A HISTORICAL AND CONTEXTUAL EXAMINATION

OF ALEXANDRE GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY

OF ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM. OPUS 29

by

PHILIP REUEL CAMP, B.M.Ed., M.M.

A DISSERTATION

IN

FINE ARTS

Submined to the Graduate Faculty

of Texas Tech University in
Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for
the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Approved

Accepted

Dean of the Graduate School

December. 2002
2002, Philip Reuel Camp
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This dissertation was only made possible because of the assistance and

encouragement from many people. Ken Davis originally concei\ ed of a dissertation

topic in the area of Russian choral music and provided immediate feedback and

encouragement throughout the duration of the study. Without his direct in\ oh ement,

this project would have never been started, and I will always be grateful. I am also \ er\

grateful for the encouragement and valuable input provided from other members of the

committee: Wayne Hobbs, Michael Stoune, Linda Donahue, and John Stinespring. To

Jonathan Witt, a best friend since childhood, and now a fellow faculty member at

Lubbock Christian University who spent many hours proofreading the manuscript, I am

also very thankful. To Sergei Shishkin, my Russian friend and brother, \\ ho spent

countless hours locating and translating primary sources, I am greatly indebted and

hopeful that we can continue to work together. To my parents, Lynn and Barbara Camp,

whose faith in the Lord led to their many trips to Russia and contact \\ ith Sergei

Shishkin, the words "thank you" hardly can express the appreciation that I feel for the

example of faith, the encouragement, and the strong upbringing that you provided me.

To my children, Landon and Lauren, who have ne\ cr known their daddy to be without

doctoral work, I say thank you and I look forward to making up lost time n ith you.

Finally, I will be forever grateful for the unconditional love, support, and inspiration from

my wife. Tammy, who throughout her career as well as my studies has truly exemplified

the virtuous woman of Proverbs 31.

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii

ABSTRACT v

LIST OF TABLES \ ii

LIST OF EXAMPLES viii

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION 1
Purpose and Justification 1
Review of Related Research 5
Method 7

II. ALEXANDRE TIKHONOVITCH GRETCHANINOFF AND

THE RUSSL\N POLITICAL ORDER 11

III. THE RUSSL\N ORTHODOX LITURGY 46

History of Russian Liturgical Singing 46
The New Russian Choral School 65
The Structure of the Liturgy 71
Stylistic Restrictions 80
Divine Liturgy Settings from the New Russian Choral School 85

IV. GRETCHANINOFF ON LITURGICAL MUSIC 90

Spokesman for the New Russian Choral School 90
The Moskovskie TeJomo^rz Publications of 1900 92
The New York Essay of 1932 106

V. OVERVIEW OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SACRED CHORAL STYLE 112

VI. OVERVIEW OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY

OF ST. JOHN CHR YSOSTOM, OPUS 29 138
Analyses 138
Summary 175

VII. PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS FOR PERFORMANCE OF

GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY
OF ST JOHN CHR YSOSTOM. OPUS 29 179

111
 Concert or Liturgical Context 1 SO
Selection of Movements 182
Performance Practice and Interpretation 190

VIII. CONCLUSION 206

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 209

DISCOGRAPHY 214

APPENDLX

A. THE MOSKO VSKIE VEDOMOSTI PUBLICATIONS OF 1900 215

B. ALEXANDRE GRETCHANINOFF, "BRIEF REVIEW OF THE

DEVELOPMENT OF ORTHODOX CHURCH SINGING" 246

C. REVIEWS OF GRETCHANESfOFF'S SECOND LITURGY

OF ST JOHN CHR YSOSOSTOM, OPUS 29 271

D. THE CHORAL WORKS OF ALEXANDRE GRETCHANINOFF 277

E. THE DIVINE LITURGY TEXT AS PRESENTED IN GRETCHANINOFF'S

SECOND LITURGY OF ST JOHN CHR YSOSTOM, OPUS 29 283
F. EXCERPTS FROM VARIOUS RUSSIAN SOURCES 295

IV
 ABSTRACT

Known for its a cappella st>'le as mandated by the church. Russian liturgical

music remained relatively undeveloped and largel\ unknown outside of Russia until the

late nineteenth century when the onset of several crucial e\ents led to the development of

a rich choral style that continued until the 1917 Revolution. Among many composers

who contributed sacred choral works in the period, Alexandre Gretchaninoff (1864-1956)

emerged as both a leading composer and spokesman for the new school. His Second

Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. Opus 29. completed in 1902. presented a more

stylistically unified musical form than ever before with individual movements that were

developed into unprecedented formal schemes. Although some movements from the

work have been appreciated and performed in English translations b\ American choirs

through most of the twentieth centur\. including "Our Father." "Come. Let I's Worship."

and "Only Begotten Son," a close examination of the original work, focusing on issues of

performance practice relating to its historical and contextual status, reveals greater

aesthetic merit than has been recognized. For the contextual examination, se\ eral

primar\' sources were discovered, translated, and analyzed. An article submitted by

Gretchaninoff to the Moskovskie Vedomosti (.Moscow daily newspaper) in 1900

generated responses from his opponents in the form of a published debate that included

two subsequent articles by the composer defending and elarif\ ing his position. The

articles are presented in their entirety, along with an essay written h\ the composer in

1932 that is hou.sed in the New \oTk Public Librar\ for the Performing Arts, titled "Brief
1932 that is housed in the New York Public Librar\- for the Performing .Ans. titled "Brief

Review of the Development of Orthodox Church Singing." The translated primar>-

sources provide valuable information concerning details of performance practice, the

perspectives of both Gretchaninoff and his critics on liturgical music, the development of

Gretchaninoff s sacred choral style, and the reputation of Gretchaninoff as a composer

and spokesman for the new Russian choral school. Finally, a thorough re\ iew and

representational analysis of the Second Liturgy' is presented in context of later pre-

revolutionary works. This study culminates with practical suggestions for performance

of the Second Liturgy springing from examination of the historical and contextual status

of the work.

VI
 LIST OF TABLES

3.1 The Divine Liturg\' 7^

3.2 The Divine Liturgy Settings of the New Russian Choral School 88

6.1 General Harmonic Scheme of the Second Liturgy. Opus 29 177

7.1 Morosan's Scheme for a Concert Performance of

Tchaikovsky's Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 41 184

7.2 Suggested Performance Scheme for

Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy. Opus 29 186

D.l The Choral Works of Alexandre Gretchaninoff 278

VII
 LIST OF EXAMPLES

5.1 "Behold the Bridegroom Comes" Opus 58. No. 1. Measures 1-6 119

5.2 "Thou. Who Clothest Thyself with Light"

Opus 58, No. 9, Measures 8-12 120

5.3 "In Thy Kingdom" Opus 58, No. 3. Measures 14-18 121

5.4 "The Lord is God..." Opus 58, No. 10. Measures 26-31 122

5.5 "Blessed is the Man" Opus 59. No. 2. Measures 1-4 124

5.6 "The Great Doxology" Opus 59, No. 9. Measures 80-85 125

5.7 "Blessed is the Man" Opus 59. No. 2

Measures 74-79 126
5.8 "To Thee. The Victorious Leader." Opus 59. No. 10
Measures 1-4 127

5.9 "The Augmented Litany," Opus 79. No. 6

Measures 55-61 132

5.10 Conclusion of the Liturgy, Opus 79, No. 15

Measures 54-57

5.11 "Trisagion Hymn" Opus 79, No. 4

Measures 9-23 135

6.1 Solo Chants, Choral Response at Beginning of Great Litany 140

6.2 Choral Responses from the Great Litany 141

6.3 The First Antiphon from Psalm 103 142

6.4 "Glory... Only-begotten Son" Opening Measures 144

6.5 "Glory... Only-begotten Son" Measures 32-37 145

6.6 "(ilor\... Onl\-begotten Son" Measures 38-42 146

\ III
6.7 "Come, let us worship" 149

6.8 The "Alleluia theme" from Movements #3 and -6 150

6.9 "Holy God!" from Movement #3 151

6.10 The Augmented Litany 153

6.11 Cherubic Hymn 155

6.12 Portion from the Creed 156

6.13 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 1-5 158

6.14 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 12-16 159

6.15 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 44-47 160

6.16 "A Mercy of Peace." Measures 72-75 161

6.17 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 94-95 162

6.18 "A Mercy of Peace." Measures 100-103 163

6.19 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 103-104 164

6.20 "It is Truly Fitting," Measures 53-56 165

6.21 "Our Father," Measures 28-32 167

6.22 "Our Father." Measures 43-54 169

6.23 "Let us fervently beseech," Measures 1-5 171

6.24 "Let us fervently beseech," Measures 39-52 172

6.25 "Let us fervently beseech." Measures 139-141 173

6.26 End of the Liturgy, Measures 1-3 175

7.1 "Let us fervently beseech," Measures 1-5.

with Addition of Dynamic Shading 200

7.2 Cherubic Hymn, Measures 17-20 201

i\
7.3 "Our Father." Measures 63-66 204
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Purpose and Justification

Alexandre Gretchaninoff' was one of the most prolific composers of choral music

for the Russian Orthodox Church. Known for its a cappella style as mandated by the

church, Russian liturgical music remained relatively undeveloped and largely unknown

outside of Russia until the late nineteenth century. In the 1880s, the onset of several

crucial events led to the development of a veryrichchoral style. The overturning of the

Imperial Chapel'srightto censor ecclesiastical choral works dramatically influenced the

development of Russian church music, encouraging composers of church music to

express themselves more freely.^ The watershed event was Peter Tchaikovsky's (1840-

1893) Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 41, and the court case it sparked when

Nikolai Bakhmetev (1807-1891), the Director of the Imperial Chapel, challenged this

work that had not been submitted to the Imperial Chapel for approval. The court sided

with Tchaikovsky and his publisher, P. Jurgenson. Though the a cappella requirement

remained an essential characteristic of the style of the new choral school that soon

developed, with Jurgenson's court victory, composers enjoyed unprecedented freedom

Variants in the spelling of the composer's name occur due to the problems of transliteration from
the Russian alphabet. Throughout this document, the spelling "GretchaninofT' will be used as authorized
by the composer's autobiography. Other spellings may be found in various sources, such as
"Grechaninov." According to a note in the autobiography, the correct pronunciation is to accent the
penultimate syllable, as in "GretchaNInoff." GretchaninofT, Alexandre. My Life. Introduction and English
Translation by Nicholas Slonimsky. (New York: Coleman-Ross Company. Inc., 1952) 1.
" Vladimir Morosan, Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia (Madison, Connecticut:
Musica Russica, Inc.. 1994. 85-86).
from censorship. An outpouring of important liturgical compositions by many significant

composers soon followed, to the extent that scholars later termed the st\'le "the new

Russian choral school."^ By the eariy 1900s, Gretchaninoff emerged as both a leader and

spokesman for this new school.

In 1899, Gretchaninoff completed his first Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, opus

13, and it was immediately premiered by the famous choir of the Moscow Synodal

School directed by Stepan Smolensky (1848-1909). In his autobiography, Gretchaninoff

recalled, "The simplicity and sincerity of the music, its lofty style and good vocal wnting

instantly won the hearts of my listeners."*^ However, he later commented that "...my first

Liturgy was unsatisfactory to me in many respects."^ In a dissertation on Gretchaninoffs

Catholic mass settings, Bradley Holmes noted: "Grechaninov later admitted that the piece

was much like the Liturgy of Tchaikovsky, adding that this realization encouraged him to

abandon the style for one distinctively his own."^

Turning again to the Divine Liturgy in 1902, Gretchaninoff completed the Second

Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29. The work premiered in Moscow in 1903 by the

professional choir directed by Leonid Vasil'ev. Particularly known for its unusual setting

of the Credo, in which the body of text is assigned to an alto soloist, the premier of the

Second Liturgy received high acclaim from both critics and Gretchaninoff himself

Further study of the work reveals that the Second Liturgy not only presented a more

^ Morosan 205-307. Morosan specifically devotes two chapters to the new Russian choral school.
Chapter 6 discusses style, and chapter 7 discusses the problems of performance practice.
•* Gretchaninoff 69.
^ Gretchaninoff 87.
Holmes. Bradley .X "Missa Oecumenica and the Roman Catholic .Masses of.Alexandre T.
Grechaninov" DM .A diss., Arizona State University, 1990. 28
stylistically unified musical form than ever before, but also developed indi\ idual

movements into unprecedented formal schemes. Furthermore, the work incorporated the

use of chant-like themes from the ancient chant tradition of the Russian Orthodox

Church. Though this tendency toward chant characterized the majorit\' of

Gretchaninoffs sacred music as well as the music of his contemporaries, the Second

Liturgy became Gretchaninoffs first major choral work largely inspired b\ the chant

idiom.

As a leader for the new Russian choral school, Gretchaninoff composed thirteen

smaller sacred choral works, as well as a setting for Passion Week (also known as The

Seven Days of Passion), Opus 58, and All-Night Vigil (also known as Vespers), Opus 59,

all for unaccompanied choir. Following the sacred cantata Kvalite Boga {Praise the

Lord), Opus 65, set with orchestral accompaniment, Gretchaninoff composed a third

liturgy in 1917: Domestic Liturgy, Opus 79, for tenor and bass solo, chorus, string

orchestra, organ, and harp, distinguishing it as the only liturgical text from the Russian

Orthodox tradition to be scored with instrumental accompaniment.

Throughout his career, Gretchaninoff voiced his sometimes controversial views

on liturgical music, and eventually was regarded as the spokesman for the new Russian

choral school. Perhaps most controversial was his belief, evident from his writings as

well as a number of his compositions, that instrumental accompaniment should be

incorporated into church music. In his autobiograph\, he u rites: "1 repeatedly stated,

orally and in writing, that our church ritual u ould gain tremendously by the introduction
of the organ or a physharmonica into the church service."' Though a formal proposal for

the use of instruments did not occur until 1917, his writings on sacred music had sparked

controversy as eariy as 1900. In February of that \ear. he submitted an article on

liturgical music to the Moskovskie Vedomosti, a daily newspaper in Moscow. Soon af^er,

critics responded with follow-up articles attacking the positions held b\ Gretchaninoff

Gretchaninoff responded, both defending and clarifying his position. In 1917, the year he

completed Domestic Liturgy, Gretchaninoff officialh' proposed to the Council of the

Russian Orthodox Church that it use an organ w ith liturgical music. The proposal \\ as

defeated, and his popularity with staunchly traditional church officials was reduced.

Even as recently as 1996, Russian writings on the subject criticized Gretchaninoff for this

proposal, grouping him with those who "dare to call themselves orthodox."

The Second Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom, Opus 29, was pivotal in

establishing Gretchaninoffs sacred choral style, which continued through the middle of

the twentieth century. Though some of the individual movements from the work have

been appreciated and performed in their English translations by American choirs through

most of the twentieth century,^ a close examination of the overall work, particularly

focusing on the issues of performance practice relating to its historical and contextual

status, reveals greater aesthetic merit than has been recognized. By examinmg the

^Gretchamnoff 119-120.
Q

B. Kutuzov, "Problemy russkogo znamennogo penia v sviazi s istoriei vozrozhdenia katolikami

gregorianskogo khorala" [Problems of Russian Sign Singing (Znamenny Raspev) in relation to the history
of revival of Gregorian Chant by Catholics], Shkola Znamennogo Penia [School of Sign Singmg], \ o 1,
1996, Moscow. Spass Cathedral of .\ndronic Monastery, 1996. Fxcerpt translation by Sei^ici Shishkin,
edited by Philip Camp, 2001.
** "Only Begotten Son," "Come, Let us worship," and "Our Father," arc three otdretchaninofTs
most famous movements from the Second Liturgy that have been performed extensively in the United
States since the 1930s.
historical background of the Second Liturgy, both the rich tradition of Russian sacred

music and the specific work can be appreciated on a much deeper le\el. By stud\ing the

context of the Second Liturgy, we can appreciate the work for the status it maintained in

the general history of Russian liturgical music as well as for the \\ a\'s it marked a growth

in Gretchaninoffs compositional style, and, beyond this, in the evoh ing compositional

style of the new Russian choral school.

Review of Related Research

The research and publications by Vladimir Morosan have pro\'ided the most

comprehensive coverage of Russian liturgical music currently available. His published

dissertation cited above, Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia, covers the

full development of Russian Orthodox Church music, from its beginnings in the tenth

century through its apex just before the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. Morosan's

Choral Performance and his subsequent works on the subject stand as the most

comprehensive sources on Russian liturgical music and, thus, are cited throughout this

study. His work includes a translation of han Gardner's Russian Church Singing, vol. I:

Orthodox Worship and Hymnology^ and se\ era! \ olumes from the series Monuments of

Russian Sacred Music. Sweeping in their scope, the Monuments series has allowed

performers and scholars access to centuries of Russian music previously unavailable.

The first of the series, One Thousand Years of Russian Church Music, 9SS-1988, offers

'° Johann von Gardner, Russian Church Singmy;. Volume I. Orthodox Worship ami Hvmnogrnphw
trans. \Madimir Morosan (New ^'ork: St. Vladimir's Seininar\ Press. 19S0).
an 832-page anthology of 79 Russian sacred choral works as well as pertinent essa\ s.''

Other volumes in the series offer the complete sacred choral works of Peter Tchaikovsk\,

Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov, Victor Kalinnikov, Vasily Titov. and Sergei Rachmaninoff.

For the purposes of this study, the essays and liturgy settings presented in the volumes of

Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff were especialK valuable.''

Only a few dissertations covering specific topics in the area of Russian liturgical

music have been completed. Two dissertations that broadly cover the topic include

Robert Addison Reid's "Russian Sacred Choral Music and its Assimilation into and

Impact on the American A Cappella Choir Movement"'^ and Keith Dwayne Wilcox's

"Russian Sacred Choral and Folk Music: A Multicultural Text for High Schools and

Colleges."'"* Though both of these works approach the topic broadly, they do provide

some useful information for this study. Dissertations over composers or their specific

works from the period of the new Russian choral school are somewhat rare. The life and

works of Sergei Rachmaninoff have been covered thoroughly; yet, dissertations over

specific works by his contemporaries are virtually non-existent. However, some studies

on the choral music of Gretchaninoff have been completed. Mary Smith's 1952 thesis.

" Monuments of Russian Sacred Music One Thousand Years of Russian Church Music, ed.
Vladimir Morosan, ser. 1, vol. 1 (Washington, D C : Musica Russica, 1991).
'^ Monuments of Russian Sacred Music Peter Tchaikovsky. The Complete Sacred Choral Horks,
ed. Vladimir Morosan, ser. 2, vol. 1-3 (Madison: Musica Russica. 1996); Monuments of Russian Sacred
Music: Sergei Rachmaninoff, The Complete Sacred Choral ii'orks, ed. \'ladimir Morosan, ser. 9, vol. 1-2
(Madison: Musica Russica, 1994).
'^ Robert Addison Reid, "Russian Sacred Choral Music and its .\ssimilation into and Impact on
the American A Cappella Choir Movement" diss. University of Texas, 1983.
'^ Keith Dwayne Wilcox, "Russian Sacred and Folk Music: a Multicultural Text for High Schools
and Colleges" diss. University of Missouri-Kansas City, 1998.
"The Music of Alexandre Gretchaninoff in its Relationship to Russian Nationalism," '

though somewhat dated, received thorough cooperation and approval ft-om GretchaninofT

himself Even more relevant to this topic is the 1949 thesis by John Seagard, "\ocal

Style of Russian Church Music as seen in the Works of Alexander Gretchaninoff," which

also employed the cooperation of the composer.'^ Bradley Holmes summarized its value

in his 1990 dissertation: "The most extensive discussion of Grechaninov's harmonic st\lc

is John Seagard's thesis. The study describes Grechaninov's music technically, but does

little to explain what makes the music viable."'^ Though Seagard's thesis may be lacking

in this regard, the information revealed from interview s w ith the composer offers some

brief but valuable glimpses into the composer's perspectives on liturgical music. Holmes'

dissertation, "Missa Oecumenica and the Roman Catholic Masses of Alexandre T.

Grechaninov," stands as the most scholarly and relevant document on Gretchaninoffs

choral music, and contains summaries of the composer's sacred choral music,

biographical information, and an appendix listing archival material left by GretchaninofT

available from U.S. libraries and museums.

Method

In examining the milieu of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturg\\ this dissertation

progresses from the global perspective of Gretchaninoff s biography and the Russian

Sister Mary Nicholas Smith, "The Music of Alexandre Gretchaninoff in its Relationship
to Russian Nationalism." Thesis: University of Southern California. 1952.
"• John Seagard, "\'ocal Style of Russian Church Music as seen in the Works of .Mexander
Gretchaninoff," Thesis, Eastman, 1949.
'M4olmes 12.
Orthodox tradition to a focus on the Second Liturgy itself Available biographical

summaries of Gretchaninoff are based on his autobiograph\' and offer no new

information. However, none of the biographical sketches discuss how the social and

political events of Gretchaninoff s day influenced him and his work. Gretchaninoffs

memoirs delve into these influences that profound!}' affected his life, the Russian

Orthodox Church, and Russian society in general. After contextualizing Gretchaninoffs

work, this dissertation moves into an overview and history of Russian Orthodox liturg\,

followed by a discussion of Gretchaninoff as a leading composer and spokesman for the

new Russian choral school. This involves an overview of Gretchaninoff s sacred choral

style in general, and an analysis of the Second Liturgy specifically. Based on the reported

historical and contextual information surrounding the Second Liturgy, the final chapter

gives practical suggestions for a modem-day performance of his most famous liturgy.

In my examination of the Second Liturgy's context, several primary sources

including Gretchaninoffs own writings were discovered, translated, and analyzed. .Xs

mentioned above, Gretchaninoffs 1932 autobiography, revised by Gretchaninoff and

translated into English in 1952 by Nicholas Slonemsky, provided useful information that

is readily accessible. The existence of other sources has been identified and referred to

by other scholars, though the actual content of these writings had not been studied. Such

a source was located at the Music Division of the New York Public Library for the

Performing Arts: a 39-page hand-written essay by Gretchaninoff on the subject of

liturgical music, dated September, 1932. Though Seagard's thesis contams some

information from this essav, the actual essav has never been made available in an HnuHsh
translation. Furthermore, Gretchaninoff refers to a controvers\ that resulted from the

Moskovskie Vedomosti (Moscow daily newspaper) articles that he submitted for

publication in February, 1900. Though these articles also are sometimes referred to b\

scholars, the information about them is only gathered from Gretchaninoffs reference to

them in his autobiography, and the actual articles also have not been directly studied and

discussed. Therefore, in thoroughly examining the context of Gretchaninoff s Second

Liturgy, both the Moskovskie Vedomosti publications of 1900 and Gretchaninoffs 1932

essay from the New York Public Library were translated and are presented here in their

entirety. These materials, as well as other related newspaper articles, reviews, and

journal articles were translated through the assistance of Sergei Shishkin, a chemical

research scientist in the city of Dubna, Russia.'^ These translations provided valuable

information concerning details of performance practice, the perspectives of both

Gretchaninoff and his critics on liturgical music, the development of Gretchaninoffs

sacred choral style, and the general reputation of Gretchaninoff as a composer and

spokesman of the new Russian choral school.

Finally, the dissertation provides a thorough re\ iew and representational analysis

of the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom, Opus 29, as well as observations of stylistic

traits consistent with his later pre-revolutionary choral works. This study then

culminates with practical suggestions for a performance of the Second Liturgy,

'" English translations of the Moskovski Vedomosti anicles are presented in Appendix .X, and a
translation of the entire text from Gretchaninoffs essay is presented in Appendix B.
'"^ Dr. Shishkin's official position is Acting Head of Sector "l of the Scientitlc Department of
Experimental Chemistry in the Flerov Laborator)' of Nuclear Reactions.
suggestions springing from this study's examination of the historical and contextual status

of the work.

10
 CHAPTER II

ALEXANDRE TIKHONOVITCH GRETCHANINOFF

AND THE RUSSL\N POLITICAL ORDER

Bom in Moscow on October 25, 1864, Alexandre Tiikhonovitch Gretchaninoff

was one of eleven children, of whom only five survived childhood.' Nine years prior to

Gretchaninoffs birth, Alexander II began his reign as the Tsar of Russia, and

immediately brought rapid and intense changes to Russian life, generally improving the

quality of life for the lower classes. Alexander II's greatest reform came in 1861 when he

proclaimed the historic emancipation of the serfs. This e\ ent began the period in Russian

History known as the "Era of Great Reforms." However, these changes only fueled the

fire of political unrest, as various revolutionary groups staged v iolent protests throughout

his reign and eventually led to his assassination in 1881 .^ According to Sandra Kay

Stewart, whose dissertation focused on the life and piano works of Gretchaninoff, the

personal freedom gained by the peasants did not improve their standard of li\ ing.

Though land ownership was made possible to them, the land that was made available uas

of poor quality, and the length of installment payments for the land was burdensome.

Many peasants left the country for the promise of a better life in the cities as shopkeepers

or factory workers. They remained poorly educated, however, and discontent spread

among them.^

' Gretchaninoff 10.

- Neil M. Heyman, Russian Histon' (New York: McGraw-Hill. 1993) 190-194
^ Sandra Kay Stewart, "The Life and Piano Collections of Alexander (jretchaninoff' diss.. South
Carolina. 1995. 11-12.

11
 Gretchaninoffs autobiography makes it clear that his parents epitomized this

situation, though he never characterizes them as discontent. They moved to Moscow a

year before his birth fi-om the small town of Peremyshl. He describes his father as

"almost illiterate," and his mother as "completely illiterate, although she \\ as greatly

endowed by nature and had ambitions for self-improvement." Upon their mo\ e to

Moscow, his father became a small merchant, and his income increased enough to enable

him to purchase land and build a two-story house for his family."*

Though neither of his parents was involved with music in a formal way,

Gretchaninoff describes his parents as "innately musical." He explains that his mother

sang in a soft voice while she worked, and his father enjoyed singing religious songs. In

his memoirs, Gretchaninoff further remembers the deep commitment of his parents to

their religious faith before recounting his participation in local choirs:

My father and mother were deeply religious. Attendance at Vesper

service on Saturday nights and Matins on early Sunday mornings was strictly
enforced in the family. When we grew older we went to church regularly... I
sang in the high school chorus, sometimes even taking solo parts. I also sang in
an amateur church choir. A parochial school student used to visit us, and my
father and I would join him in singing two-part religious chants.^

In an introduction to a 1949 published essay by Gretchaninoff, Rose Heylbut adds that

these early experiences in church "laid the foundations for his vast knowledge of old

Russian church music which was later to form so important a part of his work."''

^ Gretchaninoff 7.
* Gretchaninoff 13
6
Heylbut, Rose. "Russian Masters of \'esterday," Etude bl (1949): 344

12
 The year 1864 not only marked the year of Gretchaninoff s birth, but also the \ear

that Alexander II introduced additional significant reforms. Ivar Spector's An

Introduction to Russian History and Culture explains that these significant reforms

included the establishment of local government offices to regulate education, health, and

transportation, as well as judicial reform that introduced trial by jur\' and the

establishment of a bar for lawyers.^ Spector added further that university tuition

discounts and scholarship programs made the cost of higher education affordable to the

rising middle class for the first time in Russia's history.^ According to Neil Heyman's

Russian History, by 1880 there were more than 22.000 elementar\ schools with o\er a

million students enrolled.^

As a recipient of such education reforms, Gretchaninoffs early experiences in

school proved to be far less than ideal. When he was almost seven years old, Alexandre's

father enrolled him in the public school system. Gretchaninoff describes these early

school years as almost intolerable, from the rustic school facility to the company of his

fellow classmates, which he describes as "rude and troublesome urchins, roughnecks, and

(some of them) petty thieves," who often caused him to endure painful and humiliating

punishments from the teacher in spite of his innocence. However, Alexandre excelled in

Ivar Spector, An Introduction to Russian Histor\' and Culture (New York: D. \'an Nostrand.
1949), 137-138.
* Spector 138.
"^ Heyman 196. Spector estimates that in 1855, the population of Russia was about 70.000,000
(Spector 131). N.S. Leonov's "Itogi XX veka" [Twentieth Cenmry Summaryl in the Russian periodical,
Russkii Dom [Russian House] U\, 1999, reports that the first official census in Ru-^sia using all of the
current statistical methods took place in 1X9"^ and reported a population of 165 million people. A census
was repeated in 1915 reporting 183 million people.

13
all of his subjects, and "was graduated from primary school in the customar>' three

years."'°

Following primary school, even at his young age, his parents had planned for him

to follow in his father's footsteps to become a merchant/shopkeeper. WTien a famih*

friend noticed exceptional academic ability in the young Alexandre, he con\ inced his

parents to send him to high school. Hoping that his son would become a medical doctor,

his father consented. Alexandre again excelled, except for his difficulty with languages,

specifically Latin, Greek, French, and German. His struggle with languages not only

made it necessary for him to repeat a grade, but also kept him from a future in the

medical profession, and would have sent him back to his father's store, were it not for

what Gretchaninoff himself described as "a stroke of luck" that led him to the Moscow

Conservatory of Music.''

At the age of fourteen, his parents bought a piano for his younger sister who was

studying music at a boarding school. The piano was brought to the Gretchaninoff home

for her to play for the family on the weekends; howe\ er, the young Alexandre spent

hours every day teaching himself to play familiar folk and church melodies. Later the

same year, Alexandre began taking piano lessons from a Polish girl who would

eventually marry his older brother. Assisted by his future sister-in-law, the young

Alexandre practiced arduously for his audition to the Moscow Conservatory in the fall of

1881.

'° Gretchaninoff 12
" Gretchaninoff 13.

14
 As a student in the conservatories of Moscow and later St. Petersburg.

Gretchaninoff again benefited fi-om the reforms of .\lexander II. When Alexander II

began his reign in 1855, music education only had been made available to the nobilit\

and wealthy classes. Foreign teachers were hired by the tsar to teach in the homes of the

wealthy: among the most famous of these teachers w as John Field (Irish composer and

pianist, 1782-1837), who taught Mikhail Glinka (1805-1857), the father of the Russian

nafionahst school of composers who profoundly influenced Nicholas (1835-1881) and

Anton Rubinstein (1829-1894), Peter Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1840-1893), and Balakirev's

circle known as the "Mighty Five."'^ However, as Stewart explains, with the significant

educational reforms that took place under Alexander II's reign, music education also

made significant progress. Referring to Victor I. Seroff s The Mighty Five, Stew art

expounds on the developments that took place in the area of music education during the

reign of Alexander II, noting that Anton Rubinstein, aided by the Grand Duchess Elena

Pavolvna, the tsar's sister, founded the Russian Music Society (RMS) in St. Petersburg in

1859, which established aggressive programs for music appreciation and education, and

established successful music schools, concerts, and symphony orchestras. By 1862,

Rubinstein started the music conser\ atory through the RMS in St. Petersburg to prepare

musicians for a career that would be accepted by society, a pri\ ilege that previously

eluded musicians in Russia.'

'" M. Montagu-Nathan, An Introduction :o Russian Music (London: Cecil Palmer & Hayward,
1916) 19-20.
13
Stewart 24-25

15
 These developments resulted in the establishment of two rival schools in St.

Petersburg: the St. Petersburg Conservatory directed by .\nton Rubinstein, and the Free

Music School, also founded in 1862 by Mili Balakirev (1837-1910). The rivalr>

continued unfil 1917, when the Free Music School was disbanded, as the two schools

remained at odds with each other due to Balakirev's criticism of the conser\'atory for its

choice of European teachers.'"^ Balakirev not only directed the Free Music School, but

also became the leader of the "Mighty Five" that also included Nikolay Rimsk\-

Korsakov (1844-1908), Modest Mussorgsky (1839-1881), Cesar Cui (1835-1918), and

Alexander Borodin (1833-1887), all of whom remained in competition with the RMS and

promoted the Nationalist school in the line of Glinka rather than the European ideals

promoted by the St. Petersburg Conservatory. At times, however, the barriers between

the two schools were lifted, as the St. Petersburg Conservatory employed Rimsky-

Korsakov in 1871 as one if its instructors under Rubinstein, and Balakirev was appointed

orchestra conductor for the RMS in St. Petersburg for two years before eventually being

dismissed by the Grand Duchess in 1869.

In 1859, Anton Rubinstein's younger brother, Nikolai Rubinstein (1835-1881),

opened classes of the RMS in Moscow, and in 1866, the Moscow Conservatory was

established with Nikolai as its director. Though somewhat smaller than the St.

Petersburg Conservatory, the new Moscow school included on its teaching staff the

young Nikolai Kashkin (1839-1920) and Tchaikovsky, who had recently graduated from

the St. Petersburg Conservatory. Kashkin, who would be remembered primarily as a

'•* Stewart 25.

16
music educator and critic, established a close fiiendship with Tchaikovsky, and published

in 1875 one of the eariiest textbooks in Russian on elementary music theor\, which

remained as a standard textbook in Russia for over fifty years. He also left a large

number of essays on music in the Moskovskie Vedomosti, a daily newspaper in Moscow.

According to David Brown, Kashkin's writings on Balikirev, Bordin, Rimsk> -Korsakow

and especially Tchaikovsky, make up his most significant contributions to the field."

Yampol'sky's article further elaborates on the significance of Tchaiko\sk\''s work in

Moscow, showing how Tchaikovsky's music established a style known as the "Moscow

school" that included Taneyev, Arensky, and Rachmaninoff'^

In 1881, the same year that the young Gretchaninoff began at the St. Petersburg

Conservatory, the Era of Great Reforms during the reign of Alexander II was dealt a

devastating blow. On the night before Russia's first constitution was to be legislated,

Alexander II was assassinated, and his son, Alexander III immediately came to power.

As newly appointed tsar, Alexander III not only put an immediate halt to the plans for a

constitution, but included in his primary goals the immediate suppression of

revolutionary groups and the preservation of an orderly society through a restored

autocracy. Spector points out that Alexander Ill's appointment as emperor came at a time

of economic depression in Russia,fi^om1880-1885, which led to industrial strikes m the

cities and to the impoverishment of the landowning nobility, many of whom ended up

selling their estates and moving to the cities. Spector continues: "Here [the land owning

'* David Brown, "Kashkin, Nikolay Dmitriyevich," The N^M' Grove Dictionary' of Music and
Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie, 2"'* ed., vol 13 (London: MacMiUan. 2001) 393-394
'" I.M. Yampol'sky, "Moscow," The New Grove Dictionary of .Uusic and .\fuMcians, ed Stanlcv
Sadie, 2"^ ed., vol. 17 (London: MacMillan, 2001) 169.

17
nobility] agitated incessantly for a return to a more autocratic policy in government under

a strong, reactionary ruler. Such a ruler Alexander III proved to be."'^ His policies not

only were directed towards the firm establishment of the autocracy, but also against all

forms of liberalism and revolution as seen in the reinstatement of restrictionsft-omthe

past. Under the guise of "Russification," a policy that was enacted to remo\ e any further

threat to the reign of the tsar, various ethnic and religious groups such as Roman

Catholics, Protestants, and particularly Jews, all endured heavy persecution.'^ To

establish and maintain Russia's status as a great power, Alexander III enacted policies to

encourage industrial growth in the cities, one of the results of which was the Trans-

Siberian Railway, decided upon in 1885, begun in 1891, and completed in 1904.'*^ The

industrial expansion boosted economic growth and stability. With economic growth,

however, came the growth of discontent that led to even more people demanding social

and political change, and Marxist revolutionaries began to make their presence known.^^

In an attempt to curb the unrest, Alexander III instituted even stricter policies, as Spector

describes further:

.. .government censorship permeated every phase of life. The press and the
universities, which were reorganized in 1884, were stripped of every semblance
of liberty. There was outright interference with the courts, especially as regards
the independence of judges and the jury system. The police exercised a
supervision and operated with a license unheard of even in the days of Nicholas I.
Political prisoners were regarded as having lost all rights and w ere subjected to
shocking brutality. A greater contrast to the liberalism of Alexander II could not
well be imagined than that presented by the absolutism of Alexander III. In 1887
a plot to assassinate Alexander III was uncovered by the police. The leaders of

'^Spector 145
'* Spector 145-146.
"Spector 148.
'" Heyman 212.

18
 the conspiracy were executed. Among them w as Alexander Ulyanow Lenin's
eldest brother.^'

As a natural result of Alexander Ill's strict Russification policies designed to

strengthen the autocracy, the status of the Russian Orthodox Church was highly ele\'ated.

Heyman points out that the church parish schools taught about 100,000 pupils in 1881,

but by 1894, the number of pupils increased to almost one million.~~ Furthermore, as

Spectar notes, Alexander Ill's brutal policies against anN'thing considered to be non-

Russian or anti-autocratic were even shaped by the Russian Orthodox Church:

Since in Russia, autocratic government has always been closely associated with
the Church, it occasions no surprise that the emperor's former tutor, Constantine
Pobyedonostsev (1827-1907), Procurator of the Holy S\Tiod from 1880 to 1905.
was the directing spirit behind much of the reign of terror which broke out shortly
after the accession of Alexander III... In Russia his name became synon\Tnous
with black reaction and religious persecution under the guise of Russification.'"

In spite of the harsh persecutions enacted by Alexander Ill's policies, the strong

economic growth and the peace that Russia enjoyed w ith neighboring countries set the

scene for a period of rich musical development in the life of Gretchaninoff In 1881, the

same year that Alexander III came to power, Gretchaninoff was admitted to the Moscow

Conservatory. Since his father's business had suffered financially, Gretchaninoff paid for

his expenses by tutoring and giving piano lessons to young pupils, which would occupy

him throughout his years at the Moscow Conser\'atory. Though his first experience at

private teaching did not prove successful, he recalls, "I had no further misadventures w ith

-' Spector 147.

"' Heyman 212.
"Spector 145

19
my teaching... I was appreciated and liked as a teacher: lessons did not annoy me. and 1

had more and more pupils every passing year."'^ Gretchaninoff continued his studies at

the Moscow Conservatory from 1881-1890, where he studied piano with Nikolai

Kashkin, and counterpoint, harmony, and form with professors including Vasily Safonow

N.A. Hubert, Hermann Laroche, Anton Arensky, and Sergei Taneye\'.

Moscow in the 1880s was a time and place of rich musical acti\ity and

development for Gretchaninoff. Studying piano at the conservatory under Kashkin,

Gretchaninoff remembers him as "a kind and genial man, greatly esteemed by his

colleagues and students, but he was a poor teacher and paid little attention to his duties."

He then explains how he received no instruction in hand position or technique, and

assigned piano works that were much too difficult for him. Gretchaninoff recalls the

regular routine with Kashkin: "My teacher used to come to class with a pile of

newspapers, and read them, walking back and forth, while I was playing, seemingly

oblivious of my presence. I did not make bad mistakes and he never noticed the minor

errors."^^ In spite of this serious lack of instruction, Gretchaninoff remained determined,

preparing hours every day for his lessons and his course w ork, and w as promoted to the

"third grade" by his second year of study. Though Gretchaninoffs self-described

"strange shyness" prevented him from establishing lasting friendships at the Moscow

conservatory, he lists his classmates from the conservatory who would become w ell

known in their careers, including Sergei Rachmaninoff (1873-1943), who began his

'"'Gretchaninoff 22
''^Gretchaninoff 18-19.

20
studies at the Moscow Conservatory in the mid-1880s, and Alexander Scnabin (IS":

1915), who began his work at the conservatory in 1888.^^

Gretchaninoff describes many of the concerts in Moscow as the "greatest musical

events" for him. He enjoyed the historical concerts of Anton Rubinstein in Moscow and

participated as a member of the chorus in the RMS performance of Liszt's oratorio, St.

Elizabeth. Gretchaninoff fiirther recalls the significance of Rubinstein's concerts:

The series of historic concerts presented by Anton Rubinstein in the 1880's

was of tremendous importance to my musical de\'elopment. There w ere se\ en
concerts in all, the programs comprising piano works of all composers, beginning
with the early Italian and French classics, and ending with Schumann and Chopin.
Each program was performed by Rubinstein in St. Petersburg on Sunday night
and then, on the following morning, repeated for the music students. On Monday
night Rubinstein went to Moscow, and on Tuesday night he played in the large
hall of Nobility House for the general public, repeating the program on
Wednesday morning for the Moscow students. That same evening he would
return again to St. Petersburg, with three days lef^ to prepare for the next concert.
And so it went for seven weeks. Every Tuesday night and every Wednesday
morning I was present in the hall, with the scores in my hands, eagerly absorbing
the sounds flowing from the fingers of this great genius...'

Gretchaninoff further recounts his personal experience with Tchaikovsk>', the

composer he idealized more than any other:

My years at the Moscow Conservatory were coincident w ith the

rise of Tchaikovsky's star on the musical horizon. Every new symphony he wrote
was immediately included in the programs of the Russian Imperial Musical
Society [RMS]. His songs were avidly snatched up by Moscow music lovers as
soon as his publisher, Jurgenson, printed them...
The orchestra for these symphony concerts was usually supplemented by
violinists, cellists, and other players from the ranks of Conser\'atory students.
Theory students were sometimes assigned percussion instruments to play if the
parts were not too prominent. I had a chance to play the glockenspiel part in
Tchaikovskv's Mozartiana, with Tchaikovsky himself conducting the orchestra.

-'Gretchaninoff 21.
"^Gretchaninoff 24

21
 Naturally, I was nervous, but all went well. Dunng the intermission on the last
rehearsal, I was talking to Kashkin, when I saw Tchaikovsky coming towards us.
Kashkin introduced us. Tchaikovsky shook hands w ith me and, intending to say
something pleasant (which was characteristic of his kindly nature), remarked:
"These parts should always be given to young musicians. Professional players
never play them as conscientiously as these younger students." I w as in seventh
heaven. My friends, poking fun at me, said afterwards that I had not w ashed m\
right hand that Tchaikovsky touched, for fully a week.^^

Completing five years of work in four years time under Kashkin, Gretchaninoff

took the required examinations to be admitted for graduate study. With much effort on

the part of Kashkin to prepare him for the exams, Gretchaninoff w as admitted for

graduate study in the area of pedagogy. Assigned to the studio of Vasily Safono\, a new

teacher and recent graduate of the St. Petersburg Conservatory, Gretchaninoff continued

to devote himself to music studies. After two years of arduous study under Safonov,

Gretchaninoff finally received encouragement from his teacher, w ho recommended that

he take composition courses. Fueled by this small commendation, Gretchaninoff enrolled

in the composition courses of Taneyev and Arensky. Studying form with Taneye\',

Gretchaninoff recalls how he was "crushed" when his teacher did not remark favorably

on the songs that he presented to him. A clash with Arensky, with whom he studied

fugue, led to an intolerable situation for Gretchaninoff, and a heated argument with the

teacher in January of 1890 led to him leaving the conservatory.^^

No longer under the rules of the Moscow Conservatory, which forbade students to

publish music, Gretchaninoff arranged to have three of his songs published by a local

Moscow music store. Gretchaninoff paid for the publication costs himself, and not a

^^ Gretchaninoff 25
-"Gretchaninoff 26-30.

->7
single copy was sold. Later, Gretchaninoff e\en destroyed U\o of the three songs, except

for Lullaby, which was included in an album of five songs, opus 1. which he described as

having a "worthwhile" melody, and "written in the effective style of the then popular

songs by Cui and Tchaikovsky."^°

Gretchaninoff recalled his first experience in writing church music dunng this

time in Moscow:

By that time I had acquired considerable knowledge of church music, and

a mastery of vocal writing. I composed a Cherubic Hymn for mixed choir, and
handed it over to a man named Makarov, whose daughters studied piano w ith me.
He volunteered to show the manuscript to a choral conductor of his acquaintance
for possible performance.
In due time, Makarov told me that my Hymn had been approved, and that
it would be sung the following Sunday at the early morning service in the
Archangel Cathedral in the Kremlin.^'

Eagerly awaiting the premier of his first choral composition, Gretchaninoff arrived at the

Cathedral early in the morning, only to find out in the course of the ser\ ice that his

composifion had been replaced with the Cherubic Hymn of Bortniansky, "My

disappointment was beyond description." "

Gretchaninoffs disposition suffered immensely under criticism, thrived w ith the

smallest amount of encouragement, and yet his resolve remained constant. By the end of

August, 1890, he had saved enough money to travel to St. Petersburg and stay for a few

weeks, hoping to receive a scholarship that would take care of the rest of his expenses

while studying in the St. Petersburg Conservatory. Upon arrival in St. Petersburg, he

immediately was accepted by Rimsky-Korsakov as his student in composition and

^° Gretchaninoff 32.
'' Gretchaninoff 33.
^" Gretchaninoff 34.

23
orchestration, but on a provisional basis until a final entrance examination in fugue was

passed.

Gretchaninoff had enrolled as a student during Anton Rubinstein's last year as

director of the St. Petersburg Conservatory; Rubinstein retired in 1891, and died in 1894.

Gretchaninoff recalled a brief encounter with Rubinstein during a class in choral

composifion with Franz Czemy, in which they had just rehearsed Gretchaninoffs chorus.

In the Fiery Glow, to the text of Surikov:

Suddenly the door opened and Rubinstein came in. I felt an inner
tremor of mixed fear and joy in the expectation that my adored Anton
Grigorievitch would hear my composition. I hoped that m\' music would please
him, and that he would commend me for it. But to my distress, Czemy [the
teacher], as if frightened that he might give the impression of wasting time on
inconsequenfial trifles instead of doing something worthwhile, asked Rubinstein if
he would like to hear the Mendelssohn chorus that we had already rehearsed. My
heart stood still... I sadly gathered up my manuscript, and with a feeling of bitter
disappointment, went home.^^

During his early experiences under Rimsky-Korsakov, Gretchaninoff felt jealous

that he received so little attention from the teacher compared to the others in his class.

An early conversation with his teacher on the subject of favorite composers gave

Gretchaninoff the opportunity to reveal to Rimsky-Korsakov his natural adoration for

Tchaikovsky, whom he and others in Moscow had idolized. Unaware at this time of the

rivalry between the Moscow and St. Petersburg schools, the latter of which demonstrated

a marked preference for Glinka and those in the "Mighty Five" to the contempt of

Tchaikovsky, Gretchaninoff later realized that his outspokenness may have contnbuted to

Rimsky-Korsakov's early detachment towards him. However, this early detachment soon

.13
Gretchaninoff 37.

24
faded, and Gretchaninoff recalled many encouraging moments when Rimsky-Korsako\

approved of his work. In eariy 1892, Gretchaninoff asked Rimsk\-Korsakov to ser\e as

his best man for his wedding in St. Petersburg. In his memoirs, Gretchaninoff fondly

recalled Rimsky-Korsakov's participafion at his small wedding, and then remarked, "He

came alone, without his wife. I was too shy to invite her to my wedding."""*

Gretchaninoff focused on composing for the next two years while he was studying

at the St. Petersburg Conservatory, and published some songs, as St. Petersburg's

Conservatory had no rules against students publishing their works. His assignment in the

summer of 1892 was to complete a concert overture for large orchestra. Rimsk\ -

Korsakov was impressed with the work, and recommended it to the Council of the St.

Petersburg Conservatory for the annual students' concert to be held in the fall of the same

year. Gretchaninoff recalls: "The overture was accepted and performed with great

success. Galkin, who conducted, kept the score for a later performance in Pavlovsk,

where he led the orchestra beginning with the season in 1893."^'^ In the spring of 1893,

he was assigned to write a cantata in one month for solo voice, chorus, and orchestra.

This final project culminated in a successful premier on May 30, with the composer

conducting it himself Though the critics' reviews of the work were unfavorable,

Gretchaninoff explained that the critics in St. Petersburg never gave favorable reviews to

anything by Rimsky-Korsakov, nor to the rest of the composers who were part of the

"^ Gretchaninoff 42
" Gretchaninoff 45.

25
Mighty Five. Gretchaninoff proudly quoted from such an unfavorable review of his

cantata in the St. Petersburg Gazette:

"Gretchaninoffs cantata is concerned with fine details and

sonority; his music is the frame of a non-existent picture. This is the st\le of
Rimsky-Korsakov himself, and his students follow him. The gentlemen of the
Mighty Heap may rejoice and congratulate themselves on the acquisition of
another genius, number 13, according to our count. \'er\ soon, Stasov will
describe him as 'incredible, phenomenal, monumental, fundamental,' etc. Sh.
[Gretchaninoffs rival class-mate] at least has a recognizable picture in the
foreground."
I must admit that I felt very proud reading these re\ iew s, and
understandably so. I was being thrown into the same heap w ith the Mightv
Heap!^^

As a recent graduate of the St. Petersburg Conservatory, Gretchaninoff finally

began independent work as a composer in 1893 at the age of twenty-eight. Financial

difficuhies soon took their toll, and he struggled to attain enough students to support

himself and his wife, and to find enough time to compose.

Gretchaninoff remembered the 1893-94 concert season in St. Petersburg opening

with Tchaikovsky's new Sixth Symphony, with Tchaiko\ sky himself conducting. He

described the premier that took place on October 16, 1893: "Tchaikovsky was not a good

conductor, and his now celebrated symphony received but a mediocre success." He then

recalled meeting with Rimsky-Korsakov about it a few days later w here the "mediocre"

quality of the new symphony was confirmed by Rimsky-Korsakov's similar description

of it.^^ Later the same month, Tchaikovsky was struck with cholera and died a few days

later. Gretchaninoff added: "On October 25, Tchaikovsky died. The whole musical

'* Gretchaninoff 46.

'^Gretchaninoff 48.

26
worid was shaken by this event. Never before or since have I w itnessed such a uni\ ersal

and gripping feeling of sorrow." Following the ftineral, the Russian Imperial Musical

Society performed Tchaikovsky's Sixth Symphony again at the next concert, w here, in

the hands of a masterful conductor, according to Gretchaninoff, the orchestra "performed

the work with such penetrafion and passion that many in the audience w ept, particularly

during the last movement with its deeply mournful mood." Gretchaninoff further

lamented the legendary composer's death:

As an outlet for my sorrow, I composed an orchestral Elegy, to the

Memory of Tchaikovsky. But the music did not satisfy me, and I did not try to
have the work performed. Some years later... I destroyed the manuscript. Man\
years elapsed before I finally succeeded in writing a work adequately expressing
my feelings for the beloved master: it was my Fourth Symphony.^^

Spending the entire winter of 1893-94 teaching, Gretchaninoff also completed his

first independent composition in a large form, the String Quartet in G major, and

submitted it to the Balaieff compefifion in the spring of that year. Satisfied with this first

large-scale work, Gretchaninoff immediately began work on his first symphony. Finding

a small country cottage for rent on the Volga, he spent the summer with his wife in this

quaint country home, devoting himself to relaxation and completing the symphony.

Upon his return to St. Petersburg in the fall, Gretchaninoff presented the manuscript of

his symphony to Rimsky-Korsakov, who responded favorably, and offered to perform it

in the upcoming season. He soon also discovered that his String Quartet had w on the

Balaieff prize, and was accepted for publication along with his first album of songs,

'* Gretchaninoff 48-50.

27
opus 1. The first symphony premiered in January, 1895, under Rimsky-Korsakov's

direction. It received mixed reviews, which Gretchaninoff attributed to Rimksky-

Korsakov's inadequate interpretafion and performance of the work.

Gretchaninoffs first significant success was the large choral w ork. North and

South, which premiered in March, 1895, under the direction of Theodore Becker, the

chorus master of the Russian Imperial Opera in St. Petersburg who founded an amateur

chorus of two hundred male and female singers. Of this work, Gretchaninoff recalls:

If my symphony was hardly a success, I was compensated a hundredfold

by the tremendous acclaim that my large choral work North and South recei\ed...
For my text I selected a Crimean sonnet by Alexey Tolstoy, "Over an Inaccessible
Cliff" This sonnet presents two contrasting pictures: a somber mountain
landscape where "the enemy of the angry god, plays with storm and gale," and a
joyful scene at the seashore, where roses bloom and "spring wafts the air." I
succeeded in outlining this sharp contrast rather effecti\ ely, and the talented
Becker interpreted my music with great understanding. The w ork w as
enthusiastically received by the audience and had to be repeated. I w as recalled to
the podium several times to acknowledge the applause. ^

Gretchaninoff then comments on the work of Becker, who died soon after this premier,

and Melnikov, a retired opera singer who co-founded the choral school w ith Becker and

died shortly after Becker:

Long live the memory of these two great artists' Thanks to them, Russian
choral music was enriched, and its popularity spread not only over Russia but all
over the world, particularly in America where choral singing today is widely
cultivated... My name is known in America through some of my songs, but
perhaps even more through my secular and sacred choral w orks.

Throughout the "reign of terror" that played such a significant role during the rule

of Alexander III, Gretchaninoff was never persecuted since he lived a normal life in

'''Gretchaninoff 54-55
•*" Gretchaninoff 55.

2S
terms of typical Russian society and orthodoxy. In 1895, he again spent the summer in

the country cottage on the shore of the Volga, where he regulariy read new spapers. He

comments:

The reign of Alexander III and the early years of Nicholas II were politically so
uneventful that one could be absolutely certain that nothing w orld-shaking w ould
happen during the four months of the vacation period. My summers, with m>
regular schedule for work and rest, seemed to pass all too quickh. Still, when
autumn came, we returned, not without pleasure, to city life, with its cultural
atmosphere, theaters, concerts, and art exhibitions."^^

Though Gretchaninoff benefited from his leisure and growing prospenty during the

1890s, the increasing tension in the political scene had already begun, and w ould

eventually explode in at least two major events that would alter the course of his life

forever: Bloody Sunday of 1905 and the Bolshevik revolution of 1917.

Alexander III died at the age of forty-nine in 1894 from nephritis, a condition that

likely resulted from injuries sustained when the imperial train w as derailed in 1888. This

left his son, Nicholas II, as the next Romanov in line and the last tsar to rule o\ er Russia.

Coming to power at the young age of twenty-six, history records Nicholas II as ill-

equipped for the tremendous responsibilities as emperor. While he w as personally

known for his kind, approachable demeanor, important political decisions weighed

heavily on him. Decisions that needed to be swiftly made w ere often delayed, to the

further detriment of the situation; however, the few decisions that were sw ifth made

often proved to be costly blunders. The results of such faulty administrative decisions.

41
Gretchaninoff 56.

29
meant to strengthen Russia and the autocracy, actually strengthened the re\ olutionary

groups leading to the dissolution of the monarchy in 19n.

During the late 1890s, Nicholas II confinued the policies of his father: expanding

industrializafion in the cities primarily through the confinuation of railroad construction:

maintaining the "Russification" policy that targeted Finns and Jews, the latter of whom

continued to endure extreme violence; and continuing a domestic policy that denied any

attempts at a representative council or a constitution that threatened the power of the

monarchy."^^ Though his early years as emperor indeed were relatively "uneventful," as

described by Gretchaninoff, both foreign and domestic issues had begun to threaten

Russia's security. Tension with Japan developed as Nicholas II's growing interest in the

Far East opposed Japanese expansion in Asia, and culminated in the Russo-Japanese War

of 1904-05, resulting in humiliating defeat for Russia. The conflict ended with a

relafively favorable settlement for Russia due to the genius of a top diplmat, Sergei Witte,

who had also served as minister of finance and spearheaded industrialization efforts,

particularly in railroad construction.

Following his summer vacafion in 1895, Gretchaninoff returned to St. Petersburg,

where more of his songs began to be published, receiving popularity. In spite of this, a

new publicafion by Cesar Cui on the subject of Russian songs left him out of the main-

stream classification of composers, and to his humiliation, classified him with a group of

"third-rate" composers. Gretchaninoff promptly met with Cui and performed his songs

for him. Gretchaninoff recalls Cui's apologies for leaving him out of his book: "T

42
Heyman 223-227.

30
confess that I was wrong,' said Cui. 'I was equally unfair to Rachmaninoff. In the new

edition of my book, you and Rachmaninoff will be given the places you deser\'e.'"^-

In the fall of 1896, Gretchaninoff moved to Moscow, and re-established contact

with one of his former instructors at the Moscow Conservatory, Sergei Taneyev. At this

point in Gretchaninoffs career, Taneyev would have a tremendous influence on his

compositional style. He recounted that many Moscow composers went to him for advice,

including Rachmaninoff and Scriabin, and further stated: "From that time on, I never let

any of my large works be published before showing the music to him."^

In Moscow, work continued on hisfirstof three full-scale operas, Dobrinya

Nikiyitch, begun in 1895 in St. Petersburg, but not completed until 1901, and premiered

in Moscow in 1903. Other works included songs and piano arrangements for children,

whom he taught regularly, a collection of choruses, and chamber works for a variety of

media. Other notable worksfromthis time included incidental music for Stanislovsky's

newly founded Moscow Art Theatre. Of these works. Tsar Theodore enjoyed

tremendous success, as he recalled: "Both the audience and the progressive press

proclaimed this production an epoch-making event in the history of the Russian theatre. I

was proud in the knowledge that I, too, had contributed my 'drop of honey' to this

achievement."^^ Other works for the Moscow Art Theatre included Death of Ivan the

Terrible, Dreams, and The Snow Maiden, the latter of which included a significant

^^Gretchaninoft"57.
*^ Gretchaninoff 80.
** Gretchaninoff 70.

31
amount of music as an important part of the play, but drew onh' marginal success

partially due to technical staging difficulties that affected the first performance."'^

After a long break from composing church music. Gretchaninoff completed his

first Liturgy, Opus 13, in 1897, followed by two choruses: Praise the Lord and The Wave

of the Ocean, Opus 19, both of which employed the old chant style of the Russian church

that characterized the style of the remainder of his sacred compositions. This new st\le,

which generally characterized the music of the new Russian choral school. recei\ ed

Gretchaninoffs attention not only in his music, but also in his essays.

Gretchaninoffs two articles in the Moskovskie Vedomosti, appeared in Fcbruar\,

1900, and sparked much debate. His comments about publishing these articles reveal a

glimpse of his polifical opinion as well: "The only Russian newspaper that showed

interest in the problems of the Russian Church, and church singing in particular, w as

Moscovskye Vedomosty. I was altogether out of sympathy with the monarchist politics

of that paper, but I decided nevertheless to publish my article in this, rather than in any

other paper.""*^ Feeling he was misrepresented in the "storm of disapproval" that

followed the first essay, Gretchaninoff responded with a second article. The outcome of

these two articles put him at the forefront of what turned into a national debate on church

music, the details of which are discussed in Chapter IV.

