THE POLYPHONIC OF , ARCHIMO CAPITOLARE, MS 93: A STYLISTIC ANALYSIS

Briao Edward Powcr

A tbesis submitted ia conformity witb the requirements for the degree of Doetor of Philosopby Graduate Department of Music University of Toronto

8 Copyrigbt by Brian Edward Power 1999 National Library Bibliothéque nationale B+B of Canada du Canada Acqiiisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographic Services services bibliogiaphiques 395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington Otîawa ON KiA ON4 Ortawa ON K1AW Canada Canada

The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive Licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microfonn, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfichelfilm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.

The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fkom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ABSTRACT

The Polyphonie latroits of Tnnto, Archivio Copiolure, M.93:

A Stylistic Analysis

Doctor of Philosophy, 1999

Brian Edward Power

Graduate Department of Music, University of Toronto

Trent 93, the most recently discovered of the (a large and well- preserved source of fifteenthcenhuy sacred polyphony) contains a lengthy grouping of polyphonic settings of introits, the first item in the of the . The scope of this collection is unprecedented, and is not approached again until the siaeenth century (in collections such as the Jenu choirbook, and Heinrich Isaac's Choralis constant»tus). Why were these pieces copied? Were they ever performed in Trent, and if so. in what particular circumstances? This thesis is an exploration of the cultural and ecclesiastical context of the Trent 93 introits, in combination with a survey of their liturgical placement, and an analysis of their stylistic characteristics, in the hope that such a study will help to unravel some of these problems.

Chapter One of this thesis sets the geographical and liturgical context for the stylistic study and outlines the current scholarly situation regarding the Trent codices and their importance in the repertory, including relevant paleographical and analytical studies. Also included are Mme known facts (and some speculation), about the scnbal activity in mid fi fieenth-cenhiry Trent and the possible routes by which the music of the codices found its way to this northem Italian town. Chapter Two surveys the introits in Tr93 according to their liturgical function and the copying plan of the scribes. Chapter Three, the essence the thesis, discusses the as a musical genre, and examines the various stylistic characteristics of the repertory. The conclusions- reflect my thoughts on the level of compositional skill displayed in these pieces, and the likelihood that this music was performed from this source.

This thesis supports the theory, first suggested by Gary Spilsted, that the introit cycle of Tr93 was originally intended to be a repository for future liturgical needs; however, based on the paleographic and stylistic evidence 1 have observed, 1 do not believe that this collection was ever used for its intended purpose. Nonetheless, it does present an intriguing snapshot of both the stylistic preferences and the scribal practices of mid fifieenth-century Trent. The writing of this thesis has ken supported by Doctoral Fellowships fiom the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, and the University of Toronto. An Associates of the University of Toronto Travel Grant provided financial assistance for the second of two research trips to Europe.

Numerous individuals deserve my sincere thanks. Without any one of the followîng people the ultimate success of this project would have been in grave doubt:

In Trent, Italy (1 994, 1995): d-ssa Carla Maturi, archival assistant at the Archivio Capitohre, greatly assisted me in the location and transcription of fifieenth- century documents; Lîbrarians Alessandra Facchinelli and Gabriella Graziadei, of the Biblioteca del Mureo Provinciale d'Arte, at the Castel10 del Buonconsigi io, provided much helpful assistance, as well as access to several relevant publications not generally available outside Trent; Domenica Primerano and Héctor Peralta provided similar help at the Museo Diocesano; Don. Emanuele Curzel, with whom 1 enjoyed some fniitful discussions at the Archivio Capitolare, veiy kindly gave me a disk copy of his Tesi di Lawea, allowing me access to otherwise unpublished local scholarship; and Don Livio Sparapani, Archivista of the Archzvio della Cu& Arcivescoviie. personal ly carried many large, heavy manuscripts (includ ing Tr93) from the A rchivio Capitolare, which was closed to the public on my second visit, to a reading room across town so that 1 could view them easily.

Ln Florence, Italy (1 994): At the Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies at the Villa I Tatti, Professor Paul Gehl (of the Newberry Library, Chicago), visiting scholar, allowed me to take advantage of his bibliographie knowledge and translation talents; Giovanni Ciapelli, fellow, and a lecturer at the University of Trento, kindly agreed to be a liaison for me afler my retum to Canada; and Dr Katherine Bosi, Music Librarian, was extremely kind and efficient in making many arrangements for me while 1 was in Italy. Sr Maria Stefania, of the Laboraforio di Restauro del Libro, at the Convento Santa Maria di Rosano, near Florence, shared with me her knowledge of the restoration process used with fifieenth-century manuscripts, and specific details about the restoration of Tr93. Most helpful of al1 were Professor Timothy McGee, visiting professor at the Villa i Tatti, and Bonnie McGee, for providing me with accommodation, transpomtion, and academic and moral support during my trip.

At the University of Toronto, Graduate Department of Music: Professor James Kippen, co-ordinator of Graduate Studies, has been both accommodating and supportive, and has championed my cause on many occasions. The members of my Ph.D. advisory cornmittee have ken extremely helpful, enthusiastic, and patient throughout the various stages of my work: Professor William Bowen has been a source of advice and suppon for many years; Professor Timothy McGee, who took a special interest in my academic career at an early stage, has always been for me a font of academic knowledge, experience, and invaluable practical guidance; Professor Andrew Hughes has shared with me his expertise, and provided countless insightful suggestions throughout the research and writing process. 1 thank him particularly for his page-by-page detailed review in the final editing stages; this thesis is far stronger as a result of his sage editorial advice.

I wish to thank the Department of Music and the Dean of the Faculty of Humanitses at Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, for easing my burden during the last year of writing by relieving me of certain teaching and administrative responsibilities. 1 am also gratefùl to Dr. Margaret Bent, of Al1 Souls College, Oxford University, for a fniitfùl e-mail correspondence, and to Professor Patrick Macey, of the Eastman School of Music, for his careful reading of the te* and for his many helpful and thought-provoking suggestions.

On the home fiont: Mr. Peter Gardner, of St. John's, Newfoundland, was an early source of musical inspiration for me. I thank him for sparking and encouraging my first musicological interests. My parents, Edward and Maureen Power, whose enthusiasm and encouragement was constant from the very beginning, never doubted that 1 would succeed. The support and advice of my family and several close fhends often made it possible for me to cany on during times of uncertainty (the smallest fmily member demands a particular mention). Above al1 things is the love and inspiration of my wife, Erika Reiman, who was my constant sounding board during this process. In the end, 1 owe the completion of this thesis to her alone, for her brilliant proof reading, her encouragement and belief in my abilities, her patience and understanding, and the strongest possible support. 1 dedicate this work to her.

Brian E. Power Toronto, 1 999 TABLE OF CONTENTS

.- ABSTRACT 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

LIST OF TABLES X LIST OF MANUSCRIPTS CITED xi ... CONVENTIONS USED IN THIS THESIS xi11 xv

Chanter 1: Introduction 1 A. Cultural and Ecclesiastical Context 1 B. The Musical Sources 7 1 .The Trent Complex: General introduction 7 2. The Tr93nr90 relationship 9 3. Polyphonie Introits in fifteenth-century sources 11 and concordances with Tr93 4. Pdeography, Repertory, and Dating of Tr93 16

Chanter 2: The Introit cvck of Tr93- A bricf inventory and description 25 A. Introduction 25 B. Description and liturgical placement of the rcpertory 29 1 . and 29 2. & Ascension 31 3. & Trinity 33 4. The Remainder of the Year & Dedication of a Church 34 5. The Common of the 35

vii 6. Saints: John the Baptist, Peter and Paul, Stephen, Lawrence 7. Feasts of the Blessed

Chanter 3: A Structural and Stylistie Examioation of the Iatroie A. General Structure: liturgical and pcriormaoct considentions B. Texture and Iadcpendcncc of tbe Voica 1. Antiphons II. Psalm Verses and

C. Melodic Quality 1. The voices II. Function of the lower voices

D. Harmoay and Cadences

E. Mensuration and Rhythm 1. Conventional mensurations Il. Coloration III. Atypical mensural patterns IV. Typical rhythmic configurations 1. Hemiola 2. Openingfonnukae (incltrding rests) 3. Other uses of rests 4. Fennatas

F. 1. The Introits of II. Typical usage in Tr93 III. A typical usage/anomal ies

G. Text setting and characteristics of the underlay 1. General uiformation II. Typical underiay in the collection III. Enors and Anomalies

H. Plainchant and its Treatment in the Collection 1. Relevant sources of plainchant II. Placement of the cantmfinnui in the collection 1. intonations 2. Discant paraphrase in the top voice 3. Plainchant in the tenor

General Conclusions

Bibliography

Appendix: A Simple of Introit Styles in Tt93 LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE

Extant Sources of 1 SUtenturyPolyphonie Introits 11

The Introits of Tr93 - Concordances 14

The Introits of Tr93 and their liturgical occasions 26

The Introits of Tr93 - Plainchant/Polyphony Structure 43

Locations of extended rests (one perfection or longer) 5 1

Textural Qudity of Psairns(V)/Doxologies(D) 64

The htroits of Tr93 - Mensuration 96

Opening rhythmic formula = two semibreve rests 102

The Introits of Johannes Brassart 116

Settings with only two notated voices (mostlyfauxbourdon) 127

Unusual Instances of Text Treatment 133 LIST OF MANUSCRIPTS CITED

Polyphonic Sources:

Abbreviation Source

Ao Aosta. Biblioteca del Sernimrio Maggiore, MS A 019 ("Aosta manuscript") BoQ 15 Bologna, Civico Museo Bibliograjico Micicale, MS Ql5 Mu 14274 Munich, Bayerische Staarsbibliofhek, Latinus monacensis 14274 ("St Emmeram Codex") Pr47 Prague. Pamhnik Narodniho Pisemnicmi 'Strahovskzi' ffiihovna. MS D. G.IV 4 7 ("Strahov manuscript") Tr87- 92 Trent. Castel10 del Buonconsiglio, MS 13 74- 13 7 7 ("Trent Codices 87- 92") Tr93 Trent, Archivio Capitolare, MIS 93 ("Trent Codex 93")

Plainchant Sources:

Nuremberg, Germanisches Nu~ionalmuseum.A5 1845 75. (A combined GraduaVAntiphonal of Trent, i 5" century)

Trent. Biblioteca Capztolare, Libro Corale A Trent, Museo Diocesano, Libro Corale B (A Gradua1 of Trent, mid 16<"century, 2 parts) Trent Archival Documents:

Tm.Archivio Capitdare, Regr'strwn Praepositwae ( 143 3) Trent. Archivio Capitolare. lmtnrntenta Capituhrïa LX ( 1 455) Trent. A rchivio Capitolare, lmtrumenta Capitularia X ( 1459) Trent. A rchzvio Capitokare. Capsa 45, N.42 (The will of Johannes Lupi) Trent. Biblioteca Capitok~re.lCtr 86 (Letters of Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini - later Pius il) Trent. Biblioteca Capitolare, h4S 150 (G.Tovaui: Parochiale Tridentinum, 1764-85)

Otber sources:

Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek. St Peter, Perg. 8. (A Tridentine Missal with liturgical calendar, 1468)

Veraice, Bibliofeca Marciana, Lat. 336, COU.J SN, f 1 (added folio). (A treatise on text underlay by Antonius de Leno, north Italian, c. 1440)

xii CONVENTIONS USED IN THIS THESIS

A bbreviations lntroits Individual introits are referred to by their text incipits (e-g., Statuit ei). In cases where more than one setting of the same tea exists in Tr93, the introit is Meridentified by means of a Roman numeral according to its order in the manuscript (e.g., Spiritus domini N). Folio numbers are not always given in the text, but may be cross- referenced in any one of several Tables (see List of Tables, above). Roman numerals associated with individual introit settings should not be confùsed with those which occasionally appear following liturgical occasions (e-g., IV, meaning the fourth Sunday of Advent).

Pitches are identified in the text with lower-case characters enclosed in single quotes (e.g.,'a b')

General abbreviations

A = antiphon BVM (BMV) = Blessed Virgin Mary (Beate Marie Virgine) Ct = contratenor D = f = folio Inc. = incipit Int. = introit S = Superius T = tenor V = psalm verse

Abbreviations specific to certain Tables are given irnrnediately before the Table. Musical Examples

The vast majority of the introits in Tr93 have not appeared in modem dition, and concordances for these pieces outside the Trent Codices themselves are scarce. Unless otherwise indicated, al1 aanscriptions given in the musical examples are my own. Except in certain unusual circumstances (discussed in the text), the transcription level is constant at semibreve = quarter note. The fascicles of the manuscnpt containing the introits are devoid of key signatures, and accidentals are practically non-existent. Where applicable, I have added rnusiccrflcta according to the rules codifieci by recent scholarship (such as Margaret Bent, "Musica Recta and Musica Ficta," Musica Disciplina 26, 1972). Voice labels and text underlay (when present) are given as they appear in the source. Editorial text underlay is given in italics. Following standard practice, ligatures are indicated by square brackets, coloration by broken brackets. The realization of improvised fauxbourdon, where applicable, is presented on a small stave.

xiv PREFACE

This project began with a suggestion from my advisor, Professor Andrew Hughes, that 1 make some attempt to address a certain disparity. The music for the Ord inary of the Mass found in the Trent Codices (a large and well-preserved source of fifieenth-century sacred polyphony), particularly those pieces attrïbuted to well-known composers such as Dufay, has been examined, both paleographically and stylistically, in great detail by modem scholarship. On the other hand, the music for the Proper of the Mass, equally well represented in the sarne sources, has tended to receive less scholarly attention, possibly due to the general obscurïty (or complete anonymity) of the composers. Polyphonie introits, for example, are mostly anonymous, and are not associated with any non-musical purpose beyond their practical function in the celebration of the Mass. There are few identifiable links in this repertory to patrons, courts, architectural structures, or social events that rnight have an impact on wider- ranging research in the later Middle Ages. The music is not overly omate, nor is it even really aesthetically striking. From a scholarly point of view, however, it seemed to me worthwhile to look at the sources as the original composers and scribes may have done; clearly this music was fùnctional-it was as necessary to the fifieenth-century Mass service as any item of the would have ken. An examination of the stylistic nature of these compositions might tell us much about the liturgical practices, needs limitations, and preferences of the time. While undertaking a broad survey of the Propen in the codices, 1 was imrnediately struck by the large number of introits gathered together at the beginning of Tr93. These, 1 noticed, had ken carefully grouped together by common texts, and ordered according to the . Two things were immediateiy evident: I ) no other items fkom the Proper were present; and 2) a similar grouping of Ordinary items followed the introits in the manuscript (first a group of , then Glorias, etc.). My first thoughts were that this source represented a hi therto unknown preference of north-Italian church musicians of the fifieenth century for polyphonic introits, and that these pieces were possibly linked musically to the Ordinary items that followed; however, after much scnitiny, 1 soon discovered that the musical links, if present were not at al1 obvious. Nonetheless, it did seem unusual to see such a large grouping together of polyphonic settings of one pmicular item of the Proper. The scope of this collection is unprecedented, and not approached again until the sixteenth century (in collections such as the Jena choirbook, and Heinrich Isaac's Choralis constantinus). Why were these introits copied? Were they ever perfortned in Trent: and if so, in what particular circumstances? The goal of my thesis, then, is an exploration of the cultural and ecclesiastical context of these pieces, in combination with a swey of their liturgicai placement, and an analysis of their stylistic characteristics, in the hope that such a study will help to unravel some of these problems. Chapter One sets the geographical and liturgical context for this stylistic study and outlines the curent scholarly situation regarding the Trent codices and their importance in the repertory, including relevant paleographical and analytical studies. Also included are some known facts (and some speculation), about the scnbal activity in mid fifieenthtentury Trent and the possible routes by which the music of the codices found its way to this northern Italian town. Chapter Two surveys the introits in Tr93 according to their liturgical fùnction and the copying plan of the scribes. Chapter Three, the essence of the thesis, discusses the introit as a musical genre, and examines the various stylistic characteristics of the repertory. The conclusions reflect rny thoughts on the level of compositional ski11 displayed in these pieces, and the likelihood that this music was perfonned f?om this source. Prior to commencing the analysis in this study, it was necessary for me to transcribe the sixty-one introits of Tr93 into modem notation, since very few of them have appeared in modem editions. For the sake of time, only a few examples, representative of particular styles discussed in the thesis, have been included as full editions, forrnatted using music-notation software. These appear as an appendix to the text. Chapter 1 Introduction

A. Cultural and Ecclesiasticd Coatext

Any exploration of the cultural milieu of northem Italy in the mid tifteenth century will reveal that a significant German presence intluenced both church and state. Remnants of the Gennan influence remain in the ana today. Geman is a cornrnonly (though not univedly) spoken second language in the Trentino region, which borders on presentday , and the local Italian dialect has a distinct Gennanic flavour, even among those who do not speak German. Many towns are known by both their Italian and German names (e.g., Boizanoo/Bzen), and local sumames sometlmes betray their German origins. In fact, the region was a part of the fiom its conquest in c. 95 1, by Emperor Otto 1, until 1803. ' As a pnncipality of the Empire, the Trentino region was govemed by a prince- bishop, who retained both temporal and spiritual jurïsdiction over the area fiom his residence at the Castello del Buonconsiglio in the town of Trent? One scholar has pointed out that, nom the fourteenth to the sixteenth centuries (i-e., the time period of the repertory in the Trent codices), al1 the prince-bishops of Trent were Gerrnans,

' For a more detailed history of the region as a bastion of the Empire, see: Giorgio Falco, The Holy Roman Republic, trans. K. V.Kent (New York: Barnes, 1964).

' Simone Weber, "La residenza dei vescovi trentini," Studi Trentini di Scienze Sforiche 5 (1924): 23-37. There are additional descriptions of the Castello, its history, and its architecture. These are summarized in Gary Richard Spilsted, "The Paleography and Musical Repertory of Codex Tridentinus 93" (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1982), 15. Ch.2 of Spilsted's dissertation provides a well-documented history of the Tridentine princi pality . Poles, or Bohemians ', including those in power when the Trent codices were copied: Alexander 1 (1423-44) hmMazovia; Georgius (Hack) Il (144665) fiom

Themesvald; and Johannes (Hinderbach) [V (1465-86) from Rauschemberg.' As both a secular and a religious leader, the prince-bishop retained control over al1 aspects of govemance; although day-to-day operations were oAen overseen by both the civic bureaucracy, and, in the case of religious matters, the cathedd chapter. The chapter was an assembly of canons6who acted as the bishop's council, as well as celebrants of the liturgy and participants in the . Apparently, the powers of the chapter grew considerably in the fifieenth century. Particularly during the bishop's absence, they were granted authority to impose excommunications, confer benefices, and grant churches, parishes, and dioceses to whomever they judged worthy. By the end of the century, each member of the chapter was receiving an income of approximately 200

' Spilsted, 26. ' The years 144446 mark4 a theof "episcopal schism" in Trent, as two candidates, one German (Theobald von Wolkenstein, a Tridentine canon) and one Italian (Benedetto da Trento, a Tridentine abbot) vied for the position. In the end, neither was granted the job and the episcopl seat remained empty until the appointment of Georgius Hack, who had the approval of the Council of in 1446. See: Gino Cucchetti, Sforza di Trento (Palerme, 1939), 1 15- 18).

' For a modem assessrnent of the political power wielded by the prince-bishops in the fifieenth centuxy, see Emanuele Cune1,"Ricerche su1 Capitolo della Cattedrale di Trento alla Meta del Quattrocento: Aspetti institutionale e sociocconomici, con un' appendice di 606 regesti di documenti, 1436- 1458" (Tesi di Lama, Universi6 degli studi di Trento, 1WO), especially Ch. 2. I am gratehil to dotî. Curzel for providing me with a copy of his unpublished thesis. During most of the fifieenth century, the chapter numbered eighteen canons pius three ex oflcio members: dean, archdeacon and scholusticur. See: Albino Casetti, Guido Slorico-Archivistica del Trentino, Collana di Monoma della Società di Studi per la Venezia Tndentina MV (Trento: Terni, 196 1 ), 809- 10. florins per year, a princely surn in itself'. Absenteeism was cornmon, since many canons held appointments in more than one church8; however, a regular body of clerics was maintained at Trent Cathedra1 in order to ensure the daily celebration of the liturgy. The general system of govemance have worked well, since the second half of the fifieenth cenhvy is generaily considered to have been one of the most peacefùl and prosperous pends in Tridentine hi~tory.~ Many documents in the archives of the Trent chapter attest to the activities of the canons in the fifieenth cent~ry.'~Unfortunately, specific information about the place of music in the celebration of the Mass is not mentioned. The documents do, however, record the comings and goings of some of the clerics of the chapter whom we know fiom other evidence to have been associated with the Trent Codices at the time of their copying. The best-known such figure is Johannes Wiser, a cleric fkom Munich, whose handwriting is found in Tr93 and especially in TM,where he actually claims to be the copyist". 1 have located numerous references to Wiser in the

' Spilsted, 20. See also: Hubert Jedin, A History of the Corncil of Trent, trans. Dom Ernest Graf (London:Nelson, 1957), 574; and Carlo M. Cipolla, Money, Prices, and c.zwlr . .= ation in the Meàiterranean World fi$h to seventeenth cenrury (New York: Gordian, 1967).

Only a few fifieenthcentury documents record the assigning of parish church duties to a vicar in the absence of the canon. One such document is reported in Curzel, Ch.4,45.

Curzel, Ch.2, 19.

'O An excellent sutnmary and analysis of the mid 15~sentwydocuments found in the Chapter archives is given in Curzel, appendices.

*'The words "Scriptun notatum per Johannes Wiser" are inscribed on the 1st folio (f.465~)of TrW. See Spilsteà, 172. A similar-looking inscription appears in Tt93 (f 125v), but with the name erdAlthough the handwriting matches Wiser's, Wright points out that the erasure does not respond to ultra-violet light; therefore, we cm only presurne that Wisefs name was written there. See Peter Wright, "The Reiated parts of Trent, Muse0 Provinciale d'me MSS 87 (1 374) and 92 ( 1397): A Paleographical and Text-Critical Study" (Ph.D. diss., University of Nottingham, 1986, repr. New York & London: Garland, 1989), 307. chapter archives, dating fiom 1455-65. l2 They chronicle his gradually increasing respect and importance in the church comunity nom his early years in Trent, where he is referred to merely as "suonatore ~cholaris"~'(rnusician/scholar?) to his investiture as "capellano" of the altars of St Dorothy and St Nicolaus (Le., a benefice), where he is called master and rector of the Cathedra1 school, and referred to as an honest, discreet, young priest from Munich in the diocese of Freising14.According to Carfini and Curti, Wiser was made Trent's chancellor to the ducal court at

in the 1480s. l5 Spilsted reports that Wiser is described as a doctor of jm-spnidence in documents dating fkom the 1490s.I6An eighteenth-century history of the Trent chapter States that Wiser was made chaplain to prince-bishop Hinderbach in 1467, and that "the honourable and distinguished Johannes Wisser (sic), Doctor of Trent, livd to the

l2 Some, though not all, of these documents are summarized in Leo Santifaller, Uhnden und Forschungen ,w Geschichte des Trienter Domthpitels irn Mittelal~er, i :(lhden zur Geschichte des Trienter DomkapiteIs 1 147- 1500 (: Universum Verlagsgesel lschaft, 1948). " "Johannes Wissar [sic] suonatore scholaris in dicta civitate", found in Trento. Archivio Capitolare. 1. CJX, C284r (July 30, 1455). 1455 was, by other accounts, a fairly important year in the Trent chapter, since it marked the adoption of a new set of statutes, devised by prince-bishop Georgius Hack, governing the conduct of the Trent canons (Curzel, Ch.3,6-9).

" "honestus et discretus iuvenis dominus Johannes Wiser de Monaco Frisingeasis diocesis magister et rector scolarum", found in Trento. Archivio Cupirolure. I.C.X, f. 1% (June 3, 1459). He was griinted these altan as a benefice following the death of another German, Guntherus de Alemania. Guntherus had himself received the fkom yet another German, Nicolaus de Alemania, in 1433, according to Trenm, Archivio Capitolare, Registrum Pruepsiturue, f 2 1 3.

l5 Antonio Carlini and Danilo Ch,"11 Quattrocento e i Codici Musicali Trentini" in Dalla polrfolia al Classicisrno. II Trentino nefla muria (Trento: Alcione, 198 1), 1 5. This article also associates the post of rector scholanmr of the Cathedra1 school with the direction of the "chorus for " (Ibid , 13; also reported in Curzel, Ch.S.2 1), although no archival document appears to mention this phrase.

l6 Spilsted, 178. He does not specifiy the documents in question. year 1495. "17 Along with other German-speaking clerics, such as Joha~esWolf (~upi)'~,and Johannes Premerlg, it would seem that Wiser was a part of the iargely German contingent brought to Trent in the early to mid fifieenth century by the Geman prince-bishops to manage the lihirgical and musicai matters at the cathedra1 of St Vigilius. Among Wiser's duties was the copying of musical manuscripts Where did his exernplars originate? Given the Ge- presence in govemment and church, and the fairly constant influx of Gennan clerics to the area, it seems reasonable to suggest that the music was brought to Trent fkom German lands. The specific movements of the clencs and musicians of mid fifieenthcentury Trent are difficult to trace; however,

17 G. Tovazzi, Parochiale Tridenfinum, now found as Trento, Biblioteca Capifofare, ms 150 ( 1764-85)- The passage (E995) is translateci in Spilsted, 176. '' There are many references in the Trent chapter archival documents to Lupi as an organist of Trent (see Cunel, Ch.4, 17,23; Cb5,20). Although he was a native of Bolzano, he matnculated at the University of Vienna in 1429 (see: Leo Santifaller, ed, Der Matrikel der Universitiii Wien i. 13 77-2450, Graz & Cologne, 1956, 162.) His will, first brought to Iight by the Trent archivist Vigilio Zanolini (see: "Spigolatura d'archivio," in Programmu del Ginnusio private pr. vescovile di Trento per l'anno scolastico 1902-3. Trent, 1903) and reproduced and transcribed by Wright (333-7), is a fascinating document with many musical implications. Among Lupi's bequests are several musical instruments (a positive organ with two bellows, a portative organ, two lutes, two clavichords, a clavicembalo and a "schaffpret",) liturgical books (see: Chapter 3, Section H below), and six books containhg "cannis figuratus", which are speculated to have bansix of the Trent Codices (see: Renato Lunelli, "La patria dei Codici musicali tridentini,"Note d'archivio pet la sroria musicale 4, 1927, 122), but which Wright has show wuld only have included Tr87 and Tr92 (Wright, 109). Wright also proves fairly conclusively that Lupi was the principal scribe of these manuscripts (Ibid, 100).

l9 Prenner is mentioned as Wiser's immediate predecessor as master and rector of the school in Trento, Archivio Capitolure. 1. C.H, f.284(July 30, 1455). Curzel records that he is also re ferred to as artizun grumatice professor (Cunel, Ch.5, 10). Wright suggest~that Wiser may well have been Prenner's assistant at this time. (Wright, 1 10). Since Wiser is referred to as "suonatorew(note vemacular fonn of the word) in this document, it may well be that the position of master and rector involved some musical responsibilities, meaning that Premer may also have been a musician. one possible route for the transmission of the music of Tr93 can be suggested. The Councii of Basel (143 1-49)brought together, arnong other eminent clerics, many composers and musicians. According to Marian Cobin, there were two large English retinues present (1433JS), as well as the composers Johannes Brassart, who then served the Duke of Sussex, and Gilles Binchoi~.~'These two composers are associated with polyphonie introits found both in Tr93 and in the Aosta manuscript. One possible trammitter of this music to Trent may have been the Trent prince-bishop Alexander 1, who, with his retinue, was also present at the Council of Basel in 1 4342'. Another, more circuitous, route for the transmission of these pieces may also be postiilated: Cobin believes that parts of the Aosta manuscript were copied originally in the Strasbourg-Basel area, and eventually found their way to Aosta (approximately 300 kilometen Corn Trent) in the hands of Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini (later Pope Pius II)." Since the introits by Bras- and Binchois in the Aosta manuscript have concordances in Tr93, it seems possible that Piccolomini's music was to Trent to be copied. The Aosta-Trent comection is Merstrengthened by the fact that Piccolomini maintained a close fiendship with Johannes Hinderbach, both before and after the lattefs to prince-bishop of Trent in 1465.~~A manuscript

'O Marian Cobin, "The Compilation of the Aosfu Ah: A Working Hypothesis,"Papers Read at the Dufay Quzncentenury Conférence. BrooRI' Coiiege, December 6- 7. 1974, ed. AlIan W. Atlas (New York, 1976), 76-101.

