The problem presented by the origin of the sequence is perhaps the most
difficult of all those connected with the evolution of medieval
hymnology. So far the available information on the subject has never
been brought together in one place. To do so is a baffling task which
has by no means been completed here nor is that which follows either
exhaustive or conclusive. It is merely an attempt to trace the origin
and early development as far as the evidence at hand makes it possible,
at the same time referring the reader to those scholars who have
investigated special topics in detail.
The _alleluia_ of the mass is the starting-point of the sequence.
Inherited from the synagogue and incorporated in the Byzantine rite, it
was nevertheless brought independently to Rome. The extension of the
final _a_ constituted a musical phrase, called a _iubilus_ or
_iubilatio_. This elaborated _alleluia_ with _iubilus_ is Gregorian.[1]
It became necessary for the sake of breathing, to divide the extended
_iubilus_ into musical phrases, each a _sequentia_ and the whole
_sequentiae_. Some _iubili_ however, remained single while others were
sung by two choirs with a repetition of phrases. The next step was the
composition of a text for some of the _iubili_, which text was written
below the musical notation. Finally a text was supplied for every such
melody, which resulted in the _sequentia cum prosa_.[2]
It is one thing to note the preceding succession of steps as objective
phenomena. It is quite another to explain the origin of the idea which
transformed the _alleluia_ into the larger _iubilus_. This is the most
obscure point in the musical development of the sequence, which, for
lack of manuscript evidence cannot at present be clarified. At least
three hypotheses have been offered. Arguing from the appearance of the
trope, some have suggested that the _iubilus_ is a musical interpolation
just as the trope is a textual interpolation. This is quite possible but
perhaps too simple for an adequate solution. A much more tempting
hypothesis has appealed to a variety of scholars,—that of the
introduction of Greek melodies.[3] To these students it has seemed more
than probable that the intercourse between western Europe and the
Byzantine realms in the reign of Charlemagne constitutes a sufficient
explanation for the appearance of fresh musical themes. Again, a
possibility only has been suggested. So far manuscript evidence for the
Greek melodies from which the Gregorian _alleluiae_ and their _iubili_
are derived, has not appeared. Blume, whose treatment of the subject
forms the basis of this chapter, not only questions the hypothesis of
Greek melodies but he offers a third suggestion and that tentatively;
Gregory, he thinks, shortened the _alleluia_ brought over by the Greeks.
When, later, a tendency was felt to elaborate the forms of worship, the
longer melodies were once more revived in the sequence. This very
interesting suggestion, if one day capable of proof, would harmonize the
Byzantine and Gregorian influences which produced the initial extension
of the final _a_ of the _alleluia_.
For purposes of clearness a differentiation should be made between the
musical and poetical development of the sequence as soon as the
_sequentia cum prosa_ is reached. Manifestly it is impossible to do so,
in any complete fashion, where words and music are so inextricably
interwoven in a common development. It is better, however, to attempt
the impossible and for the present, to ignore overlappings.[4]
The origin of the word _sequentia_ itself, in the phrase _sequentia cum
prosa_ has often been discussed because of its significance in tracing
the musical development of the forms in question. To some scholars
_sequentia_ means merely _sequela_, _i.e._ notes following the _a_ of
the _alleluia_, a simple and tenable theory. To the great majority,
however, _sequentia_ is a translation of the Greek _akoulouthia_. In
fact it has been generally accepted as such, although _sequentia_
conveys the idea of continuation in the Greek word rather than its
technical meaning of a continuation specifically of songs, etc. If this
is valid, Greek influence upon the origin of the sequence is
inferred.[5] Another form of the theory of Greek influence is evident in
the suggestion that _sequentia_ means _hirmos_, that is, a regular
continuation of tones. _Hirmos_ may refer to poetry also.[6] A
derivation of _sequentia_ from Greek terms, if proven, would of course,
buttress the theory of Byzantine influence upon the whole development;
but the weakness of the derivation from _akoulouthia_, for example, is
its dependence upon a misunderstanding of the Greek form of worship to
which the word applies.[7] An entirely different suggestion as to origin
arises from the formula used in the liturgy to announce the Gospel,
_Sequentia Sancti Evangelii secundum_ _etc._[8] Often some practical
consideration, extraneous condition or unrelated incidental circumstance
has affected liturgical change or development. Consequently, even a
slight suggestion like this provokes thought.
