Pre-1600 Music Listening: A Methodological Approach

Author(s): Shai Burstyn

Source: The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 82, No. 3/4, Special Issue: "Music as Heard" (Autumn -
Winter, 1998), pp. 455-465
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/742333
Accessed: 21-01-2018 23:28 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/742333?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to The Musical Quarterly

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Pre-1600 Music Listening:
A Methodological Approach

Shai Burstyn

Understanding of the listening process is currently still in its infancy, in

spite of years of research based on modern listeners. It is therefore only
natural that the methodological obstacles confronting research into pre-
1600 listening processes and practices may seem insurmountable. They
are indeed formidable. Following are some ideas meant to enhance
methods for studying past listening practices, not in their isolated partic-
ularity but from within the richness and complexity that characterize
their cultural historical position.

I. Introduction

Polar dichotomies could be a helpful methodological device with which

to study a complex phenomenon. Approaching the study of past listen-
ing in terms of polar concepts such as oral versus literate musical envi-
ronments or functional versus aesthetic musical situations is, on the on
hand, surely artificial: such extreme contrasts hardly ever reflect a histo
ical musical reality, which is by nature complex and heterogeneous, har
boring simultaneous trends ranging from the closely similar but never-
theless distinct to the conflicting and contradictory. On the other hand
it is precisely their unrealistic either/or nature that gives polar dichot-
omies their methodological effectiveness, for they can serve as foils
against which real historical listening situations may be reconstructed,
compared, and studied. But unless explicitly meant and understood as
methodological ploy, questions relating to the complex phenomenon of
musical listening in a past historical context, if posed in black-and-whit
terms, could be decidedly detrimental to the gaining of historical insigh
This is because such a method a priori casts past musical reality in these
polar terms, thus in effect restricting the field by asking only which of
the two poles is appropriate to a given situation.
Think of the contentious arguments concerning medieval succes-
sive versus Renaissance simultaneous compositional methods, with thei
built-in presuppositions about medieval versus Renaissance listening

455

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
456 The Musical Quarterly

attitudes. Did medieval listeners perceive chords, or was harmonic per-

ception the exclusive privilege of Renaissance listeners? Or take the
arguments about composition, performance, and listening in oral versus
literate contexts and the attendant presuppositions that usually come
with them. Is formulaic thinking an exclusive phenomenon of oral musi-
cal cultures? What kind of music cannot be conceived and perceived
without notation? These and other notorious arguments that have direct
bearing on historical listening lose much of their bite when viewed from
a more flexible, multifaceted, and, I contend, realistic viewpoint. Hence,
the idea of a continuum linking two polar concepts is a methodological
refinement enabling a more variegated approach. A continuum may be
useful for studying a complex cultural phenomenon like past listening
practices, provided it is employed flexibly and its pitfalls are avoided.
Here are two relevant points: First, a continuum is linear, connecting
two polar endpoints. In a historical context, this could suggest not only a
unidirectional but even a temporal movement from an earlier to a later
phase. This is unfortunate because it often negates historical musical
reality, in which the course of concepts, mental habits, social conditions,
patronage systems, and so forth may fluctuate and move in both direc-
tions. Second, a continuum may wrongly imply a gradual, evolutionary
motion (not to mention deterministic overtones), thus either precluding
or discouraging the possibility of sudden, seemingly "revolutionary" styl-
istic developments, with their inevitable consequences for listening
audiences on the one hand, and the possibility of equilibrium and stasis
on the other hand.
The complex reality of a historical musical phenomenon like past
listening is such that several relevant explanatory continua linking pairs
of opposite polar concepts can simultaneously operate at any one point
in time. The possible coordination, not to mention agreement, of phe-
nomena presented on these different but parallel continua should be the
proper subject of investigation and by no means a preconceived, fore-
gone conclusion. For example, at any pre-1600 point of Western music
history the following continua may have been relevant to some degree
and should therefore be taken into consideration in assessing listening
attitudes:

