Soltanto alla fine del secolo scorso risale I'inizio di un' indagine sistematica delle
grafie neumatiche latine. Non che prima siano mancati simili progetti 0 tentativi, come
queUo intrapreso dall'enciclopedico p. G. B. Martini di Bologna,l 0 non ci siano stati
approfondimenti in materia, come mostrano alcuni appunti presi da G. Baini. 2
Esattamente un secolo fa, all'inizio degli anni novanta, due volumi della
"nuova" collana solesmense Pateographie Musicale 3 fanno compiere un pas so decisivo.
Questa raccolta di riproduzione di un medesimo pezzo trasmesso da tanti manoscritti
sara alIa base di tutte le ricerehe succesive e costituisce un interessante programma di
articolazione del materiale neumatico edito secondo un eriterio geografico e
eronologico.
Nel 1895 esce la prima parte dello studio pioneristico -- sempre interessante e
sotto molti aspetti ancora valido -- di o. Fleischer. 4 A varie testimonianze grafiche
italiane Fleischer dedica alcuni capitoli del II volume, ad esempio: le lamentazioni di
Geremia nel codice Amiatino quale piu antica testimonianza di neumatizzazione
(purtroppo i neumi sono di molto posteriori al testo biblico; probabilmente sono toscani
e risalgono all'Xl se non al XII secolo); le lamentazioni nei codici Napoli, Bibl.
I Forse anche in vista di un'esauriente trattazione della materia, p. Martini raccolse Dumeroso materiale,
tra cui decine di frammenti molto interessanti. Tali frammeoti SODO oggi confluiti - parziaImeote in
disordine rispetto alIa sistemazione originale - in aleuni codici fattizi, conservati aI Civico Museo
Bibliografico Musicale di Bologna, che attuaImente st~ catalogando.
2 Gli appunti si trovano aRoma, Biblioteca Casanatense.
3 Le repons-graduel Justus ut palma reproduil e(l !ac-simil d'apres plus d£ eux cents anliphonaires
manuscrils d'origines diverses du rxe eu XVJf! siecles, 2 voIl. (Solesmes, 1891 e 1892) = PaItSographie
Musicale 2 e 3. Alle grafie itaIiane SODO dedicate le tavole 4-79 del I volume. Le didascali.e preseoti:
n'
Deumi -accenti, Dotazione mista ad accenti e punti. neumi-acceoti con virghe allungate Angelica 123 di
BolognaJ. punti legati. notazione nonantolana. lombarda [= beneveotana], lombarda e aquitana, itaIiana
derivata da quella lombarda [VaIlicelliano B 24 di Subiaco], itaIiana [van testimoni dell'Italia centrale e
setteotrionaleJ, di transizione verso la notazione quadrata.
4 o. Fleischer, Neumen-Studien. Abhandlungen Uber mittelalterliche Gesangs-Tonschriften. I: Ober
Ursprung und EntziJferung der Neumen (Leipzig, 1895)
5 O. Fleischer, op. cil. ,11: Das all-chrislliche Recilaliv und die EntziJferung der Neumen (Leipzig, 1897),
1-43.
6 Op. cil., 64.
7 P. Wagner, EinftJhrung in die gregorianische Melodien. 11: NeumenJamde (Leipzig, 1905; 211912).
8 Op. cil., 168 e 137 della I edizione.
9 Op. cil., 177 dell a I ediziono.
10 H . M. Bannister, Monumenti Valicani di PaleograJia Musicale LaJina, 2 voll. (Leipzig, 1913) =
Codices e Vaticanis selecti phototypice expressi 12.
Il Op. cil., XLIV-LVII.
12 G. M. Sunyol, Inlroducci6 a la pakograJia musical gregoriana (Monserrat, 1925) . Ora, come aI
solito , ci si riferisce alla traduzione G. M. Sufiol, Introduction a la paliographie musicak Gregorienne
2
Presentando alcuni documenti che illustrano ]0 svi]uppo della semiografia
musica1e, G. Vecchi distingue fondamentalmente due gruppi di notazioni italiane:
quelle nazionali e quelle di origine straniera. Apepartengono al primo gruppo di grafie
"originali" italiche la notazione primitiva dell'Italia del Nord, la nonantolese, dell'Ita1.ia
centrale (Toscana, Umbria, Lazio) e la cassino-beneventana . Derivano, invece, da
modelli stranieri la gratia musicale della Novalesa, di Monza, Ivrea, la comasca, quella
normanna (Calabria, Sicilia) e I'aquitana (NapoJi). Posteriori sono le notazioni quadrata
e mensurale. 13
Mentre affronta il problema della tradizione "guidoniana", Smits van
Waesberghe ne elenca i testimoni in un "Conspectus codicum Guidonicam notationem
in stricto sensu continentium" . In tale prospetto si distinguono 1) ]a "notatio neumarum
dicta 'Ilaliae centralis' (i. e regionum Aemiliae, Tusciae alque Umbriae) seu ltala-
Beneventana ", 2) la notazione "Bononiensis" , 3) quella "Mediolanensis", 4) la
"Beneventana", 5) la "Nonantulensis" e, intine, 6) la "notatio quadrata".I 4 Nonostante
queste suddivisioni, l'attribuzione di alcuni codici a determinate categorie e chiaramente
inadeguata, come il caso, ad esempio, del graduale Modena, Bib\. Capi tolare , 0.1.7 e
di altri testimoni dell a gratia "ravennate" assegnati al primo generico gruppo dell'
"Italia centrale" .15
Una signiticativa scelta di materia grafico e concisi commenti molto appropriati
si trovano in un sussidio pubblicato dai monaci di Solesmes. Vi si trovano esempi delle
seguenti notazioni italiane: antica (coarte di guardia di Modena, Bib!. Capitolare
0.1.13, sec. X), "dire de Novalese", "dile de Nonantola", beneventana, dell'Italia del
Nord, dell'Italia centrale, ambrosiana, quadrata dei "corali".16 E' bene rivelare la
prudenza del guidizio quando si tratta delle notazioni "dene" della Novalesa e di
Nonantola. 17
A poche categorie grafiche riconduce E. Jammers la produzione liturgica
italiana. Egli distingue e presenta la "beneventanische und romische Schrift" , le
"oberitalienische (und mittelitalienische) Schriften" e, infine, Nonantola. 18 E' evidente
che la generalizzazione e troppo estesa a scapi to della precisione.
3
II Repertorio dei manoscritti merlievali con notazione musica1e conservati in
Francia presenta alcune testimonianze italiane che la Bemard qualifica nel sequente
modo: neumi italiani su rigo, milanesi, dell'Italia del nord. 19
Bruno Stiblein articola la sua magistrale e analitica esposizione delle grafie
italiane in base alle aree geografiche d'origine e presenta i piu importanti esempi
distinguendo, quasi sempre, varie epoche: neumi dell'Italia settentrionale (Novalesa,
Nonantola, Bologna, esemplari di Polirone, Brescia, Vercelli, Milano), ltalia centrale
(esemplari come i Vaticani lat.4770, 6078 e 5319 [quest'ultimo romano-antico],
Pistoia, Siena) e ltalia meridionale (a partire dall'arcaico Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek,
Patr. 101, c.l del sec. X a esemplari di Benevento e di Troia).20
Una panoramica d'insieme con alcuni approfondimenti interessanti e offerta pure
dalla specialista francese Solange Corbin. Ella distingue i sequenti tipi di "ita1ienische
Neumenschrift: die benevemanische Neumenschri.ft; die Neumen aus NOlUlmo/a,
Bologna; die Schrift aus Mailand und die ausgeprtigten Neumen Nord- und
Milteliralien; die Vielfalt der Neumen im Norditalienischen Bereich, die Neumen der
Gegend von Novalesa und Vercelli" .21 A proposito della molteplicitA di neumi
dell'ambito dell'ltalia settentrionale, la Corbin ricorda sol tan to tre tipologie: i neumi
sangallesi a Bobbio, quelli di derivazione bretone a Pavia e la presenza della gratia
messina a Como. 22
Recentemente due studiosi italiani hanno ripreso e aggiomato il modello
didattico del Sufiol. In altrettante tavole grafiche sono presentati i neumi del graduale
Roma, Biblioteca Angelica 123; Benevento, Bibl. Capitolare, 33 e 34.23
A parte questi e aItri studi panorainici complessivi, non sono mancate negli
ultimi decenni ricerche monografiche su particolari grafie e determinati centri scrittori.
Vale la pena ricordare alcuni dei contributi piu significativi sul1a grafia musicale della
Novalesa,24 Brescia,25 l'intera tradizione ambrosiana,26 BoIogna,27 Nonantola,28 varie
fonti del Friuli 29 e dell'ltalia centra1e,30 Roma,31 la tradizione "beneventana"32 e infine,
le tardive notazioni quadrate. 33
19 M. Bemard, Repertoire de manuscrits mMievaux contenant des notations musicaies, Ill: Bibliotheques
parisiennes. Arsenal, Narw/Ull£ (Musique), Universitaire, teak des beaux-arts et Fonds privb (Paris,
1974),25,30, 143,202, 23l.
20 B. Stiblein, Schriftbild der einstimmigen Musik, Musikgeschichte in Bildem III/4 (Leipzig, 1975),
122-145, law. 13-3Od
21 S. Corbin, Die Neumen, in Pakleographie der Musik, I: Die einstimmige Musik des Miltelaiters, a cura
di W. Arll (Koln, 1979),3.1-3.233 (apparso come fascicolo separalo nel 1977).
22 Op. cit., 3.164-3.165.
23 F. Rampi - M. Lattanzi, Manuale di canto gregoriano con u/la sinleS; Iiturgica di Reginald Gregoire
(Milano, 1991),617-620 e 625-637.
24 B. Ferretti, NOlazione neunuuica di Novalesa. Saggio slrorico-paleografico (Novalesa, Comunita
Benedettina dei SS. Pietro e Paolo s.d. [199O?]); M. Giovinazzo, Analisi morfologica e semiologica della
grafia musicale del Codice Roma, Biblioteca Casanatense 3830 (tesi dattilo, Roma, 1990).
25 R. M . T . BareZZJU1.i, La notazione di un codice brescianio (secolo Xl) [Oxford, Bodleian Libr.,
4
Queste ultime tipologie si impongono un po' ovunque,34 soprattutto nella
seconda meta del sec. XIII, probabilmente per due motivi: la diffusione deIla normativa
francescana riguardo alia confezione dei libri liturgici 35 e I' affennazione di attrezzati
laboratori di copiatura che sono fioriti in centri culturali (universitari) in grande
espansione, come ~ il caso di Bologna.
s
Prima che la fisionomia dei neumi fosse uniformata nei moduli delle grafie
quadrate, proprio nel sec. XII assistiamo a una rinnovata espansione creativa che vede
una ricca fioritura di espressioni grafiche quali caratteristiche distintive di centri
scrittori e di aree cultuali e culturali. Tale vitalita si evidenzia in una regione
privilegiata: nella rona padana 0, in senso piu allargato, in tutta I' Italia settentrionale.
Accanto a una ripresa di modelli grafici locaIi anteriori (per esempio a Vercelli,
Novara, Milano, Como, Nonanto]a), troviamo un radicale e profondo cambiamento di
tradizioni che si lasciano influenzare da matrici culturaJi diverse dal passato (si pensi ad
Aosta e a Bobbio), mentre altre aree, ancora, trovano un'affermazione decisa di una
tipologia che diverra peculiare di una rona, come quella assai estesa in cui si diffonde il
modulo "ravennate", dal padovano alle Marche senza tralasciare l'Emilia Romagna.
Non ritengo che possa dare una risposta esauriente alIa tematica esposta nel
titolo di questa comunicazione. Penso che sia opportuno segnalare alcune piste di
ricerca e soIlevare alcune questioni metodologiche.
In primo luogo si avverte sempre pi~ pressante la necessita di un rilevamento a
tappeto di tutto il materiale oggi in qualche modo ricuperabile. In append ice propongo
una ckeck-list provvisoria di codici e frammenti dei quali sono a conoscenza. Tale lista
e provvisoria non soltanto in riferimento alIa quantita del materiale segnalato, ma anche
per quanto conceme la nomenclatura usata per distinguere le singole grafie. Non sono
sceso nei particolari ne ho distinto le varie epoche in cui si potrebbero articolare meglio
le diverse testimonianze di un unico tipo. Inoltre ho usato volutamente una terminologia
"mista" per permettere di vedere i pro e i contro deisingoli criteri di scelta cui
accenner(} fra poco.
La provvisorieta dell'attuale lista di censimento riguarda poi un altro
importantissimo problema: la cronologia delle testimonianze e la loro
originelprovenienza. Come in altri settori avverto che in questo campo esiste una
fluidita di guidizi e di opinioni che cercano ancora un solido ancoraggio per una piu
precisa determinazione.
Mi permetto due sole considerazioni: la stessa grafia puo essere usata in luoghi
diversi in tempi anche diversi. Questo fatto determina talora una sfasatura cronoIogica
che puo raggiungere 10 scarto di 50 e piu anni. Analoga situazione si verifica alIa
presenza di un unico copista. Un medesimo caJligrafo trascrive codici e neumi con un
suo strile person ale che acquisisce relativamente presto e che probabilmente pratica per
tutta la vita in un'attivita che si puo estendere, pertanto, per decenni.
Tenendo presenti queste osservazioni saranno da riconsiderare, ad esempio, i
testimoni che presentano neumi in campo aperto, con 0 anche senza nessuna
preoccupazione di diastemazia: il fenomeno, gia conosciuto in epoca "tarda" per i
neumi germanici, e presente nel sec. xn anche altri ambiti geografici, come l'area
6
vercellese e del Monferrato. Alcuni esempi a tale riguardo sono offerti da frammenti
non ancora cataIogati, ma comunque ricuperati dalle filze dei "Notai del Monferrato"
presso I' Archivio di Stato di Alessandria. 36
Utile mi sembra allora anche la ricerca di codici liturgici e musicali di cui si
sappia con certezza la data e/o l'origine. Un primo abbozzo manoscritti datati 0 databili
viene proposto nella seconda append ice. COSt pure ritengo utile un esame sistematico
della pagina dei codici musicali, in particolare del rapporto esistente tra il numero di
righi musicaIi; la misura dello specchio rigato e il tipo di libro liturgico. In una terza
appendice propongo alcuni esempi. Da queste note provvisorie risulta un fatto
significativo: la maggior parte dei graduali e antifonari del sec. XII presentato 12 e 13
righi per pagina, con una tendenza ad allargare 10 spettro nelle immediate vicinanze
(9/11 e 14115 righi). Altre misura sono eccezionali (7/8 e 16/25) ed altre ancora (ad
esempio 5 0 6 righi per pagina) mancano del tuuo mentre, proprio queste uitime, sono
caratteristiche di epoche successive.
Un' altra questione di non poco conto, come gia si e avuto modo di. accennare,
riguarda la terminoiogia. Abbiamo visto alcune opinioni espresse ormai da un secolo da
diversi studiosi della materia. Non si puo continuare a vagare nell'indeterminazione e
nella non-precisione. Con quale no me identificare a1iora le diverse grafie a livello di
"genere" e di "specie", in un 'accezione piu vasta che raccolga tutti i testimoni affini e
parimenti permetta di evidenziare le peculiarita di uno 0 piu manoscritti?
Sappiamo che per quanto riguarda l'ItaIia centrale e meridionale regna una
grande confusione che non si lascia ancora dissipare. Tutta una serie di grafie
differenziate nei particolari, ma accomunate nelle caratteristiche fondamentali, sono
chiamate in modo generico grafie "di transizione" oppure, con un termine fuorviante,
notazione "beneventana". Ho l'imperssione che ci si trovi in una situazione analoga a
queUa che interessa I'assai differenziata famiglia dei neumi deU'area germanica, spesso
chiamati genericamente "germanici" 0, con un termine fuorviante, "sangallesi".
Non e chiaro, in primo luogo, che cosa si voglia intendere con "beneventano" e
"sangallese": la zona d 'origine di taIi grafie oppure soltanto un certo piu prestigioso di
altri in cui sono stati prodotti esemplari tipici? La cosa riguarda anche le grafie del sec.
XII neIl'Italia settentrionale. Caso paradigmatico e la notazione detta nonan tolana
11 11 •
Ritengo personalmente che non sia opportuno man tenere sempre e in ogni caso
la terminologia consueta. Nel caso di varie proposte, per quale si opta? Come
introdurre un vocabolario piu appropriato; ma, in questo secondo caso, in base a quaJi
criteri si faranno le scelte? Si mantiene 0 si propone un criterio puramente grafico
36 efr. Appendice l. Per quanto riguarda iJ testo letterario di questi frammenti, sotto il profilo deUa
paIeografia testuale, la Prof. Mirella Ferrari dell'DniversilA Cattolica del S. Cuore (Milano) mi ha
gentilmente confermato la datazione propoSIa del sec. XII.
7
(neumi ad accento, a punti, a punti legati ... ) che non potra mai essere discriminante di
tante varieta d'interpretazione dei segni fondamentali? Si deve preferire, al contrario,
una terminologia che evidenzi il centeo scrittorio di principale produzione -- e forse di
creazione di determinate grafie -- mantenendo in ombra, almeno neI nome, le
peculiarita grafiche? Si usano termini univoci 0 anche misti (grafici, cronologici e
geografici insieme), si preferisce evidenziare il particolare 0 si sottolinea I' ampiezza di
diffusione risalendo, se e iI caso, alle divisioni delle circoscrizioni eccIesiastiche
(diocesi, regioni)? Oppure, ancora: ci si potrebbe riferire a un testimone privilegiato
per ogni tipo di gratia, elencando le altre fonti identiche 0 simili al "campione" preso
come modello?
n problema e urgente, considerata l'aUuale terminologia non-uniforme e,
comunque, inadeguata. Tenendo conto del crescente interesse per le ricerche in questo
settore, mi auguro che un concesso di specialisti come Cantus Planus possa arrivare a
una definizione terminologica da proporre con autorevolezza a tutti gli studiosi di
paleografia m usica1e.
APPENDICEI
I ci~
2 bibliotec3 (B) 0 archivio (A)
3 tipo di libro Jiturgico (in minuscolo i frammenti)
4 origine e/o provenienza
5 datazione
6 tipo di notazione secondo il seguente prospetto:
bo bolognese
fr francese
ge germanica
me messino-comasca
me milanese
n1 novalicense
on nonanto Iana
DV novarese
Pc65 Piacenza, Bib!. Capitol are 65
pu a punti
pe a punti espansi
pq a punti teDdenti alia not. quadrata
qp a quadrati piccoli
ra raveonate
sg sangallese
vc vercellese
vr veronese
8
ALESSANDRIA AStato NotMonf mess Piemonte XIIin ve
mess Piemonte XIIin fr
mess Piemonte XIIin
AOSTA GrS~m 2 Brev S.Jacqueme ge
5 Mess Charvensod ge
6 Ant AO S.Orso XIlex qp
II Grad Sion "
71 Mess Courmayeur XIIex ge
9
MONZA BCapit a.1.3 ant
a.16.27 ant
b.Il.71 ant
b.18 .135 ant
b.24.163 ant
c.5.65 ant
c.6.66 ant
c.14.77 grad XII-XIII pu
c.15.79 Ant aSB Pavia XIJ2
d.7.93 Lez Monza XI?XIf?
d.17.105 Messe Monza XIIex pe
e.3.S ant
e.16.95 ant
f.2.102 Mess MED Venegono XI-XII
f.3.104 Mess Casale M. XII-XIII pu
g.2.7 ant
i.4.57 ant
i.5.78 Grad XIII
i.1S . 156 ant
i.19 . 161 ant
MU NCHEN Clm 17019 Grad Innicben ge
NONANTOLA Arcbivio s.n. Cant Nonantola nn
s.n. Oraz Nonantola nn
NOVACELLA Stiftsbibl. grad ge
NOVALESA AParrocchiale Mess iem. Novalesa XIIin nI
NOVARA AStato grad XII ex
AStD g 1 grad :xJ12
AStDSM CXD,c.g. exultet XIJ2 fr
BCapit A 47 Grad Ravenna XII in ra
PADOVA
BSanto s.n. grad XIJ2
BSeminario 697 Grad Padova Xllin
10
161 beev Friuli? XIIex ge
111 ant ge
grad ge
238 brev Friuli XIl-XIII ge
ant Friuli XII-XIIl ge
BArciv fol. 16 Grad AquiJeia XII-XIII ge
fol. 17 Mess Aquileia XII ge
84 Ant Treviso XIIex pe
s.n. grad S.Gallo Mog ge
URBANIA Museo Castello mess XlIin ra
URBINO ASt 318 Ultima mess ra
?11 ant XII ra
VARALLOS. BComunale Como XIIex mc
VATICANO BAV Graec. 1308 grad XlIin
Rossi grad Venezia
Urblat 393 ant ra37
Vauat 3251 ant LOO'?
1. Xl/XII
Vatlat 3797 Faenza? Xllin
Vatlat 4320 Bologna? XlIin
Vatlat 4150 OSB fa
Vallat 10645 grad (51 v) XlIin fa
Vatlat 10645 man MED (58v) Milano me
Vatlat 10646 mess (1-2) XII ra
Vadat 12932 ant MED Milano XIIi me
VERBANIA ASt Fr. 61 grad Novara RV
VERCELU BCapit CXLVI Grad VerceUi XIIin
Grad Vercelli vc
CLXXXVI Grad Baleena XI-XII me
VERONA BCapit cm (brev) Verona XII-XIII pu
CIV Ev-Oraz
CV Mess Verona XI-Xll vr-nn
CVIII Ant
C[X Inn Verona XI-XII
WIEN ONB Vind.SN.206 Sacr Trentino XIJ2 ge
31 Bannister 148. n. 477 (tay. 92a): "£0 metliamo qui IItdla sezione italiana, sebbene per quanlo concerne
la 1W1Q1.ione. potrebb 'usere opera di 1411() scriba dello. Francia meridionale nel sec. XIr.
311 Forse proveniente dllUo stesso ms di cui si trova Ull frammento It ASt Fr. 224.
11
APPENDICE 11
12
1349 Kremsmunster Stiftsbib[, Cim 4 LibOre Bologna
1350Milano BCapitDuomo, D 2 35 Inn MED Milano
1356 Piacenza BCapit,55 AntGrad
1360 Novara AStDioc, A 2 Ant iem MED Milano
1365 Krakow J agiellionska, 140 I Omel (copia da ItMeridionaIe)
1365 Venezia BMarc, Lat.H 119/2426 Grad Venezia
1367 Vendrogno S.Lorenzo, s.n. Ant iem MED
1368 Milano BCapitDuomo, E 1 22 UffMED Milano
1368 Milano S.Ambrogio, M 24 UffMED Milano
1369 Vaticano BAV, OttobLat, 47 CalSalInn OFM Assisi?
1370/1 Firenze BMedLaur, Cor.2 Grad OSB
1378 Munchen Om 23215 LibrOre
1381 Firenze BMedl;aur, Cor.39 Fi S. Pancrazio
1383 Modena A.S.2.31 LihrOre
1385 Firenze BMedLaur, Cor. 9 S. Maria Angeli
1385 Paris BN,lat,757 MessLibrOreOFM
1385 Forli BCom, 853 CalUff Ferrara?
1386 New York PMorganL, M. Cal Ravenna
1388 Firenze BNC, CSoppr, C.6.1896 Ornel Vallombrosa
1388 Vendrogno S.Lorenzo, s.n. Ant est MED
1390 Aosta BCapCatt,3 LezUff Aosta Duomo
I Aosta BSemin,4 Mess Aosta S. Or80
1392 Venezia BMarc, Lat-III 48/2291 Mess OSB Emilia?
1393 Aosta BSOrso,25 Brev Aosta 5.0rso
1393.4 Firenze BMedLaur, Cor.5 Ant OSB
1393 Savona AArchiv, 2 mss s.n. Savona
1393 Savona AArchiv, s.n. Ant Savona
1393 Savona AArchiv, s.n. Invitat Savona
1393 Savona AArchiv, s.n. Grad Savona
1394 Milano S.Arnbrogio, M 6 Mess MED Milano
1394 Nurnberg GermNMuseum, 34387 Ca!
1 Firenze MBargello, C 71 Fi S. Maria Nov.
1396 Firenze BMedLaur, Cor. I Ant aSB Firenze
1396.8 Milano BTrivulz, 2262 Beroldo Milano
1399 Oxford Bodleian, laLl it., a 4 Ant est MED MiJano
APPENDICE III
13
7 222 145 Roma BVallic B 79, 111-197 MesseUffici S.Eutizio XII
14
12 280 140 Vaticano Vial 14733. c. 16 kyr It M (ben) XIII
12 280 165 Vaticano Vial 14676 Ant Pavia xlI-xm
12 290 155 Vaticano Vlat 14676 Ant Pavia XII-xm
39 UDa cam del medesimo ms si trov. Dell'Archivio Capitolare incomiciata e appesa 81 muro.
16
Janka SZENDREI
I Vgl. l.B. Rochester N. Y. Eastmao School of Music, Sibley Musical Library, Ace. 149667 (Admont
494); Miinchen, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek elm 14965 b; Wolfenbiittel, Herzog August Bibliothdc 4641
(Gud. lat. gO 334); Wieo, Oslerreichische Nalionalbibliothek Cpv. 51, \/sw. Bedeutelld sind auch die
Fragmente auf diesem Quelleogebiet, vgl. l.B. Osterreichische Nationalbibliothdc Cod no, letz;tes Folio
(207r).
2 Vgl. B. Stablein, Schrijtbi/d der einslimmigen Musik, Muslkgeschicbte in Bildem 1lI/4 (Leiprig, 1975),
S.57.
3 B. Stablein ist dieser Auffassung (op. cil., S.57), aber die gleiche Meinung vertritt auch scbol1 P.
Wagner (in: EinjiJhrung in die gregorianischen Melodien, lJ: Neumenkunde [l.eiprig, 1912], S. I72)
sowie K. Schlager ("Neumenschrift und Liniensystem". in: Musik in Bayem. Halbjahresschrift d. G~. f.
Bayer. Musilcgeschicbte, Heft 29 (1984], S.33-34).
4 "Die mittelalterliche Choralnotation (Neumen)", in: MGG 9, Sp.1619-1620-
.s Stablein, op. cil., S.55, Anm . 537.
6 ZU dieser Zisterziensernotalion des 12. lb. vg!. Sliblein, op. cil .• s.n, 56. Abb. 11 (die leider Icein
typisches. sondern eher ein unregelmiBiges Beispiel enthilt); J. Srendrei. "Beobachrungen an der Nota-
tion des Zisterzienser-Antiphonars Cod. 1799++ in der Osterreichischen Nationalbibliolhek ', in: Stutiia
Musicowgica [SludMw] 27 (1985), S. 273-290; 1. Szendrei. ·Van-e cisZlerci bangjegyinis?" {Gibt es eine
Zisterziensemotatioo?]. in: MagyarZene23 ( 1982), S.129- 137.
7 "Notation messine de KJOSlemeubourg' (u graduel romain. 11: Les sources [Solesmes. 19:57], S.53.
55); •• . . il existe bien une notation de Klosterneuburg l proprement parler. c 'esI-A-dire une vari~e d~
notation messine . •.• (PaUographie Mwicale [PalMlLf] XIX. Graduel de K1ostemeuburg. 00 . par J.
Froger [Berne, 1974], S.33~. Auf Grund des anhallenden Klostemeuburger Gebrauchs dieser Notation
halte ich diese Bezeichnung fUr annehmbar. Da die unlingst veroffentlichten Erorterungen von R.
Flotzinger hinsichllich der Herkunft des ManusIcripts Graz 801 aus Passau SI. Nilc:ola nicht iiberzeugend
sind. meine icb nacb wie vor, daB der Begriff "K1ostemeuburger Notatioo ' keineswegs obsolet geworden
ist. (Vgl. R. Flotzinger, ·Zu Herlrunft und Datierung der Gradualien Graz 807 und W ien 13314',
StudMw 31 [1989], S.76.)
I Beispiel Nr. 1Ia: Miinchen, Bayerische Staatsbibliolhek elm 9921 , Sammelbandschrift aus Ottobeur~n
(OSB), 12. Jh. Sie zeigt nebeo der Iateinisch-grieschischen Buchstaben-Tooschrift und der 1inienlosen
deutscheu Neumeuschrift msitzlich noch zwei verschiOOene Arten von Linienootationen . D ie Unterschei-
dung der zweierlei Liniennotationen febIt in der Literatur voUstandig . Auf diese Tatsache. d.h. auf die
Vermischung der zwei Notalionen und auf die daraus entstehenden Mi.6verstaudnisse sind die ein-
schligigeu Widerspriicbe in der Fachliteratur zuriickzufiihren. VgI. z.B . PaIMw XIX , S.34* und R.
Slepbao, ·Aus der alten Ablei Reicbenau·, in : Archiv ftJr Musikwissensclw.ft 13 (1956). S.66. Arun. I.
Als -Klostemeuburger Notation' kann die letzte Notenschri ftart des COOex Clm 9921 bezeichnet werdeo,
die sich auf fol. I. und 54-57 sowie aut einigen spileren Eintragungen befindet. Das bier angefiihrte
Beispiel ist eiD Ausschn.itl aus fol.54v, vgl. J. Smits van Waesbe~ghe, MusiJcerrje/Jung. Musikgescbichle
in Bildem m/l (Leipzig. 1969), Abb. 51 , S. Il!. - l ib: Wien . Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek Cod.
573, fo I.19-25: monastisches Udalrik-Offizium aus St. Ulrich und Afra in Augsburg. 12. lb., Beispiel
von foI. 22v. Vgl. Srepban , op. cit .• S.66. - lIc: Klostemeuburg. Stiftsbibliothek: Cd . 1013. Antiphonar
OSA, 12. Jh., fol.201, Ausschnilt. - lId: Declcblatl des M Uncheo. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek. elm
22025: AntipbonaJe OSB, 12. Jh .• Wessobrunn, Augsburger Diozese, vg!. O. Ursprung. Die kaJholiscM
KircMlUTUlSik (potsdam, 1931). Tar. 7 und Stephan. op. at., S. 66 .
18
1
"
'.I~
"" .
" '2
.. '"
~ "i' It '1 77..J!·T'-::
" '"
./-"'~;""".:...:..,....,."""';-...J,-";;"'.......,-4t--
~. ""be' a'••' ".4rnfrrl~ \.r r1'~
a) Miinchen, elm 9921 (Otu)beuren, ccaJl60 OSB
.. ,
~
... It ....
; .-
f' j
J'~CJ . . r ,hS
.. ! ..r !" , _.."*,
~ 1 AI "
.
,
·U • •
.J '.7 ':G"U "U' er; r'1II ~ ..n#f. 'ton,.-
I~
19
"spitzige" Klostemeuburger Clivis, die sich aus der Clivis der suddeutschen
Neumenschrift unter dem Einflull der Metzer Schreibweise lokaJ ausbildete, leann
dagegen aus dem Zeichenbestand der klassischen Metzer Notationen nicht abgeleitet
werden. Die deutsche Herkunft dieses Zeichens, das in den frOhesten Denkrniilern der
Klostemeuburger Notation noch in statu nascendi verfolgt werden kann, unterliegt
keinem Zweifel. Aus diesem Grunde halte ich es nicht fUr angebracht, es zu den Metzer
Zeichen zu zahlen, wie es B. Stablein in der zusammenfassenden Tabe/le seiner
" Schriftbild " macht,9 offensichtlich in der Erwagung, daB es in Klostemeuburg
anzutreffen ist, das im allgemeinen BewuBtsein als ostliche Hochburg der Metzer
Notation gilt.
Die Klosterneuburger Notation ist aber keine reine Metzer Notenschrift. Sie hat
ein gemischtes Zeichensystem, in dem sogar unter den Grundneumen ein Zeichen
deutscher Herkunft (Clivis) zu finden ist, das das Notenbild bei zahlreichen
Zusammensetzungen beeinflu6t. Was dieses Zeichensystem auch als sekundares
Element vollkommen en tbettrt , ist die rechtwinklige, aber mit Tractulus beginnende
Clivis (flexa cornuta), die eine der entscheidendsten, von Hourlier besonders betonten
Neumenformen der Metzer Notation darstellt. 10 Dariiber hinaus konnen die
Erganzungs- und Zierneumen der Klostemeuburger Notation eindeutig als die Erbschaft
deutscher Skriptorien angesehen werden. 11 Lange Zeit konnte ich our als wahrscheinlich
annehmen, da6 die merkwtirdige Quilismafonn,12 die an den gebundenen Scandicus
erinnert, das Bild der mittleren Note aber eigenartig lost und die Stablein in dem
Metzer Zeichensystem wiedergibt,13 ebenfalls eine Schopfung irgendeiner deutscher
Werkstatt ist, und daB diese Form, die unler den beleannten usuellen Neumensystemen
kein unmittelbares Vorbild hat, durch die Erarbeitung der lokalen Variante der
Guidonischen Notenschrift ins Leben gerufen wurde. Unlangst fand ich diese Neume
auch in weiteren, sich des Liniensystems bedienenden deutschen Skriptorien. 14
Und zum Schlu8 bildet das genaue Praparieren des Liniensystems
(Schhlsselbuchstaben vor jeder Linie, rote bzw. gelbe Farbung der Fund c-Linien)
einen organischen Bestandteil der Klostemeuburger Notation. Zu einer derartigen
Sorgfalt neigen eher die deutschen Skriptorien als die lothringischen. Eine Unter-
suchung dieser kennzeichnenden Ausstattung des Liniensystems kann uns in die Werk-
start der Erschaffer der Klosterneuburger Notation ffihren.
20
Zusammenfassend Hill I sich sagen, daB die bekannteste "Metrer Notation" des
zwolften lahrhunderts auf siiddeutschem Gebiet, die sogenannte Klostemeuburger
Notation ein typisches und ausgeglichenes System von Kontaktneumen darstellt. Ihre
vorherrschenden Ziige sind von Metrer Art, dennoch enthalt sie auch zahlreiche Ele-
mente der deutschen Tradition. Sie entstand in einem deutschen Skriptorium als
deutsches Werk, als eigener Vorschlag fUr die Notenschrift mit Liniensystem. Eine
ahnliche Metzer Notation wiirde man in Lothringen vergebens suchen.
Die am wenigsten erforschten Liniennotationen des zw61ften lahrhunderts auf
suddeutschem Gebiet sind die verschiedenen deurschen Notenschriften mit geringem
Metrer, italienischen oder franzOsischen Einschlag. Sie waren lange Zeit nur aus Trak-
taten bekannt. Fur heute kann aber schon als bewiesen q,ngesehen werden, daJ1 sogar
ganze liturgische Gesangbucher mit diesen "lokalen" Reforrnnotationen verfertigt
wurden (Beispiel 2). IS
Im Hymnar von Einsiedeln, Cod. 336 wurden siiddeutsche Neumen, die rur das
Liniensystem fast keinen "Anhaltspunkttl boten, im Grunde genommen ohne Anderung
auf das Liniensystem gesetzt. 16 Diese Notenschrift war kein einmaliger Versuch, wie es
ein reich illuminiertes, heute fragmentarisches Graduale vom Ende des zwolften
lahrhunderts zeigt. 17 Der suddeutsche Neumenbestand ist in diesen Quellen (Beispiel
2/a-b) nur durch die infolge der diastematischen Anordnung zustande gekommene
Fonnveriinderungen modifiziert und blofi ein einziges Metrer Element fUgt sich unter
ihnen ein, narnlich der der arabischen Ziffer neun ahnlicher Cephalicus. Die
Schriftrichtung ist deutsch (Aufwaru- und Abwfutsbewegung nach rechts). Im
musikalischen Zeichensystem der beiden COOizes unterscheiden sich nur die Virga-
Formen. Ein drittis wichtiges, hierher gehorendes Notationsdenkmal, die Notenschrift
des von K. Schlager vorgelegten Prufeninger Afra-Offiziums (Beispiel 2/c) ist nur in
dem Ma.6e "entwickelter" als die beiden anderen Quellen, dafi analog zur Virga hi er
auch bei einem Teil der Pes-Fonnen ein Nachdruck zur Verdeutlichung der zweiten
Note gegeben ist. Dieses der arabischen Drei ahnliche Zeichen eignet sich besser flir
das Liniensystem als der "im Nichts- auslaufende runde, deutsche Pes und seine
U Beispiel No. 2/a: Einsiedelo, Stiftsbibliothek Cod. 366 (472), Fragmetl!CIlS'mm1ung (hauptsichlich
Hymoeo und Sequenzen) IUS der Benediktinerabtei Einsiedelo, 12. lb., S.8. - 21b: MUncbeo, Bayerische
Staatsbibliolhek Clm J0086 , siiddeutscbes GraduaJe, 12. lb., f01.l1. - 2/c: Miincbeo, Bayeriscbe
Staatsbibliolhek Clm 23037, Breviarium Notatum aSB IUS Priifening, 12. lb., fo1.24O, vgl. Schlager,
op. cil., S.37. - 2/d: PrivatbesilZ, Fragmente eines Graduates (Regensburg, St. Emmeram?), Anfang 12.
lh. - 21e: MUncben. Bayeriscbe Staatsbibliolhek elm 9921, Sammelbandschrift aus Ottobeuren, 12. 1h.,
fo1.4Ov. - 2/f: Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek. Cod. Augiensis 60, Antipbonar OSB. 12. 1h.,
fol.267 (K. Hain, Ein musi/azlischer Palimpsesl [Freiburg in der Scbweiz, 1925). Tafel VII).
16 Vgl. Sliblein, op. cil., S.I86-187; B. Ebel, Das i11Jesle alemanische Hyrmuu mil NOlen. Kodu 366
(472) . Einsiedeln (XlI. Jahrhunaert) (Einsiedeln. 0.1.). Der Cepbalicus weist auch in dieser Notenschrift
Metz.er Form .uf.
17 Vgl. Le gradud ... , S.79. Die Notation ist bier als "notation du genre de celle de l(Jostemeuoourg-
bezeichnet, obwohl das einzige Metrer Element dieser Notenschrift der Cephalicus is!.
21
Herausbildung als Normalform hatte sich schon in gewissen Gruppen oer siiddeutschen
usuellen Neumenarten eingesetzt. 18
Diese drei Notenschriften auf Li nien bilden trob. der wesemlichen Uberein-
stimmung der Notation keine richtig koharente Gruppe: Das Liniensystem ist in den
drei Quellen auf drei verschiedene Weisen gelost. Yon den geritzten Linien des Hym-
nars ist bloB die F gefci.rbt, und zwar rot, wogegen das Graduale auch noch cine griine
c-Linie verwendet. Die Notenschrift erscheint in beiden Codizes oh ne Custos, auf vier
Linien und der Buchstabenschlilssel steht alIei n oder je nach Quintenabstanden. In der
Notation des Afra-Offiziums ist dagegen jede Linie mit einem separaten Schlussel
versehen, das eine Gewohnheit der Klostemeuburger Gruppe war.
Die vierte diesbezugliche Notenschrift ist auf einem, Gradualefragment vom
Anfang des 12. Iahrhunderts erhal ten, das aus Regensburger Buchmaterial ans Licht
kam (Beispiel 2/d) . Sie schHigt in der Gestaltung der deutschen Neumen selbst dnen
eigenrumlichen und entwickelteren Weg ein. Die Yirga hat auch Ilier die Form einer
aus dem Repertoire der suddeutschen usuellen Neurnen wohlbekannten arabischen Eins,
der Pes ist ein modifizierteT Pes rotundus: Urn auch das Bild der lweiten Note
augenfiillig zu machen , erfahrt der Suel eine Biegung nach rechts und verliiuft in eincm
sehr kleinen Notenkopf. Es steh t fest, dan es sich hier urn eine "innere" Umgestaltung
handelt, die dUTCh die Einfiihru ng des Liniensystems ausgelost wurde, doch ist es auch
unbestreitbar, daB dadurch ein mit der Metzer Pes-Form identische Struktur zustande
kam . Mit Ausnahme des Metzer Cephalicus sind alle anderen Neumen aus dem
siiddeutschen Repertoire bekannt, wobei aber der Neu mator das Quilisma auf eine neue
Art, fOr das Liniensystem umarbeitet, dem Klosterneuburger Quilisma aJmlich zeichnete
(ein Pun kt, dem dann drei gebunden geschriebene Noten folgen). Von den geritzten
Linien ist im Graduale nur die F rot getarbt (vg\. das Hymnar) und der
BuchstabenschHissel F, dessen Zeichnung an die des Codex Eillsiedeln erinnert, steht in
den erhaltenen Stficken allein. Die Schriftrichtung ist abwaru steiler als die ubliche
deutsche Art und erreicht fast die Vertikale. Die Notation dieses Gradualfragments zeigt
mit der ersten Liniennotation der Miinchener Sammelhandschrift Clm 992 1 nahe
Verwandtschaft (Beispiel 2/e) .19 Ein Unterschied la.6t sich hier nur in der Gestaltung
lA Vgl. z.B. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Hs. Selden supra 27, Prosar und T ropar aus Heidenheim 11/12.
lb. Faksimile: Corpus Troporum VlI: Tropt!S du Sa~C1us, Introduction et &lition critique par G. Iversen
(Stockholm, 1990). Plancbe IV; in der linienlosen deu tscheo Neumenschrift des Graner BeoedictionaJe
(Zagreb, Meuopolitanska ICnj imica MR 89, 11. lb.) ist di~ Zeichen bestimmt a.1s Normalform zu
deuteo . FaJcsimile: J. Szeodrei, "Nemet neuma{risok Magyarorszagon" [Deutsche Neumenschriften in
Ungarn) , in: KtJzepkori hangjegyfrasok M agyarorndgon (Mittela.1terliche Choralnotationen in Uogam]
(Budapest. 1983), S.309.
19 Mit in campo aperto deutscber Neumeaschrift abwechselnd, vereinzelt zwiscben fol. 19. und 53
(ausgefiibrt in mehrereo Handen, Varianten) und dann auf fo1. 58·59 (spitere Einscbiibsel). Die in palio-
grapbiscber Hinsicht am meisten informative Iiturgiscbe Liedersammlung ist zwiscbeo fo1.4O und 47 re
lesen .
22
a) Einsiedtlln, Cod. 366 (XlI. lb.) aSB EinsiedeLn
r o
23
e) Milnchtm, elm 9921 (Otlobt!:uttoO, cca.1160) OSB
e
'" '1 / 'Y..I1 /\ •.""
.r1 /'. .... '" ) ~,J ~..J r
24
a) Bamberg, Lit. 25 (XIIL lh. )
ft\Jilf)t . Gt.-ttf ;, • •
2S
der Virga beobachten: Der winzige Notenkopf ist auf der rechten und nicht der linken
Seite des Stiels angebracht. Dieser Umstand tragt zur Verstiirkung des Metzer Charak-
ters bei. Das Quilisma erscheint auch hier als ein Punkt, dann drei gebunden
geschriebene, aufwans gefiihrte Noten, das heiBt, als ein tatsachlich
"umgeschriebenes" , diastematisches Zeichen wle im vongen Beispiel. 20 Die
Schlusselsetzung erfolgt je nach Terzen.
Zum SchluB ist noch die erste und a1teste Notation des Codex Augiensis 60
(Beispiel 2/0 zu erwrumen, die wahrscheinlich eine unter Metzer Einflu6 stehende
deutsche Notation ist. 21 In ihr sind die Metzer und die deutschen Elemente derart aus-
geglichen miteinander verschmolzen, da.6 es uns schwer rallt, sie in die eine oder an-
dere Kategorie einzureihen. Die syllabische Grundeinheit kann auch als eine Virga mit
nach rechts neigendem Notenkopf gedeutet werden. In Wirklichkeit mu6 sie aber eh er
als Metzer Tractulus bezeichnet werden, zumal sie ihre Funktion nicht mehr mit
Punkten teilt. Die Clivis erreicht die Spitzigkeit der Klostemeuburger Clivis, der Pes
hat schon einen zweiten, vom Stiel nach rechts neigenden Notenkopf erhalten und die
Form des Cephalicus kommt der arabischen Ziffer neun nahe. Zu dieser Notation
gehort eine rot gefarote Fund eine gelbe c-Linie und die Schli.isselsetzung erfolgt je
nach Terzen. Auf Grund des Vorangehenden handelt es si ch urn eine im Wesentlichen
Metzer, der Klostemeuburger Notation ahnliche Notenschrift. Trotzdem gibt es
betrachtliche Unterschiede. In diesem Fall sind namlich nicbt nur die Ziemeumen
sondern auch die Schriftrichtung deutsch. Die Punkte des CJimacus neigen nach rechts
abwarts und die Norrnalforrn des Scandicus laBt noch die Tradition der Akzentschrift
(punkt + Punkt + Virga) erkennen. Am deutlichsten wird diese Notenschrift von
Klostemeuburg durch das Quilisma getrennt: Es ist ein Tractulus (statt Punctum), dann
20 Diese eigenartige Quilismaform (vgl. Doch Rlpertoire ik manuscrils mMihaux conremalll des
notal;OfLf musicales. Sous la direction de Solange Corbin, m: Bibliotheques parisiennes Arsenal,
Nalionale [musique], Universitaire, &ale des Beaux-Arts er Foods priv6s. Par MadeJerne Bemard [paris,
1974], S.20S, PI. XV.), die der Vorschlag der siiddeutscheo Wissenschaftler isl, die die ersten
'Obertragungen auf das Liniensystem erarbeilelen. erleuchtet den Ursprung des Quilisma der
"K1ostemeuburger" NolatioD. Das KJostemeuburger Quilisma stimmt in einer etwas abgebraucbten Van-
ante mit diesem Zeichen iiberein. indem es den vorgesetzten Punkt entbeh.rt. (Der einJeitellde Punkt
wurde &ChOD von einer Schreiber des Clm 9921 weggelassen, der deutsche Notation auf Linien setzle, s.
die Notation des A1exander-Offiziums; am gJeicbeo art kann aber der Gebrauch des einleitendeo Punktes
in dem Teil mit "K1ostemeuburger" Notalion mehrmals beobachtet werdeo, vgl. z.B. die Notenschrift des
Ursula-O(fuiums.) Du "diastematische" Quilisma olme Punkt is! daher ala seJrundire, vereinfachte Form
im Vergleich 111 dem urspriinglichen Vorschlag der siiddeut.schco LiniCllDolatioQCO anzusehen, der roil
dem Quilismabild der usuelleu deutscheu Neumeuschrift nocb eager verbundea ist. - Merlcwiirdig ist nur,
da6 die gro6artige deutsche Notenschrift mil Liniensystem des Codex Miincbeo Clm 9921 noch von
keinem Forscher der gregorianischen Musik: ausffihrIich untersucht wurde, obwohl sie fast alle mit dem
Codex in BeriihruDg kommeo, und daB das rueh! encannte Quilisma in den dem Codex eutuommeneo
iJbertragungeo Fehler ergeben (so ist LB. der einleitende Punkt dem Ende der vorangebeuden Noten-
gruppe an,efiigt, vgl. Monumeola Monodi~ Medii Aevi VU: Alkluia-Melnd;~n I, bg. K. Schlager
[Kassel, 1968]. S.153, All. Eduxit dominus) .
21 Vgl. Hain. op. cil. , S.30-41.
26
folgt die charakteristische Figur der usuellen deutschen Neumenschriften mit zwei, nach
oben offenen BOgen , die leicht aufwarts steigen . Demnach gibt es keine rein
Klostemeuburger Notation in dem Cod. Aug. 60. 22
Die nachste deutsche Notationsgruppe zeichnet sich durch einige, im Vergleich
zu den vorgelegten wahrscheinlich italienische Zuge aus (Beispiel 3).2J Zwei Quellen
sicherer Provenienz aus dem dreizehnten lahrhundert ermutigen uns dazu, sie als
Bamberger zu bezeichnen. Auf den ersten Blick erweist sie sich genauso als eine
deutsche Notenschrift wie die vorangehenden und zeigt in erster Linie mit der Schrift
des Afra-Offiziums nahe Verwandtschaft. Eine Analyse jedes einzelnen Zeichens weist
jedoch einige charakteristische Merkmale auf. Das uniformierte Punctum ist ein im
Vergleich zu den deutschen Traditionen auffciJlig langes, waagerechtes Strichlein.
AuBer der bekannten deutschen Clivis kann auch eine rechtwinklige Clivis aufgezeigt
werden, die mit einem waagerechten Arm ohne Unterbrechung gezeichnet ist. Beide
Tatsachen rufen italienische (genauer gesagt zentralitalienische und beneventanische)
Parallelen in Erinnerung, wie darauf im Falle der Clivis auch schon P . Wagner
hingewiesen hat. 24 Diese rechtwinklige Clivis ist in den Bamberger QueHen schon vor
der Einfiihrung des Liniensystems belegt. 25 Die DenkmaIer der "Bamberger" Notation
stimmen auch hinsichtlich der Ausstattung des Liniensystems iiberein, indem vier
Linien, darunter eine rote F-Linie, Buchstabenschliissel in Quintenabstanden
vorkommen und def Custos fehlt.
Franrosische Einflusse konnen auf mehreren bedeutenden Quellen der friihen
siiddeutschen Notation mit Liniensystem aufgezeigt werden. Die unter franrosischem
EinfluB stehenden Notenschriften unterscheiden sich betrachtlich,26 und es obliegt
27
weiterer Forschungen festzustellen , ob einige von ihnen vielleicht doch Gber einen brei-
teren Traditionskreis verfGgen.
Die etwas miihselige Ubersicht unserer Denkmaler hat uns davon fiberzeugt, das
sich die sliddeutschen Neumen geeignet erwiesen, auf Linien gesetzt und spater als
Notenschrift voller Gesangbiicher verwendet zu werden, zwar nicht ohne jede
Anderung, sondem unter Zuhilfenahme von einigen konkreten Elementen und
Erfahrungen anderer Notationsarten. Im Gegensatz zum Einklang der Klostemeuburger
NotationsdenkrnaIer gehOren diese deutschen Notationen fonnal lockerer zusammen.
Sie waren unterschiedliche Versuche und standen dementsprechend nicht so weit von
der Notationstradition der Traktate.
All dies tragt zur Buntheit der Karte der mit Liqiensystem ausgestatteten
Notationen des zw61ften lahrhunderts bei, die iiberdies noch durch das Vorhandensein
der erwahnten Importnotenschriften erh6ht wird. Meine Erfahrung ist, daB sich die
benachbarten, liturgischen Zwecken dienenden Notationen miteinander nicht mehr
vermischten, sondem wurden mittels intensiver innerer Pflege erhalten und
wei tertradiert.
Zu dieser These gelangte ich nach palaographischen Untersuchungen und nicht
"auf Anblick". Als Ergebnis meiner Analysen scheint zurn Beispiel die Behauptung
absurd zu sein, wonach die Klostemeuburger Notation als Metzer Notenschrift ihren
Ursprung in HeiIigenkreuz hatte, wie es 1. Froger in der Einleitung der PalMus 19
schreibt. 27 PaUiographisch laJ3t sich klar nachweisen, daB die Klostemeuburger
Schreiber die Metzer Elemente nicht "via Heiligenkreuz" kennengelemt hatten. Sie
verwendeten viel mehr klassische Met2er Zeichen als d-ie Zisterzienser, aber gerade die
Metzer Neume, die in Heiligenkreuz mit VorIiebe verwendet wurde (Clivis als flexa
comuta),28 fehlt in Klosterneuburg. Die Hypothese ist auch geschichtlich unhaltbar.
Wenn wir das Quellenverzeichnis der Beispielen iiberblicken, wird eindeutig, daB die
sogenannte Klostemeuburger Notation nicht in Klostemeuburg erfunden worden war,
das in der Nahe von Heiligenkreuz liegt, sie bJieb dort nur als Ergebnis intensiver
Pflege bis zur zweiten HaIfte des vierzehnten Iahrhunderts erhalten. Die fnjhesten
DenkrnaIer dieser Notenschrift stammen alle aus einer monastischen, Benediktiner-
Umgebung und entstanden alle weiter westwarts als die KI6ster urn Wien.
Es steht jedoch fest, daB die Linienschriften nur durch ihre Einfiihrung in den
Jiturgischen Gebrauch souveranen Rarig erhielten . Die Herausbildung der
Kontaktneumensysteme ist eine separat zu behandelnde Frage. Hier gab es tatsachlich
thek und KunstsammJung, Cod. I. 2. 4° 13. Ober die Quelle s. U graduel... I1 , S.68 und Le graduel
romain N: Le tate neumaJique, vol. I (Solesmes, 1960), S.269.
27 SAl·.
28 Zu der Zisterziensemolation von Heiligenkreuz vg!. das Faksimile: Musik im miltt!IaUt!rlicnt!n Wien,
S.56.
28
eine Vermischung zwischen den ursprunglichen, kIassischen Neumensorten. Diese
Vermischung fand aber nicht in der Hand der Kopisten statt. Wir mussen bedenken,
welcher hoher musikaJischer Leistung bedurfte, die friiher in der miindlichen
Uberlieferung vorhandenen, mit ususellen Neumen begleiteten Melodien zum ersten
Mal "aufs Papier zu werfen", ihre Intervalle zu bestimmen und den Bestand an
Notenzeichen festzustellen. Ich vertrete die Meinung, da13 ein GroBteil der
Guidonischen Reformnotenschriften des elften und zw61ften Jahrhunderts, und
innerhalb dieser gerade die Notationen, die sich aus Kontaktneumen zusammensetzten
und in der Ausstattung des Liniensystems besondere "FachmaBigkeit" anstrebten, von
der Hand gelehrter Musiker, der Kenner oder Verfasser musiktheoretischer Traktate
geformt wurden. In diesem wahrscheinlich engen Kreis" dessen Vertreter iiber einen
umfassenden Uberblick des ganzes Berufs verfiigten, diirften die Moglichkeiten der
verschiedenen Neumensysteme gekannt, unmittelbar gebraucht, zu Nutze gewgen und
nach Bedarf umgestaltet worden sein, eben weil sie keine an die tagliche liturgische
Praxis gebundene, sondem theoretische Arbeit verrichteten. Die Klostemeuburger
Notation ist meines Erachtens das Meisterwerk der gelehrten Vertreter oder vielleicht
nur einer einzigen Person der Musiktheorie und die Auswahl ihrer Zeichen ist das
Ergebnis einer bewu6ten Entscheidung. Ihre vielleicht friiheste bekannte Quelle29 ist in
einem Traktat erhalten gebJieben, und auch die Sammlung Miinchen elm 9921 ist in
erster Linie eine musiktheoretische Abhandlung. Die Kontaktneumensysteme kamen
also auf theoretischem Weg und gleich in der Periode der Herausbildung der Schriften
zustande.
Von den neuen Notenschriften mit Liniensystem haben sich jene durchgesetzt,
mit der gewisse Iiturgische Gemeinschaften ihren Gesangstoff niederschrieben und die
auf diese Weise zu einem Bestandteil der Lraditionellen, taglichen Gesangspraxis
wurden. Das jetzt untersuchte, der Provenienz nach identifizierbare Quellenmaterial
geh6rt originell zu Ordensgemeinschaften. Die KJostemeuburger Notation war von
Benedi1ctinem angeregt word en und spater von den Augustiner Chorherren in
KJostemeuburg angenommen und aufrechterhalten;30 die BOcher, in denen die
deutschen Neumen auf Linien gesetzt wurden, erwiesen sich mit Ausnahme der zwei
Bamberger DenkrnaIer auch als Benediktinerarbeiten. Wir wissen, daB sich die
Zisterzienser der Guidonische Reformnotation durchaus und liberal I verpflichteten. Die
Benedi1ctiner scheinen zu ihr eine differenzierte Einstellung gehabt zu haben: sie haben
29
sie teils verworfen, gelegentlich gebraucht und teils angenommen. Gewifi ist nur, daB
die Liniennotation im zwolften lahrhundert in erster Linie von einigen gregorianisch
gesinnten und papsttreuen Zentren gewahlt wurde. Im Mittelalter war die Notenschrift
nicht nur eine Praxis, sondern auch eine Stellungnahme. Dieser Fragenkreis kann daher
erst nach Erschliefiung der entsprechenden institutionsgeschichtlichen und geistesge-
schichtlichen Zusammenhange zufriedensteJiend beantwortet werden.
Wenn aber die zeitgemiiBe Bildung des zwalften lahrhunderts und die modeme
Notenschrift als deren Ausdruck in gewissen suddeutschen KJostem vorhanden waren,
was mag wohl der Grund gewesen sein, daB es sich weder ein einheitliches Schriftge-
biet ausbildete, noch die Notation mit Liniensystem a1lgemein verbreitete. Wie est es
maglich, daR solange zum Beispiel in dem ostJich gelegenen Konigtum Ungarn die
linienlose Neumenschrift gegen Ende des zwalften lahrhunderts praktisch vollkommen
verschwand,31 blieh sie in der behandelten Gegend noch ein bis zwei lahrhunderte lang
vorherrschend. Das merkwtirdige Schicksal der jetzt gezeigten Notationen gibt auch
Stoff zum Nachdenken. Die Wahrheit ist, obwohl die Fachliteratur ganz andere
Behauptungen enthaIt, daB diese hochges.tellten Notenschriften oh ne Ausnahme verhalt-
nismiiBig schnell verschwanden, nicht einmal das ausgehende Mittelalter erlebten. Es ist
ein Irrtum, daB die Klostemeuburger Notation die Metzer Notenschrift nach Osten hin
ausstrahlte und daB die ganze mitteleuropaische "rhombische Notation" von ihr
abzuleiten ware.32 Das Schicksal der Klostemeuburger Notation war genauso das
Aussterben, nur ging dieser Vorgang langsamer vonstatten.
Der Verfall mag denselben Grund haben wie die rapide Entwicklung: Die
treibenden Krafte waren isolierte, rasch reagierende Kloster und keine einheitlichen,
groBangelegten Diozesen. Und wenn die Diozesanzentren die Umstellung auf das
Liniensystem nicht mehr ausschieben konnten, nahmen sie die Metzer gotische Notation
als ihr eigen an,33 die nicht auf den Grundlagen ihres eigenen Gebietes beruhte, sondem
anderswo herausgebildet worden war, eine neue Technik mit sich brachte und mit der
kalligraphischen Zeichnung der Neumen ein fUr allemal Schlu6 machte. Dem Zeugnis
des Graduale ONB Cod. 1925 nach durfte dieser Vorgang gegen Ende des dreizehnten
lahrhunderts begonnen, sich aber erst im vierzehnten lahrhundert voll entfaltet haben.
Gerade <fann und offensichtlich gerade deshalb verschwanden auch die friihen siid-
deutschen Refonnnotationen endgiiltig.
3\ J. Sl.endrei. "Die Geschicbte des Gnwer Choralnotatioo". in: SludMus 30 (1988), S.34-65.
32 W. Lipphardt. "Musik in den Osterreichischen Klostem der Babenbergerzeit", Musicologica Auslriaca
2 (1977), S.50. Ober das Verbiltnis zwischen der Kloslemeuburger und der Graner No,-liQn s . J.
Szendrei. "Choralnotation als Identititsausdlllck im M ittelalter " , in: SludMus 27 (1985), S.148-149.
n Metz.er-deutscbe Mischneumen mit gotiscber Schreibweise, s. z.B. Das Graduak do SI. Thomaskirrne
lU Leipzig, hg. von P. Wagner (Leipzig, 1930). Die ersten Zeotren dieser Notenschrift tanneo auf millel-
und ostdeutscbeo Gebieteo aufger.eigl werden .
30
Franz Karl PRA6L
Zur Erneuerung des geistiichen Lebens und der Seelsorge fiihrte Erzbischof
Konrad I. (1106-1147) in der Salzburger Erzdiozese die von Westeuropa kommende
Chorherrenreform durch. 1 Den Grundstein bildete die Umwandlung des Salzburger
Domkapitels in ein reguliertes Augustiner-Chorherrenstift im Jahre 1122. Urn dieses
Domstift herurn organisierte der reformfreudige Erzbischof einen Verband von 15
Klostern, zu denen sich noch andere Stifte in geringeren Abhangigkeitsverhaltnissen
gesellten. Zu den Klostem im engeren Verband der Chorherrenstifte gehorte das Stift
Seckau, das Adalram von Waldeck 1140 in Feistritz bei Knittelfeld errichtet hatte. 2 Aus
Griinden des Urmschutzes wurde die Kanonie urn 1143 einige Kilometer weit in die
Serge nach Seckau iibertragen. Spatestens urn 1150 kamen aus Salzburg Chorfrauen
dazu, aus deren Besitz ebenfalls bedeutende Handschriften iiberkomrnen sind. Mit der
Errichtung der Salzburger Eigendiozese Seckau wurde die Stiftskirche im Jahre 1218
der "Dom im Gebirge" .
Von Salzburg und Seckau aus wurde 1163 das oststeirische Chorherrenstift
Vorau gegriindet und besiedelt. 3 Vorau besitzt heute noch etliche Handschriften aus
dem Seckauer Skriptorium, die der jungen Gerneinschaft als Griindungsgut rnitgegeben
worden sind.
J Vgl. die umfassende Darstellung: Stefan Weinfurter, Sa/zburgu Bis/umsrejorm und Bisclwftpolitik Un
12. Jahrhundert. Du ErzbischoJ Konrad I. van Salzburg und die RegularlUInoniJcer, Kolner Historische
Abbaodluogen 24 (Koln-Wien, 1975)
2 Benno Roth OSB, Seckau. Du Dom im Gf!birge (Graz-Wien-Koln, ohne Jahr), S.34ff.
3 Pius Fank Can.reg., Das Chorhe~1IStift Vorau (Vorau, 2/1959), S.9ff.
Das Seckauer Skriptorium learn schon bald nach der Klostergriindung zu gro6er
BlUte. Sein erster Leiter und spiritus rector war der M6nch Bernhard, der in Salzburg
seine umfassende Ausbildung erhalten hatte. Bernhard wurde spater der zweite Propst
des Chorherrenstiftes Vorau. 4 Mit diesen biographischen Notizen ist auch schon das
wichtigste Beziehungsnetz der Seckauer Schreibschule umschrieben: Salzburg-Seckau-
Vorau. Gehort das Missale Hs. 444 der Grazer UB zu jenen Salzburger Handschriften,
die der Seckauer Kanonie als Griindungsausstattung mitgegeben worden sind -- nach
Pius Fank ist Bernhard selbst der Schreiber5 --, so sind uns aus der rasch einsetzenden
Seckauer Missaleproduktion des 12. lh. funf Me6bucher mit neumierten Gradualteilen
(die Sequentiare der gleichen Handschriften sind zum gro.6ten Teil ohne Neumen !)6
erhalten. Dies sind die Hss. 417, 479 und 769 der Grazer UB, sowie die Vorauer
Hss. 21 und 303, die im Zuge der Griindung dieses Stiftes durch Markgraf Ottokar Ill.
von Steiermark aus Seckau rnitgebracht worden sind.
