There are essentially four ancient Christian liturgical traditions that can be counted as Syrian, but the practitioners of these traditions belong to a bewildering variety of religious denominations, with diverse theological, historical and organizational loyalties. They share in common the Syriac language, an allegiance to the See of Antioch, the Syriac Bible and Syriac hymns and theological literature.
3. Liturgy and liturgical books.
HEINRICH HUSMANN/PETER JEFFERY
Syriac is a North-West Semitic tongue, closer to Hebrew than to Arabic, that developed in the city of Edessa (now Urfa, Turkey). As a dialect of Aramaic (the official language of the ancient Assyrian empire to 200 ce), Syriac is related to the Palestinian Jewish Aramaic that was the mother tongue of Jesus and the first disciples as well as of many rabbinic authorities of the Talmudic period. For this reason modern Syrian Christians frequently call Syriac ‘Aramaic’; Western scholars before modern times often called it ‘Chaldean’.
Only a minority of Syrian Christians can still speak Syriac; for most it is a theological and liturgical language, like Latin in the West. The major vernaculars are now Arabic (in the Near East), Malayalam (in India) and English (in India and North America), all three of which are increasingly replacing Syriac in liturgical services.
Antioch (now Antakya, Turkey, near the border with Syria) was the city where ‘the disciples were for the first time called Christians’ (Acts xi.26). Before the Muslim conquest Antioch was one of the four major patriarchates, with Rome, Constantinople (seat of the Byzantine rite – see Byzantine chant) and Alexandria (from which sprang the Coptic and Ethiopian rites – see Coptic church music, and Ethiopia, §II – and the now defunct Churches of Nubia and Cyrenaica). Like the popes of Rome, the patriarchs of Antioch regarded St Peter as their founder (cf Galatians ii.11). The Syrian Christians in India, despite their many theological and denominational divisions, share a further identification with the apostle Thomas, who is traditionally believed to have gone to India as a missionary and been martyred near Madras. All the Indian groups, therefore, style themselves ‘St Thomas Christians’.
It cannot be said, however, that the Syrian liturgical traditions are all directly descended from a common source, such as the originally Greek rite of Antioch: Jerusalem, Caesarea (near Haifa in modern Israel), Edessa, and Seleucia-Ctesiphon (near Baghdad) were all important centres in ancient times, and each may have contributed something to the liturgical traditions as they are now to be found.
Although there is more than one Syriac translation of the Old and New Testaments (just as there were multiple Latin translations), the Peshitta (‘simple’ or ‘common’) version is the most widely used (problematically translated by Lamsa, 1957). The Syriac psalms have their own numbering system, agreeing with the Hebrew (and Protestant English Bibles) for Psalms i–cxiii, but with the Byzantine and Latin Psalters for Psalms cxvi–cl (see table in Mateos, 2/1972, p.447).
The various Syrian chant traditions also share a corpus of Syriac theological literature as well as an extensive repertory of hymns, including the works of St Ephrem Syrus and other authors, although the liturgical arrangements for the Divine Liturgy and Office exhibit numerous structural differences. Many Greek theological writings that were judged heterodox in Constantinople and Rome survive in Syriac translation, particularly for authors associated with the Antiochene school of biblical interpretation, which played a major role in the doctrinal controversies that fragmented Syrian Christianity.
The first Syrian rite to achieve its classic form was also the only ancient Christian liturgy to develop outside the Roman empire. It originated in the Sassanian or Persian empire further east, in the region of Mesopotamia or ancient Babylon (modern Iraq and Iran). It is of great interest to liturgical historians for its many archaic features, and because it is the most thoroughly Semitic (as opposed to Hellenistic) tradition of Christian worship. After the Council of Ephesus (431 ce) condemned the teachings of Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople, many of his supporters fled over the border into the Persian empire, so that the Church of this area came to be regarded as Nestorian by the Greco-Roman majority. Today, however, these Christians call themselves the Church of the East, or (unofficially) the Assyrian Orthodox, in view of their linguistic ancestry. Hence, in this article, the liturgical tradition will be called ‘Assyrian’.
Medieval Assyrian missionaries carried their faith along the Silk Route into Turkestan, India and Tibet, and even into China, where the famous Nestorian Stone remains a monument to their activity. By the 16th century, however, active Churches remained only in the Near East and India. In 1553 part of the Near Eastern group accepted the authority of the pope and became a uniate rite of the Roman Catholic Church, adopting Catholic dogma while retaining the traditional liturgy; this community became known as the East Syrian or Chaldean rite. Most of the Assyrians in India, pressured into Roman communion by Portuguese missionaries in 1599, became known as Christians of the Malabar rite.
In 451 ce the Council of Chalcedon condemned the heresy that would become known as Monophysitism. The Latin, Byzantine and, eventually, the Georgian Churches opted for the Chalcedonian doctrine, but the Coptic and Ethiopian Churches rejected it, and they were ultimately joined by the Armenian Church. Syrian Christians who opposed the teaching of Chalcedon were eventually organized into a separate Church by James (Jacob) (Yaعqūb al-Bardaعī, c500–78) and are thus colloquially termed ‘Jacobites’. They call themselves Syrian Orthodox, the term that will be used in this article. There is also a uniate branch, recognizing the Catholic pope, which is called the Syro-Antiochene or West Syrian rite. In India, some of the Malabar rite Christians rejected uniatism and aligned themselves in 1662 with the Syrian Orthodox (notwithstanding their former antipathy to the Council of Ephesus) and adopted their liturgy, in Malayalam translation. They now call themselves the Indian Orthodox Church but in the meantime have experienced further splits. In the late 19th century a group influenced by Anglican missionaries adopted Protestantism while retaining the Syrian Orthodox liturgy; it is known as the Mar Thoma (‘St Thomas’) Church. In 1930 another splinter group rejoined with Rome as the Malankar rite; it too is liturgically Syrian Orthodox.
The Syrian Orthodox liturgical tradition contains many more texts of Greek origin than the Assyrian liturgy – not surprisingly since more of its members lived within the Roman empire. This material is often assumed to be derived from the early liturgy of Antioch, but at least some of it, including the eucharistic liturgy of St James, is more readily linked to Jerusalem (Jeffery, 1994).
The Syrian Christians who accepted the decrees of Chalcedon were disparaged by the others as ‘royalists’ for siding with the Byzantine emperor. Thus they are known as Melkites (Melchites, following the Greek spelling) from the Syriac term malkāyā. This designation survives today, however, primarily among the Catholic uniates of the Melkite rite. The other Christians of this tradition now call themselves Antiochian Orthodox and are in communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople; only this group is recognized as truly Orthodox by the Greek and Russian Orthodox and the other Churches loyal to Constantinople.
Over the centuries, as the Melkite Church became more distant from the Syrian Orthodox (Jacobite) tradition, its liturgy was gradually aligned with the Byzantine rite, becoming what is now essentially the Greek Orthodox liturgy translated into Syriac. Incompletely Byzantinized Melkite traditions are still attested, however, in medieval manuscripts. In this article such sources will be called ‘Melkite’.
Some Chalcedonian Syrians, instead of becoming Byzantinized, formed another ecclesiastical unit in western Syria, with its leadership centred at the monastery of St Maron (d c410). Opinions differ as to whether they ever adopted the Monothelite heresy condemned by the Third Council of Constantinople in 681, but with the Muslim conquest they were driven into the mountains of Lebanon, where their descendents are known as Maronites. During the Crusades, in 1182, the Maronites affirmed allegiance to Rome and became a uniate rite, the only branch of Syrian Christianity with no interdenominational divisions.
