The appearance of polyphony and its evolution needed to be accompanied by a coherent notational system that would make the graphic representation of sound, with its two basic components, possible: pitch to support consonances and dissonances, and rhythm, which regulated the accord between the parts and changes of sonority. Early theoretical attempts (Musica and Scolica Enchiriadis) were followed by the use of the first systems of rhythmic notation in polyphony (Winchester, Chartres, Saint-Maur-des-Fossés…), which as in monody would be followed by the diastematic notation of the school of Limoges or manuscripts such as the Codex Calixtinus. Both systems laid the foundations for the development of an effective melodic-rhythmic system of transmission. This would definitively take place with the emergence of the School of Notre-Dame.

Central figures

In 1163 Bishop Maurice de Sully (1160-1195) ordered the cornerstone of a new building to be laid, replacing the old Romanesque cathedral dedicated to St. Stephen. Later, in 1215, when work was yet to be completed, his remains miraculously appeared. In time, this building would become one of the most important temples of Christianity, not only capable of inspiring composers but also all kinds of artists. From this early period of construction there is evidence of the work of some of the cathedral’s musicians, such as the cantor Albert. This was perhaps the same Albert who appears in the Codex Calixtinus or Liber Sancti Jacobi as the author of the Congaudeant Catholici, the oldest polyphonic work in three voices in the history of Western music. The practice of music at the Cathedral is confirmed by the presence of the Vatican Organum Treatise (1170-1180), which perfectly codifies the Parisian musical advances of the period.

From a musical point of view, the task commenced by Bishop Maurice and continued by his nephew Odo (Eudes) de Sully (1196-1206) was marked by a number of very important events. During the former’s lifetime-specifically, on 19 May 1182-a pontifical delegate and Bishop Maurice himself consecrated the high altar. It was around this time that a so-called Léonin, or Magister Leoninus is said to have been active in the cathedral, if we are to believe the author of the anonymous treatise written by an English student at the University of Paris. This treatise, commonly known as Anonymous IV, as a result of Coussemaker’s numbering, dates from almost a century later. Information about the life of Léonin is almost non-existent. The only indirect testimony is the mentioned treatise, which describes him as “…an excellent composer of organum, [a genre that will be discussed later] … author of The Great Book of Organum [Magnus liber organi] for the chants of the Mass and the Office…”.It is very likely that during the consecration of the altar the polyphonic responsory Terribilis est was sung and that this responsory, preserved in the sources of music from this period was possibly by Léonin. It is interesting to note -as Michel Huglo has pointed out- that there are no testimonies in regard to Léonin as a cantor, rather he is simply known as a composer of organa.

In 1198 Bishop Eudes issued a decree forbidding the traditional New Year’s Day celebrations known as the Feast of Fools (especially dedicated to the cathedral’s vice-deacons) during which none too few irregularities were committed, as well as the possibility of singing the responsories of the Mass and the Office, and some other pieces “in triplo, vel quadruplo, vel organo”, that is to say, in three, four or two parts. It was at this moment Léonin’s ‘successor’ came into play: Petrus, Magister Perotinus (commonly known as Pérotin). On this occasion Anonymous IV is more explicit. He cites titles of pieces in four parts (Viderunt omnes, a gradual for Christmas Day and its Octave and Sederunt principes, a gradual for St. Stephen 26 December) perfectly coinciding with those transmitted in the manuscripts heeding both of Eudes de Sully’s (1198 and 1199) decrees. According to Anonymous IV the book (or books) composed by Pérotin remained in use “…from this period to the present…” in the choir of Notre-Dame. He also adds other names such as Robert de Sabillone, perhaps Pérotin’s successor. Despite his anonymity, the English theorist, monk and student trained in Paris, is a key figure in the interpretation of the music of Notre-Dame. Apart from citing names and places, his information and knowledge of the repertory that he himself perhaps practised and the innovations of his time, at times somewhat confusing, help to explain the internal rhythmic system of the Parisian polyphony of this period.

