Uncovering the Place and Origin of Carpatho-Rusyn Chant. Sloan Rolando

Transcription

1 Uncovering the Pace and Origin of CarpathoRusyn Chant Soan Roando What does it mean to ca a chant CarpathoRusyn? Does it indicate a iturgica chant indigenous to a region, a particuar stye, a history, or a significant departure from some other stye of chant? For those coming from a CarpathoRusyn eccesiastica tradition, 1 the question on the surface is probaby sefevident. For a majority of these peope, this chant is not ony the unique iturgica chant of the Carpathian mountains and surrounding area, it is a means of distinction, a ink to the oder chants of the ands of Rus, and the means of congregationa singing. Such peope hod it in esteem. For those outside, however, a great variety of responses emerge. Russians have been known to consider it pain and unsophisticated in its typicay monophonic form. Gaician Ukrainians simpy ignore it based on their preference for their own stye. Schoars typicay acknowedge the chants current ack of research especiay in ight of the reativey extraordinary amount of schoarship done concerning Russian chant. Our imited access to the chant repertories of the Ukraine and Great Russia eaves the door open for a thorough and comparative study between these cosey reated traditions. We await a propitious time for this seed to take root. 2 Whie part of the goa here is to study some of this further, as one deves into Carpatho Rusyn chant, the question of what do you mean by? can be appied to amost any chant system. What do we mean by Znamenny, Kievan, Byzantine, or Gregorian? In the word of chant, a of these terms are tossed around as if the name aone tes us much of what we need to know about a particuar chant. A further reveation in this study is that as we uncover the history and content of a system such as CarpathoRusyn chant, we discover particuar patterns of 1 These being both Orthodox and EasternRite Cathoic Christians. 2 Joan Roccasavo, Painchant Traditions of Southwestern Rus. (Eastern European Monographs: Bouder, 1986), Intro, p. x. 1

2 evoution, some good, some bad, some neutra, in the deveopment of chant system. In each stage something is ost, and ony sometimes is change for the better. A LITTLE HISTORY By most accounts the chant of CarpathoRus does not find its roots in SouthWestern Rus but in the great centers of Russian and Ukrainian eccesiastica ife ike Kiev, Novgorod, and Moscow. The ink is typicay caed znamenny chant. If for the time being we accept the term znamenny to indicate the indigenous chant of the ands we now ca Russia, Ukraine, Bearus, and CarpathoRus, CarpathoRusyn chant, ike other chants of these regions, can trace its roots back to this system of chant. The most popuar and fruitfu means by which to trace this famiy history is through irmoogia. An irmoogion in its origina manifestation is a book that contains the texts, sometimes notated, of hymns that make up the various canon odes (both irmoi 3 and troparia) used in Byzantine matins (and sometimes compine and the midnight office). For the Greeks and those who often use a Byzantine musica tradition, this remains the most fitting definition. However, in the ands of Rus, an irmoogion often contains much more than irmoi. Granted that the irmoi take up the argest amount of books in most Ruthenian 4 irmoogia, irmoogia of this stye are musica anthoogies containing settings for amost a of the hymns for services found in Byzantine worship. Starting from the more recent and most commony referredto book, the Cerkownoe Prostopênîe (Eccesiastica Painchants) 5 was pubished in 1906 by the Mukachevo Eparchy, which is ocated on the Ukrainian side of Carpathian region. The EasternRite Cathoic bishop 3 Pura for irmos, the first hymn for each of the eight to nine odes in a matins canon. 4 This term is used here technicay to ink Byzantine Christians of Western Ukraine, Southern Poand, Sovakia, Hungarian, Bearus, and CarpathoRus who share a particuar iturgica recension of the iturgies that are distinct from Russian, Eastern Ukraine, and parts of Byeorus. 2

3 of Mukachevo, Juius Firtsak, 6 commissioned Father Ivan Bokšai, a priestmusician, and Cantor Joseph Mainič from the Užhorod Cathedra to notate the chants sung by Ruthenians. 7 This text is often considered the basic reference of CarpathoRusyn chant, being used extensivey for the setting of Engish anguage texts to this chant system. But unike other irmoogia, the Prostopinije was not the resut of copying from oder irmoogia and then making adjustments for oca usage and was not written in Kievan notation but in modern notation; it is iteray a transcription of how chants were sung by one cantor at one cathedra. Joseph Mainič did not read music but sung the chants from memory whie Fr. Bokšai transcribed them. 8 With its pubishing, Bishop Firtsak ordered every parish of the Mukačevo diocese to buy two copies of the Prostopinije so that uniformity in iturgica chant singing woud be reaized. 9 Going back about 100 years, Ioann Juhasevich created two irmoogia manuscripts based on earier printed irmoogia from L viv, 10 Ukraine. Unike the earier printed edition, Juhasevich created hand copied editions. Moreover they were not simpy reproductions of earier works, but they were znamenny meodies with distinctive CarpathoRusyn adjustments where the od and new meodies diverged. 11 The first irmoogion was produced in 1784, and a second one in Due to simiar contents, the possibe sources of Juhasevich s work are the L vov Irmoogia of 1700 and 1709; it may aso be a formative eement of the Prostopinije being that it 5 Hence forth, this book wi be caed by the commony used short tite, Prostopinije. 6 I have transiterated the bishop s name, Îuî@ Fircak_, differenty than Sr. Joan Roccasavo, who cas him Firczak 7 Roccasavo, p Ibid., Ibid. 10 This city, ocated in Western Ukraine, is aso caed Lwow, in Poish, and L vov in many oder texts. L viv is the transiteration of the modern Ukrainian name, Lxwîw. 11 Lenora Jean Ceciia DeCaro. A Study of the CarpathoRusyn Chant Tradition in the Late Eighteenth Century: The Manuscript Irmooji of Ioann Juhasevič. Ph.D Thesis, Forida State University Schoo of Music. (1998), p

4 preceded the competion of the Prostopinije. These irmoogia were extensive anthoogies of chant that were printed using Kievan notation. As we wi see ater, the 1709 Irmoogion is aso a witness and source of the Gaician chant system of Northwestern Ukraine. Unike Juhasevich s work and the Prostopinije, the L vov Irmoogia are much more compete in the amounts of chants incuded. Finay, the eariest exampe of an irmoogion using the Kievan square notation is the Supras Irmoogion. This irmoogion is dated between and and was the work of an anonymous copyist inked to the Podasian monastery of Supras, 15 which is ocated in modernday Bearus. This irmoogion is considered by many as a witness to the transference of ancient znamenny chant from stop notation to a more modern ined notation. However, the chants are not just from one system, but are variousy named Supras (Supraski), secuar (mirski), znamenny (znamiennyj), Constatinopoitan (konstantynopoitań ski), Bugarian (bu / garski), Greek (grecki), and Tsarograd (carogrodzki). 16 Thus, the Supras Irmoogion witnesses to the addition of socaed newer chant traditions coming into the ands of Rus, which generay was imited to two major systems, kondakarion and znamenny. Moreover, the Supras Irmoogion can been seen as an intersection point of Kievan, Muscovite, Gaician, and CarpathoRusyn chant systems being that its infuence is found in a of these ater systems. 17 CARPATHORUSYN PLAINCHANT AND ZNAMENNY CHANT One can find both bod and mid caims that ink znamenny chant and the Carpatho Rusyn painchant. Sr. Joan Roccasavo states that 12 Ibid., pp Gavrii. P. Pichura, Monuments of Byeorussian Church Music. Eastern Churches Quartery. Vo. XIV, 8 (1962), p Taken from the monastery s web page (in Poish), 15 Pichura, p The names in itaics are the Poish transations of the Savonic terms as found on 4

