Active development in the 17th century of musical-theoretical thought led to the emergence of a variety of manuals refl ecting all the features of church singing art. Within this process, one can see the emergence, along with the stable types of theoretical documents, of their contaminated types which in an edited form combine information from various manuals. Contaminated manuals can combine features of documents of diff erent types and diff erent times. This article studies one of the types of contaminated manual, conventionally called “fi to-kokiznik”, which combines materials that represent both “popevkas” and “fi tas”. This list is presented, in particular, in the famous theoretical codex in the manuscript of the second quarter of the 17th century of the Russian State Library, Fund 210 (V. F. Odoevsky’s), # 1. It can be seen that the regular, and in many ways historically traditional, inclusion of “fi tas” in kokizniks or “popevkas” in the fi tniks did not destroy the basic type of the manual, which was determined by the prevailing formulas. Fito-kokiznik, as a rule, appeared in those cases where it was obvious that the author had intentionally related the guide to diff erent types of formulas. Its purpose was, presumably, the display of “fi tas” and “popevkas”, that is, melodic lines, structuring both formulas. To this end, the author of the codex has combined the information of several diff erent manuals, carrying out considerable editorial work.
church singing, contamination, musical-theoretical manual, editing, fitnik, kokiznik, formula, “fita”, “popevka”, singing, melodic string
- Bogrova K. (2012) “Russkaia natsional’naia kontseptosfera: ustoichivie sravneniia v diakhronii” [Russian national concept sphere: fi xed comparisons in diachrony]. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N. I. Lobachevskogo, 5 (3), pp. 14–19 (in Russian).
- Brazhnikov M. (2002) Russkaia pevcheskaia paleografi ia [Russian chant paleography]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
- Frolov S. (1981) ““Bol’shoi” rospev Fedora Krest’yanina na tekst prazdnichnoj stikhiry (Opyt muzykal'no-tekstologicheskogo issledovaniia)” [“Large” rospev of Fyodor Krestyanin on the text of the festive sticheron (A musical and textual study)]. Trudy Otdela drevnerusskoi literatury. Leningrad, vol. 36, pp. 297–307 (in Russian).
- Grigor'eva (Pereleshina) V. (2011) “Metody raboty s istochnikami s tsel'yu sostavleniia kokiznika znamennogo rospeva na primere popevki “koleso”” [Working methods with sources with the goal of making kokiznik of Znamenny chant with the popevka “koleso” as an example]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia V: Voprosy istorii i teorii khristianskogo iskusstva, 1 (4), pp. 42–120 (in Russian).
- Guseinova Z. (2012) “Teoriya fitnogo peniia v kontse XVI veka” [The theory of “fitnoe” singing at the end of the 16th century]. Opera musicologica, 3, pp. 4–14 (in Russian).
- Karastoianov B. “Popevki i fity v tsentonakh znamennogo rospeva i ikh osnovnye formuly” [“Popevki” and “fity” in sentons of Znamenny chant and their basic formulas], available at http://znamen.ru/txt/k/p_f_cen.htm (05.05.2020) (in Russian).
- Lozovaia I. (2015) Stolpovoi znamennyi raspev (2 polovina XV–XVII vv.). Formul'naia struktura [Znamenny chant (2nd half of the 15th — 17th centuries). Formula structure]. Moscow (in Russian).
- Sobraniya D. V. Razumovskogo i V. F. Odoevskogo; Arhiv D. V. Razumovskogo: opisaniya (1960) [Collections of D. V. Razumovsky and V. F. Odoevsky; Archive of D. V. Razumovsky: descriptions] (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; Post:
professor, head of Department of russian music history; ORCID: 0000-0001-8940-6485
*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.