text:
User:Platonykiss/sandbox/Oktoechos and Parakletike

The Octoechos (from the Greek: ἡ Ὀκτώηχος [okˈtoixos]; from ὀκτώ "eight" and ἦχος "sound, mode" called echos; Slavonic: Осмѡгласникъ, Osmoglasnik from о́смь "eight" and гласъ "voice, sound") is a liturgical book containing a repertoire of hymns ordered in eight parts according to eight echoi (tones or modes). Originally created in the Monastery of Stoudios during the 9th century as a hymnal complete with musical notation, it is still used in many rites of Eastern Christianity. The book with similar function in the Western Church is the tonary, and both contain the melodic models of an octoechos system; however, while the tonary serves simply for a modal classification, the octoechos is organized as a cycle of eight weeks of services. The word itself can also refer to the repertoire of hymns sung during the celebrations of the Sunday Office.

The Role of Meter in the Octoechos
Many hymns in the Octoechos, such as Kathismata, Odes, and Kontakia are set in a strict meter—a fixed number of syllables with a particular stress patterns, consistent throughout multiple verses. Complex poems are written with syllabic patterns matching the meter of a familiar hymn written prior. One example of such a hymn is "Ἡ Παρθένος σήμερον," the prooimion of the Christmas kontakion composed by Romanos the Melodist, set to a melody in the third mode of the Octoechos. This hymn has served as the metrical basis for many other Kontakia. In the current tradition the kontakion exists as well as a model to recite many other kontakia prosomoia which was as well translated into Old Church Slavonic. In the particular genre kontakion this model is still regarded as an idiomelon due to the complexity of the poetic form.

Usually the arrangement of the syllables with their metric accentuation are composed as a well-known hymn tune or sticheron avtomelon within the melos of a certain echos. These melodic stichera are called automela, because they can easily adapted to other texts, even if the number of syllables of verse varies—the so-called "prosomoia." The prooimion which precedes the kontakion for Christmas, is recited today with a simple melody in a rather sophisticated heirmologoc melos of echos tritos, its most important part is the conclusion called "ephymnion" (in italic characters) which uses one and the same melody for all kontakia of the same echos (at the end of the prooimion as well as at the end of each following oikos): Ἡ Παρθένος σήμερον τὸν ὑπερούσιον τίκτει καὶ ἡ γῆ τὸ σπήλαιον τῷ ἀπροσίτῳ προσάγει, Ἄγγελοι μετά ποιμένων δοξολογούσι, Μάγοι δὲ μετά ἀστέρος ὁδοιπορούσιν, δι’ ἡμάς γὰρ ἐγεννήθη παιδίον νέον, ὁ πρὸ αἰώνων Θεός. A hymn may more or less imitate an automelon melodically and metrically—depending, if the text has exactly the same number of syllables with the same accents as those of verses in the corresponding automelon. Such a hymn was usually called sticheron prosomoion or in case of kontakion "kontakion prosomoion", the echos and opening words of the model (a sticheron avtomelon or in this particular case the prooimion of the Nativity kontakion) were usually indicated. For example, the Octoechos' kontakion for Sunday Orthros in echos tritos has the indication, that it should be sung to the melody of the above Christmas kontakion. Both kontakia have nearly the same number of syllables and accents within its verses, so the exact melody of the former is slightly adapted to the latter, its accents have to be sung with the given accentuation patterns.

The printed book Octoechos with the Sunday cycles is often without any musical notation and the determination of a hymn's melody is indicated by the echos or glas according to the section within the book and its avtomelon, a melodic model defined by the melos of its mode. Since this book collects the repertoire of melodies sung every week, educated chanters knew all these melodies by heart, and they learnt how to adapt the accentuation patterns to the printed texts of the hymns while singing out of other text books like the menaion.

Types of octoechos books
The Great Octoechos (ὅκτώηχος ἡ μεγάλη), or Parakletike, contains proper office hymns for each weekday. The hymns of the books Octoechos and Heirmologion had been collected earlier in a book called "Troparologion" or "Tropologion". It already existed during the 6th century in the Patriarchate of Antiochia, before it became a main genre of the centers of an Octoechos hymn reform in the monasteries of Saint Catherine on Mount Sinai and Mar Saba in Palestine, where St. John Damascene (c. 676–749) and Cosmas of Maiuma created a cycle of stichera anastasima. Probably for this reason John of Damascus is regarded as the creator the Hagiopolitan Octoechos and the Hagiopolites treatise itself claims his authorship right at the beginning. It has only survived completely in a 14th-century copy, but its origin dates probably back to the time between the council of Nicaea and the time Joseph the Hymnographer (~816-886), when the treatise could still have introduced the book Tropologion. The earliest papyrus sources of the Tropologion can be dated to the 6th century:

"Choral singing saw its most brilliant development in the temple of Holy Wisdom in Constantinople during the reign of Emperor Justinian the Great. National Greek musical harmonies, or modes — the Dorian, Phrygian, Lydian, and Mixolydian modes — were adapted to the needs of Christian hymnography. Then John of Damascus started a new, third period in the history of Church singing. He introduced what is known as the osmoglasie — a system of singing in eight tones, or melodies —, and compiled a liturgical singing book bearing the title 'Ochtoechos,' which literally signifies 'the book of the eight tones.'"

