Byzantine Music about A. D.

1100
Author(s): H. J. W. Tillyard
Source: The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 39, No. 2 (Apr., 1953), pp. 223-231
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/739941
Accessed: 09/01/2009 07:42

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Musical
Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org
 BYZANTINE MUSIC ABOUT A.D. 1100
By H. J. W. TILLYARD

THE musical notation from the middle of the i2th century and
later, usually called the Round or Middle Byzantine system, can
be read with certainty in its melodic structure and with very high prob-
ability in its rhythmical and modal character, the divergencies of opin-
ion among Western scholars being extremely slight. But the Early
Byzantine systems, though partially explored, are still a controversial
subject. The Coislin Notation (c. IIoo-I 60) is near enough to the
Round system to allow of a tentative transcription, from which it appears
that the neumes do not yet express the exact intervals, but only give
a vague indication of the course of the melody, which the singer had to
learn from his master's lips. The rhythmical signs, however, are almost
the same in both systems. What then are we to say about the older
neumes of the Ioth and I th centuries? My learned colleagues, Pro-
fessor Wellesz and Professor Hoeg, both incline to the view that the
most archaic (or Esphigmenian) neumes had no melodic content what-
ever,1 but only showed the rhythm of an orally transmitted series of
hymns.
From this a difficult question arises. How can we fix the point at
which the neumes gained their first germ of a musical (and not merely
an accentual) value? If the words and the rhythm agree with a ver-
sion in the Round Notation, we might assume, with some show of rea-
son, that the same tune was intended, even if the Early Byzantine
form presented the rhythm and nothing else. On the other hand, if there

1 Egon Wellesz, Early Byzantine Neumes, in The Musical Quarterly, XXXVIII

(1952), 68-79; Carsten Hoeg (with some slight reservation), Monumenta Musicae
Byzantinae, VI, Transcr. (Hymns of the Hirmologium, Pt. I), Introd., p. XXVI. For
the Early Byzantine Notation in general, see Wellesz, A History of Byzantine Music
and Hymnography, 1949, pp.226-32; my contributions, Byzantinische Zeitschrift,
XXXVII (1937), 345; LII (I952), 29; Mon. Mus. Byz., III, Transcr. (Octoechus
Pt. I), Introd., pp. XIX and 38, I09, 127, 152.- Codex H in facsimile- Mon.
Mus. Byz. (Serie principale), Vol. 2, Hirmologium Athoum, ed. C. Hoeg, Copen-
hagen, 1938.
223
224 The Musical Quarterly
is any correspondencein the use of ascendingor descendingsigns (that
is, of signs known to have such value in the Round Notation and having
the same shapes in the earlier stages), then we are tempted to believe
that some melodic sense was implied in the earlier notation also. This
is admitted for the Coislin system, as has alreadybeen mentioned.Now
if we retrace our steps towards the i th century, we find MSS differ-
ing both from the later (Coislin) and the earliest (Esphigmenian) sys-
tems. These MSS differ widely among themselves;but they all have a
straight strokefor the ison (repeated note), which in the Coislin always
has a hook. I have suggested the name Andreatic for this group, from
a typical MS in the monastery (Skete) of St. Andrew on Mt. Athos.2
A little earliercomes the unique MS called the Chartresfragment,which
is a portion of Cod. Laura, Gamma, 74 (on Mt. Athos). Here too
we find a straight ison, but other more puzzling features also,3 unex-
ampled elsewhere.
We have then two questionsbefore us: I) Is the likenessin rhythmi-
cal indication and general aspect great enough between versionsin the
Andreatic and Coislin systems for us to believe that similar melodies
were intended?2) If so, had the neumesin the Andreaticsystemalready
some melodic value; or were they still nothing but a general guide
to the cantillation and singing? The study of a short example may
enable us to reply. It is a hymn for Christmas: and I have copied
from several MSS: i-Round Notation, facsimile in Codex D (Mon.
Mus. Byz., Vol. I). 2-Coislin Notation, Athen. 840. This is a well
written MS but not well preserved,so that some passagesare obscure
(for collation I also use a copy from Sinai I2I4, in the same notation).
3-Laura Gamma 74 (to which the Chartres fragment belonged):
date about 1050. 4-St. Andrew (Athos) I8, f. I 14 (from this MS,
which is clear and well written,the name of the system,with the straight
ison, is derived). If the reader will glance at the four versionsin our
figure, he cannot fail to see a general likenessso strong and persuasive
that it seems impossibleto doubt that a similar melody was meant at
all these stages. We thereforeanswer Yes to our first question.
2
It is a pleasure to recall the kindness of the Brother photographer at St.
Andrew's, which I visited in 1912. He allowed the use of his dark-room and helped
me in every way.
3 For the Chartres fragment see the article
by Mme. Verdeil in Byzantino-Slavica,
X (1949), 270. Reproduction in Gastoue, Introduction a la paleographie musicale
byzantine, I907, P1. II, and my article in Annual of the British School at Athens,
XIX, pp.95-1o8. (I hope that the name Contacarial will not be applied to the
Chartres fragment, because, although there is some likeness to the Russian Conta-
carial neumes, there is no Greek MS extant having a Contacarial notation.)
CM4 D
0l4 ()7Tra-pa- 6o-JoY W.-CT?J-pL- or (2)OL-KO-VO-.EL-7,.rL
^, ~-<--.-- o_- ^-_ _ < N
As
As 9"Zr"
99 93 9 c
C( > c'
c. ct'c11 y a c&t
_~ /a C- cv.,-7: - _
Ly 9
5
9 9 9
Y I
c c c' 9 -,a -
/' - -
StA.. 5tA
3 gA4 g 9 9 ' cd A'c
c1 d
dX 3 a C!

