Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T09:48:13.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chant research at the turn of the century and the analytical programme of Helmut Hucke

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 September 2008

Edward Nowacki
Edward Nowacki
Affiliation:
University of Cincinnati
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The end of a century, like the end of any era, is a time to take stock and lay plans. This is no less true of plainsong and medieval music than of any field of human endeavour. So it comes as no surprise to encounter in our professional literature exhortations to re-envision our subject and to contemplate its direction in the twenty-first century. Richard Crocker has been particularly cogent in recommending the abandonment of lost causes and the adoption of new or neglected research methods.1 The attempt to read the oldest melodic texts of plainchant as the trace of the sumptuous oral tradition that preceded them, however tantalizing, is ultimately unsatisfying in his view, perhaps even vain. In its place he urges us to cultivate a critical, evaluative understanding of chants composed in the era of musical notation, that is, as authoritative compositions of the time when they were copied rather than as witnesses to an obsolescent oral tradition. Putting this advice into practice would require more listening, performing and remembering of chants as they are and less speculation about how they got that way.

Type
Articles
Information
Plainsong & Medieval Music , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , April 1998 , pp. 47 - 71
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Crocker, Richard, ‘Gregorian Studies in the Twenty-First Century’, Plainsong and Medieval Music, 4 (1995), 33–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Vol. 12, pp. 74–87, used here by permission.Google Scholar

3 Adler, Mortimer J., How to Read a Book (New York, 1940), 48–64.Google Scholar

4 Hiley's, Davidsummary references to it in Western Plainchant: A Handbook (Oxford, 1993), 79 and 539, are exceptional.Google ScholarJeffery, Peter, in his detailed examination of Hucke's thought in Re-Envisioning Past Musical Cultures: Ethnomusicology in the Study of Gregorian Chant (Chicago, 1992), does not mention it, limiting his digest to works of Hucke's published since 1963.Google Scholar

5 Hucke, Helmut, ‘Toward a New Historical View of Gregorian Chant’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 33 (1980), 437–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 I use ‘text’ in its strict philological sense as anything written. Words in alphabetic script and melodies in musical notation constitute the complete text of plainchant.

7 Wiora, Walter, ‘Das produktive Umsingen deutscher Kirchenliedweisen in der Vielfalt europäischer Stile’, Jahrbuch für Liturgik und Hymnologie, 2 (1956), 47–63.Google Scholar

8 Paléographie musicale, 2 (Solesmes, 1891), 6.Google Scholar

9 Andoyer, Raphael, ‘Le chant romain antégrégorien’, Revue du chant grégorien,20 (1911–1912), 69–75 and 107–14.Google Scholar

10 Stäblein, Bruno, ‘Zur Frühgeschichte des römischen Chorals’, in Atti del congresso internazionale di musica sacra, Roma, 1950(Tournai, 1952), 271–5.Google ScholarSee also idem, ‘Alt- und neurömischer Choral’, in Kongressbericht Lüneburg 1950, 53–6;Google Scholaridem, ‘Zur Entstehung der gregorianischen Melodien’, Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch, 35(1951), 5–9;Google Scholarand idem ‘Choral’, in Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart (Kassel, 1952), II, cols. 1265–1303.Google Scholar

11 Hourlier, Jacquesand Huglo, Michel, ‘Un important témoin du chant “vieux-romain”: le Graduel de Sainte-Cécile du Trastévère’, Revue grégorienne, 31(1952), 26–37.Google Scholar

12 Huglo, Michel, ‘Le chant “vieux-romain”: Liste des manuscrits et témoins indirects’, Sacris Erudiri, 6(1954), 96–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Klauser, Theodor,‘Die liturgischen Austauschbeziehungen zwischen der römischen und der fränkisch-deutschen Kirche vom 8. bis zum 11. Jahrhundert’, Historisches Jahrbuch der Görres-Gesellschaft, 53(1933), 169–89;Google Scholarreprinted in his Gesammelte Arbeiten, ed. Dassmann, Ernst(Münster, 1974), 139–54.Google Scholar