The earliest version of a Tropologion dedicated to the repertoire of Octoechos was created by Severus of Antioch, Paul of Edessa and John Psaltes between 512 and 518. The Tropologion was expanded upon by St. Cosmas of Maiuma († 773), Theodore the Studite († 826) and his brother Joseph of Thessalonica († 832), Theophanes the Branded (c. 775–845), the hegoumenai and hymnographers Kassia (810-865) and Theodosia, Thekla the Nun, Metrophanes of Smyrna († after 880), Paul, Metropolit of Amorium, and by the emperors Leo VI and Constantine VII (10th century) as well as numerous anonymous authors. The earliest state of an octoechos collection of the Sunday canons is Ms. gr. 1593 of the Library at Saint Catherine's Monastery (about 800). This reduced version was simply called Octoechos and it was often the last part of the sticherarion, the new notated chant book of the reformers.

Until the 14th century the book Octoechos, as far as it belonged to the Sticherarion, was ordered according to hymn genre of the repertoire. Later the thematic structure of the stichera anastasima which had to be sung during Hesperinos on Saturday and during Orthros on Sunday, were emphasised and ordered according to the eight echoi, each of the eight parts structured according to the order, as they had to be sung during the evening and morning service. They became a well structured book for the daily use of chanters like the later book Anastasimatarion or in Slavonic Voskresnik. Since the 17th century different collections of the Octoechos had been separated as own books about certain Hesperinos psalms like the Anoixantarion an octoechos collection for the psalm 103, the Kekragarion for psalm 140, and the Pasapnoarion for the psalm verse 150:6.

Types of stichera
The Octoechos also included other stichera dedicated to particular saints according to the provenance of a certain monastery, which also allows conclusions concerning place, where the chant book was used.
 * Stichera anastasima. In the new book anastasimatarion (voskresnik) there are 24 stichera anastasima ("resurrection hymns") which are usually ascribed to John of Damascus, three of them in each echos. Most of them do not appear within the book Octoechos before the 15th century.
 * Stichera anatolika. Composed about the longest stichoi concerning the resurrection motive. The name probably derived from a certain composer or from their local origin.
 * Stichera alphabetika. 24 stichera composed in a style similar to the anatolika. They are usually ordered according to the alphabet concerning their incipit.
 * Anabathmoi. Antiphons structured in eight parts according to the octoechos, each one consisting of three or four sets of three troparia. The kyrioi echoi (authentic modes) are composed to parallel verses of the "Gradual psalms," while the plagioi echoi (plagal modes) usually begin by imitating Psalm 119. The last sticheron of each antiphon usually begins with the words "ἁγιῷ πνεύματι." The anavathmoi were often a separated collection within the book Octoechos, which was no longer included in later books.
 * Heothina anastasima. The eleven stichera of the heothina are ascribed to the Emperor Leo VI and are sung in connection with the Matins Gospel during Orthros. The first eight follow the octoechos order, with the plagios tetartos in the enharmonic phthora nana. The ninth sticheron was composed in echos plagios protos, the tenth in the phthora nenano (plagios devteros), and the eleventh in the diatonic plagios tetartos.
 * Exaposteilaria anastasima. The eleven exaposteilaria anastasima are ascribed to Emperor Constantine VII. Created during the Macedonian renaissance, they are a later part of the repertoire which cannot be found in manuscripts before the 11th century. The cycle was sung since the Sunday following Pentecost, followed by a theotokion and a heothinon.
 * Stichera dogmatika. These stichera are dedicated to the Mother of God (Theotokos) and they are called "dogmatika," because the hymns are about the dogmas concerned with the virgin Mary. The section of dogmatika, 24 with three for each echos, was usually completed with other Marianic hymns called "theotokia". Books with hymns about the Theotokos are sometimes called, "Theotokarion".
 * Stichera staurosima and staurotheotokia. (devoted to the Holy Cross and to the Mother of God), sung on Wednesdays and Fridays.

The temporal cycles and the prosomoia
The Sticherarion did not only include the book Octoechos, but also the books Menaion, Triodion and Pentecostarion. Certain stichera of the other books, stichera prosomoia which rather belonged to an oral tradition, because they were later composed by using the avtomela written in the book Parakletike. The early Prosomoia composed by Theodore the Studites for the evening service during Lenten period which belong to the book Triodion. Since the 14th century, sticheraria also had notated collections of the prosomoia sung within Paschal tide (tesserakostes). They were made over idiomela of the menaion and notated with the new verses, while most of the prosomoia relied entirely on an oral tradition. Although these prosomoia were part of the Pentecostarion, this cycle was often written within the Octoechos section.

Nevertheless, a temporal eight-week-order was always the essential part of the Octoechos, at least as a liturgical concept. The temporal organisation of the mobile feast cycle and its lessons was result of the Studites reform since Theodore the Studites, their books were already translated by Slavic monks during the 9th century. The eight tones can be found as the Paschal cycle (moveable cycle) of the church year, the so-called Pentecostarion starting with the second Sunday of (the eighth day of) Easter, the first usually changes the echos each day, while the third week started the eight-week cycle with the second echos, each week in just one echos. The same cycle started in the triodion with the Lenten period until Easter, with the Lenten Friday preceding the subsequent Palm Sunday. Each day of the week has a distinct theme for which hymns in each tone are found in the texts of the Octoechos. During this period, the Octoechos is not sung on weekdays and it is furthermore not sung on Sundays from Palm Sunday through the Sunday of All Saints.

