Znamenny chant
The main view of other Russian. church singing. Name comes from staroslav. the words "banner", i.e. sign. Banners or hooks were called non-linear signs used to record tunes. Z. r. was a monody, performed in unison; only at the later stages of its development (not earlier than the middle of the 16th century) did elements of polyphony appear in it. Time of occurrence of Z. r. cannot be established with complete accuracy. S. V. Smolensky believed that it had already taken shape by the end of the 10th century. D. V. Razumovsky, V. M. Metallov and A. V. Preobrazhensky believed that Z. r. was brought from Byzantium after the baptism of Russia. V. M. Belyaev claimed that he has an original, Russian. origin and arose in the 11th century. The most probable assumption is that Z. r., in its original foundations borrowed from Byzantium, developed as an independent kind of singing in the 12th century, when Christianity spread to the people. Masses and Byzantium. forms began to be exposed to Nar. music language. Z. r. developed within the system of osmosis. Eight voices with their special hymns. the texts made up the "pillar", i.e. cycle repeated every 8 weeks; therefore Z. r. sometimes called pillar singing (less often it is called hook singing). The osmosis system was a sum of well-established melodies, formulas (chants), which served as material for singing the text in one voice or another. This type of music compositions based on formulas were characteristic of both Byzantine and Western European. Gregorian chant. He reflected the general typical. features of the Middle Ages. arts. thinking. Chants Z. r. there were brief diatonic motifs. warehouse in the volume of a third or a quart. From three or four chants, the gospel of a whole chant was formed. The proverbs are preserved in the records of the 16th century, but their origin is undoubtedly earlier.
Poglasic 1st voice. Manuscript 17th c. State Public Library. M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Collection of N. K. Mikhailovsky, O. No. 14, sheet 47.
In glory. translated from Greek syllabic. the versification was not preserved, but the structure of the chants remained the same, and the chanter was required to match the rhythm of the music to the prosody of the text. Singing texts based on the chants of the gossip, the masters of singing used techniques close to the principles of nar. songwriting: singing one or another sound of a song as a reference and moving the support to the non-reference sound adjacent to it. Predominance in the records of the 12th-13th centuries. simple banners denoting one or two sounds, and the repeated repetition of such signs give reason to believe that the tunes of the early Z. r. were simple both in terms of rhythm and melodic. drawing.
Melodies Z. r. in the early period they were divided into self-voiced and similar. The similar ones differed from the samoglasnov in greater originality of the melodies. revolutions and the clarity of the construction of the lines, which made it possible to use them for singing unsung texts. Self-voiced and similar, according to tradition, were introduced into the chorus. books of the 16th-17th centuries, when the same chants were already sung in a singsong manner.
Self-voiced 1st voice. The same manuscript, folio 50 and reverse.
Similar to the 1st voice. The same manuscript, folios 52 and 53.
Fund of singing Z. r. gradually increased, simultaneously expanding their range. He reached a minor seventh, and the entire scale - duodecimes. Laconic motifs have grown into wide-singing ones, and the melody as a whole has grown into a cantilena with flowery high-pitched and rhythmic ones. contours. Improved composition technique. Masters of the 15th century were no longer limited to elementary methods of presenting the melody: singing the reference tone and moving it. They used more complex techniques: repetition, variation. development, reduction and expansion of tunes, sequences. The tunes of chants were sometimes decorated with the so-called. feats and faces. It was a kind of anniversaries. The first were marked with a sign in the form of the letter fita, in muses. respect differed in the length of the chant. The faces were more concise. To the beginning 16th century all the hymns of Sunday services of eight voices, holidays of the whole year, etc. were sung. everyday life, i.e. chants of daily worship - vespers, matins and liturgies.
Melodika Z. r. throughout the history of its development was smooth. Tertsovye and fourth jumps within melodic. lines were allowed only in those cases when they were included in one or another chants, the combination of chants into one melodic. the line was carried out in steps. Rhythm was the same smoothness and uniformity. Banners with "braces" that increase the duration by half were used relatively rarely, especially rhythmic ones. figures from a quarter with a dot and an eighth. In conclusion, the cadence was a gradual and uniform movement of the voice in the volume of a trichord or tetrachord, associated with the singing of one of its steps, on which the tune ended.
Z. r. was recorded with a special ideographic notation, which was based on the so-called. Paleo-Byzantine non-mental notation (see Byzantine music). As the fund of chants increases, the chants expand. scale, the development of chants and the complication of composition techniques, the notation itself became more complicated. In the 15th century in connection with the manner of decorating melodies with anniversaries, which was widespread at that time, the notation underwent especially great changes. Fits were written in abbreviated form, with the help of a special "secretly closed" combination of banners. The variety of anniversaries necessitated the systematization of "secretly closed" banners. There were collections of fit (fitniks), which were used in composing tunes and in teaching singing. The continued complication of the "secretly closed" banners led to the appearance of "divorces" in the fittings, i.e. a lengthy record of encrypted fit with ordinary banners. There were similar collections of tunes (called kokizniki); they usually indicated only the phrase of the text, with which the given tune (kokiza) was sung. At the end of the 17th century feats and kokises were translated into five-linear notation.
In the 16th century some Znamenny melodies were complicated mainly due to the increase in duration and the use of syncopations. As a result of the transformation of the chants, a new style of monody arose - a track chant, characterized by a slow and heavy movement.
The line of the chant of the 8th tone of the Znamenny chant and the melody of the travel chant. Manuscript con. 17 - early 18th century State Public Library. M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Collection of MP Pogodin, No 418, sheets 55 and 63 rev.
Track melodies were originally written in znamenny notation, but as they became more complex, a special track notation was created on the basis of znamenny notation.
K ser. 17th century in the song art, there has been a tendency to reduce lengthy melodies for the sake of greater clarity of the text and a better sense of harmony. The abbreviated melodies began to be called the small chant, and the original ones - the big chant. In the singer In books, usually along with the chant of the small chant, the chant of the same name of the large chant was also recorded.
Melodies Z. r. were also used in the early forms of polyphony in the so-called three-line singing (see Line singing), as well as in demestven chant. In the 2nd half of the 17th century. many of the famous one-headed. chants were translated into five-line notation, and composers of partes singing harmonized most of these chants. In addition, they widely used Z. p. in melodies of his own composition.
In connection with the approval of new forms of chorus. culture in the 2nd half. 17th century Z. r. lost its former meaning. It was preserved in hook notation among the Old Believers, and in the five-line ch. arr. in the repertoire of the monastery choirs and in the singing of deacons. In order to protect Z. r. from distortions and the establishment of uniformity of the text, the Synod of the Russian Church published in 1772 in a "square" note (see Notation), in the so-called. tsefautny key, "Use of Church musical singing", "Irmology of musical singing", "Octoich of musical singing" and "Feasts of musical singing". In 1891 "Lenten and colored triode" was published. (These books have been reprinted.)
Attention to Z. r. increases again at the beginning. 19th century in connection with the awakening of interest in Russian. nat. music. The first to Z. r. addressed D. S. Vortnyansky, although his harmonizations were a transcription of melodies taken not from synodal publications, but existing in Western-Ukrainian. church singing. Later, P. I. Turchaninov, N. M. Potulov, A. F. Lvov were engaged in the harmonization of melodies from synodal publications. Their arrangements, however, are not free from beings. shortcomings. Turchaninov, trying to subordinate the znamenny melody to a certain size, distorted it. Potulov retained the asymmetric rhythm of the Znamenny melody and did not allow its alteration, but, considering almost all the sounds of the melody as carriers of certain harmonics. functions, created on this basis a heavy and monotonous harmonization. Lvov followed an asymmetrical rhythm and achieved clarity and transparency of harmonization, but used the harmonic. minor, not characteristic of Z. r. The problem of harmonization Z. r. interested M. I. Glinka. P. I. Tchaikovsky harmonized the department. chants Z. r. in the "All-Night Vigil" (op. 52). But the key to solving the problem of harmonizing Z. r. was found by A. D. Kastalsky in folk-song polyphony. The harmonizations carried out by him in this regard revealed the beauty and nat. the nature of the melody Z. r. S. V. Rachmaninov harmonized several chants of the Z. R. in the All-Night Vigil (op. 37). K Z. r. N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov, M. A. Balakirev, S. V. Smolensky, M. M. Ippolitov-Ivanov, A. T. Grechaninov, P. G. Chesnokov, A. V. Nikolsky, N. Ya Myaskovsky and other composers.
Literature: Razumovsky D., Church singing in Russia, M., 1867; Voznesensky, I., On Church Singing of the Orthodox Greek-Russian Church, vol. 1. Great znamenny melody, K., 1887; Smolensky S., ABC of Znamenny Singing, Kazan, 1888; his own, On Old Russian singing notations, St. Petersburg, 1901; Metallov V., Essay on the history of Orthodox church singing in Russia, Saratov, 1893, M., 1915; his own, ABC of hook singing, M., 1899; his own, Osmoglazie znamenny chant, M., 1899; his own, Liturgical singing of the Russian Church. Pre-Mongol period, M., 1908, (M., 1912); Pokrovsky A., ABC of hook singing, M., 1901; Preobrazhensky A., Cult music in Russia, L., 1924; Brazhnikov M., Ways of development and tasks of deciphering the Znamenny chant of the XII-XVIII centuries, L.-M., 1949; his own, Russian church singing of the XII-XVIII centuries, "Musica antlqua Europae Orientalis. Acta scientifica congresses I. Bydgoszcze. 1966", Warsz., 1966; his, New Monuments of Znamenny Chant, L., 1967; his, Old Russian theory of music, L., 1972; Belyaev V., Music, in the book: History of the culture of ancient Russia, v. 2, M.-L., 1951; his, Old Russian musical writing, M., 1962; Uspensky N., Old Russian singing art, M., 1965, 1971; his, Samples of Old Russian singing art, L., 1968, 1971; Skrebkov S, Russian choral music XVII - early. XVIII century., M., 1969; Levasheva O., Keldysh Yu., Kandinsky A., History of Russian music, vol. 1, M., 1972, ch. 3; Swan A., The znameny chant of the russian church, "MQ", v. XXVI, 1940; Koschmieder E., Die dltesten Novgoroder Hirmologien-Fragmente, Bd 1-2, Munch., 1952-55; Palikarova-Verdeil R., La musique byzantine chez leg Bulgares et les Russes, Cph., 1953; Velimirovic M., Byzantine elements in early Slavic chant, n. 1-2, Cph., 1960. H. D. Uspensky.
Musical encyclopedia. - M.: Soviet encyclopedia, Soviet composer. Ed. Yu. V. Keldysha. 1973-1982 .
Znamenny chant- (hook singing), in the 11th-17th centuries. the main chant of ancient Russian church music. The name is from the name of the signs of banners (or hooks) used to record it. Subordinate to the osmosis system. Used in the works of S.V. Rachmaninov, P.G. ... ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary
Znamenny Chant- a system of ancient Orthodox church chants. The name comes from the Old Slavonic word "banner" - a singing sign. Banners (or hooks) were used to record tunes. Znamenny chant has various variants associated with forms ... ... Orthodoxy. Dictionary-reference
- (hook singing), the main type of ancient Russian church singing (chants were recorded with special signs, banners, or hooks). Known since the 11th century; developed within the system of osmosis (see also Voice). Znamenny chant melodies were used in ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary
Znamenny chant- [znamenny chant, znamenny chant, hook singing], the main singing tradition of Dr. Russia. It became widespread after the adoption of Christianity and is still preserved in liturgical singing. The concept of "znamenny singing" is first encountered in the texts of the ... Orthodox Encyclopedia
The main fund of Russian church tunes. The name comes from the Old Slavonic word "banner". Banners, or hooks (See Hooks), were called non-linear signs used to record tunes. Originally the name Z. r. meant... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia
See: CHANT.