* ' Spilsted, 54. For additional details about Trent's delegation to the wuncil, see Curzel, "Ricerche,"Ch.2: "Canonici trentini a Basile*" 12- 14.

Cobin, 80. Connections between the Trent Codices, the Aosta manuscript, and the Strasbourg-Basel area have also been explored by Tom Ward, "The Structure of the Manuscript Trent 924," Murica dis ci pli^ 29 (1975): 12747. Wright explores this connection fiuther (Wright, "The Related Parts," 114-33). Aithough he disputes some of Cobin's findings, he does not discount the possibility that parts of Tr87 and Ti92 were originally copied near Basel. containing some of the letters of Piccolomini is currently located in the Biblioreca Capitolare in Trent.'' Even more revealing is the fact that Piccolomini is listed as a canon of Trent (in absentia) in 1444.'5 Al1 things considered, it is very tempting to associate the transmission to Trent of some of the northem European music found in Tr93 with a meeting of clerics and composers at the Council of Ba~el.*~

B. Tbe Musical Sources

1 .The Trent Comnlex: General introductio~ As a group, the seven Trent Codices have long been recognized by scholars as one of the largest, best preserved and, consequently, most important sources of polyphonie music of this period. These manuscripts contain both sacred and secular works of English, Burgundian, and Gennan origin, composed f?om ca. 1375 to ca. 1445. They were copied in the city of Trent between approxùnately 1450 and 1475, in a fairly ordered fashion. The modern rediscovery of six of the Codices was reported in 1885 by F.X. Haberl as part of his survey of the works of Dufaym2'. In 189 1, the manuscripts

24 Trenro, BBiblioteca Capitolare, M.86, reported in Curzel, Ch5, 8.

Curzel, Ch.3, 5 1.

26 Reinhard Strohm, in a papr given at a meeting of the Amencan Musicological Society (Vancouver, 1 985) has also suggested a route by which certain English Mass Ordinary cycles (i-e.,no intraits included) may have moved nom England to Trent via the Low Countries, which had stmng trade co~ectionswith England. French singea fiom Antwerp may have brought the Masses to Ferrara in 1452, where they were evenîually passed to Johannes Hinderbach who, in 1455 (an important year in Trent- see n. 13 above), took up his first appointment as a provost of Trent. The Masses were copied as part of Ti93 in the mid 1 450s. See: Margaret Bent, "Trent 93 and Trent 90: Johannes Wiser at Wodc," in I codici musicali rrentini: Atti del comegno Laurence Feininger, ka mrrsicologia corne missione, (Trento: Museo Provinciale d'Arte, 1985), 89.

27 F.X. Haberl, Bau~ceinezur Musikgeschichte I (Leipzig, 1885, npr. Hildesheim: G. Olms, 197 1 ), 87-98. were moved to Viema to help facilitate their study by musicologists. Pioneering scholarly work was undertaken at the beginning of the twentieth century by Guido Adler and the editors of DenMer der Tonkunst in &ferreiclr" lemanuscripts were not rehimed to Itaiy until the end of the First World War, under the Treaty of St Germain ( 19 18).29 The seventh book (Tr93)was ndiscovered and inventorieci in the 1 920s by Rudolf von ~icke? and also discussed by a local xholar, Renato ~unelli." This eariy work has been followed up by several modem paleographic and repertorial studies of the manuscripts in the Trent complex which help to confithat they were, in fact, copied in Trent for use in that Additional work has gone some way toward establishing relative dating (by means of watennarks) and, in some cases, scribal identities for these manuscripts." Many items fiom the codices have been

'' G. Adler and 0. Kolier, eds., Sech Trienter Codices: Geistliche und weftliche Compositionen des W.Juhrhunderts. Erste Al~~wahI,Denkmlller der Tonkunst in Osterreich, Jg. W, 14- 15 (1900). This publication fint asserts the Tridentine provenance of the Codices.

" See: Giuseppe Gerola, "Quel10 che I'Austria deve restituire al Trentino," Alba Trentinu 2 (1918), 3534; and Spilsted, 40.

Rudolf von Ficker, ed., Sieben Trienter Cadices, Fünjie Auswuhi, Denkmiiler der Todunst in Osterreich, Jg. XXXI, 6 1 (1924).

Lunelli, 1 16. He argues strongiy that al1 the codices were wpied in Trent.

32 The most modem and revealing examinations are found in the following doctoral dissertations: Spi lsted, "The Paleography"; Wright, "The Relatai Paru"; and Supvmi Elizabeth Saunders, "The Daîing of the Trent Codices fiom their Watermarks with a Study of the Local Liturgy of Trent in the Fifteenth Century" (PbD. diss., University of london, 1983, repr., New York & London: Garland, 1989).

33 See Saunden, "The Dating of Trent 93 and Trent 90", and Bent, "Trent 93 and Trent 90" in 2 codici musimli hentini: Atti del convegno Laurence Feininger, la rnrcsicologia corne misszone, (Trento: Museo Provinciale d'Arte, f 985), which both identifL Wiser as the principal scribe of Tm. studied separately, generally as part of the works of a named cornpo~e?~,or as part of a Ordinary. '' Nonetheless, a comprehensive stylistic study of al1 the pieces in the Trent complex has yet to be achieved. This is a daunting tasic, given the over 2000 folia of mensural polyphony in the seven books.

2. The Tr93nr90 relationshi~ The two most closely related manuscripts in the Trent complex are Tr90 and Tr93. Even a cunory glance at these two sources will reveal that the majority of their repertory is the same; however, the pieces in these manuscripts have a relationship somewhat closer than traditional concordances. Prior to 1979, the prevailing opinion was that Tr93 was a direct copy of TrW. The determination of this provenance seems to have rested solely on the fact that Tr93 was discovered later, rather than on any carefully considered paleopphical evidence, and thus Tr93 was relegated to the position of an appendix to the original six Codices; however, Margaret Bent has determined that the direction of copying was almost certainly the reverse. She cites among her reasons the generally unclear nature of the pitches in Tr90 compared to the easily readable versions in Tr93, stating that many such pitch ambiguities would have been resolved in the wrong direction had the original source been T190.'~In a different article, Bent goes as far as to cal1 Tr90 a "slavish copyn of Tr93, since the main scribes copied items "literally and mindlessly, even to the point of copying

Y See, for example: Guillaume de Van and Heinrich Besseler, eds, Guiiiaume Dufi, Opera Omniu (:Amencan lnstitute of Musicology, 1948); Keith E. MUaer, ed., Johannes Brassart, Opera Omnia (Rome:American Mtute of Musiwlogy, 1965); and Arthur Parris, "The Sacred Works of Gilles Binchois" (Ph.D. diss., Bryn Mawr Coilege, 1965).

'' See Bent, ed., "Fifieenthcentury liturgical music, II: Four anonymous Masses," Early English Church Music 22 (London, 1979), ix-xi.

" ibid. x-xi; idem, "Trent 93 and Trent 9OW,84. correction signs rather than incorporating the corre~tion."~'Saunders confinns that the first half of Tr9O (containing the introits) was copied &om a continuous volume (Le., the first part of Tr93) rather than £tom separate fas~icles.'~ Numerous items in Tr93 were not copied into TM,either because they were missed by the scribe, or because they were added to Tr93 after Tr90 was copied fkom it. These items are listed by Saunded9, and include one introit, Gazdeuntus (f 356~- 357). Similarly, Tr90 contains several items not found in Tr93 which may have been added some time afler the initial copying work was done. These are also listed by Saunders," but are discussed in more detail by Marco Gozzi, who transcribed and anaiyzed them as a separate study? Among these items are four introits: one setting of Resurrexi, one of Viri Galilei, and two of Tewibilis est. Bent has also reasonably speculated about the presence of a third, more authoritative copy of the pieces found in both manuscripts, to which the scribe copying Tr93 may have referred.42 If such a "super-sourcendid actually exist, it may have been a larger, diverse collection of pieces that would account for al1 the variants in both Tr93 and Tr90.

" Bent, "Some Cri teria for Establishing Relations between Sources of Late-medieval Pol yphony," in Iain Fenlon, ed., Mrsic in Medidand Eurfy Modern Europe: Paironage. Sources and Texts (Cambridge, 198 1), 3 1 1.

38 Saunders, "The Dating of the Trent Codices", 156.

39 Saunden, "The Dating of the Trent Codices", 189-90.

* ' Marco Gozzi, II manoscritto Trento Mweo Provinciafe d'Arte, cd13 77 (Tr90) con un 'andisi dei repertorio non derNaIo cla Tm,2 vols (Cremona: Editice Turris, 1992).

42 Bent, "Fiftcenth-century lihirgical music", xi. 3. Polwhonic Introits in tifteenth-centum sourçgs and concordances with Tr93 Table 1 lists al1 extant sources of polyphonie introits of the fifieenth century, dong with the number of introit settùigs found in each, including concordances with Tr93.

tL Table 1-1: Emt$aurces of 15 -cmPolv-troia -

Source ADDrol NQd No,of date lntroits Concordrnrs witb. Tr93 Tr93 1450-56 6443 TI-90 1452-59 65 61 Pr47 1460s 50 7 Tr88 1456-62 25 3 Mu 14274 1440-60 15 2 T&W4 1429-45 11 2 Ao before 1446 11 7 Tr89 1460-66 10 O Tr91 1468-73 10 O BoQf 5 1440s 3 O Tr87 1433-45 1 O

43 This number includes three settings found at the end of the manuscript which do not figure in the plan ofthe original scribe. Sec Chapter 2, below. " It is now widely believed that the fint part of Ti92 (f 1-143) and the latter part of Tr87 (f 2 19.265) once formed a separate book Similady, the beginning of Tr87 and the end of Tr92 were originally linked. This second arrangement contains the older material, including the earliest wpied introit, Smuir ei (f 162). Individual sections of these manuscripts are frequently identified as Tr87-1, Tr92-2, etc. Wright treats Tr87-1 and Tr92-2 as one manuscript, which he cdls simply TR (Wright, "The Related Parts," 1). Paleographic and stylistic evidence has show that this group of sources as a whole contains repertory dating fiom c. 1375-1445, and that al1 these introits were copied within the 35-year penod from c. bUû-7~.~'Each source, of course, has been studied separately elsewhere? Beyond these general boundaries, more precise dating of individual compositions is still somewhat difficult. Beiween them, Tr93 and Tr90 contain a total of sùby-five introits, forty-three of which have no concordances elsewhere. No other manuscript cornes close to this number of original settings. No composers' names appear in the Tr93 introit collection. Although fifky-four of the settings are anonymous, seven can be attributed to specific composen by means of concordances in Ao: Nos ourem, Cibmit eos III (also found in Tr9247),Sapienriam sanctorum,Dilexisti iustitzam, and Wvesancta parens 1 are al1 attributed to Johannes Brassart; Gaudeamus 1 is attributed to Iohennes de Sarto; &Zve sancta pmens [I is attributed to Gilles Binchois. Mixter, however, argues that Sarto was not a composer of f~uxbourdon;thus, he numbers Godemur 1

" For a shidy cornparhg polyphonie introits in different sources, see Frohrnut Dangel- Homiann, Der mehrstimmige Introitus in Quellen des 15. Jahrhderts (Tuîzing: Hans Schneider, 1975); however, Pr47 is not included in this survey.

* For specific information on the repertory, paieography and dating of sources other than the Trent Codices, see, for example, on Ao: Cobin, "The Aosta Ms.:A Central Source of Early Fifteenth-Century Sacred Polyphonyn(Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1978); on Mu14274: Ian Rumbold, "The Compilation and Ownership of the St. Emeram Codex (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm l4274)," Eady Music Hisfory 2 (1982): 16 1-235; on Pr47 Robert Joseph Snow, "The Manuscript Strahov D.G. N 47" (PIiD. diss., University of Illinois, 1968); on -15: Charles Hamm, "The Reson Mass,"Jod of the American M~sicologicalSociety 1 8 ( 1965): 5-2 1; and Bent, "(1 380- 1430: An international style?) A contemporaxy perception of early fiftanthentury style: Bologna QI 5 as a document of scribal editonal initiative," Mtrsica Disciplina 4 1 (1987): 183-20 1.

47 Mixter postdates that the Tr92 version of Cibmit eos ilI is a direct wpy of that in Ao. See: Mixter, xii. (an introit with both verse and doxology in fauxbourdon) arnong the works of Brassart." The index of Ao shows the name "brassartncancelled and replaced by "Sarto"; according to Mixtefs theory, this cancellation is thus erroneous, making Brassart and Binchois the only known composers of the introits found in Tr93. Table 1-2 lists the introits found in Tr93, dong with their corresponding placement in TM, and other concordances as appli~able.'~Modem editions of the introits amibuted to Brassart are available in Mixtefs edition? The introit attributed to Binchois (&le sancta parenr 11) is published in an edition by Philip ~aye.'' More detailed concordance information on Tr93 can be found in Spilsted's repertonal study.''

" Mixter, xi-xii. His argument rem on the presence of another introit in Ao (Repleatur os rneum), unequivocally attributed to Sarto, which does not use fauxbourdon, and for which no other concordances exist (unlike the Brassart examples, which almost al1 have concordances in the Trent Codices). This argument seems teasonable, although it is dificult to veri@ since no other introits known to be by Sarto are available for cornparison.

Information on the concordances of the introit seîtings in Tr93 is found in Spilsted, 22 8-34 (his Appendix).

Mixter, 1-15. " Philip Kaye, ed., neSocred Worh of Gilles Binchois (Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press, 1EU), 236-4 1. An earlier edition is found in Parris's dissertation. " Spilsted, 228-54. Table 1-2: The Introits of Tr93 - Concord~c~

Tr93 f, Tr90 f, Other concordances I 12~-13 7~-8 I~uernatus est I I

Ecce advenit l8v-19 Resurrexi I 20v-2 I Resurrexi II 2 1 v-22 Resurrexi El 22v-23 Resurrexi IV 23v Resurrexi V 24v-25 Resurrexi VI 2%-26 Resurrexi VII 26v-27v Viri Galilei I 28v Viri Galilei II 29v-30

l~enedictasit I 140v 125~-261 I Benedicta sit II Benedicta sit JII Nos autem Ao: 1 6v- 17 "brassart" Cibavit eos I Cibavit eos II Cibavit eos III Ao: 14 "brassart" TH2: 179v "Brassart" Terribilis est I Terribilis est 11 l~erribilisest ID IS1 ITembilis est N Mihi autern nimis 1

Mihi autem nimis II Mihi autem nimis III In medio ecclesie I In rnedio ecclesie iI De ventre matris 1 De ventre matris II Nunc scio vere

Intret in conspectum 65 Confessio et pulchritudo 65v Sapientiam sanctorum 66 46 Ao: 16 "brassart" Statuit ei 1 69-69~ 46~-47 Statuit ei II 70 Statuit ei ïII 70v-71 Os iusti 1 71v 10s iusti II l~oauebarde testimoniis 175~-76 150~-51 1 l~ilexistiiustitiam 176~-77 151 v-52 140: 17 "brassartw l~audeamusornnes 1 Gaudeamus omnes U Ao: 14v "MSarto" Gaudeamus omnes III Pr47: 16%-166 Gaudeamus ornnes N Mu14274: 117v, 118v-119 Rorate celi I Rorate celi II Vultum tuum Suscepimus Deus 1 Suscepimus Deus II -Salve sancta parens 1 Ao: 13 v "JO.brassart" Salve sancta parens II 9 1v-92; 62v-63 Ao: 8v-9 "Binchoisn

356 53 l~aivesancta parens 192v 163v 1 1

4. Pdeoma~hv.Repertorv. and T>atinip of Tr93 Tr93 comprises 383 papa folios (40 of which are blank), and measures 21 0 mm wide by 3 10 mm long; each folio (other than those which are blank) has eight ruled, five- line staves, regardless of the amount of music copied on it. Further details conceming the paleography, repertorial content, and approximate dating of Tr93 are dealt with extensively in the doctoral dissertations of Spilsted and Saunders, as well as in articles by Saunders and Bent? Here, it will suffice to surnmarize some of their conclusions (with some additions), specifically as these relate to the Tr93 introit repertory. Spilsted determined that Tr93 is a composite source; it consisted originally of four or more separate gatherings that were brought together at the theof the binding? It is essentially the work of one scribe, who carefuily planned a liturgical ordering of the pieces (see Chapter 2, below), although at least six other hands have been identified, most of whom added pieces to folia lefi void by the original scribe; in so doing, they intempted the original liturgical order. The handwriting of the scribes (labelled A to G) is compared graphically, and describeci in some detail, by Spilsted?

s3 This introit appean in two guises in Ti93: the first version (f 9 1v-92) is set in fnwcbourdon throughout; the second version (E356) 1s incomplete, but sets a different contratenor and tenor to the same superius, Le., it does not cal1 forfauxbourdon.

Y See: Saunders, "The Dating of Trent 93 and Trent 90"; and Bent, "Trent 93 and Trent 90."

" Spilsted, 197. Bent, adopting some earlier scribal attributions by Wright," identifies the Tr93 scribes siightly differently, althou@, in the fascicles containing the introit collection, the attributions are the same.'' The introits, located at the begiming of the manuscript, are essentially the work of scribe 4 with some assistance rendered by B, who, in addition to adding a few introits to blank folia left by A., aiso provided a large portion of the text. The only other scribe whose hand can be identified in the introits is G, who provided the text of an altemate psalm verse in one example only. Since A left so many folia blank, Spilsted concludes that he must have considered Tr93 a work in pro gr es^.^^ Bent goes Mer,speculating that A worked alone at the beginning of the manuscript and that B (having joined A much later than the original introits would have been copied) went back and made some additions to the earlier work. Further, she surmises that A was working fkom several different exemplars, possibly of widely divergent ongins, when compiling the collection. This, she feels accounts for the differences in compositional and ~~nbalprocedures found in the pieces6'

'' Bent, "Trent 93 and Trent W",86. n. 10. Wright postdates that there were in fact at least nine different scribes (Wright, 3024). '*ibid, 98-9, Table 1.

59 Spilsted 197.

* Bent, "Trent 93 and Trent 90", 88. Scribe A

As a swnmary of the contents of the entire manuscript, the following Table (see Figure 2), taken fkom Spilsted's study, is extremefy useful, if fairly cryptic. It shows fascicle organization, foliation, scnbal designation, watermarks, and the repertory by genre, with iater insertions given in brackets: '01--- irt - ion scribe. A-11'

12-23' Nntroltm IMrgnificatrr~Latin wtstl 21-33'

Ank mark 34-45' Introîta I~BOOrdinary nect &cns) 46-56' IntroAta A folio lacking inL msrk 57-68' Ink Mrk 69-80 '

81-92' 93-104'

10s-116' Kyriea (Kyrieal Decorat md

- bcto rign FoAiat ion - nwrr 218-259'

%XII1 260-272' Crrdor Septornion8 A folio lrckhq Oecorated XYXV 273-284' Knv 215-296' xxv 1 297- 308'

HINI I 309- 320'

I(XVI1I 321-332' XXIX 333-343'

W XK 344-355' n)txr 3%- 36s '

nxxn 366-373'

XnxIIf 374-302' As the table shows, the introits are preceded in the manuscript by several antiphons. These are in fact polyphonie settings for the aspersion, or the blessing and sprinkling of water in the Mass. They use the set texts me, and at Easter Vidi uqumn. In the order of the senice, this item occurs as a preparation ceremony before the Mass proper begins, but only on S~ndays.~'In the compilation of the manuscript, the scribe of Tr93 has preserved this litwgicaî order, and copied these seven settings (four of Asperges me followed by three of Vidi uquam) immediately before the fmintroit. These aspersion settings are the only items of the Mass, other than introits and Ordinary movements, that appear in an ordered collection in Tr93. Although they are not introits, they are noteworthy in this study because they are extremely similar to introits in both form and style. Following the introits in the manuscript are collections of Ordinary movements: Kyries, Glorias, , and SanctudAgnus Dei pairs. Into this ordered series of aspersion antiphons, introits, and Ordinary items, scribes C-G have periodically inserted several unrelated sequences, songs, hymns, , and Magnificatd2 The final three fascicles of the manuscript contain assorted hymns, Latin motets, and French and German songs, copied by scribes F and G. Spilsted reports that the manuscript was most recentiy restored in "the mid 1970s at the Laboratorio di Restauro del Libro, Santa Maria de Rosana [recte:

A long version, possibly ushg multiple psalm verses, would be necessary for larger Cathedrals (such as the Duomo at Trent) where there would be a down the aisies and a sprinkling of the side altars pnor to the singing of the introit. See: Andrew Hughes, Medievnl Manuscripts for Mars and @$ce: A Guide tu their Organization and Tenninology (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1982, repr. 1986), 18,34,82-3.

6' For more complete inventories of Ti93, see Spilsted, 228-54; and Nanie Bndgeman, ed.. Manz1scrits de Musique Polyphonique Xve et XMe Siècles-ltalie, Répertoire Internationale des Souces Musicales, ser.B, vo1.4, pt.5. An earlier inventory is fowid in von Ficker, where the items in Tr93 are numbered fiom 1586-1864. Rosano] in Florence" .63 Wright also discusses the modern restoration of the Codices, but he adds that "no records appear to have been kept" of the restoration of Tr93 ~pecifically.~On this subject, I can now add merinformation: ïhe manuscript was restored in 1972. Most of the original binding, skin over wooden boards, was sent back to Trent for conservation, while the original metal finuigs and clasps were retained. Modem sewing reproduced the original whenever possible, and new leather was placed over cardboard for the binding. Two parchment strips of an original flyleaf were attached to modem ~aper.~' Spilsted provides some elucidation of the watermarks found in Tr93, as well as some speculation on the date of the rnanus~ript.~~Much of this information has been superseded by Saunders, whose later stuây us& a more detailed analysis of watermarks to reach conclusions on dating." She reproduced al1 the watennarks in both Tr93 and Tr9û using tracings, beta-radiography and photography, and compareci them with the same marks in archiva1 documents with established dates.68 Further

" Spilsted, 97. " Wright, 6 and n.15.

65 1 received this information in 1994 from Sr Maria Stefania, who was then an administrator at the Labomorio in the Moaasterio di Rosano. She pmvided me with a copy of the original report of the restoration, which also gives a description of the manuscript in its pre-restored state. Further evidence of the Tridentine origins of Tr93 can be gleaned £tom the original binding of the manuscript, which had a purplish tint that was not found outside of the TrentinoNeneto region. " Spilsted 67-76.

" See Saunders, "The Dating of the Trent Codices,"and "The Dating of Trent 93 and Trent 90."Earlier studies of the watermarks in Tr93 include: von Ficker, and Masakata Kanazawa, "Polyphonie Music for Vespea in the Fifieenth Century" (Ph-D.diss., Harvard University, 1966).

" Saunders, "The Dating of Trent 93 and Trent 90." 68-82. cornparison was made with modem published collections of water~narks~~.As a result, she determined that the stocks of paper making up the main body of Tr93 were in active use in the Trentino region between 1450 and 1452. She speculates, convincingiy, that the copying of the manuscript must have been wmplete by 1455- 56.'O In commenting on the nature of the repertory in Tr93, Saunders points out the large number of introits collected in this manuscript (and in Tr90). Since only one introit had been recorded in Tr87fi (which had been copied between 1433 and 1445), she concludes that certain liturgical decisions, the details of which remain a mystery, must have created a sudden growth in demand for the [polyphonic] &oit in Trent during the 1440s and early 1450s.~' This speculation draws one's attention to the pieces themselves, including their liturgical fûnctions and the nature of their music, in the hop that these factors might shed some light on the mystery of why they were copied, and whether they were performed at Trent Cathedra1 or elsewhere in the diocese. In her fuial conclusions, Saunden observes that a comprehensive discussion of the musical style of the Trent repertory, while beyond the scope of her own dissertation, is nonetheless essential in the long M." Chapter 3 of the present dissertation is the beginning of such a discussion, focusing on the Tr93 introits alone. First, however, we need a more detailed look at the organization of this specific repertory.

69 Such as: C.M Brique Les pligranes. Dictio~irehistoriques des marques du papier (Geneva, 1907); and Gerhard Piccard, Die WasserzeichenkmteiPiccard im Hauprstaatsarchiv Srmgart. Findbücher MY(Stuttgart, 196 1-83).

'O Saunders, "The Dating of the Trent Codices," 82; see also: GOA. Vol. l,67.

" Ibid., 155. "polyphonic"is my editonal addition. Cbapter 2 The introit cycle of Tr93 - A brief inventory and description

A. Introduction

The introit collection of Tfl3 is contained within fascicles 2-8 (E 12-92v) of the manuscript, and has been organ ized reasonabl y carefùlly accord ing to the linirg ical year. I use the word "reasonably" because some întroits appear outside the traditional liturgical order, and not every potential feast in the liturgical cycle is represented. Moreover, many extraneous pieces. both sacred and secular, have been entered by various hands between the folia containing the introits, and other introits are surrounded by blank folia, possibly meant foi additional items that would later have been added in the proper liturgical . The paleographical detaiis of this section of the manuscript, including a potential exilanation for every blank folio and some insights into the scribal processes involved in the copying of these fascicles, have already been elucidated by Spilsted in his paleo-mphic study of the manuscript as a wh01e.~~This chapter will survey the introit cycle as a musical and litufgicai entity, wi th on1 y occasional references to paleographic mattem. As such, comments here will be confined for the most part to the folia that contain introits, most ofwhich were copied by a single scribe in the original layer of the manuscript (see Chapter 1 above). Table 2-1 lists the introits in manuscript order, dong with their intended liturgical occasions. The dates included are found both in the Roman calendar and in a Tridentine calendar appended to a Missal dated 1468.74

73 Spilsted 2744.

" Karhuhe. Badische iundesbibliolhek St Pefer. Perg. 8. The calendar is transcribed in full in Saunders, "The Dating of the Trent Codices," 285-96. Tabk 2-1 :Tbe iitroib of Tt93 and tbeir. Iih- oecasion~

Folio # In troi t Liturgieal occasion , 1. 12v-L3r Dominus Dixit Nativity - Mass at Midnight 2. 14v-1% Puer natus est 1 Nativity - Mass in the Day 3. 15v-16r Puer natus est II Nativity 4. 18~-1% Ecce advenit (Janurirv Epiphany 6) 4 5. 20v-2 1r Resurrexi 1 Easter 6.2 1 v-22r Resmexi II Ester 7. 22v-23r Resurrexi III Easter 8.23~ Resunexi IV Easter 9.24~-2Sr Resurrexi V Easter 1 0.25~-26r Reswrexi VI er

112.28~ kiri Galilei 1 1

14. 36v-37r Spiritus Domini I Pentecost 1 5. 3 7v-3 8r Spiritus Domini II Pentecost 1 6. 3 8v-3% Spiritus Domini iII Pentecost , 17.39~ Spiritus Domini TV Pentecost . 18.40r Spiritus Domini V Pent ecos t 19.40~ Benedicta sit I Trinity 20. 4 1 v42r Benedicta sit lï Trinity 2 1.42v43r Benedicta sit JIi Trinity 22.45~-46r Nos autem Finding of the Holy Cross (May 3) J

24.47~-48r Cibavit eos IT Corpus Christi 25.48v49r Cibavit eos III Corpus Christi 1 26. 4%-50r Temibilis est 1 Dedication of a Church 127. 5Ov l~embilisest II mcation of a ~hurch 1 128. 5 1r lfembilis est IIi [Dedication of a Church 1 129. 5 1 v-52r l~enibilisest IV lDedication of a Church 1

30. 53v-54r Mihi autem nimis 1 Comrnon of Apodes I 3 1. 54v-55r Mihi autem nimis II Common of Apostles 32. 55v-56 Mihi autem nimis ïU Common of Apodes 33.57~-58r In medio ecclesie 1 Common of Doctors 34. 58v-59r in medio ecclesie II Common of Doctors 35. 59v-6Or De ventre matris 1 Nativity of St Job the Baptist ifmie 24) 36.60~-6 1r De ventre matris II Nativity of St John the Baptist 37.61v-62r Nuncsciovere Saints Peter and Paui (June 29) 138.63v64r l~tenirnsederunt I l~mdin~of the Body of 1 St Stephen (Augwt 3) 1 39.64~ Etenim sederunt II Finding of the Body of St Stephen (Aupst 3) I ,40.65r innet in mpccnmr Common of Several I 41.65~ Confessio et pulchritudo St Lawrence f (August 10) ' 42.66r Sapientiam sanctorum Conmm of %verPl Mnityn ,43.69r969v Witei I Common of a Cdessor

45. 70v-7 1r Statuit ei III Confêssor Bishop ,46. 71v Os iusti I Cornmon of a Confesser.