After Pentecost, the singing of the Great Octoechos on weekdays continued until Saturday of Meatfare Week, on Sundays there was another cycle organised by the eleven heothina with their exaposteilaria and their theotokia.

In the daily practice the prosomeia of the Octoechos are combined with idiomela from the other books: On the fixed cycle, i.e., dates of the calendar year, the Menaion and on the movable cycle, according to season, the Lenten Triodion (in combination from the previous year's Paschal cycle). The texts from these volumes displace some of those from the Octoechos. The less hymns are sung from the Octoechos the more have to be sung from the other books. On major feast days, hymns from the Menaion entirely displace those from the Octoechos except on Sundays, when only a few Great Feasts of the Lord eclipse the Octoechos.

Note that the Octoechos contains sufficient texts, so that none of these other books needs to be used—a holdover from before the invention of printing and the completion and wide distribution of the rather large 12-volume Menaion—, but portions of the Octoechos (e.g., the last three stichera following "Lord, I have cried," the Hesperinos psalm 140 ) are seldom used nowadays and they are often completely omitted in the currently printed volumes.

The Old Church Slavonic reception of the Greek octoechos
Even before a direct exchange between Slavic monks and monks of the Stoudios Monastery, papyrus fragments offer evidence of earlier translations of Greek hymns. The early fragments show that hymns and their melodies developed independently in an early phase until the 9th century. Cyril and Methodius and their followers within the Ohrid-School were famous for the translation of Greek hymnody between 863 and 893, but it is also a period of a reformative synthesis of liturgical forms, the creation of new hymnographical genres and their organisation in annual cycles.

Slavic Oktoich or Osmoglasnik and Sbornik
Though the name of the book "Oktoich" derived from the Greek name Octoechos (Old Slavonic "Osmoglasnik," because "glas" is the Slavonic term for echos), the Slavic book did rather correspond to the unnotated Tropologion, and often it included the hymns of the Irmolog as well. The Slavic reception, although it can be regarded as faithful translation of the Byzantine books, is mainly based on early Theta notation, which was used by Slavic reformers in order to develop own forms of notation in Moscow and Novgorod (znamenny chant). The translation activities between 1062 and 1074 at the Kievan Pechersk Lavra had been realised without the help of South Slavic translators. The earliest known Slavonic manuscripts with neumes date from the late 11th or 12th century (mainly Stichirar, Kondakar and Irmolog). Concerning the earlier translations of the hymns and later translations in Russia, we can observe two different approaches to translation, one which favours the musical and metrical structure and another which favours the literal translation of the hymns. The school represented by Kliment of Ohrid, Naum, or Constantine of Preslav endeavoured to match the Greek text in the number of syllables in the hymns and to preserve the verse structure indicated by the corresponding neumes, but the resulting meaning of the hymns could change so considerably that, in certain cases, the only aspect the original and the translation had in common was the prescribed music, i.e., the indicated melos and echos. On the other hand, the later translations during the missions in Russia had their emphasis on a literal translation of the texts, but this resulted in altering the metrical structure given by the avtomela and the heirmoi so much that the music had to be recomposed.

Another difference between the two Slavic receptions was the tonal system. Since the Southern Slavic reception did not change the system the prosomoia, it corresponded to the Hagiopolitan Octoechos. Glas ("voice") 1–4 are the authentic modes or kyrioi echoi, and the remaining 5–8 are the plagal modes or plagioi echoi, the latter term coming from the Medieval Greek plagios, "oblique" (from plagos, "side"). Unlike the Western octoechos, glas 5–8 (the plagioi echoi) used the same octave species like glas 1–4, but their final notes were a fifth lower on the bottom of the pentachord with respect to the finales of the kyrioi on the top of each pentachord, the melodic range composed in the plagioi was usually smaller. There was an alternative tonal system based on the obihodniy zvukoryad which was used in the Northern Slavic reception in Novgorod. It was based on a hexaechos, since it used a tone system based on triphonia with three modes organised in fourth equivalence.

Often the Parakletike was divided in two volumes as Pettoglasniks. Another popular book, also characteristic for the Obihod reception, was the so-called Sbornik ("Anthologion" or better "Synekdemos")—a chant book which contained all the chant of the divine liturgy, including proper chant of the Sticherarion books (Miney, the Triods, and the Oktoich).

Print editions with musical notation
Today heirmological melodies used primarily for canons have their own octoechos mele and their tempo, which employ a slightly modified scale for each tone; in canons, each troparion in an ode uses the meter and melody of the ode's irmos (analogous to prosomoia for sticheraric modes of a tone) and, therefore, even when a canon's irmos is never sung, its irmos is nonetheless specified so as to indicate the melody. A volume called an "Irmolog" contains the irmosi of all the canons of all eight tones as well as a few sundry other pieces of music. Abridged versions of the Octoechos printed with musical notation were frequently published. As simple Octoechos they provided the hymns for the evening (večernaja molitva) and morning service (utrenna) between Saturday and Sunday.