0
0
2(3)KaL-WO-TO-.lt--Tll 4"ia u--iS.
-4)K(a . . -"TO
Ka 0-05 av-
As a.
Le??
f a , C 7 a c4-
c'-L rc ir&-cCc' e !
r
v ? N
V' 3-"7 /
a.
-:/"c c'
" c
W..
c.
. ,.L " '
V .
.0
Lra. J -c' c' a c Zr:drc c' b '

0,

Q A
'. -, v / b' _ .- t,-- ~v. _
+-j P 1Va
(S)O-lTrEf L?-s-1-Ke (&)Kat o OUK 'v oC- f-
7eV
As | a7 C. j
ga aJ f-f j-
Lr 3 6 ;f c g 7r ge f- ,J fj s94 g
4-.
J
N
sfcAg 35 c. 3 ?gr
3f j j g 5ef
P (1) Ov UP- OV - TTO- - te, -
vL (6) OL - -- aL
As . rC. 5 a.Zr d c' c' 9
v r~, C. $ c.
Lr 9( .
C' ' C g
va Y_ " c;
- g
St.A g aCLr
t c
C gJ a z.d ti bc' C I*~~~~
z?- C~3
-"?
Fig. I
226 The Musical Quarterly

Any transcription from an "indefinite" notation must be taken as

tentative, but I have given a key that will convey the general effect. In
the Round Notation (Fig. I and Ex. i) we can show the exact intervals
without any guesswork, but in all the others the neumes except the
ison (repetition) and the duo kentemata (two dots, adding an ascend-
ing second to some other progression) only give an approximate guide.
Thus the apostrophos may be any descending step-2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th,
or 6th; and the singer had to remember the right note.

COMMENTARY
ON THE NEUMES

Line i. All MSS begin with an ison, except Si., which has an apostrophos (des-
cending sign). This probably means that the Intonation ended on a (which was
not rare in this mode) so that the melody began with g, as in the other versions.
A long recitation on f would have been quite unsuitable in Mode IV Plagal. The
Intonation in the Early Byzantine systems was left entirely to the singer's memory;
but in the i2th century it was usually indicated in an abbreviated form by some
neumes in the margin. In the Round Notation it was sometimes written out in full.4
An alternative view of the initial apostrophos must be mentioned here. From
early cantillations in the Ecphonetic and kindred notations it is inferred by theorists
that the apostrophos may have had a quasi-rhythmical value, without always im-
plying a lowered recitation-note. Hence it might be inferred that, at the begin-
ning of this hymn, one of the scribes (cither by a slip or a conscious archaism)
used the apostrophos without intending a note below the Finalis. Such a view will
not, in any case, destroy the main argument of this article; nor will it lead to any
change in my musical versions.
The oxeia over -pa- has only accentual value.
Line 2. The hypsele is used in the Early Byzantine systems for any high note,
however it might be approached.5 -jd- Lr. seems to have a form of the bareia,
with perhaps an argon added. This suggests a two-note progression, perhaps b a
(ritardando). The small "tenuto" in Andr. is also probably an argon, marked
; -raLLr. leaves a blank, which seems to imply a repeated note.
Line 3. -ge- Andr. has a chromatic sign, which may mean that the singer
could slide over the notes g, ab, b, c'.-finis: observe two ways of abbreviating
the common ornament called kylisma. D gives the formula in full, but in H
(archaic Round Notation) it is still often abbreviated.
Line 4. The klasma v or v and the diple (over 'i- and elsewhere) affect the
time-value of a remembered note. At the end of the line Ath. and Andr. have
the uncompounded form of the xeron klasma, which in the Round Notation

