St. Tikhon’s University Review . Series V: Problems of History and Theory of Christian Art

This paper addresses some characteristic traits in the performance of the 17th kathisma of the Vigil in Old-Russian liturgical practice. The indications of various recensions of the Jerusalem Typikon and the remarks in liturgical Psalter texts point to the existence of a specific form of kathisma consisting of verses and textual refrains. The combination of the verse and refrain incipits may recall archaic hymnographical forms, such as the gradual antiphons. Since the earlier half of the sixteenth century various graphical recensions of the 17th kathisma were present in the chant manuscripts. Among them one can distinguish between the earlier recensions and the main recension which had taken shape before the end of the century. The earlier recensions are characterized by the simplified set of neumes and the use of the ‘kulizma’ to represent the cadential formulas. According to the main recension, the cadential formulas of the refrains of the 17th kathisma are intonationally similar to the phrases in some Obikhod chants. These observations, as well as the hypothetical transcriptions of the ‘kulizma’ formula in the refrains rendered by the earlier recensions, point to the conclusion that the indications of Russian versions of the Jerusalem Typikon to chant the 17th kathisma on the 5th mode are due not only to the Greek tradition of the Typikon texts, but also probably to the Old-Russian practice of ecclesiastical chant.

the old-russian chant tradition, Jerusalem Typikon, 17th kathisma, psalmody, the earlier graphical recensions of psalmic cycles

1. Kazantseva T. G. 2005, in Staroobryadchestvo: Istoriya, kul'tura, sovremennost': Materialy VII Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferentsii, p. 407.
2. Lozovaya I. E. 2011, Aktual'nye problemy izucheniya tserkovno-pevcheskogo iskusstva: nauka i praktika, pp. 330—343.
3. Lozovaya I. E. Drevnerusskj notirovannyj Paraklit XII veka (The Old-Russian Notated Parakletike), Moscow, 2009.
4. Pentkovskij A. M. 2004, in Prevodite prez XIVstoletie na Balkanite: dokladi ot mezhdunarodnata konferenciya, Sofiya, 26—28 juni 2003, pp. 153—171.
5. Pentkovskij A. M. Tipikon patriarkha Aleksiya Studita v Vizantii i na Rusi (Typicon of Patriarch Alexis Stoudite), Мoscow, 2001.
6. Pereleshina V. G. 2006, in Ezhegodnaya bogoslovskaya konferentsiya PSTBI, vol. 16, pp. 330—336.
7. Tyurina О. V. Drevnerusskaya melizmatika: Bolshoj raspev (The old-Russian Melismatic Styles: the 'Bolshoj Raspev' ('Great Chant')), Moscow, 2010.
8. Shkolnik I. 1997, in Musica Antiqua Europae Orientalis, vol. 11: Acta musicologica, pp. 77—87.
9. Levy K. 1964, in Annales Musicologiques, vol. 6, pp. 7—67.
10. Strunk О. 1956, in Dumbarton Oaks Papers, vol. 9, p. 201.
11. Strunk О. 1960, in Journal of the American Musicological Society, vol. 13/1/3, pp. 50—67.

Starikova Irina

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.

Guseinova Zivar

This article is devoted to the unexplored sphere of Old Russian singing art so called early dissonant mnogogolosie. The author describes differences beetween as kind of mnogogolosie as strochnoe and demestvennoe ones, studies specialities of putevoj raspev in its connection with strochnoe mnogogolosie. Besides the popevky and litsa of putevoj raspev and troestrochie are regarded here and different ways of their notation are compared on the materials of XVII century’s manuscripts

Old Russian music, the history of Old Russian singing art, church singing, putevoj raspev, troestrochie, early russian mnogogolosie, osmoglasie, demestvo’s notation, kasanskoe znamya

