INFORMATION TO USERS
This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.
4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department.
5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed.
UniiiversiV M icidnlms international 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106
8526255
Sovik, Thomas Paul
MUSIC THEORISTS OF THE BOHEMIAN REFORMATION; TRANSLATION AND CRITIQUE OF THE TREATISES OF JAN BLAHOSLAV AND JAN JOSQUIN
The Ohio State University Ph.D. 1985
University Microfilms I n ter nation el 300 N. z ee b Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106
Copyright 1985 by Sovik, Thomas Paul All Rights Reserved
PLEASE NOTE:
In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark V
1. Glossy photographs or pages.
2. Colored illustrations, paper or print.
3. Photographs with dark background V
4. Illustrations are poor copy ______
5. Pages with black marks, not original copy.
6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of page.
7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages
8. Print exceeds margin requirements ______
9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine ______
10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print.
11. Page(s) ______lacking when material received, and not available from school or author.
12. Page(s) ______seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows.
13. Two pages numbered . Text follows.
14. Curling and wrinkled pages ______
15. Dissertation contains pages with print at a slant, filmed as received ______
16. Other______
University Microfilms International
MUSIC THEORISTS OF THE BOHEMIAN REFORMATION;
TRANSLATION AND CRITIQUE OF THE TREATISES OF
JAN BLAHOSLAV AND JAN JOSQUIN
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate
School of the Ohio State University
By
Thomas Paul Sovik, B.A., M.A.
*****
The Ohio State University
1985
Dissertation Committee: Approved by
Dr. Burdette Green
Dr. Norman Phelps A • Adviser Dr. William Poland School of Music Copyright by Thomas Paul Sovik 1985 To Pamela and Sarah Elizabeth
XI ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to express my sincere appreciation to Dr. Burdette Green for his guidance, insight, and patience throughout this research.
Thanks go to the other members of my advisory committee, Drs. Norman
Phelps and William Poland, for their suggestions and comments. The technical assistance of Dr. Jiri Hochman is gratefully acknowledged.
Ill VITA
18 October 1953 ...... B o m - Youngstown, Ohio.
1974 ...... B.A., Ashland College, Ashland, Ohio.
1974-1981 ...... Graduate Teaching Associate, School of Music, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
1975 ...... M.A., The Ohio State University, Colunibus, Ohio.
1981 ...... Doctoral Research in Czechoslovakia.
1982 ...... Instructor, School of Music, The University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa.
1982-1984 ...... Director of Yamaha Education Systems in Central Wisconsin.
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Music Theory
Music Theory: Professors Marshall Barnes, Burdette Green, and William Poland.
History of Music Theory; Professors Burdette Green and Norman Phelps.
Music History: Professors Richard Hoppin, Alexander Main, Keith Mixter, and Gordon Wilson.
IV t a b l e o f c o n t e n t s
DEDICATION...... ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... iii
VITA ...... iv
LIST OF F I G U R E S ...... viii
LIST OF PLATES ...... x
PREFACE ...... xi
PART I - THE COMMENTARY
CHAPTER PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION...... 2
Protestantism in Bohemia-Moravia...... 2 The Utraquist Church ...... 2 The Jedncta bratrska ...... 9
II. THE BIOGRAPHY OF JAN BLAHOSLAV ...... 12
Blahoslav's Early Years ...... 14 Blahoslav as Author and Editor ...... 24 Blahoslav as Educator and Publisher ...... 33 Conclusion...... 38
III. ARGUMENTS REGARDING THE IDENTITY OF JAN JOSQUIN ...... 39
The Hypothesis of Pavel Frantisek Gabulka ...... 39 The Hypothesis of Josef Jirecek ...... 41 The Hypothesis of Otakar Hostinsky ...... 44 The Hypothesis of Ladislav Dolansky ...... 51 The Hypothesis of Vladimir G r e g o r ...... 57 The Hypothesis of Frantisek Bartos ...... 58 The Hypothesis of Ivan Vavra ...... 59 Conclusion...... 62 CHAPTER PAGE
IV. MUSIC THEORY ACCORDING TO JAN BLAHOSLAV AND JAN JOSQUIN ...... 64
The Hexachord S y s t e m ...... 70 Solmization and Mutation ...... 80 Notes, Ligatures, Intervals, and Rests ...... 86 The Mensural S y s t e m ...... 93 Syncopation, Coloration, andHemiola ...... 98 Additional Notational Figures ...... 101 The T o n e s ...... 105 Transposition ...... 112 Conclusion...... 114
PART II - THE TRANSCRIPTIONS AND TRANSLATIONS
NOTES ON THE TRANSCRIPTIONS AND TRANSLATIONS...... 118
The Editions ...... 118 The Procedures...... 125
THE MUSICA OF JAN BLAHOSLAV ...... 129
To the Reader ( 1 ) ...... 131 To the Reader ( 2 ) ...... 133 Chapter 1 About the Differences Among Singers ...... 136 Chapter 2 Upon What Music Depends ...... 138 Chapter 3 About Vocables ...... 141 Chapter 4 About K e y s ...... 144 Chapter 5 About the Transformation of the Six V o c a b l e s ...... 150 Chapter 6 About the Manner and Shape of the Notes . . . 161 Chapter 7 About Pauses ...... 169 Chapter 8 About the T a c t ...... 172 Chapter 9 About the Mensural Si g n s ...... 175 Chapter 10 About the Tones ...... 181
THE MUZIKA OF JAN JO S Q U I N ...... 200
Dedication...... 203 E p i g r a m ...... 208 To the R e a d e r ...... 209 Chapter 1: About Vocables ...... 213 Chapter 2: About Ke y s ...... 220 Chapter 3: About the Mannerand Form of the Notes . . . 225 Chapter 4: About Mutation ...... 236 Chapter 5: About Transposition ...... 256
VI PAGE
Chapter 6 About Characters ...... 267 Chapter 7 About Solmization...... 275 Chapter 8 About Tones ...... 289
APPENDICES
A. Chronological List of Blahoslav’s Writings ...... 299
B. Facsimile of P. F. Gabulka’s Note Attached to Josquin’s Muzika ...... 306
C. Hymns of the Samotulsky kancional Used as Examples in Blahoslav’s Musica and Josquin's Muzika ...... 307
D. Transcription of the Polyphonic Examples Used in Blahoslav’s Musica and Josquin's Muzika ...... 309
E. Facsimile of Blahoslav’s Musica ...... 324
F. Facsimile of Josquin’s Muzika ...... 363
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 414
Vll LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
1. The Gamut of the Hexachord S y s t e m ...... 72
2. Ut queant laxis, from Josquin's Muzika (A7v) 73
3. Resolution Tendencies of "Hard" Vocables ...... 77
4. Resolution Tendencies of "Soft" Vocables ...... 78
5. The "Natural" Vocables Bordered by Whole Tones ...... 78
6. Solmization, with Two Mutations, from Josquin's Muzika (C6y) 80
7. Solmization with the Inferioris of E la mi, from Josquin's Muzika (E8v) 84
8. The Tripartite Division of the Hexachord, from Hothby's Calliopea ...... 85
9. Note Names in C z e c h ...... 86
10. Ligatures in Perfect and Imperfect Tempus, from Blahoslav's Musica (04) ...... 87
11. Ligatures and Appropriate Resolutions, from Blahoslav's Musica (E5-E5v) ...... 88
12. Ligatured Minimae, from Blahoslav's Musica (03) ...... 90
13. The Ditonus (or Third), from Josquin's Muzika (B1) .... 91
14. Rests, in Relation to the Semibrevis, from Josquin's Muzika (E4v) 92
15. Mensural Signatures and Denotations ...... 94
16. Tables of Mensural Signatures and Values, from Blahoslav's Musica (D3-D3v) ...... 95
V l l l FIGURE PAGE
17. Proportio sesquialtera, transcribed from Blahoslav's Musica (D2v) 98
18. Examples of Syncopatio, from Blahoslav's Musica (C7v-C8) ...... 99
19. The Effect of Coloration on Perfect and Imperfect Notes . . 100
20. Monophonie Hymn, with Repetitio, from Josquin's Muzika (E5-E5v) ...... 102
21. Table of Notational Figures, from Blahoslav's Musica (C6) ...... 104
22. Table of Notational Figures, from Josquin's Muzika (E2) ...... 105
23. Psalm-Tone Formulas of Tone I, from Blahoslav's Musica (D5v) 106
24. Ambit of Tone I, from Blahoslav's Musica (D6) ...... 107
25. Differentiae Tonorum of Tone I, from Blahoslav's Musica (D6) ...... 107
26. Composition of EUGUAE, from Blahoslav's Musica (D5) .... 108
27. Psalmorum Intonatione of Tone I, from Josquin's Muzika (F6v) 110
28. Table of Affects for Tones I, II, & III, from Blahoslav's Musica (D5v-D7) & Josquin's Muzika (F5) . ; . . 112
29. Transposition of a Melody into Another Nature, from Josquin's Muzika (D8v-E1) ...... 113
30. Clef Change in the Middle of a Staff, from Josquin's Muzika (D6) ...... 114
IX LIST OF PLATES
PLATE PAGE
1. Map of Sixteenth-Century Bohemia-Moravia...... 15
2. Seminary and Parish School of the Jednota bratrska in Ivancice (16th century) ...... 34
3. Rectory of the Jednota bratrska in Ivancice (16th century)...... 36
4. Comparison of Title Pages from Blahoslav's Musica and Josquin's Muzika ...... 122
5. Title Page of Blahoslav's Musica, shown original size. Knihovna Narodniho Muzea v Praze 261 ZS ...... 129
6. Title Page of Josquin's Muzika, shown original size. Knihovna Narodniho Muzea v Praze 262 Z S ...... 200
7. Illustration of James the Apostle, from Josquin's M u z i k a ...... 201 PREFACE
Religious discontent caused numerous uprisings throughout Europe
prior to the German Reformation of 1517; the insurrection of 1419 in
Bohemia and its protectorate, Moravia, culminated in the
establishment of the Czech National Utraquist Church, the first
national church to be independent of Roman authority. A splinter
group, the Jednota bratrska, was founded in 1457 and flourished until
1620. The Jednota printed eleven monophonic kancionali (hymnals), a
Czech translation of the complete Bible, a Czech grammar, and the
first Czech speller. Jan Blahoslav and Jan Josquin, members of the
Jednota, wrote the first music treatises in Czech, the only music texts known to have been written by Czech Protestants during the entire Czech Renaissance. Few Western scholars have more than superficially pursued the topic of music in Renaissance Bohemia-
Moravia ; research by the Moravian Music Foundation and the Moravian
College has centered primarily on the history and music of the
Jednota after its revival as the Moravian Church in 1722 at Herrnhut.
Careful examination of these first Czech music treatises makes it possible to evaluate the music theory of the early Jednota and, in turn, to gain a better comprehension of an era in Czech music history that has been relatively unexplored.
XI Because Jan Blahoslav (1523-71) was a bishop, diplomatic
representative, and publisher, a significant amount of information
about him exists. We know that he traveled extensively and studied
in Wittenberg, Konigsberg, and Basel. He personally knew Martin
Luther and Philip Melanchton, and may have also met Martin Agricola,
Adrianus Petit Coclico, Heinrich Faber, Hermann Finck, and Georg Rhau
during his travels. Blahoslav was a prolific writer, and at least 58
of his works, dating from 1550-71, are extant. A list of these
titles can be found in Appendix A of this study.
Of particular interest is Blahoslav's Musica (1558), the first
music treatise to be printed in the Czech language. Although no copy
of the first edition has survived, at least two copies of the 1569
reprint still exist. The 1569 revision contains two major
supplements: "Some instructions necessary for those who wish to sing
well" and "Teachings necessary for those who wish to compose songs.
The second music treatise to be printed in the Czech language,
the Muzika of Jan Josquin, appeared in 1561. One copy survives, but
it lacks the final two sections dealing with polyphony and text
setting. While it is possible that "Jan Josquin" is the author's
true name, many Czech historians believe that it is a pseudonym used
by the Jednota priest Vaclav Solin (1527-66). Little is known about
Solin; his identity would probably have been lost to us if he had not
collaborated with Blahoslav in the printing of the 1561 and 1564
^The expression "to compose songs," to members of the Jednota bratrska, meant only to attach words to preexisting melodies.
Xll editions of the Jednota hymnal. While other identities for "Jan
Josquin" have been suggested, most of the evidence favors the
assertion that the author of the Muzika of 1561 was Vaclav Solin.
The treatises of Jan Blahoslav and Jan Josquin hold few
surprises in terms of their content. These primers were directed
toward the beginning musician of the Jednota, a group whose worship
music apparently did not extend beyond vocal monophony. The
essential instructions for a practical understanding of singing are
discussed and illustrated with numerous examples. In general, both works show a close relationship to the treatises of contemporary
Wittenberg theorists. Blahoslav borrowed heavily from Hermann Finck,
Nikolaus Listenius, and Adrianus Coclico, while Josquin is greatly
indebted to Listenius.
The primary purpose of this dissertation is to present the 1558 portion of Blahoslav's Mus ica and the surviving eight chapters of
Josquin's Muzika in English translation. Only the original portion of the Musica has been translated in this dissertation because it alone concerns music theory. The 1569 supplements deal with conducting, pronunciation, the cantor's management of the choir, and text setting in the Czech language. It is unfortunate that the only extant copy of Josquin's treatise is incomplete. Although the separated portion of the Muzika had evidently been reattached at some 2 point, the end of chapter eight, chapters nine and ten, and the
2A significant layer of yellowish paste remains in the inside spine immediately following the last existing page of text.
Xlll errata are missing.
The most obvious necessity for the translation of Blahoslav's
Musica and Josquin's Muzika is that these historical documents of music theory are printed in sixteenth-century Czech. Although a
Czech transcription of both treatises was published in 1896 by Otakar 3 Hostinsky, no music treatise written in sixteenth-century Czech had been translated into English, or into any other language, prior to this study. The primary consideration, therefore, has been to make the treatises of Blahoslav and Josquin accessible and understandable to English-speaking scholars by way of translations that follow the original texts as closely as is practical. I have provided a m o d e m
Czech transcription of each treatise to accompany my translation; photocopies of the original documents are included in Appendix E
(Blahoslav's Musica) and Appendix F (Josquin's Muzika) to make comparison possible.
Very little information exists about musical practice in
Bohemia-Moravia during the Renaissance; much of the information that is printed in English is based on inadequate presentations by Czech researchers working in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It appeared necessary, therefore, to place these treatises, the authors, and the Jednota bratrska movement itself, in historical perspective before proceeding to the translations.
3 Otakar Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav £ Jan Josquin (Prague; Rozpravy cesky akademie, 1896), 1-104.
XIV Part I of this dissertation begins with an overview of the political and religious situation in Bohemia-Moravia during the
Bohemian Reformation. Next, it presents a biography of Jan Blahoslav.
Because the author of Josquin's Muzika has not yet been conclusively identified, it presents a summation of the major arguments regarding the identity of Jan Josquin as well as biographical information about
Vaclav Solin. Part I concludes with a discussion of the theoretical concepts presented in the treatises and the identification of the probable sources of ideas and illustrations. Although Blahoslav mentioned an indebtedness to only Finck and Coclico, this discussion will show that Blahoslav also borrowed heavily from Listenius and, to a lesser extent, Vaclav Philomathes. Although Josquin did not mention an indebtedness to any theorist, this discussion will show that much of his Muzika is modeled after the treatises of Listenius and Blahoslav.
Part II of this dissertation begins with technical information regarding the editions of the treatises and the procedures employed in preparing the transcriptions and translations. Czech-English editions of Blahoslav's Musica and Josquin's Muzika then follow.
XV PART I
THE COMMENTARY CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Protestantism in Bohemia-Moravia
To place the treatises of Blahoslav and Josquin in proper perspective, it is necessary to consider the religious history of
Central Europe and its influence on Protestant writers. The first portion of this chapter traces the evolution of Protestantism in
Bohemia-Moravia from the beginning of the Hussite movement in 1401 to the fate of the Czech National Utraquist Church in 1620. The second portion deals with the Jednota bratrska, an austere sect that separated from the Utraquist Church and that counted Jan Blahoslav and Jan Josquin in its membership.
The Utraquist Church
The insurrection against the Catholic Church in Bohemia began in
1401 with the appointment of Jan Hus as rector of Prague's Bethlehem
Chapel. Built in 1391 by merchants and burghers, Bethlehem Chapel was not under direct ecclesiastical authority and soon became the focal point of the growing reform movement in Bohemia. Hus, a
Catholic priest, believed that the Church had deviated from its original course and had fallen into chaos and corruption. Hus stood against the ritualized trappings of a worship service accompanied by 3 florid polyphony; he advocated responsive readings and monophonic congregational singing in the vernacular. Preaching in Czech rather than in Latin, Hus enjoyed widespread support not only from scholars and students dedicated to rectifying the vices of the Church, but also from the Czech-speaking masses as well.
In 1409 the Council of Pisa met to resolve the Great Schism of
1378. The cardinals voted to depose both Gregory XII and
Benedict XIII and to elect Alexander V as pontiff. Neither Gregory nor Benedict, however, was willing to abide by the decision of the council, and the Church faithful took sides in a three-way division.
King Vaclav (Wenceslaus IV) of Bohemia supported the decision of the council, but the German faculty of the multinational university at Prague spoke out against both the council and the king's support.
Formerly, the native Bohemians on the faculty had held only one vote while the Germans held three votes. Infuriated over the opposition encountered from the German faculty, Vaclav reversed the traditional voting rights. The result was that many members of the faculty returned to Germany and the Vaclav appointed a Czech, Jan Hus, as dean of the university. The Germans, many settling in Leipzig, mounted a campaign to portray Hus as the chief exponent of Wycliffe's beliefs in Bohemia. Pope Alexander, attempting to restrain the rising tide of anticlericalism, ordered the cessation of all preaching in independent chapels and an end to the discussion of
Wycliffe's ideas. Hus refused to obey the papal directive and, although excommunicated in 1411, continued to preach at Bethlehem
Chapel and to teach at the university. 4 Discontentment with Church policy was fueled in 1412 by the
struggle between John XXIII (Alexander's successor) and King Ladislav
of Naples. Ladislav, a supporter of the deposed Pope Gregory, had
taken control of Rome and had forced John to flee from the Vatican.
John, in an effort to finance the war against Ladislav, offered
indulgences to those contributing to his papal treasury. Hus attacked the practice of selling indulgences, leading the Archbishop
Sbinko of Prague to accuse the city of harboring a heretic. King
Vaclav announced punitive measures against the clergy in Prague in retaliation for Sbinko's accusation, whereupon Pope John placed the city under interdiction and threatened to excommunicate any person who would enforce the king's order.
The matter remained in stalemate until Sigismund, Holy Roman
Emperor, persuaded Pope John to convene the Council of Konstanz in order to end both the Schism and the accusations of heresy in
Bohemia. Hoping to defend himself against the indictment and to see the reconstitution of one Church under the leadership of one pope,
Hus arrived in Konstanz on 3 November 1414 with a promise of safe conduct from Sigismund. By March 1415, however, the council had turned against all three popes, had proclaimed itself as the supreme governing body of the Church, and had convinced Sigismund to withdraw his promise of safe conduct to Hus. Council authorities imprisoned
Hus and, on 6 July 1415, executed the spiritual leader of the Czech reform movement.
A letter of protest, signed by 452 members of the Czech nobility, was sent to the council during the following September. Nevertheless, Jeronÿm Prazkÿ, a companion of Hus who had gone
voluntarily to Konstanz to assist with Hus's defense and to answer
questions regarding his own composition of songs in the vernacular,
was executed on 30 May 1416.
The "Hussites" rallied around Jan 2izka as their military
commander and open revolt broke out in 1419. Many of the Catholic
clergy were killed, and the possessions of churches and monasteries
were confiscated by Czech municipalities. Many Czechs, believing
that the Day of Judgment was at hand, united in common city-
strongholds to await the Lord's coming. Thus, the country divided
into Protestant and Catholic towns and local skirmishes abounded.
When King Vaclav died in 1419, the Czechs refused to accept his brother and hereditary heir to the throne, Sigismund, because of
Sigismund's role in the imprisonment and execution of Hus. Sigismund mounted two "crusades," in 1420 and 1431, and numerous smaller
campaigns in hopes of subjugating the country, but for 15 years the
Czech army under Zizka and Prokop the Great succeeded in winning every battle.
Representatives of the warring factions met at Cheb (western
Bohemia) in 1432 to discuss the Four Articles of Prague. This brief statement was a summation of Hussite demands: freedom for the clergy to preach without restriction, the right of the laity to celebrate communion under both species (bread and wine), a reduction in the secular power of the clergy, and the exposition and punishment of sins committed by public officials. 6
Although they presented a unified military front against the
forces of the Holy Roman Empire, the Hussites were divided from
within as early as 1420. The conservative Utraquists (from sub
utraque specie, "under both species") consisted primarily of
university faculty, nobles, and burghers who were willing to reunite
with the Church under a modified version of the Four Articles; the more radical Taborites (who took their name from their principal
stronghold in southern Bohemia, Tabor) would accept no compromise.
Dividing the once-invincible Czech army, the Utraquists came to a preliminary agreement with papal diplomats in 1433. Fighting against not only the Catholic forces but against the Utraquists as well, the Taborites were overwhelmed at the Battle of Liban in
May 1434.
The modified Four Articles were ratified by Utraquist and
Catholic representatives in 1436 as the Compactata de Basle. The
Compactata was so vaguely worded, however, that the compromise agreement satisfied virtually no one. The Utraquist community was unhappy because of additional concessions; the Catholics in Prague refused to accept Jan Rokycana, the Utraquist bishop largely responsible for ratification of the Compactata, as their spiritual leader in Bohemia, and further refused to accept the Compactata until it was sanctioned by the pope.
Realizing that there could be no lasting peace without a resolution of the religious issue. King Jifi z Podebrady petitioned
Pope Pius II in 1462 to sanction the Compactata. The pope, however, annulled the agreement approved by papal diplomats in 1436. In 1466 7 Pope Paul II excommunicated Jiri for continuing to allow the laity to receive communion under both species, as had been allowed under the
Compactata, and released Catholic subjects living in Bohemia-Moravia from all pledges of allegiance to the king. Despite this apparent setback, the Czech Utraquists and Catholics came to an unofficial truce and the country enjoyed a period of relative peace.
In 1525 Ferdinand of Austria— a Catholic Habsburg who later became Holy Roman Emperor in 1558— was elected king of Bohemia by the
Czech nobility. Ferdinand promised substantial concessions in order to acquire the throne and was bound by his coronation oath to uphold the Compactata in spite of its nullification by Pope Pius. Thus,
Ferdinand was obliged to tolerate the national Utraquist Church.
The Bohemian nobles refused to support the Habsburgs in the
Scbmalkaldic War, a confrontation between the Holy Roman Empire and the defensive allegiance of Protestant estates in Saxony. This became the pretense under which Ferdinand severely curtailed the power of the Protestant estate holders in Bohemia and introduced the newly established, militant Society of Jesus into the country.
Because the Moravian nobles had provided financial assistance to the
Habsburgs in the Schmalkaldic War, the Protestant estate holders in
Moravia were unaffected by Ferdinand's persecution of the Utraquists in Bohemia. Consequently, many Protestants fled from Bohemia to the neighboring protectorate of Moravia.
Despite Ferdinand's commitment to the re-Catholicization of
Bohemia, both his son, Maximilian II, and grandson, Rudolf II, adopted a more tolerant attitude toward the Protestants. In Rudolf's 8
case, especially, this relaxation can be attributed to his need for
the support of the Czech nobility, many of whom belonged to the
Utraquist Church. Only the provincial governments had the authority
to levy taxes in Bohemia-Moravia, and Rudolf was dependent upon these
taxes to finance his war against the Turks. In 1619 Rudolf even went
so far as to issue the Majestat, officially granting freedom of
worship to Catholics and Protestants alike and permitting a situation
in Bohemia-Moravia that existed nowhere else in Europe.
The final conflict between Catholic and Protestant forces was
initiated by the Defenestration of Prague on 23 May 1618. Two
Catholic vice regents, accused of violating the Majestat, were thrown
from a window of the Royal Chancellery of Hradcany Palace by angry
Bohemian nobles. The Czech Catholic governors were divested of all
authority, the Jesuits were banned from Bohemia, and appeals were made abroad for assistance in the inevitable encounter with the
forces of the Holy Roman Empire. The German Protestant princes, however, were reluctant to become involved in another war with the
Habsburgs, and even the majority of Moravian estate holders voted to
remain neutral.
Following the death of Emperor Matthias in 1619 and the
ascension to power by Ferdinand II, the war against the Protestants began in earnest. On 8 November 1620 the Protestant forces of
Bohemia were defeated at the Battle of Bila Hora. Ferdinand
rescinded the Majestât, reintroduced the Jesuit Society, and
initiated an intense program of re-Catholicization of both Bohemia
and Moravia. The leaders of the rebellion were executed, and the 9
surviving Protestants were forced either to accept the Catholic faith
or to emigrate to more tolerant, foreign countries.
■ Jednota bratrska
It was during the reign of Jiri z Podebrady that a small group of the surviving Taborites, known as the Jednota bratrska, was granted colonization rights to the nearly deserted village of Kunvald
(central Moravia) in 1457. In contrast to the earlier Taborite movement, however, the doctrines of the Jednota advocated patience, nonviolence, and a love of one's enemies. In 1467 the Jednota sect broke completely from the national Utraquist Church by electing its own bishop. Although no longer recognized and protected under the
Utraquist agreements with the Catholics, the Jednota continually harassed the Catholics, as well as the Utraquists, in public speeches and in printed material. In return, the sect was cruelly persecuted by both the Catholics and Utraquists and, in 1508, Vaclav II issued the Mandate of St. James. This declaration ordered that all writings of the Jednota be burned and made the printing of new ones a punishable offense. Nevertheless, the Jednota movement flourished in rural areas, owned three of the five printing presses in Bohemia, was responsible for 50 of the 60 works printed in Bohemia between 1500 and 1510, and, by 1517, had over 200,000 followers.^ Before the rebellion in 1618, the Jednota had also published 11 monophonic hymnals, a complete Bible in Czech, the first Czech speller, a Czech
^John Hutton, A History of the Moravian Church (London: Moravian Publication Office, 1909), 61. 10 grammar, and two music treatises (the first of which later appeared in an expanded edition).
The number and variety of works published by the Jednota is a testimony to the widespread literacy of its membership. The primary endeavor to understand the Bible and to live according to its teachings made literacy a prerequisite for the entire congregation.
The relatively high level of education that was maintained, however, was treated with suspicion by outsiders. Frequent accounts, primarily by Catholic authors, credited this high level of education to the Devil; supposedly the Devil infused new members of the Jednota with the knowledge of reading. It is recorded in the year 1517, for example, that Prior Jan Strakonicky wrote to Jiri Volunsky, a Jednota priest, and demanded an explanation regarding the issue. Strakonicky stated that he himself had interviewed a farmer who declared that he, upon joining the Jednota, immediately knew how to read, and upon 2 quitting, immediately forgot how to read.
Prior to the sixteenth century, the Jednota educated their children and servants at home, where they obtained a basic knowledge of religion, reading, and mathematics. Jednota parish schools came into being during the first part of the sixteenth century. Here, the novice advanced not only to higher skills, but also received training in a practical craft. Although usually superior in quality to the education available to the general populace, the education provided to novitiates was largely dependent upon the qualifications and
^Josef Muller, Die deutschen Katechismen der Bohmischen Briider (Berlin: A. Hofmann, 1887),319. 11
talents of the manager assigned to that district. Following their
training in the parish schools, many students were sent abroad to 3 continue their studies.
Although the Jednota bratrska did not participate in the Battle of Bila Hora, the membership suffered the same consequences as other
Protestant factions. Forced into exile, the Jednota moved its documents and seat of authority to Amsterdam. Here, initially under the leadership of Bishop Jan Amos Komensky (Comenius), the surviving disciples strove to retain their religious identity while living among a foreign population. In 1722, largely due to the efforts of
Count Nikolaus Ludwig von Zinzendorf, the church was formally revived at Hermhut. The sect exists today as the Moravian Church.
Leopold Calabek, "Nâbozenské pomery v rodiste Blahoslavove [The Religious Situation in Blahoslav's Native Town],” Sbomik Blahoslavuv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny and Rudolf Urbanek (Prerov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923), 42-48. CHAPTER II
THE BIOGRAPHY OF JAN BLAHOSLAV
Jan Blahoslav was one of the most prolific and interesting
individuals of the Czech Renaissance. A bishop of the Jednota bratrska during its golden age, Blahoslav's secondary interests and assigned duties within that religious organization caused him to function as an archivist, editor, diplomat, musician, educator, publisher, grammarian, and translator. Although all of his works possess an inseparable attachment to religion, it is a characteristic of his writing style that annotations about commonplace events, practices, and prejudices are habitually interjected into his essays.
Thus, by his talkativeness, Blahoslav assured the survival of a wealth of diverse historical and technical information about the
Czech Renaissance that would otherwise be lost.
Vavrinec Orlik, who succeeded Blahoslav as scribe of the Jednota following Blahoslav's death in 1571, provided two biographical accounts of his predecessor in the Jednota*s Nekrologium. These accounts are the primary sources for Blahoslav's biography. The first of these is the autobiography of Blahoslav, which was transcribed by Orlik from notes prepared by Blahoslav before his death:
12 13
I, Jan Blahoslav, was born in the year of our Lord 1523 on the first day of Lent, at the I6th hour. In the year of our Lord 1540, on the Feast of St. Gall, Brother Wolff took me from Pferov to Prostëjov so that I would be a stableboy for Brother Martin Michalec, whose stableboy I remained until his death. In the meantime, I was sent by him to study in Goldberg, and I was there for a year. Then, in the year 1544, I was sent to Wittenberg with some other young men, and we arrived there on the Saturday before the Feast of St. John the Baptist, and I was also one year in Wittenberg. In the year of our Lord 1547 my master, Martin Michalec, died, and the Elders gave me as a housekeeper to Brother Matous Strejc, with whom I remained a year. In the year 1548, after the Feast of the Apostles, the Jednota gave me to Brother Jan Cerny and sent me to [Mlada] Boleslav. In the year 1549 I was sent by Brother Jan C e m y to study in Prussia, in Konigsberg. We did not stay in Prussia very long because of the outbreak of cholera, but all of us returned to Brother Mach [Sionsky] in Doubravna sometime after the Feast of St. James. In that same year, 1549, Rokyta and I were again sent abroad to study, to Basel. But I became seriously ill there and, from the spring of 1550, was ill for many weeks. After Easter (having somewhat recovered) I returned home again. In the year 1553 I accepted the office of student priest during the time of Lent in Hromic, and on the second Sunday after Pentecost, I was ordained a priest in Prerov. In 1557 I was accepted into the Inner Council and, on the same day, I was elected a bishop. In the year 1558 I moved to Ivancice and its environs. I arrived there, from Boleslav, around the first Sunday after Pentecost. Who knows when and in what year the Lord God will want to take me? When the time comes. He will designate the time and the manner.1
Likewise, Orlik inscribed Blahoslav's obituary into the
Nekrologium;
In this year 1571, on Saturday the 24th of November at the 23rd hour, in a field in [Moravsky] Krumlov, died Brother Jan Blahoslav. He was one of the leading four [bishops], scribe of the Jednota, a father and shepherd of the people of the Jednota,
Joseph Fiedler, "Todtenbuch der Geistlichkeit der Bohmischen Briider," Fontes rerum austriacarum V (1863), 256-257. The entries of the Nekrologium are categorized by year in the Akta Jednoty bratrske, currently held by the Zemsky Archiv v Praze. The entries cited are according to Fiedler's reprint. All translations are mine unless otherwise noted. 14
a great and excellent man, very religious, very industrious from his youth, and to all people he was always very nice, and his fame spread widely among our nation and to other nations. This was a great and precious jewel of the Jednota and too soon, according to our opinion, God has taken him from us. But only He knows why He took him (God's judgments are incomprehensible). Therefore, this year is very sad (because so many upright trees in the garden of the Jednota, like Brother Augusta, were taken down).2
A more comprehensive biography of Jan Blahoslav can be pieced
together with the aid of four sources: Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin
(1896) by Otakar Hostinsky; Jan Blahoslav (1966) by Josef Janacek;
Sbomik Blahoslavuv (1923), a collection of articles edited by Vaclav
Novotny and Rudolf Urbdnek; Jan Blahoslav Prerovsky (1971), a collection of articles edited by Frantisek Hybl and Gustav Vozda. A map of sixteenth-century Bohemia-Moravia is shown in Plate I to aid the reader in tracing Blahoslav's movements.
Blahoslav*s Early Years
Jan Blahoslav was b o m in Prerov at 4:00 p.m. on 20 February
1523. His father's name was "Blazek," an abbreviation of the name
"Blahoslav" (wealth and glory). Although the aristocratic ancestry of the Blazek family has been both "conclusively" proven and disproven by respected Czech scholars, the only real evidence of the family's wealth was discovered by Leopold Calabek in 1916. This information is related by Frantisek Chudoba in an article of 1923:
2 Fiedler, "Todtenbuch," Fontes rerum austriacarum, 256. 15
PLATE I
Map of Sixteenth-Century Bohemia-Moravia
0 Goldberg
Mladà Boleslav
Libâri
Prague Kunvald
^ ^ Olomouc «Uranice Tibor ^ihlava • Lipnik •Prerov Jindrichûv Hradecl Trebl£ Sleaanech • i # IvanSice * / / - 1 Kralice Moravsky Krumlov J / / The "Slovakia" portion of ^ / Czechoslovakia was not annexed until Znoimo / 29 October 1918. ///.*/ - / , BOUNDARY OF BOHEMIA AND MORAVIA f// //////: VienniV / /
The boundries of this map are according to The New Cambridge Modem History Atlas (p. 126). 16 [Calâbek] found, in the "foundations-register" of the city of Pferov from the second half of the sixteenth century, a note dating from 1565 according to which Blahoslav, "in a letter under the seal of the city of Ivancice," "passed to his sister, the wife of Bernard," Zuzanne his share of the property inherited from his parents and his brother, Martin Abdon [died 1561]. His share was bound by a debt on the house that his mother, Katerina Blazek, had sold for 550 kops on the Monday commemorating Master Jan Hus in 1561 to her son-in-law Bernard who, however, readily paid only 100 kops. As much as the house stood "on the hill," that is, in the upper square of Pferov, close to the old castle, it obviously belonged among the respected bourgeois houses. As much as we do not know, however, how long this house was in the property of the Blazek family, we cannot know with assurance that Blahoslav was b o m in this house.3
Blahoslav's mother, Katefina, was the daughter of a furrier
named "Bezpero" (without feathers); the family name of Bezpero is
still quite frequently mentioned in the town records of Pferov and
nearby Lipnik as recently as the first part of the seventeenth
century.
Because Blahoslav was taken to Prostëjov for apprenticeship on
16 October 1540, we can assume that his father had died before this
time. Martin Abdon, Blahoslav's only known broth(:r, was b o m on
1 February 1529. Martin was ordained a priest in the Jednota and
appointed as a clerical manager in Prague, where he lived until his death on 8 March 1561. Blahoslav's mother died the following year.
Virtually no information is recorded about Blahoslav's only known
sister, Zuzanne. Blahoslav's only other known relative, an uncle in
3 Frantisek Chudoba, "Jak pfibyvalo vëdomosti o Janu Blahoslavovi od doby obrozenske [How the Awareness of Jan Blahoslav was increased during the Era of Revival]," Sbomik Blahoslavuv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny and Rudolf Urbanek (Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923), 6-7. 17
the Bezpero family, died in Lipnik in 1565.^
Pferov, Blahoslav's birthplace, had been the center of one of
eight Moravian districts as early as the eleventh century. A
conservative town that had remained faithful to the Catholic ruling
class at the outbreak of the Hussite rebellion, Prerov was overrun by
the Hussite army in 1434. Because of its strategic position, the
town was a frequent battleground until 1438, when both the castle and
the surrounding municipality were burned to the ground. In 1457 King
Vladislav II was forced to use the reconstructed Prerov as collateral against his debts, and the town began to pass through a succession of different owners. The first of these was Vilem z Pernsteina, who evidently allowed his subjects complete religious freedom as long as he was not bothered by religious disputes between sects.
Records show that by 1518 a Jednota school had been established in Prerov under the direction of Dr. Vitt, and that by 1525 a
"larger" church had been built to accomodate increased numbers.^
When later reconstructing the Nekrologium after damage by fire,
Blahoslav does not mention Vitt, who died in 1531, as one of his former teachers at the school in Prerov. The school subsequently remained closed until 1533, when Jan Wolff was appointed as headmaster. Thus, it appears that Blahoslav did not attend the school in Prerov prior to the age of 10. It is from Blahoslav's obituary of Vitt in the Nekrologium, however, that we first l e a m
^Chudoba, "Jak pfibyvalo vedomosti," Sbornik Blahoslavuv, 7.
^Calabek, "Nâbozenské pomëry," Sbornik Blahoslavuv, 46. 18
that Blahoslav was a believer in witchcraft:
In the year of our Lord 1531 died Vitt, the doctor of Pferov, on the Saturday before the Feast of St. Matthew. He was a clean man, large, fat, with curly hair. For many years he was the cantor of the choir in Prerov. He was a student priest of the Jednota, then he married, took up the medical profession, and prospered greatly. Then witches took over the city of Prerov and cost many their lives, and among these, even the good doctor was poisoned. Neither privilege nor yeomanship granted by the Polish king could help him. His clan, the sons and the daughters, all died. None of his clan remained alive.^
In his Grammatika ceska, Blahoslav made a second reference to the practice of witchcraft in his native town:
. . . my beloved natal place, today for a number of reasons almost hated by me, mainly because of its criminal magic and even witchcraft that, I pray, the Lord may soon exterminate.^
In the Nekrologium, Blahoslav also commemorated his former teacher at the school. Brother Jan Wolff. This obituary reveals something of Blahoslav's education between the ages of 10 and 17:
And so in the year of our Lord 1548 died Brother Jan Wolff in Prerov, on the Friday before the Feast of SS. Simon and Jude, after the 15th hour. He was very dear to the Lord and to almost all who knew him, as he was very kind; he was buried in Sirave by the Elder, Brother Daniel. There is much to tell about this man. I was with him in my childhood. Whenever I remember the actions of this man I always wonder about him, because I have never known anyone like him; even now in the Jednota there is no one similar to him in these things: courtesy, pleasantness, careful speech, piety, exanq)lariness, seriousness, kindness toward people and the ability to attract them to himself, and so on. And although simple, he, nevertheless, was a pleasant
^Fiedler, "Todtenbuch," Fontes rerum austriacarum, 226-227.
^Jan Blahoslav, Grammatika ceska, ed. by Ignac Hradil and Josef Jirecek (Vienna: L. Grunda, 1857), 174-175. The original is currently held by the Theresian Bibliothek in Vienna. 19 preacher, a scribe, a man skilled in German, and a good manager who used to be a housekeeper for the Elder, Brother Lukas. He composed a large number of songs, many of which are in the new hymnal. I have never met, among the Jednota managers, any man who had fewer passions or vices than he. So great was this man's carefulness that he truly knew how to control himself. He was a man, but a rare sort of man. He knew very little Latin, but nevertheless was well learned and accomplished. He also knew physics. He was ordained a priest in 1526, and was a member of the Inner Council.8
On 16 October 1540 Brother Jan Wolff took the 17-year-old
Blahoslav to Bishop Martin Michalec in Prostëjov (18 kilometers west of Pferov). It was under Michalec's supervision that Blahoslav, as a stableboy, must have received his elementary instruction in the Latin language.
In 1543 Blahoslav and Matous Tatik were placed in charge of several younger students and sent to study in Goldberg (Silesia) with the renowned humanist, Valentine Friedland Trotzendorf. The objective of Trotzendorf's gymnasium was to prepare students for the study of theology at the university level by emphasizing the reading of Latin (the only language used in the instruction at the school) and Greek, spelling, and oratory. Trotzendorf's pedagogical regimen consisted of drill and severe discipline, with some accounts reporting serious physical punishments for students falling behind in their studies.
Blahoslav remained in Goldberg for one year, and in 1544 went with four other Jednota students to study in Wittenberg. He arrived at the home of Kaspar Peucer in May of 1544, registering at the
O Fiedler, "Todtenbuch," Fontes rerum austriacarum, 234-235. 20 university under the name "Joannes Blasius Przeroviensis" (Jan Blazek g Prerovsky). A fellow Czech, Peucer was a professor at the university who later became the son-in-law of Philip Melanchton.
While in Wittenberg, Blahoslav attended the lectures of both
Melanchton and Luther, later declaring in his Grammatika ceska that he was surprised that the Jednota and the Lutherans held such similar _. . . 10 views on religious issues.
In Wittenberg, Blahoslav undoubtedly pursued his musical education as well as his religious training. A number of theorists are known to have been active in Wittenberg during the year 1544-45, and Blahoslav likely came in contact with them during his brief stay.
The musician and publisher Georg Rhau served as town councillor in
Wittenberg from 1541 until his death in 1548; Heinrich Faber, who later wrote three theoretical texts (1548-50), matriculated at the university in 1541 and received a Master of Arts degree in 1545;
Hermann Finck, who later wrote a treatise (1556) from which Blahoslav took much of the information for his Musica, matriculated at the university in 1545; Adrianus Petit Coclico, who later claimed to have studied with Josquin Desprez (1552),^ ^ is likewise first mentioned in the register of the university in 1545. Coclico taught privately in
Wittenberg, and later tried unsuccessfully to win a position on the faculty. There is no documentation as to whether Blahoslav actually
^Chudoba, "Jak pfibyvalo vëdomosti," Sbornik Blahoslavuv, 7.
^^Blahoslav, Grammatika ceska, 162.
^^Coclico, Compendium musices (Blv). 21 met Rhau, Faber, Finck, or Coclico, but the opportunity seems to have existed in each case.
Blahoslav returned to Prostëjov from Wittenberg in 1545; we do not, however, know anything of Blahoslav's activities between this time and 1547.
Following the death of Martin Michalec in Prostëjov in January
1547, Matous Strejc assumed the spiritual responsibility for the
Jednota in central Moravia. Shortly thereafter, Blahoslav was appointed as housekeeper for the clergy in Prostëjov, who were not permitted to employ female servants.
In 1548 Blahoslav was assigned as an aid to Bishop Jan Cerny in
Mlada Boleslav. Boleslav, near Prague, had been the headquarters of the Jednota in Bohemia since the turn of the century and remained so until their protector. Sir Arnost Krajir, died in March 1555.
(Shortly after this Arnost's sons "converted" to Catholicism upon 12 threats of fines to be imposed by King Ferdinand, and the Jednota was forced to leave Boleslav.)
Blahoslav's first stay with Bishop C e m y did not last long.
Already before Easter of 1549 Blahoslav was sent once again to study abroad, this time at the newly established university at Konigsberg.••13
If Blahoslav had not met Coclico in Wittenberg, the two may have met in Konigsberg. Coclico matriculated at the university in September
12The Muzika of Jan Josquin, dated 9 November 1561, is dedicated to the sons of Sir Arnost Krajir. 13 Many Czech historians erroneously indicate that Blahoslav was sent to Hradec Krâlové (Koniggratz) rather than to Kralovce (Konigsberg). 22 1547, remaining in the city until 1550 when his housekeeper bore him
an illegitimate son.
A serious theological dispute broke out almost immediately
between the Czech students in Konigsberg and the professor of
theology, Andreas Osiander. The situation was further aggravated by
an outbreak of cholera that swept through Prussia in 1549, and the
Czech students left Konigsberg in July of that same year.
After leaving Konigsberg, Blahoslav and another Jednota student,
Jan Rokyta from Litomysl, were boarded at the home of Mach Sionsky.
Sionsky was the Jednota bishop in jurisdiction over the Poles and
Prussians, living in nearby Doubravna (Gilgenberg). During this interim, Blahoslav met Dr. Pavel Sperata from Jihlava, the Jednota bishop in Poznan. This was an important event for Blahoslav, because
Sperata gave him several letters of recommendation that would assist him in further studies abroad. After this brief stay in Doubravna,
Blahoslav and Rokyta continued their journey back to Moravia.
On 28 October 1549 a Jednota synod was convened in Prostëjov to discuss a possible reconciliation with the Lutherans. The nonviolent
Jednota had broken off formal relations with the Lutherans in 1525 after the savage repression of the peasant revolt by the Lutheran princes. The question of sending scholars abroad to study, in view of the unhappy situation at Konigsberg, was also discussed at this synod. It was decided that a group, including Blahoslav's younger brother Martin Abdon, was to return to Konigsberg but that Blahoslav and Rokyta should go to Basel. 23
Immediately leaving Prostëjov and traveling through Bohemia and
southern Germany, Blahoslav reached Basel sometime around 1 December
1549. The letters of recommendation given to him by Dr. Sperata
enabled Blahoslav to be accepted into the homes of many learned
scientists in Basel, and in particular, into that of Zigmund Hruby
from Jelenia Gora. Zigmund was associated with the printing shop of
Jerome Probin, a famous publisher of classical authors. Zigmund
introduced Blahoslav to the art of editing and printing which, at the
same time, strengthened Blahoslav's interest in classical literature.
This was a milestone in Blahoslav's education, because he would later
become the Jednota's chief editor and would himself establish a
printing shop in Ivancice.
Blahoslav was able to enjoy the favor of these sponsors only
during the winter of 1549-50. He fell seriously ill sometime after
the first of the year and was no longer able to participate in
studies at the university. He partially recovered after Easter,
recuperating under the care of Dr. Kraton, the personal physician of
Maximilian II. Dr. Kraton, feeling that Blahoslav would be able to
survive the rigors of a long journey, advised him to return to Prerov
to continue his recovery. Accompanied by Rokyta, Blahoslav made the
trip from Basel to Regensberg by carriage, and from Regensberg to
Vienna by boat on the Danube. Blahoslav and Rokyta parted in Vienna,
Blahoslav continuing to Moravia unaccompanied, Rokyta returning to
Basel where he would study for three additional years. 24
Blahoslav as Author and Editor
During his recovery in Pferov, Blahoslav authored his first work at age 27. In this work, Spis o zraku (1550), he discussed how a man can avoid falling into trouble by a careful scrutiny of the events around him. This work presents a good example of Blahoslav's understanding of human nature. Blahoslav admits that he is well- aware of the temptation of the opposite sex and notes that God
Himself likes to look at pretty girls (!), but observes that
Christians are expected to show discipline and to curb their desires.This handbook became the workbook for moral education among the Jednota. It is from this work, Spis £ zraku (Writing about
Sight), that we also l e a m that Blahoslav was among the first to wear eyeglasses in Moravia.
As Blahoslav gained better health, he began to teach at the
Jednota school in Prostëjov where he himself had once studied under
Michalec.It is widely believed that Blahoslav wrote his Slabikafe ceskeho, the first spelling primer of the Czech language, during this time. The work was not published and is no longer extant. In this same period he also met Benes Optât, the Utraquist priest who had coauthored (with Petr Gzel and Vaclav Philomathes) a Czech grammar, the Etymologia (1533), and who had translated the New Testament of the
Jan Blahoslav, Spis o zraku, ed. by Frantisek Chudoba (Prague: Rozpravy ceske akademie, 1928), 36. The original is currently held by the Knihovha narodniho Muzea v Praze.
^^Blahoslav, Spis o zraku, 18.
^^Like Blahoslav, Jan Amos Komensky (Comenius, 1592-1670) was born in Prerov and attended the Jednota school in Prostëjov. 25
Vulgate into Czech. Blahoslav doubtlessly learned from Optât about
the pitfalls that he himself would encounter in his own translation of
the New Testament (1564) and in the preparation of his own Czech
grammar (1571).
After a fire in Litomysl severely damaged the historical
archives of the Jednota in 1546 or 1547, Jan Cerny began the
difficult task of restoring and moving the remnants of the archives
to Mlada Boleslav. In 1552 Blahoslav was recalled to Boleslav to
assist with the memoirs, which in 1589 culminated in 14 handwritten
pamphlets collectively entitled the Akta Jednoty bratrske.^^
Just as the people of the Old Testament believed themselves to
be the Chosen People and therefore wished to record their history for
perpetuity, so did the Jednota believe themselves to be the Chosen
Ones of the New Testament. To record their history, the Jednota
founded the office of the "Pxsar Jednoty" (Scribe of the Union),
whose duties made him the historian and keeper of the archives.
Volumes one through six of the Akta were edited by Jan Cerny.
Blahoslav edited the seventh volume, most of the eighth, and part of
the ninth. Other writers expanded the collection with five more 18 volumes. As a supplement to the Akta, Blahoslav added the Historia
^^The Akta are currently held by the Zemsky Archiv v Praze.
18 The Akta continued to be expanded until the death of Vavrinec Orlik in 1589. The collection appears to have been discontinued at this time for two reasons: first, there was a lack of diligence on the part of Blahoslav's successors in training new recorders; second, the increased religious tolerance under Maximilian II and Rudolf II made the gathering and copying of documents less important, and documents came to be directly deposited into the Jednota library at Ivancice. 26 19 Fratrum Bohemicorum ab anno 1458 usque ad 1535. The Historia
Pratrum is a chronological ordering of the earlier documents of the
Jednota. Although there is some question about the editorship, the
five volumes of the Historia Fratrum were bound together with
Blahoslav's collection of volumes seven through nine of the Akta and
were taken by him to Ivancice in 1558 as part of his personal
library. This seems to indicate that Blahoslav had the primary
editorial responsibility for the Historia Fratrum.
On 2 February 1553 Blahoslav, at age 30, was elevated to the
position of "jahren" (student priest) in Hromic, and on 30 June of
that same year, he was ordained a priest at the synod in Prerov.
Following his ordination in 1553, Blahoslav returned to Mlada
Boleslav to further assist Jan Cerny with the restoration of
documents, remaining there until 1555. In March of that year,
following the death of Sir Arnost Krajir, the Jednota moved its
archives back to Moravia.
Returning to Moravia, Blahoslav then embarked on two diplomatic missions to Vienna on behalf of the Jednota, the first shortly after
March 1556, and the second in November of that same year. These
trips were attempts to gain an audience with Archduke Maximilian who,
although a Habsburg, did look upon the Jednota with some favor. It was hoped that through their petitions, the Jednota would achieve
religious freedom and would also obtain the release of one of their
leading bishops, Jan Augusta, from Krivoklat prison. Because of the
The Historia Fratrum is currently held by the Klasterna Knihovna na Strove in Prague. 27 influence of the papal and Spanish ambassadors at court, however,
Maximilian could not be convinced to grant Blahoslav an audience.
Between his first and second trips to Vienna, Blahoslav visited
Magdeburg in May and June of 1556. Blahoslav's mission.was to deliver a personal letter from Jan Cerny to Matthais Flacius
Illyricus, the church historian of Magdeburg. Illyricus was evidently preaching against the Jednota who had taken up residence in
Magdeburg, but neither Cerny nor Blahoslav was able to convince him to stop.
Blahoslav's visit to Magdeburg provided him the opportunity of meeting Martin Agricola. While it is not certain that the two musicians met before Agricola died on 10 June of that year, Blahoslav was probably working on a draft of the Musica by 1556 and would likely have sought out this famous choirmaster of the Magdeburg
Lateinschule. Blahoslav returned home from Magdeburg in June 1556 via Wittenberg, Leipzig, and Regensberg, accompanied a large part of the way by Philip Melanchton.
In May and September of the following year, Blahoslav undertook two additional trips to Vienna in order to bring the petitions of the
Jednota before Archduke Maximilian. These trips, however, proved to be as unsuccessful as the previous missions.
In recognition of his service to the Jednota, Blahoslav was elevated to the position of bishop during the synod in Slezanech in
1557. In the summer of 1558, the Elders met in Mlada Boleslav to divide the work and the region of authority among the four Jednota bishops. At this meeting, the Elders promoted Blahoslav to the 28 position of Scribe of the Union, which made him responsible for keeping and updating the archives and acting as chancellor. Thus, beginning in 1558, Blahoslav's duties included maintaining the archives, censoring, and handling business negotiations. Most importantly, Blahoslav was given the responsibility of caring for the souls of the Jednota in southern Moravia. He moved both his personal belongings and the Jednota archives to Ivancice in late summer of
1558.
The arrival of a Jednota bishop in Ivancice caused a great deal of apprehension among the townspeople. Ivancice was a small farming community in southern Moravia. From the end of the fifteenth century onward, the Utraquists, Anabaptists, and Jednota had lived side by side without serious confrontation. Concern about their individual existences was shared in equal measure by all three Protestant groups, and it benefited all inhabitants not to create any problem that would inevitably bring Catholic forces into their town.
Because the spiritual community of the Jednota was strengthened by the arrival of a bishop, the previously existing stable relationships between the three Protestant sects became unbalanced.
In addition, there was concern that the activities of the new bishop might endanger a city currently living in harmony. Even the
Anabaptists, who had arrived from Alexovice in 1527 and who had maintained an isolated existence, called for a public debate between their clergy and the new Jednota bishop in order to define their doctrinal differences. Blahoslav agreed to debate with the
Anabaptists from Ivancice and Znojmo, even going so far as to arrange 29
for Jan Jelicky, an expert on both the Czech and German languages, to
act as interpreter. Although Blahoslav had just recently moved to
southern Moravia, during the first part of 1559 he was called to
Samotuly (central Poland) to assist with the printing of the Jednota hymnal. Consequently, Blahoslav was unable to personally attend the debate with the Anabaptists. Instead, Blahoslav sent his future coeditor of both the Samotulsky kancional (1561) and the Ivancicke kancional (1564), Vaclav Solin, as his representative.
The Elders of the Jednota had met in Prostejov in 1549 to consider the problem of doctrinally inaccurate singing and, in particular, the resultant problem of dealing with heresies that were being introduced into their services through the assimilation of foreign hymns. The Elders felt that not even the fraternal clergy were able to distinguish good songs from bad and that many clergy, however well intentioned, were permitting the singing of heretical texts by their choirs. There was also some concern with ideological contamination from within, because many clergymen were composing songs without proper regard for the teachings of the Jednota or for the principles of good vocal composition.
During the synod of 1555, the Elders decided that the hymnal should be newly arranged and printed. The hymnal currently in use had been printed in 1541; all copies of the hymnal had been sold out for some time, while those in use in many of the congregations were heavily worn from daily use.
Jan Cernÿ, head of the Jednota in Mlada Boleslav and director of all Jednota preachers in Bohemia, was appointed to chair the 30
committee that would select the hymns for the new hymnal; the
youngest member of the committee was Cerny's assistant in Boleslav,
Jan Blahoslav. This editorial committee was to retain, alter, or
exclude compositions in the existing hymnal, and to select for
inclusion other works by the younger members. Once the committee's work was sanctioned by the Elders, the new hymnal was to be printed 20 and distributed to the membership.
Because of the Mandate of St. James, the hymnal could not be printed in either Bohemia or Moravia without great danger. Even in
Prostejov, the Jednota headquarters in Moravia, the Utraquist majority did not look favorably upon the Jednota. Poland, although a predominantly Catholic country, was much more tolerant of Protestant activities, and it was there that the Jednota located a printer for the new hymnal.^ ^
Toward the end of 1559, the Elders decided that the hymnal was to be printed in its present state of revision; the committee had already worked on the hymnal for over four years and the opportunity for its publication arose through Alexander Aujezdecky. Aujezdecky was a Jednota immigrant from Plzen who had recently established a printing shop in the castle at Samotuly, an estate owned by Count
Lukas Hrabe from Gorky.
It appears that Blahoslav continued to edit and correct the selected material even in Samotuly, thereby delaying the printing of
9Q Josef Janacek, Jan Blahoslav (Prague: Svobodne slovo, 1966), 108.
21 Janacek, Jan Blahoslav, 111. 31
the hymnal. In 1560 the Elders sent Vaclav Solin to Samotuly to
speed the publication. Charged with this responsibility, Solin was
probably not able to give full consideration to the corrections made
by Blahoslav as "music editor" of the hymnal, and it is suspected
that friction developed between Blahoslav and Solin over the sharing 22 of responsibility.
The actual printing of the Samotulsky kancional began on 25
January 1560 and was completed on 7 June the following year. The
hymnal contains 735 songs, including approximately 450 that are
accompanied by music. The remaining songs are given only in text,
with indications that they should be sung to the melodies of
particular tunes. This approach made the hymnal accessible to
members who could not read music. Following an introduction and
dedication to the benefactor. Count Lukas, the hymnal is divided into
three sections: songs in the first group refer to events from the
New Testament, such as the incarnation of Christ, His birth, youth,
temptation, miracles, death, and ascension into Heaven; those in the
second group refer to the sacraments, such as baptism, penance, and
the Lord's Supper; those in the third group deal with ethics
(referring to the Ten Commandments), admonishments for a virtuous
life, and appeals for charitable acts.
Blahoslav was not satisfied, however, with the printed edition of the 1561 hymnal. Although this edition was finer than those that preceded it, he still viewed the Samotulsky kancional as an imperfect
222, Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, XXIII-XXIV; Janacek, Jan Blahoslav, 111. 32
work and one that fell short of his editorial objectives. Upon his
return to Ivancice, he immediately began to make corrections for a
second edition. Blahoslav's glossed copy of the 1561 edition became
the basis for the 1564 edition, published in his own parish of ^ 23 Ivancice.
One of the most interesting works of Jan Blahoslav is his
Rejstfik (Register) to the Samotulsky kancional. I n it, Blahoslav
identifies 527 composers of hymns found in the hymnal; no such
information is found in the hymnal itself. In the Rejstfik,
Blahoslav provides information about the history of the hymnal,
characterizations of many of the composers, many unique pieces of
information about the Jednota, and even a list of the 79 hymns that
he considers "excellent." From the Rejstfik, we also know that
Blahoslav was a practicing composer; he credits himself with 69
compositions. It is apparent from Hostinsky's study, however, that
Blahoslav wrote the music for no more than eight or nine of these 25 compositions; the Jednota understood the expression "pisnë
sklâdati" (to compose songs) to mean the attachment of words to preexisting melodies.
23 Blahoslav's glossed copy of the Pisne duchovni evangelistske is currently held by the Muzeum Jana Amose Komenskeho v Prerove.
^^The Rejstfik is found in the 9th volume of the Akta, currently held by the Zemsky Archiv v Praze.
^^Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, XV-LXVIII. 33 Blahoslav as Educator and Publisher
Upon returning to Ivancice from Samotuly, Blahoslav took charge
of the Jednota school that had been founded at the end of the
fifteenth century (see Plate II). With the exception of religious
training, the Ivancice school was barely approaching the level of
education provided by the municipal academy. Blahoslav immediately
introduced the study of languages, rhetoric, and music into the
curriculum. In addition, he reinstated the early tradition of manual
labor as part of the students' training, with particular tasks to be completed at a specific hour of the day.
Simon Bohumil Tumovsky, who later became a Jednota bishop himself, provided a contemporary description of Blahoslav's school in
1570. In a letter, Tumovsky stressed the rigid academic schedule similar to the regimen at Trotzendorf's gymnasium, which Blahoslav had attended in 1543-44. According to Tumovsky, Blahoslav's school of 40 male students was divided into "departments" of high and low:
After prayer, they each go to their own work, the boys to school, and the adolescents and young adults to their studies to be trained in languages, and to lectures in divinity.
In the lower school, the students were taught the grammar and spelling of the Czech language; in the higher school, students learned German, Latin, and possibly even Greek and Hebrew. Mornings were devoted to academic studies while aftemoons were devoted to
Simon Bohumil Tumovsky, "Ivancicky ustav," cited in Frantisek Hybl, "Jan Blahoslav a bratrske skolstvi," Jan Blahoslav Pferovsky (Prerov, Czechoslovakia: Mëstskÿ narodni vybor v Pferovë, 1971),34. 34
PLATE II
Seminary and Parish School of the Jednota bratrska in Ivancice (16th century).
m
The school was directly across the street from the Jednota rectory. The building is currently (1981) used as a warehouse by a toy and magazine distributor. 35 manual labor:
After lunch many, in particular the younger ones, have to work at something good with their hands until afternoon prayer. There, in my presence in Ivancice, several worked in the printing shop, others were binding books, still others, the stronger ones, were splitting wood. Some, I recall, were even weaving linen.27
Jan Lasicky, another observer, likewise wrote about the work environment of the Jednota schools:
In the home environment of the Jednota, several, especially the young, bind books (especially at Ivancice), others weave cloth, others sew clothes from furs and skins prepared elsewhere, others make bowls on a wheel, others catch fish, others work in the fields or in the gardens or orchards or vineyards, others split wood--one, two, or three hours before lunch and afterward.
