Pillar Znamenny chant is the basis of different types of liturgical singing

An example of Znamenny notation with cinnabar marks, from the book “The Circle of Ancient Church Znamenny Singing in Six Parts”[1], ed.
A.I. Morozov, 1884. “We worship Your Cross, O Master, and glorify Your Holy Resurrection” (Troparion, tone 6 - performed on the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross of the Lord and on the Cross Veneration Week of Lent). Znamenny singing

, also
Znamenny chant
[2] - the main type of Old Russian liturgical singing. The name comes from non-meaning signs - banners (Old Russian “banner”, that is, a sign), used to record it.

Various types of znamenny chant and the corresponding types of banners are known - kondakarny, pillar, demestvenny, traveling.

Types of chants

Kondakar chant

Kondakar chant (also kondakar singing) is the oldest type of church singing in Rus'. The name comes from the word “kontakion” - one of the liturgical chants. The non-neutral type notation comes from Paleo-Byzantine. It is characterized by the presence of melodically developed elements and special melismatics. Kondakar singing flourished in Rus' in the 11th-12th centuries; by the 14th century it disappeared from the Russian liturgical tradition due to the change of the liturgical charter from Studite to Jerusalem and the corresponding change in the corpus of liturgical books. It is found in kontakari, the basis of which is kontakia and ikos in honor of holidays throughout the entire period of the church year and in memory of saints. The most famous written sources containing chants recorded in kondakar chant are the Typographical Charter (late 11th - early 12th centuries), Annunciation Kondakar (late 12th - early 13th centuries), Trinity Kondakar (?), Uspensky Kondakar (1209).

Pillar chant

Fitnik.
1st quarter of the 19th century and 2nd quarter of the 19th century. Half-tired. 52 sheets. Code 379-9. Composite manuscript (part 2 begins on page 42) from the collection of Archpriest Dimitry Razumovsky The main type of Znamenny singing, which is used to chant almost the entire corpus of books of the Russian liturgical liturgical tradition. The name comes from the word “pillar” - the eight-week cycle of the Octoechos, a book sung with this chant and which became widespread in Rus' in the last third of the 15th century, in connection with the adoption of the Jerusalem Rule (cf. the Gospel pillars of the Octoechos). Stolpovoy chant has become widespread and is the most commonly used in the Russian monophonic liturgical tradition at the present time. The chant consists of chants (kokiz), fits and persons, which, in turn, consist of smaller units - hooks (banners)[3]. It has an osconsonant system, i.e. Each voice corresponds to a certain set of kokiz, as well as a set of fits and faces that characterize the voice. Fita and faces represent extended melodic phrases that the singer had to know by heart. In the modern tradition, they are often written down in a fractional banner and do not have a secretly closed recording, that is, one that would not allow the singer to read the tune from the sheet, but only to sing it by heart. The pillar chant includes anenaiki - special decorations of chants, a type of Byzantine kratim. The chants (kokizas) of the pillar chant are present not only in the chants of the liturgical circle, but also in everyday chants. The most commonly used kokizs that have come into use are considered to be the kokizs of the 6th voice. In addition to liturgical books, special singing alphabets, kokizniks and fitniks, were created for studying notation.

Travel chant

A singing style common in ancient Russian musical culture along with Znamenny chant and demestvenny chant. The origin of the name is a controversial issue in medieval studies. It arose in the last quarter of the 15th century. Until the middle of the 16th century. was used in Stikhirare, then also in Common Use. At first it was written in znamenny notation (“the path of the pillar”) and played a secondary role in comparison with the repertoire of znamenny chant. At the end of the 16th century. travel chant became an independent, developed branch of ancient Russian singing art, distinguished by greater solemnity, melodiousness and smoothness. The melody of the travel chant is formed by a set of canonical melodic formulas, subject to the system of osmoglasis. The peak of the development of travel chant is the end of the 16th - 1st half. XVII centuries At the beginning of the 17th century. The first musical alphabet for travel was created, and a specific terminology arose that determined the belonging of chants to the travel chant (“put”, “putnoy”, “way”). In the 2nd half of the 17th century. the travel chant began to fall out of use. A small number of travel chants recorded “by the pillars” were preserved in Old Believer manuscripts of the 18th–20th centuries.

Demonic chant

Main article: Demonic singing

Demestvenny chant - demestvennoe singing, demestvo - is one of the stylistic directions of ancient Russian singing art. The earliest mention of it dates back to 1441 (Moscow Chronicle of the late 15th century). It became widespread in the 16th-17th centuries, including in polyphony (3- or 4-voice; in 4-voice demastic polyphony, one of the voices was called a demestvo, and the other was called a path). The repertoire of de-local chant includes individual chants of Daily Life, Holidays and Trezvonov, Lenten Stichirarion, Octoechos and Irmologiya. From the 3rd quarter of the 18th century. a number of chants of Obikhoda were included in the Old Believer book Demestvennik. Initially, the demesnic chant was written in znamenny (pillar) notation (see Kryuki). In the 2nd half of the 16th century. on its basis, a demetic notation was created, using elements of znamenny notation, but in a more complicated form. Demonic notation did not use secrecy. In childhood, stylistic patterns were developed that played a significant role in the evolution of Russian singing art: a solemn style of singing was formed with wide chants of individual syllables of the text. It is currently used as a special solemn chant, for example, during bishop's services.

Old Believer singing

When they talk about Old Believer singing, they often narrow its boundaries, talking only about Znamenny singing. In reality, Old Believer singing is a much broader concept. In an Old Believer church you can hear simple recitative singing, and singing “to the voice” in accordance with the ancient principle of osmoglasiya, and, of course, znamenny singing, which also follows osmoglasiya, but expands, decorates it and even goes beyond its limits.

Women's choir

Znamenny singing is called because chants were recorded with special signs: banners, or hooks (therefore, Znamenny singing is sometimes also called kryukov). Both the singing itself, adopted during the baptism of Rus', and the banners that serve to designate it, we inherited from the ancient Greek, Byzantine, church. To date, both ancient singing and banners, although somewhat changed in relation to the Byzantine ones, have nevertheless been preserved in the living Old Believer tradition better than those of the Greeks themselves.

Why did it happen so? Because both during the years of spiritual devastation of the 17th century and during the years of subsequent persecution, the Old Believers tried to preserve not only the letter, but also the entire image, the entire totality of ancient church services.

The main feature of znamenny singing (as, indeed, of any Old Believer chant) is its unison, or unanimity. All singers sing the same pitch at the same time. The unity of the singers is transmitted to the worshippers; unity in singing figuratively testifies to the like-mindedness of the faithful, calms a restless mind, helps to feel part of the one body of Christ - the Church. The sensual manner of performance is alien to Znamenny singing; The singers' voices should sound without affectation, naturally and without tension. All this leads to the creation of a contemplative prayerful mood, free from emotions and passions.

And although the church reformers of the 17th century did not abolish or prohibit znamenny singing, nevertheless it was no longer combined with the new spirit that captured the Russian church. Old Russian strict and calm singing in its aesthetic content was alien to Western culture, which openly came to Rus', spiritually weakened by church schism. Reformed by Nikon and his supporters, the church began to rely on heterodox customs. In it, Italian partes singing and the secular musical notation associated with it began to decisively displace both znamenny singing and the banners themselves.

In former times, only men sang in temples. At the present time of great impoverishment of male voices, as a rule, there are not enough and mixed choirs are not uncommon. The pitch of the singers may differ only by an octave. If possible, they try to avoid mixing choirs: men sing in one choir, women in another.

By the beginning of the 18th century, the dominant church had largely switched to five-line notation, which significantly facilitated the further penetration of new melodies. In the end, very little of Znamenny singing was preserved in the mainstream church. But a large number of works appeared that imitated secular Western European music. The non-Old Believer part of the Russian people lost an important component of their culture and the majority of Russians have never heard real Znamenny singing.

Only in the 19th century did researchers and experts in Znamenny singing appear among the New Believers (D.V. Razumovsky, S.V. Smolensky, V.M. Metallov). The Old Believers carefully preserved ancient singing throughout centuries of persecution. And as soon as it became possible, the keepers of ancient traditions hastened to announce to the world about the preserved art. At the beginning of the last century, Singing books, previously copied, began to be published in print.

Osmoglasie is a system of organizing Russian church singing, a unity of texts and tunes ordered in accordance with eight melodic patterns, or voices. Every seven days of the week (from Sunday to Saturday), the church service is dominated by texts and chants corresponding to a certain voice. The first tone begins on the Sunday of St. Thomas (the first Sunday after Easter), the second tone begins on the next Sunday, etc.

However, the voice of some chants performed at the service may differ from the current voice. The melodies of the voices, although they date back to the time of St. John of Damascus (8th century) and have undergone some changes over more than a thousand years of history, have retained their spiritual content and musical pattern.

The ABCs of Znamenny singing and manuals for studying it began to appear. I. A. Fortov, M. D. Ozornov and L. F. Kalashnikov worked especially hard in this matter, whose singing editions are currently being reprinted many times and are the most commonly used in the Russian Orthodox Old Believer Church. Particular merit in introducing Russian society to the ancient singing tradition belongs to the choir of the Old Believer Church of St. Nicholas at the Bogorodsko-Glukhovskaya manufactory. After the name of the church benefactor and owner of the manufactory, Arseny Ivanovich Morozov, this choir is known as Morozovsky. Under the direction of P. V. Tsvetkov, the choir held a number of public performances, which came as a surprise to the public of that time. These performances were accompanied by lectures by P. V. Tsvetkov on Znamenny singing. The singing of the Morozov choir was recorded on gramophone records.

The consequences of the October Revolution of 1917 had a heavy impact on both church life in general and the art of singing in particular. But even under the godless government, Old Believer singing did not stop. In the matter of its preservation and popularization during these years, the great merit of Ya. A. Bogatenko (1875 - 1941) - the leader of the church choir of the Brotherhood of the Honorable and Life-Giving Cross, a singing teacher at the Moscow Old Believer Teachers' Institute, who was also a famous icon painter. In the post-war years, the choir of the Church of the Intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the village of Strelnikova, Kostroma Region, gained particular fame. It was started by Bishop Gerontius (Lakomkin; 1872 - 1951), now glorified as a saint. The Strelnikovsky Choir brought the high culture of performance to the modern generation.

