BALBÍN’S DIVA MONTIS SANCTI (1665) AND ITS VERNACULAR VERSIONS AS A TYPE OF EARLY MODERN TRANSLATIONS*

Diva Montis Sancti (1665), written by B. Balbín, is an important work on Marian pilgrimage sites. Within the background of the cultural and historical contexts, the paper compares the Latin text with its translation into Czech (Přepodivná Matka Svatohorská, 1666) by M. V. Štejer and an anonymous German version (Heiliger Berg, 1668). The language analysis of the Latin and Czech versions of the text is underpinned by examples of Štejer’s translation strategies. The article also states the function and presumed readership of the versions. In contrast with the historical / patriotic function of the original aimed at educated European elites, both translations can be in today’s terms characterised as paraphrases, accentuating the religious and educative functions and, therefore, intended for less educated readers.


Introduction
In his conclusion to Dynamics of Neo-Latin and the Vernacular, Tom Deneire states three main research traditions in Early Modern multilingualism: "Imitatio / aemulatio", "Translation studies" and "Transfer studies". 1 My article should be a contribution mainly to "Translation studies", 2 using the methodological approach that compares form, content and linguistic aspects of the original and the translated text. The aim of such an analysis is to determine the extent to which the translation is exact or free and to state the function of the work depending on its source and target language. 3 The study focuses on two translations of the Latin treatise Diva Montis Sancti, which are typical representatives of Baroque adaptations with extensive text changes.
Diva Montis Sancti, published in 1665, 4 is one of the most important works by the great Latinist Bohuslav Balbín and the culmination of his Marian hagiographic production. It was preceded by other Divae, works pertaining to Marian pilgrimage sites (Silesian place Warta Diva Wartensis and Moravian place Tuřany Diva Turzanensis). 5 Following Diva Montis Sancti, Balbín utilised the same topic in the two final books of his historical treatise Epitome rerum Bohemicarum seu Historia Boleslaviensis. 6 The religious place of the examined writing, Mons Sanctus (Svatá Hora), is located in the middle of Bohemia, adjacent to the formerly renowned mining town of Příbram. Only a year later, a Czech translation was published by the outstanding expert on Czech literary language Matěj Václav Štejer. 7 The author of the translation is not listed on the title page, nevertheless Balbín himself attributes the translation to Štejer. Balbín mentions in his catalogue of scholars called Bohemia Docta that Štejer translated the history of Mons Sanctus from Latin to Czech and he characterises this translation as an abridged summary (historia in compendium contracta). 8 The author of the German translation (Heiliger Berg), which was published two years later, remains unknown. 9 However, the German version corresponds to the Czech version in its extent and structure 10 and, thus, it is likely that the translator also used the Czech version when adapting the Latin original. 11 deals with methodological approaches in the research of Baroque translations, focusing mainly on multilingualism in the Czech lands and relations between Latin, Czech and German works. 3 This approach is close to G. Toury's methodology for descriptive translation studies. In his theoretical framework oriented to target text, he combines a linguistic comparison of original and translated versions and the wider role of the sociocultural system. His aim is to identify the translation strategies and thereby to define the norms in the translation process. Cf. Munday (2016: 174-186). 4 Balbinus (1665) -hereinafter Diva Montis Sancti. There are tens of copies preserved in Czech and foreign libraries as well; cf. for instance the library search engine WorldCat: https://www.worldcat .org/search?qt=worldcat_org_all&q=diva+montis+sancti (acc. March 31, 2020). The 2nd edition: Balbinus (1670). 5 Balbinus (1655;1658). 6 Balbinus (1673). 7 Štejer (1666)  The topic of the book Diva Montis Sancti has to be examined in a broader context of hagiographic works on the Marian theme and of literary production in Baroque Bohemia. The cult of the Virgin Mary had a unique position in the Czech lands in the 17th and 18th centuries. Pilgrimages to places dedicated to the Virgin Mary were one of the main expressions of Baroque religiousness and they took place wholly within the re-catholicisation intentions of the ruling Habsburg dynasty. A number of books were created that celebrate miraculous Marian depictions. Some of them were geographically divided registers, the most famous one was probably Atlas Marianus by Wilhelm Gumppenberg to which Bohuslav Balbín also contributed (namely to the issue from 1672). 12 Others were dedicated to individual paintings / sculptures, for instance Divae of Justus Lipsius,13 which also served as an example for Balbín. These authors not only wanted to honour the Virgin Mary but also to have an educative impact on a broad range of readership since the books were published in multilingual versions (in bilingual Bohemia, besides Latin, usually also in Czech and German languages). 14 The inner structure of the treatises did not differ much. In books dedicated to one specific pilgrimage site, an inscription and a foreword were usually followed by a legend about the origins of the place and its name, the history of the site and its surroundings and a description of the miraculous depiction. The major part of the book is then dedicated to miracles that subsequently happened.
Diva Montis Sancti represents the peak of this type of hagiographic literature dedicated to a single pilgrimage site. Its author, Jesuit Bohuslav Balbín (1621-1688), 15 was appreciated by the Bohemian and European intellectual elites as an educator, poet, literary scholar, toponymist, hagiographer, historian and a staunch patriot. All of his books were written in Latin; the only Czech sentence (Saint Wenceslas' apostrophe: Nedej zahynouti nám i budoucím! [Don't let us and our posterity perish!]) concludes his treatise about the defence of the Czech language generally called Dissertatio apologetica. 16 For his extensive historical work, Balbín was called the "Bohemian Livy". The translator of the Czech version, Jesuit Matěj Václav Štejer (1630-1692), 17 was a teacher, preacher, missionary, translator of the New Testament and religious literature and an author of Czech treatises. He wrote inter alia a popular language handbook called Žáček (Pupil), 18 which has summarised the standard language norm of that time. In the period 1664-1666, he resided at Svatá Hora where he probably met with Balbín several times. Unfortunately, there is no evidence as to whether they discussed the translation of Diva Montis Sancti together or not. At any rate, these two authors have created a very important work for Czech literary history, which also illustrates the social situation and the state of religiousness in Baroque Bohemia. The main part of this article constitutes a comparison of the language variations of the treatise.

