title: Citharodic Nomos and Prooimion
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Almazova, Nina A.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2024-12-02T21:08:50Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2024-12-02T21:08:50Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2024-03
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Almazova N. A. Citharodic Nomos and Prooimion. Philologia Classica 2024, 19 (1), 4–18. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2024.101
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2024.101
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/48087
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: A citharodic performance typically included a προοίμιον that preceded a νόμος. Theoretically,
  there are three possible options: a prooimion (1) was an inseparable introduction to a specific
  main part; (2) was not performed independently, but could precede various main parts;
  (3) was an independent piece. Most evidence points to option 2. Standard circumstances of
  performance must have stereotyped the subject matter that appeared in the introduction, so
  the proem became an autonomous song that could precede any narrative part, and even be
  performed independently (if there were no agonistic connotations and transitional formulas).
  Pseudo-Plutarch’s notions of ancient citharody (De mus. 1132В–С; 1132D; 1133B–C) are interpreted
  as follows: a proem addressed to the gods was a citharode’s own composition (hence
  ὡς βούλονται, despite its formal character and epic metre). It was immediately followed by a
  nome, whose epic narration could be either original or taken from Homer and other poets and
  set to music according to one of melodic patterns systemized by Terpander. Terpander’s proems
  likely offered two proofs of this theory: they ended with a formula of transition to another
  song, which itself did not follow. Apparently, the option to use someone else’s poetry in the
  main body led to the practice of writing down the proems without the subsequent nomes, so
  that they were seen as independent works. It is likely that Pseudo-Plutarch’s source was referring
  to minor Homeric hymns, since they correspond perfectly with the information that we
  have about citharodic proems.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Philologia Classica;Volume 19; Issue 1
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Ancient Greek music
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: citharodic nomos
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: prooimion
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Homeric hymn
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Citharodic Nomos and Prooimion
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 01.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/48087/1/01.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 764,92 kB