Das Missale Graz 444 wurde schon von Kurt Holter wegen seines
Buchschmuckes nach Salzburg lokalisiert. 7 Beobachtungen zur liturgischen Ordnung, g
sowie zu Schreibgewohnheiten und zum Zeichenvorrat in der Neumierung bestatigen
diese Zuweisung. Die fur Seckau so wichtige Salzburger Schreibtradition geht noch
liber die eigentlichen Seckauer Notationsgewohnheiten hinaus. So finden wir eine nach
den ldassischen Regeln ziemlich getreue Verwendung von Virga und Tractulus, sowie
die herkommliche Unterscheidung von Punctum und Tractulus. In Salzburg finden wir
um diese Zeit noch haufig den Salicus und den Pes quassus. Beide Zeichen scheinen in
unserer Neumentabelle als Proprium der Hs. Graz 444 auf. Unsere Beobachtungen zur
32
Notation im Seckauer " Griindungsmissale" decken sich mit den Untersuchungs-
ergebnissen, die Stefan Engels in seiner Dissertation uber den Choral im S1. Peterer
Antiphonar (Hs. Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek [ONB] ser. nov. 2700) und in
anderen Stadt-Salzburger Handschriften vorgelegt hat. 9 Wenngleich zur Seckauer
Notation viele Gemeinsamkeiten quasi als Commune adiastematischer Schreibweise auf
osterreichischem Gebiet dieser Zeit bestehen, so sind doch bedeutende Unterschiede zu
den Seckauer Quellen nicht zu ubersehen. Diese Unterschiede betreffen
Schreibgewohnheiten, das in Seckau reduziertere Zeichenrepertoire, Melod ievarianten ,
ja die liturgische Ordnung selbst. Die Seckauer Liturgie leitet si ch -- wie manche
Handschrift es selbst ausdriickt -- aus der Salzburger Liturgie ab, geht aber sowohl in
der Anordnung der Gesange, als auch im Gesangsrepertoire selbst so signifikante eigene
Wege, daB wir durchaus von einer "Seckauer Liturgie" sprechen konnen. In erster Linie
betrifft dies Repertoire und Ordnung von Alleluiaversen, Hymnen und Responsorien, in
besonderem Ma.l1e aber das Sequenzenrepertoire, das in Seckau wesentlich vieltaltiger
als in Salzburg ist. 10 Die Seckauer notierten Gradualien des 12. lh. erscheinen nicht als
selbstandige liturgische Biicher, sondem als jeweils erster Faszikel eines Missale, das
jeweils aus Graduale, Sequentiar, Sakramentar und Lektionar zusammengesetzt ist.
Zahlreiche Nachtriige lassen auf einen praktischen Gebrauch bis ins 15. Jh. schliefien,
wenngleich zu sagen ist, daB bis in diese Zeit wohl die Verwendung bei der Zelebration
nachzuweisen ist, nicht aber die Verwendung des Graduale fur den tatsachlichen
Gesang.
Unsere Untersuchungen erstrecken sich auf die vier genannten Missalien der
Grazer UB. Wir geben zunachst aus jedem der Codices ein Schrlftbeispiel -- den Beginn
der Messe vom ersten Fastensonntag.
9 Stefan Engels. Das Anliphonar ron St. Peter in Salzburg Cod. DNB ser.nov. 2700 und di~ Skriptorien
de StaJI Salzburg. EiM musikwissensduiftlicM Sludi~ (Diss .• maschinschriftlich. Salzbura. (988)
10 Vgl. Pnilll. Seq~nzen. Bd. I, S.428ff.
33
GiM-Z.
ve, 444
TABELLE 1.
34
Die Notation dieser Codices haben wir zum ersten Mal uberhaupt untersucht.
Dies geschah an ausgewahlten Beispielen. So prasentieren wir mit unseren
Beobachtungen erste Ergebnisse, die keinen Anspruch auf Volistandigkeit erheben, sich
aber weitgehend mit den Ergebnissen einer Untersuchung decken, die wir bei zwei
Karntner Missalien friiher durchgefUhrt haben. 11 Den von uns erhobenen Zeichenvorrat
der Seckauer Codices haben wir in einer synoptischen Tabelle zusarnmengefallt, die im
3. und 4. Kapitel in einzelnen Details erlautert wird. Das 5. Kapitel bringt
Einzelbeobachtungen zu den Melodien, wobei eine palaographische Synopse der
lntroiten Gaudeamus omnes in Domino und GawJele in Domino semper die Seckauer
Versionen in einen gro6eren Kontext stellt.
Neben den altesten Uberlieferungen der Handschriften Einsiedeln 121, Bamberg
lit.6 und Laon 239 ist vor allem der Vergleich mit der Handschrift Graz 807 von
groBter Bedeutung. 12 Dieses Graduale mit Metzer Neumen auf vier Linien stammt nach
Rudolf Flotzinger aus Passau 13 und ist als KIosterneuburger Graduale in der Literatur
als einer der wichtigsten Zeugen fOr den germanischen Choraldialekt bekannt. Dieses
Graduale wurde in Klostemeuburg bei den Chorfrauen verwendetl4 und karn spiiter in
Seckauer Besitz. Durch diese Handschrift konnen wir viele adiastematisch uberlieferte
Versionen des 12. Jh. verifizieren, bzw. naher bestirnmen. Daneben scheint auch noch
der Vergleich mit zwei IGirntner Handschriften von Interesse, einem Missale aus dem
1123 errichteten Chorherrenstift Gurk (heute im Archiv der Diozese Gurk) und einern
Missale aus der ehemaligen Benediktinerabtei Millstatt (heute im Besitz des Kamtner
Landesarchivs. )
3. Die Neumenzeichen
11 F. K. Prafil, ·Choral in Kiimtner Quellen. Beobachtungen zur Uberlieferung von MeBgesingeo in zwei
MissaJieo des 12. la1uhuoderts" in: Musicologica Austriaca 10 (1991)
12 Nihere Angaben III diesen Haodschriften, bzw. III deren Faksimiles sind rosamrnengefa81 in Luigi
Agusloni • Johaones Berchmaos Goschl, EirifiJhrung in die Interpretation des Gregorianischen Chorals,
Bd. I: Grundlagen (Regensburg, 1987), S.76f.
13 Rudolf Flotzioger, "Zu Herlrunft uod Dalierung der GraduaJieo Graz 807 ind Wien 13314" in: Sludia
Musicologica 31 (1989), S.57·80.
14 VgI. PraB1, Sequenzen. Bd.l, S.4S7.
35
Eine Einteilung der Zeichen nach rhythmischen Kriterien, wie dies bei alteren Quellen
der Fall ist, ist hier nicht mehr moglich, da die Zeichen diesen Aspekt nicht mehr
ausdriicken.
3. 1. Grundzeichen
Die Zeichen gehoren alle zur Familie der St. Galler Neumen und sind eine
graphische Weiterentwicklung der Neumen des 10. lh.
Die mehr oder minder schriig geneigte Virga wird generell mit einem "Episem",
einer Verdickung der Feder oder einem Strichlein -- meist nur nach links gezogen --
geschrieben. 1st die episemierte Virga ganz gerade gefiihrt, so hat die Hs. 479 eine
Virgenform ohne Episem mit etwas gebogenem oberen Ende. Dies Form wird nur als
Neumenelement verwendet, nicht aber aIs isolierte Virga. Die Form des
Episemstrichleins, das sich nie wie ein T fiber den vertikalen· Strich legt, laBt vermuten,
dafi si ch die Schreibrichtung dieses Zeichens gciindert hat. Schrieb man die "klassische"
Virga von unten nach oben, so ist die Virga des 12. lh. von oben nach unten weitaus
leichter zu schreiben.
Der Tractulus erhalt mitunter einen leichten vertikalen Anstrich, bevor die Feder
kriiftig von links nach rechts gefiihrt wird (Hs. 417, 769) Dies fiihrt zu einer Form, die
einem marginalen Metzer Uncinus nicht unahnlich sieht. Generell ist in den Seckauer
Handschriften eine deutliche Scheidung zwischen dem isoliert verwendeten Punctum
und dem isoliert verwendeten Tractulus aufgehoben. Hier erscheint ein Zeichen, das
man einmal als Punkt und ein andermal auch als Tractulus lesen kann. Eine deutliche
Unterscheidung gibt es nur in compositione.
Bei der Clivis finden wir zwei Formen:
Form a) Die Verbindung von Auf- und Abstrich ist nicht mehr rund, sondern in
einem spitzen Winkel, sodaB beide Aste der CIivis nicht parallel nebeneinander
laufen. Der Aufstrich ist mehr schriig geneigt, der Abstrich ist relativ senkrecht.
Beide Striche sind mitunter etwas gebogen.
Form b) Die Rundung der Verbindung von An- und Abstrich bJeibt, am Ende
des Abstriches steht generell ein Episem, oft nur aIs Verdickung des Endes vom
Federstrich.
Der Pes hat jene Form, die sich aus der im Codex Einsiedeln 121
weiterentwickelt hat. Hat der Pes im Cantatorium die Form dnes Halbkreises mit
kerzengeradem Aufstrich, so ist dieser im Codex Einsiedeln etwas gebogen. Dieser
Knick wird nun immer grofier, sodaB in unseren QueUen der Pes die Form eines
36
dreiviertel Kreises mit einem Aufstrich in runder Verbindung annimmt. Daneben gibt es
im 12. Jh. (siehe Synopse Tabelle 3 und 4) noch die Form eines Pes, bei dem der
Aufstrich nach einem dreiviertel Kreis in spitzem Winkel nach oben geht. Oer Kreis
kann sich sogar schlieJ1en. Ein Beispiel dafiir ist der Pes im Millstatter Sakramentar.
Der Pressus erhaIt, nachdem in der klassischen Version das Oriscuselement nach
oben geschwungen auslauft, nun noch eine kleine Schlinge, sodaJ1 die Figur mit einer
Biegung nach unten ausHiuft. Diese Form find en wir Ofters in Salzburg.
Das Quilismazeichen erscheint nun als deutlicher Abkommling der Pesgraphie.
Dem Pes sind ein oder zwei kleinere Halbkreise vorgelagert, die tiefer oder auf gleicher
Rohe stehen konnen.
AIIe anderen Zeichen sind nur ruehr Zusammensetzungen dieser Grundformen.
Dies gilt sowohl fUr getrennt geschriebene Zusammensetzungen, z.B. Porrectus flexus
oder Pes subpunctis, als auch fUr verbunden geschriebene Formen. Zu diesen wit vom
graphischen Standpunkt aus in erster Linie der Torculus. Dieser wird immer so gestaltet
sein, wie Pes und Clivis in der jeweiligen Handschrift aussehen, also mit deru
entsprechenden Knick im Pes und der Spitze oder Rundung der Clivis.
1st die Wandlung in der Zeichenform selbst relativ gering, so ist der
Bedeutungswandel der Graphien enorm. Dies ist sicher die direkte Folge eines groJ1en
Wande]s in der Interpretation, bzw. Auffiihrungspraxis der gregorianischen Melodien,
den die semiologische Schule als "Geschichte der Dekadenz" bezeichnet. 14 Die
einzelnen Zeichen haben ihre urspriingliche rhythmische Aussagekraft verloren und sind
nur mehr Grundzeichen elementarer melodischer Bewegungen. Die urspriingliche
Differenzierung der Zeichen, die einen ganzlichcn oder partiellen Mehr- oder
Minderwert der Silbendauem angezeigt haben, ist ganzlich verschwunden .
Zeichenformen, die diesen Unterschied ausdriickten, erscheinen nicht ruehr, oder sie
erscheinen als systemisierte Schreibgewohnheiten oder haben eine andere Bedeutung
angenommen. Der Zeichenvorrat ist daher wesentIich Ideiner als im 10. lh .
Grundlegend dafiir ist das genereIle Fehlen rhythmisch differenzierter zwei- oder
dreitoniger Elementarbewegungen wie kurrenter und nicht kurrenter Pes, kurrenter und
nicht kurrenter Torculus usw. Dies bedingt natUrlich auch den Wegfall der partiell
kurrenten Zeichen, also die rhythmische Differenzierung innerhalb einer elementaren
melodischen Bewegung. Es gibt davon einige Ausnahmen: manche
Anfangsartikulationen und Binnenartikulationen in festen Formeln .ls (Siehe 4.2 .)
Gab es im 1O.Jh etwa 13 Graphien fUr das melodische Phanomen des Pes
subbipunctis, so sind es im 12. Jh. nur mehr zwei Zeichen. Den 14 Graphien des
14 Vgl. L. Agustoni , "Gregorianischer Choral", in: Musik im GOllesdiensl, hg. Hans Musch, Bd. I.
(Regensburg, 1983), S.222.
I~ Wir folgen generell der bei Agustoni - Goschl, op. cit. gebrauchten Terminologie.
37
Torculus resupinus entsprechen nunmehr 5, den 10 Zeichen des Scandicus flexus
ebenfalls 5. Den 10 Zeichen des Porrectus flexus stehen 3 Zeichen gegeniiber, den 15
Torculusvarianten stehen 4 gegeniiber, 7 Porrectuszeichen entsprechen nunmehr 4, 10
Peszeichen reduzieren sich auf 5, von den 12 Cliviszeichen bleiben 4 iibrig. Diese
Aufz3hlung enthalt schon die Sonderformen fOr Liqueszenzen und melodische
Bedeutungen . Fur den "Normalfall" bleibt in der Regel ein Zeichen, das die melodische
Bewegung wiedergibt, nicht aber einen differenzierten Rhythmus derselben.
Im 12.Jh nimmt nicht nur die Differenziertheit der Neumenzeichen ab, diese
werden auch in ihren Grundkategorien weniger. So haben die Salzburger Handschriften
des 12.Jh drei Kategorien Zeichen weniger als die Neumentabelle von Cardine fUr die
Handschriften des 10. Jh. ausruhrt. In Salzburg fehIen nach der herkommlichen
Kategorisierung Gravis, Apostropha und Pes stratus. In Seckau hingegen fehlen schon
sechs der bei Cardine genannten 26 Kategorien: Gravis, der Unterschied Tractulus-
Punctum, Apostropha, Salicus, Pes quassus und Pes stratus.
Bei dieser Aufzahlung ist jedoch zu differenzieren:
- Die Funktion eines Zeichens kann anders ausgedriickt werden. Die Bedeutung
des Graviszeichens iibemimmt nun eine Stropha als letztes Element in einer
Reihe absteigender Tone
- Das Zeichen selbst bleibt, erhhlt aber eine andere Funktion. Das Zeichen fUr
den Pes stratus wird das Zeichen fUr einen Torculus mit Halbton zwischen
zweiter und dritter Note.
- Der Inhalt des Zeichens ist obsolet geworden, das Zeichen verschwindet: Pes
quassus, Salicus.
Ein Blick auf die Neumentabelle ergibt, dafi nicht jedes der hier genannten
Zeichen auch in jeder Handschrift vorkommen mu6 (was auch fOr die Neumentabelle
von Cardine gilt), bzw. verschwunden ist.
Vereinzelt gibt es auch die Entwicklung neuer Zeichenformen. Fur den Pressus minor
kennt die Hs. 479 ein eigenes Zeichen, das in diesem Kontext haufig, aber nicht
exklusiv vorkommt:
Die Hs. 417 kennt eine verbundene Schreibweise von Pes und Pressus minor: cF'
Sollte im Zuge einer umfassenden Durchforschung der Seckauer Missalien noch
das eine oder andere Zeichen auftauchen (was im Bereich der Liqueszenzen durchaus
moglich sein konnte), so wird unsere Neumentabelle zu erganzen sein, die genannten
Grunddaten wird dies aber nicht mehr verandern.
38
~
>
~
Nr.
Virga
Bezeichnung
Tractulus
Grund-
fom G
/
Varianten
(Cardine
:,
5
, Gral US 444
~L.
IjJ
I v
LlG.iI.
11
Gra, US 479
T
I
nEL.
'./
J
UIP.
r
Graz US 4\7
"'lOt.
I
lI'~.
j !
Gra: OB 769
H~ L.
IjJ
1.,(0.
~
3 Punctum :} I 'v :1~ I v
: J" "
~ 4 Gravis 2 H
, I )---l
I 11-1
I. .,P 13 IL
1 H I
I]' /3 :I"~
~
11
Cl ivis Il 12 f1 ,1 .r '?fo
I
11 I
I I
s· 6 Pes ,/ 10 cl ./vJ' .I If..; I rf ,- ; \vcf c!;,' ,J"
00
/V I!/ 11f~ If/ I 1ft; ""lfl Jll 1 /I." nJ III IZ> It 1/
~
Porrectus 11"1f/ I I I I
..
c 8 Torculus .J7 15 cl{ '<1 rf' Icfo
I I
efl
1 : J5 .!l 'r
I I~ tL : . cl"" ,If,
/"~
Cl>
I. /0. I ;., If?, / .. f I f., I 11 10. I : /'a I.. I I 13
I'I!
Cl imaeus 12
~ 10 Scandieus
/
10 !J J,JJ{ /JI/f /';- l1JP. I 11" }Jft/ I :/ JI/
~.
11 Porrec tus fl exus !liI
10
M ,.Ill Iflf 1.11 I fill ]J/, eN tU III I
~ 12 Pes sub( bi) punct is '/. 13 J.. I j.~ _. J... I J} I do. J.. cf.) I
g. 16 Distropha 11 }}
)1 »)
" "I'
..
'1.11 m I .,., J»
.. . ..
Q.
Cl>
.... 17 Tristropha )) 71/
.: ': '/
}/)
./ . j J
.,. ~
~
J J , ,
18 Trigon 6
~Jl 11 (71-1/]
I If.. [n] I
" ["J // !!
~
19 Bivirga / Trivirga
I I
!lO 20 Pressus r. 14 'r.
I
r: r. ~I r. cP.J2f." I r.
[
~
21 Vi rga s tra ta r 6 r r I r I r
< 22 Ori scus 'I ;, 7 ~ S
g ,?
I f 11 t1 ,.,I' f-1 t--I f-...4'
23 Sal icus 1J :- r;::
Q
a. 24 Pes quassus ./ if 00. 1--1 I~ t----4
Irf .Jtf.,9
4
t;'
25 Qui lisma dud 6
.J" ..r- oJfJ r.J> d~df 1 I .J'at!Z J ( ~ Ic:f~.f. I 1cJ'
~ - =l ( I I L-
26 Pes s tra tlls .J H ~ L I ~ I H
w
~
3.2 . Neumen mit spezieUer melodischer Aussage
Gerade die Hs. 444 mit ihrer Salzburger Tradition enthaIt eine Reihe von
Zeichen, die dem Sanger spezielle Hinweise zur Melodiefiihrung geben . Diese kleinen
meiodischen Priizisierungen sind rein fakultativ, sie konnen, aber mussen nicht in einem
bestimmten Kontext stehen, und dienen meist dazu, ahnliche Stellen hintereinander
nicht zu verwechseln. Gerade die Art und Weise, wie diese Zeichen gesetzt oder nicht
gesetzt weeden, machen deutlich, in weJchem Ma13e die miindliche Weitergabe der
Melodien und ihr allgemeines Auswendigwissen noch eine gro8e RoUe spielt. Aus den
Neumentabellen des 10. lh. ist es getaufig, einen grofieren Melodieabstieg durch
verUingerte Abstriche darzustellen. In der Hs. 444 finden wir dies bei den nach unten
verUingerten Asten von Clivis und Torculus.
Neu ist in den Handschriften des 12. lh. die gesteigerte Tendenz, die Position
des Halbtones e oder h oder b mit eigenen Zeichen artzugeben. In den Salzburger
Handschriften finden wir hierfiir die Clivis mit Episem. Das Episem driickt hier nicht
einen nicht kurrenten Wert aus, sondem gibt die Position der fa- oder do-Lime an. Wir
finden dies nicht allzu haufig, aber an charakteristischen Stellen:
Das Graduale Dom;ne praevenisti erscheint in der Hs. 444 mit seinem Incipit
noch bei zah]reichen Heiligenfesten. Bei den Incipits an den Festen von Magnus,
Kal1istus und Theodor ist die Clivis ebenfalls mit einem Episem versehen.
Gemeinsarn in den Handschriften aus Seckau und Salzburg finden wir den Usus,
mit einem eigenen Zeichen die Position des Halbtones f-e, b-a oder c-h zu bestimmen.
Fur den Fall, dafi in einem Torculus ein HaJbton zwischen der zweiten und der dritten
Note angezeigt werden solI, verwenden die Handschriften im 12. lh. jenes Zeichen, das
im 10. Jh. die Figur des Pes stratus ausgedruckt hat. Wir geben Beispiele aus der
Hs.444.
40
CO Dicile pusillanimes timere si-do-si
IN Rorate er germinet re-fa-mi
IN Prope esto Domine Prope re-fa-mi
CO Revelabitur Revelabitur re-fa-mi
IN Erenim sederunt adversum me sol-si bernolle-la
adiuva me re-fa-mi
OF Elegerum Domine Jesu sol-do-si
1m Faksimilie Tabelle 1 ist ein solcher Torculus in der Hs. 769 sehr gut erkennbar: GR
AngeJis suis V : In manibus
Im 12. lh. wird beim Trigon das dritte Element haufig nicht als Punkt, sondern
als Stropha (= Komma) geschrieben. In den meisten Fallen ist dies eine systemisierte
Schreibgewohnhcit, nicht aber in der Hs. 444, wo diese Stropha als letztes Element des
Neumenzeichens eine besondere Bedeutung bekommt. Die Stropha bezeichnet hier
zwischen vorletzter und letzter Note ein Interval I, das gr6Ber als eine Sekund ist.
Dieselbe Bedeutung bekommt die Stropha als letztes Neumenelement in alIen Seckauer
Handschriften bei absteigenden Graphien wie Pressus major und minor, Pes subpunctis,
Climacus. Auch in diesem Falle ist der Gebrauch nicht zwingend, sondem von
Handschrift zu Handschrift verschieden, je nach dem "Sicherheitsbedurfnis" des
Schreibers. Manchmal wird eine Stelle eines bestimmten Stiickes gleich in mehreren
Codices gleich markiert. Oftmals bedeutet dieses Zeichen nicht nur den grOBeren
Melodieabstieg zwischen vorletzter und letzter Note, sondem auch gleichzeitig den
melodischen Tiefpunkt der jeweiligen Linie.
Verschiedene Formeln in Alleluia- oder Gradualversen werden hier ofters, aber
nicht immer gleich geschrieben.
In den Seckauer Hss. 479 und 769, sowie in der Salzburger Hs. 444 wird des
6fteren der Oriscus als drittes Element eines Porrectus, bzw. als viertes Element eines
Torculus resupinus verwendet. Kommt diese Konstellation vor, so ist damit sehr haufig
der Gleichklang zwischen zweiter und dritter Note im Porrectus, bzw. der Gleichklang
zwischen dritter und vierter Note im Torculus resupinus angezeigt.
3.3. Liqueszenzneumen
Gegenuber den Quellen des 10. Jh. erscheinen Liqueszenzneumen sogar noch
haufiger. lhr systematisches und tendentiell vermehrtes Auftreten laBt auf ein
41
Bewu6tsein fur die damit verbundenen AusdrucksquaJitiiten schlie6en. Die statistische
Haufigkeit darf aber nicht iiber unterschiedlic,he Qualitaten hinwegtauschen. Die Regeln
fUr Liques.zenzen sind z. T. anders. So treten sie jetzt auch in ungewohnlichen
Positionen auf, wie. z.B. im melodischen Abstieg oder an Tiefpunkten der Melodie.
Desgleichen finden wir sie auf alien SHbenpositionen eines Wortes. Zwei Beispiele in
Tabelle 3 und 4 mogen dies verdeutJichen: Gaudeamus omnes in Domino und Gaudete
in Domino semper.
Daneben seien noch ein paar Beispiele aus der Hs. 479 angefiihrt:
- vermehrtes Auftreten von Liqueszenzen in Us. 479 gegenuber Einsiedeln 121
42
und Notationsmoglichkeit in manchen Details zwei verschiedene Dinge darslellen,
sodaS wir milunler auf mehrere Moglichkeiten sloBen, den Klang graphisch zu erfassen.
Das Phanomen der Austauschbarkeil von Graphien ist schon in den Codices des
10. lh. bekannt. Man denke hier elwa an die gegenuber den Sl. GaIler Codices doch
deutlich eingeschrankte Verwendung des Salicus im Codex Laon 239, der an dessen
Stelle einen gewohnlichen Scandicus notiert (was auch fUr dieses Neumensystem
leichter zu schreiben war).
In den Seckauer Handschriften des 12. lh. ist zunachst eine rechl willkiirliche
Verwendung von Virga und Tractulus/Punctum als Einzeltonneume zu beobachten. Im
Sinne der herkommlichen Unterscheidung dieser Zeichen -- relativ hoherer I relativ
tieferer Ton -- treten oftmaIs Inkonsequenzen auf. Dies ist freilich eine Nivellierung der
melodischen Aussagekraft der Notation und nicht der rhythmischen. In den Tabellen 3
und 4 finden sich dazu folgende Belege:
IN Gaudeamus:
Gaudeamus (479, 769, Gurk), Agathae (Gurk), martyris (769, Gurk)
cuius (479, Gurk) et collaudant (Vorau, Gurk)
IN Gaudete:
iterum dieo (Vorau), modeslia (479, 769) modestia (Gurk)
gaudete (479, 769, Gurk), vestra (alle), sed in omni (417, Vorau)
petitiones (479,769), Deum (479,769,Gurk)
Dariiber hinaus sehen wir in der Hs. 769 ein Beispiel, wo eine langere rezitativische
Passage, die mit Tractuli zu schreiben ware, durchgehend mit Virgen notiert ist
Al Dies sancrificarus ... venire gentes, et adorale .. .
Sehr haufig ist der keinen erkennbaren Regeln folgende Austausch von Bivirga
und Bistropha. Die Hss. 417 und 479 schreiben die Bivirga liber einer Silbe isoliert
liberhaupt selten. Ihr haufigeres Vorkommen ist in compositione, meist als
subpunktierte Bivirga, also ein Climacus, dessen oberste erste Note verdoppelt worden
ist. Haufiger hingegen komml die isolierte Bivirga in den Hss. 444 und 769 vor, auch
in vielen "klassischen" Fallen.
IN Gaudere iterum dico (Tabelle 3)
Die Bivirga erweckt -- vor allem isoliert -- den Anschein weiter tradierter
konservativer Schreibgewohnheiten. lm Normalfall werden unisonische Kontexte durch
die Stropha ausgedriickt. Das Strophazeichen erscheint wiederum nur im Kontext
zweier oder mehrerer Strophen, nichl jedoch einzeln rus Apostropha. Diese Funktion
43
ubemehmen entweder Oriscus oder Virga. Zahlreich sind die FaIle in den
Handschriften, wo aufgrund von SchriftgroJ3e und nicht immer ganz eindeutiger
Schreibart (auch das Strophazeichen wird mitunter nicht als rundes Komma, sondern
gleichsam als Miniaturvirga geschrieben) die optische Unterscheidung beider Graphien
schwer faIlt.
Beispiele fUr den Austausch dieser Graphien:
Der Pressus minor ist ein weiteres Zeichen, das gegeniiber den QueUen des 10.
lh. verstiirkt geschrieben wird, und zwar sehr regeltreu. Die Handschriften
unterscheiden ubrigens nicht zwischen dem dreitOnigen Pressus maior und dem
zweitonigen Pressus minor, flir beide Kontexte wird das gleiche Zeichen verwendet.
Der Pressus minor kommt immer als Clivisbewegung, die an den vorhergehenden Ton
unisonisch anschliefit, vor. Gerade in den Hss. 417, 769, 479 ersetzt der Pressus die
meisten Cliviszeichen, deren erster Ton gleich hoch ist wie der letzte Ton des
vorhergehenden Neumenelementes in compositione, ist also der normale Ausdruck flir
den genannten melodischen Kontext. Die Hs. 479 kennt fUr diesen Pressus minor ein
eigenes Zeichen. Wahrend insgesamt in alIen Codices die ZahI der verbunden
geschriebenen Graphjen abnimmt, ist in der Hs. 417 eine gro.6ere ZahI verbunden
geschriebener Pressuskontexte zu beobachten, z.B. Clivis-Pressus, Torculus-Pressus.
Fur die Verbindung Pes-Pressus wird hi er sogar ein eigenes Zeichen verwendet. Dieses
ist wie ein S1. Galler Pes stratus, dem ein Punkt hinzugefiigt ist, zu beschreiben.
Pressus minor ersetzt Clivis:
Nicht ungelaufig ist der Austausch einer Clivis mit vorhergehellder Virga
(Amplifikation der Clivisbewegung am oberen Pol) durch das Trigon, das ja den
gleichen melodischen Bewegungsablauf aufweist und in den Handschriften des 10. lh.
eigentlich nur die kurrente Variante der erstgenannten Graphie darstellt. Desgleichen ist
auch zu beobachten im Austausch von Pes + Clivis dUTCh ein Trigon praepuncte.
44
Gerade bei diesen Phiinomenen ist es am augenscheinlichsten, daB eine urspriingliche
rhythmische Differenzierung verlorengegangen ist, wenn man schon bei manch
"richtiger" Orthographie der Bivirga wiederum Zweifel bekommen konnte, ob nicht das
eine oder das andere Zeichen doch als Ausdruck bewu8t gemeinter Unterschiede gesetzt
worden ist.
Trigon ersetzt Virga + Pes:
769 1 Jl, 1t ~ ~ It
sa-lu- ta re
e-
co Viderunt omnes E _ rJ) 1.//."/ I
479 , J7 1?f",~ /(
lJ..
• ell I .,• ',7 f/
769
sa-lu-ta re -
Die Hss. 479 und 769 schreiben hier vollig identisch uber der Akzentsilbe -ta-
die gleiche Melodie verschiedenartig: in der Communio Revelabitur mit Virga - Pes -
Trigon subpuncte - Oriscus, in der Communio Viderunt omnes hingegen mit Virga-
Scandicus - Climacus resupinus. Die jeweils and ere graphische Gliederung der Melodie
(1+2+5+1 zu 1+3+4+1) fiihrt zum gleichen Ergebnis. (769 hat im Climacusabstieg
einen Ton mehr, was unsere Beobachtungen aber nicht beeintriichtigt.) Sind in diesem
Beispiel ParallelfaIle unterschiedlich geschrieben, so ist im folgenden Beispiel die
Trigongraphie gegenGber der Schreibweise in E ausgetauscht:
4S
AL Ostende Domine 769
In der Seckauer Schreibtradition gibt es keinen Salicus und keinen Pes quassus.
Wird der Salicus generell durch einen Scandicus, mitunter auch durch einen
Quilismascandicus ersetzt, so fallt auf, daJl in den Hss. 417 und 479 und z.T. auch in
769 die Graphie des Pes quassus durch einen Quilismapes ersetzt wird. Es ist dabei zu
beachten, daB das Quilismazeichen nicht eindeutig auf eine bestimmte Tonzahl fixierbar
erscheint, manchmal sind zwei, manchmal drei Tone gemeint. Die folgenden Beispiele
geben FaIle an, bei denen der Kontext eindeutig ein Zeichen flir zwei Tone
(Quilismapes) ergibt.
1st hier noch eine Idee der zugigen Aufwfu1sbewegung zum h5chsten Ton der Gruppe
als Zielpunkt hin vorhanden?
Wird in den genannten Beispielen der Scandicus durch einen Quilismascandicus ersetzt,
so gibt es auch den umgekehrten Fall im gleichen Graduale.
Hier wird der Quilismascandicus flexus der Kadenz zu einem gewohnlichen Scandicus
flex us.
46
Scandicus flexus (Binnenartikulation nach der zweiten Note), Torculus resupinus
(Anfangsartikulation) und beim Porrectus flexus (Anfangsartikulation).
In Hinblick auf die allgerneine rhythmische Nivellierung ist zu fragen, was diese
Reste darstellen, die sich der generellen Verringerung des Zeichenvorrates widersetzt
haben. Es ist auffallig, daB es si ch dabei generell urn das Phanomen der
Anfangsartikulation handelt, sowie urn eine gangige Intonationsformel des Protus. Eine
ErkHirung k6nnte sich iiber eine vermutete AuffUhrungspraxis ergeben. Nach unserer
Ansicht wurden die graphisch abgespaltenen Kopfnoten nicht weich und dezent und
immer in einer gedachten Verbindung zu den iibrigen Neumenelementen angesungen,
sondem kriifiig, akzentuiert und bestimmt. Dies fUhrte dazu, daB diese Graphien nicht
mehr als ein zusammengeh6riger Komplex, sondem als zwei verschiedene "Neumen"
betrachtet word en sind. Der Sanger sieht nicht mehr einen Porrectus flexus mit
Anfangsartikulation vor sich, sondem eine Virga und einen Torculus. Ein Scandicus rnit
Anfangsartikulation wird demnach als ein Tractulus mit einem Pes gesehen.
Die Hss. 417 und 769 haben eine Eigentiimlichkeit gemeinsam. Bei isolien
vorkommenden Einzeltonneumen wird nicht genau zwischen Punkt und Tractulus
unterschieden. Wir finden vielfach Zeichen, die in jede Richtung zu deuten sind. In
compositione hingegen werden aufsteigende Melodien generell mit Tractuli
geschrieben, absteigende Melodien hingegen mit Punkten. In compositione finden wir
auch eine Pesform, die aus zwei Tractuli besteht. Der tiefere Tractulus ist des 6fteren
schriig gestellt (quasi eine Miniaturvirga), der h6here beginnt am oberen Ende des
tieferen und geht von da nach rechts. Die normalen Tractuli haben rnanchrnal einen
feinen haarstrichdiinnen Ansatz, sodaB sie einem zu kIein geratenen Uncinus def Metzer
Notation zum Verwechseln ahnlich sehen.
Die von uns aufgezahlten Falle und Beispiele sagen nichts Gber die Haufigkeit
des Vorkommens aus. So scheint in der Neumentabelle irnmer die Virga strata auf. Thr
Vorkommen ist in den Hss. 417,479 und 769 eher seIten. Selten ist auch der Gebrauch
der Bivirga in den genannten Handschriften. In der Hs. 417 kommt der Oriscus zum
Unterschied von den anderen Codices weniger haufig vor. Dieselbe Handschrift neigt
zu verbunden geschriebenen Pressuskontexten und hat fUr die Verbindung Pes-Pressus
47
auch ein eigenes Zeichen. Die Hs. 769 scheint dagegen im Gebrauch von Liqueszenzen
sparsamer zu sein.
5. Einzelbeobachtungen zu Melodien
5.1. Variantenbildung durch Ausfiillen von Tonriiumen
Unter zahlreichen kleinen Varianten der Melodien des 12. lh. gegeniiber denen
aus dem 10. lh. sind solche von Interesse, die einen gewissen Proze6 des Sich-Zurecht-
Singens ausdriicken. Dazu gehort das Ausfiillen groBerer Intervalle durch
eingeschobene Tone. In vielen FaIlen wird eine Terz zu zwei Sekundschritten erweitert.
Es ist auffaJlig, daB der zusatzlich eingeftigte Ton mit einem strukturschwachen
Quilisma ausgedriickt wird. Salicusgraphien erweitern si ch zu viertonigen
Quilismascandicusgruppen.
E 479 769
IN Populus Sion gloriam vocis !V. , , ;1~
IN Gaudere modestia :/
,-
J!
IN Vent er osrende Veni t , ,J! .::
Lux /
IN Lux .tu/gebi! ."
IN Puer natus humerum eius IfflJJ
/
CO Viderunt omnes
IN Erenim sederunt
fines
adversum
?
me ·c/J'
f'
IN Ecee advenit Ecce ·
t/
et imperium '1
•
Neben dem AuffiiIlen von Tonraumen ist auch die Reduktion von Tonzahlen in
einzelnen Neumen zu beobachten. Diese bedeutet durchwegs den Verlust an
rhetorischer Dramatik und Intensitiit, wenn man bedenkt, daB in der gregorianischen
Komposition Verdoppelung, Wiederholung usw. das Stilmittel der Steigerung
ausmachen. Besonders deutlich ist dies in der Communio Vox in Rama, deren
dramatische Tonsymbole durch die Reduktion in der Hs. 479 wie weggewischt
erscheinen. Amplifikationen werden auf ihre elementaren Grundbewegungen
zuriickgeftihrt. So wird aus der Verbindung Pes + Clivis wieder ein normaler
Torculus. So1che Anderungen zeigen tiefe Einblicke in das System gregorianischer
Asthetik. Elementare Tonbewegungen werden an bestimmten Stellen aus Griinden des
48
Ausdrucks (sei es vom Text her, sei es von modalen Strukturen her) intensiviert. Dies
geschieht nicht durch langeres Anhalten eines Tones, sondern durch Verdoppelung,
Verdreifachung ... desselben in der Technik der Reperkussion. Gehen diese Feinheiten
verloren, verschwindet auch deren graphischer Ausdruck und die Melodiegestalt nimmt
wieder ihre elementare Form an .
~ ,
c/1 479
479
ululatus /r ~
1·
noluit _tU/' ~
J
Unter den angefiihrten Beispielen sind auch eine Reihe von Liqueszenzen, die auf ihre
Stammneumen zuriickgefiihrt werden. Hier haben wir einige gegenlaufige Beispiele zur
Tendenz vermehrter Liqueszenzverwendung.
49
; ;
...... ~.
~ ~
·s ...t.: "-
t;"
'Ii::: ~
~ ~
.... .... "-
.......t. ........
~"
'"'- ..... (:
~ .. ~
.. ...
~ ...
~
~
-..:,.
.. ~.-
.....
, ....,.
, ....
"') ~ '"
'" ~.
"
, "",
, ,...\. ~ ~
,""- .....
'. ..... \.
.. ;;
I
.......
...
.......... ..
...
~-
....... ... ..
...
.\
"
'. .'-l.~ "
~~ ~ ~ \
I~' ..
TABELLE3a.
50
\.. g .....
~\. .... "'- c;
lJ) et. ~
"{
"-
'-
'-
t., ! -0:
...... ......
~
.....
<:;
"- ...:
~ ~
'-
1 ... ~ ~ ~
\.M ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~
, '- ;; ... "-
~ ....
0... '-0 .....
. , ...
~ ~
"-
~ ~ ., .....
..... ~ '-:.
.....
s::::,
.....
~ ...
....
• .!
"~ .... ......
......
, ~
~
\.J~
'i
·cs
."
'"<;;
,,~
'a .i
•
~
u
~ ';
"S
~
CO
<0
c:;;
""
~
"'i
"
<:::;
~
"
~
"{
~
~
~
~
....\. <=;:
cs, c:;
.., .... 1:0; 't:; ~ <;
.....
~ .......
\. ,, -.
..... ....
....
l
\. - ....
"-
\.. i ...
----
CO
'- ' '=;;..... ... <::;
~
C; '- '- ~ ~ ~ ~ '.
q~ ....
')
~ " '- \
os
')
.... Vi
'-,
"-
.... "".... "" .......
...... ~
~
..... ~ ::>"'-
, ..... -c: -
..:.
, '-
.... ""-=>~ .... ' o ..
.... ... ~~
"I
..... r-~ Q..
ill
:c
!: ;.
.... VI
~
:~ ~
C!o "...
'.~
!.-.:.
'-> .
~~ 1. '.' ':)
~
~ < ..... ~
!~
-< .....
"- ,,\. "-
'" ~ .... ~ "'- 'i;! ~ ......
....
I·
~ UI
"- '"
Q
..J <: -s ~
... '" . '" '" V>
'" ... J:
.....
~~ '" .... 1ri :>~~
')<
ID -J W u iii ~ ~ -"" "j: ... ~
> ~~ ~ ...
<;:'-.1 :J", o,!J", -s~ <so£>
::>
':>
"
TABELLE3b.
51
Domino: Uber der Akzentsilbe steht ein SaIicus/Scandicus mit drei Tonen. Zum
Unterschied von der Vaticana erscheint dieser in Klostemeuburg mit
einem Terzsprung zwischen zweiter und dritter Note. Dieses Intervall
wurde in Graz 417 und Vorau 21 durch einen vierten Ton ausgeftillt.
semper: Der Halbtonpes am Ende dieser Neume scheint nur noch im Salzburger
Missale auf. Ansonsten reduziert sich dieses kleine Interval1 zu einer
unisonischen Bistropha.
modestia: Die Vaticana und Klosterneuburg haben hier die gleiche Version. Diese
erscheint auBer in Graz 417 und 444 iiberall urn einen vierten Ton, der
wiederum die Terz ausfiillt, erweitert. Ganz eindeutig ist dies in den
beiden Karntner Handschriften, wo zusatzliche Einzeltone die
Quilismagraphie als Quilismapes definieren und trotzdem die Tonzahl
vier ergeben.
vestra: nur das Salzburger Missale foJgt a1teren Quellen, ansonsten ist hier
einhellig ein Scandicus mit drei Noten iiberliefert.
sitis: In der Mitte einer dreistufigen Abwarubewegung ist der Ton sol
verdoppelt. Diese Ampliftkation wird in Graz 417 und Vorau 21
zuriickgenommen, die Figur reOOziert sich wieder auf einen einfachen
resupinen Climacus.
sitis: 479 und 769 schreiben statt des Pes quassus einen Quilismapes (s.o.)
sed in: Graz 417 und Vorau 21 haben hier moglicherweise zwei gleiche Tone
oder eine inkonsequente Schreibung.
omni: Die Schreibweise von Graz 417 und Vorau 21 entspricht genau jener VOn
Klostemeuburg. Der zweite Ton der Neume ist hier ein mi. In den
anderen Quellen ist dieser Kontext mit einem Trigon wiedergegeben,
soda6 sich die Prage erhebt, ob nicht der erste Ton eines Trigon, der
normalerweise gleich hoch ist wie der zweite, im Kontext von fa oder do
nicht auch die Halbtonbeziehung ausdriicken kann, was wir auch an
anderer Stelle nicht ausschlie6en konnen.
petitiones: Graz 479 uod 769 schreiben hier inkonsequenterweise Virgen.
innotescant: Oraz 479 und 769 folgen hier der Klosterneuburger Variante, die der
Reperlrussion durch Bildung eines Pes ausweicht.
52
I
~
I ~-
~. .. .
I19 ...... "c:::: ....' ]
.
i;:
". ,i "i',- B
• '0
iI
a
~
.~
I ,
\.lo~ C, "I)
s -=;-~.
.".".! ...
-1·' ~
'-
'-
:1
'2
..-t,
. j
•
E
..... ~~
.e
'\
\., .~
~,, ..
TABELLE4.
53
5.3. Bernerkungen zu den Melodieversionen des Introitus Gaudeamus
Schon aus der vorhergehenden Synopse wird deutlich, daB eine gewisse
Zusamrnengehorigkeit zwischen den Hss. 479 und 769 einerseits, und den Hss. Graz
417 und Vorau 21 besteht. Dieses Bild verstiirkt sich noch in der synoptischen Lektiire
des Introitus Gaudeamus. Diese erste Beobachtung von ZusammengehOrigkeit reicht
freilich noch nicht aus, urn hier schon weitergehende Schliisse ziehen zu konnen.
Gaudeamus: Auf der Akzentsilbe dieser Formel steht jener Scandicus mit
Neurnentrennung nach der zweiten Note, der als Rest rhythmischer
Feinheiten den Graphien des 12. lh. erhalten bleibt (s.o.).
Domino: Die Arnplifikation dieses Torculus zu einer viertonigen Gruppe ist in
alien Handschriften auBer dern Salzburger Misssale gegeben. Interessant
ist wiederum, da13 Klosterneuburg nicht do-do schreibt, wie man
aufgrund der Kamtner Quellen und Graz 479 und 769 (hier vor allern der
Pressus minor mit seinem zwingenden unisonischen AnschluB!) vermuten
konnte, sondern si-do, was moglicherweise auch Graz 417 und Vorau 21
ausdriicken konnten. Wir sehen hier schon deutliche Tendenzen zur
Urngehung von Reperkussionen, was durchaus in die Entwicklung zum
"cantus planus" paBt.
celebrantes: Graz 417 und Vorau 21 haben hier eine sonst nicht auf Linien
verifizierbare Variante.
Agathae: Die meisten Varianten des 12. lh. sind hier wiederurn viertonig. Der
Grund liegt wieder in der Umgehung der Reperkussion.
passione: Der Scandicus flex us mit Anfangsartikulation bleibt ebenfalls als
graphischer Rest erhalten.
Dei: Im Kontext erscheint der Quilismascandicus hier dreitonig, nur zwei
Handschriften notieren davor einen Punkt, soda6 das Quilismazeichen
selber zweitonig zu lesen ist.
54
Charles E. BREWER
In recent years, the study of chant notation has reached ever greater
sophistication, especially in relation to the regions of Central and East Central Europe.
Scriptoria and, at times, even individual scribes have been identified with ever
increasing clarity as regards time and place; foremost among these more recent studies
are those directed by Walter Pass concerning materials from Vienna and those of Janka
Szendrei both on the Esztergom chant notation and on central European chant sources in
general.' Within this context, the significance of Bohemian chant notation (notatio
rhombica) has long been recognized, but is only now beginning to receive the more
detailed study it deserves. 2
Among the questions that still need to be addressed concerning Bohemian chant
notation relate to its origins during the later fourteenth century. Based on the studies of
Hutter and augmented in part by Stablein, it is clear that Bohemian chant notation
developed from a pure Messine notation during the mid-fourteenth century.3 Rapidly,
this notational style spread throughout the regions of Bohemia and later Moravia. 4 But
as yet unresolved is the rational behind the need for this change. I believe that this
probable rational can be discovered by examining how the Bohemian chant notation
came to be used in mensural monophonic and polyphonic music and by placing it in the
context of other developments in fourteenth-century Bohemia.
My interest in specific aspects of this notation was first aroused during my
studies of two polyphonic settings of the Credo found predominantly in Bohemian
I Among other works, see Janka Szendrei, "The Introduction of Staff Notation into Middle Europe"
Sludia musicologica 28 (1986), pp. 303-319; Janka Szendrei, "Die Geschichte der Graner Choralnotation"
Studia music%gica 30 (1988). pp.5-234; and the exhibition catalogue, Musik im minelallerlichen Wum
(Wien, 1987).
2 See the article by David Eben included in this volume.
3 The most thorough study of later chant notation in Bohemia is Josef Hutter, CuM notace: (tasl 11)
NOTa Choralis, Sbirks pojednaru a rosprav XVII (praha, 1930). Additional comments are contained in B.
Stablein. Schriftbild der einstimmigen Musik, Musikgescbicbte in Bildern, III/4 (Leipzig, 1975); see
especiaUy the comments on p.68 and p.206 . See also. Szendrei. 'Introduction', p.312.
4 See Szendrei, "Introduction", p.312.
r '
~...--- i • i ,
{'. ..,
Ht !F i ! j, f' ! L' f' ! !' . I i
~
i dB ·Po.- .. -trem
/I P
: • • L i: § g I d i ,J. J. i J. I j .
er' •
C.re~ - do De - um
WiY'
5 Tadeusz Miazga, Di~ Melodien des einslimmig~n Credo der rlJmisch-kalholischen lateinischen KirCM
(Graz, 1976), pp.44-45. Miazga does not, however, note the use of this famous tune as a tenor.
6 For a more complete study of this work and further references, see Charles E. Brewer, The lmroduction
of th£ •An nova· illlo Easl Celllral Euro~: A Study of LlJIe Medj~val Polish Sources (Ph.D .diss., City
University of New York, 1984), pp.312-316. F. Ludwig had already noticed nine sources for this wod
in his manuscript for the second volume of his Repertoriwn . See F. Ludwig. Repertorium organonun
recelll;oris eI mOlelorum veluslissimi slili, Band I: Catalogue raisonnJ der Quelten, Abteilun& 11:
Handschriften in M~nsural-Notalion (The Institut of Mediaeval Music, 1978), pp.7S4-7S9.
7 Concerning the "Engelberg motel style", see F. Ludwig, "Die mehrstimmigen Werlce der Handschrift
Engelber& 314", KircMnmJLfikalischt!s lahrbuch 21 (1908), pp.48-6I, and J. Handschin,
"Angelomontana polyphonica" Schw~izerisches lahrbuch fUr Musilcwissenschaft 3 (1928), pp .64-96 and
"Notenbeilagc" .
8 See Brewer, lnlroduction, pp.309-322.
9 Miazga, op. cit., p . llS.
56
The earliest four sources for this work on the source list include two from
Bohemia (#1 and possibly 3), one from Slovakia (#2), and one from Vienna (#4).
Though well known within Central Europe in the mid-fifteenth century, it was later
transmitted almost exclusively through Utraquist manuscripts and sources prepared for
the "Literati", the lay choirs that became common in Bohemia following the Hussite
Revolution.
(Cl'F iEJ[Jif
, , I
J ! J •fJ ! j I d
.i'
J ,.I i
57
Bohemian chant notation used throughout the remainder of most of the sources listed
for this two-voice Credo.
The similarity of the rhomboid form typical of Bohemian chant notation to the
traditional semibreve of mensura! notation from the thirteenth century onwards led me
to this conclusion: as evidenced in the clearly men sural uses of the rhomboid/semibreve
figure such as those noted above, this notational symbol had a clear and consistent
mensural value, which was applicable also when used in chant notation. This
interpretation of Bohemian chant notation, which consists almost exclusively of these
rhomboid figures, is not unusual, given the current theories concerning the equalist
11 This list uses the RISM sigla and inventory numbers where available. The sources are arranged in an
approximate chronological order.
58
rhomboid/semibreve figure in Bohemian chant notation would be firm evidence of its
applicability to this repertoire.
It is evident in many sources for the so-called eantus planus binatim repertoire,
that the simple, often two-voice polyphonic settings of liturgical lessons, Benedicamus
tropes, alleluias, and Ordinary settings are understandable only if there is a one-to-one
equivalence between the single notes and neumes of each separate voice. 12 This is also
clearly evident throughout the Bohemian sources for this repertoire, beginning with
manuscripts from the early-fourteenth century from the St. George's Cloister in Praha
to those from the fifteenth century, such as the Vy~ehrad manuscript (CS-PSI 376).13
In addition to the two-voice Credo (Miazga #628), there are numerous other
places in the Bohemian manuscripts from the late fourteenth and fifteenth centuries
where there is an intermixture of Bohemian chant notation and men sural elements even
in the monophonic repertoire. 14 Facsimile 2 is an excerpt from the so-called
"JistebnickY Cantiona1" (CS-Pnm II C 7). Here, in an Old-Czech setting of the Nicene
Creed, three-note neumes in Bohemian chant notation are used in the midst of normal
mensural notation to indicate three semibreves; see, for example, p.43, lines I, 2
and 6.
Facsimile 3 is an excerpt from a monophonic Sane/us from the Vy~ehrad
manuscript (ts-Pst 376) that clearly uses two-note neumes to indicate two semibreves;
see, for example, f.19r, lines 3,4 and 7.
Facsimiles 4a & b are from the Vyssf Brod manuscript from 1410 (CS-VB 42).15
In this version of the sequence "Veni Sancte Spiritus", the verses "0 lux beatissma" and
"Sine tua numine" (which begin at the bottom of f.123v) are clearly notated with
mensura! elements and the two-note neumes again must be interpreted as equal to two
semibreves. It seems improbable that the same scribe, within the same manuscript, if
not within the same work would use the identical notational symbol with both mensural
and non-mensural meanings.
12 This is evident in such sources as the Moosburger Gradual (Miinchen, Universitiitsbibliothek, 20 156);
Engelberg, Stiftsbibliothek, Hs. 314; and most of the liturgical lessons edited by T. Gollner, Die
mehrstimmigen liturgischen Lesungen, Moocher Veroffentlichungen zur Musikgeschichte 15, 2 vols.
(Tutzing, 1969).
13 For a more detailed study of the Bohemian sources for this repertoire, see J. ~emy, "Sttedov~ky
vlcehlas v reskych zemlch" [Medieval polyphony in the Czech lands], Miscellanea musicologica XXVII-
XXVIII (Praha, 1915), pp.9-116. The St. George's sources are studied in V. Plocek, "NejstarSf dvojhlasy
v rukopisech universitnf knibovny' [The Oldest Two-part Songs in the Manuscripts of the University
Library], Rofenka Universim( Knihovny v Praze 1960-1961 (praha, 1962), pp.129-148 [English
summary, p.224·225j.
14 Concerning the use of mensural elements, see Sliblein, Schriftbild, pp.68 and 69, and pp.208-21O;
Abb. 80 on p.211, which stems from a 15th-century Bohemian source, is similar to Facsimile 3 in this
paper.
I~ This source has now been published in facsimile: Die Hohenfurter Liederhandschrift (H 42) von 1410,
Bausteine zur Geschichte der Liberatur bei den Slaven 21, ed. H. Rothe (K6lnlWien, 1984).
S9
not within the same work would use the identical notational symbol with both mensura}
and non-mensura! meanings.
The question arises of why did the Bohemian chant notation develop in the mid-
fourteenth century and where was the locus of this change? Facsimile 5 is derived from
Plocek's catalogue of manuscripts in the University Library in Praha and provided some
direction for my thoughts by the juxtaposition of two sources from the same location. 16
Manuscripts VI G 3a and 3b both come from the St. George Cloister at Praha
Castle; manuscript 3b (on the right) stems from the early-fourteenth century and shows
the purer Messine character of Bohemian notation in the early part of the century;
Manuscript 3a (on the left) is from later in the century and displays clear tendencies in
the single note-forms and the pes towards the more regular rhomboid form of the
Bohemian chant notation.
What struck my eyes in looking at these two facsimiles was the clear and
significant change in notational style that occured within a relatively short period of
time (perhaps about fifty years). Following this, I examined available facsimiles and
some of my own films, and it seems that the earliest sources for Bohemian chant
notation all stem from Praha. Perhaps formost among them are the liturgical books
prepared for Amost of Pardubice, Bishop of Praha, in 1363, now in the Archive of
Praha CastleY It seems clear that whatever prompted this notational reform, its locus
was in the royal city of Praha.
I believe, however, that it is possible to further specify the rationale behind this
change. Facsimile 6 also derives from Plocek's catalogue, and is of manuscript VIII G
29, dating from the later fourteenth century. 18
The music -- consisting of chants for St. Wenceslaus, Benedicamus chants, and
finally a Latin/Czech Easter play -- was originally part of a collectio probably prepared
by a student or professor at the University of Praha. That the play stems from this same
mileau is indicated by the use of Czech; at this same period, other masters at the
university, including Jan Hus, were advocating greater use of the vernacular in the
church. Bohemian chant notation was also used within the Latin treatise attributed to
Johannes Holesoviensis concerning "Hospodyne pomyluy ny", compiled in 1397 at the
Benedictine monastery in Bl'evnov (praha, University Library, 1I1 D 17).19 Both of
these sources reflect activities that can be directly tied to the University of Praha in the
16 V. Plocek. Catalogus codicum notis musicis instructorum qui I ... ) in Bibliotheca universitatis
Pragensis servanlur. 2 vols. (praha, 1973). The facsimiles are included in Yol. 2, p.821.
17 Concerning these sources, see the paper by David Eben in lhis volume.
18 For a description of this source, see Plocek, Calalogus, Vol. I, pp.316-318. The facsimile is from
Plocek, Vol. 2, p.824.
19 The text of this treatise is published in Zden~k NejedJy, Dljiny husitsUho lI'Ivu, 6 vols. (Praha,
1954), vol. I. pp ,409-433. A facsimile of the song is publisbed in PJocek, Catalogus, vol. 2, p.811.
60
last part of the fourteenth century, and I believe that the university played an important
role in the notational reform.
The theory of mensural notation was taught at the university at least by the year
1369, the date of a treatise concerning mensural theory with ars nova elements
reflecting Praha practices.20 That mensural notation was understood in Bohemia much
earlier is shown by the Wrocfaw Rotulus and the fragments of pre-ars nova motets
found in a manuscript from l':eskY Krumlov. 21 Many manuscripts of mensural music of
the most elaborate type in medieval Central and East Central Europe all seem to stem
from university or courtly environments: the two great Polish "royal" manuscripts from
Krak6w containing works by Nicholaus de Radom, Ciconia, and "Zacharius"; the
newly discovered fragments of late fourteenth-century mass movements from Buda; the
St. Emmeram manuscript from Vienna. 22
If the change that occured in Bohemian notation reflected a performance practice
that required a clear mensural meaning, it would seem that the University of Praha
would have provided the most qualified persons to effect this reform; perhaps these
masters were attached to the cathedral chapter. Certainly, archival study of the
cathedral records will further clearify the relations between the cathedral and university
in the period following 1348.
The question of "why" remains, and I would like to draw your attention again to
Facsimile 5 from the two S1. George manuscripts. The notation on the left is much
clearer, consisting of more single elements than neumes, and even the neumes include
many clearly rhomboid features. In later versions of Bohemian chant notation, the
rhomboid character becomes even more pronounced, as in the sixth facsimile, until it
finally consists of the separate rhomboid characters connected by thin lines.
This c1earification of the chant notation became increasingly important,
especially as Bohemia moved in the direction of radical liturgical reform. And certainly
following the Hussite Revolution, the increasing lay participation demanded less
complex notations for the music. The use of Bohemian chant notation in this context is
documented by the so-called JistebnickY Cantional, which is in reality a carefully
selected liturgical manuscript to which various cantiones have been added, and the use
20 R. Federhofer-Konig, "Ein anonymer Musiktraklal aus der 2. Hilfte des 14. Jahrhunderts in der
Stiftsbibliothek Michaelbeuem Salzburg", Kirchenmusiknlisches lahrbuch XLVI (1962), pp.43-60.
21 Concerning the Wrodaw ROlUlus, see C. E. Brewer, • A Fourteenth-Century Polyphonic Manuscripl
Rediscovered", Slutiia musicologica 24 (1982), pp.5-19. On the ~esky Krumlov source, see G.
Anderson, "New Sources of Mediaeval Music", Musicology VII (Melbourne, 1982), pp.2-3, 11-16, and
21-25.
n For information on the Polish sources, see Brewer, Introduction, pp. 257-309; on the Budapest
fragments, see Charles Brewer, "The Historical Context of Polyphony in Medieval Hungary: An
Examination of Four Fragmentary Sources", Studia musicologica (forthcoming); on the Emmeram
manuscript see lan Rumbold, "The Compilation and Ownership of the 'SI. Emeram' Codex (Munich,
Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, CLM 14274)", Early Music History 2 (1982), pp. 161-235.
61
of Bohemian chant notation was continued by the Utraquist church. The viability of the
notation is reflected in its use up through the late sixteenth century, and even black
mensura! notation is found used for polyphonic works in these late manuscripts. I
believe, therefore, that already in the mid~fourteenth century, the main impetus behind
the reform of Bohemian chant notation was the attempt to simplify the pitch and
mensura! significance of the notational symbols so that they could more clearly be
understood in performance.
The development of the Bohemian chant notation in Praha during the mid~
fourteenth century is one of the most significant events in central European musical
history. It reflected a logical simplification of chant notation and made its performance
parameters clearly mensura!. Certainly, this is one more important cultural development
that was fostered during the so-called "golden age of Bohemia" during the reign of
Charles IV, but its greatest historical impact came through its popu lar use as a result of
the Hussite reforms. 23
23 Research for this article was supported in part by a grant from the International Reserarch & Exchanges
Board (IREX). with funds provided by the National EndoWlllent for the Humanities and the United Slates
Information Agency. None of these organizations is responsible for the views expressed.
62
FACSIMILE l.l5s-Pu XlII A 5, f 364r
63
FACSIMILE 1. l5$-Pnm 1I C 7, pp.42-43.
64
FACSIMILE 3.C-s-Pst376, ff.18v-19r.
65
FACSIMILES 4A & B. ~S-l1l42. ff.123r-124v.
66
.. . :. "~,... . .. .
· " ~ "' ,,: '
" " - - " ~-----""~"" -.- - -.
67
FACSIMILE 6 ; a-pu Vlll G 29, f.137 r.
6R
HartIilul MOLLER
Es iSl vermutlich bei uns alien dasselbe: Der l?ulsschlag beschleunigt sich
betriichtlich, wenn wir eine uns unbekannte Handschrift durchbHittem . Und oft kommt
es ja auch bei vertraulen Codices vor, da13 wir v611ig neue Dinge entdecken. So erinnere
ich mlch noch sehr genau an dieses Gefiihl , gemischt aus Uberraschung, Staunen,
Begeistcrung und Aufgeregtheit, als ich in der dusteren Schatzkammer der
Quedlinburger Stiftskirche eine neumierte Exultet-Prafati on entdeckte. 1 Ahnliche
Erlebnisse wird jeder von Ihnen gehabt haben und immer wieder haben. -- Was wir alle
aber auch kennen, ist nicht selten die Situation des Zeitdrucks in auswartigen
Bibliotheken: noch drei Handschriften liegen vor einem auf dem Tisch, der Bibliothekar
driingt ZUIll Aufh6ren, am Abend geht endgGltig der Zug oder der Flug nach Hause.
Deshalb bestellen wir Mikrofilme, eventuell von einigen Folios Hochglanz-
ROckvergr6Berungen oder Farbdias. Doch versuchen wir uns einmal vorzustellen, wir
lebten und forschten im 18. Jahrhundert, und unsere KoIlegen hieBen zum BeispieI
Padre Martini oder Martin Gerbert! Alle Quellen muBten damals vor Ort mit der Hand
abgeschrieben worden. Gerbert etwa trug das Material rur seine beiden groBen Werke
zur Kirchenmusikgeschichte, De cantu musica sacra a prima ecc/esiae aeulIe usque ad
praesens tempus sowie die nach wie vor grulldlegenden dreiblindigen Scriptores
ecc/esiaslici de musica sacra potissimum zu wesentlichen Teilen auf drei
Bibliotheksreisen zusammen: 2 zwischen 1759 und 1763 bereiste er Frankreich , die
Nordschweiz und SOddeut.schland, und schlit!BIkh ltalien und Osterreich . Anfang 1763
hat sich Gerbert ein Vierteljahr in Rom aufgehalten. Seinern (1765 veroffentlichten)
1 S. deo ExIrurs 1 in: Verf., Dos QuaJlinhurger Antlphonar (Berlin, StaIJIsbibliothdc Preuflischer
Kullurbesitz, Mus.ms.400(7), Teill: Unler5ucnungen , XH. 293 S. Teil2: Edi/ion und Veruicnnisse, VI,
389 s. reil 3: Fotografoclu Wiedergabe. IV. (288 S.), Mainz.er Studien rur Musikwissenschaft. Band
25/1 -3 (Tutzing. 1990)
2 Martin Gerbert. De Cantu et Musica Sacra a prima ecclesiae adaJe usque ad praesens Jempus, 2 Bde.,
bg. und mit Registem versebeo von Othmar Wessely (St. Blasien. 1774; NacbdlUck Gnu., 1968) (~ Die
gro6en Darstellungen der Musikgcschicble in &rock und Aufkliirung. Band 4); Scriptores Ecclesias/ici
de Musica Sacra, 3 vols. (SI. Biaisen. 1784) (GS] .• Die Kircberunusikgeschichte und die Edition von
Tbeoretikertexten waren von Gerben zunicbst als Einheit koo.z.ipiert; vg!. dam O. Wessely im VOtWort
zu De Canlu, XXX ff.
3 Martini Gerberti (nuoc S.JU. prUfcipis & abbatis congr. S. Blasii in silva nigra) Iter AlmuuaniCUlrl
accediJ ItaJicum et GalUcum. Editio secunda, revisa, & correcta. Pennissu Superionum. Typis San:
Blasianis. 1773. - Des Hochwilrdignen Herrn, Herrn Martin Gerberts, n~o des Heil. RtJm. Reichs
Fanlen ulld Abts du Reichs-Stifts St. Bias/en aul dmJ Schwan:wald etc., etc.• Reiseh durch Alemannien
Welch.sland und FrlZlfknich. welcht!;1I den Jahren 1759, 1760, 1761, und 1762. angestelkt worden, ~~
dem hohen Herrn Verfasser selhnell mit viekn Zus~n, besondern AnmerIcungen und schtJnen Kupforn
zur ErllJulerung derer Alterthamern ~ IUJd verbessert, und aus dem Laleitrischen in das Deussche
abersetV. auch mit zwey Registern der Orte und inerlcwardigslen Sachen wrsehen ~n J.t.K. (Ulm.
Frankfurt und Leipzig, 1767). Auf Kosteo Jobann Conrad Wohler, Buchhindler. - Vgl. Iter, 475ff und in
der Obers. 425f.
4 VgJ. L. Hanunermayer, "Beitrige zur Geschichte der 'Bibliotheca Palatina' in Rom". R(Jmische
Quartalschrift ftJr chrislliC/U Altertumslalllde 55 (1960), 1-42; ders., "Neue Beitrige zur Gescbichte der
•BibJiotheca Palatina' in Rom". RtJmische Quartalschrift Jar chrlslli~ AlIenumskundt! 51 (1962). 146~
174, bier 168. - Vgl. luch den Bericbl des 1192 in Rom geweseaen Fr. Adeluug, Nachrichien ~n
alJdeulSclun GMichten, we/cm aus der Heidelberger Bibliothek ;n die Va/ilcanisc/u g~n s;nd
(KOnigsberg, 1796). 7-18.
70
I.
Der Tonar des Reichenauer Abtes Bern (Bemo) zahlt gemessen an der Zahl der
erhaltenen Abschriften nach den Werken des 10hannes de Muris und Guido von Arezzo,
dem DiaJogo des Odo und der Musica Enchiriadis zu den am haufigsten iiberlieferten
mittelalterlichen Musiktraktaten. In Beispiei l.a. ist die Zusammenstellung von an die
vierzig Handschriften durch Michel Huglo wiedergegeben; in diesen Quellen sind die
einzelnen Bestandteile von Bems Werk teils zusammen, teils einzeln iiberliefert:
Widmungsbrief, Traktat (die sog. Musica Bernonis) und Tonar. s
Bern hat sein libellus tonarius im Auftrag des befreundeten K61ner Erzbischofs
Pilgrim verfafit; die Entstehungszeit lafit sich ziemlich genau auf die Zeit zwischen
1027 und 1031 eingrenzen.
Durch Zufall ist von Bems Widmungsexemplar das erste Blatt erhalten, mit einer
prachtigen Initiale in Reichenauer Manier und etwa einem Viertel des
Widmungsbriefes. (Zusammen mit zwei weiteren Reichenauer Handschriften befand
sich das Widmungsexemplar im Besitz des K61ner Doms; heute liegt es in Cleveland.)IO
S Laut Michel Huglo, Les Tonaires, Inventaire, Analyse, Comparaison (paris, 1971), 16 Icommt def
Tenninus "Tonarius" bei Bern zum ersten Mal vor.
6 Beide waren seit Priim miteinander befreundet und nahmen 1022 am dritteo Romerzug des 1014 mm
Kaiser gekronten Heinrich 11. teil.
7 1. Smits van Waesberghe, Quae ralio est inter Iria opera de arte musica Bernonis Augiensis, Divitiae
Musicae Artis A. VI Pars B (Buren, 1978), 58f.
8 Siehe GS n, 91: "lmpleta in nobis prophelia, quae olim miserae ac infelid ludaeae laliter esl
comminata (... ) Propterea defedt gaudium cordis nostri, versus est in luctum chorus noster, cecidit
corona capitis noslri, ita ut compellmnur dicere: vae nobis, quia peccavimus; & ut quidam sapiens dicit:
vacat hoc tempore potenibus opprimere, privatis perdere, miseris fiere .•
9 Peter Bloch, der auf die..c;e.s Kriterium hinweisl, ordnet diese Aussage allerdings t8lschlich dem Prolog
zu. - P. Bloch, "Die beiden Reichenauer Evangeliare im Kolner Domschatz", Kolner Domblal1 17
(1959),9-40.
10 Vg\. Otto Homburger, "Die Widmungsseite von Bemos 'Tonarius', ein unbekanntes Einzelblatt der
'Liuthargruppe'·, Fonn und Inhalt. FestschriJt Otto Schmitt (Stuttgart, 1950), 43-50. - Laut Peter Bloch
(wie Anm. 9), 9 und 28, waren die beiden anderen Handschriften def rur Koln bergestellte Hillinus-
71
MANUSCRITS DU THAITE ET DU TONAIRE
DE nERNON DE REICHENAU
T. ai l~ Tona;.e
Cote Date Origine (GS. II 6,) (GS, u 79) Slgl. Remarquu
- - - - -- - - - - - - -1--- - -- 1 - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -__
AOMONT 494." .. . .. .. ...... .
BAMBERG. M IV 5 (Cl ..... ,8) .. XII-XIII Bomberg I. 28-J2
+ A Cl. ROCHRSTIlR ,
f. .
CUCOVII!. Jag.1. ]965 , ...... . XI-XII It.I. du N. , . 81'9J 94-"4 R (omi. p . O.seH) .
DAJlMSrAOT 1088 . . • . . . • • . . . . . XII in S. Jaeq , Li~g. . 147-51 , '57-. 6 7 D Inc. : O,""i! iri/u"
ElcnsTlin . Ili.ch . Arcb ..... . XI E ichst. I. 126-127 H Tons I-V.
XI-XII '-'4'
~~Im~:j
IURL.RUME 50" ..... . . . ..... . I. f. 22-26· K
IV.SSEL. Landesb. 4° Ms. Math ] XII f. 40-43' Ton. Quid l.ft .. 1 (Frutolf).
4° Ms. Mat!> 4 XII allcm . I. I-I' 1. 11-2]" S (omi. p . Ouell) .
KRAKOV ... , . ..• • .••• • •• • •... Cr. CnACOVIE .
J(1..0ST~RN'RUBUR C • • •• , •••.. 'J3 0 Kloswm . + MA.
LalPZl". Un. H' ....... . ... . XIII S. Jacob . in Pegaw
B,bl , 1(.,. {)',...
hi s, perdu : cl . CO nLIEH.
(omi. p. O.sell).
I "7.
Traitl Tonaire
Cote Date Origlne Sigl. RemaTque.s
(Cs.n 62) (GS." 79)
Melk I. 113-126'
~f;
MELK 950 (710) . .. . ... .. .. .. (ms. omi. par OUCH).
HILAN. B. Ambr. M • 7 .up.. . Laon I , 27-J2 GS , I/ 6'-76 A.
MONT-CASsrN JI8 .. .. .... .. .. XII Mt . Cuo. p . 9 2 - 1 12 O,.,,,iJ igi/N~...
~IUN'CH '4417 ............ .. XII S. Emm , t , 57 -63
14 66J ..... . ..... .. . XII-XIII f . 29" -33"
1~96j' ........... ... . XI -1 I . 27-29 lragnl, (CS. II 67 A-77 A).
OXToa".
ROCHISUR.
~I;: G,;Ji,' ·,·i;.:: ::::
Sibl. ....... .. . . .
XI
XII-XII!
XI
XII
Togems.
1
nil' d. WO"b.
Admont
I. .6.-278'
I , 106-113
I. '.3-'73
t , 76-,9
.
I. 279-295
I. 113-119'
I. 19'-91
M
Q
It.
"Tonoirc de Frutoll (I, IJI-'4 2 ).
SI. CALL. SliItb' 198: :::: :::: XI S. Call De con50na
tonOT. cs. n. 116.
SI. PAUL-rN-LAV. 29.4.1 . . ... . XI S. Bioi.. f. 1'9' TOD. du Gr~duel : GS, I! 83 A
lin o 1 10 91 B .
TRtvllS. St&dtb. 18g7 (596) .. . XI nlg. de Tr~v.. incomplet (s'arr~te a CS. II
73 A. lin. 8) .
VAneAN Pal. '344 . . .. . . .. . . XI al~man . P Ed . par Cerbert Oaeune l la
fin) ,
Reg. 1146 .. ....... . XIV allem. f. '7-2" Exlr. et. CS. 11 67A-17 A (cf.
Clm. '496,-) ,
V"N:lZlA, B. Marc. la t. cl. VlU 2Q, XIII ita!. 1. 5-8 ' CS . 1/ 67-76 A .
VaRoHA. B. Cap. 2J6 (CCLXIV)' XIII ital. t. IS-'4' Orftft;. ilil.., .. . cl. CSM. 4.
p. 67·
VnIN"", ONB. 5' ....... . .. .. XII Allem. du Sud t. 49-S"
W'
W·
1836 ......•..... XII \VI Cadre seultment : tit. de
pieces 1.11 ordTO liturgique.
'5°' .. ..... ... .. XIl CS. II 6,-66 A (Olllft;. ili.
t.. , ... )
BEISPEIL la, Die handschrifilicbe OberliefeJ'UDg des Tonarius Bemonis (IUS: M. Huglo, Us TOM/res
[paris, 1971], p. 266/267)
Kodex (Koln, Domscbatz, Col. Metr. 12) und das beute in Darmstadt aufbewahrte Perikopenbuch fUr den
Erz.bishofGero.
72
Bibliothek Herkunft InhaIt
BEISPIEL lb. Abschriften des Tonarius Bemonis aus dem 11. Jahrhundert
Alle Handschriften des elften Jahrhunderts sind im Folgenden (auf der Basis von
Huglos Liste) noch einmal fUr sich zusammengestellt. Soweit lokalisiert, stammen sie
von der Reichenau, aus Lorsch, Tegemsee, sowie aus den Gegenden urn Wiirzburg und
urn Trier(?). Bemerkenswert sind die unterschiedlichen Bearbeitungen schon in diesen
frohen Handschriften: Verringerung der Antiphonenreihen umd dam it Umwandlung des
Volltonars in einen Kurztonar; Interpolationen im Traktat (vom sog. Pseudo-Bemo);
Verbindung der Mus;ca Bemonis mit einem anderen Tonar. Die einzige Handschrift des
11. Jahrhunderts, die Bems ursprongliches Werk (also Windmungsbrief, Traktat und
Volltonar) enthaIt, ist die Palatinahandschrift aus der Vaticana (VaJ.Pai.iaJ.1344). Doch
ist sie unvollstandig: sechs Bllitter (mit den Differenzen und Antiphonenreihen von
VII,5 bis VIII, 6; Blattverlust vor der Foliierung) sind verloren. AuBerdem bricht die
Handschrift kurz vor Ende des Offiziumstonars ganz ab.
Doch die Fortsetzung dieser Palatina-Handschrift ist erhalten, und zwar als
Fragment 29.4.1. (110/6) im Stiftsarchiv von St.Paul in Karnten. In kodikologischer
Hinsicht sind die Blatter 33 und 34(=1) das siebte und achte Blatt eines verlorenen
11 Ich danke Michael Bemhard fUr den Hinweis auf die Handschrift Mscr. 57 BUS der ehem. Bibliothek
des Grafen Tonring-Gutenzell, die eine friihe (ev. die friiheste?) Abschrift des Traktats enhilt, und die
heute in New York bei einem Antiquar zum Verkauf angeboteo wird. - Vg!. auch den Hinweis voo
Michel Huglo auf diese Handschrift ("le plus ancien manuscrit nOD interpoM") in seiner Bibliograpbie des
&litions relatives a la theorie musica1e au Moyen Age, Acta Musicowgica 60 (1988), 250f. Allerdiogs irrt
sich Huglo mit der Angabe, Giuseppe Donato babe 1978 Bems Tonar "reedit6 ... d'apres le Vaticanus
Palatious 1346": Donato (Gll elementi constitUlivi dei tonari, Messina 1978) hat tatsichlich aus
Vat.PaJ.lat.1346 einen Tonar ediert, doch handelt es sich dabei nicht um den Tonarius Bemonis, sondem
UDl eioen Tonar aus dem Umkreis des Johannes Affligemensis.
73
Quaternio. Auch die Foliierung wird fortgesetzt. 12 Bekannt und erschlossen sind beide
Quellen seit Hingerem (s. Beispiei 2). DaB sie - so nahtlos - zusammengeh6ren, ist
meines Wissens eine neue Beobachtung.
33
34=1
BEISPIEL 2. Die zusammengehorenden Teile der wresten voJJstandigen Abschrift des Tonarius Bernonis
in den Beschreibungen des Repertoire InJernalionale des Sources Musicales (RlSM B/m/l und RJSM
BIIII/2). Blatt 33 als heute letztes Blatt von Vat.Pal.lat.1344 bildet roit dem l.Blalt von SI. Paul 24.4.1
den Rest einer eigenen Lage.
Diese alteste Abschrift von Bems Tonar, heute auf zwei Bibliotheken verteilt,
geh6n zu einer Gruppe von fUnf mit der Liturgie verbundenen Handschriften, die a11e
12 An den vierten Quaternio von Vat.Pal.lat.1344 (fol. 25-32) ist fol. 33 roit einern Pergamentstreifen
wahrscheinlich im Zuge des Neueinbandes nachtriiglich ange1clebt warden. In SI. Paul 110/6 ist
umgekehrt das Einzelblatt vorne an den intakten Quatentio angelclebt worden. (Laurentius Kull OSB,
Archivar, Bibliothekar und Kustos der Kunstsammlungen des Benediktinerstifts St. Paul sowie Herrn Dr.
Adalbert Roth, Heidelberg/Rom, bin ich rur Jhre Auskiinfte in diesen kodikologischen Fragen sehr
dankbar.) Beide Einzelbliitter bangen inbaJtlich zusammen und lassen sich roit den fehlenden Blattern Vor
fol. 33 als 'Oberreste einer Quaternio rekonstruieren:
a b c d e f 33 1(=34)
I' I I I
I
74
zu Beginn mit einer Subskription in Capitalis rustica versehen sind: Deus propilius esto
Uodalricus peccatori. Sie sind alle in Lorsch entstanden, welches im zweiten Drittel des
XI. lahrhunderts zu den besten deutschen Schreibschulen zahlte}3
Bei Uodalricus handelt es sich (gemaB Bemhard Bischoft) urn den Abt von Lorsch,
1056-1075. 18 Damit ware das Jahr 1075 terminus ante quem fUr die Entstehung der
Uodalricus-Gruppe und eben auch fUr unsere Tonarabschrift. Durchaus denkbar, dafi
Uodalricus die Codices schon von seiner Abtszeit in Auftrag gegeben haben mag;
Hartmut Hoffmann setzt die Entstehung der gesamten Gruppe denn auch bereits auf die
Mitte des elften Jahrhunderts an. 19
Bern widmete, wie gesagt, Ende der zwanziger Jahre des elften Jahrhunderts seinen
libellus tonarius dern befreundeten K6lner Erzbischof Pilgrim. Traktat und Tonar sollen
eine Hilfe im Hinblick auf Unsicherheiten der Melodieliberlieferung sein: Im Traktat
bemliht Bem sich darum. Begriffe und Kategorien des musicus (etwa Quart- und
Quintspezies und die Modi) auf das Repertoire des cantor anzuwenden. 20 Deshalb liegt
das Schwergewicht auf Fragen der modalen Klassifikation des Gesangsrepertoires. Im
Tonar der Offiziumsantiphonen sind zu den einzelnen Differenzen teilweise hunderte
von Antiphoneninitien aufgefUhrt. Sie sind in Gerberts Edition liberhaupt nicht ediert:
wo Gerbert beispielsweise bei der Hauptkadenz des ersten Tons nach dem seculorwn
amen nur eine Antiphon auffUhrt, folgen in den Handschriften mehrere Spalten
Antiphoneninitien. Gerade diese Antiphonenreihen aber fUhren zu zentralen Fragen des
Uberlieferungsverstfuldnisses; gerade die melodiemaBig und tonartlich vereinten
13 V gl. zusamrnenfassend Hartmu! Hoffmann, BuchkunSl und K6nigtum in ollonischen und jriJhsalischen
Reich, 2 Bde. (Stultgart, 1986), 224.
14 Beschteibung roit Angabe der Literatur bei Haffmann. ebd. 212f. - Subkription auf fol. Iv und 2r.
15 Beschreibung roil Angabe der Literatur bei Hoffmann, ebd. 209f. - Subskription auf fol. 2r.
16 Beschreibung roit Angabe der Literatur bei Hoffmann, ebd. 213. - Subskriptian auf fal. lr.
17 Beschreibung roi! Angabe der Literatur bei Hoffmann . ebd. 206.
18 Dazu B. Bischoff, Lorsch im Spiegel seiner Handschriften, Miinchener Beitriige zur Mediiivistik und
Renaissance-Forschung, Beiheft I (Miinchen, 1974), 59f.
19 Vg!. Hartmut Hoffmann (wie Anm. 13), 213; zu Vat.Pal.laL1344: "wie die anderen Codices dieser
Gruppe wird der Palatinus urn die Mitte des 11. Jahrhunderts anzusetzen sein" (ebd. 220); zu St.Paul
110/6:2. DritteJ Xl. lh. (ebd. 216).
20 Vgl. Lawrence A. Gushee, "Questions of Genre in Meditwal Treatises on Music", GaflulIgen der
Musik in Einzeldarsrellungen. Gedenkschrift Leo Schrade (Bern und Munchen, 1973), 365-433; iller 370
und412f.
75
Antiphonengruppen sind Zeugen komplexer Uberlieferungszusammenhange. Dabei sind
die adiastematischen Neumenschriften des deutschen Sprachgebietes nur eine der
Voraussetzungen daftir, daB iiberhaupt Volltonare geschrieben, bearbeitet und
abgeschrieben werden. Andere Faktoren sehe ich in dem Weiterbestehen miindlicher
Uberlieferung, die sich dann bei der Fixierung der Melodien im Liniensystem
niedersch1ug: tonartlich unterschiedliche Melodieversionen konnen mit derselben
adiastemastischen Neumenfassung in Beziehung gesetzt werden, haben ein gemeinsarnes
Neumen-Pattem. (Kenneth Levy hat dies vor einiger Zeit eindrucksvoll an der
Prozessionsantiphon Deprecamur te Domine gezeigt. 21 )
Bezeichnenderweise gibt es im franzOsischen Raum iiberhaupt keine VolItonare;
daB es im deutschen Sprachbereich bis ca. 1100 immer wieder emeute Initiativen zu
Volltonaren gegeben hat, zeigt, wie sehr bei den Offiziumsantiphonen Modalitat und
Melodiegestalt noch in Bewegung waren. Gerade die Existenz dieser zahlreichen
Volltonare bestitigen in einem ganz anderen Feld das, was Andreas Haug vor zwei
Jahren am Beispiel der Sequenzeniiberlieferung in Tihany gezeigt hat: die AlIianz von
Schrift und Gedachtnis unter den Bedingungen begrenzter Schriftlichkeit. 22 Die
bescheidenen Initienreihen in diesen Tonaren sind Zeugen komplexer Uberlieferungs-
zusammenhange, deren Erforschung noch voUig in den Anrangen steckt. In Beispiel 3
ist der Beginn des sechsten Tons aus der Palatina-Handschrift wiedergegeben;
hinzugefiigt ist die tonale Einordnung der Antiphonen, in einigen Tonaren: in den
'karolingischen Tonaren' von Metz und der Reichenau (von 1001), bei Hartker und
Frutolf sowie in den Tonaren aus Altzelle und Ottobeuren. •
Betrachten wir hier nur die erste Antiphon Ascentienre (zum ersten Sonntag nach
Epiphanie) etwas natler. Bern ordnet sie dem sechsten Modus zu; der Metzer Tonar, der
21 Vg!. Kenneth Levy, "A Gregorian Procession Antiphon", La Musique elle rile sacre el profane. Actes
du XlII Congres de la Societe inlernarionale de Musicoiogie, Vo). 1 (Strasbourg, 1986), 302-309.
22 Vg!. Andreas Haug, "Zum WecbseJspiel von Schrift und Gediichtnis im Zeitalter der
Neumen" ,1nternarional Musicological Society Study Group Can/US Planus: Papers Read at the Third
Meeting, 'flhany 1988 (Budapest, 1990), 33-48.
76
..., .. ...,
•
. •
•
J
... ." ."
..
1 ~
.
.......
"
L
. ·..•
.&..
· A
-i
i 5
~
j
:;-
.
'.-
.£ -~
• "'ii 'a
.J ,5
· ,~ -1.
~ ~
'I '1
.,
,1
I : ~l
..,'"
o
.. ~
oJ
'"
....~
.. -~ .1 i".
8•
.~ ..~
1 '1
.10 .5
• .1
l
·
...!!!....
....... • er • <
...
~:
.~
.. ..
I~
I .. ~
..
•
'->
Vl
3
..........."
CD
.......
..,~
CD'" .......
........
N
• wo
:0:
......
-00"
.. ' 0
..."'''-
III
CD u o
BEISPIEL 4. Fiinf Versioneo der Antiphon Ascendente Jesu (aus: A.Turco, "Les repertoires liturgiques
latins en marche vers I'octokhos. La psalmodie gregorienne des f~tes du temporal et du sanctoral".
Eludes gregorlennes xvrn (1979), 177-223); HartJcer nach Pal.mus. nIl, 82).
77
knapp 30 Jahre altere Reichenauer Tonar und die St.Galler Tradition dagegen wahlen
den dritten Ton; die jiingeren Quellen entscheiden sich fUr den achten Modus. In
Beispiel 4 sind fiinf Melodieversionen dieser Antiphon gegeni.ibergestellt. Diese
Gegeniiberstellung vermittelt ein anschauliches Bild von den Problemen, vor die sich
die mittelalterlichen Notatoren und Musiktheoretiker gestellt sahen, wenn es galt, die
I gregorianischen Melodien I aus der (partiell) miindlichen Uberlieferung modal
einzuordnen und tonhohenma13ig zu fixieren. Anders als bei den Mefigesangen, deren
Grundbestand von den altesten notierten Handschriften des neunten lahrhunderts an eine
bemerkenswerte Konstanz der Uberlieferung aufweist, kam es im Bereich der
Offiziumsantiphonen offenbar in verschiedenen Regionen zu ganz unterschiedlichen
LOsungen: Fassung A (welcher die offizielle modeme Ausgabe entspricht) steht im
sechsten Ton und findet sich hauptsachlich in italienischen Quellen; Fassung B im
achten Ton (deutschsprachiger Bereich und Norditalien); Fassung C im dritten Ton (St.
Gallen und sein EinfluJ3bereich), schIieJ3lich Fassung 0 im ersten Ton (Aquitanien). 23
Al1e vier Fassungen stimmen in Text und Melodieverlauf iiberein, unterschiedlich sind
die modal wichtigen Kadenzpunkte und dadurch bedingt die je verschiedene Fixierung
der einzelnen Melodieglieder im VierIiniensystem.
Es sind vor allem zwei sich e.rganzende Tendenzen, die fUr die unterschiedlichen
Version en der Melodieiiberlieferung verantwortlich sind; zum einen die zunehmenden
Moglichkeiten einer eindeutigen Tonhohenaufzeichnung, zum anderen verschiedene
Stadien der Einpassung der Melodien in das Achttonartensystem seit der Karolingerzeit.
Alle vier Fassungen unseres Beispiels lassen sich als unterschiedliche Fixierungen ein
und desselben MelodiemodeIls begreifen; mit einem gewissen Spelraum der
Variantenbildung im Detail stimmen sie in ihrem bewegungsaBigen Verlauf iiberein.
Die U nterschiede in der Wahl des Schliissels und des Anfangstons (welcher in dieser
Antiphonenmelodie gleichzeitig Hauptstrukturstufe ist) hangen mit der Je
unterschiedlichen Transformation von einer adiastematischen Neumenaufzeichnung zur
Notation im Liniensystem zusammen: wahrend die Versionen B und Cauf g beginnen,
hat Fassung A den Anfangston c und Fassung D in Quinttransposition f
Doch wie mag man sich den Zusammenhang der vier Versionen erklaren? Die Fassungen A und
B lassen deutlich erkennen, daB die Antiphonenmelodie Ascendente Jesu sicb durch eine einzige
Hauptstrukturstufe auszeichnet, die gleichzeitig Kadenzstufe aller vier Abschnitte ist: in der
Schreibweise der Version A isl es der Ton c, bei Fassung B ist es g. Diese Einpoligkeit der
Struktur wird in C und D nur bei der SchluI3kaden.z auf ej in D Hauptstrukturstufe auf J.
Schlufikadenz auf d). -- Ihren Modus, ihre lonale Seinsweise verdanken alle vier Versionen den
zugeordneten Psalmlonen mil ihrer charaklerislischen Polaritit zwischen Rezitationsebene und
Finalis: bei A der sechste Modus mil der groJlen Ten c - e, bei B der achte Modus roit der
Quarte g - c. bei C der dritte Modus mil der kJeinen Sexte e - c, bei D schlieBlich der erste
Modus mit der Quinte d - a. Nach der Theorie von Jean C/aire werfen gerade unterschiedliche
2:l Vg!. Alberto Turco. "Les repertoires liturgiques lalins en marche vers J'octoechos. La psalmodie
gregorienne des fetes du temporal et du sanctoral", Etudes gregoriennes 18 (1979), 177-223.
78
Melodieversionen wie diese Licbt in die Dunkelheiten modaler Entwicklung vor der Einfiihrung
des Achttonartensystems im Deunten Jahrhundert: 24 Die Melodie von Ascendente Jesu ist -- so
Alberto Turco in der Nacbfolge Jean Claires - roit ibrer urspriinglicb einpoligen Struktur auf c
RepJisentant eines der drei sog. "Urmodi" mit cbarakteristiscben Intervallbeziehungen zwiscben
benacbbarten Tonstufen, nimlich des sog. ·C-Modus·. Dieser a11einigen Strukturstufe trete in
der zugeordneten Psalmodie des Oktoechos in den Versionen A und B als Spannungspol die
Rezitation auf der Oberterz bzw -quarte gegeniiber. F~g C und D fiigen als dritten Pol eine
Fina1is auf tieferer Tonstufe hinzu.
Wahrend Bern also bei der besprochenen Antiphon Asceruienle Jesu vollstandig aus der
Uberlieferung des deutschsprachigen Bereichs ausschert und mit zentralitalienischen
Quellen parallel geht, ist seine LOsung bei den nachsten beiden Antiphonen in Beispiel 3
vollig anders einzuordnen: bei Aedificavit iibereinstimmende Uberlieferung seit dem
Metzer Tonar; bei Alias oves dann folgt Bern der alteren Metz-Reichenauer
Tonariiberlieferung (sechster Ton), wahrend etwa Hartker, der Bamberger Frutolf und
das Antiphonar von Peters~ausen Alias oves dem achten Ton zuordnen. 25 Ohne diese
Fragen hier im Detail und auf breiter Basis weiterverfolgen zu konnen, zeigen bereits
diese drei Beispiele doch eines rnit gro6er Deutlichkeit: daB die gangige Sichtweise (wie
sie erst kUrzlich etwa Franz-Josef Schmale in Lexikon des Mitrelalters emeut referierte),
alle spateren Tonare des deutschsprachigen Raumes seien von Bems Tonar
ausgegangen, einer kritischen Revision bedarf.26
IT.
Wie zu Beginn bereits angedeutet, war Martin Gerbert Anfang 1763 ein
Vierteljahr in Rom, urn Material fUr seine Scriptores abzuschreiben. Der Zufall will es,
daB ausgerechnet seine Abschrift von Bems Tonar aus der Palatina-Handschrift 1344
erhalten ist (und zwar in einem Sammelband aus dem Nachla6 Gerberts, der zusammen
mil Handschriften, Archivalien und Wertgegenstanden nach der Salrularisation aus SI.
Blasien nach St. Paul geJangte). Das Ende von Gerberts Abschrift ist in Abbildung 1
wiedergegeben.
Neun Zeilen von unten bricht er seine Abschrift des Tonars nach regione dueta
protendatur ab. In der nachsten Zeile folgt: cetera lextus habet, darunter Notizen zur
Handschrift 1342 (auch aus dieser QueUe hat Gerbert Traktate ediert) und summarisch
24 Vg!. die Grundlegung bei Jean Claire, 'L'Evolution lDOdale clans les ~pertoires liturgiques
ocddentaux", R~ Gregori~n~ 40 (1962),229-245.
2j Belege bei Waiter Lipphardt, lJD' Karolingisch~ Tomar von Met!., Liturgiewisseoschaftliche Quellen
79
ABBll..DUNG 1. Gerberts Abschrift des Tonarius Bernonis (St. Pllul, Cod. 229/2, FoJ. 431 v)
80
Differentia [e-ptima a [uo finali in amen
pt:'r diapcllle in acumine difbt. per dia.
tefTJroll inchoat: differt enim ifla a fupe-
rioei. quod h:rc a finali raro ad diapen.
le pervenit; ilia vera non [alum in dia-
pente licenter pertingit, verum etiam ali.
quando contra legcm uhcrius proced it.
SeCII/orum anlm. Ant. Deus deorllm &c.
Differentia oftava qu~!i rara ac barba-
ra
BEISPIEL 5. Der Ubergang van Vat.PaJ.lat.l344 zu St.Paul 29.4.1 in der Ausgabe des Tonus von
Gerbert (aus: GS JI:82/83); vergleiche Beispiel 2 - Das Ende van Gerberts Abschrift
81
(cetera text us habet); dann, ein Stiickchen weiter oben, das Ende der Palalina-
Handschrift in ihrem heutigen Zustand.
Halten wir uns vor Augen: die Handschrift soIl zuende sein -- und Gerbert
schreibt trotzdem ein StUck weiter? Und zuhause in St.Blasien gibt er dann den Tonar
in seinem vollstandigen Umfang heraus? Sollte der beriihmte Fiirstabt und Gelehne
etwa die letzte Lage der Handschrift mitgenommen, besser: 'ausgeliehen' haben? Doch
zu Gerberts Ehrenrettung rant einem ein, daB Gerbert ja bei seiner Edition des Tonars
neben dem Palatinus noch eine zweite Handschrift, aus Admont (heute Rochester)
herangezogen hat: colrato cum Admolllensi, wie Gerbert in seiner VOrbemerkung zur
Edition schrieb. Doch wies Gerbert gIeich darauf hin, daB der Admonter Tonar stark
von dem Palalinus abweiche. Michel Huglo zeigte weitere betriichtliche
Textabweichungen auf und ordnete die Admonter Handschrift deshalb an den Rand der
Uberlieferung ein. Das heiBt: Editionsgrundlage Gerberts ist einzig die Vaticana-
Handschrift. Und es ist falsch, wenn es etwa im Ausstellungskatalog zur Heidelberger
Palatina-Ausstellung von 1986 heiBt: Older Tonarius des Bem(o) nach der Lorscher
Handschrift Vat.Pal.lat.1344 mit Erganzungen aus einem Manuskript des Klosters
Admont." Auch die Admonter Hand schri ft kann Gerbert also nicht vor unserem
Verdacht retten, daB er die letzte (lose?) Lage des Palatinus kurzerhand mitgenommen
hat -- oder sich schicken lielL Auf jeden Fall: zuriickgegeben hat er das Fragment nicht.
Dabei wissen wir von anderen FaIlen, in den en Gerbert sich aus auswartigen
Bibliolheken Handschriften schicken lieB; so heillt es in einem Brief aus Munchen:
"( ... ) als komme ganz gehorsamst zu bitten, urn mir 2 Codices zur Abschrift zu
communicieren. Erstens welcher P(adre) Martini Minoriten in Bolonien ehmal ist
zugeschickt worden, und er mich versicheret, soIchen wieder zuruckgestellt zu haben.
Und dann jenen, so schon in MGnchen in Handen gehabt ( ... )" Y
Aus einem anderen, diesmal aus Rom an Gerbert gerichteten Brief geht hervor ,
daB Gerbert umgekehrt einen Codex aus St.Blasien zur Kollation mit einer
vatikanischen Handschrift nach Rom geschickt hat. 28 Und es gibt den Fall einer
Handschrift aus Paris mit Traktaten von Johannes de Muris und anderen, die, so
Gerbert, ·recens nobis Parisiis transmissus·. Gerbert gibt dann die anonyme Swnma
musicae nach dieser Pariser Handschrift heraus mit dem Vermerk: "Ex ms. Paris. nunc
S.Blas. ·.29 Nach Paris ist diese Handschrift jedenfalls nie zuriickgekommen.
Unser Verciacht, daB Gerbert bei seinem Romaufenthalt die letzte Lage des
Tonars mitgenommen hat, erhartet sich zusehens. Hinzu kommt namlich, daB dies nicht
die einzigen Fragmente aus der Biblioteca Vaticana sind, die iiber SLBlasien den Weg
27 G. Pfeilschifter (Hg.), Korrespondenz des Famables Man;n 1/. Gerbm WJn SI. Blasien, Band I: 1752-
1773 (Karlsruhe, 1931), Nr. 88.
28 Ibid., Nr. 274.
29 Siehe GS, Ill: 189f.
82
Kamtner St.PauI fanden (wie iibrigens auch die Pariser Muris-Handschrift): Unter der
5ignatur 132/6 (alte Signatur 29.4.2) befindet sich heute eine Abschrift der
CommemoraJio brevis in 51. Paul. 30 Terence Bailey iibemahm 1979 in seiner kritischen
Edition (Plus engl. Ubersetzung) schlichtweg Gerberts Angabe, daB es sich urn eine
Handschrift aus den St. Blasianer Bestiinden handelt;31 als Datierung und Provenienz
gab Bailey an: zehntes/elftes Jahrhundert, aus S1. Blasien. Zwar bemerkte Bailey die
alte Foliierung 159-165 auf der oberen Blattmitte und schloB daraus, dafi diese
Handschrift einst Teil eines umfangreicheren Codex gewesen sei. Doch woher diese
Lage gekommen sein mag - dieser Frage ging Bailey nicht nach. 32 Des Ratsels LOsung
brachte erst Hans Schmid in seiner Kritischen Edition der Musica enchiriadis und damit
zusammenhangender Traktate. Lakonisch heiBt es dort zU,m Codex Palatinus [at,' (1342:
"Fasciculus ultimus huius codicis (... ) in monasterio S. Pauli in Carinthia (cod. 24.4.2)
servatur. "33
Auf eine weitere Lage aus einer Handschrift aus der Vaticana, die iiber S1. Blasien
nach S1. Paul gelangte, stiel3 Gilbert Reaney 1964. 34 Es handelt sich urn die Folios 17-
24 (originale zahlung) aus der italienischen Sammelhandschrift VaJicana, Barb. 101.
307 vom Ende des vierzehnten Jahrhunderts, in der neben anderen so prominente
Traktate wie Philippe de Vitrys Ars nova und Johannes de Muris Libe//i camus
mensurabi/is /ragmemum aufgezeichnet sind. 35 Ebenso wie die Fortsetzung des
Tonarius Bemonis war auch dieses Fragment (als Folios 51-58) in den von Oswald
Koller beschriebenen Sammelband B des Stitsarchivs S1. Paul eingebunden. Und
Reaney verrnutete ganz richtig, dafi Gerbert diese Blatter aus der Originalhandschrift
entweder selbst entfemte oder entfemen liel3; moglicherweise seien die Blatter auch fUr
die Reproduktion des Monochord-Diagramms auf der Titelseite der Scripcores
'entliehen' worden (s. Abbildung 2).36
Wie immer es urn Gerberts 'Femleihen' bestellt gewesen sein mag: Was heutigen
Benutzem und Bediensteten von Handschriftenabteilungen den SchweiB des
30 Siehe die Beschreibung in RISM B/III/I. 32. - Zur Einordnung Hans Schmid. Musica er Scolica
Enchiriadis (Miincheo. 1981). VIII mit Stemma.
31 Vg!. GS, 1:103: "huius opusculi in codice San-Blasiano".
]2 Terence Bailey, Commenwrario Brevis de Tonis er Psalmis Modulandis . /lIlroducrion, Critical Edition,
Trarultuion (Ottawa, 1979). 3.
13 Schmid, op.cll.• VIII. - In der urspninglich vollstindigen Handschrift folgten auf Traktate von
Boethius, die Musica enchiriadis und die Scholica Enchiriadis (bis fo!.158v) der heute in SI. Paul
befindliche Faszikel mit der Commemorario brevis; vg!. die BeschreibWlg in RISM B1I1II2. 102ff. sowie
bei N. H6rberg. Libri sancrae Afrae. SI. Vlrich und Afra zu Augsburg im 11. und 12. Jahrhundm nach
Zeugnissen tier Kloslerbibliolhek, Veroffentlichungeo des Mu-Planck-lnslituts fUr Geschichte 74;
Studien zur Germania Sacra 15 (Gottingeo. 1983), 53ff. u. 131-141.
34 G. Reaney. "The Question of Authorship in the Medieval Treatises 00 Music", Musica Disciplina 18
(1964),7-19.
35 Im einzelneo s. RISM BIIII/2. 102ff.
]6 Reaney, op.cit .• 16f.
83
ABBILDUNG 2. MODOChorddiagramm aus Val . Barb.lat. 307, fol.17-24 [heute in St. Paul (lCiniten)
Klosterbibliothek, Sammelband B), Titelbild in GS lli.
Entsetzens auf die Stim treiben und was Universitatsbeamte gar den Verlust von Amt
und Wurden fiirchten lieBe, das ware im 18. lahrhundert gewiB nicht so undenkbar
gewesen; dabei brauchte man gar nicht so weit zu gehen, den teils legal en , teils
84
illegalen Handel mit Handschriften und Drucken in den wirren Jahren nach der
franzosischen Revolution in Erinnerung zu rufen, von dem die Pariser
Nationalbibliothek nicht schlecht profitierteY DaB auf Betreiben oder durch
Mitwirkung des bibliophilen Abts Gerbert eine Reihe von Handschriften fUr die St.
Blasianer Bibliothek erworben wurden, Hillt sich zumindestest fUr eine
Handschriftengruppe aus der 1757 aufgelosten Reichenauer Klostergerneinschaft
konlaet belegen.38 Angesichts des hohen Ansehens, das Gerbert offenbar auch in Rom
geno6, ware die "Femleihe" oder Mitnahme einiger unscheinbarer BHitter aus dem
einen oder anderen Musiktraktat durchaus vorstellbar39 -- besonders, wenn man die
schwierigen, anfangs angedeuteten Arbeitsbedingungen fUr Besucher der Vaticana in
jener Zeit in Rechnung stellt. Wie sahe es heute urn mancbe unserer Arbeiten aus, ohne
die Moglichkeiten von Kopierer, Scanner und Mikroverfilrnung, wenn dazu noch die
auswartige Bibliothek nur einige Vormittagsstunden ge6ffnet hatte?
Ill.
37 Vgl. etwa Jean Baptiste Maug6rard - Rudolf Ewald, "Ein Beitrag zur Bibliotheksgeschicbte" ,
PaJaographische Forschungen Ill, bg. Ludwig Traube, AbhandJungen der historiscben K.Iasse der Bayer.
Akadewie der Wissenschaften, Band 23 (Miinchea, 1904), 301-388.
38 V gl. bei Gerhard Stamm, "Zur Gescbicbte der Bibliothek", Das lausendjl1hrige SI. Blasien
(Aussrellungskaralog 1983), Band 11: AujsdJl.e, 171-200, hier 184.
39 So wurde Gerbert angetragea, die Bearbeitung der Palatinabestinde in der Vatican zu iibermehmen .
Doch Gerbert lehnte ab. - Siebe Gerberts Brief ID den Herzog Ludwig zu Wilittemberg vom 14. Mm
1779: "( ... ) seine Pipstliche Heiligkeit (papst Clemens XIV.), wit welchen ich, da sie noch in minoribus
waren, vor Jahren das Gliick gebabt, sebr vertraulicben Umgang in Rom zu baben, cia man wicb sucbte
bei der vatikanischen Bibliothek als einen Deutscben 8D1llStellen, um enmal die wichtige Anectoten der
Heidelbergischen Bibliothelc: auseinanderzulesen." (ed. Pfeilschifter, wie Anm. 27, Nr. 425) - L.
Hammerayer (Beitrage zur Geschichte, wie Anm. 4, 36) siebt dieses Aogebot in Zusammenhang mit dem
AbscbluB der Arbeiten am Katalog der orientaliscbeo Handschriften; nacbdem dieser Katalog 1759 im
Druck vorlag, faBte man seitens der Biblioteca Valicana offeobar die Aufnahme der deutschen Pfilzer
Handschriften ins Auge und suchte in Ermangelung eigenen sacblrundigen Personals Gerbert ciafiir zu
gewinnen.
85
zeichung, zum anderen durch die verschiedenen Stadien der Einpassung der Melodien
in das Achttonartensystem seit der Karolingerzeit.
Drillens: Drei Fragmente aus den Bestanden der Bibliotheca Vatican a gelangten iiber
St.Blasien nach St.PauIlKarnten . In zwei Fallen bezeichnete Gerbert diese Fragmente
als Codex San-Blasiano. Im Fall des tonarius Bernonis gibt es keine Angaben. Jedoch
ist die spezifisch Uberlappung von Gerberts romischer Abschrift und seiner Edition ein
Indiz, daB Gerbert die letzte Lage aus Rom mitgenommen, 'ent1iehen' hat.
86
Claire MAITRE
CARACTERISTIQUES GENERALES
§ Toute melodie appartient al' une des huit structures modales de I'octoechos, et
doit pouvoir s'y renfermer. Un chant, qui dans une de ses parties s'en evade, est mal
construit, il convient de le corriger. Toute ambiguite modale doit etre eliminee.
1 Dans le texte de cette communication, les passages ecrits en caracteres gras se referent directement a la
tb60rie cistercienne. alors que les commentaires sont en caracteres normaux.
2 Reguie de ane musica, 66. Traite qui nous est parvenu par un seul manuscrit, du XIIlo si~cle : Paris,
Bibl. Ste Genevi~ve, 2284. Edition fautive: Coussemaker. C.S. n. 150-192. Les references sont donn6es
~: Cl. Mattre. edition a parattre. La numerotation est celle des phrases.
3 Ibid. • 68-69.
4 Ibid. • 489-492.
5 Ibid., 630.
6 Voir note 2.
7 Patrologia Latina [PL] 182, 001.1153-1168.
88
LES MEDIANTES
§ Comme dans la tradition , les mediantes des premier et sixieme ton font une
broderie au ton inferieur: 8
.~ .....
ET DIS- CIP- U - NAM
Le thooricien cistercien avertit qu une autre mediante existe, qui brode au demi-
I
ton superieur: 9
~ .• • • •
ET DIS- CIP - U - NAM
Mais dans le premier ton cette mediante doit ~tre rejet~ parcequ'elle
convient seulement a la psalmodie de finale La. Dans la psabnodie de rmale R~,
elle provoquerait un Si bemol. lO
On voit que c'est par un empechement d'ordre thoorique que cette autre
mediante est rejetee.
§ La mediante traditionnelle du quatrieme ton brode la quarte aux tons inferieur
et superieur: 11
• • • •
ET DIS-CIP-LI- NAM
mais, cette m~diante est impossible pour les chants de rmale Si: elle provoquerait
I'arriv~ d'un ton au dessus de la quarte. n faut done utiliser uoe m~diante qui
brode a la tierce mineure su~rieure: 12
~ . • • • •
ET DIS-CIP-Ll- NAM
8 Regule, 595.
9 Ibid. , 596.
10 Ibid., 598.
11 Ibid. , 606.
12 Ibid., 696.
13 Voir par exemple le DlS. Paris, Bib!. Nat., la1.8882, f. 145r.
89
§ Enfin, la mediante du septieme ton: apres une tierce mineure ascendante,
eUe redescend conjointement, et ~ )a fin remonte dlun ton: 14
• • • •
ET D1S- CIP- LI - NAM
Mais cette mediante se tennine sur le sixieme degre, qui ne fonne pas une
coojonction avec la rmale du mode. C'est une incorrection, iJ faut I'climiner.
Cer1Jlines eglises, pour I'cviter, font: 15
• • • •
ET DIS- CIP- LI - NAM
Mais une fois encore, eIle ne semble pas avoir ete retenue, meme par la
tradition cistercienne, qui a conserve la mediante traditionnelle. La preface a
I'antiphonaire cistercien en donne la raison: les mediantes de quatrieme et septieme tons
ont ete modifiees dans le graduel, mais dans I'antiphonaire les moines ont proteste, en
invoquant la tradition. Ces deux mediantes sont donc restees "fautives".
Ce regard porre sur quelques mediantes, et les reformes qu'ont voulu y apporter
les cisterciens, montre l' existence de principes directeurs exterieurs a la pratique de la
psalmodie. Ces principes sont intellectuellement tres coherents, iIs ont pour fondement
la volonte de maintenir ou retablir I'unite modale, lorsqu'elle semble menacee. Les
difficultes arrivent avec le retour a. la pratique: on voit que deux nouveIJes mediantes,
justifi6es par la theorie, ne se sont pas imposres dans les livres pratiques de I' Ordre.
Voyons maintenant ce qu'il en est d,es seculorum. Formules plus sensibles dans
la construction psalmodique que les mediantes, elles ont, a maintes reprises, eveille la
sollicitude des theoriciens du plain-chant. A
14 Regule, 609.
15 Ibid .• 611 .
16 Ibid. • 743.
90
LES SECULORUMl7
17 lels qu'ils sont analyses et modifies dans les Regule de arte musica.
18 Reguk, 617, 638 .
19 Ibid. , 630.
20 Ibid., 631 .
91
ordonnee. Le confort du theoricien prevaut sur celui du chanteur.
Concretement, cela signifie que les musiciens doivent modifier la fin des
differences psalmodiques, pour leur donner la finale de l'antienne a laquelle e1les sont
attachees, car:
Les musiciens, lorsqu'ils abaissent les cadences sur des finales ~trang~res,
font diverger les modes de la diff~rence et de I'antienne qui lui est rattachee; iI est
pourtant ~vident qu'une diff~rence peut etre attribuee avec plus d'll propos II son
antienne si eUes partagent le meme mode. 2l
LES SECULORUM CORRECTS DANS LES HUITS MODES, SELON LES REGULE
Un tableau en est donne a deux endroits differents du traite. Ces deux versions
ne sont pas toujours identiques. En effet, le premier tableau represente une sorte d'etape
intermediaire, dans laquelle le theoricien a legifere a l'interieur de la tradition, c'est a
dire que, parmi les secuJorwn qu'iI a pu entendre, il a choisi pour chaque ton celui qui
lui a semble le plus propre a traduire les caracteristiques du mode. Ces secuJorum se
retrouvent en effet tous dans la tradition, sauf celui du quatrieme ton, pour la raison qui
a ete evoquee a propos des mediantes: la broderie au ton superieur serait impossible
dans la psalmodie sur la finale Si.
Dans le deuxieme tableau, qui conclue le traite, les seculorum ne sont plus
obligatoirement empruntes a une tradition: ils sont des temoins purs mais abstraits de la
modalite. Les remaniements sont de la responsabilite des reformateurs. Certains de ces
secuJorum n'ont ete retouves dans aucune tradition pratique, meme pas la cistercienne:
fruits d une reflex ion intelJectuelle, ils ne se sont pas perpetues dans le chant des
I
eglises.
La comparaison entre ces deux tableaux, (exemple nO l), va eclairer le processus
d'elaboration de ces formules "ideaJes", et donc les elements consideres comme
fondamentaux dans la caracterisation de chaque mode. L'on ne peut manquer de
remarquer immediatement que les secuJorum du deuxieme tableau se terminent tous sur
la finale du mode.
21 Ibid., 637.
92
PREMIER TON
4 • • • • •--- • s ., • • • • ~ . ; ;:>•
E U 0 U A •E "4 E U 0 U A E
11
DEUXIEME TON
4• E
•
U
•
0
•U ..
A
•E II~ •
E
•
U
•
0
•U ..
A
•E If
TROlSIEME TON
4 • •
E U
..
0
~
-
~~
U
• • •
A
.J
E "4 • • • • •
E U 0 U A
--=;
•
E
11
QUATRIEME TON
~ • • •
E U 0
li ""
U
- •--=. •
A E
II~ • • • •s
E U 0
;::;>
• •U •A i7?;
E
11
CINQUIEME TON
• • • • • • • C'. •
4• E U 0
•
U A
•
E
I11
E U 0 U A E
11
SIXIEMETON
~ 114 • ::•
=---
• • • ; • • • • ~~.... ; • -so 11
E U 0 U A E E U 0 U A E
SEPTIEME TON
~ • • • • • ; •
II~ • • • • • •
"'-
• ?; 11
E U 0 U A E E U 0 U A E
HUITlEME TON
~ • • •
E U 0
•
U
•
A
•
E "4 • • • •
E U 0 U
•
A
•
E
11;
EXEMPLE 1. Les SECULORUM pour la PSALMODIE de I'OFFICE, dans le traile des REGULE DE ARTE
MUSICA.
Dans les premier et deuxieme tons les caraeteres authente et plagal sont bien
marques des la premiere version, et les finales sont aussi finales des modes, la
deuxieme version est done apeu pres identique a la premiere.
Dans le troisieme ton la difference psalmodique passe par la quinte, ce qui en
rend }'utilisation sur l'autre finale, Si, impossible, et elle ne se termine pas non plus sur
la finale du mode; ees deux "erreurs" sont eliminees dans la deuxieme version.
93
Dans le quatrieme ton, la premiere version monte au sixieme degre, caractere
authente; il disparait de la deuxieme version.
Dans le cinquieme ton la deuxieme version supprime le quatrieme degre, qui
empechait I' utilisation de la difference sur la finale Do; il provoque aussi la descente
sur la finale du mode.
Dans le sixieme ton, la premiere version se limite a l'ambitus plagal, et se
termine sur la finale du mode, elle n 'est donc presque pas modifiee. On remarque
pourtant l'introduction du demi-ton sous la finale, caractiristique de la troisieme
maneria.
Dans le septieme ton, le caractere authente est bien affirme, le seul changement
est la prolongation du mouvement descendant d' un degre, pour atteindre la finale du
mode.
Enfin le huitieme ton: iI se termine sur la finale du mode, et se renferme a
1'intirieur de la quarte, on pourrait donc imaginer qu'il ne serait pas modi fie. Un
changement cependant: le retour a la corde Do est remplace par la descente sur la finale
du mode, comme si un mode plagal ne devait pas s'attarder outre mesure sur sa corde
de recitation.
94
PREMIER TON
~• E
•
V
•
0
•
V
•
A
•
E
II~ • E
• • •
V 0 V
•
A
;
•
E "4 • E
•
V
• • :;; •
0 V A E
11
DEUXIEME TON
~ •
E
•
V
•
0
•
V
..
A
•E
"
TROISIEME TON
., ;,
~ •
E
~
V
• •
0
• •
V A
./
•
E
11 11
~ • • •
E V 0
•
V
•
A E
11
QVATRIEME TON
.
~
-=--
• • • ;; ; if • • •
•E 114 • • • 11
E V 0 V A E V 0 V A E
CINQUlEME TON
~ •
E
•
V
•
0
•
V
•
A
•
E
11
SIXIEMETON
~ • • • i --• • • 11
E V 0 V A E
SEPTIEME TON
~ • • • • • ; ;
E V 0 V A E
II~ • • • • •
E V 0 V A
~
E
11
HUITIEME TON
4• E
•
V
•
0
• •
V A
•
E
II~ •
E
•
V
•
0
•
V
•
A
•
E
11
On voit que les deux premiers se retrouvent dans le tonaire. Pour le troisieme,
celui qui conceme les intonations graves, un changement s'est produit. Le seculorum du
tonaire est celui du ton peregrin, les Cisterciens, a cause de sa finale, I 'ont integre au
premier ton.
Mais le magister du tonaire regrette cet etat de choses:
Cette difference o'est utilisee que pour I'antienne Nos qui vivimus, alOl'S que
I'autre (celle des Regu/e) est plus legere, et plus employee. EUe caracterise bieD le
premier mode, iJ aurait ete preferable de la garder. 22
De ces deux seculorum se terminant sur la finale, le moins usuel a done ete
retenu, paree qu'il permettait d'integrer une psalmodie etrangere a l'octoechos.
Enfin, le magister deplore que les deux autres seculorum ne caraeterisent pas le
premier mode. Il faut comprendre qu'ils ne se terminent pas sur la finale du mode.
§ Dans les troisieme et quatrieme tons, on trouve deux seculorum. Les deux
premiers reprennent ceux de la premiere version des Regule, done consideres eomme
les plus satisfaisants parmi eeux de la tradition. Les deux autres sont des seculorum
usuels.
Trois de ees formules, en passant par le ~inquieme degre, rendent impossible
une psalmodie sur Ja finale Si, ce qui est une faute thoorique. D'autre part, le magister
du tonaire fait remarquer que les deux seculorum du troisieme ton peuvent se chanter
dans le deuxieme, il y a ambiguite modale.
§ Dans les cinquieme et sixieme tons, un seul seculorum est employe, celui de la
premiere version des Regule.
Iei encore, une incorrection est signalee par le tonaire: le seculorum du sixieme
ton ne don ne pas laproprietas de son mode. En effet, il n'indique pas le demi-ton sous
la finale, comme avait eu soin de le faire le seculorum theorique dans la deuxieme
version des Regule.
96
§ Dans les septieme et huitieme tons, comme dans les troisieme et quatrieme, les
premiers seculorum sont ceux de la premiere version des Regule, les deux suivants sont
usuels.
Ce parcours montre qu' aucun des seculorum de la deuxieme version des Regu/e
ne s'est maintenu dans la tradition. Or c'etaient les formules sans defauts les plus
propres 11 definir leurs modes respectifs.
Concretement, le tonaire a repris les formules de la premiere version, celles qui
possedaient deja une reaIite musica1e, et qui, au-deJa de leurs imperfections throriques,
symbolisaient, dans la pratique quotidienne, les divers modes. La perception sensible a
prevalu sur la reflexion. Aucune des constructions de la throrie n'a pu prendre corps
dans la pratique. Enfin , la persistance de quelques seculonun tres repandus temoigne
aussi de la force de la memoire vivante, face a l'interdit, meme coherent, de la raison.
CONCLUSION GENERALE
I1 n' en reste pas moins que ce passage a I' acte des Cisterciens, qui on t voul u
mettre la psalmodie en conformite avec leur throrie du chant juste, est extremement
novatrice. 11 temoigne d'une con fiance nouvelle dans les capacites de l'individu, face a
l'auctoritas de la tradition dans cette premiere moitie du XIIO siecle.
97
Joseph DYER
The last half of the thirteenth and the beginning of the fourteenth century
witnessed a sudden revival of interest in Gregorian chant theory, a development which
led to the creation of a sizeable number of new treatises (see Appendix). These chant
treatises have been overshadowed by the comparatively smaller number of
contemporary writings devoted to polyphony. The teachings of Franco, 10hannes de
Garlandia, Anonymous IV, and the Saint Emmeram Anonymous have been minutely
analyzed by modem scholars - surely because they represent to music historians the
advancing edge of compositional practice. I This neglect of the chant theorists, who
attempted to reassess theory in view of the needs of their own time, creates a distorted
picture of the true extent of musical discourse during the period.
A comprehensive survey of the contents of these treatises would be impossible
in the present context, due both to their number and to their remarkable diversity of
size and content. 2 They range in length from the succinct treatment of a single topic,
like Petrus de Cruce's Tractatus de tonis, to the vast and comprehensive Speculum
musice of Jacques de Liege. By focusing on certain aspects of the treatises in
relationship to the philosophical currents of their time, my aim in the present survey is
to assess the place which mus;ca was allotted in the new structures of knowledge and to
I Indeed, Franco himself discouraged further interest in the chant repertoire on the part of music theorists
with his declaration that "de plana musica quidam philosophi sufficienter tractaverint". Ars canrus
mensurabilis, prologue; Corpus Scriptorum de Musica (American Institute of Musicology) [CSM) 18:23
(emphasis added).
2 As Lawrence Gushee observed, they do indeed "offer many problems for an overview". ("Questions of
Genre in Medieval Treatises on Music·, Gallungen der Musik in Einzeldarstelluflgen: Gedenkschrift Leo
Schrade, ed. Wulf Arlt et a1. [Bern, 1973], p.432). I have not taken into account incidental references 10
music in medieval summae and encyclOpedic surveys like the Speculum Doctriflale of Vincent of
Beauvais, and the De ortu scientiarum of Robert Kilwardby. See Gotlfied Goller, Vinzenz von Beauvais
O. P. (um 1l94-1264) Ulul sein Musilaralaat im Speculum Do clrillaie , K5lner Beitrage zur
Musikforschung 25 (Regensburg, 1959), 61-65 and 86·118. (Vincent's treatment of music is DO more
than a chain of quotations from earlier authors, principally Boethius.). There is a modem edition of
Kilwardby's De ortu scienliarum, ed. Albert G. Judy, Auctores Britannici Medii Aevi [AB] 4 (Oxford,
1976), chs. 18-21, p.50-60. Neither have I surveyed conunentaries on the writers tmdilionally regarded
as auctorilates in music (Augustine, Martianus Capel1a, Boethius, Plato, Macrobius), since this body of
material is not yet completely documented.
3 Few musicological studies have been devoted to this aspect of music theory. The most comprehensive
investigation is Max Haas, "Studien zur mittelalterlichen Musiktheorie I: Eine Ubersicht liber die
Musiklehre im Kontext der Philosophie des 13. und friihen 14. Iahrhunderts", in Akruelle Fragen der
musikbezogenen Mittelalteiforschung, Forum Musicologicum 3, ed. Hans Oesch and Wulf Arlt
(Winterhur, 1982), 323-456 (with extensive bibliography). See also Michel Huglo, "The Study of
Ancient Sources of Music Theory in the Medieval Universities", Music Theory and Its Sources: AntiqUity
alld the Middle Ages, ed . Andre Barbera (South Bend, 1990), 150-172; Gerbard Pietzsch, Die
KlassijikaJion der Musik von Boetius his Ugolino von OrvielO (Halle/Saale, 1929); Hennann Muller, "Die
Musikauffassung des 13. Iahrhunderts" , Archiv fiJr Musikwissenschaft 4 (1922), 405-412 (on Roger
Bacon). I have found Herbert Schueller, The Idea of Music: An lnrroduction to Musical Aesthelics in
Antiquity and the Middle Ages, Early Drama, Art, and Music Monograph Series 9 (Kalamazoo, MI,
1988) helpful, despite his opinion tbat "very little that was absolutely new was to be said in the writings
of the (chant?1 theorists of the thirteenth century" (p.393).
4 This assessment could change with the publication of hitherto unedited anonymous treatises in prose or
verse. See The Theory of Music, Repertoire International des Sources Musicales B/III/1-3 (Kassel, 1961-
1986), and Michael Bemhard, "Didaktische Verse rur Musiktheorie des Mittelalters", InterfUltional
Musicological Society Study Group Cantus Planus: Papers Read at the Third Meeting, Tihany 1988
(Budapest, 1990), 227-236. See the list of treatises in Joseph Smits van Waesberghe, Musikerz,iehung:
Lehre und Theorie der Musik im Mittelalter, Musikgeschichte in Bildem 1Il/3 (Leipzig, 1969), p.195-
198. Two complementary lists of anonymous treatises are Heinrich Hiischen, "Anonyrni" , Musik in
GeschichJe und Gegenwart J :492-504, and Lawrence Gushee. "Anonymous theoretical writings", The
New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians [TNG] 1:441-446, and the comprehensive survey by
Michael Bemhard, "Dss musikalische Fachschrifttum im lateinischen MitteJalter: Eine Characteristik" ,
Geschichte der MusiJaheorie 3: Rezeptioll des antiken Fachs im Mittelalter. ed. Frieder Zamioer
(Darmstadt, 1990),37-103.
5 Practica artis musice 1.2-3; CSM 25: 19. Amerus also hopes that the "doctores et provectos" will find
something of use ·pro pueris vel ignorantibus" (1.16; CSM 25:20).
6 De musica, prologue; Martin Gerbert, Scriptores Ecclesiastici de Musica Sacra [GS) 3 vols. (SI. Blaise,
100
proper standards in church music with the duty to denounce - sometimes with
considerable vehemence - errors and bad taste wherever they encounter them .
Beginning in the twelfth century, concurrently with the heightened prominence
given to philosophy, there was a drastic curtailment of the role of the liberal arts at
higher stages of the educational process. The availability of the complete Aristotelian
corpus (together with its Arabic and Jewish commentaries) by the early thirteenth
century redefined the traditional medieval structure of knowledge, which had been
based heretofore on the seven liberal arts. The universities, whose founding took place
during this period, altered decisively the way in which knowledge was transmitted and
enlarged. All of these changes fostered the ascendency of Aristotelian logic over the
older dialectic of the Trivium, and led to the partial eclipse of all the quadrivial arts. To
be sure, these developments found little resonance among chant theorists of the
thirteenth century. Many of their treatises (Garlandia, Lambertus, Egidius de Zamora)
could easily have been written centuries earlier. One finds in them frequent recourse to
the obligatory authorities: Boethius, Isidore, Guido, and John of Aftlighem. Only a few
authors (Grocheo, Engelbert, Jacques de Liege) made some use of Aristotle's works
and the new logic in developing their teaching.
Earlier in the Middle Ages, music theory owed its status as an intellectual
discipline to its position as one of the quadrivial arts. The intensified intellectual
endeavors of the high Middle Ages, stimulated by the astonishing breadth of Aristotle's
thought, could not be accomodated within a scheme of study (the liberal arts) which
took no account of his works on metaphysics, logic and natural science which were
unknown or known indirectly before the twelfth century. 7 Thomas Aquinas recognized
the irreversibile nature of this development when he observed that the "septem artes
liberales non sufficienter ~ividunt philosophiam theoricam". 8 Familiarity with the
complete Aristotle in Latin translation before the mid-thirteenth century transformed the
intellectual horiwns of the medieval scholar. To the Latin translations long available
thanks to Boethius were added an important group of writings known as the "Logica
nova" (Prior and Posterior Analylics, Topics, Sophistici Elenchi) . New perspectives
1784),2:287.
7 Jan Pinborg •• Aristotle in the Middle Ages", The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy, 00.
Norman Kretzmann et al. (Cambridge, 1982), 43-98; Bernard G. Dod, "Aristoteles latinus" , ibid., 45-
79; Fernand van Steenberghen, Aristotle in the West: The Origins of Latin Aristoteliaflism , trans. Leonard
Johnston (Louvain. 1955); van Steenberghen. La philosophie au Xllte siecie, Philosophes medievaux 9
(Louvain-Paris, 1966), p.81-85; F. C. Capleston, A HisloryofMedieval Philosophy (New York, 1972),
p.150-159; Etienne Gilson, LA phiLosophie au moyefl age des origines parrisliques a lafin du x.r..e siecle
(Paris 2/1944) , p.400-412; Armand Maurer, Medieval Philosophy, A History of Philosophy. 00. Etienne
GilsoD (New York, 1962), p.86-88; G. Pare et a\., La renaissance du Xl~ siecle: Les ecoles er
i'enseigfU!menJ, Publications de I'lnstitut d'Etudes Medievales d'Ottawa (Paris-Ottawa, 1933). esp.
p.t 09-137, 213-240; Lambert Marie de Rijk. LA philosophie au moyen age (Leiden, 1985).
8 Thomas Aquinas, In Boerhium de Trinitale, q. 5 a. I ad 3. Cf. van Steenberg hen: "Ies cadres des sept
arts sont detinitivement brises" (LA philosophie au Xl/~ s;ec/e, p.124).
101
were also opened up by translations of Aristotle's observations in the field of natural
science (Physica, De gene ratione animalium, De caelo et munfio, Parva naturalia) . The
Aristotelian reading list of the medieval scholar was completed by the Metaphysics and
the treatise De anima.
All of this had a profound effect on education and led inevitably to a
diminishjng role for the seven Jiberal arts. Although university students continued to
study in what was still known as the faculty of "arts", the curriculum had changed
markedly by the thirteenth century. The precise content of this course of university
study has not as yet been fully defined. It is certain, however, that the arts of the
Trivium und Quadrivium had to compete for attention with a broad range of new and
stimulating topics. They had to seek a place in an entirely restructured educational
curriculum, one governed by the preeminent place accorded to philosophical and
scientific knowledge. 9 Adaptation of older subjects to the newer trends was not always
possibJe, and there was oppositon to the emphasis given to logic at the expense of
literary studies. An outline of studies from the end of the twelfth century, known as
Sacerdos ad aitare, and attributed to Alexander Neckam (d. 1217), emphasized the
traditional curriculum. to From the early thirteenth century the treatise De disciplina
scolarium, thought in the Middle Ages to have been written by Boethius himself,
defended the continued importance of the quadrivial disciplines. 1I This rear-guard
action never stood a chance of hindering the triumphant procession of Aristotelianism.
The victory of logic over grammar and literary studies was dramatized by Henri
d Andeli in La baJaille des sept ans, written between 1225 and 1250. The armies of
I
9 Femand van Steenberghen , "L'organisation des etudes au moyen age et ses repercussions SUr la
mouvement philosophique", Revue philosophique de Louvain 52 (1954), 572-592; Philippe Delhaye, "La
place des arts liberaux dans les programmes scolaires du Xm e siecle", Arts liberaux et philosophie au
moyen age. Actes du qUalrieme congres irnernational de philosophie mMievale. Montreal 1969 (Paris,
1969), 161-173; Pearl Kibre, "The Quadrivium in the Thirteenth-Century Universities (with Special
Reference to Paris)", Am Liberaux, 175-191; Guy Beaujouan, "The Transformation of the Quadrivium·
Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century, 00. Roben L. Benson and Giles Constable (Cambridge:
MA, 1982), 463487 . Anders Piltz, The World of Medieval Learning, trans. David Jones (Totowa, NI,
1981) is an excellent introduction, but lacks adequate bibliographical references.
10 The Sacerdos ad allare has been edited by Charles Homer Haskins, Studies in tlu!. History of Mediaeval
Science (Cambridge, 1927), 372-376. In De natura rerum Neckam criticized the manner in which the
Quadrivium was taught at Paris. Alexander Neckam, De naluris rerum libri dU(), ch. 173, 00. Thomas
Wright (1863), as cited in Kibre, "The Quadrivium", p.180.
JJ Parrologia LaJina rPL] 64, cols. 1223-1238. Charles Homer Haskins, Studies in Mediaeval Culrure
(Oxford, 1929), p.73ff. There also exists a commentary attributed in the Middle Ages (wrongly) to
Thomas Aquinas (Opera Omnia 26:591 (1875)). In his Morale scolarium (1241) the grammarian John of
Garland (ca.1l90-1272) denounced his learned contemporaries for their ignorance of the classics, a
situation which led to a decline in the quality of Latin literary style.
12 Louis J. Paetow, ed., The Ballle of the Seven Arls. A French Poem by Henri d'Andeli, Ji-ouvere of the
Thirteenth Century, Memoirs of the University of California 4/1 (Berkeley, 1914). Music and her retinue
(lines 174-185) have an innocuous role: "Par mi I'ost aJoient chantant,lPar lor chant les vont
enchantant,/Cels ne combatent pas" (lines 184-186).
102
Etienne Gilson might have had this poem in mind when he epitomized the changes in
the intellectual climate as "une veritable insurrection de la logique contre les six autres
arts liberaux. "13
The most frequently cited document which describes the medieval university
curriculum is a reading list with specimen qunestiones (and replies ad primum ... ad
secundum .... etc.) compiled sometime between 1230 and 1240 by an unknown master
at the University of Paris. The source presumably reflects the contents and methodology
of the course of study in the Parisian arts faculty.14 "Philosophia" is divided into three
branches: natural, practical or moral, and rational. The subjects of the Quadrivium
occupy now only a subdivision within the Mathematica section of natural philosophy.
They are dominated by Aristotle, whose Metaphysics and treatises on physical science
fill out the curriculum in natural philosophy. It is not difficult to imagine that the De
institutione musica of Boethius, although specifically mentioned by the unknown
magister, was overshadowed by Aristotle's imposing oeuvre. The Parisian master
recommended that only the first two books of Boethius required study:
"quia in istis duobus, ut dictum est, manifestat auctor omnium illorum
scientiam, de quibus intendendum, sed in primo libro exequitur de eis
generaliter, in secundo vero specialiter determinando paulisper in tonis et
consonantiis. "15
Some parts of the Quadrivium, like arithmetic, were deemed more important to the
fostering of further study than others. Given the amount of time allowed for teaching
this part of the curriculum, however, one cannot imagine that much attention was given
to music. BoeLhius is absent from the authoritative statuta of the University of Paris
published in 1255. 16 Since all teaching was based on the reading of auctoritates, the
absence of Boethius' name effectively excluded the De inslifUlione musica from the
formal university curriculum, at least at PariS.17 There seem to be no Parisian
103
commentaries on Boethius -- a type of literary production one would expect if the De
institUlione musica were taught there. 18
Even when elements of the liberal arts succeeded in maintaining their place in
the curriculum, they served very different functions in the structure of knowledge. The
1255 statutes of the University of Paris assigned the lnstitutiones grammaticaies of
Priscian and the Barbarismus of Donatus, both standard works of the Trivium, to a
place preceding logic in the philosophia rarionalis division the curriculum. In this
context the older grammarians served a propaedeutic function to the study of language
as a system of logical discourse (scientia sennocina/is).19 Grammar was no longer
studied exclusively as a guide to correct expression but in order to gain an insight into
the relationship between language and reality . The "modist" grammarians (from "modi
significandi It) treated grammar as a subdivision of logic, not as an independent
discipline.
Music fared poorly even in comparison with the other components of the
Quadrivium; it did not survive as a significant topic for university /ecriones. The
situation was summed up by Philippe Delhaye: "11 n'est guere que la musica qui ait fait
naufrage dans l'aventure, car l'arithmetique, la geometrie et l'astronomie se voyaient
assurer une place fort importante par l'etude de l'A/gorismus" .20 The Quadrivium, and
hence Boethius, continued to be studied at Oxford, due in no small measure to the
influence of Robert Grosseteste and his disciple Roger Bacon. Both strongly promoted
the study of mathematics, and Bacon lamented its neglect at Paris in favor of logic. 21 In
not disproven by Michel Huglo, "The Sludy of Ancient Sources of Music Theory in the Mooieval
Univt'rsities", in Music Theory and Its Sources (see n. 3 above). Michael Bemhard observed that "interest
in the De inslilutione musica clearly slackened from the twelfth century 00, and there are practically no
glosses in manuscripts of the fourteeoth to fifteenth centuries" ("Glosses on Boethius' De institulione
musica" , Music Theory and Its Sources, p. 145). See the list in the same author's, Wonlw"lwrdanz zu
Ancius Manlius Severinus Boethius. De institutio1l£ musica, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften:
VerOffeotlichungen der Musikhistorischen Kommission 4 (Munich, 1979), p.SII-SI3.
18 Van Steenberghen (La philosophie au XlI!! sieck, p.nO) interprets the absence before 1240 of
Parisian commentaries 00 Aristotle's Metaphysics and books on nalural science as evidence that these
works were not lecturoo on at Paris.
19 Heinrich Roos, "Die Stel.luog der Grammatik im Lehrbetrieb des 13 . lahrhuoderts", Anes Iiberales.
Von der antiken Bildung zur Wissenschaft des Mittelalters, Studien uod Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des
Miltelalters 5, 00. Josef Koch (Leiden-Cologne, 1959), 94-106; do., "Le Triviuro A I'uoiversite au XlHe
siecle". Am liMraux, p.193-197. On speculative grammar see NOrn13o Kretz.mann. "Semantics, History
of". the Encyclopedia of Philosophy 7:374-375 ; and Jan Pinborg, Logik und Semantik im Mittelalter: Ein
Vberblick, Problemata 10 (Stuttgart-Bad Cannstall, 1972).
20 "La place des arts", p.l70. In the thirteenth century Salamanca seems to have been the exception: it
offere<! both degrees and practical instruction in music; see Hastings Rashdall, The U"iversities of
Europe, ed. F. M. Powicke and A. B. ErodeD, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1936), 2:81; Nan Cooke Carpenter,
Music in {he Medieval and Renaissance U"iversities (Norman, OK , 1958; Da Capo reprint, 1972), p.92-
95.
21 For assessments of Robert Grosseteste, Albert the Great, Thomas and Roger Bacon. see Schueller. The
Idea of Music, p.377-392. The importance of music at Oxford is doubted by James Weisheipl, "The
Curriculum of the Faculty of Arts at Oxford in the Early Fourteenth Century", Mediaeval Studies 26
(1964), 143-185.
104
essence, the subjects of the Quadrivium, music excepted, were dispersed among the
various branches of knowledge recognized by the newer classification schemes.
The destiny of the quadrivial disciplines was determined partially by Aristotle's
comparative lack of interest in mathematics. Aristotle rejected in no uncertain terms
mus;ca mundana, one of the foundations of the Boethian musico-mathematical scheme:
"the thesis that hannonia occurs when the stars move, on tthe grounds that the sounds
arising are concordant, though it is elegantly and strikingly stated by those who
enunciate it, is nevertheless not true. "22 Aristotle's emphasis in the Physics on the
connection between sounding music and physical science prepared the way for some
authors to reclassify music as one of the" scientiae mediae", i.e., subjects whose nature
placed them somewhere between mathematics and physics.23 Conceivably, a new,
"scientific" branch of music theory could have been erected on a foundation which
viewed music as a natural phenomenon in its own right not subordinated to any scientia
superior. Apparently, this was never attempted.
Music as higher discipline was also constraine(! by its traditional role as a
subject to be learned for its practical value. The purpose of musical instruction was
primarily skill in performance. 24 The me(!ieval university curriculum, on the other
hand, emphasized the reading of authoritative texts and the art of oral argument based
upon them.25 The regent masters of the faculty of arts were anxious to elevate their
metier to the status enjoyed by theology -- not an easily attained goal at a time when
philosophy was looked upon as a preparation for the study of sacra doctrina, law, or
medicine. Since musica was still inevitably and inextricably linked to cantus
Gregorianus, there was little incentive for philosophers to devote their attentions to
either. Perhaps they did not feel challenged by music and followed Aristotle's counsel
that "it is the mark of an educate(! mind to look for precision in each class of things just
22 De caelo 290 b l2ff, as quoted in Andrew Barker, ed., Greek Musical Wrirings 1/: Hannonic and
Acousric Theory (Cambridge, 1989), p.33. lohannes de Grocheo associated himself with this position of
Aristotle: Ernst Rohloff, Die Quellenhalldschriften z;urn MusiktraJam des lohannes de Grocheo (Leipzig,
1972), 122.67. Also see M. Wittmann, Vox arque son us: Srudien ..ur Rez;eprioll der ArislOtelischen Schrift
"De anima" (pfaffenweiler, 1987).
23 Thomas Aquinas was the first to use the term (In Boerhium de Trinitate, qu. 5, a. 3, ad Sum). See also
Jean Gagne, "Du Quadrivium aux Scientiae Mediae", Ans liberaux, 975-985, especially p.982; and
James Weisheipl, "The Classification of the Sciences in Medieval Thought", Mediaeval Srudies 27
(1965), 54-90. Both Robert Kilwardby (De onu scienriarum, AB 4, ch. 21, p.57-60) and Albertus
Magnus in his commentary on the Posterior Analytics (Lib. 1, tract. 3, cap. 7, ed. A. Borgnet [Paris,
1890], 2: 85A-87B) defended the doctrine of a mathematical basis. See also Ellinore Fladt, Die
Musikauffassung des lohannes de Grocheo im KOnlexJ der hochmitrelalrerlichen Aristoteles-Rez;eption,
Berliner Musikwissenschaftliche Arbeiten 26 (Munich-Salzburg, 1987), p.152-158.
24 The learned Engelbert of Admont implied that only the requests of friends convinced him to return to
"iuventutis studia" and write about music. De musica, prologue; GS 2:287a.
25 Guy Beaujouan, "L'Enseignement du Quadrivium", La scuola nell'Occidente larillO dell 'Alto medievo,
2 vols., Settimane di Studio del Centra ltaliano di Studi sull'Alto Medievo 19 (Spoieto, 1972), 2:639-
667; see also Beaujouan, "The Transformation", p.464-465.
105
so far as the nature of the subject admits. "26 Members of the theological faculties
likewise felt no need to reinterpret the traditional musical teaching they had received as
children. Indeed, they were preoccupied with reacting, often defensively, to the
challenges presented by the new knowledge and methodologies of Aristotelianism. It is
disappointing that such a profound thinker as Thomas Aquinas derived his entirely
conventional treatment of music from Augustine and Boethius. 27 For the medieval
master and student alike the glamorous fields of erudition were those which lent
themselves to the application of subtle methods of argumentation and which explored
the fascinating stimuli offered by Aristotelian thought in realms as diverse as
metaphysics, logic, ethics, psychology, and the methodology of scientific inquiry . It
must be remembered that, contrary to modern practice, a magister did not ordinarily
choose teaching in the arts faculty as a career. The aphorism "non est consenescendum
in artibus" meant that, after a few years of lecturing on philosophy, most would move
on to the study of theology, law or medicine. At that point training in philosophia
would finally achieve its goal of preparing a young man for a clerical, legal or medical
career.
One cannot pronounce a definitive judgment on the presence or absence of
music in the educational program of the universities until all of the unpublished
commentaries and manuscripts of student notes (reportationes) have been inventoried
and evaluated. I doubt, however, that the picture I have drawn will be altered beyond
the point of recognition. Music played an important role in university ceremonies,
many of which were religious in character. No doubt students made their own music
informally, but the question here concers the absence of formal musical studies in the
curriculum and the putative but as yet undemonstrated links between thirteenth-century
music treatises and university teaching. 28
The developments just described had little effect on elementary instruction.
Despite the changes in university education, and indeed in the very concept of what the
106
intellectual life should be, local cathedral and monastic schools continued to provide
basic training for young boys in the disciplines of grammar and computation. 29 Practical
training in the music of the church began at a very early age. Even boys who were not
destined for the clergy received instruction "in scientia aliqua delectabili ut in
musica. "30 Though the stress remained on practical applications, a boy who had
received an elementary quadrivial training in the subject would have absorbed at least
some of its standard philosophical components, derived from Boethius and Isidore.
Since the provision of material for elementary music instruction remained an
important goal of the treatises in the late thirteenth century, one is not surprised to find
in them the traditional doctrines on intervals, modes (toni), the use of the Guidonian
hand, and solmization syllables. In some cases these essential fundamentals are modifed
by the author, but complex mathematical calculations, apart from those required for the
preparation of the monochord, are rare.
Incidental allusions to the works of Aristotle and to the working methods and
terminology of medieval philosophy in the music treatises of the thirteenth century
cannot be used to establish a connection between the treatises, their authors, and the
curriculum of the university. Only very sparse biographical details are available about
the careers of the authors of the chant treatises. 10hannes "de Garlandia" (ca. 1240)
derived his name from an area in Paris frequented by the arts faculty of the university.
Was he also a teacher there? In all likelihood Jehan des Murs did not teach at the
University.)1 The fact that an author (Grocheo, Franco) is called a "magister" might
signify that he graduated from a university, where teaching was an obligation of both
the baccalaureus and the magister, not that he held a teaching chair. "Magister" was of
course a common word for "teacher".
Among the chant theorists of his generation 10hannes de Grocheo makes the
most consistent attempt to integrate Aristotelian concepts into the theory of monophonic
music. 32 In one of the manuscripts of his treatise he is identified as a "regens Parisius",
29 Lynn Thomdike, "Elementary and Secondary Education in the Middle Ages", Speculum 15 (1940),
400-408. On music instruction see especially Smits van Waesberghe, Musikerziehung. Not all boys
received a complete grounding in music: a private teacher in Bologna offered musical instruction to
university students; see Giuseppe Vecchi, "Musica e Scuola delle Artes a Bologna nell'opera di
Boncompagno da Signa (Sec . XIII)", Festschrijt Bruno Stablein zum 70. Geburtstag (Kassel, 1967),
p.266-273: "Non sfugge il falto che fino a questo momento la disciplina musicale ci e apparsa piU
destinata alia sfera pratica che alia teorica, piU con carattere si [di?] ars che di scientia· (p.271).
30 Circafiliorum regimen (13lh c.), as quoted in Roos, "Die SteIlung del' Grammatik", p.94 .
31 On Garlandia see Erich Reimer, lohannes de Garlandia: De meflSurabiJi musica. Kritische Edition mit
Kommentar und Interpretation der Notationslehre, 2 vols., Beihefte rum Archiv fiir Musikwissenschaft
10-11 (Wiesbaden, 1972), 1: 1-17. Gushee, "Jehan des Murs", TNG 9:587-590). According to Andrew
Hughes, Franco is given the title "magister" in the manuscript Bib!. Ambr . D5 (TNG 6:794-797).
32 Rohloff, Die Quellenhandschrijten, p.168. The philosophical dimensions of Grocheo's treatise have
received considerable attention. See Patricia De Will, A New Perspective on de Grocheo's 'Ars Musicae'
(ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, 1973), and Fladt, Die Musiknuffassung des lohannes de Grocheo.
A series of articles by Fladt and Michael Bielitz center on Grocheo's use of the tenus materia andforma.
107
-
and Grocheo appeals repeatedly to the writings of Aristotle. He promises to frame his
own treatise according to the procedure enunciated by Aristotle at the beginning of the
Physics: first to establish basic principles and then to study "one by one those things
which arise from them according to the property of the 11Ultena of the subject. "33 In this
regard it is also highly significant that Grocheo addresses an audience of "iuvenes", not
the "pueri" who seem to be the ultimate target of the other authors. Grocheo assumes
that his reader has mastered basic music theory, and several times he denies any intent
to present a detailed instruction in the fundamentals of music. His purpose is to
formulate an innovative general overview of music, while treating selected aspects of
secular music which seem important to him.
Another well-educated author was Abbot Engelbert of Admont. He studied first
at Prague (1271-74), then completed his philosophical and theological studies at Padua
(1279-88). His writings cover a wide range of philosophical and historical topics,
including a (now lost) commentary on Aristotle's De anima. 34 He cites the passages in
Aristotle (and in the pseudo-Aristotelian ProblemiUo) which refer to music, and it
comes as no surprise that, when he introduces philosophical discourse, he handles it
masterfully. Almost nothing is known of the life of Jacques of Liege, but his writings
imply a thorough university training. In the Speculum musicae he mentions that at Paris
he heard lectures on the first two books of Boethius. 35 This restricted exposure to
Boethius conforms to the guidelines provided by the anonymous Parisian master
discussed earlier. (Jacques is of course familiar with the complete text of Boethius'
books on arithmetic and music.) He quotes rather extensively from Aristotle in the first
book of the Speculum musicae. Most of the treatise, however, reverts to an exhaustive
presentation of the traditional topics with a strong emphasis on mathematical
calculation. Boethius remains the principal authority.
See Ellinore Fladt, "Die artifizielle Prozess im Hochmittelalter", Die Musikforschung 40 (1987), 203-
228; Mathias Bielitz, "Hat lobannes de Grocheo eigentlich auch iiber Musik geschrieben?" Die
Musikforschung 41 (1988), 144-150; Mathias Dielitz, "Materia und forma bei lohannes de Grocheo" , Die
Musikforschung 38 (1985),257-217 .
J3 "Modus autem procedendi erit primo coDsiderare communia, quae dicuntur principia, et postea ex illis
orientia sigillatim secundum subieclJle DJateriae facultatem" , RobJoff, 110.4. (Rohloffs emendation of
"sigjlJatim" to "singularia" is unnecessary.) Grocheo later justifies his method of proceeding from the
general to the particular with an appeal to Aristotle's De generarione animlllium; see Rohloff. 130.105.
34 George D. Fowler, "A Chronology of the Writings of Engelbert of Admont O.S.B. (ca.I250-I331)",
ParaMsis: Sludies in Memory of &twin A. Quain (New York: Fortham, 1976), p.121-134; Ktaus
Wolfgang NiemalJer, "Die Anwendung musikthoretischer Demonstrationsmodelle auf die Praxis bei
Engelbert von Admont", Miscellanea Medievalia 7: Melhoden in Wissenschaft und Kunsl des Mirteltlllers
(Berlin, 1970),206-230.
}5 "Timens autem ne !acta Boethii Musica mihi concessa toJleretur a me, .. . qui de duobus primis Iibris,
quos Parisius audieram, aIiqua ell traxeram , plura coepi et de illis et de aliis excerpere". Speculum
musiClle 56.17, ed. Roger Bragard, CSM 3/2, p.136; see also Roger Braganl, "Le Speculum Musicae du
compilateur Jacques de Liege", Musica Discipli/Ul 7 (1953), 100 and 8 (1954), 1-17; F. Joseph Smith,
"A Medieval Philosophy of Number: Jacques de Li~ge and the Speculum Music(U!". Ans liberau.:c, 1023-
39.
108
A the two treatises of Marchetto Lucidarium and
the Pomerium, illustrates the distinction between the traditional transmission of music
theory and one influenced by Aristotelianism. The Lucidarium presents with little trace
of philosophical the customary topics and understanding
chant. The Pomerium, on other hand, which treats of polyphonic music and is hence
not included among the treatises here under discussion, begins with an allusion to
Aristotelian doctrine of substance and accidents. Marchetto did not trust his own
philosophical acknowledged he had consulted with a Dominican
friar, Syphans about the employment of "philosophie raciones" It is
perhaps that the English theorist a Franciscan and
of the more traditionally oriented Summa de speculatione musice, wrote on
each of the divisions of the Quadrivium, which in time no longer served as a
of university instruction. 37 Odington followed in traditions of Robert
protector of the Oxford Franc iscans , and Roger also a Franciscan, with
to his interest in mathematics .
........."''''',... their emphasis on practical the thirteenth-century chant
do not countenance a complete disregard for a speculative understanding of musical
of their authors voice the conventional complaint that few
contemporaries seem to care about obtaining a understanding of the
music. Johannes de Grocheo the common when observed that,
"although many people these days seek [experience] of this art, few care much
about its theoretical side (de eius speculatione). "38 With a grand rhetorical ,.. ..E.bt~'rih;"
the author of the Summa musice announced that he would not
music is a liberal art or not, what is and what is the proper
(passio) of this subject", nor was he with the mathematical foundations of
music. justified this omission by that such matters were beyond the
YX"''''''''J of the young boys for whom he was writing. 39 We have already that the
manner in which Johannes de Grocheo musical topics can be to the
more mature audience for whom _'''',UU!"" de Liege drew a distinction between
his treatment of chant in VI the musice books
36 Marchetto. Pomerium I; CSM 6:39. F. Alberl Gallo, "Mllrchetto da Padova", TNG 11:662.
however, Marchetto's discussion of mllsica", Lucidarium 12.1, ed. Jan The
Lucidarium of Marchetto of Paliua p.518-520.
37 Waiter OdinglOI1, Summa de musicae, 00. Frederick Hammond, CSM 14:21-27. The
word ·summ.a" did not inevitably imply philosophical content: it signified tbal a was to be treated
comprehensively.
38 Rohloff. Die Quellenhandschriften. p.112. . . .
39 "De musica tamen an sit ars liberalis vel non, et quid ha beat pro subiecto et quae Sit propns pasSIO
subiecti eiusdem, et qualiter secundum proporlionem numerorum fundari et instilui ha~1 intervall~. ~t
circa ipsa consiste.otia. dicere super vires etenim puerorum est hoc negotium, et matOns
indigens Wquisitionis.· GS 3: 190b.
109
devoted solely to theory, which had been written for the benefit of the "subtiliores et
ingeniis capaciores" . Walter Odington promised a discussion of both the theoretical and
practical side of music. 40 In a treatise entitled Practica anis musice (1271) the English
priest Amerus dismissed any discussion of musica lIOJuralis and moralis as irrelevant to
the ars canwndi. 41 Three years later, perhaps in response to Amerus' treatise, Helie
Salomon entitled his own treatise Sciemia anis musice, a phrase which implied that
both theoretical knowledge and practical skill would be imparted.
Very few of the chant treatises have a significant "philosophical" component
reflecting contemporary intellectual preoccupations. Apart from the recent attention
focused on hylomorphic (matter and form) terminology in Grocheo (see the works of
Fladt and Bielitz cited in n. 32 above), this aspect of chant theory has not been studied
intensively. That a number of the music treatises of the late thirteenth century employ
phrases borrowed from the university lecture room is not of itself surprising. Neither
the occasional citation of one of Aristotle's relatively rare allusions to music, sometimes
serving no more than a decorative purpose, nor the conscious adaptation of scholastic
terminology is particularly significant. 42 More important for assessing the influence of
thirteenth-century philosophy on contemporary music theory are the instances in which
patterns of philosophical thought and methodology penetrated the teaching of the
treatises.
The essence of the manner of argumentation which came to be known as the
"scholastic" method is to be found in discursive, dialectic argument based on
auctorilates, which often as not could themselves be subjected to critical scrutiny in the
form of a quaestio. These quaestiones were resolved either by the rejection or by the
reconciliation of divergent positions. 43 The "questions" need not be actual matters of
40 Summa de specu/aJione, proemium; CSM 14:42. Parts 1-3 of Odington's Summa are devoted to
number and harmonics.
4\ Pradica artis musice 14; CSM 25:75. Even Grocheo cannot accept the Boethian classification of
music, nor genera other than tht: diatonic. Reacting to the claim that the angels use the eoharmonic genus,
he pointed out that: "it is not the musician's role to comment on the music of the angels, unless he is a
theologian or a prophet, ... and when they say that the planets maJce music (cantare) , they seem to be
unllware of what sound is, as it was explained in the particular division [of the monochord?)", ed.
Rohloff, 124.71). AmelUs and H6lie Salomon could have known Thomas Aquinas and heard his public
lectures and disputations at the papal court, where they both had connections. Thomas have returned to
Paris in 1268 to occupy the "foreign" chair of theology left vacant by the death of Gerard Reveri; see
Pierre Mandonnet, "Thomas d'Aquin, lecteur A la curie Romaine: Chronologie de sejour (1259-1268)",
Xema Thomistica 3 (1925), p.33 .
42 Some of the terminology appears elsewhere: for example, in Boethius' Introdudio ad sy/logismos
calegoricos (PL 64, cols. 761-794). On the presence of philosophicaJ tenninology in the polyphonic
treatises see Jeremy Yudkin, "The Influence of Aristotle on French University Music Texts", in: Music
Theory and Its Sources, 173-189. I am grateful to Prof. Yudkin for making his article available to me
before publication.
43 The classic exemplars of the method were: (1) Abelard's Sic et Non, see Peter Abailard Sic et Non: A
Critical Edition, 00. Blanche Boyer and Richard McKeon (Chicago, 1977), also PL 178; (2) Peter
Lombard, Sentenliae in IV libris distinctae, 2 vols . , 3rd ed., Spicilegium Bonavenlurianum 5
110
dispute, but the confrontation of opposing views within a formalized framework led to
new insights. Thomas Aquinas defined the pedagogical purpose of the academic
disputaJio thus:
"Quaedam vero disputatio est magistralis in scholis non ad removendum
errorem, sed ad instruendum auditores ut inducantur ad intelleetum veritatis
quam intendit; et tunc oportet rationibus inniti investigantibus veritatis radicem,
et facientibus scire quomodo sit verum quod dicitur. Alioquin si nudis
auctoritatibus magister quaestionem determinet, certificabitur quidem auditor
quod ita est, sed nihil scientiae vel intelleetus acquiret, et vacuus abscedet. "44
"Quaeritur, utrum debeant esse plures littere quam septem, vel sub pauciori
numero comprehendi possint, quoad scientiam istam?
Respondeo: plures non possunt nee debent esse, nisi alias sompniator veJlet
fingere tot litteras, quot punctos proferre posset, quod absurdum est cogitare.
[Quidam dicunt] Pauciores numero possunt esse, nam C. et. F. et G. quasi
eamdem naturam habent, et in utramque istarum trium possumus dicere,
quoniam est de natura artis, ut et fa et sol et re.
Ergo iste possunt reduci ad unam, excepto quod in G. non dicitur fa, sed
recompensatur re ... "46
Though the basic outlines of a quaestio (utrum ... respondeo .. . ergo) are present, Helie
shows a certain lack of discipline by immediately attacking the holder of the adversarial
position as a "sompniator". He introduces no auclOritaJes to support his position that
there can be no more or less than seven, nor does he construct a logical argument
suitable to a formal quaestio. 47 He is like the magister described by Thomas Aquinas
(Grottaferrata, 1971-1981); and (3) Peter of Spain, Tractatu.s (afterwards caIJed Summulae logicales), ed.
L. M. de Rijk (Assen, 1972). For a fuller discussion of the quaestio see Bemardo C. Bazan, "Les
questions disput6es, principalement clans les facultes de thoologie", in B. Bazan et al., eds. , Les questions
disputees et les questions quodlibetales dans lesfacultes de theologie, de droit et de medicine, Typologie
des sources du Moyen Age occidentale 44-45 (Tumhout, 1985); Glorieux, "L'enseignement", p.125-144;
M-ne-Dominique Chenu, Introduction a /'etude de Sainl Thomas d'Aquin (MontreaI-Paris, 1950), p.71-
81; Pare, La renaissance du X1~ siecle, p.197-206 . .
4.c Quaestiones quodlibetales 4, art. 18, as quoted in Chenu, Inlroduction a I'elude, p.73, D . 2. On the
evolution of the disputatio from the quaestio see Bazan, "Les question disput6es", p. 31 ff.
45 Scienria art;s mus;ce, proemium: GS 3:17b. I have added the implied "quidam dicunt".
46 Scienlia I; GS 3:18 .
47 The scholastic quaestio is not to be confused witb the master-pupil dialogues commonly used in
III
who offers the listener "nihil scientiae vel intellectus". Helie's subsequent comments are
hardly more than a caricature of the protocols for a formal quaestio. As a literary
device Helie favors rhetorical questions and answers ("Sed quare? '" Respondeo ... "
Ch. 28), but these common-coin phrases cannot be identified exclusively with the
scholastic method. The Scientia anis musice is studded with expressions traditional in
scholarly writing of the time: "Et (est) sciendum" (to establish a distinction) and "nota
notabiliter" (to provide background information).48 On occasion the author has recourse
to the favorite scholastic phrase: "respondeo ad primum distinguendo", but he invokes
it merely to introduce alternatives, not to establish genuine distinctions of a single term
as one might have expected in a quaestio.
Thirteenth-century theorists passed up opportunities which would have permitted
them to discuss disputed points or aspects of music theory which had elicited divergent
opinions from their predecessors. Egidius of Zamora listed seriatim opinions on
whether or not the interval of a tone should be considered a consonance or not. Instead
of framing the discussion in the form of a quaestio and thereby arriving at a
determination, he concludes weakly that, for posterity as for his contemporaries,
"adhuc sub iudice est". 49 It would be difficult to imagine a university disputation ending
so inconclusively. Engelbert of Admont neglects to reconcile the 21 voces with the 7
iitterae and the 4 tetrachords, though he hints at the need for such a reconciliation. 50
This would have presented a thirteenth-century philosopher with an interesting
opportunity for drawing fine distinctions, but Engelbert swiftly passes on to his next
topic. The most extensive passage of philosophical material in the encyclopedic
compendium of Jerome is not original with him, but is an extensive quotation from
Aquinas' commentary on the passage from book 2 of Aristotle's De caelo which denies
the existence of the music of the stars. S) The only Aristotelian statement relating to
music which had a record of commentary in the Middle Ages was the vox-son us
distinction, treated not as a musical problem but as a. part of natural science. 52
pedagogy since antiquity (cf. Amerus, Practica arris musice, ch. 2; CSM 25:21-23). It seems to me that
only one of the examples cited by Fritz Reckow (Der MusiktraJaal des Anonymous 4, 2 vols .• Beihefte
zum Archiv fUr Musikwissenschaft 4-5 (Wiesbaden. 1967], 2:67) is a genuine example of the queslio.
48 See also Garlandia. De piano musica 5 et passim, Introduclio, ed. E<hnond de Coussemaker,
Scriptorum de Musica Medii Aevi nova series [ ... ] reS], 4 vols. (Paris, 1864-67), I: 168a; Amerus 11.1,
18.3, 20.6, etc.
49 Ars musica 11.12-21; eSM 20:86-88. The author shared the thirteenth-century preoccupation with
natural science: his treatise contains a long digression. largely irrelevant to the remainder of the work, on
the behavior of nightingales and dolphins (ch . 2; CSM 20:42-52).
so De musica 3.3; GS 2:321-322.
SI Tractalus de musica, ed. Simon Cserba, Freiburger Studien zur Musikwissenschaft (Regensburg,
1935), p.26-34: Thomas' commentary is available in the Leonine edition of his works (3:174-177).
S2 H. Wittmann, Vox a/que SOIWS, passim
112
One of the topics which continued to preoccupy chant theorists in the late
thirteenth century was the question of modality. This would have presumably been a
suitable application of the quaestio method. Theorists tried to mediate between the
traditional rule, as expressed by John of Afflighem:
"Sciendum autem quod tota vis cantus ad finales resplclt. Nam ubicumque
cantus incipiatur et quomodocumque varietur, semper ei modo adiudicandus est,
in cuius finali cessaverit. "53
Although Guido held to the general principle "in fine diiudicat", he was still very
concerned with tonal unity in musical works of art and with the manner in which
phrases (distinctiones) were related among themselves and with the final of the tone. 54
The final remained the determining factor in the thirteenth century, but theorists were
usually careful to surround statements to that effect with many qualifications.
Most of the theorists considered in this study did not believe that a decision had
to be withheld until the final pitch. Amerus advised that "si vis de quolibet cantu
cognoscere cui tono subiaceat, principium, medium et finem prius perfecte con sidera " ,
and he maintained that, failing this, one could not judge the tone properly Y While
Amerus' statement reflects adequately the general theoretical consensus, there were
many nuances. Marchetto insisted that, along with ambitus and final, species of fourths
and fifths were decisive in questions of modal determination. 56 Ambitus, on the other
hand, was not a particularly important criterion for Helie Salomon. In his view a chant
(or four-voice parallel organum) could ascend even to notes outside the hand without
departing from the first tone, provided that it adhered to the regula of that tone. Helie's
rule is as simple as it is difficult to apply to everyone's satisfaction: "omnis cantus iUius
toni iudicatur, cuius naturam maiorem assumit. "57
When Engelbert of Admont had to elaborate his statement that "non potest
iudicari de aliquo can tu , cuius toni sit, nisi a sua finali voce", he cited the pseudo-
Aristotelian ProbieJ1Ulla to support the argument that one needs a broader basis of
judgment than merely the final pitch. 58 An analysis of the traditional view is found in
Il3
the treatise of Johannes de Grocheo, in a passage which illustrates the principles of
scholastic logic. Grocheo first summarizes the position (a positive universal, and hence
potentially difficult to defend) of his adversaries ("dicunt '" quidam"). He then goes on
the attack by Tevealing flaws in the position itself and in the terminology used to
formulate it. He demonstrates to his satisfaction that the principle cannot be applied
universally, and that it ignores the authentic-plagal distinction. He then indulges in one
of the favorite techniques of the medieval philosopher-logician, the definilio, by
demonstrating that neither "iudicat" nor "regula" are adequate terms. Finally, Grocheo
comes to a (negative) conclusion: that certain kinds of music cannot be categorized per
lonum.
"Describunt autem tonum quidam dicentes eum esse regulam, quae de omni
cantu in fine iudicat.
[CONTRA] Sed isti videntur multipliciter peccare. Cum enim dicunt de omni
cantu, videntur cantum civilem et mensuratum includere.
Cantus autem iste per toni regulas forte non vadit nee per eas mensuratur. Et
adhuc, si per eas mensuratur, non dicunt modum per quem nec de eo faciunt
mentionem.
AmpJius autem, cum plures toni in fine conveniant, puta primus et secundus in
d-gravi, per hoc, quod dicunt in fine, non articulatam differentiam apponunt,
nisi quis per hoc intellexerit principium et medium cum hoc esse.
Amplius autem, cum dicunt iuaicat, peccare videntur. Non enim regula iudicat,
nisi quia metaphorice dicat. Sed est illud, mediante quo iudicat homo,
quemadmodum instrumento mediante mechanicus operatur.
[CONCLUSIO] Ampliantes autem dictarn descriptionem, dicentes tonum esse
regulam, per quam cognoscimus medium et finem cuiuslibet meli, adhuc in
aliquo videntur peccantes, puta cum dicunt cuiuslibet.
Non enim per tonum cognoscimus cantum vulgarem, puta cantilenam ductiam,
stantipedem, quemadmodum superius dicebatur. "59
At first, some of this may seem no more than nit-picking, but it reflects quite accurately
the scholastic quaestio. The author states the position of certain unnamed individuals
("quidam"), which he intends to disprove. He complains that their alleged "rule" does
not apply to all types of music. He cites the examples of canlUS civilis et mensuratus,
along with the various genres of cantus vulgaris, which must be excluded. Grocheo also
makes the point that a regula does not determine anything by itself; it is merely a means
(instrumentum) by which a man judges. He is not content with a negative conclusion,
however. He proposes a distinction in the meaning of "regula" and substitutes the
following position for the erroneous view he has refuted:
"Temptemus igitur aliter describere et dicamus, quod tonus est regula, per quam
quis potest omnem cantum ecclesiasticum cognoscere et de eo iudicare
inspiciendo ad initium, medium vel ad finem.
Dico autem hic "regula, per quam etc.," quemadmodum in grammatica et in
aliis artibus regulae inveniuntur generales propter cognitionem et facilem
apprehensionem illorum, quae sub eis continentur.
114
Dico etiam "cantum ecclesiasticum", ut excludantur cantus publicus et praecise
mensuratus, qui tonis non subiciuntur. Sed dico "inspiciendo etc.," quoniam per
hoc toni ad invicem distinguuntur. "60
60 De musica. 00. Rohloff. 152.224. In a later passage Grocheo excludes from this general rule "qwdam
cantus vel legendae de novo fiunt. qui ad plenum istis regulis non guoomantur. fort tamen ad eos reduci
possunt",OO. Rohloff, 154.225 .
61 On the locus a simile see Peter of Spain, Tractatus 5.32, ed. de Rijk, p.73. Aristotle would not have
approved of a proof from another field: "quoniam autem manifestum est quod unumquodque demonstrare
Don est sed aut ex unoquoque principiorum'. Analytica posteriora (translatio Jacobii) 4.1-4, 00. L.
Minio-Paluello and Bemard Dod (Bruges-Paris, 1968), p.21.
62 Nee dicitur modus "regula" formaJiter, sic nee homo sua definitio, sed id quod per definitionem
significatur, quia defmitum non est definitio, prout haec sumuntur pro int.mtionibus secundis.· Speculum
musicae 6.36.3; CSM 6:90 . On the predicables see Niels Jl,ilrgen Green-Pedersen, The Tradition of the
Topics in the Middle Ages (Munich-Vienna, 1984), p. 118 and 231-232.
63 Speculum musicae 6 .36.9; CSM 6:91.
64 "Quod autem tonus vel modus sit modulatio, qualitas vel proprietas cantus, quantum ad Cotum suum
decursum, patet per Boethii tactam descriptionem, quia tropus vel tonus est constitutio, idest plenum
veluti modulationis corpus in totis vocum ordinibus constituta, acumine vel gravitate differens."
Speculum musicae 6.36.11; CSM 6:91. Cf. And; Manlii Torqua/; Sever;n; Boetii De ;nst;tUl;one
arithmetica libri duo, De institUlione musica libri quinque, accedit Geometria quae fertur Boerii, 00.
Gottfried Friedlein (Leipzig, 1867), p.341; trans. by Calvin M. Bower as 1he Fu1Ulmru!nJals of Music
(New Haven, 1989), p.153.
115
"[MAJOR:] Finis enim obiectorum potentiae sensitivae et intellectivae est, ut
quodlibet eorum sic se habeat secundum proportionem suam in se, quod
quantum ad apprehensionem suam a sensu et intellectu delectet et demulceat
exterius sensum et interius animum et affectum.
[MINOR:) Auditus autem est sensus maxime pertinens ad disciplinam et
doctrinam ac scientiam ipso mediante apprehendendam, sicut dicit Philosophus
I. Meraphysica circa principium, quod animalia cum sensu visus habentia
memoria m et auditum magis sunt disciplinabilia, etc.
[CONCLUSION:] Ergo voces et soni debent de congruitate ordines sui ad ilium
finem taliter in se et ad se invicem proportionari et ordinari, quod demulceant
auditum et moveant animum et affectum audientum. "65
In his conclusion Engelbert lifts the discussion to a higher plane which touches upon the
very purpose of sacred music: to move the mind and affections of the listeners.
Elsewhere, in a discussion springing from the Problemala, he maintains that the desired
effect of music is not inevitably achieved, but only "opportune".66
A long, original, though perhaps unnecessary discussion involving the concepts
of genus and species is found in the treatment of tonus in Chapter 10 of Salomon IS
Scientia anis musice. The author attempts to apply the terms in a way which respects
their meaning in contemporary philosophy. A digram intended to illustrate his teaching
was apparently supposed to represent a genealogical tree or an analysis of relationships
like that demonstrated by the tree of Porphyry. 67 The illustration in the sole extant
manuscript of the ScienJia does not correspond to the description. Instead, it shows an
enthroned bishop surrounded by eight circles representing the eight tones. The bishop
represents tonus as a genus, and the eight ecclesiastical tones are related to tonus as
species of the genus tonus. The four authentic tones are called "sons" and the plagal
tones are "grandsons" . (Now we understand why the bishop is inappropriate!) On this
level of relationship the authentics -- as subaltern species -- are regarded "ut genus et
caput", while the plagals are regarded as species. 68 The pJagals are again denominated
species of the authentics in Ch. 19, where Helie categorizes each of the seculorum
(psalm-tone endings) as species of the eight tones. He does not use the term differentia
often applied to these cadential patterns, but he may have been linking two of the
predicables discussed by Porphyry: species and differentia. As Eleonore Stump
explains: "Differentiae can be though of in two different ways: either they divide a
65 De musica 4.3 ; GS 2:339b; Aristotle, The Metaphysics, ed . and trans. Hugb Tredennick, The Loeb
Classical Library (Cambridge. MA, 1933-1935), p.5. For the Latin translation of James of Venice see
Melaphysica, 00. Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem, Aristoteles Latinus, vo!. 25/1-11 (Leiden. 1970).
66 De musica 4.7; GS 2:342-343. See the edition of the ProblemaJQ cited in n. 58 above.
67 For an example of the Porphyrian tree see Piltz, The World of Medieval Learning, p.56. Grocheo uses
the relationsrups of trinitarian theology to explain the consonances: the mother-octave contains the fifth as
a daughter, "et tertia ab eis procedens, quae diatesseron appellatur', ed. Robloff. 116.38,
68 See Aristotle, Topica (tran.vlaJio Boethii) 1.15 and 4.2, ed. L. Minio-PallueUo (Leiden, 1969). p.25
and 69; Peter of Spain. TraCfalUS 2.9. 00. de Rijk. p. 19. See also tbe explanation in Eleooore Stump.
HoethiILS's De ropicis differentiis: TranslaJed with Notes and Essays on the TexI (Ithaca. 1978), p.238ff.
116
genus, In which case they are divisive differentiae; or they constitute a species, in
which case they are constitutive differentiae. "69 Thus the subaltern genera/species of the
eight ecclesiastical tones are divided by the diverse seculorum, while the constitutive
differentia of each tone is its special properties (final, ambitus, etc.).
In the foregoing I have addressed two aspects of music theory in the latter half
of the thirteenth century: (1) the apparent exclusion of theory from the university
curriculum, and (2) the evidence for contemporary philosophical thought in the chant
treatises of the period. The first of these developments resulted inevitably from the
changes in intellectual perspective engendered by the reorientation of knowledge in the
directions suggested by intense study of Aristotle. Music could no longer compete with
logic, metaphysics, and natural science for a place in the curriculum. It is therefore
unlikely that any of our texts can be associated with university instruction. The second
aspect promises to be an interesting topic for further exploration. A closer reading of
the theorists against the background of the normative philosophical texts with which
they were presumably familiar might reveal allusions to these texts or to commentaries
upon them. 'o Such an investigation would help to clarify the position of the theory of
music within the intellectual continuum of the high Middle Ages.
I 17
APPENDIX
GS == Martin Gcrbert, ScriplOres Ecclesiastici de Musica Snrra, 3 vols. (St . Blaise, 1784)
CS = Edmond de Coussemaker, ScriptorllJ'fl de MlISica Medii Aev; nova series [ .. .), 4 vols . (paris, 1864-{;7)
11 B
Elibieta WITKOWSKA-ZAREMBA
r ARI11IMETIC
(=TRES CONSONANTIAE
PERFECTAE AND TONUS)
ARITHMETICAL
OPERATIONS
] PARS
PRIMA
l
I-IV
CONCLUSIONES
VEL TIIEOIlEMAT A
PHYSICUM
OPERATIONS
(DMSION OF lHE CANON)
MUSICAL REALITY
] PARS
SECUNDA
[ J-IV
PROPOSrrIONES
V-vu
Principium anis - the ratios of the four intervals discoverd by Pythagoras, that
constitute the basis of the Pythagorean system and ' that are acknowledged as a law of
"the true nature of things", have been adopted as the principle governing the music
created by man. It may be said, therefore, that this is the level at which a link was
established between the quadrivium and the ars cane!Uli. With the aid of appropriate
mathematical operations it is possible to generate numerical ratios from the principium
anis that shape the musical space of the Pythagorean system. By dividing the
monochord the ratios are transformed into segments of a straight line and then into real
sound. Consequently, the Musica speculativa is not so much a theoretical discipline that
examines the reality which exists independently of man as it is a mathematical
description of that reality and kind of transmission belt transporting the objective laws
of nature into the reality of sound which has undergone creative treatment at the hand
of man. The dual nature of the Musica specu[ativa - the text that represents the physics
120
of sound as well as medieval harmonics - is reflected in the introductions or accessus ,
commentaries and excerpts closely affiliated with the treatise. It also finds reflections in
the music treatises that arose independently in the circles influenced by the work of
10hannes de Muris.
I.
The Musica speculativa is considered in the context of the quadrivium with the
purpose to determine under what branch of philosophy it should be classified, in other
words, to determine where to place music in the quadrivial system of arts. Several
accessus - the introductory part of the commentary by the Prague theorist Wenceslaus
de Prachatycz (manuscript Pr3), and two texts quite probably produced in the area
influenced by the University of Vienna (manuscripts Wi2 and M03) - place music in the
category of the so-called scientiae mediae, or the arts that occupy a position
intermediate between mathematics and physics. The argument put forth was that the
subject of music, numerus SOlWnmt, must be viewed in two aspects: in the physical
aspect because of the sonus and in the mathematical aspect because of the numerus. The
physical aspect of music was related to the genesis of sound and the nature of the
interval. Whatever knowledge was available on the subject was taken from the De
institUlione musica by Boethius. That information may be outlined as follows:
The Pythagorean physics of sound did not develop a method for measuring the
number of "motions" that define the pitch of a tone. Calculations were based on the
relation between the pitch of the tone and the length of the string. Consequently,
medieval quantification procedures used in the physics of sound transposed geometric
values into arithmetical values and the other way around. That may be why the first
121
edition of the Musica speeu/ativa almost entirely left out the problem of motion as the
cause of sound.
The commentators mentioned here earlier, notably Wenceslaus de Prachatycz
and the two anonymous authors of the access us found in manuscripts Wi2 and M03,
wishing to expound the physical aspect of music in accord with the scientia media, took
the explanations they gave of the genesis of sound from other texts by lohannes de
Muris, notably from the chapter De son; generalione that opened the treatise Noliria
anis musieae and that was later included in the second edition of the Musica speeulaliva
(Fassung B) . Further in his commenatry Wenceslaus de Prachatycz quoted virtually the
entire text of that chapter . As far as we know that is the only clue we have that Notiria
or perhaps the second edition of the Musiea spedariva was known in medieval Prague.
Although the physical aspect of music was an aknowledged fact yet it did not affect the
status of music as a discipline of the quadrivium. Music remained subservient to
arithmetic, the science that provided the method of establishing proof (M03, f.82).
The Musiea speeulaliva by 10hannes de Muris is composed of two .clearly
distinct parts. The first part is devoted to numerical ratios and, according to our model
(see p.i20), corresponds to arithmetic in that it takes account of the divinum sphere: the
second part focuses on the division of the monochord and corresponds to geometry in
that it takes account of the sphere of the physicum (musical reality). Note may be taken
here of the views expressed in this context by Wenceslaus de Prachatyycz as well as by
some Cracow commentators, notably that the first part of the treatise, by demonstrating
how consonances arise, corresponds to specUlative music. The second part, in their
view, corresponds to musical practice for it provides instruction on the use of a variety
of musical instruments. The monochord was the tool which led music out of the
conceptual sphere into the area of sound, mediating between theory and practice,
between the qumlrivium and the ars eanendi.
H.
122
and composition, practice and didactics and finally ethics. The texts written under the
influence of Johannes de Muris supply material that illustrates the manner in which
elementary level instruction, that is didactics in the area of musica plana, was
subordinated to the princip;um artis.
Most noteworthy in this respect is the musical part of manuscript 1<5, written
quite possible in Braunschweig about the year 1460. The text of the Mus;ca specu/aliva
was furnished with an accessus and a profusion of glosses. The accessus, also found in
manuscript W and containing a lecture delivered at the University of Leipzig in 1503,
was, as it seems likely, a widely circulated academic text. The author of the accessus
completely ignored the quadrivial aspect of music. In his judgment the subject of the
treatise by Johannes de Muris was the vocal music (the first part of the treatise was
allegedly to have been devoted to it) and instrumental music (examined, so the author
assumed, in the second part of the treatise). The wealth of glosses that wreathed the text
of the Musica speculaJiva in manuscript K5 forms a virtually seperate treatise in the
manner of the musica plana. The glosses include the manus musicalis, the schema of
the hexachordal system and definitions of musical interval expressed in terms of
solmisation.
Another example of the mathematical theory of the interval, together with
principles of musica plana is found in the Musica speculativa by Erasmus Heritius, a
treatise that must have most assuredly been written at the close of the 15th century
within the area of influence of the University of Vienna. The title and some of the
components of the structure of the text bear marks of the influence of 10hannes de
Muris. The problems, with the Pythagorean system as their backbone, also embrace
elements of the subject that commonly appears in the accessus as well as principles of
the theory of proportion and of the hex achordal system. The Musica speculativa by
Erasmus Hertitius does not belong to the field of mathematics, or as the adherents of
the concept of scientia media proclaimed, under the heading of arithmetic and physic. It
is a musical treatise par excellence addressed to readers familiar with the principles of
the ars canendi, a treatise that serves to broaden the knowledge of the cantor and to
raise his qualifications to the rank of a musicus.
The commentary written by Andreas Perlachius to the Musica speculativa by
Johannes de Muris, presumably in the second decade of the 16th century (manuscript
M08), also originated in the sphere of influence of the University of Vienna. The
introductory part of that commentary is related by its topic to the accessus, but the
views expressed by Perlachius differ from that propagated by scholasticism and clearly
lean toword the humanistic ideas. Perlachius not only ignored the quadrivial context of
music but tended to tie it in its substance with words and poetry. He defined music as
123
the facultas canendi and required that the musician have a knowledge of the principles
of the melody.
Commentaries of the treatise Musica speculativa by Johannes de Music that
classified it in terms of musica plana and ars canenlii, incline us to ask, on what
principle do the two basic branches of ars musica: musica theorica and musica pracrica
coexist at the threshold of the modem era. The source materials suggest that what we
have here is a hierarhic order, a vertical relation rather than equal branches of musical
knowledge, each with a seperate subject and each with a seperate goal. The
introductory part of the commentary by Perlachius reperesents an exceptional case in
this material where the scholastic relation - commentary and the commented text, is
purely formal linking views that spring from diametrically different concepts of music.
BmLIOGRAPHY
Primary sources
K3 Krak6w, Biblioteka JagieIlonska 1927
f.112: a short accessus to MILfica speculaliva. Inc. "UtiJitas huius sciencie ... ", Expl.
" ... pericia moduJacionis sono cantuque consistens".
f.l13-132v: text written in Cracow by Jan of Olkusz in 1445, marginal glosses. "Liber
Musice Magistri Johannis de Muris". Inc. ·Etsi bestialium voluptatum ... ", Expl.
• ... quorum figure sunl in hoc ordine competenles et sic est finis deo summo gracias.
Explicit Musica Magistri Johannis de Muris concordans cum musica Bobecij per manus
Johannis BaccaJarij de EUruscb In die s. Marci 1445".
f.239-241: commentary 10 Musica specullltiva. Inc. "Etsi besliaJium. Iste liber cui us
subiectum est...", Expl. " ... adhuc sunt mullo plures consonancie quam quam ille in
texru" .
124
Mo3 Munchen, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 19818
f.l 2S: "Musica speculmiva per mgrum Erasmus Heritium lecta 1494". Ed.: Theodor
Kroyer, "Die Musica speculaJiva des Magister Erasmus Heritius, Feslschrijt 50."urn
Geburslag Adolf Sandberger (Miinchen, 19I5).
f.43-S4: text written probably in Ingolstadt in 1520-1530
"Musica rnagistri Joannis de muris ex Boetij musica extracta". Inc. "Etsi bestialium
voluptatum ... ", Expl. " ... quarum unam gracia exempli subiunxi·.
f.95-104: 'Annotationes in Musicen rnagistri Joannis de Muris per magistrum Andream
perlachium accuratae traditae". Inc. "Musa graecum est vocabulum ... ·, Expl.
" ... quattuor chordas, ab hoc dicitur Tetrachordurn".
F. AJberto Gallo, "Lo studio dell a Musica speculativa di Jobannes de Muris in Polonia e in ltalia. Le
glosse dell' Universita de Cracovia e i Glossemala di Franchino Gaffurio, in : Primo incintro con la
musica italiana in Powflia. Dal Rinascimenlo al Barocco (Bologna, 1974). Polo trans.: Znajomosc
Musica speculariva Iohannesa de Muris w Polsce 0 we Wlosze.ch. Pagine 3 (Krak6w-Warszawa, 1979).
Mu Haas, "Musik zwischen Mathematik und Physik: Zur Bedeutung der Notation in der Notitia arris
musicae des Iohannes de Muris (1321)", in: FestschriftftJr Arno Yolk (Koln, 1974), p.31-46.
Theodor Kroyer, "Die Musica speculariva des Magister Erasmus Heritius. FestschriJt zum 50. Geburstag
Adolf SaNlberger (Miincben, 1918), p.65-120.
Ulrich Micbels, ed ., lohannis de Muris Notitia arris musicae et Compendium musicae practicae. Petrus
de Sancto Dionysio Tractatus tk musica = Corpus Scriptorum de Musica (American Institute of
Musicology) 17.
Ulrich Michels, Die Musiktralaate des Johanne.s de Muris, Beihefte fUr Musikwissenschaft, VIII
(Wiesbaden, 1970).
Hans Schmid, Die musiktheoretischen Handschriften tkr Benediktinerabtei Tegern.see (Diss., Miinchen,
1951).
126
Zsuzsa CZAGANY
I Dieser Aufsatz ist aus einer Anregung VOn Berm Dr. Michael Bemhard enlstanden. der mir die Arbeit
mit den Quellen ermoglicht und mit zahlreicben RatschJagen erleicbtert bat. Icb m&bte ihm dafiir meinen
besonderen Dank aussprecben.
2 A. de la Fage. Essais de diphterographie musicale (Amsterdam, \964), S.404-407.
3 Monte Cassino, Biblioteca Abbaziale 318. p.298-300. Beschreibung def Handschrift: RlSM BIIII/2,
Bd. n: Italy (Miincben - Duisburg. 1968).
4 Ed. E. de Coussemaker. Scriptorum de musica medii aevi nova series [.. .] IV (paris, (864), S.178-191.
5 Beschreibung der Handschrift: CSM 31, lobannes Hothby, Opera omnia de musica mensurabili;
Thomas Walsingham, Regulae de musica mensurabili, hg. G. Reaney (American Institute of Musicology,
1983), S.35-38.
11 f.142V
7 Ibid.
8/bid.
9 Die benutzte QueUe siebe bei SiglafOnlium.
10 Uber Burtius siehe: C.A. Miller, ·Nicolaus Burtius', in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and
Musicians, ed. StanJey Sadie (London, 1980) Bd. 3, S.493-494.
128
des Marchettus de Padua und der Brevis collectio artis musicae des Bonaventura de
Brixia, das vermutlich 1489 entstanden ist. 11 In diesen Schriften findet sich auch die im
Diffinitorium genannte Definition Musica est ars spectabilis et sua vis . cuius sonus in
celo et in terra modulatur. 12
Die Formulierung Musica est disciplina. que in carminibus multis extollilur
argumentis, sowie das daraus hervorgehende Musica est discipJina canlilenarum und
Musica est omne carmen 13 aus den insgesamt zehn Musikdefinitionen des Diffinitoriums
sind bis jetzt unbekannter Herkunft. Sie finden sich bei keinem von den genannten
Autoren und sind auch im gesamten zuganglichen mittelalterlichen musiktheoretischen
Schrifttum unbekannt. Es kann angenommen werden, daB sie entweder aus einem
philosophischen Werk oder einem nicht fachspezifischen Vocabularium herstammen,
oder daB sie eigene Entwiirfe des Verfassers sind.
Nach den allgemeinen Musikdefinitionen erlautert das Dijfinitorium einzelne
Begriffe aus dem Kreise der musica plana: sonus, vox, tonus als Ganzton und als
Tonart (modus), Konsonanz. Dissonanz und zum Schlu3 die Mutation. Die
ErHiuterungen sind Boethius' De institutione musica, Marchettus, Bonaventura, Burtius
und Hugo Spechtshart entnommen. Es ist bemerkenswert, daB auch die boethianische
Definition Sonus est percussio aeris indissoluta, id est inrupta usque ad audilum l4
erwahnt wird, wobei das Wort inrupta eine Glosse zu indissolUla darstellt, die seit
dem 10. lahrhundert belegt ist. 15 Sie ist ein Beweis dafiir, dafi die Boethius-Glossen
auch noch im spaten 15. lahrhundert lebendig waren und Einflul3 auf die
musiktheoretische Literatur nahmen.
Die Definition Sonus est generale IUJmen quarumcumque vocum l6 stammt aus
der Musica Enchiriadis und bezeugt wiederum das spate Nachwirken dieser Schrift
sowie die iiberdurchschnittliche Belesenheit des Verfassers.
Nach dem ersten - der Theorie der musica plana gewidmeten - Teil eroffnet die
Definition des cantus figuratus den zweiten Teil des Diffinitoriwns, 17 welcher die
Grundbegriffe der mehrstimmigen Musik klm. Es folgen - oft nur mit einem knappen
Satz - die Bestimmungen von Modus, Tempus, Prolatio, Ligatura, Punctus, Pausa,
11 lch benutZle Brevis collectio, ediert von. A. Seay 1981. aus dem das seit 1497 in vielen Autlagen
gedruclcte bekannteste Werk dieses Autors, das BreviIoquium musicae. zusammengestellt worden ist. Die
Brevis collectio ist nur in einer Handschrift iiberliefert worden: Bologna, Civio Museo Bibliografico
Musicale, Ms. A 57 aus dem Jahre 1489.
12 f.142V
IJ Ibid.
14 Ibid.
IS Diese Glosse erscheint in folgenden Handschriften: Einsiedeln 298, 10. lh.; Einsiedelo 358, 10. ]b.;
Miinchen Clm 18478,11. lh.; MiincheD Clm 18480, 11. Jb.; Miinchen Clm 6361,11. lb.; Milnchen
elm 14272, 11. Jh.
16 f.143r
17 f.l44V
129
Alrera/io, Diminutio, Sincopa, Numerus und Proponio. Der ganze Abschnitt ist
wortIich aus Burtius' Musices opuscu/um iibemommen worden.
Dem zweiten Hauptteil des Werkes fiigt der Autor die Definition der
Canrilenarum genera nach Boethius und des Monochords nach Hugo Spechtshart zu. 18
Merkwiirdigerweise stimrnt die Monochorddefinition des Dijfinitoriums nicht nur mit
Hugos Fortnulierung, sondem auch mit der des de la Fage-schen Vocabulariums
iiberein. 19 Die ursprungliche Quelle der Definition ist noch nicht gekHirt,
wahrscheinlich stammt sie aus einer alJgemeinen Enzyklopadie.
