Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T05:08:06.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Perspectives on the early hagiopolite Tropologion (A response to Peter Jeffery and Svetlana Kujumdzieva)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2025

Harald Buchinger
Harald Buchinger*
Affiliation:
Email: Harald.Buchinger@theologie.uni-regensburg.de
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article assesses the state of research on the Tropologion of late antique Jerusalem. It is argued that the external and internal evidence points to a date of its redaction not before the later sixth century; this pertains both to the annual cycle, which presupposes the definitive introduction of Christmas in Jerusalem under emperor Justinian, and to the Oktoechos part of ordinary Sundays; also the famous chants for the veneration of the Cross, in part received in East and West, may be relatively late creations. While the reference of the book title to the ‘canon of the Anastasis’ implies a certain canonicity of the repertoire, its contents was subject to significant change; the role of particularly the Armenian tradition still requires further investigation. In any case, the history of the Hagiopolite Tropologion and its influence can only be written as a decidedly regional history.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Plainsong & Medieval Music , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , April 2025 , pp. 33 - 43
Check for updates
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press

The edition of ‘the earliest Christian chant repertory’ (Peter Jeffery), that is, the Tropologion of late antique Jerusalem preserved in the so-called Older Georgian Iadgari,Footnote 1 and its successive translations into Western languagesFootnote 2 have revealed a world of poetry hitherto unknown in the history of liturgy and music.Footnote 3 At least three methodological perspectives may be applied to this source: (a) the strictly theological analysis of the literary and liturgical contents of a poetical corpus that covers the whole liturgical year and the weekly cycle of liturgy in time; (b) consideration of musicological dimensions, especially of the Oktoechos (whereas melodies do not survive); and (c) the common ground of underlying historical questions – the attestation and organisation of pieces, genres and books, and the transmission, growth, spread, decline and change of repertories. This brief response will first succinctly address benchmark data of the formation of the annual and weekly cycles and then articulate questions that arise regarding the history of the repertory, the title and character of the Tropologion as book-type, and its place in the history of Christian liturgical singing in Jerusalem and beyond.

Benchmark data

For more than three decades, Peter Jeffery has masterfully expounded the importance of the Iadgari not only for its original context in late antique Jerusalem but also in a comparative perspective.Footnote 4 His observations and analyses cannot easily be surpassed. The tour d’horizon of Svetlana Kujumdzieva has more recently collected and reviewed key sources of The Hymnographic Book of Tropologion through Georgian, Syriac, Greek and Old Slavic witnesses.Footnote 5 The data outlined by these two scholars continue to constitute a critical basis for any further hypothesising about the book-type and the repertory.

For dating the annual cycle, the inclusion of Christmas as celebration of Christ’s nativity remains the most important feature of the collection: the Older Iadgari presupposes the dissociation of Christmas from Epiphany, which has become the feast of Christ’s Baptism. Since Christmas seems to have been established definitely in Jerusalem only by Emperor Justinian (527–65 ce),Footnote 6 this dates the collection with some confidence to the (post-)Justinian era, that is, the later sixth century at the earliest.Footnote 7 Any attempt at a prior dating of parts of the repertory therefore implies positing a significant stratigraphy within its festal hymnography.

The weekly cycle of pieces for regular Sundays is organised according to the Oktoechos; the date of this part of the repertory is therefore inseparably tied to the development of the modal system. Since the latter seems to be attested only in the same period towards the very close of Late Antiquity (sixth century at the earliest),Footnote 8 a heavy burden of proof lies on any earlier dating.

Questions

The origins of the genre

It remains a riddle when poetic elements beyond biblical chants addressed as troparia Footnote 9 were first introduced in the liturgy of late antique Jerusalem.Footnote 10

Egeria’s (381–4 ce?) mention of ymni et antiphonae along with psalmi and related responses is puzzling. The traditional understanding as different ways of performing psalms is not entirely satisfactory;Footnote 11 but how would the assumption of the existence of non-biblical troparia fit into a critical-historical view and the evidence of later sources – especially the Armenian Lectionary – outlined below? The description of the weekly Sunday vigil is particularly enigmatic: while ymni et antiphonae are mentioned in the monastic-type first part of the service, in its mimetic second part, only three psalms with everybody responding are described.Footnote 12 The distribution of genres not only appears to contradict general assumptions about their typological assignation, but, in the developed Tropologion conserved in the Older Georgian Iadgari, troparia also occur on the one hand with the nine biblical Odes, and on the other after the mimetic gospel reading and with the subsequent Laudes psalms.

Armenian and Georgian translations of the lectionary-synaxarium of late antique Jerusalem are believed to document the development of the annual celebrations from the fifth through the seventh century.Footnote 13 While in the so-called Armenian Lectionary, no troparia are mentioned at all, the so-called Georgian Lectionary attests the introduction of a repertory of non-biblical chants following the modal system of the Oktoechos and collected in the Georgian Iadgari.Footnote 14 In the Armenian Lectionary, the absence of poetic additions to the chants derived exclusively from the Bible is not a mere argument from silence; rather, in the vigils of Easter and Epiphany, the insertion of non-biblical elements into what were to become the biblical Odes can be observed.Footnote 15 If this is the very origin of what was to become the genre of the troparion, it must be dated in the period attested by the Armenian Lectionary, that is, the fifth century – which in turn would preclude the existence of the genre in Egeria’s time. In fact there seems to be no cogent proof that any concrete troparion existed before the sixth century;Footnote 16 on the contrary, many hints point at exactly such a date for the introduction of the genre.

In the Georgian Lectionary, not only do non-biblical chants occur in various positions of the Eucharistic liturgy,Footnote 17 but also the psalmodic elements of the Liturgy of the Word – the canon in the terminology of the sources – also appear to have undergone a significant transformation. While the Armenian Lectionary seems to prescribe full psalms both as responsorial psalm and with the Alleluia,Footnote 18 both liturgical forms have been abbreviated by the time witnessed by the Georgian Lectionary: the responsorial psalm now consists of a response and one single verse; the assignation of a mode testifies to the implementation of the modal system of the Oktoechos. The same is true for the Alleluia psalm, which in the Georgian Lectionary explicitly encompasses only one verse; while the Alleluia psalms in the Armenian Lectionary are stereotypically indicated by their beginning even when it is obvious that the selection is based on the typological significance of a later verse, in the Georgian lectionary later verses are also chosen for the Alleluia. May this abbreviation of text span have gone along with an elaboration of the musical form and the professionalisation of the office of singers (perhaps at the expense of congregational participation), as can be assumed for the development in contemporary Rome, where a responsorial psalm in which the people responded seems to have been reduced to the gradual responsory performed by a professional schola between the fifth and the seventh century?Footnote 19 If such a musical development is to be supposed, how is it to be imagined in concrete practice in view of the clear continuity of the selected psalms that occur already in the Armenian Lectionary, and what would that mean for the imposition of the modal system of the Oktoechos in a continuous practice of psalmody?