Musical-liturgical forms

The leading formal protagonist of the Notre-Dame period was plainchant, whether in its traditional form, that is solo, or in alternation with polyphony and in a supporting role to a large proportion of the pieces of the new repertory. Its denomination is somewhat of a compromise, but its musical significance is real. Melodically it consisted of the traditional monodic melody inherited from Franco-Roman hybridisation with possible local additions. The parameter of rhythm would also undergo some changes that would affect its innermost structure: it was ‘contaminated’ by the procedures of the trope and polyphony. The application of each of these ‘manipulations’ exerted a double influence on rhythm. The swiftness of a melisma was converted into a succession of syllablifactions in which the rhythm was ‘verbalised’ and the supporting part (the vox principalis or vox prius facta) was prolonged, favouring the agility or abundance of voices in the freely-invented part (vox organalis).

The leading formal protagonist of the Notre-Dame period was plainchant, whether in its traditional form, that is solo, or in alternation with polyphony and in a supporting role to a large proportion of the pieces of the new repertory

The word organum was employed from the earliest polyphonic examples. In its most primitive and reduced form it can be found in the Enchiriadis treatises (of the 9th century) as parallel organum (the simultaneous performance of the same melody at the distance of a perfect consonance, that is, at the interval of a 4th, 5th or 8th) or as occursus (modified parallel organum), in which beginning in unison, one of the voices progressively moves away from the other until it reaches the distance of a perfect consonance (a fourth), returning to the unison in the final part. The most interesting aspect of the procedure, aside from the polyphonic codification, is the use of a pre-existing melody as a support, a practice that would become institutionalised in music history. Polyphonic repertories prior to Notre-Dame still retained sections in plainchant that alternated with the new polyphonic parts, a custom that began to show the first signs of a promising future.

‘Organal’ pieces (as the practice of part music was known: organum-organizare) by Léonin were taken from the solo repertory: Graduals and Alleluias from the Mass, Responsories from the Office and the Benedicamus Domino. The sections to be performed polyphonically in each piece were also entrusted to the same soloists: almost complete versicles and intonations. The repertory Léonin is thought to have composed is exclusively in two parts. The lower voice taken from commonly used plainchant was endlessly drawn out, while the melody originating from the maestro’s imagination formed cascades of notes that ascended and descended in clear aesthetic imitation of the cathedral nave that would one day bare witness to that sonority inside its walls. For this reason the classic form of the Notre-Dame repertory is organum. As has already been mentioned its origins can be found in the pieces belonging to the same genre composed for the Codex Calixtinus. It thus comes as no surprise that this book of French origin (perhaps from the Abbey of Vézelay?) and almost contemporary to the new Paris building (ca. 1170), contains procedures that Léonin would extend. Pérotin would later expand the number of voices to three and four, creating textures that were previously unknown in music history.

Not all organum was composed in the same manner. When the style of plainchant was syllabic, that is, one note per syllable, the compositional procedure used was that which has just been described. But when this style became melismatic, a very frequent occurrence in these responsorial repertories, the behaviour of the cantus firmus altered. Instead of those interminable notes, there was now an ordered succession in which the punctum contra punctum of the tenor (the lower voice, that is, the plainchant) is almost palpable in conjunction with the duplum (the newly invented upper voice). But it would once again become a pedal due to the new change of style of the Gregorian tenor. These central parts, with a lighter and characteristic rhythm in which one tenor note is accompanied by two or three notes of the duplum is what is known as clausula. These clausulae were so successful during the early Notre-Dame period, perhaps prior to the change of century, that musicologists have termed them substitute clausulae, as for the one plainchant melisma the manuscripts conserve various possibilities, thus allowing changes in the repertory without completely altering the piece.

The conductus was a challenge to composers as it was entirely freely invented; there was no support from the cantus firmus

The procedure of the trope was later applied to the duplum of some of the clausulae. This resulted in one of the most popular genres in the history of vocal music: the motet. In its earliest form the motet preserved the original tenor and the text added to the upper voice (now termed motetus, perhaps from the French for word, mot) had a more or less direct relationship to the responsorial piece the clausula pertained to. In reality, it was a trope. The number of voices of these motets depended on the original clausula. For this reason it is common to find early motets with more than two voices, since the original clausula was in three or four parts. There are also motets in which another voice seems to have been added to the initial clausula. Effectively, following the early two-voice motets (tenor + motetus) derived from their corresponding clausulae, composers adopted their language and began enriching the procedure with other voices added above the motetus. Thus, it is common to find a triplum (the voice above the motetus) with a different text to that of the second voice, and even a quadruplum (the voice above the triplum) incorporating yet another text. The phenomenon of poly-textuality was now a reality. For the time being the Latin language served as a meeting point, at least phonetically, as the themes of each part could be different and were occasionally even opposed. But it was not long before there were examples in which one of the voices (frequently the highest) incorporated text in the vernacular. When a modern-day listener hears a poly-textual motet being performed and is barely able to perceive anything intelligible from that tangle of texts, he/she may begin to question the function of these pieces and for whom they were destined. They were clearly performed beyond the cathedral and liturgical ambit, since many of the motet texts, especially those in the vernacular, were amorous in content and even denounced abuses of the established power, both civil and ecclesiastic. For scholars like Christopher Page, director of the group Gothic Voices, the performance and ‘sampling’ of these pieces was limited to the intellectual circles of the period, which delighted in the multiplicity of texts. Doctors, experts in law, theologians, speculative musicians, etc. enjoyed the challenge of distinguishing each voice, in a mental exercise reserved for a special few. These practices outlived the period described in this article and were more typical of the period following that of Notre-Dame, that is, the Ars Antiqua. Tenors gradually took on a more instrumental role and were even extracted from secular songs instead of the liturgy.

The repertory characteristic of Paris and so-called peripheral repertories (construed in imitation of that of other important centres) was basically liturgical, consisting of responsorial chants whose main form was organum with its substitute clausulae and the incorporation of motets, troping the clausulae themselves. One of the forms of chant whose monodic antecedents were fairly well known and which was adopted for the frequent displacements of the liturgical actors and procession to the altar or chapels situated within the precincts was the conductus. This chant was a challenge to composers as it was entirely freely invented; there was no support from the cantus firmus over which one or more new melodies were constructed. It was the most versatile of all. There are examples from one to four voices, in strophic form, imitating the hymn but with a much greater freedom. According to Anonymous IV, Pérotin, the great composer of four-voice organa even composed a conductus for one voice, the beautiful Beata viscera, demonstrating not only his mastery of counterpoint, but of melodic inspiration. The style of the conductus is richer than other pieces, due to the composer’s increased freedom. From its simplest examples in a strict syllabic style (written in cum littera notation) to the most advanced with long caudæ (melismas) whose position fluctuated between the different syllables of the text (in sine littera notation) imitating grand organa but without the cantus firmus pedal, the conductus was eventually cast aside in favour of the new and more powerful motet. In all justice, it can be said that its very freedom was the cause for its abandonment. Nevertheless, magnificent examples of conductus have been conserved, the result of the composers’ most inspired work.

In the wake of the conductus came a new style in the spirit of the motet: the conductus-motet, a hybrid form of both. Its tenor was taken from the Gregorian repertory in use, but it also featured at least two upper voices with the same text (here there is no poly-textuality). Its appearance in the upper voices is similar to the syllabic conductus, but the presence of the tenor reveals its intentions. It possibly derived from the early three-voice clausulae, in which the upper voices contained the same text.

Although it is not strictly a form but a technique, the hocket (which would be more fully developed during the Ars Nova) originated during the period of Notre-Dame. According to Anonymous IV it was the work of “a certain Spaniard” and the oldest source in which it is conserved happens to be a Spanish manuscript conserved at the Biblioteca Nacional de Madrid (mss. 20486). This technique consists of a polyphonic interplay in which the voices imitate each other creating a hiccupped effect and a special texture. Its character is markedly instrumental, although the earliest examples could have been vocal.

Sources

As often occurs in music history, the Notre-Dame repertory is conserved in manuscripts copied many years after its composition and its period of splendour. This is due, among other reasons, to the impossibility of the notation of the new repertory at the time it was conceived. It is thus necessary to consult the work of the theorists, who reflected on the music and its rhythm, inventing a system allowing it to be preserved and transmitted. Increasingly, the time lapse between the composition of the music and its notation on paper was shortened. It is enough to recall that the main corpus of the Gregorian repertory was completed prior to the year 800 and it was not until more than a century later that there was such a coherent, faithful and carefully notated document as the Chansonnier of St. Gall (c. 900).

