On creative activity of the master of church-singing art Ivan (Is aiah) Lukos hkov (died circa 1621)

The authors of the scientific study summarize and investigate data about one of the most prominent representatives of old Russian music — Ivan (in monasticism — Isaiah) Lukoshkov, son of Trofim. Contemporaries knew him as master of Usol’e (Stroganovs) church singing art school of the 16th—17th centuries. The authors provide an overview of the artworks — Lukoshkov’s chants, and on the example of the most representative of them the creative principles and techniques of this raspevshik (Old Russin composer) are shown. The researchers base their observations and conclusions on the study of a wide range of documentary and narrative sources, church singing manuscripts of the 12th—17th centuries. In the course of the study of the Old Russian music artworks they use the author’s textological formula-structural method.

1 Researchers have drawn their attention to the musical works of the master repeatedly. More on this will be discussed later. See also: [27, p. 67-125]. 2 For example, in the Book of the Census of Solvychegodsk in 1620, among the empty courtyards the yard of Deviatka Lukoshkov is named, who with his wife "wandered to Berezov, in Siberia" [44, fol. 19].
Cathedral were restored and opened. By September 1579 the Stroganovs' scribes made an inventory of the icons and all church goods, which was used as the book of contributions for many decades 3 . At this time Ivan Lukoshkov chose the career of a priest and due to his profound knowledge in the sphere of church singing he held the position of a deacon and later the priest of this Cathedral 4 .
The inventory of the Cathedral property started in 1579 was supplemented by the following goods: a precious china bowl donated by priest Ivan Lukoshkov, son of Trofim, and a document concerning the peaceful settlement of a land conflict with peasants which was kept in the pile of other papers [96, p. 77, 83; 81, fol. 26; 38, 44]. The young priest donated the china bowl to the consecrated (1584) Blagoveshensky Cathedral in the late 1580-s -early 1590-s. The above-mentioned document (peaceful settlement of a land conflict) was compiled at this very time; the Stroganovs donated their lands from Solvychegodsk and other neighboring regions 5 to the Сathedral. Serving as a priest of this Stroganovs' family Сathedral Ivan Lukoshkov made pilgrimages to various monasteries and several times visited the Solovetsky friary. In May 1587 he came to this monastery to pray and granted 2,5 roubles for wax; he also brought 10 roubles from the wife of the deceased Semeon Anikievich Stroganov for the memorial services [43, № 424, fol. 4]. Since 1590 the Usol'e priest granted to the Solovetsky treasury 9 altyns on 3 The "inventory" of the Cathedral (was published: [96]) has come down to us rewritten at the beginning of the 17 th century (filigree of the 1590s), so it is difficult to judge which text was made in 1579, and which records were made later, by the time of the rewriting. Until the middle of the 17 th century the scribes continued to enter information about the awards (contributions) to the Cathedral [81]. 4 Let us recall that Stoglav (Hundred Chapters Sobor) allowed the appointment of deacons who had reached the age of twenty-five, and "priests" -from the age of thirty (Chapter 25). 5 The Inventory of the Cathedral mentions the deeds of sale and donation letters for "Annunciation villages", and there is also a "census of the Annunciation church villages" [96, p. 82-85]. Вестник ЮУрГУ. Серия «Социально-гуманитарные науки» 2020, т. 20, № 4 the memorial services for his parents [43, № 5, fol. 8]. During his stay in Solvychegodsk Ivan Lukoshkov created a large number of chants in the Znamenny style and got recognition as a chant master. He combined his church duties not only with his singing activities and creating new musical works but also with teaching. The 17 th century sources mention him as a teacherdidascalos. Monk Evfrosin's "The Tale" pointed the singers who were proud of Lukoshkov's teaching [26, p. 71]. "The Tale about zaremby" states "the pupils of old masters (including Lukoshkov's ones) knew their art very well" [19, fol. 376-377).
