently remains unnoticed; Dazhbog and Svarog are constantly referred to as “East Slavic=Old Russian” deities,12 although it is the South Slavic scribe that had replaced the Greek names by the names from Slavic mythology. There is no doubt that the scribe had done that to explain the mythological function:13 the Greek god of fire, Hephaestus, could be unknown to the Slavic reader, but the deity of fire, Svarog, 10 This approach is called euhemerism. 11 The most prominent researchers of Malala’s Slavic translation, Istrin and Tvorogov, and many others sub­sequently adhered to the same version of the translation’s place of origin. 12 In many respects, due to still prevailing authority of Jagic, Brückner, and Mansikka (.......... 2003: 77–78), the authors undoubtedly standout in other works on Slavic paganism. However, it is that their view that should be rejected now as the obsolete one. 13 Some similar examples of “translation” of Greek gods into Slavic ones are known in the Old Russian liter­ature, see for them (Kutarev 2021: 111–112 ft. 26). was clear for him/her (see below). Meanwhile, the name “Svarog” is never mentioned in independent East Slavic sources (.......... 2003: 78).14 The analysis of sources shows that the text of the Primary Chronicle retells Malala’s “Chronographia” quite close to the original (Kutarev 2021: 114–119); the Slavic scribes had added only several independent fragments, in fact representing just two nuances. Firstly, the names: Pheosta-Hephaestus became Svarog, and his son (Helios in the origi­nal; “Sun” in Slavic translation) Dazhbog; this correction was made by the South Slavic scribe. Secondly, a way of punishment for betrayal introduced by Svarog: being cast into a fiery furnace, having been written in the Primary Chronicle by the Old Russian author.15 Everything else (Egypt; smith tongs fallen from the heavens; establishment of the institution of marriage and punishment of betrayers by successful son-ruler) was taken from Malala by the Slavic scribes without any change. However, one more important point should be noted here: having come across the South Slavic glosses on Svarog and Dazhbog, the Old Russian author of the Primary Chronicle did not correct or remove them; he used them, which undoubtedly points to the fact that they were clear to him and those readers for whom he was writing. It is particularly obvious in the case of Dazhbog that was mentioned in the Primary Chronicle earlier regardless of external sources. Thus, Dazhbog appears as a deity of both the South and East Slavs, which undoubtedly points to his significance and probable proto-Slavic origin. A Bulgarian of the 10th century and a Russian of the 12th century did not need an explanation of who he was. The Sermons against Pagans give another ancient corpus of references to the Slavic deities. This genre also originates from Byzantine literature, and it was also partially influenced by the South Slavs. Thus, one of the most significant Sermons against Pagans, “The Sermon on Idols”,16 has the following lines: “[…] and the Slavs create and make sacrifice to the deities; to Vilas, and Mokosh, Diva, Perun, Chors, Rod, and Rozhanica, Upyrs, and Bereginias, and Pereplut, and revolving, they drink from drinking horns [in] his [honour],andpraytoFireSvarozhets,andarrangedabathfortheNavys”17 (........... 2013: 287). Mokosh (and her epithet Diva? or is it an individual deity?), Chors and Perun have already occurred in the Primary Chronicle in the list of the supreme deities of Rus; 14 Though aword “svarog”is known in Novgorod dialects as theold namefor fire, as wellas “cricket”(“.......”), grasshopper (.... 2002: 214), which in Russian literally means a “small blacksmith” (“........”). Speak­ing of Lowmianski’s concept as a whole, with considering its idea of Slavic primitive monotheism headed by Svarog-Perun, it is difficult to accept it, see for example (....... 2014: 281–282; ....... 2018: 115–120). 15 The fact that these fragments have various origins is evident from the Slavic translation of Malala’s “Chrono­graphia” that “was collected bit by bit by V. M. Istrin from chronographs and chroniclers”, mainly from Russian records of the 15th and 16th centuries; its full single text has not been preserved (...... 1994: 9). There are substitute names here (only in the chapters relating to book II), but there is nothing about the furnace. 16 The accepted short abbreviation of the name is quite explainable, for its full name is “The Sermon of St. Gregory [the Theologian] created while interpreting how formerly peoples, being the pagans, worshipped idols and made sacrifices to them, which they are doing now as well”. A number of key versions of this Sermon appeared within a period from the 11th to 13th centuries (.......... ......... 2003: 155) was published by Galkovskij (........... 2013: 281–300). 17 Translation oftheSermons againstPagans fromOldRussian hereandhereinafter is mine. Original:“...... ...... ........ . ........ . ........... ...... ...... . ........ ..... ........ ....... ...... . ......... ......... . ........... . ........... . ......... ..... .... .. ....... . ...... ......... ........ . ....... .... .......”. mysterious Pereplut must also belong to the deities. Rod and Rožanica (nevertheless, Rožanicy are usually referred to in plural) are the deified ancestors and grantors of the fates (Kutarev 2019). Upyrs are a prototype of Vampires (these words must be cognate); Bereginias are the spirits of dead babies (........... 2013: 297). Navys are the dead ancestors whose spirits, according to popular beliefs, come to the living on certain days; at that time, all accessories for washing were left for them in a bathhouse. Vilas are more interesting to us: as is not infrequently noted, these beautiful female spirits have South Slavic origin, which may point to the original stage of existence of this text, for example, in Serbia (........... 2013: .. 284). Moreover, according to this text and other Sermons against Pagans, it is also possible to obtain additional materials to analyse the image of Svarog: the concepts of “Fire” and “Svarozhets” are directly identified with each other here. The second of two most important Sermons against Pagans considered to be the most ancient: “The Sermon of man who loves Christ”18 of the 11th century (.......... ......... 2003: 153) is also aware of Fire Svarozhets. It says: “[...] those who believe in two different religions, believe in Perun and Chors, and Mokosh, and Sim and Rgl, and Volys that are 30 sisters in number. Boors say so, and regard all that as [gods and] goddesses, and, therefore, make offerings to them, and slaughter roosters [in sacrifice] to them. They pray to Fire, calling it Svarozhets, and take garlic as a deity”; at the same time, they “pray to” fire “in drying barn”19 (........... 2013: 305, 307). “Volys” is a misspelling of “Vilas”; little-known Semargl mentioned in the Primary Chronicle has split into two parts. Svarozhets is again directly specified as Fire. This name is more frequently conveyed as Svarozhich in studies; there is such a spelling in the sources, although the very diminutival suffix -ets20 prevails (cf. modern Russian: ...... (bratets) “[little or beloved] brother” [brat]; ....... (stolbets) “small column” [stolb], etc.). Seemingly, this consideration distracts us from Dazhbog, but it will be clear further why it has been provided. Let me note that there is no Dazhbog (nor Stribog) in early versions of Sermons against Pagans, although the rest of the full list of the Kiev pan­theon from the Primary Chronicle has been provided in “The Sermon of man who loves Christ” (only Mokosh goes before Semargl here, and the latter is “bifurcated”), but it is easy to explain. “A word ‘Bog’ (God) is misused in these names” that could have a wrong connotation within the Christian enlightenment, for only Christian God could be referred to as God after Christianization, and the pagan deities were considered demons (........ 2005: 138; ... ........ 1999: 111).21 Only the latest (16th century) version 18 The most famous version of the full name: “The Sermon of man who loves Christ, and Adherent of the True Faith”. 19 Original:“......... ....... ........ ....... ...... ........ . . ..... ........ ...... .. .. ........ .. ........... ......... .. .......... .. ... ..... .......i . .... ............ ... ...... . .... ... ....... ...... .. ....... ...... ... ........... . ........... ...... .......”, “...... .... .......”. 20 The versions of spelling the name according to “The Sermon on Idols”, “The Sermon of man who loves Christ”, and “The Sermon of Chrysostom”: ........., .. ..........., ..........(.) (in two editions), ..........., ..........., .. ......... (........... 2013: 287, 297, 305, 309); i.e., the form of -.. (-ets)/-.. (-its) occurs much more frequently than -.. (-ich). Other sources do not have it. 21 There is every reason to believe that basically not so much frequent occurrence of Dazhbog in the sources as might be expected may be also explained by the same thing. of “The Sermon on Idols” separately “recalls” that “other people believe in Stribog, and Dazhbog, and Pereplut”22 (........... 2013: 299). This point must be quoted (literal­ly, with only omitting conjunction “and” following “Stribog”) from the Sermon against Pagans “The Sermon of Chrysostom”23 (........... 2013: 324), dating from the 13th century (.......... ......... 2003: 159). There is no Dazhbog in other Sermons against Pagans. The last important source mentioning Dazhbog is a short (shorter than this paper) epic poem “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” created ca. 1185 and represents a masterpiece of the Old Russian Middle Ages. None of the other works has been likely to be translated and adapted so often in the whole of Russian literature; the source has been explored exhaustively. Although as far back as the middle of the 20th century, it was possible to come across the view that “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is a hoax created in the 18th century or shortly before; at present, it is absolutely impossible to state that (........ 2008) despite the fact that the original of the only record was lost in the Fire of Moscow caused by Napoleon in 1812. Despite their quite late time of creation, the pagan images used exclusively in an artistic sense appear in unexpected abundance in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” (which raised doubts about the authentic antiquity of the text). For example, the phrase (... 1985: 38): “the winds, Stribog’s grandchildren, waft from the sea”24 suggested that Stribog was related to atmospheric phenomena. The functions of one more supreme Old Russian deity known for the Primary Chronicle and the Sermons against Pagans are also explained on the basis of the text of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”: “Prince Vseslav held court for people, assigned the princes to the towns, while prowled as a wolf at night: he prowled from Kiev to Tmutarakan25 until dawn, crossed great Chors’s path as a wolf”26 (... 1985: 42–43). Thus, great Chors appears as a deity of a heavenly body. Strange though it may seem, there is no Perun in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, but Dazhbog appears twice, both times are in the phrase “Dazhbog’s grandchildren”,27 while it is not quite clear, to whom exactly it is referring. It is usually supposed that it refers to either the Russian princes or the Russian people in general. It seems that this issue has not been still resolved, and the researchers disagree. For more information, see very broad historiography of the issue (........ 1995: 80–81). 22 Original: “...... ....... .. ......... . ......... . ..........”. 23 Full name: “The Sermon of our Father, John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, about how pagans believed in idols before, and made sacrifices to them, and called their names, which many people are doing now as well, being Christians, but without knowing what Christianity is”. 24 Herein and hereinafter English translation is based on Tvorogov’s translation from Old Russian into modern Russian according to the edition (... 1985); and the original text is quoted according to the first edition of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”: “....., ........ ....., ..... ......” (... 1800: 12). 25 Nowadays it is Taman, a small town in the South of Russia, wherefrom the Crimean Bridge stretches to the Crimea. 26 Original:“............. ............, ....... ..... ......, ..... ...... ..............; ... ..... ......... .. .... ...........; ........ ....... ....... .... ..........” (... 1800: 36). 27 Original: “.......... ..... .....-.... .....” and “....... ..... .. ...... ....-.... .....” (... 1800: 16–17, 19) in the sense of “some person dies” and “some person took offence”. There are no other important textual sources on Dazhbog. Surely he has more than once appeared in the Old Russian literature, but generally those were the quatiotions from the Primary Chronicle that were less understood and more distorted by the authors. For example, the source of 1560s “......... .....” (Book of Royal Degrees) described the Christianization of Rus in 988 as follows: the statues of “Perun and Chars, and Toad and Mokosh, and Vlasiy, the deity of cattle, and other idols”28 were smashed (......... ..... 1775: 138). It is evident that Dazhbog’s name was understood as two words, where the former is copulative “..” (“and”), and the latter is “....” (“toad” by consonance), Stribog and Semargl were rejected, and Mokosh’s name was interpreted as the male one. At the same time, Volos’s name was made into Vlasiy,29 and his description as the deity of cattle was taken from another passage of the Primary Chronicle. Many similar examples may be given (Kutarev 2021: 107–109). All this points to the fact that the Russian pagan pantheon at the Modern Age was described merely as some literary rather than ethnographic tradition. The material of onomastics and especially folklore can add the data of textual sources. Thus, it is noted that “the [people’s] names Dadibog, Dadzibog(-ius), Daczbogius occur in the Polish documents of the 13th–14th centuries, Dadzibog Maskiewicz was among the students of the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in Kiev in XVII century, cf. ‘Danilo Dazhbogovich Zaderevetskiy, the dweller of the Russian land’ in Galicia (1394)” (........ 1999: 70). Folklore is also familiar with Dazhbog: he is mentioned in several Novgorod proverbs, for example: “pray to Dazhbog, he will help a little”, and similar. (........ 1995: 79). The words “Dazhbo”, “Dazhba” in some regions could be understood as “indeed” up to the 19th century, for example, “here is Dazhba, burst the eyes” in Ryazan, “Dazhba from God grant” (........ 2005: 295; ..... 2004: 241–244). Apart from personal names that may presumably originate from Dazhbog’s name and are spread among all three branches of the Slavs, some similar geographical names are also well-known. Furthermore, Ukrainian folk songs are sometimes given as an example of popular memory of Dazhbog, two of them are especially popular: “...i. ...... ........” (“Among three roads”) and “.. .., .........” (“Oh, you, the nightingale”), where (sic!) ...... (Dazhbog) appears, in the former case, he encounters the fiancé at dawn, going to his own wedding, and in the latter case, Dazhbog forwards the nightingale to open the doors to summer and close them to winter (....... 1995: 527–528). Some­times it is also possible to come across references to other Ukrainian songs mentioning Dazhbog. I think that in this case, the issue is the secondary penetration of mythological character into folklore from literature now without any continuity. Very late record of these rare songs speaks for this, the earliest one dates from 1924, and some songs were written down only in the 1970s (....... 1995: 574–575).30 The origin of “Dazhbog 28 Original: “...... . ....., .. .... . ......, . ....i. .... ...... . ...... .....”. 29 Typical Christian name; cf. Byzantine St. Blaise. 30 Some more songs containing the same refrain “.. .........” (“Oh, Dazhdbog”) were published in 1960s by Kilimnik. I have no confidence in his works; I think (although I would not state that as well, since the detailed reference to this suspiciously abundant data, but for all that remained unnoticed by the earlier ethnographers for some reason, and exceedingly resembling the authors’ knowledge of scientific interpretations of the figures used requires special and extensive consideration) that all materials provided here are unlikely to be folk, and boulder” from Minsk region in Belarus (Belarusian ........ ...... (Dazhbogav kamen); though it was frequently called Saint or just God’s one: ..... (Svyaty), ..... (Bogav)) that ethnographers described as having such a name only in the 1980s is also secondary (...... 1992: 64–69): although the very old and traditional cult (the prayers to help by means of offerings; particularly those concerning rainmaking), Dazhbog’s name was obviously added artificially later on a literary rather than popular basis. Moreover, in such cases, Dazhbog’s name could emerge from a short formula “God grant” (see below) turned to Christian God rather than pagan deity; or in case of Belarusian boulder, from “.....-...” (“Dozhd-bog” – “Rain deity”). At the same time, two popular legends of Dabog coming from Serbia and written down in the 1860s are noteworthy. Both are represented in the original and in English (as far as I know, for the first time31) in the article (Kutarev 2021: 119–122). The first legend tells that Dabog ruled on earth and God on heaven, and God could not diminish Dabog’s power that took too many people’s souls. However, God was able to determine that his son could defeat Dabog; then, God gave birth to his son, who defeated Dabog and set the souls free. The second legendrecounts that God could not create a sufficiently large heaven to cover the earth during the creation of the world. To discover how to improve the situation, he sent the bee to the meeting of demons headed by Dabog, where the latter was talking about in which way the earth could be decreased, and the heaven could be enlarged. However, Dabog then discovered the bee and began to prevent it from returning to God by means of wind and rain. Nevertheless, the bee managed to fly to God and told him everything, following which God improved the world. It seems that Dabog here may be a demonized memory of the supreme pagan deity: he is the head of some “evil spir­its” that at the pre-Christian time must be a pagan pantheon.32 In spite of demonization, Dabog still appears powerful and wise, which allows him to resist even Christian God. In modern times, Dazhbog’s name has become quite common in culture. The Slavic neopagans call communities and sanctuaries in his honour, and the entrepreneurs name this is not about the hoax or late penetration of obviously literary element. However, it is possible that refrain only means “God grant”, since it occurs here in such a form in similar songs (........ 1964: 46–54, 77–84, 99). I would note that the story mentioning Lada, Jar-Jarylo, and Svetovid is provided in the book as a folklore one (........ 1964: 123): there is no doubt that such a group does not come from the popular Ukrainian legends. Without immediately attempting finally substantiating or contesting the reliability of this source, I will leave it beyond consideration, nevertheless, without accepting it as a folklore one. To put it mildly, in my opinion, only that information about many “old deities” that Boris Cok has allegedly gathered in Slovenia may be called just “secondary folklore”: Dazhbog is also mentioned here along with Sventovit, Triglav, and Perun, see for example (Cok 2015: 109–122 itd.). Without having an opportunityto make a full review here in view of the limited size of this article and on account of the emphasis on somewhat different subject-matter, I have to explain my view in a few words. The reasons for my distrust of Cok are the same: a) overly abundant materials that for some reason remained unnoticed until the 21st century by preceding ethnographers, b) the figures that, on one hand, combine specific elements of religious systems of East and West Slavs that seem to be unique, on the other hand, were unknown in South Slavs before, c) evident signs of the latest and scientific interpretations in “ethnographic” layer of data proper. 31 The first Russian translation was also published by me (....... 2015: 107–108). 32 At the same time, I omit here the review of literature of the South Slavs, originally approached Dazhbog, mainly Cajkanovic and Causidis (who has published his works in Studia Mythologica Slavica). Their views do not seem convincing to me; (see ......., 2016b: 132 . .....). their companies after him. Astronomers have named a patera (crater) on Jupiter’s sat­ellite Io after Dazhbog (Dazhbog Patera). He is often referred to in works of fiction. Unfortunately, Dazhbog also not infrequently appears in the counterfeits of the Slavic antiquities that we will not consider herein (more about this can be found in ....... 2016a; ....... 2016b: 133). SCIENTIFIC INTERPRETATIONS OF DAZHBOG, CHORS AND SVAROG AND THEIR ISSUES Although quite stable concepts of Dazhbog’s probable functions and relations in the Russian pantheon have been formed, they raise several questions and present not quite resolved issues. First, the popular interpretation that Dazhbog is a deity of the sun, as many researchers believe, causes difficulties. Indeed, the text of the Primary Chronicle of the Hypatian Codex says that after Svarog’s rule: “his son named Sun that is called Dazhbog had reigned”,33 and he was “the Sun-king, Svarog’s son, or Dazhbog” (Kutarev 2021: 114–116). However, the Slavic deities’ names have been put in here as the explanations of Greek mythological characters. On the one hand, Dazhbog substitutes for the solar god Helios, whose name the Slavic scribes do not even mention, translating him just as “Sun”. However, on the other hand, Dazhbog’s characteristic is Svarog’s son in both descriptions of the deity. Is it possible that the scribe resorted to a substitution of names because of the identity of relationship: as is the case with Helios and the god of fire Hephaestus, Dazhbog was the son of the deity of fire Svarog rather than because of the identity of functions, meaning that Dazhbog was a deity of the sun as Helios? This assumption, which is no less admis­sible than the hypothesis of the identity of functions, has also been put forward more than once before by the great specialists in Slavic studies (........ 2005: 93; .......... 2003: 81; ....... 2014: 156–157). Moreover, I would note one more important point that seems to have not been mentioned before in the literature. There is the following fragment in the same Slavic translation of Malala’s “Chronographia”: “after Dazhbog, Svarog’s son, deceased”, Sir reigned in Egypt, followed by Or (Osiris and Hor in the original), followed by Philis,34 who asked the oracle saying the following words: “tell me, [not-]lying god, Pirisphon, that is sun” (...... 1994: 70).35 The function of the deity of the sun is attributed to the male analogue of Persephone here that has neither this male image nor any relation to the sun in Greek myths. It follows that the Slavic translator36 (Malala has some fire and truthful sky deity without name rather than Persephone in the original), without particularly understanding, 33 Original: “.. .... ......... .... ... ....... ...... ..... ......... ........”. 34 It is Malala who has mentioned the character named Thoulis (Greek T.....) for the first time. 35 Original (II, 2): “.. .......i.. ........ .... ......... <…> ....... ......”, “...... .., ...... ...., ........., ..... .......” (the variant: “........ ....”). 36 The same translator who also added the glosses on Svarog and Dazhbog. could assign the status of sun deity almost to anyone (see more in Kutarev 2021: 112–113). However that may be, the sources adduce no arguments for the fact that Dazhbog was concerned with the sun, except the comparison with Helios in the translation of Malala. Thus, Dazhbog should not necessarily be the deity of the sun. Let us check this approach considering other problem areas of researching into Dazhbog. Second, given the aforesaid, the fact that Chors is also usually referred to as the deity of the sun is frankly perplexing. The most significant contemporary research of deity Chors is Vasilyev’s work (........ 1999: 9–96), in many respects confirming one or another old hypothesis on this issue. The researcher considers the historiography of the issue, rejecting the approaches that are now irrelevant or have become secondary, for example, those aboutChors as a deity of the moon (........ 1999: 18–24). He also points out the most acknowledged etymology of the name today: it is North Iranian, namely reconstructed Sarmatic and Alanian “*xors/*xurs ‘Sun king’” that after all developed as far back as Avestan “hvar. xšaet.m” having had the same meaning (........ 1999: 55–63). Having examined in depth a great number of written sources, linguistic and historical research, Vasilyev is quite convincing when he writes: “In our opinion, the analysis of the data contained in Old Russian written sources that allow to estimate the East Slavic Chors’s nature and functions suggests that in Rus he was considered just as the solar deity, the deity of Sun. And although almost each of the source illustrations provided may be separately contested, taken in their integrity, collectively they form a convincing ‘solar vector’ for Chors” (........ 