/
Search results


Гусейнова З. М. Нотированные каноны в Стихираре конца XVI века // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия V: Вопросы истории и теории христианского искусства. 2013. Вып. 2 (11). С. 37-49.
PDF
Canon as a genre of ancient gimnography which occupied a significant place in Orthodox worship. It was created in honor of each Saint or festive event, and in these cases was used to sample one of the already existing canons. Text of canons were included in the liturgical books, but they are very rarely issued in znamenny form, as their chants were based on well-known irmosy-samples that are included in the book the Irmologion. The manuscript Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Laura No. 427 (Russian State Library), dating from the late of the 16th century, contain, however, three znamenny canons (metropolitan Jonah, Vasily Blissful, great-martyr George). The article discusses the principles of musical interpretation of texts which reveal the creative techniques of old masters.
canon, saint, heirmos, troparion, chant, text, notation, manuscript
1. Gerasimova-Persidskaya N. A. 2003, in Hymnology, vol. 4, pp. 237-251.
2. Golubinskij E. E. Istoriya russkoj tserkvi (History of Russian Church), Moscow, 1900.
3. Kiprian (Kern), archimandrite. Liturgika. Gimnografiya i heortologiya (Liturgics. Hymnography and Heortology), Moscow, 1999.
4. Klyuchevskij V. O. Drevnerusskie zhitiya svyatych kak istoricheskij istochnik (Ancient Lives of the Saints as a Historical Source), Moscow, 1989.
5. Kuznetsov I. I. Svyatye blazhennye Vasilij i Ioann, Christa radi moskovskie chudotvortsy (Saints Basil the Blessed, and John, for Christ's Sake, the Moscow Miracle Workers), Moscow, 1910.
6. Lozovaya I. E. Drevnerusskij notirovannyj Paraklit XII veka (Old Russian Parakletike of the 12th Century), Moscow, 2009.
7. Lurie Y. S. 1988, in Slovar' knizhnikov i knizhnosti Drevnej Rusi, vol. 2/1, pp. 270-273.
8. Metallov V. M. Ocherk istorii pravoslavnogo tserkovnogo peniya v Rossii (History of the Orthodox Church Music in Russia), Moscow, 1915.
9. Ramazanova N. V. 1999, in Rukopisnye pamyatniki, vol. 5, pp. 82-96.
10. Skaballanovich M. N. Tolkovyj Tipikon (The Typikon Interpreted), Moscow, 2004.
11. Spasskij F. G. Russkoe liturgicheskoe tvorchestvo (Russian Liturgical Works), Moscow, 2008.
12. Vilinbakhov G. V., Vilinbakhova T. B. Sv. Georgij Pobedonosets (St. George The Victorious), St.-Petersburg, 1995.
Гусейнова З. М. "Светильны на царьския праздники" как певческий цикл // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия V: Вопросы истории и теории христианского искусства. 2014. Вып. 3 (15). С. 115-124. DOI: 10.15382/sturV201415.115-124
The article describes one of the types of Old Russian melismatic chant - Svetilens (Eksapostilaria or Fotagogica) on diff erent holidays. They were rarely included in the Church books and were singing in style of “bolshoj raspev” (great chant). Svetilens are executed after the 9th songs of canons, the main theme is “light”, which is revealed in all the hymns. The author explores the cycles of Svetilens in two manuscripts of the 17th century Kirillo-Belozersky collection in the National Library of Russia (no. 642/899 and no. 638/895). They have an unique shaped and structured contents of poetic texts, diff erent techniques of melodic organization, as well as the link between the melody of svetilens, which should be recognized as a special song cycle.
Svetilen, manuscript, cycle, great chant, text, National Library of Russia, Kirillo-Belozersky collection

1. Brazhnikov M. V. Lica i fity znamennogo raspeva (Faces and Fitas of Znamennyj Chant), Leningrad, 1984.
2. Ramazanova N. V. Moskovskoe carstvo v cerkovno-pevcheskom iskusstve XVI–XVII vekov. SPb., 2004.
3. Skaballanovich M. N. Tolkovyj Tipikon (Explanatory Typikon), Moscow, 1995.
4. Tjurina O. V. 2009 “Formirovanie graficheskogo oblika melizmaticheskih pesnopenij: cikl Svetil'nov voskresnyh po spiskam XII — konca XV vv.” (Forming of Graphical Appearance of Melizmatic Songs: Cycle of Sunday Exapostilaria according to Copies of XII — End of XV Cent.), in XIX Ezhegodnaja Bogoslovskaja konferencija PSTGU, Moscow, 2009, vol. 2, pp. 202–213.
