H.M. BROWN, On the Performance of Fifteenth-century Chansons

8/10/2019 H.M. BROWN, On the Performance of Fifteenth-century Chansons

1/9

On the Performance of Fifteenth-Century ChansonsAuthor(s): Howard Mayer BrownSource: Early Music, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Jan., 1973), pp. 2-8+10Published by: Oxford University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3125788.

Accessed: 06/10/2014 03:52

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Oxford University Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toEarly Music.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ouphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3125788?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3125788?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup


2/9

n

t h

perform nce

o

f ifteenth

e n t u r y

chansons

HOWARD

MAYER

BROWN

The

gardenof

delights,

Cristoforo

e'

Predis or

the School

of

Cristoforo

e'

Predis

The

many

stages

through

which a

composition

must

pass

from its

con-

ception

in

the mind of a

I5th-century

composer

to

its

performance

in

a

20oth-century

oncert

hall create enormous

problems

for the

thoughtful

musician,

whose solutions

are

necessarily

filled with

compromise

and

conjecture.

The central

problem

of the

performer

remains

the

same,

of

course,

regardless

of the music: how

best to

interpret

and

project

the

composer's

intentions. But how

do we know what

they

were when we

can

scarcely

ever be sure that a

composer supervised

the

preparation

of

a

15th-century manuscript? And even if we could know that a piece was

copied

out

by

its

author,

that is still no

guarantee

that a

15th-century

manuscript

meant the same

thing

to

an earlier musician that a

definitive

edition

of a

Stravinsky

ballet means to

us.

The

modern

score

purports

to

give

the

performer

all the

information

he

needs: which notes

to

play

and how to attack and

phrase

them,

the

correct

tempo, dynamics,

and so on. Even

so,

the inevitable tension

between

composer

and

performer,

the

difficulty

in

finding

the

right

balance

between

a

correct but lifeless

reading

and a wilful

interpretation

that

overwhelms

the

composition

by imposing

on it the

player's

personality,

is

not

easy

to resolve. These same tensions were

infinitely

more

complex

in

the

Middle

Ages

and the Renaissance when

many

things

later

thought

to

be a part of the compositional processitself--text setting, instrumentation,

and

even the

choice of

notes in the case of musica

icta,

that

is,

the

accidentals

early

players

were

expected

to add in

performance-were

omitted

from

the

source

and

left

entirely

to

the

performers.

In the

I5th

century,

then,

the

performer

had

to be

an

active

colla-

borator

with

the

composer.

Thus

the

modern

player

needs

a

different

sort

of

attitude,

and

therefore

different

training,

to

play

a

piece

of

such

music

than

he

does to

perform

the concert

repertoire

of

the

I9th

and

20oth

centuries.

In his

preparation

of a

piece

he must

function

as

composer,

editor,

and

even

historian,

as

well

as

instrumentalist or

singer.

Indeed

the

serious

cultivation

of

early

music

cannot

hope

to

reach,

the

level of

professionalismfound in our symphony orchestras, string quartets, and

opera

houses,

until

colleges

of music

recognize

these

differences

and

institute

courses to

train

young

musicians

in

new,

that is

to

say

old,

ways.

In the

meantime,

we must all

do what

we

can

to

teach

performers

what

to

do,

if

only

that we

may

learn

from

their

practical

experience.

The difficulties

may

easily

be

illustrated

by

considering

the best

ways

to

perform

late

15th-century

chansons.

One of

these

elegant lyric

minia-

tures,

the

setting

of a

five-line

rondeau,

aites

de

moy

oute

qu'il

vous

plaira,

by

the

great

Burgundian

composer,

Antoine

Busnois

(c. 1430-c.

1492),

appears

in

the

supplement.

It

can be

taken as a

typical,

if

superior,

example

of

the

genre.'

Two

graceful

melodic

lines,

Superius

and

Tenor,

are

supported

by

a

more

awkward,

harmonically

oriented

Contratenor.

