45 Chapter 2
Josquin’s Music for Vihuela:
Adaptation, Imitation, and Emulation
I. The Ideal Model: Josquin as Pedagogue
Again, in this branch of study I want Cicero to be first and foremost, not the only one, and I do not think that one should only follow him, but rather imitate him and even emulate him. For the follower walks in the footsteps of another and is a slave to his model. Furthermore, it has been well said that a person who places his foot in the footstep of another cannot walk well, and no one can ever swim well who does not dare to throw away the life preserver. An imitator, however, desires to say not so much the same things as similar ones-‐in fact sometimes not even similar, but rather equal things. But the emulator strives to speak better, if he can.1
Desiderius Erasmus, Dialogus Ciceronianus (Basel, 1528)
The study of history is often driven by our recognition that the successes of the
past provide the benchmarks for the present. Renaissance humanists such as
Desiderius Erasmus (1466-‐1536) turned to the classical treatises of Quintillian and
Cicero, proposing that scholars and orators should read through the whole of ancient
literature, copying and memorizing relevant passages for immediate recall as need
arose or opportunity allowed. While the literary arts suffered no lack of classical
models, access to music of the past was relatively limited before the advent of print.
The rapid expansion of this new technology during the sixteenth century—and of
which Josquin was its first main beneficiary—accomplished more than just making
Josquin’s music more accessible; it gave Renaissance musicians a tangible connection
1 Quoted in G.W. Pigman III, “Versions of Imitation in the Renaissance,” Renaissance Quarterly 33/1 (Spring, 1980), 25.
46 with an illustrious past, and provided a universal standard against which new works
were measured.2
By the time vihuelists began setting his music to tablatures, Josquin had already
achieved canonical status in Renaissance music treatises. In his Dodecachordon,
Glarean describes Josquin as “a Vergil in his field”; in Johann Ott’s Novum et insigne
opus musicum (Nuremburg, 1537), he is described as “divine and matchless”; and in
Cosimo Bartoli’s Ragionamenti Accademici… (Venice, 1567) Josquin is compared with
Michelangelo and held up as a model for composers such as Mouton, Brumel, Isaac,
Silva, Agricola, Cara, and others who, “following in Josquin’s footsteps, have taught the
world how music ought to be written.”3
But the most significant music treatise in sixteenth-‐century Spain is the
Declaración de instrumentos musicales (Osuna, 1555) by Juan Bermudo (c.1510-‐
c.1565), which places Josquin foremost among foreign composers of music. Born into
a wealthy family, Bermudo studied music in his youth before taking up vows with the
Franciscan Order around 1525, but returned to music after illness prevented him
from religious service. Judging by his introductory remarks, the Declaraćion was
intended as a tutor for a wide range of players and singers:
Seeing that I could not serve because I lacked strength, and so I could not be idle, I set out to read books of music. On the one hand conscience and on the other hand the words of God’s servants persuaded me to write. My guilt would be great if, knowing the deficiencies that some ecclesiastics have, I did not set
2 On the significance of print on Josquin’s reputation, see Owens, “Music Historiography and the Definition of “Renaissance”,” Notes, 47/2 (1990), 305-‐330. For a contemporary summary of Josquin’s reputation, see James Haar, “Cosimo Bartoli on Music,” in The Science and Art of Renaissance Music, ed. Paul Corneilson (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 38-‐75. 3 Quoted in Owens, Op. cit., 308-‐11.
47 forth music written by the serious doctors in a language that could be understood by all.4
Chapters 54-‐86 of the Declaraćion are devoted exclusively to the vihuela and
concerned specifically with repertory and tuning, both of which were, in Bermudo’s
view, plagued by barbarisms. For Bermudo, the choice of an appropriate model was
paramount in the formation of the player’s development. The vihuelist would begin
with two-‐ and three-‐part homophonic villancicos which, although easy to intabulate
should be quickly dispensed with because they “do not have a good enough
foundation in music to edify and cultivate the good habit of fantasy [playing].”5 After
working his way through the more contrapuntally sophisticated villancicos of Juan
Vazquez (c.1500-‐1560) and Baltasar Téllez (fl. 1549?), the vihuelist was ready for
music worthy of serious study, namely that of Josquin:6
In the Masses of Cristobal Morales, you will find much music to intabulate, with so many and such good qualities that I lack the words to describe them. The person who applies himself to this music not only becomes wiser, but devout as well. You will find few composers who render so well the characteristics and variety of the text… For good foreign music to intabulate, do not forget the music of the great musician Josquin, [with which] music began. The last thing you should intabulate is the music of the excellent Gombert. It is difficult to play on the vihuela, because it is [so] spread out, thus I place it at the end. Players are often guilty of wanting to play fantasias when they are just learning to play. Even though they may know counterpoint, unless [this counterpoint] is as good as the abovementioned musicians, they should not play fantasias too soon, so as not to form bad habits.7
4 Dawn Astrid Espinosa, “Juan Bermudo “On Playing the Vihuela” (“De tañer vihuela”) from Declaración de instrumentos musicales (Osuna, 1555),” Journal of the Lute Society of America, 28-‐9 (1995-‐96), ii. 5 Ibid., 64. 6 A collection of works based on Bermudo’s guidelines, along with analysis, commentary, facsimiles and transcription is found in John Griffiths, Tañer vihuela según Juan Bermudo. Polifonía vocal y tabulaturas instrumentales, 2nd edition (Saragosa: Institución “Fernando el Católico”, 2010). 7 Espinosa, “Juan Bermudo,” 65-‐6.
48 It is important to remember that Renaissance musicians learned composition
primarily through observation and assimilation, a point that is made clear in
Bermudo’s closing remarks, and which fuels his exhaustive description of intabulation
procedures.8 While numerous treatises informed singers and players on a wide range
of theoretical guidelines and performance issues—the handling of dissonance, modal
theory, meter, tempo, ornamentation, etc.—none constituted anything close to what
we might think of as a composition manual.9 The activity of intabulation, on the other
hand, obligated the intabulator to undertake an in-‐depth analysis of authoritative
works, which offered valuable insights into the compositional process of
acknowledged masters, and led, ultimately, to their use as models.10 Unfortunately,
the scarcity of vihuela manuscript sources makes it difficult to gauge how frequently
amateurs made their own intabulations, although a manuscript addendum contained
in the Biblioteca Nacional Madrid R. 14018 exemplar of Sliva de sirenas suggests that it
was not uncommon (see Plate 2.1).
Beyond their potential as compositional models, intabulations offered players
both an extensive repertory that could be arranged in various ways, and a wide range
of instrumental challenges to overcome. While the prefaces of vihuela books assured
consumers of their suitability for self-‐taught beginners, sixteenth-‐century collections
8 It is also echoed by Thomas de Sancta Maria, who advises students to draw benefit from the intabulation of vocal works by making note of features such as points of entry, imitation, ornamentation at cadences, the handling of dissonances, and the use of variation. See Howell and Hultberg, The Art of Playing the Fantasia, 155-‐6, discussed in Ward, “The Vihuela de Mano,” 223-‐26. 9 Howard Mayer Brown, “Emulation, Competition, and Homage: Imitation and Theories of Imitation in the Renaissance,” Journal of the American Musicological Society, 35/1 (Spring, 1982), 10-‐11. 10 See John Griffiths, “Juan Bermudo, Self-‐instruction, and the Amateur Instrumentalist,” in Music Education in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, ed. Susan Forscher Weiss, Russell E. Murray, and Cynthia J. Cyrus (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010), 130-‐33.
49 Plate 2.1: Silva de sirenas, manuscript addendum (detail)11
share little in common with the step-‐by-‐step self-‐instruction method books of today,
and neophyte vihuelists may well have greeted their acquisitions with a mixture of
excitement and trepidation. Fuenllana, it seems, expected as much, and offered the
following advice:
… anyone can play it well, if he truly wishes to work and is proficient in the preceding, since everything was tried out many times on the vihuela before being notated on paper. And there is nothing in this book which was not first written down and played, before being notated. Having this certainty, I was bold enough to present the difficulties herein contained... And if someone should encounter some difficulty, believing that I go beyond the limits of possibility, I request such a person to use the time he might lose in doubting in study; and in this way, giving himself in fact to study, I am sure he will attain the desired goal.12
Concessions to beginners went beyond simple lip-‐service, however, and resourceful
amateurs could extract a wealth of material. Many Josquin intabulations were set
11 Images from Arriaga, Gonzales, and Somoza. Libros de música para vihuela (CD-‐ rom). 12 Quoted in Jacobs, Miguel de Fuenllana, lxxxvi.
50 using double-‐impression colored printing, with red ink isolating the tenor and
providing a point of entry for beginners before progressing to more difficult works.
More importantly, it reflected an approach to pedagogy that engaged players in both
the technical and theoretical aspects of music-‐making that were otherwise
sidestepped through the convenience of purchased intabulations.
II. Ideology in Practice: Literal Transcriptions and the Problem with Pisador
Despite the high esteem in which Josquin was held in Spain, only a fraction of
Josquin’s music was chosen to be intabulated, and the very qualities that made it
attractive to amateurs and viable on paper might also be the most difficult to convey
on the instrument. The preference for four-‐voice textures, for instance, was surely due
to the fact that the relatively narrow range and simple triadic harmonies of many
vocal works reflected conventional chordal shapes inherited from more idiomatic
pieces such as romance accompaniments and their offspring, the diferençia.13 In fact,
much of Josquin’s music could be placed on the lower positions of the vihuela,
avoiding extended periods of upper position playing, although such concessions to
instrumental difficulties often meant an over-‐simplification of Josquin’s musical text.
Pisador’s setting of the Kyrie from the Missa Ad fugam is one of his more
successful intabulations and warrants discussion (see Figure 2.1). Confined to the
lowest positions of fingerboard, the vihuelist never exceeds the fifth fret. Open
courses are used wherever possible, resulting in chord shapes that sound well on the
instrument and are easily played. In fact, his practice coincides precisely with
Bermudo’s recommendation for beginners to:
13 On the development of the diferençia in Spain, see Ward, “The Vihuela de mano,” 197-‐210.
51 …place the work so that it goes up to the fifth fret of the first string, and if necessary, to the sixth or seventh fret. If one wants to play good music easily, it should not go beyond the seventh fret of the first string, if possible, although [in so doing] one may forfeit the praises of the public. Common people do not praise the [good] player, but one who plays all [over] the frets… [The beginner] should place the music that he wants to intabulate so that it is on the best strings, and there are as many strokes on open strings as possible (because it is easier for the left hand) and that the intabulation should not separate the frets so much that the hand cannot reach them…14
Figure 2.1: Missa Ad fugam: Kyrie (Josquin/Pisador)15
14 Espinosa, “Juan Bermudo,” 60. 15 An explanation of the tablature transcription and critical apparatus can be found in Chapter 3.3 Critical Report
Otra missa de Iusquin de la fuga. kirie.
&b1 w w w ú ú ú Ï Ï w &b
7
&b7
Ky ri ee le e
Superius
&¥b w ú ú ú . Ï w w î ú &¥
b&¥b
Ky ri e, e
Altus
&¥b · · · w w w &¥
b&¥b
Ky ri
Tenor
?b w w wb w ú ú w ? b? bKy ri e
Bassus
0
2
0
2 4
0
1
3
3
2
345
2
345
0
2
3 234 4
w ú ú úú. Ï ÏVihuela
&b7
w · w w ú ú ú ú w &b14
&b14
son, e le i son,
&¥b ú . Ï ú ú w î ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú
£&¥b&¥b
le i son, e le i
&¥b ú ú ú Ï Ï w w · w w &¥
b&¥b
ee le i son, e le
*
?b î ú ú ú ú ú# w ú ú ú úb w ? b? be le i- son,
00
0
1
3Pisador:
3
01
0
2
00
32
1
2
0
21
3
2
02
2
2
30
00
0
1
3
023
02
0
ú úÏ Ï
kirie.myr 1/2 Wednesday, November 23, 2011, 23:35:01
52
Otra missa de Iusquin de la fuga. kirie.
