THE ORTHODOX CONCERT STAGE:
PERFORMING RACHMANINOFF’S ALL-NIGHT VIGIL, OP. 37
IN A LITURGICAL STYLE
by
Alice Generalow
_______________________
Copyright © Alice Generalow 2015
A Document Submitted to the Faculty of the
FRED FOX SCHOOL OF MUSIC
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
For the Degree of
DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS
In the Graduate College
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
2015
2
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
GRADUATE COLLEGE
As members of the Document Committee, we certify that we have read the document
prepared by Alla Generalow entitled The Orthodox Concert Stage: Performing
Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil op. 37 in a Liturgical Style and recommend that it be
accepted as fulfilling the document requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Musical
Arts.
___________________________________________________ Date: 12/01/2015
Bruce Chamberlain
___________________________________________________ Date: 12/01/2015
Elizabeth Schauer
___________________________________________________ Date: 12/01/2015
Thomas Cockrell
Final approval and acceptance of this document is contingent upon the candidate’s
submission of the final copies of the document to the Graduate College.
I hereby certify that I have read this document prepared under my direction and
recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the document requirement.
___________________________________________________ Date: 12/01/2015
Document Director: Bruce Chamberlain
3
STATEMENT BY AUTHOR
This document has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an
advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library
to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.
Brief quotations from this document are allowable without special permission,
provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for
extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be
granted by the copyright holder.
SIGNED: Alice Generalow
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES ................................................................................6
LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................................7
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................8
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................9
Overview ............................................................................................................9
Intent and Scope of Study ................................................................................10
Review of Scholarly Literature ........................................................................11
CHAPTER TWO: THE ALL-NIGHT VIGIL SERVICE ...........................................15
Overview ..........................................................................................................15
Early Christians and Evening Worship ............................................................18
East and West: The Rise of Byzantium ...........................................................22
Jerusalem and the Anastasis.............................................................................25
Sabaitic Typikon ...............................................................................................28
The Byzantine Dark Ages ................................................................................34
Studite Typikon ................................................................................................36
The All-Night Vigil in Russia ..........................................................................38
The neo-Sabaite Typikon in Russia ..................................................................40
CHAPTER THREE: RACHMANINOFF AND THE ORTHODOX CHURCH ........44
Early Church Experience .................................................................................44
Sacred Choral Works Overview ......................................................................52
CHAPTER FOUR: RACHMANINOFF’S ALL-NIGHT VIGIL, OP. 37 ....................57
Historical Context ............................................................................................57
Composition .....................................................................................................60
Performing in a Liturgical Style ......................................................................62
CHAPTER FIVE: PERFORMANCE HISTORY .......................................................91
Premiere and Reception ...................................................................................91
From Concert to Church ..................................................................................97
Sacred Music 1917-1928 ...............................................................................101
Interlude: High Stalinism ..............................................................................105
Revival of the All-Night Vigil ........................................................................108
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION ..............................................................................115
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS – Continued
APPENDIX A: THE DAILY OFFICE AS SERVED AT THE ANASTASIS
IN JERUSALEM .............................................................................118
APPENDIX B: THE RESURRECTION VIGIL AS SERVED AT THE
ANASTASIS IN JERUSALEM .........................................................119
APPENDIX C: RECOLLECTION BY RACHMANINOFF OF PASCHA 1914 ....120
APPENDIX D: ALL-NIGHT VIGIL TEXT AND TRANSLATION ........................121
APPENDIX E: PRINTED LITURGICAL COMPILATIONS NEEDED FOR AN
ALL-NIGHT VIGIL ........................................................................129
APPENDIX F: PERMISSION FOR MUSICAL EXAMPLES .................................130
APPENDIX G: GLOSSARY OF NON-ENGLISH TERMS ....................................131
REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................133
6
LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES
Musical Example 4.1 All-Night Vigil Movement I, measures 1-8 .............................66
Musical Example 4.2 All-Night Vigil Movement II, measures 1-7 ............................68
Musical Example 4.3 All-Night Vigil Movement II, measures 44-48 ........................70
Musical Example 4.4 All-Night Vigil Movement III, measures 1-7 ..........................71
Musical Example 4.5 All-Night Vigil Movement III, measures 57-65 ......................73
Musical Example 4.6 Resurrection Dogmatik, Tone 1 Znamenny chant ..................75
Musical Example 4.7 Aposticha Stichera, Tone 1 Znamenny chant ..........................77
Musical Example 4.8 Bogoroditse Devo, Tone 4, Znamenny chant .........................79
Musical Example 4.9 Bogoroditse Devo, Two-part chant ..........................................80
Musical Example 4.10 All-Night Vigil Movement VI, measures 1-8 ..........................81
Musical Example 4.11 All-Night Vigil Movement VII, measures 1-4 .........................84
Musical Example 4.12 All-Night Vigil Movement VII, measures 14-21 .....................86
Musical Example 4.13 All-Night Vigil Movement VIII,measures 1-6 ........................88
7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Resurrectional Great Vespers .....................................................................27
Table 2.2 Resurrectional Matins and First Hour .........................................................32
Table 4.1 Selected All-Night Vigil Settings from the New Russian Choral School ..58
8
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that Sergei Rachmaninoff’s All-Night
Vigil, op. 37 can successfully be performed by choral ensembles in a liturgical style by
careful selection and grouping of individual movements, along with the interpolation of
other chants or musical settings traditionally used in the Russian Orthodox Church that
are not part of the composer’s original score. This would make the work more accessible
to choirs and conductors that may otherwise not be inclined to program an
unaccompanied work over seventy minutes in duration. Additionally, such performances
would more accurately reflect the Russian liturgical performance practice history of the
work as traced in this document.
This document explores the history and form of the All-Night Vigil service,
Rachmaninoff’s exposure to the Orthodox Church, performance decisions made for the
viva voce presentation portion of this document, and the performance history of
Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil before and after the Russian Revolution.
9
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Overview
Sergei Rachmaninoff’s (April 1, 1873 – March 28, 1943) All-Night Vigil, Op. 37
was never performed in totality during the composer’s lifetime. Rachmaninoff left no
correspondence stating his preference for the work’s performance in either a sacred or
secular context. “The question of whether Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil is a work
intended for the concert stage or for liturgical performance remains a controversial topic
1
of debate in some corners.”
Today, listeners encounter Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil primarily in concert
2
settings. Often, concert performances present all fifteen movements of the work.
However, there is no documented evidence that this is the only way the composer
3
intended the work to be heard. Rachmaninoff never heard the work performed in this
4
way in Russia.
The complete work has been performed liturgically in Russian Orthodox AllNight Vigil services with interpolation of other music and texts as prescribed by church
1
Vladimir Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff” foreward to Polnoe sobranie
dukhovno-muzykal’nykh proizvedenii [The Complete Sacred Choral works] edited by Vladimir Morosan
(Madison, Connecticut: Musica Russica, 1994), lxvi.
2
3
4
Ibid., lxvi.
Ibid., lxviii.
The Synodal Choir, the ensemble that premiered Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil, did not perform
movements 1, 13, or 14 of the work.
10
rubrics. Excerpts of the work have also been performed liturgically. Concert
performances incorporating liturgical aspects would more accurately depict to listeners
the context of the work as understood by many within the Russian Orthodox Church
today to be worship music.
Intent and Scope of Study
In order to provide conductors and scholars the tools to better understand and
perform Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil, this document addresses:
1. the historical background and form of the All-Night Vigil service in the Orthodox
liturgical cycle
2. Rachmaninoff’s early exposure to the Orthodox Church
3. the performance history of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil
4. how conductors may appropriately incorporate liturgical style into concert
performances of the work
The viva voce performance presented in conjunction with this document was a
liturgically informed rendition of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil incorporating elements
not included in the score, such as the interpolation of additional music from the Russian
Orthodox tradition, and the use of a soloist to perform chant. This document and
performance demonstrated that concert presentations of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil
incorporating liturgical aspects (based on an understanding of Orthodox service and
rubrics) can create more informed performances of the work.
11
Review of Scholarly Literature
Rachmaninoff composed far less sacred choral music than the composers who
preceded him in setting the All-Night Vigil, creating only three works on Orthodox texts
(V molitvah neusypaiushchuyu Bogoroditsu [The Mother of God, ever-vigilant in prayer],
5
Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Op. 31, and All-Night Vigil, Op. 37). His AllNight Vigil, the last great unaccompanied choral composition on a sacred text premiered
in Russia preceding the Revolution of 1917, was hailed by critics as “one of the greatest
6
works in the genre to that point” and considered by the composer to be among his
7
greatest works. Today, Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil is considered the greatest work in
the Orthodox choral genre.
8
Though Rachmaninoff lived almost another thirty years after the work’s premiere,
he never composed another sacred choral piece after the All-Night Vigil. Considering the
magnitude of both the work and its composer, there is remarkably little scholarship
available specifically about Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil. Two dissertations focus on
compositional techniques used by Rachmaninoff in the work, providing ample and
thorough theoretical analysis, but little performance history or an explanation of the
5
For a comprehensive list of large-scale works composed by Rachmaninoff’s predecessors and
contemporaries on sacred liturgical texts, see Vladimir Morosan’s Choral Performance in PreRevolutionary Russia (Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Research Press, 1986), 92-93.
6
Ibid., 224.
7
Sergei Bertensson and Jay Leyda’s Sergei Rachmaninoff: A Lifetime in Music (Bloomington, Indiana:
Indiana University Press, 2001), 284. During a 1932 interview, Rachmaninoff awarded that honor only to
his All-Night Vigil and The Bells.
8
Liner notes by Nick Jones to Vespers sung by the Robert Shaw Festival Singers, conducted by Robert
Shaw in 1990 (Telarc CD-80172).
12
9
development of the liturgical service. The best available source for historical background
and performance suggestions is the introduction to a score of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night
Vigil published by Musica Russica, edited by Vladimir Morosan.
10
In 1957, during the period known as Khruschev's Thaw, Rachmaninoff’s AllNight Vigil was given its first complete liturgical performance in Russia. Even after 1957,
the All-Night Vigil was not performed in Russia as a concert piece for decades, and was
only presented in annual liturgical performances conducted by Nikolai Vasilievich
Matveyev (1909-1991) at the Transfiguration Church (also known as Joy of All That
Sorrow) located on Bol’shaya Ordynka Street in Moscow.
11
Liturgical performances of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil during the Communist
era most likely initially began as a result of the lessening of State repression during the
short period of Khruschev's Thaw (1953-1964). The Soviet regime lifted some of the
restrictions on the Russian Orthodox Church, particularly in Moscow in the late 1950s, as
a demonstrative symbol (aimed at Western governments) of religious freedom and
tolerance. Restrictions on the arts were similarly lessened during the same period as
Soviet-American dialogue was cultivated by the State.
9
Stephen H. Prussing, Compositional Techniques in Rachmaninoff's Vespers, opus 37 (PhD dissertation,
Catholic University of America,1979).
Eric Loftis, An Investigation of the Textural Contrasts in Sergei Rachmaninov's Night Vigil, Opus 37 (PhD
dissertation, University of Southern Mississippi, 1980).
10
Sergei Rachmaninoff, Polnoe sobranie dukhovno-muzykal’nykh proizvedenii [The Complete Sacred
Choral works] edited by Vladimir Morosan (Madison, Connecticut: Musica Russica, 1994).
11
Though recordings were made of the work beginning in the 1960s, they were not available for purchase
by Soviet audiences. The first public concert of the complete work was presented in 1982 by the Leningrad
Capella, directed by Vladislav Chernushenko.
13
The importance of these liturgical presentations within the context of the work’s
performance history has not always been received well in the past:
The tradition, begun sometime in the 1960s of performing it in a service around
the time of Rachmaninoff’s birthday in one of the Moscow churches, must be
looked upon as an idiosyncratic practice that has little to contribute to the real
12
issues of Orthodox liturgical aesthetics and performance practice.”
The use of the Rachmaninoff All-Night Vigil in liturgical services, even only once per
year, particularly within the context of an era when no other performances of the work,
either sacred or secular, existed, is striking and must be re-evaluated in light of the radical
political and social changes of the last two decades. It seems ironic in today’s post-Soviet
era to limit the work to only secular performance, disregarding the importance of a major
composition on a religious text having a living liturgical performance tradition, let alone
in a nation under communist rule.
There is no scholarly work available advancing the legitimacy of the work’s
liturgical performance history. With the exception of Morosan’s foreward to his edition
of the work, there are no sources for conductors to easily reference in regard to what the
All-Night Vigil service is and how its historical development may affect our
understanding of the fifteen movements set musically by Rachmaninoff.
The fall of Eastern bloc Communism in the early 1990s has provided an
opportunity for greater Western scholarship of and access to Orthodox liturgical music.
Though there are now performance editions of Russian Orthodox music available in the
United States, because of the complexity of the traditional services of the church,
conductors still face many questions concerning how this music would be used in or has
12
Vladimir Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lxvi.
14
developed from a liturgical context. Many conductors believe that Rachmaninoff’s AllNight Vigil has only been, and is only to be used for concert performance. Better
understanding of the liturgical framework surrounding the All-Night Vigil, and the work’s
performance history will allow conductors to prepare presentations that more accurately
portray the Orthodox context listeners would have experientially understood when the
All-Night Vigil was premiered, and how it is understood by many contemporary listeners
today.
15
CHAPTER TWO
THE ALL-NIGHT VIGIL SERVICE
Overview
The All-Night Vigil is infrequently included in the contemporary liturgical cycle
of Christians outside the Orthodox tradition. Though the All-Night Vigil is currently most
often associated with the Russian Orthodox Church, variants of this liturgical form were
13
in practice long before Rus’ accepted Christianity in the tenth century. The All-Night
Vigil service has historically developed as part of the Daily Office of Christian worship.
14
Predating the Great Schism of 1054, the All-Night Vigil’s roots can be found in the early
Church and liturgical history common to both East and West.
15
Most scholarship in the field of liturgical theology has not dealt with the Daily
Office. Those engaged in scholarship relevant to the Daily Office have often, but not
16
exclusively, been experts on the Byzantine tradition. The Daily Office as practiced in
13
In the tenth century, Russia was part of a larger geographical territory known as Rus’, which stretched
from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea, with its capital in Kiev. Rus’ adopted Christianity in 988.
14
The Daily Office is the cycle of services as practiced in the Christian tradition in the course of a single
twenty-four hour period.
15
This paper will limit the term “East” to the four canonical Orthodox Patriarchates (Jerusalem, Antioch,
Georgia, and Constantinople) from the ancient Church, excluding Rome because of its separation from the
Pentarchy in 1054. This paper includes in the term “East” all other Orthodox Patriarchates recognized by
the four canonical Orthodox Patriarchates: Georgia, Serbia, Russia, Bulgaria, and Romania. Other
churches (Armenian, Coptic, East Syrian, and Indian) can be considered part of the Eastern tradition, but
are not in communion with the Orthodox Patriarchates. “West” refers in this paper to what is today known
as the Catholic Patriarchate of Rome, and any subsequent divisions that have occurred from Catholicism
since the Great Schism of 1054.
16
“Byzantine tradition” refers to the liturgical rites as practiced in the Christian East both during the
historical period of the Byzantine Empire, and as developed and practiced by the churches of the East after
the fall of Byzantium, and still in use today.
16
the Byzantine rite is regarded as a confusing and overwhelming tradition for those not
accustomed to the Eastern Church:
This daily office is in a league of its own. The sheer volume of material makes it
difficult to discern any clear form to the services, and the amount of variety and
possible changes means that anyone innocently trying to follow them with a book
will quickly flounder. Its creators over many generations have fused together
material from many different sources, giving the impression of an attempt to
preserve, at least in token form, as much relevant liturgical matter as they knew
of. Some parts of it are impossible to perform fully (for example, the priest’s
silent prayers at the beginning of matins); and some have shrunk to a mere
shadow (such as brief versicles from once-entire psalms). Scattered fragments of
old forms lie embedded in it, making it rather like a battered celestial body.
For the Westerner, Byzantine worship raises puzzling questions. In particular:
17
how could anyone arrive at such a form of daily office?
Within the scholarship available on the Daily Office, few experts have undertaken
research on the development of the All-Night Vigil service. It is by far the most complex
of all the services of the Daily Office, complicated by rubric variants and widespread
individualized practices of its component parts. Additionally, study of the All-Night
Vigil’s history as a form is complicated by a lack of manuscripts, with extant sources
lagging behind chronological development by hundreds of years, and varied
reconstruction theories presented by contemporary liturgists. “The whole question of
vigils remains fraught with pitfalls for the unwary historian of liturgy.”
18
The most significant work of scholarship on the Daily Office is Robert Taft’s The
Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: the origins of the Divine Office and its meaning
17
George Guiver, Company of Voices: Daily Prayer and the People of God (Eugene: Wipf & Stock
Publishers, 2008), 77.
18
Robert Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: The Origins of the Divine Office and Its Meaning for
Today (Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1993), 165.
17
for today. The most extensive contribution to the history of the All-Night Vigil as served
in the Russian Orthodox Church has been Nikolai Dmitrievich Uspensky’s book,
Pravoslavnaya vechernya: Istoriko-liturgicheskiy ocherk. Chin vsenoshnogo bdeniya
(agripniya) na Pravoslavnom Vostoke i v Russkoy Tserkvi [Orthodox vespers: a
19
historical-liturgical guide. The All-Night Vigil rite (“vigil” ) in the Orthodox East and
the Russian Church]. Unfortunately, scholars increasingly consider sections of
Uspensky’s work, written in the 1920s and periodically revised and published up through
the 1970s, out of date with currently available manuscripts and methodology. The
complete book is still only available in its original Russian text, though a short extract has
been translated into English.
20
This particular study of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil must limit discussion of
the All-Night Vigil service to major periods of its development as a liturgical rite without
delving into myriad details of liturgical theology. Two thousand years of historical
development cannot be given the attention it is due in such a document. Those interested
in the subject should see the works and authors cited above. This paper excludes all but
periphery discussion of services of the Daily Office other than the All-Night Vigil.
19
Uspensky does not use “vigil” twice, but inserts the Greek word agrypnia in parenthesis. Agrypnia
means “without sleeping.”
20
Nikolai Uspensky, Evening Worship in the Orthodox Church, translated and edited by Paul Lazor,
(Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1985).
18
The All-Night Vigil is comprised of three separate services of the Daily Office:
21
Great Vespers, Matins, and First Hour. Vigil is derived from the Latin verb vigilia,
22
meaning, “To keep watch.” Therefore, any all-night vigil can simply be defined as the
act of keeping watch throughout an entire night.
Early Christians and Evening Worship
The Jewish traditions that preceded and existed at the same time as the early
Christian Church impacted the genesis of what eventually became a Christian daily cycle
of prayer. “Morning and evening were the most general and privileged hours of prayer in
23
the several traditions of Judaism.” It is likely that the early Christians would have
24
adapted their prayer life from these previous customs. The Jewish evening prayer
service is described in Leviticus chapter 24:
The principal element of this service is the rite of lighting the lamp and placing it
“outside the veil of the testimony, in the tent of the meeting.” The lamp is to burn
“from evening to morning before the Lord continually,” and in front of it Aaron
25
and his sons are to offer incense.
The evening ritual was the closing formal corporate service of the day. However,
individual prayer at night was also common in the first century. Jesus kept an all-night
21
The divisions of time over the course of a day come from the Roman tradition, including twelve hours for
day and twelve hours for night. The twelve hours of both day and night were divided into four “watches.”
The first hour of the day corresponds approximately to 6:00 a.m., modern time.
22
23
24
25
Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd ed., s.v. “Vigil.”
Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 9.
Ibid.
Uspensky, Evening Worship in the Orthodox Church, 14.
19
vigil of prayer: “And it came to pass in those days, that [Jesus] went out into a mountain
to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God (Luke 6:12).” References to night prayer
by the followers of Jesus also exist in the New Testament: “the disciples imitated Jesus in
26
praying at night (Acts 16:25; 2 Cor 6:5).” However, there is no explanation as to the
nature of night prayer for the early Christians, or what, if any, formal elements or texts
may have been part of such prayer. Therefore, though keeping a vigil “all-night” was
common to both the Jewish and early Christian tradition in the first century, it is vital to
note the distinction between the formal rite of corporate evening prayer (including the
lamplighting ritual) and individual private night prayer.
Evening and night prayer were established aspects of Christian practice by the
third century. A preliminary monastic Daily Office gradually formalized during the
period in Egypt, including night prayer:
In the Pedagogue 2:9, Clement of Alexandria (d. ca.215) says: “We must
therefore sleep so as to be easily awakened. For it is said: “Let your loins be girt,
and your lamps burning, and be like men who are waiting for their master to come
home from the marriage feast, so that they may open to him at once when he
comes and knocks. Blessed are those servants whom the master finds awake when
he comes” (Luke 12:35-37). For a sleeping man is of no more use than a dead
one. Therefore at night we ought to rise often and bless God. For blessed are they
who watch for him, and so make themselves like the angels, whom we call
“watchers.” A man asleep is worth nothing, no more than if he were not alive. But
he who has the light watches, and the darkness does not overcome him (John 1:5),
27
nor does sleep, since darkness does not.
Vigils in Egypt at this time would have been individual private prayer or prayer in small
groups held in monastic cells. However, the nature of individual prayer would have been
26
27
Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 9.
Ibid., 15.
20
considered universal. Even if one prayed alone in a monastic cell: “each person’s prayer
28
was seen as being a participation in the prayer of the whole Church.” All prayer,
individual or corporate, would have been understood as eschatological in nature, and “the
devout Christian of the second and third centuries was expected to take seriously the
apostolic injunction to ‘pray without ceasing’ (1 Thess. 5:17).”
29
Accounts of corporate prayer at the beginning of the third century refer to
30
“assemblies at night,” (nocturnes conuoationibus). These gatherings would likely have
included a communal evening agape (love) meal and the lamplighting ritual that would
31
have been a familiar element from the earlier Jewish tradition. The agape meal could
include a celebration of the Eucharist or be non-Eucharistic. Sacred music was part of the
burgeoning practice: “the psalms were generally used in connection with community
meals, whether Eucharistic or not, where various individuals sang either one of the
32
canonical psalms or a hymn of their own composition to the others.” Tertullian
described such an agape meal as early as 197: “After the washing of hands and the lights,
28
Paul Bradshaw, Daily Prayer in the Early Church: A Study of the Origin and Early Development of the
Divine Office (Eugene, Oregon: WIPF and Stock, 2008), 105.
29
30
31
32
Bradshaw, Daily Prayer in the Early Church, 47.
Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 18.
Ibid.
Bradshaw, Daily Prayer in the Early Church, 106.
21
someone who is able is prompted to stand in the center and sing a hymn from Sacred
33
Scripture or of his own composition.”
Despite having primary sources from the third century that mention evening
prayer and night prayer, it is difficult to draw conclusions regarding practices during the
period, as “the evidence from the first three Christian centuries, though not disparate, is
diverse enough to exclude any facile attempt to harmonize it all and fit it into one system
or horarium without doing violence to the facts.”
34
The Easter Vigil was a commonality in the early Christian communities. Vigils
were also held as group periods of prayer before martyrdom, or at the tombs of martyrs.
The first available manuscript reference to “liturgical vigils in honor of the martyrs” is
the Apocryphal Acts of the Martyrdom of St. Saturninus of Toulouse, a document from
the year 300.
35
The early centuries of Chrisitianity were marked by persecution, and Christians
were in the minority in their communities. Corporate gathering would have attracted
unwanted attention and at times was extremely dangerous: “except for an occasional
nocturnal vigil…the only two times when Christians gathered regularly on weekdays was
36
in the morning for instruction or in the evening for an agape supper.” The development
of formalized liturgical rites for corporate evening or night worship did not flourish until
33
34
35
36
Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 18.
Ibid., 27.
Ibid., 166.
Ibid., 21.
22
the new religion’s legitimacy in the Roman Empire was recognized in the fourth century.
East and West: The Rise of Byzantium
Though not a baptized Christian until he was on his deathbed, Roman Emperor
Constantine considered his military victory at the Battle of Milvian Bridge in 312, and his
subsequent ascendancy to the imperial throne, a direct result of the intercession of the
Christian God. In 313, Constantine signed the Edict of Milan, granting Christians the
legal right to freedom of worship without fear of persecution The fledgling Christian
Church suddenly and unexpectedly had an imperial patron, “showering enormous sums
of money on the Church and building lavish houses of congregation and martyrs’
37
shrines.” As a result, Christian church life throughout the Empire became public and
formalized:
The effects were immediately visible in church organization, in art and
architecture, and in liturgy. Ecclesiastical dioceses and provinces were organized,
synods held, monasteries founded, basilicas and baptisteries built, mosaics created
to adorn them. And Christian worship, formerly the furtive affair of a persecuted
minority, became an integral part of the daily public life of the Roman Empire.
