2. Russian church music: monophonic chant and its notation.
3. Russian church music: polyphonic music.
4. The southwestern tradition: Belorussia, Ukraine and Carpathian Rus'.
MILOŠ VELIMIROVIĆ (1–3, 5–6; bibliography with IRENE LOZOVAYA and GREGORY MYERS), LEONORA DeCARLO (4)
Russian and Slavonic church music
The Slavs as an ethnic group are divided into eastern Slavs (i.e. Russians, ‘Little Russians’ or Ukrainians, and ‘White Russians’ or Belorussians), western Slavs (Poles, Czechs, Slovaks and Lusatian Sorbs) and southern Slavs (Bulgarians, Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, as well as Montenegrins and Macedonian Slavs).
The eastern Slavs and some of the southern Slavs (except for Croats and Slovenes) accepted Christianity in its Eastern Orthodox form. The remaining Slavonic groups were converted to Roman Catholicism, although some of them had contacts at various times with Eastern Orthodoxy through the intermediary role of Greek missionaries. Within this article only the Eastern Orthodox Slavs will be discussed, that is, those who accepted the Christian religion from the Greeks and the accompanying ritual in its Greek form but translated the services into the Old Church Slavonic language, the root of all Slavonic languages. This language evolved over many centuries. After the 11th century it became Church Slavonic with strong regional variants so that one may speak of various national recensions of Church Slavonic as it is recorded in written documents.
In the discussion of Slavonic church music, the term ‘Russian’ will be used to describe all the eastern Slavs and their music up until the late 15th century, when the chant tradition split into two main branches, that of the Grand Duchy of Muscovy and that of the southwestern area including Kiev, Galicia and Carpathian Rus'. The tradition of the latter area after the split is discussed in a separate section (§4), but it should be noted that the earliest developments were centred on the area now known as Ukraine. The later history of Russian church music is also inextricably bound up with Ukraine, owing to the area’s close links with Western Europe and also to the fact that several of the most important composers of church music came from the area to study and work in Moscow. Similarly, the discussion of Serbian chant will cover not only Serbia, but also Montenegro, Macedonia and parts of Bosnia-Hercegovina, in whose histories the Serbs played a significant role.
One trait common to all Eastern Orthodox Slavs with regard to church music is that they practise only vocal music. Musical instruments are banned from religious services. The term ‘church music’ will here designate the music of the Christian rite. The Slavonic ethnic groups received Christianity at different points in history. All Slavs, however, view the Byzantine missionaries Constantine (who as a monk was named Cyril) and Methodius as the first apostles of Christianity among the Slavs. All celebrate their memory and honour them as saints. This mission, which started in the year 863, is also viewed as the starting-point for literature in any Slavonic language, as some of the first poems and translations of liturgical books are attributed to the Holy Brothers.
Russian and Slavonic church music
Christianity penetrated Russia probably as early as the 9th century, although it is customary to refer to the year 988 as the official date for the christianization of Russia: the date at which the ruler of the Kievan Rus', Prince Vladimir, accepted the religion. With the advent of Christianity into Russia came also Greek missionaries and church dignitaries. Such Greeks occupied important positions in the ecclesiastical hierarchy during the next few centuries. Byzantine missionaries were already involved in the christianization of the Slavs in the 9th century, with the mission of St Cyril and St Methodius to Moravia in 863. From this it is generally assumed that the liturgical books were available in a Slavonic translation considerably before the conversion of Russians. According to the Russian Primary Chronicle there was a particularly intense period of active translation and copying of books in Russia during the first half of the 11th century: during the reign of Yaroslav the Wise (1019–54) who founded the Cathedral of Kiev, which was presumably equipped with all necessary service books at its foundation in 1037 (although these earliest sources do not survive).
The earliest surviving Slavonic musical manuscripts date from the late 11th century and more particularly the 12th. In their typology these manuscripts are faithful translations of the liturgical books of the Greek Orthodox Church (heirmologia, stichēraria, triōdia, and some of the earliest collections of the kontakia); they are notated with neumes.
There is no longer any doubt about the Byzantine origin of the neumatic notation in early Russian musical manuscripts. After lengthy investigations by Russian scholars in the 19th century, Preobrazhensky had by 1909 found evidence that proved the Byzantine origins of the Russian neumes. He demonstrated, though on a limited scale, the dependence of the earliest Russian chants on their Byzantine mode. By juxtaposition of the same texts (the Greek original and its Slavonic translation) it was found in an overwhelming number of examples that identical neumes were to be found at crucial places in Byzantine musical manuscripts and in their Russian translations.
To start with the texts, it should be noted that the degree of identical meaning varies, as is to be expected in translation from one language to another that is so different in inflection and accent. Nevertheless, there is great flexibility and conscious adaptation of Russian Church Slavonic words so that they emulate their Greek equivalents. As for the notational similarities, these occur especially at a few specific structural points: at an opening melodic formula or a cadential formula. This suggests that in the earliest stages of the transmission of Christianity into Russia, melodies sung at the religious services were definitely Byzantine in origin, even if lengthy passages, especially in the middle of a verse or hymn, did not show the same degree of dependence on their Byzantine models. In the early manuscripts, probably the most difficult neume to interpret is that resembling the Byzantine ison, as it appears in extended segments, giving a visual impression of a prolonged recitation on a single tone (a phenomenon that has no real counterpart in contemporary Byzantine documents). Although this interpretation is possible it is more plausible to consider such a usage as belonging to a transitional stage in the process of evolution of the notation, when the meaning of a sign was not fixed and it could have more than one interpretation.
The neumes in most manuscripts are exceedingly close to an early stage of the Coislin system of the Palaeo-Byzantine form of notation (the Coislin system, named after a manuscript collection in France, is the most widespread of two systems in the earliest form of Byzantine neumatic notation). However, the few surviving kondakaria contain a mixed notation, in two superimposed rows, with a distinct predominance of signs that have been identified as belonging to the less common Chartres system of Palaeo-Byzantine notation. Before the modern advances in the study of Byzantine music there was a school of thought that presumed that the neumes in the kondakaria represented an ‘original’ Russian notation that was therefore named kondakarian notation. There is, however, supporting evidence for the identity of Greek and Slavonic melodies; the best example shows a text in Greek language (in the Slavonic transliteration) and its notation, together with the Slavonic translation of the same text using an almost identical sequence of neumes about the text (fig.1).
The possibilities for transcription of these earliest examples into modern notation are limited. This is not due to any scarcity of sources. In fact, for the period from the late 11th century to approximately the mid-15th, at least 70 manuscripts and fragments are at present known. The problem lies in the earliest stages of Byzantine notation, which have to be understood before the Russian sources can be transcribed. While in specific instances some of the earliest Byzantine musical manuscripts may be tentatively transcribed without assistance from later documentation, the majority of them are ambiguous, and this is reflected in studies of Russian church music and its notations for the period up to the 15th century.
Part of the problem is the characteristic conservatism of the scribes of Russian musical manuscripts. Once it was received from Byzantium the notation was faithfully copied for centuries with no changes in the neumes; in Byzantium, however, where the neumes were not viewed as a sacrosanct aspect of the text, a change in notational principles took place, so that the neumes had a more precise meaning: this is now known as Middle Byzantine notation (see Byzantine chant). However, owing to the retention of the older, imprecise signs, the transcription of early Slavonic sources presents great difficulties, and any attempt requires complex methodologies for tackling the individual hymns.
This problem of comprehension is not only important for a grasp of the traditional ritual melodies, but also for insights into some of the original Slavonic creations, which date as far back as the 9th century. As did all other Christian churches, the Russian Church acquired saints and martyrs whose memories were honoured on special feast days, with new hymnody. Some 12th-century manuscripts already contain hymns in honour of early Russian saints. Most of these hymns emulate the structure of better-known hymns to traditional saints, while a few are distinct copies of Greek hymns. Among such examples are the earliest poem in the Church Slavonic language in honour of St Demetrius (probably written by one of the Holy Brothers) and hymns honouring St Boris and St Gleb (sons of Prince Vladimir of Kiev).
The stages of evolution of the neumatic notation in Russian manuscripts from the 12th to the 16th centuries are not yet fully understood. The conservatism of retaining identical signs for centuries with only a gradual change in the ductus of the handwriting may be attributed to the association of neumes with texts that were not subject to change. Yet there were other factors that created obstacles to our understanding of the notation: considerable reduction of direct contacts between the Kievan Rus' and Byzantium due to the conquest of Constantinople (1204) during the Fourth Crusade and the establishment of the Latin Empire (overthrown 1261) in the former Byzantine capital; furthermore, Russian lands, already fragmented, were invaded by Tatars in the first half of the 13th century, bringing to an end the further development of the Kievan state. However, peripheral areas frequently maintain old traditions more faithfully than the centre of the tradition, and Russian sources preserve documentation of some aspects of Byzantine tradition since lost in Byzantium itself.
In the course of the 14th century new centres of religious and cultural activities appeared. Of great importance for later developments were the centres of Moscow and Novgorod, the tradition of the latter going back several centuries. Russian scholars have maintained that some kind of notational and melodic change took place in the 14th and 15th centuries, but the nature of the change has yet to be established. Curiously, in contrast to the two preceding centuries, which were rich in musical documentation, the number of sources dating from the 14th century drops to insignificant proportions; only in the second half of the 15th century does the number of (surviving) Russian sources start to grow, reaching large numbers – more than 1000 manuscripts – in each of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. A study of facsimiles of manuscripts dating from the 14th and 15th centuries confirms the change in handwriting, but most of the basic neumes are recognizable and identifiable (fig.2). However, a comparative study of Byzantine sources of the same period suggests that by the 14th century the links between the two notations had become rather tenuous and even nonexistent for a growing portion of the hymn repertory. In the absence of steady contacts and left to their own devices it seems likely that, in an environment dominated by a process of oral transmission, the singers may have introduced variants that contributed to the total separation of Russian tradition from its Byzantine roots.
There can be no doubt that with the gradually increasing number of manuscripts in the 15th century there arose a need for the classification of neumes and their names, since the earlier terminology and meaning of neumes appears to have become extremely loose if not extinct. To satisfy such needs, in the mid-15th century the first so-called azbuki (literally ‘alphabets’) appeared, listing neumes and giving new Slavonic names for some of them, while retaining somewhat modified but still recognizable Greek names for a few. This may also be the period in which the terms znamya and kryuk made their appearance as designations for ‘signs’ in neumatic notation (thus znamennaya notatsiya means ‘sign notation’ and kryukovoye pis'mo ‘hook-like sign writing’). Through the conflation of these terms the designation znamennïy raspev appeared, meaning ‘chanting by signs’, sometimes known in English as ‘znamennïy chant’.
Developments in Russia during the second half of the 15th century, in music as in other fields, were almost certainly associated with the downfall of the Byzantine Empire in 1453; this created a new situation in which Russia was to find itself as the only powerful defender of Orthodox Christians in eastern Europe.
Scholarly investigation of the azbuki made considerable strides at the end of the 20th century, and such books have become more precisely datable. Six are believed to date from the 15th century, approximately 40 more from the 16th century, and a number of these catalogues are of later date. Probably the greatest difficulty for the study of these sources is that they do not always agree among themselves, either in their terminology or in the meanings ascribed to individual neumes. To complicate matters further, it appears that some neumes may have had different meanings in different ‘modes’ (Russ.: glas). There are also indications that some were only in regional use and were unknown in other areas. Some of the new Russian names for the neumes are descriptive either of the shape of the sign (pauk, ‘spider’; dva v chelnu, ‘two in a boat’) or, in rare instances, of the melodic turn.
If there is any one period of Russian history during which the change in meaning of neumatic notation took place and the elements of Russian indigenous melodies made inroads into the body of religious chant, the 16th century seems the most likely time. By that period Russian neumatic notation no longer had any link with its Byzantine roots and there was a proliferation of new notational systems and terminologies totally unrelated to former traditions. Among the manifestations of the new attitude are the growing numbers of reference to singers and listings of their names and activities. In more than one way developments in Russia resemble events in the late Byzantine Empire when numerous maistores and virtuoso singers took not only to composing new pieces but also to recomposing the traditional repertory for the religious services. Even the Byzantine practice of Teretismata has its counterpart in 16th-century Russian anenayki and in the correspondingly increased length of some of the hymns. One can as yet only hypothesize in this field: that, for example, the melismatic embellishment of originally simple melodies may have led to the establishment of bol'shoy raspev (‘great chant’), which made its first appearance in the late 16th century.
By the time of Ivan the Terrible (ruled 1533–84) and his concentration of rule in Moscow there were already references to whole schools of singers being transferred from Novgorod to Moscow, and to the establishment of an imperial chapel. Ivan was himself a composer: at least two hymns are known to have been written by him. By 1589, with the establishment of the Russian patriarchate in Moscow, the Patriarchs had added a ‘patriarchal choir’ to their retinue.
New variants in the types of chanting made their first appearance during the 16th century. Besides the standard, traditional znamennïy chant there are also references to the ‘demestvennïy chant’, which some scholars associate with specially trained, skilled singers: precentors, known as domestiki (Gk.) or demestvenniki (Russ.). One of its main characteristics was apparently its profusion of melismas, and the evolution of a peculiar system of signs most of which originated in the metamorphosed neumatic notation of past centuries. There are also references to the so-called Kazan' chant and notation, associated primarily with the singers of Ivan the Terrible. Yet for all practical purposes our understanding of Kazan' chant remains slight.
In the process of melismatic elaboration – bol'shoy raspev – extensive melodic formulae were associated with certain neumes (a procedure known as popevki, belonging probably to the 16th and 17th centuries). In time these formulae were classified and assembled into collections, some of which were known as fitnik (from their previous shorthand notation using the Greek letter theta, pronounced fita in Russian) or kokiznik (from kokiza, another term for independent extended melismas, although scholars disagree about its precise meaning). Individual melodic formulae received their own names (e.g. kobïla, ‘a mare’); and the art of musical composition consisted in the euphonious matching and weaving of such melodic figures. At this period other parts of the liturgical repertory contrasted sharply with bol'shoy raspev. There was malïy raspev (‘small chant’) which consisted of abbreviated melodies with far fewer melismas and with recitative patterns on a single note. The recitative pattern was much more characteristic of what came to be known as grecheskiy raspev (‘Greek chant’) which emerged in the middle of the 17th century – the outcome, some believe, of an extended stay by some Greek singers in Moscow in the 1650s. Opinions are divided about the origin of the term bolgarskiy raspev (‘Bulgarian chant’) which also made its appearance in the mid-17th century. Some scholars see it as an import from Bulgarian lands, others deny this. The term Kiyevskiy raspev (‘Kievan chant’) now seems to have come into use late in the 17th century. It has been claimed that these may be the oldest melodies which became adapted to the musical taste of Ukraine (see also below, §4). The characteristics of ‘Kievan chant’ are the use of contrasting sections, alternating between the recitative and melodic segments, reminiscent of Ukrainian folk music patterns.
A new development in the 16th century was the staging of some aspects of the services in the manner of liturgical drama. The roots of at least one of these dramas (if that term is applicable) seem to lie in Byzantine cathedral practices that never acquired the pomp and elaborate setting enjoyed by liturgical drama in western Europe in the Middle Ages. Besides the best-known example, Peshchnoye deystvo (‘Play of the furnace’, dealing with the story of the three men in the burning fiery furnace), there are records of other deystva (literally ‘actions’) such as Shestviye na oslyati (‘Procession on the donkey’ for Palm Sunday) and Deystvo strashnogo suda (‘Play of the Last Judgment’). The impact and tradition of these last two deystva was apparently of limited duration, and by the mid-17th century they had been banned by imperial decree.
One peculiarity of Slavonic musical manuscripts is that neumes are written not only above the vowels and individual syllables but also above some mute letters. This phenomenon, already noted by philologists, suggests that the two signs concerned, which are not nowadays pronounced, did at least have sufficient length to be indicated by neumes in the earliest stages of the Old Slavonic language. It was during the 16th century in particular that a practice known as khomoniya prevailed. It consisted in transliterating mute letters into the vowels ‘e’ and ‘o’. The new pronunciation caused the deformation of words; this led to calls for reform of text and music, which happened in the mid-17th century.
In Byzantine notation, and the early Russian notation based on it, the neumes are intervallic: that is, they designate the interval between one note and the next but give no indication of precise pitch. If this interpretation was still correct at the end of the 15th century, by the end of the 16th century the neumes in Russia had acquired a new meaning: each sign designated a specific pitch rather than an interval. The process of change from relational to pitch-specific notation is not at present clear. The codification of this new interpretation may be clearly seen in the first of several notational reforms which were to take place during the 17th century. This first reform is associated with Ivan Shaydur, a singer active in Novgorod and possibly Moscow. His reform is usually dated c1600, although a later date may be more likely. Shaydur’s reform consisted in adding special signs (stylized letters) to neumes, spelling out as a mnemotechnic device the particular pitch to which the neume referred at that point. The concept of a gamut encompassing the notes of the melodies seems to have emerged with this reform. To Shaydur (or a musician in his circle) may perhaps be attributed the concept of dividing the tonal range into four groups of three notes, each separated by a semitone from the next trichord. These trichords are identical in structure, yielding the gamut in ex.1. This system strongly resembles the Western hexachord system, from which it was probably derived. Each trichord received a special name: from the lowest upwards, ‘simple’, ‘dark’, ‘light’, and ‘three times light’. For some of the trichords, notes in identical positions received additional signs. These signs were written in red ink and therefore received the designation kinovarnïye pometï (i.e. cinnabar signs for pitch). Later on, further signs were added to simplify printing in one colour; these were known as priznaki, but their use was relatively short-lived.
Another well-known singer, Fyodor Khristianin, from the late 16th century, composed a set of hymns (gospel stikhira), which were notated in pre-reform notation. At least a partial transcription of some of these melodies has been possible by means of comparative studies (Brazhnikov). Surprisingly, they reveal certain melodic features that are nowadays viewed as a typically Russian melos, with its extended range and melodic leaps (ex.2). Brazhnikov was furthermore inclined to attribute to Fyodor Khristianin the ‘invention’ of bol'shoy raspev (see above). Whoever invented it, it was certainly the result of a trend that must have ripened over several decades of growth in native practices.
