Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5c569c448b-8lphq Total loading time: 0.588 Render date: 2022-07-06T01:29:56.889Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

The lost chant tradition of early Christian Jerusalem: some possible melodic survivals in the Byzantine and Latin chant repertories*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2008

Peter Jeffery
Affiliation:
University of Delaware/Harvard University

Extract

The medieval chant traditions of the Eastern and Western churches can generally be traced back to about the tenth century, when the earliest surviving notated manuscripts were created. In these earliest sources, the various traditions are already distinct from each other and fully formed, each with thousands of chants that are assigned to at least eight modes and belong to dozens of melody types or families, carefully distributed across the daily, weekly and annual cycles of a complicated liturgical calendar. Yet we have hardly any information at all as to how these traditions evolved into the highly complex state in which we first find them. Where did they come from and when did they originate? How and when did they achieve the relatively fixed form in which we know them? Questions such as these have been important in chant research during the last thirty years, ever since Willi Apel outlined what he called ‘the “central” problem of the chant, that is, the question concerning its origin and development’. But attempts to investigate these questions have often been conceived too narrowly, overlooking as much evidence as they include or more. For instance, many scholars have written about ‘the central problem’ as if it belonged mainly to Gregorian chant and its close relative, the Old Roman or special Urban repertory, when in fact the origins and early history of almost every tradition of Eastern and Western chant are equally obscure.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Apel, W., Gregorian Chant (Bloomington, IN, 1958), p. 507Google Scholar. See also Apel, , ‘The Central Problem of Gregorian Chant’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 9 (1956), pp. 118–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 See, for instance, Peters, F. E., Jerusalem: The Holy City in the Eyes of Chroniclers, Visitors, Pilgrims, and Prophets from the Days of Abraham to the Beginning of Modern Times (Princeton, NJ, 1985)Google Scholar; Purvis, J. D., Jerusalem, the Holy City: A Bibliography (Metuchen, NJ, 1988)Google Scholar.

3 On the languages of early Christianity see: Mohrmann, C., Études sur le latin des chrétiens, 4 vols., Storia e Letteratura 65, 87, 103, 143 (Rome, 19581977)Google Scholar; Quasten, J., Patrology, i: The Beginnings of Patristic Literature (Utrecht, Antwerp and Westminster, MD, 1962), pp. 20–2Google Scholar; Quacquarelli, A., ed., Complementi interdisciplinari di patrologia (Rome, 1989)Google Scholar; Jaeger, W., Early Christianity and Greek Paideia (Cambridge, MA, 1961)Google Scholar; den Boer, W. et al. , eds., Romanitas et christianitas: Studia Iano Henrico Waszink A.D. VI Kal. Nov. A. MCMLXXIII XIII lustra complenti oblata (Amsterdam and London, 1973)Google Scholar; Metzgr, B. M., The Early Versions of the New Testament: Their Origin, Transmission, and Limitations (Oxford, 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Klauser, T., A Short History of the Western Liturgy: An Account and Some Reflections, trans. Halliburton, J., 2nd edn (Oxford, 1979), pp. 1824Google Scholar; Vogel, C., Medieval Liturgy: An Introduction to the Sources, trans. and rev. Storey, W.G. and Rasmussen, N.K., NPM Studies in Church Music and Liturgy (Washington, DC, 1986), pp. 293–7, 368–72Google Scholar; Sanders, G. and Van Uytfanghe, M., Bibliographie signalétique du latin des chrétiens, Corpus Christianorum: Lingua Patrum 1(Turnhout, 1989)Google Scholar.

4 See my article, The Sunday Office of Seventh-Century Jerusalem in the Georgian Chantbook (Iadgari): A Preliminary Report’, Studia Liturgica, 21 (1991), pp. 5275Google Scholar. Much information will be published in my book Liturgy and Chant in Early Christian Jerusalem (Fourth-Twelfth Centuries).

5 Strunk, O., Essays on Music in the Byzantine World (New York, 1977), p. 39Google Scholar. Strunk actually intended to describe Byzantine chant, lumping together all the Greek chant repertories indiscriminately. It is in fact more accurate to recognise that the city of Byzantium or Constantinople was only one of many centres of liturgical chant in Greek, just as Rome was only one of many centres that cultivated liturgical chant in Latin. Of all the Greek centres, neither Byzantium nor Greece proper nor southern Italy exerted as much international influence during the earliest period as Jerusalem and the towns and monasteries surrounding it.

6 See, for instance: Nocent, A., The Liturgical Year, 4 vols., trans. O'Connell, M. J. (Collegeville, MN, 1977)Google Scholar; Wilkinson, J. D., Egeria's Travels to the Holy Land, rev. edn (Jerusalem and Warminster, 1981)Google Scholar; Bradshaw, P., Daily Prayer in the Early Church (London, 1981)Google Scholar; Payne, R. M., ‘Christian Worship in Jerusalem in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries: The Development of the Lectionary, Calendar and Liturgy’ (Ph.D. dissertation, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY, 1981)Google Scholar; Taft, R., The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: The Origins of the Divine Office and its Meaning for Today (Collegeville, MN, 1986)Google Scholar; Talley, T.J., The Origins of the Liturgical Year (New York, 1986)Google Scholar; Baldovin, J., The Urban Character of Christian Worship: The Origins, Development, and Meaning of Stational Liturgy, Orientalia Christiana Analecta 228 (Rome, 1987)Google Scholar; Stevenson, K., Jerusalem Revisited: The Liturgical Meaning of Holy Week (Washington, DC, 1988)Google Scholar; Baldovin, , Liturgy in Ancient Jerusalem, Alcuin/grow Liturgical Study 9 (Bramcote, Nottingham, 1989)Google Scholar.

