I would like to suggest that a database with ALL transcribed melodies of Old Roman chant should be put up in the WWW - with links to the scanned sources and comments (for instance about related melodies in other chant repertories etc.). Old Roman chant should be performed on a REGULAR basis by a specialized group of at least 7 singers on the PROPER feast days in Rome - especially in the following churches: S. Clemente, S. Maria in Cosmedin, S. Saba, S. Maria in Trastevere, S. Prassede, S. Costanza, S. Sabina, S. Stefano Rotondo, S. Pietro in Vincoli, S. Lorenzo fuori le mura, Santi Quattro Coronati. There should also be regular "chant festivals" around this repertory in Rome: It's TOO important and TOO beautiful to be so neglected, as it largely really is!
All informations about performance practice details which could be valuable for this repertory (also taking into account sources for other chant repertories) should be collected and be tried out in performance by the specialized ensemble - and eventually this ensemble should make a series of recordings with ALL Old Roman chants. Recordings could then also be linked with the database of melodies so that one can read and hear the melodies at the same time.
I would consider a very supple, smooth way of singing melismas, singing high notes with somewhat reduced volume as an absolute prerequisite for such a specialized ensemble for Old Roman chant.
The "orientalizing" way of singing this repertory with extremely low pitches and strange ornaments, as was done by the Ensemble Organum, is in my view extremely unlikely - and it simply sounds "wrong" to me. So
such "fancies" should not be found on a new series of recordings of this repertory: the ensemble should stick to what is in keeping with WESTERN sources, what sounds beautiful, clear, supple.
I hope all of this can - at last! - be realized and be integrated into my CD collection!
Christoph Dohrmann
Replies
Enfin, c'était Peter Jeffery qui a réconnu les besoins aujourd'hui d'apprendre des traditions modales.
Bien sûr l'« orientalisme », ça existe. Durant ma leçon sur la Turquie (ce lundi à Bratislava), j'ai presenté aux étudiants une enregistrement du prôtopsalte Demosthenis Païkopoulos, faite dans la Grande Église. Il chante le cherouvikon dans l'êchos tritos, mais sur le mot τριάδι (trinité) il chante la mélodie du trope "Sultanîn" qui est chanté dans la tradition de Hafiz Sadettin Heper pendant le Nâ't-i Mevlana, l'entrée de la cérémonie des derviches tourneurs. Je ne connais pas la motivation du chantre de le citer. Peut-être un derviche était présent à l'église, et il l'avait chanté durant le service pour honorer le visiteur musulman durant la liturgie orthodoxe. Sur ce niveau, je suis d'accord de parler des orientalismes.
Le fanatisme je trouves chez quelques musiciens qui ne changent pas du tout leur approche depuis décennies, même quand ils connaissent bien les problèmes méthodologiques. Que je voudrais encourager comme musicologue chez les musiciens, ce sont les nouveaux idées avec respect d'un repertoire presque abandonné en faveur d'un malentendu associé par le chant grégorien.
Qu'est-ce qu'on a besoin, c'est une sonorité modale qui serve pour une intonation bien précise. Entre Rome orientale et Rome occidentale nous avons deux sonorités. La sonorité pythagoréenne à Constantinople divise le tetrachorde par trois intervalles diverses (le tone majeur, le tone médiale et le tone mineur), la sonorité néopythagoréenne à Rome divise le tetrachorde par la gamme ditonique (il y a seulement deux fois le tonus et une fois le semitonium). S'il y avait un chantre byzantin comme le primicerius de la Schola, ils avaient facilement adapter à la sonorité néopythagoréenne des chantres romains. En tous cas, les pythagoréennes étaient une secte italienne (à Crotone e après à Taranto), même si Pythagore était venu de Samos. Aujourd'hui on doit aussi expliquer aux étudiants que la chrétienté vient de Palestine et pas de Rome. Il me semble que l'éducation aujourd'hui est déjà une des victimes des idéologues.
Je ne commente pas sur les musiciens qui chantent le chant médiévale avec une telle intonation moderne qu'on doit sentir les exercises au Conservatoire écoutant à ses voix… C'est simplement kitsch!
Merci pour cette discussion magistrale et du plus haut intérêt.
L'impact des préjugés d'ordre esthétique dans l'approche du chant liturgique est trop souvent sous-estimé.