Zum Schlu6 des Textes wird die Proportionslehre erkHirt und mit einem
Diagramm veranschaulicht. 2o Dieser Abschlu.8teil ist wiederum Boethius' entnommen.
Mit seinen kurzgefa.8ten, jedoch keinesfalls so extrem knappen Formulierungen
wie bei de la Fages Vocabuiarium, gibt das DijfinilOrium des anonymen -
hOchstwahrscheinlich italienischen - Verfassers einen umfassenden Uberblick der
Grundelemente der theoretischen und praktischen Musiklehre des ausgehenden
MitteJalters. Zwar bringt es musikhistorisch gesehen keine einmalige Gedanken oder
originelle Begriffsbestimmungen, verrat jedoch, was fUr einen Gebildeten der
damaligen Zeit von besonderem Interesse war, und ist damit ein nicht ganz unwichtiges
Zeugnis der spatmittelalterlichen Bildungsgeschichte.
18 f.I46r-v
19 p.405
20 f.l46r-147r
130
EDITION
Sigla fontium
Du = Kommentar Sonet vox too in auribus meis zu Hugo Spechtshart von Reutlingen,
Flores musicae, gedruckt 1488, Strassbourg. AuBer dieser QueUe benutzte ich die
Handschrift Ms. 70 der Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit Gent, cI503-1504, f.lr-33 v .
Guido, microl. = Guido Aretinus, Micrologus, hg. J. Smits van Waesberghe, CSM IV
(Roma, 1955)
131
Explicatio abbreviaturarum
2 MusichaJ om. Hu
4 Boetius) Que teste Boelio Hu inteosiones et remissionesl inleDsionem et remissionem Hu vel) et Hu
6 Mim] tum Hu
7 Musica est ars] Musica igitur ars est Bu
8 est] om. Bu a musis) a ,..-Ja.1. graeco Bu
132
9De diffinitione musiee, require in principio huius operis et quid sit musicus et
differentia inter mu < sicum > et ca < ntorem > et alia pu1cra.
IOMusica est ars spectabilis et suavis, cuius sonus in celo et in terra modulatur.
11 Musica est disciplina, que in carminibus multis extollitur argumentis. Item musica est
disciplina cantilenarum. Item musica est omne carmen.
12Musica est di <s>cipJina, quae de numeris loquitur, qui ad aliquid sunt. Qui
inveniuntur in sonis, ut duplum, triplum, quad < r> upJum, sesqualter et eet.
13Musica est scientia bene modulandi.
14Guydo: Musica est motus vocum in arsim et thesim.
15+Va.+: Musica est materia quaedam pertinet +cat+ et eet.
16 est] om. Bu
17 Boetius] Boetius vero Bu est] add. Bu: inquit et) Et reguJariter Bu
19 Soous est) ldcirco definitur sonus IM i < d est> ] in ms
20 Sonus est casus modulate vocis) sonus vero moduJalae vocis casus IM modulate) modu1ata ms
intensione] intentione IM
133
DE VOCE
24Albertus Magnus: Vox est percussio aeris expirati ad artariam.
2sBoetius: Vox est aeris ictus auditu sensibilis quantum in ipso.
26Item: Vox est aeris spiritus verberatus.
DETONO
27Flores musices cap. 3: Tonus est perfectum spatium duarum vocum invicem
plene sonantium.
28Item: Tonus est assotiatio duarum vocum invicem plene sonantium, quod redit
in idem, sive fiat intensio sive remissio, scilicet iungendo ut re, re mi et econverso.
29De tono per doctores: Prima igitur coniunctio phtongorum tonus est, quem
autores musice nuncupaverunt: tonum, diastema, cola, emelis et sesquiottavum.
3°Boetius: Omnis tonus coniunctione et quantitate duorum phthongorum semper
con si stit.
31Encheridion Ubaldi: Tonus est legittimum spatium a sono in sonum.
32Guido: Tonus dicitur a tonando, id est sonando.
33Remigius: Tonus vere et sonus idem sunt. Sed distantia inter eos est, quod
sonus in una corda potest fieri et tonus vero in duabus fit.
34Guido: Omnis tonus acuta eius vox habet 8 spatia, gravis veTO 9.
35ldem: Tonus in musica sexquiottava, in proportionibus numerorum, id est 9:8,
in gramatica colon, epogdous in arithmetica, diastema melis.
24-26 B urtlus,
. mus. opusc. 1 , 8 ,53
29 cf. Marcbettus, lucidarium 2,3,2; Bonaventura, brev. coil. 14,14
30 Marchettus, lucidarium 2,2,3; Bonaventura, brev. coli . 14,10
31 Marcbettus, lucidarium 2,13
32 Marchettus, lucidarium 2,2,2; Bonaventura, brev. colI. 14,10
33 Marcbettus, lucidarium 2,1,2; Bonaventura, brev. coli. 14,9
34 cf. Guido, micro\. 6,11
35 cf. Marchettus, lucidarium 2,3,8; Bonaveotura, brev. colI. 14,22
24 A1bertus MagnusJ Vox, juxta AJbertum eo Jibro capitulo de voce Bu artariam] arteriam Bu
2j Boetius] Vel vox secundum Guidonem, capitulo primo suae Musices Bu ipso) add. Bu: est
26 Vox] add. Bu: ut quibusdam placet vetberatus] add. Bu: quod idem est., unde verba sunt nuncupata
27 Hie passus omiltit in opere suprascriplo
30 coniunctione] coniunctionibus MoRo phthongonun] add. MoRo: hoc est duorum sonorum
33 sunt] est MaBo distantia] diastema distantia MaBo quod] quia MaBo
134
36Flores musices capitulo quarto: Tonus est regula naturam et formam seu
debitum cursu m cantus regularis determinans, ad differentiam cantus irregularis, scilicet
sicut in ascendente in Yhesu in navicuJam et in Benedicta sit creaJrn, que regulariter
sunt 8. toni, a quibusdam sexto, a quibusdam tertio coaptantur tono.
37Item tonus est regula que de omni cantu in fine diiudicat. Item
44Mutatio est variatio nominis sive note in eadem spatio, linea ac sono, et potest
fieri in quolibet loco manus, ubi 2-e vel 3-es voces nomine sunt diverse, que quidem
sub una sola lictera includuntur, scilicet in r ut, A re, ~mi, ela et bfa mi < .. . >
45Mutatio est unius vocis pro a1tera vicaria prestatio.
16 ad differeotiaml praem. Hu: Dicitur autem regularis irregularisJ add. Hu: seu irregularium qui solent
indiffereotus in diversis principiis incboari, et inchoariis finalibus terminari . scilicet sicut in] Et sic patet
in hiis Hu in (Yhesu .. . )) om. Hu in (Benedicta ... )] om. Hu a quibusdam sex to] et tamen a quibusdam
sexto Hu a quibusdam tertio] et a quibusdam tertio Hu
40 idem est] etiam idem est Bu
41 est) vero est Bu aurem] aures Bu iniocunda] injucunda Bu
42 ut tertia] pramt. Bu: Compassibilis est
43 Incompassibilis] Incompassibiles Bu; add. Bu: vero sunl quae alio modo ecmeles DUOCupatur, videlicet
vocum quattuor sive septem, vel undecim cum similibus CODDellio.
44 Mutatiol add. Bu: igitur, ut dicunt et potest fieri] Dicunt ulterius quod mutatio potest fieri Bu
scilicet in] laI. incompl.
135
CANTUS FIGURA TUS
47Cantus figuratus est quedam vocum fractio vellevitas ex contrapuncti gravitate
edita. 48 Tria in cantu consideranda sunt, scilicet modus, tempus et prolatio.
MODUS
49Modus est coniuntio soni temporisque longis mensurati.
TEMPUS
5O'fempus est duratio subcessiva vel est numerus motus.
PROLATIO
51 Prolatio a proferendo dicitur, quia, cum tempus dividitur in partes, melius
profertur.
LIGATURA
52Ligatura est duarum pluriumve simul tenentium nolarum adunatio, et est
duplex, scilicet ascendens et descendens.
PUNCTUS
53Puntus est quid minimum in quantitate, et quid maximum in potestate.
PAUSA
54Pausa est vocum a < d > missio vel est aspiratio.
136
ALTERATIO
55 Alteratio, proprie sumta, est mutatio de qualitate in qualitatem, vel est
duplicatio note.
DIMINUTIO
s6Diminutio est quedam fractio notularum.
SINCOPA
·S7Sincopa est divisio valoris alicuius note per partes separatas, que numerando
ad invicem reducuntur. 58Sincopa est aliquarum nolarUm ad invicem per intermedia
divisarum insimul reductio.
NUMERUS
59Numerus apud Isidorum est multitudo ex uni'tatibus constituta et dicitur
numerus a nummo et a sui frequentatione vocabulum sumsit. 60Unus a greco nomen
trahit grece enna, id est unus.
NUMERI DISTINCTIO
61Triplex est numerus, scilicet numerus numerans, numerus numeratus, et
numerus, quo numeramus. 62 Et distinguitur etiam in duas partes numerorum, alius par,
alius impar. Item parium a1ius pariter par, a1ius pariter impar. Inparium vero alius
primus et simplex, a1ius secundus et compositus, et alius mediocris.
PROPORTIO
63Proportio est duorum terminorum ad se quedam comparatio, terrninos autem
vOCO numerorum summas.
ss dupiicalio note} convert. Bu; praem. Bu: Vel alteratio hie celebrata est proprii valoris, secundum
vocem, formae idest
S6 est] nihil aliud est quam Bu fractio quedam] conven. Bu
57 est) igitur est Bu
59 Numerus) Numerus igitur Bu
6] est] igitur est Bu
137
64 Vel sic: proportio est habitudo seu comparatio unius quantitatis ad aliam, scilicet
equalitati < s> et inequalitatis, vel secundum Boetium scilicet alia rationalis alia
irrationalis.
PROPORTIONALIT AS
6sProportionalitas est equarum proportionum collectio et consideratur tripliciter,
scilicet arismetrice, geometrice et armonice. 66Ari < smetrica> unum, duo, tres,
geo < metrica > unum, duo, quattuor, armonica tres, quattuor, sex. 67Inter has tres
medietates proportionalitas quidem proprie et maxime geometrica nuncupatur.
CANTILENARUM GENERA
68Genera cantilenarum eadem sunt: diatonus per semitonum, tonum et tonum .
Cro < maticus > per semitonum et se < mitonum > et tria semitona. Enarmonicus per
diesim et diesim et ditonum dividuntur.
MONOCORDUM
69Monocordum est lignum longum quadratum in modum casse, et intus
concavum in modum cithare, super quo posita corda eius sonitu varietates vocum facile
comprehendit. 70Et dicitur a monos, quod est unum, et corda, quasi unum habentem
cordam.
MONOCORDIUNVENTOR
71Inventor huius fuit Pithagoras magister Grecorum et doctor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
63-64 Burtius, mus. opusc. 3,12,69 & 3,12,71
65 B urtJus,
. mus. opusc. 3,17,103
66-67 Burtius, mus. opusc. 3,17,106
68 cf. Boethius, inst. mus. 213,20
69 Anonymus de la Fage, p. 405
69-70 Hugo, flor. mus. cap. Il
64 Vel sic] add. Bu: quod idem est aliam] add. Bu: Et haec est duplex vel secundum Boetium] diff. Bu
6S est] igitur est Bu et (consideratur)] add. Bu: nota quod considera.tur tripliciter] convert. Bu
66 Arismetrica] arithmetica proportionalitas Bu
67 lnterJ Usque inter Bu
69 est] om. Fa concavumJ cavum Fa quo] quod Hu; quem Fa cordal chorda sonat Fa eius] cuius Fa
comprebendit] comprebendis Fa
70 babentem] babens Hu
71 diff. Hu
138
NUMERUS QUADRATUS
72Quadratus numerus est ille, qui gemina dimensione in equa concreverit, ut bis
duo 4, ler tres 9, quater 40r 16.
QUADRUPLA
I IIII XVI LXII 11 CeLVI
Qui V XX LXXX CCCXX
ncu XXV C CCCC
P CXXV D
la DCXXV
12 ille] om. IM
13 Regula] Regulae IM utihs-caleulationibusJ om. IM ad inveniendasj inveniendi IM
7.. quolibel] quollibet IM
7S CCL<V>I] CCLXI ms
139
Uszl6 VIKARIUS
CanJus as a term had various meanings in medieval theory.2 One that we meet
In treatises particularly frequently -- which is, if not entirely forgotten, rarely
remembered nowadays -- is what we usually call a hexachord today, thereby using a
term rather exceptional (as opposed to cantus) in medieval theories. 3 Apart from and
I The musical theoretical material I shall briefly be trealing here is the subject of my thesis for a degree at
the Musicological Faculty of the Academy of Music in Budapest. Prof. Janka Szendrei and Prof. Uszl6
Dobszay are my tutors to whom I am most grateful for their support. My thesis will include the material
prepared for publication accompanied by a Hungarian translation and notes with a more thorough
treatment of the problems raised by the material in question. Thus, at this stage of my research, it was not
possible for me to draw definitive conclusions in every respect touched upon in the present paper. --
Apart from my professors, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to dr. Michael Bernbard
(Munich) and dr. Elzbieta Witkowska-Zaremba (Warsaw) who, by inviting me to their respective
institutions, made it possible for me to look. into sources unavailable in Hungarian libraries and who also
helped me with their advice.
2 We can look up e.g. Tinctoris, Tenninorum musicae d!ffinitorium, for four different uses of the term
cantus. Cf. the brief entry "Cantus " by Owen Janders in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and
Musicians [TNG], ed. Stanley Sadie (London, 1980), 3:737. See further the various uses of the term
collected by Margerete Appel, Tenninologie in den mitlelalterlichen MusikrrakraJen. Ein Beitrag zur
musikalischen Elementarlehre des Mitrelalters (Inaugural Diss., Bottmp, 1935).
3 E.g . Adam von Fulda, a late l5th-century German theorist, after giving a quite general definition to
canl us , immediately identifies them wilh the hexachords: "Cantus autem, quem Graeci odam, nos
aliquando laudem vocamus, est melodia ex sono, tono & modo per vocem vivam prolala. Dicitur ergo
male canere in organis, in buccinis in citharis. [.. . ) Hunc antiqui triplicem esse voluerunt, scilicet
naturalem, moll em et durum. Sed postquam Manum praeceptores invenere, insuper & litterales locales
unacum vocibus, compertum est, cantum dupliciter capiendum fore, scilicet general iter & specialiter.
Generaliter: & manebit prima divisio; sunt enim tres in generali cantus, videlicet naturalis, b. mollaris, &
H. duralis . Specialiter: & erunt septem in manu cantus, duo naturales, duo b. mollares, & tres H.
durales.· See Martin Gerbert, ScriplOres Ecclesiaslici de Musica Sacra, 3 vols. [GSI (SI. Blaise, 1784; repr.
Hildesheim, 1963), 111:343. -- The most comprehensive work on the medieval way of thinking about
hexachords is by Gaslon G. Allaire, The Theory of Hexachords, Solmizatioll alld the Modal System. A
Practical AppliCaJion, Musicological Studies and Documents 24 (American Institute of Musicology ,
1972). In his book Allaire draws upon numerous We...tem European sources less frequently examined
from which several interesting passages comparable to the source we are now to discuss can be read in
quotation. For the forming of the hex achordal system, see Georg Lange's basic study, "Zur Geschichte
der Solmisation", in SammelMnde der lnternationalen MusikgesellschaJt 1(1899/1900), pp.535-622 and
the entry "Hexachord" written by H. Oesch and M. Ruhnke, in Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 00.
Friedrich Blurne (Kassel, 1949-1979),6:349-358. -- Among the very rare cases when we come across the
expression hl!XacMrdum, are some passages in Ramos de Pareia's Musica Practica. Used later by Georg
Rhau, it can still be considered more or Jess exceptional.
4Cf. M. Bent - L. Lockwood - R. Donnington - St. Boonnan. "Musica ficta". in. TNG. 12:802-811.
Can/us ./iaus as used in our Hungarian source in the framework of cantus pliJnus had become a subject
almost unavoidable by 1500.
5 See Csaba Csapodi. "Magyarorsugi k6dexelc a becsi Osterreichische Nationalbibliothekban"
{Hungarian Codices in the Vienna ONbJ. in Magyar Konyvszemle 1979, pp. 39 1-400. The prominent
presence of the saints speciaJly honoured in Hungary in the course of the book (in the Calender, the
suffragia, and the Litany) proves its Hungarian provenance.
6 Despite its modest appearance the codex is a Book of Hours. All the decisive elements -- The Calender,
the Offices of the Virgin, the Septem psaJm; poenitenr;ales, the Litany of All Saints, Suffrag;a and the
Vigilia mortuorum -- plus some secondary or supplementary elements - like the Obsecro te or thirteen out
of the Fifteen Psalm; graduales make up the whole first part of the codex.
7 According to Csapodi, op.cit .• the codex was written between 1465 and 1467. These two dates are
undoubtedl y based on the one (" 1465") on f. 221 r, at the end of the Commune sanctorum, and the other
("Anno 141xmo septimo") on f.233r. This book of Hours, however, is not at all mentioned in Franz
Unterkircher's catalogue, Die datierten Handschrifien der Osterreichischen Nationalbibliothek, 4 vols.
(Wien, 1969-1976).
8 In the first half of this century, a short review was published on the liturgical material of the codex
concerning medieval Hungary, among which an early linguistic record, a fragment of the earliest known
Hungarian translation of the Ten Commandments, was also discovered. See Ferenc Dory. "NyelvtOrteneti
adatok" [Data to Linguistic HistoryJ, in Magyar Nyelv 1924, pp.83-88.
9 There is some possibility of differentiating between two handwritings in the musical theoretical
material, because two different kinds of brownish ink are clearly discernible. Their mingling on several
pages, however, suggests that we can rather speak of a difference in the layers and in the writing
materials than in Iha actual hands.
10 I would like to express my special indebtedness to Miss Edit Madas, a paleographer and a member of
the Fragmenta Codicum research group (Budapest), for giving me a great amount of much valued help in
transcribing the Latin text of the source from the very beginning of my study. -- In describing the codex I
also draw upon a consultation with Frau dr. Eva Irblich (Handscbriftensarnrnlung of the Osterreichische
NatiooaJbibliothek, Vienna). Dr. 1rblich kindly authorized me to publish some pages of the codex with
musical theoretical material in photographic reproduction. Both for the opportunity of our consultation
and for the authorization I am very greatful to her.
142
FIG. I. SOURCE: Codex Vindobonemis Palatinus 3571
Liber precum:
Preces private et quae publice Tecitari solent,
Officium defunctorum,
Psalmi poenitentiales et gradales,
Cum calendario praemisso.
233f. Octavo. Saec.15.
CONTENTS: 11
[f.I
11]12
11 There are traces of at least two different layers of folialion in the codex. (See e.g. the page on Fig. 68
with the old folio number.) I am always referring to the more recent ODe.
12 Ff.! and II refer to two sheets which had originally been stuck on the inner side of the binding of the
codex but were later on removed -- probably in search of old fragments. An upside-down woodcut can be
seen on f.lv while OD f.lIv some quotations from the Holy Fathers were gathered together by one of the
users of the book - . Jciod ofjlori~gium which continues on the lower part of f.233v and on f.I*r. The
handwriting of this user looks similar to that of the copyist of the musical theoretical notes.
\3 Folio-numbers in bold refer to the larger-sized, inserted papers that originally did not belong to the
codex.
14 Here two fragmentary leaves have been joined together. The lower part of this folio originally did not
beloDg to the upper part. After this leaf two more ones had been cut out from the codex.
15 This material was written by yet another hand.
16 Remains of glue cover the surface of this page and of f.23lr. This very fact CID be in connection with
the reason why both of these pages were left blank.
143
152r-226v [Commune sanctorum followed by the liturgy for the feast of the Ten
Thousend Martyrs]
152 r : Incipit Commune Sanctorum ...
221 r: in festo x milia martyrum
pages, larger-sized leaves alien to the codex were also used and fitted into the book. IS
All in all, we have seventeen small-sized pages plus six larger ones filled with
notes. Text, however, is only on less than half of these papers since fourteen pages
were used exclusively for illustration.
Although texts and figures seem far from being linked together -- in fact no
references to any table can be read -- both deal with obviously similar problems of the
tonal system. In any case, not only tables and texts are handled somewhat independently
of one another, but one or two pages with continuous text also make up separate
chapter-like units. These sections have neither headings nor paragraphs. The appearance
of these notes strongly suggests that the material was prepared for personal use.
Either in full or in their parts, the texts could well have been copied from one or
more models. Corrections of errors typical of copying makes this evident. 19 As far as
the tables are concerned, the probability of copying is more questionable. What is
striking here, is that three of them appear not only once but three times in the codex in
17 It is impossible to look at the whole verso of this leaf because, side by side with three more sheets of
paper and parchment, it is stuck on the inner side of the back binding.
18 The material of the codex proper was written on paper; the sizes of the pages are: cl46l7x 110; the
prepared lining and the margins -- although not employed on the pages used by the writer of the
musically related material -- can be seen very well throughout the book. The sizes of the four larger-sized
inserted leaves are: c143x210/15.
19 On f. Bv we find the word idem subsequently inserted in the text . In addition to Ihis one, there are
three more pages where crossed.-out groups of words appear: OD ff.llr and 13r the copyist obviously must
have looked at the wrong line since both passages in question, clearly decipherable in spite of the
crossing. figure later on on the same respective pages. The last crossing.-oul OD f.23Ov, although less
simple to explain, does not speak: against the fact that the text might be a copy either. (For the passage in
question, see 0.39 of this study.)
144
almost completely identical form and always arranged in the same consecutive order.
Even though the differences may appear relatively minor between the different versions
of a table, mainly consisting of minute details in the lay-out or in the heading, they
make it conceivable that the illustrations might have been prepared somewhat
independently of the models. 20 It is true that so far exact parallels (promising
identification of parts at least) have only been found for the written material . However,
before analysing the pages with text let us turn to the tables which -- more
comprehensive in their range of issues -- will perhaps give us a fairly clear picture as
far as the compiler's interest is concerned.
To begin with, on f.148 v , where the second group of notes begins in our source,
there is a representation of the Greek system entitled "scala greca seu pitagorica" (see
the facsimile and its transcription on fig.2a and b) supplemented with what the copyist
thought to be the "divisio boeciana ", very little corresponding with the names of the
tetrachords given by Boethius. 21 Although not completely incorrect in the use of Greek
names appearing on the table, it is still a basically erroneous representation of the
Syslema Teleion. In fact, it is a misinterpretation intended to make the illustration
conform to the medieval gamut. Apart from other inaccuracies, here the five
tetrachords, known from Boethius as settled in two partly diverging scales -- the
Greater and the Lesser Perfect System (see fig.3 taken over from Gafurius) -- are
arranged in a continuous line. The figure in the Hungarian source is not the only false
representation of this scale. It is in Nicolaus Wollick's Opus Aureum22 (see fig.4) that
we find a distortion of the "scala greca" comparable to that of the Hungarian codex. We
find this in a work that lies very close to the Hungarian source both in character
regarding its structure and methodology and in the time of its composition. Whatever
the origin of this "tradition" might have been, research into sources with
representations, faulty like the ones we are discussing now, may put us on the right
track.23
20 A possible explanation for the reappearance of certain tables might be that they were rewritten as an
exercise.
21 See A.M. T.S. Boetii De Institurione Arithmetica Libri Duo. De Institurione Musica Libri Quinque, 00 .
Godofredus FriOOlein (Lipsiae, 1867), pp.218-219 (Book i, Cbap.25-26): ·Sed diligentius intuenti
quinque, non ampJius, tetrachorda repperiuntur: hypaton, meson, synemmenon, diezeugmenon,
hyperboleon. r... ] Albinus autern earum nomina Latina oratione ita interpretatus est, ut hypatas
principales vocaret, mesas medias, synemrnenas coniunctas, diezeugmenas disiunctas, hyperboleas
excelJentes .•
22 Die Musica Gregoriana des Nicolaus Wollick, Opus aureum, KiJln 1501, pars 1111, ed. KJaus Wolfgang
Niem3J1er (Koln und Krefeld, 1955). -- As can be noticed, Wollick gives the Latin names for the
tetrachords in their correct form.
23 Passages in treatises where the Greek tetrachords are enumerated in a continuous row without any
reference to notes (liJce the one quoted from Boethius in D.21) might have led to a misunderstanding when
these names were subsequently associated with the medieval gamut. Cf. also Engelbert VOQ Admont, who
somewhat confusingly picks up Boethius' words in his De musica, Book i, chap. IS, in GS, II:297-298.
Furthermore, if one looks up some less une<{uivocal figures in the De Institutione Musica (see "Descriptio
145
l
Ij
r
~
I
I
1. pag.343 addenda" in the Friedlein-edition referred to in n.21 of this study). it seems that one cannot
preclude the possibility of Boethius himself having been one of the causes of misreading. - The question
of the different designations for the tetracbords in medieval theory is discussed in Rudolf Steglich. Die
Quesliones in Musica. Ein Choraltrabal des l.t!nlraien MitlekJuers und ihr murmajJlicher Vervasser
Rudo/fvon St. Trond (1070-J138) (Leipzig. 1911; repr. Wiesbadeo, 1970). pp. l0S-120. -- The problem
of the faulty representation of the Greek system in the Hungarian source has been elucidated to me by dr.
M. Bernhard. It was also be who drew my attention to another example with a similarly distorted
illustration of the monochord. A brief comparison with this figure. which was made in two copies
probably by the same 13th-century hand (see both in J. Smils van Waesbergbe, Musikerz.iehung: Lehre
und Theorie do Musik im Millelaller, Musiltgeschicble in Bildem IIIt3 (Leipzig, 1969], pp.84-S5), and
wbich is to be found in a manuscript also from Hungary (now in Vienna, shelf number Cpv55),
containing a collection of treatises, deserves some comments. The tetracbords rearranged in a continuous
line seems to be in common here and in the type of representation we have dealt with so far. Still, several
essential distinctions can be observed as well. E.g. this time Greek names are not only distorted but also
in some confusion when "Trite", a, and "Synemenon", h, are two different notes of the gamut. Besides,
and more importantly, the whole system is shifted a tone lower, Proslambanomenos being identified as r
instead of A. Considering such crucial divergencies, however tempting it might be, no direct connectiou
between the two types of the misinterpretioo of the Greek system seems plausible.
146
Divisio boeciana Scala greca seu pitagorica
nethe yperboJeon
tetracordum excellencium
diezeusis
rcc paranete yperboJeon
bbH tritte yperboleon
aa nethe diezeugmenon
paranete diezeugmenon
tetracordum superacutorum tritte diezeugmenon
{: paramese
synaphe nethe synnemeson
tetracordum acutorum et paranete synnemeson
affinalium
EH tritte synnemeson
mese
diezeusis
lycanos meson
tetracordum fina1ium
synaphe f: parhyppatemeson
yppatemeson
1ycanos yppaton
parhyppate yppaton
tetracordum gravium hyppate yppaton
{! prosJambanomeonon
Continuing the study of the tables, one will have the impression that the
illustrations of a whole treatise on can/us planus have been collected here. This time,
however, we shall only examine the three most interesting tables that are likely to have
been the most important ones for the copyist as well, since it is these that occur in three
versions in the materia1.
The first of them, a "scala latina tocius musice" (see fig.5), represents the gamut
supplied with the system of mutation. Contrary to similar figures from earlier centuries,
on the right-hand side, the fina1s of the modes are indicated and, interestingly enough,
not only in their "proper seats" but outside them as well. When several transposed
modes (from C-faul gravis up to g-solrew acuta) are thus displayed, too, it is also
marked whether B-flat or B-natural should be sung.
147
r=
15.16 e" I,
T r=
1728 d" I. ~)I
T
I~ c" <01 r.
S
2~ h' mi
i\p
2181 hb' fa
S
Nete hyptrbolalon 2JG.I • ~ 11; re
T
Puanele hyperbolaion 25~l g' sol re
T ~
Trile h)1>erbol.uun 2918 f' r. ul
S r= ":7
N.I. ,1I"'''gmenun 3072 • la mi
Paranete dieuugl"e,'On
T
T
J..J58 d'
re='
b '01 . N.le syn.mmenon
ProilllnbanomenOJ
T
9216 ,\ . IS'" minur ..,ntiton~. 256:2-'3)
lAp =apolome (rnajor semllone).
cl~
T 2187::!r}I,QI
(Galnm.] lo.1Ii8
FIG. 3. The Diatonic System of Guido with the Indication of both the Greater and the Lesser Perfect
System in Franchinus Gafurius' Pracrica musicae, Milano 1496 (quoted from The Practica musicae of
Fr. Gajurius, trans. and 00. by I. Young (MilwauJcee and London, 1969], p.16)
148
125 Haec scala per P y t hag 0 r a m trad1ta atque
inventa est ,quam "enerabilis B 0 e t h 1 U 8 propter
d1scordiam in Lat1num trans!igurav1t,ut Latini eo
mel1us Bubtilis8imam 8c1ent1am acquirere valeant.
e
dd Nete hyperboleon
JIyperboleae cc Paranete hyperboleon
Excellontea
bb Trite hyperboleon
aa Nete diezeugmenon
Diezeugmenon g Paranete diezeugmenon
Dlaiunctao
~ Trite diezeugmenon
e Paramese
d Nets synemmenon
SynelDJUenae c Paranete synemmenon
Coniunctae
b Trite synemmenon
a Mess
Mesae G Lichanos meson
Mediae
F Parhypate meson
E Bypate meson
D Lichanos hyp~ton
C Parhypate ~aton
Hypstas
Principales B Hypate hypaton
A Proalambsnomenos
r ammaut spud Latinos /p.19/
FIG. 4. 'scala per Pytbagoram tradita atque inventa" according to Nicolaus Wollick, Opus aureum, Koln
1501 (after Die Musica gregoriana des N. Wo/lick. .. , pp.26-27)
rebound,24 although some fluctuation of the ambilus on these three figures IS not
24 Not only the pages with the theoretical notes but also some fragmentary glosses on the edges of the
liturgical pages make it conceivable that the codex was actually rebound and the leaves Bot slightly
trimmed in the process. The probability that the codex was not only written but also bound in Hungary is
greatly reinforced by the fact that some pages from a notated Antiphonal written in pure mid-14th-century
Hungarian notation were used for the binding which becomes evident from the parcluneot found 00 the
inside of the front cover. This page shows Respexit Helias, a responsory of Corpus Christ;, with a quite
different melody from that in the Liber Usualis for which, with the help of Prof. DobsDy, I managed to
locate three variants in fifteenth-<:entury Hungarian Antipbonals. For a description of the characteristics
149
-
J
I
J
I
, . ~j
inconceivable.25 The next two pages (see fig.7) are devoted to four different "scales" --
g
'-'- 8 solreut 7us 8us per H, 1us 2us per b
... . .-
~ ~
<1)<1)
~~ 3F ffaut 5us6us
::l ;::l
"0"'0 6 finales lami 3us4us
:I:~
Q)OD 5 solre la lus2us
--
s:: c:
4
3 graves
C faut
BH mi
sol
fa b
5us 6us, 7us 8us
A re la mi
L L ut sol re
F fa ut
as the scribe puts it. These are as follows: first, a "scala H duralis" and a "b mollaris"
and then twoficla scales, one "per b" (with Eb and Ab) and the other "per Ht! (with F#
and CN). Such scales have always been constituted of two hexachords, as we learn from
other theorists, thus scala H duralis e.g. will be made up of a hexachordum durnm and
a hexachordum naturale, the latter being suppressed here.
range bad been generally replaced by a wider ambit. At the same time one cannot dispense with the
question of wbether these variants display different aspects of either the gamut itself or its thooretical
approach.
151
•
I]
.
152
-- ... ~
- I _.:.; . "
~
-_.
_.
153
FIG. 7a. f.14v, Tab.4: 'Scala H duralis' and 'Scaia b mollaris'
154
•.J
.
",
(
~
I
J
4
...:
,\
155
Before we leave the tables, some comments on certain terms might seem
appropriate since they themselves can be indicative of the period. In his Expositio
manus,26 Tinctoris tells us of the clear differences between b rotundwn and H
quadratwn and b molle and H durum, the first two referring to the rounded and the
square-shaped letters respectively, while the second two being used to signify the
proprieras of a given note. 27 It is also this author who uses the adjective b mollaris -- a
secondary word formation parallel to naturalis and duralis 2& -- in connection with
caruus and deducrio.29 The term used in this form seems to have become more
widespread among 16th-century theorists, but -- as far as I know -- was very rarely used
in the 15th century. 30 All three pairs of termini appear in the Hungarian source used
with a similar, though not throughout consistent, distinction. 31
When we now turn to the pages with tex.t to briefly summarize the issues they
deal with, the interesting thing we find is how few problems on the whole are touched
camus, i.e. the hexachords, on which all the
upon. As has already been stated, it is the
discussion is pivoted. As soon as the three camus are distinguished, the modes are
classified as (a) sung "per durum" (3rd, 4th, 7th and 8th modes), (b) sung "per molle"
(5th and 6th modes), and, finally, (c) sung according to the cantus naturalis (Ist and
2nd modes). Transposed modes (1st and 2nd on g and a; 3rd and 4th on a; 7th and 8th
on c) are examined, too. Examples are always explained using solmization syllables
while the most important rules of mutation are also expounded.32 Further on, musica
26 Jobannes Tinctoris, Opera rheoretica, ed. by A. Seay, Corpus Scriptorum de Musica ICSM]22 (American
lnstitute of Musicology, 1975).
27 Op.cit., p.44: "Capitulum V - De proprietatibus. [ •.. ] Et h.ic notandum quod H quadratum et H durum,
b rotundum et h molle multum differunt, namque H quadrum et b rotundum sunt nomina c1avium, sic
dicta ab eorum forma, ut supra in Capitulo tertio patuit, sed H dUJllm et b molle nomina sunt
proprietatum, sic dicta a qualitate vocum fa et mi in locis praedictorum c1avium canendorum. "
28 Even "duralis" came as a relatively late word formation, but appears to h.ave been accepted by theorists
earlier and more generaUy than was "mollaris". E.g . Nicolaus Wollick consistently uses the terms
"duralis" and "naturalis" while using the term "mollis" instead of "rnollaris" .
29 Op. cir., p.45: "Capitulum VI - De deduccionibus. [ ... ]Si tria et bis duo septem efficiunt ut in manu
nostra sint, septem deductiones necesse est, scilicet tres H durales, duae naturales et duae mollares.
[ ... ]Tertia ab ut de F fa ut gravi usque ad la de D la sol re inclusive, et haec est prima b mollaris."
30 One can find "mollaris" sporadically in Conrad von Zabem's Novellus musicae artis /racrarus, though
he also generally uses "mollis·, see Karl-Wemer Gumpel, Die MusiklraJaare Conradr von Zabern
(Wiesbaden. 1956), p.48; cf. also the citation from Adam von Fulda's treatise in n.3 of the present study.
31 To give an idea of the nomenclature of the Hungarian source let me quote a passage where several of
these termini are used. (While quoting I will always use a kind of transcription which tries to conserve as
many peculiarities of the writing as possible including punctuation and the irregular use of capitals. Apart
from foliation, lines are also marked with numbers.) F . 13r: lOmnis volens artificialiter solmisare, debet
40r considerare 2Primo cemat cuiuslibet cantus exordium et mox iudicatur 3ln qua c1ave talis cantus
incipiatur, et quis sit Hduralis 4aut hmollaris Omnis eoim cantus 3ii 4i 7i et 8vi 5tonorum est Hduralis,
mi proprie in bfaHmi requirens 6q uia naturaliter constat de 20 cantu Hdurali qui habet suum ut 7in
gsolreut. Nisi specialiter ibi signatum esset h rotundum, 8tunc enim cantandum est fa in bH.
32 Rules of mutation are primarily discussed on ff.13v and 23Or. The most important ones mentioned here
are as follows: leaping a fourth, a fifth or an octave from mi or fa; how to link canlus durum and molle
with naturalis; mutation within H dura/is and b mollaris; imitation of the octave if a vox is wanted in a
156
flew is introduced with examples such as can/us on B, E, D and F sub/us, the F,
beyond r. Throughout the whole discourse the question of whether to use B-flat or B-
natural in a given musical context remains vita1.
The knowledge our source offers to its reader is obviously selective in nature.
To be sure, there are several issues that would justly be expected in the material. Why
do we not hear anything, e.g., about the intervals, whereas both modus and illlervalium
are used with manifest familiarity?33 Among others, litlerae, c1aves and voces similarly
appear to be unnecessary for the writer to define. Leaving out the possibility that
passages dealing with these subjects did exist but have disappeared since then, 34 all
these must have been part of the copyist's previous knowledge.
Besides selectivity, a constant recurrence of the problems already discussed
characterizes the text. E.g., the question of whether a note above a should be b molle
or H durnm is separately examined in five different chapters. 35 Let us suppose,
however, that the tackling of the problem in five different places is not a mere
confusion in the source. All the more we can do it because tautology is not at all
foreign to the didacticism of treatises at that time. The problem, namely, of whether
you should sing mi or fa moving upwards from a might call for explanation in various
contexts, such as when speaking of the different hexachords36 or modes3? or in
clavis (e.g. la in D solre). Thus cantus on F subtus is also mentioned here though on f.232r this same
can/US only beginning in r re will be used as lID example for canlUS jictus (see Appendix). Moreover, the
rule stating that one should take the voces inferiores wben ascending and the voces ')'uperiores when
descending is also mentioned. Meanwhile the requirement that bH be sung with the right vox is
particularly in the forefront throughout the whole discussion.
33 00 the meaning and use of these and similar basic theoretical concepts in late medieval lTeatises, see
Elzbieta Witkowska-Zaremba. Ars Musica w Xralwwsldch lraiaatach muzycznych XVI wieku [Ars Musica
in 16th-ceotury Krak6w Musical Treatises] (Krak6w, 1986). Here, I would like to express my gratitude
to Mrs. Andrea Szigetvary for helping me with the translation of seleeted parts of this book.
34 Since the copyist did not exclusively use original pages of the codex but other leaves as well, one has
to reckon with the possibility of some of these latter ones having gone astray . However. I would like to
remind the reader of the fact that not even all of the extant leaves have been fully used. more than one of
the pages being left blank. 00 the other hand, there is no denying that the order of the inserted leaves
seems to be iD some confusion. A guessable later position of f.227 is very likely to have been justified by
the identification of parts of the last pages of the source with a known treatise (see further on in this
study) in which the material of f.227 comes up in a later chapter than that of ff.230 and 232.
35 See at the end of ff. II r and I3r. at the befinning of f. lS\r. as well as on ff.23Ov and 232v.
36 f.llr: 20.: .c:antus autem na~ralis .qui. 2 simplicem et mediocrem habet progressum iste esse videtur,
qui sine vanaclOmbus vocum ID se lDvlcem 2lnee magnum habet asceosum nee magnum descensum.
participans cum Hdurali et bmolli Nam ex 23utroque partem recipit. post la semper sequitur fa vel mi
ascendeote per 2am
37 f.15Ir: I In cantibus primi et secundi tonorum. ascendentibus 2uJtra aJamire una tamen nota. cantandum
est fa in bH 3~r b rotundum. Si autem per plures notas ultra alamire 4cantus ascenderit. debet cantari mi
in bH. et fa in csolfaut. ubi non signatur b rotundum. 6In cantibus autern 3ii 4i 7i et 8vi tonorum
proprie 7debet cantari mi in bH, quia naturaliter constant de 20 8cantu HduraJi. qui babet suum fa in
csoJfaut et 9ut in gsolreut. -- We read a similar wording at the end of f.232r : 20 ... Cantus vero primi et 2i
tonorum, quandoque fa. el quaodoque mi modulatur in hH. 21Cum eairn cantus transcendit ab alamire
per 2am tamen vel per unicum gradum. tunc canitur fa in hH per b 22rotundum Quando autem per plures
now seu per plures gradus cantus ulterius procedil, tunc ut plurimum mi canitur 23in bH: et fa in
157
connection with mutation 38 or when explicating how different notes should be linked
with bfahmP9 No matter, though, how convincing such reasoning might seem, the
frequent repetition of issues unambiguously points to the fact that different models were
used by the copyist. In fact, the scope of this source can easily be compared to the
relevant parts of numerous treatises of the type widely disseminated after 1500. So far I
have found such sources in Germany (e.g. Omitoparchus40 , Hermann Finck"1 among
others) and in Poland (e.g. Sebastian z Felsztyna42 , Monetarius43 ). Most of these
works, though, sum up the elementary know/edge of can/us planus only to give an
introduction before leading the reader further on to the study of a more up-to-date part
of musical theory, i.e. the teaching of mensural music and possibly counterpoint, too.
At this point, however, I have to emphasize that no interest in any other kind of music
except for the practice of plain-chant can be traced in this Hungarian source.
Nevertheless, in the text of these treatises one will find that the way of handling
problems is strikingly similar to that in our source. Sometimes even the expressions and
the sentences are almost completely identical. 44 Still, so far, I know of only one single
treatise with which some connection -- either direct or indirect -- of the Hungarian
source seems doubtless.
This treatise, entitled Honulus musices, was written by Udalricus Burchardi who
published it in Leipzig in 1514. 45 (As an Appendix the reader will find a facsimile-
excerpt from Burchardi's treatise set against two passages of the Hungarian source in
which divergencies are analysed in detail.) Generally speaking, it is surprising how
158
many minute differences there are, besides the more basic ones, between the two
otherwise identical texts. The most typical of them are the insertion of comments and
the enumeration of examples -- both unmistakably didactic in nature. On the whole,
consequently, a comparison between the two sources makes us suppose that there had
been an intermediary source -- either a textbook prepared by a teacher or the notes of a
pupil or a student -- which were duplicated subsequently by the copyist of the
Hungarian source. 46
After all, what sort of theoretical work have we treated up till now? As has
already been stated, it seems to be nothing more than extracts from rudimentary
textbook material. Even though it is far from being arranged in a scholarly manner and
in spite of all its apparent disorder, this collection of notes does make an impression of
having some coherence. This impression will be strengthened when we finally establish
that, after thorough examination, the text and the illustrations of the source basically
correspond to each other. This fact undoubtedly speaks for there having been a
consciousness in both the collection and the preparation of the material.
In a source like this, primarily important as a document of the ordinary way a
learned layman in that age thought about musical theory, theoretical problems of greater
importance can be reflected as well. Just like so many other 16th-century treatises, this
source, too, offers an insight into the process through which scala -- fundamentally
meaning a neuter series of notes, i.e. the diatonic scale itself as a whole, ready for
being transposed -- gradually replaced the old hexachords or, rather, cantus, which --
despite their structural aspect -- are likely to have been still melodically conceivedY
46 A starting point for the research into the surroundings in which this Book of Hours might have been
used is offered by the fact that it was the Benedictine Mondsee cloister whence the codex finally got to
the Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek.
47 Cr. WiIliam Drabkin, "Hexachord", in TNG, 8:543. On the history of the two terms durus and moUis
with tbe discussion of the possible logical links between the historically varied uses of them, see
Dahlhaus, "Die tennini dur und moll", Archiv fir Musikwissenschaft 12 (1955), pp. 280-296 .
159
APPENDIX
Ii n
5.:-lmuJrk'.I!:: Oct.)I(.1 ('111[? r fn: or: ere nlllll (;1 (1 n ffTi.:. (- nfl:
luaw.n.!:'1Cil(cirIL~:qhlxt rCI;\III.1I.1ncc .l+ liue Illd('l!!e uC'lfio
£1Jllcq.1 C1I1 ~:tm:l .mc d! CSI mu It.l rt c.lIIr.m r,<,lrlC ill tIC (.U:IIIO
we1t l'{ (unt lRcfr0nf(l:I.,.8ntlpl'Onc. 111)1IT.lnI 11 IHTe it uo. 5(1
qumrlc.16: .l ltll .111.1. 0ffm":1.1 . 11~o ri/nllr.1.!!:r en.
r
~la'J,(,(I1JIT~:ln{l.J~:r! III nil? (,;-1 fll 1(.Hl0C c.ll l1.1nr NI
'«:,0 In c1.1U1 b'J~ll n \11 III 11':; ~/1l1n r.~' Id rfI <'1 er (er: IIrn etlO
(c'r<'nlt. n '111 In Cf.1uf rr.1I1 (1 (l'lrc 1111.111 cl.ll1l1 f:1 cilnlr.
C"C 1110 p.1CctHC 1/1 p;ccqm('nc ((1]11(11[1,
l
11('13 in/iob /) [n br;"!~rni
1;l.1bcr "rCCC !nc-lIt (q
Ftn OnfllO Cjlllf,U /1mollilr10 ne:"ln tpur;UIO III (;111[11 [r ~ rp·=nro Cl':
r.l.
I':c(rn 0 .1 1 :1b(1'l1 ruu rotulhjllrp!clxlldullr:1l1 cnnru QU[ C!1I n~ ,r.1
rp.:lir':.ld Ipillm C}: rOIlO ccgnOr(J[ur,~J1d~, .
• Words in brackets ( ) can be considered inserted into the text when compared to the parallel passage in
Burchardi's work; when the wording of a sentence is only slightly different and has the same meaning as
that of Burchardi's or when a synonym is used, words in consideration are iJallased; a change in the word
order is marked with a I; when something is missing as compared to the text of Hortulus, it is indicated
with a caret ~ placed between the words.
160
f.230 r : ISolmisacio est debita cantus per sex voces musicales expressio. Unde
cantus ut hie capitur. Dicitur quelibet regulata 2notarum sive melodie expressio.
Quitquid enim debita arte contextum/est, ita ut (regu)atur) cantari possit. .. Hic cantus
3 vocatur A (Ad solmisandum igitur quemlibet cantum artificialiter, sciendum est. .. )••
f.232r: ICantus est duplex, scilicet fictus vel irregularis et regularis. Irregularis
est in cuius solmisacione cantantur voces (ficte) que/ 2in cJavibus non ponuntur. Vel
A
est qui ex coniunctis componitur, .. quando (scilicet in Bmi ut,) in cfaut re, in dsolre
mi, in 3elami fa, (in ffaut sol, in gsolreut la fictim) canitur. (Vel cum in rut re, in are
mi, in Bmi fa, 4in cfaut sol, in dsolre la··· fictim canitur. Item quando in elami ut, in
ffaut re, in gsolreut mi, in alamire 5fa, in bH sol, in csolfaut la fictim exprimitur. Item
quando in dsolre ut, in elami re, in ffaut mi, 6in gsolreut fa, in alamire sol, in bH la
fictim cantatur Et sic de aliis in 8vis existentibus.) .. Regularis 7(est) in cuius
solmisacione sumuntur voces in clavi bus posite et [n]ulle exteme. Hoc est in quo nulla
ponitur coniuncta SEt est duplex, scilicet Hduralis et bmo/laris: Hduralis est qui ex
naturali et propria (sua) melodia mi postulat 9in bfaHmi, dictus a Hduro quia in clave
incepta a littera H habet vocem duram scilicet mi(, ascendendo per tonum). lOBmollaris
(est) qui ex naturali et propria sua melodia falpostulat in bH, dictus a bmolli, quia llin
littera b habet vocem mollem scilicet fa, (ascendendo per semitonium). An autem
cantus quisque bmollaris sit an Hduralis, 12in cantu transposito ex presencia et absencia
b rotundi deprehenditur, in can tu autem non transposito idipsum ex 13tono cognoscitur.
Unde ... ••••
•• Here the text of the Hungarian source continues rather extensively discussing the rules of solmisation .
••• This last example of a transposed hexachord is identical with the one mentioned under Quinta regula
in Burcbardi's next chapter .
•••• Further on, the whole chapter on f.232r follows Burchardi with divergencies similar to those we have
seen up to this point.
161
Peter JEFFER Y
For early medieval Christians, Jerusalem and Rome had much in common: Both
were important administrative and pilgrimage centers in the early church. Both had
impressive liturgical traditions that were witnessed by pilgrims from all over the
Christian world, and thus exerted great influence on local liturgies throughout East and
West. I Yet when it comes to the history of their chant traditions, the two cities are quite
different. The kinds of evidence that are preserved for one city are virtually the
opposite of what survives from the other. From the city of Rome we have two fully-
preserved liturgical chant traditions, the "Gregorian" and the "Old Roman", textually
very similar but melodically related more distantly. Yet we know scarcely anything
about the processes by which these two traditions were formed, and thus we cannot say
how they are related or why they are not identical. From Jerusalem, on the other hand,
we have no notated sources at all for most of the chant repertory. 2 Yet we have many
textual sources dating from the early fifth century to the late tenth, amply documenting
the historical processes by which this repertory was formed. We can thus say a great
deal about how and when the texts of the Jerusalem chant repertory were created, and
came to be assigned to specific services and feasts, as the liturgy developed over the
course of six centuries from the late patristic period to the turn of the millenium -- the
very period from which we have so little information about the development of chant in
Rome.
The purpose of the present paper, then, is to see what could perhaps be learned
from a hypothetical comparison of the two cities. Could we somehow put them together
• I am grateful to the American Council of Learned Societies for a Travel Grant that enabled me to attend
the Cantus Planus meeting in pees.
1 See John F. Baldovin, The Urban Character of Christian Worship: The Origins, Development, and
Mealling of Stalional Liturgy, Orientalia Christiana AnaJecta 228 (Rome, 1987).
2 A partial exception is the Georgian heirmologion, preserved in tenth-century MSS. See my forthcoming
article: "The Earliest Christian Chant Repertory Recovered: The Georgian Sources of Jerusalem Chant",
in Journal of {he American Musicological Society.
The history of the Jerusalem chant tradition can be divided into at least four
developmental stages. To compare Jerusalem with Rome, we will proceed by looking
for a Roman counterpart to each stage.
3 The most important such pilgrim account is the one by Egeria; see Pierre Maraval, ed., Egtrie: Journal
de Voyage (llinbaire) , Sources Chretiennes 296 (Paris, 1982). The best English translation with
commentary is John Wilkinson, Egeria's Travels 10 lhe Holy Land, rev. ed. (Jerusalem, 1981). The other
fourth-century sources will be discussed in my forthcoming book Lilurgy and Chant in Early Chrislian
Jerusalem.
4 The Armenian Lectionary is edited in Athanase Renoux, Le codex armenien Jerusalem 121, 2 vols.,
Patrologia Orientalis 351l and 36/2 (fumhout, Belgium, 1969, 1971). On the date and the manuscripts
see especially vo!. 3511 pp. 169-181 and vo!. 3612 pp. 170-172. Many of the sources of the Jerusalem
rite are listed and described in: Charles Renoux, "Hierosolymitana: A~u bibliographique des
publications depuis 1960", Archiv ftir Liturgiewissenschaft 23 (1981), pp. 1-29, 149-175.
164
Can we find evidence of a comparable development in Rome? Partially. The
Eastern practice of singing responsorial psalmody seems to have been introduced at
Milan about the year 386, and to have spread through much of the West within a
generation. It seems to have been introduced into the Roman mass by Pope Celestine I
(422-432), who had been at Milan as younger man. s It certainly was at Rome by the
mid-fifth century, for it is clearly described in sermons of Pope Leo the Great (reigned
440-461).6
Even if the Roman Mass had responsorial psalms in the early fifth century,
however, it may still have lagged behind Jerusalem in some important respects. We
cannot establish that by this date Rome already had a fixed annual cycle of graduals, so
that the same text was sung on the same feast every year as it was at Jerusalem. Neither
do we know when the graduals, fixed or not, began to be written down in liturgical
chant books, even though both these developments had taken place in Jerusalem by at
least the year 439. Rome seems never to have had a full annual cycle of alleluias before
the seventh century; like the other Western rites we know of, it seems originally to have
made use of a very limited alleluia repertory, largely restricted to the Easter season.
The expansion of the Roman alleluia repertory to the rest of the year may not have
taken place until the seventh and eighth centuries. 7
5 Peter Jeffery, "The Introduction of Psalmody into the RollWl Mass by Pope Celestine I (422-432):
Reinterpreting a Passage in the Liber Ponlificalis·, Archiv fUr Lilurgiewissenschaft 26 (1984), 147-165.
6 Leo clearly describes the singing of Ps 109:4 in his Senno 11/ commemorating his appointment to the
papacy, delivered 29 September 443: ·Vnde et dauiticum psalmum, dilectissimi, non ad nostram
elatiooem sed ad Christi Domini gloriam coosona uoce caotauimus.· See Sancti uonis Magni Romani
Pontificis Tractalus seplem el Mnaginla, ed. Anton Chavasse, Corpus Christianorum, series latina 138
(furnhout, 1973), p. 10. Less clear is his reference to Ps 21 on Passion Sunday in the year 454; though
this psalm is the source of the tract Deus Deus meus assigned to this day in the Gregorian and Old Roman
repertories. See ibid., vo!. 138A, p. 408. This and much other sermon evidence will be fully explored in
my forthcoming book, Prophecy Mixed with Melody: From Early Chrislian Psalmody 10 Gregorian
Chanr.
7 See Terence Bailey, The Ambrosian Alleluias (Egbam, Surrey, 1983), pp. 46-52, 88-91. Thomas
Forrest Kelly. The Benevenran Challl (Cambridge, 1989), pp. 76-77, 119-124. Peter Wagoer, EinftJhrung
in die gregorianischen Melodien, Ill: Gregorianische Formenlehre. Eine choralische StilJamde (Leipzig,
1921), pp. 397-417. Karl-Heinz Schlager, Ihemarischer Kalalog tkr alleslen Alleluia Melodien aus
Handschriften des 10. und 11. lahrhunderts, ausgellommen da.s ambrosianische. all-r"mische uNi all-
spanische Repertoire. Erlanger Arbeiten rut MusiIcwissenschaft 2 (Munich, 1965), pp. 1-9. Jean Claire
and Andre Madrignac. ·Les formules centons des Alleluia anciens·, Eludes gregoriennes 20 (1981), pp.
3-4 plus twelve UODumbered pages of charts; 21 (1986), pp. 27-(45).
165
the Georgian Orthodox church, which were translated from lost Greek texts
representing the Jerusalem liturgy of the eighth century. 8 Already in the seventh
century, however, perhaps even the sixth, someone had collected all these chant texts
from the lectionary, supplemented them with the texts of the Office chants that had not
been recorded in the lectionary, and produced a true chantbook, perhaps the first one
ever created in any branch of Christendom. The original Greek of this book, too, is lost
to us, for we have only the Georgian translation; thus we cannot even be sure of the
book's original title (in Georgian it is called Jadgari, a term of uncertain meaning). It
contains not only the proper Mass and Office texts arranged in liturgical order, but
identifies the modes to which many of their lost melodies belonged, the first substantial
witness to the existence of the Oktoechos. 9
The Western adoption of the eight-mode system is the most significant example
of Jerusalem influence on Western chant, even if (which we do not yet know) the
oktoechos came to the West indirectly (for instance, by way of Constantinople). 10 The
fact that the eight modes are already pervasive even in our earliest Gregorian sources,
but were never adopted at all in the Old Roman chant tradition, shows how dramatic the
Frankish reformulation of the pre-Gregorian tradition received from Rome (whatever
that was) may have been. But it also shows how foreign the modal system was to the
city of Rome itself. In a direct comparison between the two cities, it figures only on the
Jerusalem side.
At Rome, there are indications that at least a core repertory of proper Mass
chants already existed in the seventh century, and may thus be roughly contemporary
with the Jadgari of Jerusalem. In the oldest MSS of the graduale, J1 the repertory of
Mass chants is structured around the calendar of Roman stational churches, which had
achieved its classic form by the early seventh century .12 More recent feasts, introduced
8 Edited in Michel TllTchnischviJi, Le grand lectionnaire de l'eglise de Jerusalem (ve- V//Jt! siecles), 2
vols. in 4, Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 188-189,204-205 (Louvain, 1959-60).
9 See Peter Jeffery, -The Earliest Evidence of the Eight Modes: The Rediscovered Georgian Oktoechos" ,
forthcoming in the Festscbrift for Kennetb Levy.
10 Tb~ complicated question of Jerusalem's direct and influence on Rome and other Western centers is not
the subject of this paper, and will have to be taken up in future studies.
11 The texts of selected early Gregorian manuscripts llTe edited in parallel columns in RentS-Jean Hesbert,
AnlipholUlle Missarum Sextup/ex (Brussels, 1935; repr. Rome, 1968). For the main Old Roman
manuscripts see Paul F. Cutter, Musical Sources of the Old Roman Mass, Musicological Studies and
Documents 36 (Neuhausen-Stuttgart, 1979). An attempt at a more complete list of the early sources is
Peter Jeffery, "The Oldest Sources of the Graduale: A Checklist of MSS Copied Before About 900 AD",
Journal of Musicology 2 (1983), pp. 316-321. The still primitive state of research into this subject is
evident from the fact that, already, this list is in need of considerable revision, expansion, and
improvement. See Michel Huglo's remarks in "Bulletin Codicologique", Scriptor;um 39 (1985), p. 52 ....
12 Theodor Klauser, "Ein vollstiodiges Evangelienverzeichnis der romischen Kirche aus dem 7.
Jahrhundert, erbalten im Cod. Vat. Pal. Lat. 46", RtJm;sche Quartalschrift 35 (1927), pp. 113-134,
reprinted with further comments in Klauser, Gesammelte Arbeiten zur Liturg;egeschichle,
Kirchengeschichte und chrisllichen Archdologie, ed. Emst Dassman, Jahrbuch fUr Antike und
Christentum Ergiinzungsband 3 (Munster, 1974), pp. 5-21. Winfried Bohne, "Eine neuer Zeuge
166
during the later seventh and early eight century, are only inconsistently represented in
these early graduale sources. 13 Those feasts that do occur -- the feasts of St.
Apollinaris, St. George, St. Gregory the Great, the Exaltation of the Cross,
Annunciation, Assumption, Nativity, and the Thursdays in Lent -- have few or no
proper chants that are unique to them, but rather tend simply to re-use texts and
melodies that were already in the repertory assigned to older feasts. 14 This suggests
that, at the time their chants were assigned, there was already a core repertory that to
some degree was regarded as "closed". As new feasts of non-Roman origin were
introduced it was becoming easier simply to "recycle" established chant texts than to
create new ones. The last feast to be supplied with a completely new set of chants was
the feast of the rededication of the Roman Pantheon as the church of Sancta Maria ad
Martyres about the year 609 15 -- and even some of these chants show signs of
dependence on earlier ones. 16 None of this, however, proves beyond doubt that the
stadtr6mischer Liturgie aus der Mitte des 7. Jahrhuoderts: Das Evangeliar Malibu, CA, Paul-Getty-
Museum, vormals Sammlung Ludwig, Katalog Nr. TV 1", Archivftir Liturgiewissenschqft 27 (1985), pp.
35-69. See also Antoine Cbavasse, "L'Organisation stationnale du Car8me romain avant le VIIIe siecle:
une organisation 'pastorale'," Revue des Sciences Religieuses 56 (1982), pp. 17-32.
13 Theodor KJauser, in a review of Hesbert's Antiphonale Missarum Se.xtuplex in Jallrbuch ftir
Liturg;ewissenschaft 15 (1935), pp. 467-469, observed that the feasts in Hesbert's manuscripts seemed to
represent the state of the calendar as it was in the time of Pope Honorius I (625-638), with the addition of
some (but not all) of the feasts introduced later, down to the reign of Gregory III (731-741). See also his
"Die liturgischeD Austauschbeziehungen zwischen der romischen und der friinkisch-deu1schen Kirche vom
achten bis zum elften Jahrhundert", HislOrisches Jahrbuch 53 (1933), pp. 169-189, esp. p. 175; reprinted
in Ge.tammeue Arbeiten, pp. 139-154, especially pp. 143-144. Unfortunately he never pursued this
subject in the same rigorous way he did for the Roman evangeliary, in his book Das rtJmische Capitulare
Evangeliorum: Tate uNi Untersuchungen zu seiner lillesten GeschichJe, 1: 1)!pen,
Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen 28 (Miinster, 2/1972), see especially pp. 184-185.
For the most up-to-date account of KJauser's subject see Cyrille Vogel, Medieval Lilurgy: An
Introduction 10 lhe Sources, transl. and rev. William G. Storey and Niels Krogb Rasmussen (Washington,
D .C., 1986), pp. 342-354; also Antoine Chavasse, "L'epistolier romain du codex du Wurtzbourg: Son
organisation", Revue BinMictine 91 (1981), pp. 280-331. "L'6vang6liaire roman de 645 : Un recueil, sa
composition (f~ons et materiaux)" , Revue BblMictine 92 (1982), pp. 33-75. Such a study of the graduale
calendar is badly needed, and should be undertaken once the complete pUblication of all the early MSS
has been completed.
14 One attempt to deal with this problem is Antoine Chavasse, "Evang6liaire, epistolier, antiphonaire et
sacramentaire: les livres romains de la messe au VIle et au Vme siecle", Ecclesia Orans 6 (1989), pp.
177-255.
IS Louis Duchesne, ed. Le Liber Pontificalis: Texte, Introduction et Commentaire, Bibliotheque des
Ecoles Francaises a Athenes et Rome, ed. Cyrille Vogel, 3 vols. (paris, 1981), 1:317. See Pierre Jounel,
"Le culte collectif des saints a Rome du VUe au IXe siecle", Ecclesia Orans 6 (1989), 285-300.
Translation by Raymond Davis, The Book of Pontiffs (Liher Pontificalis): The Ancienl Biographie.t of the
First Ninety Roman Bishops 10 A.D. 715, Translated Texts for Historians, Latin Series 5 (Liverpool,
1989), p. 62.
16 In particular, the gradual Locus iste borrows the second half of its verse, i.e. the words "exaudi preces
servorum tuorum" and their music, from the gradual Protector noster of Monday in the first week of
Lent. We know that Protector is the original because its text is adapted from Ps 83: 10, 9 (Latin
numbering). It is interesting that the Alleluia f/ Adorabo for this occasion seems to represent a
transitional stage between the earliest type of Alleluia (where the verse ends with the same music as the
Alleluia refrain) and the later, freer type. See Karlheinz Schlager, Alleluia-Melodien, I: his 1100,
MODu.menta Monodica Medii Aevi 7 (Kassel, 1968), p. 672.
167
seventh-century core repertory had been put down in writing; the earliest surviving
manuscripts of Gregorian and Old Roman chant date from the eighth century.
17 On the Sabaitic school. see Jean-Baptiste Pitra, Analecta Sacra Spicilegio Solesmensi Parala 1 (paris,
1876; repr. Farnborough. 1966), pp. XXXVII-XL.
18 For a few that did. see Strunk, "The Latin Antiphons for the Octave of the Epiphany· (1964),
reprinted in Essays on Music in the Byzantine Work} (New York. 1977), 208-219.