&b1 w w w ú ú ú Ï Ï w &b
7
&b7
Ky ri ee le e
Superius
&¥b w ú ú ú . Ï w w î ú &¥
b&¥b
Ky ri e, e
Altus
&¥b · · · w w w &¥
b&¥b
Ky ri
Tenor
?b w w wb w ú ú w ? b? bKy ri e
Bassus
0
2
0
2 4
0
1
3
3
2
345
2
345
0
2
3 234 4
w ú ú úú. Ï ÏVihuela
&b7
w · w w ú ú ú ú w &b14
&b14
son, e le i son,
&¥b ú . Ï ú ú w î ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú
£&¥b&¥b
le i son, e le i
&¥b ú ú ú Ï Ï w w · w w &¥
b&¥b
ee le i son, e le
*
?b î ú ú ú ú ú# w ú ú ú úb w ? b? be le i- son,
00
0
1
3Pisador:
3
01
0
2
00
32
1
2
0
21
3
2
02
2
2
30
00
0
1
3
023
02
0
ú úÏ Ï
kirie.myr 1/2 Wednesday, November 23, 2011, 23:35:01
&b14 · ú ú w w w ú ú Ï Ï ú &b
21
&b21
e le
&¥b w w ú . Ï ú ú w w w &¥
b&¥b
son, e le i son,
&¥b ú ú ú ú w · ú ú w w &¥
b&¥b
i son, e le
?b w w w w wb w w ? b? be le
Ossia (preferrable):
55
3
53
5
3
0
33542
2
542
03
C
Ossia (preferrable):
01
3
0 31
3
0
3
2
345
1
2
30 0
0
123
33542
200
2
03
ú ú úÏ Ïú.
&b21
w ú ú Ï Ï ú ú ú# w wi son, e le i son.
&¥b î ú ú ú ú . Ï w w w
e le i son.
&¥b w ú ú Ï Ï ú w w w
i son.
?b w w w w w wi son.
234
301
30
212
2
3
0
1 300
2
400
2
úÏ W
Otra missa de Iusquin de la fuga. kirie.
kirie.myr 2/2 Wednesday, November 23, 2011, 23:35:01
53
In addition to providing an accurate representation of Josquin’s harmonies,
Pisador uses open courses to signal points of imitation between voices, such as the
dialogue between superius and tenor in mm. 4-‐9, the suspensions in altus and bassus
mm. 10-‐13, and the closing suspension shared by superius and tenor in 6ths,
mm. 22-‐23. Here, the use of open courses helps preserve the durational values of the
original, and Pisador’s ability to strike a balance between instrumental expedience
and an effective rendering of the model is commendable.
As successful as Pisador’s intabulation is, however, it also demonstrates several
of his inadequacies. In m. 12, for example, the altus and tenor are printed on the
wrong courses, and while the consonance of the resulting harmony (f-‐a instead of a-‐d)
may explain Pisador’s oversight in this particular instance, the frequency with which
similar lapses occur elsewhere is puzzling. No less than twenty-‐three such errors,
along with over a hundred others, occur in his intabulation of Missa Faysant regretz
&b14 · ú ú w w w ú ú Ï Ï ú &b
21
&b21
e le
&¥b w w ú . Ï ú ú w w w &¥
b&¥b
son, e le i son,
&¥b ú ú ú ú w · ú ú w w &¥
b&¥b
i son, e le
?b w w w w wb w w ? b? be le
Ossia (preferrable):
55
3
53
5
3
0
33542
2
542
03
C
Ossia (preferrable):
01
3
0 31
3
0
3
2
345
1
2
30 0
0
123
33542
200
2
03
ú ú úÏ Ïú.
&b21
w ú ú Ï Ï ú ú ú# w wi son, e le i son.
&¥b î ú ú ú ú . Ï w w w
e le i son.
&¥b w ú ú Ï Ï ú w w w
i son.
?b w w w w w wi son.
234
301
30
212
2
3
0
1 300
2
400
2
úÏ W
Otra missa de Iusquin de la fuga. kirie.
kirie.myr 2/2 Wednesday, November 23, 2011, 23:35:01
54 alone, many of which are so blatant that one is forced to wonder whether Pisador
bothered to proof his scores at all.
While Pisador’s editorial shortcomings may be frustrating, it is his adherence to
conventional intabulation methods of his day—those described by Bermudo for the
benefit of beginners—that introduces greater problems in realizing Josquin’s music:
Pisador is conciliatory to a fault. In deferring to expedience, Pisador’s rule-‐of-‐thumb
use of open strings comes at the expense of clarity and consistency. In mm.14-‐15, for
example, his avoidance of a third-‐position barré chord (using a single finger to stop
multiple courses) distorts the voice leading by placing the tenor and superius on the
same course, obscuring their imitation from mm.11-‐16. A similar situation can be
found in mm.19-‐20, where he misses the opportunity to hold the same chord shape
for both measures and prevent a break in the flow of sound. Here and elsewhere,
Pisador’s fingerings tend to expedite a legato performance of the superius only, with
lower voices receiving secondary consideration.16
Equally puzzling is Pisador’s inconsistent treatment of unisons. Again, Pisador’s
practice reflects Bermudo’s pragmatic, if somewhat convoluted, recommendations:
Having placed the music in the score, see if any of the notes are unisons in two [of the] parts, that is, whether they have the same note name. Arrange them (if possible) so that both are on [one] open string, because if one is placed on an open string, the other will be placed on the lower string at the fret that forms a unison with the upper string. This will be the fourth or fifth fret, as has already been explained.17
However, Bermudo soon qualifies his suggestion: 16 On the transformation of these works from contrapuntal vocal works to their reception as homophonic songs, see Jürgen Heidrich, “Vokal Gattungen in der Vihuela-‐Musiks des 16. Jahrhunderts -‐ Intavolierungen von Messensatzen Josquins in Miguel de Fuenllanas Orphenica Lyra,” in Trossinger Jahrbuch fur Renaissancemusik 2 (2002): 147-‐60. 17 Espinosa, “Juan Bermudo,” 61.
55
If these notes cannot be placed on an open string, and the player cannot reach [a distance of] five frets (where necessary) to play both [notes], put them in one place, as the organ does.18
One of the advantages of stringed instruments over single-‐manual keyboards is their
ability to play the same note in different locations on the neck, resulting in variations
in timbre that in a polyphonic setting can be useful in helping listeners decipher the
counterpoint, particularly when parts are in close quarters. The first vihuela
intabulation to exploit this is Narvaez’s Sanctus setting from Josquin’s Missa Hercules
Dux Ferrarie. Narvaez’s decision to intabulate for a vihuela with an assumed tuning of
G permits him to place unisons between the superius and altus on different courses
and provides greater separation between the parts. In Pisador’s intabulation for
vihuela in E – an odd choice resulting in long periods of upper position playing
throughout the Mass and no notes below the third fret of the lowest course-‐ the
superius and altus are of necessity placed on one course, rendering them
indistinguishable (see Figure 2.2). Here, Pisador’s choice of tuning impedes playability
and impairs clarity, ultimately resulting in a chord spanning eight frets, a reach that
even the most adept player would be hard-‐pressed to manage.19 Pisador is handcuffed
by his choice, and the end result is a representation of Josquin that is inconsistent,
unclear, and even at times, unplayable.
18 Op. cit. 19 Vihuelists employed an approach to transposition in which the intabulator selected an imaginary tuning to best accommodate the range of the vocal model, transcribing the instrument rather than the music and effectively bypassing transposition of the mode. For an overview, see Howard Mayer Brown, “Changing the Instrument for the Music,” Journal of the Lute Society of America 15 (1982), 27-‐39, and Griffiths, “The vihuela: performance practice, style, and context,” 164-‐5. The unplayable section in Pisador’s intabulation can be found in measure 22.
56
Figure 2.2: Excerpt: Missa Hercules Dux Ferrarie: Sanctus (Josquin/Narvaez/Pisador)
On other occasions, however, Pisador’s intabulations demonstrate a level of
ingenuity equaling his contemporaries. In his intabulation of the Missa Faysant
regretz: Qui tolis (mm. 51 and 52), for example, his handling of a passage similar to the
previous example coincides with Mudarra’s solution. Unfortunately, when a similar
problem presents itself in measures 61-‐62, it goes unrecognized (see Figure 2.3)
To be sure, Pisador’s intabulations of Josquin represent the most comprehensive
collection of its kind in the history of Renaissance music, and they are all the more
remarkable for the fact that they represent the work of an amateur. Despite frequent
errors and inconsistencies, Pisador manages to preserve Josquin’s music intact and
&b1 î ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú w
Sanc tus,
Superius
&¥b w ú ú w w
Her cu
Narvaez: #
Altus
&¥b · · ·Tenor
?b · · · î úSanc
Bassus
3 3 30 1
33 5
3 3 10
0
ú Ïú úPisador
50
52 3
0 2
50 2
4
2ú Ïú ú
Narvaez
Ex.2.2 Hercules Sanctus opening.myr 1/1 Monday, November 21, 2011, 11:45:24
57 virtually unchanged. Ironically, it is his insistence to remain faithful to the original that
results in a rendering that is often unsatisfying, and, not surprisingly, seldom heard.
Figure 2.3: Excerpt: Missa Faysant regretz: Qui tolis (Josquin/Mudarra/Pisador)
&b50 ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï w w
ram pa tris,
Superius
&¥b ú ú ú ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï ú ú
pa tris, mi
Altus
&¥b · · · î ú
mi
Tenor
?b · · · î úmi
Bassus
30
52 3
3 25
0 24 4 2
05 0
12
Ï úúPisador
30
52 3
3 25
0 24
05 0
12
Ï úúMudarra
Ex.2.3.1 Qui tollis excerpts.myr 1/1 Monday, September 5, 2011, 13:32:25
&b59 w w î ú ú ú
bis. [Quo ni am
Superius
&¥b î ú ú ú ú . Ï Ï Ï ú
[Quo ni am tu so
Altus
&¥b w w · ·
bis.
Tenor
?b · · · ·Bassus
0
2
002
2
00 0
223
0 02
Ïú úPisador
0
2
002
2
0 50
223 5
02
Ïú úMudarra
Ex.2.3.2 Qui tollis excerpts.myr 1/1 Monday, September 5, 2011, 13:45:38
58 III. Overcoming Instrumental Limitations: The Sixteenth-‐Century Cutting-‐Room Floor
Placing Josquin’s music on the vihuela was often complicated, necessitating many
adaptations of the original model. Even after the intabulator succeeded in translating
notes to tablature, the musical text was often altered by the delineation of
counterpoint, the relative uniformity of the instrument’s timbre, and the absence of
diction and spatial cues, to say nothing of the requisites of physical execution.
Consequently, intabulation was more than a simple act of transferring a mensural
score to tablature, but a process in which Josquin was of necessity subject to
interpretation, adaptation, and revision.