Spending the summer of 1902 in another country cottage on the banks of the

Volga, Gretchaninoff composed the Second Liturgy, Opus 29, in 1902. The premier in

"Gretchaninoff 70; 75-78.

*^ Gretchaninoff 72
March of 1903 featured Vasliyev's chorus, and enjoyed a tremendous success. A leading

conductor of a professional choir of 180 voices in Moscow, Leonid Vasilyev's choir and a

detailed descripfion of the premier of the Second Liturgy will be discussed in Chapter \'

While Gretchaninoff was establishing his reputation as a significant composer in a

variety of genres during this period, the political situafion in Russia continued to worsen.

A constant string of events severely weakened the percepfion of the monarchy, nudging

the country toward revolufion. In the war against Japan, continual military defeats

weakened confidence in the imperial administration. Furthermore, the advent of

industriahzafion brought the natural result of an increased population of factory workers,

a group that had reached 2.5 million in the 1897 census. This rapidly grow ing group

endured long hours and poor living and working conditions, setting up another potential
48

political threat.

Adding to this, underground revolutionary groups began to mobilize. The first

Marxist Congress took place in Minsk in 1898, the delegates of whom were arrested,

causing no lasting results. However, by the early 1900s, other Marxist groups began to

assemble. In 1902, Lenin published his book What Is To Be Done?, and in 1903,

assembled another Marxist Congress in London. The result of this congress started two

rival parties of revolutionaries that favored the overthrow of the monarchy and the

organization of a socialist government: the Mensheviks who favored an extended

education program to train the masses before the advent of a re\olution, and the

Bolsheviks under the leadership of Lenin, who favored a forceful, abrupt deposition of

Heyman 22'

33
the existing polifical power."^^ In 1901, the radical Socialist Revolutionary Party,

appealing to the peasantry who sfill made up the majority of the population, resoned to

terrorism against imperial officials. By 1905 they had not only assassinated several

officials including the Grand Duke Sergei, the emperor's uncle and governor of Moscow,

but also had become the largest political party in Russia."^°

The year 1905 brought polifical unrest that had captivated the heart of Russia in

both urban and rural areas, bringing the course of events to one fateful day that pa\ed the

way for revolufionaries to overthrow the monarchy twelve years later. By early January

in St. Petersburg, 140,000 factory workers had resorted to strikes.'^' On January 22. a

single event known as "Bloody Sunday" destroyed any faith in the tsar that had still

endured among the people. Up to this time, the people referred to Nicholas II as their

"Little Father,"^^ and the rage of the general population had not been against him, but

against his "henchmen" who actually committed the wrongs against the people and kept

the tsar isolated from them.^"^ Led by Father George Capon, one of a minority in the

clergy who felt that it was the church's responsibility to educate the illiterate masses and

redirect their violent tendencies into peaceful ways of redressing their injustices,

thousands of men, women, and children marched to the imperial palace to peacefully

'"Spector 159.
'"Spector 160.
*'Heyman 234.
-' Marc Ferro, Nicholas II. Last of the Tsars (New \'ork. Oxford: Oxtord UP. 1993) S7.
According to Sergei Shishkin, The Russian "Bat'ushka" is the very tender word for father, as used by a
young child. The American English equivalent would be "Daddy "
" Ferro 87.

34
address the tsar. Spector further describes the scene, which had taken place follow inii a

religious service:

Reverently bearing aloft portraits of the emperor and members of the ro\al famiK
and singing hymns, they presented the aspect of a devout religious procession.
Anything less like a revolutionary demonstration cannot w ell be imagined. Father
Gapon had told them that the emperor would no doubt receive them himself and
instructed them to fall upon their knees when he appeared in token of their loyalt\
and submission...
With a blind obtuseness in judgment, which finds few parallels in history, soldiers
and Cossacks were ordered to open fire without warning upon the assembled
crowd. Estimates of the number of victims range from 70 to 500 or more killed,
and 250 to 3500 wounded.^"^

A few days later, in an address to a carefully selected delegation, the tsar forgave

their offences for "coming in a rebellious mob... [which] w as a criminal act."'' The

tsar's actions on that day, however, had lasting effects on the Russian people, both

against the autocracy and against the Russian Orthodox Church. Spector adds:

No words can depict the terror and the wrath of the people over the horrors of
Bloody Sunday. Those who had lost ftiends or relativ es vowed an undying
vengeance, the intensity and fervency of which only increased with the passing
years. Wrath also fell upon the Church, because the people were fully convinced
that they had been betrayed and entrapped by its emissaries. From this time forth
the workers aligned themselves wholeheartedly with revolutionary and socialist
forces. "Bloody Sunday" marked a crisis in the revolutionary movement."

Ferro summed up the attitude of the people toward the tsar after Bloody Sunday this way:

"He forgave his people for rebelling against him. But his people did not forgive him."

In the aftermath of 1905, the general strike forced Nicholas to make concessions,

and he reluctantly issued the October Manifesto. The manifesto promised civil liberties

^^ Spector 163.
*^ Ferro 86.
** Spector 163.
" Ferro 86.

35
and a representational council called a Duma. The Duma, elected by universal \ ote,

would have final approval before any law could be passed. By late 1905. the fulh-

implemented October Manifesto satisfied the moderate supporters of the revolution, and

though a final outburst of revolutionary activity took place in Moscow in December, it

was suppressed immediately by the Russian Army.^^

Bloody Sunday deeply affected all of Russian society. Stewart points out how the

consequences of this tragic day affected musicians in general:

The strikes which occurred throughout the country hampered travel and
communications; concerts, therefore, were difficult to arrange. The personal
feelings of musicians became aligned with liberal thinking. On February 15, a
letter signed by over thirty musicians in protest of the tyranny appeared in the
Russian Musical Gazette... The letter was signed by Rachmaninoff, Taneye\,
Gretchaninoff, Siloti, and others.^^

Rimsky-Korsakov also became involved, submitting a letter to the same publication that

not only supported the views of his colleagues, but also defended the students who were

involved with the strike, and called for educational reform. As a result of student unrest,

the St. Petersburg Conservatory temporarily closed, and Rimsky-Korsakov was

dismissed. From this time until his death in 1908, he was constantly troubled by the rigid

imperial policies against him.^

The events of Bloody Sunday in 1905 also deeply affected Gretchaninoff in a

personal way. He describes his experience surrounding it:

Russia's ill-fated war w ith Japan in 1905 produced a \'iolent resurgence of

the theretofore dormant political consciousness of the masses. Protests against the
tyrannical and short-sighted polic\ of the government were voiced with increasing

^* Heyman 235-236.
-' Stewart 32-33.
*•" V.V. Yastrebtsev, Reminiscenses of Rimskv-Korsakov, trans. Florence Jonas (.N'cw \'oxV.
Columbia University Press, 1985) 355.

36
 boldness. All over Russia, there were rumblings of discontent and indignation
meetings, culminating in the workers' public petition to the Tsar on Januarv 9
(22) , 1905, and the resulting blood bath on Winter Palace Square in St.
Petersburg.
When the news of the massacre reached Moscow, I was indignant and
outraged. As an outlet to my pent-up feelings I began a collection of funds for the
families of the slain workers... And I wrote a threnody for the fallen \ictims.^'

To the Memory of the Fallen for Freedom was scored for a cappella choir of mixed

voices.

"Bloody Sunday" not only inspired him to compose a specific work directly

related to the tragic events, but also indirectly led him to a shift in his overall

compositional style. Close friends of Gretchaninoff while attending a political meeting

at the Moscow University following the tragedy in St. Petersburg, met a **young woman

of great charm" and introduced her to Gretchaninoff Gretchaninoffs immediate but

lasting infatuation with her resulted in a long period of inner turmoil for him, until his

eventual divorce and re-marriage to Maria Griegorievna, to whom he had dedicated many

of his compositions. Gretchaninoff related this period of struggle in his life to a brief

change in the harmonic style of his compositions.^^ In his dissertation over the Catholic

masses of the composer, Bradley Holmes also suggests a correlation in his personal

struggle and the nature of his music at the time:

Grechaninov took a decided turn toward impressionism in 1907. Citing

Debussy, Ravel, Strauss, and Reger as influences, he dabbled w ith new harmonic
language... This time of experimentation seems to signal a certain uneasiness in

*' Gretchaninoff listed January 9 as the date according to Western Calendar. Ihe I-astern calendar
used in pre-revolutionary Russia was 13 days behind the Western calendar Russia adopted the Western
calendar following the Revolution. The acUial date of Bloody Sunday in Russia was Januan. 22, in the
West the date fell on January 9.
*•-Gretchaninoff 100.
"•Gretchaninoff 100-102
 Grechaninov's assessment of his own work, and indeed of his personal life. His
second marriage in 1911 coincides with the end of these wanderings.^

This period of "wandering" in the personal hfe and compositional style of

Gretchaninoff coincided with a period of internal wandering of Tsar Nicholas's

administration. Though the elected Dumas put in place by the October Manifesto of

1905 were supposed to have terms of five years each, and the power to regulate all

legislation, Nicholas refused to relinquish his autonomous power to appoint and dismiss

ministers, govern domestic affairs by decree, or conduct issues as the\ related to foreign

poHcy. The first Duma met in May, 1906, with the ambition of challenging major issues,

but was dismissed by the tsar in less than three months. The second Duma, in 1907,

suffered a similar fate, and it was not until the Third Duma, elected under strict control,

that a full five-year term was actually completed. A\ oiding controversies that led to

conflict with the tsar, the third Duma issued a very progressive education policy, w ith the

goal of teaching all children and eliminating illiteracy completely by 1922. Furthermore,

the third Duma established an "interpolation" policy that enabled them to hold

governmental officials accountable for their conduct. 05

The October Manifesto, combined w ith immediate economic progress,

strengthened the monarchy, appeased the moderate re\ olutionaries for a time, and

weakened the radical revolutionary groups. Shortly after 1905, the Bolsheviks under

Lenin became divided. However, by 1912, Lenin had further refined his radical views of

revolution and Marxism, and called his supporters together for a conference in Prague.'"'

"^ Holmes 33.

"'Heyman 239-242
** Heyman 243-244.

"^S
Meanwhile, tension increased between Russia and Germany over the future of the

Balkans, ripening conditions for the onset of world war.

During the years immediately preceding World War I, Gretchaninoff continued

his normal activities devoted to teaching and composition. His most notable work of the

period was the opera Sister Beatrice, begun in 1907 and completed in 1910. The work,

however, met with disapprovalfi^omthe church because of the appearance of a statue of

the Madonna that was at the center of the action on stage, an act that was considered to be

blasphemous due to the mixing of sacred icons with the secular stage. Sister Beatrice

never premiered in St. Petersburg, and received only one successful performance in

Moscow, followed by critical attacks from church officials. Gretchaninoff stated: "And

so my poor Sister Beatrice was buried alive; and the score reposed on my library shelf for

nearly twenty years."

In the fall of 1910, Gretchaninoff moved back to St. Petersburg. He was

welcomed as the composer of many songs and sacred works, and was received in the

homes of aristocratic music lovers. Among those who received him was Alexander

Taneyev, the uncle of Sergei Taneyev who had critiqued his work in Moscow. Further,

Gretchaninoffs Credo from the Second Liturgy was so adored by the tsar that he

commanded the Court Chapel to perform it every Sunday. Alexander Tanye\, w ho w as

close to the imperial court, arranged for the performance and for Gretchaninoff to receive

an annual pension of two thousand rubles from the tsar.

67
Gretchaninoff 110.

39
 By July of 1914, Germany declared war against Russia. The people of Russia

welcomed the war, hoping one of the outcomes would be a form of democracy in Russia.

Spector illuminates the early perception of the Russian participation in the war:

Once Germany had declared war, Nicholas II called upon all Russians to
rally to the defense of their country. His appeal met with an immediate and
enthusiastic response from all classes of the people, especially as the
governmental policy was approved by the Fourth Duma... The participation of
England and France did much to win popular support of the war in Russia...
Even the radicals saw hope for the future of Russia if she took part in a war in
which France, a republic, and England, a true democracy, w ere opposed to a
monarchial Germany. They feh that if Russia associated herself with these
countries as an ally, she too might be able in the end to secure a democratic form
of government.

However, within a few weeks, enthusiasm had been replaced by fear. On August 17. at

the insistence of her allies, Russia disrupted original strategic war plans, and invaded

Germany to ease the strain on France and England at the Western Front. Though the

Russian troops outnumbered the Germans, superior German leadership and technology

led to an overwhelming defeat for the Russians, completely destroying their morale.

During the course of the war, the monarchy suffered serious setbacks. The

Russian army suffered from a shortage of weapons and ammunition, immobility, and low

morale. Nicholas's clash with the Fourth Duma intensified, yet his ministers lacked any

ability to direct the war effort effectively. Finally, Nicholas himself took command of

military forces in 1915. With the tsar at theft-ontmuch of the time, Rasputin, the faith

healer who impressed the empress with his cures for hemophilia suffered by their son

Alexis, appeared to have significant political influence, as many of his associates were

68
Spector 181-182.

40
appointed to high ministerial positions. In 1916, rumors of coups to overthrow the tsar

were abundant, and Rasputin was assassinated. As a resuh of the ma\hem, Russia had

suffered serious political, economic, and social damage.^^ B\ the end of 1916, average

Russians experienced extreme shortages in food and fuel supplies. The soldiers at the

front sensed the lack of organization and administrati\'e skills of their commanders, and

the war seemed futile. The monarchy, in particular, lost practically all prestige. ''^

In the spring of 1914, the Gretchaninoffs traveled to Spain and France, returning

to Moscow only days before Austrian Archduke Francis Ferdinand was assassinated,

precipitating the first global war. Gretchaninoff detailed his perspecti\e of the war and

the 1917 Revolution as it affected those in Moscow:

The first two years of the war were indecisi\ e: defeats were followed by
victories; victories by defeats. Toward the end of 1916 there was a marked
deterioration of foreign affairs. Rasputin, the "Holy Man," appeared on the scene
and cast a spell upon the Imperial family, particularly the Tsarina. A conspiracy
was formed among men close to the Court, resulting in Rasputin's assassination.
This event and the continued setbacks on the battlefront signalized the approach
of Revolution. And then it struck! The news of the Revolution of February, 1917,
was greeted in Moscow with enthusiasm. People poured into the streets wearing
red flowers in their lapels. Strangers embraced each other w ith tears of joy in
their eyes. Maria Grigorievna and I joined the crowd, but not for long... '

Gretchaninoff then rushed off to compose a national anthem, "The H\Tnn of Free

Russia," to a poem by Constantine Balmont:

Manuscript in hand, I went to see Gutheil [his publisher]. Without

wasting any time he sent the music to the printer, and on the follow ing afternoon
the Gutheil store displayed copies of m\ Hymn of Free Russia. The proceeds
from the sales were turned over to the liberated political pnsoners. The Bolshoy
Theatre was closed for only a few days. As soon as it reopened, my new anthem
was performed... Thanks to the simple melody and fine text, my anthem soon

"" Heyman 252-263

^"Heyman 253.
^'Gretchaninoff 117.

41
 became popular, not only in Russia but abroad. M\ American ftiends, Kurt
Schindler and his wife, translated it into English, and it was published b\ the G.
Schirmer Company. The Hymn of Free Russia w as still sung even when there
was no more freedom in Russia.^

The hope of freedom experienced among the Russian people soon faded with the

new revolution of the Bolsheviks in October. The eariier March Revolution which

overthrew the monarchy resulted in two rival institutions of government: the Provisional

Government, recognized by the Allies, and the Soviet^^ of Workers' and Soldiers'

Deputies (Soviet), the latter of which, Spector adds, "assumed so much authority that for

all intents and purposes two governments were trying to function in Russia." "* The

Provisional Government, with members who were actually responsible for the political

revolution in March, issued decrees guaranteeing freedom of speech, freedom of press,

universal suffrage, and the establishment of a representational assembly, among other

Items. However, with "Army Order Number T' decreed by the Soviet, rights w ere

given to soldiers to elect committee members to a Soviet or Council, and to disobey any

army orders that disagreed with the Soviet. Under the auspices of Army Order Number 1,

all military discipline was in disarray: officers were murdered at the hands of the soldiers,

others deserted, and the entire Russian army was virtually destroyed. The internal chaos

that followed in the cities provided Lenin's Bolsheviks an easy opportunit\ for their

revolution, which occurred in November, and by 1918 had established the new

Communist Government.^^

^-Gretchaninoff 117-118.
^^ "Soviet" literally means council.
* Spector 267.
" Spector 268.
'"Heyman 268-291.
 Gretchaninoff recalled his viewpoint of the situation from March to No\ember,

1917, and described his musical escape from the horrible situation:

The intoxication of liberty did not last long. The spectre of a new and
bloody revolution appeared in sight. October arrived, and in its wake came
famine, cold, and the almost complete extinction of all spiritual life.
In those evil days I experienced a yearning to write religious music, to
forget what was going on around me.'

Gretchaninoff continues in his autobiography by listing the a cappella sacred works he

had composed, and then reflects: "I had exhausted all of the technical resources of choral

writing a cappella. What was to be my next step? By what method could I enhance the

expressive power in my music?" The end result was the first e\er Russian liturgy set to

instrumental accompaniment: the Domestic Liturgy, Opus 79, for tenor and bass solo,

chorus, string orchestra, organ and harp. Gretchaninoff summarizes the horrible

conditions of the time surrounding his composition of the Domestic Liturgy:

I wrote this Liturgy in the autumn of 1917 during the Bolshevik uprising
in Moscow. The bitterness of the Hallelujah in this Liturgy is explained by my
horrible experiences during this period. Every time I hear this Liturgy the
memories of those dreadful days come to mind. Peaceful citizens kept \ igil in
their homes. There were trenches right in front of our house. No one dared
appear in the streets. Gunfire and the sound of the cannonade broke the ominous
silence. At any moment a stray bullet or cannonball might have hit our house
which stood between the battle lines.

The Domestic Liturgy premiered in Moscow on March 30, 1918, and enjoyed many more

successful performances in the West throughout Gretchaninoffs lifetime.

Gretchaninoff describes the early years in Moscow under the new Communist

government as cold, hungr\, and harsh. Relief soon came through the patronage of

^' Gretchaninoff 118.

'* Gretchaninoff 119.
'" Gretchaninoff 121.

43
American and English friends, enabling him to tra\el. Howe\er. the harsh times in

Russia took their toll on him, as he went through an entire year of depression: "Dunng

the season 1921-1922,1 was in a depressed state. I could not compose, and the whole

year passed without fruitful work. I impatiently awaited the coming of spring when we

were to go abroad. "^° Throughout the remainder of his career in Russia, the spnng and

summer months were devoted to travel, and though the new government made it less

convenient to do so, he was still able to go abroad, meeting more ftiends in aristocratic

circles who enjoyed his music, and supported him financially.

Boris Schwarz's Music and Musical Life in Soviet Russia explains that conditions

of 1920's Russia caused many leading figures to emigrate. Though the New Economic

Policy (NEP) of the Communist government provided some economic relief in the eari\

1920s, Gretchaninoff permanently left Russia for Paris in 1925. The famine, the harsh

living conditions, the restrictions on self-expression in the arts, and Lenin's reaction of

indifference to it all made for intolerable conditions that forced many other leading

figures to leave Russia as well, including Alexander Tcheripin, Rachmaninofff,

Koussevitsky, Vladimir Horowitz, Joseph Heifetz, and Nicolai Medtner.^' Having made

several visits to the United States, Gretchaninoff moved to the U.S. in 1939. living in

New York City in 1941 until his death at the age of 91 in 1956. He continued to write

about music, and to compose works in a variety of genres through the remainder of his

*° Gretchaninoff 13.
*' Boris Schwarz, Music and .Musical Lijc in Soviet Russia, 1^ ed. (Bloomington: Indiana
Iniversity Press, 1983) 19-20.

44
life, including both sacred and secular choral works that were both a cappella and

accompanied. His music retained similar Russian characteristics of style throughout hi^

life; however, the Domestic Liturgy, composed in 191", would be the last work that he

composed in the tradition of the Russian Orthodox Church.

45
 CHAPTER III

THE RUSSL\N ORTHODOX LITLT^GY

History of Russian Liturgical Singing

In his monumental book. Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutiouar\ Russia,

Vladimir Morosan discusses two common misconceptions of late nineteenth and earh-

twentieth century Russian scholars: that Russian liturgical singing originated entirel>

from the importation of the liturgy from the Greek Orthodox Church, and that Russian

liturgical music included choral performance from its inception. Scholars generalh' agree

that the liturgy for the Russian Orthodox Church began developing shortly after Prince

Vladimir converted to Christianity in 988 and declared it the state religion. Further, Pre-

revolutionary Russian historians generally acknowledged that Russian liturgical singing

originated entirely from the importation of the established liturgy from the Greek

Orthodox Church. However, more recent scholarship suggests that other foreign

influences also may have played a part.' The reason such influences were so easily

overlooked, Morosan implies, is that the level of influence from these other Christian

traditions paled in comparison to the enormous influence of the Byzantine tradition. He

explains.

While the original chant melodies and notation may have undergone certain
changes in being transferred to a different language and different ethnic musical
sensibilities, the liturgical order (including the order of singing) remained
Byzantine Greek, at least as long as Greek hierarchs from Constantinople headed
the Russian Church."

' Morosan, Choral Performance 3.

" Morosan, Choral Performance 1.

46
Morosan further shows that Russian liturgical singing from its beginnings remained

soloistic rather than choral, and concludes, "There is no conclusive evidence that

ordained singers were organized into choral ensembles, and the musical function of such

ensembles, if they existed... remains undetermined."^

Johann von Gardner's Russian Church Singing, from which Morosan's work

originates, divides the history of Russian liturgical singing into epochs and periods, from

its beginnings through the Russian Revolution of 1917.** Gardner explains that the

following criteria are used in dividing the history of Russian liturgical singing into

periods, which Morosan's Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia and

subsequent writings discuss in detail:

1. PecuUarities of linguistic texts found in musical manuscripts. (The

evolution of the language often brought w ith it the evolution of
melodic content.)
2. Differences in musical style and semiographic characteristics.
3. Development and evolution (and at times, devolution) of the liturgical
order.
4. Political events that affected liturgical format and the liturgical arts.

The first epoch lasted from 988 unfil the mid-seventeenth century, and consisted of

monophonic singing, as the chants were sung exclusively in unison or parallel octaves by

soloists. The second epoch lasted from the mid-seventeenth century onward, and is

characterized by the development of polyphonic choral singing. Scholars generally agree

on the dates and the principal stylistic qualities of the two epochs; however, the

"* Morosan, Choral Performance 13.

* Gardner 143-146.
'' Gardner 137.
delineation of specific periods, dates, and style traits within the epochs has not been

universally accepted.^

Gardner bases his division of the first epoch into periods on the "predominant

types of singing found in extant written monuments of liturgical singing."' Gardner

labels the first period "the period of origins." Both Gardner and Morosan confirm that

there are no extant manuscripts from this early period that dates from 988 to the end of

the eleventh century. While Gardner states that any conclusions about this early period

must be based at least partly on conjecture, Morosan's findings, as summarized above,

indicate that the performance of such chant was soloistic rather than choral, and infer that

certain foreign and Slavic influences may have influenced the birth of Russian liturgical

chant in this period.^

Gardner identifies the next period of Russian church singing as "the period of

Kontakarian Singing." This period begins with the first appearance of manuscripts at the

end of the eleventh century, and lasts through the end of the thirteenth century, when

Kontakarian Chant disappeared. During this time, two fundamentally different types of

chant emerged, each with its own unique staff-less notafion: Kontakarian Chant, which

was unique to the period, and Znamenny Chant, more widely used than Kontakarian

Chant, and used throughout the epoch. Both Gardner and Morosan expound on the Greek

foundation that shaped the Russian Liturgy during the period. Gardner states, "In terms

of liturgical practice, this period is characterized by the use of the Constantinopolitan

* Gardner 139.
' Gardner 143
* Gardner 143
** Morosan 3, 13, 36.

48
liturgical order. Cathedrals of this time used the order of the Great Church... the

Cathedral of St. Sophia in Constantinople, while monasteries employed the order of the

Constantinople Monastery of the Studios."'^ hi his introductory essa\ to the antholog> of

music that covers the enfire history of Russian choral music, Morosan explains that

through comparative analyses of the Russian and Byzantine manuscripts, it is clear that

the early Slavs copied the Byzantine musical notation that was in common use in

Byzantium during the first half of the eleventh century."

Gardner identifies the third period as "the period dominated by Znamenny Singing

alone," extending from the beginning of the fourteenth century to the sixteenth century.

All manuscripts from this period contain exclusively Znamenny Chant, and Morosan

explains that the Znamenny Chant from the Kontakarian period dating back to the

eleventh century remained virtually unchanged until about the fifteenth century.''

Gardner mentions that changes were made in the liturgy as the order of the Jerusalem and

Mount Athos monasteries were substituted for the Constantinopolitan order.'"' Both

Gardner and Morosan acknowledge the changes that took place in notation toward the

end of the period. Morosan describes the changes thus:

.. .by the late fifteenth century, a new technical terminology develops: new names
for neumes appear in the sources, necessitating the compilation of "alphabets"
(azbuki) of neumes, while the number of musical manuscripts vastly increases.
Stylized hands and occasional illuminations impart to musical manuscripts a

'° Gardner 143-144

" Vladimir Morosan, "One Thousand Years of Russian Church Music: .An Introduction,"
Monuments of Russian Sacred Music: One Thousand Years ot Russian Church .Music, cd. \'ladimir
Morosan, ser. 1, Vol. 1 (Washington, DC. Musica Russica. 1991) xliv.
'• Morosan, "One Thousand Years ' xliii.
' Gardner 144

4')
 fanciful, decorafive appearance readily associated with iconograph\' and
architecture of the period.'"^

Gardner defines the final period in the first epoch of the history of Russian

liturgical singing simply as "the period of early Russian polyphony,'' dating from the end

of the sixteenth century to the middle of the seventeenth century when events "brought

about an abrupt halt both to this period and the entire first epoch." Gardner further

explains, "This period is characterized, first of all, by the appearance of new, heretofore

non-existent notations and types of singing... which were not necessarily performed

monophonically." Gardner elaborates further that this period w as the first to introduce

schools for church singers, organized choirs, and textbooks on notation. '

Morosan more thoroughly discusses the changes that took place during this final

period of the first epoch. He explains that all of the liturgical chants from this early

epoch of Znamenny Chant may be classified into eight modes or tones, each

distinguished by characteristic melodic formulas. He also acknowledges that by the

sixteenth century, Russian musical notation had clearly evolved from its early Byzantine

roots, and by the early seventeenth century, the entire Znamenny Chant tradition changed

significantly:

During the sixteenth and eariy seventeenth centuries, the tradition

inherited from the Middle Ages underwent significant changes. The new
melodies, created in response to evolving tastes, required a system of notation that
was more reliable in specifying musical pitch. Several key efforts were directed
at regulafing the vertical dimension of Russian notation, which heretofore had
depended mostly on the singer's memory of the given melody. Manuscripts
reveal three different methods: (1) red cinnabar marks...-a system of letters
written next to neumes, which fixed more clearly the pitch level at which the

'^ Morosan, "One Thousand Years" xliv

"Gardner 144.

50
 neume was executed; (2) the priznaki. or small black tails attached to the
neumes...; and (3) the so-called Kieven or square notes, which became
increasingly widespread toward the end of the century.

Morosan notes that these developments led to a notational system that resembles modem

staff notation, and that manuscripts from this period incorporating these features may be

readily transcribed today.'^

In his discussion on polyphony, Morosan points out that the origins of liturgical

polyphony may have taken place as eariy as the fifteenth century through oral tradition,

though the eariiest manuscripts of polyphony are dated at the turn of the sixteenth

century. He explains that the manuscripts of eariy Russian polyphony from the sixteenth

and seventeenth centuries reveal a rich repertoire, in two, three, and sometimes four

voices,'^ though none directly resembles the rich polyphony of Europe that had
1R

developed by this time. While Morosan admits that choral performance of the

monophonic or polyphonic chant from this early period of Russian history may have

occurred, he reports that there is no evidence to support this claim. In summarizing the

entire first epoch of Russian liturgical music, Morosan states the following:
The roots of the Russian choral tradition are not to be found in the first six
and a half centuries of Orthodox liturgical singing in Russia. So long as Russia
remained an Eastern-oriented, theocentric society, fully cognizant of its Byzantine
Orthodox heritage even after the fall of Byzantium, its musical development
stayed within the boundaries of the Eastern Orthodox tradition. This tradition ...
does not include choral singing in the Western sense of the word. Contrary to the
beliefs of some Slavophile music historians, Russia before 1650 shows no
evidence of indigenous cultural forces strong enough to have transfonned a
Byzantine tradition of soloistic monody into a tradition of choral singing. \\ hen
the change to choral singing did occur, it was due to powerful cultural forces from

*' * Morosan, "One Thousand ^'ears" xliv-xlv.

'^ Morosan, "One Thousand Years" xlvi
" Morosan, Choral Performance 26.

51
 the West, where choral part-singing was already a tradition of several centunes'
standing.'^

Gardner labels the second epoch in the history of Russian liturgical singing as the

"epoch of Western-style choral singing," which extends from the second half of the

seventeenth century through the twentieth century. In describing the period of earl\-

Russian polyphony, Gardner alludes to certain events that brought the first epoch to an

"abrupt halt," without giving any further details on the nature of those e\ ents. Morosan

discusses these events that led the Russian Orthodox Church to suddenl> abandon its ow n

singing tradifion in favor of foreign traditions. However, Morosan also acknowledges

that the development of eariy polyphony in the Russian tradition of Znamenny Chant

opened the door for changes in the performance of the liturgy by instigating a change in

the philosophy behind the performance:

Liturgical polyphony opened the possibility of deriving aesthetic pleasure

purely from the musical sonority, and to some extent liberated chant from the
strictly semanfic domain of the liturgical text. The need to coordinate the
polyphonic voices temporally enriched the rhythmic character of Russian music
and transformed its expressive language. In this manner early Russian polyphony
served as an important link between the medieval art of ancient Russian chant and
20

the musical art of the modem penod.

By the early seventeenth century, Russia had grown as a significant political and

economic power, leading to military confrontations with neighboring countries and

increased contact with Western nations. Liturgical singing was one area of Russian

culture most affected.'^' In his dissertation on Russian sacred and folk music, Keith

Wilcox reports that the last tsar of the Riurik line died in 1598, leaving no heir. One of
" Morosan, Choral Perjormance 36.
^° Morosan, "One Thousand Years" xlvi.
*' Morosan, Choral Performance 37.
the leading noblemen, Boris Godunov, assumed the throne and reigned for se\en \ears

before his death in 1605, bringing on a period known as the Time of Troubles (1605-

1613). During this time, various pretenders to the throne aided by Polish armies occupied

Moscow. Wilcox states: "The time of Polish occupafion brought about not only political

havoc, but also religious upheaval because the Poles tried (but failed) to forcibh' convert

the Russians to Roman Catholicism."^^ Morosan reports that during this time, Russians

heard church music of the Western style that included choral part-singing as well as

organs. He states further that by the middle of the seventeenth century, the singing of

Znamenny chant had reached a point of crisis, partially brought on by the singers

themselves, for it "no longer fulfilled the didactic and aesthetic needs of the Russian

Church. "^^

By 1652, the Patriarch Nikon (Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church from

1652-1658) instituted reforms in the church ritual and liturgies. Morosan notes that a

council of "expert singers and composers" was commissioned to carry out the reforms.

The group convened in Moscow in 1655 headed by the monk and scholar Aleksander

Mezents.^'* In reaction to these reforms, stiff opposition by certain priests and their

following led to the raskol, a schism that divided the Russian Orthodox Church into tw o

bitterly opposing sides. Morosan states that the Old Believers, as the separatist group

was called, retreated to the Northern frontiers of Russia, and kept alive the liturgical

^-Wilcox 41.
* Morosan, Choral Performance 37.
"•* .Morosan, Choral Performance 37-38. In Gretchaninoffs unpublished essay, "Brief Review ot
the Development of the Church Orthodox Singing" included in the appendix, he refers to this commission
as the "Council of 1667." Morosan notes that though the Council's work began in 1655, it was interrupted
due to on epidemic outbreak of the plague only to resume thirteen years later

s^
singing from the past, "while the rest of Russia was left with a profound culttiral and

artisfic vacuum." Morosan states further:

In the three or four decades that were to follow, the musical heritage of over six
hundred years would be summarily swept aside and supplanted b>' foreign art
forms that would dominate the nafion's culture for the next two centuries.
Znamennyi [monophonic chant]... and indigenous Russian polyphony gave way
to the "harmonious and graceful art" ofmusikii, part-singing modeled after
Western European polyphony."^^

Morosan reports that part-singing in the Western style first appeared in

Southwestern Russia before spreading to the North, and lists Kiev and L\o\ as centers of

cultural activifies that received praise from many listeners of the time. The newly

imported style was termed partsny singing (from the Latin partes, meaning parts) and

was performed from part-books rather than from a single complete score as in the past.

In describing the music, Morosan states:

Some works were Western in format, but had an internal harmonic and melodic
organizafion that was either influenced by or actually based on the chant, while
other works used entirely Western compositional techniques. In Russian music of
the 17'^ century, both styles, the traditional and the new, developed
simultaneously. The latter required heretofore unimaginable vocal skills, mastery
of a new system of notation, as well as a knowledge of a new style of
composition. Yet the immense number of manuscripts attest to the fact that
church singers and composers were quick to assimilate the new techniques.
Although officially the new style was not sanctioned until 1668, part singing was
already popular during the first half of the century. ^

The first period in this second epoch of the history of Russian liturgical singing is

described by Gardner as beginning in the mid-seventeenth century and continuing more

than halfway through the eighteenth century, and is defined as "the period ofPolish-

" Morosan, Choral Performance 38.

** Morosan, "One Thousand "i'ears" xlvi.

54
Ukrainian influence, marked by the florid, often poh'-choral 'part'... style, as well as the

simpler 'kant'... style inspired by the Protestant chorale."'^ Morosan further discusses the

significant role of the kant, or "sacred kanty," though it was not a part of the liturgy. A

sacred part song, the kant acted as a catalyst for the new style in the se\ enteenth centur>,

and influenced genres that would later become a part of the liturgy in the eighteenth and

nineteenth centuries: the sacred concerto, the sacred trio, and chant harmonization.'^

Gardner not only comments on the shift in style, but also the shift in philosophy behind

the performance of liturgical music that began this new epoch in the history of Russian

liturgical singing: "Beginning with this period, liturgical singing ceases to be considered

a form of worship itself and begins to be viewed as music introduced into church

services."^^

Though part-singing became firmly established in the seventeenth century,

Morosan adds that choral performance of Western polyphony started slowly. He writes:

Available informafion indicates that, at least at the outset, the new

partesnyi [same as partsny used above] style did not involve large choral
ensembles. In southwestern Russia, where the style w as first adopted from
Europe, it was performed as vocal ensemble music with a single voice on a part...
(.. .the L'vov Brotherhood maintained only four singers for partesnyi singing as
late as 1697)... With one voice to a part they w ould have been able to sing
twelve-part compositions, which appear in great numbers of manuscripts from the
period...^^

He notes that by the end of the seventeenth century two large organizations had been

firmly established: the Tsar's Singing Clerics, numbering between eighty and one

' Gardner 145.

•^ Morosan, "One Thousand "^ears" xlvii.
* Gardner 145
.Morosan, Choral Performance 50.
hundred from 1680-1700, and the Patriarchal Singing Clerics, numbering forty-seven in

the year 1700. However, their primary function was to sing simultaneoush' for a number

of court chapels serving the extended royal family or kremlin cathedrals, and so a single

performance with all of the singers in place seldom if ever occurred.''

Peter the Great's reign from 1698-1725 brought important changes not only to

Russian society but also to the organization of the church and the two established choral

organizations performing the liturgies for the court chapels. In previous decades, the

Patriarch Nikon not only instituted significant reforms in the church liturgy, but also

attempted to gain power over the imperial administration. As a backlash, Peter blocked

efforts to fill the vacant position of patriarch in 1700. In 1721, Peter issued a decree that

reorganized the church hierarchy. The position of patriarch was abolished and would be

replaced by a governing body consisting of a committee of church officials appointed by

the tsar-the Holy Synod. A year later, a layman, the Ober-Procurator, was added as a

supervisor to the Holy Synod to personally report to the tsar."'^ Throughout Peter's reign,

the Tsar's Singing Clerics, that had formeriy reached a membership of over one hundred,

was now reduced to as few as twenty, and as many as thirty-four by the end of his reign.

Their music consisted of the kants described above, performed for specific occasions.

Upon the dissolufion of the position of patriarch, the fate of the Patriarchal

Singing Clerics now seemed questionable at best. Having been assigned to fill in as

needed to serve the Holy Synod in St. Petersburg and various other places, the group was

^' Morosan, Choral Performance 51.

^-Heyman 109.
" Morosan, Choral Performance 57.

56
reassigned in 1725 to serve the Cathedral of the Dormidon in Moscow in addition to

singing as needed in St. Petersburg and various other places, and renamed the Synodal

Choir. By 1765, the morale, membership, and quality of performances of the S\Tiodal

Choir was in serious decline, and neariy led to its complete dissolufion b\' the end of the

eighteenth century.^^ Morosan summarizes both the history and the significance of the

Synodal Choir:

The history of the Synodal Choir through the eighteenth century,

culminating in its near demise, epitomizes the decline experienced b\ church-
supported musical estabhshments at this time. In spite of its historical importance
and stature, the Synodal Choir was reduced to a piuflil, subordinate position, ...
Not a single prominent composer or conductor was associated w ith the Synodal
Choir in the eighteenth century. Even the Choir's repertoire cannot be determined
with any certainty.
However, what may have seemed a misfortune for the Synodal Choir at
the time turned out to be a fortunate circumstance for the future of church singing
in Russia. Neglected by the authorities in St. Petersburg, the Moscow Synodal
Choir escaped the ubiquitous Western influence of the Imperial Court Chapel to
some degree. Having no means of culfivafing a technically oriented artistic
tradifion, the Choir concentrated on maintaining the Liturgical side of its tradition,
perhaps preserving some vestiges of native Russian singing style until the late
nineteenth century, when it was one again thrust into a position of prominence."'^

The second period of the epoch of Western-style choral singing is defined by

Gardner as "the period of Italian influence." Gardner briefly sums up the period as

pertaining to the Italian style of choral polyphony. He describes the period as "relatively

brief, lasting from the middle of the eighteenth century through the first third of the

nineteenth century."^^ Following the death of Peter the Great in 1725, the Court Choir,

^ Morosan, Choral Performance 62-64.

' Morosan, Choral Performance 64.
^"Gardner 145.

57
formeriy the Tsar's Singing Clerics, began to receive more attention from the Empress

Anna loannova (reigned from 1730-1740) in the form of an impenal decree in 1738 to

establish a school for training choristers for the Court Choir.^^ By the middle of the

century, the choir numbered one hundred: forty-eight men and fifty-two bo\'s. In 1763.

during the reign of Catherine the Great, the Court Choir was reorganized into the
TO

Imperial Court Chapel. Furthermore, foreign composers and musicians had been

invited to serve as kappellmeisters at the St. Petersburg court, most of whom were Italian.

Morosan lists the twelve foreign kappellmeisters that served in St. Petersburg from 1735

to 1806, the most notable of whom included Baldassare Galuppi, who ser\ed from 1765-

1768, and Giuseppe Sarti, who served from 1784-1802.^^ In a discussion of the influence

the Italian composers had on Russian church music, Morosan writes:

The arrival of Itahan composers in Russia in the middle of the eighteenth
century represents another major watershed in the history of Russian church
music. The partesny style represented an adaptation of Western European
composifional techniques to the musical requirements of the Russian Orthodox
liturgy by composers who were, for the most part, Ukrainian by nationality and
Russian Orthodox by faith (if Polish by musical training). On the other hand, the
Italians who wrote music on Orthodox church texts approached the task as
complete outsiders, confessionally and linguistically, and their implementation of
musical style within the context of the Orthodox liturgy was entirely foreign, ^'ct,
through their own compositions, and more importantly, through the Russian
students they trained, the Italians exerted a profound and lasting influence upon
Russian church music during the next century-and-a-half...
.. .the Italians brought to Russian church music the technical and
expressive arsenal of Western European music, opening up hturgical music to
both positive and negative phenomena that by then had developed in the music of
Western Churches. On the positive side, solemn liturgical moments and the
highly poetic Orthodox liturgical texts inspired the creation of outwardly
grandiose musical works... On the negative side, the sung sacred word, which had
always occupied a position of central importance, oftentimes became submerged

^ Morosan, Choral Performance 58.

^* Morosan, Choral Performance 60.
.Morosan, Choral Performance 59.

58
 in imitative contrapuntal textures or was trivialized by nonsensical repetition
dictated by the requirements of musical form."**^'

Of the Russian students that were trained by the Italians, the most important was

Dmitry Bortniansky (1751-1825), who was connected to the Imperial Court Chapel in

some fashion throughout most of his life. After receiving his earliest training under

Galuppi, he spent eleven years studying in Italy where he also composed and produced

three operas before returning to Russia in 1780. There he was appointed conductor of the

Imperial Chapel and the court of Prince Paul, heir to the throne. Upon Paul's

enthronement in 1796, Bortniansky was appointed Kappellmeister, and in 1801, director

of the entire Chapel musical establishment. Morosan further reports that the Imperial

Court Chapel under his direction developed into "an outstanding choral ensemble."

Bortniansky also was able to attain legal means for establishing standards in liturgical

music that would last almost the entire century. By 1816, an imperial decree was issued

granting Bortniansky unprecedented authority as Director of the Imperial Chapel to

control and censor all music in the Russian empire written for church use."^' Morosan

concludes that Bortniansky's Italian training combined with his sensiti\ ity toward the

inward strengths of the Russian liturgy led him to achieve this ultimate success:

In fact, Bortniansky's entire musical orientation—as a vocalist, conductor,

and composer-was thoroughly Italian, and could scarcely ha\ e been otherwise in
light of his training. What distinguished him from his Italian predecessors and
their provincial Russian imitators was an attitude of reverence for the Orthodox
liturgy and sensitivity to the bounds of good taste that should not be exceeded in
church under any circumstances. On the strength of these qualities, coupled with
an unquestionably well-polished compositional technique, Bortniansky succeeded

^" Morosan, "One Thousand Years" xlix

^' Morosan, Choral Performance 69-71.

59
 in establishing himself as sole authority and chief censor over all of Russian
church music."^^

Bortniansky not only made significant contribufions to the liturgical repertoire but

also in the overall development of style and performance practice. In a recent article on

the history of Russian choral music, Olga Dolskaya-Ackeriy reports further on the

significance that Bortniansky played in the history and development of Russian liturgical

music, emphasizing his sensifivity to the rich chant tradition:

Bortniansky's knowledge and experience, and most of all, his love of old
chant melodies, led him to return to the rich tradition of chant-based singing. He
did it in a very tactful, delicate but firm manner, and against the current of the
Italianate style that was in vogue at the time. His compositions are devoid of the
self-absorbed solos, a major step toward a focus on text and homogeneity of
sound that became known as harmoniousness. This was a bold step in
reawakening Russian humility and austerity... Boisterous and superfluous \ ocal
effects were avoided and soon the [St. Petersburg Imperial Chapel] Choir
developed a genuinely sacred style of singing, for the excellence of which it
became known as the most respected interpreter of sacred choral music in the
worid.'^^

Extra-liturgical concerts also became a focus of Bortniansky's activity, as the choir under

his direction performed sacred masterworks from Western Europe, including Haydn's

Creation (1802) and The Seasons (1805), Mozart's Requiem (1805), Handel's Messiah

(1806), Cherubini's first Mass (1810), and in 1824, the world premier of Beethoven's

Missa Solemnis. The choir also gave frequent concerts of unaccompanied choral works

in palace concert halls, and in 1810 had its own concert hall erected. Choir rehearsals

•*" Morosan, Choral Peroformance 70.

•*' Olga Dolskaya-Ackeriy, "Aesthetics and National Identity in Russian Sacred Choral Music: .X
Past in Tradition and Present in Ruins," ChoralJournal, 42.5 (December, 2001): 15 In this passage,
Dolskaya-Ackeriy quotes from Stepan Smolensky, "Pamiati D.S. Bortnianksago" [In Memory of
Bortnianskyl, Russkaia muzykal'naia i^azeta (1901), 923

60
were also open to the public and became important events in the cultural life of St.

Petersburg.

The third period in this epoch of the history of Russian sacred music is termed by

Gardner "the period of German influence." Lasting through the last two thirds of the

nineteenth century, Gardner describes it as a time when the directors of the Imperial

Court Chapel exercised complete control and censorship over the liturgical music that

would be composed and performed. For this reason, Gardner also defines this period as

the "Petersburgperiod." As this control began with Bortniansky in 1816, the major

choral works that were performed reflect his own Viennese tendencies. Morosan

acknowledges this German influence as well in describing his compositional style of

music for the church. He writes that Bortniansky's style "more clearly reflects the

Viennese Classical style, prevalent in Europe at the time, than Ukranian or Russian folk

music.""^^ The directors of the Imperial Chapel that followed Bortniansky included

Fyodor L'vov (1766-1836), Bortniansky's immediate successor who served as Director of

the hnperial Court Chapel until his death; Aleksei L'vov (1798-1870). Fyodor's son and

successor as director of the Chapel from 1837-1861; and Nikolai Bakhmetev (1807-

1891), director from 1861-1883. With each successor, the control of censorship of new

music for the church intensified, to the point that during .-Meksei L'vov's administration,

the only works that were added to those previously approved by Bortniansk\ w ere

** Morosan, Choral Performance 70-71.

''Gardner 145-146.
'" Morosan, "One Thousand dears'' I.

61
L'vov's own. However, aside from establishing and maintaining strict control of church

choirs and censorship of new music, L'vov also set in four-part harmon\ all of the

liturgical chants used in the church year and transcribed all of the chants still sung in the

monasteries according to oral tradition. He also w orked to bring all church singing into

uniformity, using the music and practice of the Imperial Court Chapel as a model. ^

L'vov's Obikhod,^^ pubHshed in 1848, consisted of a coUecfion of harmonized chants that

were to be used in any chapel setting where a member of the Royal family was present.

To ensure that this practice was adopted, among other measures, L'\ o\ began the

program of training choral conductors, resulting in a drastic intensification of the

stranglehold that L'vov maintained on liturgical music." This level of censorship was

maintained through the directorship of Bakhmetev, discouraging any major composer

from attempting to write new works, until it was abruptly lifted in 1880.^

Though Morosan indicates that the practice and enforcement of censorship under

L'vov became counter-productive in the development of Russian liturgical singing, and

that the chant harmonizations were often awkward for Russian choirs, Dolskaya-AckerK

focuses on the accomplishments of L'vov as they related to the establishment of

expressive chant singing, a distinctively Russian style trait:

*^ Morosan, Choral Performance 81.

•*** Morosan, Choral Performance 79.
*" Identified as "L'vov's Obikhodprostogo tserkovnoo peniia. pri Wsochaishem Dvore
upotrebliaemogo [The common chants of plain church singing used at the Imperial Court]" in .Morosan.
Choral Performance 80-81, 165-169. The term "obikhod" denoted one of the liUirgical chant books that
contained the chants for daily use, analogous to the Latin usualis of the Roman Catholic Church. The
obikhod first developed in the second half of the fifteenth-early sixteenth century. .Morosan. One Thousand
Years 73"
^° Morosan, Choral Performance 165-169.
^' .Morosan, Choral Performance 81, 86.

62
 When he set out to harmonize the chant in his Obikhod..., L\'ov introduced
asymmetrical non-metrical singing based on the speech inflections of the text. He
realized that the phrases of text set to chant were irregular in length, and that the
presence of bar lines and duple or triple metric division would only defeat the
purpose of transmitting the text. Not to include bar lines in those da>s was
considered uncivilized, yet Lvov had the courage to stand against the current and
take the first step in the right direction.^^

Dolskaya-Ackeriy also praises L'vov's accomplishments in the development of

performance practice of Russian sacred choral literature:

He [Lvov] also promoted the idea of seamless elasticity in singing, the use of
gentle high voices elegantly supported by rich basses and the practice of doubling
the bass with octavists, resulting in a warm, balanced, pyramid sound, better
known as the St. Petersburg style, a direct manifestation of Russian national
identity.
In his Memoirs, Lvov speaks of his reverence for chant and for the
inherently Russian solemn singing and its soft, w arm sound. He replaces Italian
dynamic markings with such terms as slow or protracted, intensifying, and
solemnly. About nuances, Lvov writes: The effect of this mass of choristers,
singing with such preciseness and meticulous rendition of nuances was so
stunning that I had difficulty conducting, especially duringpianissimos.

Morosan confirms that the performances of the Imperial Court Chapel Choir

under Aleksei L'vov received high commendations. Though the approved compositions

for liturgical performances were limiting (Only music from the Italian composers of the

eighteenth century, Bortniansky, L'vov, and a very few others received official approval),

performances of master works from Austria and Germany continued, both symphonic and

choral. Among those who heard the choir perform. Hector Berlioz, who visited Russia in

1847, reported being "overwhelmed" by the quality of the performance. Robert

Schumann in 1844, wrote, "The Chapel is the most wonderful choir that we have ever

" Dolskaya-Ackeriy 16.

" Dolskaya-Ackeriy 16; Primary source from A Lvov, "Zapisky Alekseia I edorovicha I vova'
[Memoirs of Alexei Fedorovitch Lvov], Russkii arkhiv 4 (1884) S'^, 99.

63
had the occasion of hearing: the basses at times remind one of the low notes of an organ.

while the descants have a magical sound, better than any women's \oices. The subtlest

nuances and shadings are mastered to the limit, at times even with too much refinement

and detail." ^ Even with the excellence in performance demonstrated b\ the Impenal

Chapel in St. Petersburg, the state of choral performance and composition for the Russian

Orthodox Church in virtually all other regions declined to a very low le\el until the late

nineteenth century. ^^

The final period in the history of Russian liturgical singing is defined by Gardner

as "the period of the Moscow school." As Gardner writes, this period "began at the \ er\

end of the nineteenth century, and is sfill confinuing today. "^^ Written as the result of

lectures presented at the University of Munich between 1954 and 1972, Gardner did not

have the advantage of viewing the recent history of Russian liturgical singing from a

post-Soviet perspective, and took a pessimistic view toward efforts to study Russian

liturgical singing after 1917:

By the Russian Revolution of 1917, the art and culture of Russian liturgical
singing had reached its highest stage of development. The political events of
1917 and the years following, however, effectively interrupted all further
development of this art, preventing the transference and nurture of the liturgical
singing tradition. There are no reliable sources that can authoritafively provide
information concerning the state of liturgical singing on the territory of the USSR
after 1917.^^

•* Morosan, Choral Performance 82. Morosan quotes from the Russian sources: "Berlio/ v
Rossii" [Berlioz in Russia], Russkaia musykal'naia pazehi 50 (1903): 1254; Gusin and Tkachev,
Gosudarst\ennaia akademicheskaia kapella, 46.
^' -Morosan, Choral Performance 83.
^^ Gardner 146.
57
Gardner 146.

64
Similarly, Morosan offers the following from a post-Soviet perspecti\ e, indicating that

the refinement of the Russian choral art all came to an abrupt halt w ith the 1917

Revolution:

After the Revolution, when the tide of emigration swelled the ranks of
Russian choirs abroad, few representatives of the best traditions of Russian choral
performance were among them. None of the leading figures associated with the
Moscow Synodal School or Choir emigrated; those musicians w ho did emigrate
(e.g., Grechaninov and Rachmaninoff) were not outstanding choral conductors...
In Russia, meanwhile, the events of the October Revolution and the virtual
destruction of the Orthodox Church in the 1920s and 1930s led to the dissolution
or reorganization of all institutions engaged in the cultivation of the choral art...
My personal observations over the course of several stays in the USSR suggest
that, although some present Soviet choirs are outstanding in their own right, none
of them embodies the best tradifions of the pre-Revolutionary choral school.
Thus it has become the task of scholars to reconstruct as well as possible on the
basis of available sources this remarkable chapter in the history of choral
performance—seemingly so close in time to the present day, yet in many respects
CO

less understood than the performance of Renaissance polyphony.

The second half of Dolskaya-Ackeriy's recent essay not only confirms this notion that the

pinnacle of achievement in Russian sacred choral music ended with the 1917 Revolution,

but also indicates that virtually no cultivation of sacred choral music or artistry in any

area has occurred in Russia since 1917.

The New Russian Choral School

As discussed above, the overall scope of Russian singing from the middle of the

seventeenth through the eighteenth century consisted of two distinct styles. The first was

the style of the Old Believers that continued the indigenous Russian forms of

'" Morosan, Choral Performance 126.

"Dolskaya-Ackeriy 19-24

65
monophonic liturgical chant. The other, much more widespread of the two, consisted of

partsny singing or part-singing in the Western style.^° Morosan comments further on the

development of this style in Russia: "Even after a century and a half this style remained

alien despite its widespread presence: both the literature and the function of choral part-

singing were derived from foreign forms, fostering equally foreign performance

techniques."^^ Morosan confinues to state that since church music had consisted entireK

of the largely undeveloped indigenous traditional style of chant singing or the importation

of foreign genres, a national choral style in Russia had not yet developed. He adds

further: "A national school of choral performance could not emerge until Russian

musicians, both composers and performers, came to recognize—either through instinct or

through scholarly investigation—the unique characteristics of original Russian vocal

forms and to develop a choral literature that embodied these forms."

After detailing the early nineteenth century accomplishments of Bortniansky and

the overall decline of the liturgical choral art through most of the century under the

Imperial Chapel directorship of L'vov and Bakhmetev, Morosan discusses six significant

events that directly led to the growth of a new and final period in this epoch of

polyphonic choral singing. These factors are listed as:

1. The publication in the years 1867-69 of Reverend Dmitry Razumovsky's

three-volume work, Tserkovnoe penie v Rossii (Church singing in Russia), the
first major scholarly investigation into the essence and history of Russian
liturgical singing.

^" Morosan, Choral Performance 75.

^' Morosan, Choral Perfornumce 75-76.
" Morosan, Choral Performance 76.

66
 2. The gradual growth of public concerts of sacred music, beginning in the \ear
1864.
3. The breaking of the Imperial Chapel's stranglehold on new liturgical choral
composifion-the direct resuh of Nikolai Bakhmetev's unsuccessful attempt in
1880 to block the publicafion of Tchaikovsky's Liturgy, Opus 41.
4. The establishment in 1880 of Archangel'sky's Choir, the first independent
professional choir in Russia, which several years later came to include
women's voices.
5. The appointment in 1883 of Mily Balakirev and Nikolai Rimsk\-Korsakov to
head the Imperial Chapel.
6. The reform in 1886 of the Moscow Synodal School of Church Singing,
together with the appointment of Vasily Orlov as the chief conductor of the
Synodal Choir, and the appointment three years later of Stepan Smolensk) as
the School's Director.^^

One of the results of the period of the New Russian Choral School was the

development of the choral conductor. During this period, the Synodal Choir of Moscow-

underwent significant reform, including increased pay and benefits for choral members

and improved morale. Further, the school, established in 1830, was expanded to train

boys specifically for service in the choir through an eight-year program. Among the

members appointed to the Supervisory Council over the Synodal School was

Tchaikovsky, who in 1886 recommended that Vasily Orlo\ (1856-1907) be appointed

precentor and conductor of the choir.^"* In 1889. Stepan Smolensky (1848-1909) became

the Synodal School's Director, and in 1891, Alexandre Kastal'sky (1856-1926) became

Orlov's assistant conductor. Under Orlov's leadership, the first precentor to have received

formal training from a conservatory, the Moscow Synodal Choir rose to unparalleled

excellence, surpassing the Imperial Chapel. Serving as Director of the Synodal Choir

from the late 1880s until his death in 1907, Oriov was succeeded by equally great

'' Morosan, Choral Performance 85-86.

^ Morosan, Choral Performance 100-101.
conductors he had mentored, including Nikolai Danilin (1878-1945), and Pavel

Chesnokov (1877-1944), the latter of whom also composed a number of liturgical works.

Under these conductors as well as contemporaries inspired by them, choral performances

from composers of the new Russian choral school achieved new heights, setting new

standards for performance pracfices of these works, and gaining world recognition for

their performances.^^ The tremendous influence of the Moscow Synodal Choir is

evidenced by the fact that Gardner defines the entire period by its influence. Gardner

writes:

During this period, the position of leadership in church singing shifted from the
St. Petersburg and its Imperial Cappella to the Moscow Synodal Choir and
Church Choir School.. .This period is characterized by the search for new ways of
liberating Russian liturgical singing from foreign influences and borrowings that
strongly manifested themselves during the preceding three periods of the second
epoch, particularly in the third period. The new directions were marked by a
return to the indigenous and thoroughly Russian canonical melodies, and the
application to those melodies of the latest achievements of Russian compositional
technique in conjunction with the unique feeling and spirit of folk music.^^

The rise of the Moscow Synodal Choir and School also led to the rise of other

choirs under their prominent conductors. As mentioned above. Arkhangel'sky's Choir

was actually one of the leading factors that brought on the style of the New Russian

Choral School. Exisfing for forty-three years from 1880-1923 under the direction of

Arkhangel'ky, the Arkhangel'sky Choir was also the first all-professional choir, providing

the main source of income for most of the singers, and the first to tour outside of Russia.

The continuity of membership in the choir, starting out at tw enty members, but soon

*^ Morosan, Choral Performance 187-191. Morosan devotes an entire chapter to the choral
conductor of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
'^Gardner 146.

