PALESTRINA AND HIS INFLUENCE ON THE MUSIC OF
THE ITALIAN SCHOOL. THE MADRIGAL.
[Illustration: PALESTRINA.]
=A Church Composer=.—But one master of the Italian Polyphonic schools
is worthy of lengthy notice, more because of his influence on the
music of the Church than his contribution to the new instrumental
school then only in its infancy. Palestrina, while acquainted with
Galilei, the reformer of Opera, and Neri, the originator of Oratorio,
and with many of the men identified with the new style of vocal and
instrumental music, gave his entire life to the composing of Church
music, though in his poverty-stricken condition musical work under
wealthy patronage must have often appealed to him. At any rate, the
farthest he ever strayed from the Church was in the composing of many
madrigals, in which he excelled; it is almost certain that in these
he unintentionally influenced the development of instrumental music.
For the present, however, a consideration of his life and influence on
Church music is more important. But for him, Church music would have
lacked for at least a century that simple and individual note so often
struck by himself and Bach. Palestrina, by the enormous number of his
masses and by the fertility of his invention, placed the music of the
Latin Church on so high a plane that no composers, at least until the
time of Bach, even approached him, much less equalled him.
=Giovanni Pierluigi Sante=, known as Palestrina, after his birthplace,
was born in 1514 at Palestrina, a small town southeast of Rome. His
parents were peasants and the boy received but the ordinary education
of his class. While very young he seems to have become a choir-boy at
Rome, though it is recorded that his voice was anything but pleasing.
Upon this supposition rests the statement that he was, for a short
time, a pupil of Arkadelt; this is unimportant because eventually
(1540) he became a pupil of Goudimel, whose influence far overshadowed
that of any former teacher. In 1548 he married and four sons were the
result of the union, three, however, dying at an early age and the
fourth proving, in after-life, a worthless fellow. In 1551 he succeeded
Arkadelt as choir-master of St. Peter’s; later the dedication of three
masses to Pope Julian III won him a position as singer in the Papal
Choir. Owing to the jealousy of the other singers he finally lost his
position, but received an appointment at the Church of _Santa Maria
Maggiore_ where he stayed for ten years. Naumann says that in 1565 he
received the appointment of master of the Sistine Chapel, but never
occupied the position because of the opposition among the choir. Grove,
however, says that in 1565 he was made composer to the Pontifical
Choir and did not become master until 1585, holding the position from
that time on. In 1571 he was again connected with St. Peter’s; this
also marks his acquaintance with Neri, for whom he wrote some music,
and the founding of a music school, though it cannot have amounted
to much since most authorities give no particulars in regard to it.
Indeed, it is certain that he cannot have had much influence in that
line, for his pupils, outside of his own family, did not amount to more
than a scant half-dozen. In 1576 he was given the task of revising the
Gradual and Antiphonary of the Latin Church but, with the assistance
of a pupil, finished only a little more than one-half of the work. He
died in 1594 and was buried in the Vatican. His life is marked by the
usual jealousies and quarrels of musicians, though Palestrina himself
seems to have been nobleminded and more than reasonably free from all
such faults. He was in poor circumstances during his life, and his only
living son was a bitter disappointment. Altogether, as we examine his
life we are impressed by many things; first, his apparent failure from
a worldly point of view; secondly, the enormous amount of composing
which he did; and, finally, his devotion to the Church and her music,
and because of it, his glorious success as a musician, and his undying
fame.
=Reform of Church Music=.—The year marking the climax of his life was
1565. The Council of Trent, by a unanimous vote, decided to prohibit
the use of music in the Church unless some means could be devised to
make it more devotional and suited to its purpose. Naumann says that
it was the desire of the Council of Trent to simplify the music so
that the people might take part in the services; but Grove claims that
it was because of the use of secular music in the composition of the
masses. It seems that it was customary, for part of the singers at
least, to sing in services not only the _melodies of_ the _popular
songs_, but _also_ the _words_, thus producing confusion and defeating
the very purpose of the music. In all probability, both of these
reasons had something to do with the edict. It is plain that the
fundamental principle at stake was the lack of the personal devotional
note (which caused this action by the Council of Trent), and it was the
supplying of this want that made Palestrina the saviour of music in
the Church. A committee of Cardinals was appointed to see if proper
music for the service could be found. They commissioned Palestrina to
write a mass and submit it for trial. When the trial came, at the home
of Cardinal Vitellozzi, Palestrina submitted three masses, the last of
which was the best; this he afterwards called the “Missa Papæ Marcelli.”
=Palestrina’s Style=.—In these masses Palestrina had succeeded so
well in subordinating technic to expression, and in eliminating all
extraneous matter, that he was hailed as the greatest musician of
the Church, and honors were showered upon him. From this it would be
supposed that Palestrina had shown an entire change in style, yet this
was not the case. Goudimel, his master, shows traces of the so-called
Palestrina style, and Palestrina himself was gradually growing into
that simplicity which marked the music of his later days. This
simplicity was not only simplicity of emotion but also simplicity of
technic; only a man with a most consummate skill could have written
such great music with such little use of showy technic. Palestrina
wrote in all of the polyphonic forms, complex and simple, but he
reached his highest point in his most simple works; and those works
were written for his Church.
