Ⲫⲁⲓ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲉⲛϥ

Since the feast of the Cross is approaching, I’d love to share some information about the hymn ⲫⲁⲓ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲉⲛϥ which is quite popular within Coptic Rite; the text is taken from the ⲑⲉⲟⲧⲟⲕⲓⲁ of Sunday (the stanza ⲫⲁⲓ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲉⲛϥ is actually found twice in the tadakia, once in section 6, and the other instance below).

ⲁⲩⲉⲛ ⲡⲓⲁⲣⲭⲏⲉⲣⲉⲩⲥ ⳾ ϩⲓϫⲉⲛ ⲡⲉⲛⲥⲱⲧⲏⲣ ⳾ ⲡⲓϣⲟⲩϣⲱⲟⲩϣⲓ ⲙⲙⲏⲓ ⳾ ⲛⲭⲁⲛⲟⲃⲓ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ ⳾	They brought/placed the high priest • upon our savior, • the true sacrifice • forgiving sin/forgiveness of sin —
ⲫⲁⲓ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲉⲛϥ ⲉⲡϣⲱⲓ ⳾ ⲛⲟⲩⲑⲩⲥⲓⲁ ⲉⲥϣⲏⲡ ⳾ ϩⲓϫⲉⲛ ⲡⲓⲥⲧⲁⲩⲣⲟⲥ ⳾ ϧⲁ ⲡⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ ⲙⲡⲉⲛⲅⲉⲛⲟⲥ ⳾	this one/he who offered himself up • as an acceptable sacrifice • on the cross • for the salvation of our race.
ⲁϥϣⲱⲗⲉⲙ ⲉⲣⲟϥ ⳾ ⲛϫⲉ ⲡⲉϥⲓⲱⲧ ⲛⲁⲅⲁⲑⲟⲥ ⳾ ⲙⲫⲛⲁⲩ ⲛⲧⲉ ϩⲁⲛⲁⲣⲟⲩϩⲓ ⳾ ϩⲓϫⲉⲛ ⲡⲓⲅⲟⲗⲅⲟⲑⲁ ⳾	His Good Father • smelled him • at the time of/in the evening • on Golgotha.
ⲁϥⲟⲩⲱⲛ ⲙⲫⲣⲟ ⳾ ⲙⲡⲓⲡⲁⲣⲁⲇⲓⲥⲟⲥ ⳾ ⲁϥⲧⲁⲥⲑⲟ ⲛⲁⲇⲁⲙ ⳾ ⲉⲧⲉϥⲁⲣⲭⲏ ⲛⲕⲉⲥⲟⲡ ⳾	He opened the gate • of the paradise • and restored Adam • to his place/rank/authority once more.

Known for its powerful melody and its use on solemn occasions (specifically Holy Week and the Feasts of the Cross) most people associate this hymn with ‘mournful’ seasons in the liturgical calendar or services such as funerals. In other cases, because only the middle two stanzas are extrapolated and the context is foregone the hymn is associated specifically with the Cross; in fact, it is now commonly called the “Hymn of the Cross”.

Shockingly, however, this hymn belongs more so to a totally different group of hymns known as the “Hymns of Incense”. You’ll notice that the full text of this hymn is actually speaking of the typology of Christ as the High Priest who offers the sacrifice—he himself being that sacrifice, the evening incense—raised up to the Father. (Note that the Coptic text is physically alluding to the understanding of the typology in the writings of the early Church Fathers, who saw the type as a sketch, a blueprint, an image which is to be superimposed on its original (e.g. Adam was a type of Christ, who was only completed in Christ). Here, the high priest of old is but a sketch which, on the cross, is placed upon the original from which it was sketched, Jesus Christ.)

Now then, let’s turn to these “Hymns of Incense”, identify them, and decipher their musical and textual system.

Prior to the Pauline Epistle:

(1) ⲛⲑⲟ ⲡⲉ ϯϣⲟⲩⲣⲏ

Prior to the Acts of the Apostles:

(2) ϣⲁⲣⲉ ⲫⲛⲟⲩϯ

(3) ⲫⲁⲓ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲉⲛϥ

In common practice, the first two are chanted during the weekdays of Lent, while the third (our subject) is left for Holy Week. These three hymns, however, were originally chanted as the standard hymns of incense in each liturgy, as is STILL DOCUMENTED in the editio typica, rather, the official euchologion of the Coptic Church published in 1902 (see photos). What is preserved in the more solemn occasions of Lent and Holy Week is actually the older standard practice throughout (cf. Anton Baumstark’s Liturgical “Laws”).

That being said, we can examine these three hymns.

(1) In their Bohairic use, all three of these texts are taken from the Sunday Tadakia (6th section); Each of these texts speak about the incense and are referred to in the context of the portions of the Tadakia from which they are extrapolated

(2) As a result, each of them are written and chanted in Tone 1/Tone Adam/ⲏⲭⲟⲥ ⲁⲇⲁⲙ

(3) They share relatively the same musical melodies/sentences (those of us who love these hymns will know exactly what musical phrases I’m speaking of )

It’s now time for the fun fact! Because these three hymns are in Tone Adam, it is possible to sing them with the melodies of the other verses; in particular, ⲫⲁⲓ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲉⲛϥ can be and is supposed to be (?) chanted in the same melody as ⲛⲑⲟ ⲡⲉ ϯϣⲟⲩⲣⲏ WHEN IT COMES BEFORE THE PAULINE (recording will follow and photos are below). This is common for many other hymns in tones Adam or watos when stanzas are taken and used as an aspasmos or a doxology or in place of a ⲡⲁⲣⲁⲗⲉⲝ.

This provides valuable context for the upcoming occasion, Feast of the Cross (on the old calendar), in which there is a lot of confusion as to the order of the hymns. In contemporary practice, there is much controversy over whether to sing ⲧⲁⲓϣⲟⲩⲣⲏ or ϯϣⲟⲩⲣⲏ (which is useless because they’re one hymn ⲃⲱϩⲉⲙ & ⲡⲁⲣⲁⲗⲉⲝ) followed by ⲫⲁⲓ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲉⲛϥ and then the ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛ. When we arrive at the incense of the Acts, we find a ⲭⲉⲣⲉ ⲡⲓⲥⲧⲁⲩⲣⲟⲥ only in certain books and not in others, and then we find that oral tradition (cantors Fahim, Ibrahim, etc.) tells us to sing ⲫⲁⲓ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲉⲛϥ again. Unaware of these developments and intricacies, and the original use of ⲫⲁⲓ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲉⲛϥ as a hymn of incense, most cantors chant it in its unique tune (the tune before the Acts) after ⲧⲁⲓ/ϯϣⲟⲩⲣⲏ and then chant it like ⲧⲟⲧⲉ ⲁⲗⲏⲑⲱⲥ/ⲭⲉⲣⲉ ⲛⲉ ⲙⲁⲣⲓⲁ before the Acts. This is of course extremely confusing, so please bear with me. In actuality, according to our manuscripts and the musical system of the Hymns of Incense, the text ⲫⲁⲓ ⲉⲧⲁϥⲉⲛϥ is chanted in the tune of ⲛⲑⲟ ⲡⲉ ϯϣⲟⲩⲣⲏ when it comes before the Pauline Epistle, and in its unique tune when chanted before the Acts of the Apostles. In this way, the Church places the emphasis on the Cross on occasions like Covenant Thursday, Good Friday, or the Feast of the Cross, or even the funerals of the clergy while maintaining the standard focus on the incense as the priest offers it during the Liturgy of the Word.

(Just food for thought: Have you ever compared the tune of ⲛⲑⲟ ⲡⲉ ϯϣⲟⲩⲣⲏ to the tune of the melismatic ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛ? Similar aren’t they? As a matter of fact, the reason why ϩⲓ hold two notes as opposed to one is because it attempts to mimic ⲛⲑⲟ with its two syllables When ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛ was added prior to the Pauline and took on the place of a hymn of incense, they gave it a tune similar to the hymns of incense, though the rest of its music has its own issues.)

I hope this hasn’t confused anyone too much, but as always would love to hear your questions and thoughts! One final thought, this information is meant to enhance our understanding and practice, not to cause division or argumentation, so I ask that we use it wisely for the purposes of edification in love, not in division.