[znamenny chant, znamenny chant, hook singing], the main singing tradition of Dr. Russia. It became widespread after the adoption of Christianity and is still preserved in liturgical singing. The concept of "znamenny singing" is first encountered in the texts of Ser. 17th century (see, for example: “Foreword, from whence and from what time did osmomon singing begin to be in our Rustei land” (until 1652): “sing much to the znamenny singing”; “The legend of various heresies ... contained from ignorance in znamenny books” ( 1651) Monastery of Euphrosyne: "some blasphemous nonsense in the znamenny singing"). This concept is semantically conditional, because it comes from the singer. the term "sign", known from texts from the 1st floor. 15th century (“sign”, later “banner” - a sign, indication, symbol, image, mark, designation, etc.), common to various singers. traditions (pillar, traveling, Kazan, “petia of the red”, demesne key, musical banner). Preservation of the concept of "znamnaya" for one particular singer. tradition, received no later than the XV century. the name "pillar" is obviously associated with its leading role in Russian. church singing since ancient times.
Origin
Z. r. associated with Byzantium. singing (see Art. Byzantine Empire, section "Church singing"), which came to Russia in the 10th century. along with the penetration of Christ. culture (the agreement of 944 by the Christian ambassadors of Prince Igor with Byzantium in the “collection of the church” of St. Prophet Elijah in Kyiv - PVL. 1999. S. 26; probably also the presence of Byzantine clergy and singers surrounded by St. Kng. Olga after her baptism). From the official the adoption of Christianity under blgv. book. Vladimir and the establishment of the Russian metropolia as part of the K-Polish Patriarchate, the influence of the Byzants. chanter tradition has grown significantly. Arrived in Kyiv "Priests of the Queen and Korsun" (Ibid. p. 53), Greek metropolitans and hierarchs, who headed the Russian. dioceses, and their surroundings contributed to the spread and assimilation of not only Byzantium. liturgical rites, originally performed most likely in Greek, but also Byzantine. church singing. To the erected by order of St. book. Vladimir Church of the Tithes The Mother of God, entrusted to Anastas Korsunyanin, possibly as an steward, was assigned to serve the "priests of Korsun" (numerous Greek graffiti existed on the walls of the temple as early as the 17th century). In the XI century. on the mountain next to Tithe c. the “court of demestiki” was located, where the head of the choristers lived, who usually performed the function of a teacher. It is difficult to say whether the domestic (see also: PE. T. 16. S. 751) was a Slav or had a Greek. origin; the latter seems quite probable. The choir of the cathedral metropolitan church of St. Sophia certainly had to include singers from the Greeks who were part of the metropolitan's entourage. Traces of Byzantine presence. singing in Russia survived in glory. chanter manuscripts of the 12th century: this is the Greek. texts of individual hymns in the Blagoveshchensky kondakar (RNL. Q.p.I No. 32 - for example, troparion to the Cross on fol. 84-84v.), characteristic byzantine overtones. intonation formulas such as "neagia", "agia" in the same place and in the Typographic Rule with Kondakar (TG. K-5349 - for example, on fol. 120v.), inserted syllables "ne-ve" in the melismatic chants "Alleluia" ( all of them are given in Cyrillic transliteration, which means that they were intended for Slavic singers trained in Byzantine singing - see: Der altrussische Kondakar". St. Sophia in Kyiv, containing fragments of texts and individual inscriptions of neums (see: Evdokimova. 2008).
From its inception to the end. 11th century Old Russian chanter the tradition was only oral; to a large extent, this way of transmitting both the melos itself and the laws of chant. skill due to the peculiarities of the znamenny notation was preserved later, especially in the XII - 1st half. 15th century The oldest notated manuscript containing the chants of Z. r. is the Typographic Rule with Kondakar (border of the 11th and 12th centuries; at the same time, the fragmentary surviving Stihirar was rewritten - BAN. No. 4.9.13). Only from the turn of the XI and XII centuries. it is possible to speak about Z. r. in the strict sense of this term, i.e., about the texts of chants recorded with banners (“marked”). Previously, liturgical books sometimes included only the outlines of individual melismatic formulas - fity (the so-called fit notation), which denoted more or less extended melodic turns, also reproduced from memory (see: Novgorod Service Menaions of 1095-1097 - RGADA, Type No. 84, 89, 91, Putyatina Menei of the 11th century, RNL, Sof. No. 202, Tsvetnaya Triod, 11th/12th century, RGADA, Type No. 138, etc.). Most of the lists of hymnographic books of the 11th-14th centuries that have come down to us - Menaeus, Triodey and varieties of Oktoikh - contain unnotated texts, which were sung either on the basis of a complex of existing typical melodic models - self-similar (in ancient Russian traditions they are called similar), an extensive selection to-rykh is contained in the song. application of the Typographic Charter, or with an individual combination of formulas in self-vowels, which were originally memorized in the learning process along with similar ones. Predominantly oral method of assimilation and dissemination of Byzantium. church singing had a significant impact on the emerging melos Z. r. and features of its further development. The foundation for it, as far as can be judged by the later singers that can be reliably reconstructed. forms, was the perception of the tetrachord sound system, the principles of modal organization and formulaic structure (osmosis), as well as the modal-melodic basis of the Byzantines. monody. The specificity of existence, common to all ancient singers. cultures, led to the possibility of variable melodic filling of stable modal-rhythmic structures, modification of formulas and even the intonation contour of chants, re-intonation of texts in Eastern Slavic conditions. intonation. At the same time, oral tradition, memorization of tunes by memory contributed to the long-term preservation of Byzantium. the basis of chants, which can be seen to a greater or lesser extent both in the graphics of notated texts and in the melos of znamenny chants up to the modern. printed publications. The appearance of an ideographic type of notation, which fixed only the most general chant. information, although it introduced greater stability into the chant of the texts, at the same time it left significant opportunities for melodic variation.
Already in the XII century. chants Z. r. in the main hymnographic books were recorded using notation in its developed form. Byzantium was undoubtedly the source of Znamenny notation. notated manuscripts of the 10th-12th centuries, as evidenced by the high degree of kinship between the nemens dictionaries of both traditions and the similarity of the formulaic graphics of the chants. Yuzhnoslav. the manuscripts of this time were unnotated, so ch. arr. Church Slavonic Byzantine translations. texts or original Bolg. hymnography (St. Clement of Ohrid and Constantine of Preslav); at an early stage, with the dominance of the oral form of the dissemination of singing art, the influence of the Balkan singing cannot be completely excluded. culture, but in the X-XII centuries. she was also in line with the Byzantines. traditions. In the set of books of the early period, actually singing (in addition to Kondakar, representing a different type of chant) were Stihirar and Irmologion, which included mostly self-voiced chants of Z. r. or models for singing other texts and in most cases contained znamenny notation. The presence of completely (or almost completely) notated separate lists of Menaion, Triodey and Paraklitika, which had a significant number of such texts, is a characteristic feature of Old Russian. chanter bookishness of the XII-XIII centuries. and the result of the activity of masters of singing. Russian art. The creators of these books, obviously, took into account both their service and teaching function, as well as those that arose after. translation of the difficulty of adapting such a text to a melodic model that did not completely coincide with it (self-similar, irmosu) when playing such chants without a written notation, especially by insufficiently experienced singers.
XI - con. 14th century
Information about the early stage of development of Z. r. in Dr. Russ are contained mainly in the chant. manuscripts, notated and not notated, partly in the Typicon. These manuscripts provide the most complete information about the repertoire of chants and the degree of its variability (sometimes about the place of chants in worship), about its belonging to the system of osmosis, about the presence of different melodic versions or chant variants of one text, about the characteristic features of melos. The surviving sources, however, do not allow us to draw up a complete picture of the origin and initial development of the art of painting. The stage of formation of church singing, obviously, should be associated with Kyiv, where all the innovations due to the spread of Christ. divine services were transferred to large centers - cities and mon-ri Dr. Russia. This is how the process of assimilation of Z. r is presented. in “Notice of Concordant Marks” (1670) by Elder Alexander Mezenets: “The first ubo besha at the beginning of this banner are the creators and church singers in the capital of the Russian state, the God-saved city of Kyiv. After a few years from Kyiv, this singing and banner were brought by some amateurs to Velikago Nova Grad. From the Great New City, the teachings spread out and multiplied by the great longevity of this singing to all cities and monasteries of the Great Russian dioceses and to all their borders ”(RNB. Q. XII. No. 1. L. 71 vol. - 72; Alexander Mezenets and others. 1996. S. 44-45). The first news about the creation of a book-writing workshop is associated with the name of St. blgv. book. Yaroslav the Wise, who "gathered many scribes"; then “prekladashe from the Greek to the Slovenian letter. And many books have been written off” (PVL, 1999, p. 66). This report does not make it possible to establish the composition of the books transcribed in the grand ducal scriptorium, although it can be assumed that not only chapels, but also chants were created there. books. The introduction of the Studian statute in the Kiev-Pechersk mon-re, as evidenced by the Life of St. Theodosius of the Caves and PVL (Assumption collection. 1971. L. 37b - 37c; PVL. 1999. S. 69-70), should have been accompanied by the creation of a set of liturgical books necessary for the performance of "monastic singing" and "the whole series of church" according to this charter (PVL. 1999, p. 70). There is every reason to believe that these books were in the library of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery and that they served as a source for liturgical books used in churches and monasteries in other cities. Most of the surviving singers. manuscripts comes from the northwest. lands, primarily from Vel. Novgorod. The oldest of them, at the turn of the 11th and 12th centuries, are associated with the Lazarev scriptorium - the Menaion (RGADA. Type. No. 84, 89, 91, 103, 110, 121, 125), Triode Tsvetnaya (Ibid. No. 138), Typographic Charter (see: Yanin. 1982; Stolyarova. 1998; Ukhanova. 2006); a number of notated lists 2nd floor. 12th century comes from the same scriptorium (Stichirar triode - RGADA. Type. No. 147) and from the Sofia scriptorium (Sophian Menaion - GIM. Syn. No. 159-168, Paraclitic - RGADA. Type. No. 80). Only one notated manuscript - the Hilandar Hermology (the so-called Irmology of Grigorovich) - is associated with South Russian on the basis of an analysis of orthographic features. lands (Ath. Chil. 308; ed.: Jakobson R. 1957; other parts - RSL. Grigor. No. 37 and RNB. Q.p.I. No. 75; an opinion about the southern Russian origin was expressed by R. O. Jacobson: Jakobson 1957, p. 9; see also Hannick, 1978, p. 8); this list and in the notation of irmoses has noticeable differences from the surviving Irmologia of the north-west. lands (GIM. Voskr. No. 28; RGADA. Type. No. 150-149; see: Lozovaya. 1993. . S. 419-420; She. 2000. S. 220-221).