Form of the book
The Latin treatise is almost twice as long as the vernacular versions. When translating Balbín's original, the translators adjusted it greatly; they left out many historical and geographical passages, sometimes even whole sections or chapters, and concentrated mainly on the miracles. The vernacular versions of the treatise have therefore predominantly religious character. A different format and number of pages show that both the Czech and German versions are almost half the size, the German even smaller, 19 and thanks to it, readers could probably keep it at hand and carry it with them during their pilgrimages to Svatá Hora to remind them of the miracles right on the spot.
All three versions contain engravings depicting the statue of Sacromontana Virgin Mary although in a different illustration, according to the printing block available in the printing house. An interesting observation was made with other engravings in the Latin and Czech treatises, namely about the sanctuary. Although both versions were published only one year apart, in the Latin version the church at Svatá Hora is depicted in its original form as a small chapel, whereas in the Czech version it is depicted in its current form as a large Baroque church, resulting from a reconstruction led by Carlo Lurago. This latter engraving is probably one of the newest depictions, most likely based on architectural plans than on the actual appearance of the Svatá Hora complex. Work on the extensive reconstruction was taking place at the time when both books were written, namely in the period 1659-1673.
In terms of the typographic layout of the books, the Latin core text is accompanied by frequent marginalia. Through them Balbín supplies links, divides the text into subchapters, numbers individual events, gives explanations, adds Czech names or summarises the paragraph content. These and other formal adjustments ensure better orientation in the text. In both translations, marginalia are omitted, the text is rarely divided into paragraphs and the abridged text is thus difficult to navigate through. The reasoning for this was probably the author's or printer's attempt to save space. In the marginalia, Balbín also lists sources of his quotes from classical authors, the Bible, medieval authorities and contemporary writers, which he uses in the text as examples, parallels or as a basis for reflections. The translators do not list the sources, not even in the plain text; moreover they often exclude the reflections entirely. This could have resulted from the assumption that these quotations and reflections neither add to the main story line, nor pertain directly to the miracles, and, thus, they might distract the readers from the principal topic.
The Latin text is accompanied by verses, in the form of both short and longer epigrams, which conclude almost every chapter. Their topics are a celebration of the Virgin Mary and her mercifulness, the flourishing of Svatá Hora, devotional praise or poetic plays. 20 However, not all of them are necessarily written by Balbín. 21 All these epigrams are omitted in both the Czech and German texts; nevertheless the German translator adds other verses / Marian litanies at the end of each book, in order to create a more compact hagiographic work. 22