One solution was to create an arrangement for voice with vihuela
accompaniment, placing the vocal part scored in mensural notation directly above the
tablature, such as in Fuenllana’s setting of Josquin’s five-‐voice Credo from the Missa De
beata virgine (see Plate 2.2). Here, Fuenllana indicates that the work can be performed
for “dos voces (una en notación mensural y otra en cifra) y vihuela,” and the vihuelist
could choose to play the ciphered vocal part (in this case the Bassus, notated in red
ink), sing it, or double it. The same approach is possible for the numerous
intabulations on a single score for vihuela and voice en cifra, and it is not unlikely that
the vocal part could have been performed by another instrumentalist reading from
the same tablature. Even clearer evidence of ensemble playing can be found in the
fourth book of Valderrábano’s Silva de sirenas, composed entirely of duets, including
intabulations of Josquin mass sections and motets en quinta a seys. Bermudo, who
59 praises Valderrábano’s settings, devotes considerable discussion to intabulating for a
variety of instrumental configurations.20
Plate 2.2: Credo de beata virgine Iosquin a cinco (Fuenllana)21
While duo performance—a tradition for performing arrangements of vocal music
during the fifteenth century—may have been effective in circumventing many
difficulties, the preponderance of solos in printed sources suggests that performance
on a single instrument was likely the norm. Since strict conformity to the original
often distorted the integrity of the voice leading, players were flexible in their
adaptations, omitting notes, thinning textures, and transposing or rewriting parts to 20 Bermudo’s discussion emphasizes flexibility, and involves ensembles of up to three instruments including bandurrias, guitars, discants, and vihuelas, playing music of up to eight parts. See Espinosa, “Juan Bermudo,” 38-‐9, 53-‐5. 21 Image from Arriaga, Gonzales, and Somoza. Libros de música para vihuela (CD-‐ rom).
60 better suit the new idiom. Frequently, revisions are minimal, simply moving or
skipping notes already present in another part to avoid repeating them on the same
course, or eliminating notes that momentarily dip below another line. When faced
with such a situation in the Gloria of the Missa Faysant regretz, Fuenllana’s omission of
the Altus g in measures 99, 101, and 103 confines all voices to individual courses,
avoiding the potential for confusion inherent in Pisador’s literal intabulation (see
Figure 2.4.).
Figure 2.4: Excerpt: Missa Faysant regretz: Gloria (Josquin/Pisador/Fuenllana)
Other intabulations reveal a tendency towards more extensive revision. When
setting the Gloria of Missa Dux Ferrarie, the proximity of the superius and altus in
measures 28-‐34 obliges Narvaez to gloss both parts (see Figure 2.5). His revision of
the superius in measures 28 to 29 confines it to the first two courses of the
&b99 ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú
de us, a gnus de i, fi li us pa
Superius
&¥ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú úFuenllana:
&¥b Ï Ï ú ú ú Ï Ï ú ú ú Ï Ï ú
ne de us, a gnus de i, fi li
Altus
&¥b ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú
de us, a gnus de i, fi li us pa
Tenor
?b ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú úmi ne de us, a gnus de i, fi li
Bassus
3012 2
2330
3012
023
0
3012 2
2330
3012
023
0
3012 2
2330
ú úÏ úÏÏ
ú
Pisador
3012
2330
3012
023
0
3012
2330
3012
023
0
3012
2330Fuenllana
Ex.2.4 .myr 1/1 Friday, September 9, 2011, 15:08:07
61 Figure 2.5: Excerpt: Missa Dux Ferrarie: Gloria (Josquin/Pisador/Fuenllana)
instrument, and in the following measures he chooses to eliminate it completely
rather than cross parts, relying on the presence of the tenor c and the ornamentation
of the altus in measure 30 to make up for its absence. Further glossing of the altus in
measures 33 and 36 is likely introduced to avoid unisons with the superius. In
comparison, Pisador’s literal intabulation lacks clarity, and the distribution of multiple
voices over shared courses in measures 28 to 32 is particularly problematic (the
Osana
28
ú . Ï Ï Ï ú Ï Î î ·Narvaez:
& ú. Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú ú ú î ú ú . Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú . Ï Ï Ï Ï Ïna, o san na, o san(san )
Superius
Ï Ï Ï ú Ï Ï ú Ï Ï ú ú ú ú . Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú . ÏNarvaez:
&¥î ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï ú Ï Ï ú î ú ú . Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú . Ï
o san na, o san na, o
Altus
ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú úPisador:
&¥ w w w w w · · · · ·Dux Fer ra ri- e,
Tenor
ú ú ú ú ú ú wPisador:
? w î ú w ú ú w w · · · ·na in ex- cel sis,
Bassus
3
12
01
0 013
11330
013
113
355
500
233
15333
3
2
5 513 3
1 30
01
3
5
6 8
3
55 5
13 3
1 30
Ï Ï Ï Ï Ïú ú ú úúPisador
0
24
23 2
34
0 35
2
234
0 2 322
2 2
445
3
2
5
0
2
4
32 3
50 3
0
223 0
2
30
0
2 32 3
50 3
0
2
ú ú ú ú ú úÏ Ï Ï Ï Ï ÏÏjNarvaez
Ex.2.5.2.myr 1/1 Thursday, September 15, 2011, 13:47:30
62 consecutive use of the second course for superius, altus, and tenor in measure 31 is
especially unfortunate). In measures 33 and 36, Pisador misses the opportunity to set
unisons on different courses, demonstrating the same inconsistency in approach that
blemishes his other efforts.
Octave displacement was also not unheard of, although the extent to which it is
used in Fuenllana’s setting of Missa L’Homme armé, super voces musicales: Agnus III is
unique in Spanish tablature sources. Here, the extremely narrow range of the
original–often as little as a fifth between outer voices—compels Fuenllana to
eliminate sections of the tenor voice, and raise the altus from measures 227 to 234
(see Figure 2.6).22 Light glossing of the altus and bassus from measures 234 to 242
highlights the imitation between the parts, and fills the void left by the tenor’s
absence. By contrast, Pisador’s literal intabulation dutifully furnishes all of Josquin’s
notes at the expense of clarity, particularly in measures 229-‐37, where the exchange
of thirds between altus, tenor, and bassus cannot be rendered effectively on the
instrument. The passage is further marred by errors in measure 227, where Pisador
seems to have misspelled the original harmony completely. In measures 230, 231, and
243 the superius has apparently been left out, although it is possible that Pisador may
have misread his source and set it as a unison a with the altus, an error that frequently
appears in Pisador’s intabulations and could explain his inclusion of the tenor f in the
final chord.23
22 Octave displacement also occurs in mm.45-‐9, 130-‐1, 145-‐59, 168-‐90 altus, mm.70-‐6, 115-‐9, 157-‐9, 204-‐11, and, mm. 214-‐8 bassus. 23 Pisador’s setting of Missa Faysant regretz contains thirteen similar reading errors involving thirds (see Chapter 3.4, Critical Notes). The final chord in the original is without a third.
63 Figure 2.6: Excerpt: Missa L’Homme armé, super voces musicales: Agnus III
(Josquin/Pisador/Fuenllana)
Osana
w wSmijers, Fuenllana:
&227 w w w · · w w w w w w &238&238pa
Superius
ú ú ú ú Ï Ï ú w ú ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï ú î Ï Ï w î Ï ÏFuenllana:
&¥î ú ú ú úb ú w ú# ú Ï Ï ú ú ú ú ú î ú w î ú &¥&¥do na no bis pa cem, do na, do
Altus
w w · · ú ú w · w · · ·Fuenllana:
&¥ w w · w ú ú w · w w ú ú ú ú Ï&¥&¥no bis, do na no bis, do na, do na no
Tenor
w w Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï Ï ú .Smijers, Fuenllana:
Fuenllana:
? î ú ú ú ú úb ú ú î ú ú ú ú ú ú . Ï w î ú w ??do na no bis pa cem, do na no bis pa cem, do na,
Bassus
3
033
3
033
345
45
33 3
22
33
1
33
12
33
33
012 2 3
12
0 30
212
12
0
1
ú úÏ Ï úPisador
345
2
03
0
0
4
30
3 333
0
12
3
31
2
0
3
1
3
3
2
0
1
3
112
3002
1 0
3
0
2 4
0
0
2 30
2 4
00
2
0 2
Ïú ú Ï ÏúFuenllana
Ex.2.6.1.myr 1/2 Saturday, January 7, 2012, 6:30:16
64
Clearly, the act of intabulation was a complex process that went beyond a simple
conversion from mensural part-‐books to tablature score. Successful intabulations
demanded a clear understanding of the intricacies of the musical text, a knowledge of
counterpoint, and the technical limits of the vihuela. The printed collections of Pisador
and his contemporaries provided their readers with a representation of Josquin that
was accessible, intelligible, and satisfying to play. Imperfections aside, Pisador’s
contribution is extraordinary: it represents a snapshot of Josquin as heard by
sixteenth-‐century Spanish lay audiences and is a testament to his sweeping
reputation. Perhaps Pisador’s greatest fault is his purism: he lacks the willingness of
his contemporaries to compromise his admiration for Josquin with the realities and
adaptability of the derived intabulation. Ironically, it is the readiness of his
&238 w w w w w w w w w wcem.Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï w Î Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï ú Ï Ï ú ú ú# w w
&¥ú . Ï w î ú ú . Ï ú ú ú ú Ï Ï ú ú ú# w w
na, do na no bis pa cem.
· · · · · î ú ú ú w w#&¥ú Ï&¥Ï ú Ï Ï ú ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú ú ú ú w w w
bis pa cem.
î ú Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï w î ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú . Ï ú . Ï w w w? î ú ú . ÏÏ w î ú ú ú ú . Ï ú ú w w w
do na, do na no bis pa cem.
30 3 0
2
1355
63
3 230
3
0
1
32 3
5
0
1 33
3
35
335
1
32
0
3
3
3 3
35
320
2 3
35
ú ú ú WÏ Ïj Ï Ï
30
1 3
2
1 0345 4
03 2
20
1 30 1 0 1
0
03 1
23 2
3
0 223
3 12
22
3
03
3 0220
2 3245
WÏj Ï Ïj Ï Ïj Ï ú
Osana
Ex.2.6.1.myr 2/2 Monday, September 19, 2011, 13:11:27
65 contemporaries to digress from the model that result in depictions of Josquin that are
clearer, more consistent, and musically convincing.
IV. Intabulations and Unwritten Traditions: Ornamentation The notion of intabulations as a key to unwritten performance practices is not a
new concept: since tablature is unambiguous in its rendering of pitch and rhythm, it
offers a clear picture of how practicing musicians embellished preexisting works and
realized contemporaneous theoretical principals. Thus, intabulations form a crucial
link between theoretical observation and practical application.24 Treatises such as
Sylvestro Ganassi’s Fontegra (Venice, 1535) attest to a flourishing improvisatory
tradition and offer an overwhelmingly rich repertory of ornamental figures.25 His
manuscript appendix alone includes 175 divisions on one basic clausula form, and is
unique in its division of the breve into as many as seven beats, Likewise, Diego Ortiz’s
Tratado de glosas sobre clausulas (Rome, 1553) includes some 305 variations on 33
clausula figures and 184 embellishments on simple melodic intervals, reflecting a
clear affinity with the ornamental procedures found in vihuela tablatures.26 The most
significant Spanish treatise to address ornamentation is Thomas de Sancta Maria’s
24 A wide range of scholars has explored the relationship between intabulations and unwritten performance practice. See, for example, Anthony Newcomb, “Unnotated Accidentals in the Music of the Post-‐Josquin Generation: Mainly on the Example of Gombert’s First Book of Motets for Four Voices,” in Music in Renaissance Cities and Courts: Studies in Honor of Lewis Lockwood. Ed. Jessie Ann Owens and Anthony M. Cummings (Michigan: Harmonie Park Press, 1997), 215-‐25; also see Howard Mayer Brown, “Embellishment in Early Sixteenth-‐Century Italian Tabulations,” Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association 100 (1973-‐1974), 49-‐83 25 Peter Hildemarie, ed., Sylvestro Ganassi. Opera Intitulata Fontegra. Venice 1535. A Treatise on the Art of Playing the Recorder and of Free Ornamentation. Dorothy Swainson, trans. (Berlin-‐Lichterfelde: Robert Lienau, 1959). 26 Max Schneider, ed., Diego Ortiz. Tratado de glosas sobre clausulas y otros generous de puntos en la musica de violones. Roma 1553 (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1936).
