Aspects of Church chanting Translation [„romanire”] by Mihalache Moldoveanu

A M anuscript fro m the Rom anian A cadem y Library

Alexandru DUMITRESCU*

Abstract: Mihalache's Anastasimatarion represents the second stage o f the “translation in Romanian” o f chants. Their “translation” in the new method shows us that it continues and is included in the next stage o f “translation in Romanian”,

represented by Macarie Ieromonahul and Anton Pann, through making a transcription o f chants in the new method and their printing. A t the same time, through the revision o f the text and the prosody o f the chants, the next stage o f “translation in Romanian” is anticipated, in which §tefanache Popescu, Ion Popescu-Pasarea (and many others) revised, changed and stylized the chants collection.

Keywords: Byzantine music, chants, manuscripts, Anastasimatarion, Mihalache Moldoveanu.

Concurrently with the translation of the religion books in the Romanian language many chants books started to be translated also, by answering a practical need - the singing of the texts of the divine services in the Church.

The translation process of the liturgical texts and after that, of the chants in the Romanian language, it is known by the name of

PhD, Assistant, Faculty of Orthodox Theology Bucharest.

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

“romanire” (“translating in Romanian”), expression used for the first time by Anton Pann1. The term designates not only the simple translation of the chants in Romanian, but also refers to their adaptation to the rules of the Romanian language, to the sensibility of our people, without deriving from the Byzantine model2.

In the creations of the Romanian texts, the translation process can be followed through several stages: a.) from their appearance - at least from Coresi - till the end of the XVII-th century, stage in which the hymn in the Romanian language is performed “orally”, without Byzantine neumes; b.) from the last decades of the XVII-th century till the Chrysantine reform (the beginning of the XIX-th century); c.) Macarie and Anton Pann; d.) from Dimitrie Suceveanu, Neagu Ionescu, Ioan Zmeu, Ion Popescu-Pasarea, till nowadays3.

The second stage of this process, which begins with the first musical documents in neumatic notation from the Romanian manuscript literature includes the XVIII-th century and the beginning of the XIX-th century.

The first stage of this phase is represented by the oldest manuscript of chants with notes in the Romanian language, Psaltichia rumaneasca4, finished by Ieromonahul Filothei sin Agai

1 Anton Pann in the “Foreword” of the book: Fabule si istorioare, Bucharest,1841, p. 4, says: “After I learned the canons and orthography of this profession I didn' t delay doing the translation in Romanian and to work the most useful books on notes”...; cf. Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Cultura muzicală de tradiţie bizantină pe teritoriul României (Musical culture o f Byzantine tradition in Romania), Buchares, The Musical Publishing House, 1989, p. 95.

2 Vasile Vasile - Istoria muzicii bizantine şi evoluţia ei în spiritualitatearomânească (The history o f Byzantine music and its evolution in the Romanian spirituality), The Interprint Publishing House, 1997, vol. 2, p. 134.

3 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Cultura muzicală... ( Musical culture), p. 95.4 BAR Collection, Ms. rom., nr. 61. includes in 259 leaves, 1193 hymns from

all the divine services: Catavasiile, Propedia (sau Teoria) muzicii psaltice, Anastasimatarul, Antologhionul, Penticostarul, Stihirarul, Anixandarele of

78

Jipei5 at 24 December 1713. Psaltichia contains several hymn books, among them also an Anastasimatarion6. Five manuscripts are known, copies after the Anastasimatarion of Ieromonah Filothei7.

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

Iosif Protopsaltis from Neamţ, a Doxologie of the Protopsaltis priest Balasie (Balaş) and a Rugăciune (a Prayer) of Filothei for the Prince Constantin Brâncoveanu. All this hymns collection was reproduced in facsimile and in transcription on linear notation in four volumes under the supervision of Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, between 1981-1992.

5 Filothei sin Agăi Jipei was born in the Mârşa village, from the Ilfov district in1670. Filothei will be known in Constantin Brâncoveanu' s epoch as protopsaltis, translator, composer, theologian, philologist, calligraphist and the author of the first chants anthology in the Romanian language. He learnt the psaltichia (the psalm book) with the psalm reader Theodosie from The Metropolitan Church of Bucharest, then, around the end of the XVII-th century, he lived at Muntele Athos where he educated himself also in music and theology. In 1700 he translates and prints, at Snagov, Floarea darurilor and Învăţături creştineşti, and in 1714 he prints, at Târgovişte, the first Catavasier in the Romanian language. Filothei died at the age of 50, in 1720. Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, „Manuscrise muzicale. Filothei sin Agăi Jipei. Prima psaltichie românească cunoscută până acum”, in Biserica Ortodoxă Română, LXXXVII (1969), nr. 9-10, pp. 1066-1075; Idem, Cultura muzicală..., pp. 70-158; C. Erbiceanu, „Întâia carte de cântări bisericeşti cunoscută până acum,, in Biserica Ortodoxă Română, XXI (1897), nr.3, pp. 292-294; Nicu Moldoveanu, Istoria muzicii bisericeşti la români, Bucharest, 2009, pp. 54-55. Gh. C. Ionescu, Muzica bizantină în România, The Sagittarius Printing House, Bucharest, 2003, pp. 50-53; Viorel Cosma, Muzicieni din România. Lexicon, vol. III, Bucharest, The Musical Printing House, 2000, pp. 47-49.

6 Cf. Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Izvoare ale muzicii româneşti. Vol. VII, Filothei sinAgăi Jipei - Psaltichie Rumănească. II. Anastasimatar, Buchares, The Musical Printing House, 1984. Idem, Cultura muzicală..., Bucharest, 1989.

