K. ŠTER RESACRALIZATION OF THE SACRED UDK 783.8:27-789-535 DOI: 10.4312/mz.50.2.157-180 Katarina Šter Muzikološki inštitut, Znanstvenoraziskovalni center Slovenske akademije znanosti in umetnosti, Ljubljana Institute of Musicology, Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Ljubljana Resacralization of the sacred: Carthusian liturgical plainchant and (re)biblicization of its texts Resakralizacija sakralnega: Bibliciranje besedil spevov kartuzijanske liturgije in kartuzijanski koral Prejeto: 6. januar 2013 Sprejeto: 27. marec 2013 Ključne besede: kartuzijanski koral, Biblija, re-sponzoriji, koralne tradicije Izvleček Kartuzijani so besedila svojih liturgičnih spevov izbirali in korigirali tako, da so bila čim bližja bibličnim besedilom. Primerjava responzorijev iz različnih tradicij (kartuzijanske, benediktinske, cistercijanske, clunyjske in akvitanske) pokaže, da so kartuzijani pri re-sakralizaciji repertoarja na področju besedil vedno spoštovali tudi tradicije melodij. Received: 6th January 2013 Accepted: 27th March 2013 Keywords: Carthusian plainchant, Bible, respon-sories, plainchant traditions Abstract The Carthusians selected and emended the traditional liturgical chant texts of the liturgy in order to bring them closer to the biblical texts. The comparison of the selected responsories from various traditions (Carthusian, Benedictine, Cistercian, Cluniac, Aqui-tanian) shows that it was respect for tradition of the texts as well as the melodies that led the Carthusians in their successful re-sacralization of the repertoire. The "sacred" and the "profane" are, at least from today's perspective, often represented as two contrasting and even mutually exclusive characteristics that can be applied to various things and phenomena. However, their relationship is far more complicated and difficult than something that can be described in terms of a simple dualism, even if one disregards the fact that, from a historical perspective, they are not the most appropriate terms for the majority of phenomena to which people like to apply them. The same can be claimed of the traditional understanding of the sacred and the pro- 157 MUZIKOLOSKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL L/2 fane (or "secular," although this does not have exactly the same meaning) in Western music, which is also commonly described in dualistic terms even though indicators of sacred-profane intermingling constantly pop up, causing scholars to pretend to be surprised because the reality does not fit into their categories. Nevertheless, observing musical phenomena from today's perspective and describing them with the terms "sacred" and "profane" (appropriately and clearly defined for each context) can be also a rewarding and enriching process. This is plausible only if one is aware that one is trying to describe music with one's own terms in order to understand it in a contemporary way. However, it is also important to be aware that in past ages people did not understand music the same way as we do today; even if they used the same words to describe it, these words might have had other meanings. This paper discusses a rather specific situation regarding the sacred-profane dichotomy in the context of Carthusian liturgical chant. It may not yield many new discoveries, but it will offer insight into the understanding of the sacred and into the processes of approaching it by means of text and music. The sacred chants used in the Carthusian liturgy were selected and taken from other traditions. If necessary, they were distilled to such an extent that they could be understood either as "sacred" (employing a meaning explained below)—or very close to it—and accepted, or else they were not sacred enough (i.e., they were too profane) to be accepted into the Carthusian tradition, even if they still functioned as sacred in other contexts. The Carthusians and their plainchant The Carthusian Order, which still exists today, is an interesting combination of a monastic and eremitic way of life. This strongly centrally-managed order has had a fascinating history. It was founded by St Bruno, who settled in the Grande Chartreuse near Grenoble in 1084 with six companions in order to live in solitude and prayer (but not with the intention of actually founding a new order), and the community found a strong supporter and benefactor in St Hugh, Bishop of Grenoble. At first the order grew but slowly, which is understandable due to its ascetic orientation. The order blossomed during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, especially in the German lands. Because of the great number of charterhouses, the whole community was divided into several provinces, which nevertheless were subordinated to the Grande Chartreuse, which was where the order was founded and its usual meeting place for General Chapters (except during the Great Western Schism between 1378 and 1417). The sixteenth century brought the crises of the Reformation and Turkish invasions in some territories. Many charterhouses were then abandoned or destroyed. After a relatively stable period in the seventeenth century and even later, the end of the eighteenth century brought some disastrous blows: the growing secularization caused by the French Revolution and later by the Napoleonic Wars in France and other countries, and less political tolerance of contemplative orders (i.e., the Josephinian reforms in Habsburg lands). Despite all this, the order has survived and continues to carry out its mission up to today. It has retained the most important aspects of its rigorousness and 158 K. ŠTER RESACRALIZATION OF THE SACRED liturgy and therefore the famous statement attributed to Pope Innocent XI still holds true: "Cartusia nunquam reformata, quia nunquam deformata."1 In 1127 or 1128 Guigo, the fifth prior of the Grande Chartreuse, wrote the first legislative document of the order, the clearly described Consuetudines (Customs) of the community in Grande Chartreuse which, with some additions through the centuries, has remained the basic rule of the order until today.2 Another important prior of this house was Anthelm, who organized the first General Chapter in 1140. The General Chapter of 1142 prescribed a uniform liturgy, including chants, for the whole order, and it can be assumed that all the Carthusian charterhouses had the same liturgy soon after that date, if not before.3 Liturgical issues were discussed already in Consuetudines and in the Prologue to the Carthusian antiphoner, which is attributed to Guigo or at least to a writer who was his contemporary.4 Eventually all the houses celebrated their liturgy following the example of the Grande Chartreuse; however, for the sung liturgy the process of liturgically unifying the texts was more urgent and more important than the unification of the melodies, which probably followed later. The Carthusians sing their own selection of the Gregorian chant repertoire in their liturgy.5 Their repertoire of liturgical chant was adapted mostly from the liturgical practices of the area surrounding where the order was founded (the surroundings of Lyon, Grenoble, Valence, and Vienne, with Aquitanian influences; Cluny, St-Ruf, Reims, and Sèche-Fontaine were also influential), but nevertheless it seems to be a very carefully and strictly selected compilation. The earliest preserved Carthusian liturgical musical manuscripts show that the very chants used in the order today were already being sung in the earliest days of the order, if not from its very origins.6 Even if they did use a secu- 1 For general information on the Carthusian Order and its history, see James Hogg, "The Carthusian Order from its foundation to the present day", in Analecta cartusiana, ed. James Hogg et al., Analecta Cartusiana 225 (Salzburg: Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik der Universität Salzburg, 2005), 7-26. Among Slovenian literature, see Metod Benedik, "Zgodovinski oris kartuzijanskega reda", in Benediktinci, kartuzijani, cistercijani: Redovništvo na Slovenskem, vol. 1, ed. France M. Dolinar (Ljubljana: Kartuzija Pleterje and Cisterca Stična, 1984), 87-106; Jože Mlinaric, Kartuziji Žiče in Jurklošter (Maribor: Založba Obzorja, 1991), 9-15. 