Musical "Process" Musical "Object"

"Composer Strategies" "Listener Strategies"
Successive Composition Simultaneous Composition
Monophony Polyphony
Contrapuntal texture Chordal texture

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Pre-1 600 Music Listening 457

Vocal performance Instrumental performance

Theory Practice
Oral culture Literate culture

Functional uses Aesthetic uses

Sacred/devotional Secular
"High" culture "Popular" culture

As a methodological tool, a continuum may serve to guard his

of past listening practices from their own culturally conditioned bias
example, by placing Dufay's music on the above set of continua, n
chronologically coordinated, we can form a historically anchored v
to the meaning of his music to his contemporary listeners, as well as
it meant to later ones, thereby avoiding the trap of evolutionary
tions inherent in expressions like "incipient," "advanced," "reactio
and so on. If we accept that Dufay's music was coherent and comp
ble to his listeners, we should seek to establish the historically re
components of that coherence or comprehensibility, that is, their
of expectations. Historically anachronistic conceptions that were
a part of that horizon of expectations (dominant-tonic cadences,
example) must be avoided. But these may become relevant elsew
the continua, at the points where they became part of a later hor
expectations.

II. Musical Coherence and Comprehensibility and

Listener

In the introduction to a collection of analytical essays devoted to pre-

1600 music, Mark Everist distinguished between coherence and compre-
hensibility in an attempt to identify sources of difficulties in analyzing
early music:

To describe a piece as comprehensible is simply to say that it is under-

standable, that it can be grasped by its recipient. The reasons for such
comprehensibility may be intra-musical--or they may not.. . Coherence,
on the other hand, is a concept that implies-states indeed-that a work
hangs or sticks together, perhaps, even, that it is unified .. The conflict
between a lack of coherence (but an abundance of extra-musical compre-
hensibility) in much music before 1600 and the expression of coherence
that is represented by a voice-leading analysis is therefore at the same
time problematic and productive.'

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
458 The Musical Quarterly

I propose to make use of this passage in order to clarify my position

vis-a-vis several points relevant to listening to pre-1600 music.

Comprehensibility is presented here as a function of listening, of being

grasped by the recipients. Coherence, on the other hand, is presented as
residing in the work. The listener has suddenly disappeared. One may
suppose that a musical work could be perfectly coherent in and of itself
without at all being so for its listeners. Who is to decide whether a work
"hangs or sticks together"? Moreover, and more importantly in the pre-
sent context, what are the relevant criteria for decision? What is the
role, if any, of a musical listener in the decision? Conceding that we can-
not relive the aesthetic musical experience of past listeners, to what
extent can we intellectually retrieve or reconstruct their cultural-mental
apparatus responsible for creating musical coherence?2 From these ques-
tions it is clear how closely the problem of music as heard is related to
philosophical issues such as the distinction between the work, the text
(the work as notated), and the performance. As the focus of interest
here is on listeners and listening, I shall refer only to those ontological
aspects of a musical work that directly bear on its listeners.
In a passage omitted from the above quotation, coherence is pre-
sented as a central tenet required by orthodox Schenkerian analysis,
indeed, its raison d'&tre. Accordingly, the organic unity of a musical
object is not a hypothesis to be verified or refuted; it is an axiom. (Note
that Schenkerian/Salzerian analysis conceives of organic unity not
merely as a methodological polar concept, as I suggest above, but as
actually representing musical reality). The analysis determines whether
the composer has succeeded in creating a musically unified whole, and if
so, to what extent and by what means. The title of Salzer's book-Struc-
tural Hearing-more than implies that this is also how we hear the
music, or, at least, how we should hear it. Schenkerian analysis owes its
philosophical and ideological allegiance to romantic organicism. Hence,
the very thing that makes it, at least in principle, an appropriate analyti-
cal methodology for compositions founded on musical organic unity-
understood as such by both composer and listener-also renders it
largely ineffective both for compositions based on another principle or
whose organic unity is partial or "weak" and for other music not orga-
nized in cohesive entities qualifying them to be considered as composi-
tions in the "normal" sense. This is of course the reason for the widely
accepted view that Schenkerian analysis is appropriate for analyzing
music "from Bach to Brahms."
Schenkerian analysis need concern us here only insofar as it exem-
plifies an extreme organicistic bias. The coherence it seeks is representa-