Together with a set of liturgical chants. byzantine books. traditions in Russia, the system of octoich, which was associated both with liturgical time (dividing the annual circle into time periods), and with a corpus of hymn texts organized in a certain way, as well as with specific muses, became widespread. system that was formed in Byzantium no later than the 7th century. Old Russian. Octoechos XII-XIV centuries. was not notated, but the cycles of chants related to it were sometimes written out with notation in other books. A large number of such chants are contained in the Typographic Charter after Kondakar - notated psalm verses of kathismas (the so-called alliluaries of St. Theodore the Studite) and troparia of power antiphons (preserved record of 5 tones), as well as a selection of similar ones. Gospel stichera for 8 voices came in the Annunciation kondakar con. 12th century (RNB. Q.p.I. No. 32), Stihiraryakh of the XII century. (GIM. Sin. No. 279) and 1403 (RGB. F. 304. I. No. 22 - 1 stichera notated; see: Lifshits. 2003). The Annunciation kondakar also contains a cycle of asmatics for all tones except the 7th (see: Shvets. 2008). An exceptional phenomenon was the notation of a whole book of the seven-cycle cycle, part of the ancient Oktoechos-Paraclitic (RGADA. Type. No. 80, 2nd half of the 12th century).
Changeable chants
Z. r. usually retained the vowel affiliation of Greek. originals. Unlike the Byzantine notation systems, in which the division into 2 groups was adopted - 4 authentic and 4 plagal tones (see also Authentic mode, Plagal mode), in Old Russian. in manuscripts, as in South Slavic, continuous vowel numbering from 1 to 8 prevailed, although occasionally they contain a translation of the term πλάγιος - - and the accompanying numbering in fours (Strumitsky Oktoikh - State Historical Museum. Khlud. No. 136. L. 36 43, 44; Putyatina Mineya - RNB. Sof. No. 202. Sheet 4, 8 rev., 29 rev., etc.; Stihirar - BAN. No. 34.7.6. Sheet 50, 50 rev., 53v, 57, 124v-125v, see: Lazarevi č 1964; Schenker 1981; Muryanov 1981). The ratio of the authentic and plagal voices was repeated by the Byzantine. a system with a paired connection of voices - the 1st voice with the 5th (1st plagal), the 2nd - with the 6th (2nd plagal), etc. (see, for example, the sequence of voices for verses on "Alleluia" in the Typographic Charter, sheets 110-117: 1st - 5th, 2nd - 6th, 4th - 8th), in contrast to Western Europe. osmosis, in which the authentic voice and its plagal variety were designated by neighboring numbers (plagal ones received numbers 2,4, 6 and 8 in this system). In Russia, the earliest form of Byzantium was adopted. vowel signatures, or martyria, which includes only the letter designation of the number of the voice without the accompanying neumes, specifying in Byzantium. manuscripts of a later time, the cadence of the intonational formula (ihima) of the voice. It is difficult to say whether the very tradition of singing vowels ihim was borrowed: in Old Russian. chanter In manuscripts of the initial period, indications of their syllabic subtexts are occasionally found, but later. this form of tuning to vowel singing was apparently lost, because the goblins, known from the manuscripts of the late period, had a different function - they were models for singing psalm verses “Lord, cry out” and one of the methods of teaching chanters to osmoglas, and not a way chants settings.
Notated manuscripts of the early era testify to the formulaic nature of the vowel melos and the graphic similarity of many others. formula revolutions with Byzantium. prototypes. Comparative studies of the Byzantines. and ancient Russian. formulas make it possible to draw a conclusion about the relationship and often about the proximity of the melodic contour in the chants of both traditions (see: Velimirovi ć . 1960; Floros. 1970; Strunk. 1977; Schkolnik M. 1997, 1999; Schkolnik I. 1999). However, already in the oldest notated lists, signs of Byzantine reworking are noticeable. melos and forms of recording melodies: preserved Old Russian. manuscripts have obvious differences from the Byzantines. analogues in the fixation of both formulaic and, especially, non-formula sections, which does not allow the reconstruction of chants without taking into account the later tradition of Z. r. (see: Shkolnik. 1996). In Z. r. the set of formulas for each voice separately, a kind of lexicon, also had characteristic modal features - a complex of supporting and final tones characteristic of it, which determined the "grammar" of the vowel melos - the structure of the vowel scale and the patterns of combining formulas. The modal structure of Old Russian osmosis is closely related to Byzantine, but it also has significant differences in the specific implementation of modal patterns, due to the re-intonation of melodic formulas in Old Russian. traditions, and sometimes, probably, following the archaic Byzants. samples that do not coincide with the "classical" modal structure; the temporal coordinates and the sequence of changes that have taken place have not yet been adequately studied.
In the liturgical books of the most ancient period, all the main stylistic varieties of Z. r. are represented - syllabic, neumatic, melismatic, and transitional forms.
The simplest melos syllabic variety Z. r. with a ratio of 1-2 sounds per syllable of the text, which was recorded extremely rarely, is characteristic primarily for the unanimous singing of the psalms of Vespers and Matins. Melodic half-line formulas for singing psalms according to the monastic rank (psalm tones, or alleluiaries of St. Theodore the Studite) 9 each (for 3 “glories” (antiphons) 3 kathismas) in each of the 8 voices were written out as chants. appendices in the Typographic Charter (in the surviving fragment - formulas 2, 3 and 4th kathisma of the first 5 voices, starting from l. 98) and partly in the supplement Irmology 1st floor. 15th century (GIM. Bars. No. 1348. L. 133-134; formulas 3 "glories" of the 2nd kathisma with the 2nd and 3rd "glories" of the evening 1st kathisma added to them in all 8 tones). When moving from one section (“glory”) of the kathisma to another, not only the psalm melodic formula changes, but also the chant of the Alleluia refrain that accompanies each half-line, in which the authentic (high) and plagal or medial (low) cadences can alternate . The measured and intonationally uniform alternation of verses is enriched by the means of mode and melody, as well as performing techniques: the use of various formulas that break the inertia of perception and arouse attention, and antiphonal singing (see illustration).
Little-sung irmoses and stichera are close to the style of psalm formulas. Among the stichera, the simplest form is represented by the oral tradition of the Sunday self-vowels of Oktoikh, recorded only in the 2nd half. XV century, a more developed form - in some self-similar and similar stichera derived from them from the notated Menaion and Triodion. The principles of melodic reading of the text, which took shape in psalmody and were developed in chants with the simplest melody, form the basis of the Znamenny tradition as a whole. The chant of the stichera reveals one of the most specific features of the tradition. chanter cultures - the formula structure of melos; combinatorics of formulas acts as the most important method of compositional deployment. In each type of chants, a complex of stable melodic turns is presented, called chants. Methods for arranging chants in a verbal text have also become established according to its structure and the melodic function of revolutions - initial, middle or cadenza (final). The division of the text into columns reflects, first of all, the intonation-melodic organization of the chants: the dots put down in the manuscript often do not coincide with the syntactic division; they can single out phrases that are relatively complete in meaning, having the integrity of the intonational contour, and less independent semantic units, and a separate word - if these parts of the text are sung by a formula with a single intonation, longitude or dynamic accent and cadence (the latter is more characteristic of melodically developed chants) . The end of a column, coinciding with a completed semantic turn, is accompanied by a chant with a more or less deep cadence, usually with rhythmic inhibition, when the duration of the final 1-3 syllables is at least twice as long as the duration of the main rhythmic unit corresponding to the syllable. Irmos and stichera of the syllabic type only occasionally contain simple and short fit phrases decorating melos.
Self-voiced stichera in most cases represent a neumatic, or syllabo-neumatic, type of chant with 1-4 sounds per syllable of text, characteristic of the Stihirar's style. In the most ancient layer Z. r. it is in such stichera that the formulaic type of melos is most clearly expressed - the use of various chants organized in accordance with the textual structure. The rhetorical form (disposition) of a verbal text often determines the grouping of melodic lines, the semantic and syntactic parallelism is reflected in melos - the repetition of chants corresponding to it, exact or variant, forms a series of anaphoras and homeoteleutics, while the renewal of the melodic material indicates the beginning of the next section of the rhetorical composition (see. : Lozovaya, 1987; She, 1989; Shekhovtsova, 1994). As a specific means of enriching the voice melos, a transition (modulation, in the Byzantine theory παραλλαγή - change) to other voices within the same chant is also used, which could be marked by middle martyrias (designations for the number of the voice; see: Stihirar triode of the XII century - RGADA Type No. 148. L. 3, 44v., 52, 70, 83v.-84, etc.). The skillful choice, distribution and plastic articulation of formulaic turns, their melodic and functional character ensured a clear perception of texts by ear during the service (see illustration: Stihira on the Presentation of the Lord). Symbolic images of a verbal text, exclamations, hayretisms, or the most important, characteristic words are often accompanied by various fites, melismatic insertions in neumatic melos, which are present in abundance in Stihirar. Their participation in the chant gives the chants a solemn, festive character. An extended chant can fall on conjunctions or pronouns, which allows using melos to give the chant a high sounding style without fear of losing a significant word in the melodic flow (in most cases, the places of using fit in the chants of the Byzantine and Old Russian traditions coincide).
Part of the chants of the Stihirar has a melismatic melos - they contain lengthy intra-syllable chants, sometimes of a very long length. Melismatica Z. r. associated with the predominance of melodic formulas of a special kind, called fites and faces. In contrast to the usual vowel chants with the normative reading of znams, these classes of formulas graphically represent an encoded record of melodic turns of several. signs, but suggesting extended chants of the syllables of the text; faces differ in composition and unconventionals. a sequence of znams, although at the same time the “sign-syllable” ratio, usual for chants, can be preserved, the external simplicity of which turns out to be deceptive. Both classes are derived from similar Byzants. formulas - thematisms (θεματισμοί or θέματα) and hypostases - and differ from each other by the melodic function in the chant. If the fites have the character of an embellishing insertion into the neumatic chant, then the faces (or kokises, as they were sometimes called in Russia, probably in honor of St. John Kukuzel, the Byzantine melody, which composed the chant alphabet from hypostases) form the very melismatic fabric of chants, intrasyllabic chant of the word (Lozovaya, 1999, pp. 65-67). The melismatic chant, written down in znamenny notation, in the early period had not only some stichera of the menaine and triode Stihirar (see illustration: Stichera on the Cathedral of the Archangel Michael), but also the hymns of the Sunday Octoechos - a cycle of 11 gospel stichera and Sunday exapostilaria, representing 11 texts sung according to one model (without vowel markings; see: Tyurina, 2006).
In the XI-XIV centuries. Z. r. services (or individual hymns) were sung to the saints and feasts of Dr. Russia. Services of St. Passion-bearers Princes Boris and Gleb (24 stichera, 2 canons, 3 kontakia, ikos, saddles and luminaries; the number of stichera indicates that by the 12th century there were several services to these saints), St. Theodosius of the Caves, St. Euphrosyne of Polotsk and for the consecration of St. George the Great Martyr of the church in Kyiv are preserved in notated lists of the 12th century; St. equal to ap. book. Vladimir (Vasily) Svyatoslavich, St. Leonty of Rostov, on the feast of the Intercession of the Blessed. Theotokos and the transfer of the relics of St. Nicholas of Myra in Bari - in manuscripts of the XIV century. (Seregina. 1994). Stylistics and principles of chanting original glories. texts follow the norms adopted with translated hymnography, and do not differ from the main body of chants of Z. r.
