The professional musical art in the Russian medieval city (16 Th - 17 Th centuries) Текст научной статьи по специальности «Биологические науки»

Искусствоведение и культурология

DOI: 10.14529/hum150412

the professional musical art

in the russian medieval city (16th — 17th centuries)

N. P. Parfentjev, South Ural State University, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation, parfentevnp@susu.ac.ru

The development of Russian church music in 16th — 17th centuries as a high professional musical art had an important place in the spiritual culture of Russian cities. The author describes the activities of large choirs, existence of the chanting (znamenniy) art in wide urban environment. Also the researcher presents the local chant raspevschiki's (composers) works of authorship. They reflected the regional musical traditions. These masters were representatives of different social strata. All this is done on the basis of the documents.

Keywords: Old Russian church art of singing, hierarchs 'singing diaki andpodiaki, private choirs of the feudal aristocracy, circulation of znamenny (neumatic) chanting, musical works of masters ' authorship.

The professional musical culture of a large medieval city in Russia presented a complicated and many-sided phenomenon including both the mastery of cathedral choirs (especially the choirs consisting of diaki and podiaki) and the activities of local chant masters and di-dascaloi. The znamenny (Old Russian church neumatic) chant enjoyed great popularity among feudal lords, merchants and tradespeople who knew the ABC of the kryuki (neumatic) notation, were fond of singing and created their own chants. People from trading quarters became professional singers and served in the hierarch's, patriarch's and even tsar's choirs [49].

The Cathedral of St. Sophia in Novgorod the Great which became the centre of the Novgorod singing school takes a special place in the hierarchy of old-Russian local eparchial choirs. Therefore the history of his activity is considered particularly [48, p. 14—47]. In the 16th — 17th centuries, though, there existed other local eparchial choirs in Russia. Each of them played an important part in the development of singing art and altogether they contributed to the rapid growth of musical creativity. By 1589 (the establishment of patriarchate) there were 10 eparchies in the country. In the same year there was established the eparchy of Pskov, in 1602 — of Astrakhan, in 1620—of Siberia and Tobol'sk. In the mid 17th century there were 13, at the end of the century — 22 eparchies [47]. Each metropolitan, archbishop or bishop who was at the head of this or that eparchy had a choir of professional singers. These choirs were created by the example of the metropolitan's choir (since 1589—the patriarch's choir) and were divided into stanitsas [49]. The number of stanitsas depended on the disposition of the bishop in the church hierarchy (in the 16th century — from 4 up to 5, in the 17th century — up to 5—6, in the 1690-s — up to 9 stanitsas). The first ("big") and second ("another") stanitsas singers were called singing diaki, the rest formed podiaki stanitsas. Frequently all of them were called simply singers.

The documentary sources prove that the choir of the bishop's diaki and podiaki consisted mainly of laymen— musically talented tradespeople with good voices. This layer of society was really mixed that is why there were people who paid taxes, those from the families of the episcopal court service people, from clergy, parish priests, shopkeepers and even landless peasants. Thus, the choir

of the Vologda archbishop in 1645/46 consisted of the following service people: singing diak Konstantin, whose father Kirill Terentjev Greshnik served at the hierarch's court in the rank of boyar son (nobleman); singing diak Larion, who was the son of the singing diak Grigory Arapov; podiak Sidor, who was the son of the singing diak Yakov Yakovlev Satin [104, fol. 1459, 1500, 1547]. There were some representatives from the clergy as well: Stepan, the son of the Sophia Cathedral Church priest Alexander; Aksyon, the son of the Voznesensky deacon Maksim and Ivan, the son of the Mironositsky deacon Mikhail. Among the podiaki there was Kuz'ma, the son of the Voskresensky deacon Galaktion and Ivan, the son of the Borisoglebsky deacon Ivan [104, fol. 1431v, 1448, 1459v, 1470v, 1620]. The place in the choir was determined by a singer's talent, not by his origin. Thus, Luka Ivanov, a poor landless peasant, became a singing diak [104, fol. 1497]. There existed common principles of establishing eparchial choirs from tradespeople. The Rostov census book (1678) states that the following singers from the trading quarters were admitted to the metropolitan's choir: Ganka Martynov, Boris Alferov Rodionov (12 years old), Stephan Ivanov Starchikov with his son Ivan, Varlaam Ivanov Starchikov (Bogdan by nickname), Ivan Akinfiev Andronov with his son Spiridon and others. Sometimes the relatives of the clergy became the bishop's singing diaki: e.g. deacon Feodosy's son Ivan and deacon Aleksey brother-in-law Mikhail served as podiaki [158, p. 29—31 etc.]. It is beyond doubt that all this contributed to the development and rapid growth of the local musical centres.

Local choirs also accepted people from different regions. Thus, on January, 8, 1621 Tsar Mikhail ordered the Siberia archbishop Kipriyan to employ a podiak from the Rostov metropolitan's choir, give him a salary of 5 roubles and feed him at the bishop's table [88, fol. 1—3]. Patriarch Filaret on May, 16, 1631 wrote a letter to Nizhny Novgorod promising to send them a podiak for the metropolitan's choir [159, p. 505—506]. In September 1659 the tsar's singing diaki Vasyly Aristov, Semen Sidorov and Afanasy Suzdalets with their families arrived in Kazan to serve in the choir of the Astrakhan and Tersky archbishop and were accompanied by the military officer on their way to Astrakhan [20, p. 250].

The archbishop's diaki and podiaki as well as the central principal choirs singers also got different payment

for their service: it consisted of money, food and other payments. The amount of their salary was different. It was already mentioned that in the early 17th century singing diaki in Novgorod got the salary from 3 to 5 roubles per year. Food (or bread) payment was more stable — 15— 16 quarters of rye and the same amount of oats per person. The diaki from the Tobol'sk Sophia Cathedral in 1635/36 depending on the stanitsa number received 6—7 roubles and 8—10 quarters of rye and oats. The podiaki of the same choir received 3—5 roubles and 4—5 quarters of rye and oats each [67, fol. 186—190]. In 1643/44 the diaki from the Vologda choir received 2—4 roubles (there is no information about food (bread) payment here) [122, fol. 278—279]. The Ustug singing diaki in the 1680— 90-s received 4—6 roubles per year; as for bread payment — subdeacons got 4 quarters of rye and oats, diaki — 5—6, podiaki — 2—3 [161, p. 1229; 170, p. 25] The singing diaki from the Krutitsky metropolitan's choir (which was permanently staying in Moscow) received in the 1690-s 7—7,5 roubles, podiaki received from 1 up to 6 roubles [81, fol. 35—38]. At the same time the subdeacons from the Tobol'sk Sophia choir got 4— 5 roubles, diaki got 4, podiaki — 1,5—3 roubles per year [70, fol. 138—146; 71, fol. 146—157v].

Let us remind that the Novgorod singing diaki and podiaki received the so-called "funeral money" and "food money". The 1547/48 expenses book fixed the "cloth payment" as well [48, p. 20]. Other choirs also practiced the same policy of giving various money and goods payments.

At the expense of the eparchy's treasury singers also received their clothes — fur-coats, caftans, "odnoryad-kas", stockings, shirts etc. [161, p. 1234, 1240, 1243 etc.; 70, fol. 79, 146]. Besides, they were given surplices and cassocks for performing divine services [87, fol. 1—3; 81, fol. 113—114, 168 etc.]. The goods payments included many other things as well. The Moscow state documents contain numerous petitions written by the archbishop's singing diaki in which they asked clothes and food money referring to previous years. At times the tsar granted them cloth on special occasions — ordinations of new hierarchs: e.g. singers from Kazan (1615), Novgorod (1617) and Vyatka (1663); as well as on great holidays — singers from Kazan (1660), Krutitskii metropolitan's courtyard (1661 and 1664) and from Pskov (1665) [89—95]. As a rule, in such cases singers got 4 arshins (2,84 m) of English or Hamburg cloth. In April 1670 singers of the Krutitsky, Ryazansky and Arkhangelsky metropolitans were given cotton fabrics for the commemoration of Tsaritsa Maria Ilinichna [162, p. 1520—1521]. In 1659/60—1662/63 singers from Suzdal, Smolensk and Vyatka received 4 arshins of cloth and 4 altyns and 2 dengas (0,13 rouble) for food per day [for example: 87]. On the departure of the Siberian and Tobolsky archbishop his singing diaki and podiaki got in September 1664 cloth and winter carts (they arrived home on February, 26, 1665) [68].

Sometimes singers ate at the archbishop's table (on holidays or during his ordination). For example, the newly ordained archbishop of Kholmogory, Afanasy, on his returning home, to Kholmogory, on October, 18, 1682 after the reception and divine service blessed the dinner of all his people in the Krestovaya Chamber; after the Christmas liturgy singers and "soboryane" (the church

people) were treated by the archbishop in the Krestovaya Chamber [17, p. 6, 51]. The expenses book of the Ustug archbishop's house (1684) contains some data about such dinners: they included bread, fish, kalatches (kind of fancy loaf), caviar, wine, honey, beer et al [100]. Besides, in February 1683 special kitchenware and utensils were bought for giving dinners to singers [161, p. 1055]. The book of the Krutitsky metropolitan (1694/95) also contains records about some dinner expenses for feeding singers after committing himself of some divine services [81, fol. 152, 154].

The documents dated the 1670—80-s mention the tradition to invite the singing diaki and podiaki of the bishop who celebrates mass on Palm Sunday or Easter to the patriarch's dinner in the Krestovaya Chamber. In the 1690-s such dinners were given on numerous holidays, saints' and commemoration days [30, fol. 39; 45, p. 94, 1128 etc.]. Thus, in November 1690 in memory of boyar B. I. Morozov the patriarch's and tsar's singing diaki were invited to dinner: they were treated to caviar, vizigas (dried spinal chord of cartilaginous fish), bream, great sturgeon, salmon, fish soup and pies of all kinds [45, p. 1125].

Singers also received the so-called "slavlenoe" — money that was given for Christmas and Easter glorifying Christ in the chambers of the church hierarch. The expenses book of the Vologda archbishop mentions that on December, 24, 1643 and April, 21, 1644 singing diak Grigory Pavlov with his fellows and podiaki received "slavlenoe" in the amount of 0,1 rouble per stanitsa. The 1652 document states that in December "slavlenoe" was given to Vologda singing diaki and podiaki: 5 altyns to Vladimir and his fellows from the great stanitsa, 5 altyns to Ivan Mikhailov and his fellows, 4 altyns to Timofey Ontropjev and his fellows, 3 altyns and 2 dengas to Grisha Egorov and his fellows, 10 dengas to Ofon'ka Kazak and his fellows [122, fol. 169, 220; 123, fol. 30v—31]. By the Krutitsky metropolitan's order his choir received on March, 26, 1695 1 rouble of "slavlenoe" [81, fol. 114]. As we can see there existed no fixed rates of "slavlenoe" payments from the eparchial treasury at that time.

Singers also were invited to glorify Christ in the local monasteries. In 1569 on Christmas the Smolensky hierarch's choir visited the Boldino-Dorogobu-zhsky monastery and received 1,2 rouble [163, p. 11]. In January, 1577, the Vologda archbishop's choir received 0,7 rouble in the Kornilievo-Komel'sky monastery [43, p. 23]. The Vologda choir was a regular visitor of the Spaso-Priluksky monastery. In 1576 on Easter holidays singers were given 0,51 rouble of "slavlenoe"; in 1605, on Christmas, the singing diaki and some podiaki received 0,5 rouble, others — 0,16 rouble; on Easter holidays in 1606 two stanitsas of the Vologda diaki received 0,46 rouble, podiaki — 0,15 rouble [63; 64]. In the 1680-s the Bogoslovsky monastery paid the Ryazan-sky metropolitan's choir 1,5 rouble to each singer, 0,3 rouble to three minor singers [166, p. 79, 93, 108; 167, p. 218; 168, p. 42]. Interestingly enough, in 1694—1695 the Pavlov monastery in Kostroma paid the local archbishop's choir 2,5 rouble on Christmas, Easter and the Assumption of the Virgin Mary besides the "slavlenoe" (0,25 rouble) on Christmas and Easter holidays [80, fol. 38v—39, 51v, 64v].