In addition to reorganizing the school at Ivancice, Blahoslav established the first printing shop in southern Moravia (see
Plate III). Before the end of 1562, the printing equipment of
Alexander Aujezdecky, printer of the Samotulsky kancional, was purchased and brought to Ivancice from Poland. For security purposes, this equipment was installed in the complex of buildings that served as the Jednota parsonage, with the actual printing and binding of materials performed by the residents of the school.
The printing shop in Ivancice officially began operation on
2 December 1562 with the printing of the Ivancicke kancional.
27 Tumovsky, "Ivancicky ustav," Jan Blahoslav Pferovsky, 34.
^^Jan Lasicky, "V Ivancichich," cited in Frantisek Hybl, "Jan Blahoslav a bratrske skolstvi," Jan Blahoslav Pferovsky (Prerov, Czechoslovakia: Mëtskÿ narodni vybor v Pferovë, 1971), 34-35. 36
PLATE III
Rectory of the Jednota bratrska in Ivancice (16th century).
The upper floor was used as living quarters for the Jednota clergy, while the lower floor served as the printing shop. The building is currently (1981) rented as a set of apartments. 37 completed in 1564 with the assistance of Vaclav Solin. Under the
supervision of Blahoslav, the printing shop became an important tool
in the cultural activities of the Jednota. In addition to the
Ivancicke kancional, Blahoslav supervised two printings of the Novÿ
Zâkon (1564 and 1568), which is his translation of the New Testament 29 from Greek and Hebrew, and the publication of the second, expanded
edition of the Musica (1569).
During the last decade of his life, Blahoslav completed five
other major works. The Vady kazateluv (1571) is a collection of
university lectures that he compiled for the instruction of advanced
divinity students at Ivancice. The Vady kazateluv (Faults of
Preachers) is an instructional manual of how to construct sermons, what topics preachers should avoid, and what things a preacher might
accomplish with his sermons. Three companion texts, the Ctnosti kazatelske (Virtues of Preachers), the Nauceni mladym kazatelum
(Teachings for Young Preachers), and the Pofadek kâzâni rocniho
(Order of Feast Days), are no longer extant and cannot be dated with .
assurance. These four texts were used as the curriculum materials
for the training of Jednota preachers at the Ivancice school; apparently, Blahoslav thought that these works would eliminate the need to send divinity students abroad for study. Blahoslav's fifth work written during this period, the Grammatika ceska, was completed
2Q The Kralice Bible was published in 6 volumes (1579-93) on the estate of Jan Zerotin Kralickeho. The New Testament was translated by Blahoslav (1564); the Jednota employed six Hebrew scholars to assist with the translation of the Old Testament. For practicality, the Kralice Bible was later printed in a small, one volume paper edition with a plain calf binding. 38
after undergoing 23 years of revision.
While visiting the neighboring town of Moravskÿ Krumlov, Jan
Blahoslav died at 11:00 p.m. on Saturday, 2 November 1571, at the age of 48.
Conclusion
Jan Blahoslav was one of the most brilliant scholars of the
Czech Renaissance. Prior to his appointment as a bishop in the
Jednota bratrska, he traveled extensively and met with many high- ranking religious, civil, and intellectual authorities. Blahoslav authored the first speller of the Czech language and a Czech grammar.
In addition to writing numerous religious essays, he translated the
New Testament from Greek and Hebrew and edited two editions of the
Jednota hymnal.
Blahoslav is important to the history of music because he wrote the first music manual in the Czech language, one of only two music texts written by Protestants during the Czech Renaissance. A study of Blahoslav's life and works shows that he was closely associated with his Wittenberg counterparts of the German Reformation, a point that has been relatively ignored by music scholars; this work will point out the musical similarities in the works of Blahoslav and the
Wittenberg theorists. CHAPTER III
ARGUMENTS REGARDING THE IDENTITY OF JAN JOSQUIN
The second music theory treatise to be printed in the Czech
language, the Muzika of Jan Josquin, appeared in November 1561.
Having followed its predecessor by only three years, the Muzika is
nearly identical in scope and purpose to the Musica of Jan Blahoslav.
While it is possible that "Jan Josquin" is the author's real name,
this is widely believed to be a pseudonym. The author's true
identity has been discussed by several Czech historians, with
determinations ranging from Vaclav Solin, an associate of Blahoslav,
to Josquin Desprez himself. Because the authorship of the Muzika has not yet been satisfactorily resolved, this chapter offers commentaries on the opinions held by the major Czech historians who have addressed this issue.
The Hypothesis of Pavel Frantisek Gabulka
The earliest-known scholar to have addressed the question of Jan
Josquin's identity is the first historian of the Knihovna Narodniho
Muzea v Praze, Pavel Frantisek Gabulka. In 1817, Gabulka pasted a handwritten note into the library's only extant(?) copy of Josquin's
Muzika in which he theorized that the author of this treatise may have been either Josquin Desprez, Giosquino del Prato, or Josquin
39 40
Boston.^ Following a brief anecdote about Desprez and his
relationship with Louis XII, Gabulka discussed the two lesser-known
"Josquins":
Another Josquin, Giosquino del Prato, Jodocus Pratensis, was an internationally known musical composer in the Netherlands between the years 1440-96. Again, another Josquin, Josquin Boston, also flourished in the Netherlands in the year 1556. Perhaps one of these was our Czech composer, as in past centuries Czechs were drawn to the Netherlands, as was Komensky [Comenius].2
It is well documented in musicological studies of the
Renaissance that numerous musicians took advantage of the widespread popularity of Josquin Desprez in promoting their own credibility.
Over 40 "Josquins" are known to have been active in the century following Desprez's death, including at least 5 in the Czech kingdom;
Josquin Dacicky, Josquin za Francouze, Jusquin von Holz, Jan Josquin, 3 and Tobias Josquin.
Although the name "Josquin" is not of Czech origin, the use of that pseudonym in 1561 by a Czech author of relatively insignificant stature comes as no surprise. It is surprising, however, that
Gabulka failed to realize that Giosquino del Prato and Jodocus
Pratensis are merely other identifications of Josquin Desprez, and
Pavel Frantisek Gabulka, "Jan Josquin 586/10," a note inside the front cover of Josquin's Muzika. A reproduction of it can be found in Appendix B. 2 Gabulka, "Jan Josquin." 3 Frantisek Bartos, "Bratrsky spisovatel Jan Josquin," Listy filologicke CXXIX (1956), 239. 41
that he seriously considered Desprez as a possible author of the
Muzika. Both the title page and the dedication of the Muzika
indicate that the work dates from 1561, by which time Desprez had
already been dead for forty years. In addition, we can assume from
the contemporary account of Adrianus Petit Coclico, who claimed to
have been a student of Desprez, that Desprez wrote no theoretical 4 treatise.
Gabulka also referred to Josquin Boston or Baston (fl. 1542-63), a Netherlandic composer active during the mid-sixteenth century.
While very little information about Baston survives, it is known that he visited the courts at Austria, Denmark, Poland, Saxony, and
Sweden.^ Jan Baston cannot, therefore, be summarily eliminated from a list of possible authors of the Muzika.
The Hypothesis of Josef Jirecek
Josef Jirecek reported that the Muzika of Jan Josquin was not written by a Czech at all, but by a displaced Frenchman who had entered Bohemia in 1534:
^Coclico, Compendium musices (Blv).
^Albert Dunning, "Jan Baston," The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 6th ed., 20 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie (Washington, D.C.: Macmillan, 1980), II, 282. 42 Jan Josquin was descended from a line of Reformation Frenchmen who, before the persecution of King Francis I beginning in 1534, turned from his country to foreign lands. Josquin, having found among the Jednota a kindly refuge lived, as it seems, by teaching singing and music. Among his students were counted the brothers Konrad, Karel, and Adam Krajif, sons of Sir Arnost (died 1555), to whom he dedicated his Muzika.^
Jirecek, however, offers no evidence to support his claim that
Jan Josquin was a Frenchman (Josquin za Francouze). Moreover,
Josquin himself, in the Muzika, refers to his relationship with the
brothers Krajir as one of "bratfim vlastnim" (native brothers).^
It is interesting to note that Jirecek registered the following
title-page information for the Muzika, suggesting that this work antedates the Musica of Blahoslav by seven years:
Muzika, which is the instruction appropriate for singing. For the gratification of all who desire to l e a m singing. From me, J.J. Published in the Czech language at Olomouc in 1551, and in Prostejov in 1561.®
Where Jirecek obtained the information of a "first" printing is not known. The actual title page of the 1561 edition of the Muzika, which Jirecek was supposedly quoting, reads as follows:
Muzika, which is the instruction appropriate for singing. For the gratification of all who desire to l e a m singing. From me, Jan Josquin. Newly written and published in the Czech language, in the year 1561.9
^Josef Jirecek, "Jan Josquin," Rukovit k dëjinâm literatury ceske do konce XVIII. veku (Prague: Nakladem B. Tempského, 1875), 325.
^Josquin, Muzika (A2). Q Jirecek, "Jan Josquin," Rukovit, 325.
^Josquin, Muzika (title page). 43
That there was, indeed, no edition of the Muzika in 1551 can be substantiated by evidence found in the treatises of Blahoslav and
Josquin:
1. The author of the Ad lectorem of Blahoslav's Musica (1558), known only as "S.T.T.," states that this work is the first of its kind in the Czech language:
This book (as it is first in number, so it is in excellence) first teaches the Bohemians to sing in a refined manner.10
2. Blahoslav himself, in the Musica, indicates that this is the first music theory manual to be written in the Czech language:
. . . I hope that the understanding reader will not be astounded nor blame me for having written, as never before, these instructions. . . . I have written this in Czech for the Czechs.11
3. Josquin dated the dedication of his Muzika as 9 November 1561, and this dedication contains no reference to any earlier edition.
4. In his discussion of ligatures in the Muzika, Josquin refers his reader to an earlier theoretical text in the Czech language:
If you wish to understand more of this, you will find that [it is] rather extensively [covered] in the first Czech Musica.
Perhaps Jirecek confused the works of Blahoslav and Josquin in regard to an earlier edition of the Muzika for, although published in 1558,
^^Blahoslav, Musica (A2).
Blahoslav, Musica (A3). 12 Josquin, Muzika (A4). 13 Josquin, Muzika (B7v). 44 the first edition of Blahoslav's Musica did originate in the town of
Olomouc. In any case, it seems likely that Jirecek did not actually review Josquin's Muzika prior to writing the entry "Jan Josquin" in the Rukovit.
The Hypothesis of Otakar Hostinsky
The first substantial academic investigation into the identity of Jan Josquin was the late nineteenth-century effort by Otakar
Hostinsky. In his Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, Hostinsky not only transcribed the theoretical treatises of both Blahoslav and Josquin from sixteenth-century to nineteenth-century Czech, but also attempted to lay to rest the question of the identity of "Jan
Josquin.
Hostinsky observed that the most conspicuous suggestion of the author's identity is a handwritten remark in the lower right-hand corner of the title page of the Muzika. Although part of the inscription has been obliterated, some words are still readable:
B. V. Solin sepsal tu m . .. v ten cas kdyz se ... na hneval.
B. V. Solin wrote this m . .. at a time when he was angry with
• • • TI& •
What remains of the name of the person with whom Solin was angry, however, is only the final syllable "na." This permits the
"decoding" to take several directions and still remain orthographically correct:
^^Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, LXXXV-C. 45
. . . kdyz se Jana hnëval. . . . kdyz se na mne, Jana hnëval. . . . kdyz se Prerovina hnëval.
. . . when he was angry with Jan. . . . when he was angry with me, Jan. . . . when he was angry with the Prerovite.
Thus, it is impossible to tell if Solin wrote the remark himself.
Perhaps a third party was writing about a conflict between Solin and
Jan, or perhaps Jan wrote the remark himself. The "na" may not even
complete the name of a person at all. In this latter case, the "na"
could refer to one of the common ways in which Jan Blahoslav
identified himself by referring to his native town of Prerov. In
fact, the "na" may not complete either the word "Jan" or "Prerovite,"
but could complete the name of any person or town that ends with the
spelling of those two letters in this particular grammatical
construction. Another possible decoding, although an unlikely one in
view of the limited amount of paper missing from the title page, is:
. . . kdyz se . . . Josquina hnëval.
. . . when [some unidentified person] was angry with Josquin.
To corroborate his assertion that Jan Josquin was the Jednota
priest, (Brother) Vaclav Solin, Hostinsky pointed to what he believed
is that author's allusion, in the Muzika, to his true identity. The
Muzika contains a four-part arrangement of "Kdoz pod obranau
Nejvyssiho,"^^ based on a tenor melody of Bishop Martin Michalec that
^^Josquin, Muzika (F3-F4). 46
is found in the Samotulsky kancional. Printed beneath the discant of
this arrangement are the initials "I.I.V.S." Hostinsky believed that
these initials stand for "Johannes Josquinus, Venceslaus Solin."
Hostinsky did not, however, address the possibility of a misidentification of the composer of this tenor melody in the
Rejstfik; perhaps Josquin himself was the composer and was
"correcting" the error here in the Muzika.
Very little is known about the life of Vaclav Solin, and it is only because of his association with Jan Blahoslav and the Jednota's obsession with record keeping that Solin's name receives even a minor footnote in Czech music history.
In 1560, at age 33, Vaclav Solin was sent to Samotuly by the
Elders to assist Blahoslav with the printing of the Samotulsky kancional. The specific purpose of Solin's assignment remains unclear, but Hostinsky theorized that Solin was to take over the position of editor at the printing house. In 1555 the Elders had entrusted Blahoslav with the selection and "correction" of hymns for a new kancional. By 1560, however, it had become apparent to them that Blahoslav's obsession with linguistic and musical revision, and his personal conflict with Bishop Jan Augusta over the number of
Augusta's hymns that were to be judged "acceptable," might prevent the hymnal from ever being printed. The Elders apparently thought that Solin could expedite matters.
Solin's diary reports that he was in Samotuly on 25 January
1560, a time when the printing of the hymnal was just underway. The hymnal was released on 7 June of the following year, but no mention 47
of the event is contained in the diary. Moreover, only Alexander
Aujezdecky, owner of the printing equipment in Samotuly, is cited as
the hymnal's editor. The diary further indicates that Solin was
present in Ivancice on 2 December 1562, when a revision of the hymnal
went to print, and that he was likewise there on 2 February 1564,
when the printing was completed.
The one omission from Solin's diary is obvious, and it may be
that Solin was indeed not present for the completion of the
Samotulsky kancional. Hostinsky believed that friction had developed between Blahoslav and Solin over the sharing of responsibilities, with Blahoslav doubtlessly expecting his opinions as the "music specialist" to be respected.
The supposed animosity between Blahoslav and Solin over the printing of the hymnal could have been intensified by Solin's preparation and impending publication of a second Czech theory manual. If Solin did indeed leave Samotuly prior to June 1561, the reason for his departure is not known. Several conjectures are plausible. Perhaps Blahoslav arranged to have his antagonist recalled by the Elders; perhaps Blahoslav, as a bishop and a member of the Council of Elders, refused to allow the printing of Solin's theory manual at Samotuly; perhaps Solin left voluntarily to attend to the printing of his own theory manual in Prostejov. We know that
Prostejov was the headquarters for the Jednota in Moravia, that the printing shop in Prostejov was owned by the Jednota, and that the
Muzika of Jan Josquin was dated in Prostejov on 9 November 1561. If
Vaclav Solin was "Jan Josquin," it seems understandable that he would 48
have wanted to be in Prostejov prior to November 1561 to supervise
the printing of his treatise. Furthermore, if Solin was unable to
secure permission from Blahoslav to print his Muzika, a requirement
following the Jednota edict of 1549 that forbade the printing of material without official church sanction, he may have been compelled
to travel to Prostejov to obtain that permission from a Jednota bishop in another district.
The single surviving copy of Josquin's Muzika is heavily glossed with marginal notes. Some of these marginal notes have been left unintelligible by the cropping of pages for insertion into booklet form, and many more have been rendered unreadable by the passage of time and neglect. In his Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, Hostinsky stated that he can be sure of a reasonable transcription of only 35 of these glosses.
The glosses provided Hostinsky with yet another phase of investigation in his attempt to prove that Vaclav Solin and Jan
Josquin were one and the same person. Hostinsky asked Josef Müller, historian of the Jednota archives in Ochranov, to compare the glosses found in Josquin's Muzika with the significant works and notes of Jan
Blahoslav. In a letter dated 30 March 1892, Muller replied that certain words positively do bear the characteristics of Blahoslav's handwriting, but that he could not be sure that all of the glosses were his. The complicating factor is that the handwriting varies between bold and delicate, and the ink varies between light and dark.
Hostinsky noted, however, that there is a consistency among the glosses in terms of style, temperament, and the annotator's knowledge 49 of the subject and that, from these, five things can be known about the author of the glosses:
1. He was a Czech.
2. He was an expert in the Czech language.
3. He was an experienced editor.
4. He was fond of using proverbs.
5. He was a contemporary of Josquin.
These determinations led Hostinsky to undertake his own handwriting analysis of the glosses in the Muzika, comparing these with
Blahoslav's material in the Ochranov archives. For example,
Hostinsky analyzed a copy of the Samotulsky kancional that was known to have been glossed by Blahoslav, a source that was not included in
Muller's analysis. Hostinsky dismissed the handwriting dissimilarities as arising from the use of different writing instruments and from the likelihood that the critique was done at different sittings. He concluded that all of the glosses in the
Muzika of Jan Josquin were made by Blahoslav.
Hostinsky cited three verifications to support his claim that
Solin used the pseudonym "Jan Josquin":
1. The partially destroyed inscription on the title page of the Muzika, which indicates that Vaclav Solin had some association with this work.
2. The initials "I.I.V.S.," which accompany one of the musical examples and which could be deciphered as "Johannes Josquinus, Venceslaus Solin."
3. The alleged conflict between Blahoslav and Solin, which might have led Blahoslav to gloss so heavily the treatise of his musical rival. 50
Regarding this latter argument, Hostinsky devoted a large portion of his discussion to establishing the poor relations between
Blahoslav and Solin. While no concrete evidence exists to verify this supposed conflict, Solin's obituary in the Nekrologium does seem to suggest that he experienced some difficulty in personal relationships;
In this year [1566] died Brother Vaclav Solin, administrator of the assembly at Tfebic, here in Trebic after Pentecost, on the fifth day of June, around the sixteenth hour. Still a young man, he will be buried tomorrow. He was ordained to the priesthood in Slezanech in the year 1557. He was greater alone than with others. And we have blossomed through him, but it was an impermanent flowering, [signed] Brother Matëj Cervenka. We have seen a maple that had quickly spread its leaves, but now it has fallen, [signed] Jan Kalef.16
The comment "was greater alone than with others" is highly atypical of the remarks registered in the Nekrologium. This personal characteristic of Solin and the alleged conflict between Solin and
Blahoslav, however, prove neither that Solin used the pseudonym "Jan
Josquin" nor that Blahoslav might not have glossed a treatise by any other author. Likewise, the initialing of the musical example in the
Muzika answers no question and raises many others yet to be addressed. It is only the partially destroyed title-page inscription, with the many variations for its "decoding," that in any way supports Hostinsky's determination of the author of the Muzika as
Vaclav Solin. Nevertheless, the depth of Hostinsky's research concerning the identity of Jan Josquin remains unsurpassed in any
^^Fiedler, "Todtenbuch," Fontes rerum austriacarum, 250. 51 study to the present time.
The Hypothesis of Ladislav Dolansky
Following Hostinsky's assertion that the author of Jan Josquin's
Muzika was the Jednota priest Vaclav Solin, several articles were written to challenge Hostinsky's conclusion. The first of these,
"Johannes Josquinus a Vaclav Solin," was published by Ladislav
Dolansky in 1901.^^
On the basis of his analysis of Solin's handwriting in the
Calendarium historicum conscriptum a^ Paulo Ebero 18 and of the glosses of the Muzika, Dolansky concluded that the glosses were not made by
Solin. Moreover, Dolansky declared that he could only be sure that
Blahoslav wrote the inscription on the title page.
Dolansky observed that Blahoslav always capitalized the word
"musica" in his theoretical primer. Therefore, Dolansky disagreed with Hostinsky's resolution of the title-page inscription:
[Original annotation:] B. V. Solin sepsal tu m ...... 19 [Hostinsky's transcription:] B. V. Solin sepsal tu muziku . . . [B. V. Solin wrote this Muzika. . .]
^^Ladislav Dolansky, "Johannes Josquinus a Vaclav Solin," Listy filologicke XXIV (1901), 17-24. 18 Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, XCIV. 19 Vestnik krâtky cesky spolecnosti nauka (Bratislava: Zerotinske bibliothece, 1885), 137. The original is currently held by the Osterreichishe Nationalbib1iothek in Vienna. 52
Dolansky speculated that what appears to be the character "m"
beginning a new word might not be. Instead, it might be the letter
"n," "u," or "w," or even part of the previous word, for example. „20 "tady" (here), rather than what appears to be "tu m...
Dolansky did not believe that Vaclav Solin could have had such
poor command of the Czech language as is found in Josquin's Muzika,
considering Solin's stature within the Jednota bratrska:
1. In 1559 Blahoslav sent Solin and Jan Jelicky to represent the Jednota in the debate with the Anabaptists at Ivancice.
2. Solin was appointed by the Elders of the Jednota to the editorial boards of both the Samotulsky kancional and the Ivancicke kancional in 1560 and 1563, respectively.
3. In 1565 Solin traveled to Vienna to represent the Jednota at the funeral of Ferdinand I, acting in the capacity of "spiritual advisor of the Jednota aristocracy."
4. In January 1564 Solin arrived in Trebic to assume the position of spiritual and administrative representative of the Jednota in that district.
Dolansky could find no evidence of the supposed conflict between
Blahoslav and Solin. He noted that Blahoslav did not criticize Solin in the Rejstfik, the index of composers whose songs are contained in the Samotulsky kancional, and that Solin did not criticize Blahoslav in his papers originating from the time of the alleged conflict.
Moreover, Dolansky could find no indication that Josquin's Muzika was written out of anger or in response to an earlier Czech music manual.
Dolansky noted that the dedication of Josquin's Muzika contains the partially destroyed signature of "Jan ...nk..." alongside the printed name of "Johannes Josquinus." This, according to Dolansky,
Dolansky, Johannes Josquinus," Listy filologicke, 20. 53 is proof that the author was not Vaclav Solin. Even if, as Hostinsky surmised, Solin had taken the name "Josquin" out of admiration for
Josquin Desprez, there still would have been no reason for that author to select another Christian name.
Finally, Dolansky focused attention on Josquin's stated place of residence:
Josquin declares directly [in the dedication of the Muzika] that he was a subject of the Krajir family from the district of Mlada Boleslav. Solin was not. Hostinsky slights this disagreement and tries to explain it by the fact that the Moravian branch of the Krajif family, related to the one in Mlada Boleslav, was also related to the Pernstein family, on whose estate Solin was born in 1527. The author of the glosses points out that Josquin was loyal even to the relatives of his overlords, but this relationship between the two families was a rather distant one and should hardly have led the author of the marginal notes to such an assertion.21
Thus, because he did not believe that Solin, related to the Moravian branch of the Krajir family, would have dedicated his Muzika to his
Bohemian relatives, Dolansky could not believe that Solin and the author of the Muzika were one and the same.
According to Dolansky, what can be known about the author of the
Muzika is the following:
1. He lived in the area of Mlada Boleslav.
2. He was not particularly well educated, although not ignorant.
3. He was not a particularly fine musician.
4. He had a Christian name of "Jan," and a surname of "...nk..."
5. He was a member of the Jednota bratrska.
Dolansky, "Johannes Josquinus," Listy filologicke, 21, 54
6. He wrote only one extant work.
There are a number of concerns, however, regarding the depth of
Dolansky's research in his attempt to discredit Hostinsky's findings.
Dolansky, for example, based his familiarity with Solin's handwriting
on only a single, one-line annotation in the Calendarium historicum
conscriptum for the date of 27 January 1564;
1564 ten den sem se do Treble pristëhoval. Vaclav Solin.
1564. On this day I moved to Treble. Vaclav Solin.
This meager amount seems insufficient for Dolansky to have used it as
the sole basis for a confutation of Hostinsky's extensive handwriting
comparison.
With regard to the implications of Blahoslav's failure to
capitalize the letter "m" in his title-page inscription of the
Muzika, Dolansky failed to address a number of items:
1. There is a great inconsistency in the capitalization of nouns in the printed text of both Blahoslav's Musica and Josquin's Muzika, and the capitalization of nouns in the handwritten language of the period was even less systematic.
2. This inscription may have been added some years after the publication of Blahoslav's Musica. Furthermore, the fact that a single word was or was not capitalized during an era when the rules of the Czech language were just being codified does not seem to have the importance that Dolansky assigns. This would, at most, represent only a very minor change in the writing style of Blahoslav.
3. It is possible that Blahoslav did not capitalize the word "muzika" in this inscription because he wished to chide the author of the text in one more way.
On the issue of Solin's education, Dolansky presupposed that an exemplary education would have been a requisite for a man of Solin's 55 position in the Jednota community. Detailed records in the Akta
Jednoty bratrske describe numerous educational travels both
sanctioned and financially supported by the Jednota; Solin's name, however, is not mentioned in connection with any of these scholastic sojourns. Further, Solin's obituary in the Nekrologium is quite modest in comparison to obituaries of leading members of the Jednota and indicates, by his assignment to the town of Trebic, that, in fact, Solin held a position of relatively minor importance. We can assume, therefore, that Solin had probably received only the basic education that was available in a Jednota parish school.
With regard to the fact that Blahoslav does not "criticize" the musical examples of Solin in the Rejstfik of the Samotulsky kancional, Dolansky totally ignored the insult. Although Solin is represented in the hymnal, all recognition of his life and work is omitted from Blahoslav's Rejstfik. Furthermore, Solin, coeditor of the two Jednota hymnals, is represented by only four hymns in the
Samotulsky kancional, and possibly by one additional hymn (listed under the name "Janovi z Zerotina Vaclav B.") in the Ivancicke kancional. Blahoslav, who was authorized to select the hymns for inclusion, is himself represented by 68 hymns in each hymnal.
The fact that Blahoslav's name is not mentioned in Solin's diary during the time of the alleged conflict could have a number of explanations :
1. Because of the Jednota's doctrine of forgiveness, as well as the fact that Blahoslav held the position of bishop and Solin one of subordinate authority, it would be surprising to find Solin admitting any such conflict in writing. 56
2. Any evidence of the alleged conflict between Blahoslav and Solin may have been removed when Solin's diary was recopied, possibly by Blahoslav himself, into the Akta Jednoty bratrske.
3. It may have been that Solin intentionally ignored Blahoslav, omitting recognition in places where it would have been natural to make such acknowledgment.
Dolansky stated that he was unable to find any indication that
Josquin's Muzika was written with vindictiveness toward Bishop Jan
Blahoslav or Blahoslav's Musica. It seems extremely doubtful that a
Jednota priest could publish even a subtle criticism of a Jednota bishop, especially in a Jednota printing shop located at the Moravian headquarters of the Jednota, in a town where that bishop had lived for many years, and during a time when all publications of the sect were strictly censored by church officials. Dolansky did not point out that it is nearly halfway through the Muzika before the author acknowledges the existence of an earlier Czech primer, doing so without even mentioning the author of that earlier primer by name.
Considering the relationship between Blahoslav and Solin, this is probably as far as Solin could have gone in any attack directed toward the bishop.
With regard to the marginal signature that follows the dedication of the Muzika, the only basis for Dolansky's theory that this represents the true name of the author is that the Christian name used in the marginal note is identical to the Christian pseudonym of
Jan Josquin.
Finally, Dolansky observed that the author of the Muzika lived near Mlada Boleslav, and that this fact eliminates Vaclav Solin from a list of possible authors because he was related to the Moravian 57
branch of the Krajif family. It seems that Dolansky was unaware that
Solin spent many years in Mlada Boleslav, the headquarters of the
Jednota in Bohemia. It is possible, therefore, that Solin might have
attached himself to his relatives already living there, and might have considered himself a resident of that city.
The Hypothesis of Vladimir Gregor
In his "Werk dem Pfarrer von Sumperk" of 1953, Vladimir Gregor stated that he believed that Josquin was a vicar in Sumperk, Jusquin 22 von Holz. In this assertion, Gregor followed the opinion stated in the Geschichte der Stadt Mahrisch-Schonberg (1924) by the Sun^erk archivist, Franz Harrer, who himself followed an early (and later discounted) hypothesis of Josef Jirecek, presented in "Die Anonymitat der sog. Muzik des Josquin" in Hugenottenfliichtling (1875).
Gregor, however, did not take into account the religion
(Lutheran) and nationality (German) of Sumperk during Jusquin*s lifetime; he portrayed Jusquin as a Czech writer of the Jednota while, in fact, as later studies have shown, he was a German Lutheran from Hamburg.
The most obvious problem with Gregor's information is that he placed the Muzika of Josquin before the Musica of Blahoslav in spite of six facts that contradict this arrangement:
^^Vladimir Gregor, "Werk dem Pfarrer von Sumperk," Sbomik Sluko BI (1951-53), 91-94. 58
1. The title page of Blahoslav's Musica is dated 1558.
2. The author of the Ad lectorem of Blahoslav's Musica stated that this is the first musical treatise to be published in the Czech language.
3. Blahoslav himself stated in the Musica that his is the first primer to appear in the Czech language.
4. The title page of Josquin's Muzika is dated 1561.
5. Josquin himself dated the dedication of the Muzika as 9 November 1561.
6. Josquin acknowledged, in the Muzika, that he was aware of an earlier Czech Musica.
My only explanation for Gregor's erroneous arrangement of these
treatises is that he must have based his article, in this respect, on
the erroneous information registered by Jirecek in the Rukovet k dejinam literatury ceske. It appears that Gregor, like Jirecek before him, based his article on information obtained from secondary
sources.
The Hypothesis of Frantisek Bartos
In his "Bratrsky spisovatel Jan Josquin" of 1956, Frantisek
Bartos stated his belief that the author of Josquin's Muzika was Jan 23 Cervenka, the son of the Jednota bishop Matëj Cervenka. Virtually all that is known about Jan Cervenka is that he was a painter and alchemist from Hranice, a town located only 27 kilometers from
Blahoslav's birthplace.
23 Frantisek Bartos, "Bratrsky spisovatel Jan Josquin," Listy filologicke CXXIX (1956), 239-242. Note that Jan Cervenka is also known as Jan Malir (John the painter), and that it was Bishop Matëj Cervenka who wrote the obituary of Vaclav Solin in the Nekrologium. 59
Bartos based his hypothesis on the similarity of the first name
"Jan" and the ending of the surname "...nk...," which is found as a
marginal note following the dedication of the Muzika. While Bartos
evidently did a great deal of research to prove that Jan Cervenka
could have been a subject of the Krajir family (a necessity, to match
the self-description of the author),he subsequently admitted that he could provide no substantive argument to show that Jan Cervenka had any relationship to the Krajir family, that Jan Cervenka was related to Matëj Cervenka, or that Jan Cervenka ever used the pseudonym "Jan Josquin."
While it may never be known whether Jan Cervenka authored the
Muzika of 1561, it seems extremely doubtful that he would have been the son of the Jednota bishop Matëj Ceirvenka; the Jednota clergy took 25 the vow of celibacy.
The Hypothesis of Ivan Vavra
In his "Dnesni stav josquinske otazky" of 1958, Ivan Vavra asserted that the author of Josquin's Muzika was Jan Facilis.^^ He based this conclusion on three findings:
1. There is a listing of a Jednota priest, Jan Facilis, who was active in Mlada Boleslav and Prostëjov during this period.
2. There is a four-part vocal composition by Facilis on the verses of Ovid, which proves that Facilis was also a musician.
^^Josquin, Muzika (A2).
^^Chudoba, "Jak pribyvalo vëdomosti," Sbomik Blahoslavûv, 9.
Ivan Vavra, "Dnesni stav josquinske otazky," Listy filologicke CXXXI (1958), 253-257. 60 3. There is an entry of matriculation in 0. Hartwig's Album academiae Vitebergensis 1561-1602 for a "lohannes losguinus Boleslauien [Jan Josquin from Mlada Boleslav]" dating from •30 April 1563. Regarding that entry, Vavra noted the following:
This inscription escaped the attention of all researchers looking for Czech scholars abroad. It would have saved 0. Hostinsky from his Solin hypothesis, V. Gregor from his adventure into German historiography, and F. M. Bartos from his identification of the painter Jan Cervenka.
How these findings of Vavra identify "Jan Josquin" as Jan
Facilis is difficult to understand:
1. Both Jan Blahoslav and Vaclav Solin, as well as numerous other members of the Jednota, are known to have worked in Mlada Boleslav and Prostëjov. This comes as no surprise, because Mlada Boleslav was the Jednota headquarters in Bohemia, and Prostëjov the Jednota headquarters in Moravia.
2. Facilis's single composition provides absolutely no evidence to support the claim that Facilis wrote a theoretical text using the pseudonym "Jan Josquin."
3. While an "lohannes losquinus" from Mlada Boleslav may have indeed studied at Wittenberg University, and this might have been the author of the Muzika, this fact shows no interrelationship between lohannes losquinus and Jan Facilis. Vavra did point out that the initialing of the musical example in the Muzika could be "decoded" as "lohannes losquinus Vitebergae Studiosus," but this again provides no connection between losquinus and Facilis.
The validity of Vavra's brief article is suspect in several other areas. Vavra stated, for example, that Hostinsky:
. . . very correctly identified the conflict between Jan Blahoslav and his printing assistant Vaclav Solin who, at the beginning of 1564, suddenly left the printing shop at Ivancice without waiting for the completion of his work— the kancional and the New Testament.^8
^^Vavra, "Dnesni stav josquinske otazky," Listy filologicke, 255.
^^Vavra, "Dnesni stav josquinske otazky," Listy filologicke, 253. 61
Vavra misquoted Hostinsky's work; apparently he misunderstood the
sequence of events surrounding the publication of the Jednota hymnals
of 1561 and 1564. Hostinsky pointed out that it was in 1561, before
the completion of the Samotulsky kancional, that Solin left the 29 printing shop in Samotuly; Solin's diary indicates that he was
indeed present in Ivancice on 2 February 1564 when the printing of 30 the Ivancicke kancional was completed.
Vavra took credit for "discovering" the Jednota priest Jan
Facilis, although Jirecek, in his Rukovet k dëjinâm literatury ceske 31 of 1875, listed two men with the name "Jan Facilis." One of these received a "bakalar" from the university at Prague in 1561 and the 32 other, who Blahoslav described as "a busybody and a boastful man," was a rector of the Jednota academy in Prostëjov.
Further, Vavra observed that the Muzika of Josquin is more in character with the "harmonic" tendencies of the German Lutherans than with the monomelodic music of the Jednota bratrska, and suggested that the author of the Muzika might not have been a member of the
Jednota. It is true that Josquin's treatise, as well as Blahoslav's
Musica, contains a number of polyphonic examples and that Josquin's treatise contained a chapter on polyphony. Vavra, however, overlooked three facts that negate his theory that the author might
29 Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, XXIII. 30 Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav £ Jan Josquin, XXIII.
Jirecek, Rukovet, 187-188.
^^Jirecek, "Jan Facilis, Husicka," Rukovet, 187. 62
not have been associated with the Jednota:
1. The Muzika was published in Prostëjov, the Moravian headquarters of the Jednota.
2. The author of the Muzika alludes to only one other treatise, that of the Jednota bishop Jan Blahoslav.
3. Many of the musical examples in the Muzika are extracted from the Jednota hymnal of 1561, an illegal publication and a source that probably would not have been used unless the author was himself a member of the sect.
Conclusion
The concern regarding existing research related to the
authorship of the Muzika of 1561 is twofold: the failure of
particular historians to substantiate a hypothesis with evidence and
the failure to concentrate on more than a few details of a complex mystery. Gabulka's proposal that the author was Josquin Desprez when
Desprez had been dead for forty years, Jirecek's registering of a
1551 edition of the Muzika that never existed, Dolansky's negation of
Hostinsky's extensive handwriting analysis by a study based on only a ten-word example of Solin's handwriting, Gregor's erroneous dating of
Blahoslav's and Josquin's treatises despite the fact that both works are clearly dated, Bartos's assertion that Josquin was the son of
Bishop Matëj Cervenka although the Jednota clergy took the vow of celibacy, and Vavra's "discovery" of a previously unknown Jednota priest for whom Jirecek had written a biography 83 years before are all examples that illustrate the inadequacy of Czech research on this topic. Unfortunately, it is upon this level of Czech research that we are dependent for much information; many of the materials 63 necessary for a detailed study of "Jan Josquin" are either unavailable to Western scholars or no longer extant.
Hostinsky's extensive discussion in Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin is by far the most scholarly and most comprehensive of those studies reviewed for this dissertation. Despite several oversights,
Hostinsky presented a detailed argument that the author of the Muzika was the Jednota priest Vaclav Solin. Several other possibilities that cannot be discounted at this time have been proposed by other
Czech historians. However, in view of the evidence uncovered thus far and the inferences that can be drawn from that evidence, it appears most probable that the author of the Muzika was Vaclav Solin. CHAPTER IV
MUSIC THEORY ACCORDING TO JAN BLAHOSLAV AND JAN JOSQUIN
As the seat of a university and the starting point of Luther's
reformation, the city of Wittenberg held special importance for musicians. Wittenberg, with its newly established university (1502),
became an important junction for German theorists during the
sixteenth century. Adam von Fulda, Sixt Dietrich, Heinrich Faber,
and Hermann Finck taught at the university; Georg Rhau, Johannes
Frosch, Andreas Ornithoparchus, Nikolaus Listenius, and Lucas Lossius matriculated as students. Martin Agricola maintained a close
relationship with Georg Rhau, and it was Rhau, in Wittenberg, who published many of Agricola's works. Adrianus Petit Coclico taught privately in the city before his unsuccessful attempt to win a position on the faculty.^
It is not surprising that the Elders of the Jednota bratrska
sent many of its novitiates to study in Wittenberg. In the
mid-sixteenth century one could make the 450 kilometer journey from
Three works are particularly informative concerning music training and the location of theorists during the sixteenth century; Frederick Stemfeld's "Music in the Schools of the Reformation" (1948), Nan Cooke Carpenter's Music in the Medieval and Renaissance Universities (1958), and Walter Atcherson's Modal Theory of Sixteenth-Century German Theorists (1960). Information about these works can be found in the Bibliography of this study.
64 65
Prague to Wittenberg in 12 days on the Elbe river. In Wittenberg, the student could attend the lectures of Luther and Philip
Melanchton and exchange ideas with Protestants whose beliefs were 2 very close to those of the Jednota. In addition to pursuing their religious studies while abroad, it is probable that many of the
Jednota students sought out musical instruction as well.
The Jednota sent Jan Blahoslav to Wittenberg in 1544. During the next year, he studied under Luther and Melanchton, and it is 3 possible that he also met Rhau, Dietrich, Faber, Finck, and Coclico.
Some Czech historians believe that Jan Josquin also studied in
Wittenberg. If the "lohannes losquinus Boleslauien" who registered at Wittenberg University in 1563 was indeed the "Jan Josquin" who authored the Muzika, then the treatise would have predated his 4 university training by two years.
Blahoslav recommends the treatises of two Wittenberg theorists,
Coclico and Finck, in the first supplement to his Musica:
2 Blahoslav participated in official discussions concerning the incorporation of the Lutheran and Jednota churches. See the list of Blahoslav's works in Appendix A, especially numbers 24, 53, and 65. 3 A discussion of Blahoslav's study in Wittenberg can be found on page 20 of this dissertation.
^Ivan Vavra located this entry of matriculation at the university. The related discussion can be found on page 60 of this , dissertation. 66
I refer the cantor who wishes to sing with a learned voice and who knows Latin to the disciple of that famous musician Josquin [Desprez], Adrianus Petit [Coclico], and to another like the first, Hermann Finck. The cantor will surely find these to be of great benefit.5 tkich of Blahoslav's information and many tables and examples are taken from the treatises of Coclico and Finck. To a lesser extent,
Blahoslav was also indebted to Nikolaus Listenius and Vaclav
Philomathes. Coclico, Finck, and Listenius were all connected with
Wittenberg at some point; very little is known about the Czech musician Philomathes.^ Josquin does not mention an indebtedness to any theorist, but it is apparent that portions of his Muzika are based on the treatises of Listenius and Blahoslav. Thus, it appears that the authors of the first music treatises in the Czech language were influenced by the Wittenberg theorists.
During the sixteenth century, music was typically divided into three disciplines: musica theorica, musica practice, and musica poetica. Because most music texts were destined for use in preparatory schools rather than at the university, it is not
"Nebo kantory ty, jenz na nekolik hlasû spûsobnê zpivati chti a latine umêji, odsilam k onomu ucedlniku slavneho muzika Josquina, Adrianovi Petitovi a nebo snad k ucenejsimu Hermannovi Finkiovi; ti tarn najiti mohu neco sobë nalezitého." Blahoslav, Musica (Part II, F3v-F4).
^Philomathes matriculated at the University of Vienna in 1510, and two years later published his Musicorum libra quatuor in that city. The work went through 5 editions, one published by Rhau, who wrote an introduction to the treatise, in 1534. Martin Agricola published a revision of the work. Scholia in musicam planam V. Philomathes de Nova Domo, ex variis musicorum scriptus, through Rhau in 1538. A brief biography appears in Riemann's Musik Lexikon (1959, p. 1210); Jan Trojan's doctoral dissertation on Philomathes, however, done at B m o University, is currently unavailable to Western scholars. 67
surprising that these texts contain more practical advice than
speculative theory or discussions of advanced procedures. Musica theorica, the definitions and classifications of music, was given
less attention during the sixteenth century than during the previous era; the musica theorica discussed in most manuals was "taken up in those treatises for the most part as sheer reiteration of ideas formulated as much as a thousand years earlier."^ Musica poetica, the study of polyphonic composition, was discussed by relatively few g sixteenth-century theorists. It was musica practice, then, that formed the bulk of discussion in the typical music manual of the sixteenth century. Musica practica was divided into two areas: musica plana (or musica choralis) and musica figuralis (or musica figuratus). To the first area of study belonged the fundamentals of plainsong: voces, claves, canti, musica ficta, mutatio, modi
(intervals), toni (modes), etc. To the second area belonged the fundamentals of polyphony: notae, puncti, gradus musicae (modus, tempus, and prolatio), proportiones, etc.
The topics discussed by Blahoslav and Josquin lean heavily toward musica practica. Blahoslav does devote, however, the first chapter of the Musica to musica theorica. Here, he presents a tripartite division of musicians: the theorica, "those who occupy
^Walter Atcherson, Modal Theory of Sixteenth-Century German Theorists (Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, 1960), 26. 8 Although texts devoted to polyphonic composition existed prior to the sixteenth century, Listenius appears to be one of the first to use the expression "musica poetica" in this sense. 68 g themselves only with the knowledge and understanding of music"; the
practici. who "perform or sing it";the poetae. "who write and
publish things concerning music . . . such as verses, songs, and
notes.Blahoslav further divides the art of the practici into
two: the choralis, where "all sing one song with one and the same .12 manner of the voice;" the figuralis, where music is "full of
different figures and signs, having notes, rules, manners, and many 13 differences." Josquin makes no such division of music or musicians
in the Muzika, preferring to begin with musica practica directly
following his introduction and amenities.
The expression "musica poetica" cannot be applied in its usual
sense to the music theory of Blahoslav and Josquin. The expression
"pisne skladati" (to compose songs), to members of the Jednota bratrska, meant only to attach words to preexisting melodies. Thus, musica poetica takes on a special connotation in Blahoslav's Musica and Josquin's Muzika. Although Blahoslav does not present a chapter on polyphony, he includes several multivoice examples in the Musica and wrote a supplement to the work that deals with text setting.
Josquin's Ad lectorem suggests that the final two chapters of the
Muzika dealt with polyphony and text setting. But, because this
g Blahoslav, Musica (A5).
^^Blahoslav, Musica (A5v).
^^Blahoslav, Mus ica (A5v). 12 Blahoslav, Musica (A5v).
'^Blahoslav, Musica (A5v). 69 portion of his Muzika is no longer extant, we cannot know how far
Josquin departed from the Jednota's understanding of musica poetae.
Josquin's work does include, however, numerous multivoice examples.
The most striking curiosity of Blahoslav's Musica and Josquin's
Muzika is the inclusion of polyphonic examples. The Musica was written by a bishop of the Jednota for use in the seminary at
Ivancice; the Muzika was written by a member of the Jednota, probably the Jednota priest Vaclav Solin using the pseudonym "Jan Josquin."
Despite the expectation that these texts would contain purely monophonic examples of the type used by the Jednota in their tship service, Blahoslav's Musica contains 5 polyphonic examples while 16 are found in the Muzika of Josquin. Josquin even goes so far as to illustrate the respective vocal ranges of the discant, alto, tenor, 14 and bass. Neither Blahoslav nor Josquin, however, offers any solid instruction in polyphonic composition. Surely Blahoslav and Josquin were aware of the polyphonic traditions of the Catholic and Utraquist churches that virtually surrounded the Jednota, and perhaps the inclusion of polyphony in these treatises was merely meant to make the student aware of this other practice.
Because these Czech treatises were published within a three-year period and were related through their association with the Jednota bratrska, one should not be surprised that they are fairly similar in scope and level of presentation. The following discussion will present the primary topics of musica practica covered by Blahoslav
^^Josquin, Muzika (D2-D4v), 70
and Josquin in their respective treatises, show the similarities and
differences between these Czech manuals, and identify the probable
sources from which these authors took their material. This
discussion is divided into eight topic areas:
1. The Hexachord System.
2. Solmization and Mutation.
3. Notes, Ligatures, Intervals, and Rests.
4. The Mensural System.
5. Syncopation, Coloration, and Hemiola.
6 . Additional Notational Figures.
7. The Tones.
8 . Transposition.
These topics provide a detailed account of the theoretical content of
these treatises.
The Hexachord System
The Medieval hexachord system f o m s the basis of the musical
practice described by Blahoslav and Josquin. This microcosm of 22
pitches is illustrated in many Medieval and Renaissance manuals in
the form of a ladder, with pitches located on the various "steps," or
in the form of a hand, with pitches located at the various joints and
at the fingertips. The complete compass of the system comprises two octaves and a major sixth, with specific pitches identified and differentiated by their letter (A, £, B, F, or G), the case of that letter (whether capital, lower case, or double lower case), and one or more voces or vocables (ut, re, mi, fa, sol, or la) assigned 71
to that letter. The letter indicates the particular pitch class, the
case of the letter indicates the particular octave of the pitch, and
the attached vox (or voces) indicates the particular function of that
pitch in the mutation process. Consequently, each pitch has a
specific, multiform designation that distinguishes it from the other
pitches of the microcosm.
The gamut of 22 pitches is divided into seven overlapping scalar
segments of six pitches each. These hexachords were identified in
theoretical texts as the "sex voces" or "voces musicales" until well
into the sixteenth century. Although the initial pitch of a hexachord may be either G, C, or F, the intervallic relationship between the six pitches remains invariable; tone-tone-semitone-tone- tone. This fixed pattern necessitates the introduction of one accidental (B-flat, in the hexachord beginning on F) to an otherwise closed system of "white keys." The B-natural of the G hexachord is notated with b guadratum (square ^ [h]), whereas the B-flat of the
F hexachord is notated with b rotundum (round ^ [b]). The
G hexachord is designated as the hexachordum durum (hard hexachord) while the £ hexachord is designated as the hexachordum molle (soft hexachord). This latter identification developed from the understanding that b rotundum tempered or "softened" the tritone relationship that occurs between F-natural and B-natural. Because the £ hexachord contains only the notes £ through A, without reaching either B-flat or B-natural, it is called the hexachordum naturale
(natural hexachord). 72
The lowest hexachord begins on the only Greek letter of the system, gamma ; because the vocable ut is assigned to the first note of each hexachord, the lowest note of the system is referred to as gamma ut. Seven complete hexachords occur between gamma ut and the highest pitch of the system, ee la: three durus, two mollis, and two naturalis.
Present-day Medieval Seven Hexachords Designations Designations e la ee la d la sol dd la sol c sol fa cc sol fa b fa mi bb fa/bb mi a la mi re aa la mi re g sol re ut g sol re ut f fa ut m f fa ut e' la mi e la mi d' la sol re d la sol re c' sol fa ut c sol fa ut b mi b fa/b mi a la mi re a la mi re K sol re ut G sol re ut (D) f fa ut F fa ut (M) e la mi E la mi d sol re D sol re c fa ut C fa ut (N) B mi B mi A re A re G ut r ut (D)
Figure 1 : The Gamut of the Hexachord System 73 Due to the requirement for additional accidentals in transposed
scales, a fourth "manner" of singing was invented to supplement the
durus, mollis, and naturalis hexachords. This more recent manner,
called cantus fictus, permitted additional semitones to be effected by the use of accidentals ( or t] and W beyond "square and
"round B." Without cantus fictus, the semitone could occur between only the notes of E-F, A-Bb, and B-C.
Blahoslav and Josquin offer few departures from the traditional explanation of the hexachord system, presenting the 22 pitches both on the ladder and on the hand.^^ Josquin does include, however, a melodic teaching device similar to that found in Guido's Epistola de ignoto cantu (c. 1030):
VT.queswiasis* RHonarefibris^ Mlngefioa •t f S runr FA q u U tuorttm» SO LuepoUud, LAbij
±JC g wamm, Ssnâe lohanao*
Figure 2: Ut queant laxis, from Josquin's Muzika (A7v)
15Blahoslav, Musica (Blv & B4); Josquin, Muzika (B3 & B3v). 74
Each phrase of this melody begins higher than the preceding phrase in
a stepwise ascent of tone-tone-semitone-tone-tone, an intervallic
relationship corresponding to that of the degrees of the hexachord;
the initial syllables of the phrases in the text of queant laxis
provide the successive syllables of the hexachord.^ ^ By using this
mnemonic device, the student could easily learn the pitch
relationships of the vocables.
Blahoslav and Josquin transfer much of the standard Latin
terminology into the Czech language with equivalent meaning: vox
becomes "bias" (voice), sex voces becomes "stupnice hlasove" (scales
of the voices), and the durus, mollis, naturalis, and fictus scales
become the "tvrdy" (hard) or "tuhy" (stiff), "mëkkÿ" (soft) or
"povlovny" (gentle), "pfirozeny" (natural), and "smysleny"
(invented), respectively. An individual pitch, a clavis, is referred
to as a "klic" (key); as is common in Latin .treatises of their era,
Blahoslav and Josquin use the term "key" to mean one specific pitch
of the gamut as well as one of the five "keys" that serve as clefs.
They retain some Latin terms in the original form and attach Czech grammatical endings to others (e.g., scala, tactus, syncopatio, and
repetitio).
In Jan Blahoslav £ Jan Josquin (p. 118), Hostinsky remarks that this melody is taken from Guido of Arezzo. This melody, however, is simpler than the one found in the Epistola de ignoto cantu (Gerbert, Scriptores II, p. 45). It is essentially the same as the tenor melody of the four-part setting of Ht queant laxis found in Rhau's Enchiridion utriusque musicae practicae (C3v) and Finck's Practica musica (Bl-Blv). 75
Both Blahoslav and Josquin indicate that five of the usual
22 keys serve as clefs. They present nearly identical tables
illustrating the clefs,and make the distinction that some clef-
forms are proper to musica choralis or "zpivani prostem" (simple
composition, i.e., plainsong) while others are proper to musica
figuralis or "zpivani neprostem" (complex composition, i.e., polyphony) or "zpivani bëhavém" (roving composition). Their discussions differ little, but Josquin does point out that the gamma- clef and the dd-clef are seldom used in the music of their time and
that the clefs are collectively called the claves signandae by the
Latins.T 18
For both Blahoslav and Josquin, the vocables ut and ^ are
"soft" vocables, re and sol are "natural," and mi and jta are 19 "hard." Although many Renaissance theorists adopted this division, the interpretation of these assigned qualities varied significantly.
In the Musica Choralis Deudsch of Martin Agricola, for example, these qualities are related to the style of performance:
^^Blahoslav, Musica (B2); Josquin, Muzika (B4v). 18 Josquin, Muzika (B4v). 19 Blahoslav, Musica (A8 ); Josquin, Muzika (A7v-A8), 76
Of the six vocables mentioned above, two are called b soft— namely, and ^ — because they are sung quite finely, softly, gently, pleasantly, and smoothly. They are of one nature and property, then; therefore, wherever one is sung, the other may be sung also. Re and sol are called average or natural vocables; this is because they emit an average sound, not quite too soft nor too hard. Mi and ^ are called t) hard— that is, sharp and harsh syllables. For they should and must be sung more boldly and valiantly than the b soft or the natural o n e s . 20
Rhau, in the Enchiridion utriusque musicae practicae, likewise implies that these qualities of the vocables regulate the style of performance;
Ut with ^ is a gentle sound, for it makes a tune gentle. Mi with is strong, for it makes an ode strong; Sol and re are neuter, for they do neither.21
Finck, however, in the Practica musica, expresses a totally different understanding of these assigned qualities:
I do not believe that this division of the voces musicales is to be rejected if it is properly understood: that is, if you think that the nature of any vox is such as is indicated here, that some must be pronounced softly others more loudly. Since, however, there are some who conclude from this that ut and fa are to be sung with a moderate voice, mi and la more loudly, while re and sol require a tone of voice in the middle, and thus it is not only in the nature of the vox but also in its pronunciation and this should be expressed either by increasing or decreasing the tone of the vox, I do not assent to the
20 Martin Agricola, Musica Choralis Deudsch, trans. by Derq Hewlett in A Translation of Three Treatises by Martin Agricola (The Ohio State University: unpublished doctoral dissertation, 1979), 72-73.
Georg Rhau, Enchiridion utriusque musicae practicae, cited and trans. by J. Kevin Waters in Handbook of Two Musical Practices: Plainsong (Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, 1970), 24. 77
opinion of these people. Indeed I cannot see whatever suavitas or grace there is in a composition when this awkward and uneven enunciation of the voces or notes is carried o u t . 22
Neither Blahoslav nor Josquin offers an explanation of the "hard,"
"soft," and "natural" qualities assigned to the vocables. The most
plausible explanation, however, is that the particular quality of a
vocable is related to its resolution tendency within a particular
hexachord.
Stepwise movement through consecutive durus hexachords (those
with B-naturals), which necessarily passes through an overlapping
naturalis hexachord, is accomplished by using the "hard" vocables of
mi and la. In this sequence of pitches, mi and 1^ have semitones
above, just as "square always has a semitone appearing above
itself in a "hard" hexachord:
naturalis: mi mi G A B 'C D i ÔÔ G a' B 'c D E (F) G durus: re mi ^ sol la ut re mi fa sol la ut
(semitones)
Figure 3: Resolution Tendencies of "Hard" Vocables
Stepwise movement through consecutive mollis hexachords (those with
B-flats), which necessarily passes through an overlapping naturalis
hexachord, is accomplished by using the "soft" vocables of ut and fa.
22 Hermann Finck, Practica musica, cited and trans. by Frank Kirby in Hermann Finck's Practica musica (Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, 1957), 99-100. 78
In this sequence of pitches, ut and fa have semitones below, just as
"round always has a semitone appearing below itself in a "soft"
hexachord:
naturalis: fa fa
F G A Bb 'C 5 (E) F G a ’ Bb 'c D (Ë) F ~ mollis: ut re mi fa sol la ut re mi fa sol la ut
(semitones)
Figure 4: Resolution Tendencies of "Soft" Vocables
Stepwise movement through consecutive naturalis hexachords (those
with neither B-naturals nor B-flats) cannot occur without passing
through an overlapping durus hexachord (with a B-natural) or mollis
hexachord (with a B-flat). Because re and sol are bordered by whole
tones in all hexachords, they do not have a tendency to resolve
either upward or downward and are called "natural" or "neuter":
re sol durus G - A — B C—D-E mollis F - G - A Bb— C - D naturalis C-D-E F - G - A
Figure 5: The "Natural" Vocables Bordered by Whole Tones
Despite the great similarity in their respective presentations
of the hexachord system, Blahoslav and Josquin do exhibit some
differences. Blahoslav, for example, does not discuss the cantus naturalis as an independent "zpev" (type of composition). This
omission can probably be attributed to the practical combination of 79
the naturalis hexachord with either the durus or mollis; very few
compositions are written within the limited range of one hexachord,
and expanding stepwise beyond the six notes of the naturalis hexachord would necessitate the use of either a B-natural or a
B-flat. The introduction of B-natural or B-flat into a naturalis composition would, from a sixteenth-century viewpoint, change its affective nature from naturalis into either durus or mollis, respectively. Consequently, some theorists, such as Coclico and
Heyden, disregard the naturalis as a practical, independent cantus.
Unlike Blahoslav, Josquin remains with tradition and discusses the naturalis as an independent cantus. He admits, however, that it is unnecessary to include the naturalis hexachord in his subsequent 23 discussions because of its "restrained stepping."
Although allowances for exceeding the 22 pitches are made by most theorists discussing the gamut, Josquin does not discuss this possibility. Blahoslav, in contrast, conjectures about the possibility of ascending above ee la by employing additional keys of double lower case letters (such as ff fa, gg sol, etc.) and descending below gamma ut by' employing additional letters of the 24 Greek alphabet.
23 Josquin, Muzika (C3v).
^^Blahoslav, Musica (B3). 80
Solmization and Mutation
The term solmisatio (solmization) denotes the designation of the
degrees of the scale by syllables instead of letters. This practice
dates from the time of Guido and continued until the introduction of
large numbers of accidentals rendered the modal system unsuitable.
The syllables ut, re, m i , fa, sol, and were used as the names of
the notes from C to A; the additional notes, including B-natural and
B-flat, were reached through a process called mutatio (mutation).
The primary purpose of mutation was to enable the singer to move
freely from one hexachord to another of higher or lower range, thereby
accomodating melodic progressions that exceed the limited range of
one hexachord. Various procedures for mutation existed, each based
on the principle that a vox appearing on a particular degree of one hexachord could be "renamed" and used as a different degree of an
overlapping hexachord (in principle, much like the "pivot tone" in present-day modulation);
3E3C rc vcvcrcvc ûniirevc re £i foloiiÊt mi re
Figure 6 : Solmization, with Two Mutations, from Josquin’s Muzika (C6v) 81
Blahoslav and Josquin follow a common sixteenth-century • 25 simplification of the mutation process. To preserve the "hard"
nature of a composition, the mutation is made on either D or A with
the syllable r£ during an ascent, and on either ^ or A with the
syllable 1^ during a descent. If this procedure is followed, the
singer will not inadvertently destroy the "hard" nature of the
composition by shifting into a hexachord that utilizes the B-flat.
After shifting into this next hexachord, the singer employs its
syllables until another mutation is required. To preserve the "soft"
nature of a composition, the mutation is made on either D or G with
the syllable re during an ascent, and on either D or A with the
syllable ^a during a descent. If this procedure is followed, the
singer will not inadvertently destroy the "soft" nature of a
composition by shifting into a hexachord that utilizes the B-natural.
Solmization of cantus fictus, where accidentals beyond B-natural and B-flat are employed, is easily resolved by considering each b as fa and each M or # as mi; thus, mutation in cantus fictus is, in principle, identical to mutation between "regular" hexachords.
Whether ascending or descending, the mutation is made on b, using fa, and on or # , using mi.
Although Blahoslav and Josquin present nearly identical explanations of solmization and mutation, each theorist based his discussion on a different source. Blahoslav presents the four rules
25 Blahoslav, Musica (B5v-B6); Josquin, Muzika (C5v-C6v). 26 Blahoslav, Musica (B6-B6v) ; Josquin, Muzika (CSv). 82
of solmization, eight of the nine rules of mutation, and the two 27 tables of mutation that are found in Finck's Practica musica.
