The origins of Armenian music are interwoven with those of literature, and there is an equal scarcity of reports and documents describing its development. Some past Armenian historians[1] reported, incidentally, that Armenia already had religious and profane song and musical instruments in Pagan times. Movsēs Khorenatsi mentions and records fragments of poetic value, which demonstrate that there were songs of every kind, or, tales which were sung, according to the story, by improvisers, ballad singers and especially, by the celebrated (gusan) of the province of Goghtn. These arrived at the courts of princes or in town squares to tell in poetic song of the deeds of ancient heroes and, in particular, of Armenian kings. A fragment of the most renowned epic Armenian songs tells of the deeds, the Armenian version thereof, of one of the most ancient Indo-European divinities, the Vrthrahan of the Hindus and Verethraghna of the Aryans, Vahagn, as told in the history of Armenia of Movsēs Khorenatsi:

With the spread of Christianity, Armenian song underwent a rapid renewal, which may be considered to have been fully under way in the 5th century. This new song, inspired by the contents of the faith, had the common traits of religious song of all countries at that time: simplicity and homophony, the addition of recitatives and psalmodies. The root of religious melody from the pagan period was not removed but transfigured and Christianized.

All the arts flourished with the advent and rapid spread of the Armenian alphabet in the 5th century against a backdrop of general cultural ferment. Music was the first to make incredible strides, and there was a proliferation of professional musicians and poets who composed a great number of Christian hymns.

From the 5th century, the creation of an Armenian Liturgy led to the rise of a traditional sacred music, which forms an integral part of the Liturgy.

The Psalter was divided into eight canons to correspond to the eight ancient modes of Armenian music. These in turn were divided into two categories, four for main voices and four for lateral voices, supposedly introduced by Stepanos Siunetsi in the 8th century. Two steghi, that is emblematic songs requiring special technique, were later added for the soloist.

The Armenian terms used to describe them, dzayn e koghmn, simply mean “voice” and “side.” The first canon corresponds to the first mode or voice; the second canon, the first lateral voice; the third, the second voice; the fourth, the second lateral voice, or the “major voice;” the fifth, the third voice; the sixth, the third lateral voice, or the “resonant voice;” the seventh, the fourth voice; the eighth the final lateral voice.

Two tables showing the various types of the Armenian neumatic system.

Each of the eight Armenian modes is based on specific types of melody rooted in ancient tradition. Moreover, each is given one or two kinds of dardzvatz dzayn (lento solenne), a more solemn melodic structure. The keynote, upon which all melodic structure is based, normally occupies a position of primary importance, particularly in solo melodies. The melody of the Sharakan (Hymn) can be divided into three different genres: simple (parz), festive (tonakan) and grave (tzanr). A melody can be sung in one of two rhythms, a slow or complete rhythm and a fast or incomplete rhythm.

Each canon is divided in turn into seven gubgha (antiphons), each corresponding to from two to six psalms, depending on their length. The final three psalms of David (148-150) were given as a necessary supplement. In ancient times, the first six gubgha were sung by two choirs in a simple key, with an antiphon at the beginning and the end, but the simplicity of the antiphon itself recalls a responsorial chorus. The antiphon sets the key note of the psalm and so determines the key in which it must be sung. On the other hand, the seventh gubgha of each canon, called kanonaglukh (principle of the canon), is executed with solemnity, in a booming voice, in accordance with two series of solemn tone: one for weekdays, the other for holy days. The style of execution of the kanonaglukh differs from simple psalmody: an antiphon, relatively well developed, frames the psalm, while each semi-versicle is followed by a shorter response. The musical form of the psalms is subject to the form of the texts. From the 10th to 13th centuries, during a particularly fertile period in Armenian culture driven by the development of the Kingdom of Cilicia, Armenian music made strides within the secondary schools which were in the monasteries. Here, scholars were greatly interested in issues of musical theory, particularly that of musical notation. It was these schools that compiled the books of Manrusmunk, collections of liturgical songs of the Breviary and the Divine Liturgy (the Holy Mass) and neumatic notation (khaz). At the same time, they began the practical teaching of song and neumatic notation which set the characteristics of Armenian music from the 10th to 13th centuries. Particularly important centres were the monasteries of Tathev in the 9th century, Kamrdjadzor, in the 10th century, and, up until the 12th century, Haghbat, Sanahin and Narek. It was in the latter that Saint Gregory of Narek produced a wealth of music, particularly in the tagh, free melismatic melodies deeply religious and lyrical in content. In 12th century Sanahin, there was a flourishing “college of eloquence and music” at the same time that Saint Nersēs Shnorhali was composing hymns.

In this way, from the 5th century onwards, a rich poetic and musical heritage was built up, later collected in the volume which Poghos Taronetsi called by the name Sharakan or, more precisely, Sharaknots, a collection of hymns, some original and some translated from the Greek and Syriac liturgies.

According to tradition, some hymns dated back to the times of the Saints Sahak and Mesrop to whom, respectively, are attributed some hymns for Holy Week and the Penitential Hymns which are clearly archaic in origin.

The subject matter for these hymns drew inspiration from the life and mysteries of Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Holy Apostles and Martyrs and the Holy Fathers of the Church. Others are hymns of intercession for the deceased and for penance days or ordinary days. The Sharaknots was reorganized definitively by Saint Nersēs Shnorhali, who himself added a large number of his own compositions. He also composed works not directly related to the liturgy but intended to be sung outside of divine office, such as the lengthy canticle, Hisus Vorti (Jesus the Son).

Nersēs Shnorhali stands out in the field of religious music as a great reformer who enriched divine office with many and varied songs, remodelling forms which were archaic and no longer in use in the 12th century. All the Armenian books of music and rituals were studied, revised and completed by him. His musical production amounts to over 200 different compositions.

In the 13th century, there are documented accounts of many poet composers of Armenia sacred music: Kostandin of Erznka, Frik, Nersēs Patveli son of Levon II, Armenian king of Cilicia, the brothers Avag and Thoros Drazdakertsi, the priests Hakob Yerēts and Hovhannēs, another Hovhannēs of the Monastery of Akner, Levon, Nersēs, Thoros, the illustrious musician Hovsēp of Drazark, and many more.

Musical notation may be divided into three distinct forms, which succeeded one another: semiographic or ancient Neumatic, modern Neumatic and European notation.

a. Semiographic or Ancient Neumatic Notation

Armenian hymn composers used ancient neumes, a system of which was developed by Khachatur Vardapet Taronatsi (1100-1184), who is said to have transcribed the Sharakan in neumatic notation and composed the hymn Khorhurd khorin (Oh Profound Mystery) which is still sung today in the liturgy of the Mass. These neumes already existed in the notation for Armenian religious music and were to be found in many forms and combinations. With the organization of the neumes in a musical system, the Khazagrutiun (neumatic writing) spread rapidly all over the nation. It is through these neumatic signs that the manuscripts of the collections of the Sharakan, as well many other kinds of sacred song such as gandz, tagh, meghedi, and so on, passed on Armenian sacred music. Nonetheless, the neumatic system was already falling into disuse by the beginning of the 15th century.

b. Modern Neumatic Musical Notation

Mortuary mask of the composer
Komitas Vardapet (San Lazzaro,
Museum of the Congregation).

The ancient semiographic system was succeeded by the modern one. Babà Hambardzum Limondjian (1768-1839) only adopted a series of neumatic signs from the ancient notation to which he gave names in Arabic. His followers first gave them names in Armenian, then shortened these names to their first syllable. In later times, these musical notes were given the same names as the European ones. In addition to books of theory for the schools, transcriptions in modern notation were also made of the hymns in the Sharakan, songs from the Mass and other melodies. Particular mention is due to the colossal work the Atyan Sharakan by Etchmiadzin (1874), largely published by Nikoghos Tashian and the transcription of most of the melodies of the Sharakan in 5 volumes printed in Istanbul in 1934, the posthumous work of the musicologist and musician Yeghia Tntesian.

This new Armenian notation was adopted by the great Armenian musicologist and musician Komitas (a monk whose name at birth was Soghomon Soghomonian, 1869-1935) who used it as a shorthand system for the transcription of over 3000 melodies of Armenian folk songs and religious songs. It is told that he had so completely assimilated the notation system of Babà Hambardzum that he was able to simultaneously transcribe every song that he heard and so managed to record the songs sung by peasants in the fields.

c. European Musical Notation

The European system of notation had come into use even before the reform of Babà Hambardzum. However, the ancient neumatic system continued to be used in the transcription of liturgical song for new hymns written by various composers, such as the Venerable Mekhitar, who used the ancient khaz, based on the melodies of ancient hymns. The new system introduced with the reforms of Babà Hambardzum, while contributing to the conservation of the Armenian national artistic heritage, proved insufficient, and use was made of the European system of notation. From the mid-19th century onwards, young graduates of European conservatories presented original compositions and transcriptions of folk songs and liturgical songs, concert music and music of other kinds. The European system of musical notation was used in the production of many editions of transcriptions of the Hymn Book in accordance with various traditions.

Aram Khaciaturian.

At the end of the 1800s, the Russian composer Mikhail Mikhailovic Ippolitov-Ivanov, an exponent of the Russian academic tradition and, for a number of years director of the Conservatory of Tbilisi in Georgia, captured the melodies and atmosphere of the Georgian and Armenian lands in his suite Sketches of the Caucasus (1894) and Armenian Rhapsody (1895). It was in the same period that Komitas Vardapet, already mentioned above, was at work. In 1895, he published Folk Songs of Akn and, in subsequent years, developed the traditional Armenian monodic styles into skilful polyphonic orchestrations. A contemporary of his, Alexander Spendiaryan (1871-1928), is credited with laying the foundations for Armenian symphonic music in the style of the Russian academic tradition of the likes of Rimsky-Korsakov and Balakirev, as well as composing a landmark national opera Almast (1918-28), the plot of which deals with Armenian resistance to the Persian conquest in the 18th century.

The 20th century witnessed the rise to international prominence of Aram Khatchaturian, (1903-1978). He continued with the integration of regional folk music and the Russian symphonic tradition with more natural and authentic results than the elaborate orientalism produced by composers like Borodin and Balakirev and even Spendiaryan. The three Gayanē suites (1943) are particularly representative of this style, expressing a singular vitality mingled with ethnic nostalgia which so impressed Shostakovich.

More recent times have seen the achievements of symphonic composers such as Boris Parsadanian (1925), Hovhannes Gurgeni Ter-Tatevossian (1926), Avet Terteryan (1929-1994) and Tigran Mansuryan (1939).