38
The resulting flowering of liturgical uses was striking.
Though liturgical development flourished, it could not possibly be called uniform.
39
The early fourth-century Church was still defining its major tenets and doctrines at
ecumenical councils, and immediate histories of the time relate the wide variety of
37
Cyril Mango, “New Religion, Old Culture,” in The Oxford History of Byzantium, ed. Cyril Mango
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 103.
38
39
Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 31.
Peter Sarris, “The Eastern Roman Empire from Constantine to Heraclius (306-641),” in The Oxford
History of Byzantium, ed. Cyril Mango (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 25.
23
liturgical practice: “to give a complete catalogue of all the various customs and
ceremonial observances in use throughout every city and country would be difficult–or
rather, impossible.”
40
Constantine established a new capital for the Roman Empire at Byzantium,
consecrated in 330 as Constantinople, which would dominate imperial history for the
next thousand years. The two imperial cathedrals of Constantinople were Hagia Eirene,
the first church in the city, and built slightly later, Hagia Sophia, known as the Great
Church. The practice for services at the Great Church became known as the asmatic
office.
41
In general, the liturgical offices celebrated according to the cathedral tradition of
Constantinople are referred to as the “asmatic office,” or “sung office”…the
adjective “asmatic” means that, at these celebrations, “nothing is said that is not
sung except for the prayers of the priest and the petitions of the deacon.” The
asmatic office essentially consisted of the antiphonal singing of psalms following
the Psalter of the Great Church, which was divided into antiphons...It is evident
that the asmatic office underwent its own evolution. However, the circumstances
of the origin of its ordo are unknown…Mansvetov notes correctly that “We do not
42
know what the sung office was in its original form.”
The cathedral office of the Great Church would become the common practice for
all non-monastic churches in and near the capital city, and did not include continual night
prayer in its Daily Office. In Constantinople of the fourth century, “public, common
40
Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 31.
41
For further information regarding the ordo of the asmatic office, see Nikolai Uspensky, Evening
Worship, 54-57.
42
Archbishop Job Getcha, The Typikon Decoded (Yonkers: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2012), 41.
24
43
vigils were only occasional assemblies.” These would have been “occasional cathedral
vigils for particular needs: to prepare for a feast with the Eucharist, to honor martyrs on
their anniversary, to counteract the Arians, to gain strength in time of persecution. The
core of these vigils was a series of psalms and lections…psalmody, lessons, prostrations,
and prayers.”
44
Constantinopolitan monastics developed a particular and unique approach to the
Daily Office, unlike the cathedral rite of the Great Church.
The akoimetoi (lit. “sleepless ones”) were pledged to perpetual praise of God;
45
their offices (popularly known as the akolouthia ton akoimeton) were continuous
and uninterrupted, performed by three choirs in succession, each doing one eight46
hour shift per day…an unending cycle of twenty-four offices, one per hour….”
Though Constantinople was the imperial capital, it was not the only vital center of
47
liturgical development for the Christian East. Other major centers included Antioch,
Alexandria, Cappadocia, and most importantly, Jerusalem. Because Jerusalem was the
city where Jesus experienced his final week, trial, execution, and resurrection, the sites of
43
44
Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 171.
Ibid., 177.
45
Akolouthia means “succession,” as in a succession of events, or a liturgical rite, or office. Akolouthia
ton akoimeton, therefore, means the “Office of the Sleepless Ones.”
46
Alexander Kazhdan, ed. The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, vol. 1 (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1991), 46.
47
Rome declined throughout the fourth century as Constantinople, the “New Rome,” ascended. After the
fall of Rome to the Visigoths in 410, the Daily Office in the Western part of the Roman Empire developed
under very different historical factors than in the Eastern part of the Empire. Though there were attempts
made by the Byzantine emperors, most notably Justinian in the sixth century, to re-establish the importance
of Rome, these attempts ultimately failed. The term “Byzantine Empire” is a relatively contemporary
construction, credited to Hieronymous Wolf (1516-1580). Until the fall of Constantinople in the fifteenth
century, the territories of both East and West would have been considered part of the Roman Empire, and
its citizens considered themselves Romans. For a detailed discussion of the development of the Daily office
in the West, see Taft, The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, chapters 6 through 9.
25
the city were considered holy and natural gathering places for Christian worship. The
liturgical practices of these two cities, Constantinople and Jerusalem, would influence
each other and ultimately form the Byzantine rite as understood today.
48
Jerusalem and the Anastasis
The tomb of Christ, or Holy Sepulchre, was a particularly significant site for
Christians in Jerusalem. Constantine had a basilica built on the site complex, known in
49
the East as the Anastasis, which was dedicated on September 14, 335. The diaries of
the pilgrim nun Egeria, who traveled to Jerusalem at the end of the fourth century (ca.
50
381-384), describe daily services at the Anastasis. Written to her fellow sister monastics
in Spain, the account demonstrates that daily worship in the time of Egeria’s travels were
already highly formalized, structured, and had complete service sections that would have
been familiar and recognizable to monastic pilgrims. These services included psalms,
antiphons, hymns, intercessions, clerical blessings and dismissals. The basic format of
Daily Office Egeria described is still an important component in the Byzantine All-Night
Vigil service structure as used today.
48
51
Robert Taft, The Byzantine Rite: A Short History (Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1992),
56-57.
49
50
51
Resurrection.
See Appendix A.
See Appendix A.
26
Egeria used the term “vigil” in a particular manner in regards to the Resurrection
52
services, denoting prayer that “was not part of the cursus of offices.” This vigil began at
cock-crow (approximately four o’clock a.m.) and consisted of three antiphons with
53
prayers, intercessions, a Gospel reading, blessing and dismissal. The evening Vespers
services Egeria observed included the lamplighting ritual, psalms, hymns, antiphons,
intercessions, and a blessing dismissal. This structure is the basic scaffolding of the Great
Vespers portion of the All-Night Vigil as served today (see Table 2.1).
52
53
54
Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 52.
Ibid., 55.
Ibid., 51.
54
27
Table 2.1 Resurrectional Great Vespers
Monastic Vespers
Today
Fixed
Opening
Monastic
Psalmody
Lucernarium
Introit
Cathedral Vespers
Responsory
Intercessions
Rogation
Aposticha
Concluding
Prayers
Egeria
Clergy Blessing
“Come, let us
worship”
Psalm 103
Great Litany
Kathisma:
“Blessed is the
man….”
Little Litany
Lighting of the
lamps*
Lord, I call
Psalms (including
(verses of Psalm Psalm 140) and
140)
Antiphons
Gladsome
Entrance of the
Light* (Entrance Bishop
of Clergy)
Prokimenon
Hymns and
Antiphons
Augmented
Intercessions and
Litany
Blessing
Vouchsafe, O
Lord
Evening Litany
Litya**
(Stichera and
petitions)
Aposticha
Nunc dimittis
Trisagion
Prayers
Troparia***
Dismissal
Dismissal
Litya**
Rachmaninoff
All-Night Vigil
Movement #
1
2
3
4*
5
6
*
At the Anastasis, the lamplighting preceded the psalmody.
**
At the Anastasis, the Litya included processions to the different holy sites of the complex,
following the dismissal. Today, the practice is to hold the Litya in the narthex, or outside, in front of the
church.
***
Troparia are variable, not always “Bogoroditse Devo, raduysya” [Rejoice, O Virgin Theotokos].
28
The services of the Jerusalem practice at the Anastasis as experienced by Egeria
would have included those presided over by the bishop and his clergy as part of the Daily
Office, and also corporate prayer led by monastics, as the bishop physically could not
55
have presided over the nearly continual presence of pilgrims at the Anastasis. Monastics
were needed to help lead prayer at the Anastasis, but it was more typical for monastics to
live outside the urban context, within their own community.
56
Sabaitic Typikon
Two major types of ascetic monastic communities existed in the fourth and fifth
centuries in the Roman Empire:
In the early period rural monastic buildings took two forms. One was that of the
lavra where monks lived separately in cells scattered around the church and
service buildings. In the other form, the coenobium, monks had communal
57
quarters and a refectory.
The coenobium included daily interaction among members of the community, whereas
life in the lavra was a more solitary form of monasticism.
In the lavra, the hermits lived during the week in cells that were remote from each
other. On Saturdays and Sundays they assembled in the church, located at the lavra’s
core, for a communal prayer and meal. In a coenobium the monks met daily in the
church and in the dining room. In both types the daily schedule was divided between
55
Egeria mentions the “monazontes and parthenae.” See Appendix A.
56
“Typikon” is the rule of a monastic community. The Typikon covers all general issues of life at a
monastery, and “liturgical Typikon” refers specifically to the ordo of services. Typikon can also refer to the
book where the rule of the monastic community has been written down.
57
Marlia Mango, “Monasticism,” in The Oxford History of Byzantium, ed. Cyril Mango (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2002), 212.
29
58
prayer and manual labor, which in the lavra was done in the cell.
For both types of communities, weekday prayer at night would be announced by
the precentor knocking on the sounding board, spurring monastics to rise from sleep.
59
“In the coenobium all the monks would hurry to the church for the night prayer, while
60
each cell dweller or anchorite would recite the night psalms in his own cell or cave.” In
the coenobitic tradition, there would be corporate night prayer of continuous psalmody
held in the church, but the monastics would return to sleep before coming to the church
for morning prayer.
In the lavra tradition, monastics would not go to the church on weekday nights.
Instead, they would rise from sleep and remain in their cells where they would pray
alone. “Palestinian monastic life was lavriote, not strictly coenobitic, ‘monk’ was more a
61
job description than a permanent address, and koinonia was a precarious business at
62
best.” The geographic distance from the monastic cells to the church of the lavra
community and the dangerous cliff topography of the Palestinian desert would have made
daily corporate night prayer virtually impossible.
58
Joseph Patrich. Sabas, Leader of Palestinian Monasticism: A Comparative Study in Eastern
Monasticism, Fourth to Seventh Centuries. (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1995), 3.
59
60
61
62
Ibid., 233.
Ibid., 235.
The Greek word κοινωνία (koinonia) means communion; in this context, community.
Robert Taft, “Mount Athos: A Late Chapter in the Byzantine Rite,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers, vol 42
(1988): 187.
30
However, the lavra cell dwellers were expected to gather in corporate prayer at
the lavra church on Saturday and Sunday. “The lavrites returned to their cells sometime
after the Saturday communal meal and then came again to the church for the Sunday
63
office.” Travel by foot at night among the cliffs must not have been a particularly
pleasant experience, or a safe one. A major innovation in the Saturday and Sunday
practice of prayer developed in the late fifth century at the Great Lavra of Mar Saba, the
monastery of St. Sabas, that eliminated the need for lavra monastics to return to their
cells:
Sabas instructed that at the Lavra “an all-night vigil (agrypnia) be held,
uninterruptedly from evening until the morning, in both the churches on Sundays
and dominical feasts.” These vigils were initiated by Sabas upon the dedication of
64
the Theotokos Church (July 1, 501).
The Resurrectional All-Night Vigils at Mar Saba included hundred of monastics:
The Saturday night agrypnia was of great importance in this system: as in Lower
Egypt, the brotherhood assembled for common synaxes only on the weekend. The
hundreds of anchorites who lived in small groups or as solitaries in scattered huts
and grottoes came in from the wilderness for the vigil in droves, overflowing the
65
Church of St. Sabas into the courtyard and surrounding chapels….
The new approach at Mar Saba would have meant that after the evening prayer, the
monastics would remain in the church and spending the entire night in communal prayer.
This was a major change in established monastic practice:
The Sunday agrypnia was an important innovation that Sabas introduced into the
63
64
65
Patrich, Sabas, Leader of Palestinian Monasticism, 239.
Ibid., 237.
Taft, “Mount Athos,” 187-8.
31
66
Palestinian monastic rite. There was nothing like it either in Pharan or in the
laurae of Euthymius and Gerasimus. During the sixth century it spread to other
monasteries, and by the end of that century it was practiced in Choziba. At about
the same time it is also attested in Sinai…Cyril of Scythopolis does not give any
67
details about the ordo of this office.
Sabas had a written rule for the monastics of Mar Saba that he transferred to other
monastic communities. Unfortunately, manuscripts of that written rule, or Typikon, do
not exist dating from the time of Sabas. Scholars to date cannot confirm if his written rule
included a specific liturgical order for the Daily Office or only the general rule of life for
68
the monastery. However, a specific ordo for the Sabaite All-Night Vigil is described in
69
an account which dates to “the late sixth or early seventh century.” This description is
the core of the Matins portion of the All-Night Vigil service of the Russian Orthodox
Church today (see Table 2.2).
66
67
70
One of the first Palestinian monasteries, established by Chariton in 330.
Patrich, Sabas, Leader of Palestinian Monasticism, 239.
68
Miguel Arranz, “N. D. Uspensky: The Office of the All-Night Vigil in the Greek Church and in the
Russian Church,” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 24 (1980): 106.
69
70
Taft, “Mount Athos,” 188.
Ibid.
32
Table 2.2 Resurrectional Matins and First Hour
Nocturnal Psalmody
Matins
Hexapsalmos
Kathisma
Matins
Polyeleon
Canon**
Today
Sabaite Practice
Glory to God in the highest….
O Lord, open Thou my lips….
Psalms 3, 37, 62, 87, 102, 142
Great Litany
God is the Lord
Troparia
Stasis I Variable Kathisma
Psalms 1-50
Little Litany
Our Father
Kathisma Hymns
Kyrie eleison (50x)
(Patristic Reading)
Lesson from James
Stasis
Variable Kathisma
Psalms 51-100
II
Little Litany
Our Father
Kathisma Hymns
Kyrie eleison (50x)
(Patristic Reading)
Lesson from 1 or 2 Peter
Stasis
Variable Kathisma
Psalms 101-150
III
Little Litany
Our Father
Kyrie eleison (50x)
Lesson from 1, 2, or 3 John
Psalms 134-135
Evlogetaria
Little Litany
Hypakoe and Kathisma hymns
(Patristic Reading)
Hymn of Degrees
Prokeimenon
“Let everything that breathes”
Gospel Reading
“Having beheld the
Resurrection”
Psalm 50
Through the prayers of the
Apostles….
Prayer
Odes 1, 3
Odes 1, 2, 3
Little Litany
Our Father
Kathisma hymn
Kyrie eleison
Odes 4, 5, 6
Little Litany
Our Father
ANV*
7
8
9
10
33
Kyrie eleison
Odes 7, 8
My Soul magnifies the Lord
Ode 9
11
Ode 9
Little Litany
Exapostelarion
The Praises
Psalms 148-150
Stichera
Great Doxology
12
Troparion
“Today Salvation”
13
or
and
“Having risen”
14
Litanies
Creed
Our Father
Augmented Litany
Kyrie eleison (300x)
Morning Litany
Dismissal
Dismissal
Concluding Prayer
* Rachmaninoff All-Night Vigil Movement number
** The canons in contemporary use are freely composed hymnography. The Biblical
71
Odes were used in Sabaitic practice.
Structure Common to all the Hours
Kontakion and Ikos
71
First Hour
Texts
Invitatory
Come let us worship….
Psalms
Psalms 5, 89, 100
Glory…Alleluia…
Kyrie eleison (3x)
Troparion of the Hour
PsalmVerse Psalm 118: 133
Trisagion
Our Father
Kontakion
Kyrie eleison (40x)
Prayer
Dismissal
Vzbrannoy Voevode
[O, champion leader]
Taft, “Mount Athos,” 188.
ANV
15
34
The Byzantine Dark Ages
The evolution of liturgical rites in Palestine, both at the Anastasis and nearby
monasteries, was radically affected in the seventh century by two dramatic invasions. The
Persian army first sacked Jerusalem in 614, and dominated the region until 630.
Jerusalem was briefly reclaimed by Emperor Heraclius in 630, but the Arab invasion of
637 definitively ended Byzantine control over the city and region for the next four
hundred years. Many monasteries were decimated and monastics either fled their
communities or were massacred.
Mar Saba faced a similar fate: Forty-four of its monastics were tortured and
72
killed, and the Great Lavra was severely damaged. Mar Saba was rebuilt again, though
with drastically reduced numbers of community members. In spite of the difficulties of
life under the Arab Muslim occupation, a massive influx of newly composed liturgical
poetry (hymnography) came from Mar Saba in the eighth century:
As often happens after violent destruction, a remarkably creative period followed,
and a new monastic office was produced via a massive infusion of ecclesiastical
poetry into the former staid and sober monastic psalmody [of an earlier
73
period]….
Many of the service texts considered Proper to the Orthodox liturgical yearly cycle date
to this time period, and were written by monastics of Mar Saba: Sophronius (later
Patriarch of Jerusalem,) Andrew of Crete, John Damascene, and Cosmas of Maioumas.
Their innovative hymnographic texts are characterized by highly complex poetic
72
73
Patrich, Sabas, Leader of Palestinian Monasticism, 326.
Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 276.
35
structure and style that elucidate the major tenets of the faith within the context of the
weekly, festal, and Paschal cycles.
Though monastic centers produced a tremendous number of new hymns and even
entire new forms of liturgical compositions during the eighth century, the Empire as a
whole experienced great upheaval. As a result, today’s historians of both the secular and
sacred aspects of Byzantine culture have few primary sources regarding the period.
These years [641-780] can rightly be called the Dark Age of Byzantine history: a
time of military reverses, political instability, economic regression, and declining
education, which has left but a scanty record for modern historians. The evidence
is so poor that we often have trouble not only reconstructing the course of events
and evaluating the personalities of leading figures, but even discerning the
74
broadest outlines of development.
Jerusalem was not the only city under siege. Constantinople was threatened for
nearly two centuries by both external and internal political and religious conflict. In 717,
Constantinople had nearly fallen to the Arab army, and the imperial city was riddled with
political strife and usurpation. Plague repeatedly decimated the populace.
75
In spite of the upheavals, the Great Church at Constantinople had fully developed
an intricate rite, reflective of the grandeur expected of an imperial church. The Daily
Office of the Great Church did not include an All-Night Vigil service. Vespers was
served in the evening and Matins was served in the morning to their own specific sung
office. As late as the ninth century, the Constantinopolitan monasteries continued the
twenty-four hour system of perpetual vigil:
74
Warren Treadgold, “The Struggle for Survival (641-780),” in The Oxford History of Byzantium, ed. Cyril
Mango, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 129.
75
Ibid., 149.
36
…in the organization of their liturgical life, apart from the liturgy of the Eucharist
the monasteries of the patriarchate were still marching to the beat of their own,
different drum. The monks of the capital, called akoimetoi or “sleepless” because
they celebrated in shifts an uninterrupted cursus of hours, had their distinct
76
office.
The overwhelming crisis for the Church in the eigth and ninth centuries was
Iconoclasm (726-843). Iconoclasm was the rejection and condemnation of venerating
sacred pictorial depictions. At its height, Iconoclasm included not only the destruction of
sacred images (often including destruction of other sacred items in churches,) but also the
persecution, anathematization, and even execution of iconophiles, particularly monastics.
Many monastic communities were disbanded by imperial decree and monasteries
77
appropriated by the state. Those that survived became centers of outspoken expression
against Iconoclasm, and the emperors that favored it.
Studite Typikon
One monastic was particularly vocal in his opposition to Iconoclasm. The Abbott
of the Sakkudion monastery in Bythinia, Theodore, was brought to Constantinople after
the first wave of Iconoclasm ended in 787 to restore the monastery of St. John the
Baptist, at Stoudios.
He summoned to the capital some monks of St. Sabas [Mar Saba] to help combat
iconoclasm, for in the Sabaitic chants Theodore discerned a sure guide of
orthodoxy….So it was the office of St. Sabas, not the akolouthia ton akoimeton
then currently in use in the monasteries of Constantinople, which the monks of
Stoudios would synthesize with material from the asmatike akolouthia or
cathedral office of the Great Church to create hybrid “Studite” office, the ancestor
76
77
Taft, The Byzantine Rite: A Short History, 45.
J. M. Hussey, The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), 42.
37
of the one that has come down to us to this day: a Palestinian horologion with its
psalmody and hymns grafted onto a skeleton of litanies and their collects from the
78
evchology of the Great Church.
The monasteries of Constantinople adopted this hybridized practice in the last quarter of
79
the eighth century, and continued to add to its hymnography. The practice of a twentyfour hour office of “sleepless ones” was eliminated. However, the Studite Typikon
functioned over a coenobitic monastic community of approximately one thousand
80
monks. Though the community adopted the Palestinian lavrite practice, coenobitics had
81
no need for an All-Night Vigil service, and none appears in the Studite Typikon.
So the difference between Studite and Sabaitic usage concerns mainly the order of
night prayer…Psalmody and vigils were the core of the prayer of the Palestinian
anchorites, and this agrypnia will be one of the main charecteristics distinguishing
the looser lavriote and hesychast organization from the tight cenobitism of the
Studites, who…had a lighter pensum of psalmody and fewer offices, as well as
82
the affrontery to sleep at night.
The juxtaposition of the newly introduced Palestinian monastic practice of the
Daily Office with elements (litanies and collects) of the service style of the Great Church,
combined with an influx of new hymnography, initially Sabaitic but increasingly Studite,
superimposed upon a weekly, Paschal, and yearly cycle undoubtedly caused confusion. A
78
Taft, “Mount Athos,” 182.
79
For those interested in the development of Byzantine and Russian hymnography, two fine sources to
consult are Alexander Kazhdan’s A History of Byzantine Literature (650-850) and Sister Ignatya (Puzik’s)
volume Tserkovnye Pesnotvortsi [Church Hymnographers]. See bibliography for full citations.
80
81
82
Taft, “Mount Athos,” 186.
Ibid., 186.
Ibid., 186-187.
38
83
written rule was needed to avoid liturgical disorder. “The first Studite Typika or
84
liturgical ordos to govern their use were composed in the ninth or tenth century.” At
approximately the same time, Rus’ accepted Christianity.
The All-Night Vigil in Russia
Russia was once part of a larger territory known collectively as Rus’. During the
first millennium of Christianity, the people of Rus’ were pagan. In 988, Great-Prince
Vladimir of Kiev unified the people of Rus’ through the Orthodox faith as practiced in
85
the Byzantine capital of Constantinople. As described in the Russian Primary
Chronicle, a mass baptism in the Dniepr River and conversion of the populace marked
86
the official formal beginning of Christianity in Rus’. After his conversion, Great-Prince
Vladimir was allowed to marry the Byzantine Emperor’s sister, Anna, cementing the
political and religious ties between Kievan Rus’ and Constantinople. Liturgical services
and music came to Rus’ via Byzantine clergy and service books.
It is likely that initially after the conversion of Rus’, liturgical services were not
widespread: there were neither churches nor enough trained clergy to service them.
Initally, churches would have been associated with court centers, and later, fledgling
83
84
Taft, “Mount Athos,” 182.
Taft, Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 276.
85
Vladimir’s grandmother, Great-Princess Olga, had previously converted to Orthodoxy and was baptized
in 957 in Constantinople. The Byzantine Emperor, Constantine VII, was her godfather. Great-Princess
Olga’s son, Svyatoslav (Vladimir’s father,) remained a pagan throughout his life, and died in 971.
86
Hussey, The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire, 119.
39
monastic communities. They may have used either the Daily Office of the Great Church
of Constantinople or the Studite practice. However, the very nature of the services of the
Great Church, formal rites of a sung office with imperial processions, would have been
impractical for the newly baptized Rus’.
By 1067, a copy of the Studite Typikon by Patriarch Alexios had already been
brought from Constantinople to the Kievo-Pichersk monastery, where it was translated
87
from its original Greek into Slavonic. The Studite-Aleksiev Typikon “was adopted by
other Russian monasteries and was spread by bishops and hegumens who came from the
88
Kiev cloister.” It is quite possible “…that the asmatikos [sung] office was followed in
secular [cathedral] churches while, from the time of St. Thodosius of the Caves, the
Typikon of the Studios was followed in monasteries.”
89
Neither the asmatikos of the Great Church of Constantinople, nor the StuditeAleksiev Typikon included the All-Night Vigil service in its Daily Office. Resurrectional
celebrations of the Daily Office included Great Vespers and Matins served separately.
There were no Resurrectional All-Night Vigils in Russia before the fourteenth century.
87
A.M. Pentkovsky, Typikon Patriarha Aleksiia Studita v Vizantii i na Rusi [Typikon of Patriarch Alexey
the Studite in Byzantium and Rus’] (Moscow: Moscow Patriarchate, 2001), 426.
