The contribution of Guido of Arezzo to Western music theory

1 1121 Assess the contribution of Guido of Arezzo to Western music theory. By Peter Joyce SS History Andrew Johnstone

Introduction

Guido of Arezzo's impressive legacy is left to us in four extant documents, Regulae rhythmicae, the Prologue to his Anthiphoner, the Epistle Concerning an Unknown Chant and his Micrologus. A considerable portion of the knowledge of Guido's theories is also deducible from the large number of commentaries on his works by later theorists. Although the bulk of Guido's theoretical writings are found in the Micrologus,1 I will be refraining from discussing the work in detail. This is not because of a lack of ingenuity or influential theory in it, but rather, because in my opinion his most original contributions to western music theory are found in two much shorter works, namely the Prologue to His Antiphoner,2 and the Epistle Concerning an Unknown Chant.3 Although, the Micrologus demonstrates Guido's innovations and contribution in the evolution of modal theory, proportional rhythm and organum, I shall limit my discussion here to his innovations in Notation and Solmization.

1 Hucbald, Guido and John on Music, Warren Babb (trans.) (New Haven and London, 1978), 57–83. 2 Guido of Arezzo, ‘Prologue to His Antiphoner’, in Source Readings in Music History, ed. Oliver Strunk, rev. Leo Treitler (New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1998), 211–14. 3 Guido of Arezzo, ‘Epistle Concerning an Unknown Chant,’ in Source Readings in Music History, ed. Oliver Strunk, rev. Leo Treitler (New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1998), 214–18.

2 Notation

Perhaps the one area where Guido's contribution to Western music theory is unquestionably important is in the development of staff notation. David E. Cohen, considers it as one of 'the most important of innovations ascribed to Guido,'4 While Joseph Smits van Waesberghe is almost zealotry in his admiration for Guido's 'stroke of genius.'5 Although as Claude Palisca is quick to point out, it may be an overstatement to attribute Guido entirely with the invention of staff notation, he is generally considered the most important early theorist associated with the maturation of purely diastematic notation.6 The bulk of Guido's writing on his new style of notation is found in the impressively brief and concise Prologue to His Antiphoner, which was written as an introduction to the notation system used in his collection of antiphons. The collection itself is regrettably lost, and would certainly have been a hugely important document for improving understanding and charting the history of early Guidonian notational practice.7 Nevertheless, the adoption of Guido's system spread quite quickly and widely and had been adopted throughout Europe as early as the eleventh and twelfth centuries.8 What is perhaps most impressive about Guido's system of notation, as expounded in the Prologue, is just how concise and modern it seems. Guido in an already very short text, manages to to describe his whole system of notation in one paragraph: 4 David E. Cohen, ‘Notes, Scales and Modes in the Earlier Middle Ages’ in The Cambridge History of Western Music Theory, ed. Thomas Christensen (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 344. 5 Joseph Smits van Waesberghe, ‘The Musical Notation of Guido of Arezzo,’ Musica Disciplina, 5 (1951): 15–53 (53). 6 Guido of Arezzo, ‘Prologue to His Antiphoner,’ 211. 7 Waesberghe, ‘The Musical Notation of Guido of Arezzo,’ 31. 8 Ibid., 28.

3 The notes are so arranged then, that each sound, however often it may be repeated in a melody, is found always in its own row. And in order that you may better distinguish these rows, lines are drawn close together, and some rows of sounds occur themselves, others in the intervening intervals or spaces. All the sounds on one line should sound alike. And in order that you may understand to which lines or spaces each sound belongs, certain letters of the monochord are written at the beginning of the lines or spaces.9 The above excerpt, which is only half of the paragraph describing his notation, contains the essence of his system. What is perhaps most striking about this succinct description is just how modern it seems. The above quote could to this day stand as an almost textbook description of the staff notation used in Western music. The reality of course is that Guido's system still differed greatly from the one we use now. Most noticeably, perhaps would have been the greater freedom that practitioners had in choosing the number of lines used and assigning their values.10 Also, the symbols used to represent the pitches, were still very different to modern ones. Traditional neumes were still employed, and no definite rhythmic values where as of yet attributable to the notated chants. Guido continues: And the lines are also gone over in colors, thereby indicating that in the whole antiphoner and in every melody those lines or spaces which have one and the same letter or color, however many they may be, sound alike throughout, as though all were on one line. For just as the line indicates complete identity of sounds, so the letter or color indicates complete identity of lines, and hence of sounds also.11 This final feature of his system, the use of coloured lines is the only major component of his notation that is no longer used. The use of two coloured lines, Yellow for the line representing C, and Red for the line representing F were especially chosen to highlight the two notes of the monochord which contain a semitone below them.12 This was an aid to help singers identify the semitones within 9 10 11 12

