Talk:Octoechos (liturgy)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2021 and 26 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AidanAjw.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Name space
I would like to suggest changing the name of this article from "Octoechos (liturgucal text)" to "Octoechos (liturgy)". This would more accurately describe the scope of the article. It would also seem to be more in keeping with the naming conventions employed for other articles about liturgical terms which are synonyms for secular things. I would appreciate any imput about this. MishaPan 19:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Since you've been the primary author of this article, it makes sense to me that you can do what you think best here. I can't remember why I named it as I did when I split it from Octoechos, but I like your title better. TCC (talk) (contribs) 19:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Themes
Is this correct that the themes listed for Wednesday and Friday are the same? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.74.72.75 (talk) 11:31, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Article restructured and section "Nomenclature" moved to the mother article Octoechos
The article still needs a continuation in the section "Byzantine history". The subsection about the temporal cycle should mention that the main cycle of the temporal starts on the feast of All Saints. There is another daily cycle for the Easter week.

The table with the nomenclature of the eight-mode system belongs to the other article about the eight-mode system (this corresponds by the way to Gerda Wolfram's MGG 2 article "Oktoechos" which has two parts, one for the eight-mode system, and one for the liturgical hymn book created during the Studites reform).

In English wikipedia, there are now these branches:

—Platonykiss (talk) 16:20, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The history is now fixed and an additional section about the hymn genres has been added. Note that the name Octoechos is usually associated with the octoechos order known from the book heirmologion which can be also ordered according the odes, but the early books until the 14th century are usually ordered according the chant or hymn genres. I added some links to reproductions of manuscripts, so that you can check, how different scribes composed the book. Platonykiss (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

One term unknown
Can someone pleas tel me what is the English term for eight weeks in which octoechos is chanted. In Serbian it is "stlp" (I think taken form Old Church Slavonic). Thank you!

RacoYes (talk) 19:32, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know. But somebody here messed it up, by copy and paste from the article octoechos. The correct Old Slavonic term for the book is Осмѡгласник, it does not really look like the etymological origin of the Serbian expression.


 * Platonykiss (talk) 18:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Осмѡгласникъ ... The final letter had been missing (a schwa vowel in southern Slavic pronunciation and silent in northern); also, the initial letter should be lower case and should have a breathing mark, and there should be an accent, but I'm not going to spend my time constructing it here. In the article, it is transliterated into contemporary Russian letters, as are Slavonic terms in Wikipedia in general. Vincent J. Lipsio (talk) 18:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Great! Thank you very much.
 * Platonykiss (talk) 14:31, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

"of the Sunday Office"?
"... the book octoechos is as well organized as a certain temporal of several eight week periods and the word itself means the repertoire of hymns sung during the celebrations of the Sunday Office" Is there some reason, since the book contains the office for all seven days of the week, for designating it as "of the Sunday Office"? Vincent J. Lipsio (talk) 18:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * In my opinion, this article needs to be improved. I changed something and restructured it and because of the different authors, the structure is a little bit too complex for its simple content (at least for now). So if you would like to lay another hand on, please feel free to do so.
 * For an answer to your question I advice Gerda Wolfram's article at the MGG:

"Die Oktoechos der byzantinischen Kirche enthält die Propriumsgesänge für die Offizien des Samstags-Hesperinos (Vesper), des Mesonyktikon (Mitternachtsoffizium), des Sonntags-Orthros (Morgenoffizium) und der Liturgiefeier."
 * In case you don't understand German, here is my summary. Since the earliest time, when the octoechos already appeared as a book separated from the rest of the sticherarion, it had mainly the hymns of the Sunday office. Soon there was a second more voluminous version which is called "great octoechos" or "parakletike". This difference remained constant until the last manuscripts written in the older Byzantine round notation during the 18th century (the case of the printed Anastasimatarion or printed Voskresnik is different, because it developed out of the 17th-century Kekragarion with the 11 heothina in the appendix—the name "kekragarion" refers to the vesper psalm κύριε ἐκέκραξα), but orthros and hesperinos psalms were already notated before the first eight stichera of the heothina collection within the octoechos section of 15th-century sticheraria. For this very simple reason the name "octoechos" itself means rather the short version (unlike the Great octoechos or Parakletike) and this is what I tried to say when I corrected the sentence and inserted this particular note.
 * Platonykiss (talk) 14:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Differences of the octoechos order
The description in the section of the Armenian tradition has to be checked. The usual order in the Greek books is first the authentic and then the plagal echoi. For Paschaltide there is a daily order as well. I advice to have a look at Poliakova's doctoral thesis, because she wrote about the order as it was established by the Stoudios reform and about its reception within the Greek and Slavic traditions. Relevant is here only the order of the sections in the chant books. Platonykiss (talk) 16:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I hope that the contributors of the Oriental section are satisfied by some reproductions of manuscripts and prints of the Armenian hymnal, which I found recently. I think this is one of those rare cases of wikipedia articles, which can grow thanks to different authors coming from different backgrounds. Let's continue this way. Platonykiss (talk) 21:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)