66 Libro Llamado El Arte de Tañer Fantasia (Valladolid, 1565).27 Clearly the work of a
trained professional and an experienced pedagogue, Sancta Maria’s book enjoyed
widespread circulation, the original contract with the printer Francisco Fernandez de
Cordoba specifying a run of 1500 copies.28 While Sancta Maria’s discussion of
ornamentation is both detailed and pragmatic, it nevertheless falls short of placing
embellishments within the context of a piece and, like Ganassi and Ortiz, leaves
questions of their contextual deployment largely unanswered.29
Even the most effusive vihuela intabulations of Josquin rarely display the level of
florid ornamentation one might conclude on the basis of treatises alone, and often
demonstrate greater reserve than lute intabulations of French, German, or Italian
origin.30 Pisador’s application of ornamentation, when present at all, is extremely
sparse, his choice of figuration drawn directly from Josquin and reflecting a clear
concern for authenticity (see Figure 2.7A). In fact, Pisador’s intabulation of the Missa
Faysant regretz appears almost completely unadorned, with the exception of the
Credo, where barely a handful of clausula decorate internal cadences. A single
ornamental figure of Pisador’s own design can be found at measure 70 (see Figure 27 Translated by Howell and Hultberg, The Art of Playing the Fantasia. 28 For the details surrounding the printing of his book, see John Griffiths and Warren E. Hultberg. “Santa Maria and the Printing of Instrumental Music in Sixteenth-‐Century Spain,” in Livro de homenagem a Macario Santiago Kastner, Ed. Maria Fernanda Cidrais Rodriguez, Manuel Morais, Rui Veiera Nery (Lisbon: Fundaçao Calouste Gulbenkian, 1992), 346-‐60. 29 For an inventory of ornamental figures in sixteenth-‐century Spanish vihuela sources and treatises, and a description and comparison of their nomenclature, see Nelly van Ree Bernard, “Ornamentation in Sixteenth-‐Century Iberian Music for ‘Tecla, Harp y Vihuela’: Quiebros, Redobles and Glosas,” Performance Practice Review, 4/2 (Fall 1991), 53-‐71. 30 For a comparison of the ornamental procedures in a variety of international sources, see Walter Aaron Clark, “Luis Narvaez and the Intabulation Tradition of Josquin’s Mille Regretz,” Journal of the Lute Society of America, 26-‐7 (1993-‐4), 17-‐52. Also see Howard Mayer Brown, “Accidentals and Ornamentation in Sixteenth-‐Century Intabulations of Josquin’s Motets,” in Josquin des Prez. Proceedings of the International Josquin Festival -‐ Conference held at the Julliard School at Lincoln Center in New York City, 21-‐25 June 1971. Ed. Edward E. Lowinsky and Bonnie J. Blackburn (London: Oxford University Press, 1976), 475 – 522.
67
Figure 2.7A-‐I: Cadential Ornaments in Vihuela Intabulations of Josquin’s Missa Faysant regretz
2.7B), and both figures draw attention to Pisador’s preference for approaching
cadences from a third below. Most often, Pisador makes good on his pledge that
… everything which is contained in this book, I set down with very great diligence and work in order that it might be truthful and have great clarity without a confusion of glosas, so that he who plays may more easily know how the voices go on the vihuela and thus be able to sing them.31
The ornamentation of other vihuelists, though rarely gratuitous, demonstrates
greater freedom, with Josquin’s original lower-‐third cadences invariably updated to
reflect the tastes of their generation. Often, such figures are simplified (see Figure
2.7C), and all of Pisador’s contemporaries prefer subsemitone cadences, regardless of
31 Translated in Ward, “The Vihuela da mano,” 92.
& ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï w ú Ï Ï Ï# Ï w ú ú ú# wA B C
Pisador (Credo: 22S, 46S, 80S)
Pisador (Credo: 70S)
Mudarra (Qui tolis: 51A)Valderrabano (Et incarnatus est: 29B)
ú Ï Ï ú# w ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï w ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï Ï wD E F
Fuenllana (Kyrie I: 31S; Kyrie II: 5S, 14A, 29S; Gloria: 17A*, 20T*, 35A*, 47S, 50A)
Fuenllana (Kyrie I: 35S; Kyrie II: 35S; Gloria: 31S)Mudarra (Qui tolis: 58A)
Mudarra (Qui tolis: 29A)Narvaez (Osana: 2A)
ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï w ú ú ú# w Ï Ï ú ú# wG H I
Mudarra (Qui tolis: 11A)
Narvaez (Osana: 5S, 17S)
Valderrabano (Et incarnatus est: 34S)
& ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï w ú Ï Ï Ï# Ï w ú ú ú# wA B C
Pisador (Credo: 22S, 46S, 80S)
Pisador (Credo: 70S)
Mudarra (Qui tolis: 51A)Valderrabano (Et incarnatus est: 29B)
ú Ï Ï ú# w ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï w ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï Ï wD E F
Fuenllana (Kyrie I: 31S; Kyrie II: 5S, 14A, 29S; Gloria: 17A*, 20T*, 35A*, 47S, 50A)
Fuenllana (Kyrie I: 35S; Kyrie II: 35S; Gloria: 31S)Mudarra (Qui tolis: 58A)
Mudarra (Qui tolis: 29A)Narvaez (Osana: 2A)
ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï w ú ú ú# w Ï Ï ú ú# wG H I
Mudarra (Qui tolis: 11A)
Narvaez (Osana: 5S, 17S)
Valderrabano (Et incarnatus est: 34S)
& ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï w ú Ï Ï Ï# Ï w ú ú ú# wA B C
Pisador (Credo: 22S, 46S, 80S)
Pisador (Credo: 70S)
Mudarra (Qui tolis: 51A)Valderrabano (Et incarnatus est: 29B)
ú Ï Ï ú# w ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï w ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï Ï wD E F
Fuenllana (Kyrie I: 31S; Kyrie II: 5S, 14A, 29S; Gloria: 17A*, 20T*, 35A*, 47S, 50A)
Fuenllana (Kyrie I: 35S; Kyrie II: 35S; Gloria: 31S)Mudarra (Qui tolis: 58A)
Mudarra (Qui tolis: 29A)Narvaez (Osana: 2A)
ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï w ú ú ú# w Ï Ï ú ú# wG H I
Mudarra (Qui tolis: 11A)
Narvaez (Osana: 5S, 17S)
Valderrabano (Et incarnatus est: 34S)
68 the level of complexity (see Figures 2.7D-‐H). Both internal and final cadences are
decorated, but it is often at final cadences where the most elaborate ornamentation
can be found (compare, for example, Fuenllana’s treatment of internal cadences,
Figure 2.7D, with final cadences, Figure 2.7F). The close of Josquin’s Missa Gaudemus:
Agnus dei elicited the composition of a short extension from Valderrábano based on
the ascending figure which predominates Josquin’s original (see Figure 2.8).
Figure 2.8: Cadential extension of Josquin’s Missa Gaudeamus: Agnus dei (Valderrábano)
In addition to cadential embellishment, elaboration of the model is often as
functional as it is decorative, and helps preserve instrumental sonority in slow-‐
moving textures by enlivening the original material.32 In his setting of the Missa
Faysant regretz: Kyrie I and II, for example, Fuenllana anticipates Josquin’s vivid
melodic figuration of measures 21 (superius) and 28 (superius and altus), matching it
32 Bermudo points out that, “If the music according to the old rules had need of glosas because of its heaviness, that of these times does not have the need.” Bermudo, Delcaración, fol.84v, translated in Ward, Ibid, 216-‐7.
Title
&129
ú ú ú ú# w w Ï Ï ú w w wValderrabano .............................................................................................................................................................................
Superius
&¥w w Ï Ï Ï Ï w ú Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï w w
Altus
&¥ú ú w î ú w w î ú w wTenor
? w w w Ï Ï Ï Ï w w w wBassus
012
0
2
00
2
40
2
0
0 12
30
2
0 2 3 0
00
2
2 3
20
0
12
30
2
100
2
0ú Ï W
Valderrabano
Gaudeamus coda.myr 1/1 Friday, October 14, 2011, 13:13:53
69 first in measure 8 of the altus, and following with similar figuration in the tenor (see
Figure 2.9). Fuenllana, whose preface disparages inordinate glossing of the music of
Figure 2.9: Glossing in Josquin’s Missa Faysant regretz: Kyrie (Fuenllana)
Otra missa de Iusquin que va sobre fa re mi re. Chirie.
&b4 · · · · · · · · · &b
21
&b21
Fuenllana:
Superius
w Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï úNJE: C nat.&¥
b w úb ú ú ú# w w w w w w &¥b&¥b
Ky ri e e ...Fuenllana:
Altus
Ï Ï Ï Ï w&¥b · · · · · · w w w &¥
b&¥b
Ky ri...
Tenor
?b w î ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w w w w ? b? b(Kyri)e lee i...
Bassus
0
2
1 0
02
4
4
0
20
0
224
30
2
01
2
23
0
w ú wFuenllana
&b21 Ïb Ï Ï Ï ú ú Ïb Ï Ï Ï ú ú
(e) (e)
[28]
&¥b î ú ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú
ri... (Ky)ri(Ky)
&¥b ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú
(ky) ri (Ky)ri ee
?b w ú ú w ú úe e...(Ky)ri (elie)
8
75
7 5
0
4
3 2
02
3
2
0
8
775
7
5
5
4
3
2
2
002
3
2
0Ï ú Ï ú
1/1
Otra missa de Iusquin que va sobre fa re mi re. Chirie.
&b4 · · · · · · · · · &b
21
&b21
Fuenllana:
Superius
w Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï úNJE: C nat.&¥
b w úb ú ú ú# w w w w w w &¥b&¥b
Ky ri e e ...Fuenllana:
Altus
Ï Ï Ï Ï w&¥b · · · · · · w w w &¥
b&¥b
Ky ri...
Tenor
?b w î ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w w w w ? b? b(Kyri)e lee i...
Bassus
0
2
1 0
02
4
4
0
20
0
224
30
2
01
2
23
0
w ú wFuenllana
&b21 Ïb Ï Ï Ï ú ú Ïb Ï Ï Ï ú ú
(e) (e)
[28]
&¥b î ú ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú
ri... (Ky)ri(Ky)
&¥b ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú
(ky) ri (Ky)ri ee
?b w ú ú w ú úe e...(Ky)ri (elie)
8
75
7 5
0
4
3 2
02
3
2
0
8
775
7
5
5
4
3
2
2
002
3
2
0Ï ú Ï ú
1/1
70
others for compromising the integrity of their work, achieves a commendable balance
between instrumental necessity and unobtrusive commentary.33
Figure 2.10: Florid passagework in Josquin’s Missa Faysant regretz: Qui tolis (Mudarra)
Frequently, more extensive glossing serves as a diversion from areas where
instrumental limitations preclude a satisfactory rendering of Josquin’s music. In
Mudarra’s setting of the Missa Faysant regretz: Qui tolis, for example, the introduction 33 While Fuenllana discourages the indiscriminate use of ornamentation, he admits its use for both musical and technical reasons: “I do not gloss at all times in transcriptions, because I am of the opinion that, with glosses or redoubles, the integrity of the composition is compromised. Thus we see that some, content with their opinion alone, compose anew works placed in their hands, which very fine authors have composed with excellent craft and good spirit, girding them with I don’t know what redoubles in conformance with their will. I maintain that if there is no cadence or [other] time when the composition itself allows, one should not, by [this or] another means, defraud the composition with such glosses or redoubles; and as I have said, for the reason here stated, I do not use it [glossing] in the works of this book, save at cadences or in the places demanded by the composition, as will be seen in the works themselves.” Fuenllana, Orphénica Lyra, fol. ivv, translated in Jacobs, Miguel Fuenllana, lxxxix.