The transmission of the reformed notation with red signs presented problems for copyists as it did for the intended printing of Russian liturgical books. These problems, together with abuses of singing in churches during the first half of the 17th century, led to the second reform, associated with the name of Aleksandr Mezenets, which took place about 1670. The abuses mentioned appear to have resulted from the protraction of services by additions and embellishments to traditional melodies. To remedy this protraction, singers had adopted the practice of starting the next hymn before the preceding one had ended. At its gravest, several hymns supposed to follow one another may have been chanted at more or less the same time. Whether this practice was a genuine distortion or an emulation of the polyphonic practices that were already infiltrating as far back as the 16th century is still a matter for speculation. From the mid-1650s onwards the possibility of a new reform of singing practices came under public discussion several times. Reform was made doubly problematic by the presence on the patriarchal throne from 1652 to 1656 of Nikon, an advocate of polyphony. To the orthodox clergy of Moscow polyphony smacked of Roman Catholicism and the very acknowledgment of it represented a threat to the purity of the faith if not a symbol of Roman supremacy. Reaction against patriarchal preferences led, among other things, to a schism within the Russian Church itself, establishing on the one hand the official Russian Church and on the other the schismatic groups. Among the latter the best known are the ‘Old Believers’, this term in fact embracing more than one group. All of them were, however, united in their opposition to the introduction of polyphony and in claiming zealously that they were preserving melodies of the liturgical repertory unspoilt.
The work of the reform commission took place shortly after the lands of the Ukraine were joined to Russia in 1654. This is significant, since the Ukrainian lands were for a long time in contact with Polish lands and were acquainted through them with the western European polyphony, both religious and secular.
The reforms of the mid-17th century dealt with texts as well as music. Khomoniya was banned, and orders were issued to correct liturgical books containing vowels instead of mute letters. Simultaneously the melodies were adjusted to fit the new pronunciation. Mezenets and his commission were concerned with preserving and clarifying the neumatic notation. The Old Believers, however, were ultimately the ones to transmit this type of notation into the 20th century. Though Mezenets’ reform changed the added signs from red to black to facilitate printing, the earliest printing dates only from 1772. A few more refinements, including some additional signs, are attributable to Mezenets, whose reforms coincided with the time at which western European staff notation, primarily from Poland, was beginning to be accepted in Russia. The late 17th century and parts of the 18th formed a transitional stage in which the two notational systems coexisted and were occasionally used side-by-side. While the official Russian Church gradually accepted the five-line staff notation, neumes continued to be used primarily in monastic communities, and particularly among certain sects that regarded the use of Western notation as a symptom of Russia’s abandonment of the principles of Eastern Orthodox Christianity and its ‘conversion’ to Roman Catholicism. By the 19th century the use of neumes had become an anachronism; the practice came to an end barely a century after the final reform that aimed to render the neumatic notation clear and easy to use. Transcription of the reformed neumatic notation of the 17th and 18th centuries has been facilitated by the existence of lists of neumes together with their melodic meanings (fig.3).
During the last quarter of the 17th century there appeared several treatises on music, among them the Musikïskaya grammatika (‘Musical Grammar’) attributed to Nikolay Diletsky (c1630–1680 or 1690). Besides a discussion of notation this treatise describes what must be interpreted as modes and provides the earliest known description of major and minor scales in any European musical treatise (see Jensen, 1992). Theoretical and notational problems are also discussed in a Klyuch (‘key’) by Tikhon Makarevsky, also written before 1700.
While monophonic melodies continued to be copied in subsequent centuries, the acceptance of modern staff notation during the reign of Peter the Great (1689–1725) and the favouring of polyphony shown by the official church made the monophonic traditions increasingly obsolescent in Russia from the 18th century onwards. Only the Old Believers, still to be found in Russia as well as in Canada and in the USA, still adhere to monophonic chanting (though occasionally intermingled with elements of ‘folk polyphony’). Attempts at restoring unison singing in the beginning of the 20th century in Russia were shortlived; and so far they have made no impact on the Russian Orthodox celebration of services.
Russian and Slavonic church music
Some Russian scholars believe that polyphony was practised in Russian church music before the 16th century. Their view rests solely on the practice of polyphonic singing in Russian folk music. The earliest documented references that carry implications of polyphonic singing date from about the middle of the 16th century. Uspensky has suggested that the term strochnoye peniye (from stroka meaning ‘line’, therefore ‘line-singing’) refers to such a practice. These references mention such singing on feasts and holidays when religious processions played an important role. Since the processions would imply the participation of large numbers of people, and folk-singing may have been a part of such celebrations, some scholars suggest that at least one of the idioms of the Russian polyphonic church music may actually have been derived from folk music.
There is no doubt that sophisticated polyphonic practices penetrated into Russia from the West, primarily through Poland and the Ukraine. The much more refined style of this music represents a separate strain which, at a later date, may have merged with indigenous practices, creating the blend that came to be known as Russian polyphonic church music. The existence of some native polyphonic singing may indeed have facilitated the penetration of Western elements, contributing to the official acceptance of part-singing in place of unison chanting. However, a clear distinction between these two styles, folk polyphony and a ‘learnt’ polyphony, has yet to be firmly established.
There was more than one way in which Western music could reach Russia. An important trading centre, Novgorod, had maintained contacts with central European cities. Novgorod is mentioned as one of the most important musical centres, and Ivan the Terrible had even moved singers from there to Moscow. The amount of polyphony practised there in the 16th century, however, is still unknown. Polyphonic music was certainly composed and performed in Poland during the 16th century; Polish ties with western Russia and involvement in Russian politics were strong in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. Western polyphonic styles, and five-line staff notation, were certainly already well known in Russia by 1654 when the merger of Ukrainian lands and Muscovy took place, and when Nikon sat on the patriarchal throne.
Demestvennïy chant, as was pointed out earlier, was evidently practised by skilled singers who excelled in their knowledge of music. Some of the earliest polyphonic scores in Russia seem to be settings of this type of chant written out in neumatic notation for two or three voices of more or less the same ambitus (fig.4). They are problematic in that the voices sometimes create dissonant intervals, particularly parallel 2nds and 4ths. In the absence of clef indications, one school of thought favours experimenting with transpositions of some of the parts in order to obtain more euphonious chords and progressions. The other justifies the dissonances by referring to the raw harmonic progressions found in early organum of the 11th and 12th centuries.
Most of the polyphony believed to date from before the mid-17th century is essentially for two or three voices. Even in the late 16th century there are technical terms for singers which seem to designate the pitch-range of their voices: for example verkh or verkhnik (‘peak’ or ‘highest’) and niz and nizhnik (‘lowland’ or ‘the one who is below’). These terms alone would suffice for two-part settings. In compositions for three voices the term put' (‘way’ or ‘road’) is found, and may perhaps designate a sort of cantus firmus, although in practice the melody given to put' was often highly embellished. In some instances the term demestvo instead of put' may be found. If demestvennïy chant indeed refers to the skill of its singers, then demestvo may logically imply a skilful leader of singing assigned to lead the ‘way’ by singing the traditional melody which, as practice permitted it, could be embroidered.
In the second half of the 17th century the use of Western staff notation became much more prominent. From this time there survive useful manuscripts known as dvoznamenniki which contain parallel notation of melodies in neumes and on the staff – a sort of ‘Rosetta stone’. As mentioned above, the knowledge of neumatic notation diminished rapidly after 1700 and, although manuscripts were still copied in the 18th century, it was used only by small groups of people, mostly dissenters from the official Russian church.
In the last quarter of the 17th century several composers of polyphonic church music appeared, among them Nikolay Diletsky and Vasily Titov (active between 1680 and 1710). Their works have much in common technically and stylistically with German choral music of this period (for example, that of Schütz). Besides settings for one choir in four parts, polychoral compositions began to proliferate. In such polychoral works for two and three choirs (i.e. for 8 and 12 voices; in one extreme case for 48) the typical features are frequent use of imitation and of sequential progressions. The partesnïye kontsertï (‘concertos for many parts’), of which more than 500 may survive, abound with highly effective exchanges between individual choruses.
Simultaneously, another musical genre made its appearance. This was kant (plural kantï, obviously related to ‘chant’); it comprised settings of chant, usually for three voices, syllabic and in block chords. Some examples suggest a Polish origin for this genre (possibly as a by-product of influence from the Lutheran chorale). A few even have Polish texts transliterated into the Cyrillic alphabet. The earliest kantï have religious texts. Shortly thereafter secular texts were being used; the secular kant became highly popular, and there emerged a sub-type known as ‘panegyric kant’ which flourished in the time of Peter the Great. Secular kantï remained popular during much of the 18th century.
The period between the activities of Titov and the second half of the 18th century has not yet been investigated sufficiently to provide a clear picture of the developments of church music. Conscious attempts were being made during the reign of Empress Anna (1730–40) to lure Italian composers to Russia. Contrary to the traditional belief that Italians arriving in Russia found a musical wasteland, the Italians evidently found not only a receptive audience at the court, but also an established practice of polyphony in the church.
During her reign (1762–96) Catherine the Great maintained contacts with western European scholars and philosophers, and surrounded herself with Italian musicians. The interchanges that brought Baldassare Galuppi (1706–85) to St Petersburg and took Maxim Berezovsky (1745–77) to study and work in Italy in 1765 brought music of a highly Italianate style into the Russian church. The most influential figure in this development was Dmitry Bortnyansky (1751–1825), who after ten years in Italy returned to become musician-in-ordinary to Crown Prince Paul and eventually director in the imperial chapel. He wrote well over 100 works for use in religious services, including at least 35 choral concertos with texts derived from the Psalms. Despite publication by the Russian church of four volumes of znamennïy chant in 1772, and of an Obikhod (similar to a Liber usualis) in 1778, Bortnyansky did not make great use of traditional melodies.
Despite Emperor Paul’s edict of 1797 banning the singing of concertos during services, there were many abuses in the next half-century (including a setting of the words of the Cherubic Hymn to one of the choruses from Haydn’s The Creation). The edict did not stop Bortnyansky writing his own concertos. In 1816 he was appointed to censor the compositions submitted for performance in Russian churches. Thus, for the last decade of his life Bortnyansky had supreme control over church music in Russia. He overshadowed a number of other competent composers of religious music, such as Artemy Vedel' (1767–1806), Stepan Degtyaryov (1766–1813) and Stepan Davïdov (1777–1825).
Bortnyansky’s successor as director of the chapel was Fyodor L'vov (1766–1836) who is mainly remembered as an administrator, though he did write a booklet on Russian church music in 1834. He was succeeded by his son, Aleksey L'vov (1798–1870), who served as director of the chapel from 1836 to 1861. After the period of Italian musical influence there then began a period of German influence. Pyotr Turchaninov (1779–1856) was still writing in an Italianate style, and enjoyed great popularity after official approval of his music had been granted in 1831. L'vov, on the other hand, deeply influenced by the Romantic music of his time, fostered a style that closely resembled that of the German chorale. The melodies used by the imperial chapel were in fact abridged versions of traditional tunes, and L'vov harmonized them in his own style. When the text or melody got in the way of his concepts he introduced choral recitatives on a single note. By comparison with the music of Bortnyansky and Turchaninov, that of L'vov is much richer harmonically and carries the cantus firmus in the top voice. He may be viewed as the creator of a specific style which Gardner has designated the ‘St Petersburg School’ of Russian church music. Closely related in style were the works of Gavriil Lomakin (1812–85), G.F. L'vovsky (1830–94), M.A. Vinogradov (1810–88), Ye.S. Azeyev (1851–1918) and those of Aleksandr Arkhangel'sky (1846–1924) who was the first to introduce female voices into the choir in the 1880s.
Furthermore, L'vov, in collaboration with Vorotnikov and Lomakin, organized the work on an edition of the Obikhod which was published in 1848 and which became mandatory for all churches in Russia. The settings for four voices provided in this edition rapidly came into use throughout Russia. L'vov is credited with raising the standards for performance of church music which so deeply impressed Berlioz in 1847.
In the late 1830s Glinka was associated for a short time with the imperial chapel. He wrote a few works in Italianate style. However, he soon became convinced that Russian church music must be harmonized in modal harmony, not in the major and minor keys. Glinka had intended to study the modes and ‘church scales’ with Dehn when he embarked on his last trip, during which he died. N.M. Potulov (1810–73), often described as a follower of Glinka’s ideas, harmonized all the melodies published in the Synodal edition of 1772. His harmonizations were very simple, in a strictly chordal style without dissonances and modulations.
The 1860s saw the beginnings of scholarly study in the history of Russian church music and a new awareness of a specifically Russian musical idiom fostered by ‘The Five’. L'vov’s successor as director of the chapel, N.I. Bakhmet'yev (1807–91), is seen nowadays as a reactionary in the face of these movements. He resigned his post, apparently in protest against the publication of Tchaikovsky’s Liturgy of St John Chrysostom (op.41, 1878). Tchaikovsky’s publisher, Jürgenson, did not seek approval from the imperial chapel but from the Holy Synod of the Russian Church. After publication litigation ensued which led to the downfall of Bakhmet'yev.
Although Bakhmet'yev was succeeded by Balakirev, who served as director of the chapel (1883–95) and in turn brought Rimsky-Korsakov to be an assistant, the importance of the St Petersburg school was waning. The fact that certain composers, including Aleksandr Grechaninov (1864–1956) were writing a more modern style of church music in both St Petersburg and Moscow did not arrest the decline.
Already a new school was developing. Its main vehicle of performance was the Synodal choir in Moscow under the leadership of V.S. Orlov (1856–1907) and Stepan Smolensky (1848–1909). The most significant composers of Russian church music during the two decades before the 1917 Revolution were all associated with the Moscow school, among them Aleksandr Kastal'sky (1856–1926) and Pavel Chesnokov (1877–1944). Kastal'sky revised Potulov’s settings, and established a style that allowed the cantus firmus to migrate through all voices and used a type of modal harmony which approximated to the style of Russian folksongs. Others associated with this style were A.B. Nikol'sky (1874–1943) and Vasily Kalinnikov (1866–1901). Above them all towered Rachmaninoff whose Liturgy of St John Chrysostom and All-night Vigil are now ranked as the highest artistic achievements in the realm of Russian church music.
Under the influence of the Moscow school, the Holy Synod prepared a new edition of the Obikhod in 1915, yet with the two revolutions of 1917 ending in the establishment of the Soviet Union, church music lost the exalted position that it had enjoyed for centuries. While some composition of church music may have been going on in the Soviet Union, no information about it is at present available. The Russians in the Diaspora, spread all over the world, mostly perpetuate the style of Bortnyansky and L'vov with only an occasional bow towards Kastal'sky and Chesnokov. Several Russian church choirs have achieved renown in western Europe and in the USA. Among those who tried to foster a revival of Russian church music in the mid-20th century and whose works are of more than passing value are Alfred J. Swan (1890–1970) and Johann von Gardner, the latter much better known as a scholar.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 numerous performing groups were formed; as little religious music was printed under the Communist regime, one of the most pressing tasks for the cultivation of church music in Russia was the publishing of scores. Composers who formerly were hesitant to write music for the Russian rite began to create works suitable for such use, although most congregations seemed eager to use old and well-known music from the pre-Revolutionary years.
Russian and Slavonic church music
In the late 15th century Muscovy took over Novgorod and Pskov, and the Novgorod recension of the znamennïy chant was adopted in Moscow. At the same time the ecclesiastical jurisdiction was divided, also contributing to the divergence of the neumatic chant tradition into two main branches: the northern (referred to as ‘Russian’, i.e. Novgorod–Moscow) and the southwestern (‘Rusyn’, i.e. Kiev, Galicia, Carpathian Rus'). The northern branch spread throughout the Grand Duchy of Muscovy, and the southwestern tradition developed separately from it in the areas under Polish–Lithuanian rule and the Kingdom of Hungary, where Rusyn clergy and cantors from these areas interacted. After the Mezenets reforms of the mid-17th century, the texts in Rusyn manuscripts often differ from those in Russian sources because the reforms did not directly affect Old Church Slavonic texts in Rusyn areas.
In both traditions, as well as the chants that were always written down (whether in neumatic or staff notation) there were also chants that were known through oral tradition, including both developed melodies (generally for Ordinary parts of the liturgy) and simple recitation formulas (applied to liturgical texts chanted by the priest or deacon, and to the psalms). The chants that developed the most distinctive regional differences were naturally those sung from memory: prokimny, the hymn Bog Gospod (‘God the Lord’), and samohlasni stixiry, often on the text ‘Gospodi vozzvax’ (‘Lord, from the depths’). Many melodies traditionally sung from memory were included in the early staff-notated versions of the liturgical books. In Russian books, the Rusyn variants of these chants are marked ‘kiyevskiy’, because they came to Muscovy along with Kievan cantors in the 1650s after the city of Kiev came under Muscovite rule. However, they are not necessarily specifically Kievan; only those chants marked ‘kyjivskyj’ in Rusyn sources are from Kiev, especially from the Monastery of the Caves.
The greatest change in the development of southwestern chant occurred at the end of the 16th century, when Western influences began to penetrate from Poland. Neumatic notation became insufficient to record the resulting innovations in church music, and five-line staff notation, also introduced from Poland, began to be more widely used. Its rapid spread through Galicia and Carpathian Rus' was made possible because so many young Rusyns studied in Italy and learned music according to solmization, the prevailing method of training there, and brought the knowledge back with them. Furthermore, the 1563 printing in Niaśviz (Belorussia) of the Calvinist book Katachizm … 2 molitwami, psalmami y piosnkami (‘Catechism with Prayers, Psalms and Hymns’) was written in staff notation, further preparation for the widespread use of the system in southwestern Rus'.
The new staff notation was based on the western European mensural tradition, with some variants. At the time of its introduction in Galicia it was called irmolohijna nota (irmoloj music), because it was associated with the newly-developed anthology of liturgical chant, the irmoloj. (In the Russian tradition the irmoloj, or heirmologion, was not an anthology but simply a collection of irmosy.) This staff notation later became known as kyjivs'ke znamja (Kievan signs) or kvadratna notacija (square notation). The oldest known example of a Rusyn liturgical manuscript using Kievan square notation is the Supraśl Irmoloj (dated variously between 1593 and 1601), which is considered a landmark in Rusyn music history, and there are numerous preserved manuscript irmoloji with this notation from the 17th and 18th centuries. One of the most important scribes of these books was the Carpatho–Rusyn cantor, Ioann Juhasevyč Skljarsky (1741–1814). The first printed book to use staff notation was the L'viv Irmologion of 1700; this preceded music printing in Russia by nearly three-quarters of a century.
Another factor in the musical development of the southwestern Rus' was the 1596 church union, the promulgation of which was assisted by the importation of choral polyphony. The church musicians on both sides of the religious controversy adopted polyphony, the Orthodox as a measure to counteract the ‘temptations’ of the uniate Catholic service. While both preserved the old tradition of monophonic chant, both also accepted Western innovations. In the large cathedral services during the 17th century, trained choirs performed polyphonic ‘spiritual concertos’ by Ukrainian composers. The chants of the irmoloj were no longer congregational in these large city churches and instead were sung only by the choir or cantor. This style of liturgical music performance was adopted first by St Petersburg and by Moscow, and it became standard practice in Russian Orthodox churches, where the congregation sang only in the Lord's Prayer and the Creed, if at all. It is clear that organized polyphonic choral singing existed in Carpathian Rus' at least as early as 1831, when the Belorussian Konstanyn Matezons'kyj (d 1858) founded the Užhorod Greek Catholic Cathedral choir.
