Rankraštinių ir spausdintinių LDK XVI-XVII a. knygų pasaulis : sąsajos ir sankirtos

LTStraipsnis skiriamas vienai iš LDK knygos istorijos problemų – rankraštinės ir spausdintinės knygos santykiui XVI a. antroje pusėje–XVII amžiuje. Tyrimo šaltiniu tapo Lietuvos mokslų akademijos Vrublevskių bibliotekos Rankraščių skyriuje saugomi rankraštiniai kodeksai, perrašyti LDK aptariamu laikotarpiu. Straipsnyje stengiamasi atskleisti rankraščių ir spausdintinių knygų architektonikos panašumus ir savitumus; išnagrinėti Graikų katalikų bažnyčiai naujai sudaromas rankraštines knygas; atsakyti į klausimą, ar visus XVII a. tekstus, nuorašus, sujungtus kodekso forma, galime vadinti rankraštine knyga. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Rankraštinė knyga; Spausdintinė knyga; Kirilika; Lietuvos Didžioji Kunigaikštystė (LDK; Grand Duchy of Lithuania; GDL); 16 amžius; 17 amžius; Unitai; Manuscripts; Printed books; Cyrilic; 16th c.; 17th c.; Uniates.

ENWhen researching the history of book culture, it is not only important to understand the stages of its development (manuscript, printed and electronic books) but the uniting and differentiating factors of the these stages as well. The age of manuscript book in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL) is considered to have taken place from the 13th to the first half of the 16th century, while the history of printed book began at the junction between the 15th–16th centuries, also known as the time period when the first printing-house in the GDL was established. Although, according to scientific literature, manuscript books were still functional during the era of printed books, little attention was paid to manuscripts in this context. It is not known how many manuscript books might have been transcribed between the second half of the 16th and early 18th century. This article aims to uncover what knowledge about manuscript books of the time period has been acquired so far, whether the traditional manufacturing style of manuscript books was retained or whether it was brought closer to the one applied to printed books. The topic of whether all objects in form of a codex should be considered manuscript books is looked into as well. The books currently stored in the Manuscript department of the Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Science were selected as the object of this inquiry. Based on updated dating, 112 exemplars from the libraries of Suprasl, Zhyrovichy, Markov and other monasteries were selected and studied de visu from the perspective of Book Science. The results obtained are only preliminary due to the limited number of studied samples. They are, however, sufficient to formulate further directions of research. The entirety of books in the GDL was influenced by political, cultural and religious events of the period as well as by the requirements for official and private communication.Manuscript books written in Latin were not being transcribed due to strict censorship imposed by the Catholic Church, therefore the majority or remaining exemplars are written in Cyrillic for Orthodox and Uniate Churches. After comparing manuscript and printed books from the Books Science point of view, it is evident that transcription process was moving in a two-way manner from the mid-16th up to the 17th century. Printed books were either prepared and printed based solely on manuscripts held in the libraries of monasteries or were copied by hand in the form of codices. New liturgical books for Uniates, various secular translations and collections of individual writings (newly created as well as transcribed) were being issued in the same time period. Despite difficult historical circumstances, two large centres of manuscript books survived in the GDL – the monasteries of Zhyrovichy and Surpasl. The inner structure of manuscript books had changed very slowly since the end of the 16th century and only adjustments in individual characteristics were noticeable. If the first prints were deliberately made to resemble manuscript books, in the mid of 17th century scribers and illuminators endeavoured to create manuscript books which would look as similar to printed books as possible. Therefore, it may be concluded that the manufacturing tradition of manuscript books was retained and new and functional elements of printed structures were successfully adapted for use in manuscripts. However, this resulted in a divide between manuscript books dedicated for public communication and capturing texts of personal nature. The latter provided foundation for egodocuments in the form of codices and are not considered manuscript books in consequence. [From the publication]

• Kelionių į Lietuvą XV-XIX a. pradžioje aprašymai: egodokumentalumo ir tipologijos problema / Arvydas Pacevičius. Knygotyra. 2023, t. 81, p. 7-37.
• XIX a. antrosios pusės asmeniniai tekstų rinkiniai ir jų istorinis kontekstas / Jurgita Ūsaitytė. Tautosakos darbai 2018, 55, p. 107-133.
• XVIII a. antrosios pusės Vilniaus spaustuvininkų ornamentai kaip knygos istorijos šaltinis / Ina Kažuro. Knygotyra. 2019, t. 73, p. 26-61.