Byzantine chant

Byzantine chant

Music of the liturgical rite of the Christian Roman Empire of the East from the time of the establishment of Constantinople (at the site of ancient Byzantium) in the early 4th century and persisting beyond the interruption of the Eastern imperial succession by the Ottoman conquest in 1453. The rite is still practiced by tens of millions of Eastern Orthodox Christians whose native language, or liturgical language, is Greek. Through translation into Syriac, Coptic, Arabic, Armenian, Georgian, Church Slavonic and other languages, it has remained the dominant liturgy of the Christian East during the past 1500 years. Its influence at various times has spread as far west as Spain (in the 6th century), and to north-east and south Italy (where isolated pockets still exist). It has prevailed in north-east Africa (Patriarchate of Alexandria), throughout Greece and Palestine (Patriarchate of Jerusalem), through most of the Christian Near East (Patriarchate of Antioch), all Russia, other Slavonic nations and Romania. The main focus of the following discussion is the music of the Greek rite before the fall of Constantinople. The Byzantine chant continued, however, to flourish after this event, specifically in monasteries throughout the former empire and at the patriarchal see of Constantinople. Almost all the medieval chant repertory survives in manuscript sources with musical notation, and in this respect Byzantine chant is wholly comparable to the repertories of the Roman and Ambrosian (Milanese) Churches in the West.

1. Manuscript sources and their notation.2. Ekphonetic (lectionary) notation.3. Melodic notation.4. Liturgical recitatives.5. System of eight modes (oktchos).6. Syllabic psalm tones.7. Formulaic chants.8. Florid psalmody: prokeimena, alllouaria and koinnika.9. Byzantine hymns.10. Syllabic hymn settings.11. Florid hymn settings in classical styles: kontakion and hypako.12. Post-classical florid styles: the kalophonic style and the emergence of personal styles.13. The Ordinary of the Divine Liturgy and Office.14. Paraliturgical and instrumental music.15. Byzantium and the Slavs.16. Byzantium and the West.17. Byzantine music theory.BIBLIOGRAPHY

KENNETH LEVY/CHRISTIAN TROELSGRD

1. Manuscript sources and their notation.Byzantine music manuscripts, whether from Alexandria or Jerusalem, Greece or Asia Minor, Mount Athos or southern Italy, Thessaloniki or Constantinople, in general show the same kind of unity of melodic tradition found among the widely diffused manuscripts of the Gregorian chant in Western Europe. In earlier times the controlling liturgical and musical centers seem to have been first Antioch and then Palestine (during the 6th and 7th centuries); in the 9th century at the latest, control of the melodic traditions shifted to the Constantinople region and eventually to Mount Athos and Thessaloniki, the importance of other centers being markedly reduced.Of some 12,000 to 15,000 surviving Byzantine manuscripts dating from before the fall of the empire, an estimated 10% contain melodic notation (see 3 below), used for the chanting of psalmody and hymns. In addition there are hundreds of manuscript lectionaries of the Old and New Testaments, noted throughout with the auxiliary musical signs of ekphonetic or lectionary notation (see 2), indicating the musical tones for chanting the solemn readings of scripture. The earliest surviving sources with ekphonetic; date from the 9th century, while melodic notation is documented with certainty from about the mid-10th. There are good reasons, however, to assume that both systems developed earlier. Several of the names and shapes of the neumes are common to both notations (the terminology is known from a number of medieval lists and exercises), but as their application in both systems is, with one or two possible exceptions, essentially distinct, a direct dependence of one on the other seems unlikely. The common features, therefore, must derive from a secondary influence. Likewise, no single origin of the various Byzantine notations has yet come to light; their creation and development probably resulted from practical needs or other influences, of which the most significant appear to be the systems of accentuation and punctuation and the letter classification of ancient Greek grammar.While ekphonetic notation cannot be interpreted precisely, the melodic notation in use from about the mid-12th century is fully diastematic, making transcriptions of the chants possible. Aspects of the melodic tradition can be traced from the mid-12th century back to the earliest surviving manuscripts with notation (and in some cases even beyond) owing to the musical-syntactical punctuation and the modal assignments found in early books containing liturgical texts. Important parts of the repertory, however, were not notated until the 14th and 15th centuries or, in a few cases, even later. Nevertheless, inferences can be drawn about earlier centuries partly because of the stability of the later tradition. Thus virtually the full music of the Byzantine Divine Liturgy (corresponding to the Western Mass) and Office during the last centuries of the empire can be reconstructed.

2. Ekphonetic (lectionary) notation.Ekphonetic (from Gk. ekphnsis: reading aloud) notation served as a mnemonic aid in the solemn reading of the Prophets, other passages from the Old Testament, and the Epistle and Gospel texts. In this notation, every phrase (comma) of the text bears two notational signs, one at the beginning and one at the end (see Ekphonetic notation, 3). There are about 20 conventional pairings, each conveying information about the pitch and formula to be used (see ex.1).

Hegs study of ekphonetic notation (D.i 1935) remains authoritative and has been supplemented by Engberg (D.i 1987, 1992) and others. A critical edition of the Constantinopolitan Old Testament Lectionary (the Prophetologion) with notation has also been published (Heg, Zuntz and Engberg, D.i 193981).

3. Melodic notation.This was employed from the 10th century for a wide variety of properly melodic chants. Five principal manuscript collections contain the majority of these melodies: the Heirmologion, consisting of hymns (heirmoi) used in the performance of the biblical canticles; the Stichrarion, a rough equivalent to the Western antiphoner and processional; the asmatikon, a Constantinopolitan choirbook containing florid chants of the Proper and semi-Ordinary; the psaltikon, a Constantinopolitan soloists book containing florid psalm and hymn settings, complementary to the asmatikon; the Akolouthiai manuscripts (orders of service), a group of anthologies originating in about 1300 and containing traditional and contemporary settings of the Ordinary chants as well as elements drawn from the earlier repertories, principally the psaltikon and the asmatikon.Melodic notation may be divided into three main types: Palaeo-Byzantine, 10th12th centuries; Middle Byzantine (Round notation), from the mid-12th century to about 1815; and the New Method (Reformed or Chrysanthine notation), from the 1820s.

(i) Palaeo-Byzantine notation.(ii) Middle Byzantine notation.(iii) The New Method (Reformed or Chrysanthine notation).

(i) Palaeo-Byzantine notation.In the earliest manuscripts containing examples of this stage of notation there are comparatively few signs and not every syllable of text is furnished with notation. It is noteworthy that some of the early chant books were originally text books to which notation was later added between the lines. In many cases the notation has been updated once or twice to a more developed stage or has even been converted into another type entirely. In the mid-11th century, signs began to appear above every syllable of text (Strunk, C1966; Floros, D.ii 1970), indicating the melodic features and style of performance though not the exact pitch. Precise transcription of Palaeo-Byzantine notation is impossible in isolation; approximate transcription of the melodies can be achieved only through careful and critical comparison with their diastematic counterparts in Middle Byzantine notation.Three types of Palaeo-Byzantine notation can be distinguished: Theta, Chartres and Coislin. All were used, with very few exceptions, to notate the syllabic chants of the heirmologion and the stichrarion. Chartres and Coislin notation are named after the manuscript collections in France where they were first observed and studied. Certain basic signs appear in both these branches, suggesting a common parent notation closest to archaic Coislin notation (Strunk, C1966). Notational systems with a mixture of signs from these two traditions are not uncommon. A unique notation with many big signs (megala smadia) was discovered in 1965 in a 14th-century manuscript in the cathedral library of Kastoria, Greece (MS 8; Polits, C1967) and probably represents a trace of the otherwise lost Byzantine ancestor of the Slavonic kondakarion notation (see Russian and Slavonic church music).

(a) Theta notation.This is a rudimentary type characterized by the use of a single sign (or very few signs), often like the Greek letter theta (probably an abbreviation for thema, in the sense of figure or formula) or like an acute accent (oxeia) or double acute accent, over single syllables of the chant text (Raasted, D.ii 1962). Comparison with later, more developed notational types shows that the theta positions correspond to short melismatic formulae. Theta notation indicated only the position of a melisma in an otherwise predominantly syllabic style; the whole melody, including the melisma itself, had to be supplied from memory or improvised in the conventional style of the stichrarion or heirmologion repertories. Possibly the earliest document with traces of Theta notation is a palimpsest heirmologion (US-PRu Garrett 24; see ex.2a), whose script can be dated to about 800 (Raasted, D.ii 1992).

(b) Chartres notation.Occurring in relatively few sources, the earliest of which originated in Constantinople and Mount Athos, this notation is characterized by the use of many complex signs, apparently indicating groups of notes or whole melismas (fig.1). It appears to have become obsolete during the mid-11th century, probably as a result of the reform of the stichrarion repertory, after which Coislin notation in its developed form became the standard Byzantine notation (Strunk, C1966). However, some of the earliest developments towards diastematy may be seen in Chartres notation, and in about 1300 a number of its complex neumes reappeared in Middle Byzantine notation as red or big signs.

(c) Coislin notation.This notation probably originated in Palestine, judging from the provenance of the earliest manuscripts in which it appears (Strunk, C1966). Its prevailing feature is the designation of each melodic step by a separate basic sign and the use of a relatively limited number of group signs. In its more developed stages, these signs are often combined in groups. In time, Coislin notation became refined and more precise in meaning. By at least 1106, as attested by RUS-SPsc gr.789, it had reached its most advanced stage and formed the basis for the transition to Middle Byzantine notation. The two earliest datable manuscripts transmitting Middle Byantine notation date from, respectively, 1177 (ET-MSsc gr.1218) and 116879 (GR-Psj 221).

(ii) Middle Byzantine notation.The principles of Middle Byzantine (Round) notation prevailed from the mid-11th century to about 1815. Whereas Western staff notation, which developed from the heighted neumes of Gregorian chant, can be described as a heighted or graphic notation, relative pitch being represented by relative height on the staff, Middle Byzantine notation can be described as essentially a digital notation: its conventional signs designate the number of steps up or down between each note and the note succeeding it. The notation does not indicate explicitly the size of the intervals; the singers would have understood these from the mode (see chos), the genre, and knowledge of the particular formulae indicated. During the Middle Ages the tonal system was basically diatonic, although some passages even perhaps whole melodies might have been performed chromatically, particularly in the second mode (authentic and plagal).The starting note is indicated by a special sign, the martyria (modal signature), which defines the mode itself and gives the final note of the intonation formula (occasionally written out in full; Raasted, D.ii 1966). The first neume above the first syllable of the text of a hymn thus shows the first note to be sung in relation to the end of the intonation. The most frequently encountered forms of the martyria and the final notes of their intonations for each mode are given in Table 1. The signs consist of stylized forms of the first four letters of the Greek alphabet used as numerals, and of the neumes that indicate characteristic melodic movements of the particular mode.

