17
TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS CULTURAL life in Russia in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries diflFered from cultural life in Western Europe in two important respects. Works of literature and scholarship were not written in the spoken vernacular (Russian), but in Church Slavonic, and the predominant medium for conveying thought was not the printed book, but the manuscript. Printing, which began late—the first explicitly dated Moscow imprint being that of Ivan Fedorov's Apostol (Acts and Epistles) of 1564—was dominated by Church and State and was reserved in the main for the production of generally large-format liturgical works for use in Orthodox Church services. The first printed and dated East Slavonic primer did not appear until 1574. It was a primer for children learning to read not Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it was printed not within the State of Muscovy, but in Lvov, then in Poland (but now in the Ukrainian SSR). It is the recent acquisition by the British Library of a copy of this significant and rare work (hitherto known only from a copy at Harvard) that has caused this article to be written (fig. i). During the period 1574 to 1652 in the territory within the frontiers of the present-day Soviet Union some twenty editions of Church Slavonic primers are known to have been printed. Only two came from the Moscow Printing House (printed in 1634 and 1637), the others were printed outside Russia, either in Belorussia or the Ukraine, both then part of Poland. Although edition sizes for primers were relatively large (of the Lvov primer as many as 2,000 copies were probably printed^ and in the Moscow Printing House in the seventeenth century a primer might run to 14,400 copies, as opposed to the norm of 1,200 for larger-format liturgical works^), the number of surviving copies is extremely small. The reasons for this are sufficiently obvious: their relative cheapness, small format, and their use by children lessened their chance of survival. Thus it is that of the twenty editions mentioned above only nine are represented in the collections of Soviet libraries.^ Copies of the other eleven are to be found only outside the country of their origin and owe their survival to foreign travellers or merchants who may have acquired them for the purpose of studying the language or, more likely, simply brought them home as curiosities. Such is the case with the two Church Slavonic primers, bound together, which the British Library has recently acquired. The first item in the volume is the Lvov primer, printed by Ivan Fedorov in 1574.* Of this, only one other copy is known—one which 32

TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

  • Upload
    lyhanh

  • View
    236

  • Download
    4

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574

AND MOSCOW, 1637

CHRISTINE THOMAS

C U L T U R A L life in Russia in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries diflFered fromcultural life in Western Europe in two important respects. Works of literature andscholarship were not written in the spoken vernacular (Russian), but in Church Slavonic,and the predominant medium for conveying thought was not the printed book, but themanuscript. Printing, which began late—the first explicitly dated Moscow imprint beingthat of Ivan Fedorov's Apostol (Acts and Epistles) of 1564—was dominated by Churchand State and was reserved in the main for the production of generally large-formatliturgical works for use in Orthodox Church services. The first printed and dated EastSlavonic primer did not appear until 1574. It was a primer for children learning to read notUkrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it was printed not within the State ofMuscovy, but in Lvov, then in Poland (but now in the Ukrainian SSR). It is the recentacquisition by the British Library of a copy of this significant and rare work (hithertoknown only from a copy at Harvard) that has caused this article to be written (fig. i).

During the period 1574 to 1652 in the territory within the frontiers of the present-daySoviet Union some twenty editions of Church Slavonic primers are known to have beenprinted. Only two came from the Moscow Printing House (printed in 1634 and 1637), theothers were printed outside Russia, either in Belorussia or the Ukraine, both then part ofPoland. Although edition sizes for primers were relatively large (of the Lvov primer asmany as 2,000 copies were probably printed^ and in the Moscow Printing House in theseventeenth century a primer might run to 14,400 copies, as opposed to the norm of 1,200for larger-format liturgical works^), the number of surviving copies is extremely small.The reasons for this are sufficiently obvious: their relative cheapness, small format, andtheir use by children lessened their chance of survival. Thus it is that of the twentyeditions mentioned above only nine are represented in the collections of Soviet libraries.^Copies of the other eleven are to be found only outside the country of their origin and owetheir survival to foreign travellers or merchants who may have acquired them for thepurpose of studying the language or, more likely, simply brought them home ascuriosities.

Such is the case with the two Church Slavonic primers, bound together, which theBritish Library has recently acquired. The first item in the volume is the Lvov primer,printed by Ivan Fedorov in 1574.* Of this, only one other copy is known—one which

32

Page 2: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

Fig. I. Ivan Fedorov's Primer of 1574, fol.