If the superficial Westernizations through Roman Catholic influence are ignored, the Maronite liturgy reveals many resemblances to the Syrian Orthodox liturgy. Recent research, however, has shown that its oldest chronological layers have much in common with the Assyrian liturgy (Macomber, 1973; Spinks, 1993). It is thus a unique synthesis of disparate elements, which affords valuable perspectives on the historical development of other Syrian traditions.
The principal Offices of the Syrian Churches are Lelyā, Saprā and Ramshā, corresponding to Matins, Lauds and Vespers respectively; Ramshā is also termed Nāgah in the Syrian Orthodox Church, which also possesses the Offices of Tlāth shāعin, Sheth shāعin, Tshaع shāعin and Sutārā, corresponding to Terce, Sext, None and Compline respectively. Sext is also known as Pelgāh d-yawmā (‘midday’).
The texts of the Offices are divided among various liturgical books, which in Orthodox Churches are still largely manuscript but in India and in uniate Churches are often printed (to a certain extent, however, Orthodox and uniate books are regarded as interchangeable). The Syrian Orthodox shhimtā (‘simple’, ‘ferial’) contains the weekday Offices, and the bayth gazā (‘treasury’) the texts of the model stanzas of the chants for Sundays and festivals. Proper texts for these are arranged in books according to the church year, for Sundays and saints’ days. The Assyrian kitāba (bayt) daqdhām wadbāthar (‘book [house] of before and after’; see below, §3(iii)) corresponds to the shhimtā but contains Sunday and other Offices as well; the Assyrian Proper Office texts are distributed among the gazā (‘treasure’) for the immovable feasts, the hūdhrā (‘cycle’) for Sundays and for Easter, and the kashkul for weekdays.
The Syrian Divine Office, like that of the Latin Church, centres on the recitation of psalms, except for the Little Hours of the Syrian Orthodox Church that correspond to Terce, Sext and None, whose texts are free poetry. The Psalter is read in its entirety in a period varying between a day (in Maronite and Syrian Orthodox monasteries) and a fortnight. Besides psalms, qāle (‘melodies’, sing. qālā) dominate the Syrian Orthodox Office and are important also in the Assyrian Office (see below, §5(iv) (a)). In the Offices a qālā is followed by a bāعuthā (‘petition’, also termed tbārtā). Other categories include the madrāshā, which plays a part in the night Office (see below, §5(v) (a)) and is answered by an عunithā, or choral refrain; the sughithā, related to the madrāshā and used particularly in the Maronite Divine Office (see below, §5(v) (b)); the prumion (derived from Gk. prooimion), which precedes the qālā and is itself preceded by the sedrā; and the kārūzuthā, a litany with choral refrains, which characterizes the Assyrian rite.
The Maronite liturgy in general resembles that of the Syrian Orthodox Church, and the same categories of hymn are found in both; but in some ways it is simpler and more regular than the Syrian Orthodox liturgy. (For details of the differences, see Husmann, ‘Die Gesänge der syrischen Liturgie’, 1972, pp.84ff; Taft, 1986, 2/1993, pp.225–47.)
Tlāth shāعin, Sheth shāعin and Tshaع shāعin (the three Little Hours) are the simplest in structure of all the Syrian Orthodox Offices. They comprise the three basic elements of those Offices, sedrā and prumion, qālā, and baعuthā, without any additions. The form of the baعuthā used at Terce (with 12-syllable verses) is known as the bāعuthā d-Yaعqūb (i.e. ascribed to Yaعqūb of Serugh, c500), and that used at Sext and None (with five-syllable verses) is known as the bāعuthā d-Balai (i.e. ascribed to St Balai, c400). Those with seven-syllable verses are ascribed to St Ephrem Syrus. Introductory prayers such as the Lord’s Prayer, doxology, Trisagion and Kyrie eleison precede all the Offices, as they did in the medieval Latin rite.
Lelyā, like its equivalent, Matins, consists of an introductory section followed by three nocturns (qawme, sing. qawmā), with a fourth qawmā added on Fridays. The introductory section contains an initial prayer followed by troped psalms (Psalms cxxxiv, cxix and cxvii; Syrian numbering: cxxxiii, cxviii and cxvi). The tropes are termed māعirāne (‘vigil songs’), although elsewhere in Syrian church music such tropes are usually termed عenyāne (‘answers’, ‘responds’); each psalm verse is answered by a trope verse. A prayer opens the series of qawme. Each nocturn contains a madrāshā, a sedrā and prumion, a qālā and a bāعuthā (the last is ‘of Yāعqub’ in the first qawmā, ‘of Aphrem’ [i.e. Ephrem Syrus] in the second, and ‘of Balai’ in the third). The third qawmā contains an extensive closing section subdivided into two groups: the first forms the climax of the whole Office and contains a sedrā with prumion, the Magnificat with an عenyānā, Psalm cxxxiii (Syrian: cxxxii) with عenyānā, Psalms cxlviii-cl and cxvii (Syrian: cxvi) (untroped), a ququlion and عeqbā (trope); the second of these groups is shorter, containing a sedrā with prumion, qālā and bāعuthā d-Yāعqub, and concluding with the prayer of St Athanasius and the blessing.
Saprā (Lauds) begins with Psalm l, Psalm lxiii with an عenyānā, and Psalms cxiii and cxlviii-cl (untroped). A second section contains sedrā and prumion, first qālā with ququlion and عeqbā, sedrā and prumion, second qālā and bāعuthā d-Yāعqub. Prayers for the censing (عetra) and the blessing conclude the Office.
Ramshā (Vespers) comprises an ‘introductory prayer’ and the Office proper; the former consists of Psalms cxli, cxlii, cxix and cxvii (Syrian: cxl, cxli, cxviii and cxvi respectively), with the Gloria and عeqbā. The Office itself comprises three sections: the first contains a sedrā with prumion and first qālā; the second an incense prayer (عetrā) and second qālā, ququlion, Gloria and عeqbā; and the third a sedrā with prumion, third qālā, bāعutha d-Yāعqub, concluding prayer and blessing. On Saturday evenings the third group also contains an alleluia and Gospel reading.
Sutārā, like its equivalents Compline and Apodeipnon in the Latin and Byzantine rites respectively, begins with Psalm iv concluding with the lesser doxology; however, an عeqbā is added in the Syrian Orthodox rite. The main substance of the Office follows, comprising a sedrā and prumion, qālā and bāعuthā d-Aphrem. This is followed (as in the Latin rite) by a section whose subject matter is nightfall; here it comprises Psalms xci and cxxi (Syrian xci and cxx respectively), with an alleluia interpolated between each half-verse of the psalms. A prayer of praise, the Creed and the blessing follow.
Differences from the patterns outlined above may occur: in the normal secular rite, for example, these Offices are considerably extended on feast days, notably in the singing of texts from Byzantine kanōnes (the so-called qanūne yawnāye; see below, §5(iv) (b)).
