Show Summary Details

Page of

Printed from Grove Music Online. Grove is a registered trademark. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).

date: 01 August 2021

Josquin (Lebloitte dit) des Prez [Josse, Gosse, Gossequin, Jossequin, Joskin, Josquinus, Jodocus, Judocus, Juschino; Desprez, des Près, des Prés, de Prés, a Prato, de Prato, Pratensis]free

Josquin (Lebloitte dit) des Prez [Josse, Gosse, Gossequin, Jossequin, Joskin, Josquinus, Jodocus, Judocus, Juschino; Desprez, des Près, des Prés, de Prés, a Prato, de Prato, Pratensis]free

  • Patrick Macey,
  • Jeremy Noble,
  • Jeffrey Dean
  •  and Gustave Reese

Updated in this version

updated and revised, 23 February 2011

(b ? nr Saint Quentin, c1450–55; d Condé-sur-l’Escaut, Aug 27, 1521). French composer. He was one of the greatest composers of the Renaissance, whose reputation stands on a level with those of Du Fay, Ockeghem, Palestrina, Lassus and Byrd. His music spans the transition between the sound-world of the late Middle Ages and that of the High Renaissance, and served as a model for much of the 16th century. ‘Josquin’ is the diminutive of Josse (Lat. Judocus), the name of a Breton saint active in northern France and Flanders in the 7th century; an uncommon name in recent times, it was widespread in that region during the 15th and 16th centuries.

1. Birth, family and early training (c1450–75).

  • Patrick Macey

The documentation of Josquin’s life is riddled with gaps; the earlier part of his career has been subject to considerable re-evaluation since the middle of the 20th century, and his place and date of birth remain uncertain. The evidence for the early part of his life is largely derivative or inferential, although a few definite points can be established.

Josquin spent the last years of his life as provost of the collegiate church of Notre Dame in Condé-sur-l’Escaut, on the border of the imperial county of Hainaut, and it is evident that he had long-standing family connections with the place. Documents connected with his inheritance of property in the town in 1483 show that his apparently childless uncle and aunt, Gilles Lebloitte dit Desprez and Jacque Banestonne, had named him their heir already in 1466, perhaps after the death of his father Gossard Lebloitte dit Desprez; the will had been witnessed by the mayor and several aldermen of Condé (see Matthews and Merkley, 1998). Josquin himself is given the same complex surname in these documents, and it is evident that the family name was actually Lebloitte, while Des Prez was a sobriquet (perhaps assumed by Josquin’s grandfather since both his father and his uncle used it) that was evolving into a surname.

Josquin cannot, however, have been born in Condé, for just before his death he declared himself legally a foreigner (aubain); he must therefore have been born outside the lordship of Condé if not outside the Empire. Josquin stated that he was from beyond the ‘Noir Eauwe’, perhaps referring to the Eau Noire in the Ardennes, which formed part of the southern boundary between Hainaut and France. A village called Prez, perhaps the origin of the family sobriquet, is located about 17 km south of this river (see Clarke, 1966), but Josquin may have meant some as yet unidentified watercourse nearer to Condé (see Kellman, 1971).

The former hypothesis receives some support from the tantalizingly imprecise evidence of the 17th-century antiquary Claude Hémeré (Tabella chronologica decanorum … ecclesiae S. Quintini, Paris, 1633, pp.161–2 = 159–60). He stated that Josquin had been first a choirboy at the royal collegiate church of Saint Quentin, then in charge of its music, but he gave no specific dates. Hémeré’s inaccurate statement that Josquin was master of the French royal chapel under François I (see below) does not necessarily cast doubt on his reporting of the documents from St Quentin, which he consulted, though they were destroyed in 1669. Saint Quentin was an important centre of French royal musical patronage: Loyset Compère (d 1518) and Jean Mouton (d 1522), for example, held canonries there, and both composers were buried in the church. Saint Quentin, though it lies some 70 or 80 km to the west, was the natural centre of gravity for the district south of the Eau Noire. New evidence places Josquin as a choirboy in Cambrai at the collegiate church of Saint Géry; a ‘Gossequin de condet’ completed service there in May–June 1466 and received a payment on his departure (see Fallows, Josquin, 2009).

Josquin’s deathbed declaration shows that the famous statement by the poet Ronsard that Josquin was ‘Hennuyer de nation’ (preface to Livre de meslanges, Paris, 1560, 2/1572²) involves a confusion of his later residence in Hainaut with his birthplace. In the Tschudi Liederbuch (Ch-SGs 463), copied around 1540 by a friend of Glarean’s, Josquin is called ‘belga Veromanduus’ (from the county of Vermandois, whose chief town was Saint Quentin). Finally, Josquin may himself have given a clue to his birthplace in his motet Illibata Dei virgo nutrix: the initial letters (in one case a word) of the verses of the prima pars spell out his name IOSQVIN Des PREZ, and a corresponding acrostic has been suspected in the secunda pars. Here the division into verses is less clear; the most plausible candidate seems to be ACAVVESCAVGA, out of which the name of the river Escau(t) leaps to the eye. The Escaut rises about 20 km north of Saint Quentin, and it has been speculated that Josquin was born in the nearby village of Beaurevoir (Raugel, 1921).

The date of Josquin’s birth was long estimated at about 1450, until in 1956 Claudio Sartori brought to light many documents concerning one Judochus de Picardia or Juschinus de Frantia, who was an adult singer (biscantor) of Milan Cathedral from 1459 to 1472; he identified this man with a singer of the same name in the chapel of Duke Galeazzo Maria Sforza from 1473 (earlier documented by Porro, 1878–9, and Motta, 1887), long identified with Josquin des Prez. A date of birth around 1450 remained plausible so long as Josquin’s earliest known activity was in 1473, but the extension of his adult career back as far as 1459 compelled a new estimate of about 1440. Recent archival discoveries have enlarged our knowledge about the Milanese singer, however, and finally proved him distinct from Josquin des Prez. The surname of the Josquin in Milan was latinized as ‘de Kessalia’; his father’s name was Honodius rather than Gossard; and he continued to serve the Milanese court until his death in 1498 (see Matthews and Merkley, 1998). There no longer seems any reason to doubt that Josquin des Prez was born about 1450 or perhaps a few years later, that he was a close contemporary of Compère and Isaac and only a few years older than Obrecht; his professional activity in the mid-1470s fits reasonably with such a date.

Little is known of Josquin’s movements before he appears in the service of René of Anjou in the mid-1470s (see below), but there are one or two suggestive clues. Josquin seems to have had some significant contact with Ockeghem, although the statement of Zarlino (Le istitutioni harmoniche, 1558, repeated by Zacconi, Prattica di musica, 1592) that he was a pupil of Ockeghem’s is unsupported and may only mean that he learnt from the older composer’s example. Nevertheless, no fewer than four apparently early works make use of Ockeghem’s chanson D’ung aultre amer (a mass, a separate Sanctus and the motets Tu solus qui facis mirabilia and Victimae paschali laudes), and the early double motet Alma Redemptoris mater/Ave regina caelorum begins by quoting the opening of Ockeghem’s Alma Redemptoris mater. Most suggestively, Josquin set Jean Molinet’s lament on Ockeghem’s death (1497), Nymphes des bois, as one of his most celebrated and moving works; he was also named in the company of musicians associated with the French royal chapel (of which Ockeghem had been a high-ranking member since the early 1450s) in Guillaume Crétin’s long poem on Ockeghem’s death.

Josquin had earlier been listed in Compère’s motet Omnium bonorum plena, which names a number of musicians associated in some degree with Cambrai Cathedral, including Tinctoris and Regis but pre-eminently Guillaume Du Fay; the occasion may have been the cathedral’s dedication in 1472 (see G. Montagna, EMH, vii, 1987), but it must in any case have antedated Du Fay’s death in 1474. The names of Busnoys and Ockeghem are followed by ‘Des pres’, which most likely refers to Josquin, who was a cleric of the diocese of Cambrai. It is less probable that Pasquier du Pré (also called Desprez), a member of the Burgundian court chapel from 1464 to 1477 who had no known connection to Cambrai, was meant (but see Hamm, 1960). As with his relationship to Ockeghem, it is unclear what the nature of Josquin’s association with Cambrai Cathedral may have been, but his service as a choirboy in Cambrai until 1466 indicates close contact with the city, as does his visit to Cambrai in late summer 1494 (see below).

2. Aix-en-Provence, ?Paris, Condé-sur-l’Escaut (c1475–1483).

  • Patrick Macey

The first certain employment of Josquin is attested by a document dated 19 April 1477 which calls him ‘Josquinus Despres’ and lists him as a singer in the chapel in Aix-en-Provence of René, duke of Anjou, Lorraine and Bar, count of Provence and nominal king of Naples, Sicily and Jerusalem. Another document seems to place him in Aix already in 1475 (see Merkeley, 1999, p.428). His presence at René’s court in Aix lasted at least until 26 March 1478, when a document in French refers to him as ‘Jossequin des Prez’ and certifies his eligibility to receive the first available prebend in the collegiate church of St Maxe du Château in Bar-le-Duc, the capital of René’s duchy of Bar. There is no further documentation for Josquin until early 1483, but he may well have remained in the service of René until the latter’s death in 1480. If he did, then in all probability he transferred in 1481 along with the other singers in René’s chapel to the service of King Louis XI of France, who placed René’s singers in the Ste Chapelle, Paris. Josquin’s motet Misericordias Domini in aeternum cantabo suggests direct contact with Louis: in 1481 the seriously ill king ordered the artist Jean Bourdichon to paint this verse from Psalm lxxxviii in azure lettering on 50 scrolls displayed throughout his château of Plessis-lés-Tours (see Macey, 1991). Josquin seems to have created a musical testament for Louis, who died in August 1483 with the psalm verse ‘In te Domine speravi, non confundar in aeternum’ – the closing words of the motet – on his lips.

After a documentary hiatus of nearly five years, Josquin’s name reappears – as Gossequin Despres – in February and March 1483, when he returned to Condé-sur-l’Escaut to claim his inheritance from his uncle and aunt, mentioned above. About the same time, he was given four los of wine by the chapter of Notre Dame, Condé, to mark ‘his first return after the French wars’ (see Reese and Noble, 1984). The wars between France and Burgundy had lasted from the death of Duke Charles the Bold of Burgundy in 1477 until 1483. Condé, just over the border in imperial territory, had been besieged and captured in May 1478 by King Louis XI, but just one month later, under threat of an approaching army led by the Habsburg Archduke Maximilian, the king’s forces abandoned Condé after locking the populace into the church and setting fire to the town. Possibly Josquin’s uncle and aunt perished in the conflagration; he seems to have taken the first opportunity upon the establishment of peace to return and settle their estate.

The level of Josquin’s attainment as a composer by the early 1480s is demonstrated not only by Misericordias Domini but by a number of works that had been copied by that time. The Casanatense chansonnier (I-Rc 2856) was prepared in Ferrara most probably about 1480 to honour the betrothal of Isabella d’Este to Francesco Gonzaga (see LockwoodMRF). In addition to works by composers active in Ferrara and Milan, such as Johannes Martini, Agricola, Compère and Japart, the manuscript contains French and Burgundian music, including works by Ockeghem, Hayne van Ghizeghem and Busnoys, none of whom travelled to Italy. It ascribes six chansons to Josquin (spelling his name differently each time, which suggests it was not well known to the copyist): Adieu mes amours, the four-voice En l’ombre d’ung buissonet, Et trop penser, Ile fantazies de Joskin, Que vous ma dame and Une mousque de Biscaye. The polished and expressive Ave Maria … virgo serena was probably copied around 1484 into some blank pages at the end of a gathering in the Leopold codex (D-Mbs Mus.ms.3154; see Rifkin, 2003).

3. Milan and elsewhere (1484–9).

  • Patrick Macey

While the Josquin in Milan from 1459 is now known to have been a different man, Josquin des Prez was indeed associated with the Milanese court in the 1480s; he may have entered Sforza service soon after his 1483 visit to Condé. On 15 May 1484 Josquin made a supplication to the papal curia for the rectorship of the church of Saint Aubin in the diocese of Bourges, some 12 km south of Issoudun, asking for dispensation to hold the benefice without being ordained a priest (see Matthews, 1998). Soon thereafter, on 20 June 1484, he is named in another supplication as a chaplain and member of the household of Cardinal Ascanio Sforza, who had been elevated to the cardinalate in March 1484 and was residing for the time in Milan. Although this supplication wrongly gives his name as ‘Jacobus Despres’, it is plain from from preceding and subsequent documents dealing with the same benefice that it is Josquin who was meant. In a document dated 19 August 1484 ‘Joschinus de Prattis’ appointed procurators to take possession of the rectorship of Saint Aubin (see Matthews and Merkley, 1998); these included Hector Charlemagne, a former singer in the chapel of René of Anjou, and François Guiberteau, secretary of the chancery of Paris (an association that lends support to the hypothesis of Josquin’s employment at the Ste Chapelle in the early 1480s).

Josquin must have accompanied Cardinal Ascanio to Rome in August 1484 because a document in the Vatican archives dated July 1485 states that he planned to leave the cardinal’s service and depart to attend to his affairs. He may have travelled to Paris: another Vatican document dated February 1489 indicates that Josquin and others had been involved in litigation before the Parlement of Paris with regard to the benefice in Saint Aubain (see Sherr, 2000). By this time – and probably earlier – Josquin had returned to Milan, where in January and February 1489 he witnessed documents resigning the rectorship of Saint Aubin. The last of these refers to him as ‘cantorem duchalem’, indicating that he was nominally in the service of the young Duke Gian Galeazzo Sforza; in fact Gian Galeazzo’s uncle Ludovico il Moro (Ascanio’s elder brother) controlled the government of Milan and must have been Josquin’s actual patron. Franchinus Gaffurius, who had been appointed choirmaster of Milan Cathedral in January 1484, seems to have been acquainted with Josquin during this period: in his Angelicum ac divinum opus musice (1508), he referred to discussions with Josquin and Gaspar van Weerbeke ‘many years previously’.

It must also have been during these years that Serafino dall’Aquila, who was in the service of Ascanio Sforza between 1484 and 1491, wrote his sonnet ‘Ad Jusquino suo compagno musico d’Ascanio’ (To Josquin, his fellow musician of Ascanio): in it he urged the composer not to be discouraged if his ‘genius so sublime’ seemed poorly remunerated. Zarlino positively identified ‘Jusquino’ with Josquin des Prez when he reprinted the sonnet in his Sopplimenti musicali of 1588. While it seems more probable that Josquin spent the early 1480s in French royal service, as described above, it has also been proposed that he may have joined Ascanio’s household as early as 1480. According to this hypothesis, he would have spent the years from 1480 to 1482 with Ascanio, who was banished from Milan for plotting against his brother Ludovico, fleeing first to Ferrara and then to Naples (see Lowinsky, 1971). If Josquin was indeed with Ascanio in Ferrara, this might account for the composition of the Missa ‘Hercules dux Ferrariae’ in honour of Duke Ercole d’Este, a mass that has been judged too early in style for Josquin’s period of formal service to Ercole in 1503–4 (see LockwoodMRF; Elders, 1998). Other evidence points to a renewed or continued association between Josquin and Ascanio Sforza in the late 1490s (see below).

A further speculation places Josquin in Hungary in the mid-1480s. In a late account from 1539, the papal nuncio in Vienna described the court of King Matthias Corvinus: ‘it had excellent painters and musicians, among them even Josquin himself’ (Király, 1992). Italian singers and instrumentalists had been imported to the brilliant court in Budapest in the 1480s, and a papal envoy reported in 1483 that its chapel was as accomplished as any he knew. No primary documents, however, attest to Josquin’s membership in the Hungarian chapel, and the nuncio may merely have been retailing an unsubstantiated rumour, but the possibility of Josquin’s service at the Hungarian court has received support on circumstantial grounds (see Fallows, Josquin, 2009).

Although it is no longer necessary or appropriate to account for Josquin’s works of the 1470s in terms of Milanese styles and practices, these do seem to be reflected in some works, which should therefore be dated in the 1480s. The motet-cycle Vultum tuum deprecabuntur, in particular, seems to be a set of motetti missales (see Osthoff, 1962–5; Macey, 1996) – motets that substitute for individual sections of the Mass. This genre was especially cultivated at the court of Galeazzo Maria Sforza in the 1470s by Weerbeke and Compère, but it evidently continued in the 1480s; Gaffurius composed one such cycle and a number of hybrid masses, and his choirbooks preserve Weerbeke’s and Compère’s cycles along with several motets from Josquin’s Vultum tuum.

4. The papal chapel (1489–1494).

  • Patrick Macey

Josquin joined the papal chapel in June 1489, not long after his last appearance in Milanese documents. He may have gone to Rome as part of an exchange of singers between Ludovico Sforza and Pope Innocent VIII involving Gaspar van Weerbeke, who had served the Sforza court from 1472 until 1480 and then moved to the papal chapel in 1481, remaining there until mid-April 1489, when he returned to Milan. Josquin is documented as a singer in the papal chapel until March 1494, and he may have served until early 1495 (see Noble, 1971), at first under Innocent VIII, from 1492 under the Borgia Pope Alexander VI. A newly recovered document shows that in August or September 1494 Josquin paid a return visit to Cambrai, where he received a gift of wine from the chapter of Saint Géry (See Fallows, Josquin, 2009). It was believed until recently that he had joined the papal chapel in September 1486, and then was curiously absent from February 1487 until June 1489 (with a one-month appearance in September 1487), but the ‘Jo. de Pratis’ named in the paylists in 1486 and 1487 has now been securely identified as Johannes Stokem (see Starr, 1997). How long Josquin remained in the chapel is unknown, since the accounts from 1495 to 1500 are lost; when they resume, Josquin is no longer listed. Recent restorations to the cantoria of the Cappella Sistina have revealed his name, ‘Josquinj’, carved into the wall (see Pietschmann, 1999), though it is hard to be sure whether he did this himself.

Like his colleagues, Josquin took advantage of his tenure at the papal chapel to pursue benefices. He laid claim to a canonry at Notre Dame, Saint Omer, and a parish in the gift of the Benedictine monastery at Saint Ghislain (1489), to the parish church of Basse-Yttre and two parishes near Frasnes in Hainaut (1493), as well as to a canonry at St Géry, Cambrai (1494), where he had served as a choirboy in the 1460s (see Noble, 1971; Sherr, 1994). Although there is no evidence that Josquin ever obtained possession of these benefices, they do reveal a pattern of intent, since all fell within Burgundian–Imperial territory and all were within his home diocese of Cambrai except for Saint Omer, in the diocese of Thérouanne. Josquin’s applications for benefices in Burgundian lands can be explained by the fact that although he was apparently born in French territory, perhaps Picardy, this region had been under Burgundian control almost continuously from 1435 to 1477. Josquin, as a cleric of the diocese of Cambrai, apparently demonstrated his allegiance by seeking benefices in Burgundian rather than French lands; in this context his previously mentioned negotiations over a benefice in the French diocese of Bourges in the late 1480s, and his rectorate at Saint Aubin, may be viewed as anomalies.

For the papal chapel Josquin composed the tract for Ash Wednesday, Domine, non secundum, also set in polyphony by other papal composers including Marbriano de Orto and Bertrand Vaqueras (see Sherr, 1988); all three settings are found in the earliest choirbook copied in the papal chapel (I-Rvat C.S.35). He also composed stanzas from the hymns Ave maris stella and Nardi Maria pistici as part of the papal chapel’s enlargement of Du Fay’s hymn cycle. Josquin’s five-voice tenor motet Illibata Dei virgo nutrix may also date from the same period, since it is found in another late 15th-century Vatican choirbook (Rvat C.S.15), and composers in Rome, notably Weerbeke, cultivated the tenor motet around this time (see Sherr, 1988). Others have argued that Josquin composed Illibata before 1475, citing stylistic, textural, and structural similarities with motets of Busnoys and Regis (see Brothers, 1991 and Fallows, Josquin, 2009).

5. France and Italy (1494–1503).

  • Patrick Macey

Josquin’s activities between 1494 and 1503 are difficult to trace. Based on recently recovered documentation for his visit to Cambrai in late summer 1494, it has been proposed that he spent the years 1494–8 in Cambrai (Fallows, Josquin, 2009). Further recent documentary discoveries indicate that Josquin held a canonry at the collegiate church of Saint Quentin, and that he exchanged this canonry in 1503 for the provostship at Condé. Because canonries at Saint Quentin were in the gift of the French king, Josquin’s receipt of this benefice indicates service for King Louis XII, who came to the throne in 1498 (Merkley, 2001). Others have suggested that by December 1498 Josquin may have re-entered the service of Ascanio Sforza: in that month Ludovico Gonzaga, bishop of Mantua, wrote to Rome that he was sending a servant named ‘Juschino’ to deliver some hunting dogs to Ascanio. In February 1499 Ascanio wrote to Isabella d’Este, thanking her for the gift of hunting dogs that had been delivered by his servant Juschino. It was probably about this time that Josquin composed the two frottole In te Domine speravi and El grillo, published by Petrucci with the ascription ‘Josquin Dascanio’ (RISM 15044 and 15054); frottole with their characteristics can have originated no earlier than the 1490s (see Prizer, 1989), so the works cannot belong to Josquin’s earlier period of service with Ascanio in the mid-1480s. Not long afterwards, in a letter of December 1499, Johannes Vivaysius, a singer of the Duke of Ferrara, sent an unspecified composition by Josquin to Francesco Gonzaga in Mantua (see Gallico, 1971). Although there is no implication that Josquin was present, the letter indicates the availability of his music in Ferrara and Mantua in the late 1490s.

The 1490s were particularly turbulent years for Italy, beginning in November 1494 when King Charles VIII of France led his army down the peninsula, halting briefly at Florence and Rome before moving on to occupy Naples in early 1495. The invasion triggered decades of political turmoil in Italy, including the expulsion of the Medici from Florence in 1494 and the dominance of the city’s political life by the extremist reforming friar Girolamo Savonarola until 1498, when he was burnt at the stake as a heretic. In 1499 another French invasion by the new French king, Louis XII, toppled the Sforza dynasty in Milan, and it has been suggested that Josquin was with the king in Milan in October of that year (Fallows, 2009). Louis eventually captured and imprisoned both Ludovico and Ascanio Sforza in 1500, and added ‘Duke of Milan’ to his other titles.

Recently recovered documents show that Josquin was in France during this period, as attested by two visits to Troyes, southeast of Paris, in December 1499 and again in August 1501 (see Wegman, 2008). In addition to Josquin’s receipt of a royal canonry at Saint Quentin before 1503, as mentioned above, Glarean (Dodecachordon, 1547) related an anecdote that places Josquin at the court of Louis XII (reigned 1498–1515; in repeating the tale Hémeré mistakenly substituted the name of Louis’ successor François I). The composer, so the story goes, had been promised a benefice by the king, who had failed to keep his word. As a pointed reminder, Josquin composed a motet on verses from Psalm cxviii, Memor esto verbi tui servo tuo (‘Remember your word to your servant’). The work is said to have produced the desired effect, for members of the court applauded it and the king was shamed into fulfilling his promise. Glarean went on to say that Josquin offered his thanks by setting the subsequent verses of the same psalm, Bonitatem fecisti cum servo tuo Domine, but while Memor esto undoubtedly ranks as a work of Josquin’s full maturity, Bonitatem fecisti is by another composer altogether, Carpentras (Elzéar Genet). Glarean’s story may hold some truth, despite his erroneous attribution of the latter motet.

Other works by Josquin that seem to have been destined for the French royal court are the fanfare-like Vive le roy and In exitu Israel, a setting of Psalm cxiii that paraphrases the tonus peregrinus and concludes with the antiphon for Sunday Vespers; in this it resembles settings of this psalm by Jean Mouton and Claudin de Sermisy, members of the French royal chapel (see Macey, 1991). Likewise, the five-voice setting of the funeral Psalm cxxix, De profundis, with its triple canon signalled by the words ‘Les trois estas sont assemblés/Pour le soulas des trespassés’ (‘The three estates have gathered to pray for the dead’), may have been composed for the funeral of Louis XII in 1515 (see Osthoff, 1962–5), or perhaps for a different royal funeral, such as that of Philip the Fair (d 1506) or Louis XII’s queen, Anne of Brittany (d 1514; see Kellman, 1971).

Helmuth Osthoff (1962–5) believed there was documentary evidence locating Josquin at the French court in December 1501, with a further implication of service with Ercole d’Este at a period anterior to his appointment as maestro di cappella in 1503–4 (see below). On the occasion of the state meeting in Blois between Louis XII and Archduke Philip the Fair of Burgundy, who was en route to Spain (Ascanio Sforza, who had been released from prison, was also there with the French court), the Ferrarese ambassador Bartolomeo de’ Cavalieri wrote to Ercole (13 December 1501):

I have found here a singer named Josquin, whom your excellency had sent to Flanders to find singers … and he says that the Archduke has asked him to go along to Spain, and that the Archduke has written to your excellency to see whether you will agree to lend him.

Some have argued that this singer was not Josquin des Prez, however. In the first place, in a letter of September 1501 Cavalieri had mentioned that he was sending Ercole new music by Josquin, so it is unlikely he would have referred to the composer as ‘a singer named Josquin’. Also a singer named Josse van Steeland (recorded as ‘Josquin chantre’ at the court of the Duke of Lorraine in 1493) was reported by Vander Straeten to have entered the Burgundian chapel at the beginning of November 1501 and then travelled to Spain with Philip and remained in the chapel after Philip’s death at least until 1514 (see Reese and Noble, 1984; Vander StraetenMPB, vi, vii). But it has been shown that Steeland’s name was a later addition to the Burgundian chapel list in 1504, and so he cannot have accompanied Philip to Spain (see Meconi, 2003). Others have argued that the singer in Blois in 1501 was in fact Josquin des Prez.

Meetings between Louis XII and Ercole d’Este are documented in 1499 and 1502, and, if Josquin was indeed in the service of the French king, these contacts may provide a context for the composer’s move to Ferrara in 1503. In the autumn of 1499 Ercole travelled to Milan to confer with Louis, who had vanquished the forces of Ludovico Sforza. This meeting presented an opportunity for Ercole and his agents to recruit new singers for his chapel; he was particularly anxious to hire a new maestro di cappella to replace Johannes Martini, who had died in 1497. In the summer of 1502 Louis XII was once more in Milan, and Ercole again journeyed to meet him. In the spring of the same year, Ercole had sent his son Alfonso to Lyons to meet with Louis XII to reassure the French of Ferrarese support. One of Ercole’s agents, Girolamo da Sestola (‘il Coglia’), had been sent on to Paris, where he may have had a chance to sound Josquin out about the position at Ferrara (see LockwoodMRF). Some months later, on 14 August 1502, Coglia was back in Ferrara and wrote to recommend Josquin to Ercole, who was still in Milan:

My Lord, I believe that there is neither lord nor king who will now have a better chapel than yours if Your Lordship sends for Josquin … and by having Josquin in our chapel I want to place a crown upon this chapel of ours.

Some two weeks later, on 2 September, an opposing view arrived from another of Ercole’s agents, Gian de Artiganova, who recommended Henricus Isaac:

To me [Isaac] seems well suited to serve Your Lordship, more so than Josquin, because he is more good-natured and companionable, and will compose new works more often. It is true that Josquin composes better, but he composes when he wants to and not when one wants him to, and he is asking 200 ducats in salary while Isaac will come for 120 – but Your Lordship will decide.

Artiganova provides a rare glimpse of Josquin’s personality, indicating that he was a difficult colleague and that he took an independent attitude towards producing music for his patrons. Ercole nevertheless decided in Josquin’s favour, and eagerly awaited his arrival in Ferrara in late April of 1503. The salary of 200 ducats counts as the highest ever paid to a member of the ducal chapel (see LockwoodMRF). Before departing for Ferrara in 1503 Josquin was in France, and he travelled to Italy by way of Lyons, where Louis XII was meeting with Philip the Fair. The combined chapels of the two leaders were present, as was Ascanio Sforza, Josquin’s former patron. Cavalieri’s dispatches to Ferrara from Lyons in mid-April 1503 reported that Coglia and Josquin had arrived and that he had found it necessary to provide lodging for them in his own house because of the crowded conditions in the city.

6. Ferrara (1503–4).

  • Patrick Macey

Josquin served as maestro di cappella in Ferrara for almost exactly a year from late April 1503 to mid-April 1504. Little evidence concerning his activity in Ferrara survives, but in February 1504 Ercole’s ambassador in Venice sent a work by an unidentified composer to be examined by Josquin ‘to see if it is praiseworthy’. Not long after Josquin’s arrival in Ferrara, an outbreak of plague in July 1503 caused the removal of the Este court to the coastal retreat of Comacchio. Perhaps it was the plague that prompted Josquin to depart in April 1504. His place was filled in September by Jacob Obrecht, who accepted a salary of 100 ducats, half the amount paid to Josquin. Ercole died on 25 January 1505, and the unfortunate Obrecht, who had been dismissed by the new duke, Alfonso, succumbed to the plague in Ferrara in July of the same year.

It is clear from Artiganova’s advice quoted above that Josquin was expected to compose new music – probably motets and masses – for the aging Ercole, who was known for his strong religious devotion. According to Teofilo Folengo (Opus … macaronicum, 1521), one of the composer’s most famous motets, Miserere mei, Deus, a complete setting of the penitential Psalm l, was written ‘at the earnest entreaty of the Duke of Ferrara’. Ercole was probably influenced in his choice of text by his correspondence with Girolamo Savonarola, whose meditation on Psalm l (which seems to have influenced Josquin’s setting) was printed in Ferrara in 1498 shortly after he was burnt at the stake in Florence (see Macey, 1983, 1998). Other motets that probably date from this period are Virgo salutiferi, set to a poem by the Ferrarese court poet Ercole Strozzi, and perhaps the six-part O virgo prudentissima, on a poem by Poliziano (see Brown, 1986). Josquin’s Missa ‘Hercules dux Ferrariae’ may also have been composed at this time, though it has features that have caused it to be dated earlier.

7. Condé-sur-l’Escaut (1504–21).

  • Patrick Macey

Josquin remained active during his final years as provost of the collegiate church of Notre Dame in Condé-sur-l’Escaut. In the early 16th century Notre Dame, Condé, was ranked very highly for the quality of its music among the churches of Hainaut, surpassed only by St Vincent, Soignies, and, just to the south of Hainaut, by Cambrai Cathedral; the availability of a good choir at Condé no doubt made it an attractive place for Josquin to settle for his last and longest sojourn.