1999: 54). Why, if that is so, are there two solar deities in Vladimir’s pantheon provided in the Primary Chronicle? Surely, it is possible, but rather strange if we take into account the small size of the “Kiev Olympus”. A historiographic stereotype based on writing the Laurentian (the earliest) Codex of the Primary Chronicle has arisen since the time of Bodyansky: “... ..... ......... . ..........”, meaning that in contrast to the Hypatian Codex (quoted above), there is no conjunction “and” between Chors and Dazhbog’s names that is between all other deities from the list. On this basis, Chors and Dazhbog could be even considered as one deity having two names, but it seems absurd. Both names are often mentioned independently without any reference, which is illustrat­ed by “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”. Beskov has fairly written about the absence of “and” between Chors and Dazhbog in his recent work: “it is a really interesting detail, but one should not overestimate its significance. After all, the names are separated in the Hypatian Codex”, and it is also known “apocryphal ‘Sermon and Revelation of the Holy Apostles’, where Chors and Diy’s names are also separated neither with a full stop, nor with the conjunction ‘and’. However, nobody has ever suggested identifying this pair of deities with each other! In general, such cases of writing the names of Old Russian deities in sermons against pagans are not unique”, for example, there are the following variants in “The Sermon on Idols”: “‘........ ....... . ....... . ......’ (the edition of Novgorod St. Sophia Library), ‘......... ...... ....... ......’37 (Chudovo edition)”, among others (...... 2008: 111). It seems that the omission of “and” between Chors and Dazhbog’s names in the Laurentian Codex may be considered accidental, meaningless. The mythological attempts to explain the presence of two solar deities in the list of only six characters are also unsuccessful. Rybakov’s opinion is often referred to here: “White Light (Universe) refers to the sun as Dazhbog (the deity of light and sun) refers to Chors (the deity of only one heavenly body), as Apollo to Helios” (....... 1981: 433). However, the complicated interrelation between Apollo and Helios is not a common concept for European paganism, “in Greek mythology such overlapping and functions partition are the result of long-term development and rise of Apollo: he was not a deity of sun at first” (..... 2004: 243). It is well known that “[…] early in the development of ancient Greek religion, Apollo was a cruel and gloomy deity, and one of his most ancient functions was the function of destroyer. And the solar nature began to be attributed to this deity quite late: the texts, where Apollo and Helios-Sun had been equated with each other, had appeared only since 5th century B.C.” (........ 1999: 57–58). The views, having travelled a unique and long path in Greece, cannot be applied to the Slavic material, where thereby there are too many solar deities. However, the approach under which Dazhbog is not a solar deity, can solve this issue. Only Chors is a solar deity of the East Slavs can do so, as Vasilyev also shows. At the same time, when the researcher writes:“butthesolarnatureofDazhbogis indisputable”(........ 1999:27), he nowhere even attempts to substantiate this opinion, let alone even any consideration of it; the thesis is given a priori as an axiom. Unfortunately, it is commonplace in the literature despite all the specified instances of it not fitting. Third,Dazhbogis notinfrequentlyidentifiedwithSvarozhich;inmanymodernSlavic languages, including Russian, a patronymic is formed from a name by means of a suffix -.. (-ich) that is an obligatory constituent of a personal name of Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians (e.g., Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy has a patronymic Nikolayevich as Nikolay’s son, etc.). There also was such a word formation in Old Russian. The iden­tification of Fire-Svarozhich from the Sermons against Pagans with Dazhbog could be concluded from it, or, more frequently, that they were brothers from their father Svarog, for example (....... 2014: 160). However, it was noted above that word Svarozhets generally denoted the Fire Deity, where the suffix -etsgivesa diminutive meaning: “little Svarog” (Brückner 1918: 148–149). In essence, the suffix -ich could also be used in such a meaning at all times (best of all, it has been preserved in modern Russian in the words of feminine gender having two suffixes, such as ....... [lisichka] (“little fox” from .... [lisa] “fox”), ....... [vodichka] (“little water” from .... [voda] “water”), etc.). 37 In other words, if the absence of conjunction “and” between the names allegedly allows to identify or draw together the characters, Perun and Chors “can” merge, and in some cases even female deities Mokosh and Vilas “can” merge with them as well. Thus, although Dazhbog was Svarog’s son, he is no Svarozhich or Svarozhets. Neither in the Russian mythology nor in the paganism of the Baltic Slavs (the native speakers of West group of Slavic languages), where the deity Zuarasiz was mentioned early in the 11th century by Bruno of Querfurt (in a letter to the German king St Henry II); or the deity Zuarasici was mentioned in the 1010s by Thietmar of Merseburg (“Chronicon”, VI, 23)38 if the correlation of these gods with the East Slavic Fire-Svarozhets is possible. Both “little” Svarozhets and “big” Svarog, even if there was any difference between them, except origin (East and South Slavic, respectively), are the deity of fire as clearly follows from the sources; although the former is more like a deified flame proper, and the latter rather appears in the form of a blacksmith. Let me particularly note one more historiographic stereotype: a popular theory of cognation between the Sanskrit word “svarga” (“sky”) and Svarog’s name. This alleged proximity is almost impossible from the linguistic point of view (........ 2005: 297; ...... 1986: 569–570). Another weighty theory derives Svarog’s name from the Slavic notion “.....” [svara], i.e., quarrel, discord, relating it to the function of chastising deity, for it is Svarog that had introduced punishment for betrayals (...... 1986: 569; ....... 2014: 157). However, the ety­mology deriving the word from the Slavic root “...” [var], meaning “boiling”, “broth”, should be considered preferable, (........... 2013: 16), including those word with a prefix “s-” (cf. “......” [svarka] (“welding”), “.......” [svarit] (“to boil”), and similar. DAZHBOG AS THE SLAVIC SKY FATHER Thus, Dazhbog is not a solar deity, since the Chors was that deity; and Dazhbog has no function of the fiery deity, although Dazhbog is Fire Deity’s son in the Slavic mythology. In that case, whom could Dazhbog be considered in accordance with the sources? Let me note his most obvious function in the Old Russian texts, namely the role of an ancestor for “Dazhbog’s grandchildren” in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”. Regardless of whoever these grandchildren may be, either the Russians in general (which seems the most probable to me) or only a princely family, in any event, Dazhbog acts as Parent God, Father God. Indo-European mythology knows well that image; the name of this god reconstruct­ed as *Dyeus-Phater. The deity “Dyaus Pitar ‘Sky Father’” (in Sanskrit Dyau.pit.´ and similar variants) has been mentioned more than once in Indian Vedas, including the most ancient one, “Rigveda” (15th–10th centuries B.C.). Although, according to Erman, this deity “goes back to Common-Indo-European period”, nevertheless, “as far back as ‘Rigveda’, the worship of Dyaus was reflected at the extinction stage, later Dyaus was mentioned rarely” (....... ....... 1996: 190, 375); and thunderer and conqueror Indra appears as the chief deity in “Rigveda”. In Greek myths, Zeus acts as Sky Father; in essence, his name with the epithet “Father”: Greek .e.. pat.. [Zeus pater] has the same stem as 38 Later, this deity turned into Riedegost (and similar variants of spelling) first in Adam of Bremen’s chronicle (II, 21) (.... .......... 2011: 41), and then in chronicle of Helmold of Bosau (XI–XII centuries); with Thietmar having called in this way only the town, where deity Zuarasici was worshipped (.......... 2003: 139–152). Dyaus Pitar and the Roman name of Sky Father Jupiter (Latin *I(o)u-pater). In many Indo-Europeanlanguages,theword“deity”(for example,Sanskrit“deva”,Greek“.e..” [theos], Latin “deus”, etc.39) also derives from Proto-Indo-European *dyeu-, originally meaning “sky”. Likewise, the word “father” is also resembling in various Indo-European languages (Slavic “....” [otets], “....” [batya]). The Scandinavian deity Týr, well-known for Icelandic myths, develops from a hy­pothesized Proto-Germanic deity named *Tiwaz; and the denotation of “Tuesday” derives from the English form of this deity’s name. In the Balts’ folklore, Dievas (Lithuanian Dievas, Latvian Dievs; this word also means the notion “God” proper) is a supreme deity, although the thunderer Perkunas (Lithuanian Perkunas, Latvian Perkons), whose name is similar to the Slavic Perun,40 sometimes is opposed to him in that role. It is interesting that in a number of cases Sky Father is “pushed” to the sidelines of the mythology (as Scandinavian Týr having lost his hand, or Indian Dyaus Pitar, whose certain conflict with Indra is visible), and sometimes the Sky Father and the Thunderer are the same character (Zeus, Jupiter). It seems that during some period of time similar (or even identical) images of Sky Father and Thunderer began to separate in Indo-European communities, with the Thunderer (if he separated in mythology) beginning to play a more significant role in military aristocracy within the period of settling apart the Indo-Europeans, and pushing aside formerly supreme Sky Father. In other cases, no separation has taken place, and then only the function of Sky Father was pushed to the sidelines as compared with the military and powerful one (....... 2016b: 134–138). The Slavic thunderer Perun in no way proves to be a Father/Ancestor in the sources. At the same time, the images of Sky Father and Thunderer are separated in the Balts, the closest to the Slavs, as well as other North Indo-Europeans. In this way, “it was worth supposing the Slavs’ thunderer’s latent struggle with the deity of the sky for superiority in the pantheon, which was between Zeus and Cronos41 in the Greeks, and between Indra (and, perhaps, even Parjanya substituted by him) and Dyaus in the Indo-Aryans” (..... 2004: 139); and between Perkunas and Dievas in the Balts. Then why can we not see the Slavic parallel to Dievas, which is suggesting itself? Where is the very Sky Father, who has become the Slavs’ successor of Proto-Indo-European *Dyeus-Phater? Dazhbog is fit to be the Sky Father upon a great number of criteria at once, while no other Slavic deities meet all of them. Firstly, Dazhbog is an ancestor (i.e., Father Deity), which clearly follows from the image of “Dazhbog’s grandchildren” in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”. Secondly, he plays a significant part in mythology without being, nevertheless, the supreme deity. “As a deity of thunderstorm and thunder, Perun (Indo-European *Per(kw)un- o-s), whose ‘sacral roots’ go back to the time of Indo-European commonality, 39 The word “....” [divo] (“marvel, miracle”) from same stem has been preserved among the Slavs. 40 It is believed that the Baltic mythology, as well as the Baltic languages are the closest to the Slavic according to the origin. 41 Klejn is likely to have made a misspelling here (corrected by me): struggle, which “was between Zeus and Chronos”. was related to the military sphere and considered to be a patron of warriors and their leader as far back as that time. With ‘the beginning of the heroic era of settling apart the Indo-Europeans, evidently, since the end of III mil­lennium B.C.’, the role of military function had been growing in the social structure of the Indo-European tribes, which put the deity of thunderstorm in the forefront in their pantheon. It is quite natural that within the period of forming the Old Russian stateand a lot of military activities of the first Kiev princes, Perun turned into the patron deity of them and the prince’s armed force” (........ 1999: 213). However, Dazhbog has remained among the most important worshipped characters of East and South Slavs (perhaps, the West as well? For the deities’ names of Poland and Czech until the 15th century are unknown) together with solar deity Chors and some other deities. Putting Perun in the forefront was likely taking place simultaneously with pushing the very Dazhbog to the sidelines, whose role of an ancestor, however, was not forgotten even 200 years after the Christianization of Rus, when “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” was being created. Of no small importance, linguistic research may also be involved here. Only Stri­bog’s name was attempted to be explained as an evolution of Proto-Indo-European name *Dyeus-Phater among the significant deities of the Slavs, representing its etymology as “father deity” (....... 1981: 432). However, as Toporov notes, “evidently, it is necessary now to reject (or at least seriously reconsider) deriving of the first element of this name from the word denoting father (Indo-European *patri>Slavic stri) as it was done by many researchers, and interpret stri- as an imperative from verb st.rti “stretch”, “spread” as R.O. Jakobson suggested in his works as well” (....... 1995: 529; ...... 1986: 777; ..... 2004: 244). The mysterious “Div” (demon or bird) being referred to only in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, at one moment shouting from a tree, at another being thrown down to the land, evidently does not fit for the Sky Father as to the status (... 1800: 9, 25; ... 1985: 37, 40). The name of “Diy or Dyw, the deity of rain and sky, i.e. Zeus” is of literary and undoubtedly Greek origin, also known for some Sermons against Pagans. “However, in Russian, this word was used in the sense of pagan deity in general. Our ancestors did not worship Diy. Diy has got into our Olympus due to the ancient scribes’ knowledge of Byzantine historical literature”42 (........... 2013: 11–12). The Slavs have no other male deities similar to the name *Dyeus-Phater. What is the etymology of Dazhbog’s name? Here we come across another historiographic “axiom” that seems to be better to be considered again. Dubensky’s theory proposed as far back as the first half of 19th century appears to be established: “he explained the first half of the name (‘Dazhd-’) as an imperative from verb ‘....’ [dat] (‘to give’): Dazhd-bog: ‘... ...’ [Dai Bog] (‘God grant’). On this basis, the name Dazhdbog is defined 42 For example, the very Slavic translation of Malala’s “Chronographia” says (I, 20 = I, 13): “...... ... .. . ... .......” (“Zeus that is also called Diy”), original: “.e.. .. .a. ..a. .a...s..’” (...... 1994: 29; IMC 2000: 14). as ‘giving god’43 […]; ‘deus donator’” (........ 1995: 80). However, as stated, the form of the name “Dazhdbog” (containing two letters “d”) is represented in the sources in an absolute minority: only two records of the Hypatian Codex mention it (and even then, they do not always follow this spelling), and none of the editions of the Laurentian Codex has it. It never appears in the Sermons against Pagans, and as stated, there is one spelling “Dazhd-Bozha” and another “Dazh-Bozha” (both in genitive) in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”. Istrin points out the exclusive form “........” in the reconstructed Slavic translation of Malala (...... 1994: 69–70). This overwhelming prevalence of form “Dazhbog” containing no second letter “d” requires a philological explanation, and it was offered. Having considered many exam­ples, the linguists have established that the palatalization with “j” occurred in different ways in various groups of Slavic languages. Say, proto-Slavic word *medja ‘border’ has acquired the form “.....” (“mezhda”) in the South Slavs (in Old Slavonic); Old Russian “....” (“mezha”) in the East Slavs, but, for example, Polish “miedza” or Czech “meze” in the West Slavs. Similarly, if Dazhbog’s name derives from the imperative of a word “dat” in various Slavic languages, the Old Slavonic (Bulgarian and Macedonian) form would be Dazhdbog (from “dazhd”), the East Slavic form Dazhbog (from “dazh”), and reconstructed Lechitic one *Dadz.bog. (Old Polish Dadzibog), whereas Old Czech would be *Daz.bog..44 Since the East Slavs adopted written language and literature in Old Slavonic from the South Slavs, the Bulgarian and Macedonian forms have long prevailed in the Old Russian book-learning, being the standard there despite other forms of the Old Russian proper. However, it seems that another explanation of the prevalence of the form “Dazhbog” in the sources is more probable. Many researchers “considered the form ‘Dazh-Bog’ to be original, and the first part of the name (‘Dazh-’) to be a possessive adjective from extinct Slavic word ‘....’ [dag] (cf. Gothic dags, German Tag, etc.), i.e., day, light (A.N. Afa­nasyev, I.I. Sreznevsky, F.I. Buslaev, A.S. Famintsyn, L.P. Yakubinsky, B.A. Rybakov45). 43 At Jakobson’s suggestion, the meaning “wealth, good” was also looked for in the part “-bog” of Dazhbog and Stribog’s names, but this context (even if it was derived from the acknowledged Iranian etymology of a word) would be strange to be seen only in two names, without applying to all other occurrences of quite independent word “...” [bog] (“god”) (........ 1995: 80). 44 I thank Zenkin for tips on linguistics. 45 Klejn may be also added to this list, who writesabout the extreme uncommonness of the formation of the word from imperative of a verb: in his opinion, it is more logical to regard “it as a later comprehension (according to consonance). The assumption […] that Dazh- is a natural Russian palatalization of ancient Indo-European word ‘dag’” that is concerned with the notion of day and heat “is likely to be more correct”; it is also easier to get to the Serbian form Dabog through this assumption (..... 2004: 242). Kareev also wrote: “Dazh means ablaze, burning, from root dag (‘to burn’); Lithuanian degu (‘I am burning’); German Tag; Carantanian ...-.... (‘dawn’), etc.” (...... 2011: 33). Tvorogov also has not called Dazhdbog (though preferring this spelling) solar (in contrast to Chors, “the deity of sun and light heavenly body”) in his latest works, pointing out only his function of “the deity of light and giver of good” (.... 2000: 501). Maintaining the same etymology, nevertheless, Hilferding derived the deity’s solar function, he wrote: “as to another name of the deity of Sun, Dazhbog, it also seems to contain a notion of burning, fire: we have no doubt in correctness of derivation of this name that was first proposed by honourable Mikutskiy as we know, it was derived from the ancient root ... [dag] – ‘burn’ (Sanskrit dah, Lithuanian degu, degti ‘I burn’, ‘to burn’, Slavic ...... [dyogot’ ‘tar’], and, with regular alternating of . in . [d in zh], ...., ......., [zhgu, dozhigayu ‘I burn’, ‘I burn up’] etc.): thus, Dazhbog means a burning deity” (........... 2013: 259–260 ..... 699). Sreznevsky considered the extant word having the same root ‘.......’ [dzhnica] (dawn) in the Carantanian language46 to be the evidence of the existence of the word ‘dag’ in Slavic. Deriving ‘Dazh’ from ‘dag’ (interchange of ‘g’ and ‘zh’), Yakubinsky considered the form Dazhdbog wrong” (........ 1995: 80). Thus, it seems that this version of etymology has been undeservedly passed over. Although, as to the extent of my knowledge, none of the researchers proved its incorrectness and impossibility, or at least a little convincingness; and it constantly occurs in individual works of both the second half of the 20th century (........ 1995), and the 21st century (..... 2004), it is not noticed and “forgotten” to be mentioned, since another view “came into vogue” (despite shortcomings). Meanwhile, this approach perfectly combines with all those research studies that were carried out above and is perfectly fit for Dazhbog: the Sky Father concerned with day and light. It is also easy to explain the infrequent appearance of the form containing the second letter “d”: “Dazhdbog: one geographical name in Mosalsky uyezd47 also sounds like this; this form can strengthen an opinion of those, who […] derive this name from the imperative of verb ..... However, I look at things in a different way: when people forget the real meaning of a word, they often resort to a small change in pronunciation to adapt the word to the sounds of another, more familiar word, by meansof that change” (......2011: 32). Therefore, the form “Dazhdbog” containing second letter “d” is secondary (... ...... 1992: 67–68), which is clearly shown to us by the sources. Thus, we can talk about the probability of etymology of the name Dazhbog as the Slavic evolution of Indo-European *Dyeus-Phater48 and the corresponding mythological change. The stem Dazh- correlates with *Dyeus-, and “-bog” could substitute for “-father” (*-Phater), however, having been preserved as a function in mythology. The etymological chain appears: Dazhbog’s name derives from Proto-Slavic *dag. (day); while the very word “....” [den] undoubtedly goes back to Proto-Indo-European *dyeu-. The outline of my reconstruction is as follows: Proto-Indo-European *Dyeus > Proto-Slavic *dag.(“day”) > Proto-Slavic Dazh- As a result, in my opinion, Dazhbog is a Slavic version of the evolution of the In- do-European image of Sky Father (*Dyeus-Phater) just as Dievas functions as that in the Balts. Both Dazhbog’s features of ancestor proper (“Dazhbog’s grandchildren” in the “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”) and etymology speak for this. At the same time, Dazhbog 46 To put it more precisely, this word is dialecticism of Slovene. 47 In the west of Kaluga Region in Russia. However, I have not found such a name on a modern map. 48 In 2015, in Moscow I talked about it with a reknowned specialist in Indo-European studies Vyacheslav V. Ivanov, who said that such a reconstruction was not without difficulties, but was possible to be considered. has no particular “rivalry” in this domain, for he is the only deity that combines both the possibilities of etymological development from *Dyeus-Phater and functional similarity with him. I see no need to finally reject his relation to solar and fiery functions as well; they could be well related to the archetype of Sky Father one way or another as in other Indo-European mythologies. However, in my opinion, surely, it was not prevailing, for when approached closely, it is clear that Chors acted as the chief solar deity, and Svarog/ Svarozhets as the fiery one. While the warrior Thunderer Perun was the closest to the militarized part of society and princes, evidently the cult of Dazhbog, whose function of “father” concerned not only folk and people but also the world, harvest and plenty in general, was more significant for common people being drawn to agriculture; in this regard, he truly was the giver and distributor of good. Surely, Perun was also responsible for harvest to some extent, being concerned with rain, but it seems that it is difficult to name at least one deity of the Slavic pantheon that would not be somehow concerned with fertility. However, Dazhbog’s emphasis thereon was particular and specific. In this sense, Scandinavian paganism appears to be the closest for comparison, where Thor and Odin are attached to warriors, leaders and elements, and Freyr to fertility (cf. Adam of Bremen (IV, 26)): in Sweden, there was a pagan temple of Uppsala, where “there are statues of three deities worshipped by people. […] Their powers are distributed in the following way: ‘Thor, the Swedes say, reigns in the air, controls thunder and rivers, winds and rains, fair weather and harvests. The second one is Wodan, which means ‘frenzy’, who wages wars, gives people courage in battles against the enemies. The third one is Fricco that grants peace and pleasures to the mortal people’” (.... .......... 2011: 108).49 In this case, Perun (and Veles to some extent?) can be compared with Thor and Odin, and analogy may be drawn between Freyr and the very Dazhbog. However, “it is not impossible that the pagan East Slavs worshipped Christian God in Dazhbog” as the Balts worshipped him in Dievas (........ 2005: 295; ...... 1992: 67). It is not unusual that, being the Sky Father, Dazhbog appears to be Svarog’s son. Fire is a chthonic, ancient, and creating element, with which the archetype of creating demi-urge blacksmith (mythological insight of the Big Bang?) was coordinated. For example, Olympian deities headed by Zeus represent the third generation, struggling with the Titans preceding them; the deities of the Irish Celts – Folk of the goddess Danu – appeared later also struggled for power over Ireland with the Formorian giants in the epic Battle of Magh Tuireadh. Similarly, the Germans had Ymir and other giants that existed until the deities, who appeared later and fought against their predecessors. In Indians’ Vedas, this conception is also well-known, there are “two kinds of creatures: deities and asuras [giants – O.K.]. And the deities were younger, and asuras older. They have fought against each other for these worlds”50 (......... 2003: 72). Although Dazhbog could be the 49 English translation is made according to the Russian edition. Original (Latin): “statuas trium deorum ven­ eratur populous […]. Quorum significationes eiusmodi sunt: ‘Thor’, inquiunt, ‘presidet in aere, qui tonitrus et fulmina, ventos ymbresque, serena et fruges gubernat. Alter Wodan, id est furor, bella gerit hominique ministrat virtutem contra inimicos. Tercius est Fricco, pacem voluptatemque largiens mortalibus’”. 50 Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, I, 3.1. Original (Sanskrit): “tata. kaniyasa eva deva., jyayasa asura., ta e.u loke.v aspardhanta”. winner in the struggle for the supremacy in the world in the Slavs’ myths having not reached us,51 later he was pushed to the sidelines by the militarized part of society and its cult of Perun: it is that condition in which these two supreme deities have been fixed by the Old Russian sources.52 REFERENCES53 Brückner, A., 1918: Mitologja slowianska. Krakow: NAU. Cok, B., 2015: Kamnoseško izrocilo o znamenjih na portalih in kolonah po Krasu. Nesnovna krajina Krasa (ur. Katja Hrobat Virloget in Petra Kavrecic). Koper: Založba Univerze na Primorskem. Pp. 99–134. IMC, 2000: Ioannis Malalae Chronographia. Rec. I. Thurn. Berolini: Walter de Gruyter. Kutarev, O. V., 2019: Description of Rod and Rožanicy in Slavic mythology: B. A. Rybakov and his predecessors’ interpretations. New researches on the religion and mythology of the Pagan Slavs (ed. by Patrice Lajoye. Paris: Lingva). Pp. 33–45. PDF: https://vk.com/ doc-120497_509056662 Kutarev, O. V., 2021: The analysis of the sources on Slavic deity Dazhbog: Hypatian Codex; Serbian legends of Dabog. ....... ....... ...... .. ...... ...... .............. ........ ...... «..... . ......... – ........... .........» (.. ......, 26 ....... 2021 ..;.... .... .... ............ – ..:........). Pp. 104–125. PDF:https:// vk.com/doc-120497_591698209 Slupecki, L. P., Zaroff, R., 1999: William of Malmesbury on Pagan Slavic Oracles: New Sources for Slavic Paganism and its two Interpretations. Studia Mythologica Slavica 2. Pp. 9–20. .... .........., 2011: ...... ............. ........... ....... .......... ........ ......: ....... ......... .. 7–150. [Adam Bremenskij 2011: Deyaniya arhiepiskopov Gamburgskoj cerkvi. Moskva: Russkaya Panorama. Pp. 7–150.] ......, .. .., 2008: ...... .............. ............ ................... .........: .... … ..... ...... ..... ...... ......... [Beskov, A. A., 2008: Analiz mifolog­icheskoj sostavlyayushchej vostochnoslavyanskogo yazychestva: Dis. … kand. filos. nauk. Nizhnij Novgorod.] ...., 2000: ....... ......... ... (.. ........... ........). .......... .......... ....... ..... .. 1. .....-.........: ...... .. 62–315. [Povest’vremennyh let (po Ipatyevskoj redakcii). Biblioteka literatury Drevnej Rusi. T. 1. Sankt-Peterburg: Nauka. Pp. 62–315.] ........, .. .., 1999: ......... ......... ...... ........ ........ ....: ..........­.............. .............. . ........ ...... ......... ....... ..... .......... ......: ....... [Vasilyev, M. A., 1999: Yazychestvo vostochnyh slavyan 51 Dazhbog is likely to be logically seen as Mother Earth’s husband that way that is poorly personified in the folklore (as Mat Zemlya) and the sources (for example, “zemlya-mat” (Mother Earth) (“..... ....”) was referred to in the Primary Chronicle of 988 as the element worshipped by the Christians (.... 2000: 161; ..... .... 114–115; ..... .... 100)), but it is still treated with remarkable respect by the Slavs. 52 And, perhaps, Procopius of Caesarea as well, who wrote in 6th century about the fact that in the paganism of the Slavs “the creator of thunderstorm” dominates (....... 2014: 98–99). 53 All dates for internet resources are given on 15. 04. 2021. nakanune kreshcheniya Rusi: Religiozno-mifologicheskoe vzaimodejstvie s iranskim mirom. Yazycheskaya reforma knyazya Vladimira. Moskva: Indrik.] ..........., .. .., 2013: ...... ............ . ......... ......... . ....... ..... ......: ............. ...... [both volumes in one book; the second volume is a reprint of 1913 (p. 263–572), with page numbering x+264 (p. 300 in 2013=p. 36 in 1913)] [Galkovskij, N. M., 2013: Borba hristianstva s ostatkami yazychestva v Drevnej Rusi. Moskva: Akademicheskij proekt.] ......., .., 2014: ......... ....... ......: .... .... [Gieysztor, A. 2014: Mifologiya slavyan. Moskva: Ves’ mir.] ..........., .. .., 2013: ....... .......... ....... ..: ....... ......... [Hilferding, A.F. 2013: Istoriya baltijskih slavyan. M.: Russkaya Panorama.] ........, .. .., 2008: «..... . ..... .......»: ...... .......... ......: .......... ......... ....... ..... [Zaliznyak, A.A. 2008: «Slovo o polku Igoreve»: vzglyad lingvista. Moskva: Rukopisnye pamyatniki Drevnej Rusi.] ....... ......., 1996: ........ ......... .......: ....... (... .... .... .. .. ......... . .. ............). ......:........... [Induizm. Dzhajnizm.Sikkhizm: Slovar’ (pod red. M. F. Albedil i M. F. Dubyanskogo). Moskva: Respublika.] ....., 1908: ........... ........: ...... ........ ....... .......... .. 2. ....... ....... .....-.......... [Ipatyevskaya letopis’: Polnoe sobranie russkih letopisej. T. 2. Izdanie vtoroe. Sankt-Peterburg.] ......, .. .., 1994: ....... ...... ...... . .......... ......... ....... PDF: https:// vk.com/doc-120497_589964358 [Istrin, V. M., 1994: Hronika Ioanna Malaly v slavyan­skom perevode. Moskva.] ......, .. .., 2011: ....... .................. .... ........... .......... ............ . ....... ....... .......... ......, ......... [Kareev, N. I. 2011: Glavnye antro­pomorficheskie bogi slavyanskogo yazychestva. Issledovaniya v oblasti drevnej mifologii. Moskva, Librokom.] ........, .. I., 1964: ........... ... . ........ ....... . ........... ........... .. 1 (....... .....). .i..i.... [Kilimnik, S.I. 1964: Ukrainskij r.k u narodnih zvichayah v .storichnomu osv.tlenn.. T. 1 (Zimovij cikl). Winnipeg.] ..........., .. .., 1885: ... .. ..... ............ . ...... ......... ....... ...... ............ ......... ............ ........ 1885. . CCXLI (241). .....­.......... .. 47–65 (...... .........). [Kirpichnikov, A.I., 1885: Chto my znaem dostovernogo o lichnyh bozhestvah slavyan. Zhurnal Ministerstva narodnogo prosvesh­cheniya. Sentyabr 1885. . CCXLI (241). Sankt-Peterburg. Pp. 47–65 (vtoraya paginaciya).] .....,....,2004:................... .......................................... .....-.........: ........ [Klejn, L. S., 2004: Voskreshenie Peruna. K rekonstrukcii vostochnoslavyanskogo yazychestva. Sankt-Peterburg: Evraziya.] ......., .. .., 2015: ............. ......., ........ ..... . ......... ... ....... ....... Acta Eruditorum. 2015. .... 19. .....-.........: ............ ..... .. 101–109. LJ: https://dajbojic.livejournal.com/5180.html [Kutarev, O. V. 2015: Drevnerusskij Dazhbog, serbskij Dabog i grecheskij syn Gefesta Gelios. Acta Eruditorum. 2015. Vyp. 19. Sankt-Peterburg: Izdatelstvo RHGA. S. 101–109.] ......., .. .., 2016a: ....... ............ . ........ . ....... ........... ........ (.. ........XIX ..). ......... . ........... ......: .... .................. ............(... .... .. .. ..........). ...... ........: ......... ............ .. 133–160. PDF: https://vk.com/doc-120497_442906131 [Kutarev, O. V., 2016a: Istoriya mistifikacijidomyslovvoblastislavyanskogopanteona(doseredinyXIX v.).Yazychestvov sovremennoj Rossii: opyt mezhdisciplinarnogo issledovaniya(pod red. R.V. Shizhenskogo). Nizhnij Novgorod: Mininskij universitet. Pp. 133–160.] ......., .. .., 2016b: .................... ........ ................ .... ........ .... (.....-.....). ......... . ........ .1. .. 126–141. DOI: 10.7256/1999­2793.2016.1.17386 PDF: https://vk.com/doc-120497_437685885 [Kutarev, O. V. 2016b: Slavyanskij Dazh’bog kak razvitie indoevropejskogo Boga Siyayushchego Neba (D’eus-Pa­ter). Filosofiya i kul’tura .1. Pp. 126–141.] ......., .. ..,2018:. ........(..).......... ..................... .................. .......... VI–XIII ... SocioTime. .......... ...... .3 (15). .. 113–122. PDF:https:// vk.com/doc-120497_486090289 [Kutarev, O. V., 2018: O prichinah (ne)upominanij slavy­anskogo yazychestvav zapadnoevropejskih istochnikah VI–XIII vv. SocioTime/Social’noe vremya. .3 (15). S. 113–122.] ....., 1926: .............. ......... ...... ........ ....... .......... .. 1. ....... ....... .......... [Lavrentyevskaya letopis’. Polnoe sobranie russkih letopisej. T. 1. Izdanie vtoroe. Leningrad.] ..........,..,2003:............. . ......... .....-.........:............. ....... [Lowmianski, H., 2003: Religiya slavyan i eyo upadok. Sankt-Peterburg: Akademicheskij proekt.] ......,...., 1992:...........................i....[Levkov,E. A.,1992:Mavkl.vyya svedk. m.nuvshchyny. Minsk.] ........, .. .., 2005: ....... ......... ....... ......: .... .... [Mansikka, V. J., 2005: Religiya vostochnyh slavyan. Moskva: IMLI RAN.] .......... ........., 2003: .......... ......... ....... ....... .... (..... .. .. .....). .....-.........: ..... [Pis’mennye pamyatniki istorii Drevnej Rusi (sost. Ya. N. Shchapov). Sankt-Peterburg: Blic.] ......., .. .., 1981: ......... ....... ....... ......: ...... [Rybakov, B. A., 1981: Yazychestvo drevnih slavyan. Moskva: Nauka.] ........, .. .., 1995: ....... (........). ............ «..... . ..... .......»: . 5 .. .....-.........: ....... ........ .. 2. .. 79–82. [Sokolova, L. V., 1995: Dazhbog (Dazhdbog). Enciklopediya «Slova o polku Igoreve»: V 5 t. Sankt-Peterburg: Dmitrij Bulanin. T. 2. S. 79–82.] ...,1800:...................... ...................................-.......... ..... ............. ......: .. ......... ........i.. ...... ....... «..... . ..... .......»: https://dajbojic.livejournal.com/4207.html [Iroicheskaya p.sn’o pohod. na polovcov ud.l’nago knyazya Novagoroda-S.verskago Igorya Svyatoslavicha. Moskva: V Senatskoj Tipografii.] ..., 1985:...... ............. ............... ....... ..... .........:......... .. 36–44. https://dajbojic.livejournal.com/4549.html [Slovo o polku Igoreve. Voinskie povesti Drevnej Rusi. Leningrad: Lenizdat. Pp. 36–44.] ...., 2002: ....... ....... ........ ........ .... 36. .....-.........: ...... [Slovar’ russkih narodnyh govorov. Vyp. 36. Sankt-Peterburg: Nauka.] ......... ..... 1775: ..... ......... ........ ........i. .......... .....i. ....i..... .. ...... .... .. ....... ........ .... . ........ ..... I..... ..........., .......... ....... ............. ............ ....i... . .....i.. .. 1. ......: ............. ............ [Kniga stepennaya Carskago rodosloviya soder­ zhashchaya istoriyu Rossijskuyu s nachala onyya do vremyon gosudarya Carya i Velikogo knyazya Ioanna Vasil’evicha, sochinyonnaya trudami Preosvyashchennyh Mitropolitov Kipriana i Makariya. CH. 1. Moskva: Imperatorskij universitet.] ........, .. .., 1983: .......... ....... ....... ............ 2. ......... ......... . «....... ...... ......»(..... ...... ............. ...........) .........: ...... .. 37. .. 188–192. [Tvorogov, O. V., 1983: Materialy k istorii russkih hronografov. 2. Sofijskij hronograf i «Hronika Ioanna Malaly» (Trudy Otdela drevnerusskoj literatury). Leningrad: Nauka. T. 37. Pp. 188–192.] ........, .. .., 1987: ....... ...... ....... ....... ......... . ......... ....... ..... .........: ...... .... 1. .. 471–474. [Tvorogov, O. V., 1987: Hronika Ioanna Malaly. Slovar’knizhnikov i knizhnosti Drevnej Rusi. Leningrad: Nauka. Vyp. 1. Pp. 471–474.] ......., .. .., 1995: .. ........ ........ . ....... ........ ......... ........ . ...... . ....... ........ ......... ......: ....... .. 1. [Toporov, V. N., 1995: Ob iranskom elemente v russkoj duhovnoj kul’ture. Svyatost’ i svyatye v russkoj duhovnoj kul’ture. Moskva: Gnozis. T. 1.] ........., 2003. ..:......... ........... [Upanishady, 2003. M.: Vostochnaya literatura.] ......, .., 1986: ...... .. ............... ....... ........ ....., ... 3. ......: ......... [Fasmer, M., 1986: Fasmer M. Etimologicheskij slovar’russkogo yazyka, Tom 3. Moskva: Progress.] DAZHBOG: STAROZYTNE SLOWIANSKIE POGANSKIE BÓSTWO LSNIACEGO NIEBA oleG v. kutarev Artykul szczególowo analizuje obraz slowianskiego poganskiego bóstwa Dazboga i proponuje rewizje ugruntowanych w literaturze naukowej, ale jak sie uwaza, nie zawsze udanych pogladów na jego temat. Pierwszym etapem niniejszych rozwazan bedzie przeglad informacji na temat bóstwa, które pojawiaja sie w zródlach pisanych. Dzis nie ma wiekszych watpliwosci co do tego, ze Dadzbóg byl znany zarówno wczesnosredniowiecznym Slowianom wschodnim (Rus), jak i poludniowym (X-wieczni Bulgarzy), którzy mieli czcic Dadzboga oraz jego ojca – boga ognia Swaroga. W badaniach nad omawianym problemem szczegól­na uwage zwraca sie na kreowana w XII-wiecznym pismiennictwie ruskim role Dazboga jako Przodka. Poglad ten zbudowano na gruncie zarówno sredniowiecz­nej onomastyki, ale takze obecnosci tego boga na Slowianszczyznie Zachodniej sugerujacych jego praslowianska geneze. Rozwazana jest równiez obecnosc Dazboga i prawdopodobnie pokrewnej postaci Daboga w folklorze wschodnio- i poludniowoslowianskim XIX–XX wieku. Nastepnie szczególowo przeanalizowano najwazniejsze stereotypy historiografii dotyczace Dazboga. Przede wszystkim zas poglad upatrujacy w nim bóstwo solarne, który komplikuje obecnosc w obecnosc w ruskim panteonie innego niewatpliwie slonecznego boga Chorsa. W oparciu o przedstawionematerialy zródlowe i analizy postawiono teze, ze przeslanki, na których przypisuje sie Dazbogowi role bóstwa slonecznego, sa niewystarczajace i wymagaja innego wyjasnienia. Takie postawienie sprawy moze dowodzic, ze Dadzbóg nie byl tozsamy ze Swarozycem a tym samym, wbrew ogólnie przyje­tym pogladom, nie byl bogiem ognia. Kolejnym etapem niniejszych rozwazan jest analiza etymologiczna teonimu Dadzbóg. Wykazano, ze powszechna inter-pretacja tego imienia jako “boga dajacego” nie do konca znajduje potwierdzenie w zródlach. Dosc prawdopodobna jest bowiem inna etymologia, ukazujaca go jako boga Ojca-Nieba, znanego wsród wielu ludów indoeuropejskich. Nie jest to poglad nowy, jednak z uplywem czasu zostal “zepchniety na dalszy plan” i zupelnie niezasluzenie zapomniany w historiografii. Po drugie, nalezy zauwazyc, ze obraz Ojca-Nieba w mitologii slowianskiej jest wlasciwie nieobecny, ale w kontekscie badan opartych na mitologii porównawczej oraz jezykoznawstwie wydaje sie wysoce prawdopodobny, a nawet konieczny. Jesli wiec mielibysmy poszukiwac takiego bóstwa w wierzeniach Slowian to postacia najlepiej pasujaca do roli Ojca-Nieba jest Dadzbóg. Wskazuja na to: rola przodka, prawdopodobne praslowianskie pochodzenie oraz etymologia. Przeprowadzona analiza dowodzi tez pogladu, zezuplywemczasu Gromowladca, jako patron zmilitaryzowanejczesci spoleczenstwa wysunal sie na pierwszy plan i tym samym zepchnal Dazboga do drugorzednych ról w slowianskiej mitologii. Oleg Vladislavovich Kutarev, Russian Christian Humanitarian Academy, St Petersburg, Russia; etnogenez@mail.ru 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 219 – 253 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212412 ...e .e...s.µa. a.e.. Uno sguardo sull’arktéia attraverso Phrasikleia Martina Olcese Clanek raziskuje antropološka vprašanja obreda »medvedke«, imenovanega arktéia, ki so ga mlada dekleta pred poroko posvetila boginji Artemidi v njenem svetišcu v Brauro-nu (Atika). Kore Phrasiklieia je tu vzeta kot študija primera glede na njeno dekoracijo, ki kaže na prisotnost vec atributov, povezanih z »brauronsko« simboliko. V clanku so tri poglavja: zgodovina odkritja kipa, analiza njegovih atributov in antropološka razlaga kulta. Primerjava arheoloških dokazov, zgo­dovinskih podatkov in anticnih virov vodido zakljucka, da je Phrasikleia kot »medvedka« opravila obred arktéia, vendar jeumrla, preden se je porocila. KLJUCNEBESEDE: arktéia; kore Phrasikleia; ženska puberteta; iniciacijski obred This article investigates the anthropological issues of the “she-bear” rite, named arktéia, dedicated to the goddess Artemis in her sanctuary of Brauron (Attica), by young girls, before the celebration of their marriage. Kore Phrasiklieia is taken here as a case study with respect to its decoration, suggesting the presence of several attributes connected to the “brauronian” symbolics. There are three chapters: a history of the dis­covery of the statue, an analysis of its attributes, and an anthropological interpretation of the cult. The comparison between archaeological evidence, historical data, and ancient sources leads to the conclusion that Phrasikleia had performed the arktéia rite as a “she-bear”, but she died before she was married. KEYWORDS: arktéia; kore Phrasikleia; female puberty; initiation rite A mia madre, per le sue fiabe. INTRODUZIONE Le testimonianze letterarie e archeologiche pervenute sul “rito dell’orsa”, l’arktéia, in onore di Artemide Brauronia, fanno capo a una serie di problematiche. Da un lato, l’ampia descrizione del culto, tramandata dalle fonti tardo medievali (Valerio Arpocra­zione, s.v. Arkteusai; Suda, s.v. Arktňs e Braurôníois: 361 ss.; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645), si caratterizza per la distanziazione temporale rispetto alla menzione aristofanea del rito (Aristofane, Lisistrata: 645). D’altro canto, i dati di scavo sono ad oggi per la maggior parte inediti, a causa della morte prematura di I. Papadimitriou (Padimitriou 1963)1. A pidi cinquant’anni di distanza i contributi restano parziali. Č il caso dei primi lavori esaustivi, ma anche di alcune pubblicazioni recenti. Cosě per gli studi di L. Kahlil (Kahlil 1965; 1977; 1981) e S. Sourvinou-Inwood (Sourvinou-Inwood 1988; 1990) sui krateriskoi. Lo stesso si puň dire delle ricerche di T. Linders (Linders 1972) e L. Cleland (Cleland 2005), l’una dedicata alle iscrizioni provenienti dal Brauronion sull’acropoli, l’altra a quelle dell’Artemision di Brauron. Le pirecenti pubblicazioni sul santuario dell’Erasino presentano, a pari modo, un carattere altamente specifico. Č il caso dei contributi di M. I. Pologiorge (Pologiorge 2015), V. Mitsopoulos-Leon (Mitsopoulos-Leon 2015), e D. Marchiandi (Marchiandi 2018), che vertono rispettivamente sui reperti lignei, sulle statuette in coroplastica e sulle offerte tessili. Molto interessante anche il contributo di D. Guarisco (Guarisco 2015), che ha adottato un approccio simbolico all’analisi strutturale e topografica del santuario, attraverso il confronto con altri luoghi di culto dell’Attica dedicati alla dea Artemide. B. M. Giannattasio, dal canto suo, riflette sul perdurare del culto in epoca adrianea attraverso l’analisi iconografica di un reperto di etŕ romana, rinvenuto in Sardegna (Giannattasio 2012: 2619 ss.)2. A fronte della documentazione frammentaria, i tentativi di interpretazione del signi­ficato simbolico dell’arktéia sono stati molteplici. Dagli anni Trenta agli anni Novanta del Novecento, come nel caso di A. Brelich e P. Brulé, essi hanno avuto un taglio storico-culturale (Jeanmaire 1939; Brelich 1981; Brulé 1987). All’inizio degli anni Duemila M. Giuman (Giuman 1999), D. M. Cosi (Cosi 2001) e infine B. Gentili e F. Perusino hanno invece adottato una prospettiva antropologica (Gentili e Perusino 2002). I. Nielsen ha piů recentemente proposto una interessante ricostruzione dello svolgi­ mento del rito, raccogliendo i dati iconografici e architettonici disponibili (Nielsen 2009)3. In questo panorama, complesso e articolato, si distingue il contributo di V. Brink- mann (Brinkmann 2004), che ha offerto un ulteriore spunto alle ricerche sul rito dell’orsa mediante una reinterpretazione iconografica della kore col peplo, consentendo di porre la statua in relazione con il Brauronion sull’acropoli. Questo contributo si pone parimenti in un’ottica interdisciplinare, al fine di pro-porre la rilettura di una kore altrettanto celebre e contemporanea della kore col peplo. 1 Sulla mancata edizione delle testimonianze archeologiche si č espresso in particolare P. Brulé (Brulé 1987: 179 ss). 2 Si tratta di una matrice fittile da Nora (Cagliari), datata al II sec. d. C. Il reperto, verosimilmente utilizzato per fabbricare focacce a uso rituale, raffigura un orso presso una sporgenza rocciosa, munita di ingresso mon­ umentale. L’iconografia č stata interpretata come un’allusione all’arktéia e al cosiddetto “heroon di Ifigenia” situato presso il santuario di Brauron. 3 A completamento di questa breve storia degli studi sul rito dell’orsa, si segnalano gli studi in corso di V. Szymanska, che prendono le mosse da una Tesi di Laurea recentemente discussa all’Universitŕ di Malta, con oggetto i riti iniziatici di pubertŕ nel mondo greco (Szymanska 2019). Il filone dedicato all’arktéia č attualmente oggetto di approfondimenti che indagano le sfaccettature sociali del rito dell’orsa, attraverso lo studio delle modalitŕ di partecipazione e degli attributi ad esso legati. Un capolavoro di epoca arcaica (Giuliano 1989: 156; Karakasi 2003: 129, 134; Bejor, Castoldi, Lambrugo 2008, 108, tav.13), un’effige funeraria che, per la prima volta nella storia dell’arte greca, “parla” rivelando il proprio nome: Phrasikleia. La statua, rinvenuta a Mirrunte nel 1972 (Mastrokostas 1972), nel corso del tempo č stata oggetto di approfondimenti con diverso orientamento. L’epigrafe4 individuata sulla base che sosteneva l’opera č stata oggetto dei primi contributi (Daux 1973; Kontoleon 1974; Martini 2007), fra cui spicca lo studio semiotico del filologo J. Svenbro (Svenbro 1988). Negli anni Duemila alcuni studiosi, tra i quali V. Barlou (Barlou 2013), hanno ana­lizzato l’opera ponendone in risalto le caratteristiche stilistiche. K. Karakasi (Karakasi 1997; 2008), l’équipe di V. Brinkmann (Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010)5 e infine V. Kantarelou (Kantarelou 2016) e B. Schmaltz (Schmaltz 2016), hanno invece svolto alcuni tentativi di ricostruzione della policromia della kore, avvalendosi anche di indagini chimico-fisiche sui pigmenti. Il recentissimo contributo di M. González González (González González 2019) consta in una sintesi delle ricerche, il cui taglio, attraverso lo studio dell’iscrizione, si concentra sul significato antropologico dell’effige funeraria della fanciulla, morta prima di sposarsi. Un caso a parte č l’indagine di M. Stieber (Stieber 1996), che si pone in un’ottica antropologica, concentrandosi sulla valenza simbolica degli attributi floreali della fan-ciulla. L’interpretazione della studiosa č quasi interamente basatasull’identificazione di fiori di loto sul capo e fra le mani della kore. La presente ricerca intende adottare una prospettiva simile, con l’intento di dimostrare che il carattere eccezionale dell’opera non consta soltanto nella qualitŕ estetica, né tanto meno nella sua specificitŕ di immagine funeraria, ma piuttosto nella valenza simbolica e religiosa che le č propria. Si pone perň diversamente a quanto illustrato da M. Stieber, per l’identificazione del fiore del croco fra gli attributi della ragazza; emblema, questo, che riconduce al culto di Artemide Brauronia e piprecisamente al rito dell’orsa, l’arktéia (Aristofane, Lisistrata: 645; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645). Il lavoro si prefigge precisamentelo scopo di porre in essere gli elementi che consen­tono di collegare la statua ai riti di Brauron. Questo implica in primo luogo riesaminare il contesto di ritrovamento di Phrasikleia in relazione ai santuari legati alla Brauronia dislocati in Attica. Alcune testimonianze epigrafiche, interpretate grazie alle fonti scritte, consentono infatti di supporre l’esistenza di una koiné culturale che collegava tali luoghi di culto a Mirrunte, luogo di rinvenimento della statua. D’altro canto la rilettura iconografica dell’opera, integrata da fonti letterarie e dati botanici, consente di riconoscere il krok, fiore dello zafferano ed emblema delle arktoi (Aristofane, Lisistrata: 645; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645), fra gli attributi della fanciulla. 4 C.I.G.: 28: 46-47. 5 Il tema č stato affrontato anche da V. Barlou (Barlou 2013). Tali elementi costituiscono il presupposto per l’identificazione di Phrasikleia come una giovane arkt, morta dopo aver compiuto il servizio alla dea. L’interpretazione č confermata dalla valenza antropologica del croco. Fonti scritte e testimonianze archeologiche confermano l’accezione ctonia e liminare della pianta, e la sua connessione con la pubertŕ femminile. In questa prospettiva, il rito dell’orsa assurge alla funzione di rito iniziatico che sancisce la maturazione biologica e il cambiamento di status sociale dell’individuo. I) CONTESTO E INTERPREPRETAZIONE STORICA 1) dall’acroPoli a Mirrunte, tra fonti Scritte e teStiMonianze archeoloGiche Dati archeologici, topografici e storici accomunano i luoghi di culto dedicati ad Artemide in Attica, delineando un ambito culturale omogeneo in seno al quale, in etŕ arcaica, si sviluppň la tradizione dell’arktéia. Sotto il piano religioso č il mito fondatore stesso - la saga della rovina degli Atridi - a consacrare il legame fra i santuari attici di Artemide e la fondazione dell’aition brauronio6. Secondo Euripide, Oreste fonda il santuario di Artemide Tauropolos ad Halai Araphe­nides, e sua sorella Ifigenia quello di Brauron (Euripide, Ifigenia in Tauride: 1446-1474)7. Fuggendo dalla Tauride, dove la ragazza č tenuta prigioniera, i due fratelli portano con loro il simulacro di Artemide, destinato al santuario di Halai. Le varianti medievali del mito contribuiscono a creare un legame ancor pipregnante tra la vicenda di Ifigenia, il mito di Brauron e l’arktéia. Volendo definire le origini del rito, citato per la prima volta da Aristofane nella Lisistrata (411 a. C.), lo scolio (XI se­colo; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645), afferma che la figlia di Agamennone non viene sacrificata in Aulide, comerisulta dal testo euripideo (Euripide, Ifigenia in Aulide: 1578–1614; Euripide, Ifigenia in Tauride: 9) e da quello di Eschilo (Eschilo, Agamennone: 191–247), ma a Brauron. Lo stesso scolio (Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645) narra poi che la fanciulla non č mutata in cerva, come narra Euripide (Euripide, Ifigenia in Aulide: 1590–1591; Euripide, Ifigenia in Tauride: 28), bensě in un’orsa, l’animale sacro alla Brauronia (Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645). Il testo (Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645) riporta, inoltre, una notizia trasmessa giŕ da Valerio Arpocrazione d’A-lessandria (II d. C.; Valerio Arpocrazione, s.v. Arkteusai), asserendo che il rito dell’orsa poteva svolgersi a Brauron, ma anche presso il santuario di Artemide Munichía al Pireo8. Il primo riscontro archeologico a questa koinčreligiosa e culturale consta nella diffusione capillare dei piccoli crateri figurati detti krateriskoi nei maggiori luoghi di culto dedicati ad Artemide dell’Attica, proprio in epoca arcaica (Kahlil 1981: 254–255): l’Artemision 6 Un’analisi particolarmente ricca di queste fonti letterarie č contenuta nella recente Tesi di Laurea di V. Szymanska (Szymanska 2019: 52–61). 7 Sulla vicenda di Ifigenia quale mito fondante nel sentire religioso greco si rimanda a P. Grimal (Grimal 1951: 235–236). 