Unchanging chants
which formed the basis of various liturgical rites, primarily liturgies, vespers and matins, were not recorded with notation signs until the 16th century. (with the exception of certain hymns of the Great Lent period, for example, replacements for the cherubic song, notated since the last quarter of the 15th century). Their full texts or initial words are recorded in the Missal, the performance remarks of which (“lyudiya” - “singers”) indicate the predominance of community singing of unchanging texts. In the Service Book 14th century (GIM. Syn. No. 605) to the "singers", that is, the professional choir, at the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is entrusted only with "Like the Cherubim" and "The Grace of the World" (L. 19, 23v.), in the Missal at the turn of the XIV and XV centuries. (Ibid. No. 601. L. 14v., 16, 26; No. 952. L. 18v., 20v., 31v.), containing a later version of the text of the time of the introduction of the Jerusalem Rule - the Trisagion, “Alleluia and (together with the community) the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. The main reasons for the oral existence of such singing texts were probably the firm knowledge of their tunes in the communities and the steady adherence to one melodic version; in addition, the authors of the lists of liturgical books of the most ancient period were guided by Byzantium. book tradition, in which until the end. XIII - beginning. 14th century unchanging chants were also not notated.
Con. XIV - 1st floor. 15th century
Marked in the song. books by combining obvious signs of an ancient basis, bringing them closer to the early manuscript tradition, and new trends associated with the revival of close Byzants. and Yugoslav. contacts, with the influence of Athos culture. Most of the ancient hymnographic books of this time, the texts of which were performed by Z. r., either do not contain notation marks, or, as in antiquity, reproduce only the inscriptions of fit (for example, Oktoih chosen - RGADA. Type. No. 67, 1374; Paraclitic - Ibid. No. 81, XV century, in the appendix contains the gospel stichera and lamps, i.e. Sunday exapostilaria). Some of these books reflect the Studio type, and in its archaic version (for example, Paraklitik - RSL. Vol. No. 2, late XIV - early XV centuries), others correspond to the recently adopted Jerusalem statute (Oktoikhi - State Historical Museum. Syn. No. 199, 1436, and State Historical Museum Sunday No. 10, 1437, with features of South Slavic orthography).
An important stage in the history of Z. p. was the appearance of the notated Oktoich-Stichirar (GIM. Miracle No. 59, 1st half of the 15th century), in which for the first time with signs of notation the stichera of the seven cycle were recorded. Their graphic edition at that time had not yet developed, but was already close to the one that would become the main one, starting with the last lists. thurs. XV century; the order of the stichera was also not fully determined: their cycles corresponding to Vespers and Matins, as well as the days of the week, did not have rubrics, individual texts were not placed in the sections where they followed. take a stable position (see illustration). Some lists contain only a part of the stichera of Oktoikh, fragmentarily notated (RNB. Kir.-Bel. No. 9/1086, 30-50s of the 15th century; see: Kagan, Ponyrko, Rozhdestvenskaya. 1980, p. 135).
In the 1st floor. 15th century the edition of the famous Irmologion began to change. Lists of this time, which have preserved many elements of notation from Irmology domong. epoch, contain features that bring them closer to the editors, which became widespread in the last. thurs. 15th century The typological features of this edition were preserved later. The search for a more adequate form of fixation of melos, which probably changed, although not fundamentally and very gradually, in the manuscripts of this transitional period was reflected in the less stable recording: in noticeable discrepancies in the non-mental graphics of chants between lists, in the variability of division into columns, in a different arrangement of accent banners with a tendency to observe text stresses, in the edition of the formulas (RSL. Trinity. No. 407; State Historical Museum. Bars. No. 1348 and Sin. No. 748, 1st half of the 15th century; see: Lozovaya. 2000). The changes also affected the texts of chants, phonetics (partial reduction of semivowels, including in the form of the removal of the banners that sound them, or, conversely, the clarification of the stem vowels) and vocabulary. The result of the search was a parallel, within half a century, existence of differing - to a much greater extent than in the early era - versions of the recording of irmos, corresponding to generally similar, but still not coinciding melodies.
Other trends are noted in the evolution of the Stihirar, the early stage of development of which, in contrast to Irmology, is characterized by the instability of the editions of the tunes, which acquire a more stable character only in the updated graphics in the 2nd half. 15th century (see: Seregina, 1994, p. 17).
A sign of the changes that took place in the tradition of Z. r. in the 1st floor. XV century, and maybe a little earlier, was the appearance of the first alphabets of singing - musical-theoretical manuals. At first, they contained only a list of the main banners with their names. The earliest in terms of content, the alphabet “And all the names are a sign” (RNB. Kir.-Bel. No. 9/1086, 1st half of the 15th century) reflects the transitional stage in the understanding of the signs, with which the chants of Z. r. were recorded. (“preliminary edition”, as defined by Z. M. Huseynova (1990, p. 21)). It presents a small number of banners, they are not systematized as consistently as in later manuals, the graphics of signs and formulas (chants) and their names do not fully correspond to the tradition that developed in the 2nd half. 15th century There are contradictions between the styles of banners and their names: for example, “light” are called both signs with 2 dots (light hook, light article), which became normative later, and signs with a dot (light closed article, light stick, light arrow, foot light), some of them after. will be called "gloomy". These contradictions reflect different interpretations of inscriptions in Byzantium. and early Old Russian. (signs with a dot - a high level in the scale or a jump up) and later Old Russian. (position between the relatively lower "plain" without dots and the higher "light" with 2 dots) notation systems.
Accompanying banners of a large body of texts that were not previously notated, a change and a significant degree of variability in notation in chants that previously had a relatively stable schedule, the appearance of alphabetic texts in the same period - all this testifies to the purposeful work of the masters of church singing to revise and edit the chants Z. r ., which was probably dictated by the change of the Studio Charter by Jerusalem and the need to prepare a set of chants. books that corresponded both to the changed liturgical practice and to a different level of comprehension of the connections between melos and its non-mental notation.
Last third XV - 1st half. 16th century
The period of formation and registration of the updated tradition of recording chants of Z. r., the creation of new and partial processing of previously used chants. books. At this time, as a result of what was happening in the singing. the practice of gradual crystallization and selection of formulas, as well as the development of more detailed and universal recording methods, which were accompanied by the reform of the banner dictionary, a new edition of the Z. r. and triode, Everyday. The verbal text of the chants also underwent changes during this period, ch. arr. in orthography, which reflected the influence of the South Slavic book reform (the appearance of large yuses), and in giving the full-vowel form “eram” (> and>) in all positions, since semi-vowels in ancient manuscripts were melodically voiced by various banners and could not be reduced without damage to the melody. This led to the emergence of the so-called. separate speech, or homonia.
Irmology for a long time kept the tradition. the composition of irmoses, already characteristic of the early lists of the book (XII century), however, their notation has undergone changes that reflect the emergence of a more stable graphics of formulas, their clearer, although not always consistent differentiation, and also, apparently, the ornamentation of tunes, which reduced the volume syllabic melos, which smoothed out melodic jumps and gave the chant greater smoothness and flexibility. Similar phenomena during this period are noted in the Stihirary, the recording of chants in different lists becomes more stable (Seregina. 1994. p. 17). In the triode section of the Stihirar with the last. decades of the 15th century. began to include fasting chants, which had never before been notated, first of all, rarely sounded and needed to fix the replacement of the cherubic song (see, for example: “Let all flesh be silent”, “Now the powers of heaven” - RSL. Trinity. No. 408. L. 163 rev. - 164, 2nd half of the 15th century), which had a melismatic chant in a "secretly closed" (encoded) notation, without indicating the vowel belonging. In the 1st floor. 16th century the volume of everyday hymns in the manuscripts began to increase, but their composition was unstable - in addition to the named main text of the “transfer” - “Who are the cherubs”, as well as “The Only Begotten Son”, Ps 136, a cycle of unchanging hymns of the all-night vigil, according to the Jerusalem typikon that had already been in force for a century , etc. The collection of notated everyday texts, most of which did not contain indications of the voice, made up a special cycle of the so-called. unvoiced chants, although some of them were originally vowel, they lost the corresponding designations in the manuscripts, and sometimes their vowel character. The melos of the lengthy chants that accompanied the rituals, which required a longer time to perform, differed markedly from the traditions. vowels. It was dominated not by the combinatorics of clearly outlined, easily distinguishable by ear formulas, but by the melodic type of unhurried deployment, without noticeable caesuras between textual syntagmas, the length of the lines of a wavy contour, a leveled rhythm with an elusive pulsation by ear - features that create an image of timeless sojourn (see Fig. : "Now the powers of heaven").
In the last thirds of the XV - beginning. 16th century Varieties of the famous Octoechos-Stihirar were taking shape: a short one, which included separate cycles of Sunday stichera of great vespers, and a lengthy one, with a more extensive set of stichera, the lists of which differed in the number of texts and the completeness of the liturgical cycles presented in them. The Octoechos-Stichirar contained notated cycles of stichera of the seventh circle, marked with liturgical rubrics (at vespers - on “Lord, cry”, eastern, theotokion, on the verse, “alphabet”, theotokos; at matins - on praises, eastern), including weekdays (more often theotokos ), which were usually supplemented by power antiphons (in their place in each voice or in the form of an independent section) and isolated from the succession of voices, first notated back in the 12th century. gospel stichera (sometimes with Sunday lamps and theotokia). Introduction to the singer. Oktoikh with the rite of small vespers was perceived as early as the first decades of the 16th century. as a new phenomenon, as evidenced by the headings of manuscripts (“we create scripture as if and in new okhtaiks” - RSL. Trinity. No. 411. L. 377). Early lists, unlike the unnotated Octoechos, could include only a part of the stichera (for example, only Sunday ones), and not all cycles and an incomplete set of texts (for example, 3 on “Lord, cried” with the Mother of God and 1 on the verse in the list of the RSL. Trinity No. 408). The notation of Oktoikh's stichera testifies to the fact that the manuscripts of that time recorded a well-established melodic version, which later changed slightly. Later, the non-mental notation of the chants was subjected to correction and clarification, it could reflect the slight variability of the melos, became more detailed, however, the formula structure of the melos already in this period took on the form that is well known from manuscripts of the 17th century. The chant of the Oktoikh-Stihirar, the basis of the sticherary melodic style, includes a rich fund of znamenny chants of the syllabo-neumatic type, supplemented by a small amount of melismatics (fits and faces).
Pevch. books of Z. r., previously written on parchment in the form of independent codes, each of which focused on a specific liturgical circle and / or type of chants, in the last. thirds of the 15th century, with the transition to paper, they begin to be combined into collections, a kind of anthology of chants. They could include both a complete corpus of znamenny hymns necessary for performing divine services at any time, as well as separate parts in various combinations - Irmologion, Octoechos (often its liturgical cycles - Sunday, Eastern, Mother of God, Gospel stichera - were placed in different parts of the manuscript) and A stihirarion of various completeness, more or less expanded fragments of everyday life, and often alphabetic texts. In con. XV - beginning. 16th century in the song collections appear small collections of "repentance" (repentant verses, or tender verses; see also Art. Spiritual verses), to-rye already in the middle. 16th century were framed in an osmotic cycle, after. constantly updated with new texts. The melodies of penitential verses were based on the chants of Z. r., although they could also be combined with melodic turns characteristic of folk song lyrics. Their texts were heterogeneous - borrowed from hymns devoted to the theme of repentance, contrition for sin (troparia of repentant content, triode stichera or their fragments), compilations from individual verses of well-known hymns or non-liturgical ones, in which eschatological expectations of “judgment is terrible”, moral ideals of purity, goodness, non-possession, as well as historical events (see: Korableva, 1979; Petrova, Seryogin. 1988).