Qui tollis de la misma missa
Mudarra:
Ï# Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ïb Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï# Ï Ï# Ï Ï Ï w
&b17
w# w ú Ï# Ï w# wre no bis.
Superius
&¥b w ú ú ú . Ï w î ú
re no bis. Qui
Altus
&¥b w ú ú ú ú w w
re re no bis.
Tenor
?b w wb wb w ·re no bis.
Bassus
4542
02 0 2 4
0
123
3 1 03 1 0
20 1 3
0 2 4 5 4542
20
40
21
Ï Ïj Ï Ïj Ï úMudarra
4542
0
123
12
0
1
3
4
2
23
4542
0
21
Ïú úwPisador
Ornamnetation Qui tollis.myr 1/1 Saturday, October 15, 2011, 15:43:29
71 of florid passagework in measures 17-‐21 is used to cover the exchange of consecutive
thirds between altus and tenor whose literal intabulation would otherwise distort
Josquin’s counterpoint (see Figure 2.10). Mudarra’s distribution of similar figures
elsewhere in the intabulation coincides with significant points of text and results in a
greater sense of cohesion. The decorative ascent of final altus “amen” is particularly
expressive (see Figure 2.11).
Figure 2.11: Ornamentation and expression in Josquin’s Missa Faysant regretz: Qui tolis (Mudarra)
V. Unwritten Traditions II: Musica Ficta and Digital Practicalities. While intabulations can offer some of the clearest insights into the unwritten
traditions of sixteenth-‐century musical practices, opinions on the textual value of
these works vary considerably, with perhaps the most dismissive found in Lewis
Lockwood and James Haar’s preface to the New Josquin Edition of Missa Hercules Dux
Ferrarie:
The instrumental intabulations of portions of the Mass found in the publications of Narvaez, de Vaena, Pisador, and Fuenllana are important as later evidence of the widespread reception of the Mass but their value as textual sources for an edition of this or any other vocal work of the period is extremely limited. It is true that their notation is unequivocal with respect to accidentals, but they represent the practices of solo instrumentalists operating within the digital practicalities of their instruments, thus operating on
Title
Composer:Remarks:
&¥b
31 Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï w w100
w w w Ïn Ï Ï Ï# ÏÏ Ï# Ï Ï wn[su sci pe (A ) men.]
(Tenor) (Altus)
Mudarra
&¥b · w w w w w w W.
su sci pe (A ) men.
NJE: b natural
Josquin
Mudarra Qui tolis2.myr 1/1 Sunday, October 16, 2011, 15:44:13
72 premises quite different from those that must have governed the judgments about unwritten accidentals in vocal ensembles of Josquin’s time.34
Considering the flexibility exercised by most vihuelists, to say nothing of the
frequent inconsistencies and errors that tarnish Pisador’s intabulations of Josquin,
Lockwood and Haar’s skepticism is understandable. An examination of his setting of
Kyrie II seems to support the notion that instrumental considerations helped
determine ficta practices, where Pisador’s use of b-‐natural for superius and altus in
measure 45 may have been motivated to avoid an otherwise ungainly series of left-‐
hand chord changes (see Figure 2.12). Moreover, Pisador’s setting dispenses with the
Figure 2.12: Excerpt: Missa Hercules Dux Ferrarie: Kyrie II (Josquin/Pisador)
34 Haar and Lockwood, eds., New Josquin Edition. Masses Based on Solmisation Themes (Utrecht: Koninlijke Vereinigung voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis, 2002) Vol.11.1, 44.
&37
w wb wb w ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï w &44
&44
ri e e le i son,
NJE: (b)
Superius
&¥ w w w w ú Î Ï ú ú ú . Ï &¥&¥le i son, e le
Altus
&¥w w w w w w ú ú &¥&¥Fer ra ri
Tenor
? î ú úb ú w î ú ú úb wb î ú ??ky ri e, ky ri e, ky
NJE: (b) NJE: (b)
Bassus
68
6
8 6
0
5
Reintabulation on NJE:
Ï
13
01
63
0
3
63
5
3
56
35
13
0
10
6
0
68
6
8 7
0
5 35
2
0
33
ú Ïwú ú Ï
Pisador
&44 î ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú ú w w w
e le i son .
NJE: (b) NJE: (b)
&¥ ú ú Ï Ï ú w w w w wi son .
NJE: (b)
&¥w ú ú ú ú ú ú w w w
e .
? ú ú w î ú úb ú w w wri e e le i son .
NJE: (b)
5
0
6
8
556
3 63
5
3
Ï w
0
1
3
8
70
5
0
7
5
556
3 13 3
1
13
0
33
3
73
5
3
53
35
ú ú wÏ W
ex.2.7 Hercules dux ferrarie kyrie postrero.myr 1/1 Monday, September 26, 2011, 16:19:26
73
formation of a minor ninth between bassus and altus, and a tritone between tenor and
superius, clashes that are particularly dissonant when played on the instrument, and
the use of b-‐natural in measures 42 and 48 preserves uniformity.
Elsewhere Pisador’s interpretation of ficta is clearly idiosyncratic, such as in the
following excerpt from Missa Faysant regretz: Et spiritum sanctum. In measure 19, the
inclusion of the subsemitone in the superius and secondary subsemitone in the altus,
although not unheard of in contemporaneous intabulations, is unusual even by
Pisador’s standards, as is the clashing augmented fifth between the superius and tenor
in measure 20 (see Figure 2.13). 35 Additionally, while chromaticism resulting from
the introduction of the subsemitone being applied to only the penultimate note of
clausulae appears in intabulations by Fuenllana, Cabezon, and other instrumentalists,
35 Phalèse 1553: see Robert Toft, Aural Images of Lost Traditions. Sharps and Flats in the Sixteenth Century (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992), 56.
&37
w wb wb w ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï w &44
&44
ri e e le i son,
NJE: (b)
Superius
&¥ w w w w ú Î Ï ú ú ú . Ï &¥&¥le i son, e le
Altus
&¥w w w w w w ú ú &¥&¥Fer ra ri
Tenor
? î ú úb ú w î ú ú úb wb î ú ??ky ri e, ky ri e, ky
NJE: (b) NJE: (b)
Bassus
68
6
8 6
0
5
Reintabulation on NJE:
Ï
13
01
63
0
3
63
5
3
56
35
13
0
10
6
0
68
6
8 7
0
5 35
2
0
33
ú Ïwú ú Ï
Pisador
&44 î ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú ú w w w
e le i son .
NJE: (b) NJE: (b)
&¥ ú ú Ï Ï ú w w w w wi son .
NJE: (b)
&¥w ú ú ú ú ú ú w w w
e .
? ú ú w î ú úb ú w w wri e e le i son .
NJE: (b)
5
0
6
8
556
3 63
5
3
Ï w
0
1
3
8
70
5
0
7
5
556
3 13 3
1
13
0
33
3
73
5
3
53
35
ú ú wÏ W
ex.2.7 Hercules dux ferrarie kyrie postrero.myr 1/1 Monday, September 26, 2011, 16:19:26
74 Pisador’s introduction of descending chromaticism at the cadence in mm. 21-‐22 is
singular.36 Pisador’s intabulation also includes several notes in mm. 17-‐18 that are not
easily explained. Might they have been added in the interest of sonority, as occurs
elsewhere in his setting of the Mass, or are they errors similar to those already
encountered?37
Figure 2.13: Excerpt: Missa Faysant regretz: Et spiritum sanctum (Josquin/Pisador)
While the eccentricities of Pisador’s ficta practices may invite occasional
skepticism, Lockwood and Haar’s blanket statement is nevertheless problematic, if
only for their failure to take into account the biographical details of the vihuelists
themselves. For example, the imperial privilege for Seys Libros del Delphin
36 For chromaticism in intabulations, see Toft, Op.cit., 53-‐61. 37 The fleshing out of chords occurs regularly in the intabulations of all vihuelists.
Et spiritum sanctum
ú ú ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï wNJE:
# #
&b16
ú ú ú ú ú ú ú# ú ú# ú Ï Ï# Ïn Ï wex pa tre fi li o que pro ce dit.
Superius
ú úNJE:
&¥b î ú ú ú ú ú ú# ú ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï
ex pa tre fi li o que pro ce
Altus
&¥b ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w w
ex pa tre fi li o que pro ce dit.
Tenor
?b · · · · î î ú ú úQui cum pa
Bassus
2
2
334
00
2
0012
00
2
00
2
444
0012
41
0
12
34
4 35
2
20
2
3
3
0
1
úÏ ÏPisador
Ex2.8 Et spiritum sanctum.myr 1/1 Monday, September 26, 2011, 16:38:03
75 acknowledges Narvaez as a composer of “many masses and psalms and other works
that are sung by Our Holy Mother Church,” and one who has “studied the practice and
art of music, both composing works in measured notation for voices as well as in
ciphers to be played on the vihuela.”38 It is difficult to imagine Narvaez fulfilling the
obligations of his appointment as master of the mochachos cantoricos at the Royal
Chapel shortly after the publication of his book without a working knowledge of
contemporaneous ficta practices.39 Likewise, the professional duties of Mudarra,
Valderrábano, and Fuenllana all imply an intimate knowledge of vocal practices, an
ideal that is universally expressed in the prefaces of their books and that echoes
contemporary treatises. The real issue is not one of division between vocal and
instrumental practices—the very act intabulation is a result of their convergence—
but rather the degree that instrumental considerations may have impacted ficta
practices.40
The adjustment of notes to accommodate the requirements of musica ficta is, in
the overwhelming majority of cases, a relatively simple matter of raising or lowering a
finger the distance of a single fret. Although rare instances suggest that instrumental
considerations may have colored their decisions, the practices of vihuelists more often
reflect those expressed in contemporaneous treatises. In measure 6 of the Kyrie from
the Missa Faysant regretz, for example, both Pisador and Fuenllana are in agreement
38 Juan Ruiz Jiminez, “Luis de Narvaez and Music Publishing in Sixteenth-‐Century Spain,” Journal of the Lute Society of America 26-‐7 (1993-‐4), 4-‐5. 39 Ibid., 8,10 n.5. 40 The symbiotic relationship between singing and playing and its culmination in the letter stages of the sixteenth century is discussed in Victor Coelho, “Raffaello Cavalcanti’s Lute Book (1590) and the Ideal of Singing and Playing,” in Les concert de voix et des instruments a la Renaissance. Ed. Jean-‐Michel Vaccaro (Paris: CNRS Editions, 1995), 423-‐42.
76 in their decision to approach an octave between bassus and altus via a major sixth,
coinciding with Juan Bermudo’s observation that:
Whenever we produce an octave, whether it is in a clausula or in passing, approaching it from a sixth, it will be done from a major sixth, which is called perfect and is closer to the octave than the minor sixth. If a major [sixth] occurs in the music, then no remedy is necessary, but if it is minor it is to be remedied in the upper voice with the black key that is mi….41
Here, the use of c-‐sharp over c-‐natural in the altus has no impact on instrumental
expedience whatsoever, and is accomplished simply by using another available finger
(see Figure 2.14).