A number of medieval Syriac manuscripts, including a 13th-century shhimtā (GB-Lbl Add.17241, from a Syrian desert monastery in north Egypt), probably reflect an early type of monastic liturgy, which also differs in a number of respects from the secular rite, for example, in the use of the maعniāthā of Severus of Antioch (d 538) and of other hymns by John bar-Aphthonius of Qeneshre and others. In Ramshā, Psalm lxxxvi is sung at the beginning, and the عeqbā after the psalms is omitted. Lelyā has only two nocturns, termed teshmeshtā. (For further details, see Husmann, ‘Die Gesänge der syrischen Liturgie’, 1972, esp. pp.86ff.)
In their basic structure the Offices of the Assyrian and related rites resemble those of the Syrian Orthodox tradition, although there are differences of individual detail. Subsections of the Offices are often preceded and followed by the same liturgical genres, in a characteristic symmetrical structure; the books containing these forms are in consequence termed ‘before and after’ (see above, §3(i)). All the chants are introduced by prayers, the names of which derive from the chants they precede. Many chants have two forms, used in alternate weeks. Besides the reading of Ordinary psalms at Matins, Lauds and Vespers, the Psalter is read once a fortnight continuously, with the two halves of the choir alternating week by week with the intonations. For this purpose the Psalter, termed dawīdha (‘David’), is divided into 20 hullāle, analogous to the Byzantine kathismata, with a 21st hullālā of Old Testament canticles. Each hullālā contains between three and 11 psalms and is further subdivided into two or three marmyāthā (sing. marmithā), analogous to Byzantine staseis, each containing between one and four psalms.
Lelyā consists of a variable number of nocturns: between one for ordinary weekdays and three on feast days. Introductory prayers immediately precede the first nocturn, containing from one to seven hullāle; the qālthā, comprising more psalms, follows on Sundays. The next section is termed the māwtbā (meaning ‘seat’, like the Greek kathisma), and comprises an عunithā, a qālā, a kānonā (‘refrain’), a teshbohtā (‘song of praise’, roughly analogous to the Te Deum), a kārūzuthā (litany with choral refrains) and a madrāshā. If there are several nocturns, the last is termed qāle d-shahre (‘songs of vigil’) and is similarly constructed from a hullālā, an عunithā, a shubāhā (‘song of praise’), kānonā, a teshbohtā and a kārūzuthā.
Saprā begins with introductory prayers and a characteristic group of morning psalms (Psalms c, xci, civ, cxiii, xciii, cxlviii-cl, cxvii; Syrian numbering identical with Hebrew except for the last, cxvi). This is followed on weekdays by an عunithā or the lākhumārā (‘Thee, O Lord’, a canticle similar to the Trisagion). The Office ends with the Trisagion, the Lord’s Prayer (to which is added on weekdays the qāle d-sāhde, ‘songs of the martyrs’) and the blessing.
Ramshā consists of introductory prayers, Gloria in excelsis, the Lord’s Prayer, Sanctus and ‘evening prayer’, followed by one marmithā from the Psalter (or two on weekdays). After the ‘incense prayer’ and the ‘prayer of the lākhumārā’, there follows the lākhumārā. A central group of evening psalms follows, which occurs also in the Syrian Orthodox rite (Psalms cxli, cxlii, cxix and cxvii; Syrian numbering: cxl, cxli, cxviii and cxvi); it is preceded by a shurāyā ‘before’ and an عunithā ‘before’, and followed by a shurāyā ‘after’ and an عunithā ‘after’ (with introductory prayer). (The shurāyā, ‘beginning’, contains the initial verses of psalms, but the number of psalm verses in its text varies, normally between three and eight.) The Office concludes with a twofold kārūzuthā, the Trisagion, a vāsāliqe (‘royal prayer’), an عunithā and the closing prayer; a closing psalm (suyāke) and Gospel reading may be added. After the Office proper, a short section termed Subaعa replaces Compline.
The Divine Liturgy (Eucharist) in the Eastern Churches corresponds in basic structure to the Latin Mass (see Mass, §I, 2), with a preliminary Liturgy of the Word, or synaxis, intended for both catechumens and the faithful, and a second section, including the Consecration and Communion, intended for the faithful only. This basic twofold structure is preceded by an enarxis, or introductory section, including prayers at the vesting of the priest and the preparation of the altar and the oblations. The lessons at the Divine Liturgy include not only the Epistle and Gospel, as in the traditional Roman Mass, but often additional Old Testament lessons (mostly from the Prophets) at the beginning. (See Epistle, §1.)
Some of the musical forms used in the Divine Liturgy are the same as those of the Divine Office. The Syrian Orthodox Eucharist, for example, prescribes before the Gospel a sedrā and prumion, Trisagion, and alleluia with verse; the Assyrian rite prescribes the lākhumārā, shurāya and kārūzuthā. Some, on the other hand, correspond to items of the Latin Mass: psalms, Creed, Lord’s Prayer, Sanctus and the sections allotted to the celebrant in the central part of the Mass of the Faithful, such as the Preface and Words of Institution, except that in the consecration prayer the epiclesis (invocation of the Holy Spirit) is almost entirely confined to the Eastern and Byzantine Churches.
Apart from the Melkites and Antiochian Orthodox who follow Byzantine practice, the Syrian Orthodox Church, and the parallel uniate Syro-Antiochene Church, are the only ones now possessing a system of eight ecclesiastical modes analogous to the oktōēchos of the Byzantine Church and the eight-mode Gregorian system. The Assyrian Church must formerly have possessed a modal system, as all oriental music did; this may have been the Byzantine system or an older Persian system. Modern Assyrian, uniate Chaldean and Maronite musicians refer to their scales by the names of Arabic maqāmāt and identify them with these maqāmāt; the Maronites formerly possessed, but no longer use, the Syrian Orthodox modal system.
The eight modes of the Syrian Orthodox system are usually numbered consecutively from 1 to 8; however, some manuscripts (probably under Melkite influence) use Greek terminology, beginning with protos and concluding with plagis tetartos. Modes 5–8 are plagal modes, corresponding to the authentic modes represented by modes 1–4 respectively. The modes may be listed from 1 to 8 in order (i.e. first the four authentic modes, then the four plagal), in a manner similar to that of Byzantine chant. Alternatively, in some early manuscripts such as the maعniāthā (sometimes wrongly termed Oktōēchos) of Severus of Antioch, they appear in the order 1–5-2–6-3–7-4–8, in a manner similar to that of Gregorian chant, with each pair of modes (authentic and plagal) sharing a common final grouped together (see Husmann, ‘Hymnus und Troparion’, 1971, esp. pp.46–58). Indeed, the Gregorian eight-mode system is directly related to the Syrian Orthodox system, even when the latter uses Greek terminology.
In modern practice this system shows Arab and Turkish influence: Syrian church musicians freely admit this, claiming to be Christian Arabs. In order to discover whether the original Syrian system was identical with the Byzantine oktōēchos, or an indigenous system to which Greek terminology was only superficially applied, it is necessary to attempt to distinguish the elements originally present in the repertory from those that derive from Arab and Turkish origins.
In the Syrian rites, as in the Byzantine, the chants are organized in an eight-week modal cycle: all the chants of a week are in a single mode, and the modes are taken in order. In the Byzantine rite the texts also vary, and thus any particular text is sung, to a single melody, once every eight weeks. In the Syrian rites, however, the texts remain the same from week to week but are sung to different melodies, depending on the mode of the week; furthermore, the authentic or plagal mode corresponding to the mode of the week is used on Monday, Wednesday and Friday, with the main mode of the week on the remaining days.