Only the Old Believers in Russia and the village churches of Galicia and Carpathian Rus' kept alive the monophonic chant tradition, with concessions to ‘folk polyphony’. The Carpatho-Rusyn chant became known as prostopěnije (plainchant), and gradually incorporated many elements of local folk melodies. The prostopěnije was recorded in staff notation in a 1906 collection by Ioann Bokšaj; this includes chants from both oral and written traditions: chants from irmoloji, some chants from the Moscow synodal publications, some Galician melodies, some with local folk character, and even some liturgical texts given to tunes of koljadky (carols, originally secular). The improvisational polyphonic style in Galicia was called samojilka, samojlivka or jerusalymka. The intervals used were parallel 3rds, 5ths and octaves from the melody, with occasional bass pedals and stock cadential formulas. The samojilka style was applied to melodies from oral transmission whose origin is unknown, to melodies reminiscent of the written chant, and to composed melodies. The structure of samojilka melodies differs from that of most chants in irmoloji in that they can be divided into lines of repetitive phrases with a tendency towards symmetry, making them easier for congregational singing than most chant.
The original practice of congregational singing continues to the present day in the southwestern Rusyn tradition, including the diaspora churches of Old Believers and Carpatho-Rusyn Greek Catholics and Orthodox in the USA and Canada.
Russian and Slavonic church music
The Bulgarians were apparently the first among the Slavs to accept Christianity as a state religion in 865. Their proximity to Constantinople, capital of the Byzantine Empire, fostered close ties with the Greek Orthodox Church and its ritual. Yet in spite of this and known cultural developments in medieval Bulgaria the existing documents about music and chant are sparse and fragmentary. As study of the 13th-century Bologna Psalter progresses, in which some segments of the Slavonic text contain Byzantine neumes, more may become known. Similarly, the Zographou Trefologion (or ‘Draganov Minej’, in the monastery library of Zographou, Mount Athos) contains neumatic notation that has not yet been studied critically. There are also records of Bulgarian inscriptions in Byzantine musical manuscripts. The Slavonic manuscript known as the Synodikon of Boril contains musical examples, but in Greek with Byzantine neumes. This is not a direct source of information for church music in Bulgaria.
The Bulgarians claim as their own one of the most outstanding Byzantine musicians of the 14th century, Joannes Koukouzeles, whose mother was evidently of Slavonic (but not necessarily Bulgarian) origin. One composition attributed to him is customarily referred to as ‘Polyeleon Bulgara’ (presumably ‘Bulgarian woman’), a title that some scholars have interpreted as a tribute to his own mother. Its dating and attribution are as yet uncertain, and all the works of Koukouzeles survive in Greek.
From the downfall of the Bulgarian medieval state in 1396 to the liberation from the Turks in 1877–8, the main centres of religious activity under Turkish domination were the monasteries. The absence of any records of musical activity in such circumstances is understandable. It is again in the monasteries that the first signs of cultural revival were to take place, including the writing of hymns in Bulgarian and the notation of their melodies in late Byzantine neumes. One such prominent centre was the monastery of St John of Rila, south of Sofia, where in the late 18th and early 19th centuries a whole school of singers came into existence around a neophyte monk who has been called the first Bulgarian musicologist.
Following the Chrysanthine reform of Byzantine neumatic notation in the first quarter of the 19th century (which spread rapidly through its use in printed books) the Bulgarians were the only other group besides the Greeks to accept this reformed notation not only for church music but also for secular melodies.
With the growth of the national liberation movement in the 19th century, the public libraries played a distinctive role in nationalist cultural activities. From the middle of the century a number of libraries sponsored choral groups which participated actively in religious services in their communities, gave concerts of secular music and cultivated folk music. Conductors of these choruses represent at the same time the first modern composers of Bulgarian church music to accept polyphonic settings. At first many such settings were simple arrangements of traditional melodies, hitherto transmitted only orally. Relying on a relatively recent tradition from the late 17th century and the 18th suggesting the existence of a specifically Bulgarian chant, the main body of church music in use in Bulgaria became divided into ‘Damascenian melodies’ (presumed to have been written by John Damascene (c675–c749) but in fact mostly simply transferred from 18th- and 19th-century Greek manuscripts) and Bulgarian chant.
The first conductor and arranger worthy of mention is Ianko Mustakov (1842–81). Of greater significance were Nikolay Nikolayev (1852–1938) who was active in Sofia, and Atanas Badev (1860–1908) who, with a number of his contemporaries, combined composition of religious music with the study of folk music. In the first half of the 20th century the most talented and probably the best composer of church music in Bulgaria was Dobri Khristov (1875–1941).
Russian and Slavonic church music
Although the Serbs accepted Christianity perhaps as early as the 10th century, the first references to the practice of church music come from the Serbian medieval state ruled by members of the dynasty of Nemanjides (late 12th century to 1371). Chanting is mentioned specifically in the Lives of rulers and of saints – a literary genre cultivated particularly after 1219, when the Serbian archbishopric was made independent of the Greek church in Byzantium. This latter event, the work of St Sava (d 1235), prompted a wave of religious activity, including the founding of monasteries, the copying of manuscripts and the fostering of church music. Despite the absence of any Serbian musical manuscripts before the 15th century it is possible to infer the existence of religious poetry and services composed for the feasts of Serbian saints. These contain clear indications that hymns were to be sung either in a particular mode or emulating the melodic patterns of well-known traditional hymns.
The earliest mention of musicians of more than local reputation in medieval Serbia dates from the last decades of Serbian independence, just before the total conquest by the Turks in 1459. With the exception of ‘domestik Kyr Stefan the Serb’ these singers were Greeks who had also been active in Byzantium: Joakeim the monk of the Harsianites monastery (in Constantinople) had also the title of ‘domestik of Serbia’; even Manuel Chrysaphes (fl c1440–63) resided for a while in Serbia. In the second half of the 15th century the names of Isaiah the Serb and Nicolas the Serb were recorded as composers of religious music. The works of all of these composers are notated in Byzantine neumes with Greek or Slavonic texts, or both. They survive in a few Byzantine manuscripts and bilingual fragments. Stylistically there is no difference between these chants and the melodies known from contemporary Byzantine sources. Medieval Serbian church music thus emulated the style of Byzantine models, although specifically Serbian variants of some chants did exist.
As in Bulgaria, the Turkish domination had cut short cultural growth by almost totally eliminating the educated class of people. Religion became intertwined with the idea of nationality, and church music was viewed as one of the manifestations of national spirit, in the latent struggle for survival. Some scattered records concerning chanting are available from the period of Austrian rule in northern Serbia (c1719–39). At that time closer ties were being established between the Serbian population that had settled in Austria (after retreating from the Turks) and Russian religious centres, especially that of Kiev. While the Serbs retained the tradition of monophonic chanting for some time in the Austrian lands, a new blend of church music, presumably incorporating traditional and also perhaps Russian melodies, was gradually formed. This may be the origin of the so-called Karlovac chant (named after the town of Sremski Karlovci, the seat of the Serbian archbishop who was the spiritual leader of Serbs in Austria). The only other cultural and spiritual centre in which a more or less uninterrupted religious life was maintained among the Serbs was Chilandar monastery, Mount Athos (founded by Nemanja and his son Sava in 1198).
A number of musical manuscripts were copied in the late 18th and the 19th centuries. These contained brief theoretical treatises on music (mostly adaptations of the Greek papadikē) and a large collection of hymns and chants in honour of Serbian saints. Among them is an interesting collection of chants by the well-known Greek musician Petros Peloponnesios, which was copied in the early 1770s (now in US-NH); it includes a number of hymns presumably by him but set in the Serbian recension of Church Slavonic. These late 18th-century documents are all notated in late Byzantine neumes. Melodies tend to be melismatic, and their structure still follows the contemporary Greek melodies, which were by then considerably changed from their medieval prototypes. This body of chant thus represents a new stage in the evolution of Serbian chant that has nothing in common with the melodies collected and published at the turn of the 20th century either in melodic outlines or in the structure of the hymns. The latter melodies are now viewed as the third stage in the evolution of Serbian monophonic chant. The disparity of these melodies raises the question of their origin, which as yet remains uncertain.
With the beginning of gradual liberation from the Turks (starting in 1804 with the first Serbian insurrection), other variants came to the fore in addition to the Karlovac chant. Among these, Belgrade chant and Zadar chant (named after a city on the Dalmatian coast) enjoyed considerable popularity. After some individual and rather unsystematic attempts at recording these melodies in modern western European notation, the studious labours of Stevan Mokranjac (1856–1914) as collector and editor of a great number of melodies are a milestone. His edition of the Osmoglasnik (i.e. oktōēchos), published in Belgrade in 1908, became a classic in this field. Monophonic traditions of chanting still continue in Serbia at the present time, though mostly restricted to a few monasteries and smaller churches, whereas in the cathedrals and larger churches polyphonic music now prevails.
Polyphonic settings of Serbian church music appeared rather late, in the mid-19th century. The first person to compose four-part settings of functional church music was Kornelije Stanković (1831–65) who wrote two liturgies (1851–2), besides collecting melodies of Karlovac chant, most of which still remain unpublished. Probably the greatest Serbian composer of church music was Stevan Mokranjac. By the early 20th century Serbian composers were composing music for liturgical purposes. The main followers of Mokranjac, most of whom were eclectics, were Stevan Hristić (1885–1958), Kosta Manojlović (1890–1949) and Marko Tajčević (1900–1984). These three composers wrote effective church music, combining originality and erudition. Since 1945 fewer composers have shown an interest in church music, but avant-garde composers such as Ljubica Marić (b 1909) and Vlastimir Nikolovski (b 1925) have used traditional Serbian chants, though in works unsuitable for religious services.
Russian and Slavonic church music
This bibliography is designed to give comprehensive coverage for Russian, Bulgarian and Serbian church music and their notations. It is intended to serve not only the foregoing article but also a range of other articles in the same field which carry only short selective bibliographies and are cross-referred to this bibliography for further material.
e: slavonic neumatic notations
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
(ii) bibliography and critical surveys of literature
(iii) catalogues of musical manuscripts
(iv) facsimile editions of manuscripts
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
A.V. Preobrazhensky: Slovar' russkogo tserkovnogo peniya [Dictionary of Russian chant] (Moscow, 1897)
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
A.V. Preobrazhensky: Po tserkovnomu peniyu ukazatel' knig, broshyur, zhurnal'nïkh statey i rukopisey [Index of chant literature published in Russia between 1793 and 1896] (Yekaterinoslav, 1897, 2/1900)
I.A. Gardner: Ukazatel' russkoy i inostrannoy literaturï po voprosam russkogo tserkovnogo peniya [Index to Russian and foreign literature on Russian chant] (Munich, 1958)
M. Velimirović: ‘Stand der Forschung über kirchenslavische Musik’, Zeitschrift für slavische Philologie, xxxi (1963), 145–69
M. Velimirović: ‘Present State of Research in Slavic Chant’, AcM, xliv (1972), 235–65
Yu. Keldïsh: ‘Zur Erforschung der altrussischen Musik in der UdSSR’, BMw, xxxix/4 (1987), 299–308
C. Hannick: ‘Reference Materials of Byzantine and Old Slavic Music and Hymnography’, Journal of the Plainsong and Medieval Music Society, xiii (1990), 83–9
Ye.M. Levashov: Traditsionnïye zhanrï pravoslavnogo pevcheskogo iskusstva v tvorchestve russkikh kompozitorov ot Glinki do Rakhmaninova, 1825–1917: istoricheskiy ocherk, notografiya, bibliografiya [Traditional genres of the Orthodox art of singing in the work of Russian composers from Glinka to Rachmaninov, 1825–1917: historical outline, list of musical works and bibliography] (Moscow, 1994)
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
V.M. Metallov: Russkaya simiografiya [Russian sign notation] (Moscow, 1912) [partial catalogue with a palaeographical atlas of notations]
I.M. Kudryavtsev, ed.: Rukopisnïye sobraniya D.V. Razumovskogo i V.F. Odoyevskogo i arkhiv D.V. Razumovskogo [The MS collections of D.V. Razumovsky and V.F. Odoyevsky and the Razumovsky archive] (Moscow, 1960)
Yu.P. Yasynovs'ky and O.O. Dz'oban, eds.: Notoliniyni rukopisy XVI–XVIII st: katalog [Catalogue of MSS with staff notation from the 16th to 18th centuries] (L'viv, 1979)
Svodnïy katalog slavyano-russkikh rukopisnïkh knig khranyashchikhsya v SSSR: XI–XIII vv. [Summary catalogue of Slavonic and Russian MSS books held in the USSR: 11th–13th centuries] (Moscow, 1984)
Knizhnïye tsentrï Drevney Rusi: Iosifo-Volokolamskiy monastïr' kak tsentr knizhnosti [Centres of literacy of Old Russia: the Iosif-Volokolamskiy Monastery as a centre of literacy] (Leningrad, 1991), 246–284 (catalogue of manuscripts)
Yu. Yasynovs'ky: Ukrajins'ki ta Bilorus'ki notoliniyni lrmoloji 16–18 cmorit katalog i kodikologichno-paleografichne doslidzhennya (L'viv, 1996)
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
R. Jakobson, ed.: Fragmenta chiliandarica palaeoslavica, MMB, 1st ser., v (1957)
A. Bugge, ed.: Contacarium palaeoslavicum mosquense, MMB, 1st ser., vi (1960)
M.V. Brazhnikov, ed.: Fyodor Krest'yanin: Stikhirï [Fyodor Krest'yanin: stichēra] (Moscow, 1974)
A. Dostal, H. Rothe and E. Trapp, eds.: Der altrussische Kondakar: auf der Grundlage des Blagovescenskij Nizegorodskij Kondakar', ii (Giessen, 1976) [facs.]
Vl. Protopopov, ed.: Nikolay Diletsky: Ideya grammatiki musikiyskoy [An idea of musical grammar] (Moscow, 1979)
H. Rothe and E.M. Vereshchagin, eds: Gottesdienstmenäum für den Monat Dezember nach den slavischen Handschriften der Rus' des 12. und 13. Jahrhunderts (Cologne, 1993)
G. Myers, ed.: The Lavrsky-Troitsky Kondakar (Sofia, 1994)
N.P. Parfent'yev, ed.: Aleksandr Mezenets i prochiye: lzveshcheniye … zhelayushchim uchit'sya peniyu. 1670 g. Vvedeniye [Mezenets and others: ‘Advice to those wishing to learn chant.1670.’] (Chelyabinsk, 1996) [incl. commentary by Z.M. Guseynova]
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
M.V. Brazhnikov, ed.: Novïye pamyatniki znamennogo raspeva [New documents on znamennïy chant] (Leningrad, 1967) [anthology of music exx.]
