David J. Burn: "Nam erit haec quoque laus eorum": Imitation, Competition and the "L'homme armé" Tradition

8/17/2019 David J. Burn: "Nam erit haec quoque laus eorum": Imitation, Competition and the "L'homme armé" Tradition

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/david-j-burn-nam-erit-haec-quoque-laus-eorum-imitation-competition-and 1/40

Société Française de Musicologie is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Revue de Musicologie.

http://www.jstor.org

Société Française de Musicologie

"Nam erit haec quoque laus eorum": Imitation, Competition and the "L'homme armé" TraditionAuthor(s): David J. BurnSource: Revue de Musicologie, T. 87, No. 2 (2001), pp. 249-287Published by: Société Française de MusicologieStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/947107

Accessed: 20-10-2015 01:07 UTC

EFEREN ESLinked references are available on JSTOR for this article:http://www.jstor.org/stable/947107?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/

info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 128.255.6.125 on Tue, 20 Oct 2015 01:07:57 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sfm

http://www.jstor.org/stable/947107

http://www.jstor.org/stable/947107?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp






http://www.jstor.org/stable/947107?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

http://www.jstor.org/stable/947107

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sfm

http://www.jstor.org/





250 Revuede Musicologie, 7/2 2001)

practice of composers of the fifteenth nd sixteenth enturies. Sincethen, hesuccessof this grafting as been mixed: what nitially eemedpromising ewpath has become embroiled n complications o the xtentthat the most recent ssessments avestrongly rgued for ts wholesaleabandonment.

The present rticle ims to re-examine he application f imitatio omusic, and to address for the first ime the criticisms hat have beenlevelledagainst t. The initial discussion considers the validity f therecent rguments gainst mitatio. ollowing this, t is shown that aninvestigation f wider cultural oncerns an create rich nexus withinwhich o ocate ertain eatures ound nRenaissancemusic, rovided hatthe terms f the discussion re

clearlyefined.

inally,he

repertoryf

massesusing L'homme arm6 as a cantus firmus s taken s a practicalexemplification f imitatio n the competitive erms uggested y Quinti-lian's remark. heyrepresent n extreme est-case gainstwhich ther essovertly llied compositionsmust be udged. 5

A case-study s made of Josquin's wo masses on this ong for everalreasons. n the light of the preceding iscussion, he fact that Josquinchose to set this cantus firmus, nd twice over, s seen to be part of anintellectual limate hat xtended eyond hepurelymusical.The motiva-tions behind his compositional ecisions re brought nto sharper ocus

than hitherto, s competitive-imitative esponses ohispredecessors. hetwo masses are ultimately hown to be of special significance n esta-blishing osquin's eputation nd in prolonging he tradition f compo-sing on o L'homme arm >>nto the sixteenth entury. n conclusion,it will be seen that this post-Josquin hase of the tradition as more atstake than the ? nod to historicism >that has been suggested y someauthors.

3. <<mulation, ompetition nd Homage:mitation nd Theories f Imita-tion in the Renaissance >,Journal f the AmericanMusicologicalSociety, 35(1982), -48.

4. The wo rincipal rticles pposingmitatioreRobC.Wegman, Another"Imitation" f Busnoys'sMissa L'homme rme and some Observationsnimitatio n RenaissanceMusic>>,Journal f the Royal MusicalAssociation, 14(1989),189-202 nd Honey Meconi,<<Does imitatio xist? >,Journal f Musico-logy, 2 1994),152-78. hey re discussedn depth n the next ection f thisarticle.

5. Othermore r ess xtended andidatesor arallel onsiderationncludehe<<musicians otets of the ourteenth

entury,he

Caput>masses

significantlyincludingontributionsrom ckeghemndObrecht, ach lso he omposerf<<'homme rm >>mass), ndthe <Western ynde masses. ee DanielLeech-Wilkinson,<RelatedMotets rom ourteenth-Centuryrance >, roceedingsftheRoyalMusicalAssociation, 09 1982-83),1-22;Manfred ukofzer, Caput:ALiturgico-Musical tudy >,n Studies n Medieval nd RenaissanceMusic (NewYork:W W Norton, 950), .217-310; igel avidson, < he Western ynde"Masses>>,MusicalQuarterly, 7 (1971),429-43.






DavidJ Burn - mitation, ompetition 251

Musical mitatio Pro et contra

Imitatio may be most broadly understood s any adaptation of pre-existentmaterial n new works. n this ense,whether n music or litera-ture, nd irrespective f any formal efinitions, uch a practice must bereckoned obe as old as the disciplines hemselves. learly, s a heritage spassedfrom ne generation o the next,whether rally r n combinationwith written upport, ewaccretionsmust n some waybe dependent nthe old, pre-existing epertory. his s the first roblem or nyone imingat a meaningful se of the concept of imitatio. he conclusions o bedrawn from inding xamples of this most far-reaching ind of ? imita-

tion >>are far from lear. They can be found within ny time-frame.Imitatio s, then, irstly highly ormative edagogic ool.Despite the range of phenomena mentioned n Brown's rticle-title, t

wasimitatio s an elementary art of pedagogy hatwas the main focus fhis study. The rare compositional draft from which Brown sets out isunquestionably worthy f close attention iven the absence of othersimilar ocuments rom he sixteenth entury r before. et the videncemust be seen ess as an indication f newpractices han a lucky urvivaldetailing owcomposers ad alwaysworked. herefore rom hepoint ofview of imitatio though not from ther perspectives, f course), whatBrown recounts s relatively rivial. his, coupled with flexible se ofterms hat has been ustly criticised y later authors to be discussedpresently), as engendered confusion t the outset over what may beexpected rom specifically enaissancekind f mitatio ven s it openedthe discourse orwider cholarly onsideration.

In the bsence of a critical esponse oBrown, mitatio, ith ts iteraryand humanistic vertones, was rapidly ttached, s an oblique back-ground context, o a whole host of familiar eatures f fifteenth- ndsixteenth-century usic.The range ncompassed sbroad: the borrowingin masses of chanson tenors from composer's own works or fromelsewhere), arly parody technique nvolving hetransference f mul-tiple voicesfrom model, and allusivereferences hich et up an inter-textualmeaning etween he mpliedwords f the mportedmaterial ndthe moment f allusion, have all been linked o imitatio t some time.Clearly heword osesanyusefulmeaningwhen pplied o far-reachingly.

The two most recent ommentators n imitatio, ob C. Wegman ndHoney Meconi, were troubled ot only by this asual application f theterm, ut lso by hewider ssuethat mitatio s a rhetorical onceptwhosetransplant o the realm of music may be inappropriate, ven deceptive.

6. Seeamongst thers: eeman . Perkins,< he L'homme rme"Masses fBusnoysnd Ockeghem: Comparison>, ournalf Musicology,(1994), 63-96;J. eter urkholder,<Johannes artini nd the mitation ass of the LateFifteenth entury >, ournal f theAmerican usicologicalociety, 8(1985),470-523; hristopher . Reynolds,< heCounterpoint f AllusionnFifteenth-Century asses >,Journal f the American usicologicalociety, 5 (1992),228-60.







Both writers each similar onclusions: hat mitatio s of relatively ittlehelp n musicological esearch nd would be best eft side when pproa-chingRenaissance ompositional ractice. he arguments hat ed to thisverdictmust be seriously ddressed.

Springing rom he discussion f a mass whichborrows herhythmicstructure f its tenor from Busnoys'sMissa L'homme rme, Wegman'sconcern was that mitatio oes not satisfactorily xplain what he hadfound.He wastroubled y hevagueness nd ambiguity ncurrent ses ofthe term. n an attempt o combat this by pinning mitatio own morespecifically, ewas forced o reduce heterm's efinition o its essentials,and to those only.He suggested hat mitatio hould be reserved olely odescribe hepedagogicalpractice f learning y examplefrom lassicalmodels, nd that erms uch s allusion nd ntertextuality ould be betterused nstead. Hiscriticisms ere o someextent imely nd valid. t will beseen below that he word mitatio tanding lone does indeed connotewhole range of features.Without urther recision hen the meaning shighly mbiguous and unfocussed. imilarly, n some cases allusion orintertextuality ay more accurately describe the relationships oundamongst herepertory ithout ringingwith hem host of unwantedhumanist-educational mplications. or understanding he mass thatprompted Wegman's observations, ymbolic llusion does seem to be afruitful ineof enquiry.Yet t s hard to escapethe fact hat ntertextuality r allusion t a moregeneral evelpresent imilar roblems o those posed by an unqualifieduse of imitatio. here re a largenumber f o grey cases,where he laimof purposeful llusionrequires ignificant irtuosity n the musicologist'spart. An intertextual elationship oes not a priori greatly dvanceunderstanding f a piece.Bothphenomena aveno specific ttachment oanyhistorical eriodor movement, nd maybe traceable n anyrepertorythat wecare to examine. n this ight, hey quallyrun the risk f fallingprey othe triviality f pedagogical mitatio.Moreover, herestriction fimitatio o the definition egman roposesmaynot behistorically ound.His assertion, or nstance, hat heconcepts of competition, mulationand homage are foreign o imitatio s not born out by the evidence.Moreover, mitatio as never stable nd well-defined oncept.Therewasheated debate n the Renaissance ven with reference o the pedagogicalimitation f classical authors, eaving side the fact that mitatio wasevidently nderstood o have wider mplications. aced with his, t s clearthat any attempt o give firm oundaries o imitatio will cause conflictwith he evidence. t is therefore ossiblethat relation o imitatio idexist in certain nstances of allusion or intertextuality, nd that this

7. See<Another Imitation" f Busnoys's issaL'hommerm ?>>,.197.Notall imitationesre ompetitive,obe sure such lements reonly resent t tshighest evel.Butthiswasprecisely uintilian's oint n ending ischapter nimitatio ith hewords edoes nd the ame deaswere aken p by hisRenais-sance eaders.he larity f terms orwhichWegmanrgues s mportant, ut heedges f these deas re necessarilylurry.






DavidJ Burn Imitation, ompetition 253

relation s masked n the use of distinct words to separate hesepheno-mena. Wegman's words of caution must prompt search for new alter-natives. hese will be offered fter consideration f the other main criticof musicological se of imitatio.

A more extreme rgument han that of Wegman s put by HoneyMeconi.Beginning, ikeWegman,with hehitherto verly-casual odernresorting oimitatio s a cover-all erm,Meconireviews he differing sesof imitatio n four major articles, ointing ut the trengths nd weaknes-sesof each. 8 She also surveys ts applications n treatises f the fifteenthand sixteenth enturies. n doing so, she raises fivedistinctions etweenliterary nd musical imitatio hat would seem to militate gainst the

latter's xistence:i) Musichas no antichi.ii) Self-imitation s not encompassed within mitatio, hough t

occurs frequently.iii) Musical imitatio s often cross genres, iterary lmost exclusi-

velywithin hem.iv) Imitatio s relativelymuch more prevalent nd significant n

writing.v) Imitatio ad the cultivation f a pure Latin style s a chief goal

and musichas no suchequivalents.

Other problems nclude our present ack of knowledge bout theeducational evels f composers n the fifteenth entury.

Limiting he application of imitatio o examplesof polyphonic bor-rowing nly, Meconi then sets out seven counter-points o explain theundeniable ncrease n the use of polyphonic models on strictly usicalgrounds nd thus negate herole of rhetorical mitatio:

i) It is a <natural utgrowth > f previous rocedures.ii) It continues n already-extant nifying rend n mass-move-

ments.iii) Increased<vertical hinking >makesparody <natural >>.iv) Composers were curious to exploit the possibilities f their

material.v) It facilitated peedof working.vi) Polyphonic orrowing s more urally pparent.vii) The structure f the model ntrigued hecomposer.