88
89
Ibid., 427.
Arranz, 87.
40
The All-Night Vigil only became possible in Russia during the late fourteenth century
with the arrival of the neo-Sabaite Jerusalem Typikon, still in use today.
90
The neo-Sabaite Typikon in Russia
In Constantinople, all church life was severely affected by the Fourth Crusade. In
91
1204, the capital city of Constantinople fell to the Latin Crusaders. As a result, the
Byzantine imperial house, the Patriarch, and most of the Church hierarchy fled to Nicaea,
while the capital’s cathedral churches and monastic centers alike were devastated. “Many
Constantinopolitan monasteries, included in their number the Studite [monastery] with its
92
93
great ustav, were subjucated, abandoned or destroyed.” With the shift of imperial and
hierarchical leaders to Nicaea, the complex liturgical practices of the Great Church and
the Studite monasteries were abandoned in favor of a simpler monastic practice:
Starting from this time, the gradual weakening strength of the empire, and
connected with it the existing government and economic ties of the Church, even
more so enabled the successful spreading of the Jerusalem ustav. The thirteenth
century can be considered the time [of] local spreading of the Jerusalem ustav on
94
the Orthodox East.
90
The “neo” in “neo-Sabaitic” typikon refers to the developments primarily in regards to the Matins canon,
and the divisions of the Psalter in winter and summer seasons. For more information on the neo-Sabaite
Typikon, see Taft “Mount Athos,” 188-192.
91
92
Hussey, The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire, 185.
Ustav is a Russian variant of the Greek word “Typikon.”
93
Nikolai Uspensky, Pravoslavnaia vechernia: istoriko-liturgicheskii ocherk. Chin vsenoshchnogo bdeniia
(agrypnia) na pravoslavnom Vostoke i v Russkoi TSerkvi, [Orthodox vespers: a historical-liturgical guide.
The All-Night Vigil rite (vigil) in the Orthodox East and the Russian Church] (Moscow: Izdatel’skii Sovet
Russkoi Pravoslavnoi TSerkvi, 2004), 220.
94
Uspensky, Pravoslavnaia vechernia, 220.
41
As the Byzantine Empire weakened, Rus’, too, faced grave political concerns from its
western neighbors and the ongoing invasion of Mongols from the east:
In the fourteenth century, drastic territorial changes were taking place. The old
Kievan principality was being absorbed into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. In the
center and northeast the Mongols of the Golden Horde were now dominant and
under their tolerant overlordship the principality of Moscow was growing in
importance. These changes in the balance of power were reflected in ecclesiastical
problems of organization.
Originally there had been a single metropolitan of Kiev and all Russia. But with
political changes and the expansion of Lithuania in the west the metropolitan had
moved, first to Vladimir in 1300, and then in 1328 to Moscow, though keeping
his title “of Kiev and all Russia”….Further, from the ecclesiastical angle in the
changing patriarchal circles there was some difference of opinion as to whether it
95
was wiser to promote centralization or diversity.
It is unclear whether the Jerusalem ustav was adopted
1. in order to bring Rus’ into line with the Typikon in use by the Patriarchate of
Constantinople, or
2. for internal unification to eliminate the use of the other two existant ordos of the
time (that of the Great Church and the Studite-Aleksiev Typikon), or
3. if it was simply a natural result to use a simpler monastic tradition during a period
of suppressed liturgical life resulting from political upheaval, or
4. if an explanation combining all of these possibilities would be most accurate.
For unspecified reasons, Metropolitan Alexei of Moscow introduced a Church Slavonic
96
translation of the Jerusalem Typikon to Moscow during the 1360s. The change in
97
practice was accepted “with no dissent.” Over the course of the next century, the
95
Hussey, The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire, 291.
96
A. M. Pentkovsky, Typikon Patriarha Aleksiia Studita v Vizantii i na Rusi. [Typikon of Patriarch Alexey
the Studite in Byzantium and Rus’], 427.
97
Paul Meyendorff, Russia, Ritual, and Reform: The Liturgical Reforms of Nikon in the 17th Century
(Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1991), 27.
42
regulations of the Jerusalem Typikon would come to govern liturgical life in Russia. With
the Jerusalem ustav came the celebration of the Resurrectional All-Night Vigil service.
98
As a result of having had several Typikons, “the Russian Church of the fifteenth
to seventeenth centuries was differentiated by a large variety of liturgical practices,
genuinely formed on the basis of the merging of her former practices with the new.”
99
Church reforms were carried out by Patriarch Nikon during the seventeenth century in
response to the wide variety of liturgical practices and texts in use. The basic structure of
the All-Night Vigil as served in the Russian Orthodox Church has remained relatively
stable since the Nikonian reforms of the seventeenth century. The biggest change over the
past three centuries for the All-Night Vigil has been a reduction in the length of time
necessary to execute the service. As complex Russian chant systems were abandoned for
increasingly simple styles based on Western chordal harmony, the All-Night Vigil
became shorter and shorter. A typical All-Night Vigil as served in a parish today lasts
approximately two to three hours.
By tracing the history of the All-Night Vigil, even broadly, we can see that the
service is not at all a homegrown Russian practice. Rather, it is an early Jerusalem service
structure heavily influenced by monastic psalmody, combined with prayers from the
Constantinopolitan tradition of the Great Church. It is further enhanced with an added
layer of both Palestinian and Constantinopolitan (and in later centuries, Russian) poetic
98
99
Uspensky, Pravoslavnaia vechernya, 270.
Ibid., 279.
43
hymnography. This is the rich liturgical canvas upon which Rachmaninoff painted his
masterpiece.
44
CHAPTER THREE
RACHMANINOFF AND THE ORTHODOX CHURCH
Early Church Experience
Rachmaninoff’s early exposure to the Orthodox Church was primarily thanks to
his grandmother Sofia Aleksandrovna Butakova, a deeply religious woman.
Rachmaninoff spent three summers during his St. Petersburg Conservatory years with his
grandmother. The first summer they spent together in Novgorod, and the two following
summers they stayed in the family holding “Borisovo,” outside of Novgorod.
100
Butakova
was a musical person, and guests in her home often included choir directors of
Novgorod.
101
Rachmaninoff’s cousin Sofia Satina recalled:
Grandmother loved to visit churches, and he [Rachmaninoff] would take her to
services, and started listening himself to the sacred singing and enjoying the
music. An even greater impression was made on him by the ringing of the bells
and services in Novgorod, in the monasteries and cathedrals, where he would
drive his grandmother, when he lived with her during the summer outside
102
Novgorod.
Another of Rachmaninoff’s cousins, Anna Trubnikova, also described these church visits:
Often, his grandmother would take him to the monastery, where there was a good
choir. The wonderful singing helped young Serezha stand through the long
100
Sofia Satina, “Zapiska o S.V. Rakhmaninove,” [A note about S.V. Rachmaninoff] in Vospominaniia o
Rakhmaninove, [Remembrances of Rachmaninoff] edited by Zarui Apetovna Apetian, (Moscow: Muzyka,
1988), 17. All translations from Russian sources not available in English are by the author of this D.M.A.
document. Titles of sources are transliterated and appear with a brief translation in brackets.
101
M.I. Aleynikov, “O religii v duhovnom mire S.V. Rakhmaninova (shtrihi k portretu kompozitora),”
[About religion in the spiritual world of S.V. Rachmaninoff (traits of the composer’s portrait)] S.V.
Rakhmaninov i mirovaya kul’tura [S.V. Rachmaninoff and world culture ] V (2013), 19.
102
Satina, “Zapiska o S.V. Rakhmaninove,” 18.
45
103
monastic services, and afterward, the soft, warm prosphora relieved one’s
tiredness. Besides that, listening to the bell ringing gave him great satisfaction.
Later on, as an adult, he went to hear the ringing in the Sretensky monastery, in
104
Moscow, where the bell-ringer was a true master of his work.”
During his years studying with Nikolai Sergeevich Zverev (1832-1893),
Rachmaninoff did not travel home to spend vacations with family. Instead, Zverev and
the students who lived with him spent the breaks together at Zverev’s dacha
105
outside
Moscow, with occasional trips to more interesting places, like the Crimea. When he was
fifteen years old, Rachmaninoff was allowed a very short visit to Novgorod to see his
grandmother.
106
While at the Moscow Conservatory, Rachmaninoff took basic religion classes as
prescribed by the national curriculum requirement for all schools. The instructor was
Protopresbyter Dmitriy Vasil’evich Razumovsky (1818-1898), an expert on church
music, author, and teacher of liturgical singing. He was remembered fondly by one of the
students that also lived with Zverev, Matfei Presman (1870-1937), as a cultured, lenient,
and very kind teacher, liked by all the students.
103
107
Religion classes were informal
Blessed bread
104
Anna Trubnikova, “Sergei Rakhmaninov” in Vospominaniia o Rakhmaninove [Remembrances of
Rachmaninoff] edited by Zarui Apetovna Apetian, (Moscow: Muzyka, 1988), 123.
105
106
107
Summer house
Satina, “Zapiska o S.V. Rakhmaninove,” 18.
Matfei Presman,“Ugolok muzykal’noy Moskvi vos’midesyatikh godov,” [A small corner of musical
Moscow in the eighties]. In Vospominaniia o Rakhmaninove, [Remembrances of Rachmaninoff] edited by
Zarui Apetovna Apetian, (Moscow: Muzyka, 1988), 172.
46
discussion sections, where the students could ask anything. Formal material covered and
examination questions were, of course, appropriate to the age of the students:
Rachmaninoff was taking the catechesis exam. Zverev, of course, was there also.
Rachmaninoff was asked to name the Evangelists. Having named three,
Rachmaninoff forgot the name of the fourth. Seated at the table, Zverev quickly
108
hurried to help his student and charge: “Do you know, Serezha, where [Matfei ]
Presman is right now?”–he innocently asked Rachmaninoff. It would seem that
the completely not-to-the-point question which Zverev asked reminded
Rachmaninoff of the name of the fourth Evangelist, and, not answering anything
109
to Zverev’s question, he named Evangelist Matfei.
The conservatory religion course, geared to its audience of children and young teenagers,
was obviously not a particularly rigorous theological education.
Between the years 1890 and 1900, Rachmaninoff is known to have attended
services at various churches, including visits to the Sretensky monastery and the
Andronyev monastery. At Andronyev, he “stood in the half-darkness of the huge church
for the entire service, listening to the ancient, stern singing from the oktoikh [Book of
eight tones] executed by the monks in parallel fifths. This produced a strong impression
110
on him.”
Rachmaninoff’s early experiences with the Church, both with his grandmother
Butakova and on his own as a student, were clearly positive.
Rachmaninoff’s first sacred choral composition was not for the Orthodox Church.
His short (only thirty-one measures) Latin motet “Deus meus” (1890) can be described as
simply a student exercise in imitative entrances. Written as part of his final conservatory
composition exams, the motet sets only a single line of Psalm text and was not even
108
Matfei is the Russian equivalent of the name “Matthew.”
109
See footnote 108. Presman, “Ugolok muzykal’noy Moskvi vos’midesyatikh godov,” 175.
110
Aleynikov, “Zapiska o S.V. Rakhmaninove,” 19.
47
admired by its composer, who called it “trash.”
111
However, choral singing was taken
seriously at the conservatory, and participation in “the choir class” was mandatory even
for pianists.
112
Therefore, Rachmaninoff was already somewhat familiar with the choral
instrument even as a student. “Deus meus” was probably written with the choir class
ensemble in mind. Rachmaninoff’s first work on an Orthodox service text would not
come until 1893, after he had completed his studies at the conservatory.
In 1895, Rachmaninoff began his first major composition using extant sacred
thematic material. The Latin plainchant Dies Irae pervades his first symphony. Though
this chant is not from or used in Orthodox Church tradition, it did appear in many other
works by Rachmaninoff.
113
Unfortunately, this early composition with chant was received
poorly at its St. Petersburg premiere on March15, 1897. The composer Cesar Cui (18351918) wrote in Novosti:
If there were a conservatory in Hell, if one of its talented students were instructed
to write a programmatic symphony on “The Seven Plagues of Egypt,” and if he
were to compose a symphony like Mr. Rachmaninoff’s – then he would have
114
fulfilled his task brilliantly and delighted the inmates of Hell.
Though the work was called “decadent” at its premiere, the real reason for its
disastrous debut was not in the musical material, but in the failure of the conductor,
111
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lxvii.
112
Presman, “Ugolok muzykal’noy Moskvi vos’midesyatikh godov,” 207.
113
Barry Martyn, Rachmaninoff: Composer, Pianist, Conductor (Brookfield, Vermont: Gower Publishing
Company, 1990), 99.
114
Ibid., 97.
48
Alexander Glazunov (1865-1936).
115
Following this humiliating public embarrassment,
Rachmaninoff immediately left the city and retreated to his grandmother Butakova’s
home in Novgorod for several days before returning to Moscow.
116
After the summer of 1897, Rachmaninoff returned to Moscow and worked as the
second conductor for Mamontov’s opera company. Rachmaninoff did not compose for
the next three years: “I [Rachmaninoff] felt like a man who had suffered a stroke and for
117
a long time had lost the use of his head and hands.”
Suffering from depression, he
focused his energies not on composing, but on teaching piano and conducting opera,
appearing only rarely in concert as a performer.
118
His first major encounter as an adult with the Russian Orthodox Church was not a
musical one, but rather of a more personal nature. In the spring of 1902, Rachmaninoff
married Natalia Satina (1877-1951), also a pianist and graduate of the Moscow
Conservatory.
119
Their engagement had created a two-fold problem: both parties to be
married had to go to confession, and, the bride-to-be was Rachmaninoff’s first cousin
(Rachmanoff’s father’s sister’s daughter). Marriage between relatives of such a close
degree is forbidden in the Orthodox Church. Rachmaninoff’s cousin Anna Trubnikova
described the situation, shedding light on his religious mindset:
115
116
117
118
119
Martyn, 96.
Apetian, Literaturnoe nasledie, 260.
Evgeniia Nikolaevna Rudakova, S.V. Rakhmaninov (Moscow: Muzyka, 1998), 54.
Satina, “Zapiska o S.V. Rakhmaninove,” 30.
Rudakova, S.V. Rakhmaninov, 69.
49
And here was the complication – to be married, the groom and bride had to have a
certificate that they went to confession. Sergei was not a churchgoer, and did not
go to confession, and categorically refused to go to confession. My mother knew
the priest, Amfiteatrov [of the Archangelsky Cathedral]. He was an exceptional
person – kind, smart, highly educated. Having heard Mother’s request, Fr.
Valentin asked for Serezha to be sent to him and promised to resolve this
complication. Serezha, loving and respecting my mother, gave in to her
convincing and went to Fr. Valentin. He returned satisfied and joyful, and said
that if he had known Amfiteatrov earlier, then certainly, he would have long ago
gone to him. How he resolved this complicated question, Serezha did not say, and
120
no one asked.
However, his cousin Sofia Satina (1879-1975) had quite a different recollection of
Rachmaninoff’s experience with, and opinions of confession. After reading Trubnikova’s
observation, Satina wrote on November 30, 1965:
Trubnikova’s conviction that ‘Serezha never went to confession’ is completely
untrue. Trubnikova came to that conclusion because of the fact that he refused to
go to this [pre-marriage] confession under pressure of necessity. S[ergei]
V[asilievich] unequivocally, jealously guarded his inner world. But he not only
121
once before marriage asked me to go with him to church when he govel, and he
insisted that I should not speak to anyone at home about it. Only our old nanny
Feona Dmitrievna and I knew about this (she would wake us early to go to
122
church). His favorite church was the old Dormition church “on Mogiltsah” near
123
the Vasilevski and Mertvih sidestreets.
Trubnikova further elaborates on the complications of obtaining permission for the
marriage ceremony:
120
Trubnikova, “Sergei Rakhmaninov,” 133.
121
“Govel” can be used to indicate any period of preparation for confession, or confession itself.
122
Translates as “on the graves.” Several explanations for the name of this church have been proposed,
including the uneven hill-like territory upon which the building stands, and the surname of the largest
landowners (“Mertviy”) on the street nearest the church. Moskva: Tserkov’ Uspeniya, [Moscow: Dormition
Church] http://sobory.ru/article/?object=02273 (accessed January 26, 2014).
123
Satina, “Zapiska o S.V. Rakhmaninove,” 494, endnote 2.
50
The last and highest barrier was permission from the Tsar for first cousins to
marry…if the Tsar should refuse [this petition] no priest would agree to perform
124
the marriage....”
The groom must not have been very worried about the possibility of the wedding
not taking place. Writing to Natalia Skalon while traveling from a St. Petersburg concert
in April 1902, Rachmaninoff described the situation merely as a financial and logistical
annoyance, without specific mention of either the confession or the requirement for
formal petition with the Tsar, though noting the complicated clergy involvement:
When I get to Moscow, several days will have to be spent dealing with priests,
and then I leave at once to the village in order to write at least twelve songs before
the wedding, to make enough money to pay the priests and to go abroad [for the
honeymoon]. And even afterwards, rest will not come, because I have to write,
125
write, write without putting my hands [down] so as not to go broke.
Rachmaninoff married Natalia Satina at an army chapel in the outskirts of
Moscow. Army chapels were considered beyond the immediate control of the church
Synod and answered directly to the Tsar. Rachmaninoff’s grandfather was a general, and
this family military connection probably helped the composer obtain the desired church
wedding. The bride also noted the peculiar circumstances and location of the church
ceremony, and Rachmaninoff’s demeanor:
We married on April 29, 1902 at the edge of Moscow in the church of some
regiment. I was riding in the carriage in my wedding dress, rain poured as out of a
bucket, and one could only enter the church walking past [through] very long
barracks. The soldiers were lying on their bunks and looking at us in
124
125
Trubnikova, “Sergei Rakhmaninov,” 134.
Apetian, Literaturnoe nasledie, 315. Letter to N.D. Skalon dated April 1, 1902, written from the train
station Chudovo.
51
surprise…Sergei was in a dress jacket, very serious, and I, of course, was horribly
126
worried.
There was reason to be worried: there had still been no official permission for the
wedding, which could prove to be ruinous:
In memory there had been such an instance [incident]. Having managed to go
around the law and lived together already many years, with grown children,
someone told [the authorities] and a marriage was nullified, and the husband and
wife were sentenced to penitence in monasteries, and their children were declared
127
unlawful.
Official notice of the Tsar’s permission for the ceremony arrived after the service.
128
Like many of the landed gentry, Rachmaninoff was probably not intimately
familiar with church rubrics. But, he did attend festal services when he was at the family
estate, Ivanovka, where he would spend the summers composing.
On all feastdays, Rachmaninoff with his family would drive to church, to the
service. Also, he often drove to church alone. Likewise, the priest would come to
Ivanovka, and they would have long discussions, either in Sergei Vasilievich’s
129
office, or in the summer-house [gazebo] in the park.
His recollection of the Paschal service of 1914 fully details the midnight
procession in the Kremlin, where he joined in singing with the bass section of the
130
Synodal Choir at the invitation of its director, Nikolai Danilin (1878-1945).
It was the
126
Natalia Rachmaninoff, “Vospominaniya o Rakhmaninove,” [Remembrance of Rachmaninoff] 1.
127
Trubnikova, “Sergei Rakhmaninov,” 133.
128
129
130
Ibid., 134.
Aleynikov, “Zapiska o S.V. Rakhmaninove,” 21.
See Appendix C.
52
Synodal choir that premiered his major liturgical compositions, Liturgy of St. John
Chrysostom, Op. 31, in 1910, and his All-Night Vigil, Op. 37, in 1915.
Sacred Choral Works Overview
Rachmaninoff composed only three works on Orthodox texts: V molitvakh
neusypaiushchuiu Bogoroditsu [The Mother of God, ever vigilant in prayer] composed in
1893; the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, Op. 31 composed in 1910; and the AllNight Vigil, composed in 1915. The first of these three works, V molitvakh
neusypaiushchuiu Bogoroditsu, “was not published during the composer’s lifetime but
circulated in manuscript copies.”
131
Composed during the summer of 1893, the small church concerto, V molitvah
neusipayushchuyu Bogoroditsu [The Mother of God, ever-vigilant in prayer] is a setting
of one of the Proper texts (the kontakion) for the Feast of the Dormition. The Moscow
Synodal Choir, conducted by Vasily Orlov (1856-1907), premiered the short work in
concert on December 12, 1893.
132
Though the work lacks both in length and depth, this
foray by the young composer into sacred composition, coupled with his obvious talent,
must have indicated great potential for Rachmaninoff to produce more church music.
Rachmaninoff intended to continue exploring the sacred genre with at least one more
composition the following spring. He wrote to Stepan Smolensky (1848-1909) on March
16, 1894:
131
132
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” xlviii.
Ibid., xlviii.
53
[I] very much regret, dear Stepan Vasil’evich, that I must drop for an indefinite
amount of time my one uncompleted work, namely: the sacred Concerto. It is
likewise very unpleasant for me that with that I am not fulfilling my promise,
given to you.
I dropped this piece due to the necessity of preparing for a large concert in Kiev.
Frankly speaking, I had highly enough time, to finish writing not only one
Concerto, but even several. I didn’t write even one…Either I did not have the
patience, or ability to cope with this text. In any case, both the former and the
latter are very unfortunate.
Ultimately, I think that I will finish writing this composition at some point, and
then I, having picked up the small bundle of the score, will run to you, in the hope
that you will then take pity to perform this Concerto, by which, undoubtedly, you
133
will grant me great pleasure.
Rachmaninoff never wrote the promised sacred concerto. He did not even return to
composition of any form of Orthodox music for more than a decade after his 1894 letter
to Smolensky. But Smolensky had not given up on a future for Rachmaninoff in church
music. He attempted to employ Rachmaninoff at the Synodal Choir School, to which
Rachmaninoff replied on June 12, 1896:
Dear Stepan Vasilievich!
Yesterday, I received your letter, to which I am hurrying to respond, first of all
with sincere gratitude for your desire to have me numbered among your
instructors. It would, likewise, be for me pleasing to serve at your [institution],
but I cannot agree to the salary offered….And secondly, to the date appointed by
you for the start of instruction. That is, I cannot take 100 r[ubles] less for a yearly
rate and cannot begin instruction earlier than September 20, in that I work only in
the summers, when I, in [good] conscience say to you, have the misfortune of
being placed in such a position that I have only one purpose–that purpose is to
earn as much money [as possible] by the autumn for my small works.
In conclusion, I ask you, dear Stepan Vasil’evich, to forgive me for declining.
133
134
Apetian, Literaturnoe nasledie, 231.
Ibid., 251.
134
54
Even after Rachmaninoff declined the job offer, Smolensky tried to prompt
Rachmaninoff to further sacred composition by providing him with a copy of the text to
the Liturgy service. Unfortunately, the timing of Smolensky’s attempts must have
coincided with the failed premiere of the First Symphony. Rachmaninoff wrote to
Smolensky on June 30, 1897 from Ignatovo, where he was staying for the summer,
recuperating:
Forgive me, dear Stepan Vasil’evich, for this late answer to your dear letter with
the text of the Liturgy. Believe me, I did this [i.e. delay in answering] only
because of my ill health, otherwise I would have thanked you long ago for your
kindness and attention to me. It is not fate for me [you] see, to write a liturgy. I
now feel so poorly, that I can only be engaged with treatment. As well, I am tied
to entirely outside work, that is, the reduction for piano four-hands of the
symphony of A. Glazunov. This work I must certainly do this summer.
135
In much, I have bad luck and unpleasantness!
Rachmaninoff did not make another contribution to the sacred repertory until 1910, when
his Divine Liturgy, Op. 31 was finally composed, nearly thirteen years after Smolensky’s
attempt to instigate such a major work.
The Divine Liturgy and the All-Night Vigil were the composer’s only significant
contributions to the genre of sacred music. It is important to note that the documentation
and correspondence available relavant to the Divine Liturgy is far greater than that
available for the All-Night Vigil. As a result, much of what is understood regarding
Rachmaninoff’s work process, mindset, and as has been noted, lack of liturgical and
135
Apetian, Literaturnoe nasledie, 263.
55
rubrical knowledge and experience, is drawn from the materials available regarding the
136
Liturgy.
Faced with liturgical terminology with which he was unfamiliar, Rachmaninoff
corresponded with church composer Alexander Kastal’sky (1856-1926) in order to better
understand the structure of the Divine Liturgy service. Though his unfamiliarity with
specific aspects of liturgical knowledge is obviously documented by his correspondence
regarding the Divine Liturgy, the fact that the correspondence ever took place at all
indicates that Rachmaninoff took composition on sacred texts seriously: what he did not
know, he tried to find out, even when the definition of a word or ecclesiastical term
137
would have little bearing on performances of the Divine Liturgy.