Now is the time for the revival of the Old Believer singing art. The hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Old Believer Church monitors the state of church singing in parishes. In many Old Believer communities, wonderful singers sing. The choirs of the Nizhny Novgorod and Novosibirsk communities are especially famous. The Novosibirsk Choir continues the traditions of the Morozov Choir, performing concerts and testifying to the Orthodox singing art among non-Old Believers not only in Russia, but also abroad. In Moscow on St. Sunday Evenings of spiritual chants began to be held regularly with the Myrrh-Bearing Women, and since 2005, Days of Old Russian Orthodox Church singing have been held on All Saints Sunday.

The study of Znamenny singing is mandatory at the Theological School of the Old Believer Moscow Metropolis. But znamenny chant, although it is one of the most characteristic Old Believer liturgical traditions, is nevertheless not the only type of spiritual singing.

When talking about znamenny singing, one cannot ignore the banners themselves, or hooks - signs for recording the chant. Their names are very poetic: greyhound darling, snake, two in a canoe, dark arrow, thunder-light arrow... Each syllable of the text corresponds to one or more banners (hooks); each banner represents from one to nine sounds - their sequence, relative pitch and duration. To the left of the banner are red “marks” indicating the pitch of the highest sound in the banner. But it's not that simple. Depending on the voice, some banners are sung differently; in addition, they now and then form stable combinations (the so-called “voles”), which have their own chant, which also varies depending on the voice. Some combinations of banners (they are called “fits”, from the banner resembling the letter “fita”), although they are sung the same way regardless of the voice, are sung in several dozen sounds.

Individual prayers do not have a znamenny recording, and they are sung according to melodies that are passed on by ear from generation to generation (“by chant”). The chants may not be the same in different Old Believer communities. Sometimes the chant is used even for those prayers for which there is a znamenny recording. As a rule, the duration of performing a prayer using a chant is much shorter than using a banner. Tunes form a special layer of Old Believer singing culture.

Demestvenny singing can be heard in Old Believer churches much less often than Znamenny singing. All of the above about the features of Znamenny singing can also be attributed to demestinal singing. In general, it has a slightly different rhythm, a different emotional coloring, and is generally more intense and solemn. The same prayers can be presented in both Znamenny and Demestvenny versions. Which one to choose is decided by the rector of the temple or the charter director.

Demonic singing has its own written language for recording the chant, however, outwardly it is very similar to Znamenny. But Old Believer singing is not only liturgical singing. Pious Orthodox Christians do not consider it permissible to sing secular, worldly songs, the content of which, as a rule, is far from pious, and sometimes downright blasphemous.

But life without song does not correspond to the spirit of the Russian person. Therefore, pious spiritual songs have long been born among the people. Sometimes poems by secular poets were used. They acquired a melody (which was often written in hooks) and were gratefully received by Orthodox Christians. Under the name of spiritual poems, they still exist among the Old Believers. Among the spiritual poems, there are very ancient ones, and there are also those created by our contemporaries. It is rare that a holiday meal is complete without the singing of spiritual verses. Old Believer choirs performing for outside audiences willingly include them in their repertoire.

Source: “Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Old Believers”

Sound system

Unlike Western Europe, where the theory of Gregorian church tones was fully developed by the 9th century, there was no “authentic” modal theory of Znamenny chant in Rus', just as there was no term “mode” itself. But the liturgical practice of the Russian Orthodox Church included the “voice” (translation of the Greek ἦχος), which some researchers consider a specifically Russian variety of monodic-modal mode, others - an analogue of the Western psalm tone, and still others completely deny the connection between “voice” and “mode”. An extreme point of view is represented by A. V. Preobrazhensky:

The concept of a voice, like a fret, has never existed among the Russians; the voice was determined by the singer by the presence in the melody of typical turns of phrase found only in this voice, which he (the singer?) called “singers” <…>. They didn’t even develop the concept of a scale.

— Preobrazhensky A.V.

Cult music in Russia. L., 1924. P. 26.

Since the second half of the 20th century to this day, Russian researchers, as a rule, do not dispute the very existence of the mode in Znamenny chant. The only problem is to build its theoretical model, as usual, through the description of certain specific features (categories and functions) of the pitch system. Such a theoretical model (the “hexaikha” theory) was developed by Yu. N. Kholopov together with his student G. S. Bychkova (Fedorova) in the 1980s [4] [5], however, the hexaikha model was not accepted outside his school . In the works of a number of researchers of Znamenny singing (S.V. Frolov[6], D.S. Shabalin[7], I.E. Lozovaya[8], V.I. Martynov[9], M.G. Shkolnik[ 10]) contain valuable observations on the pitch structure of Znamenny chant, however, no holistic theoretical model of the mode of Znamenny chant (except for Kholopov’s “hexaikha”) has been proposed as of 2011[11].

Examples of ancient Russian singing art

Polyphonic singing became known for the first time in the practice of Novgorod singing masters. In a monument from the forties of the 16th century. “The Order of the Archbishop of Novgorod and Pskov,” reflecting the liturgical orders of the Novgorod St. Sophia Cathedral, repeatedly mentions singing by Sofia choristers “on horseback.”28 Ivan the Terrible proposed to the cathedral convened in Moscow in 1551 to introduce Novgorod singing “in Moscow and throughout Moscow’s borders.” . Apparently, for the members of the cathedral, polyphonic singing was news and raised fears that, under the pretext of it, the simultaneous performance of textually different stichera and psalms could occur. A cautious decision followed: “And about other church singing, do everything according to the rules... Sing the doxology and katavasia at the gathering (that is, together with two choirs - N.U.) sing... what if the psalm and psalter were not spoken. Likewise, the canons would not suddenly canarchalize and speak two at a time.”29 So, 1551 can be considered the date when polyphonic singing received the sanction of church authorities to introduce it in churches throughout the state.

Polyphonic singing was created on the basis of the practice of folk choral songs. The song is sung in two or three voices and very rarely in four. One of the voices leads the main melody, the others complement this melody with supporting voices. There is no division of performers into voices based on range and timbre (sopranos, altos, tenors and basses) in folk choral singing. Women's and children's voices sing the same melody as men's, an octave higher. With any composition of performers, the main melody is entrusted to the most skillful and vocal member of the choir. He is the singer, that is, the singer who starts the song.

These typical features of folk choral song were transferred to polyphonic church singing. It is also two- and three-voice. Four-voice scores are extremely rare.

All voices in the score are melodic. The voice leading the main melody was designated in the score by the word “path”. The melody lying above the path was designated by the word “up”, and the one lying below was designated “bottom”. In the four-voice presentation, “demest” was added. The names “path” and “demestvo” indicated the dominant role of these voices in the score, but these could be the melodies of the Znamenny chant.

The score was written in relation to the composition of male voices. Its range corresponded to the full church scale: from G of the major octave to D of the first octave inclusive. The high tenor register remained unused. But the basses, which had the sounds of the entire large octave and partly of the counter-octave, sang an octave lower than what was written (as they sometimes sing now). No special parts were written for the “small singers” (as the singing boys were called). They sang the same thing an octave higher than what was written.

In all voices, the ambiguity of their melody was limited to the volume of a sixth or seventh and rarely went beyond the octave. This made it possible for most singers to perform any line of the score. Therefore, the voices were not described separately; all singers sang according to the score. To make the score easier to read, “top” was written in black ink, “path” in red and “bottom” in black. Of course, the reverse order of ink arrangement was also allowed.

The monument of the thirties of the 17th century - “The Official of the Novgorod St. Sophia Cathedral” indicates different types of polyphonic singing. On some holidays, choristers sing “on both faces,” that is, the right and left choirs alternately, the “lowercase Novgorod” liturgy,30 on others – “lowercase Moscow”,31 on others – “demestvennaya”,32 and on some – the right the choir is demestinal, and the left is lowercase Novgorod.33 In some cases, lowercase singing is called singing “in lines” and is contrasted with demestinal, for example, “... the singers sing the liturgy for both faces in lines, and the ambonic podiaks all sing demestial.”34 The words “sing” ... into lines" indicate that in line singing, unlike demestral singing, all choral voices performed the same melody, but from different degrees of the scale.35 In the "Testimony" of the Vologda singer Ananyin, dated 1666, they also differ two styles of polyphonic singing - lowercase and demonym. Ananyin’s repertoire included Zlatoust’s mass, and the Lenten mass with destitute people, and all the everyday life “stroshnoy” (lowercase - N.U.), in addition, he sang the same “parts” of the path and the bottom from demestvennoy everyday life and demestvennoy liturgy.36

No. 83 - “On the River of Babylonstey” represents an example of an early two-voice line-by-line presentation of the melody of the Znamenny chant. It is based on the technique of “splitting” the unison into the second, third, fourth and fifth.

In line singing there are two plans for presenting voices. One of them resembles a “tape” two-voice organum of a strict style of polyphony. But Russian “tape” two-voices are characterized by the absence of constancy of intervallic relationships, which is indispensable for an organum,37 and the use of thirds. and even seconds.

Ribbon three-voice is associated with the formation of triads, quarter-sex chords, and sometimes small seventh chords in the vertical. With the progressive movement of voices, parallelisms of these chords arise. The latter are often replaced by parallel movement of intervals, when one or another two voices begin to sing in unison. (83, 84, 90, 92) provide examples of such polyphony.

Another type of line polyphony was created on the basis of the predominant use of techniques of folk subvocal polyphony - second and subvocals, independence of voice movement (93, 94) at the highest level of composition mastery, which led to the formation of its own melodies in each voice. (96)

Four-voice line scores are rare. The fourth voice sings the same melody of the znamenny chant, which is performed by the other voices with minor changes and crossings caused by the limited volume of the scale. The performance of the demestvo was entrusted to the most experienced singer, the owner of a strong voice. These were usually the leaders of the choirs themselves, they were also heads or domestics. The name of the voice of the score, demestvo, comes from the last word. Singing with childhood was essentially singing with a soloist. Therefore, demestvo is found mainly in solemn holiday chants. Such an example is (97) - a fragment of the stichera for the feast of the Nativity of Christ, “The Lord Jesus is born.”

In the history of Russian polyphony, line singing preceded partes singing and existed for some time in parallel with it. This explains some of the duality of the vertical line of line scores. In some cases, these are chords with a clearly expressed tonic-dominant relationship, in other cases the harmonic functions of the chords are almost not felt and coloristic harmony comes to the fore. Sometimes in works with a clearly expressed tonic-dominant chord relationship, two fourths appear on strong times (90).

