The TIPOGRAFSKY USTAV and the BLAGOVESHCHENSKY KONDAKAR - SURVIVING WITNESSES to the EARLIEST SLAVIC LITURGICAL AND MUSICAL PRACTICES

IMS-RASMB, Series Musicologica Balcanica 4, 2023. e-ISSN: 2654-248X The TIPOGRAFSKY USTAV and the BLAGOVESHCHENSKY KONDAKAR - SURVIVING WITNESSES to the EARLIEST SLAVIC LITURGICAL MUSICAL PRACTICES by Gregory Myers https://doi.org/10.26262/smb.v0i4.8109 ©2023 The Author. This is an open access article under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivatives International 4.0 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (CC BYNC-ND 4.0), which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided that the articles is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. The copyright for eventually included manuscripts belongs to the manuscript holders. Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… The TIPOGRAFSKY USTAV and the BLAGOVESHCHENSKY KONDAKAR - SURVIVING WITNESSES to the EARLIEST SLAVIC LITURGICAL and MUSICAL PRACTICES Gregory Myers Abstract Among the oldest surviving musical sources of the Eastern Slavs, the Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar, 11th and 12th centuries, respectively, testify to the richness and intensity of the cultural foment of those early centuries following Christianization. These manuscripts represent a high point in the liturgical and musical development of the period and evince an apparent nascent Slavic musical autonomy. Appended to their kondakarian cycles are octomodally ordered collections of miscellaneous chant fragments whose corollaries can be found only in the oldest Byzantine sources. The following introduces and compares a selection of this repertory in a bid to glimpse the ritual and musical practices in place at this early critical juncture in the liturgical development of Slavia Orthodoxa. Keywords: Rus’, Novgorod, Bulgaria, Messina, asmatikon, kondakar, typikon, Studite, Constantinople, Anabathmoi, Pasapnoaria, Polyeleoi, Exapostilaria, kathisma, Alleluiarion, hypopsalmoi, Triodion, refrain This paper takes a first step on a long and circuitous journey along the periphery of the Byzantine Empire, where shared musical customs promulgated by common liturgical practices united Slavia Orthodoxa in those centuries following Christianization at the end of the 9th century. It initiates a search for a common archetype progenitor for the chanting practices in use throughout the Slavic world during this early period. From the ItaloGreek cloisters of Calabria and Messina, traversing the Eparchy of Okhrid in the Balkans, to Novgorodian Rus’, the ritual observances of the Orthodox Slavs were liturgically and musically connected and unified. As witnesses, the focus is on two of the most important extant East Slavic musical sources from this time: the Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar (hereafter TU and BK respectively). Dating from the late 11th and early 12th centuries, respectively, they are among the oldest surviving musical manuscripts from Rus’. As the musical manifestation of Byzantium’s 72 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… hegemony over the Eastern Slavs during this formative period, their existence marked a high point in early Slavic liturgical and musical development. A comparative examination of contemporaneous Byzantine musical sources reveals the Slavs’ dependence on established concurrent Byzantine practices. Both manuscripts afford us a glimpse at the customs of a particular time and place; they stand as testimonials to the richness and intensity of cultural foment of those early centuries, only to vanish in the late 13th century when a steady process of extirpation of Byzantine archaisms from the Slavic rituals began, yet were never fully completed. Stimulated by historical events and liturgical reforms of this time, indigenous traditions gradually emerged, eventually supplanting the old models. But for this 200-year window, they represent the culmination of well-established traditions disseminated across a vast geographical area. Where and when exactly do the customs and musical practices they record originate; what stage in the evolutionary development of Byzantine ritual, music, and musical notation do they