Idiomelon

 ( Genres Of Byzantine Music ) 

' (Medieval Greek: ἰδιόμελον from , 'unique' and , 'melody'; Church Slavonic: самогласенъ, )—pl. idiomela —is a type of sticheron found in the used in the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Eastern Catholic Churches which follow the Byzantine Rite, and many other Orthodox communities like Old Believers. ' are unique compositions, while ' or '—sing. ', ' or ' (Medieval Greek: αὐτόμελον, Church Slavonic: самоподобенъ, )—were used to create other hymns by a composition over the 's melody and following the poetic meter provided by the musical rhythm. The genre composed over these was characterised as ' or (Medieval Greek: προσόμοιον 'similar to', Church Slavonic: подобенъ, ).

It was a heterogenous collection of hymns, mainly of unique compositions ( ') which could be identified by their own idiomatic melodies. The later Slavonic translators of the Ohrid school (since 893) called the idiomela '. There are other stichera called ' (Sl. ) which do not have their own melodies, but they used a limited number of well-known melodies—the so-called ' (Sl. ).

The definition of αὐτόμελον () meant as well a sticheron which defines its melody—with a melody for "itself" (Gr. αὐτός, Sl. ), but not in the idiomatic and exclusive sense of the unique idiomela. simply meant that these hymns were regarded as a melodic model of their own, exemplified by the musical realisation of its poetic hymn. As such they also served for the composition of new verses, the prosomeia. The term στιχηρὸν προσόμοιον () means that this sticheron is "similar to" (Gr. προσόμιον, Sl. ) another sticheron. It was usually an avtomelon, but in some cases even idiomela had been used for a kind of contrafact and there are even cases of notated prosomoia because they had been mistaken for an avtomelon.For the cycle of 47 avtomela which can be found in notated sticheraria with indication of their exact place within the books, see table 1 in Irina Shkolnik's study (1998, 526-529).

Certain more regular and formulaic of the octoechos had not been written down with notation before the 14th century or even later, since their hymns () had to be repeated every day. Today the or or an Orthros anthology also provides certain in neumes without any text, while the texts of the prosomoia, as far as they belong to the fixed cycle including the sanctoral, are in the Menaion which should not be confused with the notated chant book (the immoveable cycle of the Doxastarion, organised between the twelve months beginning with 1 September and concluding with 31 August, or the Slavonic ).

The first notated chant books (Sticherarion and Heirmologion), created between the 9th and the 13th centuries, delivered only a small part of the monastic hymn repertoire. The beginning of the book Octoechos, the cycle 24 stichera anastasima (three stichera in each echos) or the kekragarion cycle (Hesperinos Psalm 140), appeared very late in Byzantine chant books—some of them not earlier than during the late 17th century. For most of their history they did not need to be notated, since they closely followed the recitation models of psalmody using their formulaic accentuation patterns.Within her first study of the avtomela system Irina Shkolnik (1995) called these formulaic models "echos-melodies", which preceded the creation of idiomela. The term was in fact inspired by the expression "na glas" used among Old Believers, when they talk about traditional melodies of a living oral tradition. The nature to adapt these models or their patterns to the hymnic verses and their accents are indeed that simple, that its simplicity could easily adapt to any meter and it was often accompanied by forms of multipart singing.

The reform of the Byzantine hymnody was the result of a first florescence of Greek hymnography created by singer-poets at Jerusalem like the Patriarch Sophronius (634–644), Germanos Bishop of Serachuze (died 669) and Andrew of Crete (died 713). The reform was followed by compositions of John of Damascus and his half-brother Cosmas, who continued the works of Andrew at Mar Saba. Even though the difference between "echos-melodies" and the new idiomela at that time cannot be studied, the new emphasis on the Hagiopolitan octoechos was only possible because these new hymns – their poetry and music – were appreciated and imitated beyond the patriarchate. In general this period is regarded as one when the concept of octoechos cycles was not new, but when these poets were translated and imitated throughout the Mediterranean.The repertoire was different and more concentrated on Constantinopolitan hymnographers in the Georgian Iadgari, but Greek and Slavic tropologia since the 7th century confirm the later choice of the Studites (Nikiforova 2013). The heterogenous repertoire itself, whose were sometimes simple and formulaic, sometimes with the complexity of idiomela, was probably not collected before the Second Council of Nicaea. Yahya al-Mansur who was posthumously condemned as a heretic, was not only re-established as a hymnographer and monk called John of Damascus, but also became an important Greek church father and a saint.John of Damascus, born in a privileged family close to the caliph at Damascus, became posthumously anathemised under his Syrian name during the Council of Hieria during the first iconoclastic crisis in 754, mainly because of his polemic treatises against iconoclasm (see the extract of the translation in the Medieval Sourcebook of Fordham). For the same reason he was rehabilitated during the Second Council of Nicaea in 787, during which the former one was decanonised. The second crisis of iconoclasm also caused the end of the Studites reform, so that the monastic reform was continued partly in Constantinople and partly in Sinai.