Because the neumatic notation did not represent pitch precisely, it was not uncommon for Byzantine scribes to insert medial or reference signatures at cadence points in a melody; these generally served to confirm the pitch reached at such a point. However, a medial signature was occasionally used to mark an unexpected feature, for example, the pitch E at a point where the melody apparently stands on D, or F where it ostensibly stands on G. This is generally taken to mean a temporary transposition of the normal diatonic system. Thus the D signature on the pitch E would cause the tetrachord EFGA (the D tetrachord transposed up a tone) to be used in the following passage in place of EFGA; similarly, an F signature on pitch G would cause an F to be used below the G (EF transposed up a tone) in place of F.The first lists of Middle Byzantine neumes did not appear until relatively late; the earliest known is in F-Pn gr.261, dating from 1289. On the basis of these lists the signs may be divided into three groups: the smata (bodies) indicating conjunct movement only (Table 2a); the pneumata (spirits) indicating leaps only (Table 2b); and signs that are neither smata nor pneumata (Table 2d), of which the majority are concerned with rhythmic features or tempo, whereas only a few are used for melodic movement. Of the last the most important is the ison, which indicates the repetition of a note at the same pitch as the preceding one.

The smata express the movement of an ascending or descending 2nd. For the latter there is one basic sign, the apostrophos, but there are no fewer than six signs for the upward movement, each of which conveys a special quality of enunciation and/or stress, the interpretation of which is partly conjectural (Table 2a). The kouphisma and pelaston occur less frequently than the other signs and are linked to special positions and genres.The pneumata indicate only two intervallic steps, the 3rd and 5th, each having two forms, one for the upward movement, the other for the downward direction (Table 2b). In Middle Byzantine notation no pneuma could stand alone; for example, it could be preceded on its left-hand side by a sma, which would reinforce the direction of the pneuma and also impart its quality to it. Thus the melodic movement of an ascending 3rd could be notated in two different ways, as in Table 2c: oligon and kentma (neutral), and oxeia and kentma (accented). The duo apostrophoi is an exception, for in this case the placing of signs side by side signifies a rhythmic lengthening; its melodic function is simply that of a descending 2nd.Other steps such as the 4th or 6th could be obtained by the addition of two smaller intervals, indicated by special placing of the pneumata above the smata (see Table 2c): elaphron above apostrophos (descending 4th); kentma above oxeia (accented ascending 4th).The placing of the ison (neither a sma nor a pneuma: Table 2d) above any of the smata cancels the melodic movement upwards; the note is therefore sounded at the same pitch as the preceding one but with the added quality. For example, when the ison appears above the petast it cancels upward movement but acquires stress (Table 2c). Similarly, the placing of the apostrophos above any of the ascending smata indicates a downward 2nd with the appropriate quality. Occasionally, two smata may be placed one above another; for example, oligon above petast implies the addition of two ascending 2nds resulting in an ascending 3rd with acquired stress (Table 2c). For an example of Middle Byzantine notation, with a transcription of various signs, see ex.3 (the transcription code used is that of MMB, Transcripta, 193659).

In addition to the signs for intervals, there are neumes that indicate lengthening of rhythmic values (Table 2d): dipl, interpreted as double length; kratma, a considerable lengthening, involving some sort of special stress or grace notes; tzakisma, also called klasma, a moderate lengthening; apoderma occurs frequently at the ends of phrases, but its meaning is not clear.Special signs indicate variations in tempo, for example, the gorgon for speeding up and the argon for slowing down (Table 2d); whether the individual signs are attached to a single neume or to a group of neumes (as seems to have been the case in later centuries), their precise effect is uncertain.In addition to rhythmical signs, other megala smadia (also called megalai hypostaseis: big signs or group signs) appear in the melismatic repertories from the beginning of the period in which Middle Byzantine notation flourished; in the stichrarion and other collections the frequent use of these signs occurred later. Although the megala smadia are often linked to specific constellations of interval neumes, their exact significance is not entirely clear. It is thought that they generally indicate agogic refinements, in some cases reinforcing the melodic contour expressed by the individual neumes themselves; it is also possible that they helped singers obtain a quick synoptic view of the formulae applied; additionally, they may have been connected with Cheironomy (gestures performed by the choirmasters; see Moran, D.ii 1986). (For a fuller listing of Middle Byzantine neumes see Haas, D.ii 1973; for a manuscript illustration see fig.2.)The term Late Byzantine refers to the notation in use between the 15th and 19th centuries and distinguishes those musical manuscripts copied mainly after the fall of Constantinople into Turkish hands (29 May 1453) from those written in preceding centuries. Although megala smadia were used more profusely in these later centuries, giving a visual impression of a somewhat different notational practice, all the basic neumes of Middle Byzantine notation remained in use throughout the period.From the 16th century onwards there is evidence to suggest that musicians edited or transcribed parts of the traditional repertory. These transcriptions or exegeses (Gk. exgseis) have created the impression that no Byzantine notation before the 17th century represented melodic movement in all details, but rather that it served as a shorthand record of a performance. On the basis of this assumption some Greek scholars have claimed that Western musicologists (particularly those associated with the series Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae) merely follow the metrophnia (signs of duration and melodic steps) but ignore the real melos, which may be uncovered by interpreting the megala smadia while making allowance for oral tradition (see Staths, D.ii 1978).As an argument against the shorthand interpretation of medieval Byzantine music, the specific nature of the neumatic notation itself and the adequacy of signs to express all kinds of melodic movement may be considered. No musical notation can record with absolute exactness the finer nuances of a composition and its interpretation, but 17th- and 18th-century exegesis appears to be concerned with a peculiar stylistic development that has more to do with a change in musical taste than with notational usage.Non-tempered musical intervals of various sizes (e.g. the oriental augmented 2nd) are known to have existed in 19th-century practice and are used in the current oral traditional of the Greek Orthodox Church; it is clear that during the period of Turkish domination some degree of interaction occurred between Byzantine and oriental music traditions (Zannos, F1994), but this does not exclude the possibility that such intervals may have been known in Byzantium before the 15th century.Transcriptions of chants written in Middle Byzantine notation depend, as in all reconstructions of early music, partly on the notation itself and partly on a series of assumptions regarding its interpretation. The extant musical manuscripts indicate the intervallic steps between successive notes of a chant, but such elements as rhythm, dynamic nuance, non-tempered intervals and tempo cannot be determined exactly. When transcribing chants in medieval Byzantine notation for performance, it is necessary, therefore, to consider the living chant traditions of churches following the Byzantine rite and to compare them with other medieval chant traditions.

(iii) The New Method (Reformed or Chrysanthine notation).The 181415 reform of neumatic notation is associated with Chrysanthos of Madytos, Chourmouzios the Archivist and Gregorios the Protopsaltes, collectively known as the three teachers (Morgan, R1971). This reform involved a significant reduction in the number of signs, especially the phrasing signs (megala smadia). New, special signs were introduced for chromatically altered intervals, duration and rests; and solmization syllables, based on the first few letters of the Greek alphabet, were used to define scales, for example pa, vou, ga, di, ke, z and n, for the diatonic scale from d to d'. Most important was a theory recognizing the presence of more than one type of mode, based on the ancient division into diatonic, chromatic and enharmonic modes. At the same time, the graphic forms of the intonation signs in 18th-century manuscripts were codified. The basic neumes that were retained remained similar to the Middle Byzantine notational forms (fig.3). A vast project of transcribing the Byzantine repertories as practised in the 18th and 19th centuries, including ornamented versions of the late medieval repertory, was undertaken as part of the reform (e.g. the monumental series of autograph manuscripts by Chourmouzios the Archivist in GR-An). The New Method spread rapidly, owing to the systematic pedagogical activities of the Patriarchal School at Constantinople from 1815 onwards and the introduction of music printing in 1820. While some aspects of Chrysanthine theory were subjected to another reform in the 1880s (particularly with regard to the sizes of intervals), the New Method is still used in the official chant books of the Greek Orthodox Church and in other churches following the Byzantine rite (see Greece, IIIII).

4. Liturgical recitatives.From a study of the history of liturgical chant, it may be seen that, in general, the best-known, the simplest, the most venerable chants are the last to be taken out of oral tradition and committed to musical notation. For some of the commonest Byzantine chants there is written witness only from the end of the empire or later. Thus for the amen or allloua that accompany the Trisagion and Cheroubikon, the simple authoritative versions are late. Only one medieval melody survives for the deacons exclamation sophia (wisdom), intoned during every celebration of the Divine Liturgy, and this tradition is from an isolated town in south Italy. Acclamations of emperors were copied time and again from the early 14th century, but the more commonly heard acclamation of the celebrant bishop appears only in a few Byzantine manuscripts. There is no written music at all for the litanies, and for some of the most celebrated Ordinary chants, for example, the Phs hilaron (O gladsome light) of Hesperinos, no noted version survives from before the 17th century. The simple Ordinary chants are difficult to recapture, partly because they were congregational, and therefore too well known to be copied with notation, and partly because their origins often lay in modal recitatives or exclamations which lacked characteristic melodic profiles and thus made no call on notation.

5. System of eight modes (oktchos).The chants discussed hitherto are mainly in recitative styles; in their simplicity they stand essentially outside the Byzantine canon of characteristic musical modes. Chants that were complex enough to be composed properly in Byzantium were systematically assigned to one or other of eight musical modes (choi) which, since at least the 8th century, provided the organizational framework for Byzantine melodic practice. The origins of the Oktchos may be found in ancient music theory and various Near Eastern musical practices. The system was attached to the corpus of Byzantine chant and was closely connected with a liturgical cycle of eight weeks, each ascribed to one mode. The oktchos is traditionally attributed to John Damascene, whose theological and hymnographic writings date from the first half of the 8th century at the monastery of St Sabas in Jerusalem. It is likely that the attempts to regulate chant practice and/or the dissemination of new chant repertories originated in the area of Palestine at about this time; these attempts were connected with early redactions of chant collections such as the heirmologion and the oktchos (parakltik, tropologion), both of which were conceived according to the eight-mode system.During the latter part of the 8th century the Byzantine organization in turn left its imprint on the organization of chants in the West. The eight Byzantine modes (choi) are, in external order and substance, related to the eight Western modes: both systems have the four finals on D, E, F and G, with an authentic (higher-range) form and a plagal (lower-range) form based on each final. Only the use of co-finals and the ordering of the modes differ somewhat in detail: in the Western system, authentic and plagal forms comprising modes 1 to 8 alternate (D authentic, D plagal, E authentic, E plagal etc.) whereas the Eastern numbering takes the four authentic modes in order and then the four plagal modes. More important, the relationship between Eastern and Western modes reaches beyond the systematic externals of organization to characteristic operating features of particular modes and specific details of melodic fabric. Idiomatic turns of corresponding modes may resemble each other on both sides of the liturgical and linguistic division.

