James
Samuel Kizer
Dr.
Pamela Hedrick-Hammond
REL-2020-01
Ancient Christian Theology
7
November 2011
The Origination and Early Development of
Gregorian chant in the Christian Church
Praise
through music has always been a focal point of the Christian faith. Some of the
earliest post-ascension apostolic writings, chiefly of Luke, explicitly state
that the disciples gathered to worship and sing praises to God. Until information
from the eighth and ninth centuries became available, however, scholars could
only accurately analyze the content of
worship elements, not the context. Gregorian chant is of particular interest in
this regard, since it is one of the longest-lived and most influential
components of Christian worship, forming the basis for many concepts still in
use today. While the beginning of Gregorian chant is widely debated, its impact
on Christian worship goes undisputed. Doctrinal, musical, and cultural
overtones plotted the course for its development, allowing Gregorian chant to
influence all of those areas while providing the foundation for a millennium of
Christian worship.
It
is possible the Gregorian chant was practiced as early as the late seventh
century, but no evidence exists to indicate that any sort of standardized
worship format until the early eighth century. Even so, Kenneth Levy’s argument
for early ninth-century dating is considered a stretch by many scholars- the
most widely accepted origin is around the late ninth to early tenth century (Levy
1). Levy’s evidence provides a sound argument, however, and with more research
could become the standard.
Levy
focuses his dating efforts on particular pieces of recorded Gregorian chant,
namely the Gallo-Gregorian Offertory Factus
est repente, believed to have originated in the Frankish north as part of
an entire Gregorian recension (an edited musical composition) and, according to
his evidence, introduced to the Italian peninsula around 800 (Levy 15). Since
this entire recension was transmitted in writing, complete with musical
notation (neume), it must have been in use for some time prior. Thus, Levy
proposed the idea of an early origin of all Gregorian chant, starting in
northern Europe and quickly travelling southward.
As
is the case with all ancient writings, Christian chants started as oral
tradition and later were recorded in historical writings, then into actual
documents and collections- this transmission is often referred to as the
traditional view (Hughes 378). Gregorian chant was both influenced by and an
influence to the Jerusalem chants (which later gave birth to Armenian, Syriac,
and Georgina liturgies), but holds special significance due to its widespread
geographic scope, since the aforementioned chants were highly localized
(Jeffrey 9). It is a widespread theory, and likely a fact, that because a large
portion of Europe utilized Gregorian-style chant, especially those lands ruled
by Charlemagne, many slightly altered versions of one of two Gregorian
archetypes existed (Levy 2). Written collections differ slightly depending on
the region in which they were recorded, but musically there is little
difference. “The extreme stability of the basic tradition is obvious enough”
(Hughes 398). Ancient recordkeeping allows scholars to easily identify the
rhetorical construction of the archetypes despite the local stylistics.
Levy
lists two chief archetypes of Gregorian chant: the oral tradition and the
neumed, meaning written music has been overlaid throughout a text (Levy 1). It
should be noted that the two are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they are
greatly intertwined. All chanting was transmitted exclusively in an oral
fashion for centuries, and while the general themes (prayers, praises, liturgy,
etc.) of the chants remained consistent, some melodies were improvised as
different parts of Europe adopted them for use. As time passed, “generations of
singers grew increasingly hesitant about real improvisation, preferring instead
to imitate more or less exactly the improvisations of their predecessors.”
(Hughes 401). Thus, the “frozen” improvisations remained unchanged and became
the recognized official version of Gregorian chant.
In
considering the origination of Gregorian chant, it is critical to understand why these chants developed in the first
place. What purpose did they serve? In short, they provided the backbone for
Mass. Six unique types of chant functioned independently: Introit, Gradual,
Alleluia, Tract, Offertory, and Communion (Crocker 55). Since the earliest
obtainable writings, simplicity is an overarching theme in chant. After all,
for centuries parishioners relied solely on memory. Only two components- the
Introit and Communion- was not responsorial; rather, two semi-choirs responded
to each other (normally, the congregation responds to the choir or priest)
(Crocker 58).
