UNIVERSITY OF ARTS “GEORGE ENESCU” IAŞI FACULTY OF PERFORMING, COMPOSITION AND THEORETICAL MUSIC STUDIES
RESEARCH CENTRE “ŞTIINŢA MUZICII”
ARTES vol. 13
ARTES PUBLISHING HOUSE 2013 RESEARCH CENTRE “ŞTIINŢA MUZICII"
Editor in Chief: Professor PhD Laura Otilia Vasiliu
Senior Editor: Professor Liliana Gherman
Editorial Board: Professor PhD Gheorghe Duţică, University of Arts “George Enescu” Iaşi Associate Professor PhD Victoria Melnic, Academy of Music, Theatre and Fine Arts, Chişinău (Republic of Moldova) Professor PhD Maria Alexandru, “Aristotle” University of Thessaloniki, Greece Professor PhD Valentina Sandu Dediu, National University of Music Bucharest
Editorial Team: Lecturer PhD Irina Zamfira Dănilă Lecturer PhD Rosina Caterina Filimon Lecturer PhD Gabriela Vlahopol Lecturer PhD Diana-Beatrice Andron
Cover design: Bogdan Popa
ISSN 2344-3871 ISSN-L 2344-3871
© 2013 Artes Publishing House Str. Horia nr. 7-9, Iaşi, România Tel.: 0040-232.212.549 Fax: 0040-232.212.551 e-mail: [email protected]
The rights on the present issue belong to Artes Publishing House. Any partial or whole reproduction of the text or the examples will punished according to the legislation in force.
CONTENT
Foreword………………………………………………………...……5
I. Intervals and modes. The chromatic genre VERSES OF THE EIGHT MODES AND THE AGE OF OCTOECHOS PhD researcher Daniel Suceava, “George Oprescu” Institute of Art History, Bucureşti, Romania………………………………………………7 THE CHROMATIC GENRE IN THE BOOKS PRINTED BY MACARIE THE HIEROMONK professor PhD. Elena Chircev , “Gheorghe Dima” Music Academy, Cluj, Romania………………………………………………………..20
THE CHROMATIC GENRE IN THE PODOBEN MELODIES
PhD. student Melania Nagy, “Gheorghe Dima” Music Academy, Cluj, Romania……………………………………………………………………….36 A STATISTICAL APPROACH OF THE CHROMATICITY. THE STICHERON ΣΉΜΕΡΟΝ ΣΥΝΈΧΕΙ ΤΆΦΟΣ – TODAY, A TOMB HOLDS HIM IN THE NEW AND OLD NOTATION PhD. student Dimosthenis Spanoudakis, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece………………………………………………………….58
II. Ornaments in Romanian Byzantine music ANTON PANN’S VIEWS REGARDING THE MODES AND MUSICAL ORNAMENTATION professor PhD. Vasile Vasile, University of Piteşti, Romania….86 ORNAMENTATION IN THE CHURCH SINGING OF BYZANTINE TRADITION IN TRANSYLVANIA. STICHERA OF THE VESPER, TO LORD, I HAVE CRIED, TONE 5 professor PhD. Vasile Grăjdian, “Lucian Blaga” University, Sibiu, Romania…………………………………………………………………….101 THE CHEIRONOMIC SIGNS IN THE KOUKOUZELIAN STICHERARIA IN THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES IASI (NAI) PhD. lecturer Irina Zamfira Dănilă, “George Enescu” University of Arts, Iaşi, Romania…………………………………………………………..118
III. Theory and analysis OBSERVATIONS ON THE DIASTEMATIC PRINCIPLES IN BYZANTINE MUSICAL NOTATIONS, WITH EMPHASIS ON GREGORIOS MPOUNES ALYATES’ METHOD OF METROPHONIA, AND SOME LINKS TO ANALOGOUS PHENOMENA IN WESTERN CHANT associate professor, PhD Maria Alexandru, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece…………………………………...…………138 THE EVOLUTION OF CHANT EXEGESIS IN THE ANASTASIMATARION PANN PhD. teacher Carmen Dura, “Vasile cel Mare” Orthodox Theological Seminary, Iaşi, Romania………………………..…….191
Foreword
This volume, the 13th issue of “Artes” Magazine is new in that it addresses issues of musical Byzantinology, expanding this way the general musicology theme. This new opening was made possible by integrating under the name of “Artes” the Byzantine arts magazine “Byzantium romanicon” published by the Department of Religious Music within “George Enescu” University of Arts in Iasi. During the 17 years that have passed since it was founded at the initiative and under the coordination of Associate Prof. Priest Florin Bucescu, PhD, and Prof. Gabriela Ocneanu, PhD, the “Byzantion Romanicon”, review of byzantine arts, recorded a total number of nine issues, outstanding contributions in research and Byzantine music recovery. Nowadays, the “Byzantion Romanicon” review finds a new framework – a good one, for sure – to affirm and confirm internationally research on Romanian musical Byzantinology. Therefore, the 13th volume of “Artes” Magazine contains communications presented at the International Symposium of Byzantinology organized on the 13th and 14th of July, 2012, by “George Enescu” University of Arts in Iasi, entitled “Intervals and modes. The chromatic genre. Ornaments in Romanian Byzantine music”. The volume also included another two important studies that were not subject to discussions during the symposium, but are valuable contributions to broadening the initially proposed topics.
Verses of the Eight Modes DANIEL SUCEAVA
“Barren and uninspired” or “empty and tasteless”1; this is how the verses dedicated to the eight echoi, found in the Greek printings of The Great Octoechos or Paraklitiki starting with the Venetian editions from the first half of the nineteenth century,2 were defined upon their first publication in an actual scientific work, almost a century and a half ago. Although characterized in such derogatory terms, these verses that claim to portray, in a naïve and obsolete metaphor, the character of each echos in turn are still able to transmit the message of the theological concept regarding the role of music in the spiritual development within Christianity, as passed down from the writings of the first Fathers of the
1 Anthologia graeca carminum christianorum. Adornaverunt W. Christ et M. Paranikas, Lipsiae, 1871, De octo tonis (HXOIC) musicis, p. CXXII: ”Veteres philosophos suam cuique harmoniae vim ad animos hominum commovendos tribuisse constat. Ridicule autem recentiores scriptores, cum vetera harmoniarum nomina ad octo tonos ecclesiasticos falso translata esse non perspexissent, Platonis Aristotelis Plutarchi dicta ad res diversissimas trahunt. Omnino tot et tantas vices singuli h9coi subierunt, ut certam quandam indolem cuique tono tribuere difficillium sit. Equidem satis habeo versus Octoechi, satis illos quidem inanes et inficetos, hoc loco apponere”, after which they are reproduced (p. CXXII-CXXIV) the 8 dodecasyllabic hexastichs. Wilhelm von Christ (1831-1906) is the author of the introduction (Prolegomena. pp. IX-CXLIV) of the anthology. 2 For example Paraklhtikh` h7toi h2 mega1lh o3ktw1hcoj, Venice, #Ek th~j @Ellhnikh~j Tupografi1aj Fragki1skou #Andrew1la, dia` dapa1nhj Gewrgi1ou Diamanti1dou, 1837, p. 59, 110, 162, 216, 269, 319, 368, 424. An earlier edition is from 1819 (Para` Nikola1w0 Glukei~ tw~0 e3x #Iwanni1nwn) and it does not contain the stanzas for the echoi. Not even in the other editions I consulted, going backwards chronologically (1810, 1804, 1798, 1793, 1776, 1771 etc., up to the one in 1669, the oldest one in the collections of the Romanian Academy), can one find these verses. They can be found, however, in the 1793 Vienna edition (Para` Marki1desi Pou1liou), on pages 29, 52, 75, 101, 127, 153, 177 and 203, as well as in the Venetian edition from 1812 (Para` Nikola1w0 Glukei~ tw~0 e3x #Iwanni1nwn), on pages 30, 50, 71, 93, 116, 136, 160, 183. The Bucharest edition of Hristidis and Eliad (1836), which seems to follow the mentioned Viennese and Venetian editions, but with a more elegant pattern, did not also add the verses. I do not know until when this tradition of printing the verses for the eight echoi was perpetuated, but one could still read them in the Venetian editions of 1864 and 1883. The verses also appear in the more recent Roman and Athenian editions. In Octoihul ce să zice elineşte paraclitichi [The Octoechoi Called in Greek Paraklitiki], Neamţ, 1836, with Precuvântarea (Înainte cuvântare cătră cetitori) [Foreword (Foreword for the Readers)] of Veniamin Costachi, the verses for the eight echoi are missing. It seems that none of the Slavic or Romanian translations contain these extra-liturgical texts.
7 Church. The eight dodecasyllabic hexastichs concerned3 can be found in manuscripts, in various versions, since the eleventh century. About these verses wrote in the early nineteenth century Guillaume André Villoteau (1759-1839) in De l’état actuel de l’art musical en Égypte4. Translating into French the text of the papadiki, which he had bought from Abbot “Guébraïl”, i.e. Gabriel, the musicograph on scientific mission in the Egypt conquered by Napoleon transcribed and translated in Latin5 the eight couplets dedicated to the echoi, a version other than that known from prints. Those papadiki, copied by one Emanuel Kalos in 1695,6 finally ended up in the collection of the Greek supplement of the National Library of Paris (Suppl. gr. 1302). The Theoritikon of Chrysanthos also transcribes the verses as known from the published octoechoi.7 Lorenzo Tardo, who published them in his treatise of 19388, adds in a note that ”in alcuni codici vengono attribuite a Teodoro di Cizico”9. Indeed, ever since 1900, Leo Sternbach10, who found them in
3 Ioannis Vassis, Initia carminum byzantinorum, Berlin-New York, 2005 [Supplementa byzantina. Texte und Untersuchungen, Band 8], p. 726, 395, 182, 593, 350, 214, 538, 326. The sources cited are Anthologia graeca carminum christianorum and the study of Leo Sternbach. 4 Description de l’Égypte ou Recueil des observations et des recherches qui ont été faites en Égypte pendant l’expédition de l’armée française, seconde édition publiée par C. L. F. Panckoucke, tome quatorzième, État moderne, Paris, 1826, p. 426. 5 The Latin translation is by “M. Achaintre”. 6 Charles Astruc, Marie-Louise Concasty, Catalogue des manuscrits grecs. Troisième partie, Le supplement grec, tome III, Paris, 1960, p. 572: from page 13v to page 14r there is a chapter on the origin and characteristics of the eight modes; each paragraph ends with a couplet dedicated to the voice under study. At the beginning of the manuscript, there was attached a note signed by Amédée Gastoué, who found that the volume is «celui qui fut donné par l’higoumène Guébraïl à Villoteau, au moment de l’expédition d’Égypte». The manuscript was donated to the Library of Paris by Pierre Aubry in 1903 (p. 578). 7 Qewrhtiko`n me1ga th~j mousikh~j Crusa1nqou tou~ e3k Madu1twn, Triest, 1832. To` a3ne1kdoto au3to1grafo tou~ 1816. To` e7ntupo tou~ 1832. Kritikh` e7kdosh u2po` Gewrgi1ou N. Kwnstanti1nou, Holy Great Monastery of Vatopedi, 2007. Verses on pp. 402-405, 410 ff., 416 ff., 422 ff., 428 ff., 434 ff., 440 ff., 448 ff. 8 Leonardo Tardo, L'Antica Melurgia Bizantina nell'interpretazione della Scuola Monastica di Grottaferrata (Collezione Meridionale diretta da U. Zanotti-Bianco, Serie III), Grottaferrata, 1938. The scholar hieromonk fully reproduced these verses after the Heirmologion dated Cryptoferr. E.γ.II. Cf. p. 67: «Tra i mss. neobizantini di Grottaferrata [...], notiamo qui come i più completi: il ms. E.γ.II del 1281, che ha oltre 1917 tipi di strofe-irmi» [but v. p. 333, note 1: «1934 irmi»]. The verses are on pages: 363, 367, 370, 373, 375, 377, 379, 382. Cf. L. Tardo, L’Ottoeco nei mss. melurgici (I), in: Bollettino di Grottaferrata, a. II., fasc. I . 9 Tardo, L’antica melurgia bizantina, p. 363. 10 Leo Sternbach, Analecta Byzantina, [V.], in: České museum filologiscké 6, 1900, pp. 304-308. Review by K. Krumbacher in Byzantinische Zeitschrift 10, 1901, p. 315: ”5. Des Theodoros von Kyzikos Gedicht auf den Oktoechos, das ohne Autornamen schon
8 the rich Greek anthology kept at the National Library of France (Parisinus suppl. gr. 690),11 a manuscript from which the philologist from the Jagielloński University extracted and edited numerous other precious texts, also revealed these verses of Metropolitan Theodore of Cyzicus, panegyrist, encomiast, friend and correspondent of emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (945-959).12 Leo Sternbach returned the verses to the Metropolitan, interspersed with other 8 couplets for each echos, attributed in the manuscript to Metropolitan Leon of Sardis, known as epistolograph,13 and to one Parthenios14. One of the 14 manuscripts collated by the team from Copenhagen in order to develop the critical edition of the Heirmologion, partially completed at the beginning of the fifth decade of the last century,15 the bei Christ-Paranikas, Anthologia graeca carm. christ. S. cxxii ff., gedruckt worden ist; [...]. Den Theodoros von Kyzikos hält St. für identisch mit dem Bischof Theodoros von Kyzikos, der im 10. Jahrh. ein im Cod. Vatic. gr. 1246 erhaltenes Enkomion auf den hl. Blasios verfasst hat”. 11 G. Rochefort, Une anthologie grecque du XIe s., in: Scriptorium, vol. 4, 1950, pp. 3- 17. The manuscript is dated „au siècle des Comnènes, entre 1075 et 1085 plus exactement”. The verses are on pages 108v-109. 12 Sternbach, p. 308: „versuum auctor ex mea quidem sententia non diversus est a Theodoro, Cyzici episcopo”. K. Krumbacher, Geschichte der Byzantinischen Litteratur, München, 21897, p. 169 (Theodoros, Metropolit von Kzyikos, Panegyriker), p. 390 (Theodoros, Bischof von Kzyikos, 13. Jahrh. [sic]; but v. Sternbach, ibid.: „floruit hic quidem saeculo decimo” and note 62: „ad saeculum XIII alius Theodorus (Scutariotes) Cyzicenus pertinet, de quo cf. Krumbacher p. 390”); Hans-Georg Beck, Kirche und theologische Literatur im Byzantinischen Reich, München, 1959, p. 570 (mentioned only as the author of the Encomium dedicated to St. Blasius). Épistoliers byzantins du Xe siècle édités par Jean Darrouzès, Paris, 1960 [Archives de l’Orient chrétien, 6], p. 26 (33 letters from the correspondence with Constantine, out of which, 8 of the emperor). Ilias Anagnostakis, Ou3k ei7sin e3ma` ta` gra1mmata. Ιστορία και ιστορίες στον Προρφυρογέννητο, in: Symmeikta, vol. 13, 1999, pp. 97139. 13 See for example W. Hörandner, Leon Metropolit von Sardes und die Briefsammlung im Neap. III A 6, in: Byzantinische Forschungen, vol. 2, 1967, pp. 227-237 [Polychordia. Festschrift Franz Dölger zum 75. Geburtstag]. A letter addressed to Leon of Sardis by the Metropolitan Alexander of Nicaea in Patmiacus 706, f. 90v (Jean Darrouzès, Un recueil épistolaire byzantin: le manuscrit Patmos 706, in: Revue des études byzantines 14 [1956] 92). It is about the arrest and exile of the Metropolitan who had accused the Patriarch Theophylact (933-956) of despotism, that is, during the reign of Romanos I Lekapenos (920-944). 14 Sternbach, p. 305. Rochefort, p. 10: „groupement par ton des vers de chacun d’eux (un distique pour Léon et Parthénios, un sixain pour Théodore), fondant les personnalités diverses en un poème de 80 vers sur les 8 tons musicaux”. Cf. I. Vassis, Initia carminum byzantinorum, p. 595 (Pa1ntaj u2perscw`n tou~ me1louj th~0 a3xi1a0 Leo ep. Sardensis, In tonum primum), p. 300, 397, 712 etc. 15 The Hymns of the Heirmologion, Part I, Transcribed by Aglaïa Ayoutanti and Maria Stöhr, revised and annotated by Carsten Høeg with the assistance of Jørgen Raasted, Copenhagen, 1952 [Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae, vol. VI]. Laur. Γ 9, parchment, ff. 5-89, dated ”early XIIth cent. or perhaps even late XIth cent”. (The Hymns of the
9 codex preserved in the library of the Great Athonite Lavra contains a version of the cycle of the 8 short poems dedicated to the Byzantine echoi. This version of “the epigrams” was published by Antonios A. Alyghizakis in his thesis from 198516 because “they are quite old and they are significantly different from those in the printed books”17. A different version of several verses dedicated to the eight echoi was published in 1960 by Silvio Giuseppe Mercati (1877-1963), after an Athonite manuscript dating from the fifteenth century.18 Between pages 64–65v of this codex, the anonymous scribe noted 32 sti1coi i3ambikoi` ei3j tou`j o3ktw` h7couj, respectively 8 tetra1stica i3ambika1, preceded by a pro1logoj dia` sti1cwn (5 + 2 iambi), in which one can identify another type of exposition than the descriptive one of the hexastichs of Theodore, expressed in the ethical vocabulary of the modes. Here can be found a sort of theological interpretation of the significance of each echos and the name of John of Damascus is mentioned everywhere: #Iwa1nnhj fe1ristoj e3k Damasko1qen (“the best, excellent”; to the authentic echos 1), me1lisma terpno`n #Iwa1nnhj e3nne1pei (“delightful, charming, cheerful”; to the authentic echos 4), o2 gluku`j #Iwa1nnhj (to the plagal echos 1), pa~si profai1nwn Damaskw~n #Iwa1nnou (to the plagal echos 4). Albeit partially and only in the form of decapentasyllabic couplets, the verses of the echoi were translated into Romanian, in a synthetically reshaped form, by Anton Pann. Each of the eight modes after which the songs of the “translated” Anastasimatarion were ordered according to the “old system” of cavalry commander Dionysios Photeinos19 begins
Heirmologion, Part I, pp. XIV-XV). In the Spyridonos-Eustratiades catalogue, under no. 249 (p. 32). Alyghizakis dates it as from the Xth century (p. 119). 16 Antonios E. Alighizakis, Η οκταηχία στην ελληνική λειτουργική υμνογραφία, Salonic, 1985, pp. 119-121. 17 Alyghizakis, p. 120, note 20. The author calls them επιγράμματα and compares them with those, largely identical, in another old manuscript, namely Leimonos 295 (f. 205 et seq.) See also page 52, note 157, where it is quoted the essay of Const. Sathas, @Istoriko`n doki1mion peri` qea1trou kai` th~j mousikh~j tw~n Buzantinw~n, Venice, 1878. Between pages 151-152 (rna'-rnb') of the Introduction, the Greek scholar reproduces the epithets attached to the echoi, quoting Chrysanthos (first edition of 1832, pp. 142-168). 18 S. G. Mercati, Intorno ai versi sugli otto echi e sui quattro evangelisti contenuti nel codice del Monte Athos 4279 (Iviron 159) del secolo XV, in: Byzantion no. 29-30 (1959–1960; Brussels, 1960), pp. 175-186. Summary described by Sp. Lambros, Catalogue of Greek Manuscripts on Mount Athos, II, Cambridge, 1890, p. 38, № 4279. 19 Nuoul Anastasimatar. Tradus şi compus după sistema cea veche a serdarului Dionisie Fotino şi didicat Prea Sfinţitului şi de Dumnezeu alesului Episcop D. D. Filoteĭ Buzăul. De Anton Pann, Bucureşti, 1854. În Tipografia lui Anton Pann [The New Anastasimatar. Translated and composed according to the old system of cavalry commander Dionysius Fotino and dedicated to His Grace and God’s Chosen Bishop D.D. Filotei Buzăul. By Anton Pann. Bucharest 1854. In the printing of Anton Pann]. The couplets are on pages 1, 36, 72, 106, 144, 182, 215, 249.
10 with such a couplet inspired by the Greek verses: “The first echos begins by bringing to the front, | The Tones producing sweet Melodies,”, “The second echos follows, passing to the half-note, | With its fond Melody overwhelming the first,” “The third echos begins simply, rather hollow, | However, it is heroic and sweetly harmonious,” “The fourth echos starts by giving lively and bright Tone | Then continues more panegyrically, combined with sweetness,” “The first Bar follows progressing sweetly calming, | And more in prayers and laments makes it exceedingly humiliating,” “The sixth echos follows with micturition and chromatically, | Producing a song of sorrow and joy,”, “The heavy echos having a low Tone, it was called heavy and simple, | But even the melody declines differently,” and finally “The fourth Bar is in the major Tone, | As it is its merit, it follows all the other”20. As Wilhelm von Christ critically noted in the prologue of his anthology, “more recent writers, striving in the most risible (ridicule) way to assimilate the echoi of church music with the harmonies of the old ones, had not noticed that in fact the latter, that is, Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch, referred to entirely different things.” The finding of this discrepancy generated, as of the second half of the nineteenth century and especially around 1900, a rather heated polemic involving the voices of the most important musicologists and theorists of the time. However, few were those who denied completely the ethical dimension, the musical ethos, the differentiated reflection of each modal structure in the human emotional and spiritual component, the cathartic role of music, as Aristotle claimed.21 This parallelism between “the movement of sounds” and the movements of the soul 22 has an old history and its tradition is common both in the East and West. “The Byzantines wanted,
20 The verses reproduced and translated into Latin by Villoteau are (dodecasyllabic) couplets and their content summarily expresses the same characteristics attributed to the modal ethos. 21 Polit., VIII, 7. 22 Evanghelos A. Moutsopoulos, Modal „Ethos” in Byzantine Music. Ethical Tradition and Aesthetical Problematic, in: XVI. Internationaler Byzantinistenkongress, Viena, 4–9 octombrie 1981. Akten, II. Teil, 7. Teilband: Symposion für Musikologie [...], Vienna, 1982. Published in Jahrbuch des Österreichischen Byzantinistik 32/7 (1982) 3. K. Filoxe1nhj, Lexiko1n th~j @Ellhnikh~j e3kklhsiastikh~j mousikh~j, Constantinople, 1869, p. 102. C. Sathas, @Istoriko`n doki1mion, p. rna': «#En te1lei e2ka1stou h7cou th~j proshmeiwqei1shj leitourgikh~j bi1Vlou eu6rhtai e2xa1sticon e3pi1gramma e2rmhneu~on safw~j to` e3n th~0 yuch~0 diegeiro1menon ai7sqhma h5 h9qoj u2f’ e2ka1sthj tw~n e3kklhsiastikw~n tou1twn a2rmoniw~n» (my emphasis). For the ancient doctrine of ethos, among the old, but now classical works: Fr. Aug. Gevaert, Histoire et théorie de la musique de l’antiquité, I, Gand, 1875, livre II, chap. II, § III, pp. 178-207. More recently, Andrew Barker, Greek Musical Writings, vol. I The Musician and his Art, Cambridge University Press, 1984, cf. Index (sub: ethos, character, mimēsis, soul).
11 imitating the ancient Greeks, to apply ethos (h9qoj) to their own music systems. In The Octoechoi attributed to John of Damascus, after kathismata and canons of each echos, authentic or plagal, there are those iambic sextines in which that mode is praised. These epithets are in turn a common, Eastern and Western tradition. Indeed, Latin scholars of the Middle Ages use, in order to characterize their modes, similar expressions to the Byzantine characteristics.” I quoted from the old thesis of Edmond Bouvy,23 who in turn refers to Cardinal Jean- Baptiste Pitra’s Prolegomena that prefaces the first volume, published just ten years earlier, of the Analecta sacra.24 The Benedictine bishop scientist recomposes a table25 after those found in a dusty Latin manuscript, in which Notker Balbulus “candidly”26 noted the following equivalences:
23 Edmond Bouvy, Poètes et mélodes. Étude sur les origines du rythme tonique dans l’hymnographie de l’Église grecque, Nîmes, 1886, p. 251. 24 Joannes Baptista Pitra, Analecta sacra spicilegio Solesmensi parata, I, Parisiis, 1876. 25 J. B. Thibaut (Assimilation des «êchoi» byzantins et des modes latins, in: Congrès international d’histoire de la musique, Paris, 23-29 juillet 1900, Solesmes, 1901, p. 79) makes this rather sarcastic remark (and it is only 1900!): «A vrai dire, on s’est généralement trop contenté d’afficher sur des tableaux synoptiques le soi-disant dissentiment des auteurs grecs & latins». The author of this statement further presents a picture of the parallel nomenclatures (the Byzantine echoi, Manuel Bryennios, Notker, Hucbald and the Latins, the Byzantines and the modern Greeks). Such an “image” was recently portrayed by Peter Jeffery in his study The Earliest Oktōēchoi. The Role of Jerusalem and Palestine in the Beginnings of Modal Ordering, in: The Study of Medieval Chant, Paths and Bridges, East and West. In Honor of Kenneth Levy (ed. P. Jeffery), Woodbridge, 2001, p. 153, Table 6.1. The author used as sources: (1) O. Strunk, Intonations and Signatures of the Byzantine Modes, in: Musical Quarterly 31, 1945, pp. 339-355 [repr. in Essays, New York, 1977, pp. 19-36]; (2) Terence Bailey, The Intonation Formulas of Western Chant. [Studies and Texts 28], Toronto, Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1974, pp. 18-19; (3) Jørgen Raasted, The Hagiopolites. A Byzantine Treatise on Music Theory, CIMAGL 45 (1983) 13 [for Hagiopolitēs]; (4) Vat. Barb. 300, apud Tardo, p. 151–163 [for Papadikē]. It would have been interesting to also add in the table Gevaert, vol. I, pp. 198-199. Vincent Hunink, Apuleius of Madauros, Florida, edited by..., Amsterdam, 2001, [IV] (1)Tibicen quidam fuit Antigenidas, omnis uoculae melleus modulator et idem omnimodis peritus modificator, seu tu uelles Aeolion simplex siue asti
12 [OCTO TONI] Modi græci (I. Doricus; II. Ypodoricus; III. Phrygius; IV. Ypophrygius; V. Lydius; VI. Ypolydius; VII. Mixolydius; VIII. Eolius) corresponding Latin “modes” (Modi latini: I. Authenticus; II. Plagius; III. Authenticus II; IV. Plagius II; V. Authenticus III; VI. Plagius III; VII. Authenticus IV; VIII. Plagius). The modes thus assimilated have the following characteristics: I. Gravis (h9coj a'); II. Mœestus (pl. a'); III. Mysticus (b'); IV. Harmonicus (pl. b'); V. Jocundus (g'); VI. Devotus (baru1j); VII. Angelicus (d'); VIII. Perfectus (pl. d'). Only 9 years later, Bouvy’s conclusion is much more conciliatory than the rather harsh opinion of von Christ: “Certainly these moral characteristics had originally had a real value. In the intention of the Church and of the composers themselves, the sacred songs are only the sensible interpretation of prayer and worship”27. Therefore, what are the characteristics of these echoi, expressed in metaphors that seemed to some of questionable taste? They can be summarized in one concise, synthetic epithet (or rather two), which often, if not always, meets or intersects the ancient definition of h9qoj destined for each a2rmoni1a. To simplify, let me quote the brief enumeration presented by Constantine Sathas in the introduction28 to @Istoriko`n doki1mion –
27 Edm. Bouvy, Poètes et mélodes, p. 253: «Ces caractéristiques morales avaient certainement, à l’origine, une valeur réelle. Les mélodies sacrées, dans l’intention de l’Église et des mélodes eux-mêmes, ne sont que l’interprétation sensible de la prière et de l’adoration». 28 C. Sathas, @Istoriko`n doki1mion, p. rna'. Cf. Alyghizakis, pp. 52-53: ο πρώτος ήχος είναι στη κατάταξη αξιολογικά πρώτος. [...] στον ήχο αυτό αποδίδονται τα ιδιώματα του αρχαίου δώριου τρόπου. Στη συνέχεια ο δεύτερος ήχος, ηδονικός και μελιχρός, υπονοεί το χαρακτήρα του λύδιου τρόπου· ο τρίτος, άκομψος, απλός και ανδρικός, του φρύγιου· ο τέταρτος, πανηγυρικός, χορευτικός και μεγαλοπρεπής, του μιξολύδιου· ο πλάγιος του πρώτου, φιλοικτίρμων, θρηνώδης και διεγερτικός, του υποδώριου ο πλάγιος του δευτέρου, ηδονικός και γλυκύς, του υπολύδιου· ο βαρύς, απλός, ανδρώδης και ησυχαστικός, του υποφρύγιου και ο πλάγιος του τετάρτου, θελκτικός και ελκυστικός, του υπομιξολύδιου. The same, p. 36 (table of correspondences: Hucbald, Notker, Pachymeres and Bryennios, Hagiopolites, Pseudo-Damaskenos). Moutsopoulos, Modal ”Ethos” in Byzantine Music, pp. 3-4: ”In fact, these epigrams are hymns celebrating each one of the eight officially recognized modes of byzantine music, which are thus personified. The similarity of characters existing between the «ethos» which is supposedly proper to each one of them, and that which is respectively attributed to each one of the ancient «harmonies» is more than obvious. The most prominent among these characters are virility in simplicity (first mode), rejoicing in dance (fourth and first plagal mode), complaining in sorrow (first plagal mode, again, with probable allusion to its double scale), and military courage («barys» mode, with evident allusion to its name). ”
13 authentic echos 1: megalopreph`j (glorious, magnificent29) kai` semno`j (venerable, august, holy [> se1bomai]); authentic echos 2: melicro`j (sweet as honey) kai` gluku1tatoj (and the sweetest [dulcissimus]); authentic echos 3: a3ndriko1j (manly, virile, brave30); authentic echos 4: panhguriko`j (in connection with a national holiday: festive, solemn, pompous) kai` coreutiko1j (in connection with the chorus of dancers or singers: coreu1w = to rejoice, to celebrate through dance); plagal echos 1: qrhnw0do`j (which sings a lament31) kai` filoikti1rmwn (merciful, compassionate); plagal echos 2: e3pikh1deioj (funeral32) kai` e3n tau3tw~0 h2doniko1j (and at the same time pleasant, voluptuous); plagal echos 3: h2sucastiko1j (suitable to soothe the soul33); plagal echos 4: qelktiko1j (which enchants, appeases, calms down34).
29 K. Filoxe1nhj, Lexiko1n, p. 146: (i7de #Axiwmatiko1n). Apuleius, Florida: «bellicosum» (cf. Gevaert, I, pp. 198-199). Vincent Hunink, Apuleius of Madauros, IV, 1 (vide supra). 30 Apuleius, Florida: «religiosum» (cf. Gevaert, I, pp. 198-199). 31 K. Filoxe1nhj, Lexiko1n, p. 114 (qrhnw0di1a): Melw0di1a tij qliVera` kai` o3durtikh`, h6tij kata` tou`j cudai1ouj, kalei~tai «Moirolo1gi» ou8 to` luphro`n kai` qrhnw~dej h9qoj gi1netai fusikw~j a3po` to`n @Upodw1rion h5 Pla1gion tou~ A'. h9con, w2j ei9nai kai` to` #Argo`n Stichrariko`n me1loj au3tou~ pl. A'. o6per carakthri1zei to` Qrhnw~dej h9qoj? « Qrhnw0do`j ei9 su`, kai` filoikti1rmwn a7gan ». #Iwa1nnhj o2 Damaskhno1j. (&Ide #Epita1fioj Qrh~noj). 32 De la e3pi` + kh~doj = care, solicitude, sorrow, grief, mourning. K. Filoxe1nhj, Lexiko1n, pp. 87-88 (#Epikh1dion kai` #Epikh1dioj). (6) @O qrhnw0do`j sti1coj, o6stij carakthri1zei to` luphro`n h9qoj « ^Ote e3k tou~ xu1lou Se nekro`n » h5 kai` to` e3pi` tw~0 Prosomoi1w0 tou1tw0 « Deu~te telautai~on [sic] a3spasmo1n». Apuleius, Florida: «simplex» (cf. Gevaert, I, pp. 198-199). Vincent Hunink, Apuleius of Madauros, IV, 1 (vide supra). 33 K. Filoxe1nhj, Lexiko1n, p. 106 (5): h9qo1j ti to` o2poi~on carakthri1zei Ei2rmologikw~j to`n Dw1rion h5 Prw~ton h9con, o6stij meta` to`n @Hsucastiko`n tou~ton, kai` a7lla o6moia carakthristika` sw1zei kai` carakth~ra semno`n, pro`j belti1wsin tw~n h3qw~n, (kaqw`j o2 qei~oj Pla1twn fronei~ peri` tou1tou) a3po` th`n e3peisagwgh`n tou~ &Esw qematismou~ th~j fqorikh~j poio1thtoj tou~ b'. h7cou, kai` tou~ Ei2rmologikou~ me1louj tou~ @Hgemonikou~ kai` drasthri1ou Kla1dou « To`n ta1fon sou Swth`r » ou8 oi2 bracei~j fqo1ggoi tou~ Ei2rmologikou~ me1louj proxenou~si to` a3xiwmatiko`n kai` megaloprepe`j h9qoj, kai` ei3rhnikh`n kata1stasin th~j yuch~j. Aristidis Quintiliani de musica libri tres. Edidit R. P. Winnington-Ingram, Lipsiae MCMLXIII, p. 4015 (p. 43 Meibom). Rudolf Schäfke, Aristeides Quintilianus Von der Musik. Eingeleitet, übersetzt und erläutert von ..., Berlin-Schöneberg, 1937, p. 228: «beruhigende». François Duysinx, Aristide Quintilien, La musique. Traduction et commentaire, Liège, 1999, p. 16213: «apaisants». But Apuleius, Florida: «varium» (cf. Gevaert, I, pp. 198-199): baru1j? V. Hunink, Apuleius of Madauros, IV, 1: «uarium», (vide supra). 34 From the verb qe1lgw = to attract, to captivate through charms, to seduce, to fascinate, to calm down, to appease, to soothe.
14 However, it is well know that not all echoi have just one scale. Some develop on two or even three scales (the case of authentic echos 4). Then one can find that the same epithet happens to characterize 2 different echoi (the fourth and the first plagal). Finally, there are the heirmologic, sticheraric, papadic “ticks”, agogic and stylistic categories that give modes different forms.35 All these are reasons that should dissuade from giving a unique ethical character to all the aspects of a certain echos. In reality, as it is known, one can count not only eight, but at least two times more echoi,36 so that “it is obvious that the modal ethoses listed in the eight epigrams are entirely fictitious and invented”37 and have no connection with the real attributes of the modes characterized in that way. These phrases of Evangelos Moutsopoulos contain an echo of the reprimand that Wilhelm von Christ expresses in connection to those “inanes et inficetos” verses. “No doubt, the author of the epigrams manages to also express some valid observations, but he actually extrapolates his own conceptions beyond any permissible limit.”38 This means that from now on one should abandon the sterile search of the sources that inspired Theodore Cyzicus, if indeed he is the author of epigrams, namely to what extent he was influenced by the Damonian theory39 of the ethos, a theory that otherwise could itself be invalidated as a product of pure fantasy.40 “On the contrary, the problem consists in seeking new criteria in order to proceed to the reassessment of the concept of modal ethos in Byzantine music, an assessment that, far from being moral or only moralizing, should be a purely aesthetic one.”41 I wonder, however, what would be if the reassessment the modern philosopher refers to were performed according to other criteria, perhaps closer to the spirit in which the hymnographic texts were first composed, together with the melodies that surely accompanied them from the beginning and then the verses about echoi, which entered as well in the category of extra-liturgical religious poetry. Indeed, according to a Holy Father of the Church, Clement of
35 These examples are borrowed from the short essay by Moutsopoulos. 36 Moutsopoulos, Modal “Ethos”, p. 5: “at least seventeen modes”. 37 ibidem. 38 ibidem. 39 For Damon of Athens, whose theory on musical ethics has profoundly influenced subsequent philosophers (primarily, Plato and Aristotle), see François Lasserre, Plutarque, De la musique. Texte, traduction, commentaire précédés d’une étude sur l’éducation musicale dans la Grèce antique, Olten & Lausanne, 1954, chapter VI: Damon d’Athènes and VII: La postérité de l’éthique damonienne (pp. 53-80), but also chap. VIII: L’éthique musicale au IVe siècle (pp. 88-97). 40 Argues E. Moutsopoulos, quoting J. Chailley, Le mythe des modes grecs, in: Acta musicologica 28, fasc. 4, 1956, pp. 137-163. 41 Moutsopoulos, Modal „Ethos”, p. 5.
15 Alexandria, “you can also interpret in another manner; the guitar [kiqa1ra] can be understood as a church musical symphony between Law, Prophets, Apostles, and the Gospel; and the accord goes further: the accord of each prophet with the words of the other prophets.”42 For a truly theological interpretation of the spiritual basis of the echoi, in their succession and interdependence within the octoechal system, I found this excerpt from the work of St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite about the canons dedicated by St. Cosmas of Maiuma to the Holy Feasts and of Virgin Mary, in the view of Theodore [Ptocho]Prodromos, Byzantine writer from the twelfth century:43 ”Since Reverend Cosmas used the usual echoi of the song for his musical canons, I thought it would be appropriate to show the readers, like some sort of ingredient, Theodore’s views in connection therewith.44 There are eight echoi, as everyone knows, including four upright and prevailing and forerunner,45 and the other four crosswise46 or oblique in relation to the upright ones. Cosmas the Bishop used them all, except one, the plagal of the first echos. He uses them in good order and for a perfect fit. That is because he uses the first echos for the first Feast, that of the Nativity. He uses the second echos for the second Feast, that is, for the Theophany and the Baptism of the Lord. The third echos is used for the third Feast of the Lord, that of the Presentation of Christ in the Temple, which, although it is the second in the natural order, that is according to the cycle of the sun and the moon, it is actually the third. The fourth echos is used for the fourth Feast, that of Palm Sunday, because it is the fourth from the Nativity (as circumcision does not count, since it is according to the old law of the Jews).47 The Annunciation is also omitted, not because it is not a Feast of the Lord, but because sometimes it is celebrated before, and sometimes after Palm Sunday. Arriving to the Great Passion Week, the
42 Clement Alexandrinul, Scrieri [Writings], part II. Stromatele [Stromata]. Translation, foreword, notes and indices by D. Fecioru, Bucharest, 1982 [Părinţi şi scriitori bisericeşti, 5], Stromata a VI-a, 88, 5, p. 436. Cf. Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromata, Buch I-VI. Herausgegeben von Otto Stählin, in dritter Auflage neu herausgegeben von Ludwig Früchtel, Berlin, 1960 [Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte. Clemens Alexandrinus, Zweiter Band], p. 476: «la1boij d’ a5n kai` a7llwj mousikh`n sumfwni1an th`n e3kklhsiastikh`n no1mou kai` profhtw~n o2mou~ kai` a3posto1lwn su`n kai` tw~0 eu3aggeli1w0 th1n te u2pobebhkui~an, th`n kaq’ e6kaston profh1thn kata` ta`j metaphdh1seij tw~n prosw1pwn sunw0di1an». 43 @Eortodro1mion h7toi @Ermhnei1a ei3j tou`j a30smatikoi~j kano1naj tw~n Despotikw~n kai` Qeomhtorikw~n e2ortw~n, Venice, 1836, pp. kd'–ke'. 44 Cf. @Eortodro1mion, p. iz' and ih': o2 sofo`j Qeo1dwroj o2 kalou1menoj Ptwco`j Pro1dromoj. 45 o3rqoi` kai` ku1rioi kai` prohgou1menoi. 46 tw~n o3rqw~n pla1gioi. The radical ΠΛΑΓ evokes the concept of the verb “to wander”. 47 w2j nomikwte1ra kai` i3oudai_kwte1ra.
16 composer skips the first plagal echos, because this one is suitable for celebration and joy,48 so it would not be appropriate at all for sorrow and suffering.49 For this week he makes full use50 of the second plagal and the second [authentic] echos; because these holy days are days of sorrow, the echoi are also of lament.51 Although the Lord’s Passion is cause for people’s joy, however, there can not be a soul, except if it is completely dry and wild, that would not suffer and cry in these holy days. When Reverend Cosmas52 reaches53 the Pentecost, he uses the third plagal echos, that is, baru1j, thereby imitating, I reckon, that voice that came down from Heaven over the Holy and Sanctified Apostles, as it is written in Acts 2, 2.54 After that, the last echos, that is, the bar of four is used by the Holy Spirit-inspired writer of songs55 for the last Feast, that of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, because, although the course of time (the temporal cycle)56 begins in late fall and on the threshold of the new year, that is, in [mid] September, making this the first celebration, it is, however, the last because this Feast comes a long time (that is, many years in historical time) after the Ascension.57 Moreover, the plagal of the fourth befits the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross: four, for the four sides of the Cross.58 Because the bar (plagal), the kinship with the crossing, i.e. the cross wood (tou~ plagi1ou xu1lou tou~ Staurou~) that crosses (merges) with the upright wood (me` to` o7rqion xu1lon au3tou~), thus beautifully portraying the Cross.59 But why
48 panhguristh`j kai` cari1eij. 49 kai` de`n a2rmo1zei ei3j lu1phn kai` pa1qoj. 50 katako1rwj. 51 penqikoi1. 52 o2 @Iero1j Kosma~j. 53 e7fqasen, from the verb fqa1nw ‛to reach first, as opposes to vb. u2stere1w. 54 kai` e3ge1neto a7fnw e3k tou~ ou3ranou~ h9coj w6sper ferome1nhj pnoh~j biai1aj kai` e3plh1rwsen o6lon to`n oi9kon ou8 h9san kaqh1menoi. Suddenly there came a sound from the sky, like a roar (h9coj), like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 55 o2 qespe1sioj. 56 o2 tou~ cro1nou dro1mou. 57 meta` polla`j e3tw~n perio1douj, u6stera a3po` th`n tou~ Kuri1ou #Ana1lhyin. 58 dia` th`n tetrame1reian tou~ Staurou~. 59 In relation to the meaning of the adjective pla1gioj (oblique, beside the road), an interesting testimony, although apocryphal, is found in Acta Petri cum Simone (cf. Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, ed. de R. A. Lipsius şi M. Bonnet, Leipzig, 1891–1903, nd vol. I2, p. 45–103). The apocryphal work is from the II century and renders the speech of St. Peter while he was crucified. At one point, addressing the crowd who witnessed the martyrdom, he says: “The Spirit saith: What else is Christ, but the word, the sound (h9coj) of God? So that the Word is the upright beam whereon I am crucified. And the sound (h9coj) is that which crosseth it (pla1gioj), the nature of man. And the nail which
17 did Holy Cosmas60 use the fourth echos for the Feast of the Transfiguration, as he used it for Palm Sunday? No doubt because of the celebrating nature,61 as a panegyric holiday deserves the dedication of a panegyric echos. Again, there is no doubt that, because this fourth echos was played at this Feast, the composer62 chose to sing the fourth plagal for the feast that follows, of the Exaltation of the Cross.”
ABSTRACT
The short dodecasyllabic poems devoted to each echos that can be encountered within the Greek octoechoi and which were thought to provide a late reflection of the old ethos-doctrine of the Hellenic harmoniai have been considered by the scholars who managed to scientifically publish and decipher the Byzantine musical monuments as factical poetical improvisations lacking any real ground. They appear in manuscripts starting with the twelfth century, in different versions, among which a later one (fifteenth century), published only in the middle of the last century. The most common version, which can also be found in the printed books, seems to have an author, the Bishop Theodore of Cyzicus, correspondent, among others, of emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus. Although these rhymes that claim to portray, in naïve and obsolete imagery, the character of each echos have been considered, in the first scientific printed anthology, as „barren and dull (uninspired)” (illos [...] inanes et inficetos), they are still able to transmit the message of the theological conception regarding the role of music in the spiritual development within Christianity, as it is found in the writings of the first Fathers of the Church, as well as in other authors closer to our time, such as Saint Nicodemus the Hagiorite.
Selective bibliography Astruc Charles, Concasty Marie-Louise, Catalogue des manuscrits grecs, Troisième partie, Le supplement grec, tome III, Paris, 1960. Alighizakis, Antonios E., Η οκταηχία στην ελληνική λειτουργική υμνογραφία, Salonic, 1985.
holdeth the cross-tree (pla1gioj) unto the upright in the midst thereof is the conversion and repentance of man”. See Peter Jeffery, The Earliest Oktōēchoi (cited above), p. 155. 60 o2 qei~oj. 61 dia` to` panhguriko`n tou~ h7cou. 62 o2 Melw0do1j.
18 Barker Andrew, Greek Musical Writings, vol. I, The Musician and his Art, Cambridge University Press, 1984. Bouvy Edmond, Poètes et mélodes. Étude sur les origines du rythme tonique dans l’hymnographie de l’Église grecque, Nîmes, 1886. Chailley Jacques, Le mythe des modes grecs, in: Acta musicologica 28, fasc. 4, 1956, pp. 137-163. Clement Alexandrinul, Scrieri [Writings], part II, Stromatele [Stromata]. Translation, foreword, notes and indices by D. Fecioru, Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, Bucureşti, 1982. Filoxe1nhj K., Lexiko1n th~j @Ellhnikh~j e3kklhsiastikh~j mousikh~j, Constantinople, 1869. Lasserre François, Plutarque, De la musique. Texte, traduction, commentaire précédés d’une étude sur l’éducation musicale dans la Grèce antique, Olten & Lausanne, 1954. Mercati S. G., Intorno ai versi sugli otto echi e sui quattro evangelisti contenuti nel codice del Monte Athos 4279 (Iviron 159) del secolo XV, in: Byzantion no. 29-30 (1959–1960; Brussels, 1960), pp. 175-186. Moutsopoulos Evanghelos A., Modal „Ethos” in Byzantine Music. Ethical Tradition and Aesthetical Problematic, in: XVI. Internationaler Byzantinistenkongress, Viena, 4–9 octombrie 1981. Akten, II. Teil, 7. Teilband: Symposion für Musikologie [...], Vienna, 1982. Published in Jahrbuch des Österreichischen Byzantinistik 32/7 (1982) 3. Pann Anton, Nuoul Anastasimatar. Tradus şi compus după sistema cea veche a serdarului Dionisie Fotino şi didicat Prea Sfinţitului şi de Dumnezeu alesului Episcop D. D. Filoteĭ Buzăul [The New Anastasimatarion. Translated and composed according to the old system of cavalry commander Dionysius Fotino and dedicated to His Grace and God’s Chosen Bishop D.D. Filotei Buzăul], în Tipografia lui Anton Pann, Bucureşti, 1854. Pitra Joannes Baptista, Analecta sacra spicilegio Solesmensi parata, I, Parisiis, 1876. Tardo Lorenzo, L'Antica Melurgia Bizantina nell'interpretazione della Scuola Monastica di Grottaferrata (Collezione Meridionale diretta da U. Zanotti-Bianco, Serie III), Grottaferrata, 1938. The Hymns of the Heirmologion, Part I, Transcribed by Aglaïa Ayoutanti and Maria Stöhr, revised and annotated by Carsten Høeg with the assistance of Jørgen Raasted, Copenhagen, 1952. Qewrhtiko`n me1ga th~j mousikh~j Crusa1nqou tou~ e3k Madu1twn, Triest, 1832. To` a3ne1kdoto au3to1grafo tou~ 1816. To` e7ntupo tou~ 1832. Kritikh` e7kdosh u2po` Gewrgi1ou N. Kwnstanti1nou, Holy Great Monastery of Vatopedi, 2007. Vassis Ioannis, Initia carminum byzantinorum, Supplementa byzantina. Texte und Untersuchungen, Band 8, Berlin-New York, 2005.
