Echos (Greek: 'sound', pl. echoi ; Old Church Slavonic: 'voice, sound') is the name in Byzantine music theory for a mode within the eight-mode system (oktoechos), each of them ruling several melody types, and it is used in the melodic and rhythmic composition of Byzantine chant ("thesis of the melos"), differentiated according to the chant genre and according to the performance style ("method of the thesis"). It is akin to a Western medieval tonus, an Andalusian tab', an Arab naġam (since 1400 "maqam"), or a Persian parde (since 18th-century dastgah).
Overview and semantics The noun echos in Greek means "sound" in general. It acquired the specialized meaning of mode early on in the development of Byzantine music theory since the Octoechos reform in 692.
In general, the concept of echos denotes a certain octave species, its intervallic structure as well as a set of more or less explicitly formulated melodic rules and formulae that represent a certain category of melodies within the musical genre. As such, echos is the basis for composing or improvising new melodies that belong to it, as well as for properly performing existing pieces that have been written in it. These rules include the distinction of a hierarchy of degrees (tones, notes), where certain degrees figure as cadence notes (ἑστώτες) around which the melody will revolve prominently, or on which the melody will end most of the time. However, only very late stages of the theory (19th-20th century) actually provide systematic descriptions of echoi, while earlier stages use mostly diagrams, indirect descriptions and examples. Explicit detailed descriptions must still be provided based on extensive analysis, as is the case with modal phenomena in numerous other cultures.
History and reconstruction Early treatises only state the initial or "base" degree () which is the tone sung as a burden () by certain singers of the choir called isokrates in order to support any melody composed in a certain echos. By this support singers (psaltes) could easily recognise the relative position of each note as it was organised by tetrachords based on the basis note of each echos. This base degree of the mode was communicated by an intonation formula of a foresinger, known as enechema.
There are different styles by which to notate enechema which are crucial to the understanding of the different chant books and their notation. All these forms were written in red ink. The explicit long form was called by Jørgen Raasted intonation,Jørgen Raasted (1966). but only the books of the cathedral rite used such explicit intonations, also between the sections, where these intonations were called medial intonation. This explicit form made sense, since the intonation also communicated the changes between the left and the right choir and their leaders performed these intonations to coordinate these changes. There was a short form as well which was called modal signature. It indicated the echos by the numeral like πλα' for "plagios protos," while the neumes sung with the last syllable of the enechema were written above right to the numeral. This short form was used in two different ways, as main signature (in the table called , "the witnesses of the echoi") it indicated the echos of a whole composition, but especially in sticheraria notators also wrote medial signatures (in the table called , "the witnesses of ", pitches memorised by ) between the neumes above a kolon of the text, in order to indicate that the melos changed here into another echos. The traditional Greek term for these medial signatures was "martyria" (), since the medial signature also "testified" the phthongos of the cadence made at the kolon.
of the dialogue treatise Within the dialogue treatise (erotapokriseis) a catalogue of short formulas memorizes each echos of the Hagiopolitan octoechos and its two ( and ). These formulas are also called "" (ἠχήματα)—or more often "" () or "" (). The use was also imitated by Carolingian cantors who used similar intonation formulas and collected them in a separate book called tonary.
Περὶ πλαγίων Ἀπο τοῦ πλαγίου πρώτου ἤχου πάλιν καταβαίνεις τέσσαρας φωνάς, καὶ εὑρίσκεται πάλιν πλάγιος πρώτου· ὅυτως δὲ / ἄνανε ἄνες ἀνὲ ἄνες·
.
Ὁμοίως πάλιν ὁ τρίτος καταβαίνεις φωνὰς τέσσαρας, καὶ εὑρίσκεται ὁ πλάγιος αὐτοῦ, ἤγουν ὁ βαρύς, οὕτως·
Ὁμοίως καὶ ἀπὸ τὸν τέταρτον καταβαίνων φωνὰς τέσσαρας, εὑρίσκεις τὸν πλάγιον αὐτοῦ, ὡς ἐστὶ ὁ πλ δ'οὕτως·Christian Hannick & Gerda Wolfram (1997, pp. 84f) quoted according to Mount Athos, S. Dionysios Monastery, Ms. 570, fol. 26-26'.
The of the medieval eight diatonic echoi already present a fundamental difference to the Carolingian octoechos: the kyrios and plagios do use the same octave species, but their basis tone with the ison is on the top of the pentachord within the mele of kyrioi echoi, while it is on the bottom within the mele of plagioi echoi; the octave species (D—a—d, E—b—e, B flat—F—b flat, and C—G—c) are different as well from the Western octoechos as from the New Method, which had adapted the fret scheme of the tambur fingerboard as the common tonal reference for all Ottoman musicians. Traditional protopsaltes at Athos and Istanbul who belong to local schools of the eighteenth century, do indeed not follow the Chrysanthine intonation, they always intone a pentachord on a pure fifth between the bases of echos varys and kyrios tritos. there is no absolute nor fixed position of the octave species. Sticheraric and papadic chant genres exploit not only the possibility to change between the echoi, but also the characteristic that every note (phthongos "sound, voice") has an echos defined by the octoechos. A register change is usually arranged by a transposition about a fifth, which turns a kyrios into a plagios and vice versa. Also other temporary transpositions are possible (see the five rings of the bigger Koukouzelian wheel), but not frequent. the ruling tone system is tetraphonic and based on fifth equivalence which allows the fore mentioned register changes. Heptaphonia (similar to the Western use of systema teleion and solfège with seven syllables) exist only on the level of a melos within a certain echos. Changes to the triphonic system are indicated by the phthora nana. except of a pure diatonic octoechos the chromatic and enharmonic genus is not excluded, since even the Hagiopolitan octoechos accepted the use of two ( and ).
Echemata of the Papadikai and their modern interpretation More information on the structure of echoi is only indicated in a very rudimentary way through diagrams involving neumes—the Byzantine round notation. The details of the actual intervallic and melodic structure of echoi are virtually impossible to deduce from theoretical treatises prior to the 18th century. In fact, only relatively late systematic comparisons of the echoi with the makamlar of Ottoman court music, such as those by the Kyrillos Marmarinos, Archbishop of Tinos, in his manuscript dated 1747, and the reform of the Byzantine notation by Chrysanthos of Madytos at the first half of the 19th century make it possible to understand the structure of echoi and to attempt reconstructions of melodies from earlier manuscripts.
He already introduced his readers into the diatonic genus and its phthongoi in the 5th chapter of the first book, called "About the parallage of the diatonic genus" (Περὶ Παραλλαγῆς τοῦ Διατονικοῦ Γένους). In the 8th chapter he demonstrates, how the intervals can be found on the fingerboard of the tambur.Chrysanthos' chapter "About the diapason system" (Μερ. Α', Βιβ. α', κεφ. η' Περὶ τοῦ Διαπασῶν συστήματος, p. 28) introduced into the chord lengths and recognised in a schematic representation of the tetrachord (12+9+7=28).
Hence, the phthongoi of the diatonic genus had been defined according to the proportions, as they were later called the "soft chroa of the diatonic genus" (). For Chrysanthos this was the only diatonic genus, as far as it had been used since the early church musicians, who memorised the phthongoi by the intonation formulas () of the Papadic Octoechos. In fact, he did not use the historical intonations, he rather translated them in the Koukouzelian wheel in the 9th chapter (Περὶ τοῦ Τροχοῦ) according to a current practice of parallage, which was common to 18th-century versions of Papadike:
Τὸ δὲ Πεντάχορδον, τὸ ὁποῖον λέγεται καὶ Τροχὸς, περιέχει διαστήματα τέσσαρα, τὰ ὁποῖα καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς μὲν εἶναι τόνοι. Περιορίζονται δὲ τὰ τέσσαρα διαστήματα ταῦτα ἀπὸ φθόγγους πέντε.
πα βου γα δι ΠαChrysanthos (1832, Μερ. Α', Βιβ. α', κεφ. θ' Περὶ τοῦ Τροχοῦ, 28—§66).
The pentachord which was also called wheel (τροχὸς), contains four intervals which we regard as certain tones [ἐλάσσων τόνος, ἐλάχιστος τόνος, and 2 μείζονες τόνοι]. The four intervals spanned five phthongoi: πα βου γα δι Πα ["Πα" means here the fifth-equivalent for the protos: α']These five stations of the pentachord could be memorised by the of the kyrioi echoi in ascending direction or by those of the plagioi echoi in descending direction (see Chrysanthos' explanation of the trochos parallage). Each of these had the potential to develop an own melos within its melody types:
Each echema is followed by the incipit of a sticheron idiomelon which illustrates a certain melos of the echos. The following book Kekragarion illustrates, how the hesperinos psalm has to be sung according to the sticheraric melos of each echos. The Kekragarion was later included in the printed editions of the Anastasimatarion or Voskresnik.
Chrysanthos' exegesis of the papadic enechemata
In the chapter "On the " () of his "Great Theoretikon",Chrysanthos of Madytos (1832, 135-42—§§307–317). Chrysanthos translated the Byzantine octoechos and its intonation formulas (, or ), as they could be found in the Papadikai, by offering an exegesis of the papadic in comparison to the simpler forms used by Orthodox chanters today. They served as kind of model for the composition within a certain melos, similar to the seyirler of an Ottoman makam.
Protos echos
For the diatonic echos protos, the medieval had the finalis on the top of the protos pentachord, while the enechema passes through it:
Chrysanthos made this exegesis to explain the of the whole echos:
In the first descending half he made the usual cadence on D (, phthongos ) which corresponds to the finalis of the modern melos, while it was once the finalis and the basis of the plagios protos. The second half, when the melos raises again, but within the papadic melos (used with a cherubikon or koinonikon) it prepared a change to another base tone on the upper tetrachord like a (, phthongos ).As an example listen to the papadic protos melos at the beginning of Petros Bereketis' kalophonic composition about (Demosthenis Païkopoulos). After three minutes the base tone changes to the higher tetrachord.
Hence, according to the current practice of Orthodox chant the protos mele were rather based on the lower tetrachord, but the formula could be used a fifth higher likewise. The step between the phthongoi of () and () could be C—D (—) or G—a (—).
Concerning the enechema of the , it had not changed during the centuries.
Unlike the tradition which always used register changes, the modern interpretation did not fix the base degree of echos plagios protos to the bottom of the pentachord, it could appear regularly at the top like in the troparic and heirmologic melos: a ()—c ()—b ()—a () or D ()—F ()—E ()—D ().In the papadic melos of echos plagios protos it is rather in the lower register, but this melos is nearly the same with respect to the one of kyrios protos. Listen to the fifth section of Bereketis' , where Manolis Chatzimarkos uses a free monosyllabic enechema which seems closer to the kyrios formula. The difference is a stronger emphasise of the mesos or diphonos F () which sometimes attracts G (), especially among Phanariotes.