Structure and content
As a typical foreword, all versions use a dedication, the traditional form for expressing honour and thanks to the donors, which were different for each book version. 23 In the Latin Epistola dedicatoria, Balbín additionally includes historical comments or reflections on the dedication genre and outlines how he has divided the entire work (origines et miracula). The German version inserts only a short conventional dedication (2 pages). The Czech translation attaches after its dedication a foreword to reader, concluded by an important note in which Štejer formulates the main principles of his translation method -paraphrased from Czech he says: "The translator of this History wanted it to be well understood by common people. Hence he intentionally omitted verses and other means of high style and, where necessary, added explanations for the readers. " 24 The text of the original is divided into five books (libri). In the first two (called origines), Balbín narrates the history of Svatá Hora, its miraculous statuettes, describes the Svatá Hora's complex, chapel, hermitage and healing spring, as well as the town of Příbram and its surroundings. He depicts legends and the most important historic events and he describes at length the silver mines, including such details as a description of a machine used for draining the water from the mines. 25 The first book -which consists of general considerations of miracles, holy sites, the meaning of pilgrimages and of worshipping miraculous statuettes -was not included in the translations. From the second book, the vernacular versions left out everything that was not closely connected to Svatá Hora (details about the town of Příbram, silver mines, mining machinery etc.). The German translator only inserted a brief summary of the history of the town Příbram as an introduction to the whole book. 26 The next three books are dedicated to the miracles of the Virgin Mary (miracula) and -as a pendant -followed by benefactions of grateful believers: devotional offerings, precious gifts for Svatá Hora, financed constructions and works of art. The miracles are thematically divided: transformations of the statuette (tears, sweat or blood announcing future disasters), light and sound phenomena (rays around the chapel, bells tolling on their own) and miraculous healings of various diseases. Balbín always consistently lists his sources in order to put a stamp of historic work on his treatise. In these books, the translations deviate from the original to a much lesser extent. The translators leave out some quotations, philosophical and reflective passages or Latin and Greek verses. However, they never shorten the text to the detriment of the story; in some passages they even broaden it, correct information that is no longer up-to-date or add new pieces of information. 27 In the epilogue, the Czech translator skips over Balbín's extensive digression into the topic of classical heroes and he connects only the introduction and the conclusion about the never ending mercifulness of the Virgin Mary. The Beschluß of the German translation consists only of few verses invocating the Holy Mother, 28 which finally conclude the last chapter.
The next two appendices of the Latin treatise (topographic and genealogical) are left out in the vernacular versions, certainly for the reason that they deviate too much from the hagiographic topic and miracles. Nevertheless, the Czech translation adds as an attachment a discourse of Georgius Crugerius about the affection of the Virgin Mary towards the Czech people and, vice versa, the affection of the Czech people for the Virgin Mary, 29 which is originally inserted in the first book of Diva Montis Sancti. 30 Although this discourse does not relate to Svatá Hora and the miracles themselves, it can represent an appropriate conclusion of the whole book.