Figure 2.14: Excerpt: Missa Faysant regretz: Kyrie (Josquin/Pisador/Fuenllana)
In mm. 8-‐9 of the Et incarnatus est from the same Mass, Pisador and
Valderrábano are in agreement on the necessity of subsemitones in both the altus and
superius (see Figure 2.15). As before, the interpretation of ficta practices has no 41 Translated in Toft, Aural Images, 22
Otra missa de Iusquin que va sobre fa re mi re. Chirie.
w Ï Ï Ï ÏFuenllana:
Pisador, Fuenllana: c#&¥
b1 · · · w úb ú ú ú w w 9
Ky ri e
Altus
ú ú wPisador:
?b w w w w î ú ú ú ú ú ú úKy ri e e le
Bassus
02 4
0
2
1 0
02
4
4
0
20
0
2
w ú w
w úPisador
02 4
0
2
1 0
02
4
4
0
0
03 1
2
0
w úFuenllana
02 4
0
2
1 0
02
3
4
0
20
0
2Intabulation on NJE
1/1
77 impact on the playability of the passage, but is representative of contemporaneous
theoretical practice. Echoing remarks made by Ramis de Pereia (1482), Tomás de
Sancta Maria’s Arte de tañer fantasia (Valladolíd, 1565) reminds the reader that
“…when any voice forms re ut re, sol fa sol, or la sol la, the ut, fa, and sol are, for the
most part, sharped both in the natural and in the accidental [modes]. The explanation
and the reason for this is the grace of the solfa and also because they look like
clausulae, the sound of which is always sharpened….”42 Again, the intabulations of
both vihuelists satisfy the requirements of contemporary theory and are neither
advantageous nor detrimental to the execution of the passage.
Figure 2.15: Excerpt: Missa Faysant regretz: Et incarnatus est (Josquin/Pisador/Valderrábano)
While the previous examples illustrate situations in which the introduction of
ficta notes have no technical impact, what is to be made of instances in which
42 Ibid., 25.
Et incarnatus es de la misma missa
Ï Ï# ú ú úPisador,Valderrabano: c#
Valderrabano
&b7 w î ú ú ú ú ú w
de spi ri tu sanc to
Superius
&¥b î ú ú ú ú ú w î ú
de spi ri tu sanc to ex
Pisador,Valderrabano: f#
Altus
0 0 0 74
75
6
7
7
5
3 20
úPisador
04
0 05
74
75
6
7
70
3 20
Ï úValderrabano
0 0 0 73
75
6
7
7
5
3 20
úIntabulationon NJE
Ex.2.10 Et incarnatus est.myr 1/1 Tuesday, October 11, 2011, 4:15:00
78 subsemitones are introduced despite the player’s comfort? In his intabulation of the
Missa Faysant regretz: Sanctus, Narvaez’s introduction of an f-‐sharp in measure 29 of
the altus necessitates an awkward shift from the upper to lower positions of the
instrument (see Figure 2.16). Had technical expedience been the determining factor,
Figure 2.16: Excerpt: Missa Faysant regretz: Sanctus (Josquin/Pisador/Narvaez)
Narvaez would have likely preferred the f-‐natural of Pisador and the NJE, since its
placement on the open fourth course of the vihuela results in a more fluid and
playable solution. While the application of ficta often permits multiple solutions, the
dictates of sound theoretical practice clearly supersede instrumental consideration,
and contrary to the assertion of Lockwood and Haar, instances where digital
Sanctus de la misma missa
w ú ú ú úNarvaez
&b28 w ú ú ú . Ï ú . Ïdo mi nus de
Superius
&¥b ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï w
nus de us,
Narvaez: f# Pisador: b nat.
Altus
w ú ú w wNarvaez
&¥b w w w w
Tenor
w ú ú wNarvaez
?b î ú ú ú w î údo mi nus de
Bassus
70
57
70
6
30
20 1 3
30
1
023 3
2
úÏ ÏúNarvaez
7
55 5
7
7
50
3
2 4
3012
30
0
2
023 3
2
úÏ Ï
Ï ú Ï
ú
ú
Pisador
7
55 5
7
7
50
3
2 4
3012
30
0
1
023 3
2
Intabulationon NJE
Ex.2.11.myr 1/1 Monday, October 3, 2011, 10:18:00
79 practicalities have a demonstrable impact on the interpretation of contemporaneous
theory are exceedingly rare.43
VI. Beyond Intabulations: Josquin’s Legacy In the brief span of sixteen years separating Narváez’s Seys libros del Delphín
(1538) and Fuenllana’s Orphénica Lyra (1554), the vihuela fantasia underwent a
radical transformation in style, prompted largely by the evolving act of intabulation.
As John Ward observed:
“By arranging motets, madrigals and chansons, performers learned composition, and by writing parodies and imitations of the borrowed music they transformed instrumental style… the autonomous instrumental idiom of the first two decades was gradually transformed until, by mid-‐century, the fantasia (or ricercar) had become the instrumental counterpart of the motet. And this development was due, above all, to the intabulation and its progeny the glosa and parody.”44
Given his preeminent role in vihuela tablatures, Josquin’s impact on the fantasia
is integral: the use of sequence and paired imitation are particularly evident in the
fantasias of early vihuelists such as Narvaez and Mudarra, whose preference for
transparent imitative textures in their own works are reflected in the selection and
handling of Josquin’s music in intabulations.45 Not surprisingly, the kind of music
vihuelists chose to intabulate is as different as the vihuelists themselves, and parallels
not only changes in sixteenth-‐century musical tastes and the reception and ultimate
decline of Josquin’s music, but a gradual transition in the compositional style of
43 The same conclusion can be found in Brown, “Accidentals and Ornamentation in Sixteenth-‐Century Intabulations of Josquin’s Motets.” A significant recent study of the ficta practices of vihuelists is Sam Dorsey, “Vihuela Intabulations of Josquin Masses: An Examination of Musical Texture and Musica Ficta (PhD. diss., Benjamin T. Rome School of Music of the Catholic University of America, 2006). Dorsey’s discussion leaves Pisador largely untouched. 44 Ward, “Borrowed Material,” 97-‐98. 45 This is discussed in detail in Howell, “Paired Imitation.”
80 instrumentalists from the idiomatic to the conceptual.46 Therefore, it is only fitting to
find an intabulation of Josquin’s Credo de beata virgine a cinco by Fuenllana, whose
own works tend towards consistently thicker textures with much less regard for
instrumental considerations than the generation of Narváez and Mudarra. In short,
instrumentalists tended to gravitate toward a version of Josquin that was in line with
their own compositional style.
Nowhere is the influence of Josquin more apparent than in the glosa and parody
fantasia. While the term “parody technique” may invite a variety of definitions, Ward’s
description as “free (often random) variation of an autonomous thematic complex,” or
specifically, the spontaneous variation of an authored, polyphonic work providing the
opportunity for vertical and horizontal quotation, is particularly apt.47 In fact, such
compositions become more than a nexus for newly inspired material and the
quotation or use of motivic, rhythmic, and textural elements of a respected model, but
rather a demonstration of compositional dexterity and an appropriation of Josquin’s
authority.48 Narvaez’s Fantasia [1] del primer tono por ge sol re ut is a particularly
clever exercise in covert appropriation, opening with a parody of Josquin’s Adieu, mes
amours and closing with Gombert’s Tu pers ton temps. Ironically, Narvaez’s fantasia
was in turn parodied in a posthumous Le Roy and Ballard publication of Albert de
Rippe’s Fantasie (Quart livre de tabulature, 1553), forming a parody of a parody.49
46 The gradual transition of fantasia composition from the idiomatic to conceptual is convincingly demonstrated in John Griffiths, “The Vihuela Fantasia.” 47 Ward, “Parody Technique,” 208. 48 See, for example, Brown, “Emulation, Competition, and Homage.” 49 Ward, “Parody Technique,” 222-‐5 and Ward, “Borrowed Material,” 97.
81 Other appropriations are less covert, such as the glosas in the second book of
Mudarra’s Tres libros de música, the first vihuela publication to contain acknowledged
parodies of vocal music. Josquin’s style permeates Mudarra’s predominantly imitative
polyphony, occasionally extending beyond his glosas of Josquin and into the original
music that makes up the modally organized suite-‐like sets forming the second libro.
Interestingly, Mudarra’s interpretation of glosa corresponds closely with the literary
procedure of poetic glosas found in many sixteenth-‐century cancioneros, in which the
poet rewrites another work, beginning the composition with new material and
systematically extracting lines from the model to end each new section of verse. In the
poetic glosa, the model acts as scaffolding for new material and provides the poet an
opportunity to cast the source in a new light.50
All five of the glosas contained in Mudarra’s book follow the poetic format of new
material preceding—indeed foreshadowing—the quotation of Josquin’s music, and in
some, such as his Kyrie primero de la missa de Beata Virgine de Iosquin glosado,
Mudarra’s emulation of Josquin’s motives, rhythms, and textures result in a seamless
integration of the model, eliciting Ward’s comment that “the skill with which Mudarra
matches the borrowed music with his own is extraordinarily deft; the result is neither
pure Josquin nor Mudarra, but a pleasing fusion.”51 If not for Mudarra’s score
50 Deborah Lawrence, “Mudarra’s Instrumental Glosas: Imitation and Homage in a Spanish Style,” in Encomium musicae: Essays in Honor of Robert J. Snow, ed. David Crawford & Grayson Wagstaff (New York: Pendragon, 2002), 305-‐8. 51 Ward, The Vihuela de Mano, 229, and Lawrence, “Mudarra’s Instrumental Glosas,” 314-‐6. Mudarra’s book contains five glosas, two on Kyrie I and Kyrie II of the Missa De beata virgine, one on Kyrie II of the Missa Pange lingua, one on the Benedictus of Missa La sol fa re mi, and one on the Kyrie I of Févin’s Missa Ave Maria, based on Josquin’s four-‐voiced motet. See Lawrence, Op.cit.,309.
82 indications, separating the two would likely pose problems for all but the most
informed listener (see Plate 2.3).
Plate 2.3 Mudarra, Kyrie primero de la missa de Beata Virgine de Iosquin glosado Libro II, fol.4v (excerpt with score indications)52
As impressive as the manipulation of Josquin’s music is, Mudarra’s reworking of
elements of the model to form motivic links between his set of four primer tono pieces
is equally dexterous. Beginning with a brief, improvisatory tiento, Mudarra refashions
the superius of Josquin’s Kyrie I, drawing upon the model at its most recognizable
points of rhythmic interest — the cadential figures ending each statement of “eleison”
—while reversing the order of their presentation (see figure 2.17 a-‐d). In the pair of
fantasias that frame Mudarra’s glosa, Josquin’s “eleison” figure serves as material for
further elaboration, forming an additional layer of integration (see figure 2.17 e, f).
52 Image from Arriaga, Gonzales, and Somoza. Libros de música para vihuela (CD-‐ rom).
83 The net result of Mudarra’s enterprise is a set of thematically related works with
Josquin as a unifying centerpiece.53
Figure 2.17a-‐f: Motivic borrowings in Mudarra’s primer tono set (Libro 2)
If the glosas of Mudarra illustrate the ways in which vihuelists openly
appropriated Josquin’s music and embodied his style, the parody fantasias of
53 Interestingly, Mudarra’s linking of pieces through motivic integration is not unlike Josquin’s own procedure. See Irving Godt, “Motivic Integration in Josquin’s Motets,” Journal of Music Theory 30 (1977), 264-‐92.
