É. Apor (ed.): Codex Cumanicus. Ed. by Géza Kuun with a Prolegomena to the Codex Cumanicus by Lajos Ligeti. (Budapest Oriental Reprints, Ser. B 1.)
L. Ligeti: Prolegomena to the Codex Cumanicus
PROLEGOMENA TO THE CODEX CUMANICl'S 13 All this leads us to believe that the former conception which contributes the origin of the Codex to the Genoans, should probably be revised. The more urgent this revision appears since the hypothesis was based on the «Petrarca Codex» theory. The final answer seems to be within reach. It seems highly likely that the codex was written and compiled by Italian lay persons, perhaps by the scribes of consuls or merchants, for the use of interpreters. The role of merchants in writing of the Codex should not be exaggerated. Their business was trading with the help of interpreters, not tinkering with the compilation of Coman- Persian data. The views regarding the place of origin of the «German part» have been mentioned earlier. Let me add here that the Codex was probably not used in a single missionary monastery. The fact that at times Latin dominates besides the German glosses proves this claim. Consequently, non-German Franciscans must have contributed to the writing of the second part of the Codex. Gabain maintains (Fundamenta II, 244) that the Codex in its present form was purchased from German (and other) Franciscan friars by Italian merchants (I cannot prove this hypothesis). Anyway, there is no room for doubt that these Italians were Venetians (even if earlier Genoans might have been somehow involved) and that the Codex eventually reached Venice through their offices. As for the contents of the Codex, it has been discussed almost exclusively in terms of the second part. So far the notion has prevailed that this part was written during a lengthy period, and contains mostly religious texts in prose and verse. It was not compiled by a single person, but by several tireless German (and other ?) Franciscans. As curios were the riddles included, priceless remnants of Coman folklore and folk literature, however damaged they may be. The wordlists, and grammatical glosses were included to aid the friars in improving their knowledge of the Coman tongue. 1 7 1 7 Gabain, Fundamenta I, p. 46; II, p. "245. Even more instructive are two passages quoted by Györffy (op. cit., p. 130), one of them (121) about a priest who tells his flock that he does not know their language, and has no interpreter (til bilmen tolmac yoy). He asks them to pray to God that he might be able to learn their tongue easily. The other passage (125) speaks of a friar ignorant of the local language, who is forced to hear confessions with the help of an interpreter. The interpreter is also obliged to observe the seal of confession. It was a long way from the Franciscan friar hearing confessions through interpreters to the excellent Coman translator of the Latin hymn (it is not impossible that he was a native Coman). In any case, several persons of varying levels of Coman knowledge have to be reckoned with. Turkish barbarisms resulting from the servile translation of Persian expressions should be judged in a different way: e.g. binale etileni, Persian card muxadufi «cultellù», more precisely «cobbler's knife» (86: 5). Compound verb forms like yar) et- «to spend» (P yar) kardan), peáman boi- «to repent» (P pèSman bùdan) belong to another category. The latter type of compounds is limited in number, the ones cited here were not created by the influence of the Persian expressions of the Codex. It is remark-