Ex.1 shows the first two lines of a madrāshā
in each mode as sung in successive weeks by Archbishop Kyrillos Yakobos, Syrian
Orthodox Metropolitan of Damascus (from Husmann, Die Melodien der
jakobitischen Kirche, i, 1969, pp.15–16). In the example, the 1st mode
(with D as final) corresponds to the 1st Byzantine and Gregorian mode. The 2nd
mode, also on D, is the first plagal mode (i.e. Byzantine 5th mode, Gregorian
2nd mode) and thus corresponds with the peculiarly Syrian order of some ancient
manuscripts. The 3rd mode, however, is on F and thus corresponds to the
Byzantine 3rd mode; the 4th mode similarly corresponds to the Byzantine 4th
mode (here, as in modern Byzantine church music, based on C rather than on F as
in the medieval system); this may be the result of Arab influence, since rāst,
the corresponding Arab maqām, is based on C. The 5th mode, on F,
can only be a repetition (with the same melody) of the 3rd Byzantine mode or
the 5th Gregorian mode; it thus represents another example of correspondence
with the Gregorian order, and with that of some of the Syriac manuscripts (the
5th Byzantine mode, or plagios prōtos, had already been allocated
the second place). The use of the same mode and melody for the 3rd and 5th
modes is a peculiarity of the individual singer here recorded. The 6th mode
concludes on E, but all the sections of the melody except the last conclude on
A, which seems to represent the final; the construction is, in this case,
inverted, with the lower note used as a dominant and the note a 5th above as
the final. This type of construction is unknown in the medieval Byzantine and
Gregorian systems, but occurs in the Arab maqām عajam. The
7th mode can be regarded as the medieval 7th barys mode of Byzantine
chant, transposed on to C, but the intervals used (e.g. three-quarters of a
tone between C and D and between E and F) are modified under Arab influence.
The 8th mode similarly contains C–D
-E–F in its structure: this does not occur in modern
or medieval Byzantine chant, but corresponds to the Arab maqām
hijāz and hijāz-kar (the same scale pattern is part of the
so-called ‘gypsy’ scale). It will be seen, therefore, that the eight modes as
represented in the example show anomalies due, on the one hand, to nomenclature
derived partly from the Byzantine system and partly from the Old Syrian system
(which resembles the Gregorian), and, on the other hand, to Arab influence.
A broader view of Syrian modality, based on analyses of large quantities of material, shows that a single modal name (e.g. 1st mode) may serve at different times and places for a number of different modes; these may be indigenous Syrian or Arab modes, and may exchange places. It shows too that the Syrian modes, like those of Gregorian and Byzantine chant, have notes with special functions, comparable to the finals and ‘dominants’ of medieval chant. Within a mode, the final and dominant can exchange places (see Husmann, ‘Eine Konkordanztabelle’, 1974): for example, in the 1st mode, D can be the final and F or G the dominant at one time, and F can be the final and D the dominant at another. This exchange of functions occurs also in the modern Greek ecclesiastical modal system; in both cases it can be explained as the result of Arab influence (see above, where an example of this exchange of functions was explained as the result of the influence of the Arab maqām عajam).
Another variable factor in the modal system is that of ambitus. A single modal number may refer to scales with different ranges (e.g. mainly above, or mainly below, the final) even when the final remains the same. Thus in Syrian chant the ‘authentic’ and ‘plagal’ varieties of a mode may often be grouped as subdivisions of a single mode, rather than as two separate modes.
The
following list (based chiefly on an analysis of the qāle; see
Husmann, Die Melodien der jakobitischen Kirche, ii, 1971) gives details
of the modes as they are used in practice; indications are given in parentheses
of correspondences with Gregorian and Byzantine modes. It will be seen that
almost all the Gregorian and Byzantine modes are represented, although the
numbering is different, owing partly to a confusion between the original
Byzantine and Gregorian numberings and partly to the replacement of some old
modes by Arabic maqāmāt.1st mode: D final;
occasionally F final (1st authentic and 1st plagal modes).
2nd mode: D and G finals, analogous to the Arabic maqāmāt
bayātī and nawā; F is often tuned a quarter-tone
sharp in the Arabic manner (Arabic scale).
3rd mode: E final, with ambitus above or below E; F often
tuned a quarter-tone sharp (2nd authentic and 2nd plagal modes, i.e. Gregorian
3rd and 4th modes, Byzantine 2nd and 6th). (The 3rd mode in ex.1 is an
exception to this rule, and may represent an error on the part of the singer.)
4th mode: C final, or occasionally D; leading note below C may
be B or B; E tuned a quarter-tone sharp (4th authentic mode, i.e. Gregorian
7th mode, Byzantine 4th mode).
5th mode: E and F finals (G final as a variant) even in the
same melody and with the same singer (with F as final, 3rd plagal mode, i.e.
Gregorian 6th mode, Byzantine 7th mode).
6th mode: E and D finals; characteristic motif C–E, drawn from
the Arabic maqām عajam (Arabic scale).
7th mode: E (or E a quarter-tone flat) and F finals; D and E
both often tuned a quarter-tone flat (Arabic scale).
8th mode: C and E finals, corresponding to medieval Byzantine
custom, or D final, with a scale including B and C
, in the Arabic
manner; F tuned a quarter-tone sharp (partly 4th authentic mode, i.e. Gregorian
7th mode, Byzantine 4th mode; partly Arabic hijāz and hijāz-kar
maqāmāt).
The modes of the Assyrian and Chaldean chant are given names of Arabic maqāmāt; it may be assumed that the church singers thoroughly understand the Arabic musical system. The great Chaldean singer Ephrem Bédé (see Husmann, ‘Die Tonarten’, 1969; and ‘Arabische Maqamen’, 1970) has claimed that Chaldean chant uses the maqāmāt rāst, nihawand, urfalī or dīwānī, sah-gāh, hijāz (hijāz-kar), sabā, tūrānī, araibūnī and bayātī. Of these, urfalī (‘from Urfa’, i.e. ‘from Edessa’), tūrānī (‘mountain maqām’) and araibūnī are peculiar to north Iraq and the rest are well known in the whole Arab world, although oriental musicians claim that araibūnī is simply a variant of bayātī (Musique arabe: Cairo 1932, p.150).
The rāst maqām corresponds to the C major scale; the tuning in Iraq (as with Ephrem Bédé) is diatonic, but in Arabia includes the intervallic progression of a whole tone followed by two steps each of three-quarters of a tone. Bayātī is the minor scale on D mentioned as the 2nd mode of the Syrian Orthodox system. Nawā and nihawand represent the D minor scale with D, F and G as finals; again the tuning is diatonic in Iraq and includes intervals of three-quarters of a tone in Arabia. Hijāz and hijāz-kar are constructed from tetrachords comprising an interval of one and a half tones with a semitone either side of it; this tetrachord is used for both halves of hijāz-kar, whereas hijāz has a diatonic upper tetrachord.
Sah-gāh and sabā are
Arabic scales, including intervals of three-quarters of a tone. Sah-gāh
includes E and B each tuned a quarter-tone flat and has E, tuned a quarter-tone
flat, as final; these notes are altered to diatonic tuning (E and B) in Turkey
and northern Iraq, but with D as a leading note. Sabā has D as final;
its scale is C–D-E (quarter-tone flat)-F–G-A–B-C–D. As performed by Bédé, urfalī and tūrāni
are also minor scales. Since ‘Urfa’ (derived from Syriac ‘Urha’) is pronounced
‘Ruha’ in Arabic, and ‘from Ruha’ becomes ‘ruhawī’ in Arabic, it seems
likely that urfalī is simply a Turkish translation of the Arabic maqām
name rahāwī. The latter exists, moreover, in a variant on D
that may correspond with the urfalī (for which, see d’Erlanger,
1930–59, v, maqām 31; vi, ex.109, transposed on to C).