! " # # # $# % $# % % % &
! " && $# $# % # $# % & '# #
! " # $# % % % & # & &
! " # $# % # # # & '# &
! " & & $# % % % &
! " # # % % '# & (# &
a)
Josquin: Missa De beata virgine:
Kyrie, mm.16-18 # #
b)
Mudarra: Tiento primer tono, mm.1-6
c)
Josquin: Missa De beata virgine:
Kyrie, mm.9-12
d)
Mudarra: Tiento primer tono, mm.6-11
e)
Mudarra: Fantasia[15] primer tono, mm.5-8
f)
Mudarra: Fantasia [16] primer tono, mm.21-5
84 Valderrábano could be described as settings in which the music of Josquin is so
completely absorbed into the consistently dense contrapuntal fabric of the new work
as to purposefully elude identification, prompting John Griffiths to point out that,
“there is little apparent concern that the borrowed material should ever be recognized
by the performer or the listener. Quotations are thus frequently brief, and grafted in to
the music at decidedly unstrategic moments. In many cases, the borrowed material is
significantly reworked, either by paring thicker textures to a thinner skeleton, or by
embellishing a simple borrowed framework.”54 Identification is further impeded by
Valderrábano’s idiosyncratic style in which imitative counterpoint is generally
avoided, and works proceed seamlessly without marked sectionalization.
Nineteen of Valderrábano’s thirty-‐three fantasias are parodies, two of which are
based on Josquin’s music. In his Fantasia remedando al Chirie postrero de la misa de
Iosquin De beata Virgine [Fantasia 19], Valderrábano appropriates almost all of the
original work, presenting the material in its original order interspersed with original
music.55 Rather than introducing Josquin’s music at the beginning of formal sections,
borrowed material appears midstream and is substantially reworked to match
Valderrábano’s style. Literal quotations are few, and appear only toward the end of
the piece.56 Here, Josquin’s model provides the impetus for both small-‐scale,
derivative variation, and large-‐scale, structural organization.
Valderrábano’s second parody on Josquin, the Fantasia acomposturada de cierta
parte de la missa de Ave maristella de Iosquin [Fantasia 22], demonstrates a less 54 Griffiths, “The Vihuela Fantasia,” 265. 55 First discussed in Ward, “The Vihuela de Mano,” 234-‐5. 56 Valderrábano mm.69-‐78 = Josquin mm.90-‐4. The work has been thoroughly discussed in Griffiths, “The Vihuela Fantasia,” 266-‐73.
85 rigorous approach to parody than the previous example. Although Ward’s brief
analysis of the Fantasia uncovers only a small section of borrowed music, suggesting
that measures 129-‐131 and 153-‐162 are based on semibreves 1-‐9 of Josquin’s Kyrie II,
a closer look shows otherwise.57 In fact, it is Josquin’s Gloria that inspires
Valderrábano’s most substantial appropriation (see Figure 2.18).
Figure 2.18: Valderrábano, Fantasia acomposturada de cierta parte de la missa de Ave maristella de Iosquin [Fantasia 22], mm.153-‐162.
57 See Ward, “The Vihuela de Mano,” 235.
Title
Composer:Remarks:
&b î ú ú ú w w · ·a gnus de i,
&¥b · î ú ú ú w w ·
a gnus de i
&¥b w · · î ú ú ú wus, a gnus de
?b ú . Ï w · · î ú ú úde us, a gnus
&b153 î ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú w · · î ú Ï ÏÏÏ Ï ú ú w · · &b
165
&b165
&¥b · î ú ú Ï Ï w w · · î ú Ï ÏÏÏ Ï w w · &¥
b&¥b
&¥b w · · î ú ú ú w w · · Î Ï Ï Ïn ú ú w &¥
b&¥b
? b ú . Ï w · · î ú ú ú ú . ÏÏ w · · î ú ú ú ? b? b
23
0
2
3
3
135
0 13
1
30
01
2
0
5 02
35 0
23
0
2 0
3
3
1 035
0 13 1 0
1
30
01
0 2 4
0
5 02
35 0
ú ú ú úÏ Ï Ï Ï ÏÏÏj Ïjú Ïj
Vald maris ex3.myr 1/2 Sunday, November 20, 2011, 15:15:23
86
Measures 153-‐170 of the Fantasia draw on a particularly striking example of paired
imitation that accompanies the final line of text. Here, measures 333-‐352 of the model
are presented twice in increasingly elaborate forms (Valderrábano mm.153-‐164 =
Josquin 333-‐352). At measure 165, Valderrábano feigns a third repetition of the
material (mm.153=165), but instead resumes his quotation where it was left off
(Valderrabano mm.166-‐170 = Josquin 353-‐371). Elsewhere, allusions to the model are
accomplished through the use of Josquin’s motives in single voices, the most
conspicuous occurring in the opening, where Valderrábano glosses the head motive of
î ú ú ú w w ú .fi li us pa
· î ú ú ú ú Ï Ï Ïfi li us pa
w · · î ú úus, fi li
ú . Ï Ï Ï ú ú . Ï ú ú Ïde i, fi li us pa
&b165
î ú ú Ï Ïn ú ú w w î
&¥b · î ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú
&¥b w · · · · ú
? b ú . Ï Ï Ï ú Ï Ï ú ú . Ï Ï ú ú ú
23
0
2
0
30
01
2
2 3
3
335
13
03
3 2
01
0
1
3
55
3ú úÏ Ï Ïj
Title
Vald maris ex3.myr 2/2 Sunday, November 20, 2011, 15:15:23
87 Kyrie I, elaborating on Josquin’s paraphrase of the mass’s plainchant cantus firmus
(see Figure 2.19).
Figure 2.19: Ave maris stella plainchant melody, Josquin’s Kyrie I head motive, and Valderrábano’s gloss.
By mid century, the permeation of vocal composition into the original works of
vihuelists is clearly evident. The fifty-‐one fantasias contained in the Orphénica Lyra of
Fuenllana are the product of a master instrumentalist’s appropriation and
assimilation of vocal polyphony; the predominance of four-‐voiced, imitative textures
and polythematic writing in Fuenllana’s fantasias are a direct result of the impact of
vocal intabulations,58 acknowledged in the book’s preface:
… whoever wishes truly to learn music always trains himself in studying and transcribing composed works, since true profit is obtained from them. And if the fantasias I present in this book have some fragrance of composition, I confess the cause to be [my] having seen and transcribed many works of excellent authors.59
58 Griffiths, “The Vihuela Fantasia,” 374. 59 Jacobs, Miguel de Fuenllana, lxxxix.
Title
Composer:Remarks:
.A ve ma ris stella,
Plainchant melody
Ave maris stella.myr 1/1 Thursday, November 17, 2011, 17:14:17
Title
Composer:Remarks:
&¥b w w. Ï Ï w ú w Ï Ï úKyrie mm.1-3
Altus
&¥b w ú ú w ú . Ï# Ï Ï ú . Ï ú wValderrabano
mm.1-7
Vald maris ex1.myr 1/1 Sunday, November 20, 2011, 15:25:33
88 However demure, many of Fuenllana’s compositions bear more than just a whiff
of preexisting vocal works. His Fantasía [34] undécima, del sexto tono, sobre un passo
forçado: ut re mi fa sol la shares its theme with Josquin’s Missa voces musicales,60 and
his Una compostura del author con dos canto llanos: Ave maris stella y Gaudeamus for
vihuela and two voices (one in mensural notation and one in tablature) parodies the
structure of Josquin’s Salve Regina.61
If instrumentalists wished to form an association with Josquin, one might ask
why many of their appropriations are so carefully concealed. Given the connection
between the instrumental glosa and its poetic equivalent, the answer may lie in the
writings of cotemporaneous rhetoricians such as Erasmus, whose Ciceronianus
encouraged the critical use of imitation as a pedagogical exercise whose end result
was assimilation and transformation of the model:
I approve an imitation that is not limited to one model from whose features one does not dare to depart, an imitation which excerpts from all authors, or at any rate from the most eminent, what is excellent in each and most suits one's intellect, and which does not at once fasten to a discourse whatever beauty it lights upon, but which transfers what it finds into the mind itself, as into the stomach, so that transfused into the veins it appears to be a birth of one's intellect, not something begged and borrowed from elsewhere, and breathes forth the vigor and disposition of one's mind and nature, so that the reader does not recognize an insertion taken from Cicero, but a child born from one's brain, just as they say Pallas was born from Jupiter's, bearing a lively image of its parent, and also so that one's discourse does not appear to be some sort of cento or mosaic, but an image breathing forth one's mind or a river flowing from the fountain of one's heart… Did not Cicero himself teach that the chief point of art is to disguise art? … Therefore if we wish to imitate Cicero successfully, we must above all disguise our imitation of Cicero.62
60 Observed in Ward, “The Vihuela de Mano,” 238. Analyzed in Griffiths, “The Vihuela Fantasia,” 445-‐7. 61 See Ward, “Borrowed Material,” 97. 62 Quoted in Pigman, “Versions of Imitation in the Renaissance,” 9-‐10.
89 Considering the seamlessness with which Josquin is integrated into so many of the
aforementioned works, Erasmus’ description of imitation as “an image breathing forth
one's mind or a river flowing from the fountain of one's heart” is particularly fitting.
Concealment of the model is, in essence, a natural consequence of its assimilation.
Equally important, at least part of the appeal of such works is their potential
opportunity for discovery. In his Disputationes Camaldulenses (c.1475), Cristoforo
Landino (1424-‐1498) defines the purpose of imitation as "not to be the same as the
ones we imitate, but to be similar to them in such a way that the similarity is scarcely
recognized except by the learned.”63 In other words, imitative works such as the
parody fantasias of Valderrábano act as an open invitation, whose challenge to the
reader offers the pleasure of recognition and admission, at least symbolically, into the
circles of the musically cultivated.
Of course, the emulation of Josquin by vihuelists was not limited to intabulations,
parody fantasias and glosas, or to the prevalence of such Josquinisms as sequence and
paired imitation. Of the twenty-‐six fantasias contained in Pisador’s Libros de música de
vihuela, for instance, thirteen are based on solmization themes, with the most
conspicuous emulation of Josquin in Fantasias 1 and 6, both on la sol fa re mi. It is
perhaps no surprise that Pisador’s compositional style bears the stamp of vocal music
more heavily than any of his contemporaries; his predominantly monothematic three-‐
and four – voiced works are the least idiomatic of any vihuela fantasias. Like his
intabulations, Pisador’s compositions are not without problems, revealing the work of
63 Ibid., 11.
90 an amateur whose lack of compositional refinement is balanced by his obvious
enthusiasm.64
Figure 2.20: Pisador’s Fantasia [I] sobre la, sol, fa, re, mi, a tres bozes
64 For an overview and appraisal, see Griffiths, “The Vihuela Fantasia,” 311-‐18. A thorough discussion of Pisador’s second fantasia on la sol fa re mi can be found in Griffiths, Ibid., 334-‐41.
Fantasia I
Diego Pisador
&¥1 · · · · · w w ú ú ú ú &¥
10
&¥10
&¥· î ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú ú &¥&¥(Theme)
? ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï ú w w · ú ú ??
4 2 00
224
0
2
0
224
00
224
2
02 2
0
24
30
0
2
2
20
0
02
ú ú úÏ w
&¥10 ú ú ú Ï Ï ú ú w ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï w Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï# ú &¥
19
&¥19
&¥ ú úú ú ú ú ú ú w w w w w &¥&¥
? ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w w w w ??
2
02
0
24
02
0
35
2
523
2
00
2
0
2
4
0
2
02
0
2
2
00
4
2 4 0 2
3
2
2
0
2
03 2 0
2
2
40
ú úwÏ Ï Ï
&¥19 w ú ú w w ú ú w w ú ú ú Ï Ï &¥
28
&¥28
&¥w ú ú w w ú ú w w w w &¥&¥
? w ú ú w w w w ú ú ú ú w ??
23
2
35
2
0
3
4
2
00
0
22
35
2
00
234
02
24
23
0
4
2
2
34
3 2
w ú w ú w ú Ï
91
Fantasia I
Diego Pisador
&¥1 · · · · · w w ú ú ú ú &¥
10
&¥10
&¥· î ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú ú &¥&¥(Theme)
? ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï ú w w · ú ú ??