1. Bogomolova M. V. Znamennaya monodiya i bezlinejnoe mnogogolosie na primere velikoj panihidy (Znamenny monody and neumatic polyphony by the example of Great Funeral Service), Moscow, 2005.
2. Grigor'ev E. Posobie po izucheniyu cerkovnogo peniya i chteniya (The Manual on Studying the Church Singing and Reading), Riga, 2001.
3. Evseeva L. M., Kondrashkova L. V. 2011, in Prostranstvennye ikony. Performativnoe v Vizantii i Drevnej Rusi, pp. 474-499.
4. Holopov Y. N. 1987, in Problemy deshifrovki drevnerusskih notatsij, pp. 106-129.
5. Kondrashkova L. V. 2012, in Vestnik PSTGU, vol. 3 (9), pp.173-190.
6. Pamyatniki russkogo muzykalnogo iskusstva (The Monuments of Russian Musical Art), Moscow, 1983, vol. 9.
7. Pozhidaeva G. A. Pevcheskie tradicii Drevnej Rusi (The Singing Traditions of Ancient Russia), Moscow, 2007.
8. Starikova I. V. 2011, in Hymnology, vol. 6, pp. 301-317.
9. Uspenskij N. D. Drevnerusskoe pevcheskoe iskusstvo (The Singing Art of Ancient Russia), Moscow, 1971.
10. Uspenskij N. D. Obrazcy drevnerusskogo pevcheskogo iskusstva (The Examples of Ancient Russian Singing Art), Leningrad, 1971.

Kondrashkova Lada

A special additional signs (cinnabar (red) marks) started to appear in znamenny notation in mid-to-late 17th century, which denoted the shift from one hexachord to the other. In old Russian tradition these mutations were called «strannye golosa» (peculiar voices) or «peremena glasom (golosa) neobychnaya» (peculiar alteration of voice). Most full this system of peculiar voices is presentedin the «Kluch razumeniya» (The Key of understanding) — theoretical music treatise from the end of the 17th century. The author of the treatise — monk Tikhon Makarievsk. — showed the system of relations between znamenny and kievskaya notations. Peculiar voices are systematizes by the author in the special section showing examples from chants of different genres and modes. Regarding this fact «The Key» became one of the basic sources for diff erent theoretical information.

strannye golosa (peculiar voices), marks, obihodnyj scale, theoretic musical texts, «Kluch razumeniya», Tikhon Makarievsk, fity, rozvod

1. Bogomolova M. V. 2001, in Ezhegodnaya bogoslovskaya konferenciya Pravoslavnogo Svyato-Tikhonovskogo bogoslovskogo instituta, 2001, pp. 438-443.
2. D'jachenko G. Polnyj cerkovno-slavyanskij slovar (The Complete Church Slavonic Dictionary), Мoscow, 1993.
3. Efimova I. V. 1986, in Russkaya horovaya muzyka XVI—XVIII vv., vol. 83, pp. 82-99.
4. Gusejnova Z. M. «Izveshhenie» Aleksandra Mezenca i teorija muzyki XVII veka («Message» of Alexandr Mezenc and the Theory of Music of XVII Century), Saint-Petersburg, 1995.
5. Gusejnova Z. M. 1998, in Nasledie monastyrskoj kul'tury: remeslo, hudozhestvo, iskusstvo, pp. 68-75.
6. Holopov Ju. N. 1987, in Problemy deshifrovki drevnerusskih notacij, pp. 106-129.
7. Kondrashkova L. V. 2002, in Materialy nauchnoj konferencii «Brazhnikovskie chteniya», pp. 32-37.
8. Konotop A. V. 1979, in Problemy istorii i teorii drevnerusskoj muzyki, p. 171.
9. Kravchenko S. P. Fity znamennogo raspeva. Na materialepevcheskoj knigi «Prazdniki» (Fity of Znamenny Chant. On a Material of the Singing Book «Feasts»), Leningrad, 1981.
10. Mosyagina N. V. 2006, in XVI Ezhegodnaya Bogoslovskaya konferenciya Pravoslavnogo Svyato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta, vol. 2, pp. 343-348.
11. Mosyagina N. V. 2011, in Aktualnyeproblemy izucheniya cerkovno-pevcheskogo iskusstva: nauka i praktika (k 120-letiyu konchiny D. V. Razumovskogo). Gimnologiya, vol. 6, pp. 429-434.
12. Pozhidaeva G. A. Pevcheskie tradicii Drevnej Rusi. Ocherki teorii i stilya (The Traditions of Old Russian Chant. Sketches of the Theory and Style), Moscow, 2007.
13. Vladyshevskaya T. F. 1976, in Iz istorii russkoj i sovetskoj muzyki, vol. 2, pp. 40-61.

