It is important to note that the Church does not use the term "Polyphony" as the music world does. There are two types of sacred music in the Church's legislation: chant and "polyphony". I too find it thoughtless and pedestrian to link the Mozart Ave Verum in with Josquin, but then again this is religious legislation and not a music theory textbook.

And if you want to go for technical usage, there is no reason that a motet need be religious. The earliest motets to bear that title weren't, and many were in fact written against the Church. And I believe (though I'm unsure) "anthem" doesn't even necessarily designate music. But if you want to go for the common usage, "motet" typically indicates Latin these days, and "anthem" English.

I myself have to wonder what it matters what we call that music, so long as we're doing it.

Yes, I think the Church says "polyphony" when it seems to be mean "part music". As for the strict definition, polyphonic pieces have multiple melodies of technically equal importance. The grey area occurs with those works where one melody (usually the top, but a cantus firmus may also cause this) draws the ear as a principal melody. I teach homophony as music with a principal melody and a composed harmonic accompaniment. Your list then consists of the following homophonic pieces:

Ave Verum Corpus
Panis Angelicus
Exultate Jubilate

The following I believe has a polyphonic fugue included
Gloria (Lord Nelson Mass)

I don't know this one, sorry.
Ye Choirs of New Jerusalem

As for anthem and motet, the two can overlap quite a bit. The anthem really has no tradition in the Roman Catholic Church before the 20th century and really it's just an Anglicism for motet, which itself is a very flexible term. Like Jeff, I have to wonder why you ask this.

Ken of Sarum, I'm not sure I'm willing to accept the premise of your query, nor do I understand the need for well-trained and competent choirmasters to deliberate the topic in detail. (BTW, Mike, the Stanford is a must sing!)
Polyphony as a rubrical "form" evolved clearly, despite the legend, with issues of intelligibility of the texts of ordinaries, propers and hymns. Add to that factor the concerns over centuries with parody melodies composers (can we say Ockeghem?) integrated into cantus firmi that have been surmised as having a similar effect upon medieval hearers as those who hear Sondheim in Joncas.
Misa Marcelli, as I recall, contains much more of what we'd dub "homophony" than does Pierluigi's "Sicut Cervus" (both pars.) But I'd dare not decree either work to be clearly in one camp or the other. Pretty much the same for your list.
And, of course, once modality as a rubric gives way to the admittance of tonality, how can once classify certain works of the Venetians, of Bach, M. Haydn or Vivaldi(for examples), as not being pure examples of polyphony?
I believe all of us who compose employ the attributes of both for reasons dictated by our muse, and likewise blend those dictates as we see necessary and satisfactorily.



And, again, for the record: this posting was done from my home computer on my time. Yesterday, my nominal day off, was a full work day for me because of the holiday at school later this week. And I will still be reporting to work for a half day today when I sign off from this post.

Just to (quickly, got little people tugging on me) highlight that a motet is a hard thing to define, Mozart's 'Exsultate, jubilate' is indeed a motet. I know because I sing the puppy, and its always made me ponder considering it a motet.

Much 'beginning polyphony' is much more homophonic in texture. And good starter pieces often alternate textures.

The anthem is much less familiar to me, and I look forward to being educated about its characteristics.

Motets? Now there is a barrel of monkeys. I think a good definition of a Renaissance motet is a polyphonic setting of a religious Latin text which has no specific liturgical use. This quickly dismisses the polyphonic Propers and Marian Antiphons, which were composed for specific uses (but may in turn be used AS motets). The murky waters begin when composers choose actual Office antiphons for motet texts. There is very little evidence that antiphons were sung polyphonically during any of the Office Hours, although occasionally this may have happened at Vespers or Matins on special occasions. That composers grouped motets together in collections tells that no specific liturgical function was envisioned or obligated. Rather there is excellent evidence that they were used in processions, for devotional gatherings (or private ones), and as the music for religious dramas. They were also used during Mass, much like our current hymnody. Much to our chagrin, perhaps, there is evidence that a motet was sung in place of the Benedictus or even parts of the Propers. Just check out the practices in Milan to see how often a motet could replace parts of the Mass. The genre is a slippery one, indeed, but undoubtedly a rich one.

I am also aware that the excesses of polyphony caused the Church to order it simplified. One could barely make out the texts. Maybe music is a slippery slope that leads..where? To excess, then reform, then excess, then reform, then reform of the reform...

Wonderful comments! I didn't even know the origins of the "anthem" was from the "antiphon." Thank you!

Motetus - "Medieval term (first used by Franco of Cologne,c 1280) for the voice immediately above the tenor in motets; it was also used to designate the entire composition, whether it consisted of two voices or more. In the earliest stages of the motet, when only Latin texts appear, the compositions were called ‘tropi’ or ‘prose’. Theorists also used ‘discantus’ or ‘motellus’ for the voice above the tenor." - Music Encyclopedia

Motetus - "Latin choral composition, generally in one movement. Its origins are in the 13th century, when words (French mots) began to be added to originally wordless polyphonic lines in settings of plainchant. It grew directly out of the clausula, a polyphonic decoration of a portion of organum, but it soon split off to become a separate composition, while retaining a meaningless fragment of chant text and melody in the tenor part. The upper texts often became a confusing mixture of sacred and secular — and even anticlerical — poems, indicating its intended performance in courtly as well as ecclesiastical settings. The motet was the most important musical genre of the 13th century and an essential vehicle for the development of polyphony. In the Renaissance, sacred motets, now employing a single text, were written by composers such as Josquin des Prez, Orlande de Lassus, and William Byrd, though it remains unclear how often they were performed in church settings. In the 17th – 18th centuries, motets were written by Jean-Baptiste Lully, Marc-Antoine Charpentier, Heinrich Schütz, and Johann Sebastian Bach. After c. 1750 the genre declined, and its distinguishing characteristics became diffuse." - Britannica Concise Encyclopedia

Anthem - "The English speaking Protestant Churches' equivalent of the Latin motet, from which it sprang. An Anglican creation, with a place in the C of E liturgy. It constitutes in ordinary churches the one great occasion when the choir alone undertakes the duty of song, and when an elaborate vocal setting impossible and unsuitable in other parts of the service becomes proper and effective. It is usually but not necessarily acc. by organ, and frequently incl. passages for solo vv., individually or in combination. The anthems of Purcell and Blow are like cantatas. S. S. Wesley was prolific composer of anthems nearer to the style favoured today. The term is also less strictly used, as in the phrase 'National Anthem', to denote a solemn, hymn‐like song." Music Encyclopedia