N.D. Uspensky, ed.: Obraztsï drevnerusskogo pevcheskogo raspeva [Examples of Old Russian chant] (Leningrad, 1968, enlarged 2/1971)
Vl. Protopopov, ed.: Muzïka na Poltavskuyu pobedu [Music for the victory at Poltava] (Moscow, 1973)
S. Sava, ed.: Die Gesänge des altrussischen Oktoechos samt den Evangelien-Stichiron: eine Neumenhandschrift des Altgläubigen-Klosters zu Belaja Krinica (Munich, 1984)
Khorovïye kontsertï XVIII–nachala XIX vekov: M. Berezovsky, D. Bortnyansky, A. Vedel' [Choral concertos of the 18th and early 19th centuries by M. Berezovsky, D. Bortnyansky and A. Vedel'] (Kiev, 1988)
V. Morosan, ed.: One Thousand Years of Russian Church Music, 988–1988, Monuments of Russian Sacred Music, 1st ser., i (Washington DC, 1990)
G.A. Pozhidayeva, ed.: Izbrannïye stikhirï iz sluzhbï prepodobnomu Sergeyu Radonezhskomu: perevod kryukovogo pis'ma [Selected stichēra from the service to St Sergey Radonezhsky: transcription of the neumatic notation] (Moscow, 1992)
N.V. Zabolotnaya, ed.: Russkoye khorovoye mnogogolosiye XVII–XVIII vekov: khrestomatiya [Russian choral polyphony of the 17th and 18th centuries: an anthology] (Moscow, 1993)
O. Dolskaya-Ackerly, ed.: Spiritual Songs in Seventeenth-Century Russia: Edition of the MS 1938 from Muzejnoe Sobranie of the State Historical Museum in Moscow (Cologne, 1996)
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
Grove5(A.J. Swan)
MGG2(C. Hannick)
Ye. Bolkhovitinov: Istoricheskoye rassuzhdeniye voobshche o drevnem khristianskom bogosluzhebnom penii i osobenno o penii rossiyskoy tserkvi, s nuzhnïmi primechaniyami na onoye [A historical dissertation on ancient Christian chant in general and on Russian chant in particular with commentary on the latter] (Voronezh, 1799, 3/1814); repr. in RMG, iv (1897), cols.1020–36
V.M. Undol'sky: ‘Zamechaniya dlya istorii tserkovnogo peniya v Rossii’ [Remarks on the history of chant in Russia], Chteniya v Imperatorskom Obshchestve Istorii i Drevnostey Rossiyskikh pri Moskovskom Universitete, iii (1846)
D.V. Razumovsky: ‘O notnïkh bezlineynïkh rukopisyakh tserkovnogo znamennogo peniya’ [The staffless musical MSS of znamennïy chant], Chteniya v Obshchestve Lyubiteley Dukhovnogo Prosveshcheniya, i (1863), 55–164
P. Bezsonov: ‘Sud'ba pevcheskikh knig’ [The fate of singers’ books], Pravoslavnoye obozreniye, xix/5–6 (1864)
A. Ryazhsky: ‘O proiskhozhdenii russkogo tserkovnogo peniya [The origin of Russian chant], Pravoslavnoye obozreniye, xxi (1866), 36–59, 194–214, 292–302
D.V. Razumovsky: Tserkovnoye peniye v Rossii [Church chant in Russia], i–iii (Moscow, 1867–9)
P.A. Bezsonov: ‘Znamenatel'nïye godï i znamenateyshiye predstaviteli poslednikh dvukh vekov v istorii russkogo pesnopeniya’ [Notable years and the most significant exponents of the last two centuries in the history of Russian chant], Pravoslavnïy sobesednik (1872), nos. 2–3
D.V. Razumovsky: Bogosluzhebnoye peniye pravoslavnoy greko-rossiyskoy tserkvi, i: Teoriya i praktika tserkovnogo peniya [Liturgical chant of the Orthodox Greco-Russian church, i: Theory and practice] (Moscow, 1886)
S.V. Smolensky: Kratkoye opisaniye drevnego (xii–xiii veka) znamennogo irmologa, prinadlezhashchego Voskresenskomu, Novïy Iyerusalim imenuyemomu monastïryu [A brief description of the old (12th–13th-century) notated heirmologion belonging to the monastery of the Resurrection, called New Jerusalem] (Kazan, 1887)
I. Voznesensky: Osmoglasnïye rospevï tryokh poslednikh vekov pravoslavnoy russkoy tserkvi [Russian Orthodox osmoglasnïye chant during the last three centuries], i: Kiyevskiy rospev; ii: Bolgarskiy rospev; iii: Grecheskiy rospev v Rossii; iv: Obraztsï rospevov (Kiev, 1888–93)
I. Voznesensky: O tserkovnom penii pravoslavnoy greko-rossiyskoy tserkvi: bol'shoy i malïy rospev [Greco-Russian Orthodox Church chant], ii (Riga, 1890)
V.M. Metallov: Ocherk istorii pravoslavnogo tserkovnogo peniya v Rossii [A study of the history of Orthodox chant in Russia] (Saratov, 1893, 4/1915)
D.V. Razumovsky: Patriarshiye pevchiye diaki i poddiaki i gosudarevï pevchiye diaki [Patriarchal singing deacons and assistant deacons and court singing deacons] (St Petersburg, 1895)
V. Metallov: Osmoglasiye znamennogo raspeva: opït rukovodstva k osmoglasiyu znamennogo raspeva po glasovïm popevkam [Znamennïy chant osmoglasiye: an attempt to provide a manual on znamennïy chant osmoglasiye in accordance with the modal popevki] (Moscow, 1899)
V.M. Metallov: Bogosluzhebnoye peniye russkoy tserkvi: period domongol'skiy [Liturgical chant of the Russian Church before the Mongol invasion] (Moscow, 1906, 2/1912)
K.I. Papadopulo-Keramevs: ‘Proiskhozhdeniye notnogo muzïkal'nogo pis'ma u severnïkh i yuzhnïkh Slavyan po pamyatnikam drevnosti, preimushchestvenno vizantiyskim’ [The origin of musical notation among the northern and southern Slavs according to old, primarily Byzantine, documents], Vestnik arkheologii i istorii, xvii (1906), 134–71
A.V. Preobrazhensky: Vopros o yedinoglasnom penii v russkoy tserkvi XVII veka [Monophonic chant in the Russian Church in the 17th century], Pamyatniki drevney pis'mennosti i iskusstva, clix (St Petersburg, 1907)
A. Kalashnikov: Azbuka tserkovnogo znamennogo peniya [An alphabet of znamennïy chant] (Kiev, 1908)
A.A. Ignat'yev: ‘Tserkovno-pravitel'stvennïye kommissii po ispravleniyu bogosluzhebnogo peniya russkoy tserkvi’ [The ecclesiastical and governmental commissions for correction of the liturgical chant of the Russian Church], Pravoslavnïy sobesednik (1910), Oct
A.V. Preobrazhensky: Ocherk istorii tserkovnogo peniya v Rossii [An essay on the history of chant in Russia] (St Petersburg, 1910)
A. Kalashnikov: Azbuka demestvennogo peniya [An alphabet of demestvennïy chant] (Kiev, 1911)
A.A. Ignat'yev: Bogosluzhebnoye peniye pravoslavnoy russkoy tserkvi s kontsa XIV do nachala XVIII veka [Liturgical chant of the Russian Orthodox Church from the end of the 14th century to the beginning of the 18th] (Kazan, 1916)
A.V. Preobrazhensky: Kul'tovaya muzïka v Rossii [Religious music in Russia] (Leningrad, 1924)
A.V. Preobrazhensky: ‘Greko-russkiye pevchiye paralleli XII–XIIIvv’ [Parallels between Greek and Russian chant in the 12th and 13th centuries], De musica, ii (1926), 60–76
N. Findeyzen: Ocherki po istorii muzïki v Rossii [Essays on the history of music in Russia] (Moscow, 1928–9)
E. Koschmieder: Przyczynki do zagadnienia chomonji w hirmosach rosyjskich [The problem of homonija in Russian hirmoi] (Vilnius, 1932)
E. Koschmieder: ‘Teorja i praktyka rosyjskiego spiewu neumaticznego na tle tradycji staroobrzedowcow wilenskich’ [Theory and practice of Russian chant according to the traditions of the Old Believers in Vilnius], Ateneum Wilenskie, x (1935), 295–306
T. Livanova: Ocherki i materialï po istorii russkoy muzïkal'noy kul'turï [Essays and documents on the history of Russian musical culture] (Moscow, 1938)
A.J. Swan: ‘The Znamenny Chant of the Russian Church’, MQ, xxvi (1940), 232–43, 365–80, 529–45
M.V. Brazhnikov: Puti razvitiya i zadachi rasshifrovki znamennogo rospeva XII–XVIII vekov [The development of znamennïy chant from the 12th century to the 18th and problems of its transcription] (Leningrad, 1949)
J. Handschin: ‘Le chant ecclésiastique russe’, AcM, xxiv (1952), 3–32
E. Koschmieder, ed.: Die ältesten Novgoroder Hirmologien-Fragmente (Munich, 1952–8)
C. Høeg: ‘The Oldest Slavonic Tradition of Byzantine Music’, Proceedings of the British Academy, xxxix (1953), 37–66
R. Palikarova-Verdeil: La musique byzantine chez les bulgares et les russes (du IXe au XIVe siècle), MMB, Subsidia, iii (1953)
E. Koschmieder: ‘Zur Herkunft der slavischen Krjuki-Notation’, Festschrift für Dmytro Čyževškyj (Wiesbaden, 1954), 146–52
C. Høeg: ‘Ein Buch altrussischer Kirchengesange’, Zeitschrift für slavische Philologie, xxv (1956), 261–84
V. Belyayev: ‘Early Russian Polyphony’, Studia memoriae Belae Bartók sacra (Budapest, 1957), 307–25
J. von Gardner: ‘Drei Typen des russichen Kirchengesanges’, Ostkirchliche Studien, vi (1957), 251–67
N.D. Uspensky: ‘Vizantiyskoye peniye v kiyevskoy Rusi’ [Byzantine chant in Kievan Russia], Akten des XI Byzantinistenkongresses: Munich 1958, ed. F. Dölger and H.-G. Beck, i (Munich, 1960), 643–54
M. Velimirović: Byzantine Elements in Early Slavic Chant, MMB, Subsidia, iv ( 1960)
J. von Gardner: ‘Stilistische Richtungen im russischen liturgischen Chorgesang’, Ostkirchliche Studien, xi (1962), 161–82
J. von Gardner: ‘Das Cento Prinzip der Tropierung und seine Bedeutung für die Entzifferung der altrussischen linienlosen Notation’, Musik des Ostens, i (1962), 106–21
J. von Gardner: ‘Zum Problem des Tonleiter-Aufbaus im altrussischen Neumengesang’, Musik des Ostens, ii (1963), 157–69
M. Velimirović: ‘Liturgical Drama in Byzantium and Russia’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, xvi (1963), 351–85
Anfänge der slavischen Musik: Bratislava 1964 [incl. contributions by E. Arro, V. Belyayev, K. Levy, O. Strunk and M. Velimirović]
S. Lazarević: ‘An Unknown Early Slavic Modal Signature’, Byzantinoslavica, xxv (1964), 93–108
A.J. Swan: ‘Die russische Musik im 17. Jahrhundert’, Jb für Geschichte Osteuropas, new ser., xii (1964), 161–7
M.V. Brazhnikov: ‘Arkhivnaya obrabotka pevcheskikh rukopisey’ [Archival treatment of musical MSS], Voprosï arkhivovedeniya (Moscow, 1965), no.2
Yu. Keldïsh: Russkaya muzïka XVIII veka [Russian music of the 18th century] (Moscow, 1965)
N.D. Uspensky: Drevnerusskoye pevcheskoye iskusstvo [The Old Russian art of chanting] (Moscow, 1965, enlarged 2/1971)
J. von Gardner: ‘Einige Beobachtungen über die Einschubsilben im altrussischen Kirchengesang’, Welt der Slaven, xi (1966), 241–50
S. Skrebkov: ‘Ėvolyutsiya stilya v russkoy khorovoy muzïke XVII veka’ [Stylistic evolution in 17th-century Russian choral music], Musica antiqua Europae orientalis: Bydgoszcz and Toruń 1966, 470–88
M. Velimirović: ‘Struktura staroslovenskih muzitskih irmologa’ [The structure of Old Slavonic musical heirmologia], Hilandarski zbornik, i (Belgrade, 1966), 139–61
J. von Gardner: Das Problem des altrussischen demestischen Kirchengesanges und seiner linienlosen Notation (Munich, 1967)
Yu. Keldïsh: ‘K voprosu ob istokakh russkogo partesnogo peniya’ [The origins of Russian polyphony], Studia Hieronymo Feicht septuagenario dedicata, ed. Z. Lissa (Kraków, 1967), 269–83
D. Lehmann: ‘Dilezki und die grosse Wandlung der russischen Musik’, SM, ix (1967), 343–69
M.V. Brazhnikov: ‘Zur Terminologie der altrussischen Vokalmusik’, BMw, x (1968), 189–206
Yu. Keldïsh: ‘Ob istoricheskikh kornyakh kanta’ [Historical roots of the kant], Musica antiqua II: Bydgoszcz 1969, 437–62
S. Skrebkov: Russkaya khorovaya muzïka XVII–nachala XVIII veka [Russian choral music from the 17th century to the beginning of the 18th] (Moscow, 1969)
N.D. Uspensky: ‘Problema metodologii obucheniya ispolnitel'skomu masterstvu v drevnerusskom pevcheskom iskusstve’ [The methodological problem of learning the art of performance in ancient Russian singing], Musica antiqua II: Bydgoszcz 1969, 467–501
M.V. Brazhnikov: Drevnerusskaya teoriya muzïki [Old Russian music theory] (Leningrad, 1972)
J. von Gardner: ‘Die Gesänge der byzantinisch-slawischen Liturgie’, Geschichte der katholischen Kirchenmusik, ed. K.G. Fellerer, i (Kassel, 1972), 128–59
A.D. McCredie: ‘Some Aspects of Current Research into Russian Liturgical Chant’, MMA, vi (1972), 55–152
V. Protopopov: ‘Tvoreniya Vasiliya Titova: vïdayushchegosya russkogo kompozitora vtoroy polovinï XVII–nachala XVIII veka’ [The works of Vasily Titov, an outstanding Russian composer of the second half of the 17th century and beginning of the 18th], Musica antiqua III: Bydgoszcz 1972, 847–65
O. Tsalay-Yakymenko, ed.: M. Dylets'kiy: Hramatyka muzykal'na [A musical grammar] (Kiev, 1970)
E. Koschmieder: ‘Ein Blick auf die Geschichte der altslawischen Musik’, Byzantinoslavica, xxxi (1970), 12–41
R. Taft: ‘A Proper Offertory Chant for Easter in some Slavonic Manuscripts’, OCP, xxxvi (1970), 437–43
V. Belyayev: O muzïkal'nom fol'klore i drevney pi's'mennosti: stat'i i zametki, dokladï [On musical folklore and the old written tradition: articles and notes, papers] (Moscow, 1971)
F. Keller: ‘Das Kontakion aus der ersten Sluzhba für Boris und Gleb’, Schweizerische Beiträge zum VII Slavistenkongress: Warsaw 1973, ed. P. Brang, H. Jaksche and H. Schroeder (Lucerne, 1973), 65–74
A.I. Rogov, ed.: Muzïkal'naya ėstetika Rossii XI–XVIII vekov [Musical aesthetics in Russia during the 11th to 18th centuries] (Moscow, 1973) [collection of essays]
A.J. Swan: Russian Music and its Sources in Chant and Folk-Song (New York, 1973)
M.V. Brazhnikov: Pamyatniki znamennogo raspeva [Documents of znamennïy chant], ii (Leningrad, 1974)
M.V. Brazhnikov: Stat'i o drevnerusskoy muzïke [Articles on Old Russian music] (Leningrad, 1975)
M. Ditterich: Untersuchungen zum altrussischen Akzent anhand von Kirchengesangshandschriften (Munich, 1975)
T. Vladïshevskaya: ‘Tipografskiy Ustav – kak istochnik dlya izucheniya drevneyshikh form russkogo pevcheskogo iskusstva’ [The Typographic Typikon as a source for studying the oldest forms of the Russian singers’ art], ibid., 607–20
J. von Gardner: System und Wesen des russischen Kirchengesanges (Munich and Wiesbaden, 1976)
N.D. Uspensky, ed.: Russkiy khorovoy kontsert kontsa XVII – pervoy polovinï XVIII vekov: khrestomatiya [The Russian choral concerto of the late 17th to the first half of the 18th century: an anthology] (Leningrad, 1976)
T.F. Vladïshevskaya: ‘K voprosu ob izuchenii traditsiy drevnerusskogo pevcheskogo iskusstva’ [On the question of studying the traditions of the Old Russian art of singing], Iz istorii russkoy i sovetskoy muzïki (Moscow, 1976), 40–61
F. Keller: Die russisch-kirchenslavische Fassung des Weihnachtskontakions und seiner Prosomoia (Berne, 1977)
V.V. Protopopov: ‘Notnaya biblioteka tsarya Fyodora Alekseyevicha’ [The music library of Tsar Fyodor Alekseyevich], Pamyatniki kul'turï: novïye otkrïtiya 1976 (Moscow, 1977), 119–33
D. Stefanović: ‘Unknown Russian Music Manuscripts at Cardiff’, Beiträge zur Musikgeschichte Osteuropas, ed. E. Arro (Wiesbaden, 1977), 37–47
I.A. Gardner: Bogosluzhebnoye peniye Russkoy Pravoslavnoy Tserkvi: sushchnost', sistema i istoriya [Liturgical chant of the Russian Orthodox Church: the essence, system and history] (Jordanville, NY, 1978–1982; rev., Ger. trans. by author as Gesang der russisch-orthodoxen Kirche, Wiesbaden, 1983–7)
A.F. Gove: ‘The Evidence for Metrical Adaptation in Early Slavic Transliterated Hymns’, Fundamental Problems of Early Slavic Music and Poetry, ed. C. Hannick, MMB, Subsidia, vi (Copenhagen, 1978), 211–46
Yu. Keldïsh: Ocherki i issledovaniya po istorii russkoy muzïki [Outline and research on the history of Russian music] (Moscow, 1978)
F. Keller: ‘Die slavische Fassungen des Akathistos’, Schweizerische Beiträge zum VIII Slavistenkongress VIII: Zagreb and Ljubliana 1978, ed. P. Brang and others (Berne, 1978), 87–103
A.N. Kruchinina: Popevka v russkoy muzïkal'noy teorii XVII veka [The melodic formulas in Russian music theory of the 17th century] (diss., Leningrad Conservatory, 1978)
V. Protopopov: ‘Nikolay Diletskiy i Martsin Mel'chevskiy’, Musica antiqua V: Bydgoszcz 1978, 589–605
D. Stefanović: ‘The Development of Slavonic Menaia Manuscripts’, Musica Antiqua V: Bydgoszcz 1978, 211–20
R. Zguta: Russian Minstrels: a History of the Skomorokhi (Oxford, 1978)
M.V. Brazhnikov: ‘Mnogogolosiye znamennïkh partitur (chastichnaya publikatsiya)’ [Polyphony in znamennïy scores (partial publication)], Problemï istorii i teorii drevnerusskoy muzïki [Problems of the history and theory of old Russian music], ed. A.N. Kruchinina and A.S. Belonenko (Leningrad, 1979), 7–61
