Critical And Historical Essays Lectures Delivered At Columbia U

Chapter 8

Chapter 84,014 wordsPublic domain

To appreciate the change made by Gregory (540-604 A.D.), it is necessary to bear in mind the state of the church just before his time. As the Ambrosian chant had brought something of the old declamation and sweetness back into the church ceremonial, so also in the church itself there was a tendency to sink back into the golden shimmer that had surrounded the ancient pagan rites. Already Paul of Samosata, Bishop of Antioch (260 A.D.), had striven to bring a certain Oriental magnificence into the church ceremonials. He had a canopied throne erected for himself, from which he would address his congregation; he introduced applause into the church, after the fashion of the Roman theatres; he also had a chorus of women singers, who, as Eusebius tells us, sang not the Christian hymns, but pagan tunes. Later, in Constantinople, even this luxury and pomp increased; the churches had domes of burnished gold, and had become gigantic palaces, lit by thousands of lamps. The choir, dressed in glittering robes, was placed in the middle of the church, and these singers began to show the same fatal sign of decadence that we saw before in Rome and Greece. According to St. Chrysostom (347-407 A.D.), they used unguents on their throats in order to make the voice flexible, for by this time the singing had become a mere vehicle for virtuosity; when they sang their _tours de force_, the people applauded and waved their handkerchiefs, as they did also when the preaching pleased them. The pagans pointed the finger of scorn at the Christians, as being mere renegades from the old religion, and said, plausibly enough, that their worship was merely another form of the Dionysus tragedy. There was the same altar, the same chorus, the priest who sang and was answered by the chorus; and the resemblance had grown to such an extent that St. Chrysostom (350 A.D.) complained that the church chorus accompanied its singing with theatrical gestures, which, as we know, is simply the first step towards the dance.

This was the state of things when Gregory became Pope in 590 A.D. His additions to the modes already in use have been explained. His great reform lay in severing the connection between the music of the church and that of the pagan world before it. Casting aside the declamation and rhythm, which up to now had always dominated pure sound, he abolished the style of church singing in vogue, and substituted for it a system of chanting in which every tie between the words and music was severed.

The music was certainly primitive enough, for it consisted merely of a rising and falling of the voice for the space of many notes on one single syllable, as, for instance,

[F: (f g f g a a) a (a a a g a g g f a)] [W: Gloria]

The difference between this and the Ambrosian chant is evident if we look at the following; and we must also bear in mind that the Ambrosian chants were very simple in comparison with the florid _tours de force_ of the Byzantine church:

Now this reform could not be carried out at once; it was only through the medium of Charlemagne (742-814 A.D.), a hundred years later, that the Gregorian chant was firmly established. Authorized by a synod of bishops, called together from all parts of Europe by Pope Adrian I, Charlemagne, in 774, caused all the chant and hymn books of the Ambrosian system throughout Italy to be burned. So completely was this accomplished that only one Ambrosian missal was found (by St. Eugenius at Milan), and from this work alone can we form any idea as to the character of the music used by the followers of Ambrose, who were much retarded by the lack of a musical notation, which was the next factor needed to bring music to an equality with the other arts.

[07] Imitating the sound of the thing signified. Poe's "Raven" has much of this character.

[08] [over-dot]c, perfect pause; c[mid-dot], short; c., shortest; breathings: [reverse-apostrophe] hard; ' soft.

VIII

FORMATION OF THE SCALE--NOTATION

In comparing the Ambrosian chant with that of Gregory, it may be said that we have touched upon the vital principle of modern music. The novelty in the Gregorian chant consisted in its absolute emancipation from the tyranny of actual words and declamation; while the idea, the poetic principle, or religious ecstasy still remained the ideal to be expressed in the music. Before this, as already explained, music was either a mathematical problem, a rhythm to mark the time in dancing, or a vehicle serving for the display of clever _tours de force_, the music of the tragedies being merely a kind of melodious declamation. To quote Goethe, "having recognized the fact, it still remains for us to see how it developed." Let us now consider this point.

