Chanting in American English but not imitating Greek singing

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

Dear Basil,

I will try to address various parts of your comments in a constructive and helpful manner:

BC: I think that the point agrippas was trying to make is that while the Byzantine vocal style (laryngismos) is a natural fit for the articulatory phonetics of the Greek language, it is not necessarily a natural fit for the articulatory phonetics of other languages.

NG: Not true. The vocalisations are equally adaptable for English use. One needs a good teacher, lots of listening and LOTS OF PRACTICE.

BC: Two questions I would like to ask are: (1) To what degree is the authentic Byzantine vocal style (laryngismos) compatible with the phonetics of the English language?

NG: Where a vocal ornamentation is appropriate, it can be easily adaptable for English (see above)

BC: (2) If there is a wide disparity between the Byzantine vocal style and the phonetics of a given language, how can the two be reconciled?

NG: There are two extremes in Byzantine chant in the Greek language: i) no ornamentation (i.e. metrophonia) or ii) way too much ornamentation. Both are extemes. With a good teacher and practice you can add a REASONABLE amount of ornamentation for any language.

BC: I went through (and continue to go through) a transition from a very Western vocal style to a more Byzantine vocal style.

NG: As you can see it is possible, but it takes a LOT OF PRACTICE. This is no different for Greek. It starts with metrophonia and then with a good teacher and with lots of listening and practice it will become natural.

BC: .......there are very few people with knowledge of both (a) the Byzantine vocal style and (b) the English language; these people would have the best preparation to answer the questions which I posed above.

NG: Indeed. I wish you were closer to Western PA, or Toms River NJ (Apostolos Combitsis)

BC: It is worth noting that the Arabic language is not exactly a natural fit for the Byzantine vocal style either.

NG: Not true. In fact, the Arab makamat are essentially rooted in Byzantine chant. From these, the chant of the muezzin uses all the elements of Byzantine chant, but in a novel manner. I would say that Arabic is even more compatible with Byzantine chant than English.

BC: I suppose that the alternative to "adapting" would be to abandon some elements of the Byzantine vocal style in favor of a vocal style that is a more natural fit for the language. But this is a philosophical issue which I cannot answer with certainty at the moment.

NG: I think that many novices (outside Greece and the Balkans) in Byzantine Chant try to use rational "formulaicisms" and try to fit music into formulaic rules. Although some practice and vocalisations can be put into descriptive formulae, in practice this will break down often to the frustration of the learner. There is only one solid solution: One needs to be close to a teacher to listen and then to repeat repeat repeat.

Some notes and thoughts on vocalisations and ornamentation in general: If we had Celine Dion and Christina Aguilera in the same room and asked them to sing "God Bless America", they would use different vocalisations and ornamentations. The melodic line however, stripped of these qualitative features, is the same. And this is in the English language!

For Byzantine chant, I emphasise metrophonia first, so that the skeleton of the melody is ingrained inside the student's very soul, and then slowly add just the right type and amount and level of ornamentation that the student's talent is capable of. Some have a remarkable plasticity and capacity in ornamentation, others less. No two human voices are identical.

Byzantine chant need not be heavily ornamented. Otherwise it departs from what we call "ieroprepeia". It starts sounding theatrical, devoid of tempo and rhythm. On the other hand, if it is too dry (i.e. when some do not or cannot graduate from pure "metrophonia", and completely devoid of at least some well-placed ornamentations and vocalisations, it sounds like a 5th grade school production.

Basil, you need a good teacher and I really wish there was some way to bring you closer to a few good people in the USA. You would discover that ornamentation and vocalisation in English, French and Arabic (and even German!) are not all that different from the Greek. Some of us are working to bring ourselves closer to the learners using internet and very soon we will have some exciting news, but for now, I hope I have reassured you that what you seek is possible. One need not abandon Byzantine chant for English translations for fear that Greek-specific factors would be lost.

NG

 

[basil]

I will try to address various parts of your comments in a constructive and helpful manner:

As you can see from my reply below, I realized I did not clearly express what I meant by "vocalizations." Thank you for your patience and your helpful comments.

NG: Not true. The vocalisations are equally adaptable for English use. One needs a good teacher, lots of listening and LOTS OF PRACTICE.