2 On the Consuetudines and the following legislative documents of the order, see Jean Picard, "La liturgie cartusienne, source principale de spiritualité: éléments de recherches sur les sources de son histoire", in Historia et spiritualitas cartusiensis: Acta colloquii quarti internationali, ed. Jan de Grauwe (Destelbergen and Saint-Etienne: Centre Européen de Recherches sur les Congrégations et Ordres Monastiques, 1983), 289-301. 3 On general chapters see Picard, "Liturgie cartusienne"; on the organizational structure of the order, see Léo Moulin, "Note sur les particularités de l'ordre cartusien", in Historia et spiritualitas cartusiensis: Acta colloquii quarti internationali, ed. Jan de Grauwe (Destelbergen and Saint-Etienne: Centre Européen de Recherches sur les Congrégations et Ordres Monastiques, 1983), 283-288. 4 (Un) Chartreux, "L'Office choral et le chant aux premiers temps de la Chartreuse: Un commentaire du Prologue de Guigues à l'antiphonaire", in International Musicological Society Study Group Cantus Planus: Papers Read at the 6th Meeting, Eger, Hungary, 1993, vol. 1 (Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Institute for Musicology, 1995), 271-301. 5 For basic information on Carthusian plainchant see Mary Berry, "Carthusian Monks," in Grove Music Online, ed. L. Macy, available online: (the updated version of this title in Grove is being prepared at the moment by Thomas Op de Coul); see also John A. Emerson, "Plainchant, 7: Chant in the religious orders" in Grove Music Online, ed. L. Macy, available online: . Much valuable information can also be found in Amand Degand, "Chartreux (Liturgie des)", in Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, vol. 3/1, ed. Fernand Cabrol and Henri Leclercq (Paris: Librairie Letouzey et Ané, 1948), 1045-1071; see also Heinrich Hüschen, "Kartäuser", in Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. 7, ed. Friedrich Blume (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1958), 706-714 (the same article has also been published in somewhat shortened form in the second edition of Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart). 6 For the origins of Carthusian chant, see Hansjakob Becker, Die Responsorien des Kartäuserbreviers: Untersuchungen zu Urform und Herkunft des Antiphonars der Kartause, Münchener theologische Studien 39 (München: Max Hueber Verlag, 1971); Emmanuel Cluzet, Sources et genèse du missel cartusien, Analecta cartusiana 99/34 (Salzburg: Institut für Anglistik und 159 MUZIKOLOSKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL L/2 lar form of the antiphoner, it had been "monasticized" by the time of Guigo; and so, in his famous prologue, Guigo speaks of a monastic antiphoner that is probably the same one known today in the same form.7 The Bible as the source of the Carthusian chant texts In his work Die Responsorien des Kartäuserbreviers, Hansjakob Becker defined four basic criteria for this process of antiphoner chant selection. These well-known principles or criteria, which can to a certain extent also be applied to other Office chants8 as well as Gradual chants, are: i. The biblical criterion, ii. The criterion of simplicity, iii. The criterion of tradition, and iv. The criterion of ordering of the chants in the offices.9 Becker's work emerged as the result of a thorough study of the Carthusian antiphoner texts, and it still remains the best-founded explanation of the Carthusian antiphoner in its relation to other traditions. Even if the principles of the Carthusian chant selection were known to some extent before Becker, he was the one to present them most systematically and methodically. This holds especially for the criterion of chant ordering, with which Becker proved the previously unknown connection of the Carthusian antiphoner with other traditions. Among Becker's criteria, the "biblical" criterion, which concerns the Carthusian chant texts, is the most important one. Becker confirmed that the Bible was the only valid authority for the texts for Carthusian plainchant, and so the Carthusian liturgy accepted only chants with biblical texts. Only the biblical words had enough author-ity—in other words: were sacred enough—to be chanted. Non-biblical texts such as apocryphal texts, and poetic texts such as sequences and tropes in the Gradual, or texts based on the legends of the saints were excluded from the Carthusian selection. They made only a few exceptions for chants with texts that had a very long and venerable tradition, whereby they had accrued comparative authority. Such were some hymns of the antiphoner (only four at the beginning, and later more were allowed) and the fa- Amerikanistik der Universität Salzburg, 1996), 115-118. About the regional influences on the Carthusian liturgy, see also Degand, "Chartreux", and Arthur Archdale King, Liturgies of the Religious Orders (London and New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1955). - Becker's thesis that the Carthusian Office had been a secular one at first, with nine lessons and nine great responsories for the Matins, with three lessons and responsories added later, found great but not general approval; for a thesis about the monastic origin of the Carthusian office, see Benoît Lambres "L'antiphonaire des chartreux", in Études grégoriennes, vol. 14, ed. Joseph Gajard (Solesmes: Abbaye Saint-Pierre de Solesmes, 1973), 214-216. 7 Hansjakob Becker, "'Cartusia nunquam reformata quia nunquam deformata': Liturgiereformen bei den Kartäusern in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart", in Liturgiereformen: Historische Studien zu einem bleibenden Grundzug des christlichen Gottesdienstes, ed. Martin Klöckner and Benedikt Kranemann, Liturgiewissenschaftlichen Quellen und Forschungen 88/1 (Münster: Aschendorff, 2002), 336-337. 8 A study of the application of this principle to a group of the antiphons was carried out by John B. Wickstrom, "The Antiphons adpsalmos of Carthusian Lauds", in Kartäuserliturgie und Kartäuserschriftum, vol. 1, ed. James Hogg, Analecta cartusiana 116/1 (Salzburg: Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik der Universität Salzburg, 1988), 7-33. 9 Becker, Responsorien, 90-110. Even though there were some second thoughts on the exact number and exact contents of these criteria, they did not seem to put their existence into any question, and the criteria themselves were readily accepted as a welcome apparatus for understanding and research of Carthusian plainchant, especially of the antiphoner chants. 160 K. ŠTER RESACRALIZATION OF THE SACRED mous advent O-antiphons. Even the small Carthusian Sanctorale, which expanded only slightly over the course of the centuries, accepted new chants with new texts only rarely.10 The majority of new feasts in the Carthusian liturgy usually consisted of common chants for related occasions; thus, the Finding of St Stephen's relics was celebrated, but with ordinary chants for St Stephen, and even the feast of St Stephen itself consisted partly of the proper chants and partly of the common chants for one martyr.11 Such a strict attitude towards the source of the chanted texts puts even more weight on the importance of the remaining texts selected for chanting. In addition, the chants are sung during the common liturgy of the monks, who are devoted to prayer and work in silence and solitude at other times of the day. The moment of chanting surpasses the silence and solitude and replaces these with the word of God, and so the chanted words are given a more elevated status than spoken words (which should be rare, as the rule prohibits too much communication and speaking among solitary monks). The biblical criterion was not a Carthusian invention. It was strongly connected with their sense of tradition and authority. They