Not later than in the middle of the 1590-s there was a turning point in Ivan Lukoshkov's life. Having no parents and probably being a widower he decided to take the monastic vow. There is no record so far concerning the place of this event. This rite might have taken place either in Solvychegodsk (e.g., in the Stroganovs' Vvedensky Monastery and in the town Borisoglebsky Monastery, as far as sometimes its priests were the Stroganovs' confessors) or outside the Usol'e land. It is known that having become monk Isaiah, Lukoshkov found himself in Kostroma. His relative, also Ivan Lukoshkov (most likely son) stayed for some time in the Usol'e land. He left the town and following his father's steps took the monastic vows. Later thanks to his father who became the figure of great importance at that time he continued his career in Moscow. Isaiah Lukoshkov's family left Solvychegodsk in December 1614. The official paper referring to the property division between Andrey and Peotr Stroganovs states that Andrey got "Lukoshkov's place" and "Lukoshkov's yard" [45, fol. 1]. The cadaster document (Solvychegodsk, 1620) provides more specific information: Andrey got three residences on the bank of the Vychegda river: priest Peotr's place, Ivashka Lagovka's place and Ivashka Lukoshkov's place [44, fol. 851]. Consequently, leaving the Usol'e land the master's son could not serve as a priest yet as he sold his parents' house to the Stroganovs 1 .
In Kostroma Isaiah Lukoshkov, apparently, became a priest of the main Bogoyavlensky (Epiphany) Monastery. This one was built of stone in the time of Father Superior Isaiah Shaposhnikov (1534-1572), whose name was greatly revered in this cloister [11, p. 42-43]. Having good vocal abilities and profound knowledge in the field of church singing (and the monastic name of the former highly respected Father Superior -Isaiah), Lukoshkov was in the limelight and was quickly promoted. Judging by the fact that he soon became the Head of the Bogoyavlensky monastery we can assume that he had influential patrons. These patrons could be only the boyars Godunovs who owned the land here and often visited this place. In the second half of the 1580-s -the beginning of the 1590-s Dmitry Ivanovich and his nephew, the future Tsar Boris Feodorovich, donated money on the erection of the stone walls and gates for the Kostroma Ipatievsky (St. Hypatiy) monastery, founded by their forefathers. Both the uncle and his nephew employed "krestovie diaki" whose main duty was to perform chants during divine services [38, fol. 122v-123]. The Godunovs like the Stroganovs were real connoisseurs of the Old Russian Znamenny Chant and they were greatly interested in the activities The Rozhdestvensky (Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary) Monastery in Vladimir was founded during the reign of Prince Vsevolod III (1191). Since 1230 it was directed by Archimandrite, earlier -Hegumen. In the middle of the 13 th -early 14 th centuries it was the place of the all-Russia metropolitan's residence. The white stone church dedicated to the Nativity of the Virgin Mary in 1263 became the burial place of prince Alexander Nevsky. All this defined the special role of this cloister in the life of the country. Till 1561 the archimandrites of this monastery signed important church and state documents in the first place among the monastery heads; later by Ivan the Terrible's order -in the second place after the heads of the Troitse-Sergiev (Trinity Sergiev) monastery [8; 103].
Having become the Head of one of the most significant Russian monasteries in 1602 Isaiah Lukoshkov was to pay great attention to its wellbeing and prosperity. During that time the Vladimir-Rozhdestvensky monastery was in favour with the highest authorities. We cannot rule out the fact that his great patrons might have supported his appointment. Interestingly enough, during the first year of Isaiah's service there was a trial case between the monastery and prince I. M. Baryatinsky concerning the settlement Palashkino and the village Serednikovo bequeathed to the monastery by prince Zamyatnya-Bestuzhev. Baryatinsky questioned the legitimacy of this land transfer, as his father-in-law left no written document confirming his last will. At that time the law also prohibited the land donations to monasteries. However, in spite of the fact that according to the tsars' ( at the Blagoveshensky Cathedral for a long time. It was he who told the pupils about his teacher Savva Rogov, and this teacher's pupil Stephan Golysh, who was teaching Ivan (Isaiah) Lukoshkov in the Stroganovs' lands. It is most likely that the Blagoveshensky priest Feodor Krest'anin, who was famous for his art of church singing and gained great recognition among the tsar's singing diaki, was promoted in May 1606 to the rank of an archpriest. Taking part in the state affairs and frequently visiting Moscow Isaiah Lukoshkov, no doubt, knew Feodor Krest'anin and his art very well. The works of both masters were copied and kept in the tsar's musical library.
During stormy events that happened right after False Dmitry's wedding ceremony and resulted in his death, Vasily Shuisky's accession to the throne and his dethronement, as well as the impostor False Dmitry II's invasion and the Polish intervention, Isaiah Lukoshkov stayed in his monastery. It is quite possible that during Tsar Vasily's reign he was invited to the meetings of the Council. At this time the Archimandrite's attention was concentrated on his monastery's economical activity. After the liquidation of the Polish-Swedish aggression and during the state revival of Russia Lukoshkov continued to take part in state affairs of great scale.