Josquin must have travelled directly from Ferrara to Condé, since he arrived there on 3 May 1504, according to a document that lists money received for admitting four canons into the chapter of Notre Dame, including ‘Monsieur le Prévost, messire Josse des pres’. As provost, Josquin presided over a large establishment, including a dean, treasurer, 25 canons (mostly non-resident), 18 chaplains, 16 vicars, 6 choirboys, and non-beneficed priests. The services were sung mostly by the vicars and choirboys, so that a choir of up to 22 singers could be marshalled. Josquin’s predecessor, Pierre Duwez, had agreed to resign the provostship in exchange for a similar post at Douai, which had been occupied by Loyset Compère since 1500. Compère in turn probably moved to a canonry at Saint Quentin, where he died in 1518. Josquin’s election by the chapter of Notre Dame may have been due to the sponsorship of Philip the Fair, whose support he may have sought at one of the archduke’s meetings with Louis XII. It should be noted that Pierre Duwez himself had been a long-time member of the Burgundian chapel, dating back to Charles the Bold’s reign in 1467, and at least four other members of the Burgundian chapel of Philip the Fair held prebends or canonries at Condé.

Further evidence that Burgundian rulers sought to have their candidates appointed to positions at Condé occurs in a letter to the chapter from Margaret of Austria. After her brother Philip the Fair’s death in 1506, Margaret arrived in the spring of 1507 to govern as regent in the Netherlands. The assumption of close relations between Josquin and Margaret’s court in Mechelen has been questioned, because her letter to the chapter of Condé in May 1508 indicates that she was unaware that Josquin was provost. Early commentators (Delporte, 1939; Osthoff, 1962–5) interpreted her letter as an inquiry about Josquin’s health and an offer to send a Dr Collauer for assistance. In fact she mistakenly believed that Pierre Duwez, who died in 1508, had remained as provost of Condé, and she was seeking the supposedly vacant position for Collauer, who was not a medical doctor but rather secretary to her father Maximilian. The chapter responded that their provost was in fact alive and in very good health, and that he was called Josquin des Prez (see Kellman, 1971).

Margaret’s ignorance in May 1508 that Josquin was provost of Condé suggests that she had no part in commissioning his chanson Plus nulz regretz. This sets a poem by Jean Lemaire de Belges written for the celebration on 1 January 1508 of the earlier signing of the Treaty of Calais, arranged by Margaret to secure the marriage of her nephew Charles (the future emperor) to Mary Tudor of England (see Kellman, 1971; Picker, 1978). Margaret did write to Josquin in 1519, however, urging him to favour the election of Jehan Lommel, a chaplain of Philip the Fair and Charles V, to the vacant deanship in Condé (Lille, Archives Générales du Nord, B.19049, nos.40937–8).

Lemaire, who worked in France until 1503 and for Margaret of Austria from 1504 to 1512, wrote a long poem, La plainte du desiré, to commemorate the death in 1503 of the French military leader, Louis of Luxembourg. In a later version of the poem, Josquin is called upon to compose a lament based on the Lamentations of Jeremiah, and it has been supposed that the five-voice Cueurs desolez, with its cantus firmus Plorans ploravi taken from the Lamentations, is the result (see Osthoff, 1962–5). Although the original version of the Plainte called not upon Josquin but ‘Hillaire’ (see Picker, 1978) and Cueurs desolez is preserved only in Attaingnant’s collection of Josquin’s chansons published in 1549, not in the more reliable collection published by Susato (RISM 154515), the style of the chanson is far closer to Josquin’s than to Hylaire’s; it has much in common with Mille regretz.

Recalling that Josquin had held a benefice in the diocese of Bourges from 1484 until 1489, it is intriguing to note that in September 1508 the chapter of Bourges Cathedral wrote to him seeking his services as master of the choirboys, and in September and October 1509 a member of the chapter was paid for expenses incurred for travel to ‘Picardy’ (probably a mistake for the adjacent Hainaut) to seek an interview with the composer (see Higgins, 1997). It is not known whether Josquin responded to the overtures from Bourges, but it is clear that he was thought to be still active and available. Other evidence of Josquin’s presence in Condé is provided by negotiations carried on with the papal curia regarding the exchange of benefices in Arras in May 1509 and Tournai in January 1513 (see Sherr, 1994). Finally, in 1520, an entry in the records of Charles V notes that the emperor ordered a substantial payment to two singers from Condé – one of them called ‘Joskin’ – who had travelled to Brussels or Mechelen to present him with some new chansons. The singer may be Josquin des Prez (see Osthoff, 1962–5; Picker, 1978), or someone else with the same name (see Kellman, 1971). It is perhaps significant that Josquin’s late chanson Mille regretz was a favourite of the emperor (see Rees, 1995).

On 23 August 1521 Josquin was visited by the mayor of Condé and other aldermen, to whom he formally declared himself a ‘foreigner’ (see above). He then paid the necessary tax so that his property would not revert to the feudal lord of Condé upon his death. Josquin left his goods to the chapter of Notre Dame in Condé, and a year after his death his house was sold to endow commemorative services for him. These included a Salve service on Saturdays and vigils of feasts of the Blessed Virgin, and also the performance of his own six-voice setting of the Pater noster and Ave Maria on days of processions, to be sung when the procession halted before the image of the Blessed Virgin Mary attached to the wall of Josquin’s house, which stood on the market square (see Kellman, 1971). The motet’s late style suggests that it was composed in Condé.

The date of Josquin’s death was specified in the inscription on his tombstone:

Chy gist Sire Josse despres

Prevost de cheens fut jadis:

Priez Dieu pour les trespassés

Qui leur donne son paradis.

Trepassa l’an 1521 le 27 d’aoust:

Spes mea semper fuisti.

Here lies Master Josse Despres, formerly provost of this place; pray to God for the dead, that he grant them his paradise. He died in the year 1521 on 27 August. Thou hast ever been my hope.

He was buried in the church of Notre Dame at Condé, but his tomb is no longer extant; the church, sacked by Huguenots during the Wars of Religion in the late 16th century, was completely demolished in 1793 during the French Revolution. The site is today an open square planted with trees. Only in the 19th century was the inscription discovered (FétisB), in a 17th-century manuscript collection of funerary inscriptions from Flanders, Hainaut and Brabant (F-Lm 389).

8. Portrait of Josquin.

  • Patrick Macey

Recently discovered documents reveal that the well-known woodcut of Josquin (fig.1) was almost certainly copied from a panel portrait in oil that once stood in the church of Ste Gudule, Brussels (see Haggh, 1994). Petrus Jacobi (d 1568), a canon of Ste Gudule, owned a portrait of Josquin that may have been painted while the composer was still alive. Jacobi directed in his will that this portrait should be included as one side panel of a triptych that would feature St Peter in the central panel and Jacobi himself on the opposite side; this altarpiece was to be placed near Jacobi’s tomb in Ste Gudule. The portrait was installed in 1569, the year after Jacobi’s death, but only a decade later Protestant iconoclasts destroyed the images in the church. In the Opus chronographicum, completed in 1569 but not published until 1611, Petrus Opmeer singled out the portrait of Josquin in Ste Gudule on which he based his woodcut of the composer, and approvingly referred to Josquin’s ‘truly virtuous face and attractive eyes’.

Josquin des Prez: woodcut from Petrus Opmeer’s ‘Opus chronographicum’ (Antwerp, 1611)

The masterly ‘Portrait of a Musician’ in the Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Milan, often attributed to Leonardo da Vinci and painted around 1485, has been thought to depict Gaffurius, but Clercx-Lejeune (1972) attempted to identify Josquin as the sitter. The man in the picture seems to be in his 20s and is wearing secular costume, though both musicians were clerics in their 30s at the time. Clercx-Lejeune also discussed evidence that Josquin’s likeness appears in Jean Perréal’s fresco of the Liberal Arts in Le Puy Cathedral in Auvergne, but this has not generally been accepted by scholars.

9. Reputation.

  • Patrick Macey

Although there are many witnesses to the enormous esteem in which Josquin was held after his death, little evidence survives to show how he was regarded during his life. The praise he received from the agents of Ercole d’Este (even the one who championed Isaac) has been quoted above. The Roman humanist Paolo Cortese awarded Josquin pre-eminence in the composition of masses (De cardinalatu, 1510; see Pirrotta, 1966). In 1496 Gaffurius cited him as one of several composers who exemplified the use of parallel 10ths between the outer parts, and he referred to him in 1508 as ‘a most worthy composer’ with whom he had discussed the notation of sesquialtera proportion. Aaron, in his early treatise De institutione harmonica (1516), claimed to have once been on close terms with Josquin in Florence, and referred to his use of canons and his notation of diminution. These seem to be the only references to Josquin in theoretical works of his lifetime.

Printed editions of music do more to show Josquin’s pre-eminence by the beginning of the 16th century. Petrucci gave pride of place at the opening of each of his first four motet anthologies to a motet by Josquin: Ave Maria … virgo serena (Motetti A, RISM 1502¹), O Domine Jesu Christe (Motetti B, 1503¹), Ave Maria … benedicta tu (Motetti C, 1504¹) and Alma redemptoris/Ave regina (Motetti libro quarto, 1505²). The first collection of printed music by a single composer was Petrucci’s Misse Josquin (1502), which was so successful that the printer brought out a second volume of masses in 1505 and a third in 1514 (reprinting the previous volumes each time) – no other composer merited more than one volume. The fashion for printed collections devoted to a single composer gathered momentum in the second third of the 16th century, well after Josquin’s death, but in 1545 the Antwerp printer Susato published a set of his five- and six-voice chansons, most of them unknown in earlier sources but probably genuine; these were reprinted with the addition of a few doubtful chansons by Attaingnant in Paris in 1549. In 1555 the young Parisian firm of Le Roy & Ballard brought out volumes of motets devoted to the living composers Cadéac, Maillard and Sermisy, but also a volume each of motets by Mouton and Josquin. From the 1530s onwards, German publishers (especially in Nuremberg and Augsburg) published many motets under Josquin’s name, a large proportion of which, however, are undoubtedly spurious.

Josquin’s works continued to be sung for decades after his death. Many of his motets and masses were copied for Spanish cathedrals around the middle of the 16th century, and instrumental intabulations of his works (though beginning to appear during his lifetime) were published frequently from the 1530s into the early 1590s. Performance-related adaptations were made in the 1570s to the Cappella Sistina copies of his Missa de Beata Virgine and Mittit ad virginem (see Dean, 1993). The 17th-century writer Hémeré, our source for Josquin’s connection with the church of Saint Quentin, stated that an endowment had been instituted there in the late 16th century for the singing of Josquin’s Stabat mater on Fridays in Lent and at the Easter vigil (Augusta Viromanduorum, 1643; see Osthoff, 1962–5). Finally, in 1616 the choir of the Cappella Sistina was still singing Josquin’s setting of Psalm xc, Qui habitat, on the second Sunday in Lent (see H.-W. Frey, Mélanges Eugène Tisserant, Rome, 1964, vi, 407).

Josquin’s death called forth a number of laments, three of which were printed by Susato in his 1545 collection of Josquin’s chansons. The seven-voice O Mors inevitabilis by Hieronymus Vinders employs the same text as the epitaph attached to the portrait in Ste Gudule, Brussels, according to Opmeer and Franciscus Sweertius (Athenae belgicae, 1628). Another elegy, Musae Jovis, ascribed by Sweertius to Gerardus Avidius of Nijmegen, was set to music for four voices by Benedictus Appenzeller, and for six voices by Nicolas Gombert, who employed the canonic cantus firmus Circumdederunt that Josquin himself used in Nimphes, nappés. The same cantus firmus in canon, with the addition in some sections of the words and music to ‘c’est douleur non pareille’ (it is a sorrow without equal) from Josquin’s Faulte d’argent, is present throughout Richafort’s Requiem, which thus seems to have been composed as a memorial to Josquin. Absolve, quaesumus, an anonymous, fragmentary motet for seven voices, expanding at the end to perhaps 15, is on the same funerary text (and the same canonic cantus firmus) as Josquin’s own motet for six voices, and names him as the person being mourned (see Picker, 1971). A striking musical tribute from a later generation is Jacquet of Mantua’s motet Dum vastos Adriae fluctus (printed in 155416), the middle section of whose text includes the titles of several motets by Josquin – Praeter rerum seriem, Stabat mater, Inviolata, Salve regina and Miserere mei – setting the words to free but recognizable variants of Josquin’s own music, and making it clear how highly he was regarded in Italy a generation after his death.

Much other music from the 16th century shows Josquin’s continuing influence. Many works with inauthentic ascriptions are in fact deliberate imitations (some extremely successful) either of particular works of Josquin’s or more generally of his manner, showing him to have had, especially in Germany, a ‘classical’ status supplying ideas and inspiration for younger composers (see Macey, 1993). Josquin’s position as a classic affected major composers as well: in Ferrara, for example, Willaert, Rore and Vicentino incorporated the ostinato from Josquin’s Miserere mei, Deus into motets based on Savonarola’s meditation on Psalm l, Infelix ego (see Macey, 1983, 1998); Rore, Jacquet of Mantua, Hellinck and Escobedo composed masses on the model of the Missa ‘Hercules dux Ferrariae’. More conventional homage was common as well. Both Willaert and Antoine de Févin wrote parody masses on Josquin’s Mente tota, a motet from the Vultum tuum cycle. Other motets, and a few chansons as well, provided models for some two dozen parody masses. The most popular model by far was Benedicta es, the source of masses by Morales, Rore, Hesdin, Merulo, Monte, Palestrina and La Hêle as well as a parody Magnificat by Lassus.

Theorists after Josquin’s death drew heavily on his works to illustrate their doctrines, reinforcing his classical or exemplary status. Pietro Aaron cited many of Josquin’s works, referring to Petrucci’s printed editions, in his Trattato della natura et cognitione di tutti gli tuoni (1525) and in the Supplement to his Toscanello (2/1529); Sebald Heyden printed a number of excerpts from Josquin’s works to illustrate his De arte canendi (1540). But the theorist who gave Josquin the greatest prominence was Glarean (Dodecachordon, 1547), who referred to his music and that of ‘other superior composers’ of his generation as an ‘ars perfecta’. He praised Josquin’s music above all, saying, ‘in this class of composers and great crowd of talented men, he stands out most particularly in talent, conscientiousness and industry’, and he also noted that Josquin expressed more effectively than others the complete gamut of human emotion, so that he could be compared to Virgil. He stated that Josquin worked laboriously on his compositions, revising them and holding them back for many years before releasing them to the public. Glarean printed many entire works and he also related a number of anecdotes, making Josquin the first composer in the Western tradition about whom such stories were told.

Glarean’s tale about the composition of Memor esto has already been mentioned. He also told the story of an unidentified magnate known for his procrastinating ways who had put Josquin off regarding some favour, saying ‘laisse faire moy’ (let me take care of it). Josquin in reply composed the Missa ‘La sol fa re mi’, in which the tenor wittily sings the solmization subject countless times in a variety of rhythmic forms, thus reminding the patron of his promise. The mass has been connected to Ascanio Sforza by way of an anonymous barzelletta Lassa far a mi attributed by scholars to Serafino dall’Aquila, as well as another sonnet by Serafino, La vita ormai resolvi, in which the initial letters of each section spell out ‘La Sol Fa Re Mi’ (see Lowinsky, 1971). The circumstantial evidence linking Josquin’s mass to Ascanio may, however, constitute no more than a coincidence involving a common pun on solmization syllables (see Haar, 1971). It has alternatively been proposed that Josquin composed the Missa ‘La sol fa re mi’ while he was a member of the papal chapel. In the earliest source for the mass (I-Rvat C.S.41, copied c1495), an illustration depicts a man in Turkish costume, who holds a banner with the words ‘lesse faire a mi’. The illumination may represent the Turkish prince Cem [Djem], a political prisoner of the pope, who repeatedly declared his wish to participate in a crusade and overturn his brother, the Sultan Bayezid II (see Kiang, 1992). If so, Josquin may have written his mass to evoke the promises of the Turkish prince to aid the West in a proposed crusade against Constantinople, perhaps on the occasion of the papal Mass in S Pietro on 10 January 1495, attended by Cem, Pope Alexander VI and King Charles VIII of France (see R. Stewart: disc notes, Josquin des Prez: Missa ‘Lesse faire a mi’, Ricercar 159166, 1996).

Glarean related another anecdote that has long been associated with Josquin, although he did not name him explicitly but introduced the story after mentioning Josquin in connection with similar jests. At the end of the Dodecachordon Glarean presented a ‘Carmen gallicum’, recounting how Louis XII, in spite of his weak voice, wished the master of his chapel to compose a piece in which he could take part. The composer complied with a little work based on a single long note for the king’s part, reinforced by leaping 5ths in the bass and two voices in a simple canon above. The king laughed heartily at the joke and rewarded the composer for his efforts. While Glarean presented the work untexted, it survives with the words ‘Guillaume se va chauffer’ in the Heer Liederbuch, copied in Paris in 1510 (CH-SGs 462). Here it is also anonymous, and bears an inscription connecting it with King Louis XI, who died in 1483. In the 17th century Marin Mersenne did attribute the work to Josquin (MersenneHU, ‘Traitez de la voix, et des chants’, pp.44–5), but he may have been inferring a connection not intended by Glarean.

Other anecdotes are related by Johannes Manlius, a Lutheran humanist educated in the Erasmian circle in Basel (Locorum communium collectanea, 1562). He stated that whenever Josquin composed a new work he would give it to the choir to sing, and then walk about listening to the harmony. Whenever he heard something that displeased him, he would say: ‘Be silent; I will change that.’ Manlius also reported that Josquin could be harsh: when a singer introduced ornaments into one of his works, he entered the choir and said: ‘You donkey, why did you add embellishments? If I had wanted them, I would have written them myself. If you wish to correct musical works that have been composed in a natural or plain style, then write your own, but leave my works unaltered.’ On a lighter note, the Neapolitan composer Giovan Tomaso Cimello told how Josquin had given the tenor part from his Missa ‘L’homme armé’ super voces musicales to a singer who did not understand that the notation called for augmentation and proceeded to perform it incorrectly. After laughing a good deal, Josquin explained the correct manner of singing the tenor (see Haar, 1990).

Cimello had heard the story from Jean Lhéritier, who he said was a pupil of Josquin. Nicolas Gombert was also called a pupil of Josquin by the theorist Hermann Finck (Practica musica, 1556), who noted that Josquin’s music was somewhat ‘bare’, owing to the frequent rests and duet textures, while Gombert created a fuller texture based on pervading imitation. Ronsard claimed 10 major composers as Josquin’s ‘disciples’ (preface to Meslange de chansons, 1560). None of these statements is supported by further evidence, though it is very likely that each of the other composers had some contact with Josquin. This cannot be said of Adrian Petit Coclico, an unreliable self-promoter (he falsely claimed to have been a singer in the papal chapel, for instance) who advertised himself as a pupil of Josquin. In his Compendium musices (1552), however, he gave a credible description of Josquin’s method of teaching (trans. adapted from Smijers, 1926–7):

My teacher Josquin … never gave a lecture on music or wrote a theoretical work, and yet he was able in a short time to form complete musicians, because he did not keep back his pupils with long and useless instructions but taught them the rules in a few words, through practical application in the course of singing. And as soon as he saw that his pupils were well grounded in singing, had a good enunciation and knew how to embellish melodies and fit the text to the music, then he taught them the perfect and imperfect intervals and the different methods of inventing counterpoints against plainsong. If he discovered, however, pupils with an ingenious mind and promising disposition, then he would teach these in a few words the rules of three-part and later of four-, five-, and six-part writing, always providing them with examples to imitate. Josquin did not, however, consider all suited to learn composition; he judged that only those should be taught who were drawn to this delightful art by a special natural impulse.

Writers in Italy singled out Josquin for praise. Baldassare Castiglione (Il libro del cortegiano, 1528) related that a motet performed at the court of the Duchess of Urbino pleased no one until it was discovered that Josquin composed it. Cosimo Bartoli (Ragionamenti accademici, 1567) juxtaposed Ockeghem and Josquin with two great Florentine artists (trans. from Haar, 1988):

I well know that Ockeghem was practically the first who in earlier times rediscovered music, which had become almost completely extinct, no differently than Donatello, who for his part rediscovered sculpture; and Josquin, a pupil of Ockeghem, may be regarded in music as a prodigy of nature, just as was our Michelangelo Buonarroti in architecture, painting and sculpture. Just as Josquin has so far had no one who could surpass him in composition, so Michelangelo, among all those who have cultivated these arts, stands alone and without peer. Both of them have opened the eyes of all who take delight in these arts, or who will enjoy them in the future.

Zarlino, however, while granting Josquin the highest rank among composers of his own time, held that he was ‘not to be compared with Horace or any other excellent ancient poet, Greek or Latin’ (Sopplimenti musicali, 1588, p.314).

In France, Rabelais placed Josquin at the head of a long list of composers, even giving him precedence over Ockeghem (Nouveau prologue … Pantagruel, 1552).

In Germany, Luther delivered a famous judgment on Josquin during one of his table talks in 1538, making particular reference to Josquin’s six-part Nimphes, nappés, built around a canonic cantus firmus on Circumdederunt me gemitus mortis. Luther performed the work with some friends in the widespread contrafact version Haec dicit Dominus, and after singing it through he exclaimed:

Josquin is the master of the notes, which must do as he wishes, while other composers must follow what the notes dictate. He most certainly possessed a great spirit … particularly since he was able to work Haec dicit Dominus and Circumdederunt together so effectively and melodiously.

Luther went on to express the wish that this motet might be performed at his deathbed. Luther is probably also the source of the wry comment that ‘now that Josquin is dead, he is putting out more works than when he was still alive’ (see Osthoff, 1962–5, ii, 9).

While Josquin’s fame eventually receded, he was never entirely forgotten in the 17th and 18th centuries. His works are intelligently discussed in Angelo Berardi’s theoretical writings of the 1680s and 1690s, for instance, and there is a brief entry on him in Johann Gottfried Walther’s Musikalisches Lexikon (1732). But he was restored to a position of prominence in the new historicizing climate of the late 18th century: Burney scored various works by him, analysed the music and arrived at remarkably sound judgments. Josquin looms large in Kiesewetter’s and Fétis’s pioneering studies of Netherlandish music, and in the 1860s Ambros declared Josquin to be one of the towering figures of Western music history, not merely a forerunner of Palestrina but his equal. With the publication of Josquin’s complete works beginning in the 1920s, chiefly edited by Albert Smijers, and the contemporaneous advocacy by Friedrich Blume in the series Das Chorwerk, a concrete knowledge of his music came to confirm his position at the centre of 20th-century understanding of 15th- and 16th-century music. That position has been reaffirmed by Osthoff’s monograph of 1962–5, by the international festival-conference of 1971 to mark the 450th anniversary of Josquin’s death, whose moving spirit was Edward E. Lowinsky, by a number of subsequent volumes of essays and many individual articles devoted to Josquin and his music, and by a new critical edition that began publication in 1987.

10. Works: canon and chronology.

  • Jeremy Noble

That Josquin was the greatest composer of the high Renaissance, the most varied in invention and the most profound in expression, has become almost a commonplace of musical history, thanks to the work of scholars such as those mentioned above and of the steadily increasing number of performers who have helped, both in concert and through their recordings, to make his music known to modern listeners. In some quarters this has provoked, perhaps inevitably, something like a revisionist backlash, both against Josquin’s reputation and against a scholarly mindset that is seen as having fostered it too unquestioningly.

It is undoubtedly true that early generations of music historians were hampered by an incomplete knowledge of the surviving sources – something that has only been remedied by the completion of the University of Illinois’s Census-Catalogue in 1988. It would be unwarranted, however, to deduce from this that previous attempts to establish a canon of Josquin’s authentic works were naively uncritical. There is still plenty of room for doubt in individual cases, and in the revised work-list at the end of the present article indications of scholarly disagreement have been given both among those works the authors consider probably authentic and among those they do not. It must be emphasized that all scholars acknowledge a continuum of degrees of doubt between the extremes of those works generally accepted as certainly by Josquin and those recognized as certainly not by him; the main work-list is not confined to the former extreme but also includes many works the authors regard as probably but not certainly authentic, and a fair number of compositions are finely balanced between ‘probably’ and ‘probably not’.

The degree of scepticism employed in attempting to establish the authenticity of individual works will depend on the experience and temperament of the individual scholar, and must thus be to some extent subjective. Moreover, the evidence (whether it concerns the dating and reliability of sources, or the availability of biographical data) will itself usually remain incomplete and uncertain, and hence subject to interpretation. Whatever consensus emerges through the interaction of informed opinions will and should remain fluid, capable of accommodating new evidence, both internal and external – new archival discoveries, new insights into the music. A case in point is the fundamental one of Josquin’s date of birth (see §1 above).

It has also been maintained that Josquin’s legendary supremacy among his contemporaries was essentially a creation of the 16th century, and that his high standing among modern musicologists rests on an attempt to perpetuate, or even enhance, an anachronistic view of him. Wegman in particular (1994 and 2000) has claimed that Josquin’s celebrity during his lifetime, or at least until the middle of the first decade of the 16th century, was considerably less than Obrecht’s, though the latter has been less highly regarded ever since. Yet the nature of and grounds for compositorial fame before the second quarter of the 16th century are little understood. It is true that Josquin’s reputation was to benefit more than Obrecht’s from the effect of printing technology on the transmission of music and music theory, but the histories of their employment do not suggest that he had been any less highly regarded during their lifetimes. In contrast to Obrecht, Josquin was essentially a court musician, who by 1504 had been in the service of René of Anjou, Cardinal Ascanio Sforza, the dukes of Milan and Ferrara, Popes Innocent VIII and Alexander VI, and perhaps two kings of France; thereafter he spent the last 17 years of his life as provost of Condé. This scarcely looks like the career of an unregarded composer.

In any case Josquin’s high standing in modern times rests not on the gullible repetition of received ideas, but on the direct experience of a sizable body of music very plausibly attributed to him. If a total, organic picture of his creative development has been slow to appear, and has still, two decades after the previous edition of this dictionary, not come into sharp focus, the reasons are not far to seek. Josquin’s productive career was a long one, perhaps as much as 50 years, and the quantity of his music that survives (even discounting the works doubtfully ascribed to him) is greater than that of any other composer of the period with the possible exceptions of Isaac and Obrecht. But the sources in which this music survives give relatively little help with its chronology. Music printing made its appearance only in the last two decades of Josquin’s life; unlike later 16th-century publications, moreover, which almost always made a point of the novelty of their contents, Petrucci’s earliest collections, both sacred and secular, are clearly anthologies drawn from the repertory of the previous 20 or even 30 years. For Josquin, the dates of Petrucci’s publications provide only a terminus ante quem: how new or old a given composition may have been when it was published is something that has to be decided on other evidence. More surprising, perhaps, is the lack of information to be derived from manuscript sources. Time, war and enthusiasm (both religious and anti-religious) have wrought such destruction on the musical material of the later 15th century that very few manuscript copies of music by Josquin survive from before 1500. Yet the body of his surviving work is so large and so diverse that we cannot conveniently posit the loss of all his early music; some of it at least must be contained in these comparatively ‘late’ sources, though they themselves fail to provide an accurate date for its composition.

The works themselves also provide very little external historical evidence for dates of composition. The isorhythmic celebratory motets for specific and identifiable occasions, which provide such useful signposts in the generation of Dunstaple and Du Fay, had gone out of fashion by Josquin’s time, and he seems to have been less attracted to occasional texts than his contemporaries Isaac and Mouton. Various topical references have been suggested by Osthoff, Lowinsky, Macey and others, and some of them may well be correct; but few have won universal acceptance. The elegy on the death of Ockeghem, Nymphes des bois, was presumably written soon after that event (February 1497), and Osthoff’s association of the chanson Plus nulz regretz with the celebrations for the Treaty of Calais (New Year 1508) seems fully justified. However, Glarean’s anecdotes associating particular works with particular patrons (Ascanio Sforza, Louis XII) could only be really useful if the facts of Josquin’s life were more precisely known than they yet are. More definite, since it refers to a more restricted period, is Teofilo Folengo’s information that the great psalm setting Miserere mei, Deus was composed at the request of Ercole d’Este, presumably, therefore, between April 1503 and April 1504, when Josquin was in his service at Ferrara, or at the latest by the following year, when Ercole died (see also §6 above).

The external evidence, then, is meagre, and yet for all its undoubted difficulty the question of chronology must be tackled, however speculatively, if the course of Josquin’s development is to be understood. There is in fact little disagreement about its broad outlines. Commentators such as Ambros, Ursprung, Blume and Osthoff have all remarked on a move away from exuberant melisma towards motifs closely, often syllabically, related to the text; on the development of a technique of structural imitation among voices of equivalent importance that combines a rational and homogeneous integration of the musical space with a self-renewing rhythmic impetus; on a growing preoccupation with verbal texts, and on the development of a melodic and harmonic vocabulary capable of expressing their meaning in a totally new way. Through these developments Josquin’s music, more than that of any other composer, represents the transition from the world of Du Fay and Ockeghem to that of Willaert, Arcadelt and, eventually, Lassus and Palestrina.

Points of departure and arrival are clear enough; the stages of the journey have proved less easy to map convincingly. Ambros (1887–1911) recognized in Josquin’s output the traditional three periods – early, middle and late – roughly corresponding to apprenticeship, maturity and the individual mastery that distinguishes only the last years of great composers. In dealing with the masses, in particular, Osthoff (1962–5) attempted to give these periods more specific technical and temporal definition. For him the first period (lasting until about 1485, the year – as he thought – before Josquin’s entry into the papal chapel) is characterized mainly by a rather abstract, melismatic counterpoint, perhaps deriving from Ockeghem, in which the relationship between verbal and musical phraseology is tenuous and inconsistent; the second period (ending about 1505, when Josquin had returned from Italy and settled at Condé-sur-l’Escaut) saw the development and perfection of the technique of imitation based on word-generated motifs; in the final period, lasting until Josquin’s death, the relationship between word and note becomes closer than ever, and there is an increasing emphasis on declamation and rhetorical expression within a style of the utmost economy.

So far as it goes, this categorization is convincing, though it is beginning to look somewhat over-schematic. Osthoff saw the mature, middle-period style as a synthesis of two traditions: the northern polyphony of Du Fay, Busnoys and Ockeghem in which Josquin presumably had his earliest training (see §1 above for the connection with Ockeghem) and the more chordal, harmonically orientated practice of Italy, as exemplified in improvised falsobordone and lauda. He also accepted the traditional view that this process must have begun in the 1470s, when (as was then thought) Josquin and several of his most talented contemporaries were gathered together in the lavish musical establishment of Galeazzo Maria Sforza (d December 1476) at Milan. Against this Lowinsky (1963) argued that our knowledge of the laude and their composers does not permit the assumption that such an influence existed before the 1490s; thus it would follow that such pieces as the Elevation motet Tu solus qui facis mirabilia and the Passiontide cycle O Domine Jesu Christe, both almost entirely homophonic in texture, would belong not to the Milanese years but to the later Roman ones. Now that Josquin’s connection with Milan has been, if not disproved, at least attenuated, a clear-cut temporal distinction between horizontally and vertically orientated pieces must be abandoned. Josquin had evidently learnt to mingle the two from an early date, and the only distinction to be made is between the levels of control which he displayed in doing so.

11. Motets.

  • Jeremy Noble

(i) Early and middle-period works.

Ave Maria … virgo serena was chosen by Petrucci to stand at the head of his first motet collection, Motetti A (1502), but it must already have been at least 20 years old at the time. Clearly it owes its position, and its evident popularity, to the way in which it was felt to typify the perfection of a particular style, which we can identify with that of Josquin’s early maturity. It therefore seems appropriate, before embarking on a selective survey of his work in this field (following, in the main, Osthoff’s periodization), to start with some account of it, if only to suggest the distance he had already travelled by about 1480. Its apparent simplicity conceals great subtlety and technical mastery. The basic texture is imitative, yet each section of the text is given a slightly different treatment. For the opening words of the angelic salutation there is literal imitation at the octave or unison, working (no doubt with symbolic intent) from the highest voice to the lowest; each phrase overlaps its predecessor, but in such a way that all four voices are heard together only in the three bars before the first main cadence. For the first strophe of the rhyming votive antiphon that follows, a duet of upper voices is imitated by a trio of lower ones, leading more quickly this time into a longer full section whose denser texture is enlivened by sequence and close internal imitation; for the second strophe, duets of lower and upper voices, now imitating one another at the 5th, converge briefly to form a four-part texture, which then tapers away to the unrelieved duet of the third strophe. This temporary austerity enhances the effect of the crucial fourth strophe, ‘Ave vera virginitas’, whose four-part texture is given new rhythmic life by a change of metre; the close canon between superius and tenor may symbolize the Child within the Virgin’s womb. After a fifth strophe in which this almost purely harmonic texture is resolved into melodic imitation once more, the motet ends, after a whole bar’s pause, with a chordal invocation of stark simplicity. The musical form precisely mirrors that of the text, yet without any sense of constraint; articulation is achieved by subtle changes of procedure and texture, but with no loss of onward momentum in spite of the fact that every main cadence falls on C – though that is something Josquin might not have permitted himself in later years.

The frequent imitative duets that give this motet its characteristic transparency recur as a favourite device in Josquin’s music, early and late. That they do not occur at all in the first section of the four-part setting of the Easter sequence Victimae paschali laudes, also published in Motetti A, suggests that this may be one of his earliest surviving motets. As Glarean pointed out, it is an ingenious piece in that it combines the plainsong melody (mostly in the tenor, but occasionally migrating to the two other lower voices) with the superius of two well-known chansons, first Ockeghem’s D’ung aultre amer and then Hayne van Ghizeghem’s De tous biens playne; yet the texture is uncharacteristically dense and is articulated by scarcely a trace of imitation until the lengthy duet that begins the second part. Patches of stagnant rhythm and a hole in the texture near the end which leaves the top voice momentarily isolated confirm the impression that this motet belongs to Josquin’s prentice years. Similar details of dissonance treatment and rhythm in at least some of its movements suggest that the motet cycle Vultum tuum deprecabuntur (clearly a set of motetti missales, to judge by both text and structure) must also be reckoned among Josquin’s early works. Whether or not it was written in Milan (see §3 above), its style is very comparable to that of the cycles of motetti missales known to have been composed for that city. However, the first and last sections of the version printed by Petrucci in 1505 do not appear in the earlier manuscript source known to have been copied in Milan (I-Md 4 [2266]), and they may have been added to make a cycle of Marian motets more specifically appropriate for use in the mass; these sections relate, the first through quotation of text and chant, the last by its text and structure, to Introit and Agnus Dei respectively. Macey (1989) has plausibly argued that Ave Maria … benedicta tu, which Petrucci placed at the beginning of his Motetti C (1504), may also belong to this cycle, though it appears in none of the surviving Milanese sources. A second Passiontide motet cycle, however, seems more advanced in style than O Domine Jesu Christe, mentioned above. Qui velatus facie fuisti (on a rhymed Office attributed to St Bonaventure) has a swifter harmonic movement and a more varied texture; only one section, ‘Honor et benedictio’, is purely homophonic, and in this it presents an analogy (see §12 below) with the Elevation motet Tu solus qui facis mirabilia – indeed, it reappears as an Elevation motet within the separately printed Sanctus de Passione. The association of chordal writing of this kind with moments of particular solemnity and devotion remains a feature of Josquin’s style even in works that belong indisputably to his last years (cf the ‘Et incarnatus est’ of the Missa ‘Pange lingua’ and the words ‘Et verbum caro factum est’ in the motet In principio).

Earlier than any of these at first sight are two motets that both begin in the old-fashioned perfect or triple time and with long melismatic duets of a kind that could almost have been written by Du Fay. Alma Redemptoris mater/Ave regina celorum combines paraphrases of both plainsong antiphons, Ave regina in the two equal middle voices, Alma Redemptoris in the outer ones; there is fairly consistent imitation between the pairs of voices based on the same material, but a rather heavy reliance on scalic note-spinning. Formally very similar, but musically more accomplished, is the five-part ‘signed’ motet Illibata Dei virgo nutrix, whose text presents Josquin’s name as an acrostic. Although the style and texture of its prima pars, in particular, seem to look back to that of Johannes Regis, it has been plausibly suggested that this may relate to a vogue for such works in the papal chapel even as late as the time (1489 onwards) when Josquin was a member (see Sherr, 1988). Whether early or relatively late, it shows remarkable mastery of a style that would at first sight seem rather old-fashioned for him. The structure is articulated, not only texturally, by the contrast between duets and full sections, whose alternation is gradually telescoped, but also by the presence of a transposing three-note pes or ostinato cantus firmus, sung in the tenor to a solmization of the word ‘Maria’. Jejune as this phrase is in itself (it appears alternately as D–A–D and G–D–G), Josquin’s use of it looks ahead to preoccupations and procedures that recur in later large-scale works: the gradual speeding-up of the statements, for instance, which can be seen as a last vestige of the old isorhythmic tradition but is here used to achieve a climactic integration, not only musical but also textual, with the other voices (cf Ave nobilissima creatura and O virgo prudentissima, both among Josquin’s maturest masterpieces); the clearly articulated solo and full sections; the concern for metrical variety; and not least the readiness to use straightforward musical repetition (here of a whole 12-bar clause) to build up the intensity of the final invocation to the Virgin. Though the range and abruptness of its stylistic contrasts make it probable that Illibata is a relatively early work, it already shows a mastery of at least one of the features in which Josquin is pre-eminent among his contemporaries: a control of large-scale musical architecture.

As a five-part work on a cantus firmus, however, Illibata stands slightly to one side of the main line of development leading to the homogeneous imitative texture displayed in Ave Maria … virgo serena. More relevant stages are marked by Virgo prudentissima, Missus est Gabriel angelus and the cycle of antiphons for the Circumcision, O admirabile commercium, which may betray a lack of complete maturity in its exclusive reliance on imitative texture. Gaude virgo, mater Christi, on the other hand, with its climactic move into near-homophony and its relatively close matching of words and notes, closely resembles Ave Maria … virgo serena.

Perhaps even more impressive are three motets (all published in Motetti C, 1504) that show Josquin’s ability to set a long text in prose without recourse either to a cantus-firmus scaffolding or to more than a bare minimum of plainsong reference; here the music derives its shape and its self-renewing impetus only from the free flow of original musical ideas. Liber generationis and Factum est autem may well be companion-pieces. They are settings of the genealogies of Christ taken from St Matthew’s and St Luke’s gospels and sung, before the Tridentine reforms, at Matins of Christmas and Epiphany respectively. In each, Josquin’s only musical datum was a repetitive reciting-tone, and the variety with which he contrived to invest a singularly uninspiring text is astonishing. It seems likely that these two motets were composed for a chapel north of the Alps, even though the Matthew setting was eventually copied into a papal choirbook; the Luke setting makes use of a chant that is known to have been used at the royal abbey of St Martin at Tours, and rarely elsewhere. The inescapable element of tour de force in these two huge pieces, as well as their reliance on melodic means of structural control, points to a relatively early date.

Equally striking but more difficult to date (because more untypical and perhaps even inauthentic) are two pieces that must surely have been composed as funeral commemorations of some kind. In the setting of David’s lament for Saul and Jonathan, Planxit autem David, the predominantly homophonic texture of the Passiontide motets is combined and varied with freely imitative passages, out of which the Holy Week lamentation tone emerges in long notes like a ritual keening. Josquin’s authorship has been challenged (Finscher, 2000) on the grounds of its untypicality, but since it is at least as untypical of the other composer, Ninot le Petit, to whom it is ascribed, it may perhaps be allowed to stand as another experimental venture by the younger Josquin. Shorter, but even more expressive, is another lament of David, Absalon, fili mi, which may commemorate the death of Pope Alexander VI’s son in 1497 or of the Emperor Maximilian I’s in 1506. Freely composed, it achieves its effect through a typically flexible combination of textures; set at an unusually low pitch (in the original notation the bass descends at the end to B♭′) and in an unusually flat transposition, the concluding sequence moves the music still further flatwards – a passage that may have been the starting-point for more far-reaching tonal experiments by Willaert and the later 16th-century exponents of musica reservata. Once again, however, the work’s authenticity has been questioned, and this time, it must be admitted, with more plausibility: the only ascription to Josquin dates from 20 years after his death, and the music’s style, though exceptional by any standard, has perhaps more to do with that of La Rue (the proposed author) than Josquin’s.

(ii) The later works.

The motets that belong, so far as external and internal evidence suggests, to the last 20 years of Josquin’s life exist on a high plateau of mastery where technical means are subordinated to formal and expressive ends; so far as any continuing development can be detected, it is in the direction of still further motivic density and melodic succinctness (though extended melismas reappear at times), together with formal clarity. They fall into two main groups: settings of biblical texts, mostly from the Psalms and freely composed in four parts, and large-scale five- or six-part works based on cantus firmi, in which Josquin seems to have discovered a renewed interest in his later years.

Whereas most of these cantus firmi are drawn from the repertory of plainsong, in which Josquin’s imagination was clearly steeped, Stabat mater is based on the tenor of Binchois’ symbolically appropriate chanson Comme femme desconfortée, sung or played straight through in doubled note-values (allowing for the original’s undiminished perfect mensuration). In contrast to this apparently archaic procedure, the remaining voices are in Josquin’s most modern manner, their rhythms and phrasing declamatory, with the minim as the basic note value. This piece could only be by Josquin, but Lowinsky (MRM, iii, 1968, p.223) was surely right to deny the authenticity of the only other motet attributed to him (and strongly) in which the cantus firmus has similar characteristics, a five-part setting of Missus est Gabriel; here the tenor is borrowed from Busnoys’ A une dame j’ay faict veu, but the remaining voices are quite uncharacteristic of Josquin in their lack of imitative integration. Another exceptional cantus firmus is that of Miserere mei, Deus, composed, as has been mentioned above (in §§6 and 10), for Ercole d’Este. Here the two-pitch phrase to which the opening words are sung is shifted step by step – first downwards through an octave, then, in the second part of the motet, up again, and finally down a 5th to rest on A. Between its appearances, which usually coincide with a passage of full five-part texture, various smaller groups propound the verses of the long penitential psalm text; into these the phrase ‘Miserere mei Deus’ strikes like the refrain of a litany (or – as Macey, 1983, showed – like the reiteration in a meditation of Savonarola’s), though varied in both pitch and interval, since the modal structure ensures that it covers sometimes a tone, sometimes a semitone.

Two further motets, of very different character, provide something of a puzzle. One is Huc me sydereo, a setting of elegiacs by the humanist Maffeo Veggio in which Christ speaks from the cross of the divine love that brought him there and the love he demands from mankind in return; the other is Ave nobilissima creatura, a vastly expanded version of the angelic salutation to the Virgin. Their cantus firmi are identical (apart from a single repeated note) in both pitch and rhythm, though they bear different texts, respectively ‘Plangent eum quasi unigenitum’ and ‘Benedicta tu in mulieribus’ (cf Elders, 1971). Both undergo quasi-isorhythmic diminution in the secundae partes, though the proportional speeding-up is more gradual in the latter (6: 4: 2) than in the former (6: 2: 1), no doubt in order to accommodate a longer text and to engineer the climactic coincidence of the tenor’s antiphon text with that of the motet at ‘Benedicta tu in mulieribus’. One might imagine, from the virtual identity of the two cantus firmi, that Josquin had here deliberately composed a contrasting pair of motets if the sixth voice missing in two important sources of Huc were not an obvious addition to the original texture, while Ave nobilissima was clearly conceived from the start in six parts. The explanation may be that Huc was composed first, for five voices, and that Josquin, later wishing to provide a companion-piece (perhaps for some dramatic performance representing both the Annunciation and the Cruxifixion), devised the text of Ave nobilissima (the words ‘Ave Maria gratia plena, Dominus tecum’ are placed precisely so that the tenor’s entry with ‘benedicta tu in mulieribus’ will complete them) and also added a sixth voice to the earlier Huc me sydereo to increase the symmetry between the two motets. Placidly beautiful as the Annunciation motet is, that for the Crucifixion makes the deeper impression. The sophistication of the text is fully matched in Josquin’s setting, which abounds in affective devices and word-painting: the melodic descent from the trebles’ highest note to the basses’ lowest to illustrate Christ’s descent from ‘Olympus’; the plangent fall of a 3rd to emphasize such words as ‘crudeli’ and ‘durae’ (a hallmark of Josquin’s later style); the repeated phrase at ‘verbera tanta pati’ (singled out for its pathos by the publisher Hans Ott in the preface to the second part of his Novum et insigne opus musicum, 1538); and a constant attention to clear and effective declamation.

In both these motets, as we have seen, the cantus firmus is gradually speeded up to converge with the tempo of the surrounding voices, a feature already encountered in Illibata. The beautiful five-part Salve regina takes up another feature of that seminal work, the controlled oscillation of a motif (this time the distinctive four-note phrase that begins the relevant plainsong) between pitches a 4th apart. More commonly, though, Josquin achieved a similar effect by a canonic treatment of the cantus firmus, sometimes combined with a progressive reduction in note values. This may be rather freely handled, as in Virgo salutiferi, a work very probably written at Ferrara, since its text is by a Ferrarese court poet, Ercole Strozzi (see §6 above). Here the superius and tenor at first present only the beginning of the angelic salutation ‘Ave Maria gratia plena, Dominus tecum’ with repetitions, in canon at the octave; in the second section the reduction of note values is nearly proportional, but the repetitions are removed; in the course of the last the cantus firmus is still further compressed and the salutation completed. In Benedicta es, caelorum regina the canon is once more at the octave, but free in its time interval and in other details. More usually, though, the canon is at the 5th, as in Inviolata, integra et casta, and in the transparently beautiful setting of Poliziano’s Latin poem O virgo prudentissima.

In the freely composed Praeter rerum seriem, as in a number of probably inauthentic works clearly modelled on it, plainsong melodies well known in Josquin’s day are highlighted by the use of long note-values, but in some of the very last motets they are presented in canon but dissolved, as it were, into the general texture, so that their structural function is hardly apparent to the listener. This is true, for instance, of the linked Pater noster and Ave Maria (a work not so much austere as sombre, which Kellman’s research at Condé (1971) has shown to be Josquin’s own musical memorial) and of the magnificent five-part De profundis, where the mourning of the three estates of the realm is symbolized by a canon at the 4th and the octave below. In all these works the canons perform a multiple function, partly symbolic, partly structural. As the strictest form of imitation they produce, on a larger scale, the same kind of textural integration as does the imitation between contrapuntal motifs. At the 5th, moreover, they help to ensure a certain alternation of tonal centre and thus to provide a controlled variety in the settings of large-scale texts (and not only large-scale ones, as can be seen in the late five- and six-part chansons, discussed in §13 below).

Compared with a series of masterpieces such as these, it must be admitted that the other main category of apparently late works, the psalm settings, shows no such uniformity of excellence. The best of them – Memor esto verbi tui, for instance, or the setting for low voices of Domine, ne in furore tuo – are characterized by the same dense, and tense, motivic development, the same close attention to declamation and an even more vivid response to the meaning of the words. It may be noted that the two works mentioned both occur in sources printed in Josquin’s lifetime, the first and third books of Petrucci’s Motetti de la corona (1514, 1519) respectively. Many of the rest were first printed in Petreius’s psalm collections (Nuremberg, 1538, 1539 and 1542) some 20 years after Josquin’s death, and it is perhaps in order to view them with a certain scepticism – a scepticism incorporated more unflinchingly into the accompanying work-list than into its predecessor in the previous edition of this dictionary. Works like Usquequo Domine and Caeli enarrant present some of the more obvious features of the ‘Josquin style’, notably his paired duets, but in comparison with the works already discussed their motivic development seems short-breathed and mechanical and their four-part writing often rhythmically congested and clumsy (Caeli enarrant, furthermore, quotes passages from three of Josquin’s motets at the opening of each of its partes, encouraging the supposition that it was modelled on Josquin by an unknown composer; see Macey, 1986). Even a work such as Benedicite omnia opera, which has a far more consistent impetus than most and contains several distinctive features, such as the harmonic oscillation at ‘glacies et nives’, shows an untypical squareness of rhythm and an overinsistent density of imitation. The solecism of word-setting (at bar 131), which it is hard to imagine the mature Josquin permitting himself, is perhaps due to an easily corrected misprint.

For a superb example of Josquin’s late four-part style – as definitive in its way as the Ave Maria is for the early period – we need look no further than In principio erat verbum, which stands first in an incomplete set of partbooks (A-Wn Mus.15941) copied in the Netherlandish court workshop for Raimund Fugger (and containing two more, probably authentic, psalm settings, In exitu Israel and Qui habitat in adiutorio). The texture is as transparent as ever, with its preponderance of duets, and characteristically it makes continuous reference to the underlying recitation tone, but with a variety of texture and an impetus informing the austerity that enables it to cover 14 verses of St John’s gospel with no trace of monotony. Sparks (1971) has convincingly demonstrated the inauthenticity, on stylistic grounds, of a group of five- and six-part motets, three of which first appear in even later German publications; perhaps, with the touchstone of In principio to hand, it may be possible to subject the posthumously published psalms to a similar critical scrutiny. If so, it must surely be recognized that most are no more than a well-intentioned attempt to cater for the new Lutheran market with works supposedly by Luther’s favourite composer. But fortunately a large enough body of authentic motets will remain to prove that he was indeed ‘the master of the notes’ that Luther called him.

12. Masses.

  • Jeremy Noble

Josquin’s motets, with their exceptionally wide-ranging choice of texts, show him at his most varied, yet as a whole they can be regarded as an appendix to the liturgy rather than as an essential part of it. Much work remains to be done on the liturgical practice of Josquin’s day, but it seems likely that apart from the Mass itself polyphony was still generally confined (at least outside Germany) to the more peripheral parts of the services – hymns, Magnificat settings, antiphons for Vespers, for Compline or for votive Offices of the Virgin; the remainder of the prescribed texts would still be sung in plainsong, with or without the collaboration of the organ. But for some half a century the practice of singing the five main sections of the Ordinary of the Mass (Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus and Agnus Dei) as a musically related cycle had been growing in the major collegiate churches and princely chapels. This development corresponded roughly with the lifetime of Du Fay, in whose later masses the essential outlines of the form are fully developed and some of its characteristic procedures explored. It was confined at first to the greatest occasions of church and state, but it gained ground rapidly, and by the end of the century it had become a common, perhaps even daily, occurrence in churches that boasted a professional band of singers.

The demand was great, and so too was the challenge to the composer: on the liturgical level, that of worthily adorning the Christian Church’s central rite; musically, that of reconciling the claims of unity and diversity within a span of music lasting in all some half an hour or more. Thus stimulated, the best composers of Josquin’s generation consciously vied with one another in following up the implications of mass settings by such acknowledged masters as Du Fay and Ockeghem. If Josquin’s own contribution to the form seems as a whole less forward-looking in style than his motets, this could be because the bulk of the masses were composed a little earlier in his career but also, even more probably, because of the inherent nature of the task, which places as much emphasis on structure as on expression. Although fewer of his masses survive than those of such close contemporaries as Isaac, Obrecht and La Rue, the fact that Petrucci, in his series of mass publications, chose to start with Josquin and to devote three volumes to works by (or at least attributed to) him indicates that by the beginning of the the 16th century his supremacy in the field was widely acknowledged. This supremacy was based on his ability, at least in his mature masses, to combine an inexhaustible constructive power with a wealth of detailed invention that very rarely becomes completely abstract, even if it does not aim at the detailed expressiveness found in some of the motets.

(i) Individual mass sections.

As well as full-scale masses, Josquin, like other composers of the time, seems to have composed a number of isolated mass sections, perhaps for more modest occasions or establishments. Several are to be found in Petrucci’s Fragmenta missarum (1505). Some of these, however, are found with conflicting attributions in manuscript sources, and it may be noted that only two are ascribed to Josquin in the body of Petrucci’s text (superius volume); the remainder are given to him only in the index which precedes each partbook. Of those which may, on stylistic grounds, be reasonably accepted as Josquin’s, the Gloria de Beata Virgine (based on Gloria IX, including the tropes that were soon to be abolished by the Tridentine reforms) shows vigour and imagination in its range of rhythmic contrast and bold use of sequence, though the frequent use of incomplete triads points to an early date. The Credo ‘De tous biens’ is also independently attributed to Josquin in an early Sistine Chapel manuscript (I-Rvat C.S.41), and although its dissonance treatment and its excessively bald use of the tenor of Hayne’s chanson seem uncharacteristic of the mature Josquin, a case can be made for its representing the deliberate confrontation of a specific compositional challenge, namely the combination of a plainchant melody with a secular one (cf Victimae paschali/D’ung aultre amer). Of the remaining Credos attributed to Josquin in Petrucci’s Fragmenta missarum, and accepted in the modern complete editions of his works, the most questionable (on stylistic grounds) are Chascun me crie (De rouges nes) and La belle se siet; the former in particular seems to refer to a secular style fashionable in the 1490s, by which time Josquin was surely too sophisticated to have composed so clumsy a piece, and the latter is probably by Robert de Févin (to whom it is ascribed in Rvat C.S.41). The two Credos labelled ‘Vilayge’ (for the meaning of this term see Van den Borren, 1962), as well as the untitled Credo, though all quite different from one another, could certainly be early works by Josquin.

The Sanctus de Passione incorporates (as has been noted in §11(i)) the chordal ‘Honor et benedictio’ section that also forms part of the motet Qui velatus facie fuisti; no plainsong reference has yet been identified in the Sanctus itself, but further research might clarify liturgical connections between it and the motet. The Sanctus ‘D’ung aultre amer’ is also accompanied by a short homophonic motet, Tu lumen, tu splendor Patris, in this case placed after the second ‘Osanna’. The text of this motet is the second verse of the Christmas hymn Christe redemptor omnium, but since the setting makes no reference to the hymn melody it is likely that no close liturgical connection with Christmas is implied; Sanctus and Benedictus themselves each combine the superius of Ockeghem’s chanson with a version of the plainsong for ferial days in Advent and Lent, which suggests that this may be a setting for use in penitential seasons of the Church’s year. The combination of D’ung aultre amer (principally the chanson’s tenor this time) and the Lenten plainsong is also found in the Sanctus and Agnus Dei of Josquin’s Missa ‘D’ung aultre amer’; this work, in common with some by Gaffurius explicitly labelled ‘missae breves’, is built on an exceptionally small scale with rapid parlando declamation in the Gloria and Credo; it too may have been designed for ferial use in penitential seasons. Like the above-mentioned Sanctus settings, it contains an Elevation motet (the first half of Tu solus qui facis mirabilia), this time not merely attached to the Benedictus but replacing it altogether. The mass is compositionally more sophisticated and presumably later in date than the separate Sanctus settings, though because of its exceptional character it is particularly difficult to place in relation to Josquin’s other complete settings of the Ordinary. It should be noted that none of the individual mass-sections found in the Fragmenta was republished until modern times. They represent a type of composition for the Ordinary of the Mass that was already out of date by the time Petrucci printed them, and it is not surprising if they show stylistic traits that belong to Josquin’s earliest years.

(ii) Complete masses.

A consideration of the sources again gives very little help to an attempt to trace the development of Josquin’s complete mass settings in a roughly chronological order, and for the same reasons that have been stated in connection with the motets. The two complementary manuscript choirbooks now in Vienna (A-Wn Vind.11778 and 4809) may well, as Fallows (1999) suggests, contain all the masses that their scribe Pierre Alamire considered to be by Josquin, but their internal arrangement does not suggest any chronological ordering. Of the three Petrucci volumes which together contain all but one of Josquin’s surviving masses, the first (1502) is the most homogeneous in style; the five works in it could all have been composed within the preceding 15 years (roughly speaking, Josquin’s Roman period). The Liber secundus (1505) combines evidently recent works such as Ave maris stella and perhaps Hercules Dux Ferrarie with others (L’ami Baudichon and Une musque de Biscaye) which are clearly earlier than anything in the former volume. And when, after his removal to Fossombrone, Petrucci assembled yet a third collection of Josquin’s masses, he was once again forced to include works from widely different periods: the Missa de Beata Virgine is, on both internal and external evidence (Glarean, again), a late work, but the Missa di dadi, if it is authentic, could only be an early one, and the remainder fall stylistically at various points in between (or, in the case of the Missa ‘Mater Patris’, to one side).

A categorization by genre is no more helpful. As has been noted, Josquin came on the scene at a time when the field for stylistic experiment was wide open. The strict cantus-firmus mass, drawing its musical unity primarily from a tenor part borrowed either from the Gregorian repertory or from that of secular song, was already beginning to show its limitations, while of the two techniques that were to become standardized in the 16th century – paraphrase of a plainsong melody, and so-called ‘parody’ (the transformation of a pre-existing polyphonic composition) – neither had yet become customary, let alone a matter of routine. Elements of all three types are mingled in many of Josquin’s masses, and in various proportions. Sometimes Josquin restricted his borrowed material strictly to the tenor, in the old-fashioned manner (L’ami Baudichon, L’homme armé super voces musicales, Hercules Dux Ferrarie), sometimes the ostinato principle inherent in that technique was allowed to permeate the texture (Faisant regretz, Gaudeamus, La sol fa re mi); in other works he seems to be moving towards ‘parody’ of a complete composition (Fortuna desperata, Malheur me bat), while in two (Ad fugam, Sine nomine) and in the last three sections of De Beata Virgine he elevated strict canon to the governing principle for an entire work. (In De Beata Virgine, too, the technique of paraphrasing the appropriate plainsong, with which Josquin often played more or less consistently in his settings of the Credo, is employed throughout a mass.) But none of these groups can be assigned at all convincingly to a single period of Josquin’s career. In general his instinct, at least in his mature works, seems to be to extract as much variety as possible from his given musical material, sacred or secular, by any appropriate means.

The relative poverty or wealth of resources that Josquin brought to his musical datum (of whatever kind) is therefore one of the criteria that have to be used in assessing the dates of his masses. Others are the extent to which that datum permeates the whole texture (a factor related to, but not identical with, the extent of imitative writing); the closeness or otherwise of the relationship between text and music, on both declamatory and expressive levels; the extent of agreement with the formal divisions that had become customary by the time of Josquin’s death (separate sections for the ‘Qui tollis’ in the Gloria, the ‘Et incarnatus’, or ‘Crucifixus’, and ‘Et in Spiritum Sanctum’ in the Credo); and the extent to which he sought or achieved a satisfactory musical climax in the final section or sections of the Agnus Dei – though it should be borne in mind that these were particularly vulnerable to liturgically motivated pruning, to judge by the surviving sources.

(a) The early masses.

None of the foregoing criteria alone is sufficient to justify identification of a particular mass as early or late; they must be balanced against one another, and that is inevitably a subjective matter which can produce disagreement, as can be seen by comparing even the most recent comprehensive accounts, those of Osthoff (1962–5), Sparks (1963) and Fallows (1999), let alone that of Ambros (1887–1911). Recent scholars are, however, in entire agreement in placing L’ami Baudichon as one of the very earliest of Josquin’s surviving masses. It is a cantus-firmus mass, based on an exceedingly simple dance formula (very like the first two phrases of Three Blind Mice) with a ribald text; this is not quoted in any other voice than the tenor, except perhaps in inversion at the beginning of the ‘Crucifixus’. As Sparks pointed out, the use of a virtually unchanging head-motif, the simplicity of melody and rhythm, and the clarity of texture and harmony are strongly reminiscent of the later Du Fay and must be taken as ‘proof of a direct influence of the Burgundian style of the 1450s and 1460s’. It has been noted above (see §11(i) above) that among Josquin’s early motets simplicity and clarity seem to be found side by side with a certain clumsiness, and it is only in the light of this that the Missa ‘Une musque de Biscaye’ can be accepted as being by Josquin at all, although the only known manuscript sources ascribe it unambiguously to him, and Petrucci included it in his Liber secundus. The basic tune (another secular melody, with a strongly marked popular character and a tonally anomalous ending) appears, or at least is referred to, in all voices, particularly superius and tenor, but with a lack of clarity and consistency that is quite uncharacteristic. Any attempt to regard this as mature richness of invention is contradicted by crudities of part-writing and dissonance treatment that are more frequent here than in any of Josquin’s other masses. If this mass is by him, it must be early; and if it is early it reveals a quite different aspect of his character from L’ami Baudichon. In an attempt to reconcile the discrepancy of style between the two, it has been suggested that L’ami Baudichon’s claim to authenticity is weaker than that of Une musque. It is true that it is disputed, in the sense that a copy of its Credo in the Speciálník Codex (CZ-HKm II A 7) is attributed to Tinctoris; however, the work bears little resemblance to any of Tinctoris’s known masses. Une musque, on the other hand, though its earliest manuscript source dates from the 1490s, might easily have become misattributed to Josquin through a confusion with his canonic setting of the song. The absence of any independent music at all for its Agnus Dei (at least in the surviving sources, where it is directed to be sung to that of the Kyrie) in any case suggests a very early date, since Josquin soon learnt to invest the final section of the mass with a musically climactic character. This is apparent even in a work like the Missa di dadi, so called from the peculiarity that the proportions by which the tenor’s notation is to be augmented in each section are indicated by dice faces, at least in the only known source, Petrucci’s Liber tertius. The work is clearly early, to judge by its relative lack of imitation and general simplicity of style, but in the final Agnus the cantus-firmus (the tenor of Morton’s chanson N’aray-je jamais mieulx) is for the first time taken out of the tenor and stated, a 4th lower, in the bass; for the first time, moreover, it is allowed to penetrate the rest of the contrapuntal fabric, a feature for which Long (1989) has proposed an ingenious but plausible symbolic explanation.