Page 3: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

found its way to Italy in the seventeenth century, where it may have been acquired manyyears later by the great collector of art, manuscripts, and books. Count Grigory SergeevichStroganov (1829-1910). It was rediscovered in a bookseller's shop in Rome in 1927 byanother bibliophile patron of the arts, the impresario Sergei Diaghilev, and finally passedto Harvard College Library in 1953. This copy was fully described by Roman Jakobsonand W. A. Jackson in an article in the Harvard Library Bulletin in 1955^ and only then didits existence become widely known. A microfilm was made available to Soviet scholarswhich has resulted in a number of studies, and three facsimiles were issued between1964 and 1975.^ The primer is remarkable not only on account of its rarity and its place asa landmark in the printing of Slavonic educational texts but also for the fine quality of itsprinting and layout, which is superior to that of the later primers produced in Moscow inthe first half of the seventeenth century. The primer which is bound with it is a Moscowedition of 1637,' the second of two printed by Vasily Burtsov-Protopopov (the first waspublished in 1634). The 1637 Burtsov primer is known in a number of copies (at least fourin the Soviet Union and at least five in the West, including another copy in the BritishLibrary) and as an example of typography it falls far short of Ivan Fedorov's primer.Together, the two primers serve to illustrate the diflferences and similarities betweenliterary language and printing in the Ukraine during the second half of the sixteenthcentury and in Moscow during the first half of the seventeenth century. Furthermore, ournewly-acquired copy of the Burtsov primer is of great interest for its provenance. Itcontains inscriptions by two seventeenth-century Englishmen, one of whom. Sir JohnHebdon, played a prominent role in Anglo-Russian trade and diplomatic relations duringthe reigns of Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich and King Charles II of England.

The printer of the Lvov primer, Ivan Fedorov, began his printing career in Moscow.Until 1565 he was the deacon of one of the Kremhn churches, St Nicholas the MiracleWorker of Gostun'. At this time the need to introduce printing in Russia was beginning tobe felt, partly as a result of the Church Council (Stoglav) of 1551 which had criticized thenumber of errors which had crept into liturgical manuscripts, and also because of theincreasing need for multiple copies of liturgical works, due in part to Ivan the Terrible'sconquests of the 'heathen' peoples on Muscovy's eastern frontier. Apart from sevenundated 'anonymous' editions of liturgical books believed to have been printed in the1550s and early 1560s, the folio Apostol (Acts and Epistles) of 1564, printed by IvanFedorov and his partner Petr Mstislavets, was the first book to appear in Moscow. Theyfollowed it with two editions of an octavo Book of Hours in 1565, but by 1568 they werealready printing in Zabludov (a Belorussian town then part of Lithuania), driven fromMoscow, as Ivan Fedorov himself explains, because of 'great persecutions, not at thehands of the Tsar himself, but at the hands of many powerful officials and ecclesiasticalauthorities and teachers who, out of envy, tried to lay upon me many charges ofheresy . . .'.^ Having escaped the intrigues of Moscow, but having lost the powerfulpatronage of the Tsar, Ivan Fedorov spent the rest of his life moving from place to place insearch of patrons for his printing enterprises. In Zabludov, financed by the HetmanChodkiewicz, Ivan Fedorov and Petr Mstislavets printed a folio edition of a Gospels

34

Page 4: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

commentary. A Psalter and Book of Hours printed by Ivan Fedorov alone appeared in thefollowing year (1570), and he then moved on to Lvov where in 1574 he printed a secondedition of his Moscow Apostol and the primer. In Lvov his difficulties were mainlyfinancial and only after assiduous petitioning, accompanied by 'copious tears andlamentation',^ did he eventually manage to borrow sufficient money from local wealthycraftsmen and tradesmen to set up his press. From 1578 to 1581 he printed at Ostrog inVolhynia (then in Poland), the seat of Prince Konstantin Konstantinovich Ostrozhsky, thefounder of a Greco-Slavonic seminary there. Supported by this wealthy and influentialpatron, who, in spite of his Orthodox background, was on good terms with the RomanCatholic Church and Polish State authorities, Ivan Fedorov was able to print four newworks—an octavo Greek-Slavonic chrestomathy in 1578,^'' presumably for use at theseminary, an octavo Psalter and New Testament in 1580, and two impressions of hismagnificent folio Bible in 1580 and 1581. A second edition of the Lvov primer was printedeither in Ostrog around 1580 or, possibly, in Lvov after Fedorov's death. A chronologycompiled by Andrei Rymsha printed in 1581 has also been attributed to Ivan Fedorov, butmay have been the work of his pupils. In 1583 he returned to Lvov where he died inDecember of that year. Throughout his travels he was able to take his types (or at least hispunches or matrices) with him and for the majority of his books he used the originalMoscow type of the 1564 Apostol. Only for his Greek-Slavonic chrestomathy and theOstrog Bible did he introduce new, smaller types.

With the acquisition of the Lvov primer the British Library now possesses examples ofIvan Fedorov's printing from three of the places where he was active. His Moscow periodis represented by the 1564 Apostol, a copy acquired at the sale of the Diaghilev-Lifarlibrary in 1975. From his Ostrog press we have two copies of the 1580 impression of theBible, one of which was brought to England by Sir Jerome Horsey in the sixteenth centuryand which, according to an inscription in Horsey's hand, was once in the library of Ivanthe Terrible.

