THE ACCOMPANIMENT OF GREGORIAN CHANT

by
Patricia Burgstahler
A.B., Nazareth College, 1956

Submitted to the Department of Music and

the Faculty of the Graduate School of the
University of Kansas in partial fulfill-
ment of the requirements for the degree
of Master of Arts.

April, 1959
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish first of all to thank my husband, whose constant

interest and encouragement made it possible for me to write
this thesis, and then Dr. Joseph Yasser, to whom I am deeply
indebted for his generous reading of this entire manuscript,
his many constructive comments and bibliographical sugges-
tions, and his enthusiastic approval of this application of
his quartal harmonic system. To Dr. Milton Steinhardt and
to Mr. George Michael I express my gratitude for their help-
ful direction and valuable advice.

11
 CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS· ..... . 11

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . iv
CHAPTER I HISTORICAL SURVEY OF GREGORIAN CHANT . . . . l
Origins . . . . . ... . 2
Early Forms . . . . . . . 3
Medieval Period . . . . . 5
Modern Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
ChronoloF," of the Chants. 11
CHAPTER II HISTORICAL SURVEY OF GREGORIAN CHANT
ACCOMPANIMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Early Polyphonic Settings and Later
Art Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Early Tertian Harmonizations . . . . • . • 18
Modern Tertian Harmonizations . . .. 19
The Theory of Quartal Harmony . . . . . . 26
CHAPTER III CURRENT RHYTHMIC THEORIES 35
The Mensuralist School. 36
The Accentualist School . 39
The Solesmes School 44
CHAPTER IV METHOD OF THE PRESENT ACCOMPANIMENT . 51
Harmony . . . . . . . . 52
Rhythm. . . . . . . . . 57
Selection of Chants . . 60
CHAPTER V QUARTAL ACCOMPANIMENTS . . 63
Mass I. . . . . . . . . 64
Mass IV . . . . . . . . . . 68
Mass XV • • • • • • • • • • • 73
Mass XVI with Ambrosian Gloria . . 77
Credo I . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Tones of the Gloria Patri . . . . ... 85
Psalm Tones . . . . . . . . . . . . • 87
Nativity Proper: Midnight Mass .•. 89
Holy Saturday Vigil: Alleluia and Tract. 93
Easter Sunday Proper. . • ... 96
BIBLIOGRAPHY. ... ..... .... . . 103

iii
INTRODUCTION
 V

Although Gregorian Chant is sacred monody that dates

from an age in which instrumental accompaniment was not
employed for liturgical music, today, particularly in the
services of the Roman Catholic Church, the common practice
is to use some type of organ accompaniment to the chant
sung by the choir or congregation. The present thesis pro-
poses to trace briefly the history of chant and accompani-
ments to chant melodies, to review the three current lead-
ing rhythmic theories, and to arrange a new set of accom-
paniments for a number of the melodies of the Kyriale and
certain selected Mass Propers, taking special cognizance of
the more recent studies on medieval harmony 1 and on rhyth-
mic interpretation. 2
The question of whether chant accompaniments should
be employed at all has been debated a great deal among
church musicians.3 But, although many 4 state emphatically

1 Joseph Yasser, ''Medieval Quartal Harmon'1'', The

Musical Quarterly, XXIII(1937), 170-97, 333-66; XXIV(l938),
351-85. Republished, with slight modifications, in book
form by the American Library of Musicology, New York, 1938.
2 Dom Gregory Murray, "Plainsong Rhfthm (The Editorial
Methods of Solesmes)", Caecilia, LXXXIV{l957), 10-24.
3Msgr. Leo Manzetti, "Gregorian Chant Accompaniment",
Catholic Choirmaster, XXXVII(l951), 35.
4
Inter alia, A. Madeley Richardson, Modern OPgan
Accompaniment, Longmans, Green, and Co., New York, 1907,
p. 145; Henri Potiron, Treatise .Q.ll the Accompaniment of
Gregorian Chant (translated bY- Rutilcr. Gabain), Society of
st. John the Evangelist, Desclee and Co., Tournai, Belgium,
1933, p. 95; Willi Apel,._ Gregorian Chant, Indiana University
Press, Bloomington, 195u, p. xii.
 vi
that the practice is historically unsound, these same musi-
cians usually do use accompaniments, either to support a
weak choir, to emphasize the festivity of a special Holy
Day, or to satisfy the harmonically biased modern ear.
Potiron states that 'iGregorian melodies were not composed
with a view to being accompanied; the need of support for
weak and uncertain choirs or perhaps merely the desire to
satisfy our modern taste has, however, made organ accompani-
ment an accepted practice, whether for good or for evil." 1
An accompaniment may also be considered a type of elabora-
tion of the chant, and the early church often used elabora-
tions of these melodies on important feasts or other occa-
sions.2 These factors serve to indicate that accompaniments
to liturgical melodies, for either aesthetic or practical
reasons, need not necessarily be construed as improper or
contrary to the spirit of the early Christians.
Moreover, there are a number of musical scholars who
are even more convinced than the above writers that the use
of accompaniments is not only to be defended but highly
recommended. Yasser has pointed out that the harmonic sense
is one of the most powerful driving forces in the evqlution

1
Potiron, Q.E.• cit., p. 95; cf. Rev. Johner, A New
School of Gre~orianChant, (third English edition-by Hermann
Erpf anaMax errars), Fr. Pustet and Co., New York, 1925,
pp. 289-90.
2Rt. Rev. Walter Howard Frere, D.D., 11 Plainsong",
Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 17, Chicago, 1957, pp. 997-98.
 vii
of music, 1 and that a listener can gain full appreciation
of the melody to which he is listening only if his harmonic
sense is 11 attuned 11 to that of the composer of this melody. 2
From these premises he concludes that 1'it is wrong to assume,
as many do, that we attain an adequate musical concept of
Gregorian melodies when they are performed without any har-
monies at a11. 11 3 In arriving at this conclusion, he pre-
supposes that the overwhelming majority of modern listeners
will subconsciously add a tertian background to these melo-
dies, which thus are seriously modified from their ancient
flavor and original harmonic structure. Yasser's solution
to this complex problem will be discussed in a subsequent
chapter.
In another, and more recent,publication, Jones also
comments on the problem of grasping the harmonic structure
of the chant.
But if the chant is to take its proper place in
the public worship of the church, and is to be
sung and appreciated by parish choirs and con-
gregations, an artistic solution will have to
be found to this problem, and one which will be
satisfactory to the scholar, the musician, and
the layman. The organ is not only a practical
necessity to support the choir and congregation.,
but it must also help the 'non-Gregorian' ear to 4
grasp the structure and modality of the melodies.

1 -
Yasser, Ql2.• cit • ., Vol. XXIII(1937), p. 172.
2 Ibid . ., p. 175,

3Loc. cit.
· 4Bernard Jones, "The Harmonic Basis of Plainchant
Accompaniment 11 , Caecilia., LXXXII(1955), 127.
 viii
As a practical solution, he advocates, in effect, the appli-
cation of the theories of Dr. Yasser.
The practice of the chant being "sung" by parish con-
gregations, as mentioned in the above quotation, is often
questioned by the opponents of chant accompaniments. It is
argued that the singing of chant as· part of a liturgical
function should belong to the choir only, since this was
the usual practice in the Middle Ages, particularly the lat-
ter half. However, Wagner, speaking of another practice
(that of shortening the Credo) during this era, has aptly
stated the condition of the prevalent liturgical trends.
"It is unnecessary to point out that such a proceeding
[shortening the Credo], which moreover went far on into
later centuries, bears extremely bad testimony to the li-
turgical instinct of that time. 111 If one exam.ine.s the
writings of certain reputable scholars of the chant. and""·the
liturgy, as well as the writings of the Fathers of the
Church, it is easy to find evidence that the singing of the
Ordinary of the Mass was certainly a function of the congre-
gation and was only subsequently taken over by choirs with
the approach of the decadent period of chant about 1000 A.D.
When the choir of singers usurped, in addition to
their own, those singing functions which till then
had been performed by the congregation, this sim-
ple melody seemed too poor; other richer ones were

1 Peter Wagner, 11 Introduction to the Gregorian Melodies"

(translated by Agnes Orme and Edward Gerald Wyatt), Caecilia,
LXXXIV(1957), 318-19.
 ix
then composed, and the primitive me 1 od y was
degraded to ordinary days and 1 to Masses for the
dead, where it is still sung.
Besides these short acclamations, the people's
share in the Mass since earliest times also in-
cluded a certain ever-increasihg number of hym-
nic texts, . . . the Sanctus • . . Benedictus
. . . Kyrie eleison . . . Agnus Dei . . . the
chants of the so-called ordinary of the Mass
which, . . . were taken over from the people
by the choir of c1erics and finally by the
church choirs.2
. . • the people, for example, sang their own
part at the Mass - the invariable chants such
as the K~ie, Sanctus, or Agnus,)
Niceta of Remesiana (fourth century), in a sermon on liturgi-
cal singing, addresses his congregation:
When we sing, all should sing; 4
We should not wonder, then, if the deacon in a
clear voice like a herald warns all that, whether
they are praying or bowing the knees, singing
hymns, or listening to the lessons, they should
all act together.5

1 Peter Wagner, "Introduction to the Gregorian Melodies",

(translated by Agnes Orme and Edward Gerald Wyatt), Caecilia,
LXXXIV(1957), 327.
2 Rev. Joseph A. Jungmann, s. J., The Mass of the Roman
Rite, Vol. I, Benziger·Bros., Inc., New Yo~l951, p. 238.
Cf. Dom Gregory Murray, 11 Congregational Singing at Mass",
Catholic Choirmaster, XXXIV(1948), 155.
3Rt. Rev. W. H. Frere, D~D., ' 1 Plainsong11 , Oxford History
of Music, Introductory Volume, edited by Percy Carter Buck,
Oxford University Press, London, 1929, p. 138.
4Niceta of Remesiana, "Liturgical Singing (de utilitate
hymnorum) 11 , (translated by Gerald Walsh, S .J., M.A., Ph.D.,
S.T.D.), The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 7, Fathers of the
Church, Inc., New York, 1949, p. 75.
5Ibid., p. 76.
 X

Wagner cites another ancient directive.

Moreover, the further statement of the Liber Pon-
tificalis, that the above mentioned Pope (Sixtus I,
c. 120 A.D.J had the Sanctus precented by the
celebrant, and continued by the whole congrega-
tion, certainly des 1ribes the original execution
of the chant, . . •
In the present century, the "Motu Proprio 11 of the recently
canonized St. Pope Pius X brought these ideals of congrega~
tional singing to the attention of clergy and church musicians
throughout the world. 2 It is unfortunate that the recommenda-
tions of so illustrious a leader of the Roman Church have re-
mained unheeded in so many places. Since the average parish
congregation, unaccustomed to singing modal or pentatonic
melodies, would probably find it somewhat difficult to perform
these chants without support and direction from the organ, it
is hoped that this practice of congregational singing at li-
turgical functions might be considerably facilitated by the
availability of an organ accompaniment which by its very na-
ture is designed to afford the most appropriate harmonic back-
ground for the learning and execution of Gregorian melodies.
At present there are many different accompaniments that
have been prepared for the use of the parish organist, but a
great many church musicians who have seriously studied the
problem agree that these are 11 in disrepute". 3

1wagner, QE• cit., p. 326. Cf. pp. 327 and 329.

2 Pope Pius X, Motu Proprio on Sacred Music•' (pamphlet),
11

Conception Abbey Press, Conception, Missouri, 1945, p. 7,

3 Jones, ~- cit., p. 127.
 xi
. . • many collections of carefully written
accompaniments have been published. But it is
very generally conceded, even by some of the
authors themselves, that this work has fai ed
to create a musically satisfactory result .
1
. • • for which [Gregorian melodies], admit-
tedly, no satisfactory method of harmoniza-
tion has thus far been found, despite numer-
ous attempts.2
Yet there have been methods of accompaniment proposed3 that
appear to show considerable promise of producing a truly
"Gregorian" harmonic background. The main objective of this
thesis is to apply the principles of certain acknowledged
scholars in the field of Gregorian Chant to the problem of
composing a set of accompaniments that will attempt to illus-
trate "a mastery that combines at one and the same time a
distinct artistic variety and historic authenticity. 114
Since the scope of this work is so large, the research
included will necessarily be limited. More detailed infor-
mation can be found by reference to the bibliographical ma-
terial cited.

1 Jones, .Q.E.· cit., p. 127.

2 Yasser, .Q.E.• cit., p. 171.

3 Ibid, Vol. XXIII(1937), 170-97, 333-66; XXIV(1938),

351-85.
4 Joseph Yasser, "The Traditional Roots of Jewish Harmony",
Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference-Convention of the
Cantors' Assembly and the Department of Music of the United
Synagogue of America, 1951, p. 18.
 CHAPTER I

HISTORICAL SURVEY OF GREGORIAN CHANT

 2

Origins

Gregorian Chant is the official liturgical music of the

Roman Catholic Church, dating in fundamental form from the
time of the Apostles. It is also called "plainsong", from
11 cantus planus", which is defined by Frere, the distinguished
English liturgiologist, as 11 unmeasured music 111 or a "certain
style of unisonal music, comprising chiefly the church-music
called 'Gregorian' which belongs to Rome, and that called
'Ambrosian' which hails from Milan. 112 Although the term
"Gregorian" is derived from the name of the great sixth cen-
tury pope, Gregory I, much of the actual music is many cen-
turies older.
Scholars in this field are in general agreement that Gre-
gorian Chant had its beginnings in the Jewish Synagogue and
gathered various elements from the influence of Greece, Syria-
Palestine, and other Mediterranean areas. Wagner and Gastoue
have shown evidence to support the theories of Syro-Palestinian
and Jewish origins.3 This Jewish heritage has been studied
extensively by Yasser, who has illustrated the similarity of

1Rt. Rev. Walter Howard Frere, D.D.,·"Plainsong",

Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 17, Chicago, 1957, p. 9gr.

-
2 Ibid.

~gon Wellesz, "Recent Studies in Western Chant", The

Musical Quarterly, XLI(1955), 181. Cf. Gustave Reese, Music
in the Middle Ages, W. W. Norton and -Co., New York, 1946,
p. 114.
 3
Christian and Hebrew chants by delineating basic identical
melodic patterns from pre-Christian and early Christian
times. 1 Recent studies of Wellesz indicate that the chant
may also be a mixture of Roman, Gallican, and Ambrosian ele-
ments.2 One of the few dissenting views is asserted by Dom
Sunol, a representative of the Solesmes School, who states
,v

that ''everything goes to prove that the oldest melodies were

the creation of early Christianity. 11 3 The statement is un-
supported in his text and hence difficult to evaluate. There-
fore, on the weight of the best available evidence, it may be
accepted that Gregorian Chant is primarily a heritage from
Hebrew liturgical music, and probably also was molded into
its present form by the catholic character of early as well
as modern Western Christianity.