K.Yu. Korablyova: Pokayannïye stikhi kak zhanr drevnerusskogo pevcheskogo iskusstva [Penitential verses as a genre in the Old Russian art of singing] (diss., State Institute of Arts, Moscow, 1979)
A.N. Kruchinina and B.A. Shindin: ‘Pervoye russkoye posobiye po muzïkal'noy kompozitsii’ [The first Russian handbook on musical composition], Pamyatniki kul'turï: novïye oktrïtiya 1978 (Leningrad, 1979), 188–95
V. Morosan: ‘Penie and Musikiia: Aesthetic Changes in Russian Liturgical Singing during the Seventeenth Century’, St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, xxiii (1979), 149–79
M. Rïtsareva: Kompozitor D. Bortnyansky: zhizn' i tvorchestvo [The composer D. Bortnyansky: life and work] (Leningrad, 1979)
B. Karastoyanov: ‘Tonemite v znamenniya razpev’, Balgarsko muzikoznaniye, iv/4 (1980), 50–66
L.F. Morokhova: ‘Podobniki kak forma muzïkal'no-teoreticheskogo rukovodstva v drevnerusskom pevcheskom iskusstve’ [Podobniki as a form of musical and theoretical manual in the art of singing in Old Russia], Istochnikovedeniye literaturï Drevney Rusi (Leningrad, 1980), 181–90
A.S. Belonenko: Istoriya otechestvennoy mïsli o drevnerusskom pevcheskom iskusstve [The history of Russian thought on the singers’ art of Old Russia] (diss., Leningrad Conservatory, 1982)
I.F. Bezuglova: Kanonicheskoye i individual'noye v tvorchestve raspevshchikov XVII veka (Opekalovskiy raspev) [The canonical and the individual in 17th-century chant (the Opekalov monastery chant)] (diss., Institute of Theatre, Music and Cinematography, Leningrad, 1982)
V. Morosan: ‘Folk and Chant Elements in Musorgsky's Choral Writing’, Musorgsky In Memoriam, 1881–1981, ed. M.H. Brown (Ann Arbor, 1982), 95–133
G.A. Pozhidayeva: Demestvennoye peniye v rukopisnoy traditsii kontsa XV–XIX vekov [Demestvennïy singing in the manuscript tradition of the late 15th century to the 19th] (diss., Leningrad Conservatory, 1982)
N.K. Ulff-Møller: ‘Der Platz und die Bedeutung des Bolgarski Rospev in die Lichte der Entwicklung der altrussischen Gesangspraxis’, Musica Antiqua VI: Bydgoszcz 1982, 39–55
M.M. Velimirović: ‘The Slavic Response to Byzantine Musical Influence’, ibid., 93–111
G.V. Alekseyeva: Drevnerusskoye pevcheskoye iskusstvo (muzïkal'naya organizatsiya znamennogo raspeva [The singer’s art in Old Russia (the musical organization of znamennïy chant)] (Vladivostok, 1983)
A.S. Belonenko, ed.: Problemï russkoy muzïkal'noy tekstologii (po pamyatnikam russkoy khorovoy literaturï XII–XVIII vekov) [Problems of Russian music textology (on the basis of documents of Russian choral literature of the 12th to the 18th centuries)] (Leningrad, 1983) [incl. S.V. Frolov: ‘Mnogoraspevnost' kak tipologicheskoye svoystvo drevnerusskogo pevcheskogo iskusstva’ [Mnogoraspevnost' as a typological characteristic of the art of singing in Old Russia], 12–47; S.P. Kravchenko: ‘Metodika tekstologicheskogo izucheniya melizmaticheskikh formul’ [Methods for the textual study of melismatic formulae], 142–51; N.V. Zabolotnaya: ‘Tekstologicheskiye osobennosti krupnoy kompozitsii partesnogo pis'ma’ [The textual peculiarities of large-scale composition in the partesnïy manner of writing], 152–72]
M.V. Bogomolova: Putevoy raspev i yego mesto v drevnerusskom pevcheskom iskusstve [Putevoy chant and its place in the singer’s art of Old Russia] (diss., State Institute of Arts, Moscow, 1983)
O. Dolskaya-Ackerly: The Early Kant in Seventeenth-Century Russian Music (diss., U. of Kansas, 1983)
N. Gerasimova-Persidskaya: Partesnïy kontsert v istorii muzïkal'noy kul'turï [The partesnïy concerto in the history of musical culture] (Moscow, 1983)
Yu.V. Keldïsh: Drevnyaya Rus': XI–XVII veka [Old Russia: 11th–17th centuries], Istoriya russkoy muzïki, i (Moscow, 1983)
N. Schidlovsky: ‘Sources of Russian Chant Theory’, Russian Theoretical Thought in Music, ed. G.D. McQuere (Ann Arbor, 1983), 83–108
M. Brazhnikov: Litsa i fitï znamennogo raspeva [The litsa and fitï of znamennïy chant] (Leningrad, 1984)
C. Hannick: ‘Kyrillos und Methodios in der Musikgeschichte’, Musices aptatio 1984–5, 168–77
D.E. Conomos: The Late Byzantine and Slavonic Communion Cycle: Liturgy and Music (Washington DC, 1985)
N. Gerasimova-Persidskaya: ‘Malïye formï v russko-ukrainskoy muzïke 17 v.’ [Small-scale forms in Russian and Ukrainian music of the 17th century], Musica antiqua VII: Bydgoszcz 1985, 621–35
K. Korablyova: ‘Isikhazm i nekotorïye yavleniya drevnerusskogo pevcheskogo iskusstva (k postanovke problemï)’ [Hesychasm and certain phenomena of the art of singing in Old Russia], ibid., 679–94
G. Nikishov: ‘K voprosu o sostave “Klyucha” Tikhona Makar'yevskogo’ [The composition of Tikhon Makar'yevsky’s ‘Key’], ibid., 707–18
V. Protopopov: ‘“Chetvyortaya mudrost' muzïka”: pamyatnik russkoy muzïkal'no-ėsteticheskoy mïsli XVI–XVII veka’ [‘The Fourth Wisdom is Music’: a document of Russian musical and aesthetic thought of the 16th and 17th centuries], ibid., 719–28
N.S. Seryogina: ‘Stikhirï Sergiyu Radonezhskomu kak pamyatnik otechestvennogo pesnotvorchestva’ [Stichēra to Sergey Radonezhsky as a document of Russian chant composition], Vzaimodeystviye drevnerusskoy literaturï i izobrazitel'nogo iskusstva, ed. D.S. Likachyov (Leningrad, 1985), 338–55
A.S. Belonenko and S.P. Kravchenko, eds.: Russkaya khorovaya muzïka XVI–XVIII vekov (Moscow, 1986) [incl. I. Yefimova: ‘Russkoye strochnoye mnogogolosiye vtoroy polovinï XVII – nachala XVIII veka (k probleme deshifrovki)’ [Russian linear polyphony of the second half of the 17th and early 18th centuries (the problem of transcription)], 82–99; I. Lozovaya: ‘Znamennïy raspev i russkaya narodnaya pesnya (o samobïtnïkh chertakh stolpovogo znamennogo raspeva)’ [Znamennïy chant and Russian folksong (the distinctive features of the stolpov style of znamennïy chant)], 26–45; G. Pozhidayeva: ‘Vidï demestvennogo mnogogolosiya’ [Aspects of demestvennïy polyphony], 58–81]
T. Vladïshevskaya: Traditsii drevnerusskogo peniya u staroobryadtsev [The traditions of Old Russian singing among the Old Believers] (Bydgoszcz, 1986)
J. von Gardner: On the Synodal Chant Books of the Russian Church and their Usage in Today’s Practice (Glen Cove, NY, 1987)
B. Karastoyanov: ‘Stikhirata za Boris i Gleb “Plut'skouyu bogatyashcha” – zabelezhitelen obrazets na staroto rusko pevchesko izkustvo’ [Stichēra for Boris and Gleb], Balgarsko muzikoznaniye, xi/3 (1987), 31–66
C.R. Jensen: Nikolai Diletskii’s ‘Grammatika’ (Grammar) and the Musical Culture of Seventeenth-Century Muscovy (diss., Princeton U., 1987)
I.Ye. Lozovaya: Samobïtnïye chertï znamennogo raspeva [Distinctive features of znamennïy chant] (diss., Kiev Conservatory, 1987)
G. Myers: ‘The Blagoveshchensky Kondakar: a Russian Musical Manuscript of the Twelfth Century’, Cyrillomethodianum, xi (1987), 103–27
N.S. Seryogina: ‘Otrazheniye istoricheskikh sobïtiy v stikhire o Temir-Aksake i v drugikh pesnopeniyakh Vladimirskoy ikone i problema avtorstva Ivana Groznogo’ [A reflection of historical events in the stichēron about Temir-Aksak and in other chants to the Icon of Vladimir, and the problem of attribution to Ivan the Terrible], Pamyatniki kul'turï: novïye otkrïtiya 1985 (Moscow, 1987), 148–64
V.K. Bïlinin and A.L. Pososhenko: ‘Tsar' Aleksey Mikhaylovich kak master raspeva’ [Tsar Aleksey Mikhaylovich as a master of chant], Pamyatniki kult'urï: novïye otkrïtiya 1987 (Moscow, 1988), 131–7
E.D. Carpenter: The Theory of Music in Russia and the Soviet Union, ca. 1650–1950 (diss., U. of Pennsylvania, 1988)
A.F. Gove: The Slavic Akathistos Hymn: Poetic Elements of the Byzantine Text and its Old Church Slavic Translation (Munich, 1988)
L.A. Petrova and N.S. Seryogina, eds.: Rannyaya russkaya lirika: repertuarnïy spravochnik muzïkal'no-poėticheskikh tekstov XV–XVII vekov [Early Russian lyrics: a handbook of the repertoire of musical and poetic texts of the 15th–17th centuries] (Leningrad, 1988)
G. Popov: ‘Das hymnographische Werk von Methods Schüler Konstantin von Preslav’, Symposium Methodianum: Regensburg 1985, ed. K. Trost, E. Volkl and E. Wedel (Neuried, 1988), 513–20
B. Karastoyanov: ‘Znamenata kato tonemnoprozodemen tip znatsi’, Muzikalni khorizonti (1989), no.2, 41–61
I.Ye. Lozovaya: ‘Slovo ot slova pletushche sladkopeniya’ [Weaving melody with word by word], Germenevtika drevnerusskoy literaturï: sbornik ii: XVI–nachalo XVIII vekov (Moscow, 1989), 383–422
G.A. Pozhidayeva: ‘Tekstologiya pamyatnikov demestvennogo raspeva’ [The textology of documents of demestvennïy chant], ibid., 309–54
V. Protopopov: Russkaya mïsl' o muzïke v XVII veke [Russian thought on music in the 17th century] (Moscow, 1989)
I.F. Bezuglova: ‘Muzïkal'naya deyatel'nost' solovetskikh inokov (po pevcheskim rukopisyam Solovetskogo sobraniya)’ [The musical activities of the Solovets monks (based on singers’ MSS of the Solovets collection)], Istochnikovedcheskoye izucheniye pamyatnikov pis'mennoy kul'turï, ed. G.P. Yenin and N.A. Yefimova (Leningrad, 1990), 39–50
Z. Guseinova: ‘Russian Znamenny Chant in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century’, Cantus planus IV: Pécs 1990, 311–18
S. Lazarov: ‘A Medieval Slavonic Treatise on Music’, Studies in Eastern Chant, v, ed. D. Conomos (Crestwood, NY, 1990), 153–86
N.P. Parfent'yev: ‘Vïdayushchiysya deyatel' russkoy muzïkal'noy kul'turï XVII veka Fyodor Konstantinov’ [An outstanding figure of Russian musical culture from the 17th century: Fyodor Konstantinov], Drevnerusskaya pevcheskaya kul'tura i knizhnost', ed. N.S. Seryogina (Leningrad, 1990), 124–39
J. Roccasalvo: ‘The Znamenny Chant’, MQ, lxxiv (1990), 217–41
N.S. Seryogina: ‘Iz istorii pevcheskikh tsiklov Borisu i Glebu’ [The history of chant cycles to Boris and Gleb], Trudï otdela drevnerusskoy literaturï, xliii (1990), 291–304
D. Stefanović: ‘The Phenomenon of Oral Tradition of Orthodox Chant’, Cantus planus IV: Pécs 1990, 305–10
N.K. Ulff-Møller: ‘Die Gesänge der byzantinischen Liturgie und ihre Spiegelung in der slawische Gesangtradition’, Svenska kommittén för byzantinska studier, no.8 (1990), 29–34
M. Velimirovich: ‘Melodika kanona IX veka sv. Dimitriyu’ [The melody of the 9th-century canon to St Dimitry], Muzïkal'naya kul'tura Srednevekov'ya, i, ed. T.F. Vladïshevskaya (Moscow, 1990), 5–24
Otechestvennaya kul'tura XX veka i dukhovnaya muzïka: tezisï dokladov Vsesoyuznoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii [Russian culture of the 20th century and spiritual music: theses put forward in papers from an all-Union scientific and practical conference] (Rostov-on-Don, 1990)
K. Levy: ‘The Slavic Reception of Byzantine Chant’, Christianity and the Arts in Russia, ed. W.C. Brumfield and M.M. Velimirović (Cambridge, 1991), 46–51
N.P. Parfent'yev: Drevnerusskoye pevcheskoye iskusstvo v dukhovnoy kul'ture rossiyskogo gosudarstva XVI–XVII vv.: shkolï, tsentrï, mastera [Old Russian chant in the spiritual culture of the Russian state during the 16th and 17th centuries: schools, centres, masters] (Sverdlovsk, 1991)
N.P. Parfent'yev: Professional'nïye muzïkantï rossiyskogo gosudarstva XVI–XVII vekov: gosudarevï pevchiye d'yaki i patriarshiye pevchiye d'yaki i podd'yaki [The professional musicians of the Russian State in the 16th and 17th centuries: court singing deacons and patriarchal singing deacons and assistant deacons] (Chelyabinsk, 1991)
B.A. Shindin and I.Ye. Yefimova: Demestvennïy raspev: monodiya i mnogogolosiye [Demestvennïy chant: monody and polyphony] (Novosibirsk, 1991)
T.F. Vladïshevskaya, ed.: Muzïkal'naya kul'tura Srednevekov'ya, ii (tezisï i dokladï konferentsiy) [The musical culture of the Middle Ages, ii (theses and papers from conferences)] (Moscow, 1991)
T. Vladyshevskaia: ‘On the Links between Music and Icon Painting in Medieval Rus'’, Christianity and the Arts in Russia, ed. W.C. Brumfield and M.M. Velimirović (Cambridge, 1991), 14–29
O.A. Krasheninnikova: ‘Drevnerusskiye oktoikhi XIV veka’ [Old Russian oktōēchoi of the 14th century], Germenevtika drevnerusskoy literaturï, sbornik v: XI–XIV vv. (Moscow, 1992), 301–15
N. Gerasimova-Persidskaya, ed.: Altrussische Musik: Einführung in ihre Geschichte und Probleme (Graz, 1993) [incl. E. Koliada: ‘Das Gattungenssystem der altrussischen Hymnodie’, 17–28; S. Swerewa: ‘Der Kirchengesang in Russland vom Ende 15. bis zum Anfang des 17. Jahrhunderts’, 71–84; G. Poshidajewa: ‘Der demestische Gesang’, 85–110; E. Alexandrowa: ‘Die Snamenny-Mehrstimmigkeit’, 111–24]
O.A. Krasheninnikova: ‘Oktoikh i Paraklit (k istorii dvukh nazvaniy odnoy liturgicheskoy knigi)’ [The Oktōēchos and the Paraklētikē (the history of two names for one liturgical book)], Germenevtika drevnerusskoy literaturï: sbornik vi/2 (Moscow, 1993), 398–406
A.V. Lebedeva-Yemelina: Russkaya khorovaya kul'tura vtoroy polovinï XVIII veka [Russian choral culture in the second half of the 18th century] (diss., State Institute of Arts, Moscow, 1993)
I.Ye. Lozovaya: ‘Drevnerusskiy notirovannïy Paraklitik kontsa XII – nachala XIII veka: predvaritel'nïye zametki k izucheniyu pevcheskoy knigi’ [The Old Russian notated Paraclitus of the late 12th century and the early 13th: preliminary notes for studying the singers’ book], Germenevtika drevnerusskoy literaturï: sbornik vi/2 (Moscow, 1993), 407–33
N.P. Parfent'yev andN.V. Parfent'yeva: Usol'skaya (Stroganovskaya) shkola v russkoy muzïke XVI–XVII vekov [The Usol (Stroganov) School in Russian music of the 16th and 17th centuries] (Chelyabinsk, 1993)
D. Petrović: ‘The Eleven Morning Hymns: Eothina in Byzantine and Slavonic Traditions’, Cantus planus VI: Pécs 1993, 435–48
G.A. Pozhidayeva: ‘Demestvennoye peniye’ [Demestvennïy singing], Germenevtika drevnerusskoy literaturï: sbornik vi/2 (Moscow, 1993), 433–74
H. Rothe: ‘Ost- und Südslavische Kontakien als Historische Quellen’, Millennium Russiae Christianiae: Munster 1988, ed. G. Birkfellner (Cologne, 1993), 43–61
E. Toncheva: ‘The “Latrinos” Settings in the Polyeleos Psalm 135: on the Typological Problems of the Late Byzantine Psalmody’, Cantus planus VI: Pécs 1993, 473–92
T.F. Vladïshevskaya: ‘Muzïka Drevney Rusi’ [The music of Old Russia], Iskusstvo Drevney Rusi, ed. with G.K. Vagner (Moscow, 1993), 172–246
T.F. Vladïshevskaya: Russkaya tserkovnaya muzïka XI–XVII vekov [Russian church music of the 11th to the 17th centuries] (diss., Moscow Conservatory, 1993)
N.A. Gerasimova-Persidskaya: Russkaya muzïka XVII veka – vstrecha dvukh ėpokh [Russian music of the 17th century – the meeting of two epochs] (Moscow, 1994)
C. Hannick: ‘Early Slavic Liturgical Hymns in Musicological Context’, Richerche slavistiche, xli (1994), 9–30
Muzïkal'naya kul'tura pravoslavnogo mira: traditsii, teoriya, praktika: materialï mezhdunarodnïkh nauchnïkh konferentsiy 1991–94 gg. [The musical culture of the Orthodox world: traditions, theory, practice: material from international scientific conferences 1991–4] (Moscow, 1994)
I. and M. Schkolnick: ‘Echos in the Byzantine-Russian Heirmologion: an Experience of Comparative Research’, Cahiers de l’Institut du Moyen-Age grec et latin, lxiv (1994), 3–17
N.S. Seryogina: Pesnopeniya russkim svyatïm: po materialam rukopisnoy knigi XI–XIX vv: ‘Stikhirar' mesyachnïy’ [Chants sung to the Russian saints: based on a MS of the 11th to 19th centuries: ‘The monthly book of stichēra’] (St Petersburg, 1994)
C.L. Drage and J. Sullivan: ‘Religious Songs of the Late Seventeenth Century: Folios from a St. Petersburg Manuscript Miscellany’, Slavonic and East European Review, lxxiii (January 1995), 1–36