4 Cf. my Handbook of the Middle Byzantine Musical Notation (MMB Sub-

sidia), 1935, p.31; Wellesz, op.cit., 250. For the early cantillations cf. Hoeg, Nota-
tion Ecphon. (MMB Subsidia, Vol. I, Fasc. 2), 37, and F. Praetorius, Ueber d.
Herkunft der hebriiischen Accente, etc., Berlin, 1902, pp.18-20 (Prof. Wellesz has
kindly furnished these references).
S Cf. Hoeg, Hymns of the Hirmologium, Pt. I, XXVIII, note 22.
 Byzantine Music About A.D. 1100 227
marks a staccato, having lost its original length-value. Its meaning in the Early
Byzantine systems cannot be given with certainty.
Line 5. Over -Wv- the bareia standing alone stresses a remembered note,
often the first of a small group. -KeAth. has the angular ison, which is common
in some MSS of the Early Byzantine systems. The rest will be easily understood.
Line 7. viroCelvas agrees with Oeos above.
We now give the version from D in staff-notation.

Ex. i
n for Christmas (D f. 99)
oe5 Plagal, fm g; fliS g.

1)TTc-a&-Jo-Zov 2) 6ji- j?--o

,pu-6T'rt--ov
A
^ at,nFOL-Ko-o-Evo.f-Ta
*",
?ri
_IK
J
crr6t B: 5 6 -"r
K

c
3) Kac-vo-To-,LT-TCtL ,pu-6-^.. 4) ,Ka\ Ge-05 Ev-?,W
- T0o y,y-v.-taLt.-
~ jI) C - >) ' 1-
I
5) 'O-rr, 'j, /F-ti- Vi- .e 6) Ka O OUK n 06o6- X- -pv

I -
7)oO'U
i7) 1um-4ov - e- v
'u-Wo-eEt-vas
.V
8) o
8ou- 31 JL
-a- -ye-6
-
v6

Translation: A strange mystery is dispensed today. Nature is made new and

God becometh man. That which was hath remained and took on that which was
not, undergoing neither confusion nor separation.6

Our next example is in two versions: i) Round Notation from

D; 2) Andreatic Notation from Sinai I2I9. In line 4 I follow not D
but a Trinity MS, called T (Catal. B. I. 17.) because of its greater
likeness to Sinaiticus-which is remarkable, since there is an interval
of two hundred years between them. The hymn has already been pub-
lished from D in staff notation.7

6 Cf. the words of the Athanasian Creed, "One altogether: not by confusion of
Substance: but by unity of Person."
7 See my Hymns of the Sticherarium for November (MMB Transcr. Vol. II),
64.
 (1)AEU-Te TT-0-TOI TIJ-F-W-pL6VE (z)TOV aG-Xo-#o--PoV TO
D 9g 9g Zr a 7i a g- g9 a 7c r aC

7TO1 e -- o--.ov (3)TOV y'6V-val -OV QTPa-TL--4c-T4V (4I) TDV K

^. .-) '-
- , T:.? Zr
Zrg9 a- 9 fe _ <- _q ai- T Z
- - ?_
;-5- 9 -\l
/I
__-
ZIr9 a-g. J e- _e e_ f
j 9
_ o; <
Qf 9 3-9 o 9

tt
CU
"'-4
cta--C-vov () v-rTpe e' u - L-CLS (l)a-mrL- -X- Te KoL
57 c-a -- n!, ,, . a4t.r -~ ~ c -- _ ~
:__
> ,
0? -c
yl
- . Zr 'c Z a Zr.a , 9 Zr a 2rc Zr a a-a
,i
9 - _> >
br01 _- b % 4,0, -_
.
9- c a. aa atr lrc a v rc' r a. a
9- 4- 9 9

aTs a -TO- -a -
O--X-O -V Cs)L,-oV . *C. a.- -L -
H d. Z ca
v ,f q 7rq a-9 f, ef &4. .'- iZr aZ
? 5 \ 4V : \N , ,.
d 9--a.- d c'7r- 7r 7; Zrc a.
^.
* j 9 l9rg 0-gj. &-

(q) ,-Ka-a'o-TlaL-oCTTL--rS nf?-- -J--- rw

( -o)VL-L---rL.... T -rS .,--.a.*
g g 7 a 9-tr a rcC 93 S 9 rg aG-
_ _ / -n s jr v ,- s 1ra.
9 CL 2r a-r a
C c 9. g a-
co
cs
C4 Fig. 2
 Byzantine Music About A.D. 1100 229
COMMENTARY ON THE NEUMES

Line I. The apostrophos in Si. probably means g, reckoning from the upper
Finalis b. See also note on Fig. i, line I.
Line 4. -tra- the chromatic sign (found only in Si.) may be understood as
in the previous hymn, line 3.
Line 7. -X6- the diple and klasma in Si. seem to qualify separate notes.
Line 8. The common flourish, thematismus eso, is marked by its initials in Si.
but D, as always, gives the notes in full. Over -crl- the parakletike (slur) in D
and over -rov- the apoderma (tenuto).
Line 9. IIpeafpe6e (T) is better than IIpir/3eve, the common reading.
Line Io. fin. The dot in Si. is merely punctuation.

For my third example I wish to give a corrected version of a hymn

for St. Stephen's day, which I tried to interpret many years ago,8 but
can now approach with greater confidence.

Ex. 2
Mode II, fromb finlli e.

Trin.

1) ,To-TO iv~ 2)T,rC-O-TO$ Ka ?V 1-T-6V ?-?oLX-75

i-ac-K-6-vOL
> i i r) b
Si US
s 4-;;p rr' rt '

3) ? sTE- <pa-v?. 4)o-- ta?- ?-y

-vou ToL> a -yi- ?I--
raV-a-r-

ib-- 52 < nJ 'r, c --- I

$ ,-6'- :.J -, 6-, -?.A

- S
AXp^ 6t LpA1 J

t0 etEL 8) Ka OE-) 6o. 6t t - -vIy.

7) At-o_____ o--vo v-- o

~/'~'~._I >. pA.i

fA l~b ' A5

8Journal of Hellenic Studies, XLI (1921), 46 (with the neumes), cf. B.S.A.
XXI, 127.
230 The Musical Quarterly
COMMENTARY ON THE NEUMES IN SINAITICUS

Line i. fin. Diple lengthens a remembered note; also in line 2 under fap-.
Line 2. -ov,- the uncompounded xeron klasma qualifies two remembered notes.
So also in lines 3, 4, 6, and Io. I give the probable value.
Line 3. A neume is missing over -yi- but the value seems to be the same
as in T.
Line 6. A neume is missing over -'yer. I supply an apostrophos. Over -pac the
bareia (slight accent) refers to a remembered formula.
Line 7. Thematismus eso, as in Fig. 2, line 8.
Line 9. -K'- kratema in T (not very clearly drawn) a long accented note.
Si. has the uncompounded form, evidently in a more primitive sense. In the
Round Notation, as the Papadike (singer's manual) informs us, the kratema has
become a mark of prolongation; and it usually stands over a single note, while
the xeron klasma has become a subsidiary and has no effect on the time.
Line Io. Init. Here is another vacant space. An ison (twice) is required. The
neume seems to be a strengthened form of the bareia.

We may now try to answer our second question-have the neumes

any melodic values in the Andreatic system? If we take the simplest
example, No. 2, it appears that the apostrophos is found 23 times in
the Andreatic version and that in every case a downward progression
(or one containing a downward step) answers to it in the Round Nota-
tion. Secondly a simple ison in the one is equated every time to a simple
ison in the other. An ascending sign in the Round Notation is answered
25 times out of 26 in Sinaiticus by a sign that, in the Round Notation,
would imply ascent. (In line 7 the kuphisma, an ascending second, may
have slipped to the next syllable.) Mathematical proof is impossible;
but the obvious inference is that the neumes in the Andreatic system
already had a direction-value, which corresponded to the interval-
value that they afterwards acquired.
In Fig. 2 the apostrophos answers to an apostrophos or apostrophos-
compound in 23 cases. In nine cases a descending progression in the
Round Notation answers to a subsidiary (i.e. a rhymical or accentual
sign) in the Andreatic. In one case an ascending sign in the Andreatic
stands where the Round has a descent; and conversely a Round ison
stands for an Andreatic apostrophos, once at the beginning of the hymn,
suggesting a different Intonation, and once in line 9, where a small dif-
ference of melody is suspected. Thus in our second example the evi-
dence is strongly in favor of a melodic value for the Andreatic neumes.
A detailed analysis of Fig. i would be more confusing than helpful;
but, broadly, the results are as follows. In fourteen cases an apostrophos
in the two early MSS (Lr. and Andr.) answers to an apostrophos in
 Byzantine Music About A.D. 1100 231
one or both of the Coislin MSS (Ath. and Sin. I2I4). In five cases an
apostrophos answers to a subsidiary; and in two cases the neumes differ
in some other way. Now it is admitted that in the Coislin Notation
the neumes had a melodic or direction-value. So here also there is a
strong probability of their having such value at the earlier stage; or,
in other words, we may fairly infer that the notation was musical,
not merely accentual, about the middle of the I th century and in all
its later developments. The general likeness between the Coislin and
the Andreatic specimens tends to confirm this view; and, if it is upheld,
then we shall be able to claim an unbroken tradition for many Byzan-
tine hymns from the earlier IIth century until the end of the Middle
Ages.