The Lvov primer is a small octavo consisting of five unsigned eight-leaf gatheringsmaking forty unnumbered leaves in all. It has no title-page, but year and place ofpublication are given in the colophon on fol. [5]/8^ (i.e. the recto of the eighth leaf of thefifth unsigned gathering) below a pair of woodcuts depicting the coat of arms of the townof Lvov and Fedorov's printer's mark which contains the letters IUJAH (loan being analternative form of Ivan) (fig. 2). The type, which is that used for the Moscow Apostol., hasa ten-line measure of 84 mm, and there are fifteen lines to a page. Five of the six sectionsbegin with headpieces (on fols. [i]/i% [ij/s^, [2]/4^ (fig. 3), [31/7^ and M / i ^ , the first ofwhich had been used previously in the Slavonic-Greek chrestomathy and was used againin the second edition of the primer. All of these reappear in the Ostrog Bible. There arethree tailpieces and these too are familiar from the Ostrog Bible. The leaves in the BritishLibrary copy measure only 140 x 95 mm (as against the Harvard copy's 157 x 100 mm),consequently the headpieces on fols. [3]/7^ and [4]/i^ are slightly cropped and very littleremains of the watermarks. The watermarks in the Harvard copy are described asrepresenting 'a horseshoe with sharply turned ends, like an ancient stretched bow,

35

Page 5: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

fi/uiH

iTktMH

MCAHTHAMH

2. Colophon of Ivan Fedorov's Primer of 1574, showing the coat of arms of the town of Lvovand Ivan Fedorov's printer's mark

Page 6: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

Af>/

A

^ /

CTH .

f/? / * - •

1

AfYAtTAf . fJ^

. Mil

f* /

AHAH . ^ AfMl/VI'S .

Fig. 3. Ivan Fedorov's Primer of 1574, fol. [2j/4r

Page 7: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

enclosing an outlined cross whose arms touch the sides but whose head does not quitetouch the center or toe of the shoe'.^^ The scanty evidence in our copy—a double-linedsegment of a curve with a small semi-circle joining the bottom and top lines on fols. [2]/6and [5]/6 and what appears to be the bottom of the cross and of one leg of the horseshoe onfol. [4]/6—suggests that the paper is the same as that used for the Harvard copy. Thefragmentary watermarks in our copy closely resemble Laucevicius no. 2664^^ andTromonin no. 372 ^ (both from copies of the 1574 Lvov Apostol) and Siniarska-Czaplickanos. 296-8. According to Siniarska-Czaplicka, the marks reproduce the Jastrz?biec armsand the paper may have been made at a mill at Poczesna on the river Warta, to the north ofCracow. ' A fuller physical description of type, ornaments, etc. can be found in Jakobson'sarticle. A comparison of the British Library copy with the facsimile of the Harvard copyreveals no significant differences.

The contents are divided into six sections, beginning with a Cyrillic alphabet offorty-five letters, both in direct and reverse order, and moving on to vowel and consonantsyllables. In this section paragraphs are numbered so that numbers, represented inCyrillic by letters of the alphabet, can be learned in parallel with letters. There followsections on the conjugation of verbs and on the spelling and declension of nouns andadjectives, written in traditional contracted form. The last section consists of texts forreading. The texts, which are preceded by an alphabetical acrostic, consist of well-knownprayers and selected passages from Proverbs and the Epistles, all touching on theeducation of children and offering precepts to pupils, teachers, and parents. The primerends with a short afterword addressed to Ivan Fedorov's Orthodox Christian readers inwhich he expresses the hope that his work will be received favourably and indicates hiswillingness to produce further works. Roman Jakobson has made a detailed analysis of thecontents and language of the primer and of the sources which may have been used in itscompilation. V. I. Luk'yanenko of the Leningrad Public Library, in two studies,*^ hascontinued the investigation of sources and has also discussed the influence of Fedorov'swork on later East Slavonic primers—both manuscript and printed. Luk'yanenko's firstarticle is based on a thorough textual analysis of the primer and of East Slavonicmanuscripts and other religious and educational works, mainly of the sixteenth andseventeenth centuries. She points out that these manuscripts were probably copies ofearlier texts, but that there are few surviving earlier copies (Ivan Fedorov's printed primerbeing earlier than any comparable extant manuscript of an East Slavonic primer). Threestriking points emerge from Luk'yanenko's work: the continuity of the East Slavonictradition which is reflected in Fedorov's primer; the innovative nature of Fedorov'sprimer; the lasting influence of his primer and the mutual influence of printed andmanuscript primers which continued into the seventeenth century (it must not beforgotten that in the East Slavonic countries the printed book did not supersede themanuscript for over two centuries).

In discussing Ivan Fedorov's use of earlier texts, Luk'yanenko puts forward a greatnumber of possible sources of influence, most of them pedagogical or moral works. Shestresses, however, that Ivan Fedorov's primer, while following traditions, is far from being

38

Page 8: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

a straightforward copy of any one or two earlier texts, but is rather a creative andjudiciously selected compilation from a wide range of sources. She notes that Fedorov'sscriptural excerpts for reading which, especially in the case of the Old Testament pieces,consist not of sections, but of individual verses, specially chosen and arranged so as to forma logical sequence of precepts on education, are compiled not from the then mostup-to-date and authoritative versions of the Old Testament (Archbishop Gennady's Bibleof the end of the fifteenth century) or the Epistles (Ivan Fedorov's own edition of theApostol), but follow more archaic versions to be found in early educational texts. Sheargues that Ivan Fedorov, rather than destroy the delicate and logical 'mosaic' structurewhich had been carefully pieced together by previous compilers, was willing to tolerate thepresence of certain archaisms. She notes, as does E. L. Nemirovsky,^^that Ivan Fedorovmust also have been familiar with Western, notably Polish, primers of the sixteenthcentury, but although these may have influenced him, his primer contains elements, suchas the sections which teach the morphology of the language, the acrostic, and the inclusionof biblical excerpts for reading, which belong to a purely East Slavonic tradition. Shefurther suggests that some East Slavonic primers of the late sixteenth and seventeenthcenturies may themselves in turn have been based on Ivan Fedorov's primer.