Three things were necessary before these Gregorian chants could develop at all: (1) A simple, clean-cut musical scale or systematized table of musical sounds. (2) Some definite manner of symbolizing sounds, so that they could be accurately expressed in writing. (3) A cultivation of the sense of hearing, in order that mankind might learn to distinguish between sounds that are discordant and those that sound well together; in other words, harmony.

We will begin with the scale, and review what we know of the Greek modes in order to show how they were amalgamated into our present octave system of scales.

[Tetrachords /------|-----\ /-------|--------\ ] [ F: b, c d e f g a G: b c' d' e' f' g' a'] [Mixolydian \--+-+-+-+-+-+----/ | | | | | | ] [Lydian \-+-+-+-+-+------/ | | | | | ] [Phrygian \-+-+-+-+---------/ | | | | ] [Dorian \-+-+-+------------/ | | | ] [Hypolydian \-+-+---------------/ | | ] [Hypophrygian \-+------------------/ | ] [Aeolian or Locrian or Hypodorian \---------------------/ ] [Notes labelled from highest to lowest: Nete, Paranete, Trite, Nete, Paranete, Trite, Paramese, Mese, Lichanos, Parhypate, Hypate, Lichanos, Parhypate, Hypate, [F: a,] Proslambanomenos.]

Under Ambrose and Pope Gregory, these modes had taken a different form. The chromatic and enharmonic styles had been abandoned in theory, the portamento which the singers introduced into their chants being the only principle retained. The new system was as follows:

[F8: g, a, b, G8: c d e f g a b c' d' e' f' g' a'] [First nine notes labelled: Hypoion., Hypodor., Hypophryg., Hypolyd./Ionian, Hypo-mixolyd./Dorian, Hypoaeol./Phryg., Lyd., Mixolyd., Aeol.]

In order to complete the story of the evolution of scales and clefs, we must add that the Flemish monk, Hucbald (900 A.D.), divided this scale into regular tetrachords, beginning at G, with the succession, tone, semitone, tone, forming four disjunct tetrachords,

[F: (g, a, b-, c) (d e f g) (a b c' d') G: (e' f+' g' a')]

This division remained without influence on the development of the scale.

The first change in the _tetrachord_ system of reckoning tones and dividing the scale was made by Guido d'Arezzo (first half of eleventh century), who divided it into hexachords or groups of six notes each. Up to that time, each note of the scale had had a letter of the alphabet for its symbol. It was Guido who conceived the idea of using syllables for these notes. The story of how it occurred to him is well known: On one occasion, hearing his brethren in the monastery choir of Arezzo, in Tuscany, sing a hymn to St. John the Baptist, he noticed that the first syllable of each line came on regularly ascending notes of the scale, the first syllable coming on C, the first of the next line on D, the first of the third on E, etc., up to A on the sixth line. As all these syllables happened to differ one from the other, and, moreover, were very easy to sing, he hit upon the idea of using them to distinguish the notes on which they fell in the hymn.

Furthermore, as there were six of these syllables, he arranged the musical scale in groups of six notes instead of four, hexachords instead of tetrachords. Commencing with G, which was the lowest note of the system in Hucbald's time, the first hexachord was formed of G A B C D E; the second, following the example of the Greeks, he made to overlap the first, namely, C D E F G A; the third, likewise overlapping the second, commenced on F. In order to make this hexachord identical in structure with, the first and second, he flatted the B, thus making the succession of notes, F G A B[flat] C D. The next three hexachords were repetitions of the first three, namely, G A B C D E, C D E F G A, F G A B[flat] C D; the last was again a repetition of the first, G A B C D E.

THE GAMUT.