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Pre-1600 Music Listening 459

tive of the mainstream of Western music from the late baroque to late
romanticism. The reason it is largely inappropriate for a stylistically sen-
sitive analysis of earlier music is because prior to roughly 1600 (and, as I
shall maintain, also for a long time after) the organic principle was not a
dominant, let alone a seminal force of the mental outlook of Western
creators and recipients-the former not only composers but also authors,
poets, and painters, the latter not only listeners but also readers and
spectators. Therefore, as conditioned educational products of the
"organic view," we should take every precaution to avoid the automatic
projection of the "organic fallacy" onto pre-1600 music and instead to
devise emic methodologies for its study.3
Hence, a methodologically sound approach should ask: what is
musical coherence in pre-1600 terms? And as if this question is not diffi-
cult enough to answer, a still more specific question interests this confer-
ence: what is listener's coherence in pre-1600 terms? These different,
though obviously related, questions involve several of the above-listed
continua, especially "composer strategies/listener strategies" and "theory/
practice."
The American Heritage Dictionary defines "coherence" as "[t]he qual-
ity or state of logical or orderly relationship of parts; consistency, con-
gruity."4 Since no music exists in a cultural vacuum, identifying coher-
ence in musical works always carries broader implications. If the axis of
the concept hinges on the definition of "logic" and "order" and on the
relationship of parts to whole, then the same coherence found in musical
works will most probably play a role in the overall mental outlook of
their culture. Granting that no culture is stylistically monolithic and
that defining causal stylistic relations between artistic products and their
culture involves us in a chicken-and-egg conundrum, the least one can
say is that there is often a striking correlation between the general men-
tal outlook of a culture and its musical products. Hence the distinction
between musical coherence and extramusical comprehensibility is one of
convenience, not of essence.
Moreover, coherence will obviously be interpreted differently by
different cultures or subcultures, for it is precisely a particular culture's
view of what constitutes logic, order, wholes, and parts-to-whole rela-
tionships that defines its "cognitive style," thereby conditioning its hori-
zon of expectations. There is no abstract, absolute, objective definition
of either "parts" or "wholes" and their interaction that will hold true for
all times and all places. Hence, it is not that one culture, or a musical
style period within it, has musical coherence while another (pre-1600
music, for example) does not; it is simply that the meaning of the term is
different for the two.

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
460 The Musical Quarterly

Inasmuch as "the reasons for..,. comprehensibility may be intra-

musical," they must exhibit coherence. And if the music is coherent to
its listeners on its own, "intra-musically," as it were, the concept of intra-
musical comprehensibility is redundant. If it is not coherent qua music,
we must ask, to whom is it not coherent? To present-day analysts or to
those past composers, performers, or listeners who composed, performed,
and listened to the music? It is important to recall here that the state-
ment concerning "the conflict between a lack of coherence (but an
abundance of comprehensibility) in much music before 1600" is made by
a late-twentieth-century music historian whose cognitive style is differ-
ent from that of pre-1600 listeners.
Nevertheless, the notion of extramusical comprehensibility may
still be helpful; it may guard us against our analytic habits by reminding
us that function-social, religious, devotional-plays an important role
in musical understanding and enjoyment. It should further remind us
that from a certain historical point-which I very roughly place at

around 1480-the relative weight of the extramusical components'of

comprehensibility gradually gave way to a concept of musical composi-
tion that relied more and more on the intramusical, that is, on musical
coherence. Although it may be used as a narrow, self-sufficient musical
concept, in reality, musical coherence is normally constituted within a
wider concept of cultural coherence. The task of reconstructing the
musical mental world of early listeners includes, among other things, the
distinction between a type of listening heavily dependent on extramusi-
cal elements and one largely based on purely musical elements-by
which I mean listening to music aesthetically, disinterestedly, through
well-defined compositions. These two modes of listening are hypotheti-
cal; they are drawn here in polar terms only for the sake of clarification.
Western musical reality has never known either extreme. The contin-
uum bridging functional and aesthetic listening is obviously handy here,
but so too are the pairs to be discussed next.