4 2 00
224
0
2
0
224
00
224
2
02 2
0
24
30
0
2
2
20
0
02
ú ú úÏ w
&¥10 ú ú ú Ï Ï ú ú w ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï w Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï Ï# ú &¥
19
&¥19
&¥ ú úú ú ú ú ú ú w w w w w &¥&¥
? ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w w w w ??
2
02
0
24
02
0
35
2
523
2
00
2
0
2
4
0
2
02
0
2
2
00
4
2 4 0 2
3
2
2
0
2
03 2 0
2
2
40
ú úwÏ Ï Ï
&¥19 w ú ú w w ú ú w w ú ú ú Ï Ï &¥
28
&¥28
&¥w ú ú w w ú ú w w w w &¥&¥
? w ú ú w w w w ú ú ú ú w ??
23
2
35
2
0
3
4
2
00
0
22
35
2
00
234
02
24
23
0
4
2
2
34
3 2
w ú w ú w ú Ï
&¥28 Ï Ï ú ú ú# w w · · · · · &¥
37
&¥37
&¥ ww w w ú ú ú ú w w î ú ú&¥&¥
? w w w w · w ú ú ú ú ú . Ï ??
30
2
0 2
2
4
1 2
4
2
22
2
2 034 4
22
00
2 4
2
2
wú ú Ï
&¥37 · · · · · w ú ú ú ú w &¥
46
&¥46
&¥ú ú&¥
ú ú ú w ú ú ú ú w ú ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï &¥&¥? ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï# ú ú Ï Ï ú ú ú w · î ú ??.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0
0
4
3
2
42
2 122
00 2
4 4
2
02 4
02 3
5 523 2
4
0
ú Ï ú ú úÏ Ï(Countertheme)
&¥46 · î ú ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú ú ú ú w &¥
55
&¥55
&¥ úú Ï Ï ú ú ú Ï Ï ú ú ú# ú . Ï Ï Ï ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï &¥&¥
? ú ú ú ú w ú · · · · î ú ú??
24
2
2 0
02
4
2
2
4
0
034
24
42
3 4
2
2 30
02 3
5 52
34
2
ú ú úÏ Ï Ï Ï Ïú ú
92
&¥28 Ï Ï ú ú ú# w w · · · · · &¥
37
&¥37
&¥ ww w w ú ú ú ú w w î ú ú&¥&¥
? w w w w · w ú ú ú ú ú . Ï ??
30
2
0 2
2
4
1 2
4
2
22
2
2 034 4
22
00
2 4
2
2
wú ú Ï
&¥37 · · · · · w ú ú ú ú w &¥
46
&¥46
&¥ú ú&¥
ú ú ú w ú ú ú ú w ú ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï &¥&¥? ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï# ú ú Ï Ï ú ú ú w · î ú ??.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0
0
4
3
2
42
2 122
00 2
4 4
2
02 4
02 3
5 523 2
4
0
ú Ï ú ú úÏ Ï(Countertheme)
&¥46 · î ú ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú ú ú ú w &¥
55
&¥55
&¥ úú Ï Ï ú ú ú Ï Ï ú ú ú# ú . Ï Ï Ï ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï &¥&¥
? ú ú ú ú w ú · · · · î ú ú??
24
2
2 0
02
4
2
2
4
0
034
24
42
3 4
2
2 30
02 3
5 52
34
2
ú ú úÏ Ï Ï Ï Ïú ú
&¥55 w î ú ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú&¥
64
&¥64
&¥ú ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï# ú ú &¥&¥
?ú ú? ú ú ú w · î ú ú ú ú ú w ú ú ??
23 2
230
20
2
2
4
02 3
5 52
34
2 34
22
30
000
2
2
42 1 2
0
2
4
2ú Ï Ï Ï Ïú ú ú ú
&¥64ú ú&¥64 ú ú ú w w î ú ú ú ú ú w · &¥
73
&¥73
&¥ úú Ïb Ï ú ú Ï Ï# ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï ú Ï&¥&¥
? wb · î ú ú ú ú ú w · î ú ú ú ??
0
3
01 3
4 42
24
1 24
02
20
2
4
2
0
4
03
4
2
42
02 4
02
2 30
ú ú úÏ Ï Ï
&¥73 î ú ú ú ú . Ï w w · î ú w î ú &¥
82
&¥82
&¥ú Ï&¥
Ï ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï ú w w &¥&¥? ú ú w w · î ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w ú??
(Incomplete)
2
242
4
0
0
2
3
0
4
22 3
523 2
4
024
2
2 0
02
4
2
2
2
0
2
0
[f?]úÏ Ï Ï Ïú ú ú
93
&¥55 w î ú ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú&¥
64
&¥64
&¥ú ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï# ú ú &¥&¥
?ú ú? ú ú ú w · î ú ú ú ú ú w ú ú ??
23 2
230
20
2
2
4
02 3
5 52
34
2 34
22
30
000
2
2
42 1 2
0
2
4
2ú Ï Ï Ï Ïú ú ú ú
&¥64ú ú&¥64 ú ú ú w w î ú ú ú ú ú w · &¥
73
&¥73
&¥ úú Ïb Ï ú ú Ï Ï# ú ú ú ú w ú ú ú Ï Ï# Ï Ï ú Ï&¥&¥
? wb · î ú ú ú ú ú w · î ú ú ú ??
0
3
01 3
4 42
24
1 24
02
20
2
4
2
0
4
03
4
2
42
02 4
02
2 30
ú ú úÏ Ï Ï
&¥73 î ú ú ú ú . Ï w w · î ú w î ú &¥
82
&¥82
&¥ú Ï&¥
Ï ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú Ï Ï ú ú Ï Ï ú w w &¥&¥? ú ú w w · î ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w ú??
(Incomplete)
2
242
4
0
0
2
3
0
4
22 3
523 2
4
024
2
2 0
02
4
2
2
2
0
2
0
[f?]úÏ Ï Ï Ïú ú ú
&¥82 w ú ú w · î ú w ú ú ú ú Ïb Ï Ï Ï &¥
91
&¥91
&¥· w ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï w î ú w ú úb úb ú Ï&¥&¥
?w ú? ú ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú w î ú ú ú Ïb Ï Ï Ï# ú ú ??. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0
4
0
4
2
4
2
2
2
04
0
03
4
2 34
22
00
0
0
0
13
0
3
12 1
12
2 02
4
3
Ï ú Ï
&¥91 ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w w ú ú w &¥
100
&¥100
&¥ú Ï&¥
Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú . Ï ú ú w î ú w ú ú ú ú Ï&¥&¥? ú . Ï ú ú ú . Ï ú ú w w î ú w ú ú ??
2
4
02
3 22
00
0
24
334
222
000
324
02
2 3
0 4
34
22
00
0
02
4ú úÏ
&¥100 ú ú ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú ú w w w&¥ú Ï&¥ Ï Ï Ï w ú . Ï ú ú Ï Ï ú ú ú# w w? ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú ú ú ú w w w
0
4
0 224
02
4 2
2
04
2
2
034
02 3
4
022
30
000
2
2
43 4
2úÏ Ï ú W
94
Of the two fantasias on la sol fa re mi, Pisador seems most at ease in the three –
voiced setting of Fantasia [I] sobre la, sol, fa, re, mi, a tres bozes, presented here in full
(see Figure 2.20). At 106 measures in length, Pisador’s composition is typical of his
fantasias on solmization themes, opening with a gradually expanding texture and an
initially rigorous treatment of the theme in various rhythmic guises over the first
eighteen bars of the piece (indicated by dotted arcs). After a short break at measure
19, the theme is presented once more in treble 1 before continuing with free material
until the cadence at measure 30, marking the first sectional break in Pisador’s
tripartite work.
The extended section that follows commences with a welcome thinning of the
texture and a more uniform rhythmic treatment of the theme, paired between the
bass and treble 2 from measures 31 to 40. Immediately before treble 1’s
reappearance, just before the midway point of the piece, the bass introduces a counter
theme (its initial statement at m. 38 is indicated by a dotted line), which is
subsequently taken up and developed by treble 2. The bass and treble 1 exchange the
theme from measure 42 to until measure 80, where the bass’s rather startling,
&¥82 w ú ú w · î ú w ú ú ú ú Ïb Ï Ï Ï &¥
91
&¥91
&¥· w ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï w î ú w ú úb úb ú Ï&¥&¥
?w ú? ú ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú w î ú ú ú Ïb Ï Ï Ï# ú ú ??. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0
4
0
4
2
4
2
2
2
04
0
03
4
2 34
22
00
0
0
0
13
0
3
12 1
12
2 02
4
3
Ï ú Ï
&¥91 ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú ú w w ú ú w &¥
100
&¥100
&¥ú Ï&¥
Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú . Ï ú ú w î ú w ú ú ú ú Ï&¥&¥? ú . Ï ú ú ú . Ï ú ú w w î ú w ú ú ??
2
4
02
3 22
00
0
24
334
222
000
324
02
2 3
0 4
34
22
00
0
02
4ú úÏ
&¥100 ú ú ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú ú w w w&¥ú Ï&¥ Ï Ï Ï w ú . Ï ú ú Ï Ï ú ú ú# w w? ú ú Ï Ï Ï Ï ú ú ú ú ú ú w w w
0
4
0 224
02
4 2
2
04
2
2
034
02 3
4
022
30
000
2
2
43 4
2úÏ Ï ú W
95 incomplete statement of the theme and avoided cadence mark the close of the second
section. The final section of the fantasia is distinguished by the conspicuous absence of
the theme, with attention almost completely given over to new material that might be
described as a synthesis of the theme and counter theme (its initial statement at m.83
is indicated by a dotted line). Finally, at measure 102, the bass is allowed to present
the final statement of the la sol fa re mi theme before the final cadence at measure 106.
Pisador’s Fantasia [I] sobre la, sol, fa, re, mi, a tres bozes is a work that evokes
mixed reactions. To be sure, it reveals many of the composer’s weaknesses. His
rigorously imitative texture is often muddled by the limitations of the instrument and
is exacerbated by a lack of harmonic direction. His inconsistent rhythmic treatment of
the solmization theme, especially evident in the first section of the fantasia, effectively
renders it characterless even before it is allowed to take shape. On the other hand, it is
difficult to chide Pisador for his eagerness to apply what he has clearly gleaned from
Josquin, and the work is not without ingenuity or appeal, especially considering
Pisador’s apparent lack of formal training. As John Griffiths has observed:
The occasional flashes of brilliance arouse a sympathetic view towards the composer. Here we have a composer, possibly of limited musical education or experience, writing works beyond his technical capacity, but making a desperate attempt to express himself in a valid musical language. His attempts nearly achieve greatness, but they are unable to attain the eloquence and intensity that their best moments imply. They are the vain and frustrated attempts of a would-‐be genius, reduced to near impotence by a lack of technical proficiency.65
Perhaps Pisador’s main problem is the company he kept: the printed works of his
contemporaries are among the finest collections of instrumental music of the
65 Op. cit., 318.
96 sixteenth century. Common to all is their admiration of Josquin, whose music survives
in their works as the ideal model and ultimate pedagogical resource. A close reading
of their collected works reveals an obvious concern for presenting Josquin’s music in a
way that reconciles practical considerations with fidelity to the source. Just as
important is Josquin’s impact on original compositions. Whether through covert
appropriation, overt emulation, or incidental influence, intabulations of Josquin
formed the most significant source of inspiration, and perhaps the greatest impetus
for change, for vihuela fantasias during the height of their moment in history.