Guido of Arezzo, ‘Prologue to His Antiphoner’, 212–13. Waesberghe, ‘The Musical Notation of Guido of Arezzo,’ 28. Guido of Arezzo, ‘Prologue to His Antiphoner’, 213. B-flat and B-natural, needless to say have a semitone between them, but would never have appeared adjacently in a chant.

4 the chant, and hence sing them more accurately. The practice of this trait however, died out by the thirteenth century. As time went on, the use of his system became more standardised with the use of four lines, and movable F and c clefs becoming the norm. Solmization One of Guido's more original contributions to music theory and practice is expounded in his letter, Epistle Concerning an Unknown Chant, to his friend and colleague Brother Michael. The system of solmization demonstrated in the Epistle has been of huge importance to the development of modern solmization, and was quickly and systematically adopted by teachers as a more effective way of learning how to sing at sight.13 His solmization system had one further influence however. In the eighteenth century, Guido's Gamut was seen as an intermediary stage between the ancient tetrachordal systems and the modern heptachordal system. Whether or not this interpretation is valid, it meant that Guido's theories were revisited and expanded to the extent that he continued to effect the development of Western music theory without directly suggesting anything. Guido's effect on later diatonic theory can be seen in what Stefano Mengozzi calls the 'structuralparadigmatic' interpretation of Guido's system by later music theorists.14 Mengozzi suggests that Guido's hexachordal solmization system was in fact developed to be used within the context of a heptachordal gamut. Although this appears counterintuitive, Mengozzi goes on to suggest that this was in an attempt to simplify the way the diatonic space was conceived by singers. Another apparent benefit of limiting this system of solmization to six 13 Cohen, ‘Notes, Scales and Modes in the Earlier Middle Ages,’ 341. 14 Stefano Mengozzi, ‘Virtual Segments: The Hexachordal System in the Late Middle Ages’, The Journal of Musicology, 23 (2006), 426–67 (427).

5 syllables may lie in the sole identifying of the semitone, with the syllables mi-fa. By using these syllables exclusively to highlight the semitone, Guido was better equipping singers to locate any melody within the heptachordal gamut of pitches by limiting his solmization system to six syllables.15 This is later reinforced by Mengozzi's discussion of Parisian theorists Johannes de Garlandia's theorising on the proprietas, or the intervallic context surrounding certain phrases, who suggested that the syllable ut should be placed on C when singing and chant where no b is used, placed on F when b-molle is used or placed on G when b-quadratum is sung. Garlandia essentially suggests that the placing of the proprietas should depend on the position of the mi-fa semitone as opposed to the primary syllable ut.16 As such, modern tonic-solfa still retains one of the most important features of Guido's solmization, the designation of syllables as an aid to clarifying a phrases intervallic content not identifying their finals or tonics. Conclusion Although Guido's contribution and influence on modern music theory is immense and far reaching, his theories eventually stopped having a direct influence on contemporary music theorists sometime after the Renaissance. As Mengozzi remarks there was a marked reinterpretation of his hexachordal theories beginning with Ramos de Pareja, after which it wasn’t so much Guido's own theories that were influencing the next generations of music theorists but rather, new conceptions and developments of his already well discussed theories. These constant re-imaginations and occasionally misguided interpretations served to lengthen his influence well into the eighteenth-century and increase his fame to near legendary status.17 15 Ibid., 435. 16 Ibid., 455. 17 Ibid., 465–7.

6 Bibliography Babb, Warren (trans.), Hucbald, Guido and John on Music (New Haven and London, 1978). Christensen, Thomas (ed.), The Cambridge History of Western Music Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002). Mengozzi, Stefano, ‘Virtual Segments: The Hexachordal System in the Late Middle Ages’, The Journal of Musicology, 23 (2006), 426–67. Smits van Waesberghe, Joseph, ‘The Musical Notation of Guido of Arezzo,’ Musica Disciplina, 5 (1951): 15–53. Strunk, Oliver, and Leo Treitler (eds.), Strunk's Source Readings in Music History (New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1998).