Blahoslav does not use the term mutatio; instead, he replaces it with
the Czech equivalent, "promena" (transformation). It appears that
Blahoslav's tables illustrating the durus, mollis, and fictus types
of composition are taken from the Musicorum libri quatuor of a 28 fellow-Czech, Vaclav Philomathes. Three of Philomathes's five
tables are copied directly, and the one that illustrates the fictus
scale corresponds to present-day G minor (pure form). While the
similarity between Blahoslav's and Philomathes's tables might be
coincidental, it seems unlikely that Blahoslav would have chosen by
chance the same scale that Philomathes used to illustrate cantus
fictus. Another parallel between Philomathes and Blahoslav can be
seen in the number of flats that each theorist allows. Philomathes's
fifth table illustrates a cantus fictus of five flats; Blahoslav
states that cantus fictus can occur "on those keys that do not hold 29 a ^ in themselves," thus allowing flats to inflect five of the
seven pitch-classes found on the ladder. The vocable ^ is assigned
to both the keys of C and F^; therefore, £ and F cannot be altered by
cantus fictus. Because B-flat is already allowed by the mollis hexachord, and because the vocable fa is not assigned to the keys of
27 Blahoslav, Musica (C1-C2). The locations of comparable examples in the treatises of Coclico, Finck, Glarean, Listenius, and Philomathes are indicated in footnotes accompanying the translation of Blahoslav's Musica and Josquin's Muzika. 28 Blahoslav, Musica (B7). 29 Blahoslav, Musica (B6v). 83
E, A, D, or G, Blahoslav's comment indicates the possible use of
B-flat, E-flat, A-flat, D-flat, and G-flat.
Josquin appears to have taken his tables of scala bemollaris and 30 scala beduralis from the Musica of Listenius. Although Josquin's
table of scala ficta is in a format similar to these, a comparable
table is not found in Listenius's treatise. In his table of scala ficta, Josquin demonstrates the use of four flats in a scale corresponding to present-day Ab major. In a monophonic composition illustrating cantus fictus, Josquin additionally illustrates the use 31 . of a G-flat. Thus, Josquin allows the same flat accidentals as do
Blahoslav and Philomathes.
Both Blahoslav and Josquin use the signs ÿ and interchangeably; both theorists recognize that either symbol can indicate the higher of two tones a semitone apart. Concerning the use of these signs, Blahoslav states that "sometimes a transformation properly occurs on the keys of f fa ut, c sol fa ut, and b fa b mi. . . . And so, when there is need . . . it is notated with the sign ^ or By this means, Blahoslav allows the raised accidentals of F-sharp and C-sharp (the raised " B-natural, occurs naturally in the hexachordum durum). Josquin makes no mention of which specific pitches may be altered by sharp accidentals; his only example utilizing a sharp accidental indicates the use of a
•jf) Josquin, Muzika (C4-C5v).
Josquin, Muzika (03).
^^Blahoslav, Musica (B3-B3v), 84 33 B-natural. Because Blahoslav and Josquin present a conservative overview of sixteenth-century monophonic practice, it is not surprising that neither of them uses the natural sign in any musical example, and that the sharp sign is used only by Josquin in a single example.1 34
In his discussion of solmization, Josquin divides the vocables, ut, re, m i , fa, sol, and Iji, into two groups, the superioris and the inferioris. This division is also used by Agricola, Finck, and
Listenius. As Josquin explains, a composition that begins on the key of E la mi forces the singer to decide which syllable, or mi, is to be used for the solmization. If the melody begins below the given clef and steps upward, the singer is to take the inferioris, or lower vocable (here, the syllable mi); if the melody begins above the given clef and steps downward, the singeris to takethe superioris vocable 35 (here, the syllable la):
orfvfetft&xeze ns re re tni Ikrerc vr.
Figure 7: Solmization with the Inferioris of E la m i , from Josquin's Muzika (ESv)
^^Josquin, Muzika (E4).
^^Josquin, Muzika (E4).
Josquin, Muzika (E7-E8v), 85 There are cases, however, in which two superioris or two inferioris vocables appear as possible choices, such as on the keys of d la sol re and G sol re ut, respectively. In such circumstances,
Josquin advises the singer to consider the nature of the composition, whether durus, mollis, naturalis, or fictus, and to ensure that the vocables mi and fa occur on those notes exhibiting the semitone relationship.
Blahoslav divides the vocables into three groups of two: 37 higher, middle, and lower. As with his classification of the vocables into "hard," "soft," and "natural," Blahoslav again gives little indication as to how his division of "higher," "middle," and
"lower" relates to musical practice. Perhaps this tripartite division was intended only to call attention to the intervallie relationships within the hexachord, similarly presented by Hothby in 38 the Calliopea leghale:
Demonstratori -]sol j fa - Comite [the "count" and "prince," the two — ------degrees of the hexachord that are mi - Principe separated by a semitone] re . , Demonstratori ut J} Figure 8 : The Tripartite Division of the Hexachord, from Hothby's Calliopea
^^Josquin, Muzika (E7-E7v).
^^Blahoslav, Musica (A8 ). 38 John Hothby, Calliopea leghale, cited by Hugo Riemann in History of Music Theory, trans. by Raymond Haggh (Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1962), 262. 86
Notes, Ligatures, Intervals, and Rests
Blahoslav and Josquin each present tables of the note shapes and
values that are nearly identical to one another and to a related
table in the Musica of Listenius. In these tables, Blahoslav and
Josquin use identical Czech translations of the eight basic note 39 names :
maxima = "nejvëtsi" (greatest) minima = "nekratsi" (shortest) longa = "dlouhd" (long) semiminima = "bêznâ" (quick) brevis = "krâtkâ" (short) fusa = "beznejsi" (quicker) semibrevis = "kratsi" (shorter) semifusa = "nejbëznëjsi" (quickest)
Figure 9; Note Names in Czech
It is difficult to believe that Josquin did not copy these
translations from the Mus ica of Blahoslav, since there is no historical precedent for the translation of these terms prior to
Blahoslav's treatise.
The main difference between these tables of Blahoslav and Josquin is that Blahoslav's contains a comment indicating that only the maxima, longa, brevis, and semibrevis are commonly ligatured in the music of the time. Although Josquin's table is devoid of any similar comment, this point is made in a later discussion.
The main difference between these tables and the similar table presented by Listenius concerns the categorization of the minima in
39 Blahoslav, Musica (C2v); Josquin, Muzika (B6).
^*^Josquin, Muzika (B7). 87
its relationship to the tactus, the basic sixteenth-century temporal unit. Blahoslav and Josquin indicate that two minimae are contained within one tact, whereas Listenius stipulates that a minima equals one-half of one tact. While this difference in semantics presents no change in the relationship of the minima and the tact, it is possible to see the likelihood that Josquin followed Blahoslav in preparing the
Muzika.
Blahoslav and Josquin follow their presentations of the note shapes and values with a discussion of the ligatures that explains how two or more notes are "vazany" (bound), "svazany" (grouped), or
"spojany" (combined) together into a single shape. The ligatures combine two or more notes in a notational cluster that defines the rhythm of those particular notes; although occasional disagreements can be found among other sixteenth-century theorists, the resolutions 41 provided by Blahoslav and Josquin are identical.
Blahoslav divides his discussion of the ligatures into eight rules, each of which is followed by an example with indications of the numerical equivalents of the ligatures in imperfect (C) and perfect (O) time.
[tempus imperfectus] "
[ tempos perfectus] ™ "* "" — —
Figure 10: Ligatures in Perfect and Imperfect Tempus, from Blahoslav's Musica (C4)
Blahoslav, Musica (C3v-C4v); Josquin, Muzika (B7-B7v). 88 Blahoslav then instructs the reader to refer to the back of his
Musica for further examples of ligatures. What the reader finds here, as an appendix to the Musica, is a four-part composition written both with and without ligatures.The first version demonstrates how every pitch (except the last in each of the four parts) may be written as a part of a ligature; the second version illustrates the appropriate resolution of the ligatures, with each pitch represented by an individual note shape. By this means, the student of Blahoslav's Musica is able to compare the ligatures of a composition with their appropriate transcriptions.
Figure 11: Ligatures and Appropriate Resolutions, from Blahoslav's Musica (E5-E5v)
Although Josquin treats all of the possibilities covered by
Blahoslav, his discussion of the ligatures is reduced to brief comments accompanying four detailed examples. Josquin instructs his reader, if more information is required, to study the "first Czech
Musica. T h i s is a clear reference to Blahoslav*s Musica, even if it is a peculiar one that does not mention Blahoslav by name.
Perhaps this omission was intentional, brought about by the friction
42 Blahoslav, Musica (E5-E5v), 43 Josquin, Muzika (B7v). 89
between Josquin (Vaclav Solin?) and Blahoslav; perhaps the "first
Czech Musica" was so widely known among the members of the Jednota
bratrska that it was unnecessary for Josquin to mention its author by
name.
Although Blahoslav does not discuss the downward-slanting
ligature without tail, , this ligature form appears five timesin
the examples presented in the appendix to the Musica. T h i s
ligature shape is usually resolved as a longa-brevis if the ligature is unattached to other notes, and as a brevis-brevis if used in a more complex group. Blahoslav transcribes this ligature accordingly in his appendix; its omission from his earlier discussion appears to be an oversight. The downward-slanting ligature without tail is demonstrated in the third of four ligature examples presented in
Josquin's Muzika.Josquin instructs the reader that the first note represented by this ligature is transcribed as a brevis; he provides no resolution of the second and last note.
Blahoslav discusses one additional type of ligature that he advises the student to refrain from using. Blahoslav remarks that he has seen, in Czech notation, ligatures involving the minima.T h e s e minimae, illustrated in sixteenth-century manuscripts with a shape akin to the present-day "half-note," are ligatured by connecting the note heads with an oblique line.
^^Relocated to follow C5 in my translation of Blahoslav's Musica.
^^Josquin, Muzika (B7v).
^^Blahoslav, Musica (C3). 90
Figure 12; Ligatured Minimae, from Blahoslav's Musica (C3)
Blahoslav indicates that the ligatured minima should not be used because "the sound [hlahol] of the prolonged note [protahly nota] would have to be sung without a transformation in the articulation
[zrek]."^^ As with many passages in the texts of Blahoslav and
Josquin, the author's meaning here cannot be grasped unless one first understands the terminology from a sixteenth-century, Czech perspective. Blahoslav and Josquin understand the term "sound" as the entirety of sound represented by the ligature, regardless of how many individual notes are contained within that ligature. The
"prolonged note" functions here as a synonym for the ligature, and the "articulation" represents a pronounced syllable of text.
Consequently, Blahoslav intends to caution the reader to avoid ligatured minimae because the notes of the ligature could not be sung without the "slurring" of a syllable in the text.
Concerning the distance between various notes on the staff,
Blahoslav makes only an occasional reference to the intervals. It appears that Blahoslav either expected the reader to be familiar with the basic terminology of music prior to studying the Musica or, more likely, that Blahoslav did not consider the identification of
^^Blahoslav, Musica (C3v). 91 intervals necessary for the singer. Josquin, in contrast, illustrates the unison, major/minor second, major/minor third, perfect fourth, perfect/diminished fifth, major/minor sixth, and the 48 perfect octave. There is no discussion, however, about the difference between the various qualities of the intervals. This simplification is extraordinary, considering that nearly all sixteenth-century theorists discussing the hexachord system in such detail pay particular attention to the diabolus in musica. Another curiosity is Josquin’s use of the terms "tonus,” "ditonus,"
"diapente," and "tonus diapente." Although these terms refer specifically to the major second, major third, perfect fifth, and major sixth, respectively, Josquin includes the minor second, minor third, diminished fifth, and minor sixth in his examples under these headings.
vcmifoi &rc & li fol aol £i re v;;»
Figure 13: The Ditonus (or Third), from Josquin's Muzika (B1)
In almost identical tables utilizing a four-line staff,
Blahoslav and Josquin present seven "pausae" (rests), equated to the 49 respective note shapes. The only difference between the tables is
^^Josquin, Muzika (A8v-B1v).
^^Blahoslav, Musica (C5); Josquin, Muzika (E4v). 92 that Josquin*s includes a numerical equivalent for each rest,
illustrating its temporal relationship to the semibrevis.
i 1 i 7 %
Figure 14: Rests, in Relation to the Semibrevis, from Josquin*s Muzika (E4v)
Neither Blahoslav nor Josquin assigns specific names to the pauses except for the suspirium, which both theorists indicate has the same temporal value as the minima. Unlike Josquin, Blahoslav provides a
Czech equivalent for the term suspirium, which he translates as
*'oddech" (breath), "for it is little more than a rapid breath.
One additional provision is made by Blahoslav that is not discussed in the Muzika of Josquin. When the singer is to pause for two "beats" of a composition in triple time, Blahoslav indicates that the brevis-pause would be inappropriate.^^ Although often worth two
"beats," the brevis-pause can also have the value of three "beats** in the mensural system, in which case the singer would be required to rest for an entire measure. To avoid this confusion, Blahoslav instructs the composer to use two semibrevis-pauses.
50 Blahoslav, Musica (C5v); Josquin, Muzika (E4)
51Blahoslav, Musica (C5v). 93 The Mensural System
In the mensural system, three terms, modus, tempus, and
prolatio, are used to indicate how many of one note value are
contained in the next larger note value. While the relationships are
normally binary in the present-day system, either two or three notes
can be contained in the next larger value in the mensural system.
The term modus is used to indicate the relationship between the maxima and the longa, the tempus indicates the relationship between
the longa and the brevis, and the prolatio indicates the relationship between the brevis and the semibrevis. By the sixteenth century, the
term modus was (also) used to indicate the relationship between the
longa and the brevis, the tempus to indicate the relationship between
the brevis and the semibrevis, and the prolatio to indicate the
relationship between the semibrevis and the minima. The former set of relationships occurs when the maxima is used as the largest note value of the system (modus maximarum), whereas the latter set occurs when the longa is used as the largest note value of the system (modus
longarum).
In the mensural system, those notes containing two of the lesser value are called minor or imperfectus, while those notes containing three of the lesser value are called maior or perfectus (from the tripartite structure of the Holy Trinity). If a circle, the perfect geometric shape, is used as a part of a mensural signature, the tempus is perfectus; an incomplete circle indicates that the tempus is imperfectus. In modus maximarum, the Arabic numerals "3" and "2," used as part of a signature, indicate that the prolatio is either 94 perfect or imperfect, respectively; in modus longarum, the "point"
indicates a perfect relationship at the prolatio level, while the
absence of the point indicates an imperfect relationship.
Consequently, the Medieval and Renaissance musicians used many more
"time signatures" than are now common.
Modus Tempus Prolatio
O 3 = maxima, perfect longa, perfect brevis, perfect C 3 = maxima, imperfect longa, imperfect brevis, perfect marum Oj, = maxima, imperfect longa, perfect brevis, imperfect Cj, = maxima, imperfect longa, imperfect brevis, imperfect O = longa, imperfect brevis, perfect semibrev., imperf. Long- ^ = longa, imperfect brevis, imperfect semibrev., imperf. arum O = longa, imperfect brevis, perfect semibrev., perfect (2 = longa, imperfect brevis, imperfect semibrev., perfect
Figure 15; Mensural Signatures and Denotations
Blahoslav presents two tables illustrating the mensural signatures and the resulting relationships to the note shapes. He took the first table from Finck's Practica musica and the second 52 table from Coclico's Compendium musices.
^^Blahoslav, Musica (D3-D3v). 95 i 7 à71IàII I z "3Ez z z Z 0£ £ 30 ;c 1 (j ; J 0 /0 I C5 33 5» 3 z z 5 z £ sagPii s a1az aI 1B7i ZT z z z 1E z 23 (34 E2éJ2 a3 3 z z 21% 2 z \% 8 2312”i 8g12s g!62 »a 03C3 02 C3 0 0Ic m i £ !■ Figure 16: Tables of Mensural Signatures and Values, from Blahoslav's Musica (D3-D3v)
The first table presents the eight temporal signatures discussed
above; the second table includes two additional signatures not found
in the first, and ^ 3 . These two signs came about due to the
preference for writing in smaller note values; the vertical bar
through the and (^3 indicates a 50% diminution of the temporal
relationships established by C and C3, respectively. The
signature (^3 indicates an imperfect modus (at the brevis level),
imperfect tempus (at the semibrevis level), and perfect prolatio (at
the minima level), whereas the indicates an imperfect division at
all three levels. It should be noted that the vertical bar drawn
through the 3 is actually understood to be drawn through the G ; a
vertical bar drawn through the C3 would result in the already 96
existing relationships established by the G sign.
Josquin, prior to his discussion of the tactus, writes that many
such signs were used by the ancient musicians, "particularly when
they wrote more for complexity and out of spite than for
practicality, such as [when writing] ^ modis perfectis ^ imperfectis 53 and de maiori minorique prolatione." Further, Josquin indicates
that even the ancient musicians did not fully understand the
application of these signs, observing that "much confusion in these
[styles of writing] can be comprehended from the examples that remain behind.Nevertheless, Josquin feels obligated to "mention some
instruction about the tact, to the extent that it is understood.
In his discussion of the first of two mensural signatures included in the Muzika, Josquin remarks that the sign is used to
indicate "that the singing of a simple composition is. to be restrained and gentle.He describes the second signature, C 3 » as the one that accompanies a type of singing "appropriate to both pious songs and to those that arouse us to jubilation.It appears that these mensurations indicated a particular style of singing, as well as a duple or triple metric scheme. The only technical discussion offered by Josquin is that, under the second signature, "there are
53 Josquin, Muzika (E2v).
^^Josquin, Muzika (E2v).
^^Josquin, Muzika (E2v).
Josquin, Muzika (E3).
^^Josquin, Muzika (E3). 97 two measures [of time], one expanded and the other short, as if
jumped.
It seems odd that Josquin presents such an abbreviated and
overly simplified exposition of the temporal relationships if the missing portion of the Muzika did indeed contain a discussion of
polyphonic music. The possibility exists that Josquin addressed the
temporal relationships in greater detail in that missing portion of
the Muzika, but that notion has the disadvantage that Josquin would have had to divide his discussion of the mensural system between two chapters.
In contrast to Josquin's brief discussion of the tactus, contained in a chapter devoted to the "characters" or "signs" of music, Blahoslav devotes an entire chapter to the tactus and a second chapter to the relationships created in the mensural system.
Blahoslav not only presents an explanation of the signatures, but includes a discussion of the proportiones, which are the diminutions of note values in mathematical ratio to the "usual" value, or 59 integer valor. Three proportiones are illustrated both in a table and by musical examples in Blahoslav's Musica; proportio dupla, 2:1 or 4:2, where each note value is reduced to 1/2 of its usual value; proportio tripla, 3:1 or 6:2, where each note is reduced to 1/3 of its usual value; proportio sesquialtera, 3:2 or 6:4, where each note is reduced to 2/3 of its usual value. This is his example of the
Josquin, Muzika (E3).
^^Blahoslav, Musica (C8-D2v). 98 latter proportion:
ZJÊ. I ) J. J ■I- J- p ^ *- cc
Figure 17: Proportio sesquialtera, transcribed from Blahoslav's Musica (D2v)
Syncopation, Coloration, and Hemiola
As a supplement to his discussion of the temporal relationships,
Blahoslav includes a brief definition of syncopatio:
. . . when one note is distant from another with which it could complete one tact, the separation of these notes (which complete the measure of one tact) and the insertion of one or more notes between these two (of however many complete tacts), is and is called syncopation.^0
Blahoslav offers two examples illustrating syncopatio, each of which
employs the brevis as the basic temporal unit.^^
60 Blahoslav, Musica (C7v).
^^Blahoslav, Musica (C7v-C8), 99
, Synco. I r ( U i - yr, 1 — f /I) - i r ^ - i — Figure 18; Examples of Syncopatio, from Blahoslav's Musica (C7v-C8) Both Blahoslav's and Josquin's references to the "mira" (measure) must be understood from a sixteenth-century perspective. In these treatises, "measure" refers only to a relative length of time determined by the composer's choice of a particular note value as the tactus. Blahoslav's indication that the measure is divided means only that there is an interruption of the established patterns by the insertion of larger or smaller, nonconforming fractions of the 62 tactus. Blahoslav and Josquin demonstrate an identical understanding of coloration, indicating that when coloration appears in conjunction with white notes, black notes are sung with a 25% diminution of their normal durational value. This explanation diverges from the usual sixteenth-century understanding of the procedure, which designates a substitution of three black notes for two perfect notes at the tempus or prolatio level. Both Blahoslav and Josquin clearly indicate, however, that they understand this reduction brought about by ^^Blahoslav, Musica (C7). 100 63 coloration to be "one fourth less of the amount," where the note "loses a fourth of its value.This understanding appears to have originated with the substitution of three black notes for two imperfect notes and a modification of the uneven "triplet" into a "dotted" rhythm ( ^ ^ J 73 ) • Substitution of Three Black Substitution of Three Black Notes for Two Perfect Notes for Two Imperfect 1=1 O M M « 1=1 M N M nol'd'âddd 4 d d d d d 3 Figure 19: The Effect of Coloration on Perfect and Imperfect Notes Both writers are aware of the confusion caused by the different interpretations of notes affected by coloration and mention that their contemporaries do not agree on a single definition. Blahoslav and Josquin use the term hemiola to describe situations in which all notes of a composition are affected by coloration.In contrast to the specific 25% diminution that they require when selected white notes are interspersed with coloration, both theorists are quite general in describing the result of hemiola. Blahoslav says only that a composition in hemiola "is a bit more ^^Blahoslav, Musica (D4). ^^Josquin, Muzika (B8v). ^^Blahoslav, Musica (D4); Josquin, Muzika (B7v-B8), ^^Blahoslav, Musica (D4); Josquin, Muzika (B8). 101 rapid than . . . one commonly notated with white notes,while go Josquin says only that here the notes "are sung more rapidly." Additional Notational Figures Seven additional signs are either discussed or demonstrated by both Blahoslav and Josquin: the punctus additionis, the custos, two types of repetitio, the signum congruentiae, the signum concordantiae, and the finalis. These writers exhibit an identical understanding of the punctus additionisthe augmentation dot adds to the note one-half of the value that it holds without the dot. Although the custos is used in nearly all multiline examples in the Musica, Blahoslav does not directly address this sign in his text. The custos is an indication at the end of one staff that identifies, in advance, the first note of the succeeding staff. This forewarning can be a great aid to the singer, especially when the second staff begins with a change of clef. Thus, it is not surprising that Josquin labels this sign as the "straz" (warning), although he also proposes the alternate label of index. ^^Blahoslav, Musica (D4). ^^Josquin, Muzika (B8). ^^Blahoslav, Musica (D3v); Josquin, Muzika (Cl). ^^Josquin, Muzika (E2). 71Josquin, Muzika (E4v). 102 The figure ^ was commonly used to indicate a repetition of music and the R° to indicate a repetition of text. The term repetitio, however, was often erroneously applied to the "B" section of a tripartite "AAB" composition, Blahoslav and Josquin correct this contemporary misuse, pointing out that the term repetitio should properly be applied to the "opëtovâni" (recurrence) of the initial 72 melodic section accompanying the second verse of text. Blahoslav refers the reader to a hymn in the Samotulsky kancional for an example; Josquin provides an example in his treatise so that the reader might understand how, by the placement of the R° following the second verse of text, this misunderstanding originated. ^pcasso.p«mtf «"I"»»" d30t04tM/n4n> (c vtc}aLs/ ot> 5o b a pttp p d n A Figure 20; Monophonic Hymn, with Repetitio, from Josquin's Muzika (E5-E5v) Blahoslav, Musica (C6); Josquin, Muzika (E5), 103 Blahoslav describes the signum congruentiae [ ]. as a figure that indicates a "srovani" (equalization) or "spolecny" (getting- 73 together) or "postaveni" (stoppage) of the voices; Josquin assigns the name signum convenientiae to this figure,and indicates that it signifies a "shledani a spolu sjednouceni" (gathering or uniting) of the voices.Quite apart from his discussion, Blahoslav demonstrates, in an example taken from Josquin Desprez's Missa Hercules Dux Ferrariae, that this sign can also be used to indicate where the next singer is to begin;likewise, Josquin, in a canonic example taken from Listenius's Musica, uses this sign at the point of vocal entries. Without describing it, Blahoslav links the signum concordantiae 78 [ ] to the finalis. Josquin separates the fermata and the 79 finalis, discussing these as independent signs, and remarks that the concordantiae is used when a composition reaches a "prijemného a libeho zvuku" (agreeable and pleasing sound).The finalis [ *^ ] is defined by both Blahoslav and Josquin as the last note of any 73 Blahoslav, Musica (C6). ^^Josquin, Muzika (E2). ^^Josquin, Muzika (E5v). ^^Blahoslav, Musica (B8). ^^Josquin, Muzika (E6). 78 Blahoslav, Musica (C6). 7Q Josquin, Muzika (E5v-E6). 80 Josquin, Muzika (E5). 104 81 composition. Blahoslav’s table of notational signs contains three figures: the repetitio, the signum congruentiae, and the signum concordantiae cum finalis. The organization of this table is similar to the one found in the Musica of Listenius, although Listenius separates the concordantiae and the finalis in his table of four signs. .Î. Figure 21: Table of Notational Figures, from Blahoslav's Musica (C6) Blahoslav does not offer the Latin identifications provided by Listenius; instead, he gives brief descriptions of the figures. It appears that Josquin also took the organization for his table from Listenius, retaining Listenius's four signs and Latin identifications, and adding six additional signs and identifications to bring the total number to ten. Blahoslav, Musica (C6); Josquin, Muzika (E6). 105 SimpUcitstis (j^ Tnplae Q BonoEiatiiB Be^urôattf Pauâff # Cuiiodts Rrpdiooots CSueniintfie k=9 CôbonËœe )â B o a U s * Figure 22: Table of Notational Figures, from Josquin's Muzika (E2) The Tones In Gregorian practice, the sets of melodic formulas used in singing the psalms are called tones; each set of melodic formulas corresponds to one of the eight modal scales. The four elements of these formulas include the initium, a pattern that introduces the monophonic recitation of the psalm, the mediatio, a figure that acts as an intermediary cadence of the recitation, the terminatio, a figure that concludes the recitation of the psalm, and the Seculorum Amen (abbreviated EUOUAE) , which is sung to the closing words of the doxology and ensures a smooth melodic transition back to a repetition of the introit or antiphon. In addition, alternative EUOUAE, called differentiae tonorum, are documented by many theorists. Blahoslav presents his melodic formulas for each individual tone, an example illustrating the appropriate melodic range of that mode, and the differentiae tonorum before he proceeds to a discussion 106 of the next tone. The melodic formulas of the initium, mediatio, terminatio, and EUOUAE found in Blahoslav's Musica are taken from 82 Coclico's Compendium musices. In those cases where Coclico presents two EUOUAE, Blahoslav copies both formulas. Ï H d [beginning] [middle] 3Ci±3t 9 0 [end] [forever and Î i. ever. Amen] Figure 23: Psalm-Tone Formulas of Tone I, from Blahoslav's Musica (D5v) Blahoslav immediately follows each of his sets of psalm-tone formulas with an example illustrating the modal ambit, the melodic range that distinguishes authentic tones (generally ranging from the final to the octave above) from plagal tones (ranging from a fourth below the final to a fifth above). Blahoslav's ambit examples are 83 taken from Listenius's Musica. Blahoslav does not make the distinction between authentic and plagal modes, nor does he use the terms "Dorian," "Phrygian," etc. in his discussions; he identifies the tones only as "Tone I," "Tone II," etc. QO Blahoslav, Musica (D5v-E2v). OO Blahoslav, Musica (D5v-E2v). 107 Ü Figure 24: Ambit of Tone I, from Blahoslav's Musica (D6) Blahoslav's examples of the differentiae tonorum are likewise taken from Listenius's Musica. 1. z. M ^ ^ Ê Figure 25: Differentiae Tonorum of Tone I, from Blahoslav's Musica (D6) Blahoslav combines one EUOUAE from each of the eight tones into a small composition and concludes it with the EUOUAE of the tonus peregrinus. He does not provide the peregrinus, which does not exhibit the standard characteristics of the eight "regular" tones, with a separate set of formulas; instead, he adopts the fourth 84Blahoslav, Musica (D5v-E2v), 108 85 differentia of Tone VIII as the EUOUAE of the "ninth” tone. To these nine melodic phrases, Blahoslav further attaches a text; each number in the text corresponds to the number of the tone for which 86 each EUOUAE is a component. $nonj (ÿ ** %i * ± X S = 3 t QwangtUflowe, p it md Ê W f a x = x fmgffûiv* StaiiDipj {[((I po(latrcno» X U- W-N-'W------L ^ ..1-1 M H r-j14 Figure 26: Composition of EUOUAE, from Blahoslav's Musica (D5) 85Blahoslav, Musica (E2v). 86 Blahoslav, Musica (D5). The text reads as follows: The first man was Adam, * the second was Noah, * the third was Abraham, * [there are] four evangelists, * a man has five senses, * six water jars were situated there [at the feast of Cana], * there are seven arts, * eight beatitudes, * [and] nine angelic choirs. 109 The music and (Latin) text for the first eight phrases of this example may have been taken from Finck's Practica musica, which preceded Blahoslav's text by two years. Finck, however, presents each phrase as a separate example. It is also possible that Blahoslav took this composition from the Dodecachordon (1541) of Glarean; here, the first eight melodic phrases are joined as above, but no text accompanies Glarean's example. In either case, it appears that the ninth melodic phrase and its text were original with Blahoslav. The chapter of Josquin's Muzika that contains the discussion of the psalm tones is incomplete; virtually all that is extant are Josquin's examples of the psalmorum intonationes and his examples of the ambits. Josquin's psalmorum intonationes are based on those found in the Musica of Listenius, although the differences are so significant that 87 a note-by-note comparison would be of little value. These differences are due primarily to Josquin's reharmonization of the tenor lines presented by Listenius. In both Listenius's and Josquin's examples of the psalmorum intonationes, the latter half of each of the tenor parts corresponds to the respective EUOUAE formula presented by Listenius at the end of his monophonic ambit examples. 87 Josquin, Muzika (F6v-F8v ) . 110 3 Z i S Figure 27: Psalmorum Intonatione of Tone I, from Josquin's Muzika (F6v) Like Blahoslav, Josquin identifies the tones only by their number, although Josquin does make the distinction between the authentic and plagal ranges of the modes. Josquin's ambit examples are based on those found in Listenius's Musica, and again the differences are 89 significant. The degree of difference is due primarily to Josquin's abbreviation of Listenius's examples and secondarily to some rewriting. Josquin's ambit for the eighth tone, however, is presented exactly as it appears in the Musica of Listenius. Josquin's ambit examples lack the EUOUAE formulas that Listenius presents, attached to his ambit examples. Following his presentation of the psalm tones, Blahoslav presents three tables in which the tones are categorized by their finals: the first table applies to untransposed compositions ending on the usual finals of D, E, F, and G; the second table applies to compositions "not judged according to the usual manner," i.e.. 88 Josquin, Muzika (F4v-F5v). 89 Josquin, Muzika (F5v-F6). 111 transposed up a fifth, with the exception of Tones VII and VIII, which are transposed down a fifth; the third table applies to "unusual composition," i.e., those songs that are transposed up a 90 fourth. Thereby, he presents a rather complete picture of standard modal practice. Josquin presents two tables regarding the determination of the tone that, despite their simpler form, appear to 91 have been taken from the first two tables in Blahoslav's Musica. Both Blahoslav and Josquin address the affective qualities of the tones in their respective music manuals. Blahoslav presents his descriptions in brief passages accompanying the psalm-tone formulas; 92 Josquin lists the affects for all of the tones in a single table. The descriptive Czech terms used by Blahoslav and Josquin to identify the qualities of the individual tones are, however, identical in numerous instances. Such a similarity, not only in the affects but also in the specific terminology used to identify those affects, could not have resulted from mere coincidence. on Blahoslav, Musica (E3v-E4). Josquin, Muzika (F5v). 92 Blahoslav, Musica (D5v-E2); Josquin, Muzika (F5). 112 Blahoslav Josquin Tone I merry merry sonorous sonorous beautifully diverging pleasingly floating and floating restrained restrained Tone II sorrowful sorrowful mournful mournful tearful leading to grief and bringing about grief to a humble spirit Tone III severe severe hard hard sharp sharp bitter warlike masculine masculine Figure 28: Table of Affects for Tones I, II, & III, from Blahoslav's Musica (D5v-D7) & Josquin's Muzika (F5) Hermann Finck, in the Practica musica, presents a lengthy discussion of the proprietates tonorum. The lists of affective qualities proposed by Blahoslav and Josquin are clearly modeled after Finck's discussion. Transposition Blahoslav acknowledges the process of transposition only in his tables of transposed finales, and it appears from these tables that he recognizes transposition by a fourth or fifth. Josquin, however, presents a detailed discussion of transposition made to avoid coniunctae (chromatic alterations), to change the nature (durus, mollis, naturalis, or fictus) of a composition into another nature, and to bring the written composition into an appropriate vocal 113 93 range. From the examples accompanying his discussion, it is apparent that Josquin permits transposition by a second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh. These transpositions can be effected by repositioning the notes on the staff, by changing the clef, or by a combination of methods, as in these examples : [naturalis composition] Oa paces domine, [naturalis composition transferred into mollis] Da paeon. [b b b] ^ A m Ï I [naturalis composition I '■'4 a # f . transferred into fictus] D& paeon. Figure 29: Transposition of a Melody into Another Nature, from Josquin's Muzika (D8v-E1) In addition, Josquin warns the singer to pay particular attention to 94 the change of clef in the middle of a staff. QO Josquin, Muzika (D6-E1v). ^^Josquin, Muzika (D5-D5v). 114 V o t k S n BKcefTte. 11 $ 9,______^ *= ? F Ver&um «eto. flioax Figure 30: Clef Change in the Middle of a Staff, from Josquin's Muzika (D6) Touches such as this show the practical side of Josquin's presentation. Conclusion The treatises of Blahoslav and Josquin, published in Jednota printing shops in the mid-sixteenth century, contain few surprises in terms of their content. Because all publications of the Jednota were banned after 1508, we know with relative certainty that Blahoslav and Josquin were writing only for members of their sect. The worship music of the Jednota did not progress beyond vocal monophony, and the composition of new songs was severely curtailed by the Elders. There was little need for manuals that discussed musica theorica or musica poetica, a limited discussion of musica practica being all that was necessary to train singers for Jednota choirs. The applicable fundamentals of unison singing are amply discussed and illustrated by Blahoslav and Josquin; the theoretical explanations, mathematical ratios, and complex proportions are left aside. 115 Blahoslav mentions that he is indebted to Adrianus Petit Coclico and Hermann Finck, and many of his illustrations and examples are taken directly from the treatises of these Wittenberg theorists. This study has shown that Blahoslav was also.largely dependent on Nikolaus Listenius, another associate of the Wittenberg circle, and, to a lesser extent, on Vaclav Philomathes and Heinrich Glarean. Although Josquin does not mention an indebtedness to any theorist, it appears that he borrowed heavily from the treatise of Listenius. Josquin makes a reference to the "first Czech Musica," and this study has pointed out the many similarities between Josquin's treatise and the Musica of Blahoslav. Many of the items discussed by Blahoslav are discussed by Josquin, and the two authors often construct their arguments and examples after the same model. As in the case of the downward- slanting ligature without tail, Blahoslav and Josquin occasionally omit identical pieces of information about a topic; as in the case of terminology used to identify notes and tone-affects, both writers use identical unprecedented Czech translations of Latin terms. Some topics, such as the categorization of musicians and the proportiones, are discussed only by Blahoslav; other topics, such as transposition and the intervallae, are discussed only by Josquin. It does not appear, however, that Josquin's text was written as a supplement or amplification to Blahoslav's treatise. Rather, it appears that these were rival texts competing for the same readership. Each text is complete within itself, and the omissions and enlargements appear to be based on what seemed important to the particular author. 116 Through a study of the Musica of 1558 and the Muzika of 1561 it is possible to understand the musica practica of the Jednota bratrska prior to the Battle of Bila Hora. No new system is proposed in these treatises, and the ideas presented are, for the most part, conventional. Yet, as the first two music treatises written in the Czech language, these works are important because they prove a musical interaction between the theorists of Bohemia-Moravia and Wittenberg and because they shed light on the relatively unexplored music and music theory of Bohemia-Moravia during the sixteenth century. PART II THE TRANSCRIPTIONS AND TRANSLATIONS 117 NOTES ON THE TRANSCRIPTIONS AND TRANSLATIONS The Editions For the purpose of translation, film reproductions of the only available copies of Blahoslav's Musica and Josquin's Muzika were obtained from the Knihovna Narodniho Muzea v Praze.^ These consist of a second edition of Blahoslav's Musica (1569) and an original edition of Josquin's Muzika (1561). In contrast to the Muzika of Josquin, which appears to have been published in only one edition, the 1569 edition of Blahoslav's Musica contains the original treatise and two later supplements: I. Musica, to jest knizka zpêvakûm nâlezité zpravy v sobe zavirajici. Musica, which is a handbook comprised of instructions appropriate for singers. II. Zpravy nëkteré potfebné têm, kdoz chti dobfe zpivati. Some instructions necessary for those who wish to sing well. III. Nauceni potfebné tëm, ktefiz pisnë sklâdati chtëji. Teachings necessary for those who wish to compose songs. Blahoslav attended the synod in Mlada Boleslav during the summer of 1558 and was transferred to Ivancice (southern Moravia) in August The holdings of the Knihovna Narodniho were recataloged in 1980. The earlier number assigned to Blahoslav's Musica, 27 F 23, has been superseded by 261 ZS. Josquin's Muzika, formerly listed as 27 F 24, is currently cataloged as 262 ZS. 118 119 of that same year. Because Blahoslav is known to have remained in Ivancice until 1569, it appears that his Musica (1558) was printed (at Olomouc, in northern Moravia) during the first part of 1558. We know from Josef Jungmann's report, however, that no copy of the 1558 2 edition was known in 1826. The title page of the 1569 edition indicates that the first portion had been "pilnë skorigovna" (diligently corrected), suggesting that minor changes had been made for the reprinting of the "original" Musica. The second section of the Musica is dated 1 February 1560 at the end of the "K ctenari" (To the Reader). This date would seem to indicate that this section went to print just one month after the Samotulsky kancional. Although the third section of the Musica is not dated, a note characterizing the entire, tripartite Musica is g found in the Ivancicke kancional. This implies that the third and final portion of the Musica was completed before March 1564, the date of the printing of the Ivancicke kancional. The 1569 edition of Blahoslav's Musica was printed in small octavo format, each finished page measuring approximately 10 centimeters by 15 centimeters. The Muzika of Josquin, similarly printed in octavo, is slightly smaller, with finished pages measuring approximately 10x14 centimeters. The Musica of Blahoslav contains 12 complete octavos; the Muzika of Josquin contains 6 complete 2 Josef Jungmann, Historié literatury ceske, 2nd ed. (Prague: Nakladem Ceskeho Muzeal 1849), 137 Pisnë duchovni evangelistske, 2nd ed. (Ivancice, Czechoslovakia: Jednota bratrska, 1564), 43. 120 octavos. The octavo folios are lettered and/or numbered through the fifth octavo folio in both treatises, although many of these identifying marks are either absent or incorrect. The most valuable secondary source for my translation has been the nineteenth-century edition of both treatises by the Czech music historian, Otakar Hostinsky. His transcription of the text from sixteenth-century to nineteenth-century Czech has provided many clarifications of interpretation and sentence structure, word division, and abbreviation. There are, however, numerous irregularities in Hostinsky's transcription. Ho 'iky himself acknowledges some latitude in this respect in the Wotes" to accompany his transcription.^ Since I do not believe that Hostinsky consulted the same copy of Blahoslav's Musica that I have used in this dissertation, the possibility of several printings of the second edition of the Musica might account for some of these discrepancies. During a visit to the Knihovna narodniho, where Hostinsky did his research, I found one copy of Blahoslav's Musica (second edition) and one copy of Josquin's Muzika. I was assured by a representative of the Knihovna narodniho that these originals were the only ones that the library has ever possessed. This assertion cannot be correct. Frantisek Hybl, archivist of Blahoslav's native city of Prerov, presented me with two works: Jan Blahoslav Pferovsky (1971), edited by Hybl and Gustav Vozda, and Jan Blahoslav (1966), by Josef Janacek. Each of these works contains a reproduction of the title page of ^Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, 107. 121 Blahoslav's Musica (1569) that shows a brief fragment of the Latin hymn "Jesu dulcis memoria" (music and text) and the nineteenth- 5 . century seal of the Knihovna narodniho. Neither the musical example and text nor the library seal appears on the title page of my film copy (see Plate IV). Instead, this copy shows an identification number and an undecipherable, handwritten annotation. In addition, the seal of the (private) library of Markéta Magoab appears on the reverse of the title page on my film copy; the tracing of Magoab's identity has not yet been accomplished. Hostinsky included a zincographic reproduction of exactly the same title page that is shown in both Jan Blahoslav Pferovsky and Jan Blahoslav.^ Hostinsky's transcription of that title page, however, excludes the musical example and text, but includes the following Latin arcanum in its place: Denuo Edita in Insula Hortensi Anno MDLXIX Printed anew on the island among the gardens, in the year 1569. Because of the Mandate of St. James, the location of the Jednota printing house in southern Moravia was a closely guarded secret. The insula hortensi (island among the gardens) became the assumed name, among the Jednota, for the town of Ivancice. Hostinsky noted that this arcanum is found in its abbreviated form (Ex horto) at the end ^Hybl and Vozda, Jan Blahoslav Pferovsky, 119; Janacek, Jan Blahoslav, 112B. ^Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, 3. PLATE IV Comparison of Title Pages from Blahoslav's Musica and Josquin's Muzika. MV 8ICA togtflfinjÿaÿpenw tm/niltliU iptSwf lAif^^tciitjlprawp toÇeUiaUftiiÿt^, |bWki,W,(. igcffjpr^toûfipj'wa j^oftoffloucp.'9tpi>li»mu mg malcjici I w^dimlni Sp*/ ill wAmlcvA'ci {abodin^m tm S)olbmmg. ' '^njinomu fllal *fcfp3e»Mvi akgiu pÜnf.ihiya'oèÀiiil aivoiu pajkttt / dibtiuitt JMA ftiW . ^«IquinaXasifun \X fjmwnowiff BHNkiA" X(=uk/aiMidm iP*A • hd BMwrfin W Àmtcrmn y pffij feUba tdAm. Slhi»t I f (dan. âoftir. » t. ^ n. *». • ■ VM>(t*»mfgiflunf»hng tStopclbiPaqf gip mi tm m fM ttfii ffoJpfwowoK. i6 W(Iitf pioiplaroaiait.t(» ' ^«bn. 46, A i . v. gaûn. 4^. ÿfftaft iwflcmu tfi ; ÿ ffv a tt »o5b iw(ftmu;ipitwr((/. •: '’'■yifnumtlf. Blahoslav's Musica Hostinsky's transcription of Josquin's Muzika (1569 e d U the Musica (1896) (1561 ed.) N3 N3 123 of the "K ctenari" to the first supplement.^ From this, it appears that there were at least two copies of Blahoslav's Musica extant as recently as 1971, that the only(?) copy held by the Knihovna narodniho today is not the copy Hostinsky used at that library, and that Hostinsky based his transcription on a different copy than the one that is used in this dissertation. Hostinsky suggested that another copy of the second edition of Blahoslav's Musica could have existed in Bratislava as late as 1877. We cannot be sure of this, however, because Hostinsky did not journey to Bratislava, but based his supposition on secondhand information obtained from the Vestnik krâtkÿ cesky spolecnosti nauka (1877). This work quotes a title-entry from a 1644 compendium of the holdings of the Ëerotinské bibliothece ve Vratislavi (Bratislava): 1558. Muzika, t.j. knizka zpëvâkum nâlezité zpravy v sobe zavirajici. Nejprvé vytiStëna 1558 v Olomouci.® 1558. Musica, which is a handbook comprised of instructions appropriate for singers. First printed in 1558 at Olomouc. Although the title listed in this entry did not correspond exactly with his copy of the Musica, Hostinsky was still willing to "accept g as probable" the existence of another copy of Blahoslav's 1569 Musica in the city library at Bratislava. The library staff of the Zerotinske bibliothece, however, is unable to locate this copy in its ^Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, 34. ^Vëstnik krâtkÿ cesky, 227. Q Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, LXXI. 124 current holdings or to provide any information as to its existence. I have found only one reference to the possibility of a third edition, or a reprinting of the second edition, of Blahoslav's Musica. Jiri Straus, in his "Blahoslavova 'Muzika' a jeji pedagogicky vyznam" (1979), stated the following: The instructional text of Blahoslav has this title: MUSICA, to jest knizka zpëvâkûm nâlezité zpravy otvirajici .... It was first published at Olomouc in 1558 in the printing shop founded by Konrad Baumgartner. It has 104 pages. The original publication is in the Knihovna Narodniho Muzea v Praze under the catalog number 27 F 23. Later, it was published in the Jednota printing shop in Ivancice in 1569, and additional publications followed.10 There are discrepancies, however, that suggest that Straus relied on an inaccurate source for his information: 1. Straus gave an incorrect title, substituting the word "otvirajici" for "v sobe zavirajici." 2. The 1558 edition of Blahoslav's Musica contains only the first section of the greatly expanded 1569 edition, and the title page of that 1569 edition indicates that this first section has been only "diligently corrected" for the reprinting. It seems unlikely, therefore, that the 1558 edition would comprise 104 pages while the greatly expanded 1569 edition has only 96 pages of text. 3. Straus wrote about the 1558 edition in the present tense, noting its location and catalog number. In addition to ignoring Jungmann's observation in the Historié literatury ceske that no copy of Blahoslav's 1558 Musica was extant in 1826 (over 150 years prior), Straus ignored the obvious fact that this catalog number was assigned to the 1569 edition of Blahoslav's Musica. Jiri Straus, "Blahoslavova 'Muzika' a jeji pedagogicky vyznam," Moravské bratrské skolstvi £ jeho protejsky v 16. az 18. stoleti (Prerov, Czechoslovakia: Pracovisti dëjin moravského skolstvi a Komeniologie vlastivëdného ustavu v Prerovë, 1979), 15. 125 It seems unlikely that Blahoslav would have had the time to prepare a third edition of the Musica before his death. Blahoslav waited 11 years before publishing a second edition of the Musica in 1569 and, although ill, managed to complete five other major works during the interim between 1569 and his death in 1571. The title page of Josquin’s Muzika that is reproduced in Hostinsky’s Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin is identical to that of my film copy;^^ this title page includes an undecipherable library seal and handwritten annotations. It is apparent from a comparison of these title pages and from Hostinsky’s related remarks that he transcribed the same copy of Josquin’s Muzika that is translated in this dissertation: both copies contain the handwritten note of Pavel Gabulka, both are heavily glossed, both have the same obliterations of text, and both lack the final portion of chapter eight, all of chapters nine and ten, and the errata. The Procedures The foremost obstacle in the preparation of these translations of Blahoslav’s Musica and Josquin’s Muzika has been that both authors wrote in an early form of the Czech language. The first spelling primer of the Czech language, Blahoslav’s Slabikafe ceskeho (1550) had been circulating among the Jednota for only eight years before the publication of the first edition of the Musica; Blahoslav’s Grammatika ceska (1571) was not completed until two years after the ^^Hostinsky, Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, 66. 126 publication of the second edition of the Musica. The translations have been further complicated by a lack of models for comparison. These translations are the first into English or any other language. A secondary complication with regard to Josquin's Muzika has been that the writing style of the author is so inept that some Czech scholars question whether Josquin was of Czech origin. The printing errors in the treatises of Blahoslav and Josquin are discussed in footnotes accompanying the translations rather than in an independent discussion. This manner serves to unencumber the theoretical comparison (Chapter IV) from discussions not pertinent to the understanding of musical concepts. I have retained the authors' inconsistent use of upper and lower case letters to identify pitches of the gamut in my transcriptions; I have corrected this in my translations. I have used a consistent, modern Czech spelling of words throughout the transcriptions. To assist the reader who wishes to refer to the original manuscripts, I have indicated the correct octavo pagination alongside the transcriptions. Although the right-hand pages of Blahoslav's Musica are designated with Arabic numerals in addition to the octavo pagination, I have retained the octavo identifications in my transcription. This was done to avoid the confusion between references to my transcription of Blahoslav's treatise (paginated with octavo identifications) and references to Hostinsky's transcription of Blahoslav's treatise (paginated with Arabic numerals). 127 In both the transcriptions and translations, the lines of text are indented as in the original texts. This procedure, however, is very different from that used by Hostinsky. The originals have "interspaces" within particular paragraphs, occasionally with as much as two-thirds of a line void of printed material. Hostinsky used these interspaces inconsistently as a guide for his paragraph indentation, sometimes ignoring an extensive interspace and leaving the original paragraph intact, and at other times making an indentation with little or no apparent justification. Adherence to the original indentation does, at times, result in paragraphs that might seem immoderately long or short. The translated portion of Blahoslav's Musica contains ten chapters, all identified by number and chapter title. Because the Muzika of Josquin contains no chapter numbers, chapter titles, or page headings, it has been necessary to divide it into chapters corresponding to the list of subdivisions that appears immediately 12 following his preliminary dedication and epigram. Only eight of the ten "chapter titles" are used in the translation, of course, because the final two chapters of Josquin's Muzika are lost. The identification numbers attached to many of Josquin's examples indicate the location of these hymns in the Samotulsky kancional. The identification numbers found in the margins of the hymnal are letters and Roman numerals; these numbers are presented as letters and Arabic numerals in Josquin's treatise. Josquin's system 12 Josquin, Muzika (A5). 128 is a considerable improvement over the numbering system used in the hymnal, where these marginal identifications accompany both an Arabic pagination and a Roman numeral octavo pagination (giving hymns in the kancional three identifying numbers). Josquin's alteration of the marginal numbers from Roman numerals to Arabic numerals (e.g., KII to K2) eliminates the possibility of confusing these numbers with either the Arabic pagination or the octavo pagination. The hymns presented in Josquin's Muzika are not usually presented in full; many of these examples end in the middle of a verse, and sometimes even in the middle of a word. A list of Josquin's examples taken from the Samotulsky kancional can be found in Appendix C. For the sake of authenticity, reproductions of the original musical examples are included in the translations of Blahoslav's Musica and Josquin's Muzika. The reader will encounter little difficulty in reading the monophonic examples but, because Blahoslav and Josquin present their polyphonic examples in part-form, these have been transcribed into modern score notation for the convenience of the reader. These transcriptions can be found in Appendix D. 129 PLATE V Title Page of Blahoslav's Musica, shown original size. Knihovna Nârodniho Muzea v Praze 261 ZS. MV ^ûm/niîisité spv^vof 'vfoiliattprasj^» &pfàttd JayfSem /BJjîôofls ncfttrjic^ So^T^ j^àtct. Z is^tU S^oümata^, ^tynjitamx pibïi «foi^cfcmanct awvtia ( T W $ pSbfln^fSa ^e^ïe/anaaicifpot& bad 2UaiwrSin y pifpj fgi^a tttaau 0 aùa» sff, fBîôÇo jïaœtnjJ atfî ttn lü> ftn0 mi ra ^(?nr pTojpfvotpcm* gaûn* 4^, Spftvqtt %o$u najftnm fpfaqtt/ 2 F P v m v m ( , MUSICA WHICH IS A HANDBOOK COMPRISED OF INSTRUCTIONS APPROPRIATE FOR SINGERS Written in the Czech language at the request of several good friends and first printed in the year of our Lord 1558, at Olomouc. It is here again diligently corrected and printed. Added are the rules and information necessary to cantors and composers of songs. Psalm 88.