Editorial Procedure, Performance Practice and Advice for Musicians
Sources
Two manuscripts have been consulted in compiling this edition, Christ Church manuscript 23 (Appendix 1) and British Library Additional manuscript 33287 (Appendix 2). The Christ Church manuscript is described in the John Milsom catalogue as having a late seventeenth century binding, whilst the British Library manuscript is dated to around the year 1716. The Christ Church Manuscript is in the hand recognised as the copyist and Oxford professor of music, Richard Goodson Senior, whilst the British Library manuscript is given as the anonymous ‘London D’ [1]– an anonymous London copyist with a recognisable handwriting. Due to the possible chronological advantage, as well as being in the handwriting of a more notable copyist, the Christ Church Manuscript was given preference over the British Library manuscript. The original manuscripts were possibly lost in the Whitehall fire of 1698[2]. The manuscripts were used concurrently in the editing process.
There were differences between the manuscripts, for instance the British Library Manuscript often has dotted rhythms where the Christ Church manuscript has straight quavers. In this case, the dotted rhythms were favoured, as it was felt they were stylistic of Stuart court music, in addition to fitting the text underlay better.
The Christ Church manuscript seems to make rather more copying than the British Museum Manuscript, for instance, bar 147 had the violin 2 and viola part confused, without accounting for the different clefs. Bar 214 was not present in the Christ Church manuscript for the Treble part. The bass verse at bar 255 was problematic from both manuscripts, dues to the rhythmic intricacies. Between the manuscripts, the correct rhythms could be deduced, however, the basso continuo part in bar 263 had too many beats in both manuscripts, so the last quaver beat was missed off, still leaving a rather attractive chord progression into the next bar.
Accidentals
The treatment of accidentals has been standardised and modernised. Both manuscripts have missing accidentals, but on the whole, where one manuscript is clearly missing an accidental; the other has the correct markings. In the British Library manuscript, the copyist has mistakenly copied the sharp onto notes succeeding the intended note. A common sense approach has led to the correct accidental markings to be given in the final edition.
Key signatures have been largely kept the same, but some have been changed for the sake of readability to avoid too many accidentals cluttering up the score. This is done where it is clear that a whole section has a prevailing key.
In both manuscripts, accidentals only act on the note they are written in front of or above, and do not after subsequent notes on the same part of the stave in that bar. Each note where this occurs has been checked, and the critical commentary lists instances where accidentals were and were not implied. Both of the manuscripts use sharps and flats as accidentals to naturalise notes specified in the key signature; for example, where a B sharp is written in a key signature with a B flat in, this has been realised in the score as a B natural. Therefore, all natural accidental markings are editorial and are in place of archaic practices.
Occasionally, both manuscripts have omitted accidentals erroneously, and these have been corrected with editorial suggestions written above the note rather than in front of the note. This has been done in instances which would have otherwise resulted in unprepared and unresolved false relations, or where the tonality dictates its use, such as having the leading note being a semitone below the tonic of the prevalent key rather than a whole tone. These are only editorial suggestions, and performers are advised to try them with and without, choosing which to use according to taste.
Time Signatures and Tempo
The cut-c time signature has been retained, whilst the sections with three minims in a bar have been given a modern time signature of six/four rather than three/two as it was deemed that the harmonic language changed at the middle of the bar in most cases, and where it did otherwise, it had a hemiola affect. Thomas Ravenscroft (c.1588 – 1635) described the cut-c time signature as a ‘dancing or revelling measure’.[3] A tempo that gives enough time for the semiquavers to be sung in the choral parts with the given text underlay which doesn’t leave the six/four sections at a languishingly slow tempo would be recommended. A suggestion of ‘adagio’ marking has seemed to work well for this reason, giving a justifiably stately feel. However, this suggestion has not been given in the edition as it is merely conjecture. It must be noted that the bass verse from bar 255 could be more relaxed in tempo, almost quasi-recitativo to allow the rhythms and the text to be adequately delivered to the listener. By bar 270, the tempo should be steady once more. Ultimately, the ability of the performers available and the acoustic in which the piece is played and sung should determine the final tempo or tempi changes.
On the whole, original bar lines have been retained, including instances when an anacrusis is given a bar to itself. However, in the bass verse from bar 255 the barring is somewhat sporadic, and in this case it has been standardised to be readable without hindrance. Double bar lines are only included when used to mark the end of a section, and repeats are included where the manuscripts clearly infer this to be the case, such as the presence of a second time bar, strong double bar line, or iterum markings which do not belong to the text underlay.
The beginning of the first chorus at bar 52 was preceded by a whole bars length chord in both manuscripts, but there was the implication in both scores that the chorus were to start singing at this point, so the bar was cut.
Instrumentation and Clefs
The parts are not named, and the parts are merely inferred by the editor. The court ode was well known for using the strings of the chapel royal as part of its instrumentation, and these parts are identifiable by their respective clefs and tessituras. The bottom line is played by the cello, but will have also been realised on the harpsichord, or even a theorbo or other plucked continuo instrument, an idea reinforced by the presence of a couple of rare figured bass markings in the score. These have been omitted as they serve no purpose in the wider context of performing this work. Occasionally in the chorus, a simplified bass part has been provided, and this is included in the continuo part. Where no part is specified, the lowest sounding part is given with cue sized note-heads as to differentiate it from was is explicitly written. This part has been left for the performer to realise on the instrument of their choosing.
The original clefs used are given in the prefatory stave. C-clefs are rarely used by performers today, so in all parts that use the C-clef (other than the viola part) have been given a modern G-clef that suits the tessitura of the part, hence why the tenor is given a G clef down the octave.
The tenor and alto tessituras are very similar, which suggests that the alto line was sung by a male voice ‘less low and more high than the tenors’[4]. This does not suggest the male falsetto countertenor we hear today, but rather a high tenor which used their falsetto range when required. As the alto and tenor parts do not go higher than the B and A above middle C respectively, it could conceivably be sung by a modern tenor, although a male or female alto will suffice without altering the musical integrity. The final decision may be down to the pitch at which the work is performed which is discussed later in this commentary
In the Lord Chamberlain’s accounts we can find an insight into the number of instruments that would have accompanied the court ode. The carpenters were paid for installing ‘two desk boards for the Muisck 8 fot long a piece, and setting up two bearers for the Harpsicall…’[sic][5]. Peter Holman suggests that these ‘desk boards’ are in fact continuous music stands, and he calculated that this would have accommodated about eight violinists and viola-players, and three or four bass players who either had their own stands or looked over the harpsichordist’s shoulder[6]. This would be roughly two to a part – the minimum required to play the viola part in bar two, for instance, which is divisi. The maximum number of string players used ought to be twenty-four, as this was the number of string players in the Royal string consort – aptly nicknamed the ‘four and twenty fiddlers’[7].
Giving a similar consideration to the vocal parts, the tenor part does divisi, so it is advised to have at least two singers on each part. The performer should decide on the number of singers to each part based on balance and with consideration to the singers available.
Text and Underlay
A standard font has been used to denote text found in the original, whilst font in italics indicates the editor’s realisation of the iterum marks or instances of where no text was provided in the source.
As the spelling was inconsistent across manuscripts, spelling and grammar have been standardised. The text therefore appears in the score as it appears in the Thomas Flatman’s compilation ‘Poems and Songs’ (Appendix 3), which was published in 1686, three years after this Court ode was written. As Thomas Flatman was still alive when the book was published, the text holds some authority on the poets intended spelling and grammar. This also avoids having to realise ampersands as ‘and’ and ‘ye’ as ‘the’, as is written in the manuscripts, as these are simply shorthand forms of the words. In both manuscripts the underlay reads ‘To Pæan now we sing’ and ‘Allelujah’ whilst the poem reads ‘To Pæan do we sing’ and ‘Hallelujah’. The manuscripts version has been retained in both instances for consistency, because it was felt that the glottal stop at the beginning of ‘Alleuia’ was a compositional choice by John Blow.
In the edition, the word ‘Pæan’ has retained the typographical ligature ‘æ’, as it is used in both Flatman’s text, and the secretarial-style shorthand form of the diphthong is used in the manuscripts. The word ‘Pæan’ is to be sung to rhyme with ‘European’.
The now-obsolete long form ‘ſ’, has been substituted for the standard ‘s’, as it provides no pronunciational difference, and only hinders the singer’s reading. The letter ‘j’ has not been realised as an ‘i’ in the more familiar spelling, ‘Alleuia’ as the pronunciation is discernible. The ‘e’ is missing off the word ‘Welcome’ in the text, but not in the manuscripts. The text version is present in the edition, as it probably more indicative of the seventeenth century pronunciation.
In the last chorus we have an elision of ‘the’ and ‘Almighty’. This is as per the so called ‘Italian method’; when a word that ends with a vowel is followed by a word beginning with a vowel, only one note is written for the two syllables. This has been retained in the edition as it appears in the manuscript, using both syllables under one note. It was decided to use ‘the’ from the manuscripts, instead of ‘th’’ from the text, as the pronunciation of the diphthong was deemed important in conveying the text whilst singing.
The practice of slurring notes in a melisma is present sporadically in the score, and the decision to use this unanimously across the vocal score was made, as it was clearly an intention of the composer, and it provides an extra level of familiarity and readability with the modern performer. The presence of editorial slurs has not been differentiated from those in the manuscripts for fear of unnecessary clutter on the score.
The text underlay presented an issue in the last chorus for the Decani Treble part, from bar 329 until the end. The top line in both manuscripts had no text underlay until the last stave, and it was speculated that it could be a violin descant. The similarity and frequent homophony with lower parts, which included phrases of a length to allow breathing, led to the conclusion that it was a voice part. In bar 339, a rest was added and a dotted note over the bar line was removed to allow the text underlay to fit. Should the performers decide to use this top part as a violin descant, the original notes have been provided above the stave.
Other Notes
Neither dynamics nor phrasings have been given in the source or by the editor, and it has been left to the singer’s discretion to work out suitable levels of contrast. Consideration should be given to the text, harmonic language, and melodic movement to decide on appropriate dynamic markings.
A prefatory stave has been provided showing the music up to and including the first played bar in each part, as it appeared in the manuscripts, with the arrangement of symbols kept identical. This includes the B flat in the key signature appearing in both a higher and lower octave in the bass part.
Performance Advice
The pitch of early English music has been described by many to sound a minor third higher than it would today. Indeed, performing this work a minor third higher will render the alto parts completely singable by the male alto in his falsetto register – although in this case the treble part would be remarkably high. Andrew Johnstone believes this to be erroneously based on the work of David Wulstan, whose research looked at the plainchant organs used before and after the Restoration, which used five-foot and ten-foot length pipes for economic reasons, rather than the eight-foot and sixteen-foot length pipes used from the late 17th century- around the time of the writing of this piece. Andrew Johnstone noted a convergence in the pitch of various organ pipes from around the country at a=475Hz, approximately two thirds of a tone higher than modern a=440Hz[8]. This would be a reasonable suggestion of pitch for singing this work, although modern pitch would not produce a noticeably different result for those without perfect pitch.
Whilst the manuscripts do have some ornaments written out in full, it is by no means to say that the performer cannot include their own ornamentation – most especially in the solo verses. Roger North (c.1651-1734) in his book On Music wrote:
The Italians who thinck may be our masters, never express [have written in the manuscript] graces, but write the true note which governes the harmony, and leave the gracing to the skill and capacity of the performer [sic][9]
This makes it clear that the ornamentation of music was not often written down, and that the modern performer may wish to ornament to his or her taste.
However, in Court violinist John Lenton’s book The Gentleman’s Diversion, we can see that the ornaments are particularly limited to the trills and appoggiaturas[10]– something reinforced by the presence of similar markings being found in the first recorder part of Blow’s Venus and Adonis. Therefore, florid ornamentation in the string and chorus parts would be advised against. The trill has been described by Pier Francesco Tosi-
Whether the shake be necessary in Singing, ask the Professors of the first Rank, who know better than any others how often they have been indebted to it… Whoever has a fine Shake, tho’ wanting in every other Grace, always enjoys the Advantage of conducting himself to the End of or Cadence, where for the most part it is essential; and who wants it, or has it imperfectly, will never be a great singer, let his knowledge be ever so great [sic][11]. That is to say that the trill can be used to enhance the approach to a cadence, and it is advised that the rising leading note or the falling supertonic to be ornamented in this manner – only when coupled with an appoggiatura. However, bear in mind the advice of Roger North in mind: ‘had better performe plaine, than make excusions’[12]
[1] Herissone, Rebecca. 2013. Musical Creativity In Restoration England. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 96
[2] Thurley, Simon and Cook, Alan 1999. Whitehall Palace. 1st ed. New Haven: Yale University Press.142
[3] Ravenscroft, Thomas. 1614. A Briefe Discourse Of The True (But Neglected) Use Of Charact’ring The Degrees. 1st ed. London: Edward Allde. 19
[4]Le Huray. 121
[5] Boswell, Eleanore. 1931. Restoration Court Stage, 1660-1702. 1st ed. Cambridge: HUP. 264
[6] Holman, 422
[7] Ibid.
[8] Johnstone, Andrew. 2003. “‘As It Was In The Beginning’: Organ And Choir Pitch In Early Anglican Church Music”. Early Music 31 (4): 506-525.
[9] North, Roger. 1959. Roger North On Music. 1st ed. London: Novello. 150.
[10] Boyd, Malcolm, and Rayson, John. “The Gentleman’s Diversion: John Lenton and the First Violin Tutor.” Early Music 10, no. 3 (1982): 329-32.
[11] Tosi, Pier Francesco and John Ernest Galliard. 2009. Observations On The Florid Song. 1st ed. USA: PPPC. 19
[12] North, 150
Leave a Reply