Different features of the Missa di dadi are taken up and explored separately in two more masses which can hardly be very much later. In Faisant regretz, along with quotation of the Ordinary chants, the ostinato use of a single four-note catch-phrase (taken from the second half of a rondeau by Walter Frye) forms the guiding principle of the whole work. In the final Agnus Dei it is combined with the entire Superius voice of the rondeau’s first part to clinch whatever significance Josquin wished to convey by his quotation of this particular chanson: one begins to sense the power of an imagination that thrives on self-imposed limitations. In Fortuna desperata, on the other hand, Josquin made altogether freer use of the widely diffused Italian song that served as his model; all three of its voices are used separately as cantus firmi in different sections of the mass, but the relative looseness of musical connection that this engenders is to some extent compensated by brief quotations from the original three-part complex – perhaps the first instances of the parody principle in Josquin’s music. (In the first of the two sections of the Agnus Dei, the original superius is transposed down, augmented and inverted, to form the bass of Josquin’s counterpoint, and Lowinsky (1943) saw in this a symbolic representation of a catastrophic turn of Fortune’s wheel; by the same token the return of the model’s tenor, an octave lower but uninverted, as the bass of the final Agnus Dei may perhaps suggest a re-establishment of normality.) In Mater Patris Josquin (if he is indeed the composer) made a point of borrowing at least two voices at a time from the three-part motet by Brumel on which the mass is based; the Agnus Dei consists of the entire score of Brumel’s motet, with two new voices added to it – a technique for which there are analogues in Josquin’s secular music, but which it is surprising to find him using so literal-mindedly in the climactic section of a mass. The rather stiff alternation of contrapuntal two-part and chordal four-part texture elsewhere in the work can be seen, perhaps, as a deliberate exploitation of a feature of the motet, but the structure of the chords themselves – the upper voices often moving in parallel 6-4s with a free bass beneath – is found nowhere else in Josquin’s music; although the strictly canonic duos that form the ‘Pleni sunt coeli’, Benedictus and Agnus Dei point towards his later practice, they seem short of his usual rhythmic élan. Mater Patris is an exceptional work – exceptional enough to make Josquin’s authorship questionable, but also enough to make it very difficult to suggest anyone else as its composer. Elders, in his critical commentary for the NJE edition, argues strongly for its authenticity, and even suggests that it may have been designed as a memorial tribute to Brumel, who probably died in 1512 or 1513.

Canonic writing, which is a regular resource of Josquin’s mature counterpoint, in both melodic and structural contexts, has been met with only sporadically in the masses so far discussed; further examples are the Benedictus of the Missa di dadi (where strictness is abandoned three-quarters of the way through) and the ‘Osanna’ of Faisant regretz (the tenor and bass of a four-part texture). In two masses, however, Josquin used it as his main principle of construction in almost every section. Of these the earlier is certainly the Missa ad fugam, unified not only by its canonic procedures but by a head-motif of no fewer than ten bars, repeated literally at the beginning of every section (Osthoff suggested that the different versions of Sanctus and Agnus Dei in D-Ju 31, where the head-motif is considerably abbreviated, may represent Josquin’s own second thoughts about this). In this mass, superius and tenor are in canon throughout all sections except the Benedictus (all but the ‘Pleni’ and ‘Qui venit’ in the D-Ju version); the alto quite often joins in the imitative game, but the bass remains aloof. In the Missa sine nomine, on the other hand, not only are the canons themselves distributed through all voices in turn; all voices including the bass share in the imitative texture. This mass, indeed, comes close in style to those works of Josquin’s latest period, when technical mastery is simultaneously deployed and concealed and is subordinated to the claims of clarity and expression.

(b) The mature masses.

Before that final stage of his development, however, Josquin seems to have passed through a period of confident maturity in which every resource, both of compositional technique and of vocal virtuosity, is deployed with something like bravura. To this period belong some six or seven masterpieces which are difficult to set in any completely convincing chronological order precisely because they explore different paths and solve different problems with nearly equal accomplishment. Yet distinctions can be made. Of the two masses based on plainsong melodies, for instance, Gaudeamus is surely earlier than Ave maris stella. Gaudeamus combines cantus-firmus techniques and those of ostinato with vigour and inventiveness, working to a magnificent climax in the final Agnus, where the memorable opening phrase of the introit melody is put through a vertiginous series of transpositions. Yet the sheer musical inventiveness of this work at times conflicts with the effective presentation of the text; in Ave maris stella the musical phraseology is more carefully matched to that of the words. Imitation is frequent in both works, but the texture of Ave maris stella is even more fully permeated by motifs drawn from the cantus firmus. Its use of canon also seems more structural: where Gaudeamus contains only a single extended canon (the second Agnus), Ave maris stella uses canon in all three of the Agnus sections. Comparing the two masses as a whole, one senses that in Ave maris stella the exuberance of Gaudeamus has begun to be tamed, even spiritualized. (But Elders, 1985, has interpreted these differences in an opposite sense, arguing a later date for Gaudeamus.)

The Janus-faced quality of Josquin’s genius (and the difficulties this poses for historians) is well illustrated by the Missa ‘Malheur me bat’. Like Fortuna desperata it is based on a chanson (by Martini or more probably Malcort) and again makes very literal use of all three voice parts, separately and occasionally together, in an idiosyncratic linking of cantus firmus and incipient parody techniques. But various features indicate a later date for Malheur me bat: the calculated fantasy with which the Gloria’s cantus firmus is laid out (two complete statements, but fragmented and shuffled), the considerable amount of imitative and strictly canonic writing, and above all the concluding six-part Agnus. Here the original chanson’s superius and tenor are sumptuously reclothed in a new texture woven from two close canons, a procedure which at once links this work with the probably later L’homme armé sexti toni and Hercules Dux Ferrarie masses. The second of these also illustrates the dangers of attempting to date Josquin’s mature masses by a single criterion rather than by balancing several. It was composed as a tribute to Josquin’s patron Ercole d’Este, and its cantus firmus is derived from a solmization of the title (re, ut, re, ut, re, fa, mi, re = D, C, D, C, D, F, E, D), a phrase as unpromising musically as it was complimentary to the duke. This may be one reason why Josquin conspicuously confined it to the cantus-firmus voice (usually the tenor, occasionally the superius), weaving around it a texture that is imitative within itself but melodically quite unrelated. If homogeneity of all four voices were the only criterion of Josquin’s mature style one would have to place this mass among his earliest, but the declamation and imitation in the non-cantus firmus voices suggest that it belongs somewhere between Gaudeamus and Ave maris stella, and probably nearer the latter. The extensive use of canon also suggests a relatively late date: between alto and bass at the 5th in the ‘Pleni’; between superius, alto and bass in the second Agnus; and, in the last, a quasi-canonic antiphony between the upper three voices and the lower three of a texture specially expanded to six, which at once recalls such six-part motets as Ave nobilissima and Praeter rerum seriem. The systematic transposition of the cantus firmus to the 5th and octave above, and the proportionally controlled speed of its statements, also relate this mass to the later motets.

Josquin’s two masses on the famous L’homme armé tune are both mature works yet extraordinarily contrasted in style. Of the two, that described as super voces musicales is certainly the earlier, for all its ingenuity. The title indicates that the melody is presented starting in turn on every note of the natural hexachord – on C in the Kyrie, D in the Gloria and up to A in the last Agnus Dei; since the music is in the D mode throughout, this gives rise to some piquant shifts of tonal centre and changes in the interval structure of the melody. The element of compositional virtuosity is at once apparent in the Kyrie (fig.2), which presents the three sections of the cantus firmus successively in mensuration canon between the tenor and each of the other voices in turn, but it also enters into those sections of the work from which the cantus firmus is absent: the Benedictus is a sequence of three mensuration canons, each for two equal voices, while the second Agnus is a mensuration canon for three. As with Gaudeamus, the work dazzles as much by its intellectual energy as by its eloquence. It is possible that the various processes through which Josquin put his melody in the course of it may have suggested certain features which are exploited in his other L’homme armé mass. This is described as ‘sexti toni’ (in the 6th mode) because the melody appears here with F as its final instead of the more usual G; this in practice gives it the major character that it has in Morton’s chanson setting and in Ockeghem’s mass, as against the minor character favoured by most other composers (including Du Fay, Busnoys, Tinctoris and Brumel). Apart from this transposition, the other features that may have been borrowed from the mass super voces musicales is that of retrograde statement of the theme: instead of presenting the two versions, direct and retrograde, successively, as he did in the Gloria and Credo of super voces, in the final Agnus Dei of sexti toni Josquin presented both versions in long notes simultaneously and then bedecked this severely intellectual scaffolding with two more close canons at the unison – a tour de force of musical skill that has few equals in the music of the period. Yet the hallmark of L’homme armé sexti toni is not strictness but freedom and variety. The melody appears in various speeds and rhythms in all voices, now complete, now with a single section repeated in ostinato or canon. And yet for all this wealth of contrapuntal fantasy, the expressive relationship with the words is never forgotten. Josquin’s ability to spin much out of little is even more strikingly shown in La sol fa re mi, whose basic material is no more than a solmization pun. Virtually the whole mass is derived from this single five-note phrase; even allowing for shifts between hexachords in interpreting the solmization syllables, it is a breathtaking feat of sheer inventiveness. Technically it is both a return to, and an extension of, the style of Faisant regretz: once again ostinato is much in evidence (inevitably), but the subtlety with which the basic figure is varied and the ease with which it permeates the entire texture show an enormous advance on the earlier work.

Kyrie of Josquin’s ‘Missa “L’homme armé” super voces musicales’, in a MS copied at the papal chapel when he was a member, c1495 (I-Rvat C.S.197, ff.1v–2r)

(c) The last masses.

The half-dozen or more masses of Josquin’s high maturity already discussed would be enough to establish his reputation in this genre as the supreme exponent of both the main trends of his time: free fantasy and rational organization. But in his old age he continued to develop. The exuberance, as has already been suggested, falls away – or at least is subsumed into a style that aims rather at inward communication of the essence of the sacred texts than at their outward adornment and expression. Together with this it is perhaps possible to detect a certain turning back to earlier preoccupations, a desire to rework old problems with new insight. It has been shown above how in the Missa sine nomine Josquin reinterpreted the canon mass derived from Ockeghem (which he had once explored in the Missa ad fugam), investing it with a new sweetness and expressivity. In the Missa de Beata Virgine he looked even further back, jettisoning much of the elaborate panoply of motivic unity deployed in the virtuoso middle-period masses in favour of a unity based solely on the appropriate Ordinary chants for feasts of the Virgin. Thematic and even tonal unity are sacrificed to liturgical propriety; the fact that from the Credo onwards the four-part texture is expanded to five by means of canon suggests that the work was not even conceived as a complete musical unity. As in the early mass sections, paraphrased plainsong is the main constructional principle, but it is handled now with a serene mastery that fully explains why this work became (to judge by the number of sources in which it survives) the most popular of all Josquin’s masses during the 16th century.

Whether or not the Missa ‘Pange lingua’ was composed by 1514, it was evidently not available to Petrucci for his third collection of Josquin’s masses, published in that year. Though quite widely circulated in manuscripts, and indeed placed by Alamire at the head of one of his two collections of Josquin’s masses now in Vienna (A-Wn Vind.4809), it was not printed until 1539, in Ott’s Missae tredecim. But although one of the masses attributed to Josquin in this publication is by Pierre de La Rue and another (as Sparks, 1972, convincingly demonstrated) by Noel Bauldeweyn, there can be no doubt about the authenticity of Pange lingua. The plainsong hymn melody impregnates every voice and every section of the mass, but except for the final Agnus Dei, where it at last emerges into the superius, it is not given the old-fashioned conspicuousness of a cantus firmus, but rather digested into the counterpoint, which itself has a new austerity and economy. The vigour of the earlier masses can still be felt in the rhythms and the strong drive to cadences, perhaps more so than in the Missa de Beata Virgine, but essentially the two contrasting strains of Josquin’s music – fantasy and intellectual control – are so blended and balanced in these two works that one can see in them the beginnings of a new style: one which reconciles the conflicting aims of the great 15th-century composers in a new synthesis that was in essence to remain valid for the whole of the 16th century.

It is the Corpus Christi version of Fortunatus’s Easter hymn that Josquin had in mind in Pange lingua, as is shown both by the underlay of the final Agnus Dei in certain sources and by the mass’s title (e.g. in A-Wn Vind.4809 and D-Ju 21): ‘Missa de venerabili sacramento’. The two chief inspirations of Josquin’s sacred music, to judge by the frequency with which they recur and the nature of the musical response they elicited from him, are the parallel ones of the virgin birth (more particularly its annunciation) and its re-enactment in the sacrament of the Mass. In this, of course, his piety was entirely typical of his time, but he transcended it in the intensity with which he expressed it. ‘Le génie consiste … à concevoir son objet plus vivement et plus complètement que personne’, observed Vauvenargues. It seems appropriate that in these two late masses Josquin should have given such profound expression to the twin concepts at the heart of his religious belief.

13. Secular works.

  • Jeremy Noble

The difficulties that impede a clear picture of Josquin’s development as a composer of masses and motets are if possible increased when we turn to his secular music, since the sources are fewer, more scattered and less reliable. Petrucci included some 20 three- and four-part pieces in his earliest collections of secular music, but in several cases the attribution to Josquin is questionable on grounds of style or the evidence of other sources, and in a few Petrucci himself withdrew it in subsequent printings. His first and third books of frottolas, first published in 1504 and 1505 respectively, contain one piece each attributed to ‘Josquin d’Ascanio’; these two and the lively Scaramella seem to be Josquin’s only surviving settings of Italian texts. Individual as are these pieces and the two motet-like extracts from Virgil’s Aeneid (perhaps composed for an Italian court), they hardly alter the fact that Josquin’s main concern in secular composition was the chanson. Two double canons were included, anonymously, in Antico’s collection of that specialized genre of chanson (RISM 1520³), and a further, very valuable, group of six three-part pieces in the same publisher’s La couronne et fleur des chansons à troys (1536¹). A miscellaneous anthology published at Augsburg (15407) was the first to make available a few of the five- and six-part chansons, but it was not until the appearance in 1545 of Susato’s Septiesme livre (a memorial volume devoted entirely to Josquin, together with elegies on his death) that the bulk of these, some two dozen, were given the wider circulation of print. Susato’s volume was reprinted four years later by his Parisian competitor Attaingnant, with the omission of the memorial tributes by other hands and the addition of a few more pieces of dubious authenticity. This admittedly implies some degree of public response, but the fact remains that these two publications, together with a rather earlier set of manuscript partbooks written in Flanders (A-Wn Mus.18746), are almost the only sources to transmit what seems, in retrospect, to have been the greatest of Josquin’s achievements as a composer of chansons – a body of works that brings into this genre the pathos and constructive power, albeit on a smaller scale, that inform his later motets.

They provide a fairly clear idea of the last stage of Josquin’s career as a chanson composer. Its beginnings, however, can only be deduced from the works printed by Petrucci and scattered, often anonymously, through various manuscripts, mostly Italian. The chronology of these works is still very much a matter of conjecture, but allowing for the possibility of false attributions it does seem safe to say that Josquin began life as a chanson composer in the style developed during the 15th century at the French and Burgundian courts and carried to its final flowering by Busnoys and Ockeghem – a style in which directness of declamation and rhythmic repetition are deliberately suppressed in favour of a linear elegance matching the studied artificiality of the verse. This music further matches the poetry in its careful observance of the formes fixes, the system of smaller and larger repetitions which together go to make up the total shape of both poem and composition. In what are presumably Josquin’s earliest surviving chansons these formalities are still observed: in Cela sans plus, for instance, the cadence that brings the music to a temporary halt at bar 33 clearly suggests the rondeau form, even though the music may have been conceived for instrumental performance. What is already different from Ockeghem, however, is the emphasis on strict imitation (the two upper voices are in canon for the first 25 bars) and on rhythmic and melodic repetition; the fivefold rising sequence in the second half of the piece is as typical of the younger composer as it is untypical of the older. In La plus des plus, also printed in Petrucci’s Odhecaton, continued movement in the bass prevents the median cadence from functioning as in a rondeau, nor does the only known poem with this incipit fit the music at all comfortably. The music seems, in any case, to have been composed almost autonomously and gives the impression that Josquin was here primarily concerned with the working out of purely musical problems: for instance, it explores the possibilities of imitation at three pitches a 5th and a 9th (instead of the usual octave) apart – a technical problem also handled in Fortuna d’un gran tempo (for a discussion of which see Lowinsky, 1943).

The question arises as to how many of these early pieces were conceived to be sung at all and how many were from the start instrumental. Certainly Petrucci and most of the manuscript sources omit the words, so that the practice of purely instrumental performance must have been widespread. This is probably the origin of even more unambiguously instrumental pieces such as La Bernardina and Ile fantazies de Joskin (as it is called in its only source, I-Rc 2856), where there seems to be no reference to any text or borrowed vocal material at all. These pieces give the impression of being completely free-composed and as such represent the earliest steps towards the specifically instrumental contrapuntal style that was to be explored by Willaert and his contemporaries in the next generation.

But as a general rule Josquin preferred to base a composition, whether or not voices were intended to take part in its performance, on pre-existing material, and for this purpose he drew on the ‘popular’ music of his time – not necessarily folksong in the accepted sense, but music in the popular consciousness – a rich but labyrinthine repertory which partly survives in monophonic chansonniers (notably F-Pn fr.9346 and 12744) and was thoroughly explored in H.M. Brown: Music in the French Secular Theater, 1400–1550 (Cambridge, MA, 1963). Josquin’s practice in arranging such tunes naturally varies. One of the simplest examples is Bergerette savoyenne (or savoisienne); here an elaborated version of the pre-existing tune is given to the top voice, each line being anticipated in the lower, accompanying voices. In Je sey bien dire (from Canti C) a tune with a strongly marked dance character is put in the tenor, while a web of partly imitative counterpoint is spun above and below it. L’homme armé, a rather primitive four-part notational puzzle which seems, however, unlikely to be authentic, also has its borrowed melody in the tenor.

Even in these relatively straightforward pieces there is a certain piquancy in the contrast between the simplicity of the basic material and the artfulness with which it is treated, but this is further heightened in the arrangements in which Josquin makes use of his favourite device of canon. In some, the type of strict imitation between the upper voices that we have already met in three-part pieces is transferred to the upper pair of four, as in the setting of Une musque de Biscaye, in which an elaborated version of the tune is presented in close canon at the 4th between the two upper voices. Even more ingenious are the four-part pieces which consist of two simultaneous canons: En l’ombre d’ung buissonet au matinet, Baisez moy (spoilt in the possibly unauthentic six-part version by the addition of yet another canon) and Se congié prens [Recordans de my segnora] – if this latter, with its clumsy patch at bars 22–3, is really by Josquin. (The four-voice Salve regina, though it is on a larger scale, also belongs with these works.) The canons in such pieces are too close to perform much more than a textural function; in others, though, Josquin can perhaps be seen to be working his way towards the concept of canon as an architectural scaffolding, articulating the melodic and tonal structure of an entire piece, which is so marked a feature of his later motets and masses. In Adieu mes amours, for instance, the very well-known tune is presented in turn, quasi-canonically, by the two lower voices, while the upper ones proceed more freely. (In one source the top voice is given a rondeau cinquain to sing, but the music takes little account of the requirements of the forme fixe.) The four-part setting of Entree suis proceeds very similarly, but with more motivic integration of the free voices. The basic tune of this piece also appears with the German text In meinem Sinn and with cognate Flemish forms; no doubt this encouraged the dissemination of Josquin’s arrangement. The same applies to Comment peult haver joye, in which the tune (also associated with the German text Wohlauf, Gesell, von hinnen) is presented in strict canon with great clarity; this piece was printed by Glarean as a motet (O Jesu fili David) – just one instance of the way in which Josquin’s music was annexed for use in the German-speaking countries. The five-part arrangement of the bass-danse melody La Spagna would be another, but the qualities of lucid structure and varied texture associated with Josquin (not to mention basic competence in the handling of dissonance) are so conspicuously absent from it that it is impossible to accept it as authentic on the shaky testimony of Ott, who published it as a motet (Propter peccata) in 1537.

The earliest stage in Josquin’s development of the chanson for more than four voices is probably represented by his six-part setting of Se congié prens, another popular tune. Here the canonic voices clearly perform a structural function, with dux and comes ingeniously reversing roles during the central section, but the texture is by no means as integrated as in later works of this kind. This, in fact, is probably the earliest of the pieces included by Susato in his memorial volume of 1545, for they are on the whole conspicuous for the way in which the canonic voices (the great majority are constructed round a scaffolding of this kind) are blended into the surrounding texture. Se congié prens is not the only one to make use of a popular tune: Faulte d’argent (whose authenticity is questioned in Van Benthem, 1970), Petite camusette, Vous ne l’aurez pas and Tenez-moy en vos bras are further examples. Other chansons, most notably the famous setting of Jean Molinet’s elegy on the death of Ockeghem, Nymphes des bois/Requiem aeternam, make use of a plainsong cantus firmus. Occasionally Josquin reworked a voice part from some earlier composition: Ma bouche rit borrows the superius of Ockeghem’s chanson and gives it a new, rich, and surely instrumental setting – a more elaborate development of the treatment Josquin had already accorded to Hayne’s De tous biens playne in a piece published in the Odhecaton. Several of the most individual, however, seem to be completely free-composed, such as the profoundly pathetic Regretz sans fin. In these pieces, too, it is noteworthy that although the old forme-fixe structure with its rigidly sectional cadence points had been completely abandoned in favour of through-composition, Josquin almost always took care to mirror the rhyme structure of the poem with musical repetition, either strict or varied: this applies particularly to the opening lines or couplets, as in Incessament livré, Plusieurs regretz, Je me complains and Douleur me bat. The old relationship to the structure of the text has been replaced by a new one, more in keeping with the denser texture and slower movement of a new musical style.

In his later chansons for a smaller number of voices Josquin generally eschewed canon: Plus nulz regretz and Mille regretz, both for four, are freely composed, though with the same clear articulation of lines and melodic points of imitation, achieved by a carefully balanced hierarchy of cadences. Nor did Josquin confine himself to a mood of sombre pathos, though it certainly seems to have been the one most congenial to him in his later years. Of the three-part pieces transmitted by Antico, Si j’avoys Marion, Si j’ay perdu mon amy and the two different pieces beginning En l’ombre d’ung buissonet all look forward in their elegant handling of light-hearted popular material to the ‘Parisian’ chanson of Janequin and his contemporaries. Quant je vous voy applies the same refined technique to more lyrical ideas (perhaps Josquin’s own), while La belle se siet is an astonishingly original handling of an old ballad tune as the basis for what could almost be an instrumental fantasia if it were not for the patches of clearcut declamation; it is a unique and fascinating piece. In this collection Josquin rubs shoulders with a younger generation of French court composers, such as Févin. But there can be no doubt that the real influence of his later chanson style was felt farther north, above all by Willaert.

Works

  • Jeremy Noble and Jeffrey Dean

N.B.: Entries in italics are cross-references to works listed elsewhere in the work-list

Editions:

Werken van Josquin des Près, ed. A. Smijers and others (Amsterdam, 1921–69): Missen [Mis. deel: aflevering, no.] (separate mass sections are numbered as Fragmenta missarum [Fm no.]); Motetten [Mot. deel: aflevering, no.]; Wereldlijke werken [WW deel: aflevering, no.]; Supplement [Suppl.: 55, no.]

Josquin des Prez: Opera omnia, editio altera, ed. A. Smijers (Amsterdam, 1957) [OO] (2nd edn of Mis.i: 10–11, nos.1–2 only)

New Josquin Edition (Amsterdam, 1989–) [NJE 3.1 = volume.number within volume] (Works deemed spurious by the editors of the NJE are numbered and dealt with in the commentary, though they are not edited; their NJE nos. are given in square brackets. Works of doubtful authorship are edited in the NJE and marked with a single asterisk in the edition. The nos. of works in vols. not yet published are subject to change and are thus given in parentheses.)

JC The Josquin Companion, ed. R. Sherr (Oxford, 2000)

Misse Josquin (Venice, 1502; 2/1506 as Liber primus missarum Josquin, 3/1516, 5/1526)

Missarum Josquin liber secundus (Venice, 1505, 2/1515, 4/1526)

Missarum Josquin liber tertius (Fossombrone, 1514, 3/1526)

Josquini Pratensis … Moduli ex sacris literis delecti, 4–6vv, liber primus (Paris, 1555) [1555]

Le septiesme livre contenant 24 chansons, 5–6vv, composées par … Josquin des Pres (Antwerp, 154515)

Trente sixiesme livre contenant 30 chansons, 4–6vv … le tout de la composition de feu Josquin des Prez (Paris, 1549) [1549]

Further sources in Charles (1983)

full sources forthcoming in NJE

Masses

Title or Incipit

No. of parts

NJE

Edition

Remarks

Missa ad fugam

4

(12.1)

Mis.iii: 28, no.14

Sup and T in canon throughout; ?early

Missa ad fugam

4

alternative title for Missa sine nomine in 1516¹, E-Tc 9, I-CF LIX

Missa ‘Ave maris stella’

4

3.1

Mis.ii: 15, no.6

on plainchant hymn; canons in Ag I–III

Missa coronata

4

alternative title for Missa de Beata Virgine in German MSS

Missa de Beata Virgine

4–5

3.3

Mis.iii: 30–31, no.16

paraphrases appropriate Ordinary chants; canons in all 5-v sections (Cr onwards)

Missa de venerabili sacramento

4

superscription to Missa ‘Pange lingua’ in Netherlands MSS

Missa di dadi [‘N’aray je jamais mieulx’]

4

9.3

Mis.iii: 29, no.15

on T of Morton’s chanson; title refers to symbolic presentation of T proportions; ?early; see Bloxam in JC

Missa ‘D’ung aultre amer’

4

7.3

Mis.ii: 23, no.11

on T of Ockeghem’s chanson; incorporates 1p. of motet Tu solus as Bs-substitute; Ky, Gl, Cr questioned by Noble, defended in NJE

Missa ‘Faisant regretz’

4

8.1

Mis.iii: 27, no.13

ostinato on motif from Frye’s Tout a par moy, whose Sup is quoted complete in Ag III

Missa ‘Fortuna desperata’

4

8.2

Mis.i: 13, no.4

on all 3 vv of ?Busnoys’ chanson

Missa ‘Gaudeamus’

4

4.2

Mis.i: 12, no.3

on plainchant int

Missa ‘Hercules dux Ferrariae’

4

11.1

Mis.ii: 17, no.7

on solmization motto; canons in Pleni, Ag II (3 in 1)

Missa ‘L’ami Baudichon’

4

5.1

Mis.ii: 20, no.9

on monophonic chanson; ?early; Cr attrib. Tinctoris in CZ-HKm II A 7

Missa ‘La sol fa re mi’ [‘Lesse faire a mi’]

4

11.2

Mis.i: 11, no.2; OO

on ostinato solmization motto

Missa ‘L’homme armé’ sexti toni

4

(6.2)

Mis.i: 14, no.5

on monophonic chanson; canons in San, Osanna, 6-v Ag III (4 in 2)

Missa ‘L’homme armé’ super voces musicales

4

(6.3)

Mis.i: 10, no.1; OO

on monophonic chanson, transposed to successively higher degrees; mensuration canons in Ky, Bs, Ag II (3 in 1); ‘Et in Spiritum’ omitted by Josquin, supplied in late I-Rvat C.S.154

Missa ‘Malheur me bat’

4

9.1

Mis.ii: 19, no.8

on all 3 vv of ?Martini’s chanson; canons in Ag II, 6-v Ag III (4 in 2)

Missa ‘Mater Patris’

4

10.1

Mis.iii: 26, no.12

on Brumel’s motet, whose 3 vv are incorporated into 5-v Ag III; questioned by Bloxam in JC, defended in NJE

Missa ‘Pange lingua’

4

4.3

Mis.iv: 33, no.18

on plainchant hymn (Corpus Christi)

Missa ‘Quae est ista’

4

mistaken title for Missa ‘Malheur me bat’ in D-ROu Mus.saec.XVI-40, Listenius, Musica (1537)

Missa sine nomine

4

(12.2)

Mis.iii: 32, no.17

canon mass (in various pairs of vv)

Missa ‘Une musque de Biscaye’

4

5.2

Mis.ii: 22, no.10

on monophonic chanson; questioned by Benthem, Muziek & wetenschap (1991); early MS attribs. perhaps due to confusion with Josquin’s chanson setting

Mass sections

Title or Incipit

No. of parts

NJE

Edition

Remarks

Gloria de Beata Virgine

4

13.7

Mis.iv: 44, Fm no.1

on Gl IX; ?early

Gloria de Beata Virgine

4

Gl of Missa de Beata Virgine, widely transmitted separately

Credo ‘De tous biens playne’

4

13.2

Mis.iv: 44, Fm no.2

on T of Hayne’s chanson (c.f. treatment untypically simplistic); canon in ‘Et in spiritum’; beginning adapted in I-Rvat C.S.41

Credo de villaige [vilayge] (i)

4

13.5

Mis.iv: 44, Fm no.3

on Cr I

Credo de villaige [vilayge] (ii)

4

13.6

Mis.iv: 50, Fm no.4

on Cr I, but very different from Credo de villaige (i); also attrib. Brumel; see Hudson (1986)

Credo de villaige (iii)

4

13.4

Mis.iv: 50, Fm no.6

on Cr I; A and T in canon throughout, except ‘Et incarnatus’; ?early

Credo de villaige

5

Cr of Missa de Beata Virgine, widely transmitted separately

Sanctus de passione

4

13.9

Mis.iv: 50, Fm no.7

incorporates elevation motet Honor et benedictio (= conclusion of 3p. of Qui velatus facie)

Sanctus ‘D’ung aultre amer’

4

13.10

Mis.ii: 23, no.11 appx

on Ockeghem’s chanson; incorporates elevation motet Tu lumen, tu splendor Patris

Ritual works

Title or Incipit

No. of parts

NJE

Edition

Remarks

Magnificat tertii toni

4

20.1

Mot.v: 47, no.77

only in D-B 40021; see Sherr in JC

Magnificat quarti toni

4

20.3

Mot.v: 47, no.78

attrib. Josquin only in I-Rvat C.S.44, elsewhere to Agricola, Brumel, La Rue; even verses probably orig. and authentic, possibly also 1st verse; see Maas (1966)

Ave maris stella

see Monstra te esse matrem

Honor, decus, imperium

4

26.7

Suppl.: 55, no.2

hymn Nardi Maria pistici, stanza 2

Monstra te esse matrem

4

23.9

Suppl.: 55, no.1a

hymn Ave maris stella, stanza 4

Nardi Maria pistici

see Honor, decus, imperium

Domine, non secundum peccata nostra

4

16.10

Mot.i: 4, no.13

tract; see Sherr (1988)

In pace in idipsum

4

17.5

1 p. in Picker (1965), ed.

resp; awkward; ?early

Motets

Title or Incipit

No. of parts

NJE

Edition

Remarks

Absalon, fili mi

4

14.1

Suppl.: 55, no.5

form and texture atypical; attrib. to La Rue proposed by Benthem (1989), questioned by Davison (1996)

Absolve, quaesumus/Requiem aeternam

6

(26.1)

Mot.v: 49, no.82

c.f. plainchant int in canon between A2 and T2; only in E-Tc 21; authenticity questioned by Just (1965), defended by Milsom in JC

Adjuro vos, O filie Syon

4

contrafactum of Plus nulz regretz in Italian MSS

Alma Redemptoris mater

4

23.1

Mot.ii: 21, no.38

A and T in canon

Alma Redemptoris mater/Ave regina caelorum

4

23.2

Mot.i: 7, no.21

paraphrases both plainchant ants, each in 2 vv

Ave Maria … benedicta tu (i)

4

23.4

Mot.i: 2, no.2

also attrib. Brumel in I-Bc R142; connected with Vultum tuum by Macey (1989)

Ave Maria … benedicta tu

4

contrafactum of Ave Maria … virgo serena in D-GOl A98, Ngm 83795

Ave Maria … benedicta tu

6

2p. of Pater noster, transmitted separately

Ave Maria … virgo serena

4

23.6

Mot.i: 2, no.1

Ave Maria … virgo serena

6/7

only Sup, T2, B1 survive in Italian MSS; probably contrafactum of Adieu mes amours, q.v.

