Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2020
The Baroque, which manifested itself in Muscovy during the course of the seventeenth century, has been recognized as one of the most dynamic and influential eras of Russian musical and artistic creativity. When looking at the history of Russian music one has a tendency to equate the new stylistic trends of the second half of the seventeenth century with those of the highly westernized eighteenth, and to dismiss both merely as periods of Western imitation. In reality music manuscripts reveal otherwise, and now that compositions are finally becoming available in transcription we realize that an entire era remains to be recognized and re-evaluated. In art and architecture, that era, known as the ‘Moscow’ or the ‘Naryshkin’ Baroque, is distinguished by a blend of Italian, Dutch, Russian, Ukrainian and Bielorussian features in a style that, although influenced by foreign elements, was none the less distinct from any in existence at the time. The Moscow Baroque embraced many aspects of the arts, from iconography, architecture and the applied arts to literature and music. Endorsed by Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (1645–76), foreign influence began to penetrate Muscovy, ushering in a cognizance of Western concepts that began to clash with the rich and long-established spiritual and cultural traditions. In fact Muscovy was just emerging from an aesthetic explosion known as the Golden Age of national artistic expression. Familiar are the magnificent onion-dome churches that were created during the sixteenth century and the flourishing musical centres in Novgorod and Moscow, where composers and singers developed an intrinsically Russian musical style. This was also the age of indigenous Russian polyphony (e.g. strochnoe moskovskoe, strochnoe novgorodskoe, znamennoe and demestvennoe mnogogolosie) which preceded the wave of Western infiltration that inadvertently led to an untimely halt of the evolutionary process of national awakening. Prior to that halt, the Moscow Baroque stands as a brief but unique chapter in the development of the Russian choral tradition.
1 Research for this article was supported by a travel grant from the International Research and Exchanges Board, with funds provided by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities and the US Department of State. I am grateful to IREX and the following individuals for their expert advice on seventeenth-century Russian manuscripts: Nina Gerasimova-Persidskaia (Kiev Conservatory), Tatiana Vladyshevskaia and Vladimir Protopopov (Moscow Conservatory) and Irina Lozovaia (Glinka Museum); and to Irina Medvedeva (head of the Manuscript Division of the Glinka Museum, Moscow) and Lubov Dubrovina (head of the Manuscript Division of the Central Library, Kiev) for allowing me to consult the necessary manuscripts.Google Scholar
1 Vladyshevskaia, Tatiana, ‘Partesnyi khorovoi kontsert v epokhu barokko’ (“The Russian Choral Kontsert in the Baroque Period'), Traditsii russkoi muzykal'noi kul'tury XVIII veka: Trudy, 21 (Moscow, 1975), 72–111.Google Scholar
2 For further reading on Russian Baroque architecture, see Brumfield, William, Gold in Azure: One Thousand Years of Russian Architecture (Boston, Mass., 1983); Nikolai Brunov, Istorila russkoi arkhitektury (The History of Russian Architecture) (Moscow, 1956); James Cracraft, The Petrine Revolution in Russian Architecture (Chicago, 1988); Igor Grabar, Istoriia russkogo iskusstva (The History of Russian Art), 4 vols. (Moscow, 1909–14); Hughes, Lindsey, ‘Moscow Baroque Architecture: A Study of One Aspect of Westernization in Late Seventeenth-Century Russia’ (Ph.D. dissertation, Cambridge University, 1975); Ilin, Mikhail, ‘Problemy Moskovskogo barokko XVII veka’ (‘On Issues Dealing with the Moscow Baroque in the Seventeenth Century‘), Ezhegodnik, 3 (1956); Barokko v Rossii (The Baroque in Russia), ed. Aleksei Nekrasov (Moscow, 1926); Boris Vipper, Arkhitektura russkogo barokko (Architecture of the Russian Baroque) (Moscow, 1978).Google Scholar
3 Many of the churches that belong to this style were commissioned by the Naryshkin family.Google Scholar
4 Swan, Alfred, “The Znamenny Chant of the Russian Church', Musical Quarterly, 26 (1940), 365–80 (p. 371).Google Scholar
5 For perevody or individual compositions based on chant, see Brazhnikov, Maxim, Fyodor Krestyanin Canticles, Pamiatniki russkogo muzykal'nogo iskusstva, 3 (Moscow, 1974).Google Scholar