The rhythmic subtlety of the melodies-the way in which irregular

groupings

by

twos and

threes

conflict with

the

metre-is a

characteristic

feature of

this

style.

The

shift from

duple

to

triple

time,

on the

other

hand,

is

unusual

for

rondeau

ettings.

To

pretend

that I

have

made

a

'definitive'

edition

ofFaites

de

moy

would

be

misleading,

for

that is

no more

possible

than

making

a

'definitive'

realization of a

baroque

basso

continuo.

The

fact is

that there is

more

than

one

correct,

that

is,

stylistically

acceptable

manner

of

performing

the

chanson,

especially

with

regard

to

the

text

which must be fitted

to

3

This content downloaded from 158.109.174.204 on Mon, 6 Oct 2014 03:52:00 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/9

I I I

4.

o

/

p

III

-

o

b A

?,,

,

4'

H

#44.

A-

1

r~-n ,r

-:

?~.adc

.,

-d

M



4/9

AN

lp

iZ

On thecanals in the monthof May,

Simon

Bening (?)

the

music,

the accidentals omitted

by

the

composer,

the

scoring

left

to

the

performers,

and the kind and

quantity

of melodic ornaments

improvised

by

the

singers

and

players.

Therefore the modern

performer

must

take

a

more

critical

attitude

toward this edition

than,

say,

toward a

Brahms

or

Schubert

song

published

in a

Gesamtausgabe.

He must

try

to

understand

what

the

editor

has done and

why.

In a

sense,

the

original

manuscript

version

is the

ideal

one,

for it

presents

the music in a neutral

form,

allow-

ing

the

player

full freedom.

And

yet

responsible

modern

editors

rightly

feel

that

they

must offer one

possible

performing

version,

even

while

realizing

that

in

so

doing

they

may

obscure other

equally

valid

ones.

Faites

de

moy appears

here

after one Florentine

manuscript.

Therefore,

the

problem

of

deciding

which notes are the correct ones

hardly

arises,

although

players

should

be aware that editors can

go

astray

by

adopting

the

least

good

of

several

conflicting

versions.

The

few

wrong

notes

in

the

Florentine

Faites

de

moy

are

easily

corrected,

even without

concordances to

bolster

the decision.

And

in

indicating

the

change

of time

in

bars

35-38,

I

have

obeyed

the

spirit

rather

than the

letter of

the

original

by

staggering

the

time

signatures,

in

order

to indicate the

relationship

between

the new

tempo

and

the

old.

It

is

a

proportional

one,

with three

minims

in

triple

time being equal to two minims in duple (proportio esquialtera),as the over-

lapping

rests

clearly prove.

In

short

I

have tried

to

preserve

all

of

the

essential

features

of the

original

manuscript

in

indicating

which

notes

to

sound,

and

when.2

In

adding

text

to

the

music,

on the other

hand,

I

have

allowed

myself

rather

more

freedom

to

interpret

the

original

document. For

example,

I

have not indicated

clearly exactly

where the words

appear

in the

manu-

script.

But

by putting

in italics

all

of

the

text

that does

not

appear

in

the

original,

I

do

at least show what

I

have added.

From

this

it

should be

apparent

that

I

believe

15th-century

chansonniers

do

not

supply

detailed

information

about

texting,

a

position

that some

scholars

would

attack.

I

assume that

I5th-century

performers

were free

to

place

syllables

under

whichever notes they thought appropriate, and in so doing they followed

some

fairly

conventional

procedure

which was flexible

enough

to

produce

more

than one

equally

valid result.