Early Forms

There is relatively little available record of liturgi-

cal music before the time of Pope Gregory I (590-604). The

1 Joseph Yasser, "How Can the Ancient Hebrew Melos Be

Restored?", Proceedin~s of the Ninth Annual Conference-
Convention of the Can ors' Assembly of America and the
Department of Music of the United Synagogue of Aiiierica,
1956, p. (.0. Cf. "Dr. Yasser·Lectures at a Benedictine
Monastery', Seminary Progress, January, 1957, p. 8.
2Wellesz, QI?.• cit., p. 184.
3Dom Gregory Sunol, O.S.B., Text Book of Gregorian
Chant, Desclee and Co., Tournai (Selgium), 1"9:30, p. ix.
 4
studies of Wagner indicate that any significant advances over
Jewish cantillations must have taken place after the Edict of
Milan in 313 A.D., since before that time most liturgical
services were held in secret, a circwnstance which may have
precluded much elaborate singing or ritual. 1 The exhortation
of St. Eusebius (early fourth century) to the people to "sing
psalms'' 2 probably shows that the main type of music which was
connected with the early Church was antiphonal psalmody, al-
though many of the more elaborate parts of the Office and
some of the earliest sung portions of the Mass, such as the
Gradual, Sanctus, and the Communion antiphons, were undoubt-
edly in use as well.
A few scattered references to the language used in the
texts and to the codification of chants can also be located.
It was during these first centuries that Latin became the
official language of the Western Church. Wellesz places the
change from Greek to Latin in the Roman Rite at the latter
half of the fourth century and cites as evidence the Latin
Canon introduced by Ambrose (374-397) and sanctioned by Pope
Damasus. 3 However, he likewise concludes that bilingual

1 Peter Wagner, Introduction to the Gregorian Melodies,

Part I, second edition~ (translated by Agnes Orme and Edward
Gerald Wyatt), The Plainsong and Medieval Music Society,
London, 1901, p. 7,
2 Ibid.

3wellesz, Q.E.· cit., p. 178.

 5
singing was almost certainly still in vogue 1 at least on
important feasts. Some pre-Gregorian codification of chants
was accomplished by the Abbots Catalenus, Maurianus, and
Virbonus in the form of organized chants for the ecclesias-
tical year. 2
These are but a few references to liturgical music
which hardly clarify to any extent the actual execution of
the chant of these centuries. In the next period of liturgi-
cal history the chant is usually considered to have reached
its climax in execution and organization.

Medieval Period

The age of St. Gregory is often called the Golden Age

of Gregorian Chant.3 Gregory I is credited with the codifi-
cation of the liturgical music of the Roman Church, one im-
portant product of his labors being the Cantilena Romana, a
compilation of vocal and ecclesiastical plainsong evolved by
the Papal choir during the fifth and sixth centuries. 4 This
collection was later (in the ninth century) notated with

1Wellesz, QB.· cit., p. 178.

2 Pierre Batiffol, Histoire du Breviaire Romain, Paris,
1893, pp. 349-350. -
3Rt. Rev. W. H. Frere, D.D., ''Plainsong", Oxford History
of Music, Introductory Volume, edited by Percy Carter Buck,
Oxford University Press, London, 1929,p. 148.
4Prere, "Plainsong", Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 17,
p. 998.
 6
neumes. 1 Contrary to popular opinion, St. Gregory is now
believed to have composed little or no music himself, but
was responsible for reorganizing the liturgical life of the
Church at the turn of the seventh century. Such a vital
figure was he in the growth and perfection of the chant that
after his death the Church, deprived of his illustrious lead-
ership, unwittingly left the way open for the gradual accumu-
lation of abuses that ultimately caused the period of deca-
dence which began about 1000 A.D. According to Frere "musi-
cal composition for the Mass decayed and ceased during the
course of the seventh century. 112
The following centuries witnessed what might be called
the Silver Age of Chant,3 a time when liturgical composition
was certainly less skillful though just as certainly not
completely dead. This can be demonstrated by an examination
of the tropes and sequences composed during the Carolingian
Era (751-987) which can hardly be considered of the same
quality as the earlier chant compositions. This general
lack of skill was illustrated in other matters also, such
as the organization of the Ordo, attributed
, by Andrieu to a
Franconian monk of the eighth century who could have had very

1 Frere, ''Plainsong", Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 17,

p. 998.
2 Rt. Rev. W. H. Frere, D.D., Graduale Sarisburiense,
Bernard Quaritch Co., London, 1894, p. xvii.
3 Frere~ "Plainsong", Oxford History of Music, Introduc-
tory Volume, p. 148.
 7
little knowledge of the liturgy in Rome, the capital of the
Christian empire. 1 Wagner and others 2 attest to this spirit
of decadence, the beginning of which is variously placed
from the end of the seventh century to the beginning of the
twelfth century.
In the ninth century some of the earliest known manu-
scripts with primitive neumes appeared,3 and the development
of medieval musical theory commenced about this time. The
writers of this age seemed to feel the need to make the
chant conform to some pre-existent theoretical musical sys-
tem. The most convenient systems must have appeared to be
that of the eight ancient Greek modes and the Byzantine sys-
tem of four double modes. Accordingly, the existing chants
were classified under the headings of eight paired modes.
There is considerable evidence that this was an arbitrary
choice. 4 Yasser and Hughes agree that the original scale
system of early Christian music is much older than the dia-
tonic modes and probably is built on the pentatonic frame-
work. 11 And so the theoretical writings tend to support the
claim made in recent years that the modal system is an

1 Wellesz, Ql2.• cit., p. 187.

2 Rev. Dom Anselm Hughes, o.s.B., "Theoretical Writers
on Music up to 1400 1' , Oxford History of Music, Introductory
Volume, p. 119.
3wellesz, .2.E· cit., p. 189.
4Joseph Yasser, "Medieval Quartal Harmony", The Musical
Quarterly, XXIII(1937), 186-197.
 8
arbitrary Graeco-Roman thing imposed in later centuries
upon a more elastic and primitive scale system of the earlier
1
Christian centuries. 11 This imposition was truly unfortunate,
since it led to a series of relative abuses which have
abounded to this day.
A few steps in this process can be illustrated. Guido
of Arezzo (eleventh century) is credited with the invention
of the four line staff. The increasing use of this staff
heralded the beginnings of polyphony and measured music,
the parallel decline of monophony and plainchant, 2 and the
subsequent change from the pentatonic to the diatonic modal
system. However, in this century the transition was un-
doubtedly still far from complete, since Guido in his
Micrologus regarded the normal consonance as the interval
of a fourth, rather than the third which is more basic to
true diatonic modal harmony.
Another factor in the gradual decline may have been
the slowing down of the tempo of the chant by adding a type
of organ accompaniment.3 Although there is no substantial
proof of when organs were first used in church, 4 there are
indications that the practice arose at the time of the

lHughes, ~- cit., p. 120.

2Frere, "Plainsong", Oxford History of Music, p. 133;
and Encyclopedia Britannica, p. 998.
3wellesz, Q.P.• cit., p. 189.
~eese, ~- cit., p. 124.
 9
beginnings of polyphony, when an instrument might be needed
to supply a missing part or reinforce the other vocal parts.
This type of organ accompaniment only served to encourage
further abuses of the original chant by the new polyphonic
style.

Modern Period

The history of Gregorian Chant from this time (twelfth

century) until the seventeenth century is one of a gradual
but constant decline both in chant composition and execu-
tion. It was not until the seventeenth century that the
first restoration of Gregorian Chant was attempted. 1 This
pioneer effort resulted in the Medicean edition of the
Graduale, 2 which, though badly garbled, was at least an
attempt in the right direction in reawakening interest in
the chant. In the nineteenth century the Benedictine monks
of Solesmes, France, undertook the Herculean task of chant
restoration based primarily on manuscript evidence, and
during the course of that century succeeded in publishing a
very scholarly and authoritative edition of the Graduale and
Antiphonale as well as other chant collections.3 This work

1Reese, 2.E.· cit., p. 116.

2 Ibid.
3 Loe. cit.
 10
was initiated by Dom Prosper Gueranger (1805-1875) and sub-
sequently carried on by Dom Joseph Pothier (1a35-1923) and
then Dom Andr6 Mocquereau (1849-1930) who undertook the pro-
/
duction of the voluminous Paleographie Musicale. Although
the work of these men is of indisputable merit, certain as-
pects of it, particularly the rhythmic theories of Dom
Mocquereau, have been seriously questioned by numerous musi-
cal scholars ever since their first publication. It may be
pointed out that the official unedited Vatican Graduale,
which otherwise follows the £olesmes restored versions of
the chants, does not contain the ictus, episema, dot, and
other rhythmic markings advocated by Solesmes. This may
perhaps be interpreted as indicating insufficient manu-
script evidence for these markings and consequent withold-
ing of full Vatican approval or recommendation of them.
However, in spite of a great amount of subsequent research,
no additional authoritative editions have yet been pub-
lished. Thus it is seen that the twentieth century is an
age of vigorous research and strong desire to return to the
delightful simplicity and austerity of primitive Gregorian
Chant. It is hoped that this spirit will prevail and re-
awaken in all Christian peoples an active appreciation of
their musical liturgical heritage.
 11
Chronology of the Chants

Some comments on the chronological order of composi-

tion of the various chants will be helpful in understanding
their theoretical history. One type of classification has
been outlined by Jones. 1 He lists the three periods of
chant composition as:
(1) Beginnings to eighth century - many of
the Propers; a few parts of the Ordinary, such
as Gloria XV, Mass XVIII, Kyrie XVI; the Te Deum.
(2) Ninth to twelfth centuries - most parts
of the Ordinary; many sequences and hymns; (in-
troduction of the use of the imperfect consonant,
the third).
(3) Thirteenth to fourteenth centuries -
the sequence ''Dies Irae"; some hymns such as
the "Stabat Mater''; a few anthems; (rising use
of musica ficta).
Gevaert 2 has further subdivided the earliest era into three
divisions. They are:
(1) 440 to 540 A.D. - composition of syl-
labic chants.
(2) 540 to 600 A.D. - composition of most
melodies of the Office.
(3) 600 A.D. and on - imposition of various
new and older texts on the older melodies.
These last divisions are somewhat narrow and in view of more
recent studies are probably not entirely correct. Some of

1 Bernard Jones, "The Harmonic Basis of Plainchant

Accompaniment", Caecilia, LXXXII(1955), 127-29,

8
, / 2Frangois Auguste Gevaert~ La Melo ee·Antique, Librarie
Generale de Ad. Hoste, Editeur, Gand, 1 95, pp. 159-77.
 12
the earliest melodies, such as Sanctus XVIII, the Ambrosian
Gloria, etc., are undoubtedly older than the fifth century,
and it is difficult to maintain that no new melodies were
composed after 600 A.D. Many parts of the Ordinary, espe-
cially the Credos and the Glorias, are of much later com-
position as can be ascertained by a careful examination of
their basic harmonic structure and scale patterns. These-
quences and tropes from the Carolingian Era also were com-
posed after the year 600, although relatively few of these
have survived.
Some admirable work on dating the chants has been done
by Rev. Frere in the Graduale Sarisburiense. 1 He comments
on the increase of chants for the Common of the Saints dur-
ing the eleventh and twelfth centuries 2 and lists many of
the feasts that are descended from the old Roman Festivals.3
The Vatican Graduale also dates most of the chants of
the Ordinary of the Mass according to the dates of the old-
est available manuscripts from which the chants were edited.
This at least provides some type of direction for under-
standing various styles, although the music of many dated
manuscripts is _obvious~y of much earlier origin. This is

' 1Frere, Gradua.le Sarisburiense, "Introduction", pp. xix.

2 ~bid._., P.• xxi.·

3Ibid., p. xxvii.
 13
an area that still requires much research and careful study,
especially when applied to the problem of a proper accom-
paniment to these old melodies.
 CHAPTER II

HISTORICAL SURVEY OF GREGORIAN CHANT ACCOMPANIMENT

 15
Although ''the whole corpus of Gregorian music undoubt-
edly familiarizes Roman Catholics of today with a music
enormously more ancient in its origin than any harmony", 1
the practice of harmonizing chant melodies has been used
since the ninth century and has passed through various
forms.
The earliest medieval magadizing, taken over from the
ancient Greek practice, consisted of doubling in octaves,
which was not actually harmony even in a primitive sense. 2
In the ninth century organum came into use, the initial
forms of which were duplications of the melodic line at the
intervals of the fourth, fifth, and octave. 3 Magadizing
and organum were often connected with the liturgical melo-
dies, although organum, even in its most advanced forms in
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, was a style in the
evolution of polyphony rather than a form of accompaniment.
Accompaniment is usually considered an instrumental func-
tion, at least in relation to chant melodies. There is no
proof of when instrumental or, specifically, organ accom-
paniment was used in church, but it may have been in the

1Elliott C. Carter, "Music", Encyclopedia Britannica,

Vol. 16, Chicago, 1957, p. 5.
2 Sir Donald Francis Tovey, "Harmony'', Encyclopedia
Britannica, Vol. 11, Chicago, 1957, p. 203.

3Ibid., p. 206.
 16
tenth century. Even as late as the sixteenth century, with
its tertian harmony and fully developed polyphony, instru-
mental accompaniment of Gregorian Chant as such does not
seem to be mentioned. Since accompaniments were undoubt-
edly used for secular melodies, it is probable that during
these centuries the organ performed some type of service in
connection with the chant, but indications are that this was
primarily that of playing one or more of the polyphonic
voices rather than the function of supporting the melody
with a harmonic background.