In Russia the Oktoich was the very first book printed (incunabulum) in Cyrillic typeface, which was published in Poland (Kraków) in 1491—by Schweipolt Fiol, a German native of Franconia. Only seven copies of this first publication are known to remain and the only complete one is in the collection of the Russian National Library.

In 1905 the Zograf Monastery published a set of Slavonic chant books whose first volume is the Voskresnik with the repertoire of the simple Osmoglasnik. Within the Russian Orthodox church a chant book Octoechos with notated with kryuki developed during the late 15th century. The first print edition Oktoikh notnago peniya, sirech' Osmoglasnik was published with Kievan staff notation in 1772. It included hymns in Znamenny Chant as well as the melodic models (avtomela) for different types of hymns for each Glas.

Caveat
Northern Slavs in modern times often do not use the eight-tone music system—although they always do use the book Octoechos—rather singing all hymns in the same scale but with different melodies for each tone for each of several types of classifications of hymns.

Oriental hymnals
Although the Georgian Iadgari is not the oldest manuscript among the complete tropologia which could be preserved until the present day, the Iadgari offers the most complete insight into the development of hymnography and the cathedral rite of Jerusalem. Other hymn books developed between the 7th and the 11th centuries starting from the Hagiopolitan hymn reform of 692. They contain stichera, kontakia all kinds of troparia and canons without being necessarily dependent on the tradition of Byzantine chant and later developments of the Stoudios Monastery since the 9th century. The reason of this independence is, that the church history of Armenia and Georgia preceded the Byzantine imperial age about 50 years and both traditions were more oriented to the Patriarchates of Antioch and Jerusalem. This section describes Oriental and Caucasian hymnals as they have been used by Armenians until the genocide by the end of the Ottoman Empire, and as they are still used among Orthodox Christians in Syria, Persia, Armenia and Georgia.

Syrian Tropligin
The Tropologion developed also in Syria and was called in Syriac Tropligin. A Syriac translation of the "Octoechos of Antioch", tropologion created by Severus of Antioch, Paul of Edessa and John Psaltes (early sixth century), was copied in 675, but still during the 9th century Tropligins were organised in a similar way like the Georgian Iadgari.

The Syriac Orthodox Church today still makes use of a system of eight modes (usually classified as makam). Each hymn (Syriac: qolo, plural: qole) is composed in one of these eight modes. Some modes have variants (shuhlophe) similar to the "special melodies" mentioned above. Only skilled chanters can master these variants.

The modal cycle consists of eight weeks. Each Sunday or Feast day is assigned one of the eight modes. During the weekday offices, known in Syriac by the name Shhimo, the 1st and 5th modes are paired together, so are the 2nd and 6th, the 3rd and 7th, and the 4th and 8th. If a particular Sunday makes use of the 1st mode, the following Monday is sung with the 5th mode, Tuesday with the 1st mode, etc., with the pair alternating every day of the week (see the table provided in Guide to the Eight Modes in the External Links below).

The ecclesiastical year starts with Qudosh `Idto (The Consecration of the Church), a feast observed on the eighth Sunday before Christmas (Yaldo). The 1st mode is sung on this day. The following Sunday makes use of the 2nd mode, and so on, repeating the cycle until it starts again the next year. The cycle is interrupted only by feasts which have their own tones assigned to them. Similar to the Byzantine usage, each day of Easter Week has its own mode, except the Syriacs do not skip the 7th mode. Thus, the Sunday after Easter, called New Sunday (Hadto) is in the 8th mode rather than the 1st.

In one type of hymn used by the Syriac Church, the Qole Shahroye (Vigils), each of the modes is dedicated to a theme: The 1st and 2nd modes are dedicated to the Virgin Mary, the 3rd and 4th to the saints, the 5th and 6th to penitence, and the 7th and 8th to the departed.

The primary collection of hymns in the eight modes is the Beth Gazo d-ne`motho, or "Treasury of Chants."

Armenian Šaraknoc'
In the Armenian Apostolic Church, the system of eight modes is referred to as oot tzayn (eight voices). Although there is no structural relation between the Greek and Armenian modes, the division into "authentic" and "plagal" modes is parallel. In Armenian terminology, the "Authentic" modes are referred to as "Voice" (Tzayn) and the "Plagal" modes are called "Side" (Koghm), and are utilized in the following order:

This order is important, because it is the order in which the modes are used liturgically and different from the order of the Greek traditions. Instead of using one tone per week, the Armenians use one tone per day. Easter Sunday is always the First Voice, the next day is First Side, and so on throughout the year. However, the cycle does not actually begin on Easter day, but counts backwards from Easter Sunday to the First Sunday in Lent, which is always Forth Side, regardless of what mode the previous day was. Each mode of the oot tzayn has one or more tartzwadzk‘ (auxiliary) modes.