6. Syllabic psalm tones.Each Byzantine mode, like each Western mode, has one or more varieties of simple psalm tone attached to it. One common set is shown in ex.4, as first written out in late 13th- and early 14th-century sources; through a remarkable chain of evidence developed by Strunk (G1960), its lineage has been traced to the late 8th century. As in the West, there are intonations, recitation tones and cadences. One characteristic of this psalmody may place it closer to the origins of psalmody than most Gregorian examples; this is the use of the four-element syllable-count cadence, where the last four syllables of a line are applied mechanically and without regard for word accent to four fixed, stylized musical elements constituting the cadence. The Gregorian procedure favours a variety of tonic cadences that make accommodations for differences in text accent. The simpler, more rigid Byzantine procedure of the four-element cadence is, as Strunk suggested, probably the more archaic. (For further discussion of Byzantine psalmody, including a more detailed example of syllabic psalm tones, see Psalm, III, 2 and ex.1.)

7. Formulaic chants.The process of assembling a chant as a selective patchwork (cento) of modally appropriate formulae often termed centonization is a characteristic of many orally composed and transmitted repertories. In Gregorian chant it is a common feature of the structure of the tracts and the F-authentic graduals (among others), and its use is even more rigorous and widespread among composed Byzantine chants. Byzantium was also more explicit in its recognition in music theory of formulaic composition. The earliest Byzantine music treatise is a 10th-century catalogue containing elements of music theory, notational signs and names for melismatic groups or formulae. In about 1300 Joannes Glykys and Joannes Koukouzeles undertook the elaborate task of weaving together the music for a great many of these formulae into continuous didactic chants. Such chants, which found their way into elementary instruction manuals in Byzantine chant, present a broad selection of single neumes, groups and formulae from different genres. Some formulae from To mega ison by Koukouzeles are illustrated in ex.5.

The basic operations of Byzantine formulaic composition are familiar from their manifestations in the West. Melodic patterns and formulae may represent a single mode or several modes, though rarely all the modes. The relation of formulae to specific pitches in the tonal system seems often more decisive than allegiance to a particular mode or modes. Formulae and patterns also tend to function in specific positions initial (phrase-starters), middle or cadential within the natural contour of musical phrases, and they often underline the syntactic structure of texts. The accentuation of the text also seems to have a strong influence on the choice of formula, especially in the syllabic genres; thus a specific number of unaccented syllables before the first accent often results in the same melodic opening in several pieces of the same mode. The formulae are also made to serve larger formal designs: they may embellish a psalmodic framework or combine into some abstract compositional figuration with symmetries of its own; they may be attached to a specific category of liturgical chant, or to a specific performing medium, helping to define a particular style by their rejection of other categories. The characteristic florid choral style of the asmatikon and the florid soloists style of the psaltikon have few formulae in common. The choral, syllabic hymn repertories of the heirmologion and stichrarion, however, share a good deal of stock material, some of which is common also to the psaltikon and the asmatikon.

8. Florid psalmody: prokeimena, alllouaria and koinnika.As in the West the Psalter has elaborate settings that take the shape of formulaic embellishments on a psalmodic framework. Corresponding in function to the Roman graduals (Mass responsories) and Ambrosian psalmelli are the Byzantine prokeimena (see Prokeimenon), which are delivered by a soloist before the Epistle at the Divine Liturgy (some are also used at Hesperinos and Orthros). The prokeimena are contained in the Constantinopolitan psaltikon; the refrains are given in a different version in the complementary choirbook, the asmatikon; and some parallel settings in syllabic, psalmodic style are found in the akolouthiai manuscripts. Ex.6 shows the refrain of the Easter prokeimenon in the psaltikon style. Like its Gregorian and Ambrosian counterparts, this chant is a setting of Psalm cxvii.24; it is in the plagal mode on G and perhaps has some melodic substance in common with the parallel Ambrosian chant.

The Byzantine allloua refrain and florid psalm verse (alllouarion) precede the Gospel Lesson, as in the West (see Alleluia, II). An old cycle of some five dozen Proper alllouaria survives in the psaltikon. A peculiar feature of this cycle is the complete avoidance of the authentic and plagal modes on F. This is also the case with the Ambrosian alleluia verses; in the Gregorian repertory the number of alleluias in F modes is smaller in comparison with those in the other six modes. Ex.7 gives the allloua refrain and first verse, Anastt ho Theos (Let God arise, Psalm lxvii.1), for the Holy Saturday Divine Liturgy, in the version of the 13th-century south Italian psaltikon; this reading is somewhat more florid than the related version of the standard psaltikon considered by Thodberg (I1966). The chant is in the authentic mode on G.

The cycle of Byzantine Proper communions (koinnika) was assigned to the select choirs (psaltai) of Hagia Sophia and is transmitted in the asmatikon (see Koinnikon). A representative example is given in ex.8: the koinnikon for Pentecost, To pneuma sou, to agathon (Thy good spirit, Psalm cxlii.10), a chant in the plagal mode on G. Not only is this melody also found in 12th-century Slavonic sources, but it probably existed in the Greek tradition of the 11th century or perhaps even the 10th.

9. Byzantine hymns.Unlike the Western Church, where hymns have had a relatively restricted role (they are practically excluded from Mass, and at Rome they were accepted for the Office only in the 11th century), in the Eastern Church the growth of hymnody far exceeded that of the psalmodic chants. Over 60,000 incipits of Byzantine hymns are recorded in Follieris six-volume Initia hymnorum ecclesiae graecae (J196066), which draws only on hymns in published sources. Other thousands lie unpublished in medieval manuscripts, and other tens of thousands must have disappeared as a result of the violent theological-political controversies that accompanied spiritual movements such as Iconoclasm.Pitras 19th-century study Hymnographie de lglise grecque (J1867) did much to illumine the poetic nature of Byzantine hymns, yet some details of the poetic process are still in dispute. The vast majority of hymns are strophic, and metrically the standard verse is governed by accent and not (as in ancient Greek poetry) by quantity. Line-symmetries are tailored, more or less flexibly, to the number of syllables and the position of accents within a line. A kind of formulaic poetic procedure the artistic accommodation of a select vocabulary of poetic-theological units is as obvious a factor in the formation of the literary style of some hymns as it is in their musical setting.

10. Syllabic hymn settings.

(i) Troparion.Most Eastern hymns have simple music, generally based on the principle of one note to each syllable of text, to render them suitable for congregational singing. A miscellaneous class of early monostrophic hymns also known as troparia (see Troparion) goes back in some instances to the 4th century. For these, no early written music survives since the tunes were familiar to everyone. The Ordinary hymn at Hesperinos, Phs hilaron, had (as already observed) no written music before the 17th century. For the Doxa en hypsistois The (Gloria in excelsis Deo), dating from the 4th century or earlier and sung at the conclusion of Orthros, there are only partial settings from the 13th century; and the troparion melody sung at the beginning of every Divine Liturgy, Ho monogens huios (O only-begotten Son), attributed to Emperor Justinian I (d 565), was written down at a very late stage.

(ii) Kontakion.The first major form of Byzantine hymn writing was the Kontakion, a kind of long metrical sermon that was cultivated in the 5th century or early 6th, drawing on the Syriac tradition of church poetry. Kontakia are poetic-narrative elaborations on biblical texts, often of 20 or 30 long stanzas or more. The metrically similar stanzas, called oikoi (from Gk. oikos: house), have a short concluding refrain (ephymnion), and they are normally linked by their opening letters into an acrostic that incorporates the name of the poet-composer (meldos), or the liturgical occasion of the poem, or the letters of the alphabet. The whole set of oikoi is prefaced by an introductory strophe called the koukoulion or prooimion, which is of differing structure and metre; it shares the common refrain and the musical mode of the oikoi but may be a later addition.The foremost composer of kontakia was Romanos the Melodist, born in Syrian Emesa (Him) and active at Constantinople during the first half of the 6th century. Some 85 works are attributed to Romanos, including kontakia for most major feasts of the liturgical year. His rich poetic style touches extremes of grandiloquence and pathos. Kontakia must have been intended originally for a syllabic musical setting, whether recitative or properly composed, because the hundreds of lines comprising each of these metrical sermons would take too long to perform in any other way.However, the earliest surviving melodies (?9th century or 10th) were florid (see 11 below), consisting of settings of the prooimion and the first oikos from the psaltikon collection. A cycle of kontakia in syllabic style is preserved in a small group of 13th- and 14th-century manuscripts, most notably RUS-SPsc 674 (ex.9a). The main purpose of these syllabic kontakia was to serve as model melodies for contrafact troparia; they are similar in style to the rest of the model melodies of the troparia as well as to the model melodies of the stichra automela (see Stichron). It is possible that the occasional citations from kontakia found in the syllabic stichra preserve characteristics of earlier syllabic kontakia (Levy, K.ii 1961). It would seem, therefore, that the syllabic and florid traditions co-existed for a considerable period. Although the earliest tradition of the kontakion was undoubtedly syllabic, it is difficult to identify with any certainty the archaic elements in the surviving examples written in syllabic style: during centuries of oral transmission the melodies were probably modified and reshaped; certainly, in the few extant sources, they display considerable variation.

