Anton Pritula (St.

Petersburg)

Syroturcica:
A Bilingual Poem from the Mongol Time

Among the large number of academic publications by Professor Martin Tamcke

there are some dealing with the Christianization of the Mongols and the role of
Christianity during the Mongol rule.1 With the present article in honour of Profes-
sor Tamcke, I want to stimulate the conversation about our joint field of interest by
bringing to attention a bilingual poem from the Mongol time which has not been
edited so far.
The text is uncommon and peculiar in many respects, and thus several scholars
already have taken notice of it. First, it was mentioned by Alphonse Mingana in his
study of the spread of Christianity in the Central Asia.2 A more detailed descrip-
tion was offered by Wilhelm Heffening.3 In an article on the Syro-Turkic liturgical
texts, based mainly on the manuscript Mingana Sir. 51 (though he mentioned the
Cambridge mss. Add. 2041, Add. 2820, Add. 2055 as well), he suggested a brief
analysis of the linguistic and metrical features of the poem.4 Later, several scholars
dealt with this text in their studies.5
In the manuscripts, the poetic text being published below is always connected
with the name of Ḫāmīs bar Qardāḫē, an East Syrian poet from the Arbela literary
circle of late 13th / early 14th century. The heritage of this outstanding literate did
not receive much interest of scholars until recently; however, in the last decade
several articles dealing with different aspects of his works were published.6

1 M. Tamcke, “Der Gebrauch der Bibel bei den nestorianischen Mongolen”, in Bibelauslegung
und Gruppenidentität, ed. H.-O. Kvist (Åbo: Åbo Akademis Forlag, 1992), 136–149.
2 A. Mingana, “The Early Spread of Christianity in Central Asia and the Far East: A New Docu-
ment”, Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 9, no. 2 (1925): 338.
3 W. Heffening, “Liturgische Texte der Nestorianer und Jakobiten in Süd-Türkischen
Mundarten”, Oriens Christianus 11 [33] (1936): 232–235.
4 Ibid., 233.
5 P.G. Borbone, Un ambassadeur du Khan Argun en Occident: Histoire de Mar Yahballaha III et de
Rabban Sauma (1281–1317) (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2008), 55; A. Mengozzi, “The History of Garshuni
as a Writing System: Evidence from the Rabbula Codex”, in Camsemud: Proceedings of the 13th
Italian Meeting of Afro-Asiatic Linguistics, ed. F.M. Fales & G.F. Grassi (Padova: Sar-
gon, 2010), 297–304, 297, n. 1 & 2.
6 D. Taylor, “‘Your Sweet Saliva is the Living Wine’: Drink, Desire, and Devotion in the Syriac
346 Anton Pritula

The most detailed review of the existing manuscripts of the poems, ascribed to
Ḫāmīs, was published by Alessandro Mengozzi, according to whom this text col-
lection appeared in the 14th century.7 In his article, Mengozzi also mentions the
manuscripts of the work under discussion: Vatican Borg. Syr. 33 (f. 240v–242v),
supposedly from the 15th cent., and Cambridge Add. 2041, from the 18th cent.; Add.
2820, from 1882; Add. 2055, and also Birmingham Mingana Sir. 51. The scholar
points out that in most of the manuscripts this text is placed in the section of
sōgītās of Ḫāmīs’ book.
All the Syriac stanzas, in the form of quatrains, are composed here in 7-7-8-8
meter. Each of them has its own internal rhyme, in a constant scheme, i.e. in every
first, second and last verse (ааха). In the Turkic stanzas the verses have an irregu-
lar meter variation from eight up to ten syllables. The rhyming is arranged here in
the mode ааbb, except for stanza 10, which, still, could be a scribal error.
In the Turkic translation of the Syriac original, one can meet a lot of Syricisms,
such as br marym (‘the son of Mary’), a stable phrase used in the texts. To the same
category the abbreviation wšar for the Syriac wšrkʾ (etc.) may be added, as well as
ʿwōšaʿn (‘palm twigs’). Besides, in the refrain, typical for Syriac, the particle d is
used, in this case as a subjunctive conjunction. Such a broad use of borrowings,
both in vocabulary and syntax, is common for translated texts of religious charac-
ter, in particular for liturgical ones, where the closeness to the original might have
been of great importance.

Wine songs of Khāmīs bar Qardāhē”, in The Syriac Renaissance, ed. H.G.B. Teule, C.F. Tauwinkl,
B. ter Haar Romeny & J.J. van Ginkel (Leuven: Peeters, 2010), 31–52; A. Mengozzi, “The Kṯāvā of
Khamis bar Qardahe: Preliminary Remarks on the History of the Text”, in Syriac Encouters, the
proceedings of the Sixth North American Syriac Symposium. Duke University, Durham, North Caroli-
na, June 26–29, 2011 (forthcoming); A. Barotto, P. Riberi, M. Volpicelli & A. Mengozzi, “La verità
visibile nella natura e nella scrittura. Sul baco da seta di Khamis Bar Qardaḥe (fine del XIII seco-
lo)”, Kervan: Rivista Internazionale di studii afroasiatici 13/14 (2011): 47–55; A. Mengozzi, “Persische
Lyrik in syrischem Gewand: Vierzeiler aus dem Buch des Khamis bar Qardaḥe (Ende 13. Jh.)”, in
Geschichte, Theologie und Kultur des syrischen Christentums. Beiträge zum 7. Deutschen Syrologie-
Symposium in Göttingen, Dezember 2011, ed. M. Tamcke & S. Grebenstein (Wiesbaden: Harras-
sowitz, 2014), 155–176. I express my gratitude to Alessandro for sharing his unpublished
works. — Of my own works, I may mention the following titles: А.Д. Притула, “X̮ āмӣс бар
Ḳардāx̣ ē, восточносирийский поэт конца XIII в.” Cимвол 61. (2012): 303–317; “Ḵāмӣс бар
Ḳардāx̣ ē (кон. XIII в.) и арбельский литературный круг”, Христианский Восток 6 [XII]
(2013), 216–243; “Бар ‛Эб̱рōйō, X̮ āмӣс бар Ḳардāx̣ ē: из Ниневии в Фарс”, in Сборник в честь В.
А. Лившица (forthcoming); “Zwei Gedichte des Ḫāmīs bar Qardāḥē: Ein Hochgesang zu Ehren
von Bar ʿEbrōyō und ein Wein-Gedicht für die Khan-Residenz”, in Geschichte, Theologie und Kul-
tur des syrischen Christentums, ed. Tamcke & Grebenstein, 315–328.
7 Cf. Mengozzi, “The Kṯāvā of Khamis bar Qardahe” (see above, n. 6).
 Syroturcica: A Bilingual Poem from the Mongol Time 347

Nevertheless, some terms used in the Turkic version testify an opposite tenden-
cy: a strong adaptation of the text to the cultural tradition of the language into
which it is translated. An example of such an approach is also provided by transla-
tions of the Holy Scriptures into Persian, made in the Mongol time.8 Therefore, it is
not amazing that the name Jesus is rendered in the Turkic text in a usual Islamic
way: ʿĪsā (ʿyīsʾā ), which is used as some kind of refrain in the last verse of each
stanza. In the Syriac version, nevertheless, it corresponds not to the name, but
rather to the word messiah (Syr. mšīḥā, Ar. masīḥ ). The Arabic šayṭān (šāyṭān ) in
the Turkic version (stanza 3), used in the Islamic sphere, corresponds to the Syriac
K‫ـــ ܿ ܼ?ـ*ܨ‬1‫‘( ܿܐ ܼ!ـ‬slanderer’). The word kalīsā (klyīsʾā ), also found in the Turkic version
(stanza 11), is a typical term for designating а сhurch in Persian. It is this word that
Rašīd al-Dīn used to describe an East Syrian chapel found by Duquz Hkatun, Hu-
lagu Khan’s wife, in the Ilkhanids’ summer residence on the mount of Ālā-Ṭāq in
Iranian Azerbaijan.9 This church still existed after the death of its founder (1265),
and at least until 1291 liturgy with participation of the patriarch of the East Syrian
Church were taking place there. In such churches, royal liturgies might have taken
palce, as it follows from his verses.10
Toponyms such as Bethlehem (stanza 1) and Jordan (stanza 2), present in the
Syriac text, are omitted in the Turkic one, probably because they were not familiar
for the Turkic audience. A strong discrepancy with the Syriac original is notable
also in the refrain, which, probably, was also adapted to the taste of the Turkic au-
dience. It is very simple, expressiv, with a division, emphasizing a rhythmic repeti-
tion: zeh marym. pāk marym. nwūr marym. šāhmarwāryīd dmrym dwōḡmyīš. The Per-
sian word šāhmarwāryīd (‘King perl’) is an image commonly used in the poetic tra-
dition of the Iranian circle, and the first part of this composit (šāh ) used to mean
not necessarily an attribute of a king, but rather an extraordinary quality of an ob-
ject, for instance šāhkār (‘masterpiece’, literally ‘king’s work’).
No less discrepancies with the Syriac original can be found in the ‘Stanzas of
the Church’ (stanza 11): in the third verse instead of “body and blood, bestown to
the Church” reads: nāmāz qyīlmyīš krmatlr gwōrsatmyīš (“You did namaz and demon-
strated miracles”). Both terms were in use in Islamic circles: nāmāz for ‘prayer’ and

8 Cf. А.Д. Притула, “Христианство и персидская книжность XIII–XVII вв.”, Православный

Палестинский сборник 38 [101] (2004): 15, 28, 37.
9 P.G. Borbone & A. Orengo, “Stato e chiesa nell’Iran Ilkhanide. La chiesa alla corte di Arghon
nelle fonti siriache e armene”, Egitto e Vicino Oriente XXIX (2006): 325–337, 335.
10 See Taylor, “‘Your Sweet Saliva is the Living Wine’”, 48; Mengozzi, “The Kṯāvā of Khamis bar
Qardahe”; Притула, “Ḵāмӣс Бар Ḳардāхē (кон. XIII в.) и арбельский литературный
круг”, 224–225.
348 Anton Pritula

karamat to designate miracles done by prophets. It is evident that the text being
discussed is addressed to a community that lived in the Islamic surrounding.
The simplicity and a somehow primitive style of the Turkic part is quite no-
table. It is also relevant to the Syriac original, which was probably specifically
composed to be translated. Nevertheless, this fact does not let me doubt the au-
thorship of Ḫāmīs, whose works are sometimes of extreme complexity and refine-
ment. In the period being discussed (late 13th to early 14th cent.), the Syriac poetry
reached a level in which the genre tasks were determining the style that was to be
chosen. Thus, the liturgical pieces by this author, composed for a Church choir, are
in strong contrast to his elite works. Sometimes, they surpass in simplicity even
the samples of this genre composed by earlier poets. One could suppose that the
author aimed to, or even got an order to, compose a hymnological piece corre-
sponding to the taste of the Turks. Generally, the quatrains on different subjects,
indisputably a Persian influence, reflect the mainstream of the poetic fashion of the
period; in the book of Ḫāmīs, they count up to several sections.11
It is not known whether the author of the Syriac text was at the same time the
translator. It seems more likely that this work was made by another writer, of Tur-
kic origin, possibly, being in contact with Ḫāmīs. The text might have been per-
formed in both languages. Using the refrain br marym (‘the son of Mary’) at the
end of each verse seems to be ingenious for this purpose – the combination, being
reproduced in Turkic, creates an impression of the textual unity of both parts. Evi-
dently, each stanza forms a troparion, i.e. it had to be performed by the choir on
definite holidays in both languages in turn.
We will try to define, based on linguistic data, to which regional subgroup of
the Turkic family the addressees of this text could belong. Heffening, who studied
the manuscript Mingana Syr. 51, supposed that the text had been composed in
Azerbainjani language / dialect (Azeri );12 however, he did not explain how he came
to this conclusion. I would try to list some linguistic features, mentioning in ad-
vance that my conclusions support Heffening’s suggestion:
1) The numeral qyīrḫ (‘forty’) is written with the rukkāḵā sign, indicating spi-
rantization in this word, which is a feature of Azeri. Chagatai (old Uzbek) has a fi-
nal occlusive,13 and Uiguric would have a reduction of r in this word.14

11 These quatrains are published in Mengozzi, “Persische Lyrik in syrischem Gewand” (see n. 6).
12 Heffening, “Liturgische Texte der Nestorianer und Jakobiten in Süd-Türkischen” (n. 3), 232.
13 А.М. Щербак, Грамматика староузбекского языка (Изд-Во Академии Наук СCCP,
1962), 137.
14 Этимологический словарь тюркских языков: Общетюркские и межтюркские основы на
 Syroturcica: A Bilingual Poem from the Mongol Time 349

2) The verbs with g in the anlaut are impossible, for instance, in Chagatai,15 but
typical for Azeri.
3) Furthermore, typical for Azeri is the dative with a flexion -а/ǝ meaning the
final point of movement (see, for instance, stanza 4: qwūdsʾā gyīrmyīš, ‘he came to
Jerusalem’).16
Undoubtedly, it is not correct to speak about a linguistic ‘separation’ of Azeri in
such an early period; it is accepted that this happened in the 16th century. Never-
theless, there are some reasons to suggest that the Turkic part of the text being dis-
cussed was written in a dialect within the South-Western (Oghuz) group of the
Turkic languages, to which modern Turkish, Azeri and Turkmani belong. The main
classifying feature of its western, Oghuz-Seljuq subgroup, is spirantization of q.17
The variation qïrq~qïrḫ is noted already in the Oghuz language of 10th to 11th cen-
turies.18 One more feature of this group is the already mentioned dative ending -а.19
The migration of the western Oghuz subgroup to the Near East and Anatolia
from Central Asia took place in the 11th to 13th centuries. By that time, they adapt-
ed Islam, which resulted in a penetration of their language by Arabic and Persian
loan words. Therefore, it is not amazing that it was actively used in the text. Proba-
bly, some parts of those migrants were Christians, presumably converted from Is-
lam at the Ilkhanids’ time when conversion was possible. For the mentioned rea-
sons, the “famous one” referred to in the title of the poem should rule out from the
possible addressees’ circle the famous Christians from the East-Turkic area, like
Doquz Khatun, Hulagu’s wife,20 or patriarch Jahbalaha III (1281–1317), Uighur by
origin. The Turkic cliff-climbers qayāčī, that were used by the Ilkhanid to storm
mountain fortresses, were a Christian group based in Arbela, the native town of
Ḫāmīs;21 its infidelity to the administration lead to the massacre of the Christians
in this city in 1310. But if the evidence of the contemporaries is correct, they came

букву “Қ”, ed. Л.С. Левитская, А.В. Дыбо & В.И. Рассадин (Москва: Наука, 2000), 236–237.
15 Щербак, Грамматика староузбекского языка, 81.
16 М.Ш. Ширалиев & Э.В. Севортян (ред.), Грамматика азербайджанского языка. фонетика,
морфология и синтаксис (Баку: Элм, 1971), 45–46.
17 Э.А. Грунина, “Огузский язык X–XI вв.”, in Языки мира. Тюркские языки, ed.
Э.Р. Тенишев (Москва: Индрик, 1997), 85.
18 Ibid., 87.
19 Н.З. Гаджиева, “Тюркские языки”, in Языки мира. Тюркские языки, ed. Тенишев, 20, n. 16.
20 Although she was Kerait, i.e. originated from a Mongol tribe, the extend of Turkization of this
group probably was very high.
21 P.G. Borbone, “Syroturcica 3. Hülegü’s Rock-climbers: a Short-lived Turkic Word in 13th–14th
Century Syriac Historical Writing”, in Studies in Turkic Philology. Festschrift in Honour of the 80th
Birthday of Professor Geng Shimin, ed. Z. Dingjing & A. Yakup (Beijing: Minzu, 2009), 290–291.
350 Anton Pritula

to the Near East together with the Mongols from Eastern Turkestan and were es-
caping contacts with Muslims, which they treated hostile. Such a text would have
been totally incomprehensive, at least its vocabulary.
Beside the text published below, a number of Christian liturgical texts of West-
Turkic circle (Turkish Garshuni) are known,22 which should be distinguished from
East-Turkic texts (East Turkestan, in particular the Bulaik monastery). To compare
the text with the contemporary group of Syro-Turkica from the Eastern Turkestan,
one could define the following features in common: In both groups two opposite
tendencies may be traced – on the one hand, the influence of the Syriac original,
going sometimes as far as the syntax; and on the other hand, an attempt of adjust-
ment to the local religious tradition. In the case of the Turkestan texts it is Bud-
dhism which is reflected in the religious terms used in the Christian texts.23
One more important difference of those two groups is that the Turkestani Syro-
Turkic texts were created in the outskirts of the Syriac tradition, and by the middle
of the 14th century demonstrate loosing the connection to it. That resulted in a
great number of mistakes in the Syriac words, as demonstrated by Mark Dickens.24
The western group in turn existed in the center of this tradition and was just a
compliment in the Syriac liturgical manuscripts. And it was the Turkic part that
was very often not comprehensible for the scribe. This could be a possible explana-
tion of the subtitle in Mongolian (0‫ــ‬/‫ــ‬1‫ــ‬B(‫ــ‬Z‫ــ‬+). The group of people being the ad-
dressee of the text was probably at the Ilkhanid’s service, but the details were not

22 Such as several hymns in the manuscripts Mingana 520, Mingana 184, Mingana 469 (cf.
Heffening, “Liturgische Texte der Nestorianer und Jakobiten in Süd-Türkischen”, 232). See also
H. Younansardaroud, “Die türkischen Texte aus dem Buch ‘Manuel de Piété’ von Paul Bedjan
(1893)”, in Studia Semitica et Semitohamitica. Festschrift für Rainer Voigt anläßlich seines 60.
Geburtstages am 17. Januar 2004, ed. B. Burtea, J. Tropper & H. Younansardaroud (Münster: Ugar-
it, 2005), 489–525. Besides, the bibliography on this text group can be found in the article by Men-
gozzi: “The History of Garshuni as a Writing System”, 297, n. 2 (see above, n. 5). Different tradi-
tions of garshuni are also being discussed in an issue of the journal Hugoye : M. Dehqan & A.
Mengozzi, “A Kurdish Garshuni Poem by David of Barazne (19th Century)”, Hugoye 17, no. 1
(2014): 53–79; H. Takahashi, “Armenian Garshuni: An Overview of the Known Mater-
ial”, Hugoye 17, no. 1 (2014): 81–117.
23 M. Dickens, “Syro-Uigurica II: Syriac Passages in U338 from Turfan”, Hugoye 16, no. 2 (2013):
309; P. Zieme, “Notes on a bilingual prayer book from Bulayık”, in Hidden Treasures and Intercul-
tural Encounters: Studies on East Syriac Christianity in China and Central Asia, ed. D.W. Winkler &
L. Tang (Wien: Lit, 2009), 167–180.
24 M. Dickens, “Multilingual Christian Manuscripts from Turfan”, Journal of the Canadian Socie-
ty for Syriac Studies 9 (2009): 22–42. See esp. 33: “This text demonstrates that the monks at a later
stage of the community were far more comfortable with Uyghur script than Syriac script, so they
transliterated the Psalter and other liturgical texts from the latter into the former.”
 Syroturcica: A Bilingual Poem from the Mongol Time 351

known to the scribe. In fact, this text has nothing to do with Mogolistan, despite
Mingana’s suggestion,25 as the West-Turkic features are evident here.
Unfortunately, at the present stage most of the existing manuscripts, mentioned
above, were not available to me; thus, a critical edition of this text is not possible
for now. For this publication, I have used Borg. Syr. 33.
While rendering the Turkic part in this publication, I have emloyed a transliter-
ation, although the original vocalization is retained and placed in the lower regis-
ter of the line. Such combining of transcription and transliteration was reasoned
by uncertainty of the Syriac vocalization system, in particular for Turkic.
A special grapheme č /c in the Turkic stanzas is retained in the (‫ )ܜ‬and
transcribed as č. Other additional sounds found in that part of the text are ‫ ܼܟ‬ḫ and
‫ ܼܓ‬ḡ.

25 Mingana, “The Early Spread of Christianity in Central Asia and the Far East”, 338, n. 2.
352 Anton Pritula

Edition
ܿ ܿ
Iܼ /B ܼ ,L/+.! ‫*ܢ‬-ܵ ܿRU+
ܼ ([ ܸ [f. 240v] In the name of our Lord we are
w/Z! 0LV1Z9
ܵ0S‫ܘܬܪ‬ /7S‫ܕ‬
ܿ 0/ܵEOH‫(ܪ‬X+
ܼ ‫ ܵ܀‬K‫( ܿܬ‬F*ܼ +O-‫ܕ‬ writing a sōgītā about the famous one,
ܼ ܵ ܵ
0S‫ ܵ܀ ܼܬܪ‬0QL- composed by the late teacher Ḫāmīs.
݂ RH*- *+ ݂ RH*- *+ 0/F(S‫ ݂ ܘ‬0/ܵ 1Bܼ (Z+
ܼ One stanza in Syriac, and one stanza in
ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬KJ9‫* ܐ‬+ Mongolian; and a refrain: Son of Mary,
RH*- ‫ܬ‬O1
‫ ܀܀܀‬Son of Mary! Son of God, born by Mary!
̈ [1] Stanzas of Christmas
‫ ܀‬EO1H‫ ܕ‬0S‫ܬܪ‬

ܿ ܿ 0/H‫(ܪ‬X+ In Syriac
. R‫ـــــ‬H*- ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ܼ ,‫ــ‬9 O1‫ــــ‬H‫ܬ‬ ܼ ‫ ܸܐ‬The Son of Mary was born for us
. R‫ــ‬H*-
ܿ ܿ
ܼ *+ܼ RQ‫ـ‬9 ܸ ̈ .ܼ /ܹ + (A‫ـــ‬+
ܼ ܵ in Bethlehem, Son of Mary.
. ‫ܬܗ‬Oܼ Aܼ [ܸ ܿ *?HP‫ـ‬9 ܼ 04ܵ (ܼ A‫ــ‬-
ܼ ܿ‫ ܘ ܿ ܸܐ ܼܬܘ‬And the mages came with respect and
. R‫ــ‬H*- ܼ ‫ܬ‬O1ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Q/U- ܼ 0Y1-‫ܕ‬ ܼ worship / to Christ the King, born by
Mary.

ܿ 4‫ܘ‬
0!* ܿ RH*- *+ m8‫ ܐ‬Followed by: Son of Mary etc. …
ܼ ܸ

ܿ ܿ 0/1B(Z+ ܵ In Mongolian
. R‫ــ‬H*- ܼ *ܿ +ܼ l/Z ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܼܕܘ‬0‫ــ‬LBܼ ‫ ܼܕܘ‬dw ḡ nʾ dw ḡmy š br m rym.
ū ā ō ī

. RH*-
ܿ a

ܼ *+ܼ lܵ /Z ܼ ܵ AH
ܼ ‫(ܢ‬B ܿ ܼ ܿ 6H ܵ ū
ܵ ‫ ܹܐ‬ēl g n y ḡmy š br m rym.
e ī a

݂ l/ZF(ܼ !ܼ (Hܼ *1Bܼ ‫* ܐ‬1A+ܼ *1L!ܵ ܼ ḫ nl r b glr ʾ ḡl r yw kw nmy š.

ā ā a ā ā ū ū ī

. l/ZBܼ ‫ ܼܕܘ‬RH*-‫ ܕ‬0X/S ܼ gZܸ L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.

ā e ī ā ō ī

ܵ
. RH*- ‫(ܪ‬Fܼ ݂ RH*- `ܿ ܿ b ݂ RH*- ‫ ܵ ܸܙܗ‬0/F(S ܿ ܵ
Refrain: z h m rym. p k m rym. nw r
e a ā a ū

ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R/-‫ ܕ‬OH‫*ܘ ܼܪ‬-J

l/Z ܼ 4 m rym. / š hm rw ry d dmrym dw ḡmy š.
a ā a ā ī ō ī
 Syroturcica: A Bilingual Poem from the Mongol Time 353

̈ [2] Stanzas of Epiphany

‫ ܀‬0QF‫ ܕܕ‬0S‫ܬܪ‬

ܿ ܿ 0/H‫(ܪ‬X+ In Syriac
. RH*-ܼ *+ܿ ,F‫(ܪܕ‬/‫ـ‬+ܿ Kܿ‫ܗܘ‬ ܼ OZ‫ـ‬S The Son of Mary was baptized in Jordan
. RH*‫ــــــ‬- ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ ,Lܵ 3ܼ (‫ـــ‬H ,‫ــ‬-ܼ by John – Son of Mary –,
. 04‫(ܕ‬8‫ ܕ‬03‫ܪܘ‬ ܼ n(ܵ 1‫ـ‬S ‫ܬ‬.Q ܸ ܿ ܸ ‫ـ‬F‫ܘ‬ and the Holy Spirit descended
. R‫ــ‬H*-
ܿ ܿ
ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Q/U-
ܼ ‫ܬ‬O1 ܼ 0Y1-‫ܕ‬ ܼ [f. 241r] on Christ the King, born by
Mary.
*4‫ ܘ‬RH*- *+ Son of Mary etc. …

ܿ ܿ 0/1B(Z+
ܵ ܵ ܿ In Mongolian
. RH*- ܼ ܿ *+ l/Z1 ܼ Bܼ 0ܵ Bܼ ܿ‫ ܐ‬,L3 (H yw ḥ nn ʾ ḡʾ g lmy š br m rym.
ō ā ā ā a ī

. R‫ـــ‬H*-
ܵ a

ܿ ܼ ܿ *‫ـــ‬+
ܿ ܼ 1H‫ ܵ ܼܐ‬OZ‫ـــ‬S
lܿ /Z ܵ ā
ܵ ʿm d ʾ yl my š br m rym.
a ā ī a

. l/-ܼ .[‫ܪ‬ ܼ ܿ (B ‫ـ(ܠ‬H E*1 F‫ ܐ ܵܪ! ܼ( ܼܘ‬ʾ rk w w n lrʾ yw l gw rs tmy š.

ā ā ū ū ā ō ō a ī

. l/Z ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R‫ـ‬H*-‫ ܕ‬0ܿ X/‫ـ‬S ܵ ܼ gZܸ L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.

ā e ī ā ō ī

*4‫ܘ‬ܼ RH*- ‫ ܸܙܗ‬z h m rym wš r.

e a a

‫܀‬0-‫ܘ‬ ܵ ‫ܕܨ‬ ܵ 0S‫ܬܪ‬ ̈ [3] Stanzas of the Lent

ܿ ܿ ܿ 0/H‫(ܪ‬X+ In Syriac
. R‫ـــ‬H*- ܼܿ *‫ـــ‬+ E*̈ +OZ‫ـ‬+ ܼ ܵ K‫ ܵܨܡ ܿ ܼܗܘ‬The Son of Mary fasted
. R‫ـــ‬H*- ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ ,/ܼ -(‫ــــ‬ H ,/T
ܼ +‫ ܿܐܪ‬forty days, Son of Mary,
ܿ
. K‫ــ?*ܨ‬1
ܿ ܵ ܿ
ܼ ܿ !ܼ P‫ــ‬9 Ä‫ــ‬/ܵ !ܼ ‫ ܼܘܙ‬6‫ـــ‬ ܿ Vܸ 4‫ܘ‬
ܼ ܿ And the hater was overcome and defeat-
. R‫ــ‬H*- ܼ ‫ܬ‬O1ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Q/U‫ـ‬- ܼ 0Y1‫ــ‬-ܼ ed by / Christ the King, born by Mary.
*4‫ ܘ‬RH*- *+ Son of Mary etc. …

ܿ 0/1B(Z+
ܿ ܵ In Mongolian
. R‫ـــ‬H*- ܼ ܿ *‫ـــ‬+ l‫ـ‬/‫ــ‬-*‫ــ‬
ܼ ܵ
Bܼ 0/‫ــــ‬1Å čl y g rmy š br m rym.
ā ā a ī a

. R‫ـــ‬H*- ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ ܵ l/Z:

ܼ ܵ ‫(ܢ ܼܕܘ‬B ܼ /8
ܼ ܵ ‫*ܟ‬ ܼ qy rḫ gw n dw ṭmy š br m rym.
ī ū ū ī a

. l/Z‫ـ‬:
ܼ ‫ܐܘ‬ ܼ ZHܹ ‫ ܸ ܵܗܜ‬h č y m my š š yṭ ny ʾw ṭmy š.
ܼ CLܼ M‫ــ‬/4 lܵ /Z‫ـــ‬ e ē ā ī ā ā ī ū ī

. l/Z‫ـ‬
ܿ
ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R‫ـ‬H*‫ـ‬-‫ ܕ‬0X/‫ــــ‬S ܼ ܿ gZܸ ‫ــ‬L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.
ā e ī ā ō ī

*4‫ܘ‬ ܼ RH*- ‫ ܸܙܗ‬z h mrym wš r.

e a
354 Anton Pritula

̈ [4] Stanzas of Palm Sunday

̈ 0S‫ܬܪ‬
‫܀‬0LT4‫ܕܐܘ‬

ܿ 0/H‫(ܪ‬X+ In Syriac
. R‫ـــ‬H*- ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ 01/S
ܼ ܿ 6‫ـ‬S aܼ !ܸ ‫ ܪ‬The Son of Mary saddled a jennet
. R‫ـــ‬H*-
ܿ
̈ ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ R14‫ܘ ܿܪ‬P9 6‫ـ‬S‫ ܿܘ‬and entered Jerusalem, Son of Mary,
. Ä/LT‫ـ‬4‫ܘ‬P‫ـــ‬+ Ef7ܼ ‫ـ‬4ܼ n(X‫ــ‬1 ܼ ܿ ܿ 8‫ܘ‬ܼ and the children glorified Him with
. R‫ــ‬H*-
ܿ ܵ
ܼ ‫ܬ‬O1 ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Q/U‫ـ‬-
ܼ 0Y1‫ـ‬Z9 ܼ palm twigs, / Christ the King, born by
ܿ*4‫ ܘ‬RH*- *+ Mary.
Son of Mary etc. …
ܼ

ܿ 0/1B(Z+
ܵ In Mongolian
. R‫ـــ‬H*- ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ l/ZLܼ /‫ــ‬- ܵ
ܼ 0Lܵ 9(‫ـــ‬8 ܼ qw l n m y nmy š br m rym.
ū ā ā e ī ī

. R‫ـــ‬H*-
ܿ a

ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ܿ ܿ ܼ ܿ /‫ــ‬B
l/‫ـ‬-* ܼ ܵ ܵ 0[‫ـــ( ܿܕ‬8
ܼ ܵ qw dsʾā gy rmy š br m rym.
ū ī ī a

. l/‫ـ‬-
ܼ *AÅ ܼ ܿ .L‫ـ‬T4ܼ ‫* ܵܐܘ‬1L1Bܼ ‫ ܐܘ‬lܵ H y š ʾw ḡl nl r ʾw š ʿnt čḡrmy š.
ā ō ā ā ō a ī

. l/Z‫ـ‬ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R‫ـ‬H*-‫ ܕ‬0X/‫ــــ‬S ܼ ܿ gZܸ ‫ــ‬L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.

ā e ī ā ō ī

*4‫ܘ‬ ܼ RH*- ‫ ܸܙܗ‬z h mrym wš r.

e a

‫܀‬03<bܸ ‫ ܕ‬0S‫ܬܪ‬ ̈ [5] Stanzas of Pesach 26

ܿ ܿ 0/H‫(ܪ‬X+ In Syriac
. R‫ـــ‬H*- ܼ *‫ــ‬+ܼ 0‫ــ‬3<bܸ ̈ 6‫ ܐ ܼ!ـــــ‬The Son of Mary ate Pesach,
. R‫ـــ‬H*- *‫ـــ‬+ n‫ܘ‬O‫ـ‬/Z9‫ ܬ‬RS with His disciples, Son of Mary,
. E*Z3‫ܘ‬
ܿ ܼ 0ZQ1+ ܿ ‫*ܗ‬Ab R14‫ܘܐ‬ ܿ [f. 241v] and His body / in bread and
ܿ ܼ ܵ ܼ ܿ ܸ ܼܿ
. R‫ــ‬H*- ܼ ‫ܬ‬O1 ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Q/U‫ـ‬- ܼ 0Y1‫ـ‬-ܼ wine was / delivered by Christ the King,
ܿ*4‫ ܘ‬RH*- *+ born by Mary.
Son of Mary etc. …
ܼ

ܿ 0/1B(Z+
ܵ ܿ In Mongolian
. R‫ـــ‬H*-
ܼ ܿ *‫ـــ‬+ l/Zܼ Aܼ ܵ Hܸ ‫ ܼ*ܝ‬9O a ܼ ‫ ܼ ܿܬ‬t lmy dl ry y ḡmy š br m rym.
/Z9 ī ā ī e ī

. R‫ـــ‬H*-
ܿ a

ܼ 1H‫(ܝ ܵ ܼܐ‬:
ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ܿ lܵ /Z ܵ a
ܵ ‫ ܿ<ܚ‬bܼ p ṣḥ ṭw y ʾy l my š br m rym.
ō ī ā ī a

. l/-‫(ܪ‬UV
ܼ ܿ :ܼ ,+‫(ܪ‬8 ܼ ܵ 01/+ ܼ ‫ ܐܕ‬CF‫ ܵܐܘܙ‬ʾw zny ʾ d by lʾ qw rb n ṭ pšw rmy š.
ō ī ā ā ī ā ū ā a ū ī

ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R‫ـ‬H*-‫ ܕ‬0X/‫ــــ‬S
. l/Z‫ـ‬ ܼ ܿ gZܸ ‫ــ‬L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.
ā e ī ā ō ī

*4‫ܘ‬ ܼ RH*- ‫ ܸܙܗ‬z h mrym wš r.

e a

26 In the East Syrian tradition certainly the Great Thursday is meant, which is to be distin-
guished from the holiday of the Lord’s Resurrection.
 Syroturcica: A Bilingual Poem from the Mongol Time 355

̈ [6] Stanzas of Passion

‫܀‬0Ü 3ܿ ܼ 0S‫ܬܪ‬
0/H‫(ܪ‬X+
ܿ In Syriac
. R‫ـــ‬H*- *‫ـــ‬+ 0V/8g ܼ ̈ 9ܼ k1ܸ [ The Son of Mary ascended the cross
. R‫ـــ‬H*- *‫ـــ‬+ 0H‫ܘܕ‬J‫ـــ‬H ,‫ـ‬- ܼ because of the Jews, Son of Mary,
. J3‫ܪܘ‬
ܿ
ܼ R1ܸ 4‫ܘܐ‬ ܼ ܵ J‫ـ‬4‫ ܪ‬,!ܸ ܿ ‫ ܿܘܐܪ‬laid His head and delivered His spirit,
ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Qܿ /U-
. RH*- ‫ܬ‬O1 ܼ 0Y1-ܼ Christ the King, born by Mary.
*4‫ܘ‬ܼ RH*- *+ Son of Mary etc. …
0/1B(Z+
ܵ In Mongolian
. R‫ـــ‬H*- *+ *+ l/Z1ܼ Aܼ Hܸ *ܵ9‫ܘܕ‬JÅ čhw dl r y ḡlmy š br mrym.
ū ā e ī

. R‫ـــ‬H*‫ـــ‬- *‫ـــ‬+ l‫ــــ‬/‫ـــ‬-‫ܨ‬

ܵ ܵ ܵ
ܿ ܿ ܿ ܼ ܵ ‫ ܐ‬0ÇBܼ ‫ ܵܐ‬ʾ ḡ čʾ ʾ ṣmy š br mrym.
ā ā ā ā ī

. l/Z9
ܼ (: ܼ IB(‫ـ‬B lܵ F(B ܼ ‫ـ(ܢ‬Bܼ ‫ ܐ ܵܝ‬ʾ y gw n gw n š gw gtʾ dw ṭw lmy š.
ā ū ū ā ū ā ū ū ī

. l/Z‫ـ‬
ܿ
ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R‫ــ‬H*-‫ ܕ‬0X/‫ــــ‬S
ܼ ܿ gZܸ ‫ــ‬L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.
ā e ī ā ō ī

*4‫ܘ‬ ܼ RH*- ‫ ܸܙܗ‬z h mrym wš r.

e a

‫܀‬IZ ܿ /8‫ܕ‬
ܵ 0S‫ܬܪ‬ ̈ [7] Stanzas of Resurrection

ܿ 0/H‫(ܪ‬X+ ܿ ܿ In Syriac
ܿ
. RH*- *‫ـ ܼــ‬+ E*7?‫ـ‬+
ܼ ̈ Rܵ /[ ܼ ‫ ܸܐܬܬ‬Son of Mary was laid in a grave
. R‫ـــ‬H*-
ܿ
ܿ ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ ,‫ـ‬/-(‫ ܿـ‬H I‫ـ‬9‫ܬ‬ ܼ ܵ for three days, Son of Mary,
. C1+ܼ ‫ܕܡ ܼܕ‬P‫ـ‬9 J/Zܵ ܹ /8 ܼ ‫ܘܐ‬
ܼ R‫ـ‬ 8‫ ܿܘ‬and He arose and raised the decrepit
. RH*‫ـ‬- ‫ܬ‬O1
ܿ
ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Qܿ /U-
ܼ 0Y1-ܼ Adam, / Christ the King, born by Mary.
*4‫ܘ‬ ܼ RH*- *+ Son of Mary etc. …

ܿ ܿ ܵ 0/1B(Z+ܿ In Mongolian
. R‫ـــ‬H*- ܼ Bܼ ܿ 0-(‫ـــــ‬9
ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ l/-* ܼ ‫ ܐܘ‬ʾw lw mʾ g rmy š br m rym.
ō ū ā a ī

. R‫ـــ‬H*-
ܿ a

ܼ *‫ـــ‬+ l/ZMܼ ܵ ܵ Hܼ ‫ــ(ܢ‬B ܼ ܵ‫ܜ‬ ܵ ‫ ܼܐܘ‬ʾw č gw n y ṭmy š br m rym.

ū ū a ī

‫ ܵ ܵܗܦ ܐܕ‬h p ʾ d my zw nd nd n qw ṭw lmy š.

a

. l/Z9
ܼ (:‫ܪ‬ ܼ ‫ ܢ‬OFOF‫ܙܘ‬
ܼܿ (8 C-
ܼ ā ā ā ī ū ā ā ū ū ī

. l/Z‫ـ‬ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R‫ــ‬H*-‫ ܕ‬0Xܵ /‫ـــ‬S

ܿ*4‫ܘ‬ܼ gZܸ ‫ــ‬L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.
ā e ī ā ō ī

ܼ RH*- ‫ ܸܙܗ‬z h mrym wš r.

e a
356 Anton Pritula

̈ [8] Stanzas of Ascension

‫܀‬0?9([‫ ܕ‬0S‫ܬܪ‬
0/H‫(ܪ‬X+ In Syriac
ܿ
. RH*‫ـ‬- *‫ـ ܼــ‬+ 0/ZU‫ـ‬9 k1 ܸ ܵ ‫ [ــــ‬The Son of Mary ascended the heaven
ܿ ܵ
. RH*- *‫ـــ‬+ J3ܹ (‫ــ‬14 ‫ـــ( ܼܬ‬9 [f. 242r] to the One sent Him, Son of
ܿ
ܼ Hܿ ܼ ,‫ــــ‬-ܼ ,ܵ -‫ ܼܒ ܬ‬.‫ــــ‬
. 0L/Z‫ــ‬ ܸ ܿ Hܸ ‫ ܿܘ‬Mary, / and sat there on the right,
. RH*‫ـ‬- ‫ܬ‬O1ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Q/U‫ـ‬- 0Y1-ܼ Christ the King, born by Mary.
ܿ*4‫ ܼܘ‬RH*- *+ Son of Mary etc.
ܼ
0/1B(Z+ In Mongolian
. RH*‫ـ‬- *‫ــ‬+ l/-‫ܪ‬ ܼ (: ܼ ‫ ܼܐܘ‬I:ܿ (9 ܼ (+ܼ bw l ṭt ʾw ṭw rmy š br mrym.
ū ū ā ū ū ī
ܿ
. RH*‫ـ‬- *‫ـ ܼــ‬+ l‫ـ‬/‫ـــ‬Z
ܿ
ܿ ܿ ܿ ܼ ܵ Yܼ ܿ /Å 0Bܵ (‫ــــ‬Bܵ gw gʾ čyḫmy š br mrym.
ō ī

ܼ Bܼ ܿ 0L/ܼ B‫* ܐܘ‬1!P1‫ـــ‬

. l/Z1 - CZ ܼ !ܵ ܼ ḫ my m lʾykl r ʾw gy nʾ g lmy š.
ā ī ā ā ō ī a ī

ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R‫ــ‬H*-‫ ܕ‬0Xܿ /‫ــ‬S

. l/Z‫ـ‬
ܵ ܼ gZܸ ‫ــ‬L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.
ā e ī ā ō ī

*4‫ܘ‬ ܼ RH*- ‫ ܸܙܗ‬z h mrym wš r.

e a

‫܀‬0M[(?MLb‫ܕ‬ ̈ ̈ [9] Stanzas of Pentecost

0S‫ܬܪ‬
0/H‫(ܪ‬X+ܿ In Syriac
. RH*‫ــ‬- *‫ـــ‬+ 0‫ــ‬3‫ܪܘ‬ ܼ ‫ܪ‬O‫ـــــــ‬4ܼ Son of Mary sent the Spirit,
ܿ
. RH*‫ـ‬- *‫ـ ܼــ‬+ 0‫ـ‬M/1‫ـــــ‬8*‫ـــــ‬b the Consoler – Son of Mary,
ܿ
. ‫(ܢ‬F‫ ܸܐ‬RY
ܿ ܿ EO/Z9‫ܬ‬̈ 6‫ـــــ‬S on the disciples, and instructed them,
ܸ 3‫ܘ‬ ܼ ܼܵ ܿ -ܿ Christ the King, born by Mary.
. RH*‫ـ‬- ‫ܬ‬O1ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Q/U‫ـ‬-
ܼܿ 0Y1 ܼ
*4‫ܘ‬
ܼ RH*- *+ Son of Mary etc. …

ܿ 0/1B(Z+ܿ In Mongolian
. RH*‫ـ‬- *‫ـــ‬+ l/- ܼ ‫ـــ(ܢ ܼܐܘܬ‬B ܼ ‫ ܿܐܘܢ‬ʾw n gw n ʾw tmy š br mrym.
ō ū ū ī

. RH*‫ـ‬- *‫ـــ‬+ l/Z1‫ــــ‬H‫ܐ‬

ܼ ܼ ܵ ܵ ‫ ܼ ܵܐ‬ʾ rqy l ʾylmy š br mrym.
6/‫ـــ‬8‫ܪ‬ a ī ī

. l/ZF
ܿ ܿ
ܼ (8ܿ ‫?(ܕܣ‬3‫ ܪܘ‬0LX ܵ
H‫* ܼܐ‬1F(+ ܼ ܵ ‫ ܐ‬ʾbw n l r ʾy snʾ rw ḥqw ds qw nmy š.
ō ā ā ī ū ū ō ī

. l/Z‫ـ‬ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R‫ــ‬H*-‫ ܕ‬0Xܿ /‫ــ‬S ܼ gZܸ ‫ــ‬L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.