Sometimes works begun with a tonic triad end with its quartet-sex chord (96).

The fourth lies at the basis of the final “chords” of three-part works (90, 92).

Some pieces end in two quarts (95)

Ending the music with a quart seemed quite logical, since the quart was the basis for the organization of many songs. There was an exercise in “arpeggiating” fourths, the musical system was presented on the basis of dividing the scale into thirds and fourths, and Shaidurov gave a theoretical justification for the consonance of two simultaneously sounding fourths.38

Demonic singing, like lowercase singing, could be two-voice, three-voice or four-voice. The names of the voices were preserved. But the polyphony and texture of the score were different. If the basis of line singing was the presentation of one melody in voices, then in demonic singing it was the pairing of several melodies of different types of movement. Three styles of monody—znamenny, travel, and demestvenny chants with the pronounced character of their melodies provided rich material for such a combination. It is difficult to explain why the style of polyphony using all three styles of monody was called demimal. The manuscript of GPB, O. I., No. 875 with works of this setting has the inscription “Travel everyday life in three lines.” It is possible that this polyphony was sometimes called travel, since it was based on the melody of a travel chant, but the common name was denational. (98) – the troparion “Open the doors of repentance” – an example of two-part demestial singing. The upper voice sings the melody of the travel chant. The melody of the lower one is created from the intonations of the demesne chant. Musical dramaturgy arises from the comparison of the contrast of melodies: slow, ponderous - traveling, and moving, with a motor rhythm - degenerate. The different nature of the melodies and their artificial pairing cause the voices to pronounce the words of the text at different times and the constant appearance of dissonances in the vertical.

In three-voice works, the middle voice was assigned the melody of the travel chant. The lower melody was composed from the intonations of the demestvenny chant, and the upper melody was based on the chants of the Znamenny chant. In the flow of voices, the top occupied a middle place between the path and the bottom. He was more mobile than the path, but in this respect inferior to the bottom. This further complicated the verticality of the score and increased the dissonance of the music. In this regard, (109, 110, 111) are written.

In four-voice works, demism was added. Its melody was a generalization of the Znamenny and Demestvenny chants. There is an opinion that the demest is the fourth voice of the score, and on this basis, sometimes all four-voice scores are classified as demest, and three- and two-voice scores are considered lowercase.39 This is incorrect. This or that style of Old Russian polyphony is determined by the nature and nature of the pairing of melodies. There are three-voice scores and even two-voice ones, written in the style of demestvenny singing, in which one of the voices is a demestvo.40 Obviously, the demestvo, as in line singing, had the meaning of solo. In 114 this meaning is expressed in the introduction of the de-localist. It is too long to serve as an intonation tuning for the choir: the calculation is obvious for the effect of a beautiful-sounding voice.

If the line singing of the tape warehouse can to some extent be compared with Western polyphony, then there is nothing similar there for comparison with the de-mestial one. Polyphonic counterpoints of a strict style are subordinated to the cantus firmus and justify their name as a pairing of punctum contra punctum. In demestial singing there is no such subordination of voices, therefore it can be called counterpoint only in the sense of this term as polyphony in general, and the path can be called cantus firmus only as a voice around which the free movement of other voices occurs. The melodies combined in demesne singing do not have that unity of reference tones that underlies folk song polyphony. The hymn “Like the Cherubim” (102) begins with all three voices in unison, and then each has its own supporting steps. At the top it is mi, and at the path it is re. The reference tones of the bottom are A and C. When voices begin their motifs in unison from one of these reference tones, they sound consonantal. But their freedom of movement inevitably causes the appearance of dissonance between one or another pair of voices.

At the same time, the dissonance of demestvenny singing is not a spontaneously arising cacophony and a pattern can be traced in its appearance. Demonic polyphony always begins with a consonantal sound. The dissonance that arises in the flow of movement of voices is significantly weakened, and sometimes replaced by consonantal music in those places where the work is divided into melodic lines in connection with the design of the text’s versification (remember that the fourth in line singing was considered as consonance). In 104 this pattern appears especially noticeably and serves as a means to form a multi-part work.

Such an original and strange-sounding style of polyphony could have arisen under the conditions of “polyphony” that existed during the 16th-17th centuries, i.e. simultaneous singing of various chants, about which one of his contemporaries wrote: “... I entered the holy church with great confusion, as through the charter and church rite the singer did not sing unanimously, but in voices two, and three, and six, I performed church singing, not understanding each other what they say; and from the very same priests and clerics, the noise and goat-crying in the holy churches was strangely loud: the clergy in both countries belted the Psalter and other church verses, not waiting for the end of the face from the face, but all of them screamed and groaned, while the psalmist read your verses without listening to those sung, the beginning is different, and it is impossible for the listener to understand what he understands and what he understands; Still, speeches are not like scriptures, they do not change the speech for the sake of their goat-voicing...”41 Polyphony, despite its prohibition by the church authorities, existed until the time of Peter the Great. “A bad and harmful and very ungodly custom has entered, says the Spiritual Regulations, of church services and prayers being sung in two voices and in many voices, so that Matins or Vespers, dismantled into parts, are suddenly sung by many, and two or three prayer services are suddenly sung by many singers and singers are performed. This happened out of laziness of the clergy and became a custom, and of course such prayers should be translated.”42

The singing of one chant by all singers, at least set out in different chants, was an alternative to polyphony. In some cases, it eliminated not only the “goat-vocality”, but the very reason that caused polyphony. The simultaneous singing of greatness in different chants took less time than singing it three times in the same chants. This could also apply to individual stichera, which the church charter prescribed to be sung twice or thrice. The dissonance of demestvenny singing was, in any case, no stronger than the cacophony of polyphony. It is possible that at first demestine singing differed little from the cacophony of polyphony, but the creative approach of the singing masters to combining melodies that were different in style contributed to a certain weakening of the latter, and the logic of musical thinking determined the techniques of voice leading and entry of voices typical for this type of polyphony - “initiation”, “ capture" and cadence. A style was created on which generations of singers were brought up and a certain aesthetic perception was established.

In the 17th century, demestvennye singing occupied a more prominent place in the repertoire of choirs than lowercase singing. Demonic scores contain not only everyday chants, but also holidays: magnification (109) stichera (110) irmos (111) chants of the bishop's service (114).

Chants appeared reflecting local singing traditions - Vologda (112), Tambov (113), etc. Linear singing fairly soon gave way to partes, while de-local singing continued to exist in the first decades of the 18th century. D. Razumovsky reports that it was used according to linear music books in Moscow, in the Cosmodamian Church in Taganka, in 1737.43 With the advent of Tikhon Makarevsky’s “Key”, hook demestial scores were translated into five-linear notation, while lowercase ones remained untranslated, as lost practical significance. Moreover, in the style of demestvenny singing with a consonant beginning, dissonant vertical on accented syllables and with a dissonant ending, everyday chants, usually performed in a “govork”, were presented in three voices. The melodies of Bulgarian, Kyiv and even Znamenny chants were rearranged. Individual short chants with their znamenny melody were “harmonized” in different ways for the all-night vigil and liturgy (106, 107).

All the litanies of the all-night vigil and the liturgy (105) of the many years (108) were set out in the same way, so that these services were, as it were, permeated with dissonant music from their beginning to the last “chord”. Moreover, most three-voice chants ended with a fourth and a major second and even two major seconds.

V. M. Belyaev calls the vertical of demest singing the quarto-fifth chord basis of polyphony and considers it “completely legitimate and... characteristic of an earlier stage of development of the harmonic and contrapuntal style than the “three-voiced” stage of its development.”44 But how to explain the end of music with two seconds, which is so persistently used by the masters of demestine singing even where it was not caused by voice leading? For an ear trained on music in a tempered system, the artistic and aesthetic significance of this phenomenon is incomprehensible. It remains to agree with B.V. Asafiev, who wrote to V.M. Belyaev: “It is very difficult to assimilate by ear the intonation meaning of the national style of fourth-fifth polyphony you are revealing with the amazing beauty of the cadence-second moves and the entire system of cadences. But well. You need to accustom yourself to hear (B.V. Asafiev’s style) musical documents, and not to talk about them “outright” - this is my conviction.”45

The first report of partes singing dates back to 1652 and is associated with the arrival of eleven Kyiv singers in Moscow. In the same year, eight more Kyiv singers came to Moscow “for eternal life.”46 They formed a special village of sovereign singing clerks. Patriarch Nikon greatly contributed to the successful spread of partes singing. Having achieved the title of Great Sovereign and at the same time unlimited power, it was desirable for the patriarch to have a choir that was artistically not inferior to the royal one. In addition, Nikon loved the pomp and splendor of the service, which was impossible without musical accompaniment. It is possible that Nikon had an interest in partes singing of a purely aesthetic nature, as other enlightened persons from the upper echelons of Moscow society of that time were interested in it. Nikon introduced partes singing not only in his Moscow choir, but also in the patriarchal estates - the New Jerusalem Resurrection and Valdai Iversky monasteries. Nikon's correspondence with the last of the monasteries has been preserved, from which one can see not only Nikon's interest in partes singing, but also the extent to which it was distributed to him. There was a whole liturgy, dozens of concerts, psalms, cants with different compositions of voices.47 The main factor that ensured the extremely rapid and wide spread of partes singing was the interest in the latter of the masters of singing themselves: chanters, choristers. This interest is evidenced by the fact that the Octoechos of the Znamenny chant was arranged into four voices in 12 editions and in 4 editions for an eight-voice choir. The chants of the holidays of the entire year were arranged for four voices in 17 editions, not counting the arrangements for three, five, six, eight and twelve voices in one edition.48 “It is difficult to imagine, reading the scores of some of these compositions, the prayerful mood of the then pilgrims , the strength of the onslaught from the West and, as it were, the lack of restraint of Russian artists, whose talents and good school in some cases are completely undoubted,”49 wrote S.V. Smolensky on this occasion.

Partes singing, Polish in origin, was planted on Russian soil, where musical theoretical ideas and aesthetic views had existed for centuries. A collision of two cultures was inevitable here. The latter was reflected primarily in the presentation of the scale. It was based not on the sequence of octaves as it appears to us on the keyboard, but on the former Russian twelve-step diatonic scale with a reduced octave between the III and X steps. This made it easier for singers to transition from line and demest singing to partes, but dissonances often arose in the music when the upper voices sounded in B flat, and the bass moving in an upward direction sounded in B.