5. Tjurina O. V. 2008 “Ob odnom obrazce drevnerusskoj melizmatiki: cikl Svetil'nov voskresnyh” (About One Specimen of Old Russian Melizmatics: Cycle of Sunday Exapostilaria), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija V, 2008, vol. 2/3, pp. 7–22.
Гусейнова З. М. Фрагментарное невменное нотирование в рукописях XV века // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия V: Вопросы истории и теории христианского искусства. 2015. Вып. 4 (20). С. 145-157. DOI: 10.15382/sturV201520.145-157
“Hook manuscript” with omissions notation is sustainable, it is to some extent in all extant manuscripts. This phenomenon depends on many factors, including changes in the system of singing in the 15th century («epoch of style change»). In the collection of the Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Lavra at the Russian State Library hook manuscript no. 407, 439, 440 belong the first half of 15 century, no. 408, 409 belong the second half of the century. They demonstrate the patterns of «epoch of style change». The manuscripts of the first half of the 15th century retain the traits of the ancient tradition. Here predominantly “istinnorečnyj” (“right”) text, ancient signs (“hooked arrow”, “double apostroph” etc.). The manuscripts of the second half of the 15th century, no. 409 represents the final look of a text and revision of the singing, and no. 408 represents the main fracture and shows the fragmentary notation. Certain chants or microcycles, individual textlines or syllables have the fragmentary notation in no. 408. It is due to the a different nature and depends on the specifi c problems arising from the transition to Jerusalem Charter, formation of new znamenny books (Octoechos), the need to create a new melodies for Oktoihe, Stihirare mineiny. Text in no. 408 shows that singing was a poetical editing, structural modification of the text and of the necessity of prosodic changes. This is reflected to the changes in notation, creating new neumes.
manuscript, Jerusalem Charter, Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Lavra, epoch of style change, znamenny book, fragmentary notation

1. Aleksandrina A. V. Pevcheskie rukopisnye knigi XV–XIX vv. iz biblioteki Troice-Sergievoj Lavry: Istoriko-knigovedcheskij analiz. T. II: Katalog pevcheskih rukopisej XV–XIX vv. Troice-Sergievoj Lavry iz sobranija NIOR RGB F. 304.I. Special'nost' 05.25.03 — bibliotekovedenie, bibliografovedenie i knigovedenie. Dis. … kand. ist. nauk (Song Manuscript Books of XV–XIX Cent. from Library of Troice-Sergieva Lavra: Historical-Book Study Analysis. Vol. 2: Catalogye of Song Manuscripts of XV–XIX Cent. of Troice-Sergieva Lavra from Collection NIOR RGB F. 304.I. Dissertation), Moscow, 2014.
2. Gusejnova Z. M. 2008 “Stihirari minejnye v Kirillo-Belozerskih rukopisjah XV v.” (Minaion Sticheraria in Kirillo-Belozerskije Monasteries of XV Cent.), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija V, Moscow, 2008, pp. 7–14.
3. Zabolotnaja N. V. Cerkovno-pevcheskie rukopisi Drevnej Rusi XI–XIV vekov: Osnovnye tipy knig v istoriko-funkcional'nom aspekte (Church-Singing Manuscripts of Old Rus’ of XI–XIV Centuries: Main Types of Books in Historical-Functional Aspect), Moscow, 2001.
4. Zahar'ina N. B. Russkie pevcheskie knigi. Tipologija, puti jevoljucii. Avtoref. … dis. … d-ra iskusstvovedenija. Special'nost' 17.00.02 — muzykal'noe iskusstvo (Russian Song Books. Typology, Evolution Ways. Dissertation Abstract), Moscow, 2006. S. 12–13.
5. Pletneva E. V. 2003 “Notacija v pesnopenijah drevnerusskih Oktoihov Izbornyh i Shestodnevov Sluzhebnyh (XIII–XV vv.)” (Notation in Songs of Old Russian Octoichos and Service Hexamerons (XIII–XV Cent.)), in XIII Ezhegodnaja Bogoslovskaja konferencija PSTGU: Materialy, Moscow, 2003, pp. 443–451.