Certains sont tentés de renoncer au comparatisme pour éviter de s'entendre dire : "ça fait oriental" ou "ça fait ethno" etc.
Faut-il donner raison à Stendhal : « C’est parce qu’on ne peut se rendre compte du pourquoi des ses sentiments musicaux que l’homme le plus sage est fanatique en musique. » ?
Il est sans doute davantage "productif" d'affermir les expériences les plus fécondes issues du comparatisme sur des faits historiques et des raisons musicologiques dûment établis.
Il y a là un problème de méthode que les contributions ci-dessus soulignent heureusement.
Sans doute, il y avait beaucoup des changements durant les siècles, mais au moins ça existe, les traditions vivantes de la monodie orthodoxe ont une certaine relation avec le passé byzantin et ottoman. Il faut les découvrir comme un archéologue, et on trouve beaucoup des changements et des innovations durant le XVIII siècle. C'est la raison pourquoi le rencontre avec les chantres orthodoxes était très productive pour l'histoire de la rédécouverte du plainchant.
Please excuse my mistake, the synode of 787 accepted the reform of 692 and not 792:
First of all, the Greeks of Constantinople called themselves "Romans" (Ῥωμαίοι) and they were very proud of it. If you will take your time to read the discussion about Alleluia, you will find a very similar original quotation by Gregory the Great which comes close to your imagination, but you have to understand it within the history of the 6th century, when Byzantine Emperors decided also about his election as a Pope (he was a Byzantine diplomate before). In fact, this quotation became so problematic for James McKinnon, that he avoided any further discussion of it in his book "The Advent Project".
It had nothing in common with Charlemagne's chauvinism about 800. Nevertheless, diplomatic relationships were still on good terms during the 770s, when a Byzantine legacy introduced their troparia for epiphany, but the most important step was the church council of Nikaia, during which Pope Hadrian I confirmed the Hagiopolitan oktoechos reform of 792 for West Rome. Carolingian cantors invented an own oktoechos. It was based on the Hagiopolitan concept, but not identical. It was not the concept of Roman chant, by the way, where we did not find any tonary.
The East-West-Schism was not due to a difference between the Orthodox and the Roman, the problem of those fools who excommunicated the Patriarch Keroularios in the name of a dead Pope, was the opposite, that the Byzantine Emperor and the Pope were not only an good terms, but even allies to defend Italy against the Normans. When Archbishop Elias proclaimed the synode at Bari to mediate between East and West, diplomatic relationships had become very problematic, since the Normans as allies of the Pope had expelled the catepanate Italias from Italy.
Concerning the difference between Old Roman and Gregorian chant and between Old Roman and the Byzantine chant, the difference of the first comparison became considerably evident during the 9th century, so that I expect that the Roman tradition might be perceived as "oriental" by somebody who has aesthetic preferences similar to yours. Concerning my knowledge of the sources (which might be still rare right now, but it is very appreciated for this very reason), all three traditions had microtones and ornaments, but precisely these features are usually those which made local schools appear very different from another. But even those who reduce any kind of notation to a set of Western pitch classes (and transcribe them into staff notation), might find an evidence that melopoeia among Roman cantors use the similar melodic range with respect to the Hagiopolites, very different from Carolingian cantors and their tonaries.
Thank you for the PDF - I will certainly read it. The historical terms for singers in the Roman Schola who
also improvised polyphony do not necessarily mean that singers of the Roman Schola SOUNDED as their
oriental counterparts, that they sang ornaments or improvised polyphony in a similar or identical style as
greek singers. My questions would be - how often did Western singers really get the chance to HEAR singers
of orthodox chant, how much was this emulated, did the schisma between catholic Latin and orthodox
church put an end to all influences of greek chant on Western chant traditions? Do melodic and ornamental similarities between Western and oriental traditions really mean that there were also (strong) similarities between PERFORMANCE PRACTICES and styles of singing? Perhaps some textual sources, for instance reports about singers who had traveled and heard other singers from other chant traditions etc., might shed some light on such questions. If there are no such sources which really confirm a (strong) influence of oriental traditions on Old Roman chant performance style, then I am rather inclined to think that there probably was little or no such influence. I remember reading a report that Charles "the Great" once heard some greek singers who had accompanied envoys, that he admired it and then ordered that his singers should learn to sing such chants that he had heard. So it is clear that there was an influence of greek singers even within the Franconian empire - but how great was this influence, how long did it last, how far did it reach? Was it really so far-reaching that it changed the whole style of singing chant?