He still retained his high position in society and at court. Thus, being present in May 1613 at the Zemsky Sobor, which elected Mikhail Romanov "to the Tsardom," Isaiah Lukoshkov signed an Approval Charter immediately after the bishops, the first of the monastic Fathers-Superiors. This testifies to the special position of the monastery and himself in the church hierarchy [99, v Thus, the life and activities of the outstanding representative of the Usol'e school of church singing art Ivan (Isaiah) Lukoshkov son of Trofim were connected with different cities. When he was the Archimandrite of large monasteries he was concerned with the prosperity of his cloisters, was invited to take part in the large-scale state and church affairs. Probably, at that time he stopped his active work in the field of church singing, which he used to do in Solvychegodsk in the Stroganovs' lands. It is worth mentioning that the 17 th century authors considered Lukoshkov as chant master of Ivan the Terrible's times and called him "Isaiah from Usol'e" 1 . He was always associated with the Usol'e school of church singing. Вестник ЮУрГУ. Серия «Социально-гуманитарные науки» 2020, т. 20, № 4 At present there exist the following chants in Lukoshkov's interpretation: the troparion "Да молчит всяка плоть" ("Let all mortal flesh keep silent"); the prokeimenon "Да ся исправит" ("Let my prayer be corrected"); other chants of Obikhod, as well as the Sticheraria doxastikons: "Волсви персидстии" ("The Persian Magi", the Nativity of Christ); "Благовествует Гавриил" ("Gabriel is evangelizing", the Annunciation); "Царю небесный" ("The Heavenly Tsar", the Trinity); "Придете верении" ("Come in faith", the Exaltation of the Cross); "О, колико блага" ("O, how many blessings", the week about the Publican and the Pharisee) etc. The masterpiece of the Usol'e chant master's art is the cycle "Ипакои воскресные на осмь гласов" ("Hypakoes Sundy in eight Echoi"). Researchers have already examined some works. However, their study should be performed in the accordance with the Usol'e tradition of singing of the complicated signs and neumatic formulae, i.e. taking into account the Usol'e theory of music (it will be dwelt upon further on). The peculiar features of this theory can be found in the musical works created in different styles with different artistic principles 1 .
As an example let us study the prokeimenon "Да ся исправит" ("Let my prayer be corrected") in Lukoshkov's interpretation, found in the middle of the 17 th century manuscript together with two different variants of this chant: the first of them is not marked, the second one is marked "Иного переводу Лукошкова" ("Another translation of Lukoshkov"), the third is marked "Иного знамени" ("Another znamia") [89, fol. 208].
The close study of numerous copies of this prokeimenon in the manuscripts dated the 12 th -17 th centuries lets us conclude that the earliest neumatic versions appeared at the turn of the 15 th -16 th centuries [63, fol. 242v; 82, fol. 183v; 83, fol. 165; 84, 230]. This time was marked by the formation of the book "Obikhod" (collection of church daily chants). This prokeimenon belongs to the chants of this kind and is characterized by the absence of modes and the peculiar structure. It was performed during the liturgy of the reserved Sacrament. After the hymn "The Gladdening Light" there were two paremia reading, then the singers were slowly performing the prokeimenon in the middle of the Сathedral: Да ся исправит молитва моя (Da sya ispravit molitva moya), Яко и кадило предо тобою (Yako i kadilo predo toboyu). Воздеяние руку моею (Vozdeyanie ruku moeyu), Жертва вечерняя (Zhertva vechernyaya).
The very first neumanic samples of this chant dated the turn of the 15 th -16 th centuries contain four lines. There are also numerous differences in the shape of very encrypted sophisticated formulae -fity (фиты). The syllabic fragments of the lines also differ at times but in general are more or less stable. As we can see, at the initial stage there was no common record of this prokeimenon. One hundred years later, in the last quarter of the 16 th century, there appeared the texts, which contained "razvods" of the fity formulae. In fact, these interpretations explained and clarified the earlier encrypted neume notation system 2 . Razvods, written by significant amount of simple neumes, demonstrate the melody of earlier brief ciphered shapes of fity formulae. Thanks to razvods, the musical content of fity began to be transmitted not orally, as before, but in writing. The extended fity razvods had the significant amount of differences in writing. It should be noted that in the texts of the 17 th century there is no uniformity in the record of this prokeimenon either, especially concerning the intra-formulae fity razvods.