^ Blessed are those people who know how to sing joyfully. Psalm 46. Sing to our God. Sing, sing artfully. ^This verse is found at Psalm 88:16 in the Vulgate. The second verse is found at Psalm 46:7. 130 131 In Musicam Rev. V. Johannis B. [A2] On the Musica of the Rev. V[enerable] Johannis B. AD LECTOREM TO THE READER Ornavit célébrés olim lam Music has, for some time now, Musica terras, * Musica ad adorned celebrated lands; ingenuis semper araata viris. music, loved always by upright men. Hactenus aut siluit, peregrina Until the present time, our aut arte canebat, * Aut Czech land has either been rudibus plausit Czechia silent or sung with a foreign nostra sonis. art, or it sounded with harsh sounds. Hie docet exculte primus This book (as it is first in cantare Bohemos, * (Ut numéro number, so it is in primus sic bonitate) liber. excellence) first teaches the Bohemians to sing in a refined manner. Judice sub iusto poterit Under a just judge, it will be certare libellis, * Quos able to vie with the little velat viridi turba canora books that the melodious cedro. crowd covers with green cedar.2 Est rudibus scriptus, docti at It was written for the nihil usus in illo, * Quod uneducated, but there is merito carpat quodve requirat nothing in this that a habet. learned man could deservedly criticize or require. Est facilis, methodo discentes It is easy, it guides learning ducit aperta, * Et cunctis by an open method, and it docta simplicitate placet. pleases all with a skilled simplicity. Ardua non tractat, tradit It does not treat arduous sermone polito, * Omnia quae things; it relates, in utilitas arsque modesta polished speech, everything petit. that utility and modest art demand. Non sine mente sonos calamo Not without thought it teaches formate sagaci, * Sed docet to form sounds with the sharp argutis nectere verba modis. pen, but it [also] teaches to connect words in lively manners. Quod multi tacuere, hymnos Because many have been silent, componere cultos, * Verbaque it teaches to compose elegant cum numeris rite sonare docet. hymns, and to sound words Bindings were often preserved with cedar oil. 132 with numbers [in proper rhythm]. Pallor an Insulsos cantus [A2v] I do not know whether it will crassosque fugabit, * Quos put to flight the insipid and obiter vecors pigraque turba crass songs that the simple iacit: and rude crowd tosses out in passing; Et temeré expresses, nulloque And heedlessly expressed, labore paratos, * Difficilis, contrived without exertion, crudos, desidlosa boat.3 troublesome, crude, and bellowed by the slothful. Totam igitur proprié liber hie Therefore, this book embraces, complectitur artem, properly, the whole art. It * Perpolit arguto pulpita perfects rough stages with a rauca stylo. clean manner of writing. Tu patriae Lector gratare You, reader, rejoice with the piosque labores, * Autoris fatherland and take up with a placida suscipe mente. Vale. placid mind the pious labors of the author. Farewell. S.T.T. S.T.T.' In Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josguin (p. 4), Hostinsky's transcription of the 10th and 11th stanzas reads as follows; Pallor an insulsos cantus crassosque fugabit, * Quos obiter simplex turba rudisque iacit; Indocte expresses, habite moderamine nulle. * Innatae vocis quam ore patente refert. Author unknown. 133 K CTENÂRI [A3] TO THE READER Ponëvadz tohoto naseho vëku Since many things, written mnohé vëci, kteréz jazykem only in the Greek and Latin tollko reckÿm neb latînskÿm languages and thereby kept a sepsâny a v té reci jako v mystery from us, are daily in tajemnici chovdny byly, jiz na our age being published for svëtlo denni vychâzeji i enlightenment in our own common obecnym nam jazykem ceskÿm, a Czech as well as in German, I ovsem pak nëmeckym; nebudet' se hope the understanding reader tedy ctenar rozunmÿ diviti a will not be astounded nor blame ovsem za zlé miti, ze i ja nynx me for having written, as never tuto zprévu neb jako stari before, these instructions or, vûbec byli zvyklî rîkatx reholy as our ancestors were generally zpëvékum nalezité, coz jestë accustomed to saying, maxims, nxkdy cesky psano nebylo, lidem appropriate for singers. This obecnym latxnského jazyka [handbook] is for the common neumëjxcxm, to jest Cechûm people who do not know the cesky vypsal jsem. A zvlastë Latin language. I have written kdyz X prvé jedno z sedmera this in Czech for the Czechs. umênx, totxz arithmetxka (umênl The first of the seven arts in poctû) X nëmecky i cesky vydana particular, i.e., arithmetic jest. Umênx jxstë jakoz vsem (the art of numbers), has tak oblastnê kupcûm, ano i already been published in both jinÿm s vëcmx svëtskÿmx se German and Czech.5 That art is obxrajxcxm velmi potrebné. Aie very necessary to all who potrebnëjsi toto lidem s vëcmx occupy themselves with worldly vyssxmx, nebeského krâle a affairs, specifically, the nâbozenstvx kfestanského se merchants. Much more necessary obxrajxcxm, z nichz nevsem se is this art [singing], however, dostalo, umënx jazykûv [A3v] to those people who lack rozdxlnÿch miti, jesto Pan nas sufficient knowledge of the nechce privâzan bÿtx k different languages but who narxzenxm lidskÿm, jakoz v occupy themselves with the jiném tak i v tom, aby z samÿch higher matters of the Heavenly ucenÿch aneb umëlÿch King and the Christian sluzebnxcky Cxrkvi své vybxral religion. Since our Lord wants a posxlal, aie vice patfx na to be bound by human restraints to, cehoz nemozné skrze lidi neither in this nor in anything samy nabyti. Neslusné pak vidi else. He chooses none other se bÿti, aby ti, jenz mimo jiné than learned and artful k chvâleni Boha i zpivânim i servants to fortify His church. jinâce oddani jsou a prirozeni The Lord attends more to things k muzice velmi zpüsobné mnozx that are impossible for people This is a reference to the Nove knxzky £ poctech na cifry a liny by Ondrej Klatovsky z Dalmanhorstu. The work was first published in 1530 at Nürnberg by Friedrich Peypus; a second edition was published in 1558 at Prague by Jan Kantor. 134 maji, pro samo neumeni to do alone. It is not proper latinskeho jazyku skodny v své to see, therefore, that many prâci nedostatek trpeti museli: who praise the Lord by singing ponëvadz az posavad zpravy or are in other ways devoted to vsecky, bud' jakby ozdobnê a Him, despite having an prîjemnë (a tak poslouzitelne inclination toward well-ordered lidem a i snadnè bez dlouheho music, should be compelled to se mnohych plsnl notam zpamêti suffer a grievous deficiency in uceni) zpivano byti mohlo cesky their work because they do not sepsany nebyly, a kdozkoli o know the Latin language. Since umëni to stal, musil neb v until now no instruction of how uceni se latinskému jazyku to sing decoratively and vydati anebo od netrefnych agreeably has been written in mistru misto obsirneho stromu Czech (and thus easily spatnou vetvicku, a nekdo sotva available to the people, listek cacky za vdëk pfijiti. without the lengthy learning of the notes of many songs by heart), whoever was drawn to this art was compelled to l e a m what was published in the Latin language or else be content with an inept teacher, and thus could barely become an active leaf on an ill twig of the extensive tree. Ja tomu (ponuknut jsa od Wishing (and urged by many) mnohych) vstfic vyjiti chtëje, to confront this and to please nëkterÿm milÿm prâtelûm k vûli, some dear friends, I took from vybrav z latinskÿch o vëcech k Latin those written things muzice pfilezicich pséni, coz concerning music that I mi se za potïebné vidëlo, a considered necessary, and added pfidav k tomu, coz za uzitecné to these what I judged useful. soudil jsem, to v tuto jednu [A4] I have tried to organize that krâtkou knizku jsem uvedl a ji which I know into this one tak k tomu pristrojiti short handbook so that having usiloval, aby netoliko tëm this handbook and being prospëti mohla, kdozby knizku instructed by it will not only to majice pro zpraveni se v ni profit those who already know nëkoho z têch dochézeti mohli, about music and are familiar kdoz by prvé muziku umël a with its affairs, but will be jejich vëci povëdom byl, aie i useful, also, to those who are tëm, jenz prirozenou k muzice led by a natural musical prichylnosti vedeni jsouce inclination to become good dobri kantori neb zpevaci bÿti cantors and yet are unable to zâdaji, mistra zadného vsak avail themselves of teachers. dochézeti nemohou k namalému Thus, it would be of no small aby bÿti mohla uzitku. Ac pak use to them. I have kept some slova nëktera (technica), jich of the expressions (technica) latînsti muzikové uzivaji, téz of the Latin musicians, such as ode mne zanechéna jsou, jako the names of the keys, scales. 135 jména klîcûv, stupnûv, zvuku sounds, and vocables; others I neb hlasu, nevidêlo ml se have abandoned. I saw no need potfeby jinÿcb vymÿsleti, nebo In Inventing new ones, since k mnohÿm tak dobré prâvo Cech many of these are quite correct jako Latinlk ma. Jako kdyz dis In Czech as well as In Latin, a re, b ml, F fa ut; reknellt' such as A re, B ml, and Latinlk: redire, resonare, F fa ut. If the Latin says famulus, rem, dl také Cech: "redire, resonare, famulus, reta, mllÿ Mlksl. Mnohé pak rem," so too, the Czech [says] Latlnlcl od Rekûv vzall, jlmz "reta, mlly Mlksl.The my s nëkteré câstky jestllze ne Latins took much from the bllzsl, tedy jlstê tak bllzcl Greeks, to whom we are as jsme jako Latlnlcl, trûj pocet, close. If not closer. In mnoha partlclpla a jlné vëci k several areas. Three Rekum podobné nad Latlnlky [grammatical] persons, many majlce. Vsak uzlvaje slov partlclpla, and other things do nasemu jazyku neobycejnÿch a v we have similar to the Greeks nëm prvé nemoho slÿchanÿch and the Latins. When I have kazdé tak jsem vysvëtlll, aby used unusual or little-heard snadnë, kdoz bystrejsl vtlp ma, [A4v] expressions In our language, co by se kde kterÿm tlm slovem however, I have explained these mlnllo, porozumêtl mohl. so that he who Is of swift Intellect could easily understand whatever Is meant by that expression. A protoz, komubykoll tato ma And so [I say] to whomever mallckâ knlzka v ruce pflsla, receives this tiny handbook proslm, umlsll prvé muziku, Into his hands, please think nebud' tak netrefny, aby bud' first of music and do not be so pro neprlzen bud' pro jakÿkoll, Inept as to criticize the work zdâlllt'by se tobë bÿti kde v of another from afar through cem, nedostatek clzl prâcl envy or for Its Insufficiency. hanëtl mël. Nez radëjl, Rather, be anxious to put mohlllby, lepslho a together something better and dos tatecnëj sIho co zpravltl more sufficient for pospës. A mezl tlm, dokudz, Instruction. Meanwhile, until toho neuclnls, tohoto prostého you do, do not begrudge this a nedlouhého sepsénl prostÿm a simple and limited writing for neucenÿm prej. Ty pak, kdoz the simple and unlearned. If prvé neumls muzlky, mûzesll v you, who did not previously cem této knlzky uzltl, know music, can use this vdëcnostl a zadanlm mnë od Boha handbook for anything, do not dobrého se odplatltl bezpochyby neglect to request, out of nezanedbâs. Pakll kdo uzltl jl gratefulness, a recompense for nebudes m o d v nlcemz, aspon me from the good Lord. If It The purpose Is to show that the musical syllables of the sex voces are likewise common to the Czech language. 136 toho, cehoz sâm miti nemûzes, should be that this handbook is jinÿm aby prâl, spravedlivé of no use to you, at least it jest. would be suitable for you to wish for others that which you yourself cannot have. Jan Blahoslav Jan Blahoslav KAPITOLA I [A5] CHAPTER I 0 ROZDlLE ZPËVÂKÛ ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES AMONG SINGERS Ponëvadz o mizice napsati Since I am selecting some neco ulozil jsem, nejprv ale, aspects of music to write CO by muzika byla, necht' se about, let music be defined jevi. Muzika jest umëni, jenz first. Music is the art that uci hlasy a rozdily jich znati, teaches one to know the jim rozumëti a z toho dobfe, to vocables and their differences jest slusnë, nâlezitë a and, from this, to understand ozdobnë, zpivati. 0 rozdilech well what is proper to sing muziky praviti maje, slusnë appropriately and decoratively. jest, abych oznamil, ze ne It is proper for me to specify muziku, ale muziky, totiz ty the differences that govern jenz umëji muziku, aneb zpëvaci music, and I have divided not jsou (a jakzkoli s hlasy a music, but musicians, i.e., rozdily i s znamenimi jich se those who know music or are obiraj i), rozdëlovati tuto mam. themselves singers (those who occupy themselves with the vocables and differences, as well as their signs).^ Jedni jsou, jesto u Latiniku The first are called, by the reckÿm slovem se jmenuji Latins using a Greek theorici, ktefiz toliko s expression, theorici, and are poznanim a vyrozumënim vëcem those who occupy themselves muziky (totiz k zpivani only with the knowledge and pfilezicim), se obiraji. understanding of musical Zpivanim pak se matters (i.e., those coming nezamëstknâvaji, bud' proto, ze from singing). They do not nastroje k zpravovani hlasu, engage in the singing, either totiz hrdla zpûsobného k tomu because they do not have the nemaji, bud' ze o to nedbaji. instrument of an instructed Jichz jest ten vsecken cil. voice, i.e., a trained throat. Blahoslav's division of music and musicians is the same as that given in Listenius's Musica (A4-A5) and in Finck's Practica musica (A2v). 137 strany té vëci umëti a znati, or because they do not care for neb srozumëti. it. For these, the entire purpose, direction, or affair is to know, to leam, and to understand. Druzi jsou, jenz slovou The second are those who are practici, ktefiz netoliko [A5v] called practici. These myslenim s muzikou zachâzeji, preserve the music in the mind aie na tom dosti nemajice but, not being satisfied with skutkem, totiz hlasem, to coz what the mind is sifting, mysi prebirâ, pronaseji, to perform or sing it, i.e., with jest zpivaji, bud' z priciny the voice, for the sake of své neb jinÿch libosti, bud' giving pleasure to others or pro ukazani jinÿm a nauceni for demonstrating or teaching. jich. A ti slovou vûbec These are generally called kantofi aneb cesky dim zpëvaci. cantors or, as I say in Czech, singers. Treti jsou, jesto slovou The third are those who are poetae ti na samén poznani, téz called poetae. These, not i na proneseni tëch vëci hlasem being satisfied in the dosti nemajice nëco pisi a knowledge or in the performance vydavaji na svëtlo o muzice: of such things with the voice, aneb nëjaké verse, pisnë, noty. write and publish things concerning music for enlightenment, such as some verses, songs, or notes [text, music with text, or music without text]. Tëch pak druhych, jenz The art of the second, those practici slovou, umëni na dvé called the practici, is further se dëli. Jedno slove u divided into two. The first is Latiniku choralis; prosté neb, called choralis by the Latins. jakz nëktefi nevelmi nalezité This is simple or, as some not rikévaji, lejkovské, obecného too appropriately say, of the lidu, kdyzto vsickni neb mnozi smiths, or of the common jednim neb jednostejnÿm hlasu people, since all sing one song zpûsobem zpivaji jednu pisen. with one and the same manner of To vsem znâmé jest, i tëm, jenz the voice [unison singing]. o muzice nikdy neslÿchali. A This is known to all, even to tut' jsou noty jednostejné a those who have never heard of jedny. music. And so, all of the notes are the same. Druhé slove muzika figularis, The second is called music figurné, totiz rozlicnych figur figuralis, figured, i.e., full a znameni plné, maje not, mër i of different figures and signs, zpûsobû mnohou rozdilnost. Obé having notes, rules, manners, pal to netoliko hlasem lidskÿm. and many differences. Both of 138 ale i nâstroji muzickymi se these [choralis and figuralis] prendsî. Coz mali k cili svému can be performed not only by pfijîtî, totiz usima libost the human voice, but also by uciniti a mysli nèkam pohnouti, [Â6] musical instruments. These musi podlé jistych mër a zprâv [styles] must be accomplished se pôsobitl. according to certain rules and instructions, however, to serve their purpose, i.e., to cause pleasure or to stir spirits to something. KAPITOLA II CHAPTER II NA Ce m m u z i k a z A l e 21 UPON WHAT MUSIC DEPENDS Jakoz pak od gruntu vselike Every building grows up from staveni se zaklddati a odtud its foundation; so too, when dale nahoru hnano byti md: writing instructions for the takz i tuto, pri spisovdni cantor or singer, it is zprav kantoru neb zpevdku necessary to begin with the potrebnych, od gruntu pociti se foundation. Surely, even those musi. Ano i ti, jenz cisti who teach others to read first uci, nejprv figury neb present the figures or charaktery liter predklddaji a characters of the letters to V zndmost uvodi, kteréz kdy2 initiate their knowledge. When potom slozeny a spolu vyfknuty these are attached together and byvaji, slovo srozumitedlne pronounced at the same time, zavzni. they comprise an understandable expression. Titot pak jsou gruntove neb These, then, are the pocatkove a jako nejaci foundations or the beginnings pramenove, z nichz potom feka that are the sources of the kantorskeho zvuku se vali: river of sound that flows from the cantor: i. Noty ii. Klicove i. Notes ii. Clefs iii. Hlasy iii. Vocables Skrze noty, jich zpusobnosti Through the notes and their a rozdilnosti mysleni manners and differences the skladatele zpëvu neb pisnë intention of some composer of a nëkteré vymalovdno byvd. composition or song is Kterychzto vlastnosti jak by expressed. The clef, in porozumino, nybrz i k nim particular, shows how to access pristoupeno byti mohlo, ukazuje these [notes]. Both [notes and klic. A to obé mdli usima neb clefs], if they are to be sluchem byti chopeno, musi k brought about and comprehended, tomu pfistoupiti a to vse [A6v] must have the sound accessed or pronésti zvuk neb bias s svou pronounced by the vocables in 139 rozlicnosti. A takz' z tëch their differences. And so, tri pramenû bÿvâ provaz from these three sources is lahodného zpîvâni ucinën, jîtnz made the rope of pleasurable mysi i svazâna i vedena sem singing by which minds can be nebo tam bÿti mflze, k tomu neb bridled to be led here or k onomu naklonënâ. Bez têch there, or inclined to this or tri vëci nebo bez kterézkoli z that. Without these three têch zâdnâ pisen neb zpëv things, or without any one of dokonalÿ neni. Nebo kdez not them, no song or composition neni, tu by i text byl, neznâmÿ may be accomplished. If trefili na nëj, zpivati nemûz. someone comes upon an unknown A budeli notovâno a klicû se text where there are no notes, nepridâ, tu téz ten jenz toho he cannot sing it. And if prvé kikdy nezpival, nebudu something is notated but no umëti pojednou toho zaciti, clef is added, he who had never nevëda ostréli cili povlovné, sung it before would not cili mëkké zpivânl jest. Ovsem immediately know how to start, bylliby zpëv tri neb ctyr or whether that composition is hlasu, tut' nebude Ize pociti, sharp, or gentle or soft. And, dokudz se nebude klicû dopténo. of course, if that composition has three or four voices, it cannot be sung until the clefs are determined. Star! pfed lety mnoho bez Many years ago our ancestors klicû notovati mëli obycej z usually notated without clefs pricin tëchto: jedno ze fidci for these reasons: first, cacké umëni muziky mëli. Druhé because they actively conducted ze vice podlé zvyku nezli podlé the art of music and, second, umëni zpivéni sva konali, jedni because their singing was od druhych slychajice a vice z executed more from practice slÿchéni nezli z knih se ucice. than from art, hearing it from I neni jim co za zlé miti, one another, and more from avsak proto lepsiho slusi hearing than from learning it radëji nasledovati, nebo bez in books. Although we cannot takového mistného rozdêleni blame them for singing hlasû, neb fédného a umëlého whatever they encountered, it hlasem sem nebo tam obréceni, is better and more proper to vyvysovéni a snizovéni, zpivéni follow the differing placement jak trefné bÿvâ, vëdi a tomu of the vocables, or the rozumëji ti, jenz zpëvaci [A7] tasteful and artful altering, prostredni tfebas jsouce jiné raising, and lowering of these slÿchaji (rozumëjici neb vocables. Know and understand nerozumëjici muzice) od that those who are simple prirozeni k hlasu a zpëvûv singers and who, as they are uslechtilosti nezpûsobné, jimz heard by others (understanding vûbec slovem latinskÿm (a i nâm or not understanding music), jiz V cestinë obvyklÿm) have a quality of voice devociâni rikaji, ktefiz ani unsuited for singing, are whom mëkce neb povlovnë, ani zase we generally call by the Latin tuze nemohou zpivati, nez tak expression (and even 140 CO nemaznÿ vûz, jakz mu jeho customarily in Czech) nehladkÿ hlas v nezpûsobném "voiceless." These singers are hrdle se formuje, nemaje able to sing neither softly nor jistych stupnû, ani moho mistnë gently nor stiffly. Thus, such tu, kdez mysliiby neb mêl, a man is unqualified by his sstoupiti, jako sedlâk opily, rough voice formed in an jenz i cestou i necestou se untrained throat and, as he has tapa, sem i tam nohama no sure scale, neither being necerstvyma pleta. Ac, kdoz able to step to the place to ceho z prirozeni nemùze, jak ho where he was thinking to go nor z toho viniti slusi? Nez kdoz go where he ought, is like a pro nedbânlivost, nepracovitost drunken farmer staggering along neb lenost v cem nezpûsobnÿ byl the road as he gropes here and by, ten i posmëchu hoden bÿvâ, there on uncertain legs. If zda by i tim probuzen byl. anyone is incapable because of nature, is it proper to hold it against him? But he who is untrained because of negligence, lack of industry, or laziness, should fittingly be ridiculed so that, by this, he may be awakened. Musi tedy i vsecko toto tré Therefore, all of the bÿti i s svÿmi ratolestmi (o threefold branches (about which nichz na svÿch mistech se more is given at the proper polozi), mali zpivâni kantorovo place) must be as one if the zpêvem a zpûsobnÿm neb singing of the cantor's uslechtilÿm slouti, a ne composition is to be called becenim neb kricenim neb orderly and noble, and not vrcenim: cimz netoliko k bleating, screaming, or dobrému zpôsobu se neposlouzi growling. Thus, it would be posluchacûm, aie bylli prvé useful and a service to the jakÿ, i z toho budou vyrazeni, listeners in awakening them to aby nëkdy misto k nâbozenstvi religion. But if it were not probuzeni od smichu neb hnëvu like the first [orderly and zdrzeti se nemohli. noble], they would not be able to contain themselves, and would burst out with laughter or anger. 141 A tak summou slusi znati, ze: [A7v] And so, in summary, it is proper to know that: notami vypsano a jako vymalovano neb ukazano. klici • rozsouzeno neb rozeznâvâno neb vselike zpivâni ) poznano, jaké jest, tube, povlovné. bÿti mûze a ma \ hlasem neb hlasûv^^^ \ vyneseno neb proneseno neb vykonano. stupnemi w / Co ^e Written out, expressed, or y ^ demonstrated. so that which is stiff or gentle can the various by clefs be judged, distinguished, or known. compositions ma^ and should be \ done by the vocable or to be decreed, delivered, or performed. of vocables KAPITOLA III CHAPTER III 0 HLASlCH, SKRZE NËZ SE ABOUT VOCABLES, THROUGH WHICH VSELIKÎ ZPËV PRONASf, KONA THE VARIOUS COMPOSITIONS ARE NEB POSOBI DELIVERED, PERFORMED, AND BROUGHT ABOUT Ac pak hlas ze by obecny byl That one vocable is common to jednomu kazdému, kromê nêmÿch a each [note] is known [to all], hluchÿch, znâné jest, vsak except to the mutes and the proto ma také znâmo bÿti, ze deaf. Therefore, it should be toho slovicka, "hlas," uzivâ se known that here, in this place, na tomto mistë za jediné the term "vocable" is used to zavznêni, tvrdê, tuze nebo mean one manifestation— hard or mëkce bez proraënovâni a vÿse [A8] stiff, or soft— without neb nize sstupovâni. A ta pak transformation or stepping 142 zavznënî vselikâ, coz by jich higher or lower. These various koli ucinëno bÿti mohlo, manifestations are made and rozdëlanâ jsou na tëchto VI differentiated according to rozdilu, jakz nize se ukazuje, their six differences, as is a kazdému tomu rozdilu oblastni shown below, and each jméno jednosyllabné déno jest, difference is given a specific, cemuz z této tabule porozumis: monosyllabic name. You will understand this from the table:^ J la I tvrdi neb tuzi ^ y vrchni hlasové neb stupnové^ prirozeni rozdilni hlasû I fa prostredni S slovou povlovni re ni:nizsi neb mëkci ut / l a hard or stiff sol the vocables, or the ■V are different scales of % natural , )> / called the vocables ^ gentle lower or soft Ponëvadz dévni stari muzikové Since the old musicians tak jsou jména tëm hlasûm invented these names for the vymyslili, vidi mi se za dobré [A8v] vocables so long ago, it seems jich nemëniti. A protoz na tom good to me to leave them se nie nezastavuje dale vëz, ze unchanged. Therefore, do not tëmi hlasy vselikÿ zpëv mé bÿti take exception, but know that a mûz pronesen neb vyzpivén. with these vocables all of the Kterÿmzto hlasûm nejprv kazdÿ various compositions can be nauciti se ma zpamëti, tak aby performed or sung. One should netoliko je porâd nahoru first have the information vstupuje neb dolû sstupuje about each of these vocables O Consecutive hard hexachords (those with b mi), passing through a natural hexachord, are constructed with hard vocables (mi and la, with semitones above). Consecutive soft hexachords (those with b fa) are constructed with soft vocables (ut and fa, with semitones below). Natural vocables (re and sol, bordered by whole tones) are common to all hard, soft, and natural hexachords. In the Musica, Blahoslav has apparently reordered mi and fa to make them easier to bracket. 143 trefiti mohl, ale i z jednoho memorized, so that one will be na druhy kdy a jak potîebî able not only to remember them vskociti, sstoupiti neb in order when stepping upward vstoupiti, aby umël k lepsimu or downward, but also so that pak vyrozumeni a pocviceni se v one will be able to leap from tom, bud' tento priklad: one to another when necessary. For the sake of knowing and better understanding, let these be examples for training: ± 3 t g v( re ml fa fol fa fa fof fa ml re vr* —C ■ • otrent mi VI fa vl fof vi fa fa fof fa fa fa ml fa re la vt vi ml re fa ml fof fa la fof la fa fof ml fa re ,ut vt vt I " r z :z d .i/: fa re fof mi fa (a mt [qI re fa vi Ale ze pak malo zpivâni neb [B1] But since there are a few pisni tëch jest, aby bud' nize compositions or songs that pod ty hlasy, bud' vyse nad në descend below these vocables, nevystupovaly, protoz vëdëti or ascend above them, you mas, ze ti hlasové mohou bud' should know that you can rise vyse se vznésti, kam chces, higher than these vocables when bud' nize, pokudz koli potreba, you wish, or step lower when cemuz, jak se to diti ma, there is need. The instruction klicove a za nimi polozene about keys placed below will zpravy ukazi. show how this is to be done. 144 KAPITOLA IV CHAPTER IV 0 KLICICH A JEJICH POCTU, ABOUT KEYS AND THEIR NUMBER, ROZDlLE I POftÆDKU DIFFERENCE, AND ORDER Klic jest nastroj neb znameni A key is an instriiment or otvirajici zpëv nanotovany, sign that unlocks notated kteryz ukazuje, jakby ten zpëv compositions to show how they, skrze noty vymalovany mël expressed through notes, should hlasem vyformovan totiz be formed by the voice, i.e., nâlezitë vyzpivân bÿti. appropriately sung. Vsickni klicove od starych All of the keys of the old muzikûv byvaji v zpusobu musicians were presented in the zebriku anebo ruky predkladani. manner of a ladder or of a Protoz i jâ to obé predlozim, hand. Because of this, I aby mohl i kdo které chce myself will also present both vyvoliti, i jednomu z druheho so that each can choose lépe porozumëti. whichever he wants to understand better the one by the other. [Blv] V V dvojité cc fol double neb ^ MW vysoke ■«T f X€ rS' 1 zebrik mensi minor the ladder se dëli V a < « \ and \is divided na \ f 7 into letters os tré f acute litery fit üfc- \% c fol rt vëtsi se z major hrubé, \ and grossJ tlusté \ fk ot ^ thick, as jako f if fat bardouny i tt _t1É? 145 Vysvëtlenî zebriku [B2] Explanation of the Ladder Poradek liter od nejnizsi az You can understand that the do nejvyssi, jakby sel rozumis, order of the letters goes from ze po abecedë, od A az do 6. the lowest to the highest, like Ta pak litera, kterâz dole na the alphabet, from A up to G, linë jest polozena, totiz P, The Greek letter G, i.e., £, is jest fecké g, tak polozena pro placed on the lowest line, and rozdil od jinÿch g, kterâz v [B2v] is placed there to be different tom pofâdku stoji. Neb kazdé a from the other G's that stand V tom porâdku postavené ma pod in the order. And every A, sebou g, nejvyssi dvojiti: aa situated in the order, has a G ma pod sebou g malou neb under it. The highest aa has a obecnou literu. Druhé pak a ma small or common letter g under pod sebou G literu versâlni it, the second a has a capital (jakz zvyk rikati) toto pak (as is the practice to say) G treti A veliké, ma literu g under it, and the third A, rekou, jakz receno pro rozdil large, has [under it] the Greek od jinÿch. Pomyslili kdo tuto: letter G [gamma], as was said, proc jest to tak, ze tyto to be different from the dvojité polozeny litery, ony others. If anyone should mensi jiné vëtsi, az i to fecké wonder, "Why is it so that here gamma, totiz T, jaké v tom jest are placed double, small, and tajemstvi?, takovému bud* toto large letters, to the Greek dâno za odpovëd: tak se za gamma, i.e., £?" let the answer dobré vidëlo, neb na takovÿ to the mystery be "It seemed pofâdek ten cas mysl onëch good at the time, and the order starÿch kantorfi byla tréfila. was formed in this way by the Kdyby nyni kdo byl tak drzi neb old cantors." If, however, vsetecnÿ, jesto by také svuj there was someone so arrogant vtip lidem v znâmost uvésti and inquisitive as to desire to zâdal, mohlby to rozlicnë bring the knowledge in his pfemistrovati, bud* ono sem ono intellect to the attention of tam zpfeklâdati, bud' jmén other people, he could novÿch i vëci navymÿsleti a tak masterfully differentiate this, jako udëlanou vëc znova dëlati. presenting one thing here and Aie aby toho jakÿ uzitek byl, another there, inventing new nevidim, lec snad by to kdo za names and things, so as to make uzitek pocisti sobë chtèl: a ready thing anew. But I do daremni zamëstnâni, hlavy not see what use that would lâmâni, a posmëch lidi serve unless for this: his rozumnÿch, zvlâst ucenÿch. actual wish is the worthless occupation of racking his brain in order to ridicule the understanding, and especially the learned, people. Nez jâ soudim za uzitecnëjsi, I myself, however, judge it aby tuto bylo pohledino na more useful to consider here cistÿ pofâdek a mistrovské the actual order and masterful klicû vymysleni a slozeni. invention and combinations of the keys. 146 Dvaceti jest v poctu klicû, a [B3] The keys are twenty in hlasû neni nez sest. Klicove number, but there are but six jeden kazdy od druheho rozdilny vocables. The keys are jest bud' poctem hlasû, bud' differentiated from one another jakosti, neb zpûsobem pfedni by either the number of the litery, avsak vsichni z têch vocables [attached to the sesti hlasû a z sedmi liter letter], the quality [whether jsou slozeni, jakoz figura the letter is double, small, or zebfika to ukazuje. Odkudz large], or in the manner of the netoliko to mûze bÿti poznano, first letter [the particular kterak jest to obmysleno v tom letter]. And all of these six zebriku, aby dosti hlasû bylo k vocables and the seven letters kazdému zpëvu bud' dolû neb can be combined, as the figure nahoru. Ale i toho jest of the ladder shows. From this navrzeno od vtipneho zebriku it can be known that each tohoto vymyslitele, kterak by, composition has enough vocables kdyby toho potreba byla, mohlo to go upward and downward on i tohoto zebriku povëtseno this invented ladder, and that bÿti, nahoru dvojnasobnich the clever inventor planned pridada liter, dolûv pak how, in case of need, this reckÿch, jako po nejvyssim ladder could be enlarged. By klici ee la, mohl by rici the addition of double letters f [ff] fa, gg sol a neb jakzby after the highest ee la, going byla potreba. Po nejdolejsim upward, one could say ff fa, pak r ut, nëkterou vezma z gg sol, and others, if there reckÿch liter, a hlas ji was need. After the lowest pridada ostrÿ neb povlovnÿ, r ut, one could recall any of podle potreb. 0 tëch pak the Greek letters and add a klicich f fa ut a vocable, sharp or gentle, c sol f fa ut, téz i o according to the need. It b fa b mi, ma bÿti znâmo, ze na should [also] be known that jich vlastnich mistech bÿvâ sometimes a transformation nëkdy z pricin slusnÿch (o properly occurs on the keys of nichz potom) promëna. Neb f fa ut, c sol fa ut, and nëkdy bÿvâ hlas na jich mistë b fa b mi in particular places nalezenÿ zpivân tvrdë, a tehdy for proper reasons (more nëkdy, kdyz potreba jest (o niz below). For sometimes a téz na svém mistë), znamenâvân vocable found in these places bÿvâ timto znamenim: # a neb t| [B3v] is sung hard. And so, when zvlastë V zpivâni prostém; there is need (also see below), nëkdy pak mëkce, a tehdâz and particularly in simple znamenâno bÿvâ to misto literou composition, it is notated with b: cemuz ac se z potomnich the sign# o r%.9 Sometimes it vëci lépe vyrozumi, vsak i tuto is sung soft, and in these vidëlo mi se toho dotknouti. places it is notated with the letter These things will be understood better from the ^This is Blahoslav's only reference to the specific keys that may be raised by a sharp or natural accidental. 147 following, although I saw fit to mention them here. Ale ze by pak nepëknê bylo, It would be unpleasant to kdyby pfi kazdem zpivâni write the key at the beginning vsickni klicove s pocatku lin of every [staff] line in a napisovani byli, protoz obycej composition. Therefore, it is jest, tlm sebe ani mista, usual to avoid this needless nezames tknavati bez potreby, waste of time, and to notate, ale jedinÿ toliko klic slusnym properly, a single key, charakterem neb zpûsobem character, or manner with a zvyklou jiz figurou customary figure so that, from naznamenati, aby od toho this, one can easily judge the jednoho jiz o vsech jinÿch, na place of the others. These kterych by mistech kterÿ byl, clefs, any one of which may snadnë mohlo souzeno byti. Ti usually be notated on the side pak klicove, kteréz obycej jest preceding [the notes of] the znamenavati na stranë v predku composition, are shown on the zpëvu, ti jsou téz na zebriku ladder [below] in their ukazani nëkolikerÿm zpûsobem. different manners. Although Nëkteri proto, ze v tom neni there is no uniformity as to jednostejnost, jedni tak, jini how these should be notated, jinak znamenavaji, vsak proto some doing it one way and vse nevelmi daleko jedno od others another, they should not druhého, jakz charakterové be too disparate from one ukazuj i: another, as the characters show; 10 ^^The table of clefs and the accompanying explanatory comments are relocated from page B2 of the original. 148 [B2] Pët jest klicû tëch, There are five clefs kteriz v zpivânich se that are notated in znamenâvaji, a jeden composition. These od druhého pâty jest [clefs] are five notes V rozpoctu not, kromë from one another, nejnizsiho T; ten except for the lowest, sedmÿ jest od F. £, and this one is seven [notes] from F. V zpivâni prostém, In simple composition, jenz slove u Latiniku choralni, tito klicové which is called choralis a tëmi charaktery by the Latins, the clefs znamenâni bÿvaji. are notated with these characters. V zpivâni neprostém, jenz In complex composition, slove u Latinikû figuralis, which is called figuralis kdyz i not i hlasû bÿvâ by the Latins and which rozlicnost, tito klicové a pertains when the notes timto zpûsobem se and the vocables are znamenâvaj i. diverse, the clefs are notated in this manner. 2e pak klic, kteryz mâ bÿti [B3v] This clef, then, should be znamenân napfed v zpivâni, nemâ placed nowhere else but as a jinde nez na linë bÿti polozen, sign on a line in front of the figura pfedni ukazuje. composition, as shown in the figure above. 149 [B4] m m Vysvëtleni ruky [B4v] Explanation of the Hand Snad jest dobré mladym a Perhaps it would be good if pocinajlcim nauciti se i tomu, the young and the beginners aby umeli zpamëti tu ruku, to were taught even to memorize jest na prstech se docisti the hand, which is to klicuv od jednoho k druhemu. distinguish the keys from one Coz, jakyrn by slo na ruce neb another by the fingers. The na prihbich prstu poradkem, order in which the keys proceed abecedy zpusob ukazuje, napped on the hand, or in the joints r recké, potom abeceda versalni of the fingers, is shown in the az do G, za nim abeceda prosta, manner of the alphabet from the naposledy abeceda dvojité az do first Greek £, then by the ee. To umëji potom pri alphabet in capitals to G, then notovanych knihach vida s by the simple alphabet and, pocatku klic znamenany, bud' finally, by the double alphabet F fa ut, neb c sol fa ut, neb up to ee. When one knows this g sol re ut od toho znamenaného and sees, in notated books, the jiz dale bud' nahoru eta nebo clefs notated at the beginning. 150 rikaje porâd klice, jakz either F fa ut or c sol fa ut abeceda ukazuje, bud' dolû. or g sol re ut, one will easily zpâtkem klice po abeceda na understand on which key each prstech pocitaje, vëda jen do note [pitch] should be, one kolika stupnû jitl mâ, srozuml will know how to use the snadnë, na kterém klici ta nota alphabet when reading upward or byla by. saying the order of the keys, [know] to number the keys alphabetically in reverse on the fingers when going down, and [know] how much of the scale there is yet to go. KAPITOLA V CHAPTER V 0 promèSovAnî Tëch Sesti hlasO ABOUT THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE UT RE MI FA SOL LA SIX VOCABLES: UT RE MI FA SOL LA Az jiz z ukâzâni tak From such an extensive obsirneho klicû a jejich demonstration of the keys and zpûsobû na zebriku i na ruce their manners, both on the mohl by se zpëvâk sâm ladder and the hand, the singer dovtipiti, ze vselike zpivâni could himself conclude that the mezi tëmi klici se zdrzujici mâ [B5] various compositions held among hojné na tom zebriku misto, the keys have an ample place on nahoru se vznésti jakkoli chce the ladder, that he could vysoko aneb i zase dolû always pronounce both the sound spadnouti, a vzdycky z tëch [note] and name [vocable], sesti hlasû sobë k vyrknuti finding one as well as the jakz hlaholem tak i jménem other from it [the ladder], and noty, jeden neb i vie nalezti, that he could rise to whatever a bylaliby takovâ potreba (jakz height he wishes and again i napfed dotceno), klicûv sobë descend. And if there was bud' nahoru neb dolû pridëlati: need, he could himself add keys vsak ponëvadz neumëlÿm, upward or downward [exceeding prostëjsim a ucedlnikûm toto se the gamut] (as was touched on pise, nechazt se i to, kterakby above). But since this hlasové aneb jména not mêla [handbook] is written for the promênovâna bÿti, svëtleji a simple and untrained and the jako prstem ukâze, skrze tyto apprentices,^^ allow me to The Musica was primarily intended for use by students attending the Jednota seminary in Ivancice. Because the Jednota clergy were expected to be productive members of their community as well as spiritual leaders, the seminarians apprenticed as printers, weavers, furriers, etc., in addition to attending religious and academic lectures. 151 dole polozene zpravy a enlighten you (by [referring priklady. to] the fingers through the instructions and examples below) about those vocables, or names of the notes, that are to be transformed. Zretedlnet' pak jest to, ze Let us view this prominovani toto (o nemz se transformation (about which tuto pise) neni jineho, nez this is written) as nothing slusnë a pfihodne hlasu (totiz more than what occurs when a jména nëkteré z têch sesti not proper and fitting vocable neb hlasûv) v jinÿ hlas zminëni (i.e., the name of one of the neb promënëni neb obréceni. six notes or vocables) is Jako kdezby mël rici (podlé changed, transformed, or poradku hlasû k té syllabë neb altered. That is, if one k tomu jménu pfijda) fa, aby should say fa (according to the nëco jiného rekl, totiz ut, order of the vocables, when anebo sol, a téz nazpët. coming to that syllable or name), one should instead say something else, i.e., ut or sol. And this [process] should be memorized as well. Na tré se pak dëli takové . This Change is Divided into meneni Three [Categories] Jedno slove tvrdé, neb ostré, The first is called hard or latinë durum. Druhé mëkké, [B5v] sharp or, in Latin, durus. The nebo libé, neb povlovné, latinë second [is called] soft, rikaji molle. Treti smyslené pleasing, or gentle or, in neb vymyslené, od vtipnÿch Latin, mollis. The third, muzikû nalezené, jesto neni invented or fabricated, being pfirozené, neb podlé reguli discovered by ingenious (totiz, zprav) prislé, nez jako musicians, is neither natural od jinud vypûjcené z té nor compliant with the rules pficiny, aby libëjsi a hladsi (i.e., instructions). It is as sladkost zpëvu v mistë tom if it were borrowed from prisla a jako pëknÿ sat elsewhere for this reason: pëknëjsi opremovân byl vëci a that a more pleasing and smooth neb zlutÿ neb modrÿ kvitek na sweetness might occur at that zelené ukézal se ratoléstce. place, as when a pleasant dress is ornamented by something even more pleasant, or when a yellow or blue flower is shown against a green branch. 0 kazdém pak o tom zpëvu I will now give instructions oblastni zpravy dém, jimz for each specific [type of] nebude Ize jinék porozumëti, composition, but it would be lec by prvé zebrik pfedesly i impossible to comprehend them 152 V dobré znémostî a porozumênî unless one first knows well and byl i V pamêti hotové zûstâval. understands the preceding ladder and keeps it in mind. Zprâva o tvrdém zpëvu Instruction about the Hard Composition V zpivâni tvrdém, kdyby zacna When one begins singing je zpivati bez textu, totiz without text in hard tëmi toliko tëch sest hlasû composition, i.e., stepping jmény, vstupovati nahoru mël; upward, naming each of the six tedy na té litere d, to jest na vocables, recall or say the tom mistë kdez jest ten klic syllable or name of the vocable d sol re, a téz na litere a, re on the letter D, which is at totiz na klici a la mi re, the place of the key D sol re, vezmi neb rci tu syllabu neb and also on the letter A, i.e., jméno hlasu re, a potom dâle on the key of a la mi re. pofâdkem zvyklÿm jdi, totiz re Then, proceed with the mi fa sol. customary order, i.e., re, mi, fa, sol. Kdyzby pak dolû mël Likewise, if one has to step sstupovati, tedy na litere a, [B6] downward, then on the letter A téz na litere e (totiz na and also on the letter (i.e., klicich A la mi re, E la mi) on the keys a la mi re and vezmi neb jmenuj tu syllabu E la mi) recall or name that nebo hlas la, a potom jdi podlé syllable or vocable as la, and obycejného pofâdku dolû, kamz then proceed downward according potreba, rikaje la sol fa mi a to the usual order, as is neb jakz notovâno jest dâle, a necessary, saying la, sol, fa, jakz priklad ukâze doleji. mi, as will be shown in the example notated below. 0 zpivâni mëkkém neb About the Soft or Gentle povlovném Composition V mëkkém zpëvu vstupujesli, If one steps upward in soft vezmiz neb vyfkiz na literâch composition, recall or d, g (totiz de sol re, pronounce on the letters D and g sol re ut), ten hlas neb G (i.e., D sol re and syllabu re. Kdyz pak G sol re ut) the vocable or sstupujes, pomniz na literâch syllable re. When one steps (totiz na klicich kteriz se od downward, however, call to tëch liter pocinaji) a, d mind on the letters (i.e., on (a la mi re, d la sol re) vziti the keys that begin with these la. letters) A and D (a la mi re and d la sol re. 153 0 zpëvu smysleném proti About the Invented Composition, obecnému pofâdku celicim, jenz which goes against the common latînë slove Cantus fictus order and which is called in Latin cantus fictus V tom zpëvu nejvic jest toho In this [type of] composition potrebi, aby bylo setreno té it is most necessary to regard syllaby fa, aby tu jmenovana the manner of the syllable fa byla a jako vymalovana hlasem, which, when properly named, kdez slusi, totiz, kdez se [B6v] expresses the vocable, i.e., zpivâni zmëkcuje, a k jakému softens the composition by its poutiseni se prichâzi, jakoby injection or addition, when za nëco zastupoval. Nez neni something is stepped out [when to velmi nesnadno zvyklému the composition is performed]. zpëvâku uciniti, neb nyni v This is not very difficult for tistënych zpivânich toho se practiced singers to learn nezanedbâvâ, aby nemël zpëv because this is no longer being ten, totiz cantus fictus, bÿti neglected in printed naznamenân tim znamenim b na compositions. This [type of] tom mistë, a to bÿva na tom composition, then, i.e., cantus klici, kterÿz v sobë nezdrzuje fictus, is where the ^ is fa, jako A la mi re, d sol re, notated in those places and on e la mi a k tëm podobnÿch. A those keys that do not hold a protoz také slove vymyslenÿ, ze fa in themselves, such as nejde podle obecné porâdnosti a a la mi re, D sol re, E la m i , netoliko z strany toho samého and those similar.12 And Fa, aie také musi k tomu Fa because this does not go pridâno predce bÿti porâd according to the common order, stojicich vice hlasû, nahoru it is called invented. And neb dolû, jesto to bude proti this ^ may not only be added vlastnosti klicû, aie ne proti to the side [as a signature], vlastnosti té mélodie, totiz but this ^ [can also be added] zpëvu neb pisnë té. to an already standing row of ascending or descending vocables [as an accidental]. And'this will act against the property of the key, but not against the property of the melody, i.e., the composition or song. 12 According to Blahoslav's explanation, all "keys" except C and F may be lowered by a semitone. This permits key signatures of up to five flats. 154 Priklad v zpêvu: Examples of [the types of] composition:13 Tvrdem Mêkkém Smyslenem [B7] [Hard Soft Invented] to 1^' In -U 1, fj re xt to to n S 4 % . to. to f IN tt re to IK to IE IE'» IE 6 to to re re to Vi to to ? to 1 g re re Hrfr vstupovani j vstupovani vstupovani^ [stepping up] sstupovani sstupovani sstupovani [stepping down] Tomu vsemu srozumeje a sobe v When you understand all of pamet vloze, jiz budes moci this and memorize it, you will (jakz se obycejnë fika) be able (as is usual to say) to solmizovati, totiz noty bez solmizate, i.e., to name the textu jmenovati, neb vyrikanim notes without text, or to tech sesti hlasu neb not s [B7v] pronounce the six vocables or promenou nalezitou hlaholu notes, singing the appropriate zpivati. Kterazto vëc, totiz transformation of the sound. takove cviceni, jest vymysleno This matter, i.e., that which pro ty, jenz se s pocatku was invented for training, is notam, to jest muzice neb for those who are beginning to zpivani po notach uci. V cemz learn the notes, which is [the kdoz chce uzitecnë se pocviciti art of] music, or [how to] sing a pozvyknouti, vzdycky velmi by the notes. Whoever wants to pilnë klice znamenaneho, jenz be usefully trained and otvira zpëv, setriti ma. A practiced in this must always potom miti na peci pfi very diligently observe the vstupovani neb sstupovani not. clef notated to unlock the 13 These tables are taken from Philomathes's Musicorum libri quatuor (C1v-C2v). 155 aby nahoru jda nizsi bias, a composition and then, taking dolû sstupuje vyssi brati, care as the notes step up or podlé svrchu psanych zprav, step down, remember to take the pamatoval. Ale zet' se pak lower vocable [re] as he goes netrefuje vzdycky to, aby tak up and the higher one [la] as po notach co v pateri porad he steps down, in accordance jiti mohl a tak podlé zprav to with the instructions written vse snadne mëniti, nez, jakz above. But one will not always noty rozlicnë stoji sem i tarn, encounter the notes in prlhazeti se bude, zvlast' kdyz [consecutive] order and be able daleko jedna nota od druhe to move as if these were on a stoji a spësné jsou vsecky, ze spine. Here, notes would be musis rychle vskociti s jedné changed easily according to the na druhou a proto predce instructions. Notes, however, nechybiti v jmenovani ji, nëkde occur or are placed here and z mi vskociti na druhe nizsi there in diverse locations. mi, a z fa na druhe fa. Ale k Particularly when the various tomut' vsemu zvyk pfivede, tak notes stand far away from each ze se to velmi snadne zdati other and are rapid, one must bude. I to se nëkdy trefuje, [learn to] leap quickly from ze u vysokem vstupovani, kdyz one to another, sometimes pfijde az k la, jestë jedinâ leaping from mi to a lower mi, nota zôstane, nad ni secunda, or from fa to another fa. druhâ totiz ta ma vzdycky jméno Above all, take care that you miti fa. do not mistake the naming [of these vocables]. But all of this will be known through practice, so that it will seem very easy, even when something appears that steps past to the note a secunda, i.e., a second, above. This [note] always has the name fa. Ku pocatku toho cviceni muze The beginning of this piece, tento kus od Josquina, slavneho [B8] composed by the illustrious muze toho, slozeny uzit bÿti. Josquin [Desprez], can be used for training. Tri zpivati maji, prvni, There are three singers. The totiz tenor pocina zpivati, a first, i.e., the tenor, begins kdyz pfijde k znameni tomuto the singing. And when he Jf", hned pocni druhy, totiz arrives at the sign .IT", let discant, o pët not vejse s the second [singer], i.e., the pocatku, a kdyz pfijde k discant, begin five notes druhemu takovemu znameni onen higher than the beginning prvni, tedy pocni tfeti, totiz [singer]. And when he [the bas, o ctvrtou nize od tenoru. tenor] arrives at another sign like the first [sign], let the third [singer], i.e., the bass, begin a fourth below the tenor. a 14 156 [B8v] r f /ifl I ■*— -JsJa M Ï3 È = ± JL 3St Ë ± ± 2 3 The signum congruentiae, notated above or below a note or rest, indicates the proper entrance point for a consequent voice. The sign also indicates the point of completion for a consequent voice, as discussed by Blahoslav on D6 of the Musica. In this example, the bass and discant will be at the first and second signum congruentiae on the last staff when the tenor reaches 157 Vice zprav o tech [Cl] To give more instructions prominovatiich davati skûro jest about transformations would nevelmi slusne, aby nebyli almost be improper, since the mnohym zprav rozsirovanim beginning singer should not be obtëzovâni pocinajlci zpêvâci v troubled by many scattered tom, cehozby v prodleném casu instructions or waste time on zvykem bez tezkosti nabyti that which can be had by mohli. Avsak aby nëkomu nezdâl practice without [taking] these tu bÿti skodnÿ nedostatek, pains. But that this pripomenu régulé, kteréz [handbook] may not seem Finkius v své muzice polozil. grievously deficient to anyone, I shall remind you of those rules that [Hermann] Finck established for music: 1. Nema pyti cinëno promëny, 1. One should not make a lecby toho nevyhnutedla potreba transformation unless there is byla. an unavoidable necessity. 2. Promëna at' jest v mysli, a 2. The transformation should be ne V hlasu, lecby dvë neb tri [done] in the mind and not by noty na jednom a temz mistë, the voice, unless two or three kdez promëna ucinëna bÿti ma, notes occur at the same place. polozeny byly. Then, the transformation begins where it is placed. 3. Ucinëni promën nejvice 3. Primarily, use two vocables uzivame tëchto dvou hlasû: v when making transformations: vstupovani re, v sstupovâni re when stepping up and pak la. when stepping down. (Cont.) the end of the printed composition. At this point, the endings of all vocal parts coincide. This example is the "Agnus Dei II" from Missa Hercules Dux Ferrariae by Josquin Desprez. When compared to the reprint found in Glarean's Dodecachordon (p. 221), it appears that Blahoslav omitted the last two chords from his example. The last staff should read as follows : The black note without stem on the ninth staff of Blahoslav's example is worth k; less than a white note without stem, as discussed by Blahoslav on D4. Consequently, this note is transcribed in modern notation (2:1 reduction) as a dotted half note. 158 4. Hlasové mëcki (totiz fa ut) 4. A soft vocable (i.e., ^ or nemohu promënovâni bÿti v ut) cannot be transformed into tvrdé, nebo byla by a hard one, for the nobleness uslechtilost zvuku zkazena, a of sound would be ruined takz i na odpor. because of the opposition [dissonance]. 5. Nevzdy bÿvâ promëna hlasu v 5. One does not always hlas, aie bÿvâ ucinën skok (neb transform one vocable into preskoceni) z noty na notu bez another vocable, but leams to promënëni, zvlâst' kdyz jest jump (or leap) from one note to skok obdélnÿ, jako près 5 not a another without transformation, neb 8, totiz bÿvâ z re na re, z particularly if the jump is mi na mi, z fa na fa, z sol na lively [large], i.e., from re sol. to re, from mi to mi, from ^ to fa, or from sol to sol. 6. Vseliké promënëni bÿvâ na 6. Make the various tfetim hlasu neb notë pfed fa; [Civ] transformations on the third pakliby na tom mistë nebylo vocable, or note before fa. If noty neb hlasu, tedy na druhém there is no note or vocable in neb na ctvrtém müz se promëna this place, one must start the zaciti. transformation on the second or fourth [note]. 7. Pro jednu notu nad la 7. When one note steps up past vstupujici necini se mënëni, la, one does not make a aie vzdycky se mâ tu jmenovati transformation but should fa, lecby na tom mistë bylo always name fa, unless in this znameni takové : t) a neb , place is the sign t) or#. tedy by misto fa rekl mi. Then, say mi instead of 8. V zpivâni pak smysleném, 8. In the invented [type of] jenz slove cantus fictus, tut' composition, which i& called mûze kdekoli, jakÿ neb cantus fictus, any vocable can kterÿkoli hlas vzat neb zpivân be taken or sung anywhere.^ ^ bÿti. Blahoslav omitted the third (and renumbered the fourth through the ninth) of nine rules of mutation found in Finck's Practica musica (E4v-F1). The omitted rule reads as follows: simpla nulla. Si vox dupla tunc fit mutatio dupla. tripla sena. 159 A sunnnou: promëny v zpëvu Summarizing, transformations tvrdém na trech klicich se in hard composition are made on cinivajî, a, e, d, takto: three keys. A, E, and D;16 D d Vstupujice béreme re na klicich dd A a aa Sstupujice béreme la na klici E e ee D d Stepping up, take re on the keys ^ A £ aa Stepping down, take ^ on the ^ 1 keysN E e ee V mêkkém zpëvu téz na trech There are also three keys [to klicich, totiz d, a, g, takto: be used for mutation] in soft composition, i.e., D, A, and G: G Vstupujice béreme re r 8 D d dd Sstupujice béreme la A a aa G Stepping up, take re r 8 . D d Stepping down, take la il A a aa A aby vzdy pocatecni zpëvaci [C2] And to help all of the pomoc pfi tom mëli, pfidam beginning singers, I will add jestë ctyry regule téhoz Finkia Finck's four rules about o solmizovani: solmization: While this procedure of mutation is not uncommon during the sixteenth century, the arrangement of the following two tables is taken from Finck's Practica musica (FI). 160 1. Kdoz mâ solmizovati, ten 1. Whoever solmizates, let him nejprvé spatf klic napfed v first see the clef notated at zpêvu znamenany a odtud se v the beginning of the mysli vtip a docti vsech klicûv composition and, from this, use okolnich po linach neb spaciich his intellect and read the sva mista majicich, to ucine surrounding keys [notes] that snadno se chybâm v solmizovani have their places on the lines vyhnouti budes moci. and spaces. If one leams this, it will be easy to avoid mistakes in solmization. 2. Za tim pilne setr b fa b mi, 2. Diligently regard the nebo na tom klici vse se toci, b fa b mi, since around this otvira i zavira. Tu kdez key everything turns, opens, polozeno jest b, mas zpivati and closes. Where ^ is placed, fa, pakli M a neb#-, tedy mi. you should sing fa, but in case of tj o r # , then [sing] mi. 3. Kdez se cini skok pres mista 3. When making jumps by four, 4, 5, 8, tedy skoc z mi na mi, five, or eight places [fourths, z fa na fa. fifths, or octaves], leap from mi to mi, from fa to fa, etc. 4. Na oktâvâch jest jednostejny 4. Whatever you name in one hlas, CO jmenujes na jedné octave (or [set of] eight), so oktâvë (neb osmé), to téz na name in another [octave], for druhé jmenuj. the octave requires the same vocable. Vsak pfi solmizovani prepilnë Further, in solmization it is potrebi setriti tonu, nebo bez necessary to regard the tone toho prâvë a umële solmizovati diligently, for without this it jest nesnadné. is difficult to solmizate correctly and artfully. 