The collision of two cultures was reflected in the entire texture of the score. Entrusting the main melody to the tenor, as required in Western partes singing, our composers usually accompanied it with a parallel movement of the alto in the interval of third, like the second of folk polyphony. In other cases, the accompaniment of the tenor was entrusted to the treble, which was generally inactive. Sometimes the second appeared between the treble and alto, against the background of the sustained note of the tenor. The bass, as a rule, was entrusted with excellence, and sometimes this voice was included in the general flow of movement parallel to a single rhythm, as happens in folk polyphony. Our composers used the meter characteristic of partes singing very rarely and preferred asymmetrical rhythm to it, even in melodies of their own composition. Techniques of Western polyphonic writing were used to a limited extent. They preferred the linear movement of voices.50 Diletsky also took into account the collision of two cultures. Brought up on Western music, he expounded the theory of composition in the hexachord system, archaic for the West, but close to the Russian twelve-step scale. The main hexachord of his system, do, re, mi, fa, sol, la, corresponded to the dark and light agreements of the Russian scale.

The carriers of harmonic functions were triads in their basic form and, less often, dominant seventh chords. Diletsky indicates four forms of cadences: plagal or “unusual”, authentic, which he calls “peculiar”, semi-authentic or “extraordinary” and complex of the first type or “ordinary”.51 The concepts of tonality and parallel minor did not exist. “Six signs of music, which are the essence of this: ut re mi fa sol la and are divided into two: ut mi sol of cheerful singing, re fa la - pitiful singing.”52 That’s all that Diletsky says about major-minor. Therefore, in partes works there is often a comparison of adjacent major and minor triads. This method of harmonization corresponded to the artistic taste of singers brought up on the melody of Znamenny chant, where the reference tones are constantly moving. In the absence of the concept of tonality, modulation had the character of a temporary transfer of the tonic function to the triad of one or another level of the hexachord. To do this, it was necessary to give an authentic cadence from this level using its major dominant. When modulating in the II, III, V and VI degrees of the hexachord, the tertian tone of the dominant chord increased. To return to the previous tonic, a new modulation turn was not required. It should be taken into account that the sign of alteration ceased its effect when a new stage appeared.

Creative practice often diverged from theory. In some works, along with a complex cadence, there is a sequence of triads of steps I, V, IV. Sometimes the composer, when modulating, for reasons of preserving the integrity of the harmonized melody, made the dominant chord minor. In other cases, when it was necessary to give the music a solemn character, he made not only the dominant chord major, but also the new tonic, although it was the II, III or VI degree of the hexachord.

Early partes scores represented the processing of line-by-line or harmonization of the melodies of Znamenny, Demestvenny and other chants, and finally the composition of free compositions. Demonic scores were not processed, obviously due to the exceptional dissonance of this type of polyphony.

Three-voice line scores were processed. For example, all the voices in the line score were raised an octave and distributed accordingly between the treble, alto and tenor, so that the melody of the path ended up with the alto. Excellent bass was attributed. In some cases, the composer had to adjust the voices of the line score in relation to the harmonic structure of the vertical and alter individual steps. Artistically, treatments of line scores were inferior to harmonizations.

There are examples of harmonization of the melody of Znamenny chant. One of the options for harmonization: with a harmonic structure of the vertical, the treble almost everywhere accompanies the tenor in parallel movement with him. A moderately enhanced bass “sets” the chords, and the alto fills in the missing tones. Melodic lines are separated in some cases by half-cadences, in others by full cadences. The latter are associated with modulation to major of the V degree of the hexachord. In the middle of the work (as for example in the dogma of the 5th tone “In the Red Sea” - the words “sea after the passage of Israel”) the composer highlighted the 6th century with modulation in minor, while keeping the dominant chord in minor. The main idea of ​​the dogmatist (the words “Sy and first syy”, from the same dogmatist) is highlighted by modulation in the minor of the 2nd art. The connection of all melodic lines is perceived by the ear as natural, and the voice performance is convenient for singing.

In the harmonization of the melody of the demestvennogo chant, the character of Russian folk polyphony appears here to a greater extent than in the harmonization of the Znamenny chant. First of all, this is the beginning of all verses with a tenor chorus, and the choir, as in a folk song, “picks up” the lead singer, in some cases repeating his words. Let us recall that in demesnic chant, cadence had more of a meaning of enhancing the effect of the music being listened to, rather than affirming the thought revealed in the work. This feature of the chant was also taken into account by the composer. He ends a number of lines of the psalm and all the choruses to them with a major triad on Art. hexachord, and the dominant chord of this tonic gives minor. In this way he preserves the unity of the demesne melody and achieves a spectacular ending to the music.

The material for the compositions was individual voles of the Znamenny chant. The vertical structure was generally harmonious. At the same time, the compositions differed from the transcriptions in their broader variational development of motives and the use of polyphonic writing techniques - sequences and imitation, which were used sporadically, as a kind of inlay, embedded in the simple texture of the score. The variational development of motifs, imitation and sequences gave the work a thematically consistent, monolithic character.

An interesting treatment of the sacramental verse 53 “Rejoice in the righteous” under the title “Golden”. Its melody is created on the basis of the motifs of the znamenny chant - middle kulism. Then a chant from the gloomy fita appears. The end of the chant coincided with the end of the melodic line and modulation in Art. II. hexachord. For reasons of preserving the fit melody, the composer left the dominant in minor. All subsequent presentation of the melody represents a variational development of this thematic material. In particular, based on the middle half-culisma motif, an ascending sequence is given, leading the melody to the climax of its development. When the tenor reaches an extremely high register, the composer lowers it by using a descending sequence of intonations close to those used. A new sequence appears, created from the gloomy fita motif. The upper voices ornament this conduction. In this case, the alto rotates around B flat, and the treble sings around D and then C. In this case, he has an auxiliary note B, while the viola sounds B flat. The text of the psalm ends at the VI degree of the main hexachord. The chorus “Hallelujah” follows, in which there is a long variational development of the intonations of the voles noted above. In some cases their altitudinal contour changes, in others it changes rhythmically. Modified intonations are transmitted from one voice to another. Brief motifs of sequential and imitative character are interspersed here and there. At the end of the piece, the bass has a tert-quart ascending sequence. Associated with it is a reduction in movement and the music comes to an end.

A four-voice mixed composition is the norm for the means of artistic expression of a choir, because it represents all the different timbre voices - treble, alto, tenor and bass, and its tessitura embraces their entire range. But composers were not satisfied with this norm. Their searches in the field of timbres prompted them to compose not only two- or three-voice works with different compositions of voices, which could rather be called ensembles, but also six-, eight-, twelve-voice choirs and even with a larger composition of voices. So, for example, the 103rd psalm - “Bless the Lord, my soul”, composed by V. Titov, features a six-voice choir with an original composition of voices: two trebles, two tenors and two basses. The music of this work performed by a four-voice mixed choir would be no less expressive. At the same time, there would be no voids in the vertical of the score, which sometimes arise between trebles and tenors, and unisons and parallel octaves would disappear in voicing. But the composer pays attention primarily to timbres. In some cases he moves the voices apart, in others he brings them closer together, constantly changing the movement of parallel sixths to the movement of thirds, and sometimes allows the crossing of voices. The widespread use of melodic figuration with various combinations of timbres makes the music effective. As for the use of meter, this is a phenomenon of foreign origin, Polish, and perhaps Greek. Greek singing, which Titov, as the sovereign's singing clerk, could not help but do. to know was subject to the meter. Note that Titov introduced the Greek phrase “Doxa si kyrie” into the text.

Eight- to twelve-band works with an even larger composition of voices occupied a special place in partes singing. S. V. Smolensky wrote about them: “It is even more difficult to imagine the performance in the church of 16, 24 and 48-voice works (i.e. for 4, 6 and 12 separate choirs), and yet the worn-out choral parts , the wax-drenched pages undoubtedly indicate their repeated use.”54 It is unlikely that the composition of such works was aimed at revealing the richness of timbres. The more complex the score in this regard, the more difficult it is for the ear to perceive individual voices. This is a pattern arising from the nature of our consciousness’s perception of musical phenomena.55 In addition, an increase in voices limits the possibilities of using their registers, and, consequently, the full disclosure of timbres. T. N. Livanova explains this phenomenon by the influence of Catholic instrumental-vocal music.56 Without excluding the possibility of such an influence, here one can also see an attempt to fill the vacuum in aesthetic needs that arose in connection with the steep rise of musical culture, in the absence of instrumental music. This is supported by the multi-layered texture of multi-choral scores, associated with different rhythms of movement in individual “groups” of voices. It is already noticeable in eight-voice scores, and in twelve-voice scores it appears clearly. Multi-layered texture is a phenomenon characteristic of an orchestral score and is caused primarily by the nature of the instrumentation and the technical capabilities of sound production. Vocal music does not know these conventions. Therefore, the multi-layered nature of partes scores can only be explained by the imitation of such choirs by orchestras.

The direct goals of composing works for eight-twelve-voice choirs not only changed the texture of the score, but also deprived the voices of the importance that was given to them in a four-voice mixed choir. The tenor has lost its importance as a leading voice. Excessive saturation of the vertical with constant crossing of voices made it impossible to clearly perceive movement in the horizontal. In this regard, the use of polyphonic writing techniques - imitations, sequences, echoes, even on the scale in which they took place in four-voice works, lost its meaning.

The aesthetic significance of such works lay in the mass sound of the choir, covering the entire range of voices. Therefore, the parts of trebles were presented mainly in the second octave, altos in the first and partially in the second, tenors mainly in the first, and basses in small and large. The change in sound in places where multi-layering was formed enriched the color of the widely spread vertical. The music generally expressed high emotions and a festive mood.

From an artistic point of view, the beginning of the eight-voice dogmatist in the 5th tone “In the Black Sea” - the middle (the word “sea”) - is of particular interest - these are large canvases depicting the sea. The cheerful, affirming nature of the work is emphasized by the major ending of all melodic lines. In some cases, such an ending required the composer to “rearrange” the triads of the VI and II centuries. to major (words “sometimes”, “water”, “Virgo”).