With the creation of the famous Octoechos-Stihirar, probably, the appearance of the singers in the headlines is connected. alphabet of enumerations of the concept of “pillar sign” (GIM. Eparch. No. 176. L. 208 rev., last quarter of the 15th century; IRLI. Brazhn. No. 1. L. 3, middle of the 16th century; later also “ pillar singing "- RNB. Weather. No. 385. L. 164, 20s of the 17th century; see: Shabalin. 2003. S. 17, 29, 24), which comes from the gospel pillars - an indicator of Sunday readings of the Gospel in connection with the successive alternation of weekly voices. The number of alphabetic texts in the last. thurs. XV - 1st floor. 16th century increased noticeably. Along with the alphabets-enumerations, "tales of the sign" were copied, musical-theoretical manuals containing the interpretation of signs, that is, a description of the relationship between them in height, the methods of their performance, indicating the direction of movement, melodic and rhythmic features, as well as an explanation of the most characteristic vowels chants (for example: RNB. Solov. No. 277/283. L. 252v. - 254v., 40s of the 16th century; see: Shabalin. 2003. P. 51-52). The method of presenting information in these manuals resembles the synopsis of the speech of the didascal (teacher), who uses all the methods of influencing students: he depicts the banner, and shows with his voice “how” it is sung, and gives a verbal commentary on the performance. The appearance of a larger number of such alphabets, apparently, indirectly testifies to the activities of the church authorities aimed at raising the level of knowledge and skill of the singers. In Novgorod, which from ancient times, judging by the surviving manuscripts, had a high level of development of the singer. art, St. Gennady (Gonzov), archbishop. Novgorod and Pskov, however, critically assessed the results of modern. to him the choir education and upbringing of singers, considered it necessary to create schools, which were supposed to prepare “readers and singers”, reproached the “masters” for the low quality of education (AI. 1841. T. 1. S. 144-145, 147-148, Parfentiev 1991, pp. 30, 32).
In the 2nd floor. XVI - 1st floor. 17th century
complete versions of the main singing books of the Znamenny r. are being formed, recorded in the well-established znamenny notation. The result of the improvement and detailed development of the formula dictionary Z. r. in the beginning. 17th century became independent sets of znamenny chants (“names of chants” in the “Znamenny Key” of monk Christopher from his chant. collection of 1604; see: Christopher. 1983), separated from the lists of banners, as well as collections of fit and persons, often accompanied by divorces and replenished over time. In continuation of the general trends that developed in the previous period, the composition of the singers expanded. manuscripts. As an appendix to the Irmology, in addition to the retailers (the irmos of the Triodes for the forefeast of the Nativity of Christ and the Epiphany), they began to include a section of irmos "profitable", among which were those known by the Byzants. Irmos-like lists, compiled according to the festive model (Christmas, Easter), as well as new texts for Old Russian. services (for example, the canon of St. Equal-to-the-April King Olga). The cave dewdrops could also become an addition - irmoses with troparions of the 7th and 8th songs, sung "before Christmas, when the angel is lowered", i.e. during the cave performance (RNB. Q. I. No. 898. L. 67, 1573 G.). In Oktoikh, along with a complete set of stichera of Great Vespers and Matins, all the stichera of the Lesser Vespers were written in znamenny notation, the texts of which did not coincide with the great one (Mother of God, verse); at the great vespers they added the "ammorean" stichera of the Pres. Theotokos (the cycle of Paul of the Amorites), sung in similar (Ibid.). The composition of the commemorations and znamenny hymns of the Menaine Stihirar has noticeably expanded: on feast days with a vigil, stichera of small vespers were written out, many others. memories were replenished with lithium stichera, new texts (“other stichera”) appeared, in which researchers note special attention to historical events related to the life of the celebrated saint (Seregina. 1994, pp. 16, 196, etc.). After the canonization councils of 1547 and 1549. in line with church events led by St. Macarius, Met. Moskovsky, extensive Stihirari were created - sets of znamenny chants (some of them in several volumes), which included a significant number of memoirs of Russian. saints (GIM. Chud. No. 60; Edinoverch. No. 37; Eparch. Singer. No. 24; RGADA. F. 381. No. 17, 18, 320; RNB. Kir.-Bel. No. 586/843, 681/938 and others); included in them and services of glory. saints - equal to Cyril (Konstantin) the Philosopher, St. John of Rila, St. Savva I, St. Simeon Myrrh-streaming, cor. St. Milutin (Stefan Uros II) and St. Arseny I, archbishop. Serbian, mts. Paraskeva, mch. George New. The full Stichirary was sometimes given an additional name - “The Devil's Eye” (GIM. Miracle No. 60; Syn. Singer No. 1150). In connection with the growth of Stichirar at the turn of the 16th and 17th centuries. independent books emerged from its composition. The first - notated services of the lord, the Mother of God holidays and great saints, called "Holidays", and the 2nd - services of medium and small holidays, sometimes called "Trezvony" in later lists. Some Stikhirari and Trezvons were composed almost exclusively from Rus chants. and glory. saints (RNB. Q. I. No. 238, beginning of the 17th century; see: Seregina. 1994. P. 20-28) and served as an important addition to the normative lists of the Stihirar, based mainly on the memories of the Byzants. Monthly Words (see illustration: Stichera of St. Prince Alexander Nevsky).
In the 2nd floor. XVI - beginning. 17th century a lengthy edition of the Obikhod is taking shape: znamenny notation records in full the chants of the all-night vigil and the liturgy, the extended sequences of the chants of the funeral rites, individual chants of the prayer service, weddings, and some other rites. Along with the unchanging hymns, after a long break in the manuscripts, a new tradition of notated recording of psalmody is increasingly found - selected verses of kathismas at matins, an indication of the chanter. the performance of which in an ordinary (“real”) voice was preserved in the earliest lists of the Jerusalem Charter (GIM. Sin. No. 329. L. 18 rev., last quarter of the 14th century; see: Korotkikh. 2001; Zhivaeva. 2003).
In the 2nd floor. 16th century Old Russian masters Z. r. based on a deep knowledge of tradition, they begin to create original versions of the chant of liturgical texts. Often their activity remains anonymous, such versions are supplied with remarks “in chant”, “foreign banner”, “in translation”, etc. Famous chanters appear among them, references to the creations of which are recorded in the chant. manuscripts from con. 16th century Variants of the chant of liturgical texts, although they remained in line with the culture of Znamenny chant, provoked the beginning of a tough controversy, which was reflected, in particular, in the Valaam Conversation. Its compiler was very critical of the works of such "great singers", believing that "there was no evidence of more than one translation of them from heaven, and there will not be," and calling on the authorities to "fasten one translation" (see: Moiseeva. 1958. S. 176). The names of some experts Z. r. and creators of hymns are associated with the Novgorod chants. school, to-ruyu, as they suggest, no later than the 30-40s. 16th century headed by Savva Rogov (see: Parfentiev, 2005, p. 23). The chanters came out of it, leaving a noticeable mark on Old Russian. singing 2nd floor. XVI-XVII centuries, some of them became prominent figures of church culture, representing the singer. schools of Moscow and Salt Vychegodskaya: brother of Savva Rogov, Met. Rostov Varlaam, Fr. Theodore Khristianin, a student of Stefan Golysh (who studied at Savva's school), archim. Monastery of the Nativity Virgin Mary in Vladimir Isaiah (Lukoshko). About these “old masters” and their students, the compiler of the musical-theoretical guide “The Legend of the Zarembas” speaks with admiration, noting that they sang “kakiznik and similitude by heart”, “they knew the agreement and the banner in a different way, sang and laid the banner by heart” (State Historical Museum Synonym chant No. 219. L. 376v.- 377). His own versions of some znamenny chants were also created by the leader, later the headmaster of the Trinity-Sergius Mon-rya Loggin (Shishelov), nicknamed the Cow, who, according to the Life of St. Dionysius (Zobninovsky), “a gift from God more than human nature” (see: Parfentiev. 1991. pp. 106-107; He. 2005. pp. 139-149; Parfentiev. 1997. pp. 172-180) (see ill.: The inscription and the beginning of the slavnik of the Week of the Cross).
At the turn of the XVI and XVII centuries. along with indications of anonymous, local monastic (Trinity, Kirillov, Chudovsky) and nominal translations of Z. chants, related to both the annual and daily cycle, remarks appear in the manuscripts, meaning various melodic styles - “greater chant”, “greater banner” (in turn, they can have a nominal or local affiliation), as well as “smaller chant”. The big chant is a znamenny tradition of melismatics, which since ancient times has been characteristic of certain types of chants, for example. gospel stichera, but to con. 16th century translated by masters of singing. art from a "secretly closed" form to an adjustable one. Recording chants in a divorce with a fractional banner, which required a deep knowledge of the rich formulaic vocabulary of Z. r., was sometimes marked in the lists with the name of one or another famous chanter; determination of the degree of the author's participation in divorce records, which consists in the peculiarities of the interpretation of individual banners and formulas, in each case needs a special study (see: Parfent'eva. 1997; Tyurina. 2006; She. 2008). Divorce of "secretly closed" styles could reflect both the author's reading of signs and graphic formulas, and local traditions transmitted orally, the subtle differences of which needed to be fixed with the help of detailed clarifying notation. In contrast to the “greater”, “lesser” was usually called a chant, corresponding in style to the pillars of the banner edition. The emergence of the "smaller" chant of liturgical texts of different types did not occur simultaneously. Thus, the dogmatists of the pillar Z. p. in the edition of the last third of the 15th century acquired the designation "lesser" after in the XVII century. their new, "big" version was recorded; their "smaller" chant was stylistically no different from the traditional ones. pillar melos the stichera of Oktoikh. Otherwise, the melismatic and syllabo-neumatic versions of the gospel stichera correlate in time: the “big” is primary, it arose several times. centuries earlier than the "smaller" one, created on the basis of the formula dictionary of Oktoikh's stichera in con. 16th century The development of Znamenny melismatics, along with other melismatic chants. traditions (travel chant and demestvenny singing), obviously associated with the influence of the Greek. calophonic singing and cultivating ornamental inserts in the text of chants, sung in various syllables (“no-na”, “ho-bu”, “he-bu-ve”, etc.), caused a number of polemical speeches. Anonymous, who compiled in the 2nd half. 1600s message ssmch. Patriarch Hermogenes about the inclusion of the chant “khabuva” (“ine khebuva”) in pillar singing, wrote that “that fita khabuva ... according to reason in the word repairs a split” and that the Greeks that were then in Russia. hierarchs denied the presence of such words in Greek. language, books of "conarchist" and chanters. He objected not to the chant of the fita itself, but to its subtext - the insertion of meaningless syllables into the text of the chants of the Stihirar, distorting and obscuring its meaning (see: Epistle to Hierarch Patriarch Hermogenes. 1973, pp. 59-65). Shmch. Hermogenes, during his Patriarchate, took care of the serviceability of divine services, including objecting to polyphony, the spread of which was due to the exorbitantly overgrown singing component of the rites (“A punishing message ... about correcting church singing”; see: Preobrazhensky, 1904, p. 8-10).
