Russian greek chant troparia

Searching paralel melodies in the contemporary byzantine chant

(Dávid Pancza, Bratislava, July 2005)

1. mode

I. Obichód nótnago pénija – vsenóščnoje bdénie, Moskva, 1909 (trop. 1. tone „gréčeskago rospéva“)

A B

Кa- мени за-пе-чaтану t ї-удє1й, и3 в0-инwмъ стрегyщымъ пречc-то-е тё- - -ло тво-E, A B

во-скrлъ є3-си2 триднeвный, сп7- се, дa-ру-zй мj- - - -ро- -ви жи1знь. A B

се-гw2 рa- - -ди си6-лы не-бc- ны- z во-пі-s-ху ти2, жи-зно-дa-вче: A0 A’

слa- -ва во- скr- е- -нію твое-мY, хr- тE: слaва цrтві- -ю тво-е-мY: A’ B

слaва смотрeні-ю тво-е-мY, є3ди1не чl- - вэ- -ко- лю1- -бче.

II. Anthologhie tom II., Macarie Ieromonahul, Bucureşti, 1827 A B

Pia-tra fi-ind pece-tlu-i-tǎ de ji- -dovi, şi o-staşii stre-ju-ind preacurat trupul tǎu,

în-vi- at ai a tre- ea zi mân-tu- -i- -to- ru- -le, dǎ- ru- ind lu- mii vi- -a- - - - ţǎ,

pentru a-cea-stǎ pu-te- ri- le ce-ru-ri-lor stri-gau ţi- - - - -e, dǎ- tǎ- to- - - ru-le de vi-a- - ţǎ:

Sla-vǎ în-vi- e-rii ta- - - -le Hri-stoa- -se, sla- - - vǎ îm-pǎ- rǎ- - ţi- - ei ta- - le,

sla- - - - vǎ pu-te-rii ta- - - le de gri- - -jǎ, u- - nu-le iu-bi-to-ru-le de oa- meni.

III. Greek troparion, 1. mode P. Lampadarios: A Ax B

A B

A B

A0 A’ A’ B’

The core of the russian „greek“ troparion is a result of repeating a two-part phrase A B. The final part consists of three modified members A and a modified member B. The two nearest byzantine melodies we have found consist of two repeated members A, B (with fnal tones g, d respectively) too. Of course their melody is much more free than the russian one. Let us make a brief comparation of the russian members A, B and their modifications with selected byzantine members. A: II. – 1. line

III. – 1. line I. – reconstructed full A

B: II. – 1. line

III. – 2. line I. – 1. a 3. lines

A’: III. – A0

I. – A’

B’: III. – B’ II. – B’ I. – B’

In spite of the fact that we have not found an exact byzantine prototype of the russian troparion, the comparation shows clear its byzantine origin. For a better demonstration of the similarity we have transposed the russian melody into the scale from d. This scale has a “dur” character – contrary to the byzantine dorian pentachords. The most probable reason for the russian reintonation of the melody is replacing the original melody by the higher third one. This is usual in Galicia and as we are going to see, it was not alien to muscovite Russia as well.

2. mode: I. Obichód nótnago pénija – vsenóščnoje bdénie, Moskva, 1909 In A B

Е#- -гдA снизшeлъ є3- си2 къ смe-рти животE бе- зсмeртный, A B

то-гдA ѓдъ ў-мертви1лъ є3си2 блистaніемъ б-9ествA: C A B

є3-гдA же и3 ў-мeршыz t пре-и-сп0днихъ воскR-си1лъ є3- си2,

C D

вс‰ си6лы нбcныz взы- вa- ху:

A Ex

жизнодaвче хrтE б9е нaшъ, слa- - - ва те- бЁ.

II. Anastasimatar, Neamţ , 1943 (Intervals between notes (1=whole note): c-2/3-d-7/6-e-2/3-f-1-g-2/3-a-7/6-h-2/3-c-1-d)

Când te-ai po- go- rât la moa- rte, ce- la ce eşti vi- -a- ţǎ cea fǎ- -rǎ de moa- -rte, a b

a- - tu-ncia ia- - - - dul l-ai o- -mo- rât cu strǎ-lu- -ci- -rea du- -mne- - - - ze- -i- - - - - - -rei a b

iar când ai în- vi- -at pre cei morţi din ce- le de-de-subt, toa-te pu- -te- -ri- -le ce- -reşti au stri- gat:

dǎ- tǎ- -to- ru- - le de vi- a- - -ţa Hri- - stoa- -se, Du-mne-ze- -ul no- - - stru mǎ-ri- -re ţi- - e.

The troparion of the 2nd mode is similar to those of the 4th and 6th mode. Its melody is very simple and we are not able to find a such simple byzantine counterpart. Among those available for us maybe the romanian one from 1943 is the closest, especially in the opening and concluding phrases. Comparation: In+A+B: Obichod – grečeski rospev // Rumunský tropár – Anastasimatar, Neamţ , 1943

// Theos Kyrios, P. Lampadarios

A+B: Anastasimatar, Neamţ , 1943, part b in the 3. line // 2. line // Obichod – grečeski rospev, common phrase A+B

A+Ex: Neamţ , 1943, conclusion // Obichod – grečeski rospev, A+Ex

Note: In the old byzantine distribution of scales the troparia in the 2., 4. and 6. mode have the scale e f g a h c d. In contemporary practice the troparia are sung in a soft-chromatic scale with notes e, h 1/6 tone lower than in the tempered scale and note a 1/3 tone lower. Mathematically the nearest approximation of this scale is a staff with a flat (e.g. at P.Dinev), but it sounds too oriental, much more than the normal soft-chromatic scale does. A better approximation (used e.g. by Sakellarides), in spite that mathematically not the nearest, is the staff without flats and sharps. Until today the scholars discuss about when the chromatic scales were introduced. The russian „greek chant“ scale of the 2nd, 4th and 6th modes can lead to some interesting speculations about it. After transposition of the melody, as we have done for purposes of comparing, we see that the notes e, a, h are flat – exactly those notes that are „flat“ (less than a halftone) in the soft-chromatic scale! Of course, the scale used by the Russians is an approximation – but if the approximation was made exactly by such a scale, probably the reason was, that some flattening of those three notes could be heard. Maybe the russian „greek chant“, dated to the 17th century, can be an important witness of the existence and usage of a softchromatic scale in that time in the greek church. After this „exercise“ we need to say that we consider the explanation above unreal because of the radically different sound of those two scales – there are much better posibilities for approximaion. And there exists one much simpler and more probable explanation of the russian scale, explanation based on a very well known and attested fact – using the higher third melody instead the original one. If this is the case, and we believe it is, the russian scales cannot help us in deciding about the existence of a softchromatic scale.

3. mode: I. Dinev, P., Obširen vǎzkresnik II., Sofia, 1949 II. Obichód nótnago pénija – vsenóščnoje bdénie, Moskva, 1909

