In our quest for historically accurate and artistically interesting liturgical material for the Chapel Choir of Valparaiso University to present at the annual Church Music Seminar held in St. Louis in February 1955, we recalled the three organ books published by Pierre Attaingnant in 1531, which had been transcribed in a modern edition by Madame Yvonne Rokseth in 1930. It had been the good fortune of your lecturer to have been a student of the late Yvonne Rokseth at the University of Strasbourg in 1947 and 1948. Yvonne Rokseth published these two volumes as an appendix to her exhaustive study of French organ music in the 15th and the beginning of the 16th centuries (La musique d’orgue au 15^e siècle et au début du 16^e, Paris, 1930). These three books of organ music destined for the divine office were but three out of seven tablatures published by Pierre Attaingnant in 1531. But the first four do not concern us at this juncture since they are books containing keyboard transcriptions of chansons and dances. However, the Pierre Attaingnant publication of liturgical works is of extreme interest to us since these are the first extant monuments of liturgical music destined for the organ preserved in France. This does not mean that they were the only ones to have been published, but up to this time they are the only ones to have appeared, and strangely enough, the originals now find themselves in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in Munich (Musica practica 232–238).

Perhaps one of the reasons that so few tablatures appear prior to this time is the fact that properly trained organists were capable of improvising the versicles or the verses of the Mass and the other Offices from the polyphonic compositions already extant at that time, as, for example, those of Ockeghem, Pierre de la Rue, Josquin des Prés, Busnois, Richafort, Claudin de Sermisy, Loyset Compere. But during the first decades of the sixteenth century, the art of such improvisation from a polyphonic Mass was becoming more and more cumbersome for the players of keyboard instruments, since the method of publishing these works had been somewhat revolutionized by the practices of printers and engravers since the time of Ottaviano Petrucci, who printed the first book of polyphonic music ever to be printed in Venice, in 1507.

While we are primarily interested on this occasion in the liturgical aspect of the publications of Pierre Attaingnant, it would not be out of place to give one or two more details concerning the method of reproduction that Pierre Attaingnant used in publishing his seven books.

First of all, we must indicate that this was not the first document of organ music destined for the cultus of the liturgy. All of you, I am sure, have at least a passing acquaintance with at least Conrad Pauman’s Fundamentum Organizandi, published in 1452 (also Buxheimer’s Orgalbuch, 1460), which contains a number of liturgical pieces such as verses of the Salve Regina. But the significant advance that had been made in tablature notation by Pierre Attaingnant is the fact that he used a five-line staff as compared to the six-line staff that had been current in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries even in polyphonic notation as established firmly by the theoreticians of the Ars Nova Period (Marchettus of Padua in the Pomerium; Philippe de Vitry, Ars nova). This type of notation was destined to be the father and the forerunner of all keyboard notation, including the organ, to which was later added a separate staff for the pedal, right down to the present day, the only difference being that the lozenge shape of the semibreve and of the minima have been replaced by the round figuration to which we are accustomed in our own day. Another unusual feature of the original tablature of Pierre Attaingnant is the fact that he used movable metallic type which had been manufactured for him by Haultin a number of years prior to these publications. The next important item to consider in connection with Pierre Attaingnant’s method of tablature and one which accounts for the fact that his type of notation prevailed, even though only one hundred years later, is the fact that it presented a facility of reading as compared to the cumbersome notation of the German tablatures with their combination of rhythmic symbols (breve, semibreve, minima, semiminima, fusa, semifusa), together with letters for the actual pitches. Pierre Attaingnant placed his pieces on a two-staff score of five lines, as mentioned before, and the actual notational symbols preceded by clefs were placed on the actual lines and in spaces.

As concerns the liturgical aspect of the use of instruments in connection with the liturgy, it should be pointed out before we go into the body of these pieces that there was an ever-present controversy between the kings and nobility, together with their retinue of musicians on the one hand, and the theologians on the other hand, who insisted on the purity of the text wedded to the chant. This controversy had not been entirely resolved even with almost two and a half centuries of polyphonic music beginning with the measured organum of Pérotin and ending with the Franco-Flemish school of Josquin des Prés, at which period we now find ourselves. Yet polyphony concerned itself with singing a text, and while many pious pronouncements were made regarding the control of the cantus firmus of a Mass, we are all aware of the fact that many Masses were written on profane melodies, as attested to by the fact that every composer at least once in his lifetime wrote a Mass on the popular French song L’homme armé. But instruments cannot sing a text, and the introduction of instruments posed another situation, and whether the theologians approved it or not, there were many lords, dukes, princes, and kings who, having a retinue of musicians at their disposal for their light and frivolous moments, also wanted to make use of them for performance of the divine office.