The main question is: Did singers of the Western traditions take over only some performance practice features from orthodox tradition or did they really change their WHOLE singing style - and how long did they preserve such oriental influences? Imagine some Roman bishop of around 1100 or 1150 hearing an ensemble sound like the Ensemble Organum in a Roman church service with Old Roman chants: Wouldn't he have said to the pope: "Our singers sound TOO greek - we are not orthodox: We are Roman CATHOLICS, we have to change this!"? Wouldn't it have been AGAINST their very identity as Roman catholics to take over a performance style of chant which completely changes the whole sound and singing style? I think it is better to be careful and skeptical about such far-reaching influences if there are not enough sources which can really confirm it strongly: So trying out some likely greek influences in certain chants, on certain ornaments etc. seems fruitful to me - BUT CHANGING THE WHOLE APPROACH to singing Old Roman chant, changing the WHOLE performance and singing style seems rather unlikely and very "daring" to me.
Best,
C. Dohrmann
Dear Christoph
I do not only suggest, that Roman cantors imported Byzantine chant and that their compositions are much closer to the Hagiopolitan oktoechos (see the discussion of the melos), it is a well-known fact among those who do comparative studies. We discussed James McKinnon's book. He is particular interesting among these authors, because he tried to bagatelise the Byzantine influence, while he discussed the history of the Roman rite in Byzantine periods, which would have been even inadequate, if you subscribed the term Byzantine papacy.
Concerning Byzantine cantors in the Schola cantorum during the crisis of iconoclasm, it had not been a focus of research yet. I just wrote about my expectation, that the results of such an approach might be surprising.
Constantin Floros concludes his article on “The Influence of Byzantine Music on the West” in: Crossroads | Greece as an intercultural pole of musical thought and creativity. International Musicological Conference, June 6-10 2011, Thessaloniki, Greece. Proceedings of the International Musicological Conference. KEYNOTE LECTURE. pp. 1-12 with the comment: "A fundamental difference between the Gregorian Chant and the Byzantine Music consists in the so-called Ison-technique. It is unknown in the practise of Gregorian Repertoire. There are however many indications that it was known in the early period of the old Roman Chant. In this connexion is remarkable that the Papal Chapel, the Schola cantorum, consisted of seven singers with the names Prius Scholae, Secundus Scholae, Tertius Scholae, Archiparaphonista und three further paraphonistae. What means the term paraphonista? It means one singer who sings beside the melody. This is perhaps an indication for the performance of the Ison-technique."
The Influence of Byzantine Music on the West.pdf
You are suggesting that Greek singers/cantors had influence or were even part of the Roman Schola Cantorum?
Please give me some sources and secondary literature titles about this! That there really were some orthodox influences on Old Roman, Gregorian and Beneventan chant is well known, but the question is really how far did this go over the centuries - did it really go so far that performance practice(s) were influenced strongly? I doubt that that should have been the case. Taking some melodic inspirations and possibly some similar (not necessarily IDENTICAL) ornaments from other chant traditions does not mean that they sounded "oriental" in the Roman Schola. Let's stick to what is LIKELY - each chant tradition very probably had its OWN performance practice features and tradition. And at the time when Old Roman chants were written down, these traditions were already centuries old. Is it really likely that Roman singers should have integrated something into their singing style which sounds rather "foreign", "extravagant", "strange" and even manneristic and kept it over centuries? - Isn't it MUCH likelier that they had their very OWN style of singing chant? Until there's any real evidence how Old Roman chant was (probably) sung, I would really suggest to sing it in a rather "pure" and "plain" style - without any "extravagancies" or extremes (such as too low or too high pitches), with very beautiful and clear voices, relishing in the long melismas, "additions" (polyphony, ornaments ...) only in places and in a style were these really seem APPROPRIATE from the point of view of sources of the Old Roman or Gregorian tradition: the Gregorian repertory and the pertinent theoretical sources are really linked to the Old Roman by history - orthodox or oral traditions from North Africa etc. are too far removed from it, too far fetched.