[F: g, a, b, c d e c d e f g a f g a b- c' d' ] [W: [Gamma] A B C D E C D E F G a F G a b c d ] [W: (Ut re mi fa sol la) (Ut re mi fa sol la) (Ut re mi fa sol la)] [Hexachords: (Hard Low) (Natural Low) (Soft Low)]

[G: g a b= c' d' e' c' d' e' f' g' a' ] [W: G a b c d e c d e f g aa ] [W: (Ut re mi fa sol la) (Ut re mi fa sol la)] [Hexachords: (Hard High) (Natural High)]

[G: f' g' a' b-' c'' d'' g' a' b=' c'' d'' e''] [W: f g aa bb cc dd g aa bb cc dd ee ] [W: (Ut re mi fa sol la) (Ut re mi fa sol la)] [Hexachords: (Soft High) (Hard Super Acute)]

To the lowest note of this scale, which was foreign to the Greek system, he gave a special name, _gamma_, after the Greek letter G. From this we get our word for the scale, the gamut. The other notes remained the same as before, only that for the lowest octave capital letters were used; in the next octave, the notes were designated by small letters, and in the last octave by double letters, aa, bb, etc., as in the following example.

[F: g, g G: a g' | a' g'' ] [W: Capitals. : Small letters | Double or very small letters]

PRESENT SCALE.

[F: c,, | c, | c G: c' | c'' | c''' | c''''] [W: C_ | C | c : c' | c'' | c''' | c''''] [W: Contra | Great | Small : 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th ]

Following out his system, he applied the newly acquired syllables to each of the hexachords--for instance, the lowest hexachord, G A B C D E, which was called hard, became _ut re mi fa sol la_; the second, which was called natural, C D E F G A, also became _ut re mi fa sol la_; and the third, which was called soft, F G A B[flat] C D, became likewise _ut re mi fa sol la_. The next three hexachords were treated in the same manner; the last or seventh hexachord was merely a repetition of the first and the fourth.

Now in the hymns, and also in the sequences, as they were called (which were simply a series of notes forming a little melody sung to two or three words), the voice was rarely called upon to progress more than the interval of a sixth, and so this solmization, as the new system was called, was very valuable; for one had only to give the pitch, and _ut_ always meant the keynote, _re_ the second, _mi_ the third, etc., etc. In time _ut_ was found to be a difficult syllable to sing, and _do_ was substituted. This change, however, was made after the scale was divided into a system of octaves instead of hexachords. The improvement in singing soon made the limits of the hexachords too small to be practical; therefore another syllable was added to the hexachordal system, _si_, and with this seventh note we have our modern scale. From this we see that the scale in present use is composed of octaves, just as the older scales were composed of hexachords, and before that tetrachords. Just as in mediaeval times each hexachord commenced with _ut_, so now every octave of our tonal system commences with _do_.

Before leaving the hexachordal system, it may be as well to explain the mode of procedure when the voice had to go beyond the interval of the sixth. We know that the first of every set of six notes was called _ut_, the second, _re_, the third, _mi_, etc. When the voice had to go beyond _la_, the sixth note, to B[natural], that sixth note was always called _re_, and was considered the second note of a new hexachord. If, on the other hand, the voice had to go beyond _a_, to B[flat], the fifth note was called _re_, since the syllables _mi fa_ must always come on the half-tone.

In a study of our system of writing music, it may be as well to begin with the derivation of our sharps and flats. Observing the third hexachord on our list we see that in order to make it identical in structure with the first and second, the B had to be lowered a semitone. Now the third hexachord was called soft. The B[flat] in it was accordingly called a soft B or B _molle_, which is still the name in France for a flat, and _moll_ in German still means minor, or "soft" or "lowered." For the fourth hexachord, which was called hard, this B was again raised a semitone. But the flatted B was already indicated by the letter _b_ or round _b_, as it was called; hence this B natural was given a _square_ shape and called B _carre_, [illustration]. The present French word for natural (when it is specially marked) is _becarre_; the German word for major also comes indirectly from this, for _dur_ means "hard."