During their stay in Moscow the hierarch's choir glorified Christ in different places and residences and

received "slavlenoe" for it. On Christmas in 1585 the Chudov monastery granted 0,03 rouble to the Ryazan podiaki, 0,05 to the Kolomna podiaki, 0,2 rouble to the Vologda diaki and podiaki [65, fol. 122v]. The Moscow Boldino-Dorogobuzhsky monastery gave 0,25 rouble to the same Vologda podiaki and 0,06 rouble to the Ryazan podiaki; in 1598 the father superior of the Boldino-Dorogobuzhsky monastery ordered to give 0,6 rouble to the Smolensk singing diaki and podiaki on Easter; in 1600 he granted 1,5 rouble to five stanitsas of the tsar's diaki and three stanitsas of the Smolensk diaki [163, p. 29, 139, 177]. As a rule, church hierarchs also granted money to singers. In April 1688 the Ustug archbishop ordered to give 0,5 rouble to the Krutisky choir, 0,4 roubles to the Rostov choir, 0,25 rouble to the Suzdal choir; in December he granted 1 rouble to his own singers, 0,5 rouble to the Krutitsky singers, 0,4 rouble to the Belgorod singers, 0,3 rouble to the Voronezh singers [161, p. 1235, 1253]. In December 1694 the Krutitsky metropolitan ordered to give 0,5 rouble to each singing diaki from the Pskov, Rostov and Tambov choirs [81, fol. 99].

The most stable "slavlenoe" belonged to the patriarch. In the early 17th century the hierarch's diaki of the first stanitsa received 0,15 rouble each, the second stan-itsa — 0,09—0,15 rouble; podiaki received 0,1 rouble per stanitsa [for example: 72—75]. Since 1670-s the patriarch's "slavlenoe" was given to each singer: 1 rouble to the Krutitsky, Ryazan, Kolomna, Rostov, Astrakhan, Belgorod choirs, 0,6 rouble to the Suzdal, Smolensk and Tver choirs, 0,5 rouble to the Arkhangelsk choir [for example: 77—79].

The biggest sums of "slavlenoe" were granted to singers by the tsar. In December 1673 the hierarch's singers glorified Christ at the tsar's chambers. The Novgorod and Krutitsky diaki of the first stanitsas were given 5 roubles each, of the second stanitsas — 4 roubles. The podiaki of the first stanitsas got 3 roubles, of the second stanitsas — 2 roubles, of the third stanitsas — 1,5 roubles. The fourth stanitsa (the Novgorod singers) got 1,25 roubles; the Kazan diaki of the first stanitsa got 4 roubles each; the Tver and Pskov diaki of the first stanitsas got 2,5 roubles, of the second stanitsas — 2 roubles etc. [162, p. 197—199]. In January 1676 the tsar gave "slavlenoe" money to the singing diaki of the Krutitsky, Nizhegorodsky, Belogorodsky, Smolensky, Suzdalsky and Arkangelsky eparchial choirs; besides, singers received the "food money" as well [162, p. 1405—1407].

The Hierarch's singers also received some sums of money in different ways. In September 1591 the father superior of the Boldino-Dorogobuzhsky monastery who visited the church hierarch in Smolensk recorded his expenses on the archbishop's singing diaki [163, p. 102]. The father superior of the Ryazan Bogoslovsky monastery also paid 1 rouble to the hierarch's singers in January 1688 while their stay in Ryazan, in September he paid them 0,15 rouble for singing wishes for long life in his monastery [167, p. 219; 168, p. 35]. Sometimes the Ryazan metropolitan's choir visited the Bogoslovsky monastery, e.g., on the holiday of St. John the Theologian (May, 8, 1686), where singers got 0,5 rouble each for performing the Night Vigil and the liturgy [166, p. 100].

Documentary sources contain numerous records of additional payment that singers of local choirs got for their participation in the services and rites performed in

the tsar's or patriarch's presence. In 1627 patriarch Filaret after the commemoration ceremony devoted to all metropolitans and patriarchs of Russia gave 0,05 rouble to the Suzdal, Ryazan and Pskov podiaki (Yakov Fedorov and his fellows); the singing diaki of the Krutitsky metropolitan (Stepan Afanasjev and his fellows) received 0,1 rouble. The next year during the Pancake Week (Maslenitsa) the patriarch granted money to the Astrakhan and Krutitsky singers [45, p. 115, 116]. In December 1640 r. after the funeral memorial service for Patriarch Ioasaph the Rostov and Krutitsky singers of the first stanitsas received 1,5 roubles each, of the second stanitsas — 1 rouble; the first stanitsa podiaki got 0,6 rouble, the second stanitsa— 0,4 rouble [45, p. 1053]. In February 1672 for performing the funeral service of patriarch Ioasaph II the Novgorod, Krutitsky, Ryazan, Smolensk, Suzdal and Arkhangelsk podiaki received 0,3 rouble per stanitsa [78, fol. 536]. The singers presented at the funeral service of the Sarsky and Podonsky metropolitan got 2 and 1,5 roubles [173, p. 74]. The hierarch's singers got money for their participation in the ordination ceremonies as well. In 1696—1697 at the ordination ceremony of the Fathers superior of the Arkhangelsk, Troitsky and Solvychegodsk Vvedensky monasteries (they received the archimandrite titles) all singing diaki and podiaki of the Ustug archbishop received 5 roubles [98].

The service at the hierarch's choir provided singers with all necessary means of subsistence. Besides, as a rule, the tsar's or patriarch's orders freed them from taxpaying.

The yard of each singer was situated either in the suburbs of that city where the local hierarch resided or on his territory in the city. In 1566—1568 in Kazan there existed the following yards of singing diaki: near the St Peter's Church there was Leonty and Pavel's Timofeevs' place; behind the butcher's and fishmonger's in Bolshaya street there were the yards of Dmitry, Utyasha, Bazhen and Vitushka; near the Church of the Assumption there was Sukhan's yard [51, p. 28]. Documentary sources dated the late 16th century mention among others 13 yards of singing diaki [15, p. 225]. The singers of the Ryazan hierarch stayed in 1567/68 on the territory of his patrimony in Pereslavl Ryazansky (Ryazan). In Bolshaya street there were existed the yards of singing diaki Ivan Filippov, Ivan Kanin, Peotr Savin and podiak Sery; in Negodyaev lane there was a yard of singing diak Dmitry Soloviev [50, p. 426—427]). The sources dated 1628/29 mention a special district ("slobodka") in the hierarch's lands in Ryazan where icon-painters, silversmiths, clerks and others resided. They also mention 18 yards of singing diaki and podiaki [50, p. 712]. The Patrol book of Rostov, 1619, recorded 10 yards of the hierarch's singing diaki in the suburbs, whereas the Census book, 1678, mentions 2 subdeacon's yards, 13 singing diaki's yards and 14 podiaki's yards in the metropolian's "white" (free from taxes) sloboda [158, p.3, 29—33]. The Sarsky and Podonsky metropolitan had to visit Moscow on Sundays and to help the patriarch or replace him during church services. He stayed near Moscow, in Krutitsy (that is why he was called Krutitsky as well); near his residence there were the yards of his singing diaki (1646) [45, p. 852].

As we can see, in general, the eparchial singers stayed near their hierarch's place. It was no mere chance. When newly ordained archbishop Gelasy came to Ustug the

Great in March 1682, it turned out that there was no place of residence for his service people and his choir. The church hierarch wrote a petition to the tsar where he asked for additional territory near the hierarch's residence. The tsar's order dated December, 1 allowed him to occupy the empty space near the cathedral. There was not enough empty space there that is why the local authorities started the long-term resettlement of tradespeople [23, p. 146—148; 24, p. 295].

However, sometimes the eparchial singers' residences were located not in one place. According to the Vologda Census book (1646) the majority of their yards were scattered around the city, as far as some singers came from the trading quarters; in the episcopal Nikolskaya Sloboda there resided, besides priests and deacons, service people (brewer, groom, tailor, carpenter etc.). Such tradition was preserved here and further [104, fol. 1459, 1469, 1497, 1547 etc.; 105, fol. 10v, 16v, 89 etc.]. It should be noted that in case a singer died his widow inherited his yard. In Borisoglebskaya street in Vologda there lived Domnitsa (1646), a widow of the archbishop's singer Grigory Volodimerets, in Mostovaya street there lived Marfutka, a widow of singer Ivan (1678) [104, fol. 1469v; 105, fol. 16v].

According to the sources singers of the choir were freed from taxpaying or settled in the "white" lands of the hierarch's Sloboda. Thus, in 1678 and 1686 the hierarch's singers in Vyatka who resided in the trading quarters were freed from taxes by the tsar's order [2, p. 241—243]. The local authorities did not free singers from taxpaying on their own. In 1646 the clerks of the Vologda archbishop informed that podiaki Kuzma Galaktionov and Ivan Ivanov were included in the list of tradespeople [104, fol. 1448, 1470v]. The Rostov Census book (1678) states: "These singers are living now in the trading quarters and pay taxes to the local committee" [158, p. 30]. Sometimes singers who were not freed from taxpaying got financial assistance from the hierarch's court. In September 1620 singing diaki Yakov Pavlov, Grigory Vladimirets and Vladimir Ivanov received additional "bread payment" [82, fol. 46]. Gradually the eparchial singers were freed from taxes and occupied a preferred position in the society.

The main professional activities of the hierarch's choir were connected with singing during church services in cathedral churches. The study of the Chinovnik book (the collection of rites), dated 1682—1683, which belonged to one of Russian "ordinary" hierarchs (the archbishop of Kholmogory) [17] and its comparison with other books of this kind showed that there was some similarity in the functions of singers from major and local choirs. These functions were determined by the church rules and old traditions, which were fixed in such books as Chinovniks.

Besides chanting during church services the hierarch's singing diaki and podiaki from different cities took part in special rites and ceremonies. We can mention here the rites of the Grace cup, wishes for long life etc. According to the English queen's ambassador Giles Fletcher, who paid a short visit to Russia in the late 1580-s "here every bishop shows in his cathedral church three youths burning in the furnace", that is performing "Peshnoe deistvo" (The fiery furnace action) [29, p. 164]. Fletcher, however, gave unfaithful data. The sources state that not "every bishop"

had a right to perform this rite: at that time it was only the Moscow metropolitan and a few archbishops in the rest of Russia. As we know the liturgy drama "Peshnoe deistvo" was accompanied by singing. It was usually performed in the main church of the Vologda Sophia Cathedral in 1618—1643 (excluding some years when the archbishop was staying in Moscow). Great sums of money which were gathered as a duty from the eparchial churches were spent on staging this performance. In the 1620—30-s young diaki who were performing the parts of the youths were taught by senior chorister Vladimir Ivanov. After the performance both the youths and their teacher were often were awarded with money [164, p. 29, 33—39, 42, 52].

The next performance where singers took an active part — "The Donkey Walk" — could be performed only by metropolitans (their horse or "donkey" was accompanied by the local voivode-governor). In 1667 the newly established of metropolitans of Astrakhan and Tobolsk received the permission to act these performances annually on the Palm week, "like the metropolitans of Novgorod the Great and Velikie Luky and of Kazan and of Sviyazhsk and others, as there is the custom of the Great Russian State" [1, p. 371; 169, p. 18—22]. This tradition was kept till 1678 when the Holy Council permitted only the tsar and the patriarch to perform the Donkey Walk in Moscow [7, p. 308—309].

The hierarch's choir was also to take part in the official meeting ceremonies, when high officials visited the eparchy (especially the tsars and members of their families). When Peter the Great was visiting Kholm-ogory in July 1692, he was met by the archbishop and his singing diaki who first were singing "The grace of the Holy Spirit", then wishes for long life and hirmuses of the Greek chanting. During the tsar's departure on September, 19 the hierarch's singers were singing wishes for long life to "the most Orthodox tsar". The next year in May archbishop Afanasy accompanied Peter the Great during his trip to the Solovetsky monastery; his singing diaki sang at the name-day celebration of the tsar whereas at the liturgy there were the tsar's singing diaki. In May 1701 Tsar Peter the Great visited Kholmogory one more time and sang with the singing diaki on Trinity Sunday [17, p. 247—252].

Quite often the hierarch's diaki and podiaki continued to perform their singing duties accompanying their master during his trips. The Kholmogory choir in November 1682 together with archbishop Afanasy was present at the ceremony of the Sign for the Virgin Mary in the Spassky monastery; in December on St. Antony Siysky's day — in the Siysky monastery; in February 1683 the hierarch with his choir visited the Spassky monastery and the So-lovetsky residence. The choir sang everywhere according to the existing tradition [17, p. 40—42, 71]. In June 1683 the Kholmogory hierarch was traveling to the Solovetsky monastery together with his singing diaki, the service people in the rank boyar children and the streltsy (Russian military corps in 16th — 17th centuries). They sailed in the three boats by sea. During their stay in Arkhangelsk Afanasy went to the cathedral while his choir walked in front of him and was performing "The grace of the Holy Spirit", then they sang canons while walking with icons around the wooden and stone city of Arkhangelsk. On their arriving at the monastery the hierarch's choir

together with the Solovetsky choir brothers were singing in the divine services, during the "procession per gonfalons", in the rite of sovereign grace-cup, etc. On their way back the Kholmogory singing diaki and podiaki also were performing chants sailing in boats. [17, p. 138—150]. In January, 1695 the Krutitsky metropolitan decided to visit the tsar's okolnichy (one of highest ranks of boyars in old Russia) I. I. Golovin, therefore, especially for crusades priests and choristers five "red Vladimirskiy" sleighs were bought; in May five latticed carriages were bought for the choir accompanying the hierarch to his patrimony — settlement Amirevo [81, p. 107, 168]. As we can see, no matter where the eparchial heads were moving, their choirs were accompanying them. It is beyond any doubt that the high qualification of the singers was to correspond to the high position of the hierarchs.