If both these ets of arguments eem nitially ompelling, loser nves-tigation asts significant oubts overMeconi'scase.Taking

firstlyhefive

criticisms, ach can be challenged r have ts relevancemitigated o the8. LewisLockwood, <On "Parody" s Term nd Concept >n Aspects fMedieval nd Renaissance usic: A Birthday ffering oGustave eese, d. J.

LaRue Oxford: xford niversity ress, 967), .560-75; rown, < mulation,Competitionnd Homage >; erkins, < he "L'homme rm6"Masses f Ocke-ghem ndBusnoys>; urkholder <Johannes artini nd he mitation ass>>.







extent hat t need no longer prohibit utright hepossibility f musicalimitatio:

i) The lack of antichi s frequently rought ut to distance musicfrom mitatio nd humanist rends. et it s not a fundamentalproblem, ormusicianswithin hehumanist milieu reated heirown hagiography which may stand in their place. Ancientreports f the effects f music were known and stimulatedheightened oncern with rtistic musical standards n order omake music which may be capable of re-creating heseeffects.Imitatio nd humanism werenot solely bout resurrecting ctualancient music.9

ii) Self-borrowing oes indeed defeat hepoint of imitatio, ut toccurs n literature s well.iii) Inter-genre ransfer s not an issue t east within he L'homme

arm >>tradition o be examined here, which consists of onemass responding oanother mass.

iv) The scope and prevalence f ? imitation in music s still nopen question, s the erms n which t should be considered refar from lear.Musical<<mitation >maybe lesseasyto dentifythat hetextual ariety, ut may nonetheless till xist.

v) Pure Latinwascertainly mportant, ut he nvasion f mitativeprocedures and of classicalmodels ) n the visual and plasticarts estifies oa more pervasive ffect f these deas.Moreover,pure Latin was not an end in itself, ut the bare minimumnecessary ool n order oachieve erfect ratory. s such, twasa means to an end. Music could share his nd-goal, ut reach tthrough ts own medium.

Furthermore, nd with espect oall five riticisms, t must be assertedthat he ssumption hat hetorical mitatio n iterature asuniform nd

unproblematics false. The reductive iew of

literarymitatio Meconi

gives s a modern implification f a complexphenomenon. he variousinterpretations nd implications f this racticewerehotly ebated n theliterary nd humanist ircles f the Renaissanceas the mpact of theirideasgrewwider, ven s it formed cornerstone f the humanist duca-tional programme. he argument ver the use of Cicero alone or ofmultiplemodels sonly hemost famous f many ong-standing isagree-ments. There s no reason therefore hat musical mitatio hould not beequallycomplex.

9. SeeReinhard trohm, < he Humanist dea of a Common evival f theArts nd its mplications orMusicHistory >n nterdisciplinary tudies nMusi-cology,Report rom the Third nterdisciplinary onference, oznati,April 6-28,1996, d. M. Jabloniski J. SteszewskiPoznani, 997), -25;Margaret ent,<<Humanists nd Music,Musicand Humanities>n Tendenze Metodi ellaRicercaMusicologica:Atti elConvegnonternazionale, 7-29Settembre 990, d.R. Pozzi (Florence, 995),29-38.









hope as its ultimate oal.Its studious ultivation might ventually ead tothat most

prizedchievement: ame nd

glory.An important rticle by George W Pigman II could have providedsome of the clarifications alled for by Wegman regarding ypes ofrhetorical mitation. 1After nvestigating he far from niversally ck-nowledged pplications nd theoretical ivisions f mitation, igman IIsuggests hat he broad term mitatio might egraded, rommost lemen-tary o most complex, gaining n significance nd value as it proceeds.After he non-transformative literal opying), he ransformative verbalparaphrase r some alteration), nd the dissimilutive hidden) kinds ofimitation, e reaches the summit. his is the eristic kind, nvolving n

overt lement f competition orpre-eminence. he classificatory erm<<ristic >,deriving rom he Greek <<ris>> <<trife >),was suggested,saysPigman II, byPseudo-Longinus' escription f a specific nstance feristic mitation esulting n the achievement f the sublime and thewinning f fame. The extract s drawn from longer ection oncerningthe <<mitation f earlierwriters s a means o sublimity (my talics):

Plato ouldnothave ut uch brilliant inishnhisphilosophicaloctrinesor o often isen o poeticalubjectsndpoeticalanguage,fhehadnot riedwholeheartedly,ocompete or he rize gainst omer, ike young spirantchallengingn admired aster. o break lance n thiswaymaywellhavebeen brash nd contentioushing odo,but he ompetition roved ny-thing ut alueless. s Hesiod ays, <his trife sgoodformen. >2

Commenting n the same passage,Thomas Greene clarifies oth theinteraction etween ristic nd other ypes f imitation, nd the double-edged relationship f humanist views of the past and hopes for thepresent, s a dialectic n which the imitatio must both embrace andattempt onegate hemodel:

[Pseudo-Longinus'bservation]snot n insight hatwould ave isturbedmost umanists f theRenaissance...Valla'senerationor he atina ittera-tura eterna id not revent im rom ointing ut hat ne writes nly o aysomething ew and thus ake ssuewith arlier uthorities. t is in thisdialecticalmitativetrategy hat he ensions r conflictsnherentnhuma-nism ise losest othe urface f the ext nd anbestudied ost sefully.3

11. <<ersions of Imitation n the Renaissance >,RenaissanceQuarterly, 3(1980), -32. lso ignificantor iterarymitatios ThomasM.Greene, he ightin Troy.:mitation nd DiscoverynRenaissance oetry NewHaven: Yale Univer-sity ress, 982).

12. <<On Sublimity >, 3.4-5, n ClassicalLiterary riticism, d. D.A. Russell&

M. WinterbottomOxford; xford niversity ress, 989), .158.Hesiod'swords

arefromWorksndDays, 4.<<OnSublimity>spresumedodate rom he irstcentury . E. Pseudo-Longinusasprobably Greek ontemporaryf Quinti-lian.

13. The ight nTroy, .46.Theobservation ust etempered y he act hatattitudes erenot uniform ut variedwith ime, eographicalituation ndindividualaste, ore owardsne rother f he ialectic oles.Nonetheless,hatdoesnot hreatenhe ialectic-modeltself.







If the writings f Pseudo-Longinuswereof relatively arginal ignifi-canceto Renaissancehumanists, he houghts eexpressed ad an exten-ded past and found oice n more widely-influential lassicaltexts s wellas in the writings f Renaissance humanists hemselves, hether iterary,artistic r musical. 14

Pseudo-Longinus' warlike magerywas not unadvisedly hosen. Theimplications f eristic mitation re not alwaysof the morally nimpea-chable kind associated with homage, but may arise from more dubiousmotives. n his Works nd Days, from which Pseudo-Longinus drew,Hesiod divided mitation nto good and bad. Whilst he former ncreasesthe substance f the competitor nd the atter esults n war, hedistinc-

tion s one of results, otmeans.Hesiodpointed ut that reative rismayjust aseasily tem rom nvy nd malice s does the bad sort. nterestingly,singers umber longside hebeggars, otters nd carpenters hatHesiodgives as illustration f maliciously based but beneficial ompetition.Pigman II provocatively uggests hat he bsence of a clear formulationfor ristic mitation nmore uarters han here re maypartly esult romunwillingness o officially ndorse the potentially mmoral ualities ofenvy nd malice. 15

Quintilian's ater ormulation f imitatio asclearly uided by the factthat the ultimate

urposeof the

practicewas to fulfil he ambition of

surpassing ne's predecessors whether hrough nvy r otherwise) ndthus win personal fame nd glory. ven those with ess ambition houlderistically mitate hestrong n order o grow trong hemselves:

Sedetiam ui summa on ppetent, ontendere otius uam equi debent.Namquihoc git t prior it, ortisan,tiamsi on ransierit,equabit. umvero nemopotest equare, uiusvestigiis ibi utique nsistendum utat;necesse st nim emper itposterior ui sequitur. 6

Coupled with his remarks which close the same section (<<Namerit... ), this tatement sperhaps he inglemost nfluential upport romantiquity or ompetitive mitation. 7

The centrality f this competitive treak was adopted with renewedvigour by Renaissancehumanists s they e-assessed heir elationship o

14. Greene races he deaof doing ombatwith ne's ncestors ackto thetreatise n mitation yDionysusf Harlicarnassus.ionysus' wn ext s ost, utthe fact hat he coupledmimesis<imitation ) with he ompetitively-inspiredzelos<emulation>)s known rom uotes nother orks. eeThe ight nTroy,p. 57ff.

15. <<Versions f Imitation>, .

23.16.<<ut even hose who do not aim at supreme xcellenceught opress

toward hemark ather han e content o follown the racks f others. or hemanwhose im s to prove imself etter han nother, ven f hedoesnot urpasshim,may ope oequalhim. uthecannever ope oequalhim f hethinks thisduty merely o tread n his footsteps; or hemere ollower ust lways agbehind. >,nstitutio ratoria, .ii.9-10; ransl. utler, ol.4,p.79.

17. SeePigman II, <<Versions f mitation >, .19.







the past. 18Leon Battista Alberti's reatise n painting, ella Pittura,seminalwork or

many easons,emonstrates hat

ontemporaryurrents

of humanist hought ad radiated beyond purely iterary ontext. nviewing he ndividual rtist s worthy f the utmost steem, eadviseshisreader bout achieving hisgoal. 19 In order o win comparablefame tothat f the ncients, lberti ays n his prologue hat he highest chieve-ment s in fact o outdo antiquity ot by copying t but by creating hingsthat had never efore een dreamt f:

I have ome o understand hat nmanymen, ut speciallynyou, ilippo[Brunelleschi],nd nour lose riend onato Donatello]he culptor nd nothers ikeNencio LorenzoGhiberti], uca [dellaRobbia] nd Masaccio[TommasoiGiovanni iSimone uidi], heresagenius or accomplishing]every raiseworthyhing. or this hey hould ot be slightedn favour fanyone amousn antiquity nthese rts...Our ame ught e much reater[than hat f the ncients],hen, fwediscover nheard-ofndnever-before-seen rts nd ciences ithout eachersr without nymodelwhatsoever.0

Situated s they re in Alberti's rologue, hese pening emarkswereintended o outline he goals of his project n the broadest erms. n thissense, hey ontain n element f fantasy nd ambition hat eaves sidethe ntermediate tepsnecessary oreach hat nd-point. he achievementof

renown,oth

personalnd for hewhole

communitys what matters

most. 1 As he explains ater,The first reat areof one who eeks o obtain minencen painting s toacquire he ame nd renown f the ncients. 2

It is clear,however, hatwhilst his fame may deally ultimately etachitself rom models, t s only by outbidding hosemodelsthemselves hatthis detachmentmay occur, nd imitation sa vital tepping tone on thewayto that goal. For within he body of his treatise, lberti's method fexplanation y example uses not only the well-known tories f ancientartists ut also commentary pon those of his own time, otablyGiottoand Brunelleschi. hese artists ad successfully arned the sought-afterrenown nd Alberti oes suggest hat, t least to beginwith, you should

18. On mportance f the cult f fame" nRenaissancetaly, eePaulOskarKristeller, <On the Immortality f the Soul >>,n RenaissanceThought nd itsSourcesNewYork: olumbia niversity ress, 979), .181-96,sp.182

19.Alberti 1404-72) irst rote his reatise n Latin n 1435,but quicklytranslatedthimselfnto talian n1436. uotes ndreferenceseferothemodern

edition n Painting, ransl. . R. SpencerNewHaven:YaleUniversity ress,1966).Alberti's pproach asobvious arallelsothework f Tinctoris iscussedbelow.