did not want to create anything new; quite the opposite, they wanted to return to the pristine sources of the monastic and eremitic life; and what greater "source of sources" could there be than the Bible, even if there were some other respected works (such as the works of the Desert Fathers)? Here they were not the first to think this way; a strong influence for the Carthusian biblical principle was definitely Agobard, an Archbishop of Lyons in the ninth century. In his late works De divina psalmodia and De correctione antiphonarii, among others,12 he strived for reforms of the antiphoner and its chants and he was very much against non-biblical texts for the chants.13 The Carthusians took many of his principles, but they were not as radical; Amand Degand mentions the example of the Tenebrae responsory, which was rejected by Agobard and yet accepted by the Carthusians.14 In comparison to other traditions (the responsories from the Benedictine and Cluniac traditions), the Carthusian version is shorter and, even if all traditions combine New Testament texts, it is the Carthusian version that pays special attention to the double exclamation "deus meus," which is found in the Bible; other traditions do not repeat the exclamation twice. Agobard might have also influenced the Carthusians' opinion on musical performance of the liturgy. The famous bishop, in commenting on theatrical (and also sung) performances in church, strongly opposed any excess in the performance of 10 About the Carthusian Sanctorale, see Degand, "Chartreux", and Jacques Hourlier and Benoît du Moustier, "Le calendrier cartusien", in Études grégoriennes, vol. 2, ed. Joseph Gajard (Solesmes: Abbaye Saint-Pierre de Solesmes, 1957), 151-161. 11 In his study of the antiphon variants, Falvy included two Carthusian manuscripts: UB Graz 7 and Melk Stiftsbibliothek 1139, both from the fifteenth century; the latter, however, is probably not Carthusian. Except for the antiphon Misso Herodes (which has a biblical text), all other antiphons (honouring the Holy Virgin, St Michael and St Martin) are missing from the Carthusian manuscript. See Zoltàn Falvy, "Über Antiphonvarianten aus dem Österreichisch-Ungarisch-Tschechoslowakischen Raum", Studien zur Musikwissenschaft 26 (1964), 9-24. - However, even in the Carthusian tradition one finds some exceptions with newly written texts and composed offices; such are the works of two Basle Carthusians: the Prior Heinrich Arnoldi from the fifteenth century and Thomas Kress from the sixteenth century. 12 Patrologia Latina, vol. 104 (which contains also Agobard's opera omnia), ed. Jacques-Paul Migne, 329-340 (De correctione antiphonarii), and 325-330 (De divina psalmodia). 13 E. Debroise, "Agobard", in Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, vol. 1/1, ed. Fernand Cabrol et al. (Paris: Librairie Letouzey et Ané, 1924), 972-976. On Agobard's thoughts, see also Allen Cabaniss, Agobard of Lyons: Churchman and Critic (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1953), 93. 14 Degand, "Chartreux," 1050. 161 MUZIKOLOSKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL L/2 the chant, and this was his probably his opinion on chanting in general. The attention should not be focused on the singers, but only on God; the singers should sing more with their hearts than with their voices.15 This thought also is present in the Carthusian rite and its aesthetics of selecting and performing Gregorian chant. Other criteria of Carthusian chant selection Before continuing with the connection between biblical texts and Carthusian chant texts, here is a brief discussion of Becker's other criteria.16 The principle of simplicity refers to Guigo's reduction of the repertoire. He claimed that the Carthusians excluded melodies that were too demanding to be learned by heart and performed in such small communities, but they did not change or reform the musical shape of the chants once they were accepted. Also, with the adoption of the biblical criterion, the quantity of acceptable repertoire was already significantly reduced; in addition, the order's Sanc-torale with proper chants was not large. Thus, in comparison to other traditions the Carthusian chant repertoire seems relatively small. The criterion of tradition means that the chants are taken from older traditions. Only twenty per cent of the responsory repertoire is not able to be brought into connection with the antiphoners discussed by Hesbert in his Corpus antiphonalium of-ficii. But since the Carthusians collected their chants from different sources and traditions, not from one prototype, their repertoire encompasses the echoes of various monastic and regionally important traditions. The criterion of chant ordering is very much connected to the biblical criterion. The chants are sorted and ordered by their texts: the textual ordering of the Bible and relations between the biblical texts are of great importance for the chant texts. This criterion caused the greatest confusion regarding the chants of the Carthusian rite: because of it the Carthusian chants appear in a different order than the chants of other traditions. Re-sacralization of the texts of the Carthusian chant: (re) biblicization The Bible was accepted as the only authoritative source for the texts of the Carthusian liturgy. With the adoption of the biblical criterion, the number of the chants acceptable for the Carthusian rite became relatively small, and with an utterly strict adoption of this criterion it would had been even smaller. However, the Carthusians also accepted many chants with only partially biblical texts: in these the Bible texts were mixed with other words, or very different passages from the Bible were glued together. The Carthusians also adjusted some of these chants for their own use in a special way: they tried to bring their texts closer to the biblical words and order. This process is 15 Patrologia Latina, 334 B-C; see translation and comments in Donnalee Dox, The Idea of the Theater in Latin Christian Thought: Augustine to the Fourteenth Cenutry (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2004), 65-66. 16 See Becker, Responsorien, 98-110. 162 K. ŠTER RESACRALIZATION OF THE SACRED called the "biblicization" (or, in some cases, "re-biblicization") of the texts, and with it Carthusian chant achieved one of its most characteristic features. Chants with texts that went too much astray from the Bible were excluded from the Carthusian compilation right away. But some of them were deemed to be acceptable with the text changes.17 Sometimes the changes in the texts were small and sometimes more extensive, reaching into the very essentials. This process also included different ordering of the textual passages: it tried to bring them closer to the original biblical succession of text passages and events. The end result in the Carthusian repertoire is not as strict as the principle itself. The texts of the Carthusian chants are based on the Bible, but some do not have completely biblical texts. There is only the question of lesser or greater fidelity to the Scripture, and once the text crossed the limit it was to be corrected or its problematic passage(s) were to be replaced; if it crossed another limit, it was best eliminated (together with its chant). Considering that the Bible was the most sacred, holy text, preferred above all the other sacred texts, this process can be referred to the "re-sacralization of the sacred." Connections between text and music Along with the various textual changes caused by the adoption of the biblical criterion, various musical changes also had to be made. The Carthusian chant texts have been relatively well-researched in general, especially by Becker, but there has been no comprehensive study that shows how the music was affected by the formation of the Carthusian text tradition. The (re)biblicization of the texts also has nothing to do with the fact that attending to the uniformity of the melodies in the order came