In the sacramental verse for the feast of the Nativity of Christ - “The deliverance of the Lord's ambassador by his people” - the solemn, festive character of the work is conveyed by the composer in the use of a light register of voices, in the wide and rapid flow of their movement, in the saturation of chords with overtones, in the major sound of the music. The composer repeatedly makes modulation deviations in the V stage of the main hexachord, but never modulates in II and VI. Conveying the content of this work in the language of modern musical concepts, we can say that the first half of it (the words of the psalm “The Deliverance of the Lord’s Ambassador by His People”) is written in C major and has several short deviations in G major. The second half, corresponding to the threefold Alleluia, is divided into three lengthy episodes. The first (Alleluia 1st) also begins in C major, deviates to G major and ends in C major. The second (Alleluia 2) begins in G major, then modulates into the main key and the music is presented with extensive use of the subdominant function, ending with an authentic cadence. The third episode (Hallelujah 3rd) begins with the IV degree of the main key. After a series of plagal cadences there is a modulation to G major. This very extensive deviation distinguishes the last episode among others as the finale of the work.

Polychoral works prepared the ground for the cultivation of symphonic music. Therefore, they began to disappear from the repertoire of church choirs without any demands for their elimination from the church authorities, simultaneously with the spread of orchestras (mid-18th century).

Rhythmic system

The rhythm of Znamenny chant, starting at least from the 17th century, has been based on a binary rhythmic division (the durations of adjacent rhythmic levels correspond to a 2:1 ratio, or a 1:2 ratio). This division was clearly recorded for the first time in the monuments of the Kyiv notation and is preserved to this day in the transcriptions of Znamenny chant in round (“Italian”) 5-line notation[12]. Researchers believe that “rational” binary rhythm was established in znamenny chant back in the 16th century and owes to the influence of Western professional music[13].

The question of whether the binary division was originally inherent in znamenny chant, or whether it was based solely on the prosody of the prayer text [14] has remained debatable for centuries. S. V. Smolensky back in the 19th century [15]. I. A. Gardner expressed himself even more definitely: “With monodic singing there was no... metronomic precision in the execution of the temporal (rhythmic) meaning of sounds indicated by a non-linear sign”[16].

Historical sketch

The oldest manuscripts notated with hooks date back to the 11th century. By the 17th century additional signs appeared in the hook notation - “signs” and “marks”; early manuscripts represent “markless” notation. Manuscripts of the 17th century record the appearance, along with traditional single-voice singing, of early “folk” polyphony (line singing), which was also recorded in banners. During the reforms of the 17th century. In Russia, monodic znamenny singing was gradually replaced by various forms of polyphonic music based on the major-minor tonality of the Western European model.

The same Verse of the Gospel first, tone 1, by Fyodor the Peasant, transcribed by B. Kutuzov. Gospel stichera “Mary’s Tears” in “hatchet” notation (fragment). From the book: Octoechos of musical singing. 7th ed. Moscow, 1811

Starting from the 17th century, znamenny chants (of all styles and historical traditions) began to be written down in the Kyiv notation system (in colloquial vocabulary - “hatchets”)[17], partly reminiscent of square notation (accepted in the chant books of Catholics[18]), partly (late ) mensural notation. “Hatchets” were written on a five-line staff and only in the key of C (“zefaut”).

It was in this notation that in 1772 the Synod in Moscow published a set of basic church hymns - 4 chanting books (Obihod, Irmologii, Octoechos and Holidays), which were subsequently reprinted several times[19]. Additionally, in 1778, the “Abbreviated Use of Musical Singing” was published in Moscow, in which the most popular chants from all four books were written down in square notes[20]. This publication became widely distributed and was adopted as the initial guide for teaching church singing in religious schools. In 1899 (also in Kyiv notation) the Lenten and Colored Triodion was released[21].

In the 19th century, znamenny singing was gradually replaced by “partes” (polyphonic) singing. This meant a virtual abandonment of the basic principles of Znamenny monody. At the same time, some composers made efforts to integrate “znamenny” melodies into partes everyday life, harmonizing them in the logic of Western European tonality. Currently, Znamenny chant chants are, as a rule, notated in both traditional “hook” and round (school, “Italian”) notation. A compromise solution is to record the znamenny chant in the form of so-called “dvoznamenny”[22]. This recording method combines the use of Znamenny and “classical” five-line notations. There are several varieties of hook writing, depending on the type of chant, the time and place of origin of the tradition, and it can also be characterized by special marks (see Cinnabar marks).

The greatest masters of znamenny singing: Savva Rogov, Fyodor Krestyanin (Christian), Ivan Nos, Markell Bezborody and Stefan Golysh, who worked in the era of Vasily III and Ivan IV the Terrible, Metropolitan Varlaam and Isaiah Lukoshko, whose work falls on the era of the Time of Troubles and the reign of Mikhail Fedorovich . A representative of the Usolsk school, Thaddeus Subbotin, who worked on the Commission for the Reform of Church Singing of Patriarch Nikon, was a major master. One of the best specialists in the field of Znamenny singing and the creator of the fundamental work “The ABC of Znamenny Singing” (1688), which is a complete statement of the theory of Znamenny singing, was Alexander Mezenets.

Old Russian spiritual singing. What was it like?

It is believed that there was folk music: songs and folk instruments. This is right. Less is known about sacred music. But the core of the culture of Ancient Rus' for a very long time was faith; it was in churches that painting and music were born. They are unique.

But if everyone all over the world knows about icons, then very little or almost nothing is known about ancient church music. But the ancient Znamenny chant was, according to Academician B. Asafiev, “a most monumental collection of melodic treasures.” Let's just talk about facts, without value judgments.

The practical organization of singing is associated with the names of St. Theodosius of Pechersk (1008−1074), one of the founders of the Kiev Pechersk Lavra (now Ukraine), and St. Cyril of Turov (1130−1182, Turov, now Belarus). The latter was even called the “Russian Chrysostom.”

Venerable Theodosius of Pechersk with his life (17th century icon) Photo: canada.cerkov.ru

• Znamenny singing , Znamenny chant (chanting) is the oldest type of East Slavic liturgical singing.

They still cannot come to a consensus on how the Znamenny chant came to be. There are two polar points of view.

• The first is that this is a completely unique and original phenomenon, beyond any external influences: already in the 11th century, church singing in Kievan Rus had “a very impressive volume of its books and melodies so solid and folk that they have survived to this day.”
• The opposite point of view relates the Znamenny chant to the Byzantine tradition.

The truth, as usual, is in the middle, but we can say with confidence that even with some borrowings, an original style of singing was formed, which has little in common with Byzantine monophony.

A unique notation (notation of notes) also emerged. If it is known for sure that the monk Guido Aretinsky “invented the notes” in the West, then it is unknown who “invented the notes” among the Eastern Slavs. It is only assumed that this happened approximately simultaneously with the creation of the Slavic alphabet.

Obviously, the znamenny notation was not copied from somewhere, but was developed back in the 11th century in Kievan Rus and spread from there, including further to the southwest.

So, church hymns were “put on a banner” - that is, on a kind of musical notation. Thus, a written tradition was added to the oral tradition of transmitting musical knowledge and practice.

Banners , or neumas, could be simple or compound - showing only the pitch of a sound or an entire melodic move. The banners are also called hooks (in foreign languages ​​this is still the case – Krjuki, Kryuki). The first singing “alphabet” also appeared with the interpretation of symbols - banners (hooks).

The hooks had names, they were wonderful: a simple hook with a magpie leg and a cup; a gloomy hook with a guy rope; light hook with hem; foot with point; translation with a cloud; derbitsa with a dot; double comma with article; the bench is light-colored; article with kryzh; snake with an article; two in a canoe with a guy; a gloomily quiet arrow with an extended cloud; shaking boom; spider with article; darling greyhound.

An example of znamenny notation (from the book “The Circle of Ancient Znamenny Church Singing in Six Parts,” edited by A. I. Morozov) Photo: studopedia.net

Over 200 characters, and does it look like do-re-mi-fa-sol-la-si? Indicative marks or cinnabar signs were added to the hooks: “breaking”, “rolling”, “yawn”, “recturnal quotation mark” and others.

But now these hook signs look and have names that are unclear. All these banner “notes” absorbed elements of Christian symbolism.

The same “kryzh” is a cross, and is “drawn” as such. "Cup" or "cup" is the famous symbol of the cup. These “notes” also had a clearer ethical content. The article is “shaming and vanity running away.” Darling is greyhound and quiet - “pride and all sorts of untruths are deposited.” Two in a boat - “doublethink deposition.”

Znamenny chants were a kind of synthesis. The word and melody were one, and it was in unity that they constituted the prayer.

Connected with this was the concept of “ osmoglasie ” - a system of eight voices that has certain features and is used during certain periods of the church year. The use of these voices symbolized eternity, a certain cycle, a “circle”. And this time is not linear, it is precisely a circle, eternity.

Znamenny notation (Russian lubok) Photo: reflex-vrn.ru

In fact, a millennium has passed since a special type of singing and a special type of sound recording appeared on the territory of modern Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus. However, a lot has been lost. And the “notation” is still far from completely deciphered. The work continues, various specialists are participating in it: from medievalists (specialists in the Middle Ages) to mathematicians.

But the znamenny chant has practically disappeared from the practice of church singing, surviving only in some places. There are many reasons for this. First, church reform - and after the 17th century, Znamenny chant disappeared, giving way to European singing. And the notes were already recorded using the familiar five rulers and “round” notes. Ancient traditions disappeared (“with all their countless treasures hidden in the ocean of history, like the legendary Atlantis”).

Only the Old Believers, who now live everywhere in the world, tried to preserve their memory. And there was a radical change in the very manner of East Slavic church singing.

partes singing appeared - and this is polyphony (part - part). That is, when they sing in several voices. And these are chords that are born along the melody in different voices, this is harmonization, tonality, this is Europe.

However, partes singing was born in the brotherhoods of South-Western Rus', which sought to create something different from Catholic chants with their “organ humming”. From the south, polyphony came to Novgorod and Moscow.

“The Idea of ​​Musikian Grammar” (book by N. Diletsky) Photo: econet.kz

Scientific treatises also appeared: the theoretical and aesthetic work of the Muscovite Ioannikiy Trofimovich Korenev “Musikia” (that is, music) and “The Idea of ​​Musician Grammar” by the Kiev resident Nikolai Diletsky (1630−1680). The first wrote that “musicia is the second philosophy and grammar,” and tried to preserve the old, absorbing new trends from the south. The second is actually the first practical textbook on musical composition. Diletsky himself composed a lot, and his “musikia” was performed for centuries.