The Šaraknoc' is the book which contains the Šarakan, or Šaragan (Canons), hymns which constitute the substance of the musical system of Armenian liturgical chant in the eight modes. Originally, these were Psalms and Biblical Canticles that were chanted during the services. A Sharagan was composed of verses which were interspersed between the scriptural verses. Eventually, the Šarakan replaced the biblical text entirely. In addition, the eight modes are applied to the psalms of the Night office, called Kanonaklookh (Canon head). the Armenian Church also makes use of other modes outside of the oot tzayn.


text:
Talk:Shelf:Music

I would like to suggest a shelf:Music history Platonykiss (discuss • contribs) 15:50, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Suggestion
I would like to add here the shelf:Music history Platonykiss (discuss • contribs) 15:51, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Shelf:Music


text:
User:Platonykiss/sandbox/Three genres of stichera

Source:

Idiomelon (Medieval Greek: ἰδιόμελον from idio-, "unique" and -melon, "melody"; Church Slavonic: самогласенъ, samoglasen)—pl. idiomela—is a type of sticheron found in the liturgical books used in the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Eastern Catholic Churches which follow the Byzantine Rite, and many other Orthodox communities like Old Believers. Idiomela are unique compositions, while avtomela or aftomela—sing. automelon, avtomelon or aftomelon (Medieval Greek: αὐτόμελον, Church Slavonic: самоподобенъ, samopodoben)—were used to create other hymns by a composition over the avtomelon's melody and following the poetic meter provided by the musical rhythm. The genre composed over these avtomela was characterised as prosomoion or prosomeion (Medieval Greek: προσόμοιον "similar to", Church Slavonic: подобенъ, podoben).

Definition of idiomelon, avtomelon and prosomoion
The hymn category idiomelon can only be understood in comparison with avtomelon and prosomoia. Already in the older book Tropologion each melody of a certain hymn was classified by a modal signature of the Byzantine octoechos—the eight mode system as it had developed in Constantinople, Damascus, Jerusalem, and in many other places.

The sticherarion as a collection of idiomela
An idiomelon is a melodic type of sticheron whose music was notated for the first time in the new books of the sticheraria during the Studites reform. The Greek term στιχηρὸν ἰδιόμελον (stichēron idiomelon) derives from ἴδιος ("own, special") and μέλον ("melody"). It was used to classify unique melodies composed exclusively for the text of one particular hymn. These idiomela were created in many different traditions, but one voluminous book called "sticherarion" collected and documented them all by the use of musical notation. Since there were so many traditions whose hymnographers composed within the octoechos, the solution was found by the invention of a new neume notation in order to write down the whole repertory in the sticherarion. Its books were the Menaion (Miney), Triodion (Postnaya Triod), Pentecostarion (Tsvetnaya Triod), and the Parakletike (Osmoglasnik). They documented a large repertoire, but only a small part of it made up a local monastic tradition and the latter also included many hymns which were not written in the books.

It was a heterogenous collection of hymns, mainly of unique compositions (stichera idiomela) which could be identified by their own idiomatic melodies. The later Slavonic translators of the Ohrid school (since 893) called the idiomela "samoglasniy". There are other stichera called "prosomoia" (Sl. podobniy) which do not have their own melodies, but they used a limited number of well-known melodies—the so-called "avtomela" (Sl. samopodobniy).

Avtomela and prosomoia as categories of an oral transmission
According to this simple typological definition a prosomoion could be recognised, because it had just a rubric with an incipit of the avtomelon text, while the echos or glas (musical mode) was indicated by a modal signature. It was enough, because educated chanters knew the avtomela by heart. The hymnographers had already used the melody of the avtomelon to compose the stanza and its verses of the prosomoion, while a singer had to adapt accentuation patterns, if the accent in a verse has moved to the neighbouring syllable (see the kontakion example). Hence, the prosomoia had been written in textbooks (the Octoechos mega or Parakletike, or later another textbook called "Menaion"), but sometimes the prosomoia had been also notated in the Octoechos part of certain notated Sticheraria. These notated prosomoia allow to study, how the avtomela were adapted to the verses and accents of their prosomoia.

The definition of αὐτόμελον (avtomelon) meant as well a sticheron which defines its melody—with a melody for "itself" (Gr. αὐτός, Sl. samopodoben), but not in the idiomatic and exclusive sense of the unique idiomela. Avtomelon simply meant that these hymns were regarded as a melodic model of their own, exemplified by the musical realisation of its poetic hymn. As such they also served for the composition of new verses, the prosomeia. The term στιχηρὸν προσόμοιον (stichēron prosomoion) means, that this sticheron is "similar to" (Gr. προσόμιον, Sl. podoben) another sticheron. It was usually an avtomelon, but in some cases even idiomela had been used for a kind of contrafact and there are even cases of notated prosomoia, because they had been "mistaken" for an avtomelon.

Certain more regular and formulaic avtomela of the octoechos had not been written down with notation before the 14th century or even later, since their hymns (apolytikia anastasima) had to be repeated every day. Today the Voskresnik or Anastasimatarion or an Orthros anthology also provides certain avtomela in neumes without any text, while the texts of the prosomoia, as far as they belong to the fixed cycle including the sanctoral, are in the text book Menaion which should not be confused with the notated chant book (the immoveable cycle of the Doxastarion, organised between the twelve months beginning with 1 September and concluding with 31 August, or the Slavonic Psaltikiyna Mineynik).