Corroborative evidence comes from the famous Narration of the abbots John and Sophronius, which is a key document not only for the history of the Office but also of a transitional phase in the history of Mass chant: it attests the professionalisation of the office of singers while at the same time still witnessing to congregational participation: ‘What in psalms is proclaimed with song and sound – and the people respond the refrains with melody and song – this let us concede to readers and singers and subdeacons and deacons; and the Davidic psalms shall be sound for us [i.e. the monks].’Footnote 20 The outline of Mass chant describes the role of the professional singers: ‘Singers [are elected] for chanting and singing with melody and sound and song and to lead the people at the “Holy God” and at the prokeimena and at the propsalmata and at the bematikia and at the entrance of the mysteries the “[We] who [represent] the Cherubim” and the koinonika.’Footnote 21 At the same time, troparia were firmly established as a chant genre in secular practice and were attractive also to monks, although their use in monastic practice is rejected by this source not only generally but also in view of exactly the positions in which they appear in secular use according to the Iadgari: with Psalm 140 (141) at vespers and with the Odes and Laudes Psalm(s) 148(–150) at Orthros.Footnote 22 However, it was only a matter of time before the repertory was adopted by the influential monastery of St Sabas.Footnote 23

The title of the book (-type)

The Greek title of the Tropologion as book-type is first attested in the eighth/ninth century on the one hand by a parchment fragment from Khirbet ’El-Mird in the Judean desert (ancient Hyrkania, later reused under the name of Kellion as a monastery by St Sabas) of an eclectic Τροπολόγιων (sic) σὺν θ(ε)ῷ κατὰ τὼν (sic) κανῶνα Χ(ριστο)ῦ τοῦ θ(εο)ῦ Ἀναστάσεως,Footnote 24 and on the other by the Greek manuscript of the full, yet incomplete (younger) Tropologion, Sinai ΝΕ ΜΓ 56+5: Σὺν θεῷ τροπολόγιον πασῶν τῶν ἁγίων ἑορτῶν παντὸς τοῦ ἔτους κατὰ τὸν κανόνα τῆς ἁγίας Χριστοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν Ἀναστάσεως.Footnote 25 The relatively well-attested reference of the title to ‘the canon of the Anastasis’, that is, the cathedral church known as the Holy Sepulchre, is ambivalent with regard both to its literal understanding and to its contents. Is this ‘canon’ a set of biblical pieces (readings and psalms) proper to every liturgical occasion as in the Armenian Lectionary? Does it refer to the Tropologion as a book for which a certain canonicity is claimed? Or is a relation to the ‘canon of psalmody (κανὼν τῆς ψαλμωδίας)’, including Odes,Footnote 26 implied? At any rate, in some way or other the title ascribes a certain claim of canonicity to the chant tradition of Jerusalem; but how great is the importance of this claim when the concrete repertory contained in the various books of the ‘Old’ and ‘New’ TropologionFootnote 27 in its various redactions is seen to have been in constant flux?Footnote 28

John of Damascus and the symbolism of the Ogdoas?

Traditionally, a key role in the development of the repertory and its modal ordering has been ascribed to the person of John of Damascus (d. before 754 ce);Footnote 29 at the same time, theological implications of the symbolism of the ὀγδοάς – a dimension of eternity, perfection and transcendence of the seven-day week implied by the first day of the week being the day of the resurrection since early Christian timesFootnote 30 – seem to be evident. A connection has also been proposed with the eight weeks of pre-paschal fasting already mentioned by Egeria,Footnote 31 although the history of the liturgical period of Lent is intricate and the eight weeks of a one-week paschal fast preceded by six weeks of Lent plus one week of forefast was the result of a long history that spanned the whole of Late Antiquity.Footnote 32 John himself deals with the question in a letter in which he on the one hand justifies the developed practice of his time and on the other betrays awareness of the diverging earlier tradition of a shorter Lent. His reasoning is quite pragmatic and non-ideological; an argument for a fast of eight weeks from the symbolism of the number eight is not part of John’s letter.Footnote 33

Chants for the veneration of the Cross

It now seems long-established that some chants for the veneration of the Cross that were received in East and West originated in Jerusalem.Footnote 34 There is, however, no evidence that the veneration of the relic itself on Good Friday was accompanied by singing in late antique Jerusalem; in Egeria’s famous account, the impressive ritual on Good Friday morning appears to be more an act of collective relic veneration than a fully fledged liturgy:Footnote 35 no chants are mentioned, let alone readings or prayers. Likewise, the Armenian Lectionary just refers to the exposition and veneration of the precious wood of the Cross, without any liturgical order.Footnote 36 The Georgian Lectionary does not mention a veneration of the Cross but just the peculiar rite of ‘washing the Cross’ at the end of Good Friday liturgy with pertinent chants that interpret the ritual as representation of the entombment.Footnote 37 In the Iadgari, the theme of the Cross dominates the chants for Good Friday;Footnote 38 but likewise no ritual veneration of the relic is mentioned. It appears that the recovery of the relic in 629/30 ce by Emperor Heraclius after its loss to the Persians resulted in a boost of liturgical veneration that may have instigated providing the ritual at the feast of the Exaltation of the Cross with chants.Footnote 39 Is this circumstance also relevant for dating the other prominent pieces of chant for venerating the Cross?