Mosiagina Natal'ia

Central Andrey Rublev Museum of Ancient Russian Culture and Art) The article is dedicated to one aspect of researching elaborated landscape backgrounds, appeared in Russian icon painting in the second half of the 17th century. New forms replaced traditional nature images on the icons. The landscape of a new type can play different compositional role in icons: landscape as a background; landscape, which includes hagiographical scenes; landscape, containing the main subject; landscape fragment in an arch of doorway architecture. Depending on the compositional role, connection of the main subject of the icon with a landscape changes.

icon painting, icon, landscape, 17th century, 18th century, Ancient Russian art

1. Antonova V. I., Mneva N. E. Katalog drevnerusskoj zhivopisi Gosudarstvennoj Tretyakovskoj galerei. Opyt istoriko-hudozhestvennoj klassifikatsii (Catalogue of the Ancient Russian Painting in the State Tretjakov Gallery Collection. The Experience of History and Art Classification), Moscow, 1963, vol. 2.
2. Bryusova V. G. Russkaya zhivopis' XVII veka (Russian Painting of the 17th Century), Moscow, 1984.
3. Buseva-Davydova I. L. Kul'tura i iskusstvo v ehpohu peremen: Rossiya semnadcatogo stoletiya (Culture and Art in Times of Changing: Russia in the 17th Century). Moscow, 2008.
4. Buseva-Davydova I. L., Rutman T. A. Cerkov'Il'i proroka v Jaroslavle (Church of Elijah the Prophet in Jaroslavl). Moscow, 2002.
5. Komashko N. I. Russkaya ikona XVIII veka (Russian Icons of the 18th century), Moscow, 2006.
6. Komashko N. I., Katkova S. S. Kostromskaya ikona XIII—XIX vekov (Kostroma Icons of the 13-19th Centuries), Moscow, 2004.
7. Komashko N. I., Saenkova E. M. Russkaya zhitijnaya ikona (Russian Hagiographical Icons), Moscow, 2007.
8. Kochetkov I. A. (ed.) Slovar russkih ikonopistsev XI—XVII vekov (Dictionary of Russian Icon Painters of the 11—17th Centuries), Moscow, 2009.
9. Kuznetzova O. B., Fedorchuk A. V. Malen'kie shedevry bol'shih masterov: Ikony Jaroslavlya XVI—XIX vekov iz sobraniya Jaroslavskogo hudozhestvennogo muzeya: Katalog vystavki (Small Masterpieces of the Big Masters: Icons of Jaroslavl of the 16—19th Centuries from Jaroslavl Art Museum collection: Catalogue of the Exhibition), Moscow, 2006.
10. Kuznetzova O. B., Fedorchuk A. V. Jaroslavskj hudozhestvennyj muzej: 101 ikona iz Jaroslavlya (Jaroslavl Art Museum: 101 Icons from Jaroslavl), Moscow, 2007.
11. Menjajlo V. A. Ikony iz Voznesenskogo monastyrya Moskovskogo Kremlya: Katalog (Icons from Ascension Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin: Catalogue), Moscow, 2005.
12. Poljakova O. A. Shedevry russkoj ikonopisi XVI—XIX vekov (Masterpieces of Russian Icon Painting of the 16—19th Centuries), Moscow, 1999.
13. Romanenko A. I. Patriarshie palaty (Patriachs' Palace), Moscow, 2001.
14. Saharova O. M. Ikonostas Uspenskogo sobora Ryazanskogo kremlya: Putevoditel' (Iconostasis of the Dormition Cathedral in the Kremlin of Ryazan: the Guide), Moscow, 2010.