later than concern for the unified texts; the existence of local melodic variants was not connected with the process of (re)biblicizing the texts. But here again, the order sought connections to tradition and authority: their adaptations tried to retain as much of the original contours and characteristics of individual chants as possible, and they never carried out a musical reform such as that of the Cistercians, for example.18 So what was this new music, then? The picture of the new textual and musical unities must become clearer in comparison. Compared to the chants of other traditions that retained the old texts, even if those were already remote from the original Bible texts, the Carthusian texts show how 17 In Guigo's own words from the Prologue: "Wherefore we have considered that certain things should be removed from the Antiphonary, or shortened. Things, namely, which for the most part, were either superfluous or were unsuitably composed, inserted or added, or had but little or doubtful guarantee for their authenticity, or none at all; or were guilty of levity, awkwardness or falsity. Further, anyone who carefully reads the Sacred Scriptures, namely, the Old and New Testaments cannot but know whether what has been emended or added is correct." Cited after Monk of Parkminster, "The Carthusian Liturgy: Part One", Magnificat: A Liturgical Quarterly 2, no. 12 (1941), 5-11. Available on the website: . 18 On the Cistercian plainchant reform, see Claire Maître, "L'enseignement de la musique au XlIe siècle chez les cisterciens", in L'enseignement de la musique au Moyen Age et à la Renaissance: Rencontres du Royaumont; Colloque 5 et 6 juillet 1985 (Royaumont: Editions Royaumont, 1985), 81-85. See also Manuel Pedro Ferreira, "La réforme cistercienne du chant liturgique revisitée: Guy d'Eu et les premiers livres de chant cisterciens", Revue de Musicologie 89, no. 1 (2003): 47-56. 163 MUZIKOLOSKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL L/2 they became "re-sacralized" through their "(re)biblicization." In addition, it is possible to see how this process influenced the music. The results cannot offer a final formula regarding how such procedures were developed, but they nevertheless enable a better understanding of the relationship between the sacred texts and their music in a specific monastic tradition of the late Middle Ages. In his article on Carthusian chant and the Prüll Charterhouse, David Hiley offered one of the rare examples of a melodic comparison between the Carthusian and other (general) traditions (for which the Cistercian example was selected) on the example of the Epiphany responsory. Even in one single chant the re-biblicization in the Carthusian version was obvious. The traditional version consists of passages taken from the Gospel of St Matthew (2:1 and 2:2). The connection between them is quite loose with regard to the end of the response and the beginning of the verse, but then the ending of the verse flows smoothly into the repeated part of the response. The Carthusians omitted the Matt 2:2 passage and their response with its verse consists only from the text of Matt 2:1. The shorter text means that less music is needed, but even so the musical phrases seem to flow quite smoothly from one to another.19 Hiley's comparison shows how an already "good" biblical chant text, composed from two Bible passages, had been put into an even more correct relationship to the Bible in regard to the succession of the Bible text passages. But what about other examples? It seems that the possibilities of "(re)biblicization" are: i. Unifying the Bible passages and their order; ii. Re-biblicization the quasi-biblical texts that have gone astray from the Bible version; iii. Replacing the non-biblical texts or text passages with Bible texts. The Office of the Prophets as an example of (re)biblicization A series of the responsories from a selected office—the Office of the Prophets for the summer readings—is shown here in comparison with various sources, including a Carthusian antiphoner.20 It can be logically expected that the texts for this office are taken mostly from the Old Testament and that they are biblical; but it is also important to check if potential differences between the traditions can spring out of the Carthusian biblical criterion. The order of the responsories in various traditions is shown in Table 1. Next to the Carthusian antiphoner from the thirteenth century (Graz 273), there are representatives of other contemplative monastic traditions (Benedictine, Cluniac, and Cistercian antiphoners: Graz 30, Paris 12044, and Paris n.a.lat. 1411); there are also some Aquita-nian manuscripts that may have had more local connections to the Carthusian tradition (Paris 1090 and Toledo 44.2). The Carthusians and the Cistercians have twelve respon- 19 David Hiley, "Der Gregorianische Gesang bei den Kartäusern und im Kloster Prüll", in 1000Jahre Kultur in Karthaus-Prüll: Geschichte undForschung vor den Toren Regensburgs; Festhschrift zum Jubiläum des ehemaligen Klosters, ed. Bezirk Oberpfalz (Regensburg: Verlag Friedrich Pustet, 1997), 239-240. 20 For the shortened names and descriptions of the manuscripts used in the comparison, see Sources and bibliography below. 164 K. ŠTER RESACRALIZATION OF THE SACRED sories with verses for this office and all the other manuscripts have more responsories; there are more opportunities to find a chant common to the Carthusian tradition and a tradition with more chants. In general, seen from the point of view of the twelve Carthusian responsories, the Carthusian antiphoner has eight or nine responses in common with the other traditions; this represents sixty-six or seventy-five per cent of the Carthusian Prophets' Office. The Carthusian antiphoner has four to six verses in common with other traditions (33-50%), even if there are altogether more verses than responses in the responsories. The ordering of the responsories with their verses is also interesting. Even if there are differences among the antiphoners of the other traditions, in these the individual respon-sories can be found in the same places of this office. Because of the ordering-chants criterion described above, this cannot be said for the Carthusian antiphoner. Table 2 shows the responsory texts of the Carthusian Prophets' Office (orthography is taken from Graz 273, whereas I have added the punctuation). Their ordering is connected mostly with the strict succession of individual texts from the Old Testament. This order is interrupted only by a Psalm-text responsory at the end of each Nocturn (see the second column of Table 2). On first glance they seem to be out of place, but they are standard in the Carthusian tradition and one of its unique characteristics (other traditions do not have the same phenomenon): these responsories can be found first on the second Sunday after Epiphany / Sundays per annum, and later in many other places in the antiphoner, such as in other offices of the summer readings, at the end of each Nocturn.21 Table 2 also shows underlined text passages for which differences in the texts of the same responsories can be found between Graz 273 (Carthusian tradition) and other antiphoners. Next to the examples of the types of the textual differences, the musical differences are described. i. The Carthusian tradition often starts the repeated part of the response (repeten-dum) in a different place than other traditions (in the Office of the Prophets); the latter begin at places such as "tota die," "facere," "non," "quia"). In the responsory Super muros, the non-Carthusian antiphoners begin their repetendum with "tota die," whereas Graz 273 begins it with "laudantes" (other antiphoners have "laudare" here). The non-Carthusian traditions finish the previous musical phrase on the note 'd' and begin the repetendum with the note 'c,' while Graz 273 has the note 'c' as the final note of the previous phrase and also as the beginning of the repetendum. However, in this manuscript this place might have been an emendation in order to make the passage into the repetendum smoother. ii. The non-Carthusian antiphoners sometimes use a completely different word, compound word, or word order than the Carthusian antiphoner ("laudantes," "verun-tamen rursus," "peccare in conspectu domini," "redimet," "liberabit"). In the responsory Fluctus tui, the compound word "veruntamen rursus" of the Carthusian version appears as "putas" in the non-Carthusian antiphoners (see). This is also the place of the beginning of the repetendum; here it begins in the same place in all traditions, but with 21 It was precisely this combination of the biblical ordering of the responsory texts on the one hand and the appearance of the "general" responsories at the end of each of the three Nocturns on the other that led Becker to his assumptions about the secular origin of the Carthusian office (secular offices have three responsories per each Nocturn). 