The appearance of various variants of the chant of liturgical texts, special melodic versions of chants that differed from the traditional one, was soon followed by a reform of the notation of Z. r. After the registration of the updated notation system in the 2nd floor. 15th century small changes were made to the recording of chants, the process of editing the recording of znamenny chants throughout the 16th century. was constant, but they were associated mainly with the refinement of the graphic fixation of traditions. melos. Significant departures from tradition. editions of chants, the creation of new melodic versions of texts, the transformation of the formula system, the multiplication of variants required new ways of recording them adequately in chant. manuscripts. The search for means that made it possible to more accurately display the features of the tunes and the metabola of the scale (transferring it to other steps) in non-memorial graphics, in Old Russian. Znamenny culture led to the creation of a complex of special signs that complemented and detailed the content of the banners and melodic formulas from the v. sp. performance techniques, rhythm and pitch, - a system of cinnabar litters (“anonymous consonant words”): originally, in the 1st floor. XVII century, “indicative” (- “borzo”, - “quietly”, - “soon”, - “exactly”, - “highly”, - “lowly”, etc. - see: RNB. Solov. No. 621/660. Sheet 162v., later - RNB. Elm. O. No. 80. Sheet 541v.-542; Huseynova. 1996. P. 493-494), and to the middle. XVII century - and "power" (RNB. O. XVII. No. 19. L. 60-89 rev.; Shabalin. 2003. S. 156-158, 162-165, 170-172). The introduction of “powerful” marks, necessary in order to “even if the banner, by agreement of the voice of each time, truly sing, and untruely sing in the singing of denunciation” (RNB. O. XVII. No. 19. L. 86 rev.), attributed in the alphabets to the Novgorodian Ivan Shaydur and a certain Leonty (Ibid. L. 64v.), radically changed the understanding of the sound space of Z. r., turning it from an undivided precious “substance” - “divine singing” perceived “anciently ... the Most Holy and Life-Giving Spirit by inspiration” - into a scale ("ladder") of neutral in meaning "consonant words", "degrees", and banners - into a number of discrete units with a precisely defined, but noticeably lost dependence on each other, altitude position. The indivisible sound "substance" began to be described, divided and denoted with the help of separate "consonant words" or "accords" (Lozovaya, 2002, pp. 43-45). This innovation brought the notation of znamenny chants, designed to record “on earth the divine singing by human lips” sung (RNB. O. XVII. No. 19. L. 79 rev.), to a notolinear system, content-indefinite, universal elements of which are adapted for recording any earthly "musicia" in all its varieties.
In con. 16th century special singers appeared in the Western Russian metropolis. collections, so-called. Irmologions, which contained a large number of chants Z. r. from Irmologiya, Oktoikh, Stihirar of the mine and triode, Simple and Lenten everyday life in South Russian. editions; they were translations of the znamenny unmarked lists of this book, similar to the Greek. Anthologies, into the notolinear system (the earliest - Suprasl Irmologion - NBUV IR. F. 1. No. 5391, 1598-1601). Last notolinear Irmologions were brought by people from South Russian. lands in Great Russian. mon-ri - Valdai Svyatoozersky in honor of the Iberian Icon of the Mother of God, New Jerusalem in honor of the Resurrection of the Lord, where in the 2nd half. 17th century lists were made from them that preserved South Russian. design features (see: Ignatieva, 2001).
2nd floor 17th century
in the history of Z. r. marked by coexistence, interaction, and sometimes opposition of different directions - traditional and new, national, Greek-Eastern and Western European. The change in ideas required the professionals to chant. cases of special justification, theological understanding of new trends. Approximately from Ser. 17th century musical-theoretical manuals appeared, significantly different from the previous practical manuals on Znamenny singing. They include lengthy discussions about the importance of studying chants. letters (“literate teaching, vems, as if it were God’s work” - RNL. O. XVII. No. 19. L. 71), the activity of the inventor of new designations - “consonant words” - is considered on a par with the activities of the followers of “divine John of Damascus” , the number of consonants (i.e., steps of the scale) symbolically correlates with the 7th day, the week and the “seven century” (Ibid., L. 76). The “literate teaching” of the chanters is elevated to the rank of virtue and is compared with the teaching of the book, the assimilation of the alphabet (“is it not with small words that many divine books are written, so with these seven words, all divine singing is affirmed” - Ibid. L. 84-84v. ).
The resolution of purely professional problems of fixing chants Z. r. (introducing clarifications into the non-mental record, introducing "power" marks) was part of the mainstream of the general public. measures aimed at correcting errors in liturgical books and bringing them into line with modern. them Greek. Book right con. 40s - 1st floor. 60s 17th century had a great influence on the development of liturgical poetry, affecting not only liturgical texts, but also melos. The need for reform was felt more and more acutely (see, for example, “The Tale of Various Heresies” by monk Euphrosynus), as a result, 2 “commissions” were formed to correct notated books (see: Parfentiev. 1986. P. 128-139 ; He. 1991. S. 188-210). Editing translations, bringing verbal texts to singers. books (homonia) in agreement with non-notated books (the so-called translation “into speech” - see True Speech), the desire for a unified interpretation of banners and formulas was reflected in the recording of chants Z. p. in the song books 2nd half. 17th century In 1666, in the interval between the work of 2 “commissions” of spravochnikov, the elder of the Zvenigorod Savvin Storozhevsky monastery, Alexander Mezenets, compiled a singing collection of Z. p. with the true-verbal edition of Irmologiya, Oktoikh and Obikhod, equipped with cinnabar marks (GIM. Syn. singer. No. 728; see ill.).
Musical-theoretical results of singing. the reforms were recorded in the treatise "Notice of Concordant Marks", compiled by Alexander Mezenets "with others", as stated in the final verses. A group of spravschiki and connoisseurs, "good leading the znamenny singing and knowing that banner of the face and their divorces and chants of Moscow, that of Christians, and Usolsky, and other masters" ( Alexander Mezenets and others. 1996. P. 118), who worked at the Moscow Printing House in 1669-1670, summed up the work, which was carried out by their predecessors, as well as “the banner singing of little skillful masters” “in all cities and monasteries and in villages” (There same), offering true-verbal Irmology Z. r. and a new guide for the unification of chant. performance (“if only all singing was ... arranged equally and in a good voice” - Ibid., p. 117). The innovations of the singing theory of Z. r. steel: systematization of banners according to the types of melodic movement; introduction of black signs
From the texts accompanying the practical sections of "Notifications...", it becomes clear that in addition to unifying the record, the masters had the task of improving the traditions. notation of chants that can withstand more radical changes in this area. The right, which caused an influx of learned Kyiv scribes to Muscovy, led to a reorientation of part of the literate Moscow society towards the traditions and norms of Western European culture, which was also reflected in musical and theoretical thought. The negative attitude towards the arrogant "from the newest song-makers" who wished to "transform Old Slavonic Russian ... singing into organ-vowel singing" was clearly expressed by the elder Alexander Mezenets, a highly educated theorist of Z. R., who belonged to the traditions. chanter direction: “We, the Great Russians, who directly lead this banner secretly lead the voices and in it many different persons and their divisions, measure and strength and all fraction and subtlety, there is no need for this musical banner” (Ibid., p. 122). However, despite the protest against linear notation, the influence of Western Europe is also noticeable in the "Notice ...". music theory, in particular in the presentation of the system of marks. Instead of the earlier 7-step (GN - N - S - M - P - V - GV; “there are no more than seven accords in all osmi glasakh” - RNB. O. XVII. No. 19. L. 60 ob. - 61) , and then, apparently, in connection with the development of polyphony, an 8-step octave (“The legend is known about osmost litters”: “Except for these osmi degrees in any singing, no other agreement is found” - RSL. F. 379. No. 1, last quarter of the 17th century; see: Shabalin, 2003, p. 181) and even 9-step (Ibid., p. 180) tetrachord scales with the functional identity of the steps at a distance of a quart (“In high accords in singing, these soles: the dot comes to lead, to think comes to the verb, ours comes to rest "- RNB. O. XVII. No. 19. L. 64-64v.), Elder Alexander writes out a 12-step scale, which, when translated into a system of signs, is divided them into trichords (“because all singing rises and falls with three natural voices to the second and ten degrees, if you can and more” - Alexander Mezenets and others. 1996, p. 119). The structure given by him is a direct analogue of the solmization scale, consisting of hexachords and associated with the name of Guido Aretinsky, and the closest predecessor of the same scale in the “Key of Understanding” by archim. Tikhon Makarievsky, compiled presumably in the 70s. 17th century, shortly after the Notice... (see: Shabalin, 2003, pp. 315, 317; Bulanin, Romodanovskaya. 2004. S. 31-42). Archim. Tikhon was a musician. a theoretician of a new direction, the creator of a manual on the notolinear system of notation, which he “wrote for the sake of those who wish to know the different signs of singing and the secretly different faces with the revelation of marks and degrees of the banner of everything - by notes” (see: Shabalin. 2003. p. 314). Addressing readers, Archim. Tikhon, possibly responding to the attack of Alexander Mezenets. In characteristic self-deprecating expressions, he speaks of his adherence to tradition (“as a dog collects grains falling under the meal of his masters, so also az, ancient songwriters - from their translations - having gathered this together” - Ibid), claims that in his “Key ...” there is nothing that “is written here sternly or pervertedly,” and asks, before condemnation, to delve into his words. At the same time, among the singers. books appear similar to the "Key ..." archim. Tikhon's double banners, in which chants are written in 2 ways - in znamenny notation and notolinear, the so-called. square Kievan notation (see illustration: Slavnik on praises on the Entry into the Church of the Most Holy Theotokos). The surviving double banner lists represent all types of liturgical chants. books.
In the polemical writings of the middle - 2nd floor. 17th century the problems of meaningful perception of the texts of chants were touched upon - the transition from homonia to vernacular singing, competent and justified breakdown into lines of texts intended for singing that had departed from traditions. chants of author's and local translations, obscuring the meaning of melismatic anenaeks (“some blasphemous nonsense in Znamenny singing, like “Ainani”, “Tainani”) and, in general, the problem of the predominance of melos over the word in Znamenny chants, generated by the influence of Greek. calophony (“they spoiled the sacred speeches in the Holy Scriptures, in order to make them powerfully set the kokiza” - “The Tale of Various Heresies”; “They attach themselves to fit long-drawn-out singing by their self-made, for the sake of vanity, wanting to receive fame that the singer” - “The spiritual grove ”; see: Euphrosyn. 1973. S. 72-73; [Anonymous]. 1973. S. 91), the admissibility of removing fit and other melismatic inserts for the sake of the correct perception of words (“And the banner on which speech will come a lot and inescapably to sing everything: and put it off unscrupulously, only don’t put off speech”; “I sing according to the seal, and I won’t destroy those hooks, I won’t sing anything else”; see: Avvakum, 1973, pp. 88, 90).