8 Per una introduzione al culto di Artemide al Pireo vedere G. P. Viscardi (Viscardi 2010). Fig. 1. Dislocazione dei luoghi diculto dedicati ad Artemidein Attica. Elaborazionegrafica da:Hammond 1981: tav. 9A. sull’Erasino, il Brauronion sull’acropoli, il santuario di Artemide Tauropolos ad Halai Araphenides9 e quello di Artemide Munichía al Pireo (fig. 1). Secondo L. Kahlil questi oggetti costituiscono una rara rappresentazione dell’arktéia (Kahlil 1977: 86 ss.); inoltre, la loro cronologia coincide con la tirannide di Pisistrato. Le fonti, d’altro canto, attribuiscono un ruolo preponderante alla famiglia del tiranno nella costruzione dei santuari dedicati ad Artemide in Attica. Secondo Fozio (Fozio, Lessico, s.v. Brauronia (ß 264), Pisistrato stesso fondň il santuario di Brauron. Aristotele sostiene, invece, che Ippia intraprese la fortificazione del Pireo (Aristotele, Costituzione degli Ateniesi: XIX, 2; Angiolillo 1997: 83–84); dato, questo, che induce a supporre che al figlio di Pisistrato sarebbero dovuti anche interventi presso il santuario della Muni­chía. Non a caso, forse, i santuari di Brauron (Themelis 2002: 90–93), di Halai (Giuman 1999: 180–183) e del Pireo (Brulé 1987: 193; Giuman 1999: 184) sono caratterizzati da un identico assetto tripartito in epoca arcaica, che include prodomos, naos e adyton. Quanto al Brauronion sull’acropoli, all’inizio del V secolo fu interessato da un restauro, Per la pubblicazione di buona parte dei materiali archeologici rinvenuti ad Halai si rimanda al compendio curato da K. Kalogeropoulos (Kalogeropoulos 2013). che conferě all’edificio l’identica forma ad “U” della contemporanea stoŕ di Brauron (Lippolis, Livadiotti, Rocco 2007: 192–193)10. Alla luce di questi elementi, si puň ipotizzare che la costruzione dei santuari di Artemide si iscrisse in una contingenza politica e sociale complessa, quale appunto la tirannide di Pisistrato e la rivalitŕ della sua famiglia con gli Alcmeonidi. Lo studio dei documenti epigrafici consente, infine, di suppore che i santuari della Brauronia assumevano una funzione specifica in periodi di particolare disordine. Per questa ragione, secondo I. Papadimitriou (Papadimitriou 1963: 113), durante la guerra del Peloponneso venne depositato a Brauron un tesoro in bronzo, argento e oro. Dell’evento si legge negli archivi del santuario di Atene, riconosciuti come le copie dei documenti rinvenuti presso il santuario extraurbano (Calame 2002: 53–56). Ora, alcuni elementi consentono di ipotizzare che nel complesso rapporto culturale che intercorreva fra i luoghi di culto dedicati ad Artemide in Attica in epoca arcaica, rientrasse anche l’insediamento dove venne rinvenuta Phrasikleia: Mirrunte, situata appena a 4-5 km a Sud di Brauron (fig. 1). La pubblicazione di E. P. Vivliodetis (Vivliodetis 2007), che raccoglie notizie delle precedenti ricerche di N. Kotzias, I. Papadimitriou e E. Mastrokostas, oltre a nuovi dati risultanti da interventi di emergenza e prospezioni, ha infatti appurato che Artemide era la divinitŕ principale del demo di Mirrunte. Alcune testimonianze epigrafiche datate fra il V secolo a. C. ed il II sec. d. C. citano, in particolare, una Artemide Kolainis (Vivliodetis 2007:131–143, 234). Spicca, in questo contesto, una stele in marmo (Vivliodetis 2007: 41–42, E1, 51)11 rinvenuta in giacitura secondaria nel muro della chiesa di Santa Tecla a Markopoulos. L’epigrafe, datata al IV sec. a. C., cita proprio un santuario di Artemide Kolainis. La presenza di un luogo di culto dedicato ad Artemide Kolainis a Mirrunte era stata in realtŕ suggerita da P. Brulé (Brulé 1987: 190) e da J. Travlos (Travlos 1988: 365)12. P. Brulé si era spinto persino ad affermare che questo santuario dovesse avere lo stesso impianto strutturale di Brauron e di Halai (Brulé 1987: 193). A sostegno della presenza dell’edificio a Mirrunte potrebbe ricondurre anche l’epigrafe su una “bella e piccola ara”, rinvenuta presso la chiesa della Panaghia (Vivliodetis 2007: 10 Le strutture e la topografia dei quattro santuari sono stati oggetto di un’accurata analisi di D. Guarisco (Guarisco 2015; vedere anche il commento di E. Gagliano: Gagliano 2017). L’autrice ha piprecisamente posto in essere la dualitŕ e l’ambivalenza del rapporto simbolico dei quattro luoghi di culto, attraverso il dato topografico. Sotto questa prospettiva, emerge il carattere diversamente periferico e liminare dei santuari di Brauron, del Pireo e di Halai, e la complessa rete di relazioni che intercorrono fra il santuario urbano sull’acropoli e quello sull’Erasino. Sulla base dei dati esposti non viene data una risposta chiara alle modalitŕ di articolazione del rito dell’orsa in onore della dea nei quattro santuari. D’altro canto, lo svolgimento dell’arktéia in questi luoghi di culto viene assunta come un dato certo, sulla base della presenza di indicatori quali i krateriskoi, e gli strumenti legati alla tessitura (vedere soprattutto: Guarisco 2015: 21–46). Sono grata al Dott. A. Locchi per il prezioso riferimento durante sua lezione dedicata ai miti greci nell’ambito del corso La dea feconda (associazione Viaggi di cultura). 11 C.I.G. 100. 12 Cenni sul santuario di Artemide Kolainis a Mirrunte sono contenuti nel contributo di A. Chaniotis (Chaniotis 2013: 274); piů preciso il riferimento di O. Kakavogianni, che inserisce il tema nell’ampia questione topografica (Kakavogianni 2009: 47–78). 51, E5)13. Il testo, che riporta una dedica alla dea Kolainis, rappresenta perň una testimo­nianza problematica, poiché datata al I-II secolo d. C. Se anche la si volesse ricondurre ad Artemide, la si dovrebbe quindi interpretare come l’attestazione della sopravvivenza del culto della dea in epoca adrianea. I rinvenimenti epigrafici qui ricordati andrebbero certo confermati da campagne di scavo finalizzate a localizzare e a ricostruire il reale assetto topografico del luogo di culto. Tuttavia, alcune testimonianze letterarie sembrano confermare l’ipotesi di un legame tra Mirrunte ed il culto di Artemide, pistretto di quanto non traspare dalla fonte archeo­logica. L’epiteto Kolainis, letteralmente “cardellina”, trova infatti corrispondenze molto interessanti. Se Pausania (Pausania, Periegesi: I, 31, 4) cita la presenza di una statua di Artemide Kolainis proprio a Mirrunte, lo scolio agli Uccelli di Aristofane (Scholia Ari-stophanica, Aves: 872 a) riporta alcune indicazioni che consentono di porre in relazione il culto di Artemide a Mirrunte con quello della Brauronia (Brulé 1987: 186–189). In tal modo l’autore, volendo spiegare l’origine dell’epiteto di Artemide cardellina, ricorda che “la gente di Mirrunte chiama Artemide Kolainis come gli abitanti del Pireo la chiamano Munichía, e come i Filaidi la chiamano Brauronia”. 2) PhraSikleia: oltre l’interPretazione Storica, l’archetiPo della KORE E. I. Mastrokostas rinvenne l’effige di Phrasikleia nel 1972 nei campi presso la ne­cropoli di Mirrunte (Mastrokostas 1972: 315; Vivliodetis 2007: 172–181, 232; Barlou 2013: 112), non lontano dalla “bella e piccola ara” (Vivliodetis 2007: 51)14 con dedica alla Kolainis citata poc’anzi (troppo tarda purtroppo per essere collegata con la statua), e a 200 m di distanza della chiesa della Panaghia. La kore si trovava in una fossa ret­tangolare di 0,58 m. di profonditŕ (fig. 2), e fu rapidamente posta in relazione alla base che la sosteneva. Infatti, parte della ganga di piombo colata fra il plinto e la mortasa, di cui furono individuate tracce sotto un piede della statua, si adattava perfettamente al lato anteriore di una base iscritta15, incastrata nella muratura della chiesa della Panaghia (Mastrokostas 1972: 318–319; Vivliodetis 2007: 58–59). L’iscrizione, pubblicata da A. Boeckh nel 186816, consentě di dareun nomeall’effige. Una testimonianza molto rara, se si pensa che la maggior parte delle korai arcaiche non riportano l’indicazione del nome delle donne a cui sono dedicate (Richter 1968: 3–4), e pure un dato sconcertante. Infatti, se la statua č in condizioni di conservazione eccezionali, l’epigrafe risulta scalpellata (Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 190–191). Il fatto che l’opera sia in ottimo stato di conservazione, contrariamente all’iscrizione che fu danneggiata intenzionalmente, ha fatto ritenere che la scultura fosse stata seppellita di proposito nella particolare contingenza politico-sociale della tirannide dei Pisistratidi, 13 I.G.: II2 4746. 14 I.G.: II2 4746. 15 I.G.: Ił 1261. 16 C.I.G.: 28; sul tema vedere J. Svenbro (Svenbro 1988: 16). Per una recente lettura del testo dell’iscrizione, incentrata prevalentemente sugli aspetti grafici, si rimanda al lavoro di W. Martini (Martini 2007: 275–276). cui sarebbe dovuta la costruzione di buona parte dei santuari di Artemide in Attica (Fozio, Lessico, s.v. Brauronia (ß 264); Aristotele, Costituzione degli Ateniesi: XIX, 2). In quest’ottica sono state elaborate due teorie di opposto orientamento. Entrambe disco-noscono l’opera come una statua di culto, identificandola a una personalitŕ precisa17. J. Svenbro si basa su una notizia trasmessa da Isocrate (Isocrate, Discorso sulla coppia di cavalli o per il figlio di Alcibiade: 26), il quale narra di come i partigiani di Pisistrato, al ritorno del tiranno dall’esilio, violarono le tombe degli Alcmeonidi, loro avversari politi­ci (Svenbro 1988: 17–18). Propone quindi di identificare Phrasikleia come un’Alcmeonide, la cui statua funeraria venne celata alla furia dei seguaci di Pisistrato quando il tiranno, intorno al 540 a. C., decretň l’ostracismo della famiglia rivale (Svenbro 1988: 17–18). Il tentativo di cancellare del tutto l’iscrizione sulla statua si spiegherebbe con la damnatio memoriae operata dai Pisistratidi ai danni degli Alcmeonidi. L’équipe tedesca composta da V. Brinkmann, U. Koch-Brinkmann e H. Piening (Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 189–191)18 ritiene per contro di identi­ ficare Phrasikleia come una Pisistratide, poiché l’opera fu commissionata ad Aristion di Paros, artista di corte della famiglia. In questa prospettiva, la statua sarebbe stata rimossa intorno al 510 a. C., alla fine della tirannide di Ippia, da parte degli Alcmeonidi. Questi, in un estremo gesto di pietŕ verso la famiglia di Pisistrato, avrebbero deciso di non distruggerla, imitandosi a cancellare l’iscrizione sulla base della statua. Durante l’invasione persiana del 480 a. C. l’opera sarebbe stata celata nella fossa, in cui venne rinvenuta pidi duemila anni dopo. 17 Al momento attuale, non sussistono elementi determinanti che consentano di identificare Phrasikleia come una statua di culto. Unico indizio risiederebbe nella collana con i frutti di melograno che orna il collo della fanciulla; tale emblema contraddistingue effettivamente alcune rappresentazioni di Artemide (Icard, Kahlil 1984: n. 542–544). Di certo non vi sono dati sufficienti a ritenere che l’opera sia una effige della Brauronia. Sulla rassegna di frammenti marmorei riconducibili a statue di Artemide da Brauron (verosimilmente uno o pi acroliti, di cui uno monumentale) si rimanda ai contributi di G. Despines e I. Nielsen (Despines 2005; Nielsen 2009: 92). Si tratterebbe, in ogni caso, di testimonianze pitarde rispetto a Phrasikleia, datate all’epoca classica (metŕ del V sec. a. C.). 18 Sulla controversa attribuzione famigliare del personaggio vedere anche M. González González (González González 2019: 41, 42). Queste ipotesi presentano un notevole interesse, ma lasciano ancora molti interro­gativi irrisolti. V. Brinkmann, U. Koch-Brinkmann e H. Piening non sembrano infatti tenere conto del fatto che giŕ E. I. Mastrokostas aveva escluso che Phrasikleia potesse essere stata seppellita durante l’invasione persiana del 480 a. C. Questo, perché i reperti ceramici rinvenuti nella fossa insieme alla statua suggeriscono una cronologia pialta (Mastrokostas 1972: 315, 323; Svenbro 1988: 17). Un’altra questione aperta č il reimpiego della base nella muratura della chiesa della Panaghia. Ad oggi, nulla consente di escludere che la cancellazione dell’iscrizione (pagana) sia intervenuta al momento del suo reimpiego nella muratura della chiesa in epoca cristiana19. Sostenere tale ipotesi significherebbe, perň, sottovalutare i dati archeologici che sembrano suggerire la datazione della statua all’epoca di Pisistrato. Elementi, questi, che emergono nonostante la difficoltŕ a datare con precisione il seppellimento della Phrasikleia, e a determinarne le ragioni. Le circostanze ed il contesto di ritrovamento della kore di Mirrunte, in effetti, sono ancora oggi molto confuse. A fronte delle affermazioni sulla presunta cronologia alta dei reperti da parte di E. I. Mastrokostas (Mastrokostas 1972: 315, 323; Svenbro 1988: 17), la mancata pubblicazione dei dati di scavo e la conseguente assenza di dati stratigrafici impediscono di inquadrare cronologicamente e in modo corretto la fossa in cui venne rinvenuta la statua.20 A rendere ancor piů complessa l’attribuzione cronologica di Phrasikleia č infine la presenza di un kouros disposto nella fossa, insieme a lei (fig. 2). L’immagine maschile, contrariamente a quanto suppose inizialmente Mastrokostas (Mastrokostas 1972: 320), non puň essere attribuita ad Aristion (Karakasi 2003: 129). Al contrario, le differenze stilistiche fra le due statue suggeriscono che fra di esse intercorra uno scarto cronologico di circa 10-20 anni. Sulla base di un preciso confronto con il picelebre kouros di Ana-vyssos, lo studioso greco data infattil’effige maschileal530 a. C. ca. (Mastrokostas 1972: 316).Phrasikleia, percontro,čstatadatatadopoil540ca. dalloscopritore(Mastrokostas 1972: 318)21. Tale cronologia č stata leggermente alzata da A. Giuliano al 550-540 a. C. (Giuliano 1989: 156). V. Brinkmann, U. Koch-Brinkmann e H. Piening (Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 190), e successivamente V. Barlou (Barlou 2013: 115) e M. González González (González González 2019: 41) hanno confermato questa attribu­zione mediante il parallelo stilistico con altre opere di Aristion. In tal modo, i ricercatori tedeschi datano la kore al 550-530 a. C., mentre V. Barlou la colloca al 540 a. C. In assenza di dati archeologici esaustivi, si possono fare solo alcune constatazioni. Da un lato, la firma di Aristion di Paros (Angiolillo 1997: 193) e la datazione del kouros 19 L’ipotesi del danneggiamento intenzionale dell’iscrizione in epoca cristiana troverebbe conferma solo se fosse accertato che l’epigrafe - pagana per l’appunto - era reimpiegata a vista. Fatto, questo, che non puň essere escluso, poiché la base venne impiegata come epichranitis, ovvero coronamento di lesena ed elemento di sostegno della porta Nord della chiesa: E. Vivliodetis (Vivliodetis 2007: 58). 20 Lo scavo della fossa che conteneva Phrasikleia non č mai stato portato a termine (Mastrokostas 1972: 323). 21 L’analisi stilistica di E. I. Mastrokostas si limita al confronto fra Phrasikleia e il piantico kouros di Volo­mandra (560-540 ca.). al 530 a. C. (Mastrokostas 1972: 316), ossia dieci anni dopo l’ostracismo degli Alcmeonidi, concorrono a datare la kore di Mirrunte all’epoca di Pisistrato; ossia fra il 550 ed il 540 a. C. ca. Appare d’altro canto evidente che co-loro che seppellirono la statua erano mossi da un intento preciso. Sia che si trattasse di Alcmeonidi desiderosi di nasconderla alla furia dei partigiani di Pisistrato (Svenbro 1988: 17–18), o di avversari di Ippia mossi a pietŕ dall’immagine funeraria di una Pisitratide (Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 189–191), non desideravano distruggerla ma preservarne la memoria. Č quanto risulta dal perfetto stato di con-servazione dell’opera (fig. 2, fig. 3 e fig. 6), e dall’assenza di tracce di combustione nellafossa.In altreparole,čfuordidubbio che all’immagine di Phrasikleia sia stata attribuita un’importanza notevole. Lo studio etimologico e storico di J. Svenbro (Svenbro 1988)22 attribuisce l’importanza dell’opera all’iscrizione che, per la prima volta nel mondo greco, menziona il nome di una defunta cui fu dedicata una effige. Secondo l’autore, il nome Phrasikleia deriverebbe dal greco phrazein, che significa narrare, manife-stare, e da kléos, che significa nomea, fama. In quest’ottica, la fanciulla diventa “colei che attira l’attenzione sulla fama”, o piesattamente “colei che manifesta la fama” (Svenbro 1988: 19–20; González González 2019: 42–43). In una prospettiva piampia, l’iscri­zione incisa sulla base della statua incita a riflettere sulla valenza simbolica e piů precisamente antropologica dell’intera produzione delle korai. 22 Vedere anche il commento di M. Stieber (Stieber 1996: 69–70). Dal testo originale: Seµ. F.as...e.a.....e .e...s.µa. a.e., ..t. ..µ. pa.. .e.. t..t. .a... ...µa. La traduzione di A. Giuliano (Giuliano 1989: 156): Ricordo di Phrasikleia. Fanciulla sarň chiamata per sempre, avendo ricevuto dagli dei, in luogo delle nozze, questo nome. La scelta del termine kore, che Giuliano traduce con “fanciulla”, non č forse del tutto casuale. Occorre infatti distinguere il termine greco kore, “ragazza”, “donna non sposata”, da parthenos, “vergine”(Kontoleon 1974: 4–5)23. Il fatto che la giovane Phrasikleia sia definita kore e non parthenos sembra tradurre un preciso intento nella dedica della statua. In tale prospettiva, l’importanza dello status sociale della donna che non ha legalmente contratto matrimonio risalta a discapito della sua condizione anatomica di vergine. Quest’ultima, come sottolinea S. Angiolillo, ha valore solo in quanto condizione essenziale per il matrimonio, l’unico istituto funzionale alla creazione di nuovi legami fra genoi diversi, in cui la donna esprime la propria funzione sociale - ed economica (Angiolillo 1997: 198; González González 2019: 42). Tale elemento, caratterizzante la condizione femminile sotto la prospettiva antropo­logica, si esprime nella tipologia statuaria della kore, che sublima il ruolo della donna all’interno della comunitŕ in quanto sposa (Bejor, Castoldi, Lambrugo 2008: 107). In quest’ottica la statua funebre di Phrasikleia si afferma come un’opera eccezionale, poiché rappresenta una ragazza morta quando era ancora civilmente kore, ovvero prima di contrarre matrimonio (Kontoleon 1974: 10 ss.). Si puň dunque definire la kore di Mirrunte un semplice sema, l’immagine funeraria di una donna non sposata? Il contesto di rinvenimento e la rilettura dell’epigrafe sulla base concorrono a sollevare dubbi in proposito, e a proporre che Phrasikleia intrattenga un legame particolare con il culto della Brauronia. Certo, di primo acchito sembra difficile porre in relazione la statua di Mirrunte con il rituale dell’orsa; la fanciulla dimostra 13-14 anni circa, un’etŕ piavanzata rispetto a quella che la tradizione attribuisce alle arktoi, vale a dire circa 10 anni (Valerio Arpo­crazione, s.v. Arkteusai; Suda, s.v. Arktňs e Braurôníois: 361 ss.; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645). Eppure, l’opera restituisce l’immagine di una verginitŕ resa eterna dalla morte prematura. O, per meglio dire, l’immagine di una donna la quale non vide mai realizzato il proprio ruolo di sposa e madre all’interno della societŕ. Questo semplice fatto accomuna la fanciulla di Mirrunte alle ragazze che celebravano l’arktéia come prerequisito al matrimonio, quando ancora erano vergini (Valerio Arpocrazione, s.v. Arkteusai; Suda, s.v. Arktňs e Braurôníois: 361 ss.; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645). L’analisi stilistica della kore concorrere a meglio chiarire il legame dell’effige con il rito dell’orsa, tanto sotto il profilo archeologico, tanto sotto quello antropologico. 23 Sul significato e la valenza culturale del termine parthenos nel sentire religiosogreco si rimanda alla rifles- sione di M. Untersteiner (Untersteiner 1991: 27). II) ANALISI DEGLI ATTRIBUTI E LORO VALENZA SIMBOLICA 1) confronto con la “KORE col PePlo”: la POIKILIA Giallo-roSSa Il confronto stilistico fra Phrasikleia ed una kore ad essa quasi contemporanea, la cosiddetta kore col peplo, consente di porre l’accento sull’importanza degli attributi floreali della fanciulla di Mirrunte, che consta piprecisamente nella loro colorazione. In tal modo si pongono le basi per una rilettura dell’opera in chiave antropologica. La kore n. 679 del museo dell’acropoli, conosciuta con il nome di “kore col peplo” (Richter 1968: 72) e datata al 540-535 a. C. ca., č stata in origine identificata ge­nericamente come una divinitŕ guerriera quale Artemide, o Atena (Ridgway 1977: 110; Macworth-Young, Payne 1950 (trad. 1981): 55). Nei primi anni Duemila V. Brinkmann ha perň riconosciuto l’opera come l’immagine di culto del Brauronion sull’acropoli (Brinkmann 2004, 74–75; Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 212). L’autore osserva in primo luogo come l’assetto generale dell’opera richiami quello uno xoanon. Quindi, sulla base del riscontro con la notizia trasmessa da Pausania, il quale ricorda il simulacro in legno che Ifigenia sottrasse ai Tauri per trasportarlo a Brauron (Pausania, Periegesi: I, 33, 1), propone di identificare l’opera come la copia in marmo dello xoanon dell’Artemision sull’Erasino (Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 21224). V. Franciosi (Franciosi 2010) ha con-fermato questa teoria, ponendo la kore col peplo in relazione con alcuni frammenti provenienti dalla colmata persiana, fra cui due cani da caccia (Franciosi 2010: 144, fig. 2) giŕ attribuiti alla decorazione architettonica 24 A seguito dell’analisi di compiuta su frammenti marmorei dal Museo di Brauron, G. Despines ha ipotizzato l’esistenza di almeno un acrolito della dea presso l’Artemision sull’Erasino (Despines 2004; Nielsen 2009: 92). Occorre certo considerare distintamente le testimonianze letterarie e le osservazioni sulla kore col peplo poste in essere da V. Brinkmann, e l’analisi di G. Despines. La statua monumentale di cui il ricercatore greco ipotizza l’esistenza avrebbe infatti una fattura diversa da quella di uno xoanon; soprattutto, perň, essendo datata all’epoca classica (metŕ del V sec. a. C.), sarebbe posteriore alla kore col peplo. dell’Artemision. In particolare, ha identificato una testa animale, in precedenza interpretata come una testa di leone (Angiolillo 1997, fig. 8), come una testa di orso (Franciosi 2010: 145, fig. 3), l’animale tutelare delle arktoi. Inoltre, sulla base del confronto tra la statua dell’acropoli e una statuetta in bronzo con dedica ad Artemide, databile alla metŕ del VI secolo e conservata al Museum of Fine Arts di Boston (Richter 1968: 47, figg. 456–459; Brinkmann 2004: 74–75; Franciosi 2010: 169), ha realizzato una ricostruzione della kore con arco e frecce (Franciosi 2010, fig. 16; fig. 4). Conclude con un’annotazione sull’abito della kore la cui analisi, realizzata mediante l’uso della luce radente e dei raggi UV, ha rivelato una poikilia graffita e dipinta che evoca la natura selvaggia con grifoni, pantere e cinghiali (Brinkmann 2004: 69–70). Nel paradigma decorativo spicca il colore giallo-rosso, che richiama lo zafferano e il krokot (Franciosi 2010: 161, 171), l’abito tipico delle arktoi secondo Aristofane (Aristofane, Lisistrata: 645). Nell’otticadiFranciosilakore, in quanto effigediculto delBrauronion sull’acropoli, indossa proprio l’abito tinto con il croco, come le arktoi. Conclude ipotizzando che le giovani ateniesi svolgessero una cerimonia a carattere privato sull’acropoli, nel momento in cui sopraggiungeva per loro il menarca, e che in seguito, a Brauron, “facessero le orse” nel contesto di un rituale collettivo (Franciosi 2010: 16225). L’annotazione di Franciosi sul colore della veste della kore col peplo č un fattore determinante, poiché trova un riscontro proprio nell’effige di Phrasikleia. L’analisi au­toptica ha infatti rivelato che il chitone della kore di Mirrunte ha conservato tracce di una decorazione composta da fiori gialli e neri su un fondo rosso (Mastrokostas 1972: 316). Su questa base, K. Karakasi ha proposto una prima ricostruzione cromatica dell’opera (Karakasi 1997: 16–24; Karakasi 2008: 292; fig. 5). La ricostruzione della policromia della statua fu convalidata da N. Kaltsas, grazie a un’analisi microscopica dei pigmenti (Kaltsas 2002: 511–517), e da V. Brinkmann, mediante la spettroscopia UV e la fluore­scenza a raggi X (Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 192–199, fig. 154, 156)26. Si rileva quindi una stretta corrispondenza cromatica fra l’abito della kore di Mirrunte e la veste della kore col peplo, in entrambi i casi caratterizzata dall’alternanza del giallo e del rosso; i colori che, secondo Franciosi, connotano la kore col peplo in quanto effige di Artemide Brauronia (Franciosi 2010: 162). A differenza della kore dell’acropoli (Franciosi 2010: 161, 171), Phrasikleia porta un riconoscibilissimo chitone (Karakasi 2003: 138), e non il krokot. La policromia simile non rappresenta perň una coincidenza, come pare confermato da ulteriori caratteristiche 25 L’ articolazione spaziale e temporale del culto di Artemide nei diversi luoghi di culto legati all’aition brauronio, e in particolare fra il santuario della dea sull’acropoli e l’Artemision sull’Erasino, rappresenta una questione ad oggi ancora aperta. Alcune fonti letterarie affermano infatti che il rito dell’orsa poteva svolgersi tanto presso il santuario del Pireo, quanto a Brauron (Valerio Arpocrazione, s.v. Arkteusai). Un attento studio delle fonti ha perň indotto C. A. Faraone ad ipotizzare che presso l’acropoli si svolgesse in rito collettivo, contrariamente a quanto avveniva presso il santuario sull’Erasino, che avrebbe ospitato un rituale individuale (Faraone 2003: 51–58). Relativamente a questa questione, si segnalano agli studi in corso sull’arktéia di V. Szymanska, che traggono spunto dalla Tesi di Laurea recentemente discussa (Szymanska 2019). 26 Ulteriori analisi sui pigmenti di natura metallica sono state compiute da V. Kantarelou e B. Schmaltz (Kan-tarelou 2016; Schmaltz 2016). iconografichecheaccumunanoleduestatue. La somiglianza fra la kore di Mirrunte e quella dell’acropoli, separate cronologicamente da 10-20 anni appena, č stata evidenziata da J. Boardman (Boardman 1978: 74), dall’équipe V. Brinkmann (Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 212–213), e da E. Lippolis e G. Rocco (Lippolis, Rocco 2011: 167). Le effigi femminili sfoggiano lo stesso, delicato sorriso, sottolineato dall’identico trattamento delle so-pracciglia. Parimenti, manifestano un’analoga posizione del braccio destro, abbandonato lungo il corpo, e delle trecce, disposte in tre gruppi attorno alle spalle, a formare un’aggra­ ziataacconciatura.Nell’assetto generaledella figurasiriscontrainfineilmodello “atubo”di tradizione samia, che conferisce compattezza ai volumi pur non rinunciando alla delicata resa grafica (Lippolis, Rocco 2011: 167). In questi elementi V. Barlou evidenzia il tratto caratteristico del connubio fra lo stile pario di Aristion, e gli influssi attici (Karakasi 2003: 126; Barlou 2013: 123–124). Dal puntuale riscontro fra questi elementi risalta l’importanza della policromia giallo - rossa della veste, che pone in risalto l’attributo floreale - il croco - nella sua valenza antro­pologica strettamente legata al rito dell’orsa (Aristofane, Lisistrata: 645). 