An explanation of the modern German names for notes will be easily understood in this connection. In the German nomenclature the letters of the alphabet stand for the notes of the scale as in the English, with the exception of B. This B, or "round" B, in the German system stands for B[flat], which is more logical than our English usage, since our flat is merely a slightly modified form of _b_. The German B natural is our letter _h_, which is merely a corruption of the square _b_, [illustration], which by the addition of a line in time became our [natural]. The Germans have carried the flatting and sharping of tones to a logical conclusion in their present nomenclature, for by "sharping" the sound of a single letter it is raised a semitone from its normal diapason, thus F becomes _Fis_, G _Gis_. On the other hand, in order to lower a tone, the letter representing it is "flatted," and F is called _Fes_, G _Ges_, the only exception to these rules being the B which we have already considered.

In France the Guidonian system was adhered to closely, and to this day the _becarre_ is used only as an accidental, to indicate that the note to which it refers has been flatted before. The _naturel_ (which has the same shape) is used to designate a note that is natural to the key; thus the distinction is made between an accidental and a note that is common to the key. In F major, for instance, B[natural] is _si becarre_, A[natural] would be _la naturel_. Our modern sharp is merely another form of the natural or square B ([natural]) which gradually came to be used before _any_ note, signifying that it was raised or sharped a half-tone; the flat lowered it a semitone, and after a while the natural received its present place between the sharp and flat. The first instance we have of the sharp being used is in the thirteenth century, when (in the Rondels of Adam de la Hale) it takes the form of a cross [x] (the German word for the sharp still remains _kreuz_). The French word _diese_ (sharp) comes from the Greek _diesis_, a term used to indicate the raising of the voice in the chromatic scale.

And now we have to speak of notation and its development. Thus far we have found only two ways in which musical sounds were indicated by the ancients. First, we remember the invention of Aristophanes of Alexandria, his accents, high, low, and circumflex. Then we know from Ptolemy, Boethius, and Alypius that letters were used to designate the different tones; but as there is no music extant in this notation to prove the theory, we need not trouble ourselves with it.

The system of Aristophanes, however, was destined to become the nucleus from which our modern notation sprang. We know that an elementary idea, clearly expressed, has more chances of living than has a more complicated system, however ingenious the latter may be. Now this system is so plain that we will find it is common to many aboriginal peoples, for instance the American Indians have a system very similar.

In the period now under consideration (from the third to the tenth century), music was noted in this way: an upstroke of the pen meant a raising of the voice, a downstroke lowered it, a flat stroke meant a repetition of the same note, thus [/ \ -] [G: c' g' c' c']. Gradually it became necessary to indicate the contour of the melodies with more accuracy; therefore the circumflex was added [Over-slur] [G: g' c'' g'] and reversed [Under-slur] [G: g' e' g']. Still later a sign for two steps was invented [Step] [G: e' g' b'] and when the progression was to be diatonically stepwise the strokes were thicker [Thick Step] [G: g' a' b']. So this notation developed, and by combining the many signs together, simple non-rhythmic melodies could be indicated with comparative clearness and simplicity. The flat stroke for a single note [-], indicating [G: b'], eventually became smaller and thicker, thus [Thick -]. By combining these different signs, a skip of a third and back came to be noted [Crenellation], and if the note came down on a second instead of the original note it became [Podium] [G: g' b' a']. The _quilisma_ ([Upper Mordent]) indicated a repetition of two notes, one above the other, and we still use much the same sign for our trill. Also the two forms of the circumflex, [Over-slur] [Under-slur], were joined ([Turn]) and thus we have the modern turn, so much used by Wagner.

Now while this notation was ingenious, it still left much to be desired as to pitch. To remedy this a red line was drawn before writing these signs or _neumes_, as they were called. This line represented a given pitch, generally E; above and below it were then written the signs for the notes, their pitch being determined by the relative position they held in regard to the _line_. Thus [Podium, Turn, Upper Mordent] was the equivalent of [G: c' e' d' e' d' c' d' e' d' e' d' e' d'], considering the line as being middle C pitch, a fourth higher F. This was the condition of musical notation in 1000 A.D.

