Composers in Helm

Because I am working on finding out more about the composers included in the Helm manuscript, I created this table to help me consolidate the information that I found in it. Please feel free to edit or use this, or to give me some feedback if you see anything that is unclear or incorrect.

I hope it helps!

Page	Title	Composer	Date given for publishing	Other info given
1	Moriro’ con mio	Not given	1591	A madrigal published in Antwerp with many other “diverse authors”
4	En m’oyant chanter quelque fois	Orlando di Lassus	1596	Chanson published in Antwerp in a collection called La Fleur
6	O Bien heureux	La Jeune	Non given	None given
8	Des qu’adversite nous ofense	La Jeune	None given
10	Tes jugemens, Dieu veritable	La Jeune	None given
12	Adjuva nos Deus	Glareanus	None given	Motet; Not Petrus Platenois; from Dodecachordon
16	Aye pitié	La Jeune
17	Vestivi collie le campagn’ intorno	Palestrina	1588	Published in Musica Transalpina in England with England text (beginning; Sound out my voice, etc.) In this version, however, Smith claims that the text is original
22	As Fair as Morn	Wilbye	1609	madrigal
25		Di Lassus	1579	Motet, “transcribed from original parts published in Nuremberg”
28	Homo cum in honoresset	La Jeune	1646	Taken from a book published in Amsterdam
29	Cantio 71 – Anna mihi dilecta	Di Lassus	1579	Transcribed from original parts published at Nuremburg
32	Mein hertz sich nicht erhebet	La Jeune	Not given on this page	Taken out of a book before mentioned; The 131st psalm
33	Gott mach sich auf mit seiner gwalt	La Jeune	Not given on this page	Taken out of a book before mentioned; The 60th psalm
36	In una Sipe ombrosa	Lotti	1705	A madrigal printed and published in a book dedicated to Emporer Joseph; Duetti, Terzetti etc.
56	Susanna fair sometime of love…	Di Lassus	1588	Chanson published in 1588 in Musica Transalpina; written in 1576 for the Duke of Bavaria; taken out of a set published in 1596 at Antwerp entitled “Le Fleur” “des chansons de Orlando di Lassus”
61	Who will acend	Gianches de Vuert	None given here	Musica Transalpina; madrigal
65	O God be merciful to us		1641	Anthem; Deus Misereatur, Psalm 67. Taken out of the Reverend Barnard’s collection of church music.
72	Clori son fido’ amante	Stradella	None given	Madrigal;“Stradella lived and flourished about the year 1650 or a very little later”
85	[?] ‘io quell rossignuolo	Bononcini	None given	canzona
101	Piangete Occhi dolente	Stradella	None given	Madrigal; transcribed from a manuscript in Boyce’s collection (a date of 1770 is listed at the end of the song)
114	Nominativo Hic Hac Hoc	Tarquinio Merula	None given
130	Alrigor dun bel sembiante	Steffani	None given
136	Regina Coeli latare	De Victoria	None given	“In Sabbato Sancto”
140	Mein augen ich gen berg aufricht	La Jeune	None given	“The 121st Psalm”

Assuming that Jeremy and I are the only two in this section, I would suggest the following:

Program Notes--Split evenly

Simple enough.

A more interesting idea for the review would be a duel perspective review. One review from the audience and one review from the stage (since I'm a performer in the concert).

Manuscript Description

I am excited to get back to the Lilly Library and re-evaluate the manuscript now that we have had the chance to sharpen our codicological skills. In addition to the simple physical descriptions that we can make from oberving the manuscript, I think it might be interesting to cross reference our findings with the other areas of study we are conducting surrounding the manuscript. Something that comes to mind is the study of the paper and other binding practices used. Perhaps we can uncover some information about where Smith might have purchased the book, where and when it was made, and if this has any relation to what we uncover about where Smith was during this time. Perhaps there is some overlap here between our manuscript description and the historical background sections. As Annemieke pointed out, the use of guided, directed headings leading the reader to the "so what" of what we are doing would really add to the impact of our project.

I think this idea of overlap might be a good way to structure our project as a whole. Rather than having several seemingly separate sections of information, finding a unifying narrative could really help with the overall presentation of Smith's transcriptions.

Annemieke on The Historical Background

Because of technical difficulties, I am posting Annemieke's text (G.Z.)

---

The “historical background” portion of the project seems fairly straightforward. Before we can understand the Helm manuscript we need to learn as much as we can about the historical and cultural environment of the mid to late 18th century, the time when John Stafford Smith would have been copying the Helm MS. This was a time of major political changes: England was suddenly a dominant world power, especially after wining the war with France over the American colonies, and there were revolutions happening all over Europe. People were beginning to criticize values, customs, and even the structure of society. This was the beginning of the Age of Enlightenment, of the Classical Era, where value was placed upon reason, and scientific and intellectual thinking. This can be seen by the rise of antiquarians like Smith, by the creation of encyclopedias and by people wanting to know more about things.

It is important to look at what is happening in the world, especially England, in politics, literature, music, visual arts, philosophy, scientific discoveries and inventions. It will be interesting to try to draw conclusions about world events and how they impact England and the way a person like John Stafford Smith will think about music, history and antiquarianism.

I am not sure how to present this information. I do not want to discourage the reader with a big block of text, so perhaps dividing the page into headings, asking and answering questions will be an inviting layout.

Unfortunately, I am not so sure how to go about researching the manuscript history, but I hope that by visiting the Lilly library to see if there are any clues in the manuscript and asking a lot of questions, I will get an idea of where to start looking.