Kir'ianova Svetlana

Establishing of the authorship of the baroque iconostases seems not to be a considerable problem but it remains an important task. We can take note that we have reliable information concerning a very small number of the monuments. Overwhelmingly the real name of the author of an iconostasis — of the creator of its architectural project is concealed from us. This name is often substituted by the names of the contractors: the cutters or the woodworkers. The contribution of some performers is too much exaggerated, so they are presented as the outstanding architects and they are mentioned as such many times on the pages of the research and popular science works. The documental sources are not numerous, so a lot of legends appear. In the most cases the researchers find out that the original baroque iconostases are groundlessly considered to be created by F.B. Rastrelli. Many of such legends firstly appeared in the literature of the XIX century and are repeated by the modern authors who do not use any critical approach. Now it is possible to state that the deep and all round research in this field will knock the bottom out of the stereotypes which exist in the Russian Art Studies and a new page will be written into the history of the Russian architecture of the XVIII century. Keywords: baroque, iconostasis, Harbel, Zarudny, Rastrelli

baroque, iconostasis, Harbel, Zarudny, Rastrelli

1. Arkin D. E. 1946, in Arhitekturnyj arhiv, vol. 1, pp. 21-98.
2. Batovsky Z. Arhitektor F. B. Rastrelli o svoih tvoreniyah (Architect Rastrelli about his works), St. Petersburg, 2000.
3. Golovina I. A., Knyazhickaya T. V. (ed.) IkonostasPetropavlovskogo sobora (The Iconostasis of the Peter and Paul Cathedral), Saint-Petersburg, 2003.
4. Gorbatenko S. B. 1994, in Pamyatniki istorii i kul'tury Sankt-Peterburga, pp. 139-154.
5. Grabar' I. E. Istoriya russkogo iskusstva (History of Russian Art), Moscow, 1912, vol. 3.
6. Dedyuhina V. S., Ruzavin Ju. A. 1980, in Hudozhestvennoe nasledie, vol. 6/36, pp. 193-202.
7. Denisov Ju. M., Petrov A. N. Zodchij Rastrelli (Architect Rastrelli), Leningrad, 1963.
8. El'kin E. N. 1994, in Kraevedcheskie zapiski, vol. 2, pp. 149-159.
9. Istoriko-statisticheskie svedeniya o Sankt-Peterburgskoj eparhii (Historical-Statistical Information about Diocese of Saint-Petersburg), Saint-Petersburg, 1876, vol. 5.
10. Jur'eva T. V. Pravoslavnyj ikonostas kak kul'turnyj sintez (Orthodox Iconostasis as a Cultural Synthesis), Jaroslavl', 2005.
11. Jartsev A. A. Osnovanie i osnovatel' russkogo teatra (F. G. Volkov) (Foundation and Founder of the Russian Theatre (F. G. Volkov)), Moscow, 1900.
12. Kirichenko E. I. Mikhail Bykovsky, Moscow, 1988.
13. Malickij N. V. 1911, in Trudy Vladimirskoj uchyonoj arhivnoj komissii, vol. 13.
14. Mel'nik A. G. Hramovye ikonostasy kontsa XVII—XIX veka Rostova Velikogo (Rostov the Great Temple Iconostases of the laTe Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century), Saint-Petersburg, 2012.
15. Mozgovaja E. B. Tvorchestvo I. P. Zarudnogo (The Creativity of I. P. Zarudny), Leningrad, 1977.
16. Morozova A. A. N. F. Gerbel'. Gorodskoj arhitektor Sankt-Peterburga (N. F. Gerbel'. City Architect of Saint-Petersburg), Saint-Petersburg, 2004.
17. Nikolaeva M. V. Ikonostas petrovskogo vremeni: «stolyarstvo i rez'ba», zolochenie, ikonopisnye raboty (The Iconostasis of Peter's Time: «Joinery and Carving», Gilding, Icon-Painting), Moscow, 2008.
18. Voronihina A. N. (ed.) Arhitekturnaya grafika Rossii. Pervaya polovina XVIII veka. Nauchnyj catalog (Russian Architectural Drawings of the First Half of the Eighteenth Century. Academic Catalog), Leningrad, 1981.
19. Vygolov V. P. (ed.) Svod pamyatnikov arhitektury i monumental'nogo iskusstva Rossii. Bryanskaya oblast' (A Set of Architectural Monuments in Russia. Bryansk Region), Moscow, 1996.
20. Batowski Z. Architekt Rastrelli o swych pracach (Architect Rastrelli about His Works), Lwow, 1939.