(iii) Kann.The second large-scale strophic form of Byzantine hymnody is the Kann. Although kontakia of reduced length were still being produced in the 9th century, it seems that from the later 7th century the kann was favoured above the kontakion. The first master of the new form was Andrew of Crete (c660-c740), whose Great Kann, sung in mid-Lent, is of the exceptional length of 250 stanzas. A kann is in substance an elaborate nine-section poetic trope on the nine biblical canticles sung at Orthros, among whose verses it is interspersed. (For a list of the biblical canticles see Canticle, 2; for the musical recitation of the canticles see Psalm, III.)Each biblical canticle has corresponding to it an ode (d) of the nine-ode kann; each ode consists normally of three or four similarly structured strophes sung to the same music. The first strophe of an ode is its heirmos or model-strophe; the succeeding strophes are called troparia. The eight or nine odes of a complete kann (ode 2 is often omitted) are united by references to the general theme of the liturgical occasion, by the same musical mode and, at times, by an acrostic; but in other respects they are independent. Kann composition reached its peak in the 8th and 9th centuries, first in Palestine with the works of John Damascene (d c749) and Kosmas of Jerusalem (fl 1st half of the 8th century), then in Constantinople with Abbot Theodore of Stoudios (d 826), his brother Joseph, and the two Sicilians Methodius (d 846) and Joseph the Hymnographer (d 883). Although kann texts continued to be produced into the 13th century and beyond, after the 8th century or the 9th new texts were simply adapted to the music of existing heirmoi (model stanzas). For the heirmoi, the classical chants in syllabic styles are collected in a book called the Heirmologion, which may contain as many as 2000 model stanzas. Like a Western tonary, the heirmologion is divided into one section per mode. Within each mode there are two systems of internal organization: in the first, the full series of eight heirmoi follow each other; in the second, all odes with the same number are grouped together. One of the earliest surviving heirmologia (US-PRu Garrett 24; 2nd half of the 8th century to the early 9th) is a palimpsest manuscript containing only works ascribed to the Palestine masters (Raasted, D.ii 1992). The manuscript is outstanding not only because of its age and its use of a primitive melodic notation but also because, like the Slavonic and old Georgian heirmologia, it follows the second system of organization. The oldest extant heirmologion with full melodic notation dates from the 10th century.The simple melodic style of the classical heirmos is illustrated in ex.10; this is the first ode of a Resurrection (Sunday) kann in the authentic mode on E, attributed to John the Monk (?St John Damascene). The style is almost wholly syllabic. The use of formulae plays a decisive role in the development of the musical fabric. The hundreds of heirmos melodies in each mode are patched together from a limited repertory of melodic patterns and formulae characteristic of the mode. Extreme care was given to the syntactical structure and to the proper accentuation of the text.

(iv) Stichron.The other major collection of classical Byzantine hymns whose full music survives is the Stichrarion. Unlike the few dozen extant medieval heirmologia (the tunes were probably too simple and familiar to warrant much copying), there are hundreds of surviving stichraria which normally transmit a repertory of some 2000 longer hymns in a slightly more elaborate style than that of the heirmologion. The stichrarion resembles in style and content a collection of Latin antiphons. Much of its content dates from the 8th century, although some must go back as far as the 7th or earlier (as Strunk has demonstrated for certain Easter hymns); on the other hand, hymns such as the hethina, or Morning Hymns, by the Emperor Leo VI (886912), are later, even as late as the 12th century for saints recently entered in the Calendar. Most stichra, as the individual hymns are called (see Stichron), serve as choral interpolations among the concluding verses of the ordinary psalms at Hesperinos and Orthros. The musical style and procedures are like those of the heirmoi except that the stichra are more lavishly punctuated with embellishing melismas, which in some cases may be quite lengthy. The opening of an elaborate stichron for the Veneration of the Cross (sung in the fourth week of Lent) is given in ex.11.

11. Florid hymn settings in classical styles: kontakion and hypako.Two related classes of Byzantine hymns are transmitted in the classical, florid, formulaic styles of the asmatikon and psaltikon rather than the syllabic formulaic style of the heirmologion and stichrarion. The kontakia, in the music manuscripts represented by the introductory strophe and first oikos, had complete cycles of settings in both the soloists style of the psaltikon and the choral style of the asmatikon (the latter known mainly through derived 12th- and 13th-century Slavonic copies). Only for the most celebrated of all kontakia, the anonymous Akathistos Hymn, whose 24 strophes are still sung in full on the Saturday before Passion Sunday, is there a complete florid setting of all the strophes in psaltikon style; this hymn survives in a south Italian tradition of the late 13th century (transcr. E. Wellesz, MMB, Transcripta, ix, 1957).The shorter monostrophic hymns called hypakoai (analogous to the Western responsories) also received florid settings in both psaltikon and asmatikon styles. The beginning of the kontakion-hypako for the Sunday of Orthodoxy (the 1st Sunday in Lent), a text of the mid-9th century, is given in ex.12 for both melodic traditions.

12. Post-classical florid styles: the kalophonic style and the emergence of personal styles.The traditional syllabic stylizations of the heirmologion and stichrarion may be traced back with certainty to the 10th century; possibly they had already taken their definitive shape by the 8th century or even some centuries earlier. The classical florid stylizations of the psaltikon and asmatikon probably existed during the 11th century (by which time the Asmatic repertory was borrowed by the Slavs); and there are indications that they were formed by the 9th century. With the 12th century, however, the traditional formulaic styles had begun to give way to new styles. There were new techniques of embellishment that gave greater scope to the individual musicians taste. By the later 13th century an enormous outpouring of such freer creative effort had taken place, and a new, post-classical stylization had emerged for handling the traditional melodies. Described by the Byzantine term kalophonic (i.e. beautiful-sounding or embellished), it is a style of extravagant embellishments, loosed from the restraints of the formulaic procedures of the psaltikon and asmatikon. Much freedom is given to vocal display: there are many sequences, repeated articulations of a single pitch, and wide leaps. The expansive, kalophonic versions of traditional chants are recorded with great notational precision in new classes of manuscript: the kalophonic stichrarion, kalophonic heirmologion, kalophonic kontakarion (oikmatarion) and similar florid collections. (See also Kalophonic chant.)Parallel with this was a new attitude towards composition. Musical style was previously an anonymous fusion of prose or poetry with the traditional formulae of the musical vocabulary. Now, instead, the composer cultivated a personal style and attached his own name to the composition. A specific compositional technique was applied in the kalophonic stichrarion. Taking a traditional piece in syllabic style as their point of departure and frequently preserving the syntactical-musical division and the scheme of internal modulations, composers would repeat and/or embellish parts of words, single words and even short phrases, rearrange the text (anagrammatismos) and often add whole melismatic passages on meaningless syllables (teretismata or kratmata) towards the end of each section. The kalophonic stichra normally ended, however, with a melodic or textual quotation from the syllabic original, at which point the choir joined in (apo chorou). Many composers are known from the last century and a half of the empire but few from before. And these men were animated by an unprecedented sense of artistic competition. The most celebrated composer of the period around 1300 was the Constantinopolitan mastr Joannes Koukouzeles, the organizer of the big anthologies of the current musical repertory called Akolouthiai (orders of service). These were the first Byzantine collections to contain in a single volume almost all the Ordinary music needed for the celebration of the Divine Liturgy and Office. From the time before Koukouzeles there are works attributed to Michael Aneotes (or Ananeotes), Kampanes and others (see below); later the leading composers were Joannes Glykys and Nikephoros Ethikos (both slightly older contemporaries of Koukouzeles); then Xenos Korones (perhaps a younger contemporary); the late 14th century had as its leading composer the lampadarios Joannes Kladas, and the mid-15th century, Manuel Chrysaphes. Competitive kalophonic elaborations of a single traditional chant are a common occurence. Three versions of the stichron Meta to techthnai, a hymn in the plagal mode on G for the feast of the Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple (21 November), are given in ex.13: ex.13a shows the first two lines in the classical syllabic style of the stichrarion; ex.13b is an elaboration attributed to the early kalophonic master Kampanes with further embellishments by Joannes Koukouzeles; ex.13c is what is supposed to be the same embellished version by Kampanes, but with more elaborate embellishments by Xenos Korones. All classical repertories, both syllabic and florid, were subsequently subjected to modernizations and individualizations of this nature. The most exuberant examples of the kalophonic style are the long, freely composed kratmata, which were commonly interpolated among verses of the vesper psalms and elsewhere. Some of these last ten minutes or more in performance.

13. The Ordinary of the Divine Liturgy and Office.The most important applications of the kalophonic procedure, however, were to the chants of the Ordinary. The Byzantine Ordinary includes textual counterparts to the Western Gloria in excelsis (at Orthros) and Sanctus. The Credo may have been sung at Byzantium in early times but in the middle and late Byzantine periods it was not sung, and the only independent melodies are from the mid-15th century and later. There was no Agnus Dei at Byzantium, but the Eastern rite has Ordinary or semi-Ordinary chants for some functions that in the West are Proper chants. The Byzantine offertory chant, known as the Cherubic Hymn or Cheroubikon, is Ordinary (with three alternatives for special liturgical occasions during the year). There is an Ordinary chant for the communion during Lent, based on Psalm xxxiii.8. The Trisagion, which is used at Rome principally on Good Friday, is Ordinary at Byzantium. Such chants never appear in earlier Byzantine musical manuscripts since they were intended for the congregation and their simple musical versions required no notation. During the 13th century, the Ordinary chants began to appear in manuscript, though not in their syllabic, congregational forms but rather in florid kalophonic elaborations. At times these offer glimpses of a simpler underlying chant. Thus for the Cheroubikon, Hoi ta chroubim, there were some two dozen settings by kalophonic composers, produced between the later 13th and mid-15th centuries. Nearly all these use the same underlying materials of the plagal E or related plagal G modes. The earliest surviving tradition for this chant is given in ex.14, according to an authoritative 13th-century manuscript.