165 MUZIKOLOSKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL L/2 different texts because the Carthusian version is re-biblicized. The beginning of the "veruntamen rursus" in the Carthusian tradition is also musically different than in the non-Carthusian tradition: it begins on the note 'f while others start with 'g.' All phrases have the same musical ending before going on to "videbo." But there is another strange occurrence: the phrase before the repetendum ends with the clivis 'gf' in two antiphoners, including the Carthusian one. At least in the Carthusian case the passage to the repetendum in the response part is smoother. iii. In some places the non-Carthusian antiphoners have an added text or a completely different longer text passage than the Carthusian antiphoner ("et quid eligam ignoro"). The example from the responsory Angustiae mihi sunt is described below. iv. The non-Carthusian antiphoners sometimes use a different responsory verse even if the response is the same. The verses are also bound to different traditions, so they themselves cannot be representatives of the biblical reliability of the text. Nevertheless, a short glance at the verses reveals that the Carthusian responsory verses are closer to the Bible than those of the other traditions, or at least that they tried to connect the biblical passages of the responses and verses more tightly. Such is the case with the verse of the responsory Fluctus tui, which is taken from the Book of Jonas (Jon 2:4-5). In the Carthusian tradition, Jonas' text in the verse is a direct continuation of the response, and in other traditions a few words are omitted. The melodies of the verses are mostly standardized, but even then it would not make much sense to compare them in detail because their texts might be very different. The responsory Angustiae mihi in different traditions and its biblical correctness The responsory Angustiae mihi (Example 2) is the eleventh responsory of the Carthusian Prophets' Office series; with this, the Carthusian tradition is one of the rare traditions that positions this responsory here (see also Table 1). In the list of sources indexed by Cantus, there are only two manuscripts that put this responsory in the eleventh place.22 It is true that many sources have not been indexed by Cantus yet, and considering that the position of this chant varies from source to source depending on the tradition, the final word had not yet been said—but yet it seems that the principle of (biblical) ordering was the reason for this position of the responsory Angustiae mihi. The responsory is composed in the eighth mode in all the sources included in Example 2. In Graz 30, the majority of the response (which, after repeating the repetendum part, concludes the piece) is in the eighth mode, the musical phrases coincide exactly with those in Graz 273. However, the last phrase in Graz 30 is written one note higher and so it ends on the note 'a,' which is probably an error. The text of the responsory Angustiae mihi is given below: after the response part of the responsory, there follows the repetendum (in italics) which is repeated after the 22 These are Roma, Biblioteca Vallicelliana, C.5, and Firenze (Florence), Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana, Conv. sopp. 560; the positions of other chants of the Carthusian tradition do not coincide with these two sources. Cantus database, . 166 K. ŠTER RESACRALIZATION OF THE SACRED verse; V stands for the verse: Carthusian tradition R Angustiae mihi sunt undique. Other traditions R Angustiae mihi sunt undique et quid eligam ignoro. Sed melius est michi incidere in manus hominum quam peccare in Melius est michi incidere in manus hominum quam derelinquere legem dei mei. conspectu domini. [Dan 13:22-23 = Sus 1:22-23] [Dan 13:22-23 = Sus 1:22-23; Phil 1:22] V Si enim hoc egero, mors mihi est, V Si enim hoc egero, mors mihi est, si si autem non egero, non effugiam autem non egero, non effugiam manus manus vestras. vestras. Sed melius... Melius est... [Dan 13:22] [Dan 13:22] The Vulgate version is as follows [Dan 1:22-23]: Ingemuit Susanna, et ait: Angustiae sunt mihi undique: si enim hoc egero, mors mihi est: si autem non egero, non effugiam manus vestras. Sed melius est mihi absque opere incidere in manus vestras, quam peccare in conspectu Domini. The English translation is taken from the King James Bible [Sus 1:22-23]: Then Susanna sighed, and said, I am straitened on every side: for if I do this thing, it is death unto me: and if I do it not I cannot escape your hands. It is better for me to fall into your hands, and not do it, than to sin in the sight of the Lord. The words of the responsory are spoken by Susanna, whom two old men are trying to falsely accuse of adultery because they desired her themselves and she would not indulge them. The prophet Daniel interrogates the two men separately and finds great inconsistencies in their stories, so Susanna's life and reputation are saved. For the beginning of the response and for the whole verse, line 22 (Daniel) is used in all sources. But the non-Carthusian sources add words "et quid eligam ignoro" which cannot be found in the Vulgate in the Book of Daniel. They are taken from St Paul's letter to the Philippians (1:22). Here Paul writes about his preaching Christ's works and about his hopes that Christ himself will be glorified through Paul's preaching. The context of Paul's words in the English translation is as follows (the King James Bible): "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not." The Carthusian source does not contain these words, which could perhaps explain Susanna's distress a little better and would not be unsuitable by their contents (the dilemma of choosing), yet would mix together two completely different biblical passages coming from two different contexts. Their connection might be meaningful, but the Carthusians preferred the pure Old-Testament version. The repetendum part of the response brings new differences between the versions. The Carthusian version remains closer to the Bible text although it does not retain it 167 MUZIKOLOSKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL L/2 strictly: the biblical words "absque opere" are omitted in the Carthusian responsory, and instead of "manus vestras" there is "manus hominum." Both these things seem to be taken from the tradition, because they are also found in the Benedictine and other antiphoners. However, the Benedictine version does not stay with the biblical words strictly to the end: it says a similar thing, but in other words (the Carthusians have "pec-care in conspectu domini," and the Benedictines have "derelinquere legem dei mei"). All these words can be found in different parts of the Bible, but the Carthusian version accepted only more unified combinations. Thus, here the Carthusians have either taken the more biblical tradition or re-biblicized the text, which has gone astray from one individual Bible passage. What about the music of this piece? The darker colour