Pueri Hebraeorum - repeat intonation or not? 1962 EF
  • madorganist
    Posts: 602
    The chant books in use in 1962 direct the two Pueri Hebraeorum antiphons to be repeated after every two psalm verses. It is clear that the second verse is to start on the reciting tone, but is the intonation repeated at the beginning of each pair of verses after the antiphon has been repeated?
    Thanked by 1GerardH
  • Incardination
    Posts: 833
    No.

    The intonation is for the first verse of each psalm only.

    When you reach the end of the 2nd psalm / antiphon, the 1st antiphon / psalm is sung, continuing to alternate until the distribution of palms is complete, ending with the GP of whichever psalm you are currently on and the final corresponding antiphon.
  • GerardH
    Posts: 138
    @Incardination You don't happen to have a source for this, do you? This is something I've wondered before too.
    Thanked by 1Incardination
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 1,852
    LU1962 (English 801) p xxxi
    VIII Rules ... The intonation ... In ordinary Psalmody the Intonation is used for the first verse only ... Whenever the Intonation has to be repeated for each verse - as in the Magnificat - this is always indicated.
    On the other hand, GS, which is post 1962, uses single verses, and says/indicates explcitly each should be intoned Intonatio rursus cantatur initio cuiusque versiculi
    Thanked by 1Incardination
  • madorganist
    Posts: 602
    What are other liturgical examples of antiphons sung after every two verses? Communion antiphons are all I can think of, and those repeat the intonation. Is this another example of poorly thought-out changes in the Holy Week "reforms"?
  • Incardination
    Posts: 833
    The specification from the Liber (as AFH provides above) is that psalms do not repeat the intonation on subsequent verses. Conversely, all canticles (Magnificat as mentioned, Benedictus, Nunc Dimittis) always reuse the intonation on every verse. This is true in the Office as well as those situations such as Easter Lauds incorporated into the Mass.

    I would see any examples to the contrary (i.e. repeating the psalm intonation subsequently) as the outlier. In the case of Palm Sunday, the post-55 reform is (in my opinion) better than the pre-55 rite, which has the choir simply repeat the antiphons one after the other with no psalm verses at all.

    There are other examples of alternating antiphons and verses repetitively. One that comes to mind is Candlemas. Here, the Lumen Christi antiphon occurs against single verses of the canticle Nunc Dimittis, so in this case the intonation is repeated each time.
  • Drake
    Posts: 95
    I may be mistaken, but I recall that there are both simple and solemn settings of the Psalm tones. The solemn tones repeat the intonation with each verse, and the simple do not. I’ll see if I can find a reference to what I’m remembering...or I may just have it all mixed up.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Drake
    Posts: 95
    Well, the only examples of the solemn tones that I’m finding are for the Magnificat, Liber p. 207+. As AFH already pointed out, the repetition of the intonation is explicitly shown in that case. The instruction for solemn psalmody from the same text (xxxiv in my copy) describes the Solemn Cadence rather then the intonation. So what I’m remembering is probably just my own observance of psalms with canticles.
    Thanked by 1madorganist
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 7,166
    Drake -
    It is new to me that solemn tones should have their intonations repeated after every psalm verse. Is there precedent for this? If so where/what is it?

    Mad -
    Singing the intonation for every verse of a communion psalm is also a novelty to me.
  • Incardination
    Posts: 833
    .
  • madorganist
    Posts: 602
    Singing the intonation for every verse of a communion psalm is also a novelty to me.
    Seriously? That's what's indicated in Versus Psalmorum et Canticorum, Gregor und Taube, www.gregorianbooks.com/propers.html, etc., and even in St. Gall 376 from the eleventh century - hardly a novelty! Do you have a resource that indicates the contrary? Similarly in the Liber when there is more than one psalm verse printed for the introit, e.g. Holy Thursday.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • madorganist
    Posts: 602
    Also this:
    https://media.musicasacra.com/books/Communio_RRice_2010.pdf
    I'm wondering if we're talking about the same thing?
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • Drake
    Posts: 95
    MJO, I'm pretty sure it's just my mistake. During my brief time at seminary, I mentally associated the solemn tones with particular events (e.g. Magnificat during Vespers), so I got the notion that the the solemn tones *always* repeat the intonation; probably it was just a coincidence that these solemn tones were being used with the canticles, where the repetition was specifically called out.
  • Drake
    Posts: 95
    However ... I did just find this:

    The solemn forms of the Tones which belong to the Gospel Canticles con-
    sist of the same four parts as the simpler forms which are used for the Psalms. (See the Table of Tones.) The intonations and mediations are extensions of the simple forms; the in the second half of the verse the endings are the same, but in some tones the reciting note has a slight decoration on an accented syllable if the text is of sufficient length; the accented syllable (with any that may precede it) is printed in small capitals.

    The intonations have been taken into account in each verse where there are enough syllables to allow of them; when there are not, their omission is indicated by —.


    Source: http://old.www.lithoi.org.uk/church/mop/frontmatter_a5.pdf

    This seems to be more of a plainsong reference as opposed to Gregorian chant, however, the examples given reference the eight tones of the psalms, speak of the Gloria Patri, Peregrinus Tone, etc.

    Now I'm even more uncertain. I should probably just stop before I create more confusion than I already have.
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,310
    My understanding is that for the Introit and Communion, any Psalm verses use the Gloria Patri tone in the same mode as the Antiphon (as in the Richard Rice Communio cited by madorganist above (it was Richard who confirmed this at some thread here a few years ago). These tones do not have the "intonation" structure of the usual tones for Psalmody. This may be what Drake was referring to.
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 1,773
    From "Officia Nova Hebdomadae Sanctae, No. 851c"

  • madorganist
    Posts: 602
    Regarding the Introit and Communion verses, I came across an interesting quote in a footnote this week:
    The Commemoratio brevis calls for an exception [to the speed of singing the verses] in the canticles, the Benedictus and Magnificat, "which are sung so slowly that their antiphon should follow at the same tempo." Since the psalm verses of Introit and Communion show the same solemnity of decoration as the canticles, it follows that they too are to be sung at the same tempo as their antiphons, i.e. half the tempo of normal psalm verses. (Jan van Biezen, Rhythm, Meter, and Tempo in Gregorian Chant, tr. Kevin Rooney, p. 41. Lancelot Andrewes Press, 2016)
    It's worth noting that these are exactly the chants that repeat the intonation formula for each verse.
    Thanked by 2CCooze CHGiffen
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 856
    Interesting. I suppose, then, one could surmise that something being purposely set to a recitation/psalm tone has been done for the ease of the listener because the text is important (and not for the ease of rushing through it by the cantor).
    Thanked by 1madorganist