Let's really THINK about how we can ESTABLISH such a chant database, regular chant performances in Rome and above all stylish, "classy" chant recordings of Old Roman - that seems to me a very fruitful project, which may even have some bearing for chant research.
The recordings by Ensemble Organum and others are from yesterday - let's think about something new for tomorrow.
Best,
CD
Dear Christoph
I read your text with great pleasure. I just wonder, how much impact sound colour has on the acoustic perception (aisthesis). Among Orthodox singers, Lykourgos had a very high voice. I can hardly believe that he would choose such a low register as you describe. It is rather the impression, because the general aesthetic of traditional male as well as female voices in the Mediterranean prefer a vocal technique which use even the chest voice in the highest register. The result is a spectogramme, where the lower overtones have the strongest volume.
While the voices of your preference sound rather clearer and more brilliant, because they use another voice which strengthen much higher overtones (like the fifth 12 times the basis frequence). They are simply perceived as much higher, even if they intone on a lower frequence than the dark voice.
But if you compare the ornaments and subtleties of intonation of Lykourgos' voice with the majority of those classical voices, you could do a very similar comparison as John once did. Everybody who visited those courses by Marcel or Lykourgos in Jarosław, know, how it sounds, when somebody who is not familiar with certain less common sound proportions, tries the first time to sing an ornament which uses a microtonal tremolo. It is in fact about a third, when you try to imitate it the first time. But Lykourgos felt very small in comparison with many other protopsaltes of different local schools. There were many masters whom he adored and he was very happy, whenever he could learn from them.
Symeon, the primicerius of the Schola cantorum in the time of Peppin, had not a particular Roman name, and Gerda Wolfram once found out, that the titles of singers in the Constantinopolitan cathedral rite were identical with those of the Schola cantorum. It was probably, because Latin was still the language of law in medieval Byzantium. Concerning the contemporary crisis of iconoclasm, Rome became very attractive, after the Pope had excommunicated the Byzantine Emperor, especially for well skilled Greek cantors.
Dear Piotr,
I do not at all underestimate M. Pérès and Ensemble Organum, but I think that he came to solutions which are VERY doubtful in terms of aesthetics, style and performance practice: If we would have an unequivocal medieval source that says that Old Roman chant was sung with rather low pitches (as a rule), with ornaments and polyphonic practices which are rather reminiscent of oriental practices, I will be surprised, but accept it: From a purely aesthetical standpoint, I do not find these recordings convincing - I think it VERY likely that Old Roman chant was probably and has to be sung mostly with a "normal", "middle" pitch level not with an extraordinarily low one; with great suppleness, "lightness", fluidity, not with any sense of "darkness" or roughness; with a very pure and rather bright kind of sound. And as to ornaments and polyphonic stretches, singers should rather follow Western sources and not adopt doubtful oriental practices.
I remember reading these medieval complaints that Frankish singers could first not sing the Roman melodies with that deal of "sweetness", suppleness as their Roman counterparts, that their voices were too "rough" etc. (it may have been one reason why those Roman singers who were sent into the Frankish empire to teach their chants became reluctant to do so, because it was simply too difficult to teach that deal of suppleness which makes melodies of Old Roman chant really flow and "swing" to Frankish singers) - so that would imply an aesthetic ideal of purity and "sweetness" - something very "liquid" in delivering these long melismas: Very Italian.
How beautiful it would be to be able to hear these chants reguarly in Rome with a truly specialised ensemble of at least 7 singers who sing with very clear voices, a sort of brightness in sound, trying to develop an idiomatic, very fluent approach to this repertory. Sources for performance practice of Old Roman chant are so sparse (perhaps a few more will be found) that we have to rely on Gregorian sources of the 10th-13th centuries which could shed some light on how chant might have been sung in Rome.
From performance practice sources for Gregorian chant we know that pitches (as well as tempi) could vary according to liturgical occasion/text - so to take such dark timbres and such an "oriental" sound as the Ensemble Organum et aliae AS A RULE for performing chant (as well as later polyphony!) certainly seems wrong to me in the light of such (and other) sources - it also seems very wrong to my EARS! It's like putting an oriental cloak over these beautiful chant melodies.
Best,
CD
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next