CHAPTER FOUR

The Ninth Century Revival: Sequences

I. Origin

The problem presented by the origin of the sequence is perhaps the most difficult of all those connected with the evolution of medieval hymnology. So far the available information on the subject has never been brought together in one place. To do so is a baffling task which has by no means been completed here nor is that which follows either exhaustive or conclusive. It is merely an attempt to trace the origin and early development as far as the evidence at hand makes it possible, at the same time referring the reader to those scholars who have investigated special topics in detail.

The _alleluia_ of the mass is the starting-point of the sequence. Inherited from the synagogue and incorporated in the Byzantine rite, it was nevertheless brought independently to Rome. The extension of the final _a_ constituted a musical phrase, called a _iubilus_ or _iubilatio_. This elaborated _alleluia_ with _iubilus_ is Gregorian.[1] It became necessary for the sake of breathing, to divide the extended _iubilus_ into musical phrases, each a _sequentia_ and the whole _sequentiae_. Some _iubili_ however, remained single while others were sung by two choirs with a repetition of phrases. The next step was the composition of a text for some of the _iubili_, which text was written below the musical notation. Finally a text was supplied for every such melody, which resulted in the _sequentia cum prosa_.[2]

It is one thing to note the preceding succession of steps as objective phenomena. It is quite another to explain the origin of the idea which transformed the _alleluia_ into the larger _iubilus_. This is the most obscure point in the musical development of the sequence, which, for lack of manuscript evidence cannot at present be clarified. At least three hypotheses have been offered. Arguing from the appearance of the trope, some have suggested that the _iubilus_ is a musical interpolation just as the trope is a textual interpolation. This is quite possible but perhaps too simple for an adequate solution. A much more tempting hypothesis has appealed to a variety of scholars,—that of the introduction of Greek melodies.[3] To these students it has seemed more than probable that the intercourse between western Europe and the Byzantine realms in the reign of Charlemagne constitutes a sufficient explanation for the appearance of fresh musical themes. Again, a possibility only has been suggested. So far manuscript evidence for the Greek melodies from which the Gregorian _alleluiae_ and their _iubili_ are derived, has not appeared. Blume, whose treatment of the subject forms the basis of this chapter, not only questions the hypothesis of Greek melodies but he offers a third suggestion and that tentatively; Gregory, he thinks, shortened the _alleluia_ brought over by the Greeks. When, later, a tendency was felt to elaborate the forms of worship, the longer melodies were once more revived in the sequence. This very interesting suggestion, if one day capable of proof, would harmonize the Byzantine and Gregorian influences which produced the initial extension of the final _a_ of the _alleluia_.

For purposes of clearness a differentiation should be made between the musical and poetical development of the sequence as soon as the _sequentia cum prosa_ is reached. Manifestly it is impossible to do so, in any complete fashion, where words and music are so inextricably interwoven in a common development. It is better, however, to attempt the impossible and for the present, to ignore overlappings.[4]

The origin of the word _sequentia_ itself, in the phrase _sequentia cum prosa_ has often been discussed because of its significance in tracing the musical development of the forms in question. To some scholars _sequentia_ means merely _sequela_, _i.e._ notes following the _a_ of the _alleluia_, a simple and tenable theory. To the great majority, however, _sequentia_ is a translation of the Greek _akoulouthia_. In fact it has been generally accepted as such, although _sequentia_ conveys the idea of continuation in the Greek word rather than its technical meaning of a continuation specifically of songs, etc. If this is valid, Greek influence upon the origin of the sequence is inferred.[5] Another form of the theory of Greek influence is evident in the suggestion that _sequentia_ means _hirmos_, that is, a regular continuation of tones. _Hirmos_ may refer to poetry also.[6] A derivation of _sequentia_ from Greek terms, if proven, would of course, buttress the theory of Byzantine influence upon the whole development; but the weakness of the derivation from _akoulouthia_, for example, is its dependence upon a misunderstanding of the Greek form of worship to which the word applies.[7] An entirely different suggestion as to origin arises from the formula used in the liturgy to announce the Gospel, _Sequentia Sancti Evangelii secundum_ _etc._[8] Often some practical consideration, extraneous condition or unrelated incidental circumstance has affected liturgical change or development. Consequently, even a slight suggestion like this provokes thought.