Posternak Kirill

This article focuses on the akathistus’ singing in the contemporary practice of divine service in Russian Orthodox Church. The material of study are lots of records with akathistus’ tunes and some musical texts. Among them are as published materials as unpublished ones. Last ones were given the author by regents and choristers working in churches and monasteries of Central Russia. These materials are collected, decoded and analysed by the author and on the basis of this evidens some results were obtained. The author can reveal specific nature of widespread akathistus’ tunes as one as Sarovsky tune and so called Akademichesky tune, also can show peculiarities of local acathistus’ tunes used only in one or two churches and monasteries

akathistus, akathistus’ singing, akathistus’ tune, icos, refrain, kondak, line, variantnesse

Sokolova Aleksandra

Abi Warburg is founder of iconological method. He changed the iconology of art history itself too, since the cultural and historical method of considering social, cultural and political impact on visual art was enhanced by the problem of the reverse impact of images on mentality and the role of artist in his approach to visual and ideological heritage. Edgar Wind was engaged in active communication with Warburg in the late 1920th, and was dealing with his ideas in a number of works later. The Warburgian impact can be traced in Wind’s own works, following not only Warburg’s topics of pathos formula, gesture and dialectic approach, but also his understanding of image in art as symptom and symbol as well as his pursuit of the meaning in the visual arts.

A. Warburg, E. Wind, methodology of art history, iconology, interpretation, symbol, gesture

1. Vaneyan S. 2012, in Vestnik PSTGU. Voprosy istorii i teorii khristianskogo iskusstva, vol. 3/9, pp. 127-147.
2. Vaneyan S. 2003, in Pravoslavnaya enciklopediya, p. 556.
3. Vaneyan S. 2009, in Pravoslavnaya enciklopediya, pp. 47-50.
4. Varburg A. Velikoe pereselenie obrazov (The Great Moving of Images), Saint-Petersburg, 2008.
5. Buschendorf B. 1985, in Idea. Jahrbuch der Hamburger Kunsthalle IV, pp. 165-209.
6. Buschendorf B. Auf dem Weg nach England. Edgar Wind und die Emigration der Bibliothek Warburg, Hamburg, 1993.
7. Edgar Wind: Kunsthistoriker und Philosoph, Berlin, 1998.

Toropygina Marina

This article focuses on the memories of archimandrite Matfej (Mormyl.) and on the memories of his contemporaries devoted him. According to authors’ opinion creative activity of archimandrite Matfej was so significant that his thankful descendants will remember him as long as the churh’s singing will be present.

Divine Service’s Singing, chant, choire’s score, arrangement, tradition of singing, St. Trinity Sergiev’s Lavra, Moscow Spiritual Academy, Moscow Spiritual Seminary

1. Martynov V. Istoriya bogosluzhebnogo peniya (The History of Divine Service's Singing), Moscow, 1994.
2. Matfej (Mormyl'), arkhimandrit. 2000, in Arkhimandrit Matfej, http://www.seminaria.ru/chsing/matftalk.htm (Date: 11.05.2013).

Hegumen Siluan (Tumanov A.)