7 That is, the four authentic modes (modes 1, 3, 5 and 7 in the familiar Latin numbering) are numbered 1, 2, 3, 4. The plagal modes (Latin 2, 4, 6, 8) are numbered 1 plagal, 2 plagal, 3 plagal, 4 plagal.

8 See my forthcoming articles: ‘Rome and Jerusalem: From Oral Tradition to Written Repertory in Two Ancient Liturgical Centers’, From Rome to the Passing of the Gothic: Festschrift in Honor of David Hughes, ed. Boone, G. (Cambridge, MA, forthcoming)Google Scholar; ‘Jerusalem and Rome (and Constantinople): The Musical Heritage of Two Great Cities in the Formation of the Medieval Chant Traditions’, Cantus Planus: Papers Read at the Fourth Meeting, Pécs, Hungary, 3–8 September 1990, ed. Dobszay, L. et al. (Budapest, 1992), pp. 163–74Google Scholar.

9 The more important sermons of Jerusalem origin can conveniently be listed according to the number assigned them in Clavis Patrum Graecorum (hereafter CPG), ed. Geerard, M., 5 vols. (Turnhout, 19741987)Google Scholar: (1) Cyril of Jerusalem (bishop c.ad 351–87), Catecheses (CPG, 3585), Mystagogiae (CPG, 3586, 3622); (2) Hesychius of Jerusalem (d. after 450), Homiliae (CPG, 6565–81), see also his Commentaries on the psalms and odes (CPG, 6552–5); (3) Chrysippus of Jerusalem (fifth century; CPG, 6705–8); (4) Theognius of Jerusalem (c. 460), Homilia in Ramos Palmarum (CPG, 7378); (5) Peter of Jerusalem (bishop 524–52; CPG, 7017–18), see also van Esbroeck, M., ‘L'homélie de Pierre de Jérusalem et la fin de l'Origénisme palestinien en 551’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 51 (1985), pp. 3359Google Scholar; (6) Timotheus of Jerusalem (sixth century; CPG, 7405–10); (7) Sophronius of Jerusalem (bishop 634–9 CPG, 7637–43); (8) John Damascene (c. 675–c. 749; CPG, 8057–68). For other sermons, many of them anonymous, see CPG, 1685, 1698–1701, 4740, 6515, 6712, 6715, 6917–18, 7021, 7815, 7825. Extensive discussion of the value of sermon evidence for reconstructing the early history of liturgical chant will be found in my forthcoming book Prophecy Mixed with Melody: From Early Christian Psalmody to Gregorian Chant.

voyage (itinéraire), Sources Chrétiennes (hereafter SC) 296 (Paris, 1982). The best English translation with commentary is Wilkinson, J., Egeria's Travels to the Holy Land, rev. edn (Jerusalem, 1981)Google Scholar. The generally accepted date of 381–4 is defended in Devos, P., ‘La date du voyage d'Égérie’, Analecta Bollandiana, 85 (1967), pp. 165–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For more recent discussion of her identity and date, see: Domínguez del Val, U., Estudios sobre literatura latina hispano-cristiana, i: 1955–1971 (Madrid, 1986), pp. 102–15Google Scholar; Väänänen, V., Le Journal-épître d'Egérie (Itinerarium Egeriae): Étude linguistique, Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae, ser. B torn. 230 (Helsinki, 1987)Google Scholar, and the review of this book by Löfstedt, B. in Romance Philology, 43 (1990), pp. 448–52Google Scholar; Sivan, H., ‘Who was Egeria? Piety and Pilgrimage in the Age of Gratian’, Harvard Theological Review, 81 (1988), pp. 3972CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Webber, C., ‘Egeria's Norman Homeland’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 92 (1989), pp. 437–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For writings by other early pilgrims, see Itineraria et alia geographica, Corpus Christianorum Series Latina (hereafter CCL), 175–6 (Turnhout, 1965)Google Scholar; Wilkinson, J., Jerusalem Pilgrims Before the Crusades (Jerusalem, 1977)Google Scholar.

11 Jerome's works are listed in Dekkers, E., ed., Clavis Patrum Latinorum, 2nd edn (Steenbrugge, 1961), 580642 (hereafter CPL)Google Scholar. For his activity in Palestine, see Duval, Y. M., ed., Jérôme entre l'Occident et l'Orient: 16e centenaire du départ de Jérôme de Rome et son installation à Bethléem: Actes du Collogue de Chantilly (septembre 1986) (Turnhout, 1988)Google Scholar.

12 For his writings, see CPL, 512–14. The most important one has been edited more recently by Guy, J.-C., Jean Cassien, Institutions cénobitiques, SC 109 (Paris, 1965)Google Scholar. For the significance of his liturgical information, see Taft, , Liturgy of the Hours, p. 407Google Scholar; Bradshaw, , Daily Prayer, p. 186Google Scholar.

13 CPL, 2211. A newer edition of this work is Vita S. Melaniae Junioris, ed. Gorce, D., SC 90 (Paris, 1962)Google Scholar. An English translation was published by Clark, E. A., ed., The Life of Melania the Younger, Studies in Women and Religion 14 (New York, 1984)Google Scholar.

14 Renoux, A., ed., Le codex arménien Jérusalem 121, 2 vols., Patrologia Orientalis (hereafter PO) 35/1 and 36/2 (Turnhout, 1969, 1971)Google Scholar (with French translation). On the date and the manuscripts, see especially vol. 35/1, pp. 169–81, and vol. 36/2, pp. 170–2; Devos, P., ‘L'année de la dédicace de Saint-Étienne à Jérusalem: 439’, Analecta Bollandiana, 101 (1983), pp. 4370CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 See the following articles by Hughes, A., ‘Modal Order and Disorder in the Rhymed Office’, Musica Disciplina, 37 (1983), pp. 2951Google Scholar; Late Medieval Rhymed Offices’, Journal of the Plainsong & Medieval Music Society, 8 (1985), pp. 3349CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Rhymed Offices’, Dictionary of the Middle Ages, ed. Strayer, J. R. et al. , x (New York, 1988), pp. 366–77Google Scholar.