Once polyphony appeared, a choir appeared in the modern sense. A new style, which nevertheless retained many stylistic features of earlier music. Professional training for singers appeared. If secular music was “foreign” for a long time, then folk and spiritual music were original and unique.

If there is sorrow, then it has nothing to do with primary suffering... as if there were armor and armor voiced here... there are no pampered feelings here, here are the lyrics of deep trials, heroic iron endurance and resistance... seasoned melodies, endowed with the elasticity of a spring, wrote B. Asafiev.

A non-believer may well be uninterested in the topic of ancient Russian church singing. But for some time now the high artistic value of icons has been recognized. The ancient and unique znamenny chant with its majestic, complex simplicity is recognized as no less a cultural heritage. And an extremely complex designation of sounds.

In addition, there were other types of liturgical singing: kontakary, pillar chants, travel chants, demestvenny (festive) singing.

Many discoveries are still ahead. And they tried to preserve the Znamenny chant and use it in professional music already in the 19th century.

Tags: sacred music, church music, Znamenny chant, Eastern Slavs, polyphony, Ancient Rus', church singing

The fate of Znamenny singing in the Synodal period

Page of the Old Believer Octoechos.
XIX century From the end of the 17th century - the beginning of the 18th century, hook notation began to be replaced with Western notation, and Russian Znamenny singing began to be replaced with Western European, Latin singing (see True Speech)[23][24]. Unanimous znamenny singing was considered to belong to the “schismatics” (Old Believers)[25].

Many melodies of Znamenny singing in the 18th - early 20th centuries were subjected to polyphonic processing in the traditions of Western European harmonic tonality; Among the authors of the arrangements are Pyotr Turchaninov, Alexey Lvov, Pyotr Tchaikovsky, Alexander Kastalsky, Sergei Rachmaninov, Pavel Chesnokov, Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov and others.

To this day, the traditions of Znamenny singing are observed by the Old Believers. There are specialists who are reviving znamenny singing in the new rite of the Russian Orthodox Church, for example, the Valaam Monastery (co-religionists of the Russian Orthodox Church use znamenny singing in worship)[26][27].

Revival of ancient chants

Until quite recently, znamenny singing was considered an almost forgotten form of ancient Russian church music. Today it is becoming somewhat more famous - concerts and evenings of spiritual chants organized by Old Believers make it accessible to an increasingly wider circle of listeners. However, there is still a very long way to go before the full recognition of znamenny singing as the basis of church singing art.

At the same time, in the history of world culture there are a number of examples of the full-fledged revival of ancient, almost forgotten forms of art that have again become relevant and in demand. Gleb Chistyakov talks with a specialist in the field of ancient music, Daniil Ryabchikov , about the once forgotten, but now widely known Gregorian chant .
Tell us about the roots and origins of Western church singing. Did the invention of liturgical monodic chant, known as Gregorian, really belong to Pope Gregory Dvoeslov? If not, then what is this legend connected with?

Let's first try to define the concepts.
Firstly, one should not limit the liturgical monody of the Western Church only to Gregorian chant (monody is unison singing, unison music without the use of harmonic polyphonies - editor's note). There are also Mozarabic, Old Roman singing, etc. Experts most often use the term coined by 13th-century authors to describe this tradition—cantus planus, literally “smooth singing.” That is, that singing, which, according to John de Groqueio, is not entirely correct to measure accurately.

We are talking here, first of all, about rhythm. Let's say polyphony was defined as musica mensurata, literally: measured music, i.e. that music, the duration of which can and should be measured for performance.

Let's return to the cantus planus. It was from this medieval Latin phrase that, for example, the term plainchant was born, which in English denotes liturgical monody. Further, speaking about the Gregorian chant, I note that the “Gregorian” version is a tracing paper from English and other European languages. Papa Gregorius (Gregory) in Russian will sound like GRIGORY, which is why the chant is Gregorian.

However, Pope Gregory I has no luck with the Russian tradition - we sometimes call him “Dvoeslovo”, but this name is the result of a misunderstanding. “Dvoeslov” is a translation into Russian of the Greek word yes-da - Dialogue (or Conversation). The most famous work of Gregory I was written under this title.

Now let’s talk about where the “Gregorian” name for this type of singing came from. Pope Gregory I himself was not involved in this, nor in the codification of a new type of singing. At the turn of the 6th-7th centuries, during his pontificate, this was simply not necessary. A completely different situation arose after the unification of the new empire by Charlemagne. It is known that in 754 Pope Stephen II, together with a large number of clergy, including choristers, visited the father of Charlemagne, King Pepin the Short, and remained for a considerable time in Saint-Denis and other famous centers. It was probably Pepin who ordered the introduction of Roman singing in Frankish churches, instead of Gallican.

On one of the first Frankish liturgical manuscripts that copied samples of Roman chant (probably imported at the same time), an inscription was found introducing the collection: “Gregorius presul composuit hunc libellum musicae artis.” Most likely, the reference was to Pope Gregory II (pontificate 715-31), or perhaps Pope Gregory III (731-741). Pope Gregory I was much more famous, especially among the British, who formed a significant part of the intellectual elite of the Carolingian court.

Subsequently, thanks to the activity of Charlemagne, who issued several orders regarding the new common liturgical chant for his empire and the subsequent Carolingians (royal dynasty in the Frankish state - editor's note), Gregorian chant was established for many centuries as the singing of the Catholic Liturgics. The first examples of Gregorian chant are found in manuscripts from the turn of the 9th-10th centuries.

What is special about ancient Gregorian chant and its ancient notation. Was it always unison?

I think I partially answered the question about the features above. I will only add that Gregorian chant is based on a system of 8 modes, originally borrowed from the Greek Oktoechos (Oktaya in Old Russian - editor's note ) , but significantly rethought. Over time, songs from one mode could end up in another, and only some special songs could be preserved only in one of the modes.

The mode was determined by two notes - the repercussion and the finalis. Finalis - the last note, the modal center. Repercussion is the note on which the liturgical reading takes place in this mode. The first “tonaries” with music in each mode appear literally at the same time as the first monuments of Gregorian chant proper. The first theoretical works on 8 modes in Latin also date back to the same time (mid-9th century), for example, De octo tonis by an unknown author of the first half of the 9th century.

This singing was not necessarily unison. Sometimes it could be performed solo, sometimes alternately by soloist and choir (responsory), sometimes by two choirs (antiphon). We must understand that what we can call “Gregorian chant” is the result of a long-continued tradition of liturgical creativity. Already in the 9th century, new genres appeared, such as “tropes” and “sequences,” which were first received with hostility and condemned by local councils, and then took a significant place in medieval liturgical monody.

If we move on to notation, we will again have to remember the multinational empire of the Franks. It was probably the need for globalization, for the standardization of liturgical practice throughout the empire, that gave impetus to the invention of non-neutral notation. The famous Isidore of Seville wrote in the 7th century that music needs to be memorized, since there is nothing to record it with.

The notation developed continuously, and the form in which we see the notes of Gregorian chant now - four-line non-neutral square notation - is the brainchild of the 13th century and the five-century (by that time) tradition of notation development. The main notational problem of that time: what do the notes express? What is heard, or how is it sung? The first tradition (“what is heard”) is now predominant, so modern notation accurately conveys the pitches and relative duration of music.

It conveys melismas worse (musical embellishments that do not make up the main melody - editor's note), and no longer indicates the position of the singer's larynx, whether a vowel is formed deeply or close, or whether this or that consonant is sung. Perhaps the very approach to notation shapes our musical perception, and those little things (for us little things!) that we no longer distinguish were the basis of the notation of “the way it is sung.”

"Gregorian" notation has long been a compromise. At first, perhaps, more gravitating towards the second option, with clear detailing of melismatics, with liquiescent neumes denoting sung consonants - liquiescent sounds, etc. Then, with the development of accurate pitch representation, the tendency to record music “as it is heard” began to prevail. The square notation of the 13th century clearly displays pitch and phrasing. It still doesn't accurately reflect this and isn't needed). And from the old neumas, which reflected the way of singing, the square notation retained only one - “plika”, denoting a special melisma.

How did the West manage to revive interest in Gregorian chant and make it not only used, but also popular? Is a similar revival possible for Znamenny singing in Russia?

It all started in France. After the rise to power of Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte and his alliance with Pope Pius VII (and subsequent concordats), perhaps the Catholic revival began in France. And, accordingly, a return to earlier traditions - first Tridentine, then the manuscripts of the 11th-13th centuries were raised. Researchers of singing manuscripts have found many late distortions and ways to clear ancient chants from them.

In fact, practical musical medieval studies began in France from the middle of the 19th century. Following this, the so-called The Caecilian movement (i.e., the movement in honor of St. Cecilia of Rome), associated with an interest in Gregorian chant. In France and Germany (and then in other countries), first of all, institutes and societies devoted to the study of Gregorianism were founded.

The next step was the revisions and publications carried out by Solem Abbey from 1883 to 1914. Such general interest and accessibility of the Solem collections led to the release of official Vatican publications at the beginning of the 20th century. The study of Gregorianism, debates about editions, editions and notation continue, but the main thing was done then.

Here is a scheme for the study and popularization of this ancient singing: from the interest of a few to scientific study, from scientific research to the publication of handwritten monuments, from the publication of monuments to the publication of adapted and accessible editions, and so on, for mass use and widespread singing use.

In the situation with Znamenny singing, there is still a lack of both scientific works and accessible editions (their number cannot be compared with the Solem editions). It seems to me that the main efforts to popularize Znamenny chant should be directed precisely in these areas: scientific study, paleography, first of all, and then the publication of various editions of Znamenny chants accessible to a wider public. And it would be good if these publications were carried out under the auspices of church associations, for example, the Moscow Metropolis of the Russian Orthodox Old Believer Church, or the Moscow Patriarchate, as was the case with the Vatican collections of Gregorianism.

What is the reason for the widespread use of Gregorian motifs and manner of performance in modern electronic and popular music in general?

It's actually quite a funny and fairly recent story. She is literally 20 years old. Well-known innovator in the field of electronic music Michel Cretu released the first disc of his Enigma project, on which he crossed electronics, new age and Gregorianism, and quite unexpectedly became popular.