Eventually the burden of this task fell on the organ, and with this procedure there does not seem to be too much opposition on the part of the theologically minded members of the hierarchy.

Another contributing factor to the increasing prominence of the organ in the North Countries, and especially in France, was the superb advancement made in organ construction, particularly of the Great Organ. This, too, may have been a subterfuge to fool the theologians, because since the nobility was constrained not to use their instrumentalists, the organ builders began to introduce reeds into the organs which attempted to imitate the tonal attributes of trumpets, trombones, and musettes. Even in our day the superb quality of French reeds for organs has not been surpassed.

The first of these three books of organ music bears the title: Tablature pour le jeu d'orgues / Espinetes et Manicordions sur le plain chant de Cunctipotens et / Kyrie fons. Aves leurs Et in terra, Patrem. Sanctus et Agnus dei / le tout nouvellement imprime a Paris par Pierre Attaingnant de- / morant en la rue de la Harpe pres leglise Sanet Cosme. / Avec privilege du Roy nostre / sire pour trois ans.

The second bears the title: Magnificat sur les huit tons avec / Te deum laudamus. et deux Preludes, le tout mys en tabutature des / Orgues Espinettes Manicordions imprimez a Paris par Pierre / Attaingnant libraire demourant en la rue de la Harpe pres leglise / saint Cosme. Kal. Martii 1530. Avec privilege du Roy nostre sire / pour trois ans.

And the third: Treze Motets musicaulx avec ung / prelude le tout reduict en la tabulature des Orgues Espinettes et / Manicordions et / Manicordions et telz semblable instrumentz imprimez a Paris par / Pierre Attaingnant libraire demourant en la rue de la Harpe pre / leglise Saint Cosme Desquelz la table sensuyt. Kal April. 1531.

Turning our attention now to the first book, we note that while the title mentions the Missa Cunctipotens first, in actuality the Kyrie fons bonitatis and its succeeding Mass movements are first in the publication. If one believes that he is going to find the cantus firmus of these Masses in accordance to the Gregorian melodies as we find them in present-day Vatican editions, he is doomed for disappointment, for here we find a mixture of various melodies. It is a known fact that before the Council of Trent, mixtures of Mass movements were quite the usual thing in various graduals—the Ordinary differed from one province to the other and even from one church to the other in the same province, the fragments having been differently assembled.

Upon first examination of the Mass Kyrie fons, one would expect to find its accompanying Gloria based on the melody of the Gloria of Mass II according to the Vatican edition, only to find that it is based on the Gloria of the cunctipotens Mass (Mass IV of the Vatican ed.). As a matter of fact, with the exception of the Kyries of both masses, the rest are different variations on the same Gregorian themes extracted from the Mass Cunctipotens. The reason for this is that at the beginning of the sixteenth century the Paris gradual scarcely contained more than these two, and they had been used almost exclusively for several centuries. Up to this time most Parisian missals indicate that the mass KFB was to be sung on the following occasions: the days following Pentecost and the Feast of the Epiphany, the Sundays in the Octave of the Assumption and in the Nativity of the Virgin. For the Sundays of Easter and Pentecost and on all double feasts throughout the year, the missal designates the Mass Cunctipotens.

Of these two Masses only the first one has a Deo gratias response to the Ita missa est. This melody is not to be found in any of the Masses given in the Vatican edition, but Yvonne Rokseth has noted that it coincides with the melody of the antiphon of the Magnificat O Christi pietas, designated for the second vespers of the Feast of St. Nicholas.

A word should be spoken about the Credo. As you all know, the Credo does not generally form part of the music of the Ordinary, and these two Masses are no exception. The first Mass of Book I is based on the melody of Credo I of the Vatican edition, and the second Mass contains no Credo; thus it might be safely assumed that the same one could have been used in both instances. The anonymous composer of these pieces, seeing the similarity of many of the verses of the Credo, refrained from composing different variations and no doubt was aware of the fact that the melody for the verse Genitum could be played according to the model of the melodic fragment Et ex Patre and that the verse Et resurrexit could be played according to the melody of Et incarnatus. It might be profitable to say a word or two regarding the role of the instruments for which these pieces published by Attaingnant were intended. Rokseth maintains that the anonymous composer has in mind a moderate-sized organ, such as those that one might have encountered at that time in the churches of France, rather than the enormous instruments found in the cathedrals. In support of this thesis, she advances the fact that the range does not extend beyond the low f or beyond the high a in the soprano, and since at this time pedals were found only in large and important churches, these works may be suitably played on the manuals.

Concerning the use of this music in the service it should be pointed out that these pieces served a utilitarian rather than an artistic function. In our introduction we pointed out the disfavor with which the ecclesiastical authorities regarded the use of instruments for the divine office, and while the organ was favored above other instruments, this disfavor nevertheless had to be made clear frequently, since many of the organists in regal and ducal chapels served the double function of playing for the entertainment of their patron, as well as playing for his daily Offices. One of the reasons that might be advanced for the publication of these books by Attaingnant was the fact that there was little if any sacred repertoire at the disposal of the average organist and he was thus strongly tempted to repeat, while playing for the office, the tunes that he was obliged to play at weddings (how much like our own day!) or at family or court festivals.

In the first place, the organ was used to occupy the attention or frequently the inattention of the faithful, as in our own day, before and after the divine Office. At the same time it could be used for the procession of the clergy or royalty at special occasions such as coronations, anniversaries, etc. Secondly, during the service itself the organ could be used to accompany the chants. Thirdly, the great gallery organ could be used to alternate with the chancel choir in those portions which constitute the Ordinary of the Mass, the so-called Alternatimspraxis, as well as in various canticles and hymns. In other words, a verse sung by the choir was immediately answered by the organ interlude based on the corresponding Gregorian theme. This practice, however, was reserved for important feasts. In the chapter of the Cathedral of Beauvais in 1533, for example, the use of the organ in this manner was reserved for Christmas, the octave of Easter and Pentecost, the Feast of St. Peter and St. Paul, the Feast of the Blessed Sacrament, the Assumption, all the Apostles, the Conversion of St. Paul, and the Feast of the Four Doctors of the Latin Church when it fell on a Sunday.

Later, when more such feasts were added, we see some inconsistencies in the idea that the choir and not the organ should intone the opening verses of any portion of the Ordinary, for Attaingnant’s first book, containing the two Masses, has the organ playing the first Kyrie, the choir singing the second one, and the organ playing the third one, and then continues with the choir intoning the Christe, the organ continuing with the second Christe, and the choir singing the third Christe. This same practice is carried on in the Sanctus, where the organ begins the first Sanctus, the choir singing the second Sanctus, and the organ playing the third Sanctus. The same practice is followed in the Agnus, the organ playing the first and third while only the second is reserved for the choir. Another abuse to be found and against which the ecclesiastical authorities strongly protested is the fact that the organ replaced the choir for almost half of the verses of the Credo, in spite of the fact that many councils had insisted that all the verses of the Nicene Symbol be heard clearly by the faithful. The fact that this injunction is found in so many of the decrees of the councils is a clear indication that nobody paid any attention to them.

Finally, it is not unlikely that in many court chapels the organ took the place of the choristers themselves during the daily Office when there were no choristers. The practice of alternation has long been one of interest to many of us, and the substitution of instruments for voices was only a natural outflow of the method in which the missa choralis, the cantus firmus Mass, and the missa parodia were performed during the supremacy of the Franco-Flemish School. This, in turn, was an outflow of the usual method in performing responses of the Gradual, partly chanted, partly polyphonic, again partly chanted, terminating finally in the polyphonic clausula already at the time of Pérotin in the thirteenth century.

We have recorded the Kyrie fons bonitatis of the first Mass in the first Attaingnant organ book primarily because it is of special interest to all students of Lutheran church music. The Kyrie fons bonitatis is the basis of the melodic structure of the chorale Kyrie, Gott Vater in Ewigkeit (No. 6 in the Lutheran Hymnal). The text of this chorale is nothing more than a German translation of the interpolated Latin trope, although not necessarily the Fons bonitatis trope.

While we have not recorded any of the other portions of these two Masses with the exception of the Kyrie fons bonitatis, it would not be without some profit to make an analysis of at least one other piece from the first organ book. According to the verse titles given to the Gloria of the first Mass, the organ began with Et in terra pax after the celebrant had intoned Gloria in Excelsis Deo. Laudamus was for the choir, while Benedicimus was again done by the organ, Adoramus te—choir, Glorificamus—organ, Gratias agimus tibi—choir, and so forth. Each verse alternates between choir and organ. The same treatment is accorded the Credo.

We come now to Book Two. This second book contains two works. The first contains a number of pieces related to the Magnificat, and the second is related to the Te Deum. Concerning the Magnificat, the collection is as follows: the first is a prelude apparently to be used for Tone I; the second is entitled Prelude sur chacun ton. Then come verses on each of the eight Tones—the first seven tones, with the exception of Tone III, elaborating on two verses, while the eighth Tone has four verses and the third has five. The practice seems to have been that the prelude and first two verses were done by the organ (or in the case of the eighth tone, the first four verses), and the choir then completed the performance by chanting the remaining verses. However, in our performance of this we have combined plain chant, fauxbourdon, and organ—the organ plays the prelude on Tone I and the men of the choir sing verse 1. Verse 2 is done by the entire choir in fauxbourdon. The organ then continues, and the choir, in similar manner, as stated before, does verses 5 and 6, and the organ continues, and the choir completes with verse 9 and the Gloria Patri. One of the big questions with regard to these verses as well as the Masses of Book I is: what portions thereof are transcriptions, and which are actually composed? Their style seems to indicate that the Mass pieces have been directly conceived for the organ. Several of the stylistic evidences for this belief might be the following: (1) the cantus firmus seems to be uniformly set forth in augmented values; (2) there is an abundance of figured scales and harmonic progressions; (3) the absence of repeated notes in the cantus firmus where one would expect them in declaiming a text.

On the contrary, the verses of the Magnificat seem to be transcriptions of polyphonic settings. For example, the second verse of Tone VIII follows an original polyphonic setting for four voices by Richafort (Liber Sextus, XIII quinque ultimorum tonorum Magnificat, 1534, Folio 11, Ambrosium Library, Milan). As compared to the Mass pieces, these of the Magnificat for the most part do not have the scale passages and rich ornamentation but more frequently contain well-delineated imitations. However, it would be a grave error to say that all of the Magnificat verses were transcriptions. I believe that those that we have recorded are not transcriptions but are definitely composed for the organ. On the other hand, examination of the contrapuntal devices used in the second verse of Tone III would seem to indicate a transcription of a vocal original likewise. Others seem to bear resemblances to polyphonic settings which have been treated rather loosely and liberally, thus making an exact comparison with polyphonic settings impossible. These, as well as the Te Deum, likewise seem to have fulfilled a utilitarian, that is, a practical purpose, rather than an artistic one—in other words, Gebrauchsmusik, which had for its purpose the fulfillment of a liturgical need. The Te Deum which completes the second book set forth the melodic elements of the solemn tone of the Te Deum. This seems to be only natural since the organ was to be used only on high and solemn feasts.

The third and last book contains thirteen motets transcribed for organ from their original vocal setting, preceded by a prelude. Actually, only eleven are transcriptions of motets with Latin texts, while two are Italian songs.

The only piece for which a composer was indicated by Attaingnant is the second one. We find that the second piece in the collection is a transcription of a Benedictus by Antoine de Fevin, However, the titles of the original motets were given by Attaingnant, and Yvonne Rokseth was able to discover the composers of the originals through the long process of searching through contemporary polyphonic sources. For example, it was necessary to examine seven different motets on the text Aspice Domine which had been printed since 1500, to say nothing of those which could be found only in manuscripts. Likewise, ten composers had set the Latin text Si bona suscepimus to vocal polyphony. Of the motet O vos omnes at least five contemporary settings were already then in existence.

There are represented in this anthology, therefore, the most celebrated and popular composers at the beginning of the sixteenth century. The polyphonic originals divide themselves into three groups, stylistically considered. Eight of the greater motets are in the imitative style so characteristic of the Franco-Flemish School in the first part of the sixteenth century. There are the motets of Lafage, De Fevin, Loyset Compère, Claudin de Sermisy, Antoine Bumel, and Pierre Moulu. At least two of these, Brumel and Compère were direct disciples of Ockeghem, while the rest had come under his influence through the intermediary of his other disciples, such as Josquin des Prés.

The second group are of a more archaic style in which the composer used a cantus prius factus as the unifying vehicle. Obrecht’s Parce Domine with its probable liturgical theme in the bass belongs to this category as well as the anonymous Dulcis anima and the Italian chanson Fortuna desperata.

The third group, of which there are only two, are entirely homophonic in style, that is, they progress in block chords. This style of note-for-note counterpoint is found generally in the settings of the Lamentations. Josquin’s Motetti da passione are likewise in this style, as well as the Psalms and Lamentations published in two books by Petrucci in 1506.

Time will not permit us to examine any of these works other than the one that we have recorded, that is, the motet O vos omnes of Loyset Compère. The text reads in its entirety as follows: O vos omnes qui transitis per viam, attendite et videte si est dolor sicut dolor meus. Audite, obsecro, universi populi, videte dolorem. Vocavi amicos et spreverunt me. It has undergone several verbal changes, and the final phrase does not occur anywhere in the liturgy. It is the fifth response of the IId Nocturn of Matins for Holy Saturday, although the first part is also used as the antiphon to the last psalm of Lauds for the same day. As you may have already recognized from the Latin, the text is taken from the Lamentations of the Prophet Jeremiah, chapter 1, verses 12, 18, and 19. A number of other composers had set the Lamentations and also the Improperia of Good Friday to polyphony already at this time, but all of them seem to have been doomed to oblivion because of the later, more popular settings of Ingegneri and especially those by Palestrina and Vittoria.

Loyset Compère was a canon of the Cathedral of Saint Quentin, where he died in 1518. As indicated before, he was a pupil of the great and illustrious master of the Franco-Flemish School, Johann Ockeghem. This fact is made known to us by Guillaume Cretin in his famous Déploration sur la mort d'Ockeghem. While he seems to have been overshadowed by his master Ockeghem and his contemporary Josquin in our present-day estimate, Loyset nevertheless was ranked with these masters as well as with Alexander Agricola at his own time.

It might also be of interest to note that the great Lutheran editor and publisher Georg Rhaw of Wittenberg included this particular motet in his collection of 1542 entitled Tricinia tum veterum tum recentiorum in arte musica symphonistarum (No. 15).

Rokseth is of the opinion that at least the first part is based on a Gregorian theme. That may well be, since the style is not unlike that of Books I and II, but at any rate, the augmented cantus firmus of the bars from measures 3 to 30 bears no resemblance in the slightest degree to the melodies of the Holy Saturday Fifth Response or the antiphon for the last psalm of Lauds according to the Vatican edition.

Since these three books of organ music by their very ecclesiastic nature were destined to serve a liturgical function, something should be said, by way of conclusion, concerning the liturgical function of the organ at the beginning of the sixteenth century. We have already called attention to the insistence on the purity of the chant by the ecclesiastical authorities; we have also indicated that the repetitious pronouncements of various councils and the various encyclicals and bulls of a number of pontiffs concerning this practice and abuse seem to have had little effect on kings, princes, and nobles alike, who were desirous of emulating and even outdoing one another in the splendor of their private chapels. The bishops and archbishops of wealthy dioceses were wont to behave in a similar manner, if one considers the magnificence not only of their cathedrals but also of the organs which they possessed.

Confusion is likewise added to the total picture by the obvious double meaning of certain terminology, such as organum, organisari, organisatio, organi cantus, canto de organo, and musica organizata, to set forth but a few. As you may well know, such terminology when used by medieval theoreticians such as Guido of Arezzo, Hucbald, and others, refers to the contrapuntal technique of primitive polyphony.

As nearly as we can figure it out, at least in France, the practice seems to have been somewhat like this. The great organs seem to have been used only on major festivals. For example, at Notre Dame de Paris twenty-three such solemn feasts were listed, and at the cathedral church at Angers in 1463 seventeen such festivals are given for the participation of the great organ. This would lead one to suppose therefore that on ordinary Sundays or minor festivals the little positif which was generally found in the choir would serve a similar function.

As previously indicated, the great organ was to furnish preludes, interludes, and conclusions for the Mass and vespers, and music for processions, as well as alternating with the choir in the performance of certain verses of the Mass and vespers. We have every reason to suppose that at the same time the positif was used to accompany the choir. This does not mean that the organists furnished chordal accompaniments to the chant such as we frequently hear today but that it merely reinforced the chant and perhaps played one of the voices if the composition were a polyphonic one. The first two Attaingnant books therefore were intended to furnish a repertoire for the organist who was incapable of improvising from a polyphonic edition. The fact that the Attaingnant books are the first examples of such an organ repertoire seems to indicate that with the passage of time the ability to improvise from such polyphonic editions was gradually becoming extinct.

The function of the organ motets seems to be slightly different. These motets could have served as preludes for the polyphonic motet itself, which was then sung by the choir upon the conclusion of the organ. Or they could have been performed in the manner similar to that which is demonstrated in our recording, namely, that the choir would sing the first part of the motet, while the organ would play the second part, or vice versa. Thus the Attaingnant organ books seem to have had as their goal first the fulfillment of a desperate need for such literature, and secondly, that of serving as a check on widespread liturgical abuse with regard to the use of instruments for the divine office.

Valparaiso University
Valparaiso, Ind.

Note: When this paper was first presented to the Institute of Liturgical Studies of Valparaiso University, a recording was made on tape to illustrate one portion of each of the three organ books. This tape was recorded by Mr. Robert Schunemann, organist, and the Chapel Choir of Valparaiso University. Anyone interested in obtaining a copy of this tape should write to the Music Department of Valparaiso University for further inquiry.

From The Musical Heritage of the Church, Volume V (St. Louis, Mo.: Concordia Publishing House, 1959). Copyright Concordia Publishing House. Printed by permission. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Concordia Publishing House.