6 For further reading on the music of the sixteenth century see Uspensky, Nikolai, Drevnerusskoe pevcheskoe iskusstvo (The Art of Early Russian Singing) (Moscow, 1971); Maxim Brazhnikov, Fyodor Krestyanin Canticles; Johann von Gardner, Bogosluzhebnoe penie Russkoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvi (Liturgical Singing of the Russian Orthodox Church) (Jordanville, 1978); and Iurii Keldysh, Istoriia russkoi muzyki (The History of Russian Music), i (Moscow, 1983).Google Scholar
7 Vladyshevskaia, ‘Partesnyi khorovoi kontsert’, 91, and Iurii Keldysh, ‘Problema stilei v russkoi muzyke XVII-XVIII vekov’ (‘The Issue of Style in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Russian Music‘), Ocherki i issledovaniia po istorii russkoi muzyki (Moscow, 1978), 92–112 (p. 99).Google Scholar
8 See Protopopov, Vladimir, Muzyka na Poltavskuiu pobedu (Music for the Victory at Poltava), Pamiatniki russkogo muzykal'nogo iskusstva, 2 (Moscow, 1973), 233.Google Scholar
9 In the 1650s and 60s, a large number of promoters of the new style were from the region of the Ukraine. By the 1670s they had been superseded by a new generation of Muscovite musicians. Keldysh, ‘Problema stilei’, 97–8.Google Scholar
10 Undolskii, Vukol, Zamechaniia dlia istorii tserkovnago pernia v Rossii (Notes on Russian Church Music) (Moscow, 1846), 29–30.Google Scholar
11 Aravin, Peter, ‘U istokov russkogo mnogogolosiia’ (‘The Origins of the New Russian Polyphonic Style‘), Sovetskaia muzyka (1978), 107–14 (p. 109).Google Scholar
12 Smolenskii, Stepan, ‘Znacheniie XVII veka i ego “Kantov” i “Psal'mov” v oblasti sovremennago tserkovnago peniia tak naz. ‘prostogo napeva“ (‘The Significance of the Seventeenth Century and its Kanty and Psalmy in the Context of Contemporary Church Singing’), Muzykal'naia starino, 5–6 (1911), 47–85 (p. 57).Google Scholar
13 Protopopov, Vladimir, Nikolai Diletskii: Idea grammatiki musikiiskoi, Pamiatniki russkogo muzykal'nogo iskusstva, 7 (Moscow, 1979), 547–54.Google Scholar
14 Vladyshevskaia, ‘Partesnyi khorovoi kontsert’, 75.Google Scholar
15 Protopopov, Muzyka na Poltavskuiu pobedu, 234.Google Scholar
16 Skrebkov, Sergei, ‘Evolutsiia stilei v russkoi khorovoi muzyke XVII veka’ (‘The Evolution of Styles in Russian Choral Music of the Seventeenth Century‘), Musica antiqua Europae orientate, 1 (1966), 470–88 (p. 485).Google Scholar
17 Smolenskii, Stepan, ‘O sobranii russkikh drevne-pevcheskikh rukopisei v Moskovskom Sinodal'nom uchilishche tserkovnago peniia’ (‘On the Manuscript Collections of the Synodal School of Church Singing‘), Russkaia muzykal'naia gazeta, 3 (1899), 80–3 (p. 81).Google Scholar
18 The programme of the first concert included three choral works by V. Titov and other seventeenth-century anonymous compositions. Stepan Smolenskii, Obzor istoricheskikh kontsertov Sinodal'nago uchilishcha tserkovnago peniia v 1895 godu (A Review of the Historical Concerts of the Synodal School of Church Music in 1895) (Moscow, 1895).Google Scholar
19 See the series Monuments of Russian Sacred Music, ed. Vladimir Morosan (Washington, D.C., 1991–).Google Scholar
20 Among them Stepan Smolenskii, Obzor istoricheskikh kontsertov; Antonin Preobrazhensky, Kultovaia muzyka v Rossii (Sacred Music in Russia) (Leningrad, 1924), 61; Vladimir Protopopov ‘Tvoreniia Vasiliia Titova – vydaiushchegosia russkogo kompozitora vtoroi poloviny XVII-nachala XVIII veka’ (‘The Works of Vasilii Titov – An Outstanding Russian Composer of the Second Half of the Seventeenth Century and the Beginning of the Eighteenth‘), Izbrannye issledovaniia i stat'i (Moscow, 1983), 241–56.Google Scholar
21 Protopopov, ‘Tvoreniia Vasiliia Titova’, 242.Google Scholar
22 Ibid., 243.Google Scholar
23 See Protopopov, , Muzyka na Poltavskuiu pobedu.Google Scholar
24 The treatise was well in line with the theoretical developments taking place in the West at the time. See Protopopov, Nikolai Diletskii, 587–607; Jensen, Claudia, ‘A Theoretical Work of Late Seventeenth-Century Muscovy: Nikolai Diletskii's Grammatika and the Earliest Circle of Fifths’, Journal of ike American Musicological Society, 45 (1992), 305–31; and Iurii Keldysh, ‘K voprosu ob istokakh russkogo partesnogo peniia’ (‘On the Issue of the Origins of Russian Part-Singing‘), Studia Hieronymo Feicht septuagenario dedicata, ed. Zofia Lissa (Warsaw, 1967), 269–83 (p. 271).Google Scholar
