More on the scoring of Josquin’s Huc me sydereo and the manuscript St Gallen 464

IF 0.6 2区艺术学 0 MUSIC

EARLY MUSIC Pub Date : 2024-07-30 DOI:10.1093/em/caae005

Brett Kostrzewski

{"title":"More on the scoring of Josquin’s Huc me sydereo and the manuscript St Gallen 464","authors":"Brett Kostrzewski","doi":"10.1093/em/caae005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The motet Huc me sydereo by Josquin des Prez appears in both five- and six-voice versions, having led scholars to debate which version is authentic to the composer’s original conception. The authoritative New Josquin Edition presents the motet in its six-voice version; in the critical commentary, editor Bonnie Blackburn defended it as Josquin’s original. More recently, Joshua Rifkin has demonstrated on stylistic and source-critical grounds that the five-voice version was original, with a sixth voice having been added later. In this article, I present new findings on the manuscript St Gallen 464, an important early source for Huc me sydereo, which reinforce arguments defending the authenticity of the five-voice version. I show that the origin of the sixth voice can be isolated to a trio of sources produced on the Italian peninsula in the 1510s, all but eliminating Josquin as a candidate as its author. Moreover, through a new identification of the original scribe and owner of St Gallen 464, I shed new light on that manuscript’s date and provenance. In so doing, I demonstrate how the study of musical sources and transmission can carry direct importance for essential performance decisions.","PeriodicalId":44771,"journal":{"name":"EARLY MUSIC","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EARLY MUSIC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/em/caae005","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MUSIC","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The motet Huc me sydereo by Josquin des Prez appears in both five- and six-voice versions, having led scholars to debate which version is authentic to the composer’s original conception. The authoritative New Josquin Edition presents the motet in its six-voice version; in the critical commentary, editor Bonnie Blackburn defended it as Josquin’s original. More recently, Joshua Rifkin has demonstrated on stylistic and source-critical grounds that the five-voice version was original, with a sixth voice having been added later. In this article, I present new findings on the manuscript St Gallen 464, an important early source for Huc me sydereo, which reinforce arguments defending the authenticity of the five-voice version. I show that the origin of the sixth voice can be isolated to a trio of sources produced on the Italian peninsula in the 1510s, all but eliminating Josquin as a candidate as its author. Moreover, through a new identification of the original scribe and owner of St Gallen 464, I shed new light on that manuscript’s date and provenance. In so doing, I demonstrate how the study of musical sources and transmission can carry direct importance for essential performance decisions.

查看原文本刊更多论文

更多关于乔斯昆《Huc me sydereo》的配乐和手稿《St Gallen 464》的内容

乔斯昆-德-普雷兹（Josquin des Prez）的圣歌《Huc me sydereo》有五声部和六声部两种版本，曾引起学者们对哪种版本才是作曲家原作的争论。权威的《新乔斯昆版》（New Josquin Edition）以六声部版本介绍了这首主题曲；编辑邦妮-布莱克本（Bonnie Blackburn）在评论中将其视为乔斯昆的原作。最近，约书亚-里夫金（Joshua Rifkin）从文体和源流批判的角度证明，五声部版本是原版，第六声部是后来添加的。在本文中，我介绍了对圣加仑 464 号手稿的新发现，该手稿是《Huc me sydereo》的重要早期资料来源，它加强了为五声部版本的真实性辩护的论据。我的研究表明，第六声部的起源可以归结为 15 世纪 10 年代意大利半岛的三组资料，从而排除了乔斯昆作为作者的可能性。此外，通过对圣加仑 464 号手稿的原始抄写员和所有者的新鉴定，我对该手稿的日期和出处有了新的了解。在此过程中，我展示了对音乐来源和传承的研究如何对重要的演出决策产生直接影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

EARLY MUSIC MUSIC-

CiteScore

0.20

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Early Music is a stimulating and richly illustrated journal, and is unrivalled in its field. Founded in 1973, it remains the journal for anyone interested in early music and how it is being interpreted today. Contributions from scholars and performers on international standing explore every aspect of earlier musical repertoires, present vital new evidence for our understanding of the music of the past, and tackle controversial issues of performance practice. Each beautifully-presented issue contains a wide range of thought-provoking articles on performance practice. New discoveries of musical sources, instruments and documentation are regularly featured, and innovatory approaches to research and performance are explored, often in collections of themed articles.