147. 72r [OS iusti II I~onfessor,not a Bishop 1

"Another possible fcast for this text is the Decapitation of John the Baptia (August 29); however, this would be out of chronological order in the source. Since no pdmis present in the TMsening, the specific feast cannot be ascertahed with absolute certainîy. 149. 76v-77r I Dilexisti iustitiam 1 1 lnot a Martyr, 1 (50.8 1r l~audearnusomnes 1 Iibsumption of the B.V.M. (Au* 15) 5 1. 8 1 v-82r Gaudeamus omnes II AssumDtion

153. 83v-84r l~audeamusomnes TV ksurnption 1%. 84v-85r l~orateceli 1 kunh Sunday of Advent 155. 85, l~orateceli IX l~ourthSunday of Aâvent 56. 86v-87r Vultum tuum Common Feasts of the B.V.M. l I I(Christmas to Purification) 157. 88v-89r l~usce~imusDeus 1 purification of B.V.M. (Febniasr 2) 58. 89v-90r Suscepimus Deus II Purification 59.90~-91r Salve sancta parens 1 Common Feasts of B.V.M. (Purification to Advent) 60. 9 1v-92r Salve sancta parens Il B.V.M. (Ruification to

61.92~ Salve sancta parens III B.V.M.(Purification to

- Advent)

The scribe has ordered the feasts, begi~ingwith the temporal calendar, then folfowing with groups of related sanctord items. The section headings in the folking mtiveare my own end do not appear fkdlyin the muscript, but represent logical groupings of the introits according to the major seasons of the temporal calend- always prese~ngthe order in which they appear in the source. Sanctoral items will be also discussed in groups, according to the way they were copied. B. Description and liturgkal placement of the npcrtoy

1. Christmas and Epbhqv (ff. 12v-19) Disregarding the traditional beginning of the liturgical year (the penitential season of Advent), the pnncipai scribe (A) begins the introit cycle by ccpying settings for Christmas. According to both the Roman and Tridentine Gra~iuals~~,there are three introit texts for this speciai feast: Dominus dùil ai me, Luxfulgebit hodie, and Puer natus est, corresponding to three separate Masses, celebrated at midnight, at dawn, and in the day, respectively. Only the first and third of these texts are set in the Tr93 collection. Dominus dixif is represented by a lone setting and Puer natus est by hvo settings, al1 for three voices. Although the introit for the second Mass (at dawn) is conspicuously absent, there ASa bhkbifolium between the settings of the first and third Masses which may have been reserved for such a setting, despite the rarity with which the text Luxfitigebit seerns to have been set polyphonically in the 15th century." The polyphony in al1 three settings for Christmas is fairly cornplex, yet none of these examples actually includes a polyphonie doxology, and only Domillus mcludes a sethg of its psahn vene, Qumefiemueruni. Curiousty, fa such a major feast, the settings for Christmas preserved in Tr93 are not pcuticularly elaborate or numerous- Because of the scribe's organizational plan, the next feast in the liturgical calendar (St. Stephen, December 26) is not represented at this point in the manuscript, although two settings of its tex& Etenim sedenmf, appear later. None of the intemening feasts between Christmas and Epiphany were included, such as the feast

'6 ïhe only complete graduais of Trent that corne close to the date of the copying of Tr93 are the mid lbcentury manuscripts Trento, Biblioteca Capitolare. Libro CorafeA, and Trenro. M-O Diocesano. Libro CodeB. However, see Chapter 3, Section H, below.

T7 Spilsted, 132. of the Holy innocents or the Sunday within the of Christmas; however, the feast of the Circumcision, which falls on the Octave of Christmas, also uses the introit text Puer natus est, found earlier in the main settings for Christmes. The feast of the Circumcision is thus a possible second use for the settings of this text in Tr93. The next introit copied was Ecce crhenit for Epiphany. Once again, this is a setting that is preceded by some blank folia which were later filled with unrelateci items by another scribe. So far, it is feasible to conclude that the main scribe's purpose was to assemble only introit settings for feasts of the highest rank. In contrast to the Christmas exampies, Ecce &nit is a more elaborate polyphonic setting of al1 three formai parts of the introit. Its entire psalm verse, Deus, iudiczum tuurno is set in three paris without the usuai plainchant incipit, yet the harmonies are not as static as one might expect from a polyphonic elaboration of what is essentially a psalm tone (see Chapter 3, Section B, below). The doxology is also set pol yphonicall y, beginning at the words sicut erat. This arrangement becornes a recwring pattern as one proceeds through the cycle. Only two voices are notated for the doxology, yet this passage does not seem appropriate for fauxbourdon. Since it would be odd to end such a piece with a duef this in itself might be indirect evidence that a repeat of the antiphon is required, in accordance with traditional performance practice. In any event, the sole setting for Epiphany in Tr93 is clearly a more complex piece than any of the Christmas settings. 2. East~r& bension (f.20~-301 None of the items in the liturgical calendar which follow Epiphany, including those in Lent and , are found in Tr93. The next set of introits copied consists of seven settings of the text Re~~~rrexi,for Easter Sunday. These pieces appear to be the highlight of the collection, since they fm overshahw dl the other introits in the manuscript in both number and variety of settings. Al1 manner of permutations of fomal elements, proportion of plainchant versus part-music, matment of the canhrs fimus, and melodic and hannonic complexity are present here. The special status accorded to these pieces well befits the feast, the most important of the year. Because of the lack of a specific introit setîing for St Vigilius (ca 385404), the patron of Trent78,whose feast would likely be the only cornpetition for a place of pre-erninence in the local lit~rgy'~,Easter is the highest-ranking feast in this collection. Still, the scribe has allowed for several different levels of elaboration for any given Easter Sunday, fkom the complex polyphonie structure of Restrmexi 1 to the relatively simple topvoice discant paraphrase of Remmi VI, which includes polyphony for the antiphon only. Whether or not al1 of these settings were ever d, the scribe (and, preswnably, the Trent chapter) clearly desired to have as many Resurrexi settings as possible upon which to draw for services; this underlines not only the importance of the fast, but also the importance of polyphony in the celebration of the Easter Mass. Why would this be so? Perhaps the large number and the variance in difficulty level of these settings indicates that some of them were intended for use in smaller parish churches in the diocese. This is certainly passible,

78 The life of Vigilius is chronicled in Giacomo Dompieri, Vira di S. Vigilio vescovo e martire (Trento, 1958). His fesst day is celebrated on June 26.

79 Tr93 does contain three settings ofstatuit ei, wmonintroit for Confesser Bishops, a category into which Vigilius falls. Saunders has pointed out that this is one of three introi t texts associated with bis Mass in dher Trent manuscripts. b Saunders, "The Dating of the Trent Codices,"3 13. since the Trent manuscripts were al1 copied in the city of Trent, the seat of the diocesan govemment, and were dl, until this centwy, held in the librsvy/archive of the Trent Cathedra1 chapter, which would surely have knthe primary reference source for the smaller churches of the diocese." In this panicular case, the fact that there were specifically seven settings copied might also point to the use of a different setting for each day of Easter week? It was also fairly common in large cathedrals for the Easter Mass to be re-used for each of the following five S~ndays.~*In any event, there is a considerable variety of Easter introits in this collection fiom which to choose. It is perhaps no coincidence that neither Advent nor Lent (the two penitential seasons) are represented by polyphonic settings. If only plainchant renditions of the service (or at least the Proper) were sung during such periods, îhen surely the performance of one of the more elaborate Resurrexi introits on Easter Sunday (i-e., signaling the end of Lent) would have been al1 the more striking. In stark contrast to most of the Easter introits, the next piece wpied, bypassing the rernainder of pascaltide, is a very simple setting of the tea Vingaiilei, one of two included for the . The first Viti, fitting entirely on one folio (28~)is a straightforward homorhythmic setting for two notated voices, implying a third improvised voice in the middle of the hannony to complete afatabowdon. Both antiphon and psaim verse (Omnesgentes) are set in this manner, with no indication of a polyphonic doxology. Adjacent to this introif the next setting employs slightly more complex polyphonic devices, although once again there is no doxology set. The mere inclusion of this fatin the manuscript indicates that the scribe must have considered

" Curzel, Ch.4, Sec.2, lists dl the parish churches in the diocese of Trent in the mid to late fifieenth century.

1 am indebted to Professor Timothy McGee, University of Toronto, for pointing out this possibility.

Snow, "The Manuscript Sûahov," 4 1. it of relatively high rank, although the introits here pale in cornparison to the immediately-adjacent Easter settings.

3. Pentecost & Trinie (ff.36~-43) ïhe next signifiant feast after Ascension is Pentecost Sunday, signaling the end of pascaltide. For this occasion, the scribe of Tr93 chose to copy five separate settings of the introit +intus Domini, which display between them almost as much varïety in style and fonn as can be found in the Easter set. Contusfinnus treatment varies fiom standard discant paraphrase to the unusual long tones in the tenor of Spiritus 1 (a technique first found in Resurrexi 1). Pentecost, then, is clearly the next most important feast in the collection after Easter, with the second highest number of settings fiom which to draw for any given year. The overall degree of polyphonic subtlety is less with this feast; two settings include only the antiphon, and only one includes polyphonic versions of al1 three formai divisions. One week following Pentecost cornes an aimost equally important feast, the Holy Trinity. hediately after the Spiritus Domini set, the scribe has copied three introits for this feast, on the text Benedicta sit sancta Trinitas. Like the fht Vin Galilei following the long Easter group, the first Benedictu sir following the Pentecost set is in fairly simplefatLXbowdon with only two notated voices. The other two settings have three independent parts. There seems, therefore, to be a parallel emerging in the types of introits copied for the feast groups Easter/Ascension and Pentecosflrinity: in each case, a large set of pieces in varying styles is followed irnrnediately by a small group of simpler settings. 34

4.Thn) R m 'n -4% With the next introit in the collection, the scribe (a different one herew), departs fkom the correct titurgical sequence. The text, Nos outem gl~ri~n,is for the Finding of the Holy Cross (May 3rd), ostensibly a lesser occasion than any of the temporal fuists represented up to this point (depending perhaps on the possible presence of and their relative importance to the diocese). This single setting includes polyphony in three voices for the antiphon ody. Nos autern is also the introit tea for . Since there is no text included in the Tr93 setting, the possibility exists that the scribe was inserting a Holy Week introit here; however, no confirmation of this festal designation seems possible. Regardles of the intended liturgical occasion, the disturbance in the liturgical order at this point in the manuscript, coupled with the different scribal attribution, contrasts with the Gare with which the original scribe attempted to order the introits. The blank folia scribe A left at this point, later filled more haphazardly by a different hand, were doubtless originaily intended for further examples of temporal introtts in the proper sequence. The last official temporal feast for which introits are copied is Corpus Christi, which fdls on the Thursday afler Trïnity Sunday. The introit te* Cibuvit eos, receives three settings here, each providing pol yphony for al1 three fonnal divisions. The first setting, like the fmt for Ascension and for Trinity, is a relatively simple fauxbourdon. Before proceeding to the fwts for saints, proper or annmon, the scribe chose this point in the manuscript to insert four settings of the introit for the feest of the Dedication of a Church, which uses the text Tembilis est locus iste. Since this is a relatively large number of settings in the context of the collection, it is logical to assume that the scribe felt the need for Masses of dedication to be reasonably strong in

--

83 Spilsted 138. the Tridentine region around the time of the copying. There is some variety arnong the Tem-bilissettings, and none is identicaî in style or amount of polyphony. Onîy two treat dl three fornial divisiom potyphonically, and one sets only the antiphon- Again, depending on the preferences of the partiçuhr parish of the dedication, introits containing varying amounts of and part music could be chosen firom this

PUP.

5. The Common of the Saints (fi. 53v-59.65.66-77.86~-87) The next group of introits begins with settings for Masses cornmon to any nurnber of saints with certain SMqualities. These introits, unlike the temporai examples, could potentially have been used on any one of many saints' fm days, and were not limited to a single annual usage. The scribe first copied three settings of the introit for the cornmon Mass for Apostles ( Mihi auiem nimis), then two for the Mass for Doctors of the Church (In medio ecclesie). Following this, after settings for several specific saints (whose introits will be discussed below), are two setfings for Masses for Two or More , each with a dinixent text (Innrr in mmpectw and Sapientiam sancronun), three for a Confessor Bishop (Starwr ei), two for a Confiessor Not a Bishop (Os iwti), one for a Virgin Martyr (Loquebar de testimoniis), and two for a Virgin Not a Martyr, each with a different text (Dilexisti iwtitiam and Vuitum fuum). Although this list does not exhaust every possible permutation of a saint's characteristics, it does show that the scribe was preparing for many possible contingfficies. Taken togaher, the introits of this collection would be useful on a large number of potentid days in the year, since almost every &y (outside Advent and Lent) a saint with at least one of the above attributes has a feast. There is little difference in appearance between these introits for common saints and those for the temporal occasions. The only qualities which set any of these settings apart fkom the others can be summarized by the following observations: a) Al1 five settings for Apostles and Doctors treat al1 three fonnal sections of the introit polyphonicdly, which is somewhat unusual in this collection when several settings are present for any given text. b) Although the two different versions of the introit for Two or More Martyrs appear to have been copied by two different scribes, they are nevertheless in the conect order according to the , unlike the more haphazard insertions of later scribes in the temporal set of introits. c) Al1 three settings of Statuit ez for a Confesser Bishop have moderately decorated initials in the manuscript. 'Tkse are tk first instances of an othenvise rdativdy neglected technique in Tr93- and ail for the sarne text. Almost every introit in the collection has been copied with space left for an initial, but in very few cases has the scribe actually filled one in. The Statuit ei examples are not highly artistic in their decoration, but they nonetheless stand out in this context? Since Vigilius was a bishop offrent, could we finally be seeing here some reference to the importance of Trerrt's patrtm saint? d) The one exampie of an intmit for a Virgin Martyr (Loquebar de testimîmiis), is the only introit in the collection which has been set for four voias (See Chapter 3, Section G, below, for a facsimile and partial transcription).

6. Saints: John the Bwia Peter and Paul. Steahen. Lawrence [ff.59v-54v- 6Svi Only widdy celebmted saints haw specif~intmit settings in Tr93, indicating that this is a fairly general collection. Neuerthefess, the absence of other saints probably cannot be taken as an indicator of their lack of importance in the local liturgy. We know, for example, that the manuscript was copied by Tridentine scribes for w in

" See Spilsted, 82-3 and 93-7 for a summary and description of the decorations found in Tr93. Trent? At fim dance, it may seem surpnsing that there is no clear inclusion of a feast for St Vigilio, patron of Trent (except for the possible evidence of the decorated initial discussed abve). Why would this dl-important saint have been omitted? Saunden has pointed out that no polyphonic senings of the Mas of St Vigilio (at least none that can specifically intended for his ) are known to exia in any fifteenth-century source, even though his Mass was recited and sung to plainchant throughout the diocese on a regular basisP6At this point in our investigation, it is beginning to seem possible that the repertory of Tr93 was not originally designed for Trent, but merely adapted for its use by the Tridentine scribes." It seems dangerous, therefore, to draw generalizations from the absence of polyphonic semngs in Tr93 about which saints were more venerated than others in the region of Trent in the mid tifteenth century. The Tr93 scribe included two settings of the introit text De ventre matris, for the birth of St. John the Baptist (June 24), one of Nunc scio vere, for Saints Peter and Paul the Apostles (June 29), two of Etenim sederunt for the finding of the body of St. Stephen, the first Martyr (Au- 3), and one of Con/ssio et pulchriludo, for St. Lawrence the Martyr (August 10). These settings were al1 copied in a chronological order according to the caiendar of the Roper of the Saints. Al1 the Roper saints' introits were copied by the same hand on adjacent folia. A setting of intret NI conspectum, for Two or More Martyrs, has been inserted between Stephen and Lawrence (not inappropriate since these flanking saints are two of the most well- known martyrs). Musically, there is linle in any of these pieces to distinguish them appreciably fkorn the more generalized saints' settings.

85 See Ch. 1 above; also Spilsted, 165-95; Saunden, 109-54; and Wright, 93- 1 13.

86 Saunders, 14 1.

87 Ibid, 152-4. 38

7. Feasts of the Blessed Virnin (ff.8 1-85v. 88v-92v) The 1st introit settings in Tr93 are al1 dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary, some for a specific feast, and some for more generalized occasions, appropriate for more than one day in the year. The hrst to be copied were four settings of the text Gaudemus ornnes, which is used as the introit for Mass on many different days when the Virgin is venerated, although the ben known is probably the Feast of the Assurnption (August 15). Following this, the principal scribe hcluded two settings of the text Rorate celi, the introit antiphon used for al1 votive Masses of the Virgin fiom Advent up to Christmas. Unfomuiately, there has been some confusion over the first setting of this text (E 84v-85). Rorate celi is also the antiphon text for the introit of the Fourth Sunday of Advent, obviously a temporal feast. It would be logical to assume that in this section of the manuscript the scribe intended the Marian version of the introit; however, the psalm verse that has been copied here is not Benedixisti Domine temtuam, traditionally used for the Marian feast, but rather Celi enamant gloriam Dei,the verse for Advent. The following setting of the same text includes only the antiphon, so no decision can be made about it, but the fmRorate, strictly speaking, is out of its proper liturgical order. The scribe may have mistakenly copied the wrong psalm text here." Next cornes the single setting of VuItwn ntw, which is appropriate both for a generic Virgin Not a Martyr and also for al1 votive Masses of the Virgin Mary fiom Christmas up to the Purification of the Virgin (Febnias, 2). The Marian introits then continue with a specific feast, the Purification itself. The text here, Surcepimus Deus, is set twice, once in fauxbourdon, once in full polyphony with ail three forma1 sections included in each case. The final text in the collection is Mesancta parens, the introit for al1 votive Masses of the Virgin fiom the Purification up to Advent,

88 This error was reproduced in Spilsted, 142. complet ing the small cycle. There are three setîings of this te* once again of varying complexity, but without any extreme difference in musical style. Immediately following the last setting on f9tf19, the scribe continued with the first , the begiming of a complete collection of Ordinary items, without any visible break in the manuscript. It seems evident that the scribe has taken care in both the Sanctoral and the Temporal sets to include introits with varying ievels of musical complexity for several liturgical occasions, presumably in order to maximize the available variety. Badon this bief examination of the scribe's clearly identifiable organizational plan, it is also evident that the collection of introits in Tr93 was meant to serve as a regisw of these liturgical pieces that could be drawn upon at need for the major temporal feasts of the year." In addition, introits could be selected for Masses in honour of a limited number of specific saints (such as the widely venerated Stephen and Lawrence), for any nurnber of lesser saints with certain characteristics in cornmon, or for the main feasts of the Virgin. Whether or not any of these introits were actually used at Trent Cathedral, there can be no doubt that a reasonably wide variety of musical styles and degrees of polyphonie elaboration were at lest available for use on many of the major feast days, such as Easter and Pentecost Sundays. The next chapter will examine in much greater detail the variant musical styles of the Tr93 introits.

89 Three introits appear much later in the manuscript (f356-357v),but they have been entered by a different scribe (identified by Spilsted as scribe F), and an not part of the liturgical plan found in the earlier fascicles. They include copies of the introits Wve sancta parens il (f.9IV-%!), and Cibavit eos III (E48v-491,attributed elsewhere to Binchois and Brassart, respectively, and one setting of Gazdeamus for the ftast of All Saints, attributed to Binchois in Au, which is not found in the earlier cycle of Tr93. Spilsted also makes this conclusion about the repertory as a whole (Spilsted, IO), although he refers toTr90 at a time before Bentls elucidation of the direction of the copying. See: Bent, "FifieenthcenturyLiturgical Music," and "Trent 93 and Trent 90." A Structural and Stylistic Examination of the Introib

A. General Structure: liturgical and performance considerations

One descriptive word that will emerge almost imrnediately when examining the structure of these pieces is "inconsistent". Clearly, Scribe A was either untroubled by, or not cognizant of this inconsistency while copying the introits. Adjacent settings Vary considerably in a) the number of sections present (antiphon, verse, doxology), b) the amount of polyphony present, versus the amount of plainchant (i.e., the length of the plainchant incipit), and even c) the voice in which the plainchant appears. First, then, we need to establish the standard textuaMiturgica1 fom of an introit in the fifieenth century. Figure 3- 1 is a typical introit from the of 1474.9' The text, Ad te levavi, is for the first item of the Temporale: the first Sunday of Advent. Figure 3-1

. t , DOMINICA PRIMA BE ADUENTU.

a htroifMK 1) te Itirrui animrm meam deus meus in te confida non eruk- ! 4% am.mue im

9' Missde Rornanm Mediohni, 1474, ed. Robert Lippe, 2 vols. (London I899,lWî). There is evidence to support the theory that Trent may have followed the Roman liturgy in the mid 1400s (see Section H, below, for further discussion.) As is clear from this source, the genre consists of -Antiphon - Psalm xerse - Qoxology (Gloria puti) - btiphon repeated. These features are common to al1 introits. But, if the procession or other ceremonies remained unfinished by the time the doxology was over (in larger cathedrals, for exarnple) it seems to have been the practice to sing some additional verses (versus cld repetendum). No sources indicate that this practice continued into the late Middle Ages, ho~ever.~'In fact, a single verse may well have been sufficient, even in earlier tirnes, in ordinary parish churches which did not cal1 for elaborate ~erernonial.~~ In the liturgy, al1 of the introit is Sung to plainsong, the antiphon to a melodic chant, and the psalm verse and doxology to a reciting tone slightly more cornplex than an ordinary psalm tone. The tone of the doxology repeats that of the verse. Fomally, then, the musical structure is: a b b a. Dictionaries vary in the accuracy and comprehensiveness with which they descnbe this genre and its formal structure, but can offer additional information. One common reference source, for example, defines an introit in this way: In Gregorian chant, the first item of the Proper of the Mas, Sung during the procession of the celebrant to the altar. It is an exarnple of antiphonal psalmody, in neumatic style, consisting of an antiphon (A), a verse (V) ...and the lesser Doxology (D) as follows: A V D A. Texts are most ofien drawn nom the Pslms, and the first word sometimes serves as the narne of the feast or Mass as a whole, e-g., ...and the Mass.. .Ordo Ronromrc 1, denving fiom Roman accounts of the first half of the eighth century, suggests that the singing of verses continued until the celebrant reached the altar and signaled the beginning of the Doxology. This is also permitted in modem practice. Other treatments of the fonn are suggested in such documents as well, including the singing of one or more supplementary verses (versus ad repetendum) following the Doxology. Some early musical manuscripts

" Hughes, Medievol Manuscripis, 35.

93 J.G.Davies, ed., A Dîctiomry ofLi~gyand Worship (London: SCM Press, 1972), s-v. "The Chants of the Proper of the Mass," by Mec Robertson. preserve such verses with, however, only a single verse preceding the Doxolog~.~~ This definition clearly outlines the constituent elements of an introit, its liturgical placement and function, the most basic characteristic of the accompanying chant (neumatic), the most basic description of performance technique (antiphonal psalmody), and several possible permutations of the number and placement of the verses relative to the doxology. Another general (nonaiusical) source tells us that: ..A was during the papacy of Celestine 1(422432) that the introit involved antiphonai performance of an entùe psalm to accompany the movement of the celebrant to the ah.By the seventh cenwthis format was adjusted to allow the priest to limit the number of verses, and it was abbreviated Merduring the following cent~ries.~'

Of course, al1 of the sections of an introit may aiso be set in part musics. In the Tr93 examples, the antiphon is always set to polyphony, and we may assume that its music is always the sarne in each of its appearances within the fonn; however, no musical cue to the subsequent repetitions of the antiphon is given following the verse

Although Sung to the same tone in plauisong settings, when both psalm verse and doxology are set in part music, they are set differentiy . Sornetimes, the differences are minimal; more often the music is quite different. Often, however, only the psalm verse is set polyphonically. In this case, the doxology may be omitted dtogether from

nte New Harvard Dictionary OJMWJC,1986 ed, S.V. "Introit."

'' Joseph R. Strayer, ed. Dictio~tyof the Middle Ages (New York: Charles Scribner & Sons, 1985), S.V. "htroit," by Arthur Levine.

% DangelHomiam (59-97) discusses various permutations of pari-music and plainchant in different sources of lSdcentury polyphonie introits (excepi Pr47).

97 Such a cue is, however, present in two of the Aspersion anîiphons that imrnediately precede the introits in the manuscript (f3v and f.4~). the manuscnpt, its performance to the sarne tone as the psalm king assumed, or it is cued by its opening words with their tone. Since polyphonic psalm verses are also sometimes initiated by a plainsong intonation, it is possible that the doxology may be performed similady, the polyphony of the verse king adapted for the remaining words of the doxology text. Never, though, do we find the text of the doxology w-ritten underneath the music for the psalrn verse. The foilowing table sets out the distribution of plainsong and part music in the introït collection of Tr93, indicating the various permutations with symbols. The plainchant is located in the superius unless otherwise indicated.

Table 3-1: The htroits of Tr93 - P~aiachan~o~v~bonvStructure Key to Symbols: A = Antiphon V = Psalm Verse D = Doxology c = chant incipit p = polyphonie incipit x = incipit is missing P = remainder of the section is polyphonie = chant located in tenor

Note: a blank space in a column indicates that the section is missing.