Baldly

stated,

the

procedure

I

have

adopted,

devised

partly

by extrapolating

backwards

from the rules

given

by Stoquerus

and

Zarlino,

and

partly

by

reasoning

about

the character

of the

melodic

lines,

is based

on the

belief

that each

phrase normally

began

with

syllabic,

or

nearly syllabic,

declamation,

and

ended with

a

long

melisma

on

the

penultimate

or

antepenultimate syllable,

whichever was

the more

stressed.3

This

practice

can be modified

in

several

ways,

most

notably

in Faites de

moy

by

the decision to

interrupt

the

melisma

and to

repeat

some

part

of

the

poetic

line wherever

the

melody

cadences

momen-

tarily,

a

technique

that throws

into relief the fact

that

many

of the

phrase

endings

function

musically

as codettas. Moreover I have followed the

rule that a new

syllable

cannot

begin

in the middle of a

ligature,

and for

that

reason

I

have

indicated all

ligatures

in the modern edition

by placing

square

brackets over the notes involved.

If

there is as

yet

no

consensus

among

scholars about

the

way

text

ought

to be

added to

15th-century

vocal

music,

there is

general agreement

about

the rules for

adding

accidentals.4

They

are

few and

simple.

Chief

among

them are the

prohibition against

tritones and the admonition

to

raise

leading

notes at

cadences;

almost all the others can be derived from those.

4



5/9

i

B ~111----~

J

??r

~-c~ ~Ic~L~B\

.....

'Y/5~ "

~

I??:

:;"

Lutenist

nd

singer,

Israel

van

Meckenem

Disagreement

about musica

ficta

comes when the rules are

applied

to real

music.

There

is

ample

evidence to

suggest

that this

disagreement

was

as

prevalent

in the Renaissance

as in the

20th

century,

and that in

fact

alternative

versions were current then

and were

apparently

found to be

equally

valid. Whatever the merits of

my

solution,

then,

the

2oth-century

performer,

like his

predecessors,

should

take

advantage

of his freedom to

choose

others;

to

accept

meekly

what is

given

him,

even

though

it

goes

against

his artistic

convictions,

violates

the

performing

conventions

of the

Renaissance.

Even

if the

performer

accepts

enthusiastically my

version

of Faites

de

moy,

however,

he must still make two crucial decisions-what instruments

and

voices

to

use and

whether or not to ornament-before

he

even

faces

problems

of

tempo,

dynamics,

tone

quality,

articulations,

and

so

on,

which

are in

later

music

the chief

areas where the

performer

is

given

some

degree

of

latitude.

Fifteenth-century composers

seem not to have written

with

specific

sonorities

in

mind,

at least

not so far as secular music is

concerned.

Apparently,

compositions

were intended

to be

adapted

to

differing

acoustical

situations

and

to

the

available

combinations of

voices

and

instruments.

Fifteenth-century

works of

art,

archival

records,

surviving

manuscripts, and literary references, make clear, however, that a chanson

like

Faites

de

moy

might

have been

performed

in

any

of

at

least

nine

different

ways: (i)

with

the

Superius

sung

and

the other

two

voices

played

on

instruments,

(2)

with the

Superius sung

or

played

on

a

melody

instrument and

the

lower

two

voices

played

on

a

chordal

instrument,

lute,

keyboard,

or

harp,

(3)

with the Tenor

sung

and

the

other

two

voices

played

on

instruments,

(4)

with the

Superius

and Tenor

sung

and

the

Contratenor

played

on

a

melody

instrument,

(5)

with all

three

voices

played

on

soft

instruments,

(6)

with all three voices

played

ori loud

instru-

ments,

(7)

arranged

for

a

solo

chordal

instrument,

(8)

with

all

three

voices

sung,

or

(9)

with the

Superius

and Tenor

played

or

sung

and the

Contratenor omitted.

In

listing

these nine

possible scorings,

I

do

not

mean to be exhaustive or prescriptive, but merely wish to point out that

modern

performers

need

to be

encouraged

to

take

advantage

of

the

freedom their

predecessors

enjoyed,

but that

they

must

do so

taking

into

account

as

much

knowledge

of

the limits

of

that

freedom

as we

possess

at

present.5

Our

perception

of

the

style

of

this music reinforces our

historical

knowledge

to

suggest

that

chansons like

Faites

de

moy

should be

scored

for

voices and

instruments which

contrast in

timbre,

in

order to

bring

out

the

individuality

of each line

and

to

make

clear

that each

has a

separate

function in

the texture. Full

consorts

of

like

instruments-groups

of

recorders or

viols,

for

example-produce

a

homogeneous

sound

that

does

not fit the

late

15th-century

chanson;

they

are best for

music

written

after

the

stylistic

change

of about

1500.