Greek, Georgian and Armenian hymnography – and the Tropologion as book-type

It seems universally accepted – and in fact proven beyond doubt by the congruencies with the Georgian Lectionary – that the Older Iadgari is indeed a translation of the oldest chant repertory of late antique Jerusalem. At the same time, the Armenian hymnal also betrays traces of hagiopolitan inheritance. This is especially probable for pieces that occur in both traditions,Footnote 40 but also beyond such commonalities it has been possible to identify traces of the topography of the Holy City and distinctive topics of her liturgy, notably in the Octave of the Feast of the Dedication,Footnote 41 which is particularly noteworthy since the Iadgari provides only the psalms also mentioned in the Georgian Lectionary but no non-biblical pieces for the days after the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross.Footnote 42 It remains to be explored how far a hagiopolite pedigree may be identified in other parts of the corpus.Footnote 43

* * *

In view of the overwhelming diversity of repertories, a history of the Hagiopolite Tropologion and its influence and reception must at any rate result in a decidedly regional history;Footnote 44 apart from regional and linguistic traditions, it will have to take into account different institutional contexts and ecclesial situations, since the repertory of the stational liturgy of the Holy City was received, redacted and handed on also in monastic institutions of various types in the closer and wider periphery.Footnote 45 Can one therefore even speak of the Tropologion as a book, or is the designation not generic to the extent that one should rather talk about a book-type which within given languages such as Greek and Georgian (but also Armenian and Syriac) – and all the more across institutional contexts, regions and languages – was in constant development, growth, change and exchange of repertories, with remarkably few elements of continuity even where the influence of the Holy City is evident? Not only in this respect, much remains to be explored in the history of the earliest Christian chant repertories (and, of course, in their meaning, which is where the proper task of the theologian would begin).

Footnotes

A version of this article was presented at the International Musicological Society Congress, 22–26 August 2022, Athens, Greece on the session ‘Translation, Transformation, and Mediation in Christian Music of the Eastern Mediterranean Region’.

My sincere thanks are due to Daniel Galadza and Alexandra Nikiforova as well as to the participants of the International Musicological Society Round Table in August 2022 in Athens and to the participants of the Problems in the History of Early Liturgy seminar of the North American Academy of Liturgy in January 2023 in Toronto, notably Charles H. Cosgrove, for their critical discussion of this paper, and to John Nicholson, Vienna, for a sensitive review of my English. All flaws and errors are, of course, mine.

References

1 ელ. მეტრეველი / ც. ჭანკიევი / ლ. ხევსურიანი [El. Meṭreveli / C’. Č̣anḳievi / L. Xevsuriani], ed., უძველესი იადგარი [Udzvelesi Iadgari], ძველი კართული მწერლობის ძეგლები [Dzveli Ḳartuli Mcerlobis Dzeglebi] 2 (თბილისი [Tbilisi], 1980). A helpful survey has been given by Andrew Wade, ‘The Oldest Iadgari: The Jerusalem Tropologion, V–VIII c.’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 50 (1984), 451–6; cf. idem, ‘The Oldest Iadgari: The Jerusalem Tropologion – 4th to 8th Centuries, 30 Years after the Publication’, in Σύναξις καθολική: Beiträge zu Gottesdienst und Geschichte der fünf altkirchlichen Patriarchate für Heinzgerd Brakmann zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Diliana Atanassova and Tinatin Chronz, Orientalia – patristica – oecumenica 6, 2 vols. (Wien, 2014), 2: 717–50. Peter Jeffery has been among the first Western authors to draw attention to the source: Peter Jeffery, ‘The Sunday Office of Seventh-Century Jerusalem in the Georgian Chantbook (Iadgari): A Preliminary Report’, Studia Liturgica, 21 (1991), 52–75; idem, ‘Jerusalem and Rome (and Constantinople): The Musical Heritage of Two Great Cities in the Formation of the Medieval Chant Traditions’, in International Musical Society Study Group Cantus Planus: Papers Read at the Fourth Meeting, Pécs, Hungary, 3–8 September 1990, ed. László Dobszay, Ágnes Papp and Ferenc Sebó (Budapest, 1992), 163–74; idem, ‘The Lost Chant Tradition of Early Christian Jerusalem: Some Possible Melodic Survivals in the Byzantine and Latin Chant Repertories’, Early Music History, 11 (1992), 151–90; idem, ‘The Earliest Christian Chant Repertory Recovered: The Georgian Witnesses to Jerusalem Chant’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 47 (1994), 1–38; idem, ‘Rome and Jerusalem: From Oral Tradition to Written Repertory in Two Ancient Liturgical Centers’, in Essays on Medieval Music in Honor of David G. Hughes, ed. Graeme M. Boone, Isham Library Papers 4 (Cambridge, MA, 1995), 207–47; idem, ‘The Earliest Oktōēchoi: The Role of Jerusalem and Palestine in the Beginnings of Modal Ordering’, in The Study of Medieval Chant: Paths and Bridges, East and West. In Honor of Kenneth Levy, ed. Peter Jeffery (Woodbridge, 2001), 147–209; idem, ‘The Resurrection Gospels and Their Hymns in the Early Rite of Jerusalem’, in Liturgische Bibelrezeption: Dimensionen und Perspektiven interdisziplinärer Forschung / Liturgical Reception of the Bible: Dimensions and Perspectives of Interdisciplinary Research, ed. Harald Buchinger and Clemens Leonhard, Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte 108 (Göttingen, 2022), 265–90; idem, ‘Seeking the Origins of the Oktoechos: The Resurrection Gospels and Their Hymns in the Early Rite of Jerusalem’, in Explorations in Eastern Christian Liturgy: Selected Papers of the Sixth International Congress of the Society of Oriental Liturgy, Etchmiadzin, Armenia, 11–16 September 2016, ed. Nina Glibetić and Gabriel Radle, Studies in Eastern Christian Liturgies 4 (Münster, 2022), 33–52. The characterisation as the earliest Christian chant repertory may be qualified in view of the authentic hymns of Ambrose of Milan (d. 397), which clearly belong to the fourth century and cover the annual feasts as well as the hours of the day.