The Repertory

As Dr. Zanovello has noted, this part of the project will require a fair amount of research. We need to trace the history of each of the individual works contained in the manuscript. This will include: details of their composition, when available; confirmation of their attributions (this could, I imagine, be done in cooperation with those researching the composers); examination of the sources from which the copyist has drawn these musical selections; and as much as is possible, establishing the genealogy of the various works from their original form through to the present manuscript.

We should also explore the source of any major variations in the pieces from their original form. I am thinking in particular of the German texts for the Le Jeune psalm settings. As I mentioned earlier in class, I have already located the source of the German text - a 1565 translation of the Geneva Psalter from French into German by Ambrosius Lobwasser, published in Leipzig in 1573 – but it would be nice to really nail down at what point these translations were paired with Le Jeune’s compositions.

There is a great deal of work to be done. Perhaps it would be best if we could divide the repertory amongst ourselves and follow each his own leads. We could, of course, share any information that would prove useful to each other's research.

Repertory

How did Smith come about these pieces? The answer to this is related to Smith's decision to include specific composers, but the question of how Smith came about these pieces still stands. Did he seek out these pieces? Did they happen to cross his path? Did someone give them to him?

The Project (a.k.a. collecting like an Antiquary?)

These past couple of lectures we have been defining and delving into what an Antiquary does. From my understanding, an Antiquary attempts to collect all the available information about a given subject. An Antiquary’s scope is often quite focused and detailed as to be able to recreate the object being described solely from its gathered descriptions.

Putting together the JSS Manuscript Project seems to be similar to the work/past time/follies of an Antiquary. The Project will encompass the research findings of each person in addition to a documentation of the processes taken in order achieve these findings. This will involve intimate interaction among the Antiquary and the various different research angles encompassed by the Project.

In the end, the final Project not only will include the materials collected, documented research, and research results, but also elements of the bigger picture and how the JSS Manuscript links to other closely related fields of interest. I’m sure there can be a lot gained from having an “in hindsight/addendum” section that discusses the challenges faced by this endeavor, insights gleaned, and if the JSS Manuscript just plain makes any sense!

"I am supposed to do what?" Issues in Performance Practice

The buzz phrase in all of our classes is 'performance practice.' The one of the first questions asked in many settings is "How would this have been performed?" Does this matter? The ways in which music is performed changes throughout time. The variables that contribute to this are many: previous knowledge, setting for performance, intention of performers; there are as many variables as there are performers and performances.

The first answer is usually to read a treatise. The question of what a treatise really is should be dealt with before we use them as a litmus test.I am interested to find how Smith and his colleagues would have approached these pieces and issues, but am a little uncertain where to begin.

Who Was John Stafford Smith?

I am anxious to know more about the man behind the Helm MS. After reading his biography from several standard sources (New Grove, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Wikipedia), it appears that he was a musicological pioneer in the eighteenth century. Even more striking for me, as an organist and a church musician, are Smith's connections with the Chapel Royal and Westminster Abbey in London. From all that I have read in those sources, Smith led a life that was characterized by a strong inquisitive nature, which led him to find and collect as much music as possible. New Grove lists quite a few sources in the bibliography to its entry on JSS, so it might be a good first step to investigate those sources and fully exhaust them for new and interesting information.

In an effort to avoid a dry, mundane biography about JSS, I wonder if it would be possible to recreate some sort of timeline about JSS and his creation of the Helm MS. After all, not many of us can resist a good story, and I think that Smith's role as the "first English musicologist" must have an exciting angle we can explore. His discovery of the pieces in the Helm MS and subsequent copying of them would be a great "Eureka!" moment in the chronology of music history, I think.

Another way of illuminating Smith's place in musicological history might be to make a "family tree" of sorts. Who were the other people with whom Smith studied, associated, or worked with during his career? How might they be connected with the pieces in the Helm MS? In my opinion, the larger network we can connect, the better.

Researching the Helm Composers

Over the course of the last few weeks, we have had a lot of experiences with notation and music from past centuries. Some of the most valuable experiences, I think, have involved comparing variants of the same pieces and interpreting different editors intentions. I think we have all been forced to question why certain musical choices have been made in these editions and the purpose of each variant. It is definitely a different approach than I usually take when looking at a piece of music for the first time!

I chose to focus of the composers that are included in the Helm manuscript for several reasons. I was originally interested in them simply because I enjoy music history, but soon realized that their inclusion in this manuscript can tell us much more. As we learn about the composers involved in this manuscript, we can begin to question why they were included and, more specifically, why Smith included them.

Instead of simply researching composers, we also need to compare the composers that are included and compare their works. We need to question what they have in common, and why these commonalities would matter to Smith. Because copying music was so laborious and time-consuming, we can assume that these pieces were not selected capriciously, but with purpose. Our research and findings will certainly lead us to conclusions about Smith, but will also give us information about the music valued in Smith’s time.

Kicking off the Helm Project

It is finally time to devote some serious work to the Helm project. Time to move from learning to applying what we have learned. A couple of weeks ago we started jotting down the components of the project and groups of interest -- as of now, some of the groups are a bit overcrowded given the simplicity of the task ("Composers"), other ones are more challenging and definitely understaffed, so to speak ("Manuscript History").

I thought the best way to get started would be a great session of collective brainstorming on the course blog. You are obviously free to choose how to structure you contribution, but if I were to suggest anything I would make this blog both a way of looking back to the first half of the semester and forward to the active part of the Helm project awaiting us. What have we learned so far? What are we still missing? (There is not way we can be turned into professional scholars in 7 weeks, nobody promised that). Can we count on help? And, perhaps more importantly -- are we excited about getting our hands dirty? (I certainly am). What are the things we especially look forward to?