The Importance of Organum in the Development of Musical Form
Created | Updated May 11, 2003
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~sjoh1661/
The origins of organum are unclear; but what is certain is that it was the staple diet of sacred polyphony before, during, and after Perotinus and Leoninus. Concordant intervals were an essential element in early polyphony: indeed, polyphonic technique was often discussed under headings such as De symphoniis. The technique of polyphony was based on two practices, both of them probably very old: that of parallel singing in concordant intervals, and that of the use of a drone.
The definition of the term “concordant” differs from treatise to treatise, which suggests that it differed from place to place: in the central theoretical source on organum, entitled Musica enchiriadis and dating from the second half of the 9th century, the vox organalis (organal voice) is also called the cantilena simphonica (concordant voice). In the Cologne organum treatise (c900), notes in the vox organalis that form a 3rd or 2nd with the vox principalis (principal voice, that is the original plainchant) are said to be abusivum organum (abuse of organum). However, Guido d’Arezzo permitted thirds: these differences could be put down to different intonations being used from place to place. Rather than there being a genuine difference of opinion, it is more likely that Guido’s third was indeed consonant, and Cologne’s dissonant.
The Magnus Liber Organi (Great Organum Book) was attributed by Anonymous IV to the optimus organista Leoninus, whose name is rendered in Latinate or French form, i.e. Leoninus or Léonin. The original version of the Magnus liber was liturgically designed for Notre Dame, Paris, and was therefore probably compiled in Paris about 1170. It is very difficult to determine the original form of the work because it survives only in versions that date from the 13th century. These versions differ from one another in certain ways, revealing a general tendency for existing organum sections to be replaced by discant sections in a more recent style and hence in modal rhythm. This has been seen as evidence of a historical process whereby organum style – already regarded as outmoded towards the end of the 12th century – was superseded by the more fashionable discant. Perotinus (or Pérotin) is credited with a thirteenth-century revision of the Magnus liber.
The surviving versions of the Magnus liber are witness both to the obvious climax of organum composition and to its relatively swift fall from a favoured position in the centre of the development of musical form. This fall has been attributed to the ‘invention’ of modal rhythm, which quickly gained a hold on and modified all musical forms of the period. With it arose new forms and possibilities (such as three- and four-part music) which were in one sense a natural expansion of what had gone previously, but which in another were completely reliant on the invention of rhythmic modes. In the two-voice plainchant settings it first affected the upper voice most noticeably, because the inviolability of the sacred tenor was still respected. Only later were the tenor parts affected by modal rhythm.
In the 13th century, however, all polyphony that was not in modal or mensural rhythm soon came to be regarded as unsatisfactory. Organum too was seen as requiring the application of rhythmic modes, and was finally actually rewritten. It is only in the sense of a 13th-century interpretation that a transcription such as that of Waite can be justified. Waite saw the Magnus liber as a work wholly in modal rhythm: although it may not be true that Leoninus’ original versions (assuming the majority of the Magnus liber can be attributed Leoninus; if not, it could be assumed that he was involved in some editorial capacity) were written with modal rhythm in mind, it is certainly true that the surviving copies of the Magnus liber certainly date from a time when the omission of mensural rhythm was generally unacceptable. It is therefore probable that, regardless of Leoninus’ original and Perotinus’ revision, the manuscripts we see today or indeed in rhythmic modes. However, this does not necessarily aid any attempt to actually transcribe the music.
The rhythmic modes are described in a group of treatises from the 13th century, most importantly the De mensurabili musica of Johannes de Garlandia, the texts of the St Emmeram Anonymous and Anonymous IV. The duration of each note relative to its neighbours is determined by its position within a larger rhythmic series, which is a sensible idea bearing in mind that relative and not absolute rhythms are being dealt with. A rhythmic mode consists of a patterned succession of long and short values. This is the earliest known coherent system of rhythm and rhythmic notation in Western music since antiquity.
Different ways of adding a vox organalis were made use of throughout organum’s life: the earliest examples were note-for-note, so the syllables were identically aligned: this was called discant. After the development of rhythmic modes, copula, with the upper voice in florid modal rhythm above a sustained tenor note, had a completely different melodic structure, dependent on the new rhythm.
The motion of the upper voice, or duplum, was largely restricted to the range above the tenor, which emphasized the tenor’s supporting function even more. Its range expanded somewhat, tending particularly to centre on a higher register which often necessitated a fifth or even a sixth staff line.
In pieces such as Richard the Lionheart’s Coronation Ode, Ætas Audi Redditur, there is no tenor, and the two (or three, or even four) voices move against each other (syllable-for-syllable, but not always note-for-note); a new style had emerged out of the developments in organum: conductus.