68
maintaining at least fifty members, averaged in duration from ten to tw ent\ years, and

enabled the choir to develop a repertoire of unprecedented scope. Also, the choir became

the first to replace boys completely with women, enabling the longer continuit\ of the

singers as well as a more sonorous sound.^' Morosan concludes: "Arkhangel'sk}'s major

contribution to Russian choral cuhure was that he raised choral singing from its position

as merely a servant of church ritual to the status of an independent musical art."^'^

Of the six factors discussed by Morosan that led to the New Russian Choral

School, the 1880 court case involving the Imperial Chapel stands out as the most

significant. As discussed above, the Imperial Chapel's control over sacred choral music

that began with Bortniansky in 1816 had intensified through his successors, particularly

through Aleksei L'vov, director of the Imperial Chapel from 1837-1861, and through

Bahkmetev, director of the Imperial Chapel from 1861-1883. Upon Tchaikovsky's 1878

completion of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, opus 41, Bahkmetev filed suit against

Tchaikovsky's publisher, P. Jurgenson, charging that the Liturgy was illegitimate since it

was not submitted to the Imperial Chapel for approval, though, as Morosan notes, "it was

submitted to the Moscow Office of Sacred Censorship, which \enfied the correctness of

the sacred text and granted permission for its publication (dated 25 September 1878).""'

By ruling in favor of P. Jurgenson and Tchaikovsky's Liturgy, the Russian Senate

^^ Morosan, Choral Performance 93-94.

** Morosan, Choral Performance 95.
^' Vladimir Morosan, "The Sacred Choral Works of Pcicr Tchaikovsky," Monuments of Russian
Scared Music: Peter Tchaikovsky. The Complete Sacred Choral Works, ed N'ladimir Morosan, ser 2, \'ol.
1-3 (Madison: Mu.sica Russica, 1996) Ixxwii.

69
brought the monopoly of sacred music held by the Director of the Imperial Chapel to an

immediate halt.^^

This overturning of the Imperial Chapel's right to censorship on all new choral

works for the church was an important event that directh impacted church music. Prior

to this event, virtually no significant Russian composers of the nineteenth centur>'

bothered to compose music for the church, since their works would not likely meet the

approval of the Director of the Imperial Chapel. Due to this landmark court case,

however, composers became free to write music for the church, beginning v\ ith

Tchaikovsky (1840-1893), whose Liturgy paved the way for free artistic expression and

was at the center of the court case against the Imperial Chapel. Though the a cappella

requirement remained an essential element in the style of the New Russian Choral

School, composers enjoyed a freedom from censorship of sacred music ne\cr before

experienced. An outpouring of important liturgical compositions by many significant

composers soon followed.^' Morosan reports: "Altogether, the output of this 'new

Russian school' of sacred choral composition numbered over forty large-scale works and

between nine hundred and one thousand shorter works by twenty-eight major

composers."^^ As both a prolific composer of sacred music and a writer on sacred music,

scholars generally acknowledge Gretchaninoff as both a leading composer and a

spokesman for the new Russian choral school.'

'° Morosan, Choral Performance 88-89.

^' Morosan, Choral Performance 88-91.
^" Morosan, Choral Performance 91.
'^ Igor Bazaroff, "Alexander Gretchaninoff Dean of Russian Composers,' Russian Orthodox
Journal (Dcctmhtx, 1944), 1-3; 8-10; "Alexander Gretchaninoff" Baker's Biographical Dictionary- of
Musicians, S'** ed , rev. Nicolas Slonimsky; Morosaa Choral Performance 242-244.
The Structure of the Liturgy

From the origin of Christianity in Russia at the end of the tenth century, the

Russian liturgical order consisted enfirely of the importation of the Byzantine tradition.

Though the musical settings of the texts likely became "Russified" as discussed above,

the actual texts and overall order remained completely consistent w ith the Byzantine nte.

As in the case of the Roman Catholic tradition of the West, the Byzantine Russian

Orthodox liturgy consisted of texts that formed the Ordinary, or texts that remained

unchanged regardless of the function or purpose in the context of the Liturgical year, and

texts that made up the Proper, that changed according to their function in the context of

the Liturgical year. However, in the Russian Orthodox liturgy, except for the sermons,

all audible texts presented in the course of the service were sung, marking a significant

difference from the Roman Catholic liturgy.

The rites of the Russian liturgy fall into two broad categories: the All-Night \'igil

and the Divine Liturgy. The All-Night Vigil essenfially consists of a combination of

three separate services that are lifted from the nine offices of the liturgical day. The nine

offices of the liturgical day are listed as:

1. Vespers
2. Compline
3. Nocturne
4. Matins
5. First Hour
6. Third Hour
7. Sixth Hour
8. Divine Liturgy

^ Gardner 24. Gardner notes, "In Greek and Serbian practice certain psalnis and Old Testament
readings are sometimes read in plain conversational speech."

71
 9. Ninth Hour.'^

The three offices that are combined to form the All-Night Vigil in cathedrals are the

Vespers, Matins, and First Hour, celebrated on Saturday evenings and on the eve of

major feasts. Morosan notes that the three offices that are the most important musicalK

include Vespers and Matins of the All-Night \'igil as well as the Di\ ine Liturgy. In his

essay on the subject, Paul Meyendorff notes that the All-Night \'igil, if performed in full,

can last up to eight hours, but is usually abbreviated and generally lasts two to three

hours.^^ After summarizing the makeup of the three offices of the All-Night \'igil,

consisting of a vast array of specific psalm and hymn settings in the visual context that

varies from utter darkness to dazzling light, Meyendorff concludes:

Despite its length and complexity, the Vigil service remains one of the
most popular services for Russian Orthodox Christians. They are thoroughly
familiar with it, and they pack the churches e\ ery Saturday e\ ening and on the
eve of every important feast. With its alternation of darkness and light, sober
monasfic chanting and exuberant and melodious singing, the Vigil draw s the
faithful into the realm of divine life, far removed from the struggles and
monotony of their daily existence. Standing for long hours in pewless churches,
Russian Christians draw on this liturgical tradition which has been, for many
centuries, the deepest expression of their faith.

The Divine Liturgy not only represented the focal point of Russian Orthodox

worship, but also stood as one of the three musically significant sen ices of the Russian

Orthodox Liturgy. Celebrated on Sundays and feast days, the Divine Liturgy w as often

'^ Morosan, Choral Performance 211, 342n8; Gardner 71. Gardner also provides the Russian
term for each office, and notes that the fourth office of Matins corresponds to Matins and Lauds of the
Western Church.
''" Paul Meyendorff, "Russian Liturgical Worship," .Monuments of Russian Sacred Music Peter
Tchaikovsky. The Complete Sacred Choral IVorks, ed. Vladimir Morosan, ser 2 vol. 1-3 ( Madison: Musica
Russica, 1996) \x\iii.
'''' Meyendorff xwvi. The Divine LiUirgy is also referred to as the I uchariM, signifying the
prayers and hymns that correspond with the Communion.
preceded by the All-Night Vigil, and brought the Sunday or festal services to a climactic

conclusion. Virtually all of the texts were a standard part of the Ordinary, though a few

changing texts from the Propers also were included in isolated places, depending on the

feast and context of the liturgical year. The product of many centuries of development,

many features of the service began as early as the fourth century,^^ and evolved into a

highly elaborate service that became commonplace by the late nineteenth and earh'

twentieth centuries.

According to Gardner, of the three forms of the Divine Liturgy, the Liturgy of St.

John Chrysostom, the Liturgy of St. Basil the Great, and the Liturgy of the Presanctified

Gifts, the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom was sung throughout the majority of the year.

In contrast, the Liturgy of St. Basil was sung only ten times per year, and the Liturgy of

Presancfified Gifts was sung during certain days of Lent and Holy Week, essentially

consisting of the Vespers service that closes with communion. The Liturgy of St. Basil

incorporates idenfical texts as the Liturgy of St. John Chrystom. except that the quiet

prayers of the priest are much longer in the Liturgy of St. Basil, requiring the

accompanying hymns that are sung during these prayers to be much more extensive and
80
elaborate to correspond fully with the duration of the prayers.

^^ Meyendorff xxix.
' ' Hugh Wybrew, The Orthodox Liturgy The Development of the Eucharistic Liturgy in the
Byzantine Rite (Crestwood: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1996) 27-45, 52-54. Though Wybrew makes a
case for the origination of the Byzantine Liturgy dating to the first cenUiry, the development that took place
in the fourth century shows a stronger connection to the service that the Russian Orthodox liturgy
e\ cntuallv became.
*" Gardner 91, 94.
 The detailed structure of the Divine Liturgy, particularly for the Liturg> of St.

John Chrysostom is outlined in Table 3.1. The table shows the chronology of the overall

secfions of the liturgy, functions, descriptions and beginnings of texts, singers employed,

liturgical actions, and brief descripfions of the musical treatment commonly emplo\ed by

the early twentieth century. As the table indicates, the style of music that is employed is

highly dependent on the action taking place. For instance, the Cherubic H\Tnn must be

performed slowly enough so that the processions, prayers, and incensations of the clergx

can all take place before the hymn has ended. Similar time considerations are necessar\

for the Introit verse, "O come let us worship" in the Enarxis secfion of the Liturgy of the

Word; the Trisagion Hymn, "Holy God," also from the Enarxis; and the Communion

Hymn, the paraliturgical concerto, and the Hymns of Thanksgi\'ing during the

Communion Rites. Morosan summarizes the musical results from the actions that take

place during these particular sections of the liturgy: "These hymns therefore lend

themselves to elaborate musical treatment. On the other hand, the opening antiphons, the

Creed, and the Hymns of Thanksgiving at the end [during the Dismissal secfion], which

contain a large amount of text, are more suited to syllabic musical treatment."

81
Morosan, Choral Performance 21

74
 Table 3.1 The Divine Liturgy 82

Overall section Function Text Singers Action taking Musical

employed place 1 treatment
Preparatory ntes Special entrance Clergy Clergy enters intoned chant
prayers church, vests,
wash hands,
prepare vessels
for the bread and
1
wine,
incensations
Liturgy of the Enarxis Opening Deacon or Priest; Congregation Intoned chant by
Word, or Liturgy (Entrance) Doxology choir enters Priest; chordal
of the "Amen" bv choir
Catechumens Great Litany: Deacon, choir Prayer to Intoned chant;
Series of introduce the chordal "Lord,
petitions, "Lord, collect have mercy"
have mercy" responses from
responses choir
Collect: Priest, Prayer to precede Silent recitation
Brief prayer silently read first antiphon during Great
Litany;
concluding
doxology
{ekphonesis) is
chanted aloud.
Choir responds
with chordal
"Amen"
First Antiphon: Choir Free musical
Psalm 103 treatment.
"Bless the Lord, though often to
0 my soul". common chant
generally only a tunc," major
few verses are musical musical
included elements of the
Liturgy
Little Litany: Deacon, Choir Prayer to Intoned chant;
Brief prayer introduce Collect "Lx)rd, have
mercy" choral
responses
Collect: Priest, Choir Prayer to precede Silent recitation
Prayer with second antiphon dunng Little
concluding Litany:
doxology ekphonesis
chanted aloud,
choral "Amen"

*' The table was compiled from the descriptions and tables provided from the following sources:
Gardner 91-94; Meyendorff xxx-xxxiii; Morosan, Choral Performance 2\4-2\5; Morosan, "Peter
Tchaikovsky" Ixxxix-xcv. Information is provided for the movements of the Liturgy on a typical Sunday.
For feast days, some of the content of the Liturgy would change.
" Though the "antiphon" terminology was employed, by the late nineteenth century these hymns
were not usually sung antiphonally. Meyendorff xxxi.

75
 Table 3.1 Continued

Overall section Function Text Singers Action taking Musical

employed place treatment
Liturgy of the Enarxis Second Antiphon Choir Both second
Word, or Liturgy (Entrance, plus Monogenes antiphon and
of the continued) ("Only Begotten Monogenes: free
Catechumens Son"): included musical
(continued) Psalm 146,but treatment, major
by 19"" century, musical element
usually only of the Liturgy
Monogenes was
sung
Little Litany: Deacon, Choir Prayer to Intoned chant.
Brief prayer introduce Collect "Lord, have
mercy" choral
responses
Collect: Priest, Choir Prayer to precede Silently read by
Prayer with third antiphon pnest dunng
concluding Little Littany:
doxology ekphonesis
chanted aloud.
Choir responds
with chordal
"Amen"
Third Antiphon: Choir Precedes little Free musical
Luke 23:42; entrance tteatment, major
Matthew 5:3-12a musical element
of the liturgy
Entrance Prayer Deacon Immediately Intoned chant
precedes Little
Enttance
Introit Verse: Choir Little Entrance Free musical
Psalm 95:6, "0 procession of treatment, major
Come, let us clergy with the musical element
worship..." Gospel Book; of the liturgy
precedes
Troparia
Troparia: Choir Free musical
Variable hymns treatment.
taken from the antiphonal
office of the day, tradition of right
to summarize and left choirs, a
theme of the day major musical
element of the
liturgy
Trisagion Hymn: Choir Priest silently Free musical
"Holy God" recites the treatment.
Trisagion Prayer; antiphonal
followed by ttadition of right
reciting aloud and left choirs, a
from Psalm major musical
80:I5-I6a clement of the
liturgy

76
 Table 3.1 Continued

Overall section Function Text Singers Action taking Musical

employed place treatment
Liturgy of the Enarxis Trisagion Prayer Priest Uttered during Silent recitation.
Word, or Liturgy (Entrance, Trisagion Hymn occasionally
of the continued) joining choir;
Catechumens also recitine
(continued) Psalm 80:15-16a
Liturgy of the Prokeimenon Priest, Choir To precede Variable psalm
Word from the Psalms Epistle reading sung
antiphonally
between choir
and priest. The
choir sings psalm
as a responsorial
refrain.
Epistle Priest Reading
Psalm Priest, Choir To follow Epistle Priest chants
(generally only a Psalm, Choir
few verses of responds
one psalm) "Alleluia" refrain
in responsorial
style
Gospel Priest Reading, to
precede sermon
Sermon Priest Preaching
Augmented Priest, Choir Intoned chant of
Litany priest, choir
responds three
times with
"Lord, have
mercy"
Litany for the Priest, Choir Dismissal of the Intoned chant of
Deceased; Litany Catechumens priest, choral
for the (actually only a responses during
Catechumens; formality by the litanies
two brief litanies late 19th
and prayers of century)
the faithful
Liturgy of the The Great Cherubic Hymn Choir Procession of Free musical
Eucharist Entrance Clergy who treatment, a
recite prayers, major musical
perform element of the
incensation of liturgy
the church and
the gifts (bread
and wine), place
gifts on altar
table and recite
additional texts
First Litany of Priest, Choir Kiss of peace, to Intoned chant of
Supplication prepare for the Priest, choral
Anaphora responses

77
 Table 3.1 Continued

Overall section Function Text Singers Action taking Musical

employed place treatment
Liturgy of the The Great Creed Choir To prepare for Free musical
Eucharist Entrance the Anaphora treatment, a
(continued) (continued) major musical
element of the
liturgy
Anaphora 3 part Dialogue: Deacon, Choir Immediate Three short
"a mercy of introduction to sentences
peace" Anaphora making up a
dialogue
between deacon
and choir
Anaphora: Priest, Choir Silent recitation
Eucharistic with
Prayer ascribed exclamations at
to St. John the end of each
Chrysostom section to signal
a choral response
Hymn of Praise-- Choir Final eucharistic Free musical
"It is meet and prayer is read tteatment, a
right to worship" before altar major musical
element of the
liturgy
the Sanctus, Choir Free musical
"Holy, Holy, treatment, a
Holy" major musical
element of the
liturgy
Words of Christ Priest Ekphonetic
from Matthew Chant of Priest
26:26-28
Hymn of Choir Celebrants offer Free musical
Thanksgiving, prayers for treatment, a
"We Praise transubstantiation major musical
Thee" of bread and element of the
wine liturgy
Communion Hymn to the Choir Free musical
Rites Mother of God treatment, a
major musical
element of the
liturgy
Second Litany of Priest, Choir To mention Intoned chant of
Supplication consecrated Gifts priest, choral
responses
The Lord's Choir Free musical
Prayer treatment, a
major musical
element of the
liturgy
Fraction Prayer Priest, Choir Preparation for Intoned Chant of
ofPriest. "Oneis the Breaking of Priest. Choral
Holy" response Bread responses

78
 Table 3.1 Continued

Overall section Function Text Singers Action taking Musical

employed place treatment
Liturgy of the Communion Koinonikon Choir Breaking of Free musical
Eucharist Rites (continued) (Communion Bread treatment, a
(continued) Hymn): Psalm major musical
148:1 with element of the
Alleluia refrain liturgy
Paraliturgical Choir Communion of Free musical
Concerto the Clergy treatment, a
(variable texts) major musical
element of the
liturgy
Invitation to the Priest, Choir Chalice is Intoned Chant of
Faithful: "In the brought out Pnest, Choir
fear of God and responds
with faith, draw "Blessed is he
near!" who comes in
the name of the
Lord"-Psalm
118:26a, 27a
"Receive the Choir Communion of Repeats same
Body of Christ" the Faithful, text as reftain
though by 19'*'
century was not
practiced
Hymns of Choir Clergy returns Free musical
Thanksgiving: bread and wine treatment, a
"We have seen to prothesis table major musical
the true light," clement of the
and "Let our liturgy
mouths be filled
with Thy praise"
Dismissal Primitive Priest Intoned chant of
Dismissal: priest
Prayer behind
the Ambo
Hymns of Choir Free musical
Thanksgiving, tteatment, a
including "The major musical
Many Years" element of the
liturgy
Litany of Priest, Choir Intoned chant of
Thanksgiving pnest, choral
responses
Closing Prayer Priest Dismissal of Intoned Chant of
for ecclesiastical Faithful at Pnest
and civil conclusion
authorities;
Benediction

79
Stylistic Restrictions

As shown above, the music that \\as performed as a part of the Divine Liturgy

often served to accompany liturgical actions, a feature that greatly influenced the style of

the composition. However, even by the end of the nineteenth century, other st\'listic

restrictions were imposed on liturgical music by the church hierarchy. The ban on

instrumental music stood as the most obvious restriction.

In the first chapter of Russian Church Singing, entitled "The Essence of Liturgical

Singing," Gardner immediately treats the subject of instrumental music. He states that

the ban on instrumental music usually is attributed to "ascetical tendencies," and that the

writings of the church fathers are often cited.^'^ Validating Gardner's point even as

recently as 1995, the Archpriest Boris Nikolaev wrote that the church's exclusion of

instrumental music "has its ideological basis in the Orthodoxy itself" He then described

vocal music as "natural," and instrumental music as "artificial and imitative." After

referring to both Old Testament and New Testament passages, he emphasized the

admonitionfi^omscripture to "sing praises 'with understanding'"ft-omPsalm 47:7. "

Quoting from Metallov, Nikolaev concluded that the reason that instruments were

excluded was because the voice alone is "'able to express the most diverse, deep, and

delicate movements of the human soul.'" Indeed, this line of thinking was not far from

''Gardner 21-22.
** The King James Version actually uses the phrase "with understanding," which is literally how
the Russian Bible reads.
*^ Archpriest Boris Nikolae\, Znamennyi Raspev i krukovaia notatsia kak osno\a russkogo
pravoslavnogo penia [Znamenns Chant and Hook Notation as the Heart of Russian Orthodox Church
Singing]. Moscow: Vauchnaia Kniga, 1995, 29-30. "Pochemu v pravoslavnom bogosluzhenii ne
dopuskaetsa instrumental"naia muzyka,"[\\'hy instrumental music is not allowed in Orthodox worship].
Excerpt trans. Sergei Shishkin, ed. Philip Camp, 2(H)2 The entire text of this passage is included in
Appendix F.

80
that of St. John Chrysostom himself (ca. 347-407), as demonstrated from his wntings

near the end of the fourth century:

Here there is no need for the cithara, or for stretched strings, or for the
plectrum, or for art, or for any instrument; but, if you like, you may \ourself
become a cithara, mortifying the members of the flesh and making a full harmony
of mind and body. For when the flesh no longer lusts against the Spirit, but has
submitted to its orders and has been led at length into the best and most admirable
path, then you will create a spiritual melody.^''

During the climax of the history of Russian choral music in the final period of the

new Russian choral school, the ban against instrumental music in the Russian Orthodox

Church became an issue for the first time, and was even challenged by Gretchaninoff

himself, discussed in Chapter TV. As part of the debate, A.P. Golubstov pointed to the

early Christian "decrees" that made instrumental music "forbidden to each Christian."

He then expounded upon Tertullian's metaphor—the "organ of the human word,"

describing it as "the perfect instrument by its physical design." He concluded that the

human voice "is more natural, more vivid..., expresses more intimately the inner state of

a soul and serves as a conductor of her movements." Golubstov once again pointed to the

history of the church in his final statement: "Due to those advantages, vocal performance

or singing was universally recognized in the ancient church."

*' St. John Chrysostom, "From the Exposition of Psalm XLI," Source Readings in .\lusic History
Antiquity and the Middle Ages, ed. Oliver Strunk (New ^'ork: Norton, 1965) 70. This content of this
statement is similar to that of other statements recorded by Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150-ca. 215), St.
Basil the Great (ca. 330-379), and St. Jerome (ca. 341-420).
^^ A.P. Golubtsov, Iz chtenii po tserkovnoi arkheologii i liturgika. Chast 2 Liturgica. \ Irom the
readings on the Church Archaelogy and Liturgies. Vol. 2: liturgies], (Sergiev Posad: 1918) 254-257
I npubiished translation from the chapter "Instrumentarnoe ispolnenie tserkovnykh pesnopenii"
[Instrumental Performance of the Church Motets], trans., Sergei Shishkin, ed. Philip Camp, 2002. The
complete portion of text is included in the appendix.

81
 However, Gardner's explanation seems to offer more substance than merely

poiming to the arguments of early Christian fathers. He explains that the purely vocal

music of the church is an inherent part of the "essence" of worship, and that those who

perceive liturgical music as just another category of music, with all the "same musical-

aesthefic relationships found in secular music," ha\e misunderstood the true essence of

liturgical singing. He then expounds upon the essence of liturgical singing, which by its

nature, he argues, would exclude instrumental music:

Orthodox worship consists almost exclusively of verbal expression in its

many forms: prayer, glorification, instruction, exegesis, homily, etc. Only the
word is capable of precisely expressing concrete, logically formulated ideas.
Instrumental music, on the other hand, by its nature is incapable of such
unambiguous expression; it can only express and evoke the emotional element,
which is received subjectively by each individual listener, thus giving rise to a
variety of interpretations. But it is impossible to give such an emotional reaction
a precise, logical definition. Concepts such as sadness, majesty, joyfulness,
happiness, etc. are merely general and vague characterizations of emotional
qualities and do not represent any unequivocal ideas that can be precisely
expressed in words. The same musical form, whether a simple tune played on a
fife, a complex piece of instrumental polyphony, or even a melody hummed
without words by the human voice, can be supplied with texts of different content
and character that will enable the same music to convey completely diverse ideas.
Only the word can give musical sounds a definite, unambiguous meaning. And in
worship only the word can clearly express the ideas contained in prayer,
instruction, contemplation, etc.^°

While Gardner's point seems to clearly and reasonably explain the church's ban against

purely instrumental music without "the word," it does not adequately explain the ban

against instrumental accompaniment to the vocal music. In fact, his very arguments

Gardner 22.
Gardner 22-23.

82
articulated in his next statement could also effectively support the use of instruments to

accompany vocal music:

Thus, wordless instrumental music by itself is not suited for conve\ing the
concrete verbal content of worship. It can only entertain and please the ear, evoke
various emotions, and, to a certain extent, reflect the emotional content of ideas
expressed by words. On the other, the word taken in conjunction with musical
sounds can combine logical clarity and precision of meaning with the emotional
response to verbal ideas.
Herein, it seems, lies the reason why the musical element is admitted into
the Orthodox liturgy only in conjunction with the word. Either the musical
sounds give emotional coloration to the logically concrete contents of the
liturgical texts, or the musical expression arises as an emotional reaction to the
ideas expressed by the words.^'

In a recently published interview from the ChoralJournal, Morosan's explanation

of the essence of liturgical singing seems to take Gardner's philosophy a step ftirther.

Though the question he addresses here is not specifically about the use of instruments, his

general statements about performing Russian liturgical music give a rational explanation

to the restriction:

Chu: Are there other aspects of study necessary for performing this music well?
Morosan: When it comes to performing Russian sacred music, the greatest
challenge for Western musicians seems to be the understanding that singing this
music is, first and foremost, prayer. It is music of worship, not music at worship
(something that ornaments or decorates, like icing on the cake). The same is
essentially true of Gregorian chant--it is sung worship. Somehow, this approach
needs to be central, even in a concert performance.
When Vladimir Minin of the Moscow Chamber Choir did a workshop
here in 1988 with American professional singers, the one thing he tried to convey,
using every means possible, was that you cannot sing Russian music simply w ith
a well-trained throat and a curious intellect. "There's God up there," he said,
pointing heavenward, "and then, there's us down here, and we have to approach
the music from that perspective,"...

" Gardner 23.

83
 The Western choral musician needs to understand (or perhaps, rediscover)
this fundamental truth.. .^^

The idea that all Russian liturgical music is considered to be pra\'er seems to carry

much significance in the exclusion of instruments. Therefore, the use of instrumental

music to accompany vocal music would seem to qualify as "icing on a cake," making it

"music at worship" rather than "music of worship," a notion that was recently verified b\

Morosan through personal correspondence.^^ Consequently, in Russian Orthodoxy,

instrumental accompaniment might be used if the desire to please man was

acknowledged. However, in an effort to present an offering only to please God-the

essence of Russian Orthodox liturgical singing as described above-instruments are

excluded. Morosan adequately sums up the position thus: "Singing sacred music is not

about entertainment or diversion; it's about fiindamental questions of humanity and

divinity, and us being raised from earth to heaven." Many aspects of a Russian

Orthodox service are influenced by this type of reverence, demonstrated both in the pew-

less cathedrals where the congregations stand throughout the long duration of the services

that can last several hours, and in the sustained and contemplati\ e style of the music

itself

' ' George S. T. Chu, "An Interview with Vladimir Morosan," ChoralJournal 40 3
(1999): 40.
9.1
Morosan, telephone interview, 19 May 2002
"•• Chu 40.

84
Divine Liturgv Settings from the New Russian Choral School

As discussed above, by ending the Imperial Chapel's power of censorship,

Tchaikovsky's complete setting of the Divine Liturgy gave composers the needed impetus

to compose liturgical music. As a natural course of progression, Tchaiko\'sk\'s Liturg\-

became not only the model for ftiture composers of the liturgy, but also a starting point

for those who would further develop the genre.

Though complete, stylistically unified settings of the Liturgy had existed in

Russia since the beginnings of polyphony in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth

centuries, the visiting Italian composers and their Russian students in the period

preceding Tchaikovsky did not emphasize complete liturgical settings. Morosan notes

that of the Russian followers of the Italians, only three composers left one setting each of

the Divine Liturgy: Maksim Berezovsky (1745-1777), Dmitry Bortniansky (1751-1825),

and Stepan Davydov (1777-1825), and the only other setting from the first half of the

nineteenth century was by Pyotr Turchaninov (1779-1856) whose 1842 simple Italianate

setting was scored for TTB chorus. No consistency in style or structure can be observed

from these settings. However, as Morosan observes, "the following hymns w ere set with

some degree of consistency:

No. 1 Slava... Yedinorodniy Sine (Glory... Only begotten Son)

No. 2 Priididte pokofiimsia... Sviatiy Bozhe (Come, let us worship...
Holy God)
No. 3 Izhe heruvimi ([Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim [also
known as Cherubic Hymn])
No. 4 Simvol veri" (The Creed)
No. 5 Milost mira I Tebe poyem {\ Mercy of Peace and We H\Tnn Thee)
No. 6 Dostnoyno vest (It is truly fitting)
No. 7 Otche nash (Our Father)

85
 No. 8 Hvalite Ghospoda s nebes (Praise the Lord from the heavens).^'

As the first substantial musical work for the church in a century. Tchaikovsk\''s

1878 Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 41, explored new areas of expression

previously untried. Morosan elaborates:

Certainly Tchaikovsky's Liturgy represented a significant departure from the

typical manner in which the Divine Ser\ ice was rendered musicalh in Russian
Orthodox churches of the nineteenth century. On any given Sunday or feast da\'
the Liturgy comprised an arbitrary concatenation of pieces by different
composers, displaying neither a consistent mood or level of musical complexity,
nor a logical relationship of keys. Elaborate, composed musical "numbers"
alternated with simple "plain" singing, consisting of a few stock chord
progressions. Tchaikovsky was certainly the first composer in his time to utilize
an approach that toward the end of the nineteenth century would become the
accepted standard: to treat the Divine Liturgy (and other services) as a single,
continuous musical entity, setting to newly composed music all or nearly all the
items—psalms, hymns, and responses—sung by the choir. Thus, in addition to
setting the major "numbers," as had been done by his predecessors, Tchaikovsky
was the first composer in the nineteenth century to compose music for the
following items:
The Great Litany
Two Little Litanies between the antiphons
"Alleluia" and the refrains before and after the Gospel reading
The Augmented Litany
The Litanies before the Cherubic Hymn (for the Catechumens and the
Faithful)
The Litany before the Lord's Prayer
The verse "Blagosloven griadiy" (Blessed is He that comes) at the
bringing out of the Holy Gifts
The hymns "Videhom svet istinniy (We have seen the true Light) and "Da
ispolniatsia usta nasha" (Let our mouths be filled)
The Little Litany (of Thanksgiving)
The verse "Btidi imia Ghospodne" (Blessed be the name of the Lord)
The final doxology and the "Mnogoletstvovaniye" (The "Many 'icars")'^^

'* Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" Ixxxvi-lxxxvii,

^ Morosan, " Peter Tchaikovsk>" lxxx\ iii.

86
 As shown in Table 3.2, the number of complete liturgy settings that

Tchaikovsky's followers composed is especially significant when considering the deanh

of settings in the previous century. Though it would be thirteen years before the next

liturgy setting, when Arkhangelsky would publish his Liturgy. Opus 15. numerous

settings were completed by the 1917 revolution. Following Archangelskv's settings from

the 1890s that were patterned after Tchaikovsky's Liturgy, Gretchaninoffs first Liturgy

of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 13, became the next contribution to the genre. Also based

on Tchaikovsky's setting, as Morosan explains, Gretchaninoffs First Liturgy "did not

break any new ground. It did include all the litanies and responses and the first and third

antiphons, but the latter is extremely abbreviated in form; otherwise, in its musical scope

and content, the work was clearly patterned after Tchaikovsky's setting."

97
Morosan, "The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff," Monuments of Russian Sacred
Music: Sergei Rachmaninoff The Complete Sacred Choral l^ork.s. ed. X'ladimir Morosan, Ser. 9. Vol. 1-2
(Madison: Musica Russica, 1994) 1.

87
 Table 3.2 The Divine Liturgy Settings of the New Russian Choral School OS

Composer Number of Liturgies Composed; Year of publication

Opus numbers'^
Arkhangel'sky, 1846-1924 Three Liturgies: opus 15 1890
opus 33 1894
Aleksandr Chesnokov, 1880-1941 One Liturgy: opus 8
Pavel Chesnokov, 1877-1944 Three Liturgies: opus 15
opus 42
opus 50
Gretchaninoff, 1864-1956 Four Liturgies: opus 13 1898
opus 29 \W2
opus 79 1917 1
opus 177 1943
Ippolitov-Ivanov, 1859-1935 One Liturgy: Opus 37 1903
Kastal'sky, 1856-1926 One Liturgy
Kompaneisky, 1848-1910 One Liturgy
Lisitsyn, 1871-C.1919 Two Liturgies
Nikol'sky, 1874-1943 One Liturgy: Opus 31 1909 !
Panchenko, 1867-1937 One Liturgy: Opus 18 1902
Rachmaninoff, 1873-1943 One Liturgy: Opus 31 1910
Rebikov, 1866-1920 One Liturgy
Shvedov, 1886-1954 Two Liturgies
(2""^ Liturgy) 1935
Tchaikovsky, 1840-1893 One Liturgy 1S78
Tcherepnin, 1873-1945 Two Liturgies: opus 32 i- • 1

Rachmaninoff s Liturgy setting, Opus 31 and his All-Night Vigil, Opus 37, are

often heralded by scholars as the crowning achievements of the realm of Russian church

music. Morosan writes:

[Rachmaninoff s] Liturgy, written in 1910, is an entirely free composition

in a richly sonorous choral style that has little thematic connection with canonical
chant melodies. Guided not so much by previous models as b\ his own personal
understanding and interpretation of each liturgical text, Rachmaninoff creates a
large-scale a cappella choral cycle that explores numerous emotional states
rangingfi-ompathos to prayerftil meditation. The Liturgy may be regarded as a
culmination of the free approach to setting the ordinary of this sen ice, first
essayed by Tchaikovsky.
98 Morosan, Choral Performance, 92-93; "The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff," 1-
li; telephone interview, 22 May 2002.
^ In some cases, composers did not provide opus numbers. Also, after 1905, the dating of works
becomes very problematic, as the date ceased to be a requirement for publication It may be presumed that
works in the table that appear without opus numbers were composed between 1905 and 1917. Morosan,
telephone inter\ iew, 22 May 2002.
"^ Morosan, Choral Performance 247-248.

88
 Though Morosan acknowledges Rachmaninoffs independent creati\ity in settmg

the Liturgy, he also gives appropriate significance to Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy oj

St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29, linking it to Rachmaninoff s later setting. Morosan

observes:

Gretchaninoffs second Liturgy... represents a marked evolution in terms

of musical style and serves as an important historical link between the settings of
Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff... Gretchaninoff thus became the first composer
in modem times to create a work that attempted to fashion the entire Di\ ine
Liturgy into a single large-scale artistic and musical design...
By consciously attempting, in his own words, to "symphonize" the forms
of liturgical hymns, Gretchaninoff paved the way for elaborate musical settings
that went beyond utilitarian liturgical use and carried Russian music into the
realm of the concert stage.'^'

Undoubtedly, Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy setting not only served as an important

historical step in the ultimate pinnacle of achievement for Russian liturgical music, but

also provided poignant expression on a high aesthetic plane in its own right, \ erified b\

the many performances that individual movements have received in the United States

since the 1930s.

'°' Morosan, " Sergei Rachmaninoff 1.

89
 CHAPTER r\^

GRETCHANINOFF ON LITURGICAL SINGING

Spokesman for the New Russian Choral School

Gretchaninoff actively voiced his views on liturgical music, lea\ing behind

written essays, letters, and published articles that all address the subject. Starting with a

series of publications in the Moskovskie Vedomosti in 1900, a daily newspaper in

Moscow, and culminating in a lecture that he prepared in 1932, Gretchaninoff avidl\

declared his perspectives on Russian church music throughout his most productiv c \ cars

as a composer. As discussed below, the newspaper articles from the year 1900 pro\ ed

significant. From that point onward, Gretchaninoff, as well as others, perceived himself

as the spokesman for the new direction in church music'

As detailed in Chapter II, Gretchaninoff joined with Rachmaninoff, Taneye\. and

over thirty other musicians who signed a letter published in the Russian Musical Gazette,

protesting the monarchy's "Bloody Sunday" tyranny. Soon after. Rimsky-Korsakov

became involved in the protest.^ Though the protest was not directly related to musical

activities, the overall political climate in early 1905 adversely affected concert

performances; furthermore, Gretchaninoffs involvement could have influenced other

musicians, including Rimsky-Korsakov, to become more involved.

.Morosan, Choral Performance 91. 223; Holmes 29.

Stewart 32-33; Yastrebtsev 355

90
 Morosan notes that Gretchaninoff led a protest in 1906 against an "unofficial

censorship" imposed by the Holy Synod in an effort to regain control of pow er after their

loss of it from the 1880 court case centered around Tchaikovsky's liturgy. The HoK

Synod ruled that all music was to be forwarded to the Supervisory Council of the

Moscow Synodal School to be evaluated before it could be published. Morosan descnbes

the situafion further: "This unofficial censorship-which caused inordinate dela\ s,

violated copyright with regard to unpublished manuscripts, and sometimes ended in

unexplained reftisals—brought about a vigorous protest, launched in 1906 by the

composer Grechaninov and joined by virtually every major composer of church music.""

Furthermore, as discussed in Chapter V, Gretchaninoff felt no compulsion to

continue the ban against instrumental music, and felt strongly that church music should

include the organ and other instruments. With his Domestic Liturgy, opus 79, he became

the first composer to score the Divine Liturgy to instrumental accompaniment.' Perhaps

this alone would have been adequate in voicing his objection to the ban; however, a

relatively recent publication from the Russian Orthodox Church indicates not only that

Gretchaninoff made a more formal proposal, but also that the proposal would have met

opposition even at the end of the twenfieth century, shown by the type of language used

to describe Gretchaninoff and his cohorts:

In 1917, people that dared to call themselves orthodox raised the question
about the use of an organ in orthodox worship at the Council of the Russian
Orthodox Church. A joint session that addressed specific questions concerning
church singing was held on December 8 of that year. A[leksandr] Grechaninov
proposed the introduction of the organ for use in worship. The suggestion

^ Morosan, Choral Performance 89-91

' Gretchaninoff, My Life 119-120.
Morosan, Choral Performance 244.

91
 received the support of the director of the Synodal School, A[leksandr]
Kastal'sky, as well as by D[mitri] Allemanov. a priest in the Orthodox Church
whose so called choral works are still performed even today by church choirs.
The proposal was rejected by a vote of eight to three.^

As this proposal was documented to have occurred in December of 1917. it w as certainK

overshadowed by the all-encompassing event of the Bolshevik Revolution only a few

weeks earlier.

The Moskovskie Vedomosti Publications of 1900

Soon after the turn of the twentieth century, Gretchaninoff arose as a leading

spokesman for the new direcfion in church music. As noted in Chapter II, he first

submitted his views to the public in a 1900 edition of the Moskovskie Vedomosti, which

followed with rebuttals by A. Grigorov, G. Usurov, as well as the editorial staff, and

culminated in a final published essay by Gretchaninoff less than a month later.

Gretchaninoff recalls the events that led to this series of articles:

This new style of sacred music that I adopted, as did also Kastalsky and
Tchesnokov, was for a long time refused recognition by the self-appointed
arbiters of Russian Orthodox church singing... Anything that did not sound like
German or Italian church music seemed to them—and, alas, still seems to their
disciples~as contrary to the spirit of Russian church music.
I decided to launch an open attack on this fossilized attitude, and
published an article under the title "On the Spirit of Church Singing." Two main
ideas were brought out in this article: first, that if the music corresponds faithfully
to the meaning of the text, this proves its fidelity to the "spirit" as well.
According to this premise, no ftivolous melody can be properly used in church
composifions, for there is no text in the sacred writings that it can possibly
portray...
Secondly, I pointed out in my article that the only way to write Orthodox
church music in a truly Russian style is to return to old Slavonic church singing,
to study it, learn to love it, and enjoy it as part of our own native folk music. Let

Kutuzov, see Appendix F.

92
 Itahan songs flourish in Italy; it behooves us. Russians, to cling to our ow n
Slavonic modes.^

The content of Gretchaninoff s first article, published on February 23. 1900,^

expounded several points. However, the point he described in his autobiograph\ to

"return to old Slavonic church singing" is not menfioned, though it is addressed in his

final article written to defend and clarify his position.^ In the introductory paragraphs of

the inifial article, he lists three groups that categonze "critics" of church music-admirers

of the Italian style of Bortnanski, Vedel, and Sarti, and others; "the admirers of the

obikhod" who admire only the simply harmonized chants or the pure monophonic tunes;

and a final group who quite puzzlingly seem to admire the simple settings of the obikhod

as well as the Italian style of Bortniansky, Vedel, and Sarti.

In clarifying the "correspondence of the musical contents of the composition to

the text's contents,"^^ he identified the "very wide choice" that composers have in setting

liturgical music, "if only he correctly understands and expresses the text's meaning."

Gretchaninoff ftirther stated that no formal, contrapuntal nor harmonic techniques should

be branded as out of place in church music if "used sensibly and appropriately." He then

identified three requirements that qualify church music as sensible and appropriate:

^ Gretchaninoff A/>' Life, 1\-11.

* "A Few Words about the Spirit of the Church Motets." by Gretchaninoff was published in the
February 23, 1900 edition of the Moskovkie Vedomosti, no. 53. Subsequent articles were published by the
Moskovkie Vedomosti on February 26, no. 56, and February 29, no. 59. Gretchaninoffs final article was
published by the Moskovski Vedomosti on March 14, 1900, no. 73 Complete translations of these articles
appear m the appendix.
' The inaccuracy of Gretchaninoffs recollection of the content of the first article is likely due to
the fifty-two year span that separated the publication of the first newspaper article and the publication of his
autobiography in English.
'" All Italics used in the quoted texts are Gretchaninoffs

93
(1) "Words should be pronounced by all voices simultaneously or, gi\en a contrapuntal

work, the words should be distributed among the voices so skillftilly that the listener can

absolutely follow the text." Gretchaninoff then explained that the word "Hallelujah" can

often be set contrapuntally when repeated. (2) "The text should be rightly and correcth

declaimed." He then pointed out common mistakes in text declamation, e\ en in the

obikhod. (3) Finally, the music should correspond to the meaning of the text. He labeled

this last qualificafion as the most important, and stated that if all three qualifications are

met, "we will exhaust all that is required to consider a known sacred music work suitable

for the church."

Gretchaninoff also discussed the use of unconventional compositional techniques,

stating:

If many people consider any non-hackneyed technique as a heresy (for example,

the use of any other manner of harmonization besides tonic, dominant and
subdominant), this is only because they are not accustomed to those techniques.
The more rich and vivid colors a composer has, the more \ ariety he has in the
technique of musical means. However, despite how suitable and noble those
techniques may be - if they are new and uncommon - the more they will be
regarded as a transgression of piety by some admirers of church music.

Gretchaninoff dismissed concerns about overall style in sacred music as being "so

delicate and debatable that hardly even two musicians will agree in its understanding."

He also defended against the criticism that some church music resembled opera, stating

that often times "banal things are sung in our church" that would not even have a place in

a "somewhat decent opera."

Gretchaninoff concluded this initial article with the following paragraph:

So, what kind of music should we consider as corresponding to the spirit

of our Church? I know vulgar and noble music; overly elaborate and simple;

94
 sweet and sentimental; and rigorous, serious music. If a sacred work onh fits first
definifions then it is worth nothing; if it corresponds to the text, if it is simple and
noble, and if words can be heard and are correctly declaimed, then such a work is
worthy to be performed in the church, and that is why it is "ecclesiastical" if \ou
will. But when some work is said not to correspond to the spirit of the church
motets, I understand it only in one sense: it does not correspond to the text. But
"the spirit," as it is usually accepted to be understood - is merely a convention, a
habit.

In his autobiography, Gretchaninoff described the reaction caused b\ this first

article: "My acfion aroused a storm of disapproval. My principal idea was completely

misinterpreted, and I was accused of wanfing to introduce operatic style into the Russian

Orthodox Church. There were other similarly absurd misinterpretations.""

Part of the "storm of disapproval" referred to by Gretchaninoff appeared in a brief

commentary from the editorial staff that immediately followed his article in the same

issue, as well as in subsequent letters to the editor published less than a \\ eek later, on

February 29, 1900. The note from the editorial staff that appeared just below

Gretchaninoffs article included the following criticisms:

As for the opinion of Mr. Gretchaninoff, we hope that there will be people
among the admirers of our church singing that will state their opinion to confirm
that there is a fourth group besides those three groups of admirers of church
singing mentioned by Mr. Gretchaninoff This group is not satisfied with
Bortniansky, the modem obikhod, nor with both simultaneously, but they are
moved by the marvelous and are filled with the deep religious spirit of the old and
ancient tunes of our church...
As for the "ecclesiastical spirit," we hardly think that it is only a
"convention, a habit" as Mr. Gretchaninoff thinks.
Having listed all of the necessary requirements for the composition of
church music, Mr. Gretchaninoff, like all of our modem composers, misses the
most important requirement: the religious mood, and consequentK', the sincere
faith of a composer himself Church music as well as church painting requires not

Gretchaninoff, My Lifel'.

95
 only highly creafive talent, but also religious spirituality of that talent. One ma\
compose "corresponding music" to the secular romance words; but for the
liturgical words of prayer, it is not enough; one has to be filled with the blessed
power of that prayer, one has to believe in that power, one has to pra\ himself

In the Febmary 29 issue, the editorial staff of the Moskovskie Vedemosti included

two articles written in response to Gretchaninoffs article from Febmarv' 23. The editonal

staff, idenfified as "V.G.," also presented a brief summafion of the discussion, adding that

"a lot of articles and notes" had been received, and that "today we publish the two most

thorough articles by A.I. Grigorov and G.G. Umsov." Another statement from the

editorial staff pointed to Gretchaninoffs "letter to the publisher" that was \\ ritten in an

attempt to clarify his position, but was actually used against him in the debate:

We pointed out that the most important requirement in this respect that
was [not] mentioned in Mr. Gretchaninoffs article. It is the religious mood, and
therefore, the sincere faith of the composer himself Mr. Gretchaninoff, in his
"Letter to the Publisher," hastened to declare that not only did he not reject that
requirement, but also that he considered it to be so obvious, he preferred not to
mention it at all.

The editorial staff, "Mr. V.G.," then notes other points that he believes Gretchaninoff

understated or overlooked.

The opposifion raised by Grigorov in the Febmary 29 rebuttal to Gretchaninoffs

first article affirms the statement made by V.G. of the editorial staff concerning "the most

important requirement for the composifion of church motets, namely the sincere faith of

the composer himself," as well as the "fourth class" of admirers of church music who

admire the spirit of the ancient tunes. He confinued his criticism, "that [fourth] class

deser\es our attention, though Mr. Gretchaninoff persistently ignores it, even in his Letter

96
to the Publisher published in response to the above-mentioned editorial note," and then

expounded on the significance of this fourth class.

He then crificized Gretchaninoff for making "inexact" and "inconsistent

statements," poinfing to Gretchaninoffs observation of the requirement that church music

should not be "overly elaborate, sensual, nor sentimental, and especially not sweet nor

vulgar," yet the music must also be "extremely various in its character and nuances" to

adequately illustrate the text. In this observation, Grigorov concludes: "As you can see,

the text is restricted, and at the same time 'extremely various,' with the possibility of

'extremely various illustrations' to it." Though Gretchaninoffs corresponding article of

March 14 does not address this point, it appears to be fairly obvious when comparing the

texts of Gretchaninoff and Grigorov that the latter misinterpreted Gretchaninoffs

meaning on this point: although liturgical texts are inherently restricted to some degree,

they still "may be extremely various in its contents and mood," and though the music

"should not be exquisite, sensual, or sentimental, and especially sweet or vulgar," it still

may be set with music that possesses much variety in terms of "its character and

nuances."

Grigorov then summarizes Gretchaninoffs three conditions for suitable church

music, and remarked thus:

...according to Mr. Gretchaninoffs opinion, if a composer observes the above

requirements and gets rid of the "hackneyed techniques," then he may show all of
his strength and reveal all the extent and the "nch and vivid colors" in the use of
the musical means to create a work quite suitable for church performance..
Those conditions are extremely essential and serious. Howc\ er, they are not
sufficient for the church motets.

97
Grigorov confinues to affirm the importance of the conditions spelled out by

Gretchaninoff, but adds that these condifions only insure the "permissibility." not

necessarily the "appropriateness for worship." Before listing a fourth necessary

requirement for the suitability of church music, Grigorov discusses the meaning of "what

is in the spirit." Though he does not presume to be able to define it exactly, he asserts.

"We know only one thing for sure: 'the spirit' is not 'a convention' and 'a habit' as Mr.

Gretchaninoff claims. In our opinion 'the spirit' is something stable and steadfast, and

includes the ideas of virtue, of the purity of good conscience, and so on." Grigoro\ then

expounds on the fourth condition that must be present in the composition of appropriate

church music, which may be essenfially summed up as the prayer and faithfulness of the

composer during the composition of the music, the same as listed in the editorial note that

appeared with Gretchaninoffs article of Febmary 23. Grigorov states:

If we restrict the requirements for church music to only three conditions, and if
we are satisfied with the noble, permissible music as discussed in Mr.
Gretchaninoffs article, I am afraid that the sacred music of even a talented and
sincere composer would be rather a cantata on a liturgical text, but it would not
represent the church motet appropriate for the performance in the orthodox
temple. I am not going to state that such a composer will sinfully make his work,
no, that may not happen, but he will not meet our need to pray with the reverent
mood that is evoked both by the place and by our inner desire to get rid of this
world's vanity, and to soar in the world of a higher joy that is devoid of the
earthly senses of delights, even if innocent and noble.

However, even after detailing his criticism of Gretchaninoffs article, Grigorov

concludes with a hint of gratitude to Gretchaninoff, and a suggestion that Russian

composers need not exhibit an extraordinary amount of faith to compose church music, as

his open invitation might imply:

98
 To conclude, I will say that it is comforting to think that our composers
and music crifics, just like the thoughtful Mr. GretchaninofT, are beginning to pay
attenfion to the almost forgotten area of church music. And maybe they would
share part of their talents for the comfort and the delight of those who attend the
temples and pray there.

Umsov's article, included in the same publication as Grigorov's, is much more

concise, though less substantive. He criticizes Gretchaninoff for "expressing his own

opinion that hardly may be obligatory for the people interested in the addressed topic."

He condemns Gretchaninoff for indirectly blaming Bortniansky and \'edel for the

Westemization of Russian church music, and describes his reasoning about opera to be

vague. He then casts some degree of blame on the conser\'atories for not training young

musicians to compose in the spirit of the church, yet \\ho "belittle the sacred text to the

degree of merely the ground for exercise in composition." He then digresses into a

discussion of the careers and fame of church singers. No evidence was discovered that

Gretchaninoff ever bothered to respond to his article.

In the commentary by the editorial staff that appeared with these two articles on

Febmary 29, V.G. suggests a fifth requirement that is essential in creating appropnate

music for the church:

Perhaps Mr. Gretchaninoff will consider as obvious another essential

condition that he also did not mention, but A.I. Grigorov mentioned it in his
article by inference. Here is that condifion: that church music should be
predominantly national music. Could it be that the whole secret of the spirit of
church music is hidden in the profoundly national character of church music in
general and in Russian music specifically?

V.G. then elaborates the reasons that the old Slavic church tunes, the "predominant

national music," so adequately express the sentiments of the Russian people in the

context of church singing:

99
 But why are these ancient tunes so dear to our hearts? Why do samples of our
ancient church music that are kept safe in some monasteries touch us so deeph,
even when we hear them for the first time? Could the reason be that this music is
not only ancient, but is our music as well? Perhaps it is because in this music, that
was originally borrowed from the Byzanfine tradition, our Russian national spirit
was gradually expressed over the ages, and then finally de\ eloped into that form
that was predestined to cast the mould of Russian Orthodox church singing due to
innate ethnical, ethical, historical, and aesthetic laws.

The next statement by the editorial staff confirmed Gretchaninoffs practice of returning

to the old Slavic chants in the composition of sacred music, something that, according to

his autobiography, he had begun with the composifion of two chomses, opus 19. in 189S.

"As the Waves of the Sea," and "O, Be Joyful in the Lord:"'^

That is why our modem composers of sacred music, who sincerely wish to grasp
the spirit of the Russian church motets, must reverently meditate on and
attenfively listen to our ancient church tunes, not in order to slavishly and
foolishly copy them, but in order to be inspired by their lofty religious mood and
strict church spirit that is so closely connected with the strict church spirit of the
orthodox Russian people.

Recalling the composition of the opus 19 chomses, Gretchaninoff stated that the

ancient chant emphasis that he employed "set the foundation of style I developed in my

later sacred writings, the style I maintained through the years up to the composition of my

Oecumenical Mass."'^ The reasons for Gretchaninoffs emphasis on actual chant or

chant-based motives that would predominate in practically all of his sacred music

remains to be determined with certainty, though the evidence gleaned from primary

sources may lead to specific conclusions. Morosan concludes that the chant-based style

of Gretchaninoff originated from his correspondence with a small group of composers

'- Gretchaninoff, My Life 71, 186.

'^ Gretchaninoff, My Life 71.

100
and Stepan Smolensky, the director of the Moscow Synodal School from 1889-1909 and

a distinguished liturgical musicologist.'"* However, from the content of the Moskovksie

Vedomosti articles, combined with Gretchaninoffs inaccurate recollection of it mentioned

in his autobiography, another conclusion also may be drawn.

As previously mentioned, Morosan points out that Gretchaninoff was heavih

influenced to employ the ancient chants by none other than Stepan Smolensk). Though

Gretchaninoff never directly admitted that Smolensky influenced his compositional style,

he did state that the Moscow Synodal Choir premiered his first Liturgy, opus 13 and his

two chomses, opus 19, in the autumn of 1899.'^ Morosan notes that Smolensky offered

crifical advice to Gretchaninoff in the process of preparing for the performance of these

works by the Synodal Choir, and adds, "After this inifial essay in sacred music...

Grechaninov adopted a much more melodic, chant-oriented idiom—undoubtedly,

according to Nikol'sky, as a result of'numerous discussions among Grechaninov.

Kastal'sky, Smolensky, and Orlov.'"'^

It is particularly interesfing to note here that Gretchaninoffs very next sacred

composifions would be the opus 19 chomses described above, composed in 1898,

followed by his next major choral work-the Second Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom,

Opus 29, composed in 1902, both of which employed the "more melodic, chant-oriented

idiom." These two works, composed in 1898 and 1902, the premier performances of the

'"* Morosan, Choral Performance 100-101.

'•Gretchaninoff, AA' Life 70-71.
'"Morosan, Choral Performance 230. Morosan cites .Meksandr Nikol'sky, "S A'. Smolensky i ego
rol' V novom napravlenii russkoi tserkovnoi muzyki" [S. V Smolensky and his role in the new direction of
Russian church music], Khoroyoe i regentskoe deki 10(1913): 151-56.

101
First Liturgy and the opus 19 chomses that occurred within one year of each other if not

even in the same performance,'' and the appearance of the Moskovskie Vedomosti articles

in Febmary of 1900 leads to the conclusion that all of these events were significantly

linked. Thus, the last statement by the editorial staff in the Moskovskie Vedomosti of

Febmary 29, 1900 not only confirmed Gretchaninoffs compositional tendenc\ to return

to the ancient chants but also directly influenced him to continue his pursuit of that

particular style, possibly even influencing the chant style of the Second Liturgy, Opus 29.

This conclusion may be confirmed by the fact that whereas Gretchaninoff never mentions

the influence of Smolensky in his autobiography, several paragraphs are devoted to the

Moskovskie Vedomosti articles. His discussion of the articles occur within the context

of the description of his initial stylistic inclination toward the ancient chants, and though

he never acknowledges any influence the articles may have had on his style, the timing of

his transifion to the "more melodic, chant-oriented idiom" and his preoccupation with the

articles in his autobiography at least merit consideration. Though Morosan quotes a

primary source that acknowledges Smolensky's influence on Gretchaninoffs style, he

also confirms that Gretchaninoff had no direct experience with the Moscow Synodal

School or Choir,'^ and that "some disagreement exists" on the exact level of influence

that Smolensky had on composers in Moscow.^° While it may not be fashionable to give

'^ Gretchaninoff, My Life 70, 185. Gretchamnoff actually lists two separate dates for the premier
of the First Liturgy. In the narrative, he explains that the premier occurred in the autumn of 189') (70). but
in the listing of choral works, he lists the date as 19 October, 1898.
'* Gretchaninoff, My Life 71-73.
' Morosan, Choral Performance 242.
"" Morosan, Choral Performance 230.

102
significant credit for a composer's development to a contenfious joumalist, the e\idence

points in this direction every bit as strongly as it does toward Smolensky in this regard.

The conclusion regarding the influence that the editorial comments may ha\ e had

on Gretchaninoffs style may also be confirmed by Gretchaninoffs immediate reactions,

published in the March 14 issue of the Moskovskie Vedomosti, no. 73. In this final

article, Gretchaninoff effecfively counters the arguments against the fourth group of

admirers of church music, summarizes his intentions of the first article, counters the

assertion that "the spirit is only a convenfion and a habit" by stating that it is understood

by others to be a convention and a habit and not what he himself asserts, and effecti\ el\

answers other issues raised by Grigorov and the editorial staff such as the faith and

prayerftil attitude that the composer must employ in the compositional process.

Addressing the issue of nafional music, Gretchaninoff defends himself by stating,

"Concerning the condition asserted by Mr. V.G., the demand that a composition of sacred

music should be predominantly national, 1 will answer that this question is not considered

in my main requirement of'correspondence' as Mr. V.G. would like to ascribe to me."

He follows with an elaboration of the importance of incorporating the national tunes into

church music, and even states, "I believe that our church music will reach the proper

height only when it rests upon our folk art. It will get rid of the Italianization that is alien

to us, but at the same time that reigns in our Church, only when our church music

composers will pay proper attention to antiquity and will draw their inspiration from it."

In making a case against overstating the importance of the national element in church

music, Gretchaninoff states: "Nevertheless, 1 think that the requirement of nationalit\

103
hardly may be considered as obligatory (and I meant only such requirements in my first

article)." He then states two primary reasons that nationalit\' should not be identified as a

necessary requirement: first, that nationalism is difficult to identify; and second, that

churches would have difficulty in choosing music to perform, given the lack of church

music that was currently available. Thus, the actual content of the Moskovskie Vedomosti

publications does not correspond to the summary he ga\'e in his 1952 autobiography,

where he lists nafionalism as one of his main points in submitting his essay for

publicafion: "Secondly, I pointed out in my article that the only \\ ay to write Orthodox

church music in a tmly Russian style is to return to old Slavonic church singing, to stud\

it, to leam to love it, and enjoy it as part of our own native fold music..."'' This fact leads

one to conclude that since Gretchaninoff inaccurately remembered the series of articles as

being primarily about incorporating nationalism in church music, when in fact the point

about nationalism was raised by the editorial staff and only was addressed by

Gretchaninoff out of defense, the cnticisms raised by his opponents in the debate had a

profound affect on his compositional style.

Thus, it may be concluded that the series of publications in the Moskovskie

Vedomosti of 1900 was significant in the career of Gretchaninoff, as demonstrated by the

attention he gives it in his autobiography. While the exact degree of influence that it had

on his compositional style only may be speculated, it is not impossible that it may have

directly influenced his stylistic tendency toward the ancient chants, even affecting the

style of the Second Liturgy of St. John Chn'sostom, Opus 29, composed in 1902, in uhich

Gretchaninoff, My Life 72,

104
the chant-based themes are prominent, as observed by Morosan. Though Gretchaninoff

never acknowledged this influence on his style, it is evident from his memoirs that he

highly desired the approval of his teachers, colleagues, and audiences. His introverted

temperament combined with a deep sense of pride in his accomplishments could ha\ c

kept him from admitting that these publications influenced his sty le on any le\ el, as the

criticism was submitted by "laypersons."