Whatever may be the correct origin of the word _sequentia_ the place of
origin of the sequence is generally conceded to have been France
sometime in the eighth century. The part played by other lands in the
origin of the _sequentia cum prosa_ cannot be wholly determined at
present. It must suffice to study the evidence available. It has been
demonstrated how the early French sequences have a closer tie with the
_alleluia_ and how the word is sometimes retained to introduce the
_prosae_ which accompany the music. There is considerable evidence
supporting French priority over the Germans in the creation of these new
musical forms, the chief centers of composition being St. Martial,
Luxeuil, Fleury-sur-Loire, and Moissac, the outstanding rival of St.
Martial. An origin for the sequence in France is independently probable
due to the interest in liturgical music stimulated by Charlemagne, who,
as shown in the preceding chapter, favored Gregorian and Byzantine
innovations at the expense of Gallican forms.
One of the suggestions mentioned to account for the original lengthening
of the _alleluia_ in the _iubilus_ is connected with the trope. The word
has long been defined as a textual interpolation.[9] Gastoué, however,
contends that it was originally and primarily musical, a vocalization in
the existing chant and that it was created in the music school. The
ancient form of trope is a _neuma triplex_ added to the response _In
medio_ _etc._ for the Feast of St. John the Apostle, or to _Descendit de
caelis_ for Christmas. This vocalism is described by Amalarius of Metz
and indeed Metz may be its place of origin. Alcuin has been named as the
possible originator, a theory strengthened by the fact that Amalarius
was one of his pupils.[10] At any rate Amalarius seems to have been the
first to call the melody following the _alleluia_, a _sequentia_,[11]
from which it is evident that the _iubili_ must have been regarded in
some other light prior to his writing. The _sequentia_ in connection
with the _alleluia_ may very reasonably have been considered a trope,
since vocalisms like these had already appeared elsewhere in rites of
worship, and sequences in addition to those which belong to the
_alleluia_ of the mass have been found in antiphonaries. To repeat,
Gastoué describes a musical interpolation or trope originating in the
music schools of the Franks and appearing in various liturgical
settings. He likens the _iubilus_ to a trope which Amalarius called a
_sequentia_. The original divisions created by the musical phrases in
the _iubilus_ now appear in a series, each repeated a certain number of
times with introduction and conclusion and thus the completed sequence
structure comes into being. The germ of its formal construction, Gastoué
finds in certain Gregorian sources. The ancient _alleluia_, _Justus ut
palma florebit_, shows such characteristics and reveals the liturgical
Latin origin of the sequence, its melody going back to the _versus
alleluiaticus_.
In spite of the evidence which would make the sequence a native musical
product of western Europe, the theory of Greek origin is still
persistently held by certain scholars. For that reason it must be
considered in greater detail. Gregory’s adoption of Greek novelties
forms the starting point of this theory, while Charlemagne’s well-known
enthusiasm for Greek innovations carries its proponents still further.
The fact that the original Greek melodies which are assumed to have been
used in the west, have never been produced in evidence, is not a proof
of their non-existence. An extensive study of certain sequence melodies
has been made in order to determine whether they are modeled upon Greek
originals, since the Greek names for these melodies and features of
notation point to such an origin.[12] But such names are secondary, the
original and natural name being the first phrase of the Latin words
accompanying the melodies and the Greek word a suggested title. A Greek
melody, called _Organa_, for instance, might be assumed to retain its
name in Latin. The opposite is the case for the name _Filia matris_ is
original and _Organa_ the suggested title.