In her second article, which is a comparative study of eight printed editions of EastSlavonic primers which she considers to be closely modelled on Fedorov's primer,Luk'yanenko takes issue with scholars such as Bykova " and Jakobson^^ who maintain thatthe format established by Fedorov provided the model for East Slavonic primers up tothe late eighteenth century. She argues convincingly that the direct influence of Fedorov'sprimer effectively ends with Burtsov's primers of 1634 and 1637.

Vasily Fedorovich Burtsov (or Burtsov-Protopopov), unlike Ivan Fedorov, wasprobably not a man of letters, but a craftsman printer, punch-cutter and letter-founder.He headed one of the sections of the Moscow Pechatny dvor (Printing House) between1633 and 1642 and, contrary to the traditions of that printing house, his name appears inthe works that he printed. Printing in Moscow at the beginning of the seventeenth centurywas organized very much as it had been at the time when Ivan Fedorov was printing there.Unlike the Ukrainian and Belorussian lands which were dominated by the struggle ofOrthodox believers against the increasing militancy of the Roman Catholic Church, wherethe cultural centres of Orthodoxy and printing were scattered, and where printing wasfinanced by wealthy princes or magnates, Moscow was the centre of Orthodoxy and its oneprinting house had a single patron—the collective authority of Tsar and Church. Printingwas therefore used mainly for the production of liturgical works. The output of thePechatny dvor in the seventeenth century consisted of 440 large-format liturgical works,sixty-six other religious works (including primers) intended for reading outside thechurch, and only seven secular works. ^

As has been said, Church Slavonic was used not only in church services but also for allscholarly and literary writing. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries it differed fromthe vernacular Russian not only in vocabulary but also in morphology and could beconsidered as a largely fossilized language. Thus the language of Ivan Fedorov's 1574

39

Page 9: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

primer and of Burtsov's 1637 primer is essentially the same, although in places attemptshave been made in Burtsov's primer to change some of the archaic features of IvanFedorov's orthography and morphology. In the imprint of the 1574 primer, however, theinfluence of the local vernacular is evident: for the works 'printed in Lvov in the year1574' Ivan Fedorov uses the Ukrainian vydrukovano and roku, whereas Burtsov in hiscolophon uses the Russian pechatati and leto. In form and content the Burtsov primer isalso close to the Ivan Fedorov one. It is divided into the same sections but in addition has apreface (fols. 1/1^-1/6^) and a fairly lengthy afterword (fols. i3/3''-i4/40- Burtsov alsogives the names of the symbols of punctuation in addition to the names of the letters and inhis section on orthography more examples are given. In the section of passages for readingBurtsov omits the prayers included in Ivan Fedorov's primer but includes the tencommandments, additional passages from the Old and New Testaments, and the text'How Cyril the Philosopher compiled the alphabet . . .'.

The quality of printing of Burtsov's primer is inferior to that of Fedorov's in its types,clarity of print, layout, and justification, but there are some innovations (a few lines ofprinting in red, the use of signatures, and a woodcut illustration). The primer consists of108 unnumbered leaves signed I^-I3^ 14" - The copy recently acquired by the BritishLibrary is imperfect, wanting fols. 1/4,1/5. The size of the typeface is 87 mm over 10 linesand there are eleven lines to a page. There are three headpieces on fols. 2/4^, 3/5^, and11/5^, and on fol. 2/3^, following the preface, there is a woodcut illustration representing ateacher and pupils in a school—the first Moscow book illustration with a secular motif.Beneath the illustration in the British Library copy (fol. 2/3^) is the ownership inscriptionof one George Hooke (fig. 4), and on the previous blank page (fol. 2/3^) there is a longerinscription in Russian. On the facing page (fol. 2/2" ) an attempt has been made in adifferent hand (possibly Hooke's) to copy parts of the inscription and throughout thesection on orthography this same writer has exercised himself in expanding in manuscriptthe words printed in contracted form. The inscription on fol. 2/3^ reads as follows:

KHHra a3t 6yKH arAe(H)cK(o)H 3eMAH lOpba poMaHo(B) (^a) c[bi]Ha FyKa B AeTa O(T)/ta(H)H MHpa^ppMH 4)e(B)paAJi 4[e]Hb K a (c) noKo(p)HOCTio

C[M]H'L

This translates as:

This alphabet book belongs to the Englishman Yury son of Roman Guk. In the year from thecreation of the world 7148 [i.e. 1640] February the 20th day. With humble greetings from [literally'humbly bows to the ground'] Ivashka son of Ivan Gebdon (fig. 5).

The writer of this inscription evidently knew Russian well, for it is proficiently pennedin a flowing cursive hand and contains few irregularities of spelling or grammar. In fact weknow from other sources of a John Hebdon who had a sound knowledge of spoken andwritten Russian. There were two John Hebdons, father and son, active in Russia in theseventeenth century, both indeed were Ivashka son of Ivan (or John son of John), *^ butthere is little doubt that it was the elder. Sir John, who inscribed the primer—his son

40

Page 10: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

r . -v

•XT-.