Indeed,

the

historical

evidence so

far

gathered

shows that

late

I5th-century

chansons

were often

performed

in

a

way

that

emphasized

the

top

voice as the

principal

melody;

that

is,

the

Superius

was

either

sung

or

played

on

a

melody

instrument

with some

sustaining power,

recorder,

flute,

portative organ,

or bowed

string,

while

the

lower voices were

plucked

or struck

by

lute,

harp,

dulcimer,

psaltery,

or some

other similar

instruments.

Curiously,

there is

relatively

little

evidence

that

bowed

stringed

instru-

ments

took

part

in

the

performance

of late

I5th-century

chansons.

That

5



6/9

(4 /7

..j2

.o[

-

-on

c

,'. ..,

;0..

A.

p

WF\j

/;/r

-

they

are

rare in the relevant

pictures

of the

time,

for

example,

may

at

least

partly

be

explained

by

the fact that common

practice

was

changing;

it

was

a

period

of

transition.

Although

the medieval

fiddle and rebec

lasted

well

into

the

I6th

century,

they

were

quickly losing

social

prestige

and

more

and

more

came

to be associated

exclusively

with

beggars

and

street

musicians.

In

their

place

the

suaver,

sweeter

viols took over the

leading

role

in

chamber

music.

But

precisely

when

the viola da

gamba

began

its

rise,

and

the extent

to

which

it was

played

in the

late

15th

century

remains

a

mystery

awaiting

scholarly

investigation.

And whether fiddle or viol is

more

appropriate

for chansons

by

Busnois

and his

contemporaries,

no

one

can

yet

say

for

certain.

Both

are

among

the

instruments

with

a

compass

that extends

to

the lowest

notes

of

Faites de

moy.

Until someone

settles

the

question

of

their

use

in

this

repertoire,

then,

we should

continue

to

experiment

with

both.

One

special

combination

often

appears

in

pictures,

a trio

consisting

of

harp

or

lute,

flute or

recorder,

and

voice.

Indeed,

it

is

one of

the few

conventional

groupings

that

outlives the

stylistic change

of

about

1500

and

appears

in

pictures

up

to

mid-century.

It is a

scoring,

however,

that

poses

certain

problems

if

applied

to

Faites

de

moy

and chansons

like it. If

the voice singsthe top line, as seemsself evident, then the flute or recorder

most

likely plays

the Tenor.

But both

flute

and recorder were

transposing

instruments

then,

sounding

an

octave

higher

than written.

Whereas

inner

voices are

often

very

effective

at

4-foot pitch,

even

though

they

sound

above

the

written

top

voice,

performers

must

take

care that

written

bass

notes

always

stay

below

the

others,

lest

incorrect

chord

positions

and

other

barbarisms

result. In Faites

de

moy,

and

in

many

other

chansons

of

the

period,

the Tenor

crosses

below

the

Contratenor

on

occasion,

and

so

it must

sound

at

written

pitch.

There are

a

number

of

ways

out

of

this

difficulty.

The

composition

can

be

transposed

to

a

key high enough

for

the

wind instrument

to

sound

at 8-foot

pitch,

for

example,

or the

Tenor

can

be

sung

by

a

baritone

and the

top

voice

played

on

flute or

recorder.

Perhaps the most satisfactory disposition of voices and instruments,

though,

allows

the

Superius

to be

sung

and

the

Tenor

played

at

4-foot

pitch

on a

wind,

while

lute

or

harp play

both

lowest

lines

together.

In

that

way

the

harmony

is

preserved

intact.

It is

one

of

the

few

instances

of

doubling

(wind

instrument

plus plucked

string

on

the

Tenor)

that

seems

appropriate

in

this

repertoire,

for

generally

doubling

thickens

the

sound

and

destroys

the

delicacy

of

the

texture.