6. Turilov A. A. 2012 “Posle Klimenta i Nauma (slavjanskaja pis'mennost' na territorii Ohridskoj episkopii v X — pervoj polovine XIII v.)” (After Clement and Nahum (Slavic Literature in Territory of Ochrid Archdiocese in X — First Half of XIII Cent.)), in Mezhslavjanskie kul'turnye svjazi jepohi Srednevekov'ja i istochnikovedenie istorii i kul'tury juzhnyh slavjan i Drevnej Rusi: Jetjudy i harakteristiki, Moscow, 2012.
7. Tjurina O. V. 2013 “Vidy zakljuchitel'nyh formul v pesnopenijah bol'shogo rospeva” (Kinds of End Formulae in Songs of Great Chant), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija V. 2013, vol. 3/12, pp. 7–24.
8. Filippova E. 2006 “K voprosu ob izmenenii pevcheskoj praktiki v Russkoj Cerkvi v period bogosluzhebnoj reformy XIV–XV vv.” (To Question of Change of Song Practice in Russian Church in Period of Service Reform of XIV–XV Cent.), in Lozovaja I. E. (ed.) «Idu v nevedomyj mne put'»: Pamjati Eleny Filippovoj, Moscow, 2006, pp. 75–85.
Гусейнова З. М. Списки Стихов покаянных в рукописях Троице-Сергиевой Лавры // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия V: Вопросы истории и теории христианского искусства. 2016. Вып. 3 (23). С. 36-47. DOI: 10.15382/sturV201623.36-47
А steady cycle of the repentance poems begins to be fixed in the old russian singing manuscript books in the middle of the 16th century. There are five manuscripts in Library of Troitse-Sergiyeva Lavra (Russian State Library) from the mid-16th century until the first quarter of the 17 century with the cycles of the repentance poems. Their repertoire includes almost 60 hymns: some of them are in all singing manuscript books, and another are one or two times only. Repentance poems divided unevenly into 8 “glases”: the largest number belong to 6 and 8, the smallest number belong to 3 and 7 “glas”. Some of the poems have a few music interpretations; and manuscript book TSL 432 are present early red “pomety” (remarks). The repentance poem texts are not liturgical, they specially created poems based on those stories, figurative circle of traditional gimnograf texts and chants, so art of the anonymous masters is very important. Master copies already known verses, but making changes to them, sometimes very large, includes disclose secret (“tajnozamknennyh”) formulas. Especially interesting cycle is in manuscript TSL 427. Author introduces melismatic chants, melodic variations, and he had transformed the slavnick (doxastikon) “O koliko blago” from the Lenten Triodion into one of repentance poem. This slavnick is known in many musical versions since the 12th century. Its content and organization are similar in the repentance poems. Here are constantly used exclamations “O” and “Uvi mone”, as well as the phrase on the penitential theme: “okaiannyj se lishiho”, “okaiannyi dushe”. This tradition will expand, cycles of repentance poem will be enriched by new songs, including from the Repertoire of liturgical texts.
manuscript, Troitse-Sergiyeva Lavra, repentance poem, text, znamenny chant, himn, genre, doxastikon, cycle

1. Aleksandrina A. V. Pevcheskie rukopisnye knigi XV–XIX vv. iz biblioteki Troice-Sergievoj Lavry: Istoriko-knigovedcheskij analiz. Dis. … kand. ist. nauk (Song Manuscript Books of XV–XIX Cent. from Library of Troice-Sergijeva Lavra: Historical-Book Study Analysis. Dissertation), Moscow, 2014, vol. 2: Katalog pevcheskih rukopisej XV–XIX vv. Troice-Sergievoj Lavry iz sobranija NIOR RGB. F. 304.I (Catalogue of Chant Manuscripts of XV–XIX Cent. of Troice-Sergijeva Lavra from Collection of NIOR RGB. F. 304.I).
2. Vasil'eva E. E. 2008 “O pokajannyh i duhovnyh stihah v russkoj kul'ture” (About Penitential and Spiritual Poems in Russian Culture), in Hristianstvo v regionah mira, Saint-Petersburg, 2008, pp. 246–280.
3. Gusejnova Z. M. 2013 “Notirovannye kanony v Stihirare konca XVI veka” (Notated Canons in Stiharar of End of XVI Century), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija V: Voprosy istorii i teorii hristianskogo iskusstva, 2013, vol. 2/11, pp. 37–49.