14. Paraliturgical and instrumental music.Closely allied to the liturgical ceremonial of the Church is the public ceremonial of the Byzantine court. Practically no music survives from Byzantium that is not directly connected with the church service. But rich details concerning the genres of chant and the instruments used at receptions and imperial processions are contained in the Book of Ceremonies. In this book, transmitted under the name of the Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogennetus (90559), a large number of chants and their modal assignments are cited, and likewise also in the De officiis of Pseudo-Codinus, dating from the mid-14th century. Various wind and string instruments are represented in artistic monuments. Organs, which were excluded from church use, had an important part in imperial ceremonies. The chronicler Theophanes the Confessor (9th century) reported that the Emperor Constantine VI and Empress Irene had such instruments in their baggage when they visited the military frontier at Thrace in 784. It was the importation of Byzantine organs to the West that helped revive interest in the instrument, the most notable occasion being the organ sent to the Frankish King Pippin in 757. There is a 16th-century description of the reading of lessons at Hagia Sophia where bells were rung at the end of paragraphs. Each section of the reading was repeated three times in succession by different readers posted at different points in the church. The bellringing indicated to the distant reader when the previous reader had finished. At Patmos this was still the practice in recent times, although the triple reading was no longer needed.To Western ears the most striking Byzantine performing practice is the use of an ison or drone to accompany liturgical singing. This is still heard in Orthodox churches. Rubrics in music manuscripts provide the earliest hints for the practice; this evidence can be traced back to about 1400, although the practice probably existed throughout the Middle Ages. It was described in 1584 by the German traveller Martin Crusius: more utriculariorum nostrorum, alius vocem eodem sono tenet, alius, Dra Dra, saltatorium in modum canit. There is no independent Byzantine polyphony of the kind that developed in the West.Liturgical musical drama at Byzantium is scarcely documented. Only for the Akolouthia ts kaminou (the drama of the Three Children in the Furnace) is music extant, dating from the 15th century (for a full discussion, and details concerning the traditions in Byzantium and Russia, see Velimirovi, O1962).Popular, orally transmitted traditions for liturgical chants have been insufficiently studied, although there is some documentation of such traditions in Greek enclaves by the Black Sea (Azov Greeks), in Crete, the Eptanese Islands and Corsica, and among the Albanian- and Greek-speaking minorities following the Byzantine rite in south Italy (Apulia, Calabria and Sicily).

15. Byzantium and the Slavs.Byzantine liturgical influence began its decisive impact on the Slavs with the evangelizing mission of SS Cyril and Methodius to the south Slavs in the mid-9th century. It is possible that by this time the full complement of Byzantine liturgical books had already been translated into Old Church Slavonic; and there is also some possibility that the Byzantine liturgical melodies were transmitted with the translated texts. This was certainly the case by the 11th century and the heyday of Kievan Rus'. The vast corpus of Byzantine liturgical texts were translated, and there was wholesale appropriation of the liturgical melodies, apparently without significant alteration except for slight adaptations of the melodies to take into account the different number of syllables and the Slavonic accentuation. Through the early 13th century, the Slavic copies of the heirmologion, stichrarion and asmatikon (no full Slavic copy of the psaltikon survives) were essentially faithful to the melodic traditions of their Greek originals (see Russian and slavonic church music, fig.1) and it would appear from the evidence of the extant Greek versions that Slavic liturgical conservatism even conspired on occasion to preserve a more authoritative version of a traditional melody. After the Mongol invasions during the mid-13th century, however, the musical traditions grew apart.The oldest layers of Slavic neumes are based on pre-diastematic stages of Byzantine notations. They cast precious light on early melodies for which Greek sources are lost or incomplete, but they themselves cannot generally be transcribed without a counterpart Greek melody as a guide. (Such counterpart transcriptions have been published by Velimirovi, Strunk, Levy, Floros, Schidlovsky, Konstantinova Ulff-Mller, Shkolnik and Shkolnik; see bibliography, P). The great wealth of early Slavic musical manuscripts that exist in libraries in Russia are yet to be examined in detail.The Byzantine-derived chant repertories of the early south Slavic rites and the Kievan rite were absorbed by stages into later branches of the Slavic rites, those of the Bulgarians, Romanians, Serbs, Ukranians and others. However, the synthesis between Byzantine and national idioms in these musical traditions has not yet been fully explored.

16. Byzantium and the West.The wholesale musical borrowings that took place between Slavic and Byzantine chants did not occur between Byzantium and the West. Yet there are two important interrelationships between the Greek and Latin chant repertories. The broad classification of Gregorian chants into eight modes (with all that it entails the symmetrical system of four finals, the high and low forms with each final, the canon of intonation formulae and psalmodic differentiae etc.) owes its definitive shape to Byzantine influence probably exercised most intensively during the latter half of the 8th century. On the other hand, there are a number of possible melodic borrowings (again from East to West) that can be dated variously between the 6th and 9th centuries. Notker reported (Gesta Karoli, ii.7) that Charlemagne himself during the first years of the 9th century ordered the translation of the well-known series of antiphons beginning with Veterem hominem, for the octave of Epiphany. Carolingian musical liturgists also experimented with a full missa graeca for Pentecost, elements of which made their way into a Greek Mass in honour of St Denis. The Good Friday antiphon O quando in cruce/Otin to stauron, found in both Latin and Greek forms in the Beneventan rite and in Latin in the Ravenna rite, is likely to have been borrowed from the Greek troparion Hote t staur by the mid-8th century, for at that point the submission of Ravenna to Lombard and eventual papal rule detached the former exarchate from primary Byzantine influence. The Ambrosian rite contains a number of melodic borrowings, among them the Maundy Thursday ingressa or post-evangelium Coenae tuae mirabili (based on the Byzantine Cheroubikon alternative Tou deipnou sou tou mystikou); and the ingressa Videns ne Elisabeth, for the special Ambrosian Marian Mass on the 6th Sunday in Advent, which is based on a stichron idiomelon, Blepe tn Elisabeth, sung in high medieval times at the feast of St John the Baptist. The Mozarabic rite also includes chants in Greek, and possible traces of Byzantine chant can be seen in early Spanish psalmody.Some traits common to both Eastern and Western repertories are old enough to be traced directly to the early Christian chant tradition. Thus the Gregorian communion Omnes qui in Christo for Saturday in Easter week (based on the baptismal troparion Hosoi eis Christon) and the Sanctus of the Pentecostal missa graeca, while they probably represent specific borrowings of the 6th and later 8th centuries respectively, embody earlier melodic traditions. The modal and structural concordances in some florid responsorial psalm settings (prokeimena/gradual responsories and allelouaria/alleluia verses) might also reflect an early interrelationship between East and West.

17. Byzantine music theory.Byzantine music theory is less abundant and less concerned with specific cases than its Western counterpart. One conservative line simply continues late classical speculation and is minimally focussed on contemporary practice. The Quadrivium of Georgios Pachymeres (c1242c1310) and the Harmonics transmitted under the name of Manuel Bryennius (?c1320) are both of this nature. The earliest Byzantine theoretical documents are simple catalogues of neumes and melodic formulae. The oldest, found in the 10th-century manuscript GR-AOml .67, lists rudiments of the tonal and modal systems together with names and signs for various formulae of the so-called Chartres variety of early Byzantine melodic notation (see 3(i) (b) above). Similar catalogues of the 11th and 12th centuries detail the elements of ekphonetic (lectionary) notation; there are corresponding catalogues in the Georgian language.A different type of theoretical document, again relatively early, appears within the classical stichrarion itself; this contains a handful of multimodal stichra that progress systematically through some or all of the eight modes. (Examples of such hymns, which illustrate the behaviour of the individual modes and the nature of the tonal and notational systems, were published by Strunk, R1942, and by Husmann, Modulation and Transposition, R1970.)Perhaps the earliest discursive theoretical statement occurs in an anonymous fragment, the Hagiopolits, which ostensibly details the practice of the Holy City of Jerusalem (ed. Raasted, R1983). The most important source is F-Pn gr.360 which probably dates from the first half of the 14th century, and there are various later derivatives of this treatise, including I-Rvat gr.872 (see Tardo, R1938, pp.164ff). The Hagiopolits contains observations about the Byzantine modes (including modes supplementary to the standard eight) and intonation formulae. It also provides references to different layers of Palaeo-Byzantine and Middle Byzantine notations and quotes extensive passages from ancient theoretical works.The main line of Byzantine theory is represented by the so-called Papadik, a manual first compiled perhaps in the later 13th century at Constantinople or within the orbit comprising also Mount Athos and Thessaloniki. There are many elaborations of the basic materials of this handbook. From the early 14th century, a version of the papadik often prefaced manuscript copies of the Koukouzelian Akolouthiai. The usual beginning of the treatise was Arch, mes, telos (The begining, middle, end and system of all the signs of the psaltists technique is the ison [the sign for tone-repetition]). One of the simplest versions is that found in the 15th-century manuscript I-Rvat Barber. gr.300 (ed. Tardo, R1938, pp.151ff), which contains the names and signs of the rising and falling intervals, the modulation signs (phthorai), the nomenclature of the modes, the megala smadia (stenographic and dynamic indications), the intonation formulae of the eight modes, a discussion of the tonal system, and, finally, a recapitulatory dialogue. The papadik presents an essentially different tradition of grouping Byzantine neumes from that of the Hagiopolits; mixed forms and divergent classifications are also found.Related to the traditions of the papadikai are a number of mostly anonymous lists of signs and a few didactic chants whose theoretical doctrine is set to continuous music. The most influential of these is by Koukouzeles, beginning Ison, oligon, oxeia, kai petasth. Based on earlier, partly anonymous lists, especially that of Joannes Glykys, the melody illustrates each of the neumes and formulae as they are mentioned in the text (see ex.5; also ed. Alexandru, R1996; facs., after I-Rvat gr.791, in Tardo, R1938, pp.17982). A number of other didactic chants (methodoi), some of them anonymous, are also found in the manuscripts; these concern intonations (mostly anonymous), hand signs (cheironomiai, by Joannes Glykys and Xenos Korones), solmization and modulation (anonymous), the eight modes, the stichrarion style (ascribed to Korones), and the kalophonic style (Korones and Koukouzeles).A number of treatises from the later Middle Ages include full discussion of theoretical and stylistic questions. While containing invaluable evidence on the history of music instruction and chant practice in Byzantium, these texts must be interpreted with caution; most of them were intended for those already proficient in the performance of chant, and they are often imprecise with regard to basic questions of rhythm, ornamentation, the exact tuning of scales (including the question of diatonicism versus chromaticism), vocal techniques etc. A group of dialogues beginning Eg mn, paides, the so-called Pseudo-Damaskenos (ed. Wolfram and Hannick, R1997) is perhaps the oldest of these. The treatise of Gabriel, hieromonk at the monastery of Xanthopoulos in Constantinople in the first half of the 15th century, gives important details on notation and technical nomenclature (ed. Hannick and Wolfram, R1985). An anonymous treatise on musical signs (ed. Schartau, R1997) provides some evidence concerning the relationship between chant theory and practice. An important treatise on the history of the kalophonic tradition and on the use of modulation signs (phthorai) was written by Manuel Chrysaphes in the mid-15th century (ed. Conomos, R1985). Somewhat outside the mainstream of Byzantine music theory is the 16th-century treatise by the Cypriot Hieronymos Tragodistes which advocates a reform of Byzantine notation by analogy with the contemporary harmonic system of the West (ed. Schartau, R1990).Finally, Byzantine theorists designed various graphic schemes to assist the learner (see Alygizaks, R1985). Two of these, a tree and a wheel, both illustrating the tetrachordal relationships between the eight modes, are traditionally attributed to Koukouzeles and are probably the two oldest. Other schemes to assist solmization (metrophnia) and modulation (parallag) exercises are attributed to Gabriel Hieromonachos, Joannes Plousiadenos and Joannes Laskaris.For the subsequent development of Orthodox chant see Greece, IIIII; see also Russian and Slavonic church music; Armenia, II; Coptic church music; Ethiopia, II; Georgia, II; Romania, II; and Syrian church music.