20. OnPainting, .39-40Prologue).21. Alberti xpressedishope hat e himself ould win ame rom is work t

the nd of his treatise. heyhaveproven ot to have beenmisplaced. ee OnPainting, .98 Book II, conclusion).

22. OnPainting, . 67(BookII).






DavidJ Burn." mitation, ompetition 259

? alwayshave before you some elegant nd singular xample which youobserve nd imitate >.3

Bythe mid-sixteenth entury, t the other nd of the period nwhich he<<L'homme rme >>radition lourished, nd humanist deashad substan-tially ncreased n currency, he importance f competition ould beformulated n even stronger erms:

[After elatinghe tory f howCupid ailedogrow ntil enus ave irth oanother on,Anteros, ithwhich e could ompete] think ouwill asilyconclude hat no brilliant ind an make ubstantial rogress nless heyhave n antagonistas the Greeks ay)withwhom hey an struggle ndwrestle. nd we must ontend otonlywith ur contemporaries,ut lsowith hose whowrote n the past...otherwise ewill lways e speechlesschildren. 4

It s not nly isgraceful,ut lso dangerous or ne oldenough obeableto stand ndwalk o stick lways oanother's ootsteps...Nowf course hisisfine or hose hohave et o ome f ge,who till at baby ood...buthosewho are mature, hosemuscles re stronger, et them ome out of theshade...lethem ow ontend ith he gladiator-trainerimself, hose re-cepts hey sed oreceive,nd et hem ry heir trength ith im nd notyield[.]5

It would seem that for musicians, he mostwidely-accepted ay

inwhich o ? try ne's strength ),to fight ith he o gladiator-trainers ontheir wn territory, asby taking p the hallenge f o L'homme arme >(is it no more than coincidence hat gladiators were armed men?). Bydoing so, they arboured s much mbition f gaining ame nd glory sanyone n their ime.

MusicalRevival,Competition nd Fame

The extent o which musicianswere cquaintedwith

nyof the

writingsput forth n the previous ection may never be known with ecurity. 6Clearer inks with humanist hought re evident n the ater-fifteenth ndsixteenth enturies, henhumanist earning nd the lassical revivalwereto have an indisputable mpact on many spects of music-theory, rommodes to tuning nd formulation f consonance and dissonance.Yetrelations f other kinds, r before his ime, re nonetheless ossible. nany case, direct familiarity ith humanist exts s less important han

23. OnPainting, .95.24. Celio

Calcagnini,rattati

Basel, 1544), .220, uotednd translated n

Pigman II, <<Versions f mitation >, . 17;Calcagnini'sre mongst he tron-gest xpressionsf eristicmitation f his ime nd didnotpassunchallengedymore umble riters. f. lso Greene, he ight nTroy, . 178-79.

25. Calcagnini, rattati. . 219, rans. igman II, <<Versions f Imitation ,p. 18.

26. Jaap anBethem as suggestedhat usnoys new uintilian'snstitutio.Seen. 58 below.







existingwithin n environment n which hese deas were urrent. Manypractical musicians, mongst hemmajor contributors o the <L'hommearme ? series, re known o have beenhighly ducated nd it s mpossibleto imagine hat heywouldhaveremained mmune rom he activities ftheir ontemporaries. ufay, Busnoys,Compare and Tinctoris ll helduniversity egrees ver nd above the raditional maitrise ducation f thenorthern hoir-schools. ignificant nteractions etween umanist irclesand composers avebeentraced ack to Dufay nd Ciconia. 27 It has alsobeen proposed hat t was in fact he encounter f music with humanismthat elevatedmusic to the status of an art with equality to poetry ndliterature n the perception f the people of the time and engenderedmusichistoriography s we know t. 8

From our list of composers with degrees, t was in the writings fJohannes Tinctoris hat the important oncept of achieving fame bymusic was articulated n words.This fame applied presumably ot onlyamongst ne's musicianly ontemporaries ut perhaps venmore mpor-tantly with he secular patrons who took ever greater ontrol f artisticactivity within he changing ocial order of the fifteenth entury ndwouldreward cknowledgedmeritwith iches. As with Quintilian, ame sacquired by competitive mitation f previous reat omposers s well as

vyingwith

ontemporaries.The Complexus ffectuum usices, aralleling he iterary radition fextolling heobject of one's own studies, etails ome of the numerousvirtues nd purposes of cultivating usic: 9

Deumdelectare; ei laudesdecorare; audiabeatorum mplificare;ccle-siammilitantemriumphantissimilare;d susceptionemenedictionisivi-naepraeparare; nimos d pietatem xcitare; ristitiam epellere;uritiamcordis esolvere;iabolumugare;xtasimausare; errenam entemlevare;voluntatem alam evocare; ominesaetificare;egrotos anare; aborestemperare; nimos d praelium ncitare; morem llicere; ocunditatemconvivii

ugmentare,and finally, he ist ulminateswith

peritos neaglorificare;nimas eatificare. 0

27. Thecommondeathat umanist hought as ndifferent,r even ctivelyopposed, opolyphony oesnot tand pto scrutiny. eeBent, HumanistsndMusic >;Nino Pirotta Chair), < umanism nd Music >Roundtable iscus-sion), in Report f the 2th Congress f the nternational usicological ociety,Berkeley,977, d.D. Heartz B. Wade Kassel:Bairenreiter,981), .870-93. eealso Reinhard

Strohm,The Rise

of EuropeanMusic 1380-1500

Cambridge:Cambridge niversity ress, 993), .548.28. SeeStrohm, TheHumanistdea>>,.8.29. SeeStrohm, < heHumanistdea>>,.14.30. <<opleaseGod;to adorn he praises f God;to enhance heoysof the

blessed;o make he ChurchMilitant ike heChurch riumphant;oprepare oracceptancef divine lessing;o stir he ellingsodevotion;obanish adness;osoften ardheartedness;o drive way hedevil; o nduce apture; ouplift he









possible, even necessary, o view the competitive trategies f the<<L'homme arm >>?eriesnot as a self-contained, urelymusical, heno-menon, but as an index of the wider ultural oncerns f artistic evival,the desire for ndividual ameand glory, heconception f the musicalopus, a new relationship o the past and a new understanding f thepresent. he link betweenwhat Tinctoris utlined boveand what om-posers, ncluding inctoris himself, xecuted n composing <L'hommearme ? masses s particularly lose.

Background othe L'homme rme Tradition

Despite many citations nd investigations f the <<L'homme arm >>tradition n musicological iterature, uch has centred round a smallnumber f ssues.35 heseare, hiefly, heorigins f the melody tself ndwho wrote he first mass on it. Such matters re clearly mportant ndhaveengenderedmuch debate.Nonetheless, hey re of most ignificanceonly nproviding foundation romwhich o consider he wider oncernsof what t was that nabled the tradition o exist t all and encouragedcomposers f the < L'homme arm6 ? masses to make the compositionalchoicesthat hey id.

Taking firstly heorigin f the song, t has recently nd compellinglybeen assigned oa northern rench, rban home, omposedaround theturn f the fifteenth entury, ather han arising rom ourtly r <<olk >roots. 6 It is now accepted that the song was originally monophonicrather han a chanson-tenor. ertain features uch as the falling-fifthmotifs ave been suggested o result rom n intervening ayer of poly-phonic laboration ather han be constituent lements f the < riginal >

35. See Oliver trunk, <Origins f the L'homme rme" Mass >>,ulletin f theAmericanMusicological ociety, (1936), 25-26;WilliApel, <<mitation anonson L'homme rm

?>>,peculum,5

(1950),367-73;Judith

ohen,TheSix

Anony-mousL'homme rme MassesinNaples,BibliotecaNazionale,MS. VIE 40(Rome:Americannstitute f Musicology,968 Musical ources nd Documents 1);Lewis ockwood, <Aspects f the L'homme rm'" Tradition >;MariaCaraciVela, <UnCapitolo i Arte Allusiva ella rima radizione i Messe L'hommearm1" , Studi Musicali,22 (1993),3-21;Leeman L. Perkins, <The "L'hommearme" Masses of Busnoys nd Ockeghem:A Comparison >, ournal f Musico-logy, 1984), 63-96; ichard aruskin, <Antoine usnoys ndthe L'hommearm&"Tradition >,Journal f the American MusicologicalSociety, 39 (1986),255-93, ith ommunicationsrom arbara aggh, on Giller, avidFallowsRichard Taruskin, Journal f the AmericanMusicologicalSociety, 40 (1987),139-53.everal ecent ontributions

aye found nPaula

Higginsed.),Antoine

Busnoys:Method,Meaning nd Context n Late Medieval Music Oxford:Claren-don Press, 999).WalterHaass, Studien u denL'homme rm&-Messenes 15. und16.JahrhundertsRegensburg: . Bosse, 984;K61ner eitrige ur Musikfors-chung 36) s the only tudy hat ttempts otreat ll the < 'homme rme >masses.

36. See Reinhard trohm, Music n Late MedievalBruges Oxford: ClarendonPress, 985; ev. d.,1990), . 129-31.









All this n itself s not enough to explain certain more fundamental

questions: why<<'homme arm? >>when there must have been

manycomparable ongs?And why did this particular ong engender uch along-lived nd extravagant lexing f compositional musclewhen othercantus firmi might qually well have submitted o such treatment? hythe mass, s opposed to any other enre, s the ompositional attlefield?

Some extra-musical ignificance ttached o the meaning f the ext fthe song wouldexplain the first f these uestions.At the origins f thecantus firmus mass itself, mported music fingerprinted he otherwiseunchangingmass-ordinary s appropriate or specific urpose. 4Suchamethod f distinguishing asseswas especially ppropriate or he ever-increasing umber f orders nd confraternities stablished uring hefifteenth entury hat nstituted masses to be sung for their benefit.similar xplanation would appear to lie behind the use of <<L'hommearme >>,which as been inked othe meetings f the Order f the GoldenFleece.45It is unclear whether he first < 'homme arm >>mass wascomposed t the Order's behest, r whether heOrder imply eant furtherencouragement o an already-extant rend. nteractions etween major<<L'homme rm6 ? masscomposers an be found not only n the orbit fthe Order, but also at the French Royal court as well as the mportantcentres of Tours and

Bourges.6 These assured a

widely-felt mpactbeyond the boundaries of any single nstitution. et the mage of thearmed man would havebeenparticularly pt for he Order of the GoldenFleece, founded o combat the Dreaded Turk, nd a special ceremonyadopted by heOrder nvolving words nd a man fully lad narmour hasbeen uggested s a likely erformance ccasion.47Theparticularly tableand consistent tructure f the Order ver longtime-period rew largenumber of significant omposers within ts sphere. ts taste for flam-boyance ould provide henecessary atalyst orhumanistically nspiredcompetition. The six anonymous <<L'homme arm >>masses now in

TheRise, .456,offers n alternative ypothesisoTaruskin's or his hanson.RegardingheNaplesmasses, ohen, he ix L'homme rmeMasses,lsopropo-sesBusnoyss author. on Giller as unconvincinglyuggested aron; ee his<<he Naples L'homme rm'" Masses nd Caron:A Study n MusicalRela-tionships >,Current usicology, 2(1981),7-28.