represent, how did these customs reach Rus’ where they flourished? Any answers would likely lay among the Balkan Slavs. Slavist Sergius Temchinas claims that the extant Old Church Slavonic manuscripts dating from the 11th-14th century (approximately 180 sources) serve as the basis for discerning the geographical dissemination of the different liturgical types.1 Noting the significant contrast between those from the Eastern and Western Bulgarian principalities, he concludes that extant Bulgarian manuscripts from the Eastern quarters reflect exclusive cathedral practices, (for example, the early 11th-century Enina Apostle), in place until the eve of the liturgical reforms in the second half of the 13th century.2 The conflation of cathedral and monastic elements shaping the contents of our two Rus’ sources suggests that their antigraph originated in the same Bulgaria’s Eastern sector. This would, therefore, antedate the liturgical traditions for which they were the musical exponents to the Bulgarian kingdom at the end of the 10th century; evidence, however, is slender and circumstantial. Sergius Temchinas, Reconstructing the Structure of the First Old Church Slavonic Liturgical Miscellany (Vilnius, 2001), 31-32. 2 Sofia, Bulgaria, Sts. Cyril and Methodius National Library, manuscript no. 1144. 1 73 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… The Tipografsky Ustav3 As the oldest surviving fragment of the Alexian~Studite ordinal as well as Rus’ oldest musical manuscript - one of only five surviving fully notated Palaeoslavonic kondakaria - the TU occupies a particularly exalted place in the medieval Slavonic manuscript orbit. Likely it was the book used in a large monastic establishment within an urban setting. Even as the oldest, the TU was already a second-generation source - not unlike the Ostromir Gospel from the same century - with a full complement of neumated chants for the fixed and moveable church calendar, including the first saints – the Passion-Bearers Boris and Gleb - from Rus’, in the East Slavic recension of the Church Slavonic language. Its system of musical notation was already fully formed. The Blagoveshchensky Kondakar4 Exclusively a musical source from the early 12th century, the BK is composed in a very distinct ornate hand, probably produced under special patronage for a princely library, and used in a wealthy urban parish setting; its frequent bilingual Greek/Slavonic content reflected unique local liturgical and musical customs and is a source likely engineered for cathedral use by highly trained singers. The Miscellanies The most revealing chant repertories preserved in both documents warranting special attention are those peripheral to their main contents. Following the kontakion cycles in both manuscripts, are octomodally ordered collections of chant fragments, some with mixed musical notation, others unnotated. Collectively, they provide an abundance of items for comparison. Folios 97r-109v of the TU preserve the Alleluiarion Cycle (i.e., the Anabathmoi or Kathismata of the Oktoechos) for the Sunday Office. Unfortunately, it is incomplete, breaking off at Mode V, with much unnotated. The BK categorizes similar repertory, somewhat haphazardly, in sections by mode and without rubrics. Its miscellany is comprised of four subsections, with octomodally ordered collections of Pasapnoaria, Polyeleoi, Azmatik, and Exapostilaria. In addition, are musical settings of the ferial Trisagion (ff. 104r/v), a Megalynarion for the Entrance of the Theotokos, (f. 106v), and the Mode V Boris Uspenskii, Andreevich, ed. Tipografskii ustav: ustav s kondakarem kontsa Xl-nachala XII veka. t. 1 Faksimil'noe vosproizvedeniet. 2 Nabornoe vosproizvedenie rukopisi, t. 3 Issledovaniia (Moscow: lazyki slavianskikh kul'tur, 2006). 4 A. Dostal, H. Rothe and Erich Trapp, eds. Bausteine zur Geschichte der Literatur bei den Slawen: Der altrussische Kondakars: Auf der Grundlage des Blagovešèenskij Nizegorodskij Kondakars. T. 2. Blagovešèenskij Kondakars (facsimile) (Giessen: Wilhelm Schmitz Verlag, 1976). 