One

of the

instruments in

this conventional

trio,

the

harp,

has been

unjustly neglected

in the revival

of

early

music.

It was

a

standard

chordal

instrument

then,

along

with the

chamber

organ

and the

various

harpsi-

chord

types,

and

it

was

much

more

often

used than

the

lute

before

1500

to

play

all

the

parts

of

polyphonic

compositions.

Modern

keyboard

and

harpplayers

ought

to follow

the

example

of

their

I

5th-century

predecessors

and

expand

their

repertoire

by

arranging

chansons

like Faites

de moy

or

their

instruments,

simply by adapting

the

three

melodic lines

of

the

chanson to two staves

and

ornamenting

the

Superius (ex.

I).

Literally

hundreds

of models can

be

found

in

the Buxheim

Organ

Book and

other

German

manuscripts

of the

time, and,

for

somewhat

earlier

chansons,

in

the Faenza

Codex.6

Lutenists

should also

explore

this

possibility,

for

chansons

by

Busnois and

his

contemporaries

were

intabulated

for

solo

lute

early

in

the

i6th

century,

even

though

the

playing

technique

of

the

6



7/9

:k

9.? a:..*

~5' ~~

;i/

::~????-

~'~?:?'

iB?::?i -

r

?; :

C`

~::??.: ?-;~ ajl~

rj

~

???~3~~:::,?i

..?

a~

..i

:ii

?1

r:

a

r

:~

?5~ ( "*: i~~:~-i~ ~5

~-;?:?i~?

:dL;:~-.r : : ~1t : '??*

ri ???(

?.. ?a ~ C "-I

I~ s~?,

j:i,

* d: ''

4i

~r

??:? d

.L?::

:T:~:

p. :a

:$

;?

???,:

r :a

i

:

"i .a?? ;

?:f 'I'~ '

?x

i? ;s?. ::

i

" i r-

,i 7::?

~i~??

"i I' ,,

:?:

??j~

i:-

=lit i"

_a-

.

.

.

?

"

S

.

,

- I

a s

11

,iI--

and

so

on

J

.

-.

-.

I

instrument

was

in a state of

transition

during

the

late

I5th

century,

when

players

changed

from

using

a

plectrum

for

single

melodic

lines to

using

their

fingers

for

polyphonic

music. The

timid

lutenist,

afraid

of

even

such

a

slight

anachronism,

can

always

console himself

by

ornamenting

the

Superius

of a

chanson,

while a

harp

plays

both bottom

lines,

an

arrange-

ment

apparently

quite

common

in

Busnois's

day.

Since

chansons

seem to

us delicate

and

lyrical

examples

of

chamber

music,

we are

apt

to score them

exclusively

for

soft

instruments

when

we

play

them

without words.

But

they

were

sometimes

transformed

into

raucous outdoor

music for

the standard

loud

wind

trio

of

the

time,

two

shawms

and a

narrow-bore trombone or sackbut.

In

this

scoring,

one

of

the few that obscures the treble dominated texture of the music, descant

and

tenor

shawms

traditionally

played

the structural

voices,

Superius

and

Tenor,

and the sackbut

was

given

the

Contratenor

line.

Singing

all three

voices

unaccompanied

also masks

the

supremacy

of the

top

line,

but

nevertheless

some evidence

suggests

that these

chansons

were

at least

occasionally performed

a

cappella.

For

that reason

I

have added

the

words to

the Tenor

and the

Contratenor

of Faites

de.moy,

ven

though

the

original

manuscript

included

them

only

under

the

Superius. Typically,

they

fit

the

Tenor

quite

well,

but

the

Contratenor

much

less

so. For

that

reason,

most

modern

editors

fail

to

add

the words

to

the lowest voice

and

maintain

that

it is

instrumental

in

conception;

but

since

it was sometimes

sung,

and

the

text can somewhat

unhappily

be forced onto

it,

I

have

made

the attempt, if only as an experiment.