The singing interpretation of Lukoshkov's prokeimenon corresponds to the musical evolution of the Great Syllabic-Melismatic Chant and observes its structural rules, which were formed at the earlier stage. In his creative works the Usol'e master did not exceed the norm determined by the fity formulae and other characteristic features of this Chant. For studying the peculiarities of Lukoshkov's interpretation one should refer to the chant books from the Stroganovs' scriptorium as well as to those two variants given alongside the master's interpretation. The special marks of the late 17 th centurycinnabar signs -help us decipher the older neumatic notation and translate it into the modern one.
The texts from the Stroganovs' scriptorium of the turn of the 16 th -17 th centuries belong to the earliest interpretations of the prokeimenon in the Great Chant. The differences are very slight here and can be traced in the interchangeability of the neume. Other interpretations of the late 16 th -early 17 th centuries either repeat the musical version of the prokeimenon from the Stroganovs' texts, or correlate as their variants 3 . Consequently, the typical chant of the Stroganovs' singing books was not the only one in the country. It possesses definite peculiarities and can be called the Usol'e (Stroganov) tradition or the Usol'e chant.
One can naturally presume that Lukoshkov in his artistic principles was to refer to the existing Usol'e variant of the prokeimenon. In fact, the analysis of the Stroganovs' variants and the master's interpretation resulted in the following: Lukoshkov in his work preserved the Usol'e fity razvods interpretations. In the syllabic parts of the lines the author deviated from the tradition introducing his own changes. Thus, the analysis of different variants of this prokeimenon allows us to define that the Lukoshkov's chant is the closest one to the earliest Stroganovs' manuscripts. Both works belong to the same singing tradition.
This close connection of Isaiah Lukoshkov's creative works with the local traditions of the Usol'e land
Lukoshkov's desire of enriching the melody of the chants made him follows not only the Usol'e tradition. The brightest example of the synthesis of the Usol'e and Novgorod traditions is Lukoshkov's interpretation of the sticheron "Волсви персидстии" ("The Persian Magi"). One of the manuscripts contains the master's interpretation together with a Novgorod one [51, fol. 208; 31, p. 138], which is called "Great chant" in another manuscript [ The earliest musical samples of the sticheron "Волсви персидстии" can be found in the 12 th century manuscripts. The texts of the 12 th -15 th centuries reflect the common old chant of the doxastikon of the syllabic type with a definite structure of the Znamenny chant -11-line composition. The records of this period are practically identical 1 . At the end of the 15 th century the old Znamenny chant tradition gets out of use and gets lost. A different neumatic writing replaces it where simple signs are ousted by more complicated ones (called serpent formulae complex) 2 . The syllabic relationship between verbal and neumatic texts turns into melismatic one. At the same time the appearance of a new musical variant of the doxastikon did not mean the complete rejection of the tradition: there were preserved four formulae (so-named "quilismas") above one and the same words. The complicated variant also contains the fity formulae. The musical version of this doxastikon is notated with the help of brief ciphered so-named "начертания" (shapes) of neumatic formulae.
The comparison of the singing texts of the sticheron "Волсви персидстии" dated the late 15 th -the early 17 th century shows one typical feature -12-line composition.

Lines
Hymnographic text Some texts of the late 16 th century contain the cinnabar sign "Э" before the words "увидевоше" ("saw") and "царя" ("tsar") [64, fol. 97; 68, fol. 77] 3 . It is well known that it is a characteristic feature of the Demesvenny, Putevoy or Great Stolpovoy Chants. In this case (as far as here there are numerous "qulismas" absent in the Demesvenny Chant) we more likely deal it with Great Stolpovoy Chant. Alongside some common features there can be found some differences characteristic for the shapes of complicated fity formulae.
It is hardly possible to judge the intonation pattern of the doxastikon by the "secret locked" (encrypted) neumatic formulae shapes. It is also difficult to answer the question whether the same type of the chant is recorded in such way or the texts contain different musical versions. Most probably each significant singing centre developed its own tradition of chanting this razvods of the most complicated formulae shapes during the 16 th century. This results in the appearance of different razvods variants in the early 17 th century. They disclosed to pupils the musical content of formulae, decoding them with help of the extended explanations, written by simplier neume. They reflected different chants correspondingly. Among them one can single out four variants -Lukoshkov's, Novgorod, Anonymous and Putevoy ones [29, p. 118]. The similar fragments coincide with the above-mentioned common fragments in the earlier records. The resemblance of all these chants consists in the following: common fragments in the earlier texts present brief drawings-inscriptions, whereas later variants contain extended interpretations of one and the same formulae.
