---
title: "Hagiopolitan Octoechos"
chunk: 7/11
source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagiopolitan_Octoechos"
category: "reference"
tags: "science, encyclopedia"
date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:11:13.278479+00:00"
instance: "kb-cron"
---

=== Pitches and their tonal system ===
Although Chrysanthos did not mention his name, the first who mentioned precisely these proportions starting from the open string of the third or middle chord of the oud, was the Arab theorist Al-Farabi in his Kitab al-Musiqa al-Kabir which was written during the first half of the 10th century. His explicit references to Persian and Ancient Greek music theory were possible, because they had been recently translated into Arabic and Persian dialects in the library of Baghdad. Thanks to them Al-Farabi had also an excellent knowledge of Ancient Greek music theory. The method of demonstrating the intervals by the frets of the oud keyboard was probably taken from Al-Kindi. Here the intervals are not referred to the Byzantine phthongoi, but to the name of the frets. And the fret corresponding to β was called "ring finger fret of Zalzal" (wuṣtā Zalzal), named after the famous Baghdadi oud player Zalzal. It seems that the proportion of the Zalzal fret was a refined one in Bagdad using a large middle tone that came very close to the interval of the small tone, while the Mawsili school used 13:12 instead of 12:11. There is no indication that this division had been of Byzantine origin, so Western scholars felt seduced to ascribe the use of the division called "soft diatonic" (to genos diatonikon malakon) and the chromaticism derived from it as an influence of the Ottoman Empire and to regard their view of the systēma teleion also as a norm for the Byzantine tonal system. As Phanariotes (Phanar or Fener was the Greek district of Istanbul with the residence of the Patriarchate) who composed as well in the makamlar, the teachers of the New Music School of the Patriarchate around Chrysanthos had certainly exchanges with Sephardic, Armenian, and Sufi musicians, but an intensive exchange between Byzantine, Arab and Persian musicians had already a history of more than 1000 years.
Unlike Latin treatises only a few Greek treatises of chant have survived and their authors wrote nothing about the intervals, about microtonal shifts as part of a certain melos and its echos, or about the practice of ison singing (isokratẽma). Nevertheless, these practices remained undisputed, because they are still part of the living tradition today, while Western plainchant became rediscovered during the 19th century. Neither musicians nor musicologists were longer familiar with them which explains why various descriptions, as they can be found in certain Latin treatises, were ignored for quite a long time.
Ancient Greek music theory had always been a point of reference in Latin chant treatises, something similar cannot be found in Greek chant treatises before the 14th century, but there were a few Latin treatises of the 11th century which did not only refer to Ancient music theory and the systēma teleion together with the Greek names of its elements, they even had parts dedicated to Byzantine chant. The appreciation for Byzantine chant is surprising, because there were very few authors except Boethius who had really studied Greek treatises and who were also capable to translate them.
The systēma teleion was present by the Boethian diagram which represented it for the diatonic, the chromatic, and the enharmonic genus. Several tonaries used letters which referred to the positions of this diagram. The most famous example is the letter notation of William of Volpiano which he developed for the Cluniac reforms by the end of the 10th century. In his school a unique tonary was already written, when he was reforming abbot of St. Benignus of Dijon. The tonary shows the Roman-Frankish mass chant written out in neume and letter notation. The repertory is classified according to the Carolingian tonary and its entirely diatonic octoechos. The use of tyronic letters for dieses clearly shows, that it was used as a kind of melodic attraction within the diatonic genus which sharpened the ditonus under the semitonium. Even in Guido of Arezzo's treatise Micrologus, at least in earlier copies, there is still a passage which explains, how the diesis can be found on the monochord. It shrinks the semitonium by replacing the usual whole tone (9:8) between re—mi (D—E, G—a, or a—b) by an even larger one in the proportion of 7:6 which was usually perceived as an attraction towards fa.
But there were as well other practices which could not be explained by the Boethian diagram and its use of tonus and semitonium. The authors of one theoretical tonary of the compilation called Alia musica used an alternative intonation with the name AIANEOEANE, the name was obviously taken from a Byzantine enechema ἅγια νεανὲς, a kind of Mesos tetartos with the finalis and basis on a low E, and applied the Byzantine practice to certain pieces of Roman-Frankish chant which were classified as tonus tertius or Autentus deuterus. In the following section De quarto tono the author quotes Aristoxenos' description of the enharmonic and chromatic division of the tetrachord, the remark on it in precisely this section had been probably motivated by the Hagiopolitan concept of the phthora nenano which connected the echos protos on a with the plagios devteros on E.