In the Assyrian system there are, therefore, major and minor diatonic modes besides Arabic scales; these diatonic modes, like those in the Syrian Orthodox modal system, may represent survivals of the ancient Syrian modal system.
According to the great Maronite singer Mārūn Murād, the most usual maqāmāt in Maronite chant are the عajam, nawā, nihawand, rāst, jaharka (the Pythagorean major scale on F), sabā and sah-gāh. These are all widely known Arabic scales; the particular frequency of the عajam is noteworthy.
The extensive researches of Louis Hage, on the other hand, led him to conclude that ‘the “modality” is of a special archaic type, irreducible to the Arab musical system or to that of the eight modes of Byzantine or Gregorian chant’ (Musique maronite, ii, 1995, p.156). Maronite chant, in Hage's view, consists of essentially diatonic melodies moving within a small range of a 5th or less, and ending on one of three possible finals (called ‘do’, ‘re’ or ‘mi’, depending on the presence or absence of half steps above or below). But Hage also recognizes the presence of ‘alterations’ that introduce ‘habitual formulas’ of familiar Arabic maqāmāt.
Much of the Syrian Divine Office is chanted to a recitative, as is almost the whole of the Divine Liturgy (the latter, in a manner without parallel in the West, as a dialogue between the celebrating priest and a deacon or deacons). The particular details of the recitative are freely improvised, whether the singer uses normal speech, heightened speech or (as in the readings at the Eucharist from the Old Testament and the Epistles) a fixed reciting note with simple cadential formulae such as the fall of a tone or semitone. Even in this free improvisation, however, the singers defer to tradition, since they invariably use familiar formulae learnt from their teachers. (See Centonization.)
In the Syrian Divine Office, the psalms are spoken, rather than sung, by the two halves of the choir in alternation (i.e. in the manner known in the West as antiphonal). Sung hymns are interpolated between the verses of the psalms, and these are also antiphonal, with the alternation occurring strophe by strophe as in Ambrosian hymns; the strophes are marked with the letters A and B in the margins of the manuscripts to indicate which half of the choir is to sing them (see Husmann, ‘Die antiphonale Chorpraxis’, 1972).
Both in the spoken antiphonal psalms and in the sung antiphonal hymns, primitive improvised polyphony often occurs in the various Syrian church traditions. The chant is reinforced in various ways with parallel intervals: the crudest examples use parallel 2nds, 3rds and 4ths together, but only parallel 4ths (or, rarely, 5ths) are found in the most sophisticated (see Husmann, 1966). Western polyphony, like Western antiphonal psalmody, therefore, has some parallels with Eastern practice.
Most of the Syrian hymns are sung in alternating strophes interpolated between the verses of the psalms and canticles and are thus analogous to the Byzantine stichēra and troparia. The Byzantine distinction between the latter categories is, however, not drawn in Syrian hymnody: all these interpolations are given the name عenyānā, which is derived from the root عnā (‘answer’) and which thus corresponds etymologically with the Latin responsorium (‘respond’, ‘responsory’) and the Byzantine antiphōna (‘antiphon’).
The qālā is a special category of hymn that occurs extensively in the Syrian Offices (see above, §3). The strophes of a qālā, in most current Syrian practice, are sung between psalm verses of diverse origin; but the original pattern, in which the strophes of the qālā are interpolated into single continuous psalms or canticles, survives in Maronite chant. Qāle are found in manuscripts as early as the 9th century; the simpler Assyrian qāle may, however, date from as early as the 4th century. Most of those in the Syrian Orthodox rite are attributed to Simeon the Potter (Quqāyā, c500) and are cast in a developed AABBCC … structure, including an alleluia and resembling that of the later Western sequence. One of the most widely known qāle, عm kulhun qadishaik, found in the Syrian Orthodox, Maronite and Old Syrian rites, is unique in being a translation of a Byzantine kontakion (Meta tōn hagiōn).
The melody of the psalm verse that precedes a qālā may be taken from the beginning of the strophe of the qālā itself (ex.2). When the versions of different singers are compared, the melodic variants in some qāle appear slight; in others, there are considerable divergences. (Even within the Syrian Orthodox rite the melodies of the older Indian tradition are sometimes more elaborate than those of the other branches of the tradition.) Indeed, the melodies may differ from one rite to another so widely that it is impossible to reconstruct their original form; the differences must result from the long separation of the traditions, but there is usually no way of discovering at what period melodies were adopted in particular rites, or in which rite they originated.
Some Syrian Orthodox qāle, sung on ordinary weekdays, however, have an extra ‘ferial’ melody besides the eight melodies, one for each mode, with which they are sung at festivals (the qāle for vigils have only the eight modal melodies). The ninth melody is generally simpler than the others and is normally identical in the Syrian Orthodox, Maronite and Assyrian rites. It is probably, therefore, the original melody, and the other eight were most likely composed after the introduction of the system of eight modes into Syrian Orthodox chant. It is possible that one of the eight modal melodies of the qāle for vigils was the original melody (being already suitable for use in one of the modes) and that the others were added; these qāle, and presumably their melodies, are not recent compositions since they occur in the oldest surviving manuscripts.
The normal structure of the qālā Quqāyā, like that of the sequence it resembles, may be subject to extension, abbreviation or interpolation. The alleluia may be omitted; the strophes of qāle may be preceded by short verses (pethgāme) summarizing the content of the strophe, although the last strophe is always preceded by the lesser doxology. In the Syrian Orthodox rite these latter are spoken, but in the Assyrian rite they are sung. The Assyrian qāle are simpler in style than those of the Syrian Orthodox rite, but they also exist in variants (shuchlāfe) whose melodies are quite unrelated to those of the qāle. Both qāle and shuchlāfe may have as many as 30 to 50 strophes.
Another special category of Syrian hymn is represented by the qanūne yawnāye (‘Ionian [i.e. Greek] kanōnes’), which are translations of Byzantine kanōnes associated with the nine biblical canticles. Their melodies permit a particularly interesting comparison between modern Syrian and medieval Byzantine melodies (ex.3), where it can be seen – despite differences – that the melodic tradition has remained essentially the same. These qanūne yawnāye appear in Syrian manuscripts from the 10th and 11th centuries (e.g. in GB–Lbl Add.14507; see Wright, i, 1870, pp.283ff).
A further species of hymn, the Maعnithā (like عenyānā, عunāyā and عunithā; from عna: ‘answer’; pl. maعniāthā), occurs more rarely, except in manuscripts reflecting a Syrian Orthodox monastic rite. A large collection of maعniāthā (often wrongly termed ‘oktōēchos’) for the church year is translated from a lost Greek original, the core of which was created by Severus of Antioch (see Brooks, 1909–10/R). (The original Greek term represented by maعnithā may be hypēchēsis, although it is usually translated back into Greek as antiphōna.) Each maعnithā has a single strophe in most manuscripts, preceded by a psalm verse, but in practice the strophe may have been followed (as in Byzantine troparia) by the lesser doxology and then repeated or replaced by a theotokion in honour of the Virgin Mary. In monastic Syrian Orthodox manuscripts, the maعniāthā are grouped in fours, with the first half of the lesser doxology prescribed before the psalm verse of the third maعnithā and the second half of the doxology before the psalm verse of the fourth maعnithā.
