Византијска музика — разлика између измена

|Κύριε, σῶσον.

|}

The main source about court ceremonies is an incomplete compilation in a 10th-century manuscript that organised parts of a treatise [[De Ceremoniis|Περὶ τῆς Βασιλείου Τάξεως]] ("On imperial ceremonies") ascribed to Emperor [[Constantine VII]], but in fact compiled by different authors who contributed with additional ceremonies of their period.<ref>A reprint of Johann Jakob Reiske's first edition can be found in [[Patrologia Graeca|PG]] (CXII, cc. 73–1416). For an English translation of this edition see: {{Cite book

| edition = Repr. Bonn 1829

 

=== Пустињски Оци и градско монаштво ===

 

Two concepts must be understood to appreciate fully the function of music in Byzantine worship and they were related to a new form of urban monasticism, which even formed the representative cathedral rites of the imperial ages, which had to baptise many [[catechumen]]s.

 

==== Рецитовање библијских ода ====

 

The fashion in all cathedral rites of the Mediterranean was a new emphasis on the psalter. In older ceremonies before Christianity became the religion of empires, the recitation of the biblical odes (mainly taken from the Old Testament) was much more important. They did not disappear in certain cathedral rites such as the Milanese and the Constantinopolitan rite.

The common term for a short hymn of one stanza, or one of a series of stanzas, is [[troparion]]. As a refrain interpolated between psalm verses it had the same function as the [[antiphon]] in Western plainchant. The simplest troparion was probably "allelouia", and similar to troparia like the [[trisagion]] or the [[cherubikon]] or the [[Koinonikon|koinonika]] a lot of troparia became a chant genre of their own.

 

 

A famous example, whose existence is attested as early as the 4th century, is the [[Easter]] [[Vespers]] hymn, ''[[Phos Hilaron]]'' ("O Resplendent Light"). Perhaps the earliest set of troparia of known authorship are those of the [[манк|monk]] [[Auxentios]] (first half of the 5th century), attested in his biography but not preserved in any later Byzantine order of service. Another, ''[[O Monogenes Yios]]'' ("Only Begotten Son"), ascribed to the emperor [[Јустинијан I|Justinian I]] (527–565), followed the doxology of the second antiphonon at the beginning of the [[Divine Liturgy]].

 

=== Роман Мелодичар, контакион и Света Софија ===

 

The development of large scale hymnographic forms begins in the fifth century with the rise of the [[kontakion]], a long and elaborate metrical sermon, reputedly of Syriac origin, which finds its acme in the work of St. [[Romanos the Melodist]] (6th century). This dramatic [[homily]] which could treat various subjects, theological and hagiographical ones as well as imperial propaganda, comprises some 20 to 30 stanzas (oikoi "houses") and was sung in a rather simple style with emphasise on the understanding of the recent texts.<ref>The exact ritual context of the kontakion is a controversial issue, since it also changed considerably during history. Its earliest place was probably a cathedral vigil (night service) celebrated at the Blachernae chapel near the North-Western wall for the instruction of the laity: {{Cite book

 

According to Johannes Koder the kontakion was celebrated the first time during Lenten period in 537, about ten months before the official inauguration of the new built Hagia Sophia on 27 December.

 

=== Промене у архитектури и литургији, и увођење херубикона ===

{{main|Cherubikon}}

 

<blockquote>When they sing Lauds at Hagia Sophia, they sing first in the narthex before the royal doors; then they enter to sing in the middle of the church; then the gates of Paradise are opened and they sing a third time before the altar. On Sundays and feastdays the Patriarch assists at Lauds and at the Liturgy; at this time he blesses the singers from gallery, and ceasing to sing, they proclaim the polychronia; then they begin to sing again as harmoniously and as sweetly as the angels, and they sing in this fashion until the Liturgy. After Lauds they put off their vestments and go out to receive the blessing of the Patriarch; then the preliminary lessons are read in the ambo; when these are over the Liturgy begins, and at the end of the service the chief priest recites the so-called prayer of the ambo within the sanctuary while the second priest recites in the church, beyond the ambo; when they have finished the prayer, both bless the people. Vespers are said in the same fashion, beginning at an early hour.<ref>Quoted according to the translation by Oliver Strunk ([[#Str1956|1956]], 177).</ref></blockquote>

 

 

=== Манастирске реформе у Цариграду и Јерусалиму ===

 

== Монашке реформе Студита и њихове нотне књиге ==

During the 9th-century reforms of the [[Stoudios Monastery]], the reformers favoured Hagiopolitan composers and customs in their new notated chant books [[heirmologion]] and [[sticherarion]], but they also added substantial parts to the tropologion and re-organised the cycle of movable and immovable feasts (especially Lent, the triodion, and its scriptural lessons).<ref>The expression “triodion” referred to the custom of the Lent season to sing just three odes as a complete kanon, the second, eighth and ninth ode in Constantinople and the second, third and fourth within the Patriarchate of Jerusalem. They were usually followed by Old Testament readings and thus, they did replace the usual prokeimenon. [[Theodore the Studite|Theodore]] and [[Joseph the Confessor|Joseph]] also used existing idiomela to compose the texts of new stichera for the triodion cycle. {{Cite book

| doi = 10.1553/joeb53s117

| journal = Scripta & E-Scripta. International Journal for Interdisciplinary Studies

| url = https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=17991

# the ''[[sticherarion]]'', consisting of the idiomela in the ''menaion'' (the fixed cycle between September and August), the ''triodion'' and the ''pentekostarion'' (mobile cycle around the holy week), and the short version of ''[[Octoechos (liturgy)|octoechos]]'' (hymns of the Sunday cycle starting with Saturday evening) which sometimes contained a limited number of model troparia ([[Idiomelon|prosomoia]]). A rather bulky volume called "great octoechos" or "parakletike" with the weekly cycle appeared first in the middle of the tenth century as a book of its own.<ref>There was a hypothesis that the parakletike was mainly created by Joseph the Hymnographer, but it is disputed controversially. Svetlana Kujumdžieva agreed with this ascription, while others like Frøyshov argue on the basis of the early Iadgari findings, that important parts of it already existed before Joseph.{{Cite journal

| volume = 2012

|url-status=dead

|df=

The old custom can be studied on the basis of the 9th-century tropologion ΜΓ 56+5 from Sinai which was still organised according to the old tropologion beginning with the Christmas and Epiphany cycle (not with 1 September) and without any separation of the movable cycle.<ref>See the list of incipits: {{Cite book

|title=About the History of the Menaion in Byzantium: Hymnographic Monuments of the 9th–12th Centuries from the St. Catherine's Monastery on the Sinai|last=Nikiforova|first=Alexandra

|chapter=From Earth to Heaven: The Changing Musical Soundscape of Byzantine Liturgy|ref=Lin2013

}}</ref>

Especially the first generation around [[Theodore the Studite|Theodore Studites]] and [[Joseph the Confessor]], and the second around Joseph the Hymnographer suffered from the first and the second [[Byzantine Iconoclasm|crisis of iconoclasm]]. The community around Theodore could revive monastic life at the abandoned Stoudios Monastery, but he had to leave Constantinople frequently in order to escape political persecution. During this period, the Patriarchates of Jerusalem and Alexandria (especially Sinai) remained centres of the hymnographic reform. Concerning the Old Byzantine notation, Constantinople and the area between Jerusalem and Sinai can be clearly distinguished. The earliest notation used for the books ''sticherarion'' and was theta notation, but it was soon replaced by palimpsests with more detailed forms between Coislin (Palestine) and Chartres notation (Constantinople).<ref>After first studies by Tillyard ([[#Til1937|1937]], [[#Til1952|1952]]) which explored the meaning of Coislin notation by comparisons with Middle Byzantine notation, a more recent approach (Dimitrova [[#Dim2006|2006]]) distinguishes two branches of Old Byzantine notation (Coislin and Chartres) which developed around theta signs. Originally the letter had been used to indicate melismata.</ref> Although it was correct that the Studites in Constantinople established a new mixed rite, its customs remained different from those of the other Patriarchates which were located outside the Empire.

 

|date=2000

| chapter-url = http://staging.doaks.org/research/publications/doaks-online-publications/byzantine-monastic-foundation-documents/typ009.pdf

Unlike the current Orthodox custom Old Testament readings were particular important during Orthros and Hesperinos in Constantinople since the 5th century, while there was no one during the divine liturgy.<ref>About Taft's theory about three readings (prophetic, apostolic, Gospel) of the eucharist, see: {{Cite journal

| volume = 3

 

But neither any 9th-century Constantinopolitan chant book nor an introducing treatise that explains the fore-mentioned system of the Asma, have survived. Only a 14th-century manuscript of Kastoria testifies cheironomic signs used in these books, which are transcribed in longer melodic phrases by the notation of the contemporary sticherarion, the middle Byzantine Round notation.

 

=== Преображај контакиона ===

}}</ref> But the model for these oikoi was not taken from the same kontakion, but from the other kontakion for Theophany whose first oikos had the incipit τῇ γαλιλαίᾳ τῶν ἐθνῶν.

 

 

== Словенска редакција ==

The Slavic reception is crucial for the understanding, how the kontakion has changed under the influence of the Stoudites. During the 9th and 10th centuries new Empires established in the North which were dominated by Slavic populations (mainly the [[прво бугарско царство|first Bulgarian Empire]], with two new literary centres at [[Preslav Literary School|Preslav]] and the Lake [[Ohrid Literary School|Ohrid]], after similar plans failed for [[Великоморавска кнежевина|Great Moravia]], and the [[Kievan Rus']], a federation of East Slavic tribes between the Black Sea and Scandinavia). These empires requested a state religion, legal codexes, the translation of canonic scriptures, but also the translation of an overregional liturgy as it was created by the [[Monastery of Stoudios|Stoudios Monastery]], [[Манастир Светог Саве Освећеног|Mar Saba]] and [[Saint Catherine's Monastery]]. The Slavic reception confirmed this new trend, but also showed a detailed interest for the cathedral rite of the [[Аја Софија|Hagia Sophia]] and the pre-Stoudite organisation of the tropologion. Thus, these manuscripts are not only the earliest literary evidence of Slavonic languages which offer a transcription of the local variants of Slavonic languages, but also the earliest sources of the Constantinopolitan cathedral rite with musical notation, although transcribed into a notation of its own, just based on one tone system and on the contemporary layer of 11th-century notation, the roughly diastematic Old Byzantine notation.

 

=== Књижевне школе Првог бугарског царства ===

Unfortunately, no Slavonic tropologion written in [[Glagolitic script]] by [[Ћирило и Методије|Cyril and Methodius]] has survived. This lack of evidence does not prove that it had not existed, since certain conflicts with Benedictines and other Slavonic missionaries in [[Великоморавска кнежевина|Great Moravia]] and [[Pannonian Rusyns|Pannonia]] were obviously about an Orthodox rite translated into Old Church Slavonic and practised already by Methodius and [[Климент Охридски|Clement of Ohrid]].<ref>A detailed analysis of the later vita of Saint Methodius by Svetlana Kujumdžieva is probably based on a little bit more than just on a later imagination of his liturgical innovations. {{Cite journal

| issn = 0204-4021

|date=2018

| chapter-url = https://books.google.com/books?id=9449DwAAQBAJ

* theta ("θ" for "thema" which indicates a melodic figure over certain syllables of the text) or ''fita'' notation was used to indicate the melodic structure of an idiomelon/samoglasen in glas 2 "Na Iordanstei rece" (Epiphany, f.109r). It was also used on other pages (kanon for [[Presentation of Jesus at the Temple|hypapante]], ff.118v-199r & 123r),

* two forms of znamennaya notation, an earlier one has dots on the right sight of certain signs (the kanon "Obraza drevle Moisi" in glas 8 for Cross elevation on 14 September, ff.8r-9r), and a more developed form which was obviously needed for a new translation of the text ("another" avtomelon/samopodoben, ино, glas 6 "Odesnuyu spasa" for [[Христина Тирска|Saint Christina of Tyre]], 24 July, f.143r).<ref>{{Cite journal

|date=2012

| url = https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=18375

Kujumdžieva pointed later at a Southern Slavic origin (also based on linguistic arguments since 2015), although feasts of local saints, celebrated on the same day like Christina [[Борис и Глеб|Boris and Gleb]], had been added. If its reception of a pre-Stoudite tropologion was of Southern Slavic origin, there is evidence that this manuscript was copied and adapted for a use in Northern Slavic territories. The adaption to the menaion of the Rus rather proves that notation was only used in a few parts, where a new translation of a certain text required a new melodic composition which was no longer included within the existing system of melodies established by the Stoudites and their followers. But there is a coincidence between the early fragment from the Berlin-collection, where the ἀλλὸ rubric is followed by a modal signature and some early neumes, while the elaborated zamennaya is used for a new sticheron (ино) dedicated to Saint Christina.

 

 

Since the 12th century, there are also Slavic stichirars which did not only include the samoglasni, but also the podobni provided with ''znamennaya'' notation. A comparison of the very first samoglasen наста въходъ лѣтѹ (“Enter the entrance of the annual cycle”) in glas 1 (ἐπέστη ἡ εἴσοδος ἐνιαυτοῦ echos protos, SAV 1<ref>For the numbering of the standard abridged version (SAV) of the menaion, see the article by Troelsgård ([[#SAVstichera|2003]]) about the [[sticherarion]].</ref>) of the mineya shows, that the znamennaya version is much closer to ''fita'' (theta) notation, since the letter “θ =” corresponds to other signs in Coislin and a synthetic way to write a kratema group in Middle Byzantine notation. It was obviously an elaboration of the simpler version written in Coislin:

The Middle Byzantine version allows to recognise the exact steps (intervals) between the neumes. They are here described according to the [[Papadic Octoechos|Papadic]] practice of solfège called "parallage" (παραλλαγή) which is based on echemata: for ascending steps always ''kyrioi echoi'' are indicated, for descending steps always echemata of the ''plagioi echoi''. If the phonic steps of the neumes were recognised according to this method, the resulting solfège was called "metrophonia". The step between the first neumes at the beginning passed through the protos pentachord between kyrios (a) and plagios phthongos (D): a—Da—a—G—a—G—FGa—a—EF—G—a—acbabcba. The Coislin version seems to end (ἐνιαυτοῦ) thus: EF—G—a—Gba (the klasma indicates that the following kolon continues immediately in the music). In znamennaya notation the combination dyo apostrophoi (dve zapĕtiye) and oxeia (strela) at the beginning (нас<u>та</u>) is called "strela gromnaya" and obviously derived from the combination "apeso exo" in Coislin notation. According to the customs of Old Byzantine notation, "apeso exo" was not yet written with "spirits" called "chamile" and "hypsile" which did later specify as pnevmata the interval of a fifth (four steps). As usual the Old Church Slavonic translation of the text deals with less syllables than the Greek verse. It should be noted that the neumes only show the basic structure which was memorised as ''metrophonia'' by the use of ''parallage'', not the ''melos'' of the performance. The ''melos'' depended on various methods to sing an idiomelon, either together with a choir or to ask a soloist to create a rather individual version (changes between soloist and choir were at least common for the period of the 14th century, when the Middle Byzantine sticherarion in this example was created). But the comparison clearly reveals the potential (δύναμις) of the rather complex genre idiomelon.

 

==== Примање литургије ====

У '''Примарној хроници''' (Повѣсть времѧньныхъ лѣтъ "Прича о минулим летима") објављено је како је у Цариграду примљено изасланство Кијевске Русије и како су говорили о свом искуству у присуству Владимира Великог 987. године, пре него што се велики кнез Владимир одлучио за христјанизацију Кијевске Русије. (Лаврентијев кодекс написан у нижњем Новгороду 1377):

{{Cquote

| quote = Сутрадан је византијски цар послао поруку патријарху да га обавести да је руска делегација стигла да испита грчку веру и упутила га да припреми цркву Аја Софију и свештенство, и да се намести у своје свете одоре, да би Руси могли да виде славу Бога Грка. Када је патријарх примио ове команде, он је позвао свештенике да се окупе и они су извели уобичајене обреде. Они су палили тамјан, а хорови су пјевали химне. Цар је пратио Русе у цркву и стављао их у широк простор, позивајући њихову пажњу на лепоту грађевине, пјевање, канцеларије архијереја и службу ђакона, док им је објашњавао обожавање. његовог Бога. Руси су били запањени, иу свом чуду похвалили грчки церемонијал. Тада су цареви Басил и Константин позвали изасланике на њихово присуство и рекли: "Идите одавде у своју родну земљу" и тако их одбаците са вриједним поклонима и великом чашћу.

}}

 

 

==== Kondakarian notation of the asmatikon part ====

 

See for instance the comparison of the Easter koinonikon between the Slavic Blagoveščensky kondakar’ which was written about 1200 in the Northern town Novgorod of the Rus', its name derived from its preservation at the collection of the {{ill|Blagoveščensky monastery|ru|Благовещенский монастырь (Нижний Новгород)|vertical-align=sup}} at Nizhny Novgorod.

The comparison should not suggest that both versions are identical, but the earlier source documents an earlier reception of the same tradition (since there is a difference about 120 years between both sources it is impossible to judge the differences). The rubric “Glas 4” is most likely an error of the notator and meant “Glas 5”, but it is also possible, that the Slavic tone system was already in such an early period organised in triphonia. Thus, it could also mean that анеане, undoubtly the plagios protos [[Echos|enechema]] ἀνεανὲ, was supposed to be on a very high pitch (about an octave higher), in that case the tetartos phthongos has not the octave species of tetartos (a tetrachord up and a pentachord down), but the one of plagios protos. The comparison also shows very much likeness between the use of asmatic syllables such as “ѹ” written as one character such as “ɤ”. Tatiana Shvets in her description of the notational style also mentions the ''kola'' (frequent interpunction within the text line) and medial intonations can appear within a word which was sometimes due to the different numbers of syllables within the translated Slavonic text. A comparison of the neumes also show many similarities to Old Byzantine (Coislin, Chartres) signs such as ison (stolpička), apostrophos (zapĕtaya), oxeia (strela), vareia (palka), dyo kentimata (točki), dipli (statĕya), klasma (čaška), the krusma (κροῦσμα) was actually an abbreviation for a sequence of signs (palka, čaška and statĕya) and omega "ω" meant a parakalesma, a great sign related to a descending step (see the echema for plagios protos: it is combined with a dyo apostrophoi called "zapĕtaya").<ref>Many researchers (Levy, Floros, Moran, Conomos, Myers, Alexandru, Doneda, Artamonova) did the same comparison, but all agree about an unexpected number of coincidences between Slavic and Byzantine books with musical notation. The newest approach was done by Annalisa Doneda as an expert of the Greek asmatikon and its proper notation (Kastoria 8). She developed a database for a comparison between those Slavic kondakar’s with an asmatikon part and later Middle Byzantine sources: Doneda ([[#Don2011|2011]]).</ref>

 

 

=== The kontakaria and asmatika written in Middle Byzantine round notation ===

The reason, why the psaltikon was called “kontakarion”, was that most parts of a kontakion (except of the refrain) were sung by a soloist from the ambo, and that the collection of the kontakarion had a prominent and dominant place within the book. The classical repertoire, especially the [[kontakion]] cycle of the movable feasts mainly attributed to [[Romanos the Melodist|Romanos]], included usually about 60 notated kontakia which were obviously reduced to the prooimion and the first oikos and this truncated form is commonly regarded as a reason, why the notated form presented a melismatic elaboration of the kontakion as it was commonly celebrated during the cathedral rite at the Hagia Sophia. As such within the notated kontakarion-psaltikon the cycle of kontakia was combined with a [[prokeimenon]] and [[alleluiarion]] cycle as a proper chant of the [[Divine Liturgy|divine liturgy]], at least for more important feasts of the movable and immovable cycle.<ref>{{Cite book

|title=Der byzantinische Alleluiarionzyklus: Studien im kurzen Psaltikonstil|last=Thodberg|first=Christian

The Slavic kondakar’s did only use very few oikoi pointing at certain models, but the text of the first oikos was only written in the earliest manuscript known as Tipografsky Ustav, but never provided with notation.<ref>See the black and white reproduction of the manuscript and its text edition ([[#TipografskyUstav|2006]], i-ii).</ref> If there was an oral tradition, it probably did not survive until the 13th century, because the oikoi are simply missing in the kondakar’s of that period.

 

The two Middle Byzantine versions in the kontakarion-psaltikon of Paris and the one of Sinai are not identical. The first kolon ends on different ''phthongoi'': either on plagios tetartos (C, if the melos starts there) or two steps lower on plagios devteros (slightly deeper A). It is definitely exaggerated to pretend that one has “deciphered” Kondakarian notation, which is hardly true for any manuscript of this period. But even considering the difference of about at least 80 years which lie between the Old Byzantine version of Slavic scribes in Novgorod (second row of the kondakar’s) and the Middle Byzantine notation used by the monastic scribes of the later Greek manuscripts, it seems obvious that all three manuscripts in comparison did mean one and the same cultural heritage associated with the cathedral rite of the Hagia Sophia: the melismatic elaboration of the truncated kontakion. Both Slavonic kondaks follow strictly the melismatic structure in the music and the frequent segmentation by kola (which does not exist in the Middle Byzantine version), interrupting the conclusion of the first text unit by an own kolon using with the asmatic syllable “ɤ”.

 

 

== The era of psaltic art and the new mixed rite of Constantinople ==

There was a discussion promoted by Christian Troelsgård that Middle Byzantine notation should not be distinguished from Late Byzantine notation.<ref>See the new introduction by Troelsgård ([[#Tro2011|2011]]) which replaced the former one by Tillyard ([[#Til1935|1935]]).</ref> The argument was that the establishment of a mixed rite after the return of the court and the patriarchate from the exile in Nikaia in 1261, had nothing really innovative with respect the sign repertoire of Middle Byzantine notation. The innovation was probably already done outside Constantinople, in those monastic scriptoria whose scribes cared about the lost cathedral rite and did integrate different forms of Old Byzantine notation (those of the sticherarion and heirmologion like theta notation, Coislin and Chartres type as well as those of the Byzantine asmatikon and kontakarion which were based on cheironomies). The argument was mainly based on the astonishing continuity that a new a type of treatise revealed by its continuous presence from the 13th to the 19th centuries: the [[Papadic Octoechos#Papadike|Papadike]]. In a critical edition of this huge corpus, Troelsgård together with Maria Alexandru discovered many different functions that this treatise type could have.<ref>Edition in preparation. As part one might quote {{cite book|last=Alexandru|first=Maria|author2=Christian Troelsgård

|chapter=The Development of a Didactic Tradition – The Elements of the Papadike

| ref = SAVodai

}}</ref>

 

=== The synthesis between harmonikai and papadikai ===

 

== Ottoman era ==

 

=== Petros Bereketes and the school of the Phanariotes ===

 

To a certain degree there may be found remnants of Byzantine or early (Greek-speaking, [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Orthodox Christian]]) near eastern music in the music of the [[Османско царство|Ottoman]] Court. Examples such as that of the composer and theorist [[Dimitrie Cantemir|Prince Cantemir]] of [[Романија|Romania]] learning music from the Greek musician ''Angelos'', indicate the continuing participation of [[Грчки језик|Greek speaking]] people in court culture. The influences of [[Ancient Greek music|ancient Greek]] basin and the [[Грци|Greek]] Christian chants in the Byzantine music as origin, are confirmed. Music of Turkey was influenced by Byzantine music, too (mainly in the years 1640–1712).<ref>[http://www.bazaarturkey.com/read_about-the-music.htm Influences of Byzantine music] (The music of Turkey is also, a reference to the Byzantine music. In the period of classical music, Ottoman music was influenced by Byzantine music—specifically in:1640–1712)</ref> Ottoman music is a synthesis, carrying the culture of [[Грци|Greek]] and Armenian Christian chant. It emerged as the result of a sharing process between the many civilizations that met together in the Orient, considering the breadth and length of duration of these empires and the great number of ethnicities and major or minor cultures that they encompassed or came in touch with at each stage of their development.

 

=== Phanariotes at the new music school of the patriarchate ===

 

[[Chrysanthos of Madytos]] (ca. 1770–1846), [[Gregory the Protopsaltes]] (c. 1778 – c. 1821), and [[Chourmouzios the Archivist]] were responsible for a reform of the notation of Greek ecclesiastical music. Essentially, this work consisted of a simplification of the [[Byzantine Musical Symbols]] that, by the early 19th century, had become so complex and technical that only highly skilled chanters were able to interpret them correctly. The work of the three reformers is a landmark in the history of Greek Church music, since it introduced the system of neo-Byzantine music upon which are based the present-day chants of the Greek Orthodox Church. Unfortunately, their work has since been misinterpreted often, and much of the oral tradition has been lost.

 

=== Ison ===

|work=Aprakos lectionary beginning with Easter (Gospel of John) and a menologion (ff.112v-153v) in uncial Glagolitic script from Macedonia written by the end of the first Bulgarian Empire (11th century)|ref=I-RvatVatSl3

}}

 

=== Menologia ===

}}

 

* {{Cite web

|url = http://www.igl.ku.dk/MMB/pub.html

| volume = 1-18

|date=1996–1998

| ref = EdNafpliotis

}}