As I admitted in my previous post, I was struggling to verbalize my thoughts. I understand that the word "vocalizations" can refer to "ornamentation/development/analysis", but I was specifically referring to the somewhat nasal style of performance used in Byzantine music and some other subtle techniques such as consonant anticipation and vowel explosion, which relate specifically to the phonetic characteristics of the language being used. What is the proper term for this?

NG: There are two extremes in Byzantine chant in the Greek language: i) no ornamentation (i.e. metrophonia) or ii) way too much ornamentation. Both are extemes. With a good teacher and practice you can add a REASONABLE amount of ornamentation for any language.

I understand your statement and completely agree. But as I mentioned above, I was trying to ask a different question.

NG: Not true. In fact, the Arab makamat are essentially rooted in Byzantine chant. From these, the chant of the muezzin uses all the elements of Byzantine chant, but in a novel manner. I would say that Arabic is even more compatible with Byzantine chant than English.

I agree that "ornamentation/development/analysis" is more natural with Arabic than English. But I was trying to ask a different question. For example, Arabic has the 'ayin, a voiced pharyngeal fricative, which means it is produced by forcing air through a narrow channel and articulated with the root of the tongue against the pharynx. The 'ayin occurs in the last phrase of the Lord I have cried in Arabic (see 1:14 of this video). Even the composition acknowledges that this is a bit of an awkward line to pronounce. Normally, the formula dictates that two syllables be used, one for "ga vou" and one for "pa" (which is held for two beats). But since it would be too awkward to hold the 'ayin for two beats, the composition has "ga vou pa" on the first syllable, and then squeezes the 'ayin at the very end of the two-beat "pa" before moving on to the next note. This is the kind of phonological awkwardness I was trying to describe.

NG: I think that many novices (outside Greece and the Balkans) in Byzantine Chant try to use rational "formulaicisms" and try to fit music into formulaic rules. Although some practice and vocalisations can be put into descriptive formulae, in practice this will break down often to the frustration of the learner. There is only one solid solution: One needs to be close to a teacher to listen and then to repeat repeat repeat.

I couldn't agree more!

Basil, you need a good teacher and I really wish there was some way to bring you closer to a few good people in the USA. You would discover that ornamentation and vocalisation in English, French and Arabic (and even German!) are not all that different from the Greek. Some of us are working to bring ourselves closer to the learners using internet and very soon we will have some exciting news, but for now, I hope I have reassured you that what you seek is possible. One need not abandon Byzantine chant for English translations for fear that Greek-specific factors would be lost.NG

Thank you again for your comments and your patience. Not only am I reassured, but I don't think I ever doubted in the first place!

 

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

Dear Basil,

BC: I was specifically referring to the somewhat nasal style of performance used in Byzantine music and some other subtle techniques such as consonant anticipation and vowel explosion, which relate specifically to the phonetic characteristics of the language being used. What is the proper term for this?


NG: I see what you mean. You are referring to vocal timbre and harmonics that are dynamic in real time and how one can "control" these in the context of a non-Greek language.

First, there is no such thing as Byzantine-specific timbre or controlled harmonics (i.e. quasi-nasal, from the "back of the pharynx, head, neck whatever...). Each human voice has different characteristics. Compare two extremes: Taliadoros and Magouris as well as pre-1970s Stanitsas and Pettas. Very extreme in terms of vocal harmonics and vocal timbre, yet they are all mainstream Byzantine chanters. If they were able to speak clear English, I am confident that they would sound no different and their execution of the English syllables would be crisp.

Second, do not force your voice to do anything that is uncomfortable or that does not feel physically right. Chanting (as singing) should come naturally in whatever language. With a good teacher, you can incorporate the stylistic elements into the timbre and harmonics of your natural capabilities.

Do not try and mimic (physically, timbrally and harmonically) chantor X,Y,Z. Someone will immediately compare you to the person who you are imitating. Almost always, the imitator disappoints Rather, take musical cadences and passages (and perhaps some stylistic elements) from performances of chantor X,Y,Z that appeal to you and see how they fit with your capabilities (i.e. a voice that does not have natural vibrato will never be able to perform pentagorga).