3 74 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… Easter Troparion (f. 113v). In his study of the Byzantine Alleluiarion Cycle, Christian Thodberg informs us that the cycles existed in both psaltic (soloist) and asmatic (choral) versions, as well as in long, short, and kalophonic transmissions, for which he provides a detailed description of manuscript sources.5 Known collectively as hypopsalmoi, these collections of psalm fragments were inherent to the Constantinopolitan akolouthia asmatiki. They were sung antiphonally with a musically autonomous alleluia refrain, and were present in the psalters of the 9th-11th centuries. They are characterized by stock refrains, some given extended melismatic treatment through an additive process of non-textual intercalations, resulting in highly distorted texts. Their manner of performance is laid out on each folio: See Figures 1 and 2 below. Figure 16 The Miscellanies: A. TU f. 98r, Anabathmoi, Mode I; Christian Thodberg, Der Byzantinische Alleluiarionzyklus, Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae Subsidia VIII (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1966): 21-27. 5 6 V. Metallov, Russkaia Simiografiia, (Moscow 1912); Dostal, et al. Blagovešèenskij Kondakar (facsimile), f. 114r. 75 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… B. BK, f. 114r, the ‘Azmatik’ 76 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… Figure 2 Content Comparison of the Miscellanies © G. Myers Tipografsky Ustav, ff. 98r-109v Kathismata/Alleluia of the Oktoechos, Modes I-V Blagoveshchensky Kondakar, ff. 104r-128v Trisagion Pasapnoaria Resurrection Troparion from the Oktoechos Megalynarion, Entrance of the Theotokos Theotokion Alleluia Triadikon 1 Triadikon 2 Polyeleoi Easter Troparion, Mode V Azmatik Alleluiarion-Kathisma from the Oktoechos Exapostilaria Gradual Antiphon I + verses Troparion B + verses Doxology + Alleluia Gradual Antiphon II + verses Troparion + verses Doxology + Alleluia Gradual Antiphon III + verses Troparion + verses Doxology + Alleluia Resurrection Prokeimenon + verses Pasapnoarion + verses Exapostilarion Each section of both manuscripts furnished the essential sung items for the weekly Sunday office. Forming a homogenous whole in both manuscripts, the musical numbers appear linked across the genres through the use of recurrent stock melodic patterns and common refrains. This commonality not only connects both manuscript repertories but also highlights important distinctions in their musical treatment. 77 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… Byzantine Musical Sources For comparison, the Alleluiarion repertory has substantial representation among Palaeoand Middle-Byzantine musical sources. To establish a baseline for comparison, representative Byzantine musical manuscripts from the 11th century, with a similar chant body have been enlisted. While no single source provides an exact match for the contents of the Palaeoslavonic sources – there are expected deviations - the oldest transmissions are a corollary for the TU; later sources reflect the concurrent liturgical reforms. For our purposes, from the manuscript list, three representative Byzantine musical manuscripts supply comparable material: two Palaeobyzantine Coislin sources, Γβ35 and Sinai 1237, and the Middle Byzantine Vaticanus Graecus 1606, an Italo-Greek asmatikon-psaltikon hearkening from the scriptorium of San Salvatore of Messina. Their contents accord with the Slavic manuscripts and serve here as stylistic ‘touchstones’. The Tipografsky Ustav (TU) Turning first to the TU, in the opening of his “[The] Antiphons of the Oktoechos, Oliver Strunk writes, In the Byzantine rite, at the Sunday morning office, immediately following the recitation of the Psalter and just before the prokeimenon and the morning Gospel, the 2 choirs alternate in singing the Anabathmoi of the mode, a set of 3 or 4 little antiphons on the Gradual Psalms… In all, there are 8 such sets – one in each of the 8 modes, one for each of the 8 Sundays of the modal cycle.7 Each of the TU’s psalm settings or Kathismata was performed octomodally and chanted to a set of nine melodic models according to Theodore Studites’ 72-Alleluia cycle. Our focus here is on the refrain material - the hypopsalmoi and alleluia. The illustration in Figure 3 is from the First Kathisma, Mode III in the TU’s Alleluia Cycle, compared here with transmissions from manuscripts S1273 and VG. As evidence of contemporaneous customs in the Balkans, the singing of hypopsalmoi in a like manner is also found at the Good Friday Office in the 13th-century South Slavic Orbelski Triodion, well-established practices likely began much earlier on those territories. These would have been rendered antiphonally by a divided or two choirs, a feature consistent with all Byzantine sources preserving this repertory.8 Oliver Strunk, “The Antiphons of the Oktoechos,” in Essays on Music in the Byzantine World, (New York: W. W, Norton & Co., 1977): 165. 