Regardless of the degree of influence on Gretchaninoffs style, the impact that the

Moskovskie Vedemosti articles produced on Russian church music in general was indeed

significant. In a recent article on the subject, Marina Rakhmanova states the importance

of Gretchaninoff s initial publication of Febmary 23, 1900:

Now I would like to go back to the above-mentioned discussion on church singing

in the Moskovskie Vedomosti newspaper in the years 1900-1902. It was initiated
with the famous article of A.T. Gretchaninoff, 'A Few Words about the 'Spinf of
the Church Motets." That article may be viewed in a certain sense as the
manifesto of the New School, and it was indeed perceived that way by his
contemporaries. (Actually, Gretchaninoffs article was not the first one in that
discussion, but it was that very article that "poured oil on the flames"). ^^

As Rakhmanova suggests, the publications in the Moskovskie Vedomosti certainly drew

much attenfion to the subject of church music, and played a significant role in leading

both musicians and non-musicians to the genre.

^' M. P. Rakhmanova, "Staroobnadchesno i Novoe napravlenie' v russkoi dukhoN-noi

muzyke'T'Old Belief and TMew School' in Russian Music"], Cultural Heritai^e of Medieval Russia in the
Tradition of L'ral - Siberian Old Belief Proceedings of All-Russian Scientific Conference, May 17-19,
1999. Novosibirsk: M. I. Glinka Novosibirsk State Conser\atory, 1999, trans. Sergei Shiskin, ed Philip
Camp, 2002.

105
The New York Essav of 1932

Gretchaninoff wrote a significant essay on the history of Russian liturgical music

that is housed in the Music Division of the New York Public Library for the Performing

Arts.^ The first sentence of this hand-written manuscript, all of which is in Russian,

indicates that this essay was written for a speech that Gretchaninoff deli\ered.

presumably to a Russian audience, or with a translator's assistance. On the back of the

fourth page, the essay is dated September 30, 1932. Given the facts that the manuscnpt

has many side notes that are both in the margins and on the back sides of some pages that

were added with red and black pencil and with pen markings, and that all of these notes

directly relate to the content of the essay, it may be presumed that the date pro\ ided on

the fourth page related either the actual date that he ga\ e the lecture or the date that the

essay was completed. Since the content of the first few pages, including the fourth page,

deals with the early history of Russian liturgical singing, the appearance of this would

seem to indicate another event related to the essay, such as the date for the delivery of the

speech, as it does not pertain to any detail provided in the entire essay. From the

evidence provided in his autobiography, it would appear that Gretchaninoff delivered the

lecture in the United States, perhaps even in New \'ork, as he states, "Between 1929 and

1934,1 spent about three months each year in America. I made appearances in almost all

the pnncipal cities in the United States, and made many new ftiends.'""* Given that

Gretchaninoff permanently left Russia in 1925, and that many archival matenals are

'•' The full translation of this essay appears in Appendix B.

^* GretchaninofT, A/v Life 149.

106
located in various locations in the United States from his frequent \ isits and e\ entual

immigration, it may be assumed that this lecmre was given in a major city in the United

States. Though no documentation has been disco\ered to support the event of this

lecture, in all probability from the evidence shown abo\ e. it occurred in a major city in

the United States, possibly New York City, in September of 1932.

Though much of the essay contains factual information about the history of

Russian Orthodox singing that readily can be found elsewhere, portions of the essay

provide interesting glimpses of Gretchaninoffs views on the subject, many of which were

considered unconventional and unorthodox to the mainstream Russian Orthodox Church.

As expected from a former student of Rimsky-Korsakov who was one of the "Mighty

Handful," Gretchaninoff values the original Russian character of the music even from its

origins, as stated in the following, "The flawless treasure of ancient Russian singing,

created and maintained by the genius of Russian folk, can only be explained through the

love of songs, both secular and sacred..." Though Gretchaninoff acknowledges the

Byzanfine influence in the originafion of Russian church music, he also quotes Stepan

Smolensky's conclusions that the '"independent essence of our tunes obviously developed

from ancient times through Russian strength alone,'^' which automatically belittles the

Byzantine part of our native art.'" A few sentences later. Gretchaninoff states,".. .this

pure Russian choral art that came to us from hoary antiquity leaves an impression that is

both tremendous and often majestic." Gretchaninoff describes the penod in the sixteenth

" Gretchaninoffs emphasis.

107
century and early seventeenth century, immediately prior to the de\ elopment of part-

singing in the seventeenth century that was modeled after W^estem polyphony:

It was the period of the tme golden age of our church singing. Unfortunately, it
did not last long. Very soon, in the same seventeenth century, the new 'skillful
musical art' began to penetrate from the West... This singing did not beautif\'
these marvelous ancient melodies at all; quite the contrary, it damaged their
beauty because they were harmonized by people that were not experienced in
harmonization.

Gretchaninoffs disdainful attitude toward the Italian influence of the late

eighteenth century becomes readily apparent here:

The visiting Italians played a tremendous role in the subsequent fate of our church
music. Under their influence, the national face of our church music was
completely lost for a long fime. The music was Italianized and the ancient
Znamenny chant was consigned to almost complete oblivion. That obli\ ion was
so strong, so deep, that even though the contemporary works of our Russian
composers have taken on the Italian character since then, these works were
respected as demonstrative of genuine Russian orthodox singing. That opinion
has lasted even to the present time.

He then laments over Berezovsky, a Russian composer and singer who lived from 1745-

1777, who supposedly committed suicide after not being able to find a position in the

Imperial Chapel due to the prominence of all of the Italians, though he was very talented

and had trained in Italy.^^

In his discussion of the work of Bortnianksy, the greatest Russian composer to

have received training from Italians, Gretchaninoff acknowledges that he was the first

composer "to begin to arrange the ancient melodies for use in a choral work. His

knowledge was sound in the area of harmonization and voice leading. Especially

^* Though Slonimsky confirms the suicide story in the 8 edition of Baker's Biographical
Dictionary' of Music and Musicians, the commonly reported story about his suicide does not have
documentary confirmation. More recent scholarship in Russia suggests that Berezovsky probably died
from an illness.

108
considering.. .[the time] when composers groped their way, Bortnianks\'s arrangements

testify that study of music in the West was not done in \'ain, and that we mastered

composifional technique no worse than any Italian." However. Gretchaninoff soon

decried the Italian influence on him, stating ".. .but the Italian nuisance \\as so great that

it prevented him from wrapping them into fitting harmonic and contrapuntal clothing that

would correspond to the natural melodic style." He then criticizes Bortniansky for onh'

composing in the major and minor tonal system of the Italians to the neglect of the modal

character of the ancient melodies. Similarly, the next section in the speech continues to

praise Bortnianksy's immediate successors in their natural Russian tendencies to deal

with the chants in terms of assymetrical rhythm and modality, but criticizes them for

composing in the tonal system of the Italian style.

In his discussion of his own generafion of composers who made up the new

Russian choral school, Gretchaninoff reveals his perspecti\es about Tchaikovsky's work

and identifies the overarching influence on the style of the new generation of composers

of sacred choral music. In his discussion of Tchaikovsky, Gretchaninoff reveals his own

partiality to the Russian nationalist school of Rimsky-Korsakov. Rimsky-Korsakov,

Gretchaninoffs teacher at the St. Petersburg Conservatory, and who as a member of the

"Mighty Five" rejected Tchaikovsky's style of composition in favor of the nationalist

style of Glinka, remained in correspondence with Gretchaninoff until his death in 1910.

Before Gretchaninoff discusses Tchaikovsky, however, Rimsky' Korsakov's influence

'^ Holmes notes that the Houghton Library of Harvard University contains fourteen autographed
Icners wTitten from Rimsky-Korsakov to Gretchaninoff, dated 1898-1905. Holmes 171

109
even may be seen in Gretchaninoffs discussion of Glinka, who became ill and died

before the "dream of his last days" would come tme, to be among the first to harmonize

the ancient melodies in a modal fashion. Certainly. Gretchaninoff expresses admiration

for the work of Glinka when he states, "Glinka's death tragically echoed throughout the

halls of church singing." In chapter two of his autobiography, Gretchaninoff admits that

he practically idolized Tchaikovsky during his student days at the Moscow Conser\ atory.

However, in this essay, the change in Gretchaninoffs attitude toward Tchaikovsk\' is

apparent by his description of Tchaikovsky's famous Liturgy:

Only by the reputation of his great name as a composer can one explain the
outstanding and unprecedented success that his Liturgy received—a composition
that was not at all remarkable and even weak in some places. Perhaps the success
of this work was also promoted by the scandal that was raised b\ Bakhmetev's
lawsuit against Jurgenson, the publisher of the Liturgy...

Gretchaninoffs final statements credit the members of the "Mighty Five" for

laying the foundation for the composers of the new Russian choral school to build new

frameworks for liturgical music. Gretchaninoff particularly mentions Rimsky-Korsakov

and two other members of the group, Borodin and Mussorgsky, for having the most

profound influence on the style of the new generation of composers. As discussed above,

this assertion was only alluded to in his 1900 publication in the Moskovskie Vedomosti,

which caused him extreme criticism. Gretchaninoff states here that though the period

between Bortiansky's death in 1825 and the end of the century saw almost "no progress"

in the area of church music, "new forms were created that laid the foundation for the

creative work of the present day representatives of the new school of church music

composition." He states that through their new innovations in their secular works.

110
"Borodin..., and especially Mussorgsky, taught contemporary composers of sacred music

to deal with the modal character of the ancient melodies. They taught us how to

harmonize them and how to make them contrapuntal w ithout cormpting their st\ie. spint.

or nature." Listing examples from two other members of the "Mighty Handful." Rimsk\-

Korsakov's two operas, Mlada in 1891 and Kitezh in 1903-05, and from Mussorgsky's

Boris Goudonov, Gretchaninoff concludes the entire speech by stating:

Probably, I would not be mistaken to say that all of the next generation of
composers of sacred music are above all indebted to those composers of secular
music who actually composed few if any spiritual works, but b> their secular
music influenced the development of church music. The new generation learned
from these composers, and drew inspiration from their creati\ e works (Boris
Goudunov).

In setting the context for Gretchaninoffs sacred choral compositions, his

statements about Russian liturgical music become valuable. The development of his

general style becomes clearer, and his goal to correspond the music to the meaning of the

text also becomes evident. The fact that he drew so much inspiration from the secular

works of at least three members of the "Mighty Five" is not only intriguing, but also

helps to explain Gretchaninoffs attempt to s>Tnphonize the unaccompanied choir, and

even ftirther attempted to expand the style of Russian liturgical music by introducing

instmmental accompaniment into Liturgy setfings for the Russian Orthodox Church.

These and other style traits, prominent in his pre-revolutionary choral works that began

with the Second Liturgy, are discussed in detail in Chapter V.

Ill
 CHAPTER \'

OVERVIEW OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SACRED CHORAL STYLE

Though Gretchaninoff is primarily remembered for his sacred choral music as

well as children's music, he composed music in pracfically every established genre. His

total output included five fiill symphonies as well as other orchestral works; nine string

quartets and other chamber works; many works for solo instmments and piano; o\ er fort\

collections for solo piano; six operas including three children's operas; incidental music

for four plays; several cantatas, liturgies, and masses; a huge number of single-movement

sacred and secular chomses; vocal quartets, duets, and works for solo voice and

orchestra; and songs for voice and piano. Beginning w ith his first works that appeared in

the early 1890s, Gretchaninoff continued to compose throughout his long life, even into

the 1950s when he was approaching ninety years of age.

Throughout his career that spanned over six decades, Gretchaninoff composed

many types of choral works, both sacred and secular, a cappella and accompanied.

Appendix D lists the complete choral works compiled from his own catalogue of works

listed in his autobiography. As shown in the appendix, the second Liturgy of St. John

Chrysostom, opus 29, was composed relatively early in his career, though he was thirty-

eight years of age and had already established himself as a composer in Russia.

Gretchaninoff completed the score in the summer of 1902 at his vacation cottage on the

' Inna Barsova, Gerald .Abraham, "Grechaninov, Alexandr I ikhonovich," The NVu Grove
Dictionar\- of Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie, 2"^ ed., vol. 10 (London: Macmillan, 2001) 32.^-326;
Stewart 1.

112
banks of the Volga, and later remembered, "This idyllic existence was conduci\ e to

meditation, and I felt in the mood for writingsacred music. I decided to compose a new

Liturgy, because my first Liturgy was unsatisfactory to me in many respects.

Gretchaninoff then recounted how he composed the music for the Creed:

I felt at ease and my work progressed well. But w hen I reached the Credo, I
began to wonder whether I should not write something quite different from the
first Liturgy. I had two Credos: a long one, which illustrated the text in
considerable detail a la Tchaikovsky, and a shorter second Credo, as a recitative.
How should I write a third one? I debated the problem for a long time, and then,
in a flash, an original and yet essentially simple idea came to me: to give the
entire text to the alto, not to sing, but to recite, as the nuns do; w hile the choms, in
a simple harmonic framework, accentuates, in worshipful whispers, the meaning
of the text by repeating the words "I believe," and, towards the end, "I profess"
and "I await." This Credo eventually became very popular."^

Gretchaninoff then described the successful premier, which took place on March 2, 1903.

in the Moscow Nobility House by Leonid Vaslyev's large choir. In the preparation for

the performance, Gretchaninoff personally rehearsed the music w ith the young boy who

sang the alto solo for the Creed, to ensure that the boy sang w ith correct pronunciation of

the archaic liturgical language and with the appropriate rhythmic accent. Vasilyev

himself attended these rehearsals to better prepare himself for the Liturgy, specifically the

Creed, which Gretchaninoff described thus: "the greatest difficulty was to blend the two

independent elements of music: the free recitative of the alto and the flowing harmonies

of the choral accompaniment." About the actual premier perfomiance. Gretchaninoff

stated:

The hall was packed to the doors, and the Liturgy had a tremendous success,
particularly the Credo. The young boy w ho sang the alto part was showered w ith

* Gretchaninoff, A/v Life 87.

• Gretchaninoff, AA Life 87.

\\y
 presents after the performance: a watch, lots of candy, and some money. The
newspaper reviews were ftill of superlatives. Kashkin [Gretchaninoffs former
piano teacher at the Moscow Conservatory] wTote: "Gretchaninoffs Credo,
conceived in the strict church style, is a work of genius in its inventiveness, its
simplicity, and its superb poetic spirit. This Credo made a profound impression,
completely captivating the listener." Other reviews were couched in similar
terms.

In the actual review of the premier wntten by Kashkin in the Moscovskie

Vedomosti three days later, general comments were made about the entire Liturg\, w hile

the majority of the specific comments centered on the Creed:

In hearing his new liturgy, one immediately senses that the composer freely
masters both counterpoint and harmony, and furthermore, is quite capable of
wrifing for a choir. When Mr. Gretchaninoff combines the spiritual quality of the
ancient melodies with the general character of Russian music, he leaves a stamp
that is simultaneously both individual and national, elegantly expressed through
the quaUfies of unique melodic and harmonic progressions.
From what we heard, the complete Liturgy is written w ith great talent, but
the Creed represents an ingenious invention in its genre, through its simplicity
and in the amazing poesy of its design that remains in the framework of the
strictest church style. The invenfiveness of the Creed consists of the declamation
of the text by a boy alto soloist on a few, mostly repeated notes, while the choir
sings "vemu" [I believe] through each part, emphasizing the content of the given
passage through powerful yet simple harmonic colors. This movement as a whole
creates a marvelously beautifiil impression that completely captivates the listener.
If we add that the performance of this movement along with all of the
other movements was literally excellent, then the tremendous impact that the
Creed had on the audience w ill be understandable to you; furthermore, the boy
deserves great praise, as he declaimed the text very clearly and seriously.
Generally, L.V. Vasiliev's Choir stands far above the ordinary pnvate choirs in
regard to their vocal quality and their discipline of performance; thus, we only can
rate it with first-class choirs.^

Later in his autobiography, Gretchaninoff revealed that the Creed so inspired

Nicholas II that he ordered it to be sung by the Court Chapel every Sunday, and paid

' Gretchaninoff. AA Life 87-88.

^ Nikolai Kashkin, "Den' moskovskih kompositorov" [Moscow Composer's Day], Moskovskie
Vedomosti, No 63, March 5(18), 1903, 4-5. trans. Sergei Shishkin, ed Philip Camp, 2002 I"he complete
text from the article is presented in .Appendix C.

114
Gretchaninoff an annual pension of 2000 mbles that lasted until the 1917 Revolution.^

Though Gretchaninoff only described the success of the Second Liturgy in terms of the

Creed, other movements from the work also demonstrate masterful creati\ ity. and w ill be

discussed in further detail in the Chapters VI and \TI.

Undoubtedly, the immediate success of the Second Liturgy further inspired

Gretchaninoff to continue to compose more sacred music, resulting in an abundance of

sacred works by the end of his career. The works composed on liturgical texts before his

departure from Russia essentially began with the first two Liturgy settings, opuses 13 and

29, and culminated in the Domestic Liturgy, Opus 79. Following his departure from

Russia, the distinct choral style Gretchaninoff developed in these liturgical works

permeated virtually every sacred choral work that he composed later in his career. While

many of the latter works, particularly the individual chomses, were translated into

English by N. Lindsay Norden, Noble Cain, and others for perfomiance in America, the

larger choral works that were composed in Russia at the very time of the greatest

achievements in Russian choral music remained virtually unknown throughout the entire

period of Soviet mle, with the exception of the few individual chomses lifted from the

larger works that were also among those translated into English.

The sacred works he composed in Russia before the revolution also include The

Seven Days of Passion, opus 58, composed in 1911; Vespers, opus 59, also known as the

All-Night Vigil, composed in 1912; the cantata Laudate Deum, opus 65, composed in

1914; the Domestic Liturgy, opus 79, composed in 1917; and thirteen smaller sacred

* Gretchamnoff, A A Life 107-108.

15
works that were composed from the 1890s through the end of the Russian monarchy.

Following his emigration from Russia. Gretchaninoff continued to compose sacred choral

music, the most notable of which included a group of "heterodox" compositions from the

1930s and early 1940s that infused the style of his Russian Orthodox heritage into

accompanied settings from the Catholic liturgy,^ including the Missa Oecumenica, Opus

142, the Missa Festiva, opus 154, Six Motets, opus 155, the Mass for Women's or

Children's Choms and Organ, opus 165, the Mass Et in Terra Pax, opus 166. composed

in 1942; and the Mass Sancti Spiritu, opus 169. Along with these works. Gretchaninoff

also continued to compose accompanied choral cantatas, a number of indi\ idual sacred

chomses for a cappella mixed choms, and a Fourth Liturgy, opus 177, as show n

Appendix D.

Significantly, Gretchaninoff was never directly involved w ith the church or a

specific church choir. As noted from his own writings discussed in Chapter IV and

presented in Appendix B, Gretchaninoff was most influenced by the secular music of his

immediate predecessors, receiving inspiration for his church music from the operas of

Borodin, Rimsky-Korsakov, and Mussorgsky. While Gretchaninoff often used source

material from the ancient Znammeny Chant, the freedom of expression inspired by the

secular music of his predecessors proved a significant factor in his sacred choral style.

Morosan notes, "...Grechaninov from his first essay in church music displayed less

^ Morosan, Choral Performance 92. Morosan lists the larger works and refers to the thirteen
smaller sacred works composed before the Revolution. The thirteen smaller sacred works correspond to
the number of sacred works Gretchaninoff lists, shown in .Appendix D.
* Holmes; Joseph Yasser, "GretchaninofTs Heterdox' Compositions," The Musical Quarterlv 28
(1942): 309-17.

116
concem for the ecclesiasfical element; his approach was clearh' that of a secular

musician, who, like Tchaikovsky, was 'looking in' on church music from the outside.'"

Morosan further adds:

By his own words, Grechaninov strived to "symphonize" the forms of

liturgical singing, building upon the traditions of Russian operatic and symphonic
classics. As Yuri Keldysh points out, "His choral scores are marked b\ a nchness
and brilliance of sonorous colors, a variety of textures, and large scale [thematic]
development.... The style of his sacred works often bears characteristics of purely
concert-like splendor. Frequently one encounters broadly unfolding soloistic
episodes that approach operatic arias in character."'^ Grechaninov obviously was
more interested in creating new forms within the field of Russian sacred music
than in restoring tradifional aesthefic relationships within the liturgy. Thus he
pioneered the technique of solo recitation with simultaneous choral
accompaniment, e.g., in his famous "Ferwm" (Creed) from Opus 29... From here
it was but a short step to employing soloists and choms w ith instmmental
accompaniment, which is what he did in Liturgia Domestica, opus 79, composed
in 1917."

The "richness and brilliance of sonorous colors" in the choral scores of Gretchaninoff

may be observed readily in the Second Liturgy, the All-Night Vigil, and the Passion Week

cycle.

The Seven Days of Passion, also known as Passion Week, opus 58, is a cycle of

thirteen chomses for a cappella mixed choir. The texts were selected from the prayer

book containing the services for each day of the Passion Week, and consist of prayers

intermingled into descriptions of the events surrounding Christ's cmcifixion and bunal.

The verv nature of this work was innovative, as Gretchaninoff was the first and onlv

composer from the new Russian choral school to select these specific texts for a choral

.Morosan, Choral Performance 242.

'° For this quote, .Morosan cites Yuri Keldysh, Rakhmaninov i ego vremia [Rachmaninoff and His
Times] (Moscow Muzyka, 1973), 385
" Morosan, Choral Performance 244

11
setting. Furthermore, Gretchaninoff freely interpreted these texts while maintaining a

style consistent with the ancient chants, several of which use actual chants as thematic

material. The most poignant example of chant setfing from the work is from the first

movement, "Behold the Bridegroom Comes," shown in Example 5.1. as the entire

stmcture of the movement is determined by the Kievan Chant melody presented in the

soprano voice. As seen in the example below, the contrary motion between the soprano

and bass lines, the pedal tone in the alto line, and the octave doubling of the bass line are

consistent traits in the style of Gretchaninoff, and readily can be seen in the Second

Liturgy composed a decade earlier, to be discussed in Chapter VI.

'' Morosan, Choral Performance 92-93.

'^ Morosan, Choral Performance 244.
'^ Vladimir Morsan, ed., "Behold the Bridegroom Comes," from Holy iVeek, Opus 58. no 1 by
Alexandre Gretchaninoff, (1911; Madison: .Musica Russica, 1995).

118
 Example 5.1 "Behold the Bndegroom Comes"
Opus 58. No. 1; Measures 1-6
Opus 58. No. 1

Soprano
-1 r
ya, aJ - Ii - Ju - ya, a] - Ii - lu 1 y»-
a, AJi-nn - nyH-», »;i-an - ny H

Alio
J il

ya. a] - Ii - lu - ya, al - Ti iii I

a, aji-jiH - nyii-*. aji-JiH • ay
7>

m^^^^m
-1—(—^ 1-
Tenor
I t I I
—t-
ya, al - Ii - lu - ya, al - Ii - lu y*-
a, aji-nH - jiyfl-a, aJi-JTB - ny • B_ a.

m
J L
Basj.
- * — # — • —
m
-¥—^—•—9—w—1^—=:—s-
• — • - =^=^
^ r- t=r 3
i
Al-Ii - lu ya. al - li lu - ya, al - Ii - lu I y«-
A;i-jiH - nyii a. aji-jiH - jivH - a, aji-JiH • Jiy H

Copyright 1995, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

In accordance with the style of the ancient chants, asNTiimetrical rh\1hms are often

used in the absence of regular metrical patterns in the Passion Week, demonstrating

correct textual declamation fitting the prose of the text in keeping with one of the points

of his "Brief Review" presented in Appendix B and discussed in Chapter I\' losing such

irregular metrical patterns, Gretchaninoff achieves a unique choral recitative setting of

the text. Though the texture essentially remains homophonic, it is also sometimes

animated by the insertion of passing tones in some voices against sustained notes in the

other voices. This simultaneous declamation of the text set upon the diverse vocal parts

moving against each other produces a distinct Russian style, as if the entire choir is

intended to represent the sole \oice of the celebrant chanting the text, as was practiced for

19
centuries. Such writing may be seen in Example 5.2 from the ninth movement of Passion

Week

Example 5.2, "Thou, Who Clothest Thyself with Light"

Opus 58, No. 9; Measures 8-12

«/

r'
^ ^
f I' 3ev
^ u r r^ 311

1_ VI mert va, na ga, nc - po gre 6cn na.

H. BH flCB MCpT Ba, HE ra, He - no rp€ 6eH Ha,
mf

im -M. ^
za. ri rJ :sr:
I Vf dev mert va, na ga, ne - po gre Ben na.
H BH ACB MepT Ba, Ha ra. HC - no rpc 6eB Ha,

^m H.
vf
BH
s
3ev
flCB
mert
McpT
i' J >'
va, na
Ba, Ha
ga.
ra.
; 0;
nc - po
He - no
grc
rpc
^

i'
6cn
6CH
^
^
S
na.
Ha,
mf
I
-o- -o-
^ :xsi
—fr~ V V —o—
4 4 i ->
J VI cicv tfjcrt va, na ga, nc - po gre 6cn na.
H BH ACB MCpT Ba, Ha ra, HC - n o rpc 6eH Ha,

English Translation: and he gazed upon Thee dead, naked, and unburied.
Copyright 1997, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

As seen in the above examples, moments of poignant lyricism set against the

backdrop of dense harmonic textures supported by the very low bass lines characterize

most of the chomses from Passion Week, only two of which are in minor keys. Other

chomses are reminiscent of the Creed from the Second Liturgy, Opus 29, incorporating a

solo voice on the body of the text supported by sustained choral textures u ith brief

responses by the choir at the end of each phrase, as in the third choms, "In Thy

Kingdom," that also incorporates an alto soloist, shown in Example 5.3.

120
 Example 5.3 "In Thy Kingdom" Opus 58, No. 3, Measures 14-18

14

^ ^ ^ ^ J — m • »« ^ m
=5^^
Bla - ihc-fti plachu5hchiyi. yako Ifyi u - le - shat - li'a.
BJia xe-HH ruiaTTinHH. «KO TWH y - I T - uiar • ca
r^_ P
^rrk I. '1 ~::r-
-r-»-
^- S
a.. Po- mfa - n i . nas. Gho - .<;po •
OH. no - Ma - HH. Hac. To - cno
P
w zc
m nr: ^
lF=r ^
a.. Po- rhia - nf. nas. Gho spo-
AH. n o - Ma - HH Hac. To - cno-
P
ice
ai.
^ ^ m Po- mfa - m..
X
-•—,.-•—
-X

GfKJ - $po-
nas.
AH. n o - Ma • HH Hac, To - cno-
P , ,
^gl —^
—TT" -xf-
^
—•—• a- -^-o-
ii:

a.. Po- mfa • n(_ ras. Gho • spo

aH. n o • M a - HH . Hac, To - cno-

English Translation
SOLO: Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
CHOIR: Remember us, O Lord.
Copyright 1996, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

Also like the Second Liturgy, Gretchaninoff employs a variety of tonal colors,

contrasts of polyphonic and homo-rhythmic textures, harmonic contrasts, and many other

stylistic devices to express various aspects of the texts in the Passion Week. Perhaps the

best example of such expression of text occurs in the tenth movement, "The Lord is

God... and the Noble Joseph," in which Gretchaninoff presents a highly innovative

setting of the ancient chant melody. In the notes to the separately published movement

by Musica Russica, Morosan adds:

In the minds of most Russian Orthodox churchgoers, the plamtive, mcHsmatic

Bulgarian Chant melody is so closely associated \\ ith the services of Jesus
Chnst's burial, that no composer would undertake to compose a new or different

12
 melody. Gretchaninoff, however, subjects the traditional tune to unusual
modulations and incorporates an innovative staccato accompaniment in the lower
voices, so as to create the effect of an instmmental funeral march.'"

This "ftineral march" image is even marked in the score by the composer, seen in

Example 5.4.

Example 5.4 "The Lord is God..." Opus 58, No. 10

Measures 26-31
Moderato assai; quasi Marcia funebre; molto maestoso.
26 PP nL atempo
»i /• J 7J~~71 I-A^L:;;-
^
f r Ir fr 4=^ * o
Bla go o braz niy_
Baa ro o 6pa3 HUA.
PP P
^
-cr ^
i ?
Bla go o braz niy_
Ejia ro o 6pa3

te^
PP

^' i' 4' ^i I ^ ^M'

P
=&:
$ %
3
Bla go o braz nyy_
Bjia ro o 6pa3 HUA.
PP
'n''i.Hi. 'i f
P\
J:
Bla go
^
o braz
f njy_
Ejia ro o 6pa3 HbrA.

English Translation: The n o b l e . . . (Joseph)

Copyright 1997, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

The All-Night Vigil, Opus 59, consists often chomses on liturgical texts from the

office of Vespers. According to Marina Rakhmanova, the foremost Russian scholar of

Gretchaninoff who resides in Moscow, the work premiered in November of 1912 by the

Moscow Synodal Choir under the direction of Nikolai Golovanov. Rakhmanova reports

'^ Vladimir Morsan, ed., "The Lord is G o d . . . and The Noble Joseph," from Holy Week, Opus ^S.
no. 10 by Alexandre Gretchaninoff, ( 1 9 1 1 ; Madison: Musica Russica, 1997).

122
further: "The premiere was not wholly successftil. It scored only a moderate success and

did not fmd a home for itself in the repertoire of the Synod Choir (apart from the

premiere, the choms sang it only once that year), nor was it included in the repertoires of

other famous choirs of the pre-Revolutionary period..." However, Rakhmanova adds thai

the work may have influenced Rachmaninoff s setting of the Vespers composed three

years later, and praises Gretchaninoffs setting as "undoubtedly vivid, bold music

intended for concert as well as liturgical performance."'^

The ten chomses from the All-Night Vigil also contain a remarkable degree of

expressive stylistic traits. While still employing the distinct style of homophonic choral

recitation, as described above, Gretchaninoff utilizes a greater degree of parallel thirds

and sixths to express the more joyful nature of these particular texts. Example 5.5 shows

the opening measures from the second choms, "Blessed is the Man," in which the parallel

movement between the bass, baritone, and alto parts in a brisk rhythm against the

sustained pedal tones of the sopranos and tenors readily can be seen.

'^ Marina Rakhmanova, liner notes, trans. Philip Taylor, Gretchaninov Vespers. Hoist Singers,
Stephen Layton, cond., CD, Hyperion, 1999, 4-6.

123
 Example 5.5 "Blessed is the Man" Opus 59, No. 2, Measures 1-4

Allegro moderato. J = 76

Soprano
m
r.^*i
f
3C

f
BU zhen.
f
f
= * = -#

3e
•-

na so
ne
Baa - xcH. He H wt Ha CO

I
/ -
Alto
U.
^
3:
• »
^ J J 'J > J ^
Bla zhen. muzh, f zhc fie f • 3e D£ SO
D Bfla XCH. Myat, H x e ue H • AC Ha CO
o /
a: Uh L»
u ?c=izt:
Tenor
? ? ^
Bto zhen. ne ( de na SO
JCCH. HC H AC Ha CO
Eaa
/

Bass ^i ^ g i i C i ' 1^
P=^
Lf F 1^, i ' ; ' 11' 1' '
-r

Bla zhen. muzh, f - zhe nc 1 - 8e na so

Ena accR. Myx, H x e HC H - AC Ha co

English Translation: Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel...
Copyright 2001, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

A great degree of textural contrasts heightened by extremes in dynamic levels

remain typical in the chomses that make up the All-Night \ 'igil. Though the chomses

never present sections of stark unison writing for only one voice part, extreme textural

contrasts are employed by setting several measures to upper voices followed by se\ eral

measures of lower voices, setting solo writing against the frill choir, and antiphonally

setting two choirs. This textural contrast also is intensified by the use of unexpected yet

effective harmonic shifts that correspond to the change in texture. Example 5.6 shows

such a contrast from the ninth choms, as a small solo group of tenors and sopranos

introduce not only a change in texture, but also a change in dynamics as well as harmonic

center.

1:4
 Example 5.6 "The Great Doxology" Opus 59. No. 9
Measures 80-85

Bu - 4 , Gho - s p o - i , mi losl
By •AH, To - cno-AH, KB JlOCTls
?T«fX3r i d ]

^ i^ M •> . 'Vi .1 =C=t:

^ ! »
V Bu-di, Gho-spo-di, mf lost,
80 By-AH, To - cno-AH, MH nocTk,

iS£fat mfn.
^ ^ ^
na.
VfHHb. aa.
«>

i iji: ^
^ ^ ^ * t

min. Bu 4, Gho spo-i. ml lost TVo - ya_ na nas,.

MMHli By Vi, To cnonB, MM - .nocTklBo-a lu HAC,.

U U^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
mfn Bu i, Gho • spo-4. Al lost TVo - ya na.
^aIH]i. By AH, To - cno^m. MH J10CTkT»0 - I ua.
PP.
^S ^
^
^^(=f=if
=;:
i^n*
^
Mn. Bu - di. Gho - $po-di. ml lost •IVoya_ na nas,.
MHHb By • AH, To - cno-iiM. MH .nocTbTno - a Ha HAC.

English Translation: Let Thy mercy, O Lord, be upon us

Copyright 2001, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

A Strong tendency toward strict formal patterns also may be seen in the chomses

that make up the All-Night Vigil. In some chomses, the same melodic motive is repeated

many times, though with each repeat, the modification of dynamics, texture, tempo, and

harmonic stmctures greatly add to the intensity of the moti\ic development. This is most

apparent in the first chorus that exploits the technique of motivic development until the

final coda, and in the second choms, where the formal stmcture can be clearK obsen-ed

in the steady thematic repetition and the use of an ".-\lleluia" refrain that is slightly

modified with each appearance, seen in Example 5.7.

125
 Example 5.7 "Blessed is the Man'" Opus 59, No. 2
Measures 74-79
atempo

Al - Ii - lu
An - JiH - Jiy

ui'«
I > .1 J
Al - Ii - lu
zsn
f '"f
y»-
AJI - ;iH - Jiy 8.

u w gif' ^ If' ' J ' t 331

V Al - Ii
Al 1.'.^
T; - lu ~~ 1 y»^
An - JiH - Jiy H I.

f
v'^ji"! ? r r
Al - li - lii 1
An - HH - ny H 1.

Copyright 2 0 0 1 , Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

The final choms from the All-Night Vigil, "To Thee, Victorious Leader,"

demonstrates not only Gretchaninoffs effective use of a double choir texture, but also his

tendency to set particularly joyous texts with rapidly moving parallel sixths against

constant pedal tones, seen in Example 5.8. In this example, the heavy ostinato in the

altos and baritones remain constant through most of the choms, that when combined with

the forte dynamic and the instmction of Maestoso and sempre pesante, effectively set the

scene of a triumphant march.

126
 Example 5.8 "To Thee, The Victorious Leader" Opus 59, No. 10
Measures 1-4
Vzbrannoy voyev63e To Thee, the Victorious Leader

Maestoso. J = 68
^ ^
Soprano
^
W ^ I »
r r r r r g
Vzhran - ooy vo yc - v6 - 3c po - 6c -
BsCpaH - Hod BO e - BO - AC no - 6e -

Alto
^

5 TcDor
pi^ r r r r T r cj ^
J ,J J =3=3C

Vzbiin - noy vo - ye vo - 3c po - 6e
B36paH - Hoft BO - e BO - AC no • 6e

Bau ^ tsp
e 31

J=,
Maestoso, cJ = 68

Soprano
P^
r^;M4

ttmprt ptuutte
Alto
j''"'""• j j U j 'i j ^ ^
Vzbran - noy vo - ye - vo de po he
6c
2 BaCpan - uoi BO - e BO AC no
O
a:
Tenor •ft''''•'»« ^ f =3= 1 xr:

Vzlxin - noy vo ye VO
BsCpau - uod BO e BO

Vzbran - noy VO ye VO 3c po 6e
B36paH - HoA BO e BO - AC no 6e
/- temprt pesante

Bau '^'••iSl.i! J i i i
F ^ — f
Vzbran noy. vo ye
B36paH HOfl. BO e

English Translation: To Thee, the victonous Leader of triumphant hosts...

Copyright 2001, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved

12'
 While Gretchaninoff gives brief references to the Passion Week and to the

Vespers in his autobiography, he gives substantial emphasis not only to his Second

Liturgy, as noted above, but also to the cantata "K\alite Boga" ("Laudate Deum"), opus

65:

In my liturgies, the Passion Week Music, the X'espers, and se\eral large
and complex choral works, I had exhausted all the technical resources of choral
writing a cappella. What was to be my next step? By what method could I
enhance the expressive power of sacred music?
My first work of instmmental church music was a psalm for choms with
orchestra. No Russian composer had as yet attempted a composition of this
nature; while in Western Europe every composer, whether important or not, had,
as a matter of course, written a Mass, a Requiem, or a Passion for voices with
instmments... I repeatedly stated, orally and in writing, that our church ritual
would gain tremendously by the introduction of the organ or physharmanica into
the church service...
The Russian Church prays daily for the reunion of the Catholic and
Orthodox faiths, but this reunion is hardly possible w ithout mutual concessions.
The mere suggestion of introducing the organ into the Russian Orthodox Church
is a major heresy in the eyes of the keepers of the traditions. Yet the Psalmist
sings:
Praise God in His sanctuary'.
Praise Him with the sound of the trumpet.
Praise Him with the psalten- and harp,
Praise Him with timbrel and dance.
Praise Him with stringed instruments and organs.
Praise Him upon the high sounding cymbals.
Let everything that hath breath praise the Lord.

Gretchaninoff then recalls his brief experiences with the worship services of the Catholic

Church, and his feelings of envy that resulted from being denied the use of instmmental

music in the Russian Orthodox Church. Then Gretchaninoff continues:

The psalm Praise Ye the Lord, quoted above, was the first rcHgious
composition I wrote with orchestral accompaniment. Later I wrote music to the

'^ Gretchaninoff, A A Life 119. The italics are Gretchaninoffs, and the passage in italics ib from
Psalm 150:1,3-6.

128
 psalms Bless the Lord, O My Soul, and The Heavens Declare the Glor\ of God.
scored for a large choms and an invisible children's choms behind the stage.
These three works were later incorporated into a cantata Laudate Deum.
performed for the first time on March 9, 1915, in Moscow under the direction of
Serge Koussevitsky. To relieve the monotony of continuous choral singing. I
later added to my cantata a psalm for tenor solo. Show Me Thy Ways, O Lord.^^

Gretchaninoff described the premier of the cantata in its complete and "final version"

with the tenor solo in Bmssels on December 7, 1932, where it received favorable

reviews.

Since the musical score to this cantata is somewhat inaccessible,'^ the following

generalizations of style can be made from the premier recording of the work b\ the

Russian State Symphonic Capella.^^ The three movements of this cantata maintain a

choral texture within the framework of a densely scored Romantic orchestral tapestry.

Even with the employment of a hidden children's choir, the contrast of choral texture is

not so prevalent here as in the earlier a cappella works; however, the overall contrast in

texture is achieved to a much greater degree through the multitude of tone colors in the

orchestra. Further, the tendency toward a rhythmic style is reflective of the joyous nature

of the text. The use of parallel thirds and sixths does not appear to be prevalent in this

setting, but rather, a tendency toward contrary motion among the voice parts. Similar to

his earlier sacred works, however, Gretchaninoff employs great contrasts in both

harmonic and melodic contours, the latter of which is also marked by moments of

powerftil lyricism shaped by extremes in dsnamics to suit the text. Moments of homo-

'" Gretchamnoff, My Life 120.

" Morosan, telephone interview, 24 August. 2002. Morosan reported that the score to the cantata
Kvlalita Boga is only available in its manuscript form in Moscow.
-° Valeri Polyansky, cond.. Symphony No. 3 and Cantata "Praise the Lord," by .Alexandre
Gretchaninoff, Russian State Symphonic Cappella, Russian State Symphonic Orchestra, Chandos, 1999

129
rhythmic choral chant in static harmony also appear, a trait consistent with the style of his

earlier a cappella works. Also like the earlier works, the prevailing choral texture is

homophonic, sometimes animated with moving parts in the choir and orchestra set

against the predominantly chordal texture.

The Domestic Liturgy, Opus 79, became the second sacred work of

Gretchaninoffs to employ instmmental accompaniment, and the first and onh Di\ine

Liturgy for the Russian Orthodox Church to be scored with instmmental accompaniment.

As detailed in Chapter II, Gretchaninoff composed the Domestic Liturgy in the middle of

the worst part of the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, when trenches and gunfire were

commonplace in the streets of Moscow. About the compositional process, Gretchaninoff

recalls, "I decided to write a simple sacred song for a single voice with piano

accompaniment, to the words 'O Holy God.' Later I added several liturgic chants to it

and put them together under the ancient name Demestvennaya, that is. Domestic

Liturgy."^' Over the next few years, Gretchaninoff orchestrated the accompaniment and

added choral numbers to the original solos. The revised version w as performed for the

first time in Paris on March 25, 1926, under Gretchaninoffs baton. Gretchaninoff

comments on the work, "The bitterness of the Hallelujah in this Liturgy is explained by

my horrible experiences during this period," and later adds, "Of the thirteen numbers of

the new version of the Domestic Liturgy, the most effective, in my opinion, is the Litany

with Threefold Responses..."" The "Threefold Responses" are from the Augmented

-'Gretchamnoff, .\/\L//f 121

'- Gretchamnoff. A/v Life 121, 123

130
Litany, in which Gretchaninoff transcribed the actual chant for the Deacon against the

instmmental accompaniment, with the rhythmic choral "Threefold Response" entenng on

the last syllable of text for the Deacon, shown in Example 5.9. Each of the eight

responses is very similar to the seventh response shown in the example below, \\ ith only

slight modifications in dynamics, harmony, and rhythm. The innovation here includes

the carefril coordination between the chant of the Deacon and the choral responses.

The overall style of the Domestic Liturgy closely resembles the style of his earlier a

cappella sacred works, utilizing mostly homophonic choral textures with extreme

contrasts in dynamics. Like the earlier works, the few joyful moments of the Di\ ine

Liturgy text are also expressed with the use of rapidly moving parallel thirds and sixths

set against sustained pedal tones, seen in Example 5.10, which shows the choral parts

from the final measures from the work.

13
 Example 5.9 "The Augmented Litany,'" Opus 79, No. 6;
Measures 55-61

ra-bov Bo - ihl - iji, bra -u - i svti-ta- go ma k - go.

XOB pa-6oB 6o - XH • Rx Spa-n - H cBH-Ti-ro Ml ce - ro

Gh6 spo - i ! po - da - hri.

To aio-iiB. wa- wk-rcfX,

P
/

J i^ j> at ^
/
^ n j n J
Gho spo - di. po - Ai • hry,
To Cao-Vfi, DO • M«-.rTyt,

1^ ^ rjXi

Gho
i ^
spo - di. po - tbi - luy,
Fo cao-tm. m> • ta-rrrk.
it

SS
a' p pp
if
V
a M ry
U V V ^
^
Ye-shchemb-Iiin-tA o pto-do-no
E • toe MO^TDIM-CJi O lUIO-AO-BO

Gbo - spo - di. po - mi - luy. Gbo spo-di. po - mi h»y.

To cao-flH. ao-HM-Jiyt, fo CnO-ilB, DO - MM

Gho - spo-di, po-ifii-luy, Gho spo-di, po - Ai luy..

To cno-an, no-Mii-.nylJ, fo aio-;iM, DO MM

Gho spo-di, po-(hi-luy, Gho spo-di, po Ai luy..

To cno-oH, no-MR-ziyA, To cnO-ON. DO - MM JTfU.

English Translation:
SOLO: ...the servants of God, the brethren of this holy temple CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
SOLO: Agam we pray for mercy...
Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. .Ml Rights Reserved.

132
 Example 5.10 Conclusion of the Liturgy,
Opus 79, No. 15, Measures 54-57
Alkgro ouestoso
ff
•J '.
niDO
U'l 11Ic
ga - ya
^
t2u na
r 'II r u\ [g!=t=F
r »
mno - ga-ya le • ta, na
cjr r
nuxS - ga-ya le - ta.
MHO ra - X Ta._iu MHO - ra - a nt - Ta. ua MHO - ra - a ne. - ra.

IZ J^ J I J - ^ J ;|| J -H J n I J ^ 4v_
^ * • \
I! U ' LLLf L f L / " C J a C J C j ' C J C j : j p ^
gar- ya_ t taTI. na mno - ga-ya Ic - ta, na mno - ga-ya le - tt.
MHO - ra - a JK - Ta, na MHO - ra • a Tie - Ta,

mno ga - ya ta, na mno - ga-ya \c ta, na moo - ga-ya le ta.

MHO ra - a. JK Ta, Ba MBo - r a - x JK Ta, Ba MHO - ra-i JK Ta,

^
r r r if ^ £ Fy=y
mno - ga ya le - ta, na
MHO - ra a /IC - ra. Ha

English Translation: for many years

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with Permission. All Rights Reserved.

Unlike the accompanied cantata discussed above, Gretchaninoff writes very

conservatively for the orchestra in the Domestic Liturgy, which generally either doubles

the choral parts or provides very simple harmonic support for the soloist. The alternation

of solo writing with choral fragments provides expressive contrast, and the various tone

colors combined with the harmonic motion in the orchestra add to the mono-toned chants

of the soloist. However, throughout many of the movements, the overall style could as

well have been written for a cappella mixed chorus, with the only loss being that of the

different tone colors provided by the orchestra, and the very few moments of idiomatic

orchestral scoring. Example 5.11 shows an example of the instrumental writing as the

orchestra accompanies the soloist on the Trisagion H\Tnn, "Holy God!" .As seen in this

example, which actually demonstrates more venturesome instrumental scoring from the

133
work, shown here for organ, the instrumental writing in the Domestic Liturgy indeed

remains very conservative.

Of the shift from a cappella to the accompanied style in the Domestic Liturgy,

Morosan writes, "By adding instruments in this work, he became the first composer to

clearly indicate his intention to write nonliturgical sacred choral music, since the

accompaniment violated the traditional prohibition of the Orthodox Church against

musical instruments of any kind." However, due to the conser\'ative nature of the

Domestic Liturgy in comparison to the accompanied cantata Laudate Deum, and

considering Gretchaninoffs outspokeimess on the issue of adding instruments to

Orthodox worship described in Chapter IV, it would appear that Gretchaninoff actually

intended this Liturgy setting to be performed during worship in the Russian Orthodox

Church. Furthermore, Morosan also notes that Gretchaninoff gave clear instructions for

omitting certain choral responses from the litanies of the Domestic Liturgy during a

concert performance.^"* Therefore, since Gretchaninoff composed choral responses to

accompany the litanies exclusively for a liturgical setting, it may be concluded that he

actually intended the work to be sung during the worship of the Russian Orthodox

Church. This view is strengthened by the fact that Gretchaninoff formally proposed the

use of instruments to the Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in December of 1917,

as discussed in Chapter IV.

"^ Morosan, Choral Performance 244.

'•* Morosan, Choral Performance 303.

134
 Example 5.11 "Trisagion Hymn" Opus 79, No. 4
Measures 9-23
Mistico

.iriii t i J ' ^f r ' ^

Svft-rfy Bo zhc Svd - tiy Krcp by, Svft . dy Bcs -
CBH-TNfl Bo xc. Caa -Tbii) Kpen KMfi, CBI -Tbifl 6C3 -

M *)

* i

f
^

Kfcp - kiy, SCfi-tiy Bes-jrneft-nly, po luy Svft - dy Bo - rhc

Kpcn - KHfl Csa-Tufl 6c3-cMcpT-Hi>ifl, no MM jryn Hac. CBR-Tfalfl Bo - xc.

English Translation: Holy God, Holy Almighty, Holy Immortal, Have mercy on us!
Copyright 2002. Musica Russica. Copied with Permission All Rights Reserved.

135
Furthermore, in his dissertation on Gretchaninoffs Missa Oecumenica, Holmes argues

that if the Revolution of 1917 had not occurred, the Russian Orthodox Church mi^ht ha\ e

eventually accepted instrumental music.^^ Ironically, according to Gretchaninoffs o\\x\

writings, had the Revolution not occurred, the Domestic Liturgy would not have been

written, though perhaps a different accompanied liturgy would have e\ entually resulted.

Even so, considering the convictions held by church officials at the time of the Domestic

Liturgy's inception, Morosan is accurate in stating, "By writing the work \\ ith

instrumental accompaniment, however, Grechaninov eliminated the possibilit}' of its

performance in the context of Orthodox worship.""^^

In summary, Gretchaninoffs overall sacred choral style essentially was based on

the ancient chant, even if specific works did not literally quote specific chant tunes. In

most instances, the thematic material of individual choruses resembled the ancient chants,

though they actually were freely composed, using the chant as source material. Thus,

Gretchaninoff typically used actual chant tunes as a starting point for thematic

development rather than as a foundation for the formal structure.'^^ In accordance with

his "Brief Review" written in 1932, asymmetrical rhythms were employed frequently in

these works to properly set liturgical prose with appropriate textual declamation. While

the harmonic motion usually was set with simple tonal progressions, great contrast was

achieved with melodic movement and thematic development. He tended to employ

highly organized formal patterns, with textural alternations that varied betw cen

-^Holmes 42
^* Morosan, Choral Performance 303.
'^ Morosan, Choral Performance 244.

136
polyphony, densely scored "symphonized" chords, and sections of homophonic choral

recitative that was sometimes animated with passing tones. Contrasts benveen upper and

lower voices, solo and choral voices, and double choirs also appear. WTiile literal

musical expressions of specific words or phrases almost ne\er appear, GretchaninotT

rather tends to express the overall mood for an entire section of text. Specifically, the

prevalence of doubled voice parts, pedal tones, and the use of parallel thirds and sixths in

brisk rhythms for texts that are joyous in nature remain common to Gretchaninoffs choral

style.

In short, Gretchaninoffs sacred choral style that continued throughout his long

career essentially began with his sacred works composed in pre-revolutionary Russia.

The general characteristics of that style, displayed in the Second Liturgy of St. John

Chrysostom, Opus 29, continued throughout his vast array of sacred works that were

composed over the next four decades. The facts that Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy

received such immediate success, and that Gretchaninoff devotes several paragraphs to

this work in his autobiography to the neglect of many of his other significant choral

works, prove the significance of the Second Liturgy in helping to establish his own sacred

choral style as well as the overall style of the new Russian choral school.

137
 CHAPTER \'I

OVERVIEW OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY

OF ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, OPUS 29

As noted in Chapter III, Gretchaninoff became only the third composer smce

Tchaikovsky to compose the Divine Liturgy as a unified musical genre, setting \ irtualK

all of the items from the Liturgy to newly composed music for the choir. Following

Tchaikovsky's famous Liturgy completed in 1878, Archangel'sky composed three

liturgies in the 1890s, followed by Gretchaninoffs first Liturgy in 1898 and the Second

Liturgy in 1902. As Archangel'sky's settings were largely based on Tchaikovsky's

pattern and style, Morosan notes the historical importance of the Second Liturgy in the

development of the new Russian sacred choral style: "Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy,

Opus 29... represents a marked evolution in terms of musical st\le and serves as an

important historical link between the settings of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff..

Gretchaninoff became the first Russian composer in modem times to create a work that

attempted to fashion the entire Divine Liturgy into a single large-scale artistic and

musical design."'

Analyses

Though somewhat based on Tchaikovsky's setting in terms of the coherency of

musical style, many movements from Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy proved ground-

Morosan, "Sergei Rachmaninoff 1.

138
breaking, paving the way for friture development that was brought to culmination in the

two major sacred works of Rachmaninoff, the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 31

(1910) and the All-Night Vigil, Opus 37 (1915). As shown in Appendix E, much of the

Second Liturgy is made up of solo chants in alternation with choral responses, as in the

litanies. This followed the regimen for the proper texts and form of the Divine Liturg\'

as discussed in Chapter III, and followed Tchaikovsky's model in setting freely composed

music to the choral responses.^ Though compared to the rest of the work, the choral

responses from the litanies are musically less interesting, mostly incorporating block

chords and other simple homophonic textures, to the Russian living in the early twentieth

century, the addition of the freely written choral responses to the solo chant most

certainly added a new dimension to the service. When the full meaning of the text is

understood, and the choral responses are placed together with the solo chants as intended,

the result may be aesthetically pleasing even to the non-Russian. The first movement of

the Liturgy, the "Great Litany" from Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy, serves as such an

example. Example 6.1 shows the opening of the Liturgy with the solo chants of the

deacon and celebrant, followed by the choral "Amen." The solo chants for the Deacon

and Celebrant are characteristic of the style for all of the solo chants: either a single note

is sung for the duration of the chant (Example 6.1, Deacon), or a slight derivation in pitch

^ Appendix E presents the entire liturgy text as set in the Second Liturgy. Throughout the chapter,
the liturgy text is referenced to Appendix E.
' Morosan, " Peter Tchaikovsky" Ixxxix. Morosan notes that Tchaikovsky was the first composer
to begin the Liturgy with freely composed choral responses to the Great Litan>. Prior to this time, the
choral responses alternated on I-V -I progressions, before the final cadential l-I\'-\'^-I progression on the
text "To Thee, O Lord," and a final progression to the major tonic chord on the ending ",\men "

139
is employed on the more important words, using the melodic formula at the approach to

the cadence (Example 6.1. Celebrant). In these chant transcriptions for the soloists, the

rhythms are not intended to be strictly observed, but rather are intended to show relatixe

duration according to the natural syllabic stress of the text.^

Example 6.1 Solo Chants, Choral Response at Beginning of Great Litany

DEACON (Stu)
Comodo.
^3=
Bli - fO - <Jo - C(. vU - <fi - ko
! "
BAJ • ro - C.10 - in. u i - AM - l u
CELEBRA-Vr (Tenorr A mm.
A MKHl..
/
BU - {o - ik) - veo - nu Tur ttvo Ol - ua i Sj- u i Svia - ti go Du b*-
B . H • tX) • UIO - K H - BO l U p - CTtO O T • OX « CU-IIt H C » » - TI TO Hj »«. ^ =^ :&:
A ifttfi.
A MHHl)

m Lu
~n-

iftfn.
MHtU

English Translation Z
DEACON: Bless, Master.
CELEBRANT: Blessed is the kingdom of the Father, and of the Son, 9
A fllfft.
and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.
Copyright 1996, 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Following each solo chant, fourteen choral responses before the final "Amen" are

set to simple chord progressions in C major, thirteen of which are on the on the text

"Lord, have mercy." Though the responses are simple and repetitious, each presents a

sHghtly modified melodic structure and dynamic intensity, until by the eleventh response,

a fortissimo climax is reached. Example 6.2 shows both the first response and the

climactic eleventh response before settling into dolce mezzo-forte for the final responses.

^ Morosan. Peter Tchaikovsky 429.

140
 Example 6.2 Choral Responses from the Great Litany

JJ /-^
ill.fi^
. " '_ .
Sopnoo

Gho spo - di. po Uiy.

ro cno - OB, no Ml jyt.
1
-pr— —4 1 8 > 8
1
Gho ipo - dl, ttd tay
ro - cno - KB, MI

Tenor

i ^ G«>6 • j p o - di, po
1 ro CDO - MX. no MB

I. "1 J #
Gho ipo • di. po AI Inv
To coo - en. no MI

English Translation:
Lord, have merc\.

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The second movement sets three antiphons connected b\ the little litanies with

choral responses in a similar style as in the Great Litany. The first antiphon follows the

nineteenth century tradifion of setting the first few verses of Psalm 103 to the melody of

the original Russian Chant in the first mode.^ Setting the actual melody in the upper

voice, Gretchaninoff preserves the original character of the chant b\ setting chordal

harmonies to it in a non-metrical form that is marked Senza misura (Example 6.3).

^ This nineteenth centurv practice is referred to in Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsk\" \c Morosan

further notes that this same hymn is best known to musicians from Tchaikovsky's I si 2 (h'crture For a
brief description of the modes of Znamenny chant, see Chapter III page 49.

141
 Example 6.3 The First Antiphon from Psalm 103

Alkgrrtto semplke.
ha p&MiepA. [Seozi ausura.

Sopcuo
: ' ' ; ; ; ,L;
r^M
Bla - go - slo - vt._
f f ' f
do - she mo - ya,
- I — K
a
r r •
m

Gbb-spo-da.
f f ' f-
bla - go - slo - veo
Baa - ro - cao - BE.- Jty - me MO - a. To - cno-AA. 6aa - ro - cjo • »ea

I ^
J J J
Bla - go - slo - vf,
• • * *

du - she mo - ya.
*

Gho-spo-da. bla - go - slo - vcn

Bna - ro - cjio - BJI, jy - me MO - a. To - cno-a*. 6aa • ro - cjio - ta
3L
''• 111 LI
Bla - go • slo - 91..
in
dxi - she mo - ya.
-' r I • i I I I
Gbo-spo-da. bla - go • tk> - Pen
Bna - ro - cno - •»,. ay - me MO - «, To - cno-ju. 6aa - ro - aio - »ca
JSL
BMI ^g 0 m m m m m

Bla - go - slo - v(, du - she mo - ya, Gho-spo-da. bla - go ilo • 9en

Ejia - ro • CJIO • BH fly - me MO - «, To - cno-jia. &na • ro - cao - BCB
Bo pOTurn |l

Pimo
iimiyl

English Translation: Bless the Lord, O My Soul, Blessed art Thou...

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserv ed.

After this brief antiphon, a little litany follows, and then the traditional second

antiphon on the first few verses from Psalm 146 is presented with the same thematic

material as the first antiphon, though voiced a fifth higher in B major, compared to the E

major tonality of the first antiphon. It is interesting here that Gretchaninoff includes the

second antiphon from Psalm 146, when most composers in both eighteenth and

nineteenth-century practice did not set the text at all, but rather set the minor doxology

that traditionally followed it as an introducfion to the tropanon, "Only begotten Son."**

As the first major choral hymn in the Second Liturgy, "Glory... Only Begotten

Son" also became one of the best-known works in the United States in its English

Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" \c

142
translation.^ Furthermore, this hymn also tends to be discussed most often in the few

English-language summaries of Gretchaninoff s sacred choral style. For example, N. P.