History
In the early period between the 5th and the 7th centuries Sabaite concepts attracted the monastic communities of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem. In 692 the organisation of liturgical eight-week cycles connected with a system of eight modes called "octoechos" was established and progressed to a liturgical reform. Since only the melodies are known as they had been notated in chant books by the end of the 10th century, the question arises, what preceded the individual compositions of unique melodies, known as idiomela, when they had been composed within an oral tradition since the 7th century?

The first notated chant books (Sticherarion and Heirmologion), created between the 9th and the 13th centuries, delivered only a small part of the monastic hymn repertoire. The beginning of the book Octoechos, the cycle 24 stichera anastasima (three stichera in each echos) or the kekragarion cycle (Hesperinos Psalm 140), appeared very late in Byzantine chant books—some of them not earlier than during the late 17th century. For most of their history they did not need to be notated, since they closely followed the recitation models of psalmody using their formulaic accentuation patterns.

The reform of the Byzantine hymnody was the result of a first florescence of Greek hymnography created by singer-poets at Jerusalem like the Patriarch Sophronius (634-644), Germanos Bishop of Serachuze (died 669) and Andrew of Crete (died 713). The reform was followed by compositions of John of Damascus and his half-brother Cosmas, who continued the works of Andrew at Mar Saba. Even though we cannot study the difference between "echos-melodies" and the new idiomela at that time, the new emphasis on the Hagiopolitan octoechos was only possible, because these new hymns, their poetry and music, were appreciated and imitated beyond the patriarchate. In general this period is regarded as one, when the concept of octoechos cycles was not new, but when these poets were translated and imitated throughout the Mediterranean. The heterogenous repertoire itself, whose avtomela were sometimes simple and formulaic, sometimes they had the complexity of idiomela, was probably not collected before the Second Council of Nicaea. Yahya al-Mansur who was posthumously condemned as a heretic, was not only re-established as a hymnographer and monk called John of Damascus, he also became an important Greek church father and a saint.

During the reform of the Studites and at Sinai the avtomela were not notated, but they existed within an oral tradition. Even some idiomela served as models to compose new hymns according to the needs of a local liturgy—like the prosomoia for certain martyrs. When Theodore the Studite and his brother Joseph composed the early prosomoia for Hesperinos of Lenten tide, they used certain idiomela of the Triodion as models. Together with the later book Anastasimatarion (Sl. Voskresnik), "the book of resurrection hymns", the whole repertoire of avtomela is 140 and together with their prosomeia it is even larger than the whole repertoire of unique idiomela created in various regions.

With the Slavic reception in the medieval chant book "Voskresnik", it was not possible to create the same complex relation between chant and text, when the prosomoia had been translated. So they created a system of simple avtomela melodies which could be easier adapted to the translated prosomoia.

In the monodic tradition of Byzantine chant, the reform of the 18th century, which created a new definition of the troparic, heirmologic, and fast sticheraric melos with simple melodies of the two fastest tempo levels, it was partly based on a living tradition of simple recitation out of text books without musical notation.

A kontakion as a model and its prosomoia
Similar to the case of the stichera idiomela used for the composition of new stichera needed for the Triodion cycle by Theodore and his brother Joseph, is the even more complex case of the kontakion genre which was based on 14 prooimia (used for the introductory stanza) and 13 okoi (used for the sequence of all following stanzas) which had been used in independent combinations as melodic models for about 750 kontakia. Since the oikoi and the prooimion shared in each kontakion the same refrain, also different kontakia models could be combined within the same echos, because the melody of the refrain was usually the same, even if the text changed in different kontakia. Both, the model used for the recitation of the oikoi as well as the one used for the prooimion, had been rubrified as "idiomela" (not as "avtomela") by Greek as well as by Slavic scribes of the Kievan Rus’, whether in kontakaria without or with musical notation. Even the less melismatic form with several oikoi relied on a melodic system based on just 14 prooimia and 13 oikoi, which means that all the different oikoi of one kontakion had been sung as prosomoia according to one and the same oikos model.

As example might serve the prooimion of Romanos’ kontakion for 25 December known by its incipit Ἡ παρθένος σήμερον, even if the melodic model in echos tritos is not testified by a notated source of his time. Among these 14 models for the prooimion and the 13 for the oikos, eight were chosen to create an oktoechos prosomoia cycle of the so-called "resurrection kontakia", each one did consist of one prooimion and one oikos.

According to the current practice of Orthodox chant, this resurrection kontakion could be chosen for regular Sunday services, if the week was dedicated to echos tritos. Its text was sung as a prosomoion to the melody of the famous kontakion for 25 December, which was already mentioned in the vita of Romanos as his own creation. Its prooimion has verses with 15, 15, 13, 13, 8, and 12 syllables, and the prosomoion of the resurrection kontakion for the same echos which was composed according to the meter of this stanza must have the same number of verses, each with the same number of syllables. Thus, the prosomoion can be sung with the same melody and the accentuation patterns of the idiomelon and the last verse was the refrain (called "ephymnion ἐφύμνιον) the prooimion shared with the oikoi. The following table shows, how the syllables of the prosomoion come together with those of Romanos’ prooimion and with its metric structure:

Although the stanza was reproduced accurately by the composition of the prosomoion concerning the number of syllables, especially circumflex and grave accents (Greek diacritics) appear not always on the same syllable. In the second half of the third verse the idiomelon has just one circumflex accent, while the prosomoion has two acute ones. The different positions of acute accents in the fifth verse can be explained by the different verse structure and the shorter refrain of the prosomoion (9 + 11 instead of 8 + 12 syllables). Within the same verse the acute accent on the seventh syllable moves to the eighth in the prosomoion, so that the melodic accentuation pattern has to move to the next syllable. Thus, the cadence of the verse will be delayed. Otherwise the melodic recitation will be not only against the correct pronunciation of the word, but also against the meter and the characteristic that the melody of the refrain must go with the last verse. In fact, it is not only about one syllable shorter, but the last syllable has also no accent and must therefore change the melody of the refrain. A less problematic kontakion-prosomoion is the one composed for St Nicholas (see quotation below), although it has less syllables than Romanos’ kontakion (the third and fourth verses have just 12 syllables and not 13), but the final section around the refrain fits much better.

With the recitation known from a living tradition, the melody reproduces the meter with melodic accentuation patterns and quantitative accents given by the rhythm of the model stanza. With respect to the differences which already appear between prosomoion and its prototype within the Greek language, a translation into Church Slavonic which reproduces exactly all these relations between idiomelos and avtomelon—whether in this or another way—, seems already impossible. Nevertheless, the schools at Ohrid in Macedonia and later at Novgorod and Moscow which did not know the translations made at Ohrid, were quite fearless and creative.

This is a possible modern transcription of the same kondak, based on different redactions of the Old Church Slavonic translation:

This is the resurrection kontakion composed over Romanos’ kontakion to emphasise that it was a very common model used to compose most of the kontakia in echos tritos:

Two other kontakia-prosomoia which had been composed for other occasions:

In the Slavic kondakar' and the Constantinopolitan kontakarion of the 13th century the kontakion had developed to a representative melismatic style, but also the poetic structure did not always obey strictly the rules of syntonia and isosyllabic verses (especially not between the languages to which the Greek hymns had been translated). The extract visible here only includes two thirds of the first melodic phrase of the model which was used to compose the first verse pair. It was obviously possible to adapt even verses of different length to the model: A very important source of the re-translation of the Greek hymns are the so-called mineya služebnaya of the Kievan Rus’ written during the 12th century, office menaia which had been fully notated (especially the akrosticha composed over the heirmoi and the stichera idiomela). Obviously the kondaks and the podobni were regarded as less problematic, because they had not been provided with notation.

The confrontation with two living traditions shows that even the avtomela of the Greek Orthodox tradition are less sophisticated than the Byzantine one during the 10th or 14th century. These stichera were composed within the Hagiopolitan octoechos and adapted to the "Papadike". In the medieval manuscripts we find a more complicated model following 14 prototypes of kontakia which represented the Constantinopolitan tonal system chanted at the Hagia Sophia: Romanos’ kontakion Ἡ παρθένος σήμερον was the model for the mesos tritos.

Although they were originally an almost syllabic setting of the hymn text, it was a complex idiomelon which became more elaborated by the end of the 9th century. The recitation today follows the troparic genre of the Neobyzantine octoechos according to the New Method, as it was created during the 18th century between Petros Peloponnesios and Theodore Phokaeos who supervised the print editions of Chourmouzios' transcriptions. Each genre was defined by its own octoechos and its tempo which created a new variety, but the accentuation patterns can be used in a more flexible way with respect to the high Middle Ages. The incision within the fifth verse follows clearly the syntax of the avtomelon text. This flexibility comes closer to the earlier practice of recitation employing "echos-melodies", although the accentuation of accents are still very precise, because the diacritics were still used and the simplified model has sublimed its ancient tradition. The polyphonic or multi-part recitation of the Karelian monastery on the island Valaam, known and admired as "Valaamskiy rozpev", does not care very much about the text accents which once created the sophisticated idiomela between the 7th and the 10th centuries. It simply repeats melodic patterns, while the monks observe carefully the half verses and thus, the last two verses are structured as one phrase divided into three parts. This practice offers an amazing concept of singing "na glas", as it could survive within an oral transmission high up in the North.

Caveat about north Slavic music
While the Bulgarians and Serbs use Byzantine music, adapted as explained above, Russians and other northern Slavs use polyphonic recitation models. They are less dependent on a monodic patterns of a certain "glas", but simply melodies in the ambitus of the echos in question. In their case, all idiomela (самогласны) for a given "glas" are sung to the same melody and an avtomelon (самоподобенъ) and its prosomoia (подобны) are simply other melodies related to a certain recitation model as in case of the kondak.


text:
Programming in LOLGraphics 3.4/LOLGraphics Cheat Sheet

 * * Note that this page only explains what the commands do in version 3.4 and some of them have slightly changed functionality or were only added in later versions. For more info, please see the itch.io page.


text:
User:Three Act Story/sandbox

Night Call, Collect

Text
Night Call, Collect is a short story by Ray Bradbury from his collection I Sing the Body Electric! which can be accessed via the Internet Archive.

Summary
Night Call, Collect tells a story of a man so alone that he creates an unusual way of keeping himself occupied. One that is designed to ward off loneliness, but that will come back to haunt his future self. Barton is a man completely shut off from the rest of humanity. He is the sole remaining human on the planet Mars. As a young man, Barton made a series of messages for his future self, delivered through pre-recorded phone calls. The older Barton has forgotten he did this, so the calls come as a surprise. As he relives his past through the calls, we learn that the younger Barton has played a trick on the older Barton. The trick is intended to be fatal, and it is successfully executed. Barton has laid this vicious trap for himself and dies alone on Mars. As the story ends, without a human left to call, the messages begin talking to one another.

Analysis
While this story was published over fifty years ago, we can still learn from it today. We need to see the warning that Bradbury has laid out for us. Technology can certainly enhance our lives. However, left unchecked, we have the power to build that which will lead to our destruction. This is a common theme in science fiction because it has happened again and again throughout the history of humanity. Sometimes it feels like as soon as we invent something designed to improve society, we set off a countdown clock ticking away the time until we use it to cause harm. Less than two decades ago, we viewed social media as a fantastic new way to connect with others and create a truly global community. Today we see it also has tremendous capability to degrade our society, pit us against one another, and cause us to lose our innate sense of empathy. It is not uncommon for people to get into vicious arguments with strangers online. When we are not speaking face to face with another person, it is easy to lose sight of the other’s humanity. Young Barton does not, and cannot, honestly know Old Barton. When Young Barton was first building his system of telephone messages, he could never have imagined what his older self would be like. In fact, he could not even be certain his older self would still be living on Mars receiving these messages. As none of us can predict our future or know the person who we will be in fifty years, Young Barton would not be able to know and have empathy for his future self. It’s a common phenomena of being a human that we look back on our younger selves, our previous hopes and dreams, and find it difficult to recognize the reflection looking back at us from the past. In the time that Old Barton is living, Young Barton no longer exists as a human person. He exists only in these recorded messages, an artificial intelligence incapable of human emotion. In their first exchange, the younger Barton warns, “Don’t expect my sympathy. You’re like a stranger off in another country. I can’t be sad.” (140) This lack of identification with his older self makes it all the easier for him to lay the trap which leads to his demise.

Bradbury gives us several indications throughout the story of how he feels about this technology created by the young Barton which ultimately leads to his future counterpart’s death. At the start of the first phone call, Bradbury writes, “The conversation was impossible, and should not be continued, yet he went on with it.”(139) This foreshadowing is our first warning of what’s to come. Though it seems impossible for these calls to be ignored. As time goes on they become ever more frequent. It’s then that the older Barton decides to take action against the machines he’s built. “I’ll find them, he thought, and destroy them all.” (144) However, this task is impossible for several reasons. First of all, there are far too many machines for Barton to find them all. And more importantly, as one recording from younger Barton reminds him, he needs the telephone lines to remain open if he is going to maintain hope of being rescued. It’s then that very hope that is turned against him by the younger Barton when he plays the prank which leads to Barton’s death. How is it that this technology that Barton himself created as a means to keep himself company, to comfort him in his solitude, could turn on him in the end? Again we can find an allegory here that relates to the current state of social media. What was once heralded as a magnificent tool to connect people all over the world, often has the tendency to make people feel more alone.

Bradbury is also making an inextricable link between technology and youth. The artificial intelligence was made by the younger Barton, but it also remains young itself. The AI is incapable of aging. The ideas it has been filled with are incapable of changing and growing. This inability to learn leads to an even further lack of empathy by the machine. This is in large part because its creator was a young person who was incapable of foresight and an understanding of how this would affect his future self. There has been research in recent years into the development in the adolescent brain, specifically in regards to the part of the brain that regulates decision making and reasoning. This research has shown that there is evidence that young people don’t have the same ability to anticipate outcomes of their actions that most adults possess. Therefore, technology created by young people would reasonably also lack this ability. Young Barton did not consider how his AI would behave in the future. He could not envision the capabilities of the machine he was creating. Combined with the AI’s inability to connect on a human level with Older Barton, this is how we arrive at the deadly outcome of Night Call, Collect.

Bradbury and Technology
Technology plays a major role in Ray Bradbury’s entire body of work. In fact, there are numerous times that he seems to have predicted certain types of technology including flat-screen TVs and electronic surveillance (citation or note or more content needed). It’s not uncommon for science fiction to be the inspiration for those who invent these kinds of technology.

Additional Reading
This Washington Post article Dreams of Ray Bradbury: Predictions that came true shows

a list of technology that Bradbury wrote about as science fiction which eventually became reality.

This JSTOR article Ray Bradbury on War, Recycling, and Artificial Intelligence analyzes the themes of technology and AI that Bradbury wrote about in several other stories.

Activity
Science Fiction Inspires the Future of Science | National Geographic

After watching the video above, write a short journal based on one of the following prompts:

What is something you’ve read about in a sci-fi novel that feels similar to the technology that exists today?

If you were to invent a futuristic piece of technology what would it be and how could it benefit society? What are the potential downsides?

Do you think the technology created in the last century is more helpful or harmful?

In what way have you seen technology bring people together or keep them apart?

title: User:Three Act Story/sandbox