2 Charles Renoux, Les hymnes de la Résurrection. I: Hymnographie liturgique géorgienne. Textes du Sinaï 18, Sources liturgiques 3 (Paris, 2000); Hans-Michael Schneider, Lobpreis im rechten Glauben: Die Theologie der Hymnen an den Festen der Menschwerdung der alten Jerusalemer Liturgie im Georgischen Udzvelesi Iadgari, Hereditas 23 (Bonn, 2004); Charles Renoux, L’hymnaire de Saint-Sabas (Ve–VIIIe siècle): Le manuscrit géorgien H 2123. I. Du Samedi de Lazare à la Pentecôte, Patrologia Orientalis 224 = 50/3 (Turnhout, 2008); idem, Les hymnes de la Résurrection. II: Hymnographie liturgique géorgienne. Texte des manuscrits Sinaï 40, 41 et 34, Patrologia Orientalis 231 = 52/1 (Turnhout, 2010); idem, Les hymnes de la Résurrection. III: Hymnographie liturgique géorgienne. Introduction, traduction, annotation des manuscrits Sinaï 26 et 20 et index analytique des trois volumes, Patrologia Orientalis 232 = 52/2 (Turnhout, 2010); idem, L’hymnaire de Saint-Sabas (Ve–VIIIe siècle): Le manuscrit géorgien H 2123. II. De la nativité de Jean-Baptiste à la liturgie des défunts, Patrologia Orientalis 237 = 53/3 (Turnhout, 2015); idem, L’hymnaire de Saint-Sabas (Ve–VIIIe siècle): Le manuscrit géorgien H 2123. III: De la nativité de notre seigneur Jésus-Christ au samedi de Lazare, Patrologia Orientalis 254 = 58/2 (Turnhout, 2021); Stephen J. Shoemaker, The First Christian Hymnal: The Songs of the Ancient Jerusalem Church, Middle Eastern Text Initiative, Eastern Christian Texts (Provo, UT, 2018) (Oktoechos part; further parts in preparation).

3 For a survey, cf. also Stig Simeon R. Frøyshov, ‘The Georgian Witness to the Jerusalem Liturgy: New Sources and Studies’, in Inquiries into Eastern Christian Worship: Selected Papers of the Second International Congress of the Society of Oriental Liturgy, Rome, 17–21 September 2008, ed. Bert Groen, Steven Hawkes-Teeples and Stefanos Alexopoulos, Eastern Christian Studies 12 (Leuven, 2012), 227–67. The most important subsequent discovery was the earliest extant manuscript of the younger Tropologion in the original Greek, Sinai ΜΓ 56+5; see subsection ‘The title of the book (-type)’ with n. 25.

4 See above, n. 1.

5 Svetlana Kujumdzieva, The Hymnographic Book of Tropologion: Sources, Liturgy and Chant Repertory (London, 2018), with bibliography of earlier literature, which is not repeated here; critical of some aspects, cf. Damaskinos (Olkinuora) of Xenophontos, ‘Hymns and Liturgy’, in The Brill Companion to John of Damascus (Leiden, forthcoming).

6 van Esbroeck, Michel, ‘La lettre de l’empereur Justinien sur l’Annonciation et la Noël en 561’, Analecta Bollandiana, 86 (1968), 351–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, ‘Encore la lettre de Justinien. Sa date: 560 et non 561’, Analecta Bollandiana, 87 (1969), 442–4. The authenticity has been questioned by André de Halleux, ‘Un discours héortologique de Justinien’, Analecta Bollandiana, 110 (1992), 311–28, and vindicated by Michel van Esbroeck, ‘La lettre de Justinien pour la fete de l’Hypapante en 562’, Analecta Bollandiana, 112 (1994), 65–84; cf. also Heinzgerd Brakmann, ‘Ein unbeachtetes Echo des Hypapante-Briefes Kaiser Justinians’, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, 34 (1991), 104–6.

7 It has to be noted, however, that the question of the early history of the nativity cycle in Jerusalem appears to require a reassessment in view of documents from the periphery of the Holy City; cf. Harald Buchinger, ‘Die vielleicht älteste erhaltene Predigt auf das Epiphaniefest: Vier syrische Fragmente des Titus von Bostra (CPG 3578)’, in Σύναξις καθολική (see n. 1), 1: 65–86, with reference also to the establishment of Christmas implied by homilies attributed to Antipater of Bostra (ibid., 78f.).

8 Cf. Peter Jeffery, as quoted in n. 1; Troelsgård, Christian, ‘A New Source for the Early Octoechos? Papyrus Vindobonensis G 19.934 and Its Musical Implications’, Proceedings of the 1 st International Conference of the American Society of Byzantine Music and Hymnology (Pittsburgh, 2009), 668–79Google Scholar (with table of further papyrus fragments from the sixth [?] to eighth centuries with modal ascriptions, ibid., 676; the sixth-century date has, however, been revised and the papyrus, which is identical with MPER N.S. XVII 13–25, ‘assigned to the late eighth or early ninth century’ according to Ágnes T. Mihálykó, The Christian Liturgical Papyri: An Introduction, Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum 114 [Tübingen, 2019], 89. Unfortunately, the dissertation of Céline Grassien, Préliminaires à l’édition du corpus papyrologique des hymnes chrétiennes liturgiques de langue grecque, Université Paris-4 [2011], remains unpublished); Pfisterer, Andreas, ‘Zur Vorgeschichte des lateinischen Acht-Tonarten-Systems’, in Cantus Planus Study Group of the International Musicological Society: Papers Read at the 16th Meeting, Vienna, Austria, 2011, ed. Klugseder, Robert (Purkersdorf, 2012), 321–6Google Scholar. On earlier origins proposed by Frøyshov, Stig Simeon R., ‘The Early Development of the Liturgical Eight-Mode System in Jerusalem’, Saint Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 51 (2007), 139–78Google Scholar, see subsection ‘John of Damascus and the symbolism of the Ogdoas?’.

9 A Thesaurus Linguae Graecae search suggests that securely datable literary attestations of the term τροπάριον emerge only in the sixth century, which would match the evidence outlined below; if the Vita sancti Auxentii, 46f. (Hellenica 64, 56–8 Varaldo), which describes the performance of troparia in detail and quotes seven pieces, can claim historicity, it would, however, push the date to the lifetime of the saint, who was born in Syria, spent his ascetic life close to Chalcedon and Constantinople and died during the reign of Emperor Leon, thus before 474 ce. That the music is described as μέλος and not ἦχος may point to a pre-modal character (as kindly suggested to me by Charles H. Cosgrove). The same period and context is pointed to by the note in a fragment of the Ecclesiastical History 388 of Theodore Anagnostes preserved by Nikephoros Kallistos (Die Griechischen Christlichen Schrifsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte. Neue Folge, 32, 109 Hansen) that identifies Anthimos and Timokles as οἱ τῶν τροπαρίων ποιηταί. For a critical assessment of the earliest evidence of Byzantine hymnography, cf. Gregory Tucker, The Hymnography of the Middle Byzantine Ecclesiastic Rite & Its Festal Theology: Introduction – Edition & Translation – Commentary, Studies in Eastern Christian Liturgies 5 (Münster, 2023), esp. 27–30. On the book-title τροπολόγιον, see subsection ‘The title of the book (-type)’, with n. 27.