In 1993, the early music ensemble Sequentia recorded another disc with the music of Hildegard von Bingen, which was called Canticles of Ecstasy (Chants of Ecstasy/Ecstasy). Suddenly, young people began to buy a disc with subtle and Gregorian-oriented music. It sold a crazy amount of copies for medieval music - more than 500 thousand copies. Marketers at Deutsche Harmonia Mundi quickly got their bearings and released the slogan “Chill to the Chant” especially for this audience. A collection was immediately released with the same name as the slogan itself, and the subtitle “The Magic of Gregorian Chant” (The Magic of Gregorian Chant). And so the wheels of show business started turning. In the second half of the 90s, projects such as Gregorian appeared.

Today, the main popularizers of Znamenny chant are Old Believer choirs. Every year an evening of spiritual chants is held at Rogozhsky, a series of discs of a youth Old Believer choir have been released, Old Believer groups from Moscow, Novosibirsk and Nizhny Novgorod take part in a variety of singing festivals. And yet the znamenny chant still remains the lot of the ancient Orthodox tradition. In New Believer churches, as they say, it does not work, it causes rejection. What do you think this is connected with?

You know, I had several conversations with priests and regents on this topic. All that is needed here is will on the one hand, explanations (why this is so) on the other, and publications accessible to the unenlightened musical public on the third (it’s these last two parts that I emphasized). Lvov, Italianism, and even partes are the same horror as the post-Tridentine reworkings of Gregorian chant.

I personally think that this singing should have, first of all, a liturgical meaning. Concert performances of the Znamenny chant evoke some aversion in me. It's like listening to a movie score without the movie itself.

Znamenny chant has its place in the Liturgy; it is not entirely independent.

Revival of Znamenny singing in the Russian Orthodox Church

Specialists reviving Znamenny singing include, for example, employees of the Department of Old Russian Singing Art of the St. Petersburg State Conservatory[28]. In particular, a group of musicologists led by Albina Kruchinina is studying and developing issues of ancient Russian church singing: Florentina Panchenko, Natalya Mosyagina, Ekaterina Pletneva, Ekaterina Smirnova, Tatyana Shvets[29], and others. In Moscow, issues of ancient notations are studied at the Gnessin School, including Galina Pozhidaeva, Melitina Makarovskaya, Tatyana Vladyshevskaya, Polina Terentyeva, Lada Kondrashkova and a number of other musicologists. In St. Petersburg, the Russian Christian Humanitarian Academy also plays an important role, in which there is a direction “Russian singing art”, where experts in the field of research and performance of ancient notations teach, such as Ekaterina Matveeva, professor Nina Zakharyina, Nadezhda Shchepkina, Alena Nikolaeva, Elena Topunova, Irina Gerasimova.

The International Festival “Academy of Orthodox Music” is dedicated to the revival of Znamenny singing, organized with the participation of the Department of Old Russian Singing Art of the St. Petersburg Conservatory with the support of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation and with the blessing of Patriarch Kirill[30]. The festival program includes a summer school, the purpose of which is to revive the historical tradition of Orthodox music, as well as introduce it to a wide range of public[31]. The summer school of the International Festival “Academy of Orthodox Music” was held in St. Petersburg annually from 2009 to 2015.

With the goal of “creating a publicly accessible fund of Znamenny chants and software tools for working with them for the sake of reviving Znamenny chant—canonical liturgical singing—in the Russian Orthodox Church,” the “Fund of Znamenny Chants” (Znamenny Fund) was created. It is an electronic corpus of ancient Russian singing manuscripts[32].

Compare the chants of Znamenny chant and modern partes performance

To better understand the difference and existing differences between ancient Russian church music and modern church choir singing, we invite you to listen to two versions of the famous prayer “Our Father”.
It is also called the “Lord’s Prayer.” Text of the prayer: Our Father, who art in heaven! Hallowed be Thy name, Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, as it is in heaven and on earth. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our debts, just as we forgive our debtors; and do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.

To start listening, click the button below. A fragment of the chant will open in a new window.

Help on the topic

Znamenny singing ( znamenny chant ) is the main type of ancient Russian liturgical singing, which is based on single-voice choral performance. The melody of the znamenny chant is recorded using special signs - banners or hooks. Hence the name of the singing: znamenny or hook. Each banner carries information about the number of sounds, their duration and features of execution.

Fragment of the book of Znamenny chant (Kalashnikov). Modern edition

The basic principles of liturgical znamenny singing were outlined already in the first centuries of Christianity. After the Baptism of Rus' in 988, our ancestors accepted not only Greek liturgical books, but also singing. Having studied its wisdom and mastered the laws by which the melody developed, Russian singers began to develop it on Russian soil. The heyday of Russian church singing dates back to the 15th–16th centuries, when the large Znamenny chant, the travel chant, and the demest chant appeared. A new notation emerged - a way to record these chants. The tragic events of the 17th century—the turmoil and then the schism of the Church—interrupted the development of ancient Russian church singing. The texts began to be edited, which resulted in distortion of the melody and its breaking. Then the mainstream church began to completely introduce partes singing in the Italian style.

Notes

1. Circle of ancient church singing in six parts (Morozov). Part 2: The daily routine of the all-night vigil. St. Petersburg, 1884
2. In the specialized literature of some researchers of ancient Russian church music, archaic spelling and spelling are also used for the word “chant” - “chant” (with emphasis on the first syllable).
3. Solovyov N. F.
   Hooks // Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: in 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional). - St. Petersburg, 1890-1907.
4. Kholopov Yu.N.
   Hexaikh - ancient Russian modal system // Musica Theorica-4/. M.: MGK, 1998. P. 4-8.
5. Fedorova G. S.
   The modal system of Russian monody: based on the material of notolinear singing books. Diss... cand. art history M., 1989
6. Frolov S.V.
   On the problem of pitch-free znamenny notation // Problems of history and theory of music. L., 1979. S. 124-147
7. Shabalin D.S.
   On the decipherment of “unanimous banners” and the reconstruction of the sound system of a line // Problems of deciphering Old Russian notations. L., 1987. pp. 49-72.
8. Lozovaya I.E.
   Russian osmoglasie znamenny chant as an original modal system // Musical culture of the Middle Ages: collection. articles / comp. and resp. ed. T. F. Vladyshevskaya. - M.: Center. Museum of Old Russian culture and art, 1992. - Vol. 2. - pp. 65-69.
9. Martynov V.I.
   Culture, iconosphere and liturgical singing of Moscow Rus'. M., 2000.
10. Shkolnik M. G.
    Problems of reconstruction of Znamenny chant of the XII-XVII centuries (based on the material of Byzantine and Old Russian Irmology). Diss... cand. claim M., 1996.
11. For an overview of various concepts of mode (and theories of the relationship between “voice” and “mode”), see the article: Lozovaya I. E.
    On the content of the concepts of “voice” and “mode” in the context of the theory of ancient Russian monody // Current problems in the study of church singing art : science and practice. M., 2011. P. 344-359 (Gymnology. Issue 6).
12. See, for example, musical examples for the article: Vladyshevskaya T. F., Zabolotnaya N. V. Znamenny chant // Great Russian Encyclopedia. T. 10. M., 2008, p. 516-517.
13. “The tendency towards a multiple ratio of hook durations was already present in Znamenny singing itself and is reflected in detail in later musical theoretical manuals... the multiple ratio of Znamenny rhythm units was interpreted by the 2nd Commission for the Correction of Song Books (Moscow, 1669-1670) in a broad context - probably by analogy with the temporal organization of Western European music.” Quote by: Shevchuk E.Yu.
    Kyiv notation // Orthodox Encyclopedia. T. 33. M., 2013, p. 292-302.
14. Prosodic “irrational” rhythm is characteristic of Gregorian chant, a more than thousand-year-old tradition of Catholic liturgical singing. Accordingly, in square notation, in which Gregorian chant has been written since the 12th century, the musical rhythm is not fixed.
15. Smolensky S.V. ABC of Znamenny singing. Notice of the concordant litters of Elder Alexander Mezenets. Kazan, 1888, p. 28.
16. Gardner I. A.
    Liturgical singing of the Russian Orthodox Church. T. 2. M., 1981, p. 94.
17. Other names for this form of musical notation: “church notation”, “synodal notation”.
18. See, for example, Liber usualis. Tournai, 1950.
19. See Electronic facsimiles of the first edition of Octoechos, Daily Life (first and second parts), Holidays, Irmology.
20. Electronic facsimile of Abbreviated Daily Life.
21. Electronic facsimile of the Lenten and Colored Triodion. The planned publication of the books “Trezvony” and “Trebs” in connection with the notorious political upheavals of the 20th century. so they didn’t see the light.
22. An incorrect (but common) spelling is “double-banner.”
23. Solovyov N. F.
    True speech // Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: in 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional). - St. Petersburg, 1890-1907.
24. Kataev P. G.
    Introduction of linear notation in the Russian state in the 17th century. Altai Old Believer.
25. Separate speech // Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: in 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional). - St. Petersburg, 1890-1907.
26. Kutuzov B.
    On the revival of Znamenny singing in church services // Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate. - No. 11. - 1999.
27. Pechenkin G. B.
    Znamenny singing in the Russian Orthodox Church. Ways of practical implementation. Orthodox educational portal "Word".
28. Department of Old Russian Singing Art of St. Petersburg State Conservatory named after. N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov (unspecified)
    (inaccessible link). SPbGK. Access date: June 27, 2014. Archived July 9, 2014.
29. Shvets Tatyana Viktorovna (unspecified)
    (inaccessible link). SPbGK. Retrieved June 27, 2014. Archived June 18, 2014.
30. International Festival “Academy of Orthodox Music” (unspecified)
    (inaccessible link). SPbGK. Archived from the original on September 2, 2013.
31. Summer School of the Academy of Orthodox Music (undefined)
    (inaccessible link). SPbGK. Archived from the original on July 8, 2014.
32. Fund of Znamenny Chants (Znamenny Fund) (undefined)
    . Znamenny Chants Foundation.