16 Tarchnischvili, M., ed., Le grand lectionnaire de l'église de Jérusalem (Ve-VIIIe siècles), 2 vols. in 4, Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium (hereafter CSCO) 188–9, 204–5 (Louvain, 19561960)Google Scholar (with Latin translation). On more recent research, see Outtier, B., ‘K. Kekelidzé et le lectionnaire géorgien’, Bedi Kartlisa, 38 (1980), pp. 23112Google Scholar.

17 See Jeffery, ‘The Sunday Office’, my forthcoming article, ‘The Earliest Book of the Eight Modes: The Rediscovered Georgian Oktoechos’, and Jeffery, , Re-Envisioning Past Musical Cultures: Ethnomusicology in the Study of Gregorian Chant (Chicago, 1992), pp. 000–00Google Scholar.

18 There are two modern editions: (1) Šanije, A., Martirosov, A. and Jišiašvili, A., eds., Čiletratis ladgari [The Papyrus-Parchment Iadgari], Jveli Kartuli Enis Jeglebi 15 (Tbilisi, 1977)Google Scholar; (2) Metreveli, El., Čankieva, C. and Xevsuriani, L., eds., Ujvelesi Iadgari [The Oldest Iadgari], Jveli Kartuli Mcerlobis Jeglebi 2 (Tbilisi, 1980)Google Scholar. All references in this article are to the 1980 edition. Throughout this article, all Georgian transliterations follow Aronson, H. I., Georgian: A Reading Grammar (Columbus, OH, 1982), pp. 1527Google Scholar. The three editors of the 1980 edition briefly explain their work in Le plus ancien tropologion géorgien’, Bedi Kartlisa, 39 (1981), pp. 5462Google Scholar; see also the review by Wade, A., ‘The Oldest ladgari: The Jerusalem Tropologion, V-VIIIc.’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 50 (1984), pp. 451–6Google Scholar.

19 See Métréveli, H., ‘Les manuscrits liturgiques géorgiens des IXe–Xe siècles et leur importance pour l'étude de l'hymnographie byzantine’, Bedi Kartlisa, 36 (1978), pp. 43–8Google Scholar. MSS of both the earlier and later types are described in the catalogue of Georgian manuscripts on Mount Sinai, reviewed by van Esbroeck, M. in Bedi Kartlisa, 39 (1981), pp. 316–17Google Scholar.

20 The early Georgian heirmologia are studied in Metreveli, El., ed., Jlispirni da Ğmrtismšoblisani ori jveli redakcia X-XI ss. xelnacerebis mixedvit [Heirmoi and Theotokia: Two Ancient Redactions after MSS of the 10th-11th Centuries] (Tbilisi, 1971)Google Scholar. A Greek manuscript from St Sabas, dating from the same period, is published in facsimile in Raasted, J., ed., Hirmologium Sabbaiticum: Codex Monasterii S. Sabbae 83 phototypice depictus, Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae 8, 2 vols. in 3 (Copenhagen, 19681970)Google Scholar.

21 ‘Tυπιχòν τῆς έν ‘Iε୧οσολύµοις ‘Eχχλησίας’, in A. Пαπαδóπονλος–Κε୧αμεύς, ed., Aνάλεχτα ‘Iε୧οσολνµιτιχής Σταχυολογíας, ii (St Petersburg, 1894; Brussels, 1963), pp. 1–254.

22 A much broader variety of texts from the Jerusalem sources, with their counterparts from other medieval chant traditions, will be discussed in my forthcoming book Liturgy and Chant in Early Christian Jerusalem (Fourth-Twelfth Centuries).

23 In ancient times there were three ways of numbering the psalms: (1) the Hebrew numbering, followed in most modern English Bibles, (2) the Greek numbering, also used in the Latin Bible and in translations made from the Latin, (3) the Syriac numbering. Within each psalm, there are two ways of numbering the verses: (1) the English system used in the Authorised or King James Version and in most subsequent English translations, (2) the system used in the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Syriac and most other versions. In the present article, psalms and psalm verses are cited according to the Greek–Latin numbering, while the English numberings (as used, for instance, in the New Revised Standard Version) are given in brackets.

24 Maraval, , Égérie, pp. 274–5Google Scholar; Wilkinson, , Egeria's Travels, p. 133Google Scholar.

25 It was not until the sixth century that the church of Jerusalem accepted the custom of celebrating Jesus's birth on 25 December, and reinterpreted 6 January as the feast of Jesus's baptism (as at Constantinople). See Jeffery, ‘The Sunday Office’, p. 57; Raffin, P., ‘La fête de Noël, fête de l’événement ou fête d'idée?’, Le Christ dans la liturgie: Conférences Saint-Serge, XXVIIe Semaine d’Éludes Liturgiques, Paris, 24–28 juin 1980, ed. Triacca, A. M. and Pistoia, A., Bibliotheca ‘Ephemerides Liturgicae’ Subsidia 20 (Rome, 1981), pp. 169–78Google Scholar.