Brill's work praises Gretchaninoff as being one of two composers who "felt the greatness

of the second antiphon.. ."^ Brill describes this movement as "free and spontaneous..."

and "much more plural-voiced" than previous settings.^ John Seagard's thesis centers on

five hymns from the Second Liturgy, including "Glory... only Begotten Son," and dwells

on actual melodic and harmonic structures, though his work on formal schemes and

stylistic devices offers a more important contribufion to the study of the \vork.'° In his

brief description of the overall sacred style of Gretchaninoff, Morosan points out the

strong tendency toward "chant-like" motives that became e\ident in the Second Liturgy,

poinfing to "Glory to the Father... Only-begotten Son" as an example:

Between [Gretchaninoffs] first Liturgy and the second. Opus 29, a noticeable
stylistic change occurred: in the latter, Grechaninov appears to have "discovered"
the melodic potenfial of chant-like mofives. Closer examination shows, however,
that the connection between Grechaninov's motives and actual chant melodies is
very slim: it is as if the composer was shown some znamennyi melodies, distilled
from them a few essential rhythmic and melodic characteristics, and proceeded to
write an enfire setting of the Liturgy ordinary without pursuing a closer familianty
with either the sources of chant or its performance. His quasi-chant melodies,
such as the almost dancelike motives used throughout "Slava... Edinorodyi Syne"
(Glory... Only-begotten Son) and elsewhere in Opus 29 display a regularity of
meter and periodicity of structure that is seldom encountered in genuine
znamennyi chant."

' Reid, 236-237. In his survey of sixty-rv\o college and'or community choir directors, "Only
Begotten Son" by Gretchaninoff was listed with a group of other sacred Russian selections that had been
performed often.
* N.P. Brill, History of Russian Church .Music, y5<5-/9/7 (Bloomington. Ill: Nicholas P Brill,
1980) 60. The other composer that Brill mentions with Gretchaninoff is Vasily Starorussky (no dates)
" Brill 60.
'°Seagardl7, 20, 34-35, 54, 72.
" Morosan, Choral Performance 242-244

143
Example 6.4 shows the rhythmic nature of the "dance-like motives" from the beginning

of the hymn.

Example 6.4 " Glory... Only-begotten Son" Opening Measures

AUegro moderata
Soprano I (2 soli) Op. 29, Nfl 2
-Soprano II (2 soli)

Soprano 1 ap
S:
-*—•—• -—# 1-
^ r r 7 F ^ ^ ^ - t —

Sla - va Ot - tsu i St - nu i Svft - to - rau - Du - tiu, i

Cna - Ba Or - ny H Cbi - Hy H CBH - TO - My - Jiy - xy, H

^JTAUO I C2 soli)
Alto
Ig Sla - va
m Ot - tsu
^m
i Si - nu i
i W
Svi^ - to - mu - Du
^ ^
hu 1
Cna - sa O T - ny H C U - ey H CB« - TO - My - Jiy xy, H

Enghsh Translation: Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, and.
Copyright 1997, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

As pointed out in Seagard's formal analyses of the movement, this thematic

material presented in the opening measures recurs throughout this brief chorus, bringing

stylistic unity. This trait, combined with the alternation of higher and lower ranges,

contrasts in rhythmic, harmonic, and dynamic intensity, and the effective use of vocal

doublings as discussed in Chapter V, drive the music forward to the final measures of the

hymn on the text, "save us." However, the final climax is not reached before other

portions of text are also emphasized musically through similar means. One example

occurs on the text, "Who without change didst become a man," as the music becomes

softer in volume, slower in tempo, and voices are doubled in octaves, bringing a

mysterious mood to the mysterious meaning of the text, as shown in Example 6.5.

144
 Example 6.5 " Glory... Only-begotten Son" Measures 32-37
dolce
J\. P J»E_
i ^
-t-
31:

fie - pre - lozh

^
no
% i
vo - chc - lo
'V^h M, *.
vc - ctii - viy
I3E
sia. rasp my sia
HC - npe - Jjox HO BO - HC - n o - Be - MH - BUH ex. pacn HUH CI
pj> ma pocc marc.
=C
m=^ " I ^ m m d
—c—
nc - pre lozh no vo - chc - lo ve chj - vny sia. rasp nly via
HC npc noya. HO BO HC .no BC HH - VUii CH, pacn ca

^^i—i- zzn X-J- » *

^=F i r r r r m ^ ^ g — I —
nc - pre - lozh no vo - chc - lo - ve - chi - viy ill. rasp nly sia (Sfa)
HC - npe - nox no BO - MC - n o - BC - MH - BUA cu, pacn ca (CI)
rasp niy
pacn HbiA ci
-4- PL.
^ ~rr a «
-xr a -tr- —* 9— —*-
vo che io ve chi - viy sfa. rasp my
•o MC no BC MH - BUH cs. pacn HUH

English Translation: .. .who without change didst become man, and was crucified...
Copyright 1997, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

In Seagard's analyses of "Glory to the Father... Only Begotten Son," that he

inaccurately identifies as a movement from Vespers, Opus 59, instead of from the Second

Liturgy, Seagard presents an example of Gretchaninoffs frequent doubling of voice parts,

which he dubs as "a more or less orchestral treatment of the chorus."'^ In the "Editor's

Notes" to the separately published movement by Musica Russica, Morosan states that the

doubling of voices would be a feature that characterized much of the music both from

Gretchaninoff and from his contemporaries in Moscow: "Like other composers works at

the Moscow Synodal School (e.g., Kastalsky, Chesnokov, Nikolsky), [Gretchaninoff]

used a rich palette of choral textures, ranging from stark unison (sometimes doubled in

'' Seagard 54.

14^
two or three octaves...), to 'choral symposium' in eight to twelve di\erse parts."'' .-Xs

shown in Example 6.6, Gretchaninoff employs the doubling of voice parts quite

frequently at moments of dynamic climax to emphasize a specific section of text. B\

comparison with the measures immediately preceding shown in Example 6.5 abo\ e. an

example of the extremes in dynamic movement may be observed, as a rapid crescendo

occurs from pianissimo to fortissimo, that according to the composer's literal directions,

occurs within one measure.

Example 6.6 "Glory... Only-begotten Son" Measures 38-42

38

zhe, Hri - sle

nx:
Bo
in

zhe,.
m fr.
-*—t^
^ fl'T^r t ^ ^1 i
smer - u - yu smcrt po - pra - viy, ye
xe, XpH - CTC Bo xe.. CMCp - TH - K) CMepTl>_ DO - Opa - BblA, t

•• # 3" mff. • *
^ 5 ^
p i
zhe, Hri - sic B6 zhe,. smer ti - yu smcrt po - pra - v\y, ye
xe, XpH - CTC Bo xe,. CMCp - TH - K) CMCprb. HO - Hpa - BUfl, C

i' i ^ i 0 . i - i i U \'P -'v U J i i ' - ^ ^

zhe. Hri - ste 86 zhc smer - U - yu smcrt p o - pra viy, ye
xc, XpH - CTC Bo xe,. CMCp - TH - K) c M c p r b . DO - opa BUfi,
zhe, Hri - ste 36 zhe,. e
xe, XpH - CTC Bo xe,.
ff
^ ^ 33:

^ T"
—V—
zhc,.
i f= • — #

smer - ti yu smcrt po - pra

t ^—^

viy, ye
ex xc.. CMcp - TH - K) CMepTi»_ no - npa suit. c •
3S

English Translation: ...(crucified) Christ God, trampling down death by death...

Copyright 1997, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. .-Ml Rights Reserved.

'^ Vladimir Morosan, ed., "Glory... Only Begotten Son," by Alexander Gretchaninoff (1902,
Madison: Musica Russica, 1997).

146
 Following this hymn, another little litany leads into the third antiphon centered on

the text from the Beattitudes.^"^ This antiphon, similar in style to the pre\ious antiphons.

is set to a simplified chordal texture that essentially remains on D major and B minor,

with an occasional E minor chord, functioning harmonically as the tonic, submediant, and

supertonic—a harmonic emphasis that remains prevalent throughout the work, particularh

in the simpler movements. Following the seventeen lines from the Beattitudes that are

sung on the same choral recitative that is repeated for each line of text, a concluding

chordal doxology is chanted with the same chordal patterns in D major, setting up the

tonality for the third movement.

The third movement, "Come, let us worship," was also translated for performance

in English, and has become known to American choir directors since the 1930s.

Beginning with the introit verse from Psalm 95:6, this particular text served to

accompany the entrance of the clergy with the Gospel Book, an action that was seen as

symbolic of Christ's first appearing to his disciples. Morosan notes that due to this

symbolism, accompanied by the stately blessings given by the celebrant, the mood is

particularly solemn and reverent.'^ Even so, as Morosan writes, "the conventional

nineteenth-century musical setting of the text that supports this rich liturgical symbolism

''• The "beatimdes" is the common title given to the passage of scripmre from Matthcu 5 3-11, as
each verse begins with the phrase "blessed are..."
" N. Lindsay Norden's English adaptation of "Come, and Let us Worship" was arranged by
Richard Harding, and published in 1929 by The Boston Music Company
'* Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" xc-xci.

147
consisted of a simple chordal recitative... predominantly a D-minor triad and its

dominant, moving to the C-major triad and ending on its dominant. G."'

In Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy, the chorus begins immediately following the

opening exclamation from the Deacon on the text. "Come, let us worship." in an

Allegretto duple meter that may be described as an animated homophonic texture that

centers on the supertonic scale degree in D major, resembling a transposed Dorian mode

(Example 6.7). While some semblance of the nineteenth- century ecclesiastical style may

be observed in the minor tonality of the opening chords, the prevailing style is that of a

freely written, innovative movement. The tendency toward contrary motion between the

bass line and the melodic theme in the soprano line represents another feature that

characterizes a typical style trait of Gretchaninoff s part-writing, also shown in the

example below. Seaguard claims that the melodic descent of the fourth in the soprano

line in the third measure is a word-painting technique to express "fall dovvji." \et further

study of the Second Liturgy as well as the other pre-Revolutionary sacred choral works of

Gretchaninoff would reveal that this technique is so exceptional, that an\ rendering of it

would be unintentional. While Gretchaninoff diligently attempted to set effective moods

for entire sections of text, specific melodic, harmonic, or other musical schemes ucre not

shaped by any one specific word; but rather. Gretchaninoffs concem tended toward

formal aspects of the music itself—a trait that also will be seen in later movements from

the Second Liturgy.

" Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsk>," xci.

'* Seaguard 56. The literal translation of the text here is actually "fall down and bow down

148
 Example 6.7 "Come, let us worship"

Allegretto.
"Btf
Soprano
i i
Pn - i
* 0 0-
^
df - le, po - klo - nim
-rr- ^

pn
'-<

pa
1

ripH-H flH - TC, n o - KJIO - HHM CH, npH na

Alto
fe
f Pfi - i ai. te. po
^

klo - mm lik,
-• #-
i pfi - pa 3cm, pfi pa -
IlpH-H TC, no KJIO - HHM oi, H npH - na fleM, npH na •

Teoof
)b=¥
0£ m
Pfi - i of - le, po klo
X
film
^ -•—# ±
Sfk, i fffi - pa - 3em, pfi
^
pa
HpH-H AH - TC, no KJIO HHM CH, H npH-na - ncM.npH na
mf
Ban ^ ^
r If r r r
R i - i - ^i - le. po - klo
^

film
>- rJ
^
sft,
^
i pfi - pa
y p

3cm, pfi
^
pa
ripH - H - ffH - TC, n o - KJIO - HHM CH, H npH-na ACM, npu na

English Translation: Come, let us worship, and fall d o w n . . .

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Following this opening thematic material, Gretchaninoff again turns to a section

predominantly made up of doubled vocal lines for the "Alleluia," centering on the

Dominant A major chord that sets up the sustained D major tonic chord on the final
19
Alleluia, shown in Example 6.8. Two prominent stylistic traits from the overall work

may be seen from this example that also may be observed in his later choral works from

the period discussed in Chapter V: (1) doubled, or in this case, tripled octaves marked

fortissimo, a trait that often appears during more solemn moments of the liturgy; (2)

faster moving parallel thirds or sixths, a trait that often is employed to express the

sections of text that tend to be more hopeful or joyful. Furthermore, Gretchaninoff will

19
Seagard 5 5 . Seagard labels the example the "'Alleluia' figure."

149
recycle this exact thematic material in another portion of the Liturgy to provide unit\- to

the overall work, another irmovation from the Second Liturgy.

Example 6.8 The "Alleluia theme" from Movements ~3 and =6

13

I ;-i' ;
Al lu
in'O!
AJI
t Ay
1
H
jsr JIH

i ^
Ii lu 1 ya, al L
AH Jiy H a, aji AH

'TI IAl Ii lu
\l''Qi
1
ya.
Jf AJI JIH Jiy H

m 3
33= ni i: ^
Ii lu I ya, al Ii
JIH Ay H 1, aji JIH

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

After the Alleluia, the Deacon intones the text, "For thou art holy...," followed by

a three part choral response from solo treble voices in a chordal texture in D major.

Following the audible portion of the prayer uttered by the Deacon, the treble voices sing a

slow "Amen" cadence, again temporarily tonicizing the second scale degree that sets up a

repeat of the opening thematic material for the Trisagion hymn on the text, "Holy God!

Holy Almighty! Holy Immortal..." that also emphasizes the supertonic chord of E minor.

By the third repetition of this text, the music builds to a fortissimo climax that approaches

the outer ranges of the sopranos and basses in a section that is marked maestoso

(Example 6.9).

150
 Example 6.9 "Holy GodI" from Movement #3

maestoso

Enghsh Translation: us. Holy God, Holy...

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Two measures later, placed in the middle of this climactic section is a rapidly

moving chordal chant for all voices of the choir stating the doxology on the G major

subdominant chord. Next, the buoyant opening thematic material briefly returns almost

in exact repetition for the final statement of "Holy God, Holy Almighty...", followed by a

fma] fortissimo, maestoso climax that develops out of the same thematic material as the

previous climax shown in Example 6.9. Thus, the third movement closely resembles

Tchaikovsky's Liturgy in the frequent recurrence of the opening thematic matenal.

M20
particularly the use of it on the Trisagion Hymn, "Holy God

Proceeding with the order of the Liturgy as presented in Table 3.1, the next

section to follow was the psalm verses, known as the prokeimenon, sung in alternation

20
Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" xci.

151
between the choir and a priest and serving to precede the reading of scripture. .A.fter the

scripture was read, another set of psalm verses was chanted, ending with an ".\lleluia"

refrain that served as another prokeimena before the Gospel reading. Morosan states that

by the late nineteenth century, the Alleluia was treated as a conclusion to the reading of

scripture, the psalm verses were omitted, and the three-fold repetition of ".-Mleluia" was

only sung once, instead of the prescribed three times, as a refrain between the psalm

verses.•^^ Thus, similar to Tchaikovsky's Liturgy, Gretchaninoff employs the same

format for the fourth movement, with a simple three-fold "Alleluia" choral response to

the chant of the deacon who intones readings from scripture. Typical to liturgy settings

of the nineteenth century, each choral response uses similar thematic material.

A series of litanies that makes up the fifth movement concludes the first major

division of the Divine Liturgy, the Liturgy of the Word. In this movement, Gretchaninoff

presents the Augmented Litany followed by the Litanies for the Catechumens and for the

Faithful. For the most part, this movement is similar in style to the Great Litany, with

the choral response set in alternation to the solo chant portions of text, and with an

economy of harmonic motion. Here, however, Gretchaninoff rhythmically animates the

choral chant with alternating entrances and rhythms from the tenor and bass \ oices,

shown in Example 6.10.

"' Morosan, "Peter Ichaikovsky" xci

152
 Example 6.10 The Augmented Litany

26

^rp LJ' =fc =^=P ^ ^ ^

Gbo spo - di, po - mf luy, Gbo spo-di. po-
ro cno-AH, no - MH Jiyfi, To cno-jH. no-

n^^W^ Gho
To
spo - di. po - mf
cno-AH, no - MB
i 'p
luy. Gho
nyA, To
i^nu'
spo-di. po-
cno-aM. no-
i^marcato
^
^
Gho-spo-di, po-mi-luy. Gbo spo di.
To-cno-jiH, no-MH-Jiyfi. To cno ilB.

Gbo Spo-di, po M luy, Gtao-spo-di. po-mi hiy. Gho-spo-di. po-

/To cno-iiH, no jiyt. a ^ To - cno-jiH, DO-iai jyTt, y ro-coojpu no-

Gfao spo-di, po - &{ luy. Gbo-spo-di, po-

cno-jlH, DO - MH jiyft, fo - cno-in, no-
ro

English Translation: Lord, have mercy.

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The sixth movement, the "Cherubic Hymn," comprises not onh a significant part

of the Divine Liturgy, but also one of the more innovati\e choruses from Gretchaninoff

In its liturgical context, the Cherubic Hymn begins the most solemn portion of the

Liturgy, the Liturgy of the Eucharist, and accompanies many significant actions of the

clergy, including the censing, the recitation of prayers, and the Great Entrance involving

the transferal of the Communion Gifts to the altar table. The intonation of petitions b\

the Celebrant is echoed by a choral "Amen," an element that necessitates the interruption

of the Hymn before its conclusion." In the performance notes to this separate!)

published movement by Musica Russica, Morosan adds that Gretchaninoffs Cherubic

Morosan. " Sergei RachmaninofH"" K

\>3
Hymn "departs from the typical formal scheme of A. A. A'. B. found in the settings of

Bortniansky, Glinka, and many others, but develops an inno\ ative structure: .A. B. A. B.

C. The triumphant 'Alleluia's' at the end use thematic material found elsewhere in the

Divine Liturgy-another hitherto unprecedented device.""^ This "Alleluia theme" that

comprises the C section of the Cherubic Hymn as outlined by Morosan was pre\ ioush

employed in the third movement (Example 6.8 above). Another significant feature of the

Cherubic Hymn is the use of imitation that prevails in both the A and B theme from the

opening measures (Example 6.11), a somewhat rare characteristic from the Second

Liturgy as well as his later choral works from the period. The tempo marking of Lento e

misterioso precisely follows the ecclesiastical requirements to allow adequate time for all

of the necessary actions to take place, including the silent and audible chanting of

petitions by the Celebrant.

'' Vladimir Morosan, ed.. "The Cherubic Hymn" b> Alexander GretchaninofT(1^)02, Madison:
Musica Russica, 1994).

154
 Example 6.11 Cherubic Hymn

English Translation: Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The Litany of Supplication presented in the seventh movement, as in the pre\ ious

litanies, utilizes a chordal chant of the choir in C major. Unlike the previous litan>. the

style here is chordal and static with much repetition.

The eighth movement presents the most celebrated of the Second Liturgy during

the time of Gretchaninoff. the Creed. Even with all of the attention it received after its

premier. Norden offered it the highest praise fifteen years after its premier: "[The Creed]

of Gretchaninoff. for alto solo, with a choral background of eight parts is one of the

greatest, if not the greatest, that has e\er been composed in an\ countr\ at an\ time. ,.24

Example 6.12 shows a portion from the movement, demonstrating the slow 1\ moving

-•*»N.
Lindsay Norden "A Brief Study of the Russian Liturg\ and its Music " MUSIL J/ {Jujricrly 5
(JuK 1919)436.

l.V^
chordal harmon\ set against the solo voice that presents all of the text. This example also

represents the style of the entire movement.

Example 6.12 Portion from the Creed

Ate Soto

vk - af - ye gfe - hP*- Cki vo-dde-ie y« Acrt

u e • m - e rpe - xo*. D. Bo-acpe-ce a nepr
Savoao

Team

^ ^ m IXK:

«e du y«
Ay rye
»

English Translation
CHOIR: 1 acknowledge
SOLO: (for the remission of sins.) I look for the resurrection of the dead, and...
Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Even a thorough examination of the Creed might cause one to question v\h\ such

a simple movement was ever praised so highly. Perhaps this answer lies in the review of

its premier, presented in Appendix C and discussed in Chapter V. combined with the

context surrounding its inception. Performing the same work a centur\' later and from a

tradition far removed from Russian Orthodoxy, the same music would not have the same

significance. Morosan notes that compositions of the Creed during the eighteenth and

nineteenth centuries tended to be recited or sung to a simple formulaic melod> Tlic

156
earliest composed settings also invoh ed choral recitati\ es on repeated chordal pattems."'

Both Gretchaninoffs recollections about the Creed and Kashkin's review of the premier

indicated that no one ever had set the Creed with such a combination of inspiration and

genius. This inspiration and genius was demonstrated in the actual format of designating

the alto soloist on the recited monotonic chant, accompanied by the freely composed

sustained chords of the choir. The novel texture that set slowh expanding harmonic

motion from the choir was designed to intensify the musical phrase at particularl>

poignant moments of the text, and proved highly stimulating to the Russians who heard it

for the first time. Thus, this irmovative technique of solo recitation with simultaneous

choral accompaniment had much to do with its original reception. Another factor that

must have influenced its immediate and profound success was the outstanding qualitv of

its premier. In the review of the premier. Kashkin gives as much praise to the choir and

soloist as gives to Gretchaninoff, revealing that this initial performance of the Creed must

have reached idyllic proportions.

The ninth movement. "A Mercy of Peace," begins the Anaphora, the most solemn

portion of the Eucharist when the silent prayers are read b\ the celebrant and Communion

is observed. Following the deacon's exclamation, "Let us stand aright...," the choral

response in B major immediately reflects the gravity of the actions taking place, as the

melody emerges both in tripled octaves and in a low tes.situra before passing to the upper

•' Morosan. "Sergei Rachmaninoff" l\

157
voices that continue to the cadence on F# major to set the tonality for the rest of the

movement, shown in Example 6.13.

Example 6.13 ""A Mercy of Peace." Measures 1-5

Moderato.

rp^=U
Soprano
SS ^ ^ ^
:«=?=
^
=1X1 T=n=
-1—n-
lost mi ra. zha - tvu tiva - le - ni ya.
MH aocn MB pa, xep - TB7— xsa - Jie - HB 1.

Aho
M^
W }• J J N _ J J g znz
lost mf ra, zher rvu tva Ic ni ya
MH JIOCTI) trCB
pa. xep THy XBa jie HH a.

Tenor
dbt ffi
^ ^ ^ =IX=
^ ^ ^ ^ ^
lost mf ra, zber tvu— liva le ni ya-
MH AOCTh MH
P«. xep TBy— XBa jie RH a.

Bus ;^¥i{) n o- 'J J L : J

Mf lost mf ra, zher tvu tva le ni ya
MH JlOCTh MB pa. xep TBy XBa Jie HM a.

English Translation: A mercy of peace, a sacrifice of praise.

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

With two additional choral responses to the Celebrant and a cadence in D^ minor, a more

developed response then follows the Celebrant's final chant from this section of text.

The ecclesiastical purpose of this response, on the text "it is fitting and right...." is

designated to accompany the first eucharistic silent prayer that is being read by the priest

at the altar.'^^ The solemnity of the moment is reflected from the stark unison octaves that

state the melody in the soprano and tenor voices, leading into the fulh scored text "down

to the Father, Son. and Holy Spirit" that centers on C# major (Example 6.14).

26
Morosan. "Peter Tchaikovsky" \ciii.

158
 Example 6.14 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 12-16

12

m ^
/,

Do stoy
r ^r i I r
pra
^ ^

yest po - kla
=R
h - m.
m *
Ot
no no nia
CTOfi HO npa HO ccn> no - mia TH -ca- OT •

i 14 &

po - kla
li- . i
ma (] - sta
J
01
no - KM aa TH - CJ Ot •

m Do
I" r ^ r r 1 1 ^' r -M • r r ^
stoy
^

OO-
HO.
I pra ved
BCfl
rto
HO
yest
ecn>
po - kla
no - VIA HB
^

nil - li - sfa
- TM - C J
Ot
Or
flo CTOd B npa
4-
^
9 Vi li
po • kla Ot
n o • KJia HB - TH - c a Or

English Translation: It is fitting and right to bow down to the Father...

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Unison tripled octaves are then employed on the text, "Trinity," centering on D- minor,

resembling the previous unison theme shown in Example 6.13 both in its duration and

actual rhythms, though with slightly varied melodic motion. This portion of text comes

to a conclusion on F# major, after temporarily re-establishing C# major and B major in its

harmonic motion.

The final words of the silent prayer by the celebrant are then chanted aloud, on the

text "...Singing the triumphant hymn, shouting, proclaiming, and saying:" introducing

the hymn, "Holy! Holy! Holy!" For this hymn, a faster tempo with livelier rhythms are

set to the treble voices that continue in F# major, until the basses and tenors join in the

texture that eventually unifies to the fortissimo tripled parallel octa\ es on the text,

"heaven and earth are fiill of Thy glory," ending this portion of text with a Phrygian

sounding theme that rests on D# (Example 6.15). Gretchaninoff sets the next portion of

159
text, "Hosanna in the highest" with a great degree of contrast: enharmonicalK shifting

from the D# to an E-flat tonality, changing the dynamic from fortissimo to pianissimo

misterioso, changing the lively allegro moderato to the expansive Meno mosso, and

presenting static chords in second inversion that are first sounded in the lower voices, and

then echoed by the upper voices (Example 6.15).

Example 6.15 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 44-47

44 MeoomosMX.
rk.
fcSdbl kAi
1% J r J U Iii * ^ ^ —• W;^ ¥ ui i l\V"i, II
ne - bo i—zem Ifi sla - vT TVo ye ya.-
He • 6o H— acM JIB cjia - BU T B O e B._ PP mdsUriosc

^'•''1 ^ r U ' li' ^M V 0^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

ne - bo i—zem Iii sla - vl Tvo ye ya o san na
ne - 6o B acM JIB cjia - BU T B O e a.. o can BB
PP imsunaso

I^m ^
ne - bo
He - 60
i — zem
H — xu
i
Ili
JIB
—0—0:2
sla - vT TVo
cjia - BU TBO
m
ye
e
ya..
a.-
i^V' '^'^'" r w
O
O
san
CBB
na
na
PP misterioso

i^si
^ 1 -vjj^ :B=:!

^ J
%J i^V'i. it
ne - bo i—zem Ift. sli - vi Tvo - yc ya- o san na
He - 60 H— sex JIB- cna - BU TBO - e B.. o CBB na

English Translation: ...heaven and earth are full of Thy glory. Hosanna...
Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Next, Gretchaninoff begins a fugato on the text "Blessed is He who comes...",

marked for a heavier tempo with Ancora meno mosso, and introduced in the medium-

lower range of the bass section. Based on a rather long subject that adds a D to the E

tonality, the fugue eventually modulates to A^ major, though not until all voices have

presented an answer to the subject first presented by the basses. This texture builds to a

climax on a fortissimo chordal texture in a sudden shift to F minor, on the text, "Blessed

160
IS He." The F minor chords function as a minor dominant chord progressing to B^ major

to set up another enharmonic shift by changing the function of the B*' to an .V that ser\es

as the leading tone for B natural, the minor seventh of the C# major chord that is sounded

in the next measure (Example 6.16). finally ending this series of modulations with this

dominant to tonic progression in F#.

Example 6.16 "A Mercy of Peace," Measures 72-75

mfdoUe

^''iLj
tali. ^
11 "''••; V
\T=z

r^ s^ m
o san na V vish full, O - un na
o CBB Ha B Bum HHX, 0 - CBH Ra
wtfdoUt
I^U-^^M^^h i ^
O tan IU
K.. O CBB Ha

SS -a. ^ ^

na V VI sh
=C:

nih. O san
P
O san na
O :aH Ha B BUIU HHX, O CBH HB

English Translation: Hosanna in the highest

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Following the choral "Amen" responses to the Celebrant's text that accompanies

the offering of the Communion Gifts, the final hymn for the movement, "We H>mn

Thee." is sung while the prayers are silentl> uttered by the clergy to petition for the

transubstantiation of the gifts into the Body and Blood of Christ. In accordance with

liturgical order, this hymn co\ers the time required by the cierg\ to offer these pra\crs at

161
 27
the altar." Thus, Gretchaninoff appropriateh sets the h\Tnn w ith more musical

elaboration that repeats the text, this time in B major. Again, the solemn mood is

emphasized musically with sections of densely scored chordal writing that incorporates

heavy doubling of voice parts in a senza misura rhythmic st> le. showTi in Example 6.17.

Example 6.17 "A Mercy of Peace." Measures 94-95

'f^ J J ^ J T J
f'^' t i i i r r rf r ^ ^ p $
IXH

Te 6e bU • go - $k) - vim,. Te - 6e Ua - go - da - fim. Gbo - spo - di.

Tc 6e 6;ia • ro - cno-BHM,. Tc - 6€ Ana - ro - nt-pnu. To - cno-HM.

Im hi
/

^
^m
r r r
y~5=3C
ili^'n
r '^. +«
Te 6e bU - go sio-^fm,. Tc-fe bU - go - da - ffm, Gbo spo-di.
Tc 6e 6jia - ro UIO-BHM,. Tc- 6e 6jia - ro • OM- PHM, To C210-JDI.

!'''iVli'i"i'i
nj JWTJ
"'I'i'i'
sT i ' i ' I 3ac

Tc 6e bb - go - slo- Ofm. Te - 6e bU - go - da - Tim.

r
Gho
T xr
spo-di.
Te 6e 6JU - ro - cno-BHn,. Tc - 6e 6JU - ro - AS - psn. To aio-jQi
/

1 ^ ^ r 3r Jf C 31^ jr JT jr y^j zF^F

j tf roi

Te - 6c bla-go - slo-vdn.. Tc - 6e bU - go di-Hm. Gho spo-dL

Tc - 6e 6ju-ro - uio-Bmi,. Tc - 6e 6aa - ro JU-pmt, To cno-juL

English Translation: We hymn thee, we gi\e thanks to thee, O Lord

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

This hymn also includes rapid textural contrasts, movingft-omthe densit\ of the full

choir shown above, to harmonized upper \ oices alone, then to the low bass \ oices in

unison octaves. A fiigue-like development occurs on the final section of the hymn, "and

we pray imto thee, O our God." The subject, presented in the bass voices with doubled

' Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" xciii.

162
octaves (shown in Example 6.18). resembles the themafic material from the beginning of

the movement. A comparison of Example 6.18 with Example 6.14 abo\ e show s this

similarity.

Example 6.18 "A Mercy of Peace." Measures 100-103

700 Tempo T

m P 2 soli

^I moJ- Tim^J B J J Sl^,

H MO - JIBM TH CB,

^
|l i ' | l il l| I i '
i mo lim u Sf^,
H MO - JIHM TH ca,

^
s j"j J I ,1 J J - i , ^ i
r~r~r
i nw - Tim ti - si"^, i mo - lim ti Sta.
H MO - JIHM - TH - ca. H MO - JIHM TH CB,

English Translation: and we pray unto Thee, our God.

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

In the development of this theme, rapid harmonic shifts ensue. The opening measures

center on F major with swift chordal progressions between the tonic F and its sub-

dominant. B''. With a gradual crescendo, the tonality quickly shifts to D major, this time

w ith strong dominant to tonic movement in the bass, shown in Example 6.19.

163
 Example 6.19 "A Mercy of Peace." Measures 103-104

cresc. poco a poco

103
P

i *-T-
V ?' '.
1- mo Tim tl Sia. Bo zhe nash.
H- MO .IHM TH CH, Bo )Ke Haul.
I- mo Tim tl si'a,
H- .IHM TH cs.

i
MO
q:::
^
JTXT-
tUtU
nash.- mo
^
rr
Tim tl
:^te=

Sia,
un

Bo
-0 *-

zhe nash.
Ham,- MO JIHM TH CH, Bo )KC Ham.

m -«»-

nash.
i
mo
-#—#-

Tim
£
tl Sia, B6
—
' ^^
zhe nash.
Ham, MO .JIHM TH CH, Bo Mce Ham.

^ ^
l^^ -HBt^

TCK- ICTT
J^ ^J

P P
nash. 36 zhe nash.
Ham, Bo xe Ham,

English Translation: and we pray unto Thee, O our God.

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Riahts Reserved.

As the crescendo continues, the harmonic center shifts to F# with the same dominant to

tonic movement in the bass line as shown in the above example. Sustaining the tonality

of F# to the end of the movement, the harmonic writing continues a modal tendency with

the constant use of E-natural. Furthermore, at the climax. F major is briefi\ emphasized

before the final cadence in F#.

Gretchaninoffs setting of the Marian hymn "It is truly fitting" appears in the tenth

movement, following the prescribed litiirgical order. As this hymn brings with it a more

festive mood of glorification,'^ Gretchaninoff marks the tempo allegretto scmplice.

further enhancing the mood w ith li\ ely eighth-note and sixteenth-note rhythms in the

Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" l\i.

164
 29
Opening theme. The light texture is somewhat imitative, with onh a few instances of

strict imitafion of the theme in certain sections. Compared to the previous movement, the

harmonic writing is somewhat reserved, primarily centering on G major. The heavy use

of parallel thirds and sixths (Example 6.20, measures 55-56) as well as contrar\ motion

between the voice parts effecfively adds to the festive mood of the text.

Example 6.20 "It is Truly Fitting," Measures 53-56

53 sempre Mf

^m i ^
^ ^
ni ya Se ra fun, 6ez- is tie ni
HH Cc pa 4>HM, 6e3- HC rnt HH

i i ?
r—r r
Se
ur©^
6ez tie
ni ya ra fini,. IS IU
HH Cc pa 4)HM,- 6e3 HC TJie HM

^ ^
^ i ^
ne ni ya 6ez IS tie ni
He HH 6C3 HC TJie HH
a
P
^
P ^
^
1
ni fim,- Sez-
pa 4)HM,. 6C3-

Enghsh Translation: ..than the Cherubim, without defilement...

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The sudden change to the chordal, expansive style in the coda also brings an

unexpected shift to E major, setting up the choral responses to the chants by the Celebrant

in E major that continues unfil the last response which suddenly cadences in C major to

" Morosan adds that this theme is based on a demestvermyi chant, as identified by Gretchaninoff
in the originally published score by Jurgenson, Choral Performance 244 Demestvennyi Chant, dating
from the fifteenth century, did not follow the system of Eight Tones that prevailed in Znammeny chant, and
quickly fell out of use by the time of the established polyphonic n-adition, though it was still sung by the
Old Believers. In a telephone interview, Morosan further stated that without further research, the
authenticity of the demestvennyi chant employed here is disputable, though the melodic theme contains
stylistic traits of demestvennyi chant Morosan, telephone interview, 9 September 2002.

165
set the tonalit\ for the choral responses in the final litanies. Similar to the litanies, these

final choral responses are chordal and stafic. as essentialh the same music is repeated

twelve times for each response.

With a translafion in English published in 1916. "Our Father." has been well

known to college and church choir directors in the United States for several decades. '^' In

Russia, the nineteenth century tradition of singing The Lord's Prayer remained in an un-

metered recitative, as the entire congregation sang chordal chant that mostly consisted of

simple dominant and tonic chord progressions.^ As a note to this separately published

octavo by Musica Russica, Morosan remarks on the composer's highly innovati\ e setting

of the Lord's Prayer:

In the realm of Russian Orthodox church music "Otche nash" ("Our

Father") from Liturgy No. 2 represents a highly innovative setting of the Lord's
Prayer. Rather than set this text in the traditional Russian Orthodox style of
simple recitative on a few changing chordal patterns, Gretchaninoff chose a much
more melodic style, using motives reminiscent of znamenny chant. The resulting
work is much more extended and larger in scope than any previous settings of the
Lord's Prayer....^^

In contrast to the key of C major of the previous section, the famous "Our Father."

is set in E^ major to form the eleventh movement to the Second Liturgy. In a form that

may be diagramed as ABAC, the second statement of the A theme occurs with the greater

^^ Reid 236. see note 4 above. "Our Father" ft-om Gretchaninoffs Second Litur^- was published
with an English adaptation by Arthur S. Kimball in 1916 by the Oliver Ditson Co.
^' Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" xiv.
'" Vladimir Morosan, ed., "Our Father," by Alexander Gretchaninoff (1902; Madison: Musica
Russica, 1994).

166
intensity of a higher octave, allowing for increased volume that is written into the score,

and allowing for densely scored vocal parts, shown in Example 6.21.

Example 6.21 "Our Father,*' Measures 28-32

Molto maestoso.
28

i 9J
^'/'!
5?
lileb
^ j iJ. / 3
-•—0-
^
nash na - sushch
^
^
nam diies,
£ t

i
^
1
t i f f
o - sta VI nam
Xjie6 Ham na - cym HEM ABecb, H 0 - era BB HAM

*
E J J iJ.
r r r
^m J I J. .' J m ^

HTeb nash na - sushch niy dazhd nam dnes, i o sta ^i nam

Xjie6 eam na - cym HUfi jiaxflk. BaM AHCCb, H o - era BH HaM

'.\ J J .iTTi I ilTDi \i ,H

I r r 'r F = ^
a
Hieb
Xjie6
nash na
Ham na
sushch
cym
niy
HUfi
dazhd_
jiaxfli.
nam dneS,
HaM saecit,
1
H
O
o
i o
H o
X
S i 3 'ir Jl J W if 5
i 1—•

ijleb nash na - sushch ni"y dazhd. nam diieS, I o

XJIC6 Ham na - cym HKlfl flajKju.. HaM SBecb, H 0

English Translation: Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive...
Copyright 1994, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The solemn C section sets the theme in the Sopranos, strict!) imitated b\ the first
nd
tenors, and supported by unison octa\ esfi-omthe altos. 2" tenors, and baritones, w ith the

sustained pedal tones in the basses, all of which sing different parts of the text

simultaneously. This texture confinues until all parts come together on the chordal "no

izbavi nas" (but deliver us) that crescendos into the climax of the work on the text "ot

lukavago.*" (from the evil one) set in parallel octaves between the sopranos and tenors, as

shown in Example 6.22. The climax at measure 52 on the text "from the e\ il one" is

reiterated in slow and lush expansi\ e chords marked pianissimo, showing

167
Gretchaninoffs inclination toward musical form over textual concerns, as such

expressive music is employed to this least expected section of text from the Lord's

Prayer. Though this movement is less aggressive harmonically with only brief instances

of movement to closely related ke\s. the step-wise melodic movement, a feature

borrowed from znammeny chant, and the variety in texture that is achie\ ed through

octave transposition of the theme, all combined with extremes in dynamic variation

makes for a highly expressive setting of this familiar text. Ending w ith another brief "call

and response" section between the Celebrant and the choir, the nature of the text demands

that the chants of the clergy be included between the choral responses. In addition, the

effect of adding the chant that overlaps with the choral response, to be discussed in the

next chapter, adds greatly to the aesthetic quality of the final measures of the mo\ ement.

168
 Example 6.22 "Our Father." Measures 43-54

pocoriL atempo
fr—-J P

fj'''M' r i 3i:
m ^ ^
no IZ ba Vl nas 01- lu ki
HO H3 6a BH Hac OT- jiy KB
/ y* marc.
^ i =t
* rba
Tvi
in=
2 5=
t=
no IZ nas no-
HO H3 6a BH Hac HO-

r II >^
-
T—r I'. (fl" IF .f i H i
no IZ ba VI nas ot- lu ki
HO H3 6a BH Hac OT- Jiy KB

/
^
S —WT~

no iz ba VI nas ot lu ki
HO H3 6a BH nac OT ny Ka

English Translation: and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the F.vil One.
Copyright 2002. Musica Russica. Copied with permission All Riuhts Reser\cd

169
 Again following the prescribed order of the Di\ ine Liturg>'. GretchaninotT

includes in the twelfth mo\ ement a para-liturgical concerto. Morosan describes the

purpose of this movement that followed The Lord's Prayer in the Divine Liturgy:

[The Lord's Prayer] was followed by the performance of an extended motet-like

composition known as a "sacred concerto." on verses drawn most often Irom the
Psalms, or some other musical pieces drawnft"omthe feast-day repenoire or
another service, such as the All-Night Vigil: the objecfive was to till the time
while the clergy were partaking of Commimion and preparing for the distribution
of Communion to the laity.^^

The para-liturgical movement represented the only place that composers could exhibit

fi^eedomfi*ominherent restrictions. No liturgical concems needed to be considered, and

the composer even had freedom to choose the text. For this sacred concerto,

Gretchaninoff chose a troparian hymn to the Mother of God that was used in the liturgy

for special feast days in honor of Mary.'^ For this text. GretchaninofT emplo\ed the most

extensive musical treatment of the entire work, using more venturesome means to express

the text-from musically setting an overall mood for the text, to bringing emphasis to

specific words and phrases. Rhythmically, the hymn emplovs much use of irregular

metrical division in his use of chant-based themes that not only gives proper text

inflection to the language, but also sets up interpretive emphasis on specific words of the

text. Opening in G major, this through-composed hymn begins with the upper \oices in

their medium to lower ranges with gentle thematic and rhythmic motion building toward

Morosan. "Peter Tchaikovsky" xciv

^ The complete text for this movement was located at the following website designed b\ the
parish of St. John the Forerunner Russian Orthodox Church (Chesmenska\a), St Petcrshurg, Russia:
http:' en.liturg>.ru

^0
the word "prilezhno"-the word in the phrase meaning "fervently." to create the intense

mood of sorrowful pleading (Example 6.23).

Example 6.23 "Let us fervently beseech." Measures 15

Moderate e comoda
senza misura

Soprano
Pi n

K B o - go
T r ''t
ro - di - tsc
^' ^
pfi - Iczh - no
[ ^
^

ni - nc jxi - tc - tsem,
K Bo - ro po - AH - ne npH - acM. - HO HU - HC npn - re - UCM.

Alto ^0
^ ^ * 0 \ 0 0 \ 0-

cm
K B o - go
r r
fb - di - tse
r f ^
pfi - lezfa - o o ni-oc
tJ—?
pfi-te- tsem.
K Bo - ro po - AH - qe npH - ncM. - BO HU - ne npn TC HCM.

w
P
Ikaor
1 ^

K Bo - go fo - 3i tse pn Iczh - no nt - ne pfi - Ic - tsem,

K Bo - ro po - AH nc npH OCX. - HO HU - He npn - re - ncM,

B«s ^

English Translation: Let us fervently beseech the Mother of God,

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The entrance of the basses on the next secfion that calls out to .Mary, "help us. C)

Lady..." adds to the imploring mood. A harmonic progression to E major unfolds under

the modal veiling of C natural and D natural, while the music is marked "crescendo c

accelerando.'' This speeding up of tempo directly expresses the words, "hasten, for we

perish...," repeated several times. With each repetition, the music intensifies with

increased tempo, dynamic variation, and alternation of textures from unison voices to

fully orchestrated chords, until the first tenors and sopranos enter in doubled octaves to

an almost explosive climax at measures 46-47 and 53-54. shown in Example 6.24.

171
 Example 6.24 "Let us fervently beseech," Measures 39-52

English Translation: hasten, for we perish because of our many sms.

Copyright 2002, .Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reser\ed

172
 Following this climax, the music w inds down into sustained rhythms, progressing

ft-om quarter notes to half notes to tied half notes resulting in an inbuilt ritard until the

isolated bass secfion sustains the very final thread of the theme in unison octaves on B.

The next section spring-boards off of the B from the basses into an E minor tonalitv on

the text, "Turn not thy servants away," in a style that resembles the beginning measures

both rhythmically and texturally, although the tenor voice carries much of the melodv'

while the other voices sustain the notes in the chord. With the entrance of the basses that

sustain G on a pedal tone, G major is tonicized. As the hymn concludes, slower

expansive rhythms, sustained chords that utilize much vocal doubling, and thematic

movement in parallel sixths adds to the peaceftil hopeful mood expressed on the text, "for

thou art our only hope" (Example 6.25).

Example 6.25, "Let us fervently beseech," Measures 139-141

M«DO mosso.
139 dim. meno f

ma ml. na
Ma lOI, na

m df
AH
^ m p

DU na-dezh-du (
By Ha-AC^K-Ay H
m
ma
Ma
meno

ml.
MU,
f

na
Ba
m
f - ma-mr. ye at nu n a - d e z h - d u ( ma ml. ye
H - Ma-MU, e AH By Ba-flCJc-Ay • Ma MU, e

df - nu n a - d e z h - d u f"* - ma mr, na
AH ay H a - A c x - W " • Ma MU na
f - ma-ml. ye df nu na-dezh-du 1 - ma mr, ye
B • Ma-MU, AB By Ba-aex-Ay " - Ma MU, e

^m J. ^ .1 .1 ~T,i—'I'J n J ly rf^,
\
•
ma
Ma
ml..
MU,
^f Ha

English Translation: for thou art our onh hope.

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica Copied uith permission. All Rights Reserved.

173
 Liturgically, the final movement of the Second Liturgy was intended for the

Communion of the faithfiil and of the Clergy. This movement consists mostly of choral

recitative on responsive texts to the Celebrant and Deacon, in a similar stv le to the choral

responses of the litanies, though with a greater amount of text. However, Gretchaninoff

provides some glimpses of free choral writing here as well, and repeats these sections

throughout the final movement, providing stylistic unity to the last movement and to the

overall work. Example 6.26 shows the opening chorus to the final movement, on the

text, "Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord..." With only slight variation,

this same themafic material reappears between secfions of chordal recitative on the

doxology "Glory to the Father..." and on the last chorus, "preserve them for many years."

In all three sections of this movement, the mood of hope and encouragement is enhanced

with the major tonality, the allegro non troppo e molto maestoso marking that appears on

the first two secfions, and the use of parallel sixths in the tenors and sopranos against the

sustained pedal tones in the altos and basses in unison octaves.

174
 Example 6.26 End of the Liturgy, Measures 1-3

AUegro non troppo e noito marttttm

SopCIHD

Aho

Tcaor

Bass

English Translation: Blessed is he...

Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Summary

Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy uses several traits that were innovative not only in

the development of the new genre of Liturgy settings, but also in the overall scope of

Russian sacred choral music. The Second Liturgy incorporates extensive octave

doubling of voice parts particularly during the more solemn moments of the liturgy, a

trait that became typical of the composers of sacred music living in Moscow at the tum of

the century. Parallel thirds and sixths with some use of pedal tones and contrary motion

between the soprano and bass lines are often employed to express the sections of the

Liturgy that have a more hopeful and joyful mood. Irregular metrical patterns and

sections that are marked senza misura are freely employed to appropriately set the prose

of the text, that when combined with the harmonic motion, place emphasis on particularly

poignant words or syllables from the highly reverent text. Though few melodic motives

175
originate directly from ancient Znamenny Chant, much of the thematic matenal was

inspired by Znammeny chant, demonstrated in the narrow range and conjunct motion of

the melodic themes. The liturgical constancy of the solo and choral alternation may hav e

led to a greater degree of textural contrast in the pure choral movements, demonstrated in

the high degree of textural contrasts that occur between upper and lower voice parts, and

between densely scored "orchestral" choral writing with heavy doubling of voice parts

and pure unison writing for a single voice part. Further, in spite of traditional forms that

had been employed for individual movements, Gretchaninoff tended to impose outside

formal schemes from symphonic music onto several movements, even incorporating

mutually shared themes between movements to bring unity to the work. Extremes in

ranges for the low basses that often descends to a B^ as well as extremes in dynamics

often are employed, traits that would typify the style of new Russian choral school.

The harmonic style of the Second Liturgy may be generalized as using functional

diatonic harmony, sometimes veiled with elements of modalism providing minor

tonalities. As shown in Table 6.1, though few movements depart from their original key,

many temporarily modulate to other keys before retuming to the tonic, as discussed

above. In such cases, the relative minor key often prevails. In some movements,

particularly "A Mercy of Peace," rapid sequences of venturesome harmonic shifts occur,

though the return to the tonic of the movement also transpires, just as the eminent return

to the tonic key of C major for the overall work occurs for the final movement and for

most of the litanies scattered through the overall work.

176
 Table 6.1 General Harmonic Scheme of the Second Liturgy, Opus 29

Movement Tonality Final Cadence

#1, Great Litany C c
#2a, the First Antiphon E E
#2b, the Second Antiphon B B
#2c, Troparian after the Second G G
Antiphon
#2d. Little Litany G G
#2e, the Third Antiphon D D
#3, Come, let us worship D D
#4, Alleluia F A
#5, Augmented Litany C C
#6, Cherubic Hymn D D
#7, Litany of Supplication C C
#8, Creed E E
#9, A Mercy of Peace F# F=
#10, It is truly fitting G C
#11, Our Father, Only One is E" E^
Holy!
#12, Let us Fervently Beseech G G
#13, The end of the Liturgy C C

Though the tonic chord is usually prevalent in the indiv idual movements, the

dominant chord is often understated, with a tendency instead toward the submediant,

subdominant, and supertonic, each of which progress to the tonic. As shown in the table

above, a loose parallel in the harmonic style of the individual movements and the

progression of keys between the movements may be observed. Four out of the thirteen

movements are written in the tonic C major, including both the first and last movement.

Three movements are written in the super-tonic key of D Major, and three movements,

including "Our Father" in E^, are based on the mediant key rather than on the sub-

mediant key. Perhaps to make up for the understated use of dominant chords in the

individual movements, three movements are based on G major, including the penultimate

movement serving as a dominant key for the return to C major for the final movement.

177
 Based on Tchaikovsky's liturgy in terms of coherency of musical style, manv

movements from Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy proved to be ground-breaking in leading

to the ultimate development of the genre to be displayed in Rachmaninoff s \9\0 Liturgy

setfing.^^ In this category, the following movements contain a greater degree of free and

innovafive choral writing and should be menfioned, some of which became well known

in their English translafions for performances in the United States: #2, "Glory... Only

Begotten Son;" #3, "Come, let us worship," that includes the Trisagion Hymn, "Holy

God;" #6, Cherubic Hymn; #8, "Creed;" #9, "A Mercy of Peace;" #10, "It is Truly

Fitting" (Hymn to the Mother of God); #11, "Our Father" (The Lord's Prayer); and #12,

the para-liturgical concerto, "Let us fervently Beseech." In a modem-day performance of

Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy, these movements not only should be included, but also

issues of performance practice should be considered, to be discussed in Chapter VII.

'* Morosan, "Sergei Rachmaninoff 1.

178
 CHAPTER Ml

PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS FOR PERFOR\LANCE OF GRETCHANINOFF'S

SECOND LITURGY OF ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, OPUS 29

To prepare for a performance of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy of St. John

Chrysostom, opus 29, the conductor would need to consider several issues. Taking the

liturgy out of its church context for a concert performance not onlv would influence the

stylistic considerations of performance practice, but also the actual selection and/or

modificafion of specific movements. To do this wisely, one should seek out relevant

information about the intent of pre-Revolutionary Moscow composers for their liturgical

music as well as specific information about Gretchaninoffs intent for his own liturgical

music. For matters of interpretation, general information about the stylistic norms of

performance practice in Moscow in the early twentieth century should be studied to fully

understand the expressive qualities of the music and the crucial aesthetic considerations

for the performance. Further, an understanding of the historical and contextual status of

Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy not only would enhance the appreciation of this

particular work, but also would increase the general level of appreciation of Russian

Orthodox liturgical music from the new Russian choral school.

179
Concert or Liturgical Context

It would seem that any performance of the Russian Orthodox Divine Liturgv', the

most solemn orthodox service for the observance of the Eucharist, w ould require a

liturgical context. However, a thorough study of the performance practice in the earlv

twentieth century and the actual intentions of Russian composers for their litiu^gy settings

suggests that this supposition is not necessarily the case. Morosan notes that by the time

of the early 1900s, public concerts of sacred music occurred frequently and that some

liturgical compositions were premiered only in concert settings, including

Rachmaninoff s Liturgy and All-Night Vigil.^ Thus, although composers certainly

regarded liturgical considerations in composing sacred music, performance practice

indicated that they also intended their liturgical music to be performed in concert settings.

In any case, as Morosan elaborates, by the early twentieth centurv, the line that separated

the concert hall and the cathedral had become blurred:

...some churches in Moscow and St. Petersburg serviced by well-known choirs

posted the "repertoire" that would be sung at the upcoming service on a bulletin
board outside the church. Soloists from the Imperial Opera were routinely invited
to sing solos and trios in church, particularly during Great Lent and Holy Week,
when such musical selections were particularly numerous and theatres w ere
closed. The protodeacons of major cathedrals, who frequently had voices of
operatic caliber, w ere treated as cult figures with popular followings; some
cognoscenti would keep teams of horses ready outside the church, so that as soon
as the protodeacon finished the Gospel reading at one church, they could dash off
to another church just in time to hear another "star" protodeacon perform.'

' Morosan, Choral Performance 300-301.

' .Morosan, Choral Performance 301.

180
Conversely, Morosan also adds that by the early twentieth century, sacred concerts

"served as the primary vehicle by which new sacred compositions w ere premiered and

made popular." Thus, a modem-day concert performance of a Liturgv setting from the

new Russian choral school would not be out of line with the thinking of Russian

composers from the period.

However, before the period of the new Russian choral school came to an end w ith

the revolution, church officials soon reacted against this "performance" aspect of

liturgical music. By 1915, opera singers were forbidden to participate in the services, and

new rules were established for the performance of sacred music in concert settings.

These new rules restricted any movements from the Divine Liturgy relating most directly

to the Eucharist from being performed in concert halls, specifically forbidding the

performance of the Cherubic Hymn, and "A Mercy of Peace" (the Anaphora), two of the

more musically elaborate movements from the liturgy settings of the period. Morosan's

recent recommendations for performance schemes of the liturgies of Tchaikovsky and

Rachmaninoff for a concert setting, discussed below, demonstrate a similar philosophy

some eighty years later, as he not only considers aesthetic factors in his discussion but

also alludes to the religious repercussions of presenting the more solemn portions of

certain movements in a secularized concert setting.

Performing the music of Gretchaninoff introduces more issues from the

perspective of the composer's intentions relating to performance practice. With

^ Morosan, Choral Performance 88.

•* Morosan, Choral Performance 301.
' Morosan. Peter Tchaikovsky 407, Sergei Rachmaninoff'}}2.

181
Gretchaninoffs outspokeimess on the subject, combined with his exceptionally long and

producfive career, performers can retrieve a clearer idea of his desire and intent for his

liturgical music. Seaguard's thesis, completed before Gretchaninoffs death, reports from

an interview with the composer that Gretchaninoff intended his choral movements from

the Second Liturgy to be performed both in the orthodox services and in concert settings.^

Furthermore, Gretchaninoffs own instrucfions about performing the Domestic Liturgy

indicate that he intended it to be performed both in church and in concerts, as discussed

in Chapter V. Therefore, performing Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy in either a concert

setting or an Orthodox service, and either as a complete work or as indiv idual movements

lifted from the work, would conform both to the performance practice of the day and to

the composer's wishes.

Selection of Movements

Unlike the Roman Catholic mass, with significant portions of text that were

spoken, virtually the entire text of the Russian Orthodox Divine Liturgy was set to music,

often including solo chants of the priests and deacons w ith alternating choral responses,

discussed in Chapter VI. Therefore, in performing the liturgy for a concert rather than for

a liturgical service, the conductor initially would face the issue of the actual selection of

movements or modificafions of movements. Though a complete performance of the

* Seaguard 58. Seaguard states that Gretchaninoff personally informed him "that his anthems
were intended not only for the church, but also for concert performance." Given that five of the "anthems"
discussed by Seaguard are from the Second Liturgy, it is reasonable to conclude that Gretchaninoff
approved of lifting the choral movements from the Second Liturgy for performance in concerts

182
Divine Liturgy would be possible, the absence of liturgical needs eliminates the necessitv'

for the mulfiple repefifion of the same choral response to a mono-toned solo chant-a less

musically expressive aspect of the liturgy.

In his analyses of the liturgies of both Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff, Morosan

recommends omitting several portions from the settings for concert performances. In his

discussion of Tchaikovsky's setting, he bases these recommendations on aesthetic

grounds, while noting, "The nofion of 're-enacfing' this ritual in its entirety on a concert

stage is patently unacceptable to Orthodox Christians."^ Specifically, he suggests that

overly repetitive portions or lengthy sections of monotonic chant should be omitted,

adding ".. .a concert performance should focus on the psalms, hymns, and sung prayers,
Q

which contain a greater degree of musical interest." Morosan further recommends

reducing or omitting brief sections that include short choral responses intended to cover

liturgical actions, thereby affecting all of the litanies. His recommendation for a concert

performance of Tchaikovsky's liturgy is presented in Table 7.1.

' Morosan, Peter Tchaikovsky 407

* Morosan, Peter Tchaikovsky 407

183
 Table 7.1 Morosan's Scheme for a Concert
Performance of Tchaikovsky's Liturgv of St. John Chn'sostom, Opus 41*'
Movement Title Modification
No.l Great Litan>' Include opening exclamations
and choral .\men;
omit rest of Litan\
No. 2 After the first Antiphon Omit litanies; include "Glorv...
onlv Beeotten Son"
No. 3 "Come, let us worship" Include in its entiren
No. 4 Alleluia after Epistle Reading Omit
No. 5 Augmented Litany Omit
No. 6 Cherubic Hymn Include in its entiret\
No. 7 Litany of Supplication Omit all except final exclamation
of deacon and choral response'"
No. 8 Creed Include m its entirerv
No. 9 A Mercy of Peace (Anaphora) Omit solo chant after "Hosanna in
the Highest" and final "Amens"
No. 10 We Hymn Thee Include in its entirety
No. 11 It is truly Fitting (Hymn to the Omit chant and choral responses
Mother of God) at end
No. 12 Litany of Supplication Omit
No. 13 The Lord's Prayer ("Our Father") Omit chants and responses
following the first "Amen"
No. 14 Communion Hymn (Psalm 148:1) Omit ekphonetic chant at end;
include long pause at end
No. 15 End of the Liturgy Omit opening choral "Blessed is
He..." and all of litany. Include
"Blessed be the name" and "many
years" omitting solo chants and
choral doxology between the two.

Morosan's recommendations for Rachmaninoff s liturgy follow a similar rationale,

with the same aesthetic considerafion as well as an acknowledgment of the accepted

orthodox practice of performing liturgies in concert settings. He adds that some inclusion

of the solo chants of the Deacon and Celebrant is necessary: "At the same time, in order

to create some essential musical continuity, the editor [Morosan] believes that certain

' Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" Ixxxix-xcv, 407-408.