I. Да ве- се- лs- -тсz не- -бе c- - - на- z, да рa- - - -ду- - --ю- - - тсz зе-мн†- - z:

II. Да ве- -се- - лsтсz не- бе c- - -на- z, да рa- -ду- -ю- тсz зе-мн†- - - - - - -z:

I. ћ- кw со-тво- ри2 де-ржa- - - -ву мhшце- -ю сво- e- - - - ю го- -Dь,

II. ћ- кw со-тво- ри2 де-ржa- - - ву мhшце- -ю сво- e- - - - ю го- -Dь,

I. по-прA смe- - - - - - - - - - - -рті-ю смeрть, пe- рве-нецъ мeртвыхъ бhсть,

II. по-прA смe- - - - - - -рті- - - - -ю смeрть,

I. и3з8 чрe- - - ва ѓ- до- ва и3-збa- ви нaсъ, и3 по- да- дE мjро- - - ви

II. пе-рве- нeцъ мe- - - - - - - ртвыхъ бhсть, и3з8 чрe- ва ѓ- до- ва и3-збa- - - - - ви нaсъ,

I. вe- - - -лі- - - -ю ми- -лcть.

II. и3 подадE мjро- - - -ви вe- лі- -ю ми- - - - - - - - - - - - лcть.

4. mode: I. Dinev, P., Obširen vǎzkresnik II., Sofia, 1949; (Intervals between notes (1=whole note): c-2/3-d-7/6-e-2/3-f-1-g-2/3-a-7/6-h-2/3-c-1-d) II. Obichód nótnago pénija – vsenóščnoje bdénie, Moskva, 1909

I. Свётлу- -ю во- скr- -е - - - -ні- -z пр0- по-вэдь

II. Свётлу- -ю во- скr- е- - - - ні- -z пр0- по-вэдь*

I. t ѓ- -гGе-ла ў-вё- дэвшz го- оD- ни ў- че- ни6- цы,

II. t ѓ- гGе- ла ў- вё-дэвшz го- оD- ни ў- че- ни6- цы,

II. и3 прa-дэднее њ- - - - - суждe- ні- е t- вeргшz,

I. и3 прa-дэ- дне- е њ-су- -ждe- ні- -е t-вe- - - ргшz,

II. ґ- - - пcлwмъ хвaлzщzсz гла-г0-ла- ху:

I. ґ- - пc- - о-лwмъхвa- лz- щz- сz гла- г0- - - -ла- ху:

I. и3-спро-вe- -рже- сz смeрть, во- скR- се хr- т0съ бGъ,

II. и3-спро- вe- ржесz смeрть, воскR- - -се хr- т0съ бGъ,

I. дa- ру- -zй мj- ро- ви вe- - лі- ю ми- -лcть.

II. дa- ру- -zй мj- ро- ви вe- лі- ю ми- -лcть. The first two and the last phrases are similar, in spite of some different rhythmical solutions. In the middle part of the troparia the similarity is obscured by different ordering of the phrases with final tones g and e (es): the bulgarian troparion is ordered e e g e g e, the russian „greek chant“ troparion has es es es g g es. The bulgarian melody climbes higher if needed, the russian one likes not to decline from the prototype melody.

5. mode: I. Dinev, P., Obširen vǎzkresnik II., Sofia, 1949 II. Obichód nótnago pénija – vsenóščnoje bdénie, Moskva, 1909 („gréčeskago rospéva“)

I. Со- -бе- зна- чa- - - льно- - е сл0- - - - во n- ц7Y и3 д¦- - о- - ви,

II. Со- -бе- зна- чa- - - льно- - е сл0- - -во n- ц7Y и3 д¦- - о- - ви,

I. t дв7- -ы р0- - -ждше- - е- -сz на сп7- - -се- - - - ні- - е нa- - - - ше,

II. t дв7- - ы р0- - -ждше- - е- - сz на сп7- - се- - - - -ні- - е нa- - - - -ше,

I. во- -спо- -и1мъ, вё- рні- - -и, и3 по- кло- ни1- - - - мсz:

II. во- спо- -и1мъ, вё- рні- - и, и3 по-кло- - - ни1- - -мсz:

I. ћ- - -кw бl- го-во- ли2 пл0- -ті- ю взh- - -ти на кrтъ и3 смeрть пре- те-рпё- - -ти,

II. ћ- - -кw бl-го- во- ли2 пл0-ті- ю взh- - -ти на кrтъ и3 смeрть пре-те-рпё- - - ти,

I. и3 во-скR- си1- - -ти ў- мe- - -ршы- z слaвнымъ воскr- -е- - ні- - -емъ сво- и1мъ.

II. и3 во-скR- си1- - - ти ўмe- ршы- - -z слaвнымъ воскr- - е- - ні- -емъ сво- и1мъ.

6. mode:

I. Dinev, P., Obširen vǎzkresnik II., Sofia, 1949 (troparion 6. mode), II. Anastasimataron (??), troparion of the 4. mode of P. Lampadarios (Intervals between notes (1=whole note): c-2/3-d-7/6-e-2/3-f-1-g-2/3-a-7/6-h-2/3-c-1-d) III. Obichód nótnago pénija – vsenóščnoje bdénie, Moskva, 1909 (troparion 6. mode „gréčeskago rospéva“)

I. Ѓ-гGельскі- z си6- - лы на гр0- -бэ тво-eмъ, и3 стре- гy-щі- и њ-мертвё-ша:

II.Αγγε- -λι- καί ∆υ-νά- - - -µεις ε- -πί τό µνή-µά σου, καί οι φυ- -λάσσο-ντες α- -πε- νεκρώθη-σαν,

III. Ѓ-гGельскі- z си6- - -лы на гр0- -бэ тво-eмъ, и3 стре- гy-щі- и њмертвёша:

I. и3 сто-s- - - - - -ше м-Rj- -а во гр0- -бэ, и4щущи пре-чc- - -тагw тёла твое- гw2.

II. καί ί- - - - - στατο Μαρί- - α εν τώ τά- - - φω, ζητούσα τό ά-χρα- - ντόν σου σώ-µα.

III. и3 сто-s- - ше м-Rj- -а во гр0- бэ, и4-щущи пре- - чc-тагw тёла тво-е-гw2.

I. плэ- ни1лъ є3- си2 ѓдъ, не и3- ску-си1-всz t не-гw2:

II. Ε- σκύ- - - - - - - λευ- σας τόν Ά- - - - - -δην, µή πει-ρασθείς υπ' αυ-τού,

III. плэ- ни1лъ є3- си2 ѓдъ, не и3- ску-си1-всz t не-гw2:

I. срё-тилъ є3- си2 дв7- - - - - - - -у дa- - ру-zй жи-в0тъ.

II. υ- πή- -ντη- - σας τη Πα- ρθέ- νω, δω-ρού- - µε- -νος τήν ζω- -ήν,

III. срё- -тилъ є3-си2 дв7- - - - - у дa-- ру-zй жи-в0тъ.

I. воскR-сhй и3з8 мeртвыхъ, го- - - - о- Dи, слa- - - ва те- бЁ.

II. ο αναστάς εκ των νεκρών, Κύριε δόξα σοι.

III. воскR- сhй и3з8 мeртвыхъ, го- - - - - о- Dи, слa- - - - - - - ва те- - бЁ. The russian „greek“ chant for troparia of the 6th mode is most similar to the greek troparion of P. Lampadarios in the 1st line. In the second and last lines the similarity is biggest between the russian and bulgarian (of P. Dinev) melodies. In the 3rd and 4th lines the byzantine and russian melodies diverge and the similarity is only fragmental. Nevertheless, the first two and the last lines are enough to prove the byzantine origin of the russian „greek“ troparion of the 6th mode. About the scales we can say the same as in the 2nd and 4th mode.

7. mode:

In the case of the 7th mode we don´t know about any byzantine troparion melody, that could be set as paralel to the russian „greek“ melody. Furthermore, the seventh „greek“ tone troparion has a melody with a very high degree of periodicity – this is a fact that leads as to consider, that this melody is a simplified version, an iteration of two extract phrases, which have to be found in the byzantine database. Among the chants known to us the closest one to the „greek“ troparion is „Theos Kyrios“ (Boh Hospóď) in romanian adaptation, which will serve as a main source for our comparation: I. Obichód nótnago pénija – vsenóščnoje bdénie, Moskva, 1909 („gréčeskago rospéva“)

In C

Разруши1лъ є3си2 кrт0мъ тво-и1мъ смeрть, t-вeрзлъ є3- - си2 разб0- -йни-ку рaй:

A

мm- ро- н0- -си-цамъ плaчь пре- -ло-жи1лъ є3- -си2, B

и3 ґ- пc- -то-лwмъ про- по-вё- -да- ти по-ве- лёлъ є3- - -си2:

A B

ћ-кw во- -скrлъ є3-си2, хr-тE бо-9е, дa-ру- zй мj-ро-ви вe- - -лі- ю ми- - - лcть. II. Anthologhie tom II., Macarie Ieromonahul, Bucureşti, 1827

In B

Du-mne-zeu e- -ste Do- - -mnul şi s-a a- -rǎ- -tat no- - - - uǎ,

bi- ne e- ste cu-vân-tat cel ce vi- - - - - - - ne întru nu- - me- le Do- -mnu- - lui.