4. Mosjagina N. V. 2001 “Stihi pokajannye v rukopisi inoka Eliseja” (Penitential Poems of Manuscript of Monk Elisej), in Opyty po istochnikovedeniju. Drevnerusskaja knizhnost', Saint-Petersburg, 2001, vol. 4, pp. 189–200.
5. Panchenko A. M. 1989 “Stihi pokajannye” (Penitential Poems), in Slovar' knizhnikov i knizhnosti Drevnej Rusi, Leningrad, 1989, vol. 2 (2-ja pol. XIV — XVI v.), pp. 421–423.
6. Parfent'ev N. P., Parfent'eva N. V. Usol'skaja (Stroganovskaja) shkola v russkoj muzyke XVI–XVII vekov (Usol'skaja (Stroganovskaja) School in Russian Music of XVI–XVII Centuries), Cheljabinsk, 1993.
7. Petrova L. A., Seregina N. S. Rannjaja russkaja lirika. Repertuarnyj spravochnik muzykal'no-pojeticheskih tekstov XV–XVII vekov (Early Russian Lyrics. Repertoire Reference of Musical-Poetic Texts of XV–XVII Centuries), Leningrad, 1988.
8. Frolov S. V. 1993 “«Stih-starina» za monastyrskim «pivom»” (“Old Poem” by Monastery “Drink”), in Trudy Otdela drevnerusskoj literatury IRLI AN SSSR, 1993, vol. 48, pp. 196–204.
Гусейнова З. М. Сведения по теории церковного пения в рукописи протопопа Мефодия (1647) // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия V: Вопросы истории и теории христианского искусства. 2017. Вып. 26. С. 96-108. DOI: 10.15382/sturV201726.96-108
The aim of this article is to present the theoretical codex included in hooked notation manuscript written by Archpriest Methodius in 1647 in Kashira. In the history of Russian musical theory, manuscripts of the mid-17th century manifest the wish of masters of singing to validate traditional phenomena in singing, to systematise existing techniques and to integrate purely theoretical information into the context of historical and pedagogical precepts. The note manuscript Ф. 229 № 154 (collection of N.S. Tihonravov) of the Russian State Library contains a theoretical codex that sets out both established and non-traditional fragments supplemented by literary and philosophical statements using cryptography (Russ. простая литорея). The bulk of materials on musical theory is related to the form of dvoznamenniki (“double sign”), where lines are written in putnaya and znamennaya notations (putnaya in vermilion, znamennaya in black ink). The codex also contains a fragment of the famous “Preface” to the collection of note sticherons (Russ. нотный Стихирарь) and the ABC-enumeration Имена столповому знамени. The fact that Archpriest Methodius included such changes into traditional manuals serves as a sign of his own creative work. As a result, the author of the manuscript acts as an experiences connoisseur of church singing rather than a mere copyist.
Archpriest Methodius, manuscript, codex of musical theory, putny and znamenny notations

Bogomolova M. V., Znamennaja monodij a i bezlinejnoe mnogogolosie na primere velikoj panihidy, Moscow, 2006.
Brazhnikov M. V., Drevnerusskaja teorij a muzyki, Leningrad,1972.
Kondrashkova L. V., “Troestrochnye popevki (na materiale pevcheskoi knigi ‘Prazdniki’)”, in: Vestnik PSTGU, 2013, V, 11, 50–95.
Lukashevich A. A., “Printzipy izlozhenij a materiala v putevykh (kazanskikh) Soglasnikakh”, in: Vestnik PSTGU, 2014, V, 14, 83–104.
Nasonov A. N., Istoriya russkogo letopisaniya XI–XVIII vv, Moscow, 1969.
Protopopov V. V., Russkaja mysl' o muzyke v XVII veke, Moscow, 1989.
Spasskij F. G.,Russkoe liturgicheskoe tvorchestvo, Moscow, 2008.
Гусейнова З. М. Самогласны Стихираря минейного 2-й половины XVI века // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия V: Вопросы истории и теории христианского искусства. 2018. Вып. 31. С. 70-82. DOI: 10.15382/sturV201831.70-82
The term samoglasen (Russ. самогласен, α¥τόμελον) has steadily been inscribed in Russian singing manuscript books since the 11th century as a margin comment accompanying certain chants. In scientifi c literature has developed a stable look at samoglasen as an indication of melodic autonomy of the chant, the opposite of which is the term podoben (подобен, ²διόμελον), when the chant is sung according to a melodic pattern (i.e. podoben). Meanwhile, in the copies of Stikhirar' Mineinyi, starting from the oldest MSs until the end of the 16th century, it is seen that, fi rstly, only few number of stichera are accompanied by the remark “samoglasen”; secondly, there is a discrepancy identifi ed when comparing the repertoire of stichera with this remark; thirdly, the melodically individual chant is lacking in samoglasen-shichera in all cases. The author of the articles comes to the conclusion that the term samoglasen entered the singing books from the Canon (Устав), where the term самогласен дня (“samoglasen of the day”) indicates the function of the stichera to refl ect main events of the holiday.