'"The text included is franslated thus: "DEACON; Let us love one another, that with one mind vvc
may confess, CHOIR: Father. Son, and Holy Spirit! The Trmity, one in essence, and undivided'" Morosan
recommends this to introduce the Creed. Morosan, Peter Tchaikovsky 10.

1S4
hymns and prayers should be introduced by the appropriate liturgical exclamations

belonging to the deacon and/or celebrant..."'' With few exceptions, Morosan's

recommendations for a performance of Rachmaninoff s Liturgy consistently parallel the

recommendafions for Tchaikovsky's Liturgy. The repefitive litanies composed primariK

to meet liturgical needs are omitted, as are the portions of text that directlv deal w ith the

Eucharist. Thus, in Morosan's performance recommendations for the liturgies of both

Tchaikovksy and Rachmaninoff, most of the solo chants and corresponding choral

responses are omitted, but enough solo chants and responses are included for the

purposes of "essential musical continuity," maintaining an appropriate balance between

these stylistically restrained portions of the liturgy and the more musically expressive

choral movements. Further, Morosan's recommendations for movement selection and

modificafion still allows the text to flow in a logical sequence. A reasonable musical

form results, as all of the significant choral movements are included and woven together

with an appropriate selection of solo chants to present a more unified and tightly knit

musical form—entirely appropriate for a concert setting.

In applying the same principles of movement selection for a concert performance

of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy, I would suggest the following recommendafions,

shown in Table 7.2.

Morosan, Sergei Rachmaninoff 332-333.

185
 Table 7.2 Suggested Performance Scheme for
Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy, (3pus 29
Movement Title Modification
No. 1 Great Litany Include m its ennretv
No. 2 Antiphons Include first antiphon and second
antiphon, Tropanan after second
antiphon. Omit all litanies and
third antiphon.
No. 3 1 "Come, let us worship" Include in its entirety
No. 4 Alleluia, Psalm pnor to Gospel Omit 1
reading
No. 5 Augmented Litany Optional: could alter solo chant to
omit choral repeats
No. 6 Cherubic Hymn Omit interruption of solo chant
and choral ".A.men" in the middle
No. 7 Litany of Supplication Omit
No. 8 Creed Include in its entirety
No. 9 "A Mercy of Peace" (Anaphora) Omit chant of celebrant and
choral "Amens" after "Hosanna
i
in the highest"
No. 10 It IS truly Fitting (Hymn to the Omit solo chants and litany of
Mother of God) supplication at end
No. 11 The Lord's Prayer Omit No 1 lb (Only one is holy)
and No. lie (Psalm 148:1)
No. 12 Para-liturgical Concerto, "Let us Include in its entirety
fervently beseech"
No. 13 End of the Liturgy Omit all solo Chants "1 believe"
and subsequent choral responses.
Include opening choral "Blessed
IS He." "Glory to the Father..."
and "this God-cherished country,
the holy faith and orthodox
Christians" followed by "Lord,
preserve them for many years."

In following Morosan's model for movement selection based on his recommendations for

the liturgies of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff, only the opening chants from the Great

Litany followed by the choral ''Amen" would be included in a performance of

Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy. However, several reasons can be given for performing

the Great Litany in its entirety. As discussed in Chapter \T, a development of the choral

"Lord, hav c mercy" response occurs, an expressiv e feature that should be considered lor

186
performance, though admittedly, the individual movement is not as musicallv significant

as other movements. However, the Great Litany also presents an important feature of the

Divine Liturgy—an entire movement based on dialogue between the clergy soloists and

the choir. Further, this movement also unifies the form harmonically w ith the strong

tonicization of C major—the key that occurs throughout the course of the work and that

retums for the final movement.

The second movement that contains the antiphons follows Morosan's model more

closely. The litanies presented in this movement may be omitted due to their repetition

and brevity. The third anfiphon presents a seventeen-fold repeat of a simple chord

progression on a choral recitafive. While the inclusion of this text from the beatitudes

might be significant for a worship service, this heavy repetition may be omitted from a

concert performance, where such aesthetic considerations may take precedence.

Following the complete performance of the third mov ement, incorporating all of

the solo chants of the Deacon and Celebrant, the fourth movement may be omitted due to

its brief and redundant nature, again following Morosan's model.

Morosan might suggest omitting the .-Xugmented Litany in the fifth movement,

consistent with his suggestions for Tchaikovsky's and Rachmaninoff s liturgies.

However, here an inclusion of this movement is suggested because this movement

presents a livelier choral response to the solo chants, as discussed in Chapter \T and

shown in Example 6.10. An effecfive compromise would be to perform this movement

without the choral repeats, necessitating an eliminafion of most of the solo chants.

Though care would need to be given to alter the text of the soloist so that a logical

187
sequence results, presenting the text in this format could be done without difficult) since

each statement of the Deacon from the Augmented litanv stands alone as an indiv idual

prayer, shown in Appendix E.

The sixth movement that presents the Cherubic Hymn should be performed as

written, with the exception of omitting the interruption of the solo chant and the choral

"Amen" that follows in the middle of the hymn, again following Morosan's model. This

interrupfion is solely intended to meet the liturgical needs for this section of the Divine

Liturgy, and, as such, should be omitted in the absence of such needs.

As the Litany of Supplication in the seventh movement should be omitted due to

its simplicity, brevity, and repetition, the next movement to follow is the Creed presented

in the eighth movement. For Tchaikovsky's liturgy, Morosan recommends an inclusion

of the introductory chant of the Deacon to accomplish a necessary harmonic modulation

into the key of the Creed.'"^ As a modulation also is necessary in Gretchaninoffs Second

Liturgy to progress from the D major tonality of the Cherubic Hymn to the E major

tonality of the Creed, the same procedure is suggested here to introduce the Creed. Thus,

the ekphonetic chant of the Deacon immediately preceding the Creed, on the text, "The

doors, the doors..." would be pitched on E, the key of the Creed.

The ninth movement, "A Mercy of Peace," should be modified only slightly,

eliminafing the solo chant in which the Celebrant offers the bread and wine with the

corresponding choral "Amen" responses. This alteration not only follows Morosan's

model but also eliminates an interruption of the movement, resulting in a tighter and

Morosan, "Tchaikovsky" xcii.

188
more unified whole. Thus, referring to the liturgy text presented in Appendix E. the

choral setfing of "Hosaima in the highest" would lead straight into "We hymn thee."

Following the hymn to the Mother of God in the tenth movement, the solo chants

and responses and the Second Litany of Supplication again should be omitted due to the

simplicity of style, brevity, and heavy repetition.

The eleventh movement, the Lord's Prayer should be included through the

"Amen" that follows "to Thee O Lord" and the chant of the Celebrant (see Appendix E).

Though the English translation of this movement presents the final measures of choral

responses in succession without intervening solo chants, performing the movement in

Russian would require the inclusion of the solo chants of the Celebrant and Deacon to

allow the text to proceed in a reasonable sequence (see Example 7.3). Furthermore, the

inclusion of the solo chants in this portion of the movement makes for an aesthetically

pleasing closure to the Lord's Prayer, to be discussed below. Given the brief and

simplistic nature of the remainder of the movement that incorporates choral recitative on

simple chordal pattems on the text "Only one is holy" and "Praise the Lord" from Psalm

148:1, these secfions may be omitted.

After performing the extensive para-liturgical concerto in the twelfth movement,

the more substantial choral portions from the thirteenth movement should be selected to

provide closure for the work. The omissions from this movement consist of block

chordal recitafives and solo chants. Though the choral portions from the final movement

also remain relatively simple in terms of style, their inclusion is necessary to bring textual

closure to the work, as well as thematic and harmonic finality as discussed in Chapter \'l.

189
Performance Practice and Interpretation

In the pursuit of information about the performance practice of the sacred choral

music of pre-Revolufionary Russia, several areas are suggested for consideration. First, a

basic understanding of the history of Russian liturgical music as discussed in Chapter III

would provide a framework for the performance practice, greatly enhancing the

appreciafion of the work from its liturgical roots. Information relating to Gretchanmoff s

individual development and his perspective and approach to the specific genre, as

discussed in Chapters II, IV, and V, would impart understanding of the common stylistic

attributes that the composer tended to employ. This would enhance the conductor's

ability to bring out these attributes unique to Gretchaninoff and the style of the new-

Russian choral school, adding to the expressiveness of the performance. Further, the

common performance pracfice that was in place at the fime of the work's inception

should be observed to present a historically informed performance.

Information about performance practice of the time may be gathered from

available information about the choral tradition in general and the specific choir that

premiered this work. As discussed in Chapter III, professional choirs emerged from the

new Russian choral school, beginning with Arkhangel'sky's Choir. Morosan notes that

the existence of professional choirs and their masterftil conductors served as "tangible

'sonorous laboratories'" for the composers who worked in close contact with them.'^

Leonid Vasil'ev, the conductor of such a private choir in Moscow, premiered

Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy in 1903. Gretchaninoffs memoirs about the preparation

'•^ Morosan, Choral Performance 129.

190
for the premier of this liturgy made clear that Gretchaninoff indeed maintained close

contact with Vasil'ev and his choir. This suggests that the choir performed the Second

Liturgy precisely according to the composer's intenfions.

Morosan notes other aspects of Vasil'ev's choir that shed more light on the

premier and, by extension, on how to perform the work today. He observes that little

information is available regarding the number of singers that most professional choirs

employed, and that individual services seldom used all of the singers in the choir, usual Iv

numbering from sixty to two hundred. However, more information is available regarding

Vasil'ev's choir. Vasil'ev occasionally gave concert performances as events that

employed all of his singers, which in 1909, numbered 180.'"* Since this lisfing occurred

six years after the premier of the Second Liturgy, the exact number that VasiTev

employed for the premier of the Second Liturgy in 1903 can only be speculated, though

other evidence also shows that the size of the 1903 choir probably was v ery large. From

the review of the premier written by Kashkin, it may be observed that X'asil'ev's choir

performed the liturgy as a "concert of sacred music," thereby employing all of his

singers.'^ Given the praise from Kashkin regarding the performance, the richness of

choral sonority from this choir must have been outstanding, a trait that is more typical of

a large choir.

Related to the choral sonority, the issue of the ideal sound for the soprano and

bass parts should be considered. Morosan notes that two choirs that serv ed as ideals of

'^ Morosan, Choral Performance 143. .Morosan cites Muzykarnyi kalendar' [Musical Calendar],
supplement to Muzykal'nyi truzhennik (1909).
'* See Appendix C for the full text of Kashkin's review.

191
choral sonority, the Moscow Synodal Choir and the Imperial Court Chapel, exclusiv ely

used boys' voices on the treble parts,'^ which would have resulted in a verv controlled

and restrained sound. However, in the early twentieth century, the issue of women's

voices versus boys' voices was debated, bringing out various responses to a poll that was

published in the Muzykal'nyi trushennik [Musical Worker] in 1907. Morosan quotes the

following response from Kastal'sky, one of the leading composers of the new Russian

choral school, who saw strengths to both sides of the issue: "'Speaking ideally, in church

choirs the clear sound of male children's voices, devoid of any passionate nuances, is

preferable to the timbre of women's voices. But... [with the presence of] mature and

knowledgeable [women] participants, who are more capable of feeling the idea and spirit

of the works being performed, the artisfic side of the performance can only gain...'"

Other composers and conductors clearly stated their preference of boys' voices, shown in

the following quote from Nikolai Kompaneisky:

From the standpoint of musical interest boys' voices have certain

substantial qualities that are preferable over women's voices. The timbre of a
boy's voice, especially an alto, has a penetrating quality that makes it easier to
emphasize a given voice part, [while] on high notes boy sopranos are much truer
to the pitch than women. [Moreover,] boys' voices have less vibrato, and the
character of the timbre is serene and devoid of passion, which is more appropnate
I Q

in a religious atmosphere.

In his support of the use of boy's voices, Aleksei Karasev (1854-1914) bemoaned the use

of women's voices:
It is highly regrettable that many mixed choirs with women's voices have
recently developed the manner of singing with vibrato... The choir sings as if in a
'* Morosan, Choral Performance 15"
" Morosan, Choral Performance 156. Morosan cites [Letters to the Editor] "Zhenshchiny y
tserkovnykh khorakh" [Women in church choirs] Muzykal'nyi trushennik 16 (1907): 5.
'^ Morosan, Choral Performance 156. Morosan cites "Zhenshchiny," 5-6.

192
 fever... Such singing, of course, cannot be conducive to the "laving aside of all
earthly cares,..."—the retreat from everyday concems to which we are invited in
the church. If to this one adds singing with "scoops" upward or downward, the
impression is that of a bad operetta or even a gypsy chorus. The singing of boys
may not always express religious feeling, but at least it does not display any
secularized emotionalism in performance.'^

Morosan reports further that the renowned musicologist and director of the Moscow

Synodal School, Stepan Smolensky, voiced both sides of the argument:

In 1905 [Smolensky] wrote to a student of his that "of course, boys' voices are
much more mobile than women's voices... But with good training there is v erv
little difference between a choir with women and a choir with boys."'^ Tw o years
later, however, in response to the questionnaire, Smolensky came out much more
strongly in favor of women's voices, with the added suggestion that boys and
young girls sing alongside mature women. "The opinion that boys' voices hav e
some special beauty which does not exist in female voices is mere prejudice," he
concludes.^'

Responding to the same poll, both Gretchaninoff and Rimsky-Korsakov

advocated their strong preference for women's voices, and wrote:

Boys are incapable of the same deep feeling and inspiration of which
adults are capable. Deep religious ecstasy, mysticism, the inspired prophetic
word,... which so often are found in our church works,... to all these things the
child's heart remains indifferent... Performance by children will always be
objecfively cool, naive (granted, occasionally beaufiful in its naivete), but in most
instances completely insufficient to convey the necessary mood, and inappropriate
to the content of what is being performed."

Morosan then adds that it is not surprising that Gretchaninoff employed Vasil'ev's Choir

to premier his works, since by 1908 and possibly earlier, Vasil'ev included a mixture of

boys' and women's voices on the treble parts.^^ Though one might doubt XasiPev's use

" Morosan, Choral Performance 156. .Morosan cites "Zhenshchiny," 10-11

^° Morosan cites M. Stepanov, "Zavety S. \'. Smolenskogo regentu tserkovnogo khora" [.S V
Smolensky's testament to a church precentor], Khorovoe i regentskoe delo 12 (l'M5). 221
*' Morosan, Choral Performance 157. Morosan cites "Zhenshchiny," 2-3.
^' Morosan, Choral Performance 157. .Morosan cites "Zhenshchiny," 3-6.
'^ Morosan, Choral Performance 157.

193
of women in his choir as early as 1903, the evidence presented above would indicate that

if women's voices had been an opfion for the premier of the Second Liturgy,

Gretchaninoff would have preferred it.

Therefore, in applying the informafion above for a modem-day performance that

incorporates women's voices, the following approach is suggested here. The conductor

should desire a high degree of flexibility from the soprano and alto sections. The

sopranos and altos should be able to sing with the restraint of a boys' choir, particularly

on the many sustained lines that often appear in high ranges and are marked pianissimo.

Such a tone would conform to an aspect of performance pracfice implied by Smolensky's

1905 statement about "good training." However, on the fuller climactic passages, the

treble voices should sing with the fiillness and warmth of tone color implied by

Gretchaninoffs statement, but still without a heavy use of vibrato. Though other

approaches to the sonority of the treble voices might also follow certain aspects of

performance pracfice, the type of sound advocated here would help to maintain both

tuning and balance against the low bass voices. With the extremely low range of the bass

part, the tendency for an overbalance of the soprano part would occur if left alone;

therefore, the soprano line, particulariy for the higher notes, w ould need to be approached

with the restraint of a boys' choir sound with minimal vibrato but with warmth of tone

color that results though the proper technique of vocal production.

The use of bass octavists to double the bass line an octave lower has become a

stylistic trait for which Russian choral music is best known. Morosan reports that until

recently, the only specific guidelines for the use of octavists available were N Lindsay

194
Norden's instrucfions that accompanied most of his n-anslated editions: "It is customary,

in Russian church music, for the octavo-bass to double the wntten bass when

harmonically possible. This is, perhaps, the chief element in rendering music, and should

be given the necessary preparafion."^^ Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy certainl> emplovs

bass octavists as notated in the score, discussed in Chapter \T. Howev er, in following

Norden's instrucfions, the doubling of the bass line should be employed even when it is

not present in the score. Informafion about the use of bass octavists in pre-Rev olutionary

Russia not only addresses this issue, but also may help to solv e problems created by an

absence of exceptionally strong and/or low basses in modem-dav choirs.

In Morosan's examination of this topic, the author estimates that the practice of

doubling the bass voice originated with the Italian composers in the eighteenth century,

who employed the vocal doubling of the bass line to parallel the Baroque European

instrumental practice.^^ By the end of the nineteenth century, octavists were a common

performance practice in Russian choirs, but still received more attention from writers and

crifics than any other section in the choir. Morosan includes the following quotes in his

discussion:

V. M. Orlov says that "[the octavist] is a rather rare voice. With his low velvety
sounds... [he] unites the entire choir and giv es it a great deal of beauty.
Oftenfimes one such voice is sufficient for a chorus. There are [however] among
them very strident [voices],... which should be controlled as much as possible.

-' Morosan, Choral Performance 152-153 Morosan notes the following, "See the editions ot
Russian choral music edited by N. Lindsay Norden. published by J. Fischer & Bro."
•'' Morosan, Choral Perjormance 153

195
 because they are not always pleasing to the ear.""^ Similar sentiments are
expressed by Kovin, who writes:

A ftjll sonority of the lowest notes in a chord sung by the second

basses and octavists tremendously beautifies and enhances the sound of
the choir (in slow tempos). [Just as a] modem orchestra introduces low-
sounding instruments into each group,... [so] in a chorus one should not
disregard the number of second basses, as some choir directors are
inclined to do for fear that the section will predominate over the others.
One can always contain basses that are singing too loudlv' and too
coarsely.^^

Perhaps the most intriguing quote used by Morosan in this discussion is from

Chesnokov's manuscript of notes:

Octave [doubling] is a luxury in the chorus, but one that is often

used without due consideration for the proper place and time; hence, it
does not produce the effect that can be achieved when it is used skillfully.
Composers today, as in former times, for some reason have not paid the
necessary attention to this mighty and effective element of the choir. This
leaves only the conductor to bring this aspect of the choir to order, using
the [octavists] in the most favorable sonorities and circumstances. With
this in mind I mark all pieces for the octavists and absolutely forbid them
to take liberties with their contra-octave tones.'

As Morosan states in his discussion, these quotations indicate that the use of bass

octavists was not only a prevalent feature of performance pracfice, but also most effective

when used with discretion, determined by the actual notes written in the score and by the

individual ranges and strengths of the bass voices. Morosan indicates that Iv an Lipaev. a

leading crific of choral performances in Russia, "frequently singled out the misuse of

^^ Morosan, Choral Performance 154 .Morosan cites X'asily M Orlov. Iskusstov tserkovnogo
peniia [The art of church singing] (Moscow n.p., 1910), p. 11.
"^ Morosan, Choral Performance 154. Morosan cites Nikolia Kovin, Vpravlenie khorom [Choral
conducting] (Petrograd: n p., 1916), pp. 5-6.
Morosan, Choral Performance 154. Morosan cites Chesnokov. MS notebook, Chcsnoko\
Arhive, Fund 36, no. 38, Glinka State Museum of Musical Culture, Mos..m

196
octavists as a cheap device characterisfic of the more vulgar church-choir practices."''^

Ironically, Lipaev even singled out Vasil'ev's Choir in 1901, describing the bass octavists

as "sometimes roaring 'as a lion after its prey."'^° Perhaps this criticism led to an

improvement in both the use and quality of the bass octavists, who evidentlv performed

tastefully in the 1903 premier of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy.

To apply this performance pracfice to a modem-day performance, the bass line

should be performed consistently solid and strong. To contradict the commonly accepted

pracfice advocated by N. Lindsay Norden, the octavist pitches should not be sung when

not scored by the composer. If the pitches composed for the octavists are attainable by a

few second basses in the choir, they should certainly sing them w henever possible,

though without forcing a tone that produces a harsh sound. However, if too few of the

second basses can reach the low pitches written for the octavists, tw o options may be

considered. First, the octavist pitches could be left out completely as the second basses

are assigned to sing a unison line with the baritones. This would still result in a solid and

warm bass sound, and though a certain degree of choral sonority would be lost, the

expressiveness inherent to the music still would be manifested in an otherwise expressive

performance. If the conductor greatly desires the octavist line, a second option may be

employed, though it would blatantly contradict performance practice. This option would

incorporate an instrument on the octavist line. By playing these pitches on an organ, for

instance, the depth of sonority would be present and better choral tuning might be

" Morosan, Choral Performance 154.

'° Morosan, Choral Performance 154. Morosan cites Ivan Lipae\, [Concert review], Russkaui
muzyka I naia gazeta 10 (1901): 314-315

197
maintained, even if the technical requirement of maintaining an a cappella choir would

be defied.

Considering aspects of restraint combined with the warmth of tone color and

depth of sonority that the premier must have demonstrated, and considering the general

informafion of the performance pracfice of the fime, the goal for the choral sound for a

performance of the Second Liturgy would be characterized by a "pyramid" structure that

was advocated by Aleksei L'vov in the nineteenth century, as discussed in Chapter III.''

Thus, the overall choral sound should be built upon the basses singing with the fullest

sound, providing the foundation for all of the other voices. A climactic section in which

all voices are mdLrked fortissimo in a homophonic texture should be performed w ith the

following dynamic levels to reflect this pyramid sound: "basses—//; tenors—/; altos—mf;

sopranos—w/?." As such dynamic markings always represent relative volume levels,

more exact dynamic markings can be indicated through the use of a numbered scale, from

one to sixteen for instance, effectively doubling the number of dynamic levels between

ppp andjff. The choir can number the dynamics from one, representing the softest

audible sound, to sixteen, represenfing the loudest sound that can be sung well. Thus, in

the same homophonic section described above, employing this numbered system of

dynamics, the parts could be marked thus: "basses—14, tenors—12; altos—10;

sopranos—8." Furthermore, as the sustained lines inherently require subtle gradations of

dynamic shading, this numbering of dynamics also would help shape phrases and add

nuances to the predominantly expansive style of the music.

" See page 63.

198
 Phrasing and dynamics form a crucial area of interpretation of Russian sacred

choral music, and Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy is no excepfion. As seen in Morosan's

quotation from Chesnokov's The Choir and How to Direct it, sensifivity to dynamic

nuances were considered of critical importance in the performance practice of the new

Russian choral school: "'Composers... indicate only general nuances, and do not depict

the mulfitude of minute and varied nuances that lie hidden in their compositions.

Therefore extracfing all the nuances and filling them with artistic content in performance

is the task of the conductor, wherein he reveals his giftedness and creativity.'""''

Therefore, with the ever-present goal of creating an effective mood for the text, the

conductor should careftilly evaluate each musical phrase in terms of textual meaning and

the musical expression of that meaning. Accented syllables, shown with an accent mark

in the transliterated text, should also be considered. Then, appropriate gradations of

dynamic nuances that extend beyond the score should be applied. As discussed in

Chapter VI, Example 6.23 presents such an example of an inherent but unwritten

crescendo toward the second syllable of the word "prilezhno," emphasizing this

particular word that is literally translated "fervently." Example 7.1 presents the same

music with the addifion of dynamic nuances written into the score on the soprano part to

be applied to each of the voice parts, determined by the same considerations discussed

' Morosan, Choral Performance 287. Morosan quotes Pavel Chesnokov, Khor i upr.ivlenie tm
[The choir and how to direct it], 2"^^ ed. (Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe Muzykalnoe lzdaterst\o. 1952) 86-
90.

199
above. Though subtle, the greatest crescendo would occur in the fourth measure on the

downbeat, emphasizing the appropriate syllable of the word "prilezhno."

Example 7.1 "Let us fervenfiy beseech." Measures 1-5.

with Addifion of Dynamic Shading
Moderato e comodo.
senza misura,
1.
Soprano

X
KBo-go ID - di - tse I ^ - Tezh - no m
ni - ne ph - te tsem,
K Bo - ro po - OT - ne npH • Jiex - HO HU - HC npH • re ncM,

i ^m
UUU i
Alto
^ ^
c-r
KBo-go
fr
ID • di ph - lezfa - no lu - ne p f i - t e - tsem,
tse
K Bo- ro po - OT ne npH - nex - HO HU - ae npH - TC - neM,

I
P
Tenor ^
^
K Bo - go fo - 3i - tse 1^ - Tezh - no ni - ne p f i - t e - tsem.
K Bo - ro po - m - nc npH - ncx. • BO HU - HC npH - TC - noM,

Bass ^m
English Translation: Let us fervently beseech the Mother of God,
Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Related to this discussion, phrasing of the sustained vocal lines also becomes

important. In these sustained phrases, singers will naturally want to insert a rest for the

purpose of taking a breath at a place that they may erroneously perceive to present the

end of a musical phrase. However, often fimes such places in the line are intended to

crescendo into another musical phrase. Insertion of a rest would interrupt this crescendo,

thereby decreasing the aesthetic and expressive quality of the music. Therefore, rests

should be inserted in alternate places, or the choir should use the technique of "staggered

breathing." Such an example may be seen in Example 7.2ft-omone of the more

expansive movementsft^omthe Second Liturgy, the Cherubic Hymn. In this example, the

200
singers, especially the sopranos, altos, and tenors, will want to insert a breath after the

fourth beat of measure 19. However, the text, the harmonic motion of the secondar>-

dominant E major chord progressing to A major, and the dynamic marking of forte on the

downbeat of measure 20 would determine that a performance should include a crescendo

to carry the line without interruption for a breath from the fourth beat of measure 19 into

the downbeat of measure 20.

Example 7.2 Cherubic Hymn, Measures 17-20.

ffi - (vf^-m - yu
TpH - cBJi-ry - K)

English Translation: and who sing the thrice-holy hymn to the life-creating Trinity
Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. All Rights Reserved.

The specific instructions left by the composer himself about the

performance of this work also should be carefully observed in the preparation process.

These instructions lie in the actual tempo performance markings added into the score.

For instance, Gretchaninoff adds the marking of lente e mysterioso to the beginning of

the Cherubic Hymn, the most solemn hymn in the liturgy employed to accompany

101
important acfions of the clergy related to the Eucharist. The tempo indication exactlv

follows the liturgical requirement allowing adequate time for the actions to take place

while the hymn is being sung, and requiring a type of sound that recentlv' was described

by Morosan as "floating" and "fimeless,"^^ an aspect that can be particularly enhanced bv

performing in a room with exceptionally live acousfics. In other movements, the tempo

indications equally signify the specific mood of the liturgy text, adding to the expressiv e

quality of the music. Further, in the performance notes to a separately published

movement from the Second Liturgy, Morosan adds that the originally published edition

included specific instructions written by Gretchaninoff for performing the Creed,

providing valuable insight:

The alto soloist should chant in a manner that is simple, without any
vibrato in the tone, and should not accentuate each syllable in a choppy manner.
The chanting should resemble that of a priest reciting the Gospel. Places marked
by accents should be emphasized slightly, as one would do when reciting poetry;
these subtle accents should coincide with the chords in the chorus. The
movement of the chords should be even and calm, almost exactly to the meter and
without the slightest hint of rushing (as if the chords were being 'fitted' to the
chanting).^'*

Another aspect that should be considered in performing the Second Liturgy would

involve the employment of the solo chants. As some recordings listed in the discography

demonstrate, the choral responses from the Great Litany, for instance, are often

performed without the chants, but such a wholesale exclusion significantly undercuts the

quality of musical expression. The damage to the logical flow of the piece is even more

obvious. As Morosan writes: "...the musical impact of a composed Divine Liturgy may

^' Morosan, telephone interview 14 September 2002.

'^ Vladimir Morosan, ed., "Let us fervently beseech," by Alexandre Gretchaninott (1902.
Madison: Musica Russica, 2002).

2o:
be lost in a concert performance if the litany responses are faithfullv' preserved without

the intervening priest's or deacon's exclamations. Nothing is more absurd than hearing

eleven Gospodi pomilui's [Lord have mercy's] in a row with no ekphonesis between

them."^^

However, without some research into the actual chants, non-Russian conductors

may not realize that the solo chants should be included in the performance. Following

the usual pracfice, Gretchaninoff does not compose the chants to be included in the

Second Liturgy. Rather, these chants were performed according to oral tradition, and

the insertion of the chants are only designated by the addition of double bar lines at the

end of a phrase or choral response scattered throughout the work, as demonstrated in

Example 7.3. As seen in this example, exclusion of the solo chants would not only result

in a less musically expressive closure to "The Lord's Prayer," but also would leave the

well-known text incomplete and illogical.

Morosan, Choral Performance 303.

Morosan states that the chants "in Rachmaninoffs time would have been pertormed according to
oral tradition, and therefore did not require anv musical notation on the composer's part ." Rachmaninoff
332-333.

!03
 Example 7.3 "Our Father," Measures 63-66
Commodo.
Ee3 pasMcpa. [Senza misura.]

fe^l^ J J J J J =ni -o-

^
A - mfn. I du bp - vi Tvo • ye-mu. Tc - 5c. Gho spo-di. A mfn.
A - MHHIi. xo - BH TBO c - My. Tc - 6e. To cno-AH. A MHHk

m A - mfn.
rI du
m «^=8=
tfiD - vi Tvo • ye-mu. Xc - 6c,
T
Gho
t==S^
spo - di A • nun.
A - HHHb. xo • BH TBO e - My. Te - 6c. fo cno-iiH. A - MMH^.

I
rr\
S ^
A - mfii.
i-
I du
nn-'>
hp - vi TVo• ye - mu. Te - 6c.
ii^^
Gho
:«:

spo-di.
S
A
:«=

Afn.
A - MHHb. H ny xo - BH TBO e - My. Te - 6e, To cno-OT. A MUHW

^
S zsn

A - fifn. I
K
du
JJJJ, iJ
hp - vi Tvo- ye - mu.
S
Te - 6c, Gho
I
spo-di.
31=
31=
31=

A - iWn
A - MHHI>. H Ay xo - BH TBO e - My. Te - 6c, fo cno-AH. A - MHHK

English Translation (with insertion of solo chants):

Solo: For Thine are the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.
Choir: Amen
Solo: Peace be unto all.
Choir: And to your spirit.
Solo: Bow you heads unto the Lord.
Choir: To Thee, O Lord.
Solo: Through the grace and compassion and love toward mankind of Thine only-begonen Son, with whom
Thou art blessed, together with Tliine all-holy, good, and life-creating Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of
ages.
Choir: Amen.
Copyright 2002, Musica Russica. Copied with permission. .Ml Rights Reserved.

Morosan's transcripfion of many of the solo chants as well as his discussions of them

offer pracfical solufions to this problem.'^ When the chants are carefully prepared and

performed sensitively, following the performance practice of a slight overiap between the

end of the solo chant and the beginning of the next choral phrase to create a seamless
38
elasticity of sound over a texture that altemates between solo chant and the full choir, a

" Morosan, Peter Tchaikovsky 429-431; Sergei Rachmaninoff }Ai)'3A2. .Morosan notes: "The
chanted petitions of the dceacon are rendered quite simply, in a stately recitative on a single note, without
much musical elaboration." Tchaikovsky, 406-407.
^* Morosan, "Peter Tchaikovsky" Ixxxix

204
very pleasing aesthetic experience resuhs both for the choir and for the audience. In a

practical sense as discussed above, the opening chants of the Deacon or Celebrant at the

beginning of movements can assist in establishing the new tonal centers for the

successive choruses.

205
 CHAPTER Vm

CONCLUSION

Gretchaninoffs Second Litugy of Saint John Chrysostom, opus 29. was conceived

out of a rich liturgical tradifion spanning over nine centuries. The Second Liturgy was the

product of a common Russian man drawn to music, beginning with his early exposure to

the liturgical music of the Russian Orthodox Church. Like other Russian composers,

everything about Gretchaninoffs early music education was shaped by the socio-political

events and policies that resultedfi-omthe reigning tsar's administrations. These political

influences also directly affected the Russian Orthodox Church throughout the nineteenth

and early twenfieth centuries, thereby affecting the church's musical tradition. The

overall waning popularity of Nicholas II in the early twentieth century also affected the

relationship that the Russian Orthodox Church maintained with the general population,

leading to the formation of radical political groups that eventually resulted in the

Bolshevik Revolufion, drasfically altering all areas of Russian society. Through all of the

events that led to the eminent revolution, Gretchaninoff remained a faithful member of

the Russian Orthodox Church and a leader of the new Russian choral school, both

acfively discussing and consistently composing church music even after the 1917

revolution.

Composing volumes of piano music, songs, children's music, operas, symphonies,

and many other works, Gretchaninoffs most enduring contribution consisted of his

sacred choral music, designating him as one of the leading composers from the penod of

!06
the new Russian choral school. Though his contributions to choral music after his

emigrafion ft-om Russia in 1925 continued to bare considerable traits of his distinct

Russian style, the sacred choral works composed between 1902 and 191 ~ make up a

unique category of his choral output. These particular works not only made up his most

important works composed for the Russian Orthodox Church, but also firmlv established

him as a distinguished composer of Russian sacred choral music.

Gretchaninoffs abundant writings on Russian liturgical music offer important

perspectives on the development of his sacred choral style and on performance practices

of the day that should be applied not only to his own music but also to all liturgical music

ft"om the period. As notedft-omprevious research, Gretchaninoffs approach to liturgical

music was that of an outsider, contributing to these newly developed sacred genres out of

his experience in secular music. This nofion is verified by Gretchaninoffs own writings,

specifically the New York Essay of 1932, "Brief Review of the Development of

Orthodox Church Singing," where he states that the primary inspirations for his sacred

music derived ft-om the operas of Mussorgsky, Borodin, and Rimsky-Korsakov.

However, without the previous nine centuries of development of Russian liturgical

singing that had recently culminated in Tchaikovsky's Liturgy, neither Gretchaninoffs

sacred music nor the sacred music of his contemporaries would have been composed.

Thus, Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy. composed during the highest point of

Russian liturgical music, retains a significant status in the corpus of Russian liturgical

music. He was inspired by such contrasting works as the Russian operas of the late

nineteenth century and Tchaikovsky's Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom, Opus 41; and

207
he was influenced to follow the ancient Russian chant style from such disparate sources

as the famous musicologist and director of the Moscow Synodal School, Stepan

Smolensky, and the somewhat contenfious joumalists and contributors to the Moskovskie

Vedomosti. Thus, Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy represents a synthesis of the many

ideas and trends among both composers and crifics of sacred music. While maintaining

the central service of the Russian Orthodox Divine Liturgy, Gretchaninoffs Second

Liturgy expands the genre to encompass both a more stylistically unified musical form

and individual movements developed into unprecedented formal schemes.

For decades, individual movementsft-omthe Second Liturgy have been

appreciated and performed in the United States in their English translation, although

information about the history of Russian sacred choral music and the accepted

performance pracfices of the new Russian choral school remained very limited. Even so,

this music was appreciated as an important contribufion to the canon of choral literature

throughout most of the twenfieth century. However, a thorough understanding of its

contextual and historical status both in the general area of Russian sacred music and in

the specific period of the new Russian choral school should significantly elevate the

status of Gretchaninoff s Second Liturgy in the canon of choral literature.

208
 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

"Alexander Gretchaninov". Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians, Ed. Nicholas

Slonimsky, 8^*" ed. New York: Schirmer Books, 1992.

Barsova, Inna, and Gerald Abraham, "Grechaninov. Alexandr Tikhonovich." Vie Sew
Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Ed. Stanley Sadie and John Tvrrell,
2"^^ ed., 20 vols. London: Macmillan, 2001.

Bazaroff, Igor. "Alexander Gretchaninoff Dean of Russian Composers." The Russian

Orthodox Journal 18 (December, 1944): 1-3, 8-10.

Brill, Nicholas P. History of Russian Church Music, 988-1917. Bloomington, IL:

Brill, 1980.

Brown, David. "Kashkin, Nikolay Dmitriyevich." The New Grove Dictionary of Music
and Musicians. Ed. Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell, 2"^^ ed., 20 vols. London:
Macmillan, 2001.

Chrysostom, St. John. "From the Exposition of Psalm XLI." Ed. Oliver Strunk, Source
Readings in Music History: Antiquity and the Middle Ages. New \'ork: WW
Norton, 1965,67-70.

Chu, George S. T. "An Interview with Vladimir Morosan." Choral Journal, 40.3
(October, 1999): 35-40.

Dolskaya-Ackeriy, Olga. "Aesthetics and National Identity in Russian Sacred Choral

Music: A Past in Tradifion and Present in Ruins," Choral Journal, 42.5
(December, 2001): 9-24.

"Dukhovny Kontsert" [The Sacred Music Concert]. Moskovskie Vedomosti.

27 Mar. 1903. No 85: 4.

Ferro, Marc. Nicholas LI, Last of the Tsars. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993

Gardner, Johann von. Russian Church Singing. Vol. I: Orthodox Worship and
Hymnography. Trans. Vladimir Morosan. New York: St. Vladimir's Seminary
Press, 1980.

Golubtsov. A. P. Iz chtenii po tserkovnoi arkheologii i liturgii. Chast 2. Liturgia

[From the readings on the Church Archaeology and Liturgy. Part 2.
Liturgical]. Sergiev Posad: 1918.

209
Gretchaninoff, Alexandre. All-Night Vigil, Opus 59. 1912. Ed. James Turk, Madimir
Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 2001.

—. "Behold the Bridegroom Comes," Op. 58, No. 1.1911. Ed. Vladimir Morosan.
Madison: Musica Russica: 1995.

—. "Come, and Let Us Worship." Text adaption, N. Lindsay Norden. Boston: Boston
Music Company, 1929. 1957.

—. "Glory... Only Begotten Son," No. 2ft-omthe Liturgy^, Op. 29. 1902. Ed. \'ladimir
Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1997.

—. "In Thy Kingdom," Op. 58, No. 3. 1911. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Madison: Musica
Russica: 1996.

—. "Kratki obzor razvitia tserkovnogo pravoslavnogo penia." [Brief Review of the

Development of Orthodox Church Singing]. Unpublished essay, 30 Sep. 1932.

—. "Let us Fervently Beseech the Mother of God," No. 12ft-omthe Liturgy, Op. 29.
1902. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 2002.

—. Liturgia Domestica, Opus 79. 1917. Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Musica Russica: 2002.

—. Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29. 1902. Ed. Madimir Morosan. Musica
Russica: 2002.

—. My Life. Trans. Nicholas Slonimsky. New York: Coleman-Ross Company, Inc.,

1952.

—. "Neskol'ko slov o 'dukhe' tserkovnykh penopenyi" [A Few Words about the 'Spirit'
of the Church motets]. Moskovskie Vedomosti. 23 Feb. 1900. No 53: 3-4.

—. "Only Begotten Son." Text adaptation, N. Lindsay Norden. J. Fischer & Bro., 1914.

—. "Our Father," No. 11ft-omthe Liturgy, Op. 29. 1902. Ed. Vladimir Morosan.
Madison: Musica Russica: 1994.

—. "Our Father." Text adaptation, Arthur S. Kimball. Oliver Ditson Co., Theodore
PresserCo., 1916.

—. "Pis'mo k izdatelu" [Letter to the Publisher]. Moskovskie Vedomosti. 26 Feb. P)()0:

No 56. 4.

210
—. "Po povodu moei stat'i 'O dukhe tserkovnykh pesnopenyi'"[Regarding my article
"About the spirit of the church motets."]. Moskovksie Vedomosti. 14 Mar.
1900. No. 73:3-4.

—. "The Cherubic Hymn," No. 6ft-omthe Liturgy, Op. 29. 1902. Ed. Vladimir
Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1994.

—. "The Lord is God... and The Noble Joseph," Op. 58, No. 1. 1911. Ed. \ ladimir
Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1997.

—. "Thou, 'Who Clothest Thyself with Light," Op. 58, No. 9. 1911. Ed. Vladimir
Morosan. Madison: Musica Russica: 1997.

Grigorov, A.I., Urusov, G. G. "O dukhe tserkovnogo penia (Po povodu stat'i
A.Grechaninova)"[On the Spirit of the Church Motets. (Regarding Grechaninov's
article)]. Moskovksie Vedomosti. 29 Feb. 1900. No. 59: 3-4.

Heylbut, Rose. "Russian Masters of Yesterday." Etude, 67 (June, 1949): 344.

Heyman, Neil M. Russian History. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993.

Holmes, Bradley A. "Missa Oecumenica and the Roman Catholic Masses of Alexandre
T. Grechaninov." D.M.A. diss., Arizona State U, 1990
Kashkin, N[ikolai]. "Den' moskovskih kompositorov" [Moscow Composer's Day].
Moskovskie Vedomosti. 5 Mar. 1903, No 63: 4-5.
Kutuzov, B. "Problemy russkogo znamennogo penia v sviazi s istoriei vozrozhdenia
katolikami gregorianskogo khorala" [Problems of Singing Znamenny Chant in
relafion to the history of revival of Gregorian Chant by Catholics], Shkola
Znamennogo Penia [School of Sign Singing]. Moscow: Spass Cathedral of
Andronic Monastery, #1. 1996. <http://vvvvvv.canto.ru>.

Meyendorff, Paul. "Russian Liturgical Worship," Monuments of Russian Sacred Music:

Peter Tchaikovsky, The Complete Sacred Choral Works. Ed. Vladimir Morosan.
Ser. 2, vol. 1-3. Madison: Musica Russica, 1996.

Montagu-Nathan, M. An Introduction to Russian Music. London: Cecil Palmer &

Hayward, 1916.

Morosan, Vladimir Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia. Madison:

Musica Russica, Inc., 1994.

—, ed. One Thousand Years of Russian Church Music: 98S-1988. Ser. 1, vol. 1.
Monuments of Russian Sacred Music. Washington, DC: Musica Russica, T^^^l.

11
—, ed. Peter Tchaikovsky The Complete Sacred Choral Works. Ser. 2, vol. 1/2'3.
Monuments of Russian Sacred Music. Madison: Musica Russica, 1996.

—. Telephone Interviews. 19, 22 May, 24 August, 9 September, 14 September, 2002.

—. "The Sacred Choral Works of Peter Tchaikovsky." Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Peter
Tchaikovsky The Complete Sacred Choral Works. Ser. 2, vol. 1/2'3. Monuments
of Russian Sacred Music. Madison: Musica Russica, 1996.

—. "The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff." Ed. Vladimir Morosan. Sergei
Rachmaninoff The Complete Sacred Choral Works. Ser. 9, vol. 1/2. Monuments
of Russian Sacred Music. Madison: Musica Russica, 1994.

—, ed. Sergei Rachmaninoff The Complete Sacred Choral Works. Ser. 9, vol. 1.2.
Monuments of Russian Sacred Music. Madison: Musica Russica, 1994.

Nikolaev, [Archpriest] Boris. Znamennyi Raspev i krukovaia notatsia kak osnova

russkogo pravoslavnogo penia [Znamenny chant and hook notation as the heart of
Russian Orthodox Church singing]. Moscow: Nauchnaia Kniga, 1995.

Norden, N. Lindsay. "A Brief Study of the Russian Liturgy and its Music." Musical
Quarterly, 5 (July 1919): 426-450.

Rakhmanova, Marina. Liner notes. Trans. Philip Taylor. Gretchaninov I espers. Hoist
Singers. Stephen Layton, cond. CD. Hyperion, 1999.

—. "Staroobriadchestvo i 'Novoe napravlenie' v russkoi dukhovnoi muzyke" [Old Belief

and 'New School' in Russian Music], Cultural Heritage of Medieval Russia in the
Tradition of Ural - Siberian Old Belief. Proceedings of All-Russian Scientific
Conference, May 17-19, 1999. Novosibirsk: M. I. Glinka Novosibirsk State
Conservatory, 1999. <http://www.canto.ru>.

Reid, Robert Addison. "Russian Sacred Choral Music and its Assimilation into and
Impact on the American A Cappella Choir Movement." D.M.A. diss.. University
of Texas, 1983.

Schwarz, Boris. Music and Musical Life in Soviet Russia. 2"^^ ed. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press, 1983.

Seagard, John. "Vocal Style of Russian Church Music as seen in the Works of Alexander
Gretchaninoff" M.M. Thesis, Universitv of Rochester, 1949

:i2
Smith, Mary Nicholas, Sister. "The Music of Alexandre Gretchaninoff in its Relationship
to Russian NationaUsm." Thesis: University of Southern Califomia. 1952.

Spector, Ivar. An Introduction to Russian History and Culture. New '^'ork: D. \'an
Norstrand Company, 1949.
Stewart, Sandra Kay. "The Life and Piano Collections of Alexander Gretchaninoff."
D.M.A. diss.. University of South Carolina, 1995.

Wilcox, Keith Dwayne. "Russian Sacred Choral and Folk Music: A Multicultural
Text for High Schools and Colleges." D.M.A. diss.. University of Missouri-
Kansas City, 1998.

Wybrew, Hugh. The Orthodox Liturgy: The Development of the Eucharistic Liturgy
in the Byzantine Rite. New York: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1996.
Yampol'sky, I.M. "Moscow." The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Ed.
Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell, 2"^^ ed. 20 vols. London: Macmillan, 2001.

Yasser, Joseph. "Gretchaninoffs 'Heterodox' Compositions." The Musical Quarterly, 28

(1942): 309-17.

Yastrebtsev, V.V. Reminiscenses of Rimsky-Korsakov, trans. Florence Jonas. New

York: Columbia University Press, 1985.

213
 DISCOGRAPHY

Dimitriak, G., cond. Gesdnge Der Russisch-Orthodoxen Kirche von Alexander

Gretschaninow [Alexander Gretchaninoff: Hymns of the Russian Orthodox
Church]. "Moscow Kremlin" Ensemble of Soloists. CanticaDuophon, 1994.

Layton, Stephen, cond. Gretchaninov Vespers. Hoist Singers. Hvpenon, 1999.

Polyansky, Valery, cond. Grechaninov, Premier Recording: The Seven Days oj Passion.
Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Chandos, 1994.

—, cond. Grechaninov, Premier Recordings: Symphony No. 1; Snowflakes, op. 4^,

Missa Sancti Spiritus, op. 169. Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Russian State
Symponic Orchestra. Chandos, 1995.

—, cond. Grechaninov: Liturgia Domestica, op. 79. Russian State Symphonic Cappella.
Russian State Symphonic Orchestra. Chandos, 1995.

—, cond. Grechaninov: Mass Et in terra pax;' Symphony No. 2. Russian State

Symphonic Cappella. Russian State Symphonic Orchestra. Chandos, 1996.

—, cond. Grechaninov: Symphony No. 4; Cello Concerto: Missa Festiva..

Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Russian State Symphonic Orchestra.
Chandos, 1997.

—, cond. Grechaninov: Symphony No. 3: Cantata 'Praise the Lord. ' Russian State
Symphonic Cappella. Russian State Svmphonic Orchestra. Chandos, 1999.

—, cond. Grechaninov, Premier Recordings: Symphony No. 5: Missa Oecumenica.

Russian State Symphonic Cappella. Russian State Symphonic Orchestra.
Chandos, 2000.

214
 APPENDIX A

THE MOSKOVSKIE VEDOMOSTI PUBLICATIONS OF 1900

The following excerpts are complete translations of the published correspondence

that took place between Gretchaninoff, two lay composers of church music identified as

A. I. Grigorov and G. G. Urusov, and the editorial staff of the Moskovskie Vedomosti, a

daily newspaper in Moscow. These edifions of the Moskovskie Vedomosti w ere located

in the State Historical Public Library in Moscow, translated by Sergei Shishkin and

edited by Philip Camp. This is the first complete English translation of these articles.

Equivalent to the "letters to the editor" section of contemporary newspapers in

the United States, the content of these articles provides much insight into Gretchaninoffs

views relating to liturgical music at the turn of the twentieth century, just two years pnor

to his complefion of the Second Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29. Fifty years

later, Gretchaninoff would discuss the content of these articles in his autobiography. My

Life. Given the significance that Gretchaninoff gives to these articles in his

autobiography, it can be concluded that these publications carried much weight in the

development of the new Russian choral school as well as his own compositional style.

Scholars of Russian sacred music have referred to these articles based on Gretchaninoffs

recollection of them ft-om his autobiography; however, a comparison between the actual

articles and Gretchaninoffs autobiography reveals significant discrepancies.

Consequently, observation of the actual articles leads to new conclusions about his

215
stylisfic development. For a complete discussion of the significance of the Moskovskie

Vedomosti publications of 1900, see Chapter IV.

A. T. Gretchaninoff, "Neskol'ko slov o 'dukhe' tserkovnykh penopenyi" [.\ Few

Words about the 'Spirit' of the Church motets], Moskovskie Vedomosti, Xo 53.
February 23, 1900,3-4.

In the reviews on the concerts of sacred music, we often hear or read that a sacred

work is not "ecclesiastical."' It is often quite difficult to understand what the critics mean

by the word "ecclesiastical," and how they would interpret the "spirit" of the church

motets. Some suggest that such church music refers only to music that resembles the

compositions of Bortniansky, Vedel, Sarti and so on: others consider this church music

only to be music that reminds them of the obikhod; finally, there is a third group of

people, who, by some miracle, manage to reconcile the ideals of obikhod singing with the

music of the above mentioned masters.

The first group, the admirers of semi-Italian, semi-German music of our church,

is more sincere than the other two groups. They say: "We like the sweetness in the

composifions of Bortniansky and Sarti. It inspires our souls, and it seems to us that the

church does not need better music. Dear composers, wnte in their style; that would be

good and ftilly 'in the spirit of the church.'"

We may agree or disagree with these admirers but we cannot totally ignore their

tastes. Of course, the prettiness and sweetness alone are not enough to illustrate the

richest content of the sacred text; however, a composer cannot neglect that prettiness.

' The original Russian word translated "ecclesiastical" is "tserkovnost." from the root "tserkov,"
meaning "church." "Tserkovnost" literally would mean anything from or belonging to church

216
 The second group is the admirers of the obikhod, specifically the obikhod

arranged almost exclusively in theft-amesof the harmony on the \'\ 4^^ and 5'^ degree. "

They are the so-called ascefics of our church music. According to this group of admirers,

there is no need for the composition of sacred music at all. According to their opinion, all

that is required is an arrangementft-omthe obikhod, or an arrangement that onlv follows

this well-known pattem. It is impossible to compose music that they w ould consider in

the "spirit" of the Church.

While we can understand the admirers of the obikhod, the final group is an

enigma for us. These people regard the obikhod as the ideal of church music, but at the

same time, they regard the compositions of Bortniansky, Sarti, Vedel, and their imitators

as the height of ecclesiasticism.^ What does the music of these composers and the

obikhod have in common? What is the relationship between them? Nobody knows.

Probably, they themselves do not know. To compose in a way that will satisfy the

"churchliness" requirements of this group of experts actually may not be difficult.

However, we doubt that the ambition of the serious and true composer will be satisfied in

gaining such admirers.

All of these amateurs and experts talk about "ecclesiasficism"^ and about "what is

in the spirit" and "what is not in the spirit" of the church motets. However, they do not

give definitions of these terms. It is not enough to say that something "is like" or "is not

^ Here, Gretchaninoff refers to Aleksei L'vovs Obikhod of 1848 that harmonized all of the chants
using primarily the tonic, subdominant. and dominant chords, rather than the pre\ lously known Obikhod
that only presented monophonic chants. See Chapter III, page 61, n49.
^ See note 1.
* See note 1.

217
like" an ideal, which is often imaginary. However, this issue is so important that we must

examine it.

'What do we need? What music do we really have to consider as the ideal for our

Orthodox church? Where can we find a standard for churchliness and for the spirit of the

church motets?

Nonetheless, we have this standard and it is my deep conviction that it is the

truest standard. This standard is the correspondence of the musical contents of the

composition to the text's contents. The more we have that conformity in the work, the

more it is in the spirit of the Church.

Let us try to clarify it.

The text of a sacred composition may be extremely vanous in its contents and

mood. It may be solemn, meditative, mysterious, quiet, rough, gloomy, and severe; or it

may be merry, cheerftil, bright, or joyous - even with many other nuances. All of this

endless variety in the text requires music that is also extremely various in its character

and nuances for its illustration. For example if the text states: "By the rivers of Babylon,

there we sat down, yea, we wept..." but a composer accompanies these words with the

music of cheerful character, in fast tempo and the like - of course, it would be a mistake.

It would be the same mistake if a composer took the text with joyous contents, such as:

"And David danced before the Lord with all his might" and so on, and described it with

the gloomy chords on lower notes, in an adagio tempo, and the like. In the obikhod, this

\ cry text is accompanied with music that is almost folk dancing, and so the unknown

author(s) was profoundly correct in not being scared to insult someone's religious

218
feelings by his choice of melodic character. It is so powerftil, courageous, and sincere,

that in our time such a composer's acfion would seem like a heroic act, but manv-

religious people would never forgive it.

As an example of a mistake in respect to the inconsistency of the music to the

text, a mistake with which we have become so acquainted that we do not notice, we ma>

show the following. Usually the words: "We will rise up the King..." that are subordinate

to the main clause: "And the cherubim..." and so on, are the continuation of the same

thought usually expressed by meditafive music of a mysterious mood.^ \'et, for some

reason these words are accompanied, following Bortniansky's example, bv music of

cheerftil and even warlike character. Perhaps it is profitable ft-om the purely musical point

of view, as a contrast to the previous mood, but we consider it to be a mistake as a

technique that is out of place in this instance. It would be another matter if instead of

these words, the text expressed confidence in the capture of enemies or the demand for

nations to surrender to us, and so on.

Consequently, a composer has a very wide choice regarding the character and the

mood of the church motets, if only he correctly understands and expresses the text's

meaning. If the requirement of the conformity of music to the text is fulfilled, then the

other requirement will be fulfilled as well, that is, that the church music should not be

overiy elaborate, sensual, nor sentimental, and especially not sweet nor vulgar. Why?

Because the loftiness of the liturgical texts caimot provide a groundwork for that (This is

' Gretchaninoff adds the following note here: "The interruption made here bv the exclamations of
a deacon and a priest does not correspond to the text's meanine "

219
the reason why chromafisms, due to their sensuality and pretentiousness, shock our ears

in sacred music works).

Let us consider the issue under examinationft-omthe other side,ft-omthe point of

view that only considers the purely outward musical form. Do we have any contrapuntal

or harmonic techniques that could be considered inappropriate in sacred music'' I think

that there are no such techniques. Any musical form is fitting if only it is used sensibly

and appropriately and if the following requirements are ftilfilled: First, the words should

be pronounced by all voices simultaneously or, given a contrapuntal work, the words

should be distributed among the voices so skillftilly that the listener can absolutely follow

the text. Such forms as fiigue and even ftigatto may cause some difficulties in that

regard, but those difficulties are not so excepfional that we could not use this form. If we

repeat one word many times, for example hallelujah, this obstacle disappears. Second,

the text should be rightly and correctly declaimed. There are many mistakes in that

regard, even in the obikhod, demonstrated in the following example:

In the text, "You are my Lord, the light that comes to the world" the interruption and

aspiration is made after the word "light;" the resuhing pause presents an obvious error:

"You are my Lord - the light; that comes to the world," and so on.

Having joined these three main requirements: to clearly pronounce the words,

correctly declaim them, and most importantly, the conformity of the music to the text, we

will exhaust all that is required to consider a know n sacred music work suitable for the

church. If many people consider any non-hackneyed technique as a heresy (for example,

the use of any other manner of harmonization besides tonic, dominant and subdominant).

220
this is only because they are not accustomed to those techniques. The more rich and v ivid

colors a composer has, the more variety he has in the techniques of musical means.

However, despite how suitable and noble those techniques may be - if they are nev\- and

uncommon - the more they will be regarded as a transgression of piety bv some admirers

of church music. It is quite another matter, for instance, if a tenor forgets where he is and

leads a solo on very high notes, reminding us of a very awful, sentimental romance, or if

the basses cry out: "and run and run..." - it seems to them as decent and quite in the

spirit of the church music...

Also quite often, we hear discussions about the style of sacred music works. But 1

think that this issue is so delicate and debatable that hardly even two musicians w ill agree

in its understanding. Some people say, for example, the musical style of the Western

church is not suitable for our orthodox church - but what st> le do Bortniansky, \'edel and

the others have according to the majority's point of view*^ Does a Russian style exist? If it

does, then to what degree is it independent and how much of that very Western style may

we see in it? None of these questions are even touched by the literature. Furthermore, it

is unlikely that anyone could presently answer them without reflection.

"It looks like opera" - is the blame sometimes being made to a sacred music

work. But why should music suitable for church usage not be found in opera, especially if

it is written on a lofty plot (for example, Wagner's Parsifal). And on the contrary, are not

many banal things, intended only for poor taste, sung in our church? Those things do not

have any place even in a somewhat decent opera, for example, the lav onte threefold

T") I
exclamafion "O Lord have mercy on us" known as Borodinsky's. or the tsar's, that

musically resembles a very banal secular romance.

So, what kind of music should we consider as corresponding to the spirit of our

Church? I know both vulgar and noble music; overly elaborate and simple; sw eet and

senfimental, and rigorous, serious music. If a sacred work only fits first definitions then it

is worth nothing; if it corresponds to the text, if it is simple and noble, and if words can

be heard and are correctly declaimed, then such a work is worthy to be performed in the

church, and that is why it is "ecclesiasfical"^ if you will. But when some work is said not

to correspond to the spirit of the church motets, I understand it only in one sense: it does

not correspond to the text. But "the spirit," as it is usually accepted to be understood - is

a convention, a habit.

A. Gretchaninoff

From the editorial staff

Given the place of this article from such a young talented composer as our Mr.

Gretchaninoff, our inifial response is to rejoice that the issue of our church music has

gradually come to the forefront of our spiritual interests. Then in the nearest future, wc

hope to publish the interesting research on that issue from our competent music critic,

G.A. Larosh.

As for the opinion of Mr. Gretchaninoff, we hope that there will be people among

the admirers of our church singing that will state their opinion to confirm that there is a

Literally, "belonging to church." See note 1

')->'"
fourth group besides those three groups of admirers of church singing mentioned bv Mr.