Ave mundi spes, Maria

4

23.10

Suppl.: 55, no.15; Godt (1976)

only source lacks Sup, supplied by Godt

Ave nobilissima creatura/Benedicta tu

6

23.11

Mot.ii: 18, no.34

main text unidentified; c.f. plainchant ant, virtually identical with that of Huc me sydereo

Ave verum corpus

3

21.2

Mot.i: 4, no.12

Benedicta es, caelorum regina

6

23.13

Mot.iii: 35, no.46

sequence

Christe, fili Dei

4

7p. of Vultum tuum, transmitted separately

Christum ducem, qui per crucem

4

Mot.i: 2, no.4

6p. of Qui velatus facie, transmitted separately and probably composed independently

Circumdederunt me

6

c.f. of Nimphes, nappés, as sole text in D-Mu 4o Art.401; also c.f. of several doubtful works

Clama ne cesses

3

canon of Ag III, Missa ‘L’homme armé’ super voces musicales, taken as title in some sources

Date [Da] siceram maerentibus

5

contrafactum of Je ne me puis tenir d’aimer in many German sources; attrib. Josquin only in H-Bn Bártfa 23

Delevi ut nubem iniquitates

5

contrafactum of Faulte d’argent in D-LEu Thomaskirche 49

Deo gratias

4

contrafactum of frottola In te Domine speravi in D-ERu 473/4

De profundis clamavi (i) [Ps cxxix + ‘Requiem’, ‘Pater noster’]

5

15.13

Mot.v: 51, no.90

Sup, A and B1 in canon

Diligam te Domine, fortitudo mea

2

contrafactum of Ag II, Missa ‘Ave maris stella’, in 15457

Domine, ne in furore tuo … quoniam [Ps xxxvii (selected verses)]

4

16.6

Mot.ii: 21, no.39

Dulces exuviae

4

28.11

WW ii: 54, no.51

Aeneid iv.651–4; attrib. only in 1559²; shares Sup with Mouton’s motet on the same text

Ecce Maria genuit

4

5p. of O admirabile commercium

Ecce tu pulchra es

4

14.6

Mot.ii: 16, no.30

Ego sum ipse qui deleo iniquitates

6

contrafactum of Tenez moy en vos bras in German MSS

Exaudi Domine vocem meam

2

contrafactum of Ag II, Missa ‘Pange lingua’, in 15456

Factum est autem

4

19.3

Mot.i: 6, no.16

Genealogy (Luke iii.21–iv.1)

Fama malum

4

28.15

WW ii: 54, no.50

Aeneid iv.174–7

Fletus date et lamentamini

5

contrafactum of Nymphes des bois in B-LVhuybens C, devised to commemorate Josquin himself

Gaude virgo, mater Christi

4

24.2

Mot.i: 7, no.23

Germinavit radix Jesse

4

4p. of O admirabile commercium

Haec dicit Dominus

6

contrafactum by C. Rupsch of Nimphes, nappés in 1537¹ and dependent sources

Homo quidam fecit cenam

5

19.4

Mot.i: 9, no.28

T1 and T2 in canon; ?early

Honor et benedictio

4

conclusion of 3p. of Qui velatus facie, incorporated as elevation motet into Sanctus de Passione

Huc me sydereo/Plangent eum

5/6

21.5

Mot.ii: 16, no.32

poem by Maffeo Veggio; c.f. plainchant ant, virtually identical with that of Ave nobilissima; added 6th v in most sources

Illibata Dei virgo nutrix/La mi la

5

24.3

Mot.i: 9, no.27

acrostic ‘signature’ in text; ostinato ‘La mi la’ [Ma-ri-a] motif in T

In amara crucis ara

4

4p. of Qui velatus facie, transmitted separately

In exitu Israel de Aegypto [Ps cxiii + doxology, ant Nos qui vivimus]

4

17.4

Mot.iii: 36, no.51

In illo tempore: Assumpsit Jesus

4

19.5

Mot.v: 48, no.79

Matthew xx.17–19; paraphrases gospel recitation tone; accepted by NJE, but lacks concentration and variety of In principio erat Verbum

Iniquos odio habui

4

17.6

Suppl.: 55, no.17

only T survives in I-Bc R142; probably contrafactum

In pace in idipsum

3

c.f. of Que vous ma dame; sole text in most sources

In principio erat Verbum

4

19.8

Mot.iii: 38, no.56

John i.1–14; paraphrases gospel recitation tone

In te Domine speravi, non confundar

4

contrafactum of frottola In te Domine speravi; ed. H. Albrecht, Georg Rhau: Symphoniae jucundae (Kassel and Concordia, MO, 1959)

Intemerata virgo

4

3p. of Vultum tuum, transmitted separately

Inviolata est Maria, Jesu Christi mater

5

contrafactum of Inviolata, integra et casta es in D-ROu Mus.saec.XVI-71/2

Inviolata, integra et casta es

5

24.4

Mot.ii: 25, no.42; MRM, iv (1968)

T1 and T2 in canon

Liber generationis Jesu Christi

4

19.13

Mot.i: 6, no.15

Genealogy (Matthew i.1–16)

Memor esto verbi tui [Ps cxviii.49–64 + short doxology, return]

4

17.14

Mot.ii: 16, no.31

Mente tota tibi supplicamus

4

5p. of Vultum tuum, transmitted separately

Miserator et misericors Dominus

6

contrafactum of Se congié prens in German MSS

Miserere mei, Deus, qui dixisti

2

contrafactum of 1p. of 3-v Ave verum corpus in Wilfflingseder, Erotemata musicae practicae (1563)

Miserere mei, Deus [Ps l]

5

18.3

Mot.ii: 21, no.37; MRM, iv (1968)

T a transposing ostinato; 6th v by Bidon in CH-SGs 463

Misericordias Domini

4

18.4

Mot.ii: 25, no.43

cento of psalm verses; ?early; see Macey (1991)

Missus est Gabriel angelus

4

20.7

Mot.i: 6, no.17

Mittit ad Virginem

4

24.6

Mot.i: 2, no.3

sequence

Nunquid justificari potest homo

2

contrafactum of Pleni, Missa ‘Hercules dux Ferrarie’, in 15456

Nunquid oblivisci potest mulier

2

contrafactum of Ag II, Missa ‘Ave maris stella’, in 15456

O admirabile commercium

4

21.7

Mot.i: 2, nos. 5–9; MRM, iv (1968)

cycle of 5 Vespers ants (Circumcision), treated as separate works in some sources

O bone et dulcis Domine Jesu/Pater noster/Ave Maria

4

21.8

Mot.i: 6, no.18

c.f. plainchant prayer and ant; anon. in most sources, attrib. Josquin only in I-Fn II.I.232; ?early

O bone et dulcissime Jesu

4

21.9

Mot.v: 52, no.96

O Domine Jesu Christe

4

22.1

Mot.i: 4, no.10

motet-cycle (5 partes); ‘Prayers of St Gregory’

[O] intemerata virgo

4

3p. of Vultum tuum, transmitted separately

O Jesu fili David

4

contrafactum of Comment peult haver joye in Glarean (1547¹)

O Maria, nullam tam gravem

4

4p. of Vultum tuum, transmitted separately

O Maria, virgo sanctissima

6

contrafactum of Se congié prens in I-Bc R142

O mater Dei et hominis

4

contrafactum of Tu solus qui facis mirabilia in 1508³

O Pater omnipotens

5

contrafactum of N’esse pas ung grant desplaisir in 15687

Ora pro nobis virgo sine termino

4

6p. of Vultum tuum, transmitted separately

Otze náss, genz w nebi

6

Cz. trans. of Pater noster in CZ-HKm II A 22

O virgo genitrix, partu felicissima

5

contrafactum of Plusieurs regretz in 1559¹

O virgo prudentissima/Beata mater

6

24.9

Mot.iii: 35, no.45

poem by Poliziano; plainchant ant in canon between T and A

O virgo virginum

6

24.10

Mot.v: 49, no.83

on plainchant ant

Pater noster (2p. Ave Maria)

6

20.9

Mot.iii: 36, no.50

T and A in canon

Pauper sum ego

3

c.f. of Ce povre mendiant; sole text in GB-Lbl Add.35087

Per illud ave prolatum

2

2p. of Benedicta es, transmitted separately

Petite et accipietis

6

contrafactum of Petite camusette in German MSS

Planxit autem David

4

14.9

Mot.i: 6, no.20

2 Kings i.17–27; attrib. Ninot in I-Fn II.I.232; questioned by Finscher in JC

Praeter rerum seriem

6

24.11

Mot.ii: 18, no.33

on cantio in seq form (cf F. de Salinas, De musica, 1577, p.287)

Quando natus es

4

2p. of O admirabile commercium

Quid tam sollicitis vitam consumimus

2

contrafactum of Pleni, Missa ‘Malheur me bat’, in 154916

Qui habitat in adiutorio Altissimi [Ps xc + return]

4

18.7

Mot.iii: 37, no.52

see Macey (1993)

Quis separabit nos a caritate

2

contrafactum of Pleni, Missa ‘Pange lingua’, in 15456

Qui velatus facie fuisti

4

22.3

Mot.i: 4, no.11; 6p. Mot.i: 2, no.4

motet-cycle (6 partes); poem attrib. St Bonaventure

Requiem aeternam

5

c.f. of Nymphes des bois, misidentified as motet by Petrucci (1508¹) and hence Smijers (Mot.i: 9, no.29)

Rubum quem viderat Moyses incombustum

4

3p. of O admirabile commercium

Salve regina

4

25.4

Mot.v: 52, no.95

canon 4 in 2

Salve regina

5

25.5

Mot.iii: 35, no.48

ostinato ‘Salve’ motif in Quintus

Salve rex caeli et terrae

5

Protestant contrafactum of Salve regina in CZ-HKm II A 29

Sana me, Domine

5

contrafactum of Plusieurs regretz in D-LEu Thomaskirche 49

Sancta Dei genitrix

4

2p. of Vultum tuum; beginning of motet in D-Usch 237a–d

Stabat mater/Comme femme desconfortée

5

25.9

Mot.ii: 21, no.36

sequence; c.f. T of Binchois’ chanson

Tota pulchra

4

mistaken incipit of Ecce tu pulchra es in tablature 155235

Tu lumen, tu splendor Patris

4

elevation motet incorporated into Sanctus ‘D’ung aultre amer’

Tu solus qui facis mirabilia

4

22.5

Mot.i: 4, no.14

2p. quotes words and music of beginning of Sup of Ockeghem’s D’ung aultre amer

Ut Phoebi radiis

4

25.10

Mot.i: 7, no.22

T and B in canon on hexachord subject; possibly for Order of the Golden Fleece; see Callahan (1971), Prizer (1985)

Verbum incarnatum

4

contrafactum of Ave Maria … virgo serena in D-B 40021

Victimae paschali laudes/D’ung aultre amer

4

22.6

Mot.i: 9, no.26

Sup in 1p. is that of Ockeghem’s chanson, in 2p. that of Hayne’s De tous biens plaine; plainchant seq paraphrased in A, T, B

Videte omnes populi

6

contrafactum of Nimphes, nappés in I-Bc R142

Vidi speciosam

6

contrafactum of Tenez moy en vos bras in I-Bc R142

Virgo prudentissima

4

25.12

Mot.i: 9, no.25

attrib. Isaac in late sources owing to confusion with his setting

Virgo salutiferi/Ave Maria

5

25.13

Mot.ii: 18, no.35; MRM, iv (1968)

poem by Ercole Strozzi; c.f. in canon between T and Sup

Vultum tuum deprecabuntur

4

25.14

Mot.i: 7, no.24

motet-cycle (7 partes); see Macey (1989)

Secular works

Title or Incipit

No. of parts

NJE

Edition

Remarks

Ach Unfal, was zichstu mich?

4

contrafactum of Qui belles amours a in CH-Bu F.X.21

Adieu mes amours

4

28.3

WW ii: 53, no.35

2 lower vv based on monophonic chanson

Adieu mes amours

6/7

(30.1)

Suppl.: 55, no.16; Picker (1971)

presumptive orig. text of composition surviving, inc., only as Ave Maria … virgo serena; monophonic chanson in canon between B1 and T2, paraphrased in other surviving v; attrib. Josquin in I-Bc R142

A la mort/Monstra te esse matrem

3

27.1

c.f. stanza of hymn Ave maris stella

A l’eure que je vous p.x.

4

28.1

WW ii: 53, no.41

?instrumental; canon at 9th between Sup and B

Allegez moy

6

(30.2)

WW i: 5, no.14

also attrib. Barbe, Le Brung and (less probably) Willaert; defended by Benthem, TVNM, xxi/3 (1970)

A l’ombre d’ung buissonet, Au matinet

3

27.2

WW ii: 54, no.61

possibly based on monophonic chanson

Baisiéz moy

4

28.4

WW i: 5, no.20a

canon 4 in 2

Belle pour l’amour de vous

4

28.5

Picker (1965)

?early

Bergerette savoysienne

4

28.6

WW ii: 53, no.36

setting of monophonic chanson

Cela sans plus (i)

3

27.3

WW ii: 53, no.44

untexted (?instrumental) piece, unrelated to well-known chanson by Colinet de Lannoy

Ce povre mendiant/Pauper sum ego

3

27.5

WW ii: 53, no.46

T presents Latin tag as 6-note motto in descending transposition

Comment peult avoir joye

4

28.7

WW ii: 54, no.56

setting of monophonic chanson; Sup and T in canon

Cueur langoreulx

5

(29.2)

WW i: 3, no.1

Sup and Quintus in canon

Cueurs desolez … Ne cherchez plus/Plorans ploravi

5

(29.3)

WW i: 8, no.28

only in 1549; not included in 154515

De tous biens plaine

3

27.6

2 canonic vv beneath Sup of Hayne’s chanson

De tous biens plaine

4

28.9

WW ii: 53, no.49b

2 canonic vv added beneath Sup and T of Hayne’s chanson

Dictez moy bergere

4

28.10

H. Meconi (diss., Harvard U., 1986)

canon 4 in 2; attrib. Josquin only in D-HRD 9820 (textless); attrib. La Rue in I-Fc Basevi 2442

Douleur me bat

5

(29.4)

WW i: 5, no.18

T and Quintus in canon

Du mien amant

5

(29.5)

WW i: 5, no.23

T and Quintus in canon

El grillo

4

28.12

WW ii: 54, no.53

attrib. ‘Josquin Dascanio’ in only source, 15054; opus dubium in NJE, but accepted by Fallows, Josquin (2009)

En l’ombre d’ung buissonet, Au matinet

3

see A l’ombre d’ung buissonet

En l’ombre d’ung buissonet, Au matinet

4

28.13

WW ii: 54, no.59

canon 4 in 2; some contrapuntal crudities make attrib. doubtful, but accepted by Litterick in JC

En l’ombre d’ung buissonet, Tout au long

3

27.7

WW ii: 54, no.60

based on monophonic chanson

Entré je suis en grant pensee

4

28.14

WW ii: 54, no.57

based on monophonic chanson

Entré suis en grant pensee

3

27.8

WW ii: 54, no.58

possibly based on monophonic chanson; unique attrib. to Josquin in I-Fr 2794 is not improbable

Et trop penser

3

27.9

MRM, vii (1983)

attrib. ‘Bosfrin’ in I-Rc 2856; Josquin’s authorship supported by A.S. Wolff (diss., North Texas State U., 1970) and Staehelin (1973), but rejected on stylistic grounds by NJE; accepted by Fallows, Josquin (2009)

Faulte d’argent

5

(29.7)

WW i: 5, no.15

A and Quintus in canon; authenticity questioned by Benthem, TVNM, xxi/3 (1970), but supported by Milsom and Bernstein in JC

Fors seulement

4

App. 28.40

Picker, RMMMA xiv (1981)

anon. in D-AugsS 1421 and I-FlorBN Magl. 164-7; accepted by Staehelin (1973), Rifkin (unpublished paper) and Litterick (2000)

Fors seulement

6

(30.4)

only surviving v of work attrib. Josquin in I-Bc R142, presents Sup of Ockeghem’s chanson with some alteration; cf Ma bouche rit

Fortuna d’un gran tempo

3

27.12

Suppl.: 55, no.13

based on monophonic song; attrib. missing (?dropped) from later editions of Odhecaton

Fortune d’estrange plummaige

3

alternative text (inc.) for Ce povre mendiant in I-Fc Basevi 2439

Helas madame

3/4

27.13

Suppl.: 55, no.11; MRM, vii (1983)

formally anomalous, but unique attrib. to Josquin in I-Fn Magl.XIX.178 cautiously accepted by NJE; added A in Fn B.R.229, Fr 2356

Ile fantazies de Joskin

3

27.15

WW ii: 53, no.43

untexted work

Incessament livré suis a martire

5

(29.8)

WW i: 3, no.6

T and Quintus in canon

In meinem Sinn

4

contrafactum of Entree suis in 1535¹¹ and dependent sources

In te, Domine, speravi per trovar pietà

4

28.18

IMa, 1st ser., i (1954)

attrib. ‘Josquin Dascanio’ in several sources, probably following 15044; ‘Josquinus Pratensis’ only in CH-SGs 463; opus dubium in NJE, but accepted by Fallows, Josquin (2009)

Je me

3

27.17

text incomplete in only source, I-Fn Magl.XIX.178, conjecturally completed in NJE; accepted there with reservations

Je me complains

5

(29.10)

WW i: 3, no.11

Sup and Quintus in canon

Je ne me puis tenir d’aimer

5

(29.11)

WW i: 8, no.31

not included in 154515; intabulations attrib. to Gombert (154634, Respice in me; 1554³², Lauda Syon) and Claudin (155820, Date siceram); many German sources give contrafact text Date [Da] siceram; strongly defended by Blackburn (1976)

Je n’ose plus

3

27.19

text incomplete in only source, I-Fn Magl.XIX.178; accepted by NJE; ?early

Je ris et si ay larme a l’oeil

3/4

28.19

Suppl.: 55, no.12

attrib. Josquin only in I-Fc Basevi 2442; A probably added; technically clumsy (?early)

Je sey bien dire

4

28.20

WW ii: 53, no.38

treatment of monophonic chanson; text not preserved in only source, 1504³

La belle se siet

3

27.20

WW ii: 54, no.62

based on monophonic chanson

La Bernardina

3

27.21

WW ii: 53, no.42

untexted piece; cf Ghiselin, La Alfonsina

La plus des plus

3

27.22

WW ii: 53, no.45

text wanting in sources, conjecturally completed in NJE

Le villain (jaloux)

4

28.22

L. Jonas, ed.: Das Augsburger Liederbuch (Munich, 1983)

on same monophonic chanson as Mouton’s setting

Ma bouche rit

5/6

(29.14)

WW i: 5, no.19

although texted in the sources, clearly an inst. arr. of the Sup of Ockeghem’s chanson; added 6th v in 154515, 1549; doubted by Bernstein (1994)

Mille regretz

4

28.25

WW i: 8, no.24

attrib. Josquin only in 1549², and tablature 1538²²; attrib. ‘J. Lemaire’ (?poet) in 15335; anon. in many MSS and tablatures

Mon mary m’a diffamée

3

27.27

Benthem, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971

attrib. only in late but reliable 157815

Ne come peult

4

garbled incipit of Comment peult aver joye in I-Rvat C.G.XIII 27

N’esse pas [point] ung grant desplaisir

5

(29.17)

WW i: 3, no.8

T and Quintus in canon; first attrib. Josquin in unreliable 15407, but also in 154515; untypically repetitive

Nimphes, nappés/Circumdederunt me

6

(30.6)

WW i: 5, no.21

c.f. plainchant resp, presented in canon between Quintus and Sextus

Nymphes des bois/Requiem aeternam

5

(29.18)

WW i: 5, no.22; MRM, iv (1968)

lament on death of Ockeghem (d 1497); poem by J. Molinet; c.f. plainchant int

O Venus bant

3

27.29

Harmonices musice Odhecaton A, ed. H. Hewitt (Cambridge, MA, 1942)

also attrib. ‘Gaspar’ [van Weerbeke]; considered stylistically improbable by NJE

Parfons regretz

5

(29.19)

WW i: 3, no.3

B and Quintus in canon

Par vous je suis

4

alternative incipit of Entree suis in I-Fc Basevi 2439

Petite camusette

6

(30.7)

WW i: 5, no.17

T and A in canon

Plaine de deuil

5

(29.20)

WW i: 3, no.4

Quintus and Sup in canon

Plusieurs regretz

5

(29.21)

WW i: 3, no.7

T and Quintus in canon

Plus miltz [mille] regrets

4

garbled incipit of Plus nulz regretz in several German sources

Plus n’estes ma maistresse

4

28.27

WW i: 8, no.30

only in 1549; plausible only with revised underlay (? lower vv instrumental)

Plus nulz regretz

4

28.28

WW i: 8, no.29

composed for celebration in Jan 1508; poem by J. Lemaire de Belges

Pour souhaitter

6

(30.8)

WW i: 3, no.10

T and Sextus in canon

Quant je vous voye

3

27.32

WW ii: 54, no.65

Que vous ma dame/In pace in idipsum

3

27.33

WW ii: 53, no.47

c.f. elaborated version of Compline resp; accepted by NJE; Finscher (1964) argues for attrib. to Agricola in 1504³

Qui belles amours

4

28.29

on monophonic chanson

Recordans de my segnora

4

spurious title for Se congié prens in I-Rvat C.G.XIII 27

Regretz sans fin

6

(30.9)

WW i: 3, no.5

T and Sextus in canon

Revenu d’oultremonts, Japart

4

App. 28.41

lost; attested by FétisB, iv, 428

Scaramella va alla guerra

4

28.30

WW ii: 54, no.54

on same song as Compère’s Scaramella fa la galla and the anon. setting in Hör tablature (CH-Zz Z.XI.301, ed. in SMd, vii, 1970) and elsewhere

Se congié prens

4

28.31

WW ii: 53, no.39

canon 4 in 2; textless; entitled Recordans de my segnora in I-Rvat C.G.XIII 27, untitled in Fn Magl.XIX.178; ?early

Se congié prens

6

(30.11)

WW i: 3, no.12

Quintus and Sextus in canon

Si j’ay perdu mon amy

3

27.34

WW ii: 54, no.64

based on monophonic chanson

Si j’eusse [j’avoye] Marion

3

27.35

WW ii: 54, no.63

only in 1536¹; accepted with reservations by NJE

Tant vous aimme, bergeronette

4

28.33

only in I-Fc Basevi 2442

Tenez moy en vos bras

6

(30.12)

WW i: 5, no.13

fully texted in sources, but implausibly; T alone presents orig. monophonic melody

Une musque de Biscaye

4

28.35

WW ii: 53, no.37; MRM, vii (1983)

on monophonic chanson; Sup and A in canon

Vive le roy

4

28.36

WW ii: 53, no.40

instrumental piece based on solmization syllables; Sup, A and T in canon

Vous l’arez, s’il vous plaist

6

(30.13)

WW i: 5, no.16

T and Sextus in canon

Vous ne l’arez pas

6

(30.14)

WW i: 3, no.2

T and Sextus in canon

[textless]

4

28.38

only in D-HRD 9820, ff.[128r–129r]; unidentified

[textless]

4

28.39

only in D-ZwiR 78/2: Josquin

Doubtful and misattributed works

Masses

Title or Incipit

No. of parts

NJE

Edition

Remarks

Missa ‘Allez regretz’ (i)

4

[7.1]

Mis.iv: 43, no.20

on Hayne van Ghizeghem’s chanson; attrib. ‘Jo. de Pratis’ (?= Stokem) in D-Ju 21; rhythm and treatment of model untypical

Missa ‘Allez regretz’ (ii)

4

[7.2]

CMM, xv/1 (1958)

by Compère; attrib. Josquin in D-LEu Thomaskirche 51

Missa ‘Da pacem’

4

[3.2]

Mis.iv: 34, no.19

on plainchant ant; attrib. Josquin in 1539², E-Tc 19, etc.; attrib. Bauldeweyn in D-Mbs Mus.ms.7, and probably by him; see Sparks (1972)

Missa ‘Dirige’

4

[3.4]

CMM, xcvii/2 (1992)

by La Rue (Missa ‘Cum jocunditate’); attrib. Josquin in I-Ma E.46 inf.