Whatever may be the correct origin of the word _sequentia_ the place of origin of the sequence is generally conceded to have been France sometime in the eighth century. The part played by other lands in the origin of the _sequentia cum prosa_ cannot be wholly determined at present. It must suffice to study the evidence available. It has been demonstrated how the early French sequences have a closer tie with the _alleluia_ and how the word is sometimes retained to introduce the _prosae_ which accompany the music. There is considerable evidence supporting French priority over the Germans in the creation of these new musical forms, the chief centers of composition being St. Martial, Luxeuil, Fleury-sur-Loire, and Moissac, the outstanding rival of St. Martial. An origin for the sequence in France is independently probable due to the interest in liturgical music stimulated by Charlemagne, who, as shown in the preceding chapter, favored Gregorian and Byzantine innovations at the expense of Gallican forms.

One of the suggestions mentioned to account for the original lengthening of the _alleluia_ in the _iubilus_ is connected with the trope. The word has long been defined as a textual interpolation.[9] Gastoué, however, contends that it was originally and primarily musical, a vocalization in the existing chant and that it was created in the music school. The ancient form of trope is a _neuma triplex_ added to the response _In medio_ _etc._ for the Feast of St. John the Apostle, or to _Descendit de caelis_ for Christmas. This vocalism is described by Amalarius of Metz and indeed Metz may be its place of origin. Alcuin has been named as the possible originator, a theory strengthened by the fact that Amalarius was one of his pupils.[10] At any rate Amalarius seems to have been the first to call the melody following the _alleluia_, a _sequentia_,[11] from which it is evident that the _iubili_ must have been regarded in some other light prior to his writing. The _sequentia_ in connection with the _alleluia_ may very reasonably have been considered a trope, since vocalisms like these had already appeared elsewhere in rites of worship, and sequences in addition to those which belong to the _alleluia_ of the mass have been found in antiphonaries. To repeat, Gastoué describes a musical interpolation or trope originating in the music schools of the Franks and appearing in various liturgical settings. He likens the _iubilus_ to a trope which Amalarius called a _sequentia_. The original divisions created by the musical phrases in the _iubilus_ now appear in a series, each repeated a certain number of times with introduction and conclusion and thus the completed sequence structure comes into being. The germ of its formal construction, Gastoué finds in certain Gregorian sources. The ancient _alleluia_, _Justus ut palma florebit_, shows such characteristics and reveals the liturgical Latin origin of the sequence, its melody going back to the _versus alleluiaticus_.

In spite of the evidence which would make the sequence a native musical product of western Europe, the theory of Greek origin is still persistently held by certain scholars. For that reason it must be considered in greater detail. Gregory’s adoption of Greek novelties forms the starting point of this theory, while Charlemagne’s well-known enthusiasm for Greek innovations carries its proponents still further. The fact that the original Greek melodies which are assumed to have been used in the west, have never been produced in evidence, is not a proof of their non-existence. An extensive study of certain sequence melodies has been made in order to determine whether they are modeled upon Greek originals, since the Greek names for these melodies and features of notation point to such an origin.[12] But such names are secondary, the original and natural name being the first phrase of the Latin words accompanying the melodies and the Greek word a suggested title. A Greek melody, called _Organa_, for instance, might be assumed to retain its name in Latin. The opposite is the case for the name _Filia matris_ is original and _Organa_ the suggested title.

Regarding the argument from notation it is a matter of common knowledge that the _neume_ is native to Greek-speaking lands and may have existed as early as the sixth century.[13] _Neumes_ took firm root at St. Gall, the great German center for the propagation of the sequence, so much so, that they persisted until the twelfth century even after the invention of the staff and in the interval were spread by teaching. Moreover, _neumes_ were written in the manner of the eastern church, _i.e._ in a straight line, not at different levels to indicate pitch.[14] It is unfortunate that the dearth of manuscripts showing _neumes_ makes a gap in the evidence just where support is most needed, for the earliest musical manuscripts with this notation date from the ninth century;[15] but the assumption in favor of Greek originals is at least strong enough to forbid its being ignored.

An additional circumstance which supports the theory of Greek origin is the fact of musical parallelism in the structure of the sequence. This is an important point of contact between the sequence and Byzantine musical forms, although it has not been universally convincing. On the contrary, some have traced this phenomenon of musical parallelism to one of those extraneous conditions, affecting liturgical practice, namely, the use of antiphonal choirs.[16]

Nothing can be more unsatisfactory to the student who is trying to force the sequence into any particular theory of musical origin than the contemplation of what is actually known on this subject, for the question seems destined to remain undecided. A better perspective may be reached by examining the poetical development of the sequence which began with the _sequentia cum prosa_ and ended in a new form of Latin hymn for which melodies were in turn composed.

The text written below the _alleluia_ melody is generally accepted as of French origin and likewise the naming of that text. As the text became important the melody too was named so that the melody and text were differentiated from each other, the latter as a _prosa_. It is unknown whether the name _sequentia_ instead of _prosa_ was chosen deliberately as differing from the French usage. Amalarius was apparently the first to use the word _sequentia_ in connection with the music. Later the term was destined to supersede the name _prosa_ for the poetical text.

We owe to Notker, whose part in creating the sequence will be considered in greater detail below, an account of his invention of words as an aid to memorizing the elaborate melody of the _alleluia_ trope. Whether Notker was the first to see the value of this device and to employ it, is unknown.[17] As a theory of origin it has always been popular, being held by Frere and many others. For the present it may be acknowledged that it is a reasonable theory for, of course, only the choir leader had a musical codex to refer to and the musical ability of the average monk was unequal to the difficulties of memorization by ear alone. Moreover, this theory can always be accepted with others, although it seems inadequate by itself.

A second explanation of origin arises from the possibility that sequence poetry originated in the imitation of Greek hymn models. The statement has been made definitely that sequence poetry shows the transference of the Byzantine structure of hymnody to Latin church poetry, especially Notker’s.[18] With every circumstance favoring such a transfer it is amazing that the Franks who heard so much of Greek hymns and could have translated them into Latin and sung them to the same tunes, evidently did nothing of the kind. Some other explanation of similarity must be found. Metrical parallelism, which is characteristic of the Latin sequence and contemporary Greek hymns, in Gastoué’s opinion, can be accounted for only by reference to Hebrew poetry as the ultimate inspiration of liturgical poetry.[19] Thus a Byzantine theory of origin breaks down when metrical sources are subjected to closer scrutiny. After all, the sequence is unknown in the Byzantine ritual and therefore the Byzantine influence could never have been direct.

A third theory emphasizes the metrical form of the _alleluia_ melody as the determining factor in creating a new poetical rhythm.[20] Here, the desire to create fitting expressions of praise is not explained so much as the form in which the praises are cast. Von Winterfeld thought that rhythmical prose was inseparable from the liturgical music which had already been composed, just as the Greek chorus and the Wagnerian music drama found their complement in a dignified and sonorous prose rhythm.[21] This theory may well be called the liturgical. It is most significant for the lyrical movement in general since a new metrical form is created differing from the Ambrosian meter or the revived classical meters popular among Carolingian poets. The lyric is born again, as Meyer expresses it, in the music of the church.[22] A poem arises consisting of a series of parallel strophes with introduction and conclusion, a lyric counterpart to the musical phrases of the _sequentia_.

II. Sequences of the German School

The importance played by St. Gall in the development of the sequence has given rise to the theory that it originated there. Present-day opinion, as indicated above, concedes that sequences arose in France and that St. Gall is not a place of origin but like St. Martial, a prominent center for their composition and diffusion. Other centers were Metz, Murbach, Fulda, Echternach, Kremünster and St. Florian. Reichenau, too, was important in music and in the spread of sequence poetry.[23]

Notker Balbulus, (840?-912), was largely responsible for the enviable reputation enjoyed by St. Gall. Born in Switzerland, Notker had entered the Benedictine monastery at St. Gall as a child to be educated and there he continued as a member of the Order until his death. A pupil and later a teacher of the music school in the period of Louis the Pious and Louis the German, he shared the life of the Abbey during the height of its reputation, when its doors were open to travelers from every land and every rank of society. Notker himself tells of the refugee from the French monastery of Jumièges who brought with him his famous Antiphonary. Tradition has it that Notker composed words to fit the forms of the _alleluia-iubilus_, note for note, already in use in his monastery, and thus originated the sequence, finding his inspiration, not in the Ambrosian hymns but in the liturgy.[24] The Jumièges Antiphonary reached St. Gall about 860, by which time _prosae_ were already known in France. There is evidence, moreover, from manuscripts, that texts existed before Notker’s time in St. Gall. He is not their first composer nor are the sequences emanating from St. Gall necessarily all Notker’s work. “Notkerian” means for sequences what “Ambrosian” means for hymns.

The problem of the authentic Notkerian sequences was subjected to critical study and variously solved by Schubiger in 1858, Wilmanns in 1872, and Werner in 1901. More recent students have re-examined the evidence and expressed their critical opinions as to Notker’s poetical and musical prestige: Singer in 1922, Van Doren in 1925 and Clark in 1926. Of more than 100 sequences attributed to Notker, 47 were judged to be authentic and edited in volume 53 of the _Analecta Hymnica_. Notker’s ability as a musician appears to be a matter of controversy. A new review of the Notkerian problem and its literature has been offered by the Swiss scholar, Wolfram von den Steinen, together with an edition of the sequences of the St. Gall school.[25] What scholars in general have taken away from Notker with one hand they return with the other, for if not an originator he is conceded to be the leading agent in introducing the sequence into Germany and setting a standard for this type of poetry which included from Notker’s pen a notable group of sequences for the festivals of the whole year. His sequence for Pentecost is representative of the achievements of the German school.

(See Illustrative Hymns, XI. _Sancti spiritus adsit nobis gratia_, “The grace of the Holy Ghost be present with us.”)

It is not surprising that scholars interested in the theory of Greek influence upon sequence poetry should seek confirmation of their views in Notker’s work. There is a majestic quality and a vigorous resounding praise in these poems which has been thought a reflection of Byzantine hymns. Reference has already been made to the Byzantine strophic system and its probable influence upon Notker’s poetical technique. When one considers that the monastery of St. Gall was always a port of call for refugees and travelers from the east and in the preceding century may have harbored many of them, it is reasonable to suppose that Notker was acquainted with contemporary Greek hymnody. Whatever may be the explanation of the metrical system employed by Notker, he undoubtedly named his melodies in such a way as to suggest a Greek identification.[26]

There remains another line of research, which is relatively unimportant, yet should be noted when the question of Greek influence is raised. It has been stated that Greek words are used in Latin sequences, thereby proving contact with Greek-speaking contemporaries on the part of their authors, or with Greek literary sources. Whenever this test is applied to any medieval writing produced by churchmen it should not be forgotten that the Vulgate was the one great continuous source, inspiration and standard of the Latin language as employed in the Middle Ages. Throughout the period, all Latin hymns which include a narrative element or refer in any other way to biblical statements are greatly indebted to the Vulgate. A considerable number of Greek words, naturally, appear in the Vulgate. Applying the criterion of Greek words to Notker’s sequences, one reaches no definitive results whatever. In the forty-one sequences attributed to Notker by Wilmanns, some seven Greek words appear which are not in the Vulgate.[27] If this proves anything in Notker’s case, it is significant only in connection with other evidence from Greek originals which has not been advanced.

Having considered the separate development of the musical and poetical aspects of the sequence, as far as they can be sundered, it remains to view certain factors which may have affected that development but have not as yet been stated.

The history of medieval music, quite apart from the creation of the _iubilus_ and the _sequentia_, should not be overlooked by the student who is trying to understand liturgical music in this general period. Perhaps during the eighth and certainly from the ninth century, polyphonic and harmonic forms began to appear. New melodies for sequences were in demand and were produced, which in turn were influenced by popular and secular music, with an interaction of words and music taking place, sometimes with words, sometimes with music leading the way.[28] The history of the sequence, when complete, will owe much to the studies of medieval music now in progress by musicologists, some of whose conclusions have been noted above. The history of musical instruments is relevant here but in any case it must always be remembered that the church possessed the musical notation and was able to dominate the field.

If the course of secular and ecclesiastical music accompanying the sequence remains uncertain, so are the currents of medieval religious and secular verse in Latin still uncharted. Which is the original stream? Latin secular poetry existed contemporary with the early sequence, the secular form of which was known as a _modus_,[29] which, like the sequence, was inseparable from its musical accompaniment for the minstrel both sang and played his unrhymed lay. Some have taken the extreme point of view of the part played by secular influence and have regarded the sequence as a popular lyric in worship, perhaps even a _Volkslied_.[30] But the question as to the predominance of influence whether religious or secular, remains open.

The argument for influence from vernacular verse upon the sequence is equally weak. Prior to the ninth century vernacular lyrics in the Germanic tongues are so rare as to be valueless in this discussion. Celtic lyrics from the seventh and eighth centuries are also rare. It is possible that they were known to Celtic teachers on the continent but too much should not be assumed from this possibility or from the fact that the oldest form of Celtic lyric exhibits rhythmic parallelism.[31] French, Spanish and early English vernacular lyrics appear too late to be significant in the problem of origins. In any case, the question hinges upon metrical technique which can be adequately explained without recourse to vernacular lyrics, which, insofar as they do exist, may be regarded as themselves imitations of earlier Latin forms.

The evidence offered by secular lyrics, Latin or vernacular, in the early Middles Ages points to an outstanding growth from the sequence rather than a creative source for the sequence. As a matter of fact the sequence breaks away from the church and itself becomes secular, as the history of poetry in the later Middle Ages bears witness.

The above presentation of what is known as to the origin of the sequence can scarcely be satisfactory to the scientific historian of medieval culture. Full of inconvenient gaps and baffling inconsistencies the evidence remains totally inadequate. One conclusion alone may be advanced and that tentatively; the sequence appears to have been created wholly within the liturgy of the mass. The _troparium_ or _tropary_, later the gradual and missal contained the sequences for the annual feasts just as the _hymnarium_ or _hymnary_, later the breviary had contained the hymn cycles of the offices.

The appearance of the sequence in the history of medieval hymnody was an episode of the greatest importance not only in the evolution of Latin religious and secular poetry but in their vernacular counterparts. In order to understand the extraordinary popularity and wide diffusion of the sequence it must be emphasized that it is not just another hymn, but an ornament to the mass, individually created for each and every festival with a particular theme in mind. The seasons of Advent, Nativity, the Passion, Easter, Ascension, Pentecost, Trinity, the Virgin festivals of the Nativity, Annunciation, Visitation, Purification and Assumption, the feasts of the Apostles and other biblical Saints, the Martyrs, Confessors and Virgins formed a great series which challenged the finest efforts of the clerical poets. Herein lies the essential interest of this hymnody. The original Latin hymn was associated with daily secular worship and then with the canonical hours of the monastery. The sequence was associated with the celebration of the divine sacrifice.

As a closing illustration for this chapter the Alleluiatic sequence has been selected. Based upon the canticle, _Benedicite omnia opera_, and often attributed to Notker, this superb sequence reaches a height of expression comparable to the noblest hymns of the ninth century revival.

(See Illustrative Hymns, XII. _Cantemus cuncti melodum nunc Alleluia_, “The strain upraise of joy and praise.”)