Looking over all the musical translations, I am convinced that Fr. Ephraim's and Fr. Serapheim's are the most comfortable and come quite close to allow one to incorporate stylistic elements in the English language. There are many other translations, but they are not metered and therefore IMPOSSIBLE to use in a musical/chant setting. Metering is the key followed by a simple transition between syllables and then extensive use of vowels with very brief transitions across consonants. This is what I believe leads to a successful marriage between English and Byzantine chant.

Study the works of Fr. Ephraim and Fr. Serapheim and use those as your basis. Of course, your parish may want you to use other translations, but in the interests of balance ,you should speak with your priest and emphasise why the above mentioned versions bring together translation and music in the best manner possible (at least today). And, consider that they are a work in progress and the translation will get better as time goes on in future editions of Fr. Ephraim's and Serapheim's works.

NG.

 

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

Basil,

Are you also referring to how to avoid for example "errrrrrrcy" in "mercy"? and other similar phenomena?

NG

 

[basil]

First, there is no such thing as Byzantine-specific timbre or controlled harmonics (i.e. quasi-nasal, from the "back of the pharynx, head, neck whatever...).

Georgios Michalakis wrote that vocal output should be "as close to nasal as possible (all in avoiding rhinophony, of course)." This seems to match recordings of classically trained chanters and is in contrast to most performances of Western music. Could you please clarify your statement in this context?

Study the works of Fr. Ephraim and Fr. Serapheim and use those as your basis. Of course, your parish may want you to use other translations, but in the interests of balance ,you should speak with your priest and emphasise why the above mentioned versions bring together translation and music in the best manner possible (at least today). And, consider that they are a work in progress and the translation will get better as time goes on in future editions of Fr. Ephraim's and Serapheim's works.

Thank you for your advice. I actually came to this realization about a year ago for the same reasons, so I'm glad that your advice matches. Nowadays I exclusively use the compositions of Papa Ephraim and Fr Seraphim (sometimes supplemented with my own, which are carefully done according to the same methodology). But unfortunately, while your reasoning makes sense to me, I've had difficulty convincing others around me to do the same.

 

[basil]

Are you also referring to how to avoid for example "errrrrrrcy" in "mercy"? and other similar phenomena?

Not exactly (although I would like to hear about that, as well). I'm afraid that I've reached the limit of what I can verbalize on this forum. I truly appreciate your willingness to answer my questions, but I don't think that I can contribute anything meaningful to the discussion at this point.

 

[zinoviev]

Georgios Michalakis wrote that vocal output should be "as close to nasal as possible (all in avoiding rhinophony, of course)." This seems to match recordings of classically trained chanters and is in contrast to most performances of Western music.

The following is a very nice illustration (by Iakovos Nafpliotis):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMpvT3ojK4I

There Georgios Michalakis made the following comment: "THE voice = imagine: he's about 80 years old on this recording, and had chanted almost everyday of his life (church, school, home, lessons, etc). ONLY Iakovos' vocal placement and technique could allow maintenance of such vocal QUALITY up to his last day ... occidentals call it "nasal". It really ISN'T, and it's PERFECT.... allowing COMFORT, CONTROL and vocal quality longevity..."

Second, do not force your voice to do anything that is uncomfortable or that does not feel physically right. Chanting (as singing) should come naturally in whatever language.

What you wrote seems to agree with what Michalakis wrote. Personally I found the following web page very educating: Damaging Vocal Techniques. Although this text is written by a western vocal teacher, it makes clear that the only natural way to produce good sound in a healthy way is to sing traditionally using the nasal resonance.

 

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

Folks,

Iakovos Naypliotis was a singular point in time. A MAJOR and perhaps UNIQUE moment in history, and likely unsurpassable, but he is now part of history. Plus, we really have no idea what he may have sounded like 10 years, 30 years, 40 years prior to those recordings. The human voice changes every 10 years (roughly) and what someone sounds like at the time of a recording is not necessarily what they sound like LIVE in a performance setting in a church and what they sounded like serially in the past.

It is a very subjective and personal view and many might disagree and I respectfully will concede, but you may want to listen to GEORGE HATZICHRONOGLOU (links below). If there was an example of what one can term "ieroprepes" execution it is George's.

Again, do not be afraid of YOUR voice. It is YOUR talent that should come through and not something that is being forced because someone tells you "you do not sound like [chanter XYZ] therefore you are not a chanter"

http://www.ieropsaltis.com/psalt_Xatzixronoglou.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ncUiRe5X-c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJljTvsdL-M

NG

 

[Shota]

There Georgios Michalakis made the following comment: "THE voice = imagine: he's about 80 years old on this recording, and had chanted almost everyday of his life (church, school, home, lessons, etc). ONLY Iakovos' vocal placement and technique could allow maintenance of such vocal QUALITY up to his last day ... occidentals call it "nasal". It really ISN'T, and it's PERFECT.... allowing COMFORT, CONTROL and vocal quality longevity..."

According to Fr. Seraphim Farasoglou Nafpliotis would avoid (!) conversations at all (especially during the Holy Week) because of psaltic reasons (not to put extra strain on his voice). He also had a special diet and led a disciplined and regular lifestyle, which help to preserve one's voice.

 

[herron.samuel]

According to Fr. Seraphim Farasoglou Nafpliotis would avoid (!) conversations at all (especially during the Holy Week) because of psaltic reasons (not to put extra strain on his voice). He also had a special diet and led a disciplined and regular lifestyle, which help to preserve one's voice.

To specifically speak to the diet, I know for me the less dairy I consume, the better my voice feels and performs.

 

[saltypsalti]

Not exactly (although I would like to hear about that, as well). I'm afraid that I've reached the limit of what I can verbalize on this forum. I truly appreciate your willingness to answer my questions, but I don't think that I can contribute anything meaningful to the discussion at this point.

Basil et al --I have been a vocalist/choralist since my high school days, and the best solution to the problems of English dipthongs and diction in general I have seen is found in the arrangements of Fred Waring, who practically wrote the book on choral diction (if you've ever looked at any of his scores you will know what I am talking about). Basically his solution is to either stress the 1st half of the dipthong and to put the 2nd 1/2 at the very end of the musical phrase that it sits on (example "Boy" would be rendered "bo - o - i". This would be particularly critical in the more melismatic pieces we routinely face. In the case of the naughtly "R" dipthong you mention in "Lord", "mercy" etc. is to eliminate the "R" altogether and render the diction "Luhd have muh-cy". It sounds a bit "hickish" but it works. If there are diction issues, sometimes it helps to pencil in these little dictionisms into the score.

JPP

 

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

Good points.

NG

 

[saltypsalti]

Good points.

NG

With regards to the "R" -best to roll the R's if it is used as a consonant, and not sing them all if they are part of a vowel dipthong. It's the English way.

JPP

 

[herron.samuel]

For the sake of discussion I just did a quick recording of Lord I have Cried in the 1st Mode as composed by Papa Ephraim of St. Anthony's Monastery.

A bit of background on me:

• 
  I have studied under Leonidas Kotsiris in Nashville, TN, who studied under Kyr. Ilias Frangoulis in Adelaide, from the age of 16 until 20.

• 
  At 20 years old I spent 3 months in Athens and studied under Lycourgos Angelopoulos and his merry band of chanters. I know of the many, many relevant criticisms of Angelopoulos and I know many are based in valid reasoning and experience, but for me it was an amazing time. The Christian charity shown to me by those at Agia Eirini, in EBX, and by Angelopoulos himself was nothing short of remarkable considering I had no money and could pay none of them for all the lessons, books, and experience they gave me.
  
  I also spent 1 1/2 of those months with EBX as a "member".

• 
  I am now 24 years old and will be moving to Chattanooga, TN where I will be the head chanter at Holy Annunciation Greek Orthodox Church.

My chanting style is heavily influenced, some would say completely dominated and I wouldn't be able to protest, by the Angelopoulos/Karas school of Byzantine Chant. I know of the animosity on both sides of this argument, however I welcome any and all criticism, although constructive criticism is always more welcome and helpful.

I specifically post this recording for this thread so as to provide a live example of my diction and chanting in English and how I can improve it.

Anything I do wrong? Do any words run together? Any recommendations on how to make the English sound clearer?

I will add my computer microphone does not seem to pick my "H" up very well.

 

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

As you have cited, the Karas method is not considered mainstream. It would be prudent, until the time the Ecumenical Patriarchate (for the US) issues otherwise to remain faithful to what at least a century of chant practice and method has retained as traditional. In fact, the Church of Greece has issued two edicts cautioning against the Karas method.

The church and the analogion is not a site for experimentation outside what ecclesiastic tradition permits. What those supporting the Karas method do in their academic research is not necessarily what the church accepts. The methods of their research are also questionable.

Just because the Church of Greece has not ENFORCED its edicts, does not mean that we should arbitrarily disobey them as as a sister church, especially since the EcuPatri is the spiritual leader of bother the CofG and the Archdiocese here.

As a medical scientist, as a thinker and as a chanter who has learned from some of the most traditional chanters since the age of 8, I have open-mindedly looked at both sides of the argument. I especially tried hard to see any validity of the Karas conjectures after urging by one of Agelopoulos' closest confidantes. By the first couple of pages through Karas' two-tome works, it was obvious that there was absolutely no historical, or mathematico-acoustical basis in anything written therein.

With all due respect to Angelopoulos, his PR machine is incredible and this has attracted many followers. I do not dispute his enthusiasm. I am however disappointed in his fanaticism and that of his close followers, who refuse to re-examine their arguments in light of history and undisputable mathematico-acoustic facts (indeed, in the second international conference of the ASBMH, Mr. Haralambos Symeonidis formally proved the different "scales" according to Karas as bunk using a computer-based method, but demonstrated the validity of the Chrysanthine scales; that presentation is instructive and the recorded video is available in the asbmh site).

Please stay within the norms of what the Ecumenical Patriarchate accepts as appropriate. This means the Chrysanthine system (its perceived imperfections notwithstanding) and the teachings of mainstream chant developed over 100 years in Asia Minor and the Balkans.

To stray into adventurism is not something the church accepts and one day will fall hard on.

Above all, fanaticism is no different than heresy (i.e. to make oneself an outlier and outside the mean).

If you are interested to further communicate with me in private on the problems of the Karas method I would be more than happy to offer you my insights based on facts and history.

NG.

 

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

Dear Samuel,

Your English rendition is excellent. I enjoyed it and it came through (the words) very clearly. No one should claim "I did not understand you".

However, from a musical side: Please be careful of the interval Vou-Pa on descent. Vou is too high. I would say that pushing that Vou (on descent) another quarter of a semitone down would be right on.

Please accept this constructively.

NG.

 

[basil]

For the sake of discussion I just did a quick recording of Lord I have Cried in the 1st Mode as composed by Papa Ephraim of St. Anthony's Monastery.

Thank you for having the courage to do this. I now feel emboldened to do the same. I have attached two recordings of the same piece. I welcome any constructive criticism. Bear in mind that as of yet, I have not been given any comprehensive, systematic training in Byzantine vocal technique.

 

[Nikolaos Giannoukakis]

Dear Basil,

Overall it is very nice. I am impressed identically as I am with Samuel.

Two notes (constructively):

1) Diction: The vowels are a little too "open" and "loose". Samuel's were more "closed and rounded" and easier to listen to and understand. Although I understood the words, someone unacquainted with BM would have some difficulty understanding the words.

2) The same advice as I offered to Samuel on Vou-Pa on descent. Vou is perceptibally higher than what it should be and the ELAXISTOS interval does not come out. Upon descent, lower your Vou by a quarter of a semi tone and you should be right on.

NG

 

[herron.samuel]

As you have cited, the Karas method is not considered mainstream. It would be prudent, until the time the Ecumenical Patriarchate (for the US) issues otherwise to remain faithful to what at least a century of chant practice and method has retained as traditional. In fact, the Church of Greece has issued two edicts cautioning against the Karas method.

I actually agree with a good amount of this.

The church and the analogion is not a site for experimentation outside what ecclesiastic tradition permits. What those supporting the Karas method do in their academic research is not necessarily what the church accepts. The methods of their research are also questionable.

Just because the Church of Greece has not ENFORCED its edicts, does not mean that we should arbitrarily disobey them as as a sister church, especially since the EcuPatri is the spiritual leader of bother the CofG and the Archdiocese here.

The Patriarchate has not held up to any sort of standards against the Karas Method and style either, though. Angelopoulos is an Archon, I believe. Also, while I was with them in Greece we did a private concert for the Patriarchate and his "entourage". I am not saying whether this validates Angelopoulos or not, for if we relied solely on the words and titles of Bishops to maintain tradition then the Orthodox Church would not be Orthodox. But it should be pointed out that Angelopoulos has gotten Patriarchal approval as well as the Church of Greece not enforcing their edicts.

As a medical scientist, as a thinker and as a chanter who has learned from some of the most traditional chanters since the age of 8, I have open-mindedly looked at both sides of the argument. I especially tried hard to see any validity of the Karas conjectures after urging by one of Agelopoulos' closest confidantes. By the first couple of pages through Karas' two-tome works, it was obvious that there was absolutely no historical, or mathematico-acoustical basis in anything written therein.

With all due respect to Angelopoulos, his PR machine is incredible and this has attracted many followers. I do not dispute his enthusiasm. I am however disappointed in his fanaticism and that of his close followers, who refuse to re-examine their arguments in light of history and undisputable mathematico-acoustic facts (indeed, in the second international conference of the ASBMH, Mr. Haralambos Symeonidis formally proved the different "scales" according to Karas as bunk using a computer-based method, but demonstrated the validity of the Chrysanthine scales; that presentation is instructive and the recorded video is available in the asbmh site).

Very true. However, the criticism reaches both sides. When Karas/Angelopoulos began their work the world they stepped into was not one of great Patriarchal traditional chanting being spread everywhere and correctly. In fact, one of the reasons that Karas began his work was to try to correct the errors that were done by most of the chanters in his time. Obviously, in many respects he missed the mark by a good distance. However, he also provided many useful and good reforms that have taken hold and drew me to going to Angelopoulos for teaching.

In fact, my specific reasons for going to him AND what I regard as very useful reforms that some "Patriarchal" chanters could learn from were this:

• Systemization of Isokratima - Even if one does not like their double ison (which I do), their work in creating a valid, coherent, systematic theory on when and why to move isokratima cured many of the problems that still are found in many chanting schools today that, at least for me, can completely detract from the chanting itself and produce a Westernized feel to the music, almost producing a sound that resembles chordal changes. Many of the Stanitsas-influenced Byzantine Choirs suffer from this problem. Ergasteri Psaltikis, which is a fantastic choir in my opinion, detracts from its fantastic chanting with its constantly shifting isokratima.
  
• The widespread use and rivival of classical compositions and anthologies - Indeed, this was the #1 reason actually. I find the classical compositions and classical anthologies to be unmatched for quality and simplicity and beauty. Sadly, many chanters to not even know them or use them. A big part of why I wanted to study with a group who has such respect for classical compositions is because I believe for English to have a firm foundation for Byzantine chant ti grow, it needs a repertoire of classical compositions itself. Papa Ephraim has done an excellent job in using this model, and is one I firmly support.
  
• An understanding of classical composition - If you take out all those excess signs from the Karas method, their compositions are quite classical and beautiful in nature. Ioannis Arvanitis has many fantastic compositions that I would say are unequaled by any other modern composers, and I think this is largely due to his and the Karas school's understanding and respect for classical compositions.
  
  However, I do not have much fondness for their extra signs, and can present the same problem they try to correct by returning to classical style composing. That problem being the over-analytical and mechanical interpretation of trills.
• Maximization of the art of chanting as a choir - I wanted to see if they had any special methods for training and learning to sing together as a choir. I learned some things, but ultimately it seems to just be practice. There is no special trick to this one. But I do have respect for how well their choir works together.

Please stay within the norms of what the Ecumenical Patriarchate accepts as appropriate. This means the Chrysanthine system (its perceived imperfections notwithstanding) and the teachings of mainstream chant developed over 100 years in Asia Minor and the Balkans.

To stray into adventurism is not something the church accepts and one day will fall hard on.

Above all, fanaticism is no different than heresy (i.e. to make oneself an outlier and outside the mean).

If you are interested to further communicate with me in private on the problems of the Karas method I would be more than happy to offer you my insights based on facts and history.

NG.

I would be interested, not so much to discuss the problems of the Karas method, but in working to correct these problems. Thank you for the criticism. It really is helpful and invaluable.

 

[herron.samuel]

The other reason I forgot to mention is the almost unparalleled Liturgics of Agia Eirini. It was a blessing to see the revival of the Argai Katavasia in the way they do them, along with many other things such as the Typica, Makaroismoi, and Kratima.