Missa ferialis

4

[4.1]

RRMMA, xxxiv (1999)

by Martini; attrib. Josquin in 1505¹

Missa ‘L’homme armé’ [quarti toni]

4

(6.1)

CMM, xv/1 (1958)

by Compère; attrib. Josquin in D-LEu Thomaskirche 51, Mbs Mus.ms.3154

Missa ‘Missus est angelus’

4

[10.2]

J.G. Chapman (diss., New York U., 1964)

by Moulu; attrib. Josquin in D-ROu Mus.saec.XVI-40

Missa ‘Mon seul plaisir’ [‘Monseur plaisair/phaisair’]

?4

[9.2]

on Ninot’s chanson; only T and B survive in unique source, D-LEu Thomaskirche 51; counterpoint untypical

Missa pro defunctis

?4

lost; cited by Listenius, Musica (1537), as exhibiting perfect minor mode in several sections

Missa pro defunctis

6

[4.4]

CMM, lxxxi/1 (1979)

by Richafort; attrib. Josquin in NL-Lml 1440

Missa ‘Quem dicunt homines’

4

[10.3]

on Richafort’s motet; only in I-Ma E.46 inf.; not by Divitis as stated by Osthoff (1962–5) following Smijers; style generally untypical

Missa ‘Rosina’

?4

[9.4]

Ward (1983)

? on anon. lied; inc.: T complete (anon.) in CH-Bu F.IX.55, all 4 vv of Cr (attrib. Josquin) in Faber, Ad musicam practicam introductio (1550), etc.; rejected by Ward and NJE

Missa ‘Sub tuum praesidium’

4

[4.5]

CMM, xcvii/6 (1996)

by La Rue; attrib. Josquin in 1539²

Missa ‘Veni Sancte Spiritus’

5

[4.6]

Messzyklen der frühprotestischen Kirche in Leipzig, ed. L. Youens (Tutzing, 1984)

on plainchant sequence; attrib. Josquin in unreliable D-ROu Mus.saec.XVI-49; counterpoint and texture untypical

Mass sections

Title or Incipit

No. of parts

NJE

Edition

Remarks

Kyrie paschale

4

[13.14]

only in tablature PL-Wn 564

Gloria [de Beata Virgine]

?3

[13.8]

D.G. Loach (diss., U. of California, Berkeley, 1969)

on troped plainchant; inc.: Sup complete (attrib. Josquin) in CH-SGs 463, all 3 vv of trope ‘Primogenitus Mariae Virginis matris’ (anon., textless) in Glarean (1547¹); style anomalous

Credo ‘Chascun me crie’ [de rouges nes]

4

13.1

Mis.iv: 50, Fm no.5

on ?monophonic chanson; untypical repetition and use of model; accepted by NJE

Credo ‘La belle se siet’

4

13.3

Collected Works of Robert de Févin, ed. E. Clinkscale (Ottawa, 1993)

on monophonic chanson; attrib. Josquin in 1505¹; attrib. Robert de Févin in I-Rvat C.S.41 and probably by him; accepted with reservations by NJE

Et incarnatus est

2

[13.13]

only in 154916; ? bicinium from unidentified work

Crucifixus

2

[13.12]

only in 154916; ? bicinium from unidentified work

Agnus Dei

2

[13.11]

only in 154916; ? bicinium from unidentified work

Ritual works

Title or Incipit

No. of parts

NJE

Edition

Remarks

Magnificat tertii toni

4

20.2

Suppl.: 55, no.7

only in E-SE s.s.; inc.: wants verses 10–12; ‘Esurientes’ verse 8 stylistically distinct; see Sherr in JC; published as opus dubium in NJE

Magnificat

septimi toni

4

[20.5]

attrib. Josquin in D-LEu Thomaskirche 49, H-Bn Bártfa 22; untypically monotonous

Fecit potentiam [quarti toni]

2

20.4

Miguel de Fuenllana: Orphénica lyra (1554), ed. C. Jacobs (Oxford, 1978)

only in tablature 1554³²; bicinium from unidentified Magnificat; published as opus dubium in NJE

Pange lingua

4

[22.2]

EDM, 1st ser., xxi (1942)

hymn; attrib. Josquin in 1542¹² and German MSS; counterpoint untypical

Motets

Title or Incipit

No. of parts

NJE

Edition

Remarks

Alleluia: Laudate Dominum

4

15.1

only S, T & B survive in unreliable D-Bga XX.HA StUB Königsberg 7 (formerly B of Königsberg, Universitätsbibliothek, MS 1740; hereafter Bga Königsberg 7); surviving parts edited in NJE Critical Commentary

Alma Redemptoris mater/Ave regina caelorum/Inviolata, integra et casta/Regina caeli

6

lost; cited by Zarlino, Le istitutioni harmoniche (1558), as combining 4 plainchant melodies (3 ants, seq)

Ave caro Christi cara

4

[21.1]

Mot.v: 46, no.76

sources favour attrib. to Bauldeweyn; attrib. to Josquin in 15645 strongly defended by Sparks (1972)

Ave Christe immolate

4

Protestant adaptation of text of Ave caro Christi cara; ed. in Cw, xviii (2/1950)

Ave festiva ferculis

4

[23.3]

only in E-TZ 2; reference to L’homme armé tune in last section; style anomalous; see Kreitner (1992)

Ave Maria … benedicta tu (ii)

4

[23.5]

Maîtres anciens de la musique française, v (Paris, 1975); SCMot, vi (1989)

by Mouton; attrib. Josquin in I-Bc R142 (2nd index)

Ave Maria … virgo serena

8

[23.7]

arrangement of the Sup of Josquin’s 4-v motet; only in I-VEaf CCXVIII

Ave maris stella

4

23.8

Mot.v: 52, no.94

only in unreliable I-Bc Q20 (attrib. in A); hymn text unusually set as motet; texture discontinuous; accepted by NJE

Ave verum corpus

5

[21.3]

Mot.v: 48, no.80

attrib. Josquin in 1545², 15687; T1 and T2 in canon; modelled on Inviolata, but see Sparks (1971)

Ave verum corpus/O salutaris hostia/Ecce panis/Bone pastor

4

[21.4]

Ottaviano Petrucci Motetti… B, ed. W. Drake (Chicago, 2002)

attrib. Josquin in CH-BuF.X.22–4; probably by Gregoire (attrib. in 1503¹)

Ave virgo sanctissima

5

23.12

canon 5 in 1 at unison; only in unreliable 1540 7

Beati omnes qui timent Dominum [Ps cxxvii]

4

[15.2]

EDM, 1st ser., xiii (1939)

by Senfl (15204); attrib. Josquin in D-LEuThomaskirche 49

Beati omnes, qui timent Dominum [Ps cxxvii]

6

[15.3]

CMM, lx (1973)

by Champion (15426); attrib. Josquin in D-Kl 4o Mus.24

Beati, quorum remissae sunt iniquitates [Ps xxxi]

5

[15.4]

Mot.iv: 40, no.62

attrib. Josquin in 15386, 15534; rhythm and texture untypical (?later)

Benedicite omnia opera Domini Domino

4

[14.2]

Mot.iii: 37, no.53

Daniel iii.57–74; attrib. Josquin in 1537¹, 15536, 1559²; rhythm and word-setting untypical

Benedicta sit sancta Trinitas

4

(26.2)

only in D-Rtt FKM 76/II

Bonitatem fecisti [Ps cxviii.65–80 + doxology]

4

[15.5]

CMM, lviii/5 (1973)

by Carpentras; attrib. Josquin in CH-SGs 463, D-Kl 4o Mus.24, implicitly in Glarean (1547¹); possibly response to Memor esto

Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei [Ps xviii]

4

[15.7]

Mot.iii: 39, no.61

attrib. Josquin in 15386, 15534, D-Kl 4o Mus.24; modelled on works by Josquin; see Macey (1986)

Caelorum decus Maria

9

[24.1]

only in I-VEaf CCXVIII; monophonic chanson Comment peult avoir joye in canon between T2 and Dc2, paraphrased in other vv

Cantate Domino … cantate [Ps xcv + doxology]

5

[15.6]

Mot.v: 45, no.72

attrib. Josquin in 15399, 15535; texture and counterpoint untypical

Christus mortuus est/Circumdederunt

6

[19.1]

Mot.v: 51, no.87

attrib. Josquin in 1564³; canon in T and Sup modelled on Nimphes, nappés; rhythm and texture untypical; see Milsom (1982)

Christus resurgens ex mortuis

6

[25.7]

CMM, xxviii/2 (1973)

by Verdelot (Sancta Maria virgo virginum); attrib. Josquin in lost MSS Breslau, Stadtbibliothek, 2, 5

Clamavi: Ad Dominum cum tribularer [Ps cxix + doxology, return]

4

[15.8]

attrib. Josquin in unreliable D-Kl 4o Mus. 24, Rp B211–15; rhythm and structure untypical

Confitemini Domino/Per singulos dies

6

[15.9]

by Mouton; attrib. Josquin in I-Rv SI 35–40

Congratulamini mihi omnes

4

(26.3)

SCMot, vi (1989), xiv (1995)

probably by Le Brung (attrib. in A-Wn Mus.18825); attrib. Josquin in 1537¹ and dependent MSS; attrib Richafort in I-Bc Q19

Conserva me Domine [Ps xv]

4

[15.10]

EDM, cxix, ed. C. Meyer (Wiesbaden, 1999)

attrib. Josquin in 15386, 15534, D-LEu Thomaskirche 49; probably by Martin Wolff (indexes of 15386, 15534 or H. F[inck]); attrib. in Kl 4o Mus.24

De profundis (i) [Ps cxxix + doxology]

4

15.11

Mot.iii: 35, no.47

low clefs; probably by Champion (attrib. in A-Wn Mus.15941); attrib. Josquin in 15204, 1521³, 15399, Glarean (1547¹),CH-SGs 463, D-Kl 4o Mus.24

De profundis (ii) [Ps cxxix + doxology]

4

15.12

Mot.v: 52, no.91

high clefs; attrib. Josquin in 15399, D-Kl 4o Mus.24; counterpoint and texture untypical

De profundis (ii) [Ps cxxix]

5

[15.14]

EDM, 1st ser., xiii (1939)

by Senfl; attrib. Josquin in D-Dl 1/D/3 (in Dc I and II only, in other partbooks to Senfl)

Descendi in ortum meum

4

14.3

Suppl.: 55, no.6

attrib. Josquin in generally reliable A-Wn Mus.15941, but counterpoint untypical

Deus, in adiutorium meum intende [Ps lxix]

4

[16.1]

DTB, v, Jg.iii/2 (1903)

attrib. Josquin in unreliable D-Kl 4o Mus.24, Champion in A-Wn Mus.15941, Senfl (who has another setting) in 15386; probably by Champion

Deus, in nomine tuo [Ps liii + doxology]

4

[16.2]

Mot.ii: 25, no.44; CMM, lviii/5 (1973)

by Carpentras; attrib. Josquin in 15535

Deus pacis reduxit

4

(26.4)

Mot.iii: 38, no.57

attrib. Josquin in 1538³ (index), Stoltzer in D-Z LXXXI, 2; probably by Stoltzer

Dilectus Deo et hominibus

4

[14.4]

Collected Works of Antoine de Févin, iii, ed. E.H. Clinkscale (Ottawa, 1994)

attrib. Josquin in 15387, Févin in 15388, probably both owing to misreading of 1514¹, where it is anon.

Dixit Dominus domino meo [Ps cix]

4

[16.3]

only in D-ROu Mus.saec.XVI-71/1

Domine Dominus noster [Ps viii]

5

16.4

Mot.v: 51, no.89

attrib. Josquin in 15534, D-HAu Ed.1147; structure anomalous (progressively augmented 8-note motto in T)

Domine exaudi … auribus [Ps cxlii]

4

16.5

Mot.v: 52, no.92

attrib. Josquin in 15536, D-Kl 4o Mus.24; structure and word-setting untypical; harmonically stagnant

Domine ne in furore tuo … miserere (i) [Ps vi]

4

16.7

Mot.iii: 39, no.59

attrib. Josquin in 15386, 15534, I-Bc Q20; rhythm and word-setting untypical; ?later

Domine ne in furore tuo … miserere (ii) [Ps vi]

4

[16.8]

CMM, xxviii/2 (1973)

probably by Verdelot; attrib. Josquin in D-Kl4 o Mus.24; also attrib. Baston, Stoltzer

Domine ne projicias me

4

16.9

Mot.iv: 40, no.64

attrib. Josquin in 15386, 15536; post-Josquinian

Domine quid multiplicati sunt [Ps iii]

?4–5

lost; cited by Finck, Practica musica (1556), as adding another v at words ‘Dormivi et soporatus sum’

Domine quis habitabit [Ps xiv + doxology]

4

[16.11]

only in unreliable D-Kl 4o Mus.24; rhythm and structure untypical

Domini est terra [Ps xxiii + doxology]

4

[16.12]

G.K. Diehl (diss., U. of Pennsylvania, 1974)

probably by Vinders; attrib. Josquin in D-Kl 4o Mus.24; also attrib. ‘Benedictus’ [Appenzeller]

Dominus regnavit, decorem indutus est [Ps xcii + doxology]

4

17.1

Mot.iv: 41, no.65

attrib. Josquin in 15399, 15535, D-HRD 9820; rhythmically square; ?later

Dum complerentur dies Pentecostes

5

probable orig. incipit of Lectio Actuum apostolorum, as in I-Rvat C.S.42

Ecce Dominus veniet

5

[14.5]

SCMot, xi (1999)

attrib. Josquin in D-Z LXXIV, 1; ‘Gosse’ in 15395, ‘Joh. Gossen’ in lost MS Breslau, Stadtbibliothek, 11; Senfl in EIa s.s.; probably by Maistre Gosse

Ecce video caelos apertos

3

[19.2]

SCMot, i (1991)

by Nicolaus Craen; attrib. Josquin in tablature PL-Wn 564

Gloria, laus et honor

4

(26.5)

CMM, v/5 (1972)

attrib. Josquin in 1538³, Brumel in 1505²; probably by Brumel

Haec est vita aeterna

2

proportion example in Gumpelzhaimer, Compendium musicae (2/1595, etc.); 1st edn has part of Cr of Missa ‘Fortuna desperata’ at this point; replacement probably by Gumpelzhaimer

Illumina oculos meos

4

[17.2]

cento of psalm verses, also set by Isaac, De Silva, etc., identified as ‘Quinque versus S Bernardi’ in 15428 (Isaac setting); only in D-Kl 4o Mus.24; rhythm and structure untypical

In Domino confido [Ps x]

4

[17.3]

Mot.v: 45, no.73

attrib. Josquin in 15386; inept

In illo tempore: Maria Magdalena

4

(26.6)

Maîtres anciens de la musique française, v (Paris, 1975); MRM, viii (1987)

by Mouton; attrib. Josquin in I-VEcap DCCLX

In illo tempore: Stetit Jesus/Et ecce terrae motus

6

[19.6]

Mot.iii: 38, no.55

attrib. Josquin in 1538³, 1559¹, DK-Kk Gamle kong.saml.1872, 1873, I-Bc R142, lost MS Breslau, Stadtbibliothek, 5; rejected by Sparks (1971) and NJE

In nomine Jesu omne genu flectatur

6

[19.7]

PÄMw, vi (1877)

attrib. Josquin in 15584, 1564³, D-Mbs Mus.ms.1536, Mouton in I-Bc R142, but probably by neither; see Brown (1986)

In principio erat Verbum

2

2p. of Verbum caro factum est, transmitted separately in 154916, D-Mbs Mus.ms.260

Inter natos mulierum

5

[19.9]

EDM, 1st ser., xci–xcii (1987)

only in Kleber tablature (D-B 40026)

Inter natos mulierum

6

[19.10]

Mot.v: 49, no.84

attrib. Josquin in I-Bc R142, Rv SI 35–40; rejected by NJE and Sparks (1971)

Inviolata, integra et casta es/O Maria flos virginum

12

24.5

Suppl.: 55, no.10

attrib. Josquin in D-Kl 4o Mus.38; structure generally untypical; ?English style

Ite in mundum

?5

[19.11]

only B survives in unreliable D-Bga Königsberg 7; S and T survive on microfilm

Jubilate Deo, omnis terra: servite [Ps xcix]

4

[17.7]

Mot.iv: 41, no.66

attrib. Josquin in 15399, D-Dl 1/D/6; awkward; later

Judica me, Deus [Ps xlii]

4

[17.8]

SCMot, v (1992)

by A. Caen (attrib. in 1519¹, D-Kl 4o Mus.24); attrib. Josquin in 15386, 15534, Lr Mus.ant.pract.K.N.150

Laetare nova Syon

4

CMM, xlix/1 (1970)

by De Silva; attrib. Josquin in tablatures 154625–6

Lauda Jerusalem Dominum [Ps cxlvii.12–20]

4

[17.9]

MRM, iv (1968)

probably by Maistre Jhan (attrib. in I-Fl Acq. e doni 666); attrib. Josquin in D-Kl 4o Mus.24; also attrib. Heugel

Laudate Dominum, omnes gentes [Ps cxvi + return]

16

[17.10]

Die Kantorei der Spätgotik, ed. H.J. Moser (Berlin, 1928)

probably by Matthias Eckel (attrib. in D-Dl Grimma 49, DK-Kk Gamle kong.saml.1872); attrib. Josquin in D-LEu Thomaskirche 49; attrib. Wolff Heintz in Kl 4° Mus.24; canon 4 × 4 in 1

Laudate, pueri, Dominum [Ps cxii + doxology]

4

[17.11]

Mot.iv: 42, no.68

attrib. Josquin in 15399 (A only), 15535, D-Kl 4o Mus.24

Lectio Actuum apostolorum/Dum complerentur dies Pentecostes

5

[19.12]

Mot.ii: 24, no.41

c.f. plainchant ant; version with initial phrase attrib. Josquin in 1519¹; without it attrib. ‘Jo.Viardot’ in I-Rvat C.S.42; Josquin perhaps supplied initial phrase only

Levavi oculos meos in montes [Ps cxx + return]

4

[17.13]

Mot.iv: 42, no.70

only in 1539¹; modelled on Qui habitat; see Macey (1993)

Lugebat David Absalom

8

alternative text for Tulerunt Dominum meum; ed. J. Milsom (London, 1979)

Magnus es tu, Domine

4

21.6

Mot.i: 6, no.19

anon. in 1504¹; attrib. Josquin and renotated by Glarean (1547¹), etc.; attrib. Finck in 1538³, corrected to Hellinck in D-Ju copy, also unlikely

Mirabilia testimonia tua (i) [Ps cxviii.129–44]

4

[18.1]

Mot.iv: 42, no.69

attrib. Josquin in 15399, 15536, D-Z XIII, 3; rhythm and word-setting untypical

Mirabilia testimonia tua (ii) [Ps cxviii.129–44]

?4

[18.2]

only Sup survives in NL-Uhecht

Miseremini mei

4

[14.8]

MRM, viii (1987)

probably by Richafort (attrib. in 1519¹, A-Wn Mus.15941); attrib. Josquin in 1520²; also attrib. Mouton in Glarean (1547¹) and related MSS

Missus est angelus Gabriel/A une dame j’ay fait veu

5

[20.6]

Mot.ii: 24, no.40; MRM, iv (1968)

c.f. T of Busnoys’ chanson; rhythm and texture anomalous; attrib. Josquin in 1519³, D-Mu 4o Art.401, I-Rvat C.G.XII.4, C.S.19; attrib. Mouton in 15204, 1559¹, D-Mu 4o Art.401 (B partbook before correction), I-Fl Acq. e doni 666; possibly not by him either; see Lowinsky (1968), Bras (1986)

Nesciens mater

5

[24.7]

Mot.v: 45, no.71

attrib. in 1545³, 15465, CZ-HKm II A 29; modelled on Inviolata, but rejected by Sparks (1971)

Nunc dimittis

4

[20.8]

Mot.v: 52, no.93

attrib. Josquin in I-Bc Q20; modelled on Memor esto; see Macey (1993)

O admirabile commercium

5

(26.8)

CMM, ix/2 (1956)

by Regis; attrib. Josquin in NL-L 1439

Obsecro te, domina

5

24.8

Coelho (1998)

only in tablature 154725

O dulcis amica

6

(26.9)

canon 6 in 1, ‘cuivis toni’; only in unreliable 15407

O Pater omnipotens

5

contrafactum of N’esse pas ung grant desplaisir, attrib. Josquin in 15687

Paratum cor meum, Deus [Ps cvii]

4

[18.5]

Mot.iv: 41, no.67

attrib. Josquin in 15399, 1555; sprawling; post-Josquinian

Petre, tu es pastor ovium

?5

[20.10]

only B survives in unreliable D-Bga Königsberg 7; S and T survive on microfilm

Propter peccata quae peccastis

5

contrafactum of La Spagna in all sources except DK-Kk Gamle kong.saml.1872

Puer natus est nobis … Haec dies

4

(26.10)

Georg Rhau: Symphoniae jucundae, ed. H. Albrecht (Kassel and Concordia, MO, 1959)

attrib. Josquin in D-Dl Grimma 51; attrib. in 15388 to Mouton (Sup, A, T), Mahu (B); probably by Mahu (? Mouton attrib. due to confusion with his better-attested Puer natus est … Gloria)

Quaeramus cum pastoribus

4

(26.11)

MRM, viii (1987)

by Mouton; attrib. Josquin in tablatures 154625–6 [fix: superscript 25-6]

Quam dilecta tabernacula tua

5

[18.6]

by Certon; attrib. Josquin in A only of 15535 (other partbooks and all indexes attrib. Certon)

Quam pulchra es

4

[14.10]

SCMot, vi (1989)

by Moulu; attrib. Josquin in 1537¹, 1559²; also attrib. Mouton, Verdelot

Qui edunt me adhuc esurient

2

14.11

RRMR, xvi–xvii (1974)

?contrafactum of extract from unidentified work; attrib. Josquin in D-As 2o Cod.142a (textless)

Qui habitat in adiutorio Altissimi

24

18.8

EMN, vi (1971)

canon 4 × 6 in 1; attrib. Josquin in 15426, 15687, D-HB IV–V/2; melodically untypical; harmonically monotonous

Qui regis Israel, intende [Ps lxxix (selected verses) with other material]

5

[18.9]

Mot.iv: 40, no.63

attrib. Josquin in 15386, 15535, D-Dl 1/D/3; texture and structure anomalous

Recordare virgo mater

4

25.1

Suppl.: 55, no.8

only in 1520¹; texture and word-setting untypical

Regina caeli (i)

4

25.2

Suppl.: 55, no.3

attrib. Josquin in unreliable I-Bc Q20; sprawling; inconsistent use of chant melody

Regina caeli (ii)

4

[25.3]

SCMot, iii (1991)

attrib. Josquin in 1555; technically inept; see Noble (1994)

Regina caeli

6

MT, 112 (1971), 749

T1 and A2 in canon; only in I-Rvat C.S.46, attrib. Josquin in 17th-century inventory; post-Josquinian; see Noble, MT (1971), Noble (1994)

Responde mihi

4

14.12

Mot.v: 46, no.75

Job xiii.22–8; attrib. Josquin in unreliable 1545²; exclusively imitative

Responsum acceperat Simeon

6

[20.11]

Mot.v: 49, no.85

T and A in canon; attrib. Josquin in 1545³, 15465; style anomalous (later); see Sparks (1971)

Salva nos, Domine

6

(26.12)

CMM, iii/4 (1952); MRM, iv (1968)

by Mouton; attrib. Josquin in I-Bc R142; also attrib. Willaert; see Brown (1986)

Salve regina

6

[25.6]

CMM, xxviii/2 (1973)

probably by Verdelot (attrib. in I-Rv SI 35–40); attrib. Josquin in Bc R142 (2nd index); attrib. Jacquet ibid. (music), Rvat C.S.24

Salve sancta facies

4

[22.4]

Suppl.: 55, no.4

attrib. Josquin in unreliable I-Bc Q20; counterpoint, texture, structure untypical

Sancta mater, istud agas

4

[25.8]

Suppl.: 55, no.9

by Peñalosa; attrib. Josquin in E-Bc 454

Sancta Trinitas, unus Deus

6

(26.13)

DTÖ, xcix (1961)

4-v orig. by Févin (ed. E.H. Clinkscale, Collected Works of Antoine de Févin, iii, Ottawa, 1994), 2 added vv by Arnold von Bruck; 6-v version attrib. Josquin in D-EIa s.s.; 4-v version also attrib. Craen, Festa, Morales, Mouton

Sancti Dei omnes

4

(26.14)

Mot.v: 46, no.74

by Mouton; attrib. Josquin in E-Tc 13

Scimus quoniam diligentibus/Per omnia saecula saeculorum

4

contrafactum of De tous biens plaine/Per omnia saecula

Si bibero

3

(30.18)

Hieronymus Formschneider: Trium vocum carmina, ed. H. Mönkemeyer (Celle, 1985), no.81

attrib. Josquin in tablature PL-Wn 564; dominated by melodic repetition and sequence

Sic Deus dilexit mundum/Circumdederunt me

6

[20.13]

Mot.v: 51, no.86

canon in T and B modelled on Nymphes, nappés; attrib. Josquin in 1564³; rhythm and texture untypical; see Milsom (1982)

Si dormiero

3

[14.13]

Hieronymus Formschneider: Trium vocum carmina, ed. H. Mönkemeyer (Celle, 1985), no.66

probably by La Rue (attrib. in I-Fc Basevi 2439); attrib. Josquin in tablature PL-Wn 564; also attrib. Isaac, Agricola, Finck; see Meconi (1991)

Sit nomen Domini benedictum

10

[18.10]

canon 10 in 1 at unison and by inversion; only in I-Bc Q34 (dated 1613)

Stetit autem Salomon

4

[14.14]

Mot.iii: 39, no.58

attrib. Josquin in 15387, D-Rp A.R.887–90; rhythmically square, short-breathed

Te Deum laudamus (i)

4

(26.15)

even verses only; attrib. Josquin in D-ROu Mus.saec.XVI-49; stylistically anonymous

Te Deum laudamus (ii)

4

(26.16)

CMM, xlix/1 (1970)

attrib. Josquin in D-B, Ju copies of 1537¹, ROu Mus.saec.XVI-49; also attrib. De Silva, Mouton

Tribulatio et angustia

4

[18.11]

Mot.iii: 37, no.54

attrib. Josquin in 1537¹, 1559², D-Dl 1/D/6, LEu Thomaskirche 49; attrib. Verdelot in c15265; probably by neither; see Knol (1986)

Tua est potentia

5

(26.17)

MRM, iv (1968)

by Mouton; attrib. Josquin in tablature A-Kla 4/3

Tulerunt Dominum meum

4

[20.14]

MSD, vi/2 (1965)

by Michele Pesenti (attrib. in 1519²); attrib. Josquin in CH-SGs 463, D-Mu 322–5

Tulerunt Dominum meum

8

[14.7]

Cw, xxiii (2/1950)

contrafactum of 2 unrelated chansons: Gombert’s Je prens congié (GB-Lbl Roy.App.49–54; ed. in CMM, vi/11b, 1975) and J’ay mis mon cueur (not preserved as such, but identified by melody in T1 and by Vaet’s parody Salve and mass), possibly also by Gombert; separately in I-VEaf CCXVIII as Sustinuimus pacem (attrib. Gombert) and Tu sola es virgo pulcherrima (anon.); together (sometimes separated) with text Tulerunt … (2p. Alleluia: Noli flere Maria), attrib. Gombert in tablature 155235, Josquin in 155410 and dependent MSS; also with text Lugebat David, attrib. Josquin in 1564¹ and dependent MSS

Usquequo Domine oblivisceris me [Ps xii + return]

4

18.12

Mot.iii: 39, no.60

attrib. Josquin in 15386, 15534, D-ROu Mus.saec.XVI-71/1; counterpoint untypical

Veni Sancte Spiritus

6

(26.18)

Mot.iii: 36, no.49

B and T, Quintus and Sup in canon; probably by Forestier (attrib. in S-Uu Vok. i hs.76b); attrib. Josquin in 1537¹ and dependent sources, I-Bc R142

Venite ad me omnes

5

contrafactum of En non saichant, attrib. Josquin in D-LEu Thomaskirche 49

Verbum bonum et suave

5

[25.11]

SCMot, v (1992)

attrib. Josquin in D-Mu 4o Art.401 (T); structure, use of plainchant untypical

Verbum caro factum est

5

[20.16]

Mot.v: 51, no.88

probably by Appenzeller (attrib. in 15467); attrib. Josquin in 154916, D-Z LXXIII

Victimae paschali laudes

6

[22.7]

Mot.v: 48, no.81

by Brunet (attrib. in I-Rvat C.S.42); attrib. Josquin in E-Tc 10, I-Rv SI 35–40, probably owing to close resemblance to O virgo virginum

[textless]

1

(30.16)

Sup only from unidentified work quoted in Dressler, Musicae practicae elementa (1571); long-note c.f., unidentified 3rd-mode ant

Secular works

Title or Incipit

No. of parts

NJE

Edition

Remarks

Ach hülff mich Layd

4

28.2

SMd, v (1967)

on monophonic lied; attrib. Josquin in CH-SGs 530, as correction from ‘Maister Hanssen’ (Buchner); attrib. ‘Pirson’ in Bu F.X.1–4, no.35; attrib. Bauldeweyn in A-Wn Mus.18810

Basiés moy

6

(30.3)

WW i: 5, no.20

canon 6 in 3; attrib. Josquin in 154515, 1555; = 4-v version with a further canon added, which may stem from Josquin

Cela sans plus (ii)

3

[27.4]

MRM, vii (1983)

by Colinet de Lannoy; attrib. Josquin in I-Fn Magl.XIX.178

Cent mille regretz

5

(29.1)

WW i: 8, no.26

probably by La Rue (attrib. in I-Rvat Pal.lat.1982); attrib. Josquin in 1549; not included in 154515

Comment peult avoir joye

9

[24.1]

see Caelorum decus Maria

Cueurs desolez … Pour moi de ceste peine

4

[28.8]

WW i: 8, no.32

by Appenzeller; attrib. Josquin in c15286

De tous biens plaine/Per omnia saecula saeculorum

4

[20.12]

only in D-Dl 1/D/506 (with text Scimus quoniam diligentibus in Sup, A, B); combines Sup of Hayne’s De tous biens plaine in Sup with Preface tone in T; c.f. treatment untypical

En non saichant

5

(29.6)

WW i: 3, no.9

attrib. Josquin in 154515, 1549; style anomalous; verbal text corrupt; Sup borrowed from anon. setting in D-Usch 237a–d, F-CA 125–8; see Benthem, TVNM, xxi/3 (1970), Blackburn (1976)

Fors seulement

3

[27.10]

RRMMA, xiv (1981), no.28

by Févin; attrib. Josquin in D-Ju copy of 15389

Fors seulement (i)

4

28.16

RRMMA, xiv (1981), no.21

attrib. Josquin in CH-SGs 461; attrib. Ghiselin in I-Fc Basevi 2439; probably by neither

Fortuna desperata

3

27.11

WW ii: 53, no.48b

only in E-SE s.s.; adds new B to Sup and T of ?Busnoys’ chanson, different version from that used in Josquin’s mass; questioned by NJE

Guillaume se va chauffer

4

28.17

MSD, vi/2 (1965); SMd, v (1967)

superscription ‘Carmen gallicum Ludovici XI regis Francorum’ in CH-SGs 462; attrib. to Josquin probably stems from misreading of Glarean (1547¹) by MersenneHU

Helas que pourra devenir

3

[27.14]

MRM, vii (1983)

by Isaac; attrib. Josquin in I-Bc Q34 (1613)

Il n’est plaisir

3/4

(30.17)

DTÖ, xxviii, Jg.xiv/1 (1907/R)

probably by Isaac (attrib. in A-Wn Mus.18810, tablature CH-Bu F.IX.22); attrib. Josquin in tablature PL-Wn 564; on same tune as anon. setting in DK-Kk Ny kong.saml.1848

Incessament mon povre cueur

5

(29.9)

WW i: 8, no.27

by La Rue; B and Quintus in canon; attrib. Josquin in 1549; not included in 154515

J’ay bien cause de lamenter

6

(30.5)

WW i: 8, no.33

Sup borrowed from Pietrequin’s Mais que ce fust; ?contrafactum; attrib. Josquin in unreliable 15407, D-Hs Hans.III, 4 (IV) (lost); not included in 154515; see Benthem (1985)

J’ay bien nourry sept ans

3

[27.16]

MRM, vii (1983)

attrib. Josquin in I-Fn Magl.XIX.178; attrib. Japart in Fn B.R.229, Johannes Joye in E-SE s.s.; probably by Japart

L’amye a tous/Je ne vis oncques la pareille

5

(29.13)

WW i: 8, no.25

c.f. T of Binchois’ chanson; only in 1549; questioned by Benthem (1970), Rifkin (1986)

La Spagna

5

(29.12)

WW ii: 54, no.52

attrib. Josquin in 1537¹, 1559¹, CZ-HKm II A 22, RO 22, D-Dl 1/D/6; chiefly transmitted with contrafact text Propter peccata; texture untypically busy and thick

Leal schray tante

4

28.21

H. Meconi (diss., Harvard U., 1986)

attrib. Josquin in tablature CH-Zz 301; attrib. La Rue in A-Wn Mus.18810, D-Rp C120; probably by neither

L’homme armé

4

28.23

WW ii: 54, no.55; MRM, ii (1967)

attrib. Josquin in 1502², I-Bc Q34 (1613); rhythm untypically monotonous

Lourdault, lourdault

4

[28.24]

CMM, xv/5 (1972); MRM, ii (1967)

by Compère; attrib. Josquin in CH-Bu F.X.1–4; also attrib. Ninot

Madame helas

3

27.24

Harmonices musice Odhecaton A, ed. H. Hewitt (Cambridge, MA, 1942)

attrib. Josquin in first edn of 1501¹ (dropped in later ones), D-Z LXXVIII, 3; ? confusion with Helas madame; questioned by NJE

Mais que ce fust

5

orig. text of borrowed Sup in J’ay bien cause

Mala se nea

5

(29.15)

by Le Brung (garbled incipit of N’avés point veu mal assenee, ed. in SCC, xviii, 1991); attrib. Josquin in P.P. Borrono, Intavolatura di lauto (Venice, 1548)

Marguerite

3

[27.25]

Harmonices musice Odhecaton A, ed. H. Hewitt (Cambridge, MA, 1942)

attrib. Josquin in I-Bc Q34 (1613); style untypical; rejected by NJE

Mi larés vous tousjours languir

5

(29.16)

WW i: 8, no.34

only in unreliable 15407; treatment of text uncharacteristic; questioned by Benthem, TVNM, xxi/3 (1970)

Mon seul plaisir

4

[28.26]

Picker (1965)

by Ninot le Petit (attrib. in I-Fc Basevi 2439); attrib. Josquin in CH-Bu F.X.1–4

N’avés point veu mal assenee

3

[27.28]

La couronne et fleur des chansons à troys, ed. L.F. Bernstein (New York, 1984); CMM, lxxxi/3 (1999)

probably by Richafort; attrib. Josquin in D-HRD 9821

N’avés point veu mal assenee

5

correct incipit of Mala se nea

Pensif mari

3

[27.30]

Harmonices musice Odhecaton A, ed. H. Hewitt (Cambridge, MA, 1942)

by Tadinghen; attrib. Josquin in I-Bc Q34 (1613)

Petite camusette

3

[27.31]

Collected Works of Antoine de Févin, iii, ed. E. H. Clinkscale (Ottawa, 1994)

by Févin; attrib. Josquin in 157816

Si j’ay perdu mon amy

4

28.32

Ein altes Spielbuch, ed. F.J. Giesbert (Mainz, 1936)

consecutive 5ths improbable in otherwise apparently late work; accepted by NJE

Si vous n’avez

6

(30.10)

WW i: 3, no.8a

by Le Brung (attrib. in 154515); response to N’esse pas ung grant desplaisir; attrib. Josquin in 1549

Tous les regretz

4

[28.34]

MRM, ii (1967)

by La Rue; attrib. Josquin in D-Rp C120

Vivrai je tousjours en telle paine

4

28.37

Trésor musical, xiv, ed. R. van Maldeghem (Brussels, 1878)

only in F-CA 125–8; technically incompetent

Vray dieu d’Amours

3

[27.36]

CMM, v/6 (1972)

by Brumel; attrib. Josquin in M. de Barberiis, Intabolatura di lauto, libro nono (Venice, 1549)

[textless] ‘Duo’ a 2

2

(30.15)

attrib. Josquin in D-Augs S 142a

[textless]

4

28.39

only in D-Z LXXVIII, 2; unidentified

Conjecturally attributed works

implicitly attrib. in Suppl.: 55, no.1, and NJE (23.9):

Ave maris stella, stanzas 6 (Vitam praesta puram) and 8 (Sit laus Deo Patri), 4vv, anon. in I-Rvat C.S.15; see Sherr in JC

attrib. in J.M. Llorens, Capellae Sixtinae codices (Rome, 1960):

Christo inclita candida, 6vv, anon. in I-Rvat C.S.46; unpubd; attrib. follows MS score by L. Feininger (I-Rims, Motetti, liber ii, f.93v)

attrib. in Picker (1965):

Proch dolor/Pie Jesu, 7vv, anon. in B-Br 228; ed. ibid., also Suppl.: 55, no.14

attrib. in E. Droz and G. Thibault, Poètes et musiciens du XVe siècle (Paris, 1924)

Soubz ce tumbel, 4vv, anon. in B-Br 228; ed. in Picker (1965), where attrib. is supported

attrib in SMd, vii (1970):

Ein anderes Duo, 2vv, anon. in Hör tablature, CH-Zz Z.XI.301; ed. ibid., no.25

attrib. in Benthem, TVNM, xxi/3 (1970)

Faulte d’argent, 3vv, anon. in D-Usch 237a–d; ed. ibid.

Tenez moy en vox bras, 3vv, anon. in DK-Kk Ny kong.saml.1848, PL-GD 4003; ed. ibid.

attrib. in Benthem, TVNM (1971)

all anon. in A-Wn Mus.18746:

Considerés mes incessantes plaintes/Fortuna desperata, 5vv, unpubd

Dame d’honneur [donner], 5vv, ed. ibid., suppl.

Saillies avant, 5vv, unpubd

Sans vous veoir, 5vv, unpubd

attrib. in Staehelin (1973):

Fors seulement (ii), 4vv, anon. in D-As 2o Cod.142a (Josquin fascicle), I-Fn Magl.XIX.164–7; ed. in RRMMA, xiv (1981), no.22, where attrib. is supported

attrib. in RRMMA, xiv (1981):

Fors seulement, 5vv, anon. in A-Wn Mus.18746; ed. ibid., no.23

attrib. in A. Atlas, Music at the Aragonese Court of Naples (Cambridge, 1985):

Je ne demande, 3vv, attrib. ‘J.p.’ in only source, I-Bc Q16; ed. ibid.; rejected by NJE [27.18]

Bibliography

  • Gustave Reese and Patrick Macey
  • JC The Josquin Companion, ed. R. Sherr (Oxford, 2000)
  • AmbrosGM, iii, v
  • H. Glarean: Dodecachordon (Basle, 1547/R; Eng. trans., MSD, vi, 1965)
  • A.P. Coclico: Compendium musices (Nuremberg, 1552/R; Eng. trans., 1973)
  • C. Bartoli: Ragionamenti accademici … sopra alcuni luoghi difficili di Dante (Venice, 1567)
  • J.N. Forkel: Allgemeine Geschichte der Musik, 2 (Leipzig, 1801/R)
  • F.-L. Perne: ‘Quelques notions sur Josquin Després, maître de musique de Louis XII’, Revue musicale, 2 (1827), 265–72 [reply by F.J. Fétis, 272–5]
  • R.G. Kiesewetter: Die Verdienste der Niederländer um die Tonkunst (Amsterdam, 1829)
  • F.J. Fétis: ‘Notice historique sur la vie et les ouvrages de Josquin des Près’, Revue musicale, 14 (1834), 241–3, 260–62, 265–7
  • R.G. Kiesewetter: ‘Ueber die Herkunft Josquin’s Des Prés (oder Desprez)’, AMZ, no.24 (1835), 385–92
  • G. Porro: ‘Lettere di Galeazzo Maria Sforza, Duca di Milano’, Archivio storico lombardo, 5 (1878), 107–29, 254–74, 637–68; vi (1879), 250–68
  • E. Motta: ‘Musici alla corte degli Sforza’, Archivio storico lombardo, 14 (1887), 29–64, 278–340, 514–61; pubd separately (Milan, 1887/R)
  • F. Raugel: ‘Josquin des Prés à la Collégiale de Saint-Quentin’, Congrès d’histoire de l’art: Paris 1921, 807–9
  • A. Smijers: ‘De uitgave der werken van Josquin des Prés’, TVNM, 10/3 (1921), 164–79
  • T. Werner: ‘Anmerkungen zur Kunst Josquins und zur Gesamtausgabe seiner Werke’, ZMw, 7 (1924–5), 33–41
  • A. Smijers: ‘Een kleine bijdrage over Josquin en Isaac’, Gedenkboek aangeboden aan Dr. D.F. Scheurleer (The Hague, 1925), 313–19
  • J. Tiersot: ‘Les motets de Josquin des Prés’, Le ménestrel (24, 31 July 1925)
  • O. Ursprung: ‘Josquin des Prés’, Bulletin de la Société ‘Union musicologique’, 6 (1926), 11–50
  • A. Smijers: ‘Josquin des Prez’, PMA, 53 (1926–7), 95–116
  • Y. Rokseth: ‘Notes sur Josquin des Prés comme pédagogue musical’, RdM, 8 (1927), 202–4
  • F. Blume: ‘Josquin des Prés’, Der Drachentöter: Jb des Verlages Georg Kallmeyer (1929), 52–69
  • R. Casimiri: ‘Un accenno poetico a Giosquino e Finoto di Francesco Spinola’, NA, 8 (1931), 143–5
  • G. Van Doorslaer: ‘La chapelle musicale de Philippe le Beau’, Revue belge d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’art, 4 (1934), 21–57, 139–65
  • J. Delporte: ‘Un document inédit sur Josquin Desprez’, Musique et liturgie, 22 (1938–9), 54–6
  • M. van Crevel: Adrianus Petit Coclico: Leben und Beziehungen eines nach Deutschland emigrierten Josquinschülers (The Hague, 1940)
  • E.E. Lowinsky: ‘The Goddess Fortuna in Music, with a Special Study of Josquin’s Fortuna d’un gran tempo ’, MQ, 29 (1943), 45–77
  • L. Delpuech: Josquin des Prés (St Quentin, 1945)
  • M. van Crevel: ‘Verwandte Sequensmodulaties bij Obrecht, Josquin en Coclico’, TVNM, 16/4 (1946), 107–24
  • M. Antonowycz: Die Motette Benedicta es von Josquin des Prez und die Messen super Benedicta von Willaert, Palestrina, de la Hêle und de Monte (Utrecht, 1951)
  • H. Osthoff: ‘“Wohlauf, gut G’sell, von hinnen!”: ein Beispiel deutsch-französischer Liedgemeinschaft um 1500’, Jb für Volksliedforschung, 8 (1951), 128–36
  • M.E. Brockhoff: ‘Die Kadenz bei Josquin’, IMSCR V: Utrecht 1952, 86–95
  • H. Osthoff: ‘Besetzung und Klangstruktur in den Werken von Josquin des Prez’, AMw, 9 (1952), 177–94
  • H. Osthoff: ‘Zur Echtheitsfrage und Chronologie bei Josquins Werken’, IMSCR V: Utrecht 1952, 303–9
  • C. van den Borren: ‘A propos de quelques messes de Josquin’, IMSCR V: Utrecht 1952, 79–85
  • R. Dammann: ‘Spätformen der isorhythmischen Motette im 16. Jahrhundert’, AMw, 10 (1953), 16–40
  • W. Wiora: ‘Der Religiöse Grundzug im neuen Stil und Weg Josquins des Prez’, Mf, 6 (1953), 23–37
  • G. Benoit-Castelli: ‘L’“Ave Maria” de Josquin des Prez et la séquence “Ave Maria … Virgo serena”’, EG, 1 (1954), 187–94
  • F. Feldmann: ‘Untersuchungen zum Wort-Ton-Verhältnis in den Gloria-Credo-Sätzen von Dufay bis Josquin’, MD, 8 (1954), 141–71
  • M. Antonowycz: ‘Renaissance-Tendenzen in den Fortuna-desperata-Messen von Josquin und Obrecht’, Mf, 9 (1956), 1–26
  • B. Meier: ‘The Musica Reservata of Adrianus Petit Coclico and its Relationship to Josquin’, MD, 10 (1956), 67–105
  • H. Osthoff: ‘Die Psalm-Motetten von Josquin Desprez’, Musikwissenschaftlicher Kongress: Vienna 1956, 452–6
  • C. Sartori: ‘Josquin des Prés, cantore del duomo di Milano (1459–1472)’, AnnM, 4 (1956), 55–83
  • S. Clercx: ‘Lumières sur la formation de Josquin et d’Obrecht’, RBM, 11 (1957), 155–8
  • C. van den Borren: ‘Une hypothèse concernant le lieu de naissance de Josquin des Prez’, Festschrift Joseph Schmidt-Görg zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. D. Weise (Bonn, 1957), 21–5
  • H. Osthoff: ‘Das Magnificat bei Josquin Desprez’, AMw, 16 (1959), 220–31
  • H. Osthoff: ‘Vergils Aeneis in der Musik von Josquin des Prez bis Orlando di Lasso’, AMw, 16 (1959), 85–102
  • K.G. Fellerer: ‘Josquins Missa “Faisant regretz” in der Vihuela-Transkription von Mudarra und Narváez’, Spanische Forschungen der Görresgesellschaft, 1st ser.: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Kulturgeschichte Spaniens, 16 (1960), 179–84
  • C. Hamm: ‘The Manuscript San Pietro B 80’, RBM, 14 (1960), 40–55
  • E. Stam: ‘Eine “Fuga trium vocum” von Josquin des Prez’, Mf, 13 (1960), 28–33
  • M. Antonowycz: ‘Die Josquin-Ausgabe’, TVNM, 19/1–2 (1960–61), 6–31
  • M. Antonowycz: ‘The Present State of Josquin Research’, IMSCR VIII: New York 1961, i, 53–65
  • J.A. Mattfeld: ‘Some Relationships between Texts and Cantus Firmi in the Liturgical Motets of Josquin des Pres’, JAMS, 14 (1961), 159–83
  • H. Osthoff: ‘Der Durchbruch zum musikalischen Humanismus’, IMSCR VIII: New York 1961, 2, 31–9
  • L. Finscher: ‘Zur Cantus-Firmus Behandlung in der Psalm-Motette der Josquinzeit’, Hans Albrecht in memoriam, ed. W. Brennecke and H. Haase (Kassel, 1962), 55–62
  • C. van den Borren: ‘L’énigme des Credo de Village ’, Hans Albrecht in memoriam, ed. W. Brennecke and H. Haase (Kassel, 1962), 48–54
  • H. Osthoff: Josquin Desprez (Tutzing, 1962–5)
  • E.E. Lowinsky: ‘Scholarship in the Renaissance: Music’, RN, 16 (1963), 255–62; repr. in Lowinsky (1989), 531–4 as ‘Helmut Osthoff’s Josquin Monograph’
  • E.H. Sparks: Cantus Firmus in Mass and Motet, 1420–1520 (Berkeley, 1963)
  • C. Titcomb: ‘The Josquin Acrostic Re-Examined’, JAMS, 16 (1963), 47–60
  • B. Disertori: ‘Una storica mistificazione mensurale de Josquin des Prés: sue affinità con Leonardo da Vinci’, Liber amicorum Charles van den Borren (Antwerp, 1964), 49–56
  • L. Finscher: Loyset Compère (c.1450–1518): Life and Works, MSD, 12 (1964)
  • H. Osthoff: ‘Ein Josquin-Zitat bei Henricus Isaac’, Liber amicorum Charles van den Borren (Antwerp, 1964), 127–34
  • R. Lagas: ‘Het Magnificat IV toni van Josquin des Prez’, TVNM, 20/1–2 (1964–5), 20–36
  • M. Just: Review of H. Osthoff: Josquin Desprez, Mf, 18 (1965), 109–10
  • L. Lockwood: ‘A Stylistic Investigation of the Masses of Josquin Desprez with the Aid of the Computer’, Musicology and the Computer …: New York 1965, 19–27
  • M. Picker: The Chanson Albums of Marguerite of Austria (Berkeley, 1965)
  • M. Antonowycz: ‘Zur Autorschaftsfrage der Motetten Absolve, quaesumus, Domine und Inter natos mulierum ’, TVNM, 20/3 (1966), 154–69
  • H.L. Clarke: ‘Musicians of the Northern Renaissance’, Aspects of Medieval and Renaissance Music: a Birthday Offering to Gustave Reese, ed. J. LaRue and others (New York, 1966), 67–81
  • E. Clinkscale: ‘Josquin and Louis XI’, AcM, 38 (1966), 67–9
  • D. Heikamp: ‘Zur Struktur der Messe L’homme armé super voces musicales von Josquin Desprez’, Mf, 19 (1966), 366–84
  • W. Kirsch: Die Quellen der mehrstimmigen Magnificat- und Te Deum-Vertonungen bis zur Mitte des 16. Jahrhunderts (Tutzing, 1966)
  • C. Maas: ‘Josquin–Agricola–Brumel–De La Rue: een authenticiteitsprobleem’, TVNM, 20/3 (1966), 120–39
  • N. Pirrotta: ‘Music and Cultural Tendencies in 15th-Century Italy’, JAMS, 19 (1966), 127–61
  • M. Antonowycz: ‘Die Missa Mater Patris von Josquin des Prez’, TVNM, 20/4 (1967), 206–25
  • C. Dahlhaus: Untersuchungen über die Entstehung der harmonischen Tonalität (Kassel, 1968; Eng. trans., 1990)
  • C. Dahlhaus: ‘Zur Akzidentiensetzung in den Motetten Josquins des Prez’, Musik und Verlag: Karl Vötterle zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. R. Baum and W. Rehm (Kassel, 1968), 206–19
  • E.E. Lowinsky: ‘Josquin des Prez and Ascanio Sforza’, Il duomo di Milano: Milan 1968, ii, 17–22
  • E.E. Lowinsky: Introduction and commentary to The Medici Codex of 1518, MRM, 3 (1968)
  • W. Wiora: ‘Josquin und “des Finken Gesang”: zu einem Ausspruch Martin Luthers’, DJbM, 13 (1968), 72–81; repr. in Historische und systematische Musikwissenschaft (Tutzing, 1972), 229–39
  • A. Curtis: ‘Josquin and “La belle tricotée”’, Essays on Musicology in Honor of Dragan Plamenac, ed. G. Reese and R.J. Snow (Pittsburgh, 1969), 1–8
  • A. Dunning: ‘Josquini antiquos, Musae, memoremus amores: a Mantuan Motet from 1554 in Homage to Josquin’, AcM, 41 (1969), 108–16
  • W. Elders: ‘Das Symbol in der Musik von Josquin des Prez’, AcM, 41 (1969), 164–85
  • T. Noblitt: ‘Das Chorbuch des Nikolaus Leopold (München, Staatsbibliothek, Mus.ms.3154): Repertorium’, AMw, 26 (1969), 169–208
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Die Chanson Entré je suis a 4 von Josquin des Prez und ihre Überlieferung’, TVNM, 21/4 (1970), 203–10
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Zur Struktur und Authentizität der Chansons à 5 & 6 von Josquin des Prez’, TVNM, 21/3 (1970), 170–88
  • W. Elders: ‘Josquin des Prez in zijn motet Illibata Dei Virgo ’, Mens en melodie, 25 (1970), 141–4
  • D. Kämper: Studien zur instrumentalen Ensemblemusik des 16. Jahrhunderts in Italien, AnMc, no.10 (1970)
  • S. Novack: ‘Fusion of Design and Tonal Order in Mass and Motet: Josquin Desprez and Heinrich Isaac’, Music Forum, 2 (1970), 187–263
  • M. Antonowycz: ‘“Illibata Dei Virgo”: a Melodic Self-Portrait of Josquin des Prez’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 545–59
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Einige wiedererkannte Josquin-Chansons im Codex 18746 der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek’, TVNM, 22/1 (1971), 18–42
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Josquin’s Three-Part “Chansons rustiques”: a Critique of the Readings in Manuscripts and Prints’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 421–45
  • H. Besseler: ‘Deutsche Lieder von Robert Morton und Josquin’, BMw, 13 (1971), 174–81
  • F. Blume: ‘Josquin des Prez: the Man and the Music’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 18–27
  • S. Boorman: ‘Josquin, and his Influence’, MT, 112 (1971), 747–9
  • N. Bridgman: ‘On the Discography of Josquin and the Interpretation of his Music in Recordings’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 633–41
  • H.M. Brown: ‘Accidentals and Ornamentation in Sixteenth-Century Intabulations of Josquin’s Motets’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 475–524
  • V.W. Callahan: ‘“Ut Phoebi radiis”: the Riddle of the Text Resolved’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 560–63
  • F.A. D’Accone: ‘The Performance of Sacred Music in Italy during Josquin’s Time, c.1475–1525’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 601–18
  • C. Dahlhaus: ‘On the Treatment of Dissonance in the Motets of Josquin des Prez’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 334–44
  • W. Elders: ‘Plainchant in the Motets, Hymns, and Magnificat of Josquin des Prez’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 523–42
  • W. Elders: ‘Zusammenhänge zwischen den Motetten Ave nobilissima creatura und Huc me sydereo von Josquin des Prez’, TVNM, 22/1 (1971), 67–73
  • L. Finscher: ‘Historical Reconstruction versus Structural Interpretation in the Performance of Josquin’s Motets’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 627–32
  • C. Gallico: ‘Josquin’s Compositions on Italian Texts and the Frottola’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 446–54; repr. in Sopra li fondamenti della verita: Musica italiana fra XV e XVII secolo (Rome, 2001), 179–83
  • C. Gallico: ‘Josquin nell’Archivio Gonzaga’, RIM, 6 (1971), 205–10; repr. in Sopra li fondamenti della verita: Musica italiana fra XV e XVII secolo (Rome, 2001), 227–35
  • M.L. Gatti Perer: ‘Art and Architecture in Lombardy at the Time of Josquin des Prez’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 138–47
  • D. Harrán: ‘Burney and Ambros as Editors of Josquin’s Music’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 148–77
  • L. Hoffmann-Erbrecht: ‘Problems in the Interdependence of Josquin Sources’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 285–93
  • B. Jeffery: ‘The Literary Texts of Josquin’s Chansons’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 401–20
  • H. Kellman: ‘Josquin and the Courts of the Netherlands and France: the Evidence of the Sources’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 181–216
  • W. Kirsch: ‘Josquin’s Motets in the German Tradition’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 261–78
  • Kwee Him Yong: ‘Sixteenth-Century Printed Instrumental Arrangements of Works by Josquin des Prez: an Inventory’, TVNM, 22/1 (1971), 43–66
  • R.B. Lenaerts: ‘Musical Structure and Performance Practice in Masses and Motets of Josquin and Obrecht’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 619–26
  • L. Lockwood: ‘Josquin at Ferrara: New Documents and Letters’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 103–37
  • E.E. Lowinsky: ‘Ascanio Sforza’s Life: a Key to Josquin’s Biography and an Aid to the Chronology of his Works’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 31–75
  • J.A. Mattfeld: ‘An Unsolved Riddle: the Apparent Absence of Ambrosian Melodies in the Works of Josquin des Prez’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 360–66
  • A. Mendel: ‘Towards Objective Criteria for Establishing Chronology and Authenticity: What Help can the Computer Give?’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 297–308
  • J. Noble: ‘New Light on Josquin’s Benefices’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 76–102
  • J. Noble: ‘A New Motet by Josquin?’, MT, 112 (1971), 749–53, suppl.
  • S. Novack: ‘Tonal Tendencies in Josquin’s Use of Harmony’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 317–33
  • M. Picker: ‘Josquiniana in some Manuscripts at Piacenza’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 247–60
  • W.H. Rubsamen: ‘Unifying Techniques in Selected Masses of Josquin and La Rue’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 369–400
  • J. Snížková: ‘Josquin in Czech Sources of the Second Half of the Sixteenth Century’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 279–84
  • E. Stam: ‘Die vierundzwanzigstimmige kanonische Psalmmotette Qui habitat in adiutorio altissimi von Josquin des Prez’, TVNM, 22/1 (1971), 1–17
  • R. Stevenson: ‘Josquin in the Music of Spain and Portugal’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 217–46
  • G. Thibault: ‘Instrumental Transcriptions of Josquin’s French Chansons’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 455–74
  • W. Wiora: ‘The Structure of Wide-Spanned Melodic Lines in Earlier and Later Works of Josquin’, Josquin des Prez: New York 1971, 309–16
  • S. Clercx-Lejeune: ‘Fortuna Josquini: a proposito di un ritratto di Josquin des Prez’, NRMI, 6 (1972), 315–37
  • L. Lockwood: ‘Music at Ferrara in the Period of Ercole I d’Este’, Studi musicali, 1 (1972), 101–31
  • M. Picker: ‘A Josquin Parody by Marco Antonio Cavazzoni’, TVNM, 22/3 (1972), 157–9
  • E.H. Sparks: The Music of Noel Bauldeweyn (New York, 1972)
  • B. Bujić: ‘Josquin, Leonardo and the Scala Peccatorum’, IRASM, 4 (1973), 145–63
  • L.L. Perkins: ‘Mode and Structure in the Masses of Josquin’, JAMS, 26 (1973), 189–239
  • M. Staehelin: ‘Möglichkeiten und praktische Anwendung der Verfasserbestimmung an anonym überlieferten Kompositionen der Josquin-Zeit’, TVNM, 23 (1973), 79–91
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Einige Musikintarsien des frühen 16. Jahrhunderts in Piacenza und Josquins Proportionskanon “Agnus Dei”’, TVNM, 24 (1974), 97–111
  • W. Elders: ‘Report of the First Josquin Meeting, Utrecht 1973’, TVNM, 24 (1974), 20–82
  • L. Lockwood: ‘“Messer Gossino” and Josquin Desprez’, Studies in Renaissance and Baroque Music in Honor of Arthur Mendel, ed. R.L. Marshall (Kassel and Hackensack, NJ, 1974), 15–24
  • T. Noblitt: ‘Die Datierung der Handschrift Mus.ms.3154 der Staatsbibliothek München’, Mf, 27 (1974), 36–56
  • W. Elders: ‘Short Report of the Second Josquin Meeting, Utrecht 1974’, TVNM, 25/1 (1975), 54–64
  • R. van Haarlem: ‘The Missa de Beata Virgine by Josquin used as a Model for the Mass of the Same Name by Arcadelt’, TVNM, 25/2 (1975), 33–7
  • T. Hall: ‘Some Computer Aids for the Preparation of Critical Editions of Renaissance Music’, TVNM, 25/1 (1975), 38–53 [with stemma of Missa de beata virgine]
  • N.S. Josephson: ‘Kanon und Parodie: zu einigen Josquin-Nachahmungen’, TVNM, 25/2 (1975), 23–32
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Kompositorisches Verfahren in Josquins Proportionskanon Agnus Dei: Antwort an Edward Stam’, TVNM, 26 (1976), 9–16
  • B.J. Blackburn: ‘Josquin’s Chansons: Ignored and Lost Sources’, JAMS, 29 (1976), 30–76
  • H.M. Brown: ‘Words and Music in Early 16th-Century Chansons: Text Underlay in Florence, Biblioteca del Conservatorio, MS Basevi 2442’, Formen und Probleme der Überlieferung mehrstimmiger Musik im Zeitalter Josquins Desprez: Wolfenbüttel 1976, 97–141
  • W. Elders: ‘Short Report of the Third Josquin Meeting: Utrecht 1975’, TVNM, 26/1 (1976), 17–40
  • A. Ghislanzoni: Josquin Des Prez (Jodocus Pratensis) (Frosinone, 1976)
  • I. Godt: ‘The Restoration of Josquin’s Ave mundi spes, Maria, and some Observations on Restoration’, TVNM, 26 (1976), 53–83
  • D. Heartz: ‘The Chanson in the Humanist Era’, Current Thought in Musicology, ed. J.W. Grubbs (Austin, 1976), 193–230 [Mille regretz]
  • T. Noblitt: ‘Textual Criticism of Selected Works Published by Petrucci’, Formen und Probleme der Überlieferung mehrstimmiger Musik im Zeitalter Josquins Desprez: Wolfenbüttel 1976, 201–44 [Ave Mariavirgo serena, Missa ‘Fortuna desperata’]
  • A.B. Skei: ‘ Dulces exuviae: Renaissance Settings of Dido’s Last Words’, MR, 37 (1976), 77–91
  • E. Stam: ‘Josquins Proportionskanon Agnus Dei und dessen Piacentiner Überlieferung’, TVNM, 26 (1976), 1–8
  • I. Godt: ‘Motivic Integration in Josquin’s Motets’, JMT, 21 (1977), 264–92
  • R. Sherr: ‘Notes on Two Roman Manuscripts of the Early Sixteenth Century’, MQ, 63 (1977), 48–73
  • M. Antonowycz: ‘Criteria for the Determination of Authenticity: a Contribution to the Study of Melodic Style in the Works of Josquin’, TVNM, 28 (1978), 51–60
  • W. Elders: ‘Short Report of the Fourth Josquin Meeting’, TVNM, 28 (1978), 31–7
  • P.T. Jackson: ‘Two Descendants of Josquin’s “Hercules” Mass’, ML, 59 (1978), 188–207
  • C.M. Joseph: ‘Architectural Control in Josquin’s Tu pauperum refugium ’, College Music Symposium, 18/2 (1978), 189–95
  • J. Noble: ‘Ottaviano Petrucci: his Josquin Editions and some Others’, Essays Presented to Myron P. Gilmore, ed. S. Bertelli and G. Ramakus, ii (Florence, 1978), 433–45
  • M. Picker: ‘Josquin and Jean Lemaire: Four Chansons Re-Examined’, Essays Presented to Myron P. Gilmore, ed. S. Bertelli and G. Ramakus, ii (Florence, 1978), 447–56 [Plus nulz regretz, Cueurs desolez, Soubz ce tumbel, Mille regretz]
  • L. Finscher: ‘Zum Verhältnis von Imitationstechnik und Textbehandlung im Zeitalter Josquins’, Renaissance-Studien: Helmuth Osthoff zum 80. Geburtstag, ed. L. Finscher (Tutzing, 1979), 57–72; repr. in Geschichte und Geschichten: Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Musikhistorie, ed. L. Finscher and H. Danuser (Mainz, 2003), 109–22
  • W. Kirsch: ‘Zur Funktion der Tripeltaktigen Abschnitte in den Motetten des Josquin-Zeitalters’, Renaissance-Studien: Helmuth Osthoff zum 80. Geburtstag, ed. L. Finscher (Tutzing, 1979), 145–57
  • L. Lockwood: ‘Jean Mouton and Jean Michel: New Evidence on French Music and Musicians in Italy, 1505–1520’, JAMS, 32 (1979), 191–246
  • E. Nowacki: ‘The Latin Psalm Motet, 1500–1535’, Renaissance-Studien: Helmuth Osthoff zum 80. Geburtstag, ed. L. Finscher (Tutzing, 1979), 159–84
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Fortuna in Focus: Concerning “Conflicting” Progressions in Josquin’s Fortuna dun gran tempo’, TVNM, 30 (1980), 1–50
  • A.M. Cummings: ‘Toward an Interpretation of the Sixteenth-Century Motet’, JAMS, 34 (1981), 43–59
  • Y. Esquieu: ‘La musique à la cour provençale du roi René’, Provence historique, 31 (1981), 299–312
  • L. Lockwood: ‘Strategies of Music Patronage in the Fifteenth Century: the cappella of Ercole d’Este’, Music in Medieval and Early Modern Europe: Patronage, Sources and Texts, ed. I. Fenlon (Cambridge, 1981), 227–48
  • J. Allende-Blin: ‘Beobachtungen über die Missa Pange lingua ’, Josquin des Prés, Musik-Konzepte, nos.26–7 (1982), 70–84
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Rapports structurels entre la messe Ecce ancilla Domini de Johannes Ockeghem et la déploration de Johannes Ockeghem de Josquin des Prez’, IMSCR XIII: Strasbourg 1982, 3, 161
  • C. Dill: ‘Non-Cadential Articulation of Structure in some Motets of Josquin and Mouton’, CMc, no.33 (1982), 37–55 [Inviolata, integra et casta es]
  • C. Gottwald: ‘Lasso – Josquin – Dufay: zur Ästhetik des heroischen Zeitalters’, Josquin des Prés, Musik-Konzepte, nos.26–7 (1982), 39–69
  • B. Meier: ‘Josquins Motette Dominus regnavit: ein Sonderfall des Tonartwechsels’, TVNM, 32 (1982), 45–50
  • J. Milsom: ‘ Circumdederunt: “a Favourite Cantus Firmus of Josquin’s”?’, Soundings [Cardiff], 9 (1982), 2–10
  • G. Neuwirth: ‘Erzählung von Zahlen’, Josquin des Prés, Musik-Konzepte, nos.26–7 (1982), 4–38
  • J. Stenzl: ‘“In das Reich der schönen Kunst ganz einzutreten, war ihm nicht beschieden”: zur Josquin-Rezeption im 19. Jahrhundert’, Josquin des Prés, Musik-Konzepte, nos.26–7 (1982), 85–101
  • B. Zuber: ‘Josquin Desprez: eine Nachrede auf alle künftigen “historisch-authentischen” Aufführungen seiner Werke’, Josquin des Prés, Musik-Konzepte, nos.26–7 (1982), 102–18
  • S.R. Charles: Josquin des Prez: a Guide to Research (New York, 1983)
  • L. Finscher: ‘Josquin Desprez, Dominus regnavit (Psalm 92)’, Chormusik und Analyse, ed. H. Poos (Mainz, 1983), 67–75
  • N. Guidobaldi: ‘Le due messe L’homme armé di Josquin’, RIM, 18 (1983), 193–202
  • P. Macey: ‘Savonarola and the Sixteenth-Century Motet’, JAMS, 36 (1983), 422–52