To Guido d'Arezzo is ascribed its development up to some semblance of our present system, although the claim has often been denied. It is certain, however, that the innovations were made at this period. In the first place Guido made the red line _always_ stand for the pitch of F, and at a little distance above it he added another line, this time yellow, which was to indicate the pitch of C. Thus the signs began to take very definite meaning as regards pitch; for, given a sign extending from one line to the other, the reader could see at a glance that the music progressed a fifth, from F to C, or _vice-versa_. And now the copyists, seeing the value of these lines in determining the pitch of the different signs, of their own account added two more in black ink, one of which they drew between the F and the C line, and the other above the C line, thus [illustration]. By doing this they accurately decided the pitch of every note, for the lowest line, being F, the line between that and the C line must stand for A, and the two spaces for G and B; the top line would stand for E, and the space between it and the yellow line for D. Little by little these copyists grew careless about making the lines in yellow, red, and black, and sometimes drew them all in black or red, thereby losing the distinguishing mark of the F and C lines. In order to remedy this, Guido placed the letters F and C before the lines representing these notes, thus [illustration]. In this way our modern _clefs_ (_clavis_ or key) originated, for the C clef, as it is called, gradually changed its shape to [illustration] and [illustration], and the F clef changed to [illustration], which is our bass clef in a rudimentary form.

Later, still another line was added to the set, thus giving us our modern staff, and another clef, [illustration], was added on the next to the lowest line. This, in turn, became our present treble clef, [G:]. In the course of time the signs themselves underwent many changes, until at last from [Podium], etc., they became our modern signs.

Before this, however, a grave defect in the notation had to be remedied. There was as yet no way of designating the length of time a note was to be sustained; something definite in the way of noting _rhythm_ was necessary. This was accomplished by Franco of Cologne, in the beginning of the thirteenth century. By disconnecting the parts of the sign [Podium] one from another, the following individual signs were acquired [illustration of Podium broken into three pieces]. In order to have two distinct values of length, these signs were called longs and shorts, _longa_ [illustration], and _brevis_ [illustration], to which was added the _brevis_ in another position [illustration], called _semibrevis_. The _longa_ was twice the value of the _brevis_, and the _semibrevis_ was half the length of the _brevis_ ([L = B B B = S S]). When notes of equal length were slurred, they were written [illustration]. When two or more notes were to be sung to one syllable in quicker time, the _brevi_ were joined one to the other [illustration], as for instance in the songs of the thirteenth century,

DIRGE FOR KING RICHARD'S DEATH

GAUCELM FAIDIT.

ROI THIBAUT DE NAVARRE (1250).

or, in modern style,

[G: g' a' b' c'' (d'' c'') (b' a' g') | a' b' (c'' b') (b' a' g') (a' b') g']

In this example we find the first indication of the measuring off of phrases into bars. As we see, it consisted of a little stroke, which served to show the beginning of a new line, and was not restricted to regularity of any kind except that necessitated by the verse.

The use of the _semibrevis_ is shown in the following chanson of Raoul de Coucy (1192):

[G: d'' (c'' a') b-' (a' (g' f')) g' (a' b-' a' f') f' | f' g' a' (b-' a') (c'' d'' c'' b-') (a' g') a' | d'' (c'' a') b-' a' (g' f') g' (a' (b-' a') f') f']

The French troubadours and the German minnesingers of the thirteenth century used these forms of notes only, and even then restricted themselves to two kinds, either the _longa_ and _brevis_, or _brevis_ and _semibrevis_.

The necessity for rests very soon manifested itself, and the following signs were invented to correspond to the _longa_, _brevis_, and _semibrevis_ [illustration]. Also the number of note symbols was increased by the _maxima_ or double _longa_ [illustration], and the _minima_ [illustration], which represented half the value of the _semibrevis_.