III. Process/Object and Oral/Literate Continua

In what follows I shall attempt to demonstrate the explanatory value of

projecting various relevant aspects of early music listening onto the
metaphor of parallel continua.

As noted above, we are culturally conditioned to relate to music as

packaged in wholes called works. In that we are the carriers of the
romantic heritage, still amazingly alive at the close of the twentieth cen-

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Pre-1600 Music Listening 461

tury. As music historians we should be able to identify this mental model

for its heavy prejudice and to realize its gross inappropriateness, at least
for pre-1600 music. Much music at that time was composed, performed,
and listened to that does not answer at all, or only poorly, to the later
concept of a musical work.
Thirty-two years ago, Patricia Carpenter called attention to the dif-
ferences between "music as object and music as process," two "ways in
which music can be said to be" that she took to be polar.5 The value of
her article to the present discussion is that contrary to most analyses and
music histories, which concern themselves almost exclusively with com-
positional techniques (composer strategies), Carpenter is constantly
aware of the perceiver and views both musical process and object as they
are heard (listener strategies). The differences between process and
object are explained in terms of diffuse versus articulated structure and of
"the distance from which we experience the music" (p. 57)-"temporal
becoming" as opposed to "spatial being" (p. 59)
Distance is a spatial term. We are able to discuss a complex musical
whole-a Beethoven symphony, for example-as a unified musical work
because we have "spatialized" it, often with the aid of the score, by creat-
ing a dimensional illusion, the imagined simultaneous existence of the
musical object; whereas, as is only too well known, being a unique tem-
poral phenomenon, music is actually available to us as a simultaneous
whole only in our reconstructive imagination.
It thus stands to reason that notation in general, and score arrange-
ment in particular, greatly enhance the objectification of music and its
creation and perception in discrete, cohesive units. The (re)appearance
of the score toward the end of the sixteenth century is related to the
gradually emerging conception of the musical object as "opus perfectum
et absolutum" (N. Listenius, Musica, 1537), as well as to the increasing
use of the cartella for compositional, rather than teaching purposes.6
The persistence of both choirbook and partbook formats shows that the
transition was both slow and gradual.
While aspects of the compositional process of complex polyphonic
textures without the aid of a score in this transitional period are still not
entirely clear, the oeuvre of Renaissance composers provides ample evi-
dence that they still managed to function efficiently in a significantly oral
manuscript culture, without the "benefit" of a controlling score, using the
choirbook format as their prevalent notational arrangement. Just as score
notation is ultimately related to the emergence of a new ontology of the
musical work, medieval scoreless notation optimally served composi-
tions often exhibiting a looser parts-to-whole relation, as well as music
whose work status was minimal. Not surprisingly, numerous medieval

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
462 The Musical Quarterly

compositions draw their sense of work status from their functional use,
while most Renaissance compositions are severed from the surrounding
world of activity, thus satisfying a prime condition for musical objectifi-
cation.

The appearance of polyphonic music printing is an occasion o

great moment in this regard: manuscript culture is tentative, inco
tent, aggregative, and tolerant of changes, rearrangements, and di
versions. On the other hand, print culture tends to reject these t
to fix and finalize its products. The translation of this observation
actual musical reality immediately brings up the issue of tonal c
clear beginning and ending and the perceptual musical motion li
them-as well as the means for achieving it. Because much pre-16
music was composed, performed, and listened to in a cultural env
ment significantly influenced by these oral traits (which, though
ally weakening, continued to cast a long shadow well beyond Pet
the benefits of sorting out musical operations on the oral/literate
uum are self-evident.
Oral/literate and process/object musical operations are by no means
mutually exclusive; on the contrary, they tend to exist side by side, inter-
mingle, and fructify one another, though their interrelationship natu-
rally varies in different styles. Quite often these two modes are associated
not only with the same style, or the same composer, but even with the
very same music (for example, Codex Faenza, with its vocal models
[objectlike] and their instrumental arrangements [processlike]). Early
music composers and listeners alike must have felt at home in both
idioms and their various admixtures.
It is extremely interesting, and not at all accidental, that within the
complex, heterogeneous picture around the beginning of the sixteenth
century, we can observe the gradual emergence of two closely related
phenomena highly relevant to listening: the gradual objectification of
musical products (but also a continuation and further development of
processlike music), and an emerging conception of music as art rather
than as fulfilling a function. These developments are tied to two "tech-
nological" advances: The appearance of printing for polyphonic music at
the beginning of the sixteenth century, and the appearance of the poly-
phonic score toward the end of the sixteenth century.
Concomitant with these seminal developments is the gradual but
decisive change from the medieval gap between abstract, imperceptible
compositional strategies and their resulting audible musical reality to a
much closer correspondence in the Renaissance.
The last point deserves a brief elaboration: medieval polyphonists
relied heavily on precompositional materials (cantus firmi, taleas, colors,

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Pre-1600 Music Listening 463

etc.) as structural devices. Essential as these were for reconstructing a

composition, they most often did not then-nor do they now- bear any
meaningful relationship to the listening process. Therefore, an attempt
to discover the musical sense compositions like Ars Antiqua motets and
Ars Nova isorhythmic motets made for their listeners may profitably
begin by placing them on a continuum whose poles are composer's and
listener's strategies.
Since these two strategies are never in full agreement, this is a rare
case in which the position of modern listeners is akin in principle to that
of early listeners, although naturally there are differences between early
and modern divergences from composer's strategies. While reconstruct-
ing early listening strategies is exceedingly difficult, one could devise
one's "listening scores," outlining the perceptible, gestalt-creating ele-
ments of the music. These "listening plans" may have nothing in com-
mon with the main compositional ploys, or they may to some extent
correlate with them. For example, while the palindromic structure of
Machaut's rondeau "Ma fin est mon commencement" is without doubt
beyond human perceptual capabilities, some of his isorhythmic struc-
tures may be partly perceptible, due to their masterful balance with audi-
ble melodic and harmonic motions, especially toward cadences.
To overstep momentarily the chronological boundaries of this con-
ference for the sake of gaining a wider perspective, the vast majority of
classical compositions present a similar problem to the listener: while,
unlike the medieval compositional strategies just mentioned, sonata
form can be perceived by trained musicians, its essential tonal plan is
outside the perceptual reality of the vast majority of listeners, most of
whom-in the eighteenth century as today-are not even aware of its
existence. It is obvious they are listening differently, drawing their sense
of musical meaning and "good form" either from musical materials much
more local, specific, and articulated than the overall tonal plan, or from
some mixture of the latter with structural elements partially related to
sonata form (such as recognizing thematic repetition and harmonic sta-
bility in the recapitulation). Anyone who has ever taught music appreci-
ation to non-music majors is bound to agree that "despite the funda-
mental importance that musicians customarily attach to it, tonal closure
lacks psychological reality for the listener-at least when . .. it extends
over a duration of several minutes."7
In pervading imitation, and especially in the motive-based point
of imitation, Renaissance composers honed a compositional strategy
that significantly narrowed the gap between it and listening strategy. Al-
though cantus firmus elaborations and an assortment of other contra-
puntal artifices continued to be structurally used (as in the cyclic mass),

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
464 The Musical Quarterly

in most cases they were no longer a sine qua non of composer strategy but
an added semantic surface level bearing both musical and extramusical
symbolic meanings and associations (for example, the partly audible
Requiem aeternam chant and the inaudible black notation in Josquin's
"Nymphes des bois").
Though it is widely accepted that textual content became increas-
ingly important to the Renaissance composer of polyphonic vocal music,
it was-and is-arguably less so for his listeners. There can be little
quarrel with the observation that polyphony is hardly the most efficient
texture for getting a textual message across. While this has not changed
in the last 500 years, what may have changed is the horizon of expecta-
tions listeners have while listening to polyphonic music.8
Barely able to make clear sense of the words in passages of pervad-
ing imitation, the listener must make do with the text-derived motivic
rhythm and await textural emergence from polyphonic blur to homo-
rhythmic chordal clarity. In such polyphonic passages, the important
means for musical comprehension for the listener is not the textual
phrase (even though it is this that defines the outer limits of the point of
imitation) but, rather, the sharply profiled motivic work. To a significant
extent this gradually became so also for the composer. Therefore, as soon
as this purely musical (i.e., non-text dependent) confluence of composer
and listener strategies had been attained in the vocal medium, it was
transferred to instrumental music and gave it tremendous impetus. The
consequences of these developments for the listener are hard to exag-
gerate.
All the above-mentioned stylistic factors are of great moment to
the student of past listening. As each of them involves at least one con-
tinuum, their individual study may be followed by an attempt to synthe-
size and view them in their complex interconnections, possibly with the
aid of the suggested parallel continua. The resulting complex yet flexible
picture may enable the weaving of these stylistic factors into a more
credible historical narrative whose center of attention is music as heard.

Notes

1. Mark Everist, ed., Music Before 1600 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992), ix.

2. See Shai Burstyn, "In Quest of the Period Ear," Early Music 25 (1997): 692-701.

3. In his analysis of William Byrd's Mass for Five Voices (in Everist, 217), David Stern
employs Schenkerian analysis partly because "contemporary theory as of yet had little to
say on the succession of vertical sonorities. This means that, if we wish to write about
the continuity of a composition from beginning to end, about the flow of the entire com-
plex of voices, we enter into a process that goes beyond anything systematized in Renais-

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Pre-1600 Music Listening 465

sance theory." Starting from the same observation (lack of a contemporaneous compre-
hensive analytical view), a historically oriented investigation of how the music was con-
ceived and perceived in its time would seek to gain insight into the cultural mechanisms
that formed the sense and meaning contemporaries found in their music, and to do so by
relating it to their cultural-mental outlook, not to the anachronistic organicistic out-
look--the cultural bedrock on which Schenker founded his analytical approach. In the
context of that contemporaneous outlook, the question of "the continuity of a composi-
tion from beginning to end... [and of] the flow of the entire complex of voices" may
have never arisen.

4. William Morris, ed., The American Heritage Dictionary (New York: Houghton Mifflin,
1969), 259.

5. Patricia Carpenter, "The Musical Object," Current Musicology 5 (1967): 57.

6. In the very same year, Auctor Lampadius related the tabula compositoria to Josquin's
generation (Compendium musices [Bern, 1537]). Unfortunately, the relevant passage is
not clear as to exactly how the composers used the tabula compositoria in the process of
composition. See Jessie Ann Owens, Composers at Work: The Craft of Musical Composi-
tion, 1450-1600 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 97.

7. Nicholas Cook, Music, Imagination, and Culture (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990), 55.

8. For a horizon of expectations different from that prevailing from the Renaissance on
(i.e., assuming clear text delivery to be a basic feature of vocal music), see Christopher
Page's interpretation of the thirteenth-century polytextual motet in his Discarding
Images: Reflections on Music and Culture in Medieval France (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993),
84-111, esp. 86.

This content downloaded from 89.152.6.221 on Sun, 21 Jan 2018 23:28:26 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms