<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf8'?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/archiving/1.1/JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article dtd-version="1.1" article-type="book-review">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id>TMR</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>The Medieval Review</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">1096-746X</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Indiana University</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">12.09.31</article-id>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>12.09.31, Haines, ed., The Calligraphy of Medieval Music (Inga Behrendt)</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Behrendt</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
          <aff>Catholic University of Leuven</aff>
          <address>
            <email>Inga.Behrendt@arts.kuleuven.be</email>
          </address>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date publication-format="epub" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2012">
        <year>2012</year>
      </pub-date>
      <product product-type="book">
        <person-group>
          <name>
            <surname>Haines, John</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
        </person-group>
        <source>The Calligraphy of Medieval Music, Musicalia Medii Aevi</source>
        <year iso-8601-date="2011">2011</year>
        <publisher-loc>Turnhout</publisher-loc>
        <publisher-name>Brepols Publishers nv</publisher-name>
        <page-range>Pp. 276</page-range>
        <price>75.oo EUR</price>
        <isbn>978-2-503-54005-4</isbn>
      </product>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright 2012 Trustees of Indiana University. Indiana University provides the information contained in this file for non-commercial, personal, or research use only. All other use, including but not limited to commercial or scholarly reproductions, redistribution, publication or transmission, whether by electronic means or otherwise, without prior written permission of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited.</copyright-statement>
      </permissions>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <p><italic>The Calligraphy of Medieval Music</italic> offers a rich treasury of
articles written by top-quality scholars, including three by the
great chant researcher Michel Huglo who passed away in May 2012.
The publication is based partly on the publisher's initiatives
concerning the <italic>Nota Quadrata</italic> project but also arises from
the conference entitled <italic>The Calligraphy of Medieval Music</italic>,
which took place at the University of Toronto's Trinity College in
September of 2007 (introduction, 7). <italic>The Calligraphy of Medieval
Music</italic> aims to provide a broad overview of the history of
calligraphy across the entire spectrum of medieval music notation.</p>
    <p>First, a word concerning the structure of the publication: The
first three articles (part I) address practical aspects of the
production of manuscripts. This is followed by seven contributions
(part II) about musical notation in the 10th and 11th centuries
from most major regions in medieval Europe. The focus turns to late
medieval notation in six further articles (part III), three of
which describe the traditions of Carthusians, Dominicans and
Franciscans (part IIIa) with the rest (part IIIb) focused on the
transition from neume notation in manuscripts to mensural notation
in printed sources--that is, from chant notation to polyphonic
notation--in the late Middle Ages. <italic>The Calligraphy of Medieval
Music</italic> presents its content with many illustrations within the
articles as well as sixteen color illustrations at the end of the
publication.</p>
    <p>What sets this publication apart from others on the subject are the
reflections its authors make on the transition from neumes to
square notation, and from square notation to the mensural notation
of the <italic>Ars nova</italic> period. This book is trend-setting in this
respect, and represents a successful attempt at amassing notational
case studies from individual scriptoria as well as groups of
scriptoria connected by geography or monastic order. David Hiley
notes the persistent need for research in this area when he
concludes his article this way: "Taking a broad view, while the
importance of the establishment of musical notation back in the
ninth century can hardly be overestimated, the introduction of
staff-notation two centuries later also poses fascinating questions
for future research." (161)</p>
    <p>The individual contributions to the collection will be briefly
summarized here.</p>