N.S. Gulyanitskaya: Russkoye ‘garmonicheskoye’ peniye (XIX vek) [Russian ‘harmonious’ singing (19th century)] (Moscow, 1995)
Z.M. Guseynova: ‘Izveshcheniye’ Aleksandra Mezentsa i teoriya muzïki XVII veka [The alphabet of znamennïy chant by Aleksandr Mezenets and the theory of music in the 17th century] (St Petersburg, 1995)
G.A. Pozhidayeva: ‘Drevnerusskoye raspevï XV–XVII v.’ [Old Russian chants of the 15th–17th centuries], Germenevtika drevnerusskoy literaturï: sbornik viii (Moscow, 1995), 260–75
G. Alekseyeva: Problemï adaptatsii vizantiyskogo peniya na Rusi [The problems of adapting Byzantine singing to Russia] (Vladivostok, 1996)
N.G. Denisov: Ustnïye traditsii peniya u staroobryadtsev: peniye po ‘napevke’, voprosï interpretatsii [The oral traditions of singing among the Old Believers: singing in the ‘napevka’ manner: questions of interpretation] (diss., Moscow, 1996)
A.V. Konotop: Russkoye strochnoye mnogogolosiye: tekstologiya, stil', kul'turnïy kontekst [Russian linear polyphony: textology, style, cultural context] (diss., Russian Institute of Art History, St Petersburg, 1996)
N.Yu. Plotnikova: Mnogogolosnïye formï obrabotki drevnikh raspevov v russkoy dukhovnoy muzïke XIX–nachala XX vekov [Polyphonic forms in the arrangement of old chants in Russian spiritual music of the 19th and 20th centuries] (diss., Moscow Conservatory, 1996)
M.G. Shkol'nik: Problemï rekonstruktsii znamennogo rospeva XII–XVII vekov (na materiale vizantiyskogo i drevnerusskogo Irmologiya) [The problems of reconstructing the znamennïy chant of the 12th to 17th centuries (on material from the Byzantine and Old Russian Heirmologion)] (diss., Moscow Conservatory, 1996)
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
J. von Gardner: ‘Diskographie des russischen Kirchengesanges’, Ostkirchliche Studien, ix (1960), 262–92; x (1961), 136–54; xii (1963), 39–60; xiii (1964), 282–309; xv (1966), 154–81; xvii (1968), 174–98; xviii (1969), 23–42; xix (1970), 185–207
N.V. Parfent'yeva: Tvorchestvo masterov drevnerusskogo pevcheskogo iskusstva XVI–XVII vv. (na primere proizvedeniy vïdayushchikhsya raspevshchikov (Chelyabinsk, 1997)
G. Myers: ‘The Medieval Russian Kndakar and the Choirbook from Kastoria: a Palaeographic Study in Byzantine and Slavic Musical Relations’, Plainsong and Medieval Music, vii (1998), 21–46
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
I. Kyprian: ‘Tserkovni pesnopeniya, ikh nazvy i znachyniye’ [Church chants, their names and definitions], Dyakivs'kyi blas ( 1896, 1898, 1899, 1900)
M.A. Momina: ‘Pesnopeniya drevnikh slavyano-russkikh rukopisey’ [Chant in Old Slavonic-Russian MSS], Metodicheskiye rekomendatsii po opisano slavyano-russkikh rukopisey dlya Svobodnogo katalogo rukopisey, khranyashchikhsya v SSSR, ii (Moscow, 1976)
Y.P. Yasynovs'kyi: ‘Pevcheskiye rukopisi ukrainskoy traditsii v sobraniyakh Gosudarstvennoy biblioteki SSSR im V.I. Lenina’ [Choral MSS in the Ukrainian tradition in the collections of the Lenin State Library of the USSR], Zapiski, xlv (1986), 284–98
Y.P Yasynovs'kyi: Ukrains'ki ta bilorus'ki notoliniyni Irmoloyi 16–18 stolit' [Ukrainian and Belorussian heirmologia in staff notation from the 16th to the 18th centuries] (L'viv, 1996)
I. Dol'nytskiy, ed.: Hlasopesnets ili Napevniktserkovniy [Modal or church songbook] (L'viv, 1894)
I. Bokshay and I. Malinich, eds.: Tserkovnoye prostopeniye [Church plainchant] (Uzhgorod, 1906/R)
S. Papp and N. Petrasshevich, eds.: Irmologion (Presov, 1970) [incl. essays on liturgical chant]
N.O. Gerasimova-Persids'ka, ed.: Ukraïns'ki partesni motety pochatku XVIII stolittya z Yugoslavs'kikh zibran' [Ukrainian partesnïy motets of the early 18th century from Yugoslav collections] (Kiev, 1991)
N.I. Florinsky: Istoriya bogosluzhebïnkh pesnopeniy pravoslavnoy katolicheskoy vostochnoy tserkvi [The history of liturgical chant of the Orthodox Catholic Eastern Church] (Kiev, 1881)
Ch. Steško: Džerela do istorii počatkowoi doby cerkownoho spiwu na Ukraini [Sources for the history of the beginning of church chant in Ukraine] (Prague, 1929)
I. Choma: Prostopeniye po predanyyu inokov chyna sv. Vasylyya Velykoho, oblasty Karpato-Russkyya [Plainchant of the monks of the order of St Basil the Great in the Carpatho-Rusyn region] (Mukachevo, 1930)
Y. Yavors'kij: Materialï dlya istorii starinnoy pesennoy literaturï v podkarpatskoy Rusi [Materials for the history of old song literature in Sub-Carpathian Rus'] (Prague, 1934)
F. Steshko: Čeští hudebníci v ukrajinské církevni hudbě (z dějin haličsko-ukrajinské církevní hudby) [Czech musicians in Ukrainian church music (and Galician-Ukrainian church music)] (Prague, 1935)
F. Steshko: Tserkovna muzyka na pidkarpats'ky Rusi [Church music in Sub-Carpathian Rus'] (Uzhgorod, 1936)
I. Muzychka: ‘Pershyy ukraïns'kyy drukovanyy irmoloy’ [The first Ukrainian printed heirmologion], Analecta Ordinis S. Basilii Magni, 2nd ser., section 2, ii (1954–6), 254–64
M. Antonowycz: ‘Die byzantinischen Elemente in den Antiphonen der Ukrainischen Kirche’, KJb, xliii (1959), 7–26
H. Pichura: ‘Monuments of Byelorussian Music’, Eastern Churches Quarterly, xiv (1961–2), 410–15
V. Hoshovs'ky: ‘Stranitsï istorii muzïkal'noy kul'turï zakarpat'ya XIX–pervoj polovinï XX veka [i]’, [Pages from the musical culture of Transcarpathia during the 19th century and the first half of the 20th], Ukrainskoe muzïkovedeniye, i (1964); ‘Storinku z istorii muzychnoy kul'tury Zakarpattya XIX–pershoy polovny XX stolittya [ii]’ Ukraïns'ke muzykosnavstvo, iv (1967)
P. Matsenko: Narysy do istorii ukraïns'koy tserkovnoy muzyky [Essays on the history of Ukrainian church music] (Roblin, 1968)
M. Antonowycz: ‘Ukrainische Hirmen im Lichte der byzantinischen Musiktheorie’, Musik des Ostens, v (Kassel, 1969), 7–22
A. Tsalai-Iakimenko: ‘Muzïkal'no-teoreticheskaya mïsl' na Ukraine v XVII stoletii I trudï Nikolaya Diletskogo’ [Musico-theoretical thinking in Ukraine in the 17th century and the works of Nikolay Diletsky], Musica antiqua II: Bydgoszcz 1969, 369–95
H. Pichura: ‘The Pdobny Texts and Chants of the Suprasl Irmologion of 1601’, Journal of Byelorussian Studies, ii/2 (1970), 192–221
N. Herasymova-Persyds'ka: ‘Zhanrovo-stylistichni oznaky partesnogo kontsertu na Ukraini v XVII–XVIII st.’ [Features of genre and style in the partesnïy concerto in Ukraine during the 17th and 18th centuries] Ukraïns'ke muzykoznavstvo, vi (1971), 58–72
Ya. Isayevich: ‘Bratstva i ukraïns'ka muzychna kul'tura XVI–XVIII st.’ [The brotherhoods and Ukrainian musical culture of the 16th–18th centuries], ibid., 48–57
S. Pap: ‘Dukhovna pisnya na Zakarpatti’ [Spiritual song in Transcarpathia], Analecta ordinis Sancti Basilii Magni, 2nd ser., vii (1971), 114–42
V. Protopopov: ‘Pro khorovu bagatogolosu kompozytsiyu XVII–pochatku XVIII st. ta pro Simeona Pekalits'kogo’ [On polyphonic choral composition of the 17th to the early 18th centuries, and Simeon Pekalyst'ky], Ukraïns'ke muzykoznavstvo, vi (1971), 73–100
P. Matsenko: Konspekt istorii ukrains'koy tserkovnoy muzyky [Outline of the history of Ukrainian church music] (Winnipeg, 1973)
M. Antonowycz: The Chants from Ukrainian Heirmologia (Bilthoven, 1974)
O. Tsalay-Yakymenko: ‘Kyiv'ska notatsiya yak relyatyvna systema’ [Kievan notation as a relative system], Ukraïns'ke muzykoznavstvo, ix (1974), 197–224
Yu.P. Yasynov'sky: ‘Pershi skhidnoslov'yans'ki notni vydannya’ [The first East Slavonic music publication], Ukraïns'ke muzykoznavstvo, ix (1974), 45–54
A.V. Konotop: ‘Drevneyshiy pamyatnik ukrainskogo notolineynogo pis'ma: Suprasl'skiy Irmologion 1598–1601 gg” [The oldest Ukrainian document written for the staff: the Suprasl Heirmologion, 1598–1601], Pamyatniki kul'turï: novïye otkrïtiya 1974 (Moscow, 1975), 285–93
A.V. Konotop: ‘Struktura suprasl'skogo irmologiona 1598–1601 drevnejshsego pamyatnika ukrainskogo notolineynogo pis'ma’ [Structure of the 1598–1601 Suprasl Heirmologion, the oldest record of Ukrainian staff notation], Musica antiqua IV: Bydgoszcz 1975, 522–33
L.F. Kostyukovets: Kantovaya kul'tura Belorussii [The culture of the kant in Belorussia] (Minsk, 1975)
N.O. Herasimova-Persids'ka, ed.: Partesnyy kontsert: materialy z istorii ukraïns'koi muzyky [The partesnïy concerto: material from the history of Ukrainian music] (Kiev, 1976)
Yu.P. Yasynov'sky: Stanovleniye muzïkal'nogo professionalizma na Ukraine v XVI–XVII vv. [The rise of musical professionalism in Ukraine from the 16th to the 18th centuries] (diss., Institute of Art, Folklore and Ethnography, USSR Academy of Sciences, Kiev, 1978)
L. Korniy: ‘Bolgarskiy raspev na Ukraine v kontse XVI–XVIII vv.’ [Bulgarian chant in Ukraine in the late 16th century and the 17th], Balgarsko muzikoznaniye, vi/1 (1982), 129–42
M. Antonowycz: ‘Deshcho pro ukraïns'ku tserkovnu monodiyu to pro nazvy “znamenniy” i “kyivs'kyy” rozspiv’ [On Ukrainian church monody and the names ‘znamenniy’ and ‘kyjivs'kyy’ chant], Zbirnik na poshanu prof. d-ra Volodymyra Yneva (Munich, 1983), 147–70
V. Hoshovs'ky: ‘Melodicheskiye paradigmï pesen slovatsko-ukrainskogo areala’ [Melodic paradigms in the songs of the Slovak-Ukrainian area], Sborník prací filozofické fakulty Brněnske univerzity: H, Rada hudebnevedna, xix–xx (1984), 33–44
Yu.P. Yasynov'sky: Belaruskiya irmoloy pomniki muzychnaha mastatstva 16–17 st. [The Belorussian heirmologion as a monument to musical art of the 16th and 17th centuries] (Minsk, 1984)
J.L. Roccasalvo: The Plainchant Tradition of Southwestern Rus' (New York, 1986)
Yu.P. Yasinovsky: ‘L'vovskiy Irmoloy kontsa XVI–nachala XVII v.’ [The L'viv Heirmologion of the late 16th and early 17th centuries], Pamyatniki kul'turï: novïye otkrïtiya 1984 (Leningrad, 1986), 168–75
G. Myers: ‘The Blagoveshchensky Kondakar and the Survival of the Constantinopolitan All-Chanted Office in Kievan Rus'’, Musica antiqua VIII: Bydgoszcz 1988, 703–22
M. Antonowycz: ‘Pytomennosti ukraïns'koho tserkovnoho spivu’ [Specifics of Ukrainian church singing], 1000-littya khreshchennya Rusy–Ukrainy: Munich 1988, ed. V. Janiv (Munich, 1989), 458–74
Yu.P. Yasynov'sky: ‘Naydavnishyy notolininyy rukopys na Ukraini’ [The oldest MS with staff notation in Ukraine], Ukraïns'ka muzychna spadshchyna, i (1989), 7–10
O. Shevchuk: ‘Do pytannya pro samobutnist' kyïsk'ogo rozspivu (za materialami notnykh rukopysiv kintsya XVI–XVIII st.)’ [The distinctiveness of Kievan chant (based on musical MSS of the late 16th century to the 18th)], Ukraïns'ka muzychna kul'tura mynulago i suchasnosti u mizhnatsional'nykh zv'yazkakh (Kiev, 1989), 16–45
M. Antonowycz: Ukrainische geistliche Musik (Munich, 1990)
N.V. Zabolotna: ‘Z istorii kyivo-pechers'kogo naspivu’ [History of the Kiev-Pechersky melody], Z istoriï ukraïns'koï muzychnoï kul'tury (Kiev, 1991), 75–85
N. Herasimova-Persidskaya: ‘Die ukrainische Kultur und Musik im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert’, Die ukrainische Mehrstimmigkeit: Kant und Partessny Konzert’, Altrussische Musik: Einführung in ihre Geschichte und Probleme (Graz, 1993), 125–32, 133–70
G. Picarda: ‘The Evolution of Church Music in Belorussia’, Christianity and the Eastern Slavs, i, ed. B. Gasparov and O. Raevsky-Hughes (Berkeley, 1993), 328–55
Yu.P. Yasinov'sky: ‘Ukraïnskyy notolininyy irmoloy yak typ hymnografichnogo zbirnyka: zmist, struktura’ [The Ukrainian staff-notated heirmologion as a type of hymnographic collection: contents and structure], Zapysky Naukohovo tovarystva Shevchenka, ccxxvi (1993), 41–56
Yu.P. Yasinov'sky: ‘Sotsial'na funktsiya ukraïns'kykh notnykh irmoloyiv’ [The social function of staff-notated Ukrainian heirmologia], Rukopysna ta knyzhkova spadshchyna Ukraïny, ii (1994), 63–72
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
S. Petrov and H. Kodov: Old Bulgarian Musical Documents (Sofia, 1972)
J. Zaimov, ed.: The Kichevo Triodium (cod. Sofia BAN, 38), also known as the Bitola Triodium, an Old Bulgarian Manuscript (Nijmegen, 1984)
A. Nikolov: Liturgy of St John Chrysostom (1905); Vespers (1906) [Lithographed edns of Bulgarian chant melodies]
A. Nikolov: ‘K vozrozhdeniyu bolgarskogo tserkovnogo peniya’ [The renaissance of Bulgarian chant], RMG, xiii/7–8 (1906)
A. Nikolov: Starobalgarsko tsarkovno peniye po ruskite notni rakopisi ot XVII i XVIII v. [Old Bulgarian chant after Russian musical MSS from the 17th and 18th centuries] (Sofia, 1921)
P. Dinev: Dukhovni muzikalni tvorbi na Ioan Kukuzel [The religious music of Joannes Koukouzeles] (Sofia, 1938)
P. Dinev, ed.: Tsarkovnopevcheski sinodalen sbornik [Collection of liturgical music] (Sofia, 1947–58), i: Kratak osmoglasnik i bozhestvena liturgiya; ii: Obshiren vazkresnik; iii: Triod i Pentekostar; iv: Prostranni papadicheski pesnopeniya ot liturgiyata; v: Tsarkovni trebi i slavi ot Trioda i Pentikostara
R. Palikarova-Verdeil: La musique byzantine chez les bulgares et les russes (du IXe au XIVe siècle), MMB, Subsidia, iii (1953)
P. Dinev: ‘Rilskata tsarkovno-pevcheska shkola v nachaloto na 19 vek i neynite predstaviteli’ [The Rila school of church singing at the beginning of the 19th century and its exponents], IIM, iv (1957), 5–82
L. Brashovanova-Stancheva: ‘Prouchvaniya varkhu zhivota i deynostta na Ioan Kukuzel’ [A study of the life and activity of Joannes Koukouzeles], IIM, vi ( 1959), 13–35
P. Dinev: ‘Narodnopesenni elementi v balgarskiya tsarkoven napev’ [Folk music elements in the Bulgarian church melos], IIM, vi (1959), 39–64
S. Petrov: Ochertsi po istoriya na balgarskata muzikalna kultura [Essays on the history of Bulgarian musical culture] (Sofia, 1959)
S. Lazarov: ‘Sinodikat na tsar Boril kato muzikalno-istoricheski pametnik’ [The synodikon of Tsar Boril as a musico-historical document], IIM, vii ( 1961), 5–69
V. Krastev: ‘Puti razvitiya bolgarskoy muzïkal'noy kul'turï v period XII–XVIII stoletiy’ [The development of Bulgarian musical culture from the 12th century to the 18th], Musica antiqua Europae orientalis: Bydgoszcz and Toruń 1966, 45–65
S. Petrov: ‘Tvortsi, pametnitsi i traditsii na starobalgarskata muzikalna kultura’ [Creators, documents and traditions of Old Bulgarian musical culture], Kliment Okhridski: sbornik ot statii po sluchai 1050-god od smrtta mu [St Clement of Ohrid: a collection of essays commemorating the 1050th anniversary of his death], ed. B.S. Angelov and others (Sofia, 1966), 393–403
P. L'ondev: ‘Pesni zapisani s khurmuziyevi nevmi v Balgariya prez XIX vek’ [Songs notated in Hurmouzios’ neumes in Bulgaria in the 19th century], IIM, xii (1967), 161–226
E. Toncheva: ‘Muzikalnite tekstove v palauzoviya prepis na sinodika na tsar Boril’ [Musical texts in the Palauzov copy of Tsar Boril’s Synodikon], IIM, xii (1967), 57–152
V. Krastev, ed.: Ėntsiklopediya na balgarskata muzikalna kultura (Sofia, 1968)
P. Dinev: ‘Tserkovnoye peniye v Bolgarii vo vremya I i II stva (865–1396g.)’ [Chant in Bulgaria at the time of the first and second empires (865–1396)], Musica antiqua II: Bydgoszcz 1969, 9–31
V. Krastev: Ochertsi po istoriya na balgarskata muzika [Essays on the history of Bulgarian music] (Sofia, 1970), 85–106
E. Toncheva: ‘Elenski prostranen vazkresen tropar “Khristos voskrese”’ [The extended Easter troparion ‘Christ is Risen’ from the Elena township], IIM, xv (1970), 213–53
S. Lazarov: ‘The Synodikon of Tsar Boril and the Problem of Byzantino-Bulgarian Relations’, Studies in Eastern Chant, ii, ed. M. Velimirović (London, 1971), 69–85
E. Toncheva: Bolgarskiy rospev [Bulgarian chant] (Sofia, 1971)
E. Borisova-Toncheva: ‘Kompositions- und Strukturbesonderheiten des “Bolgarski rosspew”’, Musica antiqua III: Bydgoszcz 1972, 33–65 [with Fr. summary]