Regarding
word choice, Richard Crocker’s An
Introduction to Gregorian Chant explains that each of the six elements has
a particular feel. The Introit is the official welcome to Mass, a few sentences
of praise and adoration to God. The Gradual equates to a modern-day opening
hymn; that is, liturgy set to music with a series of repeating lines and solo
voices. The Alleluia is constructed with a series of clauses each accompanied
by the phrase “Alleluia.” In many respects, this is similar to the modern day Gloria Patri and Doxology. The Tract was essentially a solo musical selection, often
with less than six lines, and occasionally the choir repeated each line. The
Offertory was a one-line hymn of thanksgiving with a reprise (repeat of the
last half of the sentence). Communion was another one-line hymn that set the
tone for the sacred meal. These elements were done in chronological order and
reflected the liturgical message of the season, but the melodies of each
remained consistent throughout the year.
Since
congregants were, essentially, required to have all responsive chants
memorized, melodies were composed in a manner conducive for easy retention. The
longer pieces, for instance, have several sections in which notes rarely shift.
While this seems inherently boring to a listener, the passion behind the
singing and the mystery behind the lyrics creates a sensual, worshipful
environment. Solo chants were much more complex. What they lacked in length,
they made up for with drastic shifts in pitch and tone- again, adding emotional
power and spiritual depth to Mass.
Politics
of the late Roman Empire played a role in every single facet of life, and
religious chanting was no exception. The sheer size of the Empire allowed for
vast landmasses to share common language and currency, and thus a “common
denominator” of culture (Crocker 66). Still, geographic and cultural divisions
were stark, inevitably affecting the development of chant. To this end,
“Gregorian chant” is often used as an umbrella term for the various sub-types
of chanting found in ancient Christianity (Crocker 65). It does not, however,
include styles vastly different from the repertoire utilized in high Mass
(Hughes 378).
Greco-Latin
music theory and composition also played a role in chant development, although
a less significant one. Due to Christianity’s distaste for the pagan culture,
the potential impact was greatly affected; nevertheless, Gregorian chant
reflects common music practices of the pagan world. One historian collected
around 4000 literary references to Roman music, indicating that musical talent
was valued, featured, and contained a wide range of both instrumental and vocal
compositions for all sorts of occasions (Crocker 68). While the earliest
written chant books seem to follow very specific and steady patterns, there is
no doubt that even those originated, at least in part, from Imperial culture.
There
is ample evidence to prove that Gregorian chant was influenced by a myriad of
cultural phenomena from the ninth and tenth centuries. Equally important is the
chant’s impact on the same historical period from which it originated. The most
obvious and best documented are the political implications. Keep in mind,
Gregorian chant developed during Roman times. Even in worship, clergy and laity
were somewhat controlled by politicians (which, even at this point in time,
doubled as religious leaders, as well). In the seventh and eighth centuries,
chants were common, but they were completely unique and independent from any
other region- there were no common themes. As Gregorian chant gained
popularity, these were phased out and replaced with a localized version of the
same chant (Milner 136). One of the most notable repertoires affected by this
scheme, the Beneventan chant, “was independent of Gregorian; commencing earlier
than Gregorian, it flourished especially in the seventh and eighth centuries…” (Milner
136). While scholars have located pieces of this chant style and others, the
richness has been lost in the shadow of the Gregorian style.
Since
Gregorian chant was one of the earliest elements on which neumes (music notes)
were applied, it should come as no surprise that it would continue to be an
influence for musical developments in the culture at-large. By the tenth and
eleventh centuries, a new concept would enter the culture- musical harmony,
which means two or more distinct voice ranges are combined to create one voice
(as opposed to melody, where everyone sings one voice range). “The emergence of
staff lines and clefs meant that new (chant) books were substituted, and the
older ones with prediastematic neumes had little further purpose” (Levy 6).
Gregorian chant was at the cutting edge of musical thought, rapidly and
radically changing how congregants and choirs interacted in worship.
Scholars, by their very nature, focus on tangible, obtainable evidence, and the fruits of their labors are numerous and groundbreaking. It is difficult, therefore, the measure and report on what cannot be observed. Gregorian chant served as a cultural bridge, of sorts, for both musical and political themes of ancient Christianity, but in examining such works, the doctrinal implications are often overlooked and are certainly not as obvious. From interpreting the chant books, it can be concluded that the doctrine of the Trinity was a common theme throughout the six chant elements, as were adoration, praise, and forgiveness. An unwritten theme, though, was unity. Gregorian chant allowed for all worshippers to feel like a part of a larger family- the Christian family. By expressing their love for Christ through melodic chant, they were able to sing as one body, which is an indescribable experience. Christian brotherhood was finally transforming into doctrine through the recorded Gregorian chants.
Scholars, by their very nature, focus on tangible, obtainable evidence, and the fruits of their labors are numerous and groundbreaking. It is difficult, therefore, the measure and report on what cannot be observed. Gregorian chant served as a cultural bridge, of sorts, for both musical and political themes of ancient Christianity, but in examining such works, the doctrinal implications are often overlooked and are certainly not as obvious. From interpreting the chant books, it can be concluded that the doctrine of the Trinity was a common theme throughout the six chant elements, as were adoration, praise, and forgiveness. An unwritten theme, though, was unity. Gregorian chant allowed for all worshippers to feel like a part of a larger family- the Christian family. By expressing their love for Christ through melodic chant, they were able to sing as one body, which is an indescribable experience. Christian brotherhood was finally transforming into doctrine through the recorded Gregorian chants.
All
ancient chants are widely studied and highly revered, but Gregorian chant holds
much more significance to both ancient and modern Christianity. Politically,
musically, and doctrinally, Gregorian chant was influenced by the surrounding
culture, and greatly impacted the Christian movement, the results of which are
seen even into the 21st century.
Bibliography
Crocker, Richard L. An Introduction to
Gregorian Chant. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 2000. Print.
Hiley, David. "Recent Research on
the Origins of Western Chant." Early Music 16.2 (1988): 202-13. JSTOR.
Web. 27 Oct. 2011.
Hughes, David G. "Evidence for the
Traditional View of the Transmission of Gregorian Chant." Journal of
the American Musicological Society 40.3 (1987): 377-404. JSTOR.
University of California Press. Web. 27 Oct. 2011.
Jeffrey, Peter. "The Earliest
Christian Chant Repertory Recovered: The Georgian Witness to Jerusalem
Chant." Journal of the American Musicological Society 47.1 (1994):
1-38. JSTOR. University of California Press, 27 Oct. 2011. Web.
Jeffrey, Peter. "The Lost Chant
Tradition of Early Christian Jerusalem: Some Possible Melodie Survivals in the
Byzantine and Latin Chant Repertoires." Early Music History 11
(1992): 151-90. JSTOR. Web. 28 Oct. 2011.
Levy, Kenneth. "Charlemagne's
Archetype of Gregorian Chant." Journal of the American Musicological
Society 40.1 (1987): 1-30. JSTOR. Web. 28 Oct. 2011.
Levy, Kenneth. "On the Origin of
Neumes." Early Music History 7 (1987): 59-90. JSTOR. Web. 27
Oct. 2011.
Mahrt, William P. "Gregorian Chant
and a Fundamentum of Western Musical Culture: An Introduction to the Singing of
Solemn High Mass." Bulletin for the American Academy of Arts and
Sciences 33.3 (1979): 22-34. JSTOR. Web. 28 Oct. 2011.
Milner, Anthony. "Early Chant."
The Musical Times 132.1777 (1991): 136. JSTOR. Musical Times
Publications Ltd. Web. 28 Oct. 2011.
Treitler, Leo. "The
"Unwritten" and "Written Transmission" of Medieval Chant
and the Start-up of Musical Notation." The Journal of Musicology
10.2 (1992): 131-91. JSTOR. Web. 27 Oct. 2011.
Wellesz, Egon. "Origins of Byzantine
Music." Bulletin of the American Musicological Society (1948):
25-26. JSTOR. Web. 26 Oct. 2011.