Four musical versions of the sticheron "Волсви персидстии", including Lukoshkov's variant, were not completely independent compositions. They were developing in the framework of one and the same structure established in the 16 th century. In the 17 th century the neumatic notation lost its "secret locked" (encryption), was changed and turned into dif-Вестник ЮУрГУ. Серия «Социально-гуманитарные науки» 2020, т. 20, № 4 ferent type of written record -presentation in the form of razvods-explanations by simple neumes of notation. This conclusion is especially important regarding Isaiah Lukoshkov's creative works.
The close study of the chant written books from the Stroganovs' scriptorium showed that the sticheron "Волсви персидстии" had 6 variants there: Brief Znamenny [6, fol. 344v; 80, fol. 531]; Putevoy of Stolpovoy notation [6, fol. 340v-341); Anonymous "litsevoy" one (without razvods) [ We should single out here the unique interpretation of the sticheron found in the Stroganovs' manuscript of the turn of the 16 th -17 th centuries (the so-called Usol'e variant, number 6). It is of great value as it was the creation of the Usol'e masters and functioned only in the Usol'e land. This unique musical version in the Ussol'e tradition was created on the base of the anonymous variant established in the 16 th century and included in the Stroganovs' chant books (variant 3). Both variants have similar structure and the same amount of formulae (22), forming the 12-line composition. The borders of both the formulae and the lines coincide, which allows analyzing both texts on parallel and assessing the degree of similarity and difference. On the whole, in comparison with the earliest one, the Usol'e variant of the sticheron "The Persian Magi" differs greatly. It can be traced in the presence of fity formulae shapes instead of litso (Rus. лицо, лицевая) formulae ones in four lines. However, the presence of similar fragments in both variants proves that the Usol'e variant is derived from this earlier prototype. This Usol'e variant was used for creating Lukoshkov's interpretation. The comparison of both variants also shows that they belong to the same tradition. The first Usol'e variant (6) presents encrypted formulae shapes, the second Lukoshkov contains their razvodsexplanations. The formulae, which were partially or completely transformed by Lukoshkov, are of great importance here. These differences in both variants allow tracing the peculiarities of the master's art.
The comparison of Isaiah Lukoshkov's variant with the Novgorod one showed that among all the formulae only three belong to the master. The rest four formulae are identical to the Novgorod variant. Thus, creating his own musical version of the sticheron "Волсви персидстии" Lukoshkov relied on the non-razvod model of the work that already existed in Usolye. The main creative task of the master was to present the chant in a new form -using simpler fractional neume. Lukoshkov, possessing deep knowledge in the field of the old-Russian music theory, brilliantly performed his task. At the same time he stuck to the tradition of his own school and his teacher Stephan Golysh from Novgorod.
The presence of Lukoshkov's and Novgorod variants in one and the same manuscript helps us to trace the influence of Novgorod tradition on the master and his art. Both chants present common formulae structure and line composition, as well as 8 common formula razvods (words: царие, увидевоше, мудро, небесенаго, от светлыя, звезда, предоставоше, во Вифлеомо, честеныя). At the same time Lukoshkov's variant is longer than the Novgorod one. The employment of different formulae in the same fragments of the verbal text was quite unusual in the times of the canonic art. The presence of completely different five formulae and nine formulas correlated with each other at the level of intraformula melodic variation from the above-mentioned twenty two ones allowed the Russian musicians of the early 17 th century to define these chants as Lukoshkov's or the Novgorod variants.
Thus, master Lukoshkov's contribution into the centuries-old evolution of the musical sticheron "Волсви персидстии" ("The Persian Magi") was the disclosure of encrypted formulae on the base of composition of the Great Chant, already established before him in Usol'e. The master gave the razvods-explanations of these previously unreadable, but only transmitted orally by heart formulae. He wrote their musical content with fixation with simple neumes, thanks to which only it can be restored.
The fact that Isaiah Lukoshkov was not generally the author of this formulae composition can be judged by the transformation in his variant of seven formulae, of which three, most likely, were performed by him, and four ones are borrowed from the chant of the Novgorod tradition. The master knew this variant very well, as he was a pupil of the Novgorod didascalos. In canonical art the techniques of creativity applied by the master gave the basis to name this variant as Lukoshkov.
The doxastikon "О, колико блага" ("O, how many blessings") can serve an example of Lukoshkov's authorship. This chant is recorded on a separate sheet, which was kept in the music library of the tsar's singing diaki. The text is marked in the following way: "Lukoshkin's interpretation, taken September, 8, 1601" [37, fol. 1].