161 KAPITOLA VI CHAPTER VI 0 ZPÛSOBU NEB TViÜlNOSTI NOT ABOUT THE MANNER AND SHAPE OF THE NOTES [C2v] NejvetsÎ osm Maxima Vëtsi a které zdrzuje " mohou byti ^ \ V sobë DIouha ctyr Longa w vâzâny spolu ■'3 ^ taktu (0 Krâtka dva Brevis 0> •r-» Semi- 0(f Kratsi jeden brevis § rHi (A NejmensÎ neb nejkratsi Ü J dvë Minima Cerné anebo bèzné mûze ■u Semi slouti, ac u Latlniku ctyri cd T minima Pn Mens! kteréz pul nejmensl slove neni obyceje < Bëznëjsi osm Fusa aby spolu byly 1 svazovany sest- Semi- T Nejbëznëjsi S v takt nact fusa eight Maxima - The greater, yl — ^ tacts 01 which can be \held in four Longa 0 bound together -^itself 0) Short two •S Brevis •rt c8 Semi- <0 Shorter one £ brevis •g 17 Smallest or shortest two Minima -s Called quick when black, Q) Semi- U but in Latin called four Ü minima ” The lesser, / half of the smallest n which are not Quicker eight V within Fusa £ usually bound X a tact together Semi- Quickest sixteen fusa Although Blahoslav and Listenius categorize the minima differently, this table appears to be taken from Listenius*s Musica (D2v). 162 Ty tri bëzné neprilis dâvna [C3] The last three [values] have nalezli neb vymyslili novi only recently been found in new muzikové, jenz jsou vice music and belong more properly nâstrojûm muzickÿm nezli hlasu to musical instruments than to lidskému nâlezité. the human voice. £ notâch svâzanych About Grouped Notes Obycej jest noty jedny s It is usual and proper to druhÿmi slusnë spojovati, dvë, combine one, two, three, or tri i vice spolu, a tim more notes together. In this svazovânim neb spojovânim jich grouping or combining, one nëkterÿm se ujimâ dlouhosti, assumes and adds the length of jinÿm pridâvâ, coz tyto each together. Summarizing suramovni zpravy po poradku instructions placed in order, polozené i s pfiklady svëtle as well as examples, will be ukâzi. shown for enlightenment. Predevsim vsak pripomenuto Above all, let us be reminded bud' to, coz jiz prvé bylo of what was first made known. povëdino, ze tyto toliko noty, Only these notes are usually aby svazovâny neb spojovâny seen grouped or combined: the byly, obycej jest: nejvëtsi, greatest, the long, the short, dlouhâ, kratkâ, kratsi. A and the shorter [the maxima, nëkdy v ceskÿch pisnich longa, brevis, and semibrevis]. notovanÿch vidël jsem, ze i But I myself have sometimes nejkratsi neb nejmensi seen, in notated Czech songs, svazovany bÿvaji, totiz tyto a the shortest or smallest timto zpûsobem: [minima] grouped, i.e., in this manner : Ale u Latiniku neni obyceje But the Latins do not usually toho ciniti. Ano i u nas do this, and we can and should mohloby a muze bez toho byti. be without it. For if one puts Nebo poloze pod dvë ty takove the articulation of one word nejkratsi noty jeden slova zfek under two such shortest notes a neb nad jednim zfekem poloze [minimae], or over one zfetedlnë dvë noty, snadnë articulation puts two notes, srozumi, ze maji ty noty [C3v] one will see and easily hlaholem samym neb protazenim understand that the sound of jeho, bez promënëni zreku the prolonged note [the vyzpivany byti. Ale vsak pro ligature] would have to be sung 163 prostëjsL zpëvâkÿ kterÿmz se without a transformation in the zda, ze se také nëco notami articulation [the t e x t ] . 18 zpravi, (snad vice nezli ve tmë But we should not wish to use samou lucernou bez svicky) proc this [ligature] because of the by i toho neuzil kdo chce. singjle singers, those who are just now being instructed in [reading] the notes (possibly being more in the dark with a lantern than if they had no candle at all). Zpravy £ notach spojenych neb Instructions about the svâzanych Combining or Grouping of Notes 1. Zprâva neb rehola, jakz 1. Instruction, or maxim, as rikali stari Cechove: our Czech ancestors used to say: Nota ctyrhranâ neb kriva, The square or oblique note kteraz mâ ocas po levé stranë, that has a tail on the left to jest proti levé ruce, a ten side, that is, facing the left nahoru tci, jest kratsi i s hand and sticking up, is a tou, kterâz se ji pridrzi. shorter [semibrevis], as is [also] the one that clings to it. Priklad: Example: 2. Zprâva: 2. Instruction: Nota, kterâz po levé stranë The note that has a tail on mâ ocas dolû visici, jest the left side, hanging down, is krâtkâ. a short [brevis]. 18 The term "hlahol" (sound) must be understood here as representing the complete sound of the ligature, regardless of how many individual notes are contained within it. Consequently, Blahoslav advises the reader to avoid ligatured minimae because the notes of the ligature could not be sung without the "slurring" of a syllable in the text. 164 19 Priklad; Example : TZt & 3. Zprâva: [C4] 3. Instruction: Nota, kteraz mâ ocas po prave The note that has a tail on stranë, to jest proti prave the right side, that is, facing ruce, dolu neb nahoru, dlouhâ the right hand, down or up, is jest. a long [longa]. Priklad: Example: a 4. Zprâva: 4. Instruction: Nota, jenz stoji napfed, The note that stands in the totiz prvni v tom svazku, front, i.e., the one that is nemajici ocasu, krâtkâ jest, first in the bundle, and which vsak s tou vyminkou, jestli ze has no tail, is a short ta, kterâz za ni jest pripojenâ [brevis]— unless contradicted k ni, nevisi dolû, aie by the one affixed to it, which vstupuje-li nahoru, jakz does not step upward, but hangs ukazuje priklad. down [see rule number 5]— as the example shows. The second numeral under the middle ligature should be a ”3' instead of a "2." Furthermore, the last ligature of this example should have a tail on the left side hanging down, not on the right sticking up. 165 [Example:] 5. Zprâva: 5. Instruction: Nebo jestlize druhâ nota k If the second note, affixed prvni pripojenâ dolû vis!, tedy to the first, is hanging down, jest ta prvni dlouhâ. then the first is a long [longa]. 20 Priklad: Example ■4i % % = 0 3 5 ', « 2 2 C 6. Zprâva: [C4v] 6. Instruction: Kazdâ, kterâz mezi svâzanymi Each of these [notes], jest V prostfedku, krâtkâ jest, grouped in the middle, is a krome té, kterâz by jsûc i mezi short [brevis] except for the jinÿmi, ocas zhûru obrâcenÿ po one which, even when among the levé stranë mêla. others, has an upwardly turned tail on the left side [see rule number 1]. 20 The numerals above the middle ligature should be "4-2-4" instead of "2-2-4"; the numerals below this ligature should be "6-3-6" instead of "3-3-6." 166 Priklad; Example: m m n n 7. Zprâva: 7. Instruction: Posledni, totiz ta, jenz jest The last [note], i.e., the zadu, jestlize dolû visi, one that is at the back, if dlouhâ jest. hanging down, is a long [longa]. Pïiklad: Example : Ug«., 44 a 8. Zprâva: 8. Instruction: Ta nota, kterâz slove The note that is called the nejvëtsi, vsudy jednostejnâ greatest [maxima] is one and jest, totiz osm taktû v sobë the same everywhere, i.e., zdrzuje, bud' k jinÿm holding eight tacts within pripojenâ, nebo obzvlâstnë itself, either when affixed to postavenâ, vsak kdyz sama others or when individually obzvlâstë bÿvâ polozena, situated. And, particularly vzdycky po pravé stranë ocas mâ when it is placed alone, it miti, aie kdyz k jinÿm should always have a tail on pripojenâ bÿvâm ocas trati. the right side. But when affixed to others, it loses its tail. Priklad: Example: = t i = = [ % ■ —&-T IS K ---- 167 Aby se také i snadêji v tom [C5] So that you will be easily zpraviti mohl,. priklady z zadu instructed in this, you will mît! budes. find [additional] examples at the back [in an Appendix to the Musica]. Priklad not vâzanÿch, kterÿch [E5] An Example of the Grouped Notes se nejobecnëji uzlvâ: that are the Most Commonly UsedTZT [E5v] s if 3 I A. k Æ II. ,I. iT yi- This example is relocated from E5-E5v of the original. One additional type of ligature, not discussed by Blahoslav, is i^ed in this example. The downward-slanting ligature without tail, , is usually transcribed as a longa-brevis if the ligature stands unattached to other notes. When this ligature appears in a more complex group, it is transcribed as a brevis-brevis. 168 Rozdëleni vâzanÿch not, [E5v] The Division of the Grouped CO kterâ plati; Notes, and What Each One is Worth;22 3 g [E6] rg-J?., Û Ù A ir H x u D h Î i This example is relocated from E5v-E6 of the original. There are two errors here in Blahoslav's transcription of the preceding example. The last ligature in the discant should be transcribed as instead of ■ ^ O - ; the third ligature from the end in the tenor should be transcribed as instead of ------s=— • These ■ m :©=n= 169 KAPITOLA VII [C5] CHAPTER VII 0 pauzAch ABOUT PAUSES Pauza jest znameni odpocinuti A pause is a sign of rest or neb pomlceni, carkou rovnou silence, made longer or shorter dolû neb nehoru trhnutou, dels! by a straight line drawn neb kratsi ucinëné. Jichz jak downward or upward. How many mnoho jest a jaci v nich there are and the differences rozdilové, z nize polozené between them should not be too figury ne nesnadné porozumino difficult to understand due to byti muze: the figure placed below: I 7 7 Coz ty noty jedna kazdâ v How much each note holds in sobé zdrzuje, a jak dlouha itself agrees with how long one hlasem jednostejnym na mi ma se should remain on the same zûstâvati: takz pod nimi vocable. Likewise, the pauses znamenane pauzy, jak dlouhou notated under these [notes] chvilku pomlceti mâ zpèvâk, give sure notice as to how long nâvëéti jisté dâvaji. a moment the singer should be silent. Ty pak pauzy od sebe rozdilné These pauses, then, different nemaji obvlâstnich jmén, nez from one another, do not nëkdy byvâ nëkterÿm té noty [always] have particular names. jméno pfivlastnëno, pod kterouz Sometimes they have the je tu V figure vidis, kromë té particular name of the note kterâz jest pod tou notou, jenz [C5v] under which you see them in the slove nejmensi, minima, tak figure, except for the one that slove suspirium, oddechnuti, is under that note called the neb také tak ji sotva jest shortest, minima, which is spësné oddechnuti. called suspirium [or] breath. (Cont.) two ligatures must be transcribed incorrectly (i.e., as Blahoslav has transcribed them here), however, if the vocal parts are to fit together as a composition. 23 . The maxima and longa in this figure should have their stems on the right instead of the left. 170 for it is little more than a rapid breath. Tuto pro prostëjsi dotknouti For the novice, that [type slusî i Coho, ze v tom zpivâni, of] composition that is called kteréz slove tripla, kdyz mâ, tripla should properly be zpocâtku zvlâstê, mlceno, to mentioned. When, particularly jest pauzovâno byti, casu za at the beginning, there is a dvë noty, kteréz slovou kratsi, silence or pause for the time a neb za jednu, kterâz slove of two notes that are called krâtkâ, tedy nedëlâ se pauze Shorters [semibreves], or for trzenim od jedné liny az k the one that is called the druhé, nebo tri udëlaji celÿ short [brevis], the pause is takt, aie udëlâny bÿvaji dvë not made by inscribing from one svrchu zavësené a dopolu line to the other, for this spâtium trzené, takto: would make a complete triple tact. Two [lines], suspended from above, are readily made Co supply this rest: Nez na zpivâni prostém toho se This [practice] is no longer nezachovânâ, nez tak pfedce, being observed in simple jakz obecnâ zprâva napred o composition but, for now, the pauzâch stoji. common instruction about the pauses stands as above. A ponëvadz jiz o pauzâch And since all of this was povëdino, jenz jsou znameni revealed about pauses, which odpocivâni, nechat' hned pfi are the signs of resting, allow tom také dotknu i tëch znameni, me also to mention those kterâz nëkdy mezi notami se [other] signs that are nalezaji, procez znâti je sometimes found among the notes potrebi jest. A jsou tato: and, therefore, are properly necessary to know. They are as follows: 171 opëtovâni, a nebo jakz jl2 latlnske slovo [C6] pozkazene zobycejnëlo, tepeticl jest srovnanl se vsech hlasuv a jako v nëjaké shledânl, a spolecné s jakousi libostl se pozastavenl i znameni t die, k nëmuz zplvani mëfilo, se podotcenl 1 findlu, jakz obycej rikati, totiz konecneho k clli prijitl a dokonanl zpëvu the recurrence or, as the corrupted Latin expression becomes the usual [name], repetition; the equalization of all the voices [parts], as if these a sort of ordering, gathering, or uniting is signs touched upon so that the composition might mete are out a pleasing quality; the final, as it is usually called, i.e., coming to the end or [fulfilling] the purpose, or, the accomplishment of the composition. Snad tuto nalezltë toho Perhaps I should properly dotknu, ze vubec mezi zpëvâky mention that generally, among prostymi ceskymi toho slova the simple Czech singers, the repetici zle uzivaji, ne tomu expression repetition is fikajice repetici, coz se wrongly used. For they do not opëtuje podvakrat, ale tomu, call repetition that which coz se zpiva po tom opëtovâni. twice occurs, but that which is Jako u pfikladu v tom prvnim sung after the recurrence. versi pisnicky té "Vesele Bohu Take, for an example, the first zpivejme, cest chvalu verse of the song "Vesele Bohu vzdavaj ice." Tëch slov nota zpivejme, cest chvélu retetuje se, totiz opëtuje vzdévajice." The notes of jinÿmi slovy, totiz tëmito: these words are repeated, i.e., "Moc i moudrost jeho znejme, recur, with different words, srdcem dsty jej ctice," a za i.e., those of "Moc i moudrost tou repetici neb opëtovânim jeho znejme, srdcem listy jej pfida se ostatek noty neb verse ctice." After this repetition tento: "Vidouc stvoreni or recurrence are added the vseliké, k jeho cti chvale remainder of the notes and veliké, ucinëné od nëho." A to verse, "Vidouc stvoreni jest teprv cely vers, jehoz vseliké, ucinëné od neho." It castka prvni se opëtuje, ale is not the whole verse that druhé nie. Ne slova, pravim ze recurs, but only the first se opëtuji, aie nota neb jako amount and not the second. I fikaji latinë melodia, totiz am not saying that the words zpûsob hlasu. Nez bÿvat' nëkdy recur, but the notes or, as the V nëkterÿch hymnéch, to jest Latins say, the melodia, i.e.. 172 pisnickâch, repetitio kratickÿ [C6v] the manner of the voice. There nëjaky versîcek, jîmz jini is, however, sometimes in versové velmi slusnë provijlni hymns, which are short songs, bÿvaji, jako v té pisni "Diky the repetition of a short verse jiz nyni vzdévejme" ten versik with which the other verses are "Jehoz slusi chvâliti s very properly intertwined, as andëly." Tut' ten versik the verse "Jehoz slusi chvâliti vlastnë slouti mël repetitio, s andëly" in the song "Diky jiz bÿt pak nëkdy i v nëkterém nyni vydavejme."24 This slovë nëco promënnë se particular verse is called the poklédal. repetitio even if, on some of the words, some changes are considered. KAPITOLA VIII CHAPTER VIII 0 TAKTU ABOUT THE TACT Slusnë (vidi mi se) mâ jiz It is proper (as I see it) to tuto zminka ucinëna bÿti o make some reference to the taktu. Nejednou jiz napfed to tact. More than once I have slovo jest polozeno a jestë used this expression, and it musi vice jeho uzivâno bÿti. will be used still more. This Jestit' pak Cechum [word], however, is not nesrozumitedlne, ponëvadz neni understandable to the Czechs, ceske, ale latinske, ac since it is not Czech, but pozkazene; protoz tuto o nëm, Latin, although corrupted [in jak mu rozumino bÿti mâ, povim. form]. For this [reason], I Latinë prâvë rikâ se tactus, will explain how it should be coz tolikéz vzni, jakoby cesky understood. In Latin, when one rekl dotceni. Zdrzuje pak correctly says tactus, the slovo to V sobë (tak, jakz jeho result is as if you say touch muzikové a kantori uzivaji) in Czech. This expression slusnou miru neb odmëfeni holds in itself (as it is used nëjaké casu, v nëmz hlas neb by musicians and cantors) a mlceni se konâ neb pâsobi od proper measure or some gauge of zpëvâkû. Kterézto mëreni u time during which a vocable or umëlÿch a zvyklÿch dëje se [C7] silence is executed or brought neznâmë, mysli toliko. Aie u about by the singer. This pocinaj icich a nezvyklÿch cini gauging is done unknowingly se refiji nebo proutkem, jeho [i.e., without effort] by the pokynutim, hnutim, uderenim, artful and practiced, and only dotcenim se knih, pulpitu a in the mind. But, for the cehokoli. Od cehoz i tak slove beginners and those tactus neb takt: a mnê se také unaccustomed to it, it is made ^^"Vesele Bohu zpivejme" is found in the Samotulskÿ kancionâl at S2; "Diky jiz nyni vydâvejme" is found at BIO. 173 pro velikÿ v torn jiz zvyk with a pointer or baton, with nevidëlo mëniti toho slova. the suggestion, motion, or stroke touching the book, pulpit, or anything else. And for this [reason], the expression is called tactus or tact. Since it is already greatly practiced, I do not see fit to change this expression. Ten pak takt nebo dotceni ac This tact or touch, then, rozlicnë jest a mûze bÿti, neb which is and can be diverse in to jedno udereni neb pokynuti the one stroke or suggestion of proutkem nëkdy jedné, nëkdy the baton, sometimes contains nëkolika not cas v sobë in itself the time of one and zdrzuje, a nëkdy jedna nota sometimes that of several nëkolik tëch taktû, jakz napred notes, and sometimes one note mûze toho priklad vidin bÿti v [contains] several of these sesté kapitole. Vsak mûze také tacts. This can be seen in the ta vsecka rozlicnost pro examples of chapter six. For pocinajici v skrovnë zavrina the beginners, all of the bÿti, a to V tëchto trech various diversities can be rozdilich: modestly comprised in these three distinctions: Jeden takt (a ten jest The first tact (and this is nejvÿbornëjsi, jemuz nëkteri the choicest, which some call rikaji kratkÿ), jesto tak the short [brevis]), holds in dlouhÿ casu kus v sobë zdrzuje, itself a part or length of time jak by tu notu, jenz slove in which you could sing the kratsi, semibrevis, totiz O a note that is called the shorter, neb o vyzpival, rozvlacitëji semibrevis, i.e., O or o , as neb spësnëji, jakkoli chces. quickly or rapidly as you Druhÿ takt jest, jesto slove wish.25 The second tact, which dlouhÿ, neb v sobë zavira is called the long [longa], prvnëjsi dva, totiz tak mnoho comprises in itself two of the casu, jakoby vyzpival neb former, i.e., is of the same vymlcel pauzovénim tu notu, time that one could sing or kterâz slove krâtkâ, brevis, pause in silence for the note totiz M . that is called the short, brevis, i.e., M . 25 The tact must be understood here as the downward-upward motion of the conductor's arm. By the brevis tact, Blahoslav means a full "measure" of two "beats" or two semibreves. Note that Blahoslav does not restrict the tact to a fixed duration of time, a departure from the usual practice. In 1496 Franchinus Gaffurius indicated, in the Practica musicae (AA3), that the tact should equal the pulse rate of a man breathing normally (i.e., semibrevis = M.M.60-70). 174 Tfeti takt jest, jenz ty [C7v] The third tact is the one prvni oba v sobë zavirâ a that comprises and holds in zdrzuje, ktâtkou i kratsi notu itself the former two, the spolu V jedno svazujic, pro short [brevis] and the shorter jichz spôsobnou nerovnost, cini [semibrevis]. It groups zpëv jakÿs skocnÿ a hejbavÿ, together these notes whose bud' k veseli neb zurivosti. manners are unequal and makes Ten takt u nëkterÿch slove the composition leaping or tactus prolationis a nebo lilting, either merry or tactus triplae a nebo tactus raging. This tact is called, proportionstus. by some, tactus prolationis, tactus triplae, or tactus proportionstus. K znâmosti pak taktû také To appropriately know this vlastnë nâlezi poznati aneb particular tact, one must know vyrozumëti tomu, coz u Latinikû and understand that which the slove syncopatio. Nebo Latins call syncopatio. prostému a synkopaci neznâménu Otherwise, to the novices and kantoru uslechtilé v zpëvich the cantors unaware of klausule (zvlastë v diskantich) syncopation, the noble zdâly by se spletenim taktu clausulae in composition bÿti. (particularly in the distants) would seem to have twisted tacts. Vëziz tedy, ze kdyz jedna Recall, therefore, that when nota od druhé té, s kterouz by one note is distant from jeden takt vyplniti mêla, jest another with which it could vzdalena pres jednu notu a neb complete one tact, the pres vice jich, tedy to takove separation of these notes dvou not (jednu miri taktu (which complete the measure of vyplnujicich) rozdvoj eni a mezi one tact) and the insertion of né not nëco (s kolikkoli taktuv one or more notes between these plnÿch) vlozeni jest a slove two (of however many complete syncopatio. tacts), is and is called syncopation. 175 26 Prikladové toho; Examples of this ± E É3& [C8] a: KAPITOLA IX CHAPTER IX 0 ZNAMENlCH ABOUT THE [MENSURAL] SIGNS Ponëvadz pfi notach a klicich As there are with both notes jestë znameni nëkterâ bÿvaji, and keys, there are, either at bud' na pocatku fadku bud' i the beginning of the row jinde, zvlast' v zpivâni [staff] or elsewhere, some figurném, cemuz Latinici rikaji signs (which the Latins call proportiones, na nichz nemalo proportiones) upon which the zalezi kantorûm. Nebo ta cantors greatly depend, znameni rozlicnych promën pfi particularly in the figurai notâch pficinou bÿvaji, casu [type of] composition. These jich bud' pfivëtsujice, bud' signs cause diverse ujimajice. Nâlezitét' jest transformations within the tedy, aby i o tom take oblâstnë notes, because they either nëco povëdino bylo, coz prostë augment or diminish the time. a krâtce ucinim. Rozdil u And it is proper that something latinskÿch muzikûv jest mezi be made known about these. tëmi slovy modus, tempus, This I will do simply and prolatio: nebo a nich prvni briefly. To the Latin slovo, totiz modus, zdrzuje musicians, there is a zprâvy neb regule nâlezité k difference among the notâm, jenz slovou nejvëtsi, a expressions modus, tempus, and k tëm, jenz slovou dhouhe, prolatio. The first of these druhé slove tempus zpravuje expressions, i.e., modus, holds noty, jenz slovou krâtké, a an appropriate instruction or tfeti, totiz prolatio, k tëm, rule about those notes that are kteréz nejkratsi nazÿvâme called the greatest [maxima], pfilezi. or those that are called the The brevis tact is used in both examples. In the first example, the syncopation is established by the notes whose numbers are 4-6 and 17; in the second, by the notes whose numbers are 3 and 7. 176 long [longa]. The second expression, tempus, Instructs the notes that are called the short [brevis]. And the third, i.e., prolatio, concerns the notes that are recognized as the shorter [semibrevis]. Vsak tech hlubosti a Leaving behind the depths and subtilnosti pozanechaje, i subtleties of these many and mnohych a rozlicnych diverse signs, I will summarize znamenavani jich, tuto zpravu [C8v] and give instructions about summovni o tech, kteraz those [signs] that are the most obecnejsi a nejpotrebnejsi, necessary. jsou, dam. Jsout' pak tyto troje There are three most common nejobecnejsi znameni, jichz signs, whose order and power poradnost i moc takto mâze can be placed and shown as polozena a ukâzâna byti: follows: [DI-DIv] Dupla B > N 0) 0) dvakrat Dupla dvë dvojitâ > u > u o >> ■rt Tripla 4J trikrat Tripla o tri trojitâ >2'3§< < > I < Sesqui- 0 ^ 1 w n PÛ1 > N CO -j altera Sesqui- pûl- (U druhe- t i polovi- 73 O altera CO druhé krât cd câtnâ (0 Dupla u double Dupla N two duple 0 a 4J Q> CO 4J O M u 4J • Q) cd (J 0) •H 01 H U > W e o 00 r4 Q) triple 60 Smysl teto tabule jest tento: The interpretation of this ze nëkterâ znameni jsou, jesto table is this: those 177 zpëv majIci je slove dupla, to compositions having these signs jest dvojitÿ, a ten jest vsem [the Arabie numerals, in the nejzvyklejsi nejprostëjsi a upper portion of the table] are obecnÿ, totiz aby noty poena od called dupla. This [meter] is nejvëtsi az do nejmensi, by far the [type] most vzdycky jedna vëtsi dvë mensi v practiced, simple, and common, sobë obsahovala. Jakz dole nad i.e., it makes use of notes takovym znamenim C spatris a beginning from the largest to jakz noty na pocatku kapitoly the least, the larger [note] sesté V svém poradku jsou always containing in itself two postaveny. of the lesser. You can see the sign C below, and [also] the notes situated in this order in chapter six above. Druhÿ dil znameni slove The second section of the tripla, kdyz vëtsi nota nëkterâ signs is called tripla, since tri mensi obsahuje. the larger note contains three of the lesser. Treti dil, kdyz jedna vëtsi [Div] The third section [which is nota V sobë pûl druhé mensi called sesquialtera] is when zdrzuje. the larger note holds one and one-half of the lesser. Prikladové toho, coz svrchu Examples of I'Jhat was Made Known povëdino Above Dupla: Dupla: [D2] 178 Tripla; Tripla: "Pfn: w Sesquialtera: [D2v] Sesquialtera: £ a < U 3 t e i t k \ 179 Ale tomu vsemu aby mohio lepe But that all of this could be a snaze porozumîno bÿti, misto thoroughly and more easily mnohÿch o tom slov vylévânî understood without my pouring figury neb tabule tyto out so many words about it, the predlozene ukazl, na nichz i figures or tables presented znamenx, kterychz muzlkove here will show those [mensural] uzivaji, polozena jsou i noty signs that the musicians use, nad kazdym tlm znamenim a nad the notes placed above each of notami pocet, aby z toho se these signs, and the numbers svëtle vidëti mohlo, jak mnoho under [and alongside] the kterâ nota pri kterém znameni notes. From these, one can be obsahovatl neb platiti ma, enlightened and see how much totiz kolik krâtkÿch, krâtkâ [D3] each note contains, what each kratsîch, kratsî kolik sign is worth, and, according nejkratsich v sobë zdrzuje, to the differences in signs, podle rozdllnosti znameni. how many lesser ones each contains in itself, i.e., [the longa] how many shorts [breves], the short how many Shorters [semibreves], and the shorter how many shortests [minimae]. 1 I 1 1 i a M Ë d 18 a liEaiEiiiEiiiaiS ISIEISISIBISlil 27 . Each Arabic numeral in the odd-numbered columns indicates the number of breves (first six mensural signatures) or semibreves (remaining signatures) that are contained in the note value to the right of the numeral. Each numeral in the even-numbered columns 180 [D3v] m 28 i l : a Netoliko pak mocx notâm These signs that were pridâvaji aneb ujîmajî ta discussed are not the only ones znameni, o nichz jiz praveno, to augment or diminish the aie také jestë i jinÿm obycejem power of a note, for this can to se pûsobiti môze, jako usually be brought about by yet privetseni moci not dëje se another [sign]. Augmenting the skrze punktiku pfilozeni k power of a note is [also] done notë, kterÿz ji polovici by applying a dot to the note, pfidavâ vâhy neb moci; which adds to it half of its own balance or power: 0 * jeden takt maly prosty v O* commonly holds in itself, sobë drzi obecnë bez punktu. without a dot, one small, simple tact.29 O* pul druheho taktu obecneho. O* [holds] one and one-half of the common tact. (Cont.) indicates how many of the next smaller note value, positioned above this numeral, are contained in the larger value, positioned below this numeral. This table is taken from Finck's Practice musica (L2), but with a printing error in the fourth mensural signature. Here, the O a should be C j . 28 This table is taken from Coclico’s Compendium musices, but with a printing error in the number "36" in the top row. 29, The note here should be without a dot, as the text indicates. 181 i ta V sobë dvë cerné drzi [D4] ^ when situated without a bez punktu postavené. dot, holds in itself two blacks [semiminimae]. t s tlm pak punktem tri cerné when [situated] with a dot, zdrzuje. holds in itself three blacks [semiminimae]. A takz o jinÿch notâch. And so on with the other notes. 0 barvach not, totiz bili a I do not see fit to write cerné, nevidi mi se mnoho much about the color of the pséti, ponëvadz se v tom ani notes, i.e., white and black, muzikové nesrovnévaji. Neb since musicians differ on this. jedni pravi, ze cerné bylaliby Some say that whenever a note nota, ctvrty dil z své is black, it loses one fourth platnosti potracuje, jako nota, of its value. So a note that jesto slove kratsi, kdyz jest is called the shorter cerna: ♦ , tedy ctvrtou [semibrevis], when it is black, castku mène v sobë zdrzuje ^ , holds in itself one fourth nezli kdyby bila zûstala: ^ . less of the amount [that it holds] if it remained white, o . . Ac i to také ne ve vsech Even this is not held and znamenich jednostejnë se drzi a observed in the same way with zachovavé, aie naléza se také i all notations. But one finds V nëkterÿch zpivénich, ze cerné that in some compositions the noty téz jako bili plati bez black notes have the same value rozdilu, vsak proto slusi toto as the white, without vëdëti: ze kdyz ve vsech trech difference. It is proper to nebo ctyrech hlasich cerné noty know, however, that when black se poklédaji dvë neb vie, a neb notes are used in all (two, i vsecky près celÿ zpëv, tedy three, four, or more) voices takovÿ zpëv tëmi cernÿmi throughout an entire notami polozeny slove hemiola a composition, this composition, jest drobet spësnëjsi neb placed in black notes, is rychlejsi zpëv, nezliby byla called a hemiola and is a bit prostâ tripla bilymi, totiz more rapid one than [one of] obecnÿmi notami nanotovana. simple tripla, i.e., one commonly notated with white notes. KAPITOLA X [D4v] CHAPTER X 0 TONÎCH ABOUT THE TONES Neslusné by bylo (podlé soudu It would not be proper mého), aby znamenity artikul v (according to my judgment) that muzice de tonis mël mlcenim a knowledgeable article about 182 tuto pominut bÿti. Protoz, music omit and be silent de opêt pozanechaje té slrokosti tonis. Therefore, once again prîlis mnohÿch rozdllû, pri abandoning the inclusion of the zprâvâch o kazdém tonu nëco too many distinctions in skrovnë o tom napisi. instruction, I will briefly write something about each of the tones. Toho slova tonus muzikové By using the expression uzivajice mini jim zpravu neb tonus, musicians mean the reholu neb reguli, kteraz konec instruction, maxim, or rule kteréhokoli zpëvu, anobrz that teaches how to judge the vsecken zpëv rozsuzovati a end of any composition, or the odtud jakost neb zpûsob jeho v whole of any composition. From nëkterÿch vëcech poznâvati uci, this, one can know the quality jako V tom, kterého zpusobu or manner in some fashion, as zpëv byl by, veseléholi ci if [to know] what manner of smutného, zufivéholi cili composition it should be, povlovného, podobnë jako pri whether merry or sorrowful, krojîch satstva, po vlaskuli raging or gentle. It is neb po starocesku usit jest similar to [recognizing] the kabât, suknë. Nebo podlé style of clothing— whether the rozdllnosti tonû rozdilnost coat or skirt is tailored in jakosti neb zpûsobûv pri Italian, Polish, German, or zpëvich bëzi. Old.Bohemian [style]. For the quality or manner of the composition differs according to the difference in tone. Tonû jest osm, kteréz poréd There are eight tones, which polozim. A pfidam k notâm text [D5] I will place in order. And by ceskÿ, pocet kazdého tonu v adding a Czech text to the sobë majici: notes, each tone will number itself: 183 30 i d t i t m $rwn| 3t«mc ôruÇ^ îge** e - ± X t e 9%o(* ^Kt|paf 2Cra^flm^ gtgty 2 @mang(0|%ow(, pz: mi tCovisi — — f------1 fl"X MM _ a w— M - , ------=]— " ■■ X fingffim* SwuDrnj (|;(l po{la|reno» ^ %n # w I M " K- « - f r ^ S Î Ï 30 In this teaching device, Blahoslav combines one EUOUAE or differentia from each of the eight tones, and to those eight adds the EUOUAE of the tonus peregrinus (listed by Blahoslav as the fourth differentia of Tone VIII on E2v) as the EUOUAE of the "ninth" tone. To these nine melodic phrases, Blahoslav further attaches a text; the number in the text corresponds to the number of the tone for which each EUOUAE is a component. The text of this teaching device reads as follows: Prvni clovek Adam, The first man was Adam, Druhy byl Noe, the second was Noah, Treti pak Abraham, the third was Abraham, Ctyri evangelistove. [there are] four evangelists, Pet ma clovëk smyslûv, a man has five senses, Stoudvi sest postaveno. six water jars were situated there [at the feast of Cana], Sedmero jest umeni, there are seven arts, Osmero blahoslavenstvi eight beatitudes, Devet kurflv andelskych [and] nine angelic choirs. Both the music and (Latin) text for the first eight phrases are found in Finck's Practice musica (PP3-PP4), although Finck 184 0 vlastnostech prlrozenÿch [D5v] About the Natural Particulars kazdého tonu oblastnë of Each Specific Tone^l 0 prvnxm tonu About the First Tone Prvni ton hodnë a nalezitë The first tone, fittingly and nejprednëjsi cini zpëvy veselé, appropriately the foremost, zvucnë a krasnë se rozblhajici makes compositions merry, a plynouci, jez mirnou sonorous, and beautifully hfmotnostl mysi clovëka ospalou diverging and floating and, a jako ustalou totiz k radosti with its restrained sound, probuzuji; aie aby celeji a awakens the mind of a settled lépe porozumino bÿti mohlo, and sleepy man, i.e., with joy. jeho vlastnosti, zpûsob So that one could better and pocatku, prostredku i skonâni more entirely understand its j eho tento znam bud': particulars, let the manner be known by its beginning, middle, and end: [beginning] [middle] Î [end] [forever and ever. Amen] (Cont.) presents each phrase as a separate example. It is possible that Blahoslav took his composition directly from Glarean's Dodecachordon (p. 35); here, the first eight melodic phrases are joined as above, although no text accompanies Glarean's example. In either case, it appears that the ninth melodic phrase and the accompanying text were added by Blahoslav. O 4 The formulas of the "pocatek" (beginning), "prostredek" (middle), "konec" (end), and "vëky vëkûv Amen" (forever and ever. Amen) correspond to the initium, mediatio, terminatio, and Seculorum, Amen. These formulas, and their organization into a set for each particular tone, are taken from Coclico's Compendium musices (D2v-F1). The ambit examples are taken from Listenius's Musica (C3v-C4v), although Blahoslav omits the EUOUAE attached to Listenius's examples. Blahoslav's differentiae tonorum are likewise taken from Listenius's Musica (C4v-C5). Aside from the discrepancies in note values, repeated notes, and note-combinations presented as 185 Jestë pro lepsî srozumënî Yet, for the better zpüsobûm toho tonu pfidâm understanding of the manner of vlastnî obycej sstupovânî a this tone, I will add the usual vstupovâni téhoz tonu, a to particulars for the stepping slove u Latînxkû upward and downward of this (Cont.) ligatures, Blahoslav's examples differ from those presented by Coclico and Listenius in the following manners : Tone 2 By the substitution of a baritone clef for a tenor clef, Blahoslav's differentiae are transposed down a third from Listenius's example. The last note of Blahoslav's 4th differentia leaps upward by a third, while in Listenius's example this note ascends by step. Blahoslav omits the 5th of 6 differentiae presented by Listenius and renumbers Listenius's last differentia as number 5. Tone 2 By the substitution of a bass clef for a tenor clef, Blahoslav's formulas are transposed down a fifth from Coclico's example. The 2nd note of Blahoslav's initium leaps upward by a third, while in Coclico's example this note ascends by step; the last note of the terminatio descends by step, whereas in Coclico's example this note ascends by step. The 6th note in Blahoslav's ambit example descends by step, while in Listenius's example this note leaps downward by a third. Tone 2 To correspond to the formulas of Coclico, the 4th note of Blahoslav's EUOUAE should be followed by an additional note descending by step. Tone ^ Blahoslav omits the 4th of 4 differentiae presented by Listenius. Tone ^ Whereas Coclico présents these melodic formulas in alto clef, Blahoslav uses a tenor clef with the appropriate repositioning of the notes. Blahoslav prescribes a signature of B-flat for this example; Coclico attaches the accidental to only the 2nd B in his example. Tone 6i Blahoslav prescribes a signature of B-flat for these formulas; no flats are indicated by Coclico. Tone 7 The 3rd note of Blahoslav's 2nd EUOUAE descends by step, while in Coclico's example this note ascends by step. Tone 8 The 5th note of Blahoslav's mediatio descends by step, while in Coclico's example this note remains on the preceding pitch. The 5th note of Blahoslav's 3rd differentia leaps upward by a third, while in Listenius's example this note ascends by step. Finck, in the Practice musica (RR3v-RR4v), presents a lengthy discussion of the proprietates tonorum. The affects proposed by Blahoslav are clearly modeled after those proposed by Finck. 186 ambitus, to jest okolek, totiz tone. This is called the okolo kterych not a okolo ambitus by the Latins, i.e., kterych rozdilû jich prvni ton that which concerns the nejvie sjfij provodi bëh: different notes that are most often initiated in the first tone: [D6] # m - 4 #■ Ï ± t - 4 § ^ g Take zda mi se, ze nebude na I also believe that there skodu i to pfidati, coz u would be no harm in adding what latiniku slove differentiae the Latins call the tonorum, to jest rozdilni differentiae tonorum, which, spûsobové toceni neb while belonging to a given tone naklonovani sem i tarn hlaholu, and serving the same purpose, V jednom vsak tonu se are the different manners of zdrzujiciho a k jednomu cili turning or inclining the sound mericiho. Tito jsou pak here and there. These, then, rozdilni zpûsobové v prvnim are the different manners of tonu: the first tone: I. ft Tomuto vsemu dobre [D6v] By comprehending all of this porozumeje, jedno s druhym and comparing one with the srovnaje pilny a bedlivy other, the diligent and 187 ucedlnlk muziky bade moci careful apprentice of music vlastnosti prvniho tonu will be able to know the poznati. A podlé toho i zpëvy particulars of the first tone. rozlicné soudë, kterÿby toho And, accordingly, [when] tonu byl, ne nesnadnë srozumi, judging diverse compositions, zvléstê kdyz vlastnosti toho he will without difficulty tonu od jinÿch dalsich bude (especially if he is able to umëti rozdëlovati. divide the particulars of this tone from all the others) recognize the tone to which they belong. 0 druhem tonu About the Second Tone prvnimu odpornem, jenz jest [The second tone,] opposite of sklad smutnych neb truchlych a the first, is the storehouse of plactivÿch zpëvûv, k zamutku a sorrowful, mournful, and mysli ponizene vedoucich a tearful compositions that lead uvodicich spûsob jakés smutné to grief and to a humble ustalosti a jako opadeni rukou. spirit; its manner initiates a sorrowful brow, as if the hand begins to cripple. Zpûsob pak tonu druheho v The manner of the second tone, pocatku, prostïedku i konci: by its beginning, middle, and end: Bi [beginning] [middle] W-A ------Q)roiTf(D(f< [end] [forever and t± ever. Amen] Ksntt. 188 Ambitus neb okolek neb [D7] The ambitus, range, or circuit okolkovani toho tonu: of this tone: i -ri ^ g é ^ é g é é---- K tomu tonu muzikové zédnÿch Musicians do not consider any differenci neb rozdilnosti differentiations or nepokladaj i. distinctions for this tone. Treti ton The Third Tone jest studnice neb spizirna [The third tone] is the zpëvu pfisnych, tvrdych, wellspring or pantry of severe, ostrych, trpkych, bojovnych, hard, sharp, bitter, warlike, muzskych. Jehoz takovy jest: and masculine compositions. It is as follows: 3 i [beginning] [middle] [end] [forever and ever. Amen] Soncc. SSKsnSftiv limm 189 Téhoz tonu ambitus, okolek: [D7v] The ambitus, or range of this tone: J i Differentiae neb zpûsobové The differentiae, of different rozdilni tretiho tonu: manners of the third tone: Ï 190 Ctvrty ton The Fourth Tone zdrzuje v sobë a plodl zpëvy [The fourth tone] holds in povolnë, pochlebné, tiché a itself and generates dosti llbé: compositions that are gentle, adulatory, quiet, and fairly pleasing: [the usual beginning of this tone] [middle] Û li'it [end] [forever and [or, forever, ever. Amen] etc.] nudic Va»t s 2U3SU; 6 Okolek toho tonu: [D8] The range of this tone: Zpûsobové rozdilni tonu The different manners of the ctvrteho: fourth tone: i s i 191 Pâtÿ ton The Fifth Tone zpëvy ma llbé, bystré, [The fifth tone] has lahodici, rozkosné, bez hurtu a compositions that are pleasing, hfmotu, ponoukaj ici a swift, delicious, delightful, veselosti: without hurry and volume, and that instigate merriment: [D8-D8v] ■ I R i [beginning] [middle] [end] [forever and [or, forever, 3 2 : ever. Amen] etc.] Okolek téhoz tonu: The range of this tone: ±rr* Æ t F m 192 Rozdilni zpûsobové patého tonu: The different manners of the fifth tone: -4- 4- Sesty ton The Sixth Tone jest drobet narikavych, [El] [The sixth tone] has those alisavych a jako neuprimnych a compositions that are a bit Istivych neb licomernych zpëvü: wailing and fawning, as if insincere, sly, or hypocritical: [its beginning] [middle] [end] [forever and ever, Amen] ^ o m * SBffg tptra % m ( n . [or, forever and i ever. Amen] 193 [The range of this tone:] o : # # ^ Zpûsob rozdilny téhoz tonu: The different manners of this tone: Sedmého tonu The Seventh Tone zpëvové drobet kriklavi jsou, [The seventh tone] of pfisnost, hnëvivost a zurivost composition is a bit screaming, mysli ukazujici, jako bÿvé pri [Elv] showing the severity, anger, zpëvich o vëcech nëjakÿch and rage of the mind. Its hroznych, bojovnych a compositions are about hurtovnych. threatening, warlike, and hurried matters. Takovy jest pak zpûsob v tomto And such is the manner of this tonu: tone: i [beginning] [middle] [end] [forever and [or, forever, ever. Amen] etc.] 194 Okolek: The range: g \*J.r t*i Zpûsobové rozdilni jeho: The different manners of this: . i . x f i 4 !.. ■ft ------^ ■f-V i. a$ [E2] 3 a ± £ 195 Osmy ton The Eighth Tone s svymi vlastnostmi, jest [The eighth tone,] with its poctivych a slechetnych jen particulars, has the manner of zpûsobûv, totiz velmi milostny, being trusting and ladylike, k nemuz priiezici zpëvové jsou i.e., very charming, and the velmi pfijemni a uteseni, compositions coming from it are posluchace své k nëjakému very agreeable and comforting, spokojeni se, dobrotivosti a and cause the listener to be krotkosti i litostovosti satisfied with goodness, privozujici : tameness, and sensitivity: » B '0'» 7 T g ^ 'a I [its beginning] [middle] [forever and ever. Amen] gOcfgtpffiio < a » m [or, forever and ever. Amen] Okolek toho tonu: The range of this tone: ± 3 ± s : [E2v] 196 Zpûsobové rozdilni toho tonu: The different manners of this tone: t t r t t 4 'g4 X. I4 - 4 ^ 4 ' é : & 4 3* Devâtÿ ton, kteremuz fikaji The ninth tone, which is peregrinus, to jest cizi, totiz called the peregrinus, is smysleny, zdrzujici v sobë alien, i.e., invented, and drobet rozdilny hlahol od vsech holds in itself a sound a bit osmi tonû. tern mûz k osmemu different from the other eight pficten bÿti a za jeho castku tones. This can be attached to polozen, jakoz se tu mezi the eighth and placed in that rozdilnymi zpûsoby osmého tonu amount [as is done here], naposledy poklada. although it can [also] be considered as a different manner of tone and [be placed] at the end of the eight [as an independent tone]. V tech osmi tonich vsickni a All of the various vselijaci zpëvové neb pisnicky compositions or songs are held se zdrzuji, jako v abecedë within these eight tones as, viech slov litery zaviraji similarly, from the letters of podobnë se. Kdozkoli tonû the alphabet, all of the words vlastnostem a zpûsobûm i are comprised. Whoever clearly rozdilnostem dobfe by understands these particulars, porozumel, ten kazdého zpivâni IE3] manners, and differences of the vlastnost jakzby je uslysal neb tones will immediately know and nanotované spatfil, i hned understand the particulars of pozna a srozumi, dobfeli zpëvék each composition and, when a nélezitëli neb umële zpiva either hearing it or seeing it neb zpëvy sklédé cili nie. Sam notated, [will know] whether také bude zpivaje umëti bias the singer sings that svûj formovati nalezitë: i composition well, smutnému, veselému, pfisnému, appropriately, and artfully, or povlovnému zpëvu neb notë not. Likewise, when he himself hlahol prislusnÿ vypoustëti, a sings, he will know how to form ovsem V sklâdéni pisni slova his own voice appropriately to 197 notë a neb tonu noty prîlezitâ release the proper sound for V mista slusnâ dâvati. Coz sorrowful, merry, severe, or obé, i tak umëlé pisnicky gentle compositions or notes, slozeni i nâlezité ji zpivâni, and, of course, in composing tepruv cini to, aby posluchac songs, [he will know how] to tam pohnut nakionën i priveden give, in the proper places, byl, kamz chce zpêvâk, aneb words with the proper concern kamz ulozil pisnë skladatel. to the note, or notes of the tone. Both the artful attachment of the song and its appropriate singing can [together] induce, incline, or lead the listener to where the singer or composer of the song wishes. Ale ze pak zpêvâk temto Since a singer not yet zprâvâm jestë neobvyklÿ ne tak accustomed to these snadnë hned pojednou poznati instructions cannot suddenly, mûze zpëv kazdÿ, kterého by easily, and immediately know tonu byl kterÿ, protoz pro the tone of each composition, pocinajici zprâvy tyto se these instructions are given dâvaji, podlé nichz soud cinën for the beginner so that, byti mûze o kazdém zpëvu: according to these, a judgment can be made about each composition: [E3V-E4] I Vselikÿ zpëv prostÿ. G sol re ut sedmého [ osmého kteryz z mezi zprâv > F fa ut I pâtého Æ J sestého nevystupuje, ' E la mi S tretihor c S ctvrtého skonâvajici se na D sol re Ail simple compositions G sol re ut seventh! [eighth that do not step . F fa ut ,fifth N M J sixth outside the \ E la mi \ third / ° \ fourth instructions, if D sol re jfirst second they end on 198 [E3V-EA] II VII. neb VIII. tonu, jestlize na b fa b mi, C fa ut jmenuje se fa, pakli se Vseliké zpivâni ^ j menuje mi, tedy jest V. nepodlé obycejného \ M neb VI. zpusobu jdouci sol fa ut skonâvâli se na pâtého I -g Jsestého [ fa b mi < tretihc> c < itvrtéhoP tonu la mi re I prvniho] «a ] druhého [ Vsak jestli ze na b fa b mi jmenuje se mi. seventh or eighth tone, Ail compositions if one names fa on not judged according fa ut fa mi. If, however. to the usual manner, c b b one names if they end on o fifth or s c sol fa ut % ]fifth K I sixth b fa mi «< third > o b L tone a la mi re I first f I second (' If there is only one b fa b mi, however, one names mi. [E4] III Téz neobycejné c sol fa ut jestlize na zpivâni, b fa b mi gjb fa b mi S « skonâvaloliby Ja la mi re jmenuje neb se na G sol re ut zpivâ se fa. o c sol fa ut VIII if one If, in an unusual b fa b mi VI composition, one a la mi re \ >iii IV w Usings ^ on ends on G sol re ut II b fa b mi. Vsak samy tyto zprâvy nejsou [E4v] These instructions alone, dostatecné ku poznâni, kterého however, are not sufficient to by tonu kterÿ zpëv byl, aie know the tone of each nejlépe jest vlastnostem, composition. And so it is best okolkum, zpüsobûm i to understand well the rozdilnostem tonûv dobre particulars, ranges, manners, vyrozumëti a v pamët sobë and differences of the tones. 199 vloziti, potom i tyto zprâvy and to insert these into your samy pfldjou ku pameti a ton memory. These instructions pri zpivâni neb oisni snadnicce will then come from the memory seznân bude. by themselves, and the tone of that composition or song will very easily be known. A jiz necht' jest ale dosti At this, enough has properly na ten cas o vëcech k muzice been made known about the nalezitych povedino. Ac pak matters of music for the time, mohloby jestë potrebnë a although there are still more zpëvâkûm uzitecnë nemâlo bÿti necessary and useful things for psâno. bud' o ozdobném zpivâni, the singer that could be bud' o nâlezitém a slusném written, either about zpëvûv V notâch neb v textich decorative singing or about the formovâni. Aie nyni na tom to appropriate and proper forming zavfino bud'. Jestlize tato of compositions in notes or in sprostnâ a krâtkâ knizka texts.22 But let us close with poboznou vdëcnosti prijata a this. If this simple and short dobre uzivâna bude, potom casem handbook will be accepted with jinÿm mûz nëco vice zpëvâkûm pious gratefulness and used nâlezitého k tomuto pridâno well, then, at a different bÿti, kdyz se toho potreba time, something more about spatri. appropriate singing can be added to this, if I see that there is a need. [End of the Musica, 1558 ed.] 32 Blahoslav completed the first supplement to the Musica, "Some instructions necessary for those who wish to sing well," in February 1560. A second supplement, "Teachings necessary for those who wish to compose songs," was written prior to March 1564. 200 PLATE VI Title Page of Joaquin's Muzika, shown original size. Knihovna Narodniho Muzea v Praze 262 ZS. tt^nclesttâ /wifccbnîm m m xoûm (g vact sabolîxwytn t» posïtïf» / 0 & e m n e ^ana Jo(qmn«3î«t5#Mn €5*e(ï ^ m - v 9 n ^ t o ^ fêçfÇknâ % !T f ik 201 PLATE VII Illustration of James the Apostle, from Josquin's Muzika. ss«r.»i g W X : The figure in this woodcut was identified by Hostinsky in Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin (p. LXXXIV). MUZIKA WHICH IS THE INSTRUCTION APPROPRIATE FOR SINGING For the gratification of all who desire to learn singing. From me, Jan Josquin. Newly written and published in the Czech language. in the year 1561, 202 203 [A2] [DEDICATION] Vysoce urozenÿm Pânûm, Panu To the highborn lords from Kundrâtovi, Panu Karlovi, Panu the district of Mladâ Boleslav, Adamovi Krajîfom z Krajku a na Lord Konrâd, Lord Karel, and Mladé Boleslavi, bratrîm Lord Adam Krajir, native vlastnim, pânûm k mnê laskavê brothers, and lords [who are] pfîznivÿm, jich milostem: graciously disposed toward me by their love: V jaké vâznosti netoliko u Many and true testimonials pohanû, aie i v lidu Bozim, [about music] are contained in vysoce urozeni pâni, pâni historical reports and in the laskavê pfiznivi, muzika Holy Scriptures. I believe faÿvala, ponëvadz mnohâ a jistâ that you, highborn lords and V historiîch i v Pismich lords graciously disposed svatych toho pozûstavena jsou [toward me], have a good svëdectvi, za tp mâm, ze v knowledge about the subject of dobré vêdomosti miti râcite, music, not only [that music] of vsak aby i jinÿm znâmé bylo, the pagans, but also that of kraticce bëh jeji vypsati chci. the people of God. In order Divné pak o pûvodu jejim pri that some other [accounts] lidech bëzi povësti, nëkteri might be known, however, I Vulkana, ze by ji on kladivy would like to briefly include svÿmi vymyslil, poklâdajice. those [accounts] that follow. Vsak Vergelius kdyz o bohynich Curious myths about the origins zpivâ, dvë za pûvod vynalazeni [of music] are [found] among bÿti pravi takto: the people, some believing that Vulcan invented it with his hammers. Virgil, however, when singing about the goddesses, offers two [accounts] to explain the origin and discovery of music. The first of these [accounts] is as follows:1 Dulciloquis calamos Euterpe Sweet-speaking Euterpe impels flatibus urget, the reeds with her blowings, Terpsichore affectus cithara Terpsichore moves, rules, and movet, imperat, auget. augments the affects with her cithara. Od kterÿchzto bohyn ze by potom [A2v] Later, that illustrious ten slavnÿ muzikus Orfeus, syn musician Orpheus, son of Apollo Apolline a bohyne recené and the goddess Calliope, was ^I have not found either of these Latin passages in the works of Virgil. 204 Kalliope, naucenÿ jsa tak libë taught the skills of how to a lahodnë na harfu hrâti umël, play so pleasingly and kteréhoz licâ zvêr slysîce od delightfully on the harp by své ukrutnostî predstâvala, that goddess. Upon hearing kamenî poskakovalo, reky this [music], wild beasts poslouchaiice stâly, stromovî stopped their atrocities, za nîm chodilo, o cemz tejz stones began to dance, and poeta svêdci: listening rivers became motionless. The poet [Virgil] likewise testifies about this: Threicus guendam vates fide Once the Threcian bard was creditur corona, believed, in faith, to have, Movisse sensus acrium ferarum, with his poetic crown. Atque anmes tenuisse vagos, Moved the senses of wild Et surda cantu concitasse saxa. beasts, To have held wandering streams. And to have aroused deaf rocks with song. Jiz pak ktefizkolî muziku But whoever discovered music, vynalezll, zajisté zet' jsou z whether from the singing of rozlicnÿch prikladûv k birds or from the pleasing vyhledâni, bud' z zpëvu ptâkûv voices of the heavenly spheres, neb z libÿch hlasûv sfér whether [music originated] from nebeskych, sobë priciny dané natural or contrived [man-made] mëli, ji divnÿmi zpûsoby, bud' voices, or whether [it was hlasy prirozenÿmi neb conceived] by Linus, Amphion, strojen^i vynâseti usilovali, Dirce, or Arion (about whom jako jsou Linus, Amphion, Herodotus writes that, having Dirceus byli Arion, o nëmz been tossed into the sea, was Herodotus pise, kterak do more brought back to the Jaconians, byv uvrzen, delfin ryba jej making music while riding on hudouclho na hfbet vzala, a k the back of a dolphin),2 it is bfehu Jaconiam pfinesla. Tento certain that after seeing these smysl jest o vynalezeni muziky different examples (the reasons Josquin mentions ten mythological figures in this brief dedication: Vulcan; Orpheus; Apollo; the Muses, Euterpe (music), Terpsichore (dance), and Calliope (poetry); Linus, who was struck and killed with the lyre upon reproaching his pupil, Hercules; Amphion, who built the walls of Thebes by moving rocks with his playing of the lyre; Dirce, who was killed by Amphion; Arion, the musician at Periander's court who was robbed and thrown overboard by seamen. The account of Arion appears in the History (c. 449 B.C.) of Herodotus of Halicarnassus. A Latin version of the History, translated from Greek, circulated as early as 1450 (The History of Herodotus, trans. by George Rawlinson, p.ix). Many of the other figures mentioned above are found in the works of Virgil. 205 pohanskÿch pîsaïûv, vsak jistsi for which were given), [one can svëdectvî, kdo nejprv zpîvani a conclude that music] was raised hudby vymyslil, v Zâkonë starém with effort and by a curious marne. I byl jest (prÿ) Tubal manner. These accounts about otec tëch, ktefiz hudou na [A3] the discoveries of music are housle a na varhany, Genesin v. the interpretations of pagan IV. A tak podle Pisma svatého writers. We have a truer prvni vynâlezce jest muziky testimony in the Old Testament, Tubal, po nëmzto jeho potomci however, as to who first vzdy vie a vie v ni se invented singing and obirajice ji rozsirovali, jakoz [instrumental] music: Tubal , citâme o onom svatém proroku was the father of those who Bozim krâli Davidovi, kterak made music on the fiddle and jsa mlad v muzice své mêl pipes (see Genesis 4 ) . ^ And veliké kochâni a potom, kdyz thus, according to the Holy krâlovstvi Izrahelské dosedl, Scriptures, the (first) rozlicné nâstroje hudebné k discoverer of music was Tubal, chrâmu zdëlal, zpëvaky v kûrich after whom his descendants, svÿch zridil pro zâdnou jinou occupying themselves more and pficinu, nez aby tudy cest a more [with music], disseminated chvâla Bozi se rozsifovala, it. We can [also] read about odkudz potom kazdého casu a the holy prophet of God, King vëku témër pri aluzbë Bozi David [in the Holy Scriptures]. muziky byl jest obycej uzivati, While a youth, [David] greatly az jako o jiné vëci v m a most enjoyed music and, when he was jest obracena. later fitted with the kingship of Israel, played diverse musical instruments in the temple and directed the singers in his choirs. In this manner, he further disseminated the honor and praise of the Lord. From these [beginnings], throughout every time and age, it has been usual to use music in God's service until, as with other things, it was altered due to vanity. Tohoto pak vëku jiz se But already by our time, some nëkteri cim dal tim vice na to (such as Guido, Boethius, vysnazovali, aby jiste poradky Augustine, and others) had a regule muziky vyhledali, jako assembled the art [of music] by byl Guidius, Boetius, a great effort, had summarized Augustinus a jini, kteriz umëni it for an easier comprehension toto s praci velikou v summu and knowing, and had striven ^"Jubal" is identified as the "father of music" at Genesis 4:21 in the Vulgate; the name "Tubal" appears at Genesis 10:2. 206 jednu pro snadsx chopnost more and more to see the true uvedli a jinyrn temuz poradku se order and rules of music, and uciti radili. Protoz i nynêjsî they taught the order [of mlâdez misto mnohych marnosti, music] to others. Therefore, V nichz oplÿvâ, se vsi pilnosti the young [are now able] to pri nejmensim aspon tomuto learn diligently a little umëni muziky uciti by se mêla, something about the art of neb znâmé jsou uzitky jeji music instead of abounding in mnohe, kterez netoliko pri their many vanities. The many tëlesnÿch, ale i poboznych [A3v] uses [of music] are known, and vëcech spatruji se, jako kdyz seen not only in carnal but clovëk V pricinach svych also in pious matters. When a rozlicnÿch, bud' v praci, v man sings for his different nebezpecenstvi, v zamutku reasons, whether at work, in prozpëvuje, tehdy oblastniho danger, or in grief, a specific potëseni nabÿvâ. 