Early Polyphonic Settings

and Later Art Forms

Before Gregorian accompaniment was conceived as such,

there were many centuries during which various modifica-
tions and additions to the chant melodies resulted in what
are now called the art forms of Gregorian Chant. The ear-
liest examples are intimately connected with the beginnings
of polyphony, when a sacred melody was doubled at the oc-
tave, fourth, and/or fifth. In the thirteenth century, the
School of Notre Dame performed the clausulae, which were
polyphonic compositions based on fragments of Gregorian
melodies. Another art form was the motet, which, in its
early stages of development (thirteenth and fourteenth cen-
turies), was almost exclusively dependent upon the
 17
ecclesiastical chant for its cantus firmus or main theme.
In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, plainsong melo-
dies were often used as canti firmi for polyphonic settings
of the Mass, notably by Machaut, Dufay, Obrecht, and other
prominent musicians.
As polyphony developed, so also did the art forms
which employed the melodic material of the chant. Indeed,
many secular compositions likewise embodied fragments of
the melodic wealth of this religious music. Lassus and
Palestrina are among the most important sixteenth-century
composers who drew to a greater or lesser degree upon this
liturgical heritage.
After the sixteenth century, with the spread of
Protestantism and the decrease of the temporal powers of
the Catholic Church, composers gradually looked less to
the church for inspiration or commissions, and hence became
less conscious of the Gregorian melodies. During the next
three centuries, the chant, having been so badly garbled by
the polyphonic abuses it endured, failed to attract much
attention from the leading artists of the day, although
with careful study a certain amount of influence can be de-
tected in their music.
With the Solesmes edition of the nineteenth and twen-
tieth centuries restoring the artistic respectability of
Gregorian Chant, its themes again began to appear more
frequently in art forms. Some few examples are Tournemire's
 18
fifty-one volumes of L'Orgue Mystique, in which he uses
Gregorian themes for compositions following the cycle of
the liturgical year; Benoit's Fifty Elevations based on
themes from the Gregorian II Sanctus'' melodies; Demessieux' s
Twelve Choral Preludes on Gregorian Themes, and others.
There are many sacred compositions like the above, and even
a few secular ones which use Gregorian themes, such as
Respighi's Concerto Gregoriano for violin and orchestra,
the middle movement of which is built on the Easter sequence,
11 Victimae Paschall Laudes". A study of these modern art
forms as well as of the earlier ones yields many interest-
ing examples and ideas for harmonizing Gregorian Chant.
However, although most of these ideas must be left to art
music since they would prove unsuitable in the function of
supporting the voices of a church choir or congregation,
occasionally there is a chord or a short passage which
"sounds right" in relation to the Gregorian theme. These
passages are worthy of note and further study by persons
interested in chant harmonizations.

Early Tertian Harmonizations

One of the earlier harmonizations of chant melodies

for use at church services was the Il Canto Ecclesiastico
by Erculeo. 1 In it Erculeo harmonized many hymns and

1 Marzio Erculeo, Il Canto Ecclesiastico, Modana,

Pergli Eredi Cassiani Stamp. Episc., 1686.
 19
motets including the "Lauda Sien" sequence, which was set
for three voices and notated in Gregorian style. The har-
monic scheme that he employs consists of thirds and complete
triads; the final notes are often unisons, sometimes thirds
or triads. There do not seem to be any accidentals added
and the four-line staff and square notes are used. The har-
monizations are applied to each note of the melody and ap-
pear to be for voices rather than an instrumental accompani-
ment, although this could not be accurately determined.
Other examples of early harmonizations can be found in
Sohner , 1 · who lists a comprehensive bibliography of manu-
scripts of early accompaniments and includes in his presen-
tation many examples of chant accompaniments, a number of
which distort the melodies in order to adapt them to
polyphonic-type harmonizations, and all of which employ
"Palestrinian" harmony written out or in figured bass
notation.

Modern Tertian Harmonizations

With the "Renaissance" of Gregorian Chant in the nine-

teenth century and the subsequent desire for more modern
accompaniments, the harmonization of chant, mostly under

1 P. Leo S5hner, o.s.B., Die Geschichte der Begleitung

des Gregorianischen Chorals in Deutschland, Dr. Benno
Felser Verlag G.m.b.H., Augsburg, 1931.
 20
the impetus of the Solesmes method, became common. In 1905
Goodrich translated a book of Neidermeyer and d 1 0rtigue 1
which was written half a century before, remarking that
there had been no better work written since then. 2 This
accompaniment in general follows the Palestrinian princi-
ples, although the dominant seventh chord is not permitted
and the melody is to be always in the upper voice. The har-
mony 1s still written note for note, which would result in
an extremely slow-moving execution of the melody hardly in
conformity with the speech-like rhythm which characterized
the early chant.3
An example of the new trend to break away from this
note for note principle is found in Haberl, 4 who advocates
one chord for one to three notes if the melody is extremely
elaborate, 5 although the former principle is the ordinary

1 Louis Niedermeyer and Joseph d'Ortigue, Gre~orian ·

1
Accom animent~ (revised and translated by WallaceGoodrich),
Novel o, Ewer, and Co., New York, 1905.
2 Ibid., p. iii.
.
3Dom Lucien David, o.s.B., Le rhythme verbal et :musica1
dans·le chant romain, Les editions de l'universited'Ottawa,
1933, p. 50.
4Rev. Dr. Franz Xaver Haberl, Magister Choralis
(second English edition translated from the ninth German
edition by The Most Reverend Dr. Donnelly), Fr. Pustet,
New York, 1892.
5Ibid., pp. 201-202.
 21
rule. He permits modulations with sharps in the inner parts,
uses a dominant penultimate chord, and a major third at the
final. 1
One of the early twentieth century treatises is that
of Richardson. 2 He states that the chant was "never in-
tended for harmonization", yet goes on to recommend that the
standard of harmony should be that of the latest modal com-
posers, Palestrina and Tallis.3 According to this thesis
he advocates the use of unaltered tones primarily, but per-
mits chromatic alterations to effect the major third in the
Phrygian mode and the one-half step leading tones in all
modes if these do not affect the melodic line. He also
permits use of the dominant seventh chord but rejects the
so-called "modern chroma.tic harmonies". Richardson's rhyth-
mic scheme, like that of Haberl, consists of harmonizing
each note of the melody although the two or three notes of
a single neume may occasionally be set to only one chord.

1 Rev. Dr. Franz Xaver Haberl, Magister Choralis,

(second English edition translated from the ninth German
edition by The-Most Reverend Dr. Donnelly), Fr. Pustet,
New York, 1892, pp. 202-203.

2A. Madeley Richardson, Modern Organ Accompaniment,

Longmans, Green, and Co., New York, 1907, 200 pp.
 22
Gastou,, 1 in 1910, and Evans, 2 in 1911, likewise show
a tendency to break away from the note for note style, and
also instruct their readers to avoid the seventh chords,
especially the dominant and diminished sevenths. Another
set of accompaniments from this decade, published by The
Plainsong and Medieval Music Society of London, 3 is similar
to the above mentioned. The harmonies are entirely tertian
and, although not note for note, are very heavy and thick.
Free rhythm is used but a faster tempo is indicated for
the florid passages than for the syllabic melodies.
A further example of chant accompaniment worthy of men-
tion is that of Dom Johner in 1925. 4 He first outlines the
conditions necessary to a good accompaniment as the proper
choice of harmony, attention to rhythmic progressions, and
discreet execution. To fulfill these conditions he employs
a harmony strictly diatonic and uses only the triad and its
sixth chord with a rare six-four inversion. All seventh
chords except the dominant seventh are permitted to be

1 Amedee Gastoue, Traite d'Harmonization du Chant

Gregorian fil:!!:. Y!! plan nouveau; Janin Freres, tj'on, 1910.
2 Edwin Evans, The Modal Accompaniment Qf. Plain Chant,
Reeves, London, 1911.
3 The Ordinary of the Mass, The Plainsong and Medieval
Music Society, London, 191cr:--o1 pp.
4 Rev. Dom. Johner, A New School of Gregorian Chant.
(third English edition by Hermann Erpfand Max Ferrara):
Fr. Pustet and Co., New York, 1925, pp. 289-309.
 23
employed without preparation or resolution, and the auxil-
iary, passing, and anticipation tones are frequently used.
Johner states that it is not necessary to use the strict
style of Palestrinian counterpoint, although the sixteenth-
century harmonies are prescribed. He employs the rhythmic
principles of Dom Mocquereau, namely, having chord changes
on the first note of every neume and on all sustained notes,
with light harmony permitted on the grouped notes. This is
the type of accompaniment in current use, with but slight
modifications according to the taste of the particular
arranger. It has been questioned in the last two decades
by Jones 1 and such scholars as Yasser 2 and Reese.3
The accompaniments published in the next decade are
all very similar to that of Johner. Dom Sunol 4 allows the
diminished triad and emphasizes the importance of the chord
changes occuring on the ictus. He guided his work by the
principle that "the accompaniment should rather study to
express in the chords the harmonic substratum which every

1 Bernard Jones, "The Harmonic· Basis of Plainchant

Accompaniment", Caecilia, LXXXIl (1955) , 127-29.

2 Yasser, "Medieval Quart al Harmony", The Musical

Quarterly, XXIII(l937), 170-97, 333-66; XXIV(l938), 351-85.

3Reese, Music in the Middle Ages, W.W. Norton and

Co., New York, 1940, pp. 148, 161 (footnote 48), 162-63.
. .
4sunol, Text Book of Gregorian Chant, 1930, p. 221.
 24
musical ear imagines and perceives when listening to the
unaccompanied melody. 111
Potiron2 outlines the theory of the three modal groups
which consist of hexachords characterized by certain recur-
ring intervals. He states that "as the principle of our
accompaniment is merely to follow the melodic outline, of
which it seeks only to synthesize the elements, we cannot
admit of an~ priori principle for the cadences of these
modes. 113
Bragers, whose close connection with the Pius X School
of Music has perhaps contributed to the popularity of his
books of accompaniments, also emphasizes the three modal
groups of Do, Fa, and Teu, demonstrating that they probably
gain their function of a tonic because of the half step be-
low each of them. 4 He states that 11 only the ictus will re-
ceive the chord", 5 but also advocates placing the chord on
the Latin word accent. He permits all ornaments to be used,
and in fact, uses them in profusion, yet agrees that "the

1 sunol, Text Book of Gregor1Qn Chant, 1930, p._157 • .Qt.

Ya.seer, "Medieval Quartal Harmony", 2.R.• cit., XXIII (1937),
172.
2Potiron, Treatise Q!1 the Accompaniment of Gregorian
Chant, 1933.
3 Ibid., p. x.
4Achille Pierre Brager~, A Short·Treatise on Gregorian
Accompaniment, Carl Fischer, New York, 1934, p.""T.
5Ibid., p. 9.
 25
accompaniment should, according to Dom A. Mocquereau, be
'discreet and unobtrusive', reduced to the softest minimum,
consistent with the size of the choir, and the ability of
the singers." 1 There is some question whether his accom-
paniments actually illustrate this "discreet and unobtru-
sive" style.
Another accompaniment book widely used in the United
States is one by Rossini. 2 Tertian harmony according to
the Solesmes principles is used throughout, with chords
placed on almost every ictus. Examples from this work will
be contrasted in Chapter IV with the results of quartal
harmony as applied to these same melodies.
Peeters 3 has written one of the more recent books on
chant accompaniment. It follows the same general rules as
Bragers, Rossini, and the other Solesmes disciples, but adds
some detailed instructions for teaching chant accompaniment
and composing short preludes and postludes. He especially
notes that "the Latin text should be respected as much as
possible. 114

1 Achille Pierre Bragers, A Short Treatise on Gregorian

Accompaniment, Carl Fischer, New York, 1934, p. §o.
2Rev. Carlo Rossini, The Gregorian Kyriale with Organ
Accompaniment, J. Fischer and Bro., New York, 19~178 pp.
~lor ~eeters, Methode pratigue pour l'accompagnement
du Chant Gregorien: A Practical Method of Plain-Chant
Accompaniment, H. Dessain Co., Malines, 1949.
!irbid . , p. 6.
 26
There are many other accompaniment books, all of which
adhere more or less closely to the general Solesmes method.
The following section will present a radical departure from
these theories of modal harmony as applied to Gregorian
Chant.

The Theory of Quartal Harmony

Although the method of Joseph Yasser, to be presented

next, comes chronologically before the last two examples
mentioned, his theories on medieval harmony are obviously
the newest ideas outlined since their first publication in
1937. This method remains in the theoretical stage since
the demonstrated principles for chant accompaniment have
not been followed up by their application to any large body
of Gregorian melodies. The most lengthy illustration of
medieval harmony available has been an accompaniment by
Farrell 1 applied to a few Masses and hymns. However, the
method employed there is not exactly that of Dr. Yasser,
although he is cited as a primary bibliographical source.
The differences between the two accompaniments will be illus-
trated in Chapter IV.
Dr. Yasser's theories first appeared in The Musical
Quarterly in a series of articles in 1937-38 under the

1 Gerald J. Farrell, o.s.B., An Accompaniment to·

Gref:orian Chant in Medieval Harmony, Master's ThesisJ
Eas man School ofMusic, Rochester, New York, August, 1951.
 27
title of "Medieval Quartal Ha.rmony". 1 This series begins
by tracing certain proofs that the scale basis of Gregorian
melodies has a pentatonic rather than a modal framework.
The six or seven note appearance of most Gregorian melodies
is attributed to the gradual addition of "pien-tones", which
are the filled-in notes of a quilisma. These tones were at
first merely indicated by the quilisma, but later found
their way into the manuscripts, first with the quilisma
above the note, and then the note alone. Other reasons for
the diatonic appearance of many melodies could be the adap-
tation of one melody to different texts, modulation within
a melody which might give two different pentatonic sets
appearing to be one diatonic melody, ornamentation of the
original melody, and notes added because of the fluid or
gliding elements of Latin speech intonation. These theories
afford strong evidence that the Greek modal system was arbi-
trarily imposed upon these early pentatonic melodies. 2
The next section in the essay proceeds to explain how
the original melodies, which Dr. Yasser divides into fifteen
pentatonic species, were adjusted to the framework of the
seven diatonic scales.3
Finally, Dr. Yasser proposes the principles of "quartal
harmony" which he feels should be applied whenever a harmonic

1 Yasse~, 2.E.· cit.

2 Ibid., Vol. XXIII, pp. 170-97.
3rbid., pp. 333-66.
 28
background for pentatonic melodies is sought. These prin-
ciples consist of accepting the fourth as the primary con-
sonant interval and harmonizing a melody with "dyads" which
are ma.de up basically of the alternate notes of the scale in
question. The dyad (two-note chord) is preferred to the
triad because a three-note chord built by superimposed
fourths in this system contains two notes which are contigu-
ous in the scale (as A, D, G) and contiguous notes in any
scale system are usually considered dissonant, demanding
resolution. A more detailed discussion of different scale
systems, and specifically the pentatonic scale, can be found
in Dr. Yasser's A Theory of Evolving Tonality, 1 but in this
thesis it is sufficient to understand this latter scale as
a series built of five tones, two intervals of the scale
equalling one and one-half tones each, and the other inter-
vals a whole tone each.
Ex. 1

The consonant chords (dyads) of this scale would then be

alternate notes as follows:

1
Joseph Yasser, A Theory of Evolving Tonality, American
Library of Musicology, New York, 1932.
 29
Ex. 2

It will be observed that the second chord in the above ex-

ample forms a major third which is interpreted by Yasser as
a diminished dyad, a dissonant interval. Three-note chords,
parallel to the diatonic seventh chords, can be formed by
superimposed dyads, as:
Ex. 3

The two notes (C and Fin this scale) surrounding the final
or tonic note form the dominant dyad which ordinarily pre-
cedes the tonic final as in the diatonic system. Except
for the formation of the chords, the rules of harmony do
not differ appreciably from the diatonic system. Parallel
octaves are forbidden since they are not harmonic, but
parallel fourths and inverted fourths (fifths) are permitted.
Chords generally progress to the chord of the nearest notes,
dissonances must be resolved, and the usual ending is a
dominant-tonic sequence. Just as the Tierce de Picardie
was once employed to provide a more resonant ending to a
 30
composition in a minor key, so Dr. Yasser advocates ending
on a fifth rather than a fourth to provide a more resonant
cadence, forming a "Quinte de Picardie". 1
The application of quartal harmony to Gregorian Chant
melodies appears justified because of their pentatonic
basis and the evidence of the medieval harmonic mentality
which accepted the fourth as the smallest consonant inter-
val.2 Although in the twelfth century the fifth began to
prevail and the fourth was largely omitted from early
twelfth century treatises, this can be considered a penta-
tonic fauxbourdon process similar to the sixth preceding
the third as a consonant interval in the current system, and
the fourth was duly reinstated _g_. 1160 by Guy de Chalis. 3
In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries a tonal change
(thirds and sixths regarded as consonances) occurred, but
this was applied primarily to the secular melodies, since
little if any composition of liturgical melodies was done
at this time. This thesis can be proved by reference to the
decree of Pope John XXII, ''Doc ta Sanctorum Patrum11 (1324),
in which all forms of secular music and current polyphonic
methods were banished from the church and the ecclesiastical
chant was reinstated. This decree allowed the intervals of

1Yasser, "Medieval Quartal Harmony", The Musical

Quarterly, XXIV(1938), 351-85.
2 Ibid., pp. 364-65.
3 Ibid., pp. 372-73°
 31
the fourth, fifth, and octave in chant, which "are in the
spirit and character of the melodies themselves. 111 There
are also other proofs that the liturgical music retained the
ancient quartal basis until it became engulfed by the modal
polyphony culminating in the sixteenth century. Thus it
would seem reasonable to apply quartal harmony to Gregorian
Chant in order to preserve its ancient and medieval character.
This method of accompaniment is strongly advocated by
Jones 2 and aptly summarized by Reese who states:
If accompaniment is desirable at all • . . ,
the 'quartal' system certainly furnishes a bet-
ter basis for it in connection with the many
melodies showing unmistakable pentatonic traits
than does . • . the 'tertian' system - . . • 3
However, other reactions to Dr. Yasser's revolutionary
suggestions have been those of mixed feelings. Farrell
applied the principle of using only fourths and fifths in
chant accompaniments, but otherwise did not use true medieval
harmony. His harmonies are built on the diatonic scale and
hence employ the pien-tones which Yasser excludes from the
chordal system. The result, as illustrated in Ex. 4, is the
combination of one harmonic method and another scaler frame-
work. To the listener familiar with correct quartal harmony,

111
White List of the Society of St. Gregory of America",
New York, 1932, p. 3, quoted in Yasser, 9.E· cit., p. 380.
2Jones, op. cit., p. 127.

3Reese, 2..£· cit., p. 161 (footnote 48).

 32

Ex .. 4

1
&o

-J.
-.

.J

,_ / -1.-son.
.

I .... . . •. . . ... ...

'. ..
L
.
--
I I

-
•
I I I
,
'. - -
I I I I I I I

-
.
-
I
' I I

-
,.
.-----..J.~
I I
- -

Ch~9te
. .J._ -:J.. J..
e - .J-).-son.
1

.- .... . . I
--- . -
.-
-
,
I
- I

. ..
I - .
•
I I
I I

1
2 Gerald !<'arrell, ~• ill·, p. ;,C.
1ctUartal harmony o.S outlined by Yasr,er, ~• illQ
 33
the introduction of the two "extra" tones of the diatonic
scale into the chords of the accompaniment sounds somewhat
odd and fails to impart a satisfying effect.
The pentatonic origin of all ecclesiastical chant is
also doubted by Cardine. 1 He attacks Yasser's theory of the
plagal modes, pien-tones, fifth as an inverted fourth, and
other aspects of the treatise. 2 Nevertheless, he agrees
there is great merit in the work and states it can certainly
be read with profit by all persons interested in the problem.
,
Gastoue also has some misgivings about Yasser's conclusions,
but he sets these aside in favor of the greater proof illus-
trated in the striking example of a harmonization of parts
of Gloria XV (cf. Ex. 5).
A conclusion certainly unexpected for many of
us. But the sequence [of arguments] and the
examples of such accompaniments, composed by
Mr. Joseph Yasser, are so sensibly attempted,
that they form a demonstrative progf in favor
of their use, at least eventually.)

1 Dom Eugene Cardine, Review of Medieval Quartal Harmony

by Joseph Yasser, Revue Gregorienne, XXIV(1939), p. 236.
2 Ibid., 238-39.

3 11 conclusion [Yasser's] certainement inattendue pour

beaucoup d 1 entre nous. Mais les encha1nements et les exemples
de tels accompagnements, composes par M. Joseph Yasser, sont
si judicieusement essay6s, qu 1 ils ferment une preuve demon-
strative en faveur de leur emploi, au mains eventuel."
Amedee Gastoue, Review of Medieval Quartal Harmony by Joseph
Yasser, Revue du Chant Gregorien, XLIII(l939), 96.
 Ex. 5 ::;.10.1:nA xv 1
) . -- .L. . .- . . . b
.. .
L L, L.
.
-
L l L I

.,.- . ". -. ....

l L
r
L
,. I
r,

--
r>

....
I I I

-
I
n
-
- .....
--
I I I I

- - -
I I

-
-'
J l J J- J. J
--·· ,. - --
•
- . .
I I I I
I I I
I
I I

1 .J
-
•
 CHAPTER III

CURRENT RHYTHMIC THF.ORIES

 The problem of rhythm in the execution of Gregorian
Chant 1s somewhat difficult to solve. There appear to be
no "sure and definitive" medieval writings or other records
that can clarify with much certainty the original rhythm of
the Gregorian melodies. However, various theories have been
postulated upon evidence gathered from certain markings in
the manuscripts, writings of the medieval theoreticians, and
references to early practices connected with the music of
the Church. Three of these theories are currently the most
widely known and practiced. Each will be briefly described
in an attempt to understand their main tenets.

1'.h!_ Mensuralist School

The Mensuralist theories, which are seldom put into

practice today, are based on evidences from treatises of
the fourth to the twelfth centuries and are supported by
many notable scholars such as Jeannin, Dechevrens, Bonvin,
Gietmann, and Peter Wagner. 1 The main tenet of this school
consists of the assigning of the modern time values of whole
notes through eighth notes to the neumes and single notes
(punctums and virgas) of Gregorian notation. This leads to
the concept of the "Gregorian measure", of which Jeannin out-
lines the following properties:

l
Reese, Music in the Midgle Ages, pp. 143, 145.
 37
(1) alternation of proportional long and short
tones.
(2) grouping of these long and short tones into
groups of two to eight primary beats.
(3) the existence of strong and weak beats. 1
The above scholar 1 together with Peter Wagner 1 advocates the
more widely accepted postulate that there are only two dif-
ferent time-durations rather than the three durations pro-
posed earlier by Dechevrens 1 Gietmann 1 and Bonvin. 2 These
two time values are roughly equivalent to the eighth-note
and the quarter-note, the latter being applied to the accented
syllables, 3 which generally occur in connection with the
ascending passages in the melody. 4 These Latin word accents
are the basis for a number of the rhythmic patterns of the
Mensuralists and are always considered of great importance.
Maugin, in the 11 Directions for Chanters and Chorus" of
his nineteenth-century Kyriale, indicates that there are four
time values, all incorporated in the K:yriale melodies which
are given in modern notation.

1 Ludwig Bonvin, "The 'Measure' in Gregorian Music", The

Musical Quarterly. XV(1929), 18.
2 Reese, Q.12.• cit.1 p. 143.

,, 3nom Jules Jea.nnin, Accent bref Q.!! Accent 12.!!& Chant

Gregorien? 1 H. Herelle and Cie., Paris, 1929, p. 2.
4Jeannin, Etudes le Rythme Gregorien, Etienne Gloppe,
Lyon, 1925, p. 120.
 38
Ex. 6

He claims that these are "faithfully translated from the

Gregorian notation", and explains that ea.ch preceding note
is longer than the other, but the "vg.lue is not so much of
mathematical exactness as of good taste and proper training
in matter of' Liturgy. 01 These examples perhaps give some
idea. of the divergence of theory among the Mansura.lists
themselves.
But in spite of this divergence, they have certain his-
torical bases for their claims. Schmidt quotes such mediev~l
theoreticians a.s Hucba.ld, Guido, and Berno of Reichenau
(ninth through eleventh centuries) . 2 Bonvin consults Aribo 3
(late eleventh century), and Jea.nnin quotes the 11 Ars
Mensurabilis'' (eleventh or twelfth century). 4 However.,
probably the main criticism against these authorities is
that they may be describing the rhythm of the new polyphony
and decadent chant rather than the original manner of

lRev. c. Maugin., Kyriale, John Murphy and Co., Baltimore.,

1857., pp. 7-8.
2J. G. Schmidt "Principal Texts of the Gregorian Authors
concerning Rhythm" fpa.mphletJ., Buffa.lo Volksfreund Pr. Co . .,
N .Y . ., 1928.
3Bonv1n., QB.• ill·, p. 16.
4Jea.nn1n, Accent bref, p. 7.
 39
executing the old chant melodies. The fact that there is
such difference of opinion concerning time values explains
why the Mensuralists have not been able to set up a universal
or workable system for the application of their theories.
These theories cannot be applied by the ordinary church musi-
cian, but only by the individual scholars according to the
respective interpretations of each. This is obviously a
highly unsatisfactory arrangement which has perhaps contri-
buted to the disrepute of the system among many twentieth-
century church musicians.

The Accentualist School

The Accentualist School illustrates in a different man-

ner the belief that the word accent was intensive from the
very beginnings of Gregorian Chant 1 and that all 11 Gregorian
melody is built on the grammatical accents of the liturgical
text. 112 It is headed by Dom Pothier, the second of the
Solesmes abbots who have lead the Gregorian reform,and num-
bers such illustrious followers as Dom Lucien David and Pierre
Aubry.
The manner of execution of chant according Lu these
scholars is relatively simple. The chant is treated much

1Reese, ~· cit., p. 141.

2Ibid., p. 166.
 40
as oratorical poetry, 1 with the notes of equal value and the
accent falling on the natural accent of the word. Contrary
to the Mensuralist views, this accent is not one of duration
but one of stress .
• • . the notes are equal in duration, and un-
equal only in intensity.2
The old liturgical languages, . . . , have in
each word one syllable affected with a tonic ac-
cent which stresses that syllable in the spoken
or chanted pronunciation and which constitutes
the unity of the word. At the time which inter-
ests us, this accent is always an accent of inten-
sity which gives to the accented syllable neither
more sharpness, 3 nor a longer duration, but a
greater stress.
These notes of equal value constitute free rhythm, which is
essential to the basic character of Gregorian chant, the ea~-
liest examples of which were simple readings or declamations. 4
According to David, the spirit of the early oratorical chants

1 Dom Joseph Pothier, Les Melodies Gregoriennes,

/ /
Desclee
and Co.~ Tournai, 1880, p. 191.
211 • • • les notes sont egales en duree, et inegales
seulement en intensi te. 11 Pothier, 2.:2.· cit. , p. 196.
3 11 Les langues liturgiques anciennes, . . • , ont dans
chique mot une syllabe affectee d'un accent tonique qui met
cette syllabe en relief dans la prononciation parlee ou chan-
tee et·qui constitue l'unite du mot. A l'~poque qui nous
occupe, cet accent est touiours un accent d 1 intens1te qui
donne·a la syllabe accentuee ni plus d'acuite, ni plus de
duree, maif!_ plus de force." Pierre Aubry, Le Rythme Tonique
dans la Poesie Liturgigue et dans le Chant·des Eglises
cEr'etiennes !!!, Moyen Age, H. Welter, Paris, 1903, p. 55.
4nom Lucien David~ 0.§.B-~ Le rythme verbal et musical
dans·le chant remain, Les editions de l'Universitrd'Ottawa,
1933, p. so.
 41
continued to influence the musical composers of the Church
in later centuries. 1
The problem of applying these theories to examples of
identical melodies with different texts has been considered
by David. While he does not deny the possibility of the pre-
sence of a purely melodic accent, he maintains that this
"melodic accent was inseparable from the accent of intensity
and was even subordinated to it. 112 Therefore it was con-
cluded that these fixed melodic formulas were usually modi-
fied when used with a differently accented text in order to
conform to the accents of the text.3
Pothier has discussed the hymns. He places emphasis on
the metrical system of Latin poetry and applies its princi-
ples especially to those hymns with poetical texts which
naturally tend to be more metrical than the other chants.
However, he maintains that the hymns must still be treated
primarily according to the word accent and less according to
the metrical accent.
Practically, let us repeat, when these hymns are
syllabic, one must give them a natural movement
of recitation, in stressing somewhat the metrical

1 Dom Lucien David, O.S.B., Le rythme verbal~ musical

dans le chant romain, Les editions de l'Universite d'Ottawa,
1933, p. 50.
211 accent melodique etait inseparable de l'accent
d'intensit~ et lui etait meme subordonne. 11 David, QE.• cit.,
p. 50.
3Ibid . , p. 55.
 42
accent, without a great deal of concern for the
tonic acc!nt, and in leaving out completely the
quantity.
The Accentualist theories appear to be fairly well sup-
ported. Aubry, in criticizing the work of the Mansura.list
exponent, Dechevrens, demonstrates that all chant is of the
same basic pattern of free rhythm according to the universal
sign, XPON0S., which is the smallest rhythmic unit. 2 He
maintains that it was from the sixteenth to the eighteenth
centuries that the chant was altered both in tonality and
rhythm.3 and that unequal rhythm is primarily the result of
the work of eighteenth and nineteenth century artists. 4 He
confirms the Benedictine free rhythm of Dom Pothier in stating
The liturgical poetry of the Christian Churches
has not known any other principles of versifica-
tion other than this accent, the return of which
at fixed places constitutes a rhythmic element.5
Dom David defends the idea that there may be larger group-
ings than the two-and three-note-groups ordinarily recognized

1 "Pratiquement, nous le repetons, lorsque ces hymnes

sent syllabiques, 11 faut leur donner un mouvement natural
de recitation, en appuyant quelque peu sur l'accent metrique,
sans s'inquieter beaucoup de l'accent tonique, et en laissant
absolument de cote la quantite. 11 Pothier, 2.!2.· cit., p. 197.
2 Aubry, QE.• Cit., p. 11.
3 Ibid. , p. 82 •
4 Ibid., p. 78.