In troi üFoUJg tro* LV 1. 12v-13r Dominus Dixit cP DP

2, l4v-15r Puer natus est 1 , CP l 3. 15v-16r Puer natus est 11 CP 4. 18v-19r Ecce advenit CP pP xP 5.20~-21r -.Resurrexi1 pPgcP xP 6. 21v-22r Resurrexi II pP pP 7.22~-23r Resunexi Dl CP pP 8.23~ Resurrexi IV CP pP 9. 24v-25r Resurrexi V GP CP CP

1 12.28~ l~iriGalilei 1 ICP IDP 1 1 1 13. 29v-30r lvin Galilei II I~P IppI 1 17.39~ Spiritus Domini IV CP CP , 18.40r Spiritus Domini V CP CP 1 19.40~ Benedicta sit 1 CP pP xP 20.41 v42r Benedicta sit If CP CP 1 2 1 .42v-43r Benedicta sit iIï cP cf cP 22.45v-46r Nos autem CP 23.46v47r Cibavit eos I CP pP CP 24.47v-48r Cibavit eos ïi CP xP xP 25.48v-49r Cibavit eos DI CP CP cP 26.49~-50r Terribilis est 1 CP CP xP 27.50~ Terribilis est II pP pP 28.51r Terribilis est ïII ,pP 29.51 v-52r Tenibilis est N CP CP xP 30. 53v-54r Mihi autem nimis 1 CP CP CP 3 1. 54v-55r Mihi autem nimis II CP pP CP 32. 55v-56 Mihi autem nimis III CP xP xP 3 3. 57v-58r In medio ecclesie 1 CP CP CP 34. 58v-5% In medio ecclesie II CP pP CP 35.59~-60r De ventre matris 1 pP pP 1 36.60v-6 1r De ventre matris II CP pP

i4 1. 65v cP Confessio et pulchritudo pP , 42.66r Sapientiam sanctorum cP cP 43.69~69~Statuit ei 1 CP pP 44.70r Statuit ei II CP pP 45. 70v-7 i r Statuit ei ID cP CP CP 46.71~ Os iusti 1 CP CP

47.72r Os iusti II CP PP A 48.75~-76r Loquebar de testimoniis cP 49. 76v-77r Dilexisti iustitiam CP CP CP 150. 8 1r budeamus omnes I 51. 81v-82r Gaudeamus ornnes 11 CP CF CP 52. 82v-83r Gaudeamus omnes III CP CP xP 53. 83v-84r Gaudeamus omnes rV CP pP 54. 84v-8% Rorate celi 1 CP CP cP 155. 85v Rorate celi II cf 56. 86v-87r Vultwn tuum CP pP-xP 57. 88v-89r Suscepimus Deus I CP pP y2 58. 89v-90r Suscepimus Deus LI cP CP xP 59. 90v-9 1r Salve sancta parens 1 CP CP CP 60. 9 1v-92r Salve sancta parens II cP cf xP 61.92~ Salve sancta parens ILI CP pP xP

An examination of this table reveais some of the most and least cornrnon cornbinations. Fifteen settings, accounting for fully one quaner of the total, include antiphon with incipit and full polyphonic verse without doxology (cP, pP), while there are nine settings of the antiphon with incipit alone (cP). Rarer combinations include any setting with a fully polyphonic antiphon (pP, five settings), and any instance of a psaim verse with its first phme missing (xP,two settings). Less than half of the introits have any setting of the doxology at al1 (27 settings). There are no instances of the hi11 doxology text set polyphonically. Clearly, many of the settings are stnicturally incomplete; however, to be liturgically valid, a performance of any introit in its proper context would require ail three of the genre's constituent elements. Whether or not a plainsong incipit appears, it is reasonable to assume that any section, if it is not given polyphony, is to be Sung to the proper plainchant tone. Other, more remote, possibilities for the performance of the incomplete settings include: a) the missing polyphonic elements were provided in some oîher source, presently unknown, b) polyphonic verses andor doxologies were borrowed fiom or fkely exchanged between different settings of introits for the sarne feast, or c) the disembodied antiphons in the manuscript were performed separately, outside their proper lihvgical context. In summary, the data emerging from this table are suggestive of inconsistency at the most basic structural level. Very few introit settings could have been perfonned fkom this source without any modification or addendum. In almost every case, some missing element would have to have been provided. Assuming that the perforrners were conversant with al1 necessary tonal fonnulae and psalm tex*, the missing psaims could conceivably be provided as chant. This procedure would be even easier for missing doxologies, given the cornrnon text. Given the choice in the collection, why would a singer deliberately choose a setting wi-th no polyphonic doxology? If the preference of the chapter was for plainchant fonnulae only in this section, why did the scribe bother to copy any settings with polyphonic doxologies? The argument that smaller parish churches with fewer skilled singers would have chosen the settings with less polyphony doesn't seern entirely logical here, since polyphonic psairns and doxologies. essentially hannonized reciting tones, would have been relatively easy to sing when compared to the antiphons. The intended use of this collection, then, is far from clear. B. Texture and Independencc of the Voiccs

1. Antiphons To begin, antiphons alone will be discussed, since they display by far the most textural and contrapuntal interest. Three textural types are evident in the Tr93 introit antiphons: 1. Homorhythmic settings. Senings where al1 voices move in similar, or identical rhythmic patterns are quite common. In some such antiphons a slight terracing in the level of rhythmic activity from slowest (tenor) to quickest (superius) is often evident. Frequently, two of the three voices seem to be deliberately paired in a cornplementary pattern (sometimes moving in parailel motion). Most often, this paired combination is tenor and contratenor, as the following typical example nom Remexi VI demonstrates:

Example 1: Resurrexi VI, antiphon, begi~ing

O

Here, tenor and contratenor clearly move together in a pattem which is quite distinct frorn the more rapid melodic movement of the superius. Mervoice pairings in this rnanner are less typical, although superius and contratenor are often fond moving homorhythmically at cadential points: Esample 2: Puer natus est 1, antiphon

The most overt instances of homorhythrn and parallel motion occur, not unexpectedly, in antiphon settings which cal1 for an improvised fanabourdon voice. These settings also present some of the only cases where superius and tenor are clearly paired rhythmically. Examples in this style will be discussed in Section F, below.

2. Rhythrnically independent settings. More complex polyphony is ofien the hallmark that most clearly distinguishes the antiphon stylistically £iom the psalm and doxology (which are indeed set homorhythrnically most of the time). While there are no instances of absolute independence of parts throughout an antiphon, many antiphons display passages of relatively independent counterpoint interspersed with sections of homorhythm between two or al1 three voices. A typical exarnple is the antiphon of Spin'r~Domini III, which we may classi@ as predominantly rhythmically independent (this is transcribed in full in the Appendix). In this piece, we notice a simultaneous entry in al1 three voices following the opening incipit, leading the listener to expect a relatively homorhythmic passage. Even by bar 4, however, the voices are beginning to assert some independence, leading into the first cadence. While tenor and contratenor carry on in a paired pattern, superius clearly introduces some contmpuntal variation with its delayed entry following two rests. As the piece progresses, we discover that al1 three voices are capable of rhythrnic independence, a good exarnple king the setting of the words "orbem terrarum, alleluia." in fact, the remainder of this antiphon is pnncipally rhythrnicaliy independent rather than homorhythmic, with some brief episodes featuring voice pairings. Al1 three voices display some delayed entries with rests independent of the other parîs. Imitation is occurs only occasionally (e-g., see tenor/superius, bar 6-8), aithough there is a rare stretto effect later in the piece (bars 36-37), where a descending triad (c-a-f) appears in varied rhythmic values (see Example 3).

Example 3: Spiritus Domini III, antiphon

A variation of the predominantly rhythmically independent texhue is represented by the antiphon of Resurrexi IV (see Example 4). This type of texture makes judicious use of rests to achieve some degree of rhythrnic complexity. In this case, however, the rests occur not only as singularities, delaying a melodic entry by one kat, but also in longer values in a single voice (tenor), allowing for brief sections of duet texture (between superius and contratenor). In fact, Exarnple 4 displays several contrasting textures occurring in reasonably quick succession. Following the opening of the polyphony in long tones, the harmonic rhythm begins to increase in al1 voices until the action focuses clearly on the superius at "alleluia". Inasmuch as passages such as bars 5-6 are characterized by motion in the top voice, with held notes or slower motion in the lower voices, they may be said to be "melody with accornpaniment". Rarely dws such a texture last long, however. At bar 9, the tenor unexpectedly drops out for several bars, while the superius and contratenor carry on in a duet with an qua1 degree of motion in each part. A deliberate silence of this kind, noted with rests, is unusual because of its apparently haphazard character. Alternation between two- and three-part textures generally occurs only at clear articulations.

Example 4: Resurrexi IV, antiphon, begiming Only rarely in the entire collection does any one voice rest for one perfection or longer. The rare occasions where this technique does occur may reflect the begimings of a desire for more subtle textural variety in Mass settings (a desire vigorously pursued by the next generation of composen). The following table outlines the few occurrences of such passages of extended rests in the Tr93 introit repertory, and the overall effect these rests have on the textural quality:

Table 3-2: kations of esteided mts (one ncrfcrtioi, or 10- - -- - Int./Folio btroit Voh 8.23~ Resurrexi IV T creates duet between S and Ct 27.50~ Tembilis est II S creates imitative entry with T 28. Slr Terribilis est III S, Ct creates 3-voice imitation with T A 35. 59v-60r De ventre matris 1 T creates duet between S and Ct 1 43.69~69~ Statuit ei 1 T n n n 1

A 58. 89v-90r Suscepimus deus II T, Ct creates altemating duets with S I

3. Mixed settings. Another texturai category in the Tr93 collection is characterized by a reasonably equal mixture of homorhythm and rhythmic independence. Such an ti phon settings contain significant arnounts of con- and oblique movement between parts, in addition to the more conventional similar (or parallel) motion. It would be a fhstrating and even questionable exercise to attempt to codifi the percentage of contrary versus parallel motion in the collection as a whole. Nonetheless, it is possible to make some general observations using a mode1 antiphon, Spiritus Domini II. In this piece (see Example 9, the contratenor has a wmpletely independent part, often contrasting in motion to the other two voices. The antiphon appears, at first glance, to be rhythmically independent. One might expect that contrary and, to some extent, oblique motion would prevail here. Indeed, in the opening bar of the polyphony on the word "replevit" we immediately see contras, movement between superius and contratenor, both of which are oblique against the held note in the tenor. However, this setting is not at all devoid of parailel motion between the voices, both in isoiated instances (such as at cadence points) and in occasional longer passages. It is curious thaî, other than at cadences, parallel passages tend to occur most ofken when the voices are moving in faster note values.

Eumple 5: Spintus Domini II, antiphon

The preceding examples of antiphons illustrate two general observations: 1) predominantly parallel antiphon setîings (e.g., those using fauxbourdon) still rely on contrary motion as an integral pari of their textural structure, and 2) predominantly rhythmically independent settings almost always include pcssages of homorhythmic, parallel motion behveen two or al1 voices, once again assuring variety.

n. Psalm Verses and DoxoIo- In assessing texture in these parts of a polyphonic introit, we are faceci with Mme inescapable facts concerning their nature: namely that they are al1 based on plainchant settings which are essentially tonal formulae, and, Mer,that such formulae use repeated pitches in large proportions. Thus, it seems inevitable that polyphonic settings of these chants will beyto a large extent, hannonically static. It remains to see what textural variations are actuslly possible when they are set for three voices (for the identification of polyphonic verses and doxologies in the collection, refer to Table 3-1, above). Four distinct categories are present here:

1. Homorhythmic settings. Ecce ahitcan be taken as a typical arrangement. As a cornparison, the following examples show the appropnate plainchant for the psalm and doxology of this introit in the , followed by the polyphonic seaing of the sarne text in Tr93 (this is trandbed in full in the Appendix):

Example 6: Plainchant psalrn & doxology for Epiphany (Roman grdual)*

I

Uri- a Patti, et fi- ü- 0, et Spi-rf- tu- i &II-

cto. Sc-ut c-rat jb princi-pi- O, zt nunc, et semper, et

98 Graduale sacrosanctae romanae ecclesie... (Rome & Tournai: Desclée, 1908). (Ex-6, contd.)

Ps.De- US, judi-ci- um tu- um Re-@ & : et jud-ti- am tu-am

Example 7: Ecce advenit, psalm (Tr93) It is immediately evident that the plainchant tone for the psalrn and the doxology are extremely similar (see Example 6). The only differences are linked to text setting: additional repeated notes (on the reciting tone) are obviously required for the slightly longer text of the doxology. Structurally, the two sections are equally balanced. However, the polyphonic settings of these sections in the Tr93 introit (see Appendix) difTer in several respects, including the nurnber of notated voices and the degree of rhythmic independence between the voices. According to Table 3-1, this introit is classified as cP, pP, xP. Thus, the verse is fully polyphonic, while the doxology is missing its incipit, the polyphony begiming on the second phrase of text. In this exarnple, the polyphonic portions of each element have quite distinct settings. in the three-voiced psalm, tenor and contratenor are essentially paired rhythmically (see Example 7). More independence is afforded to the superius, which is the only voice bearing any resemblance to a plainchant reciting tone (and only at brief passages of repeated pitches, e.g., "iudicium" and "nlio"). The polyphony of the doxology, begiming, as is usual, at "sicut erat", is set for only two voices (superius and tenor) in a mensuration contrasting with that of the psalm. The texture is mostly homorhythmic, with slightly more rhythmic variety in the superius. The movcinent between voices is mostly contrary with no overt parallelisms. Any attempt to add an improvised fatabourdon part here would result in incorrect harmonies against one or both of the voices. This predominance of contrary motion, coupled with the infeasibility of a fauxbourdon voice, would indicate that this doxology was conceived as an independent two-voiced structure. Other than a few repeated pitches in the superius (e.g., on "principio" and "semper"), there is little about the style that mirron a tonal formula. There is still, however, a musical relationship between the psalm and doxology. When one compares the polyphony of the two, disregarding the difference in mensuration and number of voices, the melodic contours of both sections are similar, and the resting tones at cadence points, as well as the length of the intervals 56 between cadences, are roughly the same. The polyphony of the doxology rnay thus be considered a musical variation on that of the psalm in this exarnple.

2. Homorhythmic settings with a hamionued reciting tone. Domine probusti me, the psalm verse for Remmexi IV, is a typical exarnple of a variation of homorhythrnic texture. Here a polyphonie setting betrays unmistakably its plainchant psalm-tone origins. The introït code from Table 3-1 (cP pP) tells us that the entire p& verse is set polyphonically. Example 8: Resurrexi IV, psalm Although the antiphon of this introit is not fauxbourdon (Le., it has a notated contratenor), there is nonetheless no contratenor part present in the psalm, and an editorial fauxbourdon voice, which fits the texture well, has thus been added. The psalm is almost entirely homorhythrnic. Only in bars 4347 do the supenus and tenor have slightly variant rhythmic values. There is only one instance of a rest, and this falls at a cadence (bar 44 in the superius over the long tone in the tenor). Most strikingly, at bar 40 and bar 48-50, both notated parts "recite" on repeated tones at the interval of a sixth. When viewed in conjunction with its highly rhythmically independent antiphon (see Example 4, above), this psalm marks a distinct stylistic change in the introit, as striking as the change from antiphon to psalm tone would be in a rnonophonic introit. When viewed as an independent musical entity, this pol yphonic psalm can clearly be seen as a fairly simple hannonization of a psalm tone, with only a small amount of added mensural rhythm.

3. Rhythmically independent settings. Intnguingly, the most rhythmicaily independent psalm setting of the collection is the first one copied in the manuscript, for the introit Dominus durit for Christmas Day (see Example 9). The introit is cP,pP; the psalm incipit is polyphonic and there is no doxology. Three independent parts move in mostly contrasting motion (note, for example, the contour of the opening bar) and fairly individual rhythm. There are numerous instances of rests delaying entries at different points in the superius and contratenor. Only one bar seems to break the prevailing style: bar 32, at c'populi meditati." For this bnef moment, contratenor and tenor are rhythmically paired, while superius "intones" the text on repeated f S. Othenvise, there is little about this music that would suggest a plainchant reciting tone. Eumple 9: Dominus dixit, psalm 4. Mixed settings. A relatively equal mixture of homorhythm and rhythmic independence can be observed in the psdm and doxology of Spi- Dornini [I (see Example 10). Beginning at "atemplo sancto tuo" in the psalm, the texture is reasonably homorhythmic, with some minor variety in the superius. The harmonies and texture cannot be said to be static, however, except pehaps for the slower rhythm on the word "sancto". In the second polyphonie phrase, "quod est in Ierusalem7', the rhythm increases right up to the final cadence. Al1 three voices are equally active and independent of one another, although the tenor and contratenor have some parallel p as sages.*

99 In bar 5 1 of Exarnple 10, the tenof s notes in the manuscript are 'f g a g d'. In order to avoid clashing dissonances with the superius and contratenor, 1 have changes these to 'fa g f e'. This change also creates a more conventional cadence formula for the tenor. Esample 10: Spiritus Domini ïi, psalm and doxology

-1

est m It-rus sa km Example 10 (contd.)

When we look at the doxology, the most striking difference is the fact that the contratenor voice is missing entirely (a fouxbourdon voice is provided in the edition)loO.Moreover, the first polyphonic phrase, "sicut erat in principio", is far more static than its counterpart in the psalm, with straight homophony throughout. This recitation is more imitative of the style of the original plainchant. The next phrase, "et nunc, et semper", introduces a brief passage of rhythmic independence, only to be replaced once again by static homorhythm at "et in secula seculorum". For the final melisma on 'Amen", more active, independent rhythms return. Cwiously, the final phrases of both the psalm ("Ienisalem"), and the doxology ('Amen"), are musically

lm Beginning in bar 67, the tenor moves to a fourth below the superius, usurping the normal role of the improvised part. Thus, at this point in the edition, 1 have moved the improvised part down to a sixth below the superius to maintain the fatabourdon sanority (for Merdiscussion of the role of the improvised part in fourbourdon textures, see Section F, below. ) identical in the superius voice only. The tenor employs similar rhythrns but different notes, and the contratenor is, of course, absent in the doxology. At fht glance, it may seem that the contratenor is meant to repeat its note patterns fkom the psalm in the doxology, and that the scribe was simply avoiding the duplication of notation. However, if fit to the doxology, the contratenor nom the psalm would be discordant against the different tenor. The reading as illustrated in the example is thus more likely . The most striking quality of the doxology itself ,unlike the arrangement in the psalrn verse, is the aitemating styles of homorhythm and rhythmic independence, delineated by the phrases of the text. Three intriguing points emerge from the preceding analysis of the textures of polyphonie psalrn/doxology pairs: 1) the contrast between three-part settings for the verse and twwpart settings for the doxology (or vice versa), 2) the balance between homophony and counterpoint from verse to doxology (these two styles may also be mixed within both the verse and the doxology), and 3) most intriguing of dl, the fact that the distinction between homorhythm and counterpoint is sometimes detennined by the phrasing of the text. The following table (Table 3-3) summarizes the main textural quality of the psalm verse and doxology settings in the collection as either principally homorhythmic, pnncipally rhythmically independent, or a roughly equal mixture of these styles. Settings that include a hannonueci reciting tone of substantial duration (i.e. long passages of static hannony) are indicated separately. Table 3-3: Textural Oualitv of PsalmsCVVDorol~ Key to symbols: h = homorhythmic; i = rhythmically independent; hi = mixture (without indicating pnonty); f =fauxbourdon r = includes harrnonized reciting tone (more than 2 Breve duration) (note: a blank space indicates no doxology is notated)

1. 12v-13r Dominus Dixit Quare fiemuenint 11 4. 18v-19r l~cceadvenit l~eusiudicium tuum lhi lhi Resurrexi 1 Domine probasti me hlrf hkf Resurrexi II Domine probasti me hi f Resurrexi III Domine probasti me hi f Resurrexi N Domine probasti me hlr f Resunexi V Domine probasti me h/r f h/r f Resurrexi VII Domine probasti me 1 Viri Galilei I Ornnes gentes h f Viri Galilei II Omnes gentes 1 Spiritus Domini II Confirma hoc Deus hi h/r f Spiritus Dmini IV Confirma hoc Deus h f Spiritus Dornini V Confirma hoc Deus h/r f Benedicb sit 1 Benedicamus patrem* h f bi/ r f 20. 4 1v-42r benedicta sit II b3enedicamus mtrem* Ih I 2 1. 42v-43r l~enedictasit III benedicarnus ~atrem* hi f br 23.46~-47r l~ibaviteos 1 l~xultateDe0 24. 47v-48r l~ibaviteos II C ibavit eos III Exultate Deo h h/r Tembilis est I QumdilecW MrfMrf Dominus regnavit* 27. SOv Tenibilis est II Qum dilecta h/r f 29. 5 1 v-52r Tembilis est N Diligit Dominus* h/r h/r 30. 53v-54r Mihi autem nimis 1 Domine probasti me h/r h/r 3 1. 54v-S5r Mihi autem nimis II Domine probasti me hi f hilrf 32. 55v-56 Mihi autem nimis ID Domine probasti me 1 1 133. 57v-58r 11n medio ecclesie 1 knum est confiteri 134. 58v-39r 1I.n rnedio ecclesie II l~onurnest confiteri Ih Ihi 1 135.59v-6Or ID^ ventre matris 1 hnum est confiteri 1 136. 60v-6 1 r be ven~matris II l~onumest confiten IP* 1 1 1 3 7. 6 1v62r hunc scio vere bornine ~robastime Ii 1 1 13 8. 63v-64r l~tenimsederunt I l~eatiimmaculati hi m/r 1 140.65r llntret in consbectum beus venenxnt gentes bdr f 1 lconfessio et pulchritudo pantate Domino IMr '1 canticum novum 42.66r Sapientiarn sanctorum Exultate iusti h f 43. 69r-69~ Statuit ei 1 Misericordias domini* h f 44. 70r Statuit ei II Misericordias domini* hi f 4 145. 70v-7 1r huitei III 1~isericordiasdomini* Ihi h/r 1 146. 71v 10s iusti 1 koli emulari bi/r 1 1 147. 72r 10s iusti II holi emulari br f 1 1

150. 81r !~audearnusomnes 1 l 5 1 . 8 1v-82r Chudeamus omnes Ii 52. 82v-83r Gaudeamus omnes III 53. 83v-84r Gaudeamus omnes N 54. 84v-85r Rorate celi 1 56. 86v-87r Vulturn tuurn 57.88~-89r SuscepimusDeus 58. 89v-90r Suscepimus Deus 59. 90v-9 1r l~alvesancta Darens Sentiant omnes* Ih/r f Ih/r f I 160.91~-92r lsalvesanctawens kentiant ornnes* Ih/r r 1 161. 92v lsalve sancta ~arens kentiant ornes* hi f Ihih f 1 * Psalm text does not correspond to Roman gradual; or multiple verses ** Only superius notated - Le., at least 1 part missing C. Melodic Quality

The Tr93 introits are more than simply melody with accompanirnent. Al1 three voices fiequently exhibit distinct melodic contours, with lengthy passages of conjunct (or only sl ightly disjunct) motion. Each part has its own tendencies, however.

1. The voices Figure 3-2 shows the typical range of each voice. Exceptions to these ranges do occur, but are rare. Figure 3-2: Typical melodic range

1 .Superi~s~~' In al1 but four cases in the collection, plainchant appears, in a paraphrased fonn, in the uppermost voice. More detailed discussion of the use of plainchant in these pieces

'O' The top voice of these pieces is never labelled in the manusaip 1 have chosen the editorial label "supenus",indicating the highest-sounding voice, for purposes of comparative discussion cdy. Otfier terrns, such as "ciiscantus",or 'triplum",are also possibilities, although each of these also has a specific meaning relating to compositional technique. For a discussion of the interchangeability of voice part labels, see: David Fallows, "Specific Information on the Ensembles for Composeci Polyphony, 1400-1474," in Srudies in the PerjCormance of Lare Medieval MUJC,ed. Stanley Booman (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). 10960. 1 am gratethil to Margaret Bent, of Al1 Souls College. Oxford, for sharing with me her views on this subject. will appear in Section H, below. Here, it is sufficient to say that the Tr93 introïts are, for the most part, treble-style structures, i-e., the pre-existent voice is the top part, and

additional voices have been added be10w.'~~Since the SU~~~USis generaily the most active voice, and also lies in the highest range, it is therefore most easily perceived (by modem ears) as the rnelody of the piece. Its motion is predorninantly step-Wise, but when leaps do occur, they rarely reach above a fourtb. Typicai superius parts on1 y rarely move by consecutive leaps. The most comrnon disjunct pattern found is the triadic outline. The most consistent characteristic of the superius throughout the collection is the opening metodic formula: always rking, usually pausmg at a third, and gradua1ty retuming to the starting pitch via a standard cadential fmula. The following sarnpling of superius openings will substantiate the consistency of this pattern.

Example 11 : Various superius openings Dorninus àixit:

Ecce advenit:

Spiritus Domini IV :

lm This methoci of construction seems to have been abanâoned between the tenth and fourteenth centuries; it is documented in the Mmico Enchiriadis, and is not found again until the works of laîe fourieenth-cenîury ItaIian and fiknui-century Franco-Netherlandish corn posers. See: Andrew Hughes, Styfe and Symbol: Medieval Mmic: 800-1 453 (Ottawa: IMM, l989), 258. 68 2. Tenor. Under this heading, we may discuss two categories: a) the typical independent tenor, and, b) the tenor rhythrnically paired with a contratenor.

The tenor is usually the lowest sounding voice, although it sometimes yields this place to the contratenor, given the inherent overlapping of the parts and the similarity in their range. in four specific cases, the tenor contains a cantusfinnus (see Section H, below). In al1 other cases, the chant voice is actually the superius, and the tenor is theoretically fiee to move in any manner. In facf however, these independent tenors tend to stay relatively conjunct Overt leaps occur somewhat more fiequently in the tenor than they do in the superius, yet much less so than they do in the contratenor. If the tenor does move by a leap larger than a fourth, it is much more apt than the contratenor to follow this with a relatively stepwise pattern in the opposite direction, as in this typical antiphon opening:

Eumpk 12: Ecce advenit, antiphon, tenor only

Example 13 shows a section of an antiphon where contratenor and tenor are rhythmically paired against a slightly varied superius line. Notice here that both lower parts leap by octave. Following the leap in the tenor, the line continues with a descending third followed by step-wise descent, a leap of a fourth followed by another series of descending steps, etc. By contrast, after the contratenor leaps the octave, it follows with another series of leaps, none of which is smaller than a fourth. This passage actually seems to be characterized by the melodic device of a rising fourth ("g" to "cm)preceding a descent by step. The supenus and the tenor use this device in imitation. The contratenor, while outlining the intervals, does not participate as clearly in the melodic patîem.

Esample 13: Resurrexi IV, anûphon

3. Contratenor As with the tenor, the contratenor appears in more than one guise: a) as an independent, disjunct voice, "filling in" a note in the harmony, b) as a voice moving in parailel motion to one of the other voices, and c) as a combination of these. The range of the contratenor, by far the greatest of the uiree parts, is most akin to that of the tenor, which it frequently overlaps. Generally, however, the contratenor lies slightly higher and usually takes the middle pitch in passages of homorhythm. Frequently, the contratenor serves as a "filler" voice in the texture. As might be expected, this voice, when it is actually notated (Le., not in fauxbourdon senings) has the highest percentage of anguiar or highly disjunct passages (Example 14 shows how a typical contratenor appears in the manuscript). Yet this is by no means its prirnary nature. Another role for the contratenor is to complement or move in parailel motion to either the superius or the tenor, particularly at cadences. While fulfilling this role, the contratenor, by necessity, takes on the melodic quality of the voice with which it moves. Assurning, for example, that the superius in a given setting moves primarily in a conjunct rnanner, it would not be unusual to expect the contratenor to follow suit. The following excerpt from Puer tus est LI is typical of a contratenor moving in this way. The opening of this antiphon shows that the contratenor, while occasionally employing some wider laps than the other parts, moves in a generally complementary, homorhythmic pattern, either with the superius, the tenor, or both (see Example 15).

Example 14: A typical contratenor (note wide range; disjunct motion) Example Puer natus est II, antiphon, opening

Another common characteristic of the contratenor is also exemplified in Example 15. At bars 4-6, octave laps surround a d isjunct figure punctuated with a rest. Another instance of this sort of movement is found in Ecce advenir (see Example 16). Example 16: Ecce advenit, antiphon, opening

id- i JI '

Here, the contratenor exhibits both subservience to another voice and more independent, angular movement. In the opening, the contratenor moves at first with the tenor, then with the superius at the cadence. As in Puer MM est II, ?he contratenor does not leap more than a third in the opening five bars; however, following the cadence at bars 6-7, this voice begins to take on a life of its own. An octave leap on 'c' is followed by a descent by thirds to 'd', intempted by a rest, and then by another octave leap, after which it remsto more conjunct motion. This highly disjunct passage presents quite a contrast to what came before it, and bears no resemblance to the melodic contour of either the superius or the tenor, however, it does not provide enough evidence to label the melodic quality of this part as primarily disjunct. A safer conclusion to draw is simply that the contratenor contains the highest percentage of contrast between conjunct and disjunct passages. Without delineating thern specifically, it is also safe to say that most of the contratenon in the collection fa11 into this category.

IT. Function of the lower voices Conventionally, the contratenor has been seen as performing a "filler" role, suppiying notes inessential to the piece, so that it may, in theory at least, be ornitteci. This function as an inessentiai voice is primarily harmonic and rhythrnic in nature*and discussion of these features, although intimately bound up with meiody, must be delayed. Melodicaily, in a few cases, the fùnctions of tenor and contratenor seem to be not so clearly distinct. In introit settings where disjunct motion is taken to its apparent limit, the most overt examples of filling out the hannony do invariably fall in the contratenor, as the following bRef excerpt demonstrates (see Example 17). While the supenus and tenor both move in generally stepwise patterns, the contratenor moves predominantly by leap. This, coupled with the periodic rests, brands the contratenor here as disjunct, and quite independeni of the other voices. Example 17: Spiritus Domini DI, antiphon

Occasionally, the style of the tenor in psaim and doxology settings differs fkom that in antiphons. In some introits, the tenor takes on the appearance of a "filler voice" in these sections, abandoning its usual tendency toward generally conjunct motion. In such cases, it thus imitates the stereotypical role of the contratenor. Example 18 shows the tenor acting as if it were an extension of the contratenor, jumping between low and high ranges with apparent abandon. As a mle, when the tenor makes such overt leaps, the contratenor generally conhasts this with simultaneous leaps in the opposite direction. The resulting effect is a constant overlap and trading of range. While the superius in this piece is fairly conjunct, following the contour of the plainchant with a moderate emphasis on the reciting tone, neither the contratenor nor the tenor can be said to be particularly smooth here, although the amalgamation of both parts produces the aurai effbct of two relatively conjunct lines. Tenor lines of this nature are much less comrnon in the collection than those illustrated in Examples 15 and 16, above. Example 18: Resurrexi VII, psalm The preceding example may be evidence of a rare subtlety of compositional practice: the contratenor and the tenor may have been conceived together. There are so many instances of range swapping and contrary motion that it seems as if neither part could have been added as an afterthought, even though the tenor and superius could possibly stand as a self-sufficient duo. In the context of Tr93, however, the mefodic quality of the tenor in this example is more the exception than the rule. D. Harmony and Cadences

For the modem listener, consideration of this repertoire from a vertical, rather than a horizontal, perspective is perhaps more revealing of the aura1 quality of these pieces. Since cadences occur quite often within the normal fi-arnework of the antiphon settings, it is sometimes dificult to separate typical non-cadential harmonies fiom those that are merely preparation for an upcoming cadence. 'Inus, it is logical to discuss both harmony and cadences together. Points of articulation, indicating the opening sonority of phrases, use bare fifths and octaves, with superius and tenor fonning the outer voices. Within phfases, the 733" chord, generally associateci with English discant polyphony and with fauxbourdon, predominates, especially in parallel textures.

Example 19: Resunexi V, antiphon Often, sononties are too v&ed to allow generalization, but it is clear that thirds and sixths are usually present. in Example 19, for instance, the 613 sonority abounds (bar 28, bar 37, etc.). The extended position of the 613 (as 10/6), however, is relatively rare. When it does occur, the third is often in the top voice, as a tenth (e-g., bar 27, beat 2). Closed-position arrangements other than the 613 are generally limited to 513. Generally, every one of these arrangements may be affecteci by rhythrnic displacement, rests, or other similar devices (see Section E below). In these circumstances, dissonances are oflen ineoduced in the forrn of passing notes or suspensions. These features of melody, harmony, dissonance, and rhythm are crystallized at cadences. Typically, the cadence is simply a three-part 6-8 arrangement, sometimes with under-third ornaments in the supenus and contratenor (see Example 20-A), or merely in superius alone (see Example 20-B).

Erample 20: Typical6-8 cadences: A) Puer natus est 1 B) Dominus dixit

When the contratenor does not mirror the omarnents of the superius, it is often in rhythrnic unison with the tenor (as in Exarnple 20-B). The contratenor can also approach the fi* above the tenor as part of a rhythmically independent line, frequently jumping by octave, as in Example 2 1 (bars 46-7; 52-53).

Example 21: Spiritus Domini HI, cadences with leap of octave in Ct

There are, of course, innumerable minor variations on this cadence type, but the harmonic implications are essentially the same regardless of melodic figuration in the superius or contratenor, or of the character of the approaching or following melodic contour in any of the parts: the octave is approached by contrary motion in the outer voices, and the tifth is provided by the contratenor. Finally, an exampie of one hannonic anomaly in the collection may add to the impression that these works were not copied particularly carefully. By the fifieenth century, some harmonic arrangements were prohibited in written polyphony; for example, one cannot have fourths between the lowest sounding voice and an upper voice, this interval was considered dissonant.'03 Nonetheless, there are several conspicuous exarnples of fourths in the Tr93 introïts, such as the passage in Example 22. Many of these can likely be explained by copying errors, or misplaced clefs which were never corrected in the manuscript. In the absence of such practical corrections, it thus seems unlikely that these particular pïeces were ever sung fkom this source. Another possibility, of course, is that the composen were simply unskilled.

Example 22: Puer natw est 1, fourths against tenor

'O3 This rule was mentioned in the fifienth century by several theonsts, including Tinctons in his Liber de arre contrapmcti ( 1477), Franchino Gaffurio in his Practtca muszcae (Milan, 1496), Book iII, Ch.2 and 5; and Guilielmus Monachus in his Deprecepris arrzs musice (late 1S& c. ), found in London. British Libr-y. Ms. Lansdowne 763. E. Mensuration and Rbythm

in the following discussion of mensuration in the introit collection, certain assumptions must be made about the tactus, or overall kat of the music. in the absence of theoretical statements exactly contemporary with the manuscript, the convention, first described by Gaffurius in 1496, that a normal semibreve was roughly equivalent to the resting pulse of an adult male will be taken as applicable to the Tr93 introits, even though they predate the writings of Gafirius by at least fi@ years.lW

1. Conventional mensurations Four mensural signs are basic to the later medieval rhythmic system: 0, C, 0,and c. Throughout Tr93, however, these four are predominant: 0,C, @, and c, al1 of which are represented in the introit collection. The first two indicate tempus perfectum @rolatzone irnperfecta), and tentpus impeflectum @rolutione irnpeflecta), respectively. Completely absent corn the introits is the sign 0,and there is only one instance of (discussed below). Whether this is tnie for other contemporary manuscripts (and the significance of this phenornenon in those other sources) must await a later investigation. The following examples are typical of the wrïting in each of the four main mensurations found in the Tr93 introits: O is used for the majority of the antiphon settings. Even in cases where introit open ings are unsigned, this mensuration cm generally be inferred by the context, by means of rest patterns, etc. (see Example 23).

'a Gaffurio. Practica Mrrsicae (1496), Book Hi, Ch.4, trans. Clement A. Miller, Musical Studies and Documents 20 (American Institute of Musicology, 1968). See also: J.A. Bank, Tucrus, Tempo, and Notation in Memura/ Muricjiom the 13* to the 17'' Century (Amsterdam: Annie Bank, 1972). Eumple 23: Os Iusti II, typical opening in 0

Exarnple 24 shows one common usage for C: to mark the beginning of a new section, in this case the doxology. Compared to O, this mensuration occurs fairly infiequently in the collection (see Table 3-4 below). When it is used, the rhythm are generally not cornplex, except occasionally at cadential points.

Eumple 24: Ecce advenit, doxology, typical usage of C

The slashed signs, @ and Gyalso occur with some fkequency in the collection, oflen at a change of section. Historically, these signs have been interpreted in different ways. Until recently, it has been assurned that they heralded some forrn of proportional shifi in the music. The sign 0,for example, is labelleci by Apel as tempusper$ectum diminutum. In Example 25, this sign occurs at the change fiom anti phon to psalm verse.

Example 25: Dominus dixit, antiphodpsalm, as proportion

The technique relating the new section to the old is described by Apel as diminutio ~irn~lex.'~~,Le., a simple halving of note values, where the new sernibreve receives only half the value of the oid. This interpretation of Q, when it follows O in a single

'O' Willi Apel, The Notation of Poiyphonic Mwic 9900-1600 (Cambridge, Mess: MAA, 1953), p. 152. composition, is echoed by Busse Berger. '" Other than the visual appearance of busier rhythm as a result of the modem transcription (e.g., sixteenthaotes in the psalm replace the eighth-notes of the antiphon), there is nothing rhythmically unique about the figures used in 9 when compared to those used in O. As this example shows, there is the same tendency to increase rhythmic activity as the cadence approaches. Note that if the cadence at the end of the psalm were transcribed at one note value Iarger (as it appears in the manuscript, but taking no account of the so-called proportional sign), the appearance would be very similar to the cadence at the end of the antiphon. More recently, Margaret Bent has convincingly posited the theory that, in music of the middle fifteenth century, is indicative of a proportional shift only if it occurs simultaneously with 0 in different voices, or in repetitions of the sarne voice (e.g., in a the-fold Kyrie or setting). Otherwise, she says, is nothing more than a marker, used for a variety of purposes such as the coordination of parts, or the sign that something new is happening in the piece (e-g., the psalm verse is begi~ing).Mensuraily, it has the same meaning as 0,and does not indicate any change in note values or, consequently, of perfiormance tempo. Thus, as a mensural label, it is, in effect, red~ndant.'~'Using this interpretation, the similarity of the rhythmic patterns of the 0 and @ sections in the previous exarnple (Example 25) makes more sense. A transcription of part of this exarnple (transition fiom antiphon to psalm) with one mensuration value only looks like this (see Example 26):

'O6 She cites several southern European theorists of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries such as Guilielmus Monachus (c. 1480-90). who explain this sign as a diminution by one halt See: Anna Maria Busse Berger, Menmration und Proportion Signs, Orzgins and Evolution (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), 125-34.

'O7 Margaret Benf "The Early Use of the Sign O," Eady Music 24/2 (19%), 199-225. Example 26: Dominus dixit, antiphodpsaim, @ as score marker only

Much the same situation exists in stereotypical instances of the use of c. The adoption of a proportional explanation for this sign would mean tempuc imper/ectum diminutum. In Example 27, the note values for the new section (in this case, still part of the antiphon) would be twice as fast as those in the previous section. The wntrast here is even greater than in Example 26 above, since the original mensuration is not C?but 0;the new section, begiming at cuius imperium, wodd, according to ApeI, cal1 for both a proportional shift and an imperfection of the breve. For cornparison, the superius is shown both in facsimile, and in modem score with proportional reduction: Example 27: Puer natus est iI, antiphon, superius only

as proportion

Although Bent does not discuss g in the same detail as @, she does irnply that there mas be an analogous situation here: g may be only a score marker, not an indication of a proportional shifi. This interpretation provides the simplest solution in singing these pieces (Le., perfonners need not worry about changing tempo). II. Coloration Coloration in this collection occurs only in tempusperfecr~m,and is lirnited to what Apel refen to as hemiola temporis, where the coloured breve loses one third of its value, thus becoming effectively imperfect.lo8 In fact, the breve is the value most ofien found coloured; it is occasionally repiaced by smaller coloured values, or two breves by one coloured longa. When viewing Tr93, it is important to make the distinction between this type of coloration and other blackened notes found in the manuscript, such as notes that are naturally black in mensurai music (e-g., the semiminim), and notes that indicate plainchant (see Section H below). Coloration, indicating imperfection, is used reasonably infrequently in these introits; although it is present in thirty-five of the sixty-one settings, it usually occurs only once or twice in each, generally in the tenor or contratenor. The most comrnon use for this technique is to fit a series of imperfect notes into the value of two perfections: Example 28: Os iusti II, psalm, typicai use of coloration

f. 72 (superius) In Statuif ei 1' a slightly longer-than-usual series of coloured notes in the supenus, and a similar passage in the contratenor, are achially preceded in the manuscript by a superscript numeral "2", presumably indicating that herniola temporis is definitely intended here:

Example 29: Statuit ei 1, f. 69 (superius)

One exception to the stereotypical use of coloration, in combination with some unusual rhythmic variety, is found in the doxology of Resurrexi V. Here, some notes are coloured (and thus imperfected), but not always in a sequence adding up to two perfections. This is unusual, and may indicate the inexperience of the composer. Moreover, the presence of periodic rests in al1 parts makes the rhythm, and thus the text. of this setting extremely disjunct, more so than in any other introit in the collection, and in stark contrast to the other settings of the Easter text. Exa mpie 30-A: Resurrexi V doxology (tenor), unusual coloration

Exarnple 30-A shows an excerpt fiom the tenor of this doxology. The coloration at the beginning of the second line does not add up to two perfections, even if the breve rest is included in the grouping. Another possibility is that the rest should actually be the value of a semibreve and was copied incorrectly. in either case, this tenor is somewhat rhythmically disjunct. Example 30-8shows the tirst part of this excerpt in a three-voice context (in modern notation):

Example 30-B: Resunexi V doxology, unusual coloration III. Amical mensural patterns Several examples employ mensural signs in atypical ways, or use different signs

Only two introït antiphons begin with @: Cibuvit eos I (E46v47) and Terribilis est Ill (f. 5 1 ). In the first example, both antiphon and verse fa11 under this sign, but there is a change to O for the doxology. In the second example, there is no further mensuration specified after @; however, neither verse nor doxology have been notated; had they ken, it is of course possible that a change of mensuration would have been included. This example is unique in that it seems to relate directly to Terribilis est iI, its immediate predecessor in the manuscript (f SOv), which, although only set for two voices, is notated in O (the sign is not actually present, but is nonetheless implied). Spilsted refers to Tembilis III as a "three-part variation of [Tewzbilis II]"'09. Although there is a considerable difference between the writing of these wo settings, the melodic contours are oflen quite similar, and the opening rests in the superius are duplicated (see Example 3 1 ).

Example 31: Terribilis est nmi (superius)

lW Spilsted, 282. If these pieces are linked, then, the presence of the @ in Terribilis est III can be seen as a sign that something new is happening, i-e., the addition of a third voice. This would account for the sign's placement at the beguining of the antiphon, which is, in effect, merely a change of section, perhaps meant to be the repetition of the antiphon following the doxology, according to the normal liturgical practice. If Terribilis Ki is merely a varied repetition of the previous antiphon, then @ here might also indicate a proportional shifl based on the hteger valor of Terribilis Il. In four other cases in the manuscnpt, a setting of a lone antiphon follows immediately afier a more complete setting of the same text. In none of these, however, is the relationship between the settings as clear as it is in Tem-bilisII and Iii, described above. The four additional scenarios are: 1. Resurrexi V and VI: Both settings are for three independent voices (no fauxbourdon) and both antiphons are in the same mensuration (O). There are no obvious parallel passages of rests or phrases, as in Terribilis iI and III. 2. Spiritus Domini II and III: The sarne conditions exist here as in scenario 1. Moreover, Spiritus dornini iIl has its own incipit, set differently Born that in Spirinus dornini II. 3. Etenim sederunt 1 and II: Here, the first setting is for three voices, while the second is for two voices +fauxbourdon; however, there is no change in mensuration for the second antiphon. 4. Rorate 1 and Li: Here, the settings are remarkably different, since Rorate 1 has its chant in the tenor (see Section H, below), while Rorate II has the more conventional discant paraphrase in the superius, including its own incipit. The mensurations are different as well, although both antiphons are set for three independent voices. Among the pairs of settings which follow this pattern (antiphon + psalrn/dox., followed by a single antiphon on the same text), it seems that only TeWbilis U and III have al1 the following charactenstics: a) the antiphons have different numbers of notated voices (one in fauxbourdon, one not); b) the mensuration changes for the second antiphon; c) rests, melodic contour, and phrase lengths in the two antiphons are frequently parallel. Thus, a strong case can be made for the consideration of these two pieces as two parts of a single setting Le., Tewibiiis III is merely a varied repetition of the antiphon, marked by the sign @. The same cannot be said with assurance for the other pairs described above. While the instances of introits beginning in @ may be seen as mere anomalies in the larger context of typical mensural patterns, there are eleven exarnples of antiphon settings that begin with the sign (see Table 34below), making this situation more of a legitimate category. It is surely no coincidence, however, that in al1 but two of these settings, no additional mensuration signs appear, despite the fact that most of the introits have more than one notated section. In effect, these nine remaining settings use itself as a time signature, since there can be no implied proportional change to or from any other section of music. The different examples of this scenario, outlined in Table 3-4, do not follow any predictable pattern in the manuscript. ln some cases they are the first items of a given text to appear; thus, they cannot be proportional variations of a previous setting, unless the original exemplar was not copied. Since ail voices fa11 under the same sign throughout, it is immaterial whether the notes are transcribed as integer vaior, or at half the "standard" value. Apel refers to this usage of $ as king "much more frequent" than other applications of this sign'"; however he seems to be considering exclusively sixteenthcentury repertoire, "practically dl" of which, he says, "is written with the alla breve sign g in al1 the pans".:" The Tr93 introits surely predate the standardization of the alla breve time signature, yet these nine examples seem to stand as precurson of its usage.

"O Apel, 154,

"' Ibid, 188. Two exceptions to the a opening pattern are Mvesancta parens LI (f 9 1 v), and Mihz autem 1 (R53v-54). In the first of these introits (see Exarnple 32), the antiphon begins with this sign, but there is a shift to for the psalrn (notated in the tenor) and doxology (notated in the superius). The relationship here between and @ must be analogous to the relationship between C and 0;there is no implied proportional shift, merely a shift to perfection of the breve for the psalm and doxology. The use of slashed signs here, an anomaly in the context of this collection, does not seem to change the appearance or style of the music, which is othenvise essentially the same as it is in the rest of the introits. Therefore, this example could also be a precursor of the sixteenthtentury alla breve time signature. Example 32: Salve sancta parens lI (f 9 1 v) In Mihi autern 1, the antiphon also starts in C, but changes signs at the beginning of a new section (see Example 33). It is more intriguing than Salve sancta parens II, for two reasons: a) it introduces a sign not found anywhere else in the collection: 02,and b) this new sign actually indicates a proportional shift f?om ô, which in this case is the Ïnteger valor. The sign 02 is defined by Apel, along with

several other symbols, as merely a synonym for Q, Le., tempus pet$ectum diminutum, .

or proportio dupla of O. ' " Busse Berger further distinguishes two uses of @ in the fifteenth century, of which this is the earlier interpretati~n''~(the later use can be seen in the music of both Dufay1'"and Busnoy~~'~).Had the more conventional @ been used here. following the opening  it could merely have indicated a change to a perfect breve, as in Salve sancta pclrens tI. In order to show that proportion was clearly intended, the scribe therefore had to choose an altemate symbol that would leave no doubt about the proportional shift. Perhaps as emphasis that it is intentional, the new symbol is carefûlly copied in al1 three parts. It appears at the beginning of the psalm verse, Domine probarri me. The effect at this point is therefore both a perfection of the breve and a halving of the note values for the psalm. Although the end result is not really unique, this setting still stands out in the collection as a notational oddity.

Il2 Apel, 147.

II3 Busse Berger, 228-9. She cites Baude Cordier as the first composer to use 02 in this way in the fifteenth century.

"" /bid Dufay, she says, is credited with the later reinterpretation of 02to mean diminished minor mode, where the long, not the breve, is the goveming value.

' l5 See: Richard Tamkin, preface to Antoine Busnoys, Coflecred Works. Part 2: The Lat in-rexred Works, Masters and Monuments of the Renaissance, 5 (New York: The Broude Trust, 1990), xxii-xxv. Coincidentally, the only other example of an unusual mensural sign appearing in the collection cornes in a setting of the same tea, Mihi ciutem nimis III (ff. Sv-56). The symbol, ê, indicates temps imperjectum nun prolatione pegecta (where the semibreve = three minhs), and is not actually unusual at al1 in the broader conte- of fifieenth-century manuscripts. Its labelling as a rarity here is merely due to the fact that it occun in only one introit in the entire collection. At the psalm, the mensuration changes to C, which holds also for the doxology. As in the previous example of a rarely used sign, the scribe is more careful than usual to copy the syrnbols in each part, perhaps in order to underline the unexpected mensuration (see Exarnple 34). Example 33: Mihi autem nirnis 1 (ffS3v-54) 02 mensuration sign in al1 parts at psalm

In only two introïts, De ventre rnahis 1 (R59v-60), and Suscepimus deus Il (ff.89~-90),the mensuration changes in the middle of a section-here, the antiphon. In both of these examples, the initial mensuration is 0,and there is a bief switch to $, indicating only a change to imperfect time (not proportion). This change corresponds to a move from three to two-part texture; is used in extended duet passages with the superius and either the tenor or the contratenor (see discussion under Section B, and Table 3-2 above). In Suscepimus deus iI, the mensuration remsto O when al1 three voices rewiite. Until now, 1 have assumed that al1 mensurations and proportional changes apply equally to al1 voices in an introit setting, whether or not the scribe has bothered to copy the signs into each voice part, a very inconsistent practice in Tr93. More cornplex proportional puzzles, in which one part is notated in a different mensuration than another, are not generally an issue in this collection. There are three exceptions,

however, all of which fa11 into a special category of introit' 16: Resurrexi 1 (ff.20~-21 ), Spiritus Domini 1 (ff.36~-37),and Rorate celi 1 (f 84v-85). In the first case (see Example 39, both superius and tenor are giwn the sign g, although the transcription will not be correct unless one considers the relationship between them in a different way: the tenor is actually in proportio dupla to the other parts, Le., the note values of the tenor require a reduction by one half. Thus the Q in the superius is likely an error, and should really be C.

Il6 See Section H below, where these introits will be discussed in terrns of their treatment of plainchant. Example 35: Resurrexi 1 ,antiphon

In the second case, the upper voices are given the sign O, while the tenor is given C. Again, the tenor requires a reduction by one half to align with the other parts; this may be a case where a slashed sign actually does indicate a proportional relationship. in transcription, the tenor also appears to move in a different time signature (2/4) against the other parts (314). For clarity of reading, however, a cornmon signature cm be used (see Example 36).

Example 36: Spiritus Domini 1, antiphon

The third example, Rorafe celi 1, mirrors the situation encountered in Resurrexi 1: only one sign is given (in this case, C),yet the tenor must be reduced by one half in order for the parts to align. Rorafe celi 1 is one of only two introits in the collection that actually begin with the C mensuration; the other is Goudeamus 1 (f 8 1). Other than the unusual tenor of Rorare, the appearance of these two pieces is similar to that of the nine examples in e,discussed above. Both of these settings were the first of several exarnples of the same feast to be copied. This is perhaps only a coincidence, however, since this pattern does not continue with other feasts having multiple settings. Nonetheless, by numbers of examples alone, it would appear that 4 was more popular than C in Tr93, as rn indication of tenipus imperfetum. Finally, three additio~almensural anomalies may likely be dismissed as scribal errors. two of which were actually corrected: 1) In Stafuit ei 1 (K6969v), the only sign given is $, at the begiming of the antiphon; however, tempus perjiectum is implied by the presence of periodic hemzola temporis coloration in al1 three voices, indicating the imperfection of certain notes. This imperfection is made expl icit by the presence of the superscript numeral "2" (see Exarnple 29, discussed above). Therefore, the actual mensuration mua be perfect: either O, or @, and thus, the sign c, which appears only once, is merely a copying error. 2) In Vulrum tuum (ff.86~-87),the antiphon is set in 0,the psalm in 4, and the doxology in Q;however, in the contratenor only, two signs appear at the psalm verse: . Since a reading in 0 does not produce an intelligible result against the other voices, it would seem that the scribe mistakenly copied the first sign, and, rather than scratch it out, simply added the correct sign after it. One possible alternative, that the psalm is meant to be Sung twice (once in each mensuration) would not be liturgically valid unless there were a second verse text present. 3) In Suscepimus deus 1 (ff.88~-89),a similar error appears in the superius only, at the doxology: C. Obviously, since the first sign was, in effect, already ''crossed out" by virtue of the slash, the remaining methods of fixing this error would have ken: erasure (quite rare in Tr93), an expenditure of ink to cover it up, or simply the addition of the correct sign after it. As tempting as it would be to ascribe these instances of dual signage to some sort of elaborate mensural variation, which would be highly unusual in the context of this style, simple error corrections on the part of the scribe would seem to be much more likely. The following table outlines the mensurations of the entire Tr93 introit collection. Most settings begin in the stereotypical O mensuration. In cases where no sign is present in the manuscript, this mensuration is generally irnplied by means of rhythm, rests, coloration, etc. Especially noted are: scribal errors (3); settings where a reduction in the tenor is required (3); settings which employ unusual mensural signs (2); and settings where more than one mensuration is used in a single section (2).

Table 34: The Introits of Tt93 - Mensuration S=superius; T=tenor; Cmontratenor; A=antiphon; V=psalm verse; D= doxology Where no signs are present in the manuscript: [O]=tempus perjiecturn impl ied

# = assumes sarne mensuration as previous section (Note: A blank space indicates that the section is missing) Iot./Folio Introit A V D Notes 1. 12v-13r Dominus Dixit 0 2. 14v- 1 5r Puer natus est 1 [O] 3. 1 5v- 16r (puer natus est II 1 0 1 1 1 1 - -- 4. 1 8v- 19r Ecce advenit 0 O c 5. 20v-2 1 r Resurrexi 1 # T requires reduction by 6.21 v-22r Resurrexi II [O] # 7. 22v-23 r l~esurrexiiII 1 roi I#I 1 1 9.24~-25r Resurrexi V 0 Q) # 10. 25v-26r Resunexi VI [O] 1 1 . 26v-27v Resurrexi VI1 [O] # 1 12.28~ Viri Galilei 1 [O] # i 1 3. 29v-30r Viri Galilei IT [O] # 14. 36v-37r Spiritus Domini 1 $ in tenor oniy; T requires I I l l l l I 15. 37v-38r Spiritus Domini Il 0 # # 16. 38v-39r Spiritus Domini III O 17. 39v Spiritus Domini IV [O] # I 18.40r Spiritus Dornini V [O] # 19.40~ Benedicta sit I # 0 [O] 1 20. 4 1v42r Benedicta sit II O # 2 1 -42~-43rBenedicta sit III [O] # # 22. 45v-46r Nos autem [O] 23.46~-47rCibavit eos 1 # 0 24.47~-48r Cibavit eos Ii # # 25.48v49r Cibavit eos III # # 26. 49v-50r Terribilis est 1 )# # 27.50~ Terribilis est II [O] # 28. 51r Tembilis est III 8 possibly varied A for

-- - 29. 51v-S2r Terribilis est IV # # 30. 53v-54r Mihi autem nimis1 02 # O2 copied in ail parts in y 3 1. 54v-55r Mihi autem nimis II O # d) 32. 55v-56 Mihi autem nimis iIi C C # only instance of C in cd. 33. 57v-5% In medio ecclesie 1 0 # 34. 5th-59r In medio ecclesie II 0 @ c h 35. 59v-60r De ventre matris 1 [O14 # change to C in A 36.60~-61r De ventre matris Ii r01 # 3 7. 6 l v-62r Nunc scio vere # [O] I 38. 63v-64r Etenim sederunt 1 0 # 8 39.64~ Etenim sederunt II r01 A -- 1 40.65 lhtret in conspectum [O] # 41.65~ Confessio et pulchritudo O 42.66r Sapientiam sanctorum (O] # 43. 69r-69v Sbtuit ei I c [O] error: A should be or O 44. 70r Statuit ei II 0 #

46. 71v Os iusti 1 [O] # 1 47. 72r Os iusti II 0 # 48. 7%-76r Loquebar de testimoniis [O] # 49. 76v-77r Dilexisti iustitiarn # [O] .â a 50. 81r Gaudeamus omnes I C # - - 51. 81v-82r Gaudeamus omnes II 0 # 52. 82v-83r Gaudearnus omnes Dl # # 53. 83 v-84r Gaudeamus omnes IV O C 154. 84v-8% l~orateceli 1 1 C 1 # 1 # IT rsrdctio b % 1 155. 85v Rorate celi II 56. 86v-87r Vuhm tuum 0 Q emor: "eFu in y (ct oniy)

57. 88v-89r SuscepimusDeusI 0 # C enor: "$ Cu in g (S ody) 58. 89v-90r Suscepimus Deus II [OlGO # # change to C and back in A 59. 90v-9 1 r Salve sancta parens 1 [O] # # 1 - - 60. 9 1v-92r Salve sancta parens iI 61. 92~ Salve sancta ~arensLLi r01 # # IV.T-vital rhvthmic configurations

The most cornmon neume types found in the manuscript include: longa = 0 ;breve (perfect) = d-; breve ( irnperfect) = d ;sernibreve = J ;rninirn = t;semiminirn = P. Other, more ememe durational symbols (e-g., maxima, fusa) occur only rarely. Typical rhythmic combinations within a single perfection (found particularly frequently in the supenus) include:

Stylistic characteristics in the collection which have a bearing on rhythm include the following:

/. Herniola This technique, as in Apel's hemiolu temporis coloration, described above, occurs at the level of the breve. Hemiola at the level of the semibreve, made apparent in other sources by coloration of that note value, is here rendered only by a facile switch fiom 314 to 618 without coloration, a rhythmic characteristic that is barely noteworthy in the context of the rhythmic styles of the time. As Example 37 shows, this pattern, found most often in O, is common both hmonically (e.g., bar 51, superius against tenor and contratenor) and melodically (e.g., bar 54-55, tenor). Melodic patterns are never particularly regular, and only rarely do al1 voices change the perceived meter simultaneously. Thus, a single time signature, 3/4, is suficient in transcription.

Example 37: Resurrexi VII, psalm (hemiola at the semibreve)

2. Openzngfomtdae (including rests) Most antiphon settings employ a relative balance of long tones in al1 voices and passages of more complex rhythrnic activity. This contrast is almost always set up in the first several bars. Frequently, the polyphony begins with slow note values in al1 voices (occasionally with a tiered effect, i.e., slowest in the tenor). Within two or three bars, at least one of the voices (usually superius) begins to move in substantially faster values. Examples of this typical opening strategy are numerous. Exarnple 38 shows two samples.

Example 38: opening in long tones

Resurrexi N

Viri Galilei II Another type of opening formula involves the presence of two semibreve rests preceding the polyphony in al1 parts. In these cases, the voices invariably enter in homorhythm on the third semibreve, and generally proceed with equal note values fkom this point forward. This technique is found in the eleven settings outlined below (see Table 3-5). Note that the rests cm appear at the beginning of any section of the introit.

Table 3-5: O~eoinerbvtbmic formula = two semibrtve rtsts IntJFolio Jntroit sah! . 4. 18v-19r Ecceadvenit A 15.37~-38r SpiritusDominiU D 16. 38v-39r Spiritus Domini iiI A 19.40~ Benedicta sit 1 V . 25.48~-49r Cibavit eos III A, D 33.57~-58r InmedioecclesieI V I 47.72r Os iusti Il A 49. 76v-77r Dilexisti iustitiam A 3 58. 89v-90r Suscepimus Deus II D (in S) . 59. 90v-9 1r Salve sancta parens 1 A/V/D 60.91~-92r SalvesanctaparensII V/D * Here the rests are omitted in the contratenor and tenor.

The purpose of this convention is not entirely clear. If the rests are not meant to be in strict time, they could merely be an indication that al1 polyphonie parts must wait for a certain interval (presumably as long as it takes for the soloist to intone the plainchant) before beginning. But if this is the case, why would the scribes not merely notate a generic rest with fermata? A more plausible explanation is that the duration of the rests was to be counted strictly, perhaps to help set the tempo; this would merely serve as an underscoring of tempw perfectum, Le., the voices are thus instmcted to begin on a sort of anacrucis to the next perfection. Since a rest cannot be imperfected, two semibreve rests, rather than one breve rest, are necessary in this situation.

3. Other uses of rests Exarnple 39 (transcribed in full in the Appendix) illustrates a feature common to al1 the mensurations: the appearance of semibreve rests in one voice only on the cadence note (e.g., superius: bars 13, 1 8). These rests have no function in advancing the counterpoint, since they only occur when al1 voices are held; here, for example, the effect is merely that the superius holds the final note of the cadences for the value of one semibreve less than the tenor and contratenor. The aesthetic vdue added to the composition by this rhythmic convention is arguably negligible, yet it is used fiequently throughout the collection.

Example 39: Ecce advenit, antiphon

I a 4. Fermatas This symbol, found in a small nurnber of Tr93 introits, may be interpreted in more than one way. It could be indicative of a simple pause, or of a point where improvised embellishments were to take place, as in the cantus coronutus described by Charles Warren. ' '' In either case, the value of a note or rest would be extended ôeyond its normal duration, either at the final cadence, or in a secondary location, where some non-musical action might take place (such as censing). A small number of examples fiom the collection, in pariicular involving rests and long tones with fermatas, merit discussion here.

1. In the psalm setting of ln rnedio ecclesie II (f 58v-59), one of the cadences is intempted in al1 parts by a semibreve rest just before the final note. In the supenus, the scribe has gone so far as to add a fennata to the penultimate note (see Example 40- A). The result is a very halting cadence, to say the least (see Example 40-B).

Example 40: in medio ecclesie II, psalm (halting cadence)

A) f.58~(superius)

B)

"'Charles W. Warren, "Puncms Organi and Cantus Coronatus in the Music of Dufay," Pupers Read at the Dqtiây Quzncen~enaryConference, Brookiyn College, December 6-7, 1974, ed. Allan W. Atlas (New York, 1976), 128-43. Because the rest appears in al1 parts, this construction would seem to be deliberate, and not simply one of the many scribal errors found in the collection. The mere presence of a fermata on a note in the middle of a section, rather than at the end, is unusual, and suggests the possibility that some other action, possibly a liturgical fünction, was to take place during this pau~e."~On the other hand, there is no mbnc or other manuscript evidence of this action; moreover, this situation seems to be unique in the context of the psalm settings in the collection. Most unusual is the fact that the pause occurs on the penultimate note of the cadence, presumably causing the listeners to wait until the non-musical action was complete before they could hear the ultimate resolution. tn the doxology of this sarne setting, pauses also appear in al1 parts; however, they seem to correspond with the natural divisions in the text (e-g.,at szcut eraf in principio), and the cadence is not delayed. 2. In Spiritus Domini 1(f 36~037)~the scribe has copied fennatas above the penultimate breve of the antiphon setting in al1 parts. It is clear that the top voice is meant to signal the end of the pause by being the fint to move on; its breve is imperfected by a following semibreve (without fermata), while the other parts each have their fematas on a perfect breve (see Example 4 1).

Example 4 1: Spiritus Domini 1, antiphon, final cadence

"* Professor Andrew Hughes of the University of Toronto has suggested a precedent for this situation in an anonymous fifieenth-century English piece, where censing may have taken place during the pause. See: Early English Church Music, vol. 8, no.38, bar 47-9. 3. Another unusual use of the fermata is found at the end of the doxology in Gaudearnus III (f 82v-83). Here, following what would normally be the final longa (with its own fermata) in the superius, on the last syllable of the word "Amen", are four additional notes in a rising scale. Above the notes are three distinct fermatas and possibly a fourth, meaning that each note was probably meant to be decorated (see Example 42-A). There is no fûrther text underlay (what can corne after "Amen"?), so the notes may be an extension of the last syllable. This curiosity might be dismissed as a doodle, except for the fact that a similar figure appears in the tenor (four different, but concordant notes), while the contratenor is notated with a final maxima (rather than a longa) with fermata, presumably indicating that it should hold its 1st note until the superius and tenor finish their odd littie tag. The result is harmonically viable, if structurally unusual (see Example 42-B).

Example 42: Gaudearnus DI, doxology, final cadence A- A) f 82v (superius)

f 83 (tenor) Although the fermata notes are notated as al1 breves, their rhythm and duration is not certain. Since they are probably nothing more than a melisma on "Amen", textual accent is not available here as a guide. This is the only introit with such an elaborate ending; it is al1 the more unusual that this figure appears in the doxology (normally a simpler setting than the antiphon), which would presurnably not be the last music of the piece to be Sung. In the context of this repertory, then, this exarnple is unusually omate. Before moving away f?om the topic of unusual fermatas, one last piece, striking in its use of this sign, must be mentioned, even though it is not actually an introit. The piece, copied between the introits Dilexisti iustitiam and Gaudeamus I by a later scribe, is a setting of the Marian antiphon Salve reginu (f 77v-78).It is a veritable treasure trove of fermatas; they occur in large numbers in al1 voices at the beginning of three structural divisions in the text: at Wveregina, Et Iesum benedictum, and O clemens. Opza. The last two of these are set apart fiom the remainder of the text by long rests in al1 parts (see Example 43). Eumplc 43: Salve regina (Marian antiphon), f77v This odd use of fermatas is not simply an idiosyncrasy of one scribe, since this piece and the Gaudeamus III example, just discussed, were copied by different

hands. ' l9 What the two pieces do have in common, other than physical proximity in the manuscript, is the general theme of the veneration of the Virgin. Perhaps the presence of ferrnatas in Gazdeamus, the introit for the Fast of the Assumption of the Virgin, as well as in a setting of one of the four Marian antiphons, is an indication of the particular accorded to settings of Mm-antexts in general. Extra omarnentation may have been expected on such occasions. This case is strengthened by the presence of one additional example in Gaudeamus IV (f.83~084)~where three ferrnatas appear above the notes at the word Murie (see Example 44). As in the Wve regim setting, these notes are set apart by rests, drastically haiting the rhythmic flow of the introit (which is clearly subservient here to the needs of the text).

Example 44: Gaudeamus N (f.83~)fennatas on "Marie"

' l9 The anonyrnous scribe who copied this setting of Salve regina has been labeled by Spilsted as scribe G, a "very small, undistinguished band.?' The surrounding introits were copied by the main scribes, A and B. See Spilsted, 79-8 1, and 143. As a method of underlining a paxticular phrase of tex& this use of fermatas, unusual in the context of the Tr93 introits, nonetheless has many precedents in the works of other fifieenth-century composers. Well-known examples include the motets of Dufay (e.g., O Beate Sebastiane), which oflen decorate proper narnes or final "Amens" by setting them apart as block chords with fennata~.'~~ In general, mensural and rhythmic patterns in the Tr93 introits do not seem overly elaborate for the time. Most of the noteworthy exceptions involve the use of the fermata (possibly as a sign for ernbellishment) as an indication of special reverence, such as in the introits venerating the virgin. In its use of coloration, the collection is quite facile, and, in some cases, poorly constmcted, as in the psalrn and the doxology of Resurrexi V, where some individual notes are colored (and thus imperfected), but not always in a sequence adding up to two perfections. Multiple, inconsistent mensural signs make it dificult to generalize about this aspect of the notation. if indeed they are meant to indicate proportional shifts, one wonders if these pieces fa11 in the category described by Apel when he says: With the rise of the new 'classical' style under Dufay and Ockeghem, the rhythmic complexities of the earlier perïod fell into disuse. Proportio duph occurs now chiefly for passages which could just as well be wrïtten in inieger valor (with the next smaller note values), but which are notated in diminutio in order to bestow upon the composition an aura of learning."'

More likely, however, the simplest explanation of these slashed symbols, as described by Bent (Le., that they are no more than score marken), is applicable to this repenory.

''O John Banks, The as a Formol Type in Northern Ztafy ca. 1500 (New York and London: Garland Publishing, 1993), 36. F. Fauxbourdon

As an early fifieenth-century cornpositional practice, fauxbourdon generally required an upper plainchant voice, a lower line moving beneath it, moving mostiy in sixths and octaves, and another voice (improvised) which would sing a line doubling the plainchant at a fourth below. Composers were often, though not always, explicit about this technique. sometimes going so far as to inscribe the word "fauxbourdon" or some variant at the beginning of pieces or sections that were intended to be perforrned in this manner. '"

1. The Introits of Johannes Brassart Since Brassart is one of the only identified romposers of this genre for whom we have several examples. a brief examination of his style, particularly his use of fauxbourdon. might shed some light on issues of authorship for the remainder of the collection in Tr93. Mixter attributes eight introits to Brassart (ïncluding two which are incorrectly attributed to Sarto in Ao), six of which have concordances in Tr93 (see Table 1-2, above, and Table 3-6, below).

Table 3-6: Tbe Introits of Jobanaes Brassafi

1 Introit, as in Ao 1 Coneordiicc in Ti93 1 Remarks 1 1 Spiritus Domini 1 1 Ao: incorrect attrib."Sarto" 1

Cibavit eos C ibavit eos JII Ao: "etc. ut supra" for doxology

'" For currently standardized definitions of early fi fieenth-centuryfourbourdon, see: Ernest Trumble, Faurbourdon: An Historical Survey (Brooklyn: LM.M., 1959); and Ann B. Scott, "The Beginnings of Fauxbourdon: A New interpretation," Journul of the American Musicological Society 24 ( 197 1): 345-63. 1 Gaudeamus ormes 1 Gaudeamus iI 1 Ao: incorrect attri b."Sarto" 1 De ventre matris Ao: "ut supra" for doxology 1 Sapientiarn sanctorum Sapientiarn Ao: "ut supra" for doxology Tr93: doxology missing Nos autem Nos autem Tr93: psalm & doxology missing Dilexisti iustitiarn Dilexisti

Mixter States that al1 of these pieces use fauxbourdon for both their and doxologies. He lays out the following scheme for these eight pieces as they appear in Ao, showing a consistent approach to both plainsong/polyphonk structure and style treatment :lZ3 Section Treatment A a Intonation Plainsong b Antiphon proper Contrapuntal [i-e., rhythrnically independent] B c Verse, first part Plainsong d Verse, second part Fauxbourdon B' c Gloria Patri, first phrase Plainsong e Gloria Patri, second & third phrases Fauxbourdon

In three cases. however, the Ao settings contain no notated doxology, but merely the mbric "ut supra", presumably refemng the singer to a previous setting of the doxology in the sarne mode.'" Ln the absence of other evidence, we must deduce, in these cases, that the doxologies are also to be performed as fauxbourdon. In Tr93, two of Brassart's introïts are missing doxologies, while one (Nos autem) is also missing its

'" Mxter, x

12' 12' Ibzd., xi. psalm verse. Unfortunately, the helpful rernark "ut supra" does not appear anywhere in the Tr93 collection. Assuming Mixtef s attributions are correct, and thus, that the structure and style generalizations outlined above are possible pointers to the works of Brassart, we can now survey the anonymous introits in Tr93 for this pattern, i-e., introits containing fauxbourdon in both verse and doxology (but not antiphon). Elimînating the works already known to be by Bras- only five other settings fa11 into thîs category: Reswrexi 1, Resurrexi V,Cibavit eus 1, Terribilis 1, and Rorate 1. Of these, two (Resurrexi 1 and Rorate 1) set the plainchant in the tenor (see Section H, below). a practice not attributed to Brassart, leaving us with only three settings. It is possible, of course, that some introits with psalrn verses in fainbourdon, but which are missing their doxologies, might fa11 in thîs category (much like the &pientaam setting by Brassart, which includes the "ut supra" in Ao. ) Adding these possibilities ftom Tr93 eives us only two additional settings: Resurrexi IV, Statuit ei ï, for a total of five. C and Of course,fauxbourdon use in itself is no sure-fire îndicator of a particular composef s style; however, if Brassart was indeed consistent in his use of fauxbourdon, only these five anonymous pieces from Tr93 could possîbly be his work. Beyond this easily observable characteristic, other possible stylistic indicators of the music of Brassart, if present, are not easy to quanti@ in the faüly simple, functional polyphony of an întroît. Thus, no hirther suggestions on authorship can be posited.12'

"' The only remaining introit attributable to a composer via a concordance is Salve sancta ILI, by Binchois. htriguingly, it does not use fauxbourdon in any of its three sections; thus, it presents no confusion with the established style of Brassart. II. Twical usane in Tr93 The general structure of a polyphonie introit, with its upper voice elaborating on plainchant, lends itself well to the fautbourdon style. My identification of the fauxbourdon settings in the introit collection is predicated on the initial assumption that the number of voices for this genre is nonnally three. Therefore, when only two voices are present, some stylistic variation is clearly evident and must be accounted for: either the section 1s a duet, or falabourdon is implied. Although a written indication of the technique is not consistently present, the abbreviation "faburt" does appear in two places in the introit collection (Spinlus Domzni IV, E39v, and Guudeamus 1, f 8 1, both of which are settings for only two notated voices). Other variations of the word occur periodically in the remainder of TM. the most unabbreviated king "faburdon", found at the end of the first Kyne (E93), immediately following the introit cycle. Why would only two settings in the collection actually have the nibric included? This essentially questions the consistency of the scribe; however, if, as has been suggested, the copyist was working fkom several different exemplars in assembling the collection, this could simply be a case of inconsistent use of the label among the various original sources. If the pieces were copied accurately, we can assume at least two things: 1) that the use of fauxbourdon was so obviously called for that al1 but two of the original sources did not bother to use the rubric (indicating that use of the technique was cornmonplace), and 2) that the Tr93 scribe may not have been sufficiently musically literate to realize the inconsistency of copying 'faburt' from two sources while not accounting for its absence in the others (i.e., why not just omit ai! such references?) In the majority of the Tr93 settings, realization of the fauxbourdon presents no hannonic difficulties. The following examples show typicai instances of the use of this technique in an antiphon, a verse, and a doxology. respectively: Example 45: Viri Galilei 1 antiphon

Te-

1 . Viri galilei 1 (see Example 45) demonstrates a characteristic lack of independent movement in the two notaterl parts (this piece is transcribed in full in the Appendix). Motion is frequently parallel and rhythm aimost uniformly homogeneous, very much contrasting with the usual texture of a non-fauxbourdon antiphon setting. Occasionally, the tenor will use some larger note values at cadence points (such as the longa at bar 5-6). The addition of the improvised voice (realized on the smdl clef in the example) completes the characteristic paralleld/3 harmony. Stereotypicd cadential patterns occur with great fkequency, such as those at bars 405,708, and 9-10. In these cases, the improvised voice, always at parallel fourths below the superius, allows the possibility of double leading-tone cadences. Example 46: Spiritus Domini V, psalm

2. Psalm verses or doxologies set in fatabourdon such as in Spiritus Domini V (See Example 46) exhibit the same texturd homogeneity as do the antiphons. The main difference lies in the reciting-tone nature of the superius (and thus also of the improvised voice based on it), meaning that the hannonies are more static and the cadences not as frequent. The resulting passages of repeated notes in the superius (and improvised voice), such as at bar 39 (sancto tuo), are sometimes given very minor variation by a moving note in the tenor, altering the interval between it and the superius fiom an octave to a sixth. Example 47: Spiritus Domini U, Doxology

b nm. A . m

3. In general, however, the latter half of doxologies set in fauxbourdon are of greater musical interest than corresponding passages in psalm verses. One can speculate that the reason for this is the length of the complete doxology text (longer than that of the typical psalm verse), allowing more potential for musical variety. It would not be unusual, for instance, to find an increase in the activity level of the music as it progresses, such as the relatively elaborate melisma on the final "Amen" of the doxology of Spiritus Domini II (see Example 47). III. Atv~icalusane/anomalies Tr93 also contains several atypical settings. In some cases, they may simply be settings for two voices (i.e., not fauxbourdon), since the realization of a third voice is problematic. The following examples, al1 psalms and doxologies, do not seem to fit the typical mould of fifteenth-centuryfuurbourdon. For the first three of these anomalous pieces. we rnay suggest some unconventional, or modified, application of fauxbourdon technique, in which fauxbourdon, as a term implying paralle1 extemporïzation, may be inappropriate.

1. Resurrexi 1, Psalm and Doxology: In this highly unusual case, the lower notated voice, generally a fourth apart fiom the superius, is actually labelled contratenor (i.e., not tenor). Thug it is unlikely that these sections are meant to be duets. It is possible that a clef error has occurred here (Le., the lower voice should be at a sixth below), but the addition of a labelling error in the paris seems too coincidental. Although the addition of an improvised voice a sixth below the superius is an unprecedented practice, as far as I can tell, such an improvised tenor does create a fauxbourdon-like structure (see Example 48).

Example 48: Resurrexi 1, psalm (with speculative added voice)

Theoretical voice 2. Resurrexi II, Psalm: The same situation appears to exist with this setting The superius and contratenor (Le., not tenor) are notated, although they do not follow smctly in any set intervallic relationship. While a theoretical third voice (singing at a sixth below the top part) would not be generally discordant, neither would it always create typical faubourdon harmony. More so than the previous example, this psalm verse could well stand alone as a two-voice structure.

3. De ventre matris 1, psalm: This exarnple stands out as a two-voice setting which exhibits the character of three-voice fauxbourdon. The tenor seems to altemate in fourths and sixths below the superius, providing one or other of the required intervals for the harmony at every note (but never both, of course). This rather disjunct tenor seems to be an amalgarn of the two lower lines in a standard fauxbourdon seîîing, allowing for the approximation of thefaubourdon style in two voices only. Any improvised voice would have to move in a similar alternating pattern to complete the fauxbourdon, requiring more improvisational ski11 than in previous settings discussed (see Example 49). Example 49: De ventre matris 1, psalm (two voices only) f.60

In the previous two examples, it is likely that the setting was written for three voices but that the contratenor, for some reason, was simply not copied. This is particularly evident in Exarnple 49, since the bare fourths cannot stand alone, and there is no octave at the cadence. It is perhaps no coincidence that the next setting following De ventre matns 1 in the manuscript is missing both tenor and contratenor parts for the psalm verse. This section of the manuscript rnay be a victim of generally sloppy copying, or the original exernplars may have been incomplete. Although error is the more likely explanation, an alternate solution may be considered. These examples may show evidence of a possibly more subtle compositional technique. One mi&, for example, envisage a slightly different improvised part, namely an altemation between 6/3 and 815. This would potentially explain such anomalies as Resurrexi (1, and provide an altemate explanation for De ventre mafris 1, discussed above. Ln fact, a precedent for such pseudo-fauxbourdon is found in the psalm verse "Beati immaculati" in Etenim sederunt I (f.63v-64), which, althougb it is clearly written for three voices, nevertheless resembles improvised fauxbourdon in sonority (see Example 50). Here, the contratenor and tenor cross ranges kequently and often altemate the intervals necessary to create the fauxbourdon sound (nonetheless, because there is no improvised voice, 1 do not label this setting as fauxbourdon proper).

Example 50: Etenim sederunt 1, psalm opening E63v -3 voices The next two examples of two-voice settings both present problems of dissonance for a potential improvising voice: 4. Ecce advenir, doxology: an improvised voice singing a fourth below the superius here would frequently fall below the range of the tenor, creating a dissonance, such as a second, in the process (see Example 7, discussed in Section B, above)

5. Benedzcta sit m,doxology: An improvised voice here would cause a series of repeated dissonances against the tenor, particularly evident in the reciting-tone passages (see Example 5 1). Again, it is possible here that the improvised voice was meant to drop from a fourth to a sixth below the superius for reciting tones only.

Eurnple 51: Benedicta sit III doxology

I Si - cut *-rat in prh-cipfo ...

In general, then, many of the atypicalfauxbourdon situations in the collection may simply be a result of incornpetence, on the part of either the composer or the copyist, or both. It is also possible that some sections, particularly psalms and doxologies, were conceived as duets. For some of the possible errors, speculative solutions involving altemate methods of improvisation can be considered, but such solutions require some creative thinking on the part of the perforrner. As it stands, the use offauxbourdon in the collection is extremely inconsistent. 127

Table 3-6 outlines al1 the settings in the collection which have only two notated voices. In rnost cases, standardfauboron style is applicable, although exceptions have been noted. In total, settings in this style include: sixteen antiphons (A), thirty psalrn verses (V), one of which cannot be realized in f~wrbourdon~and seventeen doxologies (D), three of which do not conform to standard patterns. Also included are the locations of the two "faburt" rubrics and some incidental observations.

Table 3-6: Settings with onlv two aotatcd voices (mostlv fauxbourdon) Sectioa Notcs Ecce advenit D Fauxbourdon cannot be realized Resurrexi I V-D 1 Second notated voice labelled Ct Resurrexi LI V 1 Second notated voice labelled Ct Resurrexi III Resurrexi IV Resurrexi V Viri Galilei I Spiritus Domini iI Spiritus Domini N "faburt sequittu aliud spiritus domini" Spiritus Domini V

Benedicta sit Xi 1 ~oinbourdoncannot be realized in D Cibavit eos 1 Cibavit eos III Tembilis 1 Tembilis II Mihi autem II De ventre 1 1 T alternates 4ths & 6th below I superius; Ct omitted? De ventre iI V Ct and tenor omitted Nunc scio vere

Intret in conspectum A,V Confessio A7V error in T: C-clef shouid be F-clef ------Sapientiam V Statuit ei I V Statuit ei II OS iusti il Dilexisti iustitiarn 1 V7D Gaudeamus I 1 A,V -- Gaudeamus il Gaudeamus IV 1 A7V 1 TWO psalm verse texts are set I Rorate celi 1 1 V,D 1 Second notated voice labelled Ct 1 Suscepimus I A,VD SaIve sancta 1 V7D Salve sancta III G. Text setting and cbaracteristics of the underlay

1. General information Fifieenth-century theory seems to be relatively bereft of specific information on contemporary practices of text underlay, when compared, for example to the plethora of sources availabie afler approximately 1533 which codie such pract~ces."~The only extant rules prior to 1500 are found on a single page of manuscript nom c.1440 (coincidentally of northem Italian origin) attributed to the theorist Antonius de Leno."' Of the seven main points elucidated in abbreviated Italian on this fiagmentary document, two seem to be directed specifically at composers or scribes, admonishing them to : 1 ) "be careful to specify where the syllable is to be sung" and 2) "never write a syllable on any other note of a ligature than the first"."' The rernaining rules are directed at singers, probably novices or young students, judging from the tone and vemacular language of the writing. Iz9 Unforiunately, the rules for composers are not particularly usefûl in analyzing the patterns of the Tr93 scribe, except perhaps the second, which might help identiQ a sioppy copying job if the underlay of a syllable appears to be copied below some secondary note of a ligature. The text underlay in Tr93 has not ken particularly carefully achieved. Although there are many introits in which tea appears to have been placed deliberately under certain groups of notes, this practice is not at al1 consistent, nor do

'" Gary Towne, "'A Systematic Formulation of Sixteenth-Century Text Underlay Ruies (Part 1 of II)," MuiFica Disciplina 44 (1990), 256-7 and n. 3 & 4.

"' Venice. Biblzuteca Màrciana. Lat. 336. coll. 1581,f. 1 (added folio). See: Don Hamin, "In Pursuit of Ongins: The Earliest Writing on Text Underlay (c. 1440)," Acta .4~usicologica50 ( 1 W8), 2 1 7-240. the examples with such apparently careful underlay always solve the inherent difficulties. In the antiphon, the superius is always the most carefully set of the three parts, with a virtually complete tea. The psalm is the next most carefûlly set section, followed by the doxology. OAen, the psalm and doxology texts do not appear in complete form. Frequently absent is any text beyond the fim phrase. If a plainsong opening to the psalm or doxology is present in any voice, the remaining voices

CIeenerally have no more than a few words of the following phrase, indicating the beginning of the polyphony. Rarely, the entire doxology text is set. When this happens, it occurs most often in the superius only. As a general rule, the tenor and contratenor tend to receive only occasional snippets of text beyond the initial incipit, usuaily at formal divisions in the piece (i.e., beginning of the psalm verse or doxology). This practice may have been useful for the copyist, allowing a clear reference point in aligning each part. As a guide for singers of the tenor or contratenor parts, it would be similarly useful; however, it cleariy implies that if performers were to sing nom this copy, they must have known the remainder of the text by heart, or have been able to transfer the moresr-less complete text from the superius to their own parts, presumably applying their own rules of underlay as they went. in the case of the doxology, a common text, this would not pose a problem; however, in the case of the antiphon, and, to some extent, the psalm verse, one can imagine that some ski11 would be required, perhaps more than one might expect from moderately-skilled singers.

II. Tv~icalunderlav in the collection Example 52 (facsimile) shows a typical arrangement of underlay. The introit, Terribilis est IV, is introduced by the plainchant incipit notated at the head of the superius (note the lack of initial). Example 52: Terribilis est IV (f.5 1 v-52) The remainder of the antiphon text appears in the superius with gaps, presumably indicating the precise place in the music where each word grouping begins: locus isie hic domur dei est et porta ceii et vocabitur aula dei

It is likely no coïncidence that each word group, with the exception of the single est which seems to mark the final note of a cadence, can be seen to coincide with the beginning of a new musical phrase following a rest. A slight exception is the grouping beginning et porta celi (note the spurious abbreviation syrnbol above et), which appears slightly to the right of the rest. This is only a partial guide for underlay, however, since it leaves the performer to choose where to sing each syllable following the first of any group. The psalm verse, DiIigit donrinus, also receives a plainchant incipit in the superius, although the text is set under the beginning of the polyphony (an error- strictly speaking, these words should fa11 under the actual plainchant). The remainder of the psalm text is simply absent. The doxology plainchant intonation is not present, but the begi~ingof the polyphony is marked by the only remaining tea in the superius: sicui erat. The tenor and contratenor receive very little text throughout. The tenor begins with a text incipit of the first four words, but there is no attempt made to underlay them at all. At the beginning of the psalm, we see a generic abbreviation for "verse", with no specific text. The doxology is marked in the sarne manner as it is in the superius: sicul erat where the polyphony begins. Meanwhile, the contratenor receives nothing in the way of text other than a somewhat ambiguous word (huzus?) which seems to bear no relation to the actual text of the introit and is likely a copying error. Although this contratenor does contain parts for both the psalm and doxology (delineated by the long lines), there is no text incipit in the manner of that in the tenor. The overall text arrangement in this example, complete with periodic mistakes, is quite typical for the collection. The majority of introits, then, display the following underlay characteristics: 1. The superius is fully texted, with underlay assigning groups of words to the first note following a rest, but without complete and specific word-to-note underlay. 2. The tenor has only a text incipit for the antiphon (not underlaid). and possibly a word or two at the beginning of the psalm verse andor the doxology. 3. The contratenor is completely textless, or has at most a brief antiphon incipit (not underlaid), and only rarely any other text.

HI. Errors and Anomalies Twenty-two introits exhibit some sort of exception to the characteristics estabiished above. Table 3-7 lists any instances of unusual text or text treatment in the collection, ranging from simple errors to true anomalies. Unless othenvise specified, "full text" implies everything following the usual chant intonation (e-g., in a doxology, everything from sicut erut to the end.)

Table 3-7: Uniisual Instances of Text Treatmenf inc.=text incipit S=superius T=tenor Ct=contratenor A=antiphon V=psalm verse Moxology

1 f.21 1 Resurrexi 1 1 Ct: dubious inc. huius? 1 f.28~ Vin galilei 1 T: A inc. incorrectly placed r f37v Spiritus II Ct: A inc. inconectly placed; T: full D text f.39 Spiritus III Ct: FULL ANTIPHON TEXT f.48 Cibavit eos il Ct: almost fiill D text / Tembilis 1 1 S and T: two V te-: Qum di/ecro and Dominus

1 E53 v-54 1 Mihi autan 1 1 T: full V and D text 1 f 54~-55 1 Mihi autan II 1 T: full D text 1 f56 1 Mihi autem III 1 Ct: partial A text; V and D inc. 1 f.58 1 In medio 1 1 T: full V text; Ct: almost full V text 1 f.71~ 1 OS iusti I 1 Ct: lengthy A in=. (not strictly underlaid) 1 Os iusti Ii 1 T: full V text f 75v-76 1 Loquebar 1 4 voices! Full text in top 2 parts and in T 1 f.76~-77 1 Dilexisti 1 T: full A text; partial text in V and D 1 f.81 1 Gaudeamus 1 1 T: full V text 1 f.82 1 Gaudeamus Il 1 T: error-V and D texts copied together 1 f.83~ 1 Gaudearnus N 1 S: two V te*: Emc~mitand ExaI~ata 1 f.85 1 Rorate 1 1 Ct: full V tea; alrnost full D text ( f.85~ 1 Rorate II 1 T: lengthy A inc. (not strictly underlaid) 1 Ct: full D text I Salve I 1 T: v text 1 T: full v tea , 1 T: full V and D texts

Three of these examples deserve special mention due to their highly unusual character in the context of the collection:

1. In Spiritus Domini ïII (f39), the contratenor inexplicably contains hiIl texting for the antiphon, complete with underlay (see Exampie 54- this piece is also transcribed in fidl in the Appendix). This is not merely a case of a long, yet imprecise, incipit; groupings of words appear following obvious rests, as they do in the typical superius, and are set with the same level of care. Meanwhile, the tenor has a mere one word. This example stands out as the only such contratenor in the entire collection. 1 cm find no reason why this is so, since this introit setting does not othenvise distinguish itself in matters of style or paleography.

Example 54: Spiritus Domini UI, contratenor (f 39)

2. In Mihi aulem 1 (E53v-54), a copying error has made underlay for the SU~~~USand tenor particularly problematic. The tenor contains the full psalm and doxology texts, including the plainchant intonations for each (see Example 33, discussed in Section E, above.) In the psalm, the plainchant includes the words Domine proba«i me; however, these words appear to be set again, under the polyphony in the superius, which should normally begin at the words tu cognovistz sessionem meam. Because of the reciting-tone nature of the psalm and the large number of words squeezed under the notes in the superius, it is difficult to guess at the precise underlay intended. I presume? however, that the fint three words of the psalm text were simply copied in error in this part.

3. One introït in the collection is actually w-ritten for four voices' Loquebar de testimoniis (f 75v-76). The top two voices, both overlapping the normal range of the superius (should one voice be labeled a "contra-superius"?), are underlaid fairly precisely, mostly by individual word rather than by group of words (See Exarnple 55- A). The contratenor contains only a text incipit of five words. The tenor, on the other hand. receives the complete text (along with a rare decorated initial); however, what appears to be the start of careful underlay in this part quickly fades out, unless one makes the questionable assumption that the majority of the tenor part is a long melisma on the last syllable. Exarnple 55-B shows the beginning of this piece in modem notation. Clearly, both upper voices are equally active and rhythmically independent. Imitative passages are fkequent in the top parts, much more so than in a standard three-voice texture. The contratenor displays its usual wide range and overt leaps, but it is nevex-theless the lowest sounding voice practically throughout (another characteristic not often found in three-part textures)'30. In the end, because these introïts are al1 based on plainchant models, one could look to the original chants for a guide to the placement of words against notes in the polyphony. This matter is discussed in the following section dealing with the treatment of plainchant in the collection.

130 There is an uncorrected clef error in the contratenor- C should be on the fourth line. Example 554: Loquebar de testimoniis, f.75~-76(four voices) Example 55-B: Loquebar de testimoniis, beginning (4 voices)

I 111 - -., I. *T LI y L .m. I n~ II I II III 111~~1~

I hi- k H. Plainchant and its Treatment in the Collection

In assessing the use of plainchant in the polyphonie introïts of Tr93, it is necessary to establish, if possible, what plainchant sources would have been available to the scribe. This may help determine, for example, whether the plainchant intonations used in the collection represent local chant use, or whether they were merely copied straight from another source, one not native to Trent. Perhaps more illuminating, from a stylistic perspective, will be an exploration of the methods by which the plainchant, regardless of its original source, is incorporated into the structure of the introïts.

1. Relevant sources of blainchant Unfortunately, there are very few extant sources of Tridentine plainchant available for comparison. In her exhaustive archival study, Suparmi Elizabeth Saunden has identified only twelve plainchant manuscripts that were copied in and for Trent; however, these date from the fifteenth to the seventeenth cent~ries.'~'Of these, only three contain chants for the proper of the Mass: the , Lsbn Comli A and B, and a combined graduavantiphonal, now located in Nuremberg, which Saunden refers to as the "plainsong manuscript of ~ppiano"'~'because of its original location, the St. Vigilius church in Predonico, near Appiano, in the diocese of ~rent.13' The

IWO graduals, well-preserved and reasonably cornplete, nonetheless postdate Tr93 by

13' Saunders, "The Dating of the Trent Codices," 1 18-9 and 207.

l 3L Ibid., 1 42. The manuscript is: Nuremberg, Germonisches Nationalmureum. A.6 184575.

'" lbid. 1 1 8. For a description of this manuscript, see also: W.Irtentauf, "Ein Messbuch aus der Vigiliuskirche Perdonig," Der Schlern 54 (1980), 296-7. at least sixty yearsi3",so direct cornparisons of their chants with those of the Tr93 introits may not produce results relevant to this study. The Nuremberg gradual/antiphonal does date from the fifieenth century, but it contains only three Mass propers: Terribilis est (Dedication of a Church), Stutuit ei (Confesser Bishop, but rnarked specifically here as "De sancto Vigilion), and Salve sancta parens (BVM). Since Tr93 also contains introits using these texts, a direct cornparison is possible between the notes of the Nuremberg source and the plainchant intonations found in the Tr93 settings. As an illustration, Example 56 shows the intonations for the antiphon and psalm verse of Statuif ei, as found in: a) the Nuremberg rnanus~ript,~~~b) the Roman Graduai, and c) Tr93:

Example 56: Statuit ei (3 Sources)

IY Saunders points out that they were copied during the reign of the Bishop Bemardo Clesio ( 15 14-39). See: Saunders, "The Dating of the Trent Codices," 1 19. (Ex. 56 contd.) B) Roman gradua1

k-lu- ia die- 16- ü Pz.Yemtnta Dami-ir Ik-

C)Tr93, f. 70v (Statuifei [II, superius) Immediately evident is the fact that the opening intonation of the antiphon in Tr93 matches exactly the melodic contour of the Nuremberg ms. chant: a rising fifth (Id-a'), followed by a rising third (to 'c')136;whereas the Roman gradual rnoves up a fi&, then up a half step (to 'b'-flat). The psalm intonations, with the exception of the different text in the Roman gradual, are identical in al1 sources. Clearly, then, Tr93 follows the plainchant of the Trent source more closely than that of the Roman gradual in this

Nonetheless, Trent may weii have followed the Roman use at the time of the copying of Tr93. Evidence is provided in the will of a contemporary musician of Trent, Johannes Lupi (Wolf)"', who mentions among his bequests three breviaries, corresponding to the uses of Salzburg Passau, and the Roman curia. The first two, he says, should be sold, while the should be kept in Trent cathedral, chained in place, so that it would not be removed, but could be used by other clerics who did not have their own Saunders reasonably concludes fiom this evidence that "Trent Cathedra1 may have followed the Use of the Roman C~ria."'~~

'36 Note the clef enor in Tr93: the superius clef is one line too high. The first chant note should be Id', the tint polyphonie entry, 'a'.

'" The will was reported Ion in Spilsted, "Towards the Genesis of the Trent Codices: New Directions and New Findings," Studies in Music at the University of Western Ontario 1 ( 1976): 55-66; however, the document does exist in the Trent chapter archives, labeled Trenfo.Archivio Capitolare, Capsa 45, ci. 42, and is full y tnuixribed in Wright, 333-7. Wright presents an ememely welldocumented biography of Lupi (Ibid., 95-1 13) and suggests, quite convincingly, that the will probably dates tiom 1455 (Ibid., 106). This would make it almost exactly contemporary with Tr93.

13' See Saunders, "The Dating of the Trent Codices," 148 and n. 86, and Wright, 10 1, 337. The relevant text fiom the will is transcribed by Wright as: "Item lego et ordino brevianun meum secundm rubricam curie Romane ut cum catena ligetur in choro sancti Vigilii ad locum aptum propter forenses et clericorum aliorum qui non habent proprios libns et quod nunquam amovetur."

lJ9 Saunders, "The Dating of the Trent Codices," 148. The variants, just discussed, in the chants of Stufuit ei, although fairly insignificant in themselves, seem slightly at odds with this conclusion; however, there is far too little evidence available to rnake a more detailed cornparison of the chants in Tr93 with any Tridentine plainchant source.

II. Placement of the cantusfinnus in the collection Plainchant is incorporateci into the structure of the Tr93 introits in two main ways: as the opening intonation of each section (as above), and as the basis for the upper part, which presents the chant in an elaborated form. In addition, there are four introits in this collection which state the appropnate chant not in the superius, but rather in the tenor, in the manner of a motet. These introits, highly unusual in the context of this collection, will be examined separately.

I. Intonations As mentioned fkequently above, the Tr93 introits almost always open each of their formal divisions with a plainchant intonation. The notational convention in the manuscript is to copy the chant in black notes, reserving white notation for the p~lyphony.'"~There is nothing particularly unusual about the practice of singing chant intonations for polyphonic introits, given the plainchant basis of the superius in each setting. Example 57, Cibavit eus III, is a good illustration of the typical arrangement:

'"O Two exceptions are the settings of Nos outem, f45v-46,and Sapienciam sanctorum. f.66, where the plainchant is copied in void notes as well-these are both later insertions by scribe B. See: Spilsted, 135-4 1. Example 57: Cibavit eos HI (f.48~-49),superius

The first words of each section, antiphon (Cibavit eos), psalm verse (Exultate deo adiuiorum nostrum) and doxology (Gloria patri), are copied in black notes in the superius. These incipits are always set off from the polyphony by long lines through the slaves. Variations found in other introits include the copying of one or more of the intonations in a voice other than the superius (usually the tenor), and the omission of one, two, or (rarely) al1 three incipits, when only the polyphony is actually notated. While most settings have the same anangement as the above example, the placement of plainchant intonations in particular voices is not consistent in the collection. It is dificult to be certain about the implications here for performance practice. If the scribe has been uniformly accurate in the copying prwess (not at al1 a certainty), then some settings appear to cal1 for different voices to intone different sections (e-g., superius intones antiphon, tenor intones psalm, superius intones doxology). When no intonations are present, it must be assumed that the made the assignation at the tirne of performance. The notation of the plainchant incipit sometimes gives the appearance of some rhythmic differentiation between the notes. In general, the chant notes are indicated by symbols resembling breves. As is cornrnon in , where there is recitation on a single pitch only. a single symbol is used. in fact, this symbol is ofien a Longa, but without rhythmic implications. A pause at the end of a textual phrase in the original chant may similarly be indicated by a longa-like graphic symbol. There are' however, some extremely conspicuous exceptions to this way of writing intonations. Occasionally, the plainchant appears to employ mensural rhythm in its notation (see Exarnple 58-A), including longas, breves, semibreves, dots, rests, and even (in one case) what looks like an under-third cadence melodic decoration (see Example 58-B, second stave).

Example 58: Rhythmic chant incipits (?) A) Cibavit eos 1, (f.46~)- detail of doxology incipit with semibreves & rests (Ex. 58, contd.) B) Bened icta sit II (f.4 1 v) - psalm incipit in mensural rhythm (second stave)

Examples like this are either copying errors (Le., they are actually polyphony, but black notation was used instead of voici), or indications of stylized rhythrnic chant singing. In the case of the introits excerpted in Example 58, an error seems unlikely, since the polyphony clearly begins in al1 voices afier these plainchant intonations.

2. Discant parclphruse in the top voice There is one stylistic nom common to al1 but four of the sixty-one settings in the collection: the appropriate plainchant is paraphrased or elaborated upon in the top voice.'." The resulting structure is that of a disant Mass, as defined in standard musical reference works, e-g.,

'." This technique is discussed in David Fallows, "Introit Antiphon Paraphrase in the Trent Codices: Laurence Feininger's Confronto," Journal of the Piuinîong and Medievol lMusic Socieiy 7 (1984), 47-77. "a Mass or Mass section of the 14th or 15th century in which the cantus fimus, usually paraphrased, is presented in the uppennost voice or discant rather than in the tenor".'"

The details of the paraphrase technique Vary wi-th each example; however, the original chant line is visually, if not always aurally, discemible among the numerous melodic extensions. filled-in intervals and mensural rhythms of the superius. In the following example. the plainchant first phrase of Tem-bilisest (Nuremberg rnanu~cript~~~)is given (see Example 59-A): followed by the corresponding passage in the superius of Terribilis I from Tr93 (see Example 59-B). The plainchant notes are indicated by a small X in the superius. Occasionally, repeated pitches are not reflected in the polyphony. In general, the chant notes are confined to longer durational values (semibreve, breve, and longa- rarely minim). Textual phrases in the chant line tend to be set apart by rests in the polyphony, although the underlay in Tr93 does not always reflect this accurately (see Section G above).

Example 59: Chant paraphrase in superius

The New Harvard Dictionary ofMusic, 1986 ed., S. v. "Discant Mass." Saunden, "The Dating of the Trent Codices," 326. (Ex. 59, contd.) B) Tr93, f 49v (Tembilis 1, superius)

10 - cu3 . a i de hic

3. Plainchant in the tenor Perhaps the most intriguing stylistic variation in the Tr93 introit cycle involves the location and nature of the plainchant voice itself In four specific examples, the plainchant of the antiphon is incorporated into the polyphonie structure in a unique manner. Missing fiom these settings is any form of paraphrase. The plainchant appears, relatively unadorned, in the tenor. The four examples comprise: two settings of the Easter Sunday introit, Resurrexi, one of the Pentecost introit, Spiritus Domini, and one of the introit for the founh Sunday of Advent, Rorate celi. The unusual tenors are pictured in Example 60. Transcriptions for the openings of three of these pieces are given in Example 61. Example 60: Four tenon containing plainchant

1)-f P ?~ucdavl.fwvaC - Example 61: introïts with plainchant in tenor

Resurrexi 1

Resurrexi II

Spiritus domini 1 Resurrexi 1: Because of the unique nature of the tenor in this antiphon, the resulting polyphonie structure is also unique. Since the tenor moves constantly until the final cadences, al1 subsidiary cadences are brief and overlapping. The two upper voices, although they are quite independent of one other, do not use any values larger than semibreves, giving the entire antiphon a feeling of relentless motion. The notation of the tenor appears to be in breves; however, as discussed in Section E above, a reduction by one half is required in order for this voice to align with the other parts.

Resurrexi II: Despite the conspicuous comrnonality of the unusual tenor line in this and the previous example, they nevertheless contain slightly different variations in the use of the plainchant. Whereas the tenor in Resurrexi 1 is notated completely in non- rhythmic breve-like symbois, the tenor of Resurrexi II is set in both breves and semibreves. with their relative rhythrnic values intact. This minor rhythmic variety tends to strengthen the rhythrnic connections between al1 three voices. in addition, this example does not require a reduction of the note values in the tenor. As a result, the tenor appears here in longer note values against a faster moving top voice and contratenor. Unlike the situation in Resurrexi 1, some secondary cadences, with a feeling of full stop, are another result of this rhythmic variety. The upper voices are slightly less independent than they are in Resurrexi 1, with several passages of parallel motion. usually at the sixth or third. One other difference here is a slightly increased level of rhythmic activity in the contratenor. (See the Appendix for a full transcription of this piece). Spiritus Domini 1: The principal difference in plainchant treatment in this example is the clear indication of an intonation of the first two words, notated in the tenor. As in Resurrexi 1, the "breve" in the tenor mua be reduced to half its value to align with the other parts. Here though, the manuscript actually presents the sign B, a rare instance of proportion, in the tenor part to make the relationship immediately clear to the prospective singer. This piece is similar to Reswexi 1 in tems of terraced degrees of activity among the parts (slowest in tenor, quicker in contratenor, quickest in the top voice), as well as a feeling of relentless motion with no clear full-stop cadences.

Rorate Celi 1: This example mirrors bth Resurrexi 1 and Spiritus Domini 1 in tems of a) character of the tenor (non-rhythmic breves), b) proportional relationship (tenor must be reduced by one half (see Example 62)-although there is no proportional label included in the manuscript), and c) degree of activity arnong the parts (terraced). Unlike Resurrexz 1, but in a similar fashion to Spiritus Domini 1, a plainchant intonation of the first word 1s present. The contratenor clef is incorrect throughout, and no attempt has been made to make the necessary practical changes in the manuscript.

Example 62: Rorate celi 1, antiphon These four introit settings are remarkably conspicuous in the context of the Tr93 repertory. Their deviation from the more standard discant-paraphrase introit construction demonstrates a much simpler method of incorporating the plainchant into a polyphonie structure. Why, though, in the entire repertory, are there only four examples? Some insight can be gained by examining the placement of these introits in the manuscript. The unusual settings appear at points of major division in the liîurgical year. Two of the four examples are for Easter, the most important feast of the year. The third is for Pentecost, a feast of almost equal rank. Although there is no such setting for Christmas itself (the Christmas plainchants, Dominus dixit and Puer natus est, are set in paraphrase style), the fourth example is the introit for the Fourth Sunday in Advent, irnmediately before the Christmas season beguis. in each of these -eroupings, the unusual introit was the first of several settings of the same text to be copied (in the case of Easter, the Brst and second settings). Therefore, the apparent progression, as one leafs through the collection, is always a move from a simpler to a more complex treatment of the chant for each of these feasts. General Conclusion

The Tr93 introits are, by their very nature, functional pieces-the music was composed to serve a particular liturgical need, using a pre-existent canrusfirmus and a set formal structure. These pieces are not associated with any non-musical purpose, political or social, beyond their practical use as part of the celebration of the Mass. It is not surprising, therefore, that the music is generally not particularly complex or even aesthetically striking. Moreover, these characteristics are not to be expected in this context-highly elaborate, or notationally complex pieces are not called for during the processional. Music of limited complexity was better suited to the clerics and singen of the parish churches, some of whom may have had little in the way of performance resources, and may have had to incorporate the polyphonic introit into their local service at short notice. As for the Cathedrai of St Vigilius in Trent, we may imagine that a larger choir and singen of greater ski11 were available for the Mass, although specific archival documentation of the musical activities at that institution (beyond the few references to the activities of the German scribe, Johannes Wiser, and the instruments in the possession of the organist, Johannes Lupi) have still not corne to light in any great detail. in this thesis, 1 have uncovered several instances of notational oddities, uncorrected scribal errors, and performance puzzles requinng in some cases, fairly wide leaps of imagination to solve satisfactorily. These anomalies in the collection are at odds with the general principal associated with the performance of introits-that they should be easily accessible by singers of moderate skill. 1 must therefore conclude that this manuscript was not used actively as a register of liturgical music in Trent, even though this purpose was obviously the original expectation of scribe A, who began the copying of these pieces at the beginning of the manuscript with a reasona bl y carefull y ordered plan in mind. Certainly, his general organizational scheme is a sound one: a collection of settings for the major feasts in the church year, which include slightly varying levels of complexity within settings of the same text, fiom which the singeen of the entire Trent diocese could theoretically draw at will, according to their specific liturgical needs and performance resources. A concurrent desire of the scribe may have ken to groups of settings for the same liturgical occasion that represented various music styles according to the geographic origins of the exemplars-a cosmopolitan liturgical register; however, beyond the evidence that a small nurnber of introits may be attributed to Brassart and Binchois, there is no definitive proof of this theory. Trent, a moderately-shed tom in the mid fifieenth-century, was ideally located as a point of rest between the major city States of Italy, such as Venice and Florence, and the kingdoms to the north, including the ducal court at Innsbruck. One may speculate that there was ample opportunity for the transmission of northem European music to Trent via the many ecclesiastical delegations whic h surely must have stopped there. The connection between the Council of Basel, where we know Brassart and Binchois to have been in attendance in the 1440s: and the canons and prince-bishops of mid fifieenth-century Trent, including Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini (a Trent canon in absentia) is significant; it may indicate a means by which some musical exemplars reached the Trent scribes, particularly the Tr93 introits by Brassart and Binchois, which have concordances in the Aosta manuscript, Piccolomini's legacy. In my study of the stylistic characteristics of this music, several observations lead to the conclusion that the original plan of scribe A (to make this collection a liturgical register), was not actually put to practical use, at lest not using this source. The organization of scribe A was compted from the start by scribe B, who, working concurrently with A at one point, nonetheless added some introits to blank folia that disturbed the liturgical sequence (such as Nos outem, E45v-46). Funher clouding the plan, B (who was responsible for much of the text underlay in the collection), mistakenly copied the Advent N psalm verse text (Celi enurrant gloriarn Dei) with the introit Rorate celi 1, which should have ken the Marian version of this introit (requiring the verse text Beneduisti Domine terrum tuam) according to its placement in the collection. The fact that this error is not comected in the source indicates either that the piece was indeed used out of context for Advent IV (Le., that its placement in the copying pian was irrelevant to the perfonners who used it), or that it simply was not used at all, and the error thus went undetected. Many observations shed light on the varying skills of the composers of these introïts. Lnconsistency is the hallmark of this collection as a whole. The structural divisions of this genre (antiphon, psalm verse, doxology) are sometimes al1 set to polyphony; more frequently, however, either the psalm, the doxology, or both are simply not included in these settings. This implies that the missing sections were meant to have been Sung to their relevant plainchant tone. Settings with widely varying levels of polyphony appear to have been copied randomly, with no evident pattern other than their common tea. This adds to the overall variety of the collection, but sheds no immediate light on the preferences of the diocese regarding the amount of plainchant versus polyphony in the service. There is not much compositional subtlety in the collection, nor would it necessarily be expected; however, some of my observations indicate that, in a smail number of introits, a more skilled compositional hand may have ken at work. For example, six senings include extended duet passages, not merely when moving between antiphon and psalm/doxology, but within the antiphon itself (see Table 3-2). This is a relatively simple means of achieving textural variety which is nevertheless overiooked in the remaining settings (intriguingly, the Brassart and Binchois introits do not number among these texturd anomalies). Psalm and doxology settings, normally relatively simple harmonized reciting tones, occasionally display some small amount of uncharacteristic contrapuntal variety, such as the doxology of Spiritus Domini III which altemates between counterpoint and homophony, apparently delineated by the phrases of the text. In general, these pieces are in treble style, i.e., the top voice (a paraphrase of the plainchant) was composed first, and other voices were added beneath it (probably tenor, followed by contratenor); however, some pieces (such as the psalm of Resurrexi W)show evidence that the tenor and contratenor may have been conceived together. In the broader context of the collection, however, this quality is more the exception than the rule. The case of Terribilis II and its cornpanion on an adjacent folio, Terribilis DI, is intnguing because of its implications about the formal structure of an introit. We can only assume that polyphonic introits called for a repeat of the polyphonic antiphon (according to the standard practices of plainchant introits); however, no actual mbrics or musical cues in the manuscript attest to this repetition. Tewibilis iII (an antiphon setting ody) appears to be a varied version of the antiphon of Tewibilis II, using an added voice and, possibly, a proportional shift. Taken together, these two settings complete the pattern of one introit (A V D A); the second statement of the antiphon (not nonnally indicated specifically) was thus actually copied out, in this one case, because of its musical variation. The possible signs of compositional subtlety discussed above are more than counterbalanced by the large number of anomalies and errors in the collection that possibly point to both poor compositional skills and careless copying. For example, the fifieenth-century aesthetic forbidding the interval of the fourth above the lowest- sounding voice (a dissonance) has been ignored in some settings (such as Puer natu est 1). Coloration is generally facile, usually indicating simple imperfection of the breve. But, in some introits (such as the doxology of Resurrexi V), the coloured notes do not add up to the expected durations. Fauxbourdon,although clearly called for in many settings (see Table 34), is explicitly indicated in the collection only twice by an actual rubric (even then, the word is abbreviated); thus, the scribe was unaware of the inconsistency of copying this term in some but not al1 cases requiring the technique. In sorne introits (such as the psalm of Resumexî 1), the reaiization of the fauxbourdon becomes increasingly difficult because of clef or note errors in the manuscript that have gone uncorrected; I have suggested speculative solutions for some of these anomalies (such as an improvised tenor part altemating sixths and octaves against the plainchant to complete the 613 harmony), but there is no indication in the manuscript of any performance-related corrections to show that the pieces were actually Sung from this source. Text underlay is extremely inconsistent in the collection, particularly in psalms and doxologies. Even in antiphons which usually show the entire text in the supenus only, the most carefùl underlay only presents groups of words, sepanited by rests, showing the beginning of each textual phrase, but not necessady the specific note-to-syllable connection. While the tenor underlay is sometimes partially included, the contratenor part almost never receives any tea beyond an incipit (except the highly uncharacteristic Spiritus Domini III, for which 1 can offer no explanation). Mensuration and rhythm in the collection are not generally out of keeping with styles of the time; however, several points fiom my discussion on these issues warrant amplification here. It would seem, for exarnple, that the sign 4 was becoming popular as a substitution for C in pieces requiring imperfect mensuration; nine examples in the collection use as the only mensural sign, possibly standing as precursors of the standardization of the alla breve time signature in the sixteenth century. The technique of beginning an introit with two semibreve rests in ail parts (see Table 35) is a means of indicating perfect mensuration even when no sign is present; the rests probably indicate that the following note is meant to be an anacrucis to the ne* perfection. Theoretically, such a cue to the singers should not have ken necessary- the notation alone should have been sufficient to make the mensuration clear, however, the rests could be an indication that these pieces were copied for perfomers who were not considered to have ken skilled enough to decipher the mensuration without such cues. Margaret Bent's interpretation of @ as a simple score marker, rather than a sign of complex proportional shift, seems to apply to much of this repertory, and accords with the contention that some of these introits were intended for singers of moderate abilities. Fermatas appear in great nurnben in these settings. In most cases, these are copied in logical places, such as the last note of a section, which may have ken a point for improvised embellishment if the celebrant and his retinue had not yet reached the altar. In some examples, the placement of fermatas is unusual. Two settings of Goudeamuî use fermatas unconventionally. In at least one case (Gaudeamur IV), the fermata is likely meant to ampli@ an important word (Mde)in the manner of some of the more famous ceremonial motets of Dufay. One of the most unusual fermata placements cornes in the psalm of In medio ecclesie iI. Here, the cadence is interrupted by a striking pause in al1 parts. One possible explanation is that some Iiturgical function (such as censing) was meant to take place during the pause; however, there is no rubric to indicate this action. Moreover, this would seem to be an isolated case in the collection. Given the wide diversity of style, polyphonic complexity, and resulting level of performance difficulty in the introits of Tr93, one can speculate that, at the time when the these pieces were copied, there was a desire to assemble as varied a collection as possible of settings for special feasts. Included in this variety are four introits composed in a pseudo-motet style with the chant in the tenor (highly unusual in the context of the collection). Why would such a variety be necessary, especially considering that any specific introït would presumably only have ken Sung once in a given year? At lest two possible explanations could account for this: 1 ) the most complex setting could have ken reserved for the main Cathedral of Trent, while the less complex settings could have been distributed among the smaller churches of the diocese, who presumably had lesser performance resources. This is certainly possible, since the Trent manuscripts were al1 copied in the city of Trent, the seat of the diocesan govemment, and were all, until this cenmry, held in the library/archive of the Trent Cathedra1 chapter, which would surely have been the primary reference source for the smaller churches of the diocese; and 2) the different settings for a specific feast couid have been perfonned on subsequent Swdays in the appropriate season, or (as in the case of Easter) on al1 the feria1 days of the week, with the most complex setting reserved for Sunday (there are. coincidentally, seven settings of the Easter introit in Tr93). No archiva1 research completed to date has yet shed any light on the specific musical practices of any church in the diocese. Information on this topic may well be recorded in the archives of the Trent chapter; unfortunately, the scope of such research is well beyond the limits of one doctoral dissertation. This thesis supports the theory, first suggested by Gary Spilsted, that the introit cycle of Tr93 was originally intended to be a repository for future liturgical needs; however, based on the stylistic evidence 1 have observed, 1 do not believe that this collection was ever used for its intended purpose. Nonetheless, it does present an intriguing snapshot of both the stylistic preferences and the scnbal practices of mid fifteenth-century Trent. Bibliography

Adler, Guido et al, eds. Sechs Tkienter Codices: Geistliche und weltliche Compositionen des W.Jahrhunderts, Erste AuswahI. Denkmaler der Tonkuna in Osterreich, Jg. VU, 14- 1 5 ( 1900).

Apel, Willi. me Notation of Polyphonie Music 900-1600. Cambridge, Mass.: The Mediaeval Academy of America, 1 953.

Ap fel, Ernst. Die Lehre vom Orgamrm, Drskmt. Kontrapunkt und von der Komposztion bis un 1480. Saarbrtfcken: Univenitat des Saarlandes, 1989.

Bank, J.A. Tactus, Tempo, and Notation in Mensural Music fiom the 13" to the 1 Th Cenlury. Amsterdam: Annie Bank, 1972.

Banks, John. The Motet as a Fonnal Type in Northem Ira& ca. 1500. New York and London: Garland, 1 993.

Bent, Margaret. "Musica Recta and Musica Ficta." Musica Disciplinu 26 (1 972): 76- 100.

-ed. "The Transmission of English Music 1300-1 500: Some Aspects of Repertory and Presentation."Studien zur Tradition in der Musik, ed. Hans Eggebrecht and Max Lütolf, 65- 83. Munich: Katzbichler, 1973.

. Fijeenth-Centuy Liturgieal Music. II: Four Anonynrous Masses. Early English Church Music, 22. London: Stainer & Bell, 1 979. . "SomeCriteria for Establishing Relationships Behveen Sources of Late-Medieval Polyphony." Muric in Medieval and Eariy Modem Europe: P atron~ge,Sources and Texts, 295-3 1 7. Cambridge: 198 1.

. "Trent 93 and Trent 90: Johannes Wiser at Work. " I Codice Mirsicali Treniini a Cento Anni Dalla Loro Riscoperta; Atti del Cortvegno Luurence Feininger la ntusicologia corne missione, eds. Nino Pirrotta & DaniIo Curti, 84- 1 1 1. Castel10 del Buonconsiglio, Trento, 6 September 1985. Trento: Museo Provinciale d'&te, 1986.

. "( 1 380- 1430: An international style?) A conternporary perception of early fifieenth-century style: Bologna Q 15 as a document of scnbal editorial initiative." Murica Disciplina 4 1 ( 1987): 183-20 1.

. "The Early Use of the Sign 9."Earij Music 24/2 (1 996), 199-225.

Biblia Sacm Editionis SUtz Quint Pont. Mm. Jussu Recognita atque Mita Romae. Frankfurt a. M.: Typis et Suptibus Andree, 1826.

Bockholdt, Rudolf "Notizen zur Handschrift Trient '93' und m Dufays frühe Messensatzen." Acta Musiçologica 33 (1 96 1 ): 40-7.

Brassart, Johannes. Opera Omnia. ed. Keith E. Mixter. CMM, Rome: Amencan Institute of Musicology, 1965. 163 Bridgeman. Nanie, ed. Manuscrits de Musique Polyphonique XVe et WleSiècles - Italie. Repertoire international des Sources Musicales, ser.B, vo1.4, pt.5. München: G. Henle, 199 1.

Briquet, C. M. Les Jligranes. Diciionaire historiques des marques du papier. Geneva, n.p., 1907; reprïnted 1968.

Busse Berger, Anna Maria. Mensuration and Proportion Signr. Orïgins and Evolution. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.

B usnoys, An toine. Collected Works, Part 2: The Latin-iexted Workr. Ed. Richard Taniskin. Masters and Monuments of the Renaissance, 5. New York: The Broude Trust, 1990.

Carlini, A. and Danilo Curti. "11 Quattrocento e i Codici Musicali Trentini." Dalla poli/oniu al Classicisrno: Il Trentino nella musica, 7-48.Trento: Alcione, 1982.

Casetti, Albino. Guido Storico-Archivistica del Trentino. Collana di Monografia della Società di Studi per la Venezia Tridentina MV.Trento: Terni, 196 1.

Cattin, Giulio. "Testi tropati nei Codici Trentini." I Codice MusicaIi Trentini a Cento Anni Dalla Loro Riscoperta; Atti del Convegno Laurence Feininger la rnusicologia corne missione, eds. Nino Pirrotta Bi Danilo Curti, 1 30-7.Castel10 del Buonconsiglio, Trento, 6 September 1985. Trento: Museo Provinciale d'Arte, 1986. 164 C i pol la, Carlo M. Money, Prices, and Civilizution in the Meditemanean Worid,fifh to seventeenth centwy. New York: Gordian, 1967.

Cobin. Marian. "The Aosta Ms.: A Central Source of Early- FifieenthCentury Sacred Polyphony." Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1978.

. "The Compilation of the Aosta UÎ.: A Working Hypothesis. " Papers Read at the Dufay Quincente~ryConference. Brooklyn Coflege. Deceinber 6- 7. 1974, ed. Allan W. Atlas. New York: School of Performing Arts- Brooklyn College, CUNY, 1976.

Codices Musicales Tndentini (facsimiles). Rome: n.p., 1969.

Cuccetti, Gino. Storia di Trento. Palermo: n-p, 1939.

Curtis, Gareth R. K. "Jean Pullois and the Cyclic Mas& a Case of Mistaken Identity?" Music and Letters 62 ( 198 1 ): 4 1-59.

Curzel. Emanuele. "Ricerche su1 capitolo della Cattedrale di Trento alla metà del quattrocento: Aspetti instihizionale e sociwconomici, con un' appendice di 606 regesti di documenti [1436-14581." Tesi di Laurea, Università degli studi di Trento, Facultà di Lettere e Filosofia, 1990.

Dangel-Hohan, Frohmut. Der Mehrstimrnige Introitus in Queflendes 15. Jahrhunderts. Würzburger Musikhistorische Beitage, ed. Wolfgang Osthoff, 3. Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1975. 165 Davies, J.G. ed. A Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship. London: SCM Press, 1972. S.v. "TheChants of the Proper of the Mass," by Alec Robertson.

Dompien, Giacomo. Vira di S. Vigzlio vescovo e mariire. Trento, n.p., 1958.

Dufay, Guillaume. Opera Omnia. eds. Guillaume de Van & Heinrich Besseler. CMM, 1. Rome: Arnerican Institute of Musicologv~1948.

Dunstable, John. Complete Works. ed. Maneed F. Bukofier. 2nd ed. Musica Britannica, 8. London: Stainer & Bell, 1970.

Eaton, Frank Allen. nie Origins ofCantus Finnus Used in the English Magn~jkat fmm the Fourteenth to the Seventeenth Centwy. Ph. D. dis, University of Washington, 1987.

Falco, Giorgio. The Hoiy Roman Republic. Translated by K.V. Kent. New York: Barnes, 1964.

Fallows, David. "Specific Information on the Ensembles for Composed Polyphony, 1 400- 1474." Studies in the Per/rmance of Late Medieval Music, ed. Stanley Boorman, 10960. Cambridge: Cambridge Univenity Press, 1983.

. "Introit Antiphon Paraphrase in the Trent Codices: Laurence Feininger's Confronto." Jounial of the Plajnsong and Medieval Music Society 7 (1984), . "Dufay and the Mass Proper Cycles of Trent 88" and "Songs in the Trent Codices: An Optimistic Handlist." I Codice Musicali Trentini a Cento Anni

Dalla Loro Riscoperta; Atti del Convegno hurence Feininger [a rnuiicoiogia corne missione, eds. Nino Pirrotta & Danilo Curti, 45-59, 170-9. Castello del Buonconsiglio, Trento, 6 September 1985. Trento: Museo Provinciale d'Arte, 1986.

Federhofer, Helmut. "Harmonik in Motetten der Trienter Kodices." Archivftr Musikwissenschalfr 49 ( 1 992): 200-206.

Feininger, Lorenzo, ed. Il codice 87 del Castel10 del Buon Comigïio. Trento: n-d.

,ed. Monuments pol'honiae liturgicae. 2nd ser., i. Rome: 1947.

Ficker, Rudolf von, ed. Sieben Trienter Codices. Fünfre Auswahl. Denkmaler der Tonkunst in Osterreich, Jg. XXM, 6 1 ( 1 924).

Gafirio, Franchino. Practica rnusicae ( 1496). Trans. Clement A. Miller. Rome: American Institute of Musicology, 1968.

Gerber, Rebecca Lynn. "The Manuscript Trent, Castello del Buonconsiglio, 88: A Study of Fifteenth-Çentury Manuscnpt Transmission and Repertory. " Ph-D. diss., University of California at Santa Barbara, 1984.

Gerken, Robert Edward. "The Polyphonie Cycles of the hoper of the Mass in the Trent Codex 88 and Jena Choirbooks 30 and 35." Ph.D. diss., Indiana University, 1969. Gerola, Giuseppe. "Quel10 che I'Ausma deve restituire al Trentino. " Alba Trentina 2 (19 18), 3536.

Gottlieb, Louis Edward. "The Cyclic Masses of Trent Codex 89." Ph-D. diss., University of California at Berkeley, 1958.

Gozzi, Marco. II manoscritro Trento Mieo Provincide d'Arte, cod 13 77 (Tr 90) con un 'anulisi del repertorio non derïvato da Tr 93. Università degli studi di Pavia, Scuola di paleografia e filologia musicale, Studi e Tesri Musicali, ed. Albert Dunning, Vol. 1, 1 & 2. Cremona: Editrice Turris, 1992.

Graduale socrosanctae romanae ecclesiae de Tempore et de Sanctis. Rome & Tournai : Desclée, 1 908.

Graduale sarisburiense. A 13th-century Manuscript in facsimile (British Library Addl. 121 94). Walter Frere, ed. (1 894); reprinted, London: Farnborough, 1 966.

Haberl, F. X. Bameine zur Musikgeschichte. 3 vols. Leipzig: 1885, repr. Hildesheim: G.Olms, 1 97 1.

Hamm? Charles, ed. Cennrs Catalogue of Manuscript Sources of Polyphonie Music 1400- 1550. RMS 1,3. Neuhausen-Stuttgart: 1984.

. "The Reson Mass. " Journal of the Americun Muicological Society 1 8 ( 1965). 168

. A Chronology of the Worhof Guillaume Dufq based on a Sîudj of Mensurd Practice. Princeton : Princeton U.P., 1 964.

. " Manuscript Structure in the Dufay Era. " Acta Musicologica 34 ( 1 962): 1 66.

Harran, Don. "ln Pursuit of Origins: The Earliest Wnting on Text Underlay (c. 1440)." Acta Muricologica 50 ( 1978): 2 17-40.

Harrison, Frank LI. Music in Medieval Brirain. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1958.

Hughes, Andrew. Medieval Man2~~cripf.sfor Mass and Oflce: A Guide to their Organization and Teminologv. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1 982; reprint, 1 986.

. StyZe and Symbol: Medieval Music: 800-1453. Ottawa: iMM, 1 989.

Irtenkauf, W. "Ein Messbuch aus der Vigiliuskirche Perdonig."Der Schlem 54 ( 1980), 296-7.

Jed in, Hubert. A History of the . Translated by Dom Emest Graf London: Nelson, 1957.

Kanazawa, Misakata. "Polyphonie Music for Vespers in the Fifieenth Century." Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1966. 169

Kaye, Philip R. The "ContenanceAnglaise" in Perspective: A Stuc of Consonance and Dissonance in Continental Music c. 1380-1440. New York & London: Garland, 1989.

ed. neSacred Works of Gilles Binchois. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press, 1 992.

Kirsch, W infried . Die Quelle der Mehrstintmigen Magnificat- und Te Deum- Vertonungen bis zur Mitle des 16. Jahrhunderts. Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1 966.

Kulleseid, Eleanor Ransom. "The Sacred Music of Gilles Binchois." Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1962.

Leverett, Adel yn Peck. "A Paleographicd and Repertoriaf Study of the Manuscript Trento, Castello del Buonconsiglio, 91 (1 378)." Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1990. 2 vols.

Levri, M. La capella musicaIe di Roverto. Trento: n.p., 1972.

Loyan, Richard, ed. Canons in the TM Codices. CMM, 38. Rome: American Institute of Musicology, 1967.

Lunelli, Renato. "La patria dei Codici musicali tidentini." Note d'archivio per la storia musicale 4 (1927): 1 16-28.

. Organi trentini: notirie storïche, iconogroja. Trento: 1 964. . La Musica ne2 Trentino dal XV al WIII secolo. Trento: n.p., 1967.

. Sîmmenti musicali nel Trentino. Trento: n. p, 1 968.

Marbach, Carol. Cannim Scrz@urarurn. Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1963.

:Missale Romanwt Mediolani, 1474. Robert Lippe, ed. 2 vols. London, 1899 & 1907.

Mitchell, Robert James. "The Paleography and Repertory of Trent 89,9 1, together with analyses and editions of six mass cycles by Franco-Flernish composen from Trent Codex 89." Ph.D. diss., University of Exeter, 1990.

Musica e Lzfurgia nella Rifona Thfina. Catologo a cura di Danilo Curti e Marco Gozzi, Trento, Castel10 del Buonconsiglio, 23 September 1926. Provincia Autonoma di Trento, Servizio Beni Librari e Archivistici, 1995.

The Nav Ha~~urdDictiomryof Muic, 1986 ed. S.V."Discant Mass"; "Zntroit".

Pamis, Arthur. "The Sacred Works of Gilles Binchois." Ph.D. diss., Bryn Mawr College, 1965.

Piccard, Gerhard . Die Wàsserreichenkarlei Piccard zm Hauptsfaatsarchiv Stuttgart. Findbücher 1-XIV. Stuttgart, 196 1-8 3.

Pirotta, Nino. "Music and Culwal Tendencies in 15th-Century My."Journal of the American Musicological Society 19 ( 1966): 127-6 1. 171 Power, Leonel. Opera Omnia. I (Moters). ed. Charles Hamm. CMM, 50. Rome: Arnerican Institute of Musicology, 1969.

Reese, Gustave. Music in the Renaissance. New York: Norton, 1959.

Rumbold, Ian. "The Compilation and Ownership of the St. Emeram Codex (Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Ch 14274)." Early Muic History 2 ( L 982): 16 1-235.

Rutschman, Carla Jean. "Magnificats in the Trent Codices: A Critical Anaiysis." Ph.D. diss., University of Washington, 1979.

Santi faller, Leo ed. Urhnden und Forschungen zur Geschichte des Trienter Domkopitals im Mittelalter. VOLI: (Irkunden zur Geschichte des Trienter Domkapitels 114% 1500. Vienna: Universum Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, 1948.

ed. Der Mab-ikel der Universitdt Wien i 1377-1450.Graz & Cologne: n.p., 1956.

Saunders, Suparmi E. "The Dating of the Trent Codices From their Watemarks (with a Study of the Local Liturgy of Trent in the FiReenth Century)." Ph.D. diss., University of London, 1983; reprint, New York & London: Garland, 1989.

. "The Dating of Trent 93 and Trent 90." 1 Codice Musicaii Trenîini a Cento Anni Dalla Loro Riscoperta: Atti del Convegno Lourence Feininger la rnusicologia corne missione, eds. Nino Pirrotta & Danilo Curti, 60-83. Castello del Buonconsiglio, Trento, 6 September 1 985. Trento: Museo Provinciale d'Arte, 1986.

Scott, Am Besser. "The Beginnings of Fauxbourdon: A New Interpretation." Journal of rhe Amencan McologicologicaI Society 24 ( 1 97 1 ): 36-63.

- "English Music in Modena, Biblioteca Estense, a. X 1,11 and other Italian Manuscnpts." Musica Disciplina 26 (1972):145-60.

Snow, Robert Joseph. "The Manuscript Strahov D.G. IV 47." Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois, 1968.

Spilsted, Gary. "Toward the Genesis of the Trent Codices: New Directions and New F ind ings. " Studies in Music from the University of Western Ontario 1 ( 1 976): 55-70.

. "The Paleography and Musical Repertory of Codex Tridentinus 93." Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1982.

Staehelin, Martin. "Trienter Codices und Humanismus." I Codice Micsicali Trentini a Cenio Anni Dalla Loro Riscoperta; Attz del Convegno Laurence Feininger la rnusicologia corne misszone, eds. Nino Pimotta & Danilo Curti, 15849. Castello del Buonconsiglio, Trento, 6 September 1985. Trento: Museo Provinciale dtArte, 1986.

Strayer, Joseph R., ed. Dictionary of the Middle Ages. New York: Charles Scri bner & Sons, 1985. S.V."Introit," by Arthur Levine. Tinctoris, Johannes. Liber de arte confrapuncti (1477).Trans. Albert Seay. Rome: Arnerican Institute of Musicology, 196 1.

Towne, Gary. "A Systematic Formulation of Sixteenth-Century Text Underlay Rules (Part 1 of II)." Muricu Disciplina 44 ( 1 990):255- 87.

. "A Systematic Formulation of Sixteenth-Century Text Underlay Rules (Part II)." Musica Disciplina 45 (1991): 143-68.

Tmm ble, Ernest. Falorbourdon: An Historicd Survey. Brooklyn: Institute of Medieval Music, 1959.

Vicentino, Nicola. Ancient Music Adapfed to Modern Pructice. Translated by Maria Rika Maniates . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996.

Ward, Tom R. "The Office Hymns of the Trent Manuscripts." 1 Codice Musicali Treniini a CenfoAnni Dalla Loro Riscoperta; Aiti del Convegno Laurence Feininger la musicologia corne missione, eds. Nino Pirrotta & Danilo Curti, 1 12- 129. Castel10 del Buonconsiglio, Trento, 6 September 1985. Trento: Museo Provinciale d'Arte, 1986.

. "The Polyphonic Office Hymn fiom the Late 14th until the Early 16~ Century. " Ph.D. diss., University of Pittsburgh, 1969.

. "The Structure of the Manuscript Trent 92-1 ." Musicu Disciplina 29 (1975): 1 27-47. 77te Polyphonie Oflice Hymn fiom 1400- 1520: A Descriptive Inven tory. RMS, 3. Rome: American lnstitute of Musicology, 1979.

Warren, Charles W. "Punctus Organi and Cantus Coronatus in the Music of Dufay," Papers Read ut the Dufq Quincentenary Conference. Brooklyn College, December 6-7. 1974, ed. Ailan W. Atlas. New York: School of Perfonning Arts- Brooklyn College, CUNY, 1976, 128-43.

Wathey, Andrew. "Music in the Royal and Noble Households in Late- Medieval England: Studies of Sources and Patronage." Ph-D. diss., University of Oxford, 1987.

Weber, Simone. "La residenza dei vescovi trentini. " Studi Trentini di Scienze Storiche 5 (1924): 23-37.

White, Richard James. "The Battre Fascicle of the Trent Codex 87." Ph.D. diss., Indiana University, 1975.

Wright? Peter. "The Compilation of Trent, Museo Provinciale d'&te, Mss. 87 and 92." Early Music History 2 ( 1 982): 237-71.

. "On the Origins of Trent 87 1 and 92 2." Eady Music Histoty 6 ( 1 986):

. "The Related Parts of Trent, Museo Provinciale dfArte, Mss. 87 (1 374) and 92 ( 1379): A Paleographical and Text- Critical Study." Ph-D. diss., University of Nottingham, 1986; reprint, New York and London, Garland, 1989. Zanolinil Vigilio. "Spigolatura d'archivio."Chap. in Programma del Ginnasio private pr. vescovile di Trenfoper I 'anno scolastico 1902-3. Trent: n. p., 1903. APPENDIX A Simple of Introit Styles in Tr93

1. Spiritus Domini KiI (f 37v-3 8) Antiphon only, in a rhythmically independent setting.

2. Ecce advenit (f 1 8v- 1 9) Antiphon with polyphonic psalm verse in a mixed setting (homorhythm and rhythmic independence); two-voice doxology with plainchant opening and polyphony beginning at "sicut erat" (fauxbourdon cannot be realized here).

3. Virz galilei I (f. 28v) - fauxbourdon Ant iphon and polyphonic psalm verse in a homorhythmic setting; Improvisedfoubourdon voice throughout.

4. Resurrexi iI (f.2 1 v-22) Antiphon with rhythmic cantufînnus in the tenor (rare); polyphonic psalm verse with speculative improvised voice (sixth below superius) to complete a fauxbourdon sonority. Spiritus Domini III

Tenor [Spiritus Domini T[n

III Il I I II 1 III 1 L Y II 11- 1 1( 1 1A 1

con - ti- att om - ni - r [Spiritus Domini m'J

pcntecost Sunday]

The Spid of the LordjUs the world, u&fwU1a,is ali-cmbracuig, and knows man's utteronce. &luia. alleluiu, alleluia [Wisdom 1.7)

11 1 I 1 11, I 1 1. 1. II 1 II1 1 1 1 w II 1 il 11 L A11 1 1 Il 1 ' 1 I II AT 1 -11 I 1 1 I II I1 ' 9 # Id ' 10a-- I ' 1' YU'

I 36 - ri am.] De - or, ia-di- ci-wn Y- 1 '1 58 si - cut erat [in *cipi- O et nunc

Behold the Lord the RulPr is come; und the kingdom is in HCr hrurd, anàpower Md &minion.[hlalachi 3,1] O Gori, with Your juàgewunt en&w the hg,Md witA Your ju~n'ce*the king *sson. [Psah 72.11 Glory be to the Father. and to the Son, and ta the Holy Spirit, as it was ih the beginning, is now Md mer shall be, world without end Amen. VinGalilei 1 rem in Ce - hm& i 10 w - kit,

I I 1' I ' r I Om - nes a~r piau - di I- I', I

[Ascension of our Lord]

Men of Gafike. why do you si~dboking up ta hraven? AkkHe SMcome in the same way as you have seen Him going up to ken, aUtluia, alleiuia akIiu'a.[Acts I, 111 AU you peopks, c&p your han&, shout to God with the voice of exrckatiion-(Psh47.11 Resurrexi II

ad huc te - cum sum,

ad - huc te - cum sum. r

I ad - ~UC tc - CU^ SuIn. I sti su

L l 1 I 11 II 1 II 1 1 I sti su - per

11 1 1 C I 1 L 1 I I I Il 1 1 1 1 I 1 i I i T I mc ma - num tu - un, mi ra bi IL,- - lis fa

mi ra - bi - lis fa -

K cta est r;- 1 I 1 1 1 A 1 1 11 Il 1 1 a I m. rm F 1 T i 1 I 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 i 1 I 1 cm est II 1 III 1 Il 11 1 l II 1 111 II A IJ ' r*r il 1 m I I œ~a4 1-1- I w - - / " Do mi - nc pro - bo - sti me cr co - gno - 1 " vi - sti s - si

1 vi - sti ses - si - O-llcm

mterSunday)

I arose and am still with Yoy alleluia; You rest your hand upon me,allehia; Your howkdge Cr too wondeel alleluia, alleluia~salm139: 183.61 Oh Lord, You haveprobed wre and You howme: You know when I sit and when I arise. pslam 139: 121 Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, as it was in the beginning, is now, and mer shall be, world wirhout end Amen.