26 Maraval, , Égérie, pp. 250–1Google Scholar; Wilkinson, , Egeria's Travels, pp. 126–7Google Scholar.

27 In the Armenian lectionary it is sung at the Palm Sunday processions, but not mentioned at Epiphany; see Renoux, , Le codex, II ( = PO 36), pp. 258–9Google Scholar. Its continuing use in the Palm Sunday procession is confirmed by an anonymous sermon published in Aubineau, M., ed., Les homélies festales d'Hésychius de Jérusalem, 2 vols., Subsidia Hagiographica 59 (Brussels, 19781980), II, pp. 748–77Google Scholar. One manuscript of the later Georgian lectionary assigns this text to the plagal E mode, another to the authentic G mode as the gradual of the Mass of the day; see Tarchnischvili, , Le grand lectionnaire, i/2 (=CSCO 189), pp. 81 n, 83Google Scholar. In the Greek typikon of 1122 it occurs as the gradual of the Palm Sunday Mass, assigned to the authentic G mode; see ∏απαδóπονλος-Kε୧αµεύς, ed., ‘Aνάλεχτα, ii, p. 24. In the Georgian Iadgari or chant book, it does not occur on Palm Sunday but does occur as the gradual of the Mass on Epiphany (with verse 27 as the refrain rather than verse 26), assigned to the plagal G mode; see Metreveli, , Ujvelesi, p. 56Google Scholar.

28 For the Palm Sunday procession in particular, much of the classic research stems from the period of the Roman Catholic reform of Holy Week during the 1950s, and thus antedates the recent burst of new research on Jerusalem. See: Mesnard, G., ‘Vers la restauration du dimanche des rameaux’, Études Grégoriennes, i (1954), pp. 6981Google Scholar; Bugnini, A. and Braga, C., Ordo Hebdomadae Sanctae instauratus: Commentarium ad S.R.C. Decretum ‘Maximae Redemptionis Nostrae Mysteria’ diei 16 Novembris 1955 el ad ‘Ordinem Hebdomadae Sanctae Instauratum’, Bibliotheca ‘Ephemerides Liturgicae’, Sectio Historica 25 (Rome, 1956), pp. 2839Google Scholar; Schmidt, H. A. P. et al. , Hebdomada Sancta, 2 vols. (Rome, 19561957), i, pp. 271–2, ii, pp. 694705, 968–9Google Scholar; Gräf, H. J., Palmenweihe und Palmenprozession in der lateinischen Lilurgie, Veröffentlichungen des Missionspriesterseminar St Augustin, Siegburg 5 (Kaldenkirchen, 1959)Google Scholar. For more recent discussion, see: Nocent, A., The Liturgical Year, ii: Lent, trans. O'Connell, M. J. (Collegeville, MN, 1977), pp. 184201Google Scholar; Dalmais, I. H., Jounel, P. and Martimort, A. G., The Church at Prayer: An Introduction to the Liturgy, iv: The Liturgy and Time, new edn, ed. Martimort, A. G., trans. M. J.O'Connell (Collegeville, MN, 1986), pp. 70–1, 75Google Scholar; Talley, , Origins, pp. 176–89Google Scholar.

29 Baumstark, Anton, Comparative Liturgy, rev. B. Botte, ed. Cross, F. L. (Westminster, MD, 1957), p. 156Google Scholar.

30 Because the modes were numbered differently in East and West, the use of modal numbers is avoided here. Instead, modes are referred to by their final (D, E, F or G) and range (authentic or plagal). Individual pitches are referred to using the letter notation of the medieval Western gamut: capital letters A–G for the lowest octave, lower-case letters a–g for the next octave, with c as middle C, and double letters aa–ee for the upper fifth. See Example iii-2 in Hoppin, R. H., Medieval Music (New York, 1978), p. 63Google Scholar. The melodies in the music examples and their sources are fully identified below, pp. 187–90.

31 In the Armenian lectionary this psalm is sung during the octave of Epiphany, with its second verse serving as refrain; on Hypapante or Presentation (2 February) with its third verse serving as refrain, and on Palm Sunday, with the eighth and ninth verses serving as the refrain; see Renoux, , Le codex, II ( = PO 36), pp. 222–3, 228–9, 256–7Google Scholar.

32 The lectionary is published in Dold, A., ed., Das älteste Liturgiebuch der lateinischen Kirche: Ein altgallikanisches Lektionar des 5./6. Jhs aus dem Wolfenbüttler Palimpsest-Codex Weissenburgensis 76, Texte und Arbeiten 26–8(Beuron, 1936), p. 38Google Scholar, where our psalm, with the first verse indicated as the refrain, is assigned to Epiphany. The sermon, of uncertain authorship and date, is published in Patrologia Latina, Supplementum (hereafter PLS), ii, col. 1057.

33 In the Georgian lectionary, this psalm is assigned to Epiphany week with the third verse (Viderunt omnes) as refrain, to Hypapante (the Presentation or Purification feast on 2 February) with the same refrain and assigned to the authentic G mode, and to Palm Sunday, with the refrain from the eighth verse and assigned to the authentic D mode. See Tarchnischvili, , Le grand lectionnaire, i/2 ( = CSCO 189), pp. 26–7, 34, 82–3Google Scholar. The provisions of the Iadgari are the same, except that there is no modal assignment on Palm Sunday, see Metreveli, , Ujvelesi, pp. 67, 98, 175Google Scholar.

34 Gregorian Chant (Bloomington, IN, 1958), pp. 347, 350Google Scholar.

35 The meaning of this word has been the subject of much debate, both in the Middle Ages and in the present. See: Werner, E., ‘“Hosanna” in the Gospels’, Journal of Biblical Literature, 65(1946), pp. 72122CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Richardson, C. C., ‘Blessed is He that Cometh in the Name of the Lord’, Anglican Theological Review, 29 (1947), pp. 96–8Google Scholar; Kennard, J. Spencer, ‘“Hosanna” and the Purpose of Jesus”, Journal of Biblical Literature, 67 (1948), pp. 171–6Google Scholar; Lehmann, H. J., “Hosanna: A Philological Discussion in the Old Church”, Armeniaca: Mélange d’études arméniennes publiés à l'occasion du 250e anniversaire de l'entrée des pères Mekhitaristes dans l'île de Saint-Lazaire (1717–1967) [ed. Gianascian, Mesrob] (San Lazzaro, Venice, 1969), pp. 165–74Google Scholar; Albright, W. F. and Mann, C. S., eds., Matthew, The Anchor Bible (Garden City, NY, 1971), p. 252Google Scholar; Lohse, E., ‘ώσαννά’, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Friedrich, G., trans, and ed. G. W. Bromiley, 9 (Grand Rapids, MI, 1974), pp. 682–4Google Scholar; G. C., , ‘Hosanna au Fils de David (Mt 21,9)’, Esprit et Vie, 80 (1980), pp. 65–6Google Scholar.