5 Secuded among the mountainous Carpathians, these [simpe] peope have kept aive a rich chant tradition that is the authentic heritage of the entire Rus peope. In preserving this music, they have preserved an unbroken ifeine to a gorious past not just for themseves but for southwestern and northern Russia as we. 18 One gets the feeing from this statement that the Rusyns have diigenty been protectors of znamenny chant. Both Stephen Reynods and Dr. Leonora DeCaro have taken a mider stance. prostopinije is a composite chant system, incuding eements from various sources. The odest of these is the znamennyj chant, and it is remarkabe that this chant, which has amost disappeared in Great Russian church singing, is preserved in a few stiiving traditions: the chant of the Russian Od Beievers, the Ukrainian Chant of Gaicia and other western Ukraine provinces, and the CarpthoRusyn prostopinije. 19 The manuscript irmooji copied by Juhasevyč in the ate eighteenth and eary nineteenth centuries yied significant insight into the CarpathoRusyn chant tradition because, whie capturing the essence of the regiona stye, they aso demonstrate considerabe ties to their heritage, the znamennyj chant. 20 If we accept that the chants of square notated irmoogia and other coections of iturgica music are deveoped from oder znamenny chants, we can see whoe and partia chants being passed on through these coections even into the chants found in the Prostopinije. However, each scribe or compier has made changes. For exampe, since Juhasevich was a EasternRite Cathoic, textua changes occurred such as changing the term for orthodox 21 (Prawosawno), which is iteray rightgorying (worshipping) in Od Savonic, to an aternate term, rightbeieving (Prawowêrno), that catches the other meaning of Orthodox so as to distinguish themseves from the Orthodox Churches in communion with Moscow or Constantinope. 22 Other changes in both text and music can aso be attributed to scriba error. 17 Pichura, p P Stephen Reynods, Znamennyj Chant in the CarpathoRusyn Prostopinije. CarpathoRusyn American, (Vo. II, no. 3: 1979), p DeCaro, p Orthodox being formed from the Greek terms ÑrqÒj, meaning correct, and dòxa, which means both gory and opinion or beief. This former definition, as Thayer s Greek Lexicon notes, appears in this sense very often in secuar writ; but in the Bibe ony in 4 Macc. 5:17(18) (1468). In ancient writers ike Pato and Herodotus, it typicay meant opinion or beief. 22 Ibid., p

6 However, the rea probem is not whether or not some or a of the CarpathoRusyn chants can be inked to znamenny chants. Rather, what does one mean by znamenny? Znamenny chant, in the most basic sense, is a type of ancient Russian based on both set meodic kernes (popewki) and a type of notation (stop) that dates back to the eeventhcentury. 23 Thus, between the eeventh and sixteenth centuries a ot of chant was produced. Moreover, two strains of znamenny can be discerned that foow poitica and eccesiastica ines: the northern (what we may think of as Russia, i.e., NovgorodMoscow branch and the southern ( Rusyn, i.e., Kiev, Gaicia, Carpathian Rus ). 24 One then can break down into categories of compexity: Great, Midde, and Litte. 25 Which of these then best reates to CarpathoRusyn chant if znamenny is a system of chant that covers over six hundred years of deveopment and uses a radicay different notation system, whose eariest forms are not yet deciphered? Or put another way, at what point does a chant stop being caed a form of znamenny. Therefore with the introduction of Russian chant manuscripts using the Kievan square notation in the ate sixteenth century, 26 some might argue that it ceased to be znamenny with the changed of notation. Whatever the case is, the name znamenny is not necessariy the best description of a particuar piece of iturgica music. Therefore to say CarpathoRusyn chant is the preservation of znamenny is a caim that must be quaified as to which tradition of znamenny chant it is reated. And what does inking a system of chant to znamenny chant give us? I do not beieve that simpy pedigreeing a piece of music by means of its ink to an ancient chant makes it necessariy the best chant for a iturgy. The potentia fa out of making znamenny the criterion for a EastSavic chants is that chants that do not respect the text conveyed or iturgica action 23 Johann von Gardner, Russian Church Singing, Vo. II,(Crestwood: SVS Press, 2000), pp DeCaro, p Johann von Gardner, Russian Church Singing, Vo. I,(Crestwood: SVS Press, 1980), p Pichura, p

7 being manifested can become the center of the iturgy. What this can resut in is very ovey, ancient music that is a showpiece of a cuture, whie the reveation of the Gospe of Christ fas to background. In this way the church becomes a museum and iturgy an exhibit within it. EXAMINING THE CHANTS What we can discover when we examine irmoogia is that in every new change and new edition something is ost and something is gained. When ancient chants of Rus went from stop notation to ined notation, a system with a great dea of interpretive information beyond that of just note duration and tone (be it reative or absoute) was ost. This process was aready under way in the stop notation since singers were aready osing a sense of the different nuances of stop neums that seemed to have the same note vaue but different shades of execution; as this occurred, simiar quaity neums woud be repaced by a singe neum to express a the variants. 27 But on the gain side, the newer notation was easier to read, copy, print, and sing. In each new irmoogion one can aso see gains and osses. Sometimes, errors are removed or added, music made more textuay and iturgicay appropriate, simper, or oveier; however, rarey can it be a of these things. In the foowing examination, we wi ook in depth at the irmoi of the tone four canon from severa sources. From this we wi be abe to see the reationship of CarpathoRusyn chant to earier systems and what changes can occur for good or i. The primary exampes wi come from the foowing irmoogia L vov Irmoogion Prostopinije L vov Irmoogion. This Irmoogion is structured much ike the 1709 with much of the same content. The Ukrainian Greek Cathoic Church under the guidance of Metropoitan 7

8 Archbishop of L viv, Andrij Sheptitsky, pubished this version. It is essentiay a reprint of the 1797 Pochachev monastery Irmoogion 28 with some corrections and changes Moscow Obihod_ Notnagw Pênîq. This coection abes the resurrectiona irmoi as being znamenny chant. These irmoi are identica to those found in the 1890 Moscow Îrmoogîi Notnagw Pênîq and the 1892 Moscow Obihod_ Notnagw Pênîq. Matching first ode irmoi from each tone are aso found in Dimitri Rozumovski s 1867 book, Cerkownoe Pênîe w_ Possîi Methodus Cantus Eccesiastici GraecoSavici. This manua, written and compied by Ioanne De Castro, presents the Ruthenian modes of chanting for a the tones. Its contents are based on the 1816 printing a L vov irmoogion. 30 This book, written in Latin, presents not a whoe irmoogion, but the modes for the Ruthenian (or GrecoSavonic as De Castro terms it) chant. Concerning the irmoi, he ony gives the first ode s irmos for each tone. 6. And for comparison of something that is not caed znamenny, I have incuded Russian Greek 31 chant taken from the 1959 reprint of the 1916 St. Petersburg Sputnik_ Psaom]ika. However, since its form is highy patterned, I am incuding ony odes one and nine. Each of the odes has been transcribed from the Savonic texts for ease of comparison. In the process of transcribing, I have transcribed the Cyriic texts just as they appear in the origina books with the foowing exceptions: 27 Gardner, Vo. II, p DeCaro, p Myrosaw Antonowycz, The Chants from Ukrainian Irmoogia, (Bithoven; A. B. Creyghton, 1974), p Roccasavo, p It is chiefy caed Common Chant ( ) in the 1916 Sputnik, but it is aso parentheticay caed Greek chant. An amost identica setting is found in the 1909 Obikhod where it is caed Greek ( ). 8

9 A modern stye of orthography has been used whie retaining oder etters not currenty in use in any of the modern Savic anguages such as the jat ( = ê or ê). Every occurrence of has been changed to o. Likewise, has been changed to ot. The diphthongs and are transcribed as the modern u and q. Where the etter e appears, I have transcribed it into a modern Ukrainian stye, that is, if it appears after a consonant, the etter e is used. After a vowe, the etter є is used. In the 1709 Irmoogion many of the words are abbreviated, are speed differenty or are a competey different word than what is used in the more modern editions. Due to the difficuty of reading the 1709 Irmoogion, I have made my best guess in severa paces. Sometimes I have borrowed the speings of abbreviated words from the 1904 or 1906 editions when it was ceary the same word. I have otherwise eft the speings the same incuding not putting in the hard ( ) and soft ( ) signs even when I knew what they shoud be. I eft these out in order to show where it appears that the hard sign might actuay have been notated as voiced and to highight where it was sometimes written as the etter o. When we ook at the stye of notation, we must keep in mind that the cef is essentiay a doh cef, such that the midde note is the doh. For comparison sake, it is easiest to think of the cef as being trebe and the key of Bfat is impied except that ony the upper E is fat and the ower natura. The origina versions can be found in Appendices IIVI. For ease of comparison, I have transcribed each piece into Bfat as noted above; however, I have transcribed irmoi from the 1909 Obikhod down a fourth from where they appear. Things to note, such as errors, corrections, text painting or styes, wi foow each exampe and a fina anaysis wi be presented after a of the odes are presented. For the Engish text of the irmoi, see Appendix I. 9

10 ODE 1/ Line L vov Irmoogion & bb 31 Мо ря черм на го пу чи ну не мо крий ми сто па ми & bb Мо ря чер мну ю пу чи ну не влаж ны ми сто па & bb Мо ря черм ну ю пу чи ну не мо кры ми сто & bb. j Мо ря чермну ю пу ну не влажны ми сто па & bb. j Мо ря чермну ю пу чи ну не па влаж ны ми сто па ми & bb j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j Мо ря чер мну ю пу чи ну не влаж ны ми 1904 L vov Irmoogion 32 сто па ми 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije 33 Notes: This is the ony version that does not start with a whoe note on sea (ìîðà) Obikhod Notnago Peniia 34 ми ми 1881 Methodus Cantus Eccesiastici GraecoSavici. 35 Notes: This is basicay identica to the 1904 version with exception of the word ñòîïàìè and the words ending with unvoiced ú Sputnik Psamshchika 36 Notes: There is nothing more than pattern meodies as is indicated, i.e., two repeating phrases and a termination. ми 31 Îrmoogîw. (Lxwow_: Stawropêgîwn_ Lwowskago Uspenîq Preswqtaîq Bogomatere, 1709). Gas_ D. 32 Îrmoogîon_: Soderva]_ w_ Sewê Razièiq Pêiîq Cerkwwiq. (Lxwow_: Ivdiwenîem_ i tïpom_ Stawropigîjskagw Înstîtuta, 1904), p Bok[aj, Îogannom_, i Îosifom_ Mainiè_. Cerkownoe Prostopênîe. (Mukaèewo: Sobstwennoctx Isdateej, 1906), p Obihod_ Notnagw Pênîq: Wseno]noe Bdênîe. (Moskwa: Sïnodaxnoj tïpografîi, 1909), p Ioanne De Castro. Methodus Cantus Eccesiastici GraecoSavici. (Romae: Typographia Poygotta, 1881), p Sputnik_ Psaom]ika. (Jordanvie: Hoy Trinity Monastery, 1959), p. ogos. 10

11 ODE 1/ Line 2 & bb Дре вле шествовав Notes: Upward motion on cross (êðåñòà ). b & b Дре вній пѣшеше ство ва въ Із ра илъ & bb & bb Дре внійпѣше шество вавъ Із сра илъ & bb Древнійпѣшешество вавъ Із ра илъ & bb j W j j j j W j j Дре ній пѣшешество вавъ Із ра иль, кре стооб раз_ныма 1709 L vov Irmoogion 1904 L vov Irmoogion Notes: Movement on cross (êðåñòî ) is ost and speing has changed from o to a. In the 1709, and occasionay on the 1904, ú is voiced, perhaps the ast eements of khomonia. Here it occurs on ï øåøåñòâîâàâú. In a the other versions, it is not voiced Tserkovnoje Prostopinije Notes: Like the 1709, cross has upward movement. І зра ил крестообраз ныма Моѵсе о вы ма Дре вле пѣ ше шествовавъ І зраилъ кресто о бражно ма, моѵ се о ви ма кресто об раз ныма Мо ѵ се о выма крестообраз ныма Моѵсе о вы ма креста о бражнома, 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia Notes: Movement on cross (êðåñòî) is now in the opposite direction of the Methodus Cantus Eccesiastici GraecoSavici. моѵ се о ви ма 1959 Sputnik Psamshchika моѵсеовыма 11

12 ODE 1/ Line 3 ру ка ма А ма ли ко ву си лу Notes: Notice the Pattern: Intonation, A, B, C, D, Termination L vov Irmoogion & bb ру ка ма А мали кову си лу въ пусты ни по вѣ дилъ єст L vov Irmoogion & bb j j ру ка ма А ма ли ко ву си лу в пу сты ни по вѣ ди лъ єсть 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb w въ пусты ни по вѣ дилъ єстъ 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb w ру ка ма А ма ли ко ву Notes: The êà on ðóêàìà (hand) gets richer treatment. си лу в пу сты ни по вѣ дилъ єсть 1881 Methodus Cantus Eccesiastici GraecoSavici. & bb ру ка ма А ма ли ко ву си лу в пу сты ни по вѣ дилъ єсть 1959 Sputnik Psamshchika & bb j j W j j j j w ру ка ма Амаликову силу въ пу сты ни по бѣ дилъ єсть Extra ine. ============ & bb aiae teicae Other endings are indicated (aiae teicae) Methodus Cantus Eccesiastici GraecoSavici. 12