=Secular Art Song=.—The secular life of the 15th and 16th centuries, as
well as the Church, had an art music, which, like the other music of
the period was _vocal_, not solos with accompaniments, but _choral_,
consisting of three or more parts; this we may call a species of vocal
chamber music. We can trace the development of this form of musical
composition to an application of the principle of Discant to secular
or Folk-melodies. The minstrels, as mentioned in a previous lesson,
were accustomed to improvise accompanying parts to a familiar song—a
favorite custom was that of adding two parts—for the entertainment
of their hearers. This process was not a haphazard one, but followed
fixed rules. The absence of a simple system of notation, however,
prevented the accumulation of musical records. And when minstrelsy
ceased to exist as a calling, only the memory of the crude attempts of
the minstrels remained. But the principle was not lost. Fortunately
for the good of the art, the trained musicians of the Church took it
up, and, calling to their aid the resources of their art as used in the
music of the Church, applied them all to secular melodies, the songs of
the people.
=The Predecessors of the Madrigal=.—Several of the forms of secular
music found in Italy, the Frottole (song of the mass or crowd), and the
Vilanelle (village or peasant songs), were used in a crude way by the
musicians of the people as airs to which to add accompanying parts.
Both Germans and English made similar use of their folk melodies. But
since the text was usually of a humorous, or a witty character, the
accompanying melodies or “_counterpoints_” were simple in style. The
work of the trained composers along this line resulted in the Madrigal,
which shows a union of the musical spirit of the people with the finest
poetic art; the melodies had the style of the popular music, but they
were used with technical skill.
=The Madrigal=.—The text of the madrigal was erotic in character,
representing the emotions of a heart filled with noble, often hopeless
love. The Italian poets Tasso and Petrarch were masters in this style
of writing. The name Madrigal was first applied to this kind of
lyric, and afterward became identified with the music itself. There
is disagreement as to the origin of the name, the common explanation
being that it comes from the word _mandra_, a sheepfold, _mandriale_,
shepherd, in allusion to the frequent pastoral character of the text.
The Madrigal undoubtedly owes its origin to the composers of the
Flemish school. The musicians of the Netherlands, in the middle of the
15th century, had a polyphonic song, elaborate in construction, in the
old Church modes, modeled doubtless on the plan of the Motet, but using
the melody of some popular song as a _Cantus Firmus_. When the centre
of musical power was transferred to Italy, the madrigal principle came
into new hands, those of the composers of the Venetian school, who gave
it the character which made it so popular.
=The Italian School=.—The first great composer in this style was Adrian
Willaert. After him came Arkadelt, who published several books of
madrigals. The most famous composer of madrigals was =Luca Marenzio=
(1560-1599), called by his contemporaries “the sweetest swan of Italy,”
whose works attained extraordinary vogue. They are extremely melodious.
A composer who made considerable use of the chromatic element was
=Gesualdo=, Prince of Venusia (1560-1614). Other Italian composers of
madrigals are Festa, Palestrina, Anerio, Waelrant, Orlando di Lasso,
Cipriano di Rore, Vecchi and Gastoldi, the latter being credited with
the introduction of the “Fa, la.”
=The English School=.—The Madrigal never displaced the Folk-song in
Germany or the _Chanson_ in France, but it found a home in England, in
which country a number of composers were developed whose best work is
considered to be superior to that of their Italian predecessors. The
period of fifty years, beginning with 1588, when the first collection
of madrigals was published in London, is called the Madrigalian Era.
The composers of prominence are: William Byrd, Thomas Morley, Thomas
Weelkes, John Dowland, John Wilbye, Orlando Gibbons and Richard
Edwardes. So great was the interest in this class of music that it was
considered a necessary part of the education of a gentleman that he
should be able to sing, when requested, a part in a madrigal, as we
learn from a work or music study published by Thomas Morley in 1597.
=Characteristics of the Madrigal=.—The best means of securing an
understanding of the Madrigal style is to study good examples, and,
if possible, to hear them sung by a good choral organization. They
are written in three, four, five and six parts, the five part being
the one most favored. The principle of construction is _polyphonic_,
imitation being freely used, cross accents being frequent on account of
the syncopated style, each part being conceived as melody, not as the
result of the movement of successive chords.
=Influence of the Madrigal=.—The great number of madrigals written
by so many composers may be taken as an indication of the growth of
musical sensibility. The creative side developed. The composer was
no longer contented with taking a melody or some theme ready made,
and elaborating it or accompanying it; he _invented_ his own themes,
thus opening the way to the idea that each text should have a theme to
suit its special character, a principle which rules in modern music.
Since the themes thus took on greater significance, it became important
that accompanying parts should not obscure them by over-elaboration;
hence the counterpoint used became clearer and simpler, and therefore
more artistic. Another fact of great significance is that frequently
the madrigals were played by viols, instead of being sung by voices.
Composers marked the pieces as “Apt for viols or voices.” It was also
customary to sing one part and play the others on instruments, the
design being to cause the melody to stand out more clearly; this aided
in developing a feeling for the solo with instrumental accompaniment, a
fact of great significance in preparing the way for the opera.
=Petrucci=.—Music owes a great debt to =Ottaviano Petrucci=, who is
credited with devising a method for printing music from movable type.
He was born in 1466, died in 1523 or shortly after that date. Before he
began his great work all music was written out by hand, a fact which
necessarily interfered with its circulation; the works of the great
writers were jealously guarded and students had small chance to profit
by the work of experienced composers. Petrucci and his successors
changed this. In 1501, he printed a collection of ninety-six pieces in
three and four parts by Isaac, Josquin, Hobrecht, Okeghem and others;
in 1504, a collection of eighty-three motets for four, five and six
voices. By the time the composers of the Venetian Madrigal school
appeared on the scene, printing processes had been improved and spread
more widely; thus their works could be circulated freely and made
popular. We who know the tremendous power of the printing press can
appreciate the new force in the development of music inaugurated by
Petrucci in the early part of the 16th century.