7 1) Anastasimatarion from the Romanian convent Prodromos-Athos - Ms.rom. nr. 4020, copied around 1717; 2) Anastasimatarion of Ioan sin Radului Duma Braşoveanul (1751), BAR, Ms. rom. nr. 4305. 3) Anastasimatarion from Alba -Iulia, BAR, Ms. rom. nr. 4443 (the end of the XVIII-th century - the beginning of the XIX-th century). 4) Anastasimatarion of Acachie from Căldăruşani (1821), BAR, Ms. rom. nr. 5970, 5) Anastasimatarion from Cluj-Napoca, BCU - CN, MS. rom. nr.

79

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

The Romanian variant of the text wasn' t taken from the printed works; the text was either copied from the manuscripts or translated by Ieromonahul Filothei himself.

The musical model was the Anastasimatarion of Chrysaphes the Younger8, and during the translation process (“romamre”), we come across several situations:

1. Chants reproduced alike after the Greek originals, with an identical number of syllables or slightly different; their texts could be translated word for word, with the identical order of words;

2. Chants in which Filothei diverted from the Greek original, trying a light adaptation of the musical prosody at the Romanian text, especially at those written in the heirmologic and sticheraric idiom, with a word for word translation, identical order of words and number of syllables considerable different;

3. Chants created by Filothei after the Greek prototype “shorter” - after his saying - for corresponding to the needs of the Romanian ecclesiastical service;

4. The most extensive category of chants from the Psaltichia rumaneasca by Filothei is created from the joining of all the mentioned methods.

The translation in Romanian of the chants from the first Psaltichie rumaneasca doesn' t mean to be a simple action, mechanical, of arranging the Romanian text in the place of the

1106. Cf. Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Filothei sin Agai Jipei - Psaltichie Rumaneasca, IIAnastasimatar, p.15-61.

8 Chrysaphes the Younger - was the protopsaltis of The Patriarchal Church from Constantinople (cca. 1655 - cca. 1680). He elaborated the first version of the Anastasimatarion, work of reference, in 1671. The version of the Anastasimatarion of Chrysaphes was the most diffused till the beginning of the XlX-th century, eclipsing all the versions which followed after it, till a certain point, even that of Petros Lampadarios..

80

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

Greek one, under the Byzantine neumes, but an extremely complex and difficult process, action which could be realised only by a philologist and theologian, but especially of a learned musician, qualities combined in abundance by Filothei9.

The second stage is represented by an Anastasimatarion in the Romanian language written by Mihalache Moldoveanu10 in 1767. The first who makes mention of this manuscript is Anton Pann: “From the Romanian translators and creators of hymns (...) the first one who translated the Anastasimatarion is Mihalache Moldoveanu, as he writes himself: The Romanian Anastasimatarion created first by me, Mihalache Moldoveanu in 1767...”11.

Constantin Erbiceanu talks about such a manuscript containing old texts, as if it were in the Library of the Seminary from Iaşi, in the middle of the XIX-th century with the title: “ Începutul cu Dumnezeu cel Sfânt al celor opt glasuri, alcătuite pe psaltichie pe ifosul grecesc, de mine, cel mai mic între psalţi, Mihail Moldoveanul” . (“The beginning with the Holy God of the

9 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Mihalache Moldovlahu, compozitor de muzicăbizantină şi precursor al reformei chrisantice - sec. XVIII, , Bucharest,The Musical Publishing House, 2008, p. 27.

10 Mihalache Moldoveanu (Moldovlahu, Vlahu, Protopsaltul, Dascălul) Moldavian by origin, worked more in Bucharest, where, in 1776, is appointed through a princely order by Mihail Şuţu, teacher of music („dascăl musicos”) at The National School of Sfântul Sava. At Bucharest he worked also as a protopsaltis at the Gospod Church (Domnească), then as a teacher of psaltichie at the school near the Succursal Monastery of Râmnic Diocese (where Ateneul Român is today) and again at The National School. Cf. Nicu Moldoveanu, Istoria muzicii..., p.166. Ms. rom. 4013 from BAR, fol. 5 (cca. 1860-1870) makes mention of: „Pasapnoarios facere a lui Kir Mihalache, ucenic al lui Petru Lampadarie cel vestit”. The fact that he was the pupil of Petru Lampadarie Peloponesiul is o f a great importance for the promotion of the Byzantine music in Wallachia and Moldavia. Cf. Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Mihalache Moldovlahu..., pp. 6-7.

11 Anton Pann, Bazul teoretic şi practic al muzicii bisericeşti sau Gramaticamelodică, or “The melodic grammar”) Bucharest, 1847, p. XXIX.

81

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

eight keys, created on the church music on the Greek style by me, the smallest from the psalm singers, Mihail Moldoveanul” .) This has a note written by the Bishop Veniamin Costache: “This Psalm book which is called Anastasimatarion is bought by His Holiness Kyr Veniamin, The Bishop of Moldavia, from the psalm reader Constantin, which they gave to the psalm reader Pavel to prescribe and after him he will prescribe it to remain of the psalm reader Gheorghe, on which the seal of His Holiness was put also”12.

The original manuscript was considered lost till in 1982 when it was discovered by Sebastian Barbu-Bucur in the Library of the Monastery Marea Lavră from the Athos Mountain (Ms. Z 26): “ the beginning with the Holy God of the eight keys, created on the Psalm book on the Greek style by me, the smallest from the psalm singers, Mihalache (Moldoveanul)” 13.