13 ODE 3/ : Line L vov Irmoogion & bb Ве селит ся Notes: Sighty neumatic on Christ (õðèñòå) athough not totay respectfu of the accent beonging on ñòå L vov Irmoogion Notes: Neumatic quaity reduced from 1709 version on Õð ñòå, but it respects the accent better and paces focus on Christ as the center of the procamation Tserkovnoje Prostopinije Notes: Pattern: Inton., A, B, Term. Christ not painted as centray as in the L vov irmoogia. Accent has been sacrificed a bit Obikhod Notnago Peniia Notes: Christ (Õð ñòå) has the same shape as in the о Те бѣ Хри сте зо ву & bb Ве се лит ся о Те бѣ & bb Ве се лит ся о Те бѣ цер ковъ тво я Хрї сте Хрі сте зо зо ще ву ву & bb Ве се лит ся о Те бѣ цер ковъ тво я церковъ тво я цер ковъ тво я Хрї сте зо ву ще ще щи: : 13

14 ODE 3/ : Line L vov Irmoogion & bb Ты Notes: Hod on You/Òü³ when shifting to the text of the quoted cry ( You are my strength ) 1904 L vov Irmoogion Notes: Minor third jumps imited to the quoted cry ( You are my strength ) possibe indicating the shift to narrative procamation Tserkovnoje Prostopinije 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia Notes: The way You are my strength is treated appears to be a compromise between the 1709 and 1904 versions; it has both a hod and a shift upward by an interva of a minor second. ще и оутвержде & bb. Ты мo я и прибѣ жи ще и нї оутвержде & bb w Ты мо я крѣпость Гос по ди, прибѣ жище и & bb w Ты мo я и при бѣ ми крѣ пост Гос по ди, прибѣ жи крѣ постьгоспо ди, оутвер крѣ постьгоспо ди, жище и жде ні нї є. оу твержде нї є. є. є 14

15 ODE 4/ Line L vov Irmoogion & bb Воз дви жен на Notes: A subsequent versions have a different opening text (áîçíåñåíà Òÿ âèä âøè öåðêîâü...) than what appears here L vov Irmoogion Notes: Pattern: Inton., A', A', A, B' (very specia), Term. тя ви дѣв ше цер кви на крес тѣ & bb Воз не се на Тя ви дѣв ши цер ковь на крес тѣ 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb Воз не се на Тя ви дѣв ши цер ковь на крес 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb Воз не се на Тя ви дѣв ши цер ковь на тѣ крес тѣ 15

16 ODE 4/ Line 2 солн ца пра вед на го, Notes: Jumps down a third at the excamation, Ñëàâà L vov Irmoogion & bb 1904 L vov Irmoogion & bb j солн це. вед пра но є, Notes: Son of righteousness (ñîëèöå ïðàâåäíîå) has a bit of emphasis with use of repeated notes (more than 1709) Tserkovnoje Prostopinije ста ста ко вчи чи ну нѣ сво 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia єм, сво єм, & bb солн це пра вед но є, ста въ чи нѣ сво & bb солн це пра вед но є ста в чи нѣ сво ємъ, ємъ, 16

17 ODE 4/ Line 3 Notes: Jumps down a third at the excamation, Ñëàâà. Notes: Shift missing on excamation L vov Irmoogion & bb 1904 L vov Irmoogion & bb 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb n b w достой но во зы ва ю щи : сла ва си лѣ тво єй Гос по ди. достой но зы ва ю щи : сла ва си лѣ тво єй Гос по ди. дос той но зы ва ю щи : сла ва си лѣ тво єй Гос по ди Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb w дос той но зы ва ю щи : сла ва си лѣ тво єй Гос по ди. 17

18 ODE 5/ Line 1 & bb Notes: Pattern: Inton., A, B, C' (E fat removed), Term L vov Irmoogion Ты ми Го спо ди свѣт, во мир при шел є си 1904 L vov Irmoogion & bb Ты Го со ди мо й свѣть в міръ при шелъ є си, 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb Ты Го со ди мой свѣть въ миръ при шелъ є си, 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb. j Ты Го со ди мо й свѣть в міръ при шелъ є си, 18

19 ODE 5/ Line 2 & bb свѣт, свя тый Notes: Light (Ñâ òú) of Hoiness is at the highpoint. о бра ща я 1709 L vov Irmoogion 1904 L vov Irmoogion свѣтъ свя тый о бра ща яй из мрач на не вѣ дѣ нї я Notes: Light of Hoiness is at the highpoint (Ñâ òú) with added contrast and emphasis to the first Light at the owest note in the range Tserkovnoje Prostopinije из мрач & bb & bb свѣтъ свя тый о бра ща яй из мрач на на не не вѣ ви дѣ де нї нї я 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb свѣтъ свя тый о бра ща яй из мрач на не вѣ я дѣ нї я 19

20 ODE 5/ Line 3 Notes: Extra neumatic quaity on sing (âîñï àþùèÿ). Notes: Less neums on sing (âîñï àþùèÿ) than in the L vov Irmoogion & bb вѣ ро ю во спѣ ва 1904 L vov Irmoogion & bb вѣ ро ю во спѣ ва 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije я тя 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia Notes: Less neums on sing (âîñï àþùèÿ) than in the 1709 but more ike the 1709 in treatment than the 1904, overa. ю щы & bb w вѣ ро ю во спѣ ва & bb n вѣ ро ю во спѣ ю щы ва ю я ю щим тя щы я тя.. тя. 20

21 ODE 6/ Line 1 & bb По жру ти Notes: On I wi offer You a sacrifice of praise You (òè) has a significant meisma L vov Irmoogion 1904 L vov Irmoogion Notes: On I wi offer You a sacrifice of praise You (òè) no onger has the significant meisma, but ïîæðó does (perhaps a better treatment of the accent) Tserkovnoje Prostopinije Notes: Pattern: A' (specia intonation with A ending), B, C, D, Term. со гласом хва ле нї 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia По жру ти со гла сомъ хва ле нї я Гос по ди Notes: No meismatic treatment unike in 1709 and The setting favors a more neumatic treatment. я Гос & bb По жру ти со гласомъ хва ле нї я по Гос по & bb По жру Ти со гла сомъ хва ле нї я Гос по & bb ди ди ди,,,, 21

22 ODE 6/ Line 2 & bb. Цер ковъ во пї єт ти, Notes: Church is paced at the high point. Цер ковь во пї єть ти, Notes: Church is at the high point. Line L vov Irmoogion 1904 L vov Irmoogion 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije о чи щи ся, 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia 1709 L vov Irmoogion Notes: There is a meisma aso on mercy on a syabe or word (âíî) that is not in ater Savonic texts L vov Irmoogion Notes: Meisma shifted to first syabe of mercy (ìèëîñòè). от кро ви о чишъ & bb от вѣ сов скї я кро ве о ші чищ ши & bb цер ковь & bb ра ди ми во пї єтъ Ти, ло сти от от вѣ сов скі я кро ве & bb Цер ковь во пї ис тек ше ю кро ся ся, вї ю 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb w бѣ сов скї я & bb ми лости вно от ребръ тво их ис тек ше ю кро вї ю ребрътвоихъ ра ды ми лос ти єть ти, от ребръ Тво от ихъ, вѣ сов и скї я кро ве стев ше ю о кро чищ ши ся, 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb ра ди ми ло сти от ребръ тво ихъ ви ис тек ше ю кро ю. вї ю 22

23 ODE 7/ Line 1 & bb Во пе щи Ав ра ам скї и дѣ ти пер 1709 L vov Irmoogion 1904 L vov Irmoogion 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije Notes: Pattern: Inton., A, B' (begins ike C), C, D + Term. Shift (athough probaby unintentiona) at quotation, Bessed are You Obikhod Notnago Peniia Notes: Love for the true faith (ëþáîá þ áëàãî åñò ÿ ïà å) has been smoothed out in comparison to the other L vov irmoogia, especiay сід сте лю бо вї ю & bb В пещи Ав ра ам стї и от ро цы пер сід стѣй, лю бо вї ю & bb Въпе щи пер сѣд стѣй Ав ра ам сті и от ро цы лю бо вї ю & bb В пещи Ав ра ам стї и от ро цы пер сід стѣй, любо вї ю 23

24 ODE 7/ Line 2 & bb бла го рѣ ри я па че Notes: More neumatic on cried out (âîçü³âàõó). не же липла ме нем 1709 L vov Irmoogion 1904 L vov Irmoogion Notes: Neumatic quaity on cried out (âçü³âàõó) 36 has been greaty minimized but is increased on the second fames (ïàëÿºìè) as if they are moving Tserkovnoje Prostopinije не же ли пламенемъо па ля є ми взы ва ху: 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia благо че сті я бла го честі я па че, не же ли пла менемъ о па ля є мивзы ва ху: Notes: There is even more movement on the first fames, but not on the second. It is more ike the 1709 cried out (âçü³âàõó) even though the o has been dropped but sti has the descent of a fourth. о ва ху: & bb бла го че сті я па че, не же ли пла менемъ о па ля є мивзы ва & bb па ля є ми во зы па че, & bb ху: 36 Notice aso that the o is gone. 24

25 ODE 7/ Line 3 & bb бла го сло вен є Notes: Church (öåðêâè) is used instead of tempe (õðàì ) L vov Irmoogion 1904 L vov Irmoogion Notes: Word for tempe has been corrected in this version and a subsequent versions Tserkovnoje Prostopinije Notes: Notice the first use of the specia recitation note ( си вцер кви сла вы тво є & bb бла го сло венъ є си в хра я ) in the origina version (See Appendix V). я Гос по Гос ди. & bb w въ хра мѣ тво є 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb бла го сло венъ є си в хра мѣ я славы тво є я Гос по ди. мѣ славы тво є по ди. бла го сло венъ є си сла вы Гос поди. 25

26 ODE 8/ Line 1 Notes: Eongated on a singe tone, Stretched out his hands (Ðóö ðàñïðîñòåðú). Notes: Eongated on a singe tone, Stretched out his hands (Ðóö ðàñïðîñòåðú) L vov Irmoogion & bb нї я 1904 L vov Irmoogion & bb Ру цѣ лъ лвовъ зї 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije Notes: Pattern: Inton., A' (A with extended ending), B' (ike B' in ode 4), C' (E fat removed), D' (Different ending), Term Obikhod Notnago Peniia цѣ распростеръ Да нї илъ, лвовъ зї я нї я врo вѣ зат че : Notes: Shares the same beginning and the neumatic quaities seen in a the other versions but with more respects for accent. я вро нї я вѣ вро зат че: вѣ зат _ че: & bb w лвовъ зї я нї я Ру цѣ распрос тер Да нї ил лво ва зї я распростеръ Да нї и Ру цѣ рас простеръ Да нї илъ въро вѣ & bb. j Ру зат че: 26

27 ODE 8/ Line 2 & bb ог нен ну ю же си лу у га Notes: Neumatic on utimate syabe of extinguished (oyãàñèøà). ог нен ну ю же си лу у га си Notes: Neumatic on extinguished (oyãàöèøà) 38 as seen in the 1709 version. Line 3 си ша 1709 L vov Irmoogion & bb ог нен ну ю же си лу у га си 1904 L vov Irmoogion ша, 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb n b 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb 1709 L vov Irmoogion до бро дѣ те лї ю пре по я сав шї и ся & bb до бро дѣ те лї ю пре по ша, & bb ог нен ну ю же си лу у га си ша 1904 L vov Irmoogion я сав ше ся 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb до бро дѣ те лї ю пре по я сав ше ся 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb до бро дѣ те лї ю пре по я сав ше ся 38 This has been misaccented in the 1709, 1904, as we as

28 ODE 8/ Line 4 & bb бла го чес тї я ра чи те ли от ро цы, в зы Notes: Neumatic on cried out (âçü³âàþùå) as seen in the 1709 version. Line 5 и же бла го чес тї я ра чи те ли от ро ци во зы Notes: Neumatic on penutimate syabe of cried out (âîçü³âàþùå) regardess of accent. ва 1709 L vov Irmoogion ю ще: 1904 L vov Irmoogion & bb бла го чес в зы ва ю ще: 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia 1709 L vov Irmoogion & bb сло ви тї я ра те чи те ли вся дѣ от ла ро цы, & bb бла го Господ ня Гос по да L vov Irmoogion & bb бла го сло ви те вся дѣ ла Гос под ва ю & bb бла го чес тї ня Гос ще: по да Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb w бла го сло ви те я вся ра чи те ли дѣ ла от ро Гос под ня цы, в зы ва ю ще: Гос по да Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb бла го сло ви те вся дѣ ла Гос под ня Гос по да. 28

29 ODE 8/ Line L vov Irmoogion & bb. j Пой те и пре воз но си 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb Гос по да Хва лимъ бла го словимъ по кла ня єм ся Гос по де ви & bb n w поємъ и пре воз но симъ Є Notes: This refrain has its own recitation type of tone. The 1709 irmoogion is the ony other book to suppy this (athough the text is somewhat different there). The text is the specia refrain for the eighth ode based on Danie 3:82; Õâàëèìú áëàãîñëîâèìú ïîêëàíÿåìñÿ Ãîñïîäåâè, Ãîñïîäà ïîåìú è ïðåâîçíîñèìú ªãî âú âñÿ â êè. A curious notation is added to a the exampes of this; in a book that is otherwise written in od Cyriic orthography, the modern Itaian notation, Recitando, is present using Latin etters. What this probaby indicates is that this meody, which is common to any irmos written in the given tone, was the meody in which the bibica odes were sung. This recited tone is basicay structured ike a psam verse meody from one of the ñàìîãëàñíèé that the evening psam verses woud be sung on between the stikhera for Lord, I Ca. We coud, therefore, assume that the intended purpose of the refrains was at first a repacement for the dispaced bibica ode, not congregationa refrains. Therefore, the text structure is currenty that of a response that coud be done by a congregation, but the musica structure is recitative to be done by a cantor or schoa cantorum. те го є го въ во вѣ вся вѣ ки. ки. 29