8 For the layout of hypopsalmoi-refrains for the Good Friday Hours, see G. Myers, Music and Ritual in Medieval Slavia Orthodoxa. The Exaltation of the Holy Cross. Varia Musicologica 23 (Bern: Peter Lang 2018): 137-138. 7 78 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… Particularly notable is the treatment of the alleluia refrain which is employed after each verse of the fixed antiphons of the Gradual psalm, a custom corresponding with Byzantine praxis. While we can recognize and account for the similarities with contemporaneous Byzantine transmissions and practices there are some notable differences. An examination of the TU folios reveals a remarkable adaptation process undertaken by the Slavic scribe. The melodic material for the psalm text and alleluia, troparion, and the stichoi is recycled and reused, an economical compositional process that is unique to this manuscript transmission and one that distinguishes it from its Greek counterparts. It could be construed as a form of troping. Figure 39 Musical Anatomy of the Kathisma, Mode III © G. Myers Excerpted from Uspenskii, ed., Tipografskii ustav, f. 103v, mss Sinai no. 1273 (Palaeobyzantine), f. 84r, and VG (Vaticanus graecus 1606, Middle Byzantine), f.157r. 9 79 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… This was a feature first noted by Strunk, who writes: • In the Slavic-speaking countries, the verses and doxologies of the Anabathmoi were at first recited to the same simple tones that were used for the verses of other troparia.” • they were followed by Alleluia refrains adapted to the melodies of Theodore’s paraphrases…. To sing the Anabathmoi with Alleluia refrains would be to tie them in with the reading of the Psalter that precedes them, for in former times the psalms recited on Sunday mornings were regularly chanted with Alleluia refrains that followed each distinction of the text.” • the verses and doxologies of the Anabathmoi were at first recited to the simple tones that were used for the verses of other troparia… they were followed by Alleluia refrains adapted to troparia, not only an instance of recycling and integration but the hint of an even more archaic syllabic underpinning. If this was the case the extensive melismatic accretion was a later addition or an option.10 This deployment of text and neumes had a unifying function that provided seamless links and smooth transitions between each statement of the verses, features we recognize in the corresponding sections of both miscellanies. In his 1979 study of the Gonyklisia or kneeling service for Pentecost, Dimitri Conomos proposed that the melismatic chants of the old cathedral office were supported by an archaic syllabic underpinning.11 This also resounded with Strunk in his remarks above. We may add that these same simple tones could have provided syllabic support for the highly florid settings of the BK whose ‘Azmatik” is discussed below. The Blagoveshchensky Kondakar (BK) ‘Azmatik’ The bewildering proliferation of hypopsalmoi comprising the BK’s Azmatik, many of which also appear in the TU, furnishes substantial additional material for comparison, liturgically, musically, and stylistically. Literally meaning ‘chanted’, the Azmatik, occupies seven folios, ff. 114r-121v. It is an octomodally-arranged collection of psalm fragments, each with a recurrent alleluia refrain. While the distribution of the material and its manner of performance appears derived from the old cathedral chanted office Strunk, “The Antiphons,” 190. Dimitri Conomos, “Music for the Evening Office on Whitsunday,” in Les Actes du XVe Congrès Internationale d’Ètudes Byzantines, Athènes, Septembre 1976; I Art et Archeologie, (Athens, 1979): 467. 