This began to be published in facsimile and made a transcription of, in an European notation, with an introductory study in the work Mihalache Moldovlahul, composer o f Byzantine music and precursor o f the chrisantic reform - the XVIII-th century - I Anastasimatarion, in the series “Sources of the Romanian music, vol. XII A”, The musical Publishing house, Bucharest, 2008 (volume I, modes I-IV).

Four copies are known of this Anastasimatarion:1. The Romanian manuscript no. 551 from The Romanian

Academy Library (BAR) from Bucharest. It is an Anastasimatarion (called Octoehos) of 198 f., with Koukouzelian notation, of transition to the Chrysantine one and text in the Romanian language written in the

12 Constantin Erbiceanu, “Manuscripte de psaltichie din Biblioteca Seminarului Veniamin”, in Revista Teologică, Iaşi, V, nr. 19, 1866, p. 150; apud Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Mihalache Moldovlahu..., p.14; Vasile Vasile, Istoria muzicii bizantine..., pp. 76-77.

13 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Manuscrisele muzicale româneşti la Muntele Athos, Buchares, The Musical Publishing House, 2000, pp. 269-273.

82

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

Cyrillic alphabet: on the last leaf of the manuscript (f. 197r), it is the following note: “Glory, Faithfulness, Praying in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit that in the Trinity glorified, God who advised us to begin and after the beginning helped us also to end and started this Octoechos to be written in 20 August and to end it on the 4 November and this holy book was written with my hand that of the sinner and the humble from the writers, Vasile, the pupil of the psalm singer Mihalache Eftimivici. And from the beginning were brought out and were revised by the psalm singer Mihalache himself (...). And it was written in the 1798”14

2. The Romanian manuscript no. 578 from the Romanian Academy Library from Bucharest. It is an Anastasimatarion of 154 f., with a neobyzantine notation of transition to the Chrisantine, and text in the Romanian language written in the Cyrillic alphabet, resulted from “C. Munteanu from Fălticeni, 1879, 20 August” (f.1r). The manuscript dates from the first or the second decade of the XIX-th century15.

3. The Romanian manuscript no. 4557 from The National Library from Bucharest. It is a manuscript of 183 f., pointed to by Alexie Buzera16 and described minutely by Florin Bucescu17, which includes “Resurrection Chants created with church music, being produced and created by the Protopsaltes Mihail Eftimivici (...) and was written by me, the psalm singer Dimitrie Cruceri(u)

14 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, MihalacheMoldovlahu..., p. 19.15 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Mihalache Moldovlahu..., p. 20.16 Alexie Al. Buzera, Cultura muzicală românească de tradiţie bizantină din

sec. alXIX-lea, Craiova, 1999, p.178.17 Florin Bucescu, Cântarea psaltică în manuscrisele moldoveneşti din secolul

al XIX-lea, Doctorate thesis in manuscript, Bucharest, 2002, pp. 568-570.

83

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

1819

Săpătoriul, after the book of the psalm reader Ioachim from whom I had also learnt (...) in 1827, 18 January. At the Holy Monastery Dumbrăvele from Neamţ” (f.1r)18.

4. The Romanian-Greek manuscript no.215 from The Museum of Cernica Monastery. It is an Anastasimatarion-Anthologion with Koukouzelian notation, of transition to the Chrysantine one and text in the Romanian language written in the Cyrillic alphabet. In the first part of the 306 f. it contains the only full version of Mihalache’s Anastasimatarion, copied by Januarius The Monk in 1803 at the Monastery of Neamţ19.

The importance of Mihalache's Anastasimatarion results from:1. The work represents the beginning of the second stage of

Chants translated in Romanian. It isn' t only about putting of Romanian words instead of Greek ones, of an adaptation of the text to music or of music to text, but also about the creation of a melodic line adapted to the Romanian text, belonging to the author, in which care kept the scale, the cadences and the style;

2. It is the most complete Anastasimatarion with Koukouzelian and Chrysantine notation (includes all the Stichera of the Kekragaria - seven Stichera, at which he adds three more prosomias for each mode - The Troparion from the end of the Matins, for each mode, Exapostilaria and Evloghitaria, the third, the sixth, the eight and the nineth hymns from the Resurrection Canon).

3. Mihalache anticipates the work carried through by Macarie, Anton Pann, Ştefanache Popescu, Dimitrie Suceveanu, I.

Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Mihalache Moldovlahu..., p.21.Alexandru Dumitrescu, „Ianuarie protosinghelul şi Mihalache Moldoveanu în două manuscrise din muzeul mănăstirii Cernica”, în Studii Teologice, seria a III-a, anul VIII, nr. 4, 2012, pp. 163-200.

84

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

Popescu-Pasarea, arranging the chants in the syntomon style (briefly), as the new times requested, getting near so much to that of nowadays, that if it weren' t been dated, we could believe that it was written after the Chrysantine reform accomplished and officially diffused in 181420.

4. Besides the syntomon style, adopted in the time in which it was created in Constantinople (by Daniel Protopsaltes and especially by Petros Lampadarios Peloponnesios), concerning the melodic structures, Mihalache follows the same innovating measure. The first mode is completely reorganized confronted by that from Byzantium and from Athos, in the last four or five decades of the XVIII-th century occuring a change of the melody from ke in pa, with a melodic renewed structure21.