The Moscow Synodal Choir, directed by Nikolai Danilin, premiered
138
Rachmaninoff’s Divine Liturgy.
The work did not positively overwhelm critics:
Most of those gathered to hear the performance of S.V. Rachmaninoff’s newly
composed Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom were probably expecting a major event,
a real celebration for lovers of Orthodox Church music…But the Liturgy did not
fulfill those expectations…the composer this time did not master the task he set
for himself…
As a work of church music, it struck us as being overly subjective, not at all
‘churchly’ in its affect…Either the composer has not yet sufficiently acquainted
himself with the Liturgy as a form, or his emotions cannot find expression in this
139
form….
136
137
138
139
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lii-lviii.
Ibid., xlviii.
Ibid., li.
Ibid.
56
Perhaps the composer, indeed, had not yet “master[ed] the task he sat for himself.” Five
years later, he would return to text and music of the Orthodox Church and compose what
is considered the culmination of the genre: his All-night Vigil, Op. 37.
57
CHAPTER FOUR
RACHMANINOFF’S ALL-NIGHT VIGIL, OP. 37
Historical Context
Musical settings of the All-Night Vigil as a cycle are virtually non-existant
before the late ninenteenth century. Rather, individual texts from the All-Night Vigil
were set separately by composers without any attempt to comprehensively address the
service as a musical genre. Beginning in 1880, the presence of choral “cycle” settings of
the All-Night Vigil service paralleled the rise of the New Russian Choral School.
140
The composers of the New Russian Choral School that wrote All-Night Vigil
cycles were in relatively uncharted territory.
The only setting of the All-Night Vigil dating from the turn of the [nineteenth]
century is by Vedel. Only a handful of individual hymn settings from the Vigil
were composed during the course of the nineteenth century; it was not until
Tchaikovsky published his All-Night Vigil, Op. 52 in 1882 that composers turned
141
their attention to this cycle.
There were a variety of musical settings of the All-Night Vigil that preceded
Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil. Major church composers who composed All-Night Vigil
settings include Mikhail Ippolitov-Ivanov (1859-1935), Semyon Panchenko (1867-1937),
Alexander Nikolsky (1874-1943), Alexander Gretchaninoff (1864-1956), and Pavel
140
For an extensive history of the New Russian Choral School, see Vladimir Morosan’s book Choral
Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia, chapters 3, 6 and 7.
141
Vladimir Morosan, “Russian Choral Repertoire,” in Nineteenth-Century Choral Music, ed. Doona M. Di
Grazia (New York: Routledge, 2013), 440.
58
Chesnokov (1877-1944).
142
Their settings of the All-Night Vigil vary in number of
143
movements set, and even in titles chosen for the collections (see Table 4.1).
Table 4.1 Selected All-Night Vigil settings from the New Russian Choral School
Composer
Mikhail
IppolitovIvanov
Semyon
Panchenko
Alexander
Nikolsky
Catalog
#
Op. 43
Op. 45
Op. 26
Alexandre
Op. 59
Gretchaninoff
Pavel
Op. 21
Chesnokov
Op. 44
Title of work
Izbrannye molitvosloviia iz
Vsenoshchnogo Bdeniia
[Selected prayers from the AllNight Vigil]
Penie na Vsenoshchnoi
[Hymns of the All-Night]
Neizmeniaemye pesnopeniia iz
Vsenoshchnogo bdeniia,
[Unchanging Hymns from the AllNight Vigil]
Vsenoshchnoe bdenie, [All-Night
Vigil]
144
Vsenoshchnaia [All-Night]
145
Vsenoshchnaia [All-Night]
Year
Number of
published movements
1907
12
1908
12
1909
9
1912
10
1909
1913
23
10
Texts included in the Ordinary of musical settings of the All-Night Vigil service
varied from composer to composer, and “cycle” settings of the All-Night Vigil service
did not necessarily include all the ordinary texts needed for liturgical performance.
Composers of the period had far greater success with setting the Divine Liturgy, the main
Eucharistic service of the Orthodox Church. The Divine Liturgy more closely resembles
142
For a list of sacred output from composers of the New Russian School, see Vladimir Morosan’s
Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia, table 3.2, pages 92-93.
143
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lxxi, footnotes 89-94.
144
“Bdenie” is sometimes dropped from the term “Vsenoshchnoe bdenie” in common parlance. This is a
problematic issue, as the meaning of the term, “keeping watch,” is thereby lost. Therefore, the resultant
“Vsenoshchnoe” only refers to time, “all-night,” without referring to the action of occurrence itself.
145
Ibid.
59
a libretto: the vast majority of the service “is relatively unchanging,”
146
providing a clear
Ordinary to set, as almost all of the text is Ordinary.
In 1878, the Tchaikovsky setting of the Divine Liturgy captured the attention of
composers and church officials alike regarding the process for officially recognizing
liturgical music. Late nineteenth century Russian liturgical music censorship functioned
with an administrative byzantine beauracracy. Pieces that did not meet liturgical approval
of Imperial censors were not published or performed. After the 1878 Jurgenson case
regarding Pyotr Tchaikovsky’s (1840-1893) Divine Liturgy, composers were freed from
many restrictions of the official church censorship bodies. Publication could bypass the
liturgical censors and composers did not have to specifically express the intended
function of their works on sacred texts. Composers of the period simply did not address
whether their works were to be used liturgically or were solely intended for concert
performance:
…no composer is known to have expressly articulated a clear-cut distinction
between works intended for use in church and works best suited for performance
outside the liturgical context; the matter was left largely to the critics and to the
147
discretion of each individual church precentor.
Without a formal declaration of intent necessary for liturgical publication, choral works
on sacred texts could easily be premiered. This created an open avenue for composers to
create works on sacred texts without having to define whether the works were for
146
147
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lix.
Ibid., xlviii.
60
liturgical use. Rachmaninoff “never indicated what his intentions or preferences were”
148
for his All-Night Vigil.
Composition
Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil was composed in less than two weeks in January
and February 1915. His Divine Liturgy of 1910 had similarly come together quickly, in
three weeks.
149
It was common for the composer to work in intense spurts, as described by
his wife, Natalia:
When he would work, it would proceed very quickly, especially when he was
composing on some sort of text. It was this way not only with the romances. His
opera Miserly Knight, for example, was composed in nearly just four weeks,
strolling among the fields of Ivanovka. Just as quickly went the work with The
Bells. When he composed, he did not exist for those around him. Day and night he
only thought about composition, completely going into his work. It was this way
in his youth, and I observed the same in August 1940, when he composed his last
150
work – Symphonic Dances.
Rachmaninoff had approached composing his Divine Liturgy with caution. From
his correspondence with Kastal’sky, it is clear that he was seeking guidance from the
preeminent church composer in Moscow on questions of basic liturgical understanding
while he worked:
I looked up the 102nd Psalm. It is very long. Is it really necessary to set it
completely? At the same time to omit it entirely (as did Tchaiikovsky) I regard as
undesirable. To me it seems essential to insert a number at this particular place, so
as to separate the initial “Lord have mercys” from the ones that follow. Is it
148
149
150
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” xlviii.
Ibid., li.
Natalia Rachmaninoff, Vospominaniya o Rakhmaninove, 48.
61
possible to use some other, shorter text here? (Incidentally, please tell me what
151
does this word ‘antiphon’ mean?)
Despite the documentation available for the Divine Liturgy, there are no existing letters to
152
trace the mindset of the composer while he worked on the All-Night Vigil.
There is no
evidence that he consulted anyone regarding any liturgical questions he might have had
concerning the All-Night Vigil service. This is peculiar, because the All-Night Vigil is a
far more complicated service than the Divine Liturgy.
153
Not only is it much longer in
duration, but also there are far more variable portions to the All-Night Vigil service than
the Divine Liturgy. It is extremely unlikely that in the five years between the composition
of his Divine Liturgy and All-Night Vigil Rachmaninoff became fluent in church rubrics
and terminology. Either Rachmaninoff consulted no one and had a thorough
understanding of the task at hand (highly improbable) or more likely, he sought advice
from church composers for which there is no extant documentation.
The most likely person that Rachmaninoff would have turned to for guidance
would have been Kastal’sky, with whom he corresponded regarding the Divine Liturgy.
Kastal’sky himself later recalled:
His [Rachmaninoff’s] sensitivity to the church style of music made me very
154
happy, and the sbornik of Obikhod melodies, which I gave to S.V.
Rachmaninoff when he announced his intention to write the All-Night Vigil,
turned out to be useful, because [I] put into his artistic hands that material, which
151
152
153
154
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lii.
Ibid., lviii.
Ibid., lix.
“Compilation,” meaning a compiled book of music, as in this case, an Obikhod.
62
working on he entered upon a true path and achieved in many instances [ways]
155
great results.
The lack of correspondence regarding the All-Night Vigil may possibly be
explained by the fact that Rachmaninoff’s two major sacred works were composed in
different places. The Divine Liturgy was composed during the summer of 1910 at the
Ivanovka estate, where Rachmaninoff was relatively isolated, surrounded primarily by
family. To consult other Moscow church musicians, he would have had to be in contact
via post. The All-Night Vigil, composed during the winter months of 1915, would have
been created while Rachmaninoff was in Moscow where he would have easily been able
to consult in person with experienced church composers without writing letters to request
clarification of liturgical points.
Performing in a Liturgical Style
Addressing the issue of how to perform Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil
liturgically is a much easier task than addressing how to perform the work as a concert
piece in a liturgical style. A contemporary Orthodox Church choir director today
functions in much the same way as one might have a century ago, with a knowledge of
rubrics and repertory to piece together an aesthetically pleasing, and hopefully spiritually
edifying, program in much the same way as putting together a puzzle, selecting
“movements” of settings from different composers, eras, and styles.
155
156
This type of
Svetlana Zvereva, Aleksandr Kastal'skii: idei, tvorchestvo, sud'ba [Alexander Kastalsky: ideas, works,
fate] (Moscow: Vuzovskaia Kniga, 1999), 132.
156
See Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” xlviii.
63
programming skill has not significantly changed in the last century, for either secular or
sacred context. Choosing to perform the entire Rachmaninoff All-Night Vigil (or any of
the cycle settings of the service by other composers) would actually simplify the process
for a church choir director: to execute the work liturgically one only needs to select music
for the texts needed for the service that were not set by the composer.
For secular performance by those unfamiliar with the liturgical cycle of the
Orthodox Church, the task at hand is far more complicated and daunting. This document
intends to demonstrate one approach to this challenge that can be used by others as an
example of how to address programming this work in a secular performance context in
the future.
Firstly, conductors choosing to program this work must assess the capability of
their ensemble to perform seventy minutes of continuous, unaccompanied music. For
most choral directors, that is a very difficult goal to actually achieve with even the finest
of ensembles. Secondly, choral directors need to accommodate their goals for an
ensemble’s development. The All-Night Vigil would consume either the vast majority of a
concert, or be an event in its entirety. A professional ensemble can afford to program
such a large cycle without addressing pedagogical needs, but a university ensemble
cannot: Students may need a more representative variety of repertoire for educational
progress than this work can provide. Thirdly, conductors must address their own Church
Slavonic fluency and how effectively their ensemble can learn to deliver such a large
amount of text in a language with which they are probably unfamiliar, that is written in
an alphabet (even in Russian translation) that they likely do not know.
64
An effective approach to this situation is to program an excerpt of the work,
considering the liturgical context of individual movements. There is already an efficient
delineator within the liturgical structure of the All-Night Vigil itself: Great Vespers and
Matins are cohesive units unto themselves. For the viva voce performance of this
document, the Great Vespers portion of the work (movements 1-6) was selected with the
addition of the first two movements from the Matins portion. Other movements of Matins
were excluded from consideration for the viva voce presentation simply because of the
large amount of text that they include (particularly movement nine, “Blagosloven esi,
Gospodi” [Blessed art Thou, O Lord] and movement twelve “Velikoe Slavoslovie”[Great
Doxology]. Teaching the Slavonic text to non-native Russian speakers of those two
movements alone would have taken more rehearsal time than was available in totality.
The goal of the performance was to present a liturgically informed secular
performance, not a church service. To perform Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil using
strict liturgical guidelines in a secular context would both exlude entire movements (1, 5,
7, and 13 or 14) and border on farce. Rather, conductors should evaluate how best to
strike a balance between the liturgical predisposition of a work on a sacred text and actual
secular performance.
Though the first movement was never performed by the group that premiered the
piece, and would not be performed in a liturgical context (this invitation to worship is
traditionally sung by the clergy and not the choir,) it was used in the viva voce
performance. Rachmaninoff did include notated litanies for his Divine Liturgy, but not for
65
the All-Night Vigil. Because no litanies or exclamations were used in this performance,
the opening “Amen” of movement 1 (see Musical Example 4.1) was excluded.
66
Musical Example 4.1 All-Night Vigil Movement I, measures 1-8.
157
157
Sergei Rachmaninoff, Vsenoshchnoe Bdenie, Op. 37 (Madison, CT: Musica Russica, 1992), 1. Examples
printed with the authorization of Musica Russica. See Appendix F.
67
There is no liturgical action between the texts of movement 1 and movement 2 in
a sacred setting. In liturgical use, “Priidite, poklonimsya,” whether sung by clergy or the
choir, is always immediately followed by Psalm 103 “Blagoslovi, dushe moya, Gospoda”
without any litany or use of an “Amen.”
158
Therefore, the “Amen” at the beginning of
movement 2 (see Musical Example 4.2) was omitted.
158
This is explained in detail by Vladimir Morosan in “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff.”
68
Musical Example 4.2 All-Night Vigil Movement II, measures 1-7.
159
Sergei Rachmaninoff, Vsenoshchnoe Bdenie, 5.
159
69
In the viva voce performance, the second movement was performed featuring a
female soloist. Though a soloist was not used at the work’s premiere in 1915, this was
due to the fact that use of soloists in the Dormition Cathedral by the Synodal Choir would
have generally been an anomaly (though not an impossibility). Rachmaninoff scored the
vast majority of the text in movement 2 for mezzo-soprano soloist, with the choir
primarily providing the refrains of the psalmody. A native Russian speaking mezzosoprano was available for the viva voce presentation. This not only saved rehearsal time
by not having to teach the altos of the choir the diction necessary for the psalm verses,
but also reflected the composer’s intention to have the movement performed by a soloist.
A slight pause was taken between movements 2 and 3, primarily for the practical
need to smoothly transition from the final C major chord of the movement 2 (see Musical
Example 4.3) into d minor for movement 3 (see Musical Example 4.4). However, in a
sacred context there is also liturgical action between these two sections (the Little
Litany). The Little Litany helps in the liturgical transition from the psalm of creation
(103) to the radically different and evocative psalmody beginning with the text “Blazhen
muzh izhe ne ide na sovet nechestivikh” [Blessed is the man that walks not in the counsel
of the wicked].
70
Musical Example 4.3 All-Night Vigil Movement II, measures 44-48.
160
Sergei Rachmaninoff, Vsenoshchnoe Bdenie, 12.
160
71
Musical Example 4.4 All-Night Vigil Movement III, measures 1-7.
161
Sergei Rachmaninoff, Vsenoshchnoe Bdenie, 13.
161
72
We can see from Chapter Two of this document that the reason the “Blazhen
muzh” text has a permanent place in the Resurrectional All-Night Vigil service at all is
the influence of the Jerusalem Typikon and its original monastic continuous psalmody.
The first stasis of the first kathisma would have begun with the opening of the first psalm
and then proceeded through the entire Psalter. Today, the contemporary standardized
usage is an abridgement of the first stasis to only selected verses from the first three
psalms with an Alleluia refrain. This considerably shortens services, partly explaining
how the so-named “all-night” service can be executed in contemporary practice in a little
over two hours.
An element of liturgical style in this movement that was not used for the viva voce
performance but could be an effective approach would be having only a small select
group of singers learn the verses, with the full choir only singing the Alleluia refrain
sections and the conclusion to the psalmody, the “Slava” [Glory] section (see Musical
Example 4.5). One would need to carefully orchestrate the alternation from small group
to full choir texture without dynamic bombast. Though Rachmaninoff does not indicate
use of a smaller group, it would be an efficient way of learning the repertory quickly by
non-native speakers of Russian, and would still reflect an appropriate liturgical style,
consistent with the tradition of responsorial psalmody.
73
Musical Example 4.5 All-Night Vigil Movement III, measures 57-65.
162
Sergei Rachmaninoff, Vsenoshchnoe Bdenie,17.
162
74
Between movements 3 and 4, there are many choices for the conductor.
Liturgically, there is a “proper Ordinary” text that occurs at this point in the service,
“Gospodi, vozzvakh” [Lord, I call] (psalm 140 was also experienced by Egeria in the
Vespers service of the Anastasis). At a typical Resurrectional All-Night Vigil, this text
would be sung in the tone of the week from the Oktoechos.
163
This would be followed by
ten stichera, a combination from the Oktoechos, with its prescribed Resurrection texts,
and the Menaion, with its prescribed daily Proper texts.
164
For the viva voce presentation, a baritone soloist was used to sing “Gospodi,
vozzvakh,” [Lord, I call] the first psalm verse, and Dogmatik stichera in tone 1
Znamenny chant (see Musical Example 4.6). Other musical settings could be used at this
point, including choral settings of a stichera for a saint’s day from the Menaion.
However, if this is done, it would be best to do two stichera, with the first stichera in the
Resurrectional Oktoechos tone, and the second stichera could be in a different tone.
165
163
The Oktoechos is the eight-tone cycle of melodies and texts used throughout the liturgical year.
“Oktoechos” is also used to refer to the book comprised of the liturgical texts used in the eight-tone cycle.
164
Stichera are hymnographic texts composed within the eight-tone system, but not specific only to the
eight-tone weekly cycle. The Menaion is the collection of Proper texts for each day of the liturgical year.
165
The tone of the Gospodi vozzvakh, if used, must be in the same tone as the first stichera. The tone of the
Resurrection stichera and the tone of the Menaion stichera can vary. A Menaion stichera throughcomposed setting could be performed, but in the Orthodox tradition, this is a relatively new approach.
75
Musical Example 4.6 Resurrectional Dogmatik, Tone 1 Znamenny chant.
166
166
B. Kutuzov. Vsenoshchnaya i Liturgiya: Obikhod znamennogo peniya [All-Night Vigil and Liturgy:
Collection of Znamenny chant] (Moscow: Izdanie Spaso Nerukotvornogo Obraza Andronikova
Monastirya, 10-11.
76
The fourth movement, “Svete tihiy,” is the entrance hymn associated with the
lamplighting ritual. In the fourth century, this lucernarium (as witnessed by Egeria)
marked the beginning of the Vespers service. Today, in nearly all parish (non-monastic)
practice, candles are already lit from the beginning of the service, but the processional
liturgical action of an entrance is still the context surrounding this text. Clergy process
with the Gospel book, candles, and censer into the altar. To immediately follow “Svete
tihiy,” [Gladsome light] or the entrance, in which the text mentions, “now that we have
come to the setting of the sun,” with “Nine otpushchaeshi,” including the text of “let thy
servant depart in peace,” distorts the nature of both texts. The first marks an arrival, the
second a departure: coming to worship is thus effectively negated immediately by a
departure. Though the Biblical context of Simeon’s canticle is obviously the priority over
the literal, it is no accident that this text is placed almost immediately before the dismissal
of the Great Vespers service.To separate these two movements effectively in concert
performance so as to evoke a more liturgical style, in the viva voce presentation, the
baritone soloist sang a Proper Aposticha stichera (see Musical Example 4.7).
77
Musical example 4.7 Aposticha stichera “Tsar nebesniy” Tone 1 Znamenny chant
167
167
Oktoikh notnago peniya, sirech Osmoglasnik [The Eight-tones notated for singing] (Saint Petersburg:
Sinodal’naya Tipografiya, 1900), 6b.
78
Following the “Nine otpushchaeshi,” instead of singing the sixth movement
directly, the troparion was treated as it could be at one of the Resurrectional Vigil
services: three times. The baritone soloist sang a setting for solo chant (see Musical
Example 4.8) of the Bogoroditse Devo text, followed by the women of the choir singing
an A minor setting of the Bogoroditse Devo text in two parts (see Musical Example 4.9),
followed by the Rachmaninoff setting of the text (see Musical Example 4.10).
79
Musical Example 4.8 Bogoroditse Devo, Tone 4 Znamenny chant.
168
168
B. Kutuzov. Vsenoshchnaya i Liturgiya: Obikhod znamennogo peniya [All-Night Vigil and Liturgy:
Collection of Znamenny chant] (Moscow: Izdanie Spaso Nerukotvornogo Obraza Andronikova
Monastirya, 25.
80
Musical Example 4.9 Bogoroditse Devo, Two-part chant.
169
169
Bogoroditse Devo, paduysya, napeva Voznesenskogo monastirya, [Rejoice, O Virgin Theotokos,
Ascension monastery chant] http://ikliros.com/sites/default/files/5/bogorodice_devo_raduysya_napeva
_voznesenskogo_monastyrya_dlya_zhenskogo_hora.pdf (accessed January 15, 2014).
81
Musical Example 4.10 All-Night Vigil Movement VI, measures 1-8.
170
Sergei Rachmaninoff, Vsenoshchnoe Bdenie, 32.
170
82
This is both a practical and aesthetically pleasing approach. Some have argued
that repeating Rachmaninoff’s setting three times is an “obvious unsuitability,” which can
be a fair and accurate observation considering the movement’s length and climactic
musical phrasing. However, the “obvious unsuitability” does not necessarily support the
conclusion that, therefore, “the All-Night Vigil is better suited to a concert performance,
than a liturgical context,” as the three-fold repetition of Rachmaninoff’s musical setting
can be easily avoided in either context by using other musical settings of the prescribed
171
text.
The viva voce presentation addressed the repetition by beginning with a simple,
historical, authentic solo chant, followed by a slightly more complex and commonly
performed two-part chant that built to the culminating thicker choral texture in the third
declaration of the text using the Rachmaninoff setting.
This would be an appropriate and effective way to end a concert presentation,
grouping movements (1-6) on their own, effectively demonstrating a presentation of the
Great Vespers music set by Rachmaninoff. However, the choir for the viva voce
presentation was capable in the rehearsal time available to learn two more movements.
In the seventh movement, Rachmaninoff musically set the two psalm verses that
begin Matins, “Slava v vishnikh Bogy,” [Glory to God in the highest] and “Gospodi,
ustne moi otverzeshi” [O Lord, open Thou my lips]. In a liturgical context, according to
171
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lxiv.
83
the Typikon, this text is read preceding the Hexapsalmos, and not sung.
172
The exception
of this practice has become the now commonplace singing of these psalm verses on the
eve of two feasts, Nativity and Theophany.
173
Rachmaninoff’s use of the “Slava v
vishnikh Bogu” thematic material (from the more complete Great Doxology in movement
twelve) to set the psalm verses preceding the Hexapsalmos (see Musical Example 4.11)
has been assessed as an “innovation.”
174
172
If one wanted to use the seventh movement of the Rachmaninoff All-Night Vigil liturgically, one would
need to request a clergy blessing (permission) to do so.
173
The early Christian Church did not celebrate the Nativity of the Lord, but rather celebrated Theophany,
the Lord’s Baptism. Therefore, Nativity services were later structured on the original liturgical rites of
Theophany, and both services can be understood and evaluated from the context of a single service. The
structure of both services (Great Compline, Matins, First Hour) is identical, but with different liturgical
themes and proper texts (Christ’s birth, and Christ’s baptism). For either Nativity or Theophany, Great
Compline and Matins would not include the texts set by Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil as movements
1,2,3,4,6,9,10,11,13, or 14.
174
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lxxii.
84
Musical Example 4.11 All-Night Vigil Movement VII, measures 1-4.
175
Sergei Rachmaninoff, Vsenoshchnoe Bdenie, 36.
175
85
“Innovation” may be a polite way to describe a mistake based on lack of liturgical
knowledge, or it might be an indicator that Rachmaninoff did indeed consider his AllNight Vigil as a work that could enter the liturgical repertory, not necessarily as a whole
unit of fifteen movements, or even as only a Resurrectional Vigil, but possibly as a body
of material from which to draw individual movements or sections for liturgical use as
needed.
Furthermore, though movement seven was included in the premiere of the AllNight Vigil in 1915, movements one, thirteen, and fourteen were not, violating what is
often called “the grand design” of the work.
176
There is no reason for the choir to have
omitted these movements if, indeed, the composer wanted to innovate and promote a
grand design for secular concert performance. If the choir was only willing to perform
those movements that they used liturgically, they would never have bothered to include
movement seven, as it is never sung for a Resurrectional Vigil, and almost never sung for
a festal Vigil. They more likely would have included either movement thirteen or
fourteen, or performed both movements in the secular setting of the premiere, if
overarching formal design structure were crucial.
The liturgical formula for the two psalm verses used in movement seven is a
repetition of the first psalm verse three times, and the second psalm verse sung twice.
Though the first section is treated accordingly by Rachmaninoff, the second, homophonic
section is only presented once (see Musical Example 4.12).
176
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lxxiii.
86
Musical Example 4.12 All-Night Vigil Movement VII, measures 14-21.
177
Sergei Rachmaninoff, Vsenoshchnoe Bdenie, 39.
177
87
For the viva voce presentation, the choir did take a repeat of the second section
which is not indicated in the score, with the preceding fermata being held only a short
time. On the repeat, the concluding fermata was held significantly longer. Additionally,
the repeated section was sung at a slightly softer dynamic level, and with more rubato
used on the concluding phrase. The repetition effectively confirmed that with an
appropriate approach, a repetition of the secondary section, though not indicated by the
composer, negates the position that “it probably could not withstand a second repetition.”
The final movement used for the viva voce presentation was the eighth movement,
the Polyeleon, “Hvalite imya Gospodne” [Praise the name of the Lord]. In a concert
setting, this movement often presents itself as incongruent with the soft ending to the
previous movement. The forte entrance of the altos and basses that is marked in the score
“spiritoso; molto marcato e ritmico”
178
(see Musical Example 4.13) seems to particularly
oppose the deeply introspective nature of the preceding movement’s conclusion.
178
With spirit; very marked and rhythmic.
88
Musical Example 4.13 All-Night Vigil Movement VIII, measures 1-6.
179
Sergei Rachmaninoff, Vsenoshchnoe Bdenie, 40.
179
89
This adverse juxtaposition may in fact be explained from a liturgical standpoint:
the psalm verse is never immediately followed by the Polyeleon. The opening to Matins,
“Glory to God in the highest,” whether read or sung, is followed by six Psalms read in
totality. Next, there would be a Little Litany, four more psalm verses intoned by the
clergy (with a refrain sung by the choir) the appointed troparion or troparia for the day,
reading of the kathisma from the Psalter split on three stasis with kathismata hymns,
another Little Litany, and only then (after approximately fifeen to twenty minutes in
contemporary practice) the Polyeleon would begin.
Additionally, the Polyeleon is marked by liturgical movement and activity: all the
clergy proceed from the altar to the center of the church. This would have been the point
in the service by which all candles would have been lit on the central chandelier.
180
Today, it is more common practice to simply turn on all the electric lights of the church.
“The Royal Doors are opened, and the clergy in full vestments process to the center of
the church to stand with the people,” followed by a full censing of the church.
181
The
effect of this is undoubtedly “one of the musical high points of every Vigil service.”
182
Considering this liturgical context of a church suddenly being flooded with light
after extended darkness and a procession of vested clergy, Rachmaninoff’s “spiritoso;
molto marcato e ritmico” presentation of Znamenny chant “while above it, the sopranos
180
In the Athonite tradition, the chandeliers are swung during the Polyeleon. A brief example of this can
be seen in the recent 60 Minutes documentary “Mount Athos” at 20’30.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubg3mqhG4uE.
181
182
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lxiv.
Ibid.
90
and tenors hover and swirl like choirs of cherubim and seraphim” seems not only
appropriate, but magnificent.
183
Without this liturgical context, however, it is an
unexpected shift that cannot be adequately contextualized from the “Adagio, dolcissimo.
Molto espressivo” that immediately precedes it.
Many other possible programming options could be explored using this approach.
One could program a large excerpt of the work focusing primarily on Matins, beginning
with the Polyeleon of movement eight, including the “Blagosloven yesi Gospodi”
[Blessed art Thou, O Lord] of movement nine and movement 10, “Voskreseniye Hristovo
videvshe” [Having beheld the Resurrection of Christ] and then adding musical settings by
other composers of any Resurrection canon, or kontakion setting, and closing with
movement fifteen, “Vzbrannoy voevode” [O, champion leader]. There are nearly endless
ways to use the repertory of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil evaluating the work from the
liturgical performance perspective with which it has been increasingly addressed in
Russia over the past century.
183
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lxiv.
91
CHAPTER FIVE
PERFORMANCE HISTORY
Premiere and Reception
The premiere of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil was entrusted to the Moscow
Synodal Choir. The choir roster included fifty boy choristers and thirty adult male
singers, and the choir traveled and performed internationally.
184
The ensemble was the
finest choir in Moscow, and arguably, in all of Russia:
From 1897 to 1917 the Choir gave no fewer than sixty-two concerts, in which
close to one hundred works were premiered. This fact alone singles out the
Moscow Synodal Choir as the ideal choral ensemble of its time, and the one for
185
which most choral composers conceived their works.
Nikolai Mikhailovich Danilin (1878-1945) directed the choir. Danilin had an
exceptional voice and was an alumnus of the Synodal School (1890-1897). His initial
appointment in 1901 as a faculty member of his alma mater was as a teacher of solfège.
In 1902, he became the assistant conductor of the choir, and ultimately, the ensemble’s
principal conductor in 1910. His friendship with Rachmaninoff has been traced to the
years both spent involved with the Musical-Dramatic School of the Moscow
Philharmonic Society, from which Danilin graduated as a pianist.
184
186
The Synodal Choir
The history of the Moscow Synodal Choir is covered extensively in Vladimir Morosan’s book Choral
Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia.
185
186
Morosan, Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia, 104.
Ibid., 195.
92
had premiered Rachmaninoff’s Divine Liturgy in 1910, and had included excerpts from
that work in their spring 1911 tour of Europe.
187
An anecdote in Oskar von Riesemann’s book on Rachmaninoff relates that
Rachmaninoff brought the score for the newly composed All-Night Vigil for a readthrough to Danilin and Kastal’sky. The work’s fifth movement, “Nine otpushchaeshi,”
concludes with a slowly descending bass line that comes to rest on a low B-flat,
demonstrating the penchant in Russian choral taste for deep and sonorous bassi profundi.
Supposedly, Danilin asked Rachmaninoff in disbelief: “Where are we to find such
basses? They are as rare as asparagus at Christmas.”
188
Whether this in fact happened or
is merely legend surrounding the work, it accurately indicates the difficulty of finding an
ensemble with a bass section to do the work justice.
189
Former Synodal Choir boy chorister Alexander Petrovich Smirnov documented
the only detailed account of the rehearsals for the premiere of the All-Night Vigil decades
after the event:
In February 1915, at one of the regular rehearsals of the Synodal Choir, there
appeared on the music stands a new score in a blue cover. Opening the music, we
saw the inscription: “S. Rachmaninoff. All-Night Vigil. To the memory of Stepan
Vasil’evich Smolensky.” The score, like all the Synodal Choir’s music, had been
187
188
189
Morosan, Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia, 116.
Oskar Riesemann, Rachmaninoff’s Recollections (New York: Macmillan, 1934), 177.
Unfortunately, the majority of Riesemann’s book is told from the first-person viewpoint of Sergei
Rachmaninoff. Much of its content is difficult to believe in light of the devastating critique it received from
Sofia Satina over several pages in her memoir of Rachmaninoff, regarding the author’s “research” process:
“Riesemann, strolling with Sergei Vasilievich in the forests of Clairefontaine, did not even have a pencil in
his hands.” Though Rachmaninoff and his manager tried to have the book released simply as a biography,
instead of a memoir, Riesemann became ill and Rachmaninoff finally allowed release of the book for fear
that the stress of the situation would negatively impact Riesemann’s health. See Sofia Satina,
Vospominaniia o Rakhmaninove, 82-84.
93
reproduced lithographically and had not yet gone through any publishing house.
We were to be the first to perform the work on the concert stage….
We began to rehearse with a sense of emotion. Ordinarily, at the start of the
rehearsal process Danilin would play through a new work once, but this time he
played it twice, accompanying the demonstration with short comments: ‘Listen
one more time,’ or ‘This only appears to be difficult. It’s difficult to play on the
piano but in the chorus it’s easy.’ And indeed, Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil
190
turned out not to be so difficult a piece for the Synodal Choir.
Despite Smirnov’s assertions that the piece was not so difficult, other details from
his account give clues to the challenge facing the choir. Danilin brought in singers that
were upperclass students of the Synodal Choir School (former boy-choristers of the
Synodal Choir) as ringers in the adult sections:
At one of the first rehearsals, students from the older [upper] classes of the
Synodal School, who had in the recent past sang here as children, and were now
themselves preparing to become choir directors, were placed at the stands of the
adult singers. This type of “involvement” of absolutely educated musicians,
though with somewhat less satisfactory (because of changing) voices was
191
temporary (only for two rehearsals) but brought about the expected affect.
Unfortunately, Smirnov did not further elaborate what exactly was the “expected affect.”
However, the added singers’ previous experience with both the Synodal Choir and
Danilin’s rehearsal process must have aided the ensemble. It is possible that the extra
190
191
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff,” lix.
Alexander Smirnov, “Ucheniki i pevchie” [Students and singers]. In Synodal’niy Hor i uchilishche
tserkovnogo peniya [The Synodal Choir and School of Church Singing] edited by Svetlana Zvereva
(Moscow: Yaziki Russkoi Kul’turi, 1998), 540.
94
singers’ presence was to augment the adult singers because the choir was struggling with
absences due to army service.
192
Rachmaninoff also attended the rehearsals, sitting in the first row with a copy of
the score, following silently. Smirnov’s account further describes how Rachmaninoff and
Danilin would go to the conductor’s office, located next to the rehearsal hall, during
rehearsal breaks and smoke together.
193
Unfortunately for today’s conductors and
historians, no one knows what the two discussed.
Smirnov’s account documents only two specific instances of Rachmaninoff
providing direct input during rehearsals. On one occasion, Rachmaninoff’s opinion
differed from Danilin’s interpretation:
In one of the movements, Rachmaninoff persistently tried to obtain a different
rendering from what Danilin offered. He clearly was seeking new shades
[nuances] in the tone, and Nikolai Mikhailovich carried out the desires of the
composer. It soon became apparent, that [Danilin] became tired of [pestered by]
this experimentation. He frowned and, turning to Rachmaninoff, said: ‘Good,
Sergei Vasilievich, —we will take that into consideration’ and closed the lid of
the piano, which meant that the rehearsal was over. The composer and the
conductor left through different doors.
We decided that because of this incident, rehearsals of the All-Night Vigil would
completely stop. But, how [great] was our joy, when on the next day we again
saw the same score, and as before, Rachmaninoff walked into the hall. This time,
Danilin stopped the choir, and turning his face to the hall said: ‘Hello, Sergei
Vasil’evich!’ to which the former replied, ‘Hello’. The incident, as can be seen,
194
was exhausted, and all felt relieved.
192
By December of 1916, eleven of the thirty adult singers had been called to military duty. It seems
plausible that adult singers were already missing from the choir by 1915. See Svetlana Zvereva, Aleksandr
Kastal’sky, 166.
193
194
Smirnov, “Ucheniki i pevchie,” 540.
Ibid., 541.
95
The second performance issue recorded by Smirnov was a more technical request
made by the composer. While the choir was rehearsing the second movement, scored for
alto soloist with choir, Rachmaninoff asked Danilin to try a different approach from how
the choir had been prepared:
Sergei Vasil’evich asked for the soloist part to be sung not by all the altos, as had
been prepared, but only by the firsts [altos], and then afterwards, by the seconds.
It should be mentioned that soloistic performance was generally not practiced in
the Synodal Choir; solos were performed either by an entire section or a part of it,
a stand (four or five singers,) and in this instance the solo was being prepared by
the entire section of altos, in view of the fact that the score allowed this type of
juxtaposition. Rachmaninoff was not satisfied with this arrangement, and it came
out that he was recommending that this movement by sung by the Bolshoi Theater
soloist O.R. Pavlova, who had a wonderful mezzo-soprano. (I will note that for
the fifth movement, Nine otpushchayeshi, S.P. Yudin, a soloist from Zimin’s
Opera, had already been invited). When the Prucarator [of the Synodal Chancery
and Choir Administrator] found out about this suggestion, he offered to give the
Vigil to the Bolshoi Theater. At the concerts, the solo part was sung by the
195
altos.
Smirnov makes a point of mentioning in his account that Rachmaninoff attended
all the rehearsals preparing the work, except for one: Natalia Rachmaninoff attended that
rehearsal in her husband’s stead. Evidently, during the rehearsal breaks she did not go to
Danilin’s office to smoke, but read a book, a fact that seemed important enough for
Smirnov to mention it, probably out of propriety.
196
Natalia Rachmaninoff’s acting as substitute for her husband would not have been
uncommon. A skilled pianist, she had graduated from the Moscow Conservatory as a
195
196
Smirnov, “Ucheniki i pevchie,” 540.
Ibid.
96
student of K.N. Igumnov.
197
She took great pride in the fact that her musical opinions
were often the same as her husband’s. Shortly before the Second World War, while the
couple was in England, Rachmaninoff was invited to attend a performance of The Bells,
which he could not atttend:
Sergei Vasilievich was already engaged to perform in concert that day somewhere
else and could not do this [attend the concert of The Bells]. But he replied to the
conductor, that in his place, his wife would come to the concert and that
198
“whatever she says will be my opinion as well.”
There must have been significant excitement among the city’s musicians and
sacred music lovers awaiting the first performance of this new work in the midst of a
dreary wartime winter. As part of an announcement of the upcoming premiere,
Kastal’sky wrote in Russkoye Slovo on March 7, 1915:
Rachmaninoff’s new composition, All-Night Vigil, is undoubtedly a contribution
of great importance to our church’s musical literature, and its proposed March 10
performance – an entire musical event within the motley Lenten concert programs
this season…One should hear what has become of the simple, straightforward
[chant] melodies in the hands of a major artist! [Rachmaninoff exhibits] a loving
and careful attitude towards our ancient ecclesiastical melodies. And in this, the
199
guarantee of a good future for our church music.
The work premiered on March 10, 1915 in the Kolonniy Zal [Great Hall] of
today’s Dom Soyuzov. In Moscow at that time, applause was prohibited at performances
of sacred music. At the work’s premiere, the audience burst into applause at the concert’s
completion. Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil was hailed as a triumph, and after its initial
success, was performed four more times in quick succession on March 12 and 27, and
197
198
199
Rudakova, S.V. Rakhmaninov, 68.
Natalia Rachmaninoff, Vospominaniya o Rakhmaninove, 27.
Zvereva, Alexander Kastal’sky, 132.
97
April 3 and 9, 1915. Proceeds from the first two concerts, March 12 and 27, were
contributed to the war relief effort.
200
The work was well received by most reviewers:
Perhaps never before has Rachmaninoff approached so close to the people, to
their style, to their soul, as in this work. And, perhaps, this work in particular
bespeaks a broadening of his creative flight, a conquest of new dimensions of the
201
spirit, and, hence, a genuine evolution of his powerful talent.
From Concert to Church
The summer after the concert premiere of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil,
Danilin conducted one movement of the work in a liturgical service at the Dormition
Cathedral. Singing for feastdays, in general, was difficult on the young choristers, and
Dormition (August 15/28,) the feastday of the church, would have been particularly
stressful:
All the festal services in the Dormition Cathedral were for the young singers very
torturous…Some of the children [returning home in the evening] could not
withstand it and would begin to cry. Though, overnight we would all manage to
rest, and the liturgy on the next morning would occur [be sung] without tiredness.
It has to be stated that singing the Dormition liturgy was difficult and [full of]
responsibility: the repertoire was very difficult and the strictness of the conductors
202
without measure.
Less than six months after the All-Night Vigil premiere, Danilin had the Synodal
Choir sing the final movement of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil at the end of the festal
service:
200
Satina, “Zapiska o S.V. Rakhmaninove,” 485.
201
Morosan, “The Sacred Choral Works,” lix.
202
Smirnov, “Ucheniki i pevchie,” 571.
98
…only once, on the eve of Dormition, the Synodal Choir sang in the [Dormition]
203
Cathedral with just the right kliros, directed by Danilin, the final movement
“Vzbrannoy Voevode.” I remember well that service: the cathedral was
overflowing with worshipers, even Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna and
Sabler, the ober-procuror of the Holy Synod, were literally pressed to the kliros;
we, singers, were very tired, and suddenly, Danilin decided to sing Rachmaninoff!
The rendition had nothing in common with what it had been in concert: not in
204
sound, or in overall cohesiveness.
From Smirnov’s description, it appears to have been a spontaneous decision on the part
of the conductor. But it is unsurprising that, as described by Smirnov, the presentation
had “nothing in common with what it had been in concert.” The concerts included an
intermission and were held in springtime, a less than balmy season in Moscow.
Dormition services would undoubtedly have been the most difficult of the year for the
choir of the Cathedral consecrated in honor of that feast. Furthermore, Smirnov describes
in his memoir that the singers (in August!) were dressed in their red velvet choral robes,
and it was so stuffy from the crowd and many candles that the singers, uncomfortable and
exhausted, would take turns going outside to get some air and drink diluted wine.
205
At
the end of such a service, nothing could have compared to the concert presentations. In
another recollection of the event, Smirnov wrote:
In 1915, at the Dormition service, the right kliros gave the single [church]
performance of Rachmaninoff’s composition Vzbrannoy Voevode under the
direction of Danilin – nothing came of it! Generally, movements from
Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil were never performed in the Dormition Cathedral.
It was considered that their contemporary sound did not correlate with the ancient
203
Here, “right kliros” means the choir on the right side of the church. In the next sentence, Smirnov
indicates the public was “pressed to the kliros,” indicating that the crowd was pushed up to the choir area
on the right part of the church.
204
205
Smirnov, “Ucheniki i pevchie,” 541.
Ibid., 570.
99
church. Moreover, after the brilliant concerts of the All-Night Vigil, it was
difficult for even the Synodal Choir to adapt a performance to [suit] the
conditions of church services. Only one movement, Bogoroditse Devo, was
considered by the “synodals” to sound consonant to the Dormition Cathedral,
206
because of its exceptionally spiritual nature.
Smirnov’s account was written decades after his tenure as a boy alto with the
Synodal Choir. Though the recollection of his time spent in the ensemble is invaluable to
scholars, it also includes observations that may have been formed after the facts occurred
and could have been influenced by others. Smirnov states that it was “considered that
their [movements from Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil] contemporary sound did not
correlate with the ancient church” and yet, evidently Danilin did not necessarily agree.
Smirnov speaks for all the “synodals” in stating that only the “Bogoroditse Devo”
movement was considered “consonant to the Dormition Cathedral” and yet, that
movement was never performed in the Dormition Cathedral.
207
Danilin’s use of the last
movement of the work, “Vzbrannoy Voevode,” indicates that he, at least, felt it to have an
“exceptionally spiritual nature” since that is the movement he chose to use in the
Dormition Cathedral.
Danilin must have considered the Rachmaninoff All-Night Vigil a work with a
potential liturgical future. His use of one movement at one service does not necessarily
mean he would have used the majority of the work at the Dormition Cathedral. It does,
however, indicate that Danilin considered the use of individual movements outside the
206
207
Smirnov, “Ucheniki i pevchie,” 571.
Though the troparion for the feast would be sung at Dormition instead of Bogoroditse Devo, there is no
indication from Smirnov or any other source that Bogoroditse Devo was used at the Dormition Cathedral
on any other occasion. It is also interesting to note that this was usage at a festal, not Resurrectional, AllNight Vigil.
100
context of the whole work as not only possible, but acceptable within a liturgical context.
This would have been a common approach to music selection by church musicians at the
time, and remains the same today. Though one cannot definitively claim that the
Rachmaninoff All-Night Vigil would have been performed in totality in a liturgical
context had political events not unfolded, at least one movement of the composition was
already attempted in Russia before the revolution of 1917, and according to Smirnov, a
second movement was considered “consonant to the Dormition Cathedral.” Perhaps other
movements would have been attempted in a liturgical context.
The final presentation of any of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil by the Synodal
Choir was in 1916, not in the Dormition Cathedral, but in the concert hall of the Synodal
School. Notable guests were the great bass Feodor Chaliapin and the director of the
Synodal School, Kastalsky. The second through sixth movements were performed on that
occasion. From Smirnov’s account, it appears to have been a relatively private visit from
Chaliapin to the school rather than a formal public concert event.
208
Again, the first
movement was omitted from performance, even in this less formal setting.
Unfortunately, it impossible to know what the future of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night
Vigil would have been in either a concert or liturgical context had the Synodal Choir
continued to exist. The short two years following the All-Night Vigil premiere and
preceding the February 1917 revolution was a difficult time for the Synodal Choir, as it
was for most of Russia. The war was taking its toll both at the front and at home, and the
financial situation was bleak with deprivation and shortages affecting all aspects of
208
Smirnov, “Ucheniki i pevchie,” 542.
101
society, including institutions of education and culture. Many of the adults of the Synodal
Choir were called to serve in the military. By 1916, eleven of the choir’s thirty adult
singers were at the front on active duty.
209
Because so many of the adults were absent due
to the war, in January 1917, the choir began to sing only at major services presided over
210
by the rector of the cathedral.
Sacred Music 1917-1928
The February revolution of 1917, and the abdication of the throne by the Tsar
several weeks later, began the colossal changes that would affect church music and all of
Russian society for the next eighty years. Almost immediately after the February
revolution, the new political leaders turned their attention to Church affairs.
211
But,
despite the revolutionary upheaval, initially church buildings remained unscathed and
services continued to be held. At this early stage of political overturn, the newly formed
Provisional Government was more concerned with food rationing than atheist ideology:
churches were searched and raided for stockpiled flour supplies, not priceless sacred
212
icons or chalices.
209
210
Though the clergy were defamed in the press, the situation remained
Zvereva, Alexander Kastal’sky, 166.
Ibid.
211
B.K. Abramov, ed. et al.. Pravoslavnaia Moskva v 1917-1921 godah: sbornik dokumentov i materialov
[Orthodox Moscow 1917-1921: a collection of documents and materials] (Moscow: Glavarchiv, 2004), 19106.
212
Ibid., 21.
102
relatively free of violence. Clergy critical of the new political leadership were removed
213
from their positions, squelching opposition.
By early summer 1917, animosity towards the Church turned violent. Large-scale
looting of churches and monasteries began, and clergymen were brutally murdered.
214
The
Provisional Government took extreme action against the Church in the fall of 1917. Two
decrees were issued in November and December of 1917 that nationalized church land
and property. Authorities began to forcibly attack monasteries and remove or kill
monastics, resulting in clashes between the military and the faithful, both clergy and
laymen. This direct violence affected the tenuous balance between the Church and the
Provisional Government. Patriarch Tikhon issued a statement on January 19, 1918
anathematizing (excommunicating) those who acted against the Church.
215
The Provisional Government responded with further violence and decrees against Church
holdings. On March 7, 1918 the government requisitioned the Synodal School’s
properties.
216
The Synodal Choir sang its final service in the Dormition Cathedral on
Pascha, April 22/May 5, 1918 and the Cathedral was closed.
217
The closing of the Synodal Choir School marked the symbolic death of sacred
Orthodox music in Russia. Though one might imagine that during a revolution led by an
213
An early removal was of Metropolitan Makariy of Moscow, one of the most influential bishops of the
nation.
214
215
216
217
Abramov, Pravoslavnaia Moskva v 1917-1921 godah, 15.
Ibid., 142.
Zvereva, Alexander Kastal’sky, 181.
Ibid., 186.
103
atheist regime all church life would grind to a complete halt, the process took time. The
Russian Orthodox Church did not completely disappear with the closing of the
monasteries and major centers of clerical authority in 1917-1918. Some churches
managed to remain open, and continued to function during the turbulent early years of the
1920s, while others were completely liquidated. Musicians continued to sing and conduct
at services. Though the ensembles active in the 1920s did not include the the Synodal
Choir, some of the sacred repertory of Rachmaninoff and his contemporaries was
performed in those years by other ensembles.
Danilin had another choir at his disposal that was capable of performing
Rachmaninoff’s works. Beginning in 1915, Danilin had worked with the privately
218
endowed Kayutov Choir based at the Church of St. Pimen.
The complete choir included
approximately seventy singers when Danilin began to work with them. They rehearsed as
a group with all members, and then split into smaller ensembles to sing simultaneously at
different churches. The Kayutov choir along with Danilin made several high profile
appearances, including singing the funeral service for Kastal’sky in December 1926.
219
Though the ensemble sang difficult repertory, including Rachmaninoff’s Liturgy, there is
220
no documentation available indicating that they sang the composer’s All-Night Vigil.
Further investigation into liturgical singing of Russian church choirs during the 1920s,
218
“Danilin,” in Pravoslavnaya Enzyklopediya, [Orthodox Encyclopedia]
http://www.pravenc.ru/text/171325.html (accessed January 26, 2014).
219
220
Smirnov, “Pamyati Kastal’skogo” in Russkaya duhovnaya muzika vol. 5, 417.
Vladimir Morosan, Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia (DMA dissertation, University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1984), 486-495.
104
particularly as archives continue to be opened today, needs to be undertaken for a more
complete picture to emerge of sacred singing in the early era of Communism.
Recently, details have emerged regarding the concert performances of sacred
repertory in the early Soviet period. The Imperial Cappella of St. Petersburg, known in
the early years after the Revolution as the Petrograd People’s Choral Academy, included
Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil in their 1918-1919 concert season.
221
Previously, scholars
had evidence of a possible 1926 concert performance. In a 2012 article, Pauline
Fairclough claims that this was not a single event, but annual concert performances of the
All-Night Vigil that continued until 1928, but Fairclough does not provide any further
evidence to document these concerts.
222
Dating the conclusion of these concerts to 1928
corresponds with the dramatic changes that occurred at the beginning of the first fiveyear plan, known as the “Great Break”:
… the radical nature of the shift from mass proletarian education to an urgent
defense against the bourgeois enemies of socialism caused a definable “break” in
1928…. What set the period from 1928 to 1932 apart was the increased urgency
in attacks on those perceived as holding back the process of building socialism;
with the First Five-Year Plan compounding a disastrous famine, provoking civil
unrest (Soviet workers even went on strike), and inflicting the disaster of forced
collectivization on the countryside. The sheer scale of arrests, deportations, food
shortages, and civic disquiet demanded scapegoats: “saboteurs” whose alleged
223
enmity to the Soviet Union was spoiling progress for everyone else.
221
Pauline Fairclough, “Don't Sing It on a Feast Day: The Reception and Performance of Western Sacred
Music in Soviet Russia, 1917–1953,” Journal of the American Musicological Society 65 No. 1 (Spring
2012): 73.
222
Fairclough will be releasing a book on her recent research in late 2015 with Yale University Press titled
“Classics for the Masses: Shaping Soviet Musical Identity 1917-1953.”
223
Fairclough, “Don't Sing It on a Feast Day,” 79-80.
105
The “scapegoats” included anyone and anything that was connected, or had been
connected to the Church. The repertory of Orthodox music was effectively silenced.
Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil slept quietly for the next several decades. Orthodox
musical culture in Russia drifted into a somnambular epoch of Soviet rule. The Russian
musicians that had dominated the cultural and artistic spheres at the opening of the
century were quickly separated into those that left Russia after the Revolution and those
that stayed behind. Rachmaninoff and his family left Russia on December 23, 1917,
never to return to Russia again.
Interlude: High Stalinism
The fate of the Orthodox Church leading up to and during the Second World War,
like much of Soviet history, was peculiar. The years immediately preceding the war
(1936-1938) had brought not only Stalin’s purges against the citizenry, but also a third
wave of persecution against the Church.
224
Stalin had been a seminarian in his youth, and
understood the implications of a populace strongly committed to the Orthodox Church.
He systematically tried to eradicate the Church and came very close to his goal:
By the late 1930s, 80,000 Orthodox clerics, monks, and nuns reportedly had lost
their lives at the hands of the Bolsheviks. This figure represents about half the
total number of clerics, monks, and nuns serving before the 1917 revolution. In
the late 1930s there were only four active bishops in the USSR….The church was
perilously close to demise, given the canonical need for an unbroken apostolic
succession – bishops were essential for the continuation of both a line of hierarchs
and of priests. The police might have carried off the remaining openly functioning
225
bishops in a single night…..
224
225
Davis, A Long Walk to Church, 11.
Ibid., 11-12.
106
Hitler gave the order for the German Army to invade the Soviet Union on June
22, 1941. As the German army advanced, Stalin had reason to fear that the people could
see the invaders as liberators.
226
Conditions throughout the country were disastrous. By
1943, even Stalin, once eager to destroy the Russian Orthodox Church, changed tactics
and permitted the Church to function, albeit on a short leash. On September 4, 1943,
Stalin met with three Russian Orthodox bishops. He granted them “permission to set up
shops and candle factories, to publish a monthly journal, [Journal of the Moscow
Patriarchate] to open new churches, to consecrate bishops, to ordain more priests” and
hold a patriarchal election.
227
Reopened churches meant an opportunity for sacred music
to be performed.
On February 6, 1945 a unique concert was held at the Moscow Conservatory that
would have been unthinkable just a decade before. Organized by the Moscow
Patriarchate, the concert program was an evening of sacred music attended by “priests,
dressed in cassocks and carrying Orthodox pectoral crosses, bishops, foreign guests,
literary figures, singers, musicians, representatives from the press, members of the Radio
228
Committee, and employees of the publishing industries.”
Included on the first part of
the program, was the fifth movement of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil, performed by
the Patriarchal choir conducted by Viktor Stepanovich Komarov (1893-1974). A small
liturgical work by Danilin, “O Tebe raduetsya” [All creation rejoices] was also included
226
227
228
Ibid., 17.
Ibid., 18.
Fairclough, “Don't Sing It on a Feast Day,” 92-93.
107
on the program amongst standards of the sacred repertory by composers such as
Chesnokov, Kastalsky, Archangelsky and L’vov. The final piece of the evening was
performed by the State Symphony Orchestra of the USSR. Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture,
with its musical reference to the liturgical hymn “Spasi Gospodi, lyudi Tvoya,” [O Lord,
save thy people] particularly affected the audience that had experienced four long, brutal
years of war.
229
Unfortunately, the concert “was a rare and possibly unique event for its
time” that “seems to have been the first and last major concert of Russian Orthodox
music in those years .”
230
Immediately after the war, though liturgical life was not encouraged, neither was
it completely halted. Though many church buildings had been destroyed in the years
between 1917 and the Second World War, some had survived and were evaluated for
feasablity of use, particularly in the capital. The Transfiguration Church known as “Joy
of All that Sorrow” on the Bol’shaya Ordynka thoroughfare was reopened in 1948
because of its size, location, and relatively good condition. Nikolai Vasil’evich Matveyev
was appointed its choir director. Nine years later, he would be the first conductor to
231
publicly perform the entire Rachmaninoff All-Night Vigil.
229
230
231
Fairclough, “Don't Sing It on a Feast Day,” 94.
Ibid.
The All-Night Vigil was performed almost entirely. For liturgical use, one would perform either
movement 13 or movement 14 based on the tone of the week in the Orthodox eight-tone cycle.
Liturgically, both movements (texts) can never appear in the same All-Night Vigil service.
108
Revival of the All-Night Vigil
Nikolai Vasil’evich Matveyev was born on February 5, 1909 in Vilnius.
232
In
1918, when he was nine years old, Matveyev’s family moved to Zagorsk, today’s Sergiev
Posad, approximately seventy-five kilometers from Moscow’s center. His early formation
as a choral singer is attributed to the tradition of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra.
233
The Lavra
has been one of the most important monastic centers of Russia since the fourteenth
century. However, Matveyev’s exposure to the services and music at the Lavra would
have been short-lived. Though services continued at the Trinitiy-Sergius Lavra several
years after the revolution, on May 7, 1920 (N.S.) all its churches were closed by the Red
Army in accordance with the government’s March 26, 1920 order “On the closing of the
234
Trinity-Sergius Lavra and the transfer of the Lavra relics to the Moscow Museum.”
After 1920, Matveyev’s formation as a singer took place in the shadow of the Lavra
tradition, in Sergiev Posad’s St. Elijah Church, which remained open.
In 1927, Matveyev began directing the Holy Virgin Protection Church choir in the
village of Cherkizovo.
235
Though attempts were made to convert the Holy Virgin
232
S. Shumskiy, “V ego ispolnenii otrazhena plamennaya vera,” [His renditions reflect fiery faith] i
Praktika muzykal’nogo oformlenija bogosluzheniya: sbornik statej, vospominanij, arhivnih dokumentov.
[The formulation and musical practice of services: a collection of articles, recollections, and archival
documents.] Trudy Moskovskoy regentsko-pevcheskoy seminarii [Works of the Moscow choir directorsinger seminary] (2005): 85.
233
234
235
Ibid.
Abramov, Pravoslavnaia Moskva v 1917-1921 godah, 516.
Shumskiy, “V ego ispolnenii otrazhena plamennaya vera,” 86.
109
Protection Church for secular use in 1934, they were ultimately unsuccessful.
236
However,
the church was temporarily closed for an undisclosed length of time in the 1930s. In
1935, Matveyev completed his education at the Moscow Institute of Architecture.
Matveyev had attended a school for music in his youth, studied choral conducting at the
Moscow Conservatory,
Gnesin Institute.
237
and also completed the choral conducting program at the
238
On December 27, 1945 Fr. Mikhail Zernov (future Bishop Kiprian) was appointed
239
rector of the Holy Virgin Protection Church in Cherkizovo.
It is likely that this is where
he met Matveyev, the church’s choir director. On May 12, 1948, Zernov was assigned to
be the rector of the newly renovated Joy of All that Sorrow Church. It seems Zernov
brought his choir director from the Holy Virgin Protection Church with him to his new
appointment. Matveyev’s association with Joy of All That Sorrow also dates to 1948.
The Church of the Transfiguration, also known as the “Joy of All that Sorrow”
(so-named for a miracle-working icon of the same name housed in the church) is now
synonymous with the revival of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil. The Joy of All that
Sorrow had been stripped of its sacred objects in 1922, was liquidated by the State on
236
Cherkizovskiy Pokrovskiy Hram, [The Protection Church of Cherkizov] http://drevoinfo.ru/articles/4868.html (accessed 10 June, 2014).
237
238
239
It is unclear if Matveyev crossed paths there with Danilin, who was on the choral faculty.
Shumskiy, “V ego ispolnenii otrazhena plamennaya vera,” 86.
Kiprian (Zernov), http://drevo-info.ru/articles/17338.html (accessed 10 June, 2014).
110
240
March 11, 1933, and given to the Tretyakov Gallery’s architectural arts department.
Its
bells had been removed and destroyed, but the church building itself did not suffer the
same disastrous fate as many other Moscow churches. The building had been listed on
the national register of architectural monuments in 1928.
241
Many of today’s seasoned Moscow singers sang at some point in their career in
the choir at Joy of All That Sorrow with Matveyev.
242
Despite the hardships (which could
include losing one’s secular job) for singers who worked in church choirs at the height of
the Cold War and after, Matveyev had a choir of thirty paid singers, which he augmented
to thirty-six singers for major services.
243
The most famous of these services were annual performances of Rachmaninoff’s
All-Night Vigil. Matveyev conducted the work every year as part of the Resurrection
Vigil service on the Saturday in March closest to the death date (March 28) of
Rachmaninoff. However, the first presentation of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil at Joy
240
Its centralized location proved desirable as an extension for the Tretyakov Gallery: the church is located
just a few minutes walk from the gallery. As part of the greater gallery holdings, the church was better
cared for than many other Moscow churches that were either completely razed or destroyed. During the
Second World War, the Tretyakov Gallery used the church to store artwork.
241
The church was considered historically important because the architect who oversaw its reconstruction
in 1812 was Joseph Bové. After the burning of Moscow to thwart Napoleon, Bové had been in charge of
reconstructing not only churches, but also Red Square, and Theatre Square, where the Bolshoi Theatre is
located.
242
Personal interviews, July 2009. Singers interviewed requested that their names not be published,
demonstrating reticence (even decades later) to formally document their liturgical participation during the
Soviet era.
243
The right kliros of the church is tucked away quite out of view of most of the building, and has a rather
high, fully enclosed screen of icons surrounding it. It is unclear when the enclosed kliros design was
incorporated into the structure. It remains a particularly intimate singing space, unusual when compared to
the more open kliros design of many Orthodox churches. The particular positioning of the choir and the
icon screen which kept the choir from the view of the crowd, and also of any officials taking note of who
was singing, might also have increased the likelihood of singers’ participation.
111
of All That Sorrow was not connected to Rachmaninoff’s death date at all. This tradition
may have begun in 1958 or in a subsequent year. Rather, the first complete liturgical
presentation of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil was given in November, not March, of
1957. The occasion was the first Moscow service presided over by newly consecrated
Bishop Pimen (future Patriarch Pimen).
244
The episcopal visit also coincided with
celebrating the thirty-year anniversary of Matveyev’s service to the Church as a choir
director.
Indeed, both events would have been occasion for special repertory from the
choir. Not only was there a new bishop presiding, but he was also known to have an
excellent lyric baritone voice, and had (previously to hierarchical consecration) been the
choir director at several Moscow churches.
245
In November of 1957, he had even
compiled the repertory list for the services of his own consecration to the episcopacy.
246
There is no way to know for certain if there was any discussion between Matveyev and
Bishop Pimen about resurrecting the All-Night Vigil, as no such documentation regarding
the November 1957 service at Joy of All That Sorrow is available to date.
244
“Iz zhizni Eparhii,” [From diocesan life] Zhurnal Moskovskoy Patriarhii [Journal of the Moscow
Patriarchate 7 (1978): 26.
245
Transfiguration Church (1925) in Pushkaryah, the Church of Saints Flor and Lavr (1926) at
Myasnitskyh Vorot, the Church of Maxim the Confessor “na Varvarke,” the Church of Pimen the Great in
Vorotnikah (1928-1932), and the Theophany Cathedral (1935-1936) in Doromogilov. See Svyateyshiy
Patriarh Pimen kak regent [His Holiness Patriarch Pimen as choir director]
http://www.mpda.ru/site_pub/334521.html (accessed 10 June 10, 2014).
246
Svyateyshiy Patriarh Pimen kak regent [His Holiness Patriarch Pimen as choir director]
http://www.mpda.ru/site_pub/334521.html (accessed 10 June 10, 2014).
112
For Matveyev to perform the complete Rachmaninoff All-Night Vigil in any
context, let alone liturgical, when the work was not performed in concert halls would
have been a radical, daring move, possibly bordering on professional suicide. It seems
fair to conclude that no conductor would have taken such a bold step, let alone on the first
visit of a newly consecrated hierarch, unless they felt secure that the bishop would not
only approve, but provide support in case of any conflict or questioning of such action by
officials.
The choir of the right kliros, directed by Matveyev, would sing the movements of
Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil, and the choir of the left kliros would sing all the variable
texts and litanies, mostly using the Obikhod. The church would be full of people. The
Matveyev liturgical performances of the All-Night Vigil were the only public
performances of the work anywhere for decades. Musicians and worshipers alike eagerly
awaited the event each year. It was an annual reminder of the heights attained in Russian
music, particularly in the Orthodox choral genre. The tradition begun by Matveyev
continued until his retirement in 1990. After Matveyev’s death in 1993, and due primarily
to the radical financial constraints in Russia during the early 1990s, the Joy of All That
Sorrow Church stopped the annual presentations of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil.
Conductor Aleksei Aleksandrovich Puzakov had been a director of the left kliros
choir during the latter portion of Matveyev’s career at Joy of All That Sorrow. In 1996,
Puzakov revived the annual tradition of performing Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil every
113
March at the Church of St. Nicholas, where he is the choir director.
247
The Church of St.
Nicholas, like Joy of All that Sorrow, was given to the Tretyakov Gallery in 1932. It is
still part of the greater gallery complex, a five-minute walk from Joy of All That Sorrow,
and was also used as a storage facility during the Soviet years. The church was opened
again for liturgical use in 1993. In April 2009, Puzakov was assigned as the choir director
at Joy of All that Sorrow.
248
The Rachmaninoff All-Night Vigil annual liturgical tradition
returned with Puzakov back to the church where it began with Matveyev, and has since
been presented there annually.
Recently, the work has started to expand its reach into other Moscow churches.
On December 1, 2001, Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil was used liturgically at the
Church of Martyr Tatiana of Moscow State University, conducted by Ekaterina
Maleina.
249
In 2003, the university parish website announced the release of the live
recording made of the service with an explanation of why the the work is rarely used
liturgically:
Though individual movements of the Rachmaninoff have affixedly entered the
repertory of the finest church choirs, this piece is in its entirety rarely heard at
services, primarily because of its complexity for performers.
Performing individual movements of the work has already entered the greater church
choir repertory, regardless of the concert setting of the piece’s premiere in 1915. As
understood by many Moscow musicians today, the primary reason the work is rarely
247
The full name of the church includes its location “na Tolmochah,” as it was built on the intersection of
Large and Small Tolmachevsky Lanes.
248
249
Concurrently, he remains the principal choir director at the Church of St. Nicholas.
Hram sv. Tatiani, http://www.st-tatiana.ru/text/33928.html (accessed September 10, 2012)
114
performed liturgically in totality is the difficulty level of the work as a whole, not its
origins in the concert hall. Over time, the context of the work’s premiere may become
less and less important for the work’s reception as a liturgical composition.
115
CHAPTER SIX
CONCLUSION
The argument regarding Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil’s suitability for liturgical
use has been a lengthy one, lasting most of the twentieth century and still ongoing today.
Before the Revolution of 1917, the work was heard publicly only five times in concert in
the span of five weeks, never in totality, and only one of its movements was ever
presented in church. Since 1957, during the era of the Communist state, the work was
heard for thirty years exclusively in church and not in concert. The irony of this inversion
is like much of Russian history in the twentieth century: difficult to explain and harder to
comprehend.
Proponents of limiting Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil to concert performances
defend this viewpoint with the fact that the work was premiered in concert. That is
indisputable. But the work also was premiered without several of its movements, and yet
no one claims that the All-Night Vigil should be performed today without movements 1,
13, and 14. Limiting a work to certain venues or contexts based solely on the details of its
premiere would completely change our understanding of many pieces, often
detrimentally. It is the life of a work after its premiere, and its subsequent survival and
evolution throughout vastly different social and cultural contexts that often defines a
work’s greatness.
The conductor that premeired Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil introduced one of
its movements liturgically at the Dormition Cathedral. There is no way to know what
further liturgical presentations might have been presented of the All-Night Vigil had the
116
Russian revolution not occured. The cataclysmic events that shaped nearly a century of
Russian history are inalterable.
Whether hailed or criticized, the fact remains that the liturgical performances that
began with Matveyev in the 1950s may have been a historical anomaly, had they
occurred once or twice. Instead, they became a regular practice that continued for
decades. The revival by Matveyev has been extended to the next generation of Moscow
singers via the recent liturgical presentations of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil by Alexei
Puzakov. Though Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil can now be performed in concert halls
in Russia, from the perspective of the last century, this is actually a relatively new
development in the performance history of the work.
What kind of music will be created for the Russian Orthodox Church today, and
who will decide if it is appropriate for worship, the concert stage, or both has yet to be
determined. The Russian Orthodox Church must wrestle with the question of who defines
such lines and what criteria they will use in the new millennium. Furthermore, both
Church authorities and musicologists must evaluate whether such lines are ever firmly
secure, or what can make them fade and disappear with time.
Performers and conductors, both within the Orthodox tradition and outside of it,
wanting to perform Rachmaninoff’s All-Night Vigil, must understand not only the context
of the work’s composition and premiere, but also the actual, though perhaps not
widespread, living liturgical performance history of this repertory when preparing to
present the work. Furthermore, conductors need to take this into account when
117
performing the All-Night Vigil in a secular context, as one would when programming any
piece of sacred music.
The viva voce concert and this supporting document have demonstrated that a
liturgically informed presentation of selected movements of Rachmaninoff’s All-Night
Vigil is a practical approach for secular performance. Though this study is not an
exhaustive guide for musicians on how to perform the Orthodox choral repertory in a
historically informed way, it provides an initial example of an approach that may promote
further performance of this repertory.
118
APPENDIX A
250
THE DAILY OFFICE AS SERVED AT THE ANASTASIS IN JERUSALEM
Loving sisters, I am sure it will interest you to know about the daily services they have in the holy places,
and I must tell you about them. All the doors of the Anastasis are opened before cock-crow each day, and
the “monazontes and parthenae,” as they call them here, come in, and also some lay men and women, at
least those who are willing to wake at such an early hour. From then until daybreak they join in singing the
refrains to the hymns, psalms, and antiphons. There is a prayer between each of the hymns, since there are
two or three presbyters and deacons each day by rota, who are there with the monazontes and say the
prayers between all the hymns and antiphons.
As soon as dawn comes, they start the Morning Hymns, and the bishop with his clergy comes and joins
them. He goes straight into the cave, and inside the screen he first says the Prayer for All (mentioning any
names he wishes) and blesses the catechumens, and then another prayer and blesses the faithful. Then he
comes outside the screen, and everyone comes up to kiss his hand. He blesses them one by one, and goes
out, and by the time the dismissal takes place it is already day.
Again at midday everyone comes into the Anastasis and says psalms and antiphons until a message is sent
to the bishop. Again he enters, and, without taking his seat, goes straight inside the screen in the Anastasis
(which is to say into the cave where he went in the early morning), and again, after a prayer, he blesses the
faithful and comes outside the screen, and again they come to kiss his hand.
At three o’clock they do once more what they did at midday, but at four o’clock they have Lychnicon, as
they call it, or in our language Lucernare. All the people congregate once more in the Anastasis, and the
lamps and candles are all lit, which makes it very bright. The fire is brought not from the outside, but from
the cave – inside the screen – where a lamp is always burning night and day. For some time they have the
Lucernare psalms and antiphons; then they send for the bishop, who enters and sits in the chief seat. The
presbyters also come and sit in their places, and the hymns and antiphons go on. Then, when they have
finished singing everything which is appointed, the bishop rises and goes in front of the screen (i.e. the
cave). One of the deacons makes the normal commemoration of individuals, and each time he mentions a
name a large group of boys responds Kyrie eleison (in our language “Lord, have mercy.”) Their voices are
very loud. As soon as the deacon has done his part, the bishop says a prayer and prays the Prayer for All.
Up to this point the faithful and the catechumens are praying together, but now the deacon calls every
catechumen to stand where he is and bow his head, and the bishop says the blessing over the catechumens
from his place. There is another prayer, after which the deacon calls for all the faithful to bow their heads,
and the bishop says the blessing over the faithful from his place. Thus the dismissal takes place at the
Anastasis, and they all come up one by one to kiss the bishop’s hand.
Then, singing hymns, they take the bishop from the Anastasis to the Cross, and everyone goes with him.
On arrival he says one prayer and blesses the catechumens, then another and blesses the faithful. Then
again the bishop and all the people go Behind the Cross, and do there what they did Before the Cross; and
in both places they come to kiss the bishop’s hand, as they did in the Anastasis. Great glass lanterns are
burning everywhere, and there are many candles in front of the Anastasis, and also Before and Behind the
Cross. By the end of all this it is dusk. So these are the services held every weekday at the Cross and at the
Anastasis.
250
See Robert Taft’s The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, pages 49 and 50. Taft cites that this
translation is from J. Wilkinson’s Egeria’s Travels (London, SPCK, 1971).
119
APPENDIX B
251
THE RESURRECTION VIGIL AS SERVED AT THE ANASTASIS IN JERUSALEM
But on the seventh day, the Lord’s Day, there gather in the courtyard before cock-crow all the people, as
many as can get in, as if it was Easter. The courtyard is the “basilica” beside the Anastasis, that is to say,
out of doors, and lamps have been hung there for them. Those who are afraid they may not arrive in time
for cock-crow come early, and sit waiting there singing hymns and antiphons, and they have prayers
between, since there are always presbyters and deacons there ready for the vigil, because so many people
collect there, and it is not usual to open the holy places before cock-crow.
Soon, the first cock crows, and at that the bishop enters, and goes into the cave in the Anastasis. The doors
are all opened, and all the people come into the Anastasis, which is already ablaze with lamps. When they
are inside, a psalm is said by one of the presbyters, with everyone responding, and it is followed by a
prayer; then a psalm is said by one of the deacons, and another prayer; then a third psalm is said by one of
the clergy, a third prayer, and the Commemoration of All. After these three psalms and prayers they take
censers into the cave of the Anastasis, so that the whole Anastasis basilica is filled with the smell. Then the
bishop, standing inside the screen, takes the Gospel book and goes to the door, where he himself reads the
account of the Lord’s resurrection. At the beginning of the reading the whole assembly groans and laments
at all that the Lord underwent for us, and the way they weep would move even the hardest heart to tears.
When the Gospel is finished, the bishop comes out, and is taken with singing to the Cross, and they all go
with him. They have one psalm there and a prayer, then he blesses the people, and that is the dismissal. As
the bishop goes out, everyone comes to kiss his hand.
Then straight away the bishop retires to his house, and all the monazontes go back into the Anastasis to
sing psalms and antiphons until daybreak. There are prayers between all these psalms and antiphons, and
presbyters and deacons take their turn every day at the Anastasis to keep vigil with the people. Some lay
men and women like to stay on there till daybreak, but others prefer to go home again to bed for some
sleep.
251
See Robert Taft’s The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, page 52. Taft cites that this translation is
from J. Wilkinson’s Egeria’s Travels (London, SPCK, 1971).
120
APPENDIX C
RECOLLECTION BY RACHMANINOFF OF PASCHA 1914
One of the unforgettable memories of past days in Russia – Pascha night in the Kremlin. For those who
have spent this Holy night in Moscow, who walked with thousands of worshipers into the Kremlin, who
felt the deep meaning of the religious ceremonies, who saw the unique panorama of the city from the
[in]side of the Kremlin – that [person] will forever remember the beauty and mystical feelings that are
called out by this night.
The last days of Great Lent have passed. With the onset of night, all usual life of the city dies away. Along
the deserted streets, along the vacant boulevards, huge crowds of people make their way to the Kremlin.
This old fortress with her cathedrals, churches, palaces of the first Tsars, is sacred for every Russian heart.
The stone walls of the Kremlin were first built in 1367 by the Great Knyaz Dimitriy Donskoy, who drove
the Tatar hordes out of Rus’. Within these walls many historical events took place, here many memories
live.
On Pascha night, thousands of worshipers came to pray in the old cathedral, where Tsars are crowned, or in
one of the many other Kremlin churches. Churches quickly filled to the maximum. Crowds stand on the
street, with reverence awaiting in silence the triumphal moment of midnight. The Kremlin and city with its
numerous churches, which are seen from the height of the Kremlin, are found in half-darkness.
The tension grows. Finally, the doors of the churches open: processions headed by priests with crosses and
banners walk out of them. The metropolitan of Moscow himself heads the main procession. All his higher
clergy accompany him, behind them follows the famous Synodal Choir with the boys, dressed in scarlet
with gold vestments. No words can relate the faultless harmony of the singing of this choir, the best [of] all
I’ve ever heard. The procession walks around the church three times. Once, I was invited by the famous
choir director of the Synodal Choir, Mr. Danilin, and was given the privelege to take part in this procession,
joining with the basses. An unforgettable experience!
252
Simultaneously, all the bells 253
of the “forty by forty” churches with joyful chimes answer the call of the
old bell from Ivan the Great. Everything in a wondrous manner transfigures: the entire Kremlin and city
churches are inundated with light. In a moment, the quiet and dark city reveals itself a stately picture of
light and joy. The dark masses of worshipers hold burning candles in their hands. For a time, all cares and
sorrows are forgotten. Old and young, poor and rich, fortunate and unfortunate, – all are united [in] one
brotherly feeling of new hope and joy….
And above them all, above the illumined churches, above the Bright city shining with light is heard the
triumphant song of the bells. Deep bronze tones, clean gold tones, crystal silver tones create a beautiful
symphony. It seems, the air, itself, sings! This ringing of the
bells, which continues without interruption all
254
of Bright week, is heard for many miles around Moscow.
252
“Forty by forty” or 40 multiplied by 40, (1,600) is a Russian idiom to describe the large number of
churches in Moscow.
253
254
The bell-tower called “Ivan the Great” is the tallest (266 feet) of the Kremlin belltowers.
Translated from Svetlana Zvereva, “O nekorotikh muzikal’nikh zamyslah Rakhmaninova seredini 1930x godov.” [About several musical plans of Rachmaninoff in the mid-1930s] S.V. Rakhmaninov i mirovaya
kul’tura [S.V. Rachmaninoff and world culture] 5 (2013): 36-37.
121
APPENDIX D
ALL-NIGHT VIGIL TEXT AND TRANSLATION
CHURCH SLAVONIC
255
ENGLISH
I
Приидите, поклонимся Цареви нашему Богу.
Приидите, поклонимся и припадем Христу,
Цареви нашему Богу.
Приидите, поклонимся и припадем Самому
Христу, Цареви и. Богу нашему.
Приидите, поклонимся и припадем Ему.
Come, let us worship God, our King.
Come, let us worship and fall down before Christ,
our King and our God.
Come, let us worship and fall down before Christ
Himself, our King and our God.
Come, let us worship and fall down before Him.
II
Благослови, душе моя, Господа!
Благословен ecu Господи.
Господи Боже мой, возвеличился еси зело.
Благословен еси Господи!
Во исповедание и в велелепоту облеклся еси.
Благословен еси Господи!
На горах станут воды.
Дивна дела Твоя, Господи!
Посреде гор пройдут воды.
Дивна дела Твоя, Господи.
Вся премудростию сотворил еси.
Слава Ти, Господи, сотворившему вся.
Слава Отцу, и Сыну, и Святому Духу,
и ныне и присно и во веки веков.
Аминь.
Bless the Lord, O my soul!
Blessed art Thou, O Lord.
O Lord my God, Thou art very great.
Blessed art Thou, O Lord.
Thou art clothed with honor and majesty.
Blessed art Thou, O Lord.
The waters stand upon the mountains.
Marvelous are Thy works, O Lord.
The waters flow between the hills.
Marvelous are Thy works, O Lord.
In wisdom hast thou made all things.
Glory to Thee, O Lord, who hast created all!
Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy
Spirit, both now and ever and unto ages of ages.
Amen.
Аллилуиа, Аллилуиа, Аллилуиа, слава Тебе, Боже.
Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia, glory to Thee, O God.
255
256
Text is given in Russian transliteration.
The entire phrase “Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia, glory to Thee, o God” is repeated three times.
256
122
TEXT AND TRANSLATION – Continued
III
Блажен муж, иже не иде на совет нечестивых.
Аллилуиа, аллилуиа, аллилуиа.
Яко весть Господь путь праведных, и путь
нечестивых погибнет. Аллилуиа…
Работайте Господеви со страхом и радуйтеся
Ему с трепетом. Аллилуиа….
Блажени вси надеющиися Нань. Аллилуиа…
Воскресни, Господи, спаси мя, Боже мой.
Аллилуиа…
Господне есть спасение, и на людех Твоих
благословение Твое. Аллилуиа…
Слава Отцу и Сыну и Святому Духу.
И ныне и присно и во веки веков.
Аминь.
Blessed is the man, who walks not in the counsel of
the wicked.Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia.
For the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but
the way of the wicked will perish. Alleluia…
Serve the Lord with fear and rejoice
in Him with trembling. Alleluia…
Blessed are all who take refuge in Him. Alleluia…
Arise, O Lord! Save me, O my God!
Alleluia…
Salvation is of the Lord; and Thy blessing is upon
Thy people. Alleluia…
Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy
Spirit, both now and ever and unto ages of ages.
Amen.
Аллилуиа, Аллилуиа, Аллилуиа, слава Тебе, Боже.
Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia, glory to Thee, O God.
257
IV
Свете Тихий святыя славы
Безсмертнаго Отца Небеснаго,
Святаго, Блаженнаго, Иисусе Христе!
Пришедше на запад солнца,
видевше свет вечерний,
поем Отца, Сына и Святаго Духа, Бога.
Достоин еси во вся времена
пет быти преподобными,
Сыне Божий, живот даяй;
темже мир Тя славит.
Gladsome Light of the holy glory
of the Immortal One-the Heavenly Father,
holy and blessed–O Jesus Christ!
Now that we have come to the setting of the sun,
and behold the light of evening,
we praise the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit–God.
Thou art worthy at all times
to be praised in hymns by reverent voices.
O Son of God, the Giver of Life;
therefore all the world glorifies Thee.
V
Ныне отпущаеши раба Твоего, Владыко,
по глаголу Твоему, с миром;
яко видеста очи мои спасение Твое,
еже еси уготовал пред лицем всех людей,
свет во откровение языков,
и славу людей Твоих Израиля.
257
Lord, now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace,
according to Thy word,
for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation,which Thou
hast prepared before the face of all peoplea light to enlighten the Gentiles,
and the glory of Thy people Israel.
The entire phrase “Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia, glory to Thee, o God” is repeated three times.
123
TEXT AND TRANSLATION – Continued
VI
Богородице Дево, радуйся,
Благодатная Марие, Господь с Тобою:
благословена Ты в женах
и благословен Плод чрева Твоего,
яко Спаса родила еси душ наших.
Rejoice, O Virgin Theotokos,
Mary full of grace, the Lord is with Thee:
Blessed art Thou among women,
and blessed is the Fruit of Thy womb,
for Thou has borne the Savior of our souls.
VII
Слава в вышних Богу,
и на земли мир,
в человецех благоволение. (трижды)
Господи, устне мои отверзеши, и уста моя
возвестят хвалу Твою.
Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace,
goodwill among men. (thrice)
O Lord, open Thou my lips,
and my mouth shall proclaim Thy praise.
VIII
Хвалите Имя Господне,
хвалите, раби Господа. Аллилуиа.
Благословен Господь от Сиона,
живый во Иерусалиме. Аллилуиа.
Исповедайтеся Господеви, яко Благ,
яко в век милость Его. Аллилуиа.
Исповедайтеся Богу Небесному, яко в век
милость Его. Аллилуиа.
Praise the name of the Lord,
praise, O you His servants. Alleluia.
Blessed be the Lord from Zion,
He who dwells in Jerusalem. Alleluia.
O give thanks unto the Lord, for He is good,
for His mercy endures forever. Alleluia.
O give thanks unto the God of Heaven, for His
mercy endures forever. Alleluia.
124
TEXT AND TRANSLATION – Continued
IX
Благословен еси, Господи,
научи мя оправданием Твоим.
Blessed art Thou, O Lord,
teach me Thy statutes.
Ангельский собор удивися,
зря Тебе в мертвых вменившася,
смертную же, Спасе, крепость разориша,
и с Собою Адама воздвигша,
и от ада вся свобождша.
The angelic host was filled with awe,
when it saw Thee among the dead.
By destroying the power of death, O Savior,
Thou didst raise Adam with Thyself,
and save all men from hell.
Благословен еси, Господи,
научи мя оправданием Твоим.
Blessed art Thou, O Lord,
teach me Thy statutes.
Почто мира с милостивными слезами,
о ученицы растворяете?
Блистаяйся во гробе ангел
мироносицам вещаше:
видите вы гроб и уразумейте,
Спас бо воскресе от гроба.
“Why do you mingle myrrh with your tears of pity,
o you women disciples?”
cried the radiant angel in the tomb to the
myrrbearers:
“Look at the tomb and understand,
The Savior is risen from the dead!”
Благословен еси, Господи,
научи мя оправданием Твоим.
Blessed art Thou, O Lord,
teach me Thy statutes.
Зело рано мироносицы течаху
ко гробу Твоему рыдающия,
но предста к ним ангел, и рече:
рыдания время преста,
не плачите,
воскресение же апостолом рцыте.
Very early in the morning the myrrbearers ran
with sorrow to Thy tomb,
but an Angel came to them and said:
“The time for sorrow has come to an end!
Do not weep,
but announce the resurrection to the apostles!”
Благословен еси, Господи,
научи мя оправданием Твоим.
Blessed art Thou, O Lord,
teach me Thy statutes.
Мироносицы жены, с миры пришедша
ко гробу Твоему, Спасе, рыдаху,
ангел же к ним рече, глаголя:
что с мертвыми Живаго помышляете?
Яко Бог бо воскресе от гроба.
The myrrbearers, coming with myrrh
to Thy tomb, O Savior, were weeping
but the Angel addressesd them, saying:
“Why do you seek the living among the dead?
Since He is God, He is risen from the tomb!”
Слава Отцу и Сыну
и Святому Духу
Glory to the Father and to the Son
and to the Holy Spirit.
Поклонимся Отцу, и Его Сынови,
и Святому Духу,
Святей Троице во едином существе,
с Серафимы зовуще:
Свят, Свят, Свят еси, Господи.
We worship the Father, and His Son,
and the Holy Spirit:
the Holy Trinity, one in essence!
We cry with the Seraphim:
“Holy, Holy, Holy art Thou O lord!”
125
TEXT AND TRANSLATION – Continued
И ныне и присно и во веки веков. Аминь.
Both now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.
Жизнодавца рождши,
греха, Дево, Адама избавила еси,
радость же Еве в печали место подала еси;
падшия же от жизни к сей направи,
из Тебе воплотивыйся Бог и Человек.
Since Thou didst give birth to the Giver of Life,
O Virgin,Thou didst deliver Adam from his sin!
Thou gavest joy to Eve instead of sadness!
The God-man who was born of Thee
has restored to life those who had fallen from it!
Аллилуиа, Аллилуиа, Аллилуиа, слава Тебе, Боже.
Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia, glory to Thee, O God.
X
Воскресение Христово видевше,
поклонимся Святому Господу Иисусу,
Единому Безгрешному.
Кресту Твоему покланяемся, Христе,
и святое Воскресение Твое поем и славим:
Ты бо сеи Бог наш,
разве Тебе иного не знаем,
Имя Твое именуем.
Приидите, вси вернии,
поклонимся святому Христову Воскресению:
се бо прииде Крестом
радость всему миру.
Всегда благословяще Господа,
поем Воскресение Его:
распятие бо претерпев,
смертию смерть разруши.
258
Having beheld the resurrection of Christ,
let us worship the holy Lord Jesus,
the only Sinless One.
We venerate Thy Cross, O Christ,
and we hymn and glorify Thy holy resurrection,
for Thou art our God,
and we know no other than Thee;
we call on Thy name.
Come, all you faithful,
let us venerate Christ’s holy resurrection.
For, behold, through the cross
joy has come into all the world.
Ever blessing the Lord,
let us praise His resurrection,
for by enduring the cross for us,
He has destroyed death by death.
The entire phrase “Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia, glory to Thee, o God” is repeated three times.
258
126
TEXT AND TRANSLATION – Continued
XI
Величит душа Моя Господа,
и возрадовася дух Мой о Бозе Спасе Моем.
My soul magnifies the Lord,
and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.
Честнейшую Херувим
и Славнейшую без сравнения Серафим,
без истления Бога Слова рождшую,
сущую Богородицу, Тя величаем.
More honorable than the Cherubim
and more glorious beyond compare than the
Seraphim, without defilement Thou gavest birth
to God the Word, true Theotokos, we magnify Thee.
Яко призре
на смирение рабы Своея,
се бо от ныне
ублажат Мя вси роди.
For He has regarded
the low estate of His handmaiden.
For behold, henceforth
all generations will call me blessed.
Честнейшую...
More honorable…
Яко сотвори Мне величие Сильный,
и свято Имя Его, и милость Его
в роды родов
боящимся Его.
For He who is mighty has done great things for me,
and holy is His name, and His mercy
is on those who fear Him
from generation to generation.
Честнейшую...
More honorable…
Низложи сильныя со престол,
и вознесе смиренныя;
алчущия исполни благ,
и богатящияся отпусти тщи.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and has exalted those of low degree.
He has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich He has sent empty away.
Честнейшую...
More honorable…
Восприят Израиля отрока Своего,
помянута милости,
якоже глагола ко отцем нашим,
Аврааму и семени его, даже до века.
He has helped His servant Israel,
in remembrance of His mercy,
as He spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his posterity forever.
Честнейшую...
More honorable…
127
TEXT AND TRANSLATION – Continued
XII
Слава в вышних Богу, и на земли мир,
в человецех благоволение.
Хвалим Тя, благословим Тя,
кланяем Ти ся, славословим Тя,
благодарим Тя, великия ради славы Твоея.
Господи Царю небесный,
Боже Отче Вседержителю,
Господи, Сыне Единородный, Иисусе Христе,
и Святый Душе.
Господи Боже, Агнче Божий, Сыне Отечь,
вземляй грех мира,
помилуй нас;
вземляй грехи мира,
приими молитву нашу;
седяй одесную Отца,
помилуй нас.
Яко Ты еси един Свят,
Ты еси един Господь, Иисус Христос,
в славу Бога Отца. Аминь.
На всяк день благословлю Тя,
и восхвалю Имя Твое во веки, и в век века.
Сподоби, Господи,
в день сей без греха сохранитися нам.
Благословен еси, Господи, Боже отец наших,
и хвально и прославлено Имя Твое во веки.
Аминь.
Буди, Господи, милость Твоя на нас,
якоже уповахом на Тя.
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace,
goodwill toward men.
We praise Thee, we bless Thee,
we worship Thee, we glorify Thee,
we give thanks to Thee for Thy great glory.
O Lord, Heavenly King,
God the Father Almighty.
O Lord, the only begotten Son, Jesus Christ,
and the Holy Spirit.
O Lord God, Lamb of God, Son of the Father,
who takest away the sin of the world
have mercy on us.
Thou who takest away the sin of the world,
receive our prayer.
Thou who sittest at the right hand of the Father,
have mercy on us.
For Thou alone art holy,
Thou alone art the Lord, Jesus Christ,
to the glory of God the Father. Amen.
Every day will I bless Thee
and praise Thy name forever and ever.
Vouchsafe, O Lord,
to keep us this day without sin.
Blessed art Thou, O Lord, God of our fathers,
and praised and glorified is Thy name forever.
Amen.
Let Thy mercy, O Lord, be upon us,
as we have set our hope on Thee.
Благословен еси, Господи,
научи мя оправданием Твоим. (трижды)
Blessed art Thou, O Lord,
259
teach me Thy statutes. (thrice)
Господи, прибежище был еси нам
в род и род.
Аз рех: Господи, помилуй мя,
исцели душу мою, яко согреших Тебе.
Господи, к Тебе прибегох,
научи мя творити волю Твою,
яко Ты еси Бог мой:
яко у Тебе источник живота,
во свете Твоем узрим свет.
Пробави милость Твою ведущим Тя.
Lord, Thou hast been our refuge
from generation to generation.
I said: Lord, have mercy on me,
heal my soul, for I have sinned against Thee.
Lord, I flee to Thee,
teach me to do Thy will,
for Thou art my God;
for with Thee is the fountain of life,
and in Thy light shall we see light.
Continue Thy mercy unto those who know Thee.
259
The entire phrase “Blessed art Thou, O Lord, teach me Thy statutes” is repeated three times.
128
TEXT AND TRANSLATION – Continued
Святый Боже, Святый Крепкий,
Святый Безсмертный,
помилуй нас. (трижды)
Holy God, Holy Mighty,
Holy Immortal,
260
have mercy on us. (thrice)
Слава Отцу и Сыну
и Святому Духу.
И ныне и присно и во веки веков. Аминь. Святый
Безсмертный, помилуй нас.
Glory to the Father, and to the Son,
and to the Holy Spirit,
both now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen.
Holy Immortal, have mercy on us.
Святый Боже, Святый Крепкий,
Святый Безсмертный, помилуй нас.
Holy God, Holy Mighty,
Holy Immortal, have mercy on us.
XIII
Днесь спасение миру бысть,
поем Воскресшему из гроба,
и Начальнику жизни нашея:
разрушив бо смертию смерть,
победу даде нам и велию милость.
Today salvation has come to the world.
Let us sing to Him who rose from the dead,
the Author of our life.
Having destroyed death by death
He has given us the victory and great mercy.
XIV
Воскрес из гроба
и узы растерзал еси ада,
разрушил еси осуждение смерти,
Господи,
вся от сетей врага избавивый;
явивый же Себе апостолом Твоим,
послал еси я на проповедь,
и теми
мир Твой подал еси вселенней,
Едине Многомилостиве.
Thou didst rise from the tomb
and burst the bonds of Hades!
Thou didst destroy the condemnation of death,
O Lord,
releasing all mankind from the snares of the enemy!
Thou didst show Thyself to Thine apostles,
and didst send them forth to proclaim Thee;
and through them
Thou hast granted Thy peace to the world,
O Thou who art plenteous in mercy.
XV
Взбранной воеводе победительная,
яко избавльшеся от злых,
благодарственная восписуем
Ти раби Твои, Богородице;
но яко имущая державу непобедимую,
от всяких нас бед свободи,
да зовем Ти:
Радуйся, невесто неневестная.
260
To Thee, the victorious Leader of triumphant hosts,
we Thy servants, delivered from evil,
offer hymns of thanksgiving,
O Theotokos!
Since Thou dost possess invincible might,
set us free from all calamities,
so that we may cry unto Thee:
“Rejoice, O unwedded Bride!”
The entire phrase “Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us” is repeated three times.
129
APPENDIX E
261
PRINTED LITURGICAL COMPILATIONS NEEDED FOR AN ALL-NIGHT VIGIL
Psalter
262
(Palestinian)
Horologion
(Book of
Hours)
Oktoechos
(eight tones)
Menaia
(Months)
263
Septuagint
Divided into 20 kathismata
Each kathisma has 3 sections
Fixed parts of the Daily Office
Hymnography arranged in eight
sections/tones
Hymnography for the annual cycle of
fixed feasts
Divided into 12 books, one for each
month, with entries for each day
Triodion
Hymnography for the Lenten cycle
Pentecostarion Hymnography for the Paschal cycle
Typikon
Rubrics for liturgical rites
Evchologion
Priest’s service texts
Hieratikon
Texts for litanies and priest’s prayers
Evangelion
Gospel texts
11 for Matins
Synaxarion
Lives of the saints
261
See Archbishop Job Getcha, The Typikon Decoded, Chapter 1.
262
Grouping of psalms has been treated variously in Psalters. The Russian Orthodox Church uses the
Palestinian Psalter, whereas the Constantinopolitan Psalter groups psalms differently, and includes refrains
on all psalm verses.
263
The numbering of psalms varies between the Septuagint and the Hebrew Bible. See Getcha’s The
Typikon Decoded page 16 for further clarification.
130
APPENDIX F
PERMISSION FOR MUSICAL EXAMPLES
From:Vlad Morosan ([email protected])
Sent: Fri 4/12/13 6:26 PM
To: [email protected]
April 12, 2013
Dear Alla,
We can hereby authorize you to reproduce brief excerpts of the following work for use in your thesis for your
doctoral degree in music.
ALL-NIGHT VIGIL op.37
Author: Vladimir Morosan
Composer: Sergei Rachmaninoff
© 1994 Musica Russica
This reproduction is authorized on the following conditions:
- Only extracts of the work “All-Night Vigil” can be reproduced in your thesis and not the entire work
- The copyright credit must appear in the document
This authorization is given to you free of charge.
Sincerely Yours,
Vladimir Morosan
President
Musica Russica
7925 Silverton Ave., Ste. 501
San Diego, CA 92126-6350
Tel: 1-858-536-9989
Fax: 1-858-536-9991
[email protected]
131
APPENDIX G
GLOSSARY OF NON-ENGLISH TERMS
Agape
Love, in a spiritual fellowship or brotherhood
Agrypnia
Vigil
Akoimetoi
Sleepless ones
Akolouthia ton akoimeton
Office of the Sleepless ones
Anastasis
Resurrection
Aposticha
Hymns with correlating Psalm verses
Asmatikos
Sung Office
Coenobium
Communal monastery
Dacha
Summer house
Dogmatik
Vespers Theotokion at “Lord, I call” that teaches the
dogma of Christ’s two natures
Evlogetaria
Resurrectional troparia referring to the refrain of
“Blessed”
Exapostelarion
Matins hymn of the Eastern Church that follows the
completion of the Canon
Hagia
Holy
Hexapsalmos
Six Psalms read consecutively at the beginning of Matins
(Psalms 3, 37, 62, 87, 102, 142)
Kathisma
Seat; divisions or sections of the Psalter
Kliros
Location in a church for the singers
Kontakion
Poetic form of hymn of the Eastern Church
264
264
Most frequently used in reference to the Holy Sepulchre, or basilica at the Lord’s Tomb, the Church of
the Anastasisis, or Resurrection.
132
Lavra
Monastic center
Lucernarium
Service of Light
Mar Saba
Lavra of St. Sabba the Sanctified, located near the Kidron
Valley
Menaion
Collection of liturgical propers for every day of the year
Nocturnes conuoationibus
Assemblies at night
Obikhod
Collection of Russian Orthodox chants
Oktoikh/Oktoechos
System of eight-tone singing used by the Eastern Church
Ordo
Order
Polyeleion
Psalms 134 and 135 sung at Matins
Prokimenon
Psalm verse that precedes readings of scripture
Prosphora
Blessed bread
Rogation
To ask; a series of petitions
Sbornik
Collection; often referring to a book
Stichera
Poetic hymnography used in Vespers and Matins of the
Eastern Church, interspersed with Psalm verses
Theotokion
Hymn of the Virgin Mary sung after a series of stichera
Theotokos
“Birthgiver of God,” the Greek term used in reference to
the Virgin Mary
Troparion (s) Troparia (pl)
Hymn or hymns of the Eastern Church
Typikon
Guide to all liturgical and non-liturgical practices of a
monastic community, often written down in a single book
Ustav
Russian term for the Greek word Typikon
133
REFERENCES
Books, Articles, Dissertations and Online Sources
Abramov, B.K., ed. et al.. Pravoslavnaia Moskva v 1917-1921 godah: sbornik
dokumentov i materialov. [Orthodox Moscow 1917-1921: a collection of
documents and materials]. Moscow: Glavarchiv, 2004.
Aleynikov, M.I. “O religii v duhovnom mire S.V. Rakhmaninova (shtrihi k portretu
kompozitora.” [About religion in the spiritual world of S.V. Rachmaninoff (traits
of the composer’s portrait)] S.V. Rakhmaninov i mirovaya kul’tura V [S.V.
Rachmaninoff and world culture] (2013): 17-26.
Alkiviadis, Calivas. Aspects of Orthodox Worship. Brookline, Massachusetts: Holy
Cross Orthodox Press, 2003.
Apetian, Zarui Apetovna, ed.. S.V. Rakhmaninov: literaturnoe nasledie [S.V.
Rachmaninoff: literary heritage]. Moscow: Sovetsky kompozitor, 1978.
——. Vospominaniia o Rakhmaninove [Remembrances of Rachmaninoff]. Moscow:
Muzyka, 1988.
Applebaum, Anne. Gulag: A History. New York: Doubleday, 2003.
Arranz, Miguel. “N. D. Uspensky: The Office of the All-Night Vigil in the Greek Church
and in the Russian Church.” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 24 (1980): 83195.
Becker, Gregory. The ‘Vigil’ in the Parish: Reflections on the Typikon Ideal. M.Div.
thesis, St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, 1977.
Bertensson, Sergei. Sergei Rachmaninoff: A Lifetime in Music. Bloomington, Indiana:
Indiana University Press, 2001.
Bogoroditse Devo, paduysya, napeva Voznesenskogo monastirya, [Rejoice, O Virgin
Theotokos, Ascension monastery chant]. http://ikliros.com/sites/default/files/5/
bogorodice_devo_raaduysya_napeva_voznesenskogo_monastyrya_dlya_
zhenskogo_hora.pdf (accessed August 15, 2014).
Bradshaw, Paul. Daily Prayer in the Early Church: A Study of the Origin and Early
Development of the Divine Office. Eugene, Oregon: WIPF and Stock, 2008.
134
Brill, N.P. History of Russian Church Music, 988-1917. Bloomington, Illinois: Brill,
1980.
Burlatsky, Fedor. Khrushchev and the First Russian Spring: The Era of Khrushchev
Through the Eyes of His Advisor. Translated by Daphne Skillen. New York:
Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1991.
Cherkizovskiy Pokrovskiy Hram, [The Protection Church of Cherkizov] http://drevoinfo.ru/articles/4868.html (accessed 10 June, 2014).
Chetverikov, Sergei. Bogosluzhenie pravoslavnoi tserkvi v ego piesnopieniiakh i
obriadakh [Services of the Orthodox Church in its singing and rituals]. Prague:
Princess N. Jaschwill, 1926.
Covington, William Sydney. Relations Between the Bolshevik Government and the
Russian Orthodox Church, 1917-1918: An Examination and Interpretation of the
Documents. MA thesis, The University of Texas at Arlington, 1997.
Curtiss, John. The Russian Church and the Soviet State, 1917-1950. Gloucester, Mass:
Peter Smith, 1965.
Danilenk, Boris. Okozritel’nyi ustav v istorii bogosluzheniia Russkoi tserkvi [Seeing the
ustav in the history of services in the Russian Church]. Munchen: O. Sagner,
1990.
“Danilin,” Pravoslavnaya Enzyklopediya, [Orthodox Encyclopedia]
http://www.pravenc.ru/text/171325.html (accessed January 26, 2014).
Davis, Nathaniel. A Long Walk to Church: A Contemporary History of Russian
Orthodoxy. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1995.
Dickinson, Anna. “Quantifying Religious Oppression: Russian Orthodox Church
Closures and Repression of Priests 1917-1941.” Religion, State and Society 28/4
(2000): 327-335.
Dmytryshyn, Basil. USSR: A Concise History. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons,
1984.
Emilianova, Nina. Ivanovka v zhizni i tvorchestve Rakhmaninova [Ivanovka in the life
and works of Rachmaninoff] Voronezh: TSentralno-Chernozemnoe knizhnoe
izdatel’stvo, 1984.
135
Fairclough, Pauline. “Don’t Sing It on a Feast Day: The Reception and Performance of
Western Sacred Music in Soviet Russia, 1917-1953.” Journal of the American
Musicological Society 65 no. 1 (Spring 2012): 67-111.
Figes, Orlando. A People’s Tragedy: A History of the Russian Revolution. New York:
Viking Press, 1997.
Fitzpatrick, Sheila. The Cultural Front: Power and Culture in Revolutionary Russia.
Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1992.
Fletcher, William Catherwood. The Russian Orthodox Church Underground 1917-1970.
London: Oxford University Press, 1971.
Fryntzko, Theodore D. The Daily Cycle of Worship in the Orthodox Catholic Church.
BDiv thesis, St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, 1954.
Gardner, Johann von. Bogosluzhebnoe penie russkoi pravoslavnoi tserkvi [Sacred
singing of the Russian Orthodox Church]. Jordanville, New York: Holy Trinity
Russian Orthodox Monastery, 1978-1982.
——. “On the ‘Ecclesiality’ (Tserkovnost’) of our Liturgical Singing.” In Russian
Liturgical Music Revival in the Diaspora edited by Marina Ledkovsky and
Vladimir von Tsurikov, 252-262. New York: Foundation of Russian History,
2012.
Getcha, Job (Archbishop). The Typikon Decoded: An Explanation of Byzantine Liturgical
Practice. Yonkers: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2012.
Golubtsov, Sergei. Moskovskoe dukhovenstvo v preddverii i nachale gonenii 1917-1922
gg.: tserkovno-obshchestvennye dvizheniia 1917-1918 gg [Moscow clergy
immediately preceding and at the beginning of the repression of 1917-1922: the
church movement 1917-1918]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Pravoslavnogo bratstva
Sporuchnitsy greshnykh, 1999.
Guiver, George. Company of Voices: Daily Prayer and the People of God. Eugene: Wipf
& Stock Publishers, 2008.
Harrison, Max. Rachmaninoff: Life, Works, Recordings. New York: Continuum, 2005.
Hirt, Charles C. Graeco-Slavonic Chant Traditions Evident in the Part-Writing of the
Russian Orthodox Church. PhD dissertation, University of Southern California,
1946.
136
Hram sv. Tatiani, http://www.st-tatiana.ru/text/33928.html (accessed September 10,
2012)
Hussey, J.M. The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1986.
“Iz zhizni Eparhii.” [From diocesan life] Zhurnal Moskovskoy Patriarhii [Journal of the
Moscow Patriarchate] 7 (1978): 22-27.
Kazhdan, Alexander. A History of Byzantine Literature (650-850). Athens: Institute for
Byzantine Research, 1999.
——, ed. The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. 3 vols. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1991.
Keldysh, IUrii Vsevolodovich. Rakhmaninov i ego vremia [Rachmaninoff and his time].
Moscow: Muzyka, 1973.
King, John Glen. The Rites and Ceremonies of the Greek Church in Russia; Containing
an Account of its Doctrine Worship, and Discipline. New York: AMS Press,
1972.
Kiprian (Zernov), http://drevo-info.ru/articles/17338.html (accessed 10 June, 2014).
Kosar, George T. Russian Orthodoxy in Crisis and Revolution: The Church Council of
1917-1918. PhD dissertation, Brandeis University, 2004.
Kovalev, A.B. “Horovye tsykly Liturgii i Vsenoshchnogo bdeniya S. V. Rakhmaninova:
k voprosu o zhanrovoy spetsifike.” [The Liturgy and All-Night Vigil choral cycles
of S.V. Rachmaninoff: on the question of genre specificities] S.V. Rakhmaninov i
mirovaya kul’tura V [S.V. Rachmaninoff and world culture] (2013): 40-49.
Kutuzov, B. Vsenoshchnaya i Liturgiya: Obikhod znamennogo peniya [All-Night Vigil
and Liturgy: Collection of Znsmenny chant]. Moscow: Izdanie Spaso
Nerukotvornogo Obraza Andronikova Monastirya.
Leonard, Richard A. A History of Russian Music. New York: Macmillan, 1957.
Leont’eva, T.G. Vera i progress pravoslavnoe sel’skoe dukhovenstvo Rossii vo vtoroi
polovine XIX-nachale XX vv [Faith and progress of Orthodox clergy in Russia in
the second half of the 19th-beginning of the 20th centuries]. Moscow: Novyi
khronograf, 2002.
137
Levashev, Evgenii. Traditsionnye zhanry pravoslavnogo pevcheskogo iskusstva v
tvorchestve russkikh kompozitorov ot Glinki do Rakhmaninova, 1825-1917:
istoricheskii ocherk, notografiia, bibliografiia [Traditional genres of Orthodox
choral art in the works of Russian composers from Glinka to Rachmaninoff,
1825-1917]. Moscow: Nezavisimiy izdatel’skii tsentr TeknoInfo, 1994.
Lisitsin, M. Pervonachal’niy Slavyano-Russkiy Typikon: istoriko-arhielogicheskoe
izsledovanie [Introductory Slavic-Russian Typikon: a historical-archeological
study]. St. Petersburg: Typografia V.D. Smirnova, 1911.
Loftis, Eric K. An Investigation of the Textural Contrasts in Sergei Rachmaninov’s Night
Vigil, Opus 37. PhD dissertation, University of Southern Mississippi, 1980.
Lvov, L. “Rahmaninov, ko dniu evo shestidesiatiletiia” [Rachmaninoff, on the occasion
of his sixtieth birthday]. Rossiia i slavianstovo, April 1, 1933: 3.
Malacaj, Liudmila. “Problema cerkovnosti v bogosluzebnom penii i duhovnoj muzyke
Rossii na rubezah vekov” [The problem of religious devotion in Russian liturgical
singing and religious music at the close of centuries]. Isskustvo na rubezah vekov:
229-231.
Mango, Cyril. “New Religion, Old Culture.” In The Oxford History of Byzantium, edited
by Cyril Mango, 96-114. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Mango, Marlia Mundell. “Monasticism.” In The Oxford History of Byzantium, edited by
Cyril Mango, 209-213. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Martyn, Barry. Rachmaninoff: Composer, Pianist, Conductor. Brookfield, Vermont:
Gower Publishing Company, 1990.
McKinnon, James W. “Desert Monasticism and the Later Fourth-Century Psalmodic
Movement”. Music & Letters 75 no. 4 (Nov. 1994): 505-521.
Metallov, V.M. Ocherk istorii pravoslavnogo tserkovnago peniia v Rossii [Essays on the
history of Orthodox church singing in Russia]. Moscow: A.I. Snegirevoi, 1915.
Meyendorff, Paul. Russia, Ritual, and Reform: the Liturgical Reforms of Nikon in the
17th Century. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1991.
Moravsky, Nikita. Russian Orthodox Dissent in Historical Perspective. PhD dissertation,
Georgetown University, 1989.
Morosan, Vladimir. Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia. Ann Arbor,
Michigan: UMI Research Press, 1986.
138
——. Choral Performance in Pre-Revolutionary Russia. DMA dissertation, University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1984.
——. “Liturgical Singing or Sacred Music? Understanding the Aesthetic of the New
Russian Choral School.” Christianity and the arts in Russia 33 (1999): 124-130.
——. “Russian Choral Repertoire the New Russian Choral School.” In NineteenthCentury Choral Music, 435-448. New York: Routledge, 2013.
——. “The Sacred Choral Works of Sergei Rachmaninoff.” Foreward to The Complete
Sacred Choral Works: Sergei Rachmaninoff. Madison, Connecticut: Musica
Russica, 1994.
Moskva: Tserkov’ Uspeniya, [Moscow: Dormition Church]
http://sobory.ru/article/?object=02273 (accessed January 26, 2014).
Naumov, A.A., ed.. Pamiati N.M. Danilina: pisma, vospominaniia, dokumenty
[Remembering N.M. Danilin: letters, recollections, documents]. Moscow:
Sovetskiy kompozitor, 1987.
Nikitin, Boris Semenovich. Sergei Rakhmaninov: dve zhizni [Sergei Rachmaninoff: two
lives]. Moscow: Znanie, 1993.
Nikol’skaia-Beregovskaia, K.F. Russkaia vokal’no-khorovaia shkola ot drevnosti do XXI
veka [The Russian vocal-choral school from ealy times to the twenty-first
century]. Moscow: Vlados, 2003.
Nikol’sky, Konstantin. Posobie k izucheniyu ustava Bogosluzheniya Pravoslavnoy
Tserkvi [Interpretation to learning the ustav of the Orthodox Church]. St.
Petersburg: Synodal’naya Typografia, 1907.
Norris, Geoffrey. Rachmaninoff. New York: Schirmer Books, 1994.
Obolensky, Sergei. One Man in His Time. New York: McDowell, 1958.
Oktoikh notnago peniya, sirech Osmoglasnik [The Eight tones notated for singing, that is
to say, the Osmoglasnik] St. Petersburg: Sinodalnaya Tipografia, 1900.
Ovsiannikova, Irina Petrovna. Psikhologicheskie konteksty russkoi dukhovnoi muzyki
kontsa XIX-nachalo XX vekov [Psychological contexts of Russian sacred music at
the end of the nineteenth – beginning of the twentieth centuries]. Novosibirsk:
Novosibirskaia gosudarstvennaia konservatoriia imeni M.I. Glinka, 1996.
139
Paisov, IU. Traditsionnye zhanry russkoi dukhovnoi muzyki i sovremennost: sbornik
statei, issledovanii, interviu [Traditional genres of sacred music and the
contemporary: a collection of essays, research, interviews]. Moscow: Kompozitor,
1999.
Pentkovsky, A.M. Typikon Patriarha Aleksiia Studita v Vizantii i na Rusi. [Typikon of
Patriarch Alexey the Studite in Byzantium and Rus’]. Moscow: Moscow
Patriarchate, 2001.
Plotnikova, Natalia Iur’evna. Mnogogolosnye gormy obrabotki drevnikh rospevov v
russkoi dukhovnoi muzyke XIX-nachala XX vekov. [Use of polyphonic ancient
chant in Russian sacred music from the nineteenth – beginning of the twentieth
century]. Moscow: Moskovskaia gosudarstvennaia konservatoriia imeni P.I.
Tchaikovskogo, 1996.
Pospielovsky, Dimitry. The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia. Crestwood, New
York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1998.
——. The Russian Church Under the Soviet Regime 1917–1982, 2 volumes. Crestwood,
New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1984.
Presman, Matfei. “Ugolok muzykal’noy Moskvi vos’midesyatikh godov” [A small corner
of musical Moscow in the eighties]. In Vospominaniia o Rakhmaninove,
[Remembrances of Rachmaninoff] edited by Zarui Apetovna Apetian, 157-219.
Moscow: Muzyka, 1988.
Protopopov, Vladimir Vasili’evich. “Muzyka prednacinatel’nogo psalma vo vsenoscnom
bdenii.” [Music of the opening psalm in the All-Night Vigil] Muzykal’naja
akademija 1 (1999): 1-10.
Prussing, Stephen Henry. Compositional Techniques in Rachmaninoff’s “Vespers, Opus
37.” PhD dissertation, The Catholic University of America, 1980.
Puzakov, Aleksei. “Dar tserkovnogo regenta osobiy: intervju.” [The Church choir
director’s special gift: Interview] Praktika muzykal’nogo oformlenija
bogosluzheniya: sbornik statej, vospominanij, arhivnih dokumentov. [The
formulation and musical practice of services: a collection of articles, recollections,
and archival documents] Trudy Moskovskoy regentsko-pevcheskoy seminarii
(2005): 89-95.
Rachmaninoff, Natalia. Vospominaniya o Rakhmaninove [Remembrance of
Rachmaninoff] http://www.senar.ru/memoirs/Rachmaninova. Accessed 18 June
2010.
140
Rachmaninoff, Sergei. Vsenoshnoe bdenie [All-Night Vigil]. Edited by Vladimir
Morosan and Alexander Ruggieri. Madison, Connecticut: Musica Russica, 1992.
Rachmaninoff, Sergei. Polnoe sobranie dukhovno-muzykal’nykh proizvedenii [The
Complete Sacred Choral works]. Edited by Vladimir Morosan. Madison,
Connecticut: Musica Russica, 1994.
Riazanova, Irina G. An Inquiry into Text and Music Relationships in Sergei
Rachmaninoff’s “Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom,” Opus 31. DM dissertation,
Northwestern University, 1999.
Riesemann, Oskar. Rachmaninoff’s Recollections. New York: Macmillan, 1934.
Roslof, Edward Eldon. The Renovationist Movement in the Russian Orthodox Church,
1922-1946. PhD dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
1994.
Rudakova, Evgeniia Nikolaevna. S.V. Rakhmaninov. Moscow: Muzyka, 1998.
Sarris, Peter. “The Eastern Roman Empire from Constantine to Heraclius (306-641).” In
The Oxford History of Byzantium, edited by Cyril Mango, 19-59. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2002.
Satina, Sofia. “Zapiska o S.V. Rakhmaninove” [A note about S.V. Rachmaninoff]. In
Vospominaniia o Rakhmaninove, [Remembrances of Rachmaninoff] edited by
Zarui Apetovna Apetian, 11-122. Moscow: Muzyka, 1988.
Schmemann, Alexander. Introduction to Liturgical Theology. Crestwood, New York: St.
Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996 (1966).
Shevzov, Vera. Russian Orthodoxy on the Eve of Revolution. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2004.
Shkarovskiy, Mikhail. Russkaya pravoslavnaya tserkov’ i sovetskoe gosudarstvo v 19431964 godah [The Russian Orthodox Church and the Soviet government 19431964]. St. Petersburg: Dean.Adia-M, 1995.
——. Russkaya pravoslavnaya tserkov’ pri Staline i Khrushcheve [The Russian
Orthodox Church during Stalin and Khrushchev]. Moscow: Krutistskoye
Podvor’e, 2005.
Shumskiy, S. “V ego ispolnenii otrazhena plamennaya vera.” [His renditions reflect fiery
faith] Praktika muzykal’nogo oformlenija bogosluzheniya: sbornik statej,
vospominanij, arhivnih dokumentov. [The formulation and musical practice of
141
services: a collection of articles, recollections, and archival documents] Trudy
Moskovskoy regentsko-pevcheskoy seminarii (2005): 85-89.
Skaballanovich, Mikhail. Tolkoviy Typikon [Interpretation of the Typikon]. Kiev:
Typografiya Aktsyonernago Obshchestva, 1910.
Skaftymova, Liudmila. Vokalno-simfonicheskoe tvorchestvo S.V. Rakhmaninova i
russkaia kantata nachala XX veka [Vocal-symphonic works of S.V.
Rachmaninoff and the Russian cantata at the beginning of the twentieth century].
Saint Petersburg: Kanon, 1998.
Smirnov, Alexander Petrovich. “Ucheniki i pevchie” [Students and singers]. In
Synodal’niy Hor i uchilishche tserkovnogo peniya [The Synodal Choir and School
of Church Singing] edited by Svetlana Zvereva. Moscow: Yaziki Russkoi
Kul’turi, 1998.
Sokolof, Dimitrii. A Manual of the Orthodox Church’s Divine Services. Jordanville, New
York: Holy Trinity Russian Orthodox Monastery, 1975.
Sokolova, Olga Ivanovna. Sergei Vasilievich Rakhmaninov. Moscow: Muzyka, 1987.
Stepanova, Svetlana Romanova. Muzykalnaia zhizn Moskvy v pervye gody posle
Oktiabria: Oktiabr 1917-1920. Khronika. Dokumenty. Materialy [Musical life of
Moscow in the first years after October: October 1917-1920. Chronology.
Documents. Materials]. Moscow: Sovetskiy kompozitor, 1972.
Strickland, John. Orthodox Patriotism and the Church in Russia, 1888-1914. PhD
dissertation, University of California Davis, 2001.
Svyateyshiy Patriarh Pimen kak regent, [His Holiness Patriarch Pimen as choir director]
http://www.mpda.ru/site_pub/334521.html (accessed 10 June 10, 2014).
Symeon, Archbishop of Thessalonike. Treatise on Prayer: An Explanation of the
Services Conducted in the Orthodox Church. Brookline, Massachusetts: Hellenic
College Press, 1984.
Taft, Robert. The Byzantine Rite: A Short History. Collegeville, Minnesota: The
Liturgical Press, 1992.
——. The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: the Origins of the Divine Office and
its Meaning for Today. Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1993.
——. “Mount Athos: A Late Chapter in the History of the Byzantine Rite.” Dumbarton
Oaks Papers 42 (1988): 179-194.
142
Taubman, William. Khrushchev: The Man and His Era. New York: W.W. Norton &
Company, 2003.
Threlfall, Robert and Geoffrey Norris. A Catalogue of the Compositions of S.
Rachmaninoff. London: Scolar Press, 1982.
Traina, Michael Joseph. Lenin, Religion, and the Russian Orthodox Church: An Analysis
of Theory and Practice. PhD dissertation, Kent State University, 1970.
Treadgold, Warren. “The Struggle for Survival (641-780)” In The Oxford History of
Byzantium, edited by Cyril Mango, 129-15. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2002.
Trubnikova, Anna. “Sergei Rakhmaninov.” In Vospominaniia o Rakhmaninove,
[Remembrances of Rachmaninoff] edited by Zarui Apetovna Apetian, 123-156.
Moscow: Muzyka, 1988.
Tsypin, Vladislav. Istoriya Russkoy Pravoslavnoy Tserkvi: 1917-1990 [History of the
Russian Orthodox Church: 1917-1990]. Moscow: Hronika, 1994.
Urvantseva, O.A. Kontseptsii avtorskogo i kanonicheskogo v russkoi dukhovnoi muzyke
nachala XX veka ocherki [Concepts of authorship and canonicity in Russian
sacred music at the beginning of the 20th century: essays]. Magnitogorsk:
Magnitogorskaia gosudarstvennaiia konservatoriia, 1999.
Uspensky, Nikolai. Evening Worship in the Orthodox Church. Translated and edited by
Paul Lazor. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1985.
——. Pravoslavnaia vechernia: istoriko-liturgicheskii ocherk. Chin vsenoshchnogo
bdeniia (agrypnia) na pravoslavnom Vostoke i v Russkoi TSerkvi [Orthodox
vespers: a historical-liturgical guide. The All-Night Vigil rite (vigil) in the
Orthodox East and the Russian Church]. Moscow: Izdatel’skii Sovet Russkoi
Pravoslavnoi TSerkvi, 2004.
Varakin, M.A. Pevcheskaia shkola Sinodal’nogo khora istoki, sud’by, perspektivy [The
Synodal choir singing school, its sources, fate, perspectives]. Moscow:
Gosudarstvennaiia akademiia slavi’anskoi kul’tury, 2004.
Volkov, Solomon. The Magical Chorus: A History of Russian Culture from Tolstoy to
Solzhenitsyn. Translated by Antonina W. Bouis. New York: Alfred A. Knopf,
2008.
Wehrmeyer, Andreas. Rakhmaninov. London: Haus, 2004.
143
Williams, Benjamin D. and Harold B. Anstall. Orthodox Worship: A Living Continuity
with the Temple, the Synagogue and the Early Church. Minneapolis, Minnesota:
Light and Life Publishing Company, 1990.
Wynot, Jennifer. Keeping the Faith: Russian Orthodox Monasticism in the Soviet Union,
1917-1939. College Station, Texas: Texas A&M University Press, 2004.
Zvereva, Svetlana. Aleksandr Kastal'skii: idei, tvorchestvo, sud'ba. [Alexander
Kastalsky: ideas, works, fate]. Moscow: Vuzovskaia Kniga, 1999.
——. “O nekorotikh muzikal’nikh zamyslah Rahmaninova seredini 1930-x godov.”
[About several musical plans of Rachmaninoff in the middle of the 1930s)] S.V.
Rakhmaninov i mirovaya kul’tura V [S.V. Rachmaninoff and world culture]
(2013): 27-39.