5 11 La poesie liturgique des Eglises Chretiennes n'a pas

connu d'autres principes de versification que cet accent,
dent le retour a des places determinees constitue un element
rythmique. 11 Aubry, p. 55.
 43
by the Mocquereau disciples, by giving examples of Latin
psalm verses that fall very naturally into a four syllable
pattern.
But the presence of monosyllables and the psy-
chological and grammatical necessity of some-
times adding them as the close complement of a
preceding ternary group, determine 1 then a group-
ing of four indivisible syllables.
He also maintains that certain signs in the manuscripts prob-
ably represent intensity, and not elongation. 2
Pothier has reconciled free rhythm with the writings of
Guido3 and aptly summarized his own views on the Mensuralist
proofs for their theories.
While quoting in their treatises some examples
of plain-chant, the mensuralists do not intend
therefore to submit the Gregorian melodies to
their system of rhythm; the plain-chant of which
they speak is that which o~dinarily makes up the
bass part in their motets.
The importance of the word accent is maintained by all
schools of rhythmic theories, yet that of the Accentualists
seems to provide the only system easily applied to achieve

1 "Mais la presence de monosyllabes et la necessit6

psychologique et grammaticale de les adjoindre parfois comme
le comp16ment intime d'un groupe ternaire precedent determi-
nent alors un groupement de quatre syllabes indivisible."
David, 212.· ~it., p. 46.
2 Ibid., pp. 98-99.
3pothier, QE.• cit., ~P• 182-83.
411 En citant dans leurs traitfs des exemples de plain-
chant, les mensuralistes n'entendent pas pour cela soumettre
a leur systeme de rythme lea melodies gregoriennes; le plain-
chant dont ils parlent est celui dont ils font ordinairement
la partie de basse dans leur motets." Pothier, p. 197.
 44
this result in actual singing of the chant. They are indi-
rectly supported by many writers on the chant who emphasize
this word accent yet hesitate to support any particular school
of rhythmic theories.

The Solesmes School

The Solesmes rhythmic theories are by far the best

known and probably the object of the most diverse criticisms
of all the systems. The title of "Solesmes" is not entirely
accurate since the rhythmic theories which are meant are
actually those of Dom Mocquereau and his disciples and do
not include those of Dom Pothier and the other Solesmes lead-
ers in Gregorian restoration. However, since this title is
popularly employed, it will also be used here.
The main theories of this system are based on the pre-
mise of free rhythm, or all notes basically equal in dura-
tion. To this premise are added the theories of two-and
three-note groupings of notes, the arsis and thesis, and
the four signs, i.e. episema (i.), dot(,·), ictus(•),
and the connna (. '•) . 1
The grouping consists of dividing a melodic line into
groups of two and three notes and placing an ictus on the
first note of each group, 2 as in the following Kyrie:

1 Reese, ~- cit., pp. 141-42.

2Dom J. H. Desroquettes, o.s.B., "The Rhythmic Traditions
in the Manuscripts", Caecilia, LXXXI(1954), 51.
 , ,..
45
Ex. 7

C
I
,
• • •, •
I
•·
I II
Ky- ri- e e- le- i- son.

This is accomplished by placing an ictus on the first note

of every neume and on all doubled or long notes, and then
counting back (right to left) by twos to place the others.
"It is an excellent practice in rhythming, therefore, to be-
gin from the first certain ictus on the right and work back
to the left to find the others. 112 This type of grouping is
disputed by David3 and Murray, the latter of whom claims that
"although this exclusively binary and ternary grouping is an
essential element in Solesmes theory, it is unsupported by
any literary evidence from the past. 114 This criticism seems
particularly enlightening since it comes from a person who

1 Graduale Sacrosanctae Romanae Ecclesiae de Tempore et

de Sanctis, et rhythmicis signis a Solesmensibus Monachis,
Society of St. John the Evangelist, Desc16e and Co., Tournai,
1952, p. 4.
2 Dom -
Gregory Sunol, o.s.B., Text Book of Gregorian
Chant, Desclee and Co., Tournai, 1930, p. 77.

3 Dav id , .Q:Q.. cit . , p . 46 .

4 nom Gregory Murray, "Plainsong Rhythm (The Editorial

Methods of Solesmes)", Caecilia, LXXXIV(1957), p. 11
(footnote).
 46
was for many years in complete agreement with the Solesmes
rhythmic theories. 1
The ictus, sometimes called a vertical episema ('}, is
a term and a sign evolved by Solesmes to mark the rhythm of
a melodic line. Its actual function is rather elusive since
the various definitions and explanations given do not appear
to clarify sufficiently its proper interpretation. It has
been defined as an "alighting place" 2 or "simply a 'dip' of
the voice, an alighting place sought by the rhythm at inter-
vale of every two or three notes • . . 113 Other definitions
include the "rhythmic fall", 4 the "beat, sound, touch, or
stroke 115 which "falls at the end of the rhythm, on the note
of repos. 116 Sunol compares the ictus to the first beat of a
measure 7 and goes on to say
The ictus must be divorced from any idea of
force or lengthening out. It is a common fault
to assimilate it to the accent of the words and

1Murray, ttGregorian Rhythm: A Pilgrim's Progress",

Downside Review, LII, Catholic Records Press, Exeter, 1934,
pp. 13-47.
2 sunol, Q.E.• cit., p. 67.
3Ibid., p. 73.
~ev. Andrew F. Klarmann, Greforian Chant, Gregorian
Institute of America, Toledo (Ohio, 1945, p. 33.
5nom Andre Mocquereau ·Le Nombre Musical Gregorien,
(translated by Aileen Tone~, Soc. of St. John the Evangelist,
Descl~e and Co., Tournai, 1932, p. 47.
6 rbid., p. 61.
7 ,......
Sunol, Q.E.• cit., p. 77.
 47
give it their value. In itself it may be
strong or weak; it only gains its dynamic
or quantitative value from the note which
happens to correspond to it • . . . It can
readily be understood that this must be so
in order to safeguard the unity of the com-
pound beat.l
The above descriptions testify to the difficult-to-
define nature of the ictus. Murray summarizes the numerous
criticisms of this synthetic rhythmic sign when he states
• . • the Solesmes writers can adduce no an-
cient description or definition of the 11 ictus 11
in their special sense of the word, as a down-
beat essentially without impulse actual or im-
plied . • . . Furthermore, there is not a sin-
gle "ictus" mark as such in any ancient manu-
script; all the authentic rhythmic signs con-
cern the lengths of the notes.2
The episema and dot are two more rhythmic :markings
peculiar to the Solesmes method. The first usually denotes
a lengthening but not a doubling of a note value, while the
second occurs most often at the end of a phrase and means
the note shall receive two pulses. These markings are not
as widely criticized as the ictus since there appears to be
some historical evidence for them in certain manuscripts such
as those of St. Gall and Beneventaine. 3

1 Sunol,
- 2E..· cit., p. 73,
2 Murray, "Plainsong Rhythm", p. 11 (footnote).
,..,,,
3Dom Gregory S~nol, o.s.B., Introduction 'a la Paleo-
.,
graphie Musicale Gregorienne, Society of St. John the
Evangelist, Descl~e and Co., Paris, 1935, pp. 136-38,
157-58.
 48
The comma, as well as the vertical double, full, half,
and incise bar lines, indicate where phrases end and where
breaths may be taken. Frequently they are purely editorial
markings that do not appear in the manuscripts.
In view of the extensive studies of the Solesmes schol-
ars, it is important to consider their views and historical
claims very carefully. Sunol states that most manuscripts
t"J

indicate rhythm by modifying the neumes or making certain

additions to the notation. 1 However, the method of inter-
preting these modifications appears to be somewhat arbitrary
upon examination of an explanation such as this:
If indeed, in a series of notes on the unison,
the copyist writes the punctum planum in an
elongated manner, this is not in order to mark
the note long, but simply for greater conven-
ience of writing. Let us note that the punctum
planum is a 2 true sign of retard when it affects
the neumes.
There are also indications that many of these signs exist
only in the St. Gall manuscripts and possibly were not at

1 ,,....,
Dom Gregory Sunol, O.S~B., Introduction a' la Paleo-
.,,
graphie Musicale Gregorienne, Society of·St. Johnthe
Evangelist, Descl§e and Co., Paris, 1935, p. 157.

-
211 s1 en effet dans une serie de notes
, .,, a
l 'unisson,
le copiste ecrit le punctum planum allonge, ce n'est pas
pour marquer une note longue, mais simplement pour une plus
grande commodite d'ecriture. Notons que le punctum planum
est un veritable signe de retard quand 11 affecte les
neumes. 11 Sunol, Introduction a la Paleographie Musicale
Gregorienne, p. 140.
 49
all indicative of universal practice at that time. 1 Sun.al
admits that there are justifications for the interpretation
of certain manuscript rhythmic letters from other writings
of monks, but these writings make no mention of rhythmic
signs. 2 He concludes that
Without doubt many of the manuscripts do not
define the rhythm with all the desirable clar-
ity; but there has been found a very sufficient
number which is of incontestable value - we
have already studied some of them,-which ena-
ble us to clarify this qu§stion of rhythm as
far as its least details.,
Burge 4 has violently criticized the rhythmic theories
of Dom Mocquereau, refuting one by one the various proposi-
tions outlined in Volume VII of the Paleographie Musicale.
He refers to this volume as a "large quarto of nearly three
hundred pages, written in a diffuse and exaggerated style
that makes it rather trying to read",5 and states of Dom
Mocquereau that

1 Jeannin, Etudes le Rythme Gregorien, p. 124.

2 sunol, Introduction, p. 140-50.

3 11 sans doute beaucoup de manuscrits ne precisent pas

le rythme avec tout~ la clarte desirable; mais 11 s'en.
trouve un nombre tres suffisant et d'une valeur incontest-
able - nous en avons deja etudie quelques -uns, - qui nous
permettent d'eclairer cette question du rythme jusque dans
ses moindres details." Sunol, p. 434.
4 Rev. Thomas Anselm Burge, o.s.B.,An Examination of
the Rhythmic Theories of Dom Mocguereau, R. & T. Washbourne,
London, 1905.
5Ibid., p. 4.
 50
We may also see his strong preoccupation to
reduce the Gregorians to bars and measures of
modern music, to place the accent on the weak
beat, the thesis on the strong, the forcible
adaption of text to music, the inability to
understand trochee metre, and a number of other
oddities tha£ I hope to expose in the course of
these pages.
Although these criticisms are very strongly stated, similar
ones have been noted by the present writer and others. 2
Desroquettes answers them thus:
. . • but in spite of all their imperfection,
the rhythmic signs of Solesmes, even the most
criticized vertical episemas, make possible an
execution not only popular, not only artistic,
but also as a whole certainly based on the indi-
cations of the manuscripts, on the objective
structure of·the melodies that they have trans-
mitted to us, and on the rhythmic principles
constantly applied in those melodies.3
Many church musicians and scholars will agree that the
renditions according to this system are certainly popular and
often artistic, yet the disagreement on manuscript evidence
leads to the conclusion that a great deal of further study
and evidence will be required before these theories can be
accepted unequivocally.

lRev. Thomas Anselm Burge, o.s.B.,·An Examination of

the Rhythmic Theories of Dom Mocquereau, R. & T. Washbourne,
London, 1905, p. 6.
2Jeannin, Etudes sur le Rhythme Gregorien; and Murray,
"Plainsong Rhythm", Q.12.• cit.
3nesroquettes, ~- cit., p. 52.
 CHAPTER IV

METHOD OF THE PRESENT ACCOMPANIMENT

 52
Harmony

The harmonic structure employed in the following accom-

paniments is essentially that proposed by Dr-. Yasser 1 and
discussed more fully in Chapter II of this thesis. This is
a quartal system based on the premise that Gregorian melodies
are built on a pentatonic scale structure.
The underlying pentatonic structure has been observed
in numerous instances, particularly in the earlier chants.
In the psalm tones, for instance, the flexus ordinarily
occurs on the note directly adjacent to and below the recit-
ing tone. However, in the second, third, fifth and eighth
tones, this flexus drops a minor third which is two notes
below the reciting tone. The reason for this may well be
the unconscious desire to avoid using the pien-tone as a
note of repose. Other indications of support for the pien-
tone theory also follow from a close examination of the Gre-
gorian melodies. These pien-tones appear most often as part
of a neume. When they do occur in monosyllabic chants they
almost exclusively accompany a syllable unaccented in the
Latin text. Sentences and word phrases, as well as melodic
phrases, never end on a pien-tone. Two pien-tones are never
found in succession, either set to separate syllables or to
one syllable (thus causing what is executed as a note of

1Joseph Yasser, "Medieval Quartal Harmony", The Musical

Quarterly, XXIII(1937), 170-97, 333-36; XXIV(1938;,351-85.
 53
double time value). The only instances of pien-tones appear-
ing as long notes are in the Solesmes editions where a dot
is added to the note, probably arbitrarily. Therefore, the
premise of pentatonic structure has much factual evidence and
was thus accepted as a basis for the use of quartal harmony.
The first step in the application of this harmonic
theory to an accompaniment for a Gregorian melody consists
of classifying the melody according to one or more of the
fifteen pentatonic species {Table 1). 1 This can be done by
examining the melodic figurations of the melody and deter-
mining which tones were originally pien-tones. Thus, by a
process similar to "reverse restoration", 2 the melodic struc-
ture can be reduced to five tones rather than six or seven
as it ordinarily appears in the present notation.
Ex. 8 Kyrie XVI
--
J, J:) E 3t t di 3
{:.
f;. b -fl
"if- -;;_
II ~) I II
, , , .
Ky- ri- e e- le-i-son. Chris-te e- le-1-son.