Finally,

the

performer

needs

to decide

if

he

will

play

the

notes

exactly

as

they

are

preserved

in

the

manuscript,

or

if

he

will decorate them with

more or

less

elaborate

divisions.7 The

variant

readings

found

in

multiple

versions

of the same

composition

show

that

composers,

or at least

scribes,

had a

much

less

rigid

concept

of

one

sacrosanct

version,

immutable in

all

of its

details,

than

we

do.

They regularly

filled

in thirds

by

steps,

for

example,

and

made

minor

changes

in

the

rhythm apparently

following

their

whims rather

than

any

careful

artistic

policy.

Moreover

the

only

7



8/9

manuscripts

from

the

15th

century

that are

unambiguously

and

exclusively

instrumental

are

anthologies

of

keyboard

music,

much

of it

arrangements

of chansons and

other

vocal

music

in

highly

ornamented versions.

By

the

early

16th

century

instrumentalists

seem

to have

been

expected

to

improvise

ornaments

as a

regular

part

of

their

playing

technique.

It

seems

likely,

then,

that

instrumentalists

of

the

previous

century,

and

possibly

singers

as

well,

were

expected

to

do

likewise.

How

much

can

the

modern

performer

decorate

chansons,

and where ?

Naturally,

hard and fast rules can never be

formulated,

since ornamenta-

tion

depends

so much on

personal

taste and

ability.

Most or all of the

cadences

can

certainly

be

varied

by

conventional

formulas

(as

in ex.

2).

IF-

b.

1L

T,

-

,

7

J

IJV

...

f

'

i

j

j

J

b.C

"

--.-..-

-

_-,J

_I~

-

--

I

w

it.i

z

..

.ITJ

e,

l

~,lLl l

.,,

.J

i LLI

I

II

.

,,,,,i

1

V

1II

And

from time to

time the

modern

singer

or

player ought

at least to

try

to decorate

the

top

voice more

elaborately, along

the lines

of

ex.

3,

-4

I-

,

,1

-

-

I

Sand

so

onI

,,'

..

[...

.

.

.

L- .

_,

l J ii J

-

and so on

8



9/9

realizing

full well

that he

runs

the

risk

of

overstepping

the

bounds

of

good

taste. The

intabulations

in the

Buxheim

Organ

Book

can

serve him

as

models

for such

experiments,

even

though they

were

intended

exclusively

for

keyboard

instruments,

for

the

15th-century

musician

was

not

as

sensitive

to

stylistic

differences

among

various

instruments

as

we

are.

In

sum,

Busnois left us

only

the

essential

elements of

Faites de

moy

in

written

form.

The

I5th-century

manuscript

which

includes

it should

thus

be

considered

more

like

an intermediate

draft of

a

I9th-

or

20oth-century

composition than like its final published version. To bring Faites de moyto

life as actual

music,

the modern

performer

must collaborate

with the

I5th-century

composer

in

deciding

how

the text

should be fitted

to

the

music,

which

accidentals

need to

be

added,

who

is

to

sing

or

play

it,

and

how

extensively

to

ornament,

even

before he

can face the

questions

he

is

more

used

to

asking:

how

fast

to

play,

how

loud,

how

slurred

or

detached,

and

so on. Historians of

music

can

help

him

with

some of these

problems,

but

he can

also

help

the

historian

by

pointing

out

what

is

practical

and

effective. Even

together

we

may

never

be

able

to

reconstruct

precisely

how

the

music

sounded

in

the

past;

we

can

at least

give

it

meaning

for

the

present

1

Modern editions of

late

15th-century

chansons include the following: E. Droz

and

G.

Thibault, eds.,

Pontes

t musiciens u

XVe

sidcle

(Paris,

i924);

E.

Droz,

Y.

Rokseth,

and

G.

Thibault, eds.,

Trois

chansonniers

franfais

du

XVe

sidcle

(Paris,

1927);

K.

Jeppesen,

ed.,

Der

Kopenhagener

hansonnier

Copenhagen,

1927);

H.

Hewitt, ed.,

HarmoniceMusices

Odhecaton

(Cambridge,

Mass.,

I942);

H.

M.

Brown,

ed.,

Theatrical

Chansons

f

the

Fifteenth

and

Early

Sixteenth

Centuries

(Cambridge,

Mass.,

1963);

M.

Picker,

ed.,

The Chanson

Albums

of

Marguerite

f

Austria

(Berkeley

and Los

Angeles, 1965);

and the forthcoming editions of the

Mellon

Chansonnier

in the

Yale

University

Library

by

Leeman

Perkins,

and

my

Florence,

Biblioteca

Nazionale

Centrale,

MS

Magl.

XIX,

59 (B.

R.

229)

SThe chanson

appears

in

Florence,

Biblioteca

Nazionale

Centrale,

MS

Magl.

XIX, 59

(B.

R.

229),

fol.

238v,

and

also

in

manuscripts

in

Paris,

Seville,

and

Verona.

The

wrong

notes

in the

Florentine

manuscript

are:t

(I)

Tenor,

bar

18,

reads

D

instead

of

C;

(2)

Superius,

bar

28,

reads

F instead

of

E;

(3)

Contratenor,

bar

32,

reads

A

instead

of G; and (4) Contratenor, bar 57, reads

F instead

of E.

The

time

change

in

bars

35-38

is

indicated

in the

original

by

blackened

notes

(coloration).

3

My

views

on

text

underlay

are much

indebted

to

Edward

E.

Lowinsky;

see

especially

his 'A

Treatise

on

Text

Underlay

by

a

German

Disciple

of

Francisco

de

Salinas',

Festschrift

Heinrich

Besseler

Leipzig, 1961),

and

his

introduction

to

H.

Hewitt,

ed.,

Ottaviano

Petrucci.Canti

B

numero

inquanta.

Venice,

r502 (Chicago and London, I967).

4

On musica

icta

see the

various

essays

by

Edward E.

Lowinsky,

and

especially

his

introduction

to H.

Colin

Slim, ed.,

Musica

nova

(Chicago

and

London,

1964).

5

My

views

on

the instrumentation of

chansons

are

developed

at

greater

length

in

'Instruments

and Voices

in

the

Fifteenth-Century

Chanson',

Current

Thoughts

n

Musicology

University

of

Texas

Press,

to be

published).

6

The

Buxheim

Organ

Book

has

been

published

in a

modern

edition

by

B.

A.

Wallner

in

Das Erbe

deutscher

Musik.

Reichsdenkmale,ols. 37-39 (Cassel,

1958-59).

The

smaller German

keyboard

manuscripts

are

published

in

Willi

Apel,

ed.,

Keyboard

Music

of

the

Fourteenth

nd

Fifteenth

Centuries

American

Institute

of

Musicology, 1963).

A

facsimile of

the

Faenza Codex,

appears

as An

Early

Fifteenth-Century

talian

Source

f Keyboard

Music

(American

Institute of

Musicology,

I96I).

And

some of

its

contents

have

been

transcribed

in

Dragan

Plamenac,

'Keyboard

Music

of

the

14th

Century

in

Codex

Faenza

I

17',

Journal

of

the

American

Musicological

Society

4

(1951):

179-20

, and also his 'New Light on

Codex

Faenza

1

17',

Report,

nternational

Society

or

Musical

Research,

ifth

Congress,

Utrecht,

3-7 July

1952 (Amsterdam,

i953),

pp.

310-26.

7

My

views on ornamentation

in

15th-century

chansons

are

developed

at

greater

length

in

'Improvised

Ornamentation

in the

Fifteenth-Century

Chanson',

Memorie

contributi

.

.

offerti

a

Federico

Ghisi

(Bologna,

1972)-

10

This content downloaded from 158.109.174.204 on Mon, 6 Oct 2014 03:52:00 AM
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

Documents

H.M. BROWN, On the Performance of Fifteenth-century Chansons