/

J

/ ^ z ^

4. Burtsov's Primer of 1637, fol. 2/3'

Page 11: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

tc 6/K 0 /fT) 6 uJo \

r

; . 5. Inscription by Sir John Hebdon on fol. 2/3^ of Burtsov's Primer of 1637

Page 12: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

would have been little more than eight years old in 1640. Sir John Hebdon's career as amerchant in Russia (he exported caviare and pitch to England), as an agent and later adiplomat for Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich is well documented by his Russian biographerGurlyand.^^ From Gurlyand's account, based on documents from the Prikaz Tainykh Del(Office of Secret Afifairs) we know that between the years 1652 and 1662 Hebdon wasemployed by the Tsar to travel to Western Europe to promote the export of Russian rawmaterials and to import into Russia manufactured goods, both luxury goods and weapons.At the same time he was instructed to recruit craftsmen and professional soldiers forRussian service. By the time of the Restoration he had been accorded semi-diplomaticstatus by the Tsar, denoted by his title of rezident.'^^ The Russians had not as yet anypermanent diplomatic representatives abroad, but the need for such representatives wasbeginning to be felt, and Hebdon, as rezident in Holland and England, was one of the firstof these foreign 'experts' to be recruited. The fact that he gained such influence at theRussian court must have been due in no small part to his knowledge of Russian and hisunderstanding of Russian customs and protocol, coupled with his business acumen andability to establish the right connections. To Gurlyand's biography are appended variousletters written by Hebdon to officials at the Russian court and to the Tsar himself whichshow that Hebdon was well able to combine the flowery and obsequious style necessary fordealings with the Russian court, with a shrewd ability to advance his own interests.Certainly, in the period following Charles Fs execution, when the English were personaenongratae in Russia^a decree of 1649' ^ banned them from Moscow and abolished theirformer trading privileges—Hebdon seems never to have lost favour.

Gurlyand's account illuminates the Russian side of Hebdon's activities only. Forreferences to his relations with the British government (during the Commonwealth andRestoration periods) we have to rely on a number of scattered English sources.^ Fromthese we know that Hebdon was one of the governors of the Russia Company^^ which hadbeen engaged in trade with Russia from the middle of the sixteenth century.^^ Hebdonseems to have been a staunch Royalist throughout the years of the Commonwealth—in1650 he was instrumental in negotiating a loan from Tsar Aleksei for the Royalist camp^^and he is alleged to have been extremely unhelpful towards Cromwell's ambassadorWilliam Prideaux when he was assigned as interpreter to Prideaux's mission to Russia in1650. ^ Soon after the restoration of Charles II, by 1662 or at the latest 1663, he hadreturned to settle in England where his experience of Russian life made him invaluable asan adviser on Anglo-Russian relations and subsequently as an ambassador to Russia.There seems to have been a period when his position was somewhat ambiguous, in that hewas considered to be in the employ of both the Russian and English governments. In June1663 h^ *s dubbed the 'Russia Resident' (i.e. the Russian Ambassador in England) byPepys^^ only a week after he had been knighted by Charles II for his 'good servicesperformed between England and Russia'.^'^ During these years Hebdon's wife andmarried daughter remained in Russia, and he was still involved in commissions for theTsar.^^ As late as 1664 when he travelled to Russia as part of the Earl of Carlisle's embassy,he was still being described by the Russians as the 'Russian Resident'.^^ In 1667 he made

43

Page 13: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

his last journey to Russia, this time as Ambassador, with the task of restoring England'sformer trading privileges with Russia. His mission was a failure. Konovalov suggested thatHebdon's recent change of allegiance from the Russian to the English court may havecaused the Russians to distrust him and so may have been a partial cause of his lack ofsuccess.^^ He returned to England in 1668 where he died on iojune i670^and was buriedin Tooting Graveney.^^

Although the period of Hebdon's life from 1652 onwards is relatively well documented,very httle is known about his early life and the date of his first arrival in Russia is uncertain(unfortunately the records of the Russia Company for most of the seventeenth centurywere destroyed in the Great Fire of London). The first mention of Hebdon which occursin the documents on which Gurlyand based his account refers to the year 1647 when he isdescribed as interpreter for the English inhabitants of Moscow. They further record thatin 1650 he was settled in Russia with his wife, his grown-up son Ivan-Rikhard (in factthese were two sons John and Richard),^^ and his married daughter (Elizabeth whowas the wife of Thomas Bryan, also of the Russia Company). Thus the inscription inthe primer (dated February 1640) predates Gurlyand's reference by seven years and theknowledge of Russian which it reveals suggests that Hebdon had already been in thecountry for some time when he wrote it. Indeed, a note in Pedigrees of London states that hewas '33 years a merchant in Russia'.^'' Since he had definitely returned to live in Englandby 1663, if this source is correct, he would already have been in Russia in 1630, when hewould have been aged eighteen.^^However, his name does not appear in a list of merchantsresident in Russia in 1636^^ and it seems likely that '33 years a merchant in Russia' resultsfrom a not infrequent confusion between himself and his son John who last went toMoscow in 1677-8. Our inscription stands as the earliest certain evidence of Hebdon'spresence in Russia. That he was there six months later is proved by his signature on acontemporary document, an oath taken by a merchant Henry Twentyman in Archangel inAugust 1640.'*^ It seems most likely that Hebdon first went to Russia sometime between1636 and 1640.