M. Velimirović: ‘The “Bulgarian” Musical Pieces in Byzantine Musical MSS’, IMSCR XI: Copenhagen 1972, ii 790–96
E.V. Williams: ‘A Byzantine Ars Nova: the 14th-Century Reforms of John Koukouzeles in the Chanting of Great Vespers’, Aspects of the Balkans: Continuity and Change: Los Angeles 1969, ed. S. Vrysonis and H. Birnbaum (The Hague, 1972), 211–29
S. Lazarov: ‘The History of Bulgarian Music’, Studies in Eastern Chant, iii, ed. M. Velimirović (London, 1973), 98–111
L. Brashovanova: ‘Über die historische Entwicklung der bulgarischen Musik seit ihrer Entstehung bis 1878’, Bulgarian Historical Review, iii (1975), 66–81
E. Toncheva: Problemi na starata balgarska muzika (Sofia, 1975)
E. Tontschewa: ‘Les chants bulgares dans les manuscrits musicaux néobyzantins’, Makedonski folklor, ix/17 (1976), 93–106
S. Djoudjeff: ‘Johannes Koukouzeles und die mittelalteriche bulgarische Musik’, Beiträge zur Musikgeschichte Osteuropas, ed. E. Arro (Wiesbaden, 1977), 237–58
S. Kuyumdzhiyeva: ‘Kam vaprosaza kharaktera i znachenieto na deinostta na Rilskata skola prez Vazrazhdanieto’ [Questions on the character and significance of the activities of the Rila-School during the [Bulgarian] Renaissance], Balgarsko muzikoznaniye, iii/3 (1979), 41–59
E. Toncheva: ‘Neuendeckte Abschriften des cheironomischen Lehrgesangs von Johannes Kukuzeles (zum Problem der Entwicklung der byzantinischen Musiktradition nach dem 14. Jahrhundert)’, Actes du XIVe congres international des études byzantines: Bucharest 1971, ed. M. Berza and E. Stanescu, iii (Bucharest, 1979), 579–88
E. Toncheva: ‘Tsrkovnata muzika v Trnovskata knizhovna skola i sobranenieto i v moldavskata tsrkovnopesenna praktika prez XVI v.’ [Church music in the Trnovo literary school and its preservation in the Moldavian church-singing practice through the 16th century], Trnovska knizhovna skola, ii (1980), 573–89
E. Toncheva: Manastirot Golyam Skit – skola na ‘Balgarski rospev’ – Skitski ‘Balgarski’ irmolozi od XVII–XVIII vek [The monastery of the Great Skete as a school for Bulgarian chant: the Skete ‘Bulgarian’ Heirmologia of the 17th–18th centuries] (Sofia, 1981)
S. Georgiyeva-Kuyumdzhiyeva: ‘Die Forschungsarbeit auf dem Gebiet der alten bulgarischen Musik (aus dem Mittelalter und der frühen Renaissance) seit den 50-er Jahren: Probleme, Errungenschaften und Perspektiven’, Palaeobulgarica, vi/3 (1982), 59–72
B. Karastojanov: ‘Ornamentirane v “Balgarski rospev” [Ornamentation in Bulgarian chant] Balgarsko muzikoznaniye, vi/1 (1982), 107–14
J. Raasted: ‘Zur Analyse der bulgarisch-griechischen Melodie des Doxastichons, “Bogonachalnim Manoveniem”’, Balgarsko muzikoznaniye, vi/1 (1982), 68–85
Simpozium Bolgarski rospev: Bulgarsko-ruski muzikalni vruzki prez XIV–XVIII vek: Purvi mezhdunaroden kongres po bulgaristika: Sofia 1981, ed. P. Zarev and B. Kiriakov (Sofia, 1982)
E. Toncheva: ‘“Bulgaricon”-Melodien in der Akalouthie des Psalm 135’, Musica antiqua Europae orientalis VI: Bydgoszcz 1982, 93–111
E. Toncheva: ‘Die Skitische Musikhandschriftenfamilie des bolgarskij rospev vom 17–18 Jh. und die spätbyzantinische Musikpraxis’, Jb der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, xxxii (1982), 85–98
M. Dimitrova: ‘Sluzhbi za balgarski svtci v starata muzikalna tradicija’, Balgarsko muzikoznaniye, viii/4 (1983), 36–49
L. Stancheva-Brascovanova: Die mittelalteriche bulgarische Musik und Joan Kukuzel (Vienna, 1984) [see also D. Touliatos-Banker, Kleronomia, xvii (1985), 377–82]
E. Toncheva: ‘Grigory Tsamblak i tsrkovnopevcheskata praktika v slavyanski yugoiztok v perioda XIV–XVII v.’ [Gregory Tsamblak and the church-singing practice in the Slavic South-East between the 14th and 17th centuries], Trnovska knizhovna skola, iii (1984), 397–411
S. Kuyumdzhiyeva: ‘Kavko so peyeli Kiril i Metodii prez IX vek’ [What did Cyril and Methodius sing in the 9th century?], Muzikalni horizonti (1985), no.4, 4–14
E. Toncheva: ‘Balkanski notirani izvori za Skiskiya “Bolgarski rospev” v Ukraina’ [Balkan notated sources for the Skete variant of ‘Bulgarian chant’ in Ukraine], Trnovska knizhovna skola, iv (1985), 412–29
E. Toncheva: ‘Middle Byzantine Fragment with Melismatic Chant in the Bachkovo Monastery Musical Manuscript Collection’, Musica antiqua VII: Bydgoszcz 1985, 109–34
A.A. Avenir: ‘Die byzantinische Kirchenmusik in Bulgarien’, ABDOSD-Tagung XIII: Vienna 1984, ed. M. Novak, Veröffentlichungen der Osteuropa-Abteilung, Staatsbibliothek preussischer Kulturbesitz, iii (Berlin, 1986), 189–209
E. Toncheva: ‘The Bulgarian Liturgical Chant (9th–19th C.)’, Rhythm in Byzantine Chant: Hernen 1986, 141–93
B. Karastoyanov: ‘Notirani stihiri za Ivan Rilski v russkii mesechen stihirar’ [Notated stichēra for John of Rila in the Russian monthly sticherarion], Vtori mezhdunaroden kongres po balgaristika: Sofia 1986, xvii (Sofia, 1987), 165–84
E. Toncheva: ‘Kalofonni stihove ot maistor Ioan Kukuzel’ [Johannes Koukouzeles’s kalophonic verses], Balgarsko muzikoznaniye, xi/4 (1987), 88–117
E. Toncheva: ‘Polieleinoto tvorchestvo ma Ioan Kukuzel v konteksta na balkanskata tsrvkovno-pevcheska praktika’ [Joannes Koukouzeles’s creation of polyelea in the context of Balkan Church practice], Vtori mezhdunaroden kongres po balgaristika: Sofia 1986, xvii (Sofia, 1987), 224–62
E. Trapp: ‘Critical Notes on the Biography of John Koukouzeles’, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, xi (1987), 223–9
C. Hannick: ‘Das musikalische Leben der Frühzeit Bulgariens: aufgrund literarische Quellen des frühslavischen Schrifttums’, Byzantinoslavica, xlix (1988), 23–37
S. Kujumdžieva: ‘Mitteilungen über Psalm 140 in der liturgischen Praxis’, Musica antiqua VIII: Bydgoszcz 1988, 561–76
E. Toncheva: ‘Die Keramische Platte aus Preslav vom 9. Jahrhundert mit Prokeimena Incipits als Musikdenkmal’, Symposium Methodianum: Regensburg 1985, ed. K. Trost, E. Volkl and E. Wedel (Neuried, 1988), 315–29
E. Toncheva: ‘Muzikalno tolkovane (ekzegezis) na balkanski melodii v skitskiya “Balgarskii rospev” (Kam problema za post-vizantiiskata muzikalna ekzegfetika na Balkanite prez XVII–XVIII vek)’ [Musical exegesis of Balkan tunes in the Skete variant of Bulgarian chant (contribution to the problem of Post-Byzantine musical exegesis in the Balkans in the 17th and 18th centuries)], Balgarsko muzikoznaniye, xii/2 (1988), 40–60
C. Hannick: ‘Der Einfluss von Byzanz auf die Entwicklung der bulgarischen Kirchenmusik’, Kulturelle Traditionen in Bulgarien: Hedemunden 1987, ed. R. Lauer and P. Schreiner (Göttingen, 1989), 91–102
S. Kuyumdzhiyeva: ‘Über die Zeichen Aphona während der spät- und postbyzantinischen Periode’, Musikkulturgeschichte: Festschrift für Konstantin Floros, ed. P. Petersen (Wiesbaden, 1990), 449–60
E. Toncheva: ‘Über die Formelhaftigkeit in der mündlichen Kirchengesangstradition auf dem Balkan (das Automela-Proshomoia-Singen der Südslawen im 15. Jh nach MS. Athen Nr. 928)’, Cantus planus IV: Pécs 1990, 251–65
D. Jung: ‘The Kathismata in the Sofia MS Kliment Ochridski cod.gr.814’, Cahiers de l’Institut du Moyen-Age grec et latin, no.61 (1991), 49–77
N. Herasimova-Persidskaya: ‘Die ukrainische Kultur und Muzik im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert’, Altrussische Musik: Einführung in ihre Geschichte und Probleme (Graz, 1993), 125–32
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
A. Jakovljević: ‘Bibliografija srpskog crkvenog narodnog pojanja’ [A bibliography of Serbian church chant], Pravoslavna misao (1963), nos.1, 2
A. Jakovljević: ‘Bibliographie du chant ecclésiastique populaire orthodoxe serbe’, Byzantinoslavica, xxv (1965), 477–84
D. Stefanović: ‘The Earliest Dated and Notated Document of Serbian Chant’, Zborník radova Vizantološkog instituta, vii (1961), 187–96
D. Stefanović: ‘Izgoreli neumski rukopis br.93 Beogradske narodne biblioteke’ [On the burnt neumatic MS 93 of the Belgrade National Library], Bibliotekar, xiii/5 (1961), 379–82
J. Milojković-Đurić: ‘Some Aspects of the Byzantine Origin of the Serbian Chant’, Byzantinoslavica, xxiii (1962), 45–51
D. Stefanović: ‘The Beginnings of Serbian Chant’, Anfänge der slavischen Musik: Bratislava 1964, 55–64
M. Velimirović: ‘Joakeim Monk of the Harsianites Monastery and Domestikos of Serbia’, Zborník radova Vizantološkog instituta, viii/2 (1964), 451–8
P. Konjović: ‘Musica divina’, Ogledi o muzici (Belgrade, 1965), 172–90
D. Stefanović: ‘The Serbian Chant from the 15th to the 18th Century’, Musica antiqua I: Bydgoszcz and Toruń1966, 140–63
M. Velimirović and D. Stefanović: ‘Peter Lampadarios and Metropolitan Serafim of Bosnia’, Studies in Eastern Chant, i, ed. M. Velimirović (London, 1966), 67–88
D. Stefanović: ‘Crkvena muzika od XV do XVIII veka’ [Church music from the 15th century to the 18th], Srpska Pravoslavna Crkva 1219–1969: spomenica o 750-godišnjici autokefalnosti (Belgrade, 1969), 209–14
D. Stefanović: ‘Muzika u Srednjovekovnoj Srbiji’ [Music in medieval Serbia], ibid., 117–27
D. Stefanović: ‘New Data about the Serbian Chant’, Essays in Musicology in Honor of Dragan Plamenac, ed. G. Reese and R.J. Snow (Pittsburgh, 1969/R), 321–30
D. Stefanović: ‘Some Aspects of the Form and Expression of Serbian Medieval Chant’, Musica antiqua II: Bydgoszcz 1969, 61–75
D. Crevar-Petrović: ‘Pregled glasova u staroj srpskoj pojanoj poeziji’ [Survey of modes in Old Serbian chanted poetry], Srbljak, iv (Belgrade, 1970)
Karlovačko pojanje: Srbljak, stavio u note Branko Cvejić [Karlovac chant: feast of Serbian saints, as set to music by Branko Cvejić] (Belgrade, 1970)
Đ. Trifunović and D. Bogdanović, eds.: Srbljak, i–iii (Belgrade, 1970) [texts of services for feasts of Serbian saints]
D. Stefanović, ed.: ‘Pojanje stare srpske poezije’ [Chanting of Old Serbian poetry], Srbljak, iv (Belgrade, 1970)
A. Jakovliević: ‘Koukouzeles’ Part in the Funeral Service of Mediaeval Serbia and Byzantium’, Cyrillomethodianum, i (1971), 121–30
A. Jakovliević: ‘Servikon kratima’, Hilandarski zbornik, ii (1971), 131–41
M.Vukdragović, ed.: Zbornik radova o Stevanu Mokranjcu (Belgrade, 1971) [memorial volume with 20-page bibliography of studies on Mokranjac]
D. Petrović: ‘One Aspect of the Slavonic Octoechos in Four Chilandari MSS’[Music MSS], IMSCR XI: Copenhagen 1972, 766–74
B. Cvejić: Karlovačko pojanje: Pentikostar [Sremski Karlovci tradition of Serbian chant: the Pentekostarion] (Belgrade, 1973)
B. Cvejić: Karlovačko pojanje: Triod [Sremski Karlovci tradition of Serbian chant: the Triodion] (Belgrade, 1973)
S. Đurić-Klein, ed.: Srpska muzika kroz vekove/La musique serbe à travers les siècles (Belgrade, 1973) [incl. D. Stefanović: ‘Les sources de la recherche sur la vieille musique sacrée serbe’, 113–52; D. Petrović: ‘Le chant populaire sacré et ses investigateurs’, 275–92]
A.E. Pennington: ‘The Pronunciation Norm of Liturgical Singing in Fifteenth-Century Serbia’, Stara srpska muzika, ed. D. Stefanović (Belgrade, 1975), 189–202
D. Stefanović: ‘Serbian Church Music through the Centuries’, Beiträge zur Musikkultur des Balkans, ed. R. Flotzinger (Graz, 1975), 127–38
D. Stefanović: ‘Services for Slavonic Saints in Early Russian Music MSS’, Musica antiqua IV: Bydgoszcz 1975, 211–17
A. Jakovljević: ‘Ioannes Harsianites, domestikos Serbias’, Beiträge zur Musikgeschichte Osteuropas, ed. E. Arro (Wiesbaden, 1977), 261–72
N. Mosusova: ‘Das balkanische Element in der südslawischen Kunstmusik’, Balcanica, viii (1977), 779–85
D. Stefanović: ‘Srednjovekovna stihira u čast pape Klimenta I, Rimskog (+102)’ [A medieval stichēron in honour of Pope Clement I Romanus (d 102)], Zbornik Vladimira Mošina , ed. D. BogdanoviĆ, Đ. Trifunović and B. Jovanović-Stipcević (Belgrade, 1977), 81–5
D. Petrović: ‘Ukrainian Melodies in the Serbian Monastery of Krka (Dalmatia)’, MZ, xiv (1978), 35–49
D. Stefanović: ‘The Works of Stefan the Serb in Byzantine Music Manuscripts of the XVth and XVIth Centuries’, MZ, xiv (1978), 13–19
E. Toncheva: ‘Der Übergang vom Mittelalter zur Wiedergeburtszeit in der kirchlichen Gesangstradition auf dem Balkan’, Musica antiqua V: Bydgoszcz 1978, 105–21
D. Petrović: ‘Hymns in Musical Manuscripts and Modern Editions in Honour of Serbian Saints’, Studies in Eastern Chant, iv, ed. M. Velimirović (Crestwood, NY, 1979), 134–9
D. Stefanović: ‘Melodijsko poreklo stihire u čast knezu Lazaru’ [The origin of the melody for the stichēron in honour of Prince Lazar], Manastir Ravanica 1381–1981: spomenica o šestoj stogodišnjici (Belgrade, 1981), 201–4
D. Petrović: ‘The Importance of the Chilandari Music MSS for the History of Serbian Church Music’, Musica antiqua VI: Bydgoszcz 1982, 223–63
D. Petrović: Osmoglasnik u muzičkoj tradicji Južnih Slovena [The oktoēchos in the musical tradition of the southern Slavs] (Belgrade, 1982)
D. Petrović: ‘Počeci višeglasja u srpskoj crvenoj muzici’ [The beginnings of polyphony in Serbian church music], MZ, xvii (1982), 111–22
S. Golabovski: ‘Tonal Bases of Macedonian Church Music of the 9th–15th Centuries’, Macedonian Review, xiv (1984), 278–83
A. Jakovljević: ‘Musical Works of Serbian Composers Stefan and Nikola the Serb from the 14th-Century Bilingual Anthology of Great Lavra (E-108)’, Balcanica, xv (1984), 69–82
D. Petrović: ‘A Russian Music MS in the Belgrade Patriarchal Library’, Musica antiqua VII: Bydgoszcz 1985, 273–85
D. Petrović: ‘Aspects of the Continuity of Serbian Chant’, Alte Musik als ästhetische Gegenwart: Bach, Händel, Schütz: Stuttgart, 1985, ii, 186–90
D. Stefanović: ‘Jedna dragocenost i fondu Narodne biblioteke: Karlovačko pojanje’ [A precious item in the holdings of the National Library; Karlovac chant], Spomenica 1832–1982 Narodna biblioteka Srbije, ed. R. Suljagić (Belgrade, 1985), 67–76
D. Petrović: ‘Novootkrivrni ruski rukopis sa pesmama u čast Sv. Save i Sv. Arsenija’ [Newly discovered Russian MS with chants in honour of St Sava and St Arsenius], Osam vekova studenice: zbornik radova [Eight centuries of the Studenica Monastery] (Belgrade, 1986), 261–4
D. Stefanović: ‘The Importance of Rhythm in the Bilingual Polyeleos by Isaiah the Serb (15th c.)’, Rhythm in Byzantine Chant: Hernen 1986, 101–8
D. Stefanović: ‘Der serbische Kirchengesang: Herkunft, gegenwärtige Praxis, Hinweise auf einschlägige Bestände an Notenmaterial und Sekundarliteratur’, ABDOSD Tagung XIII: Vienna 1984, ed. M. Novak, Veröffentlichungen der Osteuropa Abteilung, Staatsbibliothek preussischer Kulturbesitz, iii (Berlin, 1986), 210–14
D. Petrović: ‘The Heritage of SS Cyril and Methodius as Reflected in Serbian Chant’, Christianity among the Slavs: Rome 1985, ed. E.G. Farrugia, R.F. Taft and G.K. Piovesana [Orientalia Christiana Analecta, no.231 (1988)], 291–4
D. Petrović: ‘Jerotej Mutibarić i karlovačko pojanje’ [Jerotej Mutibarič and the Karlovac chant], Zbornik za likovne umetnosti Matice Srpske, xxiv (1988), 273–96
E. Toncheva: ‘Isaija’s Anthology (Athens MS No.928, XV c) as a Source for the Late Byzantine Melodical Lexicology’, Musica antiqua Europae: Bydgoszcz 1988, 1025–46
D. Stefanović: ‘An Additional Checklist of Hilandar Music MSS’, Hilandarski zbornik, vii (1989), 163–76
D. Stefanović: ‘The Serbian Musical Heritage’, Tradition and Modern Society: Stockholm 1987, ed. S. Gustavsson (Stockholm, 1989), 111–16
D. Petrović: ‘Different Stages of Written and Oral Traditions in Serbian Church Music Singing, using the Example of the Trisagion Hymn’, Cantus planus IV: Pécs 1990, 293–301
D. Petrović: ‘Fruškogorski manastiri i srpsko pojanje’ [The monasteries in Fruška Gora and Serbian chant], Fruškogorski manastiri, ed. S. Celić (Belgrade, 1990), 176–96