During their stay in Moscow the hierarch's diaki and podiaki sometimes were to sing together with the tsar's and patriarch's choirs, which led to the mutual musical enrichment. Occasionally the local choirs performed the same functions as the capital ones. For example, on November 4, 1666 the tsar was giving dinner in the Faceted Chamber for the ecumenical patriarchs who came to Moscow. The tsar's singing diaki were walking and singing before the patriarch's sleighs; on their way back the patriarchs were accompanied by the podiaki of the Novgorod and Krutitsky choirs. The diaki of those choirs that day were "singing liturgy", being located respectively on the right and left kliroses (sides) ([21, p. 98—99]. Patriarch Ioakim's Chinovnik says that on Palm Sunday, 1677, his singers, going in front and behind the "Donkey Walk" procession, were performing the "Evangelical Sticherons", whereas the archiepiscopal podiaki were standing along the road with willow branches and singing the same sticherons "waiting till the patriarch passes them by horseback" ("by donkey") [30, fol. 7]. All this proves that the hierarch's singers were as professional as the tsar's and patriarch's ones. If necessary they could even to replenish the main choirs of Russia.

The following facts let us analyze the peculiarities of the local choirs' repertoire. After the Church Councils of 1547 and 1549 alongside "new miracle workers" whom the choirs were to celebrate all over Russia there were established other saints to celebrate in Tver, Murom, Ustug etc. [4, p. 203—204]. This rule was observed for some time. In January, 1600, Boris Godunov was told in the Assumption Cathedral about the sticherons, canon and life story of Kornily Komelsky. The tsar with the Council ordered to celebrate this saint with the vespers, night service and liturgy in the Vologda region [5, p. 379—380]. Similar events contributed to the dynamic creative activities of local chant masters.

The centre constantly regulated the repertoire of the provincial choirs. Thus, the tsar's letter dated June, 21, 1548 fixed the common memorial day for performing commemoration services in honor of "princes and boyars and religious host"; another letter — dated September, 29, 1649 — ordered to reintroduce the celebration of the Appearance of the "Kazan" Icon of the Theotokos (October, 22) [4, p. 208; 7, p. 61]. In 1624 patriarch Filaret informed the Rostov metropolitan about the samples of proclamation "ectenes" (litanies) and wishes for long life devoted to the tsar's wedding ceremony [6, p. 223]. Such letters (about coronation

ceremonies or birth of new members of the tsar's family) were quite common.

The repertoire of the 17th century Russian provincial choir can be demonstrated with the help of the representative source — "Records of the Vologda hierarch's singers. Three-line (three-voice) singing". Here one can find a specific singing diaki's report about the peculiarities of their repertoire. The singers could read two neighbouring lines (put and niz, put and verkh, verkh and demestvo); some singing diaki could sing all the lines, less experienced singers — only one line [8, p. 322—323]. In spite of the fact that this document goes back to 1666 it would be incorrect to connect it only with this definite time. The tradition of singing line works in the tsar's choir existed since the early 17th century. It can be proved by the documents from the Tobolsk Sophia Cathedral. Those, dated 1635/36, mention the singing diaki of the first stanitsa: putnik Nikifor Afanasjev, demestvennik Nazar Grigorjev, nizhnik Ivan Vasiljev Struna, putniks Grigory Afanasjev and Tomilo Larionov; the second stanitsa: nizhnik Nikita Erofeev, putniks Emeliyan Nikitin, Ivan Nikiforov, Timofey Filippov [67, fol. 186v, 189v—190]. Consequently, we can assume that "The Records of the Vologda singers" describe the repertoire of the medieval choir during a long period in the 17th century. At the same time in the early 17th century line chants did not dominate in the church services; apparently, they were performed by the special order of hierarchs, though singers were familiar with them. Since the mid 17th century due to the popularity of the European polyphonic ("partes") singing Russian choirs started to sing mainly line chants. Most probably, this was the reason why such a peculiar document as "The Records" appeared.

Publishing this documentary source in part A. S. Belonenko marked that it reflected a great singing repertoire which existed at that time. It mentions 125 different singing works. One can find here chant books and collections (Sunday Octoechos, Triodions, books of church songs), genres and chant cycles (hymns in praise of the Virgin Mary, doxastikons, Evangelical l sticherons, hymns to the Theotokos), separate services (liturgies, night services) and chants devoted to definite saints including Stephan Permsky and Dmitry Priluksky, Vologda miracle-worker) [8, p. 321—322]1. Thus, the scholar characterized the line repertoire of the hierarch's singers in full. We can only add that sometimes they performed chants in different styles: singers called them the Small chant, Greek and Kiev chants [8, p. 324—328].

Line chants, however, were only part of the repertoire. The Chinovnik of the Kholmogory Council, 1682, shows that alongside line chants singers continued to perform usual Znamenny chant works: doxastikon "Christ The Lord Is Born Today" on the left side was performed in the Znamenny chant, on the right side — in the singing lines); the first verse was performed in the line manner, others — in the Znamenny style, doxastikons were performed in the line manner, the Evangelical Sticheron — also in the line style [17,

1 The author does not understand the meaning of the designation "tsar-verse", which is found in the document (p. 323). We know the collection of the same name — "tsar-verses"— included the favourite doxastikons in honour of saints [86].

p. 46, 54, 64]. The one-voice Demesvenny chant was also preserved in the repertoire: minor stanitsas were singing in the Demesvenny chant [17, p. 12, 16, 49 etc.]. Sometimes the chants of Greek style are mentioned here, as well as samples of the Small and Great chants [17, p. 49, 81, 87, 94, 209 etc.].

As we can see, the sources supplement each other. The chant collections written by the diaki and podiaki of the local choirs or copied for them and circulated in their environment are of great importance here as well. They contain valuable material about the repertoire of the hierarchal choirs.

The main part of the chants was performed by the choir but there were some rare chants which characterize the professional interests of certain singers, though they could be performed in some other rites. The chant books of the hierarch's choirs contain a rich musical material. The collection of sticherons dated the early 17th century (which was written by the Ustug archbishop's singer Mikhailo Protopopov [32, fol. 138v]) presents plurality of chants given in different versions of singing with the marks "another znamia (neumes)", "another interpretation". The sticheron "In the Bethlehem land" ("Вифлиеме земле") which was performed on the eve of Christmas is marked "Nikitin's another znamia"; and after chants with cinnabar editing of musical neumatic text is marked: «What is written in cinnabar red color — it is taken from Varlam's variant" [32, fol. 295, 777v]. The collection dated the second half of 17th century which belonged to the Krutitsky singer Boris Nikitin [153, fol. 718] has nearly all chant books. A great amount of chants here have two or more variants (another chant, another interpretation, small chant, Put, Demestvo, the great chant, monastery, nontraditional free, Greek, Solovetsky variants etc.). One more peculiar chant collection belonged till 1676 to the Vologda diaki Pavel Mikhajlov and Christopher Alekseev [149] and contained (besides the Octoechos and the "Obik-hod" — collection of church daily songs) the musical theoretical works — "Fitas with interpretations and lines of the eight-mode singing" and the ABC book. The structure of the chants is similar to the previous chant book: nontraditional free, great, monastery, Tikhvinsky etc. Let us mention "The Obihod" of the last quarter of 17th century in "the Demesvenny-line style" which belonged to the metropolitan's singer Matfey Soldatov. This book contains two-voice and three-voice works (some of them in the Greek style and in the Great chanting]) [130, fol. 307, 72v, 86v etc.]

Apparently peculiarities of the local choirs' repertoire can be traced in the manuscripts of the hierarchs under whose supervision the choirs were. Here it should be attributed and collections created by their orders. Taking into account that there exist no other 16th century documents these sources are of great importance. The Inventory of the Iosifo-Volokalamsky monastery (1573) mentions among the books donated to the monastery a collection of sticherons which belonged to the Ryazan hierarch Leonid, two copies of the identical collection ("Complete Hirmologion with the Collection of Sticherons") which belonged to the Novgorod archbishop Feodosy, similar collection belonging to the Rostov archbishop Vassian and Hirmologion of his own writing, the Hirmologion of the Krutitsky hierarch Savva

Cherny and Kazan archbishop Lavrenty, two collections of sticherons belonging to the Krutitsky bishop Simeon [116, fol. 107v—109v, 112v, 128]. Partially these books have been found1, which allows their detailed investigation in the context of the old-Russian history of local choirs. Similar documents can be found in other collections as well2. As a rule, such collections are rather extensive and include a great amount of chanting interpretations as well as theoretical references.

Thus, the singing activities and the repertoire of the local choirs are evidence of their highly professional art. At the same time the hierarch's diaki and podiaki performed many other non-singing duties.

First of all, one should mention that among singers there were people with versatile talent. They succeeded in various fields of picturesque creativity and in the crafts. In October 1652 the Vologda singing diaki Ivan Poliektov and Konstantin Kirillov son Greshnoy got 1,62 roubles for gilding and painting the icon case in cathedral. The same month they were given 10 roubles each for the icons created for the archbishop — Deesis painted on 15 boards, prophets and holidays on 15 "boards", "tsarist doors", 3 local icons, the "image of Ust-Vymsky Wonderworkers", on the northern door — "the wise thief", for the throne — the images of Vladimir Mary and St. Nikola. All of them were "painted on gold". In November Ivan Poliektov was given 0,95 rouble "for creating 10 icons of Tenderness to the Treasury"; in December, 1652 and February, 1653 Poliektov and Greshnoy received 2,2 roubles for their joint work—painting four icon cases for the local icons [123, fol. 11, 14, 21, 24, 43]3. The singer of the same Vologda choir Stephan Aleksandrov in November, 1652 was binding the Altar Gospel for the new church; diak Aksen Maksimov besides his singing duties worked as a silversmith and in December made an icon shutter; diak Timofey Smola made veils and icon-cloth searching and buying silk for them [123, fol. 19, 27—30].

Being educated people singers often were involved in writing legal documents. In 1579 singing diak Semei-ka Tretyakov son Bogoyavlensky wrote a loan mortgage and a bondage paper for Nikita, an archdeacon from Pre-chistenka, who borrowed 15 roubles from archdeacon Fedot and pledged his house in Bakin street in Rostov. One more singing diak assisted him in this business — Nikifor Kirjakov son Popov [3, p. 266—267].

Singers often were committed to short-distance and long-distance trips. In 1635 the Tobolsk hierarch sent his singing diak Boris Protodjakonov to the Enisey-sky fortress [67, fol. 153v]. The clerk of the Siberian archbishop Ivan Pavlotsky with the help of singing diak Ivan Ivanov and podiak Mikhail Rodionov from the Tobolsk Sophia cathedral in 1650 delivered vestry goods to Moscow. Singing diak Yury Gavrilov was sent to deliver religious letters to the provincial towns [69,

1 For example, the books of Vassian [119] and Savva writing [120] or belonged to Lavrentiy [117] and Theodosiy [118].

2 For example, the Sarskiy and Podonskiy bishop Dosofey's book-contribution to the Holy Trinity-Sergiev monastery [131 fol. 1—2], the book of Simon, archbishop of Vologda [135, fol. 2—6].

3 Hereinafter Constantine Greshnoy is mentioned only as archbishop's iconographer. In 1678 his home was in Watery Street. [105, fol. 22].

fol. 45—46]. In March 1695 the singing diaki of the Ustug archbishop Stephan Olenev with his fellows were sent to Moscow. They took with them the following products: fish (5 altyns), kalatches (7 altyns and 2 dengas), wine (6 altyns) [100, fol. 13v]. It should be noted that singers also were to accompany their hierarchs during their trips to monasteries, cities, capital.

Interestingly enough, that as the central choirs singers the choristers of local choirs also performed military duties being belonged to serving people. According to the Voivode Inventory book (Vologda, 1665), the hierarch's singing diaki had the following weapon: Timofey Antropjev had an axe, Feodor Naraft had a spear, podiaki Ivan Ivanov and Dmitry Stepanov both had an axe [66]. The Pskov military document of 1683 mentioned after the metropolitan's children (each of whom had a couple of pistols, one carabine and a sabre) singing diaki and podiaki, all in all 15 people, who had spears [22, p. 420]. Apparently, singers also were to participate in military inspections.

The morals and manners of the eparchial choirs differed little from the morals of the trading quarters' people. The documents mention some breaches of obligation and misconduct among the singers alongside their decent behavior. In 1631 the metropolitan podiak Afanasy was sent to Yuryevets Povolsky on affairs of the Nizhny Novgorod Pechersky Monastery archimandrite Rafail without informing the local metropolitan. According to the archimandrite's complaint addressed to the patriarch, the metropolitan "abused him left and right for it". The patriarch ordered to chain up that podiak as the perpetrator of quarrel and bring him to Moscow accompanied by guards and send another one to the metropolitan [159, p. 505—506]. In July 1683 an ecclesiarch of the Kholmogory Preobrazhensky Cathedral saw the hierarch's diak takes some gold money from the pendant on icon. The archbishop ordered to interrogate that podiak and repress him [17, p. 154]. One complaint written in 1684 to the tsar by the archbishop of Ustug the Great and Totem Alexander is evidence of the fight which involved a singing diak. He suffered greatly in this fight as he was beaten by two townspeople one of whom was the nephew of stolnik (a courtier rank below the boyar) Poyarkov [97, fol. 1]. As a rule, singers at fault were exiled to remote monasteries. In the 1680-s podiak Vasily who was from the same choir of archbishop Alexander and was exiled to the monastery of Zosim wrote in his petitions: "I am chained in iron heavy fetters here and work hard from morning till night that is why I am exhausted". The podiak asked to set him free and forgive promising to stop drinking [99, fol. 1—2]. Sometimes exiled singers ran away. In May 1695 a singer of the Ustug the Great hierarch's choir Danila Ivanov escaped from the Koryazhemsky monastery. The church donator F. I. Zinovyev who was supervising him testified that he closed the chained singer but at 4 a. m. Danila asked him to bring him a ginger root for the treatment as he was feeling unwell. While Zinovyev was searching for it in the lumber-room the exiled singer ran away having broken a plank in the fence [101, fol. 1—2]. Undoubtedly, such cases of misconduct were single instances, though they demonstrate the social portrait of the hierarch's singers.

Defining the social status of the local choirs' singers one should bear in mind the whole range of factors related to their singing and non-singing duties, as well as their reputation in the society. Many, perhaps the majority of singers came from the trading quarters. Those who paid taxes before continued to do it some time after joining the choir. Part of the singers went on working on the wasteland and vegetable gardens [172, p. 38, 82]. Others had their own small shops. The Kazan documents dated the 16th century mention that two singing diaki of the archbishop had their own shops [15, p. 204]. The Rostov inventory books of the late 17th century mention singing diaki Ivan and Bogdan Starchkiovs among others selling onions and garlic [172, p. 87; 160, p. 87], the book of 1691 mentions two shops of singing diak Ivan Andronov in Sapozhny Ryad, who had bills of sale dated 1615/16 and 1619/20 (they officially belonged to Ivan Ignatyev, a tradesperson, who was his close relative) and paid a quitrent in the amount of 0,4 rouble per year [171, p. 39—40]. Thus, the hierarch's singers who came from tradespeople were closely connected with their environment and at the same time had a special position in the society.

All singers, as a rule, were enlisted in documents together with service people of Bishops courts. The document of land property ("Sotnaya Gramota", 1567/68) that belonged to the Ryazan hierarch enumerates the yards of diaki and podiaki after the yards of serving people in rank "boyars children" (minor gentry) and "prikaznye" (officials, clerks); they were followed by the yards of grooms, cooks, stokers etc. [50, p. 426—427]. The "Dozorny books" which were written on different occasions (e.g. the change of the hierarch) sometimes mention singers before clerks and boyar children (Rostov, 1619) or after them (Tobolsk, 1635), but in each case in the lists of courtiers service people — "dvorovye" [158, p. 3; 67, fol. 153]. The Siberian archbishop staying in Moscow in 1664 asked the tsar to give him carriages for his people to go to Tobolsk and presented the document "Recording of Sofia house court people according to their ranks" where singing diaki were mentioned after boyar children [68]. The expenses book of the Vologda hierarch's residence (1643/44) contains the following payment records: priests, monastic elders, boyar children, clerks, singers [122, fol. 272—279]. The Ustug archbishop on September, 14, 1687 ordered to give money and bread payment to all courtiers service people: clerk, diak, subdeacons, singers, podiaki, boyar children, cooks, grooms and watchmen [161, p. 1227].

Taking into account all the above-mentioned we can define the status of singing diaki and podiaki from the old-Russian local choirs as service people of the hierarch's courts. In terms of their professional duties they stood close to the clergy, as regards their social status — they belonged to service class. The last statement can be proved by the fact that singers could be transferred to the hierarch's boyar children or prikaznye. Thus, in the 1670-s the Novgorod singing diak Feodor Novgorodets was transferred to boyar children of the first class; in 1697 the singing diak of the Siberian archbishop Luka Bokov became a minor official (clerk) [44, p. 46; 71, fol. 147]. The rights of the hierarch's singers as service

people were regulated according to the Code: in 1649 for bringing dishonor on singing diaki one was to pay 3 roubles, on podiaki — 2 roubles [55, p. 70].

The existence of the particular hierarch's singers' profession maintained the high artistic level of local choirs. Their close interaction with other provincial choirs and the main choirs of Russia contributed to forming common culture of professional music.

At the same time not only these choirs presented the musical culture of church singing in provinces.

Since by virtue of his appointment, the old Russian church singing art was implemented especially in the worship, we could assume that all churches and cathedrals in Russia had their own choirs. But documents show that it was not so. According to the Census books usually at the parish of churches there were one or two yards of priests, deacon, clerk, sexton [for example: 19 (Mozhajsk, 1596), p. 22; 106 (Solvychegodsk, 1620), fol. 134v]. At the cathedral there were several priests (one of them senior — protopope), deacons (senior — protodeacon), clerks, sextons; at the largest urban cathedrals were also called "pridelnyh priests" who administered the service in several chapels of the cathedral [106 (1620), fol. 790 etc.; 102 (1625), fol. 8, 20v, 21v; 107 (1646), fol. 16—17; 108 (1678), fol. 2v, 6, 11v etc.]. Clergy salaries (ruga) issuance books confirmed that. Often parishioners elected the clergy themselves [for example: 96].

By the Church Statute on June 26, 1551 All-Russian Metropolitan Macary demanded in the church "to elect the priests and deacons of skilled and trained to read and write" [4, p. 221]. In practice this was carried out subsequently. In November 1657 the parishioners of Shenkursky fortress "have chosen and loved" priest who was the son of former priest giving him the church "village", "arable and mowing land" and his father monetary salary (ruga) [161, p. 421]. Note also that the variety of fees received from the parishioners almost completely was withdrawn in the eparchial treasury. Parish church had not enough money for the maintenance of even the clergy and most of them received funds from eparchial, the monastery or the sovereign's treasury in the form of "ruga".

Thus, in the documentary sources we do not find a staff of professional singers in the town parish churches and cathedrals. Limited funds did not allow churches maintain such staff. But who then carried out singing activities here?

The first Russian Patriarch Iov ordered in writing October 1, 1604 to the priests and deacons of all the churches. They "ought to sing the Divine Chanting every day: Matins, and prayers, and hours, and Liturgy, and Vespers" [5, p. 380—382]. Even more concrete answer we found in the extant order of Novgorod Metropolitan (march 1687). The document resembled to the priests that if there were two of them in the church, then they should serve in turn, each for a week. Those who were free from the service week they (with deacons) would come to his parish church to sing in the choir together with all sextons [2, p. 262—264]. In the sources we often find the information that during traveling of bishops, and, rarely, patriarchs by the cities clergy (or "Cathedral Folk") were singing with their choirs in churches and cathedrals [for example: 17, p. 150—152; 18, p. 169;

25, p. 24]. There is evidence of "Cathedral Folk" singing not only during regular church services, but also in special holiday activities including outside the church. A striking example of this is the Christmas and Easter glorification of Christ.

Choral repertoire of Russian churches except the church Statute was determined as by the tsar's, patriarch's and bishop's decrees. In connection with Boris Godunov ascension to the throne patriarch Jov in March 15, 1598 reported to the "Kostroma suburbs and uyezds in all the churches" as "Mnogoletie" (Wish many years of life) to thing in detail pointing chants and even the style of chanting (for example, what exactly to sing in Demestvo style). There are known the letters of False Dmitry I to Solvychegodsk (June 1605) and Tsar Vasily Shuisky to Great Perm (May 1606) about the same [5, p. 1—6, 92, 100]. Metropolitan of Rostov ordered to perform praying on the occasion of the war campaign against the False Dmitry II and to pray for the "many years health" of Tsar Vasily in the letter dated June 7, 1607 addressed to Protopope Luka "with the brothers" of the Sol'vychegodsk Annunciation Cathedral [5, p. 164—165]. Such messages have been received in the regions after various kinds of events in the life of the state, the tsar's and the patriarch's courts.

It is noteworthy that in city cadastres in sections of census church property, it is extremely rare to find mention of chanting books [for example: 103, fol. 177: 19, p. 18]. Meanwhile among the extant Old Russian chanting neumatic manuscript collections the city cathedrals clergy's collections with the recording of their owners and even scribes perhaps make up the greatest number after the monastery ones. Consequently as usual chanting books did not belong to the church library but to the clergymen themselves. Many of the manuscripts are allocated by completeness of composition; contain almost the full repertoire of chanting works. The book, written in Yaroslavl by the protopope (senior priest) Potapov and sold him to Velikoretskiy priest Fedot Dmitriev in August 1552 [37, fol. 68v], included: Octoechos, Monthly Sticherons, Heirmologion, Lenten Sticherons, Obikhod. Collection of the first quarter 17th century passed from hand to hand in the clergy: first, it was sold by rural priest of the Rostov district Matthey Ivanov to Moscow priest Ivan Filimonov, then it was found at the priest, "who sells books", Semyon Matfeev and before 1665 Simon Azarin was the owner of this collection. The manuscript contains: Heirmologion, Obikhod, Octoechos, Holidays. Many hymns are given by the Putevoy style of singing, there is "Mnogoletie" (Many Years) for tsar Michail Fyodorovich [132, fol. 182v, 238, 241v, 246]. Close to this composition of manuscript chanting books another collections can be called — belonged to the widower priest Gavriil (until February 1651) [9], to Ust-Vaga sexton Fedot Danilov (until April 1673), to the priest Yevdokim of Vologda Sofia (until 1692) [137]. There are frequent and not so extensive collections, including no more than two books, such as manuscripts, which in the 17th century belonged to the deacon Fedor Petrov, Tver sexton Nikita Ivanov, sexton Mikhail Ivanov Kustov [56; 113; 145].

The significant amount of chanting manuscripts existed among the clergy contains the most difficult to sing works, unique chants. This is evidence of the high chanting culture in the Old Russian churches, the development of profes-

sional interest and the choristers' mastery. Thus, a certain priest Ivan Guriev in the beginning of the 17th century had "demestvenniy style" two-voices-line Obikhod [112]. In "Sticharal" (collection of sticherons), written in 1646/47 by protopope Methody from Kashyrsk, among the variants of chanting Novgorod, Usolsky, Great, Putevoy ones were included [129, fol. 347, 366 etc.]. In the manuscript of the beginning 17th century purchased from townsman Matthey Sobolev for the church of St. Nicholay and Elijah, to whom it has come from a priest Yakim Grigoriev "with the children", there are variants of Lukoshkov, Lvov, Usolsky, Novgorod, Moscow, Trinity and others authors' singsongs. [11; in fol. 6 — "Wish of many years" for Vasily Shuisky]. There are a lot of chants in styles of Demestvo, Put, Great in the collection of the first half of 17th century belonged to deacon Alexei Kharlampiev from Kholmogor [154, fol. 316, 319, 354 etc.]. Many chants in the same styles are located in the znamenny (neumatic) Holidays, signed "with his own hand" by priest Vasiiyl from Arzamas January 1, 1689; Easter stichera of Greek singsong of chanting is here too [59, fol. 64, 87, 210 etc.]. Sticheras and slavniks (doxastikon) with designations "Great znamia (neumes)", "another singsong", "another znamia" are often found in the collection of the deacon Fedor Klimov from Rostov (he sold it at the end of 17th century) [12, fol. 114, 152, 272 etc.].

As part of the Russian professional-musical culture of medieval city we consider the activities of singing and krestovyi diaki (choristers) of the feudal aristocracy. Similarly to Stroganovs [for example: 48, p.123—147], some persons of rank had churches in their ancestral lands or large houses in Moscow where highly professional singers had to chant on the kliros. Service of great feudal lords as vicegerents and voevodas (military chiefs) proceeded on different cities of Russia, including small towns, which also forced them to acquire their choir or a small staff of krestovyi diaki for the fulfilment of divine services in the lord's chambers.

The earliest information that secular lords had choirs refers to the 16th century. So, December 24, 1585 boyar D. Godunov's krestovyi diaki came to praise at the Moscow farmstead of the Boldino-Dorogobuzh monastery. December 27, 1585 at the Chudov (Miracle) Monastery there were to glorify the boyar (future tsar) B. Godunov's krestoviy priest and diaki (choristers), D. I. Godunov's krestovyi diaki, A. Shchelkalov's three diaki, V. Shchel-kalov's "stanitsa" (group) of singing diaki (choristers) [163, p. 29; 65, fol. 122—123]. At the beginning of 1655 chanter Ostafii Yakovlev was taken out the choir of Prince Andrey Meshcherskiy to the patriarch choir, and Kirill Ivanov — out the choir of Trubetsckoy [76, fol. 153]1.

We note that the choirs of aristocracy adopted new trends very quickly. Already in the 50-s years of the 17th century they moved to the predominant performance of polyphonic (partesniy) works turning into the "vspevaki" (singers) choir (capella) which Ukrainian singers were enlisted initially. Boyar Petr Vasiljevich Sheremetev in 1665—1668 years being voevoda in Kiev has collected here choir, which was brought then by him to Moscow

1 The name of Trubetskoy is not specified in the document. Therefore, it must be assumed that he was the famous person. At that time he was Alexey Nikitich Troubetzkoy, who served in the 20—50-ies as voevoda in various cities [26, p. 946; 27, p. 297; 28, p. 23, 434 etc.].

[28 p. 600, 843; 53, p. 44]. Extant extensive neumatic collection, which belonged to him, speaks about his worship of Old Russian chanting2. Possibly up to capella of "vspevaki" (singers) Sheremetev had choir of singing diaki. Stroganov's choir was one of the most famous in the country. It became the centre of formation of the chanting school as a special trend in the art. In 1689 on demand the tsar's letter its singers were sent by Grigory Dmitriyevich Stroganov to Moscow and were enlisted in sovereign's choir [48, p.213—218]. In 90-s years tsar's relative boyar Lev Kirillovich Naryshkin's choir was known in the capital [81, fol. 100; 144]. Level of "private" choirs' mastery showed that the feudal lords of the city had a deep interest in the professional musical art since ancient times.

The fact of widely existence of chanting books in these circles should be considered as a showing their interest in. Availability of chanting books in the Stroganovs' family patrimonial libraries indicates that the members of the genus not only owned the ordinary knowledge of chanting but knew very complex writing system of Old Russian music. They were able to contact with the achievements of medieval Russia professional music, the great masters' works of it. This reveals one side of the spiritual needs of the richest merchants-manufacturers. Chanting manuscripts, written in patrimonial scriptorium, reflected requests tastes of the owners [for example: 48, p.129—131 etc.].

Of course, not all members of the feudal elite had large library collections of chanting books and even more so own scriptorium. But the presence of some books among old chanting amateurs was common. In the second half of 16th century prince G.A. Bulgakov had the extensive manuscript collection. After the death of his son he granted the book as memorial contribution to the monastery on the "Ilontovy Mountains" [37, fol. 241—247]. In the 16th century collection belonged to the Russian Duma nobleman Andrey Vasilievich and the stolnik (high steward of court) Ivan Andreyevich Tolstov contains a number of hymns in various singsongs of chanting [125, fol. 5—25, 228]. In the 1660-s in the "the newly elected diligent follower of chanting" prince Y S. Urusov's house correction and writing chanting books were carried out with the help of outstanding Russian music theorist A. I. Mezenets. One of the manuscripts, made by the master, was presented to the prince with respect, but after a short time he gave it as contribution to the Nilo-Stolbensky hermitage [33]. Note also in the collection that belonged to the stolnik A. G. Sytin in the middle of the 17th century. There where many slavniks (doxastikons) given in two versions of singsong (remark "another chanting"). We should also mention the manuscript entitled to possession by stolnik G. I. Golovin in the November 12, 1679 [35; 128]. In the inventory of the tsar's library of 1682 there were Boyar V I. Streshnev's "Sticheral Putnoy (Put style of singsong) and Triodion", Boyar S. L. Streshnev's "book Demestvennik (Demestvenniy style of singsong)", stolnik prince M.N. Odoevskiy' writing "znamenny (neumatic) variant" [54].

Not only the upper feudal classes of the city knew neumatic notation, loved znamenny chanting. The same

2 Collection of the first half 17th century includes: Heirmologion, Obikhod, Octoechos, Holidays, Monthly collection of sticherons; and singsings of chants: Putevoy, Great, Medium, «Arbitrary», etc. [58].

could be observed among the serving people (not belong to the clergy). For example, Great Treasury clerk, assistant of the diak and scribe I. J. Protopopov, Bread Palace managing household tasks I. Y. Tyutchev, tsar's shoemaker K. M. Sapozhkov (from him manuscript went to the palace stoker Kondrat Artemiev) had chanting books in Moscow in 17th century [57; 152; 110]. We specially note the "All fully Menaia " — quite rare among chanting manuscripts — of Yamskoy Prikaz (tsar's governance of horse transport) clerk Pavel Chernitsyn, who was A. I. Mezenets's pupil (1677) [31].

Service people of different cities, eparchies and monasteries kept pace with the Moscow ones. In the middle of 17th century clerk of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery Philip Ertazov bought neumatic Holidays of the whole composition [133, fol. 212]. Extensive collection, which includes Putevoy, Great, Medium chants, until November 1671 was belonged to V. G Danilov-Domnin, "clerk" of the Vologda Archbishop. By order of hierarch this book was transmitted to Cathedral of St. Sophia after its owner's death [36]. In November 1674 clerk Ga-vrila Rodionov from Suzdal Pokrovsky Monastery and serviceman Feodor Belin asked scrivener Ivan Belin in letters to buy them in the Moscow trading rows each one chanting book and send it to Suzdal [41]. In December 1689 chanting books "Obikhod and Oktay (Oktoechos) the complete" were purchased by the Cyril Belozersky Monastery scrivener Ivan Burnashev from the monk Isakiy [149, fol. 4].

Singing inhabitants of Yaroslavl. Icon of the 17th century

Chanting books were common in the broadest strata of the city population — among the townspeople. This reflects not only the spread of conventional literacy, but

also about townspeople' knowledge of music theory and their familiarizing to complex systems of neumatic fixing of singing works. We can say with confidence that this population was attached to the achievements of medieval Russian professional musical culture. A special study of the question of the chant manuscripts existence in the most democratic circles ("lower ranks of society") as well as the composition and content of these books gives a new and extremely valuable information on the church spiritual culture of this part of the population in Russia.

It has been repeatedly noted that the replenishment of the Old Russian professional choirs by talented people from town folk was commonplace. There were a great number of townspeople' chanting collections with records of owner's or scribe's names, fixing sale, contribution of book. Chanting books circulated in this stratum of society and was not rare. So, on August 16, 1602 "townsman from Beloozero" (belozerets) Bud-ilko Dmitriev sold "Holiday Sticherar" (collection of sticherons) to S. V. Godunov's servant [39]. Certain time neumatic collections belonged to Vasily Grigo-riev Makeev from Vologda (up to 1637), Fedor Ivanov Popov from Uglich (up to 1645), Alexey Nazarov from Nizhni Novgorod and Lev Kupriyanov from Kargopol (17th century), Feodor Semenov Ageev-Bolshoy (17th century) and Athanasiy Kondratiev Ikonnikov from Kaluga (up to 1701) [35, fol. 229; 83; 84; 111; 133, fol. 227v; 146]. Often in records there are no indications of their authors' social status. Nevertheless, based on the designation of book owners' professions or nicknames, we can assume that they belonged to the trade and craft circles of towns. For example, in the first half of 17th century Moscow seller of fabrics for monastic robes Ponkrat Danilov had church singing manuscript. In the first half of 17th century Bogdan "Rukavishnik" (the master of making mittens) bought chanting collection close to the previous one. Its difference was that it included the Fitnik and "The Legend about znamenni (neumes)" additionally. In the 17th century the other books belonged to the "master of making mittens" Vasily Rozanov, to the "master tailor" Karp Solomin etc. [34; 38; 85; 114; 150; 155].

Among the already mentioned manuscripts there were complicated in structure and content. They often contained works in Demestvenniy, Putevoy, Bolshoy (Great) chanting styles. In the townsman of Tver Gregory Rishetov's collection turn of 16th — 17th centuries we found slavnik (doxastikon) in honour of Russian holy princes Boris and Gleb "Pridite Novokreschennie russkie sobori" in Feodor Krestjanin's singing variant. In the collection there are hymn "O tebe raduetsa" of Moscow chanting and the chant "Vozide Bog" indicated as "another neumes of Varlam" (perhaps of outstanding chanting master Varlaam Rogov) [121, fol. 339, 352, 367 etc.]. In the book of the beginning of 17th century, which belonged in this century to townsman of Shenkursky fortress Dey Ivanov Kozlov and after him — to Nikifor Petrov Rasputin, we have the interesting notes: "I have corrected it from Mikhail's sample" (the text of the chant "Vo glasekho voskliknemo"), "another variant, copied from Michail" ("Dukhoveno naso"), "another version, I have corrected it from Ivan Borsukov" ("Cherubic Hymn" and "Pod'emlusche

angeliskimi"), "March, 25, neumes were corrected from Michael Danilov" ("Sokrovennoe tainstvo") [134, fol. 157, 352v, 399, 401]. Collection, in the 17th century some time belonged to townsman Matthey Sobolev, contains Lvov, Lukoshkov, Great, Small, Demestvenny variants of singsong [11, fol. 205, 205v etc.]. Chanting version of master Lukoshkov and chants in the Great style are found in the manuscript of the first half of 17th century. Its owners were inhabitants of Tikhvin the townsman Stefan Davidov's children; by July 1691 the townsman Fedor Yakovlev Davydov became the owner of the book and later he "gave it as contribution" in Tikhvin Paraskeva Pyatnitsa Church [14, fol. 4—58, 65, 115 etc.]. Let us call finally another singing manuscript — "Obikhod" belonged to Gregory Artemyev son Vereshchagin, townsman from Cherdyn. He wrote a book by his own hand and signed it. At that he fulfilled his record in Latin letters that has become fashionable among the most educated people in the second half of 17th century. Ural inhabitant townsman wrote his "Obikhod" in the 1680/81 according to the existing in the manuscript the chant "Mnogoletie" (wishes many years of life for tsar Feodor Alekseevich and tsarina Agafja (1680—1681). The collection includes a number of hymns in different versions of chanting with the denotation: "The other variant", "Great", "Opekalovsky" [16, fol. 112, 131, 146 etc.]. All these facts indicate that the Russian townspeople had a deep interest in the art of music.

Znamenny (neumatic) singing was widespread among the workers who were in bondage of feudal and slaves. For example, 16 August 1602, according to the already mentioned recording, boyar S. V. Godunov's house serf Vasily Dokuchaev bought the book from Be-loozero townsman [39]. Prince Vladimir Volkonskiy's slave had the interesting on structure collection of the second quarter 17th century (Heirmologion, Fitnik, Ok-toechos, Obikhod, Holidays) [138]. In December 1703 G. D. Stroganov's worker Nicandr Ivanov bought chanting book from the Moscow assistant of deacon. Among other things, there was a copy of the famous treatise on the theory of Old Russian music written by Alexander Mezenets [139]. Data of singing book is the addition to the documents. The documents about searching of slaves fled to the Urals and Siberia in the 17th century often, along with the most expressive signs of fugitives, contain such as "can read and write and sing and is hasty in speech", "(he) earns on meal writing at the church as sexton and teaches singing", "is able to read and write, writes book", "is able to write and sing" etc. [52]1.

So, the wider population in the cities of Russia 16th— 17th centuries knew the works of singing art. The highly professional singers of eparchial choirs, representatives of the clergy, feudal aristocracy and service people, townsmen and slaves sang church chants. Far not every city, like Novgorod, Moscow or Solvychegodsk, became the centre of the special school in art, but in the towns

1 We consider one of the phenomena — musical culture of the Russian city 16th-17th centuries and are not concerned with the question of existence znamenny singing among the peasantry. Although it is not excluded. For example, in the Russian North since ancient times many peasants have been "studied literacy chanting" [42, p. 99]. There are the musical manuscripts with their recordings [109].

there were local chanting masters ("raspevschiks"), they also often worked as teachers of singing and music theorists.