Thus the inscription in the primer adds a small but important fact to our knowledge of aprominent seventeenth-century figure whose identity is well established. The identity ofYury son of Roman Guk (i.e. George son of Robert Hooke), however, remains a mystery,although a possible candidate would seem to be a certain George Hooke who was baptizedat St Vedast's Church, Foster Lane, on 20 July 1617, the fifth of six children of RobertHooke, member of the Goldsmiths' Company.'^^ Little further information has come tolight about George Hooke, but his father Robert is recorded as still living in the parish ofSt Vedast in 1629'*^ and in 1638 in 'Cheapside, on the Southside thereof'."^^ An entry in theMemorials of the Goldsmiths' Company for 2 September 1657 shows that Robert, thenaged seventy-nine, successfully petitioned the Company for an annuity of £4 a quarter.His petition states that 'Mr. Robert Hooke, sometime Upper Warden of this Company,and now a poor member thereof. . . was formerly employed by the Company about thenew building of the Hall, wherein he spent his time daily for the space of about 4 years...'.The Clerk further recounts that Hooke had 'personally served in all the places of the

44

Page 14: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

government of the Company' and mentions his Miligent care and pains in the searches inthe West Country as far as Launceston in Cornwall . . .\'^

If George Hooke followed in his father's footsteps as a goldsmith or a prospector ofmines then his profession would offer a plausible reason for his being in Russia in 1640.For the exploitation of precious metals which Russia possessed in abundance there wasneed of foreign expertise for both prospecting, mining, refining, and manufacturing.During the reign of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich (1614-45) it is known that five Britishmetallurgists served him in various capacities. One Walter Basbee, former assaymaster atthe Goldsmiths' Hall, was ordered by the Tsar to refine the gold of a rich copper mine inSiberia. In the 1620s and r63os John Bulmer, John Martin, John Gilbert, and FrancisGlover were all hired by the Tsar for their expert knowledge of jewels and precious metals.In 1633 Glover who was, like Hebdon, a Russia Company merchant, was granted 'aten-year monopoly for the manufacture of small gold, silver and copper objects. For thispurpose Martin was commissioned to search abroad for craftsmen who specialised inmaking gold and silver thread. Three years later Martin's brother Benedict brought someforeign craftsmen he had hired for John's use."*" We know too that one of the tasksentrusted to John Hebdon, during his journeys to Holland and Italy in the 1650s, was torecruit skilled goldsmiths, silversmiths, and diamond-cutters.'^ It could be that in earlieryears too he was engaged on similar commissions for Tsar Mikhail and that he wasresponsible for persuading George Hooke to visit Russia. Or perhaps he simply helpedHooke to find his feet in a strange country. In August 1642 a goldsmith Thomas Attwood,who, having heard that there was employment for goldsmiths in Russia, had come to findwork, was accompanied by Simon Digby, chief agent of the Russia Company, and JohnHebdon 'interpreter' to a meeting with local Russian officials in Archangel, from whom heobtained a letter of recommendation to the Tsar and money for the journey to Moscow." "Hooke, too, evidently made his way to Moscow and remained in Russia for at least sixyears, for in April 1646 a letter was received by one of the Englishmen in Russia Thomas'Vergents'(?) from 'Yury Gok', in which 'Gok' writes that he has arrived in Riga fromMoscow (possibly on his way home to England). Another tenuous Hebdon connection isthe fact that 'Vergents' also received a letter from John Hebdon's brother Thomas, sentfrom Riga at about the same time.** However, absence of firm evidence makes itimpossible to do more than speculate on the profession of George Hooke, his reasons fortravelling to Russia, and his relations with John Hebdon.

The wording of the inscription suggests that Hebdon gave the primer to Hooke. Thepartial copy of the inscription on the facing page, which is not a stroke-by-stroke copy, butis in a different style of handwriting, suggests that the writer (perhaps Hooke) was able toread and understand what Hebdon had written and had therefore also mastered thelanguage to some extent. The marginalia in the section on orthography which appear to bein the same hand suggest that he had some interest in using the primer for the purpose oflearning the language. As has been noted, the primer is not a Russian but a ChurchSlavonic primer and its printed letters are of the semi-uncial style which was used inChurch Slavonic books and manuscripts. The Russian language, which was written in a

45

Page 15: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

different form of writing, in cursive hand, and which was used in the seventeenth centuryfor private correspondence and in documents relating to business, law, administration,and diplomacy, was the language which Hebdon and Hooke would have needed to learnfor practical purposes. However, in the absence of any specifically 'Russian' primer--thefirst Russian grammar, compiled by a German, H. W. Ludolf, was printed in 1696, inOxford'^^—Burtsov's primer seems to have served as the best available stepping-stone tothe mastery of the vernacular Russian language.