10 11 80 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… most notably the proliferation of the refrain ‘Tin Ikumeni, Alleluia’ not found in the TU each psalm text and melodic fragment accords with Studite monastic psalmodic practices, like the TU (see below page 13). The contents of the BK’s ‘Azmatik’ are presented in Figure 4 table below. While the likely origin for its use was Constantinople’s Hagia Sophia, current research by liturgical scholars has called into question the impact of the Great Church ordinal on medieval Eastern Slavic liturgical practices. Michael Zheltov has stated that the ordinal was never present in Rus’ during this time.12 He concedes that some (but not all) Byzantine cathedral elements were introduced and observed - implying a certain Slavic fore-knowledge of the ordinal and cathedral practices, likely the result of South Slavic influence - but syncretically adapted to East Slavic sacred rituals, via the Studite filter having undergone liturgical, musical and cultural ‘acclimation.’ Michael Zheltov, “Chiny vecherni i utreni epokhi.”Bogoslovskie Trudy, vyp. 43-44 (2012): 443. 12 v drevnerusskikh sluzhebnikakh studiiskoi 81 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… Figure 413 The Blagoveshchensky Kondakar ‘Azmatik’, Mode I Partitioning of Psalm Text, Intercalations and Alleluia © G. Myers Hypopsalmos Text Раби господа По вьсеи земли Тин икѹмениии О феѡс мѹ Слава теееебе боже Тин икѹмениии Єноли кааардиа мѹ Помилѹи мѧ боже помилѹии мѧ Тин ииикѹмениии Тин ииикѹмени Слава тебе ееееееее бо ооо же еее Иерѹ ฀฀฀฀฀฀฀ са а ли и ме ееее еееееееееее И свѧтѹ ฀฀฀฀ мѹ ฀ дѹ ฀฀ хѹ Melismatic Insertion (‘trope’) Alleluia Cadential Refrain алееннѣѣ аалееннееее аааааалееннееее лѹиа лѹг฀а лѹгиа алеенаанееннеее аленѣее алѣнанѣенанѣенанѣѣѣнанѣѣнанѣ ѣѣ аленанѣеньнанѣнанѣѣѣ аалеенаанѣѣее аааааааааааленеее лѹгиа лѹгиа лѹгиа аленанееньнаненанѣѣѣ ооиноотоонноонноѣѣньньнѣньньн ѣньньтанѣѣѣѣѣ ааааалѣнааанеееее лѹгиа лѹгиа лѹгиа ааааааааааааааааааалѣнанѣѣѣ лѹгиа лѹгиа лѹгиа лугиа Liturgist Aleksei Pentkovskiy goes even further in his study “Ohrid na Rusi”, in which he questions equally the liturgically defining roles of both Constantinopolitan and Alexian~Studite ordinals, noting the divergencies within the same typikon tradition. He claims the Azmatik was connected more with the chanting of the Psalter in the monastic office as determined by the Italo-Greek recension of the Studite ordinal family. Whereas, the Alexian~Studite transmission, to distinguish it, regulated the octomodal chanting of 13 Dostal, et al. Blagovešèenskij Kondakar (facsimile), ff.114r-115r. 82 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… the kathismata as in the TU. This implies that two manifestations of the Studite ordo could have been employed on Slavic territories around the same time, and could account for the disparities between our two miscellanies.14 Whatever its liturgical foundation, contemporary Russian scholars consider the BK’s Azmatik as evidence of the impact of the chanted cathedral office on the monastic order of service.15 Figure 5, below, is folio 116r from the BK’s Azmatik with its highly florid treatment of the psalm text and extensive textual distortion. The transliterated Greek phrase followed by its Slavonic transliteration, is unique to this manuscript. Both share the same neumation; the statements are interrupted by an interpolated alleluia. Figure 516 Aleksei Pentkovskiy, ““’Okhrid na Rusi’”: Drevnerusskie bogosluzhebnye knigi kak istochnik dlia rekonstruktsii liturgicheskoi traditsii Okhridsko-Prespanskogo regiona v X-XI stoletiiakh,” in Zbornik na trudovi od megunarodniot nauchen sobir, Okrid, 3-4 Oktomvri 2013 (Skopje 2014): 48. 15 See Irina Lozovaya and Irina Starikova, “Asmatik,” in Pravoslavnaia Entsikopediia. Т.3, (Moscow, 2008): 612. 16 A. Dostal, et al. Blagovešèenskij Kondakar, f.116r. 14 83 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… The BK’s peculiar notational mix which supports extensive non-textual insertions, creates a highly complex pastiche-like texture that is formulaic, detailed, and nuanced; it is unique to the BK and has no known Byzantine corollary or precedent. Even though it cannot be transcribed, an inspection reveals the structural complexity, and organizational properties, including interlocking neumatic/melodic patterns and internal repetition of figures, evidence of a high degree of compositional sophistication. A closer examination also reveals a textual and musical organization more cohesive than it first appears. Recurring patterns are regularly recast for each mode, with mode I as the simplest. Figure 6, below, presents the opening three fragments. Each shares the same neumation and ‘melody’. However, with each successive mode, melismatic accretion is increasingly compounded resulting in overly distorted texts. Hypopsalmos 17 Figure 617 + Bipartite Alleluia Refrain © G. Myers Dostal, et al. Blagovešèenskij Kondakar (facsimile), Azmatik, f.114r, detail. 84 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… Figure 718 Figure 7 shows the structural ‘anatomy’ of a Mode III BK Alleluia + Hypopsalmos Verse Fragment, wherein we see the standardized portioning of the chant into the alleluia, melismatic insertion-extension, medial and final cadential composites patterns. © G. Myers In the aforementioned study of the Gonyklisia, Conomos raises two important points which can be brought to bear in this study. (1) Musical documents from the Empire’s periphery preserve the archaic urban cathedral ritual for Vespers even while the Palestinian ordinal was on the ascendency and enjoying “unchallenged hegemony over the Orthodox world.” Indeed, monastic sources from the early 11th century (i.e., Vatopedi 1488) display features that distinguish the two practices, monastic and urban cathedral. 18 Dostal, et al. Blagovešèenskij Kondakar (facsimile), Mode III, f.116r. 85 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… (2) Concerning the non-textual insertions in Byzantine sources from the 12th century onwards, and our Palaeoslavonic sources from the 11th century, he notes: (a) the precise regularity of their application, and, (b) their recurrence at identical points in the musical construction.19 We recognize these features in the florid settings of both sources. That they appear in later transmissions, he attributes to a reluctance to change and “a more conservative musical and liturgical tradition was to be found in the distant parts of the Orthodox world,” in these instances, the Italo-Greek cloisters and the medieval Slavs. Indeed, for the Gonyklisia the recurrent Tin Ikumeni, alleluia refrains, a remnant from the cathedral office, is recorded in the rubrics of Messina monastic Typikon (ff. 246r/v).20 Generations of Byzantine musical manuscripts preserve the music in this cathedral variant, furnishing a stylistic connection to the material in the BK. Figure 8 below shows the single transmission of the Tin Ikumeni, alleluia, Mode II plagal for the Gonyklisia Office from another Coislin source,  where it has been paired with the Mode VI version from the Azmatik. Both settings are highly florid, with as many points of contact as well as divergencies. Worth noting, the BK inserts two additional psalm fragments within the alleluia, where the Byzantine setting features extensive melismatic distortion. The psalm fragment could even recycle the same alleluia melody fragment, and again be construed as a form of troping. Dimitri Conomos, “Music for the Evening Office on Whitsunday,” 458-459. Miguel, Arranz, Le Typikon du Saint-Sauveur à Messine. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 201 (Rome, 1969): 278-279. 19 20 86 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… Figure 821 A comparison of the ‘Tin Ikumeni” refrain from manuscripts Γβ 35 and the BK. © G. Myers 21 Mss. Γβ f. 34v and ms. Dostal, et al. Blagovešèenskij Kondakar (facsimile), ff.119v-120r. 87 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… The TU and BK – Musical Treatment of the Refrain Compared Figure 9 shows this shared compositional practice, wherein a tabulation of the two Slavonic transmissions of a Mode IV Doxology + alleluia refrain, from the TU and BK respectively, with no apparent liturgical connection find their closest match. This additive adaptational process of paraphrasing and integration creates a seamless musical texture. The process repeats for each mode with