The origins of organum are unclear; but what is certain is that it was the staple diet of sacred polyphony before, during, and after Perotinus and Leoninus. Concordant intervals were an essential element in early polyphony: indeed, polyphonic technique was often discussed under headings such as De symphoniis. The technique of polyphony was based on two practices, both of them probably very old: that of parallel singing in concordant intervals, and that of the use of a drone.
The definition of the term “concordant” differs from treatise to treatise, which suggests that it differed from place to place: in the central theoretical source on organum, entitled Musica enchiriadis and dating from the second half of the 9th century, the vox organalis (organal voice) is also called the cantilena simphonica (concordant voice). In the Cologne organum treatise (c900), notes in the vox organalis that form a 3rd or 2nd with the vox principalis (principal voice, that is the original plainchant) are said to be abusivum organum (abuse of organum). However, Guido d’Arezzo permitted thirds: these differences could be put down to different intonations being used from place to place. Rather than there being a genuine difference of opinion, it is more likely that Guido’s third was indeed consonant, and Cologne’s dissonant.
The Magnus Liber Organi (Great Organum Book) was attributed by Anonymous IV to the optimus organista Leoninus, whose name is rendered in Latinate or French form, i.e. Leoninus or Léonin. The original version of the Magnus liber was liturgically designed for Notre Dame, Paris, and was therefore probably compiled in Paris about 1170. It is very difficult to determine the original form of the work because it survives only in versions that date from the 13th century. These versions differ from one another in certain ways, revealing a general tendency for existing organum sections to be replaced by discant sections in a more recent style and hence in modal rhythm. This has been seen as evidence of a historical process whereby organum style – already regarded as outmoded towards the end of the 12th century – was superseded by the more fashionable discant. Perotinus (or Pérotin) is credited with a thirteenth-century revision of the Magnus liber.
The surviving versions of the Magnus liber are witness both to the obvious climax of organum composition and to its relatively swift fall from a favoured position in the centre of the development of musical form. This fall has been attributed to the ‘invention’ of modal rhythm, which quickly gained a hold on and modified all musical forms of the period. With it arose new forms and possibilities (such as three- and four-part music) which were in one sense a natural expansion of what had gone previously, but which in another were completely reliant on the invention of rhythmic modes. In the two-voice plainchant settings it first affected the upper voice most noticeably, because the inviolability of the sacred tenor was still respected. Only later were the tenor parts affected by modal rhythm.
In the 13th century, however, all polyphony that was not in modal or mensural rhythm soon came to be regarded as unsatisfactory. Organum too was seen as requiring the application of rhythmic modes, and was finally actually rewritten. It is only in the sense of a 13th-century interpretation that a transcription such as that of Waite can be justified. Waite saw the Magnus liber as a work wholly in modal rhythm: although it may not be true that Leoninus’ original versions (assuming the majority of the Magnus liber can be attributed Leoninus; if not, it could be assumed that he was involved in some editorial capacity) were written with modal rhythm in mind, it is certainly true that the surviving copies of the Magnus liber certainly date from a time when the omission of mensural rhythm was generally unacceptable. It is therefore probable that, regardless of Leoninus’ original and Perotinus’ revision, the manuscripts we see today or indeed in rhythmic modes. However, this does not necessarily aid any attempt to actually transcribe the music.
The rhythmic modes are described in a group of treatises from the 13th century, most importantly the De mensurabili musica of Johannes de Garlandia, the texts of the St Emmeram Anonymous and Anonymous IV. The duration of each note relative to its neighbours is determined by its position within a larger rhythmic series, which is a sensible idea bearing in mind that relative and not absolute rhythms are being dealt with. A rhythmic mode consists of a patterned succession of long and short values. This is the earliest known coherent system of rhythm and rhythmic notation in Western music since antiquity.
Different ways of adding a vox organalis were made use of throughout organum’s life: the earliest examples were note-for-note, so the syllables were identically aligned: this was called discant. After the development of rhythmic modes, copula, with the upper voice in florid modal rhythm above a sustained tenor note, had a completely different melodic structure, dependent on the new rhythm.
The motion of the upper voice, or duplum, was largely restricted to the range above the tenor, which emphasized the tenor’s supporting function even more. Its range expanded somewhat, tending particularly to centre on a higher register which often necessitated a fifth or even a sixth staff line.
In pieces such as Richard the Lionheart’s Coronation Ode, Ætas Audi Redditur, there is no tenor, and the two (or three, or even four) voices move against each other (syllable-for-syllable, but not always note-for-note); a new style had emerged out of the developments in organum: conductus.