0 Saulovi téz elation can be brought about. citâme, kdyz od d'âbla poseden We can also read about Saul [in byl, vsak Davida svatého slyse the Holy Scriptures] who, hudeni poukrotil se; nebo although possessed by the muzika smutek zahani, veseli Devil, was likewise tamed by prinasi, hnëv kroti, radost the music-making of the holy zbuzuje, mysi lidskou bud' k David [as the wild beasts were boji neb ku pokoji ponouka a tamed by Orpheus]. For music vzdycky, kdyz k dobremu uzivana dispels grief, brings back bÿvâ, chvâly jest hodnâ. Tou merriment, tames anger, excites pricinov tehdy ti, kteriz one to joy, and instigates milost a chut k ni maji, ji either war or peace in the umëti latinského jazyku human mind. And everything, neznajice zadaji, snadsi when it is used for goodness, pristup aby k uceni mëli, is fitting of praise. This, zvlâstë, kdyz i v novë vydaném then, is the reason for this kancionâlu mnohé a neznâmé [handbook]: it is for those nachâzeji se mélodie, jichzto who have a love and a thirst muziky neumëjicimu snadnë [for music], desiring to know trefiti nemozné, a mistra k about it yet not knowing the kazdé pisni hledati tesklivé by Latin language, so that they bylo. Protoz summovnë jsem may have an easier access to touz muziku jazykem ceskÿm the learning (particularly when sepsal a na svëtlo vydati in the newly-published uminil, aby i takovi, jesto, od hymnbook many unfamiliar koho by se ucili, nemaji, vsak melodies are f o u n d , 4 and these pomScku z této zprâvy nejakou would be impossible to decipher sobë vezmouce a pilnost easily for one who does not prilozice mohli spolu s jinÿmi know music, and it would be zpivati a Pana Boha svého tiresome to look for a master chvâliti. A ponëvadz dobrou of each song). Therefore, I This is a reference to the Samotulsky kancional, published just five months prior to the printing of Josquin's Muzika. 207 vêdomost o slavné pamêti Fânu, bave written this compendium of Panu Otci vasich milosti maje, music in the Czech language and kterak on muzîkus a kantor [A4] mean to publish it for the vÿbornÿ byl, téz i o vasîch enlightenment of those who have milostech, ze Fana Otce vasîch no [teacher] to learn from so milosti V torn nésledovati a that, being aided by these muziky milovnici bÿti récite, instructions, these [beginners] mém, protoz tuto mou vlastni may recall and apply these praci jakzto panûm ke mnë [instructions] diligently, and laskavë priznivym ku poctivosti may sing together with others, a na pamétku jména vasich and praise the Lord their God. milosti pripisuji, dedikuji a Because you have in mind a oddévém, cele dovërnosti jsa, good knowledge of the ze ji ode mne vdëcne a laskavë illustrious Lord, the loving prijiti, a mÿmi milostivÿmi Lord, your Father, and how He pény bÿti récite. Fan Bûh pak was a musician and choice vsemohouci, ten rac vasim cantor, and also because of milostem dlouhé a st'astné your love for Him, follow the panovéni zde i potom déti. loving Lord, your Father, and Datura V Frostëjovë IX. den be a lover of music. mësice llstopadu. Léta 1561. Therefore, I give you this, my own work, which I lovingly dedicate to the memory of your names, lords graciously and genuinely disposed toward me, dedicated, devoted, and completely faithful. This [handbook] is given gratefully and graciously to you, my loving lords. May the Lord God Almighty give you love and long, fortunate reigns here and hereafter. Dated in Frostëjov, the ninth day of the month of November, in the year 1561. Vasich milosti vzdycky Ever submissive to your love. povolny. Johannes Josquinus Johannes Josquinus 208 EPIGRAMMA. AD LECTOREM MÜSICAE [A4v] EPIGRAM TO THE STUDIOUS STUDIOSUM READER OF MUSIC Qui cupis ut referas modulandi You who wish to be very dragmata paucis, * Hune fruitful at singing, wear out rapida librum, contere quaeso this book with a rapid hand, manu. I beg you. Est parvus fateor, parvis quia It is small, I confess, because scriptus, ad unguem, * Crede it is written for the small mihi, Momo iudice, tersus [uneducated], but, believe adest. me, in Momus's judgment,5 it is terse to a hair. Ille viam stemit, reliques This [handbook] extends the pede lector, adiré, * Possis way; with an unobstructed inoffenso, fac lege, pelle foot, you, the reader, will moram. be able to approach the rest. Come; read. Banish delay. The mythological god of laughter, ridicule, and censure. 209 [A5] [TO THE READER] Kazdÿ, kdoz by zâdost i chut' Whoever has a desire and a k muzice mël, ji se uciti thirst for music and wishes to strojil a chtël, vëdëti ma: ze harness its teachings has to jakoz jinâ vsecka umëni poradek know that, as all of the other svûj pro snadsi jim srozumëni arts have their order for an maji, tak i toto z sedmera easier understanding, so too, jedno umëni (ackoli v as one of the seven, this art latinském, nëmeckém, ano i (although whatever was seen as ceckém jazyku hcjnë a dosti good and pleasing has been siroce zpûsoby rozlicnÿmi, tak amply and fairly jakz se kdy kterému vydavateli comprehensively written about libilo i za dobré vidëlo, and published in diverse napsano jest) oblastni své manners, in Latin and German, regule a zprâvy ma. Kterézto as well as in the Czech aby kazdému prostému a jemu se language), has its own specific uciti pocinaj icimu pochopnëjsi rules and instructions. These i snadsi bylo, v porâdek jsem [rules] are [written here] so je tento uvésti a nasim ceskÿm that it will be very easy and jazykem vypsati uminil, comprehensible for those zpûsobem timto: novices just beginning to leam [about music]. Writing in our Czech language, I mean to bring these [rules] into order in this manner: 1. hlasich 1. vocables 2. klicich 2. keys [pitches and clefs] 3. notach 3. notes [shapes and values] 4. mutaci 4. mutation 5. transposici 5. transposition 6. karaktefich 6. characters [various signs] 7. solmizovani 7. solmization 8. tonich 8. tones 9. regimentu 9. regiment [polyphony] 10. akcentu 10. accent [text-setting] Tyto kusy porad psane dobfe It is very necessary to znati a jednomu kazdému ne svém [A5v] comprehend these points in the mistë tim pofâdkem ne od order written, to learn each prostfedku a konce, aie s one in its place according to pocâtku se jim uce, vlastnë this order (not from the middle porozumëti velmi jest potrebi, or end, but from the neb na torn, aby to vse v sebe beginning), and to understand slozené mël, nejvice zâlezi, the particulars [of each], for jinâc prâce kazdého daremni a drawing everything together bez uzitku byla by. Vëdomé depends heavily on this. jest zajisté, ze bez hlasûv Otherwise, the work of each nijakz zpivâno bÿti nemûz. [item] would be fruitless and Protoz nejprve slusi hlasy a without use. Surely it is 210 jich vlastnosti znati, jimzto known that without the vocables kazdy notovany zpëv nothing can be sung. srozumitedlne j a k : ^ pak koli Therefore, it is a proper start zpûsobem, bud' textem, to know the vocables and their solmizovanim neb instrumenty particulars, since, pronasin bÿvâ. Tomu understandably, every notated vyrozumeje, pristupiz k zebriku composition is in some manner, klicuv jako k nëjakému whether by text, by pravidlu, v nichz rozmnozeni solmization, or by an poctu tychz hlasû na horu i instrument, initiated by these dolu stupujiclch najdes, a tu [vocables]. Understanding opët velmi divné mistrovstvi v this, you may then enter into vynalezeni uhlédâs, odkudz the discussion about the ladder skrze në k kazdému notovâni of keys, on which there is a pristup miti muzes. multitude of these vocables, stepping upward and downward. Here again you will see a very masterful perfection and invention, and through these [clefs] you will be able to unlock every notation. Dale mali jaky zpëv kantoru Further, if even a small zpivati chtëjicimu vypsan bÿti, composition is to be written oblastniho nëco k tomu out for the cantor wishing to vynalezti bylo potrebi; nebo by sing it, something specific and ty nejvÿbornëji hlasy znal, je appropriate is necessary. For vysloviti prâvë umël, k tomu i even if he were to know the pristup, jakÿm zpûsobem se choicest vocables, their zacinâ pisen, znal, a not by correct expression, and how to nebylo, nie jiného nezpravis, begin the song properly, nez jakoby s dobfe nabrousenou without notes there would be no sekerou drva sekati chtëje na .instructions, and he would be luka neb na nâkou plan pfisel. as the one who, wanting to chop I protoz jsou noty v rozdilich down a tree with a well- svÿch nalezeny, aby kazdÿ, kdo [A6] sharpened ax, entered a meadow klice a hlasy znâ, mohl podlé or a bare plain. Notes, nich jako podlé nakÿch liter therefore, are found in their vselikÿ zpëv vycisti. A ze differences so that everyone notâm obycej jest vejse i nize who knows the clefs and the nad hlasy jiz oznâmené vocables can, according to them stupovati, potrebi jest k tomu as according to the alphabet jiného kusu, kterÿz mutaci [when reading the language], slove, jinâc opët mejlka read the various compositions. nastane, ty umëje hlasy noty And since it is usual for the chtël by zpivati a tobë se nâkÿ notes to step above or below vysoko znâsejici neb nizko the indicated [hexachords of sstupujici zpëv nahodë, svedes the] vocables, it is necessary jakoby stoje na stole makovice to take up another point, dosâhal; touz tehdy pricinou called mutation. This is so jest uzitecnâ i pri té vëci that, when coming to those 211 zprâva. Casto se i to prihâzi, notes or vocables that ze pro nemîrné zpëvu mutovâni i accidently exceed [the klicové se promënujî a jinâc hexachord] by stepping higher pfekiâdajî, coz transposici or lower, one can know how to slove, nacez kantor toho reach these [notes] as if neznajici prijda umlkne a se [reaching] for a crumpet by velmi prudce rozbêhna po jednou standing on a stool. For this sedne; takz tehdy toho pro reason, instruction in this uvarovâni i to znâti slusi. matter is [also] useful. And it often comes about that, because of the restrained mutation of a composition, the clef is transformed, or transferred to another [line], which [process] is called transposition. The cantor who does not know this will either become silent or proceed very discordantly in the original position. Of this, then, it is proper to know and be aware. Jestit' i tento zpûsob There is also a manner of muziky, ze v spëvîch composition (called figuralis znamenitych (jenz latinë in Latin) in music in which figuraies slovou) divnâ a curious and diverse signs are rozlicnâ nachâzeji se znameni, found; [signs] such as (^ , jako jsou: ((: , C 3 , TT , C3, and TT . if one were to kterâz jestliby se kdy stray upon these in [singing] neznajicimu jich v zpivâni a composition of trium or trium neb quatuor nahodila, quatuor [voces] (when [singing] jini znajice je kde ceho cas, with others who knew how to bud' repetovâni po smlceni preserve the time, repetition, takby se zachovali a onen o tom or silence), and if one were nevëda jednostejnë svou povede, not familiar with the tak ze naposledy krkavcem mezi uniformity [of the composition] slavicny zûstati musi. Tëmto and lacked knowledge of these jiz napfed psanÿm kusom kdyz [A6v] [signs], he would eventually be prâvë porozumis, vezmi pred ostracized like a crow among sebe a uved' v jedno, cehoz si the nightingales. Therefore, pomâlu nabyl, klici, mutivânim when you have correctly se zpravuje hlasy onëmi (coz understood the points written vlastnë solmizovâni slove) about, recall the foregoing vyslovuj noty, a tak z tëchto [points], in which you will libych hlasûv utësenÿ bude progressively be instructed lahodného zpivâni zvuk. Vëci (keys, mutations, vocables, tëchto budesli prâvë povëdom, rests, and their particulars) jiz sâm kazdou notu (zvlâstë and say the notes (which chorâl) podle zprâvy této [process] is called snadnë trefis a v tom zvykaje solmization). And thus, from sâm se utvrdis. those pleasing vocables, there 212 will be the singing of comforting and delicious sounds. If you are correctly familiar with these things, then you can easily come upon each note (particularly in the choral [plainsong singing]) according to the instructions [given below] and, having practiced [using] these, you will be confident. Zûstâvâ jestë toto tré, ne There are still three tak k zpivâni prostému jako remaining things that are tëm, kteriz dokonall bÿti useful, not so much to the chtëj1 zpëvâcl, uzltecné: simple singer, but to the one who wants to become an accomplished singer: 1. Tony, jakého kterÿ zpëv 1. The tone, which is [used] to pfirozenl jest, mëkkÿll cl know whether the conq>osition is ostrÿ, lahodnÿ neb pflsnÿ natural, soft, or sharp, and znâti. whether it is pleasing or severe. 2. Akcenty, kterak zfek a 2. The accent [In text- syllaba kazdâ podlé vlastnosti setting] , which is [used to smysla notou mâ vyslovena bÿti. know] the articulation of each syllable according to the particular sense that is to be expressed by the note. 3. Regiment, jak se kterÿ bias 3. The regiment [in polyphony], a na kterém mlstë zaklâdâ, k which Is [used to know] how tomu, kdyz quatuor neb trium each voice is based [on zpivati chces, jak kterÿ jeden another], in which place, and od druhého hlasu brâti mâs. how to take one voice from another when you wish to sing in trium or quatuor [voces]. 0 tëchto jiz krâtce sepsanÿch As I have made known by this a summovnë jako pred oci brief commentary and summary, naskycenÿch vëcech, cehoz sâm my sincere intent is to write povëdom jsa, upflménu kazdého about this lovely art for each toho umëni mllovnlku co [person] in the entire world. nejsvëtlejl vypsati chcl. Now to begin: Nejprv: 213 [A7] [CHAPTER I] 0 HLASlCH A VLASTNOSTECH JICH ABOUT VOCABLES AND THEIR PARTICULARS To slovicko hlas, nemînî se The term voice [vocable] does tuto prirozeny lidsky, kteryz not mean the natural human one vsickni krome nëmÿch maji, ale that all except the mutes jednoho kazdého stepnê, neboli possess, but an individual mizického zebriku sprysle, [part] of the scale (springing vlastni vocabulum a jmeno, up from the musical ladder) or kterézto hlasy sta?i muzikové a a particular vowel, i.e., a, £, zpëvûv skladatelé podle liter i, £, or u, or a name [of an pëti, totiz a, e, i, o, u, individual part of the scale] vynalezle, a ze na pëti hlasich that was invented by our dosti k vysolmizovani zpëvu musical ancestors by adding prostého, samu sextu tak [consonant] letters to these." recenou toliko obsahuj iciho These five vocables were enough nebylo, pridali jsou literu k to solmizate a simple tomu prvni, a, to jest vrchni composition. But these la. I jiz jest dostatek takovy [vocables] did not include the zpëv sesti hlasy vyzpivati so-called sixth [vocable], and ucinën, jakoz i podlé nich so [the ancients] added to that (nëkteri pravi) svaty Jeronym first [group of five vowels] versik slozil, v nëmz se another £, which became la, and vlastni jména hûasûv, ano i this made the six vocables that prirozeni mélodie obsahuji, are sufficient to sing any cemuz z notovâni jeho composition. And further, porozumëti budes moci: according to some, St. Jerome wrote a verse that contains the particular names of these vocables. These [vocables] are contained in this natural melody, which you will be able to understand by this notation:7 The vowel £ is used for the vocable je is used for re, etc. ^In Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin (p. 118), Hostinsky remarks that this melody is taken from Guido of Arezzo. This melody, however, is simpler than the one found in the Epistola de ignoto cantu (Gerbert, Scriptures II, p. 4 5 ) . It is essentially the same as the tenor melody of the four-part setting of Ut queant laxis found in Rhau's Enchiridion utriusque musicae practicae (C3v) and Finck's Practica musica (Bl-Blv). 214 V T qurant Iaxis RElonarefi&ris, Mira gel^orum FAmuIi tuorum» SOLurpolluii LAb/j rcaium* Saaciclohanncf4 [A7v] VT-queatirlazis> R£ianare£bris> Mlngefioi ruitr FAosuU tuonim» SOLuepoUuri» LAbq KËS ± M : rcaoua, SanAe lobannes, Ted' je opët v svych fâdîch Here you have [the vocables] zejmena poznamenané mas: again, notated in their own categories : vrchni z nichzto se S jmenuji spodni higher those that are / lower Na tëchto sesti hlasich The compositions of every kazdého nârodu zpëvové nation depend on and can be zâlezeji, tëmi vyzpivani bÿti sung by means of these six 215 mohou; jsou pak mezi nimi vocables. There are, among nëkteri ostïi, jako la, mi, these vocables, however, some prirozeni, sol, re, mekci, fa that are sharp, such as ^ and ut; kteryzto rozdil nastroji mi, some that are natural, hudebnimi, jakoz se to samo [A8] Tsuch as] sol and re, and some ukazuje, jest vynalezen, a that are soft, [such as] fa and najvice tehdaz, kdyz ozdobne a ut, and these distinctions are lahodnë kdo zpivati chce, demonstrated by musical uzivan bÿvâ. Protoz se jim s instruments [as well as by pilnosti uc, jednoho kazdého singers], being appropriately vlastnost dobre znej, aby ut za found and most often used when ut, la za la mël, jim jinych one wishes to sing decoratively jmen nedaval, nezpretvarel, ani and delightfully. Therefore, zvuku pravého odjimal, ale learn these [distinctions] with jmenuje jiz jmeno i vlastni diligence and comprehend the hlasu zvuk vyrekl, cemuz aby se particular of each, recognizing dobfe nauciti mohl, tento ut as and ^ as fa. Avoid priklad mëj: giving them other names or reorganizing or departing from the proper sound; [instead] name that name and pronounce that sound particular for each vocable. In order to be able to l e a m this well, take these as examples: i j n : v t tciol h JbLk la. iol 6 mi re vt» I * vt rc mi k mi & fbl b la foi la mi 6 mire vt. a i l a ; a c t vt re mi re mi 6. mi 6, & ibi la laToIkibl ±x±si^s:|r: A m i Ami re mi rc vU 216 Dosti pak na tom, aby jeden [A8v] It is not enough to be able hlas po druhém ustavicnë to sing one vocable after the zpival, neni; neb pisni other in consecutive order, for takovjfch, V nichz by hlasové one will not [always] find tim porâdkem nahoru a dolu sli, songs in which the vocables nenajdes. Aie jiz pravému proceed upward and downward in stupovâni a nëkdy hlasem près this manner. You must also jiné dva, tri i ctyri spadovâni l e a m the correct stepping of podlé rozdilûv tëchto, jimz each vocable as it descends latinici modus neb intervalla through another two, three, or rikaji, musis se uciti. four [consecutive vocables], according to the difference that the Latins call the modus or intervalla. 1. Unitonus, kdyz not nëkolik 1. The unitonus [occurs] when bud' na linë neb na spacium several notes share either [the pospolu jest; same] line or space: > 3 X 3 VC ml fa fo i b . 2. Tonus vel secunda, kdyz nota 2. The tonus (vel secunda) jedna druhou nasleduje, a za ni [occurs] when one note follows vejs neb nize stupuje, k cemuz another, but steps above or podobny priklad nahofe jest: below [that note]. This is an example similar [in pedagogical purpose] to the [example presented] above:8 Ü: VC rc mi fa fol la la fol fa mi rc vc. Here, Josquin uses terms, which are usually specific, in a generic manner. The terms "tonus," "ditonus," and "tonus diapente" refer specifically to the major species of the second, third, and sixth; Josquin applies these terms to the minor species of these intervals as well. The term "diapente" refers to the perfect fifth; Josquin uses the term for the diminished fifth as well. 217 3. Ditonus vel tertia, kdyz 3. The ditonus (vel tertia) nota jedna za druhou linu neb [occurs] when one note follows spacium pfeskakujic jde: another, jumping to the [next] line or space: ± 3l [B1] vcnufol Eire & la fa re vt» 4. Diatessaron sive quarta, 4. The diatessaron (sive kdyz nota pres jiné ctyry quarta) [occurs] when one note stupuje: moves to another through four: L i VC £a re loi mi ia la mi fol re£i vc. 5. Diapente vel quinta,, kdyz 5. The diapente (vel quinta) nota pfes jinych pet stupuje: [occurs] when one note moves to another through five: fi— — I—»— m- fc # f ^ A t a * V 1 -4--- ^ VCTol re la mimi £i ÊU 6. Tonus diapente aut sexta, 6. The tonus diapente (aut pres sest nota kdyz stupuje: sexta) [occurs] when one note moves through six: 1] * . rf— n .4" • "W 218 7. Diapason octava, kdyz près [Biv] 7. The diapason (octava) jinÿch osm nota stupuje: [occurs] when one note moves to another through eight: vtibl vc6 reibl vc. I Naleza se jich i nad tyto More of these [intervals] are poznamenany proportiones vice, found [in music], and they are jako 10. 12. 15. kterez vie k known as proportiones, such as komponovani nez k zpivâni the tenth, the twelfth, and the nalezeji, ty na tëchto dosti fifteenth; these, however, are maje, jim se téz dobre vyuce, found more in [instrumental] toliko pocâtek vëda, kazdou works than in [vocal] prostou pisen mûzes sâm compositions. Having enough trefiti. -A ten bude prvni with these [intervals above] ouzitek uceni tveho. and learning them well, you can, knowing this much as a beginning, decipher every simple song yourself. This [example] will be the first [occasion] to use your learning. Priklad: Example : U- 4-t 219 Zvyknouti tomu aby lepe mohl, In order to train and better k cviceni hlasûv tento canon accustom yourself to the mëj, kteryz na ctyry hlasy vocables, take this canon, zpîvân bÿti mûze; which can be sung in four voices.9 I. Ccnar. ■vt X» Z e M r * ■« [B2] vc u CetMr» s ± vc 4» Ztitùr» Jg' v c 9 This example is based on a five-voice canon in Listenius's Musica (A8v). Josquin presents this canon in its original form in his discussion of the signum congruentiae and the fermata on E6 . 220 Opët jinÿ, sesti hlasûv Here is another example, rozdil V sobë zdrzujici holding in itself the six priklad; different vocables : 10 vc Ce»dr. iT.-g & vt 2349* [B2v] VP Jiz o prvnim kusu necht' jest Let this be enough about the za dosti. first point. [CHAPTER II] I KLiClCH A POÈÂDNÉM JICH ABOUT KEYS AND THE ORDER u ZIv An I IN WHICH THEY ARE USED Velmi uzitecne vynalezeni These [keys] were a very jest toto, bez nëhoz nikoli useful discovery, without which zâdnâ nota dobfe zacatâ, ani no notes could ever be started vyzpivana bÿti nemûze. Neb well, or sung. The keys are klicové jsou jisti a prâvë the true and correct instrument ukazujici kazdÿ zpëv for demonstrating every nâstrojové; kdoz by se tëmi composition. Whoever would not nezpravoval, jich neznal, ten be instructed in these cannot potom zâdného pravého umëni, have any correct art, either in bud' V mutaci, v solmizovani mutation or in solmization, but miti nemûze, ale jako slepÿ v must wander like the blind in a 10This example is taken from Listenius's Musica (Biv), but with changes in the clefs used by Listenius (soprano, tenor, and bass). 221 neznâmém sobë mlstë leckams place without signs. The old blouditi musl. Ackoli stari cantors (some of whom are found kantor! (coz se podnes nachâzl) even today), however, notated bez kllcüv notovali, not vice without clefs, using notes more pro pamët zpëvu nez jinÿm pro [as a device] to remember the snadnost uzivajice. Vsak jaké composition than for the ease to zpivâni byvalo, rozumëti of others [who wished to l e a m kazdy mûze, neb zadnÿ jiny té that composition]. No one pisnë neznajici toho bez else, however, was able to klicûv notovâni trefiti jest understand that composition. mohl. My opustice jejich zlÿ a We, leaving this old, wrongful stary zvyk, dobrÿch zpëvâkû a [B3] practice, cling to a device muziku, toho, co onl za that good singers and musicians prostfedek vynalezli, find appropriate and useful. uzivajice, se pridrzme. Timto dvojim zpûsobem klicové The keys are presented by predklâdâni bÿvaji; i. na these two manners: first, on a tabuli, il. na ruce. table; second, on a hand. Scala muziky: The Musical Scale: vrchni phigher 46^ prostredni Klicové \ m ^The keys are na tré redivided into se dëli three spodni s flower ■WfV- 222 [B3v] T m Vsech klîcûv poradek tento [B4] The order of the keys, of [jest], jichzto v poctu dvaceti which there are twenty in mâs; rozdllni pak jsou od sebe number, is [to be known by 1. mistem, 2. figurou, these characteristics]: first, 3. vlastnosti. 1. Mistem, ze by place; second, by figure; nëkteri vrchni, prostredni, third, by particular. First, spodni se jmenuji. 2. Figurou, [these keys can be known] by ze versalni, malou, dvojitou place, in that some are named literou znamenani bÿvaji. higher, some middle, and some 3. Vlastnosti, ze nëkteri tëzce lower. Second, [these keys can spadujici, tako A re, b mi, be known] by figure, in that jini finalni, jako G, F, E, D, they are notated by capital, slovu, téz nëkteri vice v sobë small, and double letters. hlasûv nad jiné zavirajî. Toto Third, [these keys can be mistrovské klicuv sporâdâni a v known] by particular, in that kratickost tak snadnou uvedeni some are low, like A re and jiz muzes poznati, jak od A b mi [which are specific 223 lltery poena az do G jedno s designations], or are like G, druhym se spojujice slusne jde, F, £, and D, which are called k tomu jestli by jaka potreba the finals. Further, [you must vice klicûv pridat'i nastala, know] that some [of the keys] mista dosti zûstâvâ, toliko aby are comprised of more vocables oktavy jedny k druhym rovnal, than others. You can easily jim hlasy ty, kteriz prilezeji, know this brief and masterful dâval; vsak toho ne tak v ordering of the keys from the zpivâni mnoho jako pfi hudbâch previous [table], beginning se uzivâ. Kdoz by pak tuto from the letter A up to G, prâci dobrou jinâc pïedëlâvati properly combining one with the chtëje rusil, netoliko daremnâ, other. If, for some necessity, aie i vsetecnâ byla by smëlost. more keys must be added, enough Protoz ty, kdo muziku umëti places remain so that the chces, klicûm tëmto z pamëti octaves will equal one another. nahoru i dolûv stupovati se And coming to these [notes], dobre uc, tak, kdyby give them the appropriate solmizovati chtël, beze vseho vocables. This [extension] is pleteni a mÿleni je dobfe not used as much in [vocal] vycisti aby mohl, o cem na composition as it is in mistë svém sifeji ukâzâno bude. instrumental [works]. If someone desired to reconstruct this good work, wishing to interfere with it, the fruitlessness would not be so much from his quest as from stupidity. Therefore, you who wish to know music, memorize the upward and downward stepping of the keys so that, if you want to solmizate, you will be able to read these [keys] well without confusion or miscalculation. There will be a more comprehensive demonstration of this in another place. Obycej jest téz pfi znamenâni [B4v] In notating the keys, the klicûv, jich pofâd, jak v order of which you see on the zebfiku vidis, v zâdném ladder, it is also usual to notovâni neklâsti, neb to place them with a sign. Not to neslusné a ohyzdné jest, jako i do this would be improper and pfi orthografii kdyby pfi kazdé offensive. It would be as if, litefe i jeji hlahol kladen in orthography, the letter of byl, ale toliko samy pfedni each pitch were considered but litery znamenâny i vycteny only the foremost letter bÿvaji; takz i pfi klicich notated and read. Thus it is jest, protoz ti, jimiz toliko with the keys, because those by zpëvznamenâ se klicové, latinë which so many compositions are claves signandae slovou: made known are the clefs, which 224 in Latin are called the claves signandae; t U - •dd la (61- —fffijl reut -€4- ;(bl &UC — Ffeur- \ V zpëvu prostern' V zpëvu bëhavém In simple compositions In roving compositions Klicové tito dvojim zpûsobem The clefs are shown in two znamenani bÿvaji: 1. prostë, manners: first, those that you jakoz V râdku prvnim vidis, a [B5] see in the first column are ti toliko V notovâni prostëm, considered in simple notations jenz latinë choralis slove, (which are called choralis in kladou se; 2. neprosté, to v Latin); second, those in the notovâni bëhavém a mnohotvâmëm second column are considered in kladeni bÿvaji, kterëz v râdku roving and multiform notations drukém mâs. (which are called complex). Tëchto pak klicûv pët v poctu The clefs are five in number. jest, ale ne vsech se uzivâ, Not all are used, however, only jediné trech nejvice, G pri three at most: G with the discantu, C pri tenoru a altu, discant, £ with the tenor and F pri bassu a vagantu, ostatni alto, and F with the bass and dva, totiz dd a r ne casto v vagans. Nowadays, you will nynëjsich najdes, vsak ty na seldom see the remaining two, jednom predstaveném dosti maje i.e., ^ and T^. But, having klici, snadnë kazdou pisen enough of the clefs at this pociti mûzes, cemuz, kdyz o presentation, you can easily solmizovâni psâti budu, begin every song. You will be svëtleji porozumis. A tak o even more enlightened about klicich a vlastnostech jich this when I write about ted' poznamenané mâs. solmization. Thus, you have knowledge of the keys and their particulars. 225 [CHAPTER III] 0 ZPÛSOBU A FORMÉ NOT ABOUT THE MANNER AND FORM OF THE NOTES A jakoz bez znâmostl liter Just as no word can be zâdné slovo napsâno ani vycteno written or read without byti nemûze, tak i zâdna pisen knowledge of the letters, so neb melodia bez not znamenâna also, no song or melody can be ani vyzpivâna bÿto by nemohla. notated or sung without notes. Protoz nâramnâ ostrost vtipu Therefore, the enormous lidského, ano i uzitek sharpness of human intelligence nevymluvnÿ jak pri vynalezeni is seen in the inexpressible liter, tak i tëchto not se [B5v] usefulness and the discovery of spatruje. Kazdÿ zajisté these letters and notes. rozumnÿ dobfe vi a zna, ze Truly, every understanding obzvlâstni sluzba Bohu, casem i [person] comprehends that a potëseni a obveseleni ëlovëku z particular service to the Lord zpivâni pochodi. Neb i pro tu is, at times, both elating and pficinu pisnë dobré sklâdâny a cheering, and that this k nim noty dëlâny byly, kteréz [service] may bring a man to lidé pobozni pfi Bozich sing. For this reason, songs sluzbâch dobrÿm oumyslem jich [texts] were well composed and vie a vie pridëlâvajice jsou notes made for these, which are zpivali. Takovÿch tehdy pisni used over and over with good bez znameni a tëchto not, intent by pious people singing ponëvadz zpëvâci stafî zemfeli, in the Lord's service. But kdo by z nynëjsich uzivati since the old singers have mohl? Aie je zpivati chtëje died, who today can use those musil by ihned jiné mélodie [old songs] that are without dëlati a vymÿsleti, a tak signs and notes? Those wanting kazdého vëku jiné a jiné noty k to sing [the old song-texts] starÿm textûm (coz velmi would now have to make or nepofâdné jest) dëlâny byly, z invent another melody. Thus, cehoz nejednostejnost témëf in each age, [new] notes would jinâk a jinâk od kazdého again and again be supplied for pochâzejicî, misto utëseného a the old texts (which is very lahodného skaredé i ohyzdné, disorderly). From this, jako od Zidûv slÿchâvâme, bylo artificiality and by zpivâni. Tou tehdy pficinou non-uniformity would come from velmi potîebné jsou tëm, ktefiz almost everyone, and the zpivati chtëji, noty proto, 1. singing, instead of being ze novÿch nezvyklÿch melodii comforting and delightful, delati netfeba, 2. starodâvni would be coarse and offensive prvé dëlané, jim mâlo (like we hear from the Jews). porozumëjice, trefi, 3. s It is for these reasons, then, jinÿmi zpivajicimi se srovnaji, that notes are very necessary 4. kazdâ pisen pro potomky for one who wishes to sing: kteréhokoli vëku na budouci first, so that it is not pamët od skladatelû tëmi necessary to make new, znamenimi not vypsanâ a unfamiliar melodies [for the zanechâna bÿti mûze a ti, ktefi old texts]; second, [because] 226 je znajl, tejz zpêv trefiti our ancestors first made these mohou. [melodies], hitting upon them with little understanding [of notation]; third, so that singers can be comparable with other [singers]; fourth, [so that] every song can be written and left behind for the descendants in whatever future age, the composer's intent made known by these notes. Then, those who know these [notes] will be able to reconstruct the compositions. Nejednostejnou téz vahou [B6] Songs are sung with a pisnë, nëkde spësnë, poskocnë, non-uniform balance; sometimes podluznë se zpivaji. I takovi [they are] rapid, leaping, or zpûsobové notami poznamenani a enchanting. And such a manner vyzpivani bÿti mohou, coz can be known and sung by the latinë vallores notarum slove: notes, which in Latin are called the vallores notarum: Nejvëtsi 8 Maxima Dlouhé 4 Longa - - 3 ^zdrzujici v sobë taktû / Kratkâ 2 Brevis ❖ Kratsi 1 Semibrevis T Nejkratsi 2 Minima _ r Bëzné 4 Se [mi] minima ^zaviraji se v takt < T Bëznëjsi 8 Fusa r Nejbëznëjsi 16 Semifusa 227 Greatest - 3 . 8 Maxima Long 4 Longa y tacts held within A Short itself 2 Brevis Shorter 1 Semibrevis T Shortest 2 Minima 11 T Quick 4 Semiminima ^held within a tact T Quicker 8 Fusa r Quickest 16 Semifusa Pominouti toho neslusi, ze se It would be improper to fail casto punkt prosty k note pro to mention that sometimes a zadrzeni na tom mlstë male simple dot is written together pripisuje, kteryzto kazdé note with a note, [indicating that polovici toho coz v sobë sama the note is] to be held a vazl, pridâvâ, jakoz u prlkladu little at that place. This mas: [dot] adds to that note half of what it holds in itself [when standing alone]. Here you have an example: ^ ^Although Josquin and Listenius categorize the minima differently, this table appears to be taken from Listenius's Musica (D2v). 228 [B6v] vâzi jakoby takto stâly taktû steadfastly binding R O' tacts this many tacts Iu [contained] Aby tëmto vsechnem notâm So that you might pomâlu zvykati mohl, tyto porâd progressively become practiced psane priklady mëj: in all of these notes, take these written examples in order: were Jiny: Another: vt£i 229 Jinÿ: Another: Velmi se caste i ligatura, to [B7] Very often, one also jest vâzâni not, bud' v zpëvu encounters a ligature, which is prostém neb figuméra nachâzx, a binding of notes [found] coz nie jiného neni, toliko aby either in simple or in figured syllaba jedna pod dvë neb tri composition. This is nothing noty uvedena byla. Tyto pak other than when one syllable is ctyry noty obecnë vâzâny set under two or three notes. bÿvaji: nejvëtsi, dlouhâ, These four note [values] are krâtkâ a kratsi; ostatnich ctyr commonly bound: the greatest u dobrÿch muzikûv lec pro [maxima], the long [longa], the velkou hloupost zpëvâkûv short [brevis], and the shorter nenajdes. 0 torn zprâva tato [semibrevis]. You will not kraticka necht' jest. find the remaining four [notes bound as ligatures] among musicians, except for the great stupidity of the singer. About this, let the instruction be brief. Kazdâ nota kromë dlouhé Every note, except the long trojim obycejem se vize neb [longa], can usually be seen spojuje: 1. s pocâtku, 2. v combined in three ways: first, prostredku, 3. p?i konci. at the beginning; second, in Nejvëtsi takto: the middle; third, at the end. The greatest [maxima, can be seen combined] as follows: 230 Dlouhâ toliko s pocâtku a The long [longa] is hound at konce vâzâna byti mâ, takto: the beginning and at the end, as follows: Krâtkâ takto: [B7v] The short [brevis, is bound] as follows:12 Kratsi takto: The shorter [semibrevis, is bound] as follows: Jestit' jeste nad toto There are still more diverse rozlicnëjsi vâzâni, kteréhoz bindings, which I have omitted 12 Josquin presents the downward-slanting ligature without tail, !ZZ], although the resolution of only the final value of the figure is made known by this example. The resolution of the initial value is not given in any of Josquin's examples. This figure is usually transcribed as a longa-brevis if the ligature stands unattached to 231 krâtkosti setre pominul, a coz for the sake of brevity, and uzitecne bylo, poznamenal jsem; which, If they were useful, I vice chcesli tomu porozumëti, would have made known. If you dosti obsirnë v prvni ceské wish to understand more of Muzice o torn najdes. this, you will find that [it is] rather extensively [covered! in the first Czech Musica. Jiz pak o notach cernych, ac I will now mention the black mnozi muzikove v tom srovni notes. Many musicians are not nejsou, jedni v rovne druzi v in agreement about this, as mensi vaze je poklâdajice, some consider these to be equal dotknu. Ponëvadz prostÿm psâti [to the white] while others use jsem uminil, aniz toho mlcenim them as [worth] less. Since I pominouti chci, aie na ten cas mean to write this [handbook] V jakémby obyceji byly ukâzi. for the novices and do not wish 1, V prosâch a v prostém to omit this in silence, at notovéni uziva se jich obecnë a this appropriate point, I will V jedné vaze, neb v rovnosti demonstrate these [black vâhy, jakoz vidâme, kdyz v notes]. First, in prose with notovéni cernÿmi semibreves [B8] simple notations, they are zadné jiné bile neni; malÿ commonly used and bound as one rozdil jest od bilych not, nebo in equal balance [with the by i ten zpëv bilÿmi byl white], as when we see the notovén, jednostejné jest, notation of black semibreves toliko ze pfipadnost sama but no white [among them]. cernÿmi notovati notami obycej There is little difference ten uvedla. [here] from the use of white notes, for if this composition were to be notated with white notes, it would be one and the same. In this case, the black notes are usually understood to be notated with the same [value as the white notes]. (Cont.) other notes. When this ligature appears in a more complex group, it is transcribed as a brevis-brevis. 13 Although it appears that Josquin was personally acquainted with Blahoslav and used Blahoslav's Musica in the preparation of his own treatise, this is Josquin's only reference to Blahoslav's book. 232 Pfîklad: Example: Vcripumbonunr. A f* rç ve Tejz vers, ale bilÿmi: The same verse, but [written] with white [notes]: re v t Nachazi se téz mnohÿ zpëv One may also encounter samÿmi cernÿmi mnoho tvâmÿmi compositions that are notated notami znamenanÿ kterémuz pro with a great many black, rozdil od prvniho ze spësnëji multiform notes. This is zpivân bÿti ma hemiola rikaji, different from the preceding V nëmz netoliko samy •[type], and [these notes] are semibreves, ale i jiné kladeny sung more rapidly, and this is bÿvaji. called hemiola. Here, not only semibreves, but other [note values] are considered. 233 Toho prîklad tento jest: "0 An example of this [hemiola] Stvofiteli vs[emohûcî] is [found in the hymn] "0 Stvofiteli vsemohuci":14 t 1 II (C& [B8v] Jina hemiola: Another hemiola: v t ^4"o Stvofiteli vsemohiici" is found in the Samotulsky kanciondl at A4 ^^This is a tenor part taken from a three-voice example in Listenius's Musica (F7) 234 [Another Example;]^ ^ (K témuz) (These are together) ^enor* i vt 1 5 0 8 ^ n=s — — e g k P -K _ Druhy zpûsob jest dobïe This second manner is well- rozdîlnÿ od prvniho. Nebo kydz differentiated from the first. se cerné noty mezx bill kladou, When black notes are considered tehdy kazdâ takova c e m a toho, among the white ones, then coz plati, ctvrty dil every such black [note] loses potracuje, obecnë pak tyto a fourth of its value. ctyry noty cerné bÿvaji; Commonly, the four black notes longa, brevis, semibrevis, are the longa, the brevis, the minima. Ostatni, ponëvadz od [Cl] semibrevis, and the minima. prir'ozeni cerné jsou, tak The others, since they are zanechany bÿti museji. black by nature, must be excluded.^ ^ This example is taken from Listenius's Musica (F7v), but with a printing error in the last note of the bass. Here, the should be an F. ^^Josquin excludes the maxima from his discussion. In addition, it should be noted that the blackened minima looks like a semiminima. 235 m 0 * vazx jako neb takto =1 i I iJ [I rw^l 1 ( bound together * » or [having] i V w thus A i the tact I L U j I a 0 j* "oj c^j I mi toi There are two errors in the last column of this table; first, the brevis should have an augmentation dot; second, the lower of the two dotted minimae should be blackened. ^^There are no black minimae in this example, only regular semiminimae. 236 [CHAPTER IV] 0 MÜTACl, TOTlZ ABOUT MUTATION, i.e., THE PROMÊiîOVitol HLASOV TRANSFORMATION OF THE VOCABLES Za to mâm, ze tëmto napred [Civ] I know that everyone can psanym kusôm kazdÿ nêco understand something of those porozumëti a k muzice jako points written above for a blizsi pristup miti mûze. Vsak better access to music. But ponëvadz zpëvové vejse i nize since compositions step above sesti hlasûv stupuji, na torn and below the six vocables, jestë dosti neni, protoz této this is not enough. It is mutaci dobfe vyrozumëti, ji i necessary to comprehend these umëti velmi jest potrebi, z mutations and to memorize them, cehoz tepruv snadnost kazdou for only from this will come pisen vysolmizovati, potora i the ease in solmizating every zpivati prijde. [type of] song in composition. Jestit' pak mutaci pravé a There is a correct and vlastni jednoho hlasu v druhÿ particular mutation from one na horu neb dolûv prominovâni, vocable to another, transformed kterézto ne vsudy jakzby se upward or downward. This komu libilo a vidëlo, toliko v cannot occur anywhere that one samÿch dopustënÿch mistech byti pleases to see it, but only in mûze. Pricina toho jestit' those places in which it is tato, ze kazdÿ hlas (o nichz na allowed. The reason for this bore) obzvlâstni svou mâ is that every vocable (each of vlastnost, jiz jeden druhému which was discussed above) has tak vesmës a lecjaks its own particular, which it nepropûjcuje aniz dopousti; does not allow or loan to jinâc nelibÿ a ohyzdnÿ zpëv another [vocable] universally bude, kdo proti vlastnosti té or randomly. Otherwise, the cini, odkudz vzato jest u composition would be unpleasant muzikû prislovi o arabském and offensive. Whoever does pistci, kterÿ lahodnë velmi this [mutation] against the tëchto vëci nesetre za penize particular [of the vocable] piskâ, tak ze posluchac, aby will be looked upon among prestal, râd mu jiné tri pfidâ. musicians as the one in the Protoz zpûsob ten, jimzto proverb about the Arab flute- pfipadné hlasûv prominovâni player: he could whistle very bÿti mûze, ukâzân bude. deliciously on the flute for a coin, but he disregarded these things in order that the listener would gladly give him three [coins] to stop [playing]. Therefore, the manner by which the vocables are characteristically transformed will be demonstrated. 237 Obnoviti tuto nejprv, coz First, it is proper to review napred povedino, slusi, ze that which was stated above: hlasove na dve rozdelenx jedni the vocables are divided into vrchni druzi spodni slovou. two [groups], some being called Vrchni pro uzivani jich, kdyz [C2] higher, and some [being dolûv zpëv stupuje se jmenuji: called] lower. The upper are ti jsou la, sol, fa. Spodni so named because of their use, pak, kdyz nahoru: ti jsou mi, since [these are used] when the re, ut. Mistrovske tuto composition steps downward. vymysleni jich kazdÿ spatfiti These [vocables] are sol, mûze, jak polovice hlasûv, z and fa. The lower are [so nichz nikteri mekci, tvrdi named because these are used jsou, nëkteri zespod jini when the composition steps] nahofe, vse pro snadsi a upward. These [vocables] are vlastnëjsî jich prominovâni se mi, re, and Everyone can kladou, coz sam poznas. see the masterful invention of this: half of the vocables are soft, the others are hard,20 some [vocables] are lower, others higher, and all of this is considered for an easier and particular transformation, as you yourself will know. A prve nez tabuli hlasûv Before I present the tables prominovâni polozim, jestë tuto of the transformations of the velmi potfebnou zprâvu, podle vocables, I will first give out niz i scale snâze srozumëti these essential instructions mûzes o zpëvich dâm. Zpëv ze about the [types of] trûj jest, ode vsech muzikûv composition, which you will poklâdâ se: 1, naturalis, easily understand as the totiz pfirozenÿ; 2. bemollaris, [different types of] scales. totiz mëkkÿ; 3. beduralis, The [types of] composition that totiz tvrdÿ. Od nynëjsich all musicians consider are ctvrtÿ pridanÿ cantus fictus three: first, the naturalis, slove, kterÿzto smÿslenÿ i.e., the natural; second, the vyklâdâ se. Znameni pak bemollaris, i.e., the soft; jednoho kazdého zpëvu toto third, the beduralis, i.e., the jest. hard. Nowadays an additional fourth [type of composition] is considered, which is called the cantus fictus. The signs of each of these individual [types of] composition are as follows. Naturalis takto znej: kdyz The naturalis is known by se na C spodnim neb vrchnim ut. being named on the lower or 20 On A7v-A8 of the Muzika, Josquin divides the vocables into three groups: sharp, natural, and soft. 238 na F fa, na A la jmenuje, higher C ut [and progressing] zâdného téz b fa be mi through F fa to A la. No nedosahuje, ale pfi samy sexte b fa b mi is reached, and one zûstâva. remains with these six [notes]. Bemollaris jest, kdyz se na The bemollaris is [known] F ut, na b fa, na e la [d la] when one takes F ut through here, snadnë ten znati po klici b fa to D la. You can easily a b napfed postavenem mûzes. know this [type of composition] from the clef and the b situated in front [as a signature]. Beduralis, toho se pocatek na The beduralis is named by G ut, na c fa, na e la jmenuje, beginning on G ut [and zâdného b neni a na zpiva se progressing] through C fa to mi. E la. There is no and on ^ is sung mi. Cantus fictus, tern nedavno [C2v] The cantus fictus is shown by pro okrâsu obzvlâstni jest the sign b. [This type of vymyslen, jehoz zpûsob proti composition] was invented vlastnosti a prirozeni klicûv rather recently for the purpose timto znamenim b poznân bÿvâ. of decoration, and has a particular and a nature opposed to the keys. 0 tëchto ctyrech zpëvich Take these examples for those pfiklady tyto mëj: four [types of] composition: Naturalise Vourcdonpcor. 239 Bcmolaris» vcre R^waccelt G«» Bcdkscatis» [C3] 4 'JT ♦ f C V t Da paccmdomfDc. K8L Canm< Fctus. »L*.j Izi'k * a. 61a 6laiôI&(ôf^(bX 6ou1ab&ioL nu rere« Naturalis cum bcduro. w — ------— :— 4 i " 7 — # * — Sanâuf. Z 4* 240 Bedurusoim h a n o ta rû ixtare, B 4» TT [C3v] t.# » J f l - p ------Î1 :" 1 & & # 1 Podle pfikladû tëchto i jim According to these examples podobnych mûzes se jiz sam and ones similar to them, you uciti zpëvy znâti a zprâvu tuto can l e a m and know the kratickü maje pomalu jim [different types of] zvykati. A jakoz zpëv na ctyry composition and, by this brief dëli se strany, tak i scala, instruction, become totiz zebrik ctverÿ jest, vsak progressively accustomed to prirozenÿ obzvlâstni své scaly them. As composition is pro m i m é stupovâni nemâ, aie v divided into four [types], so tvrdé i V mëkké své misto, also is the scale, i.e., the zâdného ^ and b nedosahuje, ladder, fourfold. The natural drzi. Jiz pak kazdého zpëvu [type of composition], however, prominovâni z tëchto tabuli will not be given its own snadnë porozumis: particular scale [below] because of its restrained stepping; it holds neither the hard [scale] nor the soft in its place, nor does it reach or hold any ^ or . You will easily understand the transformations between every [type of] composition from these tables : 241 SobBcmolarâ* [C5] 21 ------&—-.fe------Jbi Col e. mf la T» fol 6 6 re k f » & a tc fol A mi mi 1* . ur Tol f&L nu V t Vt S ^ l t t x o e ^ é ppvodn^. p p w d n ^ , [stepping upward] [stepping downward] ^^This example is relocated from C5 of the original. This table is taken from Listenius's Musica (B3v), but with printing errors in the fifth and twelfth vocables in the ascending column. According to both Listenius's table and Josquin's own explanation of mutation in the soft scale found on C6, both of these vocables should be sol instead of ut. 242 fiaEiBcduraltf» [C5v] 22 b u -di- fÔI« 6 - 4 - rr la & b 1. r r 61 mf uir foi mi la fnl r& b - 4 - re —r — V l a d c a t é [upward] [downward] This example is relocated from C5v of the original. This table is taken from Listenius's Musica (B4), but with printing errors in the eighth and fifteenth vocables in the ascending column. According to both Listenius's table and Josquin's own explanation of mutation in the hard scale found on C6v, both of these vocables should be sol instead of ut. 243 S a h E a s u [C4] 23 n4§çrffé [upward] [downward] Kratsi zprâva prominovâni [C4v] A brief instruction about the hlasûv V tabuli této polozenâ transformation of the vocables jest, z niz snâze, kteri is placed in this table hlasové V které prominuji se, [below], from which you can poznati mûzes: easily know which vocables are transformed into which: mi la zase la mi la la re zase > V < re > V ( sol sol sol sol ut zase ut fa fa 23 Unlike his tables of scala bemollaris and scala beduralis, Josquin*s table of scala ficta has no comparable table in Listenius's Musica» Since this scale corresponds to our present-day A-flat major, the reader must himself supply the B-flats and E-flats at the appropriate places. 244 mi la again la ml la re > on < again > on < re sol sol sol sol ut again ut Ë3. Is. Zpëv jeden kazdy po cem znati As is made obvious and mas, napred ukâzâno, jakby jej demonstrated by the scales on pak solmlzoval, scaly neb the ladders (which must be zebfîkové tito zjevnë ukazujl, known or learned to sing any kterez kdo by neumël a jich song correctly), you should neznal, prâvë zâdné vyzpivati know each [type of] composition nemuz pisne. Protoz o kazde as if you had [actually] scale neco obzvlâstê psâti solmizated each. Therefore, I budu. shall now write something about each particular scale. 0 scale mëkké About the Soft Scale Tato prvni scala k zâdnému The first scale is proper for jinému zpëvu nepïislusi, toliko no other [type of] composition k mëkkému; vsak mejliti se na than a soft one. Do not tom nemâs, ze pfirozenÿ své suppose, however, that [its misto v ni obdrzuje, neb i range] holds no other [scale] tvrdé to cini. Pfi této pak than the natural, because the scale tento zpûsob zachovej: hard one is made here as well. kdyz na horu stupujes, tehdy na With this [soft] scale, klici D a G ten hlas re, dolûv preserve this manner; when you na D a A la pomni jmenovati, [C6] step upward, call to mind and jakoz pfiklad ukazuje: name the keys D and G by the vocable re; [when you step] downward, name D and A [by the vocable] la. The example [below] demonstrates this: AdCmr A&fubAck A It X vtm i (bl(bl la El VC re 6 re VC £» tcb ibl 3 %3 C ÿ la. |ct| & l&lof 6 6 ce vcrc vc btm remifafol 245 V tomto versiku troji mutacie In this verse you have three mas, prvni jest na klici C, a mutations. The first is on the tu se sol podle scaly v ut key of £, and here you must prominuje, neb i tak v tabuli transform sol into ut, male najdes. Druka téz na C; according to the scale. You ponevadz zpëv dolûv jde, tehdy will find it this way in the vyssi hlas brâti mas, prijde small table [above]. The pak tuto ut, protoz rci sol second [transformation] is also jakoz V scale i v tabuli vse on C, since the composition poznamenane jest. Tfeti na )*, goes downward. Here, you take fa trefi se zpivati, ale kdyz the higher vocable and, zpëv vysoko stupuje, musis fa v therefore, coming to that at, ut promëniti, jiz zpûsob tento say sol, as is notated in the pfi vsech zpëvich takovych, scale on the table. The third netoliko pfi klicich [transformation] comes on ): , prostfednich, ale i pfi tëch, [where] fa is to be sung. But jenz graves slovou, uzivati when the composition steps mûzes, neb v této scale podlé upward, you must transform ^ oktav vsech mutovati mûzes into ut, which is a manner you hlasy, jako kde fa neb sol [C6v] can use with all compositions, jmenujes, v oktévéch tymz not only in the middle keys, zpûsobem fa neb sol jmenuj: but also with those called the tomu lépe z scaly a tabule jeji graves. [In addition, know srozumis. that] in this scale, you can mutate all vocables according to their octaves. Wherever you name fa or sol, in the same manner name fa or sol in the octave. You will understand this better from the scale on the table. 0 scale tvrdé About the Hard Scale Jakoz mezi zpëvem tvrdym a As the hard and soft [types mëkkÿm rozdil jest, tak i jedna of] composition are different, scala od druhé; nebo jiny se so are their scales. For one zpûsob V této scale nad jiné manner is to be used in that uzivati ma v tomto, aby na scale and another in this. klici D a A, kdyz nahoru Here, on the keys D and A, when stupujes, ten hlas re bral, you step upward, take the dolûv pak na klici E a A la, po vocable re, and [take the nich jiz jiné nasledujici, bud' vocable] on the keys E and nahoru neb dolûv hlasy: nahoru A. After this [mutation], the re, mi, fa, sol, dolûv la, sol, other vocables follow, either fa, mi. downward or upward, [in the usual order]: upward, re, mi, fa, sol; downward, la, sol, fa, mi. 246 pfîklad: Example: Laixâz Sion* K Iff* 2. XX X rc vt vcrc vt £inu re vt re à ibl mi 6 mi re 3 4 ft-;.-* : f 3 i X mi&ibf rcmiAiaibi 1» 6ibiibL Pocniz od nejprvnëjsîho re i [C7] Begin, then, from the first vstuplz na sol, ale, ponevadz re and step to sol. But since sol V ut se prominuje, tedy sol is transformed into uÆ, in rciz misto sol ut, bude re ut. this place say ut instead of Dale, kdez zpëv dolûv stupuje, sol, and [the order of the tehdy ut v sol promin. Opët vocables] will be re, ut. pfi stupovani nahoru sol v ut Further, whenever the obrâtî. Naposledy pak se trefî composition steps downward, you na klici A mutovati; zprâva must transform ^ into sol, and toho jiz jest dâna, ze whenever the composition steps vstupovani nahoru re ten hlas upward, change sol into ut. na A brâti mâs, protoz la v re Finally, come to and mutate on promëni se. A tak jiz the key of A. The instruction vlastnost i pfirozeni hlasûv about this has already been podlé zprâvy té zachovâvati given: when stepping upward, budes. you are to take the vocable re on A, because ^ is transformed into re. And thus you are able to preserve the particular and nature of the vocables according to the instructions. Skodnÿ se blud pfi mnohÿch, Many, who understand only a ktefiz ponëkud i muzice little about music, commit a rozumëji, nachâzi, ze z scaly grievous error due to their Josquin does not make the transformation of syllables according to his explanation that immediately follows. The reader is instructed to change sol into ^ at numeral "3," and, likewise, to change into re at numeral "4." The syllables under these numerals in the example should be ut and re, respectively. 247 tvrdé V klicich spodnich, improper understanding of the kteréz graves slovou, pro jich composition: they make a hard nevlastni zpëvûm srozumëni scale into a soft in the lower mëkkou dëlaji, myslice ze by v keys (which are called the scale tvrdé jako v mëkké v graves) . They think that one oktavich jednostejné hlasy skrz and the same vocable would come oposici se strefovali, jako la upon an opposition in the a la, re a re, fa a fa. Nebo octave (as ^ and la, re and mnozi (kdyz zpëv nizko jde) na re, or ^ and fa) in the hard D sol re la, C fa ut sol, scale as well as in the soft. b mi fa. z vrchnich oktav to When the composition goes berouce, jmenuji. downward, many [erroneously] name D sol re la, C fa ut sol, and b mi fa, taking these [vocables] from the higher octave. Pfiklad: Example: Zdûiiaâragcnarûr» D i<* [C7v] ■♦■4 ♦ Sfc;. U U U mi U U U fit U. re rt. re mi re [incorrect] U filjol mi fâ (il Tel fol fel U fol [correct] 5(c m* W r*mt uL [incorrect] èabce.U. ft fol féft- [correct] Rozdil pravého a zlého You can easily know the zpivéni snadnë z prikladu difference between correct and napsaného seznati mûzes, neb ac incorrect singing by this pocâtek zpëvu tohoto na example. For although the D sol re jest, kterÿzto klic v beginning of this composition oktavë sobë podobnÿ ma, totiz is on D sol re, which has a key d la sol re, vsak ne tak mnoho similar to it in the octave, hlasûv onen jako tento v sobë still, [this key] does not hold zdrzuje, protoz jemu z oktavy as many vocables in itself as vrchni, zadnÿ pro hloupost svou does this one, i.e., hlasu ciziho brâti nemâ, ac pak d la sol re. Therefore, do not V scale mëkké (o cemz nahofe) inject an alien vocable [taken] 248 dopousti se, ale v tvrdé to from this one of a higher byti nikoli nemflz, neb spodni octave. That would be stupid. D sol re, nemâ v sobë la jako In the soft [type of] oktava jeho d la sol re, ani composition (discussed above), C fa ut V sobë zdrzuje sol jako however, this [procedure] is oktava jeho c sol fa ut. Kdoz allowed. But this is never pak koli toho nesetri neb [allowed] in the hard [type of opousti, prâve a vlastnë nijakz composition], because the zpivati nemûze, aie hlasem jako lower D sol re does not have a nemazanym vozem sen i tam la in itself, as does its vrzati bude. A tak vejstraze octave d la sol re, nor does toho zadosti bud' povëdino. C fa ut hold a sol in itself, as does its octave c sol fa ut. Whoever disregards this or leaves it out can in no way sing the particulars, but will [instead] squeak here and there with his voice like an ungreased wagon. With this, enough has been made known [about the hard scale]. 