Regarding the argument from notation it is a matter of common knowledge
that the _neume_ is native to Greek-speaking lands and may have existed
as early as the sixth century.[13] _Neumes_ took firm root at St. Gall,
the great German center for the propagation of the sequence, so much so,
that they persisted until the twelfth century even after the invention
of the staff and in the interval were spread by teaching. Moreover,
_neumes_ were written in the manner of the eastern church, _i.e._ in a
straight line, not at different levels to indicate pitch.[14] It is
unfortunate that the dearth of manuscripts showing _neumes_ makes a gap
in the evidence just where support is most needed, for the earliest
musical manuscripts with this notation date from the ninth century;[15]
but the assumption in favor of Greek originals is at least strong enough
to forbid its being ignored.
An additional circumstance which supports the theory of Greek origin is
the fact of musical parallelism in the structure of the sequence. This
is an important point of contact between the sequence and Byzantine
musical forms, although it has not been universally convincing. On the
contrary, some have traced this phenomenon of musical parallelism to one
of those extraneous conditions, affecting liturgical practice, namely,
the use of antiphonal choirs.[16]
Nothing can be more unsatisfactory to the student who is trying to force
the sequence into any particular theory of musical origin than the
contemplation of what is actually known on this subject, for the
question seems destined to remain undecided. A better perspective may be
reached by examining the poetical development of the sequence which
began with the _sequentia cum prosa_ and ended in a new form of Latin
hymn for which melodies were in turn composed.
The text written below the _alleluia_ melody is generally accepted as of
French origin and likewise the naming of that text. As the text became
important the melody too was named so that the melody and text were
differentiated from each other, the latter as a _prosa_. It is unknown
whether the name _sequentia_ instead of _prosa_ was chosen deliberately
as differing from the French usage. Amalarius was apparently the first
to use the word _sequentia_ in connection with the music. Later the term
was destined to supersede the name _prosa_ for the poetical text.
We owe to Notker, whose part in creating the sequence will be considered
in greater detail below, an account of his invention of words as an aid
to memorizing the elaborate melody of the _alleluia_ trope. Whether
Notker was the first to see the value of this device and to employ it,
is unknown.[17] As a theory of origin it has always been popular, being
held by Frere and many others. For the present it may be acknowledged
that it is a reasonable theory for, of course, only the choir leader had
a musical codex to refer to and the musical ability of the average monk
was unequal to the difficulties of memorization by ear alone. Moreover,
this theory can always be accepted with others, although it seems
inadequate by itself.
A second explanation of origin arises from the possibility that sequence
poetry originated in the imitation of Greek hymn models. The statement
has been made definitely that sequence poetry shows the transference of
the Byzantine structure of hymnody to Latin church poetry, especially
Notker’s.[18] With every circumstance favoring such a transfer it is
amazing that the Franks who heard so much of Greek hymns and could have
translated them into Latin and sung them to the same tunes, evidently
did nothing of the kind. Some other explanation of similarity must be
found. Metrical parallelism, which is characteristic of the Latin
sequence and contemporary Greek hymns, in Gastoué’s opinion, can be
accounted for only by reference to Hebrew poetry as the ultimate
inspiration of liturgical poetry.[19] Thus a Byzantine theory of origin
breaks down when metrical sources are subjected to closer scrutiny.
After all, the sequence is unknown in the Byzantine ritual and therefore
the Byzantine influence could never have been direct.
A third theory emphasizes the metrical form of the _alleluia_ melody as
the determining factor in creating a new poetical rhythm.[20] Here, the
desire to create fitting expressions of praise is not explained so much
as the form in which the praises are cast. Von Winterfeld thought that
rhythmical prose was inseparable from the liturgical music which had
already been composed, just as the Greek chorus and the Wagnerian music
drama found their complement in a dignified and sonorous prose
rhythm.[21] This theory may well be called the liturgical. It is most
significant for the lyrical movement in general since a new metrical
form is created differing from the Ambrosian meter or the revived
classical meters popular among Carolingian poets. The lyric is born
again, as Meyer expresses it, in the music of the church.[22] A poem
arises consisting of a series of parallel strophes with introduction and
conclusion, a lyric counterpart to the musical phrases of the
_sequentia_.