BIBLIOGRAPHYa: general surveysb: history of the liturgyc: manuscript sourcesd: neumatic notationse: liturgical recitativesf: system of eight modes (oktchos)g: syllabic psalm tonesh: formulaic chantsi: florid psalmodyj: byzantine hymnsk: syllabic hymn settingsl: florid hymn settingsm: post-classical florid styles: the kalophonic stylen: ordinary chants of the divine liturgy and officeo: paraliturgical and instrumental musicp: byzantium and the slavsq: byzantium and the westr: byzantine music theoryByzantine chant: Bibliographya: general surveysMGG2 (C. Hannick)H.J.W. Tillyard: Byzantine Music and Hymnography (London, 1923/R) E. Wellesz: A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography (Oxford, 1949, enlarged 2/1961) H.-G. Beck: Kirche und theologische Literatur im byzantinischen Reich (Munich, 1959), 23366 [liturgy and hymnody] E. Wellesz, ed.: Die Musik der byzantinischen Kirche, Mw, xiii (1959; Eng trans., 1959) G. Marzi: Melodia e nomos nella musica bizantina (Bologna, 1960) M. Velimirovi: Musique byzantine, Encyclopdie des musiques sacres, ed. J. Porte (Paris, 1969), ii, 14564 Musica byzantina, IMSCR XI: Copenhagen 1972, 73799 [11 articles] O. Strunk: Die Gesnge der byzantinisch-griechischen Liturgie, Geschichte der katholischen Kirchenmusik, ed. K.G. Fellerer, i (Kassel, 1972), 12847 O. Strunk: Essays on Music in the Byzantine World (New York, 1977) [repr. of 22 articles on Byzantine chant, 194272] D.E. Conomos: Byzantine Hymnography and Byzantine Chant (Brookline, MA, 1984) D. Touliatos: Women Composers of Medieval Byzantine Chant, College Music Symposium, xxiv/1 (1984), 6280 E.V. Gertsman: Vizantiyskoye muzkoznaniye (Leningrad, 1988) B. Schartau: On Collecting Testimonia of Byzantine Musical Practice, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.57 (1988), 15966 C. Hannick: Reference Materials on Byzantine and Old Slavonic Music and Hymnography, JPMMS, xiii (1990), 839 M. Velimirovi: Byzantine Chant, NOHM, ii (2/1990), 2668 K. Nikolakopoulos: Literatur zum Studium der byzantinischen Musik, Orthodoxes Forum, vii (1993), 23956 G. Wolfram: Der byzantinische Chor, wie er sich in den Typika des 9.12. Jahrhunderts dargestellt, Cantus Planus VI: ger 1993, 397402 B. Schartau: Testimonia of Byzantine Musical Practice, III, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no. 68 (1998) Byzantine chant: Bibliographyb: history of the liturgyL. Duchesne: Origines du culte chrtien (Paris, 1889, 5/1920; Eng. trans., 1903, 5/1919/R as Christian Worship: its Origin and Evolution) A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus: Analekta hierosolymitiks stachyologias (St Petersburg, 18918/R), ii, 1254 [contains the typikon dated 1122 of the Church of the Resurrection at Jerusalem] L. Clugnet: Dictionnaire grec-franais des noms liturgiques (Paris, 1895/R) A.A. Dmitriyevsky: Opisaniye liturgicheskikh rukopisey [An account of liturgical MSS] (Kiev and St Petersburg, 18951917) J.-M. Hanssens: Institutiones liturgicae de ritibus orientalibus, iiiii: De missa rituum orientalium (Rome, 193032) P.N. Trempelas: Hai treis leitourgiai (Athens, 1935) F. Mercenier and F. Paris: La prire des glises de rite byzantin (Amay-sur-Meuse, 193748) A. Raes: Introductio in liturgiam orientalem (Rome, 1947) D. Attwater: The Christian Churches of the East (Milwaukee, 19478, 2/19612) P.N. Trempelas: Mikron euchologion (Athens, 195055) [historical discussion of the Ordines for Orthros and Hesperinos] A. Baumstark: Liturgie compare: principes et mthodes pour ltude des liturgies chrtiennes (Chevetogne, 3/1953; Eng. trans., 1953) R. Janin: Les glises orientales et les rites orientaux (Paris, 4/1955) H.-G. Beck: Kirche und theologische Literatur im byzantinischen Reich (Munich, 1959), 23366 J.M. Sauguet: Bibliographie des liturgies orientales, 19001960 (Rome, 1962) J. Mateos, ed. and trans.: Le typicon de la grande glise: MS Sainte-Croix no.40, Xe sicle (Rome, 19623) R. Bornert: Les commentaires byzantins de la divine liturgie du VIIe au XVe sicle (Paris, 1966) M. Arranz: Le typicon du monastre du Saint-Sauveur Messine (Rome, 1969) Mother Mary and Kallistos Ware, trans.: The Festal Menaion (London, 1969) H. Leeb: Die Gesnge im Gemeindesgottesdienst von Jerusalem (vom 5. bis 8. Jahrhundert) (Vienna, 1970) J. Mateos: La clbration de la parole dans la liturgie byzantine: tude historique (Rome, 1971) H. Husmann: Der Aufbau der byzantinischen Liturgie nach der Erzhlung von der Reise der Abte Johannes und Sophronios zum Einsiedler Nilos auf dem Berge Sinai, Musicae scientiae collectanea: Festschrift Karl Gustav Fellerer zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. H. Hschen (Cologne, 1973), 2439 R. Taft: The Great Entrance: a History of the Transfer of Gifts and Other Preanaphoral Rites of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (Rome, 1975) H.-J. Schulz: Die byzantinische Liturgie: Glaubenszeugnis und Symbolgestalt (Trier, 1980) R. Taft: The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West (Collegeville, MN, 1986) J.F. Baldovin: The Urban Character of Christian Worship: the Origins, Development, and Meaning of Stational Liturgy (Rome, 1987) M. Ricci Miglietta: I makarismi nella tradizione liturgico-musicale del rito bizantino, RIMS, viii (1987), 30366 S. Janeras: Le Vendredi-Saint dans la tradition liturgique byzantine: structure et histoire de ses offices (Rome, 1988) G.T. Vergots: Lexiko leitourgikn kai teletourgikn horn [Lexicon of liturgical and ceremonial terms] (Thessaloniki, 1988) W. Hugh: The Orthodox Liturgy: the Development of the Eucharistic Liturgy in the Byzantine Rite (London, 1989) R. Taft: A History of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, iv: The Diptychs (Rome, 1991) R. Taft: The Byzantine Rite: a Short History (Collegeville, MN, 1992) Byzantine chant: Bibliographyc: manuscript sourcesA. Rocchi: Codices cryptenses (Grottaferrata, 1883) [Grottaferrata] V. Gardhtausen: Catalogus codicum graecorum sinaiticorum (Oxford, 1866) [Mt Sinai] A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus: Hierosolymitik bibliothk, iv (St Petersburg, 18911915/R) [Jerusalem] I. and A. Sakkelin: Katalogos tn chirographn ts ethniks bibliothks ts Hellados [Catalogue of the MSS in the Greek National Library] (Athens, 1892) S.P. Lambros: Catalogue of the Greek Manuscripts on Mount Athos (Cambridge, 18951900/R) A. Gastou: Introduction la palographie musicale byzantine: catalogue des manuscrits de musique byzantine de la Bibliothque nationale de Paris et des bibliothques publiques de France (Paris, 1907) V.N. Benesevi: Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum graecorum qui in monasterio Sanctae Catherinae in Monte Sinai asservantur (St Petersburg, 191117) Spyridn and S. Eustratiads: Catalogue of the Greek Manuscripts in the Library of the Laura on Mount Athos (Cambridge, MA, 1925/R) L. Tardo: La musica bizantina e i codici di melurgia della biblioteca di Grottaferrata, Accademie e biblioteche dItalia, iv (193031), 35570 L. Tardo: I codici melurgici della Vaticana, Archivio storico per la Calabria e la Lucania, i (1931), 22549 C. Heg, H.J.W. Tillyard and E. Wellesz, eds.: Sticherarium, MMB, Principale, i (1935) [facs. of A-Wn theol.gr.181] O. Tiby: I codici musicali italo-greci di Messina, Accademie e biblioteche dItalia, xi (1937), 6478 C. Heg, ed.: Hirmologium athoum, MMB, Principale, ii (1938) [facs. of GR-AOi 470] R. Devreesse, ed.: Le fonds Coislin (Paris, 1945) M. Richard: Rpertoire des bibliothques et des catalogues de manuscrits grecs (Paris, 1948, 2/1958, rev. 3/1995 by J.