stichera, manuscript, Stikhirar' Mineinyi, samoglasen, manuscript copy
  1. Gardner I. A. (2004) “Zabytoe bogatstvo (o penii na «podoben»)” [“Forgotten Wealth (On Singing according to “Podoben”)”], in L. V. Vovchuk (ed.) Podobny. Kiev, pp. 4‒14 (in Russian).
  2. Kiprian (Kern), archimandrite (1999) Liturgika. Gimnografi ia i eortologiia [Liturgics. Hymnography and Heortology]. Moscow (in Russian).
  3. Potemkina N. A. “A. V. Nikol'skii i ego rabota «Formy russkogo tserkovnogo peniia»: metody analiza, terminologiia” [“A. V. Nikol'skii and his Work “Forms of Russian Church Singing”: Methods of Analysis and Terminology], available at http://docs.google.com/a/gnesinacademy.ru/viewer?url=http://vestnikram.ru (15.01.2017).
  4. Seregina N. S. (1985) “Stikhiry Sergiiu Radonezhskomu kak pamiatnik otechestvennogo pesnotvorchestva” [“Stichera to Sergy Radonezhsky as a Monument of Russian Art of Chants”]. Trudy Otdela drevnerusskoi literatury. 1985, vol. XXXVIII, pp. 338-355 (in Russian).
  5. Skaballanovich M. (2004) Tolkovyi Tipikon [Explanatory Typikon], pt. 2. Moscow (in Russian).
  6. Uspenskii N. D. (1971) Obraztsy drevnerusskogo pevcheskogo iskusstva [Examples of Old Russian Art of Singing]. Leningrad (in Russian).
  7. Vladyshevskaia T. F. (2006) “Tipografskii Ustav i muzykal'naia kul'tura Drevnei Rusi XI– XII vekov” [“Typographic Canon and Music Culture of Ancient Rus’ in the 11th — 12th Centuries”], in B. A. Uspensky (ed.) Tipografskii Ustav: Ustav s kondakarem kontsa XI — nachala XII veka [Typographic Canon: Canon with Kontakia of the Late 11th — Early 12th Centuries], vol. 3. Moscow (in Russian).
Guseinova Zivar
Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Art Criticism;
Academic Rank: Professor;
Place of work: St Petersburg State Conservatory; 3 Teatral’naya Sq., St Petersburg, 190000, Russian Federation;
Post: professor;
ORCID: 0000-0001-8940-6485;
Email: zivar-g@mail.ru. *According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.
Гусейнова З. М. Фитники середины XVII века как отражение музыкально–теоретической мысли своего времени (по рукописи РГБ собр. Одоевского N 1) // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия V: Вопросы истории и теории христианского искусства. 2019. Вып. 36. С. 97-111. DOI: 10.15382/sturV201936.97-111
Russian manuals of theory of music of the mid-17th century contain information about the main elements of the system of singing. In this period, in Znamenny chant, the rendering by the formulae (fi ty and popevki, Russ. фиты и попевки) was topical. They were explained in special manuals (fi tniki and kokizniki, Russ. фитники и кокизники). In the manuscript of this time from the collection of V.F. Odoevskiy kept at the Russian State Library (fund 210, № 1) are presented ca. 20 various manuals, among which there are eight fi tniks; most of them are parts of larger manuals. In the repertoire of the fity of this codex, a whole range of repeated formulae have been identifi ed, they have differences in their shape and, particularly, chants (разводы). From the point of view of structuring the material, the presenting of fi ty should theoretically include the demonstration of fi ta within the echos, the writing of the formula, its name and chant. In reality, the information is far from full. The fi tniks can lack any of these components, and the chants of fi ty can be written in several singing chants. In separate cases, the fitniks contain accompanying remarks that specify the musical attribution of the ways of chanting (e.g. усольский, монастырский) or particularities of their writing and formation (e.g. фита трестрелная, фита тихая без своду). The composition of the fita chants is based on the musical-linear, non-textual system; the number of lines in the chant varies from one to four. The complexity of the fi ta chant depends not on the melismatic concentration but on the number of the lines. In the fi ta singing, there has formed a repertoire of lines which are stable in each echos and are contained in the chanting of many formulae. However, the main technique of the intonational variability of chanting was preserved, which can be regarded as the most distinctive feature in the artistic work of Old Russian masters of singing.