ā e ī ā ō ī

*4‫ܘ‬ ܼ RH*- ‫ ܸܙܗ‬z h mrym wš r.

e a
 Syroturcica: A Bilingual Poem from the Mongol Time 357

‫ ܀‬07/9‫ܕܨ‬ ̈
ܼ 0S‫[ ܬܪ‬10] Stanzas of the Cross

ܿ 0/H‫(ܪ‬X+
ܿ In Syriac
. RH*‫ـ‬- *‫ــ‬+ 0‫ـ‬X/8ܼ s!ܼ .‫ــــــ‬4‫ ܸܐ‬The tree was found, Son of Mary,
ܼ /‫ـــ‬9‫ܕܨ‬
. R‫ـــ‬H*‫ـ‬- *‫ـــ‬+ K‫ــــ(ܬ‬7‫ـ‬ ܼ of the crucifixion, Son of Mary,
ܿ
.03*‫ــ‬H ‫(ܠ‬1HP‫ــ‬+ܼ *X‫ـ‬Sܵ
.9.‫ـــــ‬+
ܼ ܿ ܿ on the thirteenth [day] of the month
. RH*‫ـ‬- ‫ܬ‬O1ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Q/U‫ـ‬-ܼ 0Y1-‫ܕ‬ ܼ Elul, – / the one of Christ the King, born
27

ܿ*4‫ ܘ‬RH*- *+ by Mary.

Son of Mary etc. …
ܼ

ܿ ܿ 0/1B(Z+
ܵ ܵ In Mongolian
. RH*‫ــ‬- *‫ـ‬+ l/‫ـ‬Z‫ـ‬1
ܵ
ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܼܘܢ‬.!ܼ ܿ 0L‫ــ‬9‫ ܸ ܵܗ‬h l nʾ ḫ tw n g lmy š br mrym.
ē ā ā ā ū a ī

. RH*‫ــ‬- *‫ـــ‬+ l/‫ــ‬Z‫ــ‬V‫ــ‬ ܼ ܵ :ܼ ܵ CÇ‫ـ‬ āܼ ! k čy ṭ pmy š br mrym.

ī a ī

*‫ـ‬+ l‫ـ‬/- ܿ ܵ ܵ ܿ ܿ
ܼ ‫ ـ‬.‫ـ‬Bܼ ‫ ܕ‬EO‫ـ‬L‫ـ‬/ܼ ‫ـ‬B‫ ܐܘ‬6‫ـ‬- *‫ـ‬1L- ‫ܬܘ ـ ـ‬ūܼ tw m nl r m l ʾw gy ndʾ d ḡtmy š.
ā ā ā ō ī ā ā ī

.RH*-
. l/Z‫ـ‬
ܿ ܵ ܵ
ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R‫ـ‬H*‫ـ‬-‫ ܕ‬0‫ــ‬Xܿ /‫ــ‬S ܼ gZܸ ‫ــ‬L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.
ā e ī ā ō ī

*4‫ܘ‬ܼ RH*- ‫ ܸܙܗ‬z h mrym wš r.

e a

‫ ܀‬K‫ܬ‬O ܿ S‫ ܕ‬0S‫ܬܪ‬ ̈ [11] Stanzas of the Church 28

ܹ
0/H‫(ܪ‬X+ In Syriac
. RH*‫ـــــ‬- *‫ـــ‬+ K‫ܬ‬OS ܹ ̈ J9
ܿ 07ܼ ‫ــ‬B [f. 242v] Son of Mary chose the Church
. RH*‫ـــــ‬- *‫ـــ‬+ ,/Z ܼ Zܿ Sܼ 6! ,-ܼ of all the peoples, Son of Mary,
ܵ ܿ
. 0/3ܼ J‫ــ‬-‫*ܗ ܘܕ‬Ab
ܿ
ܵ ܼ J9 ‫ ܿܒ‬J‫ـــ‬H‫ܘ‬
ܼ and gave it His vivifying flesh and blood,
ܸ Hܸ ‫ ܕ‬0Q/U‫ـ‬-
. RH*‫ـ‬- ‫ܬ‬O1‫ـ‬ ܼ ܿ 0Y1‫ـــ‬- Christ the King’s, born by Mary!
*4‫ܘ‬ܼ RH*- *+ Son of Mary etc. …
0/1B(Z+
ܵ In Mongolian
. RH*‫ـــــ‬- *‫ـــ‬+ l/Z1 ܼ Aܼ Hܸ *ܵ 9O/Z‫ـ‬9‫ܬ‬
ܼ tlmy dl r y ḡmy š br mrym.
ī ā e ī

. RH*‫ـــــ‬- *‫ـــ‬+ l/-‫(ܪ‬8

ܼ ܿ 0X/1! ܼ 6! kl kly sʾ qw rmy š br mrym.
ī ā ū ī

. l/-
ܿ ܿ ܵ ܿ ܵ ܵ
ܼ .[‫ܪ‬ ܼ (B
ܿ ܼ *9.-*!ܼ lܵ /Z1 ܼ /8 ܼ gZܵ F n m z qy lmy š krm tlr gw rs tmy š.
ā ā ī ī a ō a ī

ܼ Bܼ ‫ ܕܘ‬R‫ــ‬H*‫ـ‬-‫ ܕ‬0Xܿ /‫ــ‬S

. l‫ـــ‬/Z‫ـ‬ ܼ gZܸ ‫ــ‬L!ܼ ḫ nm z ʿy sʾ dmrym dw ḡmy š.
ā e ī ā ō ī

*4‫ܘ‬ܼ RH*- ‫ ܸܙܗ‬z h mrym wš r.

e a

27 The month of the Syriac calendar, corresponding to September.

28 The holiday of the Consecration of Church is meant, which is celebrated at the end of the
liturgical year.