When and by whom, whether together or separately, the Ivan Fedorov and Burtsovprimers were brought back to England, is not known. They were certainly in Englandbefore the end of the eighteenth century, for the spine of the eighteenth-century Englishbinding remains intact. The volume remained in private ownership from that time until1982 when the British Library was able to acquire it. *

I would like to express my gratitude to Mr NormanEvans of the Public Record Office and ProfessorGeraldine Phipps for their help in my research onHebdon and Hooke, and, most of all to Mr J. S. G.Simmons, without whose encouragement and assist-ance this article would not have been written.

1 H. 3anacK0, MucmeuhKa cnadmuHa Ieana 0edopo6aBH4aBHHu,TB0 npH AbBiscbKOMy ^ep-

pCHTeTi, 1974), p- 25.2 H. n . KnceAeB, ' O MOCKOBCKOM KHHrone'ia-

TaHHH X V I I BeKa', Kuma, 3 (i960), pp. 123-

186 (p. 133)-3 B. H. AyKbflHeHKo, 'nepeH34aHHH nepBo-

nenaTHOH a36yKi'i PlBaHa (l>eAopoBa', Knmo-neMamanue u KHUoiCHhie co6paHUR e Poccuu do

cepeduHhi XIX eexa (AeHMHrpa^: EAH CCCP,1979), pp. 6-25 (p. 7). See also A. C. 3epHOBa,

KHpHAAOBCKoii ne^aTH, xpaHaujHecfl B6H6AHOTeKax H Hen3BecTHhie B

pyccKOH 6ii6AHorpa(|)HH', Tpydu Foe. 6u6nuo-mexu CCCP UM. B. H. Jleuuna (1958), T. 2,

PP- 5-36-4 No. 2 in i?. 3anacK0, H. IcacBuq, IJaM'nmKu

KHliJ^€Koeo^o Mucmeumea: xamajioz cmapodpyKie,

eudauux na YKpaim

npH AbBiBCbKOMy

1981- X I (1574-1700)-5 R. Jakobson and W. A. Jackson, 'Ivan Fedorov's

Primer', Harvard Library Bulletin, ix (1955),no. I, pp. 5-42.

6 FpauamuKa Ieana 0edopoea (KHIB: /[ninpo,1964); A36yKa Meana 0edopo6a (MocKBa: n p o -CBeirjCHHe, 1975); Eyneap Ieana Oedopoea (KHIB:

/I,Hinpo, 1975).

7 No. 108 in A. C. 3epHOBa, Knueu Kneuamu u3daHHue e Moacee e XVI-XVII eenax:ceodHbiu Kamajioe (MocKBa: Foe. GwSAHOTeKaCCCP HM. B. H. AeHHHa, OT^eA pe/tKwx KHHF,

1958) and no. 442 in H. KapaTaeB, OnucanueCRaenno-pyccKux KHUZ HaneHamauHbix Kupujuioe-

(CaHKTneTep6ypr: Tnnorpa(J>HflHayK, 1883).

8 Afterword to Ivan Fedorov's Anocmoji (AbBoe,1574). Reprinted in Y ucmoKoe pycacozo KHuzone-Hamanun (MocKBa: Hs^aTeAbCTBo AKa/ieMHnHayK CCCP, 1959), pp. 234-247 (p. 235).

9 Ibid., p. 246.ro H. Grasshoff and J. S. G. Simmons, *Ivan

Fedorovs griechisch-russisch/kirchenslavischesLesebuch von 1578 und der gothaer Bukvar von1578/1580', Abhandlungen der Deutschen Aka-demie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Klasse furSpr., Lit., und Kunst, Jg. 1969, no. 2, pp. 5-14.

11 R. Jakobson and W. A. Jackson, art. cit., p. 40.12 E. Laucevicius, Popierius Lietuvoje XV-XVIIIa.

2 vols. (Vilnius: Mintis, 1967).13 K. Ya. Tromonin, TromonirCs Watermark Album.

A facsimile of the 1844 Moscow edition. Withadditional materials by S. A. Klepikov. Edited,translated and adapted for publication in Englishby J. S. G. Simmons. Monumentae chartae papy-raceae historiam illustrantia, xi (Hilversum: thePaper Publications Society, 1965).

14 J. Siniarska-Czaplicka, Filigrany papierni polo-zonych na ohszarze Rzeczypospolitej Pohkiej odpoczqtku XVI do polowy XVIII wieku (Wroclaw,Warszawa, Krakow: Zaklad Narodowy im. Osso-linskich, 1969), p. 10.

Page 16: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …

15 B. H. AyKsaHeHKO, 'A36yKa HBaHa pee HCTO HHKH H BH^oBtie oco6eHHOCTH', TpyduOmdejta JJpeenepyccKoU Jiumepamypu MHcmumymapyccKoH Jiumepamypu AH CCCP, i6 (i960), pp.208-229. B. H. AyKBaneHKO, TTcpeHs^aHHs . . . ' .

