Τῷ τριττῷ τῆς ἐρωτήσεως
(comments by GKM)

Extended version Doxastikon
by Iakovos from Peloponnesos:

Case study of Chrysanthos’ citation
of this composition.

«Chrysanthos and his example of
« Dynamis »
(modular changes and scale shifts)

According to Chrysanthos
(par. 387, page 173, Pelopides edition, 1832)

some modulations may cause complete scale shifts.

This occurs when

scales are combined (during a first modulation)
without taking into consideration the common pitches
that can occur at the EXTREMITIES of various tri/tetra/pentachords
consisting of differing intermediate intervals
which may be used for such modulation changes.

The end result, upon return to the initial scale (using a second or even subsequent modulation) is a scale  “shift” either upwards or downwards.

(GKM : the above description should not be confused with “parachordi”,
which does not necessarily lead to overall pitch changes).

According to Chrysanthos, downward shifts were known to ancient psaltis,
and were “compensated” for by adding an extra “tone” interval,
called “Dynamis”.

As an example, he gives the following Doxastikon of Chrysanthos, citing the words «Αὐτὸν ἱκέτευε».

Study question : according to the score as it has been handed down to us,
is such a “downshift” possible?

If so, where, and by how much
(how many units)?

Is it possible that there might be no such downshift, and that there is simply only an isolated tonal upheaval in the end of the score?

TEXT

(notice that in the original Doxastarion score

one reads

τὸ τρί-τον

instead of

τὸ τριτ-τὸν

(this has been remedied for in the re-edited score below, textually as well as melodically).

ΤΗ ΚΘ' ΤΟΥ ΜΗΝΟΣ ΙΟΥΝΙΟΥ

Μνήμη τῶν Ἁγίων ἐνδόξων καὶ πανευφήμων Ἀποστόλων καὶ Πρωτοκορυφαίων, Πέτρου καὶ Παύλου.

ΕΝ ΤΩ ΜΕΓΑΛΩ ΕΣΠΕΡΙΝΩ

Δόξα... Ἦχος δ' ποίημα Ἰωάννου Μοναχοῦ

Τῷ τριττῷ τῆς ἐρωτήσεως, τῷ  «Πέτρε φιλεῖς με;», τὸ τριττὸν τῆς ἀρνήσεως, ὁ Χριστὸς διωρθώσατο· διὸ καὶ πρὸς τὸν κρυφιογνώστην ὁ Σίμων·  «Κύριε, πάντα γινώσκεις, τὰ πάντα ἐπίστασαι, σὺ οἶδας ὄτι φιλῶ σε». Ὅθεν πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ Σωτήρ·  «Ποίμαινε τὰ πρόβατά μου, ποίμαινε τὴν ἐκλογάδα μου, ποίμαινε τὰ ἀρνία μου, ἃ ἐν τῷ ἰδίῳ αἵματι περιεποιησάμην εἰς σωτηρίαν».  Αὐτὸν ἱκέτευε, Θεομακάριστε Ἀπόστολε, δωρηθῆναι ἡμῖν τὸ μέγα ἔλεος.

Τῷ τριτ‑τῷ τῆς ἐ‑ρω‑τή‑σε‑ως, τῷ  «Πέ‑τρε φι‑λεῖς με;», τὸ τριτ‑τὸν τῆς ἀρ‑νή‑σε‑ως, ὁ Χρι‑στὸς δι‑ωρ‑θώ‑σα‑το· δι‑ὸ καὶ πρὸς τὸν κρυ‑φι‑ο‑γνώ‑στην ὁ Σί‑μων·  «Κύ‑ρι‑ε, πάν‑τα γι‑νώ‑σκεις, τὰ πάν‑τα ἐ‑πί‑στα‑σαι, σὺ οἶ‑δας ὄ‑τι φι‑λῶ σε». Ὅ‑θεν πρὸς αὐ‑τὸν ὁ Σω‑τήρ·  «Ποί‑μαι‑νε τὰ πρό‑βα‑τά μου, ποί‑μαι‑νε τὴν ἐκ‑λο‑γά‑δα μου, ποί‑μαι‑νε τὰ ἀρ‑νί‑α μου, ἃ ἐν τῷ ἰ‑δί‑ῳ αἵ‑μα‑τι πε‑ρι‑ε‑ποι‑η‑σά‑μην εἰς σω‑τη‑ρί‑αν».  Αὐ‑τὸν ἱ‑κέ‑τευ‑ε, Θε‑ο‑μα‑κά‑ρι‑στε Ἀ‑πό‑στο‑λε, δω‑ρη‑θῆ‑ναι ἡ‑μῖν τὸ μέ‑γα ἔ‑λε‑ος.

Score

SCALE Comparisons

Fig 1)       DOUBLE scale shift
(downwards [5] followed by upwards [8])

Fig 2)       UNIQUE scale shift
(unique final upward [8] )

Compare the starting and ending points of “BOU”.

According to the above score,  you think that there might ANOTHER way to obtain “scale-shift pitch changes”?

Simplified melody (will all modulations)
(sample melody revealing the various associated modulation signs
(“fthora”)
as they appear in the
Extensive Melody Doxastarion (“Doxastarion Argon”) of
Iakovos from Peloponnesos,
as it appears transcribed in
Contemporary Psaltic Notation (classical edition)
[GKM]

Try following the melodies below, and note how a scale shift can be obtained.

Also notice how a MODULATION can be ANTICIPATED

(Fthora 5),

so as to guarantee a smooth transition as well as to guarantee

COMMON pitches of

tri/tetra/pethachordal

extremities

(Diastoles have been placed BEFORE modulations so as to draw the listener’s attention to any upcoming modular changes)

Please neglect the  pitch error of the first Zo, for it is too low

Audio 1:	Audio 2 :	Audio 3
DOUBLE scale shift	UNIQUE scale shift  (non-anticipated)	UNIQUE scale shift  (anticipated)
Audio 1:	Audio 2	Audio 3
corresponds to the scale combinations of Figure 1	corresponds to the scale combinations of Figure 2	corresponds to the scale combinations of Figure 2 with the anticipation of modulation 5 as shown below
NB: NO “elxeis” (= “accidents”) have been added other than those that appear on the score (which an expert psaltis will interpret DIFFERENTLY, depending on many parameters).

Example of Modulation Anticipation (of enharmonic Fthora 5)

FINAL QUESTION : DOES all of this theory really amount to anything useful at all? 

Most psaltis will ANTICIPATE the enharmonic FTHORA (5 ant), just as they do elsewhere, and the overall effect will be that of a UNIQUE pitch shift (upwards), equivalent to the diatonic

Pa-Bou interval.

Others will start thinking about “theory”… they will thus bring down by some small unit (between 2 and 3 units of 72 unit scale)

only to bring it up again by diatonic

Pa-Bou interval, leading to an overall

almost “half-tone” upheaval.

Finally, there are those who will go into Palaiography and will come up with who knows what.

OTHER THEORY

It is quite possible that there is some error whereby an apostrophos is missing, thus leading to a pitch shift.

Savvas Papadopoulos of “Melodos” offers a score plus playback, using his program, so as to demonstrate this possibility:

(Tritton on Melodos)

Conclusion on Chrysanthos:

The way the score has been handed down to us, there is NO Dynamis:

-A “dynamis”, by definition, requires that

1) the pitch of some INITIAL note (let’s say BOU in the above example) DROPS because of modulation in UNCOMMON (differently pitched) notes

AND

2) that this drop be remedied by the addition of an extra tone in the end of the score.

In the above score, there is NO drop of BOU, just simply a PARACHORDI PLUS pitch upheaval.

The reader and listener of all of the above does not need to have a Ph.D. in musicology to understand that Chrysanthos is simply citing the WRONG example to illustrate the “DYNAMIS” effect (according to his definition).

For those hiding their lack of o/aural tradition by putting forth the “Chrysanthos” manual,

and for those who are mesmerised by their “knowledge”,

let it be known that

the PATRIACHAL tradition has always treated Chrysanthos

as someone who had not really grasped the ESSENCE of psaltiki

(read Boudouris),

the main criticism being that he used INSTRUMENTS (traditional, of course)

as a means of teaching psaltiki.

Doesn’t the criticism of Chyrsanthos’ presentation and “method” “ring a bell”?

How many times must it be repeated that PSALTIKI is to be learned by O/AURAL tradition, and not by some ABSTRACT numerical/instrumental studies.

For instance, contemporary Palaio-ornithoskalismatologists will claim that the INTERVALS of psaltiki have “changed” ever since some 1881 commission or even a bit before.

In other words, according to THEIR interpretation of Chrysanthos’ work as well as the work of others, we are to understand that, in almost 100 to 200 years, we have “lost” our “traditional” intervals, which they have re-established throughout Greece and the entire planet, given that no one is countering seriously enough these ignoramuses and CONTEMPORARY SECTARIAN REFORMERS of psaltiki.

What, then should we say about the Copts, who have learned their sacred chants ONLY by o/aural tradition and who have chanted until now EXCELLENT and traditional intervals, IDENTICAL to those of most of the AUTHENITCALLY traditional psaltis? Are we to understand that their intervals “shifted” as well in the past 200 years, so as to become identical to those chanted in the Patriachate of Constantinople until the early 1960s?

OTHER issues

“Pa diesis” : that’s just a simple “slur” = “glissando”, typical in Fourth mode melodies (especially sticheraric and heirmologic).

Note some OTHER Special chronos and CONSEQUENTIAL diastematic “effects” as well, on words such as :
Κύριε

and

περιεποιησάμην

According to Stylianos TSOLAKIDIS,
while learning the

“Ellampsen”

(one of the Lenten Sunday Doxastikons, which is in mode FOUR,
just like the one above),

Iakovos had told him:

“FOCUS ON THE BOU”

(“ton BOU” na skeptesai”).

GKM : We chant TEXTS and not SCORES
(usually drowned in THEORETICAL annotations ):

Iakovos NAFPLIOTIS
(to his student and First Domestichos,
Angelos BOUDOURIS) :

:

Ἄγγελε, ὅλαι αἱ γνώσεις καὶ ὅλη ἡ μάθησις τῆς Μουσικῆς ἀποβλέπουν εἰς τὴν ἀρίστην ἐκτέλεσιν. Ἡ καλὴ ἐκτέλεσις τῆς Μουσικῆς εἶναι τὸ πᾱν…

Angelos, all the knowledge (γνώσεις) and all the learning (μάθησις ) of Music has as a purpose - seek to attain (ἀποβλέπουν) - excellence (ἀρίστην) in interpretation (performance - ἐκτέλεσιν) .

Correct (good, decent - καλὴ) interpretation of Music is the “utmost objective” (πᾱν) .

GKM:

All the rest, is

PALAIO-ORNITHO-SKALISMATOLOGY

France, 2007

All scores and scales were typeset using the
SUPERB PSALTIC NOTATION PROGRAM

MELODOS

which was also used for the playback recordings.

www.melodos.gr

(300 EUROS.. and really worth it… EXCELLENT… )

---------------

Various scores interpretations

(http://www.analogion.com/TwTrittw.html)

(GKM comments and HOME CHOIR version of "Tritton")

(http://tinyurl.com/ywk7ez)