19 See Josef Swvertfy, Die Annalen der lmeinischen Hymnetuiichtung: Ein Hatuibuch 1: Die lareinischen
Hymnen bis zum Entk tks 11. lahrhunderts (Berlin. 1964). pp. 110-261.
20 The evidence is least explicit for the first three. The epitapb of Honorius I (625-638) describes him as
"divino in carmine pol/ens.· See Am6d6e Gastou6, Les Origines de chanl romain: L 'Anliphonaire
gregorien. BibJiotheque Musicologique 1 (paris, 1907), pp. 93-94. The Liber POnlijicalis describes Leo
IT (682-683) as ·Vir eloquentissimus, .,. ca.ntelena ac psalmodia praecipuus." and says that Benedict II
(684-685) "se ... in divinis scripturis et cantilena a puerili etate ... exhibuit.· Duchesne u Liber I: 326-7,
359, 363. Davis, The Book. pp. 77-78, 79.
2] •••• quia studiosus erat et capax in officio cantelenae, priori cantorum pro doctrina est traditus.·
Duchesue. Lt! Liber 1:371. Davis. The Book, p. 82.
168
Ecclesiastica in the year 731.22 Anglo-Saxon England boasted a number of singers who
learned and taught the chant "in the manner of the Romans or Kentish people. "23 At
least one of them seems actually to have studied at Rome,24 During the reign of Pope
Agatho (678-681), a certain John, Archcantor of St. Peter's and abbot of St. Martin's,
was brought to England by Benedict Biscop, founding abbot of Wearmouth, to teach the
monks "the yearly course of singing as it was done in St. Peter's in Rome. "25 But
others were said to have learned "Roman" chant in England from fellow Anglo-Saxons,
who were known as "the disciples of the blessed Pope Gregory in Kent. "26 Kent, of
course, was the location of Canterbury, where Augustine and the other missionaries
sent by Pope Gregory had set up their headquarters. It was from there that the Roman
form of Christianity, including the chant, spread to other parts of England,27 at the
expense of the older Celtic ecclesiastical culture. The tendency to see Canterbury as a
kind of outpost of Rome, linked to Gregory, seemed quite natural in England, which
regarded Gregory as its national apostle; this may be behind the tendency to see the
Canterbury chant teachers as "disciples" of Gregory. It was in England that Gregory's
cult first flourished,28 for he "was unpopular in Rome at the time of his death. "29 Since
22 Bertram Colgrave and R.A.B. Mynors, eds., Bede's Ecclesiastical History of The English People
(Oxford, 1969).
23 For example a certain Jacobus Diaconus, who was at York in the second half of the seventh century,
was a "magister ecclesiasticae cantionis iuxta morem Romanorum sive Cantuariorum" who instructed
many . Col grave and Mynors, Bede, pp. 206-207, cf. 192-193.
24 "Nam et ipse episcopus Acca caDtator erat peritissimus, quomodo etiam in liUeris sanctis
doctissimus ... cum quo etiam Romam ueniens multa iIIic, quae in patria nequiuerat, ecclesiae sanctae
institutis utilia didicit." Col grave and Mynors, Bede 530-3. Acca, a contemporary of Bede, eventually
became bishop of Hexham, where he brought in Maban, trained at Canterbury, to teach chant and reform
the local practice. See the next note.
25 Colgrave and Mynors, Bede, pp. 388-389.
26 Putta, who was bishop of Rochester until its destruction by Aethelred in 676, was "maxime autem
moduJandi in ecclesia more Romanorum, quem a discipulis beati papae Gregorii didicerat, peritum."
After the destruction he "went round wherever he was invited, teaching church music," "ubicumque
rogabatur, ad docenda ecclesiae carmina diuertens.· Colgrave and Mynors, Bede, pp. 336-337, 368-369.
Bishop Acca of Hexham is said to have brought in a certain Maban, who had studied with "Gregory's
disciples" at Canterbury, and who restored the deteriorating local chant tradition to its "pristine state":
'Cantatorem quoque egregium, uocabulo Maban, qui a successoribus discipulorum beati papae Gregorii
in Cantia fuerat cantandi sonos edoctus, ad se suosque instituendos accersiit, ac per annos XII tenuit,
quatinus et quae illi non nouerant carmina ecclesiastica doceret, et ea quae quondam cognita longo usu uel
negligentia inueterare coeperant, huius doctrina priscum renouarentur in statum." Colgrave and Mynors,
Bede, pp. 530-531.
27 One person involved in this spread was a certain Aeddi or Eddius Stephanus, the fin;t cantandi
magisTer in Northumbria, who taught a kind of singing that up to then had been known only in the
Canterbury area. H Sed et sonos cantandi in ecclesia, quos eatenus in Cautia tantum nouerant, ab hoc
tempore per omnes Anglorum ecclesias discere coeperunt ... " Colgrave and Mynors, Bede, pp. 334-335.
28 The most recent history of Gregory's cult is: Pierre Joune1, "Le culte de saint Gregoire le Grand",
Gregoire le Grand: Chantilly, Cenrre Culturel Us Fonlaines, 15-19 septembre 1982, ed. lacques
Fontaine, Robert Gillet, Stan Pellistrandi (Paris, 1986), pp. 671-680j an expanded version with the same
title in Ecclesia Orans 2 (1985), pp. 195-209. However this article is weak on the Anglo-Saxon sources
and does not recognize that Gregory's cult fin;t grew in England and was only later brought back to
Romej see JeffTey Richards, Consul of God: The Life and TImes of Gregory the Greal (London, 1980),
169
"the growth of his continental reputation was [one] of the Anglo-Saxon contributions to
European thought . . . during the late seventh and eighth centuries, "30 it may well be
that the legend of Gregory's role in the origin of Gregorian chant was first "born in
English ecclesiastical circles. "31
Only in the early eighth century do we begin to encounter the term "schola
cantorum",32 which may be a sign that the Roman way of training singers had now
become more formalized, perhaps along the lines of the schola defensorum, which
Gregory the Great had set up in imitation of the even older schola notariorum. 33 Thus
the official who had been called the "prior of the cantors" in the seventh century was
being called "the prior of the school of the cantors" in the eighth.34 Whereas the future
Pope Sergius I had been "given to the prior of the cantors" in the seventh century, the
twelve-year-old orphan who would become Pope Sergius II (844-847) was given by
Pope Leo III (795-816) "to the school of the cantors, for the learning of common letters
and that he might be instructed in the mellifluous melodies of cantilena. "35 By the late
ninth century it was apparently standard procedure that poor boys who could sing well
be transferred from other schools into the schola cantorum; after being educated there
they moved on to become papal cubicularii or chamberlains, joining the noble boys
who could achieve this position without such training. 36 The earliest legal document that
259-266. Among the Anglo-Saxon sources Jounel did not mention is The Earliest Life of Gregory the
Great by an Anonymous Monk oJ Whitby, ed. Bertram Colgrave (Lawrence, Kansas, 1968; repr.
Cambridge, 1985), which does not yet attribute to Gregory a role in the history of the chant repertory.
29 J.N.D. Kelly, The Oxford Dictionary of Popes (Oxford, 1986), p. 68 .
30 Owen Chadwick, "Gregory of Tours and Gregory the Great·, Journal of Theowgical Studies 50
(1949), pp. 38-49, quotation from p. 38.
31 Piem RicM, Education and Culture in the Barbarian West, SixIh through Eighrh Centuries, trans.
John J. Contreni (Columbia, Soutb Carolina, 1976), p. 315. See also my forthcoming article, "The
Gregory Legend is From England."
32 The term occurs in Ordo Romanus I, see Michel Andrieu, Les Ordines Romani du haul moyen Ilge 2,
Spicilegium Sacrum Lovaniense 23 (Louvain, 1948), pp. 80, 81, 83, 84.
33 The document by which Gregory did this is published in S. 'Gregorii Magni Registrum Epistuiarum, 2:
Libri VII/-XIV, Appendix, ed. Dag Norberg, Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 140A (fumbout, 1982).
pp. 534-535.
34 In a letter to Pippin written between 761-7, Pope Paul I apologized for recalling Symeon, scholae
can/orum prior, back to Rome from Rouen, wbere he had been teaching certain monks of Bishop
Remedius, Pippin's brother. He said he would not have done this had not Symeon's predecessor,
Georgius, died, for which reason Symeon was needed to take his place. Meanwhile the Rouen monks had
followed Symeon back to Rome because they had not bad enough time to learn the psalmodii modu/aJio
perfectly. Paul assured Pippin that the Rouen monks would remain with Symeon until they learned
eccksiasticae docrrilUJe cantilena. This well-known letter is published in Monumenta Germaniae
Historica [MGH1, Epistolarum Tomus 3: Epistolae Merowingici et Karolini Aevi I, ed. Emst Diimmler
(Berlin, 1892), pp. 553-554.
J5 "Tunc praesuJ eum scolae cantorum ad eNdiendum communes tradidit litteras et ut mellifluis instruetur
cantilenae melodiis. " Ducbesne, Le Liber, 2:86.
36 "Primum in qualicumque scola reperti fuerint pueri bene psallentes, tolluntur unde et nutriuntur in
scala cantorum et postea fiunt cubicularii.· Ordo Romanus 36, in Michel Andrieu, Ordines Romani 4,
Spicilegium Sacrum Lovanieo.se 28 (Louvain, 1956), p. 195, see also comments on pp. 123-126. See also
Andrieu, "Les ordres mineurs dans I'ancien rit romain·, Revue des Sciences Religieuses 5 (1925), pp.
170
mentions the schola can tOfU m by name dates from about 919.37 Thus the most
conservative reading of the evidence leads us to see a gradual development. In seventh-
century Rome there was some kind of program for training singers, and by the eighth
century it had been fully organized and was being called the schola cantorum. Under
that name it was still functioning in the ninth and tenth centuries, by which time Pope
Gregory was being identified as its founder. A thorough and unbiased history of this
shadowy organization and its northern European offshoots remains to be written,
however. 38
What and how were the boys in the schola actually taught? That the schola
cantorum taught a largely or completely oral art is suggested by one alumnus of the
Canterbury school, who wrote that he had learned "the right way to fit syllables to the
musical modulations of cantilena. "39 Though we must not read too much into such a
brief remark, it is nonetheless interesting that the writer chose to summarize his musical
studies this way, instead of saying that he had read Boethius or learned to understand
neumes.
Clearly the Roman schola did not produce hymnographers of the sort that
flourished at Mar Saba near Jerusalem. In this respect Jerusalem and Rome were very
different. Yet whatever Roman chant was like during the seventh and eighth centuries,
it was undoubtedly made that way by the graduates of the schola cantorum, just as the
Jerusalem chant of the same period was largely the product of the hymnographers of
Mar Saba.
232-274.
31 See Paul Fridolin Kehr, ed., Regesta Ponlificum Romanorum, Ilalia Pontificia 1: Roma (Berlin, 1906;
repr. 1961), pp. 17-18.
38 For older literature see Enrico Josi, "Lectores -- schola cantorum -- c1erici', Ephemerides Lilurgicae
44 (1930), 282-290. Guilherme Scbuben, ·Scbolae puerorum: sua hist6ria e organi~·, Revisla
eclesidslica brasileira 9 (1949), pp. 893-912.
39 • •• . et ad musica cantilenae modulamina recto sillabarum tramite lustrare, cuius rei studiosis lectoribus
tanto inextricabilior obscuritas praetenditur, quanto rarior doctorum numerositas reperitur.· R. Ehwald,
ed., Aldhelmi Opera, MGR, Auctorum Antiquissimorum Tomus 15 (Berlin, 1919), p. 477. For a
translation and commentary of the complete letter see Michael Lapidge and Michael Herren, eds.,
Aldhelm: The Prose Works (Cambridge and Totowa, New Jersey, 1979), pp. 152-153, 199. Aldhelm's
letter describes his studies of meter in a way that suggests he was reading the Servius. a commentator OD
Vergil of the fourth century A.D.; had his study of music included the reading Boethius or other writers,
be might have described it in language echoing one of tbem, rather than as a practical matter of fitting
syllables to melodies, a subject that received little attention in the music treatises available at the time.
171
imponant respects, reflecting differences in their Greek originals due to changes made
at Jerusalem itself.4O Thus it is not that one manuscript was imported into Armenia and
there became the archetype of the new Armenian rite. The process of translation and
importation into Armenia happened more than once. Even after the Armenian liturgy
began to develop independently, with the fifth-century Jerusalem lectionary as its basis,
for centuries it continued to be influenced by new developments in Jerusalem . 41
What is true of the Armenian rite is even more evident in the Georgian
lectionary and Iadgari, and of the relationship of Jerusalem to the Byzantine rite. By the
beginning of the ninth century, the monastic typikon of St. Saba near Jerusalem was
adapted and expanded at the Constantinopolitan monastery of St. Studios, producing the
Studite typikon which spread everywhere the Byzantine liturgy was then in use, from
Russia to southern Italy. The Studite typikon was itself further synthesized at St. Saba,
and the book that resulted, still known as the Typikon of Jerusalem, is the basis of the
Byzantine Rite in use today . Yet neither the Studite typikon nor the earlier or later
typika of st. Sabas are extant in pure, early copies, originating at the monasteries
themselves. They are known to us only from the countless adaptations made at other
monasteries all over the Byzantine world, incorporating both local peculiarities and later
developments. 42 Here again, then, the spread of the Jerusalem rite was not something
that happened once and for all, but something that happened over and over, leaving
behind a bewildering variety of manuscripts for us to sort out.
All this sounds complicated and confusing, but it resembles nothing so much as
the current state of knowledge about Western chant, where even the very earliest
manuscripts exhibit a great variety of textual recensions and notational types, and where
no extant manuscript can be linked especially closely to a key historical milieu, such as
the court of Charlemagne, the Cathedrals of Metz or Rouen with their Roman-trained
singers, a particular Roman church or the reign of a particular pope. Though loss of
sources no doubt accounts for much of this, it is time to recognize that we are not
40 Renoux, Le codex 35/1, pp. 30-32, 186-188, and 36/2, pp. 152-154, 160-161.
41 See the following articles by Charles Renoux : "Liturgie a.rmeruennc et liturgic hierosolymitainc",
Lilurgie de Z'Eglise paniculiere et liturgie de l'I£glise universeUe: Conf~renl:es Saint-Serge, XXlF
semaine d'etudes lilurgil/ues, Bibliotheca 'Ephemerides Liturgicae' , Subsidia 7 (Rome, 1976), pp. 275-
288. "La mte de la Transfiguration et le rite 8flDenien", Mens concordet voci: pour Mgr A.G. Manimon
(Paris, 1983), 652-662 .• ~. ct tonakan atDJ6niens: Dependance et complementari~" , Eccluia Orans
4 (1987), pp. 169-201.
42 Robert Taft, The Liturgy of th£ Hours in East and West: The Origiru of tlu! Divine Office and Us
Meaning for Today (CollegeviUe. Minnesota, 1986), p. 276. Alexander Schemann, Introduction to
Liturgical Theology, trans. Asheleigb E. Moorbouse (Crestwood. NY, 1986). pp. 205-212. For the
extant manuscripts of the various recensions of the St. Saba typikon, see A. nJ,lliTp,!?BC I: i A, OnHC3-
Hi !? JlIlTyprHl.leCKHX'b PywnHC1?1l 3: TUrTlKa /I (petrograd, 1917; repr. Hildesheim. 1965).
Many other Studite and Sabaite sources are described in Gabriel Bertoniere, The Historical Development
of tlu! Easter Vigil and ReiLJtM Services in the Greek Church, Orientalia Christians Analecta 193 (Rome.
1972).
172
dealing with a single historical event, but with a long historical period, during which
repeated waves of Roman influence washed over parts of the West at different times,
with varying strengths, and with varying effects. This is in fact what the literary
sources actually tell us: "The Germans and the Gauls, among the other peoples of
Europe, were given a remarkable number of opportunities to learn and repeatedly
relearn the sweetness of this modulation," complained John the Deacon, yet because of N
their fickle soul s, as well as their natural savagery, they were utterly unable to preserve
it incorrupt, because they mingled things of their own into the Gregorian chants. "43
Indeed, attempts to export Roman liturgical practices are documented continually from
the beginning of the fifth century. 44 Even the two most concerted efforts to spread the
Roman liturgy, the Anglo-Saxon mission and the Carolingian reform, involved
numerous trips back and forth in search of Roman books and Roman singers.45 To put
it another way, the process of exporting the Roman chant repertory was much like the
better-documented processes involved in exporting the Roman sacramentaries,
lectionaries, and other liturgical books.
S. Summary
The origins and early history of Gregorian and Old Roman chant have been so
heavily worked over, so clouded and confused by controversy, that it is helpful to look
away for a moment at another center like Jerusalem -- a center where many of the same
processes took place, but where they are much better documented and hence more
easily traced. Once we have seen clearly how the Jerusalem chant repertory began in
the fifth century with the responsorial psalms accompanying the annual cycle of
readings, how this cycle attracted other chant genres until it had grown into the
complete written repertory of the seventh century and the fully developed lectionary of
the eighth, how it was expanded further through the creativity of the eighth-century
43 "Huius modulationis dulcedinem inter alias Europae gentes Germani seu Galli discere crebroque
rediscere insigniter potueruot, incorruptam vero tarn levitate animi , quia nonnulla de proprio Gregorianis
cantibus miscueruot, quam feritate quoque Daturali servare minime potuerunt.· Sancti Gregorii Magni
Vita, in Patrologia LaJina 75 (paris, 1862), pp. 90-91.
44 See the material summarized in Vogel, Medieval LiJurgy, pp. 147-150, 61-105, 110-133, esp.
footnotes 131, 194. The earliest document advocating the adoption of Roman customs elsewhere is a
letter of Pope Innocent I written in the year 416. Robert Cabi6, La iettre du pape Innocent Fr d
Decentius de Gubbio (19 mars 416): Twe critique, traduction et commentaire, Bibliotheque de la Revue
d'Histoire ecclesiastique 58 (Louvain, 1973).
4S On the manuscript traffic between Rome and the north see: Armando Petrucci, "L'Oociale Romans:
Origini, sviluppo e diffusione di UDa stilizzazione grafica altomedievale (sec. VI-IX)" . Studi Mulievali
ser. Ill, 12 (1971), pp. 75-134 with 20 plates. Paola Supino Martini, "Carolina rolDllD.a e minuscola
romanesca: Appunti per una storia della scrittura latins in Roma tra IX e XlI secolo" , Studi Mulievali
ser. Ill, 15 (1974), pp. 769-793 with twelve plates. Supino Martini and Petrucci, "Materiali ed ipotesi
per una storia della cultura scritta neUa Roma del IX secolo", Scritrura e civiltil 2 (1978), pp. 45-101.
D.A. Bullougb, "Roman Books and Carolingian Renovario" , Renaissance and Renewal in Christian
History, Studies in Church History 14 (Oxford, 1977), pp. 23-50.
173
hymnodists, and how, after exerting strong influence on neighboring churches
throughout its history, it finally overwhelmed and partly merged with the rite of
Constantinople in the ninth century and later -- then we can look again at the Roman
tradition and see it from a new perspective. Allowing for the many differences between
the two cities, an understanding of what happened in the East can help us imagine more
realistically what might have happened in the West, by showing us how to sift through
the much more meager Western evidence, what to look for as we do it, and how to
interpret what we find. This in turn will help us feel more confident about where to
look, and about what to make of what we see. In short, it will lay the beginning of a
framework that will help organize and orient further explorations into the formation of
the two Roman chant repertories. 46 Thus, to quote from famous medieval hymns, the
chant tradition of "urbs beata Ierusalem", is rightly "dicta pacis visio", for its early
development is so fully documented that we can truly say "hic promereantur omnes
petita acquirere". After studying the Jerusalem sources thoroughly, we can turn to
"Roma nobilis" and ask with a new confidence "ut quae repleverit te sapientia, ipsa nos
repleat. "47
46 See my article "Rome and Jerusalem: From Oral Tradition to Written Repertory in Two Ancient
Liturgical Centers" , From Rome to the Passing of thi! Gothic: W~tern Chant Repertoires and Their
lnjlulmce on Early Polyphony: Studies in Honor of David G. Hughes (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Music Department, forthcoming) .
47 From the hymns ·Urbs beata Jerusalem" and ·0 Roma nobilis.· A convenient edition is F.J.E. Raby,
ed., The Oxford Book of Medieval LaJin Verse (Oll.ford, 1970). pp. 83-84, 140,462,472-473. For "Urbs
beata" see also Anselmo Lentini, eel., Te Decet Hymnus: L '/nnario della "Liturgia Horarum" (Vatican
City. 1984), p. 251. Liber Hymnarius, AntiphonaJe Romanum Tomus Alter (Solesmes, 1983), pp. 247-
248.
174
lames McKINNON
New Testament, and here a new feature is introduced, communions from the epistles.
One notes, however, that while every gospel communion is taken from the gospel of the
day, the epistle communions, with the exception of Easter (possibly a more ancient
assignment), are not from the epistles of the day. Again one notes a consistent policy.
The psalmic communion, Can/ale domino, from Psalm 95, might seem to mar the
symmetry of the set, but in fact it achieves a larger symmetry. It occupies a place within
the Easter season, similar to that of the other Cantate domilUJ, Psalm 97, within the
Christmas season. Psalm 97, one recalls, provides the communion for the third mass of
176
Prophetic comms.
Christmas. That medieval ecclesiastics looked upon these two as a pair is clear from the
designation of them in the early graduals as Cantate I and Cantate Il.l
Of the remaining ten Paschal tide communions, those from the vigil of the
Ascension to the Saturday after Pentecost, only two are not from the gospels. Factus
est, the communion for Pentacost, is taken from the vivid narrative of Pentecost day in
the Acts of the Apostles, a case similar to that of Stephen; while PsaIlite oomino qui
ascendit super ce/os, a psalmic text associated with the Ascension from earliest times,2
was too strikingly appropriate to be sacrificed to any compositional plan. But now,
paradoxically, the eight last gospel communions of the Paschal season confirm the
existence of such a plan by a negative circumstance. Not one of them is derived from
the gospel of the day; the practice maintained for every gospel communion we have
observed up to this point is abruptly abandoned. The reason for this change in policy
appears to be simply that there is insufficient description of the Ascension and Pentecost
in the gospels to satisfy the narrative impulse that plays so strong a role in the
composition of gospel communions. So a different principle is adopted: the gospel of
John is searched for any short passage that might bear upon the mysteries of the
Ascension and Pentecost. It is, moreover, precisely at this point that the responsories of
ISee ReDl~-Jean Hesbert, Anriphonale Missarum Sexruple:x (Brussels, 1935), pp.14-15. 102-103.
2See, for ell8mple, Augustine, Enarralio in psalmum LXVII, 42; Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 39
(Turnhout, 1956), p.899.
177
Gospels Epistles Gospels match, epistles do not
the night office are called upon to make their contribution to the annual communion
cycle. Among several borrowed chants is that which brings the Paschal series to its
touching conclusion: Non vos relinquam orphanos, veniam ad vos iterwn.
It is hoped that this hasty survey, a summary of a larger study on both the texts
and the music of the communions of the temporale,3 succeeds in demonstrating that
communion texts display a degree of compositional strategy unequaled elsewhere within
the Gregorian repertory. So carefully crafted a body of material ought to be replete with
internal evidence, evidence suggesting layers in its development, and indications by
which we might date these layers -- indications, that is, beyond the familiar one of the
establishment of the Lenten Thursdays under Gregory n. But the aim of the present
paper is simply to survey the communions of the post-Pentecosta1 period in the hope of
finding some trace of the order and logic that pervade the other segments of the cycle.
At first glance there appears to be nothing of the sort beyond the numerical ordering of
the psalmic communions (table 3), a feature shared with the post-Pentecostal introits
3 To be presented at the meeting of the American Musicological Society, Oa/dand, California, November,
1990.
178
. ~§ ~ gorrO....,I ·"~
r >
= 11
r n~ :;:~
/ ({H. oH) IIIVr,J,o L'l\.t Il, T...
~ ~ (/~ . ,) (llJI.f,J,,,
~l~ Lr kl~... t
&'" ::s ell ~ 3 (" .,) E~o dc..n.AJr'
~ ;; g ~
~ (11.3) [J,;~ ~rrrtt..M(A.f~_
o ::l. S ( ~U) flf,. i Oil. 5
~ aa r.>ell Ltf\4.I71 '-
I
"6' L CU .d C,,( .... ;bo /,
go ] [ cp, 30.3) I"..l,,, .. w.."", t ....u.J [ )
g §. ~ {G«.stt...tt .t y,d.t, q"ltml"-"'1,) s ....Cl.V,~ (~t 0,;-1. ..
1
o 0- g (3U) 1
!\" ::s ....
:;,-
Cf (,Ht B) Pr,,,,,,,,,,,, ill.A.tr,h r(' ............. I), ; <t anvu ... <I..I J +......... b'i ' .
'(:/< ••
o....v.usr's
9
'"5'
~ Q 10 (5b.~J) Awptc.b " \r.(,nj,u...,v J",t.tl<"<, ~blr..tlD1Us <t \";'/.(Oo.«st" s'<f«( c.lf ..... tu'""'. D",...
A~~.. nu.r
10
C1l /w-vd 11 hwwd.-
11 (Pro. 3. '-I~ Hcm.or,- D~~ ~f t ........ s ... b,IQ.,d, .... ,t dt (r""f" e J'~""'" t"'Or>4n1 ...
Io· sa..cri fi(.~
.... (rQ
12
~
:s ~ ~ IJ (Ps IH IH~ Or ~,'U: f... optr......... r<wr ......... D,;:, se..t ,e...h,f"r t'rrQ. J- .duCA>\' f"J" ..... ... d YI'lIU'>2 . ~rb"'p .U'1f S
~ §" n (~IU~) P<U'l ..... b '0'/0 d,~,s-t, N;>b" 0,;:, bb.... h", O'»VI,"" d./"t"""'lI\.fw.c .. 13
~
.§ ~. ~ '"= 11,
!~
(J() L. 5~)PClJlII q<Ltm. ~o d,d(r" cc..ro MCc)" (,st pro ,wJ; ~;to..
(Jo L. S'1)Y ...; 11'tJl,..Jv..<..1 (WIlL'" rlWll>I. d. b~b;t Sa.~~IU"" M(U,I1t ...
J,
14 L'lI.tI,TI.u. r
~
'"§ e. IL (70./1 -11) Vi:, ..... ""on..bor'
(] Lt ...tUn ....
(h,~t W,Th,)
nJ h~, C. l(Tkil ~. .,
/1
Q. Er 17 (7~. 12·iJ) V.",..h (t ,.."Lt:.
~ ::tl C1l
I~ (95_ y.~) Tollitth~rt,,,t 11 .
-<:
,.>< C1l ~
:;,- I? (IIL'/-~J T.... mQ."J",t; 11 j" .! ••
<
sc.. ~
o
!!l.
::s
;./; (!If. ",.sa) M,m,,,,f.. y,rh; ~ ....
).J rircrifr L,,,,t
S ~ ).J (m. JHL) [11 sr..l",fw( tuo
,.>< .21 (U 1:i.IO) 0;(0 rD~;1 ~ ......d,;" ........
s. 5- a iJ (I1tIUQ) A~,,, dKO YC!>' q..)~<L,J ~} U·tft r;'
:!o §c::
r.> VI
?il g. }/o.,rr.. ho /1l'>1.fI. , .. f>1.lr4..b,/,,, fe.." _. f sal/a.M t7..tn>'lin.~ tu 0, 0../ tlHlmJ ,
in"~
....
eT ~
c:: 5 UM..tvt tuft, c... /)11.-6, h.a'l(' 0CfUr~, J ,dv..b;/·(M I .... d_. i)O"VI<; O",,-.t,;b~l d"6,,s Y-'/Q.' mfa.~. }
- ;1 Pt .U
Er ell , c.~U.L ,'be d: ''''''I''t"I",b" f"brrr..ac''-I./o ~j"'l hosf,CoJn. i'.. ~.!.::...t('"';s '"
~ ~
If"
~ a t7 VtJV(r( d rrd,f( OllLD /)(0 V(~-Iro Ol'><fVS '1"'; m. c,,, ... ,I.... (j',s ~ f(rfl~ ht'<.Il(rr.. hrnb'/,
~.... ~
0
{$ To/Ut h~sf"s et In.ffOih 11'1. (",1-,,4.. (JUs c..dor",h Oft"" 1/1. AA./o.. su.n.d", {~s .
....... fi 0 /(. I)(f'n\. , ""., MJ.'N>r'r..,b"r j .. d,f,f..t fWA,t .. , ViM' '" d.r,f/~"U-4~ ~1.
'Cl 2. 0:
seemingly at random, and, significantly, the gospel communions do not match the
gospels of the day. Dom Hesbert, however, made an observation that opens up a rich
vein of speculation. He noted that the communion De jructu, from Psalm 103, was out
of numerical order, and offered the clearly satisfactory explanation for this that De
.fructu was concerned with the harvest and that it finds place in the company of texts
simiJarly concerned. 5 Antoine Chavasse expanded upon Hesbert's point to claim the
existence of an eight-piece segment of harvest communions extending from Gustate to
Qui mandUCal. 6 This set of eight is the starting point for my own speculations and I
shaJ/ return to it after providing some background on the development of the Sundays
after Pentecost in the various genres of liturgical books.
To start with one must recall that the very notion of assigning specific
formularies to every day in the liturgical year is relatively late. Improvisation of texts
and selection of texts from a number of possibilities were the more typical early
practices. As late as the Leonine Sacramentary a choice of prayer sets was offered for
each feast day, no less than twelve for St. Lawrence. When proper texts came to be
assigned to individual days, among the last to be so provided were the ordinary Sundays
of the year, that is, the Sundays after Christmas and the Sundays after Pentecost,
including those from the time that would come to be called Advent. The Old Gelasian
sacramentary has no proper prayers for any of these dates, but rather a set of sixteen
ordinary prayer sets, which one assumes were somehow to be utilized throughout this
total of close to forty Sundays. Perhaps the most likely manner of such utilization would
have been that of free choice at the discretion of the celebrant, but Chavasse looks upon
these sixteen formularies as a rigid sequence, constructing elaborate schemes for their
precise placement throughout the year, and more than that, divining analogous sets of
sixteen in the gospels, epistles, and, as we shall see, tha chant formularies, including the
post-Pentecostal communions. 7
Whether or not one reacts sceptically to Chavasse's emphasis upon the Old
Gelasian's set of sixteen, 8 it is necessary to be aware of another system for coping with
5 Ibid., p. Ixxiv.
6 "Cantatorium et AntiphonaJe Missarum", Ecclesia Orans 1 (J984), pp. 24-25; at an earlier date he
covered the same ground with only slightly different results in "Les plus anciens types de Lectionnaire et
de I' Antiphonaire romains de la Messe " • Revue Benedictine 67 (1952), p.60.
7 Chavasse's focus upon sets of sixteen is one of the major themes of the lengthy article cited in the
previous footnote. Its theoretical justification and one of the fundamental methodologicaJ principles of
Cbavasse's work is that for each key stage of early medieval liturgical history, for example the time of
Gregory I, it is possible to match a concordant sacramentary, lectionary and antiphonar. Needless to say
this requires much delicate juggling of existing sources and ingenious reconstruction of those no longer
extant.
g Among the many purported sets of sixteen within the various liturgical books only one is at all
convincing. The post-Pentecostal introit series opens with a numerical sequence of seventeen psaJrnic
chants followed by a cluster of six, only one of which is psalmic. With the removal of Omnes genies from
the seventeen there remains a psalmic set of sixteen. In the absence. however, of similarly suggestive sets
180
the Sundays after Pentecost. Most liturgical books of the seventh and eight centuries fix
upon a set of three sanctoral signposts and provide a series of numbered Sundays after
each (table 4).9 The dates are 29 June, the feast of the apostles Peter and Paul; 10
August, the feast of St. Lawerence; and 14 September, the feast of Sts. Comelius and
Cyprian, later replaced by 29 September, the feast of St. Michael the archangel. The
system, while by and large efficient for the time after 29 June, the Apostolic feast, has
an awkward gap at the beginning, where there are as few as two and as many as six
Sundays between Pentecost and the Apostolic feast, depending upon the date of Easter.
Earlier books tended to leave it more or less blank, with a formulary for the Octave of
Pentecost at the beginning, and at the end the curiously titled Ebdomara 11 post
pentecoslen ante natale aposlolorum . Perhaps the gap was filled at first with repetitions
of the octave of Pentecost formulary, but in any case one sees at a glance that with the
passage of time it came to be filled with additional formularies. The disadvantage to
doing this was that there would be unused formularies in a typical year. One readily
understands why the Frankish system of twenty-three numbered Sundays after Pentecost
came to be accepted around the beginning of the ninth century. One must keep this gap
in mind when attempting to trace the development of the presently known series of
twenty-three post-PentecostaJ cfommunions.
To return to that series, and Chavasse's interpretation of it, we begin with the
non-controversial step of eliminating from consideration the seventh communion,
Inclina, which was of course added by the Franks to the Roman set as part of the Omnes
gentes formulary. Chavasse divides the remaining twenty-two into an original sixteen
and an added six, set back here from the margin in table 3.
His original sixteen includes the fifteen psalmic communions plus one from the
Book of Proverbs. The added six are all non-psalmic; four of these (Primum, Panem,
Panis and QUI) have subject matter relating them to the harvest group and are placed
accordingly, while two of them (Dico vobis and Amen dieD vobis) do not and are appen-
of sixteen, one can just as easily explain this single example as the result of coincidence. On the Omnes
genies fonnulary, see the classic study of Hesbert, "La Messe 'Omnes gentes' du VIle dimanche apres la
PentecOte et J'Antiphonale Missarum romain", Revue Gregorienne 17 (1932), pp.81-89. 170-79 and 18
(1933), pp. 1-14.
9 Table 4 gives, in approximate chronological order, liturgical books that utilize the so-called Roman
system of naming the Sundays after Pentecost. The Greek letter designations of the evangelary types are
based on the standard work of Theodor Klauser. Das romische Capitukzre Evangelorum.
Liturgiegeschichtliche Quellen und Forschungen 28 (MUnster in Westfalia, 1935). The most difficult of
the books to date is the Padua D 47 version of the Gregorian sacramentary. Although a ninth century
Frankish copy of a mid-eigbth century Roman document (it has the Thursdays of Lent), Chavasse has
convinced many of its essentially mid-seventh century content; see Jean Deshusses, Le Sacramenlaire
Gregorien, Spicilegium Friburgense 16 (Fribourg. 1971), p.57. However. even ifChavasse is correct. its
Sundays after Pentecost, along witb its Thursdays of Lent, are in all probability among the eighth century
additions, and hence the placement given it in table 4. On the so-called AJcuin epistolary, see Andre
Wilmart, "Le Lectionnaire d'Alcuin", Ephemerides Lilurgicae 51 (1937), pp. 136-97.
181
QC!
N
:;!
~ TT, , 1\.
,
D-
.
v,,-,.' /o..f
r
O.. r ., tf ...1"
-AI
(j,r " P.. f
t.l - P,J
0_
0'(1
rAUof
- 6.
O,t P."t
- - "'''11.~' . ~
0.,..,
f
..... , • _. _.,
v ... ~ ... t
• ~.
k"""
J
o-
v•• rrJ/~9--
f>'
a flJ i
er po" ",,1 r~'~"
0"., ... 1 $","" P,~f IT ,..:t Pr .. ~
i,....
~
lJ1 f~3f p,~t
Ti
Ii1
lY
J!
lIJ
if
f
I
ill
[i
cc./\ 1-4.1,<>
£3" dG.M-..;
0..., !ir "'V><'" to......
~ ii Post ~41 ... f. Ap TJ p.$r A.. f JJ puT ~lIt
...
'"C ~'J ....... P,fr.,. _J 1'.... ,,/
a
g
~
I ~.sf Ap I f. sf Af' I f'sf Ap 1 r${ Ap I pod Ap TI p.st ~p .L ,.ft o..~ AI' LL........ fcT;i
II n 11 L.F.rf Cd Ap UJ IT C,., ....i 1,.,
s- [l m ill l1J II I¥ ur G.atA.+' ,t ... ;.!.h
\1\
0
, Y Ti fi ii liT ~ JY P..;"' ..... 9....,,.if..
(')
ii f f Jl If ff 'l ACL(I'+~;'
-..I
El! Ii 'iI .v w
\1\
0
em
10 A.. ,. Sf. 4wr'.I\.c.e ,
I p. ,I h.s" r 1 (J.sf J...." I fGsf 1... ..... ~f.$f J..,.;r I f'ft /...,. r f.st k.." ~ p".t s.u., .. I·L".,."....... 0 ..-;,.
iI Il 11 u i1 IT IJ i), ~~ .. ~t-....
iF IiI iJ1 m ill ill ill p..,., .... i. colo
Ji ii i1 [i iI ii iY p"", it qiLlM •&"
F Y Y i y ¥ 'i %:,..t ",.,,2
i """ ~
11 riff. sh. C.""II~t I- C,,/(Jri~ I S.'f. ... "~ On. (&<4.1' 1i Xl .... 1,.,"rA.-b~,..
. "d ,"'p'4,. Vii
~ {>'sf (,I' I posT Cff' I fdf (JP
~., S"f. s/. !I,~/. ..( I
11 II 1I
JIJ m ill I pd All, I fllf .A~, I f'lt A~~ J fut A..~ Vovcl-e
Ii iF if II II IT TI Tailor. k.rhoJ
Z i Y Ul ill lIT ID I ..........~t..,i-;
Yi If. Y1 if [£ Ii I£ ~tm' . . . +-o
YJI ill 111.1 'i .r ¥ f i .. t..J,.J.....i t"",
'll III ~ 0.(.0 rob ,"oS
VII' ID. vrr A....." J;u \fob;,
'----- !l!lI
ded to the end of the series. This is a plausible enough arrangement even if it fails to
explain why Honora Dominum is singled out among the seven non-psalmic communions
to achieve the desired number of sixteen.
There is a larger objection to Chavasse's scheme, however, and it has to do with
his narrow definition of the harvest group. Three of these communions make no direct
reference to harvest, but speak rather of the sacrament of Communion. Gustale et videte
is of course the ancient communion verse par excellence, while the subject of the two
communions from the gospel of John, Pan is quem ego and Qui manducat, could not be
more obvious. It is true that the notions of harvest and communion are related; bread
and wine are prominent among the gifts of the earth, but one ought to make this explicit
and speak of a harvest-communion group. Still, even this is too narrow a conception.
Honora Dominum enjoins one to honor the Lord from the first fruits of the harvest, and
how is this done but by the act of sacrifice? What is implicit in Honora Dominum is
explicit in the preceding communion, Acceptabis sacrificium justifiae. oblaliones et
holocausta; here one speaks directly of neither harvest nor communion, but only
sacrifice. Thus we have a three-fold theme -- harvest-communion-sacrifice -- and if one
simply glances on either side of Chavasse's group of eight, it is seen to be surrounded
by communions that speak of sacrifice: Circuibo et immolabo ... hosdam jubilationis,
for example, and in the last communion of the group, Tollite hostias. Finally there is a
fourth motif that goes to enrich this theme, the location of the sacrifice -- the Lord's
tabernacle, his sacred precincts, his house. We see this in Circuibo, where the
immolation will take place in tabemaculo ejus, and in Tollite, where the victims are
brought in atria ejus and aula sancta ejus; while the idea is touchingly introduced in
what I would claim to be the opening communion of this group: Unmn petii a Domino .
. . ut inhabitem in domo Domini omnibus diebus vitae meae.
Thus we see even in the apparently random communions of the post-Pentecostal
period some measure of the compositional planning that is the special characteristic of
communions. This group of twelve, with its evocative mixture of Old and New
Testament motifs might remind one of the prophetic Advent-Christmas set. But what of
the four that precede and the five that follow? To deal first with the latter, I do not think
that one can argue too strongly for a clearly defined theme. At best one might claim that
the three communions from Psalm 118 constitute a "justice" group; they enjoin one to
follow the Lord's commandments and to expect his protection in return. The two
remaining communions, from Luke and Matthew, might be viewed as part of this
group, but are probably better looked upon as a second postscript, perhaps a late
addition.
To return to the harvest-sacrifice series, extending as we have seen from Unam
pedi to Tollite hostias, one notes a flaw in its make-up: Domine memorabor justitiae
183
tuae has no apparent relationship with the subject matter of its companions. Rather it
would seem to belong to our loosely defined justice group, and there is an intriguing
indication that it may in fact be absent from its original position. AJl six of the Lenten
Thursday communions were borrowed from the post-Pentecostal communions, and they
were borrowed apparently in exact sequence. The only one out of place is the same
Domine memorabor that is out of place thematically in the present arrangement; it
would seem, then, to belong to the justice set on both counts. And how did it come to
be displaced? It could have happened at a late stage in the development of the cycle
when the psalmic communions were reordered to achieve a numerical sequence. It is
conceivable that at the time it was considered necessary to maintain De jructu from
Psalm 103, in its original place because of the compelling nature of its subject matter,
while Domine memorabor was put in numerical order because its subject matter was not
taken to be so flagrant a violation of the harvest-sacrifice theme. It should be noted,
finally, that it is possible to scramble this series of eighteen beginning with Unam pelii
into a hypothetical original order which on the one hand lacks a numerical order for its
psalmic communions, but on the other hand maintains both the integrity of the harvest-
sacrifice series and the proper sequence of Lenten Thursday borrowing. 10 The point is
too speculative to argue strongly; it is offered here only as a possible explanation for the
one seeming difficulty with the harvest-sacrifice set.
To turn now to the four communions at the beginning of the post-Pentecostal
series, the frrst, Narrabo, taken from the second Tuesday in Lent, would seem to stand
out as the only communion borrowed from Lent; this is the reverse process from that
employed for the Lenten Thursdays, perhaps one with chronological implications. More
on that point presently; for the moment one must note in admiration the apparent
motivation for the choice. How better to begin a lengthly sequence of chants than with
the promise: Narrabo omnia mirabilia tua . . . psallam nomine IUO altissime. The
following three are of very special interest. It has' been said of the five Lenten gospel
communions that they must have replaced the five psalmic communions at an early date
because no trace of them remains in the sources, but surely we have here the first three
of these five. We know that they were derived from Psalms 12, 16, 17, 20 and 21, and
there appear here communions from Psalms 12, 16 and 17.11 Mathematical
10 1bere is more than one possibility, for example, the following: Pss. 26. 26. 75. SO, Prov, 103. 95,
Sap, 33, Mt 6, Jo, 10, 118, 70, 118, 118, U, Mt 11. It should be emphasized that the process of
reordering an existing body of chants into a numericaJ sequence is essentially different from the obViously
a priore scheme of composing a series of cbants based 00 Psalms I througb 26 as in the case of the Lenten
feriaIs. Chavasse confuses the two and concludes that the post-Pentecostal arrangement was accomplished
at the same time as the Lenten one; "Le CaJeodrier dominical romain au sixi6me si6cle", Recherches de
Science Religieuse 41 (1955), p .97.
11 I am not the first to have noticed this; R. Le Roux, for example, makes the observation in "Les
graduels des dimanches apres la Pentecote", Eludes Gr~goriennes 5 (1962), p. I25.
184
considerations alone would seem to rule out any other possibility than the borrowing of
these three from Lent. Unlike their companion Narrabo there is no thematic significance
involved; they simply happened to be available because of their removal from the
Lenten repertory.
Thus the four stand as a unit at the beginning of the post-Pentecostal series, and I
would argue that they constitute the last step in the make-up of that series (possibly
along with the concluding Luke-Matthew pair), as opposed to Chavasse's set of six non-
psalmic communions. 12 For one thing it is difficult to imagine borrowing Lenten
communions at an earlier, more creative phase of communion composition. Aside from
the Thursdays in Lent and clearly late dates like the fourth Sunday of Advent and the
Octave of Pentecost, there are no other instances of shared communions in the entire
temporale.
But why borrow only three of the available five? Apparently this was the number
considered adequate to fill the gap at the beginning of the post-Pentecostal season. That
what appears to us as a gap here was looked upon similarly by seventh and eighth
century liturgists and that they treated the Sundays after the Apostolic feast as the
beginning of the segment of the liturgical year in question, is clear from the content of
various contemporary liturgical books, but especially the Eighth-century Gelasian
sacramentaries. These books incorporate the series of sixteen Sunday fonnularies into
their post-Pentecostal period, but in doing so place the beginning of the series at the first
Sunday after the Apostolic feast so that it is necessary to compose new fonnularies for
the time immediately after Pentecost. And it turns out, happily, that there is a musical
source suggesting the same process for mass chants. The Vatican 5319 Old Roman
gradual preserves the eighth century Roman system rather than the Frankish numerical
series so that we can see the original placement of the communions. Unam petii, the
beginning of the harvest-sacrifice series, stands at the first Sunday after the octave of the
Apostolic feast (presumably the Sunday within the octave uses the feast day fonnulary).
The post-Pentecostal gap is filled first with the octave day of Pentecost, using the
formularly of the preceding day including the communion Non vos relinquam, then the
four fonnularies entitled Sundays after Pentecost, which might more precisely be called
Sundays after the octave of Pentecost. Thus a workable compromise is achieved. A total
of five fonnularies are provided for a period with a maximum need of six, a need that
would be relaized only occasionally. 13 More often one or the other of these fonnularies
12 Whether Chavasse's notion of an original sixteen is valid or DOt is immaterial to the conclusions reached
here. If tbere is an original group of sixteen. it would be the twelve harvesl-sacrifice communions plus the
justice postscript of four. The additional six would of course be the first four plus the Luke-Matthew pair.
Actually this works better than Cbavasse's sixteen which included the Don-psalmic anomaly of Honora
Dominum .
13 The sixth Sunday would be necessary wbenever Easter fell on 'l2 March to 28 March inclusive; this
happened sixteen times in the eigbth century or an average of about every sixth year according 10 the dates
185
wQuld have to be dropped on years that had only three or four Sundays before the
Apostolic feast.
In conclusion ( would express the hope that while much of what has been said
here is speculative, two central points emerge as probable. These are the existence of a
twelve-communion harvest-sacrifice set at the heart of the post-Pentecostal cycle and the
late addition of the four borrowed communions at its beginning. Considerations of time
and space do not allow for a thoroughgoing attempt to date these developments. Such an
attempt in any case would be dependent upon factors involved in the entire annual cycle
and must therefore be reserved to the larger study referred to above. But there are two
minor chronoJogical indications existing within the confmes of the present brief paper,
two indications, that is, beyond the obvious one that the borrowing for the Lenten
Thrusdays establishes the existence of the harvest-sacrifice series and justice postscript
before the time of Gregory 11. The first is, that if our speculations about the
misplacement of Domine memorabor are correct, then the numerical ordering of the
Post-Pentecostal series was accomplished at some time after the Lenten borrowing. The
second is that we have a suggested date for the addition of the first four communions in
the anaJogous additions so sacramentaries and lectionaries of the mid-eighth century.14
Indeed with the four additionaJ communions fitting the reordered sequence so precisely,
it is easy to imagine both late steps as part of the same mid-eighth century process.
given in A. Cappelli·s Chrotwlogw, Crotwgrajia ~ Calendrio P~rpetuo (repr. Milan, 1969). It might not
seem exceuive to provide a fomwJary that would be used every sixth year, but there is iood reason not to
utililz a COIIIDIUD.ion from Psalm 20, the Dext available possibility. The subject matter of the entire psalm
deals with the kin, and his relationship to God; l1li such any communion drawn from it would be
iDapproprildle to me post-Pentecostal period and must have appeared incongruous in its required Lentm
position. 0. the other hand a sanctoral communion would be appropriate. and this is borne out by Magna
ut gJon. (PI 20.6). the communion for several dates in the sanctorak.
Aa for Pu.lm 21 , incidentally, the fifth of the irouP. C. CaUewaer1 in oS. Gregoire. les Scrutins
et quelquee Messes Quadragesimales". Ephenerldu Liturgicae 53 (1938). p.l97. claims IbaI the
communion AJjlllor mew u tu Domine ne derelinquas me, appearing in the Rbeinau manuscript for
Friday of the fourth week in Lent (see Sexluplex. p.80). is the original Psalm 21 communion. The one
verse from Psalm 21 resembling Adiulor mew is verse 20, which reads, in the Roman version. Tu alllDn
Domine ne kmge facias auxilium tuum. Adjutor meus might be considered as a paraphrase of Tu aUlmr ,
but the other communions in the series are derived from the PsaJter more or less literally.
14 While table 4 presents liturgical books in approximate chronological order from "c6S0 to c7S0·, the
majority of the books date from a period closer to the latter date. Only the evangelaries are lacking the
Thursdays in Lent.
186
Theodore KARP
I The present study forms a small part of a much larger essay to be issued as part of a book dealing with
diverse problems of orality and formularity in Gregorian chant. The broader work will furnish
documentation and reasoning for some assertions that appear here without such support.
2 ·The question of the 'Old-Roman' Chant: A Reappraisal· , Acta Musico/()gica 39 (1967), p. 19f.
EXAMI'LE l. Two mediaJ formulas for second-mode Tracts: AI) the Old Roman version of De
nece.ssilalibus. verse 2; A2) the Old Roman version of De nece.ssilalibus. verse I; Bland 2) the
Gregorian equivaJents of Al and A2.
In some thirty-three instances the Old Roman formula given as lA2 has as its
counterpart the Gregorian formuJa lB2. And in eleven instances the Old Roman lAl
has as its counterpart the Gregorian formula 1Bl. Only in verse 5 of Qui habitat do we
ftnd an opposite pairing. In this instance at least there is a very high degree of
consistency in the reJationship between the two repertoires. Each Gregorian phrase
seems to represent a speciftc transformation of its Roman modeP However, not all
formulas are handled equally systematically by the Franks. For example, the Old
Roman formuJa that concludes each verse of the three earliest Tracts to be adopted into
the Gregorian repertoire -- De necessitatibus, Domine exaudi, and Domine audivi -- has
not one, but two Gregorian equivalents.
The Gregorian phrase 1B2 is part of a very broad family encompassing chants of
six different modes and five different genres. Representative excerpts from this family
are shown in Example 2. As one works backward from the cadence itself, which is
quite firm, one finds an increasing number of alternative possibilities for the cadential
preparation. These, however, are generally related in one or more aspects.
1 GiVeD the fact that both the Gregorian and Old Roman repertoires are consistent in the formulaic content
for these passages, it seems reasOnable to infer that there was comparable COIlSislency in the eighth-
century Roman model known to the Franks, I do not imply that this model ,was necessarily identical to
the surviving Old Roman melodies.
188
• ••
to.' -
••• .;; . '"
'e '
i -;: .;
<)
• • £ ....
~-
.! • .: • -J ~;
.; • .:; .,;"'
• •;
2: . I • .:-. -S• e;
.s: I·G
de - 1,;
·i; ... .; • w Q • ! ~;
Vi -
•
ffP· · MM • _ MW ::;. e .;
.
I I
.. ! .. ! .w • M : ..
• .:: € •;
M.
• •• M:; IQ .:
Q D~ - ~j 15-
K~~ r~/ -
ll~/ .: l;
Mi
:! •
;,. - Li - .,
ml~ wO
r", -
•
~~
:Q :g ; ..SS @;:.2 «IQ .:' .;
o l' J - J ....
EXAMPLE 2. Excerpts from representative Greiorian chants utilizin, the Gregorian cadence in Example
182: a) Domini! audiYi (second-mode Tract, transposed up a fourth); b) Qui conjidum (eighth-mode
Tract); c) A summo caelo (second-mode Gradual); d) Tecum principium (fifth-mode Gradual); e)
1Imebunt genies (Respond, fifth-mode Gradual); t) 1imebunI genies (Verse, fifth-mode Gradual); g) Ecce
quam bonum (first-mode Gradual); b) Benedictus Dominus (eight-mode Gradual); i) Speciosus forma
(third-mode Gradual); j) Benedictus Dominus (seventh-mode Gradual); k) JubilaJe Deo univusa terra
(first-mode Offertory); I) Super flumina Babylonis (first-mode Offertory, verse 3); m) Deus Iu converlens
(third-mode Offertory); n) Bonum esl conjileri (fifth-mode Gradual); 0) Dilexisli justiliam (eight-mode
Introit).
189
When we compare the relevant passages with their counterparts within the Old
Roman repertoire shown in Example 3, we note immediately the absence of the Old
Roman lA2. There are phrases that share some of the characteristics of IA2, but these
are limited in number and vari~ty.
J~: • .;;
t ... - ... ,...,
e,: Ift.:,:a:
•~ ;; - fi7:X; t-; 6:i .c:?; .Z~ .;I:i :i32?;
... . •§k @.)
ae -
e -
,,~/- "" ....
;;7!iii: ;We:;. ME• • • ~
j "'J
_
o ...--..
•••• e.
• !5:'. .... • · . > i!. :;:5?:
bd - 1" ......
I~~ • .... ;;2 -i;1 ;:;ij \.) :f!5@: .;.;; ... i . .-tS2:
e
rt - Jt.! ~-
f 1% • • ~ fP
vi' -Je - ~ .
.>
..~
v..c:::
.
• • •
.:;
• .. ;£; .§C• .. ; . ..~
~ '
tt,/-.~
.~' ;. iJ ::'.;Q :;:]¥j :.;
(j - 1i . (J .• r"'..... 1= - ,,~ .....
.. Q.~.o.. Q • •-:
tu -
•
lu· ,,_ t, - iU.
EXAMPLE 3. The Old Roman counterparts to the Gregorian excerpts given in Example 2.
190
Both repertoires are formulaic, but they differ noticeably in the ways in which they
assign formulas to different works. There is a still more basic difference in musical
vocabulary. The Gregorian cadence seems not to exist in any context within the Old
Roman repertoire. And yet the Old Roman singers were aware of this cadence by virtue
of its appearance in the Gregorian Alleluia Dum complere1Uur, which is included in the
Old Roman GraduaJ, Bibl. Apostolica Vaticana MS lat.5319. (Because this Alleluia
features a different cadential preparation, it was not included as part of Example 2.)
There are numerous instances parallel to the one cited above, but I shall cite
only one of these. Example 4A demonstrates a Gregorian nexus typical of mode 3 that
interrelates chants of several different genres. As shown in Example 4B, the Old
Roman counterparts are quite diverse. The Introit, Miserere naim... conculcavil, opens
with an alternative third-mode formula that one recognizes immediately from its
Gregorian counterpart. The Alleluia Paratum cor meum is in an entirely different mode.
B·· ... -
------
~£r
I! •
"- (".5 '''''1
===
Co, --
'''''"''
ve.;'_ re", _ J"
EXAMPLE 4. A comparison of a third-mode formulaic opening in the Gregorian tradition (A) with Old
Roman counterparts (B): a) Bealw servru (Communion, transposed down a fourth); b) Exswrg~ DomiM...
non praevaJeal (Gradual); c) wlldi DomiM... alkb4ia (first-mode Introit, transposed down a fourth); d)
Alkluia Paralum cor meum; e) Alkluia Qui sanar; f) Misuere mmi... conculcavit (lntroit).
When this paper was presented orally, Professor Jsrgen Raasted kindly pointed out the
strong kinship between the Gregorian formula and a prominent Byzantine formula also
characteristic of chants in modes on e." No suggestion of such a relationship exists in
the Old Roman repertoire .
.. For a rapid sampling of the Byzantine formula, see Egon WeUesz, Di~ Hymnen dI!S Sricherarium ftlr
September, MODumenta Musica ByzanliJlae, Transcripta, I (K~gen, 1936), pp.34, 35, 44, 52, 74,
and 117.
191
There is no one way in which our two repertoires either preserve or transform
formulaic nexuses. Example 5 assembles passages from the respond of Viderunt omnes
and the first verse of the Tract, Domine audivi, in both the Old Roman and Gregorian
traditions. Here comparison reveals immediately the very close correspondence between
the Gregorian counterparts. The Tract passage eliminates two tonal repetitions present
in the Gradual and supplies an additional neume for the first syllable of opera; it
regroups certain pitches but is otherwise identical in content to the excerpt from the
Gradual. The two passages are also related to one another within the Old Roman
repertoire, but the relationship is considerably more distant. Indeed, if we had no
knowledge of the Gregorian correspondence we might easily regard the Old Roman
passages as basically independent.
.-:-; G -
• •
~ • • 0· «
ep. •"
"'-'" «/..----....
al6) ,. .,., -
~dlClfa.] re Pe - ...--.
b FT • .~ . ... ; re" •
•-----
• '1:'• '~...-..
•• .. •• «
fJf5
C.o" - ~ i - .,ll. - '-,a - vj .. - ft!.·,a
EXAMPLE 5. Excerpts from Vukrunl omnu (transposed down • fifth) and Domine audivi in the
Gregorian transmission (a and b) and in the Old RODIIUl transmission (c and d).
192
The Old Roman counterpart thus furnishes still another alternative to the complex
discussed in Example 3.
• • ...
--... -----..
~ .. .• ..
$ -- -R ..·~2.Z .
. ~ e.
0- p<2 - ,. v - i t lae. - I" •
b 10 .': ;2- .
..--.,
I
..----."
•••
.. • w.??: -Q .Ge.; .
-
(
c19'; .g.
~,
v. -
..
'----..
Q
'
e.s
.. .,.
c:::\.:,.
.- . . .
c·~
nQ -
~
• • • ••
[,'\
. ,Q . ·G:::: .
EXAMPLE 6. A comparison of the openings of: a) verse 4 of Domine audivi; b) the Alkluia Dies
sanctificarus; and c) the Alkluia Video mews in the Gregorian tradition .
::1
..--,
••
,
.3 1'=7
0- p<! -
bI9;'~· · •
D~ - es ,$31 1 (..t;-
~~
c.1R···· AP
, •• • •
v; - J". 0 ca~los
The consequence of the changed relationship between text and music affects not
only the formulaic content but also the form of several of the pieces. Within the
Gregorian tradition, the type melody utilized by the members of the Alleluia Dies
sanctijiCalUS family is most often laid out in two unequal halves, these being marked
out by parallel beginnings. This parallelism exists in the Old Roman melody for the
Alleluia Dies sanctijiCalUS itself. There, as in the Gregorian repertoire, the varied return
occurs at the words, quia hodie. The interior disposition of the first half varies from
one repertoire to the other. In the Gregorian tradition, the first phrase is associated with
the word Dies. Following an inflected recitation on d, the second phrase is associated
with the word nobis. The third phrase, beginning with venite and ending with
Dominum, is interrupted and enlarged by an interior inflected recitation on f. In the Old
Roman tradition, the opening phrase, shown above, incorporates the words Dies
sanctijicaJus. This leads to an articulation on f rather than on d. As in its Gregorian
counterpart, the second phrase is associated with the word nobis and leads to the same
tonal goal, c. The two repertoires continue to parallel one another in the continuation of
193
the melody inasmuch as the Old Roman repertoire returns in varied form to the material
of the opening at the words, quia Iwdie. In this instance the melodic form is the same in
both traditions. But neither the Alleluia Vulimus stellam, nor the Alleluia Video eaelos,
nor the Alleluia Hie est discipulus return to the opening phrase at their respective
midpoints. The last of these three does reuse in its closing half the material of the
second phrase. But the parallelism between the respective settings of the words qui
testimonium and quia verum est provides a textual division that contrasts with the
Gregorian parallelism between ejus and verum est.
Examples 8 and 9 deal with the third phrase of the Alleluia Dies sanctificarus (as
defined above). The Gregorian phrase underlying the text, venUe gentes et adorare
Dominum, has equivalents in many chants in four different genres and in four different
modes. There is, however, no obvious trace of this nexus among the Old Roman
counterparts. The downward leap of a fourth to A that plays an important role in
defining the second-mode character of the Alleluia Dies sanctificatus family is absent
from the Old Roman versions. Again we find a difference of melodic vocabijJary. The
Gregorian version of the Alleluia Hie est discipuJus is also preserved in the Bibl.
Apostolica Vaticana, MS lat.5319. Yet its presence there does not cause any change in
the OJd Roman idiom.
.:;;; •• i i •
alV
···L~ filii -. ..:_ tl ...
~ IV • @.2.:QQ·~~·
p<! ....1;; - bit f Jc.
.-;-2 .2 Z pm. •• .-; . ,i;
.7.:2 z.
"'"
•• • ••
-.
.:;'. lii ::1 Q • •• *! •
......
.:;€ .'DQ • •• • ••
•• M.-- e .A
---..
••• •••• ;2 •
~f> e· JU~
194
-
~
~
•••• • •
"," -
•
t"\..t i
v . .,
•. «.
~
L- . .,
-"""'
eM. M •
..---.,
M •• '
""\
•
.. ..
~
( 19
~
rM·M·
,)~
.
·.M· ·M. b"•.... /" .~
,
~
V -
.---.~---..
•• • .,. • w,
("\I"
-...--...~
t if'n" eJ. :",,~ .~M ~ ~ ,-
~,
c.,;Z,?Fllj"!):I~
'Q
e - oJM
. ~
~ Ij
• M
J€ - G-' -
h 19 :. ,f, .{5;::~
f.J - d - t'~
•••
\I i -
.
;:;=;? • •
....--.-
M•
•~.
~ -
EXAMPLE ,. The Old Roman counterparts to the excerpts in Example 8. (Excerpt 9f is Transposed
down a fifth!) •
Even though the foregoing constitutes only a small sampling of evidence, I have
discovered no reason to think that this sampling is atypical of the whole. How might
this information be of assistance? Different interpretations open up. Within the
framework of a small essay I can explore only some of these.
I shall begin with a hypothesis that the surviving Old Roman melodies are on the
whole moderately close to those known during the late 8th century. Such a hypothesis
would rest on two main observations: 1) the repertory is largely (though not entirely)
archaic in content, and 2) the oral transmission of liturgical repertoires throughout the
world is generally very conservative in nature, sometimes astoundingly so. Although
Paul Cutter has demonstrated the nature of differences that may distinguish surviving
readings of the same chant within the Old Roman tradition, 5 these differences appear to
be surface phenomena. Certainly there are other examples of more complex melodies,
such as those of the second-mode Tracts that are remarkably similar from one reading
to another. J shall show that a few melodies apparently did submit to basic changes over
the centuries, but these form only a tiny proportion of the total.
5 "The Old-Roman Chant Tradition: Oral or Written?", Journal of lM American Mwicological SotUty
[JAMS] 20 (1967), pp. 167-181.
195
The Franks apparently invested considerable effort in learning Roman chant.
According to a propagandistic report, they were frustrated in their work by changes
introduced over a period of time by the Romans. Despite this, the Franks apparenUy
felt that they had been successful. Michel Huglo has put forth the thesis that only one
liturgy was known and practiced in Rome during the eight century. If we combine this
thesis with one claiming that the surviving Old Roman melodies are reasonable
approximations of their 8th-century forms, we shall be led to conclude that the Franks
had little success in their task. Under these twin conditions, one can hardly think in
terms of the assimilation of individual melodies. Despite ongoing efforts to master
Roman chant, efforts that occupied several decades, there may not have been sufficient
opportunity for Frankish singers to master the enormous Roman repertory. Because of
restricted access to their models, that which they were able to assimilate accounted to a
vague feeling for certain individual melodies plus an imprecise sense of appropriate
formulaic procedures. Left primarily to their own devices, with only occasional
guidance from Roman masters, they actually succeeded in creating a repertoire that
differed from their model in basic features. This is not merely a matter of innate
differences in musical cultures. Were such factors the main determinants of change, the
transformations could have been carried out in some systematic manner. But if the
Gregorian formulas in Example I represent the Frankish understanding of their Roman
models, why do the related forms of Example 2 reflect such diverse materials in the
Old Roman repertoire? And why do the same materials in the Old Roman repertoire so
often receive different realizations in the Gregorian repertoire? The most readily
apparent answer is that the Franks learned melodic procedures and not melodies.
Imbued, however, with a desire to adhere to an original considered to be of divine
inspiration, they failed to realize the nature of gulf that had arisen between the two
repertoires.
Such a scenario is worthy of ongoing consideration. It readily explains the
inconsistencies in the relationship between the bodies of Old Roman and Gregorian
chant. Yet this hypothesis suffers certain disadvantages. The Admonitio generalis of 789
mandated that all clerics should learn Roman chant, just as decreed by Pippin. 6 Since
Pippin's kingship occupied the years 751-768, this document seems to imply a learning
and transition period of at least twenty-five years. Such a period is in consonance with
the report of John the Deacon, who alleges that "Again and again the Germans and
Gauls were given the opportunity to learn chant. "7 John goes on to charge that two
Frankish clerics studied wjth the Roman schola under Pope Adrian, who reigned from
196
772-795. It is disconcerting to posit that the Franks were able to learn so little over a
period of 25-50 years. 8
John presents a very patronizing account of Frankish accomplishments. Yet if
Old Roman chant is at all close to 8th-century forms, his criticism of Frankish
ineptitude is extraordinarily mild. Had John had more than a fleeting acquaintance with
northern chant, he would have had available to him the basis for a far more scathing
denunciation. In order to sustain the two hypotheses discussed to this point, we must
virtually discard both John's account and the opposing version of the anonymous
Frankish monk as being without merit. This is a step that we may eventually be led to
take. Nevertheless, it is a step that I would prefer to reserve until a later point in our
studies. However open to suspicion these propagandistic accounts may be, they do
furnish eye-witness testimony bearing on the Frankish assimilation of Roman chant.
It is conceivable that the differences observable between Old Roman and
Gregorian chant may be attributable in large part to fundamental changes occurring in
the Roman repertoire between the 8th and 11th centuries. In that event the Gregorian
forms might be closer to their presumed models than we have present reason to suspect.
I am wary of past reasons adduced to support such a hypothesis. General appeals to the
variability exhibited by many oral traditions wiU not suffice. An oral tradition may also
exhibit extraordinary fixity , depending upon the cultural values of the particular milieu.
There seems to be such a strong tendency to equate orality with variability that scholars
often have difficulty in dealing with oral traditions displaying fixity. Commenting on a
paper summarizing the extraordinary range of practices in the creation and transmission
of oral literature, Albert Lord, one of the leading scholars involved in the study of oral
formulaic composition in epic literature, offered the ill-considered suggestion that
" .. . the kind of composition in which the singer makes up a song orally and ... commits
it to memory, may not be oral composition, but rather written composition without
writing. "9 Should we limit our concept of orality to any single tradition, we shall
handicap ourselves severely . From an ethnological standpoint it is risky to describe Old
Roman melodies as having a ''fin de siecie appearance characteristic of a later stage of
evolution. "10 In his discussion of musics of pre-literate peoples Curt Sachs places
"pathogenic" melodies ("tumbling strains") on an equal level of antiquity with
"Iogogenic" ones. It appears that by and large Mediterranean peoples are given to a
more exhuberant melodic style than northern ones.
8 The FIllD.ks also implied that a lengthy learning period was involved. See the well-known remarks of an
anonymous Frankish monk, translated ibid. , p.27.
9 Oral Literature and the Formula, ed. Benjamin Stolz and Richard Shannon, ill (Ann Arbor, 1976),
p.176.
10 Paul Cutter, "The Question of 'Old-RollWl Cbant'" , p.14.
197
The hypothesis of major change within the Old Roman repertoire may best be
sustained in either of two fashions. On the one hand, one may deal with the effects of
orality per se. Such an effort would need to answer several questions. How would a
variable or improvisatory oral tradition lead to a markedly finn written tradition form
many elaborate and often lengthy chants? Why is it that many formulaic nexuses in the
Gregorian tradition lack counterparts within the Old Roman tradition, and why do many
formulaic nexuses in the Old Rpman tradition lack Gregorian counterparts? How would
Orality at some times cause a greater reliance on formulas in Old Roman chants vis-a-
vis their Gregorian counterparts and at other times cause a lesser reliance?
Taking a different tack, one could seek to show a marked change in attitude on
the part of Old Roman singers, leading to a deliberate stylistic revision. The latter route
seems the more promising of the two, although not without hazards. In this regard, one
might seek to establish parallels with a similar process that evidently took place in
Byzantine chant. According to Oliver Strunk, a change from a simpler to a more
melismatic form of Byzantine melody took place between the years 850-1000: " ... a new
and more elaborate style was being developed, and composers were beginning to think
of themselves as virtuosi and to expect virtuosity of the singers who sang their
music. "11 Within the framework of this study I I can only indicate this possibility for
exploration.
If we wish to credit the Franks with a modicum of success in the assimilation of
melodies, we shall probably be led to posit the existence in the 8th century of a melodic
repertoire possessing features intermediate between those of the two surviving
repertoires. Several scholars, Stephen van Dijk among the foremost, have claimed that
two liturgies were known in Rome during the 8th century and for a long time
thereafter. Perhaps some of the disagreements on this topic reflect semantic issues
involving nuances attaching to the words "liturgy" and "different". If, for example, the
same actions and similar texts are supported by changed melodies, would one speak of
different liturgies?
Van Dijk's theories present us with a different set of advantages and
disadvantages. If an alternative melodic repertoire existed in Rome during the 8th
century, then Gregorian chant might be markedly closer to this alternative than to the
surviving Old Roman repertoire. We would be able to posit a greater degree of success
in the assimilation of melodies and consider the harvest of a quarter-century or more of
Frankish study to have been more bountiful.
Though we would still need to treat the conflicting accounts of John the Deacon
and the anonymous Frankish monk: with caution, we would be able to accommodate a
11 "Melody Construction in Byzantine Chant', Actes du Xl!! congres illlernaJionaI d' etudes byulnt/nes
(1963), repr. in Essays on Music in the Byzantine World (New York. 1977). p.194.
198
greater proportion of their information into our working scheme. The two accounts are
capable of resolution if we understand that John's major concern was with style while
our Frankish informant was preoccupied with notes. They are not discussing the same
issue. The conflict between retention of style and retention of detail is a familiar one on
several ethnological levels.
The most obvious of the disadvantages to this hypothesis concerns its
complexities and the problems posed for the execution of the stational liturgy. It is
likely that previous attempts to assign each of the different chant repertoires to specific
groups may have to be abandoned. However, I see no necessity for postulating such
assignments. Alternatively, one may think of a progressive repertoire that came to
challenge a previous conservative repertoire. One of these led ultimately to the
surviving Old Roman repertoire, while the other was adopted and transformed by the
Franks. Rather than being limited in use to a single group, such as the papal schola,
each repertoire would have been available to any group wishing to employ it, including
those involved in the stational liturgy. There was no legislation dictating the
abandonment of the older versions of the melodies. These continued to be used by
establishments reluctant to accept major revision.
Although I have an initial preference for this last set of hypotheses, it is
premature to reach any final judgment regarding the various alternatives. Much more
study needs to be accomplished before a reasonable balance sheet may be drawn. In this
process the comparison of different nexuses of melodic interrelationships promises to
furnish meaningful illumination into the complexity of our task.
Further light on the inherent difficulties of sorting out the ongoing
interrelationship between Roman and Gregorian chant may be shed by the study of
melodies whose Gregorian forms are known to have undergone significant change. At
present these appear to be of two sorts: 1) melodies whose modal assignments were the
subject of debate, and, 2) melodies not readily notatable within the limits of the
Guidonian gamut.
In his study of Old Roman Introits, Thomas ConnoUy has shown that Old
Roman formulae are not restricted to specific tonal goals. 12 The drive towards a
predictable final is weak. Regino of Prom informs us that the same was true for a
limited number of Gregorian Introits and Antiphons that he labels "canrus fU)lhae" .13
However, the main thrust of Frankish musical theory was towards a more centralized
form of tonal organization. Thus many of Regino's cantUJ fU)thae were reshaped by
later hands. Dew in adjutorium, provides a case in point.
12"lntroits and Arcbetypes: some Arcbaisms of the Old Roman Chant", JAMS 25 (1972), pp. 157-174.
lJ"Epistola de hannonica institutione, " ed. Martin Gerbert, Scriplores Ecclesiasrid th Musica Sacra (St.
Blasien, 1784; repr. 1931,1963), f: 231.
199
. ",
....---
• • .--;~w. .ii •~
,\ r--. '" ~
a
/~ .... "\'" '; ~ ... I! - rv"f
,.-.
0- ,,; -"'c'" t"rI . . . a", Ps. A - o/t.r-~., - r".-
~
~
,\ /':
b
J
v
.:.
~l
J~
-- /"' --::",
EXAMPLE 10. The opening and the close of Dew in adjUlorium. a) Rome, Bib/. Angelica MS 1436; b)
Rome, Bib/. ValliceUiaoa MS C52; c) Vatican, Bib!. Apostolica MS lat. 5319.
In Regino's day, the opening tonal reference of Deus in adjutorium was a fourth
higher than the closing reference; the melody began in eighth mode and closed in
seventh. The version of Rome, Bibl. Angelica MS 1436 presents a modal organization
matching the description given by the theorist. This is a fourteenth-century Gradual
from Bamberg. (Other sources preserving this organization include Munich, Bayerische
StaatsbibI. MSS clm17013, 17014, 17025 -- Premonstratensian sources from ScheftJarn
-- and Bibl. Apostolica Vaticana MS Rossi 76 -- a thirteenth-century source from
Aquileia. 14) This form of modal organization apparently underlies the reading of Laon,
Bibl. mun., MS 239. IS Rome, Bibl. Vallicelliana 'MS C52, an eleventh- or twelfth-
century Gradual from the region of Arezzo, provides one of the earlier readings
featuring a revised, unified modal organization. This version is to be found in the major
Aquitanian sources, as well as in Benevento, Bibl. Cap. MS V. 19 and VI.35. It occurs
also in a few Italian sources preserved at VerceIIi and Padua as well as in German
sources such as Berlin, Deutsche Staatsbibl. MS lat.4° 664, Salzburg, Bibl. St. Peter,
.4 Additional transcriptions of Deus in adjUlorium are given by Hendrilc van der Werf in The Emergence
of Gregorian Challl (Rochester, N. Y., 1983), II: 104-107, and in this author's ·Some Chant Models for
Isue's Choralis Constant;nus~, Beyond the Moon: Festschri/t Luther Dillmer, ed. B. Gillingham and P.
Merkley, Musicological Studies un (Institute of Mediavel Music, 1990), pp.337-340.
IS The nature of the melody is such that &diastematic MSS are Dot able to indicate unequivocally which of
the various forms of modal organization is being intended unless they provide neumes for the psalm tone.
Einsiedeln StiftsbibJ. MS 121 employs a seventh-mode psalm tone. Other early sources, such as Chartres,
Bibl. mun. MS 47 and st. Gall, Stiftsbibl. MS 339 lack music for the psalm tone.
200
MS a.iv.14, and Melk, Stiftsbibl. MS 109. In the readings of both the Bodmer
Gradual 16 and the Vatican, Bibl. Apostolica MS lat.5319 -- given above -- the modal
organization is comparable to this late Gregorian reading, as may be seen by comparing
Example lOb and Wc.
Should one posit that a unified tonal organization was present in the Roman
model available to the Franks, one claims that it was the Franks who made the
organization diffuse, only to reverse themselves at later date. This goes entirely against
the grain of what we know of Frankish and Roman musical tastes. It seems far more
likely that the diffuse tonal structure was characteristic of the composite of eighth-
century Roman practices and that it was taken over by the Franks. The tonally unified
nature of the Roman melody appears to be the result of Frankish influence on later
Roman musical practice, whether in terms of general attitudes towards tonal centricity
or in terms of the knowledge of the modified form of the Gregorian melody.
Similar conclusions may be drawn from other chants that involve problems of
modal stability. Viclricem manum and Judica Domine, another two of Regino' s cantus
nolMe, again demonstrate that the Old Roman versions are comparable to reworkings
of the early Gregorian tradition for the purpose of achieving modal unity. Regino's
partial list of canlUS MIMe includes only twelve Introits. More than a third of these
concern changes within a single maneria, one presents a special problem in the
defmition of mode, and in one instance the Old Roman and Gregorian melodies are
unrelated. Thus the existence of three melodies having similar histories of transmission
is likely to be more significant than the small number might initially lead one to
conclude.
My final example concerns the third-mode Communion, Beams servus. Two
years ago, Professor Charles Atkinson delivered a fine paper before this group tracing
the interaction between this melody and medieval modal and notational theory.17 The
problem presented by this chant concerns the fact that the second degree is variable.
Inasmuch as the only variable degree admitted within the mainstream of medieval
theory involved the alternatives of b flat and b natural, the chant was generally notated
with the final on a. Scribes wishing to notate the chant on the normal final of e had to
find alternative ways of indicating the placement of half-steps within the central portion
of the chant. This was generally accomplished by a downward displacement of certain
material followed by an upward return to the normal level. Example 11 shows the
16 Facsimile edition, ed. by Mu Liitolf, Das Gradua1e von Santa Cecilia in Trastevere, 2 vols. (Cologny
- Gen~ve,1987).
17 -From 'Vitium ' 10 'Tonus acquisitus': On the Evolution of the NOlationaJ Matrix of Medieval ChanV
InternaJionaJ Musicologicol Society Study Group Cantus Planus: Papers Read aJ ZM Third Muting,
Tlhany 1988 (Budapest. 1990), pp . 181 -197.
201
;: ? ....
- • • f!l •
-
.~ -i·~
,,;r
•
- -iV -.&0$
.
[)" - "" - "vj
'''- >le. "e. - ~,
Sj - J.J., .
•7 • • • 1.1 •
I
:;: C • ;: :
•• -- • fe) • .7, •• • •• ."4
:: . .,. - ,) i.
.; .
iJ - "..,~" <.0 VC> -
- -- ..
• • • ••
•
• . .: •
EXAMPLE 11. A critical area in Bealus servus: a) Montpellier, Facult6 de Medecine, MS H 159 (here
transposed down a fourth); b) Paris, Bib!. nat. MS n. acq. lat. 1669; c) Modena, Bib!. cap. MS 0 .1.7; d)
Vatican, Bib!. Apostolica MS lat. 5319.
critical area of the chant according to selected representative versions. 18 For present
purposes we may focus on the section setting the words, vigilantem: amen dico vobis,
super omnia. And, to begin, we may concentrate on the leap occurring at the juncture
of the words vobis and super. The central core of the Gregorian tradition, based on an a
final, gives this leap as a fourth. The reading of the Montpellier MS serves to document
this core. The e final, on the other hand, is normally associated with a leap of a fifth,
owing to the downward displacement of previous material. This is demonstrated in the
reading of Paris, Bib!. nat. MS n.acq.lat.1669, which exemplifies a normative
adjustment -- beginning with the setting of the word Dominus -- made in order to
compensate for the lack of f sharp when the chant is notated on e. However, in the
version described by the theorist, John "Cotton", and present in the Modena source
given above, in Padua, Biblioteca Capitolare MS A 47, and in Sa1zburg, Bibliothek
Sankt Peter MS a.iv.14, there is no displacement of material and hence the leap of the
fourth is preserved. The Modena MS may be the earliest of these sources. This gradual
from Forlimpopoli (near Ravenna) is dated vaguely from the 11th-12th centuries. The
11 Additional readings for this chant are given in this author's ·Some Chant Models,· pp.330-332.
202
theorist John was apparently writing shortly before the turn of the twelfth century,
while the Padua MS (from Ravenna) is dated from the beginning of that century. The
Salzburg source is late, being attributed to the 14-15th centuries.
When we compare the Old Roman readings for this melody with their Gregorian
counterparts,19 we find that: l) the two traditions differ markedly in the degree of
floridity; 2) the written sources for the Old Roman tradition present a highly uniform
account of the melody; and, 3) the Old Roman scribes apparently had to wrestle with
the same problem of a variable second degree. Their solution is based on e and does not
involve the displacement of any material. Hence we find the leap of a fourth at our
critical juncture. The comparison of the relative pitch levels of the various traditions for
Beatus servus is made difficult at the opening because of the strong differences between
the Gregorian. and Old Roman readings. But if we compare the Old Roman setting of
the words, amen dico vobis, with the sample Gregorian readings, we note that the level
accords with the Montpellier and Modena readings, and not with that of the Paris MS.
Furthermore, the setting of the word vigilamem comes to an articulation on d, rather
than on one on c. It is clear that the Old Roman solution--adopted unanimously--is
equivalent to a late Gregorian version found in only three of the approximately hundred
sources that I have studied, albeit one corroborated by John. This evidence and that of
the canIUS nothae suggests that cross-currents of influence continued to swirl between
northern and southern repertoires of chant for a period of several centuries.
It is probably only wishful thinking to suppose that by continuing to broaden our
perspectives on the interrelationship between Old Roman and Gregorian chant we shall
finally achieve certainty regarding respective origins and mutual influences. But such
efforts will undoubtedly result in richer and more nuanced hypotheses. The various
forms of comparison broached in this paper have a great deal to offer in terms of
clearer understanding and offer promising veins for further exploration.
19 A comparison of the opening of the melody according to the two traditions has been afforded by
Example 4.
203
Simon HARRIS
Many years ago a colleague of mine took me to task over the definition of the
word hymn. I suggested to him that a hymn was a musical setting of non-Biblical
liturgical poetry. But although this is a fairly common meaning of the word among
liturgists, I had to agree that it will not work for Latin traditions. Such a definition
would, for instance, put the Gloria in excelsis Deo and the Te Dewn (neither of which
are usually regarded as hymns) into the same category as Aeterne rerum conditor and
Dew creator omnium (which are). And this definition also fails to take account of the
most important medieval habit of transferring a text from one part of the liturgy to
another. So that, for example, there are texts, the form of which is psalmodic or
hymnodic, but not the content. As an example of a chant whose form but not content is
psalmodic, we might consider the first of the Advent Responsories in the Roman Rite as
described by Amalarius; I as an example of a chant whose form but not content is
hymnodic, we might turn to one of several Byzantine Communions. 2
For I feel that, whilst the word psalm is universally unambiguous (it being
understood that Biblical Canticles like the Magnijicat are also psalmodic), the word
hymn as understood by musical historians of the Latin West is not. So I propose to
replace it with the word antiphon. At this point it becomes clear that, whilst many
psalms are sung without antiphon (that is: direct or in direclWn), many more, both
Greek and Latin, are sung with one.
J Amalarius, De ordine Anliphonarii, 8. Migne, 00., Parr%gia Lalina 105, col. 1260. P. Battifol,
Histo;re du Breviaire Romain, 3rd 00. trans. into English by Atwell Baylay (London, 1912) pp.87-88,
gives the full text of the Responsory Aspiciens a longe. It should be DOted perbaps !hat this is not wholly
unpsalmodic since vv. 2 and 3 quote isolated psalm verses - Pss.79 v.l and 23 v. 7 respectively .
2 I.e. !he Byzantine Communions of the 13th-century As matikon , !hough I am sure many later examples
could be found . In all such cases a psalmodic text is used, but this seems to have had no influence upon
the ultimate musical form of !he chant.
~ Reference is made here to all chants in both Mass and Office, traditionally regarded as reductions of
psalms - Responds, Graduals, Alleluias, Offertories, Introits and Communions - see Willi Apel.
Gregorian C1uznI (Bloomington, Ind., 1958), pp. 179-198, 228-241, 244-245, 305-392.
4 I am thinking of the psalmody of the Office - including (no doubt imer alia) the psalmody of the
MagnijicaI. See Apel, 0p. cif., pp.208-228 and 392-404.
S The Sticherarion and the HinnologioD. I make no reference to the acknowledged complications of these
two books - in the former concerning the so-called S~dard Abridged Version, in the latter concerning
the relationship between K«..."~V and qtt~OS.
6 There is evidence that some Greek psalmody was choral. In the 12th c. the Hexapsahnos in Orthros
seems to have been sung chorally, at least in some places, and there are references in St Basil's letter to
the clergy of Neocaesarea to choral, and indeed antiphonal, psalm singing. But there seems to be no
reason to suppose that any of this psalmody was other than direct. Cf. J. Mateos, "La Psalmodie daDS le
rite byzantin", Proche-Orienr Chretien 15 (Jerusalem. 1965), pp. 107-126; and "L'office moaastique a la
fin du IVe si~cle: Antioche, Palestine, Cappadoce", Oriens Christian us 47 (Wiesbaden. 1963), pp.53-88.
7 The Greek equivalents to the Latin soloist's chants are to be found in the Prokeimena and Alleluias of
the Psaltikon. For the latter there is an important publisbed study - Christian Thodberg, Du
Byzantiniscm Alleluiarionzyklus: Studien im /cun.e" Psaltilconslil, Monumenta Musicae Byzantioae
[MMB). Subsidia, vrn (Copenhagen, 1966).
Since the psalmody under consideration seems to be unaffected by the known duality of Greek psalmodic
traditions, I have nol referred to this duality. Those interested in it should perhaps begin by consulting
Oliver Stnmk's essay "The Byuntine Office at Hagia Sophia", printed in Essays on Music in t~
Byzantine World (New Yort, 1977), pp.1l2-150. Another of Strunk's essays to which I have made no
reference ("S.Salvatore di Messina and the Musical Tradition of Magna Graecia", op. cif., pp.45-54)
206
It is against this background I suggest, that the Christmas and Epiphany
Troparia, and their associated psalmody, should be seen. For in spite of their odd
liturgical contexts, to my knowledge they are the only complete swvivals from before
1300 of Greek musical examples of this composite form of psalmody and antiphon. s
There are two of them in the vigil for each feast, but since the second psalm is the same
for each (ps. 92), there are four troparia (antiphons) but only three psalms (pss. 86 and
92 for Christmas Eve, and Pss. 66 and 92 for the Eve of Epiphany). And there are only
two modal arrangements in the series, since those for the troparia with Pss. 86 and 92
are all the same. The service books published in 1971 show that modem practice is
textually very similar to that of the thirteenth century, but it is not identical and so
cannot be taken as a wholly reliable guide. Nor do medieval sources agree entirely
among themselves, which rather suggests that medieval practice was not completely
stable. But the Psaltika and Asmatika of thirteenth-century Southern Italy seem to agree
entirely with a published musical source of 1207 from Russia and so must represent a
well-established tradition. 9
The thirteenth-century music for the troparia is found in six copies of the
I
Asmatikon, a book apparently for a choir of trained singers or "'oc).~ L.. That for the
psalms is found in eight copies of the Psaltilron, which almost certainly was a soloist's
book. In addition, at least three books have the music for both troparia and psalms -
two thirteenth-century Psaltika from Southern Italy in mediobyzantine notation and at
least one Russian source in an un transcribable paleoslavonic notation. I have transcribed
from Italian sources of the so called Messina tradition the first of the two Christmas
Eve pieces - the troparion f\.oce~" 6ri.x~'t ~ with its associated psalm, Ps. 86.
And following a suggestion made many years ago by Anton Baumstark, I have
appended a transcription of the Latin Invitatory Psalm and Antiphon for Christmas Day,
since I think this may be the nearest the Latin West comes to this kind of psalmody,10
A comparison between the two (Examples 1 and 2) shows four differences that
are noticeable straight away: the way the psalms are divided, the presence or absence of
does discuss this psalmody, bUI only in connexion with the relationship between the Psaltikon and
Asmatikon.
8 The Christmas and Epiphany psalms and antipbons appear in the early part of Great Vespers for the
Eves of these two Feasts - services which include celebrations of the Mass of SI Basil; see the Menaea for
December pp.378-385 and January pp.121-129 (Athens, 1971); and for the services' 9th c. form see
Anton Baumstark - Odilo Heiming, 00., Noctuma lAus (MUnster, 1956), pp.67-70.
9 The sources consulted are: Grottaferrata r.I(.I, r.V.vn and E.a.XllI (all S, Italian Asmatika); r.y.v,
Vatican gr.l606, Messina Univ.Lib.129 and 120 (all S. Italian Psaltika); Conracariwn Paleoslavicum
Mosquense, 00. Arne Bugge, MMB, Principal Series, VI (Copenhagen, 1960). A paleoslavonic MS
published in facsimile and da.ted 1207 has a lacuna where both lroparion and psalm (quoted in Ex. 1)
should be.
10 Baumstark's suggestion first appears in Liturgie Comparee (1939), revised by Bemard Botte (paris,
3/1953), p.121; Eng. trans. of this edition by F. L. Cross, Compararive Liturgy (London, 1958), pp. 109-
1l0.
207
the Gloria Patri, the amount of the antiphon forming the internal refrain, and the much
simpler musical style of the western Invitatory.
The first three points of difference appear within Greek traditions for these
psalms. All medieval sources, musical and non-musical, agree in dividing all the psalms
into three sections at exactly the same points. But the modem service books divide the
same psalms into five sections for Christmas Eve and four sections for the Eve of
Epiphany. And not only is Ps. 92 differently divided for Christmas and Epiphany, but
both Pss. 66 and 92 are textually deficient for Epiphany. J I
The Gloria Patri is absent from the Greek psalms in all the medieval musical
sources, including the published Russian paleoslavonic source, and in such a way as to
suggest that it was not sung. But it seems to be indicated by lypika and lectionaries
from the tenth to the fifteenth centuries, and by modem service books. 12
[n both the Greek psalms and the Latin Invitatory, the antiphon is sung complete
at the beginning and the end. For the two internal refrains, the Greek antiphon is
reduced to its final third, while for three of the six internal refrains the Latin antiphon
is reduced to its final half, being sung complete for the other three. The modem Greek
service books agree with the medieval musical sources on the extent of the internal
refrain of all four antiphons; but a few medieval non-musical sources preserve internal
refrains in which the antiphon was either sung complete. or was more drastically
reduced 10 its closing words. 13 I should perhaps add that, when it is applied, the process
of reduction preserves in all cases, both Latin and Greek, the end of the antiphon and
not the beginning.
So the first three points of difference between the Greek Christmas Eve psalm
and the Latin Christmas Day Invitatory may be misleading. The fourth I think is
probably not. Admittedly, very few parallels - perhaps surprisingly few - have been
drawn between Latin and Greek medieval chant, but all of them to my knowledge have
~hown that Latin chants are simpler than Greek ones. This is not just because Greek
medieval music is more elaborate. Compare for example the two antiphons. The fact
that the Greek antiphon is more than eight times the length of the Latin antiphon is not
simply because it is more melismatic, or contains intonation formulae. It is also because
it is a setting of twenty eight words against the Latin six.
II See the Menoea for December. pp.381 and 383 and for January. pp. 123-124 and 125·126
12 See the MetUJeQ for Dec. and Jan. (wc. cil.); the Prophetologium, ed. C. Hoeg - G. Zuntz - G.
Engbetg. MMB. Lectionaria (Copenhagen. 1939-80), Vol.l : pp.39-41, 45-46. 6Hi2. 61-68; J. Mateos,
Le 7ypicoll tk la Grandl! Eglise, 2 vols. , eel. Oriellla/ia Chrlstiana Analeda 165-166 (Rome. 1962-
1963). vol. J (16S) pp. ISO, 176, 111; and Mateos, "La Psalmodie". lot. cil. Maloos does not seem to
have consulted the musical sources. and regards the presence or absence of the GIoria PaIri as significant
enough to form a distinguishing feature between "antiphonal" and "responsorial" psalmody. In the
Byzantine Rite this distinction seems to me unnecessary and difficult to sustain.
13 See the Menaea for Dec. and Jan.; the Prophetologium; and Mateos. Le 7'ypicon (allloc. Cif.).
208
But simplicity does not necessarily mean lack of sophistication. Turning to a
comparison between the two settings of the psalms themselves we may notice that both
c.ontain the elements of what became psalm-tones in the West - initia, tenors, flexes,
medial and final cadences - and both are thoroughly repetitious, but haphazardly so in a
way which seems to preclude their reduction to a musical formula like a psalm-tone. In
my opinion, however, there is a significant difference. The Greek setting is repetitious
both within each psalm-section and from one section to the next; but although each
section has approximately the same scheme, returning at the end to the style and
cadence of the antiphon, no psalm-section can possibly be predicted from the last, even
the number of internal cadences (marked off in transcription by double bars) varying
from one to the next. By contrast, in the Latin setting there are no repetitions within a
psalm-section; and each successive section is closely similar to the last, varying in little
more than the number of syllables that have to be accommodated at each stage.
So if we take a teleological view of things, measuring the distance of each
psalm-setting from the evolution of a musical formula like a psalm-tone, I think we
must admit that the Latin Invitatory has travelled a lot further down this road than the
Greek psalm.
209
The Gn~k.
Troporion. l\a.9<.w ~~'ls and PscJm 86 ClSsocio.ted. Ca)i.lh it on
Christmas ~,0.5 fou.nd. in XII Ith. Cent. Asrmti.kA and. PsaLtCka. from.
,j liH
,....,.o.,..,.,~.o,,: S. lta.l~
~~ C~~ .
''le.. o._",~
1 I 3d J Jl. U
La..thon. e_
ij qr J Jl r sp
ttW<ht.Jche:. e_ "IS. e •.
ij ~ ::
~' Q!.-vz Arx.9~v E. &. Tr;,~; &'. E;.E:.. &. lS_ t._ E.
~ 6' Ukho.khon:
, o.S' 6kho.
o.
J j i J J ~ ill
xo. o.
o.llOll..YU..
){O-J?" «»"00_ (lOt-
"ID r
1"0 ..!:hos:
VO:;"0-N'S-
j J
o.
0_ o. o.
r b b 6:
o. ~_ 0.
')to 0_
os IR:. t· Wilt. cx.. mY E. 1fIJ· '1. t'). ~.'1- t'J. (.11. ~£. ~JJO
Solo Cho~r
"~J lJ ,J
lle. a.. Yl.. e OS_
n 8J QSG J b~JlJljlHb %
per slo. "90.l'na.. kln.JL Q..khll._ no...
'1- Q.. '(t. £ (J- W(T'. me aro_ o. 0_ no-fL«.- 'Aoc..~. a.j..ot... VOt..
xa..
tt
~. a: Ta.oY GIl_O'n•• (. '].t. 1..6-llfX.... fX.... OL. ]..oc..-x..:xrx- ~. oc.
tD 1] ¥J ,CjolrO£) J J Cr J] ]I J ~ GJ D
ne- o....ne "CL.no... P""~. Llo_ kho.kho. me_~.e.~.
"1- "'-"1 x... x. weo-~«.- tt... llo. 1\!>- 1...0-. 1'4f-.'21.£. ~t.
210
gChoir
;3 iQJq@IIJ ffitlJ AJ DOJ &¥4
SoLo
;, J J% h H· J>!;U J j h P tl J J J fl ij) J Et
t19i...ne- Jd,e.)S_ Q!. nkwl: en pi.. ~_ Lkhi.._ stL ~roskl.. nOI4_
m. Vf.. xt. ~- E:. E.. ~EV" f,V nL. ~_ '--Xl. L. OTEL ~ocn(U. u. u. you.
,{HU]
~_
kilo. o. o.
~UJ 1]tJJ~}J
l"ISo. o. ~o.kho. ~.o. o~ ~.
ru J UJ!O® 0. ~. 0_ kho.
l..CiJ • ~. (,J. (;). nCJ. r.>. AG.)· XCJ . ~.(.). c.J. ~- w. (.)- ~.c.). 'R.)-
f J] J1 J i in J p £J Ji; ~ J J ~ J) ~ } J J H]
'g. on. e-khe. le. n~e: • l. _ nl"k!U.. .... so.
~.c.rt €-x€. t. At. f.. €. n£" -~- V'lX'· ~_ 0"0_ 0. 0.
1.
,J ~ S (Tb
en ai.s o.
J>
re.5L
~llJlJ p IlJ ~ F J !i JiHi J
. tis o...yi._
Ntt
ou· (.v -ro~S o. o. ee _ O"~
, J ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ J iD ~ J ) Hij G la j ~ j)l 11
tQ.S PI,· La.s St. on: •
Ta:.S TTU. u. ks crL.W. elL W. c.>. Cil. CaJ. ~~ c.>. l.). c.')V·
d~<h>_X4une •
bf_oO.}xCJ]AE. E.
'"
J)J IJ
. fTle_ khe_ ~Le_ ~_khe_~. e_ '"'ge_ hge. :-
L.I. pE_ £. E_e_]..t_ t_ ~.€_ €_t_V€_J...€- 2L f.._ nt;# ll~ :-
Oo.l Segn.o 2a.L Ftne) e po\. ~o, 2.
fi.LL: ke
o. 0_ o. tv-Ao\...ot: KOCL.
, Er H)
tL_
6 p ]) ] J G' H ~ 1 Pr Hd§]
TO!>: ke lo.._ os ton e_thl_O_
nJ ~
Otl TU. U. eos 'I«<L Aoc._ 0_ OS Tt.N CXI...Bl._ 0_ 0_ 0_ 0_ O. 0"- o. 0_
~on:
fi £J? Gb5El
Oll_ tL
aPJ) 0 bJ~ ddJ
e _ye.hL.
J
thL~~a.n:
o. mAL W. WV' OU. TOL. OL_ OL e: .r-.v~- ~.a~.cr(L
, PG SUj) H J~ 1
pos;
ad i ~JJ
ke on.
a6n S:!i J tr
thro. ~os' e
TTO. 0_ o. o. o. o. os' I«X1. en. cr..v. 8ew. lTO. os' E,
f pt.Ha
ye t'11.;
~ ~!l hp ID ID
(t.)
uRn thl.: en
llll. ~F ~
Q.V. b.:
re v'l.'1-' ~- '1. '1- fJ- '1- 1')- 1']. '1. et]· ~v ~lJ.1l]. 'l.t'}- 'l-
r
t')- t'J- '1- "'I. ~. t'J- .,. K(lL OCV. TO. O. os
Jl
e.the.me_
btJ Gu...f ~ J Jl a v ~ J &:!J
0. Sell a.v.b.n: 0 l.
id o[j J
~SL ~to.
8
~. 6E..I-'€_ AI.. (.>-CItV <XU. TT]. l'}V' 0 U. U. U. +1-- cnO. o. O.
u
Ic.lio. ~. o. no.kho. )S. o. "'90. n9 0s : .
o. xo. <so o. o. vc-xo- lS. o. no. uos
da.L Segno ~ QL Fi.ne, e ~oi. No. 3
F et1
ev
qro..fL:
II N 4."HD mID IH@ J
(L:)
}'e«..4>t'J . '1.' 'l- '1. '1' t)- .,. t}". ~. ~.
J Jl J
lo.._
Aa:._
on:
m
w. W.e.>.
fr HgDfHUgs[Ul
.
jlJ)J Ilpl ~J J
os ev. fre.no. me_
t']. '1' ,- '1- 1, .,. '1- ~- .,.~. 1- ~. (,.)s EU-feCXL-Vo. ~
; bGJl tJIF l ~ j) Jl PG m~ J
,",on po... an. Clon (. kAJ:L .k~. 0.
jl J 6:llJ ~
en si.._
f
n~Jhi.._
n
'IS. i..._
vt.:Jv TTGt.CX-V_ 'T(,)V '1 1<<x'.TOl. KI... lo. L. oc. £v (fOL,OI... VOL.X0I.. ~_ 01..
,D fJ
no.
b Jl) tl f] P jJ P P n.Ob P ]l ~1 NHS
~tro:pra.e.oc..clt. pe. trW.$ }o.. CA.. em e... lUS tn con.'fes-,s,- o. ne.,
'fH'~bjlbPppnppjlPfUPH
oe. os: quo. n.i... Q.tn non F'f.. ~ let ])0. mL. nus ~le.. be", s\'\'o Am, Cl,u.i..a. in
; fJ ;I'l jl ~ P b Jl rh) [H
ma..P'l1L to. iw JW\t OI1'lJ\tS fL nu tu.
a !jJ1 P 1)j)j) $J
YCI£.. et 01.. ti. tu... di.. nes "'Oh..
216
No. 3. [Solo]
'P~~~~J))~)P)~))~lln)npSn
tnl£S CD.nun Da.m\..no,ctw, fo..cit nOJ,q,w....a. i..,Jm est Do.mi..nus ~ W "0. br: nos
fn~~bPIl~}n~J1Il~£l~nnan 1
QIol. ~tm ~D. plLi..u e. u..s, tJ: 0. ~ts ~Q.. 1tl.&.. ~ e... Lw. D<l. c.opo
Cl!. FinL, epot No.1t.
No.t... [SoLo]
fmJ!JlJlHHUD~£llljljl]1ObH;1 )
Ho. ~ \.. f. SLVO-C.tm (. tus cud~. e. ri. • tu, no. li. te ob.~IA.. TIL. re tor. aClt
. -
I Ut. ac.. .str. to: \.Lb~ tm.l:A..ve.rwd:mc ~o... tres n. 5tri., pro. bo... ve.'CUI\t et v~.
fbPldPJ)bflJ!1JJlRf)fl pDhidm
u,q,~s lu.ro... 'It in \.. fa. tne. 4., si. In.. tro. ~_ bunt u, re.
No. 6.
fP Jli\ i i\ P fl H
Glo.
[Solo]
P b jl
ri.. a. Pa...tri, et Fi.. u..o t d: Sp~.ri..t\.l. ~ SClI\.
tJ Jl £1 JJ 11 flJl
cb>; .14.wt
English versions of Pss. 86 and 94 can be found in the Anglican Prayer Book (as Pss.
87 and 95).
219
Gerda WOLFRAM
Will man liber Fragen der Modulation in der byzantinischen Musik sprechen, so
muB man vorerst klarsteIlen, was das eigentIiche Wesen einer byzantinischen Tonart,
eines sog. Echos, ist. L. Richter definiert es folgendermaBen: "Die Echoi sind keine
Skalen mit absoluter oder funktioneller Stufenbedeutung, sondem modale Kategorien,
d.h. Zusammenfassungen von Melodieformeln, denen ein gleiches Konstruktionsprinzip
zugrunde liegt. " I
In der ersten HaIfte des 15. Jh. schreibt Gabriel Hieromonachos, der Verfasser
einer Schrift zum byzantinischen Kirchengesang, folgendes liber den Echos: "Die
Gestaltung eines jeden Echos ist wie eine {Klang)farbe, die jeden der Echoi von den
anderen unterscheidet. ( ... ] JOOer von diesen ist nicht eingestaltig, sondern vielfiiltig,
und in jedem einzelnen werden verschiedene Eigenarten wahrgenommen."2 Uher die
Anzahl der byzantinischen Tonarten erfahren wir von diesem Autor in folgender Weise:
"[ ... ] die Psaltike beinhaltet noch die Echoi. Es sind acht an der Zahl und nicht mehr.
Es ist ebensowenig moglich, zu diesen noch eine Zugabe auszudenken, wie zu den acht
Teilen der Rede. Und so harmoniert all das, was ein Sanger iiberhaupt singen kann, mit
einem der acht Echoi."3 Wie wir wissen, handelt es sich hier urn die vier
Haupttonarten, die Echoi Kyrioi, und die vier Nebentonarten, die Echoi Plagioi. In der
zentralen Oktave bilden die vier Haupttonarten das obere Tetrachord, die vier
Nebentonarten das untere. AlIe weiteren Tonarten wurden immer als Ableitungen der
vier Haupt- und der vier Nebentonarten empfunden. Die Tabelle des Cod. Athos Laura
r 67 weist uns darauf hin, daB bereits im 10. Jh. neben den vier Haupt- und den vier
Nebentonarten drei mediale Echoi und zwei Phthorai, d.h. Modulationszeichen, in
Verwendung waren. 4
51. Rusted, "The Hagiopolites. A Byzantine Treatise OD Musical Theory", Cahiers de ,'lnsfifUf du
Moyen-Age grec efialin 45 (Copenhague, 1983), S.lO, § 2.
6 Raasted, "The Hagiopolites ... ", S.14, § 6.
7 D. Conomos, The Trearise of Manuel Chrysaphes, fhe Lampadarios, Corpus Scriptorum de Re Musica
der MMB, Bd. 2 (Wien, 1985)
8 Conomos, op. Cif., S.49.
9 Hannick - Wolfram, op. cif., S.89.
10 Conomos, op. cif., S.49 .
222
Die Phthorai hingegen bewirken eine Enallage des Echos und des Melos. Die
Modulation findet in der Lage der vorher gesungenen Tonart statt, also auf der dieser
eigenen relativen TonhOhe. Gabriel Hieromonachos verwendet rur diesen phthorischen
Vorgang das Verbum metaballein,1I Substantiv metabole, einen Begriff, mit dem in der
griechischen Musiktheorie sowohl die Transposition, die Veriinderung der TonhOhe, als
auch die Modulation der Melodie bezeichnet wird.
Bei Manuel Bryennios, dem Theoretiker der klassischen Musik im 14. Jh. findet
sich folgende Defmition der Metabole in der iibersetzung Jonkers: "Modulation is the
transposition (of a tonos) to a different region (of the voice), or the variation of the
underlying scale and of the character of the melody. "12 Dies entspricht der von
Ptolemaios genannten melQbole kala tonon (fOr die Transposition) und metabole kala
melollS (fUr die Transformation).)3
Die neubyzantinische Musiktheorie des 19. Jh. trifft ihre Formulierungen iiber
die Metabole im Sinn der klassischen Schriften. J. Raasted wies darauf hin, daB dieses
System der Metabolai in der neubyzantinischen Musik zum Teil Zustande forrnuliert,
die bereits in den musikalischen Handschriften des 12-13. Jh. in den Zwischen-
signaturen zum Ausdruck kommen diirften.14
Die Modulation in eine andere Tonart geht nach dem Setzen einer Phthora durch
eine langsame Veriinderung des Melos vor sich. Fur das Melos der Phthorai verwendet
Manuel Chrysaphes das Aristotelische Begriffspaar dynamis und energeia, wie in seinen
Formulierungen zum Ausdruck kommt "[ ... ] he uses the phthora of the fourth mode
and destroys immediately the power (dynamis) of the nenano phthora, and it creates its
own individual melody." "[ ... ] the melody of the phthora is extended artistically and
demonstrates its strength (energeia). "IS Es wird hier klar, daB Manuel Chrysaphes und
Gabriel Hieromonachos versucht haben, durch das Modulationssystem der Phthorai
Beziige zur antiken Musiktheorie herzustellen. Waren sie mit den antiken Texten
vertraut, oder bezogen sie ihr Wissen aus den Schriften der hyzantinischen Theoretiker
der klassischen Musik, des Pachymeres und des Bryennios? Bryennios wollte ja mit
seiner Schrift auf die praktizierenden Musiker seiner Zeit EinfluB nehmen und
bezeichnete sie als neoteroi melopoioi.
Der Echos wurde, wie oben erwahnt, als eine Zusammenfassung von
Melodieforme1n, denen ein gleiches Konstruktionsprinzip zugrunde liegt, definiert. In
der Modulation erhiilt die Frage nach dem inneren Autbau der beiden Tetrachorde jeder
223
einzelnen Tonart, und vor aJlem die Frage nach der Lage des Halbtons gro.8e
Bedeutung. Besonders beim Zusammentreffen von zwei Medialsignaturen, von denen
die eine das apo parallages vertritt, die andere das apo melous, wird man die
IntervallverhaJtnisse der einzelnen Echoi genau unterscheiden miissen. Wiederholte
Male trifft man in den spatbyzantinischen Mu si khandschri f ten innerhalb einzelner
Gesange auf zwei iibereinanderstehende Signaturen, von denen die untere die
Bezeichnung apo melous rragt, die dariiber befindliche apo parallages. Das hei8t, durch
Moduswechsel wird eine bestimmte Tonart erreicht. Nun wird aber nicht in dieser
Tonart fongesetzt, sondern apo melous gesungen. Es findet also zum Beispiel im
QuintintervaU des Echos Tetartos eine Modulation in den Echos Protos statt. Das
Tetrachord D - a der 1. Tonart erscheint in der Lage G - d und muB mit Gab c d
angenommen werden. Chrysaphes schreibt, daB, falls keine Phthora gesetzt wird, man
nicht erkennt, daB eine Veriinderung des Echos eingetreten ist. 16 Diese Modulation apo
melous geschieht in einigen Beispielen nicht innerhalb eines Kolons, sondem am
Kolonanfang.
Beispiel 1 weist in der vorletzten Zeile eine Doppelsignatur auf. Die Signatur
des Echos Protos tJigt die Bezeichnung apo melous, jene des Echos Tetartos triigt die
Bezeichnung apo parallages. Auch Beispiel 2 besitzt eine derartige Doppelsignatur.
Hier wird in der Lage des Plagios Protos der Echos Tetartos apo melous gesungen.
Abgesehen von diesen Doppelsignaturen wird in den spatbyzantinischen
Handschriften eine Modulation durch ein stiHsiertes Phi angezeigt. Manuel Chrysaphes
nennt sechs Phthorai, die tatsachlich in Verwendung sind: die Phthora des Protos 6 ,
des Deuteros <? ' des Tritos 9 ' diese ist gleichzeitig die Phthora des Plagios Tetartos,
also das Nana, weiters die Phthora des Tetartos b. , des Plagios Deuteros 9 und des
Nenano .d.
Den Phtorai werden zwei Funktionen zugeschrieben: jene des Bindens --
desmein -- und des LOsens -- lyein. Desmein bezeichnet den Proze.B der Modulation in
eine andere Tonart, Iyein bezeichnet die Auflosung einer Phthora durch eine andere und
die Riickfiihrung in die urspriingJiche Tonart. Nicht alle Phthorai haben diese
Doppelfunktion.
Beispiel 1 und Beispiel 3 zeigen die Phthora des Protos. Diese Phthora hat nur
die Funktion des Bindens. Sie leann in jede Tonart gesetzt werden und ftihrt immer eine
Modulation in den Barys oder in den Plagios Protos herbei. Beispiel 4 ist das einzige
von Gabriel Hieromonachos genannte Modulationsbeispiel. Es ist apo parallages der
Echos Tritos, apo melous jedoch Nenano, d.h. es moduliert auf der Quinte c - g, dem
oberen Tetrachord des Tritos. Nimmt man das Melos des Nenano mit E F Gis a an, so
224
muBte es in der Lage des Tritos (c d e fis g) zu d es fis g werden. Das Nenano bindet
haufig neben dem Tritos auch den Echos Protos und den Echos Tetartos.
Manuel Chrysaphes erlautert seine theoretischen Ausfiihrungen anhand von
Kompositionen, die in den Handschriften des 14-15. Jh. zu fmden sind. Neben friihen
Beispielen aus der ersten HaIfte des 14. Jh. von Glykys, Korones und Kukuzeles finden
sich auch seine eigenen Stucke. Viele dieser herangezogenen Beispiele sind in den
Akoluthiai, den musikalisch Iiturgischen Sammelhandschriften der spatbyzantinischen
Zeit, enthalten, wie bspw. die Kratemala. Daneben findet sich aber auch eine gro8e
Zahl von kalophonischen Stiehera, sog. AlUlgrammatismoi. Interessant ist die
Feststellung des Manuel Chrysaphes, daB Ioannes Kukuzeles die alten Stichera in seinen
AlUlgrammatismoi nicht veIinderte, sondem ihnen Schritt fUr Schritt folgte, obwohl vor
allem er in der Lage gewesen ware, eigene originale Gesange zu komponieren, welche
nichts mehr mit den urspriinglichen Stiehera gemeinsam gehabt hatten. 17 Kann man
anhand einer sole hen Aussage das gesamte Phthorai-System als spatbyzantinische
Sehopfung abtun? Wir kennen ja die theoretischen Ausfiihrungen des Hagiopolites,
welche auf ein Modulationssystem hinweisen, das zumindest ab dem 12. lh. in
Gebraueh war, also lU einer Zeit, als noch eine adiastematische Notation zur
Aufzeichnung der Gesange diente. Vergleicht man freilich das im Hagiopolites
dargestellte System mit jenem des Manuel Chrysaphes, so wird ganz klar, daB sich die
modulatorischen Moglichkeiten im Lauf der lahrhunderte enorm vergrf>8ert haben.
GemaB den AusfUhrungen des Hagiopolites konnte nur in jene Tonarten moduliert
werden, welche mit der Anfangstonart in einem mediantischen Verhliltnis standen. Da
die Phthorai immer aus den medialen Echoi hervorgingen, muBte beim Gesang klar
erkennbar gewesen sein, daB es sich hier urn eine Modulation handelte. Die Phthorai
endeten entweder in der neuen Tonart oder kehrten in die urspriingliche Tonart zuriick.
Fur diesen Vorgang der LOsung war eine and ere Phthora offensichtlich nicht notig.
Dies konnen wir nur aus dem Hagiopolites erschlie6en.
In den paUiobyzantinischen Musikhandschriften finden wir jene zwei Phthorai,
welche in der Chanres-Tabelle verzeichnet sind:
1. eine zweitonige Formel, welche aus einer Ligatur von Dyo und Phi
besteht /</
//
Sie ist auch im Lehrgesang des Kulruzeles enthalten, und zwar
im Plagios Tetartos, im aufsteigenden QuartintervaU G - c. IS
Sie moduliert in den Echos Mesos Tetartos '- '-I.
'I
;-
r
~
!f~oea.
225
lm Vind. theol. gr. 136 ist diese Phthora vor all em im Echos Deuteros, im
Plagios Deuteros und im Plagios Tetartos zu finden.19
2. Die Hemiphthora ist eintonig und besteht aus einer Ligatur von Petasle und
Phi e; . Beispiele dafiir finden sich im Vind. theol. gr. 136 hauptsachlich
im Echos Deuteros, Plagios Deuteros und Plagios Tetartos.
Welche Veriinderung diese Hemiphlhora tatsachlich bewirkt, konnte bis jetzt
nicht eindeutig gekUirt werden. ,?,
Es ist interessant, daB sich Hemiphthorai ~ auch in spatbyzantinischen
Musikhandschriften finden. Diese Zeichen kommen haufig nach einer
Phthora des Tritos, welche auch die Phthora des Plagios Tetartos ist, vor,
meist unter dem Intervall G - F bzw. d - c.
In den mittelbyzantinischen Handschriften mit diastematischer Notation gibt es
keine Hinweise auf ein Modulationssystem. Nenano und Nana stehen nicht als Phthorai,
sondem als Anfangs- oder Zwischensignaturen. J. Raasted wies darauf hin, daB die von
ihm und Ch. Thodberg bei der Untersuchung der mittelbyzantinischen Sticheramelodien
vie1fach festgestellten ungewohnlichen Positionen der Medialsignaturen ein Hinweis auf
den Gesang apo meiOl4.S sein konnten. 20
Manuel Chrysaphes stand, so glaube ich, annehmen zu diirfen, bei der
Abfassung seiner Schrift unter dem Eindruck der griechischen Musiktheoretiker der
spatbyzantinischen Zeit. Es ist moglich, daB er das offensichtlich miindlich iiberlieferte
Modulationssystem der palao- und mittelbyzantinischen Notation den Bediirfnissen der
neuen Kompositionstechnik anpa13te und formulierte. Es bleibt aber noch zu
untersuchen, inwieweit Chrysaphes zur Demonstration des spatbyzantinischen
Modulationssystems nur Kompositionsbeispiele des 14-15. Jh. heranzog, die in dieses
Schema pa13ten.
226
Beginn in .., . . "f, d'~ , I
D!.
/-
>-; -~ -\
- \......,-,- '- ') \-., \ -
')
F F h e d de d ded de de
/; , \-;\-; ,,....
~~
/> '-
71< '- --r-
G G h e d e de dede de de d h h e
\ -., \ -") /. '1 )'1 '- ~'- _ -./") ./ ~ \ to- '1 . / ')
ed ' ed ef e d d d e f 9 f 9 f f e f e
..,,,,. / ~
7
,..., --r-- VV ',' -- ~\'-., \ L..
., \ L...,
he d ch e h e a h F h e d e e d de c h
/L c a h F h e d f e f e e d d e ch ch h .Kolonende
j(
,L
.)
"'1 ~7~ '::;} .., ') .s
L
:::? I
i,
~
'1 -r- =i/ )1 '7....
d cba G e e b d c ba Gd d Gd d
bllr~"vS' ",-s I L
? S '1 '- - -r-
It
).
:/) S ., ~ .,,, .:-
eba G G a b e d 9 fed e d d G 9
227
).,)')
TrLj t... \ c: )
') ./s )
- \- .., ;:;/) \<-) \<-) \Co-)
E EO E F Ga G aGF E F G F a G GF F E ED
;.. '>
f'j
;;J V"\ .., t:;.I.s/.s /., \-,... --r- 4 '- - /1 ) -r
E F G h G F F ED F EO E0 EC D D E FisG a ·.G a
.(.
)1<../\'-) /.., \~ '7
\ ~
"} \~) \-., ., ~ ..J ') ..J \ -,v> L
D a a G a G a G a G a G a G a G a h a h a GG
\ -S - ')
BEISPIEL 2. Tij 6fuvO."'CCjl OCIJ )(o~ufmI von Patzades, NB Atben, Cod.8SS, I3S v
...
r4edialsignaturtr~' endet in d:
>- L- ' \ L. ~\ 7., ...... \ - \ ~ ...... - ')
d d e d e d e dcd e d
ch h e d e d de d c ch c h h c c d c e h a Ga
- ,/
\~ ~ .... )5 \ -") ::;//"\
S ., ')
/
I1
228
. ,1..
//
Vf V~ v..v
G d es fi s 9 9 9 9 fis d 9 gab a a gag
es d es d d
229
Jm-gen RAASTED
The study of recurrent motifs, formulas, and phrases has attracted many scholars
in the field of Byzantine and Slavonic musicology; some of us have spent years on
meticulous analyses of the use and function of these recurrent elements in some genre
or repertory of Byzantine or Slavonic Chant.
The general picture emerging from all these studies of details is that some kind
of "formulaism" has governed Byzantine Chant as far back as our written tradition
goes. For some genres this means 10th century, for others the written tradition begins
hundreds of years later.
Now, of course, there is nothing in this written tradition which suggests that the
formulaism was creared together with the oldest musical manuscripts. On the contrary,
we must assume that formulaism came first -- otherwise we would not, for instance, be
able to explain why singers could use even the most imprecise and sketchy types of
Palreobyzantine musical notation. We usually say that these singers must have "known
the melodies in advance" and just needed to be reminded of their orally acquired
knowledge. Maybe one should not speak of "remembered melodies", but rather of
"fonnulas and phrases". The Palceobyzantine musical notations thus point towards an
earlier oral formulaism. They have served, no doubt, as an adequate aid-memoire for
singers who already mastered the melodic elements of the musical language. These
elements -- to use the distinction which Peter Jeffery made in 1986 at the International
Congress for Byzantine Studies Washington -- comprised both "the melodic principles
borrowed from Jerusalem" and "a more recent layer of musical characteristics, specific
to individual chant traditions" -- in our case: the Byzantine tradition of chant. I
My paper for Bydgoszcz 1985, on "Compositional Devices in Byzantine
Chant" ,2 claimed to be a sketch for some paragraphs of what you might call "A
I Contribution not published. From Ieffery's hand-Qut at the congress I quote in extenso the fifth item of
his "Outline of Main Points": "Standard centonization formulas, modal characteristics, and many other
stylistic features are often specific to individual chant traditions. and are often not part of the heritage of
Jerusalem. They represent a more recent layer of musical characteristics, one that developed as the
melodic principles borrowed from Jerusalem were used to spin out new melodies in the style of each
chant tradition. "
2 Musica Anriqua, VII, Acta Scientifica (8ydgoszcz, 1985), pp. 181-204; reprinted in Cahiers de I'lnstitut
As a rule, our study of the formulas dea1s with the shape the melodies had
acquired at the end of the 12th century, when a diastematic notation had been
introduced. The earlier, Pal<eobyzantine, musical MSS are mostly used as a control, to
check whether the outlines of these melodies -- and some of their details -- can be
recognized in the earlier sources, from the 10th century onwards. Normally, we see an
astonishing stability of the written tradition, at times down to very small details. But
still, for obvious reasons, we can only make guesses as to the stability of the previous
oral tradition. Is the melody for a Heirmos by Kosmas really the one which ~ used for
his text, in the 8th century? And has Kassia's famous Sticheron really retained the
melody which she gave it more than 150 years before our oldest written source? Or is
it, perhaps, rather so that Kosmas and Kassia and the others were only responsible for
the texts -- maybe also for the choice of mode -- but nol for the melodies as we know
them from the musical MSS. Maybe the formulaism was so strong that every singer
could improvise, if only he knew what echos and style he was meant to use. If this is
so, the melodies which we know from the written tradition might represent one
realization amongst many. Once taken down, the melodies were preserved with
astonishing stability and uniformity for centuries: but for the previous period of total
orality we might perhaps rather operate with a plurality of musical realizations.
These are important questions to which no quick answer can be expected ...
232
My examples come from the two oldest collections of Byzantine melodies, the
Heirmologion and the Sticherarion. The oldest extant MSS for both collections date from
the 10th century. As I have already mentioned, both texts and music are considerably
older -- in other words, we have to reckon with a long period of entirely oral tradition,
usually several centuries.
/ ./ ,,::.-
60 °t - "e' - jw .•
.. / \ :/ /
),- ./
.... & / /
"
/ /
". /
vyp" E'r 3
,., ~,/
Itr ,..
/ ,
>x / \
,.J
/ /-
rOot M!>l . 111 /
2.00""- 1.00"
Example 1. is taken from the Heirmologion. It shows the beginning of the first
Heinnos of Kosmas's Good Friday Kanon. 4 The feature which interests me to-day is the
4 The Pala:obyzantine tradition for this Heinnos is well documented in O. Strunk's SpecimiM notationum
antiquorum, Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae IMMBJ. Principal ser., VII (Copenhagen, 1(66), 20 sources
being listed in the index (MMB, Princ. ser., VII, Pars suppletoriB, p.39). My two sources in Round Nolation
are Iviron 470 (mid-twelfth century; C. Hleg, ed., Hirmowgium Alhoum, MMB. Prine. ser.• n [1938]) and
233
musical marking of the mid-verse caesura. For the moment I shall leave the question
open, whether or not this punctuating element goes back to Kosmas himself. Instead, we
might ask about the stability of its shaping -- and also see if we can establish some kind
of rule for its use. Here we shall need the support of my next example: Example 2 shows
the beginning of five Stichera which are used at Good Friday . All five texts are sung to
the same melody -- though with so many differences that the written tradition considers
them to be Idiomela, the Byzantine term for texts which have a melody of their own.s
Also here, I am interested in the transition between the two short-verses. As you see, there
are three different neumations for the last syllable before the punctuation dot:
At the end of this example I have added the neumation of the Old Slavonic
version of the set of Stichera, from our facsimile edition of the Chilandar fragments. 6
Apparently, the extension is here used constantly, not only in No. 2.
Now, the majority of Greek MSS which I have inspected 7 display the same pattern
for these Stichera as shown in my example, with three options for the transition. What
dictated the choice? Obviously, the number of syllables in the following -- more
precisely: the number of unaccented syllables before the heavy accent, the syllable with
the Kratemohyporroon. The rule is quite simple:
Four syllables get a special treatment of the 'first syllable, a bareia-group on bc,
with the usual continuation until the accented kratemohyporroon. Before this bareia-
group on bcwe find an ornamental extension at the preceding verse-end, as a kind of
preparation.
Cryptensis Epsilon gamma 3 (L. Tardo, ed., Hirmowgium Cryplense, MMB. Prine. ser., III [Rome, 1951),
AD. 1281).
S A sixth text (En to delpno sou) is left out by my source, perhaps because of its c10seDess to one of the
others, En 16 nlptert sou. A futher sticheron, TrycbomeDe cbrtste be tekousa se, is only known from very
few MSS. For my present purpose, there is no need 10 include these two Stiebera. DictiofUlQire
d'Arc:Mo/ogie Ch,hienne et tU! LiIu,~, I, ed. F. Cabrol - H. Leclerq (1924), 2473-74 uses this antiphon to
show the old wly of performlnce.
6 R Jacobson, cd., Fragmenla Chiliandtuica Pa/tI!OSlavicll, MMB, Prine. ser. , V/A (1951), fols.30r-31v.
i I hive had I look. It 8 Plbeobyzantine and 12 Middlebyzantine MSS. pick.ed out at nndom.
234
Q~
. .-.
!i
.. t"'
~~
j)
x,.
'1Y lH
G-
- 0(
G-
Ao& -
c;,..
/.
rbor - eou
'"
,.",,,
c:.-
::.>
b
( Y't -
Go
,.:-,
6"
c.b
./.
0("
0. C-
"
- U -
b
~
Eo'
c
."
"TO
0..
W -
~
&_'" -
---:v
VIII(
<tdc.
60l
b
~
"-
-
~
><'e«u
be
- r-: -
bQ
~o",·
Go
I.
Y'''1 ~
~
TI'
be
.~.
f-
b ...
- 6Tl
G-
o
~ ~ G- G- G-
~
Q.
~ ;l
..
0' . ./..
----. ,..:... !(,V-v ./. :;:.y ;; >-.
.. - K." _ T<
/
[
Tf) -
G- G- b "- G- c;.. db G- el. Cl c b
• c: de-be.. b "- be. b ... G-
'"r1 .-,
..
:3.
Q.
'::
.......
j ."
<,y> &...
G-
,.-",
G-
/.
.,
V'I - '1TT'1 -
G
f.1
"
60"
c;.
,~
;a'-
cb
6n
:;/.
... c-
0 h-
<~
06'
c
."
T(IIt~
0.. b c
~
/"". ~ - reo"
de) c-
60"
b
""to -
...
~
be.
A,
b ...
l~"
G-
..=
Q.
/.
,.:.. ./.
~ ~
>
r:t.
"Q
go
y <"n
~'j > re.'" ~o
c;.
- e.' TL K., "ftO- 61" - jl
... e b
6&~
b
. l
b
- "Ill(
c
1"'''1
c~ e.
'Tt(,
I.
e" ,~
b c- b
TE, '
G-
G- b 0.. G- c.b cl
'" 0..
!=I
Z
0
,:;.:. ~... , ---. ~. .~.:,~:~'!.~~.~,::: .. :, ..... ~ . ~\~<~ ..
-
1"
V.
~)
0-
... . ~ . .. ~ --
JIT JI.3.,'!-A pAAn&?f'rA ,nr.HA~~ ~~~A,n.·~:-
- .~
All-....: ." ...... -... :-" :- A--::; . ~ ~/' -::. ... .- .......... , .410
:;'- ... -, ~::..-:---::. ' =~-
llib'7..AnTf n~~,A.mr.I_~~,~.rtrlHr~"I('~
~i.+~'~' :';;L~~:~~~:';:;_~;:;':;=~
f ::p
11
< "A~jlTn'&~nnr~#\,(tl ·~ Jvr;cri "~P'" ',':"::::
(0'
.e-
S
b
~ ." ,...n : .
';:' ~:+' .. ~'f.. ' ' i ,-:~ ' -::~\' .. -
10 ..• - , . '.
- ,\- I
• -=-'::.~.
f
.>- - .. :--~ ;..-- ~ .. , " -::.:-;- :: ~\'...
" lliI~~BI,MJ~:~~'f~pJ,nllreAI~~tnolln.""~ !
O ' lJ.JJ.. _ ./ J.<:. ~- " --\: - 'L. - - . _ ..;.;.--~ --')"'~.,~~ .. .-- " -;:- ":! .::.---~ ... "- ,.
~ f'4. cnlTp~'r.i\.~':[,,'/IAAU;frf.MLn:i..·r~A~ :1 ',~, :,: 1l0~An.1U AA C'rn JI ..... AlII '.I.'. ,. ClCAAA'O I{ ..!.o'~
~
r
-
QC 0; ·~=':..':":"'-- .......1.;".: .___ , ..... , .\
f;nire3.n.y~~ nr l1UJ l>lUU T~r~ C~D~~~.~~~ij
...... --=. "_-:"":",~~'~~'S;
,- "»,~'~\'_ ' ..
:'~:':i:!~!Zf.;:'~ ", .:~'6--' ~. :
-
c
N 71l IJt..... .-. .. "..: ,,- -;:;--::: '-- -:: - _ .:.-- ~g(8 'J ~~~~~~~~"~~,H~,fP'::~A~'~M~""::~
."'.." ':'~·j~~"A.tA IIT.4. 1('7.. T. H c·,. .. · ·,· ....·O,f' IlT.£a 'M'~~~~::'"
• ' . ti...J~~':':::: . ,~o ri. .. t· ..-,l.·'; 11'.1,4.4. J.j! 11'· ,. 1f{. ( , . ,:J.7 ":' iU '
!!
z
: -....- ... :~ r ~- .... .- .....: ?' .. ...:--:-~ -::~~. . . . ~z.~ . :.:
cl } ThlJA 11( JUL~Kf nr, fI TU /1"" t'Tf~' ",,-,,0 f'YU~j.r;'..1.~:
i /---= ... .::.- .1
N
w
..
0-
011
. DJ} .. ,,--;.- .'.- '..
: Jt'IUl~(l:tH"~J\·" 1'J\A 'I~iHlA A uI f ;C-nJ-U
..... ." .---'" -:,:-.
.. , ,
"" 11
Evidently, however, the distinction was not preserved in the Slavonic tradition, at
least not in the Chilandar fragments.
In Example 2 the melodies move in the upper register, around be d. In Example 1
we were a fifth lower, on EF G. The latter is the nonnal position of our two motifs. Also
in Example 1 the extension prepares a line with 4 unaccented syllables at the beginning.
In order to get an idea of the general use of our ornamental extension I have made
some statistics. You will find my material in Examples 3 and 4. My statistics in Example
3 can be summed up as followS: 12
In Arnargianakis's edition of the Stichera Idiomela for September, in the Deuteros
modes,13 there are 20 occurrences of our extension,14 all of them followed by the EF D G
8106,1.2,
933,11 48,5 54,19.
10 48,10-11.
236
motif in one of its numerous variations.l s The 20 occurrences are listed in Example 3, C.
In most of these cases the next line begins with four unaccented syllables -- like we saw it
in my Examples 1 and 2; in a few cases, the first of the four syllables carries an accent.
Now, as shown in my Example 3, A and B, Amargianakis's "Formula 10", i.e. the EF D
G motif, can also follow upon resting E-cadences and leading-on cadences on F. But here
only one out of more than 30 cases has the four unaccented syllables which call for a
preparation by our extension. 16
Evidently, then, we have found a quite stable rule which we might state as
follows: When verse-endings on E are followed by a line beginning with four unaccented
syllables, the medieval Sticherarion and Heinnologion tend to enlarge the E-ending by a
leading-on element FG F G. and the following verse tends to use the EF D G motif.
Please, turn now to Example 4. It pretends to cover all occurrences of lines that
begin with four unaccented syllables, in Amargianakis's edition -- 55 cases in all, but I
may have overlooked some. The five cases underlined are the only ones where the new
line begins with some kind of the EF D G motif -- and of these, only two follow upon an
ending of E without the extension FG F G. The general picture of Example 4 thus
supports the "rule" which I have just suggested.
With Example 5 we return for the last time to our ornamental extension -- but now
I am interested in its shape rather than in its function. From a neumatic point of view, we
notice a difference between the Pabeobyzantine and the Middlebyzantine sources: At the
places where our MSS in Round Notation have the ornamental extension, the older
sources prefer a shorter neumation, consisting of diple + oxela with dyo kentemata. This
group ofneumes apparently means E FG -- thus a shorter fonn than that of the later MSS,
where the last two notes are sung twice (E FG F G). In the lists of neumes, the short form
is called anatrichisma.
Now, it is possible, of course, that the anatrlchisma of the old MSS is only a
convention of neumatic orthography; in the context which we are dealing with, the
singers may have sung the longer form, although it was not written downP On the other
hand, if the old neumes are to be taken at their face value, the written tradition implies a
stylistic change of a detail, a general phenomenon where the short anatrichisma was
exchanged for a longer extension in hundreds and hundreds of cases, both in the
Sticherarion and in the Heirmologion.
is The occurrences of the EF D G motif(and ilS rare transposition to be a d) are listed by Amargianakis as
Formula to, op. ci/., p.224.
16 106. 1-2.
17 For this explanation, I refer to Constantine Floros wbo suggests tbat the Paheobyzaatine aaatric:bisma
may have been "ex improviso ausgeschmilckt" by the singers (Universale Neumenkunde (](assel, 1970), I,
p.204.
237
·3,4 '4,7 13,7 ·17,6 ·'8,6 22,2 23,6 23,10 23,11 ·24,10 24,19 27,3 ·28,2 33,2 33,3 33,15
33,16 ·35,14 35,1.9 37,10 37,13 38,5 38,9 38,10 44,9 48,9 ·49.2 49,10 49,15 ·51,14 54,2
54.12 56,10 65,3 "'n,lO 72,13 *72,15 ·78,3 ·78,7 79,5 79,11 81,18 84,2 88,8 ·88,16 91,8
92,7 ·97,5 ·102,7 102,29 103,2 ·103,3 *103,4 ·103,14 106,2
Total: 55 cases. Of these, 17 cues (the ones with .) have already been referred to in Example 3.
c. 18 The remaining cases are distributed as follows:
After preceding 23,10 33,3 56,10 72,13
13,7 33,2 33,15 79,5 84,2 92,7 106,2
22,2
48,9 49,10 88,8
23,6 24,19 33,16 35,19 37,13 38,5 38,9 38,10 49,15
65,3 79,1181,18 91,8
102,29
27,3
44,9 54,12 103,2
37,10 54,2
The fIVe cases underlined are the only ones where the new line begins with some kind of
Amargianakis's Formula 10.
EXAMPLE 4.Line-beginnings with four unaccented syllables (or 1 accented + 3 unaccented syllables) in
Amargianakis's September Stichera. NB Those wbicb are ·prepared" by the EG ornament (Amargianakis's
"Formula 4E") ate marked by an asterisc.
Example 5 demonstrates that the embellished form -- the one later-on cal1ed thes
kai apothes, provided with its own symbol in the list of Great Hypostases -- appeared
already in a few Palreobyzantine MSS, though only sporadically.19 As for the normal
short-form of the Palreobyzantine tradition, the socaJIed anatrlchisma, it is frequently
used also in three Round Notation sources. Two of these are very old (Sinai 1218 from A.
D. 1177 and Iviron 470 from the mid-twelfth century). Also Paris 262 has many of the old
short anatrJchjsmata: we have reasons to believe that this 14th century MS was copied
from a very old model, in early Round Notation.
The embellished form of our extension is thus a secondary form. Originally, in the
Palreobyzantine period, it may have been an optional element, not unlike the kylisma,20
or a peculiarity of some local center. Why not Constantinople, to which strong ties
connect both Patmos 218 and the Sticherarion set Sinai 1217+1243? From there it spread,
already in the earliest phase of the Round tradition,21 but in some areas, the simple form,
the anatrichlsma, might still be found.
18 To these should be added the following Stichera which begin as the above: 27,1 29,1 44,1 55,1 78,1
103,1. Apart from 55,1 the EF D G motif is invariably used at these openings.
19 Lavra Delta 11, Patmos 218, Sinai 1217 and 1243 + a dubious case from Vienna 136.
20 Cf. J. Raasted, ·Some Reflections on Byzantine Musical Style", Studies in Eastern Chant, I (Oxford,
1966). pp.57-66.
21 The old and worn Wien theol. gr. 204 apparently used the embellished form, only.
238
(a) in Pros se orthriz6 (Example 1):
Slum form: most Pal~obyzantine MSS + Iviron 470
Long form: Lavn Delta 11 (:.>;;.- 0/) and PalmOS 218 ( ~ ),,<-q ).
(c) Slichen Idiomela from the Pentekostarion (11 cases inspected, MMB Transcripta VII, Nos. 10,11
20,4 39,5 49,5 55,8 66,2 66,6 66,15 91,1 94,4 97,3):
Leningrad 789 (CN): short
Sinai 1243 (CN): long 39,5 97,3; otherwise short
Witn 136 (CN): short
Paris 262 (RN) short 20,4 49,5 55,8 66,2; otherwise long 22
Paris 264 (RN): short
Sinai 1218 (RN): long 66,2 66,6 66,15; otherwise short
(d) Stichen Idiomela for the November (18 cases inspected, MMB Tnnscripta II. Nos. 5,6 10,11 17,5
17,16 19,3 19,8 19,15 22,3 26,2 42,5 47,3 54,4 64,2 64,5 70,5 70,9 74,7 76,4):
Leningrad 789 (eN): short
Sinai 1217 (CN): short 64,2 70,5 76,4; otherwise long
Wien 136 (CN): long (?) 26,2 ( ~ ..Y ); otherwise short
Paris 262 (RN) long 26,2 42,5 47,3 70,9; otherwise short
Paris 264 (RN): short
Sinai 1218 (RN): long 10,11 17,5 19,15; otherwise short
In my concluding remarks I shall go beyond the detail which I have dealt with
until now:
As we have seen, the rule about how to connect an ending on E with a line
beginning with four unaccented syllables seems to be very old and very stable.
Apparently, the habit of embellishing the anatrlchlsma by means of a repetition of its
ending began already in the Pal.eobyzantine period, to grow later-on into a universally
accepted norm.23
Together with a number of other rules -- known already, or still to be discovered --
this rule must have been al work already in the pre-notational, oral tradition.
24 With some exceptions the Prosomola are not included in the musical manuscripts. In the liturgical books
they normally are provided with a cue, consisting of the indication of its mode and the lndpit of the model
text. the go..caUed AutomeloD. Thousands of Sticbell Prosollloia follow the models of less than 30 Stichera
Automela. In Kanon poetry, similarly, the majority of strophes is sung on pre-existing models, the
BelrllloL Also for other genres we fInd the Slme pattern, e.g. in the Kathismala.
240
Nina Konstantinova ULFF-Mf)LLER
It is a well known fact that one of the most characteristic features of medieval
art and its poetics is the strict adherence to a normative system of canonical patterns,
typical of every form of art. The tradition has been maintained without noticeable
change throughout centuries. The epoch-making formula-theory of M. Parry, based on
an investigation of Homer, and further developed by A. Lord on the basis of Serbian
folklore songs, seems also to be valid for Byzantine and Old Russian Chant.
The importance of musical formulas as a basic structural unit of Byzantine and
Old Russian Chants has been discussed in the scientific works of several scholars from
East and West. They have been able to demonstrate that every genre of Byzantine and
Old Russian Chants was built from a certain number of opening, medial, and cadential
formulas with a modal definiteness, which, in proper combinations, construct the
musical phrases into well organized musical compositions. 1
The medieval singers were using common images, reflected in ready-made
formulas, which were repeated again and again, and could be found in many of the
chants. The quantity of these musical formulas gives the available fond of means of the
artistic layout, which appears to remain quite stable throughout many centuries. This
formulaic layout seems to change and widen extremely slowly. The explanation of this
phenomenon can presumably be found in the strict following of the canons. 2 My own
I M. Parry, L 'Epithete traditionelle dans Homere (paris, 1928); A.B. Lord, The Singer of Tales
(Cambridge, Mass., 1960); E. Wellesz, "Melody construction in Byzantine Chant", in Actes du Xlle
Congres International d'EtuO.es Byzantines. Ochride 10-16 Septembre 1961, vol. I (Beograd, 1963),
pp.] 35-151; Idem, A History of Byzanline Music and Hymnography (Oxford, 2/1961), pp.325-329; J.
w
Raasted, "Compositional devices in Byzantine Chant • Musica Anliqua, VII, Acta Scienlifica (Bydgoszcz,
1985). pp.181-204; G. Amargianakis, An Analysis of Stichera in the DeUleros Modes. The Srichera
ldiomelafor the Month of September in the Modes Deuteros, Plagal DeUleros and Nenano, Transcribed
from (he Manuscript Sinai 1230 (A .D. 1365), 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1977) =: Cahiers de l'Institut de
Moyen-Age Grec et Latin [CIMAGL] 22-23 (Copenhagen" 1977): Milos Velimirovic, Byzallline eiemellls
ill early Slavic Cfumt, Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae [MMB], Subsidia, IV (Copenhagen, 1960); N .K.
U1ff-Moller, Tmmcription of the Slichera Idiomela for the Month of April from Russian Manuscripts
from the 12lh Century, Slavislische Beitrige 236 (Miincheo, 1989).
2 See: "Problemy kanona", Sbornix Statei {MOSCOW, 1973}.
J.'
la MSS
"
CD
2 MSS
..... ~
l'
c-
I
;: '
t -
lP- (j r
EXAMPLE 1.
study of stichera idiomela3 for the months of September, November and April has
shown that the written Byzantine and Old Russian sticheraric tradition from the period
11 th-15th centuries is enormously stable. 4
The available Byzantine manuscripts are written in the period 11 th-15th
centuries in different types of the Byzantine neume notation -- Chartres, Coislin and
3 For the usage of the sticbera and their division into categories see: WeUesz., A History of /JyzanJine
Music and Hymnography, pp.243-245; J. von Gardner. Bogsluzhebnoe penie russkoi pravosiavnoi cer/cvi
(Jordanville, NY, 1978), pp.89-92; N. Sbidlovsky, The NotaJed Lenten Prosomoia in the Byzantine and
Siavic Tradilion (pb.D.diss., Princeton, 1983), pp.68-72.
4 See: Ulff-MoUer, op.dt. ;Idem, The SJicheraric Tradition in Russian and Byzantine Musical
Manuscriplsjrom the 12th-15th Centuries (in print).
242
No. of Mss
"t'l1V £ P'l uov In Round notation
1.
-.G
--b
C-
b
L
b 16
2.
-G -ab•• '-
b
L-
b 13
3.
--
G
• L-
G
-••
ab
c-
b I
I
? -/.
/I
L L-
4. D Gb b b 1
S.
'>('"\
D
-"•
G
-'.
ab
L-
b 1
";)
-
.
11 '
.,(, L L
6. D Gab b b 2
_L /, ? '7
II b d c b 18
EXAMPLE 1.
Round notation. s Their ongm can be connected with Asia Minor, Jerusalem,
Constantinople, Athos, Italy etc. Nevertheless, the sticheraric melodies in all these
S lnfonnation concerning the different Stages of the Byzantine neume notation could be found in: H.J.W.
Tillyard, "Byzantine Neumes: The Coislin Notation·, in Byzantinische Zeilschrift 32 (1937), pp. 345-358;
Idem, "The Stages of the Early Byzantine Musical Notation", in Byzantinische Zeitschrift 45 (1952),
pp.29-42; E. Wellesz, "Early Byzantine Neumes", in The Musical Quanerly [MQ] 38 (1952), pp.68-79;
TilIyard, "Byzantine Music about A.D. 1100·, in MQ 39 (1953), pp.223-231; O. Stnml, "The Notation
of the Chartres Fragment", in Annales musicologiques, UI (1955), pp. 1-31. Repr. in Essay on Music in
the Byzantine World (New York, 1977), pp.68-109; Idem, Specimina noltJIionum allliquorum, MMB,
Principal ser., VII, Pars suppletoria (Copenhagen, 1966), pp.I-27; C. Floros, Universale NewnenJamde
(Kassel, 1910), I, pp.305-346; D. Stefanovic, "Early Stages of Byzantine Notation", in Musica Anriqua,
VII, Acta Scientifica (BydgOSl£Z, 1985), pp.259-271. For more detailed information see also the article
of M. Velimirovic, 'Present Status of Research in Byzantine Music·, in Acta Musicologica 43 (1971),
pp. 1-20.
243
nov 'T~l KH) ... Occurrences Notes
i- «- V
I'
L
I. G G ab b 3 See Ex.1 (I,3)
I
?~ P c-- ~
2. Ga be b b 2
?: y ~ It.--
3. Ga be ab b 2
2 V L..... ~
EXAMPLE 3.
sources show that in fact only one main written musical tradition existed.
The melodic formulas used in Byzantine and the Old Russian sticheraric
tradition until the end the 15th century clearly demonstrate that a combination of
conventionality and instability has been characteristic. The dominant unchanging main
musical structure of the sticheraric melodies has been varied by applying many small
nuances, like substituting one interval by another, minor changes in the melodic~
rhythmical line, use of a different neume, but still preserving the same interval value of
the melody etc. These small modifications do not disturb the main melodic structure of
the Chant, but merely add new details to its expressive character (see example 1).
The analysis of 21 stichera for the month of April (in approximately 273 lines)
has shown that from 60 Byzantine manuscripts in fact only in three phrases an
application of different melodic formulas to certain places in the material can be
observed, demonstrating a division of the sources into two or more groups (see
example 2) .
The available Old Russian material clearly shows a similar division into two
melodic groups for "poustyniu" (see example 3).
It has to be remembered that the variations in the melodies (characterizing the
instability of the musical formulas) are very, very small according to our point of view.
244
All available Byzantine sources point Qut very clearly the interplay between the
following two variants of the same formula in Modes deuteros a
t, and a
fc",
where the only difference seems to be the third leap. For some reason in the Russian
t;\ ,//1"'1
sticheraric tradition only the applying of a be can be observed. The case with G EF,
Ii':. :> ({
and GF EF is similar.
The next example shows 15 different melodic variants ending on D, E, EF,
FE, but based on the same formulaic structure (see example 4).
It can be concluded that the musical formulas in the available Russian sticheraric
material until the end of the 15th century have not been varied as frequently as the
Byzantine counterparts. The following example shows the most typical neume
modifications in the Russian formulas (see example 5).
In a previous study6 I have shown that some textual phrases appear in the
Byzantine as well as in the Old Russian Sticheraric tradition which are always
accompanied by the same musical formulas and that the combination of melodic
formulas and textual stereotypes was treated as a single unit by the medieval singers.
The next example demonstrates clearly that the musical formulas in connection with
the stereotype text phrases appear not only exactly repeated but given in variations of
the same basic formulaic models (see example 6).
The existence of conventionality and instability of the musical formulas can also
be seen in the appearance of the "red variants" in the Byzantine Sticheraria.7
Mostly the variants are quite small and can be treated as variants of the formulas
in the main reading (filling out of a third leap, creating a third leap, by leaving out the
middle filling second etc).
Their existence can be interpreted in several ways: as an older or revised
version, a local version, or as a simple act of creativity on the part of the medieval
singers (see example 7).
However, all examples clearly demonstrate that the instability of the musical
formulas appears not as a negation of the dominant tradition, but as a mastery of fine
elaborate expressiveness in the freedom and grace shown in applying the universal
typical shemes. Obviously, in spite of strict rules which the medieval Byzantine and Old
Russian singers had to follow and the necessity of preserving exactly the canonical
6 N.K. U1ff-Moller, "The Connection between Melodic Formulas aod Stereotype Text Phrases in Old
Russian Stichera", CIMAGL 54 (Copenhagen. 1987), pp.49~.
7These "red variants" are numerous corrections or variants of the melodies. They can vary from a single
neumatic sign to a whole musical phrase. Usually they have been written in red ink, to avoid confusion
with the black or brown signs of the notation. See: J. Raasted, "The production of Byzantine Musical
manuscripts". in Ades du XIle Congres lnterna/iolUll d'Etudu /lyr,anlinu, vol. II (1964), pp.601-606.
245
ye: yo
Occurrences in
No.
)ta.L Va.~ lto\. 1.1nv Mediobzyantine Mss
_. / ? ? '/ L-
I.
_.
G a
/
G
?
F
-;7
E
~ h
E 1
2. G a G F E FE 2
5.
--
G
/
a G
~ "':1(\
E
L-
E
-
~
F 1
-. ,/ ~""' «- ""
"-
'/
6. G a f E E f 2
9.
-,
G
/'
G
'7
f
?
E
c...-
E
~F 8
-#
/" ::> ? t.-
~
10. G G F E E F 5
-, /' -;7 ?
E
?tI
DE
ViF 1
ll. G G F
L-
-, /' '? ? ? <-
12. G G F E D D 5
13.
-.
G
/
a
>f"
F
,,;:>v
E
?
D
~
/"'T'"
D 12
\, c:/ ~" ::::> ~ L
14. ')GF Ga F E D 0 1
- /. :>" ":) ? ~
15. F a F E 0 D 1
Occurrences in
c ,....
...ca -....
CJ
0
V
«- ~':)V 2 V c.....- Russian Mss
(see§ 12)
E
IU
...
«I
0
G G Ern E 0 0 7
Cl) c
246
no " Aft ftA H en·n 'TPOY H ''''- ,~ Tao " JI~
Ms
GIM
Sin. 589
L. 4!..-
, // // // t- t/v t- ~ t/ \. //
GIM ., •
.,
Sin. 572 L-
1°
..,
V"
GPB
Q.n.I-15 "
t..:,... "
// // t7
GBL ,.
Jos. Vo1.3 '\ ,/
GBL ? '7
EXAMPLES.
norms, a possibility of showing personal creativity was not completely excluded. This
creativity has been achieved by substituting of some variants of the musical formulas
for others, keeping the main structure of the Chant but giving it a new expressive
character. Stylistic coloration was emphasized because musical variants were matters of
choice, a selection from several alternatives. The presence of choice, the possibility of
changing from one musical variant to another was the basis for the development and
I
'){~"'J ..,,,Y,: ;J
~
,-,
222r OEF E
1r(>
'j l "),
222v
269r (twice 1~'!l
\L =>f"'
t. ;I
'1
27Jv EF DE 0
, //
'"
",./
". "",., l28r
• •
\.. """" ,
",. /c./ ""......I
129r
,;,..- •
"- ". ,
.,./ .............. 129v
'-
,/
".
'
..........
•
............
186r
EXAMPLE 6.
Russian Chants. 8 This semiotic interpretation is based on the iconic character of the
formulas and on a single dominating invariant factor -- the duality of the medieval
Chant and its division into two contradictory spheres, one of which is functioning as
written, while the other one is functioning as oral tradition. 9 The patterns of the musical
8 From the enormously rich literature written on the subject of semiotics I refer only to: The Semiotics of
Russian Cultural History. Essays by Jurii M. Lotman, Lidija A. Ginsburg, Baris A. Uspensltii. Edited by
Alexander D . Nakhimovsky and Alice Stone Nakhimovsky (1thaka and London, 1985);
Lotman - Uspensltii, The Semiolics of Russian Cullure, ed . Ann Shuman, Michigan Slavic Contributions
11 (Ann Arbor, 1984).
9 L. Treitler, "Oral, Written and Literate Process in the Transmission of Medieval Music", in SpecuUun
56 (1981), pp.471-49I.
248
No. of Ms. TTW £ PT)
Sin. 1218
~;
- , -. L.-
G
c_
b
~
b
e.,....
b
(b b)
Jer. St. 30
-.
~).(. _L
'lIj b
L- ~
d
?
c
.,
b
Cb b)
.,~.(. ~L
~
/. .,
,,,", t...
?
Jer. Taph. 533 'l b d c b
Cb cd b b)
• "
="L /, ?
t- '-
"?
Par. 262 b d c b
(C ab b b)
Par. 264,
Ath. 883, N
-. -.
_L
G
/,
b
;»
t--
b
c-
b
-:J
-
(b d c b)
/, .., ?
..,.,~ ..!-
Sin. J220 ~ C
-••
ab
c-
b
c-
b
(b d c b)
Cop. 4960
-,
-t
C
-.-•• -
b b
~
b
(C ab) b b
Coisl. 42
."
~
£
-.
-
G
L /,
...!.!
ab
~
"'")
b
?
«--
b
(b d c b)
Sin. 1564
.. ,
~
-.C
L
-.
-:...:..
b
'-
b
G.-
b
CC ab b b)
EXAMPLE 7.
formulas studied seem to construct an organic model, in which these two contradictory
spheres do not merely oo-exist, but presume and define each other. Such a model
permits the re-reading of numerous facts, related to the various aspects of the musical
tradition and the different stages of the development of Byzantine and Old Russian
Chants.
249
Elena TONTSCHEV A
Bis in die Gegenwart hinein beginnt das Erlernen des Kirchengesangs (nach
Angaben der bulgarischen Kirchengesangspraxis) mit dem Oktoechos. Besondere
Aufmerksamkeit wird hierbei dem Erlernen des Proshomoia-Singens gewidmet. Die
erstrangige Bedeutung dieses Singens zur Herausbildung des Professionalismus im
Kirchengesang wird auch durch die Angaben des sowjetischen Musikwissenschaftlers
N. Denissov bestatigt,l und zwar aufgrund seiner Beobachtungen der Singkunst der
Altglaubigen in Russland -- eine Kunst, die DenkmaIer der mittelalterlichen russischen
Kirchenmusik "in natura" aufbewahrt hat. Nach Denissov begann die Einschulung in
das Proshomoia-Singen mit dem Auswendiglernen der Mustermelodien (Automela).
Weiter erfolgte das Erlernen analytisch -- es wurde die ZahJ der den Gesang bildenden
Musikphrasen -- "Stroki"2 festgelegt, wonach die melodischen Formeln erlemt wurden,
aus denen er bestand, wobei deren Kombination mit unterschiedlichen Texten geiibt
wurde. Eben diese spezifische Art von Kirchengesangprofessionalismus und zwar unter
dem Gesichtspunkt seiner traditionsgebundenen Formelhaftigkeit ist Gegenstand des
vorliegenden Vortrags.
1 N . Denissov, "Die beruflichen Gesangtnulitionen des Strelnikovo-Chors aus dem Kostroma-Gebiet" (in
russischer Sprache - weiter Russischl, in : Professionalismus in der Volksgesangs- und in der
mittelalterlichen Kirchengesangspflll(is, Muzikalni Horizonri 1988/12-13 [bulgarish - weiter bg.]
2 Der Terminus "Stroks" hat zweierlei Bedeutung: 1) als Parameter des TonbOheoniveaus beim Singen
und 2) als ein ' die Textzeile aussmgender Musikabschnitt - Text-"Stroka". Siebe: A.N. Ktueinina,
"Semiografii popevok mamenogo raspeva v musikal'no--teoretireskicb rukovodstvach konca XV -
serediny xvn vw". in : Probleme der Ge.schichte und der 'l1uwrie der aIrrussischen Mwik (russ.]
(Leningrad, 1979), S.152.
. ..
auf sich, insofem es einmalige Moglichkeiten zur Erforschung des spaten
mltielalterlichen
•
slawischsprachigen Singens auf dem Balkan bietet, das
bedauerlicherweise uber eine ziemlich beschriinkte Zahl von notierten Quellen verfiigt. 4
Bekannterweise stammt\ das Manuskript Athen Nr. 928 aus dem Maria-
Entschlafung-Kloster (auch :l:egligovo- und Mateiee-Kloster genannt) in Skopska Cema
gora (heule VR Mazedonien). Es geh6rt zum Typ der spatbyzantinischen Akulouthiai-
Sammelbande; wie jedoch aus der eingehenden Inhaltsbeschreibung (durch den
serbischen Mediavisten Andrija Jakovlevic)5 ersichtlich, ist das eine inhaltsspezifische
Anthologie von der Art der sog. "pers6nlichen" oder "privaten" Gesangbucher.6 Die
Untersuchung im vorliegenden Bericht beginnt mit dem flir die Akolouthiai untypischen
sticherarischen Repertoire, das in der Anthologie neumiert ist -- und zwar bestehend aus
Stichera von der Proshomoia-Art. Die Stichera sind am Ende des Manuskripts
angeffihrt.
Ich m&hte hier insbesondere auf drei Stichera-Gruppen eingehen, die nach dem
Automelon ~O divnoe Cioudo~ (vO -rou napa:66~ov 9a:uJ,la't'o,) im I.
authentischen Echos gesungen werden. (Je drei Stichera "Na Gospodi lIozzllach" [Kyrie
ekekraxa] zu Maria Entschlafung [das Fest der Klosterkirche] [foI.15Iv-152r] und zu
Einfiihrung Maria [foI.152v-153r] [Vesper], und drei Stichera "00 chllalite" [Ortros]
rur Geburt der Gottesmutter [fo1.l56v-157r]).1 AIle drei Stichera-Gruppen sind
vollstandig neumiert, sie legen uns in Schriftforrn eine Praxis vorlegen, die gew6hnlich
der miindlichen Berufstradition vorbehalten bleibt. Der Schreiber der Zegligovo-
Anthologie geht allerdings noch weiter: in alIen neumatischen Aufzeichnungen der
Stichera erscheint konsequent der rur das Manuskript spezifische melodisch-
segmentierende Punkt, in den Wortzeilen in unterer Position geschrieben . Auf diese rur
die spatbyzantinische neumatische Praxis einmalige paIeographische Besonderheit habe
ich bereits vor drei Jahren auf dem Symposium in Sofia hingewiesen. & In meinem
Referat auf dem KongreB-Festival fUr alte Musik in Bydgoszcz9 versuchte ich die These
3 A JaJcovlevic, Diglosse Paliographia kai MelodQi - HymMgraphoi tou Kodihl ton AlheMn 928
(Leukosia, 1988) mit Bibliographie. D. Stefanovic, Old Serbian Music, 2 Bde. (Beograd, 1974-1975).
4 E. TODCeva, "PiJa's Musik-Notiuo" [bg.], Bulgarsko muzilcovumie 1983/2. S.3-28.
s Jak:.o vlevit, op. ciJ.
6 A. Pennington, The Composition of Eustalie's Song Book, Oxfords Slavonic Papers, New Series, VI
(1973). S. 108.
7 Au&rdem sind zwei weitere Stichera neumiert: Rna chv&lite" aus dem Orthros zur Gotteserscheinung
nach AutomeloD "Angel'sue predidete sill (At a:YYEh\.IlCU, 7tp07tO pEUE:aOE: 6UVa:I-\E:LC;) im
2. EcbOll Plagal (foI.154r) und Automelon im 1. Ecbos Plagal der Vesper ("Kyrie ekekraxa") -
"Prepodoboe o6e bogonose Theodosie" C' Oa!. e 7t(i'tEP ~e:ocp6pe ee:o Mal:E: )(foI.l54r).
8 E. Toneeva, "Der Punkt &Is musik-segmeotierendes Zeicheo in der Ms. NB Athen Nr. 928 - Anthologie
van lsaija dem Serben &US dern 15. Jb .• [bg.}, in: PaUographie et dipWmatique sla~, m (in Druck).
9 E. Tonteva, "Isaija's Anthology (Atheo Ms.Nr. 928, XVc.) IS a source for the Late-Byzantine
252
zu beweisen, daB im melismatischen Repertoire (in der melismatischen Psalmodie des
Polyeleos) der Punkt die traditionsmafiige spatbyzantinische melodische Lexik trennt
(die sog. Theseis-Forrneln -- ornamentale melodische Tonfiguren IO). Das hierzu
untersuchte Repertoire ist jedoch nicht melismatisch, sondem neumatisch -- hier
herrscht die Syllabie vor, wobei die ornamental en Figuren nur in einzelnen Momenten
des silbeninternen Aussingens zum Einsatz kommen. Das veranlal3t zu der Annahme,
daB auch die melodisch-segmentierende Funktion der Punkte unterschiedlich ist. Ein
erster Versuch zur Charakteristik dieser Funktion wurde in meiner Studie
untemommen, die in der Fesrschrift fUr Consranrin Floros zum 60. Gebunstag
erschien; 11 hier mOchte ich kurz auf meine weitere Ergebnisse eingehen.
Betrachten wir das Beispiel 1 (darin sind anstelle von Punkten in der
Notentranskription bedingt Taktstriche benutzt; um die Beobachtung zu erleichtem, sind
die Punkte bzw. Linien laufend nurneriert):
Als erstes ware zu erwaJmen, daB die Sticheron-Komposition (Sticheron I. aus
dem Maria-Entschlafung-Zyklus) zum sog. strophischen Typ gehort; 12 sie ist durch
periodische Wiederholung eines melodischen " Modells" -- nennen wir es bedingt
Periode -- aufgebaut. Die Periode besteht aus zwei " Phrasen " 13 (wieder eine bedingte
Bezeichnung): Phrase A -- in der das Intonieren urn den modalen Hauptgrundton
(Tonika) konzentriert ist: den Grundton des 1. authentischen Echos (a), auf ihm wird
kadenziert; und Phrase B -- in ihr wird der Mittelpunkt des Intonierens durch die
Dominante gebildet: hier die obere Quarte (d 1); kadenziert wird jedoch wieder auf dem
Grundton (a). Es ist ersichtlich, daB es urn psalmodischen Typ des Intonierens geht mit
Entgegensetzung von zwei Intonationshauptbereichen -- Tonika- und Dominanten-
bereich, wobei die modale Grundlage durch die herkommliche Quartenachse (a - d l )
gebildet wird. Die Gesarntkomposition -- die sticherarische Strophe, ist durch die
vierfache Wiederholung des Periode-Modells aufgebaut (die vierzeilige sticherarische
Strophe herrscht in alien drei Zyklen vor, es erweist sich jedoch auch eine durch
Melodical Lexicology (Theseis)". Musica Anliqua. VIII, Acta Scientifica (8ydgoszcz, 1988), S.I025-46.
10 D. Conomos, The Trealise of Manuel Chrysaphes the Lmnpadarios, Corpus ScriptollllD de Re Musica
der Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae (MMB). Bd. I (Wien, 1985); Ch. Hannick - G. Wolfram, Gabriel
Hieromonachos. Abh(lIIdlung aber den Kirchengesang, Corpus Scriptorum de Re Musica der MMB, Bd.
I (Wien. 1985).
11 E . Ton6eva, "Die musikalische 8edeutung des Interpunktionszeichens 'Punkt' in dem Sticherarischen
Repertoire der Handschrift NB Athen Nr. 928 (15. lb.)", in: MusikkuuurgeschichJe. FeslSchrift fUr
Constanlin Floros zum 60. Geburtstag (Wiesbaden, 1989), S.461-478.
12 E. Toneeva, "Der Strophe-Ko1DpOsitioostyp in der byzantioischen uod slawischen mittelalterlicheo
Musik. Einige Beobachtungen" - Intemationales Symposium anlilHich der 100. Wiederkehr des
Geburtstages von Egon Wellesz. Wien, 28-31. Oktober 1985.
13 Die Termini "Periode" und "Phrase" werden mit analog er Bedeutung auch von Paolo Ferretti benulZt.
Siehe: P. Ferretti. Esthetique gregorienne. Bd. I (Abbaye Saint-Pierre de Solesmes, 1939), ch. VI.
253
"/'<7 ...... " . .
~~Ii~ljl 11 nfr uri1 (r ,J 0 rI
rpo·o - p-&l "'-~- £ - I:ll .
• f"...J c,... t' ,. 1
\-....\....~--'.,,"'''''
\.."'- r
.n
" ,/.;'
t
. J
BEISPlEL lL Automeloo ·0 divnoe ~udo· Mode 1. Ms. AtbClll NO 928, 15. Jh.
254
BEISPIEL lb.
2SS
fiinffache Wiederholung der Periode, bzw. des Modells aufgebaute Strophe als
moglich, wie z.B. Sticheron 3 aus der Sticheragruppe zur Maria Entschlafung I4).
Sehen wir uns nun die melodischen Abschnitte an, die durch die melodisch-
segmentierenden Punkte abgegrenzt sind. So markiert Punkt 1 -- nach einem Rezitativ
auf dem Grundton -- eine melodische Abweichung zur unteren Quarte (Synagma-
Tonfigur IS ); das Intonieren bleibt aber im Rahmen des Terz-Quinten-Tonambitus e-g-h,
d.h. im Rahmen der sog. monofunktionalen Terzgruppen (Terminus nach Iskra
Ratscheva, gebildet aufgrund von Beobachtungen der Modalitiit in der bulgarischen
Folklore l6 ), die in diesem Fall einen als fortstrebend geladenen unteren
Intonationsbereich abstecken. Logischerweise folgt eine Ruckkehr -- hier durch einen
steigenden Quartensprung, in den Grundton; nach seiner Durchsetzung erscheint eine
Ubergangsintonation zur Dominante (Tonfigur der Anatrichisma) (Punkt 2). Punkt 3
trennt wiederholt eineD Bereich der fortstrebenden Intonation -- dies mal fiihrt eine
Psefiston-Figur zur unteren Sekunde des Grundtons (g), ebenfalls in einen Terz-Quinte-
Tonambitus (monofunktionale Terzgruppen einschlie.l3end, die aus die tonikale Terz
umsingenden Tonen aufgebaut sind: g - h - d l ) . Aufgrund der Zusammenwirkung mit
der Quartenhauptachse (a - d 1) jedoch verstiirkt sich bei diesem Intonieren die Funktion
der Dominante, die als temporarer Grundton -- tonikale Antithese -- auftritt; Punkt 4
markiert ebenfalls ein Rezitativ auf der Dominante. Erst danach beginnt das tonikale
Zentrieren, wobei nach kurzem Schwanken zwischen beiden Grundtonen (Figuren der
Bareia-Lygisma), die Melodie auf dem Hauptgrundton (Tonika) a endet (Punkt 5).
Aus dem bereits Gesagten wird ersichtlich, daB die in die Wortzeilen
eingefiihrten Punkte kleinere melodisch-strukturelle Glieder segmentieren, die ich --
wieder bedingt - Motive nenne; diese Glieder stellen -- im Laufe des
Intonationsprozesses -- Intonationsphasen mit forrnbildender Funktion dar.
Und nun wollen wir "das Verhalten" der auf diese Weise durch die Punkte
segmentierten Glieder -- Motive (Intonationsphasen) bei der Wiederholung der Periode
-- des Modells verfolgen. Es erweist sich, daB die Motive spezifischen Anderungen
ausgesetzt sind. So fehIt in Wiederholung I (Zeile II) das Anfangsmotiv, das die
Abweichung zur unteren Quarte einleitet; es wird durch ein Motiv -- Rezitativ auf dem
Grundton, mit einer Anfangsabweichung zur tonikalen Terz (a - cl), ersetzt (Punkt 6).
Anders ist das Motiv A. Es ist kadenzartig und ffihrt ein melismatisches Aussingen ein
(Bareia-Lygisma-Figuren in fallender Sequenz, gefolgt durch eine Darta-Kadenz im
Rahmen der Terz-Quinte-StrebungstOne g - h - d l ), das zum Grundton fiihrt; ent
256
danach erscheint die bekannte Anatrichisma-Intonation. Die Motive B (hier fehlt das
Rezitativ-Motiv auf der Dominante) treten nur mit geringen variations-rhythmischen
Anderungen auf. Wesentliche Anderungen bringt die Wiederholung II des Periode-
Modells ein. So wird in der Phrase B ein Hingerer Intonationsaufenthalt im Bereich der
Dominante d l eingefiihrt, der auch darauf mit einer Anatrichisma-Kadenz kadenziert
(punkt 7). Und in der Wiederholung III des Periode-Modells (Zeile IV) erweist sich
auch der Intonationsaufenthalt im Grundtonbereich verlangert: es wird ein zweites
Motiv eingefiihrt, in dessen Mittelpunkt der Grundton steht (Punkt 18); an seiner
Kadenzintonation sind andere melodischen Figuren beteiligt (Darta-Lygisma2 , Piasma),
doch der fortstrebende Terz-Quinte-Bereich bleibt erhalten; wieder ffihrt die bekannte
Anatrichisma-Intonation zur Dominante. Lexikalischen Anderungen ist auch die flir die
Komposition abschlieBende Kadenz (die Kadenz der Wiederholung III des Periode-
Modells) unterworfen; es wird durch eine Piasma-Figur (und durch die Figur eines
eigenen Stricheffekts, durch den "Portato") kadenziert (Punkt 21).
Beispiel 1 zeigt, daB die Vertonung auch der beiden folgenden Stichera in der
Gruppe, sowie der sechs Stichera der anderen zwei Zyklen, auf die gleiche Art und
Weise erfolgt: durch die periodische Wiederholung desselben melodischen Periode-
Modells, derse1ben es aufbauenden Phrasen; als bereichert erweist si ch einzig und allein
der Fonds der die Phrasen bildenden Motive mit unterschiedlichen "lexikalischen"
LOsungen, die jedoch ihre Charakteristika im Rahmen des modalen
Intonationsverhliltnisses Ruheton--Strebungston behalten (es erscheint z.B. ein
alternatives Motiv vom Typ A, in dem statt der Figurensequenz Bareia-Lygisma eine
komplizierte Prephiston-Figur erscheint (Prephiston-Antikenoma); es behaIt jedoch --
gebaut auf die den Grundton umsingenden Tone g - cl -- seine fortschreitende
Intonationscharakteristik (Zeile VII).
Die bis jetzt vorgenommene Analyse zeigt also, daB die Vertonung der
sticherarischen Texte nach dem Automelon des I. authentischen Echos "0 divrwe ciudo It
257
sticherarischen Komposition. Sie lassen sich hauptsachlich in zwei Typen gliedem: 1) in
einen rezitativischen und 2) einen melismatischen, wobei letztere hauptsachlich als
Kadenzphrasen fungieren. Es zeichnen sich auch melismatische Motive mit dem
Charakter von vorbereitenden, von Ubergangsintonationen ab. Im melismatischen Typ
zeichnen sich auch Elemente von diverser Intonationsstabilitat aus: eine Art "Wurzeln"
(es werden bedingt Fachausdriicke aus der Grammatik eingeflihrt) -- die sich aus
dauerhaften lexikalischen LOsungen zusammensetzen -- , und eine Art "Vorsilben " , die
lexikalisch veranderlich sind (z. B. in den Kadenzphrasen des Satzes A - A 11 bleibt die
Darta-Kadenz-"Wurzel" invariant, d.h. intonationell stabil, wahrend ihre Vorsilben
unterschiedliche lexikalische LOsungen zulassen (Beispiel 2). Gleichzeilig erweist si ch
H
auch die Einfiihrung unterschiedlicher "Nachsilben zu den Wurzeln a1s moglich. Im
konkreten Fall ist das die Anatrichisma-Figur, die nach der Darla-Kadenz erscheint
oder nicht erscheint. Aufgrund der somit eingefiihrten ersten Klassifikation erwies sich
auch eine erste Systematisierung der Motive als moglich, ja die Bildung eines
"Glossars" derselben; es hat sich herausgestellt, daJ3 a1le drei Stichera-ZykJen auf einem
Glossar von 25 Motiven basieren. 17 Die eingehende Untersuchung des Problems der
Klassifikation und Systematisierung der Formel-Motive im Proshomoia-Singen nach
dem Automelon im 1. Echos ist eine Aufgabe, die aus dem Rahmen dieses Vortrags
tritt. Hier m6chte ich nur darauf hinweisen, da8 der so beschriebene motivgebundene
Typ des Segmentierens, in den Wortzeilen unserer QueUe durch Punkt graphisch
dargestellt, auf eine nahe AnaJogie verweist -- das Popevka-Intonieren, wohlbekannt
aus der Praxis des russischen "Znamenoe"-Singens (sticherarisch und heirmologisch),
dessen friiheste Systematisierung -- Azbuki-Neumen-Listen -- zur selben Zeit entstand,
als auch die Zegligovo-Anthologie neumiert wurde. An der Wende des 15-16.
lahrhunderts lassen sich Analogien bei den Prinzipien des Autbaus der Popevka
feststellen, insbesondere im grundsatzlichen Verhaltnis intonationelle Stabilitiit-
Mobilitiit (fUr ihre Bezeichnung nutzt die sowjetische MedHivistin A. Krucinina die
Termini Popevka-Archetyp ("Wurzel") und "Podvod" (gleichzustellen mit unserem
Terminus "Vorsilbe").18 Diese Analogie zwischen beiden slawischen Gesangtraditionen
-- siid- und ostslawisch -- verlangt weitere aufmerksame Untersuchung.
Moglichkeit ZUT Beobachtung der FormeLn vom Popevka-Typ -- die sog. Motive.
258
Die QueUe bietet allerdings auch eine lweite einmalige Moglichkeit zur
Beobachtung des mundlichen Gesangtyps im gleichen Echos, jedoch in einem anderen
~)
..
J
Un Ut (l t , a tt t
Psefiston-
Antikcnomn D:'l.rt1ll. An:ttrichism~
.
.-<./
r
J tJf
BElsrr.EL 2.
Genre: dem Genre der Polyeleos-Pripevi.1 9 Wie bekannt, sind die Pripevi (Pripeli) eine
der Hauptformen hymnographischen Schaffens in der spatbyzantinischen Zeit. 20 Ihre
Erscheinung baut auf eine auch in der westeuropaischen mittelalterlichen Musik
wohlbekannte Technik des sog. Tropierens. Die byzantinische Praxis der Pripevi, d.h.
des tropierten Refrains, wurde zum ersten Mal vom amerikanischen Forscher E.
Williams in der melismatischen Psalmodie der GroBen Vesper beschrieben. 21 Im
Prinzip folgen die Polyeleoi der gieichen melodischen Prozedur: die erweiterten
melodischen Allelouia-Refrains des Poyeleos-Psalms 134 werden mit neugeschaffenen
Texten versehen. Der Terminus "Pripevi" ist der slawischsprachigen Singpraxis eigen --
so wurden luerst die Allelouia-Refrains der Polyeleos-Psalmen selbst genannt; diese
Bezeichnung wurde auch auf die tropierten Polyeleos-Refrains iibertragen. 22
19 E. Tonceva. "Polyeleos-Pripeli im MS.Athen Nr. 928 (Isaija-Anthologie. 15. Jh.) und deren Beziebung
roT hymnographischen--schopferischen AXtivitit des Patriarchen Eutornios" , in: 7yrnovo-Schule.
Denkml1ler, Poetik, Hisloriographie, Symposium - Veliko Tymovo, September 1989 (in Druck).
20 Or. Stathis, E Deko.pentasyllabos Hymnographia fn le Byzanlinf MeJopoiia (Athenai, 1977)
21 E. Williams, John Koukouzele5' Reform of Byzanline Chanting for Great Vespers in lhe FourtheenJh
CenJury (Ph.D.diss., Yale Univ., 1968).
22T. Simendrea, "Les 'Pripela' du moine Philothee-, Romanoslavica 17 (Bucu~ti, 1970). S.183-225.
259
In der Zegligovo-Anthologie wurde ein reiches Pripevi-Repertoire neumiert23
(fo1. 64r-8Ov), das sich je nach dem benutzten Echos in zwei Hauptzweige teilt: Pripevi
im 1. authentischen Echos und Pripevi, die im 4. Echos gesungen werden. Hier ist fUr
uns nur das Pripevi-Repertoire im 1. authentischen Echos von Interesse. Von den
insgesamt 42 Pripevi-Melodien in diesem Echos,24 die in der Anthologie neumiert sind,
gehoren 13 zum spatbyzantinischen Pripevi-Repertoire (9 Melodien stammen von
Iohannes Koukouzeles, zwei von Xenos Korones und zwei sind anonym). Die restlichen
Melodien sind nach der QueUe ein Werk von lsaija dem Serben (obwohl diese
Zuweisungen nicht konsequent bezeichnet sind). Die Untersuchung dieser Pripevi-
Melodien zeigte, daB sie hauptsachlich einem melodischen Hauptmuster folgen -- ein
Modell, nach dem unterschiedliche Pripevi-Texte gesungen werden. Beispiel 3a-b zeigt
diese Kompositionsmuster. 25 Wie ersichtlich, folgt sein Aufbau den uns aus dem
Proshomoia-Singen bekannten Prinzipien. Die Komposition aJs Games l3.8t sich dem
Intonationsbereich nach in drei Abschnitte einteilen -- Bereich des Hauptgrundtons --
Tonika und Bereich zweier Dominanten. Im ersten Abschnitt lassen sich zwei Phrasen
vom bekannten Typ A abgrenzen (AI> Ai) - d.h. ein urn den Grundton a zentriertes
Intonieren. Jede Phrase besteht aus den bekannten Popevki-Motiven -- ein
rezitativisches und ein kadenzartiges. In der Phrase Al stellen wir auch das bekannte
Kadenzrnotiv vom Typ A - Psephiston-Antikenorna fest; in der zweiten Phrase A2 bietet
das Kadenzmotiv von Typ A II eine neue "lexikalische LOsung -- Bareia-Lygisma
N
+
Psephiston + Anatrichisma, die aJlerdings ihren Terz-Quinte-Ambitus g - h - d1 bzw.
ihre Charakteristik einer fortstrebenden Intonation beibehalten hat (Zeile 2, Punkt 2).
Der zweite Abschnitt -- Intonieren irn Bereich der Dominante d 1 -- beginnt
direkt mil einem steigenden Quartsprung, ohne die Vermittlung der bekannten
Anatrichisma-Figur. Er besteht aus drei Motiven: einem rezitativischen und zwei
rnelismatischen. Die ersten zwei Motive setzten die Dorninante d 1 durch, das dritte
kadenziert auf a. Es folgt der 3. Abschnitt C. Er beginnt mit der bekannten Popevka
vom Typ B -- eine Bareia-Prephiston-Figurenkombination, die zur Sekunde unter dem
Grundton a fiihrt -- irn Terz-Quinte-Ambitus g - h - d 1 (C, Punkt 2). Von nun an aber
enthalt die Kornposition eine neue Popevka-Zusarnrnensetzung, die auch eine zweite
Dominante einfiihrt -- die obere Quint e l . Sie wird erreicht durch Anabasma-Intonieren
(durch eine Stauros-Figur omamentiert -- Punkt C2). Im Unterschied zur Quarten-
Dominante d 1 setzt sich der Ton e l deutlicher durch als provisorischer Intonations-
Hauptton; dies wird durch die Einfiihrung von Intonationen bestitigt, die von diesem
260
Recitntivisch r-CH\ (,l1~"rt ir.
c..': - ",F1r-/
1 ID tJ ~~ ~'i E. t. t •••
.,o.-~ ~t) /.
f" "' ••
. 6l ~
.,n •• v
. oI)/,/
,.
r ~.
nuu r
rpo 0 D 61
. ,.
1')o';:;~.).n ~/
...... IJ.
Jj {HA t1 r I
BEISPIEL 38. Zeile 1,2,3,4,5 - Melodisches Modell (nach dem unterschiedliche Pripevi-Texte gesungen
werden. Zeile I,Il,m - Parallele Motive BUS dem Proshomoia-Singen (nach dem Automelon "0 divnoe
ciudo").
261
~ ( j.
\. ".
') .I
~
L",'"
q~
J.r
~
~.!'
I')J
.. ~
~-+I~+H[j...h 11
J
~IIIII ~.- I
i l~~1ii1r T
~~ ft.tt I J\i#1
l~ll- -4lllll
f f
1
r
~ 11
~
(' \.'"
~I~
~.,l'
\\
:~
I1
D
--4
11
~
262
Ton zentriert werden (c. Punkt 3); in die gleiche Richtung wirkt auch die Intonation
vom "Lege"-Typ, die darauf aufgebaut ist. (Punkt 4) Und erst die nachste Popevka
beginnt seine Funktion als Hauptton zu schwachen, indem sie an die Quartendominante
d 1 "erinnert" (Punkt 5). In den letzten zwei Popevki (Punkt 6, 7) ist der Ton e l schon
ein Strebungston, der zum Grundton a fortstrebt, der sich zweifach durchsetzt.
26 A. Penington, "The Prononcialion Norm of Liturgical Singing in Fifteenth Century Serbia·, in: Old
Serbian Music, Bd. I, S. 191.
21 E. Ton6eva, "The 'Velikij Slti" (Sltil Mare) Monastery - a Scbool of 'Bolgarskij Rospev'·,
·&lgatskij" Hermologia a/the 17th -l&h Centuryjrom the Skit Monastery. 2 Bde.(Sofia, 1981) [bg .]
28 ldt!m.
263
Stichera notiert; darunter befindet sich auch ein Zyldus aus drei Stichera aus der Vesper
zum Fest der Geburt der Gottesmutter. 29 Ein Vergleich der beiden paraIlelen
Aufzeichnungen derartigen Singens -- der Zegligovo-AnthoJogie aus dem 15. lh. mit
spatbyzantinischer Notation mit den Skitischen Heirmologia aus der Mitte des 17. lh. in
Liniennotation weist eine Ahnlichkeit auf, die eindeutig von der Traditionsmi6igkeit
der Motive (Phasen) zeugt, die in der Singpraxis nach dem AutomeJon im 1.
authentischen Echos benutzt wurden. Aus Zeitgriinden wird hier keine eingehende
Analyse der skitischen sticherarischen Komposition vorgenommen, an deren Intonieren
die Haupttypen der Popevki beteiligt sind, die in den beiden hier untersuchten
Repertoires aus der ~gJigovo-Anthologie beschrieben sind; zumal unter
Beriicksichtigung der Tatsache, daB der skitische Gesang eine ukrainische exegetische
Version des siidslawischen Prototyps ist. 30 (Es erscheint gleichzeitig mit der sog.
musikalischen Exegesis auf dem Balkan und bietet somit neue Anregungen zur
Erforschung dieser immer noch nicht gekJwn Erscheinung in der Gesangspraxis der
Orthodoxen Kirche. 31 Daher wird hier nur die gro8e Ahnlichkeit beider Versionen
veranschaulicht, eine Ahnlichkeit, die den traditionsgemi6en Charakter der
Formelhaftigkeit in der Praxis des mittelalterlichen Proshomoia-Singens auf dem Balkan
beweist (Beispiel 4).
29 Bukarest, Bibliotheb Centrala de Slat. Musibbteilung, Ms. 10875 VOD 1684, fof.82r.
10 E. Toneev•• "The Musical IDterpretation (Exeaesis) of the Balkan Melodies - The Skit 'Bulgarian
Chant' (following the problem for the poat-byzantine musical exegesis iD the BaUtans during the XVll to
the XVIII ceoNry)" [bg.], Bulgarslw muzjkovumie 198812, S.S9-84.
31 Or. Statbis, "An Analysis of the Sticberon by Germanos Bishop of New Patras (The Old 'Synoptic'
and the New 'AnaliticaJ' Method of Byzantine Notation)", in: Studies in Ea.uern Cham, IV (New York,
1979),5.180-182.
264
>~
•
~r
~~ ~-
- .
v
~
I,), I
I-~
I 2
) ~
-:... if.
D
~ ~
.~'),
~
!S
:r
;,.
x
";~
..,
~
51 I-
~
~ ~
'":z
I ..,,
~
. ...
~
I
a.
I 1-
x
~
2
.;
lA
\l I ~ ~
J 1-3 .
&...
:;;
LA
I
8..
~3
'f.-
i!
~
~
....
<>
J
a
~
<-
I-
...
:a
~
~~ ,.'"
. ",....,-
~
~! :a
,
~
i!
"• 0
t
w
2 &.. I
-",
r
x
:r I
o
L..
t
c
. ~" s
..
0
1-
:s: ,.~ o
.; UI
I
~\ ~ e
,
0
I
~ ~
I
0 ~
~\' ~
,'" .;..
g
I
A
!I ,.. Z
S
>" (I
....
~ l)>
01 I
.) s '"
~
-'
" ,-'
BEISPIEL4.
265
.,.;
Nanna SCHI0DT
First a citation from the book Living Music by the Danish composer, Carl
Nielsen, written in 1925. "One ought to show the overly satiated that a melodic skip of
a third should be considered godgiven, that of a fourth a thrilling experience, and that
of a fifth the supreme happiness. Thoughtless gluttony undennines the health.
Consequently, we will see that it is necessary to maintain the connection with the
primary. - First we must reverence and respect the simple intervals, dwell on them,
listen to them, learn from them and love them." I think this citation fits so well with the
simplicity on which Byzantine and Gregorian hymns are based, a simplicity which is
unusual to our modern ears, and sometimes difficult to grasp in all its 8 modes-mystery.
The final cadence is the most neutral and stable part of a Byzantine hymn, both
from a musical and a textual point of view. The incipit vary much more. The final
cadence has the function of bringing the hymn to a rest. There are no new ideas or
reflexions to express and develop as there are in the incipit. In a previous study, to be
published in Bulgarian Musicology in Januar 1991, I chose for investigation the final
cadences from the 741 hymns in the 12 months of the Sticherarion Coislin 42 from the
end of the 13th century. It turned out that they could be reduced to 108 musical model
cadences covering all 8 modes. The cadences were filed alphabetically in a list. I also
found that 7 text model cadences were used in 54,5 % of the 741 hymns.
Many questions can be asked to this list of model cadences. One could be: Can
the final cadences from the 12 months be found in other parts of the Sticherarion,
Coislin 42? As comparison objects I have chosen the 36 Dogmatic Hymns for the
Virgin Mary, and the 11 Morning Hymns of the Emperor Leo.
To decide how many tones should be included in a final cadence I follow the
nature of both neumes and text. When these two elements approach the finalis tone,
they often get into a kind of formula-shape. In the hymns I have examined up to now, it
happens 7-8 neumes or neume-groups and 5-6 syllables before the finalis tone.
-
PI
:1.
2
.I A E
A A·A E
p
X
D X
D I
o 2. -;;-
1I '-
/
;;-
J
"", >
""' ,,.
:-:.
) >
<-
L-
1
e,
~
i tu
j ~', ~( 'i ~
I'~r J
J I
3 I 4 A A E X D J 2. '-- ;/ ~ ~ ~~ 1- S ~~~I~ j l
4 I K 0
A A A E )( D IT ~> 1 1$ !":Ct. 1'1
a
:::: ;/ :- ' '- i J I
S- I A A A E :x D K 0 2. - ; ;••: ;/ '; )0 :10 > '-- 1 \ '$£1 I J I I
£:> OEAX X i A A A E X D X 0
. 2 ,/"/ '"'
,.. :110
&-,.~-
::.,' ~ 1
\
tj' u J J I
?
J1 JJ (.
I
-.
'7 I A A A I 0 A A X 4 / :>
)0
"7'--'
-
.
~
.
.,
......, L.. 1 \;iSrru R'
S I A A A K 0 0 (, A Lt ~)C - -;;' ~
:>
.:> <- 15 \$ r J r , a I
.....
~l,:er
C} oA DX: i A A A K X 0 DA 2. /.
'" " :> ';; /..
" " 1
,.
10 I A A A 0 A A Lt -;; 18
.
:> L-
" '"
..
:>
I4 J o H n
,
13
.II AAI-\OAKO Lt - }. -;; "
,.
:> i.-
24 z
14 A A ,A 0 E A D A 1r ").. ') "'"' -;; "
~
17 A A A 0 E K \ 2. '-- ~ -;;
:>
,. <- 1.4 A
~
:>
1'J \A A ·A 0 E K 0 1I - 7i :>
:> '-- I?S -._ A
1~ I A A A 0 E K 0 2. - ~ -;;- :>
:>
:> '-- 5"3 ;$JqJt~ll
it •
0
,.
20 I A A A 0 E 0 I IT <- )i: '""';( ,.
.I
:> '-- :3 ~.
1 ~~ ~ I ~ I ·~.j~
:>
22. iAAAOEOO 2.-~-;; > ~ <- ~ ~
~
E! 2"3 A A fit 0 0 0 D iI I " 11 ~
'- lit I 3 f) I D I
-
~
~
24
2.51 i
A A
AAAOO'><
A 0 0 0 D
2 I:. :
Lt ~ ;- CJ ••
./
,.
L..
'-
'-
29 A A A POt A D IT,,....
- J ~
~
~.> ....
35
3(;
AAEPAK
AAEPDXOO
ill
\11
I): -
J
-;;
~).>
/.- J
L-
~ )') <-
31 A A E P ll'- '- J ~~ .. L-
>
L..
'-
1.
2
&$ si /.
i@ f f). J r J' J
t) J ; l' I
41 i A A 0 A E 0 0 D ill.:.:. ~ /, ~ L- 23 ~l B ?-) I lJ ;
~8 i i A A POD i
49
50
51
i
i A A P 0 i A
i A A P 0 0
I A A X A E p
D E
i
A
IT '-
3
3
I ~
;;,
"r,
'-~ ~> ~
d
1:;
-=-.:
'-
~
J
:1 {i Ji\ :
;:J
z:J;;
rH i ; ;
~
~
/'
,.
:
,.
'- '-
'-
L. ~
'-
1.1~~~~~$~~
1
C3
v ...........
L J l J
~; j ~ ~~~ ~
; : ~ ~ ~ ~ »~ 4~re~ ~ i iI1:
; :
1 I~§¥~~Pn~~~
• - ;. JJ
5 Lt I A A X A 0 K A A 11.:>,,;:: /' ,. " ' -
55 A A X E K. A Lt .,. ),:. /' , " :2. IFl~r~ ~-
po
~1 i A E APE A P 0\ ~ Z;I ~'" v' >';.. '> '- 1 1i$4i ~ ; ) J
(.gi A EA)(DO A 4:> -/")",. ~'-- 2 :"JE!:ltJ
(;9
. I
A E A X , D 0 0
. ~ - -;;- ';; ~" ~
.'
'- '--
~