19
The Chromatic Genre in the Books Printed by Macarie the Hieromonk
ELENA CHIRCEV
1. Introduction Macarie the Hieromonk is one of the personalities who had a decisive influence on the fate of the Romanian music of Byzantine tradition, through his entire activity as psalm singer, teacher, translator and writer of church music books. The Metropolitan Iosif Naniescu, who donated all of Macarie’s manuscripts in his possession to the Romanian Academy, admiringly called him “dascălul şi traducătorul muzicii bisericeşti în limba românească” [the teacher and translator of church music into the Romanian language]. And rightly so, given that many of the religious songs “Romanianized” by Macarie the Hieromonk still constitute today one of the basic stocks of church repertoire in the Romanian churches. His name was engraved on the history of national music also through the printing of the first music theory book in the Romanian language: the Theoriticon, Vienna 18231. Starting with Anton Pann – who in 1845 made the first reference to the activity of Macarie the Hieromonk in the Introduction to his theoretical work Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşti [The Theoretical and Practical Basis of Church Music] – and continuing with Bishop Melchisedec and Constantin Erbiceanu at the end of the XIXth century, and later with Nicolae M. Popescu, his first biographer – whose articles opened the series of works dedicated to him –, many authors of numerous studies and books on church music from across Romania have referred to Macarie’s activity and especially to the three books printed by him2. This paper focuses on the way in which the chromatic genus is treated in the chapters of his theoretical book, while also presenting the conclusions of the research on the set of melodic formulas underlying the chants in the chromatic genus included in these collections. The comparative analysis between the initial and cadential formulas in Macarie’s Anastasimatarionion and those in the Greek original by
1 Ioan Andrei Wachman’s book entitled Principii de muzică europenească modernă [Principles of European Modern Music] appeared only in 1846. 2 We mentioned these contributions in the paper Ieromonahul Macarie în bibliografia românească [Macarie the Hieromonk in the Romanian Bibliography], published in ”Byzantion romanicon. Revistă de arte bizantine”, Editura Artes, vol. 8-9, 2012, pp. 225-233.
20 Petros Ephesios emphasizes the importance of language in structuring the melodic discourse, as well as the contribution of one of the Romanian psalm singers to the perpetuation of the Byzantine tradition.
2. The Theoriticon – the first music theory book in the Romanian language 2.1. Sources of the text Macarie the Hieromonk printed his theoretical work in Vienna, in 1823, along with the Anastasimatarionion and the Irmologion. After several printings during the XIXth century, when it was used as a textbook, the book was reprinted in 1976, under the supervision of Titus Moisescu, in a version intended for research purposes. Through the carefully documented introductory study of the late Byzantinologist, Macarie’s outstanding personality and his contribution to the shaping of psaltic music theory in the Romanian language were brought back to the attention of the Romanian musicologists. The text of the Theoriticon is undoubtedly a translation, an adaptation, and not an original work conceived by Macarie. In the aforementioned study, T. Moisescu is trying to answer the question: ”Which were the documentary sources of the book?”, starting from the assertions made by Nicolae M. Popescu, who indicated as source Ms. Gr. 761 BAR, signed by Theodoros Gherasimou and dated 18203. A few small differences revealed by the comparative analysis, along with the good condition of the manuscript, which shows no sings of wear or long use, led T. Moisescu to assert that this may have not been the source for Macarie’s translation and to opine instead that Macarie may have also been familiar with the theoretical work printed by Chrysanthos of Madytos in 1821. The contact with that first theoretical work of the “new method” may have led him to opt for the writing of a separate theoretical volume and for a less common title at the time; here is Titus Moisescu’s argumentation: ”...la Pesta... el nu împărtășea încă ideea de a tipări o lucrarea teoretică separată, intenționând să structureze gramatica în introducerea proiectată pentru Anastasimatarion. De la Pesta pleacă la Viena, în 1822, la «popii armeni, mechitariștii» care erau la curent cu toate noutățile meseriei lor. La Viena Macarie se hotărăște să scoată o gramatică de sine stătătoare, pe care a intitulat-o Theoriticon – și nu propedie, nici gramatică, nici introducere în muzica bisericească. Noțiunea de theoriticon, adaptată la muzică, nu era prea răspândită – doar Chrisant de Madit a folosit-o înaintea lui Macarie, în 1821, fapt ce pledează pentru ideea că dascălul român a cunoscut Theoriticonul
3 Titus Moisescu, Dascălul de cântări Macarie Ieromonahul, introduction to Macarie the Hieromonk’s Theoriticon, Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste România, Bucureşti, 1976, p. 20.
21 acestuia la Viena”. [... In Pesta ... he had not yet contemplated the idea of printing a stand-alone theoretical work, intending instead to structure the grammar in the introduction to the Anastasimatarionion. In 1822, he left Pesta to go to Vienna, to the “Armenian priests of the Mekhitarist order”, who were up to date with all the latest ideas in their field. In Vienna, Macarie decided to write a stand-alone grammar book, which he called Theoriticon – and not propaedia, or grammar, or introduction to church music. The notion of theoriticon, adapted to music, was not very common – only Chrysanthos of Madytos had used it before Macarie, in 1821 –, which advocates the idea that the Romanian teacher came into contact with Macarie’s Theoriticon in Vienna]4. I brought back into discussion some well known issues on the origins of Macarie’s text in order to emphasize once again the indelible connection between the music theory perpetuated throughout the XIXth century in the Romanian Principalities and the Byzantine music theory promoted by the Greek teachers throughout the Orthodox world. As a matter of fact, although the question of the originality of Anton Pann’s work was long debated, we already know today that his Baz teoretic și practic… [Theoretical and Practical Basis…] is a translation from a Greek source, according to the clarifications we owe to the indefatigable researcher pr. Alexie Buzera5. (I wanted to mention his name in remembrance of the countless meetings we had with him, who was a model of diligence and perseverance in researching the musical manuscripts).
2.2. The Theoriticon – the basis of the Romanian psaltic music theory in the 19th and 20th centuries Despite the incessant emphasis on the importance of Macarie the Hieromonk's work in spreading the “new method” (the Reform), his contribution is treated with a fair deal of objectivity, due to a certain amount of awkwardness observed in the translation of the terms, to the work’s concise style and to the insufficient clarifying comments in some of the chapters. The comparison with the next theoretical book, written in the Romanian language by Anton Pann, sets these aspects in even bolder relief. Despite all this, Macarie’s Theoriticon was certainly one of the most popular and most republished textbooks. This is proven by the (probably insufficient) number of volumes of this Theoriticon, published successively until the late XIXth century, and by the first print run of 1,000 copies dedicated to each province. Some of the manuscript copies reached even our libraries, among them the one housed by the
4 ibidem. 5 See: Alexie Al. Buzera, Cultura muzicală românească de tradiției bizantină din sec. al XIX-lea, Fundația Scrisul Românesc, Craiova, 1999, pp. 36-47.
22 Romanian Academy Library, written by Nicolae Canache from Bucharest, in 1832. In 1848, the sluger Dimitrie Suceveanu, the protopsaltes from the St. Metropolitan of Moldova, printed the second edition of the book, using Macarie’s text with slight modifications. In the following decade, Hieromonk Seraphim printed a third edition in Buzau, in 1856, after the model of the one printed in Iaşi. It was again in Buzău that in 1875 Neagu Ionescu and I.B. Sburlan printed the Grammar, the Anastasimatarionion and the Irmologion of church hymns, mentioning that they were “acum retipărite întocmai după cele tipărite de Episcopia Buzăului în 1856” [now reprinted in strict conformity with the ones printed by the Diocese of Buzau in 1856]. The musical grammar books that followed continued to draw on the music theory book translated by Macarie in the Romanian language, because, as T. Moisescu stated, ”măturisind sau nu, psalții români au folosit cu toții Theoriticonul lui Macarie în cărțile teoretice eleborate de ei. Fie că au reprodus-o întocmai, fie că au preluat-o parțial, prezența acestei prime gramatici muzicale românești se face simțită. Circulația terminologiei lui Macarie, a formulărilor lui teoretice, a scărilor și a semiografiei lui o putem recunoaște, evolutiv, în micile sau marile gramatici muzicale psaltice apărute în țara noastră” [whether they admitted it or not, all the Romanian psalm singers used Macarie’s Theoriticon in the theoretical books they wrote. Whether they reproduced it exactly, or borrowed parts from it, the presence of this first Romanian musical grammar book makes itself felt. The circulation and evolution of Macarie’s terminology, of his theoretical formulations and of his scales and notation can be recognized in the smaller or greater psaltic music grammar books published in our country]6.
2.3. The modes of the chromatic genus in the Theoriticon 2.3.1. Generalities The theory of church modes is presented by Macarie in Chapters 9- 17 of his book, on pages 13-22, each mode being assigned a separate chapter. The general aspects relating to the modes are addressed in Chapter 9, entitled Pentru glasurile bisericești [On Church Modes]. The 9 paragraphs of the section contain a presentation of the main issues, namely: the two types of modes (authentic and plagal), the musical genera and systems, the tones and their ambitus, the musical styles. These are in fact the usual aspects taken into consideration in any introductory chapter of musical grammars. Reading the text is not an easy task for the contemporary reader, but it is instructive and reveals the transformations that have occurred in the specialized vocabulary. As
6 Titus Moisescu, Dascălul de cântări Macarie Ieromonahul, op. cit., pp. 23-24.
23 an example, we quote the first paragraph: ”Glasuri bisericești, ne-au predat noao Sfinții Părinți, dascălii Sfintei noastre Biserici a răsăritului, opt. Dintru care pre patru le-au numit stăpânitoare, trei culcătoare sau alăturătoare, și unul greu. Aceste opt glasuri nu să unesc nici în ființă, nici în alcătuire, ci în trei neamuri. Diatonicești, adecă așăzate, Hromaticești, adecă prefăcute, și Armonicești. Și în trei așăzări, în opt strunite, care să zice Diapason, în cinci strunite, care să zice și Roată și în patru strunite care să zice și Trifonii” [The Holy Fathers, teachers of our Holy Eastern Church, have taught us eight modes, of which four were authentic, three were oblique or lateral and one was strong. These eight modes are grouped by genera: Diatonic, or natural, Chromatic, or altered and Enharmonic. They are of three kinds: with eight notes, called Diapason, with five notes, called Wheel, and with four notes, called Triphony].7 Let us first note that when speaking about the mode, Macarie prefers the Slavonic term, i.e. “glas” [voice] and not “eh” [echos] (just like Anton Pann and Ştefanache Popescu, his student), and therefore the term was incorporated as such into our language. Let us also note that his entire approach is based on the tradition conveyed by the Holy Fathers. The terms used to denote the authentic and plagal modes – ”stăpânitoare” [dominant] and ”culcătoare” [oblique] or ”alăturătoare” [lateral] – were not preserved in this form; Pann calls them ”proprii” [principal] and ”lăturașe” [lateral], the term used for plagal being used as such up to Ion Popescu-Pasărea. Also, it is only here and nowhere else that the 7th mode is treated as a separate category. In Chapter 16, paragraph 1, we find an explanation for this separation: ”Glasul al șaptelea s-au numit Varis adecă Greu și nu culcătoriul glasului al treilea pentru că isonul lui iaste mai greu [adică mai grav] decât toate celelalte glasuri”. [The seventh mode was called Varis, meaning Heavy, and not oblique of the third mode, because the ison is heavier [i.e. graver] than all the other modes]. Back to Chapter 9, we also notice the use of another term that was lost over time, i.e. “neam” [family], which is the equivalent of the already long-used term “gen” [genus]. The musical genera are summarily presented in paragraph 2, in brief sentences: “Și neam Diatonicesc iaste acela a căruia scară arată numai tonuri. Și Hromatiscesc iaste acela a căruia scară arată și jumătăți de tonuri. Iar Armonicesc iaste acela a căruia scară arată și pătrare de ton.” [Approximate translation: And the Diatonic genus is that whose scale shows only tones. The Chromatic genus is that whose scale also shows half tones. And the Enharmonic one is that whose scale
7 Macarie Ieromonahul, op. cit., p. 21.
24 also shows quarter tones]8 A few comments are required here. First, we remind that Macarie the Hieromonk used the same division of the octave into 68 intervals, just like Chrysanthos of Madytos, operating with three types of tones: great tone equal to 12 parts, small tone equal to 9 parts and a “smaller” tone equal to 7 parts. All the divisions of the tone – the half, the “fourth” or the quarter – are related to the 12-part great tone. While trying to make the connection between the definitions of the three genera and the way in which they are reflected in the schematic representation of the modes in the tables at the end of the book, we discover a few inconsistencies. Thus, in Table 3, dedicated to Mode 2, we notice that the tones that succeed one another in its scale are equal to 7 and 12 parts, i.e. smaller and greater tones, without any half tones. We will now return to the structure of the scale, in order to emphasize two more aspects related to this chapter. Paragraph 7 presents the defining elements of a mode: ”Așăzământuri a glasurilor sânt patru: glăsuirea, scara, stăpânitoarele glasuri și răzimările” [The constituents of the echoi are four: the apechema, the scale, the dominant notes and the cadences]. A little earlier, talking about the three types of tones, Macarie stresses the importance of the oral tradition passed from teacher to disciple: ”Și pentru ca să poată noul începătoriu să învețe ca să-și aducă cu întregime glasul pre aceste trepte ale tonurilor, să cade să învețe scara prea bine de la dascăl iscusit și ales în meșteșugul musicheiei, că cel neiscusit cântând, nu păzește treptile precum s-au orânduit” [Approximate translation: And for the new beginner to be able to learn how to carry his voice along these tone steps, he must learn the scale very well from a highly skilled singing teacher, for an unskilled one, when he sings, cannot follow the steps as they were ordained]. One final remark before moving on to Mode 2. Unlike Pann, Macarie designates the modes with numbers from 1 to 8, a method of identification that has been preserved to our days. In the “Thoretical and Practical Basis…”, the modes are numbered as in the medieval manuscripts, i.e. from 1 to 4, while the plagal ones are referred to as, for example, ”lăturaşul celui de al doilea” [the lateral to the second] – i.e. Mode 6.
2.3.2. Mode 2 Mode 2 is treated in Chapter 11, entitled Pentru glasul al doilea [On Mode 2]. The presentation of each mode follows the same pattern, in that almost every chapter contains five paragraphs, determining the genus to which the mode belongs, discussing the types of tones that make up the scale, and indicating ”glăsuirea”, i.e. the apechema, the
8 Macarie Ieromonahul, op. cit., p. 13.
25 cadence system, the phthorai and the martyries. Finally, reference is made to the end of the book where there is a table for each mode, containing the tones, steps, martyries and phthorai – a useful teaching material to practice and learn the correct intonation of the sounds of the scale and the intervals specific to each modal genre. Paragraph 1 of the aforementioned chapter confirms the succession of tones mentioned above, while also specifying the structural composition of the scale based on diphony (which is omitted in the introductory chapter): ”Începându-se glasul al doilea de la di, pogorâm treapta di-ga ton mare, iar pre ga-vu ton mai mic. Și pre vu-pa ton mare, luând ifesis (scris greșit diesis n.n.) pre pa iar pre pa-ni ton mai mic. Și mai lămurit o acest feliu de scară răsună așa și celelalte asemenea” [approximate translation: Mode 2 starts from di, then follows a slide down di-ga great tone, and ga-vu smaller tone. And then vu-pa great tone, with iphesis (misspelled diesis – author's note) on pa and pa-ni smaller tone. More exactly, this kind of scale sounds like this…it follows the succession ni pa vu ga di ke zo ni pa vu and the others alike]. In like manner as in the final table, the construction of the scale by adjoining trichords appears very clearly.
Figure 1: Macarie Ieromonahul, Theoriticon, fragment of Table 3
26 The following paragraphs present “glăsuirea” (i.e. the apechema), the ison (on di and on vu), “stăpânitoarele glasuri” (i.e. the dominant notes) and “răzimările” (i.e. the cadences). We will not insist on the entire chapter, since it follows the algorithm described above, containing information on Mode 2, as known from the Romanian psaltic theory perpetuated up to the XXth century.
2.3.3. Mode 6 Mode 6 is dealt with in Capter 15, with its 5 paragraphs following the well known pattern. We quote the first paragraph, presenting the structure of the scale: ”Pre glasul al șaselea l-au numit Plaghios tu devteru, căci întrebuințează scară Hromaticească, întra-acest chip: , care are cea dintîiu împătrit strunită pre vu Ifesis și ga Diesis. De multe ori însă întrebuințează și pre o acest feliu de împreunată sau unită scară pa vu ga di ke zo ni pa.” [Mode 6 was called Plaghios tu devteru, because it uses the Chromatic scale, namely: pa vu ga di ke zo ni pa, with vu Ifesis and ga Diesis in the first tetrachord. Oftentimes, however, it also uses the mixed scale pa vu ga di ke zo ni pa]9. In the next paragraph, the author also specifies that in the heirmologic style, the ison is on di and uses the scale of Mode 2. Here we make two remarks. The implied structure of the scale is the one based on two disjunct tetrachords – ”cea dintîiu împătrit strunită” [the first tetrachord]. The disjunct tetrachords, separated by the great tone between di-ke, is very clearly shown in Table 5 of the Theoriticon. Two decades later, in his theoretical work, Anton Pann was writing about the two “patra-coarde” [tetrachords] that make up the scale of “Lăturașului al doilea” [the 2nd plagal mode], a structure that makes a crucial difference between the two related modes, i.e. Mode 2 (based on diphony) and Mode 6. What Macarie does not explain, but specifies instead in Table 5, is the structure of each tetrachord, which consists of a small tone and a quarter-tone.
9 Macarie Ieromonahul, op. cit., p. 19.
27
Figure 2: Macarie Ieromonahul, Theoriticon, fragment of Table 5
Table explanation: Column 1 Scara a noua cea din Hromatiecască împreunată cu Diatonicească a Glasului al șaselea [The ninth scale of Mode 6, chromatic and diatonic]. Column 2 Scara a zecea cea întru tot hromaticească a glasului al șaselea [The tenth scale of Mode 6, chromatic] Column 3 Scara a unsprezecea a aceștii ftora Hromaticească ce să chiamă Mustaar [The eleventh scale of the chromatic phthora, called Muștaar].
The second remark: Macarie mentions one of the mixed forms of Mode 6, which seems to be the only one preserved by the Romanian tradition until the XXth century; here we will refer to a brief note made by Ion Popescu Pasărea in his theoretical work: ”Glasul VI stihiraric, adesea întrebuințează o scară mixtă, având tritonul I (pa-di cromatic iar tritonul al II (di-ni) diatonic, după cum se vede și în formulele de cadențe imperfecte în di.” [Mode 6 sticheraric often uses a mixed scale,
28 with the first tritone (pa-di) chromatic and the second tritone (di-ni) diatonic, as seen in the formulas of imperfect cadences on di]10. In his Bazul teoretic ... [Theoretical Basis...], Anton Pann indicates three mixed scales of Mode 6.
Figure 3: Anton Pann, Bazul teoretic…, [Theoretical Basis...], p. 127
3. Aspects of the chromatic modes in the chants of the Anastasimatarionion The Anastasimatarionion printed by Macarie the Hieromonk in 1823 was inspired by the Greek version printed by Petros Manuel Ephesios in 1820. ”Anastasimatarionul lui Macarie Ieromonahul este identic cu cel al lui Petros Efesios în ceea ce priveşte conţinutul cântărilor şi stilul în care au fost scrise” [The Anastasimatarionion of Macarie the Hieromonk is identical to that of Petros Ephesios in terms of content of the chants and of the style in which they were written]11,
10 Ion Popescu Pasărea, Principii de muzică bisericească orientală, Tipografia Cărţilor Bisericeşti, Bucureşti, 1936, p. 56. 11 Costin Moisil, Anastasimatarele în limba română tipărite în prima jumătate a secolului al XIX-lea: conţinut, surse, autori, [The Anastasimataria in Romanian Language Printed in the First Half of the XIXth Century: Contents, Sources, Authors],
29 asserted 10 years ago Byzantinologist Costin Mosil, who also established the origins of the main groups of chants, while mentioning, besides Petros the Peloponnesian (Petros Ephesios’ model), also Petros Vyzantios, Grigorios Protopsaltis and Hourmouzios Hartofilax. In a previous comparative analysis of a few chants from the two Anastasimatarionia, we managed to identify the methods used by Macarie in the complex process of translation of the Greek text and of adaptation of the Romanian one to the melody of Greek origin. This time, however, we will dwell only on a few examples, in order to see how the theoretical concepts exposed in the Theoritikon are reflected in the chant books.
3.1. Mode 2 We will illustrate the chants of Mode 2 with the sticheron Doamne, strigat-am. Macarie’s melody closely follows the Greek model, its characteristics matching those described theoretically: the tonic of the mode is di, with the interior cadences on vu and di, and the final one on di. The ambitus of the melody is a minor seventh, and the entire melodic line is marked by gradual progression, in the tradition of the Byzantine monody. What captures the attention from the beginning is the different initial sound than in the original version of Petros Ephesios and the use of ga dies in the first melodic line.
Example 1: Doamne, strigat-am, initial formule Petru Efesiul Macarie Ieromonahul
Along with the ga dies, the gradual progression of the two diphonies, from vu and di, which contain the augmented second in the staff notation, gives added weight to the prayer at the beginning of the text – Doamne, strigat-am către Tine [Lord, I have cried unto thee]. When repeating the prayer, the renunciation to the intonation changes produced by the phthora of di of Mode 6 is compensated by the rhythmic acceleration of the discourse which, in the Romanian version, replaces the two-beat durations with eighth – and fourth-note values. In e same melodic line we notice the descending course of the melody up to the
“Acta Musicae Byzantinae” Journal , vol. IV, Centrul de Studii Bizantine, Iaşi, 2002, p. 144.
30 tonic vu, meant to highlight the stressed syllable in the word auzi-mă, through the leap of a fifth (which is non-existent in the Greek version).
Exemple 2: Doamne, strigat-am, fragment Petru Efesiu
Macarie Ieromonahul
Instead, the formula of the final cadence is identical, as can be seen in the example below.
Exemple 3: Doamne, strigat-am, final cadence Petru Efesiu
Macarie Ieromonahul
31 Throughout the sticheron the melody undulates gently along upward and downward lines that place particular emphasis on the dominant notes. The gradual motion of the melody is replaced by leaps – especially by fifths or thirds – only where there is a need to emphasize the stressed syllable of the word. The stressed syllable is also emphasized through signs of expression and ornamentation, as in the example below. Here we can also see how Macarie adapted the musical text of the Greek source to the Romanian language, by replacing the leap with stepwise progression on the unstressed syllable zi.
Exemplul 4: Doamne, strigat-am, cadence on di
Macarie Ieromonahul
The beginnings of most chants are similar or nearly identical, but in many of them, Macarie's version departs from that of Petros Ephesios in the middle part, to become similar or often identical again in the final cadence. It should also be noted that, unlike in the kegragaria, in the middle section of the dogmatika, aposticha and troparia, Macarie introduced new melodic fragments, which we believe belong to him, and created new cadential moments, sometimes on different steps than in the Anastasimatarionion of Petros Ephesius. All these changes are not necessarily related to the differences in the number of syllables in the Greek and Romanian literary texts, but rather reflect Macarie’s preoccupation with creating a melodious and well balanced musical line, fully consistent with the literary text.
3.2. Mode 6 To illustrate the above, we will give a second example: The Dogmatikon in the 6th Mode, Cine nu te va ferici. The beginning is identical, on ke, but diatonic in the Greek version and chromatic in the Romanian one.
32 Exemple 5: Doamne, strigat-am, fragment Petru Efesiu
Macarie Ieromonahul
The interior cadences are 12 in number in Macarie’s version, as compared to 8 in the other one. The cadences mentioned in the Theoriticon are on di and pa: ”Și stăpânitoare glasuri Stihirariceste are pre di și pre pa, răzâmându-se cu nesăvârșire în di, cu desăvârire în pa și cu desăvârșita ispravă în di și pa” [“The dominant notes in the sticheraric style are on di and pa, while the imperfect cadences are on di , the perfect ones on pa and the final ones on di and pa”] (pp. 19-20)12. In addition, Macarie introduced a new cadence on ke (imperfect), which does not appear in the Greek model. This cadence was preserved in the XXth century Romanian tradition as well, being mentioned in Ion Popescu Pasărea’s theoretical book as one of the most frequent examples encountered in the Romanian church singing of the early XXth century. Its formula is identical with that in the Dogmatikon of the 6th Mode, from the Anastasimatarionion translated by Macarie13.
Exemple 6: Cadence on Ke Ion Popescu-Pasărea
12 Macarie Ieromonahul, op. cit., p. 19-20. 13 Ion Popescu Pasărea, op. cit., p. 55.
33
Macarie Ieromonahul, Fragment of dogmatica
In the course of the chant we also find several new fragments inserted by Macarie, as well as many changes even to the melodic lines that have identical beginnings. This permanent shift between chromatic and diatonic was maintained in the Romanian version as well. Below is an illustration of the final cadence segment.
Exemple 7: Dogmatica mode 6, final cadence Petru Efesiu
Macarie Ieromonahul
4. Conclusions The journey undertaken above, in an attempt to discover the facets of the chromatic genus in the theory and practice of early XXth century Romanian church singing, has confirmed the already known truths related to the endeavours of the modest Romanian monk to promote the use of the national language in the Church. The comparative analysis between the initial and cadential formulas in Macarie’s Anastasimatarionion and those in the original Greek version of Petros Ephesios emphasizes the importance of language in structuring the melodic discourse.
34 Viewed from the perspective of the transformations occurred during the century following the printing of his books, the tireless work of the humble Romanian monk reveals yet again its importance and calls for respect and consideration towards all those who have created a repertoire that has been maintained within the Byzantine tradition, while being expressed in a language understood by all the believers.
ABSTRACT
For the history of the Byzantine music in Romania, the name Monk Macarie is synonymous with the printing of the first books of ecclesiastical music written in Romanian: the Theoritikon, Anastasimatarionion and Irmologhion, published in Vienna in 1823. The given paper aims at presenting the chromatic genre in all the above mentioned volumes, starting from the manner in which the theoretical aspects have been presented in Theoriticon and continuing with the research of the content of the melodic formulae out of which the chants of the chromatic genre are composed in these collections. The comparative analysis between both the initial formulae and those pertaining to cadence from Macarie’s Anastasimatarionion and the original Greek formulae by Petros Ephesios emphasize the importance a language bears on the structuring of the melodic discourse, but also the contribution of the Romanian psalm singers to the perpetuation of the Byzantine tradition.
Selective Bibliography Buzera Alexie, Cultura muzicală românească de tradiţie bizantină din sec. al XIX-lea, Fundaţia Scrisul Românesc, Craiova, 1999. Giuleanu Victor, Melodica bizantină, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1981. Lungu Nicolae, Costea, Grigore, Croitoru Ion, Gramatica muzicii psaltice, Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, Bucureşti, 1951. Macarie, Ieromonahul, Opere, I: Theoriticon, Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucureşti, 1976. Moisescu Titus, Prolegomene bizantine. Muzică bizantină în manuscrise şi carte veche românească, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1985. Pann Anton, Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşti sau Gramatica melodică, "Întru a sa tipografie de muzică bisericească", Bucureşti, 1845. Panţiru Grigore, Notaţia şi ehurile muzicii bizantine, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1971. Popescu-Pasărea Ion, Principii de muzică bisericească orientală, Tipografia Cărţilor Bisericeşti, Bucureşti, 1936.
35
The chromatic genre in the podoben melodies
MELANIA-ELENA NAGY
1. Objective. Sources The aim of our paper is to describe the chromatic genre, as well as the varied manner in which it manifests itself within a category of frequently used chants during the orthodox services – namely that of the podoben. The sources we have based our research on are taken mainly from manuscripts in the Byzantine tradition kept in the libraries of Cluj- Napoca. We have identified two Romanian manuscripts and a Greek one1, in which the podoben have been grouped into separate series, based on the order of the modes. One of the two Romanian manuscripts comes from the private library of poet Marcel Mureșeanu from Cluj- Napoca, some copies of this document being kept in the library of the “Gheorghe Dima” Music Academy (Cluj-Napoca), under call number Ib 2559. Due to the five polychronia it contains, which are dedicated to both Voivodes Alexandru Dimitrie Ghica and Grigore Dimitrie Ghica, as well as to the Bishop of Râmnic – Neofit2 – who eventually became Metropolitan of Ungro-Wallachia (to whom three of the five polychronia are being dedicated), we can date this document as being written around 1840, the year of Neofit’s enthronement as Metropolitan. The other Romanian manuscript belongs to the special collections in the “Octavian Goga” County Library under call number Ms. II-14. Fr. Petru Stanciu, who studied this manuscript, dates it according to the note from f. 165r “April 12th 1871”3. It is compiled, therefore, 31 years later than the first manuscript under discussion. The third document is written in Greek and belongs to the “Cipariu Fund” of the Library of the Romanian
1 We limited our analysis to the manuscripts in Chrysanthine notation. 2 The Râmnic Diocese, today the Râmnic Archdiocese has had several different names over the time. One of those names was that of Episcopia Râmnicului Noului Severin. A brief history of the diocese can be found at: http://www.arhiram.ro/istoric. For a detailed biography on the topic, see ierom. Marcu Petcu, Nicolae Lihănceanu, fr. Adrian Pintilie, Ramona-Anca Creţu, Pagini din istoria monahismului ortodox în revistele teologice din România, II. Așezăminte monahale, București, Editura Bibliotecii Naționale a României; Putna, Editura Mitropolit Iacov Putneanul, 2011, p. 109. 3 Fr. Petru Stanciu, Cultura muzicală de tradiție bizantină, Editura Renașterea, Cluj- Napoca, 2010, p. 182.
36 Academy (Cluj-Napoca Branch). It was written by a certain Marinos4, probably before 1838, when it seems to have arrived in Timotei Cipariu’s library5. In terms of typology, the first Romanian manuscript under analysis – the one belonging to poet Marcel Mureșeanu – is an anthology, one which mainly comprises chants sung at the Divine Liturgy. The second manuscipt, the manuscript II-14 (“Octavian Goga” County Library, Cluj- Napoca) is an anthology too, much more extended though. It includes a printed part entitled Colecțiuni de cântări bisericești, by Ștefan Popescu, which appeared in 1860, in Bucharest. We are thus talking about a coligat. The third manuscript, the Greek one – Ms. O. 354, BAR, Cluj- Napoca Branch – is an heirmologion syntonom, composed by Petros Byzantios. Apart from manuscripts, we have also resorted to printed books. Among such papers is the collection Podobii și Axioane compiled by fr. Nicu Moldoveanu and fr. Vasile Stanciu, published in 1996 at Arhidiecezana in Cluj-Napoca. The collection reunites the prosomia included in several volumes, such as Cântările Sfintei Liturghii și alte cântări bisericești, Editura Institutului Biblic al BOR, 1994, Cântările Sfintei Liturghii și Podobiile celor opt glasuri, published by the same printing house in 1960, as well as the prosomia gathered and noted by Dimitrie Cunțanu or the ones published under Timotei Popovici’s personal care. These Transylvanian prosomia, noted exclusively on staff, do not made the subject of our analysis in this paper. To a lesser extent, in order to compare the prosomia, we have made use of Anastasimatarul cuviosului Macarie Ieromonahul cu adăugiri din cel al paharnicului Dimitrie Suceveanu published at Editura Bizantina, Bucharest, 20026.
4 As it is revealed in the final note of the Oriental manuscript 354, from the Romanian Academy Library, Cluj-Napoca Branch: επαρχει εμου του μαρήνος (it belongs to me, to Marinos), p. 166. The method of writing belonging to this former owner of the manuscript is identical to that from the titles of the chants, which proves that he was also the copyist. 5 Zsofia Csakany, István Nemeth, Un manuscris de muzică psaltică din Biblioteca Timotei Cipariu, în „Acta musicae Byzantinae”, vol. II, no. 1, Iaşi, Aprilie, 2000, pp. 146-147. We wish to add, though, that the information regarding the year and origin of this manuscript do not rely on clear bibliographical references. 6 Only two prosomia, out of the eight we are analyzing, appear in this volume.
37 2. Terminology In Romanian, podobie and prosomie are synonyms as explained in Dicționarul de termeni muzicali7 (the Dictionary of Musical Terms). In the manuscript belonging to the private library, the section is entitled Podobiile glasurilor (f. 47v). In manuscript II-14 from the “Octavian Goga” County Library, the title of the same section is Podobiele sau Prosomiele celor opt glasuri (f. 14r). In the Greek manuscript, there are practically two separate sections, one for the prosomia of the modes, and another one for the kathismata8 (in Greek καθίσματα), both of these having been arranged according to the order of the modes9. The Romanian versions reunite both these sections in a single one, as we have already seen, under the name of prosomii or podobii, without distinguishing between prosomia and kathismata as is the case in the Greek manuscripts and printed books. In order to avoid confusion as to the slightly different usage of the term prosomie both in Romanian and in Greek, we have chosen to make use of the more general term of Slavonic origin podobie.
3. The chromatic podoben We have chosen out of the series of podoben which illustrate the chromatic genre only those that appear in all the three mentioned manuscripts. We have analysed, as expected, the podoben in the chromatic modes II and VI (2nd authentic and 2nd plagal)10, but at the same time those written in modes known as diatonic11 but sharing chromatic scales – more precisely, modes I and IV. We have studied eight such chants: Mormântul Tău, Mântuitorule – Τόν τάφον σου Σωτήρ; Casa Efratului – Οίκος τού Ευφραθά; Când de pe lemn, mort – Ότε εκ τού ξύλου σε νεκρόν; Degrab ne întâmpină – Ταχύ προκατάλαβε; Cel ce Te-ai înălțat pe cruce – Ο υψωθείς εν τώ Σταυρώ;
7 Podoben (prosomie, asemănândă) – “standard melody for certain hymns. The podoben can also be used with other texts, on the condition that these have the same structure as the original text (they should be isosyllabic and homotonic). Each of the eight tones has its own podoben melodies, which are marked above the hymns to be sung, according to the indicated podoben. Prior to the moment when the podoben melodies started to be marked down, the melody being known by tradition, the podoben melodies were a mnemonic means for singing the stichera.” (Dicţionar de termeni muzicali, Editura Enciclopedică, Bucureşti, 2008, p. 451) 8 Kathismata vb. sl. сѣдѣти, „to sit, to stand still”, the Greek equivalent ϰαθέζεσθαι, ϰαθῆσθαι), „chant out of a group of two or three chants, sung at the beginning of Matins after the Troparion. During this chant, those present may sit.” (Dicţionar de termeni muzicali, Editura Enciclopedică, Bucureşti, 2008, p. 488) 9 Ms. O. 354, BAR Cluj-Napoca, p. 133, 145. 10 In Romanian psaltic music theory, as well as in numerous manuscripts and almost all printed books, the modes are numbered from 1 (I) to 8 (VIII). 11 At least in Romanian psaltic music theory
38 Spăimântatu-s-a Iosif – Κατεπλάγη Ιωσήφ; Toată nădejdea – Όλην αποθέμενοι; Din pântece Te-ai născut –Ἐκ γαστρός ετέχθης. The manner in which the modes are revealed in the three manuscripts is different. The private manuscript follows the Greek model. The term used by the copyist is that of eh (and not that of glas), which can be identified by the initial specific martyria (key), while the number is missing. The plagal modes are accompanied by the mention πλ (from the Greek πλάγιος), and, at times, by the Romanian homonym - lăturaș (abbreviated lăș in this mansuscript). The second manuscript, Ms. II-14, makes use of the term glas, which is usually indicated by Arabic numerals. Finally, in the Greek manuscript Ms. O. 354, the modes can also be identified by the initial specific key, with the difference that it is the same for both authentic and plagal ones, the last being accompanied by the mention πλ.
3.1 Mormântul Tău, Mântuitorule – Τόν τάφον σου Σωτήρ The sedalny-podoben entitled Mormântul Tău (Τόν τάφον σου) is probably the most interesting of the chants belonging to this category in terms of mode, namely the scale to be sung. In the Romanian manuscripts and printed books it is written in the first authentic mode with a chromatic scale mention (either through the chromatic phthora of the 2nd authentic mode, or through specifications of the kind „ glasul I, forma glasului II12”, either through both means). More precisely, the podoben is inserted among the other 1st mode chants (a diatonic mode in the Romanian psaltic theory), but is usually executed in the 2nd mode. The questions that naturally arise are: what mode is eventually this podoben, and which is the right scale to perform it? If we were to confine ourselves to the mere three given manuscripts from the libraries of Cluj, we would notice that there are not two identical versions. The manuscript from the private collection (Ex. 1) presents a more detailed mode indication: firstly, the 1st mode key with its tonic on pa (re) is shown, followed then by the sound ke (the ancient tonic of the 1st mode); at the end there is the oligon with the kentema on it (the sign which indicates the fourth), namely a di (sol), with the chromatic phthora of the 2nd mode (which is at the same time the starting pitch13). The phthora also appears on the first neume, an ison on di. Most of the cadences are on ke, the formula that appears more frequently being marked in green in the example bellow. In the last
12 1st mode, with the scale borrowed from the 2nd authentic mode 13 On practical grounds, the singer usually transposes the chant a second lower, from ke to di (a fourth higher from pa). In the given situation, the transposition occurs in written form, the copyist mentioning di as a starting pitch.
39 phrase14, the chromatic phthora is no longer on di but on ke. The final cadence is on di too, but somewhere a mistake intervened (either the final martyria is, in fact, on ke, or the copyist omitted or wrongly notated an interval), as we do not reach on di, but on ke.
Ex. 1 Private manuscript (M. Mureșeanu), f. 48r
The second example, Ms. II-14 BJC (Ex. 2), presents a 1st mode indication too, having its tonic on ke (la). The chromatic phthora of the 2nd mode does not appear in the mode indication, but on the second neume, on ke, and not on di as in the other version. Although in both versions most of the cadences are on ke, the cadential formulas are different (Ex. 315). They share, though, a diatonic segment before the final phrase. Even though the segment is quite different in the given versions, the cadences are in both cases on pa, and the cadential formula is the same (the formula marked in pink, both in Ex. 1 and in Ex. 3)
14 I use this term for the melody between two martyrias. 15 I have inserted the predominant cadential formula within a green frame. The variations of this formula are marked with the help of the hexagonal frames.
40
Ex. 2 Ms. II-14 BJC, f. 15r
Ex. 3 Ms. II-14 BJC, f. 15v
In the third manuscript, Ms. O. 366, we have a Greek version of this sedalny-podoben. Here we find a 1st mode indication (Ex. 4), the 2nd mode scale being rendered differently: next to the 1st mode key the copyist writes an apostrophe with a clasma, then the 1st mode tonic – pa (re), and the starting pitch vu (mi) (which is the 2nd inferior mode tonic – as it is named by Greek scholars 16). The chromatic phthora of the 2nd mode does not appear on the key, but on the second neume, namely on vu. In this version, all the cadences are on pa. The predominant cadential formula (marked in green) is identical as far as neumes are
16 Georgios N. Konstantinou, Teoria și practica muzicii bisericești, vol. 1, ed. a II-a revizuită și adăugită, Asociația Culturală Byzantion, Iași, 2012, p. 246. Konstantinou entitles this tone glasul al II-lea inferior cromatic moale (de la vu) (second inferior soft chromatic mode from vu) (ibidem)
41 concerned to the one in Ms. II-14 BJC (Ex. 3), but is intonated a fifth lower (Ex. 5).
Ex. 4 Ms. O. 354 BAR Cj, p. 146
Ex. 5 Ms. O. 354 BAR Cj, p. 147
Wishing to see which of the three versions is preferred nowadays in Romania (when psaltic music is being sung) we have resorted to printed books too. Therefore, in the Anastasimatar, published in 2002, mentioned at the beginning of the paper (p.3), the podoben is in the 1st mode, having the tonic on ke and the phthora on the first neume (an ison on ke) (Ex. 6). Comparing this version to the ones in the manuscripts, we have noticed that it resembles to a great extent the one in Ms. II 14 BJC (Ex. 2, Ex. 3): two of the phrases are almost identical, the cadential formulas are the same, yet the diatonic passage which the first two manuscripts (Ex. 1, Ex. 3) have in common is missing.
Ex. 6 Anastasimatar (Macarie Ieromonahul), Buc., 2002, p. 28
42 It seems that this version, having its tonic on ke, is the most frequently sung in Greece too. In Teoria și practica muzicii bisericești, by G. Konstantinou, the mode is entitled glasul I cromatic moale difonic de la ke (first mode, soft chromatic diphonos, from ke)17. Here we are also remainded that, in the past, the 1st mode had its tonic on ke, some chants being transcribed in the New Method with the same tonic. The scale of Τόν τάφον σου kathisma makes reference to the 1st mode branch known as naos. Today, in the psaltic music books, this structure is presented as belonging to the 1st mode, being sung, though, as a scale specific to the 2nd mode and receiving thus its phthora, on ke, as well as all its features.18 In the other printed book I have chosen for comparison (the collection of podoben published in Cluj19) the podoben is in the 1st mode, having its tonic on di, with the chromatic phthora of the 2nd authentic mode (Ex. 7). With a double notation – chrysantine and western staff notation, the latest has an A-flat as key signature20. Even though it has the same tonic as the version in Ex. 1, the scale and, implicitly, the cadential formulas are different. The formulas are, on the other hand, identical to the ones in Ex. 2 and Ex. 3 (Ms. II-14) and 6 (Anastasimatar), but a second lower and similar to those in Ex. 5 (Ms. O. 354) – a fourth higher. Consequently, the first version is the most different in comparison to the other ones.
Ex. 7 Podobii și axioane, Cluj, 1996, p. 5
17 G. Konstantinou, op. cit., p. 280 18 ibidem. 19 Podobii și Axioane, Arhidiecezana, Cluj-Napoca, 1996 20 Due to a misprint, the key signature on the first two staves of this podoben is B-flat instead of A-flat.
43 There are many discussions on the subject of the genre, the mode and the scale required for this podoben to be sung21. On the other hand, both the intonation and the manner of interpretation of the melody differ from psaltis to psaltis. The Danish ethno-musicologist Tore Tvarnø Lind briefly summarises these discussions in his book – The Past Is Always Present: The Revival of the Byzantine Musical Tradition at Mount Athos22 – which represents the outcome of research undertaken for almost a decade, at Mount Athos: That this particular hymn exists in a number of versions suggest that in oral transmission certain versions have coexisted with the written ones: the monks “know it by heart” as Father Agapios mentioned. Moreover, there seem to be different ways to theoretically conceptualize the mode of the hymn, which again suggests that the hymn existed in various forms in performance, rather than as one original version. Music theory here seems to be retrospective, rather than anticipating musical practice23.
Casa Efratului – Οίκος τού Ευφραθά As far as this podoben is concerned, the examples from the manuscripts resemble each other to a greater extent, they are more homogenous. The 2nd authentic mode is indicated, but with the chromatic phthora of the 2nd plagal mode, or, as it is found written in some Romanian printed books24 – glas II, forma glasului VI (2nd authentic mode, borrowing the 2nd plagal mode scale).
Ex. 8 Private manuscript (M. Mureșeanu), f. 48r – 48v
21 On the Greek forums specialized in Byzantine music there are whole pages dedicated entirely to this kathisma. There are pertinent discussions with examples from manuscripts in New and Old Method of notation, or from printed books (including theoreticons). Thus, there are many Greek versions of this kathisma. See, for example, http://analogion.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20 (Περί του ήχου του «Τον Τάφον Σου Σωτήρ») 22 Tore Tvarnø Lind, The Past Is Always Present: The Revival of the Byzantine Musical Tradition at Mount Athos, Scarecrow Press, Lanham, MD, 2012, p. 96 23 T.T. Lind, op. cit., p. 96 24 See Ex. 11
44 Two of the three examples from the manuscripts (Ex. 8 and Ex. 10) have the tonic on pa, and the other example (Ex. 9), on vu.
Ex. 9 Ms. II-14 BJC, f. 15v
They all share the same incipit, yet the Greek version (Ex. 10) is slightly different from the Romanian ones. This is due to the different phrasing. Thus, the first phrase is practically divided in two through an imperfect cadence, just as the punctuation of the liturgical (literary) text indicates25 : Οίκος τού Ευφραθά, η Πόλις η αγία,... (Casa Efratului, cetate sfântă,...). In both Romanian versions the cadence appears only on the second comma of the literary text (Ex. 8, Ex. 9).
Ex. 10 Ms. O. 354 BAR Cj, p. 135
The version in Podobii și Axioane (Ex. 11) has its tonic on pa (re). The first phrase from this example is identical to that in Ex. 9, even though the tonic was on vu (mi) there, the neumes being the same. On the whole, these are the two examples that resemble the most, the difference lying in the starting pitch.
25 Cadențele ocupă locul punctuațiunei textului cântărei; [...] Cadențele imperfecte se fac la virgulă, punct și virgulă, la legăturile propozițiunilor, etc. acolo unde necesitatea cere o cadență, cu toate că ideia nu e complectă. („Cadences stand for the punctuation used in the text of the chant; [...] The imperfect cadences are on the comma, the semicolon, the link between sentences, etc, where necessity requires a cadence, even though the idea is not complete.”) (I. Popescu-Pasărea, Principii de muzică bisericească – orientală (psaltică), Tipografia Cărţilor Bisericeşti, Bucureşti, 1939, p. 35)
45
Ex. 11 Podobii și axioane, Cluj, 1996, p. 14
Când de pe lemn (cruce), mort – Ότε εκ τού ξύλου σε νεκρόν At first sight, the podoben is in the 2nd mode, the key being typical to this mode in all given examples26. The scale, though, differs, aspect indicated by the different phthoras. Two examples share the phthora of the 6th mode (2nd plagal) and the tonic pa (Ex. 12 and Ex. 15), and the other two have the phthora of the 2nd mode and the tonic di (Ex. 13 and 14).
Ex. 12 Private manuscript (M. Mureșeanu), f. 48v
Similar to the preceding podoben, the resemblance is more obvious between the versions in Ms. II BJC (Ex. 13) and the one from the printed collection of podoben (Ex. 14).
26 The Greek manuscript represents an apparent exception, for the key is that specific to the 2nd plagal mode, as it appears in the Romanian Theoreticons. Yet, the podoben is in the 2nd authentic mode, as it does not have a plagal indication. On the other hand, throughout this manuscript, the key is the same both for the authentic modes and related plagal ones, the difference lying only in the mention πλ (plagal), in the second case.
46
Ex. 13 Ms. II-14 BJC, f. 16r
Ex. 14 Podobii și axioane, Cluj, 1996, p. 14 The Greek version is different in this case, as it has a different incipit (Ex. 15).