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

1 Yasser, 212.· cit., p. 335.

2 Yasser, "How Can the Ancient Hebrew Melos Be Restored?",
Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference-Convention of the
Cantors' Assembly of America and the Department of Music of
the United Synagogue of America, 1956, p. 31.
 54

TABLE I
FIFTEEN PENTATONIC SPECIES

Species Scale with piens in ( ) Mode

1 n* (E) F G A (B) C D I
I
2
-D E (F) G A B (C) D
-
3 D E (F) G A (B} C D I
4 D E (F) G A (Bb)c D I

5 D (E) F G A (Bb)C D I
6 A (B) C D (E) F G A II
-
7 E (F) G A B (C) D E III
8 E (F) G A (B) Q D E III
9 B (C) D E (F) G A B IV
10 F G A (B) C D (E) F V
11 G (A) Bb C D (E) F V
-F
12 F G A (Bb)c D (E) F V
C D E F G A B VI
- -
G

A (B) C D (E) F G VII

13
-G -
14 G A B (C) D E (F} G VII
15 G A (B) C D E (F) G VII
D E F G A B C D VIII

* indicates final of mode, indicates dominant of mode.

-
 55
It will be noted in Exar.1ple 8 (p. 53) that the starred pien-
tones (C and F) are either due to elaboration of the melody
(C) or represent a part of a descending, and presumably
"quilismatic 11 , passage (F). The melody retains its general
contour and melodic essence when these tones are omitted.
If modulations are present, they must also be determined by
this same process.
With the pentatonic scale of the Kyrie in Ex.ample 8
outlined as:

Ex. 9-~----0-4~-6--0_ _

the system of quartal chords (dyads and triads) can then be

constructed according to the alternate notes of the scale.
Ex. 10

Tonic Dom.

The dominant and tonic dyads are noted, as well as the three-
note chords (quartal triads) and their respective resolutions.
The last step is to place these chords in a certain
relationship to the melodic line. The most practical method,
which consists of having the dyadic accompaniment below the
 56
melodic line, is the one employed here, although other
arrangements are certainly desirable and give an artistic
variety. The accompaniment may be varied by placing it
above or around the melodic line as is illustrated with the
Introit of Christmas and the Easter Sequence. With a suf-
ficiently well trained choir the melodic line may be omitted
entirely and the accompaniment perhaps expanded in range
and/or number of voices to accomodate this change. The in-
dividual organist may experiment with these variations ac-
cording to the needs and abilities of his choir and
congregation.
One of the problems encountered in classifying chants
according to species is the evidence of diatonic elements
in many melodies, particularly the Credos, and some of the
later Ordinaries such as Masses VIII and XI. These may be
harmonized in a manner mixing tertian and quartal elements
according to the principle that "the harmonies used should,
as far as possible, be a synthesis of the most important
intervals in the melody. 111 However, bearing in mind the
fact that many of the later chants were derived from earlier
melodic patterns, the basic elements of quartal harmony should
not be neglected.

1Henr1 Potiron, Treatise on the Accompaniment of

Gregorian Chant. (translated by Ruth c. Gabain), Soc. of
St. John the Evangelist, Desclee and Co., Tournai, 1933,
p. 141.
 57
Quartal formations may also be applied with a
persuasive effect to melodies veering away
gradually from the pentatonic to the diatonic
basis. And even thou~ it would be quite nor-
mal, generally, to inJect here an ever increas-
ing amount of tertian formations, their avoid-
ance rather than use would still be preferable
in harmonizations, of at least some of such
'intermediate' melodic specimens.I
Although these quartal formations are foreign to the
modern ear, the experiences of the writer and others 2 in
comparing tertian and quartal accompaniments (Ex. 11) indi-
cate that the ear of the listener adapts quite readily to
the new sounds, especially if these correctly employ the
melodic elements. Therefore "conditions should be favorable
now for a new approach, based upon the principle that the
accompaniment should be related as closely~ practicable to
the times of origin of the chants. 113

Rhythm

Another factor in the placing of the chords is the rhyth-

mic movement. Since the Solesmes edition of the Vatican

1 Joseph Yasser, "The Traditional Roots of Jewish Harmony",

Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference-Convention of
the Cantors I Assembly and the Dept. of Music of the United
Synagogue of America, 1951, p. 17.
2Jones, "The Harmonic Basis of Plainchant Accompaniment",
Caecilia, LXXXII(1955) 127-29; and Farrell, An Accompaniment
to Gregorian Chant in Medieval Harmony, Master's Thesis,
Eastman School of Music, Rochester, August, 1951.
3Jones, QB.• cit., p. 127.
 58

Ex. 11

1
a .. M.;;.;iS XVI

• e- ili- S<P'•

1 Ross1n1,
· · .2.E,.• £..•,
·t P• 92 •
4
Quart3.J. horn:ony by writ.er.
 59
Graduale is currently the most widely used, all of the rhyth-
mic markings, excluding the controversial ictus, will be
followed. The icti and the corresponding Solesmes practice
of placing a chord on almost every one of them are rejected
because of the resulting conflict with the Latin word accent.
"But to place chords under the theses [which have icti], and
to take them by preference will make the accent seem to be in
perpetual discord with that which should be its support and
the result will be a kind of syncopation. 111 Therefore, while
most dots and episemas will be retained, chords will be
placed only on Latin word accents or on the first notes of
neumes in melismatic passages in basic accordance with the
Accentualist rhythmic theories.
The frequency of chord changes is also to be considered.
Since the earliest chants were simple readings or declama-
tions,2 it is felt that this speech-like movement should be
retained in executing the chant. This should result in a
movement a little faster than is often heard, although never
sounding hurried. Therefore, chord changes, except for ca-
dences, are relatively infrequent, ranging from every two or
three to every six or more notes according to the passage in

1 Quotation of Vincent D'Indy in Burge, An Examination

of the Rhythmic Theories of Dom Mocguereau, Ff:- & T. wa·shbourne,
London, 1905, p. 16. - -
2oavid, Le rythme verbal et musical dans le chant remain,
Les editions de l'universite d'Ottawa, 1933, p. 50.
 60
question. Jones states
Constant changes of chords and intervals sound
heavy and clumsy, and create rhythmic difficul-
ties which need not exist if sustained ones are
held . . . . Let rhythm be the concern of the
singers. The business of the organ is to 1 fur-
n1sh harmony without impeding the rhythm.
While it is agreed that the accompaniment should not impede
the rhythm, neither should it entirely neglect it since the
assistance of an accompaniment with certain basic elements
of movement may enable a choir or congregation that is un-
familiar with free rhythm to execute it in a more satisfac-
tory manner.
Therefore, chord changes will be employed less frequently
than in previously published accompaniments, and will prefer-
ably take place on the Latin word accent. Since occasionally
a more ornate accompaniment may be desired, an illustration
of parts of Mass I harmonized in this manner is included
(Ex. 12).

Selection of Chants

The chants selected for harmonization were chosen for

two primary reasons.
(1) Frequency of use by choirs in the modern
Catholic High Mass and relative artistic
and practical value.
(2) Date or era of probable composition with
preference given to the earlier chants.

1Jones, .QE.• cit., p. 129.

 61

Ex ... 12

MASS I

i.i - 1

ri - e Ky-ri-

.JlJ J
 62
Four of the more common masses of the Kyriale are har-
monized. Next the Gloria Patri tones and the psalm tones
are included because they are so frequently employed to chant
the propers at High Mass. Finally, the full Gregorian pro-
pers of the Feasts of the Nativity and Easter, as well as the
Alleluia and Gradual of Holy Saturday, are harmonized.1 It is
hoped that this will represent a sample collection which will
be practical for the average parish organist.
Perhaps this small group of accompaniments will help to
create, for some at least, . the 11 :musically satisfactory
result" 2 which other accompaniments have not yet accomplished.

1 rn conformity with the style of Gregorian notation,

the Lr.tin words in the accompaniments have been arranged
with the vowels beneath the first note to be sung on that
§..Y.llable..•

2·Jones, Q.E.· cit., p. 127.

 CHAPTER V

QUARTAL ACCOMPANIMENTS
 MA.iS I 64

iij.

e
. --
,-
.. .......
____ -----.
1lri-s.op. iij.

ij.

X c.

Glef-ri- a in ex- ell-sis De- o.

7.nae
-
/ /
mi-ni-bus vo-lun-ta- tis. Lau-da-mus te • Be-ne- di -

--·-- .J

Ci • Glo-ri-fi-cf- mus te.

4'-·
 ,. ,.
.----- ......
Gra,-ti- as ar" 6 i-111us am

us Pa-ter

/ .
Do-mi- r.e Fi-li
---

us Pa-
 66
(con;

~-------- .
•
Quo-ni- am_t,; so-lua san.:ct so -

IN

3an-ctus 1mi- nus De-us

ri-a tu- a.
.---
Ho-oan-
 67

,
A-~J De-i qui tol-lia pec-c_:r..,:a mi-se-

---". . J
re no - his. ij. A-~..l. De-i qui tol-lis

.~ -•. -----.
pe c-c~- ta m'\n - di,: do-na
 68

/
le-i-son. iij.

.J:--J: ---_ /

--- -
Chi-!!!, le-i-son. ii.i.
---:

•
- -
/ /

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

- - - -
/
le-i-son.

ri-a in ex-c/1-sis De - o. in ter-ra pax ho- r.i-

-
 ,I
A-do- ra mus te. ca - mus

- --
I I'
Gra-ti- as glo-ri- am tu- am.

I /
Do-mi-ne De- us, rtex eae-le- stia, De - us Pa

I' .
-pot-ens. Do-mi-r.e

-- - - .. Pa
,I
I'
ste. Do-mi-ne De- us, A-gnus De- i, Fi- li- us

I
tris. Qui tol-11s r,ec-c:i-ta mun-di, mi-se- re no-bis.
 70

re-ca-ti~ - nem

stram. no -

bis.

-
Tu so-lus mus, Je Chri ste. Cum
.
3U
,,,..

,- ~--
--
.... .
#I
-
- -~- -- - -__,
•
.
I I I I

-
I I I I

-
I
- I

• A
J.--.J. -.J:- .J.. mj;J
-.·--.
- - •·
- I -
I
-

- • I
I I I
 71

-~-~~-*·-~ . -.·
/
- ctur, . I Sap - I ctur Dofmi-nus

ba- oth.
J

,I
in Be-ne-di-

/ .
ctus qui in no-mi-ne

,I /
san-na in eel
--J.--J

c.

j · gnus De qui
I
pee-ca-ta. mun-di:
/
mi-se-1- -
 72
on.)

i:;r-
/
Ar:nus De-i, qui tol-lis pee-ca-ta di:
,r -

; I ..L -
-- -- . .. ... -- .. h.
I

- -- -- - -- -
I . ,,1
, I I - I I I r

I -
"' I~ I I I I --, I

- - -
I I
-
I

7se-l~.}:l - J-lis
-

. • Dj ;J_ l
/
b:ts.
~- gnus qui pee

. _,..... . . --I .
. . .
..-
-
.,,
I

--· -
.
I ....-

'
l I I I I I

I I
I l

I
.......
I.. .... - I
- . . .
-- .
,. ....
I r I

,._
-
" I I I I I I
I I

. - ca-ta
/
mun- di: do-na - ~.l--=---:r ·
.-·_,.. I J.
. I I
I
I
I

•
'
I

I I I
 MA.SS XV
.:iH:1-.,LE E:S~T.3 73

....
I I
- ~eri-son. Ky-
.~
•

I .
e - le-i-son. Chri-ste
J:---..L

NI

•
I
.- . I
I I
•
I I \• ' h ll
•
•

,_;t
- 1e'-1:r·
e

... . . - J•
'

,
•
r
• • - • •
•

. .-. .." • -•
I Glcris-\ .. . . ...
.
- .. . .- .. ...
• _X .C • I

- -.... -- - -
I I l

--
I. I
r
_, "
n
•,. • "•
. '. -
I I I I I I

- -
-•
- ,.
~r- -
I
Et in ter-':.:.t :,e-:J-ni-~
..4
' Gl,t-;:•i-c\ in ex-cel-s1.s De-o. bo-

.- .. .. -•J . -.
r
I
. . I
-
*'Ia.K:en in :::)art, ,nth slight modifications. from -:>r •.. Yas:;er•s "Medieval
~uartal Harmony'', JUL. _g.!_., pA 360, with his ki.ud perllll.ssion ..
 I Gloria..
.
Cc on ...)
. ..... . ... - .... .... .. - ..... - ...
74

- - -
.
I
.-.
I
•
- - -- -- -
I

•
- -- . -
r

-
I a I

-
I I I I I I
I

• Lfd~-m~s . -
;'

......---.. :l·
;'
nae vo-lun-~tie. te.

---
~ne- ~ci-mus
.-_,.... - -J - J
. -.
-- -·
-
,.
•
- . . :.
I I
I I I I

,.,
I• I I

-
•ri-fi-c.;rmua te.

tol-lia pee -

mun-di, mi-se-rl-re
~-
 75

-··-
P~tris,

cto

tu-a. Ho
..Li .J.
 76

I
Ho san-na.
.J.

qui tol-lis pec-clta mun-di: re

ta mun - di:

i, qui

tol-lis cem.
 MAS::. XVI 77
1',ERIAL

1L4-. .. "
-
/
e e-,41-son. 11 j • Ch~ate e-~i-eon. iij. Ky-ri - e

-
\
.

-- -.. .s;r-:-~
e -19l.:
__i __
/
ij.

- -
I , I , /
Glo-r1-a in ex-eel-sis De-o. -ra pax ho-~ni-bua b_:nae

I
La1..1-da-mus te •
..l

t .... ... .... .. .... ... .. . . . .

- - - . . .... ... .... .-
-- -- --
I

-
I

-
,, I " ,- I 1• r I I
I
I

'I

I
! ' pro-pter ma-gnam ,51o-ri-am
' .
tJam. DI .
o-cu-ne lus Rex cae -lf-stis,
.J.
. J- I.
-J. --
- ir:::11
I
-.
..-- -
.. ....-.-
.. ---.. - --· .
I
 78

I . F /
Do-ru1.-ne •i-li lni-~;_1i-~, Je-su

I
us :i-tris. tol-lis pee-ca-ta mun-di,
J.

se-re-re
I
q_,d. tol-lis pec-c::i.-ta mun-di,
I

. ... . . .
. . - .
. ..
... . - . ....•
- -
I I l

-
I I I I
n •• n n
I
r> n
I
n
I I I I I

- -
,

- - ...
;Jui se-cie s ad ciex-te-ram
.- ~- ..l-J
I
' slsci-pe ~1;re-ca-ti-o"-nem no-stram.
J J:-- _.l.
I
... -.
~...
I

I
- .-- •
I
--::.-.
I

-I
I I

•
I

. • . . .. .. - . . .,. ..
.. . - .
- - --
I l

- -
I I I I I
n
'" n
__.
-
I I I I I l I l

-
,
' Pa-tris, mi-se-re-re no-bis.
I
~uo-ni-am t so-lua 3au-ctus. ')_so-
1
-..l-
ll

--..L
-J
,-1 .J .J.
. .. --·
.
- -. - -
J-
. --
~-
. ,.. .
I
I
-
.
I I

I
 79
. . . ....
--,. --.. - -'
...,- "' Gloria (con.)
Ambrosian • l h M
--
I
,, ft
,. n ft r, n ft I I I I
-
-
I - I

• •
1- I

- -

Dl~'l·
/

-
/
' lus so-lus Al-~~mx, Je-su
Ch~!:l j
.....
. I .. I
I I
. -~
•
-
.
I
-..
I
I

~ i Pa-tris.

. . . . -- . -. . .-
- -- - - - -- - -- - --- -.
. -
- -
I I

_,I -
I I - I 'I I

-
I

' meno
.J_ rt- --r! J
-J..
-..
I .
-
- I
I
I
-l -
.
I

.:ian-ctus,

eunt
.~
et t .. r-ra r' ·

I
no-
/ /
Be-ne-di-ctus qui ve- nit in no - mi- ne Do- mi-ni.
..1. .J. .J ..L-..l J
 80
. ..... ...
Sancduo , c.c.n. ). -
.• •--
.
'
-- - - ·-
·---
.

-.
,.
l I I
.. I
I
-
I I I

-
j

sfn-~-11- c~l_:f:J.a_;.t I

-..-- -- ..-
.
I
I I
-
I
•
-
-
I
I

/
qui pee-ca-ta mun di:

tol-li.s

I'
mi-se- re-re no- bis. A - rnus pee-
_J.

I
ca-ta mun - cli: pa - cem.
 CR~DO l
81

/
Cre-do in u-num De-um. trem cto-rem cae-
-----.J.•-

/ ,/
li et ter- rae, vi-si-bi-li-um o-mni-um, et in-vi-si-bi-li- ur
----J.-.J .J.-.Jr ~.J. - . ..J..-..

t
-. - - - . .. .......
--- - - - -
. . .. . . .,. ..
l
... ..
.. .
- l

-
I

--
l

-- - ....- ....
" "' I I

- -
I I
I
_, I

/ /
ni- tum. Et ex Pa-tre na-tum an-te o-mni-a sae-cu- la. De-um de
J-- ~~.l--1- -.J.. -.J.
4

--··,. .. -.
I
I I
I
-- -- . . --
I I I
I

' I

.. .
.. . .. .,. ... __...
- -
I ...
..
l L

-- -
I L
,.

- .
,. .... .... '"

- - -
L. L. I
n

-r
I I

-
I I I
I
- --- -

quern lmni-~ ~eta

,
------ . -.
,/

,- ... ..l-
J non 'lctum, cl-sub-stan-ti-a-lem Pa-tri:
. .
.. ...
.
-

I
I

I
J.
-....
I
I
I I I
 ...
. .. .. ...
82
..
-.
Credo (con.)
.•• ...
.
.. .
--.
.
-- - ... ..
I

.., .
- - - -- -
....
-. --
I

-
I n I I

- - ••
I I
-
' -

l1~- " •
I

J-.J- •. 1
' Qui :~pter nos ho-mi-nes, J:,ro-pter n.;r.s.:.:,am
sa:11tem
- ,... . .. .
..
•
.
I
I

' - I
I

-...
... . .. . . . ... . . . ..
-
. .
- .. - -- .
I .
..
- --
.--. •
- - - -
,-
- - - ~-cto
I I

- "'
.
n

- !,n- car.:.!11, tu s - Spi-ri-tu

I I I n I I

-
I

-
rl I I

-
I

,-1
I /

-
de-::t-dit de c_'.J-:is. est de

. J.
..... ---·I
-
- .
, - • -·
-
I I I
I I
.
.
I
I I .
I

I I

... - --
.--'I
I
......
-
.. ..
I I

_,
I I

.
--- I
I
•... I
n
...•
-- -
I
I
.... •
II
.
I
- ...
.l.-
I I

fvia-1a.- 'J
I
I -

I I - I'

J- -J
ex est.
.;
Vir-gi- ne; ho-mo ~ctus Cru-ci-fi-xus et-
I
I
I
-
I
I
...
I

i-api pro no-bis:

I
.
re-sur-re-x1t t er-t i -a di-e, se- cun-dum Scri-ptu-ras.
.J-..L ..J.r---..J. ..L·

,
.
-- - -- - --- -- -
....
"
- -..• . ..
'. ·-
- -
I
n
I

"
,.
l
I ..
-
I
n
I
.
. ...
- - -- ---- --
ll
I
I

.....
I

' 1:--a-!j~-di c_l~~r.1: ;;r~t t in ... .

ad ~-te-ram ):tris.
I
l~te-
"
, ... -·
I -· • .
- .
I I LJ I
I I I
I
I I
 ..:j. ex f3.-tre Fi-.li.-o-que pro-
•
/

/ d'it.
ce-
-J.
, et con -

,. . .., .
-- - • -- --..,.
...,. ... .,. . ...__..
I

- -- - -
.
I I
,
, ,
- -- -- •• - ....
L L. I I

- -
I I I l l I

-
I l
-
~

I - Et u-nam
. / 1,
"
-..l.· .. .
~lo-ri-fi-~jtur: qui lo-cu-tu~ e~t per Pro-1me-
..L--J,-..J· -J.-4'.·
-1.s.

.J...-
..
-.- . . - . I. - ---
I

.
I I

- I

I
- I
l l

I
 84
.. .. - ....-,.
Credo (con.)
. .......
..
.•
-- -- - -. ...-- -. - -...
,. _..,. I I

.•
-- -- - - ....,. .,.
,.
-
L I L
• •
- - -
I I I I

-
I• I I
.aL

!te-or u-num ba-ptie-ma, .!r re.:mis-si2nem pec-ca-t.lrum.

-
---- -

~-- -
/ / / /

. .... . .- -J:
'
..I: .
-· .
I
.
.. . -.
I

-
I
-
. .
I

' ,I_ r I I
'
'
I I

I
. .. .
- - - ..
.L

-- -
,. I

-- --
,.
....
ft

-
I n I I I I

-
l
I I I
._, . I

-=
. ,

.. -
/

-<J.- ...
;I
' ex-spe-cto re-1-re-cti-o-nem mor-tu-o-rum.
/
vi-tam ven:).-
J .J_
-
~-
I

-
I I""' I
I I

'
I I
I I I

.... . .
• -. . .
. .
l

.. •-~- -- -- - -- - ...
,.

- -
r

- ....
I I I I

-
I I
I

-_,;
I

. • ri sae
/
- cu-~ l-~·- l ~- me::J
-.-J
.-
-
.
__..
I
I
.
.c::
- .....-· •
_i

I
I I I
 '.'O} ~S (,f THL GLCJHlA PATRl 85

Glo"-ri - a 'Pa.tri., et F.i.l:l.o, et Spi-r{ - ut

_.J,. erat in principio, et nu c, in

..• ..., .. , .,
- .. •~-. ..
•
I ' •
I

. . .
1

-- -
Ir I I I
•
--
-
. • • .... • • •
-
~_:._._j-rum .• J. - :r•
•
I I

•
I I

. , ,
sae-1__:.__ lrum ..:t:J1•
.
I

aaecula or)

- ..-· .
--
• I • •
• •. .
I I

• •
'J
•

. .
. ..- ....
..,. -~
I ( .
. •
.• .
I

.•
.

. ·-
' I
I
,.

,
I I I

J.. - 1Jrum. ;r~J

•
... (or)

..
.---·
--
-=

--
•
. .•
I I

•• I
I

.l-

13 may oe DP p 1.e
H_:__\:e ~·•;_:..t., r,i Lt\r1P~ ...
 .J-J J----- .J. J-- ... ;

1
- ...
., i Dr,
- ... .-
-
I } •
.

-
.,,
-
I

-
"'

-- -
I I I I I I I I

.
I I

- ..
J. I I J. .I
I
6
--.
I
-
I

'
I I

I I I

or /
 _____________87

-
l 1
.....
-
--r
I
I
I - ..
. -. - -
I I• &
,
..
I
I
.
I '-
PSALM 'l'ONES

, I
,
..- , -.• .
·-
.
-- -- . . ,
,
.. ~,
• or

~-- ---~ _J
,II

.
I

- -
-
I
. I

'

- .... J:. ·--c-1)

. -.
,- I
--J.
.J
. . ..
- - .
.. ... .
. -
I
I I
I I

\ I

...
or
I)

. --
.... I - . .
.. or
... •..
. ....
. .
.
-- -
- -
I

- - ... . .....
--
"'
-
I

•
I
., I • I I

- -
I I I I i I

-
I I I

.-

-- .... J. J ;. ..l .J-- -,_; ..I J. .J---..l

. -. . . -
. -•• I.
I I I I

•
I

-
I I I I
. I I
I

,-L
...
I 2.
. .... .. L
.. ......
. I •..
-•.. . _..
I
,
.. -
I I I

-
I I
I I -•

a l- ;.
4

-1. - i-
1

- .. .. . .... .
a,.
-
-
I
I

. . .....
I - I

.
... J U . r-
I I
• I I

• • I I

,, •I
'...- ... -- --
3. __.. L.
- .. -· .
l •.
- ..
I
L. •

-- .
•
- -
r I
,II L I I
•
.a -' I
..... I
. I I

~,.;.,- - .J
I I 0 _. I ,_ ,- I

..... --
...
.J )-.r~
11,j

- •... . - . . .
l:i
.
.J- -.ta. - -. .
. - .-
.
I I

....
I

•
.....
r I I

,
4. I ...• --- .. . .....- .•• ... . -.
....
} I
I

• L.
--
L.

~--
- - -. -
II. I I I
I I I I I I
•
- I .I I
- - . . -
...

..... ~-
_;. ' e 11., -a 1
.. - . .. - -l-J .•
--J ..1
-
I - I

....
I r I

-• • I
•
•

-
I

.... )
.
..
... ,,
I
or
...
•.,,
.
...,. .-- . .
•
I
-
l

--
.
.
•.
• . •.
.,.
I I

•. - ' "''
I I I

- -
.
I

.
. .... -.J-- J J.
-J_ ,,.-
-J.
-
-
I I I
I I I
 88
) 6. / I
. I

..- ' '... --=- . ,~-,..

.L. .
.--• .. -.. L
I

-= -
. .
, ...
- ' '
I•
,

-
, --,
'

.
.J.-- .. .,.,. 1.l1 -1 a
- .J ..J..
-----
.-· --
I I
•
-
-
-.,
'
.
r

,
,
6. / /
. ... . . ..
L
·~ ·-
----,
•,.
I
I . "' ..J'
L ,
~---, I

.
- \• I

•
..I.· ..l- . . .i . a J. .J:~~.J
- •... .
~(+-) JO. -=
, ,. I
' • .
.,

- -. ..' . - ·'.
/
l -7. ..
I

. -. ....
L
-.
I

-
"'
-
I . T

~,
-
_J J I -
' . ' - I

. •
.J .
. •··-.. .J. -----
'
4 - .I.
.
0. .I.-
- -
-,
I

" .
I

l .....
-~
I
...
. .
L

. ._ ....
I
, .
-... ,
-... -.
. .. •
-
-
-
I I I I

.._.,
-
l J.•
'
._-
I
L

- J.
. -
.... -LI- -
- .
.I. I
.
.
I

.,• I I I

LJ .
-• I I

_J.
 THE NATIVITY - MIDNIGHT MASS

di - xit ad me: - l i - us me - us ee
_J. J .l rl

l -
. . .I - - . •.
. -..
.
-- -- --- - - - -
I I

-
I I
I

- - --
I

'
I I I I

-
I I I

- tJ J-- ... ~hj_-_di - e

. ..
- nu-i
rJ.
,
.. -.
1l.
-
. -
- . -· -
- -
•
1
I
.
I
- .
•
I

,
Pa-tri et Fi-li-o, et Spi-
j3.

,
Si - cute-rat in prin-ci-pi-o,
.Q.
 . . ..
I (¼radual and Alleluia-2&8. ... .- 90

- --
...
- ·-
1 • I
, • I•
1.• I _a..-_ ..... • -• .
•
I • .....
Ill

• - I

. /
Te-cum prin-ci-pi

--
um in
;. J
di e

. .... -- J .J-~ J. - .l, .~. 1-.l J

- ..
... .
I I
•
I

• •
_•_
I •

\
 ..... .
I • Gradual and Alleluia (con.)
. 91
- --
....
h
-- .. .
-

--
i

, I n

• .._,. -

,.
- I

. Di-xit DI'
:f;i-
.

- injt~=
o-minus Do'mino Sede a dex-t::i donec ponam
.J.. d
.....- .. - .- - -.-. ..
a:...,.

- . - _.

.... . . .• ...,..- --•

I
-• •.. __
11111

-- . ...-. .
•
.
·- . -
I I

• •
a I
•
I

- - -
•
I I

,
I

--
I

•
- - -
;, ;,

):f -
inimicos scabellum pedum tu-.:(.rum. Alle lu
.a .1.--~ ,.l . -.. .1-
..
.
...
- .. -·
.r-

• .
- I

,, . .
--
I
I .. I
• I

-
xit ad - us me-us
J----J· .l-

-
nu- i
 ,

-l -
em ~~-ni
 _ HOLY SA'l'U.RDAY VIGIL 93
Tract-8

....__~

--
-
- -
I . . . . --- .......
.. . . .• •• -
l
.
I

. .-
I

--
-. -
•

-
, I I I I •

.
I I I I I I

__,,
I I I

- - -
I I I I

-J~- -
J:-J. .J..-
1'
Al-~
4'-·- - .J. --
-

- - -· .-- .
:J.
-

. .
I -
D

I
•
. . -- I . - - -
- -
I
-
•
I

l I I

mi- no,

ni -j

- - se-ri-:i -
. I
 1:J_. -
-
ge-nte · . col-

•- --
um

po
,.

- ...
c1n- fir-ma ta su-
per J

-..:-
. - ...
dil ·-
- eel- - a e
._.;
-,. - -
 Tract ( - 95

-------
/
s Do-mi ni

,
ae-ter
-
I ;-,
. .
.. ..--
L,. I
.- "' .
I I,.
I
•
- -
I

-
-
.
J-- -,J .l-1
-
-- ....... ..- . •.
.. .- . . .-
I

I
 EAS'£E.rl SUNDAY 96

hue te,-cum sum,

am,
-
1-le bi-lis

nJ..- mi - ne pro•i-ill
Ps.
-

-
aes-ei-o-nem me-
 97

,
-
-sur-re-ctij - nem •~a-tri et Fi-li-
JCZ-

o, et

,
-------- -
et in sae-cu-la sae-cu-:;J, -
-~

et
-
hue te-cum sum, - ...
al - le
---

D. s. al Pa.
 98

di fe-cit
.a.
,j -

- - -
mus,
..1.--J
lae -
a.

J.

__,
. .-
I
- --
I
..
I
-.
...
--. -·- ...
- -,_
I I I
-..
- I
.
I•

~- n.z: diH•.
--. -. -
... • /
qaniam in saeculum miserico~dia jus. Al-

-- .... - I

- -
-.
-.. - .. I

, I
,
..
I -.
Ta
 99

-
J. - - Pa-scha
-

no

- ;.-_

---..L- .J.- =-..l-~- .--1.

-
 100

- -
Vi~cti-mae Pa-sc~li ~:ii:des im-mo-lent

--·-
At-gnus
-

-.
r.:i-~-do:

x vi-tae Ma-ri-a, quid vi-

I
in vi-a? Se-pul-chrum Ch~s_..:,_i_·__

I
te-stes, su-da-ri-um et ve-ates.

-,r.
 101

Chri-stus spes m~ - a
,
prae-ce-det su·-os in Ga.-li-lae-

- -

. --
I
Sc~-mus Chri-stum sur-re-xis-se
'
I

- .. -
a mor-tu-is ve-re: tu no-bis,

vit,

ge - ret in

us,

-
j-
 102

ta. que e-pu -

-.. J

-
mur et

tis, .r:::..J -______ j, ia, al - le

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 104
Andrews, Frederick Sturges, Abstract of Medieval Modal TheoryJ
unpublished dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, New
York, 1935. 6 pp.
Aubry, Pierre, Le Rythme Tonigue dans la Poesie Liturgique et
le Chant des E~lises Chretiennes au Moyen Age, H. Welter-,-
Paris, 19a3". 5 pp. -
Battifol, Pierre, Histoire du Breviaire Romain, Paris, 1893.
Bonvin, Ludwig, 11 The I Measure' in Gregorian Music,,, The
Musical Quarterly, XV(l929), 16-28. -
Boylan, Rev. James, Review of Medieval Quartal Harmony by
Joseph Yasser, Catholic Choirmaster, XXV(l939), 48-49.
Bragers, Achille Pierre, A Short Treatise on Gregorian
Accompaniment, Carl Fischer, New York, 1934. 82 pp.
Burge, Rev. Thomas Anselm, O.S.B., An Examination of the
Rhythmic Theories of Dom Mocquereau, R. and T. Washbourne,
London, 1905. 25 pp.
Cardine, Dom Eugene, Review of Medieval Quartal Harmony by
Joseph Yasser, Revue Gregorienne, XXIV(l939), 233-39-
Carter, Elliot, "Harmonic Origins of Music 11 , Encyclopedia
Britannica, Vol. 16, Chicago, 1957, pp. 5-7.
Climacus, "The Drag of the Chant", Caecilia, LXXVI(l949),
165-66.
David, Dom Lucien, o.s.B., Le Rythme verbal et musical dans
4
le chant omain, Les editions de l'universit€ d'Ottawa,
1933. 10 pp.
Desroquettes, Dom, o.s.B., "The Rhythmic Tradition in the
Manuscripts' 1 , Caecilia, LXXXI (1954), 49-52.
Erculeo, Marzio, Il Canto Ecclesiastico, Modana, Pergli Eredi
Cassiani Stamp-.-Episc., 1686. 67 pp.
Evans, Edwin, The Modal Accompaniment of Plain Chant, Reeves,
London, 1911. 145 pp.
Farrell, Gerald, o.s.B., An Accompaniment to Gregorian Chant
in Medieval Harmony, unpublished thesis, Eastman School
of Music, Rochester, 1951. 76 pp.
Frere, Rt. Rev. Walter Howard, D.D., Introduction of the
Antiphonale Sarisburiense, Plainsong and Medieval Music
Society, 1925. 102 pp.
 105
Frere, Walter Howard, Graduale Sarisburiense, Bernard
Quaritch Co., London, 1894.
Frere, Walter Howard, "Key Relationship in Early Medieval
Music 11 , Proceedings of the Musical Association, 37th
Session, 1910-11, Novello and Co., London, 1911, pp.
129-49.
Frere, Walter Howard, ''Plainsong", Encyclopedia Britannica,
Vol. 17, Chicago, 1957, pp. 997-99.
Frere, Walter Howard, "Plainsong", Oxford History of Music,
Introductory Volume, edited by Percy Carter Buck, Oxford
University Press, London, 1929, pp. 133-63.
, , ,
Gastoue, Amedee, Review of Medieval Quartal Harmony by Joseph
Yasser, Revue du Chant Gregorian, XLIII(l939), 95-96.
, , , , ,
Gastoue, Amedee, Traite d'Harmonisation du Chant Gregorien
!!!!:_ un plan nouveau, Janin Freres, Lyon, 1910. 130 pp.
Geva~r~, Francois Auguste, La Melopee Antique, Librarie
Generale de Ad. Hoste, Editeur, Gand, 1895. 446 pp.
Graduale Romanum, edited by the Solesmes Monks,
-~So_c_i~ety of St. John the Evangelist, Descl6e and Co., Paris,
1952.
Haberl, Rev. Dr. Franz Xaver, Magister Choralis, 2nd English
edition translated from the 9th German edition by The
Most Rev. Dr. Donnelly, Fr. Pustet, New York, 1892. 272 pp.
Horne, Dorothy, "Dyadic Harmony in the Sacred Harp", Southern
Folklore Quarterly, IX(l945), 209-12.
Hughes, Rev. Anselm, O. S .B., "Theoretical Writers on Music up
to 1400 11 , Oxford History of Music, Introductory Volume,
edited by Percy Carter Buck, Oxford University Press,
London, 1929, pp. 117-32.
Idelsohn, Abraham Zebi, Jewish Music in Its Historical
Development, Holt and Co., New Yori<; 1929, 535 pp.
Jeann;n, Dom Jules, Accent bref ou Accent long~ Chant
Gregorien?, H. Herelle and Co., Paris, 1929. 12 pp.
,
Jeannin, Dom Jules, Etudes sur le Rythme Gregorien, Etienne
Gloppe, Lyon, 1925. 234 pp.
Jeannin,Dom Jule,s, Sur !'importance de la tierce dans l'accom-
pagnement gregorien, Herelle and Co.-,-Paris, 1920. -15 pp.
 106
Johner, Dom, A New School of Gregorian Chant, third English
edition by Hermann Erpf and Max Ferrars, Fr. Pustet and
Co., New York, 1925. 363 pp.
Jones, Bernard, 11 The Harmonic Basis of Plainchant Accompani-
ment", Caecilia, LXXXII(1955}, 127-29.
Kienle, Ambrosius, Choralschule, Herdersche Berlagshandlung,
Frieburg, 1899. Part I, 156 pp., and part II, 27 pp.
Klarmann, Rev. Andrew, Gregorian Chant, Gregorian Institute
of America, Toledo (Ohio), 1945. 148 pp.
Lapierre, Eugene, Gregorian Chant Accompaniment, Gregorian
Institute of America, Toledo (Ohio), 1949. 103 pp.
____ Liber Usualis, edited by the Benedictines of Solesmes.,
Society of St. John the Evangelist, Desclee and Co.,
Tournai, 1952.
Manzetti, Msgr. Leo., "Gregorian Chant Accompaniment",
Catholic Choirmaster, XXXVII(l951}, 35-37.
Maugin, Rev., Kyriale, John Murphy and Co . ., Baltimore, 1857.
60 pp.
, Le Nombre Musical Gregorien.
Mocquereau, Dom Andre, , ( trans-
lated by Aileen Tone;, Desclee and Co., Tournai, 1932.
140 pp.
Murray., Dom Gregory., "Congregational Singing at Mass".,
Catholic Choirmaster, XXXIV(1948}, 155-57.
Murray, Dom Gregory, "Gregorian Rhythm: A Pilgrim's Progress",
Downside Review, LII, Catholic Records Press., Exeter, 1934,
pp. 13-47.
Newman, Ernest, "Harmon~ Old and New", The Sunday Times,
London, Dec. 18, 1938.
Niceta of Remesiana., "Liturgical Singing (De Utilitate
Hymnorum)". (translated by Gerald Walsh, s. J.}., The
Fathers of the Church, Vol. 7, Fathers of the Church.,
Inc., NewYork, 1949, pp. 65-76.
Niedermeyer, Louis, and d'Ortigue, Joseph., Gregorian Accom-
paniment. (revised and translated by Wallace Goodrich),
Novello, Ewer and Co., New York., 1905. 97 pp.
The Ordinary of the Mass, The Plainsong and Medieval
--,M=u-si....c Society, London-;-T9ro:- 61 pp.
 107
Parrish, Carl, The Notation of Medieval Music, W.W. Norton,
New York, 1957. 228 pp. -
Peeters, Fl~r, Methode pratigue pour !'accompagnement du
Chant Gregorien: A Practical Method of Plain-Chant
Accompaniment, H. Dessain Co., Malines"; 1949. 99 pp.
Pius X, Pope, "Motu Proprio on Sacred Music" (pamphlet),
Conception Abbey Press, Conception,Missouri, 1945, pp. 3-16.
Pothier, Dom JosephA Les Melodies Gregoriennes, Descl~e and
Co., Tournai, 18~0-.-268 pp.
Potiron, Henri, Treatise on the Accompaniment of Gregorian
Chant. (translated by Ruth Gabain), Societyof St. John
the Evangelist, Desclee and Co., Tournai, 1933.
Reese, Gustave, Music in the Middle Ages, W.W. Norton, New
York, 1940. 502 pp-. -
Richardson, A. Madeley, Modern Organ Accompaniment, Longmans,
Green and Co., New York, 1907. 200 pp.
Rossini, Rev. Carlo, The Gregorian Kyriale with Organ Accom-
paniment, J. Fischer and Bro., New York,1§4°2. 177 pp.
Schmidt, J. G., "Principal Texts of the Gregorian Authors
concerning Rhythm" (pamphlet), Buffalo Volksfreund
Printing Co., New York, 1928.
Schrernbs, Most Rev. Joseph, Sister Alice Marie, o.s.u., and
Huegle, Rev. Gregory, O.S.B., The Gregorian Chant Manual
of the Catholic Music Hour, Silver, Burdett and Co., New
Yor~l935. 329 pp. - -
Selner, Rev. John, "Chant - With Organ or Without?", Catholic
Choirmaster, XXXV(1949), 151-52,
s8hner, P. Leo, o.s.B., Die Geschichte der Begleitung des
gregorianischen Chorals in Deutschland, Dr. Benno Felser
Verlag G.m.b.H., Augsburg, 1931. 213 pp. and Noten-
beilagen, 21 pp.
Springer, Max, The Art of Accompanying Plain Chant (trans-
lated from the German by the Benedictine Fathers, Concep-
tion, Missouri), J. Fischer and Bro., New York, 1908.
238 pp.
Strangways, A. H. Fox, "Whence? Whi ther?' 1 , The Observer,
London, Part I, Feb. 18; Part II, March-r, 1934.
 108
Strangways, A.H. Fox, Review of Medieval Quartal Harmony
by Joseph Yasser, Music and Letters, XX(l939), 74-75.
Sunol, Dom Gregoire, O.S.B., Introduction a
la Paleographie
Musicale Gregorienne, Society of St. Johnthe Evangelist,
Desclee and Co., Paris, 1935.
Sunol, Dom Gregory, O. S .B., Text Book of Gregorian Chant,
Desclee and Co., Tournai, 1930. 221 pp.
Swan, Alfred, "Harmonizations of the Old Russian Chants",
Journal of the American Musicological Society, II {Summer,
1949), 83-80,
Tovey, Sir Donald Francis, "Harmony", Encyclopedia Britannica,
Vol. 11, Chicago, 1957, pp. 203-12.
Wagner, Peter, Introduction to the Gregorian Melodies, second
edition, Part I.• ( translated by Agnes Orme and Edward
Gerald Wyatt), The Plainsong and Medieval Music Society,
London, 1901.
Wagner·, Peter, "Introduction to the Gregorian Melodies",
Chapters 5 and 6, Caecilia, LXXXIV(1957), 298-344.
Wellesz, Egon, "Recent Studies in Western Chant", The Musical
Quarterly, XLI (1955), 177-90,
Yasser, Joseph, "Foundations of Jewish Harmony", Musica
Hebraica, Musica Hebraica Ltd., Jerusalem, Palestine,
1938, pp. 8-11.
Yasser, Joseph, "How Can the Ancient Hebrew Melos be Restored?",
Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference-Convention of
the Cantors' Assembly of America and the Department of
Music of the United Synagogue of America, 1956, pp. 30-35.
"Dr. Joseph Yasser Lectures at a Benedictine
__M_o_n_a-stery", Seminary Progress, Jan., 1957, p. 8.
Yasser, Joseph, "Medieval Quartal Harmony", The Musical
Quarterly. XXIII(1937), 170-97, 333-66; XXIV(l938),
351-85. Republished, with slight modifications, in book
form by the American Library of Musicology, New York, 1938.
Yasser, Joseph, Review of The Cantillation of the Bible by
Solomon Rosowsky, Judaism, Vol. 7, No. 2, Spring Issue,
1958.
Yasser, Joseph, "A Revised Concept of Tonality", Proceedings
of the Music Teachers' National Association, 1935, edited
by Karl W. Gehrkens, Oberlin Printing Co., Oberlin, Ohio,
1936, pp. 100-21.
 109
Yasser, Joseph, A Theory of Evolving Tonalit8,
American
Library of Musicology, New York, 1932. 3 1 pp.
Ya.sser, Joseph, "The Traditional Roots of Jewish Harmony",
Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference-Convention
of the Cantors' Assembly and the Department of Music of
the United Synagogues of America, 1951, pp. 15-18.

ADDENDA TO THE BIBLIOGRAPHY

Apel, Willi, Gre,orian Chant, Indiana University Press,

Bloomington, 958. 529 pp.
Jungmann, Rev. Joseph, S.J., The Mass of the Roman Rite,
Vol. 1 (translated by Rev. Francis Brunner, C,SS~R.),
Benziger Bro., Inc., New York, 1950. 494 pp.
Uurray, Dom Gregory, "Plainsong Rhythm (The Editorial
IIethods of Solesmes)", caecilia, LXXXIV(l957), 10-24.