25 Protopopov devotes a chapter to Diletskii and ‘his Russian contemporaries’ in Nikolai Diletskii, 540–67. Also see Skrebkov, ‘Evolutsiia stilia’, 483, and Nikolai Findeisen, Ocherki po istorii muzyhi v Rossii (Essays on the History of Russian Music), i (Moscow, 1928), 302.Google Scholar
26 Protopopov, ‘Tvoreniia Vasiliia Titova’, 246.Google Scholar
27 Protopopov, Muzyka na Poltavskuiu pobedu, 228.Google Scholar
28 Different versions or arrangements of the same work were found in various areas of the country. Since there were no scores but only partbooks, choir directors had to remember all the parts. Thus memorization played a major role in learning and copying this repertory. This might explain the minor discrepancies that are often found in two partbooks of the same work. For further discussion see Nina Gerasimova-Persidskaia, Partesnyi kontsert v istorii muzyhal'noi kul'tury (The Kontsert in the History of Music Culture) (Moscow, 1983), 8, 253.Google Scholar
29 Vladyshevskaia, Tatiana, ‘On the Links Between Music and Icon Painting in Medieval Rus’, Christianity and the Arts in Russia, ed. William Brumfield and Miloš Velimirović (Cambridge, 1991), 14–29.Google Scholar
30 Keldysh, ‘Problema stilei’, 97.Google Scholar
31 L. Kiknadie. ‘Osobennosti stilia barokko v russkoi muzyke’ (‘Peculiarities of the Baroqur Style in Russian Music‘). Traditsit russkoi muzykal'not kul'tury XVIII veka Trudy. 21 (Moscow, 1975). 32–46 (p. 40).Google Scholar
32 Nina Gerasimova-Persidskaia, Kharakternye komposisionnye cherli mnogogolosiia partesnykh konisertov XVII-XVIII st. (‘Characteristic Compositional Flements in the Polyphonic Kontserty of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries‘). Musica antiqua Europae orientalis (1969). 369–95 (p. 394).Google Scholar
33 Nikolai Uspensky. Obraztsy drernerusskogo percheskogo ukusstia (Examples of Early Russian Vocal Music) (Moscow, 1971), 13.Google Scholar
34 Skrebkov, Sergei, Russkaia khorovaia muzyka XVII-nachala X VIII veka (Russian Choral Music of the Seventeenth and Early Eighteenth Centuries) (Moscow, 1969), 95, found that some kontserty of that era were composed for separate, alternating choirs.Google Scholar
35 The issue of integrated voices in the Russian kontserty of the Baroque is further discussed and confirmed in Vladyshevskaia, ‘Partesnyi khorovoi kontsert’, 103.Google Scholar
36 Kto ny razluchit has been published as a five-voice anonymous work in Nikolai Uspensky, Russhii khorovoi kontsert kontsa XVII-XVIII vekov (The Russian Choral Kontsert of the Late-Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries) (St Petersburg, 1976). It was also located by Nina Gerasimova-Persidskaia in the Manuscript Division of the Kiev Central Library as an eight-voice anonymous work (see Gerasimova-Persidskaia, Partesnyi kontsert, 252). I discovered the present 12-voice setting, identified in the manuscript as Titov's, in MS 283 of the Manuscript Division of the Glinka Museum in Moscow.Google Scholar
37 Very little is known about the performance practices of the time. The number of voices per part must have differed from one choir to another. For further discussion, see Gerasimova-Persidskaia, Partesnyi kontiert, 73.Google Scholar
38 See Razumovsky, Dimitri, ‘Gosudarevy pevchie diaki XVII veka’ (‘The Tsar's Singers in the Seventeenth Century‘), Sbornik Obshchestva drevnerusskogo iskusstva (Moscow, 1873), 153–81, and Protopopov, Muzyka na Poltavskuiu pobedu, 228.Google Scholar
39 Vladyshevskaia, ‘Partesnyi khorovoi kontsert’, 85.Google Scholar
40 Ibid., 95.Google Scholar
41 Major/minor fluctuation was discussed in Diletskii's seventeenth-century treatise Idea grommatila' musikiiskoi. See Protopopov, Nikolai Diletskii, 587.Google Scholar
42 The term peremennyi lad was introduced by B. Iavorskii in a letter of 17 April 1906 to S. Taneev. Ibid., 587.Google Scholar
43 Keldysh, ‘K voprosu ob istokakh russkogo partesnogo peniia’, 272.Google Scholar
44 See Kastalsky, Aleksandr, Osobennosti narodno-russkoi muzykal'noi sistemy (Characteristics of the Russian Folk-Music System) (Moscow, 1923), 78–85.Google Scholar
45 Findeisen, Ocherki po istorii muzyki v Rossii, 296–7.Google Scholar
46 Keldysh, ‘Problema stilei’, 101.Google Scholar
47 Contrary to the eighteenth-century practice of going West for additional musical training, seventeenth-century musicians are believed not to have received any training outside Russia.Google Scholar