30 ODE 9/ Line L vov Irmoogion & bb Ка мен не ру ко сѣч ны от го ры не сѣ ко мы я тя Notes: Eongated on a singe tone at the beginning just ike in ode eight. The commonaity is the word hand in both cases (Ðóö ðóêî) L vov Irmoogion & bb. j Ка мень не ру ко сѣч ный, Notes: Eongated on a singe tone at the beginning just ike in ode eight. The ink is the word hand in both cases (Ðóö ðóêî) Tserkovnoje Prostopinije Notes: Pattern: Inton., A, B, C' (E fat removed), D, Term. Notes: Again, the patterns are the ony rea driving force. от не сѣ ко мы я го ры те & bb Ка мень не ру ко сѣч ный от не сѣ ко мы я го ры те бе бе 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb Ка мень не ру ко сѣч ный от не сѣ ко мы я го ры те 1959 Sputnik Psamshchika & bb j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j Ка мень не ру ко сѣч j ный от не сѣ ко мы я го ры, бе те бє, 30

31 ODE 9/ Line 2 дѣ во Notes: Four neums on virgin (ä âî). Notes: Neums on virgin (ä âî) are reduced from L vov Irmoogion & bb кра є 1904 L vov Irmoogion Notes: Totay syabic on virgin (ä âî) compared to 1709 and 1904 and rather more ike the Sputnik Psamshchika у гол ны от сѣ че ся & bb œ» дѣ во кра є у гол ный 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb дѣ во кра є у гол ный 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb дѣ во кра є у гол & bb j j j j j j j дѣ во кра є у гол ный ный от от от от сѣ сѣ сѣ сѣ че че че че ся ся ся ся 31

32 ODE 9/ Line L vov Irmoogion & bb сте ствѣ: 1904 L vov Irmoogion & bb Хрїс тосъ со во ку пи вый раз сто я ща я ся є сте ства: 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb со во ку пи вый раз сто я ща я ся є сте ства: 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb. j Хрис тос со во ку пи~ рас то я щї и ся є Хрїс тосъ Хрїс тосъ со во ку пи вый разсто я ща я ся є сте ства : 1959 Sputnik Psamshchika & bb j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j Хрїс тосъ со во ку пи вый раз сто я ща я ся є сте ства: 32

33 ODE 9/ Line L vov Irmoogion & bb ли ча єм L vov Irmoogion & bb Тѣм же ве се ля ще ся, тя Бо го ро ди це, ве Тѣмъ ве се ля ще ся, тя Бо го ро ди це, ве ли ча ємъ Tserkovnoje Prostopinije & bb w Тѣмъ ве се ля ще ся тя Бо го ро ди це, ве ли ча ємъ Obikhod Notnago Peniia & bb w Тѣмъ ве се ля ще ся, тя Бо го ро ди це, ве ли ча ємъ Sputnik Psamshchika & bb j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j w Тѣмъ ве се ля ще ся, тя Бо го ро ди це, ве ли ча ємъ. 33

34 The odes have a very imited range and stays in the minor scae (a is the minor root on the second ine in this midde doh cef). There is minima recitative, which is often used ony to accentuate a phrase. It usuay occurs in the opening notes and is generay four 1709 L vov Irmoogion or fewer repeated notes. Common meodic kernes are used throughout the odes, but no strict patterns adhered to except in the termination athough not in every ode. Range is imited to a sixth (so to mi). There is some noticeabe text painting and decorating in some of the irmoi. There is a baanced amount of syabic and neumatic styes (rarey exceeding over four neums). The ony time it has more meismatic sequences is in ode six. There is minima recitative. It usuay occurs in the opening notes and is generay four or fewer repeated notes just as in the Common meodic kernes are used throughout the odes, but ike the 1709 irmoogion, there are no strict patterns adhered to 1904 L vov Irmoogion except the termination, which has a very definite pattern with some fexibiity where note duration is concerned. Range is imited to a sixth (so to mi). There may be a greater concern for accent in this irmoogion than in the Text painting and decorating has been both added and subtracted. Neumatic sections that were four neums are often reduced to two or ess from their 1709 versions. Likewise, the ony time it has more meismatic sequences is in ode six. 34

35 Each ode is basicay based on six unique phrases that are not repeated: an intonation, phrase A, B, C, D, and a termination. Whie there is a greater amount of recitative than the two L vov irmoogia, the patterns are not savishy adhered to. Some effort at accounting for the text has been made. Written in g minor, it has a range simiar (athough shifted) to the L vov irmoogia (a sixth, G to E/a to fa) with a touch of chromaticism, which is a distinctive character of many of the chants in the Prostopinije. Text painting is amost competey ost reative to the 1709 and 1904 irmoogia. A of the interna whoe notes are ost that are present in a of the other versions. The genera sound of the music, however, sti inks it to the other versions found in the 1709, 1904, 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije and 1909 irmoogia. Accent is not aways respected. There has been some specuation that the accenting in some of the books not coming from the Moscow Patriarchate refects a different vernacuar pronunciation. However, I woud propose that it represents the surrendering of the text to a fixed pattern. The pattern is adhered to savishy. Consider the phrase, òü³ Ãîñïîäè ìîé ñâ òú ( O, Lord, my ight ), from ode five. In Od Savonic, Ukrainian, Rusyn, and Russian, Ãîñïîäè is aways accented on the first syabe

36 In these four exampes, ony the 1906 version does not fuy respect the accent. The pattern forces the singer to put the accent on the second syabe of Ãîñïîäè. These settings share the same basic quaities found in the 1709 and 1094 irmoogia concerning stye, range, patterns, and amount of recitative. In some way it is a baance between the two other irmoogia. The notation foows that used by Moscow printers, which is sighty different than the od Kievan stye. There seems to be a greater respect for accent in the Moscow irmoogia. Stepwise motion aso seems to be a greater 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia concern for accent in this version. A significant visua difference concerns where the music is pitched. Reative to the L vov irmoogia the music is written a fourth higher; however, this does not change anything since the reative pitch reationships remain the same. In comparison to the L vov irmoogia, a frequent difference is the addition of a pattern of four eight notes: If L vov has this, it becomes this in Moscow edition This occurs at east thirteen times in one variation of this or another. Most often it begins on doh and ends on re. But it can start as high as re or as ow as a. Sometimes the first quarter note and the eighth note are on the same note For exampes of this phenomenon, see 1.2 (reference is by ode and ine number), 3.1, 4.3, 5.2, 6.1, 6.3, 7.1, 8.1, 8.4., 8.5, 9.1, 9.3, and