44. SeeStrohm, heRise, .229.45. Thispossibility astentatively uggested n Lockwood, <Aspects >, . 115;

more ecent esearches ave dded ubstantiallyo ts redibility.eeWilliamPrizer, <Music nd Ceremonialn the LowCountries: hilip heFair and theOrder of the Golden Fleece >>,arly MusicHistory, (1985), 113-53, sp. p. 128;

BarbaraHaggh, < heArchivesf the Order f the Golden leece nd Music >,Journal f theRoyalMusicalAssociation, 20 1995),1-43, sp.p. 28ff.46. SeeHiggins,<Antoine usnoys >, .4-5;Strohm, heRise, .440, 50.47. SeeHaggh, < heArchives>, .30;this eremony asnot nvented y he

Order ut byCharlesV of Bohemia, rom hom heOrder dopted t.SeealsoFlynnWarmington,< heCeremonyf the ArmedMan: The Sword, heAltarand the "L'homme rm'" Mass>>& MichaelLong, <Arma irumque ano:Echoes f a GoldenAge >nAntoine usnoys,d.Higgins, .89-130 p. 133-54.






David J Burn Imitation, ompetition 265

Naples originally ame from urgundy. hey would seemto have consti-tuted part of the repertory f the ducal chapel, the Sainte-Chapelle tDijon, at which he Order was based, with he Duke of Burgundy t itshead. 8

Whilst <L'homme arm? >>masses were not the Order's only musicalconcern, t s not accidental hat heoutlet f competitive nergies ounda prime ocus n the polyphonicmass,rather han lsewhere. ot onlywasthe inging f large uantities f masses for he oulsof its members neof the most mportant unctions f anyOrder, ut the masswasalso idealfrom he viewpoint f purely musicalconsiderations. he mass was themost prestigious nd extensive ehicle f compositional kill vailable o

composers cross the period n which <L'homme arm >>masses werewritten. f one wanted odemonstrate ne's compositional apabilities nthe widest cale then he mass was the obviouschoice. 9

The Competitive trategies f L'homme rm? >untilJosquin

It is now necessary o describe how the deas described bove playedthemselves ut n the <L'homme arm >>massesthemselves. he threadslinking hesemassestogether ccur on several different evels.There areallusionsbetween hem, oth to one another nd to material eyond heirimmediate rbit for nstance, o masses based on other material, rwell-known lainsong nd chansons). Such external eferences ot onlyadd levels f meaning, ut lso provide hemusical quivalents f varietassought by Renaissancerhetoricians nd outlined yTinctoris. 0

Competition ntails more or less overt echnicalmanipulations. hetwin ims of both using hitherto nexploited reatments f the cantusfirmus nd of successfully xecuting ncreasingly omplex ompositionaltasks run side by side throughout he tradition, nd may, but do notnecessarily, o hand n hand.

The most mmediately bvious features f competition re found nfour echniques: omplex mensural ombinations; he transposition f

48. Six s presumably ot n arbitrary umber: he eriesmight onstituteweekly ycle the Order eserved ondays or he Requiem). ohen, heonlycommentatoromention henumber, oesnotnote his, aying hat t would akesixSundays operform he et.The inking-togetherf severalmasses s n tselfvery are at any ime), nd the rganization f six nto uch grand chemesunique. he only ther omparablenstance rom he ime s the wo O rosabella >massesa <<ialectallypposed >pair rather han ragmentsf a largerplan).The <<enedictus> f Ockeghem's<L'hommerme >massquotes Orosa bella >>;eeStrohm, heRise,p. 426& p. 474.

49. ThesixNaplesmasses, ogether orming hat as beendescribed <<eu-dalistic ndhumanistuperset >Strohm, heRise, .468), emonstrateow venthe oundaries f the ndividual ass ould e torn own.

50. On varietas n painting, ee Michael Baxandall, Giotto nd the Orators:HumanistObservers f Painting n taly nd the Discovery f Pictorial Composition1350-1450Oxford: larendon ress, 971), .94f.







the cantus firmus o an unusually wide variety f pitches; the use ofimitation-canon nd mensuration- r proportion-canon; 1 nd the ppli-cation of transformational rocedures uch as retrograde, nversion ndretrograde-inversion. 2 None of these s, of course, n any wayexclusiveto <<'homme arm? >>reatments nd they were all familiar means ofdisplay; what is special, however, s their systematic ultivation ndconcentration.

If the competitive nvironment n which <<L'homme arm >>masseswereproducedprovided he ncouragement o show off ne's skill, nter-nallymusicalfeatures an account for he form his demonstration ook.Firstly, omensurally ransform he amewritten otes n ways ther han

through ugmentation y two, for xampleunder variety f mensura-tion signs,would suggest tself airly mmediately s an extension f theconvention f notating he enor t prolatio evel, n 2:1 ratio o the othervoices.The convention tself eems to have been taken over from heEnglish, nd was famously ondemned by Tinctoris if applied withoutverbal xplanation). t carried hrough he<<'homme arm6 tradition,from Ockeghem nd Busnoys the latter of whom used it to create ascheme o symbolize hePythagorean atios)53to Caron, Faugues,Tinc-toris, Orto, Josquin nd Vaqueras to Palestrina's ive-voiceetting. heextraordinary ensuration anons of Josquin nd La Rue,to be discussed

below, an be seen to stem from his.Ambiguity egarding he mode of the song s apparent rom heverybeginning f the tradition. his would seem to lie behind hecultivationof transposing he cantus firmus o begin at a variety f pitch-levelswithin he mass, as well as account for the range of modes in which<<L'homme arm? >>masses were set - by the end of the tradition, llconceivablepossibilities had been covered. Whilst the usual pitch onwhich o begin he ongwas G, it may continue ither s a mixolydian rtransposed dorian melody i. e. without r with Bb). 54Following helatter f these hroughwould result n the song beginning n D, ratherthan G, although hepitch-level f the antus firmus nd overall mode areseparate ssuesprecisely ecauseof this mbiguity. 5

It s rrelevant hether riority sassigned oBusnoys r Ockeghem, orboth embrace he ssues of mode and pitch-level, nd at identical laceswithin heir structures, ndicating close relationship etween them.

51. Thismay rmay ot nvolve he antus irmus. pel, <mitation anons >,dealsmainly ith hose hat o.

52. See R. Larry Todd, <<Retrograde, nversion, Retrograde-Inversion ndRelated Techniques n the Masses of Jacobus Obrecht , Musical Quarterly, 4

(1978),50-76,for he wideruse of these echniques.53. SeeTaruskin, <Antoine Busnoys >.54. The G-mixolydian s believed obe the original.Nonetheless, he nability

of the arly L'hommearm6 >masses o resolve he matter s significant or aterdevelopments

55. Perkins ttributes hismodal insecurity, ost noticeable n Ockeghem, othe effect f the chanson L'autre d'antan. ee <<The "L'homme arm6" Masses>>,p. 379ff.






DavidJ Burn: Imitation, ompetition 267

Overallmode s particularly nconsistent n Ockeghem.Whilst he antusfirmus s givenmainly without Bbs, they reep n, either n written rimplied form, eading to the final <<Agnus Dei >>,which adopts a Bbsignature nallvoices ncluding he enor. hus hismassbegins nthemixo-lydianmode,but nds unquestionably nthe transposed) orian.Transpo-sition f the antus firmus oanother itch-class ccurs n the Credo,bydownward ifth, oC. 56This doesnot upset hemode,despite mplyingshift rom he uthentic othe plagalambitus. t was presumably hosen norder opreserve he ntervallic dentity f the antus irmus n ts untrans-posed form. One other nstance f transposition s found n the first ndlast <<Agnus Dei >>ections the second s without antus firmus), y a

downward ctave, orcing hecantus firmus o act as a bass. 57If the mode n Busnoys s less ambiguousdue to his consistent se of aBb signature n all voices,he nonetheless ransposes he cantus firmusdown a fourth o D, its <<orrect dorian pitch, hroughout heCredo alocation dentical o that n Ockeghem, nd again, as in Ockeghem, oapitch whichpreserves he ntervallic dentity f the usual version f thecantus firmus). 8Overall mode is not altered. Where Ockeghem hadplaced his octave ransposition, usnoys lso placedhis only ther rans-formation f the antus firmus, ot transposition, owever, ut nversion(<<Agnus Dei >> and III, the second again being without antus fir-mus). 9 In effect, his nversion lacesthe antus firmus n the ame owerregister s Ockeghem. ts greater rtifice, s an example of technicaloutbidding, s evidence orplacingBusnoys fter Ockeghem.

The AgnusDeiwas increasingly obecomea locus of technical isplay(particularly ts last section). That Dufay's Missa L'homme arme iscontent o use overt manipulation nly nthe ast ection f theAgnusDeiwould seem osupport placing before usnoys other musical-technicalevidence f Busnoys ynthesizing ckeghem nd Dufay also suggest nearlier lacement orDufay). Dufay's ast <<AgnusDei >>uns hecantusfirmus n retrograde or wo thirds f the section, efore t resumes tsprime orm n diminished roportions. 0 As an almost nique nstance fretrograde nDufay'smasses, t appearsparticularly pecial, lthough ne

56. Theverbal nstruction tates imply < escendo n diapente >.CompareBusnoys's ery iterary erbal anons these re lsopart f the ompetition.

57. The verbal anon s plain, s previously,< escendo n diapason >. heprocedure as a parallel n Ockeghem's issacaput, here he antus irmus salsoused s a bass despitets esperate nsuitability.eeStrohm, heRise, .421.

58. Theverbal anonreads Ne sonites acaphaton, ume ycanosipaton>.Jaap anBenthem assuggestedhat usnoys ot heword cacaphaton> rom

Quintilian's nstitutio; ee?

Text, Tone and Symbol:Regarding usnoys'sConception f In hydraulisnd its Perceived elationshipo Ockeghem's theremita olus>>n Antoine usnoys, d. Higgins, . 224 n. 6.

59. Thenormal otation s preserved, ut the ransformations madeclearfrom hepoetic anon,which eads, Ubi thesis ssint ceptra, bi arsis t econtra >.

60. This s encapsulatedn the legant anon < ancer at plenus, ed redeatmedius >







might magine omething more thoroughgoing f he were responding oBusnoys r Ockeghem. 1 Some mensural ransformations n earlier ec-tions begin the ong tradition f rhythmically anipulating hecantusfirmus. n the second <<Kyrie >, the note-values f the pitches of thecantus firmus re halved rests re preserved). 2 This is balanced by theappearance t <<t expectoresurrectionem)),of the opposite procedure:removal f longarests nd reduction f the others yhalf, ut preservingthe note-values f the pitches. 3 Dufay eaves hemode slightly bscuredby using partial ignature: b in the ower voicesonly.

Dufay's younger ssociate,Johannes egis, n his <<'homme arm6mass with textual tropes for St. Michael added to the cantus firmus

throughout it is therefore ften alled Missa Dum sacrum mysterium),resolves he modal confusion by adopting a straightforward -dorianoverall tonality. 4 The cantus firmus lso adopts D as its pitch-level.However,more or ess strict anon at the fifth etween enor nd contra-tenor ntroduces antus firmus resentations n A aswell, lthough his snot applied to every ectionwith antus firmus. he close linking f thequasi-canonic voices is clear from heir both taking he distinguishingtrope-texts, espitebeingwritten ut separately.

The final Naples mass also makes this onnection etween ransposi-tion and canon evident. Unlike Regis, t presents ts cantus firmus n astrict anon at the ower fifth G-C) in every ectionwith antus firmus.The canon is so spread-out, however, hat the two voices hardly versound simultaneously, nd the effect s one of each successive hrase nturn ndergoing ransposition.