Gretchaninoff. This group is not safisfied with Bortnianskv'. the modem obikhod. nor

with both simultaneously, but they are moved by the marvelous and are filled with the

deep religious spirit of the old and ancient tunes of our church. A.I. Grigorov repeatedlv

addressed these tunes in the columns of this newspaper, show^n in No 34 of the current

year.

As for the "ecclesiastical spirit," we hardly think that it is only a "convention, a

habit" as Mr. Gretchaninoff thinks.

Having listed all of the necessary requirements for the composition of church

music, Mr. Gretchaninoff, like all of our modem composers, misses the most important

requirement: the religious mood, and consequently, the sincere faith of a composer

himself Church music as well as church painting requires not only highly creativ e talent,

but also religious spirituality of that talent. One may compose "corresponding music" to

the secular romance words; but for the liturgical words of prayer, it is not enough; one

has to be filled with the blessed power of that prayer, one has to believ e in that power,

one has to pray himself

^^3
Gretchaninoff, A. "Pis'mo k izdatelu" [Letter to the Publisher]. Moskovskie
Vedomosti, No. 56, February 26. 1900, p. 4 (2).

Dear Sir,

I am very gratefiil for the kind offer to publish my article in your respectful

newspaper. Unfortunately, several regrettable misprints slipped into the article. They

considerably distorted some of my thoughts. For example, on page 3, last column, lines

16 and 17, in the phrase "Nonetheless, we have this standard and it is mv deep conviction

that it is the truest standard" instead of the word 'vemoe' [truest], 'vazhnoe' [important]

was printed. On the same page, line 30, instead of the word 'bodryi' [cheerful], 'dobryi'

[kind] was printed. On the next page, the first column, line 8, 'not' was missed before the

word 'scared' ("the unknown author was profoundly correct in not being scared...").

I have two thoughts in response to the editorial comment on my article.

First, it was said that I overlooked the most important requirement for the

composition of church music: the religious mood. But I will state that if a composition of

sacred music does not have that religious mood, it does not meet that requirement that I

consider to be the most important—the correspondence of the music to the text. Since the

religious mood is always present in the sacred text, then as a matter of fact, the music

must have that religious mood as well, or else that correspondence will not exist.

Next, I totally agree with the opinion that in order to compose worthy music on

the words of a prayer, one needs to be filled with that prayer. When you compose music

on these profound and lofty texts, you must also feel yourself tuned in to such profound

loftiness, but this point does not relate directly to the main subject of my article. In the

article, I did not intend to address the issue of how to compose. 1 just wanted to note,

224
from my own understanding, what we should require from the w ork alreadv composed,

or in other words, if possible, to establish the hallmark for works of sacred music on a

better substantiated basis.

Grigorov, A.I., Urusov, G. G.

"O dukhe tserkovnogo penia (Po povodu stat'i A.Grechaninova)"
[On the Spirit of the Church Motets. (Regarding Grechaninov's article)].
Moskovksie Vedomosti, No. 59, February 29, 1900, pp. 3-4.

1 [Griogorov]

More than once and with great attention, I have read Mr. Gretchaninoffs article

"About the 'Spirit' of the Church motets".^ The sincere opinion of this young composer,

who has already joined the ranks of composers of songs for the church, is very important

and also may provide us with very valuable hopes.

The impressive editorial note to the article redeems me from the necessity of

repeating what I have already stated regarding church music and singing. The editorial

staff was absolutely correct when they clearly pointed out the existence of the class of

admirers of church singing that the author did not perceive, either because he did not

know about that class or because of some other reason. However, that class deserves our

attention, though Mr. Gretchaninoff persistently ignores it even in his Letter to the
8
Publisher published in response to the above-mentioned editonal note.

^ See N(i 53, Moskovskie Vedomosti.

' See No 56, Moskovskie Vedomosti.

1^^
 That fourth class of admirers according to Gretchaninoffs reckoning, though

perhaps it would be more correct to identify them as the class of ardent supponers of

purity and holiness in church singing that strongly keeps devotion to the ancient tunes,

believes both in their mighty chaste power and in their final triumph.

However, let us not severely reproach Mr. Gretchaninoff for not noticing them until

now. Indeed, they can go unnoficed because they are few in number and are extremelv

meek and shy. They are rarely heard from, and do not speak much among themselv es.

Even when they speak, they are without fervor and pride, without any intention of

making a noise or attracting attention. They are very modest. They are people w ho simply

delight in the smallest yet progressive movement toward the triumph of their hopes.

Let us then tum to Mr. Gretchaninoffs article. It has the flaw that was pointed out

by the editorial note, and then confirmed even by Mr. Gretchaninoff himself in the above-

mentioned Letter to the Publisher. Not only did Mr. Gretchaninoff not mention the most

important requirement for the composifion of church motets, namely the sincere faith of a

composer himself, but also his article is ftill of inexact if not inconsistent statements.

For example, in the beginning of the article, the author states that the text of a

sacred composition is "extremely various," and therefore for its illustration, "requires

music that is also extremely various in its character and nuances." But in the middle of

the article, addressing the restrictions on the character of church music that does not

allow anything in its sphere that is "overiy elaborate, sensual, nor sentimental, and

especially not sweet nor vulgar," he points out quite correctly that this assumption would

not correspond to a text that is always "lofty" and therefore "cannot provide a

226
groundwork for that." As you can see, the text is restricted, and at the same time

"extremely various," with the possibility of "extremely various illustrations" to it.

So, what kind of music is suitable for the church motets? Moreover, do the

restricfions for a composer's usage of such musical resources exist?

In Mr. Gretchaninoffs own words, suitable music for the church should meet the

requirements of "the correspondence of the musical contents of the composition to the

text's contents..., the text should be righfiy and correctly declaimed." and "the words

should be pronounced by all voices simultaneously" or "given a contrapuntal w ork, the

words should be distributed among the voices so skillfully that the listener can absolutely

follow the text." Therefore, according to Mr. Gretchaninoffs opinion, if a composer

observes the above requirements and gets rid of the "hackneyed techniques," then he may

show all of his strength and reveal all the extent and the "rich and vivid colors" in the use

of the musical means to create a work quite suitable for church performance.

We must express gratitude to Mr. Gretchaninoff for firmly raising the important

issue of the composition of church motets, and for his well-grounded intentions for lisfing

the requirement of three conditions. Those conditions are extremely essential and

serious. However, they are not sufficient for the church motets.

Those conditions are sufficient for defining a "work" in an exclusively technical

sense, and it is obvious that without them, such a work would be not only imperfect but

also meaningless. The results of such a work led to the creation of "the pieces" that

offend the believers; those pieces are permitted for shameless performance in the temples

Grigorov adds this note, "We are a little bit confused about the meaning of the phrase "hackney
techniques.'. Does the author mean the ancient and monastic tunes?"

227
that leads to great temptafion. The above condifions could be sufficient for the

"appropriateness" that is permissible for the performance of such "works" in church, but

they are not enough for their ftill appropriateness for worship. In mv opinion

"permissibility" and "appropriateness" are quite different conceptions. The "permissible"

is only tolerated, but the "appropriate" demands further reasons for existence because it

maintains fiill rights.

Before I explain what else is required in addifion to Mr. Gretchaninoffs three

conditions for the appropriateness of church motets, I will try to find out what troubles

Mr. Gretchaninoff about the amateurs of church singing - namely the uncertainty of their

idea of what "is in the spirit" and what "is not in the spirit" of the church motets. Mr.

Gretchaninoff himself allegedly has settled that question, having found "the standard of

ideal music for our Orthodox Church." The standard consists of the same correspondence

of the musical contents of the composition to the text's contents, in addition to the two

conditions already mentioned.

Indeed, as admirers of church singing, we cannot define exactly "the spirit" of the

church motets. Is it only a series of subtle to imperceptible features that immediately

distinguishes the church song? Do only the believers understand it? Or, does it have a

characterisfic that announces itself to any person who is not without hearing and feeling?

We do not presume to judge. We know only one thing for sure: "the spirit" is not "a

convenfion" and "a habit" as Mr. Gretchaninoff claims. In our opinion "the spirit" is

something stable and steadfast, and includes the ideas of virtue, of the purity of good

conscience, and so on.

228
 I'll say more to clarify my thought. If we restrict the requirements for church music

to only three conditions, and if we are safisfied with the noble, permissible music as

discussed in Mr. Gretchaninoffs article, I am afraid that the sacred music of even a

talented and sincere composer would be rather a cantata on a liturgical text, but it would

not represent the church motet appropriate for the performance in the orthodox temple. 1

am not going to state that such a composer will sinftilly make his work, no, that mav not

happen, but he will not meet our need to pray with the reverent mood that is evoked both

by the place and by our inner desire to get rid of this world's vanity, and to soar in the

world of a higher joy that is devoid of the earthly senses of delights, even if innocent and

noble. We go to the temple, or at least, we should go there, not to admire our own virtues

and talents, but to join the assembly of higher beings that secretly have communion with

our trusting soul and with our most blessed zeal to have our hearts settled on "things

above." In this very state of the prayerftil person, according to Mr. Gretchaninoffs article,

any tenor solo that reminds us of a very awful, sentimental romance would be extremely

indecent and insulting. However the proud composer's right to wrap a church song into

"any form ... if only it is used sensibly and appropriately" will also ruin the great

simplicity of the feelings and faith that we have just now discussed.

Also, we especially value the ancient church tunes because their creators, the

monks, formerly began this work with great trusting diligence and reverence, recognizing

and remembering their unworthiness. This is probably why these motets are filled with

the powerful and strengthening effect on the person who is listening or praving. These

motets certainly correspond to "the spirif of churchliness, and they provide musical

229
forms of prayers and songs that are most suitable for the temple. However, the abov e-

mentioned compositions may be appropriate and permissible, but at the same time they

may not correspond to the church spirit. The difference is obvious. The former ones were

composed with the presence of talent and deep sincere faith, but with the domination of

faith, whereas the latter works may not have been composed sinfully but w ith the

dominafion of the talent alone and the necessary condifions for an intelligent technical

work.

I dare think that I succeeded in clarifying at least partially the definition of "the

spirit" of the church motets, and what music is appropriate for them.

A few more words—Just as not any famous stylist is able to arrange and to wnte an

acathistus, and just as not any talented poet would retell bylina'^ in the same maimer, not

any talented musician is able to write appropriate church music. The acathistuses are

created through deep faith that inspires the author with great power, and bylinas are

narrated by folk who have a powerfiil genius for creativity. So-called enlightened people

almost do not have imaginafion. In their pursuit of the knowledge proven by feelings,

they have dulled their inspiration. Conversely, the imagination works in its mighty

creativity through the folk that are close to the contemplation of the nature and revelation

of God's Providence. These folk give very unique pictures, supported with taste as well

as lively and profoundly edifying songs. The same is true with secular singing. Millions

of folk singers, through their sensitive hearts, and through their artistic taste and talents,

Literally translated from the Greek akathistos, (derived from the negative prefix "a" and
"kathizo,"meaning to sit dowTi) the "acathistus" is a Christian song of praise that was sung by all present
while standing, and the "bylina" is a Russian epic poem.

230
have created marvelous songs of a courageously wide range that are wise in idea,

fascinafing in beauty, and colossal in power. Mr. Gretchaninoff refuses to name the bra\ e

author of the music for the text "And David danced before the Lord with all his might,"

that was accompanied with music that almost resembled folk dancing, though he

acknowledges its courage, sinceritv', and power. I assure you that the courageous

composer of that tune, who was not "scared to insult somebody's religious feelings," is

and was represented by the orthodox Russian folk, and no one else. It is pleasant to leam

how Mr. Gretchaninoff praises this pure folk tone. Furthermore, from our point of view,

we agree with him that this tune is underrated and is performed ignorantly.

To conclude, I will say that it is comforting to think that our composers and music

critics, just like the thoughtftil Mr. Gretchaninoff, are beginning to pay attention to the

almost forgotten area of church music. And maybe they would share part of their talents

for the comfort and the delight of those who attend the temples and pray there.

A. Grigorov

2 [Urusov]

Articles about church singing seldom appear in the daily press. Thus, how much

more pleasant it was to find the article on this topic written by the respectable figure in

the area of church music - Mr. Gretchaninoff Unfortunately, this author touches only the

surface of the subject expressing his own opinion that hardly may be obligatory for the

people interested in the addressed topic.

231
 For example the author states that "any form fits if only it is used sensiblv and

appropriately," that "the words should be pronounced (by the choir) simultaneously," and

that "the text should be rightly and correctly declaimed." Then, in mentioning the

admirers' reasoning "about the style of the sacred music works," Mr. Gretchaninoff

touches the names of "Bortniansky, Vedel, and the others." In this w ay he indirectly

blames these composers for westemizafion, and right here points out to "the loftv plot" of

Wagner's Parsifal and asks "why music suitable for church usage should not be found in

an opera?" along with the accusation from some admirers that some things in the most

recent works can be characterized by the expression "it looks like opera(!)."

That reasoning is very vague. All of the recent wonder-workers of church music are

not free of the "banality" and "chromatic sensuality" that Mr. Gretchaninoff also blames

the past composers of using. "A convenfion and a habit" already has begun to

accompany the works of the new composers as well, though they are blameless.

We cannot suspect neither Sarti, nor Vedel, nor Bortniansky, nor especially

archpriest Turchaninov in the lack of the religious spiritual motives for the creation of the

church motets. There is more misery from the lack of needed spirit in the compositions of

the young composers who studied in the Conservatory. But we should not blame them for

the lack of spirit in their church composifions that are considerable in form, pretty,

technically serious, and somefimes demonstrate talent. Even so, they belittle the sacred

text to the degree of merely the ground for exercise in composition. This is the fault of

the school that may not and does not want to understand the impossibility of serving two

masters at the same time. The modem school graduates hordes of young men, providing

-»-5-)
them with fiill sacks of musical knowledge and abilifies to use throughout their course of

life. But the existence of "the two masters" leads both a composer and a singer astray.

Regarding the singers... [The remainder of the article addresses the careers of

church singers.].

G. Urusov

3 [Editorial Staff, Moskovskie Vedomosti]

From the editorial staff

As we have foreseen, A. Gretchaninoffs article, "About the spirit of the church

motets," has caused intense interest among the amateurs of our church music. We

received a lot of articles and notes that confirm that. Today we publish the two most

thorough articles by A.I. Grigorov and G.G. Urusov.

While we express gratitude to the authors of these articles for their warm and

loving attitude towards an issue that is so dear to the Russian man, we think that they and

other amateurs of our church singing will point out one more important flaw among the

conditions that Mr. Gretchaninoff has laid out for composers of church motets.

We pointed out that the most important requirement in this respect that was not

mentioned in Mr. Gretchaninoffs article. It is the religious mood, and therefore, the

sincere faith of the composer himself Mr. Gretchaninoff, in his "Letter to the Publisher,"

hastened to declare that not only did he not reject that requirement, but also that he

considered it to be so obvious, he preferred not to mention it at all.

233
 Perhaps Mr. Gretchaninoff will consider as obvious another essential condition that

he also did not menfion, but A.I. Grigorov menfioned it in his article by inference. Here

is that condifion: that church music should be predominantly national music. Could it be

that the whole secret of the spirit of church music is hidden in the profoundly national

character of church music in general and in Russian music specifically?

A.I. Grigorov is absolutely correct when, even under such mitigating

circumstances, he reproaches Mr. Gretchaninoff for his article and his "Letter" that

almost deliberately ignore "the class of ardent supporters of purity and holiness in church

singing that strongly keeps devotion to the ancient tunes." But why are these ancient

tunes so dear to our hearts? Why do samples of our ancient church music that are kept

safe in some monasteries touch us so deeply, even when we hear them for the first time?

Could the reason be that this music is not only ancient, but is our music as well? Perhaps

it is because in this music, that was originally borrowed from the Byzantine tradition, our

Russian national spirit was gradually expressed over the ages, and then finally developed

into that form that was predesfined to cast the mould of Russian Orthodox church singing

due to innate ethnical, ethical, histoncal, and aesthetic laws.

That is why our modem composers of sacred music, who sincerely wish to grasp

the spirit of the Russian church motets, must reverently meditate on and attentively listen

to our ancient church tunes, not in order to slav ishly and foolishly copy them, but in order

to be inspired by their lofty religious mood and strict church spirit that is so closely

connected with the strict church spirit of the orthodox Russian people.

234
 The analogy with the Russian church icon painting thrusts itself forward. We

pointed this out in our previous note, but obviously Mr. Gretchaninoff did not pav' proper

attenfion to it. Is the painting that covers the walls of our Cathedral of Christ the Savior

appropriate and permissible? Yes- it is permissible and can be tolerated. But does it

correspond to the spirit of the Russian orthodox temple? Of course not. But does the

modern painting that corresponds to that strictly orthodox church spirit exist? \'es, it

undoubtedly exists. The Kiev Cathedral presents outstanding evidence. Its walls are

inspired by the exalted creative work of V.M. Vasnetsov. What is the difference between

Moscow and Kiev Cathedral? In the Moscow Cathedral, talented artists painted their

pictures according to Mr. Gretchaninoffs recipe. Indeed, the artistic content of those

pictures "corresponds to the given biblical text's contents." Those pictures, without any

doubt, are "rightly and correctly" painted, colored and lighted. A spectator can

"absolutely and clearly follow" all the details of their contents. But that is all, and nothing

more. They are beaufifiil museum pictures. They do not have the Russian church spirit

inside because they do not have the ancient Russian national spirit. The authors of those

pictures ignored the ancient Russian icons with the same neglect as Mr. Gretchaninoff

obviously ignores the ancient Russian church tunes.

V.M. Vasnetsov treated the works of Russian ancient icon painting quite

differently. He studied it with sincere love and deep reverence. He completely filled

himself with its spirit and created church icons that are immortal and completely original.

They not only shine with modem technical perfection and an indisputable

235
correspondence with the biblical and prayerftil text that they embodv, but thev also are

ftill of the spirit of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Because of V.M. Vasnetsov, the quesfion about the church spirit of Russian

religious/7flm/z>2g is completely solved. Since Mr. Gretchaninoff and other puzzlers like

him ponder the definition, and quesfion the liturgical spirit in Russian religious music,

perhaps it can be explained only by the fact that Russia is still waiting for her religious-

musical Vasnetsov that would within himself join both ingenious musical talent and

sincere faith with deep love to the national church antiquity of Russian spiritual motets.

V.G.

Gretchaninoff, Aleksandr. "Po povodu moei stat'i 'O dukhe tserkovnykh

pesnopenyi'"[Regarding my article "About the 'spirit' of the church motets.".
Moskovksie Vedomosti, No. 73, March 14, 1900, pp. 3-4.

My article "About the spirit of the church motets" apparently has stimulated keen

interest to the issue that I have raised, confirmed by the number of articles that have

appeared in response. Therefore, I believe that it is necessary to clarify some

misunderstandings that have occurred because of my article.

Mr. Grigorov and Mr. V.G. have reproached me" because I allegedly ignore the

admirers of the ancient tunes and the ancient tunes themselves. Let us see-is this really

so? When I addressed in the article the admirers of sacred music, I divided them into

three groups: the first one, the admirers of the semi-Italian, semi-German music of our

church; the second one, the admirers of the obikhod, and the third one, people that regard

" See Moskovski Vedomosti No. 59.

236
the obikhod as the ideal of church music and at the same fime kneel before the

compositions of Sarti, Vedel, Bortniansky, and others.

It was not the purpose of my article to uncover the damage that those Italians, the

Russian composers of sacred music who adopted the Italian style, and especiallv their

unskillftil, untalented, and often very ignorant followers, caused to our nativ e art. Mv

purpose was different. I wanted to shed light, at least in part, on the vague ideas that reign

in the concepfions of our amateurs about what we should regard in the spirit of our

church, or at least what we should consider fitting for the church, and what we should

reject. In my article I suggested as a standard three main requirements: 1) the conformitv

of the music to the text, 2) simultaneous pronunciation of the words by all voices

(conditionally) and 3) correct recitation.

This is the brief content of my article.'^ Along with my article, the editorial note

was published. In that note, my groups of admirers were listed. It was said about the

second group, and I do not know if this was deliberate or not, that I numbered among

them the admirers of the modern'' obikhod, and that I completely missed the admirers of

the old and ancient tunes. I did not discuss "the modem" obikhod in my article, and

could not even do so, because I am puzzled (Mr. V.G. justly calls me a puzzler) - what

could the addifion of the word "modem" to the obikhod actually mean? As everyone

knows, the obikhod is the collection of the repetitive motets of the ancient tunes that are

used in liturgies, vespers, dirges, and in the holiday. Lent and Easter services. If one

states, "the melody from the obikhod" - it always means that the ancient melodv was in

'* See .\f(K\kovskie I edomosti No. 53.

237
view. Just as with secular folk songs, this melody was passed down through the centunes

-this same melody that endured complicated hook notation (no insult intended for the

respectfiil S.V. Smolensky) and that did not lose its freshness, power, beauty, or unusual

originality after many centuries. One of the features of such melodies is that the

composer (s) is not known. This is why they are usually referred to as the obikhod,

bearing in mind an ancient melody. Therefore if one uses the expression "the modem

obikhod" doesn't it look like "the modem ancient song(?l)"

To make up the second group, I designated the amateurs of the obikhod, that is, the

amateurs of the ancient motets, as it is clear to all who correctly understand the meaning

of the word. From where does one conclude that I forgot about these admirers? And

what did my respectfiil opponents have in view in classifying a fourth group of admirers?

Could it be that Mr. Grigorov and Mr. V.G., being admirers of antiquity as seen

from their statements, at the same time are not satisfied with the close framework in the

arrangements of the ancient tunes (based on the V\ 4^^ and 5'*^ degree) that are completely

enough for the amateurs of my second group?'"' Do they want to allow more breadth and

variety of techniques for the arrangement of these tunes? Do they long for the appearance

of modem compositions, that along with religious mood and sincere faith would be filled

with love for antiquity?

To my deep regret, I can answer that such admirers are very few in number, and

there is no way of regarding them as a disfinct group. My purpose was to refute the

'^ Gretchamnoff notes, "The tvpical representatn e of that group of amateurs-ascetics is the
respectful priest father Afonsky. In his article (No. 71) he directly says: 'We can hardly ever recogni/c as
desirable and useful the compositions that were composed recently for the divine service, though they
would correspond with both the contents and the text of the motet.'"

238
common opinion about "the spirit." But the amateurs mentioned above hold on to a

"separate opinion." These amateurs study the anfiquity and meditate on it, some of them

draw inspirafion out of it for their works; in other words, they do the very thing that Mr.

V.G. wishes, within the limits of their power and degree of the talent. Others tr>' to

culfivate and popularize these works. However the majority does not value the activitv of

that small group, and some even make fun of them. Some "critics," for example, accuse

them of- would you believe it - receiving musical education! Poor P.I. Tchaikovsky!

He also was musically educated. Under what a terrible accusation he lies!

In my letter to the publisher, I did not answer the note from the editorial staff (in

No. 53) that discusses "the modem obikhod" and the fourth group, supposing that it was

my opponents' owm personal misunderstanding, and that anyone who has read my article

would realize that. It tumed out that I was wrong: they were looking for my answer on

that particular point, and having not found it, they explained my silence in their own way.

As I already stated, they explained it by saying that I neglected the amateurs of ancient

tunes (in that case I would ignore myself) and even the ancient tunes themselves.

However, from my enthusiastic response on the melody for the text "And David danced

before the Lord with all his might," taken by chance from the treasury of the marvelous

ancient melodies, it would be more reasonable to suggest (if anybody is interested in my

taste) that I am rather an admirer of antiquity rather than a neglecter of it.

'* Gretchaninoff adds this note, 'Mr. \'.G. writes: The artists of those pictures (in the Moscow
Cathedral) ignored Russian ancient and old icons with the same neglect as Mr Gretchaninoff obviously (.')
Ignores ancient and old Russian church tunes."

239
 Conceming the condifion asserted by Mr. V.G., the demand that a composition of

sacred music should be predominantly national, I will answer that this question is not

considered in my main requirement of "correspondence" as Mr. V.G. would like to

ascribe to me.'^ I partially touched that question in my article when I mentioned style.

For this discussion, I will add the following. Nafionality in the music is important, and

perhaps it is essenfial, especially on the first steps. From history, we observe that the

beginning of the flourishing of musical art in almost any country is connected w ith the

fact that composers tumed to the nafional folk art—for example, Weber with his

Freishutz, Glinka with The Life for the Tzar and Ruslan, Chopin, and Grieg. I believe that

our church music will reach the proper height only when it rests upon our folk art. Only

then it will get rid of the Italianization that is alien to us, but at the same time that reigns

in our Church, when our church music composers will pay proper attention to antiquity

and will draw their inspiration from it. Those who long for the renewal of our church

singing will not regret that the composifions of Vedel, Sarti, Galuppi, Maurer, Esaulov,

Lamakin, Bagretsov and on and on, will be considered as not meeting this nafionality

requirement.

Nevertheless, I think that the requirement of nationality hardly may be considered

as obligatory (and I meant only such requirements in my first article) and especially at

the present time and for the following reason. First, it is often difficult to decide whether

a given work is national or not; second, at the present time we hav e so few desirable

" Gretchaninoff quotes \'.G. in the following note, Alaybe Mr Gretchaninott will consider as
obvious another essential condition (?) that he did not mention as well . .' and so on."

240
composifions for the church that it would be difficult to decide what to perform during

worship. This is why even though it is very desirable for our sacred music to be national,

I would not include this requirement in the list of the necessary requirements.

This is sad, but I must point out another wrong interpretation of my words. In mv

phrase "the spirit, as it is usually accepted be understood - is a convention, a habit," .\.\.

Grigorov omits my words "as it is usually accepted to be understood," and states, "the

spirit is only a convenfion, a habit as Mr Gretchaninoff asserts.'' I did not assert that.

There is a big difference between the way I understand that spirit and the way it is

usually accepted to be understood. And usually it is accepted to be understood in such a

way that anything that does not look like the obikhod is not in the spirit; and if it does not

look like Bortniansky, so it is not ecclesiastical.'^

In my article, I wanted to point out the lack of grounds for such reasoning, and if

possible, to define a more correct criterion (but not "a recipe" as Mr. V.G. understood)

for sacred musical works. I completely agree with the respectful Mr. Grigorov that the

spirit is something that absolutely is impossible to define because of "the intangibility of

its characterisfics." In that case, how one can prove that such a work "is in spirit" and

such work "is not in spirit"? It will lead only to one result - expressions like "m my

opinion that is in the spirit" and "but in my opinion, that is not" will spread w idely. The

critics should stand on more firm feet; that is why I suggest to exclude that word "spint"

from the critics' vocabulary and replace it with something different that is more definite.

It seems to me that the requirements I offer (among which the most important are: the

"' See note 1

241
conformity of the music to the text, simultaneous pronunciafion of the words and right

recitation) guarantee us - at least to some degree - loftiness of the art of sacred music.

It has been stated that those requirements are not enough, and that a composer must

have a sincere faith. Well, how will you examine by the given composition whether its

composer had faith or not? Perhaps it is possible to make a partial judgment about it, but

only according to the correspondence of the composer's music to the text. For example, a

composer takes the text "I believe in the only God the Father," and then expresses it with

fimid sounds (pianissimo), with diffused harmony that has an unstable character (for

example, with diminished seventh chords), and so on. You would agree with me that it

would not correspond to the text.

No, in spite of the importance of the belief of a composer in what he musically

speaks - I do not see a tangible form of how we can demand the realization of that

condifion. After all, it is easy to say "we need faith," but show me how to examine it. In

my requirements of the appropriateness, I did not want to allow anything uncertain.

The issue I have touched is extremely important, and that is why we should discuss

it peacefully while paying attention to the opinions of others, and with caution to be

completely honest. It would make me happy if I were able to play even a small part in the

movement to put in order everything in our church singing that we can observe todav

I believe that this movement will not pass without leaving a trace, and that a happy

age will come when all indecent and offensive things to the religious mood will be dnven

out from our church with shame. I believe that the time will come when anyone entering

242
a temple will be confident that his religious and aesthetic feelings will not be harmed b^

this lofty art that is presented to him only there. Let us striv e for that!

A. Gretchaninoff

From the editorial staff

We are very thankftil to A.T. Gretchaninoff for his response that removes the

primary misunderstanding between us: our talented young composer proves himself to be

an ardent admirer of our ancient church motets and that he himself longs for the

appearance of the sacred music compositions "that along with religious mood and sincere

faith would be filled with love for antiquity."

With that, he has stated everything, and we long for the same, undoubtedly as well

as A.I. Grigorov and G.G. Umsov, and all of the numerous admirers of ancient sacred

music singing that are not satisfied only with those melodies that survived in the

contemporary edition of the obikhod, or as we say for short - in the modem obikhod. Mr.

Gretchaninoff regrets that ''such admirers are very few and there is no possibility to

regard them as a distinct group." In reality such admirers are much more than Mr.

Gretchaninoff suggests. There are dozens even in Moscow, but according to the correct

expression of A.I. Grigorov, "they all are extremely meek, almost shy. They are rarely

heard from and they do not speak much themselves, and even if they speak, it is without

fervor and pride, without any intenfion of making a noise and attracting attention." That

243
is why our fiery young composer did not nofice them.'" Imagine if we were able to

organize a Society of Admirers of the Motets of Ancient Sacred Music; then we could

make sure how many of these people, along with Mr. Gretchaninoff, make up that special

but important group of true amateurs of orthodox church singing. So, our first

misunderstanding is resolved completely.

The second one concems the issue of the necessity of Russian national element in

Russian church singing. Mr. Gretchaninoff denies that necessit), but we more than

casually insist on it. However, it also seems to us that this difference in our v iew s is onlv

apparent but not essential. Mr. Gretchaninoff himself longs for the appearance of the

sacred music works that "would be filled with that love for antiquity". In this case, is not

Russian ancient and Russian national church singing the same thing? Mr. Gretchaninoff

thinks that it is difficult to distinguish the national element in music from the non-

nafional. It seems to us that it is much more difficult to disfinguish music that

"corresponds" to the text from the music that "does not correspond" to it. In any case,

whether a melody obviously corresponds to the text or obviously does not correspond to

the text, there falls dozens of other melodies that we may endlessly argue about

conceming their correspondence to the text, from single words in the text to the overall

meaning of the text. Thus, it is much easier to determine the national character of

melodies, as at any rate, it is not difficult to ascertain either the presence or the absence of

the national character in the given melody.

'^ The literal meaning of this sentence shows irony in Gretchaninoffs outspoken, "fiery nature."
and the "meak and shy" nauire of this group of admirers.

244
 If we ignore nafionalism in our church music, we take a risk of acknowledging

melodies with pronounced foreign nuances {Italian, for example) as fitting for the

Orthodox Russian worship if they correspond to the three "essential" requirements of Mr.

Gretchaninoff. We do not even menfion that in our opinion the art in general should be

national, nor that "the spirit" or "the style," that Mr. Gretchaninoff cannot define in the

area of church music, lies in that very nafional element of art. That "spint" was found by

V.M. Vasnetsov in the area of the church painting and exactly on a national ground.

V.G.

245
 APPENDIX B

ALEXANDRE GRETCHANINOFF, "BRIEF REVIEW^

OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF ORTHODOX CHURCH SINGING'

The following document is a translafion of Gretchaninoffs hand-written essay

housed in the Music Division of the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts, 40

Lincoln Center Plaza, New York, N.Y. 10023-7498; phone (212) 870-1630. The location

lisfing for the manuscript is: MNY* (box) Grechaninov. Though John Seaguard's 1949

thesis refers to brief portions of the essay, this is the first complete English translation of

the document. The 39-page manuscript was digitally photographed by Philip Camp in

New York on February 19, 2002. It was then e-mailed to Russia for translation by Dr.

Sergei Shiskin. The translation was edited with the addition of annotated footnotes by

Philip Camp in March, April, and May, 2002.

On the back of the fourth page of the manuscript, the essay is dated September 30,

1932, probably signifying either the date that the essay was completed, or the date that

the essay was read as a lecture. Much of the material in the essay provides a narrative

history of the development of Russian liturgical singing that readily can be found

elsewhere. However, many portions from the essay provide interesting glimpses of

Gretchaninoffs views on the subject, many of which were considered unconvenfional

and unorthodox to the mainstream Russian Orthodox Church. For a complete discussion

of the significance of this manuscript, see Chapter I\'.

246
 'fyitUf^L i^/

uuu^ f-^-^V^ ^.a;LuU ^ ^ ^

kv.V.

\ T ^ . W ; / ^ rt^o..«^?« / : t | « j . w

Figure B. 1 Actual Title Page

"Brief Review of the Development of Orthodox Church Singing'"

Permission to reprint this image granted by the Music Division. 1 he New ^•oIk Public I ibrary
for the Performinu .\its, .isfor. Lenox and Tildcn Foundations

!47
Brief Review of the Development of Orthodox Church Singing

The aim of my lecture is to give a brief historical survev of the origin and

development of our church singing from its first appearance in Russia to the present. Bv

necessity, such a survey that is limited to the confines of one lecture only can be sketch v.

In fact, the things spoken here may serve as landmarks for those in the future who may

desire an even broader and deeper knowledge through independent study.

From ancient times, Russians have been known as lovers of singing. In

Karamzin's History of the Russian State," we find the following interesting information

taken from the accounts of Byzantine historians: "During the war of the Greeks with the

Avar khan in the 6^*^ century, three strangers were taken captive. Instead of weapons,

they only had psalteries and cithers. They were taken to the emperor who asked them

where they were from. They responded, 'We are the Slavs. There is no iron in our land.

We live quiet and serene lives and do not know wars; we enjoy music.'" These Slavs

were from the Balfic Sea coast. The Byzantine historians gave the Slavs the epithet,

"song-lovers."

The flawless treasure of ancient Russian singing, created and maintained by the

genius of the Russian folk, can only be explained through the love of songs, both secular

and sacred. The secular songs were handed down from generation to generation without

being recorded...

^ Nicholai Mikhailovich Karamzin (1766-1826) was a historian and writer whose greatest work
was the eleven volume History oj the Russian State, that presented a dramatic account of the political
repercussions of the Imperial administrations through 1613.
^ At this point, the extant manuscript continues from page two to page five. The two missing
pages likely discuss the development of the secular folk songs and begin a discussion of the early liturgical
melodies, perhaps by re-telling the story of the baptism of Prince Vladimir in 988.

248
 According to the notes of the Metropolitan Makari of Moscow ,"* the notation

monuments from the eleventh and twelfth centuries are as much from Greek as from

Slavic origins. Manuscripts from this epoch also contain traces of Bulgarian wxiting.

Thus, it is obvious that our ancient Znamenny chant is actually a Russified Greek

chant. This jusfifies the more accurate Greek-Slavic chant label, as proposed bv' the well-

known historian of Russian liturgical singing, Priest Dm. Vas. Razumovskv.'

However, I should note that some archeologists minimize the Bv-zantine influence

on our Znamenny chant. For example, Priest Metallov^ has a tendency to see not only the

Byzantine influence on our church singing, but also the Syrian influence. That is why he

labels it Greek-Syrian chant. S. V. Smolensky' goes even farther. In his essay, "About

Ancient Russian-Greek Notations," he says," I allow myself to think that the independent

essence of our tunes obviously developed from ancient times through Russian strength

alone, which automatically belittles the Byzantine part of our nafive art." And then about

notafions: "Though the distant relafion of our Znamenny script with the Greek is without

quesfion, nonetheless the relation is so weak that it completely vanishes in the mass of

*0f the two men who were distinguished as the Metropolitan Makari of .Moscow in the nineteenth
century, the most prominent was Makari (Mikhail Petrovich Bulgakov, 1816-1882) who was Moscow
metropolitan from 1879-1882. He wrote a nine volume history of the Russian Orthodox Church.
^ Priest Dmitry Razumovsky's (1818-1889) three volume work, Tserkovnoe penie v Rossii [Church
Singing in Russia] was unprecedented in scope, and marked the first substantial work of Russian liturgical
musicology. His work was a significant factor that led to the development of the new Russian choral
school. Morosan, Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia 85.
* Priest Vasily Metallov (1862-1926) was an important historian dunng the peak of the new
Russian choral school and authored Bogosluzhebnoepenie russkoi tserhi vperioddomongol'skii [The
liturgical singing of the Russian church in the pre-Mongol period], Moscow: 1912, among other
publications.
^ Stepan Vasil'evich Smolensky (1848-1909) was a liturgical musicologist, a pedagogue, and
director of the Moscow Synodal School from 1889 who first brought the Moscow School and choir to
prominence.

249
Russian musical script signs. That leads us to conclude that Russian notation dev eloped

completely and independently through Russian strength."

Only musicians who are specialists in archeology, as well as the Old Believers

that still sing according to signs are able to understand Znamenny chant notation. As it

should be with all things that relate to the worship of God, sign books have been copied

with much care.^

Znamenny tunes are all monophonic. They are sung in unison, actually better

described in octaves-tenors with altos in unison, and basses an octav e low er. The Old

Believers sing devoutly, often with much enthusiasm and with ftill comprehension of the

importance of what is sung. Though it looks poor-there are neither contrapuntal nor

harmonic combinations— and though it is performed by singers that neither studied at any

conservatory nor with any professor, this pure Russian choral art that came to us from

hoary antiquity leaves an impression that is often both tremendous and majestic.

The experts of Znamenny chant notation, S. V. Smolensky among them, claim

that the melodic delicacies of Znamenny chant are lost in the transcription to the modem

five-line staff notation because, according to S. V. Smolensky's writings, a reader is

presented with only a cool outline of the tune instead of a "vivid picture in colors."

Personally, I tend to see in this view an excessive passion for signs. I believe that by

means of the modem notation system with dynamic nuance indications, everything may

" Here, Gretchaninoff added the following statement and then crossed it out: "Probably c\en now,
one may hear them sung by the Old Believers in Russia if their churches have still survived

250
be written more accurately. For example, one can judge how ambiguous the sign svstem

was by examining the known definifions for the signs:

Common sign-proclaim it a little bit higher than a line.

Gloomy sign-higher than a common sign
Three-bright sign-even higher than a bright sign.

The duration of Znamenny signs was never precisely defined. Because of that, the skill

of reading sign books requires very difficult scholarship. It often happened that the same

chant notation could be interpreted in different ways. In order to reach at least some

degree of enhanced clarity, special marks were invented, or as they were called at that

time, "notice words." For example, the letter "vedi" meant a high sound, "n" a low

sound, and "gn" a much lower sound.^ That invention is attributed to the Nov gorod

singing master Ivan Shaidurov who lived in the late sixteenth century. In actuality.

Shaidurov only improved a pre-existing system. Marks were written w ith cinnabar (red

dye) and were placed near the signs that were written in India ink. Cinnabar marks made

the reading of signs slightly easier, yet many things were still confusing. Furthermore, no

one had thought about the definifion of absolute pitch or tone. There was also a notation

called "kondakarian" notation that existed unfil the fourteenth century. At the present, it

is impossible to decipher kondakarian notafion, and it looks as if the clue to unlock it is

lost forever.

Two styles of the ancient liturgical singing of Znamenny chant should be

distinguished: one is strictly regulable or great chant [bolshoi] and the other is free

' "Vedi" is the third letter of the Russian alphabet. The Russian word that means "high" begins
with that letter-'Vysokyi". The same pnnciple applies to the examples ol "n" and "gn"

251
customary [obikhod] or small chant [malyi].'" Bolshoi represents the singing that was

more prolonged and solemn. It was used for the singing of prokimens, antiphons,

dogmatics, and so on," and the motets were sung on the eight tones.'" Motets such as

Hemvimskaya, Dostoine yest, Velikoe Slavoslovie'^ and all other kinds of custoniar>'

Divine Services were with malyi Znamenny chant. (Examples of great Znamennv chant.

Dogmatic of 5^*^ tone "V Tchermnem More" [hi the Reed Sea]).''' Malyi Znamenny chant

then went out of use and was replaced with Kiev'^ and Greek chants.

In addition to Znamenny chant, the so-called demestvennoe singing also existed

from the earliest times. The Greek origin of this word informs us that this kind of singing

was also brought over from Greece. Demestvennoe singing was household singing, free,

a kind of singing that did not follow the law of eight tones. When historians describe

demestvennoe singing, they call it the most beautiful. Perhaps it was indeed beautiful;

however, we cannot make a judgment from the little evidence that has survived to the

present. Both melodically and rhythmically, demestvennoe singing was freer and more

'° Morosan describes bolshoi chant as the most complex melodicly; obychni or "common" chant
and malyi chant employed simpler melodies. Morosan, Choral Performance, 216.
" Prokeimenon are specific psalm settings used to precede a scripture reading, usually set in a
combination of antiphonal and responsorial styles incorporating the reader, and the nght and left choirs.
Antiphons are hymns that are sung antiphonally by two choirs alternation. Dogmatics are hymns that
poetically express key doctrinal points of the Russian Orthodox Church. Gardner actually labels this
"Hymns of a Dogmatic nature.^' Gardner, 28, 37, 48-49.
'^ Morosan explains: "The Russian system of Eight Tones, while superficially based on the
Byzantine system, is different in musical structure. Whereas in the Byzantine Octoechos each cchos is a
distinctly different scale or mode, all eight Russian Tones (glas's) are based on the same tone row or gamut
and are differentiated only by characteristic melodic formulae." Choral Performance, 341n7
'^ Hemvimskaya is the Cherubic Hymn; Dostoyno yest is n-anslated "It is truly fitting" and is a
hymn in praise to the "Mother of God;" and Velikoe Slavoslovie is translated "Great Glorification "
^* Presumably, at this point in the lecture, Gretchaninoff either discussed these examples or
performed part of it on the piano.
" Kiev IS an ancient Russian city, now the capital of Ukraine.

252
elegant, and in terms of overall character, it more closel> matched the secular song, and

its semeiography, or hooks, were a little different than Znamennv chant hooks.'^

The books of Znamenny chant are divided into three periods: 1) the old tme

speech, from the earliest sources available dafing from the Uv elfth to the fifteenth

centuries; 2) the distinct speech, lasfing about two centuries; and 3) the new true speech

that followed the Council of 1667-69. The issue of those three speeches consists of the

following. Semi-vowels using the "hard sign" or "soft sign"'^ of the old books had a

musical sign that ftmcfioned as a note to be sung in a certain manner, but how? That

secret was lost by the fifteenth century. Then, the semi-vowels were simply replaced by

vowels-the hard sign by the letter 'o,' and the soft sound by the letter 'e.' Instead of

s'greshihom', bezzkonovahom' ni s'tvorihom' ni bludohom' pred Tobou and so in, it was

now sung 5ogreshihomo, bezzaknovahomo ni sotvorihomo ni sobludohomo pred

Tobou. The syllable 'homo' was repeated very often and that is why that singing was

called 'homovy' or 'hamovy' singing. The phenomenal style itself was called 'homonia.'

Morosan discusses "demestvennyi" singing as a style that was erroneously believed to have
been intended for extra-liturgical, household use. Razumovsky was the first to suggest this view, which
was uncritically supported by many writers after him, including Gretchaninoff as evidenced here. Morosan
writes, "Yet, as Gardner points out in his monograph. Das Problem des altrussischen demestischen
Kirchengesanges und seiner linielosen Notation (Munich, 1967), the evidence overwhelmingly indicates
that demestvermyi singing was a liUirgical genre, in many instances specifically intended for feast and
solemn hierarchal services." However, to be consistent with Gretchaninoffs summary of its overall srvle if
not its ftinction, Morosan then adds that demestvennyi singing was not governed by the Eight Tones, and
thus, achieved much more melodic and rhythmic freedom. Morosan, Choral Performance 24
The Russian alphabet has two letters that designate whether the preceding or the following
sound should be pronounced hard or soft. For instance, the "hard sign" was present at the end of every
noun of masculine gender. Following the 1917 resolution, the Communist government reformed the
language and abolished this rule conceminc hard smns.
The sentence here demonstrates the addition of syllables using the [o] \owel.

!53
Bezpopovtsy pracficed homonia for a long time, perhaps even todav if this group still

exists in Russia.'

One more very indecent custom was set up in that miserable time in Russia."^^ In

order to shorten a service and at the same time to sing all that was required according to

church regulations, singers began to sing simuhaneously: one deacon sang a motet,

another deacon sang another motet, and sometimes even three deacons sang at once. One

can only imagine what happened out of this! The ardent supporters of the correct order

condemned this practice. Ivan the Terrible, a great lover of singing, summoned the 1559

Council that decided that when shortening the service, texts should be read instead of

sung.^'

But all those disgraceftil things of that epoch were terminated only by the Council

of 1667, when the singers' committee that included well-known persons of that such as

Alexander Mezenetz, the famous writer on the Znamenny singing alphabet, Grigory Nos,

Feodor Konstanionov, and others composed the new true speech irmolog^' of Znamenny

chant.^^ That is why all of the following period is called the new tme speech penod. .\t

this time, singing schools were opened everywhere in Russia; for example, the well-

" Bezpopovtsy was a sect of the Old Believers that had no pnests. The word literalh means
"without priest."
^" Gretchaninoff adds a note here: "The epoch of the Tatar yoke, the epoch of diminishing the
number of competent and experienced singers.
"' Gretchaninoff adds this note: "By the way, Ivan the Terrible was a composer. The hv-mns that
he composed were published with this inscnption: 'The works of the tsar loann, despot of Russia."'
^^ Irmolog is a collection of irmos. See note 44 below.
^^ See Note 24 in chapter 3. Mezenetz authored a theoretical treatise entitled Izx'cshchcme a
soglasnctshikh pometakh [a report on the most consonant markings]. This treatise was the result of the
Comrmssion, and is noted by Morosan as "the last important n-eatise on neumatic notation " Morosan.
Choral Performance, 38, 253.

254
known Novgorod school of Sawa Rogov^"^ where the famous Shaidurov came from,

inventor of cinnabar marks; the Moscow school of Sylvester, the Domostroy author, and

other schools. The first Russian composers of sacred music whose names have survived

appeared at this fime. These composers include: Ivan Nos, the singing deacon who

"sang" as it was described at that time; in other words, he composed music for the postnv'

[Lenten] and tsvetnaya [colored] Triod, and also hymns"" for many saints; Markel

Bezborody who composed music for the Psalter; Stepan Golysh; Ivan Lukoshko, and

others.^^

It was the period of the true golden age of our church singing. Unfortunately, it

did not last long. Very soon, in the same seventeenth century, the new "skillful musical

art" gradually began to penetrate from the West. The so-called partesnoe singing on

several voices appeared. This singing did not enhance these marvelous ancient

melodies at all; quite the contrary, it damaged their beauty because they were harmonized

by people that were not experienced in harmonization. Soon afterw ard, the epoch of

Italian influence began and the ancient Znamenny chant receded into the background,

though it was not completely forced out of the Church. As we might express it today, it

simply went out of fashion.

Morosan cites an anonymous mid-seventeenth century treatise that speaks of Feodor Khristianin
as a famous singing teacher of Znamermy chant in Moscow, who taught about the old singinu masters of
Novgorod, mcluding Sawa Rogov. Choral Performance, 16-18.
The actual term used for hymns here is Stichera, referring to a type of hymn of varying content
and length, usually having poetic verses between eight and twelve lines, with the same number of
corresponding melodic lines. The "postny and tsvetnaya Triod" refers to a group of stichera defined by
Gardner as triadikon, or a hymn in praise of the Holy Trinity, Gardner 37.
Evidently, Gretchaninoff was familiar with the anonymous mid-seventeenth century treatise.
"Predislovie," which mentions all of the composers that he lists. .\ portion of the treatise is translated in
Morosan, Choral Performance, 17-18.
See Chapter 3, page 9 for a discussion of partesny singing

!55
 The harmonization of that time of the old tunes, or so-called "strochnoe penie"

[lower case singing] consisted of the addition to the Znamennv' chant melody two or three

melodies that were sometimes placed with it, the main Znamenny chant melodv was

placed in the middle and was called "the way" (as a 'Cantus Firmus'), one melodv was

higher-on top, and another was lower-on the bottom. I would sav' that in terms of

harmony, this type of singing was far from perfect, as nobody was able to harmonize.

The other voices simply repeated the same main melody, sometimes in thirds, sometimes

in sixths, but the worst of it were the voices that somefimes sang parallel fifths and even

seconds or sevenths that hardly could bring great pleasure to listeners. At the same time,

however, there was something new and attractive in it.

The notafion of this type of singing sfill consisted of signs. One line of signs was

written above the other with different dye, cinnabar or India ink so that the singers would

not get off key. However, very soon during the same seventeenth century, the five-line

staff notation system from the West reached us through South Russia. Its freedom and

superiority over the sign system were so obvious that it quickly replaced the signs. Since

that fime, all choral scores were written exclusively with linear notes and with a clef that

Still did not define the absolute pitch, but gave only the relafive pitch. That early clef

did not use the attached flats and sharps to determine the key. Gradually, other clefs

28 The term given for the type of clef used is the "cephautny clef"

256
appeared-the alto and tenor clefs, and the accidentals were introduced in the middle of

the composition and also beside the clef ^*^

At about the same time, the period of Polish influence came into both our

liturgical and non-liturgical sacred music. Many compositions in the form of "psalms,"

"chants," "concertos," and so on appeared bearing the name "Polish art." Outwardlv, the

Polish influence was reflected even in the singers' dress. That clothing-colored caftans

with galloons and sleeves that folded backwards-not so fitting to the Russian tvpe,

survived intact in some choirs unfil the October revolufion.^^ In the end of the same

seventeenth century, the so-called "God's services" for four, five, eight and sometimes

more voices were introduced (there were even "compositions" for fortv-eight voices!).

Among these composifions, one sometimes could find music that mav have

sounded fine, but the majority of them were a senseless conglomeration of voices and

melodies of figurative constmcfion. The adoration of melodies with figurations was

named "excelirovanie,"^' the word that was so characteristic for that epoch. By the way,

Peter the Great, who loved church singing, sometimes participated on the basso part

performance that often consisted of fast and rather difficult passages.

The following comment of a contemporary testifies that such music did not give

pleasure to amateur singers: "It's noise and sound that only novices like, but experts

consider it to be nonsense."

''' One word with very small letters was inserted into the original manuscript here that was
illegible. The last phrase at the end of the sentence, "and also beside the clef," is the translator's best guess
at the actual text.
^° The reference here is to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917.
'' "Excelirovanie" is a contrived word that is not used in Russian. It is from the 1 atin "excel"

257
 The partesnoe singing supported by Peter the Great, the paniarch Nikon, and

other influenfial persons then gave way to a new passion, the passion for secular Italian

music that predominated in all Western Europe. The Court orchestra emerged in St.

Petersburg, and Italian composers were inv ited there as conductors. The v isiting Italians

played a tremendous role in the subsequent fate of our church music. Under their

influence, the national face of our church music was completely lost for a long time. The

music was Italianized and the ancient Znameimy chant was consigned to almost complete

oblivion. That oblivion was so strong, so deep, that even though the contemporary works

of our Russian composers have taken on the Italian character since then, these works

were respected as demonstrative of genuine Russian orthodox singing. That opinion has

lasted even to the present time.

The first Italian invited to serve as the court conductor in St. Petersburg w as

Baltasar Galuppi (1706-1784).^^ Having already reached the age of sixty, Galuppi had

written more than seventy comic operas that were performed with success in his

homeland; so that Italian came to us and composed music for our church that was, of

course, in the same style as his comic operas. His concertos were so enormously

successftil that a number of imitators resuhed.

Galuppi's successor who took over the duties as Director of the Court Chapel w,is

Giuseppi Sarti (1729-1802). He also composed various motets and concertos for our

" Baldassare Galuppi actually livedft-om1706 to Januar>' 3. 1785. The discrepancy in dates arc
probably due to the differences of the Eastern calendar system to the Western calendar system. See note 61
on Chapter II. Galuppi served as director of the Court Chapel in St. Petersburg from 1765-P68

258
church, and among other things, directed the eight-part oratorio "Tebe Boga kh\ alim"

[We Praise Thee God] that was performed with great pomp near the town of Yassv in

the open air, and in the presence of Potemkin.^^ The concert was performed with

orchestra, three hundred singers in the choir, and with nnging bells and canon blasts

included in the accompaniment.

It is interesting to note here what was said in their homeland about those Italians

who caused such a sensation by their music in Russia. Look at what the critic Malpurg

wrote: "Today, only those who do not have taste may like the fiivolous works of such

masters as Galuppi, Sarti, Scalabrini, and the like."^^ ("Otche Nash" [our Father] by

Sarti).^^

One of the prominent Russian composers of that epoch was Berezovsky who lived

in the middle of the eighteenth century (1745-1777).^^ Being a student of the Court

Chapel Choir, Berezovky was distinguished both for his voice and for his musical

abilities. First, he leamed music theory from the choir teacher Cinnis, who was Italian of

course. Then, when he was twenty years old, he was sent to Italy at the expense of the

" This oratorio was one of two Russian oratorios that Sarti composed for the Imperial Chapel
Choir.
^* Count Grigory Potemkin maintained a private court chapel and employed Sarti as maestro di
cappella. Potemkin was also a favorite courtier of Catherine the Great. Morosan, Choral Performance in
Pre-Revolutionary Russia 65.
" About the style of liturgical music composed by Italians, Morosan notes: "The sacred works
written by composers such as Galuppi and Sarti for the Roman Catholic Church, were, in most instances,
considerably more restrained in style than their works for the Orthodox linirgy. Sacred composition in the
West was governed by distinctions between the stile antico and the stile modemo. However, no similar
guidelines existed conceming writing for the Orthodox Church-the Italians w ere breaking completely new
ground." Morosan, Choral Performance, 320n71.
"*'• Presumably at this point in the lecture, Gretchaninoff either discussed Sarti's setting or
performed part of it on the piano as an example.
^' Maksim Berezovky was a student of Galuppi and a contemporarv' of Dmitri Bortnianksy (17"^l-
1825), both of whom received similar eariy music education under the institutions of the Court Chapel as
well as in Italy. Morosan, Choral Performance. 61.

259
government to study with the well-known pedagogue and historian. Martini in Bologna.

Berezovsky brilliantly graduated from the school. He excelled with his compositions to

the degree that his name was engraved with golden letters on a marble plaque in the

Bologna Academy. Upon his return to Russia, since all of the high positions in the

Chapel were held by Italians, he only received an insignificant position. Thus, hav ing

been neglected, and finding himself in desperate need to the point of pov eny. he

tragically took his own life, given up to despair, bv slitting his throat.^^ We may point to

the most typical and best of his works-" Veruu" [Credo] and the concerto "Ne otv erzhi

mene v starostu" [Do not reject me when I am old].

While the Italians composed sacred music for our church often w ithout any

agreement of music with the text, this could not happen w ith our Russians: Berezovsky,

Dekhtvarev (1766-1813) and Vedel (1767-1810) who hved after him.^^ These composers

favorably differed from their Italian teachers since the Italians did not know the church

Slavonic nor even the Russian language.

The most prominent among the composers of the Italian epoch was undoubtedlv

D.S. Bortniansky (1751-1825). He, like Berezovsky and other talented young men in the

Recent scholarship reports that in actuality, Berezovsky probably died from a fever associated
with catarrhal disease. The corrmionly reported statement that he comrmtted suicide does not have
historical documentary confirmation.
Stepan Degtiarev served for most of his life as a serf singer, precentor, and a composer in the
chapel of Count Sheremetev, and was one of the few such serfs who was recognized for his superior
musical talent and finally awarded emancipation. Both Degtiarev and .Artemy Xedel' (1772-1808) were
criticized in 1870 by the cntic Hermann Larosch: "...Ignorant critics fail to understand that the [Russian
church] music of Sarti and Galuppi and their Russian followers [eg., Bormiansky, Vedel', Degtiarev, et
al] represents the worst examples of a fallen 'Latinism'-extemal formalism without an inner warming
spirit, worldly and secular content covered up with a 'churchly exterior'..." Morosan, Choral Perlormance.
66. 87.

260
fime of Elizaveta Petrovna,"^^^ was sent to improve his musical knowledge in Italv' where

he leamed from the same Galuppi who in 1768 returned home to Venice after his bnef

stay in Russia. While living abroad, Bortnianksy sent his works that created his

reputafion to Russia. In 1779, he returned to Russia and in 1796 filled the position of

director for the Imperial Court Chapel.

Bortniansky appeared in between two epochs when the Italian stv le reigned verv

deep and with absolute power, but also when the eyes of the lovers of church singing

began to appeal to half-forgotten ancient melodies. In 1772, a decree from the Holy

Synod stimulated the published editions of books of great and small monophonic

Znamenny chant. Five years later, the concise customary chant book was published."^'

Our dear old tunes, loved from the ancient times, were heard in our churches due to the

appearance for the first time of published chant books in easy to read five-line staff

notation. Bortniansky was the first to begin to arrange the ancient melodies for use in a

choral work. His knowledge was sound in the area of harmonization and voice leading.

Especially considering the strochnoe penie,"*^ when composers groped their way,

Bortnianksy's arrangements testify that study of music in the West was not done in v ain,

and that we mastered compositional technique no worse than any Italian.

Natural Russian instinct helped Bortnianksy to appreciate the epic and lofty

beauty of our ancient tunes, but the Italian nuisance was so great that it prevented him

40
Elizabeth was the daughter of Peter the Great who ruled the empire from r 4 l - P M
"' The actual term describing this book of chants is "obikhod." Morosan notes the following: "In
reference to liturgical books the term obikhod (lit. custom daily use) corresponds to the Latin usualLw
however there is no equivalent term in English." Morosan, Choral Performance, 323nll.
^' Strochnoe Penei is the lower case singing described above on page eight

261
from wrapping them into fitting harmonic and contrapuntal clothing that would

correspond to the natural melodic style. He appreciated their beauty, but he did not

understand their modality. He knew only the major and minor tonalitv of the Italian

music of the time. This explains why Bortnianksy sometimes changed melodies bv the

insertion of a sharp where it seemed to him more beautifiil, or sometimes arbitrarilv

changed the rhythm that led to a distortion and loss of the melodic character. So for a

long, long time, our ancient tunes, an inexhaustible spring of deeply religious

inspirations, could not find worthy hands for their arrangement. ("Khristos voskrese")

[Christ is risen]."^^

The arrangements of Turchaninov (1779-1856)'*'^ were a step fonvard to some

degree. For the first time after a long break, the ancient tunes that had been almost

forgotten but were so dear to the Russian soul were heard in his simple, unpretentious

arrangements. His zadostoiniki*^^ were especially successftil, and have remained so to

this day. Nevertheless, Turchaninov did not figure out the modal character of the ancient

tunes, and his arrangements do not exceed the boundaries of the normal major and minor

tonality.