-M. Olivier) [bibliography of bibliographies of Byzantine MSS] L. Tardo, ed.: Hirmologium cryptense, MMB, Principale, iii (195051) [facs. of I-GR ..II] L. Tardo: I manoscritti di musica nella Biblioteca universitaria di Messina, Archivio storico per la Calabria e la Lucania, xxiii (1954), 187204 C. Heg, ed.: Contacarium asburnhamense, MMB, Principale, iv (1956) [facs. of I-Fl Ashb. 64] R. Jakobson, ed.: Fragmenta chiliandarica palaeoslavica, MMB, Principale, v (1957) [facs. of GR-AOh 307 and 308] C. Astruc and M.L. Concasty: Le supplement grec (Paris, 1960) N.G. Wilson and D.I. Stefanovi: Manuscripts of Byzantine Chant in Oxford (Oxford, 1963) O. Strunk, ed.: Specimina notationum antiquiorum, MMB, Principale, vii (1966) L. Polits: Duo cheirographa apo tn Kastoria [Two MSS from Kastoria], Hellnika, xx (1967), 2941 N.A. Bes: Ta cheirographa tn Metern [The MSS of Meteora] (Athens, 196784) J. Raasted, ed.: Hirmologium sabbaiticum, MMB, Principale, viii (196870) [facs. of IL-Jgp St Sabas 83] P. Canart and V. Peri: Sussidi bibliografici per i manoscritti greci della Biblioteca Vaticana (Vatican City, 1970) M.K. Chatzgiakoums: Mousika cheirographa tourkokratias, 14531832 [Music MSS from the period of Turkish rule] (Athens, 1975) E. Follieri and O. Strunk, eds.: Triodium athoum, MMB, Principale, ix (1975) [facs. of GR-AOva 1488] H. Husmann: Ein syro-melkitisches Tropologion mit altbyzantinischer Notation Sinai Syr. 261 (Wiesbaden, 19758) G. Staths: Ta cheirographa byzantins mousiks: Hagion Oros [Byzantine music MSS: Mt Athos] (Athens, 197593) A. Dostl, H. Rothe and E. Trapp, eds.: Der altrussische Kondakar': auf der Grundlage des Blagovescenskij Nizegorodskij kondakar' (Giessen, 197690) A.E. Pennington: Seven Akolouthiai from Putna, Studies in Eastern Chant, iv, ed. M. Velimirovi (Crestwood, NY, 1979), 11233 M.K. Chatzgiakoums: Cheirographa ekklsiastiks mousiks, 14531820 [Liturgical music MSS, 14531820] (Athens, 1980) G. Ciobanu, M. Ionescu and T. Moisescu, eds.: Manuscrisul nr. 56/544/576 I de la Mnstirea Putna Antologhion [MS no.56/544/576 I from the monastery of Putna: Antologhion] (Bucharest, 1980) A. Jakovljevi: Cypriot Musicians and Copyists of Byzantine Musical Manuscripts in the 15th and 16th centuries, Diptycha, ii (198081), 727 G. Ciobanu, M. Ionescu and T. Moisescu, eds.: Manuscrisul nr. I26/Iai Antologhion (Bucharest, 1981) G. Pantiru, ed.: Lectionarul evanghelic de la Iai (MS 160/IV34) [The Iai Gospel lectionary] (Bucharest, 1982) [with Eng. summary] G. Ciobanu, ed.: Antologhionul lui Evstathie protopsaltul Putnei [The anthologion of Evstatie of Putna prtopsalts] (Bucharest, 1983) H. Hunger, O. Kresten and C. Hannick: Katalog der griechischen Handschriften der sterreichischen Nationalbibliothek (Vienna, 1984) B. Schartau: Manuscripts of Byzantine Music in Denmark, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.48 (1984), 15104 T. Moisescu, ed.: Manuscrisul nr. 12/Leipzig Antologhion (Bucharest, 1985) T. Moisescu: Prolegomene bizantine: muzic bizantin n manuscrise i carte veche romneasc [Byzantine prolegomena: Byzantine music in MSS and old Romanian books] (Bucharest, 1985) N.K. Moran: A List of Greek Music Palimpsests, AcM, lvii (1985), 5072 E. Toncheva: A Middle Byzantine Fragment with Melismatic Chant in the Bachkovo Monastery Musical Manuscript Collection, Musica antiqua VII: Bydgoszcz 1985, 10934 H. Trebici-Marin, ed.: Anastasimatarul de la Cluj-Napoca, ms. 1106: relatii i structuri n muzic de traditie bizantin [The anastasimatarion from Cluj-Napoca, MS 1106: relationships and structures in Romanian post-Byzantine music] (Bucharest, 1985) P. Agapitos: A Post-Byzantine Musical Anthology: MS Greek 21 in the Houghton Library, Harvard Library Bulletin, xxxv (1987), 15064 D. Touliatos-Banker: Check-List of Byzantine Musical Manuscripts in the Vatican Library, Manuscripta, xxxi (1987), 227 G. Wolfram, ed.: Sticherarium antiquum vindobonense, MMB, Principale, x (1987) [facs. of A-Wn theol.gr.136] A. Jakovljevi: Diglss palaiographia kai meldoi-hymnographoi tou kdika tn Athnn 928 [Old dual-language writings and hymn melodies in Athens codex 928] (Leukosia, 1988) A. Jakovljevi: Cod. Lavra E-108 iz XIV veka kao na stariyi srpsko-grchki antologiya sa Kukuzelyovom notacijom, Hilandarski zbornik, vii (1989), 13361 G. Staths: H asmatik diaphoropois: hops katagraphetai ston kdika EBE 2458 tou etous 1336 [A comparison of the chants in codex Gr-An 2458 dating from 1336], Christianik Thessalonik, palaiologeios epoch: Vlatadon 1987 (Thessaloniki, 1989), 165211 A. Jakovljevi: Catalogue of Byzantine Chant Manuscripts in the Monastic and Episcopal Libraries of Cyprus (Nicosia, 1990) A. Doda: Osservazioni sulla scrittura e sulla notazione musicale dei Menaia Carbonesi, Scrittura e civilt, xv (1991), 185204 C. Hannick: Die byzantinischen liturgischen Handschriften, Kaiserin Theophanu: Begegnung des Ostens und Westens um die Wende des ersten Jahrtausends, ed. A. von Euw and P. Schreiner (Cologne, 1991), 2532 L. Perria and J. Raasted, eds.: Sticherarium Ambrosianum, MMB, Principale, xi (1992) [facs. of I-Ma A139] J. Raasted: The Princeton Heirmologion Palimpsest, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.62 (1992), 21932 S. Kotzabassi: Das Berliner Sticherarion, Poikila byzantina, xii (1993), 11173 G. Myers, ed.: The Lavrsky Troitsky Kondakar' (Sofia, 1994) I. Papathanassiou: Some Remarks on a Possible Syro-Melchite Origin of the Manuscript Sinai gr. 1258, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.64 (1994), 3357 E.M. Schwarz, ed.: Das Lektionar von St. Petersburg: vollstndige Faksimile-Ausgabe des Codex Gr. 21, Gr. 21a aus der Besitz der russischen Nationalbibliothek in St. Petersburg (Graz, 1994) C. Adsuara: The Kalophonic Sticherarion Sinai gr. 1251: Introduction and Indices, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.65 (1995), 1558 I. Papathanassiou: The Dating of the Sticherarion EBE 883, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.66 (1996), 3548 D.C. Skemer: The Anatomy of a Palimpsest (Garrett MS 24), Princeton University Library Chronicle, lvii (1996), 33543 S. Kotsabassi: Das Sticherarion Laura Gamma 74: Beobachtungen zu seinem Repertoire und Indizes, Palaeobyzantine Notations II: Hernen 1999, 10927 C. Troelsgrd: An Early Constantinopolitan Sticherarion (MS Leukosia, Archbishopric of Cyprus, Mousikos 39) and its Notated Exaposteilarion, Palaeobyzantine Notations II: Hernen 1999, 15972 N. Schidlovsky, ed.: Sticherarium palaeoslavicum petropolitanum, MMB, Principale, xii (2000) [facs. of RUS-SPan 34.7.6] Byzantine chant: Bibliographyd: neumatic notations(i) EkphoneticC. Heg: La notation ekphontique, MMB, Subsidia, i/2 (1935) C. Heg and G. Zuntz: Remarks on the Prophetologion, Quantulacumque: Studies Presented to Kirsopp Lake, ed. R.P. Casey, S. Lake and A.K. Lake (London, 1937), 189225 C. Heg, G. Zuntz and G. Engberg: Prophetologium: lectiones anni mobilis, MMB, Lectionaria, i (193981) G. Engberg: Les Credos du synodicon, Classica et mediaevalia, xxiii (1962), 293301 G. Engberg: Greek Ekphonetic Neumes and Masoretic Accents, Studies in Eastern Chant, i, ed. M. Velimirovi (London, 1966), 3749 K. Levy: Three Byzantine Acclamations, Studies in Music History: Essays for Oliver Strunk, ed. H. Powers (Princeton, NJ, 1968/R), 4357 D. Jourdain-Hemmerdinger: La notation ekphontique archaque (Vaticanus gr. 2144), Annuaire de lEcole pratique des hautes tudes, iv (19689), 55760 G. Pantiru, ed.: Lectionarul evanghelic de la Iai (MS 160/IV34) [The Iai Gospel lectionary] (Bucharest, 1982) G. Engberg: The Greek Old Testament Lectionary as a Liturgical Book, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.54 (1987), 3948 G. Engberg: Greek Ekphonetic Notation: the Classical and Pre-Classical Systems, Palaeobyzantine Notations: Hernen 1992, 3355 (ii) MelodicH.J.W. Tillyard: Handbook of the Middle Byzantine Musical Notation, MMB, Subsidia, i/1 (1935/R) O. Strunk: The Tonal System of Byzantine Music, MQ, xxviii (1942), 190204 O. Strunk: Intonations and Signatures of the Byzantine Modes, MQ, xxxi (1945), 33955 B. di Salvo: La trascrizione della notazione paleobizantina, Bollettino della Badia greca di Grottaferrata, new ser., v (1951), 92110, 22035 O. Strunk: The Notation of the Chartres Fragment, AnnM, iii (1955), 737 B. di Salvo: Qualche appunto sulla chironomia nella musica bizantina, Orientalia christiana periodica, xxiii (1957), 192201 C. Thodberg: The Tonal System of the Kontakarium (Copenhagen, 1960) J. Raasted: A Primitive Palaeobyzantine Musical Notation, Classica et mediaevalia, xxiii (1962), 30210 J. Raasted: Intonation Formulas and Modal Signatures in Byzantine Musical Manuscripts, MMB, Subsidia, vii (1966) J. van Biezen: The Middle Byzantine Kanon-Notation of Manuscript H (Bilthoven, 1968) C. Floros: Universale Neumenkunde (Kassel, 1970) J. Raasted: Modernization and Conversion: Two Types of Notational Change and their Consequences for the Transmission of Byzantine Music, IMSCR XI: Copenhagen 1972, 7757 M. Haas: Byzantinische und slavische Notationen, Palaeographie der Musik, i/2, ed. W. Arlt (Cologne, 1973) G. Staths: H palaia byzantin smeiographia kai to problma metagraphs ts s to pentagrammon [Old Byzantine notation and the problem of transcribing into staff notation], Byzantina, vii (1975), 195220 G.T. Staths : H exgsis ts palaias byzantins smeiographias [The explanation of old Byzantine notation] (Athens, 1978) [incl. Fr. summary] H. Hucke: Die Cheironomie und die Entstehung der Neumenschrift, Mf, xxxii (1979), 116 J. Raasted: Musical Notation and Quasi Notation in Syro-Melkite Liturgical Manuscripts, Cahiers