After the evident technical exploitation rom Ockeghem, Busnoys,Dufay,Regisand the Naplesmasseswhen etting <L'homme rm6 ? asacantus firmus, ocomposer ould now approach twithout esponding othem by new means. The wholesale borrowing n Obrecht's < 'hommearme ? mass of the rhythmic cheme, enordivisions nd mensural lan-ning from Busnoyswas first oted by OliverStrunk n 1936. Obrecht'smass s all the more unusual n including direct ransfer f the engthseven of the sections f Busnoyswithout antus firmus. 5 Yet being no

61. The nly ther nstance f retrogradenDufay'smassess n heMissa e laface aypale; seeTodd, < Retrograde >, . 72.

62. <<Ad medium eferas,ausas eliquendoriores >.63. <<cindite ausas ongarum;etera ermedium >.64. Thecopying f a Regis L'homme rm& >masswasrecorded t Cambrai

in 1462-63;hiswould eem oo arly date or heMissaDum acrum ysterium,andprobably efersoRegis' ow-lost L'homme rm >>mass ited yTinctorisas

usinghemensuration

2,which um acrum

ysteriumoesnot. ee

Strohm,The Rise, p. 468-69. The Missa Dum sacrum mysterium s not the only troped<<'homme rm&>mass: ach f he Naplesmasses as troped yrie; inctoris'shasa troped yrie nd<<anctus >.

65. SeeEdgar Sparks, Cantus irmus n Mass andMotet, 420-1520BerkeleyLosAngeles: niversity f California ress, 963), . 248.Taruskin, <AntoineBusnoys>, as rgued hat usnoys'scheme asextra-musicalignificance.hismay ave eenknown o Obrecht. eeWegman, Another Imitation" >,.201.







mere copyist, ut a serious competitor n the <<L'homme arm6e tradi-tion, Obrecht tillhad to make some contribution f his own, nd this smost obvious n his choiceof overallmode and cantus firmus itch-level.Rather han ome down on one side or another ver he mbiguous ssueof whether o use G-mixolydian r G-transposed orian, he chose to setthe cantus firmus n an as yet completely nused pitch, E, giving nunusual phrygian olour although adencing normally ccurson A). Asboth Busnoys nd Ockeghemhad transposed hecantus firmus or theentire redo, o does Obrecht, own a fifth oA, another itch yet barelyexploited. 6 This thrusting nto he ower egister orces he antus firmusto act as a bass, as had Ockeghem n his Agnus Dei. Thus when Obrecht

came to his own Agnus Dei, he had already made space for ven morespecialtreatment hanhismodels.Having lready matchedOckeghem, ecombated Busnoys's nversion nd Dufay's retrograde, ith combina-tion of both: a retrograde-inversion. 7 The customary inal ong of thecantus firmus ow becomes the first ote of the final AgnusDei ?, andcreates n enormously mpressive edal-point, o less than twelve ars nmodern ranscription.

The Twoo L'homme rme Masses of JosquinUndoubtedly or hedisplay f his kill, osquinomposed he womassesL'hommerme uper ocesmusicalesndL'hommerme exti oni.

- Henricus larean 8

The importance f Josquin's wo<<L'homme arm6 masses - theMissaL'homme rme upervocesmusicales nd the MissaL'homme rmesexti toni as both a response nd a challenge s of the highest rder.They were hefirst L'homme arm6 massesto appear n print, nd, byinclusion n the MisseJosquin f 1502, omprised art of the first ollec-

tion of masses by any composer to issue from he publishing ouse ofOttaviano Petrucci. Within this collection, the status of Josquin's<<'homme rm6 >>masses s evident rom heir lacing.They tand t themost significant ocations n the volume: the <<uper voces musicales >mass first, nd <<exti oni >>oclose. 9

As is the ase with o manypiecesby Josquin nd so many L'hommearme > masses, the problem of chronology emains.The gap between

66. Hisverbal anon nd his rocedureetray heir ebt oBusnoys.he ingerisexpressly arned ot o do what usnoys id: <Nesonitesycanosipaton,umein

proslambanemenon>

67. Thecanon eads,< utenor ancrisa t per ntifrasim ontra >.68. Dodecachordon,rans. lement iller Rome:Americannstitute f Musi-

cology, 965 Musical ources nd Documents ),p.272.69. The contents re, n order:MissaL'homme rms super ocesmusicales,

Missa La solfa remi,Missa Gaudeamus,MissaFortuna esperata,Missa L'hommearme exti oni. he ddition f motet, cce, upulchras, micamea, t the eryenddoesnotweaken he ffect f the lacing f the < exti oni >mass.







composition nd publication by Petrucci may be considerable. t maynever be possible to determine with certainty ither which <<'hommearm6 ))masswascomposedfirst, r whether heywere omposed ogetheror far part. Of the varioushypotheses hathavebeenadvanced, articu-larly or he < uper vocesmusicales mass, Ferraran onnection eemsmost probable. The similarities etween he <<'homme arm6 >massesand the Missa HerculesDux Ferrariae, robablywritten or r duringvisit Josquin aid to Ferrara with his patron Asconio Sforza n 1480-81,wouldenhance his ossibility. 0Whatever as the ase,by hebeginningof the sixteenth entury when they were printed, osquin's < 'hommearm6 ? masseswere onsidered o belong ogether. 1 Thistwin esponse s

particularly nteresting nd it s highly empting oimagine hem o havebeen conceived rom he start s a dialectically pposed pair. Whether twas for musical or quite different easons that Josquin took up the<<L'homme rm6 >hallenge wice,n doing o,he was forced o find wodistinct nd varied olutions ohis predecessors' hallenges. y doing o,he n turn ompelled hose hat ollowed im ocomposenot one,but two,<< 'homme arm6 >masseswhichdeal with hecantus firmus n comple-mentary ays.

The primary tructure f the <<uper voces musicales mass is ustlyfamous, lthough t s in many wayshighly ncharacteristic f the com-poser n its strictness f application. t places the cantus firmus n eachpitch of the natural hexachord uccessively, n C in the Kyrie, in theGloria through o A in the final <Agnus Dei >>.n the ight f previoustreatments, his s simply he ogicaloutcome of a cantus firmus ith ninherent nd unusual tendency owards ransposition. osquin ombatsthe problem y embracing ll the possibletranspositions n a systematicway. Despite the resultant urious relationship etween he pitches onwhich the cantus firmus egins and those of the cantus firmus-derivedmaterial n other voices usuallyA or D), a D-dorian mode is preservedthroughout. 2 Josquin's doption of the D-dorian mode has only oneancestor, ohannes egisand it could well ndicate n acquaintancewithRegis'swork. 3

70. See Lewis Lockwood, Music in Renaissance Ferrara 1400-1505 Oxford:Clarendon ress, 984), . 241-49; ockwood,<Aspects >, . 111-12,uggestsvogue or < 'homme rm >>masses t Ferrara ollowingvisit here yTinctorisin 1479. ee also Strohm, heRise, .612.

71. It s an observablehenomenonhat < 'homme rm ?>>asses end o bepreservedngroups, ith he bvious onsequencef nviting eady omparison.For nstance,he <Chigi odex places < 'homme rm? >masses yBusnoys,

Brumel, omparend

Josquin<<exti oni

>;without anctus nd

Agnus ei)side y ide, s well s ncluding ckeghem'slsewhere.ee Vatican ity, ibliotecaApostolica VaticanaMS. ChigiC VIII234, foreword y Herbert Kellman NewYork:Garland ress, 987 Renaissance usic nFacsimile2).

72. The nonymous issaDucwurje ouspierlso uses transposingstinatowhilst aintaining single verallmode. eeStrohm, heRise, .618.

73. Josquin mulatednd urpassednother f Regis'sworks, isAveRegina-...Virgo erena. ee Strohm, heRise,p. 482.







Moreover, Josquin's cantus firmus s an ostinato, nvariant n bothpitches nd rests. he transformations hat ccur result nly rom eadingthe dentical notation under a variety f mensuration igns.This is theonly such treatment n any Josquin Mass. It is extremely nusual forcomposer o given o varietas s an artistic rinciple, nd of importancefor hat eason. t recalls Busnoys n ts rigour nd must e read as a cleardemonstration yJosquin hathecould work nder ny trictures hathispredecessors ad used. To provide ome characterisation o this usterescheme, he antus firmus tself s not the plain version f the ong,but nelaboration hat emained niqueto Josquin.His treatment s of particu-lar nterest or learly istinguishing hefirst nd third hrases,which reotherwise

irtuallydentical

Ex.1:

Josquin's < upervocesmusicales

>>cantus firmus ith he version rom he Naples manuscript): 4

" "2 ''u

'.:. . J , o o J.. .... J. ll,it

1109 all IF IFI F"I r "

Example 1.

With transposition ow the central tructural rinciple f the wholemass, Josquin reated new space to match the other echniques f hismodels. f Busnoys nd Ockeghemhad distinctly oloured their Credosbytransposition, his ption was not open to Josquin. nstead, he chose touse retrograde, xtending ts use from heCredo into the Gloria as well,although n both cases, only for one section <<Qui tollis >>and <<tincarnatus >>).Retrograde echniquehad as yet made only brief ppea-rance n the <<L'homme arm6 >>radition, n Dufay. nversionmust havebeenquickly uled ut because t wouldhaveupset heprogressively isingregister f the cantus firmus y forcing t nto a loweroctave.The <<Qui

74. Haass, tudien, ets ut he antus irmusf each < 'hommearm6 >massfor asy omparison. owever,eomits he inal estatementf he irst art f hesong, lthough t cannot e assumed hat hiswill lways eidentical ith heinitial tatementasis clear rom x. 1).







tollis > ffsets hetenor etrograde ith fragment f the prime orm fthe antus firmus,

lthoughhisdoes not

happenn the < t incarnatus

>>(Ex. 2: Gloria, b. 78-82):8oSui ol lis pec ea- - - ta

-lis,tt"

tol--

Qui tol - lis pec - -- -- . -- m- a - di,

Example2.

The other principal ocus for ompetition n Busnoys nd Ockeghemhad been theAgnusDei,and here Josquin otonly rumps hem oth, butadds his own, new, hallenges. he movement s planned as a dramaticunit n a waywholly ifferent rom ispredecessors. n his first <AgnusDei >>, osquin's antus firmus ransposition asonlyreached ts penulti-

mate pitch-level f G, yet he hints t both the proportion anon of thesubsequent ection nd the forthcoming antus firmus resentation n Ain the uperius oice Ex. 3:AgnusDei, b. 26-30):

mi- - - -se- - --re- - - re no

mi - - se - -re-re no- b is,

-re no-- - - bis, mi - - se - re- - re no - - bis,

re- -- re no .- bis, mi - se

Example3.

On arriving t the final <Agnus Dei >>,he cantus firmus eaches tsterminus-pitch. osquin akes t out of the tenor voice and gives t to thesuperius, clear mirroring f Ockeghem'suse of it as a bass. A verbalcanon, <<Clama ne cesses >>,emands heremoval f all the rests, oppingDufay's removal of longa rests but maintenance f the others, lbeithalved.75The combined esult f Josquin's emoval f the rests nd theadopted mensuration-combinations s that hecantus firmus ecomes a

75. There re nfact wo ests ept nthe anonic esolution iven yPetrucciandmaintainednSmijers' dition b.80 & 84).







series f more or ess engthy inverted) edalpoints. f none ndividuallyis as extended s that which

opensObrecht's final <

AgnusDei

>>,heir

prolonged use is even more grand. Not content with this alone, andremembering hat hiswas a chosen place to manipulate heform f thecantus firmus, osquin ombineshis ong-note resentation ith n imi-tative oint n the ower voicesfashioned rom he earlier antus firmusretrograde. his passage is distinct rom ll the previous music of thesectionby ts complete bsenceof crotchet-movement Ex. 4:AgnusDei,b. 138-40):

-___-

140

-gnus

i,-a-

'- - gnus

z- iDe - i, a-

a - - -gnus De - i,

Example4.

The free oicesfrequently hare antus firmusmaterial hroughout hemass. n keepingwith he ostinato cheme, heirmaterial s often trictlymensurally erived e. g. <<hriste >>,b. 21ff, ltus; <<Kyrie>>I, b. 65,bassus).Thistype f procedure ives foretaste f whatJosquinwas to doin the few ectionswithout cantus firmus.