the syllabication of the alleluia corresponding to the psalm texts in Greek sources. Figure 922 Treatment of the Doxology + Alleluia, Mode IV © G. Myers Treatment of Hypopsalmos Refrain, Mode III Uspenskii, ed., Tipografskii ustav, f.103v; Dostal, et al. Blagovešèenskij Kondakar (facsimile), f. 115v; TU, f.107v and BK f.116v. 22 88 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… This process of standardization through the use of recurrent stock melodic figures is particularly evident at cadence points; the same or similar patterns are cycled and recycled. The melismatically extended Alleluia refrain in both collections appears autonomous, detaching and migrating between hymn types regardless of modal designation. Conclusions The medieval Slavs not only straddled the two dominant liturgical traditions of the Eastern Church: Constantinople and Jerusalem, having customized and localized them to fit specific liturgical needs but embraced different aspects within one, i.e., Studite. While all five kondakaria represent a common East Slavic liturgical/musical heritage, the result of a unique set of conditions in Kievan and Novgorodian Rus’ at this time, the tradition to which they testify was is in full accord with neither the Great Church nor the Studite ordinal. In lieu of a Byzantine prototype, their creation could have shared the same non-Studite practices as those that shaped the Book of Ilia and the Novgorodian Putjata Menaion, two precious East Slavic sources also dating from the 11th century.23 These folios afford a glance at these early Slavic sacred music practices as of the 11th century when contacts with the South Slavs were also at their zenith. The miscellanies bear witness to a unique chapter in the development and dissemination of Byzantine chant, chant book, paleography, and codicology among the Slavs at this earliest juncture. They cast light on music and ritual at its most sophisticated and could constitute a missing link in the evolutionary development of the notation, transmission of a chant body, and manuscript type. The tradition to which they testify remained almost static from the time of reception, affixed in time, having eschewed the more rapid evolutionary development taking place at the heart of the empire. The Koukouzelean reforms of the 14th century, which marked a historical and liturgical ‘threshold’, and the advent of Kalophonia in Byzantium bypassed by the Eastern Slavs, who had already embarked on a different developmental path. The 14th century also marks a distancing in the liturgical and musical practices of Rus’ and the Balkan Slavs, one likely determined by historical upheavals. In Byzantium, these reforms advanced new and emerging chanting techniques, all the while continuing to build on earlier practices; others were repressed or subordinated. Moscow, Russian Archive of Ancient Acts (RGADA) No. 137 and St. Petersburg, Russian National Library Sofia Collection, No. 102. 23 89 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… Manuscript witnesses have shown that the most archaic elements survived on the Novgorodian territories as late as the 15th-16th centuries, where they can be seen to have established a continuing, unbroken historical link with the past. Such antique practices continued to be observed among the Eastern Slavs who resolutely preserved and perpetuated them well into later epochs. 24 For the earlier period, in this case, the contents of the TU and BK miscellanies, testify to the widespread dissemination of established Byzantine practices at an early high point in their development, one attained at least two centuries anterior to the liturgical reforms throughout the Slavic middle ages in the second half of the 13 th century. Their musical content is evidence of a successful synthesis achieved and their contribution to the emergence of a distinctly Slavic sacred musical identity. We may conclude that, owing to this inherent conservatism, these Slavonic documents from the northern-most outpost of the Empire’s influence and the point farthest from the center of reform and change, preserve the oldest transmissions of Byzantine chant and ritual, establishing a long line of descent from this time. Reference List Arranz, Miguel. Le Typikon du Saint-Sauveur à Messine. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 201. Rome, 1969. Brazhnikov, M. V. Blagovešèensky Kondakars: Russian National Library, St. Petersburg, Ms. No. Q.п.I. 22. Blagoveshchensky Kondakar’. Vstupitel’naia stat’ia, primechaniia, sverka ukazatelei, podbor illiustratsii, N. S. Sereginoi. SPB: ID “Petropolis/ Rossiiskii institute istorii iscusstv, 2015. Conomos, Dimitri. “Music for the Evening Office on Whitsunday.” In Les Actes du XVe Congrès Internationale d’Ètudes Byzantines, Athènes, Septembre 1976; I Art et Archeologie. Athens, 1979: 453-469. Crvenkovska Emilija and Liljana Makarijoska. Orbelski triod. stari tekstove X. Skopje, Macedonia: Inst. za mak. jazik "K. M," 2010. Dostal, A., H. Rothe and Erich Trapp. Eds. Bausteine zur Geschichte der Literatur bei den Slawen: Der altrussische Kondakars: Auf der Grundlage des Blagovešèenskij Nizegorodskij For example, this concept has been explored in the doctoral work of Tat’iana Shvets. See her Blagoveshchenskii Kondakar’ – Muzykal’niy Pamiatnik Drevnei Rusi (St. Petersburg 2018), especially her discussion of the Polyeleos, pages 161-196. 24 90 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… Kondakars. T. 2. Blagovešèenskij Kondakars (facsimile). Giessen: Wilhelm Schmitz Verlag, 1976. Frøyshov, S. and Irina Starikova. “Kathisma.” In Православная Энциклопедия. Т.32, Moscow, 2008: 114-119. Krysko, V. B. Il’ina kniga, Rukopis’ RGADA, Tip. 131, Moskva: Izdatel’stvo Indrik, 2005. Metallov, V. Russkaia Simiografiia. Moscow, 1912. Michev, K. and Khr. Khodov, eds. Eninski Apostol – Starobalgarski Pametnik ot XI v. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1965. Myers, Gregory. Music and Ritual in Medieval Slavia Orthodoxa. The Exaltation of the Holy Cross. Varia Musicologica 23. Bern: Peter Lang 2018. Pentkovskiy, Aleksei. ““’Okhrid na Rusi’”: Drevnerusskie bogosluzhebnye knigi kak istochnik dlia rekonstruktsii liturgicheskoi traditsii Okhridsko-Prespanskogo regiona v X-XI stoletiiakh.” In Zbornik na trudovi od megunarodniot nauchen sobir, Okrid, 3-4 Oktomvri 2013, Skopje 2014: 43-65. Shvets, Tat’iana. V. Blagoveshchenskii Kondakar’ – Muzykal’niy Pamiatnik Drevnei Rusi. St. Petersburg 2018. (Doctoral Dissertation) ______. “Repetuar pevcheskoe knigi Kondakar’ v Studiisko-Aleksievskom Ustave.” Vestnik PSTGU: Voprosy istorii i teorii kristianskogo iskusstvo. Vyp. 2 (22) (2016): 69-89. ______. “Azmatik Blagoveshchenskogo Kondakariia// Greko-russkie paralleli.” In K 100_letiiu afonskoi ekspeditsii C. V. Smolenskogo. M., Sankt Peterburg, 2008: 100-132. Starikova, Irina and Irina Lozovaya,. “Asmatik.” In Pravoslavnaia Entsiklopediia. Т.3, Moscow, 2008: 612. Strunk Oliver. “The Antiphons of the Oktoechos.” In Essays on Music in the Byzantine World. New York: W. W, Norton & Co., 1977: 165-190. Temchinas, Sergius. Reconstructing the Structure of the First Old Church Slavonic Liturgical Miscellany. Vilnius, 2001. Thodberg, Christian. Der Byzantinische Alleluiarionzyklus, Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae Subsidia VIII, Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1966. Uspenskii, Boris Andreevich. Ed. Tipografskii ustav: ustav s kondakarem kontsa Xl-nachala XII veka. t. 1 Faksimil'noe vosproizvedeniet. 2 Nabornoe vosproizvedenie rukopisi, t. 3 Issledovaniia. Moscow: lazyki slavianskikh kul'tur, 2006. Vereshchagin, E. M. Ed. Il’ina Kniga. Drevneishii slavianskii bogosluzhebnii sbornik. Moscow: Izdatel’sto Indrik, 2006. 91 Myers, The Tipografsky Ustav and the Blagoveshchensky Kondakar… Zheltov, Michael. “Chiny vecherni i utreni v drevnerusskikh sluzhebnikakh studiiskoi epokhi.”Bogoslovskie trudy. 2012. vyp. 43-44; 443-470. Biography: Gregory Myers (PhD, MLIS) is an independent musicologist, publisher and bibliographer residing in Vancouver, Canada. Specializing in the music of Russia and the Balkans, he researches, publishes and lectures on music in the medieval period and postWorld War II. Myers has held research fellowships at the Moscow Conservatory, Dumbarton Oaks Research Library, Ohio State University, University of Illinois, Center for Advanced Study in Sofia, Bulgaria, and the Hill Museum and Manuscript Library, St. John’s University, Minnesota. 92