As often occurs in music history, the Notre-Dame repertory is conserved in manuscripts copied many years after its composition and its period of splendour.

The time lapse was not as great for the music of Paris. Except in the case that an earlier source has been lost, the oldest extant manuscript does not even originate in Paris, but from the Benedictine priory of St. Andrews in Scotland. This codex, known as Wolfenbüttel 1 [W1], due to its present location (Wolfenbüttel Herzog August Bibliothek, cod. Guelf. 628 Helmstad) was copied between approximately 1240 and 1245. It contains organa in two, three and four voices, conductus in two and three, together with other troped pieces, both monodic and polyphonic, from the Mass repertory.

The most complete source of the repertory is the Florence Manuscript [F] (Florence, Medicea-Laurenziana Library, Plut. 29.1). Copied in Paris between 1245 and 1255, according to some scholars, and illuminated in the workshop of Jean Grusch situated between Notre-Dame and the Sorbonne, it is the largest collection of pieces from the repertory. The Florence Manuscript contains organa, conductus, motets and even pieces that did not pertain to the common repertory such as planctus and other pieces copied in the form of an appendix.

The Madrid Manuscript [Ma] (Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional, mss. 20486) is the smallest source in regard to size and content. Copied around 1260, it pertained to the Chapter Library of the Cathedral of Toledo until 1869, when it became part of the holdings of the Biblioteca Nacional de Madrid. Of unknown origin, perhaps from one of the important centres in Castile or Toledo itself, it contains a significant collection of conductus and motets, some of which are unique sources and others pertaining to a supposed Hispanic repertory, also transmitted in the Las Huelgas Codex. Its first pages contain Pérotin’s two great quadrupla. It doesn’t contain any of the organa dupla or tripla that are representative of the repertoire, from there they are sometimes excluded as a primary source of the Magnus liber organi. Its main corpus consists of conductus and motets. The presence of Pérotin’s two great organa (Viderunt omnes and Sederunt principes) together with the only clausula in four voices of the repertory (Mors) in the initial quinternions leads to the hypothesis that there were originally two separate books that were bound together at a later date. The fourth and last of the primary sources, Wolfenbüttel 2 [W2] (Wolfenbüttel Herzog August Bibliothek, cod. Guelf. 1099 Helmsatd), is held at the same library as its brother W1. Copied in Paris between 1250 and 1260 it is a collection of pieces perfectly ordered by genre and by their pertinence to the Office or the Mass. Of special note are its illuminated capitals depicting various cantors singing in front of lecterns, in direct relation to the repertory copied in its pages. At the end of the manuscript there is an important collection of motets, many in the vernacular.

In addition to these four manuscripts, considered the main sources to transmit the repertory, there are other complete or fragmentary sources. Many of the pieces were copied in later manuscripts principally containing works from other genres pertaining to the period immediately posterior to Notre-Dame. Thus, as well as being the most complete source to transmit motets (over 300), the Montpellier Manuscript [Mo] (Montpellier, Bibliothèque Interuniversitaire, section de Médecine, Ms. H 196), copied and illuminated in Paris between 1260-1280, contains some interesting examples of organa in notation post-dating that of the oldest testimonies from Notre-Dame. This allows us to make some interesting observations concerning rhythm. Equally, the Bamberg Manuscript [Ba] (Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek, ms. lit. 115) preserves around 100 motets, some pertaining to the early period of the genre, although they were copied between 1275 and 1300. Finally, the Las Huelgas Codex [Hu] (Burgos), the only one of these manuscripts still to be conserved in the place it was copied for between the last years of the thirteenth century and the beginning of the fourteenth. Besides incorporating repertory from the Ars Nova, it preserves pieces from the early tradition, such as some organa, conductus and motets, many of probable Spanish origin, coupled with those from the manuscript Ma. Although the Las Huelgas repertory is not the same as that contained in W1, the style and conception of the beginning of Las Huelgas concords with the final part of latter.