10 An excellent critical survey of sources, structures and elements is given by Daniel Galadza, Liturgy and Byzantinization in Jerusalem, Oxford Early Christian Studies (Oxford, 2018).

11 Cf. Egèria, Pelegrinatge, ed., trans. and comm. Sebastià Janeras, Fundació Bernat Metge, Escriptors Cristians, 2 vols. (Barcelona, 1986), 1: 77, and 2: 173, n. 187, with reference to the earlier bibliography.

12 Egeria, Itinerarium, 24. 8f. (Fontes Christiani 203, 214 Röwekamp); on this office, cf. J[uan] Mateos, ‘La vigile cathédrale chez Egérie’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 27 (1961), 281–312; idem, ‘L’Office dominical de la Résurrection’, Revue du clergé africain, 19 (1964), 263–88; Stig Simeon R. Frøyshov, ‘The Resurrection Office of the First Millennium Jerusalem Liturgy and Its Adoption by Close Peripheries. Part I: The Pre-Gospel Section’, in Studies on the Liturgies of the Christian East: Selected Papers of the Third International Congress of the Society of Oriental Liturgy, Volos, May 26–30, 2010, ed. Steven Hawkes-Teeples, Bert Groen and Stefanos Alexopoulos, Eastern Christian Studies 18 (Leuven, 2013), 31–57; idem, ‘The Resurrection Office of First-Millennium Jerusalem Liturgy and Its Adoption by Close Peripheries. Part II: The Gospel Reading and the Post-Gospel Section’, in Sion, mère des Églises: Mélanges liturgiques offerts au Père Charles Athanase Renoux, ed. Michael Daniel Findikyan, Daniel Galadza and André Lossky, Semaines d’études liturgiques Saint-Serge, Supplement 1 (Münster, 2016), 109–47; Jeffery, ‘The Resurrection Gospels’ (see n. 1); idem, ‘Seeking the Origins’ (see ibid.). Differences in the modal system and, obviously due to its establishment, in the order of Gospel readings across the sources and traditions demonstrate that the prominent and influential ritual had a long history, which is perhaps mirrored in different kinds of troparia.

13 Athanase Renoux, ed., Le codex arménien Jérusalem 121. I: Introduction aux origines de la liturgie hiérosolymitaine: lumières nouvelles, Patrologia Orientalis 163 = 35/1 (Turnhout, 1969); II: Édition comparée du texte et de deux autres manuscrits. Introduction, textes, traduction et notes, Patrologia Orientalis 168 = 36/2 (Turnhout, 1971); Michel Tarchnischvili, ed., Le grand lectionnaire de l’Église de Jérusalem (Ve–VIIIe siècle), Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 188f.; 204f. = Scriptores Iberici 9f.; 13f. (Louvain, 1959–60); for an overview, cf. Sebastià Janeras, ‘Les lectionnaires de l’ancienne liturgie de Jérusalem’, Collectanea Christiana Orientalia, 2 (2005), 71–92; Harald Buchinger, Lektionarsgeschichte und die Entwicklung von Feiern im Rhythmus der Zeit, in Liturgische Bibelrezeption (see n. 1), 85–118. While all manuscripts contain the biblical lections in extenso, they are not identified as lectionaries by their titles, which instead refer to elements of a synaxarium. The dating of the Armenian Lectionary between 417 and 439 ce established by Renoux, Le codex arménien, II: 169 [31] has recently been challenged by Méndez, Hugo, ‘Revising the Date of the Armenian Lectionary of Jerusalem’, Journal of Early Christian Studies, 29 (2021), 61–92 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 After the fundamental study of Helmut Leeb, Die Gesänge im Gemeindegottesdienst von Jerusalem (vom 5. bis 8. Jahrhundert), Wiener Beiträge zur Theologie 28 (Vienna, 1970), see various titles by Jeffery quoted in n. 1, and Galadza, Liturgy and Byzantinization, 49–52.

15 Non-biblical refrains are intercalated in Dan. 3 in both the Epiphany and Easter vigil according to Armenian Lectionary, 1 (PO 168 = 36/2, 212 [74]–214 [76] Renoux); ibid., 44 (ibid., 306 [168], with Ms. Erevan 985 mentioning the genre designation կցուրդ/kc’urd [= ‘refrain, response’] in the margin); furthermore, in the paschal vigil, the first verse of Exod. 15 is used as a refrain with that canticle according to Ms. Erevan 985 (ibid., 300 [162]).

16 The Trishagion, which is attested already in the fifth century, is not a troparion in the proper sense; cf. Sebastià Janeras, ‘Le Trisagion: Une formule brève en liturgie comparée’, in Comparative Liturgy Fifty Years after Anton Baumstark (1872–1948): Acts of the International Congress, Rome, 25–29 September 1998, ed. Robert F. Taft and Gabriele Winkler, Orientalia Christiana Analecta 265 (Rome, 2001), 495–562. But see n. 9 on the Life of Auxentius (third quarter of the fifth century).

17 Cf. n. 14.

18 It has to be noted, however, that in contrast to the readings, psalms are indicated only with their incipits – probably because chanters were assumed to know them by heart?

19 Cf. Jeffery, ‘Jerusalem and Rome’, and idem, ‘Rome and Jerusalem’. While Leo the Great, Tractatus, 3:1 (Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, 138, 10 Chavasse: dauiticum psalmum … consona uoce cantauimus) unequivocally refers to congregational singing (‘we sang with a voice sounding together’), the developed Roman chant repertory codified in the early Middle Ages clearly presupposes specialists institutionalised in the schola cantorum, palpable from the (later) seventh century onwards; cf. Joseph Dyer, ‘The Schola Cantorum and Its Roman Milieu in the Early Middle Ages’, in De musica et cantu. Studien zur Geschichte der Kirchenmusik und der Oper. Helmut Hucke zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. Peter Cahn and Ann-Katrin Heimer, Musikwissenschaftliche Publikationen, Hochschule für Musik und Darstellende Kunst Frankfurt/Main 2 (Hildesheim, 1993), 19–40. In contrast to Jerusalem, indications of continuity are rare in Rome; but cf. Jeffery, Peter, ‘Monastic Reading and the Emerging Roman Chant Repertory’, in Western Plainchant in the First Millennium: Studies in the Medieval Liturgy and Its Music, ed. Gallagher, Sean, Haar, James, Nádas, John and Striplin, Timothy (Aldershot, 2003), 45–103 Google Scholar.

20 Augusta Longo, ‘Il testo integrale della “Narrazione degli abati Giovanni e Sofronio” attraverso le “ἑρμηνεῖαι” di Nicone’, Rivista di studi bizantini e neoellenici, 12f. = N.S. 2f. (1965–6), 223–67, 263, § 10: Ὅσα δὲ ἐν ψαλμοῖς μετὰ ᾄσματος καὶ ἤχου προεκφωνοῦνται καὶ ὁ λαὸς τὰ ἀκρόστιχα ὑποψάλλουσι μετὰ μέλους καὶ ᾄσματος, ταῦτα παραχωρήσωμεν ἀναγνώσταις καὶ ψάλταις καὶ ὑποδιακόνοις καὶ διακόνοις καὶ ἦχος ἔστωσαν ἡμῖν οἱ δαυϊτικοὶ ψαλμοί. Cf. also 261, § 8. Longo (237) dates the text towards the end of the sixth and the beginning of the seventh century. The terminology of ἦχος (‘sound’ in general, but also ‘musical mode’) for the musical character may point to a dimension of modality and therefore presuppose the Oktoechos.

21 Ibid., 254, § 3: ψάλτας μὲν διὰ τὸ ψάλλειν καὶ ᾄδειν μετὰ μέλους καὶ ἤχου καὶ ᾄσματος καὶ προκαθηγεῖσθαι τοῦ λαοῦ εἰς τὸ Ἅγιος ὁ Θεὸς καὶ εἰς τὰ προκείμενα καὶ προψάλματα καὶ τὰ βηματίκια καὶ εἰς τὴν προέλευσιν τῶν Μυστηρίων τὸ Οἱ τὰ Χερουβὶμ καὶ τὰ κοινωνικά· On the various chant genres, cf. Robert F. Taft, ‘The βηματίκιον in the 6/7th c. Narration of the Abbots John and Sophronius (BHGNA 1438w): An Exercise in Comparative Liturgy’, in Crossroad of Cultures. Studies in Liturgy and Patristics in Honor of Gabriele Winkler, ed. Hans-Jürgen Feulner, Elena Velkovska and Robert F. Taft, Orientalia Christiana Analecta 260 (Rome, 2000), 675–92.

22 On the order of the Office, see Longo, ‘Il testo’, 251–3, § 1f.; and generally, cf. 256, § 5: ‘And I say this not as rejecting the song and poetic creations [τὸ ᾆσμα καὶ τὰ ποιήματα] of the Catholic and Apostolic Church but because the troparia are not suitable for the hesychasts and those who repent their sins.’ Also see 265, § 12: ‘The song and the troparia are of no avail for those who live apart [τὸ γὰρ ᾆσμα καὶ τὰ τροπάρια οὐ λυσιτελοῦσι τοῖς μονάζουσι]’; cf. Stig Simeon Frøyshov, ‘La réticence à l’hymnographie chez des anachorètes de l’Égypte et du Sinaï du 5e au 8e siècles’, in L’hymnographie. Conférences Saint-Serge: XLVIe semaine d’études liturgiques, Paris, 29 Juin–2 Juillet 1999, ed. A[chille] M. Triacca and A[lessandro] Pistoia, Bibliotheca ‘Ephemerides Liturgicae’, Subsidia 105 (Rome, 2000), 229–45.

23 Cf. Charles Renoux, L’hymnaire de Saint-Sabas (see n. 2). The liturgical innovation may have gone along with the transition of St Sabas’ monastery from a lavriote to a more cenobitic type of monasticism.

24 J[oseph] van Haelst, ‘Cinq textes provenant de Khirbet Mird’, Ancient Society, 22 (1991), 297–317 + 7 plates, 310 + pl. 3, Palestine Archaeological Museum (now Rockefeller Museum), 2, now kept at KU Leuven University Library; cf. also Tinatin Chronz, ‘Das griechische Tropologion-Fragment aus dem Kastellion-Kloster und seine georgischen Parallelen’, Oriens Christianus, 92 (2008), 113–18.

25 Alexandra Nikiforova, ‘The Tropologion Sin. gr. ΝΕ/ΜΓ 56–5 of the Ninth Century: A New Source for Byzantine Hymnography’, Scripta & e-scripta, 12 (2013), 157–85, at 158; Tinatin Chronz and Alexandra Nikiforova, ‘Beobachtungen zum ältesten bekannten Tropologion-Codex Sinaiticus graecus ΜΓ 56+5 des 8.-9. Jhs. mit Erstedition ausgewählter Abschnitte’, in Σύναξις καθολική (see n. 1), 1: 147–74, at 148, with reference to further witnesses at 147f., n. 4; Alexandra Nikiforova, ‘The Oldest Greek Tropologion Sin.Gr. ΜΓ 56+5: A New Witness to the Liturgy of Jerusalem from outside Jerusalem with First Edition of the Text’, Oriens Christianus, 98 (2015), 138–73, at 139, with description of further witnesses in n. 7. Further parts have been and continue to be edited by Alexandra Nikiforova; cf. https://uni-regensburg.academia.edu/AlexandraNikiforova; cf. also Stig Simeon R. Frøyshov, Aleksandra Nikiforova and Natalia Smelova, ‘Byzantine Influence before Byzantinisation: The Tropologion Sinai Greek ΝΕ ΜΓ 56+5 Compared with the Georgian and Syriac Melkite Versions’, Religions, 14 (2023), 1363.

26 The κανὼν τῆς ψαλμωδίας as general designation of set psalms is not to be confused with the Canon of Odes, although the latter belong to the former in its developed state. The Iadgari regularly comprises proper chants for the Eucharistic synaxis, for Psalm 140 (141) at Vespers, for the nine biblical Odes (known as Canon) and the Laudes Psalms 148 (-150) at Matins plus material for special celebrations in the course of the week (Sunday Matins Gospel reading), for procession to the Cross at the end of Vespers, and for particular occasions of the liturgical year (e.g., Epiphany, Holy Week).

27 Research distinguishes between an ‘Old’ and a ‘New’ Iadgari; cf. Chronz and Nikiforova, ‘Beobachtungen’, 149. As early as in the later seventh or early eighth century, the Doctrina Patrum mentions a ‘New’ and ‘Old Tropologion’: Franz Diekamp, Doctrina Patrum de Incarnatione Verbi: Ein griechisches Florilegium aus der Wende des siebenten und achten Jahrhunderts (Münster, 1907), 242, in the context of a section-count (στιχισμός) of biblical and other books. These are the earliest attestations of the term τροπολόγιον included in the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, the next coming from Theodore the Studite (d. 826 CE), Epistles, 150 (Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae. Series Berolinensis 31/2, 268 Fatouros; probably soon after 816 CE, cf. ibid., 252*).

28 The complexity of the development is also stressed by Stig Simeon R. Frøyshov, ‘Rite of Jerusalem’, in The Canterbury Dictionary of Hymnology, www.hymnology.co.uk/r/rite-of-jerusalem, in spite of tendencies of early dating.

29 For a critical reassessment, see now Olkinuora, ‘Hymns and Liturgy’.

30 Cf. Franz Joseph Dölger, ‘Zur Symbolik des altchristlichen Taufhauses. 1. Das Oktogon und die Symbolik der Achtzahl. Die Inschrift des hl. Ambrosius im Baptisterium der Theklakirche von Mailand’, Antike und Christentum, 4 (1934), 153–87; Reinhart Staats, ‘Ogdoas als ein Symbol für die Auferstehung’, Vigiliae Christianae, 26 (1972), 29–52; Antonio Quacquarelli, L’Ogdoade patristica e suoi riflessi nella liturgia e nei monumenti, Quaderni di Vetera Christianorum 7 (Bari, 1973); Podskalsky, Gerhard, ‘Ruhestand oder Vollendung? Zur Symbolik des achten Tages in der griechisch-byzantinischen Theologie’, in Fest und Alltag in Byzanz. Hans-Georg Beck zum 18. Februar 1990, ed. Prinzing, Günter and Simon, Dieter (Munich, 1990), 157–66, 216–19Google Scholar.

31 Frøyshov, ‘The Early Development’; cf. Egeria, Itinerarium, 27. 1 (Fontes Christiani, 203, 224 Röwekamp).

32 Cf. Harald Buchinger, ‘On the Early History of Quadragesima: A New Look at an Old Problem and Some Proposed Solutions’, in Liturgies in East and West. Ecumenical Relevance of Early Liturgical Development: Acts of the International Symposium Vindobonense I, Vienna, November 17–20, 2007, ed. Hans-Jürgen Feulner, Österreichische Studien zur Liturgiewissenschaft und Sakramententheologie 6 (Vienna, 2013), 99–117 [= Studia Liturgica, 43 (2013), 321–41].

33 Patrologia Graeca, 95, 62–78; cf. Vassa Conticello, ‘Un florilège sur le Grand Carême attribué à Jean Damascène: Authenticité, sources, nouveaux fragments de Sévère d’Antioche’, in Philomathestatos: Studies in Greek and Byzantine Texts Presented to Jacques Noret for His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. B[art] Janssens, B[ram] Roosen and P[eter] Van Deun, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 137 (Leuven, 2004), 77–104; eadem, ‘La Quarantaine hiérosolymitaine dans le De sacris jejuniis de Jean Damascène’, in θυσία αἰνέσεως. Mélanges liturgiques offerts à la mémoire de l’archevêque Georges Wagner (1930–1993), ed. J[ob] Getcha and A[ndré] Lossky, Analecta Sergiana 2 (Paris, 2005), 77–94. The sequence of one week of forefast, six weeks (of Lent proper) and the week of the Passion is described as the ‘common order and law of the Church, which we know to be fulfilled also in the holy Anastasis of Christ our God (i.e., the church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem)’ (De sacris ieiuniis, 5f.; PG 95, 69–72).

34 Cf. Peter Jeffery, ‘Eastern Elements in Western Chant’, in this issue, and the bibliography referenced there; among the milestones of earlier research that did not yet have important sources, most notably the Iadgari, at hand, are Baumstark, Anton, ‘Der Orient und die Gesänge der Adoratio crucis’, Jahrbuch für Liturgiewissenschaft, 2 (1922), 1–17 Google Scholar, and Adolf Rücker, ‘Die Adoratio Crucis am Karfreitag in den orientalischen Kirchen’, in Miscellanea liturgica in honorem L. Cuniberti Mohlberg I, Bibliotheca ‘Ephemerides Liturgicae’ 22 (Roma, 1948), 379–406.

35 Egeria, Itinerarium, 37. 1–3 (FC 203, 248–50 Röwekamp).

36 Armenian Lectionary, 43 (PO 36/2 = 168, 280 [142] Renoux).

37 Georgian Lectionary, 703 (CSCO 188 = CSCO.I 9, 132 / CSCO 189 = CSCO.I 10, 105f. Tarchnischvili); cf. Sebastià Janeras, Le Vendredi-Saint dans la tradition liturgique byzantine: Structure et histoire de ses offices, Studia Anselmiana 99 = Analecta Liturgica 12 (Rome, 1988), 389–93.

38 Udzvelesi Iadgari, 197–205; French translation: Renoux, L’hymnaire de Saint-Sabas I, 369 [129]–384 [144]; on the Idiomela, cf. also Janeras, Le Vendredi-Saint, 235–77. The attribution of the latter to ‘our father Cyril, archbishop of Jerusalem’, attested first in the eighth/nineth-century Tropologion Sinai ΝΕ ΜΓ 56+5, fol. 135r (this information kindly provided by Alexandra Nikiforova), is probably anachronistic on the one hand because the pieces emerge only in the Georgian Lectionary and Iadgari and on the other hand because other attributions also occur (Cyril of Alexandria, Sophronius of Jerusalem); cf. Janeras, Le Vendredi-Saint, 250–9.

39 Cf. Louis van Tongeren, Exaltation of the Cross: Toward the Origins of the Feast of the Cross and the Meaning of the Cross in Early Medieval Liturgy, Liturgia Condenda 11 (Leuven, 2000), esp. 34f.; cf. also Janeras, Le Vendredi-Saint, 286. Ibid., 284f., following Leeb, Die Gesänge, 262–4, draws attention to an ‘oxitaj of the Cross’ in Sinai georg. 37, which seems to belong to the feast of the Exaltation of the Cross: Georgian Lectionary, Appendix 1, 114 (CSCO 204 = CSCO.I 13, 134 / CSCO 205 = CSCO.I 14, 108 Tarchnischvili); cf. lines b: ‘The Cross has been exalted today’, and c: ‘In the exaltation of the Cross the whole world congregates’. According to Holger A. Klein, Byzanz, der Westen und das “wahre” Kreuz: Die Geschichte einer Reliquie und ihrer künstlerischen Fassung in Byzanz und im Abendland, Spätantike – Frühes Christentum – Byzanz, Reihe B: Studien und Perspektiven 17 (Wiesbaden, 2004), 35f., the Greek term ὕψωσις τοῦ σταυροῦ is not attested before the 630s as designation of the hagiopolite feast, which would match the date of Heraklius’ recovery. An order for the veneration of the Cross on that day is provided only in the Lathal manuscript of the Georgian Lectionary, 1240 (CSCO 204 = CSCO.I 13, 43f. / CSCO 205 = CSCO.I 14, 37 Tarchnischvili); this ritual betrays cross-fertilisation with Good Friday not only through the subsequent washing of the Cross but also through its chants: while the first, ‘We venerate, o Christ, the lance’, refers to the Holy Lance, the second, ‘The ascent to the cross enlightened us’, appears in the Orthros of Good Friday in the Iadgari (Udzvelesi Iadgari, 198 / PO 224 = 50/3, 371 [131] Renoux), and the third, ‘Come, o faithful, and let us learn’, is provided at the end of the washing of the Cross on Good Friday both in the Georgian Lectionary (see n. 37) and in the Iadgari (Udzvelesi Iadgari, 205 / PO 224 = 50/3, 384 [144] Renoux); the fourth is the famous ‘We venerate your cross, o Christ (Crucem tuam)’, which in the Iadgari Oktoechos is part of the procession to the Cross following vespers (Udzvelesi Iadgari, 463 / Sources liturgiques 3, 291 Renoux; cf. also the longer recension in the third mode: Udzvelesi Iadgari, 402 / PO 231 = 52/1, 126 Renoux), while a variant occurs among the alternative chants for the fifth Ode on the feast of the Exaltation (Udzvelesi Iadgari, 305 / PO 237 = 53/3, 617 [343]f.). The chants provided by the Iadgari for the feast of the Exaltation of the Cross (Udzvelesi Iadgari, 298–313 / PO 237 = 53/3, 607–31 [133–57] Renoux) partly refer to its luminous apparition, celebrated by a feast of its own on 7 May, which is already furnished with a full proper scriptural canon in the Armenian Lectionary, 54 (PO 168 = 36/2, 332 [194] Renoux), whereas on the day after the Dedication (Enkainia), the later feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, the canon of the Dedication is to be repeated according to ibid., 68 (ibid., 362 [224]), while the venerable Cross is shown without any further liturgical elements. Is this borrowing of chants and motifs from the older feast not another sign of a relatively late arrangement of the chant proper for the Exaltation?

40 Renoux, Ch[arles], ‘Le Iadgari géorgien et le Šaraknoc‛ arménien’, Revue des études arméniennes. Nouvelle série, 24 (1993), 89–112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 Findikyan, Michael Daniel, ‘Armenian Hymns of the Church and the Cross’, St. Nersess Theological Review, 11 (2006), 63–105 Google Scholar; idem, ‘Armenian Hymns of the Holy Cross and the Jerusalem Encaenia’, Revue des études arméniennes. Nouvelle série, 32 (2010), 25–58; cf. also Nazénie Garibian de Vartavan, ‘Note sur l’article de M.D. Finidikyan’, Revue des études arméniennes. Nouvelle série, 33 (2011), 331–44.

42 Udzvelesi Iadgari, 314 / PO 237 = 53/3, 633 [159]f.; Georgian Lectionary, 1247; 1251; 1253; 1254 (CSCO 204 = CSCO.I 13, 45–7 / CSCO 205 = CSCO.I 14, 38f. Tarchnischvili).

43 Historical study of the Armenian hymnal (Šaraknoc‛) is inhibited not least by the lack of a critical edition; cf. Findikyan, ‘Armenian Hymns of the Church’, 69. Nerses Ter-Mikaëlian, Das armenische Hymnarium: Studien zu seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung (Leipzig, 1905), is based on the internal evidence of the received printed tradition.

44 I take this term from Stefano Parenti, Storia reigionale del rito bizantion. I: Costantinopoli e dintorni, Jerusalemer Theologisches Forum 47 (Münster, 2025), who further develops Comparative Liturgy in the school of Juan Mateos and Robert F. Taft. Daniel Galadza, ‘Holy Week and Hymnography between the Liturgy of the Holy City and South Italy’ (to be published in the series Studia Byzantina Upsaliensia, ed. Stratis Papaioannou, Charis Messis and Cristina Rognoni) also opts for a regional history of Hagiopolite and Byzantine hymnography.

45 Cf. various titles by Renoux quoted in n. 2, and idem, ‘Hymnographie géorgienne ancienne et Hymnaire de Saint-Sabas (Ve–VIIIe siècle)’, Irénikon, 80 (2007), 36–69, as well as Tinatin Chronz, ‘Review of Renoux, L’hymnaire de Saint-Sabas I’, Oriens Christianus, 95 (2011), 291–5. Most extant manuscripts of the Iadgari are preserved on Mount Sinai, although this says nothing about their actual origin; the famous scribe Ioane Zosime, who was active both in Mar Saba and then on Mount Sinai, played a role not only as copyist but also as compiler and redactor, as did his anonymous colleagues. Sinai ΜΓ 56+5 has been allocated to the monastery of St Arsenius in the Melkite patriarchate of Alexandria by Chronz and Nikiforova, ‘Beobachtungen’, and research is going on.