in Example 2 indicates the places in which other traditions differ from the Carthusian one. The lighter colour shows the places where differences among other traditions are found. For the first part of the response there are no significant differences; overall it appears that different traditions tend to employ the notes 'b' and 'c' differently. The first phrase is concluded on the note 'f' and the second one (found only in the non-Carthusian traditions) on the note 'a,' which represents a contrast in the eighth mode. It is interesting that the non-Carthusian traditions begin the repetendum on the note 'f,' only the Carthusian tradition has a clivis 'af,' as if wanting to make up for the loss of the previous phrase ending with 'a' in other traditions; or perhaps it wants to stress the word "sed" with which it replaces and summarizes the "missing part" which came from Paul's letter in other traditions. And whereas the other traditions reach for the note 'a' in "melius est," the Carthusian tradition heads directly towards the note 'g,' which is reached a little later in the versions of other traditions. Here there are only small, but characteristic melodic differences: they concern the use of the whole tone or semitone between the notes 'b'/'bb' and 'c' or 'e' and 'f,' some notes are repeated in some traditions and in others they are not.23 But in the place of the words "peccare" in the Carthusian tradition and "derelinquere" in the others it is not possible to find any difference in the music in spite of the textual difference (except for smaller variants in some traditions; but these variants are not connected to the use of the certain text). There are also some typical uses of the series of the notes 'f,' 'a,' and 'c' as a variant of the series 'g,' 'a,' and 'c' (on the words "in conspectu" or "legem"). This note series represents a typical beginning of the phrase in the eighth mode (and the eighth psalm tone as well). The Carthusian tradition shares the 'f,' 'a' and 'c' notes with the Aquitanian and Cluniac traditions whereas other antiphoners have 'g,' 'a' and 'c.' There might be a scribal error in Graz 30 because the end of the response is written one note higher than the melody in other traditions, and the chant does not end on the "correct" final note. 23 In this particular manuscript of the Carthusian tradition (Graz 273) the b-flats are usually later additions. 168 K. ŠTER RESACRALIZATION OF THE SACRED Concerning the verse, one can observe that some traditions stay longer on the recitation note of the eighth mode (this is also connected with the choice of the note 'b' or 'c'), but the differences here are slight. These differences usually represent local variants or even the variant of one single monastery. They have no connection to the lesser or greater biblical reliability of the text. Conclusion In the Carthusian tradition, the word of God, the Bible and its coherence or unity-its contents and form, so to speak—are more sacred than newly-written texts, however inspired, pious, and accepted for sacred use they might be elsewhere. The Carthusian "re-sacralization" of the sacred texts means not only excluding non-biblical texts, but also putting aside many later constructions and reconstructions of the Bible texts, such as re-ordering and mixing of the biblical texts or paraphrases of them. No detail is too small to be left behind; the application of the biblical criterion is thorough, yet flexible. In regard to music of the re-sacralized text passages one could speak about the "principle of the tradition" as well: even the places that were textually changed tried to retain the shape, ordering, and structure of the standard musical phrases. Some smaller variants only make the Carthusian tradition closer to some local traditions of the order's homeland. If necessary, some very small procedures are taken to make the melodic passages between individual phrases smooth. The Carthusians did not compose new chants; instead, they tried to take for them what they considered to be the best of the tradition based on the primacy of the text: the authentic and the authoritative versions of the texts that were guaranteed by the Bible itself, and the valued Gregorian melodies. Sewn together with as few stitches as necessary, the new "re-creations" of the chants, with biblicized texts and adapted melodies, are liturgical music that is condensed and unified in its contents, and at the same time aesthetically effective. Thus, the (re)bibli-cization of the Carthusian chants gave them firmer textual ground without impoverishing their musical form. Sources and databases Graz 29 (A-Gu 29): Universitätsbibliothek Graz, Hs. 29, Antiphonarium benedicti-num pars hiemalis, monastery St. Lambrecht, ca. 1400. Benedictine (monastic) tradition. The index of the manuscript is available in the Cantus database. The manuscript is available on the website of the University Library of Graz: . Graz 30 (A-Gu 30): Universitätsbibliothek Graz, Hs. 30, Antiphonarium benedicti-num pars aestiva, monastery St. Lambrecht, ca. 1400. Benedictine (monastic) tradition. The index of the manuscript is available in the Cantus database. The manuscript is available on the website of the University Library of Graz: . 169 MUZIKOLOSKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL L/2 Graz 273 (A-Gu 273): Universitätsbibliothek Graz, Hs. 273, Antiphonarium cartus-iense, Zice (Seitz), between 1271 and 1318. Carthusian (monastic) tradition. The manuscript is available on the website of the University Library of Graz: . Paris lat. 1090 (F-Pn lat. 1090): Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France - Département des manuscrits, fonds lat. 1090, Antiphonarium Massiliense, antiphoner from the Marseille cathedral, between 1190 and 1200. Aquitanian (cathedral) tradition. The index of the manuscript is available in the Cantus database. The manuscript is available online in Gallica: . Paris n.a.lat. 1411 (F-Pn n. a. lat. 1411): Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France - Nouvelles acquisitions latines 1411, antiphoner from the monastery Santa Maria de Mo-rimondo, 12th century. Cistercian (monastic) tradition. The index of the manuscript is available in the Cantus database. The facsimile was published in: Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Nouvelles acquisitions latines 1411: Un antipho-naire Cistercien pour le temporal XIIe sciècle ; Introduction, table, index, edited by Claire Maître. Le Mécénat Musical Société Générale and La Direction de la Danse au ministère de la Culture: Poitiers, 2009. Paris lat. 12044 (F-Pn lat. 12044): Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France - Département des manuscrits, lat. 12044, Antiphonarium ad usum sancti Mauri Fossatensis, antiphoner from the monastery of St.-Maur-des-Fossés, early 12th century. Cluni-ac (monastic) tradition. The index of the manuscript is available in the Cantus database. The manuscript is available online in Bibliothèque numérique Gallica (digital collections of the Bibliothèque nationale de France): . Toledo 44.2 (E-Tc 44.2): Toledo, Archivo y Biblioteca Capitulares, Aquitanian (cathedral) tradition. The index of the manuscript is available in the Cantus database and in: Olexy, Ronald T., Joseph P. Metzinger, Keith Falconer, Lila Collamore, and Richard Rice (with the introduction by Ruth Steiner). An Aquitanian antiphoner: Toledo, Biblioteca capitular, 44.2: Printouts from an Index in Machine-Readable Form. Ottawa: The Institue of Medieaeval Music, 1992. Cantus database, . (Accessed between April 2013 and September 2014.) Gallica:, Bibliothèque nationale de France, . (Accessed between April 2013 and September 2014.) King James Bible. The ARTFL Project: Multilingual Bibles. . Latin Vulgate. The ARTFL Project: Multilingual Bibles. . 170 K. ŠTER RESACRALIZATION OF THE SACRED Bibliography Becker, Hansjakob. '"Cartusia nunquam reformata quia nunquam deformata': Liturgiereformen bei den Kartäusern in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart." In Liturgiereformen: Historische Studien zu einem bleibenden Grundzug des christlichen Gottesdienstes, edited by Martin Klöckner and Benedikt Kranemann, 325-345. Liturgiewissenschaftlichen Quellen und Forschungen 88/1. Münster: Aschendorff, 2002. Becker, Hansjakob. Die Responsorien des Kartäuserbreviers: Untersuchungen zu Urform und Herkunft des Antiphonars der Kartause. Münchener theologische Studien 39. München: Max Hueber Verlag, 1971. Benedik, Metod. "Zgodovinski oris kartuzijanskega reda." In Benediktinci, kartuzijani, cistercijani: Redovnistvo na Slovenskem, vol. 1, edited by France M. Dolinar, 87-106. Ljubljana: Kartuzija Pleterje and Cisterca Sticna, 1984. Berry, Mary. "Carthusian monks." In Grove Music Online, edited by L. Macy, available online: . (Accesed May 30, 2013, and August 3, 2014.) Cabaniss, Allen. Agobard of Lyons: Churchman and Critic. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1953. (Un) Chartreux. "L'Office choral et le chant aux premiers temps de la Chartreuse: Un commentaire du Prologue de Guigues à l'antiphonaire." In International Musicologi-cal Society Study Group Cantus Planus: Papers Read at the 6th Meeting, Eger, Hungary, 1993, vol. 1, 271-301. Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Institute for Musicology, 1995. Cluzet, Emmanuel. Sources et genèse du missel cartusien. Analecta cartusiana 99/34. Salzburg: Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik der Universität Salzburg, 1996. Debroise, E. "Agobard." In Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, vol. 1/1, edited by Fernand Cabrol, Henri Leclercq, and Henri Irénée Marrou, 971-979. Paris: Librairie Letouzey et Ané, 1924. Degand, Amand. "Chartreux (Liturgie des)." In Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, vol. 3/1, edited by Fernand Cabrol and Henri Leclercq, 1045-1071. Paris: Librairie Letouzey et Ané, 1948. Dox, Donnalee. The Idea of the Theater in Latin Christian Thought: Augustine to the Fourteenth Cenutry. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2004. Emerson, John A. "Plainchant: 7: Chant in the religious orders." In Grove Music Online, edited by L. Macy, available online: . (Accesed May 30, 2013, and August 3, 2014.) Falvy, Zoltân. "Über Antiphonarvarianten aus dem Österreichisch-Ungarisch-Tschechoslowakischen Raum." Studien zur Musikwissenschaft 26 (1964): 9-24. Ferreira, Manuel Pedro. "La réforme cistercienne du chant liturgique revisitée: Guy d'Eu et les premiers livres de chant cisterciens." Revue de Musicologie 89, no. 1 (2003): 47-56. Hiley, David. "Der Gregorianische Gesang bei den Kartäusern und im Kloster Prüll."In 1000Jahre Kultur in Karthaus-Prüll: Geschichte und Forschung vor den Toren Re-gensburgs; Festhschrift zum Jubiläum des ehemaligen Klosters, edited by Bezirk Oberpfalz, 236-243. Regensburg: Verlag Friedrich Pustet, 1997. 171 MUZIKOLOSKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL L/2 Hogg, James. "The Carthusian Order from its foundation to the present day." In Analecta cartusiana, edited by James Hogg, Alain Girard and Daniel le Blévec, Analecta car-tusiana 225, 7-26. Salzburg: Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik der Universität Salzburg, 2005. Hourlier, Jacques, and Benoît du Moustier. "Le calendrier cartusien." In Études grégoriennes, vol. 2, edited by Joseph Gajard, 151-161. Solesmes: Abbaye Saint-Pierre de Solesmes, 1957. Hüschen, Heinrich. "Kartäuser." In Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. 7, edited by Friedrich Blume, 706-714. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1958. King, Arthur Archdale. Liturgies of the Religious Orders. London and New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1955. Lambres, Benoît. "L'antiphonaire des chartreux." In Études grégoriennes, vol. 14, edited by Joseph Gajard, 213-218. Solesmes: Abbaye Saint-Pierre de Solesmes, 1973. Maître, Claire. "L'enseignement de la musique au XIIe siècle chez les cisterciens." In L'enseignement de la musique au Moyen Age et à la Renaissance: Rencontres du Royaumont; Colloque 5 et 6 juillet 1985, 80-86. Royaumont: Editions Royaumont, 1985. Mlinaric, Jože. Kartuziji Žiče in Jurklošter. Maribor: Založba Obzorja, 1991. Monk of Parkminster. "The Carthusian Liturgy: Part One." Magnificat: A Liturgical Quarterly 2, no. 12 (1941), 5-11. Available on the website: . (Accesed January 26, 2014.) Moulin, Léo. "Note sur les particularités de l'ordre cartusien." In Historia et spiritualitas cartusiensis: Acta colloquii quarti internationali, edited by Jan de Grauwe, 283-288. Destelbergen and Saint-Etienne: Centre Européen de Recherches sur les Congrégations et Ordres Monastiques, 1983. Patrologia Latina, vol. 104, edited by Jacques-Paul Migne, 329-340 (De correctione an-tiphonarii), and vol. 104, 325-330 (De divinapsalmodia). Picard, Jean. "La liturgie cartusienne, source principale de spiritualité: éléments de recherches sur les sources de son histoire." In Historia et spiritualitas cartusiensis: Acta colloquii quarti internationali, edited by Jan de Grauwe, 289-301. Destelbergen and Saint-Etienne: Centre Européen de Recherches sur les Congrégations et Ordres Monastiques, 1983. Wickstrom, John B. "The Antiphons ad psalmos of Carthusian Lauds." In Kartäuserliturgie und Kartäuserschriftum, vol. 1, edited by James Hogg, 7-33. Analecta cartusiana 116/1. Salzburg: Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik der Universität Salzburg, 1988. 172 K. ŠTER RESACRALIZATION OF THE SACRED 173 MUZIKOLOSKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL L/2 174 Example 2b R Angustiae mihi, second part of the response (repetendum) Graz 273, Carthusian tradition Sed me-li-us est mi-hi m-ci-de-re in ma - nus ho - mi - num quam pec - ca - re Graz 30, Benedictine tradition in con-spe - ctu do-mi - m « de- Pans lat. 1090, Aquitanian tradition Me-li-us est mi-hi m-ci-de-re in ma - nus ho - mi - num quam Pans n.a.lat. 1411, Cistercian tradition re-lin-que-re ir\ ## 0 ### 00 #### •# ## # r le-gem de - Pans lat. 12044, Monastic (Cluniac) tradition -A— = = L ## 0 ### #### ••# i-us est mi-hi in-ci-de-re in ma - nus ho - mi - num quam de-re-lin-qu Example 2c R Jingustiae mihi, V Si enim hoc egero Graz 273, Carthusian tradition % •m + mß m m Si e — mm hoc e- ge-ro mors mi- hi est si au-tem non e—ge-ro non ef-fu-gi-am ma-nus ve - stras Graz 30, Benedictine tradition Si e — mm hoc e- ge-ro mors mi- hi est si au-tem non e—ge-ro non ef-£u-gi-am ma-nus ve - stras A 1 m+m --.----- - *t #-m9 •• + m* # # *m # J ## -^—gm-mfimm m0-; 1 I Si e — mm hoc e- ge-ro mors mi- hi est si au-tem non e—ge-ro non ef-fu-gi-am ma-nus ve - stras Pans n.a.lat. 1411. Cistercian tradition Si e — mm hoc e- ge-ro mors mi- hi est si au-tem non e—ge-ro non ef-fu-gi-am ma-nus ve - stras 1 . J fo* r*— .....••--•-I * * ........