According to the author of "Tales of zarembas (musical signs)" "philosophers" Feodor Kopyl (Veliky Ustyug), Semen Baskakov (Nizhny Novgorod) and Grigory Zepalov, Cyril Gomulin, Lev Zub (the author did not inform they where from) and other masters, which we have already mentioned (Luka Ivanov, Ivan Shajdur, Tikhon Korela) worked to improve musical notation in the first half of the 17th century in different cities of Russia. However, these theorists created their own works of authorship — chanting "neumatic variants". So, the chant of Semen Baskakov from Nizhny Novgorod was popular among Russian singers by the beginning of the 1650-s. Evphrosin in "The Legend of various heresies" described how church singing masters of that time boasted: "I am the Shaidur' pupil. And the other boasted: (I have) teaching of Lukoshkov, and the other also: Baskakov version of chanting, etc." (emphasis added — N. P.) [46, p. 71]. We have been able find this master's work in the one of the hand-written chanting book of the second quarter of 17th century. Its scribe put stichera "Pridete ublazhimo vesi Josepha" prefacing by the remark "Baskakov's another version of chanting". This version was recorded the last, fourth after three other chants of the same stichera. Baskakov's chant refers to the Putevoy style, but is written with "stolpovoy" neumatic notation [13]. The rare work of Kirill Gomulin — penitential verse "Pravednoe solnetse" (Adam's Lamentation about paradise) was found in the manuscript of 30—40-s. Chant is made in the Putevoy style, and the last line is two-voice (the designation "put" and "niz" (down). In accordance with the opinion of the researchers, Gomulin's chant is the first known penitential verse of the musical authorship, the first variant of this genre recorded with Putevoy style neumatic notation [165]. We have found in the manuscript of the early 17th century the "Lvov's chanting" of the Christmas slavnik (doxastikon) "Augustu edinov-lastelstvuyuschu" [11, fol. 205]. The master Lev Zub likely created it. It is interesting that all marked works were common during the life of their authors.

In the chanting books you can find the names of masters who like the singers were not mentioned in the other sources. In the Sticheron book of the middle 17th century among the hymns on bringing the Chasuble of God to Moscow in 1625 we can find three sticheras ("Riza chestnaya", "Derzhava nepobedima", "Khramo tvoi") in the chanting of the deacon Postnik Ageev from the Tolchkovskaya church in Yaroslavl' [143]. Obihod of the same time includes Peter Grabow's chanting "Alleluia" [124]. The scribe of Triodion book the last quarter of 17th century has written header on one of the pages: "This variant of stolnik (courtier) Ivan Andreevich Musin-Pushkin", but for some reason the work itself is not written in the collection [40]. Before the header there were "Opekalovsky", Great and Putevoy styles singsongs of the stichera "Voskre-senie tvoe" (Thy Resurrection). Apparently, there was this chant musical version of I. A. Musin-Pushkin's authorship also.

Thus, some of the chanting masters come from different cities of Russia became known. The names of the

most chanters have not been preserved, but their chants, named for the creation of works areas, were copied from the collection in the collection.

Manuscripts of the first half of 17th century contain chants with the designations: Vladimir and Volynka (Trisagion)1, Yaroslavl' ("Da ispolnyatsya usta moya"), Pskov variant ("Svetisya, svetisya"), the Put of Kazan ("Dukhovenye moi bratie"), etc. [136; 141; 148]. Obviously, "worldly" ("mirskoy") chant was born in democratic strata of a city society. Tsar's singing diak wished to have around and copied in 1601—1602 years two chants ("Pesn vsyaku prinesemo", "Slukho uslyshakho") in this variant [60; 61]. From the middle of 17th century, after the reunification of Ukraine and Russia, Kievan chanting became extremely popular among Russian singers. If you collect in one book all the chants of the Kievan singsong [10; 115; 126; 127; 140; 147; 156; 157], it is likely they will form a full chanting book Obikhod.

So, the Old Russian church chanting art occupied prominent position in the spiritual culture of the Russian cities. Wide circulation of znamenny (neumatic) chanting contributed to its musical enrichment. Local masters—people from different social strata—created works that reflected regional music (including folk) tradition. It is in fact allowed the singers and copyists of books to allocate one or another chanting, linking it to a particular locality. The best works of masters' authorship were included in the all-Russian culture. The process of inclusion was gradual.

References

1. Acty istoricheskie, sobrannye i izdannye Arkheogra-ficheskoy Komissiey [Historical Acts collected and published by the Archaeographical commission]. St. Petersburg, 1841, v. 3.

2. Acty istoricheskie... St. Petersburg, 1842, v. 5.

3. Acty juridicheskie [The acts juridical]. St. Petersburg, 1838, p. 266—267.

4. Acty, sobrannye v bibliotekakh i arkhivakh Rossiyskoy imperii Arkheograficheskoy ekspeditsiey [Acts collected in libraries and archives of the Russian Empire by Archaeo-graphic expedition.]. St. Petersburg, 1836, v. 1.

5. Acty, sobrannye. St. Petersburg, 1836, v. 2.

6. Acty, sobrannye. St. Petersburg, 1836, v. 3.

7. Acty, sobrannye. St. Petersburg, 1836, v. 4.

8. Belonenko A. S. Pokazaniya arkhiereyskikh pevchikh XVII v. [The evidence of the archiereus singers of the 17th century]. Trudy Otdela drevnerusskoy literatury Instituta russkoy literatury (Pushkinskiy Dom) Academii Nauk SSSR. [Treatises of the Ancient literature department of the Russian literature institute (Pushkin house) Academy of sciences of the USSR]. Leningrad, v. 36, p. 321—328.

9. BRAN [Library of Academy of sciences of Russian, St. Petersburg]. Arh. pev. № 26. Fol. 155.

10. BRAN. Osn. 21.2.3.

11. BRAN. Osn. 32.16.18.

12. BRAN. Strog. № 39. Fol. 114—286v.

13. BRAN. Tek. № 280. Fol. 289—291.

14. BRAN. Tselepi. № 20. Fol. 4—115.

15. Chechulin I. D. Goroda Moskovskogo gosudarstva v XVI v. [Cities of Moscow State in the 16th century]. St. Petersburg, 1889.

16. Cherdynsky kraevedchesky muzey [Local History Museum of Cherdyn]. № 1043/16. Fol. 112—146.

1 It is noted that both singsong are "from the ancient teachers" [62; 142].

17. Chinovniki Kholmogorskogo Preobrazhenskogo sobora [Books for divine service of Kholmogorsky Preo-brazhenskiy Cathedral]. Publ. A. P. Golubtsov. Moscow, 1903.

18. Chinovniki Novgorodskogo Sofijskogo sobora [Books for divine service of Novgorodsky Sofijsky Cathedral]. Publ. A. P. Golubtsov. Moscow, 1899.

19. Dionisiy, arkhim. Mozhayskie akty [Mozhayskiye Acts]. 1506—1775. St. Petersburg, 1898.

20. Dopolneniya k Actam istoricheskim, sobrannye i izdannye Arkheograficheskoy Komissiey [Additions to historical acts collected and published by the Archaeographical commission]. St. Petersburg, 1851, v. 4.

21. Dopolneniya. St. Petersburg, 1853, v. 5.

22. Dopolneniya. St. Petersburg, 1867, v. 10.

23. Dopolneniya. St. Petersburg, 1869, v. 11.

24. Dopolneniya. St. Petersburg, 1872, v. 12.

25. Dubrovsky N. Patriarshie vykhody. [The patriarchs' Appearances in public]. Chtenija v Obshestve Istorii i Drevnostey Rossiyskirh pri Moskovskom universitete. [Readings in the Imperial society of history and Russian antiquities at the Moscow University], book 2, 1869.

26. Dvortsovye razryady [Palace ranks]. St. Petersburg, 1850, v. 1.

27. Dvortsovye razryady, 1851, v. 2.

28. Dvortsovye razryady, 1852, v. 3.

29. Fletcher Dj. O gosudarstve Russkom [About Russian State]. Publ. N. V. Golitsin. St. Petersburg, 1911.

30. GIM [State Historical Museum, Moscow]. Sinod. № 425. Fol. 7—39.

31. GIM. Sinod. pev. № 98. Fol. 1—1v.

32. GIM. Sinod. pev. № 123. Fol. 138—777v.

33. GIM. Sinod. pevch. № 728. Fol. 1—22.

34. GIM. Uvar. № 142. Fol. 330v.

35. GIM. Uvar. № 164. Fol. 95—308.

36. GIM. Uvar. № 583. Fol. 2—36

37. GIM. Uvar. № 692. Fol. 68—247.

38. GIM. Uvar. № 694. Fol. 286v.

39. GIM. Schuk. № 770. Fol. 6—20.

40. IRLI [Russian literature institute (Pushkin house), St. Petersburg]. Otdeln. № 24. Fol. 57v.

41. Kataev I. M., Kabanov A. K. Opisanie aktov sobrani-ya grafa A. S. Uvarova. Akty istoricheskie [Description acts of Count A. S. Uvarov's collection. Historical Acts]. Moscow, 1905, p. 421—429.

42. Kopanev A. I. Iz istorii bytovaniya knigi v severnykh derevnyakh XVI v. [From the history of the books spreading in the northern villages in the 16th century]. Pamyatniki cultury. Novije otkrytija, 1975 [Cultural heritage. New discoveries, 1975]. Moscow, 1976, p. 99.

43. Letopis' zanyatiy Arkheograficheskoy Komissii [Chronicle meetings of Archeographyical Commission]. St. Petersburg, 1871, v. 5.

44. Letopis' zanyatiy Arkheograficheskoy Komissii [Chronicle meetings of Archeographyical Commission]. St. Petersburg, 1902, v. 14.

45. Materialy dlya istorii, archeologii i statistiki goroda Moscvy, sobrannye i izdannye rukovodstvom I. Zabelina [Materials for the history, archaeology and statistics of Moscow, collected and published by I. Zabelin]. Moscow, 1884, v. 1, p. 94—1134.

46. Muzykal'naya estetika Rossii XI—XVIII vv. Sost. A. I. Rogov [Music aesthetics of Russia in the 11th — 18th centuries, composed by A. I. Rogov]. Moscow, 1973.

47. Nikolaevskiy P. Patriarshaya oblast' i russkie eparkh-ii XVII v. [Patriarchal region and Russian Dioceses of the 17th century] Сhristianskoe chtenie [Christian reading]. St. Petersburg, 1888, № 1—2, p.169—189.

48. Parfentyev N.P. Drevnerusskoye pevcheskoye iskusstvo v dukhovnoy kulture Rossiyskogo gosudarstva XVI—XVII vv.: Shkoly. Tsentry. Mastera. [Old Russian chant art in the

spiritual culture of Russia in the 16th — 17th centuries. Schools. Centers. Masters]. Sverdlovsk, 1991, 236 p.

49. Parfentjev N.P. Professionalnye muzikanty Rossi-yskogo gosudarstva XVI—XVII vv.: Gosudarevy pevchie diaki i patriarshie pevchie diaki i podiaki [Professional Russian musicians of the 16th—17th centuries. The Tsar's singing diaki and the patriarch's singing diaki and podiaki]. Chelyabinsk, 1991, 446 p.

50. Pistsovye knigi Ryazanskogo kraya XVI—XVII vv. [Census books of Ryazansky land 16th—17th centuries]. Publ. V. N. Storozhev. Ryazan', 1898, v. 2, p. 426—712.

51. Pokrovskiy I. Kazanskiy arkhiereiskiy dom [Courtyard of Kazan Archbishop]. Kazan', 1902.

52. Preobrazhensky A.A. Ural i Zapadnaya Sibir' v kontse XVI — nachale XVIII vv. [Ural And Western Siberia at the end of 16th — early 18th centuries]. Moscow, 1972, p.127—128.

53. Preobrazhensky A.V. Kultovaya muzyka v Rossii. [Cult music in Russia]. Leningrad, 1924.

54. Protopopov V.V. Notnaya biblioteka Tsarya Fedora Alekseevicha [Music library of Tsar Feodor Alekseevich]. Pamyatniki cultury. Novije otkrytija, 1976[Culturalheritage. New discoveries, 1976]. Moscow, 1977, p.129—131.

55. Razumovsky D.V. Tserkovnoe penie v Rossii [Church chant in Russia]. Moscow, 1867.

56. RGADA [Russian State Archives of Ancient Acts,

Moscow]. F.181. № 574.

57. RGADA. F. 181. № 789. Fol. 54—69.

58. RGADA. F. 188, № 937.

59. RGADA. F. 188. № 940. Fol. 64—211.

60. RGADA. F. 188. № 1584. Fol. 4v.

61. RGADA. F. 188. № 1589. Fol. 1v.

62. RGADA. F. 188. № 1696. Fol. 33—33v.

63. RGADA. F. 196. Inv. 1. № 141. 27—53v.

64. RGADA. F. 196. Inv. 1. № 200. Fol. 9.

65. RGADA. F. 196. Inv. 1. № 273. Fol. 122—123.

66. RGADA. F. 210. № 1. P. 1. Fol. 35—36.

67. RGADA. F. 214. № 74. Fol. 153—190.

68. RGADA. F. 214. №119. Fol. 15—35.

69. RGADA. F. 214. № 278. Fol. 45—46.

70. RGADA. F. 214. № 860. Fol. 79—146.

71. RGADA. F. 214. № 1159. Fol. 146—157v.

72. RGADA. F. 235. Inv. 2. № 1. Fol. 186—381.

73. RGADA. F. 235. Inv. 2. № 3. Fol. 78-376v.

74. RGADA. F. 235. Inv. 2. № 8. Fol. 418v.

75. RGADA. F. 235. Inv. 2. № 9. Fol. 473v.

76. RGADA. F. 235. Inv. 2. № 38. Fol. 153

77. RGADA. F. 235. Inv. 2. № 73. Fol. 189v.

78. RGADA. F. 235. Inv. 2. № 75. Fol. 218—536.

79. RGADA. F. 235. Inv. 2. № 78. Fol. 174v.

80. RGADA. F. 237. Inv. 1. № 8. Fol. 38—64v.

81. RGADA. F. 237. Inv. 1. № 39. Fol. 35—188.

82. RGADA. F. 247. Inv. 1. № 270. Fol. 46.

83. RGADA. F. 381. № 282. Fol. 1—30.

84. RGADA. F. 381. № 284. Fol. 151v.

85. RGADA. F. 381. № 306. Fol. 210.

86. RGADA. F. 381. № 319.

87. RGADA. F. 396. Inv. 1. № 8455. Fol. 1—4.

88. RGADA. F. 396. Inv. 1. № 39719. Fol. 1—3.

89. RGADA. F. 396. Inv. 2. № 277. Fol. 168.

90. RGADA. F. 396. Inv. 2. № 279. Fol. 444v.

91. RGADA. F. 396. Inv. 2. № 314. Fol. 109.

92. RGADA. F. 396. Inv. 2. № 315. Fol. 114.

93. RGADA. F. 396. Inv. 2. № 317. Fol. 225v.

94. RGADA. F. 396. Inv. 2. № 318. Fol. 333v.

95. RGADA. F. 396. Inv. 2. № 319. Fol. 156.

96. RGADA. F. 396. Inv. 2. № 529—541.

97. RGADA. F. 1206. Inv. 1. № 297. Fol. 1.

98. RGADA. F. 1206. Inv. 1. № 349. Fol. 1—1v.

99. RGADA. F. 1206. Inv. 1. № 1413. Fol. 1—2.

100. RGADA. F. 1206. Inv. 2. № 6. Fol. 5—13v.

101. RGADA. F. 1206. Inv. 2. № 70. Fol. 1—2.

102. RGADA. F. 1209. Inv. 1. № 449 (1624—1625). Fol. 8—21v.

103. RGADA. F. 1209. Inv. 1. № 451. Fol. 177.

104. RGADA. F. 1209. Inv. 1. № 14732 (1646). Fol. 1431—1631.

105. RGADA. F. 1209. Inv. 1. № 14741 (1678). Fol. 10—89.

106. RGADA. F. 1209. Inv. 1. № 15039 (Sol'vychegodsk, 1620). Fol. 134—790.

107. RGADA. F. 1209. Inv. 1. № 15058 (1646). Fol. 16—17;

108. RGADA. F. 1209. Inv. 1. № 15053 (1678). Fol. 2—22v.

109. RGB [Russian State Library, Moscow]. F. 37. № 144. Fol. 169.

110. RGB. F. 37. № 145. Fol. 1—28v.

111. RGB. F. 37. № 147. Fol. 1—15.

112. RGB. F. 37. № 149. Fol. 152v.

113. RGB. F. 37. № 210.

114. RGB. F. 37. № 358.

115. RGB. F. 37. № 373. Fol.217—236v.

116. RGB. F. 79. № 37. Fol.107—128.

117. RGB. F. 113. № 238.

118. RGB. F. 113. № 241.

119. RGB. F. 113. № 245.

120. RGB F. 113. № 249.

121 RGB F. 178. № 766 Fol. 339—367.

122. RGB F. 178. № 823 Fol. 169—279.

123. RGB F. 178. № 824 Fol. 11—43.

124. RGB F. 199. № 167 Fol. 31.

125. RGB F. 199. № 289 Fol. 5—228.

126. RGB F. 205. № 246 Fol. 167v.

127. RGB F. 205. № 354 Fol. 515v.

128. RGB F. 272, № 289

129. RGB F. 299. № 154 Fol. 347—366.

130. RGB F. 310. № 165 Fol. 72—307.

131. RGB F. 304. № 411.

132. RGB F. 304. № 430 Fol. 182—246.

133. RGB F. 304. № 448 Fol. 212—227v.

134. RGB F. 353. № 38. Fol. 157—401.

135. RGB F. 354. №138.

136. RGB F. 354. № 144. Fol. 564v.

137. RGB F. 354. № 145

138. RGB. F. 379. № 14. Fol. 354.

139. RGB. F. 379. № 16. Fol. II.

140. RGB. F. 379. № 19. Fol. 119—125v.

141. RGB, F. 379. № 29. Fol. 134v.

142. RGB. F. 379. № 46. Fol. 7—8.

143. RGB, F. 379. № 65. Fol. 130—131.

144. RGB. F. 380. № 8/5. Fol. 6.

145. RGB. F. 734. № 72.

146. RNB [Russian National Library, St. Petersburg]. Kir.-Bel. № 577/834. Fol. 1.

147. RNB. Kir.-Bel. № 628/885. Fol. 173.

148. RNB. Kir.-Bel. № 642/889. Fol. 87.

149. RNB. Kir.-Bel. № 707/964. Fol. 4—92.

150. RNB. 0.1. 399. Fol. 101—106.

151. RNB. 0.1. 403. Fol. 178—184.

152. RNB. Sol. № 276/279. Fol. 1—34

153. RNB. Sol. № 277/286. Fol. 718.

154. RNB. Sol. № 277/290. Fol. 316—354.

155. RNB. Sol. № 277/291. Fol. 11.

156. RNB. Sol. № 690/757. Fol. 67.

157. RNB. Q.1. 85. Fol. 23—42.

158. Rostov. Materialy dlya istorii goroda XVII— XVIII st. [Rostov. Materials for the history of the city16th— 18th centuries]. Moscow, 1884, p. 3—33.

159. Russkaya istoricheskaya biblioteca [State Public Historical Library of Russia]. St. Petersburg, 1875, v. 2, p. 505—506.

160. Russkaya istoricheskaya biblioteca, 1892, v. 12, p. 152—195.

161. Russkaya istoricheskaya biblioteca, 1894, v. 14, p. 421—1256.

162. Russkaya istoricheskaya biblioteca, 1904, v. 23, p. 197—1521.

163. Russkaya istoricheskaya biblioteca, 1923, v. 37, p. 11—177.

164. Savinov M. P. Chin Peshnogo deystva v Vologodskom Sofiyskom sobore [Rite of Furnace action in the Vologda St. Sophia Cathedral]. Russkiy filologicheskiy vestnik [Russian philology Bulletin]. Varshava, 1890, № 1, p. 29—52.

165. Seregina N. S. Pokayannyi stikh «Plach Adama o rae» raspeva Kirilla Gomulina [Cyril Gomulin's penitential verse "Adam's Lament of paradise"]. Pamyatniki cultury. Novije otkrytija, 1983 [Cultural heritage. New discoveries, 1983]. Leningrad, 1985, p. 258—262.

166. Shlyapkin I. Prikhodno-raskhodnye knigi Bogoslovskogo monastyrya (1684—1689) [Income and expenditure books of Bogoslovsky monastery]. Trudy Ryazanskoy uchenoy komissii [Proceedings of the scientific Commission of Ryazan], v. 18. № 1. Ryazan', 1903.

167. Shlyapkin I. Prikhodno-raskhodnye knigi Bogo-slovskogo monastyrya (1684—1689) [Income and expenditure books of Bogoslovsky monastery]. Trudy

Ryazanskoy uchenoy komissii [Proceedings of the scientific Commission of Ryazan], v.18. № 2. Ryazan', 1903.

168. Shlyapkin I. Prikhodno-raskhodnye knigi Bogoslovskogo monastyrya (1684—1689) [Income and expenditure books of Bogoslovsky monastery]. Trudy Ryazanskoy uchenoy komissii [Proceedings of the scientific Commission of Ryazan], v.19. № 1. Ryazan', 1904.

169. Sulotskiy A. Krestnyi khod na oslyati v Tobol'ske v Verbnoe voskresenie [Cross procession on a donkey in Tobolsk on Palm Sunday]. Chtenija v Obshestve Istorii i Drevnostey Rossiyskirh pri Moskovskom universitete. [Readings in the Imperial society of history and Russian antiquities at the Moscow University], 1870, book 3, p. 18—22.

170. Suvorov N. I. Ustug Velikiy v kontse XVII stoletiya [Ustug Velikiy at the and of 17th century]. Moscow, 1864.

171. Titov A. A. Dozornye i perepisnye knigi drevnego goroda Rostova [Inspection and census books of the ancient city Rostov]. Moscow, 1880.

172. Titov A. A. Perepisnye knigi Rostova Velikogo [Census books of Rostov the Great]. St. Petersburg, 1887.

173. Undolsky V. M. Biblioteka Pavla, mitropolita Sar-skogo i Podonskogo [Library of Sarsky and Podonsky Metropolitan Paul]. Moscow, 1850.

Received August 18, 2015

Bulletin of the South Ural State University Series «Social Sciences and the Humanities» 2015, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 67—82

УДК 783(470.5) + 94(470.5) DOI: 10.14529/1пит150412

ББК Ч611.3 + Т3(2Р36)-7 + Щ313(2)

профессионально-музыкальное искусство в русском средневековом городе (xvi—xvii вв.)

Н. П. Парфентьев

Развитие церковного пения в России XVI—XVII вв. как высокого профессионально-музыкального искусства занимало важное место в духовной культуре русских городов. В статье на основе документов освещаются деятельность крупных хоров, бытование знаменного пения в широкой городской среде, творчество местных мастеров-распевщиков — выходцев из различных социальных слоев, создававших авторские произведения, в которых отражались региональные музыкальные традиции.

Ключевые слова: древнерусское певческое искусство, архиерейские певчие дьяки и подьяки, частные хоры феодальной аристократии, бытование знаменного пения, авторское творчество мастеров.

Литература и источники

1. АИ. — СПб., 1841. — Т. 3.

2. АИ. — СПб., 1842. — Т. 5.

3. Акты юридические. — СПб., 1838.

4. ААЭ. — СПб., 1836. — Т. 1.

5. ААЭ. — СПб., 1836. — Т. 2.

6. ААЭ. — СПб., 1836. — Т. 3.

7. ААЭ. — СПб., 1836. — Т. 4.

8. Белоненко, А. С. Показания архиерейских певчих XVIIв. /А. С. Белоненко //ТОДРЛ. — Л., 1981. — Т. 36. — С. 321—328.

9. БРАН. Арх. певч. № 26. Л. 155.

10. БРАН. Осн. 21.2.3. Л. 51.

11. БРАН. Осн. 32.16.18.

12. БРАН. Строг. № 39.

13. БРАН. Тек. № 280. Л. 289—291.

14. БРАН. Целепи. № 20.

15. Чечулин, И. Д. Города Московского государства в XVI в. /И. Д. Чечулин. — СПб., 1889.

16. Чердынский краеведческий музей. № 1043/16.

17. Чиновники Холмогорского Преображенского собора / изд. А. Голубцов. — М., 1903.

18. Чиновники новгородского Софийского собора /изд. А. Голубцов. — М., 1899.

19. Дионисий, архим. Можайские акты 1506— 1775. — СПб., 1898.

20. ДАИ. — СПб., 1851. — Т. 4.

21. ДАИ. — СПб., 1853. — Т. 5.

22. ДАИ. — СПб., 1867. — Т. 10.

23. ДАИ. — СПб., 1869. — Т. 11.

24. ДАИ. — СПб., 1872. — Т. 12.

25. Дубровский, И. Патриаршие выходы / И. Дубровский // ЧОИДР. — 1869. — Кн. 2.

26. Дворцовые разряды. — СПб., 1850. — Т. 1.

27. Дворцовые разряды. — СПб., 1851. — Т. 2.

28. Дворцовые разряды. — СПб., 1852. — Т. 3.

29. Флетчер, Дж. О государстве Русском / изд. Н. В. Голицын. — СПб., 1911.

30. ГИМ, Синод. № 425. Л. 7—39.

31. ГИМ. Синод. певч. № 98. Л. 1—1 об.

32. ГИМ. Синод. певч. № 123.

33. ГИМ. Синод. певч. № 728. Л. 1—22.

34. ГИМ. Увар. № 142. Л. 330 об.;

35. ГИМ. Увар. № 164. Л. 95 об., 272 и др.

36. ГИМ. Увар. № 583. Л. 2—36

37. ГИМ. Увар. № 692. Л. 68—247.

38. ГИМ. Увар. № 694. Л. 286 об.

39.ГИМ. Щук. № 770. Л. 6—20.

40. ИРЛИ. Отд. № 24. Л. 57 об.

41. Катаев, И. М. Описание актов собрания графа А.С. Уварова. Акты исторические/И. М. Катаев, А. К. Кабанов. — М, 1905. — С. 421—429.

42. Копанев, А. И. Из истории бытования книги в северных деревнях (XVI в.)/А. И. Копанев //ПКНО,

1975. — М., 1976. — С. 99.

43. Летопись занятий Археографической комиссии. — СПб., 1871. — Вып. 5.

44. Летопись занятий Археографической комиссии. — СПб., 1902. — Вып. 14.

45. Материалы для истории, археологии и статистики города Москвы / под ред. И. Забелина. — М., 1884. — Т. 1. — Стб. 94—1134.

46. Музыкальная эстетика России XI—XVIII вв. / сост. А. И. Рогов. — М., 1973.

47. Николаевский, П. Патриаршая область и русские епархии XVII в. / П. Николаевский // Христианское чтение. — СПб., 1888. — Вып. 1—2. — С. 169—189.

48. Парфентьев, Н. П. Древнерусское певческое искусство в духовной культуре Российского госу-дарстваXVI—XVII вв.: Школы. Центры. Мастера / Н. П. Парфентьев. — Свердловск: Урал. гос. ун-т, 1991. — 236 с.

49. Парфентьев, Н. П. Профессиональные музыканты Российского государства XVI—XVII вв.: государевы певчие дьяки и патриаршие певчие дьяки и подьяки / Н. П. Парфентьев. — Челябинск : Книга, 1991. — 446 с.

50. Писцовые книги Рязанского края XVI— XVII вв. / изд. В. Н. Сторожев. — Рязань, 1898. — Вып. 2.

51. Покровский, И. Казанский архиерейский дом, его средства и штаты / И. Покровский. Казань, 1902.

52. Преображенский, А. А. Урал и Западная Сибирь в конце XVI — начале XVIII в. / А. А. Преображенский. — М., 1972. — С. 127—128.

53. Преображенский, А.В. Культовая музыка в России/А. В. Преображенский. — Л., 1924.

54. Протопопов, В. В. Нотная библиотека царя Федора Алексеевича / В. В. Протопопов // ПКНО,

1976. — М., 1977. — С. 129—131.

55. Разумовский, Д. В. Церковное пение в России /Д. В. Разумовский. — М., 1867.

56. РГАДА. Ф. 181. № 574.

57. РГАДА. Ф. 181. № 789. Л. 54—69.

58. РГАДА. Ф. 188, № 937.

59. РГАДА. Ф. 188. № 940.

60. РГАДА. Ф. 188. № 1584. Л. 4 об.

61. РГАДА. Ф. 188. № 1589. Л. 1 об.

62. РГАДА. Ф. 188. № 1696. Л. 33—33 об.

63. РГАДА. Ф. 196. Оп. 1. № 141. Л. 27—53.

64. РГАДА. Ф. 196. Оп. 1. № 200. Л. 9.

65. РГАДА. Ф. 196. Оп. 1. № 273.

66. РГАДА. Ф. 210. № 1. Ч. 1. Л. 35—36.

67. РГАДА. Ф. 214. № 74. Л. 153—190.

68. РГАДА. Ф. 214. № 119. Л. 15—35.

69. РГАДА. Ф. 214. № 278.

70. РГАДА. Ф. 214. № 860.

71. РГАДА. Ф. 214. № 1159.

72. РГАДА. Ф. 235. Оп. 2. № 1. Л. 186, 380.

73. РГАДА. Ф. 235. Оп. 2. № 3. Л. 78, 376 об.

74. РГАДА. Ф. 235. Оп. 2. № 8. Л. 418 об.

75. РГАДА. Ф. 235. Оп. 2. № 9, Л. 473 об.

76. РГАДА. Ф. 235. Оп. 2. № 38.

77. РГАДА. Ф. 235. Оп. 2. № 73. Л. 189 об.

78. РГАДА. Ф. 235. Оп. 2. № 75. Л. 218, 536.

79. РГАДА. Ф. 235. Оп. 2. № 78. Л. 174 об.

80. РГАДА. Ф. 237. Оп. 1. № 8. Л. 38—64 об.

81. РГАДА. Ф. 237. Оп. 1. № 39. Л. 35—188.

82. РГАДА. Ф. 247. Оп. 1. № 270.

83. РГАДА. Ф. 381. № 282. Л. 1—30.

84. РГАДА. Ф. 381. № 284. Л. 151 об.

85. РГАДА. Ф. 381. № 306. Л. 210.

86. РГАДА. Ф. 381. № 319.

87. РГАДА. Ф. 396. Оп. 1. № 8455. Л. 1—4.

88. РГАДА. Ф. 396. Оп. 1. № 39719.

89. РГАДА. Ф. 396. Оп. 2. № 277. Л. 168.

90. РГАДА. Ф. 396. Оп. 2. № 279. Л. 444 об.

91. РГАДА. Ф. 396. Оп. 2. № 314. Л. 109.

92. РГАДА. Ф. 396. Оп. 2. № 315. Л. 114.

93. РГАДА. Ф. 396. Оп. 2. № 317. Л. 225 об.

94. РГАДА. Ф. 396. Оп. 2. № 318. Л. 333 об.

95. РГАДА. Ф. 396. Оп. 2. № 319. Л. 156.

96. РГАДА. Ф. 396. Оп. 2. № 529—541.

97. РГАДА. Ф. 1206. Оп. 1. № 297.

98. РГАДА. Ф. 1206. Оп. 1. № 349. Л. 1.

99. РГАДА. Ф. 1206. Оп. 1. № 1413.

100. РГАДА. Ф. 1206. Оп. 2. № 6.

101. РГАДА. Ф. 1206. Оп. 2. № 70.

102. РГАДА. Ф. 1209. Оп. 1. № 449.

103. РГАДА. Ф. 1209. Оп. 1. № 451.

104. РГАДА. Ф. 1209. Оп. 1. № 14732.

105. РГАДА. Ф. 1209. Оп. 1. № 14741.

106. РГАДА. Ф. 1209. Оп. 1. № 15039.

107. РГАДА. Ф. 1209. Оп. 1. № 15058.

108. РГАДА. Ф. 1209. Оп. 1. № 15053.

109. РГБ. Ф. 37. № 144. Л. 169.

110. РГБ. Ф. 37. № 145. Л. 1—28 об.

111. РГБ. Ф. 37. № 147. Л. 1—15.

112. РГБ. Ф. 37. № 149. Л. 152 об.

113. РГБ. Ф. 37. № 210.

114. РГБ. Ф. 37. № 358.

115. РГБ. Ф. 37. № 373. Л. 217, 232, 236.

116. РГБ. Ф. 79. № 37.

117. РГБ. Ф. 113. № 238.

118. РГБ. Ф. 113. № 241.

119. РГБ. Ф. 113. № 245.

120. РГБ. Ф. 113. № 249.

121. РГБ. Ф. 178. № 766.

122. РГБ. Ф.178. № 823. Л. 169—279.

123. РГБ. Ф. 178. № 824.

124. РГБ. Ф. 199. № 167. Л. 31.

125. РГБ. Ф. 199. № 289.

126. РГБ. Ф. 205. № 246. Л. 167 об.

127. РГБ. Ф. 205. № 354. Л. 515 об.

128. РГБ. Ф. 272, № 289.

129. РГБ. Ф. 299. № 154.

130. РГБ. Ф. 310. № 165.

131. РГБ. Ф. 304. № 411.

132. РГБ. Ф. 304. № 430.

133. РГБ. Ф. 304. № 448. Л. 212—227 об.

134. РГБ. Ф. 353. № 38.

135. РГБ. Ф. 354. №138.

136. РГБ. Ф. 354. № 144. Л. 564 об.

137. РГБ. Ф. 354. № 145.

138. РГБ. Ф. 379. № 14. Л. 354.

139. РГБ. Ф. 379. № 16. Л. II.

140. РГБ. Ф. 379. № 19. Л.119, 125 об.

141. РГБ, Ф. 379. № 29. Л. 134 об.

142. РГБ. Ф. 379. № 46. Л. 7—8.

143. РГБ, Ф. 379. № 65. Л. 130—131.

144. РГБ. Ф. 380. № 8/5. Л. 6.

145. РГБ. Ф. 734. № 72.

146. РНБ. Кир. Бел. № 577/834. Л. 1.

147. РНБ. Кир. Бел. № 628/885. Л. 173.

148. РНБ. Кир. Бел. № 642/889. Л. 87.

149. РНБ. Кир. Бел. № 707/964. Л. 4—92.

150. РНБ. О. 1. 399. Л. 101—106.

151. РНБ. О. 1. 403. Л. 178—184.

152. РНБ. Сол. № 276/279. Л. 1—34.

153. РНБ. Сол. № 277/286.

154. РНБ. Сол. № 277/290.

155. РНБ. Сол. № 277/291. Л. 11.

156. РНБ. Сол. № 690/757. Л. 67.

157. РНБ. Q. 1. 85. Л. 23 об, 39, 42.

158. Ростов. Материалы для истории города XVII—XVIII ст. — М, 1884.

159. Русская историческая библиотека. — СПб., 1875. — Т. 2.

160. Русская историческая библиотека. — СПб.,

1889. — Т. 11.

161. Русская историческая библиотека. — СПб., 1894. — Т. 14.

162. Русская историческая библиотека. — СПб., 1904. — Т. 23.

163. Русская историческая библиотека. — Петроград, 1923. — Т. 37.

164. Савинов, М. П. Чин Пещного действа в вологодском Софийском соборе / М. П. Савинов // Русский филологический вестник. — Варшава,

1890. — Вып.1.

165. Серёгина, Н. С. Покаянный стих «Плач Адама о рае» роспева Кирила Гомулина / Н. С. Серёгина // Памятники культуры. Новые открытия, 1983. — Л., 1985. — С. 258—262.

166. Шляпкин, И. Приходно-расходные книги Богословского монастыря (1684—1689) /И. Шляпкин // Труды Рязанской ученой архивной комиссии. — Рязань, 1903. — Т. 18. — Вып. 1.

167. Шляпкин, И. Приходно-расходные книги... — Т. 18. — Вып. 2.

168. Шляпкин, И. Приходно-расходные книги... — Т. 19. — Вып. 1.

169. Сулоцкий, А. Крестный ход на осляти... в Тобольске в вербное воскресенье / А. Сулоцкий // ЧОИДР. — М., 1870. — Кн. 3.

170. Суворов, Н.И. Устюг Великий в конце XVII столетия / Н. И. Суворов. — М., 1864.

171. Титов, А.А. Дозорные и переписные книги древнего города Ростова / А. А. Титов. — М., 1880.

172. Титов, А.А. Переписные книги Ростова Великого/А. А. Титов. — СПб., 1887.

173. Ундольский, В. М. Библиотека Павла, митрополита Сарского и Подонского / В. М. Ундольский. — М., 1850.

Поступила в редакцию 18 августа 2015 г

ПАРФЕНТьЕВ Николай Павлович, доктор ист. наук, доктор искусствоведения, профессор, заслуженный деятель науки Российской Федерации, заведующий кафедрой искусствоведения и культурологии, ЮжноУральский государственный университет. Автор более 100 научных трудов, в том числе 6 монографий, в области истории духовной культуры России и древнерусского искусства. E-mail: parfentevnp@susu.ac.ru