    <p>Michel Huglo's article begins the collection with a general
description of the scientific paleography of music (13-21). He
attempts to determine which neume shapes were taken over by the
notation of <italic>musica mensuralis</italic> and which were not. In doing
so, he emphasizes the main question put forth by the publication:
how did notational transition take place: from neumatic to square,
and from square to mensural?</p>
    <p>Albert Derolez describes codicological aspects of late medieval
music manuscripts in great detail, with a special concern for page
layout (23-35).</p>
    <p>The wide range of the publication's content is evident in the next
article, which is about manuscript production in Ethiopia, by
Getatchew Haile (37-44).</p>
    <p>A large part of the publication is taken up by detailed
examinations of notational families, determined on a geographical
basis.</p>
    <p>In her article, "Calligraphy and the study of neumatic notations"
(47-62), Susan Rankin describes the notation in the two Winchester
tropers from the 11th century (Cambridge, Corpus Christi College,
ms 473, probably copied in the 1020s-30s and Oxford, Bodleian
Library, ms Bodley 775, from the 1040-50s). She comments on two
different <italic>clivis</italic> neume shapes (the <italic>clivis</italic> represents
a progression of two notes, the first higher than the second) in
the two-voice <italic>Kyries</italic> in these Winchester manuscripts: the
round <italic>clivis</italic> (the familiar shape) and the square
<italic>clivis</italic>, which appears to have a special meaning. Rankin
identifies the square <italic>clivis</italic> "as a signal which warns the
reader that something different is to happen" (53). The square
<italic>clivis</italic> indicates uncommon intervals between the chant and
the organal voice. Further, Rankin presents the <italic>virga</italic> neume
(which represents a single note that is higher or equal to previous
notes), whose length of the stem indicates the height of the pitch
in syllabic passages (the longer the stem, the higher the pitch).
Elsewhere in the manuscript, the <italic>virga</italic> also indicates pitch
through its careful and differentiated vertical placement above the
text. While this sort of attempt still proves inaccurate, it paves
the way for future developments concerning indications for exact
pitch (58). Rankin describes the calligraphic diversity as a rich
historical resource, noting the benefits of both studying
individual scribes and undertaking comparative analyses of several
scribal traditions over a longer period of time (59).</p>
    <p>In the only French article in <italic>The Calligraphy of Medieval
Music</italic> is contributed by Lean Luc Deuffic and concerns Bretonian
neume notation ("La Bretonne neumatique notation: manuscrits et
centers de diffusion (Xe siécle XIIe)" (63-90).</p>
    <p>Susana Zapke informs the reader in her contribution "Dating neumes
according to their morphology: the corpus of Toledo" (91-99) about
manuscripts from the Iberian Peninsula. She discusses the mutual
impact of the two morphologies of notations from the north and the
south on each other in Toledo. One difficulty in the exploration of
the morphologies is that the oldest source with notation from the
south is an 11th-century fragment from Coimbra. This Coimbra
fragment "is the only proof that both morphologies (the one from
the south and the one from the north) coexisted from at least the
eleventh century onwards" (96). The antiphonal of Leùn (Leùn, arch.
Cat. 8) seems to confirm the presumption that southern codices were
used as models for copyists, as well as practical use, in northern
Iberian centres. This mid-11th-century antiphonal is, according to
Díaz y Díaz, a copy of a southern model from Beja (Alentejo,
Portugal) (94).</p>
    <p>In the next article, Giacomo Baroffio describes music writing
styles in medieval Italy (101-124) and isolates Frankish and German
influences on the notations in northern Italian manuscripts. This
article mines decades of research and provides a considerable basis
for future publications on medieval Italian chant notation.</p>
    <p>In her article "Liturgical books and book production in the
thirteenth-century diocese of Chartres. Case of the Biblioteca
Apostolica Vaticana, Vatican lat 4756" (125-151), Margot Fassler
identifies 12th- and 13th-century manuscripts from the diocese of
Chartres that are scattered across different European archives in
order to compare their notation. Fassler concentrates her attention
on an early 13th-century breviary from Chartres, which is now kept
in the Vatican Library (<italic>Biblioteca Apostolica</italic>, Rome), under
the shelf-mark <italic>Vatican Lat. Kept 4756</italic>. The Chartrain staff
notation in this manuscript is very close to square notation.
Fassler describes the scribes of the text and the neumes in detail,
giving codicological information, as well as feast names and dates
of implementation into the diocesan calendar (145 and 146).</p>
    <p>In "Some characteristic neumes in North French, Sicilian and
Italian chant manuscripts" (153-162), David Hiley analyses the
<italic>clivis</italic> in manuscripts from northern France, Sicily and
Italy. In Sicilian chant books, he finds a repertory which is
almost exclusively northern French. This notational change is
embodied by the manuscript Madrid, <italic>Biblioteca Nacional</italic> 288,
from southern Italy or Sicily. The chief scribe of this manuscript
writes French adiastematic neumes (154). Later additions of the
sort typical of late Sicilian books indicate that it was probably
used in Sicily. We are left to speculate as to whether Madrid 288
was written in Normandy and transported to Sicily or southern
Italy, or written in Sicily or southern Italy by a scribe trained
in the Norman tradition.</p>
    <p>Michel Huglo's second article "The earliest developments in the
square notation: the twelfth-century Aquitaine" (163-171) discusses
the term <italic>Aquitanian notation</italic>. He addresses Bruno Stèblein's
suggestion that all medieval musical notations were derived from
Paleofrankish notation (166). Huglo also questions Paolo Ferretti
(and, after him, Dom Grégoire Sunol), who asserted that Aquitanian
notation developed from Breton notation. Huglo's criticism is based
on concrete observations of Aquitanian neume shapes (in particular,
the <italic>quilisma</italic>).</p>
    <p>The third part of the volume deals with late medieval notations.</p>
    <p>Olivier Cullin's article, "Notation in Carthusian liturgical books:
preliminary remarks" (175-194), deliberates on the question of a
unified notational tradition within the Carthusian monastic order.
Cullin describes several Carthusian sources and identifies their
networks of connections. Cullin writes that "most of the music in
Carthusian manuscripts is written in either pure Aquitanian
notation or one derived from it" (190). Due to the fact that
liturgical unity was only achieved at the first general chapter
meeting in 1140 and implemented twenty years later, sources which
predate 1140 show a lack of unity.</p>
    <p>Michel Huglo mentions, in his article "The Dominican and Franciscan
books: similarities and differences between their notations" (195-
202), that Dominicans and Franciscans initially sang the office
following the usage of the diocese in which their convents were
founded (195). But as early as the 13th century, model manuscripts
were copied in all convents and their own scribal traditions were
born. Huglo describes the rules for these transcriptions of
Dominican and Franciscan codices.</p>
    <p>John Haines, the editor of the publication, writes in his article
"On ligaturae and their properties: medieval music notation as
esoteric writing" (203-222) that "notes were visible symbols of
things invisible" (204). With this, he explores a different, and
rarely explored, meaning for calligraphical signs. The reader
learns about types of secret writing (205), about the original
usage (and meaning) of terms such as <italic>brevis/breve</italic> (206) or
<italic>ligatura</italic> (207 et seq.). The word <italic>ligature</italic> was first
used "in the traditional medical-magical context common from
Antiquity onwards" (215) and the <italic>ligature</italic> concept was taken
over in 13th-century music notation. Haines believes that "music
writers adopted these terms (<italic>ligature, proprietas,
perfectio</italic>) because they were part of the fashionable university
jargon of the day" (215). Quoting different treatises for instance
by Franco of Cologne, Haines suggests that the "<italic>ligature-
proprietas</italic> music writing tradition was not intended as a clear
notational code available and comprehensible to a wide public.
Rather, it was designed as opaque, esoteric writing for a literate
few" (217).</p>
    <p>In "Interpreting the deluxe manuscript: exigencies of scribal
practices and manuscript production in Machaut" (223-240), Lawrence
Earp distinguishes between different types of manuscripts according
to usage. Earp focuses on the Machaut manuscripts (in particular on
Paris BnF, fr. 9221 (E), which was a product of the 1390s and
copied for John, duke of Berry) (229). He suggests reasons for the
creation of a new Machaut manuscript like fr. 9221 in the first
place.</p>
    <p>In Anna Maria Busse Berger's article "The consequences of Ars Nova
notation" (241-251), plainchant notation and mensural notation are
compared. Chant notation in neumes does not provide accurate pitch
and duration, whereas mensural notation does; neumes are
inseparably connected to an oral tradition, "while mensural
notation allows one to learn an entire polyphonic composition from
a manuscript without ever having heard it before" (241). Busse
Berger also mentions that special training is required to read or
write mensural notation and that therefore it has been associated
with university circles (242) from its very beginnings. The first
descriptions of the <italic>Ars Nova</italic> notation are by Philippe de
Vitry and Johannes de Muris. Busse Berge sets out the recognizable
impact that the new notation system had on music and the musicians
of the time. On the one hand, the performer probably changed the
musical text, written in <italic>Ars Nova</italic> notation, each time it was
performed. On the other hand, we know that composers, such as
Machaut, wanted their pieces to be performed "as written" (243).
The singer was only free to choose the tempo and <italic>musica
ficta</italic>. Busse Berger characterizes this initial result of <italic>Ars
Nova</italic> notation as a pride in musical authorship.
The myriad of paths taken by manuscripts in medieval Europe show
that compositions could be performed anywhere, and survive
independently "from a performer who was familiar with the piece or
the composer who did not need to be present at the performance"
(243). A further result of the introduction of mensural notation
was the advent of rhythmic games involving mensuration signs, with
composers experimenting with for instance diminutions and
augmentations (245).</p>
    <p>Busse Berger mentions Heinrich Besseler and Peter Gƒlke who coined
the expression, <italic>Entlastung der Küpfe</italic>, for performers who did
not need to memorize the pitch and duration of the single notes
anymore to perform and "were thus free to conceive complicated
polyphonic structures" (244). She disagrees with this idea,
together with Mary Carruthers and Craig Wright, since even after
the invention of an unambiguous notation system, elements of the
music and texts were often memorized. Busse Berger quotes the
anthropologists Jack Goody who states that once the music is
written down, one is able to analyze the text and the music in its
structures and rules. With this in mind, Busse Berger gives her
readers an example: Note-against-note counterpoint was based on
memorization and emulation. First the dissonant and consonant
intervals needed to be learned by heart using all the permissible
interval progressions as described by Johannes de Muris, by the
French Cistercian Petrus dictus Palma ociosa (1336) and by
Goscalchus (1375). While the note-against-note counterpoint was
described by Italian theorists from the 14th and 15th century,
references to diminished counterpoint also occur in French
treatises. Busse Berger says that "the analysis of a written score
was the central element that allowed the gradual formulation of
counterpoint rules governing diminished counterpoint. These rules
could not have been formulated in an oral culture" (249).</p>
    <p>Barbara Haggh-Huglo's article, "The chant and polyphony in the
meeting of monophonic square notation from Cambrai Cathedral 1250-
1550" (253-272), relates the special case of the scribe Simon
Mellet who wrote both plainchant and polyphonic music in Cambrai.
Haggh-Huglo finds neume shapes that are similar in their appearance
with ligatures of polyphonic notation within the notation of the
early 13th-century manuscript 38 from Cambrai (today preserved in
the <italic>Médiathèque Municipale</italic> of Cambrai). Further, she
mentions that there is "the possibility that Dufay might have used
CA 38 as a reference work" (258). Haggh-Huglo's precise and
extensive analysis leads to the suggestion that (within syllabic
passages of the chant) this scribe actively removed any ambiguity
between the notation signs of chant and polyphonic music but did
not necessarily restrict his use of one style of notation to one
genre of music. Haggh-Huglo concludes, "in short, the scribe of
this sequence (<italic>Salve decus puritatis</italic>) is using polyphonic
mensural notation, not chant notation--and not a recent notation,
but only of the late thirteenth or early fourteenth century" (264).
This shows that square notation (of chant) and mensural notation
(of polyphony) influenced each other.
</p>
    <p/>
  </body>
</article>