Ex. 15 Ms. O. 354 BAR Cj, p. 135
3.3. Degrab ne întâmpină – Ταχὺ προκατάλαβε All four examples are written in the same 4th mode, which has the final cadence on vu (mi). The mode takes different names: the soft chromatic legetos mode27, the median soft chromatic fourth mode28, the 4th mode, borrowing the 2nd mode scale (glasul IV – forma glasului
27 G. Konstantinou, op. cit., p. 275. 28 ibidem.
47 II29). The key of the mode is, in its turn, written in four different ways as can be seen in the examples bellow. The first one has the 4th mode indication, and the tonic di with the chromatic phthora of the 2nd mode, phthora which also appears on the first neume (Ex. 16).
Ex. 16 Private manuscript (M. Mureșeanu), f. 49r
In the next example, apart from the key and the tonic, the legetos intonation formula (apichima) appears (Ex. 17).
Ex. 17 Ms. II-14 BJC, f. 23r
In the Greek manuscript (Ex. 18), the starting pitch di is the only one indicated, the chromatic phthora of the 2nd mode being on the first neume of the chant – an ison on di. The incipit is identical to the podoben from the private manuscript (Ex. 16), both also having in common cadential formulas.
Ex. 18 Ms. O. 354 BAR Cj, p. 150
The printed version (Ex. 19) opens just like the version in Ms. II 14 BJC (Ex. 17). Yet, the indication of the mode is slightly different from
29 Podobii și axioane. Culegere de muzică bisericească ortodoxă întocmită de Pr. prof. dr. Nicu Moldoveanu și de pr. lect. dr. Vasile Stanciu, Editura Arhidiecezana, Cluj- Napoca, 1996, p. 30, 37.
48 the manuscript versions, having the indication forma glasului II (borrowing the 2nd mode scale).
Ex. 19 Podobii și axioane, Cluj, 1996, p. 30
Cel ce Te-ai înălțat pe cruce - Ο υψωθείς εν τώ Σταυρώ This is another podoben in the 4th mode, with the scale borrowed from the 2nd mode. However, in the private manuscript, the key is that of the 2nd mode (Ex. 20) and not of the 4th mode, as opposed to the preceding podoben from the same manuscript, which has the same scale, but a 4th mode key (Ex. 16).
Ex. 20 Private manuscript (M. Mureșeanu), f. 49v
In the other Romanian manuscript (Ex. 21), the mode is also indicated by number (the Arabic numeral 4), while in the Greek version, the concise indication is being preserved, identical to the preceding podoben. The versions, though, are quite similar. Even if there are some differences between them, they repeat themselves in the next phrases, so the variation is consistent (the preference for a certain interval at the beginning of the phrases, for instance). Some cadential formulas are identical in all three Romanian versions and, at the same time, similar to those in the Greek version.
Ex. 21 Ms. II-14 BJC, f. 23v
49
Ex. 22 Ms. O. 354 BAR Cj, p. 150
Ex. 23 Podobii și axioane, Cluj, 1996, p. 37
Spăimântatu-s-a Iosif – Κατεπλάγη Ιωσήφ This is the last podoben in the 4th mode, this time having the scale specific to the 2nd plagal mode (6th mode). In Teoria si practica muzicii bisericesti30, this mode is named “the hard chromatic 4th mode (nenano)”. It is here too that we discover that this sedalny stands as a testimony to the fact that nenano was considered a 4th chromatic mode by those “from ancient times”, whereas in the actual notation it is considered to be either a 2nd plagal mode, triphonos, or “simply nenano”31.
Ex. 24 Private manuscript(M. Mureșeanu), f. 50r
Ex. 25 Ms. II-14 BJC, f. 22r
30 G. Konstantinou, op. cit., p. 283 31 idem, p. 284.
50 In the given examples, the martyria of the mode is, this time, written approximately the same. Exception to the rule is the Greek version, which is consistent in its use of a concise mode indication, with the phthora on the appropriate neume and not on the mode indication before the chant, as is the case with the other versions32. As far as this podoben is concerned, the tonic is di (sol) in all versions. The first two examples (Ex. 24, Ex. 25) have the initial phrase almost identical. The Greek version is slightly shorter than the Romanian ones, being the only one which does not have diatonic (notated) fragments.
Ex. 26 Ms. O. 354 BAR Cj, p. 149
Ex. 27 Anastasimatar, Buc., 2002, p. 169
Ex. 28 Podobii și axioane, Cluj, 1996, p. 28
32 In the Greek manuscript, the mode indication usually appears just at the beginning of a new mode. Within it, the podoben or the sedalnies follow each other without any other indications, the tonic being the only one mentioned, usually when it has to change.
51
Toată nădejdea – Όλην αποθέμενοι This is a podoben in the 2nd plagal (6th) mode, with the scale borrowed from the 2nd authentic mode. The initial martyria is written differently for each version. At first sight, the examples group each other two by two. Two examples have the tonic vou (mi) (Ex. 29, Ex. 30), the other two di (sol) (Ex. 31, Ex. 32). In fact, though, if we are to calculate the interval of each example, we notice that they all begin from ke, and that they have an almost identical incipit.
Ex. 29 Private manuscript (M. Mureșeanu), f. 51r
Ex. 30 Ms. O. 354 BAR Cj, p. 140
The versions from Ex. 31 and Ex. 32 share a different phrasing, the first martyria appearing only at the end of the text Toată nădejdea punându-şi în ceruri,… It is not a mere coincidence that these two versions are the most recently dated ones. In these two Romanian examples, one takes into account the logical literary phrasing for the Romanian language: Toată nădejdea punându-şi în ceruri, vistierie nefurată loruşi sfinţii şi-au agonisit,... In Greek, the order within the phrase is different: Όλην αποθέμενοι, εν ουρανοίς τήν ελπίδα, θησαυρόν ασύλητον,... One can notice the comma following the first two words (translated into Romanian – Toată nădejdea). In the older Romanian versions, similar to the one in Ex. 2933, the comma from the Greek text is being preserved, namely it is musically conveyed through a cadence, despite the fact that, once translated and modified through change of
33 The copyist of the private manuscript is obviously influenced by the Greek models. One can notice the manner in which he notates the keys, his preference to the use of the term eh, and the inclusion of a Greek cherubic hymn.
52 topic, it becomes useless in the literary text. In examples 31 and 32, the comma is theoretically eliminated. However, even though the martyria does no longer appear in the middle of the phrase, the cadence is implied by the same ison with clasma (which doubles the value of the note above which it stands), also present in other versions. In conclusion, the adaptation is done only on a theoretical and visual level, for in practice, more precisely, on the auditory level, the cadence is immediately noticed. The explanation lies, we believe, in the fact that, even though the desire and effort to “correct and adjust” a liturgical text has existed for two centuries, this is still hard to achieve, especially when the text overlaps the music. Here intervenes the psychological component, because it becomes difficult to “correct” a chant that has already entered both the cognitive and the affective memory of the psaltis, respectively of the community within which it is being intonated.
Ex. 31 Ms. II-14 BJC, f. 26r
Ex. 32 Podobii și axioane, Cluj, 1996, p. 52
53
Din pântece Te-ai născut – Ἐκ γαστρὸ ς ἐ τέ χθης This podoben does not appear in the collection of Podobii și axioane, published in Cluj, which we have used so far for our comparison. In Ex. 33, both the key and the phthora on the tonic di are the ones specific to the 2nd mode.
Ex. 33 Private manuscript (M. Mureșeanu), f. 51v
In Ex. 34 there is a 6th (2nd plagal – lăturaș) mode indication, with the tonic vu and the chromatic phthora of the 2nd authentic mode. The first interval, though, indicates that the melody starts from di, too.
Ex. 34 Ms. II-14 BJC, f. 27r
In Ex. 35, from the Greek manuscript, there is no indication. The indication that initiates the group of podoben, which is a page prior to this podoben, is the 2nd plagal mode, with the tonic on vu. If the beginning is on vu, we do not reach the first martyria properly. The copyist therefore forgot to indicate a new tonic, di, for this podoben.
Ex. 35 Ms. O. 354 BAR Cj, p. 141
54 All the examples have a final cadence on vu. Naturally, all three versions present common features (similar melodical-rhytmical profile and ambitus, almost identical cadential phrases and formulas). Some passages from the Greek version resemble to a great extent one of the Romanian versions, while other passages resemble the other Romanian version. At other times, the Romanian versions resemble each other. What is more, the phenomenon is common with all the podoben we have presented. In general, the analysis and comparison of all these podoben creates the impression of a continuous permutation among the versions in question34.
3. Conclusions The chromatic genre presents itself as extremely varied within the proposed category of chants. The examples illustrate a series of combinations of genres, modes and keys (or ways of indicating modes). Thus, there are podobens in the 1st mode borrowing the 2nd mode scale, in the 2nd mode borrowing the 6th (2nd plagal) mode scale, in the 4th mode borrowing the 2nd authentic or 2nd plagal (6th) mode scale, and finally podobens in the 6th (2nd plagale) mode borrowing the 2nd authentic mode scale. Practice, as reflected in the musical repertoire of the manuscripts, shows itself richer and more nuanced than the theory. The versions resemble one another, sometimes to a greater extent, at other times to a lesser extent, for one and the same podoben. Even though we are referring to a noted repertoire, this repertoire manifests the dynamics specific to the oral tradition, the variation, respectively the versions, being specific notably to the oral tradition. Orality probably plays a bigger role than one might think or wish, even if it involves a written repertoire.
ABSTRACT
The aim of this paper is to present the diverse manner in which the chromatic genre occurs in the podoben (prosomia) melodies, using examples taken mainly from the manuscripts kept in Cluj-Napoca libraries. Beside the frequent case of the chromatic second authentic mode exchanging scale with its plagal, there are also podobens in diatonic modes borrowing scales of the chromatic modes. We found Romanian manuscripts and also Greek ones containing series of podobens for all eight modes. Each of these podobens has a number of
34 The effect is, obviously, both visual and auditory.
55 variants, as reflected in the chosen manuscripts and printed books. The oral tradition influence is evident once more even when we are dealing with a written repertoire, such as the one analysed in this paper.
Bibliography Anastasimatarul cuviosului Macarie Ieromonahul cu adăugiri din cel al paharnicului Dimitrie Suceveanu, Editura Bizantină, București, 2002. Angelopoulos Lykourgos, Vocile Bizanțului, Asociația Culturală Byzantion, Iași, 2011. Barbu-Bucur Sebastian, Ioan sin Radului Duma Brașoveanu, in „Studii de muzicologie”, vol. X, Editura Muzicală, București, 1974, pp. 161-222. Ciobanu Gheorghe, Muzica bizantină, in „Studii de muzicologie”, vol. VI, Editura Muzicală, București, 1970, pp. 69-97. Ciobanu Gheorghe, Teorie, practică, tradiție – factorii complementari necesari descifrării vechii muzici bizantine, in „Studii de muzicologie”, vol. XVII, Editura Muzicală, București, 1983, pp. 191-198. Ciobanu Gheorghe, Vechimea genului cromatic în muzica bizantină, in „Studii de muzicologie”, vol. IX, Editura Muzicală, București, 1973, pp. 88-93. Csakany Zsofia, Nemeth István, Un manuscris de muzică psaltică din Biblioteca Timotei Cipariu, in „Acta musicae Byzantinae”, vol. II, no. 1, Iaşi, aprilie 2000, pp. 146-148. Dura Carmen, Contribuții la cunoașterea operei lui Anton Pann. Anastasimatarul, in „Byzantion Romanicon”, vol. 8-9, Editura Artes, Iași, 2012, pp. 234-262. Dicţionar de termeni muzicali, Editura Enciclopedică, Bucureşti, 2008. Konstantinou N. Georgios, Teoria și practica muzicii bisericești, vol. 1, second edition, Asociația Culturală Byzantion, Iași, 2012. Makris Eustathios, The Chromatic Scales of the Deuteros Modes in Theory and Practice, in „Plainsong and Medieval Music”, vol. 14, no. 1, Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 1-10. Manuscris psaltic, biblioteca scriitorului Marcel Mureșeanu, Cluj- Napoca. Manuscrisul II-14, Biblioteca Județeană „Octavian Goga”, Cluj-Napoca. Manuscrisul Oriental 354, Biblioteca Academiei Române, filiala Cluj- Napoca. Moisil Costin, Diatonic, cromatic, enarmonic. Observaţii privind intonaţia în muzica bizantină, in „Acta musicae Byzantinae”, vol. V, Iaşi, mai 2003, pp. 51-55. Moisil Costin, Observaţii privind genul enarmonic la începutul secolului al XIX-lea, in „Acta Musicae Byzantinae”, vol. VII, Iaşi, Mai 2004, pp. 90-95. Moisil Costin, Scările muzicale la Macarie Ieromonahul, in „Acta Musicae Byzantinae”, vol. II, no. 1, Iaşi, aprilie 2000, pp. 128-137. Petcu Marcu ierom., Lihănceanu Nicolae, Pintilie Adrian Pr., Creţu Ramona-Anca, Pagini din istoria monahismului ortodox în revistele teologice din România, III. Cultură, artă, documente, București, Editura Bibliotecii Naționale a României; Editura Mitropolit Iacov Putneanul, Putna, 2011.
56 Podobii și axioane. Culegere de muzică bisericească ortodoxă întocmită de Pr. prof. dr. Nicu Moldoveanu și de Pr. lect. dr. Vasile Stanciu, Editura Arhidiecezana, Cluj-Napoca, 1996. Popescu-Pasărea Ion, Principii de muzică bisericească orientală (psaltică), Tipografia Cărţilor Bisericeşti, Bucureşti, 1939. Raasted Jørgen, Chromaticism in Medieval Byzantine Chant, in „Cahiers de l'Institut du Moyen Âge Grec et Latin”, no. 53, Copenhague, 1986, pp. 15-36. Raasted Jørgen, Thoughts on a Revision of the Transcrisption Rules of the Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae, in „Cahiers de l'Institut du Moyen Âge Grec et Latin”, no. 54, Copenhague, 1986, pp. 13-38.
57
A statistical approach of the chromaticity. The sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος – Today, a tomb holds Him in the new and old notation
DIMOSTHENIS SPANOUDAKIS
Η περαιτέρω ανάπτυξη μεθόδων ανάλυσης της Βυζαντινής Μουσικής μέσω διακαλλιτεχνικών και διεπιστημονικών ανοιγμάτων, ειδικά με την αξιοποίηση πορισμάτων έρευνας στους τομείς των γνωσιακών επιστημών της μουσικής, μπορεί να φέρει στο φως πολλές άγνωστες ακόμα πτυχές αυτής της θαυμάσιας μουσικής.1
1. Introduction The present study proposes an interdisciplinary approach (Musicology and Mathematics – Statistic) which has to do with the analysis to the Byzantine Music through the research in manuscripts with new and old notation2. More specifically, we use a mathematically-statistically3 informed approach to investigate chromaticity in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει
1 Α further development of analytical methods of Byzantine Music through interarts and interdisciplinary approaches, especially through the use of research findings in the fields of cognitive science of music will enlighten many unknown aspects of this wonderful music; Μαρία Αλεξάνδρου, “Παρατηρήσεις για την ανάλυση, υφή και μεταισθητική της Βυζαντινής Μουσικής. Ο ύμνος Σιγησάτω πάσα σαρξ βροτεία” (Maria Alexandru, “Remarks on the analysis, musical texture and meta-aesthetics of Byzantine Chant. The Hymn Let all mortal flesh keep silence”), in International Musicological Conference ”Crossroads | Greece as an intercultural pole of musical thought and creativity", School of Music Studies of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki and International Musicological Society (IMS), Regional Association for the Study of Music on the Balkans, 6-10 of June 2011, Θεσσαλονίκη, at the conclusions of this article – unit 4. Proceedings to be published; I would like to thank Professor Alexandru for her support and encouragement. 2 By new notation we mean the so called New Method or New System in use since 1814, the year of the Reform of the Three Teachers. Old notation is every kind of notation before 1814, in our case especially the middle-Byzantine one. Cf. Μαρία Αλεξάνδρου, Ιστορία της Βυζαντινής και Μεταβυζαντινής Μουσικής (Maria Alexandru, History of Byzantine and post-Byzantine music), vol. 2, Αριστοτέλειο Πανεπιστήμιο Θεσσαλονίκης, Τμήμα Μουσικών Σπουδών, 2007-2008, pp. 7-8. 3 “Statistics is the science of learning from data, and of measuring, controlling, and communicating uncertainty; and it thereby provides the navigation essential for controlling the course of scientific and societal advances.” From the American
58 τάφος – Today, a tomb holds Him4 which is chanted as the first idiomelon of the Lauds of Mattins of Holy Saturday and it is in the second (B’) mode with finalis Di5. In the present study, the sticheron which belongs to the repertory of the Old Sticherarion, is examined: i) In new notation from the manuscript Sancti Sepulcri 715 (MPT 7156), which is written by Chourmouzios Chartofylaxin the early 19th century7 and includes the slow exegeseis – transcriptions – interpretations of the aforementioned Teacher for the old sticheraric style. ii) In old notation from the highly important manuscript Dionysiou 564 (D 564), which is written by Grigorios Mpunis Alyatis8 in
Statistical Association webpage: http://www.amstat.org/careers/whatisstatistics.cfm (11/05/2012). 4 The Lenten Triodion, transl. by Mother Mary and Archimandrite Kallistos Ware, Faber and Faber, London, 1978, p. 652. 5 Τριώδιον (Triodion), Αποστολική Διακονία της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, Αθήνα, 1960, p. 417. For the theoretical finalis of the eight modes in the new notation: Maria Alexandru, Ἐξηγήσεις καὶ μεταγραφὲς τῆς βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς. Σύντομη εἰσαγωγὴ στὸν προβληματισμό τους (Maria Alexandru, Exegeseis and transcriptions of byzantine music. Brief introduction to the musicological issue), University Studio Press, Θεσσαλονίκη, 2010, p. 65. See also Δημήτριος Παναγιωτόπουλος, Θεωρία καὶ Πρᾶξις τῆς Βυζαντινῆς Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς Μουσικῆς (Dimitrios Panagiotopoulos, Theory and practice of Byzantine Ecclesiastical Music), Ἀδελφότης Θεολόγων "ὁ Σωτήρ”, Αθήνα, 1997, pp. 181-183. 6 The abbreviation MPT comes from the Greek name: Metochion Panagiou Taphou. 7 For the new analytical notation and specially for Chourmouzios Chartofylax see: Χουρμούζιος Χαρτοφύλαξ, Εἰσαγωγὴ εἰς τὸ Θεωρητικὸν καὶ πρακτικὸν τῆς Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς Μουσικῆς (Chourmouzios Chartofylax, Introduction to the theory and practice of ecclesiastic music), critical edition by Εμμανουήλ Γιαννόπουλος, University Studio Press, Θεσσαλονίκη, 2002, pp. 9-16. See also Γεώργιος Παπαδόπουλος, ῾Ιστορικὴ ἐπισκόπησις τῆς βυζαντινῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς μουσικῆς ἀπὸ τῶν Ἀποστολικῶν χρόνων μέχρι τῶν καθ’ ἡμᾶς (Georgios Papadopoulos, Historical review of the byzantine ecclesiastical music from Apostolic times until today), 1st repr., Τέρτιος, Κατερίνη, 2002, pp. 198-200. About the ergography of Chourmouzios:Μανόλης Χατζηγιακουμής, Μουσικὰ χειρόγραφα Τουρκοκρατίας pp. 1453-1832 (Manolis Chatzigiakoumis, Musical manuscripts of the Tourkokratia), vol. I, Αδελφοί Ρόδη, Αθήνα, 1975, pp. 389-391. About the dating of the MPT 715: Chourmouzios Chartofylax.: Χατζηγιακουμής, Μουσικά Χειρόγραφα, p. 390. See also Γρηγόριος Στάθης, Τιμὴ πρὸς τὸν διδάσκαλον.Ἔκφραση ἀγάπης στὸ πρόσωπο τοῦ καθηγητοῦ Γρηγορίου Θ. Στάθη. Ἀφιέρωμα στὰ ἑξηντάχρονα τῆς ἡλικίας καὶ στὰ τριαντάχρονα τῆς ἐπιστημονικῆς καὶ καλλιτεχνικῆς προσφορᾶς του (Gregorios Stathis, Honour to the Teacher. Expression of love for the Teacher Gregorios Stathis. To his sixtieth birthday and thirty years of his scientific and artistic contribution), Ανατολής το Περιήχημα, Αθήνα, 2001, p. 706. 8 Alyatis was possibly the Precentor of St. Sophia in Constantinople in 1453, the year of the Fall of the City. For a detailed ergobiography: Maria Alexandru, “Gregorios Mpunis Alyatis: An Open Bioergographic Index Card and an analysis of the pentikostarion Τὴν
59 1445 A.D. This manuscrpt is neumated with fully developed Middle- Byzantine notation.9 The aim of the study is to investigate whether some notes of the chromatic scale have a “closer relation” with: i) the ison and the neumes which augment the duration of the phonetic signs10, ii) the syllables and the kola11 of the hymnographic text.
λάμψιν τοῦ προσώπου σου”, in Psaltike, Neue Studien zur Byzantinischen Musik: Festschrift für Gerda Wolfram, ed. Nina Maria Wanek, Praesens, Vienna, 2011, p. 18. See also Κωνσταντίνος Καραγκούνης, Ἡ παράδοση καὶ ἐξήγηση τοῦ μέλους τῶν χερουβικῶν τῆς βυζαντινῆς καὶ μεταβυζαντινῆς μελοποιΐας (Konstantinos Karagunis, The tradition and exegesis of the melos of the cheroubic hymn of the Byzantine and post-byzantine melopoiea), IBM – Μελέται, Γρ. Στάθης, Αθήνα, 2003, p. 270. About a detailed description and the dating of the manuscript: Γρηγόριος Στάθης, Τὰ χειρόγραφα βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς, Ἅγιον Ὄρος, Κατάλογος περιγραφικός (Gregorios Stathis, The manuscripts of byzantine chant, Holy Mountain, Descriptive catalogue), vol. 2, Ίδρυμα Βυζαντινής Μουσικολογίας and Γρηγόριος Στάθης, Αθήνα, 1976, pp. 688-689. 9 For the stages and the development of the old notation see: Αλεξάνδρου, Ιστορία, pp. 7-8. 10 In the new notation these signs are the so called prosthetika chronika simeia (additive duration marks): the klasma, the apli with its derivates (dipli [double], tripli [triple] e.t.c.) and the argon. All signs add duration to the note on which they have been put. Παναγιωτόπουλος, Θεωρία, pp. 66-67 and 78. The pauses in the new notation could be considered as prosthetika chronika simeia but they will not be included in our measurements because they are not related with any note. In the old notation the duration marks are called argiai and they are four: kratima, dipli, dyo apostrophoi, and tsakisma. However, in this paper we will not examine the tsakisma because it represents only the half length (ήμισυ αργία) according to the Protheory of the Papadike. Cf. Maria Alexandru, Studie über die 'grossen Zeichen' der byzantinischen musikalischen Notation unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Periode vom Ende des 12. bis Anfang des 19. Jahrhunderts, Dissertation, vol. 2, University of Copenhagen, 2000, p. 17. Moreover it seems that tsakisma’s functionality has to do both with the embellishment and only a small increasing of the duration of the note on which it stands. 11 The kolon could be defined as the basic musical and poetical unit of a setting. It ends with a cadence. Cf. Maria Alexandru, “Αναλυτικές προσεγγίσεις και ιχνηλασία του κάλλους στη βυζαντινή μουσική. Ο Ευχαριστήριος Ύμνος Σὲ ὑμνοῦμεν”, (Maria Alexandru, “Analytic approach and a quest for the discovery of beauty of byzantine music. The Thanksgiving Hymn, We pray You), in Symposium Μουσική Θεωρία και ανάλυση – Μεθοδολογία και Πράξη (Music Theory and analysis – Methodology and Practice), Proceedings of the Symposium, 29.09.-1.10. 2006, ed. Kostas Tsougras and A.U.Th. - School of Music Studies, Θέρμη - Θεσσαλονίκη, 2006, p. 320. See also Oμάδα Παλαιογραφίας Βυζαντινής Μουσικής από το Τμήμα Μουσικών Σπουδών του Αριστοτελείου Πανεπιστημίου Θεσσαλονίκης, “Χρυσέοις έπεσι, ένα στιχηρό εις τιμή του Αγίου Ιωάννου του Χρυσοστόμου στη διαχρονική του εξέλιξη: Παλαιογραφικές & αναλυτικές αναζητήσεις” (Study Group of Palaeography of Byzantine Music, “Chryseois epesi-In golden words” – a sticheron in honor of St. John Chrysostom in its diachronic musical development), ed. Μ. Alexandru, in Proceedings of the 1st
60 Moreover, we want to examine whether and how some notes have a greater total duration in comparison with other notes in the same scale and to visualize the “profile12” of the second mode according to the acoustic result of the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος. The conclusions emerge through a parallel research which focuses on the modulations which occur in the sticheron both in new and old notation. It has to be noticed that the notes in the old notation show us the metrophonic structure of the melody13.
2. The sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος in new notation. The interpretation of Chourmouzios Chartofylax in MPT 715 In new notation we examined statistically: In which note and how often we have the ison and the additive duration marks14. Which are the first notes of every kolon and inside the kolon, of every new syllable of the hymnographic text. Which is the total duration of each note in the whole sticheron. Which is the “profile” of the B’ mode according to the distribution of the duration of the tones of the chant we examine. The reason we include the ison and the additive duration marks in our measurements, is that the first sign causes repetition while the second group of signs causes extension of the note, in other words, both signs lead to melodic strengthening of the respective notes. Similarly, we
International Conference of the American Society of Byzantine Music and Hymnology, September 10-15th 2007, Αθήνα, p. 357 (337-485). Published on the internet: http://ww.asbmh.pitt.edu/page9/page10/page11/page11.html and http://www.asbmh.pitt.edu/page12/Alexandru.pdf At the beginning of this study the plan included only the measurements for the first note for every syllable. After the suggestion of Professor Alexandru the first note of the kolon has also been taken in consideration. 12 This was the second suggestion of Professor Alexandru. 13 Metrophonic structure of a piece is what is written down with the intervals signs (ison and emphona) of the middle-Byzantine. Μαρία Αλεξάνδρου, Παλαιογραφία Βυζαντινής Μουσικής (Maria Alexandru, Palaeography of Byzantine Music), Αριστοτέλειο Πανεπιστήμιο Θεσσαλονίκης, notes of the courses entitled: Μετροφωνία – Παραλλαγή – Μέλος και άλλες έννοιες κλειδί στη Θεωρία της Ψαλτικής Τέχνης (Metrophonia – Parallagi – Melos and other key terms in the Theory of the Chanting Art), academic year 2012-2013. The notes we read in metrophonic structure (old notation) are called notes of the metrophonic structure or structural notes. On the other hand, dominating notes (new notation) are the notes, on which the cadences (perfect, imperfect, final) of the melos occur. Additionally, these notes appear more frequently and the melody focuses on them, while neighbour notes usually tend to be attracted by them. See: Παναγιωτόπουλος, Θεωρία, pp. 126-127. 14 The so called prosthetika chronika simeia (klasma, apli and argon). See footnote 16 in the introduction.
61 examine the first note of every new syllable and the kolon. The relation between words and music in Byzantine Chant is very strong15 and additionally, it seems that the first note of each syllable and the incipit of each kolon are of major importance in the perception’s and memory’s area16. Furthermore, we examine the total duration for each note in order to: a) find out which notes sound longer in this sticheron and b) shape the “profile” of the second mode with finalis Di. In Fig. 1 is the sticheron from manuscript MPT 71517. The additional colored circles show the phthorai which indicate modulation. Blue circles show the phthorai for the soft chromatic scale, red circles the phthorai for the intense chromatic scale and green circles the phthorai for the soft diatonic scale. Table 1 includes the hymnographic text with structural, metrical and modal analysis18 of the sticheron. In the first, second and third column the periods, verses and kola are noticed respectively. In the fourth column the full hymnographic text is colored in order to show the use of the soft chromatic scale with blue color, the intense chromatic scale with red color and the diatonic scale with green color. Sometimes, a change of scale occurs inside a syllable. In such cases the syllable is underlined. The color of the letters shows the scale at the beginning of the syllable and the color of the line shows the following scale. There is no syllable with more than one modulation in this sticheron. At the last column there is the total number of syllables for each kolon. In Table 2 we have the statistic measurements we aforementioned and in Graphs 1a till 6 we have the visualization of these measurements. It is necessary to notice some parameters of the measurements. When the intense chromatic scale or the diatonic scale is used, then the
15 Egon Wellesz, Byzantinische Musik. Ein Vortrag, ed. Gerda Wolfram, Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna, 2000, p. 17 & cover page. Cf.: Αλεξάνδρου, Σιγησάτω πᾶσα σὰρξ βροτεία. 16 Sven Blankenberger & Katrin Bittrich, “The Impact of Trace Decay, Interference, and Confusion in a Tonal Memory Span Task”, in 12th International Conference for Music Perception and Cognition and 8th Conference of the European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music. Proceedings of the joint Conference, 23-28.07.2012, ed. Emilios Cambouropoulos, Costas Tsougras, Panayotis Mavromatis, Konstantinos Pastiadis, A.U.Th. – School of Music Studies, Θεσσαλονίκη, 2012, p. 109 and hand out of the presentation. In the proceedings only the abstract of this paper is included exclusively in p.109. In this research, the impact of different mechanisms of forgetting in short term memory for tonal and verbal stimuli is examined. In the main results, included in the hand out, it was mentioned that the first verbal and tonal stimuli had the greatest percentage of correct immediate and delayed recall. 17 For this manuscript see the unit 1. Introduction. 18 This multilevel analysis is based on the researches of the Study group of Palaeography from Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.: Oμάδα Παλαιογραφίας, "Χρυσέοις έπεσι”.
62 measurements are based on the notes of the pseudoparallagi19. Moreover, the effect of the phthorai is measured from the sign on which they stand. For instance, almost at the beginning of the second line of the sticheron, on the syllable συν- of the word συνέχει, there is a phthora for the intense chromatic scale (see Fig. 1). This ison is counted in the intense chromatic scale. Furthermore, in two cases there are two isa with gorgon20. The duration of each ison pair lasts one protos chronos (one quaver in a hypothetical transcription on staff) and for this reason each pair is counted as one ison.
19 By Pseudoparallagi we mean the change of the names of the notes according to a phthora which indicates a modulation in another mode or/and scale. 20 1) Seventh line of the sticheron on the syllable –θος of the word λίθος. 2) Fifteenth line on the syllable –ξα of the word δόξα.
63 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 64
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Figure 1. The sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος in manuscript MPT 715 (f. 193v-r). Blue circles show the phthorai for the soft chromatic scale, red circles the phthorai for the intense chromatic scale and green circles the phthorai for the diatonic scale.
Structural, metrical and modal analysis
Text of iod with indications of the modulations between Verse
soft and intense chromatic scale and diatonic Nr. Kolon
Per
scale syllables
Ι A 1 Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος, 8 2 τὸν συν έχο ντα παλάμῃ τὴν Κτίσιν 11 B 3 καλύ πτει λίθος 5 4 τὸ ν καλ ύψαντα ἀρετῇ τοὺς οὐρανο ύς 12 C 5 ὑπνοῖ ἡ ζωή 5 6 καὶ ᾍδης τρέμει 5 D 7 καὶ Ἀδὰμ τῶν δεσμῶν ἀπολύεται 11 ΙΙ E 8 Δόξα τῇ σῇ οἰκονομ ίᾳ 9 9 δι' ἧς τελέσας πάντα 7 F 10 σαββατισμὸν αἰώνιον 8 G 11 ἐδωρήσω ἡμῖν ῶς Θεός 9 H 12 τὴν παναγίαν 5
ἐκ νεκρῶν σου Ἀνάστασιν 8 13
Table 1. Structural, metrical and modal analysis of the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος with indications of the oscillations between soft and intense chromatic scale and diatonic scale in ΜΠΤ 715 f. 193r-v21.
21 Based on the multilevel analysis of: Ομάδα Παλαιογραφίας, "Χρυσέοις έπεσι".
65
2.1. Table for measurements and Graphs
Manuscript MPT 715, f. 193r-v
h ct Measu- Notes e rements - Measurements Obj Mode Grap - Scale - Percentag Percentage (%)
Notese Ni Pa Vou Ga Di Ke Zo’ Ni’ Pa’ Vou’ Ga’ Number - - 10 5 15 11 4 - - - - 1a Β’ Percentage % - - 22,2 11,1 33,3 24,4 8,9 - - - -
n Notes Pseudopar. Ps.Ni Ps.Pa Ps.Vou Ps.Ga Ps.Di Ps.Ke Ps.Zo’ Ps.Ni’ Ps.Pa’ Ps.Vou’ Ps.Ga’
Iso Number 1 8 - 7 12 4 2 2 1 1 - 1b Pl.B’ Percentage % 2,6 21,1 - 18,4 31,6 10,5 5,3 5,3 2,6 2,6 - Diat. Number - - - - 1 2 - 1 - - - 1c scale Percentage % - - - - 25,0 50,0 - 25,0 - - -
Notes Ni Pa Vou Ga Di Ke Zo’ Ni’ Pa’ Vou’ Ga’ Β’ Number - - 23 14 37 18 1 1 - - - 2a Percentage % - - 24,5 14,9 39,4 19,1 1,1 1,1 - - -
Notes Pseudopar. Ps.Ni Ps.Pa Ps.Vou Ps.Ga Ps.Di Ps.Ke Ps.Zo’ Ps.Ni’ Ps.Pa’ Ps.Vou’ Ps.Ga’ Number 3 21 16 12 24 13 11 3 4 1 1 2b Pl.B’ Percentage % 2,8 19,3 14,7 11,0 22,0 11,9 10,1 2,8 3,7 0,9 0,9 tive tive duration marks i Diat. Number ------3 2 2 - - 2c scale
Add Percentage % ------42,9 28,6 28,6 - -
Notes Ni Pa Vou Ga Di Ke Zo’ Ni’ Pa’ Vou’ Ga’ Number - - 18 8 16 5 - - - - - 3a Β’ Percentage % - - 38,3 17,0 34,0 10,6 - - - - -
Notes Pseudopar. Ps.Ni Ps.Pa Ps.Vou Ps.Ga Ps.Di Ps.Ke Ps.Zo’ Ps.Ni’ Ps.Pa’ Ps.Vou’ Ps.Ga’ syllable Number 2 11 5 8 18 4 3 1 - - - 3b Pl.B’ Percentage % 3,9 21,6 9,8 15,7 35,3 7,8 5,9 2,0 - - - New Diat. Number - - - - 1 - 1 2 - - - 3c scale Percentage % - - - - 25,0 - 25,0 50,0 - - -
Notes Ni Pa Vou Ga Di Ke Zo’ Ni’ Pa’ Vou’ Ga’ Number - - 4 - 3 ------4a Β’ Percentage % - - 57,1 - 42,9 ------
olon Notes Pseudopar. Ps.Ni Ps.Pa Ps.Vou Ps.Ga Ps.Di Ps.Ke Ps.Zo’ Ps.Ni’ Ps.Pa’ Ps.Vou’ Ps.Ga’ k Number 1 1 1 - 1 1 - - - - - 4b Pl.B’
New Percentage % 20,0 20,0 20,0 - 20,0 20,0 - - - - - Diat. Number ------1 - - - 4c scale Percentage % ------100,0 - - -
Notes Ni Pa Vou Ga Di Ke Zo’ Ni’ Pa’ Vou’ Ga’ Number 4 14 116 139 231 171 66 13 - - - 5a Β’ Percentage % 0,5 1,9 15,4 18,4 30,6 22,7 8,8 1,7 - - -
Notes Pseudopar. Ps.Ni Ps.Pa Ps.Vou Ps.Ga Ps.Di Ps.Ke Ps.Zo’ Ps.Ni’ Ps.Pa’ Ps.Vou’ Ps.Ga’ Number 32 122 127 151 179 87 65 39 25 9 3 5b l l duration
a Pl.B’ Percentage % 3,8 14,5 15,1 18,0 21,3 10,4 7,7 4,6 3,0 1,1 0,4 Tot Diat. Number - - - 2 9 21 13 13 - - - 5c scale Percentage % - - - 3,4 15,5 36,2 22,4 22,4 - - -
Table 2. Measurements for the ison, additive duration marks, new syllables, new kola and the total duration which is counted in quavers i.e. half chronoi protoi. (Pl.B’: Plagal of the second mode.)
66
Graph 1a. The notes with ison in the Graph 1b. The notes (pseudoparallagi) Graph 1c. The notes (pseudoparallagi) parts where the soft chromatic scale is with ison in the parts where the intense with ison in the parts where the diatonic used. chromatic scale is used. scale is used. Graphs 1a-c. The notes (horizontal axis) and the number of (vertical axis) isa for each note in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος from the manuscript MPT 715, f. 193r-v. ------
67
Graph 2a. The notes with additive Graph 2b. The notes (pseudoparallagi) Graph 2c. The notes (pseudoparallagi) duration marks in the parts where the soft with additive duration marks in the parts with additive duration marks in the parts chromatic scale is used. where the intense chromatic scale is used. where the diatonic scale is used. Graphs 2a-c. The notes (horizontal axis) and the number (vertical axis) of additive duration marks for each note in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος from the manuscript MPT 715, f. 193r-v.
Graph 3a. The first notes of the new Graph 3b. The first notes Graph 3c. The first notes syllables in the parts where the soft (pseudoparallagi) of the new syllables in (pseudoparallagi) of the new syllables in chromatic scale is used. the parts where the intense chromatic scale the parts where the diatonic scale is used. is used. Graphs 3a-c. The first notes (horizontal axis) and the number (vertical axis) of their appearance on a new syllable in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος in manuscript MPT 715, f. 193r-v. ------68
Graph 4a. The first notes of the new kola Graph 4b. The first notes Graph 4c. The first notes in the parts where the soft chromatic scale (pseudoparallagi) of the new kola in the (pseudoparallagi) of the new kola in the is used. parts where the intense chromatic scale is parts where the diatonic scale is used. used.
.Graphs 4a-c. The first notes (horizontal axis) and the number (vertical axis) of their appearance on a new kolon in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος in manuscript MPT 715, f. 193r-v.
Graph 5a. The overall duration of each Graph 5b. The overall duration of each Graph 5c. The overall duration of each note in the parts where the soft chromatic note (pseudoparallagi) in the parts where note (pseudoparallagi) in the parts where scale is used. the intense chromatic scale is used. the diatonic scale is used.
Graphs 5a-c. The notes (horizontal axis) and their overall duration (vertical axis) in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος in manuscript MPT 715, f. 193r-v. ------69
Graph 6. The “profile” (distribution of the duration of the tones) of the second mode with finalis Di in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος in manuscript MPT 715, f. 193r-v. The inner modal oscillations in B’, pl.B’ mode and diatonic scale of the sticheron are included. Duration is counted in quavers i.e. half chronoi protoi.
2.2. Observing the measurements’ results and the graphs 1a till 6 Observing the Graphs 1a-c for the ison, we can see that when the melody uses the soft chromatic scale, the notes with ison are more usually the notes Vou, Di and Ke (overall percentage of the dominating notes22 of the B’ mode Vou and Di23: 55,5%). On the other hand, when the melody uses the intense chromatic scale, the notes are more usually Pa and Di (overall percentage of the dominating notes of the plagal of the second mode [pl.B’] Pa and Di24: 53,7%). It should be noticed that in this sticheron there is no ison on note Pa in the soft chromatic scale, while there is no ison on note Vou of the pseudoparallagi in the intense chromatic scale. There are also small parts of short duration where the diatonic scale is used. For this reason we will not examine them in this paper. A future study will focus on the diatonic genre with more than two stichera. Graphs 2a-c and Table 2 show us similar things with Graphs 1a-1c. Dominating notes are strengthened with additive duration marks more than the other notes. Vou and Di for the soft chromatic scale have an overall percentage: 63,8%. Pa and Di (pseudoparallagi) in the intense chromatic scale have an overall percentage: 41,3%, bigger than any other pair of notes. In Graphs 3a-c and Table 2 we see a very strong relation between the dominating notes and the first note of the syllables of the hymnographic text. Specifically, the first note for each new syllable is more usually in the soft chromatic scale one of the dominating notes Vou or Di (overall percentage 72,3%), while in the intense chromatic scale syllables begin with the dominating notes Pa and Di (pseudoparallagi) in overall percentage 56,9%. In Graphs 4a-c and Table 2 a difference between soft and intense chromatic scale is obvious. In the soft chromatic scale new kola begin exclusively with the dominating notes Vou and Di (percentage 100%) while in the intense chromatic scale new kola begin equally with notes of the pseudoparallagi Ni, Pa, Vou, Ga, Di (Pa and Di 40,0%). Graphs 5a-c are differentiated from the previous graphs. While both in the soft and intense chromatic scale the note Di25 has the biggest
22 Dominating notes are the notes, on which the cadences (perfect, imperfect, final) of the melos occur. Additionally, these notes appear more frequently and the melody focuses on them, while neighbour notes usually tend to be attracted by them. See: Παναγιωτόπουλος, Θεωρία, pp. 126-127. 23 Θεωρητικὸν μέγα τῆς μουσικῆς Χρυσάνθου τοῦ ἐκ Μαδύτων (Great Theoritikon of Music by Chrysanthos ek Madyton), critical edition by Γεώργιος Κωνσταντίνου, Ιερά Μεγίστη Μονή Βατοπαιδίου, 2007, pp. 412-413. 24 Θεωρητικὸν μέγα, pp. 420-421. 25 For the intense chromatic scale: Di of the pseudoparallagi.
70 overall duration, notes Vou and Pa respectively are the fourth notes in overall duration. In the soft chromatic scale the second and the third note are Ke and Ga (Di 14,0%, Ke 10,4%, Ga 8,4% and Vou 7,0%). In the intense chromatic scale the second and the third note of the pseudoparallagi are Ga and Vou, followed by Pa on the fourth place (Di 10,8%, Ga 9,1%, Vou 7,7% and Pa 7,4%). In Graph 6 we have the “profile” of the second mode for this sticheron. It seems that there is an axis of symmetry in this Graph formed by the notes Di-19,5% and Ga-21,8% (Ke and Di / Pa and Ni of the pseudoparallagi in the pl.B’ respectively). The notes higher than Di (Ke-16,5% and Zo’-8,6%) have a reduced overall duration in a similar way with the notes lower than Ga (Vou-15,3% and Pa-6,6%). Concerning the above, we conclude that dominating notes of each mode-scale are melurgically strengthened with ison and additive duration marks (prosthetika chronika simeia) and are directly connected with the beginning of the microstructural (syllable) and mesostructural26 (kola) parts of the musical-poetical text. However, as we see in Graphs 5a-c, they don’t have always the greatest overall duration. In short, dominating notes are strengthened qualitatively but not always quantitatively. In this point we have to notice that we have already examined the sticheron in the new notation where almost every sign indicates a specific note and the B’ mode and the pl.B’ mode have a different scale with different intervals. In the old notation these two parameters were significantly differentiated. Firstly, in the old notation. the scale for the B’ and the pl.B’ mode is the same27 and secondly, the old notation is treated as stenographical by the Three Teachers, thus being subjected to slow exegesis. This means that every sign indicates one or more than two notes or a whole musical phrase according to the musical context28. Thus, an important question arises: Which will be the results of the measurements if we examine the same sticheron in the middle- Byzantine notation?
26 For the categorization of the musical poetical text in microstructural, mesostructural and macrostructural level see: Σωτήρης Δεσπότης, Ἑρμηνευτικές προσεγγίσεις στό μουσικό ὑλικό τῆς ἑλληνικῆς ψαλτικῆς τέχνης (Sotirios Despotis, Approaches to the interpretation of the music material of the Greek Chanting Art), in Γρηγόριος ο Παλαμάς (pp. 417-428), y. 90, fasc. 818, Θεσσαλονίκη, 2007, p. 421. 27 See Fig. 2. 28 Maria Alexandru, Kostas Tsougras, “On the Methodology of Structural Analysis in Byzantine and Classical Western Music – A Comparison”, in Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Interdisciplinary Musicology [CIM08], ed. E. Cambouropoulo, R. Parncutt, M. Solomos, D. Stefanou, C. Tsougras, A.U.Th. – School of Music Studies, Thessaloniki, 3-6 July 2008, p. 1.
71 3. The sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος in middle- Byzantine notation from the manuscript Dionysiou 564 Now we will examine the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος in the old notation from the manuscript Dionysiou 564 (D 564) which is written by Gregorios Mpunis Alyatis in the year 144529. As it is mentioned at the beginning of this paper, the highly important manuscript is neumated with fully developed Middle-byzantine notation. In Fig. 3 we see the sticheron with additional transnotation according to former researches30. As it is expected, there are no phthorai in the old manuscript despite the fact that in the interpretation by Chourmouzios we see eighteen phthorai for soft and intense chromatic and diatonic scale. Thus, an additional important question arises: Why did Chourmouzios Chartofylax made the modulations that we see in MPT 715? An obvious answer is that Chourmouzios knew the modulations from the oral tradition. However in this paper, we examine whether, except of the oral tradition, there are some embodied and hidden elements in the old notation which could reveal to us these modulations or generally some properties of the second mode and the chromatic genre. We make the same measurements according to the modulations or rather modal oscillations in the interpretation by Chourmouzios Chartofylax. See Fig. 1 with the interpretation and the phthorai in MPT 715, Fig. 3 with the transnotation in D 564 according to the modulations in Chourmouzios’ exegesis and Table 1 with the analysis in the hymnographic text. In Fig. 3 the letters of the transnotation indicate the modulations in the exegesis. Thus, the blue letters indicate soft chromatic scale in the interpretation, while red and green letters indicate intense chromatic and diatonic scale respectively. There are some syllables with two scales in their melody, for instance the syllable -θος of the word λίθος31 with soft and intense chromatic scale. In such cases the color of the transnotation letter in Fig. 3 refers to the first scale. It is also important to be noticed that the transnotation letters for each syllable are without space. Moreover, the illegible place from this folio of D 564
29 For detailed information of the manuscript see unit 1. Introduction. 30 Αλεξάνδρου, Ἐξηγήσεις, pp. 24-33, 76-77, 96. See also Jørgen Raasted, Intonation Formulas and Modal Signatures in Byzantine Musical Manuscripts. Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae: Subsidia 7, Munksgaard, Copenhagen, 1966. Cf. Ομάδα Παλαιογραφίας, "Χρυσέοις έπεσι", p. 370. For transnotations of the old notation on staff see also: Christian Troelsgård, Byzantine Neumes: A New Introduction to the Middle Byzantine Musical Notation, Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae: Subsidia 9, Museum Tusculanum Press, Copenhagen, 2011. 31 See Fig. 1, lines 6-8.
72 has been supplemented according to a comparative study of many other manuscripts from the same period. In Fig. 2 we see the scale of the second mode. Each note has three names. The first name is according to the old theoretical scale of the B’ mode E, F, G#, a, b, c, d, e32 and finalis (E). The second name is for the B’ mode according to the New Method with the contemporary names Ni, Pa, Vou, Ga, Di, Ke, Ζο’, Νι’, Pa’ with finalis Di and dominating note Vou. The third name is for the pl.B’ mode in the New Method with the finalis Pa and the dominating note Di33.
Fig. 2.: 34 i. The old theoretical scale of the second (B’) and the plagal of the second (Pl.B’) mode. Finales E and b. ii. The new theoretical scale of the B’ mode. Finalis Di. Dominating notes Vou and Di. iii. The new theoretical scale of the pl.B’ mode. Finalis Pa. Dominating notes Pa and Di.
32 Μαρία Αλεξάνδρου, Παλαιογραφία Βυζαντινής Μουσικής (Maria Alexandru, Palaeography of Byzantine Music), vol. 3, Αριστοτέλειο Πανεπιστήμιο Θεσσαλονίκης, academic year 2009-2010, p. 34, 37. 33 Θεωρητικὸν μέγα, pp. 412-413. See also: 1) Αλεξάνδρου, Ἐξηγήσεις, pp. 65-66. 2) Κωνσταντίνος Φλώρος, Η ελληνική παράδοση στις μουσικές γραφές του μεσαίωνα. Εισαγωγή στη νευματική επιστήμη (Constantinos Floros, The Greek tradition in musical notations of the Middle Ages. Introduction to Neumatic Science), transl. Κώστας Κακαβελάκης, Ζήτη, Θεσσαλονίκη, 1998, p. 157. 34 See the previous footnote.
73
Fig. 3. The sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος of the manuscript D 564, f. 275r. The structural notes are colored according to the modal oscillations between soft and intense chromatic scale and diatonic scale in the slow exegesis by Chourmouzios Chartofylax (MPT 715, f.193r-v).
74 3.1. Table for measurements and Graphs The above considerations could be summarized in Table 3 and visualized in Graphs 7a-12d. Manuscript Dionysiou 564, f. 275r
Notes of the metrophonic structure:
Measure- h
n Old and New theoretical finalis ments – ig D E F G# a b c d e S
Scale Scale Percentage Grap Mode – Mode Zo Ni Pa Vou Ga Di Ke Ζο’ Νι’ Β’ Number - - - 10 - 2 - - - 7a Percentage % - - - 83,3 - 16,7 - - -
n Number - 2 - - 1 - 2 - - 7b Pl.Β’ so
I Percentage % - 40,0 - - 20,0 - 40,0 - - Diaton. Number ------7c Scale Percentage % ------Number 8a Β’ - - - 3 1 4 - - - Percentage %
- - - 37,5 12,5 50,0 - - - i Number - 3 - - 2 1 2 - - 8b
ipl Pl.Β’
D Percentage % - 37,5 - - 25,0 12,5 25,0 - - Diaton. Number ------8c Scale Percentage % ------
Number 9a Β’ - - - 2 1 1 - - - Percentage % - - - 50,0 25,0 25,0 - - - Number 1 2 - - 1 - - - - 9b Pl.Β’ Percentage % 25,0 50,0 - - 25,0 - - - - apostroph.
Number ------9c
yo Diaton. D Scale Percentage % ------Number 10a Β’ - - - 1 - 4 1 - - Percentage % - - - 16,7 - 66,6 16,7 - -
ima ima Number - - - - 1 - 2 1 - 10b t Pl.Β’ Percentage %
ra - - - - 100 - - - -
K Diaton. Number ------10c Scale Percentage % ------Number 11a Β’ 1 - - 22 8 16 1 1 - Percentage % 2,0 - - 44,9 16,3 32,7 2,0 2,0 - Number 1 13 7 8 9 6 4 3 - 11b yllable yllable
s Pl.Β’ Percentage % 2,0 25,5 13,7 15,7 17,6 11,8 7,8 5,9 -
ew ew Diaton. Number - - - 2 1 - - - - 11c N Scale Percentage % - - - 66,7 33,3 - - - - Number 12a Β’ - - - 5 - 2 - - - Percentage % - - - 71,4 - 28,6 - - - lon lon
o Number 1 2 - - 1 1 - - - 12b k Pl.Β’ Percentage % 20,0 40,0 - - 20,0 20,0 - - - ew ew
N Diaton. Number - - - - - 1 - - - 12c Scale Percentage % - - - - - 100 - - - Table 3. Measurements for the ison, dipli, dyo apostrophoi, kratima, new syllables, and new kola. Old and new theoretical finalis35.
35 See Fig. 2.
75
Graph 7. The ison in the whole sticheron.
76
Graph 7a. The ison in the parts where Graph 7b. The ison in the parts where Graph 7c. The ison in the parts where the soft chromatic scale is used in the the intense chromatic scale is used in the diatonic scale is used in the exegesis. exegesis. the exegesis.
Graphs 7-7(a-c). The notes of the metrophonic structure (horizontal axis) and the number (vertical axis) of the isa in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος from the manuscript D 564, f. 275r. Colors indicate the modal oscillations in Chourmouzios’ exegesis. See also Fig. 2 for old and new theoretical scale of B’ and pl.B’ mode.
Graph 8. The dipli in the whole sticheron.
77
Graph 8a. The dipli in the parts where Graph 8b. The dipli in the parts where the soft chromatic scale is used in the the intense chromatic scale is used in Graph 8c. The dipli in the parts where exegesis. the exegesis. the diatonic scale is used in the exegesis.
Graphs 8-8(a-c). The notes of the metrophonic structure (horizontal axis) and the number (vertical axis) of the diples in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος from the manuscript D 564, f. 275r. Colors indicate the modal oscillations in Chourmouzios’ exegesis. See also Fig. 2 for old and new theoretical scale of B’ and pl.B’ mode.
Graph 9. The dyo apostrophoi in the whole sticheron.
78
Graph 9a. The dyo apostrophoi in the Graph 9b. The dyo apostrophoi in the Graph 9c. The dyo apostrophoi in the parts where the soft chromatic scale is parts where the intense chromatic parts where the daitonic scale is used in used in the exegesis. scale is used in the exegesis. the exegesis.
Graphs 9-9(a-c). The notes of the metrophonic structure (horizontal axis) and the number (vertical axis) of the dyo apostrophoi in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος from the manuscript D 564, f. 275r. Colors indicate the modal oscillations in Chourmouzios’ exegesis. See also Fig. 2 for old and new theoretical scale of B’ and pl.B’ mode.
Graph 10. The kratima in the whole sticheron.
79
Gra Gra Gra ph 10a. The kratima in the parts where ph 10b. The kratima in the parts where ph 10c. The kratima in the parts where the soft chromatic scale is used in the the intense chromatic scale is used in the diatonic scale is used in the exegesis. exegesis. the exegesis.
Graph 10-10(a-c). The notes of the metrophonic structure (horizontal axis) and the number (vertical axis) of the kratima in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος from the manuscript. Colors indicate the modal oscillations in Chourmouzios’ exegesis. See also Fig. 2 for old and new theoretical scale of B’ and pl.B’ mode.
Graph 11. The first note of the metrophonic structure of each new syllable in the whole sticheron
80
Graph 11a. The first note of the Graph 11b. The first note of the Graph 11c. The first note of the metrophonic structure of each new metrophonic structure of each new metrophonic structure of each new syllable in the parts where soft syllable in the parts where intense syllable in the parts where diatonic scale chromatic scale is used in the exegesis. chromatic scale is used in the exegesis. is used in the exegesis.
Graphs 11-11(a-c). The first note of the metrophonic structure (horizontal axis) and the number (vertical axis) of the appearances in a new syllable in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος from the manuscript D 564, f. 275r. Colors indicate the modal oscillations in Chourmouzios’ exegesis. See also Fig. 2 for old and new theoretical scale of B’ and pl.B’ mode.
Graph 12. The first note of the metrophonic structure of each new kolon in the whole sticheron.
81
Graph 12a. The first note of the Graph 12b. The first note of the Graph 12c. The first note of the metrophonic structure of each new metrophonic structure of each new metrophonic structure of each new kolon in the parts where soft chromatic kolon in the parts where intense kolon in the parts where diatonic scale scale is used in the exegesis. chromatic scale is used in the exegesis. is used in the exegesis.
Graphs 12-12(a-c). The first note of the metrophonic structure (horizontal axis) and the number (vertical axis) of the appearances in a new kolon (vertical axis) in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος from the manuscript D 564, f. 275r. Colors indicate the modal oscillations in Chourmouzios’ exegesis. See also Fig. 2 for old and new theoretical scale of B’ and pl.B’ mode.
3.2. Observing the measurements and the Graphs 7(a-c) till 12(a-c) In Fig. 3, Table 3 and Graphs 7a-7d we see that the ison in the blue notes of the metrophonic structure36 (soft chromatic scale) occurs only on G# and b / Vou and Di. More specifically, ten of the twelve isa are on the structural note G# / Vou. On the other hand, in the red Graph 7b we see that isa are on the structural notes E, a and c / Ni, Ga and Ke. This is important because the structural notes E and a, define a tetrachord which indicates the tetrachord Pa-Di in the New Method. Thus, the structural notes E, a and c / Ni, Ga and Ke correspond to Pa-Di-Zo♭. We will not comment the graphs for the diatonic parts due to their small percentage in this sticheron. Graphs 8-8(a-c), 9-9(a-c), 10-10(a-c), 11-11(a-c) and 12-12(a-c) have a similar form with Graphs 7-7(a-c). Structural notes G# and b / Vou and Di in parts which have been interpreted in the soft chromatic scale are connected with the dipli, dyo apostrophoi, kratima and the beginning of the new syllables and kola. Respectively, in Graphs 8b, 9b, 11b and 12b, structural notes E and a / Ni and Ga are more than any other note connected with these measurements’ objects.
4. Conclusions According to the measurements of this study in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος, some conclusions for the chromaticity and the dominating notes in the old sticheraric genre arise. In the new notation dominating notes are melurgicaly- compositionally strengthened with the usual repetition via ison (Graphs 1-1[a-c]) and with the usual extension of their duration through additive duration marks (Graphs 2-2[a-c]). Dominating notes (Δεσπόζοντες φθόγγοι) have a direct relation with the microstructural (syllables) and mesostructural (kola) verbal units of the hymnographic text, since they usually function as their first note. Dominating notes are differentiated as far as their overall duration is concerned. One of the two dominating notes has the greatest overall duration (Di in the B’ and Ps.Di in pl.B’ mode), while the other
36 As we mentioned in 1. Introduction. Notes of the metrophonic structure or structural notes are the notes we read in metrophonic structure (old notation). However, dominating notes (in the new notation) are the notes, on which the cadences (perfect, imperfect, final) of the melos occur. Additionally, these notes appear more frequently and the melody focuses on them, while neighbour notes usually tend to be attracted by them. See: Παναγιωτόπουλος, Θεωρία, pp. 126-127.
82 dominating notes have the fourth overall duration (Vou in the B’ and Ps.Pa in pl.B’ mode). To sum up the above, dominating notes are strengthened qualitatively but not necessarily quantitatively. In new and old notation, The parts of the exegesis where Chourmouzios uses the soft chromatic scale correspond to the parts of the D 564 where the metrophonic structure focuses on notes G# and b / Vou and Di; In the same way, the parts of the interpretation where Chourmouzios uses the intense chromatic scale correspond to the parts of the D 564 where the metrophonic structure focuses on notes E and a / Ni and Ga. This means that in the second mode the metrophonic structure indicates the modal oscillations we see in the slow exegesis. It is about an indirect way of suggesting-showing the modulations since those are not explicitly noted (with phthorai) in the musical manuscript. These modulations or better modal oscillations will be easily noticed-recognized by an expert in old notation and oral tradition like the Three Teachers. It seems that there was no need for phthorai in middle- Byzantine notation in such cases. The notes of the metrophonic structure had greater «melurgical-compositional importance» than in new notation and sometimes, under specific circumstances, an individual note, which was strengthened for example with one or two contiguous isa, indicated a modulation in another mode37. With the passing of centuries the old notation becomes more and more exegetical- analytical. Thus, the same «melurgical-compositional idea» is shared- described in more notes than before and the «melurgical-compositional importance» of each note is decreased. This made more difficult for the musician to estimate-recognize the importance of the metrophonic structure notes which could lead to modulation. A need for an easier and direct sign for modulation arose, the phtora. Τhe same measurements have been already done for other signs (e.g. tsakisma, bareia e.t.c.) and possibly will be presented in the future. It seems that such a palaeographical and statistical approach can reveal elements for the functionality of these signs in the old notation.
37 Such a case can be observed on the words ως Θεός in D 564 (end of the eighth line), in comparison with the interpretation in MPT 715.
83 A statistical approach of the chromaticity. The sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος – Today, a tomb holds Him in the new and old notation
ABSTRACT
The present study proposes an interdisciplinary approach (Musicology and Mathematics – Statistic) which has to do with the analysis to the Byzantine Music through the research in manuscripts with new and old notation. More specifically, we use a mathematically- statistically informed approach to investigate chromaticity in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος – Today, a tomb holds Him which is chanted as the first idiomelon of the Lauds of Mattins of Holy Saturday and it is in the second (B’) mode with finalis Di. According to the measurements of this study in the sticheron Σήμερον συνέχει τάφος, some conclusions for the chromaticity and the dominating notes in the old sticheraric genre arise; In the new notation dominating notes are melurgicaly-compositionally strengthened with the usual repetition via ison (Graphs 1-1[a-c]) and with the usual extension of their duration through additive duration marks (Graphs 2- 2[a-c]); Dominating notes (Δεσπόζοντες φθόγγοι) have a direct relation with the microstructural (syllables) and mesostructural (kola) verbal units of the hymnographic text, since they usually function as their first note. In new and old notation, the parts of the exegesis where Chourmouzios uses the soft chromatic scale correspond to the parts of the D 564 where the metrophonic structure focuses on notes G# and b / Vou and Di. In the same way, the parts of the interpretation where Chourmouzios uses the intense chromatic scale correspond to the parts of the D 564 where the metrophonic structure focuses on notes E and a / Ni and Ga. This means that in the second mode the metrophonic structure indicates the modal oscillations we see in the slow exegesis; It is about an indirect way of suggesting-showing the modulations since those are not explicitly noted (with phthorai) in the musical manuscript. These modulations or better modal oscillations will be easily noticed- recognized by an expert in old notation and oral tradition like the Three Teachers.
84
Selective Bibliography Alexandru Maria, Studie über die 'grossen Zeichen' der byzantinischen musikalischen Notation unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Periode vom Ende des 12. bis Anfang des 19. Jahrhunderts, Dissertation, vol. 2, University of Copenhagen, 2000. Alexandru Μaria, Study Group of Palaeography of Byzantine Music, “Chryseois epesi-In golden words” – a sticheron in honor of St. John Chrysostom in its diachronic musical development in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference of the American Society of Byzantine Music and Hymnology, September 10-15th 2007, Αθήνα, pp. 337-485. Αλεξάνδρου Μαρία, Παλαιογραφία Βυζαντινής Μουσικής (Alexandru Maria, Palaeography of Byzantine Music), vol. 3, Αριστοτέλειο Πανεπιστήμιο Θεσσαλονίκης, academic year 2009-2010. Δεσπότης Σωτήρης, Ἑρμηνευτικές προσεγγίσεις στό μουσικό ὑλικό τῆς ἑλληνικῆς ψαλτικῆς τέχνης (Despotis Sotirios, Approaches to the interpretation of the music material of the Greek Chanting Art), in Γρηγόριος ο Παλαμάς, y. 90, fasc. 818, Θεσσαλονίκη, 2007, pp. 417-428. Φλώρος Κωνσταντίνος, Η ελληνική παράδοση στις μουσικές γραφές του μεσαίωνα. Εισαγωγή στη νευματική επιστήμη (Floros Constantinos, The Greek tradition in musical notations of the Middle Ages. Introduction to Neumatic Science), transl. Κώστας Κακαβελάκης, Ζήτη, Θεσσαλονίκη, 1998. Καραγκούνης Κωνσταντίνος, Ἡ παράδοση καὶ ἐξήγηση τοῦ μέλους τῶν χερουβικῶν τῆς βυζαντινῆς καὶ μεταβυζαντινῆς μελοποιΐας (Karagunis Konstantinos, The tradition and exegesis of the melos of the cheroubic hymn of the Byzantine and post-byzantine melopoiea), IBM – Μελέται, Γρ. Στάθης, Αθήνα, 2003. Lenten Triodion, transl. by Mother Mary and Archimandrite Kallistos Ware, Faber and Faber, London, 1978. Raasted Jørgen, Intonation Formulas and Modal Signatures in Byzantine Musical Manuscripts. Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae: Subsidia 7, Munksgaard, Copenhagen, 1966. Troelsgård Christian, Byzantine Neumes: A New Introduction to the Middle Byzantine Musical Notation, Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae: Subsidia 9, Museum Tusculanum Press, Copenhagen, 2011. Wellesz Egon, Byzantinische Musik. Ein Vortrag, ed. Gerda Wolfram, Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna, 2000.
85
Anton Pann’s Views Regarding the Modes And Musical Ornamentation
VASILE VASILE
The issue of musical ornamentation and of the voices in Anton Pann’s view is vital for the present day interpreting and exegesis of Byzantine music, as his work represents a crucial point in its development as performed in Romanian. Anton Pann was familiar with both musical semiographic systems to an extent which is different from the extent some contemporary composers claim to have, assuming sometimes imaginary melody variants; as for Anton Pann, he was a practitioner of Kukuzel’s notation and one of the most important adapters of chants from the old into the new system of notation, mainly of chants by Dionisie Fotino. In terms of church music, Pann went through all the stages a musician would in his time, from learning and performing (singing) the chants in the two musical notations, of which the older – Kukuzel’s notation – had become a source of very different interpretations from one psalm reader to the next for the same musical text, and the recent one, called Chrisanthean – supported material by Romanian singers. In his works, he will speak of his attempts at initiating a new semiographic system for Byzantine music, which ultimately proved futile1. The three tractates in the theory of music and the fifteen anthologies of chants in Romanian are proof of Pann’s constant position in favour of Romanian Chrysantine music, as he stands out as one of the major figures of the process of adaptation to Romanian, in the course of which ornamentation and the ethos of the modes held central position. The extended and complex process of adaptation to Romanian places him as an outstanding figure among those who achieved the passage from oral chanting in the old synoptic stenographic notation to the Chrysantine notation which was close in terms of precision to the Guidonean notation and could render the melodic elements specific of Romanian music and involved ornamentation and the specificity of the modes. This notation eliminated signs that were useless or produced similar or adjacent effects and especially those signs that allowed
1 Anton Pann, Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşci sau gramatica melodică. Predat în seminarul Sfintei Mitropolii [...] şi tipărit [...] de..., Bucureşci, întru a sa tipografie de muzică bisericească, 1845, p. XVI.
86 inappropriate, excessive, extravagant ornaments, similar to virtuosic arias in operas, against which the psalm readers who felt responsible for the evolution of the genre rose, following Pann’s guidelines. He himself admitted the superiority of Chrysantine notation for the simplicity and precision it allowed, for the possibility to avoid ambiguities and the sometimes inexplicable liberties in the earlier notation, some of which were continued after the official implementation of the Chrysantine reform; he admitted that it was the “easier method and fashion of writing based on understanding”; many Romanians became familiar with it, “practicing and becoming proficient in it, they started to adapt and translate whole books and teach it in public schools, where well-off merchants were eager to send their children to be taught church chanting. Also, young aristocrats had to learn church music along with reading and writing.”2 It is not by chance that he is the first musician to identify and apply in his work the Aeolian vs the Ionic alternation, of which the most typical example is his masterpiece, Lord’s Prayer, a genuine hymn of Romanian Orthodoxy. The presence of certain intonations specific of Dorian, Mixolydian, Phrygian or Locrian modes in Romanian composition, or of the Dorian mode in the IVth step raised in the famous Doxologia hisar are arguments to prove that many of his creations are close to the specificity of the Romanian music. In terms of ornamentation, all the commentators of Pann’s musical works have emphasized his preference for the concise syntomon (brief syllabic) style and an avoidance of exaggerated ornamentation which interferes with the prayer status of liturgical music. An in depth analysis of his music reveals his propensity towards this simple style, rid of excessive ornamentation, and about the necessity of a syncretism between the text and the melody associated to the prayer; this is a permanent feature in his creation. His text can quoted where he speaks disapprovingly of the “flamboyant style” he had “deliberately avoided”, seeking instead “the tone appropriate to Romanian music” and the match with “the sound of natural speech”3. In a special chapter in his Hristoitia, 1834 – On church chanting, the composer urged his colleagues to avoid dramatic interpretations, remote from the spirit of prayer, and advised his students to refrain in their performance from contorting chants, which is an undesirable habit, like the habit of those singers who huff and wriggle, or nod their head
2 idem, pp. XXV-XXVII. 3 Anton Pann, Heruvico-Chinonicar care coprinde în sine heruvice şi chinonice pentru tot anul, lângă care s-au adăogat acsioanele tutulor glasurilor şi ale praznicilor, Prelucrate şi date la lumină [...], de [...], prof(esor) de muzică bisericească în Seminarul Sf(intei) Mitropolii, Bucuresci, întru a sa tipografie de muzică bisericească, 1846, p. VI.
87 like a cuckoo bird or “squeal like a cockerel” when they sing, and thus make the church goers “laugh instead of collect their thoughts for prayer/ So instead of vailing their pride,/ They make them sin all the more.”4 The tendency to simplify the melody was so strong that I can rightly say that the version of the Christmas carol ”We three King from the Orient are” I used to know and sing as a child clearly had richer ornamentation than that in Anton Pann’s collection. In Pann’s printed creation, terirems are nowhere to be found, as they had disappeared from his earlier manuscripts, as there are no ananes – intonation formulas for the eight voices in Kukuzel’s system, later replaced in the new Chrysanthean system by the syllables needed for paralaghia; he considered that the use of such redundant protracted syllables was proof of affectation. The composer actually expressly disapproved of such methods and mocked those who still used them. As an example of such irony directed at those colleagues who used such terirems and ananes as well as other similar artifices to ”enhance their personal fame”, we can quote the famous lines in the Heruvikon – Keinonikon chants aimed at the impostors who performed ”hollow axions”, nodding their heads like a drake and craning their necks like the cockerel, ”as the cockerel is a psalm singer too”5; the criticism was directed at he authors of such inauthentic performances, which they ”hold precious, thinking people listen to them in awe.”6 The author of the three Doxastarions joins efforts with his colleague Macarie the Protopsaltes in their protest against ”the Constantinople-fashion airs” and the fact that, when they sang the tererems, the singers retained their old habits of thinking of themselves as high as if they were ”the famous Kukuzel” or even better, when ”they swell like a turkey” and ”puff the nenenales through the nose.” In his introduction To those fond of the Muses, Pann expressively calls this batch of recently proliferated church singers epigones, new Kukuzelis, Neo-patrons or shifters, and claims they are ”narrow minded, easily self sufficing in spite of their little knowledge and of their meager ideas of the musical craft; thus they do not allow others to perform
4 Anton Pan(n), Hristoitie sau Şcoala moralului, care învaţă toate obiceiurile şi năravurile cele bune. Compuse în versuri de [...], profesorul de Muzică vocală al Şcoalelor Naţionale din Bucuresci, 1834, p. 179. 5 Anton Pann, Heruvico-Chinonicar anual care coprinde în sine deosebite heruvice şi chinonice pentru toate sărbătorile anului. Lângă care s-au adăugat şi anti-acsioanele lor Prelucrate şi date la lumină de [...], profesor de muzică bisericească în Sem(inarul) Sf(intei) Mitropolii, tom. II, Bucuresci, în tipografia sa de muzică bisericească, 1847, p. 168. 6 ibidem.
88 music well and neither can they do it”7; this statements equally constitute a plea in favour of simple ornaments in church music, where each and every ornament must be in close relation with the text it is associated with. Even the Bazul teoretic/ Basic Theory must serve the same major aim: to help create and adapt the liturgical text according to the ”spirit of the Romanian language,” in observance of the specific character of the voices and of the ornaments, with their purpose in the discourse of liturgic music8. These elements are to be found implicitly in his creations and explicitly in his theoretical work: Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericesci sau Gramatica melodică / Basic Theory and Practice of Church Music or the Grammar of Melody, 1845 (232 +XL pages), An Abridged Basic Theory of Church Music and the Anastasimatarion to Be Chanted Fast and Slow, 1847, 120 pages and A Little Musical Grammar, 1854, 52 pages. The high church authorities in the following period recognized these vitues of the psaltes. Nifon of Ploeşti asked: ”Who else among his contemporaries was more productive than Anton Pann in those times of revival?” and provided the answer himself: ”In his time, he was the only author of musical works, be they lay or sacred”9. More than century ago, Niculae M. Popescu considered him the most prominent personality of Romanian psaltic music in the XIXth century10. Placing him within the constellation of the ”Nation’s revival” century, Ion Popescu-Pasărea drew the attention to the fact that Anton Pann was, among other things, a ”great performer of church and lay music”, pointing to the fact that this was an important aspect of his activity; however, in this respect, his personality ”has not been studied and appreciated enough”, mainly due to the lack of interest towards old church chanting, considered by some as monotonouos, uncultivated, as well as due to the trend toward modernization” along with the difficulties of psaltic notation11. Ion Popescu-Pasărea wrote that Pann’s ”capital work was the adaptation, according to the Romanian national spirit, of church chanting,” explaining that what he accomplished for the church music
7 Anton Pann, Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşci..., p. XIV. 8 ibidem, p. XXXVII. 9 Nifon Ploeşteanu, Carte de musică bisericească de psaltichie şi pe note liniare, pentru trei voci, Joseph Göbl, Bucureşti, 1902, p. 63. 10 Nic(olae) M. Popescu, Viaţa şi activitatea dascălului de cântări Macarie Ieromonahul, Bucureşti, 1908, p. 45. 11 Ion Popescu-Pasărea, Rolul lui Anton Pann în muzica bisericească, in Cultura, Bucureşti, An XX, no. 5-6, mai-iunie 1930, p. 4.
89 was not a slavish adaptation, as he succeeded in ”rounding off, polishing, simplifying and accommodating church chanting according to the Romanian expression”12. Titus Moisescu considered him ”one of the complex personalities of Romanian culture”, specifying some aspects of his multifarious activity13, after first outlining his activity as a historiographer and theoretician of Byzantine music14, and remarked on his propensity to Romanian intonation. Gheorghe Ciobanu focused on Pann’s creation in its twofold aspect, as a Byzantinologist and ethnomusicologist, also emphasizing his proficiency as a publisher, a man of letters and above all a musician, the most prolific and daring,who, more than anyone else, contributed to establishing church chanting in Romanian through his musical pieces published between 1841 and 1854.15 On the anniversary of 175 years from birth, Gh. Ciobanu identified several important contributions: 1. more than any other of his contemporaries, he helped establish church chanting in Romanian by publishing the collections of church chanting needed by church psaltes; 2. relying on his aesthetic views, he established a close connection between the text and the melody; The term of Romanization = adaptation to Romanian that he used between 1841 and 1846 should be understood especially as the process of adapting the melody to the phonetic system and the harmony of the Romanian language 3. He outlined the development of Romanian psaltic music at least regarding the actual style of the Katabasiai and the Sticheraria, which is less laden than that of Macarie the Hieromonk. In everything he did, Anton Pann remains the most prominent personality of Romanian culture in the XIXth century16.
12 idem, pp. 4-6. 13 Titus Moisescu, Anton Pann – personalitate complexă a culturii româneşti (1796- 1854); în Studii şi cercetări de istoria artei, seria Teatru – Muzică – Cinematografie, tom 43, Bucureşti, 1996, pp. 3-12. 14 Titus Moisescu, Anton Pann – istoriograf şi teoretician al muzicii de tradiţie bizantină, in: Muzica, Bucureşti, serie nouă, An I, no. 2 (2), aprilie-iunie, 1990, pp. 73- 94. 15 Gheorghe Ciobanu, Muzica instrumentală, vocală şi psaltică din secolele XVI-XIX, în seria Izvoare ale muzicii româneşti, volumul 2, Bucureşti, Editura muzicală, 1978, p. 151. 16 Gheorghe Ciobanu, Anton Pann şi „românirea” cântărilor bisericeşti, în Biserica Ortodoxă Română, Bucureşti, An LXXXVII, no. 11-12, noiembrie-decembrie 1969, pp. 1154-1160; reference from Studii de etnomuzicologie şi bizantinologie, vol. I, 1974, p. 322.
90 Pann’s biographers retained the moment when the psaltes, together with Macarie and Pangratius, was appointed by metropolitan bishop Dionisie Lupu in 1820 as members in the committee for the translation of church chants into Romanian: ”with no delay was I summoned as a participant in the act of translating chants into Romanian and of creating a template to print them.” Anton Pann himself explained the meticulous process of adaptation to Romanian: ”It’s five and twenty years since I was involved in the translation and adaptation of church chants [...] the writing and adapting, the teaching of lessons of how to use them in town churches and in monasteries gave me the opportunity to re-write them several times; I have noticed that certain chants in the papadic and sticheraric genre were really long and, when I sang them, I was forced to abruptly shorten and reduce them at awkward points where the melody was left hanging and was maimed in a tasteless manner; thus, being urged by many, we inconspicuously reduced the parts that were left hanging immoderately”17. The first stage in Anton Pann’s creative life, when the foundations of his style in terms of ornaments were laid, as well as the manner of handling the voices, is captured in the chants printed in the volume The Liturgy, where the following notes can be found: “chanted/intoned by me, Anton Pann, in Greek and Romanian in 1822”; “composed in Greek and Romanian by me, Anton Pann, in 1822”18; “composed by me, Anton Pann, in1825 and and altered in 1854”19; To the range of his interests in and views on voices and ornamentation, we must add the translation of the pieces he mentions in the preface to the volume Fables and stories of 1841: the Anastasimatarion by cavalry commander Dionisie Fotino, the Doxastarion and Triodion cum Pentecostarion, Heruvikon-Keinonikon, the Katavasis and “many other chants” which he did not manage to publish and which had been “lying at the bottom of the chest for about twenty years.” The most important creations of the Romanian psaltes gained recognition along time and some are still appreciated by contemporaries; they illustrate the ornaments and their close intercorrelation with the text of the liturgy: Our Father, The Great
17 Anton Pann, Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşci..., p. XXXVII. 18 idem, Sfânta Liturghie a Marelui Vasil(i)e, Tipografia Anton Pann, Bucuresci, 1854, p. 30. 19 ibidem, p. 36.
91 Answers, the Heruvika, axia, polyeleoi, doxology, the Resurrection, katabasiai and others, all the result of the psaltes’ inspiration and tested by his own voice, displaying ornaments adequate to the text of the liturgy and the spirit of prayer. A special place in Anton Pann’s creation is held by the prosomia “adapted to other troparia, following closely the rhythm and tone of the Greek ones” to help psaltes ”the true nature of the similarities” rendered in all voices – perennial models for ORAL chanting. Pann’s advantage was the knowledge and use of the previous attempts, efforts and successes, including the old chants in Greek, as well as some created in Romanian, such as the “We Praise Thee...” by Filotei, the monk at Cozia monastery, and the psalms by Dosoftei the metropolitan bishop which later made their way in the standing repertoire of Christmas carols (“Guided by the star...”). The psaltes joins in the tradition of simple chanting, freed from sterile virtuoso embellishments in the manner traditionally performed at the Neamţ Monastery, as proved by certain chants by his famous predecessor, Joseph, and of his contemporary Visarion. Not accidentally, Pann, the historiographer of church music in Romania, praises Nectarie Frimu from Neamţ Monastery. He is aware of the need to create a strong connection with the tradition set by the predecessors from Constantinople in order to provide “a clear understanding of the beginning of a craft... as many write about music in an attempt to reveal its initial source and true beginning,” yet some of them get lost in the chaos of the ancient times without a chance of finding their way out.”20 He is convinced that music and its notation will evolve, as its source is in the ancient times, with the “people of the previous ages” who “invented what never existed before, also perfected it.” The ornaments used by Anton Pann are characterized by simplifying the excessive mellismas or eliminating them altogether when they did not serve any purpose, and observes a certain expressiveness specific of Romanian; to refer to it, he even created his own terminology: swift and slow. The Western terms suggest new ways to adapt the ornaments and he also introduces a translation of these terms in Romanian: largo – at ease, andante – moderately slow, argon – double, allegretto – moderately fast, slow and sweetly, and also found equivalents of the ornamentation signs: psifiston – firmly, omalon – smoothly, endofon – a voice inside etc. The ornamentation signs explained in Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericesci / Basic Theory and Practice of Church Music are
20 Anton Pann, Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşci..., p. IX.
92 translated according the specific nature of the signs and the practice in folk singing, the antichenoma translated as condră – emptying, omalon explained as ”that which produces the gliding smooth voice, swiftly growing and slowly or gradually decreasing,” while the version termed heavy ”produces heavily the sound of the sign following it.” These are concrete manners of using ornamentation by replacing the inaccurate and equivocal ones in the previous semiographic system; the precise description of the effect of each consonant or ”non-sounding” sign contribute to the prevention of excessive gratuitous melodic ornamentation. It is important to note that Pann makes efforts to provide translations of most ornamentation signs in Romanian; here are some others: psifiston – firm sound, endofon – voice inside. The earlier Kukuzel notation had become difficult and awkward due to those who had started to “adorn it exceedingly, so its wings were heavy and was left flat on the ground”, mainly because they invented some new signs that they called large signs, one for each thesis and it takes a lifetime to learn them all to perfection”21. The process of exegesis had become extremely difficult, only a proficient master of chanting in both its oral and written forms who was a good practitioner at the same time could manage this notation. “Later – he writes further on– seeing that the music disappears and is altogether corrupted, and not being able to learn it due to the difficulty of the system and since most were content to know only one of its branches from the practice, they started to pluck its feathers, as useless, and with only about one fourth of them left did music attempt to soar again to get to the degree of respect due to her and approaching European music”22. The process of exegesis – of transfer from the earlier Kukuzel semiographic system – to the new Chrysantine tone – is paralleled by a process of adaptation to and translation into Romanian; Pann’s advantage in this process was his thorough knowledge of the specific elements of folklore and especially of “the permanent attempt to simplify, to find a melody that was as accomplished artistically as possible by preserving the characteristic features of the voices”23. The Romanian author would adapt the old pre-existing Byzantine melodies in Greek to the specific nature of the Romanian language and take into account, at the same time, the Romanian church-goers’ sensitivity, as he himself states: “I pruned and adapted the external figures which completely resembled the Asian ones and posed difficulties to the Romanian listeners, I made them to be similar to the
21 Anton Pann, Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşci..., pp. XIV-XV. 22 idem, p. XV. 23 Gheorghe Ciobanu, st. cit., pp. 340-341.
93 closest form of church music, staying on track and preserving the character of the ancient saintly mountain people and especially the national spirit,” as our church music had long acquired its own “national spirit” and departed from “the “Constantinople pretenses” and spirit, very similar to the Asian one. Even for the more developed chants of the Glory type, Pann recommends an interpretation close to the national spirit, which is “quiet, devout, soothing and sweet [...], and you should not stray by including distorted additions/ that are hateful to God and people alike”24. The Romanian psaltes accommodated naturally to the process of adaptation to Romanian, as he recalls in 1842: “Since my early childhood, I have had an inclination towards church chants and arduously studied the craft of music; I have been successful in both the old system and the new, and I have also made many books and I have laboured in the language of my country”25. The Romanian composer and singer considered that the inadequacy of form in which Romanian church chants were performed was mainly rooted in the Greek and Slavonic language, which the church-goers did not know; as a matter of fact, Greek singers called their Romanian colleagues schatovlachos and made them feel ashamed of their nationality and origin and thus induced them to sing in Greek, too, in order to stick to the fashion imposed by the foreigners (Greeks). A singer who would sing “like an angel” in Romanian would be paid considerably less and would be despised by the Greeks on account of the language he performed in; he would thus be forced to learn Greek chanting and “speak with a lisp” after the Greek fashion. Only the Greek were accepted in monasteries, “which the others called well-off and would be envied/ as they had come from Constantinople with tobacco and coffee.” Such lines explain the presence of millet beer makers and of fabric manufacturers as chant singers in church choirs: “on week days they worked and sold their wares/and on holidays they were happy to be hired as church singers.” An analysis of Pann’s creation in view of his own theoretical standpoint as presented in his Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericesci/Basic Theory and Practice of Church Music reveals the following methods of adaptation to Romanian that he used; these methods should be mentioned since they reflect his position regarding
24 Anton Pann, Noul Doksastar, prefăcut în româneşte după metodul vechi(u) al serd(arului) Dionisie Fotino şi dat la lumină pe acest metod nou [...], tom I, Bucuresci, în tipografia pitarului Const(antin) Pencovici [...], 1841, p. IV. 25 Gh. I. Moisescu, O sută de ani de la moartea lui Anton Pann (1854-1954), in Biserica Ortodoxă Română, Bucureşti, An LXXIII, no. 1-2, ianuarie-februarie 1955, p. 175.
94 the Byzantine voices, their expressiveness and the ornamentation of the chants, simpler, comparable to that in folk music, which is part of the adaptation process: Establishing a set of rules for the process of adaptation which would take into account the specific requirements of Romanian as the language of performance: Adapting the texts of certain chants to the Romanian language, observing the new word order and emphasizing certain key words; Adopting chants by his predecessors such as Filotei Cozianul, Filothei Sin Agăi Jipei, Mihalache the Moldo-Vlachos, Joseph and Visarion from the Neamţ Monastery etc.; Abridging the chants that were too long and creating new briefer versions, syntomon; Eliminating the tererems and other gratouitous virtuoso segments; Creating new chants in which the Byzantine style and the influence of Romanian folk sounds are felt throughout; Suggesting new terms to replace the Greek names, such as in the fast manner of composition for the heirmologic genre; in the slow manner of composition for the sticheraric genre; papadic – for ample chants that transform into genuine musical-liturgic poems: the doxology (slavoslovia), polyeleoi, anixandaria etc. Actually, most of the methods listed above have been explained in his volume Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericesci / Basic Theory and Practice of Church Music, where he declares that he had purged the chants in Romanian of all the ”external figures” and brought them closer to the authentic form. Pann emphasizes that the rules of adaptation and translation into Romanian ”were never even drawn in the Romanian language, and neither were they taught in any school, nor was anyone aware that such rules were necessary”26. The very term of “adaptation to Romanian” was created and launched by Anton Pann; the Christmas carols offered him a model in his strive for simplicity. He identified the contiguities and used them, especially as they also included church chants such as The Troparion on the Saviour’s Birth, which is associated in many areas to the songs of the carolers. He himself offers a general view of his own activity in the process of adjusting church chanting to fit the Romanian national sentiment and he adapts, translates and creates them in agreement with the “sound of the Romanian text”; he consistently and purposefully favours the creation of a new trend to excel those who “have tried their hand in translating church chants, but did nothing but eliminate the
26 Anton Pann, Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşci..., p. XXXVII.
95 syllables of the foreign text and replace them with the syllables of the Romanian text, and did so in terms of melody, too” by gratuitously adding vowels or heaping the syllables one onto the other, changing the stress position, thus violating the language and causing “the meaning of the text to be lost as the stressed syllables become unstressed and the unstressed one become stressed”. Pann himself mentions “the match between the rhythm and the sound” in some chants achieved through the elimination of certain chromatic inflections and rhythms which are not specific to the Romanian’s sentiment, appropriate ornaments and other such meticulous operations which he cautiously designates as: translations, renditions, arrangements, transformations, reformulations, repetitions, reconsiderations, creations, compositions etc.; these terms frequently occur in his musical printed works. Pann clearly states that there are significant differences between the church chant and the lay song which should be taken into account; the main difference lies mainly in the musical ornaments, which should be different in each case, since the former “is sung in church and must therefore consider decorum.” As Pann himself claims in the dedication of the book to the metropolitan bishop, Bazul teoretic / Basic Theory is a synthesis: ”all the rules are condensed in this book, which I started writing on command from His Most Blessed Metropolitan immediately after my being appointed at the seminary. The book is rooted in the works of the learned cantors/ who in the musical system have already achieved perfect mastery/[...] preferred easy and accessible rules [...] and dropped those that were difficult and toilsome to grasp.” Theoretical explanations should be accompanied by examples, since such rules” have never so far been revealed/ and neither were they written in Romanian, nor were they taught anywhere”27. Bazul teoretic / Basic Theory combines theoretical and practical aspects and divides the eight voices – also named echoi – into two classes: authentic and plagal. A closer inspection of the book shows that previous statements regarding the purpose of the echoi and of the ornaments were confirmed. The plagal voices are called by Anton Pann ”adjacent”, thus suggesting the contiguity between the pairs of voices: I-V, II-VI, III-VII, IV-VIII. Macarie the Hieromonk observes the division Chrisanthos gives in his book An Introduction to Theory and Practice of Church Music (1812) into 68 sections, while the intervals of seconds are 7, 9 and 12 sections. However, Anton Pann divides the octave into 22 subdivisions:
27 idem, pp. VII-VIII.
96 the tones are 2, 3 and 4 sections, a lower tone and a higher tone respectively; such a division can be found in Indian music: 22 matras or srutis. On discussing the quarter tones, the three types of tones: large, small, and smaller, as well as in the 22 sections of the scale suggested by Anton Pann, Victor Giuleanu mentions that „the hindu music scale also consists of 22 sections calle srutti, then the content in microtones of equal size of the schur Turk-Arab maqâms, nava, egah and rast”: the Byzantine octave after Euclides, adopted by the Greeks has 36 sections; Helmholtz’s octave has 54 sections; the octave of an international committee dating in 1881 has 72 sections; Hrisant de Madyt’s octave has 68 sections28; he also includes among the examples chants by the distinguished Psaltes and musician Anton Pann. The Romanian musician cannot have known this system, but George Breazul comments on the opinion of Dom Schwartz, a Western researcher29 who considered that the system was ”adequately accurate and clear”30. In the Vith mode he replaces the number of sections as follows: 18, 12, 7 and 3 with 6, 4, 2 and 1, which reflects a novel view on the scales. The fourth part of the book defines the ftora and presents their distribution as follows: eight diatonic, five chromatic (muştaar, nisabur included) and the five enharmonic, indicating the distances between the degrees with illustrative diagrams. The fifth part is the melopiia, which he designates melofacere or căntofacere and defines as the craft of performing the melody. Titus Moisescu points out the fact that Pann ”distinguishes between the voice and the mode of the echos; this idea was adopted by other theoreticians, too, however, they did not manage to provide a clear presentation and to consistently use this difference [...] he gives a correct and definitive form to general diez and general ifes,” thus replacing the Greek terms that Macarie had adopted with no attempt at providing an equivalent in Romanian: ghennichi diesis and ghennichi ifesis; he also suggests a structure of the scales that was ”clearer and better organized,” which places him a in prominent position among the theoreticians of psaltic music.”31 The author insists on each voice – for the voice and the modes of the echoi – on the first step of the modes, on the disdiapazon (octave)
28 Victor Giuleanu, Melodica bizantină, Editura muzicală, Bucureşti, 1981, pp. 42-43. 29 Dom M. Schwartz, Le chant écclesiastique byzantin de nos jours, in Idenikon, Belgique, tome XI, no. 3, 1934, p. 172. 30 George Breazul, Pagini din istoria muzicii româneşti, vol. I, Ediţie îngrijită şi prefaţată de Vasile Tomescu, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1966, p. 272. 31 Titus Moisescu, Dascălul de cântări Macarie Ieromonahul, in Macarie Ieromonahul, Opere, vol. I, Theoreticon, Ediţie îngrijită, cu un studiu introductiv şi transliterare de Titus Moisescu, Editura Academiei, Bucureşti, 1976, pp. 24-25.
97 scale, insisting on ”the types of the echoi/modes”. After a general presentation of the issue of the echoi, all the eight scales are presented in turn, their characteristic features are clarified and grafically rendered by means of diagrams; the intonation of each scale, with their specific elements, is considered crucial. The characterization of each voice, which he calls echoi, is of equal interest; these descriptions can be found in the Anastasimatarion, which reveals that Pann was familiar with the ethos of the Byzantine voices; no other theoretician was known to have been thus acquainted with it: ”echos I – ”sweetly producing the tones of the melody”; echos II – ”with a tender melody”; echos III – ”rather hollow, yet still heroic and sweet, harmonious”; echos IV – ”at its onset with a lively and light sound, then more panegyrical, and sweetly together”; echos V – ”stepping sweetly, soothing, and rather in prayer and weeping, humbling”; echos VI – ”giving praise to God”; echos VII – an echos which heavy and simple was called, however, its melody can be sung in various ways”; echos VIII – being in a major scale, it follows all the others in a natural way”. In turn, Nicu Moldoveanu considers that ”the results of his work are broader than of Macarie’s”, as Pann ”lived in an age that was more favourable to the art he served, as well as to his talent and his system of adapting to the general taste of his contemporaries”32; he also added that Pann did not try to be very faithful to the original Greek melodies”, instead he aimed at ”correct phrasing, with a broader ambitus, prosodical and, above all, influenced mainly by the folklore”33.
ABSTRACT
The Chrisantic reform has established, among other things, the division of the eighth into 68 elements, as the musician Hrisant de Madyt had anticipated. The Byzantine eighth according to Euclid and adopted by the Greeks had 36 elements, while Helmholtz’s eighth had 54. Eventually, an international committee decided the division of the eighth into 72 in 1881. Anton Pann replaced the division of the eighth into 68 elements with that of 22 elements; the seconds consisted of 2, 3 and 4 elements which he called: ton mic, ton mare, ton şi mai mare (small/low ton, high/large ton and larger/higher ton).
32 Nicu Moldoveanu, Istoria muzicii bisericeşti la români, Editura Basilica a Patriarhiei Române, Bucureşti, 2010, p. 79. 33 idem, pp. 81-82.
98 In terms of modes, he will introduce the division of the eight achos into the two categories ihos şi ihos plaghios and we can remark on the use in his creation of expressive modulations; we owe him the introduction in the Byzantine music of certain modes which are specific of Romanian folk music, such as the famous hisar scale in the well- known Doxology, composed in a Dorian mode with the fourth degree which is raised. He is the first to use the major – minor parall scales in psaltic music, frequently occurring in Romanian folk music. He will also introduce the oriental scales in religious music in Romanian: muştaar, nisabur and the enharmonique, ezpecially the protovaris – întâiul greu, which was awarded certain weigh. The ornamentation in Anton Pann’s music is characterized by simplicity and the elimination of the melismes which did not play a significant role and he takes into account a certain specific expressiveness illustrated by the Romanian terms of which some were invented by him: grabnic şi zăbavnic. The Western terms suggest new manners of adapting the ornamentation; he introduced certain specific terms and their Romanian translation: largo – pe larg, andante – mai domol, argon – îndoit, allegretto – iutişor, domol şi dulce; he also found in Romanian equivalent terms for the ornamentation signs: psifiston – ton hotărât, omalon – neted, endofon – glas înăuntru a.s.o.
Selective bibliography Arghezi Tudor, Anton Pann în: „Viaţa Românească”, Bucureşti, An VII, no. 11, noiembrie 1954, pp. 153-155. Barbu-Bucur Sebastian, Anton Pann – Clasic al muzicii psaltice româneşti 200 de ani de la nașterea sa, in „Muzica", Bucureşti, An X, no. 1 (37), ianuarie-martie 1999, pp. 119-122. Buzera Alexie, Cultura muzicală românească de tradiţie bizantină din sec. al XIX-lea, Fundaţia Scrisul Românesc, Craiova, 1999. Ciobanu Gheorghe, Anton Pann şi „românirea” cântărilor bisericeşti, în: „Biserica Ortodoxă Română”, Bucureşti, An LXXXVII, no. 11-12, noiembrie- decembrie 1969, pp. 1154-1160. Ciobanu Gheorghe, Muzica instrumentală, vocală şi psaltică din secolele XVI-XIX, în seria Izvoare ale muzicii româneşti, vol. 2, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1978. Cosma Octavian Lazăr, Hronicul muzicii româneşti, vol. III, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1975. Cosma Viorel, Muzicieni din România Lexicon bibliografic, vol. VII (N- O-P), Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 2004. Giuleanu Victor, Melodica bizantină, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1981. Iorga Nicolae, Oameni care au fost Amintiri şi comemorări, Tipografia Neamul Românesc, Vălenii de Munte, 1911.
99 Macarie Ieromonahul, Irmologhion sau Catavasier musicesc, Kirio Kir Veniamin, Viena, 1823. Moisescu Titus, Dascălul de cântări Macarie Ieromonahul, în Macarie Ieromonahul, Opere, vol. I, Theoreticon, ediţie îngrijită, cu un studiu introductiv şi transliterare de Titus Moisescu, Bucureşti, Editura Academiei, 1976. Moisescu Titus, Anton Pann – personalitate complexă a culturii româneşti (1796-1854), în „Studii şi cercetări de istoria artei”, seria Teatru – Muzică – Cinematografie, Bucureşti, tom 43, 1996. Moldoveanu Nicu, Istoria muzicii bisericeşti la români, Editura Basilica a Patriarhiei Române, Bucureşti, 2010. Pann Anton, Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşci sau gramatica melodică, Bucureşti, 1845. Pann Anton, Heruvico-Chinonicar, Tipografia Anton Pann, Bucureşti, 1846. Pann Anton, Sfânta Liturghie a Marelui Vasile, Tipografia Anton Pann, Bucureşti, 1854. Panţiru Grigore, Notaţia şi ehurile muzicii bizantine, Bucureşti, Editura Muzicală, 1971. Ploeşteanu Nifon, Carte de musică bisericească de psaltichie şi pe note liniare, pentru trei voci, Joseph Göbl, Bucureşti, 1902. Popescu Nicolae M., Viaţa şi activitatea dascălului de cântări Macarie Ieromonahul, Bucureşti, 1908. Popescu-Pasărea Ion, Rolul lui Anton Pann în muzica bisericească; în „Cultura”, Bucureşti, An XX, no. 5-6, mai-iunie 1930. Teodorescu Gheorghe Dem, Încercări critice asupra unor credinţe, datine şi moravuri ale poporului român, Bucureşci, 1875. Vasile Vasile, Concepţia Sf. Niceta de Remesiana, privind rolul muzicii în viaţa religioasă, în „Byzantion”, vol. II, Academia de Arte „George Enescu”, Iaşi, 1996, pp. 37-43. Vasile Vasile, Macarie Ieromonahul şi Anton Pann – două destine diferite pe un drum comun, în: Studii şi Cercetări de Istoria Artei, seria Teatru – Muzică – Cinematografie, Bucureşti, Editura Academiei Române, tom 44, 1997. Vasile Vasile, Semnificaţii spirituale şi culturale ale procesului de românire a muzicii bisericeşti, in „Akademos” – Cercetări de muzicologie, no. 2 b, 1997, pp. 105-111. Vasile Vasile, Nectarie Frimu – figură reprezentativă a muzicii româneşti, in „Cronica Episcopiei Huşilor”, vol. VI, 2000, pp. 486-533.
100
Ornamentation in the Church Singing of Byzantine Tradition in Transylvania. Stichera of the Vesper, to "Lord, I have cried", Tone 5
Pr. VASILE GRĂJDIAN
The traditional liturgical chant in the Romanian Orthodox Church is rooted in the Byzantine1 musical tradition; so is regional Romanian church singing, which was subject to a series of regional folk influences added over time.2 The project of Systematic research and valorisation of the oral patrimony of chanting in the parishes belonging to the Archdiocese of Sibiu, developed within the “Lucian Blaga” University of Sibiu between 2002-2004,3 allowed the compiling of an archive of audio records of almost 100 church singers, most of them from the Archpriestships of Sibiu, Sălişte and Agnita in the Archdiocese of Sibiu4. A brief overview of the audio records reveals the great richness of the oral melodic variations that circulated in Southern Transylvania (in the mentioned archpriestships), which are still waiting for more thorough research meant to highlight the features of a complex and subtle art. For this part of Romania, the analysis of church singing – at least in principle or declaratively – is made by comparison to the book of
1 Gheorghe Ciobanu, Raportul dintre muzica liturgică românească şi muzica bizantină (The Relation between the Romanian liturgical chant and the Byzantine one), in "Studii de etnomuzicologie şi bizantinologie" (“Studies in Ethnomusicology and Byzantology”), vol. II, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1979, p. 268: "muzica liturgică românească, cu toată varietatea ei regională, are la bază muzica bizantină” (“Romanian liturgical chant, in its entire regional variety, is based on Byzantine music”). 2 Gheorghe Şoima, Muzica bisericească și laică în Institutul Teologic din Sibiu (Church and Lay Music at the Theological Institute of Sibiu), in "Mitropolia Ardealului", VI 1961, no. 11-12, p. 798. 3 Granturile MEC(T)-CNCSIS (MEC(T)-CNCSIS Grants (Ministry of Education, Research and Youth-The National Council for Scientific Research in Higher Education) no.290/2002 and no.368/2003 and 2004. 4 The DVD that includes the compressed archive accompanies the study by Pr. Prof. Dr. Vasile Grăjdian, Pr. Lect. Drd. Sorin Dobre, Prep. Eng. Grecu Corina, Librarian-Archive Eng. Streza Iuliana, Cântarea liturgică ortodoxă din Sudul Transilvaniei - Cântarea tradiţională de strană în bisericile Arhiepiscopiei Sibiului (The Orthodox Liturgical Chant in Southern Transylvania – The Traditional Monodic Chant in the Parishes of the Archdiocese of Sibiu), Editura Universităţii “Lucian Blaga”, 2007, p. 464.
101 Church Songs published in 1890 in Vienna by Pr. Dimitrie Cunţan (1837-1910) of Sibiu.5 On the coordinates above, this study aims to highlight a series of aspects of ornamentation in the chanting of Byzantine tradition in Southern Transylvania, for the particular case of Stichera of the 5th Tone to "Lord, I have cried" of the Vesper.
Methodological aspects To this aim, from a methodological point of view, I opted for a method similar to the one used in a previous study concerning the current oral varieties of the Irmos of the Resurrection6 in Ardeal. The purpose is to see in parallel (on overlaying staves) more variations of the same song – in this case the first Stichera of the 5th tone to “Lord, I have cried” – starting from a reference variation, for instance that of Dimitrie Cunţan from 1890,7 and approaching more and more unrelated variations from the point of view of melodic structure. Of course, as the title of this study shows, the focus is mainly on the aspects of melodic ornamentation of the considered variations. The archive of the research project mentioned above (Systematic research and valorisation of the oral patrimony of chanting…) contains records of 54 church singers from Ardeal for the Stichera of the 5th tone to “Lord, I have cried” – a list thereof is presented in Annex 1.8 Since this large number is difficult to process analytically in a low-scale research, I selected a number of 8 variations in order to observe them in parallel.
5 Dimitrie Cunţanu, Cântările bisericesci - după melodiile celor opt glasuri ale sfintei biserici ortodoxe, culese, puse pe note şi arangeate de Dimitrie Cunţanu, Profesor la seminarul "andreian" arhidiecesan (Church Songs – according to the songs of the eight tones of the Holy Orthodox Church, selected, transcribed and adjusted by Dimitrie Cunţanu, teacher at “Andrei Şaguna” Seminary of the Archdiocese) , Sibiu, ed. I, 1890, Author’s press (printed at “Jos.Eberle şi Co. Publisher”, Wien, VII); previous editions that preserve the song unchanged are: ed. III, 1932, Institute of Graphical Arts Krafft & Drotleff S.A. and ed. IV, 1943, Press of the Institute of Graphical Arts Krafft & Drotleff S.A. Sibiu. 6 Pr. Vasile Grăjdian, Irmosul Învierii în variante orale actuale ale cântării bisericeşti de strană din Ardeal (The Irmos of Resurrection in current oral variations of the monodic church chant in Ardeal), study presented at the 10th International Congress of Byzantine Music, Iaşi, 12th-15th of May 2003, published in “Acta Musicae Byzantinae”, Iaşi, vol.VII, 2004, pp. 137-156; republished in an extended version in the volume of Pr. Prof. Dr.Vasile Grăjdian, Pr. Lect. Drd. Sorin Dobre, Prep. Eng. Grecu Corina, Librarian-Archive Eng.Streza Iuliana, Cântarea liturgică ortodoxă din Sudul Transilvaniei... (The Orthodox Liturgical Chant in Southern Transylvania), pp. 128- 186. 7 Dimitrie Cunţanu, Cântările bisericesci... (Church Songs), p. 20. 8 Copied from Pr. Lect. Drd. Sorin Dobre, Prep. Eng. Grecu Corina, Librarian-Archive Eng. Streza Iuliana, Cântarea liturgică ortodoxă din Sudul Transilvaniei (The Orthodox Liturgical Chant in Southern Transylvania), pp. 389-390.
102 The selection criterion was a sufficient portrayal of different ornamentation degrees, in a progressive presentation (based on the complexity of the ornamentation) in relation to the melodic text of Dimitrie Cunţan, from the simplest to the more complex ones from an ornamental perspective. I hope that the intention of portraying the means of ornamentation is not affected by the likely and inevitable subjectivity of the selections – determined by the personal preferences of the person making the selection. However, to use a visual image, it can be said that these are all great gems among other great gems, some of which have been put aside for the time being. The 8 records that were selected are marked in bold in the list in Annex 1. Annex 2 further presents the actual comparison between the variations of the first Stichera of the 5th tone to “Lord, I have cried.” The first two staves (1-2) include those variations that have become a landmark since published in books of songs: the one belonging to Dimitrie Cunţan9, to which I added the one included in the Book of Songs of 1925 of the team managed by Timotei Popovici,10 which is important at least because it implicitly (and explicitly) drew attention at the time on the existence of other possible singing versions, maybe equally qualified for being used in the traditional monodic church chanting in Transylvania. The fact that the latter variation was not very much appreciated can explain why the following editions of the Book of Songs of Dimitrie Cunţan, although published by the same Timotei Popovici,11 went back to the musical text of the first edition, namely that of 1890.
9 Dimitrie Cunţanu, Cântările bisericesci... (Church Songs), p. 20. 10 Timotei Popovici, Candid Popa, Aurel Popovici, Cântările bisericeşti (Church Songs) based on the songs of the eight tones of the Holy Orthodox Church selected, transcribed and adjusted by Dimitrie Cunţanu, teacher at “Andrei Şaguna” Seminary of the Archdiocese of Sibiu, 2nd edition, revised and augmented – published by the Consistory of the Archdiocese, Sibiu, 1925, p. 11. 11 Cântările bisericeşti după melodiile celor opt glasuri, ale sfintei biserici ortodoxe române, culese şi aranjate de Dimitrie Cunţanu, fost profesor la Seminarul Andreian din Sibiu (Church Songs according to the eight tones of the Romanian Holy Orthodox Church, selected, transcribed and adjusted by Dimitrie Cunţanu, former teacher at “Andrei Şaguna” Seminary of Sibiu), 3rd edition, by authorisation of the church supervised by Timotei Popovici; priest, music teacher at Andreiu Şaguna school and manager of the metropolis choir, Sibiu, 1932, (printed at) the Institute of Graphical Arts Krafft & Drotleff S.A.; Cântările bisericeşti după melodiile celor opt glasuri, culese şi întâi publicate în 1890 de Dimitrie Cunţanu, fost profesor la Seminarul Andreian din Sibiu (Church Songs according to the songs of the eight tones, selected and first published in 1890 by Dimitrie Cunţanu, former teacher at “Andrei Şaguna” Seminary of Sibiu), 4th edition, supervised by Timotei Popovici, former music teacher
103 The melodic differences are still rather slight between the two staves/variations. Few as they are, I conventionally marked them with two types of “circling”: the rectangular ones concern especially the changes in the “main” song, and the round (/oval) ones concern specifically the aspects of melodic ornamentation. These two types of marking will also be used for the other melodic variation (oral), transcribed on the next staves. I also added an intermediate marking method, namely rectangular with rounded corners, necessary where especially rich ornamentations get to influence the main melodic line itself – or even replace it –, making it even more difficult to distinguish pure and simple between the ornamentation, on the one hand, and the change of the main melodic line, on the other hand. Other methodological observations regard the fact that, since different voices are concerned, for the purposes of facilitating the comparison all transcriptions have been transposed into the ambit of the reference variation of Dimitrie Cunţan (an “A minor” similar to the linear correspondence of the Stichera of the 5th tone of the chant). Furthermore, the separation “pointed” in measures attempts to suggest a compromise between the published variations of Dimitrie Cunţan and Timotei Popovici, where the rule is the 2/4 measure, and the ad libitum interpretations, with an especially advanced (and subtle) rubato of the oral interpretations, for which the division into measures is usually irrelevant. Another small methodological compromise is the adaptation of the literary text of 1890 of Dimitrie Cunţan to the current orthographic norms, so as not to uselessly complicate the comparison with aspects that do not concern the melodic part; this means the adjustment of „cătră” into „către”, of „rugăciunei” into „rugăciunii” etc., as well as the replacement of certain characters/letters that are no longer used in Romanian (ĕ instead of ă or ḑ instead of z...). In addition, whereas at the beginning the tempo Andante suggested by Dimitrie Cunţan was preserved, it must also be noticed that there are sometimes slightly important tempo differences between the transcribed oral variations – although in general the general indication of Andante can be accepted; therefore, when the version suggested by Nicolae Popa (no. 12) obviously exceeded the tempo limits indicated by Andante, an Allegretto was suggested. Moreover, for the replacement of certain differences between the categories of melodic and ornamental variations presented, I opted for grouping the staves (at the beginning), by 1, 2 or 3, by curly braces in the
at “Andrei Şaguna” Seminary, Sibiu, 1943, Press of the Institute of Graphical Arts Krafft & Drotleff S.A., Sibiu.
104 case of published musical texts, and by square brackets in the case of oral (slightly) related variations. As a final general methodological observation, as far as the intermediate transcription (between “brief” and “final”) of the oral variations is concerned,12 the final reference is always the “phono- graphics” of the audio recording.
Findings, observations and conclusions After the first two staves presenting the published reference variations that were mentioned above with their relatively few differences – where the ornamentations concern only certain “written” mordents and appoggiaturas for the measures 9-10, 28, 37-38, the following two grouped staves (3-4) provide the transcription of the interpretation of two good singers near Sibiu, Luca Simion and Dumitru Munthiu, both graduates from the Popular Art School of Sibiu,13 currently parish priests in Sibiu. The more advanced musical “schooling”, at least in the solfeggio area, is most likely the reason why they comply with and abide by the “letter” of the music, “by the book,” any possible ornamentation being practically inexistent. (Between parentheses, this raises the rhetorical question whether the narrow solfeggio school can lead to the sterilization of the melodic and/or corresponding ornamentation.) The situation is rather different in the case of the singer of the following stave (5), namely Coşorean Axente of Coveş, who, lacking any “school”14 training in music, unleashes the melodic ornamentation, which seems to merge with the main melodic line; consequently, the rectangular marking with rounded corners was used. For the following two staves (6-7), I return to the two “reference” melodic texts of the first two staves (1-2) in order to take the research a step further, namely to the application models of the stichera (with verses before), the ones that start with “Thy venerable cross,” also published in the books of songs of Dimitrie Cunţan (1890)15 and Timotei Popovici (1925).16 This is motivated by the fact that, after listening to all
12 Emilia Comişel, Probleme de transcriere (Transcription Issues), in “Studii de etnomuzicologie” (Studies in Ethnomusicology), vol. II, Editura Muzicală a Uniunii Compozitorilor şi Muzicologilor din România, Bucureşti, 1992, p. 182 Ş.u. 13 See biographical notes in the volume by Pr. Prof. Dr. Vasile Grăjdian, Pr. Lect. Drd. Sorin Dobre, Prep. Eng. Grecu Corina, Librarian-Archive Eng. Streza Iuliana, Cântarea liturgică ortodoxă din Sudul Transilvaniei (The Orthodox Liturgical Chant in Southern Transylvania) pp. 237-238, and pp. 245-246. 14 See biographical note at ibidem, p. 231. 15 Dimitrie Cunţanu, Cântările bisericesci… (Church Songs), p. 21. 16 Timotei Popovici, Candid Popa, Aurel Popovici, Cântările bisericeşti... (Church Songs), p. 12.
105 the recordings available for the 5th tone of “Lord, I have cried,” I generally observed that the singers do not play by notes (the stichera transcribed by Dimitrie Cunţan) and also use for the first two stichera (the ones without verses, namely “Lord, I have cried” and “Let my prayer be set forth”) a practical type of application close to the one suggested by Dimitrie Cunţan. By comparing the melodic models of the published practical applications of the staves 6-7 (with the words associated in the brackets, since the interest is merely on the corresponding melodic relevance), minor differences between the two versions can be noticed, including in relation to the ornamentation, slightly similar to the situation of the first two staves (1-2). For the following (and last) five staves with transcriptions of other oral variations, the published melodic “references” are the two application models highlighted under the staves 6-7, insofar as the vast majority of the oral variations seem to be related to them rather than to those of the staves 1-2. The first group of variations (8-10) of the last five staves consists of 3 singers which have been grouped together because of their relative connection to the application model (or to its “traceability”), despite the ever richer melodic ornamentation. The first singer of this group is actually a female singer, Luca Victoria of Ocna Sibiului, aged 66 years old at the recording date (meanwhile she passed away). Farmer and housewife, she was part of a family of highly gifted church singers (among them the father-in-law, the husband and two of their sons, one of the children being Pr. Luca Simion, whose interpretation is rendered under no.3).17 Her singing, clear and quiet, has maybe the most “classical” (even “Olympian”) character by the just measure of classifying and “melting” the ornaments of the general melody. By listening to her, one can understand how the overall chanting (even in the absence of exaggerated vocal ornamentation) becomes an ornamentation, a jewel in itself, by expanding the meaning of the melodic ornamentation up to including the agogic subtlety of the rubato characteristic to popular singing (for which numerous indications of rall., rit., accel., a tempo, etc. would be necessary in transcription, although they would have usually been insufficient in order to represent the live interpretative moment of inspiration). Because at this level the separation between the “variation” of the main song and the ornamentation by special melodic “figures” is almost impossible to achieve, most of the transcription was marked by rectangles with rounded edges – which will be generally
17 See biographical note in the volume by Pr. Prof. Dr..Vasile Grăjdian, Pr. Lect. Drd. Sorin Dobre, Pre Eng. Grecu Corina, Librarian-Archive Eng. Streza Iuliana, Cântarea liturgică ortodoxă din Sudul Transilvaniei (The Orthodox Liturgical Chant in Southern Transylvania), p. 260.
106 copied on the next staves as well. Moreover, to make a more special reference, I would like to highlight the melodic evolution of the measures 22-27, where the melodic ornamentation is paradoxically combined with the recitative “crowding” of more syllables of the hymnographic text. Ivan Constantin of Sadu (no.9), who learnt church singing in an actual village “community” of more church singers,18 is also driven by a self-teaching spirit in learning musical notation and by a will of greater self-improvement, which made him complete his theological studies (Bachelor’s and Master’s degree) by the age of 42, in spite of the everyday (family) difficulties. His singing also aims at “remaining” close to the application model, even if his rich experience as a singer prompts him to embellish the style with various small mordents, which can sometimes replace notes of the main melodic line (that of the “reference model”); see for instance measures 28-30. Hârţoagă Ioan of Agnita (10)19 takes the general(ised) melodic ornamentation a step further, as can be seen from the measures 5-8 or 46-47. What should be remembered, both in the case of Hârţoagă Ioan and in the other singers, is the highly varied use, as ornaments, of the vibrato, which is sometimes hard to distinguish from mordent or tremolo. Anyhow, with this singer the feeling of folkloric singing is increasingly marked, as it will also be seen in the case of the last two singers. Thus, for the singers of the last group (11-12) the melodic and ornamental exuberance completes the fusion of the ornamental and impromptu spirit with the intimate structures of the melodic speech. Angela Beschiu of Jina (11)20 is a real exponent of a special vocal virtuosity, her interpreting being a continuous chain of melodic “twists” that seem unique and some of which are memorable; see, for instance, a mordented (decorated) mordent with other three mordents in the 5th measure, as well as the countless tirades of appoggiaturas of all kinds, slides etc., such as, among others, those of measures 41-47. (Anyhow, in relation to the ornamental melodic concentration, it should be borne in mind that this study compared the correspondent of only 7 lines of stichera model). The last analysed church singer is Popa Nicolae of Apoldul de jos,21 whose melodic art could be described as an uninterrupted transitional state, which, however, does not give the impression of a melodic aporia; on the contrary, the general formal coherence does not seem to be
18 ibidem, p. 43; v. and biographical note at p. 235. 19 Biographical note in ibidem, p. 333. 20ibidem, p. 344. 21 ibidem, p. 208.
107 affected; as a typical example, see the melodic (ornamental) evolutions of measures 16-40.
*
As a final conclusion to the observations of this study, a rhetorical question needs to be asked, whose answer may come in future research: is the musical text identified by D. Cunţan the reference that is ornamented in the actual interpretation or is the live style the reality of the church singing of Byzantine Tradition in Transylvania and the text of D. Cunţan, an “abstraction” of the oral variations? A probable answer would be that both approaches can have a specific, mutually complementing relevance, according to the purpose of specific research.
ABSTRACT
Previous musicology research established the kinship of the traditional Orthodox Church singing in Transylvania with the church music of Byzantine tradition, to which were added over time a series of regional folk influences. An important collection of songs for the church singing in Transylvania is the book of Church Songs published in 1890 in Vienna by Father Dimitrie Cunţan (1837-1910) from Sibiu – that is until today a defining landmark for the liturgical singing of the Orthodox Church in Transylvania. Other research – including many audio records - have shown that in the practice of the liturgical chant in the Transylvanian Orthodox parishes there is a great melodic variety for every type of song, compared with the patterns recorded in the Dimitrie Cunţan’s book of Church Songs. The interpretation performed by the different Transylvanian church singers is often characterized by a rich ornamentation, contributing in an important measure to achieve that melodic variety. This study aims to compare the melodic model proposed by Dimitrie Cunţan in his book for the Stichera of the 5th Tone to the "Lord, I have cried" of the Vesper with some characteristic interpretations, transcribed from 54 more recent records available. The examples chosen are trying to highlight specific types or styles of ornamentation and their influence on the general melodic profile of that song – from close variations until more far variations, in comparison with the model of Dimitrie Cunţan.
108 Selective bibliography Cunţanu Dimitrie, Cântările bisericeşti după melodiile celor opt glasuri (culese şi întâi publicate în 1890 de D. Cunțanu), ediţia a IV-a, îngrijită de Timotei Popovici, Krafft & Drotleff S.A., Sibiu, 1943. Grăjdian Vasile, Irmosul Învierii în variante orale actuale ale cântării bisericeşti de strană din Ardeal, studiu prezentat în cadrul celui de Al 10-lea congres internaţional de muzică bizantină, Iaşi, 12-15 mai 2003, publicat în „Acta Musicae Byzantinae”, Iaşi, vol.VII, 2004, pp.137-156. Popovici Timotei, Popa Candid, Popovici Aurel, Cântările bisericeşti după melodiile celor opt glasuri ale Sf. Biserici Ortodoxe culese, puse pe note şi aranjate de Dimitrie Cunţanu, Ediţia a II-a, Sibiu, 1925. Şoima Gheorghe, Muzica bisericească și laică în Institutul Teologic din Sibiu, în „Mitropolia Ardealului", vol. VI, 1961, no. 11-12.
109 Annex 1
5th Tone no. “Lord, I have cried” (sticheraric – automela) duration 1. CD 2, Florea Vasile - Alămor (26th of June 2002) 01’ 08” 2. CD 3, Balteş Nicolae - Ocna Sibiului (26th of June 2002) 00’ 47” 3. CD 4, Nechita Gheorghe - Mag (21st of July 2002) 00’ 43” 4. CD 6, Bighea Ioan - Cristian (22nd of July 2002) 01’ 00” 5. CD 7, Lupea Ioan - Galeş (24th of July 2002) 01’ 20” 6. CD 9, Petra Ion - Sibiel (3rd of September 2002) 00’ 46” 7. CD 10, Schiau Ilie - Apoldul de Sus (September 2002); appears to be a combined form 00’ 26” 8. CD 11, Popa Nicolae - Apoldul de Jos 00’ 43” 9. CD 12, Manta Ioan - Sibiu (29th of September2002) 01’ 13” 10. CD 13, Ivănuţ Nicolae - Mohu (14th of October 2002) 01’ 29” 11. CD 14, Nica Ioan - Mohu (14th of October 2002) 02’ 38” 12. CD 16, Albu Ioan - Şelimbăr (24th of October 2002) 02’ 10” 13. CD 17, Tătoiu Ioan - Răşinari (24th of October 2002) 01’ 27” 14. CD 18, Jianu Ioan - Răşinari (24th of October 2002); seems to be a combined form 00’ 48” 15. CD 19, Roman Ioan - Răşinari (24th of October 2002) 02’ 20” 16 a. CD 20, Damian Petru - Gura Râului (21st of November 2002); appears to be a combined 00’ 31” 16b. form - Variation (test) 00’ 17” 17. CD 21, Ihora Ilie - Gura Râului (21st of November 2002) 00’ 46” 18. CD 22, Arcaş Gheorghe - Sadu (12th of December 2002) 02’ 22” 19. CD 23, Ţarălungă Gheorghe - Sadu (12th of December 2002); an interesting form of the 5th Tone 02’ 24” 20. CD 24, Ivan Constantin - Sadu (12th of December 2002) 02’ 16” 21. CD 25 A, Pr.Munthiu Dumitru Adrian - Sibiu (19th of Sep.1985); şi cu aplicare 03’ 08” 22. CD 26 A, Diac.Susan Mihai - Sibiu (28th of December 2002); with application 03’ 27” 23 a. CD 27, Ciocan Constantin - Sibiu (30th of December 2002-29th of January 2003) 03’ 41” 23b. - Application 01’ 09” 24. CD 28, Arhid.Luca Simion - Sibiu (21st of Janury 2003); cu aplicare 04’ 27” 25. CD 30, Veştemean Ioan - Sibiu (25th of January 2003) 02’ 27” 26. CD 31, David Simion - Sadu (25th of January 2003) 01’ 59” 27. CD 32, Săvoiu Ioan - Sadu (25th of January 2003): appears to be a combined form 01’ 02” 28. CD 35, Luca Dumitru - Ocna Sibiului (30th of January 2003) 02’ 09” 29. CD 36, Luca Victoria - Ocna Sibiului (30th of January 2003) 02’ 03” 30. CD 40, Pr.Ciocan Ioan - Sălişte (5th of March 2003); Dogmatic of the voice 02’ 46” 31. CD 43, Novac Augustin - Sibiu (18th of October 2003) 03’ 00” 31. CD 44 A, Herciu Ionel - Sibiu (22nd of July 2004) 02’ 20” 32. CD 45, Ciuchină Alexe - Sibiu (30th of July 2004) 01’ 31” 33. CD 46, Buzan Jimăn Daniel - Sibiu (15th of September 2004) 01’ 54” 34. CD 52, Capătă Maria - Sălişte (21st of September 2004) 01’ 21” 35. CD 53, Stoica Ioan - Mândra (22nd of September 2004) 02’ 37” 36. CD 56, Barna Ionuţ Emilian - Sibiu (10th of January 2005): Verse and Stichera 01’ 07” 37. CD 58, Stoica Cornelius - Sibiu (17th of January 2005): Verse and Stichera 00’ 49” 38. CD 59, Mitru Ioan Remus - Sibiu (12th of January 2005): Verse and Stichera 01’ 25” 39. CD 60, Zepa Adrian - Sibiu (17th of January 2005): Verse and Stichera 00’ 47” 40. CD 61, Mitru Remus - Sibiu (18th of January 2005) 00’ 48” 41. CD 62, Pr.Dumitrean Cătălin - Sibiu (18th of January 2005): Dogmatic 03’ 04” 42. CD 63, Pr.Coşa Ioan - Sibiu (18th of January 2005): Verse and Stichera 00’ 57” 43. CD 67, Pintea Ioan Adrian - Sibiu (20th of January 2005): Verse and Stichera 01’ 17” 44. CD 72 Ţichindelean Mircea - Alţâna (27th of January 2005): Verse and Stichera 01’ 06” 45. CD 73 Tibu Vasile - Agnita (27th of January 2005) 00’ 34” 46. CD 75 Coşorean Axente - Coveş (27th of January 2005) 01’ 15” 47. CD 76 Hârţoagă Ioan - Agnita (27th of January 2005) 01’ 11” 48. CD 78, Barbu Nicolae - Retiş (27th of January 2005) 00’ 54” 49. CD 79, Ţânţ Voinea - Retiş (27th of January 2005) 00’ 34” 50. CD 81, Gorea Ioan - Roşia (28th of January 2005) - the melody of the troparion 00’ 32” 51. CD 83, Beschiu Angela - Jina (20th of February 2005) 02’ 07” 52. CD 101, Muntean Lazăr - Cristian (Braşov – 22nd of November 2002) 00’ 34” 53. CD 102, Muntean Ion - Vulcan (5th of November 2002) 02’ 02” 54. CD 108, Ducaru Ion - Râşnov (August 2004) 00’ 43”
110 Annex 2
111 112
113
114
115
116
117
The Cheironomic Signs in the Sticheraria with Koukouzelian notation at the National Archives of Iaşi (NAI)
IRINA ZAMFIRA DĂNILĂ
I. Introduction In the Romanian Byzantine musicology, two approaches regarding the periodization of Byzantine notation are currently known. According to the former, established in the second half of the XXth century by the Western school of paleography1, there are four main periods of Byzantine neumatic notation: the Paleo-Byzantine notation (XIth to XIIth century); the Medio-Byzantine notation (XIIth to XIVth century); Koukouzelian notation (XVth century to the benginning of the XIXth)2; and finally modern Chrysantean notation (later than 1814). According to this former approach, the Medio-Byzantine notation is considered to be different from the Koukouzelian notation in that in manuscripts, beside the somata, pnevmata, nici soma nici pnevma categories, it makes use of a balanced number of cheironomic signs (around 15)3, as compared to the large number of cheironomic signs (around 38)4 occurring in the manuscripts that use the Koukouzelian notation. The former, relatively recent, approach, circulated mainly in the specialised literature in Greek musicology, but not only, designates as Medio-Byzantine notation the semiography used in the manuscripts between the XIIth and the beginning of the XIXth century; the argument in favour of this
The manuscripts presented in this paper were studied in the postdoctoral project with the theme “The research of the psaltic music manuscripts at the State Archives of Iaşi” in progress between 01.04.2012 and 01.04.2013 at MIDAS (Music Institute for Doctoral Advanced Studies), Bucharest, Romania, POSDRU/89/1.5/S/62923; the project is co-financed from the European Social Fund through the Sector operational programme for human resources development 2007-2013. 1 An important centre of Byzantine musical studies was created at the beginning of the XXth century at Copenhagen. Its main representatives were: Carsten Hoeg, Egon Wellesz, Ioan D. Petrescu, Jorgen Råasted ș.a. This first classification of the Byzantine notation was suggested in Romania by Priest Ioan D. Petrescu, the founder of musical Byzantine paleography in Romania and developed by his disciples Grigore Panţiru and Gheorghe Ciobanu. 2 Grigore Panţiru, Notaţia şi ehurile muzicii bizantine, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1972, p. 9. 3 ibidem, pp. 32-34. 4 ibidem, pp. 67-72.
118 periodization is that this notation makes use of the neumatic sub- categories somata, pnevmata and nici soma nici pnevma and that ”most [of these categories, n.n.] are expressive signs meant also to refer to issues related to rhythm, tempo or melody phrases (megala semadia, megalai hypostaseis, the large signs).”5 Thus, an explanation emerges for the fact that in the last stage of Medio-Byzantine notation, also known as Koukouzelian notation or late Medio-Byzantine (XVth to XIXth century), ”an important number of the large cheironomic signs were explained, leaving the impression of an entirely new and different notation practice. In fact, all the basic neume found in the Medio- Byzantine notation had been used and were still in use throughout the period.”6 I am of the opinion that the former approach is more correct, since it has been supported by arguments related to the significant differences in compositional style between the Medio-Byzantine and the Koukouzelian period. The issue of Byzantine semiography has been approached theoretically in Romania by Ioan D. Petrescu, Grigore Panţiru, Gheorghe Ciobanu and Sebastian Barbu-Bucur. Priest Ioan D. Petrescu studied the Paleo-Byzantine manuscripts in document funds abroad7 and Deacon Grigore Panţiru focused mainly on deciphering the ecphonetic notation and compiled the first didactic volume on Byzantine semiography8 at university level. Byzantinologist Gheorghe Ciobanu demonstrated the interdependence between the phonetics of the language used in church chanting and the melody construction of this type of chanting and thus explained the causes behind the musical differences between the performance in Greek and the performance in the Romanian language. Priest S. B. Bucur, Archdeacon, contributed to broadening the research initiated by the specialists mentioned above and investigated mainly the propedias in manuscript form to be found in the document funds in Romania9. Another important contribution made by S. B. Bucur is that he was able to clarify the existing sub-periodization of the process of translating and adapting religios chanting into Romanian by analysing and bringing to the public’s attention several important manuscripts. Among them are the Romanian anthology of liturgical hymns Psaltiki by Filothei sin Agăi Jipei (1713) and the Anastasimatarion by Mihalache
5 Nicolae Gheorghiţă, Muzica bizantină. Scurtă introducere, in ,,Byzantion Romanicon”, revista de arte bizantine, vol. VII, Editura Artes, Iaşi, 2008, p. 164. 6 ibidem. 7 Ioan D. Petrescu, Études de paléographie musicale byzantine, Editura Muzicală, București, 1967. 8 Grigore Panțiru, op. cit. 9 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Cultura muzicală de tradiție bizantină pe teritoriul României și aportul original al culturii autohtone, Editura Muzicală, București, 1989.
119 the moldo-Vlachos (1767). Together with Professor Priest Ion Isăroiu, the Romanian Byzantinologist also discovered and published the entire musical work of Ghelasie Basarabeanu, thus placing him among the three great masters of Romanian psaltic music of the XIXth century, Macarie Ieromonahul, Anton Pann and Dimitrie Suceveanu. In the second part of the Romanian anthology of liturgical hymns Psaltiki, namely in the beginning of the part containing the Sticherarion, the first propedia in the Romanian language in Romania can be found, where the signs of the Koukouzelian notation are presented. All the categories of signs are shown – somata, pnevmata, nici soma, nici pnevma. We can also find in the propedia the category of cheironomic signs, which Filotei names “the large mute signs called states” which we reproduce according to S.B. Bucur10:
It can be seen that 33 ”large signs” are reproduced. As shown by the above mentioned byzantinologist, this propedia by Filotei was adopted identically or in a slightly modified version in several manuscripts in Romania (around 10), which were widely circulated on the territory of the Romanian Principalities11. The Romanian propedia
10 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Filothei sin agăi Jipei, Psaltichia rumănească, II. Anastasimatar, Editura Muzicală, București, in Izvoare ale muzicii românești, vol. VII B, pp. 113-114. 11 ibidem, p. 69. Here are the manuscripts in which copies of Filotei’s propedia appear: 1) Romanian ms. 1106 at the University library in Cluj-Napoca, written in 1745 by an anonymous copyist; 2) Romanian ms. 4305 at BARSR, completed in 1751 by ”Ioan sin Radului Dumei Braşoveanul”; 3) Romanian ms. 3210 in BARSR, signed by Naum Râmniceanu; 4) ms. in Greek and Romanian 795 at BARSR, copied in 1792 by an anonymous copyist; 5) ms. in Greek and Romanian 91 at the Museum of Oltenia in Craiova, XVIIIth century, copied by an anonymous copyist; 6) ms. in Greek and
120 by Filotei represents the first and most important musical grammar in the Romanian language; it opened the way for other similar books that were required for the instruction and training of the future cantors. When Makarie the Hyeromonk’s Theoretikon (Viena, 1823) and Anton Pann’s Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericesci sau Gramatica melodică / Basic Theory and Practice of Church Music or the Grammar of Melody (Bucharest, 1846), were published, Filotei’s propedia was no longer needed.
II. The presentation of the topic In the present study, we discuss the cheironomic semiography used in an important corpus of musical manuscripts, the Koukouzelian Sticheraria at the National Archives of Iaşi.
III. Argumentation of the topic At the National Archives of Iaşi an invaluable fund of manuscripts can be found, consisting of 17 musical manuscripts containing various types of musical collections and Byzantine semiographies. According to the type of musical collection, the NAI fund contains: 8 Anthologion books (Ms. in Gr. and Rom. 79, Ms. in Gr. Rom. 181, Ms. in Greek. 199, Ms. in Gr. and Rom. 202, Ms. in Gr. and Rom. 207, Ms. in Gr. and Rom. 1541, Ms. in Gr. and Rom. 1546, Ms. in Rom. 1737), 4 Sticherarion books (Ms. in Gr. 198 by P. Lampadarios, Ms. in Gr. 203, unknown composer, Ms. in Gr. 204 by Panagiotes Chrisaphes the Younger, Ms. in Gr. 206 by Germanos of the New Patra, 2 Liturgy song books (Ms. in Gr. and Rom. 73 and Ms. in Gr. 75), 1 Anastasimatarion (Ms. in Greek 1667, a selection from the book by Petros Ephesios, Bucharest, 1820), 1 Herouvikon and Koinonikon (Ms. in Greek 208), 1 Irmologion and Octoechos (Ms. in Greek. 201, by Petros Lampadarios). According to the type of notation: In Koukouzelian type notation (pre-Chrysantean): 8 mss: Ms. 198, Ms. 199, Ms. 201, Ms. 202, Ms. 203, Ms. 204, Ms. 206, Ms. 207.
Romanian 3 at Neamţ Monastery, dating from the second half of the XVIIIth century, no author mentioned; 7-8) Romanian manuscripts 4233 and 4443 at BARSR the end of the XVIIIth century and the beginning of the XIXth century, unknown author; 9) ms. in Greek and Romanian 1350 at BARSR, written in 1808 by Chesarie at Căldăruşani Monastery; 10) Romanian ms. 5970 at BARSR written by Hieromonk Acachie at Căldăruşani Monastery in 1821.
121 In Chrysantean notation: 9 mss: Ms. 73, Ms. 75, Ms. 79, Ms. 181, Ms. 208, Ms. 1541, Ms. 1546, Ms. 1667, Ms. 1737. The sticherarion is a liturgical book in Bzyantine rite containing the stichera, the hymns inserted between the verses of psalms at Hersperinos and Orthros. Sticheraria include both stichera idiomela and stichera automela: stichera idiomela have their own melodies and are usually sung only once during the Church year; stichera automela do not in themselves constitute a sung repertory but function as melodic and metrical models for the generation of stichera prosomoia12.
III.1.The syntethic analysis, codicological and musical- liturgic of the NAI Sticheraria In the following section we present the basic codicologic musical- liturgic data of the Sticheraria in manuscript form in pre-Chrysantean (Koukouzelian) notation at the National Archives of Iaşi. Two of the sticheraria, Ms. 198 and Ms. 203, were studied by Sebastian Barbu- Bucur and Florin Bucescu in seminal papers.
III.1.1.Ms. in Greek 198 NAI13 Syntomon sticherarion. Transitional Koukouzelian notation. Author: Petros Lampadarios the Peloponnesian. No date, no place mentioned, no name of the copyist. Source: the church ”The Dormition of the Holy Virgin” in Roman, Neamţ. The description of ms. 198. In good condition. Format II, 18x13 cm. Written area: 15x11 cm, with 10 lines of neume and corresponding text. Binding in board covered in leather, decorated with floral motifs, simple, embossed. The back is ornamented with horizontal stripes and floral motifs; the back has the inscription in Greek: ANQOLOGIA STHXIRARION (“An Anthology – Sticherarion”). The paper is good quality, with water-marks. The ink is in two colours, red for titles of chants, keys of the modes, the martyriai, the cheironomic signs: antichenoma, lighisma, piasma, in certain cases psifiston, the temporal sign gorgon; black ink for the vocal signs, for clasma, varia. The writing is elaborate, the touch is confident, indicating a professional hand. Ornaments: capitals ornamented with
12 See more characteristics of the sticherarion in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, vol. 24 (Sources of instrumental ensemble music to Tait), second edition, edited by Stanley Sadie, executive editor John Tyrrell, Macmillan Publishers Limited, New York, 2001, s.v. sticherarion. 13 Ms. 198 was first described by S. B. Bucur in his study Manuscrise psaltice românești și bilingve în notație cucuzeliană în marile biblioteci din România, in ,,Biserica Ortodoxă Română”, București, XCIV, no. 9-12, 1976 and then by Priest Florin Bucescu in Cântarea psaltică în manuscrisele moldovenești din sec. XIX. Ghidul manuscriselor psaltice – Moldova, sec. XIX, vol. II, Editura Artes, 2009, Iași, pp. 156-157.
122 simple floral motifs. Late foliation from sheet 1 to 241; beside this, there are two more sheets, without page numbers (one at the beginning and the other at the end.) The general title is on sheet 1: “Anqología Sthxirárion periéxousa pánta ta docasthká tou eniautoú te despotikýn kai Qeomhtorikýn ™ortýn kai álwn eortazoménwn agíwn sunteqénta pará tou mousikologiotátou Lampadaríou thß tou Xristoú megálhß Ekklhsíaß Kúr Pétrou tou Peloponhsíou di’idían kai koinën wfelían” (“A synthesis made by the wise musician, in charge of candles and second psaltes in Christ’s Great Church, Kir Petru of Peloponnesus, for his personal use and for general use”).
Ms. 198 NAI, sh. 1, front page
123 Extra-musical notes: ”it belongs to The Holy Virgin [Mary Church] with the dedication day on Dormition of the Theotokos” [in Cyrillic characters] (sh. 1r); f. 225: ,,αυγουστου 6”/ August 6th. Probable date. Byzantinologist Priest Florin Bucescu hypothesizes that Ms. 198 NAI ”was copied by a Greek in the last two decades of the XVIIIth century or the first decade of the 19th century”14. The chants contained: the Sticherarion contains the stichera and the Doxastika of fixed date feasts throughout the year organized according to the month when they are celebrated, beginning on September 1st and ending on August 29th. It is an important manuscript as it is a copy of the famous work of the post-Byzantine composer Petros Lampadarios15.
III.1.2. Ms. in Greek 203 NAI16 Kalophonic sticherarion. Koukouzelian notation, in its form of greatest development. No date, no place mentioned, no name of the copyist. Source: the church “The Dormition of the Virgin Mary” of Roman, Neamţ county. The description of Ms. 203 NAI. In relatively good condition. Format III, 21x14 cm. Written area: 17x10 cm, with 11 lines of neume and corresponding text. Binding in board covered in black damaged leather; front cover is
14 Florin Bucescu, op. cit., p. 157. 15 Petros Lampadarios (around 1730-1778, Constantinople). He was a great chanter, composer and teacher of byzantine music. He was in charge of the church candles and conductor of the left-hand choir at the Great Church Saint Sophia in Constantinople between 1769 and 1773. Most of the monodic chanting performed today in the tradition of the Orthodox Church Marea are transcriptions of his compositions, which he created while he was a teacher at the Second New School of the Patriarchal church His fame as a teacher and composer relies on his substantial contributions regarding the Irmologhion (The Katavasia or Irmologhion argon, printed in a transcribed form in 1825), the Sticherarion in an abbreviated version or simple (Doxastarion syntomon) printed in a transcribed form in 1820) as well as the Anthology for the Holy Liturgy (such as the Papadic Heruvikon collection and the keinonikon cycles) and basic chants of psaltic music – for example, the explanation of the chant exercises by John Koukouzeles (Mathimata – lessons), Mega Ison (transcribed by Hurmuz and published in an anthology by Kyriazides Agathangelos in 1896). His reputation was not limited to teh area of Orthodox chants, he also composed other genres of music, Armenian, Turkish, including melodies composed according to makamlar rules. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petros_Peloponnesios). 16 Ms. 203 NAI was first described by S. B. Bucur in his study Manuscrise psaltice românești și bilingve în notație cucuzeliană în marile biblioteci din România, in ,,Biserica Ortodoxă Română”, București, XCIV, 1976, no. 9-12, and then by Priest Florin Bucescu in Cântarea psaltică în manuscrisele moldovenești din sec. XIX. Ghidul manuscriselor psaltice – Moldova, sec. XIX, vol. II, Editura Artes, Iași, 2009, pp. 159-160.
124 detached from the body of the manuscript. Quality paper, thick, but several sheets were perforated by bookworms. Neat writing, by a professional hand, in black and red. Red ink for titles of chants, keys of the modes, the martyriai, the cheironomic signs: antichenoma, psifiston, omalon, eteron, lighisma, piasma, paraklitiki, kilisma, ouranisma, thematismos esso and nenano ftorai, in certain cases psifiston, the temporal sign gorgon; black ink for the vocal signs somata and pnevmata, ison, for clasma, xironclasma, varia. Ornaments: full titles in two colours on the title sheet and initial capitals, ornamented with floral motifs. Late foliation, from sheet 1 to 276, recorded on the cover page by archivist Elena Lungu.
Ms. in gr. 203 NAI, frontleaf: sh. 1 recto
125 Sh. 1, title page: ”Anqológion plousiotátwn periéxwn ápanta twn eortýn kai ..... diáforwn agíwn tou ólou eniantoú arxómenwn apó tou septembríou min htoi tou néon Étouß” (”Antologhion... including all the feasts... and of the various saints throughout the year starting from September, which is the first day of the new year”).
Extra-musical notes: sh. 1 „belonging to the Holy Virgin [church]” [in Cyrillic characters]; sh. 276 ,”Ek twn tou didaskálou Nikoláou Kanel” (”from psaltes Nicolae Canel”); ”Manolachi Boghiţă” [colophon note of the ”monokondilio” type]; ”This book was presented by me, the above signed Dinu Psaltes from the Holy Bishopric of Roman. 1819? July 24th” The chants contained: Ms 203 contains the stichera and the Glory sung on the fixed date feasts throughout the year, starting from September 1th and ending with August 29th. On sh. 275 the note: ”Tα παροντα ψαλλοντα εις την ο πισθεν κυριακιν μετα ο α ευαγγελιον οις του ορθρου Ą Ķ Ni”, Της μετανοιας ανοιξον μοι ζωοδοτον (”These are sung on Sunday after the Holy Gospel at morning services, plagal of the fourth mode on Ni”, Open The Doors to Repentance to Me, You Giver of Life). Thus, at the end of the manuscript a chant is added belonging to the Lent period sung during the morning service.
III.1.3. Ms in Greek 204 NAI Kalophonic Sticherarion. Author: Chrysaphes the Younger17. Koukouzelian in its form of the greatest development notation, dated approximately in the first half of the XVIIIth century. Unreported until now. It belonged to Gavril, priest at the Great Church. The description of Ms. 204 NAI. In good condition. Format II, (20,7x13 cm), covers of wood covered in brown leather. It used to have metal fasteners that broke. The front cover is ornamented with embossed floral patterns forming a border; in the middle there is an inset representing Resurrection; in the corners are the authors of the four gospels. The back cover is similarly ornamented with the inset containing the scene of the Crucifixion. Written area: 13, 5 x 8,5 cm, 12 lines of running text and corresponding neumes. Carefully written, by a
17 Panagiotes Chrysaphes the Younger (cca. 1622-1682), composer, protopsaltes at the Patriarchal Chair of Constatinople between 1665 and 1680. He was a student of Georgios Raidestinos, protopsaltes at the Patriarchal Chair. His creation relies on recomposing the late mediaeval Sticherarion as described by Manuel Hrisafi in his treatise on the psaltic art as well as on recomposing the Byzantine Anastasimatarion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panagiotes_the_New_Chrysaphes).
126 professional hand. Special attention for ornaments, full titles and initial capitals, ornamented with floral motifs artfully and tastefully decorated. Three types of ink are used: green, red, black. The green ink is used mainly for the full titles and the initial capitals; red ink for titles of chants, keys of the modes, the martyriai, the cheironomic signs: antichenoma, psifiston, omalon, eteron, lighisma, piasma, paraklitiki, kilisma, ouranisma, thematismos esso and nenano ftorai, in certain cases psifiston, the temporal sign gorgon; black ink for the intervalic signs somata and pnevmata, ison, clasma, xironclasma, varia. Late foliage, in pencil, from sheet 1 to 486.
The title page of the manuscript reads as follows: sh. 1, title: [Σ]τηχεράριον σὺν Θ(ε)ῷ ἁγίω πλουσιώτατον, καὶ καλλοφωνικόν. Περιἔχων απασαν τὴν ἁκολουθεῖαν τῶν προταρίων τοῦ ἐνιαὐτου κατὰ τάξιν συντεθὲν παρὰ τοῦ λογιοωτάτου καὶ χρυσιμωτάτου κὺρ χρισαφοῦ τοῦ νέου καὶ προτοψάλτου τῆς ἁγιωτάτης τοῦ χριστοῦ, μέγαλλης ἐκκλησίας. ἀρχόμενον ἀπὸ τῆς ᾷ τοῦ σεπτεμβρίος. καὶ λὺγον μέχρι τῆς τελεωτέας τοῦ αὐγοὺστου. (”[S]ticherarion with the Holy God, very rich and kalophonic, containing the entire canon of the troparia throughout the year in their order, composed by the highly educated and much useful gentleman Chrysaphes the Younger and the Protopsaltes of Christ’s Great Church, starting with September 1th and up to the last day of August”). „Εις τὺν ᾷ τοῦ α οσιου καὶ θεωφόρου π(α)τ(ε)ρας ημον συμεων του στυλιτου” ἦχος Ľ Eκ ρυζις αγαθος αγαθοι ευλαστισε ἦχος Ľ Eκ ρυζις αγαθος αγαθοι ευλαστισε (”from 1 to 1 of the saint and teophoros our Father Priest Simeon of the Pillar”, second mode on vou As a good fruit from a good root it has sprung).
127
Ms.in gr. 204 NAI, sh.1: title page
Extra-musical notes: sh. 1: “it belongs to the the Holy Virgin [church]” [in Cyrillic characters]; sh. 486 overleaf: [colophon note] [a note of the “monokondilio” type that can be only partially deciphered] ,,[ἀμονάχου (?)] Γαβριὴλ τοῦ καὶ ποτὲ χριματίσας ἐφιμέριος τῆς μεγάλης ἐκκλησίας ἐκ τῆς νίσου ἀστύπαλιάς ρουσάτος.” ([this manuscript belongs to the] ”lay Gavriil who once was an ordinary priest at the Great Church [probably the Church of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and his origin or his birth-place is the] Astypalaia Island, Rousatos”18.
18 With thanks to Mrs. prof. Maria Alexandru and Mr. prof. Emmanouil Giannopoulos from ”Aristotle” University from Thessaloniki, Greece, for helping in deciphering and interpreting of this colophon note.
128
Ms. 204 NAI, fv sh. 486 – a colophon note
Date and place. Due to the characteristics of the musical notation and of the compositional kalophonic style specific of the Chrysaphes the Younger’s chants, Ms. 204 NAI can be dated approximately in the first half of the XVIIIth century. According to the colophon note on sh. 486, Ms. 204 cannot be localized, but it is confirmed that it belonged to Priest Gavriil of the Great Church (from Constantinople, possibly). The probably origin of Gavriil is the Astypalaia Island (Greece). The chants contained: the ordinary content of a Sticherarion, consisting of stichera and doxastika of the feasts of fixed and mobile date throughout the year. Ms. 204 NAI has a special value as a document as it is a copy of the Sticherarion Kalophonicon by Chrysaphes the Younger, copied in professional hand, with ornaments of impecable taste and great aesthetic beauty which can raise the interest of paleographers due to its rich cheironomic semiography.
III.1.4. Ms. in gr. 206 NAI Kalophonic Sticherarion. Author: Germanos of the New Patra. Koukouzelian (Medio-Byzantine) notation, date: 1736, location: Iviron Monastery, copied by kir Iakoumis. Description of the Ms. 206 NAI. General condition: relatively good. Format III, 22x17,3 cm, the binding: 2,3. Written area: 17, 2x11,2 cm, 17 lines of neumes and corresponding text on average. Bound in wooden covers covered in leather eaten by bookworms. The covers are beautifully ornamented with an embossed floral edge and an inset in the middle representing the Crucifixion (front cover) and the Resurrection (back cover). Quality paper with water marks, perforated by death watches. Calligraphic writing in two colours, in one professional hand. Red ink for titles of chants, keys of the modes, the martyriai, the cheironomic signs: antichenoma, psifiston, omalon, eteron, lighisma, piasma,
129 paraklitiki, kilisma, ouranisma, thematismos esso and nenano ftorai, in certain cases psifiston, the temporal sign gorgon; black ink for the intervalic signs somata and pnevmata, ison, clasma, xironclasma, varia. Ornaments: full titles and capitals initials decorated with floral motifs, skilfully executed. Ms. in Gr. 206 has sheet title at sh. 4: ”στιχηράριον Θεῶ ἁγίῳ περιἔχοντα τοῦ ὄλου ἐνιαωτου μὴν σεπτεμβρίου α. ἀρχὴ τῆς ἰνδίκτου καὶ τοῦ ὁσίου πατερας ἡμῶν συμεὼν τοῦ στιλίτου”, Οσιε πατερ (”Sticherarion [with] Holy God containing everything throughout the year. September 1st. The beginning of the indiction and of the pious father Simeon of the Pillar”, Holy Father).
Ms 206, sh. 4, overleaf
Extra-musical notes: the fv front cover: ”Eἰς τοὺς ,αζλστ΄ω ἰουλίου κγ’η ἀρχήνησα ἐγὼ ὁ κὺρ γιακουμεῖς τὸ στηχηράριον τοῦ νέων πατρῶν καὶ ὁ Θ(ε)ὸς καὶ ἡ Παναγία ἡ πορταριτησσα νὰ μὲ βοηθήση νὰ τὸ περάσω ὀγλήγορα” (”in 1763, the 23rd [day] of July, I, Iakoumis, gentleman, started the translation of the New Patra’s sticherarion and God himslef and the Holy Gatekeeper may help me to finish it soon”).
130
Ms. 206 ANI, fv cover 1
Folio verso cover 1: ”Eἰς τοὺς αζνα΄ ἀπριλὶου 11” (1751 April 11th)
sh. 2: ”1783” sh. 134 fv: ”ᾔλυφε τέλος τὸ παρὸν στιχιράριον εἰς τήν μονήν Ιβήρον” (the present sticherarion from the Iviron monastery ends here”).
Date. Location. Copyist. The notes on the back of the front cover (sh. 134v) indicate that Ms. 206 NSAI in Greek was made at Mount Athos, the Iviron Monastery by de Kir Iakoumis. It was started in 1736, as noted on the back of the front cover, two other years appear, however, on the ms.: 1751 and 1783. The chants contained: the stichera of the feasts with a fixed date throughout the year, from September 1st to December 31st. Ms. in Greek 204 represents an incomplete copy of the Sticherarion Kalophonic by Germanos of the New Patra19; it is interesting for its musical liturgic content as well as a paleographic
19 Germanos, bishop of the new Patra (the former half of the XVIIth century) composes a sticherarion, a triodion. He was the pupil of Chrysaphes the Younger.
131 document due to the fact that a significant number of ”large signs” (cheironomic) are used, which are specific of the ”kalophonic” compositional style of the XVIIth and XVIIIth century.
III.2. The musical notation in the pre-Chrysantean sticheraria at NAI In Ms. 198, Sticherarion syntomon by Petru Lampadarie, the Koukouzelian notation of late XIXth century is used, which anticipates the modern, simplified notation. Sebastian Barbu Bucur20, as well as Florin Bucescu use the phrase ”transitional – or pre-Chrysantean – Koukouzelian notation”21 to refer to this notation and shows that it is simpler, with fewer cheironomic signs and hence relatively similar to Chrysantean notation. Other researchers, from Greece22 as well as from Western Europe, consider that it could be better described by the phrase ”transitional medio-Byzantine exegetic” notation. The reason would lie in that is used in manuscripts from the chants that display a synoptic musical notation, that is, more synthetic, less expanded. Such a description of the notation is in agreement with the type of notation in Petros Lampadarios’ musical creation; here, the tendency to simplify musical notation can be noticed, as revealed by a smaller number of megalai hypostaseis, which were, however, performed in an exegetic manner, based on oral tradition.
20 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Cultura muzicală..., op.cit. 21 Florin Bucescu, Pregătirea refomei hrisantice, în ,,Acta Musicae Byzantinae”, no. 1, vol. II, Iași, Editura Novum, 2000, pp.37-47. 22 Maria Alexandru, Calofonia, o filocalie muzicală. Cântarea liturgică în secolele XIII-XVI din Bizanț în Țările Române, in Istorie bisericească, misiune creștină și viață culturală II, Creștinismul românesc și organizarea bisericească în secolele XIII- XIV. Știri și interpretări noi, Galați, Editura Arhiepiscopiei Dunării de Jos, 2010, p. 33, planșa 5c.
132
Cheironomic signs used in Ms. Other ”great signs” used in Ms. 198 198, adopted by the Chrysantean notation
varia tromikon
psifiston paraklitiki
omalon piasma
antichenoma lighisma
eteron apoderma
Cheironomic signs used in Ms. 198 NAI23
In Mss. 203, 204, 206, Sticherarion Kalophonic, at NAI, Koukouzelian notation is used in its form of the greatest development (also known as late Medio-Byzantine, according to the second periodization mentioned in the introduction to the present paper), characterized by the large number of cheironomic signs used. It is noticeable from the table below that, apart from the signs adopted from the Chrysantean notation (antichenoma, psifiston, varia, omalon, eteron), the following signs also appear: lighisma, piasma, tromikon, uranisma followed by thematismos eso with the syllable ne underneath, xironclasma, eteroparakalesma, psifistoparakalesma, the kai apothes, the ftora nenano.
23 In the table the cheironomic signs adopted by the Chrysantean notation were placed in the left column, and the rest of the cheironomic signs discovered in Ms. 198 were placed in the right column.
133 The cheironomic signs used in Other ”great signs” used in Ms. 203, Mss. 203, 204, 206, adopted by 204 and 206 the Chrysantean notation
tromikon24 varia
psifiston paraklitiki
omalon piasma
antichenoma lighisma
eteron xironclasma
ouranisma
kilisma
psifistoparakalesma
ftora thematismos esso
thes kai apothes25
Cheironomic signs used in Ms. 203, 204 and 206
Also, Ms 204 and 206 at NAI, belonging to the same category of kalophonic Sticheraria of the XVIIIth century, are written in the same semiography as Ms. 203, which is developed Koukouzelian or late
24 The shape of the signs: tromikon, xironclasma, kilisma, psifisto-parakalesma was taken from the Ms. 206 NAI. 25 This particular shape of the sign thes kai apothes was taken from the same manuscript, 206 NAI.
134 Medio-Byzantine notation, characterized by a relatively large number of cheironomic signs. A remark must be made on the combination uranisma followed by thematismos eso, with the syllable ne underneath, which raises the specialists’ interest as it appears mainly in the compositions characteristic of the kalophonic style at large. In the Grek Byzantinological literature, this combination is explained as an element to draw the performer’s attention that a significant ”exegesis” follows, an ample improvisation relying on virtuoso passages performed by relying on the oral tradition, as Gregorios Stathis proves in one of his seminal studies26. In Romania, this combination was studied by researcher Elena Chircev in a relatively recent study published in the journal ”Byzantion romanicon”27. She considers that ”around the two signs of the Koukouzelian notation [referring to the uranisma followed by thematismos eso or exo in Ms.1106 at ”Lucian Blaga” Central University Library of Cluj, Anastasimatarion in Romanian, XVIIIth century, n.n.] a well established rhythmic melody formula develops, which is present in all the modes [referring to the combination uranisma followed by thematismos eso or exo in Ms.1106 at ”Lucian Blaga” Central University Library of Cluj, Anastasimatarion in Romanian, XVIIIth century, n.n.]. in the Greek manuscripts, the two forms of the formula are clearly different, as for the leap in the third at the end the thematismos eso sign was consistently used, while for the leap in the fourth the thematismos eso sign was used, similar to the Ms. in Greek 953 at the Library of the Romanian Academy in Bucharest”28.
IV. Conclusions 1. In the specialised literature, there are at least two periodizations of the Byzantine neumatic notation, belonging to the various paleographic schools in Europe. 2. The fund of manuscripts at NAI is invaluable, as there are stored 17 musical manuscripts belonging to the various types of muscial collections and notations. 3. In the fund at NAI there are four sticheraria in Koukouzelian notation, namely Ms. gr. 198, Sticherarion syntomon by Petros Lampadaros in transitional Koukouzelian notation (Medio-Byzantine
26 Γρηγόριος Στάθης, “Ἡ παλαιὰ βυζαντινὴ σημειογραφία καὶ τὸ πρόβλημα μεταγραφῆς της εἰς τὸ πεντάγραμμον”, Βυζαντινά 7, 1975, 193-220, 427-460: 212-213, 444. With thanks to Professor Maria Alexandru at the ”Aristotelis” University of Thesalonic for providing the necessary documentation for this bibliographical note. 27 Elena Chircev, Ouranisma și thematismos în manuscrisele muzicale cu notație cucuzeliană din secolul al XVIII-lea păstrate în bibliotecile clujene, in ,,Byzantion romanicon”, revista de arte bizantine, vol. VII, Editura Artes, Iași, 2008, pp.114-123. 28 ibidem, p. 122.
135 exegetic), Ms. in Greek 203, Sticherarion Kalophonicon, by an unknown author, Ms. in Greek 204 Sticherarion Kalophonicon by Chryrisaphes the New, Ms. 206, Sticherarion Kalophonicon by Germanos of the New Patra; the last one illustrates developed Koukouzelian notation (late Medio-Byzantine notation). 4. The cheironomic signs used in the four pre-Chrysantean sticheraria at NAI illustrate the subcategories of Koukouzelian notation mentioned above. 5. We could emphasize the presence of a remarcable unity regarding the musical language in the psaltic manuscripts written in Greek in Romania.
ABSTRACT
The present paper aims at presenting the cheironomic signs in some exemplary manuscripts to be found at the National Archives in Iaşi (NAI); these documents are four Sticheraria. The first codex is Ms. in Greek no. 198, Sticherarion syntomon, author: Petros Peloponnesios, in transitional koukouzelian notatation, not dated, the copying place is not known, the name of the copyist is not recorded, but it was probably copied in the last quarter of the XVIIIth century or in the first decade of the XIXth century. The next document is Ms. 203 NAI, a Sticherarion- Kalophonicon in Greek, in koukouzelian notation in its form of the greatest development. Ms. 203 is not dated, the publication place is not known, the name of the copyist is not recorded, but it was probably copied in the last decade of the XVIIIth century or in the first decade of the XIXth century. Both mentioned manuscripts come from the ”The Dormition of the Holy Virgin” Church in the town of Roman (Neamț County, Moldavia). The other documents are two unreported manuscripts: Mss. 204 and 206. Ms. 204 NAI in Greek, Sticherarion- Kalophonicon, by Chrysaphes the Younger, in Koukouzelian notation in its form of the greatest development, not dated, the copying place is not known, the name of the copyist is not recorded, but it was probably copied in the first half of the XVIIIth century. Ms. no. 206 NAI in Greek is a Sticherarion-Kalophonicon, by Germanos of the New Patra, in Koukouzelian notation in its form of the greatest development, copied at the Iviron Monastery by Kir Yakoumis in 1736. In Ms. 198 NAI, in transitional Koukouzelian notation, the number of cheironomic signs is relativelly small, because this type of notation is more synthetic. The megalai hypostaseis used in Ms. 198 are: antichenoma, psifiston, varia, omalon, eteron, paraklitiki, tromikon, piasma, lighisma, apoderma.
136 In Ms. 203, 204, 206, in koukouzelian notation in its form of the greatest development, apart from the signs adopted from the Chrysantean notation (antichenoma, psifiston, varia, omalon, eteron), it appears a large number of megalai hypostaseis like: lighisma, piasma, tromikon, uranisma followed by thematismos eso with the syllable ne underneath, xironclasma, eteroparakalesma, psifistoparakalesma, the ftora thematismos esso, thes kai apothes.
Bibliography Alexandru Maria, Calofonia, o filocalie muzicală. Cântarea liturgică în secolele XIII-XVI din Bizanț în Țările Române, în Istorie bisericească, misiune creștină și viață culturală II, Creștinismul românesc și organizarea bisericească în secolele XIII-XIV. Știri și interpretări noi, Editura Arhiepiscopiei Dunării de Jos, Galați, 2010. Barbu-Bucur Sebastian, Manuscrise psaltice românești și bilingve în notație cucuzeliană în marile biblioteci din România, în ,,Biserica Ortodoxă Română”, București, XCIV, no. 9-12, 1976, pp. 1004-1038. Barbu-Bucur Sebastian, Filothei sin agăi Jipei, Psaltichia rumănească, II. Anastasimatar, în colecția Izvoare ale muzicii românești, vol. VII B, Editura Muzicală, București, 1984. Barbu-Bucur Sebastian, Cultura muzicală de tradiție bizantină pe teritoriul României și aportul original al culturii autohtone, Editura Muzicală, București, 1989. Bucescu Florin, Pregătirea reformei hrisantice, în ,,Acta Musicae Byzantinae”, no. 1, vol. II, Editura Novum, Iași, 2000, pp. 37-47. Bucescu Florin, Cântarea psaltică în manuscrisele moldovenești din sec. XIX. Ghidul manuscriselor psaltice – Moldova, sec. XIX, vol. I-II, Editura Artes, Iași, 2009. Chircev Elena, Ouranisma și thematismos în manuscrisele muzicale cu notație cucuzeliană din secolul al XVIII/lea păstrate în bibliotecile clujene, în ,,Byzantion romanicon”, Revista de arte bizantine, vol. VII, Editura Artes, Iași, 2008, pp. 114-123. Gheorghiţă Nicolae, Muzica bizantină. Scurtă introducere, in ,,Byzantion Romanicon”, revista de arte bizantine, vol. VII, Editura Artes, Iaşi, 2008, pp. 153-178. Panţiru Grigore, Notaţia şi ehurile muzicii bizantine, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1972. Petrescu Ioan D., Études de paléographie musicale byzantine, București, Editura Muzicală, 1967. The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, vol. 24 (Sources of instrumental ensemble music to Tait), second edition, edited by Stanley Sadie, executive editor John Tyrrell, Macmillan Publishers Limited, New York, 2001.
137
Observations on the diastematic principles in Byzantine musical notations, with emphasis on Gregorios Mpounes Alyates’ method of metrophonia, and some links to analogous phenomena in Western Chant1
MARIA ALEXANDRU
I. Introduction: Forms of diastematy in Byzantine Chant An early form of diastematy in the written tradition of Byzantine Chant has been discovered during the first decade of this century by Ioannis Papathanasiou and Nikolaos Boukas. Five Greek sources of Coptic origin, dated between the VIIth-beginning of IXth century (P. Ryland Copt. 25r-29r from the John Rylands Library in Manchester), use a peculiar neumation labeled Hermoupolis notation by the two aforementioned scholars. It is made up mainly by the oxeia-sign and its multiplications, indicating different numbers of rising seconds, always calculated from the finalis of the mode2 (Ex. 1). However, the main musical notations found in Greek manuscripts from the end of the first Christian millennium, namely the Ekphonetic and the Palaeobyzantine ones, are well-known as adiastematic and mnemotechnic. As Constantin Floros showed with many examples, the striving towards intervallic precision can be observed mainly in the last evolutional stages of the Coislin notation3 (Ex. 2). Alberto Doda described Middlebyzantine notation as a symbolic system, made up by “conventional signs for melodic intervals placed on a single horizontal line”4. Nevertheless, the vertical component is not
1 This paper was initially presented at the Sixteenth meeting of the IMS Study Group Cantus Planus in Vienna, 21-27 August 2011. The theme of the triptych metrophonia- parallage-melos also preoccupied the Group for Palaeography of Byzantine Music from the Department of Music Studies of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki during 2012, at different presentations in Iaşi (July) and Athens (December). The source material consulted for this study comes mainly from the microfilm collections of the Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae in Copenhagen and from the Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies at H.M. Vlatadon, as well as from the Greek National Library in Athens. We would like to express many thanks to prof. Christian Troelsgård, to Mrs. Aikaterini Katsarou and to Mrs. Evangelia Panou for their generous help. 2 Cf. Papathanasiou and Boukas, “Early Diastematic Notation”. 3 See Floros, Neumenkunde, I, pp. 16-17, 311-328, and also Doda, “Coislin Notation”. 4 Doda, “Coislin Notation”, p. 65.
138 missing completely from Byzantine notations: “A little bit of iconicity can, for example, be seen in the disposition of the musical signs in the notation of certain themata”5 and other formulas, both in Palaeo- and Middlebyzantine notations (Ex. 3-4). The use of a ‘verticalised pitch spectrum’ also occurs in didactic diagrams, mainly in the so-called tree of parallage (solmisation) and similar schemes (Ex. 5-6)6. Though, it is not the vertical position, but the specific sign or combination of signs which define the diastematic value of the neumes in Middle-Byzantine notation. Ex. 7 displays a comparison between the horizontally written intonation formula in the Protopapadike Petrop. gr. 495 with early Middlebyzantine neumes, and the corresponding nonenoeane of the autentus protus from the Tonaire d’Auch, with Aquitanian neumes which achieve diastematy through point-neumes displayed vertically. Oliver Strunk described the introduction of the staff in Western notation (XIth cent.) and the crystallization of the Middlebyzantine neumes (XIIth cent.) with its specific symbols for each interval, as two comparable crucial steps, with immense consequences for the later development of each musical tradition (Ex. 8).
II. Aspects of the concept of metrophonia Diastematy is linked in Byzantine musical theoretical tradition to the concept of metrophonia (see below, 1. neume-lists, 2. didactic poems and 3. treatises). Μετρῶ φωνάς means to count or measure voices, i.e. to calculate the number of intervals of a second shown by a sign, contained in a thesis (formula) or a phrase, or even within a whole piece. 1. In Ex. 9 one can see the famous neume-list from the Protopapadike in Petrop. gr. 495, where each interval sign is encircled together with its metrophonical value: ison is ‘voiceless’, oligon has one voice (ascending second), oligon with kentema in front of it has two voices (ascending third) etc. Similar lists (although not with circles) can be found in the Protopapadike contained in Paris. gr. 261 (A.D. 1289), f. 140r, in early Papadikai of the XIVth century, like Athens EBE 26007, f. 3r-v, or from the Holy Monastery Lavra I 79, f. 6r-8r, which presents a very large number of combinations of signs. In the ms of the H.M. Iviron 970, an autograph of Kosmas Makedon from A.D. 1686, which contains a fine specimen of the brief redaction of the post-Byzantine Papadike, one can observe the verbalization of the metrophonic content of the
5 ibidem, p. 64. 6 For the process of ‘verticalisation of the pitch spectrum’ in Western notation, cf. Witkowska-Zaremba, “Visual Representations”. 7 For the dating of the manuscript, cf. Troelsgård, Inventory. For a recent description, cf. Touliatos-Miles, Catalogue, p. 449.
139 basic interval-signs: «ἔχουσι δὲ καὶ φωνάς τὸ ὀλίγον, μίαν ἡ ὀξεῖα, μίαν· ἡ πετασθή, μίαν [...] τὸ κέντημα, δύο» etc. (Ex. 10). 2. Passing now over to metrophonia in didactic poems, one can observe two categories of methods: a) The first one contains exercises consisting of a troparion, usually from the Sticherarion, rendered only by stepwise movements, supplied with the signatures corresponding to each melodic degree, i.e. combined with the so-called parallage (solmisation with the polysyllabic names- formulas ananes, neanes etc.: Ex. 11).8 b) A second category of methods, lesser investigated, contains paradigmatic ascending and descending movements within diastematic frames of 1, 2, 3,4, 7 and even 10 and 11 voices. This kind of methods can pass through the eight modes, or can stay in a single mode throughout the piece: cf. Ex. 12-13. A step further on this way goes Gregorios Mpounes Alyates, with his method of metrophonia, which will be discussed below. Finally, it is Ioannes Plousiadenos who at the beginning of the post-Byzantine era makes a synthesis of previous theoretical approaches in his Methodical parallage or Technology of the musical art (Laura K 172, p. 8, XVIIIth cent. [Spyridon/Eustratiades]), which in ms Brussels IV 515, f. 11r-18r, 17-18 Jh. (Troelsgård) bears the rubric «Mεθοδικὴ παραλλαγή, [...] πονηθεῖσα παρὰ κὺρ Ἰωάννου του Πλουσιαδηνοῦ [...] καὶ τῶν φωνῶν αἱ συνθέσεις κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀρίστως συντεθεμένων διαφόρως τε καὶ ποικιλοτρόπως καταλεπτῶς. πῶς δεῖ ἀνέρχεσθαι μίαν, ἑτέρας κατέρχεσθαι [...]». It begins with the troparion Ἁγίῳ Πνεύματι, goes on with a prooimion whose text mentions the ‘Art and Science of Papadike’ (Παπαδικὴ τέχνη καὶ ἐπιστήμη), and ends with an extended method of metrophonia, which draws, among others, on Alyates’ similar didactic poem9. 3. a) If we turn to theoretical treatises, we can see that Gabriel Hieromonachos considers the metrophonia as the ‘beginning’ or ‘principle and base’ and thus a sine qua non of the Chanting Art: «Ἔστι γὰρ οἷον ἀρχὴ καὶ θεμέλιος ἡ λεγόμενη μετροφωνία. Ταύτην γὰρ καλῶς μετελθὼν ῥαδίως ἂν καὶ τἄλλα τῆς ψαλτικῆς κτήσαιτο· χωρὶς δὲ ταύτης οὐδὲν κατορθωκὼς εἴη ἂν ὁ ψάλτης»10.
8 See also the example of the metrophonic exercise Χορὸς τετραδεκαπύρσευτος, in Alexandru and Troelsgård, “Σημασία”, vol. III, 1227 (plate III.2). 9 Cf. Χαλδαιάκης, “Ἀκριβολογία Ἰωάννου Πλουσιαδηνοῦ”. Alexandrescu, “Tipuri de Gramatici”. 10 Gabriel Hieromonachos, Abhandlung, edd. Hanick/Wolfram, pp. 90-91, verses 587- 590.
140 b) At the beginning of the XVIth century, Akakios Chalkeopoulos gives in his Akribologemata different examples of metrophonical calculation. The first one is applied to the beginning of the Fourth Heothinon, Ὄρθρος ἦν βαθύς, in the fourth authentic mode11. He explains that this fragment counts 19 ascending and 19 descending voices and has to finish, according to the parallage (solmisation), in the plagal of the fourth mode (see Ex. 14). According to the same author, an incongruence between the number of ascending and descending voices can indicate a mistake in the orthography of a piece («σφαλτὸ μάθημα»), while another, correctly written fragment, has the same number of ascending and descending voices («σωστὲς ταῖς ἀνιοῦσαις φωναῖς, ὥσπερ καὶ ταῖς κατιοῦσαις»)12. c) A new aspect of metrophonia emerges from the anonymous treatise contained in the ms Athens EBE 968 (XVIIth-XVIIIth cent., Zannos). On f. 177r the beginning of St. John Damascene’s sticheron Τὰς ἑσπερινὰς ἡμῶν εὐχάς in a setting of the new embellished style (neos kallopismos) is taken as an example of explaining the ‘measures’ («μέτρα») οf the piece, with the aid of an octachordal diagram (see Ex. 15). It can be presumed, that the anonymous teacher had a polychord instrument (e.g. the psalterion-kanonion) in mind by drawing his diagrams.13 In his treatise, the metrophonia is elucidated as the grasping of the basic intervallic structure of the piece. In contrast with older methods of metrophonia like Κύριε ἐμοὶ τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ ἔθου (Ex. 11), no explicit reference to a stepwise rendition is made; instead, the diagram fits exactly to the intervallic signs (emphona) of the original piece. d) At the beginning of the XIXth century, Chrysanthos conveys this latter aspect of metrophonia by using the very same example of Τὰς ἑσπερινὰς ἡμῶν εὐχάς. He defines metrophonia as a kind of rendition at face value of the old neumatic text, i.e. as a melodic line made up only by the intervals indicated with the emphona of the Middlebyzantine notation, in a rhythmical rendition, but without extra melodic developments used in the melismatic forms of exegesis (see Ex. 16)14.
11 Cf. Ambrosianus A 139 sup., f. 299r (slightly different variant). Παρακλητική, 466. 12 Cf. Athens EBE 917, f. 3r-v and the edition of Chalkeopoulos’ text by Αλυγιζάκης, “Θεωρητικό”, pp. 355-356, lines 55-76. For the chronology of the treatise, cf. Χατζηγιακουμής, Χειρόγραφα ἐκκλησιαστικῆς μουσικῆς, pp. 113-114. 13 See also the triangular diagrams of the different modes contained in the ms EBE 968, f. 179v-184v. 14 See also Αρβανίτης, “Ἐνδείξεις”, 236, n. 9. Αλεξάνδρου, Ἐξηγήσεις, pp. 36-43.
141 III. Gregorios Mpounes Alyates’ Method of metrophonia: Steps for a critical edition in the Papadike-Project Αfter this brief historical survey, we will turn back to the second quarter of the XVth century and focus on Gregorios Mpounes Alyates’ Method of metrophonia. This piece has been published after the Codex Chrysander (‘not earlier than the last quarter of the XVIIth cent.’15) by Oskar Fleischer, in 190416. Below, the method will be approached in two steps: palaeographical-analytical and synchronic.
1. Palaeographical-analytical approaches: In Ex. 17 some preparing work concerning Alyates’ didactic poem is presented, as part of the project of the critical edition of the Papadike, in collaboration with Christian Troelsgård17. The μέθοδος τῆς μετροφωνίας (more seldom also called μέθοδος παραλλαγῆς [ex. 17, nr. 3b and 5], presumably because of the close connection between metrophonia as stepwise counting of voices, and the solmisation system), has been appreciated in its transmission history as being ‘very useful’ (ὠφελιμώτατος), and ‘extremely beautiful’ (πάνυ ὡραία). Due to the many small differences in the choice and positioning of the big signs (megala semadia – MgS), the decision has been taken to work with a positive collation. Transnotation has been supplied to the version from one of the ‘codices meliores’, the Papadike ms Jerusalem Anastaseos 45, written by Antonios Megas Oikonomos in A.D. 1719 (Ex. 18)18.
15 Makris, Tradition des Anastasimatarion, p. 33. 16 Fleischer, Tonschrift, Teil B, pp. 33-36. 17 Cf. Alexandru and Troelsgård, “Σημασία”. Id., “Development”. 18 We are still looking for Alyates’ autograph of the piece – if possible – and for early good copies of it. In the meantime, the method has been found in the following sources (below follows a list taken from Alexandru, “Gregorios Mpunes Alyates”, 44-46, enriched with some more sources): Athos, H.M. Lavra E 6, f. 9r, XVIth cent. (Spyridon/Eustratiades, Catalogue, p. 76, 448. Demetriou, Sticherarion, p. 224, note 434) // Athos, H.M. Iviron 1009 (665), f. 12r-v, XVIth cent. (Λάμπρος, Κατάλογος, II, p. 245) // Σιάτιστα, Δημόσια Βιβλιοθήκη: Siatistas 27, after f. 1r, 1st half-middle of XVII th cent. (Γιαννόπουλος, Ταμεῖον χειρογράφων, p. 32) // Athens, EBE 941, f. 16v- 28r, XVIIth cent. (Σακελλίων: Troelsgård, Inventory. Touliatos-Miles, Catalogue, 142) // Athos, H.M. Lavra K 188 (nr. 1475), pp. 3-4, XVIIth cent. (Spyridon/Eustratiades, Catalogue, p. 254. Troelsgård, Inventory) // Athos, H.M. Iviron 1008 (663), f. 4v-5r, XVIIth cent. (Λάμπρος, Κατάλογος, II, p. 245) // Athos, H.M. Ιviron 951, f. 3v, 2nd half of XVIIth cent., autograph by Germanos Neon Patron (Στάθης, Χειρόγραφα Ἅγιον Ὄρος, vol. III, p. 642-643) // Athos, H.M. Karakallou 237, f. 18v, 2nd half of XVIIth cent. (Στάθης, op. cit., vol. III, p. 463) // Sinai 1300, f. 10r, A.D. 1670, autograph by Kosmas Alektryopolites (Mπαλαγεώργος/Κρητικού, Χειρόγραφα Σινᾶ, vol. I, p. 436, 438) // Athos, H.M. Panteleimonos 1008, f. 15v, last quarter of XVIIth cent., autograph by Mpalasios hiereus (Στάθης, op. cit., vol. II, p. 418) // Athos, H.M. Iviron 1006 (665),
142 f. 12r-v, “at least 2nd half of XVIIth cent.” (Troelsgård, Inventory) // Athos, H.M. Panteleimonos 959, f. 12r, end of XVIIth cent. (Στάθης, op. cit., vol. II, p. 291) // Ιdra, Prophitou Iliou 597 (33), f. 10v, end of XVIIth cent. (Χαλδαιάκης, Χειρόγραφα Ὕδρα, pp. 75-76) // Tübingen Universitätsbibliothek, Codex Chrysander, ❖ facsimile in Fleischer, Tonschrift, Part B, pp. 33-36, XVth cent. (Floros, Universale Neumenkunde, vol. I, p. 112)/end of XVIIth cent. or later (Makris, Tradition des Anastasimatarion, p. 33) // Athos, H.M. Lavra K 188, after f. 1r, XVIIth cent. (Spyridon/Eustratiades, Catalogue, p. 254, 448) // Μeteora, Ag. Triados 37, f. 26r, end of XVIIth cent. (Στάθης, Χειρόγραφα Μετέωρα, p. 493, 497 and facsimile of f. 26r on p. 498) // Athos, H.M. Koutloumousiou 449, f. 6v, end of XVIIth cent.-around A.D. 1700, autograph by Daniel monachos (?) (Στάθης, Χειρόγραφα Ἅγιον Ὄρος, vol. III, p. 330) // Jerusalem, Patriarchate, ms without number, f. 8v-9r, late XVIIth/first half of XVIIIth cent. (M.A.; Troelsgård, Inventory, MMB 17,07) // Lesbos, H.M. Leimonos 459, f. 7r-v, around A.D. 1700, autograph by Παύλος ἱερεύς (?) (Xατζηγιακουμής, Χειρόγραφα Τουρκοκρατίας, pp. 99, 360) // Lesbos, H.M. Leimonos 238, f. 12r-v, around A.D. 1700, written by pupil of Kosmas Makedon and Damianos hieromonachos Vatopedinos, (Χατζηγιακουμής, op. cit., pp. 109-110, 360) // Bruxelles, Bibliothèque royale IV 515, f. 18r-v, XVIIth-XVIIIth cent. (Troelsgård, Inventory) // Sinai 1298, f. 13r, beginning of XVIIIth cent., autograph by pupil of Mpalasios hiereus (Μπαλαγεώργος/Κρητικού, Χειρόγραφα Σινᾶ, vol. I, pp. 395-396) // Sinai 1299, f. 12r, A.D. 1715, autograph by Ἀθανάσιος ἱερομόναχος ἐκ Μουδανιῶν (Μπαλαγεώργος/Κρητικού, op. cit., vol. I, pp. 407-408) // Jerusalem, Patriarchate, Anastaseos, Abraham 45, f. 13v-14r, A.D. 1719, autograph by Ἀντώνιος μέγας οἰκονόμος (Troelsgård, Inventory and colophon of the ms, f. 8v) // Athos, H.M. Panteleimonos 1019, f. 11r, about A.D. 1720-1740 (Στάθης, Χειρόγραφα Ἅγιον Ὄρος, vol. II, p. 452) // Andros, Korthiou 10, f. 7r, about A.D. 1725- 40 (Γιαννόπουλος, Χειρόγραφα Ἄνδρου, p. 67, 95) // Athos, H.M. Lavra E 132, f. 7v-8r, A.D. 1733 (Spyridon/Eustratiades, Catalogue, p. 88) // Athos, H.M. Lavra E 128, f. 8v- 9r, A.D. 1741 (Spyridon/Eustratiades, Catalogue, p. 88) // Athos, H.M. Lavra M 93 (nr. 1784), f. 9r-v, A.D. 1728, autograph by Ioannes Lampadarios (the later Protopsaltes, Trapezountios) (Xατζηγιακουμής, Χειρόγραφα Τουρκοκρατίας, pp. 157-158 and table 66. Troelsgård, Inventory) // Athos, H.M. Iviron 987, f. 6v, after A.D. 1731 (Στάθης, Χειρόγραφα Ἅγιον Ὄρος, vol. III, pp. 827-828) // Meteora, Ag. Stephanou 52, f. 8v, A.D. 1743, autograph by Ioannes Protopsaltes Trapezountios (Στάθης, Χειρόγραφα Μετέωρα, p. 354, 356) // Meteora, Ag. Stephanou 19, f. 22r, 1st half of XVIIIth cent. (Στάθης, op. cit., pp. 279, 281) // Αthens, EBE 893, f. 13r-v, A.D. 1747, autograph by David Skopelites (Χατζηγιακουμής, Χειρόγραφα ἐκκλησιαστικῆς μουσικῆς, pp. 165- 166. Troelsgård, Inventory). // Athos, H.M. Dionysiou 581, f. 1r, middle of XVIIIth cent. (Στάθης, Χειρόγραφα Ἅγιον Ὄρος, vol. II, p. 736) // Athos, H.M. Iviron 998, f. 6r, middle of XVIIIth cent. (Στάθης, op. cit., vol. III, p. 899) // Athos, H.M. Koutloumousiou 397, f. 8r, middle of XVIIIth cent. (Στάθης, op. cit., vol. III, p. 228) // Jerusalem, Patriarchate, Anastaseos, Abraham 85, beginning of the ms, A.D. 1754 (Παπαδόπουλος-Κεραμεύς, Βιβλιοθήκη, vol. V, p. 436. Demetriou, Sticherarion, p. 224, note 434) // Athos, H.M. Koutloumousiou 446, f. 7r, A.D. 1757, autograph by Theokletos monachos (Στάθης, op. cit., vol. III, p. 313) // Athos, H.M. Iviron 983, f. 2r, A.D. 1762 (Στάθης, op. cit., vol. III, pp. 806-807) // Athos, H.M. Xiropotamou 307, f. 13r, A.D. 1767 & 1770, autograph by Ἀναστάσιος Βάϊας (Στάθης, op. cit., vol. I, pp. 106- 107) // Σουρωτὴ Θεσσαλονίκης, Ἡσυχαστήριο «Ἅγιος Ἰωάννης ὁ Θεολόγος καὶ Ἅγιος
143 In Ex. 19.a-f a polyprismatic analytical approach is carried out, investigating the form, the metrophonical frames, cadences, formulas, ambitus and contours of the melodic phrases.19 The piece exposes at its very beginning the heptaphony G-g, then it moves within the frame of the tetraphony G-d, giving many possibilities of filling in this interval (Ex. 19.a). The third period moves within the triphony G-c (Ex. 19.b) and the frame is shrunk to the diphony G-h and ‘monophony’ G-a in the next two periods (ex. 19.c). The structural frame is enlarged again to a third and a fourth in the periods VI and VII, respectively (Ex. 19.d). Further formulas are given for the tetraphony G-d in the period VIII (Ex. 19.e), and towards the end of the piece, after the lowest point of the piece, D, has been heard, there is a spectacular climax on high a’, in the frame of hendecaphony (Ex. 19.f). A macroformal and generative analysis of Alyates’ Method of metrophonia (see Ex. 20.a) shows the structural background of the piece, made up by the following intervals, used as frames for multiple fillings-in: octave, fifth, fourth, third, second, third, fourth, fifth, octave, fourth, undecime, second+fourth+fifth+fourth=duodecime, fourth, second, fourth (first staff on Ex. 20.a). On the bottom of the same example there is an attempt of modeling a kind of ‘Ursatz’ of this piece on the ground of the ison G. One can observe the mirror-symmetries around the center of the piece, where the one voice ‘μία’, i.e. the interval of a second is presented (kola 36-44), as well as the climax towards the end of the piece (kola 70-71): Ex. 20.b. Shifting from the macroformal approach to a microsyntactical one, the next example (Ex. 21.a-g) shows the formulas displayed by Alyates for the frame of diphony (kola 26-35 and 45-48). Each kolon contains: 1. the neumes after Jerus. Anast. 45, with the identification of the theseis above, 2. a generative analysis (whole tones = structural notes), 3. an attempt of transcription-syllabic rendition mainly in binary feet,
Ἀρσένιος ὁ Καππαδόκης»: Sourotis 22, f. 11r, about 1770 or slightly later, autograph by Kyrillos hiermonachos (Γιαννόπουλος, Ταμεῖον χειρογράφων, pp. 86-87) // Meteora, Metamorphoseos 329, f. 3v-4r, about A.D. 1775, autograph by Parthenios Meteorites (?) (Στάθης, Χειρόγραφα Μετέωρα, p. 155) // Athos, H.M. Lavra I 184, after f. 1r, XVIIIth cent. (Spyridon/Eustratiades, Catalogue, p. 210, 448. Demetriou, Sticherarion, p. 225 note 427) // Athos, H.M. Vatopaidiou 1440, f. 4r-v, XVIIIth cent. (Catalogue of the Monastery: cf. Troelsgård, Inventory) // Athens, Byzantine Museum 56, f. 23-v, XVIIIth cent.? (Troelsgård, Inventory. Date estimation according to musical notation of f. 1r-5v, M.A.) // Lesbos, H.M. Leimonos 8, f. 17v-18r, end of XVIIIth cent. (Χατζηγιακουμής, op. cit., pp. 155-156, 360) // Athens, Byzantine Museum 153 (Adrianople 1158), f. 12v, 18th-beginning XIXth cent. (Troelsgård, Inventory. Date according to Δ. Πάλλας and M.A.) // Petropolitanus gr. 132, f. 27r, A.D. 1858 (Demetriou, Sticherarion, p. 224, note 418). 19 For further details on this kind of analysis, cf. Alexandru, “Χριστὲ ὁ Θεός”.
144 according to research conducted by Ioannis Arvanitis.20 Further investigations should be carried on, in order to reconstruct also a slow exegesis for this method.
2. Synchronic approach through composition and singing A major problem connected not only to Alyates’, but also to the other didactic songs contained in the Papadike, concerns their performance practice through history. In order to explore this main aspect of Alyates’ Method of metrophonia, a synchronic approach through composing and singing has been attempted. The structural melody resulted by the intervallic frames of the Method (see Ex. 20.a, the first staff) has been given to a traditional singer-teacher, namely to prof. Ioannis Liakos, Protopsaltis of the Metropolitan Cathedral St. Gregory Palamas in Thessaloniki, in order to freely create a composition for his pupils, showing paradigmatic ways of filling-in these structural frames, according to nowadays practice (see Ex. 22-23). Both the resulted exercise and its performance by the aforementioned protopsaltis can help us to approach somehow the frame of mind in which such exercises might have been composed, performed and taught to the pupils. The same experiment could continue also with other singers-teachers.
IV. Conclusions Diastematy in Byzantine Chant is a highly interesting phenomenon, connected to different kinds of notation and achieved through different procedures. As shown in the pages above, the earliest form of diastematy seems to have been connected to the Hermoupolis notation and operates mainly with the oxeia-sign (number of oxeiai indicates number of rising seconds from the finalis of the mode: cf. part I and Ex. 1). Western notation found its main path toward diastematy with the ‘verticalization’ in the lay-out of the neumes and the introduction of the staff during the XIth cent. In the East, the XIIth century witnessed the crystallization of the Middle-Byzantine notation, characterized by a highly refined system of diastematy, which is achieved through concrete combinations of the basic interval signs known as emphona. Although symbolic in its way of representation and mainly horizontally displayed, the Byzantine notation makes also a restricted use of ‘verticalized’ pitch-space, e.g. in themata and other formulas of the Palaeobyzantine and
20 Cf. Arvanitis, “Way”. Id., “Δομή”. Id., “Ἐνδείξεις”. Id., Ρυθμός.
145 Middlebyzantine notation, the Tree of parallage and similar diagrams of the latter notation (cf. part I and Ex. 2-8). A key-concept connected to diastematy in Middlebyzantine notation is the metrophonia. In its historical evolution, it shows several layers of semantic implications: In neume-lists, metrophonia is connected to the number of ‘voices’ (phonai), i.e. intervals of seconds for each neume (cf. part II.1 and Ex. 9- 10). In didactic poems, namely in stichera which have been transformed into methods of metrophonia, the whole pieces go only with stepwise movements, and can be sung together with the parallage (solmisation: ananes, neanes…), or with the hymnographic text written below the neumes (cf. part II.2.a and Ex. 11.a-f). Other metrophonia methods, in different degrees of difficulty, display a wealth of theseis-melodic formulas within structural frames of the second, third, fourth, fifth, octave, undecime and duodecime, involving both stepwise movements and skips (cf. part II.2.b and III and Ex. 12, 13.a-b, 19.a-f). In theoretical treatises, metrophonia is praised as the base of the psaltic art (Gabriel Hieromonachos: cf. part II.3.a); it can be also connected to the counting of the total number of ascending and descending ‘voices’ within a fragment or a piece, as a means of checking its correctness (Akakios Chalkeopoulos: cf. part II.3.b and Ex. 14). In late post-Byzantine tradition it is associated with the grasping of the structural intervals of a piece, with the aid of a kanonion with eight strings-measures (Anonymus in Athens EBE 968: cf. part II.3.c and Ex. 15), and Chrysanthos explains metrophonia as a syllabic and rhythmic rendition of the old notation which can serve as a preparation for long melismatic exegesis (cf. part II.3.d and Ex. 16). Gregorios Mpounes Alyates’ Method of metrophonia, one of the most complex samples of this type of didactic pieces (cf. part III and Ex. 17-23), can be contextualized within the large corpus of theoretical writings as drawing on the different kinds of neume-lists (especially the emphona) of the Papadike, on the older methods of metrophonia like the one by Xenophon (Xenos Korones), and also, in its larger conception, on the Mega Ison by St. John Koukouzeles. In its turn, Alyates’ method of metrophonia inspired Ioannes Plousiadenos in his poly-synthetic Μεθοδικὴ παραλλαγή (Ex. 24). From the evidence listed above, metrophonia emerges as a basic tool connected with the understanding of the diastematic structure written down with the emphona of Middlebyzantine notation. Intimately connected to the old form of parallage (the complex medieval solmisation system), it belonged to the prerequisites of good chanting,
146 without being its essence, which lied in the adequate rendition of the pieces according to oral tradition21. When in 20th of March, A.D. 1719, the Presbyter Antonios, Great Oikonomos of the Great Church finished his Papadike in the ms Jerus. Anast. 45, one of our ‘codices meliores’, he putted in head of his kolophon the following twelve-syllable verses (f. 8v): «τῷ μουσικὴν ἔνθεον προθυμουμένῳ / ὀρθῶς μαθεῖν, καὶ μουσόληπτος φῆναι, / συντόμως τήνδε μετιέτω τὴν βίβλον»22, touching thus on the main role of the Papadike as a theoretical text: to facilitate the correct and quick learning, as well as the singing with musicality of the divine chants.
21 See Ex. 16 and part II.3. in this paper. 22 “To the one who is eager to learn in the right way the divine music and to sing with musicality, I whish that he should quickly go through this book”.
147 V. Examples
Example 1. The beginning of the theotokion Ἐπὶ σοὶ χαίρει, Kεχαριτωμένη, from P. Ryland Copt. 25r, 7th-beginning of IXth cent., with early diastematic notation.
Above the text: neumes of the Hermoupolis notation, below a transnotation into alphabetical notation. (Source: I. Papathanasiou and N. Boukas, “Early Diastematic Notation in Greek Christian Hymnographic Texts of Coptic Origin. A Reconsideration of the Source Material”, in Palaeobyzantine Notations III. Acts of the Congress held at Hernen Castle, The Netherlands, in March 2001, edited by G. Wolfram, Eastern Christian Studies 4 [2004], 17).
Thematismos (Coislin I-IV)
Thematismos (Coislin V-VI)
Thematismos (Middlebyzantine notation)
Example 2. The case of thematismos, from Palaeobyzantine adiastematic to Middlebyzantine diastematic notation.
(Sources: C. Floros, Universale Neumenkunde [Kassel: Bärenreiter-Antiquariat Kassel-Wilhelmshöhe, 1970], vol. 3, p. 48. Ms Athens EBE 2458, f. 3r, A.D. 1336, fragment of the Mega Ison by St. John Koukouzeles [from microfilm of the collection of the Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae, Copenhagen]. For a description and some plates of this ms see Γρ. Στάθης, “Ἡ ἀσματικὴ διαφοροποίηση ὅπως καταγράφεται στὸν κώδικα ΕΒΕ 2458 τοῦ ἔτους 1336”, in Χριστιανικὴ Θεσσαλονίκη. Παλαιολόγειος ἐποχή, ΚΒ΄ Δημήτρια, Ἐπιστημονικὸ Συμπόσιο, Πατριαρχικὸν Ἵδρυμα Πατερικῶν Μελετῶν, Ἱερὰ Μονὴ Βλατάδων, 29-31 Ὀκτ. 1987, Κέντρο Ἱστορίας Θεσσαλονίκης τοῦ Δήμου Θεσσαλονίκης, αὐτοτελεῖς ἐκδόσεις 3 [Θεσσαλονίκη, 1989], pp. 169-188, 200-207).
148
Examples 3-4. Although the Byzantine neumes are usually placed on a horizontal line, a vertical component is discernible in the disposition of certain neumes in Palaeobyzantine and Middlebyzantine notations.
(Sources: Above: Vind. theol. gr. 136, f. 228v, first half of XIIth cent., Coislin V, from the edition by Gerda Wolfram, Sticherarium Antiquum Vindobonense, MMB Série principale 10, Pars Principalis [Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften]. Below: Fragment from St. John Koukouzeles’ Mega Ison, from ms Athens EBE 2458, f. 3r, A.D. 1336, [from microfilm of the collection of the Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae, Copenhagen]).
Examples 5-6. Examples of ‘verticalised pitch spectrum’ in Byzantine tree-diagrams.
(Sources and notes: Left: Ms H.M. Dionysiou 570, f. 79v, scribe Ioannes Plousiadenos, end of XVth cent., description of the ms by Γρ. Στάθης, Τὰ χειρόγραφα βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς. Ἅγιον Ὄρος [Αθήνα: ΙΒΜ, 1976], τ. Β΄, 698, 703. Note the descending and ascending scale in the frame of an octave in the lower part of the diagram. Right: Ms Gennadius 23, f. 11v, A.D. 1713, facsimile from: Rev. Konstantinos Terzopoulos, “Hidden in Plain Sight: Musical Treasures in the Gennadius Library. Byzantine Repertories and a Snippet of Modern Greek History”, in Hidden Treasures at the Gennadius Library, The Gennadius Library, American School of Classical Studies at Athens, The New Griffon 12 [2011], fig. 13. For the notion of ‘verticalised pitch spectrum’, cf. footnote 6 in this article).
149
Example 7. Diastematy in East and West (I): Left: Middlebyzantine notation: diastematy by designing for each interval its own, symbolic sing/combination of signs, displayed horizontally. Right: Aquitanian neumes: diastematy through point-neumes displayed vertically. (Sources and notes: Left: upper roads: the intonation formula of the first authentic mode, copied from the Protopapadike Petrop. gr. 495, f. 4r, second half of XIIIth cent.: cf. facsimile in Evgeny Vladimirovich Gertsman, Petersburg Theoreticon [Odessa: Variant Publishers, 1994], p. 230 and plate LVII; on staff: transnotation. Right: upper roads: the intonation formula of the fist authentic mode, copied from the Tonaire d’Auch, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Ms latin 1118, f. 104r, A.D. 990: cf. facsimile in C. Massip, Le livre de musique, Conférences Léopold Delisle [Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2007], p. 42, table 10. See also David Hiley, “Diastematic”, New Grove Dictionary of Music. Version html [thanks to Miss A. Karanikola for her help]. Ι. Παπαθανασίου, Εγχειρίδιο Μουσικής Παλαιογραφίας. Πρώτη ενότητα. Δυτικές νευματικές σημειογραφίες [Αθήνα: Διογένης, Αθήνα 2002], 89; on staff: transnotation: see J. Raasted, Intonation formulas and modal signatures in Byzantine musical manuscripts, MMB, Subsidia VII [Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1966], 154).
150
Example 8. Diastematy in East and West (II): From the period of the adoption of Middlbyzantine notation (“could have begun during the 1st first half of the XIIth cent.” [Papathanasiou] /about 1150 [Troelsgård], until 1814, “the notation used in the transmission of Byzantine chant underwent no radical change. With the general acceptance of the diastematic principle at the very beginning of this long time-span, Byzantine musicians had taken a crucial step, a step no less crucial than the analogous one taken in the West at a somewhat earlier date” (Guido d’Arezzo’s reform, ca A.D. 1030), “and once this crucial step had been taken, there could be no turning back” (Sources: quotations from O. Strunk, Specimina notationum antiquiorum, ΜΜΒ VII, Pars Suppletoria [Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1966], 1. See also I. Papathanasiou, “The musical notation of the Sticherarion MS Vat. Barb. gr. 483”, in Byzantine Chant. Tradition and Reform, Acts of a Meeting held at the Danish Institute at Athens, 1993, ed. C. Troelsgård, Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens [Athens, 1997], vol. 2, 53-67. See further the entry “Notation”, § III,1,v,b, in New Grove Dictionary of Music, Version html. For the picture above: copy from the list of the ascending intervallic signs from the Protopapadike Petrop. gr. 495, f. 2v, second half of the XIIIth cent.: cf. facsimile in Evgeny Vladimirovich Gertsman, Petersburg Theoreticon [Odessa: Variant Publishers, 1994], plate LIV. For the picture below: fragment copied from the ms BnF latin 10508, f. 6r, XIIth cent., from the Benedictine Abbey Saint-Évroult d’Ouche, with “french neumes of the second epoch”, and lines [added afterwards]: dry-point lines with letter-clefs a and e [la, mi] and coloured lines in red [F-Fa] and in green [c-do]: see facsimile and description in C. Massip, Le livre de musique, Conférences Léopold Delisle [Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2007], p. 21 and 41, tab. 9. See also “Notation”, § III,1,v,b, New Grove Dictionary of Music, Version html).
151
Example 9. Metrophonia in neume-lists: the content of ‘voices’ of each interval sign (emphonon) according to the Protopapadike in Petrop. gr. 495, f. 2v-3r, a copy by Neophytos Hieromonachos from Damascus, 2nd half of XIIIth cent.
(Sources: Evgeny Vladimirovich Gertsman, Petersburg Theoreticon [Odessa: Variant Publishers, 1994], plates LIV-LV. See also M. Alexandru and Chr. Troelsgård, “Η σημασία της Παπαδικής λεγόμενης προθεωρίας για την έρευνα της βυζαντινής και μεταβυζαντινής μουσικής”, in Πρακτικά του ΣΤ’ Διεθνούς Συμποσίου Ελληνικής Παλαιογραφίας [Δράμα, 21-27 Σεπτεμβρίου 2003], edd. Β. Άτσαλος and Ν. Τσιρώνη, Ελληνική Εταιρεία Βιβλιοδεσίας, Αθήνα 2008, vol. II, pp. 563-564 and III, pp. 1224-1225).
152
Example 10. The verbalization of the metrophonic content of the basic interval signs in the brief redaction of the post-Byzantine Papadike, ms Iviron 970, f. 2v, A.D. 1686, scribe Kosmas Makedon: “and they have the following content of voices: the oligon has one, the oxeia one (…), the kentima two…”
(Source and notes: Γρ. Στάθης, Φάκελος μαθήματος «Ἀναλυτικὴ βυζαντινὴ σημειογραφία». Σημειώσεις πανεπιστημιακῶν παραδόσεων καὶ τέσσερις ἑνότητες – προθεωρία καὶ μελισμένα τροπάρια - ἀπὸ χειρόγραφους καὶ ἔντυπους μουσικοὺς κώδικες μὲ βυζαντινὴ σημειογραφία [Αθήνα: Εθνικό και Καποδιστριακό Πανεπιστήμιο Αθηνών, Τμήμα Μουσικών Σπουδών, 1997], 38. In line 6 of the ms, there should be τὸ ἐλαφρὸν, δύο instead of μίαν).
153
Example 11.a. Metrophonia in didactic poems (a): Selected stichera transformed into exercises of metrophonia and parallage, with exclusive stepwise movements within the intervallic frames of the actual sticheron. Renditions: i. stepwise movement with the apechemata corresponding to each melodic degree, and presumably ii. stepwise movement with the text of the sticheron. The case of Κύριε ἐμοὶ τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ ἔθου, idiomelon for Thursday morning in the First Week of Lent.
(Sources and notes: the collation contains for each kolon: the sticheron from the Sticherarium Ambrosianum A 139 sup., f. 188r-v, A.D. 1341, edd. Perria/Raasted, MMB XI [Copenhagen, 1992] and the homonymous exercise for metrophonia and parallage from Athens ΕΒΕ 2458, f. 5r, A.D. 1336. Both sources are supplied with transnotation of the interval signs on staff. It should be underlined that the interval signs show only the structural notes of the piece; in order to sing the melos, one has to rely on the different forms of traditional exegesis: cf. M. Αλεξάνδρου, Ἐξηγήσεις καὶ μεταγραφὲς τῆς βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς [Θεσσαλονίκη: University Press, 2010], pp. 14-17, 36-43, 80-94).
154
Example 11.b. Continuation of the collation of the sticheron Κύριε ἐμοὶ τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ ἔθου.
155
Example 11.c. Continuation of the collation of the sticheron Κύριε ἐμοὶ τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ ἔθου.
156
Example 11.d. Continuation of the collation of the sticheron Κύριε ἐμοὶ τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ ἔθου.
157
Example 11.e. Continuation of the collation of the sticheron Κύριε ἐμοὶ τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ ἔθου.
158
Example 11.f. End of the collation of the sticheron Κύριε ἐμοὶ τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ ἔθου. (Note: on the last four staves the modal structure οf the sticheron is shown. Nr. 1 and 3 display the melodic steps with the signatures occuring in the metrophonia & parallage exercise from EBE 2458. Since the same signatures are repeated at the interval of a fifth (trochos-system), f-sharp is required in the upper register. Nr. 2 and 4 explain the brief echemata which correspond to each melodic step, according to a parallage-exercise found in Codex Chrysander, and published in O. Fleischer, Die spätgriechische Tonschrift, B [Berlin: Reimer, 1904], 17-18. For the dating of Codex Chrysander not earlier than the last quarter of the XVIIth cent., cf. E. Makris, Die musikalische Tradition des Anastasimatarion im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert, Doctoral Dissertation [Universität Wien: Geisteswissenschaftliche Fakultät, 1996], 33. For a collation of the aforementioned exercise with similar parallage methods, cf. Alexandru and Troelsgård, “Σημασία”, III, 1229).
159
Example 12. Metrophonia in didactic poems (b): paradigmatic ascending & descending movements within frames of 1, 2, 3, and 4 voices, passing through the modes: the case of the Ἰσασμοὶ τῶν η΄ ἤχων – ‘Equalizations’ of the 8 modes from the Papadike H.M. Iviron 973, f. 15v, beginning of XVth cent.: fully developed Middlebyzantine notation and transnotation on staff. (Description of the source: Γρ. Στάθης, Τὰ χειρόγραφα βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς. Ἅγιον Ὄρος [Αθήνα: ΙΒΜ, 1993], τ. Γ΄, pp. 739-740).
160 Example 13.a. Metrophonia in didactic poems (b): paradigmatic ascending & descending movements within frames of 1-4 and 7 voices, in the plagal of the fourth mode: Ἑτέρα μέθοδος, H.M. Iviron 973, f. 15v, beginning of XVth cent.: fully developed Middlebyzantine notation and transnotation on staff. (Description of the source and note: Στάθης, Xειρόγραφα Ἅγιον Ὄρος, τ. Γ΄, 739-740. The same method, with very small differences, can be found also in ms Lavra Λ 165, f. 32v, where it is ascribed to Xenophon, author which can be identified with Xenos Korones, according to Γρηγόριος Αναστασίου, Τὰ κρατήματα στὴν Ψαλτικὴ Τέχνη, IBM, Μελέται, 12, ed. Γρ. Στάθης [Αθήνα, 2005], 515. Τhis ms was used in order to facilitate the reading of some unclear places of Iviron 973 [kolon and beginning of kolon 37]).
161
Example 13.b. Continuation of the Ἑτέρα μέθοδος, H.M. Iviron 973, f. 15v.
162
Example 14. Metrophonia as calculation of the voices of one piece: Akakios Chalkeopoulos’ example of the Fourth Heothinon. (Sources and notes: The present collation contains: in the first and third line: the beginning of the Heothinon from the Sticherarium Ambrosianum, edd. Perria/Raasted, MMB XI [Copenhagen, 1992], and in the second and fourth line: the corresponding example from Chalkeopoulos’ Akribologemata, Athens ΕΒΕ 917, f. 3r, A.D. 1500-1520. The theoretician explains that at the beginning of the Heothinon: “Ἔχει δὲ φωναὶ ἀνιοῦσαι ιθ΄, ὁμοίως καὶ κατιοῦσαι” [“There are 19 ascending voices and the same number of descending ones”]. In order to understand this kind of metrophonic calculation we wrote below the second and fourth line the number of rising and falling voices [intervals of seconds] shown by each sign. Summing them up, we obtain as total number of ascending voices: 4+4+1+2+2+2+1+3 = 19, and as total number of descending voices: 4+4+1+2+2+1+1+1+1+1+1 = 19).
163
Example 15. Diagram for the apprehension of metrophonia in the anonymous treatise from Athens EBE 968. The paradigm Tὰς ἑσπερινὰς ἡμῶν εὐχάς. Metrophonia = rendition of the intervallic structure of a piece, with singing of the hymnographic text.
(Notes and sources: At Nr. 1 the beginning of the first hesperion sticheron in the first authentic mode, with text by St. John of Damascus, and melody by Chrysaphes the New is given, after an Anastasimatarion of the XVIIIth cent. [thanks Rev. Nektarios Paris for this source]. Below, a transnotation in staff is supplied. Nr. 2 shows a copied fragment of the well-known diagram from EBE 968, f. 177r, XVIIth-XVIIIth cent., together with our transnotation on staff and the addition of the Chrysanthine monosyllabic solmisation in the left margin. The Anonymos states below the diagram: “Μὲ ὀκτὼ μέτρα ψάλλεται αὐτὸ τὸ στιχηρόν· Τρεῖς χορδαὶς ἔχει ἀνιοῦσαις καὶ τέσσαραις κατιοῦσαις, καὶ μία φυλάττη τὸ κύριον ἴσον” = “This sticheron is to be chanted with eight measures: It has three ascending and four descending strings, and one holds the ison (basic tone)”. For editions of this diagram cf. K. Ψάχος, Ἡ παρασημαντικὴ τῆς βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς, 2nd ed. Γ. Χατζηθεοδώρου [Αθήνα: Διόνυσος, 1978], plate K, and A. Αλυγιζάκης, Η οκταηχία στην ελληνική λειτουργική υμνογραφία [Θεσσαλονίκη: Πουρναρά, 1985], 272. For the dating of this theoretikon, see I. Zannos, Ichos und Makam. Vergleichende Untersuchungen zum Tonsystem der griechisch-orthodoxen Kirchenmusik und der türkischen Kunstmusik, Orpheus-Schriftenreihe 74 [Bonn: Orpheus-Verlag, 1994], 541).
164
Example 16. Chrysanthos, Mega Theoretikon, Trieste 1832, pp. XLVI-XLVIII, §§ 70-73: about the triptych parallage-metrophonia-melos, as the three degrees in the apprehension-process according to the Old Method. Once more the paradigm Tὰς ἑσπερινὰς ἡμῶν εὐχάς. Metrophonia = syllabic rendition of the old neumation ‘at face value’, with rhythm, and by singing the hymnographic text.
(Further reading concerning this example: A.K. Κhalil, Echoes of Constantinople: oral and written tradition of the psaltes of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, PhD Dissertation, UC San Diego, 2009, UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations, Permalink: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6r2794cz, pp. 45-49).
165
Example 17. Gregorios Mpounes Alyates, Method of metrophonia, incipit: an open collation of sources.
Sources: 1. H.M. Iviron 1009, f. 12r-v, XVIth cent. (Lampros): ἐτέρα μέθοδος τῆς μετροφωνίας ὀφελημώτατος ποίημα κῦρ Γρηγορίου Πούνι τοῦ Ἀλιάτου | 2. H.M. Laura K 188, pp. 3-4, XVIIth cent. (Spyridon/Eustratiades): μέθοδος τῆς μετροφωνίας Γρηγορίου Μποῦνι | 3.a-b. H.M. Iviron 1008, f. 4v-5r and 37r-38r (man. sec.), XVIIth cent. (Lampros): ἐτέρα μέθοδος κὺρ Γρηγορίου Μπούνη τοῦ Ἀλιάτου and ἑτέρα μέθοδος τῆς παραλαγῆς κὺρ Γρηγορίου τοῦ Ἀλυάτου | 4. Codex Chrysander, ed. Fleischer, Tonschrift, B, pp. 33-36, ‘the earliest in the last quarter of the XVIIth cent.’ (Makris): ἐτέρα μέθοδος τῆς μετροφονίας ὀφελλιμωτάτη ποίημα κὺρ Γρηγορίου Μπούνι τοῦ Αλιάτου πάνι ὀρέα | 5. H.M. Koutloumousiou 449, f. 6v-7r, ‘end of XVIIth cent.-around 1700’ (Stathis): μέθοδος παραλαγῆς πάνυ ὀφέλιμος κὺρ Γρηγορίου τοῦ Ἀλυάτου | 6. Brussels IV 515, f. 18r-v, XVIIth-XVIIIth cent. (Troelsgård): ἔτερη μέθοδος τῆς μετροφωνίας πάνυ ὁφέλημος ποίημα κὺρ Γρηγορίου Μπούνι τοῦ Ἀλυάτου ἐκ τῆς Συλιμβρίας | 7. Jerusalem, Anastaseos 45, f. 13v-14r, A.D. 1719, scribe Antonios Megas Oikonomos (cf. kolophon f. 8v and Troelsgård) | 8. H.M. Laura M 93, f. 9r-v, A.D. 1728, scribe Ioannes Lampadarios (Spyridon/Eustratiades): μέθοδος μετροφωνίας ὠφελημωτάτη ποίημα Γρηγορίου τοῦ Ἀλυάτη (blurred copy) | 9. H.M. Laura E 132, f. 7v-8r, A.D. 1733 (Spyridon/Eustratiades): μέθοδος μετροφωνίας ὡφελημωτάτη ποίημα κὺρ Γρηγορίου τοῦ Ἀλυάτη | 10. H.M. Laura E 128, f. 8v-9r, A.D. 1741, scribe Agapios (Spyridon/Eustratiades): μέθοδος μετροφωνίας ὡφελημωτάτη ποίημα κὺρ Γρηγορίου τοῦ Αλυάτου
166
Example 18.a. Gregorios Mpounes Alyates, Method of metrophonia, in one of the ‘codices meliores’: Jerusalem Anastaseos 45, f. 13v, A.D. 1719, scribe Antonios Megas Oikonomos.
167
Example 18.b. Gregorios Mpounes Alyates, Method of metrophonia (continued), Jerusalem Anastaseos 45, f. 14r.
168
Example 19.a. Polyprismatic analytical approach to Alyates’ Method of metrophonia. The frame of heptaphony G-g and of tetraphony G-d.
169
Example 19.b. Polyprismatic analytical approach to Alyates’ Method of metrophonia (continued). The frame of the triphony G-c.
170
Example 19.c. Polyprismatic analytical approach to Alyates’ Method of metrophonia (continued). The frame of the diphony G-h and the monophony G-a.
171
Example 19.d. Analysis of Alyates’ Method of metrophonia (continued). Again the frame of the diphony G-h and triphony G-c, with new formulas.
172
Example 19.e. Polyprismatic analytical approach to Alyates’ Method of metrophonia (continued). Once more the frame of the tetraphony, with further formulas.
173
Example 19.f. Polyprismatic analytical approach to Alyates’ Method of metrophonia. The epilogue, within the frames of heptaphony G-g, triphony D-G (lowest point), decaphony (D-g) and hendecaphony (climax! D-a), and again monophony (G-a) and triphony (G-c). Metrophonic calculation of voices (intervals of second) in the entire piece: ascending: 242, descending: 242.
174
Example 20.a. A macroformal & generative analysis of Alyates’ Method of metrophonia, based on ms Jerusalem, Anastaseos 45, f. 13v-14r.
175
Example 20.b. The same analysis, with highlighting of the mirror-symmetries and the climax.
176
Example 21.a. Alyates’ Method of metrophonia. The formulas in the frame of diphony: neumes after Jerus. Anast. 45, with: identification of formulas, transnotation, generative analysis, transcription-syllabic rendition according to Arvanitis’ method, total number of ascending & descending voices, melodic contour. Kolon 26.
Examples 21.b-c. Alyates’ Method of metrophonia, the frame of diphony, k. 27-28.
177
Example 21.d. Alyates’ Method of metrophonia, the frame of diphony, k. 29-31.
178
Example 21.e. Alyates’ Method of metrophonia, the frame of diphony, k. 32-34.
179
Example 21.f. Alyates’ Method of metrophonia, the frame of diphony, k. 35, 45-46.
180
Example 21.g. Alyates’ Method of metrophonia, the frame of diphony, k. 47-48.
181
Example 22. Synchronic approach to Alyates’ Method of metrophonia, through composition and singing: The task given to a contemporary chanter.
“Above you can find a chain of intervals in the plagal of the fourth mode. Try to create for your pupils a didactic poem having as structural tones or as intervallic frames the above chain. Please give several possibilities of filling in each intervallic frame. As text, feel free to choose whatever you consider suitable for didactic purposes”. For the idea of using structural tones of a Byzantine troparion as a base for new composition, thanks to our student, Miss Aikaterini Polychronopoulou.
182
Example 23.a. Possibilities of filling in the diphonic frame Ni-Vou in the plagal of the fourth mode, in actual chanting practice: a draft by Ioannis Liakos, Precentor of the Metropolitan Cathedral St. Gregory Palamas in Thessaloniki, XIIth August 2011.
183
Example 23.b. Continuation of the same draft.
184
Example 24. Gregorios Mpounes Alyates’ Method of metrophonia in the context of Byzantine theoretika.
(Source of inspiration for this diagram: C. Troelsgård, “The Development of a Didactic Poem. Some remarks on the Ἴσον, ὀλίγον, ὀξεῖα by Ioannes Glykys”, in Byzantine Chant. Tradition and Reform, Acts of a Meeting held at the Danish Institute at Athens, 1993, ed. C. Troelsgård, Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens [Athens, 1997], vol. 2, 80, fig. 1).
185 Observations on the diastematic principles in Byzantine musical notations, with emphasis on Gregorios Mpounes Alyates’ method of metrophonia, and some links to analogous phenomena in Western Chant
ABSTRACT
The starting point of our investigation is Oliver Strunk’s observation about the major importance of the adoption of diastematy in Middlebyzantine notation (Specimina notationum antiquiorum, ΜΜΒ VII, Pars Suppletoria, Copenhagen 1966, p. 1). The paper begins with a brief reference to the diastematy in the Hermoupolis-Notation, and some considerations on the gradual change from adiastematic Palaeobyzantine notation to diastematic Middlebyzantine neumes in comparison with the development of diastematic notations in Western Chant (part I with Ex. 1-8). In part II with Ex. 9-16, focus is shifted on the teaching of the Protopapadike, the later Papadikai and other theoretical texts about the intervals and the notion of metrophonia (intervallic counting, in different levels of theoretical and practical application), which represents a multi-stratified key-concept for the understanding of diastematy in Byzantine musical tradition. Part III with Ex. 17-24 concentrates on issues concerning the preparation of a critical edition of Gregorios Mpounes Alyates’ well- known didactic Method of metrophonia Ne, houtōs oun anabaine (first part of XVth cent.), which forms a precious guide both for the investigation of diastematy and musical texture, and represents a stable element of the late Papadike, transmitted up to the beginning of the XIXth century.
Sources and secondary bibliography 1. Editions of musical manuscripts, theoretical and liturgical texts Ἀκάκιος Χαλκεόπουλος. Ἀκριβολογήματα. Εdited by A. Αλυγιζάκης. “Τὸ Θεωρητικὸ τοῦ Ἀκακίου Χαλκεόπουλου”. In Μελουργία. Μελέτες Ανατολικής Μουσικής, ed. A. Aλυγιζάκης. Έτος Α΄, τεύχος Α΄. Θεσσαλονίκη, 2008: 354- 363. Χρύσανθος, Αρχιεπίσκοπος Διρραχίου. Θεωρητικὸν Μέγα τῆς Μουσικῆς. Εdited by Π. Πελοπίδης. Tεργέστη, 1832. Reed. Αθήνα: Kουλτούρα. Γαβριὴλ Ἱερομόναχος. Περὶ τῶν ἐν τῇ ψαλτικῇ σημαδίων. Εdited by Chr. Hannick and G. Wolfram: Gabriel Hieromonachos, Abhandlung über den
186 Kirchengesang. MMB, CSRM I. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1985. Gertsman Evgeny Vladimirovich, Petersburg Theoreticon. Odessa: Variant Publishers, 1994. Παρακλητική, Αθήνα: Εκδόσεις «Φῶς», without year. Sticherarium Ambrosianum. Εdited by L. Perria and J. Raasted. ΜΜΒ Série principale, 11, Pars Principalis & Pars Suppletoria. Copenhague: Munksgaard, 1992. Sticherarium Αntiquum Vindobonense. Εdited by G. Wolfram. ΜΜΒ Série principale, 10, Pars Principalis & Pars Suppletoria. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1987. Strunk Oliver, Specimina notationum antiquiorum. ΜΜΒ VII, Pars Suppletoria. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1966.
2. Manuscript catalogues Χαλδαιάκης, Αχιλλεύς. Τὰ χειρόγραφα ἐκκλησιαστικῆς μουσικῆς. Νησιώτικη Ἑλλάς. Κατάλογος περιγραφικός. Τόμος Α΄. Ὕδρα. Ἱερὰ Σύνοδος τῆς Ἐκκλησίας τῆς Ἑλλάδος. Ἵδρυμα Βυζαντινῆς Μουσικολογίας. Αθήνα, 2005. Χατζηγιακουμής, Μανόλης. Μουσικὰ χειρόγραφα Τουρκοκρατίας (1453- 1832). Τόμος α΄. Αθήνα, 1975. Χειρόγραφα ἐκκλησιαστικῆς μουσικῆς 1453-1820. Συμβολὴ στὴν ἔρευνα τοῦ Νέου Ἑλληνισμοῦ. Αθήνα: Μορφωτικό Ίδρυμα Εθνικής Τραπέζης, 1980. Γιαννόπουλος, Εμμανουήλ Στ. Τὰ χειρόγραφα ψαλτικῆς τέχνης τῆς νήσου Ἄνδρου. Ἀναλυτικὸς περιγραφικὸς κατάλογος. Ἀνδριακὰ Χρονικά 36. Άνδρος: Καΐρειος Βιβλιοθήκη, 2005. Ταμεῖον Χειρογράφων Ψαλτικῆς Τέχνης. Ἑταιρεία Μακεδονικῶν Σπουδῶν, Ἐπιστημονικαὶ Πραγματεῖαι, Σειρὰ Φιλολογικὴ καὶ Θεολογική, αρ. 20. Θεσσαλονίκη, 2005. Λάμπρος Σπυρίδων, Κατάλογος τῶν ἐν ταῖς βιβλιοθήκαις τοῦ Ἁγίου Ὄρους ἑλληνικῶν κωδίκων. 2 vols. Cambridge: University Press, 1895, 1900. Μπαλαγεώργος, Δημήτριος/Κρητικού, Φλώρα. Τὰ χειρόγραφα βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς. Σινᾶ. Κατάλογος περιγραφικός. Ἱερὰ Σύνοδος τῆς Ἐκκλησίας τῆς Ἑλλάδος. Ἵδρυμα Βυζαντινῆς Μουσικολογίας, τόμος Α΄. Αθήνα, 2008. Παπαδόπουλος-Κεραμεύς, Α. Ἱεροσολυμιτικὴ Βιβλιοθήκη, τόμος Ε΄. St. Petersburg, 1915. Repr. Brussels: Culture et Civilisation, 1963. Spyridon of the Laura/Eustratiades, Sophronios. Catalogue of the Greek Manuscripts in the Library of the Laura on Mount Athos. Harvard Theological Studies XII. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1925. Repr. New York: Kraus Reprint Co, 1969. Στάθης Γρηγόριος, Τὰ χειρόγραφα βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς. Ἅγιον Ὄρος. Κατάλογος περιγραφικός. Ἱερὰ Σύνοδος τῆς Ἐκκλησίας τῆς Ἑλλάδος. Ἵδρυμα Βυζαντινῆς Μουσικολογίας, τόμοι Α΄-Γ΄. Αθήνα, 1975, 1976, 1993. Τὰ χειρόγραφα βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς, Μετέωρα. Κατάλογος περιγραφικός. Ἱερὰ Σύνοδος τῆς Ἐκκλησίας τῆς Ἑλλάδος. Ἵδρυμα Βυζαντινῆς Μουσικολογίας. Αθήνα, 2006.
187 Rev. Terzopoulos Konstantinos, “Hidden in Plain Sight: Musical Treasures in the Gennadius Library. Byzantine Repertories and a Snippet of Modern Greek History”. In Hidden Treasures at the Gennadius Library. The Gennadius Library, American School of Classical Studies at Athens. The New Griffon 12 (2011): pp. 35-43 and figs. pp. 1-19. Touliatos-Miles Diane, Descriptive Catalogue of the Musical Manuscripts of the National Library of Greece: Byzantine Chant and Other Music Repertory Recovered. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, 2010. Troelsgård Christian, Inventory of Microfilms and Photographs in the Collection of Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae. Database of the ΜΜΒ: http://www.igl.ku.dk/MMB/catbyz.htm
3. Secondary bibliography Alexandrescu Ozana, “Tipuri de Gramatici în manuscrise de tradiţie bizantină”. Studii şi Cercetări de Istoria Artei. Teatru, Muzică, Cinematografie, serie nouă (2011-2012) (forthcoming). Αλεξάνδρου Μαρία, Ἐξηγήσεις καὶ μεταγραφὲς τῆς βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς. Σύντομη εἰσαγωγὴ στὸν προβληματισμό τους. Θεσσαλονίκη: University Studio Press, 2010. Alexandru Maria, “Χριστὲ ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν, ein emblematisches Sticheron zum Hl. Kreuz. Ansätze zu einem multiprismatischen Analysemodell aufgrund von J. Raasteds Strukturierungsmethode byzantinischer Troparia”. Revue des Études Byzantines et Postbyzantines 6 (2011): pp. 325-345. “Gregorios Mpunes Alyates: An Open Bioergographic Index Card and an analysis of the pentekostarion Τὴν λάμψιν τοῦ προσώπου σου”. In Psaltike. Neue Studien zur Byzantinischen Musik: Festschrift für Gerda Wolfram, edited by Nina-Maria Wanek, pp. 13-64. Wien: Praesens, 2011. Studie über die 'grossen Zeichen' der byzantinischen musikalischen Notation unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Periode vom Ende des 12. bis Anfang des 19. Jahrhunderts. PhD Dissertation. 3 vols. Copenhagen University, 2000. Alexandru Maria, Christian Troelsgård, “Η σημασία της Παπαδικής λεγόμενης προθεωρίας για την έρευνα της βυζαντινής και μεταβυζαντινής μουσικής”. Ιn Πρακτικά του ΣΤ’ Διεθνούς Συμποσίου Ελληνικής Παλαιογραφίας (Δράμα, 21-27 Σεπτεμβρίου 2003), edited by Β. Άτσαλος and Ν. Τσιρώνη, vol. II, pp. 559-572 & vol. III, pp. 1221-1233. Αθήνα: Ελληνική Εταιρεία Βιβλιοδεσίας, 2008. “The Development of a Didactic Tradition – The Elements of the Papadike”. In Tradition and Innovation in Late- and Postbyzantine Liturgical Chant II. Proceedings of the Congress held at Hernen Castel, the Netherlands, 30 Oct. – 3 Nov. 2008, edited by G. Wolfram and C. Troelsgård. A.A. Bredius Foundation, Peeters. Leuven – Paris – Dudley, MA. Eastern Christian Studies 17 (2013): pp. 1-58. Αλυγιζάκης Αντώνιος, Η οκταηχία στην ελληνική λειτουργική υμνογραφία. Θεσσαλονίκη: Πουρναρά, 1985.
188 Αναστασίου Γρηγόριος, Τὰ κρατήματα στὴν Ψαλτικὴ Τέχνη. IBM, Μελέται 12, ed. Γρ. Στάθης. Αθήνα, 2005. Αρβανίτης Ιωάννης, “Ἡ ρυθμικὴ καὶ μετρικὴ δομὴ τῶν βυζαντινῶν εἱρμῶν καὶ στιχηρῶν ὡς μέσο καὶ ὡς ἀποτέλεσμα μιᾶς νέας ρυθμικῆς ἑρμηνείας τοῦ βυζαντινοῦ μέλους”. In Οἱ δύο ὄψεις τῆς ἑλληνικῆς μουσικῆς κληρονομίας. Ἀφιέρωμα εἰς μνήμην Σπυρίδωνος Περιστέρη. Πρακτικά τῆς Μουσικολογικῆς Συνάξεως 10-11 Νοεμβρίου 2000, edited by Ε. Μακρής. Ἀκαδημία Ἀθηνῶν, Δημοσιεύματα τοῦ Κέντρου Ἐρεύνης τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς Λαογραφίας ἀρ. 18, pp. 151-176. Αθήνα, 2003. “Ἐνδείξεις καὶ ἀποδείξεις γιὰ τὴν σύντομη ἑρμηνεία τοῦ Παλαιοῦ Στιχηραρίου”. Ιn Θεωρία καὶ Πράξη τῆς Ψαλτικῆς Τέχνης. Τὰ γένη καὶ τὰ εἴδη τῆς βυζαντινῆς ψαλτικῆς μελοποιΐας. Πρακτικὰ Β' Διεθνοῦς Συνεδρίου Μουσικολογικοῦ καὶ Ψαλτικοῦ, Ἀθήνα, 15-19 Ὀκτωβρίου 2003, edited by Γρ. Ανασταστίου, 233-253. Αθήνα: Ἱερὰ Σύνοδος τῆς Ἐκκλησίας τῆς Ἑλλάδος. Ἵδρυμα Βυζαντινῆς Μουσικολογίας, 2006. Ο ρυθμός των εκκλησιαστικών μελών μέσα από την παλαιογραφική έρευνα και την εξήγηση της παλαιάς σημειογραφίας. Η μετρική και ρυθμική δομή των παλαιών στιχηρών και ειρμών. Doctoral Dissertation. 2 vols. Iόνιο Πανεπιστήμιο, Κέρκυρα, 2010. Arvanitis Ioannis, “A Way to the Transcription of Old Byzantine Chant by means of Written and Oral Tradition”. In Byzantine Chant. Tradition and Reform, Acts of a Meeting held at the Danish Institute at Athens, 1993, edited by Chr. Troelsgård. Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens, vol. 2, pp. 123-141. Athens, 1997. Χαλδαιάκης Αχιλλεύς, “Ἡ ‘ἀκριβολογία’ Ἰωάννου ἱερέως τοῦ Πλουσιαδηνοῦ”. Paper presented at «Θεωρία καὶ Πράξη τῆς Ψαλτικῆς Τένχης». Ἱερὰ Σύνοδος τῆς Ἐκκλησίας τῆς Ἑλλάδος. Ἵδρυμα Βυζαντινῆς Μουσικολογίας. Ε’ Διεθνές Συνέδριο Μουσικολογικὸ καὶ Ψαλτικό: «Ἐρωταποκρίσεις καὶ Ἀκρίβεια τῆς Ψαλτικῆς Τέχνης», Ἀθήνα, 13-15 Δεκεμβρίου 2012 (forthcoming). Demetriou Christiana, Das Sticherarion kalophonikon Machairas A4 und die musikalischen Werke des Manuel Chrysaphes. Dissertation. Universität Wien, 2001. Doda Alberto, “Coislin Notation. Problems and Working Hypotheses”. In Palaeobyzantine Notations. A Reconsideration of the Source Material, edited by J. Raasted and Chr. Troelsgård, pp. 63-79. Hernen: A.A. Bredius Foundation, 1995. Fleischer Oskar, Die spätgriechische Tonschrift. Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1904. Floros Constantin, Universale Neumenkunde. 3 vols. Kassel: Bärenreiter- Antiquariat Kassel-Wilhelmshöhe, 1970. Hiley David, “Diastematic”. New Grove Dictionary of Music. Version html Κhalil Alexander Konrad, Echoes of Constantinople: oral and written tradition of the psaltes of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople. PhD Dissertation, UC San Diego, 2009. UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Permalink: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6r2794cz Makris Eustathios, Die musikalische Tradition des Anastasimatarion im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert. Doctoral Dissertation, Universität Wien, 1996.
189 Massip Catherine, Le livre de musique. Conférences Léopold Delisle. Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 2007. Nagy Melania Elena, “Elemente arhetipale în construcţia Sonatei bizantine pentru violă sau violoncel solo de Paul Constantinescu”. Acta Musicae Byzantinae VII (2004): pp. 104-113: http://www.csbi.ro/ro/r07/art17.pdf (7.1.2011). Παπαθανασίου, Ιωάννης. Εγχειρίδιο Μουσικής Παλαιογραφίας. Πρώτη ενότητα. Δυτικές νευματικές σημειογραφίες. Αθήνα: Διογένης, 2002. Papathanasiou Ioannis, “The musical notation of the Sticherarion MS Vat. Barb. gr. 483”. In Byzantine Chant. Tradition and Reform. Acts of a Meeting held at the Danish Institute at Athens, 1993. Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens, vol. 2, edited by C. Troelsgård, pp. 53-67. Athens, 1997. Papathanasiou Ioannis, Nikolaos Boukas, “Early Diastematic Notation in Greek Christian Hymnographic Texts of Coptic Origin. A Reconsideration of the Source Material”. In Palaeobyzantine Notations III. Acts of the Congress held at Hernen Castle, The Netherlands, in March 2001, edited by G. Wolfram. Eastern Christian Studies 4 (2004): pp. 1-25. Ψάχος Κωνσταντίνος, Ἡ παρασημαντικὴ τῆς βυζαντινῆς μουσικῆς, 2nd ed. by Γ. Χατζηθεοδώρου. Αθήνα: Διόνυσος, 1978. Raasted Jørgen; Intonation formulas and modal signatures in Byzantine musical manuscripts. MMB, Subsidia VII. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1966. Στάθης Γρηγόριος, “Ἡ ἀσματικὴ διαφοροποίηση ὅπως καταγράφεται στὸν κώδικα ΕΒΕ 2458 τοῦ ἔτους 1336”. Ιn Χριστιανικὴ Θεσσαλονίκη. Παλαιολόγειος ἐποχή. ΚΒ΄ Δημήτρια, Ἐπιστημονικὸ Συμπόσιο, Πατριαρχικὸν Ἵδρυμα Πατερικῶν Μελετῶν, Ἱερὰ Μονὴ Βλατάδων, 29-31 Ὀκτ. 1987, pp. 165- 211. Κέντρο Ἱστορίας Θεσσαλονίκης τοῦ Δήμου Θεσσαλονίκης, αὐτοτελεῖς ἐκδόσεις 3. Θεσσαλονίκη, 1989. Φάκελος μαθήματος «Ἀναλυτικὴ βυζαντινὴ σημειογραφία». Σημειώσεις πανεπιστημιακῶν παραδόσεων καὶ τέσσερις ἑνότητες – προθεωρία καὶ μελισμένα τροπάρια - ἀπὸ χειρόγραφους καὶ ἔντυπους μουσικοὺς κώδικες μὲ βυζαντινὴ σημειογραφία. Αθήνα: Εθνικό και Καποδιστριακό Πανεπιστήμιο Αθηνών, Τμήμα Μουσικών Σπουδών, 1997. Troelsgård Christian, “The Development of a Didactic Poem. Some remarks on the Ἴσον, ὀλίγον, ὀξεῖα by Ioannes Glykys”. In Byzantine Chant. Tradition and Reform, Acts of a Meeting held at the Danish Institute at Athens, 1993, edited by C. Troelsgård, 69-85. Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens. Athens, 1997. Witkowska-Zaremba Elzbieta, “Visual Representations of the Pitch Systems in Late Medieval Chant Treatises”. International Musicological Society, Study Group ‘Cantus Planus’, Congress Zürich, July 10-15, 2007, Abstract. In http://www-app.uni- regensburg.de/Fakultaeten/PKGG/Musikwissenschaft/Cantus/CANTUSPLAN US/papers.htm (9.5.2013). Zannos Ioannis, Ichos und Makam. Vergleichende Untersuchungen zum Tonsystem der griechisch-orthodoxen Kirchenmusik und der türkischen Kunstmusik. Orpheus-Schriftenreihe 74. Bonn: Orpheus-Verlag, 1994.
190
The Evolution of Chant Exegesis in the Anastasimatarion of Anton Pann
CARMEN DURA
The adaptation of liturgical songs to the Romanian language is a complex topic that involves, first, a clarification of the issue of the translation of religious books into Romanian.1 We owe Deacon Coresi the first printings in Romanian, with Cyrillic letters: Tetraevanghel [The Four Gospels] (1561), Psaltire [Psaltery] (1570), Liturghier [Liturgy Book] (1570). Although some of the books in Romanian were a means for Reformed propaganda among Romanians, his prints have played an important role in the development and unification of Romanian as a cultural language. We can not talk about liturgical singing in Romanian without the existence of religious books in Romanian. The question is: Why were Slavonic and Greek abandoned and replaced by writing in Romanian? There are multiple causes, both external and internal, such as: the service and the religious texts in foreign languages were not available, sometimes not even to Romanian priests, let alone believers; Reformed propaganda sought to attract Orthodox Romanians to the new Lutheran Church. One of the innovations of the Reformation was to introduce national languages in the religious service. The movement was broad and covered the entire Europe, thus enabling the emergence of concerns for adapting the liturgical songs to Romanian. In the fight with Slavonic, Romanian became increasingly prominent in church service. In this respect, Gheorghe Ciobanu stated: “Slavonic was up to the late seventeenth century both the religious language and the state language [...]; in the second half of the seventeenth century, Greek replaces Slavonic in the chancelleries of the Romanian rulers, with increasing use in the Church as well, and in the early eighteenth century Romanian ultimately became the language of worship”2.
1 This paper is a rewriting of the author’s dissertation, defended in July 2010, on graduating the Master degree programme of the University of Arts “George Enescu” of Iaşi, under the guidance of Prof. PhD Florin Bucescu. I would like to take this opportunity to also thank the musicologist Nicolae Gheorghiţă for providing several manuscripts necessary to complete this study. 2 Gheorghe Ciobanu, Raportul dintre muzica liturgică românească şi muzica bizantină [The Relation Between the Romanian Liturgical Music and Byzantine Music] – paper at I. Congresso internazionale di studi di musica bizantina liturgica e orientale, Grottaferatta (Italy), 6-11 maggio 1968; published in: Studii de
191 In the musical field, two important musical personalities of the eighteenth century, Filothei Protopsaltul and Mihalache Moldo-Vlahul, are worth mentioning in this respect. The first musical personality who initiated the process of adapting liturgical songs to Romanian was Filothei sin Agăi Jipei or Filothei Protopsaltul. His most important work is Psaltichia rumănească [The Romanian Psaltery], completed on December 24, 1713. Filothei Protopsaltul adapted the Romanian texts to traditional Byzantine music. Songs from Psaltichia were then copied by other musicians and circulated in all Romanian provinces. Nearly three centuries later, The Romanian Psaltery was studied and published by the Byzantinist Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, in four volumes. Thus, Sebastian Barbu-Bucur noted: “The work of translating the hymn books from Greek was linked to the difficulty of matching the text in Romanian with the traditional melody, which could not be changed. This meant to select and set out in order the Romanian words so that they would have the rhythm required by the melodic needs of Byzantine music. The translation problem thus became complicated with a musical issue.”3 From the Byzantinist’s statements we can deduce that Filothei Protopsaltul encountered two major difficulties in the process of adapting musical works to Romanian: “the translation” from Greek to Romanian and the matching of the musical accent to the prosodic / metric accent. Referring to the work of Filothei, Gheorghe Ciobanu4 mentioned the existence of three types of songs: 1. translations, fully respecting the Greek melody; 2. translations in which the melodic line was adapted to the Romanian prosody and word order; 3. own melodic creations. Mihalache Moldo-Vlahu is the author of an Anastasimatar românesc [Romanian Anastasimatarion], dated 1767. The original manuscript was discovered at Mount Athos and has been printed recently by the Byzantinist Sebastian Barbu-Bucur. The work is mentioned by Anton Pann. The aforementioned Byzantinist shows that with Mihalache began the second stage of the process of adaptation to Romanian. This means that it is no longer about adapting the text to music or vice versa, but about a melodic line “processed and adapted to etnometodologie şi bizantinologie [Studies of Ethnomethodology and Byzantinology], vol. II, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1979, p. 263. 3 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Filothei sin Agăi Jipei. Psaltichie rumănească [Filothei sin Agăi Jipei. Romanian Psaltery], vol. I, Catavasierul [Hymn Book], Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1981, p. 53. 4 Gheorghe Ciobanu, Cultura psaltică românească în secolele al XVII-lea şi al XVIII- lea [Romanian Psaltic Culture in the Seventeenth century and Eighteenth century], in: Muzica [Music], Bucharest, Year XXIII, no. 3, March 1973, p. 46; reprinted in: Studii de etnomuzicologie şi bizantinologie [Studies of Ethnomusicology and Byzantinology], vol. I, p. 302.
192 the Romanian text“5. The preference for the eirmologica style is noted in Mihalache, his Anastasimatarion being written συντόμον (syllabic, short, concise). The music scene of the first half of the nineteenth century is a syncretic one, featuring the coexistence of completely opposite styles. Music in this period is under continuous transformation, seeking its own identity in an attempt to relate to Western music, but also to preserve the national character. In terms of music theory, two directions are configured and will develop in parallel during 1823-1859: sacramentary music (Hieromonk Macarie and Anton Pann) and Western music (Teodor Burada, I. A. Wachmann and A. Petrino). Regarding the byzantine notation system, we note a first tendency to adapt the sacramentary to Romanian by removing oriental influences, and a second tendency, consisting in the attempt to adopt the western music system and even to introduce harmonic chanting in church. Titus Moisescu identifies four important moments in the development of religious music in the Romanian Orthodox tradition6, namely: 1. old Byzantine music (ecphonetic, paleo-Byzantine, medio- Byzantine / Hagiopolite and neo-Byzantine / Koukouzelian), also known as “the old system”; 2. modern Crysanthine sacramentary (XIXth-XXth centuries), also known as “the new system”; 3. monodic religious music in linear notation from Transylvania, Banat and Bukovina; 4. harmonic and polyphonic choral religious music, with or without instrumental accompaniment, developed starting with the XIXth century. Those who continued, in the XIXth century, the tradition started in the VIIIth century of adapting chants to Romanian were Hieromonk Macarie, Anton Pann and Dimitrie Suceveanu. The three psaltes of the XIXth century explained in their prefaces that the process of adapting chants to Romanian did not take place ex nihilo, but was the result of a complex process, a struggle of centuries, with the Romanian culture emerging victorious in the end. Adaptation to Romanian involved: removing the supporters of chanting in Greek, consolidating the position of the singers who supported the Romanian language, removing the Turkish influences (eliminating tererems or dashes), publishing theoretical works, interpreting and creating in Romanian. Among the
5 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Manuscrise muzicale româneşti la Muntele Athos. Anastasimatarul lui Mihalache Moldovlahul [Romanian Music Manuscripts at Mount Athos. The Anastasimatarion of Mihalache Moldovlahul], a study commissioned by the Union of Composers and Musicologists, no. 22 679, p. 9. 6 Titus Moisescu, Cântarea monodică bizantină pe teritoriul României. Prolegomene bizantine [Monodical Byzantine Chant in Romania. Byzantine Prolegomena], vol. II, Variante stilistice şi de formă în muzica bisericească [Variants Differing in Style and Form in Church Music], edited by Constantin Secară, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 2003, pp. 41-42.
193 important theoretical works of the XIXth century I would like you mention: Theoreticonul [The Theoreticon] of Macarie, 1823, Vienna; Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşti sau gramatica melodică [The Theoretical and Practical Basis of Church Music or the Melodic Grammar] of Anton Pann, Bucharest, 1845; Prescurtarea după Bazul teoretic [Abridgement of The Theoretical Basis], Bucharest, 1847; Mica gramatică muzicală [The Little Grammar of Music] of Anton Pann, Bucharest, 1854. “Since 1814, following a so-called reform promoted by the three musicians – Chrysanthos Arhimandritos, Gregorios Lampadarios and Chourmouzios Chartophilax – appeared the modern religious music, called Chrysanthic, after the name of one of the reformers, the new system, the so-called sacramentary ...”7. In 1816, the first school of psaltery was established in Bucharest, at St. Nicholas Church in Şelari, thanks to the initiative of Petru Efesiu. The students of this school include Hieromonk Macarie and Anton Pann.8 Titus Moisescu discusses the main features of modern psalm notation9: 1. giving up many signs from the notation of the old system; 2. introducing 20 ftorals – 8 diatonic, 5 chromatic, 5 enharmonic, 2 supports (the sharp and the ifes); 3. using the stichirarica, eirmologica and papadica times, distinguished by the final cadences, perfect and imperfect and by tempo; 4. clarifying the rhythmic structures. Constantin Catrina demonstrates that the psaltes of the XIXth century had merit because “they created a full repertoire of songs in Romanian, offering psaltes from monasteries and parish churches the entire musical creation required for all religious services in the Orthodox Church. They all tried their hand at original creation [...] at first timidly (Macarie, Dimitrie Suceveanu), then with more courage and more originality (Anton Pann, Ioan Popescu-Pasărea)”10. Hieromonk Macarie was one of the first Romanian musicians who talked about the need to replace the Greek chant with the Romanian one. In the preface to The Heirmologion, Macarie stated: “The wealth and happiness of a people, my dear, comes from respecting the ancient laws and the love and strong desire to increase the wealth of the nation because the laws are like springs that water the soul, multiply and feed that close relation of love and desire on which depend the richness and
7 ibidem, p. 37. 8 ibidem. 9 Titus Moisescu, Cântarea monodică bizantină pe teritoriul României. Prolegomene bizantine [Monodical Byzantine Chant in Romania. Byzantine Prolegomena], vol. II, p. 38. 10 Constantin Catrina, Ipostaze ale muzicii de tradiţie bizantină din România [Faces of Byzantine-Inspired Music in Romania], Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 2003, p 116.
194 the happiness, they work and multiply sciences that are so useful in people’s lives.”11 Anton Pann, the second founder of the Romanian psaltery, paid attention to the importance of the word that imposes the accents of the musical phrase. “The theoretical and rhetorical principles are designed and applied according to the specificity of the Romanian language, which is the decisive factor in composing the chants.”12 These psaltes were criticized for not taking into account the existence of an original chant from the churches in the villages, heavily influenced by folk music.13 There are manuscripts by Anton Pann that show a tendency to compose some songs under the influence of folk songs and western songs. “Researching the content of these manuscripts puts us in a position to discover the development in the concept of Anton Pann [...]. It’s about some so-called «Great responses», which, due to their non-Byzantine style, Anton Pann did not include in any of his printings.”14 Anton Pann supports the idea of adapting to Romanian in verse too: “Many, I noticed, when they look at the song/ And they see it with gorgons, they like it like mad,/ Not knowing that art does not lie in the writing with gorgons,/But in the best adaptation and the enlightened style./ But I, I avoided as many gorgons as I could/And I respected the accuracy, I never ignored the rules ...”15. Dimitrie Suceveanu, the most important representative of the sacramentary in Moldova, is considered “the last of the triad of the Chrysantine reformers in our country”, “who gave us the richest music literature in the church circuit, collected in the three volumes of the incomparable Idiomelar, adecă cântarea pe singur glasul unit cu Doxastarul [Idiomelar, that is chanting in one voice united with the Doxastar], printed at Neamț Monastery, during 1856-1857”16. Thus, the process of adapting church songs to Romanian began in the XVIIIth century with Filothei sin Agăi Jipei and continued with greater impetus in the XIXth century through the efforts of three Romanian protopsaltes: Hieromonk Macarie, Anton Pann and Dimitrie
11 Hieromonk Macarie, Irmologhion sau catavasieriu musicesc [Irmologhion or Musical hymn Book], p. III, Bucureşti, 1823. 12 See Octavian Lazăr Cosma, Hronicul muzicii româneşti [History of Romanian Music], vol. III, “Preromantismul” [Pre-Romanticism], p. 139. 13 George Breazul, Patrium Carmen, pp. 574-576. 14 Gheorghe Ciobanu, Studii de Etnomuzicologie şi Bizantinologie [Ethnomusicology and Byzantinology Studies], vol. II, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1979, p. 241. 15 Anton Pann, Heruvico-Chenonicar, Bucureşti, 1846, p. 4. 16 Vasile Vasile, Istoria muzicii bizantine si evoluţia ei în spiritualitatea românească [History of Byzantine Music and its Evolution in the Romanian Spirituality], vol. II, Editura Interprint, Bucureşti, 1997, p. 162.
195 Suceveanu. Their contribution is essential, resembling that of deacon Coresi for the Romanian religious printing from the XVIth century. What the three did should not be considered a xenophobic act, but an attempt to bring church music closer to the soul and the feelings of the people – a simple, humble people who wanted music to be closer to their soul, less “baroque” and “gorgoned.” The entire XIXth century is characterized by an attempt to modernize the Romanian society, which began by replacing the Phanariot rulers with native rulers and continued with the Bourgeois-Landlord Revolution of 1848. This explains why there are changes in church music as well. If the three psaltes had not fought for the adaptation of the songs to Romanian, it is possible that this kind of music would have disappeared because it was in strong competition with the Western, linear music. As mentioned above, the oldest manuscript with songs on musical notes in Romanian is Psaltichia rumănească [The Romanian Psaltery], of Hieromonk Filothei sin Agăi Jipei, completed on December 24, 1713. The manuscript also contains an Anastasima (f. 71-113)17, which was composed after the model of Hrisah’s Anastasimatarion, Filothei processing the Greek material in whole or in part. Another Anastasimatarion is that of Mihalache Moldoveanu, produced in 1767 and mentioned by Anton Pann in Bazul teoretic şi practic... [The Theoretical and Practical Basis...] Another Anastasimatarion in Romanian was written by Protosinghel Ianuarie, before 1821, but the manuscript was not found. Anton Pann mentioned in the same work that he had seen it. The first Anastasimatarion printed in Romanian was that of Hieromonk Macarie, written after that of Petru Efesiul (1823). In 1847, Anton Pann published Prescurtarea din Bazul muzicii bisericeşti din Anastasimatar [Abridgement of the Basis of Church Music from the Anastasimatarion]. As the title indicates, the book also contained chants from Anastasimatarion. In 1848, The Anastasimatarion of Dimitrie Suceveanu is published, which was reedited after The Anastasimatarion of Macarie, revised and enlarged. Another important Anastasimatarion is the one published by Anton Pann, in 1854, the year of his death, after the model of The Anastasimatarion written in 1809 by Dionisie Fotino (Fig. 1). The present study aims to unravel some of the mysteries of the process of adapting to Romanian the chants in this Anastasimatarion. I chose for analysis 2 compositions and 3 examples to discover what this process actually comprised. I stopped only at the chants of voice I from Vespers,
17 See Gheorghe C. Ionescu, Muzica bizantină în România, Dicţionar cronologic [Byzantine Music in Romania, Chronological Dictionary], with a preface by Academician Virgil Candea, German-English translation: Carmen Simina Ionescu; French translation: Magda Bindea, Editura Sagittarius, Bucureşti, pp. 50-53.
196 intending to approach the subject in more detail in a subsequent book. The applied method is inductive and comparative. It starts from examples and by means of comparison it extracts the mechanisms of the adaptation to Romanian. The three books from which the songs were extracted were not selected fortuitously, as they are related to one another. In fact, every new book published arose from the previous one. Here they are: 1. the Greek manuscript Νέον Άναστασιματάριον, from the collection of psalms Livre de Musique, of Dionisie Fotino; signed manuscript found in the Library of the Romanian Patriarchate, Bucharest, under Ms. gr. 185 – Ms. 198, year 1809; Anton Pann stated in the preface to The Anastasimatarion that this Anastasimatarion had been burnt, but, in reality, it is now found in the Library of the Romanian Patriarchate; “on leaf 343 starts Αναστασιμάριον Νέον (Fig. 2 n.n.) with a total of 112 pages preceded by the title of the work and a dedication to Ştefan Belu”18. “Νέον Αναστασιματάριον, which is in Livre de musique, mentions right from the title its stylistic and aesthetic dimension, the author and the place of its writing”19: „Αναστασιμάριον νέον, σύντομον, ευρυθμόν, και κατα νοήμα συντεθέν, παρά εμού Διονυσίου βατάφου του εκ παλαίων πατρών, της εκ πελοποννήσω αχαίας προτοπή (!προτροπή translator’s note) του αρχόν (!αρχου translator’s note) παχάρνηκ Στεφάνου πελίου προς χάριν, των εκ τω της Υγγροβλαχία Βουκουρέστιο φιλομούσων κατά μήνα σευτέβριος τω αωθ' έτος."20 At the end of The Anastasimatarion, Dionysios presents a brief characterization of his musical genre, in the decapentasyllabic technique: “Τόδε υπάρχει σύνθεμα, εμού Διονυσίου/εκ των Πατρών της Πόλεως, του Πελοπονησίου./όπερ προς χάριν γέγονε, των φιλομούσων μόνων,/οίτινες κρίνουσιν ορθώς και νόημα και τόνον./Το ύφος έχει
18 Nicolae Gheorghiţă, Dionysios Foteinos (1777-1821), Opera muzicală. Anastasimatarul [Dionysios Foteinos (1777-1821), The Musical Work. The Anastasimatarion], p. 19; This study is an abridged form of some chapters from the PhD thesis of Nicolae Gheorghiţă (in development) at the University Makedonias of Thessaloniki, entitled Ο ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟΣ ΦΩΤΕΙΝΟΣ (1777-1821) ΣΤΗΝ ΕΛΛΗΝΙ Η ΑΙ ΡΟΥΜΑΝΙ Η ΠΑΡΑΔΟΣΗ ΤΗΣ ΒΥΖΑΝΤΙΝΗΣ ΜΟΥΣΙKΗΣ. 19 Nicolae Gheorghiţă, Dionysios Foteinos (1777-1821), Opera muzicală. Anastasimatarul [Dionysios Foteinos (1777-1821), The Musical Work. The Anastasimatarion], p. 21. 20 Ms. gr. 185 – Ms. 198, year 1809, Library of the Romanian Patriarchate, f. 184 r; “The new short / concise harmonized Anastasimatarion, drafted according to the established order by me, Dionisie Vatafu, from the old Patras, in Achaia Peloponnese, at the suggestion of cupbearer Ştefan, whom I thank, and the music lovers in Bucharest of Ungro-Wallachia, in September of 1809.” (translated by sister Paraschiva Grigoriu).
197 σύντομον, εθρύθμους (! ευρύθμους translator’s note) τας συνθέσεις,/το μέλος κατά νόημα, με φθορικάς τε θέσεις/Μανθάνειν έξεστι λοιπόν, λογίοις καλοφώνοις,/αλλ' ού τοις αμαθέσι δε, άμα και κακοφώνοις./ αι έστω εις μνημόσυνον, του φιλομούσου όντως,/αιτίου τε και προτρεπτού κα'μού του κοπιώντος/."21 2. 741st (527th) Greek manuscript, BAR, Αναστασιμάριον νέον, the new writing (Fig. 3), interpreted by Anton Pann in 1853-1854, at the suggestion of the Metropolitan of Moldova, Iosif Naniescu. “Αναστασιμάριον νεον, σύντομον, ευρυθμον, και κατά νόημα συντεθέν, παρά Σερδάρου Διονυσίου Φωτηνώ, νυν δε εξυγήθη κατά των νέον μέθοδον παρά εμού Αντωνίου Πανν."22 “This book, the Anastasimatarion of Dionisake Fotino, translated by Mr. Anton Pann after the system of church chants with the old, complicated notes into the new system, with the same simplified notes, is translated and written by Anton Pann himself with his own hand in 1853-1854, for me, the undersigned, according to our agreement; I write this here for eternal remembrance in 1899. † Iosif Naniescu, Metropolitan of Moldova, in 1899, May 29.”23 Ms. gr. 741 (527), BAR, Άναστασιμάριον νέον, was edited by the musicologist Nicolae Gheorghiţă, on Mount Athos, at the Hermitage “St. Demetrius”, Lake, 2009.24 3. The Anastasimatarion of Anton Pann, 1854, published in his own typography (Fig. 8). Noul Anastasimatar, tradus și compus din sistima cea veche a serdarului Dionisie Fotino, dedicat Prea Sfințitului și de Dumnezeu alesului, Episcop Filoteiu al Buzăului de Anton Pann [The New Anastasimatarion, translated and composed of the old system of serdar Dionisie Fotino, dedicated to His Holiness and God’s Chosen, Bishop Filoteiu of Buzău by Anton Pann]. I shall provide the
21 Ms. gr. 185 – Ms. 198, year 1809, Library of Romanian Patriarchate, f. 245 r; “This is my composition, of Dionisie from the city of Patras in the Peloponnese, which was created only for the satisfaction of music lovers who can rightly appreciate the order and the tone. The style is concise, the compositions are harmonized, the melos is set according to the established order. It should therefore be learned by those educated in music, and not by the uneducated or the tone deaf. And it is to be in remembrance of the true music lover, Ştefan, who commissioned this composition and my exhorter, whom I worked for.” (translated by sister Paraschiva Grigoriu). 22 Ms. gr. 741 (527), donated to BAR by Metropolitan Iosif Naniescu in 1894, f. 1 r; The new short / concise harmonized Anastasimatarion, drafted according to the established order by serdar Dionisie Fotino, and now interpreted according to the new method by me.” (translated by sister Paraschiva Grigoriu). 23 Ms. gr. 741 (527), f. 8 v. 24 Διονυσιου Φωτεινου, Αναστασιματαριον νεον, Έπιμέλια-Πρόλογος-Σχόλια άπο τον Nicolae Gheorghiţă Μουσικολόγο, Ιερά Καλύβη «Εύαγγελισμος της Θεοτόκου», Ιερά Σκήτη Αγίου Δημητρου-Λάκκου, ΑΠΟΝ ΟΡΟΣ, 2009.
198 transliteration of the preface of the book, which contains important information about it:
“To His Holiness and God’s Chosen Bishop D.D. Filotei of Buzău.
Your Holiness!
This Anastasimatarion was composed according to the old system by serdar Dionisie Fotino in 1809 and, as the author was embraced by the sons of the country back then, it was taught until 1816 to the youth, among which was one, the late, His Holiness, Bishop Chesarie of Buzău, who had been a singer of the worthy of remembrance Iosif, the first Bishop of Arges, when I, too, attended as an auditor with him; then also came Petru Efesiu with the new system of the Art of Music, the old system was abandoned and they all followed this one, as it was simpler and easy to learn. After that, being chosen and enthroned as Bishop Chesarie of Buzău, seeing that this Anastasimatarion remained forgotten, knowing the artful composition and the gentle song in it and wishing very much for his singers to interpret it, he called on me and urged me first to translate it in the original Greek, and then in Romanian, wanting to print it and publish it; he also ordered me to begin to work on prodobii of the evenings and the mornings from all mineie to regulate them according to rhythms and tones similar to the Greek, as it is the funeral song of our Lord Jesus Christ and podobii in this Anastasimatarion. When both Anastasimatarions still needed work, His Holiness moved to the eternal palaces, The Anastasimatarion in Greek language burned in 1847 in the Church of St. Demetrius; and the Romanian one remained until today, waiting for a patron to publish it. Your Holiness, as the one who has been apprentice and in all a follower of the good works of the late Bishop, and wishing to carry out what he had had in mind and remained unfinished, death ending his life, you favoured this Anastasimatarion as well to bring out to light. And in order not to bury it with me in the grave, you gave the necessary aid and you interceded for its printing. Now that it is finished, please receive it and give it to be taught at Seminar, for your Holiness’ eternal remembrance; and I always remain
Your Holiness’s Humble servant A. Pann”
199 From the Preface of The Anastasimatarion, we find out that it was composed around 1809 and has been studied in schools until the coming of Petru Efesiu in Bucharest (1816). The old system was replaced with the new one also because the latter was easier to learn. Among the disciples of serdar Dionisie Fotino, Anton Pann mentions the future Bishop of Buzau, Chesarie, who was then singer of the Bishop of Arges, Iosif. Among the students was also the author of the Preface (Anton Pann). Because the Anastasimatarion had been forgotten, Bishop Chesarie of Buzău urged Anton Pann to translate it first into Greek, then into Romanian, in order to be printed. While Anton Pann was finishing the two Anastasimatarions, Bishop Chesarie passed away. In 1847, following a fire at St. Demetrios Church, the Greek Anastasimatarion disappeared, and Anton Pann thought it was burned. In 1854, Anton Pann printed the Anastasimatarion of Fotino which he had translated from the old system to the new, from Greek into Romanian. Let us observe in the three titles mentioned two stages of the adaptation of chants to Romanian: the first stage is the translation of The Anastasimatarion of Dionisie Fotino by Anton Pann, from the old system to the new one, but preserving the Greek text; the second stage refers to the Romanian translation of the Greek text; the text is written using Cyrillic letters. The musicologist Nicolae Gheorghiţă believes that after Petru Efesiul came to Bucharest, in 1816, Dionisie Fotino fell into obscurity, as his musical concerns were set aside for his historical concerns.25 To analyze Anton Pann’s methods of interpretation and translation rules, I have chosen two stichera from First Mode, written in the stichirarica form, and three musical examples, studied comparatively: stichera “Our prayers...”; stichera “Heavens, rejoice,...“. For each musical phrase, observations will be made, outlining what was involved in the process of adaptation to Romanian. Our prayers... /First Mode (see Fig. 4 and Fig. 6) – Comparative analysis from Ms. gr. 185 – 198, 1809, The Library of the Romanian Patriarchate (the first example from each musical phrase noted a); Ms. gr. 741/527, 1853-1854, BAR (the second example from each musical phrase noted b); Anastasimatarul românesc [The Romanian Anastasimatarion] of Anton Pann, 1854 (the third example from each musical phrase, noted by c)
25 Nicolae Gheorghiţă, Dionysios Foteinos (1777-1821), Opera muzicală. Anastasimatarul [Dionysios Foteinos (1777-1821), Musical Work. The Anastasimatarion], p. 17.
200 Musical phrase 1
In Ms. gr. 185 – Ms. 198, the martyriai appear less, while in the new system, the musical phrases are well defined. Where the martyriai does not appear in Ms. gr. 185 – Ms. 198 I only noted the sound in the parentheses. Frequently, Anton Pann transforms a musical phrase from the old system into two phrases in the new one. Titus Moisescu explains that the new system does not simplify notation, but establishes a more rigorous framework of notation: “In terms of graphics, the old neumatic writing was preserved, with the necessary adaptations to the new theoretical concept, such as, for example, noting the ftorals, the martyriae and other signs specific to the new system, signs that they also converge towards complexity.”26 The Romanian text of the chant Our prayers... has more syllables than the Greek one. Anton Pann solves the problem by repeating some melismatic structures, as seen in the musical phrase 1.c. from AP 1854 (The Anastasimatarion printed by Anton Pann): repeating three times the following musical structures:
The interpretation in two ways of the clasma in E.g. 1.b. should be noted:
26 Titus Moisescu, Al cincilea sistem de notaţie neumatică bizantină. De la diatonism la cromatism [The Fifth Byzantine Neumatic Notation System. From Diatonism to Chromatism], in “Acta Musicae Byzantinae”, Centrul de Studii Bizantine, Iaşi, vol. III, April 2001, p 33.
201
The oligon with 2 apli from the end, from E.g. 1.a., is interpreted differently: in E.g. 1.b. it appears as superior embroidery; in E.g. 1.c. it changes the interpretation of the final note due to the occurrence of a Zo towards the end. In both examples, the first time is divided:
Musical phrase 2
Isachi disappears in the new system, as it can be noted from all Romanian Anastasimatarions from the XIXth century; it is possible to preserve them only in writing in the manuscripts that mark the transition from one notation to another, as in old Romanian certain sounds were recorded in writing, but were not pronounced in speech (see the case of the -u ending in old Romanian). The text in Romanian metrically prevented the departure directly from Ga or from Di. Whereas in E.g. 2.a. it starts from Ga, in E.g. 2.b. it starts from Di, and in E.g. 2.c. it also starts from Di through a skip from Pa. This allows it to reach the sound Ni, enhancing the beauty of the chant. Otherwise, the three phrases are similar.
202 Lyghisma, a sign that in the old system indicates “the flexing of the voice, legato and the first tremolo sound,”27 disappeared from the new system and is interpreted, as we see from the examples above, as follows, being replaced with the homalon (in E.g. 2.b. and E.g. 2.c.).
An interesting combination of notes from the old system is that of the apostrophos located underneath the ison. It appears repetitively in cadences on Pa, in First Mode, stichirarica, forming a well-known formula. The difference between E.g. 2.b. and E.g. 2.c. resides only in the writing of the formula and not in the interpretation:
Musical phrase 3
27 Grigore Panţiru, Notaţia si ehurile muzicii byzantine [Notation and Echos of Byzantine Music], Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1971, p. 70.
203 Piasma, the sign that starts to be recorded in the manuscripts of the mid-Byzantine period, appears, in our case, in the combination apostrophos with clasma – apostrophos – elaphron and is often found in first mode.
One can see that the first note with piasma is transcribed with accent both in E.g. 3.b. and in E.g. 3.c. In E.g. 3.b., the second epistrophos halves its time value by gorgon. Piasma, in Greek (πίασμα), means pressing down. In E.g. 3.c., piasma is replaced by psifiston placed under oligon. It is possible that, at some point, several musical signs might have had the same meaning/interpretation. Therefore, the Crysanthine reform can be said to have simplified a difficult notation in which many of the cheironomic signs had come to overlap as intonation. Moreover, about the consonant signs in the new system (bareia, homalon, antikenoma, psifiston and heteron), Titus Mosescu states that “they have a somewhat similar meaning, of superior embroidery.”28 Antikenoma (άντικένομα) in Greek means emptying against and was part of the dynamic signs from the paleo-Byzantine notation period. It played the role of liaison between two or more sounds like a legato. Evolving in the following centuries, antikenoma is performed today as an échappé note. In E.g. 3.b. and in E.g. 3.c., antikenoma is transcribed by heteron. Simple antikenoma was written in the old system under apostrophos with gorgon, while in the new system it is written under simple oligon or with gorgon, followed by a descending sign.29 In fact, in a certain period, two different neumes have come to have the same interpretation or explanation. How did the reformers solve the dilemma? One of the signs disappeared and was replaced by another or changed its interpretation.
28 Titus Moisescu, Al cincilea sistem de notaţie neumatică bizantină. De la diatonism la cromatism [The Fifth Byzantine Neumatic Notation System. From Diatonism to Chromatism], p. 33. 29 Grigore Panţiru, Notaţia si ehurile muzicii byzantine [Notation and Echos of Byzantine Music], p. 197.
204 Musical phrase 4 The first two examples are similar, while the Romanian phrase no longer resembles the Greek one but is enriched, making the perfect cadence on pa and not on ga.
Musical phrase 5
205
Other uses of lyghisma can be observed in the fifth musical phrase. In E.g. 5.b., there is the following translations of lyghisma into the new system:
In the first transcribed example, in the new system there is another gorgon. It is not known if the lyghisma acted in this situation as a gorgon. In E.g. 5.c. notes last one time each, compared to E.g. 5.b.:
In the second example, lyghisma is a part of the cadential formula. Perhaps its function was similar to that of clasma, making a superior embroidery of ga. Piasma appears again in the combination apostrophos with clasma – apostrophos – elaphron, only it is transcribed differently in E.g. 5.b., compared to the case of E.g. 3.b. In E.g. 5.c., the transcription is done simply by lowering the notes with one step, like in E.g. 3.c. Anton Pann, in the Romanian version, opts to simplify the examples with piasma:
To see other uses of piasma, I have chosen three examples from other songs of first mode, from the Vespers:
206 Musical phrase 6
Piasma has the same interpretation both in E.g. 6.b., and in E.g. 6.c.:
Musical phrase 7
Pu ne Doa mne (stra a je)
In E.g. 7.c., the formula in which piasma appears is more developed, containing a syllable in addition to the first two (stra-):
207 Musical phrase 8
In the examples below there is a simple interpretation of piasma without superior embroideries:
Heavens rejoice... / Mode I (see Fig. 5, Fig. 7 and Fig. 9)
Musical phrase 9
208 Piasma has an interpretation that I identified in E.g. 8.c. An oscillation can be seen between interpreting the sign simply, by three apostrophoi, or as melismatic. Clasma is also interpreted, in the second case, in E.g. 9.b., the 2 times are divided by gorgon. In E.g. 9.c., oligon with clasma is interpreted using a melismatic formula:
Oligon with 2 apli is transcribed differently. In E.g. 9.c., the leap is of four skipped steps, which enhances the beauty of song, compared to E.g. 9.b. where it is of is three skipped steps. In the second part of phrase no. 9, one can see a potentiation of musical expressivity at AP. In E.g. 9.c. the first two times divide, compared to E.g. 9.b., where only the first time divides:
Musical phrase 10
209 Piasma appears within this song also with an interpretation identified above as well. The 2 apostrophoi accompanied by clasma and the double apostrophos (Syndesmos apostrophoi) at the end are interpreted in the new system by division. The interpretation is identical in the two texts, in E.g. 10.b. and in E.g. 10.c.:
Musical phrase 11
Lyghisma appears in two different contexts and is interpreted similarly both in E.g. 11.b., as in E.g. 11.c. The first interpretation is also found in the stichera Our prayers ..., in musical phrase 2. The second
210 interpretation, in which the lyghisma is followed by ison with 2 apli, created the cadential formula specific for First Mode, stichirarica:
The same cadential formula, on pa or on ke, could also be written in another way, in the old system (see E.g. 2.b. and 2.c.)
These last examples confirm that, at one time, there were more possibilities to write the same melody: with lyghisma or with apostrophos under the ison (such as the case of the cadence formula discussed). This could be a reason why a reform was necessary to simplify things, as some neumes reached a synonymy relationship, while others had too many interpretations. This is a phenomenon that occurs in the sacramentary, created by a certain stereotype of religious music. The singer who can sing well feels the need to surpass the set scheme and, therefore, to introduce his or her own modes of expression, that is, small creations, melisms, embellishments, each time interpreted differently. In Gregorian music one can hardly find this rare phenomenon because polyphony implies a certain dynamic, though we can also find there heterophonies. Byzantine music, par excellence a monodic music, focuses on the freedom of expression.
Musical phrase 12
211 Psifiston and piasma have the following interpretation in E.g. 12.b.:
The interpretation is also preserved in the Romanian version in E.g. 12.c. The final oligon followed by 2 apli has an interesting interpretation; the first time is divided into a triolet both in E.g. 12.b., and in E.g. 12.c.:
Musical phrase 13
The Romanian phrase preserves the martyria on ga, the modulation, but changes the melody. In E.g. 13.b. there are the following interpretations:
212 It can be noticed above that the oligon with 2 apli is divided, being interpreted as an oligon with clasma followed by an oligon with gorgon, and the homalon is replaced by bareia. In the second example, clasma divides the neuma by introducing an ison. The apostrophos in front of the final sound create a superior embroidery and the first time from the oligon with 2 apli also divides, in the third example above.
Musical phrase 14
In E.g. 14.b., the oligon with 2 apli is chanted as in the previous situation in E.g. 13.b. Lyghisma appears interpreted differently from previous examples in E.g. 14.b. The Romanian phrase is altered, featuring the semi-cadence on Ke, similar to that in E.g. 9.b. It is clear that Anton Pann liked more the expressive formulas he created and, therefore, abandoned the Greek model:
213 Musical phrase 15
It should be observed that, in general, in the old system, the penultimate neuma followed by oligon with 2 apli divides, as well as the first time of the oligon with 2 apli. Below there is an interesting example, in Ms. gr. 741 (527):
Musical phrase 16
214 Piasma has an interpretation also found in the above examples, and lyghisma, both in E.g. 16.b., and in E.g. 16.c., is part of a cadential formula, on Zo:
It is worth mentioning the occurrence of the digorgon (triolet) at the beginning of the phrase, given that it was not used in the old system. I believe it is possible that the phrase in E.g. 16.b. might have been influenced by the Romanian phrase. Translations from the old system to the new one were not accurate and translators, when translating the phrases into the new system, made some changes, as seen above. Ms. gr. 741 (527) was interpreted in 1853-1854, about the same time when Anton Pann also worked on the Anastasimatarion written in Romanian, which he edited in 1854. If he completed them simultaneously, there may be some contamination between Ms. gr. 741 (527) and The Anastasimatarion printed by Anton Pann.
Musical phrase 17
215 When the old system presented petaste followed by bareia and elaphron, the new system interpreted them as follows:
A similar situation we find in E.g. 14.b. The elements analyzed so far show that in the old music leaps were generally avoided and the slow progression was preferred. In this sense, here is a clear example from Ms. gr. 741 (527):
Lyghisma and piasma have interpretations known from the other examples, in E.g. 17.b.:
The Romanian text deviates from the manuscripts by an expressive cadential formula on Di:
Conclusions The analysis above leads to the conclusion that the neumatic notation before 1814 was “synoptic”, “shorthand”, whereas the new notation is “interpretive”, “analytical”30. The only way to identify how they chanted before the reform is the comparative study, also used in linguistics to recreate extinct languages such as Sanskrit or Indo- European. This is discussed by Gregorios Stathis, who focuses on the five main elements promoted by the new method: “1. The polysyllabic
30 See in this regard the observations of Titus Moisescu, Al cincilea sistem de notaţie neumatică bizantină. De la diatonism la cromatism [The Fifth Byzantine Neumatic Notation System. From Diatonism to Chromatism], pp. 32-37.
216 replacement of the paralaghia, the old solfeggio system (annanes, neanes, nana, aghia, aanes, neeanes, aneanes, neaghie, nenano) with the mono-syllables pa, vu, ga, di, ke, zo, ni, pa (which would correspond to the notes: do, re, mi, fa, sol, la, si, do); 2. More precise time measurement for the duration of sounds; 3. Defining the size of the intervals between tones (high, low and lower) and regulating the structure of the scales in all three genres – diatonic, chromatic and enharmonic; 4. Reducing the number of neumes and clarifying their meaning; 5. “Analysis” or “exegesis” of all music "theseis” and the music content of the great instances of chironomia from the old notation and the full transcription of this methodical content in the notation system of the new method.”31 The new method aimed to transcribe meticulously the shorthand writing of the old method. Starting from the musical phrases of the new method towards those of the old method, one can reconstruct, using the comparative method, the music before 1814. This study aimed to bring some light on the process of adapting church chants to Romanian. What did Anton Pann understand by adaptation to Romanian? How far is the model respected and what did Anton Pann understand by innovation? The full analysis of two stichera and other three examples revealed several aspects. Anton Pann delimited musical phrases by martyriae, characteristic of “the new system.” For Ms. gr. 185 – Ms. 198 I indicated the martyriae in parentheses where it was not mentioned, in an attempt to see if there are different cadences in the given examples. Cadences are the same with one exception: the musical phrase IV from stichera Our prayers ... from AP 1854. Among the cheironomic signs, I frequently found the simple antikenoma, the lyghisma, the homalon, the piasma, the psifiston. I also found other cheironomic signs in Ms. 741 (527), such as kylisma, tromiko etc., which will be the subject of a continuation of this study in an extensive paper. Simple antikenoma has the following transcriptions in the new system: musical phrase 3: it is substituted with the heteron;
31 Gregorios Th. Stathis, An Analysis of the Sticheron “Ton ilion krypsanta", de Germanos, Bishop of New Patras. (The Old “Synoptic" and the New “Analytical" Method of Byzantine Notation), in “Studies in Easter Chant", vol. IV, St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, Crestwood, N.Y., 1979, pp. 177-227, apud Titus Moisescu, in Al cincilea sistem de notaţie neumatică bizantină. De la diatonism la cromatism [The Fifth Byzantine Neumatic Notation System. From Diatonism to Chromatism], p. 36.
217 in E.g. 10.b.: it is not transcribed; however, it may have been chanted as an échappé note, although it was no longer written;
in E.g. 13.b.: it is not transcribed; the division that occurs is related to the presence of the clasma;
Lyghisma is transcribed as follows: musical phrase 2: it is substituted with the homalon;
in E.g. 5.b.: it shortens the fourth neuma, as if it would be an échappé note;
musical phrases 5, 11, 16: lyghisma makes a superior embroidery, like a tremolo, achieving the final cadence, specific to mode I stichirarica, in the first case; semi-cadence, in the second case; imperfect cadence on zo, in the last case:
musical phrase 11: it is no longer transcribed;
in E.g. 14.b.: it divides the sound;
218 The homalon was identified only once, in E.g. 13.b., where it is replaced by bareia:
Piasma occurs frequently and has the following transcriptions: Piasma appears in the combination apostrophos with clasma – apostrophos – elaphron and is interpreted through an accent created by the sound supported on petaste in E.g. 3.b. or supported on psifiston in E.g. 3.c.
in E.g. 5.b.: it makes a superior embroidery;
it is transcribed by division in: in musical phrase 6:
in E.g. 8.b.: in E.g. 9.b.: piasma no longer serves to emphasize the neuma, the mentioned structure is transcribed through three apostrophoi:
musical phrase 12: combination between superior embroidery and division;
The psifiston has an accentuating role and is transcribed by neumes supported on the oligon: musical phrase 3:
219 Sometimes it is transcribed exactly, because it was also preserved in the new system: musical phrase 5:
The accent can also be achieved by eliminating the psifiston at the beginning of the musical phrase and replacing it with a gorgon (Ms. gr. 741/527). The neuma that begins with gorgon receives accent:
in E.g. 7.b.:
The psifiston is also transcribed through the antikenoma with 1 apli, preserving the idea of accent (Ms. gr. 741/527).
in E.g. 8.b.:
An interesting transcription of the psifiston is the following: in E.g. 12.b.: the kentimata make a superior embroidery.
Regarding the time signs, I insisted on clasma and apli. These time signs accompany neuma, indicating superior embroideries or division of sounds: in E.g. 1.b.:
in E.g. 9.b.:
220 in E.g. 10.b.:
musical phrase 12:
In AP 1854, from a total of 17 musical phrases, I found the following: no full copy of the melody in Greek; 9 partial copies of the Greek melody; 8 phrases completely changed. It is important to note that no full copies of the melody were identified. Partial copies are due to the difference of syllables between the Greek text and the Romanian or to the Romanian metric, which differs from the Greek. Thus, the process of adapting to Romanian means, on the one hand, adapting the music to the Romanian metric and, on the other hand, creating a new melody, preserving the voice structure, beginning and ending with the same martyriae. The almost equal percentage reached proves that Anton Pann always tried to find new ways to enhance the expressiveness of the melody. The uniformization of Byzantine music has led, in a way, to the loss of its specificity. By eliminating the melisms, introducing tones and halftones, and providing the progression of melody more through leaps rather than by slow progress and glissando, Romanian music of Byzantine tradition became closer to the Western music system. I believe that the current trend of highly melismatic chant is a response to the tendency of simplifying this music, with the result that sometimes the introduction of melisms is exaggerated. The fact is that the Romanian sacramentary is going through an identity crisis. Time will clear things, and going back in time we will help us see clearly where we are in this chain of the evolution of the notation system. I do not believe that the reintroduction of cheironomic signs from the old system would solve the problem. It would be like going back to the Cyrillic alphabet or the Romanian language of the 19th or the 18th centuries. Such a thesis
221 advocated by some contemporary psaltes is unrealistic, contradicting the natural evolution of culture. This is why many cheironomic signs disappeared because, as noted above, a single sign was interpreted in n ways. It was necessary to make an analytical presentation of a synoptic notation, because the interpretation was varied and it even varied from singer to singer. From among so many Romanian psaltes and composers of music of Byzantine tradition, each singer can choose what he wants to sing, depending on location (church or auditorium) and depending on time (liturgical or secular). I do not think that a reform of sacramentary grammar would be necessary and topical, as it would only contribute to satisfying the pride of some psaltes who want acknowledgement by any means. Reform must arise from some specific, objective needs. There is no need of reform for reform’s sake. It is good to have varied songs and to be able to approach other sacramental musical styles. Implementing a single vision would reduce the freedom, the creativity of psaltes, contradicting the very evolution of the musical cultural phenomenon. This is the beauty of this sacramentary: although its canons are strict, as the cadences and the martyriae impose a kind of rigidity, within the phrase, nevertheless, a new melody and a new interpretation can always be created. “If the admiration for old musical structures [...] is certainly a natural attitude in various modern and contemporary researchers, however, denigration based on questionable evidence of at least two centuries of music (18th – 19th centuries) shows an unrealistic attitude and an arrogant position to address the old-new relation, applied to the musical phenomenon. The apologists of (“pure”) Byzantine music forget that in the two centuries of supposed decadence the great Romanian psaltery was born, equally admired by believers as that of the early centuries of Orthodox church music. Asserting a sovereign contempt towards the music promoted by Hieromonk Macarie, Anton Pann, Dimitrie Suceveanu had negative consequences, demobilising those who wanted to study it and publish studies and articles.”32
32 Pr. Dr. Florin Bucescu, Cântarea psaltică în manuscrisele moldoveneşti din sec. XIX. Ghidul manuscriselor saltice-Moldova, sec. XIX [Psaltic Chant in Moldovan Manuscripts from the XIXth Century. The Guide to Psaltic Manuscripts – Moldova, XIXth century], vol. I, Editura Artes, Iaşi, 2009, pp. 38-39.
222
Fig. 1 ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟΣ ΦΩΤΕΙΝΟΣ (1777-1821)
223
Fig. 2 ΑΝΑΣΤΑΣΙΜΑΡΙΟΝ ΝΕΟΝ, f. 184r Ms. gr. 185 – Ms. 198 (year 1809), Library of the Romanian Patriarchate
224
Fig. 3 ΑΝΑΣΤΑΣΙΜΑΡΙΟΝ ΝΕΟΝ, f. 1r Ms. gr. 741 (527), year 1853-1854, BAR
225
Fig. 4 ΑΝΑΣΤΑΣΙΜΑΡΙΟΝ ΝΕΟΝ, f. 2v Ms. gr. 741 (527), year 1853-1854 BAR
226
Fig. 5 ΑΝΑΣΤΑΣΙΜΑΡΙΟΝ ΝΕΟΝ, f. 3r Ms. gr. 741 (527), year 1853-1854, BAR
227
Fig. 6 ΑΝΑΣΤΑΣΙΜΑΡΙΟΝ ΝΕΟΝ, f. 185v Ms. gr. 185 – Ms. 198 (year 1809), Library of the Romanian Patriarchate
228
Fig. 7 ΑΝΑΣΤΑΣΙΜΑΡΙΟΝ ΝΕΟΝ, f. 186r Ms. gr. 185 – Ms. 198 (year 1809), Library of the Romanian Patriarchate
229
Fig. 8 Anastasimatarul românesc [Romanian Anastasimatarion] of Anton Pann, 1854
230
\
Fig. 9 Anastasimatarul românesc [Romanian Anastasimatarion] of Anton Pann, 1854, leaf 8
231 ABSTRACT
This study aims to clarify the process of chant adaptation to the Romanian language. What did Anton Pann understand by adaptation? What are the limits of this pattern and what does Anton Pann see as innovation? To answer these questions, I compare the development of chant exegesis at Anton Pann based on a complete analysis of two stichera and other three examples. More exactly, I compare and contrast three musical sources: 185th-198th Greek Manuscript, Library of the Romanian Patriarchate, 741st-527th Greek Manuscript, 1853-1854, BAR, Anton Pann's Romanian Anastasimatarion, 1854. The study finds that, for Anton Pann, this process has the meaning of adapting the music to specific Romanian standards, on the one hand, and creating a new song, which preserves the structure, the beginning and the end, on the other hand. The study also notes Anton Pann’s interest in highlighting the expressivity of the song.
Bibliography Barbu-Bucur Sebastian, Filothei sin Agăi Jipei. Psaltichie rumănească, vol. I, Catavasierul, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1981. Barbu-Bucur Sebastian, Manuscrise muzicale româneşti la Muntele Athos. Anastasimatarul lui Mihalache Moldovlahul, studiu achiziţionat de Uniunea Compozitorilor şi Muzicologilor, no. 22 679. Breazul George, Patrium Carmen, Editura Scrisul Românesc, Craiova, 1941. Bucescu Florin, Cântarea psaltică în manuscrisele moldovenești din sec. XIX. Ghidul manuscriselor psaltice-Moldova, sec. XIX, vol. I, Editura Artes, Iași, 2009. Catrina Constantin, Ipostaze ale muzicii de tradiţie bizantină din România, Editura Muzicală, București, 2003. Ciobanu Gheorghe, Cultura psaltică românească în secolele al XVII-lea şi al XVIII-lea, in: ,,Muzica”, Bucureşti, an XXIII, no. 3, martie 1973, p. 46. Ciobanu Gheorghe, Raportul dintre muzica liturgică românească şi muzica bizantină – comunicare la I. Congresso internazionale di studi di musica bizantina liturgica e orientale, Grottaferatta (Italia), 6-11 maggio 1968; publicată in: Studii de etnometodologie şi bizantinologie, vol. II, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1979. Fotino Dionisie, Νέον Άναστασιματάριον, Ms. gr. 185 – Ms. 198, din colecția psaltică Livre de musique, Biblioteca Patriarhiei Române, anul 1809. Gheorghiță Nicolae, Διονυσιου Φωτεινου, Αναστασιματαριον νεον, Έπιμέλια-Πρόλογος-Σχόλια άπὸ τὸν Nicolae Gheorghiță Μουσικολόγο, Ιερᾶ Καλύβη «Εύαγγελισμὸς τῆς Θεοτόκου», Ιερᾶ Σκήτη Άγίου Δημητρου-Λάκκου, ΑΓΙΟΝ ΟΡΟΣ, 2009.
232 Ionescu Gheorghe C., Muzica bizantină în România, Dicţionar cronologic, cu o prefaţă de Academician Virgil Cândea, German-English translation: Carmen Simina Ionescu; French translation: Magda Bindea, Editura Sagittarius, București, 2003. Macarie Ieromonahul, Irmologhion sau catavasieriu musicesc, Bucureşti, 1823. Moisescu Titus, Al cincilea sistem de notație neumatică bizantină. De la diatonism la cromatism, in „Acta Musicae Byzantinae”, Centrul de Studii Bizantine, Iași, vol. III, aprilie, 2001. Moisescu Titus, Cântarea monodică bizantină pe teritoriul României. Prolegomene bizantine, vol. II, Variante stilistice şi de formă în muzica bisericească, edited by Constantin Secară, Editura Muzicală, 2003. Pann Anton, Anastasimatarul, Tipografia lui Anton Pann, Bucureşti, 1854. Pann Anton, Heruvico-Chenonicar, Bucuresci, 1846. Panțiru Grigore, Notația și ehurile muzicii bizantine, Editura Muzicală, București, 1971. Vasile Vasile, Istoria muzicii bizantine și evoluția ei în spiritualitatea românească, vol. II, Editura Interprint, București, 1997.
233
©2014 Editura Artes Str.Horia, nr.7-9, Iaşi, România Tel.: 0040-232.212.549 Fax: 0040-232.212.551 www.artesiasi.ro [email protected] Tipar digital realizat la tipografia Editurii „Artes”
234