0^ scale pfirozené [C8] About the Natural Scale Nahofe jsem toho dotekl, proc I have mentioned above [that zpëv pfirozenÿ obzvlâstni své the reason] why the natural a od jinÿch rozdilné scaly [type of] composition does not nemâ; vsak aby kazdého zpëvu have its own particular scale scala i pofâdek jeji ukâzân is because it is different from byl, této ac kratické vsak these others. Still, so that uzitecné zprâvy mlcenim the scale of every [type of] pominouti nechci. Vëdëti mâs, composition and its order might ze zpëv tento nad sest hlasûv be demonstrated, I do not wish vejse a nize nikdâ se nevznâsi, to omit in silence this brief b mollu a b duru téz zâdného but useful instruction. You nedosahuje. Protoz mutaci should know that this [type of] nemaje scalu vlastni opousti. composition is never raised Tabulicka tato vlastni jeho beyond the six vocables, jest, z niz snadnë kazdou pisen neither higher nor lower, never poznati i vyzpivati mûzes: reaching b mollis or b durus. Therefore, not having mutations, this particular scale is [sometimes] left out. This [example below] is a small table of the particulars of this [scale], from which you can easily know and sing every [natural] song: 249 roi ftc T - t- mi ttd V* vt L. Prîklad: Example : q [C8v] Audtbenfgneit. o * rcre£unrfa re fàre ixrerem m mm re m m ini6mm^î Cm (ôl^L.1 fol &mire C _ __ * : £ f » * * * I *' - — i ^ - «H t * - ■ B n i CC& rc ta uc utrc mi Êtni rc mf ft fol» 0 scale smyslené About the Invented Scale Z priein velmi potrebnÿch, The old musicians did not [be]z nichz by pisnê nemohl know ^ cantu ficto. This zpivati zadnÿ, tato scale scale was invented for no vymyslena neni, neb stari essential reason, but only muzikové ^ cantu ficto because intelligent men become nevêdêli; aie ze se cim dale ever sharper. Without it, tim vice lidskÿ ostfi vtip. songs could still be sung. Pro ozdobu jakousi zpëvu scala This scale was discovered as a tato nedâvno jest nalezena, kind of decoration to kterâzto pro jeji nejednostejnâ composition, and was discovered hlasûv prominovâni, velmi od only recently. Because of the jinÿch rozdîlnâ ano i nesnadnâ non-uniform transformation of jest; neb tuto ne klicûv kdyz its vocables, it is very mutujes, aie tohoto znameni b different from and not as easy setre, na tom mistë, kdezby ono [to sing] as the other [types koli stâlo, fa zpivati musis. of composition]. For here Protoz tabule tato k [in cantus fictus], you do not svëtlejsimu srozumëni toho mutate into [different] keys, bude : but, regarding the sign b, you 250 must sing ^ at whatever place this might stand. Therefore, understand and be enlightened by this table: [D1] b & 6 ■c- -mf- -la- rr nK nu -re—— -4a- v t fol -6— - A l mi ow riAtoru* [upward] [downward] Znamenane v této tabuli tfi b You have three b 's notated in mas, prvni a spodni na this table: the first and D sol re, druhy na a la mi re lowest [is] on ______D sol re; the tfeti na d la sol re. Tito pak second on a la mi re; the third klicove jmenovani hlasu toho fa on d la sol re. These keys V sobë nemaji, vsak pro [b] na named do not have the vocable nich stojici fa jmenovati fa in themselves, but you must musis, cehoz kdyby v zpëvu name ^ for the ^ standing [in takovém nesetril, jako pfi these places]. If this were jinÿch tak i pfi tomto bloudë disregarded, compositions would skaredë by zpival. wander and be coarsely sung. Pfikladûv v zpëvu chorâlnim You will not often see an této scaly nebrzy nejdes, example of this scale in choral protoz V zpëvich figuralnich je compositions, so you must look hledati mas. for it in figurai compositions [if you wish to see an example]. Jiz pak mutovani vselikého I have already placed the zpëvu V tabulich tëchto mutations of ever)' kind of polozim, odkudz snadnë v kazdém composition in these tables hlasu promënëni seznati mûzes, [above], and from these you can jediné pilnë toho setf, kdyz se easily know the transformations tobë zpëv jakÿ nahodi, aby v of every vocable. If you tëch mistech, kdez scala diligently regard these dopousti, jeden [hlas] v druhÿ [Div] [ins true t ions], upon promeno[val] a [ty hlas]y encountering such a [type of] 251 ktefiz se k mutaci trefuji, composition, you will be able je[dny] za [dru]hé bral, o cemz to transform one [vocable] into V tabuli mensi poznamenéno mâ§. another and to use these in those places where the scale allows. And then you will be able to mutate from one [scale] to another as you have it notated in these small tables. Tabule tato ukazuje vsech The distinctions between all zpëvüv rozdil, a jak jeden of the different [types of] kazdy obzvlâstni své composition are demonstrated in prominovâni na kterém klici the table [below]. [This table zachovâvâ: also shows] how each [type] preserves its own particular transformation on each key: Naturals. Bduralis Boiolans. Tiauu ut— m l— I m i 252 Takto jdou: These are [the vocables in natural composition]:^5 [D2] -- fill-- --- .... . la W UA (oT /*. c _ . . re mi mi ft 4 « ue DiTcantL AH, Tcooris* Forma diskantu v tvrdem The form of the discant in zpëvu: hard composition: ^^The tenor part in this table illustrates a hard hexachord instead of a natural hexachord. 253 [Another example of this same type of composition;] [D2v] ■4bh> 6 - m i I» re -Tol- -ut* - f o l - 6 h ■4a— ' n*- -mi -fa----- ibl re re fol *6 — - 6- mi mi mi V zpëvu mëkkém: [The form of the discant] in soft composition: -(a- fol fol Pol -6- -6- U mi mi bk 4 b l- -Tr -re- -ibl- h ue 6 —mi -mi t i re ff a ■*UC^ -ut "Ub“ Forma altu i tenoru tvrdem: [D3] Form of the alto and the tenor in hard [composition]; 254 V tvrdém zpëvu tenoru samého: The ténor is the same in hard composition: 4a— — h — ibl -6— mi m i -re— -4»- ut Col — mi m i — rc -re- v& Vfr Forma v mëkkém zpëvu altu i [D3v] Form of the alto and the tenoru: tenor in soft composition: Forma bassu v tvrdém: Form of the bass in hard [composition]: •/5i"" ■' ft- 255 Jinâc V témz! [D4] Again, a similar [example]: V zpëvu mëkkém: [Form of the bass] in soft composition: a£ mi 256 Opët jinâc: [D4v] Again, another [example] & — la- fol (ôf -fit- m/ nu «— fC— û - -re 4a- ut (bl lie fol -A- mf b. '4bl. uc A & — m A -m f- re [CHAPTER V] 0 TRANSPOSICÎ, T0TI2 PSELOZENI ABOUT TRANSPOSITION, i.e., TRANSFERENCE Maje jiz o transposici psâti, As I now wish to write about kolikera by byla, nejprve the transpositions, you must oznânim. Vëdëti pak slusi, ze first know what kinds there jest dvoje. Jedna pri klîcich, might be. It is proper to know kdyz noty nad pët lin vejse neb that there are two [types]. nize stupuji, nemohouc dosti The first is by clef, when mista pod nadepsany klic bez notes, not having enough places liny sesté miti; protoz under the written clef without transposici, totiz promënëni a sixth line [being added to klice, na pocâtku neb v the staff], move upward or prostred râdku ucinëna bÿti downward [beyond] the five musi, a tak tÿz klic prelozen lines. Therefore, a neb jinÿ vyssi neb nizsi misto [D5] transposition, i.e., a prvniho naznamenân bÿvâm coz transformation, by clef must be jestli se kdy neznaj icimu made at the beginning or in the pfitrefi, nemalou prekâzku middle of a line. And thus netoliko v zpivâni aie i v that [original] clef is notovâni miti bude: neb takovy transferred to another [line], ani zpivati, ani sobë by co higher or lower, and notated in chtël prâvë z jiného vynotovati place of the first [clef]. If mûze. Druhâ transposici jest someone came upon this pri zpëvu, kterâz daleko ignorantly, he would have no rozdilnëjsi od prvnî jest; nebo little obstacle in singing and tuto ne klic aie zpëv, jako in notating. For as such a one tvrdÿ V mëkkÿ, mëkkÿ v could not sing, neither could prirozeny, bud' z potreby neb he correctly notate [the pro okrasu, promënën bÿvâ. Jiz singing] if he wished. The 257 pak o jedné kazdé transposici second [type of] transposition jak se kde pûsobi naplsi. in composition is very different from the first. For here, not the clef, but the [type of] composition is transformed, either from hard to soft, or soft to natural, for [reason of] necessity or for decoration. I shall now write about how each transposition is brought about. Klicûv prelozeni prikladové Examples of the Transference of Clefs Setriti toho dvého pri It is most proper to regard promënovâni klicûv nejvice two things in the slusi: prvni kustose, druhé transformation of the clefs: klice. Kustos, ten ma na râdku first, the custos; second, the prvnim nâsledujici noty misto clef. The custos shows the vlastni ukazovati. Klic pak particular place of the first jménu noty, kterâz na râdku [note] in the [next] row, with druhém stoji, uciti mâ, ty other notes following. The vlastnë jiz kustos ukazçval. V clef teaches the name of the takovém promënovâni zajisté [first] note [in that next vsech zpëvâkû mukâni prestane, row], the one that the custos kteriz po notâch toliko mukajic specifically shows. In this je jako kroupy zobi; horkÿt' transformation, oftentimes all jsou V této nâdobë: nebudouli of the singers, in their vëtru totiz znâmosti kusu blockheadishness, either stop tohoto miti, vëf mi, ze se [saying] their syllables or castokrât spâli. Neb to bÿvâ, say those syllables (or notes) ze noty nëkde vysoko nahoru [D5v] like [fowl] pecking up hot jdou, a vsak zpëv nizko se grains of barley. If these spousti, ten pak, kterÿz toho [fowl] do not receive air, neznâ, zpivâ po notâch i.e., if these [singers] do not transposici nesetre, tak ze ho receive this point of knowledge vyvedou ony na nejvyssi, az na [about transposition], they posledy hlasu i not nechaje will often be burned. For, toliko vrestëti bude. although the notes go upward to some height, one may be released to sing lower. The one who does not know this, however, and sings according to the notes without regarding the transposition, will be led to the highest until finally, wishing for his voice and the notes, there will be only bellowing. 258 Prîklad jak se kllcové na Examples of how clefs are pocâtku preklâdaj i: transferred at the beginning: _____ Atcxufcga,. A n » * ■ * ■ * ♦ *•' »■« ■*' ÿ « I f : Pfeklâdânî v prostred râdku: [Examples of] transference in the middle of a row:^^ ______Gbtfein Bxogffis. 11 g 9, [D6] X H t CjT# pA% Ve r b u m cwro. x± ± j f ± i r . c z ± %ku(f fUwaz ^^The transposition of clef in the Gloria in Excelsis is identical to the change made in the Samotulsky kancionâl at B9» No such change of clef is made in the Verbum caro, however, found at B13. 259 Kdyby se tobë Cato neb jinâ k If you encounter this or nim podobnâ pfeklâdânî another example similar to it, nahodila, jak jim rozumêti mâs, you are to understand nahofe doCceno; vsak aby lépe [transposition] as it is zvykal, kraticce o torn znovu touched on above. However, in pripomenu. Nejprv v prîkladu order that you might be better prvnim na râdku jednom 7*» na accustomed to this, I shall druhém C vidis. F ten klic again briefly remind you [of jest spodni, C vrchni. A tak the instruction]. First, in kdyz noty vejse nad F stupuji, the first example, you see the tehdy C, pakli nize pod C, on one row and the £ on tehdy F kladen bÿvâ. Jiz dâle another. The clef of F is on kustose setriti musis, kde on the lower [staff], and [the ukazuje, ze i nota v tom mistê clef of] £ on the upper. And stoji, jakoz z pfikladû têchto to continue, if the notes step snadnë se tomu nauciti mûzes. higher, over the F [clef], then [the clef of] £ is considered. Further, you must regard the custos, as this shows which note stands in what place. You can easily l e a m this from the examples. Jiz pak o transposici zpëvu i I now wish to write about the pricinâch jejich psâti chci. reasons for the transposition Prelozeni zpëvu co by bylo, na of composition. I know of only bore ukâzâno, toliko priciny two reasons for the toho tyto dvë oznâmim. Prvni transference of a composition, jest vyhejbâni neb pomijeni as I pointed out earlier. The hlasûv spojenÿch, jimz latinë [D6v] first [reason] is for the coniunctas rikaji. Neb mnozi avoidance or bypassing of zpëvové, jestli se podlé reguli combined vocables, which in na klicich finalnich skonâvati Latin are called coniunctae. maji, tehdy pod vsecku scalu Many compositions, if they are nize stupovati museji, a tak to end on the final keys hlasové jini, nez je klicové v according to the rule, must sobë maji, dâvâni budou. step below their scale [into Protoz nëkdy kvintou neb the graves]. Thus, these kvartou vyvysuje se zpëv, [notes] need to be given odkudz potom vlastni hlasové vocables other than those that notâm dâvâni bÿti mohou. Druhâ these keys have in themselves. pricina jest setreni formy Consequently, sometimes a lahodného a prijemného zpëvu, composition is lifted by a coz nejvie k komponovâni fifth or a fourth, where prislusi; neb kompositor, jakz particular vocables can be kdy vidi ceho cas, z tvrdého given to these notes. The mëkkÿ, z prirozeného tvrdÿ zpëv second reason [for the mûz uciniti, zvlâstë kdyzby transference of &■ composition] nëkterâ nota v zpëv jinÿ, nez is to regard the form of notovâna jest, zvykem obecnÿm delicious and agreeable prominovâna byla, tedy mûze v singing, which is most proper 260 zpëv uvyklÿ prelozena bÿti, in composition. Consequently, cehoz potom priklad ukazân the composer, if he sees the bude. Tou pîlcinou tedy jestli requirement, is able to begin a takÿ zpëv kdy uhkédas, aby mu hard composition as a soft rozumël, podlé onëch napred [one], or a soft as a natural. polozenÿch pîîkladûv, tuto Particularly if some notes are zprâvu dâm. transformed into a [type of] composition other than that which is notated in common practice, [the original composition] can then be transferred into that practiced [type of] composition. An example of this will be shown later. So that you might see such [types of transposed] compositions and might understand [transposition] according to the examples placed above, I will give these [additional] instructions.27 Priciny prvni prikladové Examples of the First Reason Kompositor kazdy zajisté, Truly, let every composer, if kdyz melodii jakou bud' libou he wishes to write a melody hroznou neb veselou sloziti (either pleasing, threatening, chce, aby se zpëv ten, jejz or merry) so that this cini, podlé reguli, na klicich composition might be made to finalnich skonaval, nej...... [D7] end on the final key according to the rule...... podlé libosti své bud' pres 28 kvintu neb kvartu jej vyvejsiti lift it, according to his mûze, kterémuzto vyvysovâni pleasure, by either a fifth or elevatio cantus fikaji. Nebo a fourth. This lifting is ne vzdycky tak melodie, jakz called elevatio cantus. Not slozena jest, zûstâvé, ale every melody written remains casem v mëkkÿ, prirozenÿ v the same, but sometimes is tvrdÿ zpëv tou elevaci mûz transformed into a soft, promënën bÿti. natural, or hard [type of] composition by this elevation. 27 According to Josquin, transpositions can be made for two reasons. The first type of transposition eliminates the necessity of making chromatic alterations (coniunctae); the second satisfies the practical requirement of notating the composition as it is performed in common practice rather than as it was originally written. At this point, a line of text in the original has been trimmed away by the bookbinder. 261 Ut exemplum: Ut exemplum: Vttamquae fàciunr* Melodie ta, kdyz slozena This melody, when it was byla, takto notovâna stala na D written, was invariably notated skonâvâni majic, kdyz pak komu with an ending on If, se libilo v zpëv jinÿ however, someone was pleased to pfemëniti, skrze elevaci près change this [melody] into kvintu v tvrdÿ takto promënëna another [type of] composition, jest, jakz K7 notovanü naj des ; then, through the elevation of a fifth, it could be transformed into a hard [type of] composition. You will find it notated in this way at K7 [as "Aj, jak jest to mile," in the Samotulskÿ kancionâl]: xcfx Pfiklad druhÿ A Second Example V kancionâlu prvnim nota In the first hymnal pisné této: "Ve jméno Bozi [1541 éd.], the notes of this pocneme" kvintu nad vlastnost song, "Ve jméno Bozi pocneme," svou na a la mi re se pocina... [D7v] begin a fifth above the ...... zeni zpëvu particular, on a la mi re...... novém zase ...... of the singing tak, jakz slozena b yla na D in the new [hymnal] it is spustëna jest a tak, coz kazdÿ lowered...... 29 rozumnÿ poznâ, vlastnost zpëvu just as it was originally i tonu svého zachovâvâ. written. This, which every 29 At this point, a line of text in the original has been trimmed away by the bookbinder. 262 understanding [person] will know, preserves the particular of this [type of] composition and the tone. Prvni notovâni: First Notation: K ü ^ ft ft p. 0 0 * R 0 g ( H r-Q ■-ft "9 0-0- Q-fl ft ^ 0 f- Mf[and so forth] Transponovana takto: A transposition of this: & jeLS l [D8] ’ ^ -(^ 0 a O -O -O /' ' -I ■ ■■ -...I. tf 263 Druhé priciny prikladové Examples of the Second Reason Zpëv prirozenÿ v tvrdÿ takto The natural [type of] prelozen bÿti mûze: composition can be transferred into a hard: ♦ M - » - * Vent redetnp tor*' ± f . f I M e V mëkkÿ takto: [The natural transferred] into a soft: V smyslenÿ takto: [The natural transferred] into an invented: [D8v] 264 Mëkky zpëv takto v tvrdÿ se The soft [type of] priklâdâ: composition [can be] transferred into a hard: Regiozcoell. V prirozenÿ tento kus  natural piece cannot be pfelozen bÿti nemfiz v smyslenÿ transferred into an invented: takto: Zpëv tvrdÿ v prirozenÿ takto: The hard [type of] composition [can be transferred] into a natural: ♦ f A Da paces domine. 265 V mëkkÿ zase [takto]; [El] Again, [a hard composition transferred] into a soft: Da pacesw V smyslenÿ opët: Again, [a hard composition transferred] into an invented: D & p acem» [Another exanq)le:] TTSS ^ ft r«barto Qyonlta. È 6 @ '-o 0-9-— 0 I 30"Tës se dcerko Sionskâ" is found in the Samotulskÿ kancionâl at Al 6. 266 Prvnî notovâni stalo v scale You invariably see the tvrdé, jakz vidis; ze pak preceding notation in the hard obycej nebyl tak zpivati, v [Elv] scale. Since, however, it is mëkkÿ zpëv promënëno jest not usual to sing it thus, it zpûsobem timto: is transformed into the soft [type of] composition in this manner: Dosti jest se cemu podiviti, This is enough [instruction] kterak muzika dostatek v sobë to admire the great sufficiency veliky ma, tak ze zpëv kazdÿ v that music has in itself, in pfirozeni jiné prelozen a that every composition may be promënën bÿti mûze, neb mista i transferred or transformed into moznosti k tomu v klicich i v another nature. There are the hlasich jest; toliko v samén places and possibilities for smysleném zpëvu ne podlé this [transference] by vlastnosti scaly, ale b ciniti [altering] the keys and the se musi, cemuz vÿbornë z vocables. Only the invented pfikladû jiz polozenÿch [type of] composition cannot be porozumëti jsi mohl. known according to a particular scale, but this [type of composition] is [instead] made [known] by the which you can understand from the choicest examples placed above. 267 [E2] [CHAPTER VI] 0 KARAKTEËÎCH NEB VSELEKtCH ABOUT CHARACTERS, OR THE ZNAMENÏCH VARIOUS SIGNS Jiz pak nêco obzlâstnim Now something will be zpûsobu, kterÿz v notâch [presented] about the netoliko v zpivâni figurném, particular manner in which the . aie i V prostém uzivân bÿvâ, notes are used, not only in totiz o karakterich poznamenâm. figured composition, but also Vëdëti slusi prednë, ze in simple [composition], i.e., karakter klic neni, jimz to the notation of the characters. vsecko notovâni zpravuje se, It is proper to know first that aie jest znameni, kteréz cosi a character is not a clef, by obzvlâstniho v zpivâni, bud' which all notation is pro potrebu neb okrasu, veli instructed, but [that this ostfihati, a tëch jest v poctu character] is a sign of deset: something particular in composition, [used] either as a necessity or [to bring about] a decoration. The number of these [characters], greatly abridged, is ten: S i m p I i c W s Obecniho taktu Triplae Triply Bemoliicatfs Mëkkého zpëvu Bedurirattf I Tvrdého zpëvu Signu Paufar Pauzy S Znameni Cuftodts Strâze Repetfuonu Opëtovâni Couenicnue Hlasu shledâni Cocordâlûe Libého znëni JFinalis, Finâlu 268 Simplicitaris a Of Tripl* Of 5 Bcmofiicatis L Of Bcduràatir # Of Paufir Of Signs — “n r >The signs Cui^odts ifS'- Of Of Rrpdiuonts % Couenienfie Of the meeting of the voices . , , I C o r a n Ë t û e a Of : Fmalis, Of % Stari muzikove mnohem vice [E2v] The nad tato znameni pokladali, many more signs than these, zvlâstë kdyz jsou vie pro particularly when they wrote nesnadnost a jakousi neprizen, more for complexity and out of nez pro uzitek ^ modis spite than for practicality, perfectis £ imperfectis, de such as [when writing] ^ modis maiori minorique prolatione perfectis ^ imperfectis and de vypisovali, jesto jakâ maiori minorique prolatione. michanina tehdaz byvala, znati That there was much confusion se dobfe z exemplaru od nich in these [styles of writing] pozûstavenÿch mûze. My vie can be comprehended from the jâdra nez supin setrice, na examples that remain. We, têchto dosti mëjme. Protoz o regarding the kernel more than kazdem tomto znameni jak kde the shell, are [content] enough uzivano bÿvâ, porâd oznâmim. with these [ten]. Therefore, I will notate, in order, how each of these signs is to be used. Dobré jest pri zprâvë této i [But before I begin about the o taktu, co se jim rozumi, signs] it might be good to also dotknouti. Tactus, to slovo mention some instruction about jest latinské, kteréz dotceni the tact, to the extent that it cesky vyklâdâ se, a jest casu is understood. Tactus, which toho, V nëmz nota kazdâ i zfek is a Latin word, is understood vynesen bÿti mâ, jisté as touch in Czech, and this is vymëreni, to pak ne znameni, the gauge of time in which each aie pravidlo zpivaj icim bÿti note and articulation is mâ. Nebo kdyz zpëvâkûv disclosed. This is not a sign nëkoliko jest, tahdy kazdÿ [however], but an axiom for the témër podlé navyklosti své, singers. For when there are jeden prudce, druhÿ spësnë ' several singers, each singing zpivâ, odkudz nejednostejnost •approximately according to his zpëvu a konkordanci pochâzeti habit [personality], one musi. Protoz taktem timto jako [singing] rashly and another mërou nëjakou, aby zâdnÿ nad rapidly, uniformity and 269 druhého spësnëji ani concordance do not provlâcnëji nezplval, zpraveni characterize this singing. bÿvaji, touz pricinou tehdy Therefore, the tact is a type jako pri hodinâch minuty, tak of gauge so that, by its pri zpëvâcich takty byti musi. instruction, no one will sing more rapidly or more moderately than another. For this reason, then, there must be tacts among singers as there are minutes among hours. Jiz o znamenich zase pocnu: I will now begin [my discussion] about the signs: Prvni karakter jest obecniho, [E3] The first character is of the prostého taktu: , kterÿz common, simple tact, , kdekoli stoji, prostÿ zpëv ten which, wherever it stands, bÿti mirného a povlovného shows that the singing of zpivâni ukazuje. Ne vzdycky se simple composition is to be pak pri notovâni hlasu restrained and gentle. It is samotného klade, aie kdyz not always considered with each quatuor neb trium jest; vsak i individual voice [part] in V notovâni prostém nëkdy z notation except when [the potreby musi polozen bÿti, jako composition is written] in kde pisen spolu s triplou quatuor or trium [voces]. smisena jest, aby vëdomo bylo Sometimes it must be placed in kde tripla prestâvâ, karakter simple notations, however, ukazuje: because of a necessity. When a song is mixed together with triple [tact], this character is used so that one can be familiar with where the triple [tact] is arranged: iansCbri{!in.. O X. m g Druhé znameni jest triply The second sign is of the C 3 , kterÿmz jinÿ zpûsob triple [tact], C 3 , by which is zpivâni, netoliko znamenim. shown a different manner of 270 ale i notami od jiného rozdllny singing. [And this manner can ukazuje se; neb tuto dvoji be understood] not only by the mira, jedna prodlouzna, druhâ sign, but also by the notes, krâtkâ jakoby poskakoval, bude, which are different from these vsak i V poboznych pisnich a k others [in simple tact]. Here plesani probuzejicich takovy [in the triple tact, it will be zpëv se nalézâ: as if] there are two measures [of time], one expanded and the other short, as if jumped. Such a [style of] singing is appropriate to both pious songs and to those that arouse us to jubilation; [E3v] SurrcxJt Chrilhu. G, f, »Ct Treti karakter jest b, jimz The third character is the zpëv mëkkÿ toliko znamenan sign by which only the soft bÿvâ. Klade se pak casem pri [type of] composition is known. klici, casem v prostred râdku, It is considered [both] with vsak, kdezkoli stoji, the clef [as a signature] and jednostejnou zachovâvâ in the middle of a row [as an vlastnost. Protoz na kterém accidental]. Wherever it jej koli miste vidëti budes, stands, however, it uniformly fa, lecby skrz -# odjato bylo, preserves the particular. zpivati pamatuj: Remember to sing fa, therefore, in whatever place you see this, unless you must depart [from singing fa] because of the treatment of a #: Aueprxclara. I. *o. y . ± ± ± r . t S 271 Ctvrté znameni, toho prâvë The fourth sign, or#, is ba odpor prvnimu jest; neb correctly the opposite of the jakoz b zpëv mëkkÿ, tak tento # preceding [sign]. For as b is tvrdÿ a ostrÿ oznamuje, tou notated in soft composition, so pficlnou tedy dotud, dokudzby # [is notated] in the hard or skrz b odjato nebylo, tvrdë a [E4] sharp. For this reason, then, ostre na tom mistë hlasem mi up to where one departs from zpivâno bÿti mâ: this [#] because of a b , m is to be sung as a hard or sharp vocable in those places [that you see this sign]. Pâté jsou pauzy, to jest The fifth [group of signs znameni krâtkého neb dlouhého comprises] the pauses, which mlceni, kterézto se nëkdy z are the signs of short and long predu, nëkdy v prostred râdku silences. These are sometimes kladou. Priciny vynalezeni considered in front, and jich nejvëtsi jsou tyto dvë: sometimes within a row. The 1. aby zpivaj icimu volné greatest reason for learning oddechnuti bylo, neb jakoz na these is twofold: first, to virgulich v citâni, tak na free the singer to breathe, for pauzâch V zpivâni oddechnouti as the comma is in reading (so sobë kazdÿ mûze; 2. pro that each can breathe), so is uvarovâni nelibého zvuku, the pause in singing; second, ponëvadz zajisté v hlasich to warn of an unpleasant sound, ctyrech, pëti nëkdy nelibâ since, truly, an ugly or nepëknâ trefi se proporci, unpleasant proportion is tehdy misto not a zpivâni sometimes encountered in kladeny bÿvaji pauzy, totiz aby [compositions of] four or five té chvile, dokud' pravé a voices. Instead of notes and dopustëné misto nepfijde, v singing in these places, pauses mlceni ten bias byl. Rozumêti are considered, i.e., so that, jim takto budes: cârka od linÿ at those moments when a correct az do pûl spacium dolûv trzena and allowed vocable does not jeden takt mlceti znamenâ, a appear, there could be a kdyz vzhûru, pûl taktu plati, silence. You will understand coz suspirium slove; kdyz pak them as follows: a mark od liny az do liny, dva takty v notated from the line above and sobë zdrzuje: inscribed half a space downward is [worth] one tact of silence, and when [notated] upward is worth half of one tact (which is called the suspirium), and 272 when [notated] from line to line holds two tacts in itself: V [E4v] T T i Sesté znameni jest kustos The sixth sign is the custos, wJL, kterÿzto od strezeni mista /JL» which takes its name from nâsledujici noty jméno své mâ, guarding the place of the ale vlastnëji index od following note. Properly, this ukazovâni sloul by; vsak should be called the index due ponëvadz ten zvyk jest, pfi tom to its use. Since it is not jménu zanechân bud'. Tento pak the practice, however, let us kustos V kazdém notovâni jest leave that name behind. The potrebny, neb velmi tëzce kdyz custos, then, is necessary in se râdku druhého dosolmizuj es every notation. It would be prvni notu bez nëho zaciti very troublesome to start the mûzes, lec pomlce chvilku, po first note, when you [begin to] klicich doptal by se jména solmizate the second row, jejiho. Protoz kustos jest, without [the custos] and, being aby notu na linëli nebo na silent for a moment, you spacium râdku druhého ukazoval, [search to] find the name [of coz ty vida snadnë i hned jakz this note] according to the nâlezi ji jmenovati mûzes, neb clef. The custos, therefore, on tak mnoho jako nota (kromë [was invented] in order to show jeho jmenovâni) vsudy plati: the note on the line or space of the second row. You, easily seeing this [custos], will be immediately able to discover and name [this note on the second staff]. This sign is just as valuable as a note, but it is not called [a note]. 273 Gregoriuf» A, a, [E5] it-» V « ::f . ♦ ♦ t *> Sedme znameni jest repetitio, The seventh sign is the p , neb R° coz nasim jazykem repetitio, ^ , or R°, which is vlastne zase opëtovâni slove. called recurrence in our Ne V kazdem tez notovâni language. It, likewise, is not kladeno byvâ, lec v considered in every notation, obzvûâstnich pisnich, kdez se but [only] in particular songs, znovu klauzule prvni repetovati where the first clause is to be mâ. Tuto pak ne to repetici, repeated. The repetitio should které po dvou klauzulich se not be recognized as that which repetuje, mâ nazvâno byti, ale comes after the two clauses to vlastne, kdyz vyzpivaje [one of which is] repeated, but jednu, druhou pod touz notu particularly that [section zacne klauzuli, jako v pisni occurring] when the second A15; "Vsickni vemi." clause of the composition Nevlastne repetici "V nemz begins with the same notes milost svrchovanâ" nazvâna [that have already occurred]. bÿvâ, neb se tu nie neopëtuje, In the song at A15, "Vsickni aie jeji nota vlastni ta jest; vemi," "V nëmz milost pravâ pak toho verse repetitio svrchovanâ" is [often] jest: "Pamatuj ic spolecnë improperly recognized as the Kristovo," kdez ne text, ale repetitio. Here, nothing nota prvni klauzule se opëtuje. recurs, but the notes are particular to that one [verse]. The verse of this [with the words] "Pamatujic spolecnë Kristovo" is correctly [known as] the repetitio. Here, not the text, but the notes of the first clause recur. 274 31 Priklad: Example : Wfficfni^toirn^’^üftiané/tvtfiï* 2^(penn>.p«ma tu^^ç fp^ltcai/^ryfio^ [E5v] cbPwanâ/nûm ft vtdjolal^b pie» Itiir'T-'j'l ", à9btèfy^J Iaf)4»^« panA Ten rozum i pri jinÿch Have this same understanding pisnich mej. also with other songs. (f Osmÿ karakter jest O na ^Jhe eighth character is the misto jedno se hlasûv shledâni, |±J, which [indicates] a coz nejvice v fugâch a v meeting of the voices in one zpëvich sebe se honicich byvâ. place [to show where the Protoz kde by koli znameni individual vocal parts end], takové nasel, ze tu hlasûv tëch and [this sign] happens shledâni a spolu sjednoceni primarily in fugues and in vëdëti mâs. compositions that chase after themselves. Therefore, wherever such a sign is used, you are to know that here is the gathering or uniting of the voices. There is a slight deviation in the text of this example as compared to the hymn found in the Samotulsky kancionâl at A15. Here, Josquin has changed the phrase "nâm jest ukâzânâ" to *'nâm se ukâzala." 275 Devaté znameni jest Ô The ninth sign is the Ô , prijemného a libého zvuku, [occurring when] an agreeable kteréz po kazdé klausuli nëkdy, and pleasing sound [is zvlâst V chorâlu, pro nêjaké na reached]. Sometimes this tom mistë trochu zastaveni a [sign] is considered after each oidrzeni se klade. clause (particularly in choral [composition]), and [indicates] some minute stoppage or holding at this place. Priklad: Example: 32 CL [E6] X lC Fosledni karakter slove The last character, ^ , is finalni jimzto kazdické called the final, by which the pisné final bud' bilou neb final [note] of every song (of cernou notou znamenan bÿvâ, either white or black notes) is cehoz priklady u kazdé pisnë notated. There is an example jsou. of this in every song. [CHAPTER VII] 0 solmizovAnI, to jest ABOUT SOLMIZATION, WHICH IS THE HLASOV JMENOVÂNÎ NAMING OF THE VOCABLES Vseliké zajisté notovâni, Truly, every notation, if it prâvë a vlastnë jestlize mâ is to be correctly and vyzpivâno bÿti, bez tohoto particularly sung, cannot be kusu, kterÿz solmizovâni slove [sung] without this point nemûze. Ac pak pri lidech called solmization. Although 32 This five-voice canon is taken from Listenius's Musica (A8v). Here, Josquin misplaces the third signum congruentiae, which should appear above the rest rather than over the 7th pitch. Josquin correctly omits the note stem of the 8th pitch (found in Listenius's example), although he perpetuates a second printing error involving the signum concordantiae. Both Josquin and Listenius omit the (first) fermata, which should appear over the 11th pitch. These printing errors were corrected in the 1549 edition of Listenius's Musica. 276 nëkterÿch muziky neznaj icich z some people, not knowing music, prirozeni nâramnâ k zpëv bÿvâ naturally have [such] an schopnost, tak ze casto sami enormous ability for the jakÿmsi toliko hlaholem dosti comprehension of singing that nesnadnou vyzpivaj i notu, vsak they can often sing the note of to nie jistého a stâlého bÿti a fairly difficult sound, this nemûze, neb jsou takové noty, [talent] cannot be anything jez netoliko takovÿ zpëvâk, aie precise and invariable. There i muzikus dobrÿ ledva vyzpivâ. are notes [that are so Protoz vynalezen jest zpûsob difficult] that not only these vlastni a pfipadni, jimz kazdé singers, but even a good notovâni vyzpivâno bÿti mûze, musician can barely sing them. to jest solmizovâni, kterézto [E6v] Therefore, a particular and slovo ani latinské ani nëmecké characteristic manner [of jest, ale cizim nevlastni, singing], by which every zâdného vÿkladu nemaj ici. notation can be sung, was Jestit' pak solmizovati: invented. This [manner] is syllaby sesti hlasûv napred [called] solmization, a word polozenÿch, la, sol, fa, mi, that is neither Latin nor jmenivati, kterÿmizto hlasy a German, but alien, improper, jich tak jmenovânim jakâsi and having no definition. To vlastnëjsi kazdého zpëvu forma solmizate is to name the pronâsina bÿvâ jesto kdyby se syllables of the six vocables text jakékoli pisnë spolu i s placed above (la, sol, fa, mi, notou jmenoval, ne tak ji etc.). By means of these snadnë, jako kdyz solmizuje, i vocables and by their naming, nejlepsi zpëvâk trefiti mûze. the form particular to each Têchto pak ctyr kusû pilnë [type of] composition is setriti pfi kazdém solmizovâni introduced. If the text of mâs; 1. klice, 2. noty, 3. some song were sung together zpëvu, 4. scaly. Jakoz za to with the notes, however, it mâm, jsi tèmto kusûm z napred would not be as easy as this psané zprâvy mohl dobfe solmization. Even the best porozumëti, neb pro tu pficinu, singer can use this, but he nez bych o solmizovâni co psal, must diligently regard these nejprv jsem ji polozil; vsak four points in every aby jiz toho, cehoz po mâlu solmization: first, the keys; nazbiral a jako nachoval, mohl second, the notes; third, the k této potfebë uziti, cestu a [types of] composition; fourth, prostfedek, jak k tomu the scales. I believe that you pfistoupiti mâs, hned ukézi. can comprehend these points from the instructions written above. By reason of wanting to write about solmization, [it was necessary that] I place these [points] first [before this chapter on solmization]. This was [done] so that you could already use these necessities [before learning about solmization]. These, 277 which you have progressively collected and kept, will immediately show the way and be the device with which you are to enter [solmization]. Nejprv praveno, aby klice First (as was discussed), setril, to jest, nez pocnes attend to the clefs. That is, solmizovati, prvé jakÿ tu klic, before you begin to solmizate, C ci F. stoji, pohledël, z ceho look at which clef stands [at snadnë vsech lin a spacii jini the beginning of the staff], poznâni bÿvaji klicové, jinâc £ or F [or G]. From this, you jestli pilen toho nebudes, will easily know the keys of snadnë v omyleni prijdes. all the lines and spaces. Otherwise, if you are not diligent in this, you may easily come to fault. Druhé, pat? k noté, nad Second, attend to the notes. klicemli ci pod nim jest, kdez [E7] See by which clef these will be ji pak koli stâti uhlédâs, od read, and read from there, klice toho pocna, bud' nahoru beginning from that clef, neb dolûv, jakz scala ukazuje, either upward or downward as k ni se docti, odkudz i hned, the scale shows. You will also na kterém klici nota jest, then immediately and easily snadnë poznâs, a na tomi mnoho, know the key upon which each kdyz pocâtecni noty klic vëdëti note appears. Much depends on mûzes, zâlezi. this, because you can know the beginning note [and the notes following] by the clef. Treti, setreno ma bÿti zpëvu, Third, regard the [type of] nahoruli ci dolûv od noty jde, conqjosition. Read the notes neb ponëvadz klic kazdÿ hlasûv above and below [the clef]. nëkolik v sobë mâ, vëdëti Since every key has several docela nemûzes kterÿ hlas z notes in it, you cannot know nich nota zdrzuje. Jako kdyby for sure which vocable that na G sol re ut byla, kterak ta note holds. If [for example] nota, bud' sol neb re neb ut the note is on G sol re ut, the jmenovâna bÿti mâ, klic sâm, key itself does not show toho neukazuje, aie ty z tëch i whether to name sol or re or z jinÿch pricin jak by ji prâvë ut. You must judge this jmenoval, bedlivë souditi [situation] carefully, for musis. Po têchto pak dvou these reasons [given below] and vëcech kazdé noty jméno seznâno others, as to how one correctly bÿti mûze: 1. kdyz zpëv od names [this note]. According noty své prvni nahoru vysoko to these two things the name of stupuje, tedy spodnëjsi hlas every note may be known: toho klice p?i ni zûstâvâ, jako first, if the composition steps ut, re, 2. Jestli dolûv nizce upward, higher than the first se spausstÿ jiz vyzssÿ hlas note, you must take one of the 278 téhoz klice vziti musis, jako lower vocables of that key, sol, fa, cemuz z nize psanych such as ut or re; second, if pfikladû snadnë porozumis.33 the music steps downward, you must take [one of] the higher vocables of that key, such as sol or fa. You will easily understand this from the examples written below. Ctvrté, ponëvadz klic nëktery Fourth, [be aware] that when V sobë dva neb tri hlasy spodni a key holds two or three [sic] neb vrchni zdrzuje, jako jsou lower or upper vocables in a la mi re, d la sol re, itself, such as a la mi re, c sol fa ut, opët velika mÿlka d la sol re, or c sol fa ut, tobë nastane pri nich: vëdëti you may again commit a large tuto tak dalece z vrchni zprâvy fault. You cannot yet know nemûzes, ktery jmenovity hlas [E7v] here, from the instructions samÿ toliko brâti mâs. Protoz above, which single name of the potrebi nejvic scaly setriti, vocable you are to take. 1. pod kterou ten zpëv, jejz Therefore, one must zpivati chces, slusi, 2. na additionally regard the scales: kterém klici jak jmenovati first, under which [scale] the hlasy dopousti, cemuz jsem të composition you want to sing vse pfi mutaci dosti siroce properly belongs; second, the ucil. Protoz sobë jiz to name that is allowed for that pfipomen a toho posud'; tak vocable on that key (which I kdyz ucinis, snadnë potom sâm have taught you rather zvyk pfi tom osviti. K extensively under [the snadnëjsimu srozumëni tyto discussion of] mutation). svrchu psané kusy po pofâd Therefore, be reminded of that obnovim. now. If you learn this, you can then easily understand this practice [of solmization]. For an easier understanding, I will [now] review, in order, those points that were discussed above. 33 In Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin (p. 121), Hostinsky remarks that this passage is "patrnë chybné a snad i neûplné" (probably incorrect as well as incomplete). The passage is incomplete as it appears in Hostinsky's transcription (p. 96), although the missing portion is due to Hostinsky's oversight rather than to an omission of text in the original Muzika. 279 Prîklad prvni: First Example: 1* £i mi rc fx vc vc mi re mi Ikie vt rt- Kratické dva priklady ted' You now have two brief mâs, z nichz se uciti pocâtküm instances from which you can kazdé pisnë mûzes. V prvnim learn [to recognize] the predstaveném jest klic c, na beginning of every song. The nëmz nota jest a zpëv dolûv first is initiated with the stupuje; protoz vyssi hlas clef of C, on which the [first] vezmi. Otâzka tuto jest, ktery note stands, and [then] the hlas vzat bÿti ma, ponëvadz dva composition steps downward. vrchni, sol a fa, klic tento v Therefore, recall the higher sobë obsahuje; befe se pak tuto vocable [of the key of the fa a ne sol pro tu pficinu, ze first note]. There is a zpëv tento pod scalu tvrdou question [however] of which nâlezi, kterazto na c (jakz v vocable is to be taken, since tabulich o tom mâs) nedopousti [E8] two of the higher [vocables], sol jmenovati, jinak ne tvrdâ sol and fa, are contained in aie mëkkâ bylaby. Kdyz pak na this key. Fa should be taken c fa j menu je se, tehdy na here, and not sol, for this slouti bude mi a tak prâvë reason: this composition is tvrdâ scala zâstâvâ. found under the hard scale, which does not allow sol to be named on C (as you know from the tables). Otherwise, the composition would not be hard, but soft. If, however, ^ is named on C^, then mi will be called on ij, and thus, correctly, the hard scale will remain. Druhy priklad: Second Example: (S’* 13. 3 i * r D Z E 3 : vt vc£xau£a.lbl&iarolfol fbiïbifblfollxfôL 280 Pocâtek jest a g sol re ut, The beginning [of this jehoz se takto docîsti mas: example] is on G sol re ut, pocni od klîce a rci C, b, a, which you are able to read g, najdes, kde nota prvni thus: beginning from the clef, stojl; ponëvadz tuto zpëv say £, B, A, G, and you will nahoru vstupuje, nâlezi, aby find where the first note nizsi hlas klice toho vzal. stands. Since here the Jsou pak dva spodnl, re a ut; composition steps upward, it is kterÿ by pak z tëchto dvou vzat appropriate to take the lower mël bÿti, z scaly souditi vocable of this key. But there musis. Nahofe jiz dotceno, jak are two of the lower [vocables se pfi tvrdé chovati mâs. in this first key], re and ut. You must judge from the scale [to know] which of these two [vocables] should be taken. Here, you must remain with the hard [scale], which was already touched on above. Protoz ut ten hlas vziti se Therefore, ^ is to be taken mâ, a tak na t) zpivati mi bude. as the vocable, and m will be sung on . Tfeti: Third [Example]: I B . xo. 6 vt rcK vt re & re £k b vt» Kdyz nota v zpëvu tvrdém na F [ESv] When a note in the hard [type stoji, a zpëv vzhûru stupuje, of] composition stands on 2 arid jmenovati jinâc tu nemâs nez the composition steps upward, fa, neb jestliby ut rikal, you may not name any [vocable] pfijde na b fa b mi fam coz other than fa. If you should jest proti tvrdé scale. Ale say ut, then fa would come on vyslovë fa jiz ut a jiné b fa b m i, which is against the nâsledujici hlasy jmenuj, jakoz hard scale. Instead, saying nahofe mâs. fa [for the first note], name ut [for the second note], and then the other vocables that follow as you did above. 281 Ctvrtÿ: Fourth [Example] taivtec &sctc re re re to/ Gtrere vc; Docitej se takové noty Read these notes in this zpôsobem timto rci: C, b, a, manner: [first] say £, B, A, g, f, e, jiz jsi se dovëdël, na G, F, E^. You already know that kterém klici nota stoji, totiz there are two vocables, and na E la mi, V nëmzto dva . mi, in that key on which the hlasove jsou, la a mi. Souda first note stands, i.e., on jiz potrebi, ktery z tëchto E la mi. It is now necessary dvou hlasuv vzat bÿti mâ; to judge which of the two praveno pak na hore, kdyz zpëv vocables should be taken. As nahoru vstupuje, aby nizsi vzal previously discussed, when the hlas, vezmi tedy mi a tak composition steps upward, you vlastni jmeno prvni noty vëdëti should take the lower vocable. budes. Kdyz se pak nëkdy nad Therefore, take m , and thus klicem noty pocinaji, tim you know the particular name of zpôsobem jako i dolûv tak k nim the first note. When notes na horu podle scaly klicuv begin above the clef, you are docitati se mâs. to read the keys [to find the vocable], upward or downward, in a similar manner and according to the scale. Priklad: [Fifth] Example: [FI] ;fol 6 A)lmi rolrenu & fol (àl iafoi refamf re vc Cti od klice na horu az k Read upward from the clef to notë, fikaje: C, d, e, f, g; the [first] note, saying £, JD, tento klic, na nëm pocinâ se 1.» Z.» £• This key, on which nota, tri hlasy v sobë mâ, sol, the notes [of the composition] re, ut. Ponëvadz pak zpëv begin, has three vocables in dolûv stupuje a pod scalu itself: sol, re, and ut. 282 tvrdou prislus1, sol jmenovati Since the composition steps mâs. Jiz podlé zprâvy této pri downward and is properly vsem notovâni, kteréz znameni b [found] under the hard scale, nama, pomni se zachovati; neb you must name [the first] note jinÿ opët zpûsob vsechen pri b sol. Call this [instruction] bÿti musi, cemu z prikladû to mind and preserve this tëchto porozumis. [method] with all notations that do not have the sign b, for here, with the ]b, there must be another method. You will understand this from these examples. Priklad prvni: First Example: i m rrvtrcvtmrrtnUro. mi 6 mi re vt I V tomto versi nota na a In this verse, the [first] stoji; jakÿ ji hlas dâti mâs, note stands on A. A diligent soudu pilného potrebi, neb klic judgment is necessary for you ten tri v sobë zdrzuje hlasy: to know which vocable to give la, mi, re. Ale ponëvadz k this [note], because this key scale mëkké nâlezi a na holds three vocables in itself : b fa b mi fa zpivâno bÿti mâ, la, m i , and re. But since this tedy takovÿ hlas, kterÿby fa na [Fiv] [composition] is appropriate to nëm cinil, vezma, ten jest mi, the soft scale, ^ must be sung podle nëho takto solmizovati on b fa b m i . Thus, in order budes mi, re, ut, re, ut. to call the vocable fa [in the appropriate place], this [first note] is mi, and, accordingly, you should solmizate mi, re, ut, re, ut. 283 Druhy: Second [Example]: 3 . 2* Najdes tuto notu na F stâti, You will find that the V nëmz dva hlasy zavrxny jsou, [first] note, standing on F, is fa a ut. Ponëvadz pak na horu comprised of two vocables, fa zpëv stupuje, nizsl hlas podle and ut. Since the composition regule vziti pamatuj, totiz ut; steps upward, remember to take a tak prave na b fa b mi fa the lower vocable according to jmenovati pfijde, coz vse k the rule, i.e., And thus, scale mëkké prilezi. correctly coming to it, name fa on b fa b mi, all of which comes from the soft scale. Naposledy të k [tomu na] In conclusion, I mean [to pominam, aby pilnë setril zprav remind you] diligently to [o tom] tëch, kteréz jsem regard those instructions that napred polozil; nebo jestli ze I have placed above. If you si jim, bud' zpëvûv prirozenim have not comprehended these neb tabulim v mutaci, prâvë a correctly, either the nature of dobre neporozumël, jistë bez the [types of] composition or pleteni mnohého 1 skodného pri the tables of mutations, you zpivâni nebudes. Ponëvadz pak will, indeed, be abundantly and nyni o solmizovani pisi, pro grievously confused in singing. lepsi zvyk a se zmocnëmi v nëm Since I am now writing about nëkteré pisnë trium a quatuor solmization, I shall add to vocum k kusu tomuto pridâm, these points a few songs in nejprv fugu, jiz dva, jeden po trium and quatuor voces so that druhém zacnouc, zpivati mohou. you might practice and be strengthened [in solmization]. First, [here is] a fugue that two can sing, one starting after the other. Bas pocinâ, tenor po nëm v The bass begins, the tenor diapente, jeden takt pauzuje; following him at the diapente after pausing one tact: Although Josquin indicates that this hymn is located in the Samotulsky kancionâl at K2, I am unable to find this composition either at that location or anywhere else in the kancionâl. 284 [F2] 35 Z Z C j l g ): [Another Example;] Primus Tenôr. 5 [F2v] 35^.This canon is taken from Listenius's Musica (D5). 285 36 [Another Example:] 8 (^ < 2 S Vtcun quxâcfunc. ZcnùT 36 The tenor of this composition is found in the Samotulsky kancionâl at K7 as "Aj, jak jest to mile." This melody is also used by Josquin on D7 of the Muzika. 286 [Another Example;] Siïcwtt. 4 Po^Ictftenamne «t^rcncmocf» [F3] Ccnor» 287 [Ano ther Example:]^ ^ f)ifc4n& ^doj* pa» obronoiu L.X» V» S» « ■»■ j-n. il 0 j n. ‘ 1 8 ^ j* [F3v] 2lleu&. [JTmor*! % pjl± S :^ g ^,.rqTrfl [F4] 288 37 The tenor of this composition is found in the Samotulsky kancionâl at Q4 as "Kdoz pod obranau Nejvyssiho," except that in the kancionâl the first note of both the "A" and "B" sections is a brevis. Bishop Martin Michalec is identified, in the Rejstfik, as the author of this tenor-melody. In his discussion of Josquin's identity, Hostinsky refers to the initials "I.I.V.S." below the discant of this example (Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin, p. C). Hostinsky believes that these initials are meant to identify both the composer of this four-part arrangement and the author of the Muzika, "Johannes Josquinus, Venceslaus Solin." Hostinsky also remarks (p. 122) that the antepenultimate note in the bass should be A instead of C, and he alters his transcription accordingly (p. 101). Original Example: Hostinsky's Transcription: — ' 1 — © ----; -e \ ^ ' o -.- I — © ---- -r> 289 K cvicenî lepsintu prikladûv For a better training, it sobë vice od jinud hledej, neb would be sufficient to look at i obzvlastnich partes hlasûv various other examples, and dosti jest. [to study] the individual parts of the voices. [CHAPTER VIII] 0 TONlCH A PSIROZENI JEJICH ABOUT TONES AND THEIR NATURES Kantori stari dosti obsimë The old cantors wrote fairly de tonis piIni toho umini byvse extensively ^ tonis. These vypsali; neb o to jich nejvëtsi [musicians] were very diligent prâce i ousilé bylo, aby in their art, and their netoliko zpivati aie kazdého greatest effort was [directed] zpëvu prirozeni dobfe not only so that they could rozeznâvati mohli. Protoz sing, but so that they could pëkné a libé zpëvy, jimiz clearly distinguish the nature lidskâ mysi sem i tam vedena [F4v] of each composition. bÿvala, jsou vymÿsleli. Zâdnÿ Therefore, they invented zajisté dokonalÿ muzikus bez handsome and pleasing umëni tohoto bÿti nemûz, compositions [by their ponëvadz na tom nejvie bud' appropriate singing of the lahodné zpivâni bud* pëkné a notes], and man's thoughts were libé zpëvûv sklâdâni zâlezi. led here and there. No truly Neb mâli kantor hlasem a accomplished musician can be kompositor sklâdânim svym k without this art, since on this veselosti neb k zarmouceni depends the most delicious posluchace zbuditi, singing and the pleasant and obzvlâstniho k tomu potrebi pleasing composition of kusu, kterÿz toliko z znâmosti [musical] works. If the tonûv pochâzi, jinâc chtëje je cantor, by his single voice, or ty zasmisiti oni by plakali, k the composer, by his zâmutku pohnouti, veseli by composition, is to excite the byli, a tak vsecko zpët listener to merriment or grief, ukazovalo by se; protoz o tëch he needs this particular point tonich, coz mnë povëdomého [of art], which can come only bylo, ktâtce poznamenal jsem. from the knowledge of the tones. Otherwise, if he wished to make [the listener] laugh, he would cry; to grieve, he would [instead] be merry; and everything would appear backward [from the intent of the composer]. Therefore, 1 shall tell you what I know about the tones. Tonus pal vlastnë jest fehola The tonus is, particularly, a nebo jistâ zprâva, podlé niz maxim or true instruction, and 290 jeden kazdÿ zpëv bëh svûj, according to this, each and prirozeni a melodii obzvlâstni every composition roves, a cini, tou Cake prâvë rozeznân particular [type of] melody is bÿvâ. Tëch tonû v poctu ostn made, and [a melody] is also jest, kterlzto se na dvé dëli: correctly distinguished. The jedni slovou pro jich vysoké na tones are eight in number, and horu stoupâni authenti, a ti these are divided into two lichem cteni bÿti maji, jako [groups]. Some are called, prvni, tfeti, pâtÿ, sedmÿ, from their stepping upward, druzi pro jich dolûv, nizké authenti, and these are the stupovâni plagales slovou, ti ones read with the odd sudou se pocitaji, jako druhÿ, [numbers], and are the first, ctvrtÿ, sestÿ, osmÿ. Jiz pak third, fifth, and seventh. The prirozeni a vlastnost jednoho others, from their stepping kazdého z nich z tabule této downward, are called the kazdÿ poznati mûze: plagales, and these are the even-numbered [tones], and are the second, fourth, sixth, and eighth. One can thus know the nature and particulars of each of these [tones] from this table: [F5] 1 veselosti, mime, zvucne a libë plynouci 2 smutné, truchlé, k zâmutku zbuzujici 3 prisné, tvrdé, ostré a mysl muzskou prokazuj ici 4 mëkké, tiché, povlovné, posluchace uspici > cini zpëvy< 5 lahodné, veselé, k radosti ponoukajici 6 placlivé, narikavé, k litovâni pohybujici 7 ukrutné, hnëvivé, k boji popouzej ici 8 milostné, utësené, k dobrocivosti [a] milosrdenstvi napomînaj ici merry, restrained, sonorous, and pleasingly floating sorrowful, mournful, and bringing about grief severe, hard, sharp, and producing a masculine sense ^ makes the soft, quiet, gentle, and easing the listener singing < delicious, merry, and instigating joy tearful, wailing, and conjuring up one's sensitivity atrocious, angry, and giving way to war loving, comforting, and calling goodness and love to mind 291 Znameni zpëvu kazdého, po The evidence by which the nëmz, kteréhoby tonu byl, tone of each composition can be seznan bÿti mûze, jest dvoje, known is twofold: first, the 1. pocâtek, 2. konec. Prvni: beginning; second, the ending. kterÿ koli zpëv i hned od prvni By the first [method is meant noty své vzdy vejse az k that] whenever the composition diapason vstupuje, authentus a immediately steps upward from lichÿ jest. Kdyz pak nize od the first note to the diapason, noty az k diapente sstupuje, [this composition will be known plagalis a z sudy jest. Druhé to] always be authentus and pfi konci seznâvâ se timto odd. If [however, the zpûsobem: ponëvadz klicové composition] steps downward tito D, E, F, G finalni slovou, [F5v] from the note of the diapente, protoz vselikÿ zpëv ne it is plagalis and even.3b The transponovanÿ, skonâvâli se: other [method of identifying a tone comes] at the end. It is known by the keys of D, E, F, and 6, which are called the finals. Therefore, every composition, if it ends: D sol re 1 E la mi 3 na ' ^ jest tonu ( > neb < F fa ut 5 G sol re ut 7 D sol re 1 2 E la mi 3 4 on <" > is of tonec > or < F fa ut 5 6 G sol re ut 7 8 38 The usual octave-range of the authentic tone is from the note of the finalis to the octave (diapason) above; the octave range of the plagal tone is a fourth below the finalis to the fifth above. Josquin conforms to these perimeters for both the authentic and plagal tones, here describing the plagal tone as the one that has its range within the octave below the fifth (diapente) of the authentic tone. 292 Vselikÿ transponovanÿ zpëv Each of the transposed skonâvâli se: compositions ending: A la mi re 1 2 b fa b mi 3 4 na < > jest tonu < > neb ( c sol fa ut 5 6 C fa ut 7 8 a la mi re 1 2 b fa b mi 3 4 on c > is of tone< >or < c sol fa ut 5 6 C fa ut 7 8 Prikladove, kterÿmz latine Examples of what are called ambitus ^ repercussiones the ambitus ^ repercussiones tonorum rikaji, jsou tito: tonorum by the Latins Ambitus prvniho tonu: Ambitus of the First Tone: a # . 39 . These ambit examples are based on those found in Listenius's Musica (C3v-C4v), although the differences are so significant that a note-by-note comparison would be of little value. The differences are due primarily to Josquin's abbreviation of Listenius's examples, although some rewriting occurs as well. The ambit example for the eighth tone, however, is presented exactly as it appears in Listenius's Musica. Unlike Listenius, Josquin does not present the primary EUOUAE of the tone at the end of its corresponding ambit example. 293 Ambitus druhého tonu: Ambitus of the Second Tone: Ambitus tfetiho tonu: [F6] Ambitus of the Third Tone: s i r » * / * " Ambitus ctvrteho tonu: Ambitus of the Fourth Tone: Ambitus pétého tonu: Ambitus of the Fifth Tone: Ambitus sesteho tonu: Ambitus of the Sixth Tone: » * * * * ■ •¥1 — 294 Ambitus sedmého tonu: Ambitus of the Seventh Tone: Ambitus osmeho tonu: Ambitus of the Eighth Tone: Aby tez i rozdil kazdého tonu So that the difference of dobfe znam byl, polozi se tuto each tone might be quatuor vocum zalmove, ktefxz comprehended, I shall present Psalmorum intonationes slovou. [below] these psalms of quatuor voces, which are called the psalmorum intonationes: 40 These examples of the psalmorum intonationes are based on those found in Listenius's Musica (C5v-D1), although the differences are so significant that a note-by-note comparison would be of little value. These differences are due primarily to Josquin's reharmonization of the tenor lines presented by Listenius. There are several obvious errors and omissions in Josquin's examples; these are corrected in brackets in my transcriptions (see Appendix D). In both Listenius's and Josquin*s examples of the psalmorum intonationes, the latter half of each of the tenor parts corresponds to the respective EUOUAE formula presented by Listenius at the end of his monophonic ambit examples (C3v-C4v). 