16 E. A. HeMiipoBCKHH, Hanajio KHueoneHam.aHUHHa YKpaune: Mean 0edopo6 (MocKBa:1974), pp. 79, 80.

17 T. A. BtiKOBa, 'MecTo «ByicBapfl»

KOB', H3eecmuR AH CCCP, Omd. Jium. u ns., T. 14,Bbin. 5 (1955), PP- 469-473 (P- 470-

18 R. Jakobson and W. A. Jackson, art. cit.19 KHceAeB, op. cit., p. 135.20 Society of Genealogists, 'Boyd's Inhabitants of

London', 15748, 15749.21 H. Si. rypAflH4, Mean Te6doH, KOMuccapuyc u

pe3ubeHm (ilpocAaBAb: THnorpa^na ry6epH-CKaro npaBAeHHH, 1903).

22 rypAJiH4, op. cit., p. 14.23 CodpaHue zocydapcmeeuHux zpauom u dosoeopoe,

xpannviuxcH e TocydapcmseHuou KOJIMZUU HHO-

cmpauHhix JJeji (MocKsa: B THnorpa(|)HH CeAH-BaHOBCKaro, 1813-1828), iii, pp. 455, 456.

24 Geraldine Marie Phipps, Britons in seventeenth-century Russia: a study in the origins of moderniza-tion. University of Pennsylvania Ph.D., 1971(Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International,1982). S. Konovalov, 'England and Russia:three embassies, 1662-5', Oxford SlavonicPapers., x (1962), pp. 60-104. S. Konovalov,'England and Russia: two missions, 1666-1668', Oxford Slavonic Papers^ xiii (1967), pp.47-71.

25 S. Konovalov, 'England and Russia: two mis-sions', p. 51.

26 T. S. Willan, The early history of the RussiaCompany., 1553-1603 (Manchester: ManchesterUniversity Press, 1968).

27 G. M. Phipps, op. cit., p. 218.28 Thomas Birch, A collection of State Papers of

John Thurloe (London: printed for ThomasWoodward, 1742), iii (1654-6), pp. 173, 387,601, 698.

29 Robert Latham and William Matthews (eds.), Thediary of Samuel Pepys. A new and completeedition (London: G. Bell and Sons, 1970-83),iv, 1663, p. 175.

30 P. Le Neve, Le Neve's Pedigrees of the Knightsmade by Charles II . . . (Edited by GeorgeMarshall.) Publications of the Harleian Society,viii (London, 1873), p. 169. W. A. Shaw, The

Knights of England, vol. ii (London, 1906),

P- 239-31 FypAJiH/j,, op. cit., p. 26.32 Ibid., p. 27.33 S. Konovalov, 'England and Russia: two mis-

sions', p. 58.34 Hebdon's will was proved at the Prerogative

Court of Canterbury in 1670. PROB 11/333,fol. 77.

35 O. Manning and E. Bray, The History andAntiquities of the County of Surrey . . . (London:J. White, 1804-14), iii, p. 376.

36 FypAflH^, op. cit., p. 6.37 Society of Genealogists, Pedigrees of London.,

xviii, p. 208.38 The inscription on his memorial, transcribed in

The History and Antiquities of the County ofSurrey., stating that 'he died ye 10 of June 1670,in ye 59 yeere of his age . . .', suggests that hewas born in 1612.

39 LJeHTpaAbHbiK rocy/iapcTBeHHbiH apxHB Apee-HHX aKTOB, (|). 35, roAa 1636, 11, 165-166.

40 Public Record Office, State Papers Foreign, SP91/3, fols. 56^-57''-

41 W. A. Littledale (ed.). The registers of St. Vedast,Foster Lane and of St. Michael le Quern. Publica-tions of the Harleian Society, xxix (London,1902), vol. i. Christenings, p. 41,

42 Public Record Office, Tax Returns, Eii5/2i7/78.

43 T. C. Dale, 'The inhabitants of London in 1638,edited from MS. 272 in the Lambeth Palacelibrary, I, 60' (Guildhall Library).

44 W. S. Prideaux, Memorials of the Goldsmiths'Company, 2 vols. ([London:] printed for privatecirculation [1896]), ii, pp. 120, 121.

45 G. M. Phipps, op. cit., pp. 360-4.46 FypAflH4, op. cit., p. 7.47 B. H. TpoH^KHH, CjLoeapb MOCKOBCKUX uacmepoe

30Jiomozo, cepedpRHOzo u ajiMa3Hozo de/ia XVII eexa(AeHHHrpaA: Academia, 1928-30), p. 130.

48 BecmU'KypaHmu^ 1645-1646, 1648 zz., no/i pCA-C. r i . KoTKOBa (MocKBa: Hayxa, 1980), p. 85.

49 H. W. Ludolf, Grammatica Russica (Oxford,1696). B. O. Unbegaun (ed.), Henrici WilhelmiLudolfi Grammatica Russica, Oxonii A.D.MDCXCVI (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1959).J. S. G. Simmons, 'H. W. Ludolf and theprinting of his Grammatica Russica in Oxfordin 1696', Oxford Slavonic Papers, i (1950),pp. 111-13.

50 The volume is now placed at C.i04.dd.u.

47

Page 17: TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND … · TWO EAST SLAVONIC PRIMERS: LVOV, 1574 AND MOSCOW, 1637 CHRISTINE THOMAS ... Ukrainian or Russian, but Church Slavonic, and it …