Together with the creation of a true-verbal edition of the chants of Z. r. the composition of the notated singers also changed. books. Corrected "for speech" Irmologiy in a brief edition retained the tradition. a set of irmos, known from the ancient period, however, from the 70s. 17th century in a new, lengthy edition, it contained more than 1 thousand texts. Significant changes were made to the composition of the Znamenny Oktoech, where the texts of the stichera at the small vespers were completely updated. Similar replacements also affected the stichera at the small vespers of the Znamenny Feasts of the mobile cycle (see: Parfentiev. 1986. p. 138-139; Kazantseva. 1998. p. 126). Stihirar of the full composition, formed by the 1st half - ser. 17th century and divided in some lists into several. volumes, after transformed into collections of stichera of unstable composition - for selected holidays, often with a predominance of Russian. memories (Trezvony). In con. 17th century collections of chants are distributed, including different melodic versions of texts, mainly from Holidays and Everyday life. In the XVIII century. chanter books Z. r. are represented by 2 main types: 1) belonging to the synodal tradition, notolinear lists of Feasts, Trezvonov and Obikhod, less often Irmologiya and Oktoikh (chap. arr. beginning of the 18th century), as a rule, as part of chants. collections; 2) hook manuscripts of traditions. singing books and collections, created in various Old Believer centers before the beginning. 20th century (Khomov, or Naon, among the Bespopovtsy and with the corrected "Josephian" text among the Old Believers of priestly consent). Conservation Z. r. in a church chanter The repertoire was facilitated by musical notation editions of liturgical chants. books, carried out by the Synodal printing house since 1772. In 1884-1885. at the expense of A. I. Morozov, the Society of Lovers of Ancient Literature published the “Circle of Church Ancient Znamenny Singing” (at 6 hours; the so-called Morozov books). After 1905, the publication of books of Znamenny Singing and teaching aids began in the Znamenny Singing publishing house under the direction of. L. F. Kalashnikova (Kyiv, Moscow; Kalashnikov books), reprints to-rykh up to the present. time are used by singers of priestly consent, as well as in the printing house at the Preobrazhensky almshouse in Moscow (books of Pomor consent), also reprinted in Riga under the arm. S. P. Pichugin. Awakened since the 90s. 20th century the interest of church singers in Old Russian. chanter culture is reflected in the editions of collections of chants and practical aids for mastering the znamenny notation and the skills of performing chants Z. p. (Singing Octoechos of the 18th century, notated (znamenny and five-line notations) / Intro. Art.: E. V. Pletneva. SPb., 1999; A guide to the study of the church. singing and reading / Comp.: E. A. Grigoriev. Riga, 2001 2; Self-voiced and sung lines of pillar chant: [Textbook. allowance] / Comp.: G. B. Pechenkin. M., 2005; Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom we know. chant: post-reform ed. / Comp.: M. Makarovskaya; intro. Art.: hierodiac. Pavel [Korotkikh]. M., 2005 and others).
Source: Preobrazhensky A.V. The question of unanimous singing in the Russian Church of the 17th century. SPb., 1904. S. 8-10. (PDPI; 155); Jacobson R. Praef. Fragmenta Chiliandarica Palaeoslavica. Copenhagen, 1957. Tl. B: Hirmologium: Cod Chil. 308 (MMB. Ser. Principale; 5b); Assumption collection of the XII-XIII centuries. M., 1971; Avvakum, archpriest. Message to Boris and other servants of the Most High God // Muz. Aesthetics of Russia in the XI-XVIII centuries. / Comp., trans. and intro. Art.: A. I. Rogov. M., 1973. S. 90; he is. Epistle by the servants of Christ // Ibid. S. 88; [Anonymous, 1683]. Spiritual furrow // Ibid. S. 91; Euphrosynus, Mon. The legend of various heresies // Ibid. pp. 72-73; Message ssmch. to Patriarch Hermogenes about abuse in church singing "Khabuva" // Ibid. pp. 59-65; Der altrussische Kondakar"/ Hrsg. v. A. Dostal und H. Rothe unter Mitarb. v. E. Trapp. Giessen, 1976-1980. Bd. 8. T. 2-5; Christopher. Znamenny key. 1604 / Pub. , trans.: M. V. Brazhnikov and G. A. Nikishov, foreword, commentary, researcher: G. A. Nikishov, M., 1983. (PRMI; 9); Alexander Mezenets and others. Notice ... to those wishing to learn singing (1670) / Introduction, publ. and trans., ist. researcher: N. P. Parfentiev; comments and research., deciphering the familiar. notations: Z. M. Huseynova. Chelyabinsk, 1996; The Tale of Bygone Years / Prepared. text, trans., art. and comments: D. S. Likhachev; Ed.: V. P. Adrianov-Peretz. SPb., 1999; Typographic charter: Charter with Kondakar con. XI - beg. 12th century / Ed. B. A. Uspensky. M., 2006.
Lit .: Moiseeva G.N. The Valaam conversation is a monument to Russian. journalism ser. 16th century M.; L., 1958; Velimirovi ć M. Byzantine Elements in Early Slavic Chant: The Hirmologium. Pars Principalis et Pars Suppletoria. Copenhagen, 1960. (MMB. Subs.; 4); Lazarevič St. V. An Unknown Early Slavic Modal Signature // Bsl. 1964. T. 25. P. 93-108; Floros K. Universale Neumenkunde. Kassel, 1970. 3 Bde; Strunk O. Two Chilandary Choir Books // Essays on Music in the Byzantine World. N. Y., 1977. P. 220-230; HannickChr. Aux origins de la version slave de l "hirmologion // Fundamental Problems of Early Slavic Music and Poetry. Copenhagen, 1978. (MMB. Subs .; 6); Korableva K. Yu. Penitential verses as a genre of ancient Russian singing art: Kand Dissertation, Moscow, 1979; Kagan M. D., Ponyrko N. V., Rozhdestvenskaya M. V. Description of collections of the XV century. scribe Euphrosyn // TODRL. 1980. T. 35. S. 3-300; Muryanov M.F. On the Old Slavonic "sparks" and its derivatives // VYa. 1981. No. 2. S. 115-123; Shenker A.M. Old Church Slavonic "sparks" (close) and its derivatives // Ibid. pp. 110-114; Yanin V. L. Novgorod scriptorium of the XI-XII centuries: Lazarev Monastery // AE for 1981. M., 1982. S. 52-63; Parfentiev N.P. On the activities of commissions for the correction of Old Russian. chanter books in the 17th century. // AE for 1984. M., 1986. S. 128-139; he is. Old Russian singer. art in the spiritual culture of the Russian state of the XVI-XVII centuries: Schools. centers. Masters. Sverdlovsk, 1991; he is. Outstanding Russian. musicians of the 16th-17th centuries: fav. scientific Art. Chelyabinsk, 2005; Lozovaya I.E. Original features of the Znamenny chant: Cand. dis. K., 1987; she is. “Word from words weaves sweet singing” // GDRL. 1989. Sat. 2. S. 383-422; she is. Old Russian. notated Paraclitic con. XII - beginning. XIII century: Prev. notes for the study of singing. books // GDRL. 1993 Sat. 6. Part 2. S. 407-432; she is. Byzantine prototypes of Old Russian. chanter terminology // Keldyshevsky Sat.: Muz.-ist. Thu. in memory of Yu. V. Keldysh, 1997. M., 1999. S. 62-72; she is. Old Russian. notated Paraclete in the circle of Irmologii XII - 1st half. XV century: Melodic variants and versions in the chant of the canons // Gimnologiya. 2000. Issue. 1. S. 217-239; she is. Images and symbols of ancient Russian. chanter art: Canons of melopei and "Shestodnev" // From the history of Russian. music culture: In memory of A. I. Kandinsky. M., 2002. S. 31-47. (Scientific tr. MGK; Sat. 35); Petrova L. A., Seregina N. S., comp. Early Russian. lyric: Repertoire reference book. music-poetic. texts of the XV-XVII centuries. L., 1988; Huseynova Z. M. Guidelines for the theory of signs. 15th century singing (sources and editions) // Old Russian. chanter culture and literacy: Sat. scientific tr. L., 1990. S. 20-46. (Problems of musicology; 4); she is. "Notice ... to those who demand to learn to sing" - a monument to Russian. medieval music-theor. thoughts: Comment. and research. // Alexander Mezenets and others. Announcement ... about the most concordant litters requiring learning to sing. Chelyabinsk, 1996, pp. 493-494; Seregina N. S. Chants Rus. saints: According to the materials of the handbook. chanter books of the 11th-19th centuries "Monthly Stihirar". SPb., 1994; Shekhovtsova IP Hymn and Sermon: Two Traditions in Byzantium. hymnographic art // Music. orthodox culture. of the world: Traditions, theory, practice. M., 1994. S. 8-34; Shkolnik M. G. Problems of Reconstruction Znam. chant of the XII-XVII centuries: (Based on the material of the Byzantine and Old Russian Irmology): Ph.D. dis. M., 1996; eadem (Schkolnik M.). 4 Principles of the Development of the 11th-17th Cent. Significant Notation // Musica Antiqua Europae Orientalis. Acta Musicologica, XI. Bydgoszcz, 1997. P. 241-253; eadem. Reconstructing the Znamenny Chant of the 12th-17th Cent.: Problems and Possibilities // Palaeobyzantine Notations, II: Acta of the Congr. Held at Hernen Castle (The Netherlands) in Oct. 1996 / Ed. Chr. Troelsgard, G. Wolfram. Hernen, 1999, pp. 63-70; Schkolnik I. Stichera-Automela in Byzantine and Slavonic Sources of the Late 11th - Late 18th Cent. // Ibid. P. 81-97; Parfentieva N.V. Creativity of the Old Russian masters. chanter art of the XVI-XVII centuries. Chelyabinsk, 1997. S. 172-180; Gruzintseva N.V. Triode Stihirar in Russian. chanter practice of the XII-XVII centuries. // Glory days. writing and culture: Mat-ly Vseros. scientific conf. Vladivostok, 1998, part 1, pp. 112-120; Kazantseva M. G. Evolution of the book. Irmology in singing practice Dr. Russia (XII-XVII centuries) // Ibid. pp. 121-128; Stolyarova L.V. Old Russian. inscriptions of the XI-XIV centuries. on parchment codices. M., 1998. S. 197-199; Zabolotnaya N.V. Church chorister. manuscripts dr. Russia XI-XIV centuries: The main types of books in the historical-functional aspect: Issled. M., 2001; Ignatieva A. A. Singing manuscripts from the collection of the New Jerusalem Monastery (State Historical Museum, Synodal Singing Collection) // EzhBK. 2001. S. 428-437; Korotkikh D. Stihirar Logina Shishelova // Ibid. pp. 405-411; Zhivaeva O. On the tradition of performing kathismas in the Russian Church // Gymnology. 2003. Issue. 3. S. 152-153; Zakharyina N. B. Russian liturgical singers. books of the 18th-19th centuries: Synodal tradition. St. Petersburg, 2003; Lifshits A. L. On the dating of the Stihirar from the library of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra // Chrysograph: Sat. Art. to the anniversary of G. Z. Bykova. M., 2003. S. 96-101; Shabalin D.S. Singing ABCs Dr. Rus: Texts. Krasnodar, 2003; Bulanin D. M., Romodanovskaya E. K. Tikhon Makarievsky // SKKDR. 2004. Issue. 3. Part 4. S. 31-42; Ramazanova N.V. The Moscow kingdom in the church choir. art of the XVI-XVII centuries. St. Petersburg, 2004; Tyurina O.V. Gospel Stichera: A New Look at the History. the path of development of the cycle and the ratio of editions // "I'm going to a path unknown to me ...": In memory of E. Filippova. M., 2006. S. 53-61. (Scientific tr. MGK; Sat. 55); she is. Cycle of stichera of the Gospels: Stylistic editions according to the manuscripts of the end. XV - ser. 17th century // Hymnology. 2008. Issue. 5: Oral and written transmission of church choristers. traditions: East - Russia - West. pp. 171-176; Ukhanova E.V. The most ancient Russian. redaction of the Studian statute: the origin and features of worship according to the Typographic list // Typographic statute. M., 2006. S. 239-253; Pozhidaeva G. A. Singing traditions Dr. Rus: Essays on theory and style. M., 2007; Smilyanskaya E. B., Denisov N. G. Old Believers of Bessarabia: Books and Singing Culture. M., 2007; Evdokimova A. A. Musical Greek. graffiti from the church of St. Sophia in Kyiv // ADSV. 2008. Issue. 38. S. 185-195; Shvets T. V. Azmatik of the Annunciation kondakar // Greco-Russian singers. parallels: To the 100th anniversary of the Athos expedition of SV Smolensky. M.; SPb., 2008. S. 100-132. See also lit. in Art. Church singing in the volume "Russian Orthodox Church" PE.