In the measure realized by Mihalache through his Anastasimatarion, Nicolae Gheorghifa makes a very important observation: “Unfortunately, Petros Peloponessios dies at the beginning of 1778, without letting an autographic manuscript with his own Anastasimatarion; it was noted by his pupils only after his death. Undoubtedly that Mihalache, as pupil of Petros, knew very well the hymns of the Anastasimatarion of his teacher. What it is remarkable concerning this Romanian manuscript containing old texts is that Mihalake, in his wish for offering his conationals creations in the native country language, he translates in Romanian, the Anastasimatarion of his teacher before that at least his pupils notes it in Greek”22.

Although, Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, analysing the original manuscript of the Anastasimatarion, comparatively with that of

20 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, MihalacheMoldovlahu..., p.39.21 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Mihalache Moldovlahu..., p.56.22 Nicolae Gheorghiţă, Chinonicul duminical în perioada post-bizantină (1453­

1821). Liturgică şi muzică, The musical Publishing house, Bucharest, 2007, footnote 60, p.42.

85

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

Petros Lampadarios, published by Petros Ephesios, and with that of Macarie Ieromonahul, concludes that: “The Anastasimatarion of Mihalache hasn' t the same source with that of Macarie, which is translated after that of Petros Ephesios and which, in his turn, is that of Petros Lampadarios Peloponnesios”23.

In this context of searchings, concerning one of the most important Romanian musical manuscript containing old texts, it is registered also the Romanian manuscript no. 3501, from the Romanian Academy Library collection from Bucharest.

The manuscript was described briefly by Alexie Buzera: “Anthology, written in 1860, (in the contents are mentioned the years 1820-1860, n.n.), format 245 x 185 mm, 56 leaves, containes hymns by Petros Bereketes, Petros Lampadarios, Iakobos Protopsaltes, Georgios Kritos, Daniel Protopsaltes, Petros Byzantios, Visarion Duhovnicul, D. Suceveanu24.

The description of the manuscriptIt is a composite volume which includes several fascicles

with different kinds of paper, each having a different type of writing from different periods; it has a different contents. It had a previous pagination (not original), in the same binding, which shows that it was included in a more ample manuscript containing old texts (for instance f.21 corresponds f.100, and f.44, which has other writing, corresponds to f.123)25.

From this manuscript, the fascicle included between the leaves 17-24 is taken into consideration, which includes specific

23 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Mihalache Moldovlahu.., p.37.24 Alexie Buzera, Cultura muzicală..., p.161.25 Gabriel Ştrempel mentions that the fragments proceed from the last

manuscript 2896, which was dismembered. Gabriel Ştrempel, Catalogul manuscriselor româneşti , The Scientific and Encyclopaedic Publishing house, Bucharest, 1987, vol. III (3101-4413), p. 149.

86

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

chants for the Anastasimatarion collection. The fragment is written in Chrysantine notation, with the text in the Romanian language, written in the Cyrillic alphabet. The writing is elaborated, very beautiful, calligraphic (both the neumes and the text); the paging is balanced and symmetrical; the first leaf has 14 melodic rows, and the others has 16 melodic rows. The initials of the words from the chants beginning are written with red ink and are decorated with floral models; the neumes and the consonant signs (excepting heteron) are written with black ink, and the temporal signs, the heteron (from the consonants), the ftorai, martyria, the keys of modes, the hymns titles and the observations (f. 18) are written in red ink; the hymns succession in the ritual order shows that it belongs to a wider volume, destined to the lectern utilization.

The general aspect of the fragment, the uniformity and the confidence of the hand which wrote it, in all the 16 leaves, as well as the lack of the proofs (it is discreetly cut one single ison, f 20v and two gorgons (f. 21r) shows that the fragment is copied after another manuscript or after another initial variant of work.

We come across to one single note, at the beginning of tichera of the Kekragaria, where it is written: “by Petros Lampadarios” (f. 18v).

The fragment includes the chants of the Vespers of Saturday evening, the first mode, completely and the beginning of the chants of the Matins of Sunday morning: Kekragaria, (in the sticheraric style), the stichoi o f the Kekragaria, (22), the stichera o f the Kekragaria (10): Rugăciunile noastre, înconjuraţi noroadelor Sionul, Veniţi noroadelor să cântăm, Veseliţi-vă cerurile, Pre cela ce cu trupul, Stând înaintea mormântului, Cuvântului Celui împreună cu Tatăl (in the sticheraric measure), Ceea ce eşti bucuria, Prea lăudaţilor mucenici, O, preaslăvită minune (in the sticheraric style); Slavă şi acum, Dogmatica o f the Theotokos (Pre ceea ce este slava a toată lumea), the stichera o f the Stichology (4): Cu patima Ta Hristoase, Să se bucure făptura, Împărat fiind

87

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

cerului, Muierile cele purtătoare de miruri (in the sticheraric style), sticheron: Iată s-a plinit proorocia Isaiei (in the sticheraric style); the Resurrection troparia, Piatra fiind pecetluită, Gavriil zicând ţie Fecioară; Dumnezeu este Domnul; the first hymn at the first line of Sedelna: Mormântul Tău Mântuitorule (prosomia), the first melodic line (Pre Cruce Te-ai pironit de voie Indurate) from the second chant to the first line of Sedelna.

At the beginning of the XIX-th century, the chants of the Anastasimatarion in the Romanian language know (through manuscripts and printing) only four melodic main variants, which were “translated” from Greek sources: the first, is the one of Filothei sin Agăi Jipei, which translates the Greek version of Chrysaphes the Younger, the second, of Mihalache Moldoveanu, the third is that of Macarie Ieromonahul, which “translates in Romanian” the version of Petros Lampadarios, the fourth is the version of Anton Pann; who adapts (exegesis), and then translates the version of Dionisios Photeinos. From all these, only one has the catalogue included in the fragment described above, that of Mihalache Moldoveanu. The specific features of this version is placing three prosomias in the line of Stichera of the Kekragaria raising their number to ten26.

A'<i\ pn

o;a XI1 - u - da - ţi

t I- lor mu - ce - nici ^ pr

^e voi pia - mân - tul

- £ ------ - h A --------4 5 = ? vM -------J — -

Prea lă - u - da - ţi - lor mu - ce - nici pre voi pă - mân - tul

’ 1 H \ , I

P rea lă - u - da - ţi - lor mu - ce - nici, p re voi nici___ pă - mân-tul

26 Prosomia „Prea lăudaţilor mucenici”, The nineth stichera of the Kekragaria: Ms. rom. 3501 from The Romanian Academy Library f. 21r, comparatively with Mihalache Moldoveanu, Ms. rom. Z 26, Marea Lavră, Sfântul Munte Athos, f. 7v, transliterated by Sebastian Barbu-Bucur in Mihalache Moldovlahu..,, p. 87.

88

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„ românire ”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

89

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

The melodic analysis of the fragmentStarting from the similitude of contents of the manuscripts,

we' ll make a short analysis of chants from Ms. 3501 comparatively with the chants from the Mihalache' sAnastasimatarion21.

The succession of chants is identical, with two exceptions:1. At the Stichoi of the Kekragaria at Mihalache are

registered the 18 stichoi, after that the stichera begin; in Ms. 3501 are registered in succession also the stichoi 19­22 (the four stichoi which are sung when the stichera of the Kekragaria are put on six - f. 18v). These stichoi are rediscovered also in Macarie' s Anastasimatarion.

2. In Ms. 3501 the Resurrection troparia are put at the end of the Vespers, before Dumnezeu este Domnul (f. 24r); at Mihalache' s they are put at the Matins, after Dumnezeu este Domnul.

The melodic form of the hymns in Ms. 3501 and at Mihalache is identical. The chants in the new method are more ornamented. This is due to the fact that through their translation (exegesis), through the passing from the old method, of transition, to the new method, Chrysantine, the melody has an analytical character, taking into consideration explicitly all ornaments and the melodic melismatic formulas28. At the sticheraric chants, there are only a few situations in which the form is changed. * 28

21 For this I used the original version (Ms. Z 26 Marea Lavra) transliterated in European notation by Sebastian Barbu-Bucur in Mihalache Moldovlahu..,, pp. 60-111, and its copy BAR Ms. rom. 518 (which includes in part the first mode).

28 The old notation system has a stenographical character, the true melody, or the melos of the hymns, being included in the thesis, real musical phrases or formulas, created by “the great cheironomic signs”. The revision phenomenon, namely of the analytical music notation, included several stages, representing the concern o f the main composers after

90

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

The differences of the melodic form are rediscovered at some stichoi of the kekragaria (especially at the melodic beginnings of the stichoi and at the stichoi 10-18). The different fragments from the Ms. 3501 are alike with the melodics of those of Petros Ephesios and of Macarie.

The melody of the chants has a special fluency, without any repeated formulas, with varied melodic formulas, mainly on the perfect cadence and final in the sticheraric style. The ambitus is extended, mainly in the lower register; various ascending and descending leaps are used, bigger than the quint, which can be found identical in the two variants. Comparatively with these, at Macarie Ieromonahul, at the first mode we come across frequently at the repeated melodic formulas, especially on the perfect cadences, the leaps bigger than the quint are very rarely used29.

1500, and which improved concurrently with the adoptation o f the new semiography, through the Chrisantine reform, at the beginning o f the XIX-th century. These were transmited orally from the master to the scholar. „Zicând erminie înţelegem folosirea mai multor semne muzicale diastematice în vederea scrierii mai pe larg (scrierii analitice n.n.) a nenumăratelor fraze muzicale care până atunci se executau din memorie prin intermediul semnelor afone (marilor semne cheironomice n.n.) subînţelese.” (Constantin Psahos); „Exighisirea vechii semiografii bizantine înseamnă transcrierea şi cântarea integrală a melosului (melodiei reale n.n.) ce se află, pe de o parte, în semnele fonetice - ascendente sau descendente - şi, pe de altă parte, în semnele afone sau, cum mai sunt numite, în marile semne cheironomice sau marile ipostasuri.” (Gr. Stathis): apud Nicolae Gheorghiţă, Chinonicul duminical..., p. 96, pp. 106-107 see also pp. 88-111.

29 The second stichera of the stichology: Ms. rom. 3501 from The Romanian Academy Library f. 22v-23r, comparatively with Mihalache Moldoveanu, Ms. rom. Z 26, Marea Lavră, Sfântul Munte Athos, f. 10r-10v, transliterated by Sebastian Barbu-Bucur in Mihalache Moldovlahu..,, pp. 97-98.

91

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

V'lui Ce - la ce eşti_

Iui Ce - la [ ̂«CL̂„ tu -__ t ______ \L______________.______________ ' ce eşt1^ ------------- ne - cu -

L_L_L - 9 S 1 · s ^ ̂ =b)

ce eşti_

a)

b)

92

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

The cadence system is almost identical, following the adequate phrasing of the text and its rendition through a prosody as suitable as possible. The unusual cadences are frequently used; on ke four times, on ke grave three times; on di grave four times, on ni, once (to be observed that we don’ t come across the cadence on zo, which is used by Macarie Ieromonahul). Only one cadence on di grave is changed in Ms. 3501 with a cadence on pa). (the fourth sticheron of the Stichology, f. 23v). The alternation of perfect and imperfect cadences, as the imperfect cadence formulas contribute to the fluency and equilibrium of the melodic speech.

In Ms. 3501 we found many modulations which diversify the melodic speech. We come across three short chromatic modulations, the sixth mode (the stichos 9, f. 17v; the stichos 11, f. 18r; the third stichera of the Stichology, f. 23r)30.

30 The nineth stichos o f the Kekragaria: Ms. rom. 3501 from The Romanian Academy Library f. 17v, comparatively with Mihalache Moldoveanu, Ms. rom. Z 26, Marea Lavră, Sfântul Munte Athos, f. 2v, transliterated by Sebastian Barbu-Bucur in Mihalache Moldovlahu..,, p. 67.

93

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

VJ ^ *---- CA. — A A ^pâ - nă ce voi tre - ce. ^

m j j j i = H — 1— \> J J J — -7- ^ — Jpâ - nă ce voi

.... .........................................-

tre -

------ ?------------ 1-------

■ ce.

1 I------- J 11

pâ - nă ce voi__ t re - ce.

At the tenth sticheron of the Kekragaria an enharmonic modulation is used, through_nisabur (f. 21r). Also, at the same chant, as if at the fourth sticheron of the Kekragaria, a enarmonic phtora, agem, is also used, put on the ga (f. 19v).

Three of the four cadences on di grave are introduced through diatonic modulations, in an inward sense, through placing the phtora of diatonic ke on pa (the system of the “circle” o f the descending quint)31.

31 The fourth sticheron o f the Kekragaria: Ms. rom. 3501 from The Romanian Academy Library f. 19v, comparatively with Mihalache Moldoveanu, Ms. rom. Z 26, Marea Lavră, Sfântul Munte Athos, f. 5r, transliterated by Sebastian Barbu-Bucur in Mihalache Moldovlahu.., p. 77.

94

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

All the modulations mentioned above are made without changing the melodic form.

We come across a special modulation at prosomia Mormântul Tău, Mântuitorule. The chant has at the beginning the key of the first mode, from he, placing itself on the first neume the chromatic phtora of di of the second mode. So, it is sung in the second mode, having cadences on ga and on ke (nowadays we don' t do transposition; it is sung directly from di). In Ms. 3501 the whole hymn finale is diatonic, with cadences and specific melodic formulas32.

32 Prosomia “Mormântul Tău Mântuitorule”, The first troparion at the first line of Sedelne: Ms. rom. 3501 from The Romanian Academy Library f. 24v, comparatively with Mihalache Moldoveanu, Ms. rom. Z 26, Marea Lavră, Sfântul Munte Athos, f. 13r-13v, transliterated by Sebastian Barbu-Bucur in Mihalache Moldovlahu.., pp. 109-110.

95

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

11- tru.

A ^

• tru.

In the transcribed version after Mihalache there are no modulations. A special melodic element is introduced in Ms. 3501 at the sticheron Dogmatica, where we find a cadence extended formula, specific to the papadic idiom, which can' t be found in the mentioned transliteration and neither at Macarie Ieromonahul33. But this formula is specific to the analytic transcription of some thesis included in the old notation34. Although Mihalache used a transitional notation, very close of the Chrisantine one, it includes specific elements to the old notation, which are translated according to their interpretation in the oral tradition. The introducing in a sticheraric chant of a specific

33 The formula is used identically in the Greek version of Th. Fokaevs, Albinamuzicală. Anastasimatarul pe larg şi pe scurt, (lb. gr.), Tom. I, Constantinople, 1847, p.36.

34 The cadence formula from the original version, in the old method of writingsupports such a revision in the papadic idiom. In Ms. 578 the formula is self-evident, because we can identify also the colour in which the signs are written. This was very important for the way in which hymns were performed. Nicolae Gheorghiţă, Chinonicul duminical..., pp.119-120.

96

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

formula of the papadic idiom is justified through the place where it is done. The sticheron Dogmatica is the most important chant, according to the musical point of view, from the ceremonial of the Vespers, being treated frequently as a soloist piece.

In addition to these original musical elements the text of the chants was subjected to a revision. We come across to several words which are changed, without altering the melody:

• At the first, instead of “Pune Doamne strajă gurii m ele”is “Pune Doamne pază gurii m ele”.

• At the sixth stichos of the Kekragaria, instead of „Auzi-se-vor graiurile mele că au p u tu t’ is “ Auzi-se-vor graiurile mele că s-au îndulcit.”

• At the fifth sticheron of the Kekragaria, instead of “PreCela ce cu trupul de voie pentru noi S-a răstignit” is “Pe Cela ce cu trupul pe cruce pentru noi S-a răstignit”.

• At the Resurrection troparion, instead of “mărire purtăriiTale de grijă” is “slavă iconomiei Tale”.

• All the way in the chants the word “splendour” is replacedby “glory”.

All the revisions are closer to the original Greek variant of the text. It is outstanding the fact that, excepting the term “glory” instead of “splendour”, which appear in the first printed works after the reform, the other terms appear in the versions of the Romanian Anastasimataria only at the beginning of the XX-th century. From those presented above, a few conclusions are imposed:

1. The comparative analysis of the chants contents and melodics from Ms. 3501 with those from the Mihalache' s Anastasimatarion35 and of its copy35 36 shows that it is the same variant of Anastasimatarion.

35 Transliterated in European notation by Sebastian Barbu-Bucur in MihalacheMoldovlahu...

36 BAR, Ms. rom. 578.

97

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

2. The geographical origin of the manuscript confirm this. Florin Bucescu shows that all the copies of the Mihalache's Anastasimatarion were made in Moldavia37. In Ms. 3501 it is mentioned Visarion Duhovnicul (from Neamţ) and includes also the Stichera Heotina of Dimitrie Suceveanu (f. 44r-49v), thing that makes us believe that it was written calligraphically in Moldavia, in the first part of the XIX-th century.

3. The Mihalache' s Anastasimatarion wasn' t known till now but in the old method of writing, in prechrysantine notation. Ms. 3501 shows that Mihalache' s version was transcribed (translated) in the new method, in the chrysantine notation, immediately after the reform in 1814.

4. We don' t know the author of the melodic variant in the new method from the fragment of the manuscript 3501 and neither that who wrote this manuscript containing old texts (in the position in which he isn' t the same person). The fragment analysis emphasizes the complexity of the translation process of chants and the training of that who carried it out. That proves to be an expert of sacred music, thoroughly preoccupied of the music quality and of the liturgical text, but also their execution in the lectern.

5. The chants orthography in Ms. 3501 is impeccable, showing maturity in the knowledge and application of the new method of writing. This places the writing of the fragment, the earliest, in the third decade of the XIX-th

37 Ms. rom. nr. 551, written at Botoşani in 1798 by Vasile, the scholar of the teacher Mihalache Eftimivici; Ms. rom. nr. 578, resulted from C. Munteanu from Fălticeni - 20 August 1898. Ms. rom. nr. 4557 from the collection of The Romanian National Library from Bucharest, written by the psaltul Dimitrie Cruceri(u) Săpătoriul, in 1827, January 18. At Sf. M(ănăstire) Dumbrăvele from Neamţ.

98

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

century, when the orthographical elements of the new semiography were completely explained38.

6. Although, as a result of the studies till now, Sebastian Barbu-Bucur inclines to believe that the Anastasimatarion of Mihalache has a different source than that of Macarie39, which is after Petros Lampadarios, the note from the beginning of the stichoi of the Kekragaria (f. 18v: “ a lui Petru Lampadariu”) shows that the man who wrote (who translated) this manuscript gives Petru Lampadarie as the author of the chants.

Sebastian Barbu-Bucur reached a justified conclusion if we analyse comparatively the Anastasimatarion of Mihalache and that of Macarie. The differences between these have however another explanation, that is to say the stages through which each from the two versions passed by from the source till the finished form in the Chrysantine notation.

A. Mihalache's Anastasimatarion passed by through two stages:

In the first stage it was written, as Nicolae Gheorghi(a40 notices, directly in the Romanian language, from the source, namely represents the written Romanian version of the oral version of Petru Lampadarie, deriving advantage simultaneously from the experience and subjectivity of that who wrote it (Mihalache)41.

38 We consider that the main landmark of the permanence of the new orthography is the printing o f the three volumes by Macarie Ieromonahul in 1823, at Viena. Before 1820, certain orthographical vague elements exist, specific to the beginning period o f the hymns analytical notation, as if we can observe in a fragment from Ms. rom. 4480 from BAR, dating from 1818, written by Macarie Ieromonahul.

39 Sebastian Barbu Bucur, MihalacheMoldovlahu..., p. 37.40 Nicolae Gheorghiţă, Chinonicul duminical..., footnote 60, p. 42; see footnote 27.41 The copyist Ms. 551, “Vasile ucenicul psaltului Mihalache Eftimivici”,

(„Vasile the scholar of the psalm singer Mihalache Eftimivici”) says that

99

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

The second stage is “the translation” (exegesis) in Chrysantine notation, the version from Ms. 3501 having the subjective stamp of the translator or of the copyist.

B. M acarie's Anastasimatarion went through three stages:

a. The writing down of the oral version of Petros Lampadarios, by his pupils, in the Greek language, in the old notation.

b. The translation in the Chrysantine notation by the “transcriptions” : Grigorios Lampadarios and Chourmouzios Chartophylax.

c. The changing and printing in the Romanian language of the Greek variant by Macarie. This is the most complex and difficult stage because it includes two processes: the translation of the text in the Romanian language and the adaptation of the melody at its characteristics.

All the three stages imply personal interventions, subjective of those who made them.

From the things stated above we see that Mihalache' s version and that of Macarie have the same source, but being the result of different steps. The two variants don' t exclude one another, but they emphasize themselves mutually, enriching our treasure of sacred music. The step of Macarie is so much meritorious so as it implied a complex work, his version, imposing itself, especially through printing42.

At the beginning of the XlX-th century, the Romanian manuscript 3810 from the Romanian Academy Library is also dated, which is mentioned by Costin Moisil and Sebastian Barbu-

these chants „din început s-au scos şi s-au diorthosit de însuşi psaltul Mihalache.” („from the beginning were taken and revised by the psalm singer Mihalache himself’).

42 Alexandru Dumitrescu, Cântările vecerniei şi utreniei din duminici - tradiţie şi continuitate —, Bucharest, 2010, (Doctorate thesis in manuscript).

100

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

Bucur in the context of the manuscripts copies of Mihalache's43 Anastasimatarion. The manuscript has 38 leaves, 16,5 x 11 cm and it is written in Chrysantine notation. Between the leaves 12 and 24, on the first page of each leaf it is written a footnote which says: “This hymn book, which has in itself the keys on the new church music was written by me, the sinner... the brother Feodor Popovici in 1819, on the 4-th of January. “ On the last leaf (38) it is written: “It must be known that I took this book from Father Calimah. He offered it to me as a gift so that I could learn on <it>”44. The contents: f. 1-11 v includes a small grammar of the Chrysantine music; f. 12-33v are written: Kekragaria and the Dogmatika of the Theotokon of the modes I-VI; at f. 33v the beginning of the mode VII.

Describing the contents and presenting some melodic beginnings comparatively with the holograph manuscript of Mihalache, Sebastian Barbu-Bucur reaches the following conclusion: “Studying this Octoiha§, we draw the conclusion that it doesn' t have any connection with the Anastasimatarion of Mihalache Moldovlahu”45.

As I mentioned above, at the beginning of the XlX-th century the collection of the Resurrection Hymns has only two main directions: the old version of Chrysaphes the Younger, taken by Filothei Jipa and that of Petros Lampadarios, taken by Mihalache and Macarie. This Hymn book belongs to one of these variants.

Taking into consideration the fragment in Chrysantine notation of Mihalache' s version and comparatively with its copies from the old notation, we can say that Ms. 3810 represents

43 See also the description made by Sebastian Barbu-Bucur after Costin Moisilin Mihalache Moldovlahu..., p.15.

44 G. Ştrempel, Catalogul manuscriselor româneşti, vol III, 3101-4412, Bucharest, 1987, p. 253.

45 Sebastian Barbu-Bucur, Mihalache Moldovlahu..., p.17.

101

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

a “transcription” in Chrysantine notation of Mihalache' s hymns. The dogmatic melodics o f the first mode shows an anterior version to that from Ms. 3501, less cursive, but preserving all cadences and the melodic drawings46.

46 The hymns orthography is specific to the beginning period o f the Chrysantine notation, see the footnote 37.

102

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

103

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

All these elements leads to the conclusion that Mihalache Moldoveanu' s Anastasimatarion was transcribed in the new notation ever since its appearance, having many versions of translation. At the same time it was used as a manual for learning church music.

The importance of Mihalache Moldoveanu' s Anastasimatarion for the Romanian music derives also from its diffusion in the Romanian space. It is mentioned in many musical centres from Moldavia: Iaşi (the copy mentioned by Constantin Erbiceanu), Botoşani (Ms. rom. 551 BAR), Neamţ (Ms. rom. 4557 Biblioteca Naţională), Fălticeni (Ms. 578 BAR), Mănăstirea Neamţ (Ms. 215 Cernica). At the same time Mihalache worked for a considerable time in Bucharest, where it seemed that his Anastasimatarion was seen by Anton Pann. All the mentioned versions imply anterior versions after which they were copied.

The translation in the new method shows the diffusion of the manuscript and the contemporary interest for Mihalache' s version. However, from the facts that we have in hand, the using of this very beautiful melodic variant it seems to be lost somewhere in the middle of the XIX-th century, even in Moldavia, where it was

104

Aspects o f Church chanting Translation [„românire”]by Mihalache Moldoveanu

intensely used. Here, only the hymns of Petros Lampadarios were imposed, translated and printed by Macarie Ieromonahul in 1823, and after that revised and transformed by Dimitrie Suceveanu in his Anastasimatarion from 1848.

Mihalache' s Anastasimatarion represents the second stage of the chants translation in Romanian (“românire”). Its transcription in the new method shows us that it continues and is included also in the following stage of translation, represented by Macarie Ieromonahul and Anton Pann, through the chants transcription in the new method and printing. At the same time, through the revision of the text and the prosody of the chants, the next step translation is anticipated, in which Ştefanache Popescu, Ion Popescu-Pasărea and many others have revised, transformed and improved stylistically the collection of chants.

References

1. Barbu-Bucur, Sebastian, Cultura muzicală de tradiţie bizantinăpe teritoriul României, Bucharest, 1989.

2. Barbu-Bucur, Sebastian, Izvoare ale muzicii româneşti. Vol. VII,Filothei sin Agăi Jipei - Psaltichie Rumănească. II.Anastasimatar, Bucharest, 1984.

3. Barbu-Bucur, Sebastian, Manuscrisele muzicale româneşti laMuntele Athos, Bucharest, The musical Publishing house, 2000.

4. Bucescu, Florin, Cântareapsaltică în manuscrisele moldoveneştidin secolul al XIX-lea, Doctorate thesis in manuscript,Bucharest, 2002.

5. Buzera, Alexie Al., Cultura muzicală românească de tradiţiebizantină din sec. al XIX-lea, Craiova, 1999.

6. Dumitrescu, Alexandru, „Ianuarie protosinghelul şi MihalacheMoldoveanu în două manuscrise din muzeul mănăstirii Cernica”,în Studii Teologice, seria a III-a, anul VIII, nr. 4, 2012.

7. Dumitrescu, Alexandru, Cântările vecerniei şi utreniei dinduminici - tradiţie şi continuitate - , Bucharest, 2010,(Doctorate thesis in manuscript).

105

AlexandruDUMITRESCU

8. Erbiceanu, Constantin, „Manuscripte de psaltichie din BibliotecaSeminarului Veniamin”, in Revista Teologică, Iaşi, V, nr. 19, 1866.

9. Pann, Anton, Fabule si istorioare, Bucharest, 1841.10. Ştrempel, Gabriel, Catalogul manuscriselor româneşti,

Bucharest, The Scientific and Encyclopaedic Publishing house, 1987, vol. III (3101-4413), p. 149.

106