Roman Usage vs Monastic Usage in Chant
  • monasteryliturgistmonasteryliturgist
    Posts: 393
    I might be opening a can of worms here, but, does anyone know why there is a difference b/w the monastic use and roman use in certain hymns and even gregorian psalm tones? Im wondering if the monastic usage was original and was simplified later? Perhaps with Urbanite reforms?

    One of the reasons it seems strange to me is the monastic way is actually a lot easier to sing, adding a pes seems so much easier and less awkward in the flow of music, or maybe Im just used to it... which is original? Why was it changed? Thoughts?

    *on the vexilla my marking bounced but you can see the difference at the end of the verse.
    Screenshot 2025-06-03 163906.png
    2284 x 1322 - 1M
  • RoborgelmeisterRoborgelmeister
    Posts: 240
    The Sarum form of the Veni Creator created a minor sensation when sung by a schola in alternation with the Durufle Veni Creator. 50 years ago!
    Thanked by 2monasteryliturgist CHGiffen
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,874
    I've probably been prejudiced by Liszt, but I still prefer starting Vexilla so-lado-do.
    Thanked by 3monasteryliturgist GerardH CHGiffen
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 2,798
    The melodic variation is due to a different approach to the sources (geographic, then a systematic preference for B natural in the monastic).

    Talk to Dom Guilmard of Solesmes among others.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw monasteryliturgist
  • Xopheros
    Posts: 39
    The melodic variety of "Vexilla regis" is particularly diverse in the sources, even in 20th century prints. I have attached the version from the prayer and chant book "Laudate" for the diocese of Münster, Germany, which, e.g., differs considerably from your two versions.

    "Laudate" was printed in 1950 and it was meant for congregational singing (and praying) and it also included a German version of "Vexilla regis" with a metric melody that was loosely built upon the medieval melody. As only the German version had all stanzas, I guess that the congregation sang it thus in German and not in Latin. I can remember that we still sang the German version in the 1970s.

    Note that even the incipit varied, as Richard Mix pointed out: The well-known setting by Palestrina, e.g, starts all stanzas with Ut-Re-Fa-Fa instead of Ut-Re-Mi-Fa. Out of curiosity, I have counted the versions listed in the Cantus database, and, out of ten different manuscript sources, six start with Ut-Re-Fa-Fa and only four with Ut-Re-Mi-Fa.

    For my own alternatim setting, I have combined a multi-part setting of the melody that I remember from my childhood with a plainchant version from MS 406 in the univerity library of Utrecht.
    vexilla-laudate.png
    1008 x 1432 - 885K
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CHGiffen
  • monasteryliturgistmonasteryliturgist
    Posts: 393
    I guess my main question is why monastic versions utilize the pes much more than the Roman usage....

    Particularly it is weird for me the tone II for psalm tone without it.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
Add a Comment