manuscript, codex, handbook of musical theory, fita, popevka, fitnik, kokiznik, chant, text, structure, line, intonation
  1. Brazhnikov M. (1972) Drevnerusskaia teoriia muzyki [Old Russian Theory of Music]. Leningrad (in Russian).
  2. Brazhnikov M. (1984) Litsa i fity znamennogo raspeva. Leningrad (in Russian).
  3. Brodskii N., Lavretskii A., Lunin E., L'vov-Rogachevskii V., Rozanov M., Cheshikhin-Vetrinskii V. (1925) Literaturnaia entsiklopediia: Slovar' literaturnykh terminov [Encyclopaedia of Literature: Dictionary of Literary Terms], available at http://feb-web.ru/feb/slt/abc/ (02.11.2019; in Russian).
  4. Grigor'eva V. (2012) “Kniga inoka Iosifa Lovzunskago. Ego znameni i pomety” [Monk Iosif Lovzunskiy’s Book]. Vestnik PSTGU Seriia V. Voprosy istorii i teorii khristianskogo iskusstva, 3 (9), 7–54 (in Russian).
  5. Guseinova Z. (2001) Fitnik Fedora Krest'ianina. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  6. Karastoianov B. Popevki i fity v tsentonakh znamennogo rospeva i ikh osnovnye formuly; available at http://znamen.ru/txt/k/p_f_cen.htm (in Russian; 02.11.2019).
  7. Kruchinina A., Shvets T. (2012) “«Khristos pri dverekh, zhremaia Paskha priide…»: Chin umoveniia nog v drevnerusskoi pevcheskoi traditsii” [“Christ is at the Door, the Easter has Come...”: the Rite of Washing the Feet in Old Russian Tradition of Singing]. Evraziia: dukhovnye traditsii narodov, 1, pp. 186‒215 (in Russian).
  8. Kudriavtsev I. (ed.) (1960) Rukopisnye sobraniia D. V. Razumovskogo i V. F. Odoevskogo i arkhiv D. V. Razumovskogo. Opisaniia [Manuscript Collections of V. F. Odoevskiy and Archive of D. V. Razumovskiy. Descriptions]. Moscow (in Russian).
  9. Semenenok I. (2017) “K probleme formuly v znamennom raspeve” [The Problem of Formula in Znamenny Chant]. Muzyka i vremia, 5, pp. 3–9 (in Russian).
  10. Seregina N. (2014) “Notirovannaia fi ta v stikhire Epifaniiu Kiprskomu iz rukopisi Troitskogo pistsa Epifaniia” [Notated Fita in the Sticheron to Epiphanius of Salamis from the Manuscript of the Troitsk Scribe Epiphanius], in: M. Sen’, I. Chudinova, A. Timoshenko (eds) Prepodobnyi Sergii Radonezhskii v russkoi kul'ture i iskusstve: tezisy nauchnykh dokladov mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoprakticheskoi konferentsii [St. Sergiy of Radonezh in Russian Culture and Art. Abstracts of the Internationl Conference]. St Petersburg. Pp. 11‒12 (in Russian).
  11. Timofeev L., Turaev S. (1974) Slovar' literaturovedcheskikh terminov [Dictionary of Terms of Literary Studies]. Moscow (in Russian).
  12. Vladyshevskaia T. (2006) Muzykal'naia kul'tura Drevnei Rusi [Musical Culture of Ancient Rus’]. Moscow (in Russian).
  13. Zakhar'ina N. Iz istorii russkogo bogosluzhebnogo peniia [From the History of Russian Church Singing]; available at http://www.rusland.spb.ru/zv_1_3b.htm (in Russian; 02.11.2019).
Guseinova Zivar
Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Art Criticism;
Academic Rank: Professor;
Place of work: St. Petersburg State Conservatory; 3 Teatral’naya Sq., St Petersburg 190000, Russian Federation;
Post: Head of Department of Russian Music History;
ORCID: 0000-0001-8940-6485;
Email: zivar-g@mail.ru. *According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.