—— Si e — mm hoc e- ge-ro mors mi- hi est si au-tem non e—ge-ro non ef-fu-gi-am ma-nus ve - stras Table 1 Responsories with verses m the Prophets' Office, antiphoners of different traditions (J: the facsimile of the source was available; T: tradition) Graz 273 S Graz 30 S Toledo 44.2 Paris lat. 1090 S Paris lat. 12044 S Paris n.a.lat. 1411S T Carthusian Benedictine Aquitanian (cathedral) Aquitanian cathedral cursus (Marseille) Monastic cursus (St-Maur-des -Fos s és) Cistercian 1 Vidi dominum Seraphim Vidi dominum Seraphim Vidi dominum Seraphim Vidi dominum Seraphim Vidi dominum Seraphim Vidi dominum Seraphim 2 Super muros Qui reminiscimini Aspice Domine de sede Respice Domine Aspice domine de sede Qui regis Israel Aspice domine de sede Ne irascaris domine Aspice domine de sede Qui regis Israel Aspice domine de sede Non enim 3 Fluctus tui Aspice Domine quia Aspice Domine quia Aspice Domine quia Aspice Domine quia Aspice domine quia Circumdederunt Plorans ploravit Omnes amici Plorans ploravit Plorans ploravit Plorans ploravit Plorans ploravit 4 Domini est terra Super muros tuas Super muros tuas Super muros tuas Super muros tuas Super muros tuas In manu Qui reminiscimini Praedicabunt Praedicabunt Qui reminiscimini Qui reminiscimini Qui reminiscimini 5 Indicabo Muro tuo Muro tuo Muro tuo Muro tuo Muro tuo Abstinere Erue nos Erue nos Erue nos Erue nos Erue nos 6 Sustinuimus Sustinuimus pacem Sustinuimus pacem Sustinuimus pacem Sustinuimus pacem Sustinuimus pacem Solii Peccavimus Peccavimus Peccavimus Peccavimus Peccavimus 7 RedimetH Misit Dominus angelum Misit Dominus angelum Misit Dominus angelum Misit Dominus angelum Misit Dominus angelum Eritque anima Misit deus Misit deus Misit deus Misit deus Misit deus 8 Ad te Domine Cus to di Laudabilis populus Beata gens Angustiae mihi Si enim hoc Angustiae mihi Si enim hoc Angustiae mihi Si enim hoc Angustiae mihi Si enim hoc 9 Aspice Domine quia Omnes Angustiae mihi Si enim hoc Laudabilis populus Beata gens Exclamavit voce magna Erat enim cor ejus Laudabilis populus Beata gens Laudabilis populus Beata gens 10 Mi s it Dominus Redimet dominus ^jRedemit dominus angelum Mi s it deus A fructu frumenti Eritque anima A fructu frumenti 11 Angus tiae mihi Si enim A facie furo ris Converte nos deus A facie furo ris Converte nos deus 12 Audiam Benedictus Fluctus tui Abyssus vallavit Fluctus tui Abyssus vallavit 13 Indicabo tibi Indicabo tibi Spera in domino Spera in domino 14 Civitatem istam Avertatur furor Genti peccatrici Es to placabilis 15 Praecipita domine Tu autem Qui caelorum Non enim 16 Genti peccatrici Es to placabilis Civitatem istam Avertatur furor 17 Qui caelorum Non enim Praecipita domine Tu autem 9 responsories and 4 9 responsories and 6 verses in common with verses in common with the Carthusian tradition the Carthusian tradition Laudabilis populus Ego sum dominus Redemi t dominus A fructu frumenti Redemit dominus Eritque anima Redemit dominus A facie furoris A facie furoris Eritque anima Converte nos deus Converte nos deus Fluctus tui Qui caelorum Fluctus tui Abyssus vallavit Non enim Abyssus vallavit Indicabo tibi Fluctus tui Bonum est preastolari Abyssus vallavit Genti peccatrici Indicabo tibi 1 Esto placabilis Religio munda Qui caelorum Non enim Genti peccatrici Es to placabilis Civitatem istam Civitatem istam Revertatur obsecro Avertatur furor Do cebo te quae Ex die qua 9 responsories and 4 verses in common with 9 responsories and 4 verses in common with 8 responsories and 5 verses in common with the Carthusian tradition the Carthusian tradition the Carthusian tradition Table 2 Texts of the Prophets' Office in Graz 273 (Carthusian tradition) *: only the incipit of the chant is given in this place in Graz 273 VT: Vetus testamentum / Old Testament The original liturgical occasion and position of the chant are given in the square brackets [Responsones 8, 9, and 12 of the second Sunday after Epiphany — Responsones 4, 8, 12 of the Sundays per annum\. R Vidi dominum sedentem super solium excelsum et elevatum et plena erat omnis terra maiestate eius. Et ea que sub ipso erant replebant templum V Seraphin stab ant super lllud sex ale uni et sex ale alteri VT/Pro - Is 6:1 and 6:3 R Super muros tuos lerusalem constitui custodes tota die et nocte non tacebunt. Eaudantes nomen domini V Oui reminiscimmi domini ne taceatis et ne detis silentium ei VT/Pro - Is 62:6 R Fluctus tui super me translerunt et ego dixi expulsus sum ab oculis tuis. 1Yeruntamen rursus videbo templum sanctum tuum V Circumdederunt me aque usque ad animam abyssus vallavit me VT/Pro - Jon 2:4-5 R Domini est terra* V In manu* VT/Ps - Ps 23:1 [IIEpi8/Dom pa4] R Indie abo tibi homo quid sit bonum autquid dominus re qui rat a te face re ludicium et lusticiam. Et sollicitum ambulare cum deo tuo V Abstinere a carnalibus desiderns militant adversus animam VT/Pro - Mich 6:8 R Sustinuimus pacem et non venit quesivimus bona et ecce turbatio. Cognovimus dominepeccata nostra non inperpetuum obkvis caris nos V Soln p-lorie tue record are ne irritum facias fedus tuum no bis cum VT/Pro - Jer 14:19-20; Lam 5:20 R Redimet dominus populum suum et liberabit eos et venient et exultabunt in monte svon et p-audebunt de bonis domini super frumento vino et oleo. Et ultra non esurient V Eritque anima eorum quasi ortus irriguus VT/Pro-Jer 31:11-12 R Ad te Domine* V Custodi* VT/Ps-Ps 24:1-2 [IIEpi9/Dom pa8] R As pice domine quia facta est desolata civitas plena divitus sedet in tristicia domina gentium. Non est qui consoletur earn nisi tu deus V Omnes amici eius spreverunt ill am persecutores eius apprehenderut earn inter anp-ustias VT/Pro - Lam 1:1-2 R Misit dominus angelum suum et conclusit ora leonum. Et non me contaminaverunt quia coram eo iusticia inventa est in me V Misit deus misencordiam suam et ventatem suam animam me am enpuit de medio catulorum leonum VT/Pro - Dan 6:22 R Anpustiae michi sunt undique. Sed melius est michi incidere in manus hominum quam tec care in conspectu domini V Si enim hoc egero mors michi est si autem non egero non effugiam manus vestras VT/Pro - Dan 13:22-23 (Sus 1:22-23) R Audiam* V Benedictus* VT/Ps-Ps 25:7 [IIEpil2/Dom pal 2] ON MUZIKOLOSKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL L/2 POVZETEK Kartuzijanski koral je liturgična glasba kartuzijan-skega reda, gregorijanski koral, v katerem najdemo sledi različnih monastičnih in lokalnih tradicij območja, na katerem je red nastal. Kartuzijanski liturgični repertoar, ki je v rabi še danes, se je izoblikoval kot skrbno načrtovana kompilacija in strogo nadzorovan izbor spevov iz uveljavljene tradicije. Kriterije izbora je pojasnil Hansjakob Becker, ki je še posebej izpostavil t. i. načelo bibličnosti, ki zadeva biblično zanesljivost besedil. Razen nekaterih izjem so kartuzijani v svoji liturgiji namreč dopustili le besedila spevov, ki so bila sama na sebi biblična ali pa se od biblične besedilne različice niso preveč oddaljila. A izbiranje spevov je bilo tudi aktiven, ne le pasiven proces: če besedilo, ki je sicer temeljilo na Bibliji, ni bilo dovolj blizu biblični različici, a je bilo vseeno sprejemljivo, so ga kartuzijani pogosto korigirali oz. »biblicirali«. To je lahko pomenilo manjše ali večje spremembe glede na v različnih tradicijah uveljavljena besedila spevov. Z biblicira-njem so kartuzijani besedila spevov uveljavljenih tradicij napravili še bolj sveta, še bolj sakralna - in jih »sakralizirali«. Spreminjanje besedil je nove različice besedil približalo Bibliji, kar je imelo tudi glasbene posledice. Na primeru izbranih responzorijev iz oficija prerokov so z ozirom na biblično zanesljivost besedil istih spevov, ki jih najdemo v različnih tradicijah, prikazane povezave in razlike v besedilih in glasbi spevov. Viri primerjave so vzeti iz različnih mona-stičnih tradicij (kartuzijanske, cistercijanske, benediktinske in clunyjske) ter iz akvitanskih virov, ki so bili s kartuzijanskimi rokopisi povezani z lokalnega stališča. Tovrstne povezave še niso bile natanko raziskane, a že na nekaj primerov daje zanimiv vpogled v kartuzijansko razumevanje repertoarja. Na mestih besedilnih razlik, ki so v kartuzijanski tradiciji nastale kot rezultat bibliciranja besedil, za kartuzijanske različice melodij. Skupaj z izpuščenim besedilom so bile izpuščene določene glasbene fraze, druge pa so bile v manjši ali večji meri spremenjene glede na spremenjeno besedilo. Zdi se, da so bile vse glasbene spremembe izvedene brez kakršnega koli novega komponiranja posameznih delov spevov. Kartuzijani so tudi pri melodijah spoštovali tradicijo: podobno kakor pri besedilih jih je vodilo »načelo tradicije«, še eno od pomembnih načel (besedilnega) izbora spevov kartuzijanskega repertorja. Oblike, zaporedja in strukture glasbenih fraz so poskušali ohraniti v čim večji meri. Na podlagi bibliciranih oz. sakraliziranih besedil preoblikovane melodije so napravljene enako brezšivno kakor njihove v drugih tradicijah uveljavljene dvojnice. Kartuzijanski spevi so zgoščena in enovita, obenem pa tudi estetsko učinkovita li-turgična glasba. Tako je sakralizacija kartuzijanskih spevov - oz. njihovo bibliciranje - kartuzijanskemu korala dala trdnejše besedilne temelje, ne da bi pri tem osiromašila njegovo glasbeno podobo. 180