37 1881 Methodus Cantus Eccesiastici Graeco Savici 1959 Sputnik Psamshchika This coection is ceary reated to the 1904 recension of irmoogia without being an exact dupicate. Since it was pubished in Rome by a Spaniard, the work assumes to have a western audience; a descriptive texts are written in Latin. In this ight an interesting adjustment has been made to the whoe note neum ( ); it has been turned sideways ( ) so that western readers, who were perhaps acquainted with Gregorian notation, woud know what pitch it referred to on the staff, since a person not used to Kievan notation might not know that the midde of the neum is the pitch that is sung. The RussianGreek Chant meody consists of fairy band and rigid patterns. It is an A B pattern with a specia termination based on phrase A. The accent of beginning and ending words of a ine and the fixed patterns are the ony driving factor in pacement of text and notes. The ony thing in common with the others is the shape of the ast few notes (ending on the ti), which is true in every case and most imitates the ending phrases of the znamenny settings found in the 1909 Irmoogion. Based on the comparisons of these various editions, the foowing concusions about evoutions in irmoogia emerges. First and foremost, the printed editions ceary reate to earier editions (i.e., L vov and Moscow) are concerned with both preservation of ancient music and presentation and sometimes corrections of textua and musica eements; this resuts in adjustments to accent pacement, correction of speings, and minor simpifications in ater editions. This means that the music aways strives to move towards better conveyance of the text s meaning. The Prostopinije does not aways do that as we see in the tone four canon. Its settings are based on the memory of one cantor. Therein we see questionabe accenting and the cantor s prerogatives such as the harmonic adjustment of the seventh scae degree when a shift to minor is perceived instead of retaining the moda character of the chant and the styistic addition 37

38 of chromaticisms 40 and ending on an interva of a descending fourth, both of which are seen in many paces in the Prostopinije book and not just in any one tone. The Prostopinije instead represents the movement toward fixed patterns, which necessariy introduces more recitative. The Prostopinije is sti ceary reated to the earier znamenny based versions but has began to give up respect for text and individua shaping of musica motifs to individua text eements. The most batant exampe of this movement towards pattern meodies with excessive recitative is demonstrated in the Kievan meodies found in the Sputnik. 40 This often takes the form of a sequence ike B natura, A, B fat, A, G. In the oder editions, the B woud never be sharpened to B natura. This appears to be as a stye the cantor iked. 38

39 EXAMINATION OF STIKHERON MELODIES With the examination of the tone four canon, we have seen there is a reationship between the various irmoogia and transcribed znamenny chant. There is aso evoution and change such that we coud say that each new coection begins to take on its own characteristics. Let us again examine various coections with regard to meodies used for stikhera. Sr. Joan Roccasavo makes the bod caim that NOT THE LEAST DOUBT EXISTS THAT THE PLAINCHANTS OF THE PROSTOPINIJE ARE THE VERY SAME PLAINCHANTS FROM THE 1709 IRMOLOGION 41 and that these chants represent the continuation of the znamenny heritage. 42 On the previous exampes, we did see simiarity, but I think we woud be hard pressed to say that the Prostopinije and 1709 are the very same painchants. We wi see this even ess so when ook at the Lord, I Ca stikhera from vespers for Saturday night. The foowing is the Prostopinije setting of the first stikheron for tone one, Accept our evening prayers. 43 ====================== & bb ====================== & bb Ве чер ня я на ша мо ли твы пріи ми святый Го спо ди, и по даждь намъ о став ле ні е грѣ ховъ, я ко єдинъ є си ====================== & bb # яв лей въ мі рѣ во скре се ні є. 41 Roccasavo, p Ibid., p Prostopinije, p

40 As we have seen previousy, this setting has the harmonic adjustment for the perceived shift to g minor, which does not exist in other irmoogia. Unfortunatey, the 1709 and 1904 irmoogia do not give any notated stikhera, but instead present the opening verse for Lord, I Ca, which presumaby provides the pattern for subsequent stikhera. The Prostopinije does the opposite by giving ony the first stikheron for the tone. However, the 1909 Obikhod gives both Lord, I Ca pus a of the stikhera for Saturday evening, which is abeed as znamenny chant. 44 Beow is a transcription of the stikhera, which I have owered a fourth for ease of comparison with the other settings. 45 ====================== & bb Ве чер нї я на ша мо ли твы ====================== & bb w w w w ====================== & bb w w w W прї и ми святый Гос по ди, и подаждьнамъ о ставле нї е грѣховъ, я ко є динъ є си я влей вмі рѣ вос кре се нї є. The reationship between this chant and the Prostopinije is not as cear as what we have seen in irmos meodies. If there is a reationship, it can be found in how the phrases generay end in the same pace and the overa shape coud be taken to indicate possibe simiarity. However, the recitation tones are not the same. 44 Znamennagw Rospêwa. Obikhod, p Ibid., p

41 Taking the next step in examining inks to znamenny, we can compare this stikhera to an Od Beiever setting. The foowing is taken from a manuscript ocated at the OdBeiever monastery ocated in Beaja Kranica (Heiige Dreifatigkeit), which was ocated in Bukovina 46 under Austrian contro at the time of its creation. The manuscript s introduction states that it was written in Now in modernday Ukraine. 47 Stea Sava. Die Gesänge des atrussischen Oktoechos samt den EvangeienStichiren: Eine Neumhandschrift des AtgäubigenKosters zu Béeja Kriníca. Vo. 1 Faksimie/Übertragung. (MünchenSazburg: Musikverag Emi Katzbicher, 1984), p. IX. 48 Ibid., p

42 Incuded is a transcription taken from the same book but transposed up a fourth for the purpose of comparison. 49 ====================== & b w Ве чер ня я на ша мо ли твы ====================== & b w w прї и ми свя ты й Го спо ====================== & b w и по да ждъ намъ о ста вле ====================== & b w w_ w є грѣ ковъ, я ко ты є динъ є си ====================== & b w w w w_ я вле й вми рѣ во скре се ди, нї нї є. As it is we known, the OdBeievers are known for their preservation of oder texts and music. If this is then an exampe of znamenny chant (ceary written in a notation consistent with znamenny chant), then it bears even ess resembance to the same 1906 Prostopinije stikheron. Finay, athough the 1709 and 1904 irmoogia do not have these stikhera, they do give the mode meody, which do share common features with the As we have seen previousy, 49 Ibid., p

43 the 1709 version has both textua differences (aternating between Hear me, O Lord and Hear us, O Lord and different accent pacement reative to the music. 50 ====================== & bb w Го спо ди воз звах кте бѣ у слы ши w мя ====================== & bb w w w w у слы ши нас Го спо ди Го спо ди воз звах кте бѣ у слыши мя. ====================== & bb w w w w Вон ми глас мо ли твы мо е я ====================== & bb w w w Є гда воз зо ву кте бѣ у слы ши нас Го спо ди. Likewise, the 1904 version appears to be a modification and augmentation of the The text matches the 1906 version and again takes greater care to respect the accenting as recorded in the service books. 51 The 1904 can be characterized as being a bit more forid than the 1709 with its use of eightnotes and sma meismas Transcribed from tone one in the 1709 Irmoogian. 51 This assumes that the accenting that is fundamentay a part of Od Church Savonic texts actuay represents how native hearers spoke the text. If not this may account for musica misaccenting in the 1709 and 1906 books and occasionay in the It appears that the 1909 settings were exceedingy mindfu of text accents regardess of how the text might have been spoken. 52 Transcribed from tone one in the 1904 Irmoogian 43

44 ====================== & bb w.. w Го спо ди воз звах кте бѣ у слы ши мя ====================== & bb w w. w у Athough making inks to other socaed znamenny that represent Russian recensions is difficut, the 1906 ceary has inks to earier Ukrainian irmoogia without being exact dupicates of the слыши мя Го спо ди Го спо ди воз звахъ кте бѣ у слы ши мя. ====================== & bb w w w w Вон ми глас су мо ли ====================== & bb w w w w Є гда воз зо ву кте бѣ, у твы слы мо ши мя е Го я,. спо ди. CONCLUSION As we have seen in this sma sampe of Rusyn and Russian chants, the CarpathoRusyn chant of the 1906 Prostopinije does find its pace and origin within the greater history of chant in the ands the make up ancient Rus. However, I woud not concude that the Prostopinije is neither the ast word in CarpathoRusyn chant nor its best witness as has been the assumption of many who set music in Engish to the meodies found in the Prostopinije. It has been presumed that the uniformity that resuted from Bishop Firtsak s demand that every parish have two copies was a good thing. I conversey beieve that it is antithetica to the practice of CarpathoRusyns in their church singing; CarpathoRusyn chanting on any given Sunday tends to differ sighty 44

45 parish to parish despite written music. Instead of preserving chants that where in accord with the oder irmoogia, the chanting of one cantor has been hed up as the paradigm for future manifestations of CarpathoRusyn chant. So when we say CarpathoRusyn chant as when we say znamenny chant, we must remember that no one coection, book, irmoogion, or piece of music is CarpathoRusyn chant. With this in mind we can draw two fina concusions for the future of iturgica music that wi be derived from the CarpathoRusyn chant tradition. 1. The marriage of text and iturgy must be done with great care. Using one source and savishy reproducing Engish text fit cosey to Od Savonic settings wi more ikey provide poory set music in Engish and the mutipication of errors. Knowing that Carpatho Rusyn chant draws not ony from the Prostopinije, adaptors of chant are free to adjust their settings based on respect for text and better exampes seen in other irmoogia ike those printed in L viv for the Ukrainian church. To do otherwise is to reegate iturgy to being a cutura museum eement and not a too for gorification of God. 2. The names given to chants need to be both more precise and used appropriatey. Precision shoud indicate not ony the famiy (Gaician, CarpathoRusyn, Znamenny, etc.), but where it is from, that is, both its ocaity (Mukachevo, Moscow, L viv, Kiev, etc.) and its printed or manuscript source (Prostopinije, 1909 Obikhod, 1601 Supras Irmoogion, etc). Appropriate use shoud be for identification, not justification for use in iturgy. As we advance in our rediscovery of iturgy, we shoud be prepared to use and adapt music that best serves the Church s ca to praise God whie sti respecting the particuar characteristics of a community. This might just mean giving up or changing those things we have previousy justified using because it was caed CarpathoRusyn. 45

46 APPENDIX I First Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi For Tone Four CANTICLE ONE 53 In ancient times Israe waked dryshod across the red sea, and Moses, ifting his hand in the form of the Cross, put the power of Amaek to fight in the desert! CANTICLE THREE Your Church ceebrates in You, O Christ, and cries aoud: You are my strength, O Lord, my refuge and my stronghod! CANTICLE FOUR Seeing You ifted upon the Cross, Sun of righteousness, the Church stood sti and cried aoud: Gory to Your power, O Lord! CANTICLE FIVE Lord my ight, You have come into the word as a ight of hoiness, turning back from dark ignorance those who sing Your praises in faith! CANTICLE SIX The Church which is purified from the bood offered to demons by the bood which fowed in mercy from Your side cries aoud to You, O Lord: I wi offer You a sacrifice of praise! CANTICLE SEVEN The chidren of Abraham in the Persian furnace, burning with ove for the true faith, stronger than the fames, cried out from the midst of the fire: Bessed are You, Lord, in the Tempe of Your gory! CANTICLE EIGHT Danie stretched out his hands in prayer in the den of ions and stopped their mouths. And girded with hoiness, the chidren, overs of the true faith, quenched the power of the fire as they cried aoud: A works of the Lord, bess the Lord! CANTICLE NINE Christ, the corner stone not cut by human hand, was taken from you, Virgin, the unhewn mountain; joining in one two different natures, therefore we magnify you, Theotokos, with great rejoicing! 53 Odes taken from Hoy Myrrhbearers Monastery Octoechos, which was made avaiabe to the author in ASCII text format. 46

47 APPENDIX II Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1709 L vov Irmoogion ODE 1/ ODE 3/ : 47

48 APPENDIX II Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1709 L vov Irmoogion ODE 4/ ODE 5/ 48

49 APPENDIX II Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1709 L vov Irmoogion ODE 6/ This ode has a scriba error; athough it has the Savonic numbering for four, i.e., ä, it is actuay ode six. 49

50 APPENDIX II Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1709 L vov Irmoogion ODE 7/ 50

51 APPENDIX II Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1709 L vov Irmoogion ODE 8/ 51

52 APPENDIX II Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1709 L vov Irmoogion ODE 9/ 52

53 APPENDIX III Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1904 L vov Irmoogion ODE 1/ ODE 3/ : 53

54 APPENDIX III Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1904 L vov Irmoogion ODE 4/ ODE 5/ 54

55 APPENDIX III Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1904 L vov Irmoogion ODE 6/ ODE 7/ 55

56 APPENDIX III Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1904 L vov Irmoogion ODE 8/ ODE 9/ 56

57 APPENDIX IV Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije ODE 1/ ODE 3/ : ODE 4/ ODE 5/ 57

58 ODE 6/ APPENDIX IV Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije ODE 7/ ODE 8/ 58

59 ODE 9/ APPENDIX IV Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1906 Tserkovnoje Prostopinije 59

60 APPENDIX V Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia ODE 1/ ODE 3/ : ODE 4/ 60

61 APPENDIX V Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia ODE 5/ ODE 6/ ODE 7/ 61

62 APPENDIX V Origina Version of Tone Four Resurrectiona Canon Irmoi from the 1909 Obikhod Notnago Peniia ODE 8/ ODE 9/ 62