"^ At this point, Gretchaninoff likely either played or discussed this particular work listed in
parenthesis as an example. See note 34 above.
** Pnest Pyotr Turchaninov, along with L'vov, Nikolai Potulov (1810-1873). and others made
early attempts at harmonizing chants. As they did not recognize the melodic nature of the chant, their
harmonizations are constructed so that the chant can only be performed "slowly and lugubriously."
Morosan, Choral Performance, 271.
^' Zadostoiniki were a kind of irmos, or link that consisted of an initial stanza that was followed b\
a set of two or more stanzas identical to the initial stanza in meter, number of syllables, and melody I hc>
functioned as connecting links between Old Testament and New Testament themes sometimes developed in
humns. Gardner 40-41

262
 Then, the arrangements of Potulov (1810-1873)'*^ appeared. Thev were worthy of

interest because he tried to put on our ancient melodies a suit of the strictly Western style

which was not altogether fitting for it. The note for note style with the use of exclusiv ely

consonant triads made his arrangements monotonous and boring. The adv antage of

Potulov's arrangements was that they were written in asymmetrical rhythms that stnctlv'

followed the original rhythm of the melody.

L'vov the son (Alexey Fedorovitch) was one of the first men that addressed free

and unsymmetrical rhythm. He was the director of the Court Chapel Choir from 1837 to

1861, and author of the anthem "Bozhe, tzaria khrani" [God save the tsar]. His thought

was expressed as follows—since the verbal text of church motets is always prosaic and

free, then the accompanying melody should be the same: free and asymmetrical in terms

of rhythm. The melody should not be pressed into the boundaries of a strictly determined

meter. To illustrate his point, L'vov takes Bortnyanksy's "Otche Nash"'*^ and points to the

declamatory mistakes in it and suggests a free rhythm of his own for the same text.
48
Nevertheless, I must say that his correction is also weak. Bortniansky has

"^ Nikolai Potulov was an amateur composer who taught Arkhangel'sky, the most prominent figure
in choral music in St. Petersburg by the end of the nineteenth century. Stylistically, he is grouped with
Metallov (1862-1926) and Solov'ev (1883-1909), who imitated the strict style of Western poKphony,
resulting in, according to Morosan, "simple, amazingly dull; worse yet, they represented another infusion
into Russian church music of a foreign style." (Morosan, Choral Performance. 21). His Rukovodstvo k
prakticheskomu izucheniiu drevnegopeniia Pravoslavnoi Rossiiskoi Tserhi [A manual for the practical
study of the ancient singing of the Russian Orthodox Church] was one of four sources from the time (as
listed by Morosan) that provided additional examples of onginal chants that were not found in the Synodal
chant-books, as well as helpful instruction in the rhythmic interpretation of chants Morosan, Choral
Performance 252, 264.
*^ "Our Father," the complete text is from Manhew 6:9-13 and Luke 11.2-4
*^ At this point, Gretchaninoff includes musical examples and discussion that are crossed out The
remarks and musical examples are included here, howe\ er

263
 [example of music included at this point in the essay, the text is translated: "Let thy
_ kingdom come. Let thy will be done."]

^P^Z^^fffM^l^ ^ /^-^^/--.WJi^
i
L'vov suggests on the same text the following rhythm:

^m
^ ; ; ^ 2 ^ / ^ 4^?^^^<'^^<^'^
t^H^-^ ^Hwi^ / ^ s

The indication that Bortnianksy has the long notes on the weak syllable "da" [let] two

times that leads to a declamatory mistake is completely right. Howev er, in no way mav

one agree with the method proposed by L'vov for correcting that mistake. Resorting to

the meter altemafion in that example, L'vov offers a rather clumsy rhythm. Bortnvanksi's

mistake could be corrected very easily and without meter alternation. For example;
V »-f

Sk ^jM
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ H ^ ^
Asymmetrical rhythm in itself does not contain anything attractive or worthy of

aspiration. Very often, it is just a forced necessity during composition on a prosaic text.

On the contrary, L'vov, as if on purpose, invented metric alternation in a place w here the

meter itself was really not essential or necessary.

At this point, the text that is not crossed out continues.

264
 Today, the free rhythm question has already lost its actuality. Mussorgskv'.

Borodin, and other composers of the golden age epoch of Russian music, but especially

Borodin, though unfortunately they did not compose spiritual music, brilliantlv solved the

free rhythm issue with their secular music. So, modem composers of spiritual music

should not have to raise any questions.

Among the famous Russian composers, only Tchaikovsky, and in a small w av

Glinka and Rimsky-Korsakov, paid special attention to our spiritual music. Emperor

Nikolai Pavlovitch,^^ after the great success of ^ Life for the Tsar,'^ appointed Glinka as

the director of the Imperial Court Chapel Choir in 1836,^' when he said. "My singers are

known throughout Europe, and therefore are worthy of your care. I have onI> one

request: they should not be Italians." I doubt that the singers in the Imperial Court

Chapel Choir were known to all Europe—it hardly corresponded to the actual state of

affairs, but the fact that the tsar did not want Italians to sing in the choir is both

remarkable and typical for the epoch we are talking about. From this point onw ard, a

tum in a direction away from the Italian style was accomplished, and our spiritual music

started down the path of national self-determination, at last taking the nght direction.

However, as we will see, it was a strikingly slow process.

^° Nicholas I who reigned as Tsar from 1825-1855.

'" Upon the 1836 premier of his opera .4 Life for the Tsar, Glinka was acknowledged overnight as
Russia's leading composer.
^' Morosan notes that Glinka was appointed the special position of "kapellmeister" for the Imperial
Chapel in 1837, and adds: "The German term kapellmeister in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Russia
signified the musical (as opposed to the administrative) leader df either a vocal or instrumental
establishment, someone who functioned both as a conductor and as a pedagogue. The Imperial Chapel,
however, had no such position in it organizational structure. This post was apparently created especially
for Glinka, who had no specific duties assigned to him." Morosan, Choral Performance, 77, 322n4.

265
 Glinka's ministry to the Choir lasted only about three years, and regrettablv it was

not marked with anything noteworthy. Only manv years later, after the creation of

"Ruslan," the great founder of the Russian national school began to consider our ancient

tunes. Their richness and beauty so deeply captivated the great artist that he decided to

dedicate himself to the study of liturgical singing. Glinka was perhaps the first to

discover the modal character of our ancient melodies. ]n the twilight of his life, Glinka

collected sources and manuals on ancient singing, and made the first attempts to

harmonize the ancient melodies (by the technique that was later adopted by Potulov. who

I mentioned above). He finally then went to Beriin and Vienna to improve his technique

of dealing with the ancient church modes. Howev er, his dream of his last days did not

come true. Soon upon his arrival in Berlin, he fell sick of a mortal illness and died.

Glinka's death tragically echoed throughout the halls of church singing. Its

development stopped for a long time. Due to some strange coldness toward our native

church art, the leaders of Russian musical composition who were Glinka's followers, left

the field of church music almost completely untouched. Mossorgsky. Borodin, and even

Balakirev who was director of the Imperial Court Chapel Choir for twelve years,'"^

composed virtually nothing for the church. Though Rimsky-Korsakov did leav e

•* Rusland i Lyudmila was Glinka's fifth opera produced after. f Life for the Tsar, composed from
1837-1842, and premiered in 1842.
Morosan notes that Balakirev was appointed Superintendent of the Imperial Court Chapel in
1883, and he served in this capacity until 1895. The same year he was appointed, the position of director
was eliminated. Choral Performance. 96.

266
something when he was the deputy director of the Chapel under Balakirev," - he made no

efforts to hide his indifferent attitude towards our church singing.

Tchaikovsky made greater contributions than others, but onlv in terms of number.

He was the only one among the outstanding composers of the preceding epoch to give

greater attention to our church singing. He composed two large-scale compositions: the

Liturgy on his own tunes, and his arrangement of the Vsenoshnoe Bdenie [All-night

Vigil].

Only by the reputation of his great name as a composer can one explain the

outstanding and unprecedented success that his Liturgy received-a composition that w as

not at all remarkable and even weak in some places. Perhaps the success of this work

was also promoted by the scandal that was raised by Bakhmetev's law suit against

Jurgenson,^^ the publisher of the Liturgy. At that time, Bakhmetev was the director of the

Imperial Court Chapel Choir. Bakhmetev demanded the destruction of the work because

allegedly some censorial rules had not been obeyed, and also because it could not be

permitted in the church due to its allegedly operatic style. Bakhmetev lost the case.

^^ About Rimsky-Korsakov's achievements during his time with the Imperial Chapel, Morosan
states: "In an effort to upgrade the liturgical chant repertoire Balakirev and Rimsky-Korsakov collaborated
on Penie pri Vsenoshchnom Bdenii Drevnikh Napevov [The all-night vigil of the ancient chants], a
collection of four-part harmonizations for mixed chorus in which the chant melodies were preserv ed
without alteration and the harmonies were appropriately modal But despite Rimskv-Korsakov's belief that
in this work he and Balakirev had "opened everyone's eyes with regard to the proper and natural
harmonization of common chants," the Vigil did not succeed in superseding the Obikhod of L'vov-
Bakhmetev. Choral Performance, 97, citing Antonin Preobrazhensky, Kul'tovaia muzyka v Rossii [The
music of the cult in Russia], Leningrad: Academia, P)24, 107-108.
'^ P. Jurgenson of Moscow was a firm named for its founder that published Russian hturgical
music throughout the era of the New Russian Choral School, and by 1913 was the largest publisher ot
sacred choral music. Morosan, Choral Performance. 88- S9.

267
 Tchaikovsky's All-night Vigil played a more important role. It consists of

arrangements of the obikhod tunes created bv the master's hand. Howev er. this work also

did not inftise any fresh spirit into the arrangement of our ancient melodies.

Now I would like to draw your attention to the interesting and v ery strange

phenomenon in the sphere of the development of our church singing. During the long

period of time beginning from Bortniansky's death in 1825 until the end of the last

century, almost no progress took place in the development of the art of spiritual music.

Meanwhile, during this particular period, new forms were created that laid the foundation

for the creafive work of the present day representatives of the new school of church

music composition. Borodin, who did not write music for the church, and especially

Mussorgsky, taught contemporary composers of sacred music to deal with the modal

character of the ancient melodies. They taught us how to harmonize them and how to

make them contrapuntal without cormpting their style, spirit, or nature. Regarding

Rimsky-Korsakov, one might say that his secular works, for instance "Kitezh," could

serve and did serve as an example for contemporary composers of sacred music, much

more so than any of his works created especially for the church. The composers

mentioned above quite often had to use folk songs from traditional ceremonies that bore a

strong resemblance to the church melodies. They also pictured pagan worship, as in

" Rimsky-Korsakov composed the four act opera Skazaniy o nevidimom grade Kitczhe i dcve
Fevronii [Legend of the Invisible City of Kitezh and the .Maiden Fevroniiya] in 1903-1905 It premiered in
St. Petersburg in 1907.

268
Rimsky-Korsakov's "Mlada."^^ For their operas, they used, and did not take it amiss, our

ancient church tunes. We should not reproach them, but we should rather praise them,

because those melodies originated from ancient times-when the same melodies most

likely were sung in honor of Pemn or Veles^^ ~ those same melodies also serv ed for the

praise of the new God: after all, the image of the artist Creator and his spirit remained the

same. Let us take for example Mussorgsky's "Boris Goudunov," and we w ill see that,

with the exception of the Polish third act, this opera is almost entirely saturated with

music of a liturgical character. Let me point out the following passages: the end of the

prologue's first act (beggar's choms), and Boris's entry in the prologue's second act; the

scene in Pimen's cell that was intermpted by the monk's singing behind the stage; the

second part of Yurodivi's song [Yurodivi means "God's fool"]; the Boyar duma

conference being held to the accompaniment of the majestic and religious character;

Boris's death to the accompaniment of singers behind the stage; and very many other

single episodes (such as the brief characteristic scenes of the monks, Varlam and Misail,

in the scene of Boris with the closest boyar and many others).

Probably, I would not be mistaken to say that all of the next generation of

composers of sacred music are above all indebted to those composers of secular music

who actually composed few if any spiritual works, but by their secular music influenced

" Rimsky-Korsakov composed two operas titled Mlada. The first, composed in 1872. uas a result
of a collaboration with Borodin, Cui, Mussorgsky, and Minkus. Due to the fact that it was unfinished,
unpublished, and ne\ er performed, this reference may be assumed to be to his second Mlada, composed in
1889-90, published in 1891, and premiered in St. Petersburg in 1892.
Perun and Veles were pagan gods that were worshipped in Russia prior to the bapusm of the
Rusin988.

269
the development of church music. The new generation leamed from these composers,

and drew inspiration from their creative works (Boris Goudunov).

270
 APPENDIX C

REVIEWS OF GRETCHANINOFF'S SECOND LITURGY

OF ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, OPUS 29

The following excerpts are complete translations of the published rev iew s in the

Moskovskie Vedomosti of the premier performance of Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy of

St. John Chrysostom, Opus 29, which took place on March 2 (15), 1903. in the Moscow

Nobility House. The first review on March 5, 1903, was written by Nikolai Kashkin,

professor at the Moscow Conservatory and former piano teacher of Gretchaninoff. As

noted in Chapter II, aside from Kashkin's 1875 textbook on elementary music theory that

remained in use in Russia for over fifty years, Kashkin's most significant contribution to

music would be his many essays published in the Moskovskie Vedomosti that discussed

the music of Balikirev, Borodin, Rimsky-Korsakov, and especially Tchaikovsky. The

second review, from an anonymous author, discusses a second performance of Vasiliev's

Choir that took place on March 26 (April 8), featuring many of the individual choral

movements from Gretchaninoffs second Liturgy. The editions from the Moskovskie

Vedomosti represented here were located in the State Historical Public Library in

Moscow, translated by Sergei Shishkin, and edited by Philip Camp.

271
Kashkin, N. "Den' moskovskih kompositorov" [Moscow Composer's Dav],
Moskovskie Vedomosti, No 63, March 5(18), 1903. 4-5.

On Sunday, March 2, the music from nine young composers w as performed at

three separate concerts. The concerts were successful to a greater or lesser degree,

revealing the talents and skills demonstrated in the composers' w ork. .Among these

composers, only A. T. Gretchaninoff already has a significant reputation, as the rest of

them recently have just begun their careers as independent composers. A.T.

Gretchaninoff studied composition at the St. Petersburg Conservatory under N..-\.

Rimsky-Korsakov, and the rest of the composers graduated from the Moscow

Conservatory where they received their musical training.

We already have spoken often about how the Russian musical school has

developed with astonishing speed, and even continues to develop and grow before our

eyes. The day March 2 presented the visual evidence of that fact. F orty years ago,

Russian music literature practically did not exist at all; only two of Glinka's and one of

Dargomizhky's operas were the first fiiiits of the possibility of the independent

development of Russian music, and only a few people began to appreciate the greatness

of Glinka's works. Now, forty years since the time that the first Russian conservatory

was opened in St. Petersburg, we have a magnificent group of composers that hardly can

be exceeded by the modem composers of any other country, both in terms of quality and,

very likely, quantity.

Due to the occasion of March 2, we may once again commemorate the Rubinstein

brothers. Russia is indebted exclusively to them for the establishments currently in place

for music education. They have put Russian musicians on the same plane of education

272
with those of Western Europe. In the past, there was great opposition against the routine

of what was allegedly a German school for our Russian musical forces, the school that

was established and sustained by the authority of the Rubinsteins. But now, we no longer

hear such voices of opposition. The facts now point to the benefit of the school for our

Russian musicians, who have matured in that strong healthy soil. With gratitude we must

remember both the intellect and the unconquerable energy of those workers that planted

and brought up the ideas of music educafion that now stand as unconquerable pillars in

the Russian art world.

March 2 represented the triumph of those ideas, because those who appeared

before the public showed such seriousness of training and knowledge in addition to their

talents, which are independent of the school, serving as the best guarantee for the

fruitftilness of their ftiture activity. This activity will not suffer from the chance of not

being grounded in solid technical training, upon which talent is always dependent. This

is why we decided to remind you of the names of the people that have served most of all

to the work of music educafion in Russia.

In addressing the three concerts held on March 2, we must speak about such a

large quanfity of music, completely new and being performed for the first time, that we

must be very brief. Moreover, even our memory reftises to keep the details of these

compositions that we do not have in hand. Thus, we will put off a more complete

analysis of the most significant works for another special article, and now we will limit

ourselves to only a brief list.

273
 A.T. Gretchaninoffs new Liturgy^ ft2 was performed at the concen of sacred music

given by L.V. Vasiliev's Choir in the Assembly's great hall. This concert was

accompanied by such great success of the performers as well as the composer, and

attracted so much attention from the public, that we must address it.

A.T. Gretchaninoff already has been recognized as a significant composer of

church music, where he is an independent figure. He belongs w ith the most talented

group of renovators of Russian church music. In hearing his new liturgv, one

immediately senses that the composer freely masters both counterpoint and harmonv', and

furthermore, is quite capable of writing for a choir. When Mr. Gretchaninoff combines

the spiritual quality of the ancient melodies with the general character of Russian music,

he leaves a stamp that is simultaneously both individual and national, elegantlv expressed

through the qualifies of unique melodic and harmonic progressions.

From what we heard, the complete Liturgy is writtenw ith great talent, but the

Creed represents an ingenious invention in its genre, through its simplicity and the

amazing poesy of its design that remains in the framework of the strictest church style.

The invenfiveness of the Creed consists of the declamation of the text by a boy alto

soloist on a few, mostly repeated notes, while the choir sings "vemu" [I believe] through

each part, emphasizing the content of the given passage through powerful yet simple

harmonic colors. This movement as a whole creates a marvelously beautiful impression

that completely captivates the listener.

If we add that the performances of this movement along with all of the other

movements were literally excellent, then the tremendous impact that the Creed had on the

274
audience will be understandable to you; furthermore, the boy desen es great praise, as he

declaimed the text very clearly and seriously. Generally. L.\'. \'asiliev 's Choir stands far

above other ordinary private choirs in regard to their vocal quality and their discipline of

performance; thus, we only can rate it w ith first-class choirs.

We were not able to hear the second part of the Liturgy^ because we were in a

hurry to get to the young composers' concert held in the Conservator) 's great hall.

N.K

"Dukhovny Kontsert" [The Sacred Music Concert], Moskovskie Vedomosti, No 85,

March 27 (April 9) 1903,4.

On March 26, the choir of L.V. Vasiliev presented a concert of sacred music in

the great hall of the Conservatory. The concert was performed for the benefit of the

parish tmsteeship under the Sorokosviatsky church. The concert consisted of the motets

from the Liturgy #2 by A.T. Gretchaninoff that already had been performed w ith great

success by the same choir on March 2. As in the first performance, the Creed brought

forth the greatest ecstasy. The composer conceived the Creed very artistically and w ith

absolute originality. Gretchaninoffs Creed is positively the rev elation in the field of

orthodox church singing, shown by its deep, movinglv simple and sincere religious

mood, and by the wonderful musical form in which it is expressed. Hardly anything

writtenin the past can be compared to the Creed.

The Creed created and extraordinary impression on the listeners. The audience

listened to this motet with undivided attention. When it finished, the unanimous requests

275
for a second performance were heard. The composer took a call and was met with

applause, and was given the laurel wreath.

After the second performance of the Creed, the boy who perfectly declaimed the

text to the motet against the slow and soft accompaniment of the choir received manv

golden coins on a platter. Most probably, the coins were collected immediatelv from the

audience.

276
 APPENDIX D

THE CHORAL WORKS OF ALEXANDRE GRETCHANINOFF

 Table D.l

The Choral Works of Alexandre Gretchaninoff

Title Opus Year of Completion,

Publisher
4 Choruses, mixed voices a 4 1892. Balaieff
cappella—
1. Abadendrate; 2. Im Abendrot;
3. Uber'm Fluss; 4. Nord und Siid
Samson, cantata for 4 solo voices, 1893, manuscript"
chorus, and orchestra
2 Choruses, women's voices a 10 1895, Balaieff
cappella—
1. Die Nacht; 2. Der Lenz ist nah!
2 Tableaux, mixed voices a 12 1897. Balaieff
cappella—
1. Apres le coucher du soleil;
2. La nuit
First Liturgy of St. John 13 1897. Jurgenson
Chrysostom, mixed chorus a
cappella
2 Melodies, mixed voices a 16 1898, BalaeitT
cappella-
1. Le matin dans les montagnes;
2. Le soleil et la lune
2 Sacred Choruses, mixed voices 19 1898,Jurgenson ]
a cappella— 1
1. As the Waves of the Sea;
2. Oh, Be Joyful in the Lord!
Hear, 0 Lord, My Prayer, mixed 26 1901, Boston Music Co.
voices a cappella
Second Liturgy of St. John 29 1902,Jurgenson
Chrysostom, mixed chorus a
cappella
Ay-doo-doo!, 6 Russian songs for 31 1903. Gutheil
children's chorus and piano (also
for one or two voices and piano)
2 Sacred Choruses, mixed voices 34 1904,Jurgenson
a cappella—
1. Lord, now lettest; 2. Praise ye
the Name of the Lord
To the Memory of the Fallen for 1905, manuscript
Freedom, funeral march for
mixed voices, a cappella

' This table was compiled from Gretchaninoffs own catalogue of \uuks listed in his
autobiography. Gretchaninoff, A/\ Az/f 175-204
" The items listed in manuscript were unpublished as of l'>52, the year of the publication of
Gretchaninoffs autobiography.

!78
 Table D.l Continued

Title Opus Year of Completion,

Publisher
2 Fables of Kryloff, men's voices 36 1905, Moscow State Publishing
a cappella— House
1. The Frog and the Bull; 2. The
Swan, the Carp, and the Crawfish
The Little Brook, 4 melodies for 40 1907, Gutheil
1
children's chorus with piano
2 Sacred Choruses, mixed 44 1908, Jurgenson 1
voices a cappella—
1. Communion Service;
2. Blessed art Thou
In the Country, 4 children's 45 1908, Gutheil
choruses with piano
Four Seasons, 4 children's 46 1908, Gutheil
choruses with piano—
1. En hiver; 2. L'appel du
printemps; 3. La recolte; 4. En
automne
2 Sacred Choruses, mixed voices 24 1909, Jurgenson
a cappella-
1. The Lord, 0 My Soul! 2. Oh
Gladsome Light!
Passions, mixed voices a cappella 58 1911, Jurgenson
Vespers, mixed voices a cappella 59 1912, Jurgenson
2 Sacred Choruses, mixed voices 71 1913, Jurgenson
a cappella
Laudate Deum, cantata for Tenor 65 1914, Gutheil
solo, mixed chorus, orchestra,
and organ
L'Abeille, for children's chorus 66 1914, Gutheil
and piano (also for solo voice and
piano)
Domestic Liturgy (Third Litiu-gy 79 1917, Gutheil
of St. John Chrysostom), for
tenor and bass solo, chorus, string
orchestra, organ, and harp
2 Sacred Choruses, mixed voices 80 1918, Gutheil
a cappella—
1. Meet It Is; 2. The Lord's Prayer
5 Sacred Choruses, mixed voices 94 1921, Raymond A. Hofftnan
a cappella-
1. Hymn to the Trinity;
2. Cherubim Song; 3. Hymn to
the Virgin; 4. The Lord's Prayer;
5. Communion Service
2 Songs, children's or women's 105 1926, Moscow State Publishing
chorus a cappella House

279
 Table D.l Continued

Title Opus Year of Completion,

Publisher
4 Sacred Choruses, mixed voices 107 1927, G. Schirmer
a cappella—
1. The Lord's Prayer (also solo);
2. The Lord is My Light; 3. The
Lord's Prayer (soprano solo);
4. Lord Have Mercy Upon Me!
2 Children's Choruses with piano- 90 1929. Moscow State Publishing
1. Chant d'automne; 2. Le House
printemps est venu
2 Poems for women's chorus and 121 1929. manuscnpt
piano (also for soprano and
1
contralto solo, piano)
Blessed is the Man, mixed voices 136 1932, Oliver Ditson
a cappella
2 Chomses, mixed voices a 148 1935. H.W Gray
cappella— 1
1

1. Ice Floes; 2. Rainbow !1

2 Chomses, mixed voices a 149 1935, Oliver Ditson [
cappella- j

1. Echo; 2. Rhyme
2 Chomses, mixed voices a 151 1935.Neil A. Kjos
cappella—
1. After the Storm; 2. Faith
Victorious
Missa Oecumenica (Universal 142 1936, Manuscript
Mass), for 4 solo voices, choms,
organ, and orchestra.
Missa Festiva, for mixed chorus 154 1937, Pocure de Musique
and organ Religeuse
6 Motets for mixed choms and 155 1937, Procure de Mu.sique
organ Religieusc
Mass, for women's choms or 165 1939, Manuscript '
children's choms, and organ 1

3 Chomses for Funeral Service, 162 1940, manuscnpt ,

mixed voices a cappella
2 Hebrew Psalms, for tenor solo, 164 1941, Transcontinental
mixed voices, and organ—
1. Adonoy; 2. Tov L'hodos
Et in Terra Pax, mass for mixed 166 1942, McLaughlin & Reilly
choms and organ
Sancti Spiritu, Mass for rmxed 169 1943, J lischer&Bro.
choms and organ
Novy obihod (Fourth Liturgy of 17^ 1943, Federated Russian
St. John Chrysostom), for mixed Orthodox Clubs ot America
choms a cappella
The Lord Reigneth, cantata for 1946, nunuscript
mixed choms and organ

180
 Table D. 1 Continued

Title Opus Year of Completion,

Publisher
2 Sacred Chomses, mixed chorus 193 i 1950. J. Fischer
1
with accon^animent 1

3 Scotch Folk Songs, women's 195 1950. Leeds

choms with accompaniment
5 Sacred Chomses, mixed voices J. Fischer c^ Bro.
a cappella—
1. The Chembic Hymn;
2. 0 Gladsome Light; 3. As the
Waves of the Sea; 4. Only '
Begotten Son; 5. 0 Be Joyful in
the Lord
6 Chomses, mixed voices a Neal .A Kjos i
cappella— 1

1. We Magnify Thee; 2. The 1

Lord's Prayer; 3. The Lord is

Gracious; 4. 0 Willie Brew'd a
Peck o' Mak; 5. Her Daddy
Forbade; 6. Barmocks o'
Bearmeal
Nunc Dimittis, mixed voices a Boston Music Co. i
cappella
3 Chomses, mixed voices a Carl Fischer
cappella— [
I. Have Mercy, 0 Lord;
2. Night; 3. My Native Land 1
Hail, 0 Virgin, mixed voices a C. C. Birchard
cappella
2 Sacred Chomses, mixed voices Galaxy
a cappella-
1. Vouchsafe, 0 Lord; 2. Long
Life and Glory
Hear Me, 0 Lord, mixed voices a Boosey & Haukcs
cappella
11 Chomses, mixed voices a G. Schirmer
cappella—
1. Holy, Radiant Light; 2. Sun
and Moon; 3. AuUimn; 4. Over
the Steppe; 5. Lord, Have Mercy
Upon Us; 6. 0 Gladsome
Radiance; 7. Hymn to the Virgin;
8. The Lord's Prayer; 9. The Lord
is My Light; 10. Chembim Song;
11. A Poet's Monument ^^^^-^—^—^.^^^—^^^^^—^^^—^^

281
 Table D.l Continued

Title Opus Year of Completion,

Publisher
13 Sacred Choruses, mixed H. W. Gray
voices a cappella—
l.ToThee, OLord, ICry;
2.1 See Thy Kingdom; 3. O Lord,
I Have Loved; 4. Chembic Song;
5. Lord, I Have Cried Unto Thee;
6. Gladsome Radiance; 7. Praise
Be the Name of the Lord;
8. Praise the Lord, O My Soul;
9. From My Youth; 10. O Plena
Gratia; 11. Of Thy Mystical
Supper; 12. The Coolie Song;
13. 3 Funeral Songs

282
 APPENDIX E

THE DFV^INE LITURGY TEXT AS PRESENTED IX GRETCHANrNOFFS

SECOND LITURGY OF ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, OPUS 29'

No. 1 The Great Litany

DEACON: Bless, Master.

CELEBRANT: Blessed is the kingdom of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.
DEACON: In peace, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For the peace from above and for the salvation of our souls, let us pray to the
Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For the peace of the whole world, for the welfare of the holy churches of God,
and for the union of all, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For this holy house and for those who enter with faith, reverence, and the
fear of God, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For our lord. His (Holiness, Eminence, Grace), our (Patriarch, Metropolitan.
Bishop) (N.),for the honorable priesthood, the diaconate in Christ, for all the clergy and
the people, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For this country, for its civil authorities and armed forces, andjor ever\'
Christian land, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For this city, for every city and country, and for the faithful dwelling in them.
let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For seasonable weather, for abundance of the fruits of the earth. andp>r
peaceful times, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.

' Text Translation provided by N'ladimir Morosan, Copynght 2002 Musica Russica. .All Rights
Reserved. Used by Permission. In following Morosan's model of presenting the entire Liturgy texts as set
by Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff, the solo chant sections of the clergy are presented here in italics. The
choral responses set by Gretchaninoff appear in bold type.

283
 DEACON: For travelers by sea and by land, for the sick, the suffering, the captives, ami
for the salvation of them all, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For our deliverance from all affliction, wrath, danger, and necessity, let us
pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O God. by Thy grace
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.^
DEACON: Commemorating our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious Lady
Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary, with all the saints, let us entrust ourselves and each
other, and all our life unto Christ our God.
CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord.
CELEBRANT: For unto Thee are due all glory, honor, and worship: to the Father, and
to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.

No. 2a—The first Antiphon from Psalm 103

Bless the Lord, O my Soul,

Blessed art Thou, O Lord.
Bless the Lord, O my Soul,
And all that is within me bless
His Holy Name.
Bless the Lord, O my soul,
And forget not all his benefits.
The Little Litany after the first Antiphon
DEACON: Again and again, in peace let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O God, by Thy grace.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Having remembered our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious
Lady Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Marw with all the saints, let us entrust ourselves and
each other, and all our life unto Christ our God.
CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord.
CELEBRANT: For Thine is the majesty, and Thine are the kingdom, the power, and the
glory, of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages oJ
ages.
CHOIR: Amen.

' Gretchamnoff actually includes two more "Lord, have mercy" responses than presented here
The actual number of responses depended on the actual chant being sung, uhich varied sliiihtly according
to the day of the Limrgical year In a performance, decisions would need \o be made about either
modifying the chant, or cutting the number of choral responses.

2S4
 No. 2b The Second Antiphon from Psalm 146
CHOIR: Praise the Lord, O my Soul,
I shall praise the Lord in my Life,
I shall sing to God wherever I am.
Put not your hope in the sons of men.
In them there is no salvation.
God reigns forever
Thy God, O Sion, Thy God O Sion,
And from generation to generation.

No. 2c Glory to the Father... Only Begotten Son

(Troparian after the 2"** antiphon)
CHOIR: Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,
both now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.
Only-begotten Son, and Word of God,
Who art immortal,
and didst will for our salvation
to be incarnate of the Holy Theotokos
and Ever-Virgin Mary,
Who without change didst become man,
and wast crucified, O Christ God,
trampling down death by death.
Who art one of the Holy Trinitv,
glorified with the Father and the Holy Spirit,
save us.

No. 2d Little Litany

DEACON: Again and again, in peace let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercv on us, and keep us, O God, by Thy grace.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Having remembered our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious
Lady Theotokos and Ever- Virgin Mary, with all the saints, let us entrust ourselves and
each other, and all our life unto Christ our God.
CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord.
CELEBRANT: For Thou art a good God and lovest mankind, and to Thee we render
glory, to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages nf
ages.
CHOIR: Amen.

No. 2e The Third Antiphon (In Thy Kingdom)

CHOIR: In Thy Kingdom remember us, O Lord,

when Thou comest in Thy kingdom.

2S5
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled.
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God.
Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake,
for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.
Blessed are you when men shall revile you and persecute you, a
and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for My sake.
Rejoice and be exceedingly glad,
for great is your reward in heaven.
Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,
both now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.
Lord, have mercy.
No. 3 Come, let us worship (Psalm 95:6)
DEACON: Wisdom, let us be attentive!
CHOIR: Come, let us worship, and fall down before Christ! Save us O Son of God,
who art risen from the dead, save us, who sing to Thee: Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia.

CELEBRANT: For holy art Thou, O our God, and unto Thee we render glory: to the
Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever...
CHOIR: O Lord, save the pious and hear us!
DEACON: ...and unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.
Trisagion Hym
CHOIR: Holy God! Holy Almightv! Holy Immortal, have mercy on us!
Holy God! Holy Almighty! Holy Immortal, have mercy on us!
Holy God! Holy Almighty! Holy Immortal, have mercy on us!
Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,
Both now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.
Holy Immortal, have mercy on us.
Holy God, Holy Almighty, Holy Immortal,
Have mercy on us.

The Reader chants the Prokeimenon of the day, with the Choir responding, and then
reads the appointed Epistle Reading. Upon completion, the Reader intones: Alleluia,
alleluia, alleluia!
No. 4 Alleluia (Psalm prior to Gospel Reading)
CHOIR: Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia!
CELEBRANT: Wisdom! Let us be attentive' Let us listen to the Hnlv Gospel Peace he
unto all!
CHOIR: And to your spirit.

2S6
DEACON: The reading of the Gospel according to St. (N).
CHOIR: Glory to Thee, O Lord, glor> to Thee!
DEACON: Let us be attentive.
(The Deacon reads the appointed Gospel reading)
No. 5 The Augmented Litany
CHOIR: Glorv to Thee, O Lord, Glory to Thee! [repeated several times in the settmg]
DEACON: Let us say with all our soul and with all our mind, let us sav:
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: O Lord Almighty, God of our fathers, we pray Thee, hearken and have mercy
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Have mercy on us, O God, according to Thy great goodness, wc pray Thee,
hearken and have mercy.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Again we pray for our lord, His (Holiness, Eminence, Grace), our (Patriarch,
Metropolitan, Bishop) (N.) for priests, deacons, and all our brethren in Christ.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Again we pray for the blessed and ever-memorable holy Orthodox patriarchs:
and for the blessed and ever-memorable founders of this community: and for all our
fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, the Orthodox departed this life before us, who
here and in all the world lie asleep in Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy.
lyEKCOH: Again we pray for mercy. life, peace, health, salvation, visitation, forgiveness
and remission of sins for the servants of God, the brethren of this holy temple.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Again we pray for those who bring offerings and do good works in this holy
and all-venerable house; for those who labor and those who sing: and for all the people
here present, who await Thy great and rich mercy.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy.
CELEBRANT: For Thou art a merciful God, and lovest mankind, and unto Thee we
ascribe glory: to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and
unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.

No. 5b Litany for the Catechumens

DEACON: Pray to the Lord, you catechumens.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Let us, the faithful, pray for the catechumens, that the Lord may have mercv
on them.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: That He me teach them the word of truth.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DF.ACON: That He may reveal to them the gospel of righteousness.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: That He may unite them to His Holy, Catholic, and .Apostolic Church

187
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Help them, save them, have mercy on them, and keep them, O God, bv Tin-
grace.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Bow you heads unto the Lord, vou catechumens.
CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord.
CELEBRANT: That with us they may glorify Thine all-honorable and majestic Name: oj
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto a^cs ofj^es.
CHOIR: Amen.

5c. First and Second Litanies of the Faithful

DEACON: All catechumens, depart! Depart, catechumens! All that are catechumens.
depart! Let no catechumen remain! Let us, the faithful, again and again in peace pray
unto the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O god, by Thv grace.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON.- For unto Thee are due all glory, honor, and worship: to the Father, and to
the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.
DEACON: Again and again, in peace, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For the peace from above and for the salvation of our souls, let us pray to the
Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For the peace of the whole world, for the welfare of the holy churches of God,
and for the union of all, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For this holy house and for those who enter with faith, reverence, and the
fear of God, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For our deliverance from all affliction, wrath, danger, and necessity, let us
pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O God. by Thy grace.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Wisdom!
CELEBRANT: That guarded always by Thy might we may ascribe glor\' unto Thee: to
the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.

No. 6 Cherubic Hymn

CHOIR: Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim,
and who sing the thrice-holy hymn to the life-creating Trinity,

288
now lay aside all cares of this life.
CELEBRANT: May the Lord God remember you in His kingdom, now and ever, and
unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen. That we may receive the King of All, who comes invisiblv upborne
by the angelic host. Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia.

No. 7 The Litany of Supplication

DEACON: Let us complete our prayer unto the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For the precious Gifts now offered, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For this holy house, and for those who enter with faith, reverence, and the
fear of God, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For our deliverance from all affliction, wrath, danger and necessity, let us
pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O God, by Hiy grace.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: That the whole day may be perfect, holy, peaceful, and sinless, let us ask of
the Lord.
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: An angel of peace, a faithful guide, a guardian of our souls and bodies, let us
ask of the Lord.
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: Pardon and remission of our sins and transgressions, let us ask ot the Lord.
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: All things that are good and profitable for our souls, and peace for the world.
let us ask of the Lord.
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: That we may complete the remaining time of our life in peace and repentencc.
let us ask of the Lord.
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: A Christian ending to our life: painless, blameless, and peaceful: and a good
defense before the dread judgment seat of Christ, let us ask of the Lord.
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: Commemorating our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious Lady
Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Man. with all the saints, let us entrust ourselves and each
other, and all our life unto Christ our God.
CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord.
CELEBRANT: Through the Compassions of Thine only-begotten Son, with whom Thou
are blessed, together with Thine all-holy, good, and lijc-creatmg Spirit, now and ever.
and unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.

289
CELEBRANT: Peace be unto all.
CHOIR: And to your spirit.
DEACON: Let us love one another, that with one mind we mav confess.
CHOIR: Father, Son and Holy Spirit! The Trinitv, one in essence, and undivided!

No. 8 The Creed

DEACON: The doors! The doors! In wisdom, let us attend!
CHOIR/DEACON: I Believe in one God, the Father, the Almight\,Maker of hea\en and
earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of
God, the only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages. Light of light, tt^e God of
true God; Begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father, B>' whom all things were
made; Who for us men and for ous salvation came down from heaven, and was
incarnated of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man. And He was
crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried. .\nd the third da\ He
rose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into Heaven, and sits at the right
hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead;
whose kingdom shall have no end. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Gi\er of Life,
who proceeds from the Father; who with the Father and the Son together is \\ orshipped
and Glorified; who spoke by the prophets. In one holy. Catholic, and .\postolic Church. I
acknowledge on baptism for the remission of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

No. 9 A Mercy of Peace (Anaphora)

DEACON: Let us stand aright! Let us stand with fear! Let us attend, that we may ojYcr
the Holy Oblation in peace.
CHOIR: A mercy of peace! A sacrifice of praise!
CELEBRANT: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God the Father, and the
communion of the Holy Spirit be with all of you.
CHOIR: And with your spirit.
CELEBRANT: Let us lift up your hearts!
CHOIR: We lift them up unto the Lord!
CELEBRANT: Let us give thanks unto the Lord.
CHOIR: It is fitting and right to bow down to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy
Spirit: the Trinity, one in essence and undivided.
CELEBRANT: ...Singing the triumphant hymn, shouting, proclaiming, and saying:
CHOIR: Holy! Holy! Holy! Lord of Sabaoth! Heaven and earth are full of Thy
glory! Hosanna in the Highest! Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!
Hosanna in the highest!
CELEBRANT: Take, eat. this is Mv Body, which is broken for vou for the remission oj
sins.
CHOIR: Amen.
CELEBRANT: Drink of it, all of you, this is My Blood of the new covenant, which is shed
for vou and for many, for the remission of sins.
CHOIR: Amen.

!90
CELEBRANT: Thine own of Thine own we offer unto Thee, on behalf of all and for a!l.
CHOIR: We hymn Thee, we bless Thee, we give thanks to Thee, O Lord, and >\e
pray unto Thee, O our God.
CELEBRANT: Especially for our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious Lady
Theotokos and Ever- Virgin Mary.

No. 10 It is truly fitting (Hymn to the Mother of God)

CHOIR: It is truly fitting to bless you, O Theotokos, ever-blessed and most pure
and the Mother of our God. More honorable than the Cherubim, and more glorious
beyond compare than the Seraphim: without defilement you gave birth to God the
Word: true Theotokos, we magnify you.

DEACON: Among the first, remember, O Lord, His (Holiness, Eminence, Grace), our
(Patriarch, Metropolitan, Bishop) (N.). Grant him for Thy holy churches m peace, safety,
honor, health, and length of days, rightly to define the word of Thy truth.
CHOIR: And all mankind.
CELEBRANT: And grant that with one mouth and one heart we may praise Thine all-
honorable and majestic Name: of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now
and ever, and unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.
CELEBRANT: And the mercies of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ shall be with
all of you.
CHOIR: And with your spirit.

No. 10b Second Litany of Supplication

DEACON: Having remembered all the saints, again and again in peace let us pray to the
Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For the precious Gifts offered and sanctified, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: That our God, who loves mankind, receiving them on His holy, heavenly, and
ideal altar as a sweet spiritual fragrance, will send down upon us m return His divine
grace and the gift of the Holy Spirit, let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: For our deliverance from all affliction, wrath, danger and necessity, let us
pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O God, by Thy grace.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: That the whole day may be perfect, holy, peaceful, and sinless, let us ask of
the Lord.
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: An angel of peace, a faithful giude, a guardian of our souls and bodies, let us
ask of the Lord.

291
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: Pardon and remission of our sins and transgressions, let us ask of the Lord
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: All things that are good and profitable for our souls, and peace for the world.
let us ask of our the Lord.
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: That we may complete the remaining time of our life in peace and repentencc.
let us ask of the Lord.
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: A Christian ending to our life: painless, blameless, and peaceful: and a good
defense before the dread judgment seat of Christ, let us ask of the Lord.
CHOIR: Grant it, O Lord.
DEACON: Having asked for the unity of the Faith, and the communion of the Holy
Spirit, let us entrust ourselves and each other, and all our life unto Christ our God.
CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord.
CELEBRANT: And count us worthy, O Master, that with boldness and without
condemnation we may dare to call Thee, the God of Heaven, "Father," and sa\:

No. 11 Our Father (The Lord's Prayer)

CHOIR: Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy Kingdom
come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread;
and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors; and lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from the Evil One.
CELEBRANT: For Thine are the Kingdom, and the power, and the glon\ of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.
CELEBRANT: Peace be unto all.
CHOIR: And to your spirit.
DEACON: Bow your heads unto the Lord.
CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord.
CELEBRANT: Through the grace and compassion and love toward mankind of Tfune
only-begotten Son, with whom Thou art blessed, together with Thine all-holv, good, and
life-creating Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.
No. l i b Only One Is Holy
DEACON: Let us be attentive!
CELEBRANT: The Holy Things for the holy!
CHOIR: Onlv One is Holv! One is Lord, Jesus Christ, to the glory of God the
Father. Amen.
No. l i e Psalm 148:1
CHOIR: Praise the Lord from the heavens! Praise Him in the highest! .\lleluia!
.\lleluia! Alleluia!

292
 No. 12 Let us Fervently Beseech (Para-liturgical Concerto)
CHOIR: Let us fervently beseech the Mother of God, though we are sinful and
unworthy, and call out in repentance from the depths of our souls, "Help us. O
Lady, in thy tenderheartedness; hasten, for we perish because of our many sins.
Turn not thy servants away empty, for thou art our only hope."

No. 13 End of the Liturgy (Communion and Dismissal)'^

DEACON: In the fear of God, and with faith, draw near!

CHOIR: Blessed is He that comes in the name of the Lord! The Lord is God, and
has revealed Himself to us!
CELEBRANT: I believe, Lord, and I confess that Thou art in truth the Christ, the Son i^l
the Living God, who camest into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first. I
believe also that this is indeed Thy most Pure Body, and that this is indeed Thy Precious
Blood. Therefore, I pray Thee: have mercy on me and forgive me my transgressions,
voluntary and involuntary, in word, in deed, in knowledge and in ignorance: and count
me worthy to partake without condemnation of Thy most Pure Mvsteries for the remission
of sins and for life eternal. Amen. Of Thy mystical supper. O Son of God, today receive
me as a communicant; for I will not speak of the mystery to Thine enemies, nor will I give
Thee a kiss, like Judas; but like the thief I confess Thee: Remember me. Lord, in Thy
Kingdom. Not for judgement or condemnation be the partaking of Thy Holy Mysteries
unto me, O Lord, but for healing of soul and body.
CHOIR: Accept the body of Christ, taste the immortal spring. Alleluia, Alleluia,
Alleluia.
CELEBRANT: O God, save Thy people, and bless Thine inheritance.
CHOIR: We have seen the true light, we have received the heavenly Spirit, We have
found the true faith, we bow down to the indivisible Trinity, It has saved us.
CELEBRANT: Always, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen.
CHOIR: May our mouths be filled with Thy praise, O Lord, that we may sing Th>
glory. That it may please Thee to impart Thyself to us with Thy holy, Divine
Immortal and life-creating mysteries. Observe us in Thy temple All day studying
Thy truth. Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia!
DEACON: Having received the Divine, Holy. Pure, Immortal, Heavenly, Life-giving and
Dread Mysteries of Christ, let us worthily give thanks to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.

' As the text for the final movement of the Second Liturgy is identical to that of GrcichaninotTs
Domestic Liturgy, opus 79, the text translation for this movement was found on Liner notes, Grechaninov
Liturgia Domestica, Russian State Symphomc Cappella, N'alery Polyansky. cond.. CD. Chandos. V)')S, 23-
25. The text for the chants of the Deacon and Celebrant were found on the followini: website designed by
the parish of St. John the Foremnner Russian Orthodox Church (Chemenskaya). St Petersburg. Russia
http://en.liturgy.ru. nav, limrg/litS.php.

293
DEACON: Help us, save us, have mercy on us, and keep us, O God, by Thy grace.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
DEACON: Having asked that the whole day may be perfect, holy, peaceful and sinless.
let us entrust ourselves and one another and our whole life unto Christ Our God.
CHOIR: To Thee, O Lord.
CELEBRANT: For Thou art our Sanctification, and to Tliee we give glon: to the Father.
and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.
CELEBRANT: Let us go forth in peace.
CHOIR: In the name of the Lord.
CELEBRANT: Let us pray to the Lord.
CHOIR: Lord, have mercy.
CELEBRANT: O Lord, Who blessest those who bless Thee, and sanctifiest Those who
put their trust in Thee: save Thy people and bless Thine inheritance; preserve the fullness
of Thy Church; sanctify those who love the beauty of Thy house; glorify them in return by
Thy divine power, and forsake us not who put our hope in Thee. Give peace to Thy world.
to Thy Churches, to the priests, to all in civil authority, and to all Thy people. For every
good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from Thee, the Father of
lights; and to Thee we give glory, thanksgiving and worship, to the Father and to the Son.
and to the Holy Spirit, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen. May the name of the Lord be blessed from now and for ever. May
the name of the Lord be blessed from now and for ever. May the name of the Lord
be blessed from now and for ever.
CELEBRANT: The blessing of the Lord be upon you through His grace and love towards
mankind, always, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages.
CHOIR: Amen.
CELEBRANT: Glory to Thee, O Christ our God and our Hope, glory to Thee.
CHOIR: Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit Both now and
always and for ever and ever, Amen. Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy. Lord,
have mercy. Bless.
CELEBRANT: May He Who rose from the dead Christ, our true God, though the
prayers of His all-holy Mother of the holy, glorious and all-praised Apostles, of our
Father among the Saints, John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, (or: oJ our
Father among the Saints Basil the Great, Archbishop ofCaesarea in Cappadocia) and of
Saint N (of the Temple), of Saint N (of the day), and of all the Saints, have mercv on us
and save us, as He is good and loveth mankind.
CHOIR: (the God-cherished great country of Russia, the holy faith and orthodox
Christians)'*
CHOIR: Lord, preserve them for many years.

" This portion of text changed with the mlers who were in power at the time, as the rulers were
identified by name in the prayer. The text that was included here in parenthesis \\as employed for the
Russian State Cappella's 1995 performance of Gretchaninoffs Domestic Liturgy, and would fit both the
style and the context for a modem-day performance of the Second Liturgy.

294
 APPENDIX F

EXCERPTS FROM VARIOUS RUSSIAN SOURCES

In examining the context for Gretchaninoffs Second Liturgy. opus 29. the

following excerpts from Russian sources proved relevant. Each of the anicles were

translated by Sergei Shiskin and edited b\ Philip Camp. The first three articles deal

with the ban on instrumental music imposed by the Russian Orthodox Church,

discussed in Chapter III. The period of the new Russian choral school ushered in a

debate on the topic of instrumental music in the church for the first time in Russia's

history. The first article by Golubtsov written in 1918 demonstrates the typical

explanation for the ban against the use of instruments. The subsequent essays

completed in the mid-1990s by the Archpriest Boris Nikolaev and B. Kutuzov show

that both the reasoning behind the restriction and the conviction to impose the

restriction among church leaders hardly changed over the course of the twentieth

century. The final excerpt is from a speech delivered in 1999 b\ Dr. Marina

Rhakmanova, the leading Russian scholar on Gretchaninoff. This excerpt briefl\

explains the significance of the Moskovskie Vedomosti publications of 1900.

discussed in Chapter IV and presented in Appendix A.

:^^5
A. P. Golubtsov. Iz chtenii po tserkovnoi arkheologii i liturgii. Chast 2. Liturgia
[From the readings on the Church Archaeolog\ and Uiturg\. Part 2.
Liturgica.] Sergiev Posad: 1918. 254-257.

Instrumental Performance of the Church Motets

Now we will say a few words about the ancient church attitude toward the use

of instruments in the performance of the church motets. .At the beginning of the

Christian church, there were two ways of performance: purely vocal, and \ocal

performance accompanied by instrumental music. The pagan religions of the ancient

world used both ways equally. Those who are acquainted with the en\ ironment and

the ceremonies of the games and religious feasts of the ancient Greeks will understand

quite well the use of instrumental music in the pagan practice of the ancient world.

Hebrew worship was also accompanied with instrumental music. The ancient

Christian church was very suspicious of sculpture, and partiall> suspicious of

painting, but it was even more suspicious of the use of instruments in the worship

assembly. The church teachers stated that the Jews of the Old Testament had been

allowed to accompany singing with musical instruments because God was lenient

with their carelessness, faintheartedness, and the spiritual infirmit\. With that

permission, God wanted to excite their sensual mind to more vivid and energetic

activity.

In the Apostolic decrees, instrumental music was regarded frankly as forbidden

to each Christian. There was a ban on teaching the sacrament of baptism to fiddlers,

harpists and lyre-players. Therefore, the performance of Krical compositions was

purely vocal. Tertullian stated: "We use only one organ - a word. With a word, not

N6
with a psaltery, nor a taboret. nor a pipe we worship God." Indeed, the organ o\

human word is the perfect instrument b\ its ph\sical design. Even though a human

voice does not embrace all the acts performed b\ the stringed instrument in general, it

is able to create polyphonic harmony vsith the most rich and elegant consonances.

Besides, a human voice is more natural, more vivid, and so to sa\. it expresses more

intimately the inner state of a soul and serves as a conductor of her movements. Due

to those advantages, vocal performance or singing was universall\ recognized in the

ancient church.

Only in the beginning of the Middle Ages, and soleh in the West, instrumental

music became accepted in the church. According to scholars, the very first known

organ in the West was received by Pepin as a gift from the Byzantine emperor

Constantine Copronim [c. 757]. Most probably, it was a domestic instrument which

was in use in Constantinople. Charles the Great received another large organ from the

Byzantine Empire and gave the order to build a similar one for Aachen's church.

Since that time, organs were wide spread among Western churches. They became

especially known in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries as technological advances

of the instrument increased. By the time of the Council of Trent.' the use of organs in

church practice became so entrenched and popular that the members of the Council,

while reasoning about church discipline, did not sa\ a word against the use of organ.

Instead, they canonically sanctified its use, while banning the use of an\ other

instrument in the church, thereby proving that other instruments pre\iousl> had been

used to accompany singing besides an organ. However, this diversit\ of instrumental

' The author refers to the Council of Trent that occurred from 1 .M5-1 N-.^ thai placed
restrictions on the Renaissance polyphonic stNle.

:^'7
music came much later than the use of an organ in the church practice. Thomas

Aquinas stated that the church did not allow musical instruments such as the zither

and psalter) to distinguish the church from Jewish practice. Uater that rule was

abandoned...^

In the Greek Church, instrumental music was never accepted in worship.

However, it was not an absolute attitude. There were cases when instrumental music

was permitted. According to Codinus. one ma\ conclude that durinc the solemn

ceremonies such as the emperor's coronation and the king's public appearances, choral

chanting was accompanied by the instrumental music. We know also from Byzantine

writers that after singing "longevity" to an emperor on Christmas Da\ before the end

of the liturgy, the same was repeated b\ different musical instruments: "rcsonantihus

organus, puae varia sunt", or "organa satis multo prostepunt", or "organis qenuo ad

modicum tempus resonantibus." Nevertheless, these cases were among the exceptions.

and it seems they took place only in the court chapels and in the domestic ceremonies

of the Byzantine court. In the public worship assemblies of the Orthodox Church.

however, singing with instruments was never introduced.

'The remainder of the paragraph digresses into the discussion aht>ui the use ot dittercni
musical instmments in the West, and is omitted here.

:98
Archpriest Boris Nikolaev, Znamennyi Raspev i krukovaia notatsia kak osnova
ru.sskogo pravoslavnogo penia [Znamenn\ chant and hook notation as the
heart of Russian Orthodox Church sinking]. (Moscow: Nauchnaia Kni^'a
1995)29-30.

Introduction

Why instrumental music is not allowed in Orthodox worship

Finally, singing in the Eastern Orthodox Church has one more important

feature: it is not substituted nor accompanied with insu-umental music during worship.

Though there is an extra-temple use of the percussion instruments (bells), this music -

if it can be called music - has only an external meaning and it is not worship music in

the direct meaning of the word. The church-going bell calls and prepares believers for

worship, proclaims the very important moments of the temple worship to the

absentees, and sanctifies the air outside the temple, like the echo of the solemn temple

performances. But there are no prescriptions about any special melodic turns in the

Charter.

The unwritten custom that excludes the use of instrumental music in worship

has its ideological basis in the Orthodoxy itself Vocal music is natural music but

instrumental music is an artificial, imitative one. As histor\ testifies, instrumental

music appeared later than vocal music. Old Testament worship consisted of dumb

sacrificial animals and dumb music. As the blessed Theodorit noted: "It was not

because God was delighted in their (musical instrument's) sounds but because it \sas

His intention for doing that." All of that, along with many other things were allowed

in the kingdom of "shade and images" because of the hardness of their hearts (Matt.

19:8)."^ Nevertheless, even there, the ver\ best things were sacrificed to (iod (den.

^MaUhew 19:8 stales "[Jesus| said to them, 'lor >our hardness (W heart Moses allimcd >ou to
di\orce your wi\es. but from the beginning it was not so.'" Revised Standard N'ersion.

299
4:4). Even though the Psalmist summons us to praise God on all musical instrumenis

that were used during Jewish worship, he also admonishes all peoples to sing praises

"with understanding'" that is according to the interpretation of the hallowed Aphanas\

the Great, "not with harps as the former singers did."

Researchers call a human voice a string-wind instrument that embraces

harmonic accords of three octaves. As professor-archpriest Metallov says. "The

reason for the exclusive use of vocal music in the Orthodox worship lies in the ver>

nature of the human voice that is able to express the most diverse, deep, and delicate

movements of the human soul." Natural science also speaks in favor of the human

voice.

Kutuzov. B. "Problem) russkogo znamennogo penia \ sviazi s istoriei vozrozhdenia

katolikami gregorianskogo khorala" [Problems of Singing Znamennv Chant in
relation to the histor> of revival of Gregorian Chant bv Catholics), Shkola
Znamennogo Penia [School of Sign Singing], (Moscow: Spass Cathedral of
Andronic Monasterv. #1. 1996). <http:/www.canto.ru>.

In 1917, people that dared to call themselves orthodox raised the question about the

use of an organ in orthodox worship at the Council of the Russian Orthodox Church.

A joint session that addressed specific questions conceming church singing was held

on December 8 of that vear. A[leksandr] Gretchaninoff proposed the introduction of

the organ for use in worship. The suggestion received the support of the director of

the Synodal School. A[leksandr] Kastal'skv. as well as by D[mitri] Allemanov, a

priest in the Orthodox Church whose so called choral works are still performed even

todav b\ church choirs. The proposal was rejected by a vote of eight to three.

^(lenesis 4:4 states "and Abel brought of the firstlings of his tlcKk and of iheir tai portions.
And the LORD had regard for Abel and hisotTering."
' I he quotation here is taken trom I'salms 47:7.

M)()
M.P.Rakhmanova. "Staroobriadchestvo i Novoe napravlenie" v russkoi dukhovnoi
muzyke"[01d Belief and New School' in Russian Music]. Cultural Heritage of
Medieval Russia in the Tradition of Ural - Siberian Old Belief Proceedings of
All-Russian Scientific Conference, Mav 17-19. 1999. Novosibirsk: M. 1. ^
Glinka Novosibirsk State Conservatory. 1999. <hnp://WVVA\.canto.ru>.

Now I would like to go back to the above-mentioned discussion on church

singing in the Moskovskie Vedomosti newspaper in the years 1900-1902. It was

initiated with the famous article of A.T. Gretchaninoff "A few words about the

'spirit' of the church motets." That article mav be viewed in a certain sense as the

manifesto of the new school, and it was indeed perceived that way bv his

contemporaries (actualK, Gretchaninoffs article was not the first one in that

discussion, but it was that very article that "poured oil on the fiames"). Manv other

priests, researchers, joumalists, precentors appeared in the newspaper later on: thev

wrote differently and about different things.

301