Manuscripts of the maعniāthā had an appendix of other chants, including a Syriac version of the ancient Byzantine troparion Hypo tēn sēn eusplanchnian.
The madrāshā is a category of independent strophic hymn whose invention is attributed to St Ephrem Syrus. Each strophe is followed by a short refrain, whose melody is generally that of the first half of the strophe. Although the madrāshā is commonly regarded as the ancestor of the Byzantine kontakion, there are structural differences between the two categories: the strophes of the kontakion end only at the conclusion of the refrain (the last verse of the prooimion, termed the koukoulion), which differs in metre from the strophe.
Several of the madrāshe are sung in both the Syrian Orthodox and Assyrian traditions (including, in each case, the parallel uniate rites); it is thus possible to compare the melodic traditions. Variations occur in the optional embellishments and in the tuning of the scales used; they also occur particularly at the beginnings of melodies, where (as in folksong and other comparable traditions) the singer is ‘searching’ for the melody (ex.4). These variations are not essential, however, and the rites may well share a common melodic tradition in the madrāshe.
At the beginning of a madrāshā, the incipit of the original text sung to the melody of the madrāshā is given. Thus madrāshe are in effect contrafacta. The incipits are not always consistent, however: a single melody may appear with several different titles, which may therefore represent the incipits of further contrafacta – or perhaps there was no single original. In his edition of Ephrem’s hymns, Beck has investigated this nomenclature and has shown that in most of the cases where nomenclature varies, one of the titles used is also attested as the incipit of a madrāshā by Ephrem. It seems, therefore, that all these melodies may originally have been composed by Ephrem and subsequently used by him for constructing contrafacta; this fact may discredit the medieval tradition that early Christian hymnographers used secular or pagan melodies in order to win the hearts of the people.
Syrian musicians believe that all the madrāshe originally had eight melodies, although in current practice all except the ‘great’ four have only one. At the time of Ephrem (d 373), however, the church year was not divided into eight-week cycles according to the modal system, and the hymns of Severus of Antioch (d 538) were not originally categorized according to mode (see Oktōēchos); there would therefore have been no reason for each madrāshā to have eight melodies. Accordingly, the melodies of the great madrāshe (perhaps all eight of each, or seven if the original melody was retained) must have been composed after the introduction of the eight-week cycle.
The sughithā (pl. sughiāthā) resembles the madrāshā in form but includes alphabetical acrostics in its text. Since its text often features dialogue in direct speech, the sughithā may thus be regarded as a prototype of liturgical drama. There are two sughiāthā in a fragment now bound into ET-MSsc syr.233, a Sinai manuscript to which Palaeo-Byzantine notation was later added (see Husmann, ‘Eine alte orientalische christliche Liturgie’, 1976).
Smaller hymn forms include the bāعuthā (tbārtā), which is divided into three categories according to metre (see above, §3(ii)). Each text has eight melodies, whose musical style is simple; the bāعuthā, like the qālā (see above, §5(iv) (a)), may have shuchlāfe. The melodies, like those of some of the other categories, are used according to the eight-week modal cycle.
A sermon in prose or verse, the mimra is a particularly popular genre, of which there are examples among the works of St Ephrem Syrus. Those in verse are analogous to the rhymed sermons of the West in the Middle Ages. In current practice all of them are merely spoken, but mimre in verse must originally have been sung; ET-MSsc syr.233 contains mimre with musical indications, including details of the mode and terms such as ‘low’ and ‘he declares’ (perhaps meaning ‘spoken’). It is remarkable that only short sections of the mimra remain in the same mode: there is constant modulation.
Most Syrian liturgical books lack musical notation, except in the Melkite rite. Palaeo-Byzantine notation, supplemented with some Middle Byzantine signs to clarify the size of the melodic intervals, occurs in a Melkite manuscript, ET-MSsc syr.261 (see fig.1; facs. ed. Husmann, 1975–8; see also Husmann, ‘Ein syrisches Sticherarion’, 1975). This notation is used also in the sughiāthā of MSsc syr.233 (see above, §5(v) (b)). A more primitive version of Palaeo-Byzantine notation – using only a limited number of its signs – occurs in Syrian manuscripts, especially for marking melismas; it also occurs in Byzantine manuscripts, from which (on account of its lavish use of the Greek letter thēta) it has been termed ‘theta notation’ by Raasted (1962). Another Syrian Orthodox notation, discovered by Husmann in a musical notebook, uses mainly oxeiai. (See also Byzantine chant, §3(i–ii).)
A distinctive Old Melkite notation occurs in Syrian Melkite manuscripts; although this is more highly developed than the notations described above using thēta signs and oxeiai, it is still less developed than Byzantine or Latin chant notation. It was first discovered in 1898 by Parisot and published in facsimile by J.-B. Thibaut (Origine byzantine de la notation neumatique de l’église latine, Paris, 1907; see fig.2). This notation appears also in manuscripts from Sinai (of which MSsc syr.80 is particularly rich in neumes), and there are good examples of it in I-Rvat syr.331–3.
A similar notation is used in some Syrian Orthodox manuscripts, especially those at Berlin, where there are also Assyrian and Chaldean manuscripts with neumes constructed with dots. Such neumes also occur in Chaldean manuscripts in Iraq (according to a private communication from Ephrem Bédé; for an example see Hatch, 1946, pls.CLXXI–CLXXX).
See also Ekphonetic notation, §1.
W. Wright: Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum (London, 1870–72)
O. Heiming: Syrische عEniāne und griechische Kanones: die Hs. Sach. 349 der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin (Münster, 1932)
H.P. Hatch: An Album of Dated Syriac Manuscripts (Boston, 1946)
W.F. Macomber: ‘A List of the Known Manuscripts of the Chaldean Hudrā’, Orientalia christiana periodica, xxxvi (1970), 120–34
H. Husmann, ed.: Ein syro-melkitisches Tropologion mit altbyzantinischer Notation, Sinai Syr. 261 (Wiesbaden, 1975–8)
P. Kuruthukulangara: The Feast of the Nativity of Our Lord in the Chaldean and Malabar Liturgical Year: a Study of the Sources (Kottayam, 1989)
A.J. Maclean, trans.: East Syrian Daily Offices (London, 1894)
F.E. Brightman, trans.: Liturgies Eastern and Western, i (Oxford, 1896/R)
P.G. Jazzini: Messe maronite et psaumes (Beirut, 1901)
E.W. Brooks, ed. and trans.: James of Edessa: the Hymns of Severus of Antioch and Others (Paris, 1909–10/R), 1–179, 595–802
G. Furlani, ed. and trans.: Sei scritti antitriteistici in lingua siriaca (Paris, 1920), 292ff [hymns of Severus of Antioch]
Breviarum iuxta ritum Syrorum orientalium id est Chaldaeorum (Rome, 1938)
M. Black, ed.: A Christian Palestinian Syriac Horologion (Berlin MS. Or. Oct. 1019 (Cambridge, 1954)
E. Beck, ed.: Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalium, cliv–clv, clxix–clxx, clxxiv–clxxv, clxxxvi–clxxxvii, cxcviii–cxcix, ccxii–ccxiii, ccxviii–ccxix, ccxxiii–ccxxiv, ccxl–ccxli, ccxlvi–ccxlix, cclxx–cclxxi, cccv–cccvi, cccxi–cccxii, cccxx–cccxxiii, cccxxxiv–cccxxxv, ccclxiii–ccclxiv, ccccxii–ccccxiii (Leuven, 1955–79) [hymns of Ephrem Syrus]
G.M. Lamsa, trans.: The Holy Bible from Ancient Eastern Manuscripts (Philadelphia, 1957)
J. Molitor, ed.: Chaldäisches Brevier: Ordinarium des ostsyrischen Stundengebets (Düsseldorf, 1961)
The Prayer of the Faithful according to the Maronite Liturgical Year (Brooklyn, NY, 1982–5) [Eng. trans. of Proper hymns]
K.E. McVey, ed.: Ephrem the Syrian: Hymns (New York,1989)
J.C. Jeannin, J. Puyade and A. Chibas-Lassalle, eds.: Mélodies syriennes et chaldéennes, i/1: Mélodies liturgiques syriennes (Paris, 1925); i/2 (Beirut, 1928) [vol.ii containing Chaldean chants not pubd; MS at the seminary at Al Mawsil (Mosul), Iraq]
P.P. Ashkar: Cantiques arabes (Beirut, 1928)
P.P. Ashkar: Mélodies liturgiques syro-maronites (Jounieh, 1939)
P.P. Ashkar: Messe maronite et psaumes (Beirut, 1952)
M. Vadakel and P. Aurelius, ed.: Liturgical Melodies of the Chaldaic Syrian Rite (Alwaye, 1954) [edn of the Indian melodies of the Chaldean rite; texts in Malayalam, music in European notation]
P. Youssef, ed.: Cantus missae SS Apostolorum iuxta ritum ecclesiae Chaldaeorum (Rome, 1961) [traditional Chaldean chants of the Divine Liturgy according to the practice of Al Mawsil (Mosul), Iraq]
H. Husmann, ed.: Die Melodien des chaldäischen Breviers-Commune nach den Traditionen Vorderasiens und der Malabarküste (Rome, 1967)
H. Husmann, ed.: Die Melodien der jakobitischen Kirche, i: Die Melodien des Wochenbreviers (Shīmtā) (Vienna, 1969); ii: Die Qāle gaoānāie des Beit gazā (Vienna, 1971)
L. Hage: Le chant de l’église maronite (Beirut, 1972) [continued as Musique maronite (Kaslik, 1990–)]
MGG1 (‘Akzentschrift’, §2; H. Husmann); MGG2 (U. Nieten)
G.P. Badger: The Nestorians and their Rituals (London, 1852/R)
J. Parisot: ‘Rapport sur une mission scientifique en Turquie d’Asie’, Nouvelles archives des missions scientifiques el littéraires, ix (1899), 265–511
J. Parisot: ‘Les huit modes du chant syrien’, Tribune de Saint-Gervais, vii (1901), 258–62
A. Baumstark: Festbrevier und Kirchenjahr der syrischen Jakobiten (Paderborn, 1910/R)
A. Baumstark: Die christlichen Literaturen des Orients (Leipzig, 1911)
J.C. Jeannin: ‘Le chant liturgique syrien’, Journal asiatique, 10th ser., xx (1912), 295–363; 11th ser., ii (1913), 65–137
S. Euringer: ‘Die neun Töpferlieder des Simeon von Gēšîr’, Oriens christianus, new ser., iii (1913), 221–35
J.C. Jeannin and J. Puyade: ‘L’octoëchos syrien: étude historique, étude musicale’, Oriens christianus, new ser., iii (1913), 82–104, 277–98
A. Rücker: ‘Die liturgische Poesie der Ostsyrer’, Vereinsschrift der Görresgesellschaft, iii (1914), 54–77
L. Bonvin: ‘On Syrian Liturgical Chant’, MQ, iv (1918), 593–603
A. Rücker: ‘Über einige nestorianische Liederhandschriften, vornehmlich der griechischen Patriarchatsbibliothek in Jerusalem’, Oriens christianus, new ser., ix (1920), 107–16
A. Rücker: ‘Die wechselnden Gesangstücke der ostsyrischen Messe’, Jb für Liturgiewissenschaft, i (1921), 61–86
A. Baumstark: Geschichte der syrischen Literatur mit Ausschluss der christlich-palästinensischen Texte (Bonn, 1922)
A.Z. Idelsohn: ‘Der Kirchengesang der Jakobiten’, AMw, iv (1922), 364–89
E. Wellesz: Aufgaben und Probleme auf dem Gebiete der byzantinischen und orientalischen Kirchenmusik (Münster, 1923)
O. Heiming: ‘Die عEniānehirmen der Berliner Handschrift Sachau 349’, Oriens christianus, 3rd ser., v (1930), 19–55
R. d’Erlanger: La musique arabe (Paris, 1930–59)
Musique arabe: Cairo 1932
T. Weiss: Zur ostsyrischen Laut- und Akzentlehre (Stuttgart, 1933)
C. Høeg: La notation ekphonétique, MMB, Subsidia, i/2 (1935), esp. 142ff
J.C. Jeannin: ‘Octoëchos syrien’, Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, xii/2, ed. F. Cabrol and H. Leclercq (Paris, 1935), 1888–900
A. Raes: Introductio in liturgiam orientalem (Rome, 1947, 2/1962)
J.B. Segal: The Diacritical Point and the Accents in Syriac (London, 1953)
G. Rechundi: ‘Notation musicale syrienne’, L’orient syrien, iv (1959), 114–18
J. Raasted: ‘A Primitive Palaeobyzantine Musical Notation’, Classica et mediaevalia, xxiii (1962), 302–10
J.M. Sauget: Bibliographie des liturgies orientales, 1900–1960 (Rome, 1962), 104–29
M. Hayek: Liturgie maronite: histoire et textes eucharistiques (Tours, 1964)
P.-E. Gemayel: Avant-messe maronite: histoire et structure (Rome, 1965)
H. Husmann: ‘The Practice of Organum in the Liturgical Singing of the Syrian Churches of the Near and Middle East’, Aspects of Medieval and Renaissance Music: a Birthday Offering to Gustave Reese, ed. J. LaRue (New York, 1966), 435–9
L. Hage: ‘Les mélodies-types dans le chant maronite’, Melto, iii/1–2 (1967), 325–409
L. Hage: ‘Le chant maronite’, Encyclopédie des musiques sacrées, ed. J. Porte, ii (Paris, 1969), 218–22
C. Hannick: ‘Syriens occidentaux et syriens orientaux’, Encyclopédie des musiques sacrées, ed. J. Porte, ii (Paris, 1969), 214–17
H. Husmann, ed.: ‘Die Tonarten der chaldäischen Breviergesänge’, Orientalia christiana periodica, xxxv (1969), 215–48
J. Kuckertz: ‘Die Melodietypen der westsyrischen liturgischen Gesänge’, KJb, liii (1969), 61–93
H. Husmann: ‘Arabische Maqamen in ostsyrischer Kirchenmusik’, Musik als Gestalt und Erlebnis: Festschrift Walter Graf, ed. E. Schenk (Vienna, 1970), 102–08
L. Hage: ‘Music of the Maronite Church’, Parole de l’orient, ii/1 (1971), 197–206
H. Husmann: ‘Hymnus und Troparion’, JbSIM Berlin 1971, 7–86
I. Totzke: ‘Die Musik in den nichtchalkedonischen Kirchen’, Handbuch der Ostkirchenkunde, ed. E. von Ivánka and others (Düsseldorf, 1971), 444–50
M. Breydy: Kult, Dichtung und Musik im Wochenbrevier des Syro-Maroniten (Kobayath, 1971–9)
H. Husmann: ‘Die antiphonale Chorpraxis der syrischen Hymnen nach den Berliner und Pariser Handschriften’, Ostkirchliche Studien, xxi (1972), 281–97
H. Husmann: ‘Die Ostkirchlichen Liturgien und ihre Kultmusik’, ‘Die Gesänge der syrischen Liturgie’, ‘Die Gesänge der melkitischen Liturgie’, Geschichte der katholischen Kirchenmusik, i, ed. K.G. Fellerer (Kassel, 1972), 57–68, 69–98, 161–4
H. Husmann: ‘Die syrischen Auferstehungskanones und ihre griechischen Vorlagen’, Orientalia christiana periodica, xxxviii (1972), 209–42
J. Mateos: Lelya-Sapra: les offices chaldéens de la nuit et du matin (Rome, 2/1972)
W.F. Macomber: ‘A Theory on the Origins of the Syrian, Maronite and Chaldean Rites’, Orientalia christiana periodica, xxxix (1973), 235–42
G. Menachery, ed.: The St. Thomas Christian Encyclopaedia of India (Trichur, 1973–82)
H. Husmann: ‘Eine Konkordanztabelle syrischer Kirchentöne und arabischer Maqamen in einem syrischen Musiknotizbuch’, Symposium syriacum: Rome 1972 (Rome, 1974), 371–85
H. Husmann: ‘Die melkitische Liturgie als Quelle der syrischen Qanune iaonaie: Melitene und Edessa’, Orientalia christiana periodica, xli (1975), 5–56
H. Husmann: ‘Ein syrisches Sticherarion mit paläobyzantinischer Notation (Sinai syr. 1)’, HJbMw, i (1975), 9–57
J. Vellian, ed.: The Romanization Tendency (Kottayam, 1975)
H. Husmann: ‘Eine alte orientalische christliche Liturgie: altsyrisch-melkitisch’, Orientalia christiana periodica, xlii (1976), 156–96
H. Husmann: ‘Madraše und Seblata: Repertoireuntersuchungen zu den Hymnen Ephraems des Syrers’, AcM, xlviii (1976), 113–50
H. Husmann: ‘Syrischer und byzantinischer Oktoëchos: Kanones und Qanune’, Orientalia christiana periodica, xliv (1978), 65–73
H. Husmann: ‘Zur Geschichte des Qala’, Orientalia christiana periodica, xlv (1979), 99–113
S.Y.H. Jammo: La structure de la messe chaldéenne du début jusqu’à l’anaphore: étude historique (Rome, 1979)
J. Raasted: ‘Musical Notation and Quasi Notation in Syro-Melkite Liturgical Manuscripts’, Cahiers de l’Institut du Moyen Age grec et latin, no.31 (1979), 11–37, 53–77
I.J. Ross: ‘Ritual and Music in South India: Syrian Christian Liturgical Music in Kerala’, AsM, xi (1979), 80–98
A. Cody: ‘The Early History of the Octoechos in Syria’, East of Byzantium: Syria and Armenia in the Formative Period: Dumbarton Oaks 1980, ed. N. Garsoïan, T.F. Mathews and R.W. Thomson (Washington DC, 1982), 89–113
W.F. Macomber: ‘Antiochene Rite’, Dictionary of the Middle Ages, ed. J.R. Strayer (New York, 1982), 326–8
E. Beck: ‘Ephräms des Syrers Hymnik’, Liturgie und Dichtung: ein interdiziplinäres Kompendium, ed. H. Becker and R. Kaczynski (St Ottilien, 1983), i, 345–79
J. Madey: ‘On the Reform of the Chaldeo-Malabar Liturgy’, Ostkirchliche Studien, xxxiii (1984), 172–99
S.P. Brock: ‘Syriac and Greek Hymnography: Problems of Origin’, Papers Presented to the Seventh International Conference on Patristic Studies: Oxford 1975, ed. E.A. Livingstone, ii (Berlin, 1985), 77–81
R. Taft: The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: the Origins of the Divine Office and its Meaning for Today (Collegeville, MN, 1986, 2/1993), 225–47
E. Kesrouani: ‘L’octoéchos syriaque’, Aspects de la musique liturgique au Moyen Age: Royaumont 1986, 1987 and 1988, 77–91
A. Palmer and L. Rodley: ‘The Inauguration Anthem of Hagia Sophia in Edessa’, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, xii (1988), 117–67
E.G. Mathews: ‘The Vita Tradition of Ephrem the Syrian, the Deacon of Edessa’, Diakonia, xxii (1988–9), 15–42
G.A.M. Rouwhorst: Les hymnes pascales d’Ephrem de Nisibe: analyse théologique et recherche sur l’évolution de la fête pascale à Nisibe et à Edesse et dans quelques églises voisines au quatrième siècle (Leiden, 1989)
J. Absi: L’hymnographie grecque et ses versions syriaques et arabes: la relation texte–musique (Beirut, 1990)
G.J. Cuming: ‘The Liturgy of Antioch in the Time of Severus (513–518)’, Time and Community: in Honor of Thomas Julian Talley, ed. J.N. Alexander (Washington DC, 1990), 83–103
M. Velimirović: ‘Christian Chant in Syria, Armenia, Egypt, and Ethiopia’, NOHM, ii (2/1990), 3–25
P. Yousif and others, eds.: A Classified Bibliography on the East Syrian Liturgy (Rome, 1990)
P. Kannookadan: The East Syrian Lectionary: an Historico-Liturgical Study (Rome, 1991)
A. Palmer: ‘The History of the Syrian Orthodox in Jerusalem’, Oriens christianus, lxxv (1991), 16–43
J.R.K. Fenwick: The Anaphoras of St Basil and St James: an Investigation into their Common Origin (Rome, 1992)
L. Hage: ‘Le chant maronite’, EG, xxiv (1992), 189–94
N. Antiba: ‘Liturgical Renewal in the Greek Melkite Catholic Church’, Euntes docete: commentaria urbaniana, xlvi (1993), 19–32
B.D. Spinks: Prayers from the East (Washington DC, 1993)
P. Jeffery: ‘The Earliest Christian Chant Repertory Recovered: the Georgian Witnesses to Jerusalem Chant’, JAMS, xlvii (1994), 1–39
G. Malacrida: Forme del canto siriaco (Lucca, 1997)
The Music of the Syrian Orthodox Church, Philips 6586 014 (1973) [Jacobite liturgy; notes by H. Touma]
Chant traditionnel maronite: noël, passion, resurrection, Sr Marie Kerouz and l’Ensemble de la Paix, Harmonia Mundi France HMC 901350 (1991)
Eglise syrienne orthodoxe: liturgie d’Antioche, UNESCO: Anthologie des musiques traditionelles, Auvidis D8039 (1992) [commentary by C. Poche]
Eglise syrienne orthodoxe: tradition de Tur Abdin en Mésopotamie, UNESCO: Anthologie des musiques traditionelles, Auvidis D8075 (1998) [first issued in 1973; notes by H. Touma]