de lInstitut de Moyen Age grec et latin, no.31 (1979), 1137, 5381 H. Husmann: Interpretation und Ornamentierung in der nachbyzantinischen Musik, AcM, lii (1980), 10121 S. Koucharov: Paleografski problemi na tita-notacijata v srednobalgarskite rakopisi ot XIIXIII vek, Slavyanska paleografiya i diplomatika (Sofia, 1980), 22846 C. Floros: Zur Rhythmik der byzantinischen Kirchenmusik, Mf, xxxv (1982), 1545 J. Raasted: Pulse and Pause in Medieval and Postmedieval Byzantine Chant, Jb der sterreichischen Byzantinistik, xxxii (1982), 6372 N.K. Moran: Singers in Late Byzantine and Slavonic Painting (Leiden, 1986) J. Raasted: Chromaticism in Medieval and Post-Medieval Byzantine Chant: a New Approach to an Old Problem, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.53 (1986), 1536 Rhythm in Byzantine Chant: Hernen 1986 [C. Hannick: Probleme der Rhythmik des byzantinischen Kirchengesangs, 119; G. Ciobanu: La rhythmique des neumes byzantins dans les transcriptions de J.D. Petrescu et de Egon Wellesz par rapport la pratique actuelle, 2135; J. Raasted: Rhythm in Byzantine Chant, 6791; B. Karastojanov: Tonemas and Prosodemas as Rhythmic Elements in Znamennyj Chant, 10927] K. Levy: On the Origin of Neumes, EMH, vii (1987), 5990 J. Raasted: Thoughts on a Revision of the Transcription Rules of the Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.54 (1987), 1338 S. Kujumdzieva: ber die Zeichen Aphona whrend der spt- und postbyzantinischen Periode, Musikkulturgeschichte: Festschrift fr Constantin Floros, ed. P. Petersen (Wiesbaden, 1990), 44960 K. Romanou: A New Approach to the Work of Chrysanthos of Madytos: the New Method of Musical Notation in the Greek Church, Studies in Eastern Chant, v, ed. D. Conomos (Crestwood, NY, 1990), 89100 E. Toncheva: Die musikalische Bedeutung des Interpunktionszeichens Punkt in dem sticherarischen Repertoire der Handschrift NB 928, Musikkulturgeschichte: Festschrift fr Constantin Floros, ed. P. Petersen (Wiesbaden, 1990), 46178 A. Doda: Osservazioni sulla scrittura e sulla notazione musicale dei Menaia Carbonesi, Scrittura e civilt, xv (1991), 185204 J. Raasted: The Princeton Heirmologion Palimpsest, Cahiers de lInstitut de Moyen Age grec et latin, no.67 (1992), 21932 Palaeobyzantine Notations: Hernen 1992 [incl. J. Raasted: Theta Notation and some Related Notational Types, 5762; A. Doda: Coislin Notation, Problems and Working Hypotheses, 6379; C. Troelsgrd: The Role of Parakletike in Palaeobyzantine Notations, 81117; J. Raasted: Observations on the Chartres and Coislin Versions of the Good Friday Stichron O pos i paranomos synagog, 13153] G. Wolfram: Modulationszeichen in der palobyzantinischen Notation, Studi di musica bizantina in onore di Giovanni Marzi, ed. A. Doda (Lucca, 1995), 3344 Palaeobyzantine Notations II: Hernen 1999 [incl. M. Alexandru: Bemerkungen zu den Neumen- und Formelbezeichnungen des Byzantinischen Gesanges, 121; A. Doneda: The Hyperstases in MS Kastoria 8 and the Kondakarian Notation, 2336; I. Papathanassiou: The Use of Bareia in the Old Layer Melodies of the 4th Authentic Mode in MS Saba 83, 12943; G. Wolfram: Das Sticherarion Vindobonensis Theol. gr. 136: eine Kurzbeschreibung und Weiteres zur Notationstechnischen Tradition, 14558 ] Byzantine chant: Bibliographye: liturgical recitativesK. Levy: The Byzantine Sanctus, AnnM, vi (195863), 767 K. Levy: Three Byzantine Acclamations, Studies in Music History: Essays for Oliver Strunk, ed. H. Powers (Princeton, NJ, 1968/R), 4357 K. Levy: The Trisagion in Byzantium and the West, IMSCR XI: Copenhagen 1972, 7615 Byzantine chant: Bibliographyf: system of eight modes (oktchos)H.J.W. Tillyard: The Hymns of the Octoechus, MMB, Transcripta, iii, v (194049) O. Strunk: Intonations and Signatures of the Byzantine Modes, MQ, xxxi (1945), 33955 O. Strunk: The Antiphons of the Oktoechos, JAMS, xiii (1960), 5067 M. Huglo: Les tonaires: inventaire, analyse, comparaison (Paris, 1971) M. Huglo: Comparaison de la terminologie modale en Orient et en Occident, IMSCR XI: Copenhagen 1972, 75861 O. Strunk: Essays on Music in the Byzantine World (New York, 1977) H. Husmann: Syrischer und byzantinischer Oktochos, Kanones und Qanune, Orientalia christiana periodica, xliv (1978), 6573 D. Petrovi: Osmoglasnik u muzikoj tradicji Junih Slovena [The oktchos in the musical tradition of the southern Slavs] (Belgrade, 1982) [with Eng. summary] A.E. Alygizaks: H oktaechia stn hellnikn leitourgik hymnographia [The oktchos in Greek liturgical hymns] (Thessaloniki, 1985) [with Eng. summary] I. Zannos: Ichos und Macham: vergleichende Untersuchungen zum Tonsystem der griechisch-orthodoxen Kirchenmusik und der trkischen Kunstmusik (Bonn, 1994) L. Richter: Zur Lehre von den byzantinischen Tonarten, JbSIM 1996, 21160 Byzantine chant: Bibliographyg: syllabic psalm tonesO. Strunk: The Byzantine Office at Hagia Sophia, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, ixx (1956), 175202 O. Strunk: The Antiphons of the Oktoechos, JAMS, xiii (1960), 5067 A. Jung: The Settings of the Evening and Morning Psalms according to the Manuscript Sinai gr. 1255, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.47 (1984), 363 D.H. Touliatos-Banker: The Byzantine Amomos Chant of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries (Thessaloniki, 1984) E. Toncheva: Za rannata polielejna pesenna praktika na Balkanite (po izvori ot XIIXIII v.) [Early Balkan polyeleos practice (after 12th- and 13th-century sources)], Balgarsko muzikoznanie, ix/3 (1985), 329 E. Toncheva: Polieynoto tvorchestvo na Joan Kukuzel v konteksta na balkanskata carkovnopeveska praktika (po rukopis Atina no 2458 ot 1336 g.), Dokladi: Balgaristika II: Sofia 1986, ed. P. Zarev and others (Sofia, 19869), xvii: Teatr i kino: muzik, 22462 S. Kujumdz'eva: The Kekragaria in the Sources from the 14th to the beginning of the 19th Century, Cantus Planus VI: ger 1993, 44963 E. Toncheva: The Latrinos Settings of the Polyeleos, Psalm 135: to the Typological Problems of the Late Byzantine Psalmody, Cantus Planus VI: ger 1993, 47392 M. Dimitrova: Prokimenite vav vizantiyskite muzikalni rakopisi ot XIV i XV vek [The prokeimena in 14th- and 15th-century Byzantine music MSS], Balgarsko muzikoznanie, xix/1 (1995), 3953 Byzantine chant: Bibliographyh: formulaic chantsG. Devai: The Musical Study of Koukouzeles in a 14th Century Manuscript, Acta antiqua Academiae scientiarum hungaricae, vi (1958), 21335 O. Strunk: Melody Construction in Byzantine Chant, Congrs dtudes byzantines XII: Ohrid 1961, 36573 E. Wellesz: Melody Construction in Byzantine Chant, ibid., 13551 K. Levy: A Hymn for Thursday in Holy Week, JAMS, xvi (1963), 12775 K. Levy: Die slavische Kondakarien-Notation, Anfnge der slavischen Musik: Bratislava 1964, 7792 G. Amargianakis: An Analysis of Stichera in the Deuteros Modes, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, nos.223 (1977) [whole issues] O. Strunk: Essays on Music in the Byzantine World (New York, 1977) H. Schmidt: Zum formelhaften Aufbau byzantinischer Kanones (Wiesbaden, 1979) J. Simonovi: Melodijske formule stihira vizantijskog osmoglasnika od XII do XV veka [Melodic stichra formulae in the 12th15th-century Byzantine oktchos], Zvuk (1983), no.4, pp.4157 J. Raasted: Compositional Devices in Byzantine Chant, Musica antiqua VII: Bydgoszcz 1985, 181204 J. Raasted: Formulaism and Orality in Byzantine Chant, Cantus Planus IV: Pcs 1990, 23140 A. Doda: Considerazioni sulla meccanica delle melodie irmologiche, Studi di musica bizantina in onore di Giovanni Marzi, ed. A. Doda (Lucca, 1995), 4569 A. Jung: The Long Melismas in the Non-Kalophonic Sticherarion, Cahiers de lInstitut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.70 (1999), 1830 Byzantine chant: Bibliographyi: florid psalmodyK. Levy: A Hymn for Thursday in Holy Week, JAMS, xvi (1963), 12775 C. Thodberg: Der byzantinische Alleluiarionzyklus: Studien im kurzen Psaltikonstil, MMB, Subsidia, viii (1966) S. Harris: The Communion Chants in Thirteenth-Century Byzantine Musical Manuscripts, Studies in Eastern Chant, ii, ed. M. Velimirovi (London, 1971), 5167 H. Husmann: Modalittsprobleme des psaltischen Stils, AMw, xxviii (1971), 4472 G. Hintze: Das byzantinische Prokeimena-Repertoire (Hamburg, 1973) D.H. Touliatos-Banker: The Byzantine Amomos Chant of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries (Thessaloniki, 1984) S. Harris: Psalmodic Traditions and the Christmas and Epiphany Troparia as Preserved in 13th-Century Psaltika and Asmatika, Cantus Planus IV: Pcs 1990, 20519 S. Harris: Two Chants in the Byzantine Rite for Holy Saturday, PMM, i (1992)