36 Melodies 3 and 4 are transmitted with texts that are related to the Greek troparion Eίσε୧χοµένου σου which occurs in the Typikon of 1122 in the authentic E mode; see Пαπαδóπουλος-Kε୧αµεÚς, ed., ‘Aνάλεχτα, ii, p. 31. For other Western texts derived from this troparion, see Huglo, M., ‘Source hagiopolite d'une antienne hispanique pour le dimanche des rameaux’, Hispania Sacra, 5 (1952), pp. 367–74Google Scholar.

37 Melody 1 has had some notoriety in the musicological literature, since it has often been said to be adapted from a drinking-song preserved in an ancient Greek epitaph, the ‘Skolion of Seikilos’. The claim seems to have been made first in Möhler, A., Die griechische, griechisch-römische und altchristlich-lateinische Musik: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des gregorianischen Chorals, Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Alterthumskunde und für Kirchengeschichte, Supplementheft 9 (Rome, 1898), pp. 55–7Google Scholar, although P. Spitta laid some of the groundwork by asserting that the melody of the skolion could be considered Mixolydian; see Eine neugefundene altgriechische Melodie’, Vierteljahrsschrift für Musikwissenschaft, 10 (1894), pp. 103–10, see p. 110Google Scholar. This apparent example of a Gregorian chant based on an ancient Greek song has been repeated by many subsequent writers, notably Vivell, C. in ‘Direkte Entwicklung des römischen Kirchengesangs aus der vorchristlichen Musik’, Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch, 24 (1911), pp. 2154Google Scholar, and Gastoué, A. in Les origines du chant romain: L'antiphonaire grégorien, Bibliothèque Musicologique 1 (Paris, 1907), pp. 40–1Google Scholar, until it finally found a place in such influential handbooks as: Reese, G., Music in the Middle Ages with an Introduction on the Music of Ancient Times (New York, 1940), pp. 49, 115Google Scholar; Werner, E., The Sacred Bridge: The Interdependence of Liturgy and Music in Synagogue and Church during the First Millennium (New York, 1959; repr. New York, 1979), pp. 338, 354Google Scholar.

Yet the alleged similarities between the chant melody and the skolion melody are mostly illusory, as was demonstrated by Holleman, A. W. J. in ‘The Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1786, and the Relationship Between Ancient Greek and Early Christian Music’, Vigiliae Christianae, 26 (1972), pp. 117CrossRefGoogle Scholar, see pp. 16–17. More accurate transcriptions and discussions of the skolion melody will be found in: Pöhlmann, E., Denkmäler altgriechischer Musik: Sammlung, Übertragung und Erläuterung aller Fragmente und Fälschungen, Erlanger Beiträge zur Sprach- und Kunstwissenschaft 31 (Nürnberg, 1970), pp. 54–7Google Scholar, and Henderson, I. and Wulstan, D., ‘Introduction: Ancient Greece’, A History of Western Music, ed. Sternfeld, F. W., i: Music from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance (London, 1973), pp. 2758, see pp. 4951Google Scholar.

38 ‘Ώσαννά έν τοίς ύψίστοις in ∏απαδóπουλος-Kε୧αµεύς ed., 'Aνάλεχτα, ii, p. 17. A processional troparion with almost the identical text is given in the Iadgari; see Metreveli, et al. , Ujvelesi, p. 175Google Scholar. This and the other troparia mentioned in this article are among the chants that will be treated in my book Liturgy and Chant in Early Christian Jerusalem.

39 ∏୧ò ἡμε୧ῶγ, in ∏απαδóπουλος-Kε୧αµεύς ed., 'Aνάλεχτα, ii, p. 25, assigned to the plagal E mode. The text of Ante sex dies (melody 3) occurs in one of the earliest Western sources of Palm Sunday processional ordines, the Romano-Germanic pontifical of the tenth century; see Vogel, C. and Elze, R., Le Pontifical romano-germanique du dixième siècle, ii Studi e Testi 227 (Vatican City, 1963), pp. 46, 54Google Scholar.

40 Originally sung during the Office of Palm Sunday, these two antiphons were introduced into the Palm Sunday procession with the reform of Holy Week in the 1950s, and thus appear in editions of The Liber Usualis with Introduction and Rubrics in English (Paris, Tournai and Rome) and other liturgical books published after 1955. The melodies were edited from unidentified ‘manuscrits anglais’, according to Claire, J., ‘Les nouvelles pièces de chant de la semaine sainte’, Revue Grégorienne, 39 (1960), pp. 138–49, see pp. 140–2Google Scholar. However, melody 1 can be found in the Worcester antiphoner, published in Paléographie Musicale, 1st ser., 12 [ed. L. McLachlan] (Solesmes, 1922, repr. Bern, 1971), p. 113; melody 2 can be found in Frere, W.H., ed., Antiphonale Sarisburiense: A Reproduction in Facsimile from Early Manuscripts (London, 19011924, repr. Farnborough, 1966), p. 207Google Scholar. The text also occurs in the tenth-century Romano-Germanic pontifical; see Vogel, and Elze, , Le Pontifical, ii, p. 48Google Scholar.

41 In a sermon that may have been delivered while he was patriarch of Constantinople, John Chrysostom seems to say that Psalm 145 [146] was sung there rather than Psalm 117 [118], see Patrologia graeca (hereafter PG), lv, p. 520Google Scholar. For discussion, see Talley, , Origins, pp. 186–7Google Scholar.

42 Tήν χοινήν άνάοτασιν. Mateos, J., ed., Le typicon de la grande église: Ms. Saint-Croix n° 40, Xe siècle, ii: Le cycle des fêtes mobiles, Orientalia Christiana Analecta 166 (Rome: Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1963), pp. 62–3, 66–7Google Scholar. This troparion serves as the introit of the Palm Sunday Mass in the seventh-century chant book and in the Georgian lectionary; see Metreveli, et al. , Ujvelesi, p. 175Google Scholar; Tarchnischvili, , Le grand lectionnaire, i/2 (=CSCO 189), p. 83Google Scholar. The Roman and Byzantine Palm Sunday rites are compared in: Baumstark, A., ‘La solennité des palmes dans l'ancienne et la nouvelle Rome’, Irénikon, 13 (1936), pp. 324Google Scholar.

43 See Jeffery, , ‘The Sunday Office’; Taft, The Liturgy of the Hours, pp. 273–91Google Scholar. The most detailed study of this influence is: Bertonière, G., The Historical Development of the Easter Vigil and Related Services in the Greek Church, Orientalia Christiana Analecta 193 (Rome, 1972)Google Scholar.

44 Kenneth Levy once observed that many early Eastern and Western melodies for the Ordinary of the Mass occupied a ‘broad pre-Oktoechic modal area that combines aspects of the modes on E and G. … Its central scale is a series of white notes from E up to c; F is of minor importance; … its pattern of melodic nodes and attractions may be projected in a scheme of interlocking fourths (E-a; G-c) and conjunct thirds (E-G-b) …’ See The Byzantine Sanctus and its Modal Tradition in East and West’, Annales Musicologiques, 6 (19581963), pp. 767, especially pp. 56–7Google Scholar. Many other melodies belonging to this ‘pre-Oktoechic modal area’ will be discussed in my book Liturgy and Chant in Early Christian Jerusalem.

45 On the so-called Justus ut palma group of graduals see: [Mocquereau, A.,] ‘De l'influence de l'accent tonique latin et du cursus sur la structure mélodique et rythmique de la phrase grégorien’, Le répons-graduel Justus et palma: deuxième partie, Paléographie Musicale, 1st ser., 3 (Solesmes, 1892, repr. Bern, 1974), pp. 177, especially pp. 3152Google Scholar; Pothier, J., ‘Graduel “Haec dies,” du jour de Pâques’, Revue du Chant Grégorien, 4 (18951896), pp. 113–20Google Scholar; Daras, M., ‘Le psaume de Pâques’, Les Questions Liturgiques et Paroissiales, 4 (19131914), pp. 337–49Google Scholar; Wagner, Peter, Einführung in die gregorianischen Melodien: Ein Handbuch der Choralwissenschaft, iii: Gregorianische Formenlehre: Ein choralische Stilkunde (Leipzig, 1921, repr. Hildesheim and Wiesbaden, 1962), pp. 716, 370–6Google Scholar; David, L., ‘Le répons et l'antienne “Haec dies” du jour de Pâques’, Revue du Chant Grégorien, 29 (1925), pp. 33–8Google Scholar; David, , ‘Le graduel des défunts et celui de Pâques’, Revue du Chant Grégorien, 43 (1939), pp. 97105Google Scholar; Johner, D., Wort und Ton im Choral: Ein Beitrag zur Aesthetik des gregorianischen Gesanges (Leipzig, 1940; 2nd edn 1953), pp. 314–19Google Scholar; Apel, , Gregorian Chant, pp. 357–63Google Scholar; Stäblein, B., ‘Graduale (Gesang)’, Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, ed. Blume, F., 14 vols. (Kassel and Basle, 19491968 and suppls.), v, cols. 631–59, see cols. 640–2 and Beispiel 1Google Scholar; Hucke, H., ‘Die gregorianische Gradualeweise des 2. Tons und ihre ambrosianischen Parallelen: Ein Beitrag zur Erforschung des ambrosianischen Gesanges’, Archiv für Musikwissenschaft, 13 (1956), pp. 285314CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gerson-Kiwi, E., ‘ “Justus ut Palma”: Stufen hebräischer Psalmodien in mundlicher Überlieferung’, Festschrift Bruno Stäblein zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Ruhnke, M. (Kassel, 1967), pp. 6473Google Scholar; Kojima, S., ‘Die Ostergradualien “Haec Dies” und ihr Verältnis zu den Tractus des II. und VIII. Tons’, Colloquium Amicorum: Joseph Schmidt-Görg zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Koss, S. and Schmidt, H. (Bonn, 1967), pp. 146–78Google Scholar; Haberl, F., Der responsoriale Gesang des gregorianischen Graduate (Rome, 1979), pp. 4371Google Scholar. A detailed reconstruction of the history of this melodic group will be published in my book Prophecy Mixed with Melody.

46 Fourth-century sources in which it is asserted that this psalm was sung on Easter include: Zeno of Verona (CCL 22, pp. 63, 85), Gregory of Nyssa (Gregorii Nysseni Opera, ix: Sermones, 1, ed. Heil, G. et al. [Leiden, 1967], pp. 249, 279, 310)Google Scholar, Amphilochius of Iconium (Corpus Christianorum, Series Graeca (hereafter CCG) 3, p. 157). Sources of the late fourth and early fifth centuries include sermons by: Chrysostom, John (PG, lv, pp. 328–38)Google Scholar, Chromatius of Aquilea (CCL 9A, p. 78), Maximus of Turin (CCL 23, pp. 214–16), Jerome (CCL 78, pp. 545–7 and 548–51) and especially Augustine of Hippo (Patrologia Latina (hereafter PL), xxxviii, cols. 1098, 1099, 1103– SC 116, pp. 344–50; PLS, II, cols. 556–8, 585). Sixth-century sources include Caesarius of Aries (CCL 104, p. 819), and Leontius of Constantinople (SC 187, pp. 368–85, 431–41), and verse 24 is marked as a refrain in the St Germain psalter of the same century; see Huglo, M., ‘Le répons-graduel de la Messe: Évolution de la forme, permanence de la fonction’, Schweizer Jahrbuch für Musikwissenschaft, neue Folge, 2 (1982), pp. 5377Google Scholar, especially p. 60. In addition, the singing of this psalm and refrain on Easter is also cited in many anonymous sermons: PG, l, cols. 821–4; CCL 87, pp. 56–9; PLS, i, col. 737; PLS, ii, cols. 1199, 1250, 1254, 1289–90; CCL 101, p. 213.

47 In the Armenian lectionary this psalm and refrain are sung at the Easter Vigil, while in the Georgian lectionary and the Greek typikon of 1122 it has moved to the Mass of Easter day and is assigned to the plagal G mode. See Renoux, , Le codex, ii ( = PO 36), pp. 298–9Google Scholar; Tarchnischvili, , Le grand lectionnaire, i/2 ( = CSCO 189), p. 114Google Scholar; Пαπαδóπονλος–Κε୧αμεύς, ed., 'Aνάλεχτα, ii pp. 201, 253–4. The text is also cited in an anonymous Easter sermon from Jerusalem, published in SC 187, pp. 318–25; CPG, 4740. In the Iadgari it is the gradual of the Mass, both on Easter and on the Sunday following, but in the first location there is no modal assignment – only in the second location is it assigned to the plagal G mode; see Metreveli, , Ujvelesi, pp. 217, 225Google Scholar.

48 See also the remarks in Levy, K., ‘Byzantine Rite, Music of the’, The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Sadie, S., 20 vols. (London, 1980), iii, pp. 553–6, especially p. 556Google Scholar.

49 See the convenient centonisation table in Apel, , Gregorian Chant, pp. 360–1Google Scholar.

50 The Armenian lectionary repeatedly assigns this text to feasts of apostles; the Georgian lectionary and Iadgari continue this tradition, assigning the melody to the authentic E mode. In the Greek typikon, the text is assigned to Easter Monday and the melody to the plagal G mode. See Renoux, , Le codex, ii ( = PO 36), pp. 356–7, 362–3, 364–5, 370–1Google Scholar; Tarchnischvili, , Le grand lectionnaire, i/2 ( = CSCO 189), pp. 16, 37, 61, 73, 120, and ii/2 ( = CSCO 205), pp. 10, 12, 14, 30, 41, 44, 46, 48, 57, 62Google Scholar; Metreveli, , Ujvelesi, pp. 29, 130, 226, 232, 260Google Scholar; Пαπαδóπονλος–Κε୧αμεύς, ed., 'Aνάλεχτα, ii, p. 211. After Ambrose (PL, xvi, col. 1020 [1063]) in the fourth century, Western sources include sermons of Augustine (PL, xxxviii, col. 1367; PLS, ii, cols. 600–1, 604) and some anonymous sermons (PLS, ii, col. 1162; CCL 101, p. 377).

51 The Armenian lectionary assigns this psalm to Good Friday with verse 22 [21] as refrain; see Renoux, , Le codex, ii ( = PO 36), pp. 288–9Google Scholar. A Syriac lectionary dating from about a century later places it on Good Friday, with verse 21 [20] serving as refrain; see Burkitt, F. C., ‘The Early Syriac Lectionary System’, Proceedings of the British Academy (19211923), pp. 301–38, especially p. 309Google Scholar. The Georgian lectionary indicates it a number of times during Lent and Holy Week, with various refrains and in various modes; on Good Friday, however, the refrain verse 22 [21] and the mode is G authentic; see Tarchnischvili, , Le grand lectionnaire, i/2 ( = CSCO 189), pp. 47, 62, 95, 102Google Scholar, and II/2 ( = CSCO 205), p. 113. On Good Friday in the 1122 typikon, however, the mode has shifted to plagal E; see Пαπαδóπονλος–Κε୧αμεύς, ed., 'Aνάλεχτα, ii, p. 152. The Georgian Iadgari assigns the psalm to Lent with refrains from verses 17–18 or 18, in the second case with a modal assignment to plagal G; see Metreveli, , Ujvelesi, pp. 130, 523Google Scholar. The Palestinian supplement to the typikon of Constantinople places the psalm on Sunday Vespers, with verse 18 [17] as the refrain, in the plagal G mode; see Mateos, , Le typicon, ii, p. 79Google Scholar. In the West, the sixth-century St Germain psalter also gives verse 18 [17] as the refrain Ne avertas; see Huglo, ‘Le répons-graduel’, p. 60. Another sixth-century Western document, the Titulipsalmorum series I of the same century, states that the psalm is to be ‘read’ during Passiontide; see Salmon, P., Les ‘Tituli Psalmorum’ des manuscrils latins, Collectanea Biblica Latina 12 (Rome, 1959), p. 65Google Scholar.

52 The Armenian lectionary places the psalm on Friday of the first week of Lent (refrain: verse 5 [4]), Wednesday in Holy Week (same refrain) and on Good Friday, with verse 7 [6] as refrain; see Renoux, , Le codex, ii ( = PO 36), pp. 240–1, 264–5, 270–1, 284–5Google Scholar, while the early Syriac lectionary assigns the psalm to Wednesday in Holy Week, with the same refrain; see Burkitt, ‘The Early Syriac Lectionary’, p. 308. The Georgian lectionary assigns this psalm to Wednesday in Holy Week (refrain from verses 7–8 [6–7], plagal F mode), Holy Thursday (refrain from verse 9 [8], plagal D mode) and Good Friday (refrain from verse 7 [6], no mode specified); see Tarchnischvili, , Le grand lectionnaire, i/2 ( = CSCO 189), pp. 88–9, 93, 99Google Scholar, and ii/2 ( = CSCO 205), pp. 99, 102, 111. The 1122 Greek typikon gives the refrain as verse 7 [6], and the mode as G authentic; see Пαπαδóπονλος–Κε୧αμεύς, ed., Aνάλεχτα, ii, p. 148. In the Georgian Iadgar;, however, Psalm 40 [41] with a refrain from 5 [4] is placed at Cheese Week (the week before Lent), but without a modal assignment; see Metreveli, , Ujvelesi, p. 107Google Scholar.

Early Western sermons that witness to the singing of this psalm do not clearly specify the occasion: Augustine, Sermo Mai 17 (CCL 41, pp. 231–4, 374Google Scholar; Peter Chrysologus (CCL 24, pp. 88–92); Pseudo-Augustine (PLS, ii, cols. 1123–4). The Titulipsalmorum series I says the psalm is to be read with Isaiah in Passiontide; see Salmon, , Les ‘Tituli Psalmorum’, p. 60Google Scholar; the St Germain psalter marks verses 2 and 5 as refrains; see Huglo, ‘Le réponsgraduel’, p. 59. An Egyptian papyrus of about the same period, a fragment of a lectionary, assigns this psalm to Saturday before the First Sunday in Lent, with verse 5 ‘4’ as refrain; see Milne, H. J. M., ‘Early Psalms and Lections for Lent’, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 10 (1924), pp. 278–82, especially p. 280CrossRefGoogle Scholar. At Constantinople this psalm was sung on Thursday in the second week of Lent, with the refrain from verse 5 [4] and in the G authentic mode, as part of a series of psalms in numerical order throughout Lent; see Mateos, , Le typicon, ii, pp. 28, 74Google Scholar.

53 The letters and numbers beneath the brackets (e.g. ‘Fl, F10’, ‘a10’, ‘A15’) refer to the centonisation tables published in Apel, , Gregorian Chant, pp. 360–1Google Scholar (the Justus ut palma type), 348–9 (the F authentic types).

54 B. Stäblein and M. Landwehr-Melnicki, eds., Die Gesänge des altrömischen Graduate, Vat. lat. 5319, Monumenta Monodica Medii Aevi 2 Kassel, (1970), p. 91.

55 This psalm and refrain occur repeatedly in the Armenian lectionary; see Renoux, , Le codex, ii ( = PO 36), pp. 173, 224–5, 226–7, 230–1, 346–7, 350–1, 352–3, 358–9)Google Scholar. The Georgian lectionary assigns the authentic G mode on the feast of St Stephen, and the authentic D mode in the common of martyrs, while the Iadgari has no modal assignment; see Tarchnischvili, , Le grand lectionnaire, i/2 ( = CSCO 189), p. 31; ii/2 ( = CSCO 205), pp. 64–5)Google Scholar, and Metreveli, , Ujvelesi, p. 114Google Scholar, in both of which the editors have confused the Hebrew and Greek verse numberings. The singing of this psalm is also cited in a sermon of Hesychius of Jerusalem; see Aubineau, , Les homélies, i, pp. 546, 554Google Scholar.

Outside Jerusalem, the liturgical reading or singing of this psalm is explicitly mentioned in the early Syriac lectionary (Burkitt, ‘The Early Syriac Lectionary’, pp. 311, 313, where the refrain is also from verse 6 [15]), and in sermons by Ambrose, (Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum (hereafter CSEL), LXII, p. 84Google Scholar; Augustine (SC 116, pp. 338–42; PL, xxxviii, cols. 1400–5; PLS, ii, cols. 587–8, 781–5); Caesarius of Arles (CCL 104, p. 868), and many anonymous sermons, published in PLS, ii, cols. 1011–12, 1083; CCL 87, pp. 81, 83, 86. See also: Leclercq, J., ‘Les inédits africains de l'homiliaire de Fleury’, Revue Bénédictine, 58 (1948), pp. 5372, see pp. 68–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lambot, C., ‘Les sermons de saint Augustin pour les fêtes de martyrs’, Analecta Bollandiana, 67 (1949), pp. 249–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar, reprinted in Revue Bénédictine, 79 (1969), pp. 82–97; Saxer, V., Moris, martyrs, reliques en Afrique chrétienne aux premiers siècles, Théologie Historique 55 (Paris, 1980), p. 317Google Scholar. On the peculiar structure and verse numbering of this psalm, see: Barré, M. L., ‘Psalm 116: Its Structure and Its Enigmas’, Journal of Biblical Literature, 109 (1990), pp. 6178CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56 The final stage in this process can be observed in some of the earliest manuscripts of the Gregorian chant tradition, where the text still survives with a minor place in the repertory, but it is no longer provided with a notated melody. In the famous cantatorium St Gall 359, for instance, the text scribe did not even bother to leave spaces for the melismas, recognising that for this text no neumes would be added. See Musicale, Paléographie, 2nd ser., ii: Cantatorium de Saint-Gall (Solesmes, 1924, repr. 1968, 1988), p. 131Google Scholar.

5
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The lost chant tradition of early Christian Jerusalem: some possible melodic survivals in the Byzantine and Latin chant repertories*
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The lost chant tradition of early Christian Jerusalem: some possible melodic survivals in the Byzantine and Latin chant repertories*
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The lost chant tradition of early Christian Jerusalem: some possible melodic survivals in the Byzantine and Latin chant repertories*
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *