T WOULDN’T MAKE SENSE to “transfer” pedal markings from a piece by Brahms to one by Chopin. Similarly, it would be blameworthy to superimpose adiastematic neumes from a particular manuscript (e.g. 121einsie|961) above the notes of the official edition, which is a CENTO. In other words, it would be nonsensical to “transfer” the rhythm—assuming one could divine it—from a particular manuscript to the EDITIO VATICANA. Whoever does that inadvertently demonstrates ignorance of the official edition.1 It’s a CENTO, and its creators took into consideration the entire Gregorian repertoire, not just a handful of manuscripts which were easily accessible or particularly beautiful. I have argued that the official edition should be sung as it was intended to be sung by those who created it. This statement of mine has become controversial (!) owing to the pervasiveness of Dom Mocquereau’s editions, which contradict the official rhythm in more than 10,000 instances.
He’s Not Killing Time • I take no satisfaction in “disagreeing with” or “provoking” or “challenging” my colleagues. Nor do I write about this subject because I’m bored. On the other hand, no force on earth could make me believe that Dom Mocquereau’s thousands of modifications are somehow consonant with the official rhythm. Indeed, Dr. Katharine Ellis of CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY discovered evidence suggesting Mocquereau’s modifications were done for financial gain.
Response To Dr. Weaver • In his excellent article published on 5 February 2024, Dr. Weaver wrote: “Given the uncertainty of relative note lengths in syllabic chant in non-Solesmes uses of the Vatican edition, I actually think on the contrary that the Mocquereau method is quite simple and easy to incorporate into a schola.” When Dr. Weaver refers to “the uncertainty of relative note lengths in syllabic chant,” what does he mean? This is what will be explained in my article (below).
HOSE WHO PUBLISH plainsong books hardly speak about the “French vs. German Trochee.” Such lacunae are reprehensible. One author who does treat this subject is Father Dominic Johner, OSB, but only with a tiny section consisting of 22 words! A trochaic word has its accent on the penultimate syllable: Déus, própter, nómen, méus, plantátus, posuísti, diérum, florébit, confitéri, prævenísti, and so on. The tonic accent of a dactylic word, on the other hand, falls on the ante-penult: Dóminus, quóniam, illúminas, témperas, Líbani, córnibus, átriis, lápide, longitúdinem, and so forth. Dactyls pose no problems. Trochees can be rather problematic (as Dr. Weaver mentioned).
A Knotty Subject • The EDITIO VATICANA does not “micromanage” or “asseverate” or “rigidly dictate” the precise way in which trochees are to be lengthened. Indeed, on page 55 of his book (Méthode Pratique de Chant Grégorien, Selon les Principes Et la Notation de l’Édition Vaticane, 1919), Dom Lucien David admits this subject is knotty: “we have not succeeded in deciding the theory [vis-à-vis the syllabic trochee length].” Consider the following passage, as printed in the official edition:
Not So Fast! • I suspect you already “know” how to sing that. The problem is, the EDITIO VATICANA allows freedom for trochees. French singers tend to emphasize final syllables (as does their language). Germans, on the other hand, “bring out” or “elongate” or “honor” the tonic accent. For instance, notice how Dr. Peter Wagner (Commissionis Pontificiae Gregorianae Membrum) lengthens the tonic accent:
Regína Coéli • How about the famous REGINA COELI? Everybody knows how to sing that one, right? But take note (pardon the pun) of how it appears in the EDITIO VATICANA:
Teutonic Trochee Treatment • The following—taken from a German edition of the EDITIO VATICANA (Kleines Vesperbuch, 1928)—demonstrates how Germans sing the REGINA COELI. For the record, my German is terrible; perhaps someone could tell me what “Einfachere Singweise” means. Take note of the TTT (“Teutonic Trochee Treatment”):
Textual Pauses (1 of 4) • Now I must say something which I should have mentioned years ago. The reason I haven’t mentioned it until now is because I had erroneously believed it was already known by everybody. When we speak of the “freedom” in the EDITIO VATICANA, that means when it comes to syllabic chants, the editor can indicate what might be called “textual pauses.” In other words, if the choirmaster (or book editor) believes a “textual pause” is warranted, nothing prevents such an elongation. Consider the following antiphon, as printed in the official edition:
Textual Pauses (2 of 4) • Now take a look at how this antiphon is printed on page 74 of a German version (Kleines Vesperbuch, 1928) which reproduces the EDITIO VATICANA. Specifically, notice that the book’s editor has added a “textual pause” after the Latin word circúitu:
Textual Pauses (3 of 4) • Do such “textual pauses” contradict the official rhythm? They don’t, because such minor elongations are considered in accordance with the freedom of the EDITIO VATICANA. In other words, because such “textual pauses” are so trivial in the broad scheme of things, they aren’t considered to be a violation. Indeed, Max Springer adds them constantly. If one examines editions by Father Mathias, Dr. Peter Wagner, Monsignor Nekes, and others, one encounters such “textual pauses” from time to time. (For the record, the LEMMENSINSTITUUT never adds “textual pauses.”) Needless to say, adding an occasional “textual pause” isn’t the same thing as what Dom Mocquereau did since he eliminated thousands of melismatic morae vocis and added thousands where they don’t belong. Similarly, cutting someone’s hair isn’t the same thing as amputating both their legs.
Textual Pauses (4 of 4) • Dom Mocquereau added numerous “textual pauses” in his editions. Such additions do not contradict the official rhythm. In other words, all editors—including Dom Mocquereau—enjoyed the freedom to employ “textual pauses.” Indeed, they tend to be so subtle (especially in the CREED) they can be difficult to discern. If you want to see Dom Mocquereau using “textual pauses,” look no further than his edition of CREDO I:
The “Johner Rule” • Let’s return to the subject of trochees. How much trouble would have been avoided if all editors had adopted what I call “The Prior Johner Rule.” (Father Dominic Johner served as PRIOR of Beuron Abbey from 1913-1933.) In essence, Dom Johner suggested lengthening trochees which occur prior to double barlines and single barlines. When it comes to trochees occurring prior to half barlines and quarter barlines, Dom Johner suggested no elongation. And that, my friends, is what I call the “The Prior Johner Rule.”
Pause On Vobis … Or Not? • So let’s get down to business. We sang the following antiphon a few hours ago for Vespers. Notice the words “Pax Vobis.” What are we supposed to do with the word vobis? Do we lengthen both syllables or just the final syllable?
If all editors had adopted “The Prior Johner Rule,” there would be no problem. However, that’s not how things turned out. Broadly speaking, the Germans always elongate trochees, whereas the French do not. For instance, notice how Dr. Peter Wagner (Commissionis Pontificiæ Gregorianæ Membrum) employs the TTT (“Teutonic Trochee Treatment”):
On the other hand, Dom Mocquereau—since he’s very French—doesn’t lengthen the trochee. The French language tends to place the accent on the ending of each word, so it’s only natural Frenchman drag this tendency into CARMEN GREGORIANUM:
Interestingly, the LEMMENSINSTITUUT finds itself in a bit of a bind with that particular passage. They “solve” the problem by changing chords on all three notes!
Searching For A Solution
Which is the “correct” approach? To be completely honest, both approaches are allowed. My goal is to discuss both approaches. The ‘theory’ of Dom Mocquereau favors a kind of bouncy rhythm—and there’s nothing wrong with bouncy music. Indeed, there’s something quite charming and memorable about Mocquereau’s ‘bouncy’ approach. An excellent way to observe this is to examine Dom Mocquereau’s edition of the VICTIMAE PASCHALI LAUDES:
Those who sing that version for decades—and many of us have done precisely that—will eventually start to confuse all the accents. For example, they will begin to erroneously believe the accentuation is “re-cón-ci-lí-a-vít pec-cá-to-rés.”
Teutonic Trochee Treatment • When it comes to that Easter Sequence—viz. “Víctimæ Pascháli Laudes”—all German editors without exception employ the TTT (“Teutonic Trochee Treatment”):
French Love Final Syllables! • There’s no question Dom Mocquereau favors the final syllables of words, just as his native language does. Anyone who doubts this should consult page 8 of Plainsong for Musicians (1955) written by Solesmes Abbey’s organist, Dom Jean Hébert Desrocquettes. When it comes to placing emphasis on the final syllable, sometimes Dom Mocquereau’s results can be grotesque: cf. the words “Laudámus te, benedícimus te, adorámus te, glorificámus te” in the GLORIA from Mass IX.
A Discrepancy (“Part A”) • It’s worth noting that a discrepancy exists when it comes to Dom Mocquereau’s approach. Those who listen carefully to the phonograph recordings made by the monks of Solesmes—going back all the way to the 1930s—will undoubtedly discover this discrepancy. Specifically, the monks don’t seem to follow the rhythm of Dom Mocquereau. For instance, listen to this excerpt, paying special attention to the treatment of trochees. Or, listen to this recording of CREDO I by the monks of Solesmes. They seem to be elongating the trochees, or at least taking a “middle way” like the approach promoted by Joseph Gogniat (see below).
Jeff Blows His Own Horn • When it comes to the rhythmic theories of Dom Mocquereau, I must “blow my own horn” for a moment. Last year I wrote a lengthy article examining Dom Mocquereau’s approach to rhythm, and I included copious examples. I’m quite proud of that article, and I encourage everyone to read it:
* Article • “Solesmes Ictus” • Can It Be Justified? (Examples)
A Discrepancy (“Part B”) • Regarding this discrepancy, I urge readers to try the following test. Having selected a really good singer—preferably one who’s sung nothing but Mocquereau for many years—sing together the following Mode II psalm tone. I suspect 99% of singers will “instinctively” or “inadvertently” elongate both trochees:
Joseph Gogniat • When it comes to trochees, perhaps the best solution would be the one promoted by Joseph Gogniat: a type of “middle way,” which lengthens the trochee in a very subtle, delicate, imperceptible way. The problem is, such a “middle way” is virtually impossible with a choir. In other words, the moment one attempts to adopt the “middle way” with more than a handful of singers, chaos ensues. There are limits to how much “subtlety” or “nuance” can be achieved with large groups of singers.
Loca Clavórum (1 of 6) • Let’s consider an example from the COMMUNION we sang at Mass earlier today. Here’s how it appears in the EDITIO VATICANA:
Loca Clavórum (2 of 6) • Without exception, all the German editors employ the TTT (“Teutonic Trochee Treatment”). For instance, consider the edition by Dr. Peter Wagner (Commissionis Pontificiæ Gregorianæ Membrum):
Loca Clavórum (3 of 6) • The edition by Dom Mocquereau, as one would expect, favors the final syllables—as does the French language—and makes it seem like the word is pronounced “clá-vo-rúm.” The correct pronunciation is clavórum:
Loca Clavórum (4 of 6) • Each one of the Solesmes accompanists—Henri Potiron, Dom Jean Hébert Desrocquettes, Achille P. Bragers, Julius Bas, Dom Ferdinand Portier, etc.—follow the same rules. Therefore, I could choose any of them. However, let’s go with the version by Julius Bas, who was commissioned by Benedictines of Solesmes to produce organ accompaniments for every single chant contained in the EDITIO VATICANA. The Solesmes school makes one believe (erroneously) that the word is pronounced “clá-vo-rúm,” as you can see:
M My name (“Jeffrey”) is a trochee.
M Dr. Weaver’s name (“Charlie”) is
M also a trochee. That means we can
M use those names to help us judge
M whether a setting sounds natural.
Loca Clavórum (5 of 6) • I created a “nonsense” sentence which has an exact correlation to the strong and weak accents of the Latin. This allows an “apples-to-apples comparison.” First, play through the “French Trochee” version:
Loca Clavórum (6 of 6) • Now, play through the “Teutonic Trochee Treatment” and see whether you agree with me that it’s more natural:
Howls Of Protest • I can’t pretend to offer a definitive solution vis-à-vis syllabic trochees. Indeed, I have gone back-and-forth on certain examples for decades. I join my voice to that of Dom Lucien David, OSB: “On n’a pas réussi à déterminer la théorie” (we have not succeeded in deciding the theory). I do feel Dom Mocquereau’s penchant for syncopation in plainsong is unreasonable. On pages 65-66 of her book, Dr. Katharine Ellis agrees. Furthermore, she explains that as early as 1901 Dom Mocquereau’s “hardened views” on organ accompaniment were “eliciting howls of protest” owing to their unrestrained syncopation and “the almost constant use of chord-changes on unstressed syllables.”
Fixing Absurdity (1 of 2) • One sometimes encounters a version by Dom Mocquereau which is syncopated to the point of absurdity. A good example would the Corpus Christi Sequence (“Lauda Sion Salvatórem”):
Fixing Absurdity (2 of 2) • One can have the singers‚using a pencil or red pen—change the music to something more natural, such as the German approach:
However, beware of the German treatment. If used too much, it changes the plainsong into something “heavy” or “stodgy” or “tedious.”
Conclusions
When Abbat Pothier was a young man, the height of technological discoveries was the telegraph. Basically, it allowed you to send a little “beeps” using Morse code. Just think how everything has changed! I can pull out my iPhone and instantly access every book ever written. Using that same iPhone, I can take a high definition video of myself and immediately send it across the ocean. The point I’m trying to make: Do we really have a right to complain about the fact that Abbat Pothier allowed “freedom” with regard to trochees in the official edition? Is it that difficult to have singers bring a pencil? Moreover, the GRADUALE ROMANUM contains very few instances of syllabic trochees. Broadly speaking, I like the approach taken by Abbat Pothier’s protégé, Dom Lucien David, in his 1,638 pages of plainsong. In essence, Dom Lucien took a “middle way” which is basically a compromise between French-speakers and German-speakers. For the record, we owe those rare books to the kindness of Dr. Weaver.
1 Father Anthony Ruff, who on 4 May 2020 publicly referred to himself (!) as a “renowned expert” on Gregorian Chant, created a book called Canticum Novum: Gregorian chant for Today’s Choirs (GIA Publications, 2012). In the book’s PREFACE, Ruff claims that his book has “restored” what he calls “the more original melodic version” which he declares is “often quite striking in its aesthetic superiority.” However, in that same PREFACE, Ruff admits that his “restored” melodies come from one manuscript while the rhythm he applies to those melodies comes from another manuscript.