During the reform of the Studites and at Sinai the were not notated, but they existed within an oral tradition.According to Irina Shkolnik (1998) the books of the sticheraria written during the Byzantine period document the existence of 47 avtomela (most of them in the Parakletike, but also in all the other parts of the Sticherarion), but 30 of them had not been written down and notated before the 13th century. They were mainly documented in Slavonic books, because the whole system of avtomelon and prosomoia had to be adapted to the poetic prosody of the language. The adaption to Slavonic prosody caused partly the recomposition of the prosomoia. Even some idiomela served as models to compose new hymns according to the needs of a local liturgy—like the prosomoia for certain martyrs. When Theodore the Studite and his brother Joseph composed the early prosomoia for Hesperinos of Lenten tide, they used certain idiomela of the Triodion as models.Gerda Wolfram (2003, 120). Together with the later book (Sl. ), "the book of resurrection hymns", the whole repertoire of is 140 and together with their prosomeia it is even larger than the whole repertoire of unique idiomela created in various regions.

With the Slavic reception in the medieval chant book , it was not possible to create the same complex relation between chant and text, when the prosomoia had been translated. So they created a system of simple melodies which could be easier adapted to the translated prosomoia.For more examples, see Julia Shlikhtina (2004, 184-196).

In the monodic tradition of Byzantine chant, the reform of the 18th century, which created a new definition of the troparic, heirmologic, and fast sticheraric melos with simple melodies of the two fastest tempo levels, it was partly based on a living tradition of simple recitation out of text books without musical notation.

As example might serve the prooimion of Romanos' kontakion for 25 December known by its incipit Ἡ παρθένος σήμερον, even if the melodic model in echos tritos is not testified by a notated source of his time.The earliest unnotated sources of Romanos’ kontakia can be dated back to the end of the 9th century (Krueger & Arentzen 2016). Among these 14 models for the prooimion and the 13 for the oikos, eight were chosen to create an oktoechos prosomoia cycle of the so-called "resurrection kontakia", each one did consist of one prooimion and one oikos.

According to the current practice of Orthodox chant, this resurrection kontakion could be chosen for regular Sunday services, if the week was dedicated to echos tritos. Its text was sung as a to the melody of the famous kontakion for 25 December, which was already mentioned in the vita of Romanos as his own creation.According to the hagiographic tale, the Theotokos appeared to him and asked him to eat the written scroll, so that he became able to read a kathisma of the psalter correctly, but instead he recited this kontakion. Its prooimion has verses with 15, 15, 13, 13, 8, and 12 syllables, and the of the resurrection kontakion for the same echos which was composed according to the meter of this stanza must have the same number of verses, each with the same number of syllables.According to a 10th-century kondakarion-tropologion (ET-MSsc Ms. Gr. 925, ff.48v-49v) the common refrain of Romanos’ kontakion used in the prooimion and six oikoi started with Παιδίον νέον, the last verse of the kontakion. Thus, the can be sung with the same melody and the accentuation patterns of the idiomelon and the last verse was the refrain (called ephymnion ἐφύμνιον) the prooimion shared with the oikoi. The following table shows, how the syllables of the come together with those of Romanos' prooimion and with its metric structure:

With the recitation known from a living tradition, the melody reproduces the meter with melodic accentuation patterns and quantitative accents given by the rhythm of the model stanza.Note that the rhythm of medieval Byzantine notation is a very controversial matter. Two living Orthodox traditions recite the Prooimion of the Christmas Kontakion by Romanos as follows: (1) (2) Slavonic Kondak sung in Valaamskiy Rozpev (Valaam Monastery): With respect to the differences which already appear between and its prototype within the Greek language, a translation into Church Slavonic which reproduces exactly all these relations between idiomelos and avtomelon—whether in this or another way—, seems already impossible. Nevertheless, the schools at Ohrid in Macedonia and later at Novgorod and Moscow which did not know the translations made at Ohrid were quite fearless and creative.With respect to the Slavic and Northern reception, Jopi Harri (2012, 354-360) classified a second musical setting the same text, but composed in glas 4 (mesos tetartos) as "non-generic" (next to a generic troparion avtomelon in glas 3). There is a "complex artistic" reception in the Old Russian Kondakar known as "Tipografskiy Ustav" (12th century), even if Christmas kondak is left without notation (RUS-Mgt Ms. K-5349, f.46), many of its podobni (kontakia-prosomoia) had been notated. It was part of a reception of the Constantinopolitan cathedral rite and its book kontakarion and Slavic kondakar’s are its oldest sources today. 14 other prototypes whose reception is regarded as "Bulgarian indeed" by Harri, are obviously composed in the context of court music. They all are published as polyphonic recitation in print editions between the 18th and the early 20th centuries

This is a possible modern transcription of the same kondak, based on different redactions of the Old Church Slavonic translation:The Church Slavonic translation of Romanos' Christmas kontakion was reconstructed by Roman Krivko in his study of the medieval sources (2011, 717 & 726). Since Slavonic languages have a synthetic morphology, the verses must be shorter than their Greek prototypes.

   Отроча Младо, Превечный БогCurrent Old Church Slavonic version.

   отрочѧ младо превѣчьныи богъOrthography according to the Uspensky Kondakar' (ff.47v-48r). The double page was published by Artamonova (2013, ex.2).
     

This is the resurrection kontakion composed over Romanos' kontakion to emphasise that it was a very common model used to compose most of the kontakia in echos tritos:

  συν ἀναστήσας χρίστεQuoted according to the kontakarion of Sinai (ET-MSsc Ms. Gr. 1314, ff.212r-v). The scribe obviously copied from a damaged page, because he left empty spaces on a complete page, where the original was no longer readable.

  ꙗко въскрьсе ЖиводавьчьQuoted according to the Blagoveščensky Kondakar (RUS-SPsc Ms. Q.п.I.32, ff.[http://expositions.nlr.ru/ex_manus/kondakar/_Project/ShowIzo.php?l=78 76r]-v). The verses are arranged according to the musical structure (the repetition of the same ''cheironomiai'' which are gestic signs used within Kondakarion notation), and the result is a rather unequal number of syllables for the verses, although it is clear that и насъ (καὶ ἡμᾶς) was the translation of the second verse.
     

Two other kontakia-prosomoia which had been composed for other occasions:

  ὁμέγας μύστης τοῦ Θεοῦ τῆς χάριτοςKontakion for [[St Nicholas]] quoted according to the kontakarion of Sinai (ET-MSsc Ms. Gr. 1280, ff.117v-119r).

   ибо божьствьнаѧ врача ѥстаKondak for Boris and Gleb quoted according to the Blagoveščensky Kondakar (RUS-SPsc Ms. Q.п.I.32, ff.[http://expositions.nlr.ru/ex_manus/kondakar/_Project/ShowIzo.php?l=53 52r]-v).
     

In the Slavic kondakar' and the Constantinopolitan kontakarion of the 13th century the kontakion had developed to a representative melismatic style, but also the poetic structure did not always obey strictly the rules of syntonia and isosyllabic verses (especially not between the languages to which the Greek hymns had been translated). The extract visible here only includes two thirds of the first melodic phrase of the model which was used to compose the first verse pair. It was obviously possible to adapt even verses of different length to the model: A very important source of the re-translation of the Greek hymns are the so-called of the Kievan Rus' written during the 12th century, office menaia which had been fully notated (especially the akrosticha composed over the Heirmos and the stichera idiomela). Obviously the kondaks and the podobni were regarded as less problematic, because they had not been provided with notation.One can check Romanos the Melodist's Nativity kondak and all its podobni which dominate the menaion of December (RUS-Mim Ms. Sin. 162).

The confrontation with two living traditions shows that even the of the Greek Orthodox tradition are less sophisticated than the Byzantine one during the 10th or 14th century. These stichera were composed within the Hagiopolitan octoechos and adapted to the Papadike. In the medieval manuscripts is a more complicated model following 14 prototypes of kontakia which represented the Constantinopolitan tonal system chanted at the Hagia Sophia: Romanos' kontakion Ἡ παρθένος σήμερον was the model for the mesos tritos.

Although they were originally an almost syllabic setting of the hymn text, it was a complex idiomelon which became more elaborated by the end of the 9th century. The recitation today follows the troparic genre of the Neobyzantine octoechos according to the New Method, as it was created during the 18th century between Petros Peloponnesios and Theodore Phokaeos who supervised the print editions of Chourmouzios' transcriptions.See the current editions cited in the article about the book Octoechos. Each genre was defined by its own octoechos and its tempo which created a new variety, but the accentuation patterns can be used in a more flexible way with respect to the high Middle Ages. The incision within the fifth verse follows clearly the syntax of the avtomelon text. This flexibility comes closer to the earlier practice of recitation employing "echos-melodies", although the accentuation of accents are still very precise, because the diacritics were still used and the simplified model has sublimed its ancient tradition. The polyphonic or multi-part recitation of the Karelian monastery on the island Valaam, known and admired as , does not care very much about the text accents which once created the sophisticated idiomela between the 7th and the 10th centuries. It simply repeats melodic patterns, while the monks observe carefully the half verses and thus, the last two verses are structured as one phrase divided into three parts. This practice offers an amazing concept of singing , as it could survive within an oral transmission high up in the North.

• Menaion
• Menologion
• Oktoechos and Parakletike
• Pentekostarion
• Sticherarion
• Triodion

• Jopi Harri (2025). 9789512948642, University of Turku, Finland. . ISBN 9789512948642
• (2025). 9788680656106 ISBN 9788680656106
• Irina Shkolnik (1995). 9789637074547, Hungarian Academy of Sciences. ISBN 9789637074547
• Irina Shkolnik (1998). 9789637074677, Hungarian Academy of Sciences. ISBN 9789637074677
• Julia Shlikhtina (2025). 9789042914346, Peeters. ISBN 9789042914346
• Christian Troelsgård (2025). 9789637074776, Hungarian Academy of Sciences Institute for Musicology. ISBN 9789637074776
• Gerda Wolfram (2025). 9783700131724 ISBN 9783700131724