I. E. Lozovaya
Russian church music began with the Znamenny chant, which arose during the baptism of Russia. Its name is associated with the use of special notation signs - “banners” for its recording. Their intricate names are associated with a graphic image: a bench, a darling, a cup, two in a canoe, etc. Visually, banners (otherwise - hooks) are a combination of dashes, dots and commas.
Each banner contains information about the duration of sounds, their number in a given motive, the direction of the sound of the melody and the features of the performance.
The intonations of the Znamenny chant were assimilated by the chanters and parishioners of the church by ear from the masters of Znamenny singing, since the banners did not fix the exact pitch of the sound. Only in the XVII century. the appearance in the texts of special cinnabar (red) marks made it possible to designate the pitch of the hooks.
Spiritual component of Znamenny chant
It is not possible to understand what Znamenny chant is and appreciate its beauty without referring to the spiritual significance of chant in Russian Orthodox culture. Samples of Znamenny melodies are the fruits of the highest spiritual contemplation of their creators. The meaning of znamenny singing is the same as that of the icon - the liberation of the soul from passions, detachment from the visible material world, therefore the old Russian church unison is devoid of the chromatic intonations that are needed when expressing human passions.
An example of a chant based on the Znamenny chant:
S. Trubachev “Grace of the world”
Thanks, the Znamenny chant sounds majestic, dispassionate, strict. The melody of monophonic prayer chant is characterized by smooth movement, noble simplicity of intonations, a clearly defined rhythm, and completeness of construction. The chant is in perfect harmony with the spiritual text being performed, and singing in unison focuses the attention of the singers and listeners on the words of the prayer.
From the history of the znamenny chant
Znamenny notation example
To reveal more fully what Znamenny chant is, an appeal to its origins will help. Znamenny originates from the ancient Byzantine liturgical practice, from which Russian Orthodoxy borrowed the annual circle of osmosis (the distribution of church hymns into eight singing tones). Each voice has its own bright melodic turns, each voice is designed to reflect different moments of a person’s spiritual states: repentance, humility, tenderness, delight. Each melody is associated with a specific liturgical text and is tied to a specific time of the day, week, year.
In Russia, the chants of Greek singers gradually changed, absorbing the features of the Church Slavonic language, Russian musical intonations and metro rhythms, acquiring greater melodiousness and smoothness.
Types of Znamenny chant
Asking the question of what Znamenny chant is and what varieties of it are known, one should look at it as a single musical system that actually embraces famous, or pillar (eight voices form a set of melodies "pillar", cyclically repeated every 8 weeks), travel and demestvenny chants . All this musical matter is united by a structure based on chants - short melodic turns. The sound material is built on the basis of the liturgical rank and the church calendar.
Travel chant is a solemn, festive singing, which is a complicated and transformed form of pillar chant. The travel chant is characterized by strictness, firmness, and rhythmic virtuosity.
Of the named stylistic varieties of znamenny chant, the demest chant is not included in the book of Oktoih (“octophonic”). It is distinguished by the solemn nature of the sound, a festive style is presented, they sing the most important liturgical texts, hymns of hierarchal worship, weddings, and consecration of churches.
At the end of the XVI century. the “great znamenny chant” was born, which became the highest point in the development of Russian znamenny singing. Extended and chanted, smooth, unhurried, equipped with an abundance of extensive melismatic constructions with rich intra-syllable chants, the “great znamenny” sounded at the most significant moments of the service.
Theological and liturgical dictionaryZnamenny singing(hook singing) - type, which is based on a monophonic choral performance of the composition. Znamenny singing is also called Orthodox canonical singing due to its antiquity and prevalence in the times of the Byzantine Empire, as well as its development within the framework of osmosis.
The very name of Znamenny singing comes from the word "banners" and its synonym "hooks" (hence the hook singing). The fact is that it was customary to designate sound intervals with the help of special signs called “banners” or “hooks”, which were placed above the canonical text. These signs carried information about the melodic turnover (chants, melody). For the singer, such melodic turns formed original patterns that he could use to compose melodies, depending on the time and rank of the service.
Znamenny singing was widespread in Russia from the 11th to the 17th century. The source of Znamenny chant is Byzantine liturgical practice. In the 17th century, Znamenny singing was replaced by partes. P. I. Tchaikovsky, S. V. Rakhmaninov, and others used the melodies of Znamenny chant in their compositions. Now in Orthodox Church there is an interest in Znamenny chant and its revival.
From the book: "Temple, rituals, worship":
Znamenny chant- the main chant of ancient Russian monodic music (11-17 centuries). It received its name from the general name of the signs used to record it - “banners”. The source for Znamenny was the late Byzantine (so-called "Coislin") notation; From the Byzantine liturgical practice, the principle of organizing musical material, the system of osmosis, was also borrowed. The melody of the Znamenny chant is based on the Everyday scale, it is distinguished by smoothness, balance of wavy lines.
In the process of development of the Znamenny chant, several types of it arose. Stolpovoi Znamenny chant belongs to the neumatic style - there are 2-3, less often 4 tones per syllable (the most typical number of tones in one banner is neuma); there are also melismatic inserts (Fita). He has the richest fund of melodies - chants, the connection and sequence of which is subject to certain rules. The rhythm of the pillared Znamenny chant is varied. He sang the main singing books - Irmologion, Oktoih, Triod, Everyday life, Holidays. Small znamenny chant - syllabic style, recitative - is intended for daily services. He is close to the likes of the old Znamenny chant, found in manuscripts from the 11th century. The large Znamenny chant of the melismatic style originated in the 16th century; among its creators are chanters Fyodor Krestyanin, Savva Rogov and their students. The Great Znamenny chant is distinguished by a wide intra-syllable chant, free variability of the melodic pattern (alternation of gradual movement and jumps).
Znamenny chant served as a source of travel chant and local chant; the development of signs of written notation underlies the way and demestvenny notations. Melodies of the Znamenny chant were used in polyphonic line singing, partes singing (3 and 4 voice harmonizations). In 1772, the Synodal Printing House published notolinear monophonic singing books with chants of Znamenny and other chants, which served as the basis for adaptations and harmonizations of the 19th-20th centuries. M. I. Glinka, M. A. Balakirev, N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov, P. I. Tchaikovsky addressed the harmonization of the Znamenny chant; new principles for processing the Znamenny chant, found by A. D. Kastalsky and based on Russian folk song polyphony, influenced the work of P. G. Chesnokov, A. V. Nikolsky, A. T. Grechaninov, S. V. Rachmaninov (Liturgy , All-night vigil, etc.). Znamenny chant in a monophonic version has survived to this day among the Old Believers.
Fita is a melodic formula of the melismatic style, used in Byzantine and Old Russian music. In the musical monuments of different times there are Phytas, which were abbreviated ("secretly closed" Phytas) - using the letter of the Greek alphabet "phyta". From the 16th century Fits began to be written out completely with the help of a number of simple banners; such a record was also used as a decoding of abbreviations, having received the name "divorce". The melodic content of Fita is, as a rule, developed melodies of different duration (for example, 17 sounds in Fita "leading", 67 - in "comforting"), which are sung in 2-3 syllables of the text. Feats are only used at the beginning or middle of chants. Fits were most widely used in the stichera of especially solemn holidays. The name Fit, their styles, as well as divorces are also contained in the ancient Russian musical-theoretical manuals - the alphabets of music and fitniks.
Hooks, banners (Slavic banner - sign; Latin neuma), signs of ancient Russian non-linear notation. Hook (by the name of one of its main signs) notation (also znamenny, or pillar) originates from the early Byzantine (Paleo-Byzantine) notation and is the main form of ancient Russian musical writing. In the development of znamenny notation, 3 periods are distinguished - early (11-14 centuries), middle (15-early 17 centuries). and late (from the middle of the 17th century). The notation of the first two periods has not yet been deciphered. In the 17th century cinnabar marks appeared in the recordings of the pitch line, then ink marks, which made the Znamenny notation accessible for deciphering. There are unmarked, marked, simultaneously marked and recognized hook manuscripts.
Znamenny notation has an ideographic character. There are 3 types of graphic fixation of melodies, corresponding to melodic formulas of different scale levels: hook proper - Hooks denoting 1-3 tones (sometimes more) in a certain sequence; singing - includes relatively short melodic formulas written in simple banners, often with elements of secret writing ("mystery"); fitny - contains lengthy melodic constructions, completely encrypted.
Znamenny chant
[Against known delusions]
At present, one can speak of the revival of canonical liturgical singing in the Russian Orthodox Church. Znamenny chant is again heard in many monasteries and parishes, schools of znamenny chant are organized, congresses of headmen (regents), etc. At the same time, the experience of the practical restoration of znamenny chant shows that a number of misconceptions have accumulated in relation to Russian liturgical singing.
First of all, Znamenny chant is often associated with the Old Believer Church, calling it the singing of schismatics. This is not true. Znamenny singing is the singing of the united Russian Church, which sounded in it for 7 centuries. At its origins stood such ascetics as St. , such singing was heard by St. Sergius of Radonezh. Liturgical singing was seen as a continuation of monastic prayer work. Only znamenny chant has completeness - the hook books that have come down to us include a full range of chants, which surprisingly correspond to the service in rhythm, character, duration, since the chant was formed in indissoluble unity with the service. The second misconception: Znamenny chant is considered one of the styles of music included in the line of evolutionary development of musical styles. As if Znamenny chant had some kind of musical style as its predecessor, and over time it naturally passes into more developed forms, for example, into polyphony. This is also incorrect. Changes in styles in secular music are based primarily on changes in content. But for liturgical singing, the content is unchanged, eternal, and in time there is not development, but revelation, an approximation to the Truth during periods of spiritual upsurge, or distortion, clouding during recessions. The peak points associated with the prayer feat of the Russian Orthodox people were imprinted and fixed in the Znamenny chant. This is Tradition - the collected experience of the great ascetics of the Church, which becomes the property of the entire Church, all its members.
The difference between liturgical singing and music can also be seen in the means used by Znamenny chant. Its main function is clear and strong pronunciation. the words- dictates the use of monody, the absence of metric pulsation and periodicity in the form. Liturgical singing is characterized by evenness, continuity, corresponding to the constancy of the prayerful feat. There are no actual musical formal effects, climaxes, dynamic and tempo contrasts in it. There is no isolation, completeness, characteristic of a musical work. The hymns are open, included in the whole divine service. The gospel stichera of a large znamenny chant, sounding at the end of a long service, is listened to quite differently from that performed separately. Her perception is prepared by the whole previous sound of the service, and not only melodically. In Sunday Matins, she returns the attention of the worshiper to what has already been experienced - first when reading the Gospel, then when it is repeated-retelling in the exapostilary. Only a special concentrated attention to the Word of God during divine services can explain the very phenomenon of the great znamenny chant. Another wrong bias in relation to the Znamenny chant is the museum one. Znamenny chant from this point of view is a historically localized phenomenon, which has nothing to do with modern practice. Researchers set the task to accurately reconstruct the performance of past centuries. But at the same time, it is overlooked that liturgical singing is only one plane in the complex integrity of worship, is determined by this integrity and bears its imprint.
With a “museum” look, it is difficult for theorists to distinguish fundamental features from random and unimportant ones, and practitioners begin to look for an archaic “manner”, fall into a stylization that kills Znamenny chant as a means of communion with God. The museum approach completely excludes the continuation of the living tradition of Russian liturgical singing, the possibility of the appearance of new znamenny hymns, such as, for example, canonically sung services to the newly glorified saints are today ...