Language and style
In the Latin original, there are prevailing language-stylistic elements of humanistic Latin typical for Bohemia of the 17th and 18th centuries -so called "Baroque humanism". 31 The Czech text uses a good standard of Baroque language norms, reasoned from the fact that Štejer was not only a translator but also an author of several language handbooks. Our linguistic analysis was concentrated only on the Latin and Czech texts 32 and compared both the lowest text units (words and terms), set phrases and constructions, as well as entire clauses, sentences and more extensive passages.
Štejer translated the Latin original rather freely, i.e. he focused mainly on the narrative of the text, which he transformed into a simple and easy-to-understand manner.  Hejnic (1974); Svatoš (2000). 32 A detailed analysis of the German translation is a task for future research.

Omissions
The translator leaves out rhetorical adornments, especially these forming whole sentences, omits additional information or rhetorical questions. He skips historical or literary digressions, simplifies long clauses and searches for suitable phrases that allow him to substitute an entire sentence while preserving the substance of the original. This may be explained by the assumption that uneducated recipients will perceive the text only by listening.

Additions
On the other hand, he inserts explanations or repeats certain information in order to facilitate understanding. He amplifies the story for the sake of better continuity, fluency and clarity. In some places, he inserts his own reflections, ideas or observations into the text, as well as effective metaphors, similes or poetical ornaments, which adds interest to the translation and makes it more gripping for the readers. The Czech word order often remains influenced by the Latin (for instance a verb at the end, hyperbaton 67 or postposition of adjectives) and, following the Latin example, the Czech text is divided by rhetorical punctuation. The translator uses many participles 68 as a means of condensing the text and even infinitive phrases can be found, which is untypical for the Czech language. 69 On the contrary, the Latin text is retrospectively influenced by Czech, which is a quite uncommon aspect. There are, for example, Czech toponyms, explanations or allusions in the marginalia. Perhaps most interesting is a linguistic pun pertaining to the name of the Czech hermit called Procházka (whose name means a "walk" in Czech) in a short epigram:

Conclusion
From the formal part of the comparison above it follows that the vernacular versions of the treatise cannot be considered as translations within today's meaning of the word. They present a selection, i.e. a paraphrase / adaptation, 71 done with a different intention and for a different readership than the Latin original. In the Latin work, the ratios between hagiographic elements and other parts, mainly historic, topographic and genealogical, is balanced, whereas the translations focus purely on the miracles because they offer faith in healing, mercifulness and the protection of the Virgin Mary to common readers. This is the reason why all digressions, philosophical, historic and patriotic passages, as well as verses and rhetorical adornments, are left out in the translations.
The languages of the different versions also refer to the intended recipients. Balbín's book is comprehensible only to a reader who commands Latin and who is capable of appreciating the author's style of narration, which involves long digressions, expert descriptions, quotations from Greek and Latin works, and a high stylistic level of text. This treatise was intended for the educated European elites and, besides a promotion of the Cult of the Virgin Mary, it has informative, historical-educational and patriotic functions, not overlooking its aesthetic function as well.
The Czech and German vernacular versions, on the other hand, make the text accessible for local readers or listeners. The translations are abridged with respect to the content and the topic of the original and omit large parts of the text. They leave out not only the quotes by classical authors but also a number of biblical quotes or parallels and thus significantly shift Balbín's style of narration. In the translations, the religious experiences result mainly from miracles, cult objects and acts. However, the detailed language analysis of the Czech translation shows Štejer's deep understanding of the original and a great feeling for the language. He avoids literal set phrases, yet interprets faithfully the essence and the meaning of the story. He transposes the Latin text with the same richness and aptness, adds plasticity to the text through his own complements and uses Baroque figurativeness, all of which are necessary elements for capturing the attention of common readers. The function of both translations is especially religious-educative and they are primarily intended for lower social classes.
This submitted article will hopefully serve as a component for a larger synthesis of the typology of Baroque translations in the Czech lands during the 17th and 18th century. Such a summary outline cannot be done without primary form, content and linguistic comparisons of the originals and the translations, which determine the function of the works and their intended readership. Further work is needed to draw up a comprehensive list and classification of the translation output. These pebbles in the mosaic will finally help to create a picture of Early Modern multilingual dynamics.