This doxastikon was the last one in the cycle "На господи воззвах" (Calling the Lord "Gospodi vozzvakh"), which was performed on the Sunday of the Prodigal Son. The poetical text of this chant belongs to the Byzantine hymnographer Stephan Savvait (died circa 807). It is closely connected with the corresponding Gospel Parable. Being the chant of preparatory days before the Great Lent it is included in the collection of Triodions Sticherons.
We know the earliest musical version of the doxastikon from the 12 th century manuscript. [20, fol. 7]. It consists of 15 complexes of neumes, each of which includes the fita or popevka formulae shapes. On the whole the text of the 12 th century can be characterized as a syllabic and melismatic composition. The next stage in the existence of this doxastikon is the 14 th -early 15 th century [87, fol. 4v  Due to the fact that till the beginning of the 17 th century there were no razvods or interpretations and that all chant masters had to chant these encrypted formulae on their own, we can presume that these fragments of filled with the freed melodic movement gave rise to the creative impulse of masters. Each of them interpreted similar formulae in the framework of their own traditions. There exist documentary evidences that at this time the musical ways of chanting to the existing formulae became one of the trends in the development of the Old Russian singing art 1 . The differences in their interpretations were the result of purposeful creative work of local masters or the consequence of a number of other reasons: the imperfection of the encrypted neumatic notation, remoteness of musical centres. It should be noted that musicians already defined these differences in the 17 th century as author's ones.
The record of the doxastikon "О, колико блага" in Lukoshkov's interpretation is dated 1601. There were found no earlier versions with razvods so far. Probably, Lukoshkov was the first who disclosed musical content of the formulae that is why the manuscripts of the early 17 th century contained his variant of interpretation mainly [65, fol. 472; 71, fol. 724v-725]. Alongside these variants there existed some other ones. Interestingly enough, the differences can be traced only in the melismatic lines (with previously encrypted formulae). Syllabic lines are more stable and canonical. As we can see, Lukoshkov's authorship was connected with a new musical interpretation of fity shapes, though the author's unique style also is reflected in the melodic development of the recitative fragments. The Usol'e master's interpretations were preserved in other texts of the late 17 th century.
The manuscript of the late 17 th century is of great interest in reference to Lukoshkov's peculiar style. It contains the doxastikon in neumatic znamennaia notation with the translation into the five-line notation [35, fol. 6v-7]. This work gives a unique opportunity to decipher the chant and transform it into the modern notation. In spite of the phonetic peculiarities of the text and replacements of certain words, the musical base of the chant underwent no considerable change and is extremely similar to the Lukoshkov's interpretation. All formulae are given in brief ciphered inscription and in extend razvods-explanations of them by simple neumes and modern notes.
The work of the Usol'e master consists of 17 melodic formulae, which are united into 14-line composition.

Lines
Hymnographic The study of the interaction between the neumatic and verbal texts showed that in general it is based on the principle of correspondence. The logic of the musical development of the chant emphasizes the structure of the poetical text, without breaking its shape and semantic content. The singsong significantly affects the line organization of the doxastikon.
The poetical content of the "О, колико блага" can be found in the intonation contour of the chant by means of rhyming of the endings of every complete thought. They link the phrases and speak of the high degree of musical generalization of semantic units of verbal text and deep processes of text and melody interaction. The musical language of the chant is characterized by the alteration of syllabic and melismatic lines, which differ not only by the degree of melodic development, but also by the sound range and by the functional importance in terms of revealing the sense of the text. Melismatic lines where the melody prevails over the verbal text perform the constructive as well as image-bearing, semantic and partially decorative functions. The dynamics of their singsong creates an emotional underlying message. In syllabic lines, the content of the verbal text does not dissolve into the melody, but interacts with it. These lines are the main ones in delivering the informative meaning of the doxastikon.
The doxastikon "О, колико блага" in Lukoshkov's interpretation presents the peak in the evolutionary development of the ancient chant. His mastery revealed itself in the ability to disclose the melodic significance of formulae with the introduction of the master's own manner into the formation of their razvods. Besides, Lukoshkov enriched the certain fragments of the chant. His contemporaries considered him a master who "introduced the Znamenny chant and spread it". His work is characterized by the interaction and complementarity of poetical text and melody, syllabic and melismatic lines, the old tradition and the innovation.
The creation of the chants on the base of the established traditions (the Ussol'e, Novgorod ones) put Lukoshkov in the forefront among the Russian outstanding chant masters. However, the creative works of this master are also marked by original, author's compositions.
The sticheron "Царю Небесныи утешителю" ("The Heavenly Tsar, the Comforter") was performed in the 6 th echos on Trinity Sunday as a doxastikon in the Collection of Sticherons sung "at verse" (The Great Vespers) and as a sticheron after Psalm 50 (The Litiya). The oldest records are dated the 12 th and 13 th centuries [20, fol. 212; 86, fol. 180]. They are practically identical and reflect the Znamenny chant: it has 7 popevky and 2 fity formulae. The texts of the 15 th -16 th centuries can be characterized as editions of this old chant. They have preserved the general amount of signs and the syllabic and melismatic proportion of the words and the melody. Some signs underwent changes; two popevky formulae were designed in a new way as well. Thus, the amount of formulae in the chant rose to 11. The greatest number of changes was introduced in the late 15 th century. The chant, which got established till the beginning of the 16 th century (its texts differ on the level of sign variability), was widely spread. All the available records of the sticheron contain this Typical variant. The general amount of formulae in the anonymous chant corresponds to the number of lines -11. The Lukoshkov variant has 21 formulae, which are given for separate words but at times one word takes two or even three formulae. The linear and formula structure of both variants -the anonymous and the Lukoshkov's ones -can be viewed in the table where popevky are "p (п)", litsa -"l (л)", fity -"f (ф)".
The renowned chant master of the Usol'e land refused to follow the canonic tradition. The neumatic signs are completely changed in his variant. The melismatic type of verbal text and singsong proportion, in which fita and litsa razvods prevail, replaces the syllabic melismatic type. The master was not satisfied with the restrained strict sounding of the archaic chant. The poetical text of the Sticheron reflects the elevated state of anticipating of the Mystery -the Descent of the Holy Spirit. Lukoshkov was among the first (if not the first one) who dared to create an original musical composition for the text of this chant. Only a highly gifted and authoritative musician could afford it at that time in the canonic art 1 .
All the variants that appeared in the 17 th century differ from Lukoshkov's interpretation [29, p. 109]. The only exception is the anonymous variant of the Great Chant of the second half of the 17 th century. It has two fragments similar to the Lukoshkov variant: the beginning of the first line (word "царю") and the interpretation of the fita (the last syllables of the word "утешителю") [21, fol. 93]. In other respects these works differ: regarding the neumatic composition, the number of formulae and their division into lines etc. The variants which appeared later, in the second half of the century, can be interesting in terms of their perception of the Usol'e master's tradition.
Lukoshkov's interpretation and the anonymous one, created at the same time [13, fol. 506v-507; 29, p. 109-114), are different, original and independent compositions, which have no analogues in the past. Lukoshkov's variant is much longer in comparison with the anonymous one. The structure of lines based on the proportion of the verbal and neumatic texts is also different. The whole chant of the Usol'e master presents the sounds coming gradually and forming intonation waves with the rising and lowering movement.
The anonymous master while creating his variant extended the sound range and the borders of the melody, allowing it to rise to the highest pitch and to reach the peak expressiveness. In both variants the words "утешителю" (comforter) and и "очисти ны" (cleanse us) are the key ones. However, the anonymous author emphasizes these words not only by means of melody razvods but also of the higher pitch of the sounds.
The Usol'e chant master was creating his variant as a sample of "ideal singing", going back to the "divine archetype". All possible means of musical expressiveness serve to turn all the musical and poetical lines into the single artistic unity. Everything is aimed at the continuous development of the musical thought. At the same time the master, working at the original chant, did not exceed the limits of the traditional intonation and composition techniques, characteristic of his epoch and resting on the canonic idea of the beautiful. Free art revealed itself not in the search of a new musical language but in the technical mastery of creating the Great Znamenny Chant. Lukoshkov shows himself as a connoisseur of fity singing. His innovative technique reveals itself in the original interpretation of complicated fity formulae. Combining popevky, litsa and fity The grand cycle "Ипакои воскресные на осмь гласов" (The Hypakoes Sundy in eight Echoi) in Lukoshkov's interpretation stands in the same row with such outstanding works as "The Cross Sticherons" by Varlaam Rogov or "The Evangelical Sticherons" by Feodor Krest'anin. This cycle was found in the manuscript dated the second quarter of the 17 th century [104, fol. 304-308] 1 . It tells how the Resurrection of Christ was announced to the world through Angels, Holy Women Myrrh-Bearers and Apostles.
The oldest texts of "The Hypakoe" sung in eight Echoi can be found in the 12 th century Collections of "kondaks" (kontakions) in the corresponding "kondakar" neumatic notation [58, fol. 85-93; 92, fol. 72v-81v]. The following records of these chants can be found in the manuscripts of the Octoechos beginning from the second half of the 16 th century. Usually they were included in the chants of Matins before antiphons, but at times they were presented all together as a cycle at the end of the book [53; 67; 69]. At this time the Hypakoe had several chant variants. The most wide spread one was the brief variant with the traditional composition. Later there appeared another variant with a more complicated type of the Znamenny style chant, which can be characterized as moderate or middle between brief and great. In some manuscripts it is marked as "another interpretation", "another neume" [57, fol. 113v-115v; 90, fol. 149v-150v]. Its earliest record was found in the Collection dated the middle of 1580 from the Stroganovs' book-writing workshop [12, fol. 86v, 102v, 116, 133v, 153, 170v, 188, 205v]. Part of the formulae is interpreted, that is, spelled out in the form of razvods or clarification with simple neume here. Taking into consideration that it was the period of the Usol'e singing school formation, N. V. Parfenteva presumed that Stephan Golysh from Novgorod could provide his interpretation as far as he was teaching the Stroganovs' chanters at that time. Consequently the chant itself is given in the tradition of the Novgorod singing school [30, p. 143-149]. This supposition can be partially proved by the fact that Isaiah Lukoshkov chose a different text as the source version for his interpretation.
The Great (Big) chant of the Hypakoe, widespread in the Usol'e land, became the base for Lukoshkov's interpretation. It was found in the manuscript from the Stroganovs' workshop dated 1590-s [70, fol. 42, 55v, 69, 82, 97, 111v, 124, 135v]. Its comparison with the previous variants showed that this chant (let us call it as the Usol'e variant) has no similar fragments with the Brief version but has much in common with the suppositive Novgorod variant. To be more exact, Usol'e Hypakoe chants of some Echoi are similar to the Novgorod ones, others -differ greatly from this variant [30, p. 142-149]. Thus, the Usol'e anonymous masters have not yet set the task of performing the chant of each Hypakoe in a single Great Znamenniy style. This was the first attempt to melodiously renew of the cycle. 1 The record was introduced into science by A. M. Rat'kova, the study of the cycle was carried out by N. V. Parfentieva [29, p. 114; 30, p. 142-171].
Isaiah Lukoshkov while creating his own variant of chanting mainly rested upon this Usol'e singing version of the Hypakoe, in which the majority of litsa and fity formulae are presented in the form of their brief encrypted shapes. The cycle "The Hypakoe in eight Echoi" performed by the chant master contains the most complete disclosure of the content of all the melodic formulae. Both previous variants (the Usol'e and the Novgorod ones) served the base for this work. They were spread in the Usol'e land at the time when Lukoshkov was still staying there.
The master decided to create the cycle in the style of the Great Chant with complicated melismatics. He selected those formulae, which helped solve this task, at times breaking with the traditions of his own school and applying to the traditions of his teacher's singing school of Novgorod (Hypakoe of the 5 th and 6 th Echoi). He also enriched the Hypakoe chants with the new litsa and fity formulae (up to 17), not used before him in cycle. It was in them that the individual, unique originality of Isaiah Lukoshkov's interpretation mastery was revealed. On the whole, the amount of formulae here (112) exceeds the Hypakoe in the Novgorod (105) and the Usol'e (107) traditions. Thus, in the conditions of the canonic art performing his task to create the Hypakoe cycle in the style of the Great Chant, the chant master was choosing the sources applying the principle of formulae-combinatorial composition [30, p. 142-154]. The creative activities of Isaiah Lukoshkov gained wide recognition among the contemporaries. His interpretation of the Hypakoe was the most widespread variant in the chant books till the end of the 17 th century 2 .
Thus, the majority of the above-mentioned works connected with the name of Isaiah Lukoshkov present the result of his creative activities in the framework of the Usol'e school, going back to the oldest depths of the old Russian singing culture. The master's desire to search for new ways of enriching the melody of the chants made him not only follow the traditions of his singing school. He could also employ the traditions taken from his teacher -Stephan Golysh from Novgorod. At the same time the chant master created works of original structure, which can be considered as the highest achievement of the musical theoretical and artistic thought of that time. But even in this case, he remained within the framework of the canonical tradition, using already established principles of creativity, artistic techniques and singing formulae, their affiliation to some Echoi and Style. The available at present legacy of Isaiah Lukoshkov puts him in the forefront among the most outstanding masters of Old Russian church singing art.