14 Waesberge, Joseph Smits van, ‘L’Etat actuel des recherches scientifiques dans le domaine du chant grégorien’, in Troisième congrès international de musique sacrée, Paris,1957 (Paris, 1959), 206–25;Google Scholaridem‘Neues über die Schola Cantorum zu Rom’, in Zweiter Internationaler Kongress für katholische Kirchenmusik, Wien, 1954(Vienna, 1955), 111–19;Google Scholarvan Dijk, S.J.P, ‘The Urban and Papal Rites in Seventh-, and Eighth-Century Rome’, Sacris Erudiri, 12(1961), 411–87;CrossRefGoogle ScholarStäblein, , ‘Zur Frühgeschichte’; idem, Die Gesänge des altrömischen Graduale Vat. lat. 5319, Monumenta Monodica Medii Aevi 2(Kassel, 1970)Google Scholar; Hucke, Helmut, review of Stäblein, Die Gesänge, in Musik und Altar, 24(1972), 138–41.Google Scholar

15 See, for example, Connolly, Thomas H., ‘The Graduale of S. Cecilia in Trastevere and the Old Roman Tradition’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 28(1975), 413–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Nowacki, Edward, ‘Constantinople–Aachen–Rome: The Transmission of Veterem hominem’, in De Musica et Cantu: Studien zur Geschichte der Kirchenmusik und der Oper: Helmut Hucke zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. Peter, Cahnand Heimer, Ann-Katrin(Hildesheim, 1993), 95–115.Google Scholar

16 Lipphardt, Walther, ‘Gregor der Grosse und sein Anteil am römischen Antiphonar’, in Atti del congresso internazionale di musica sacra, Roma 1950(Tournai, 1952), 248–54.Google Scholar

17 Through spot-checks the author was able to satisfy himself that the differences between manuscripts Vat. lat. 5319 and Phillipps 16069 [now Bibl. Bodmeriana MS C 74] are negligible. The two manuscripts belong closer together than Vat. lat. 5319 does with the thirteenth-century manuscript Archivio di San Pietro F 22, which exhibits slight variants.

18 Connolly, Thomas H., ‘Introits and Archetypes: Some Archaisms of the Old Roman Chant’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 25(1972), 157–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 Jeffery, , Re-envisioning Past Musical Cultures,91.Google Scholar

20 Hucke evidently misread the melisma at the beginning of the second segment over (di-) sci(-pulus). In fact it is identical to the one over (di-) e(-bus) in staff 3. The error has been corrected in the example.

21 Compare, for example, the versions notated in staffless notation in St Gall, MS 339, in Paléographie musicale(Solesmes, 1889).

22 In Rome, as a comparision of the manuscripts Vat. lat. 5319 and Archivio di San Pietro F 22 shows, the formation of variants (albeit unessential ones) began to occur as late as the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.

23 ‘Three’ (erroneously) in the original.

24 Hucke, Helmut, ‘Improvisation im gregorianischen Gesang’, Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrbuch, 38 (1954), 5–8.Google Scholar

25 Jameson, Fredric, The Prison-House of Language: A Critical Account of Structuralism and Russian Formalism(Princeton, 1972), 5–6.Google Scholar

26 Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, MS lat. 10511.

27 It goes without saying that much new creation ocurred outside the central canon of chants for the Mass, but that is not the subject of this article.

28 On tradition in the Roman schola cantorum, see the Hucke, Helmut, ‘Die Tradition des gregorianischen Gesanges in der römischen Schola Cantorum’, in Zweiter Internationaler Kongress für katholische Kirchenmusik, Wien, 1954(Vienna, 1955), 120–3.Google Scholar

29 Hucke, Helmut, ‘Die Anfänge der abendländischen Notenschrift’, in Festschrift Rudolf Elvers(Tutzing, 1985), 271–88.Google Scholar

30 Hucke, Helmut. ‘Der Übergang von mündlicher zu schriftlicher Musiküberlieferung im Mittelalter’, in Proceedings of the Twelfth Congress of the International Musicological Society, Berkeley, 1977(Kassel, 1981), 180–91.Google ScholarFor empirical confirmation see Boe, John, ‘Chant Notation in Eleventh-Century Roman Manuscripts’, in Essays on Medieval Music in Honor of David G. Hughes, ed. Boone, Graeme M.(Cambridge, Mass., 1995), 43–57.Google Scholar

31 McKinnon, James, ‘The Eighth-Century Frankish-Roman Communion Cycle’, Journal of the American Musicological Society,45(1992), 179–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32 See Hucke, Helmut, ‘Die Einführung des gregorianischen Gesanges im Frankenreich’, Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte, 49(1954), 172–87.Google Scholar