E. Toncheva: ‘Das bilinguistische (griechische-slavische) Polyeleos-Repertoire in der Isaija Anthologie (Ms. Athens Nr.928, XV. Jhd.)’, Musikkulturgeschichte: Festschrift für Konstantin Floros, ed. P. Petersen (Wiesbaden, 1990), 461–78
D. Petrović: ‘Baroque and Serbian Chant in the 17th and 18th centuries’, Zapadnoevropski barok i vizantijski svet: Belgrade 1989–90, ed. D. Medaković (Belgrade, 1991), 95–102
D. Petrović: ‘Grčko-srpske kulturne veze i srpsko pojanje u 18.v.’ [Greco-Serbian cultural links and Serbian chant in the 18th century], Sentandrejski zbornik, ed. D. Medaković, ii (Belgrade, 1992), 149–59
D. Petrović: ‘A South Slavonic Sticherarion in a Seventeenth-Century Neumatic Manuscript in the Monastery of the Great Lavra’, Laborare fratres in unum: Festschrift Laszlo Dobszay, ed. D. Hiley and J. Szendrei (Hildesheim, 1995), 249–60
Russian and Slavonic church music: Bibliography
D.V. Razumovsky: Tserkovnoye peniye v Rossii [Church chant in Russia], i–iii (Moscow, 1867–9)
S.V. Smolensky, ed.: Azbuka znamennogo peniya (Izveshcheniye o soglasneyshikh pometakh) startsa Aleksandra Mezentsa (1668-go goda) [The alphabet of the znamennïy chant of Aleksandr Mezenets of 1668] (Kazan, 1888)
V.M. Metallov: Azbuka kryukovogo peniya [The alphabet of chanting from neumes] (Moscow, 1899)
S.V. Smolensky: O drevnerusskikh pevcheskikh notatsiyakh [The notation of Old Russian chant] (St Petersburg, 1901)
K.I. Papadopoulo-Keramevs: ‘Printsip tserkovno-vizantiyskogo notnogo pis'ma po dannim slavyanskikh i grecheskikh muzïkal'no-bogosluzhebnïkh pamyatnikov’ [The theory of Byzantine musical notation according to Slavonic and Greek musical and liturgical documents], Vizantiyskiy vremmenik, xv (1908), 49–70
A.V. Preobrazhensky: ‘O skhodstve russkogo muzïkal'nogo pis'ma s grecheskim v pevchikh rukopisyakh XI–XII vv’ [The similarity between Russian and Greek musical notation in 11th- and 12th-century MSS], RMG, xvi/8–10 (1909)
O. van Riesemann: Die Notationen des altrussischen Kirchengesanges (Leipzig, 1909)
V.M. Metallov: Russkaya simiografiya [Russian sign notation] (Moscow, 1912, Ger. trans., rev., Munich, 1984) [facs. of important Slavonic MSS]
A.V. Preobrazhensky: ‘Greko-russkiye pevchiye parallelï XII–XIII vv’ [Parallels between Greek and Russian chant in the 12th and 13th centuries], De musica, ii (1926), 60–76
E. Koschmieder: ‘Zur Bedeutung der russischen liturgischen Gesangstradition für die Entzifferung der byzantinischen Neumen’, Kyrios, v (1940), 1–24
M.V. Brazhnikov: Puti razvitiya i zadachi rasshifrovki znamennogo rospeva XII–XVIII vekov [The development of znamennïy chant from the 12th century to the 18th and problems of its transcription] (Leningrad, 1949)
C. Høeg: ‘The Oldest Slavonic Tradition of Byzantine Music’, Proceedings of the British Academy, xxxix (1953), 37–66
R. Palikarova-Verdeil: La musique byzantine chez les bulgares et les russes (du IXe au XIVe siècle), MMB, Subsidia, iii (1953)
M. Velimirović: Byzantine Elements in Early Slavic Chant, MMB, Subsidia, iv (1960), 18ff
J. von Gardner: ‘Einiges über die Orthographie der altrussischen Neumen vor der Reform 1668’, Welt der Slaven, v (1960), 198–213
V. Belyayev: Drevnerusskaya muzïkal'naya pis'mennost' [Old Russian musical notation] (Moscow, 1962)
J. von Gardner: ‘Zum Problem der Nomenklatur der altrussischen Neumen’, Welt der Slaven, vii (1962), 300–16
M. Velimirović: ‘Stand der Forschung über kirchenslavische Musik’, Zeitschrift für slavische Philologie, xxi (1963), 145–69
J. von Gardner and E.Koschmieder, eds.: Ein handschriftliches Lehrbuch der altrussischen Neumenschrift (Munich, 1963–6) [pt.i: Text; pt.ii: Kommentar zum Zeichensystem]
K. Levy: ‘The Slavic Kontakia and their Byzantine Originals’, Queens College Twenty-Fifth Anniversary Festschrift, ed. A. Mell (New York, 1964), 79–87
K. Levy: ‘Die slavische Kondakarien-Notation’, Anfänge der slavischen Musik: Bratislava 1964, 77–92
O. Strunk: ‘Zwei Chilandari Chorbücher’, ibid., 65–76
C. Floros: ‘Die Entzifferung der Kondakarien-Notation’, Musik des Ostens, iii (1965), 7–71; iv (1967), 12–44
N.D. Uspensky: Drevnerusskoye pevcheskoye iskusstvo [The Old Russian art of chanting] (Moscow, 1965, enlarged 2/1971)
J. von Gardner: Das Problem des altrussischen demestischen Kirchengesanges und seiner linienlosen Notation (Munich, 1967)
M.V. Brazhnikov: ‘Zur Terminologie der altrussischen Vokalmusik’, BMw, x (1968), 189–206
J.A. von Gardner: ‘Zur Frage der Verwendung des Sema Fita in den altrussischen liturgischen Gesanghandschriften mit linierten Notation’, Akademie der Wissenschaften und Literatur, ix (1969), 3–23
C. Floros: Universale Neumenkunde (Kassel, 1970)
J. von Gardner: ‘Altrussischer notierten “Oktoich” der Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal zu Paris’, AcM, xlii (1970), 221–5
G. Pantiru: Notatia si ehurile muzicii bizantine (Bucharest, 1971)
S. Sava: ‘Die altrussischen Neumen-Handschriften in der Bibliothek der Rumänischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Bukarest’, Musik des Ostens, vi (1971), 126–35
M.V. Brazhnikov: Drevnerusskaya teoriya muzïki [Old Russian music theory] (Leningrad, 1972)
M. Brazhnikov: ‘Eine neuentdeckte linienlose Gesangsnotation’, BMw, xiv ( 1972), 77–82
J. von Gardner: ‘Altrussischen Notenhandschriften des orthodoxen Kirchenmuseums in Kuopio (Finland)’, Welt der Slaven, xvii (1972), 225–36; xviii (1973), 101–20
J. von Gardner: ‘Das letzte Stadium der Entwicklung des Stolp-Notation Typus A’, Welt der Slaven, xvii (1972), 394–407
J. von Gardner: ‘Über die Klassification und die Bezeichnung der altrussischen Neumenschriftarten’, Welt der Slaven, xvii (1972), 175–200
G. Habenicht: ‘Bemerkungen zu einigen neuerschienenen musikwissenschaftlichen Schriften in Bulgarien’, Mf, xxx (1972), 188–91
D. Petrović: ‘A Liturgical Anthology Manuscript with Russian “Hammer-Headed” Notation from A.D. 1674’, Musica antiqua III: Bydgoszcz 1972, 293–321
M. Velimirović: ‘Present Status of Research in Slavic Chant’, AcM, xliv (1972), 235–65
G. Pantiru: ‘Une nouvelle interpretation de la notation ecphonétique d’un manuscrit à Iasi, Roumanie’, Studies in Eastern Chant, iii, ed. M. Velimirović (London, 1973), 4–80
O. Tsalay-Yakymenko: ‘Kyïvs'ka notatsiya yak relyatyvna systema (za rukopisami XVI–XVII stolit')’ [Kievan notation as a relative system (on the basis of MSS of the 16th and 17th centuries)], Ukraïns'ke muzykoznavtsvo, ix (1974), 197–224
G.A. Nikishov: Dvoznamenniki kak osobïy vid pevcheskikh rukopisey posledney chetverti XVII–nachala XVIII vv. [Dvoznamenniki as a special form of singers’ MSS of the last quarter of the 17th century and the beginning of the 18th] (diss., U. of Leningrad, 1977)
K. Levy: ‘The Earliest Slavic Melismatic Chants’, Fundamental Problems of Early Slavic Music and Poetry, ed. C. Hannick, MMB, Subsidia, vi (1978), 197–210
A.N. Kruchinina and A.S.Belonenko, eds.: Problemï istorii i teorii drevnerusskoy muzïki [Problems of the history and theory of Old Russian music] (Leningrad, 1979) [incl. M.V. Brazhnikov: ‘Mnogogolosiye znamennïkh partitur (chastnichnaya publikatsiya)’ [Polyphony in znamennïy scores: partial publication], 7–61; S.V. Frolov: ‘K probleme zvukovïsotnosti bespometnoy znamennoy notatsii’ [The problem of pitch in znamennïy notation without markings], 124–47; A.N. Kruchinana: ‘O semiografii popevok znamennogo rospeva v muzïkal'no-teoreticheskikh rukovodstvakh kontsa XV–seredinï XVII veka’ [The signs of the znamennïy chant popevki used in musical and theoretical manuals of the 15th–mid-17th centuries], 148–59]
S.V. Smolensky: Paläographischer Atlas der altrussischen Gesangs-Notationen (Munich, 1979) [repr. ofSnimki s pevcheckikh rukopisej kopisaniiu (neiznannomu) solovetskikh rukopesei (1885)]
C. Floros: Einführung in die Neumenkunde (Kassel, 1980)
M. Brazhnikov and G.Nikishov, eds.: Khristoforov: Klyuch znamennoy, 1604 [Key to the znamennïy symbols, 1604] (Moscow, 1983)
S.P. Kravchenko: ‘Metodika tekstologicheskogo izucheniya melizmaticheskikh formul’ [Methods for the textual study of melismatic formulae], Problemï russkoy muzïkal'noy tekstologii (po pamyatnikam russkoy khorovoy literaturï XII–XVIII vekov) [Problems of Russian musical textology (based on Russian choral literature of the 12th–18th centuries)] (Leningrad, 1983), 142–52
N. Schidlovsky: The Notated Lenten Prosomoia in the Byzantine and Slavic Traditions (diss., Princeton U., 1983)
M. Brazhnikov: Litsa i fitï znamennogo raspeva: issledovaniye [The litsa and the fitï in znamennïy chant] (Leningrad, 1984)
N. Schidlovsky: ‘A note on the Slavic Modal Signature’, Cyrillomethodianum, viii–ix (1984–5), 175–81
M. Velimirović: ‘Evolution of the Musical Notation in Medieval Russia’, ibid., 165–73
N. Schidlovsky: ‘Melody, Text and the Slavic Notation of a Byzantine “Sticheron”’, Musica antiqua VII: Bydgoszcz 1985, 535–52
E. Toncheva: ‘Notatsii v slavyanskite rukopisi do XIV v.’ [Notations in Slavic MSS up to the 14th century], Paléographie et diplomatique slaves II: Sofia 1983, ed. B. Velcheva and K. Stanchev (Sofia, 1985), 101–27
N.K. Ulff-Møller: ‘Transcription of the Paleoslavonic Stichera for the Month of April from Old-Russian Musical Manuscripts: Preliminary Results’, Musica antiqua VII: Bydgoszcz 1985, 77–91
B. Karastoyanov: ‘Tonemas and Prosodemas as Rhythmic Elements of Znammenyj Rospev’, Rhythm in Byzantine Chant: Hernen 1986, 109–27
N.K. Ulff-Møller: ‘The Connection between Melodic Formulas and Stereotype Text Phrases in Old Russian Stichera’, Cahiers de l’Institut du Moyen-Age grec et latin, no.54 (1986), 49–60
I. Yefimova: ‘Russkoye strochnoye mnogogolosiye vtoroy polovinï XVII–nachala XVIII veka (k probleme deshifrovki)’ [Russian linear polyphony of the second half of the 17th century and the early 18th (the problem of transcription)], Russkaya khorovaya muzïka XVI–XVIII vekov, ed. A.S. Belonenko and S.P. Kravchenko (Moscow, 1986), 82–99
S.P. Kravchenko and A.N.Kruchinina, eds.: Problemï deshifrovki drevnerussikh notatsiy [The problems of transcribing Old Russian notation] (Leningrad, 1987) [incl. Z.M. Guseynova: ‘Kombinatornïy analiz znamennoy notatsii XI–XIV vekov’ [Combinative analysis of znamennïy notation of the 11th to 14th centuries], 27–49; D.S. Shebalin: ‘O deshifrovke yedinoglasostepennïkh znamyon i rekonstruktsii zvukovoy sistemï stroki’ [Deciphering the first glas symbols and the reconstruction of the sound system of the line], 49–72; S. Zvereva: ‘K probleme rasshifrovki znamennoy notatsii kontsa XVII–XVIII vv’ [The problem of deciphering znamennïy notation of the late 17th century and the 18th], 73–89; M.V. Bogomolova: ‘K probleme rasshifrovki putevoy notatsii’, [The problem of deciphering putevaya notation], 89–106; Yu.N. Kholopov: ‘“Strannïye bemoli” v svyazi s modal'nïmi funktsiyami v russkoy monodii’ [‘Strange flats’ in connection with modal functions in Russian monody], 106–29; G.A. Pozhidayeva: ‘Ob osobennostyakh rasshifrovki demestvennogo rospeva’ [The peculiarities of transcribing demestvennïy chant], 129–56; S.P. Kravchenko: ‘Slovar'fit pevcheskoy knigi “Prazdniki” (nachertaniya fit, rozvodï, notolineynïye transkriptsii, kommentarii)’ [A dictionary of fitï in the ‘Prazdniki’ singing book (drawing of fitï, the rozvodï, staff transcriptions, commentaries)], 157–95]
O. Störmer: Die altrussische Hss. liturgischer Gesänge in sematische Notation als Hilfstuttel der slavische akzentologie (Munich, 1987)
M. Bogolomova: ‘Azbuki putevoy notatsii’ [Azbuki of putevaya notation], Musica antiqua VIII: Bydgoszcz 1988, 111–33
B. Karastoyanov: ‘O tablitsakh melodicheskikh formul znamennogo rospeva’ [The tables of melodic formulae for the znamennïy chant], ibid., 491–516
M.V. Bogomolova: ‘Neizvestnaya kryukovaya notatsiya vtoroy polovinï XVII veka’ [Unknown neumatic notation of the second half of the 17th century], Germenevtika drevnerusskoy literaturï, sbornik ii: XVI–nachalo XVIII vekov (Moscow, 1989), 423–46
B. Karastoyanov: ‘Znamenata kato tonemnoprozodemen tip znatsi’, Muzikalni khorizonti (1989), no.2, 41–61
Z.M. Guseynova: ‘Rukovodstva po teorii znamennogo peniya XV veka (istochniki i redaktsii)’ [Manuals on the theory of znamennïy singing of the 15th century (sources and editions)], Drevnerusskaya pevcheskaya kul'tura i knizhnost', ed. N.S. Seryogina (Leningrad, 1990), 20–46
Kh. Khannik: ‘Razvitiye znamennoy notatsii v russkom irmologii do kontsa XVII veka’ [The development of znamennïy notation in the Russian heirmologion up to the end of the 17th century], Muzïkal'naya kul'tura Srednevekov'ya, i (1990), 141–9
S. Kuyumdzhiyeva: ‘Dynamics between Written and Oral Church Music’, Cantus planus IV: Pécs 1990, 283–92
M. Shkol'nik: ‘K probleme interpretatsii pevcheskogo znameni v stolpovom rospeve XVII veka’ [The problem of interpreting the singing signs in the stolpov chant of the 17th century], Muzïkal'naya kul'tura Srednevekov'ya, i (1990), 109–32
N.K. Ulff-Møller: ‘Conventionality and Instability of the Musical Formulas in Byzantine and Old Russian Chant’, Cantus planus IV: Pécs 1990, 241–50
D. Shebalin, ed.: Pevcheskiye azbuki Drevney Rusi [Singers’ azbuki from Old Russia] (Kemerovo, 1991)
M. Bogomolova: ‘O repertuare grecheskogo rospeva v zapisi “grecheskoy” notatsiyey’ [The repertory of Greek chant recorded in ‘Greek’ notation], Germenevtika drevnerusskoy literaturï, sbornik iv: XVII–nachalo XVIII vv. (Moscow, 1992), 256–85
N.K. Ulff-Møller: ‘A Note on Formulaic Organization in Byzantine Stichera’, Greek Orthodox Theological Review, xxxvii (1992), 393–401
P. van Poucke: ‘Aspecten van de oud-russischen muziektheorie’, Musica antiqua: actuele informatie over oud muziek, ix (1992), 117–9; x (1993), 30–33
S. Kuyumdzhiyeva: ‘The Kekragaria in the Sources from the 14th to the Beginning of the 19th Century’, Cantus planus VI: Pécs 1993, 449–64
I. Lozovaia: ‘Altrussische Musikanschauung vom 11. bis zum 16. Jahrhundert’, Altrussische Musik: Einführung in ihre Geschichte und Probleme, ed. N. Gerasimowa-Persidskaia (Graz, 1993), 29–56
E. Schewtschuk: ‘Überblick über die altrussische Notationen’, ibid., 57–70
M. Velimirović: ‘Problems of Evolution in Meaning in the Russian Neumatic Notation between the Fourteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’, Cantus planus VI: Pécs 1993, 465–72
G. Myers: The Asmatic Troparia, Katavasiai, and Hypakoai ‘Cycles’ in their Paleoslavonic Recensions: a Study in Comparative Paleography, (diss., U. of British Columbia, 1994)
N. Parfent'yeva: ‘K rekonstruktsii azbuki popevok “usol'skogo masteropeniya”’ [Reconstructing the popevki azbuki of the ‘Usol singing school’], Muzïkal'naya kul'tura pravoslavnogo mira: traditsii, teoriya, praktika: materialï mezhdunarodnïkh nauchnïkh konferentsiy, 1991–94 gg. (Moscow, 1994), 222–30
I. Yefimova: ‘Muzïkal'no-teoreticheskiye osnovï interpretatsii kryukovïkh partitur’ [The musical and theoretical basis for interpreting scores written in neumes], ibid., 231–42
G. Myers: ‘The Legacy of the Medieval Russian Kondakar and the Transcription of Kondakarian Musical Notation’, Muziek & Wetenschap, v/2 (1995), 129–61
M. Velimirović: ‘Evolution of Byzantine Musical Notation in Russia’, Studi di musica bizantina in onore di Giovanni Marzi, ed. A. Doda (Lucca, 1995), 29–32
G. Alekseyeva: Problemï adaptatsii vizantiyskogo peniya na Rusi [The problems of adapting Byzantine singing in Russia] (Vladivostok, 1996)
M.G. Shkol'nik: Problemï rekonstruktsii znamennogo rospeva XII–XVII vekov (na materiale vizantiyskogo i drevnerusskogo Irmologiya) [The problems of reconstructing the znamennïy chant of the 12th–17th centuries (on material from the Byzantine and Old Russian heirmologion)] (diss., Moscow, 1996)