Гусейнова З. М. Исторические и теоретические сведения в «Указе о подметках» (по списку РГБ ф. 379 № 1) // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия V: Вопросы истории и теории христианского искусства. 2020. Вып. 38. С. 36-50. DOI: 10.15382/sturV202038.36-50
This article deals with one of the copies of the famous musical and theoretical document of the 17th century Ukaz o podmetkakh in the manuscript of the Russian State Library, fund 379 (of D. V. Razumovsky), no. 1. This document, preserved in several copies of the 17th and 18th centuries with diff erent names, became famous because of the presentation of the “teaching” of the Novgorod chanter Ioann Shaidur regarding the introduction cinnabar letter marks specifying the height of symbols of the hook notation and the structure of the scale. The need to introduce such adjustments was caused by the gradual attrition of unity in the performance of one chant by diff erent singers, and even more so in diff erent churches. The “teaching” of Ioann Shaidur is based on information about the singing of signs in explanatory manuals, abbreviated to one or two letters added to the notation signs in red. This system of marks came into use in the middle of the 17th century and was actively used until the introduction of marks presented in the other theoretical document, Izveshchenie (“Notifi cation”) by Alexander Mezents (1670). In the text studied in this article, the system is presented several times in diff erent variants, which shows that diff erent masters repeatedly introduced additional information and clarifi cation in the document refl ecting local traditions of church singing. As a result, the marks and the structure of the scale are presented in this document in diff erent versions. The copy also contains important historical information on the personality of Ioann Shaidur, as well as on the origin of church singing, which was not borrowed from Byzantium, but originated on Slavic soil, similarly to the Cyrillic alphabet.
Ukaz o podmetkakh, hook notation, marks, sound, church singing, music theory, chanter
  1. Brazhnikov M. (1972) Drevnerusskaia teoriia muzyki [Old Russian theory of music]. Leningrad (in Russian).
  2. Grigor'eva V. (2014) Ranniaia teoriia pomet v drevnerusskikh muzykal'no-teoreticheskikh rukovodstvakh [The early theory of marks in the Old Russian musical-theoretical handbooks]. Vestnik PSTGU. Ser. V: Voprosy istorii i teorii khristianskogo iskusstva, 3 (15), pp. 42–76 (in Russian).
  3. Guseinova Z. (2008) «Izveshchenie» Aleksandra Mezentsa i teoriia muzyki XVII veka [Alexander Mezent’s “Notice” and the theory of music of the 17th century]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  4. Kloss B. (2012) O proiskhozhdenii nazvaniia «Rossiia» [On the origin of the name “Russia”]. Moscow (in Russian).
  5. Likhachev D. (1998) Razvitie russkoi literatury X–XVII vekov [Development of Russian literature of the 10th — 17th centuries]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  6. Rogov A. (ed.) (1973) Muzykal'naia estetika Rossii XI–XVIII vekov [Musical aesthetics of Russia of the 11th — 18th centuries]. Moscow (in Russian).
  7. Orlov A., Skripil' M. (1941‒1956) “Vvedenie: Obobshchaiushchie predpriiatiia XVI v.” [Introduction: Generalising enterprises of the 16th century], in Istoriia russkoi literatury [History of Russian literature], II, 1, pp. 432–445 (in Russian).
  8. Parfent'ev N. (2013) “Osobennosti provedeniia reformy muzykal'nogo iskusstva v kontekste izmenenii v dukhovnoi kul'ture Rossii 1650–1670-kh gg.” [The pecularities of implementation of musical art reforms in the context of changes in Russian spiritual culture in 1650—1670s]. Vestnik IuUrgU. Ser. «Sotsial'no-gumanitarnye nauki», 13, 2, pp. 94–102 (in Russian).
  9. Smoliakov B. (1980) “Dve redaktsii «Predisloviia, otkudu i ot koego vremeni nachasia byti v nashei Rustei zemli osmoglasnoe penie...»” [Two versions of the “Introduction, from where and from what time the Octoechos started to exist in our Russian land...”]. Pamiatniki Otechestva: al'manakh VOOPIiK, 1, pp. 53–57 (in Russian).
Guseinova Zivar
Academic Degree: Doctor of Sciences* in Art Criticism;
Place of work: St. Petersburg State Conservatory; 3 Teatral’naya Sq., St Petersburg 190000, Russian Federation;
ORCID: 0000-0001-8940-6485;
Email: zivar-g@mail.ru. *According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.