The cantus firmus s absent n three ections: he <<leni >>,< enedic-tus >>nd second <<AgnusDei >>.n these places,Josquin gain seizestheopportunity o lay down major new challenges.Whilst the <<leni >>capitalizes n its hanceto demonstrate reelymitative rio-writing, ithno reliance on any precedent r cantus firmus material, he atter wosections are both overt demonstrations f skill in proportion-canon.The frequently xploitedmensural ransformations f the cantus firmusso evident n earlier <<L'homme arm? >>masses provide obvious sti-mulus for both the <<enedictus >and the second <<Agnus Dei >>,although no-one had yet applied the technique strictly within a<<L'homme arm6 >mass. ts use is not common n Josquin's masses andthese two passagesbecame extremely amous.This applied especially othe second <<Agnus Dei >>,whichwas more discussed n ater heoreticaltreatises han ny other ection f either f Josquin's < 'homme arm >>masses.6

76. See SydneyRobinsonCharles,Josquin esprez.:A Guide o Research NewYork:Garland ress, 983), .48-49.







The <<Benedictus>>consists of three short two-part proportion-canons. 77In proceeding rom bassus duet to an altus duet to a

superiusduet, the rising egistral chememirrors he rising ranspositions f thecantus firmus. lthough hemotivicmaterial s simple, t may recall heretrograde f the cantus firmus eard n the Gloria and Credo (Ex. 5:<<Benedictus >, . 1-6& cantus firmus etrograde):

5

Bassus.Be - - ;e - - -dic- - tus;

Bassus.Be- - ne- - -

dic-tus,be- ne- dic--.. ..--- -----

c.F.iGX- __

Example 5

As a three-in-one ensuration anon (with no motivic elation o thecantus firmus, owever), here re few omparable xamples n anyreper-tory, ncluding osquin's wn, to the econd <<AgnusDei >>.A precedentmay be found n Ockeghem, ot n his <<L'homme

arm6 >mass, but his

Missa Prolationum. ckeghem's xtremely amous hree-in-one anonicchanson Prenez ur moymight lso be considered. he second <<AgnusDei >>ecalls he <Benedictus>>et, nd links heir espectivemovementstogether. usnoys and Ockeghem had both transferred he mensurallayouts rom heir anctus movements nto the Agnus Dei, thus pairingthe womovements t an abstract evel allowing or he greater umber fsections n the Sanctus; ee Table 1). 78 To create he ame effect, osquinuses not an identical mensural chemebut similar nd striking echnicalprocedures.

Even within herigid

antus firmusramework,

n whichJosquin

wasalways t pains to surpasshismodels nplainly echnicalways, he chemewas not allowed to dominate t the xpense f everything lse.Therewasstill pportunity or hevarietas o highly rizedby Tinctoris nd there salso an obvious concern with he rhetorical elivery f the mass text. Byadding these features, osquin haracterizes nd personalizes is mass nways over and above the structural utline he imposed. This might beconsidered s setting ompetitive esthetic tandards eyond hepurelytechnical aspects that were a so greatly acknowledged factor in<<L'homme arm6 >.

77. A division f the < enedictus>nto hree uets s relativelyommonnJosquin, lthough ot n other < 'hommearm6 >masses. f.MissaGaudeamus,Missa HerculesDux Ferrariae,Missa L'ami baudichon, issa Sine nomine.

78. It is not self-evident hat hesemovementshould hare mensuration-schemes.t is not the casein other < 'hommearm6 >masses. he mensuralcombinationsf Josquin's < uper ocesmusicales>masshave een ncludednTable1for omparison.







TABLE.

Busnoys OckeghemTenor Freevoices Tenor Freevoices

Sanctus/Agnusei I 0 O G OPleni/Agnus ei II - O - O

Osanna/Agnusei II 02 C

JosquinTenor Freevoices Tenor Freevoices

Sanctus 0,- 0 Agnus ei I ,0c 0Pleni - C Agnus ei II - C+4~ 3

Osanna 9,C,0 C3 Agnus ei III 0,C,0

Of the many urprises n the work, he < t incarnatus >maybe singledout. When the cantus firmus nters in retrograde, s noted above), theother voicesdrop awayfor n entire reve Ex. 6: Credo, b. 63-65):

65

est de

est de

-Et in - -

est de

Example6.

The symbolism s suggested y the text: he cantus firmus s aurallygiven lesh y the ubsequent ntry f the other oices. 9

79. Other otable omentsncludehe emarkableomposed-inallentandofthe < hriste >; ighlightinghewords <Agnus ei >>n the Gloria, .52-54; heonly xtended pper-voiceuet n the <Quitollis >,llustratingheword <ltis-simus >Gloria, . 114-17),ollowedy hehomophonicongnotes or < esu >(Gloria, . 118); n unusual hreefold epetitionf a repeated-noteiguren thebass, Credo, b. 38-40, o the word < ero >,whichmay have omesymbolicsignificance.







An obvious ase of varietas s found t the beginning f the Credo.Theopening ffests he antus firmus derivedmaterial n the bassusfirst, henin the enor roper)with paraphrase f the plainsongCredodevillage nthe uperius oice,whichwouldnot havegoneunnoticed t the time Ex.7: Credo, b. 1-10,with Credode village): 0so

To.- - ~mori- L- po-te - - l,- -o to- rwmcO-Superius O

'fs Pa- - trem o- ni po ten temrn, ac to - rem

4itus __

Pa-

trem omr--

i--

po-ten -tem, fac - to - remTenor _I

Bassus

~ ; 7 Zr7- - ra, vi-si-S bi- i - r7 71 7 e t

Coe-li et ter- rae, vi- si - bi -li um om- ni - ulm t

coe-li et ter - rae, vi-si - bi - - i um om- - - -ni-

Pa- - trem om -

S Vi- - - si - bi - li - - m om ni um et

in vi - si - bi- i - umrn.

emat in - - vi -

ni -- po -

in - vi - si - bi - li -

Example7.

80. Noted nStrohm, heRise, .618.TheCredo evillagespresent-dayredo

I. Itsuse n polyphonysnot nknown nother osquin asses;eeRichard herr,<<he Performancef Chant n the Renaissancend ts nteraction ith oly-phony >,n Plainsong n the Age of Polyphony, d. Thomas Forrest Kelly Cam-bridge: ambridge niversity ress, 992), . 178-208.t was also used at Jos-quin's ead?)n Compere's< 'homme rm? >>mass. enfl's < 'homme rm >>mass epresentshe ec lus ltra f ombining L'hommearm )>with lainsong;see Herbert Birtner, < ieben Messen von LudwigSenfi , Archivfiir Musikfor-schung, (1942), 40-54.







This maybe a sacred ounterpart o the quodlibet n the fourth hapterof Tinctoris's roportionale n whichL'homme rme s combined with Orosa bella,Et robinet nd an unidentified une.

If, despite tsmany xamples f varietas, he < uper vocesmusicales >mass is a consciously, eliberately, nd uncharacteristically trictly lan-ned work hat esponds othe formalism f Busnoys, heMissaL'hommearme sexti toni embodies a different nswer o the <<L'homme arm ?>>challenge. < exti toni >>relates most mmediately o the flexibly ariedtreatments f Dufay and Ockeghem.By doing so, it sets tself up as apartner n a dialecticpair with ts companion n a manner ecalling hetwo <<O rosa bella >>masses.

The decision obase the work n the ixth mode it s sixth, ather hanthe fifth, ecausethe B-section f the antus irmus stransposed own noctave) replies o the original modal dilemma urrounding < 'hommearm >>n the opposite way from < uper voces musicales >.Whilst helatter, espite he ransposing antus firmus, ad consistently aintaineda dorian mode, <<exti toni>> favours he <<major>>version, both forcantus firmus nd overall. Although there s little practical differencebetween he ydian nd the mixolydian ersions f the <L'homme rm >>song, the former mode had not been used in the tradition efore. fJosquin's hoiceof the ixth mode continues he xploration f the modalsystem hat had been a feature f earlier L'homme arm >>masses, hemaintenance f a singlepitch-level or the cantus firmus, , across thewhole mass, responds competitively o a cantus firmus hat had beenespecially rone to transposition y counteracting t with bsolute regu-larity.

The pursuit f varietas within his table tructure, ith no accompa-nying verall scheme such as there was in <<uper voces musicales >,renders his mass much more difficult o describe n general erms. hecantus firmus as no single ixed ersion nd is often ecoratively xten-ded or internally laborated; ts rhythms nd rest patterns re subject omuch variance nonetheless, ts simplest orm, n the augmented note-value presentations f the lengthy exts of the Gloria and Credo, issimpler hanthe consistently ecorated ersion f < Supervoces musica-les>>).There is still a concern with technical display, specially withimitation-canon, nd many clear points of contact with earlier massesremain.

The most obvious of these points s the final <AgnusDei >>,which,whilst not making any chronological laims, surpasses even that of<<uper voces musicales in its technical virtuosity. 1The number fvoicesexpandsfrom our o six, practice ot onlywithout recedent nthe <<L'homme arm? >>radition, ut far from ustomary n Josquin'smasses nd one that nly ccurs n hismost obviousdisplay ieces. 2The

81. Suchproceduress areused n<Sexti oni ))aremore r essprecludedpriori n<Super ocesmusicales> y he verall cheme.

82. There are four nstances: HerculesDux Ferrariae,Malheurme bat, Materpatris nd De Beata Virgine. hefirst as obvious erraran onnections.hese







six voices form hreepairs: the owest wo voices, he tenor nd bassusconstitute hefirst

air,nd it shere o

beginwith hat

Josquin urpasseshis predecessors. n their respective gnus Dei movements, ckeghemhad used the cantus firmus s a bass, and Dufay had run t n retrogradethen prime form. Josquin uses all these procedures imultaneously: hebassus takes the first art of the cantus firmus n prime form whilst hetenor counterpoints t with the second section of the cantus firmus nretrograde. lthough he antus firmus ad been used as a bass already, nthe <Christe >nd <<Qui tollis >,hereference o the final <AgnusDei >>sections of other <<'homme arme >>masses is clear. 3 Retrograde sunique to this ection nd is the only form f permutation sed in the

whole mass. At the midpoint reversal s made, resulting n the bassusgiving ts previous material n retrograde hilst he tenor reverts o aforward tatement b. 116ff.). f thiswerenot enough, heupper wopairsare both anonic nd share losely-related, ut not cantus firmus-derived,material. f Josquin does not use Busnoys's nversion, e makes a clearallusion oBusnoys's inal <AgnusDei >>n b. 126-28. 4 In both ases, hequicklymoving pper voicessuddenly rop away oleavethe owest pairsustaining ong notes. Josquin's effect s the more dramatic becausetwo-thirds ather han half the texture s removed, oth the remainingvoices are involved n the cantus firmus, nd the contrast of pace is

sharper Ex. 8: Busnoys, <Agnus Dei >>II, b. 14-25 & Josquin, AgnusDei, b. 124-29): 5

-_.j o . _ .. , . .pl?,"ta

i : I Ir 1, ,7"Olei '

O

qul

Example8(a):Busnoys.

have lso been ypothesizedor he econd nd for he < 'homme rme >masses;the ast s different n being argely n five oices hroughout. he final < gnusDei>>f Malheur e at s almost denticalothat f <exti oni > n ts tructure:it also uses three airs f voices, wopairs n canon d minimam,nd one pairoccupied ith he antus irmusncanon.

83. Strohm, heRise, .514,notes five-part anctus ntheCodex pecialnikwhich lso uses ts antus irmus from Busnoys hanson) n both rime ndretrograde ormsimultaneously.

84. Noted but naccuratelys the xact midpoint) yDavidFallows,< om-munication >, ournal f theAmericanMusicological ociety, 0 (1987),147n. 4.

85. The Busnoys xtract s taken rom aurence eininger's dition Rome:SocietasUniversalis anctae Ceciliae,1948 Monumenta olyphoniae iturgicaeSanctaeEcclesiae,Romae1/1/ii).







125 180

do - -na no

do -nnano-b

nncemo

cem,do na no bis

o - nno

-- his

Example 8b: Josquin.

Another oint of contact withBusnoyswould ppear to be made at theclose of many of the sections. usnoyshad used harmonies trongly n

the flat ide here. o too doesJosquin, ither y mplied r plainly otateduse of prominent b . The specialeffect f such passages s frequentlyenhancedby a couplingwith more or ess extensive equential epetition,a normal procedure or omeother omposers such as Obrecht r saac),but one usually reserved or rhetorical ffect y Josquin Ex. 9: Kyrie, .65-74).86

The final <AgnusDei >>s not the only xample f strict anon. A quitesystematic xploration f canon at various distances, etween variousvocal combinations nd at a selection f ntervals sfound hroughout heSanctus: n the <<anctus >>ection between enor nd altus two bars'distance t the unison); n the <<Osanna >>etween enor nd bassus onebar's distance t the owerfifth); n the <<Benedictus >between uperiusand tenor three ars' distance t the ower fifth). 7 The application f aparticular echnical rocedure types of canon) to pair the Sanctus andAgnusDei has already een seen n <<uper voces musicales >. 8

86. Other xamplesf ither rboth flatwardhift nd n extendedequence:<< yrie>>, b. 14-16; <Et n terra ax>>, . 49-50; <Quitollis >, . 136-41;<<anctus >>,. 16;<<AgnusDei >>, b. 12-16, 9-22; <AgnusDei >>I, b.65-70. f itmay ethought hat equencenevitablyrises rom he tepwise otion f the

cantus irmus, oth t and the prominent bs areavoided requentlynough omake hem special eature hen hey o occur.87. The first welve ars of the <<leni > re also strictly anonic between

superius nd altus, wo ars'distant, t the ower ifth),lthough he ubsequenteight renot.Musicdenticalothe < enedictus>sused or he <n nomine >,unique ccurrencenJosquin.

88. Compare arallels osquinn lsousing mitation-canonnly n he <anc-tus >, < sanna >,nd AgnusDei,at the upper ifth s well s at the unusual







65

Ky - - ri - e-e e - - - - son,;"F r F - F... .. Fw 0:

son, K ri e, Ky ri- e, Kyr--

e,- ri

y - ri-e, yKy- e y - ri- e, K - --'70

KY - ri- e-le . . . . .. i- - son.

e . ..le - i- son.

e e- - - le- - . i- -son.

e, Ky- -ri- e e - - le- i- - son.

Example9.

A parallel to the rigid, uasi-isorhythmic, stinato cantus firmus f<<uper vocesmusicales >nd earlier < L'homme rm6 >masses, smade,uniquely, n the <<t resurrexit >.This section s structured round foursuccessive nd identical epetitions f the B-section f the cantus firmusin the uperius Ex. 10:<<t resurrexit >,uperius oice, rom etrucci): 9

7cr a ad ill l i f iaJlid detz ruta-ptr.GOX'osl

irI itl erU; ?

'IIJ

9'lilt tu(UiU r

rgo" c,tn

eml..fiil "ft I fpriiluftQiiiu milll &j &;11 a rM qui c Py ilv,t p ordLf,Qua cii aJrr fito &g ciiI glorificdtar qUwfdIo.u i pr pphcral

Example 10.

The registral lacing n the uppermost oice, heonly ime n the massthat he superius s given oleresponsibility or he cantus firmus, akesthe procedure articularly lear and has a parallelwith hefinal <AgnusDei >>f <<uper voces musicales >.Even in <<exti toni >>Josquin mustintervals f the pper nd ower emitone heappears obe the irst ousethese,although he antus irmusendstself othem articularly ell). isoverall se ofE as themain itch or he antus irmus asanobvious recedentnObrecht.

89. Thenotation f his artwith epeatmarks pplies qually oother ources(e.g.the<Chigi odex >)s to Petrucci's rint.







have felt the pressure o demonstrate hat he could create the mostbeautiful nd varied musicwithin fixed cheme f he chose to do so. Thechoice of this particular moment o raise the cantus firmus o the top ofthe texture may have been suggested y the word <<esurrexit > n themass-text.

A nod is made to the practice f transposing he cantus firmus n the<<leni >>/<<loria tua >.The divisionhere of this normally ingle ectionis unique n Josquin's mass output. The two sections re a pair of duets,first or hesuperius nd altus, henfor enor nd bassus. The material snot derived rom he cantus firmus. oth use identicalmusic, xcept hatthe atter s a transposition own a fifth f the former.

The comprehensive ature f Josquin's esponse o<<L'homme rm >>cannot be underestimated. ogether, is masses comprise a point ofculmination n the <<L'homme arm >>radition, rawing ogether ll itsmany pre-existent hreads. hese two pieceshad a major part n assuringJosquin's eputation s the most famous nd respected omposer of histime s well s in consolidating isdominance ver he next eneration fcomposers.Even before heywent nto print, oth masses were widelycirculated n manuscript nd numbered mongst the most celebratedpiecesof the time. < uper voces musicales > speciallywas amongst hismost widely dmired ompositions y the 1490s and remained o

longafter is death. The central ole playedby thesemasses n prolonging he<<L'homme arm? >>radition nto the sixteenth entury s of the utmostimportance, orwhen ater omposers pproached L'homme arm6 >>,twas to Josquin's works hat hey esponded. n this ense, < uper vocesmusicales > nd <<exti toni >>an be seen to have successfully ulfilledtheir ristically mitative oal. If they aid down newand potentially vengreater hallenges hanJosquin ad to face, good number f composersnonetheless ravely tepped nto the arena to do battle with he master.

< L'homme rme after Josquin

Amongst henumerous rogeny f Josquin's masses number ome ofthe most ambitious nd extravagantmass-settings f the wholeperiod.Twowhosedebt s unquestionable nd which ank t the top of the calefor mbition re those by Pierre e la Rue and Mathurin orestier. 0

The reliance of La Rue on Josquin was noted by Glareanus, whoobserved that, <<Undoubtedly La Rue's second <<AgnusDei >>]s inemulation of Josquin. > 1The passage to which he was referring s

90. I refer o La Rue'sdefinitelyscribed ass abelledMissaL'hommermsin La Rue, Operaomnia, d. N. St. John Davidson,J. E. Kreider& T. H. Heahey(Neuhausen-Stuttgart: dinssler Verlag, American Institute of Musicology,1989- Corpus musicusmensurabilis 7).Another L'homme rm >>mass,pre-served nonymously n VatS 34, a Netherlands ourt choirbook n which ll theidentifiable iecesare by La Rue, s also probably is.

91. Dodecachordon, . 274.







nothing essthan four-in-one ensuration anon, outbidding osquin's

similarlylaced canon in <<

upervoces musicales>>

bya voice, and

mind-boggling nough to merit Willi Apel's description f it as, <<Themost brilliant xample of contrapuntal irtuosity efore Bach's Art ofFugue. >92 Two-part mensuration-canons lso occupy the nner voicesthroughout he Kyrie. La Rue explores other mplications f <<upervocesmusicales bybringing n mitations f the antus irmus n the freevoices at unexpected itches. The most notable example s found t thebeginning f the first AgnusDei >when he antus firmus nd imitativeentries re brought n on D (tenor, uperius), E (contratenor) nd F(bassus) successively. he third Agnus Dei >>combines the first ndsecond sections f the cantus firmus imultaneously ut only n primeform, etween he superius nd bassus.This outbids Ockeghem's se ofthe antus firmus s a bassonly nd o Supervocesmusicales use of it asthe top voice only, by combining oth procedures. f there s referencehere to the simultaneous resentations f these ame cantus firmus ec-tions n o Sextitoni >, La Rue, perhaps wisely, oes not try o outbid tbeyondwhat has been described.

Mathurin orestier, owever, as ess diffident. is o L'homme rm ?>>mass is perhaps the most pervasively mbitious of all the << 'homme

arm >>masses, lthough ts extreme chematization tretches othe pointof fatally lawing hepossibility f musical uccess. 3 Every ar s subjectto an overall architectural lan, whose sole purpose is to outbid allprevious ? L'homme arme >>composers, particularly osquin.A rigidcantus firmus, nvariant n both rests nd pitches, ppears nevery ection(no compromises re made for he engthy exts f the Gloria and Credo:they scramble o fit n all the words). Moreover, he cantus firmus sdesigned o work n canonic mitation etweenG and any pitch of thenatural hexachord, ncluding itself remarkably, t remains urprisinglyclose to the plain <<'homme arm >>song, considering hese restric-tions). 4The result s that Forestier an outbid < uper vocesmusicales >by carrying ut Josquin's rocedure f transposition ncanon. The comesvoicerises rogressivelyhrough hehexachordwhilst he duxconsistentlymaintains ts home-pitch f G. 95 Every section of Forestier's mass iscanonic except the <<t incarnatus >,but that too still maintains he

92. ? Imitation anons >>,. 372.93. Themisattributionf hismass oMouton none ource srepeatedn ome

modern iteraturee.g.Lockwood, Aspects >).94. Theunison anon equires inor lterations, learly necessary f unwil-

ling ompromise.95. There s one xception:he anon etween and G leadswith whilst hecustomary roceduresto eadwith .SeeDavidBurn, < urther bservationsnStacked anon nd Renaissanceompositional rocedure: ascogne'ssta estspeciosaand Forestier's Missa L'homme rms >>, ournal f MusicTheory, orth-coming, or detailed xplanationfwhy hiss o.As with osquin,orestierriesto preserve consistent verallmode, n this ase G-mixolydian, lthough bviouscompromisesmust be made for hecantus firmus tatements n F






David1J urn Imitation, ompetition 283

invariant antus firmus. 6 By rising through he hexachord betweensections ather han across movements, orestier

ompletesis

two-partcanons in the <<leni >. However, his cantus firmus llows not onlytwo-part ut multiple anon three ossible hree-in-one anons and onefour-in-one), nd these onstitute hefoundations f the remaining ec-tions.

Perhapswith he final AgnusDei >>f Josquin's Sexti oni >mass nmind, Forestier lanned something articularly pecialfor his own final<<Agnus Dei >>.7 For the first ime he breaks with his cantus firmusscheme, ut only to accomplishhis most remarkable eat, seven-voicecanon, which, lthough sing nly hefirst art of the L'homme rm? >>song, preserves ts dentity ith xtraordinary larity. his outbids Jos-quin's six-part etting y a voice. t also outbids ll previous ppearancesof the cantus firmus s a bass or top-line, or the cantus firmus owconstitutes he entire exture. orestier's mass represents neplus ultrawhich pawnedno obvious successors. here was after ll little urther ogo down Forestier's articular path, and it may have served to focusconcentration lsewhere n techniques uch s retrogrades, nversions ndmensural ricks hat he left ompletely ntouched.

If Forestier s a dead-end, interest n <<L'homme arm >>masses

nonetheless ersisted indeed, ristic mitation ould suggest hat om-petition ecameyet tronger. he thread arrying he radition hrough oits ast flowering n the middle f the sixteenth entury assupported yan especially llustrious nstitution. rom the 1490s, hePapal Chapel inRomewas not only nthe process f consolidating canon of repertory folder music,but also enjoying voguefor L'homme arm6 >masses. 8The twophenomenawouldappear to be linked nd Josquin's workswerekey players n both. o L'homme arm? >>masses would by this time havebeen acknowledged s the vehicle par excellence n which composerdemonstrated he very best of his capabilities, nd almost the entiretyof the known settings re still preserved oday in the Capella Sistinalibrary.

As a conservative, litist, nstitution, t is clear that the singers f theSistineChapel prided themselves n their bility ccurately o interpretcanons and cryptic otational rtifice. hey ang suchpieces s Josquin's

96. Forestier's asswasnot he irst r he nly ne oconsistentlypply anonto the antus irmusFaugues's asprobablyhe irst nd here re thers, uch sNaplesVI),but t s the nly ne o have osection ithout antus irmus,nd ninvariant antus irmust that.

97. Forestier ore learly mulatedhat iece f Josquin'snthe inal AgnusDei >>f his Missa Baises-moy.98. SeeJeffrey ean, ?TheEvolution f a Canon t the Papal Chapel:The

Importance f Old Music n he ifteenth ndSixteenth enturies , andMitchellBrauner, < raditionntheRepertory f the apalChapelChoir nthe ifteenthand Sixteenth enturies >nPapalMusic ndMusiciansnMedievalndRenais-sanceRome, d. Richard herr Oxford: larendon ress, 998),p. 138-66p. 167-76,sp.p. 171.







<<L'homme arm >>masses until t least the Council of Trent. 9 Of theline of

composers writing< 'homme arm >>masses after

Josquin,almost all had some known ttachment o that nstitution. <L'hommearm >>had achieved classicstatus n tself, nd the hoir of the CapellaSistinahad a particular astefor preserving lassics.This would seem toprovide ome of the ncreasingly ecessary xplanation equired orwhythese ater omposers othered o set < L'homme arm >>t all.

The interest f the Papal Chapel n <<L'homme rm ?>>asses oupledwith the increasingly eavy presence of Spanish singers n its choiraccounts for the striking nd hiterto nseen Spanish presence n thetradition etweenJosquin nd Palestrina. Unlike previously, hegenea-

logyfrom ereon is

relatively asyto

outline ccurately.It is difficult o make an assessment f the L'homme arm ?>>ass ofFranciscoda Pefialosa c. 1470-1528) ecause t still emains npublisheddue to an unsolved anon n theAgnusDei. 100 onetheless, ome onclu-sions may be drawn from he facts that he was present n the SistineChapelchoir from t east 1517to 1525 t the xpress emand f the Pope(although none of his music urvives n Roman sources) nd could wellhave been a teacher to Morales. Pefialosa held a benefice t Sevillecathedral nd was summoned o draw up an educational urriculum orex-choirboys n 1516 mongstwhichMoralesnumbered. 01 hus t eems

safe to view Pefialosa as an intermediate tage between Josquin andMorales.Morales himself eft pain for Rome n 1535, ang n the Sistine hapel

choir for decade thereafter, nd published his most mportant ollec-tions here. n approaching L'homme rm >>,t can be assumed hatheintended o contribute oCapellaSistinarepertory 02 In composingnotone but two <<L'homme arm >>masses, n the manner f a dialectic airin opposed modalities,Morales shows first-hand cquaintance with Jos-quin's double challengewhich he would definitely aveencountered nRome if not before hrough efialosa.Morales' five-voice etting learlybetrays ts debt to Josquin's < exti toni >>mass in choosing to use theidenticalmode.Also like that mass, t subjects hecantus firmus ofreelyelaborated ariation s well s expanding o a six-voice exture or ts final<<Agnus Dei >>, hough no contrapuntal wizardry s attempted. 03 Itsmost strictly rganised ection s the <<anctus >>,tructured round anostinato-repetition f the opening hrase f the antus firmus lternating

99. James aar, Palestrina s Historicist: he Two L'homme rme" Mas-ses>>, ournal f theRoyalMusicalAssociation, 21 1996),196&n. 26,notes hatLodovicoZacconi,as late s 1596,knew wo L'homme rme >>masses:Josquin's

(presumably Super vocesmusicales ) and the five-voiced etting y Palestrina.100. It is preserved n Tarazona, Archivo Capitular de la Catedral, ms. 3,f. 124v-134.

101. See Jo-Ann eif, Music and Grammar: mitation nd Analogy n Mora-les>>,arly MusicHistory, (1986), 230-31.

102. SeeHaar, o Palestrina s Historicist , p. 193.103. Added-voice inal <AgnusDei > sections re relatively requent n Mora-

les anyway. onetheless, eobviously new < exti oni >.







between F and C pitch-levels. otivic allusions to Josquin onfirm tsrelationship.04

Morales' other etting, four-voice ork, salso unusual n ts hoiceofmode. In using the phrygian, t allies itself with Obrecht nd Compare,and demonstrates he continued concern with modal exploration no L'homme arm >>masses.The link with Compare s also clear n repea-ted motivic llusion to his << Christe >.105 he four-voice mass is moreobviously rchaic han ts ounterpart n being nperfect ime hroughoutand its cantus firmus tructure s relatively ore obvious and invariant.The final <<Agnus Dei >>shows a passing, f not highly ompetitive,engagement ith he tradition ssociated with his ection. The opening

phraseof the cantus firmus s first

resentedn the bass on

E,then

transposed own to A, before eing akenoverfor herest f the sectionby the top voice on E). If it must be admitted hatMorales' <<L'hommearme >>masses re not overt emonstration-pieces, nd do not exploit nyof the devices familiar rom ther masses, they remain mportant orbeing the most mmediate timulus or work hat more clearly its hetradition. 06

Two volumes of Morales' masses were published n Rome in 1544.Palestrina'smodelling f his Liberprimusmissarum f 1551upon them swell-known. ach of Morales' volumes ontained o L'homme arm >>

mass- the five-voice etting n the first nd the four-voice n the second.Palestrina lso produced a four-voice nd a five-voice etting, nd likeMorales, used different odes n each (Palestrina arefully voids eitherof those usedby Morales- his four-voice etting s n the dorian, nd hisfive-voice etting nthemixolydian). onetheless, f Morales was themostobvious catalyst orPalestrina's decisionto set << 'homme arm >>,hemusical evidence hows that Palestrina ooked beyond him nto earlierparts of the tradition.

The main feature f Palestrina's ive-voice L'homme arm6 >mass sits archaic and complexuse of mensuration igns,most remarkably ts

preservation f prolation-notation or he tenor part against bewilde-ring rray f other igns. 07 It draws n Josquin's Super vocesmusica-les >>mass as well s the L'homme rm >>massof Marbriano de Orto asa basis for his, nd sas fearsome, f not moreso, han ny previous se of

104.E.g.at the pening f the Sanctus >; oted nOwenRees, Guerrero's"L'hommearm6"Masses nd heir odels >,arlyMusicHistory, 2 1993), 8.

105.SeeHaar, Palestrina s Historicist , p. 193.

106. Morales lso aybehind he womassesone substantial evisionf theother) yFrancisco uerrero. uerrero's riginal ass s a clumsytudent-work,offeringvidencef the edagogicalature f <L'hommearm6. Both t nd tslater ersion re thoroughly iscussedn Rees, <Guerrero's L'hommearm6"Masses >>.

107. Thebest dition sAnnaMariaMonterosso acchelli,a Messe 'hommearm' diPalestrina.: tudioPaleografico dEdizioneCritica Cremona:FondazioneClaudio Monteverdi, 979 Instituta Monumenta, 1/7).







the technique. 08 he mass was clearly ntended o demonstrate ales-trina's mastery f such devices for the members f the Capella Sistinachoir whichkept therwise oorly-voiced ingers ecauseof their kill nnotation) nd almost ertainly atesfrom is brief enure s a singer herein 1555.Palestrina's massdulyreceived he dmiration t sought nd wasamongst ismost famous ieces,however istant t seems odayfrom urreceived iewof Palestrina's tyle.

The mposing ature f Palestrina's ive-voice L'homme rm6 >>massfound a much less pretentious ounterpart n his four-voice etting(published ncognito s Missa Quarta n 1582).Despite a few ater et-tings, alestrina's masses must be taken as the distinguished lose of a

distinguishedradition. 09

Conclusion

If the o L'homme arm >>raditionwas not the only competitive ndimitative radition n the fifteenth nd sixteenth enturies, t was certainlythemost pectacular nd widespread. y being o, tmarked n importanthistorical hift f balance. nspired yhumanist deasof revival nd aidedby a changing ystem f patronage, he concepts of fame and creative

competition cquired hitherto nknown irculation. uch deas receivedparallel written ormulations or iterature, isual art and music. Theywere the ultimate oal of the pedagogicalpractice f imitatio. oth themeans and the ends of this practicewere imilar n all three isciplines.

With their aspirations fuelled, composers approached <<L'hommearm >>to fulfil heir mbitions of making musical masterworks ndwinning ersonalglory s never efore. hey et themselves p in compe-tition with hepast and with heir ontemporaries ya process f techni-cal outbidding. hey used the opportunity s a laboratory or xploringcurrent musical procedures o the limits s well as investigating ew

possibilities. n this ense,whatever eremonial r functional ttachments<<L'homme arm6 >>masses may have had are overridden y their rela-tionships o other iecesof music nd the tatus hey cquired from heseas objects worthy f respect.As these discoveries lowed ut into widermusical onsiderations, heprize for heir uccesswas duly handed over.People n the Renaissance ccorded he omposers f < L'homme rme >>masses hefame hey ought, nd it s certainly rue o say, n the trengthof the works hey ave eft s, that hey urpassed heir redecessors ndtaught hosethat ame after hem.

108.SeeHaar, < alestrina s Historicist >, . 198&200;Haar doesnot noteOrto's wn ependencynJosquin, lthough his sclearly he ase.

109. The <<L'homme arm? >>mass long attributed o Carissimi s in fact asixteenth-century ork. eeStrohm,Music nLate MedievalBruges, . 129n. 105.







RESUME

Depuis la parution de l'article lef de Howard Mayer Brown, < mulation,Competition nd Homage: Imitation nd Theories of Imitation n the Renais-sance>>,a notion d'imitation hetorique jou6 un r6le considerable ans l'expli-cation des strategies ompositionnelles e la Renaissance.Cependant, 'introduc-tion de ce terme vant tout itteraire ans l'histoire e la musique pose tant deproblemes ux yeux des commentateurs es plus recents ue ces derniers ntparfois i6 on utilit6, oire a pertinence. pres voir xamine es critiques, ousavons ent6 '6tablir

uel'imitatio

euttre etenu omme

oncept peratoire ourcomprendre a musiquede cette 6poquea condition ue l'on tienne ompte desacceptions de ce terme, es objectifs t des fonctions e l'imitation, nfin esdiff6rents iveaux uxquelles lle est susceptible e s'exercer.

Lesnombreusesmesses ur e timbre e <<'homme arm6 > omposeesdurantplus d'un siecle llustrent recisement econceptd'imitation <ristique >, savoirceluid'une imitatio outenue ar ledesird'atteindre a renommee t a fortune nsurpassant es maitres. ette pensee humaniste st a 'oeuvre ans les liens quiunissent es premiers ompositeurs e ces messes ainsi qu'en temoignent esstrategies eveloppees ar es uns ou les autres our surpasser eurspredecesseurs.Le processus tteint on point culminant vec a messede <<L'homme arm6 > e

Josquin. e rAve e Josquin 'atteindre 'une gloireposthume'est

accompliil

devint a figure entrale a partir de laquelle la tradition < 'homme arm? >>rayonna out u longdu xvIe siecle. a predominance eJosquin ur a generationsuivante st due en grandepartie u succesdu defi ancepar <<'homme arm6 >.