295 Prvni ton: [F6v] The First Tone: Dâdc Oominui Ooraioo* m . .A##* * ♦ ÿ »♦ B- Cntor. 25A6. Druhy ton: The Second Tone: Difcant, "* * * ■■ 'T»- "' -- g * j r * ^ ^ Laudate puera Dommua* I I 0 * * i * * f-M-» [F7] Cotor. S 4 5 * # # # . r * - $ A # * * # " ' M 296 Tretî ton: The Third Tone: Ctcdidt propter quod locutus* ait. JJL ' — [F7v] .Z3uL*..,a— M Ctvrtÿ ton: The Fourth Tone: t)ifcAnc« ^ g * *■ * f t ti V ' * .lOT 7»i» » Lwi^cDomimmt omn% m . ^ W t t 4 I M t t.t^ I * # A - j p «Ccnor. 3 r r “ ri! 297 Pâtÿ ton: The Fifth Tone: Si|c4nt» i m # # # #  é * é * « ^ ^ B a d OiZucS'Çtùii&enb — I r?______ i&A», > — V ' --- - 1 1 t • “"fTT^ Sestÿ ton: The Sixth Tone: 4 ____ r— Laudalcnifilcm Dom. (Ténor. [F8v] i 23o«. 298 Sedmÿ ton: The Seventh Tone: Î3i(cant, Memento Domine Dauid. a i t . Ccnor. ê-^A:*Lé»*M*rw » - r » ! T r y ÿ Z ê i * .*.. * "* * #. : : :f a - [End of the Manuscript] APPENDIX A CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF BLAHOSLAV'S WRITINGS Extant Works Published During Blahoslav*s Lifetime 1. Spis £ zraku, jak clovëk zrakem, to jest, videnim £ hledenim, sobë nebo jinÿm skoditi mûze. Written in Prerov at the end of 1550, this work was published (no date given) in Prague at the printing house of Sumansk. The work is a discussion of how a man, through his sense of sight, can bring himself and others to ruin. 2. Musica, to jest knizka zpevakum nalezite zprâvy v sobë zavirajici. This work was published in Olomouc in 1558 and again, in a greatly expanded edition, in Ivancice in 1569. The work is the first music treatise written in the Czech language. 3. Pisnë duchovni evangelistske, subtitled Pisnë chval bozskych. Edited by Blahoslav, this hyranbook of the Jednota bratrska was published in 1561 in Samotuly (Poland) and in 1564 in Ivancice. The work was reprinted in Kralice in 1581, 1583, 1594, and 1598. 4. Novy Zakon unovë do Cestiny prelozeny. This work is Blahoslav*s translation of the New Testament from Greek and Hebrew into Czech. The work was published in Ivancice in 1564, and again in 1568. Blahoslav*s translation later became the latter half of the Kralice Bible. 5. Evangelia anebo Cteni svata kteraz slovau Pasije. Dated in Nâmëst in 1571, this work is a discussion of the Passion of Christ. The work was probably printed in Ivancice. Extant Works Remaining in Manuscript During Blahoslav*s Lifetime 6. Predmluva k VII. svazku Aktu Jednoty bratrske. Written in 1548, this is a preface to the seventh volume of the Acts of the Jednota bratrska. 299 300 7. 0 pfivodu Jednoty bratrske £ radu v ni. Written in 1550 or 1551 in either Prerov or Prostejov, this work is a discussion of the origin of the Jednota bratrska and its organization in the mid- sixteenth century. 8. List hr. Zachariasi v Mlade Boleslavi. This is a letter written to Brother Zacharias in Mlada Boleslav regarding Blahoslav's meeting with the Utraquist priest Benes Optat in Prostejov in 1551. 9. List panu Wolfovi Krajiri, nejvyssimu purkrabimu. This is a letter to Wolff Krajif, governor of Prague, regarding the opening of a Jednota church in Mlada Boleslav. The letter is dated 1553. 10. List nejvyssimu panu purgkrabimu, totiz panu Krajirovi Wolfovi. This is a second letter to Wolff Krajir regarding the opening of the Jednota church in Mlada Boleslav. The letter is dated 1554. 11. Historia hrozneho zahfmeni Boziho, anobrz hromobiti strasliveho, vykonaneho skrze Antykrysta. This work is a description of the persecution of the Jednota by the "Antichrist" Ferdinand. The work is dated 1555 in Mlada Boleslav, just prior to the closing of the Jednota headquarters in Bohemia. 12. Psani jednomu z panuov. This is a letter to an unspecified nobleman regarding the printing shop at Homim. The letter is dated 1555. 13. Summa libelli cuiusdam nuper editi a fratribus, qui a nonnullis vel per errorem vel per odium Piccardi seu Valdenses vocantus. Dated 1555, this work is a criticism of the Piccards and the Waldensians. 14. Legatio Vienna ad Phauserum. Dated 1556, this work is a description of Blahoslav's first diplomatic mission to Vienna. 15. Vypsdni cesty do Magdeburka. Dated 1556, this work is a description of Blahoslav's diplomatic mission to Magdeburg. 16. Druhé poselstvi Blahoslavovo do Vidne. Dated 1556, this work is a description of Blahoslav's second diplomatic mission to Vienna. 17. Summa quaedam brevissima collecta ex variis scriptis Fratrum, qui falso Valdenses vel Piccardi vocantur, de eorundem Fratrum origine et actis. Dated 1556, this work is a continuation of #13. 18. Tfeti poselstvi Blahoslavovo do Vidne. Dated 1557, this work is a description of Blahoslav's third diplomatic mission to Vienna. 19. Latinsky dopis Jani Rokytovi. Dated 1557, this is a letter to Jan Rokyta. 301 20. Ctvrté poselstvi Blahoslavovo do Vidnë. Dated 1557, this work is a description of Blahoslav's fourth diplomatic mission to Vienna. 21. Latinsky dopis hr. Jirimu Izraelovi. Dated 1557, this is a letter to Brother Jifi Israel. 22. Argumentum responsionis Domino Joanni £ Lasko, Baroni Poloniae, ad quasdam reprehensiones Confessionis Fratrum, quae Vitebergae édita fuit florente academia Vittebergensi ac vivante adhuc piae memoriae Domino D. Martin Luther. Blahoslav wrote the Latin preface and a Czech addition to this testimony of Martin Luther. The work is dated 1558. 23. Spory £ panem Voj techem £ Pernstejna a j ednani £ jeho bratrem Vratislavem. Dated 1558-60, this work chronicles the dispute of the Jednota with Voj tëch z Pernstejna and his brother, Vratislav. 24. Sepsani B. Jana Blahoslava £ rozdile Jednoty bratrske od Luteryanske. Dated 1558, this work is a comparison of the beliefs of the Jednota and the Lutherans. 25. Anvolimator to jest £ rote milovne. In this work Blahoslav describes how it is possible to love one's enemies while being persecuted. The work is not dated, but is believed to have been written in 1560. 26. Rejstfik. Dated 1561 as an unattached appendix to the Samotulsky kancionâl, the Rejstfik contains a list that identifies 527 composers of hymns in the kancionâl, brief biographies of some of these composers, and a list of the 79 hymns that Blahoslav considers "excellent." 27. 0 vyvoleni bozim. This work is a discussion of how a man must accept the will of God. The work is dated 1562. 28. Obrana kancionâlu bratrského proti bakalâfi Martin Zateckému v Domazlichich, subtitled Apologia pro editione Cantionalis nova. This work is a defense of the Samotulsky kancionâl against the criticism of Martin Zateck from Domazlice. The work is dated 1564. 29. Prokâzâni svëtlé toho, ze cirkev svatâ a jeji ucitele stafi £ novi nevefili £ nevyznâvali £ clovêcenstvi Krysta Pana, ^ by bylo nestvofene £ neucinêné, £ ^ ^ slov tëch. Dated 1564, this work is a discussion of the humanity of Christ. 30. 0 pronâsledovâni Bratfi v kladskych horach skrze ufednika cisafskeho. This work is a description of the persecution of the Jednota in the mountains of northern Bohemia. The work is dated 1565. 302 31. £ supplikaci Bratri ke krali Maxmilianovi pfi pohfbu krale Ferdinanda. This work, dated 1565, is a petition delivered to Emperor Maximilian at the funeral of Emperor Ferdinand. 32. Prosha Bratfi podana Blahoslavem panu hejtmanu moravskemu. This work, dated 1565, is a petition delivered to an unnamed governor in Moravia. 33. £ supplikaci olomuckeho biskupa Vilema Prusinovského k cisafi. Written by Blahoslav on behalf of the Olomouc bishop Vilem Prusinovsky, this work is a petition delivered to Emperor Maximilian. The work is dated 1565. 34. Pilne rozjimâni otazky té; Slusi-li feci Bozi, cteni.svatâ a epistoly od starodavna k nedelim pfes cely rok pfilozene opovrci a në vice kâzâni neciniti. Dated 1565, this work is a discussion of the religious services of the sixteenth century and earlier. 35. 0 artykulich Satbauchovych. Dated 1566, this work is a discussion of the Articles of Satbauch. 36. 0 utonuti pana Joachyma z Hradce. Dated 1566, this work contains a biography and a description of the drowning of Joachym z Hradce. 37. Vyklad na XIII. kapitolu zjeveni sv. Jana vybrany z doktoru, to jest ucitelu, nejprv fimske cirkve, potom ucitelu evangelisskych, ktefiz se od cirkve fimske oddelili. This work is a discussion of John XIII and the differing views of the Roman and Jednota churches regarding the selection of teachers. The work is dated 1566. 38. £ nekterych knezich podobojich na Morave. Dated 1566, this work is a criticism of Utraquist preachers in Moravia. 39. 0 biskupu olomuckem, Vilemu Prusinovskem. Dated 1566, this work is a biography of the Olomouc bishop Vilem Prusinovsky. 40. £ supplikaci sboru austêckého turnovskeho k cisafi. Written by Blahoslav on behalf of the Jednota congregations at Austëck and Tumov, this work is a petition delivered to Emperor Maximilian. The work is dated 1566. 41. £ pokuseni, jaké jest na sbor pardubsky Pan Buh dopustiti racil. This work, dated 1566, is a discussion of "the temptation that the Lord sent to the Jednota congregation at Pardubice." 42. Dva latinske dopisy Kasparu Peucerovi, doktoru lekafstvi a profesoru na université ve Wittenberce. These are two letters addressed to Kaspar Peucer, doctor of medicine and professor at Wittenberg University. The letters are dated 1566. 303 43. Legatio k jeho milosti cisafi Maxmilianovi Druhému od Bratfi s pisnêmi nëmeckymi, skrze urozeného pana, pana Znatu z LomniceT a pana Voldficha _z Kaunitz, item pana Bartholomëje Vâneckého, pana Jana Kbelského, pana Jana Nekse ucinënâ. This work, containing German songs written by Czech nobles, is a testimonial to Emperor Maximilian. 44. Zprâva upfimnâ a sprostna na tyto dvë otazky; 1. Proc se Bratfi od jinych Jednot bud' pod jednou nebo pod oboji dëli? 2. Proc lidi ku poslusenstvi zavazuji? This work is a discussion of how the Jednota movement differs from the other churches and why people must obey the Lord. This work was written at the request of the Moravian judge, Albrecht Cemohorsky of Boskovic, who was preparing a legal ruling. The work is dated 1566. 45. Corellarium additum anno 1567 die 15 Februarii, subtitled Filipiky proti misomusum. Dated 1567, the work is a critique of a letter written by Brother Lukas in 1502. 46. Latinsky dopis Flaciu Illyrikovi, poslany po hr. Jindfichu Svorcovi. Dated 1567, this is a letter written to Flaccius Illyricus. 47. 0 sporu nekatolickych panu moravskych s_ biskupem Vilemen Prusinovskym stran synody olomucke. Dated 1567, this work is a discussion of the dispute between Utraquist nobles and the Olomouc bishop Vilem Prusinovsky regarding the Olomouc Synod. 48. List panu Mikulasi Walterovi z Waltrsperku, JMti cisafske radë a sekretafi v kralovstvi ceskem. Dated 1568, this letter is addressed to Mikulas Walter of Waltersberg, secretary to Emperor Maximilian. 49. List "jednomu pfiteli dobremu" o mandatu Maxmiliana II. Addressed to "a good friend," this letter of 1568 is a discussion of the mandates of Emperor Maximilian. 50. Latinsky dopis Dr. Kratonovi. Dated 1568, this letter is addressed to Dr. Kraton, who had been Blahoslav's doctor in Basel in 1550. 51. Latinska odpovëd' na list Huberta Langueta, saského vyslance u videnského dvora. Dated 1570, this letter is addressed to the English ambassador in Vienna, Herbert Languet. 52. Latinska odpovëd' hrabëti Juliu Salmovi, pfiznivci cirkve Krostovy. Dated 1571, this letter is addressed to the Czech noble Julius Salm, a patron of the Jednota bratrska. 304 53. Confessio Augustana. This work is a reply to a letter of Dr. Kraton; it opposes the uniting of the Jednota bratrska and the Lutheran churches. The work is dated 1571. 54. Latinske dopisy Joachymu Camerariovi, Esromu Rudingerovi, a Janu Lasickemu. Dated 1571, this letter is addressed to Joachym Camerari, Esrom Rudinger, and Jan Lasicky. 55. Vitia concionatorum to jest Vady kazateluv. In this work Blahoslav discusses the faults that are common to preachers. The work is not dated, but is believed to have been written in 1571. 56. Grammatika ceska od kneze Benese Optata £ od kneze Vaclav Filomatesa, pfedeslych let vydana £ nyni od J. B. P. povysvetlena, nemalo £ napravena, £ porozsifena. This work is a correction of the Etymologie of 1533 by Benes Optât, Vaclav Philomathes, and Petr Gzel, with extensive supplements added by Blahoslav. The Grammatika was begun in 1550(?) and dated in 1571. 57. Numerous brief entries, initialed by Jan Blahoslav, are found in volumes seven, eight, and nine of the Akta Jednoty bratrske. These entries are not dated, and were made at various times between 1552 and 1571. 58. The entries of the Nekrologium are categorized by year in the Akta Jednoty bratrske. These were extracted from the Acts by Vavrinec Orlik, Blahoslav's successor as scribe of the Jednota, and rewritten and supplemented according to Blahoslav's notes. The obituaries written by Blahoslav survive both within the Acts and as a separate work entitled the Nekrologium. Blahoslav's notes and instructions to Orlik, however, are no longer extant. Authentic Works No Longer Extant 59. Slabikafe ceskeho. Believed to have been written in 1550, this work was the first spelling primer of the Czech language. 60. Naucenl mladym kazatelum. Believed to have been written between 1569-71 for use at the Ivancice seminary, this work contained advice for young preachers. 61. Virtutes concionatorum, subtitled Ctnosti kazatelske. In this work, a companion text to #55, Blahoslav discussed the virtues that are common to preachers. The work is believed to have been written between 1569-71. 62. Pofadek kâzâni rocniho. Believed to have been written between 1569-71, this work was a discussion of the necessary ingredients for sermons throughout the church year. 305 63. Duchovni Alchymia Johaitnis Blahoslai. Written in 1571, this work contained a summary of the religious beliefs held by Jan Blahoslav. Apparently taken to Sweden as plunder during the Thirty Years War, the manuscript was lost when the castle library at Stockholm burned in 1698. Extant Works of Questionable Authorship, Often Attributed to Blahoslav 64. Historia Fratrum Bohemicorum ah anno 1458 usque ad 1535. This is an annotated, chronological ordering of the documents of the Jednota- bratrska prior to the beginning of the Akta Jednoty bratrske. 65. Proc Bratfi Cechove k knezim Luteryanskym neb (jakz fkou) Evangelistskym pfistoupiti nechti. This undated work explains why the Czech Jednota did not wish to merge with the Lutherans. 66. Zivot Jana Augusty. This work is a biography of the Jednota bishop Jan Augusta. The work is not dated. APPENDIX B FACSIMILE OF P. F. GABULKA'S NOTE ATTACHED TO JOSQUIN’S MUZIKA M t»Aj, i^tT^ /MP ft kW*«» " f ^ W g w.w# fx it^ fie^iét»^pbwt9 /w4 306 APPENDIX C HYMNS OF THE gAMOTULSKŸ KANCIONÆL USED AS EXAMPLES IN BLAHOSLAV*S MUSICA AND JOSQUIN'S MUZIKA Hymn Number Hymn Title Page Number A2 Isaias prorok swaty porokowal s zadosti a rka 2 A4 0 stworiteli wssemohaucy / Otce nas pïezadaucÿ 4 A5 Tagné rady ulozeni / newzalo gest promënëni / Bûh 5 A 6 Pan Bûh wssemohaucy / pfediwny w swe 6 A13 Laska wëcnâ Bûh gediny / zgewil se w ni k nâm pre 16 A15 Wssickni wërni Krestané / weselme se nyni / Pani 19 A16 Tës se dcerko Syonska / ty Cyrtwi Kresta 20 B9 Slawa nawysostech hospodinu / a na zemi p 39 BIO Diky giz nyni wzdaweyme / Panu Bohu gegz 41 B13 Prokrik nemz wssickni k chwale Pana nez swëtegisiho 45 DIO Srdce me sklâdâ Pisen / pisen welmi pfihodnau / k t 102 D13 Hospodine Otce zadaucy / Pane wssemohaucy / o 107 D14 Gezis Krystus gsa Bûh prawy / Otce Syn 108 E4 Neyskawëgisi Klaru Kryste / Synu Panny vzdy 123 G3 Radûgme se wssickni nyni / cinic wesele zpiwani 184 G6 Krystus zmrtwych wstal / kteryz byl za nas na k 189 G20 Ay prworozeny / cti a slawau ozdobeny / gizk 210 14 Hospodin Pan Bûh swaty / neobsahle podstaty / b 249 120 Radûg se matko synü Bozich rodicko / genfs w 274 307 308 Hymn Number Hymn Title . Page Number K2 Ay gak gsau mill towgi pribytkowe / gak ro 278 K7 Ay gak gest mile a vtëssené / Duchem S 286 K8 Litost meg nad nami pas Pane / natet' ocetawamelo 300 K16 Kfestane chwalmez Doha kteryz moha bez nas 311 07 We gmeno Bozi pocneme / a dokuoz mûzme prac 437 Q4 Kdoz pod obranau Neywyssiho / w swëtë dau 487 S2 Wesele Bohu zpiweyme / cest chwalu wzdaw 552 To assist the reader in locating these hymns, the titles are listed as they appear in the index of the Samotulsky kancional. APPENDIX D TRANSCRIPTION OF THE POLYPHONIC EXAMPLES USED IN BLAHOSLAVS MUSICA AND JOSQUIN'S MUZIKA Blahoslav, Musica (B8-B8v): Canon by Josquin Desprez p e : : ' " ' 1 Lj-- jj- ..-- 1“ ---- r 1 ' J -J— 4--t---- mL y ± = E = j ------'1 1 ■■ ------p r *-i Jt . i 1 11 ,1 1 J 1 J . J 1 î--L -d ------: 4T:-.--dr.z:z.^ p-*:Tr 1 F 'l o : , |i o ------=------r-« -l9---- u. >'■ rp-~ = £ = : - ^..- L j - 1 ] - i ~ T ~ t ■"T— :— fr—r— r - — —1----fr-—h J- U JJIj ‘•'ijd n r f — FT" —j—T—u y J r.-J-ii."Tn*—f—F—r-r1 J Lab i=. ^ —1 F—F— Tz: ------1 r>'-rri1——H P--'vr------H----... 309 310 Blahoslav, Musica (B8-B8v); Canon by Josquin Desprez (Cont.) # # ■ Ü J—j" — r- . 1— Tt~r"ri—:- r » ---- 3 FFF r - r ---- 1 ---- = t y -tb W — ^ .'■ ■ T d -i= d ± = = ^ 1 - - f - i 1 m -f-F-.T i-F ^ 4 -r-4 i.-zZ-p.- , ' iLf!_L -X----i-4— 4 H - -4 4 - rO------r. 1—T r i 1 - r j — 4 ------r-t- -1--- 1 11- - - 1 = ± g = y d 1 r-K— ■—f~) 1 jt * -■t f " r v i 1 si------?-U i i " X z ! q 1 V - f ■ X" H: FP_ ë.mll - I f-Pe-i f-j PT------:r-P- V b . LJ r 1---KjLJ -L i - H ._L_ -M-W- 4P------z— K—;—1—h-rH—k: -r —1--- T—14------1-= F F 4 t - ---- J------= t i 4 = t i h - i - T r f ”d— i 74 —h f / [zOJL4 - ^ i '8 -S— I----- '^ r ~ * 'p T T 4 —it-t-pf-p'lf ”V t r 1 ^ O ïl-----L jt J3---- ,1 - 4 —E = t - ± ± -----p J _ L . T -rt---- r-T—H-t—— 1 -1 ■' _j_»_I _ . 1 -t—tH------J! J j - i - j ------«M » !■■ P I . —11 1 -f J 11 k' 1 1 -1 mf —r [ • “ 1 • é. t | ; —H 4-X—X □ 4-J j- i * * j: f # S 311 Blahoslav, Musica (B8-B8v): Canon by Josquin Desprez (Cont.) J' -0- ^ P J "■<. J*rrè"j - ë\.f- :■Jl' J" è-1 " 1— [iilfjr.. 1 J | j ^ i-j-—U - -- -P 1 ------■Xxnrf—ri -a y:-M-- #-4—i-i. é r—- -ü-' - -- O ■ Blahoslav, Musica (D1v-D2): Dupla — 1 - 7 ------hrtï—T---- 1------=------n— p -p ------TTt------Ô---u-j=------1---1---- ¥ 4 - —PTT ------n— 7 p------P— - p - y - j ------r - 1 — JLt- ---- L—d— r . ■*■■■—" — d < ■» ■■■■ f-Tfr— I■ L j --- g — o(-l-)-r ' J J -- n — - ¥ = 8 A i r -1p— .. p, ■— O n " ' u “1 - "li" ---- 1------u_j u 312 Blahoslav, Musica (D2): Tripla ■ffTT — 1— n---- T- .. ■ Lh i_@--- e — ÜIuL A~1r-J, J ■< J! ■ c) — _p- ,---___ L._ J____ T^'TD " r - -f-# -3-0— ^ ------r r -JH— _l _ ------U-'U d- ■ p -- a 0 - 3 Blahoslav, Musica (D2v): Sesquialtera t-- 3---- J--- H = * — h- 1— H— 12 . ... — - H r 1 -«ÿ- 0-m~z------=------n------© — — ;------— .., : , ;■■■,; ------r-^ - 4 — 6 — , — e- 313 Blahoslav, Musica (E5v-E6): The Division of the Grouped Notes ---- eL — f : c,:___ o- |=2==ë=: iîrr"®— 5— -U... -e— ü'-~' -o— &-0 — T -p— h"- -G— o— -2-éj—J-O"-- - ci -- - — r-f-rT- -2--% ------? 0 0-- o .. 0 --I n ~ " " ~ n -o—n -O- O O O ■ ■ g .." ■ ■ o o--- ■O o------®- e f = ^ “ T T — ^ o o.. -e--- p-%— -ë-a--- 'X t — ~ V—é — .g— ----2-W-J O ■■ ■ ■ G— H -u:— -7=3 t “- -— e — e-T"5“ — S— ' -0— 8---- c _ Q c . 9 B — n ---- y-LCijzi — 0— 0 --- -O-— o— -O — o -- zcl: : ë = = ^ zn: I £ - e — e - jaz 0 --0 - -e- -o— U. •g ' D o o- g o ' n TT s 3 z::za. 0- 0- 314 Josquin, Muzika (B1v-B2): Canon for Four Voices î f Y \è If r r ^ y— &pz={±: - *- S: 3—- e ------— — ■ ? Ÿ ' ii -Q— n® ¥— p-=-----r—r- ■ m ------ - m ------ Josquin, Muzika (B2-B2v): Example Containing the Six Vocables ----- (- “H y— ------n----1— T" 0 ----u_ #- •e- _____ -d—1—T- 1 p 1 ■-n— T“ r -1—f— t— m e P a._ “t I--- m— -jizyj-SL. -r—Q— 0— _ s ------Rî--- l-p-Q— 1 P-—-P- J 3 —a----p— 1 r '..i.-j-'- bÊz£z±y — q 315 Josquin, Muzika (B8v): Two-Voice Example of Hemiola K -O" ... \ = ^ = ¥ = ------r —-il--(3-----\-rs-----ri- - r %- - h - r - T - - p ' ■■■q " _U ______° ------— l-U 0 i-e— — 14 - 4 — ^ --- _ *¥7------p— -p —& J ' J— o- ■ 13 ■■■- [D-]- 316 Josquin, Muzika (E6): Canon Illustrating the Signum Concordantiae E £ n: a I £ I £ I £ f = p f = = 2 = ^ ■ h - 1 ' .... %------[—— 9 ‘ J ...... - -o— ■- 1— o 4 _ — _— js— ---- p------(j) P --- ^ ----!— e-- 317 Josquin, Muzika (F2): Canon for Two Voices 1 E 1 m I hf-i 'r=rT=^=^-?~ - £ f i f j, f f S g § r r r - r i T - f * m ? ■> f F f i~ tT ------1------L l__pi.,1. r * 1 c ------d ------—o ------ j ------f - - V i n - ' Un :— 1 ~ p _ r J ------— '— (_T“ ------T“T----- i— ' 318 Josquin, Muzika (F2-F2v): Primus & Secundus Tenor y-t- f " W " t -r-H-ti- ■ — 1 n— J "J ' 1 --4 —;— ■ J..J ,4 - 1 d ------. — 1 — ^ #"# 1 m TTTÎ -d,.j f-3ȱ: — f-t-T--- l- l- ■!■ - - Q —%—r—1--- H—1—H—t—I- _ _ —n—- ...' ' il- 1 " " r r -p-,J .J JbL E E F - = i X k ' ■rr " — '1 p ' ■ ■J’" -T ,- n J i-i-i M 1 1 1■ 1' ■ 1 ' 1— -■ ÆZZ {4-__1 : g. c J W w 1 n II Josquin, Muzika (F2v): "Vitam quae faciunt" I e — * T f I f T _ü ___ XJ------■>< - ^ 1 - p - f - m - ■J J j — 14— t ----- zpzjiz:?- 9 ^ r : 319 Josquin, Muzika (F2v-F3): "Pohled'te na mne v tëzké nemoci" H ---- -t 4 t5— I r r r ï - J - . M f '1 ü - -(— i-i-j __ « — -1--- r # - F f = F f ÿ p ' M a — F p - r r ~ r T f T ^ W ^ J -1— J---- 1- U-L- - - Œ i q I l î ^ E = i = Ç ^ d ■J J f' -m-O P Pi* 1— =- “ 7T ■' A— l— cjT" 4 —— 1- _ ____ L. -J J• Jri p ■ ' -Vf " p- - n ------1------^ Z  . J..-. |o = '^ ' r 14 - i - i - J r ^ - T ' i _ü ___1 Josquin, Muzika (F3-F4): "Kdoz pod obranau" 1: p l ' . j : k # = a = 1 ^ - ITT” U l. W m S - f - 3 - êj - l ------p - “?— - ë ------£ r J ■i p r i 3_____ :___ % ------ë- f - - = # = 320 Josquin, Muzika (F3-F4): "Kdoz pod obranau” (Cont.) =w=W 'J" j —" j ~il-:J:.'l 1— w w -% i - 1------j------Y b p ..... ' 'f— -jf— — 1— 4-c- "j -,r~- ■ r------p— .. ■■i—tJ---- -tL-,— -d -kl---- — p —e — #- b = ^ : : j = \ = à = ^ ------T ~ —------1 K u r g — 1 ■ 0 ï : ------—1—1------—1— j —1------1 1-0 ■ O- _ J _ d ------■ ■■ ' * d ::: 1 J 1 --- F—T— f'P. f . ■ 1...... '“ i_: A ^ A » r f ------p 1 1—•—'— 1 * 5 ■ 1—...J. ii------ # = ^ 1 = ■'■-■d----- a --- — o — o ----- ------p ------> ------' UM------4 ------I'* : J Ll------— e ----- - J— e ------ — e — 321 Josquin, Muzika (F6v): Psalm Intonation of Tone I I $ 3 C m $ Ig ' * ff 7 fl Josquin, Muzika (F6v-F7); Psalm Intonation of Tone II 3 0 0 C I t : -#— #- Josquin, Muzika (F7-F7v): Psalm Intonation of Tone III a i i p , T i J : 8 3 E I -e- . : - u = 322 Josquin, Muzika (F7v) : Psalm Int:onation of Tone IV m I m § # " O e # Josquin, Muzika (F8): Psalm Intonation of Tone V I • » TT a a * * Josquin, Muzika (F8-F8v): Psalm Intonation of Tone VI 'i' m * m 323 Josquin, Muzika (F8v); Psalm Intonation of Tone VII -t— - a I -r~r ■»— cr J t i J L X A ^ lâ «. JLJIJL _ - U - - Ô f— Q. g S APPENDIX E FACSIMILE OF BLAHOSLAV'S MUSICA 324 325 QJI — g o i W ^ 1* 1 ? f t ij • ^ s # ! ' ^ M ■ é t | v « e # m CR** e m ; m î i r " S - s i ® j a Ij V MVSICAM ^prz Vi l O H > A N m S 'B: JtDLECro\E3i* Omduhceîchesolm idm M VSlCtA. tardi, My'SlCtÆdkïngcrtuisfemferdmaUvlrij.. HaSienmdutJi{uU-,ftrcgrinddutdrte cdmhsu xA^utrudilusfUufitCT^chid n^rafonh» Hhdocetexcultéfnmiacdntdrcÿol)attost ( y t numéro frimts Jtclonitdte) lia r .. ludicejiihiujio^erhcertdrelihtllèy ■ Quos veldt viridi turld CMorscedro» . , EÎirudiiusJîripuffOoSIidtnihilvfus in iBo, Qwdmerhocdrpdtquoduerc^uirdt heitu EÎiJitcilitMedfodoMccnîcsdttcU dfertd, • £ t cunBlis doSidJmpIichatefldcet. iir é td non trdSldtytrddit/hmone folito OmnidquxvtilitAtdrs^modcfld petit’ j y otifine mentefinos cdldmo formsrefsgdci ■■ ■■ ■ .Seddout drgutitneSlere verld modis * ' ;• • * ] ' ilMdmuititdcuert't^mnoscomponcre cultpty > • : Vethdj^etmm m erit rhi (bndre. dif^t- • y ) . w ho ON 327 lîiià îa i & l f f f ' T"* S k s «o "A g ."<* i i f T B 3&a«crTTrwimT'»-» 328 ««lunnwrtia*— •^".T- 329 I m m i f - t f â i f i« t t m Ï5UMU 330 I liîîîMîî lîKMî^l lïill'ïlitftifffitIPlilS a s { ■ ■ '.= 5%^ I f 331 t « l l W i f i K P f W f î i » : -A- ■•:" I — iiiiiiiaaiM II iM^>a **#«" ■ > y<*»<«#» v v*# 332 IV , 1 1 * tltli|U» f m t b f la s . . M l f é r ^ c t i I «A i fwpnottéroii ft If : poü>( lil -oNA k v S l » * 5 s ; * s n a I 2 I* U t f i l l ^ l i k : « ■ M m i m m m m m :.SV • . ; 0 % w . 9 ... îïfcf tpp^tmaànjttfMü tppspf WKt)t ml w fa vt fol vt (a la fol h k M iU Sjjufni M&ml oD ( l - M I- la fa la ml la re la ot 't>f ml rcfa mi W n } . 44------I______, > \ii»§fgfîibftrrlc^ei 7 t± a6(§0.kpCpOW{Um«l» 1^,1 faja. fol Ufa fol mi fa rcml vtvf j ù t m i t m â & B ' ' » i P c S i / fa « fol mi la U.ml fol: r« fa or ; w ,v.. ^ -• .-.. . • • • . . w w 334 I I l f Ê s g a f è s s S jpWobimtciiMwaé* migf. JBjrtwInl u ‘l é t « 4 SIS; iii • i î i ^ SâSSlijiss5!Saî3Sti»!^i<«wÎTO 335 m m Îtliii ^ Si -- ^ ^ ^ » f S ï i l l î i » . 336 r 1 . 1 I ittfilS#-S f ■=-?'S«§«a # itiirif mit iliiîlfitl llîî l l l l ü i ï i i & m m i i LZ£ 338 m m m & 339 " 1 lîijâ T ttjjTupOlÇfttl/, .. 8 % % % -Q an!- Jli: tts |Q l I L S L J J f , »(îupoirin/* t i J z i i i l i I* 4 . ia # m mjrifpoWnjr.i: M a a Imt fit- litllfïlili 2 s a. B 1 t l l i l î i f f l N i # ■r . 0<7€ 341 u m r w flit it« o u . Ô u* * ® r m m m ^ *:îiîf!% O I* a * » . f J CO l i® i a , i . . r s - 5 - M I I I î î 9 lîiiimi ^iîltii r • ,.• •■■■■{i :.Cf. o .... # 342 g a * s > § ^ i ' iljil •■• s • « * i f - .s^:?: .g-is.- « . w M 6 5 W s Ë i-S'E : % , f - îtliÉÎÎtIîîii ■■' t f t t S i S I r i M l i ® 8 J J i 343 o T '### lîïiïS ^ . S u il 0 ^ t î t i f: . r ’»' • 4. f. ; . _ • " ®Éîii[>4. 1 — 6 -— fW/bÇ^ra M iîwifrt. A 6 » Sfv///r« ' • Stratfjh ^nüJjrg • ■»•♦'■ I I §T. ? : M § .0 # m. ) ' ~ . ..• 'ô c o ^ P P ' ttnaâpûfm» I ntma : P o ù t % ' . ,Ù(h* j:» JS<^É» -S y Z < , 6» J n ^ J ^ J • L«2*- 344 a O I i sSJ \sj I I- a git -3* m t i i K3 m â s g « s . S I i . s f S . © ®!l = ^ î f » a . ü <ü itro SÎ (Ü *iî ■ :■ - ï ï t- y ^ O:: i m IIM m•3 - lift # 1 1 1 “ I s - •»> © ÜIÏ & a » 2 * I 345 M i U S 4 1 I I I I If t s i p fill.8 îtÜ-iill I lit'ÏIWI s ua* I t l l ' t l ê - T .'-.-T'y III 4«■rs. s i 1 # It 1 1 346 ^ Ill ' 1 1 . Il lîiiilHl mlîtïlMl m * Q s fB iîiiifttia i Îfiîliir 347 ?t!l j i l i f t i i f i ; ' .;■•■•/■ ^ .'ÆÎ'Y'fX') :-V'k'. I R îliiMitstt i â sM Ü I g,:. Wiîiîîfîiïl ilit ilifili illïll iiiiil mmA. ■ ■ c '^fiîiïllifelltl ï f tiflii ittifi £ s ( j ^ S 349 I# § : f Switiii ilfi I 350 1 ■CH J & :ct ÏJ, m j; m m : a 4 H M t \__ '— J. t is I ^ OSwammi*. w (fg4/ffd(M fwt(ïi:%/fr J l 3se 353 r - - W s- : *§» f f l IM I î t' i W i I . £ I I I ’m (W s ' A # M M I I f 1 î i • w "I i $ m i àt I I m q# t q a t o *S r z z ? I 1 P g s e l l e 354 m . H I y 1 » § T 'O I V A I fllllîl 1 1 " 1 " llfîtîs IlilîHî | i f ® 5 0 ^ ïilîîï m s : e& . ;.HV I-./-.-— i-.. — 355 1 1 1 ! m l ! ® xh I" 'Zr-%. w m II 1 ##! 356 .a. . > m 'B % j "I % ; anz m g - â f ! 357 Itî (' # SÂB®&i5aS«!Ss% «h»icr î: y . m # I i J3Î t. c, :□• : □: □ : I :c* . i J * l ' m f {.%:-: A Tv' -i % ' : • • • ••• . '. . • • '...... j i <• » I ; 4 ':-C y.'-..; ' ' - - " : a a : ^ î If I 8 se 359 îMiiiîlitïftl ^ ? l i i L I - a ' « a » "% I liltflî « «I g îO: I î i /A T O = ' ï É i ï ' “ 360 ■ « « , I iir I .. :. -,.r- , /. mm ^ i i i s i l i p j I l f 1 1 i n m m [à-r'/.-K- l i i i * k.:' . •■•.a z c I f . : □ TO: 19Z 362 i ililPl l i l a i i l i i * 1 1 1 m m m m m m M m APPENDIX F FACSIMILE OF JGSQUIN'S MUZIKA 363 364 iiilv i M m m . UVi-l'C-ï^ " K ' : t w m : # 1:; ,.;i A' J •r.*' » #%r 365 ;-FTV % i l » iÿffr'i.v 366 = f-'tï*. - r ' 5 Yil ipiiif s r II »» w liîP 367 s * 1 1 f i l l ü ! V t t l iillîfiil^i a ti i î s a î » ! # ”i m ms m t# 3 i r î i i r & f s i s il! ',1 â i.3 i ,1 # -s S..SS »■if Îiî M ■? ïS rî's-.p §^i| I ? 8, a j « J t t .2 % : 4U«* - S e âj^ tr C j» SI ® S. ®' îîiir-.•t •üI a a ‘5<2.^Ô »• SPcë i Si # ê#A&4:ë'§H2< w - % ; • - : \ . 4 : / " \ . . j/ : . . . ' ' fiedj i jip/nai^tcc voafj^ npt^fii w tbin . jc)%aBofibyj (Cjlo .>«(I.?bo>»4ti/rt m ^ y t y » w w ^ toii.xo piqiiniàf (wyS rojlicitydj/ bug » : fgcem4ii&rOfbW( twp^hK4»»MA$#Dr^ . ptacy / -W hebejpcccrtfîwiî / w samucSu tc. ^ ^^àejtb^punubm |e mni pr#)ptwûge / tebby ObluflcuqbO poci(|«nif pbap*%uof % / 4 ito pumitlat g I m b f w a * O &aulbi»i tés (bys ob . ^^ÿflqcfo wtifogt pftpifit^ / bebygugf 4 bb W b L ] jbtabU pofloen byl/ wffdt ^ dwiba&toave/ JwdmicdcbPWixnbfii sfhlit ÿ obcornewb%f ; ' bo fiyffe bubeny povBrotil (c/Hcbo JTïu3yf .v«. d:ut f tn«jvc«,fnU7 gi jè wdfrf vw fircgil A ,îoj giita wifeefaVttiJMff/ 't t i jwu0g pro ;.':% 'DÏL#T,OREM MV« jdmirng* M^agq. ÇuEytoto $ Gcbmif ra g^K$ ' > % :5, .-.%MC*E (TV D losyai. . ■• • A: - .-. ■• • ..•, . . . V ‘ VmtnQ' wÂ'atinftttnf ttîmeclî'éRf^j^ÿ-y, rtnoy c'f- v " . . j w ON NO 370 lilMiffii rw W tliiîifï" -- o T: ,*4 S's f î M î i l T f j g m i S liiltfiiMIIIILÏIflîlS'S’^S.'g t : 4f: . tofim fov5 prat»? pdrd}amq($/womf 1% ■ .x^febc a vtvc^ w BiPtta èelyaifi pomdlu nab'çl/' I c %. »• ■ • -, , - fj-., i ^Ij^cij/jnutomcnüiiî tc. I'c^pramuBe^lafyca n(mi(cO) w 6 m omq (iowe)wy# . -1 potottog n ow/acag$ttd?to_UMcb.hVlUtg/ >. w vu(|^»ÿbupe jwuC. ^I«ô / h«mqrt$ (ê i ‘^ Bu^ejfli prJwe~p0pfitfi>nf: tutb priVP3enf ûbffy / Eterf ^famfa$bauVï^tit (stcldifec Cborai) poble dVtt ErPm?n?iny(& m 4 g!Î/^egeb#^ f ?pn w y tici^ fhabm / 4y» tarn jwy# ' ttobofnftigbo mtpht/ ncboKE l ln^ SvcfEe'bo rtbncEn fTpryfle/ wlaftn^ V c c a b s^ ^ •î S ’SnPpawa gefîrî* ta é / ite m{! t )p#^ lum a gménP J EtetéjtP bî<*fÿ p4tq tn«5ÿE^i>"‘ XDatt^ proiiemii tit» Ecriq$ PoEoiuiU mê a Sptwttw (E(ab4 tcle. poblé (tterWpEpW ' - ' fcy«^t*gq'5 P'EA>4 cy/»5iwcnêi ttqcbpîctV r. 4 g 10 tt. xotnaUiUJ 4 ît üa sfh* "L bl4fÿd)bopt EcDy[blmt50tP4 nq.3p?iùu prP4 ^ „.i I. C^i;y/ y<»te&o Etcry îpîw prirojeit^. ^IBep/mîpÿlï Ppri/ k.èçOpÿ. »cb ptjîfe.c Pebo/ (àmu ppcu tnE rcccnnu tob'EO Pbfa^ué J Snatf. . - ggcÿl^g ncbylo / pnbnlt (àu literu t tatnu prd ' V 2, ZccctylttevatsUt a (fttaba Baibâfpùbté xonq/a. togeffvcrcbitvi îa., X g(; gcfi bP# , ttîafinofii fmyfïa nctm md voyflùtoata by et. PaccE taEotey jpîi» (fept bl4(ÿ wy3pq'i»4t£- ! j. Régiment/ yaE jè Eterÿ plos « na Etc# tfàn?n/3^Ë 0S y poblé nidi (niécev^ pr a W 0 ' rém mnnfidElo’bg/Etomn/E6'g< quatuorncb . 6np4ty Cleronym tncrflqE (IP51I/ wnfins A jRiwm $pq«DAtt vjW ••r. t . " ' _ \7""TTT—. , ------] ve^ct tc(>ba5 tby$. csbobiîÇRwB^onî •- V T quêamlaxis» R j^nare âbrii» Ml'ragcfio-X ;3pq'w4ti àjctlvsiixodnbÿxod, procol fê gû» >v é* pilnôfK vi/. gebrt0î)0 {fasbé^b wlafîtwfl/W' tobrc^nty/aby wc.)4ne. (4.34 la li, mil/gin* iW: gi4 ÿ * gniett «ebawal/ ne- 3prectV4çâ / 4r£ ' %; jvm FAinuIi tiiorum, SO ;wul!4 pr4»ébo oba^n}4l / 4k gmeiinge Qi$ = gmieno y wlafêitq* feTafïi 3w»l! to^vetll cemuf 4by fê bbbr* ttmapi wb^l / w»f* pvqtl4(> L m%gi . . •• . rcanim, SanAc lohannes» V . ••• ■ .••.. • I g r w gc opvfc tso (njfci> itsfntnÀ tic ^ ' pOjiMinen^l^é mafè» yc rc n^nteal ti Ix (ol tni re vt. 0 1 ; jîol Ü ± 3 ± 3 E ' Wmemwgqf, vt rc mi 6 mi & ibl la la foi fâ mi fa mi rc vt. mi f t =i(pobrtg‘ J %- Lût" vt re mi re mi & mi fâ ib 6 foi la la foi & lot • yW rt tîÆ t^ flêfii^Irtfyib tTT<»rdrf fcajpîwowéîflIéjcgqVttiniwipspqwâM by« . ,ttiO&4U/(4u paimti'^nimi nietcrq © (irq/ya^ 5±3d^i$:zz$r,♦:)t Kfo^lâ. im. pnrojen^/ fpl* re. irîÇcÿ/ f». »c* fâ 4 u k in i rcini rc vt. I L: ^ ,vS-v ••• .• .. - .. . . ---- W w E9M ■ÿ'. - '* 4 ' s p 4 / • M .:•• /. 4; : . : V.- • ■-: tri y c/:yri fpaPotvani? pablé r*)bqWw t i d ) ^ Dtaaffaroti (luequarta, w / gtmskcfnqcy tHobue neb jnuruaUa pie&ginécvfrf f l u p P ^ ' ’ x^ugmrnvm w^Wh ~'z. ------ • • Ï . Vnitonus, fbyf tTot lÿéfoltl/ bub %» . neb W4 j^nexww pb (pbln geff. Vt fa rc iblmi la la mi ibl rc6 vt». « * ' Diapmtc ucl quino.Eby^ljof vt tc • m: . fi ,fo - • • ' ; gmycbp?t:f{upuge» - V - 4-— N-' ■ • ■ ■ ••' • -.:. % Z» \ ^ - Tonus ud&mn& , f bÿ) ÿ;ébM 3 = r i : twMft4Oetitgef4$itmiWeyr0mbr:iiilt vt ibl rc la mi mi 6 la, - i fiupugc/icmuipbbohnypfqttab ' m k^ic gefî. . Tonus Diapenieauc ! fe= ir^ï:târ“ flêfî CTp w f by.? fîupugc.: : ; J T f . T a c t f ± VC rc mi £i ibl la la ibl fa mi re vt» if Ditonusudtmia, tbyixiùta ÿtbm ia vt la rc ia ibl mi h v4 :. tni{>4tf U m neb f r a ç w m prcj?4?ngqç flbc* w u> ÿjyyjB-- «pKâaranr-'- r s r > • -■ ‘ ■•'■:> 2* Certdr* Diapajon pdbiia, ^ Y 5 pres 0 m/ I t z W : S f  g Vt ' > / » r W ~sj 375 ■ - ?■'•■ 1 •• 1 ' r'-' ' # 1 '■•• ï [ l î r $ i fws itî t â & U j Is . IS :3< A-»X f xDt M lUf > ù : y r < t d ' t ? ■ 4- . ,»tr. ■f- l I I p•5 i g e i S * ‘f. . i . - H * : 5^* S^_ *r» «w ## rN B ^ *B S '7 mo #t R 4 4^ 1 t j^ A ét\ i® p i i i INi* S f HlilîUitt t itiii® - § ; 8 s . I l l i s - l l 376 lîîîiiia £i on t •». K : - . ■ H-,...:- 377 “If :& 1 s l ' W f II# #. mu O a s - 5 . . f ■lillfi*« W • o t) o .a .H ÜK # 1 1 ïlilîr 378 '« kV» î m 6 II-p I I % i | « m m 1 1 I «53é tit*? î> É '■ l i # l l ilîilil yiiir*' ^iiæ îfS ’S'êf^: iîfîiîiî»-s-5-s.ià-s reîi ^ ' seagWam i 11J l iïSI||51 IÎM|||I: 379 'E- l î H :S ‘g îiîiïa^ «n s Ie s ît I 5 ‘ C!.- 3 .- IT 380 II. kl* ] i 11 9 k ils • m i «AI I f @ I É. t l ■ à I m m S i a -SX S' ■ #L. î i 0 2 I M l ilfl i i i m .X fi . Pf—' > ' n y b ]^ ' 1 [M: 4 s « //A ^titnni kneb tnbtoa ^ V îCciîOr, Z Z * % % : ÿ # g iL -.. ' %AS. f ''" SQtu^fipu^f^bqtff bobre r0$b^1nfcb prwttpibo» nebotbys fe cerné n^ t y mejy f>q te {(abau/tebb'ÿ £ U) 0 0 382 illîl Pill .2lliiïH ItüisMIitti: ' ( = ^ 2 S Eau& t w lÂikEmw# re v r crpre4> pf^W^y ' tytpm*g*.-T-... : Naturalisa Ganius GifW:K ' - # = = = d ™ ^ N * ? : » # i » 6 w 6 la ibi & ibi'la ibl • fii ini la b 6 (bl - • Vcnircdemptor» A j }> ± 3 ± r E E E E t a d t nu re re* . Naturalis cum bedura«. ' ^ 3C Bcmolaris# ' ■ laizini " F 5 - = w = Z ' : Sandh-'p* I. 4. ; p * q p c t m ± ± 3 : v tre .. 'Bédumscum bemolari» R%ma(W ^ ± x r S ^ - Be I K Ë E 5 . ûeiaïc, • K 4, '. .'4 ' w w00 : ■■■: . pfqMAb# C A w y gxm pobob# . nf^.f ümtPjefâ fê.gij fâm raeijpîwy jitâtt/ ;. 3ptw KA cpyry WW (( ► *»y/ C(à® y gcrtitf.t. ^sebcqC fewcrv geft/ w# ITat pfiroientt 0bswidfTmtt Ttvé Scaly pr» y, knqrné (htpowâiif ttemâ(l aie w twvbé y .w r m fté ftoé miffip jabitéJbo/B «ni nebbflîl;u# v jB £ b £ |^ fSi$ pAtW b(b^3p%»» prbmtAo# - y - - . ; n « 6 o n t« K ' ' ç » w V m w 4>-00 385 • ■■. • ■'aai'»» «* i t î t f à ilîi (D ^ ‘2 - , <24 f # •5» I l i H M # 11 W f ? : f u l f i l pmnismn0w.i^/X4t^ b tta^uge» — SdiEfiBcAiuaUi* ' Adlifnt Ëçfhfubilca* A- If. (W-4-"4bI 6 ' 6 \ :TTi fdlibl la h v c re la re v t fa re£» fol ' I 'f * la iôl fa'fâ re vcrc VC £iini reniËi'ibl'''’. I ,vC. a sufc Jpl. poblé %">c.t‘î (f.üE prom*Mi*g2/MA f y' ï ziiÂÎL WiLagbe^. Ôrub té$ Hti .(t.potiix»at$. ipiêu» bblwow gbe tebby br#t& mdfb/ pfcgbe pob ciito .nt» proto^ rcy .(bù :' yat05 w eealcy to Cabult xoffe p^inamtnà^ ÿ' Itifge^. Cwpqi MA )%f4 , (ê )p^W4 t(/; I aU fPys ipiw xo'çfôio fiupuge/ntufyli ,(».W pUff^at* I ut, promfnitt / gu ^puofôb tcwto prt teflêcbi. b ;. . :,•.'.•>>•••■' ■ . 3P % w q < b utHoaidi i pii Xilqcgcb pr^pwbM^*/ 4 (ey pnt$(t>0citsGiaues HOA Ul. ' * *. • : • * • ’ «xwoln'watfm&fcfe/itcb xomo Scale pob4 U d>cg«tw «vflêct» m ifw w atf niu^iefe & lo^/ W 00 G\ 387 îillM l üilüîi 1 : if «S a .L : e . •g m <2 «a. .2 J I JS k h ü m: k ü ft fol U re rt rt mi re l^,;dobicfolfolfo! U fol fol mifi foifolfolfeiUfol rP5ctty ob'3wtajptti|^ttté 4Pbgwf*rP3b#j % né &caly nemd / 4by tasbé^d'$pitvé y ecala vpprdbtB geg^ vtd^dnbyl/técôi â{ V-: fratiiBé wffat viiuiné$prdn>y mUenjm pP# .. ' 5(c. - mi (livré u st. im'tMutt' çetbpy. WtW:* mdf» $t $pîw tent& • iSibicM ft fol /« /i. • »4b nc(( ^(4(ùpw LwcyfR 4 # 3 ( wAbt^jè me . ;: . * ÿKosbgl prawé^<> jW; i»54aflg7t> ntplu 4 Hbum téi sabtt^^p it^pp ; ttapfàné^» fi^nati ' prctoysnutac^ n m a ^ &èd^ > i» m l 4 ^ ÿ ‘ ppauffiq» iCabuJtcBa t4tP wl4({it| , ... yato tcrtw i»|>bî ybr^nffc / gcmtt ;.. 3.fl>lfcowy «>rcbtîâ7 w 0 0 00 f. f> • Aud\ÿifgne^ rcrcfarn-fà rcfareutrcrc rcr.'ii&foirolnmire — — •* W '"• j - -£Lmice£i re ut uc vi rc n.** f»nH rc urfafol» . prtvnqi ';^0btt^.it4 ^(ôfrc: ... Spu^ÿ âWmiM. Crctq* « 4 2)l4 (blrê»' îCtfco p4b ttqV i- cttwé3’.nettdW4ttf/f::Irt(»wbb.f«.wjôbïnef. ,. ’'Viifrtisitmofil fjq’Wftti5i^'onf/\ J O t» W 00 KO 390 € ■ 1 ' - ' S k y B O.C.B Æ K L r . $ .'-»i : *..• . - 'W: • V I | ü l ‘«'^ : ■’ l„ 4 % i ‘ I'« ith.' I M I f 4 ^ f 1 |;«fi,’ 1. If e i # ' 1 I F Î * =ÿ-!' ‘ I f ' «0 « a. t ■' *5 »a a* n T 391 ÿ r : ; ' 0 y » 5 # ' -I-”' g # . -’fc- % » " - " - t •*!••: •■■ ' ç s E r t n - i ; B M ••/P.. .? » . ’ ... I ili., JitÆîi (••>■■ k -v% r -> i j ; •-••I - = . 1r I r i ® 1 U V H T - •fci*’ i5i.?*“ #•»•'.* •*• • ' : | 4 W g 0 ; # 1 è l i l l ; %.':. m a i : •'.4 •• 53^ -îa- J < W V V . f c ! ^ f o l "“ i).' —6— m f •.-• : SS^tttt4J0A6ft\ jt w t b é m »» ; fc! ; uc mi m t V. V...- LO VON 393 I t l l l î p â l e mm a 8 l l I F f lîi iiiiîIS ...... * * * *à*feâ • •> # 1 . X sin - # • I 'T'-'r B K 3< litli y..; 394 ï'iiiîiîiî ü t a i i i i f i ? ! M & >o‘ I k S & I m K . iilî «Â'm z m c . m m h ! I •. '•, ".4 395 * # : a 1 ..i.§ ■J ii . J l » iC- I # 1 J 'ûth I '-'>■ .v; v*;.;^...^..^ itiiitillripeï: " < ' i l s . ” ja o 'îf S ♦wï'^s R "t: I llM l l l i m 2 8 3 m m m â l l : “ M t 396 i f '•■ illE m •W p . ; . 6 r 5 O <► <> U <> S R ' m IS" fis. ■ |r ÿf; . : . .3 , . st. I 3!e JE m: 0 #•'" a 0 <► ‘■'2‘g '•SI. e ■ 5- î o .am = . W " i Da ^'accm. ;• 3 p e r iaftwr^y '• g'ÏD ©myfîTcitf bp?t. fè pJekIÂWy "L i fi pacem» ;> !.. Rçgmacœli. . , . ; . .^ , -t ■ JWpnVdjeity eeiitd pMk$e»^byt( £{|» Çt bccrFo 6yonfFô> n t m u 0 $ l w (hiYfTleitÿ w tfo . '. Rcgitiii coziû ; • H —I- ■rji î-0 -rr^-À S'^piiv norby w p&M3wÿ tûfto. 01 ipçÿr^ïzqp^ i STpnvnâf mbtbwffmg tÜtlb v^@c 7 - 3 : ; y " i f . C.^ I > - '. j - » *• _ f 'Simplici(uis (J ®6cci)«*«(t»]. •« i ± ! 3 i 0 3 r ÿ 3 ± ± E ^ i '( A B . 7 , 7 f 0 ( > p i g«(B A &mw pobiw(Mu# Be^ifraiis ^ ^ V to ^bixoü^j md / tatit}piw Sf* P a u f x ‘ • ^ Cwrb^^jpfwn B w # ■ ;jr«5by w pnrojenq gmcpfglo^gKA promWi* «"^Cuftodii 5*cne*. ■ 0 ^ f t i muosc / neb müRa y mosno(h* B romu n>. ± , «9. . %; Hlq#d)y w> blafvcb ffefîI toliBo vofamém ^ '-'(myAleném 3pïn>u/ne poblé wÏ4|în^fli ÇôucnW^ 4km-Wdi» ' . ig/ me .fc» iûiitt (e itmff / Cseitinj mÿboriic'$ I l t S peqitUby a»i potoicnyéb pW)wmW # . S * " : % 2 6 e • * ^.(7. X '. > Vk U) VO 0 0 399 IHI m m ; w J S - H r i T m t m a t.' • 1 ,»S 3>I&S.8><:' il t É i m u 4 IÎIP 2 é . § - e . % ■ : a g - o m n t i t î K l i ,5"» 400 r g . | s s ; ? â § * S u >? m a I#' m V-’«* A « ALB A w III# îï'5;g &.g » iffl ililil I>.M n * 1 II ■I I 'A' ii' a.M & 401 l I M M - *** 'C*' i ' "fi. f t : illlptilliîl» i .....111*!,,. z zmz. IV'v . # -v - V T !' '"■• Vt- £ l ». S CLa.': ■ ‘ 1 .’• > '2‘-a-*3 ' d u f e lilPilflli i r } | J t M i l « { ! i Î i i i'K 402 ■rs-- a # ilîi#î|ê . S ' i l -'«S-SS'gfjÆ-g fSF'tSi" : f i U ^ 1 S Sür iim u i m t iio *S 1 - M i : iniililMi H i \V ii II"&* w %:gp « S l s f c ■n|fl - • C 1IP I 403 % lï«l 3_ s s w . s . » l s i I J m w lt» 'a l f f m # W f 404 r ji •a-, if il. cl'* D ! •'tt' H 2 U2. % I- ", I S i c ’l M a.'sr^ ( s [^'5(4 = •u » ctr 4- 'ar« 1 •1 11 i' â t i s w i;| â : IIKilîîl s i I J ï S ' P ü ' i i 't/; Â' . 405 •1 « ‘S S ’? g n. i f f s i SWÊum# i M î i mu. rjnEU affliïif.jj III flïtîllifti # 1 I i ï « i m us #11 ■t . # 1 1 0 1 0 c m c .a 406 1 TÜ 1 - : ■ i « " t îiiii If. !-m I 407 oil .M: # ! i ■ m 1 w % i■ nt 8 - d a 1-4: 408 -S’tt- .liiiï m 4 |!|iat i l i i l M ^ A J 9 . .-.r .1 w » ÏÏ If :\\ 409 V...» >. s» % M  'S III#" g 1 ^ ® 1 '«•i «i t 4mS lit S tféllîllf ^ m mimiiimmimmi! ^ i ; i § i ■•'• . . - ■ f m 410 ='(11 i s f •* m A a iîi J J 3 If r ê . 1 •XJO JUiC*. Tirt I !|i #A S I I d s .® î;M a- « aaotOv I & J w : .Ait i i P I î 0 ' : ^ . i::ÿsÿr.;0. , Cchor. > * Dàdc Donunus Domînô*. % • / 1 ?tIÇ;- 23ae. % - ♦ E E - E m r&ttor«. I'.. . ;-iC^Kdidî proptcr qubd iocuntÿ* • m / - . ■ îDifcnnt. ' Cett^r». VO.Laûdatepueri Doc'/num* * I •■ >/• Bead o'oineSQi^cuQca^.. ... . a k : , • iaijcortc, • W -f*-Tt±f*w^.±;357M Z t m # r . 4 ' C Laiiduc 0onunino omn'es» -J?— aazzmnTJEuxoT p e c . Ccnor. , ©|ê(î^îC — ..... - " — :• -# - : le .,.. 1. 4> N3 I Ml ' » ... --.-I ^ i •■ 1 • ■ * : - r it- : - • i i i f c a n t t . * = ■ ' . V :.v . Memento Domini. Dauid; 2 llt. t W : y.y. , . V - ' Ce»Oi\ : . \ • • ; - • ^ .;U. — v V - - - 4S W BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Sources Blahoslav, Jan. Musica, to jest knizka zpevakfim nâlezité zprâvy v zavirajici, 2nd edition. Ivancice, Moravia: Jednota bratrska, 1569. Microfilm of a copy in the Knihovna Narodniho Muzea, Prague, Czechoslovakia. Coclico, Adrianus Petit. Compendium musices (Nürnberg: Montanus & Neuber, 1552), facsimile edition ed. by Manfred Bukofzer. Kassel: Barenreiter-Verlag, 1954. Finck, Hermann. Practice musica, 2nd edition. Wittenberg: Georg Rhau, 1556. Microcard of a copy in the Sibley Music Library, Rochester, New York. Josquin, Jan. Muzika, to jest zprava k zpivani nalezita, vsechnem zpëvûm se uciti zâdostiv^ ku pozitku. Prostejov, Moravia: Jednota bratrska, 1561. Microfilm of a copy in the Knihovna Narodniho Muzea, Prague, Czechoslovakia. Listenius, Nikolaus. Musica. Wittenberg: Georg Rhau, 1548. Microcard of a copy in the Sibley Library, Rochester, New York. Philomathes, Vaclav. Musicorum libri quatuor, compendioso carmine elucubrati. Wittenberg: Georg Rhau, 1534. Microfilm of a copy in the Sibley Music Library, Rochester, New York. Pisne duchovni evangelistske, ed. by Jan Blahoslav. Samotuly, Poland: Jednota bratrska, 1561. Microfilm of a copy held by the Moravian Music Foundation, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Pisne duchovni evangelistske, 2nd edition, ed. by Jan Blahoslav. Ivancice, Moravia: Jednota bratrska, 1564. Microfilm of a copy in the Newberry Library, Chicago. 414 415 Books and Articles Aber, Adolf. "Das musikalische studienheft des Wittenberger studenten Georg Donat," Sammelbande der Intemationalen Musikgesellschaft XV (1914), 68-75. Atcherson, Walter Thomas. Modal Theory of Sixteenth-Century German Theorists. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, 1960. Bartos, Frantisek. "Bratrsky spisovatel Jan Josquin," Listy filologicke CXXIX (1956), 239-242. Benovsky, Frantisek. Jan Blahoslav: 1523-1923. Prague: Slezska Grafia, 1923. Bidlo, Jaroslav. "Bratr Jan Blahoslav jako archivaf a knihovnik Jednoty bratrske," 34-37 of Sbornik Blahoslavuv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny & Rudolf Urbanek. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1Q23. Bilka, Frantisek. Monument v Kameni. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Okresni narodni vybor v Prerove, 1972. Blahoslav, Jan. Akta Jednoty bratrske (1548-1571). Portions reprinted in Theologie prihola Krest'anske revue, ed. by Edita Sterikova, XXXI (1964), 81-105. ______. Grammatika ceska (1571). Reprinted as Grammatika ceska, ed. by Ignac Hradil & Josef Jirecek. Vienna: L. Grunda, 1857. ______. Nekrologium (1552-1571). Reprinted as Todtenbuch der Geistlichkeit der Bohmischen Briider, ed. by Joseph Fiedler in Fontes rerum austriacarum V (1863), 213-310. _ . Rejstfik (1561). Reprinted as "Blahoslavuv rejstrik ceskobratrskych pisni a jeho pozdejsi zpracovani," ed. by Jan Kouba, Miscellanae musicologica XVII (1962), 1-175. Spis o zraku (1550). Reprinted as Spis o zraku, ed. by Frantisek Chudoba. Prague: Rozpravy ceske akademie, 1928. "Blahoslav, Jan," Cesko-slovensky Hudebni Slovnik. Prague : Statni hudebni vydavatelstvi, 1963, 102-103. Blume, Friederich. Protestant Church Music; A History. New York: W. W. Norton, 1974. Branberger, Jan. Katechismus vseobecnych dëjin hudby. Prague : Narodniho divadlo, .1905. 416 Buzga, Jaroslav. "Philomathes, Venceslaus," Riemann MusIk Lexikon. New York: Schott Music, 1959, 1210. Caha, Amost. Jan Blahoslav. Brno, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vydavatel odboru ustred spolku ucitelskeho na Moravë a v Slezsku, 1922. Calabek, Leopold. "Nâbozenské pomëry v rodisti Blahoslavovë," 38-49 of Sbornik Blahoslavuv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny & Rudolf Urbanek. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923. Carpenter, Nan Cooke. Music in the Medieval and Renaissance Universities. Norman, Oklahoma: The University of Oklahoma Press, 1958. Chudoba, Frantisek. "Jak pribyvalo vëdomosti o Jani Blahoslavovi od doby obrozenske," 1-33 of Sbornik Blahoslavûv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny & Rudolf Urbanek. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923. Chumchal, Milan. "Jan Blahoslav prehled zakladnich ûdajû o zivotë, dile, a literatufe," 91-100 of Jan Blahoslav Pferovsky, ed. by Frantisek Hybl & Gustav Vozda. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Mëstskÿ narodni vybor v Pferovë, 1971. Clapham, John. "Blahoslav, Jan,” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 6 th ed., 20 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie. Washington, D.C.: Macmillan, 1980, II, 773. Coclico, Adrianus Petit. Compendium musices (Nürnberg: Montanus & Neuber, 1552), trans. by Albert Seay. Colorado Springs, Colorado: Colorado College Music Press, 1973. Davidsson, Ake. Bibliographie der musictheoretischen Drucken des 16. Jahrhunderts. Baden-Baden: Heitz, 1962. Dolansky, Ladislav. "Johannes Josquinus a Vaclav Solin," Listy filologicke XXIV (1901), 17-24. Dostal, Josef. "Jan Blahoslav a Pferov," 7-21 of Jan Blahoslav Pferovsky, ed. by Frantisek Hybl & Gustav Vozda. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Mëstskÿ narodni vybor v Pferovë, 1971. Dunning, Albert. "Baston, Josquin," The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 6 th ed., 20 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie. Washington, D.C.: Macmillan, 1980, II,. 282. 417 Écrits Imprimés Concernant la Musique, ed. by Francois Lesure. Volume BVI^ of Répertoire International des Sources Musicales. Munich: International Musicological Society and the International Association of Music Libraries, 1971. Fialové, Vlasta. Kralice. Bmo, Czechoslovakia: Kraksjé stredisko statni pamétkové péce a orchrany prirody, 1972. Fukac, Jiri. "Blahoslav a hudebni proudy jeho doby," 161-171 of Jan Blahoslav, ed. by Svatopluk Bimka & Pavel Floss. Uherskÿ Brod, Czechoslovakia: Muzeum Jana Amose Komenského, 1971. Gaffurius, Franchinus. Practica musicae (1496), trans. by Clement Miller in Musicological Studies and Documents XX. American Institute of Musicology, 1968. Gerbert, Martin. Scriptores ecclesiastici de musica sacra potissimum, 3 vols. Milan: Bolletino Bibliografico Musicale, 1931. Gindely, Antonin. Dekrety Jednoty bratrské. Prague: I. L. Kober, 1865. "Quellen zur Geschichte der Bohmischen Briider," Fontes rerum austriacarum II (1859). "Zivotopis Jana Blahoslava," Casopis ceského musea I (1856). Glarean, Heinrich. Dodecachordon (1547), trans. by Clement Miller in Musicological Studies and Documents VI. American Institute of Musicology, 1965. Gregor, Vladimir. "Werk dem Pfarrer von Sumperk," Sbornik Sluko BI (1951-1953), 91-94. Haitmar, Jaroslav. "Prostëjovské bratrské skola v 16. stoleti," 10-13 of Moravské bratrské £ jeho protëjsky v 16. az 18. stoleti. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Pracovistë dëjin moravského skolstvi a Komeniologie vlastivëdného ustavu v Pferovë, 1979. Haskovec, Miroslav. "K cenëni Blahoslavovy Grammatiky," 198-201 of Sbornik Blahoslavûv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny & Rudolf Urbanek. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923. Helfert, Vladimir. "Muzika Blahoslavova a Philomatova," 121-151 of Sbornik Blahoslavûv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny & Rudolf Urbanek. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923. 418 Herodotus of Halicarnassus. The History of Herodotus, trans. by George Rawlinson & ed. by Manuel Komroff. New York: Tudor Publishing, 1932. Hostinsky, Otakar. Jan Blahoslav a Jan Josquin. Prague: Rozpravy ceske akademie, 1896. Hrejsa, Ferdinand. "Nâbozenské stanovisko B. Jana Blahoslava," 50-120 of Sbornik Blahoslavûv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny & Rudolf Urbanek. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923. Hutton, John. A History of the Moravian Church. London: Moravian Publication Office, 1909. Hybl, Frantisek. "Jan Blahoslav a bratrske skolstvi," 23-48 of Jan Blahoslav Pferovsky, ed. by Frantisek Hybl & Gustav Vozda. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Mestsky narodni vybor v Pferovë, 1971. _ . "Podil Jana Blahoslava na rozvoji moravského bratrského skolstvi," 6-9 of Moravské bratrské a jeho protëjsky V 16. az 18. stoleti. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Pracovistë dëjin moravského skolstvi a Komeniologie vlastivëdného ustavu v Pferovë, 1979. _ \ "Vyznam ceskobratrského skolstvi v dobë pfedbëlohorské se zvlâstnim zfetelem k Moravë," 141-152 of Moravské bratrské a jeho protëjsky v 16. az 18. stoleti. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Pracovistë dëjin moravského skolstvi a Komeniologie Vlastivëdného ustavu v Pferovë, 1979. Hÿsek, Miroslav. "Blahoslavovo misto v dëjinâch ceské literârni kritiky," 186-197 of Sbomik Blahoslavûv, ed. by Vâclav Novotny & Rudolf Urbânek. Pferov, Czechoslovakia : Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923. Janacek, Josef. Jan Blahoslav. Prague: Svobodnë Slovo, 1966. Jirecek, Josef. "Abdon Martin," "Aujezdecky Alexander," "Blahoslav Jan," "Cemy Jan," "Cervenka Jan," "Cervenka Matëj," "Facilis Jan, Boleslavsky," "Facilis Jan, Husicka," "Gzel Petr," "Hiruby Zigmund," "Hus Jan," "Jeronym Prazsky," "Jordan Tomas," "Josquin Jan," "Mach, Matëj Sionsky," "Michalec Martin," "Optât Benes," "Orlik Vavfinec," "Rokycana Jan," "Rokyta Jan," "Solin Vâclav," "Wolff." Dëjiny literatury ceské. Prague: • Nâkladem B. Tempského, 1875. Jordan, Tomâs. Kniha o vodâch hojitedlnych (1580). Reprinted as Kniha o vodâch hojitedlnych, ed. by 0. Bab1er. Olomouc, Czechoslovakia: Nârodni knihtiskâma Kramâf a Pochâzka, 1948. 419 Julian, John. A Dictionary of Hymnology, revised edition. London: John Murray, 1925. Jungmann, Josef. Historié literatury ceské, 2nd edition. Prague: Nakladem ceského muzea, 1849. Kafka, Rita Petschek. "Music in Bohemia," 728-741 of Gustave Reese, Music in the Renaissance, revised edition. New York: W. W. Norton, 1959. Kaminsky, Howard. A History of the Hussite Revolution. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967. Kouba, Jan. "A Historical Suirvey of Czech Music," 74-77 of Dejiny ceské hudby v obrazech. Prague: Supraphon, 1977. Kvasnicka, Edvard. Duchovni pisne Jana Blahoslava. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Komenského Muzeum, 1934. Lamping, A. J. Ulrichus Velenus and his Treatise against the Papacy. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1976. Langton, Edward. History of the Moravian Church. London: Allen & Unwin, 1956. Listenius, Nikolaus. Musica (1549), trans. by Albert Seay. Colorado Springs, Colorado: Colorado College Music Press, 1975. Molnar, Amedeo. "Motivy Blahoslavova pohledu na dëjiny," 15-23 of Jan Blahoslav, ed. by Svatopluk Bimka & Pavel Floss. Uherskÿ Brod, Czechoslovakia: Muzeum Jana Amose Komenského, 1971. Muller, Josef. Die deutschen Katechismen der Bohmischen Briider. Berlin: A. Hofmann, 1887. The New Cambridge Modem History Atlas, ed. by H. C. Darby & Harold Fullard. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1978. "Philomathes, Vaclav," Cesko-slovensky Hudebni Slovnik. Prague: Statni hudebni vydavatelstvi, 1963, 299. Polisensky, Jan. The Thirty Years War, trans. by Robert Evans. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1971. Polisensky, Josef. "Zprâvy o moravské Jednotë v poznanském archivu ceskÿch bratri," 11-14 of Jan Blahoslav, ed. by Svatopluk Bimlca & Pavel Floss. Uherskÿ Brod, Czechoslovakia: Muzeum Jana Amose Komenského, 1971. Pospisil, Antonin. "Jan Blahoslav - jazykovëdec a literât," 50-66 of Jan Blahoslav Pferovskÿ, ed. by Frantisek Hÿbl & Gustav Vozda. Pferov, Czechoslovakia. Mëstskÿ nârodni vÿbor v Pferovë, 1971. 420 Quoika, Rudolf. "Die Musica des Jan Blahoslav 1569," Gesellschaft fiir Musikforschung (1954), 128-131. Racek, Jan. Ceska Hudba. Prague: Statni nakladatelstvi krâsné literatury, hudby, a umeni, 1958. Reese, Gustave. Music in the Middle Ages. New York: W. W. Norton, 1940. Music in the Renaissance, revised edition. New York: W. W. Norton, 1959. Rhau, Georg. Enchiridion utruisgue musicae practicae (1538), ed. by Hans Albrecht in Documenta Musicologie I. Kassel: Barenreiter- verlag, 1951. Riemann, Hugo. History of Music Theory, trans. by Raymond Haggh. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1962. Sbornik Blahoslavûv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny & Rudolf Urbanek. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923. Sedlak, Jan. Ivancice. B m o , Czechoslovakia: Krajske stredisko statni pamâtkové péce a ochrany prirody, 1980. Selective Bibliography of Literature on Czech and Slovak Music. Prague: Czechoslovak Music Information Centre, 1969. Settari, Olga. "Blahoslav hymnolog," 179-187 of Jan Blahoslav, ed. by Svatopluk Bimka & Pavel Floss. Uherskÿ Brod, Czechoslovakia: Muzeum Jana Amose Komenského, 1971. "Jan Blahoslav jako hudebni teoretik a hymnogfaf," Z kralické tvrze V (1971), 18-38. Shepherd, William. Historical Atlas, 8 th edition. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1956. "Solin, Vaclav," Cesko-slovensky Hudebni Slovnik. Prague: Statni hudebni vydavatelstvi, 1963, 564. Stëpânek, Vladimir. An Outline of Czech and Slovak Music. Prague: Orbis, 1964. Sternfeld, Frederick. "Music in the Schools of the Reformation," Musica Disciplina II (1948), 99-122. 421 Straus, Jiïî. "Blahoslavova 'Muzika' a jeji pedagogicky vyznam," 14-17 of Moravské bratrské a^ jeho protëjsky v 16. az 18. stoleti. Pferov, Czechoslovakia; Pracovistë dëjin moravského skolstvi a Komeniologie vlastivëdného ustavu v Pferovë, 1979. Strunk, Oliver. Source Readings in Music History. New York: W. W. Norton, 1950. Travnicek, Frantisek. "Poznamky o Blahoslavovë Grammatice," 202-216 of Sbomik Blahoslavûv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny & Rudolf Urbanek, Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923. Uher, Boris. "Blahoslav pedagog," 2-5 of Moravské bratrské a jejo protëjsky v 16. az 18. stoleti. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Pracovistë dëjin moravského skolstvi a Komeniologie vlastivëdného ustavu v Pferovë, 1979. Urban, Ladislav. The Music of Bohemia. Boston: D. B. Updike, 1919. Urbanek, Rudolf. "K Blahoslavovë 'Filipice proti misomusûm'," 152-185 of Sbomik Blahoslavûv, ed. by Vaclav Novotny & Rudolf Urbanek. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Nakladem vyboru pro postaveni pomniku Blahoslavova, 1923. Vavra, Ivan. "Dnesni stav josquinské otazky," Listy filologické CXXXI (1958), 253-257. Vëstnik krétkÿ ceskÿ spolecnosti nauka. Bratislava, Czechoslovakia: Zierotinské bibliothece, 1877. Virgil. The Aeneid, the Eclogues, & the Georgies, trans. into English verse by James Rhoades as The Poems of Virgil. Chicago: William Benton, 1953. Vozda, Gustav. "Jan Blahoslav - musicus," 67-90 of Jan Blahoslav Pferovsky, ed. by Frantisek Hybl & Gustav Vozda. Pferov, Czechoslovakia: Mëstskÿ narodni vybor v Pferovë, 1971. Vyslouzil, Jifi. "Jan Blahoslav a ceska teorie hudby," 154-160 of Jan Blahoslav, ed. by Svatopluk Bimka & Pavel Floss. Uherskÿ Brod, Czechoslovakia: Muzeum Jana Amose Komenského, 1971. Waters, J. Kevin. Handbook of Two Musical Practices: Plainsong. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, 1970. Wechsberg, Joseph. Prague : the Mystical City. New York: Macmillan, 1971. 422 Unpublished Materials Gabulka, Pavel Frantisek. "Jan Blahoslav 586/10," a handwritten note inside the front cover of Josquin*s Muzika, located at the Knihovna Narodniho Muzea, Prague, Czechoslovakia. Howlett, Derq. "A Translation of Three Treatises by Martin Agricola— Musica Choralis Deudsch, Musica Figuralis Deudsch, and Von Den Proporcionobus— with Introduction, Transcripts of the Music, and Commentary." Ph.D. Dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1979. Kirby, Frank. "Hermann Finck*s Practica musica; A Comparative Study in 16th Century German Musical Theory.** Ph.D. Dissertation, Yale University, 1957. Settari, Olga. "Jan Blahoslav," carbon copy of an article under preparation. "Otakar Hostinsky k pocâtkûm ceské hudebni teorie," carbon copy of an article under preparation. Interviews Husak, Josef, Archivist of the city of Ivancice. Interview at the former house of the Lords of Lipa on 23 October 1981. Hybl, Frantisek, Archivist of the city of Pferov. Interview at the Muzeum Jana Amose Komenského on 19 October 1981. Poliak, Marie, Curator of the Kralice Bible Museum. Interview at the Pamatnik Bible kralické on 22 October 1981. Settari, Olga, Professor on the music faculty of B m o University. Interview at the music department on 26 October 1981. Singhovs, Jindriska, Curator of the royal castle at Jindrichuv Hradec. Interview at the castle library on 13 October 1981. Suchy, Cestmir, Professor Emeritus of Prague University. Interview at the university library on 6 October 1981.