2) la STEPHANE: PhraSikleia, la “raGazza dal KROKŇS” Uno degli attributi principali di Phra­ sikeia, la corona (fig. 6), pare per l’appunto rinviare alla simbologia del croco. Si tratta di una testimonianza unica nel suo genere, un magnifico gioiello composto da una serie di perle (?) su cui si apre un registro di fiori aperti e chiusi. L’ornamento rimanda all’uso greco (Stieber 1996: 94) di porre corone sul capo dei defunti, ma non trova riscontro nella tipologia delle korai, le quali appaiono talvolta provviste di copricapo del tipo kalathos o polos. E. I. Matrokostas (Mastrokostas 1972: 316–317), G. Macworth-Young e H. Payne (Macworth-Young, Payne 1950 (trad. 1981): 62), J. Svenbro (Svenbro 1988: 17), A. Giuliano (Giuliano 2003: 156) l’équipe di Brinkmann (Brinkmann, Ulrike Koch-Brin­kmann, Heinrich Piening 2010: 191) e M. González González (González González 2019: 41) hanno interpretato gli attributi sul capo di Phrasikleia come dei fiori di loto. Questa interpretazione č stata sostenuta in particolare da M. Stieber, la quale attribuisce all’attributo una valenza simbolica connessa all’eterno avvicendarsi della vita e la morte, derivante dalla cultura egizia (Stieber 1996: 86–87). A questa teoria si possono contrapporre due argomenti, che si desumono da dati botanici. In primo luogo, la forma ovale dei bulbi e dei fiori aperti, che ricorda una campana rovesciata (fig. 6), assomiglia di piů a quella dei fiori di zafferano (crocus sativus, fig. 7), che a quella dei fiori di loto (nelumbo). Mentre il nelumbo si caratterizza per un pistillo piatto circondato da nume­rosi stami e per i petali a forma di ovale appuntito (Manenti 1988: 492), il crocus sativus presenta tre soli stami e sei petali oblungo-ottusi (Manenti 1988: 214; Maleci Bini, Mariotti Lippi, Maugini 2006: 553). Tale forma ricorda proprio quella dei fiori aperti che ornano la corona di Phrasikleia, i cui petali si dipartono in tre diverse direzioni, il contorno finemente sottolineato in rilievo a suggerire la presenza di una seconda serie. D’altro canto, le analisi cromatiche non lasciano adito a dubbi in merito al fatto che i petali dei fiori aperti di cui č ornato il diadema della fanciulla fossero di colore rosso (Karakasi 1997: 16–24; Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 192, 195; fig. 5). Lo stesso si puň dire dei petali che accennano appena a dischiudersi dai boccioli, ancora protetti dall’involucro verde27. Tale scelta da parte dell’artista potrebbe voler richia- mare il caratteristico colore rosso degli stimmi dello zafferano, che spicca contro lo stilo giallo e i petali color malva. Si tratterebbe di un richiamo simbolico volto a sottolineare l’importanza dello zafferano, dai cui stimmi (Manenti 1988: 214–215) era estratto il co-lorante che, secondo la tradizione, conferiva il caratteristico colore giallo-rosso all’abito delle giovani seguaci della dea di Brauron (Aristofane, Lisistrata: 645). A scartare definitivamente l’opzione “loto” concorre infine ricordare che il genere nelumbo comprende due specie, n. lutea e n. nucifera. Mentre la prima originaria č del sud degli Stati Uniti e di colore giallo, la seconda proviene dalle regioni sub tropicali dell’Asia, e presenta un colore rosa (Manenti 1988: 492). Chiaramente, si tratta di una pianta sconosciuta in Grecia, o che perlomeno non cresce spontaneamente in quella zona. Come sottolinea la stessa M. Stieber (Stieber 1996: 86–87), in Egitto era invece noto il genere nymphea, che appartiene alla stessa famiglia del fiore di loto, le Nympha­ eaceae. Piů precisamente, nella valle del Nilo erano conosciute le specie nymphea lotus e nymphea caerulea (il cosiddetto “loto egizio”), le quali presentano rispettivamente un colore bianco e blu. Si puň accettare, come suggerisce M. Stieber (Stieber 1996: 86–87), che la ninfea avesse una simbologia fortemente legata alla dualitŕ della morte e della rinascita nel mondo egizio, e che questo significato fosse ben noto in Grecia. Tuttavia, negli attributi di Phrasikleia la scelta cromatica del rosso propende a identificare i fiori come crocus sativus, i cui stimmi rossi avevano un valore funzionale e decorativo, ma soprattutto simbolico, legato all’arktéia. Alla luce di queste considerazioni, pare possibile sostenere l’ipotesi che Phrasikleia porti il krok.s, il fiore che, secondo la tradizione, era utilizzato per tingere l’abito delle “orsette” di Brauron. 3) il Bocciolo, la collana e Gli orecchini: confronti con il culto di deMetra dalla Grecia occidentale I boccioli sulla corona di Phrasikleia sono del tutto identici, per quanto attiene la morfologia e la colorazione28, al singolo bocciolo che la fanciulla regge nella mano sinistra, all’altezza del petto. Al di lŕ del riscontro puntuale, che induce a sottolineare l’importanza del croco come attributo di Phrasikleia, questo emblema trova confronto in diverse testimonianze il cui significato pare fortemente radicato nella sfera funeraria. Č quanto prova, per esempio, la stele funeraria cosiddetta “degli Alcmeonidi”, conservata al Metropolitan Museum of 27 Nella ricostruzione cromatica di Phrasikleia realizzata da V. Brinkmannn si distingue chiaramente il colore rosso dei petali del fiore che si dischiude nella mano sinistra della fanciulla (Brinkmann 2003: 182, fig. 326; Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 192). 28 La ricostruzione cromatica di Phrasikleia realizzata da V. Brinkmannn evidenzia bene il colore rosso dei petali del fiore che si dischiude nella mano sinistra della fanciulla, del tutto uguale a quello che caratterizza i fiori sulla corona (Karakasi 1997: 16–24; Brinkmann 2003: 182, fig. 326; Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 192, 195). Art di New York. Il reperto, proveniente dall’Attica e quasi contemporaneo (540-530 a. C.) a Phrasikleia, raffigura due ragazzini: il maschio regge un bocciolo di fiore fra le dita (Stieber 1996: 96; González González 2019, 49-51, fig. 3.3; fig. 8), proprio come la kore di Mirrunte. La kore di Mirrunte trova tuttavia un piinteressante riscontro con la tipologia della “ragazza col bocciolo”, la cui valenza simbolica complessa č ricca di richiami ctoni. Si rimarca, innanzi tutto, come alcune raffigurazioni femminili arcaiche, appartenenti proprio a questa tipologia, siano legate al culto di Artemide. Notevole in particolare il corpus dell’Artemision di Corfů, che comprende 550 esemplari identificati da N. Icard e L. Kahlil (Icard & Kahlil 1984: n. 545–546) come effigi di Artemide col bocciolo, tutti datati all’inizio del V secolo a. C. (fig. 9). Se il riscontro da Corfnon bastasse per comprovare il legame, simbolico oltre che stilistico, che il tipo della fanciulla col bocciolo intrattiene con Artemide, un ulteriore parallelo risulta determinante. Ossia, almeno una decina fra gli esemplari censiti da L. Kahlil, databili all’inizio del V secolo a. C., vengono proprio da Brauron (Icard, Kahlil 1984: n. 547; fig. 10). Il parallelo piů interessante si individua perň nelle effigi con bocciolo e porcellino dalla Grecia occidentale (fig. 11). I due emblemi, il bocciolo e il maialino, sono entrambi attestati nel culto di Artemide, come dimostra la presenza di offerenti con porcellino, il tipo della “ragazza col bocciolo”; inizio del V secolo a. C.; Brauron, Museo (Icard, Kahlil 1984: n. 547. Per gentile concessione del Ministero della Cultura e dello Sport, Ephorate of Antiquities of Eastern Attica, competente per la conservazione del reperto. © Ministry of Culture and Sports / Ephorate of Antiquities of Eastern Attica). anteriori al V sec. a. C., dallo stesso santuario di Corf(Sguaitamatti 1984: 49). Ricerche recenti hanno tuttavia suggerito un legame particolare fra questi due emblemi, ponendo in essere una teoria secondo la quale il tipo della ragazza col bocciolo avrebbe dato origine a quello dell’offerente col porcellino(Rizza 2008: 188–189). Punto di confronto determinante, secondo G. Rizza (Rizza 2008: 188–189) e A. Pautasso (Pautasso 2012: 131), sono alcune statuette che reggono entrambi gli emblemi, databili alla prima metŕ del V sec. a. C. e largamente diffuse in localitŕ della Sicilia greca (ma anche punica), legate al culto di Demetra e /o a quello di Kore29. Fra di esse Agrigento (santuario delle divinitŕ ctonie sulla collina dei templi presso porta V), Catania (santuario di Demetra e Kore presso il teatro; fig. 1130), Gela (thesmophorion di Bitalemi), Selinunte (santuario di Demetra Malophoros)31. Ora, nell’ottica del presente studio, il santuario di Demetra a Selinunte assume un’importanza particolare, poiché il sema di Phrasikleia, qui riconosciuta come una giovane “orsa”, trova nel contesto ulteriori riscontri rispetto a quello tipologico con le offerenti col maialino. Si rimarca infatti la stretta somiglianza tra alcuni attributi della kore di Mirrunte ed emblemi tipici delle statuette e delle protomi femminili provenienti dal santuario della Malophoros, databili fra la metŕ del VI e l’inizio del V secolo a. C. (Dewailly 1992: 23 ss.; Wiederkehr Schuler 2004: 80). In primo luogo, gli orecchini di Phrasikleia, sorta di disco che si prolunga in un elemento oblun-go, sono del tutto identici a quelli di alcune 29 Sul culto di queste divinitŕ in Magna Grecia e Sicilia vedere il compendio di V. Hinz (Hinz 1998). 30 Per un aggiornamento degli studi sul santuario di Piazza San Francesco (attribuzione cronologica tra etŕ arcaica e classica attraverso la tipologia della ceramica), vedere il contributo di A. Pautasso (Pautasso 2010). 31 Sulladislocazionediquestimaterialiin Siciliasipuň fareriferimento ailavoridiL. BeschieS. M. Bertesago (Beschi 1988: n. 105; Bertesago 2009). protome selinuntine (fig. 12). In secondo luogo, la collana della kore di Mirrunte, come quelle di molte statuette, rappresenta frutti di melograno (fig. 13).32 L’impressionante somiglianza degli orec­ chini (fig. 12), giŕ notata da E. Wiederkehr Schuler (Wiederkehr Schuler 2004: 64–65), ha dato adito a due interpretazioni diverse; ovvero, potrebbe trattarsi tanto di boccioli di fiore, quanto di coppie di bucrani. Ora, se la prima ipotesi puň essere giustificata dal fatto che Demetra č la dea della fertilitŕ, la seconda trova un preciso riscontro in alcune rappresentazioni dell’Artemide di Efeso, il cui carattere peculiare legato alla fertilitŕ č ben noto (Brenk 1998: 165–166). I melograni raffigurati sulla collana (fig. 6) sono stati interpretati come un indicatore che richiama il viaggio di Kore agli inferi (Inno omerico aDemetra: 393–404), e che pertanto concorrerebbead identificarelastatuacome un’effige di culto di questa divinitŕ (Stieber 1996: 71; González González 2019: 42). Tuttavia, alcune statuette arcaiche da Corfe un’altra, coeva e di fattura corinzia,33 tutte riconosciute come effigi di Artemide (Icard, Kahlil 1984: n. 542–544), dimostrano come il melograno possa connotare anche l’apparato simbolico della dea della caccia. a. C. ca. Parco archeologico e paesaggistico di Catania e della Valle dell’Aci, inv. 1580 (Rizza 2008: 188. Su gentile autorizzazione del Parco archeologico e paesaggistico di Catania e della Valle dell’Aci. Č vietata l’ulteriore riproduzione e/o duplicazione dell’immagine con qualsiasi mezzo). L’accezione ctonia del culto del culto di Artemide pare confermata anche da alcune fonti epigraficheda Selinunte, che pongono in relazione Demeter Malophoros con altre divinitŕ, le quali assumono un carattere liminare oltre che infero. Č fatto riferimento alle iscrizioni che associano Demetra Malophoros a Pasikratéia,34 letteralmente l’“onnipo­tente”, e a Einodia, ossia “colei che tutela i luoghi di passaggio” (Barone, Elia 1979: 47; Dewailly 1992: 147–148). Questa testimonianza, di per sé, richiama un’accezione liminare che č propria del culto di Artemide, divinitŕ preposta alla tutela dei crocicchi (Callimaco, Inno ad Artemide: 38). Ora, la lettura dei testi di Selinunte alla luce delle testimonianze letterarie ha dimostrato che entrambi i termini, Pasikratéia (Esiodo, 32 Si tratta degli elementi circolari inseriti nella collana. 33 L’esatta provenienza del reperto č ignota. 34 Sull’epiteto di Artemide Enodia vedere anche: Esiodo, Catalogo delle donne: fr. 23a. Inoltre, i contributi di J. Pouilloux e N. Serafini (Pouilloux 1944: 418; Serafini 2015: 113–114). Teogonia: 411–412) e Einodia35 (Inno orfico a Ecate: I, 1), rappresentano un epiteto di Ecate. Quest’ultimo riscontro si rivela determinante in quanto lo stesso inno orfico che definisceEcateEinodia, attribuiscealladeaun abito color croco, ovvero tinto con ilfiore che costituiva l’emblema delle “orsette” (Inno orfico a Ecate: I, 2). Tali corrispondenze hanno indotto M. L. Famŕ e V. Tusa a proporre una rilettura delle stele del temenos dedicato a Zeus Meilichios (collocato a Nord-Est del santuario della Malophoros)36, identificando la coppia divina che vi č rappresentata come Zeus e Demetra/Pasikratéia, oppure Zeus e Einodia/Ecate/Artemide (Famŕ, Tusa 2000: 13)37. Questi elementi sembrano confermare il carattere ctonio del culto di Artemide, e dell’effige di Phrasikleia che ad esso sembra legata. Colpisce, a maggior ragione, l’acco-stamento fra l’arktéia, culto prematrimoniale (Valerio Arpocrazione, s.v. Arkteusai; Suda, s.v. Arktňs e Braurôníois: 361 ss.; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645) dedicato ad 35 Sul legame della figura denominata Pasikrateia con la sfera demetriaca nel contesto selinuntino vedere anche lo studio di C. Greco (Greco 2013, 51). 36 Per un inquadramento generale sulle stele del Meilichios, fare riferimento al contributo di C. Antonetti e S. De Vido (Antonetti, De Vido 2006: 215). Sul culto di Zeus Meilichios e le sue accezioni misteriche oltre che ctonie, vedere il lavoro di H. A. Shapiro (Shapiro 2002: 87). 37 Sui culti in onore di Ecate vedere anche il contributo di N. Serafini (Serafini 2015: 115). Artemide, e il culto ctonio di Demetra, connesso al sacrificio tesmoforico del porcellino (Clemente Alessandrino, Protrettico: 2, 17, 1). Entrambi sono strettamente legati alla sfera della fertilitŕ femminile. III) PHRASIKLEIA, O DELL’AMBIVALENTE RAPPORTO AI RITI DI PUBERTŔ COME FATTO SOCIALE Gli elementi qui posti in essere hanno posto l’accento sulle diverse sfaccettature - sim- boliche oltre che iconografiche - del confronto fra due riti diversi; il culto di Artemide Brauronia da un lato, e il culto di Demetra dall’altro. Alla luce del confronto fra due riti apparentemente distanti, l’intento in questa sede č chiarire le problematiche antropolo­giche cui fa capo il rito dell’orsa. 1) l’ARKTÉIA, rito di PuBertŕ L’arktéia presenta un’accezione fortemente ambivalente, che si ravvisa nel topos letterario del sacrificio della vergine e si incarna nella valenza simbolica del colore giallo-rosso dello zafferano. Il mito di fondazione (Suda, s.v. Arktos e Braurôníois: 361 ss.; Scholia Aristophani-ca, Lysistrata: 645; Bekker, Anecdocta graeca: I, 206) dipinge in maniera drammatica la storia dell’animale sacro ad Artemide allevato a Brauron. Un giorno una ragazzina infastidě la bestia sino a renderla folle; questa, in preda alla pazzia, fece scempio della bambina. Come conseguenza, il fratello di lei diede la caccia alla fiera, e la uccise. La dea, irata, inviň una pestilenza agli Ateniesi i quali, per liberarsi del flagello, furono costretti ad obbligare le proprie figlie a “fare l’orsa” prima di sposarsi. L’epos narra la vicenda di due giovani donne, strettamente legate all’aition brauro­nio, le quali incarnano lo status sociale di coloro che si rapportano per la prima volta al matrimonio e alla sessualitŕ. Da un lato vi č la ninfa Callisto, che Artemide avrebbe trasformato in orsa per aver mancato al proprio voto di verginitŕ, unendosi a Zeus (Ovidio, Fasti: II, 154–193). Il legame di questa fanciulla con il mito di Brauron č confermato dall’analisi di due piccoli crateri figure rosse (Kahlil 1977: 86 ss.), datati al V secolo a. C., la cui decorazione pone in associazione figure di giovanette danzanti e impegnate nella corsa con l’orso, l’animale tutelare delle arktoi (Kahlil 1977: 89–93; Giuman 1999: 132–133). Su uno dei vasetti č raffigurata la dea Artemide in persona, riconoscibile dall’arco e dai cervi che l’accom­pagnano, intenta a minacciare un uomo e una donna che portano maschere a forma di muso d’orso. I. Nielsen (Nielsen 2009: 8–88) ha proposto di identificare i personaggi presenti sulla scena come dei sacerdoti, intenti in una sorta di sacra rappresentazione in onore della dea. Tuttavia, l’atteggiamento atterrito della figura femminile di fronte alla minaccia della dea sembra confermare la lettura di L. Kahlil, la quale ha identificato la donnacomeCallisto, ed ilgiovanecomeAkras, ilfiglio illegittimo chelaragazzagenerň da Zeus (Ovidio, Fasti: II, 154–193; vedere Kahlil 1977: 86 ss.). Secondo questa lettura l’immagine della fanciulla appare quale un monito alle giovani donne a non sfidare la dea, avendo rapporti con un uomo prima di aver rispettato le regole del servizio rituale (Kahlil 1977: 86 ss). L’altra figura, che intrattiene un legame ancor piů stretto con l’aition brauronio, č Ifigenia, fondatrice del culto (Euripide, Ifigenia in Tauride:1446–1474)38. Pronta al ma-trimonio, non giunge a celebrare la propria unione con Achille; anche questa fanciulla, secondo una tradizione, viene trasformata in orsa (Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645). TantonelcasodiIfigenia,tantoinquellodiCallisto,ilprimoapproccioallasessualitŕ č destinato a fallire poiché incompleto, in quanto č vissuto ai margini della societŕ. Cosě, mentre Callisto rimane incinta senza essere sposata e paga la sua colpa con la trasforma­zione in orsa (Ovidio, Fasti: II, 154–193), Ifigenia non giunge mai a sposarsi, anzi perde la vita (Eschilo, Agamennone: 191–247). Nelle figure mitiche di queste due giovani si incarnano quindi perfettamente gli elementi fondanti dell’arktéia: da un lato, la pratica del sacrificio umano; dall’altra, la morte simbolica della vergine39. Nel mito di Ifigenia, questo concetto si esprime simbolicamente attraverso la sim-bologia del croco. Eschilo, descrivendo la scena del sacrificio, precisa che la giovane lascia cadere la propria veste tinta di croco, appena prima del momento fatale (Eschilo, Agamennone:238–239). NellaconcezionediC. Roscino(Roscino 2015:172–181), que­sto gesto presenterebbe anche una sfaccettatura erotica, in quanto alluderebbe alla morte simbolica della fanciulla nubile e vergine che si appresta al matrimonio. C. Sourvinou-Inwood (Sourvinou-Inwood 1988: 805–806; Franciosi 2010: 156) ri­teneva, dal canto suo, che le arktoi dovessero deporre il proprio vestito color del croco, durante le feste in onore di Artemide Brauronia. In quest’ottica l’arktéia assorbe la simbologia del krok.s, in quanto rito iniziatico che prevede la morte simbolica, requisito indispensabile perché l’individuo possa affrontare il passaggio ad una tappa successiva, ed essenziale, della propria esistenza. Secondo C. Calame (Calame 2002: 57–61) e M. Giuman (Giuman 2002: 92–96), tale tappa coincide con la pubertŕ. L’analogia fra il colore rosso del fiore e il primo sangue mestruale č semplice da stabilire, mentre l’associazione fra il krok.s e la condizione dellagiovane pubera č con-fermata dalle proprietŕ terapeutiche della pianta, il crocus sativus. Č noto che dagli stimmi (e in parte dallo stilo) del fiore č possibile estrarre il colorante, ma anche una droga (Maleci Bini, Mariotti Lippi, Maugini 2006: 554)40. In farmacolo­ gia tale sostanza - tossica se assunta in quantitŕ eccessive - č impiegata come sedativo e digestivo, ma anche come emmenagogo, elemento atto a indurre il ciclo mestruale e, 38 Sulla vicenda di Ifigenia quale mito fondante nel sentire religioso greco si rimanda a P. Grimal (Grimal 1951: 235–236). 39 Secondo C. A. Faraone questo concetto di “morte” assume un’accezione particolare caratterizzata dal binomio sacrificio umano/trasformazione in animale: in quest’ottica, l’orso assurge alla funzione di simbolo in quanto sostituto del sacrificio umano (Faraone 2003). 40 Le autrici precisano come l’impiego dello zafferano per il trattamento dei disturbi mestruali, attestato nell’antichitŕ, sia caduto in disuso. pertanto, all’aborto. Alcuni studi hanno, infine, posto in evidenza come la pianta abbia un’azione antidepressiva (Maleci Bini, Mariotti Lippi, Maugini 2006: 554). Queste considerazioni consentono di azzardare l’ipotesi che l’arktéia, in quanto rito iniziatico di pubertŕ, prevedesse l’assunzione della sostanza estratta dal fiore dello zafferano da parte delle partecipanti, e non solo l’impiego del composto come colorante per tingere i loro vestiti. Questo poiché le proprietŕ del fiore, attea favorire un processo biologico che era precisamente oggetto del rito, erano ben note agli antichi. La tradizione letteraria prova infatti che essi erano a conoscenza degli usi molteplici della pianta; in particolare, il Corpus Hippocraticum (Ippocrate, Corpus hippocraticum, De Sterilibus: 230; Calame 2002: 60–61) e Plinio (Plinio, Osservazione della natura: XXIV, 166; Calame 2002: 60–61) danno notizia del fatto che unguenti a base di zafferano potevano costituire un rimedio contro la sterilitŕ. Le fonti riconoscono al croco anche la facoltŕ di destare il desiderio, come č testimoniato dal fatto che la pianta presiede l’unione di Hera e Zeus (Omero, Iliade: XIV, 346–349), e quella di Apollo e Creusa (Euripide, Ione: 887–889). Alcuni dati archeologici documentano, infine, la relazione simbolica del croco con la pubertŕ femminile, a cominciare da una testimonianza antichissima, risalente al II mil- lennio a. C. Si tratta del ciclo di affreschi del settore femminile della Xesté 3 ad Akrotiri (Santorini), che rappresenta alcune giovani donne intente alla raccolta del croco per farne offerta a una divinitŕ femminile seduta in trono. Secondo L. Alberti (Alberti 2009), l’intero ciclo figurativo illustra un rito di iniziazione alla fertilitŕ che prelude al raggiungimento del menarca. In quest’ottica, la raccolta del croco potrebbe rappresentare il delicato mo-mento di segregazione (Alberti 2009: 44) in cui l’individuo richiede la protezione della divinitŕ, che si esprime nel ruolo profilattico della pianta. Un altro interessante riscontro archeologico viene proprio da Brauron. Come č noto, fra le offerte attinenti la filatura e il cucito citate nel corpus delle iscrizioni dal santuario sull’Erasino č presente il korokot.s (Cleland 2005; Alavanou 1972: 12–1341). Tali do-cumenti epigrafici suggeriscono di scartare l’ipotesi che l’arktéia fosse un mero rituale prematrimoniale. Si rileva infatticome l’offerta del krokot.s sia spesso citata insieme ai rakoi, letteralmente “stracci”.42 Se D. Marchiandi interpreta i rakoi come vesti consunte (Marchiandi 2018: 78–79, n. 78), l’associazione del krokot e il rakos sembra piuttosto confermare l’interpretazione di P. Brulé e M. Giuman, il quali identificano i frammenti di stoffa come le bende che le fanciulle utilizzavano quando raggiungevano il menarca (Brulé 1987, 236; Giuman 1999: 60–61)43. Alla luce di queste osservazioni il rito dell’orsa si connota in maniera inequivocabile comeun rito dipubertŕ femminile, denso disfumaturectoniecheaffondano leproprieradici nell’aition (Suda, s.v. Arktos e Braurôníois: 361 ss.; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645; Bekker, Anecdocta graeca: I, 206), al cui centro č il topos del sacrificio della vergine. 41 Per una rassegna sulle offerte tessili da Brauron, fare riferimento al testo di D. Marchiandi (Marchiandi 2018). 42 Vedere per es. la testimonianza citata da L. Cleland (Cleland 2005: 39-40, n. 1529, righe 312-324). 43 Sul significato simbolico dell’offerta della veste nella sfera femminile vedere anche quanto riportato da C. Roscino (Roscino 2015: 176-177). Ora, dall’accostamento fra la pubertŕ femminile e il sacrificio cruento si desume una domanda. Come si spiega che nel sentire religioso greco la condizione della giovane donna pubera e nubile - la condizione delle arktoi - si iscrivesse ad un rito di espiazione? 2) PuBertŕ feMMinile e riti di eSPiazione Elementi di risposta a questa domanda si possono desumere dalla connessione fra mate-riali archeologici legati alla Brauronia e testimonianze legate al culto di Demetra e Kore dalla Grecia occidentale. Fra i materiali legati al culto della Brauronia attualmente inediti (per quanto attiene gli esemplari di Brauron e di Atene) si annoverano le tavolette fittili. Ora, le poche noti­zie ad oggi disponibili inerenti questi reperti consentono di porre in essere la loro stretta somiglianza con alcuni pinakes di tipo locrese coevi (Parra 2013)44, il cui tema principale č il ratto di Kore-Persephone. Un primo riscontro interessante č quello fra il tipo di Brauron che raffigura Artemide Tauropolos (Parra 2013: 328; fig. 14) e quello locrese che rappresenta Europa in groppa al toro (Lissi-Caronna, Sabbione, Vlad Borelli 2004-2007, tipo 10/445, fig. 15; Marroni 2016: 68). In secondo luogo, il tipo della filatrice attestato sull’acropoli di Atene (fig. 16) assomiglia molto all’analogo tipo di Medma (Parra, Settis 2005: 247; Parra 2013: 327–328;fig. 17)46. Secondo M. Parra, il tipo ateniese rappresenta Atena Ergane. Tuttavia l’offerta delle vesti, prerogativa delle vergini prossime al matrimonio47, č attestata dai dati archeologici sia nel culto di Kore (Lissi-Caronna, Sabbione, Vlad Borelli 1996-1999, II, 3, p. 431 ss.), come dimostrano i pinakes locresi, che in quello di Artemide, come attestano le epigrafi di Brauron48, e dell’Artemision sull’acropoli49. L’iconografia delle tavolette locresi, come č noto, č stata successivamente interpretata daP.ZancaniMontuoro (ZancaniMontuoro 1994-1995), M.Parra(Parra1996:139), L. E. Caronna, C. Sabbione e L. Vlad Borelli (Lissi-Caronna, Sabbione, Vlad Borelli 1996-1999; Lissi-Caronna, Sabbione, Vlad Borelli 2000-2003; Lissi-Caronna, Sabbione, Vlad Borelli 2004-2007), e da M. Mertens Horn (Mertens Horn 2005), come un’allegoria desunta dalla 44 L’autrice non precisa l’esatto luogo di rinvenimento dei pinakes di Atene, indicato genericamente come “l’acropoli”. Č dunque impossibile sapere se vengono dal Brauronion di Atene. Se questo fosse il caso, si tratterebbe evidentemente di un ulteriore elemento atto a comprovare il legame fra la sfera simbolica legata alla Brauronia e la valenza culturale dei culti di Locri. 45 Il compito di rivedere la prima classificazione dei pinakes intrapresa da P. Zancani negli anni Trenta del Novecento fu affidato a F. Barello, M. Cardosa, E. Grillo, M. Rubinich e R. Schenal (corpus edito da: E. Lis­si-Caronna, C. Sabbione, L. Vlad Borrelli: Lissi-Caronna, Sabbione, Vlad Borrelli 1996-1999; Lissi-Caronna, Sabbione, Vlad Borrelli 2000-2003; Lissi-Caronna, Sabbione, Vlad Borrelli 2004-2007). 46 L’autrice non precisa l’esatto luogo di rinvenimento di questi pinakes dell’acropoli. 47 Un caso celebre č quello del peplo tessuto in bisso offerto dalla poetessa Niosside al santuario di Hera Lacinia (Crotone) nel IV secolo a. C. (Antologia Palatina VI, 265). 48 Vedere per es. l’epigrafe riportata da L. Cleland, in cui appaiono il krokot e il rakos (Cleland 2005: 39-40, n. 1529, righe 312–324). 49 Si puň ricordare l’iscrizione citata da T. Linders, in cui appaiono il krokot e il chitone (Linders 1972: 45, n. 1518, righe 78–79). del Ministero della Cultura e dello Sport, Ephorate of Antiquities of Eastern Attica, competente per la conservazione del reperto. © Ministry of Culture and Sports / Ephorate of Antiquities of Eastern Attica). filosofia orfica, che trascende la funzione di ex voto prematrimoniali.50 La valenza simbo­lica della vicenda di Kore, in quest’ottica, muta da metafora del cambiamento di vita della giovane donna prossima al matrimonio, a metafora del destino dell’anima, che non incorre nel trapasso, ma nella metamorfosi (Zancani Montuoro 1994-1995: 198; Parra 1996: 139). Il richiamo all’arktéia, in quanto rito iniziatico, č a questo punto evidente. Tanto il culto della Brauronia, quanto quello di Kore a Locri, riflettono la condizione fisica e culturale della vergine. Rito di pubertŕ da un canto, rito prematrimoniale che allude alla perdita della condizione sociale di nubile (kore) e di vergine dall’altro. I due culti si iscrivono al medesimo fenomeno antropologico: l’atto attraverso il quale la comunitŕ riconosce il cambiamento di status biologico e sociale dell’individuo. Una tappa indivi­duale, che acquista senso solo in quanto č vissuta all’interno della comunitŕ attraverso il rito iniziatico (Brelich 1981: 25 ss.51), ed incarna, allo stesso tempo, una dimensione transitoria, altra, infernale. Si tratta di uno spazio-tempo che raccoglie la condizione delle giovani donne pubere, ma non sposate, per “esorcizzarla” e trasformarla in qualcosa di noto, regolamentato, definito dai costumi sociali52. Secondo A. Van Gennep, sotto il profilo antropologico tale fenomeno si iscrive ad una fase di segregazione, che rientra nei riti di margine e separazione propri della sfera del matrimonio e del fidanzamento (Van Gennep 1909 (trad. 1981): 112–113)53. In quest’ottica, la segregazione č definita come un requisito all’integrazione di individui che non hanno ancora assunto il proprio ruolo all’interno della comunitŕ e vengono per-tanto percepiti come “pericolosi” dal punto di vista sociale54. La tradizione (Aristofane, Lisistrata: 640–647) greca fa coincidere questa tappa “a metŕ fra due mondi” con il rito dell’arktéia, situando quest’ultimo fra la preadolescenza, rappresentata dalle arrephoroi e dalle alétrides, e la completa maturitŕ sessuale, simboleggiata dalle kanephoroi55. 50 Sull’interpretazione dei culti di Locri come riti prematrimoniali vedere anche C. Roscino (Roscino 2015: 175). Un aggiornamento sulla questione č proposto da M. Torelli; si veda al riguardo soprattutto la monografia sui pinakes locresi curata da E. Marroni e M. Torelli 2011: 86; Marroni 2016: 74 ss.; Torelli 2016: 88. Per un aggiornamento sul rapporto del culto di Kore a Locri con la filosofia orfica vedereil contributo di H. Eisenfeld (Eisenfeld 2016). Sulla diffusione dell’orfismo in Magna Grecia, M. Torelli (Torelli 2011: 94). 51 Sulla distinzione fra pubertŕ fisiologica e pubertŕ sociale, fare riferimento ad A. Van Gennep (Van Gennep 1909 (trad. 1981): 57). 52 Secondo P. Vernant, l’elemento che completa l’“addomesticamento” della componente femminile della societŕ č il matrimonio (Vernant 1990: p. 86). 53 Sul tema vedere anche in lavori di C. Survinou-Inwood e K. Dowden (Sourvinou-Inwood 1988: 58–60; Dowden 1989; Giuman 1999: 109 ss.). Si ricorda inoltre la Tesi dottorale discussa in tempi recentissimi all’Université de Lorraine da S. Laribi-Glaubel, che si concentra in particolar modo sui riti dedicati all’infanzia (Laribi-Glaubel 2019). 54 In merito alla pericolositŕ di questi individui non ancora cresciuti fisicamente e socialmente, cui viene associata a una componente selvaggia, si č espresso M. Untersteiner (Untersteiner 1946 (ed. 1991): 27); l’autore definisce selvaggia la sessualitŕ femminile, quando l’individuo non č unito a una controparte maschile. Si segnalano inoltre gli studi in corso sull’arktéia di V. Szymanska, che traggono spunto dalla Tesi di Laurea recentemente discussa (Szymanska 2019) e pongono un’attenzione particolare alle fonti scritte. Significativamente, autori antichi traducono l’accezione selvaggia della gioventů, di cui č ricordata l’indole facile all’eccitazione (Pla-tone, Leggi: 666a). In letteratura, risulta particolarmente evocativa l’immagine dell’orsa femmina, alla quale č attribuita una sessualitŕ sfrenata, che riceve una caratterizzazione simile a quella umana (Aristotele, Storia degli animali: VI, 579a; Oppiano d’Apamea, Cynegetica: III, 146–158). 55 Sulla valenza sociale delle tappe che sanciscono la maturazione fisica della donna vedere i lavori di D. Musti e C. Roscino (Musti 1990: 11–12, Roscino 2015: 176–177). Phrasikleia, in quest’ottica, rappresenta un interessante punto di confronto. L’etŕ apparente della fanciulla, 13 o14 anni, non coincide con le fonti che affermano che le arktoi avevano circa 10 anni (Valerio Arpocrazione, s.v. Arkteusai; Suda, s.v. Arkt e Braurôníois: 361 ss.; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645). Eppure, l’etŕ della giovane donna corrisponde alla tradizione storica che fissa la prepubertŕ intorno ai dodici anni, la pubertŕ e l’adolescenza intorno dodici/tredici anni e l’etŕ matura per il matrimonio intorno ai quindici anni (Musti 1990: 11–12). Se l’arktéia coincide con la tappa transitoria tra la pubertŕ e il matrimonio (Musti 1990: 11–12), e interessa quindi fanciulle di etŕ piavanzata rispetto a quanto suggerito dalle fonti (Valerio Arpocrazione, s.v. Arkteusai; Suda, s.v. Arktňs e Braurôníois: 361 ss.; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645), allora il rito coincide con l’etŕ apparente di Phrasikleia. Ossia 13, al massimo 14 anni. PHRASIKLEIA, RICORDO DELLE ARKTOI L’immagine funeraria di Phrasikleia, la kore di Mirrunte, sembra riassumere in sé gli aspetti caratterizzanti di un’identitŕ antropologica e religiosa dal carattere ambivalente e ctonio a un tempo, comprovata da molteplici riscontri archeologici e dalle fonti scritte. Una sorta di filo rosso collega il santuario di Artemide sull’acropoli di Atene a Mirrunte, e la kore col peplo, interpretata da V. Brinkmann come l’effige di culto del Brauronion sull’acropoli (Brinkmann 2004: 74–75; Brinkmann, Koch-Brinkmann, Piening 2010: 212), all’arktéia e a Phrasikleia. Alcune testimonianze epigrafiche da Mirrunte56 hanno dimostrato come la divinitŕ principale del demo fosse Artemide Kolainis (Vivliodetis 2007: 41–42, 51), cui le fonti attribuiscono prerogative simili alla Brauronia (Scholia Aristophanica, Aves: 872 a). L’analisi stilistica di Phrasikleia consente, d’altro canto, di riconoscere fra gli attributi della giovane il krok (fig. 6 e fig. 7), l’emblema delle arktoi (Aristofane, Lisistrata: 645; Scholia Aristophanica, Lysistrata: 645). Nell’insieme, questi dati consentono di proporre l’identificazione della fanciulla di Mirrunte come una giovane “orsa” morta prematuramente, dopo la celebrazione del rito. L’identitŕ dell’arktéia, d’altro canto, č confermata dall’analisi antropologica; testi­monianze letterarie e dati archeologici comprovano che il rito dell’orsa aveva il preciso scopo di celebrare la pubertŕ. Cosě, il mito di Callisto, trasformata in orsa per aver par-torito un figlio senza essere sposata (Ovidio, Fasti: II, 154–193), sembra rappresentare, su un krateriskos a figure rosse proveniente da Brauron, un monito alle fanciulle che non abbiano compiuto il rito (Kahlil 1977: 86 ss). Inoltre, il fatto che nelle iscrizioni dal santuario sull’Erasino siano menzionate rudimentali bende igieniche (rakoi), accanto all’offerta del krokot57, la quale č fortemente legata all’arkteia (Aristofane, Lisistrata: 645), lascia intendere che il culto della dea di Brauron intendesse celebrare il menarca (Brulé 1987, 236; Giuman 1999: 60–61). 56 I.G.: II2 4746. 57 Vedere per es. l’epigrafe riportata da L. Cleland (Cleland 2005: 39–40, n. 1529, righe 312–324). Il confronto fra materiali archeologici provenienti da santuari legati alla Brauronia e testimonianzearcheologiche rinvenitein GreciaOccidentale, legate alculto diKore(fig. 14 efig. 15;fig. 16 efig. 17;Parra2013), consentedimeglio percepirelesfumaturereligiose e antropologiche di questo particolare momento. Sotto questo aspetto, il rito risponde alla necessitŕ di isolare temporaneamente individui che non hanno ancora assunto un ruolo sociale, e vengono pertanto percepiti come “pericolosi”, onde favorirne l’integrazione all’interno della comunitŕ (Van Gennep 1909 (trad. 1981): 112–113; Sourvinou-Inwood 1988: 58–60; Dowden 1989; Giuman 1999: 109 ss.). Č ancora possibile, alla luce di queste considerazioni, affermare che l’immagine di Phrasikleia sia un semplice sema, la statua funeraria di una donna, morta prematuramente? L’iscrizione incisa sulla base che sosteneva l’opera pone in essere una perfetta identitŕ semantica e ideologica fra il testo e la statua. Il nome di Phrasikleia significa “colei che manifesta la fama” (Svenbro 1988: 19–20); d’altro canto, la scultura č definita dal testo dell’iscrizione sema, termine che indica il concetto di ricordo e allo stesso tempo definisce la scultura funeraria. Altrimenti detto, la statua materializza una relazione concettuale fra la fama (kléos) e il ricordo (sema), tale da rendere quest’ultimo eterno. Nell’ottica di questa relazione - quasi archetipale - fra testo e opera, Phrasikleia, diventa per definizione colei che č destinata a perpetrare la fama (kléos) (Svenbro 1988: 22 ss.; González González 2019: 44). La ricostruzione del contesto di rinvenimento consente ad oggi di credere che la statua di Phrasikleia rappresentasse una giovane donna vissuta al tempo di Pisistrato. Un’Alcmeonide, forse, la cui effige funeraria fu seppellita per evitare un atto sacrilego (Mastrokostas 1972: 23; Svenbro 1988: 16–17). Tuttavia, l’analisi qui proposta sembra suggerire un legame inscindibile fra il sema di Phrasikleia e il culto di Artemide, quasi a fare eco alle parole di Pausania (Pausania, Periegesi: I, 31, 4) che ricorda la presenza, a Mirrunte, di una statua della Kolainis, “colei che la gente di Mirrunte chiama Kolainis […] come i Filaidi la chiamano Brauronia” (Scholia Aristophanica, Aves: 872 a). Se la kore nota come Phrasikleia rappresenti o meno l’immagine di culto della dea, non č attualmente dato saperlo58. Per avvalorare questa ipotesi sarebbe necessario intraprendere a Mirrunte campagne di ricerca che consentano di restituire valore alle testimonianze epigrafiche, indagando l’ubicazione e il reale assetto del luogo di culto dedicato ad Artemide Kolainis. Al momento attuale si puň soltanto riporre l’accento sulla profonda valenza antropo­logica dell’opera, che si desume da confronti stilistici precisi. L’arte arcaica, attraverso l’immagine di Phrasikleia, non restituisce soltanto l’immagine commuovente di una donna mortaprimadisposarsi. Alcontrario, ilsignificato diquest’opera, cuiAristion hadonato bellezza eterna, trascende dal ricordo (sema) al simbolo; un simbolo destinato a perpetrare per sempre la memoria (kléos) di una condizione sociale, di una tradizione, delle arktoi. 58 Unico dato materiale che concorrerebbe a identificare l’opera come una effige della dea risiederebbe nella collana con i frutti di melograno; si tratta effettivamente di un attributo che contraddistingue alcune rappre­sentazioni di Artemide (Icard, Kahlil 1984: n. 542–544). RINGRAZIAMENTI: Il presente contributo č il frutto dell’approfondimento di alcune linee di ricerca emerse dalla mia Tesi di Specializzazione. Esprimo la mia piů viva riconoscenza alla Prof.ssa B. M. Giannattasio (DAFIST, Universitŕ degli Studi di Genova), che ha seguito il mio lavoro orientandolo in maniera determinante. Rivolgo i miei piů sentiti ringraziamenti anche al Prof. N. Cucuzza (DAFIST, Universitŕ degli Studi di Genova) e alla Prof. ssa D. Novaro (Université de Strasbourg, F), che mi hanno fornito preziosi spunti e consigli. Un ringraziamento particolare alla Prof. Ssa M. C. Parra (Universitŕ di Pisa), alla Prof.ssa M. Rubinich (Universitŕ degli Studi di Udine), alla Dott.sa F. Cappadonna (Museo di Castello Ursino, Catania), al Dott. C. Malacrino (Museo archeologico Nazionale di Reggio Calabria) e alla Dott.ssa A. Ruvituso (Museo archeologico regionale A. Salinas, Palermo), per l’aiuto prestatomi nel reperimento delle immagini. Tengo inoltre a ringraziare i colleghi e amici che hanno condiviso con me la loro esperienza di studio, prestandomi aiuto: Dott.ssa M. Greco, Dr. P. Persano, Dott.ssa E. Samantŕ. Infine, mi č caro ricordare con affetto due donne eccezionali che, andando al di lŕ delle convenzioni, hanno segnato positivamente il mio percorso: Marion G. e Stefania P. BIBLIOGRAFIA Alavanou, Anna, 1972: Brauron and Halai Araphenides. Atene: Lycabettus Press. Alberti, Lucia, 2009: La raccolta del croco a Thera: un tipo particolare di iniziazione femminile? Studi micenei ed egeo anatolici LI, 30–70. Angiolillo, Simonetta, 1997: Arte e cultura nell’Atene di Pisitrato e dei Pisistratidi. Bari: Edipuglia. Antonetti, Claudia; De Vido, Stefania, 2006: Cittadini, non cittadini e stranieri nei santuari della Malophoros e del Meilichios di Selinunte. In: Naso, Alessandro (ed.), Stranieri e non cit-tadini nei santuari greci (Atti del convegno internazionale, Udine 20-22 novembre 2003). Firenze: Le Monnier, 2006, 410–451. Barlou, Vasiliki, 2013: An itinerant Parian before Skopas: Aristion, Phrasikleia and the problem of regional styles. In: Katsonopoulou, Ntora; Stewart, Andrew(eds.), Skopas of Paros and his world (Proceedings of the third international conference on the archaeology of Paros and the Cyclades, Paroikia, Paros, 11-14 June 2010). Atene: Institouto Archaiologias Parou kai Kykladon, 111–132. Barone, Vito; Elia, Sebastiano, 1979: Selinunte: vicende storiche, illustrazione dei monumenti. Palermo: S. F. Flaccovio. Bejor, Giorgio; Castoldi, Marina; Claudia Lambrugo, 2008: Arte greca: dal decimo al I sec. a. C. Milano: Mondadori Universitŕ. Bertesago, Silvia M., 2009: Figurine fittili da Bitalemi (Gela) e dalla Malophoros (Selinunte): appunti per uno studio comparato di alcune classi della coroplastica votiva. In Antonetti, Claudia; De Vido, Stefania (eds.), Temi Selinuntini. Pisa: ETS, 53–70. Beschi, Luigi, 1988: s.v. Demeter. In: LIMC, IV. 1. Zurigo - Monaco: Artemis Verlag, 844–892. Boardman, John, 1978: Greek sculpture, the archaic period: a handbook. Londra: Thames and Hudson. Brelich, Angelo, 1981: Paides e parthenoi. Roma: Edizioni dell’Ateneo. Brenk, Frederick E., 1998: Artemis of Ephesos, an avant garde goddess. Kernos XI, 157–171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/kernos.1224. Brinkmann, Vinzenz, 2003: Mädchen oder Gtin? Das Rätsel der Peploskore von der Athener Akropolis. In: Brinkmann, Vinzenz; Wünsche, Raimund (eds.), Bunte Götter. Die Farbig­keit antiker Skulptur. Berlin: Antikensammlung Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. München: Hirmer, 53– 60. Brinkmann, Vinzenz, 2004: Fanciulla o dea? Il mistero della “Kore del peplo” dell’Acropoli di Atene. In P. Liverani (ed.), I Colori del Bianco: mille anni di colore nella scultura antica: guida alla mostra (Cittŕ del Vaticano, Musei Vaticani 17 novembre - 31 gennaio 2005). Roma: De Luca, 67–78. Brinkmann, Vinzenz; Koch-Brinkmann, Ulrike; Piening, Heinrich, 2010: The funerary monument to Phrasikleia. In: Brinkmann, Vinzenz; Primavesi, Oliver; Hollein, Max (eds.) Circumlitio. The polychromy of antique and mediaeval sculpture (Akten des Kolloquium Liebieghaus, Frankfurt 2008). München: Hirmer, 188–217. Brulé, Pierre, 1987: Lafilled’Athčnes. La religiondes filles ŕAthčnes ŕ l’époqueclassique. Mythes, cultes et société. Parigi: Les belles lettres. Calame, Claude, 2002: Offrandes ŕ Artémis Brauronia sur l’acropole: rites de puberté? In: Gentili, Bruno; Perusino, Franca (eds.), Le orse di Brauron: un rituale di iniziazione femminile nel santuario di Artemide (Atti del Seminario di Studi di Urbino). Pisa: ETS, 43–64. Chaniotis, Angelos, 2013: Epigraphic bulletin of greek religion 2010 (EBGR 2010). Kernos 26, 241–302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/kernos.2216. Cleland, Liza, 2005: The Brauron clothing catalogues: text, analysis, glossary and translation. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Cosi, Dario M. (ed.), 2001: L’arktéia di Brauron e i culti femminili (materiali della giornata di approfondimento organizzata dal seminario avanzato sul tema: Il politeismo promosso dall’insegnamento di Storia delle religioni del mondo classico). Bologna: Universitŕ degli studi, Facoltŕ di lettere e filosofia, Dipartimento di storia antica. Daux, Georges, 1973: Les ambiguďtés du grec koré. Comptes-rendus des séances de l’académie des inscriptions et belles lettres CXVII/3, 382–393. Despines, Giorgos, 2005: Die Kultstatuen der Artemis in Brauron. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung 119, 261–315. Despines, Giorgos; Kaltsas, Nikolaos, 2014: Ethniko Achaialogiko Mouseio (Katalogos Gluptňn). Atene: Museo Archeologico Nazionale. Dewaily, Martine, 1992: Les statuettes aux parures du sanctuaire de la Malophoros ŕ Sélinonte (Cahiers du Centre Jean Bérard, XVIII). Napoli: Centre Jean Bérard. Dowden, Ken, 1989: K. Dowden, Death and the maiden. Girl’s initiation rites in greek mythology. London, New York: Routledge. Eisenfeld, Hanne, 2016: Life, death, and a lokrian goddess, revisiting the nature of Persephone in the gold leaves of Magna Graecia. Kernos XXIX, 41–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ kernos.2388. Famŕ, Maria Luisa; Tusa, Vincenzo, 2000: Le stele del Meilichios di Selinunte. Padova: Bottega d’Erasmo. Faraone, Christian, 2003: Playing the bear and fawn for Artemis. In: Dodd, David; Faraone, Chris­tian (eds.), Initiation in ancient greek rituals and narratives. London: Routledge, 43–68. Franciosi, Vincenzo, 2010: Una statua di Artemide Brauronia dall’Acropoli pisistratea. Annali dell’Universitŕ Suor Orsola Benincasa 2010, 139–172. Gagliano, Elena, 2017: Guarisco, Diana, 2015, Santuari “gemelli” di una divinitŕ. Arte-mide in Attica. Bologna: Bononia University Press. Annuario della Scuola arche­ologica di Atene e delle missioni italiane in oriente XCIII. 3. 15/2015, 319–324. Gentili, Franca; Perusino, Bruno (eds.), 2002: Le orse di Brauron: un rituale di iniziazione femminile nel santuario di Artemide (Atti del Seminario di Studi di Urbino). Pisa: ETS. Giannattasio, Bianca Maria, 2012: Una matrice fittile da Nora. Africa Romana XIX, 2661–2672. Giuliano, Antonio, 1989: Storia dell’arte greca. Roma: Carocci. Giuman, Marco, 1999: La dea, la vergine, il sangue: archeologia di un culto femminile. Milano: Longanesi. González González, Marta, 2019: Funerary epigrams of ancient Greece, reflections on literature, society and religion. Londra: Bloomsbury Academic. Greco, Caterina, 2013: The cult of Demeter and Kore between tradition and innovation. In: Bennett, Michael; Lyons, Claire; Marconi L. Clemente (eds.), Sicily. Art and invention between Greece and Rome. Los Angeles: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 50–66. Grimal, Pierre, 1951: Dictionnaire de la mythologie grecque et romaine. Paris: Presses universi­taires de France. Guarisco, Diana, 2015: Santuari “gemelli” di una divinitŕ. Artemide in Attica. Bologna: Bononia University Press. Hammond, Nicholas, G., L., 1981: Atlas of the greek and roman world in antiquitiy. Bristol: Classical Press. Hinz, Valentina, 1998: Der Kult von Demeter und Kore auf Sizilien und in der Magna Graecia. Wiesbaden: L. Reichert. Icard, Noëlle; Kahlil, Lilly, 1984: s.v. Artemis. In: LIMC, II.1. Zurigo - Monaco: Artemis Verlag, 618–753. Jeanmaire, Henri, 1939: Couroi et courčtes: essai sur l’éducation spartiate et sur les rites d’ado­lescence dans l’antiquité hellénique. Lille: Bibliothčque Universitaire. Kahlil, Lilly, 1965: Autour de l’Artémis Attique. Antike Kunst VIII, 20–33. Kahlil, Lilly, 1977: L’Artémis de Brauron: rites et mystčre. Antike Kunst XX, 86–98. Kahlil, Lilly, 1981: Le cratérisque d’Artémis et le Braurion de l’acropole. Hesperia XX, 253–263. Kakavogianni, Olga, 2009: Topographia tou arkaiou demou Murrinountos. In: Vassilopoulou, Vive; Katsarou-Tzeveleki, Stella (eds.), From Mesogeia to Argosaronikos: B' Ephorate of prehistoric and classical antiquities: research of a decade, 1994-2003 (Proceedings of conference, Athens, December 18-20, 2003). Atene: Ephoreia ProistorikoŻn kai KlasikoŻn ArchaiotetoŻn, 47–78. Kalogeropoulos, Kostantinos (ed.), 2013: .. .e.. t.. ..t.µ.d.. .a...p.... st.. .... ..af...de.. Athenai: Pragmateiai tes Akademias Athenon. Kaltsas, Nikolaos, 2002: Die Kore und der Kouros aus Myrrhinous. Antike Plastik XXVIII, 1–40. Kantarelou, Vasiliki, 2016: New investigations into the statue of Phrasikleia II. Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 131, 51–91. Karakasi, Katerina, 1997: Die prachtvolle Erscheinung der Phrasikleia. Zur Polychromie der Ko­renstatue. Ein Rekonstruktionsversuch. Antike Welt XXVIII, 509–517. Karakasi, Katerina, 2003: Archaic Korai. Los Angeles: The J. Paul Getty Museum. Karakasi, Katerina, 2008: Die Kore «Athen-Lyon» «Phrasikleia». In: Kourayos, Yannos ; Prost, Francis (eds.), La sculpture des Cyclades ŕ l’époque archaďque : histoire des ateliers, ray-onnement des styles; suppl. XLVIII Bulletin de correspondance hellenique. Paris: École Francaise d’Athenes, 285–310. Kontoleon, Nikolaos, M., 1974: Perě to sema Phrasikléias (apologia mias ermeneias). Arkaiologiké Ephemeris 1974, 3–12. Laribi-Glaubel, Sophie, 2019 : Des enfants et des dieux: les divinités et les rites de l’enfance dans le monde grec de l’époque archaďque ŕl’époque hellénistique. Tesi di Dottorato, Université de Lorraine. Tutor: Prof. Christophe Feyel. Lechat, Henri, 1891: Terres cuites de Corcyre. Bulletin de correspondance hellénique XV, 1–112. Linders, Tullia, 1972: Studies in the treasures records of Artemis Brauronia found in Athens. Stockholm: P. Ĺstr. Lippolis, Enzo; Livadiotti, Monica; Rocco, Giorgio, 2007: Architettura greca, storia e monumenti del mondo della polis dalle origini al V secolo. Milano: Mondadori. Lippolis, Enzo; Rocco, Giorgio, 2011: Archeologia greca: cultura, societŕ, politica e produzione. Milano: Mondadori. Lissi-Caronna, Elisa; Sabbione, Claudio; Vlad Borrelli, Licia, 1996-1999: I pinakes di Locri Epizefiri (Atti e Memorie della Societŕ Magna Grecia, IV serie, 1). Roma: Societŕ Magna Grecia. Lissi-Caronna, Elisa; Sabbione, Claudio; Vlad Borrelli, Licia, 2000-2003: I pinakes di Locri Epizefiri (Atti e Memorie della Societŕ Magna Grecia, IV serie, 2). Roma: Societŕ Magna Grecia. Lissi-Caronna, Elisa; Sabbione, Claudio; Vlad Borrelli, Licia, 2004-2007: I pinakes di Locri Epizefiri (Atti e Memorie della Societŕ Magna Grecia, IV serie, 3). Roma: Societŕ Magna Grecia. Macworth-Young, Gerard; Payne, Humfry, 1950: Archaic greek marble scuplture from the acropolis. Londra: Cresset Press. (Trad: Pottino Tommasi, Margherita, 1981: La scultura arcaica in marmo dell’acropoli. La storiografia della scultura greca del VI sec. a. C. Roma: L’Erma di Bretschneider). Maleci Bini, Laura; Mariotti Lippi, Marta; Maugini, Elena, 2006: Manuale di botanica farmaceu­tica. Padova: Piccin Nuova Libraria, 2006. Manenti, Giorgio, 1988: Il grande libro dei fiori e delle piante: enciclopedia pratica. Milano: selezione dal Reader’s digest S.p.A. Marchiandi, Daniela, 2018: Dediche effimere ad Artemide: tessili iscritti negli inventari di Brauron. In: Camia, Francesco; Del Monaco, Lavinio; Nocita, Michela (eds.), Munus Laetitiae: studi miscellanei offerti a Maria Letizia Lazzarini, v. 2. Roma: Sapienza Universitŕ Editrice, 61–93. Marroni, Elisa, 2016: L’immaginario figurato. In: Marroni, Elisa; Torelli, Mario (eds.), L’obolo di Persefone, immaginario e ritualitŕ dei pinakes di Locri. Pisa: ETS, 23–84. Martini, Wolfram, 2007: Zu den Epigrammen von Kroisos aus Anavyssos und Phrasikleia aus Merenda. In: La Rocca, Eugenio; Le, Pilar; Parisi Presicce, Claudio (eds.), Le due patrie acquisite, studi di archeologia dedicati a Walter Trillmich; suppl. Bullettino della commissione archeologica comunale di Roma. Roma: L’Erma di Bretschneider, 269–276. Mastrokostas, Efthymios, I., 1972: Myrrhinous: la koré Phrasikléia, śuvre d’Aristion de Paros, et un kouros en marbre. Athens Annals of Archaeology 1972, 298–324. Mertens Horn, Madeleine, 2005: I Pinakes di Locri Epizefiri, immagini di festa e culti misterici dionisiaci nel santuario di Persefone. In: Bottini, Angelo (ed.), Il rito segreto, misteri in Grecia e a Roma. Milano: Electa, 49–58. Mitsopoulos-Leon, Veronika, 2015: ..a.... : die Tonstatuetten aus aus dem Heiligtum der Artemis: die jüngere Phase (Vivliotheke tes en Athenais ArchaiologikesHetaireias, 298). Atene: Archäologische Gesellschaft zu Athen. Musti, Domenico, 1990: La teoria delle etŕ e i passaggi di status in Solone. Per un inquadramento socioantroprologico della teoria dei settennii nel pensiero antico. Antiquité Tardive 102/1 (Mélanges de l’Ecole Française de Rome), 11–35. Nielsen, Inge, 2009: The sanctuary of Artemis Brauronia: can architecture and iconography help to locate the settings of the rituals? In: Fischer-Hansen, Tobias; Poulsen, Birte (eds.), From Artemis to Diana: the goddess of man and beast (Acta Hyperborea 12). Chicago: Chicago University Press, 77–109. Papadimitriou, Ioannis, 1963: The sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron. Scientific American XXII/6, 110–120. Parra, Maria Cecilia, 1996: I culti a Hipponion. In: Lattanzi, Elena; Iannelli, Maria Teresa; Luppi-no, Silvana; Sabbione, Claudio; Spadea, Roberto (eds.), Santuari della Magna Grecia in Calabria. Napoli: Electa, 139–143. Parra, Maria Cecilia; Settis, Salvatore, 2005 (eds.): Magna Graecia. Archeologia di un sapere. Milano: Electa. Parra, Maria Cecilia, 2013: Pinakes, tra Grecia e Magna Grecia. In: Graziadio, Giampaolo; Guglielmi-no, Riccardo; Lenuzza, Valeria; Vitale, Salvatore; Benzi, Mario (eds.), Philiké Sunalia, studies in mediterranean archaeology for Mario Benzi. Oxford: Archaeopress, 323–332. Pautasso, Antonella, 2012: L’etŕ arcaica, affermazione e sviluppo delle produzioni coloniali. In: Albertocchi, Marina; Pautasso, Antonella (eds.), Philotechnia. Studi sulla coroplastica della Sicilia greca. Catania: Consiglio nazionale delle ricerche, Istituto per i beni archeologici e monumentali, 113–140. Pologiorge, Melro, I., 2015: Ierň Artémidos Brauronías: tŕ xulina euremata ton anaskaphon 1961­ 1963. Archaiologiké Ephemeris CLIV, 123–216. Pouilloux, Jean, 1944: P. Philippson, Thessalische Mythologie. Zurich: Rhein-Verlag (recensione). Bulletin de correspondance hellénique LXVIII/1, 418–419. Richter, Gisela Marie Augusta, 1968: KORAI. Archaic Greek Maidens. Londra: Phaidon. Ridgway, Brunilde Sismondo, 1977: The archaic style in greek sculpture. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rizza, Giovanni, 2008: Demetra a Catania. In: Di Stefano, Carmela Angela (ed.), Demetra, la di­vinitŕ, i santuari, il culto, la leggenda (Atti del I congresso internazionale). Pisa: Fabrizio Serra, 187–192. Roscino, Carmela, 2015: La sposa ritrovata, l’iconografia di Elena phainomeris nella ceramica attica del 3° venticiquennio del V secolo a. C. Ostraka XXII-XXIII, 169–185. Schmaltz, Bernhard, 2016: Neue Untersuchungen an der Statue der Phrasikleia I. Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, 131, 31–50. Serafini, Nicola, 2015: La dea Ecate e i luoghi di passaggio: una protettrice dalla quale proteggersi. Kernos XVIII, 111–121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/kernos.2331. Sguaitamatti, Michel, 1984: L’offrantedeporceletdans lacoroplathiegéléenne: étudetypologique. Mainz am Rhein: Von Zaber. Shapiro, H. Alan, 2002: Demeter and Persephone in Western Greece: migrations of myth and cult. In: Bennet, Michael; Paul, Aaron; J. Iozzo, Mario (eds.), Magna Graecia, greek art from south Italy and Sicily. New York, Manchester: Hudson Hills Press, 2002, 82–97. Sourvinou-Inwood, Christiane, 1988: Studies in girls’transitions. Aspects of the arktéia and age representation in attic iconography. Atene: Kardamitsa. Sourvinou-Inwood, Christiane, 1990: Lire l’arktéia - lire les images, les textes, l’animalité. Dia­logues d’Histoire Ancienne XVI, 45–60. Stieber, Mary, 1996: Phrasikleia’s lotuses. Boreas. Münstersche Beiträge zur Archäologie, 19, 69–99. Svenbro, Jesper, 1988 : Phrasikléia. Anthropologie de la lecture en Grčce ancienne. Parigi: Découverte. Szymanska, Vanessa, 2019: The youth and the twins: a critical reading of puberty rites of passage in ancient Greece (eighth-century BC to fourth-century BC). Tesi di Laurea (Master of Arts in Mediterranean Studies), Universitŕ di Malta. Tutor: Prof Michael Zammit. Themelis, Petros, G., 2002: Contribution to the topography of the sanctuary at Brauron. In: Gentili, Bruno; Perusino, Franca (eds.), Le orse di Brauron: un rituale di iniziazione femminile nel santuario di Artemide (Atti del Seminario di Studi di Urbino). Pisa: ETS, 103–116. Torelli, Mario, 2011: Dei e artigiani, archeologia delle colonie greche d’Occidente. Roma-Bari: GLF editori Laterza. Torelli, Mario, 2016: Linguaggio, riti e funzioni dei pinakes. In: Marroni, Elisa; Torelli, Mario (eds.), L’obolo diPersefone, immaginario eritualitŕ deipinakes di Locri. Pisa: ETS 85–112. Travlos, John, 1988: Bildlexikon zur Topographie des antiken Attika. Tübingen: Ernst Wasmuth Verlag. Untersteiner, Mario, 1946 (ed. 1991): La fisiologia del mito. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri. Van Gennep, Arnold, 1909: Les rites de passage. Parigi: E. Nourry. (Trad: Remotti, Francesco, 1981: I riti di passaggio. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri). Vernant, Jean-Pierre, 1990: Mythe et religion en Grčce ancienne. Parigi: Seuil. Viscardi, Giuseppina Paola, 2010: Artemide Munichía: aspetti e funzioni mitico-rituali della dea del Pireo. Dialogues d’histoire ancienne XXXVI/2, 31–60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/ dha.362.0031. Vivliodetis, Evangelos, P., 2007: O demos tou Myrrhinountos; e organose kai e historia tou. (Ar-chaiologike Ephemeris 2005). Atene: Archaiologike Etaireia. Wiederkehr Schuler, Elsbeth, 2004: Les protomés féminines du sanctuaire de la Malophoros ŕ Sélinonte (Cahiers du Centre Jean Bérard, XXII). Napoli : Centre Jean Bérard. Zancani Montuoro, Paola, 1994-1995: I pinakes di Locri (Atti e Memorie della Societŕ Magna Grecia, serie III, 3). Roma: Societŕ Magna Grecia. .... .....S.... ..... A LOOK AT ARKTÉIA THROUGH PHRASIKLEIA Martina olceSe This contribution proposes a novel interpretation of the ancient Greek masterpiece known as kore Phrasikleia, a funerary statue discovered in Myrrhinous (Attica). The intent is to correlate archaeological evidence, historical data, and ancient sources, which connect the statue to the symbolics of the ‘she-bear’ rite: a cult that young girls of Attica dedicated to goddess Artemis in her sanctuary of Brauron before they were married. Ancient literature and epigraphic sources enable discerning a common thread that connects all sanctuaries dedicated to Artemis throughout Attica. Within this context, we observe that Myrrhinous very likely hosted a temple dedicated to Ar­temis as the major deity of the settlement. In contrast, the history of the discovery and the epigraphic analysis of the text carved on the statue’s base reveal the great importance attributed to the kore. The funerary image very likely represented a youth from the tyrannical Pisistratus family, to whom the construction of most sanctuariesof Artemis in Attica credit isdue. Furthermore, the inscription confirms the exceptional character of the statue, as it mentions the fact that the girl died before the celebration of her marriage. This simple fact allows establishing a connection between Phasikleia and the Brauron ‘she-bears’, who performed the arktéia while still virgins. The parallel is confirmed by the iconographic analysis, revealing that some of Phrasikleia’s attributes are strongly connected to the ‘bear’ cult. In particular, this is the case of the stephane; indeed, the girl’s crown is composed of flowers, whose form evokes that of crocus (crocus sativus, universally known as saffron), the very symbol of the arktoi. These features allow one to conclude that Phrasikleia had performed the arktéia cult as a ‘she-bear’, but she died before the celebration of her marriage. A close investigation on the anthropological significance of saffron enables stating that arktéia was not a mere prenuptial ceremony but that this cult had the specific significance of a puberty rite, whose meaning was both linked to fertil­ity and the chthonic world. This is mainly due to the red colour of the flower, reminiscent of human blood and sacrifice. Furthermore, various ancient sources confirm that the plant was used to treat gynecologic diseases and was especially connected to the menstrual cycle. In this perspective, the cult aimed to resume the liminary condition of girls who are biologically fertile but not yet married – people who were perceived as ‘border-line’, as they could potentially procreate, while they were not entirely part of the community in their capacity of mothers and brides. Thus, by the expiation rite, which signified the symbolic ‘death’ of the girl, the group reconciled the female fertility inside human custom. Martina Olcese, Ph.D., Ricercatrice indipendente, Dr. in Letterature e culture classiche e moderne Scienze storiche dell’antichitŕ, Universitŕ degli studi di Genova (IT), martina.olcese@archlib.eu R azvoj raziskovalnih metod in diskusija S viluppo dei metodi di ricerca e discussione D evelopment of Research Methods and Discussion 24 STUDIA MYTH O L OGICA SLAVICA 2021 257 – 264 | https://doi.org/10.3986/SMS20212413 Tudi stari Slovani so poznali gnomone Andrej Pleterski Prepricanje, da so za naše poznavanje prete­klih znanj merodajni samo zapisi starogrške znanostiin dazunajteh znanjninicesar, cesar ni v pisnih virih, je zavajajoce. Stari Slovani so svoje znanje matematike in astronomije lahko razvili neodvisno od starogrške zna­ nosti. Zanicevanje znanja starih Slovanov ob njegovem primerjanju s starogrškim je v izhodišcu zgrešeno in ne more privesti do uporabnih ugotovitev. KLJUCNE BESEDE: stari Slovani, stari Grki, arheoastronomija The belief that only written records of ancient Greek science are relevant to our knowledge of past science and that there is nothing out­side of that knowledge that is not contained in written sources is misleading. The ancient Slavs were able to develop their knowledge of mathematics and astronomy independently of ancient Greek science. Neglecting the knowledge of the ancient Slavs in comparing it with that of the ancient Greeks is misguided and cannot lead to useful findings. KEYWORDS: ancient Slavs, ancient Greeks, archeoastronomy V pokrajini obstajajo matematicne in astronomske pravilnosti. Zakaj je temu tako, je predmet številnih znanstvenih razprav. V teh razpravah so možni razlicni pogledi in posledicno razlicni zakljucki. Moje raziskave kažejo, da so te pravilnosti posledica fenomena, ki ga imenujem miticna pokrajina (Pleterski 2018) in ga pojasnjujem prvenstveno na primeru starih Slovanov. Ena od mnogih pravilnosti je ponavljanje kota 23,5°, ki ni nakljucno in ga najbolj smiselno pojasnjuje nagnjenost ekliptike. Tomislav Bilic je miticno pokrajino zreduciral na trikotnik s kotom 23,5° in poskušal dokazati, da ga stari Slovani niso mogli poznati ter ga razglaša za mit o »soncnem kotu« starih Slovanov (Bilic 2020). Ceprav se ne strinjava, mu moram najprej izreci priznanje, da je našel voljo in cas ter svojo kritiko tudi napisal.1 S tem je dal pomemben pospešek diskusiji o miticni pokrajini. Pravilno je opazil, da sem pred cetrt stoletja pri svoji prvi predstavitvi ideje, od kod ponavljanje kota 23° med kulturno in simbolno pomembnimi tockami v pokrajini, zag-rešil lapsus pri definiciji nagnjenosti ekliptike (Pleterski 1996: 182). S tem sem nehote povzrocil ponavljanje in celo nadaljnjo erozijo te napacne definicije pri vrsti kolegov na Hrvaškem, ki se jim na tem mestu opravicujem za slab zgled. Pri opozarjanju na te Op. ur.: Bilicev prispevek in kritika je objavljena v Studii Mythologici Slavici 23 (2020), 35–50. napacne definicije se Bilic ne moti. Ne drži pa njegova trditev, da tega lapsusa nisem opazil dve desetletji in da v treh publikacijah uporabljam hkrati pravilno in napacno definicijo. Kdaj sem opazil spodrsljaj, se res ne spominjam vec. Ga pa že v objavi iz leta 2002 ni vec. Vendar v nasprotju z Bilicevim pricakovanjem kota tam ne definiram s presekom dveh ravnin, ampak z odklonom osi Zemljinega vrtenja od pravokotnice na ravnino Zemljine krožnice okoli Sonca. V navedenem delu res stilisticno slabo povem, da os Zemljinega vrtenja ni pravokotna na ravnino njene orbite okoli Sonca, ampak gre za omenjeni kot odklonjena (Pleterski, Belak 2002: 19, 49). In stilisticna slabost je, da ne poudarim odklona od pravokotnice na ravnino orbite. Ta kot kaže tudi Biliceva slika 1, zato se mi je ta pravokotnica zdela samoumevno zaobsežena v navedbi, da os Zemlji­nega vrtenja ni pravokotna na Zemljino orbito. Vse nadaljnje definicije so zato pravilne; dvojnost, ki jo je Bilic opazil, pa je v tem, da lahko ta kot definiramo na dva nacina, z dvema ravninama ali pa s pravokotnicama na ti dve ravnini, kar kaže tudi Biliceva slika 1 z dvakratno oznako e. Za tokratno razpravo o zapisu matematike in astronomije v pokrajino je seveda po­membno vprašanje, kaj današnje poznavanje definicije nagnjenosti ekliptike pomeni za ta zapis v preteklosti. Trdim, da nic. Pri vsem tem je namrec najpomembnejše dejstvo, da je sonce pri nas poleti višje na nebu kot pozimi in da to ni prav nic odvisno od tega, kako ta pojav definiramo. Definicija nam samo pomaga razumeti pojav, vendar ga sama ne povzro-ca. Tako je bilo s soncem, še preden so se pojavili ljudje, in tako bo, ko ljudi ne bo vec. Živimo v obdobju informatike. Število objav v odprtemdostopu sevecavsako sekun-do in z lahkoto moremo zbrati citate za kakršnokoli trditev, vendar pa število citatov k neki trditvi ni nikakršno potrdilo za njeno pravilnost. Citat je zgolj orodje za preverjanje trditev. Zato se osebno pri citatih držim nacela, manj je vec. Ce želim v nadaljevanju razumljivo pokazati, da je Biliceva kritika povsem zgrešena, moramnajprejopozoritinanekatere njegove tihe teoreticne predpostavke (zapisujemjih krepko), o katerih pa lahko sklepam iz nacina njegovega argumentiranja, ki je izrazito deduktivno in v zvezi s starimi Slovani zanemarja empirijo. Današnje astronomsko znanje je izhodišce za ocenjevanje astronomskega znanja v preteklosti. – Bilic poudarja starogrško tradicijo kot izvor sodobne astronomije in kot odlocilno postavlja vprašanje, kako se domnevno poznavanje razmeroma tocne mere nak­lona ekliptike pri starih Slovanih vklaplja v znanje moderne zgodovine znanosti o razvoju primerljivih znanj v grški tradiciji. Nato prikaže starogrško znanje o naklonu ekliptike in v nadaljevanju še starogrško prepoznavanje in razlage solsticijev, kot izpricujejo pisni viri. Staroslovanski žreci bi morali poznati dela Eratostena ali Hiparha, da bi zmogli v pokrajini postaviti trikotnik s kotom 23,5° ali pa sami na enak nacin kot starogrški modreci izracunati ta kot in zapustiti v pisnih virih sledove tega miselnega procesa. – Iz tega Bilic izpelje trditev, da ni dokaza (samega obstoja trikotnikov s tem kotom ne priznava za dokaz), da bi Slovani poznali mero naklona ekliptike, bodisi da bi do nje prišli neodvisno ali pa bi jo prevzeli iz grške znanosti. Trdnost Bilicevega sklepanja je samo navidezna. Kot 23,5° lahko postavimo v prostor, tudi ce nimamo nobenega znanja o merah naklona ekliptike. Dolocimo ga lahko geo­metrijsko, ce imamo postavljen gnomon in celo leto opazujemo gibanje njegove sence. S pomocjo štirih kolickov in dveh vrvic ga lahko nato kadarkoli prenesemo kamorkoli in v katerokoli smer (Slika 1). Starim Slovanom ni bilo treba poznati niti Eratostena niti Hiparha niti izracunavati kota. In zakaj bi ga hoteli postaviti? Povezava med višino sonca in letnimi casi je ocitna. Postavitev kota 23,5° po nacelih imitativne magije zagotavlja naravno ravnovesje in pravilen tek letnih casov. Res je na možnost opazovanja sence gnomona pomislil tudi Bilic, a jo je zavrnil s trditvijo, da uporaba gnomona pri starih Slovanih ni poznana. Še vec, trdi, da ni nobenega dokaza za obstoj kateregakoli astronomskega pojma ali postopka v njihovem znanju. Kateregakoli raziskovalca starih Slovanov zanesljivo ne bo preprical o resnicnosti teh svojih trditev. Res je, da o znanju starih Slovanov pisni viri ne dajejo uporabnih podatkov in so v tem pogledu stari Slovani nevidni. Vendar naj spomnim, da arheologija zmore predstavljati preteklost s pomocjo tvarnih virov. Velika vecina arheologov, ki raziskuje prostor, se vsaj od Binforda dalje strinja, da je pokrajina tvarni vir (artefakt). Vanjo so ljudje zapisovali tudi svoje misli s pomocjo ideogramov. Jaz jo imenujem miticna pokrajina in kot 23,5° je samo ena od njenih številnih sestavin. Kako kompleksen fenomen je miticna pokrajina, prikazujem v svoji monografiji „Kulturni genom“ (Pleterski 2014). Vmiticni pokrajini se prepletajo informacije arheologije, arheoastronomije, jezikoslovja, folkloristike, pisnih virov. V njej so matematicne, astronomske in folkloristicne strukture, ki se ponavljajo. Vse to je bilo mogoce opaziti empiricno, številne primere podrobno opisujem v knjigi Kulturnigenom (2014). Taknjigapredstavljainduktivnidelraziskovalnega postopka, ki je omogocil postavitev teoreticnega modela in preverljive hipoteze. Ta je bila potrjena z arheološkimiizkopavanjivBodešcah (Pleterski2020;Modrijan2020),karjededuktivni del raziskovalnega postopka o miticni pokrajini. Za konec še nekaj konkretnosti. Že leta 2003 sva z Jirijem Marešom pokazala nacin, kako so stari Slovani lahko uporabljali gnomon, prikaz obsega tudi prenos kota v vodo­ravno ravnino (Pleterski, Mareš 2003, Abb. 2). Prav tako tam predstaviva dva ohranjena gnomona in sledove drugih dveh pri starih Slovanih (Pleterski, Mareš 2003: 18–24). V knjigi Kulturni genom (2014) dodatno prikazujem sledove dveh gnomonov (Pleterski 2014: 205–207, 211) in temu v svoji zadnji objavi dodajam še štiri (Pleterski 2020: 267–271); nadaljnje kopicenje se mi ne zdi potrebno. LITERATURA Modrijan, Zvezda, 2020: Bodešce. Srednjeveški Blejski otok v arheoloških virih. = Medieval ar­chaeology of Bled Island (ur. Štular, Benjamin). Ljubljana: Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae 42. 279–286. Pleterski, Andrej, 1996: Strukture tridelne ideologije v prostoru pri Slovanih. Zgodovinski casopis 50, 163–185. Pleterski, Andrej, 2014: Kulturni genom. Prostor in njegovi ideogrami miticne zgodbe. Ljubljana: Studia mythologica Slavica, Supplementa, suppl. 10. Pleterski, Andrej, 2018, Mythical landscape: what is it?. Sacralization of landscape and sacred places: proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Mediaeval Archaeology of the Institute of Archaeology, Zagreb, 2nd and 3rd June 2016, (ur. Belaj, Juraj; Zbornik Instituta za arheologiju, knj. 10, vol. 10). Zagreb, 5–18. Pleterski, Andrej, 2020: Miticna pokrajina. Preizkusi njenega obstoja z napovednima modeloma na primeru Bleda. = A mythical landscape. Tests of its existence with predictive models for the Bled case. Srednjeveški Blejski otok v arheoloških virih. = Medieval archaeology of Bled Island (ur. Štular, Benjamin). Ljubljana: Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae 42. 235–277. Pleterski, Andrej in Mateja Belak, 2002: Grobovi s Pušcave nad Starim trgom pri Slovenj Gradcu. Arheološki vestnik 53, 233–300. Pleterski, Andrej in Jirí J. MAREŠ, 2003: Astronomische Grundlagen einiger frühmittelalterlichen Kultstellen in Praha. Studia mythologica Slavica 6, 9–35. The ancient Slavs also knew gnomons Andrej Pleterski There are mathematical and astronomical regularities in the landscape, and the reasons for their existence are the subject of much scientific discussion. Indeed, different views are possible and, consequently, varied conclusions can be drawn. My research shows that these regularities result from a phenomenon that I call a mythical landscape (Pleterski 2018), which I explain primarily in reference to the ancient Slavs. One of many regularities is the repetition of the angle of 23.5°, which is not random and is most sensibly explained by the obliquity of the ecliptic. Tomislav Bilic has reduced the mythical landscape to a triangle with an angle of 23.5°, trying to prove that the ancient Slavs could not have known it, proclaiming it the myth of the “solar angle” of the ancient Slavs (Bilic 2020).1 Although we disagree, I must first acknowledge his personal determination to find the will and the time to write a critique. In doing so, he has given significant impetus to the discussion regarding the mythical landscape. Bilic has rightly observed that, a quarter of a century ago, in my first presentation of the notion of the repetition of the 23° angle between culturally and symbolically si­ gnificant points in the landscape, I made lapsus in defining the obliquity of the ecliptic (Pleterski 1996: 182). With this, I unintentionally caused a recurrence and even further erosion of this misconception with some colleagues in Croatia, to whom I now apologise for setting a bad example. Bilic is not mistaken in highlighting these erroneous definiti­ons. However, his claim that I did not notice this lapse in the previous two decades and that I have used correct and incorrect definitions in three publications simultaneously is not true. I no longer remember when I first recognised the error, but it was certainly not apparent in the 2002 publication. Nevertheless, contrary to Bilic’s expectation, the angle there is not defined by the intersection of two planes but by the deviation of the axis of the Earth’s rotation from a rectangle to the Earth’s orbital plane. I said this stylistically badly: I simply stated that the axis of the Earth’s rotation is not perpendicular to the plane of its orbit around the Sun, but rather is deflected by said angle (Pleterski, Belak 2002: 19, 49). Moreover, the stylistic weakness is not to point out that the axis of the Earth’s rotation is deflected from a rectangle to the plane of the orbit. This angle is also shown in Bilic’s Figure 1, and the rectangle seemed to me to have been taken for granted in the statement that the axis of the Earth’srotation isnot perpendicular to the Earth’sorbit. Therefore, all further definitions are correct, but the duality that Bilic observed is that the discussed angle can be defined Editorial comment: The article and critic from T. Bilic was published in Studia Mythologica Slavica 23 (2020), 35–50. in two ways: either with two planes or with rectangles on both, as additionally shown in Bilic’s Figure 1 with the double notation of e. Of course, for the present discussion of the mathematical and astronomical record in the landscape, the important question pertains to what contemporary knowledge regarding a definition of the obliquity of the ecliptic means to this record in the past. I claim nothing. The most important point is that in the summer, the Sun is higher in the sky than in the winter and that this does not depend on how we define this phenomenon: the definition helps us understand the phenomenon, but it does not cause it. This fact was true even before humans appeared and will remain so after we are gone. We live in the age of information technology. The number of open access publi­cations is increasing every second, and we can easily collect quotations for any claim. Their number depends only on how long we choose to sit at the computer. The number of quotations to a claim does not in any way confirm its correctness. A quotation is merely a tool for verifying claims. That is why when quoting, I personally adhere to the principle of less is more. To make clear below that Bilic’s critique is totally mistaken, I must first highlight some of his quiet theoretical assumptions (I write these in bold), of which he may not even be aware, but which I can conclude from his method of argument, which is distinctly deductive and neglects empiricism in relation to the ancient Slavs. Today’s astronomical knowledge is the starting point for evaluating astronomical knowledge in the past. Bilic emphasises the ancient Greek tradition as the origin of mo­dern astronomy, and as a decisive question, how the supposed knowledge of the ancient Slavs – of the relatively accurate value of the obliquity – fits into the knowledge of the modern history of the science that speaks of the development of comparable knowledge in the Greek tradition. He then presents ancient Greek knowledge of the value of the obliquity and the ancient Greek understanding of the annual solar movement with the solstices, as written sources testify. Ancient Slavic priests should be familiar with the works of Eratosthenes or Hipparchus in orderto be able to set up a triangle at an angle of 23.5° in the lands­cape, or to calculate this angle in the same way as the ancient Greek sages did and to leave traces of this thought process in written sources. From this, Bilic derives the claim that there is no proof (he does not admit the very existence of triangles with this angle as evidence) that the Slavs knew the value of the obliquity, either to calculate it independently or to assume it from Greek science. The tenacity of Bilic’s reasoning is only apparent. An angle of 23.5° can be placed in the landscape even if we have no knowledge of the value of the obliquity of the ecliptic. It can be determined geometrically if we have a gnomon in place and we observe the movement of its shadow all year long. With the help of four sticks and two ropes, the angle can then be transferred at any time in any direction (Figure 1). The ancient Slavs did not need to know Eratosthenes, Hipparchus, or how to calculate angles. Furthermore, why would they want to put the angle in landscape? The connection between the height of the Sun and the seasons is obvious. Setting an angle of 23.5° according to the principles of imitative magic ensures a natural balance of the seasons’ proper course. Figure 1. Use of gnomon in determining and passing the angle of 23.5°. True, the possibility of observing the gnomon’s shadow is also considered by Bilic, but he rejects it by claiming that the use of the gnomon was not known to the ancient Slavs. Moreover, he argues that there is no evidence for the existence of any astronomical concept or process in their knowledge. Any researcher of the ancient Slavs will certainly be uncertain of the value of his claims. It is true that written sources do not provide useful information about the knowledge of the ancient Slavs and they are invisible in this respect. However, let me remind the reader that archaeology can represent the past through material sources. The vast majority of archaeologists exploring the landscape agree, at least from Binford onwards, that the landscape is a material source (an artefact). People would also write down in the landscape their thoughts using ideograms. I term this the “mythical landscape”, with the angle of 23.5° as just one of its many components. I demonstrate the complexity of the mythical landscape as a phenomenon in my monograph The Cultural Genome (Pleterski 2014). In the mythical landscape, information about archaeology, archaeoastronomy, linguisti­cs, folklore studies, and written sources intertwine. It contains repeated mathematical, astronomical, and folkloristic structures. All of this could be observed empirically, and I describe many examples in detail in my monograph. This book represents the inductive part of the research process. It made it possible to establish a theoretical model and a verifiable hypothesis, which was confirmed by archaeological excavations in Bodešce (Pleterski 2020; Modrijan 2020), a deductive part of the research processon the mythical landscape. Finally: some concreteness. Asearly as2003, Jirí Marešand I showed howthe ancient Slavs were able to use the gnomon, involving the transfer of the angle to the horizontal plane (Pleterski, Mareš 2003, Abb. 2). We also represented two preserved gnomons and traces of the other two in the ancient Slavs (Pleterski, Mareš 2003: 18–24). In The Cultural Genome, I additionally show traces of two gnomons (Pleterski 2014: 205–207, 211), while in my most recent publication I add four more gnomons (Pleterski 2020: 267–271). No further accumulation of gnomons seems necessary. BIBLIOGRAPHY Modrijan, Zvezda, 2020: Bodešce. Srednjeveški Blejski otok v arheoloških virih. = Medieval ar­chaeology of Bled Island (ed. Štular, Benjamin). Ljubljana: Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae 42. 