LiveInternetLiveInternet

Liturgy (fragments). Early Russian polyphony "We Sing Thee". Early Russian Ecclesiastical Hymns (17th century). Divine Liturgy (fragments)

Male choir of the Publishing Department of the Moscow Patriarchate under the direction of Hieromonk N. Nosov, 1987 In terms of sound, the modern “restoration” was not even close!
Quality: lossless (ape) and mp3 CBR stereo 320 kb/sec. Light vinyl noise, faint background crackling, and here and there soft clicks. But all the critical clicks are neatly cut out in the forge. Scans of the envelope in the archive. 1. It is worthy to eat - 5.20 Deacon Nikolai Parusnikov 2. Tone Despotin (znamenny chant) - 0.57 Ispolla these (final demestry) 3. Great Litany - 5.21 Protodeacon Pavel Smirnov 4. The Only Begotten Son - 2.32 5. I brought food from paradise, blessed 1- 1st tone – 3.25 6. Come, let us worship – 0.54 7. Sealed Stone, Sunday troparion 1st tone (znamenny chant) – 2.10 8. Chosen Voivode – 1.47 9. Holy God – 3.22 10. May Thy mercy be upon us, O Lord , prokeimenon 1st tone (znamenny chant) – 1.15 Hierodeacon Joseph Dyachenko 11. Alleluia – 1.52 Hierodeacon Joseph Dyachenko 12. Cherubic hymn – 10.38 13. Petitionary litany – 4.57 Protodeacon Pavel Smirnov 14. Father and Son (znamenny chant from the Old Believer hand pussy) – 1.02 15. The mercy of the world (Znamenny chant) – 6.05 16. It is worthy to eat – 3.35 17. One is Holy (Znamenny chant) – 0.42 18. Praise the Lord from heaven, communion (Znamenny chant) – 3.22 19. Body of Christ, communion (restoration N. Nosova) – 3.40 20. We see the true light – 0.50 21. Let them be fulfilled – 1.17 22. Small litany – 2.15 Protodeacon Pavel Smirnov 23. Be the name of the Lord – 0.53 24. Perennial – 2.09 Decoding by E. Shavokhina (4, 6, 9 , 11, 16, 19, 21) Transcription by I. Efimova (1, 8, 12, 24) Transcription by I. Efimova (3, 5, 13, 20, 22, 23) Synodal everyday life (2, 7, 10, 15, 17, 18) Znamenny polyphony (1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 16, 19, 21, 24) Demonic polyphony (3, 5, 13, 20, 22, 23) (click)
=== =======================================
OLD RUSSIAN CHURCH CHANTS (XVII CENTURY) Liturgy (fragments)
The chants presented on the record are monuments of early Russian professional polyphony, sounded in the Russian Orthodox Church in the second half of the 17th - early 18th centuries.
They take the listener to one of the most difficult eras in the cultural history of our people - the transition period from the creativity of the Russian Middle Ages to the creativity of the New Age. This was an era of profound transformations of the entire system of musical thinking, a change in creative principles, renewal of forms, styles, and genres. This was a time of new opportunities for expressing Christian truths, when alongside the monophonic divine singing, eloquent polyphony began to sound. Initially, like the unison singing of Ancient Rus', polyphony was recorded with hook notation in the form of a score: one singing part - a line of musical notes - above the other (singing was predominantly two- and three-voice, each part was written down in its own color for ease of reading: black and red) . This method of recording gave early polyphony in Russia the name of line singing. The history of line singing is very peculiar. In an unusually short period of time - from the middle of the 16th century to the beginning of the 18th century - ornamented ensemble polyphony and choral polyphony of a harmonic nature arose from the unconscious, random stratification of the unison. The intensity of mastering polyphony, which had no precedents in Europe, was reflected in the stylistic appearance of line singing. It organically combines seemingly incompatible things: the sharpness of some consonances, characteristic of the earliest stages of the development of polyphony, the euphony and harmonic logic of the succession of others, characterizing line singing as a fully developed system of polyphonic thinking. An amazing fusion of archaism and novelty is a distinctive property of the early church polyphonic tradition, recreating the sound atmosphere of a Russian church of that time. Samples of the art of singing introduce the listener to two main types of line singing: demestial and znamenny polyphony, named after the type of notation used by master singers to record them. A comparison of demestvenny and znamenny polyphony gives an idea of ​​the evolution of line singing: from the patterned weaving of melodic lines of demestvenny polyphony to the harmonious and harmonically clear znamenny counterpoint. In the history of Russian music, line singing served as a link between the old, monodic practice of singing and the new, harmonic one. It contributed to the rapid spread of the Partes style in Russia and its organic integration into the original national traditions. Early church polyphony, thus, stands among the phenomena of Russian culture of the 17th - early 18th centuries, which became a kind of bridge between the creativity of the Middle Ages and the New Age. Unfortunately, most examples of non-linear polyphony created before the middle of the 17th century cannot be deciphered and translated into five-line notation. Hook scores from the second half of the 17th - early 18th centuries became readable only recently. Less than ten years have passed since researchers established and scientifically confirmed the relative nature of recording singing parts, which requires, when deciphering, the transfer of voices or their fragments to a pitch other than that indicated in the notes... Another difficulty in mastering line singing often lies in as the singing documents themselves. The unfavorable condition of some manuscripts (dilapidation, soiled sheets, their loss, etc.), the unfinished appearance of others (unfinished parts, fragmentary notes) require responsible and painstaking work of researchers in the restoration of monuments of musical antiquity. This record is one of the few recordings to date of genuine examples of early liturgical polyphony, deciphered and restored taking into account the latest achievements of musical science in this field. The CD contains chants from handwritten sources of the M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin State Public Library in St. Petersburg and the State Historical Museum in Moscow. Trying to give an idea of ​​line singing not just as a museum exhibit, trying to show its inner meaning as an integral part of the divine service, we demonstrate it in the context of the service. Against the background of reading and unison singing, in conditions similar to actual worship, the listener will most fully experience the spiritual power and freshness of the colors of the first Russian polyphonic singing, strictly and joyfully, solemnly and radiantly addressed to God. ========================================================= Metropolitan Pitirim and the men's choir of the Publishing Department Moscow Patriarchate, 1987
(click to enlarge)

Dorje1975: “This record has come a long way... My close friend bought it in 1988, when she lived in Moscow, and then brought it with her to Kharkov.
In 1993, when a beardless but slightly bearded young man returned home to Kharkov from St. Petersburg, from the Valaam courtyard, the record immediately turned out to be with him, played many times on Romantika, but in the end it was copied onto a cassette. Then the player broke down, the cassette was worn to holes... But I still couldn’t forget this unique recording. A brand new CD with “restoration” purchased in the Moscow store of the Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church only opened the wounds: artificially raised high frequencies, extremely depleted mids and lows... “Plasremastered”, on a plastic disc, they sound no worse. This means that the problem with the depleted sound of most modern CDs lies not so much in the type of recording (digital or analogue), but in the current style of sound engineering. In May, I once again went for a couple of days to my native Kharkov, where the miraculous discovery of this record took place. Then she returned to Moscow again - after 20 years! - and ended up in the hands of my friend Gideon - not only an amazing poet, but also a music lover, a great expert in vinyl digitization. Many thanks to him: using good equipment, he made wav files, which I then manually cleared of critical clicks. Unfortunately, some faint background crackling and clicking noises remain, but all critical clicks have been removed. Come enjoy it: this is one of those records that you can listen to endlessly. Those who don't mind traffic can download lossless. Mp3 also sounds better than modern CD.” MP3 CBR stereo, 320 kb/sec, RAR archive without password, 180.67 MB, 6% recovery information: narod.ru or axifile.com Lossless (are), 4-volume RAR archive (for successful unpacking you must download everything parts), with a total volume of approximately 370 MB: volume 1 narod.ru or rapidshare.com volume 2 narod.ru or rapidshare.com volume 3 narod.ru or rapidshare.com volume 4 narod.ru or rapidshare.com Manuscript of the hook line score of the chant “It is worthy to eat”

Literature

• Course on the history of Russian church singing. Priest Dimitry Allemanov
• Kalashnikov L. F. 1910 Kyiv ABC of church znamenny singing Textbook. Kyiv. Publishing house Znamenny singing. 1910 36 pages. Consists of 8 lessons. Further chapters on signs and degrees of sounds, plus an appendix with faces and coolisms.
• Smolensky V.S. ABC of Znamenny singing. Notice of the concordant litters of Elder Alexander Mezenets Kazan, 1888. - 24 p. — 132 p. Mezenets (real name Stremmoukhov) Alexander is a Russian music theorist of the mid-17th century, an expert in church singing (didaskal). From 1657 he was a “researcher” (corrector) of the Moscow Printing House, and from 1668 an elder (member of the Council of Elders) of the Zvenigorod Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery. He headed a commission of 6 didaskals that established exemplary editions of church hymns. His theoretical work (created with the participation of other didaskals) “Notice of the most consonant marks” is the most complete presentation of the theory of znamenny singing. Notice of consonant marks Instead of a preface Notes on the Mezenets alphabet Notes on lines from the Irmos
• Razumovsky D.V.
  Church singing in Russia. Moscow, 1867-1869.
• Arnold Yu.
  Theory of ancient Russian church and folk singing <…>. Moscow, 1880,
• Metallov V. M.
  The ABC of hook singing. - M.: Synod. typ., 1899. - 130 pp.: music.
• Metallov V. M.
  Essay on the history of Orthodox singing in Russia, 4th ed. Moscow, 1915.
• Voznesensky I.
  About the church singing of the Orthodox Greek-Russian Church. Great banner chant. Kyiv, 1897.
• Brazhnikov M.
  Development paths and tasks of deciphering Znamenny chant, XII-XVIII centuries. Leningrad - Moscow, 1949.
• Uspensky N.
  Old Russian singing art, 2nd ed. Moscow, 1971.
• Uspensky N.
  Samples of Old Russian singing art, 2nd ed. Leningrad, 1971.
• Zabolotnaya N.V.
  Church singing manuscripts of Ancient Russia of the 11th-14th centuries: the main types of books in the historical and functional aspect. M., 2001.
• Gardner I. A.
  Liturgical singing of the Russian Orthodox Church. Moscow: PSTBI, 2004 (2 volumes).
• Kutuzov B.
  Russian Znamenny singing. Moscow, 2008. - 304 p. — ISBN 978-5-9901442-1-7.
• Znamenny chant // Orthodox Encyclopedia. - M.: Tserkovno-nauchny, 2009. - T. XX: “Zverin in honor of the Intercession of the Most Holy Theotokos convent - Iveria.” — P. 285-297. — 752 p. — 39,000 copies. — ISBN 978-5-89572-036-3.
• Levy K.
  Die slavische Kondakarien-Notation // Anfänge der slavischen Musik. Bratislava, 1964, S. 77-92.
• Levy K.
  The Slavic kontakia and their Byzantine originals // The Department of Music, Queens College of the City University of New York: Twenty-fifth Anniversary Festschrift, ed. A. Mell. Flushing, NY, 1964, pp. 79-87.