Comparation: „In“: Russian „greek“ chant

Romanian „Theos Kyrios“

A: Russian „greek“ chant

Romanian „Theos Kyrios“

B: Russian „greek“ chant

Romanian „Theos Kyrios“ Dinev: troparion 7. mode (end phrase)

8. mode: I. Obichód nótnago pénija – vsenóščnoje bdénie, Moskva, 1909

A B

Съ вы- со-ты2 снизшeлъ є3- -си2, бl-го- -у-тр0- -бне,

A B

по- гре- -бe-ні- -е прі- -sлъ є3- -си2 три- -днe- вно- -е,

C

да нaсъ сво-бо- -ди1- - - ши стра-стeй,

Az B

жи- во- тE и3 воскr-е-ні- -е нa-ше го- D- -и, слa- - -ва те-бЁ.

II. Anthologhie, Macarie Ieromonahul, Bucureşti, 1827, 2 versions

1. A B

Di-ntru î- - nǎ- - lţi- me te-ai po- -go- rât Mi- - - - - -lo- - - sti- - - - - - ve,

2. A B

în-gro- -pa- - re ai lu- -at de trei zi- - - - - - le,

3. C

ca sǎ ne mâ- ntu- -ieşti pre noi din pa- - - - - - - - timi

4. Az B

ce- la ce eşti vi- a- - - - ţǎ şi în-vi- e- - rea noa- - -strǎ, Doa-mne sla- vǎ ţi- - - - - e

The structure of the russian „greek chant“ troparion is identic with the structure of the byzantine troparia. The basic phrase is A+B, its repeating is interrupted before the end by a phrase C and the troparion is concluded again by a modified Az+B. Comparation of the phrase A+B withe respective parts in romanian troparia shows, that it is the same melody but one third higher in the russian version (and with small rhythmical differences). A+B: 2. line in romanian troparia – 2 versions // 1. line of the russian troparion

In the phrase C is the comparation with romanian troparia possible, but not convincing

without konwledge of some other facts. For our purpose it is enough to observe, that a declamation in the first part uses a note f in the romanian troparia and the note b in the russian one – the difference is a fourth. For a detailed comparation we shall use a better example, the forelast phrase C from the greek theotokion and its bulgarian adaptation:

C: Theotokion, forelast phrase, P. Lampadarios // Theotokion, forelast phrase, P. Dinev //

phrase C in the russian „greek chant“ troparion // phrase C in the russian „greek chant“ theotokion

The first part of the phrase is hard to be compared. But the concluding part is in all cases identical – with a difference of a fourth, which does not change the melody in the russian fourth-invariant diatonic scale. The russian troparion of the 8. mode is not a simple transposition of the greek one, but it combines two different transpositions for different phrases.

Conclusion:

For a comparation we have used an accesible material mostly from internet sources. Maybe after a better search it would be possible to find more and closer examples, but also those used in this study are enough to prove the fact, that the russian “greek chant” is indeed a chant of greek origin. In the case of troparia the melodies are a little bit simplified and in 5 from 8 tones a third higher (in the 8th mode only partially). No other radical changes happened and still the melodies resemble enough their byzantine counterparts.

The russian version of the greek chant needs not to be written as “greek chant”, and on the other side, if the greek chant in Russia can be dated to the 17th century, the contemporary (in the books after the reform in 1814) byzantine melodies for troparia have not broken their continuity with the ancient tradition.