279–286. Pleterski, Andrej, 1996: Strukture tridelne ideologije v prostoru pri Slovanih. Zgodovinski casopis 50, 163–185. Pleterski, Andrej, 2014: Kulturni genom. Prostor in njegovi ideogrami miticne zgodbe. Ljubljana: Studia mythologica Slavica, Supplementa, suppl. 10. Pleterski, Andrej, 2018, Mythical landscape: what is it?. Sacralization of landscape and sacred places: proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Mediaeval Archaeology of the Institute of Archaeology, Zagreb, 2nd and 3rd June 2016, (ed. Belaj, Juraj; Zbornik Instituta za arheologiju, knj. 10, vol. 10). Zagreb, 5–18. Pleterski, Andrej, 2020: Miticna pokrajina. Preizkusi njenega obstoja z napovednima modeloma na primeru Bleda. = A mythical landscape. Tests of its existence with predictive models for the Bled case. Srednjeveški Blejski otok v arheoloških virih. = Medieval archaeology of Bled Island (ed. Štular, Benjamin). Ljubljana: Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae 42. 235–277. Pleterski, Andrej in Mateja Belak, 2002: Grobovi s Pušcave nad Starim trgom pri Slovenj Gradcu. Arheološki vestnik 53, 233–300. Pleterski, Andrej in Jirí J. MAREŠ, 2003: Astronomische Grundlagen einiger frühmittelalterlichen Kultstellen in Praha. Studia mythologica Slavica 6, 9–35. Andrej Pleterski, red. prof. dddr., upokojeni sodelavec ZRC SAZU, Novi trg 2, SI – 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija, andrej.pleterski@zrc-sazu.si R ecenzije in porocila o knjigah R ecensioni di libri B ook reviews ÉVA PÓCS (ED.), BODY, SOUL, SPIRITS AND SUPERNATURAL COMMUNICATION. caM-BridGe: caMBridGe ScholarS PuBliShinG, 2019, 487 P., illuStrationS. This book presents the proceedings of the international conference organised by the East-West Research Group on religious Ethnology at the Department of Ethnology and Cultural Anthropology of the University of Pécs (Hungary) in December 2014. The conference aimed to offer a more nuanced picture than had existed before regarding the notions of the soul and spirits among different peoples of Europe. The papers published in the first part of this volume discuss the problematic issues of the connections of body and soul. They include Vilmos Voigt’s article on Hungarian “spirit, soul” – lélek; Virág Dyekiss presents the ideas about the soul in the belief system of the Siberian Nganasan; Daiva Vaitkevi-ciene writes about the shadow as the soul outside the body; Judit Farkas reports on her research among Hungarian Krishna believers; Kata Zsófia Vincze researches the relationship of body and soul which concerns sexual mores in the framework of Judaist laws, regulations, and customs of marriage. Willem Blécourt reveals how deeply rooted were the notions of the second body in Western European textual folklore. Francesca Matteoni discusses the spirits that helped witchesto perform maleficent magic in English folklore. The objective of the second part of this book is to shed light on the notions of the soul and faith in life after death. Examples quoted by Tatjana Minniyahmetova present perceptions of the soul of the dead in Siberia. Suzana Marjanic cites examples from the folklore of the post-mortal and cataleptic soul. Éva Ps discusses how the souls of the dead individuals excluded from the community can turn into assaulting demons in folk belief perceptions. Anna Judit Th focuses on the unburied dead who reappear as demons of vendetta by the ancient Greeks. Kaarina Koski researches the notions about the dead who live on in the shape of specific “cemetery spirits”. In the third part of this volume are presen­ted beliefs and rites related to so-called double beings, which represent a special, archaic pre-Christian variant of soul notions, such as werewolves, vampire, witches, nightmares, and fairies. These figures – partly human, partly spiritual – are discussed by Julian Goodare and also by Lizanne Henderson, who writes about the folklore and literary traditions of the Scottish world of fairies. Sandis Laime discusses the possible origins of the Livonian werewolves; examples of vampires and their representations in oral narratives, films and works of literature are analysed in the contributions by Annemarie Sorescu-Marinkovic and Maria Tausiet. The fourth part of this book is dedicated to communication with the spirit world: the otherworldly journeys of the souls, the dead who appear to humans, and New Age spiritualism. The techniques practised to obtain this goal, falling into a trance, for instance, are discussed in the paper by Mir-jam Mencej, who researches the techniques related to circular movements. Christa Agnes Tuczay enlists medieval German examples of the “soul journey” seeking contact with the dead. Gordana Galic-Kakkonen resear­ches the noted example of the worldly and otherworldly journey of Ramón de Parellós. Different aspects of communication with the dead are also explored in the studies written by Alejandra Guzmán Almagro on the practice of exorcism; Ilaria Micheli pre­sents these practices among certain African tribes; Sarolta Tatár researches the Buryat folk religion; Vilmos Tánczos introduces the religious world of Moldavian Csángó man. Finally. Julia Gyimesi writes about the Budapest School of Psychoanalysis at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries and reveals the connections between spiritualism, parapsychology, and psychoanalysis. This book gives a nuanced picture of the notions of body and soul associated with the Judeo-Christian tradition and other religions, denominations, and alternative practices; it can be concluded that the essays give a good insight into the folklore and literary representations of these concepts. Monika Kropej Telban, Ljubljana ÉVA PÓCS (ED.), CHARMS AND CHARMING. STUDIES ON MAGIC IN EVERYDAY LIFE. ljuBljana: založBa zrc, zrc Sazu (Studia MytholoGica Slavica – SuPPle-Menta 15), 2019, 311 P., illuStrationS. This book focuses on the verbal aspects of everyday magic. The authors devote their attention to phenomenological and theoretical studies of incantations and discuss various topics, including charms and ancient magical practices and their reception and diffusion. The studies of 18 renowned researchers fo­cusing on charms, incantations and prayers, and their studies cover a wide spectrum of countries, from the United Kingdom to Russia and Iran are presented. The book is subdivided into two parts; in the first, the range of roles these verbal magic played in everyday life is resear­ched, from healing practices to the charms that repel witches and demons. Svetlana Adonyeva discusses contemporary magic practice in Russia, specifically magical writing and sending letters to the forest king or leshyi. Olga Khristoforova also presents contemporary Russian witchcraft through the terms of power. Evelina Rudan and Josipa Tomašic present Croatian folk prayers that are practised as charms next to a person’s deathbed, and work as clarifica­tion of blurry and dangerous state between “here” and “there”. Valer Simion Cosma researches the role of Romanian priests as enchanters. Daniver Vukelic dedicated his study to the uroci – evil charms and spells in Croatian tradition. Davor Nikolic discusses folk prayers and verbal charms as irrational discourse through the spectre of rational argumentation. Tomas Kencis presents Latvian witchcraft against witches, Zsuzsa Závoti focusses on the aspect of mental disorder in Anglo-Saxon England in the context of medical charms; Louse Milne researches dreams, nightmares, and charms in belief-systems from a wide range of time and places to explore certain tena­cious semiotic structures in the charms. Finally, Alevtina Solovyeva researches the mythological world of Mongolian charms and the diverse world of their rituals. The second part of this book is comprised of essays that offer phenomenological and theoretical explorations of verbal charms as a genre of textual folklore, their broad thematic range, such as the generic boun­daries of incantations and their connections with other genres. Distinctive textual motifs, transference, reception, and dissemination are studied. Magic practices with charms as performance and its relation to non-textual rituals, and even the magic tied in with ima­ ges and objects are also researched. Henni Ilomäki researches oral charms and literal notes and discusses whether an oral charm performed at the request of an outsider can be considered the same as one recited in the moment of urgent need. Maria Eliferova discusses charms within non-charm texts; Eszter Spät presents Yezidi sacred objects as symbols of power, tools of healing and seals of divine favour; Éva Ps researches Hungarian incantations between Eastern and Western Christianity; Saša Babic researches the role of location in charms, and stresses that the locations in incantations can be understood not only as descriptions of the landscape but also as the human body and body parts that are inhabited or taken by evil or disease. Inna Veselova dedicated her article to the magic of turning “just words” into “reality-transforming agents” and to the role of personal names in ritual speech. The sources and the symbolism of the images in Russian charms are discussed by LiudmilaFadeyeva, and also in thefinal paper in which Vilmos Voigt researches Russian metal icons and their “eye-power”. This book aims to strengthen the co-ope­ration among the researchers from the various relevant disciplines, employing a range of parallel and divergent methods to study verbal charms, and simultaneously contributes to the understanding of international verbal magic tradition. Monika Kropej Telban, Ljubljana ARKTICKÁ TEÓRIA O NAŠOM PÔVODE. z ruSkého oriGinálu: GuSeva, P. a kol.: KTO ONI I ODKUDA? do SlovenSkého jazy­ka Preložil: viktor tiMura, BratiSlava: nitrava, 2020, S. 209. Zaciatky tejto teórie siahajú do konca18. a 19. storocia. Vroku 1893 americký profesor V.Warren vydal knihu: Nájdený raj alebo kolíska ludstva na severnom póle. V roku 1903 odborník na sanskrit Bal Gangadn­hara Tilak publikoval: Arktická vlast vo Védach. Táto jeho práca bola preložená do viacerých jazykov. Tilak vychádzal znajstarších indických pramenov avprvej zo štyroch castí Véd: Rigvédy dokazoval pôvod Árijcov a Slovanov na severnom póle ci v jeho blízkosti. Svetlo modrá obálka knihy, s ma-pou starého sveta severného pólu a jeho prilahlých oblastí, navodzuje príjemné zimomriavky z nepoznaného a tajuplného. Ako je možné, že tak rozdielne kultúry ako je indická aslovanská môžu matspolocnú dávnu minulost? Ako je možné, že podla tvrdenia slovenského prozaika, dramatika, diplomata a politika Jozefa Banáša, ktorý navštívilIndiu, sas Indmi rozprával po slo­vensky aIndovia sním vo svojich jazykoch a vzájomne si rozumeli? Publikáciajezborníkomštúdiíruských historikov a archeolov: Rybakova, Gusevy, Shastriho, Clenovej a Žarnikovej. Zborník vyšiel v Moskve roku 1998. Podla slov prekladatelaV.Timuru:„Ked sa midostal tento titul do ruky aoboznámil som sa s jeho obsahom, pochopil som, že je to nieco také dôležité,cobymalapoznatširšiacitatelská verejnost.“ (s. 7). Mnoho bádatelov je tej mienky, že by samalo vysvetlitjazykovépríbuzenstvo od jazyka, ktorý sa spomína v knihe Genezis v 11. kapitole: „V celej krajine bol jeden jazyk a jedno nárecie.“ Avšak treba veno­ vat pozornost aj slovám z10. kapitoly, že od synov Javana, ktorý bol vnukom Noe-ma: „národy obývali svoje územia, každý svlastnýmjazykom, podla svojich kmenov, medzi svojimi národmi.“ (s. 13). Vo svojej štúdii sa Rybakov zaoberá pohanstvom Slovanov a Árijcov. „Pro-blém vývoja pohanského svetonázoru po-cas tisícrocí, ktorý predchádzal prijatiu krestanstva, takmer nikdy neprestal. Bolo zaznamenané len zvetrávanie, oslabenie pohanstva, ktoré sa zmenilo na „dvojitú vieru – dvojvieru“.“(s.17). Tvrdí napríklad, že symbolika velkonocných vajícok, ktoré sú personifikáciou života, je spojená smágiou plodnosti. Malovanie vajícok rastlinný-mi vzormi a symbolmi na jar vypovedá o agrárnej mágii. „Myšlienka vajícka ako mikrokozmu, v ktorom sa odráža vesmír siaha (...), do indo-iránskych legiend, ktoré hovoria ovzniku vesmíru zvajca.“ (s. 27). Aj staroveká viera Árijcov hovorí o tom, žestvoritelBrahmasámvznikolzo zlatého vajca vprimárnom oceáne. Gusevavo svojejštúdiihladáArktickú rodinu (Árijcov aSlovanov) v najstaršíchpa­miatkach indickej literatúry Védach. Bá­datelia 18. a 19. storocia študujúc sanskrit (jazyk indickej kultúry), zacali venovat pozornost prírodným javom opísaným vo Védach a eposu Mahabharate. Tieto javy nemohli byt pozorované z územia dnešnej Indie alebo krajín Ázie ležiacich na západ. Napr. opisy polárneho dna a noci, svetlá polárnej žiary ci zmienka o tom, že súh­vezdie Velkej Medvedice je vysoko nad horizontom, co nemožno pozorovat v Indii. Tiež vAveste sú zmienky opolárnej hviez­de, ktorá vychádza z Ladového oceánu, ci opohorí Hvarno, Vydrija (bohatá na vydry), ktorésúnajuhuneznáme.Bohoviaajludia nosia plášte z bobrích a líšcích kožušín. Letopocty sa pocítajú na zimy anie na letá. HodnovernostVéd potvrdzuje ajskutocnost, že každý zvuk a každé slovo museli ostat bez zmien. Podobnost mnohých znakov slovanských jazykov so sanskritom hovorí otom, že prvotné centrá týchto neskorších etnických skupín sa formovali spolocne a to vArktickej oblasti. „Jazyk si zachováva slová pochádzajúce z úsvitu ludskej reci aprenáša ich po stárocia (...) . Vnom možno nájst otlacky všetkého, co ludia zažili (...). Vrátane stôp stretnutí sdalšími etnikami aj príbehy (...) o necakaných a nedostatocne preskúmaných javoch histórie.“ (s. 55). Okrem porovnávania slov, porovnáva aj slovanskéaindoárijskéreligiózneamagické pojmy. Napr. Jaga slovanská vedma, caro­dejnica, baba Jaga, žiadostivá smrtelných obetí, usilujúca sa zožrat kohokolvek a v sanskriteJaga-jadka vzmysle obeta. Svarog slovanský boh nebeského svetla, otec slnka Dažboga avsanskrite Svarga nebo, nebeské žiarenie. Slovanský Dažbog vzmysle slnko, slnecný král a Dakša v sanskrite žiarivý boh, slnko. Slovanská mytologická bytost (drak) Indrok, Indrik, Indra oslobodzujúca rieky od zajatia, zamrznutia a Indra boh hromu v sanskrite ochranca v oslobod­ zujúci ich od démona, ktorý ich schováva, zadržiava. Podla autorky Gusevy: „...je to evidentne pamät o zemi a zamrzajúcich riekach na severe.“ (s. 76). Perún slovanský boh nebeských javov, hrozieb, hromov a v sanskrite vládca vzdušných vôd, hrozieb, vlastník neba azeme Varuna. Slovanský boh zvierat Veles, Volos a slovo Vala v sanskrite znamenajúce vlasatý, srstnatý. Slovanská bohyna smrti Mara, Mora, Morena avsan­skrite Mara, mrtiu, Marana oznacuje smrt a umieranie. „Napriektomu,žeporozdelení skupín mytologicko-náboženské predstavy sa vyvíjali odlišne, boli založené na spolocných tradíciách, ktoré predchádzali rozdeleniu. Tam sú korene súcasnej podobnosti ipríbu­znosti.“(s. 72). Na Slovensku sa podobnej téme venuje Martin Golema, ktorý to posúva ešte dalej adokazuje asimiláciu slovanského pohanstva s krestanstvom. V casopisoch: Studia mythologica slavica, Conversatoria litteraria ci Acta historica neosoliensia publikoval viacero clánkov o slovanskej Morene, Perúnovi ci Velesovi. Profesor Shastri porovnal sanskrit s ru­ským jazykom aeurópskymi jazykmi aprišiel k záveru, že sanskritu je najpodobnejšia ruština.Napr.rusky:„To vashdom,etonash dom.“ V sanskrite: „Tatvas dham, etatnas dham.“ (s. 85). No a môžeme doplnit po slovensky: To je váš dom, a toto náš dom. Vdalšompríspevku N.Clenovavysvetlu­je, kto sú Adronovci. Táto iránsky hovoriaca vetva Árijcov prišla do južných krajín od Volgy. V Aveste opísaná rieka Ranha je Volga, kde je oslavovaná ako krásna žena oblecená v kožuchu z 300 kožiek bobrov. Kedže bobry sa vIráne nenachádzajú anie je tam potrebné nosit kožuch, tak to znamená, že sa jedná o severskú rieku. Arabi v 9. a 10. storocí opisujú Rusov a ich modly, ci obrad spalovania mrtvych, pri ktorom sa manželka zomrelého bud sama zabije, alebo ju zabijú a je spálená spolu s telom svojho manžela. Vstarovekej indickej literatúre je opísaný podobný obrad, ktorý pretrval až do 19.–20. storocia. Alebo inázaujímavost, kedy sa ženské božstvo (modliaca sa žena) opakuje na ruských výšivkách a indických tkanivách ci rituálnych predmetoch. Podla N.Celanovej najstarší predkovia Slovanov boli evidentne príbuzní Árijcom, pretože jazyk a ornamenty boli prostriedkom vzá­jomnej komunikácie adôkazom genetickej blízkosti. V Prílohách (s. 142) je publikovaný preklad výnatkov zväcšiny kapitol Tilakovej knihy: Arktická rodina vo védach. Viktor Timura vo svojej záverecnej Poznámke prekladatela (s.203) polemizu­ je s bádatelmi a vysvetluje, preco s nimi nesúhlasí. Podla neho spolocná rec Slova­nov aÁrijcov sa musela formovat už pred 8. tisícrocím pred Kr., to znamená ešte predtým ako sa presunuli do arktických oblastí. „Preto treba hladatpôvodnú vlast pred 8. tisícrocím, teda indeako varktickej oblasti.“ (s.204). Podla Timuru v tejto dobe ešte nemožno hovorit o Slovanoch a Árijcoch, ale o kaukazskej europoidnej celadi (europoidoch), ktorých pôvod je na Kaukaze. Timura spochybnuje aj to, že názov Árijci má svoj pôvod v pripolárnych oblastiach. „Slovo „arya“ - odtial Árijci, sa po prvý raz objavuje v súvislosti s prícho­dom prvých vln europoidov s príbuzným, vtedy už slovanským jazykom do Indie. Tvar „arya“(...) znamenal „tí co obrábajú polia a pecú chleba“ – teda rolníkov.“ (...) Prvé skupiny však neprichádzali do Indie pôvodom zo severu, z arktických oblastí, ale zo strednej a východnej Európy (nositelia kultúry lievikovitých pohárov a šnúrovej keramiky – stopy po šnúrovej keramike našli archeológovia aj pri rieke Ganga).“ (s. 205). Podla prekladatela, ked zacali do Indie prichádzataj skupiny zpripolárnych oblastí, tak ich rovnako nazývali Árijci, ale sa nevie aký bol skutocný názov týchto skupín. Lenka Mihová, Bratislava Jaroslav otcenášek (ed.), ceské lidové pohádky: 1. Zvírecí pohádky a BAYKY, 2/I KOUZELNÉ POHÁDKY [czech folktaleS: 1. aniMal taleS and faBleS, 2/i. taleS of MaGic]. vyšehrad: nakla­datelStví vyšehrad 2019, Str. 437, 554. Uveljavljeni ceški slavist in folklorist Jaroslav Otcenášek je v letu 2019 izdal kar dve knjigi v knjižni zbirki »Ceške ljudske pravljice«, ki je urejena po mednarodnem klasifikacijskem sistemu Aarne – Thomp­son – Uther (ATU)1. Kot ugotavlja avtor v uvodnem poglavju, je najvecji manko ceške folkloristike prav to, da doslej še ni bil prip­ravljen tipni indeks ceških ljudskih pravljic, ki bi omogocil znanstveno in primerjalno raziskavo, v katero bi bilo vkljuceno tudi ceškopripovednoizrocilo.Takokotdrugod po svetu, so namrec tudi na Ceškem sredi 20. stol. potekale razprave o smiselnosti tovrstnih indeksov, saj so raziskovalci videli v siste­matizaciji pravljickar nekajpomanjkljivosti. Zaradi tega je edina strokovno pripravljena zbirka ceških pravljic, ki je izšla do zdaj, Soupis ceských pohádek I, II/1, II/2 (1929, 1934, 1937), pod uredništvom Václava Tilleja. Znanstvena izdaja ceških pravljic in povedk, razvršcenih po mednarodni siste­matizaciji, sledi sodobnim potrebam razi­skovalcev s tem, da prinaša veliko število pripovednega gradiva, razvršcenega po zaporedju pravljicnih tipov oz. po ATU številkah. Vkljucujetudipripovedietnicnih skupin, ki živijo ali so živele na ozemlju današnje Ceške, npr. pravljice Sudetskih Nemcev in Romov, ki pa so seveda prevedene v cešcino. Otcenášek je vkljucil v knjigo tudipripovednoizrocilo ceških emigrantov, 1 Uther, Hans-Jg. 2004. TheTypes of International Folktales. A Classification and Bibliography I–III. (FF Communications; 284–286). Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica. ki je – kot méni – ohranilo ceške folklorne pripovedi v njihovi prvotni obliki. Avtor uvodoma nacrtuje devet knjig, v katerih bodo predstavljene vse ceške pra­vljice in povedke, ki jih je lahko registriral in se uvršcajo v mednarodne pravljicne tipe, a že v drugi knjigi, v kateri zacenja s predstavitvijo cudežnih pravljic, ugotavlja, da bo število knjig precej narastlo. Oba dela zbirke, ki sta izšla doslej, sta opremljena z ustreznim znanstvenim apa­ratom, vkljucujoc indekse krajev in imen pripovedovalcev, kratice, literaturo, vire in angleški povzetek. Po krajšem uvod­nem besedilu sledi gradivo, razvršceno po pravljicnih tipih. Avtor najprej predstavi pravljicni tip, nato papripadajocepripovedi, ki so razvršcene kronološko. Na koncu so navedeniustreznipodatki,cesoznani:pri-povedovalec,krajincas zapisaterarhivski ali bibliografski vir, od koder je pripoved prepisana; sledi avtorjev kratek komentar k zgodbi, ki opozarja na njene posebnosti. V prvi knjigi, ki prinaša živalske pravljice in basni, so predstavljeni prepisivseh avtorju dostopnih pravljic in basni, razvršcenih po številkah ATU 1–299. Knjiga zajema nekaj vec kot sto razlicnih tipov živalskih pravljic. Natanacinjepredstavljenih230pravljic.Pri tem Otcenášek ugotavlja, da izvira najsta­rejša ceška živalska pravljica iz 12. stoletja, medtem ko je novejše gradivo iz 70-ih let 20. stoletja. V primerjavi s slovenskimi teksti je ta casovni razpon precej drugacen, ceški viri so namrec dosti starejši. Nasprotno pa smo lahko med novejšim gradivom v Slo­veniji dokumentirali živalske pravljice še v današnjem casu, kar je razvidno iz prve knjigeslovenskegatipnegaindeksapravljic.2 KropejTelban, Monika. 2015, Tipni indeks slovenskihljudskih pravljic. Živalske pravljice in basni. Ljubljana: Založba ZRC: ZRC SAZU. Druga knjiga prinaša ceške cudežne pravljice po enaki shemi in z enakim znan­stvenim aparatom kot v prvi. Ker pa so cudežne pravljice po obsegu precej daljše od živalskih pravljic, jev tejknjigizajetih le deset pravljicnih tipov od ATU 300 do ATU 304, objavljenih pa je le 97 pravljic, kljub temu,dajetaknjigaobsežnejša.Kazalona koncu knjig zajema le naslove pravljic, ne pa tudi pravljicnih tipov, kar uporabniku oteži iskanje gradiva po dolocenem pravljicnem tipu. Vsekakor bi bilo dobro v prihodnjih korpusih v kazalo vkljuciti tudi naslove pravljicnih tipov. Namen te znanstveno izdane zbirke ce­škihpravljicjeomogocitiuporabniku hiter dostop do pripovednega gradiva, urejenega po mednarodni klasifikaciji, in na ta nacin olajšati sodobne primerjalne raziskave. Obenem pa je zbirka namenjena tudi širše-mu krogu bralcev in marsikomu bo služila kot navdih za umetniško ustvarjanje ali poustvarjanje. Monika Kropej Telban, Ljubljana Navodila avtorjem Uredništvo sprejema avtorsko povsem dokoncane clanke, napisane v slovanskih jezikih, v anglešcini, italijanšcini ali nemšcini. Rokopisi naj vsebujejo tudi seznam kljucnih besed v anglešcini, avtorski izvlecek v anglešcini in povzetek v drugemjeziku kotclanek bodisiv anglešcini, italijanšcini, nemšcinialislovanskemjeziku. Oddaninaj bodo neoblikovani in v formatu MS Word 6.0 ali vec oz. v zapisu RTF. Digitalizirane slike naj bodo v formatu TIFF ali JPG. Slikovno gradivo v klasicni obliki digitalizira uredništvo. Uredništvo daje prednost clankom, ki niso daljši od 45.000 znakov, vkljucno s presledki in prostorom za slike. Rokopisi naj bodo v koncni obliki. Tiskovne korekture opravi uredništvo. Z objavo v SMS se avtor strinja, da je njegov clanek dostopen tudi v digitalni obliki na svetovnem spletu. Prispevki so recenzirani. Podrobna navodila za oblikovanje clanka so na: http://sms.zrc-sazu.si Istruzioni per gli autori La redazione accetta contributi scritti nelle lingue slave, in inglese, italiano e tedesco. Si richiede che i manoscritti contengano pure l‘elenco delle parole chiave in inglese, 1‘abstract in inglese e il riassunto redatto in una lingua diversa da quella usata nell‘articolo, ovvero in inglese, italiano, tedesco o lingue slave. I manoscritti devono essere consegnati su copia cartacea e in formato MS Word 6.0, o versione successiva, oppure in formato RTF. Si accettano le fotografie digitali nel formato TIFF o JPG mentre il materiale iconografico nel formato classico verrŕ trasferito in formato digitale dalla redazione. La prioritŕ viene attribuita agli articoli che non superano le 45.000 battute, compresi gli spazi e le fotografie. I manoscritti devono essere consegnati nella versione definitiva. Gli errori tipografici sono corretti dalla redazione. Con la pubblicazione in SMS 1‘autore č d‘accordo che il proprio articolo sia disponibile anche in formato digitale su internet. Gli articoli sono stati recensiti. Istruzioni particolareggiati sono su: http://sms.zrc-sazu.si Submission Instructions forAuthors Articles should be sent to the editors in final version, written in a Slavic language or in English, Italian, or German. They should include a list of key words and an abstract, both written in English, and a summary in a language different from the language of the submitted article (English, Italian, German, or Slavic language). The proposed articles need to be unformatted, and sent as a Word document, preferably in Rich Text Format (RTF) by e-mail or on a floppy disk. A print-out should also be sent to the editor‘s address. Illustrations in digital form should be saved in TIFF or JPG format; classic photographs and illustrations will be converted to digital form by the editors. Articles should preferably be no longer than 45,000 characters (including spaces and room for illustrations). Proofs will be done by the editors. The author agreesthat by publishing in SMSthe article will be available also in the digital form on the Internet. The articles are externally peer-reviewed. For further informations see: http://sms.zrc-sazu.si Letna narocnina / Prezzo d’ abbonamento /Annual Subscripttion for individuals: 20.00 EUR for institutions: 24.00 EUR Narocanje / Ordinazioni / Orders to: Založba ZRC / ZRC Publishing P. P. 306, SI-1001 Ljubljana, Slovenija E-mail: zalozba@zrc-sazu.si