  • R. Sherr: ‘Notes on some Papal Documents in Paris’, Studi musicali, 12 (1983), 5–16
  • R. Toft: ‘Pitch Content and Modal Procedure in Josquin’s Absalon, fili mi ’, TVNM, 33 (1983), 3–27
  • T. Ward: ‘A Newly-Discovered Josquin Attribution’, TVNM, 33 (1983), 29–48 [Credo, Missa Rosina, wo war dein Gestalt]
  • M. Bent: ‘Diatonic ficta’, EMH, 4 (1984), 1–48; repr. with commentary in Bent, Counterpoint, Composition, and Musica Ficta (New York and London, 2002), 115–59 [Ave Maria … virgo serena]
  • J. Caldwell: ‘Some Aspects of Tonal Language in Music of the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries’, PRMA, 110 (1983–4), 1–24
  • C. Gottwald: ‘Von der Babylonischen Gefangenschaft der Musik: Josquin und Luthers Encomion’, Württembergische Blätter für Landeskunde, 51 (1984), 207–16
  • W. Haass: Studien zu den ‘L’homme armé’-Messen des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts (Regensburg, 1984)
  • W. Kirkendale: ‘ Circulatio-Tradition, Maria Lactans, and Josquin as Musical Orator’, AcM, 56 (1984), 69–92; repr. in Music and Meaning: Studies in Music History and the Neighboring Disciplines, ed. W. Kirkendale and U. Kirkendale (Florence, 2007), 1–32 [Ave Maria … benedicta tu (i)]
  • G. Neuwirth: ‘Über das erste Kyrie der Messe “Ad fugam” von Josquin Desprez’, Musicologica austriaca, 4 (1984), 13–26
  • G. Reese and J. Noble: ‘Josquin Desprez’, The New Grove High Renaissance Masters (London, 1984), 1–90 [revised from Grove6]
  • J. van Benthem: ‘The Scoring of Josquin’s Secular Music’, TVNM, 35 (1985), 67–85, 90–96
  • H.M. Brown: ‘Josquin and the Fifteenth-Century Chanson’, Proceedings of the British Academy, 71 (1985), 119–58
  • W. Elders: ‘Josquin’s Gaudeamus Mass: a Case of Number Symbolism in Worship’, Studi musicali, 14 (1985), 221–33
  • D. Fallows: ‘The Performing Ensembles in Josquin’s Sacred Music’, TVNM, 35 (1985), 32–66; repr. in Fallows, Songs and Musicians in the Fifteenth Century (Aldershot, 1996)
  • C.C. Judd: ‘Some Problems of Pre-Baroque Analysis: an Examination of Josquin’s Ave Mariavirgo serena’, MAn, 4 (1985), 201–39
  • J. Noble: ‘The Function of Josquin’s Motets’, TVNM, 35 (1985), 9–22
  • W.F. Prizer: ‘Music and Ceremonial in the Low Countries: Philip the Fair and the Order of the Golden Fleece’, EMH, 5 (1985), 113–53
  • F. Robin: ‘Josquin des Prés au service de René d’Anjou?’, RdM, 71 (1985), 180–81
  • R. Stewart: ‘Voice Types in Josquin’s Music’, TVNM, 35 (1985), 97–189
  • L.F. Bernstein: ‘Chansons Attributed to both Josquin des Prez and Pierre de La Rue: a Problem in Establishing Authenticity’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 125–52
  • N. Böker-Heil: ‘Josquin und Verdelot: die Konfliktzuschreibungen’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 55–8
  • T. Braas: ‘The Five-Part Motet Missus est angelus Gabriel and its Conflicting Attributions’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 171–83
  • H.M. Brown: ‘Notes Towards a Definition of Personal Style: Conflicting Attributions and the Six-Part Motets of Josquin and Mouton’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 185–207 [O virgo prudentissima]
  • A. van Campen: ‘Conflicting Attributions of Credo Vilayge II and Credo Chascun me crie ’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 93–8
  • W. Elders: ‘Who was Josquin?’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 1–14
  • E. Green: ‘La prononciation du français dans les chansons de Josquin des Prez’, TVNM, 36 (1986), 52–65
  • F. de Haen: ‘A Magnificat quarti toni with a Fourfold Ascription’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 117–23
  • B. Hudson: ‘Josquin and Brumel: the Conflicting Attributions’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 67–92
  • K. Knol: ‘Die Motette Tribulatio et angustia ’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 59–62
  • J.E. Kreider: ‘Works Attributed in the Sixteenth Century to both Josquin des Prez and Pierre de la Rue’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 103–16
  • F. Krummacher: ‘Schema und Varietas: zu Josquins Missa Malheur me bat’, Festschrift Martin Ruhnke zum 65. Geburtstag (Neuhausen-Stuttgart, 1986), 185–202
  • P. Macey: ‘ Celi enarrant: an Inauthentic Psalm Motet Attributed to Josquin’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 25–44
  • J.-P. Ouvrard: Josquin Desprez et ses contemporains, de l’écrit au sonore: guide pratique d’interpretation (Arles and Paris, 1986)
  • M. Perz: ‘Fragmenty lwowskie: źródło dzieł Dufaya, Josquina, Piotra de Domarto i Piotra z Grudziądza w Polsce XV wieku’, Muzyka, 34 (1986), 3–46
  • M. Perz: ‘The Lvov Fragments: a Source for Works of Dufay, Josquin, Petrus de Domarto, and Petrus de Grudencz in 15th-Century Poland’, TVNM, 36 (1986), 26–51 [Missa ‘L’ami Baudichon’, Missa ‘L’homme armé’ sexti toni ]
  • J. Rifkin: ‘Problems of Authorship in Josquin: some Impolitic Observations, with a Postscript on Absalon, fili mi ’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 45–52
  • M. Staehelin: ‘Luther über Josquin’, Festschrift Martin Ruhnke zum 65. Geburtstag (Neuhausen-Stuttgart, 1986), 326–38
  • R. Stewart: ‘Jean Mouton, Man and Musician: Motets Attributed to both Josquin and Mouton’, Josquin Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 155–70
  • L.H. Ward: ‘The Motetti Missales Repertory Reconsidered’, JAMS, 39 (1986), 491–523
  • J. Barbier: ‘Faulte d’argent: modèles polyphoniques et parodies au XVIe siècle’, RdM, 73 (1987), 171–202
  • J. van Benthem: ‘A Waif, a Wedding, and a Worshipped Child: Josquin’s Ut Phebi radiis and the Order of the Golden Fleece’, TVNM, 37 (1987), 64–81
  • W. Elders: ‘Josquin’s Absolve, quaesumus, Domine: a Tribute to Obrecht?’ TVNM, 37 (1987), 14–25
  • J. Lambrecht: Das ‘Heidelberger Kapellinventar’ von 1544 (Codex Pal. Germ. 318) (Heidelberg, 1987)
  • C. Reynolds: ‘Musical Evidence of Compositional Planning in the Renaissance: Josquin’s Plus nulz regretz ’, JAMS, 40 (1987), 53–81, 575
  • R. Sherr: ‘The Relationship between a Vatican Copy of the Gloria of Josquin’s Missa de Beata Virgine and Petrucci’s Print’, IMSCR XIV: Bologna 1987, 2, 266–71
  • F. de Haen: Josquin des Prez, ‘der noten Meister’ (Peer, 1988)
  • A. Dehaine: ‘La trace de Josquin des Prés dans les archives de Condé’, Valentiana: Revue d’histoire régionale publiée sous l’égide du Cercle Historique et Archéologique de Valenciennes, 1 (1988), 12–14
  • J. Haar: ‘Cosimo Bartoli on Music’, EMH, 8 (1988), 37–79
  • M. Just: ‘Zur Frage der Autorschaft in den Josquin des Prez zugeschriebenen Werken’, Opera incerta: Echtheitsfragen als Problem musikwissenschaftlicher Gesamtausgaben: Mainz 1988, 301–14
  • R. Sherr: ‘ Illibata Dei Virgo nutrix and Josquin’s Roman Style’, JAMS, 41 (1988), 434–64 [also Domine, non secundum]
  • R. Toft: ‘Traditions of Pitch Content in the Sources of two Sixteenth-Century Motets’, ML, 69 (1988), 334–45 [Inviolata, integra et casta es]
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Lazarus versus Absalon: about Fiction and Fact in the Netherlands Motet’, TVNM, 39 (1989), 54–82
  • W. Elders: ‘The Performance of Cantus Firmi in Josquin’s Masses based on Secular Monophonic Song’, EMc, 17 (1989), 330–41
  • W. Elders: ‘Le problème de l’authenticité chez Josquin et les éditions de Petrucci: une investigation préliminaire’, FAM, 36 (1989), 108–15
  • W. Elders: ‘Struktur, Zeichen und Symbol in der altniederländische Totenklage’, Zeichen und Struktur in der Musik der Renaissance, ed. K. Hortschansky (Kassel, 1989), 27–46
  • M. Just: ‘Josquins Vertonungen der Genealogien nach Matthäus und Lukas’, Zeichen und Struktur in der Musik der Renaissance, ed. K. Hortschansky (Kassel, 1989), 87–105
  • M.P. Long: ‘Symbol and Ritual in Josquin’s Missa di dadi ’, JAMS, 42 (1989), 1–22
  • E.E. Lowinsky: Music in the Culture of the Renaissance and Other Essays, ed. B.J. Blackburn (Chicago, 1989) [incl. reprints of articles listed above]
  • P. Macey: ‘Josquin’s “Little” Ave Maria: a Misplaced Motet from the Vultum tuum Cycle?’, TVNM, 39 (1989), 38–53
  • D. Preciado: ‘Francisco de Peñalosa versus Josquin Despres’, RdMc, 12 (1989), 423–430
  • W.F. Prizer: ‘Music at the Court of the Sforza: the Birth and Death of a Musical Center’, MD, 43 (1989), 141–93
  • H.M. Brown: ‘The Mirror of Man’s Salvation: Music in Devotional Life about 1500’, Renaissance Quarterly, 43 (1990), 744–73
  • A.M. Cummings: ‘The Transmission of Some Josquin Motets’, JRMA, 115 (1990), 1–32 [esp. O admirabile commercium]
  • D. Fabris: ‘The Tradition of the La sol fa re mi Theme from Josquin to the Neapolitans Through an Anonymous 4-part Ricercar (ca.1567)’, JLSA, 23 (1990), 37–47
  • J. Haar: ‘Lessons in Theory from a Sixteenth-Century Composer’, Essays on Italian Music in the Cinquecento, ed. R. Charteris (Sydney, 1990), 51–81
  • M. Just: ‘Josquins Chanson Nymphes, Nappés als Bearbeitung des Invitatoriums Circumdederunt me und als Grundlage für Kontrafaktur, Zitat und Nachahmung’, Mf, 43 (1990), 305–35
  • D.M. Randel: ‘Music and Poetry, History and Criticism: Reading the Fifteenth-Century Chanson’, Essays in Musicology: a Tribute to Alvin Johnson, ed. L. Lockwood and E.H. Roesner (Philadelphia, 1990), 52–74
  • R. Sherr: ‘Josquin’s Missa Pange lingua: a Note on Agnus Dei III’, EMc, 18 (1990), 271–5
  • H.C. Slim: ‘Dosso Dossi’s Allegory at Florence about Music’, JAMS, 43 (1990), 43–98 [Ag II, Missa ‘L’homme armé’ super voces musicales]
  • M. Teramoto: ‘Vorlage und Bearbeitung: die meist von dem Hofhaimerschen Kreis instrumental bearbeiteten Werke von Josquin Desprez’, Florilegio musicale, ed. K. Tanimura, U. Mabuchi and Y. Takimoto (Tokyo, 1990), 321–34
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Josquins Motette Huc me sydereo, oder Konstruktivismus als Ausdruck humanistisch geprägter Andacht?’, Die Motette: Beiträge zu ihrer Gattungsgeschichte, ed. H. Schneider (Mainz, 1991), 135–64
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Was “Une mousse de Biscaye” Really Appreciated by L’ami Baudichon?’, Muziek & Wetenschap, 1 (1991), 175–94
  • L.F. Bernstein: ‘A Canonic Chanson in a German Manuscript: Faulte d’argent and Josquin’s Approach to the Chanson for Five Voices’, Von Isaac bis Bach: Festschrift Martin Just, ed. F. Heidlberger, W. Osthoff and R. Wiesend (Kassel, 1991), 53–71
  • T. Brothers: ‘Vestiges of the Isorhythmic Tradition in Mass and Motet, ca.1450–1475’, JAMS, 44 (1991), 1–56 [Missa ‘L’ami Baudichon’, Illibata Dei virgo nutrix, Ave Mariavirgo serena]
  • N. Davison: ‘Continental Cousins of the In nomine Family?’, MR, 52 (1991), 1–11
  • D.E. Freeman: ‘On the Origins of the Pater nosterAve Maria of Josquin des Prez’, MD, 45 (1991), 169–219
  • M.L. Göllner: ‘ Praeter rerum seriem: its History and Sources’, Von Isaac bis Bach: Festschrift Martin Just, ed. F. Heidlberger, W. Osthoff and R. Wiesend (Kassel, 1991), 41–51
  • N.S. Josephson: ‘Formal Symmetry in the High Renaissance’, TVNM, 41 (1991), 105–33
  • W. Kirsch: ‘Zur Rezeption der Motetten Josquin Desprez’ im 19. Jahrhundert’, Die Motette: Beiträge zu ihrer Gattungsgeschichte, ed. H. Schneider (Mainz, 1991), 283–97
  • P. Macey: ‘Josquin’s Misericordias Domini and Louis XI’, EMc, 19 (1991), 163–77
  • J. Rifkin: ‘Motivik – Konstruktion – Humanismus: zu Josquins Motette Huc me sydereo ’, Die Motette: Beiträge zu ihrer Gattungsgeschichte, ed. H. Schneider (Mainz, 1991), 105–34
  • R. Sherr: ‘The Performance of Josquin’s L’homme armé Masses’, EMc, 19 (1991), 261–8
  • G. Allaire: ‘Some Overlooked Modulations in the Works of Josquin des Pres?’, RBM, 46 (1992), 33–51
  • T.W. Bridges: ‘Louis XII and Guillaume: One Note, One More Time’, The Creative Process, Studies in the History of Music, 3 (New York, 1992), 3–16
  • L.D. Brothers: ‘On Music and Meditation in the Renaissance: Contemplative Prayer and Josquin’s Miserere ’, JMR, 12 (1992–3), 157–87
  • H.M. Brown: ‘On Veronica and Josquin’, New Perspectives on Music: Essays in Honor of Eileen Southern, ed. J. Wright and S.A. Floyd (Warren, MI, 1992), 49–61 [Salve sancta facies]
  • E. Jas: ‘Some Newly Discovered Fragments of Sixteenth-Century Polyphony’, TVNM, 42 (1992), 69–89
  • C.C. Judd: ‘Josquin des Prez: Salve regina (à 5)’, Models of Musical Analysis: Music before 1600, ed. M. Everist (Oxford, 1992), 114–53
  • C.C. Judd: ‘Modal Types and Ut, Re, Mi Tonalities: Tonal Coherence in Sacred Vocal Polyphony from about 1500’, JAMS, 45 (1992), 428–67
  • D. Kiang: ‘Josquin Desprez and a Possible Portrait of the Ottoman Prince Jem in Cappella Sistina Ms.41’, Bibliothèque d’humanisme et Renaissance, 54 (1992), 411–26 [MissaLa sol fa re mi’]
  • P. Kiràly: ‘Un séjour de Josquin des Prés a la cour de Hongrie?’, RdM, 78 (1992), 145–50
  • R. Sherr: ‘The Performance of Chant in the Renaissance and its Interactions with Polyphony’, Plainsong in the Age of Polyphony, ed. T.F. Kelly (Cambridge, 1992), 178–208
  • M.P. Brauner: ‘Traditions in the Repertory of the Papal Choir in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries’, Papal Music and Musicians in Medieval and Renaissance Rome, ed. R. Sherr (Oxford, 1998), 167–74
  • H. Elzinga: ‘Josquin’s Missa Quem dicunt homines: a Reexamination’, TVNM, 42 (1993), 87–104
  • J. Haar: ‘Josquin as Interpreted by a Mid-Sixteenth-Century German Musician’, Festschrift für Horst Leuchtmann, ed. S. Hörner and B. Schmid (Tutzing, 1993), 179–205
  • L. Lockwood: ‘Music at Florence and Ferrara in the Late Fifteenth Century: Rivalry and Interdependence’, La musica a Firenze al tempo di Lorenzo il Magnifico, ed. P. Gargiulo (Florence, 1993), 1–13
  • P. Macey: ‘Josquin as Classic: Qui habitat, Memor esto, and Two Imitations Unmasked’, JRMA, 118 (1993), 1–43 [Levavi oculos meos, Nunc dimittis]
  • P. Urquhart: ‘Cross-relations by Franco-Flemish Composers after Josquin’, TVNM, 43 (1993), 3–41 [Ave Maria … virgo serena]
  • E.S. Welch: ‘Sight, Sound and Ceremony in the Chapel of Galeazzo Maria Sforza’, EMH, 12 (1993), 151–90
  • L.F. Bernstein: ‘ Ma bouche rit et mon cueur pleure: a Chanson a 5 Attributed to Josquin des Prez’, JM, 12 (1994), 253–86
  • W. Elders: Symbolic Scores: Studies in the Music of the Renaissance (Leiden, 1994)
  • B. Haggh: ‘Josquin’s Portrait: New Evidence’, From Ciconia to Sweelinck: Donum natalicium Willem Elders, ed. A. Clement and E. Jas (Amsterdam, 1994), 91–110
  • M. Just: ‘Josquin des Prez: Missa L’homme armé super voces musicales ’, Grosse Chorwerke: Werkanalyse in Beispielen, ed. S. Helms and R. Schneider (Kassel, 1994), 11–34
  • P. Macey: ‘Some Thoughts on Josquin’s Illibata dei virgo nutrix and Galeazzo Maria Sforza’, From Ciconia to Sweelinck: Donum natalicium Willem Elders, ed. A. Clement and E. Jas (Amsterdam, 1994), 111–24
  • L. Matthews and P.A. Merkley: ‘Josquin Desprez and His Milanese Patrons’, JM, 12 (1994), 434–63
  • J. Noble: ‘Another Regina celi Attributed to Josquin’, From Ciconia to Sweelinck: Donum natalicium Willem Elders, ed. A. Clement and E. Jas (Amsterdam, 1994), 145–52
  • R. Sherr: ‘A Biographical Miscellany: Josquin, Tinctoris, Obrecht, Brumel’, Musicologia humana: Studies in Honor of Warren and Ursula Kirkendale, ed. S. Gmeinwieser, D. Hiley and J. Riedlbauer (Florence, 1994), 65–73
  • P.W. Urquhart: ‘An Accidental Flat in Josquin’s Sine nomine Mass’, From Ciconia to Sweelinck: Donum natalicium Willem Elders, ed. A. Clement and E. Jas (Amsterdam, 1994), 125–44
  • R.C. Wegman: Born for the Muses: the Life and Masses of Jacob Obrecht (Oxford, 1994)
  • W. Elders: ‘The Symbolism of Reconciliation in Agnus Dei Settings of Josquin des Prez’, Das Blut Jesu und die Lehre von der Versöhnung im Werk Johann Sebastian Bachs, ed. A.A. Clement (Amsterdam, 1995), 49–62
  • E.F. Fiedler: ‘A New Mass by Gaspar van Weerbeke? Thoughts on Comparative Analysis’, Studien zur Musikgeschichte: eine Festschrift für Ludwig Finscher, ed. A. Laubenthal (Kassel, 1995), 72–87 [Missa Une musque de Biscaye]
  • L. Finscher: ‘“…auss sunderem Lust zu den überschönen Worten”: zur Psalmkomposition bei Josquin Desprez und seiner Zeitgenossen’, Literatur, Musik und Kunst im Übergang vom Mittelalter zur Neuzeit, ed. H. Boockman and others (Göttingen, 1995), 246–61 [Miserere mei, Deus, Memor esto]
  • L. Litterick: ‘Vocal or Instrumental? A Methodology for Ambiguous Cases’, Le concert de voix et des instruments à la Renaissance, ed. J.-M. Vaccaro (Paris, 1995), 157–78
  • O. Rees: ‘ Mille regretz as Model: Possible Allusions to “The Emperor’s Song” in the Chanson Repertory’, JRMA, 120 (1995), 44–76
  • M. Teramoto: ‘Text und Musik in den Psalmmotetten von Josquin Desprez’, Studien zur Musikgeschichte: Eine Festschrift für Ludwig Finscher, ed. A. Laubenthal and K. Kusan-Windweh (Kassel, 1995), 100–10
  • C. Vendramini: ‘Le cantus firmus dans les six messes Hercules dux ferrariae’, Itinéraires du cantus firmus IV: de l’église a la salle de concert: Paris 1995, 37–48
  • N. Davison: ‘ Absalom fili mi Reconsidered’, TVNM, 46 (1996), 42–56
  • D. Fallows: ‘Josquin and Milan’, PMM, 5 (1996), 69–80
  • L. Lockwood: ‘A View of the Early Secular Style of Josquin Desprez’, Trent’anni di ricerca musicologica: studi in onore di F. Alberto Gallo, ed. P. Dalla Vecchia and D. Restani (Rome, 1996), 161–6
  • P. Macey: ‘Galeazzo Maria Sforza and Musical Patronage in Milan: Compère, Weerbeke, and Josquin’, EMH, 15 (1996), 147–212 [Vultum tuum]
  • P.A. Merkley: ‘Patronage and Clientage in Galeazzo’s Court’, Musica e storia, 4 (1996), 121–53
  • J. Roset: Josquin des Prez: 1440–1521: prince de la musique (Saint-Quentin, 1996)
  • M. Steib: ‘A Composer Looks at his Model: Polyphonic Borrowing in Masses from the Late Fifteenth Century’, TVNM, 46 (1996), 5–41 [Missa Fortuna desperata]
  • R.C. Wegman: ‘From Maker to Composer: Improvisation and Musical Authorship in the Low Countries, 1450–1500’, JAMS, 49 (1996), 409–79
  • L.F. Bernstein: ‘Josquin’s Chansons as Generic Paradigms’, Music in Renaissance Cities and Courts: Studies in Honor of Lewis Lockwood, ed. J.A. Owens and A.M. Cummings (Warren, MI, 1997), 35–55 [Mon mary m’a diffammée, Adieu mes amours, Entrée suis (3vv), Faulte d’argent]
  • B.J. Blackburn: ‘For Whom do the Singers Sing?’, EMc, 25 (1997), 593–609 [O domine Jesu Christe; Salve sancta facies; Ave Maria … virgo serena]
  • A.-E. Ceulemans: ‘L’analyse des structures modales dans le répertoire polyphonique préclassique: Les Kyrie de Josquin des Prez’, Musurgia, 4 (1997), 43–65
  • L. Clutterham: ‘Dating Josquin’s Enigmatic Motet Illibata Dei virgo nutrix’, The Choral Journal, 38 (1997), 9–14
  • A.M. Cummings: ‘Notes on a Josquin Motet and its Sources’, Music in Renaissance Cities and Courts: Studies in Honor of Lewis Lockwood, ed. J.A. Owens and A.M. Cummings (Warren, MI, 1997), 113–22 [Alma redemptoris mater/Ave regina caelorum]
  • W. Drake: ‘A New Source for the Text of Josquin’s Passion Motet Cycle O Domine Jesu Christe’, Context, no.13 (1997), 35–46
  • P. Higgins: ‘Musical “Parents” and their “Progeny”: the Discourse of Creative Patriarchy in Early Modern Europe’, Music in Renaissance Cities and Courts: Studies in Honor of Lewis Lockwood, ed. J.A. Owens and A.M. Cummings (Warren, MI, 1997), 169–86
  • J.A. Owens: ‘How Josquin became Josquin: Reflections on Historiography and Reception’, Music in Renaissance Cities and Courts: Studies in Honor of Lewis Lockwood, ed. J.A. Owens and A.M. Cummings (Warren, MI, 1997), 271–80
  • P.F. Starr: ‘Josquin, Rome, and a Case of Mistaken Identity’, JM, 15 (1997), 43–65
  • J. Barbier: ‘Josquin a la cour de Lorraine? ou “Comment peult avoir joye”’, Symphonies lorraines: compositeurs, exécutants, destinataires: Lunéville 1998, 11–28
  • H.M. Brown: ‘The Joys of Mary by Josquin and Others’, All Kinds of Music: In Honour of Andrew D. McCredie, ed. G. Strahle and D. Swale (Wihelmshaven, 1998), 30–46
  • A.-E. Ceulemans: ‘A Stylistic Investigation of Missa Une mousse de Biscaye, in the Light of its Attribution to Josquin des Prez’, TVNM, 48 (1998), 30–50
  • A.-E. Ceulemans: ‘Une étude comparative du traitement de la mélodie et de la dissonance chez Ockeghem et chez Josquin Desprez’, Johannes Ockeghem: Tours 1997, 707–53
  • V. Coelho: ‘Revisiting the Workshop of Howard Mayer Brown: Obsecro te Domina and the Context of Arrangement’, ‘La musique, de tous les passetemps le plus beau’: hommage à Jean-Michel Vaccaro, ed. F. Lesure and H. Vanhulst (Paris, 1998), 47–65
  • W. Elders: ‘New Light on the Dating of Josquin’s Hercules Mass’, TVNM, 48 (1998), 112–49
  • C.C. Judd: ‘Josquin’s Gospel Motets and Chant-Based Tonality’, Tonal Structures in Early Music, ed. C.C. Judd (New York, 1998), 109–54
  • M. Just: ‘Kontrafacta von Werken Josquins in der Handschrift Leipzig U 49/50’, Aneignung durch Verwandlung: Aufsätze zur deutschen Musik und Architektur des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts, ed. W. Steude (Laaber, 1998), 85–105
  • P. Macey: Bonfire Songs: Savonarola’s Musical Legacy (Oxford, 1998)
  • J.-C. Margolin: ‘A travers quelques déplorations: pour un ‘tombeau’ littéraire de Jean de Ockeghem’, ‘… La musique, de tous les passetemps le plus beau…’: Hommage à Jean-Michel Vaccaro, ed. F. Lesure and H. Vanhulst (Paris, 1998), 289–315
  • L. Matthews: ‘Josquin Desprez and Ascanio Sforza: a Singer in the Cardinal’s Retinue’, Chant and its Peripheries: Essays in Honour of Terence Bailey, ed. B. Gillingham and P. Merkley (Ottawa, 1998), 359–69
  • L. Matthews: ‘Reconstruction of the Personnel of the Ducal Choir in Milan, 1480–1499’, Musica e storia, 6 (1998), 297–312
  • L. Matthews and P. Merkley: ‘Iudochus de Picardia and Jossequin Lebloitte dit Desprez: the Names of the Singer(s)’, JM, 16 (1998), 200–226
  • H. Meconi: ‘Another Look at Absalon’, TVNM, 48 (1998), 3–29
  • T.H. Steele: ‘Tonal Coherence and the Cycle of Thirds in Josquin‘s Memor esto verbi tui ’, Tonal Structures in Early Music, ed. C.C. Judd (New York, 1998), 155–81
  • M. Steib: ‘A Study in Style, or Josquin or not Josquin: the Missa Allez regretz Question’, JM, 16 (1998), 519–44
  • D. Fallows: ‘Approaching a New Chronology for Josquin: an Interim Report’, Schweizer Jb für Musikwissenschaft, new ser., 19 (1999, 131–50
  • H. Kellman, ed.: The Treasury of Petrus Alamire: Music and Art in Flemish Court Manuscripts, 1500–1535 (Ghent and Amsterdam, 1999)
  • A. Kirkman: ‘From Humanism to Enlightenment: Reinventing Josquin’, JM, 17 (1999), 441–58
  • P.A. and L.L.M. Merkley: Music and Patronage in the Sforza Court (Turnhout, 1999)
  • K. Pietschmann: ‘Ein Graffito von Josquin Desprez auf der Cantoria der Sixtinischen Kapelle’, Mf, 52 (1999), 204–7
  • R.C. Wegman: ‘“And Josquin Laughed …”: Josquin and the Composer’s Anecdote in the Sixteenth Centruy’, JM, 17 (1999), 319–57
  • J. Barbier: ‘La chanson polyphonique au XVIe siècle: Introduction et illustrations (Josquin Despres, Janequin, Passereau, Lassus)’, Analyse musicale, no.36 (2000), 4–21
  • R. Sherr: ‘Chronology of Josquin’s Life and Career’, JC, 11–20
  • R.C. Wegman: ‘Who Was Josquin?’, JC, 21–50
  • B.J. Blackburn: ‘Masses Based on Popular Songs and Solmization Syllables’, JC, 51–87
  • A.E. Planchart: ‘Masses on Plainsong Cantus Firmi’, JC, 89–150
  • M.J. Bloxam: ‘Masses Based on Polyphonic Songs and Canonic Masses’, JC, 151–209
  • R. Sherr: ‘Mass Sections’, JC, 211–38
  • R. Sherr: ‘Missa Da pacem and Missa Allez regretz’, JC 239–47
  • L. Finscher: ‘Four-Voice Motets’, JC, 249–79
  • J. Milsom: ‘Motets for Five or More Voices’, JC, 281–320
  • R. Sherr: ‘Two Hymns and Three Magnificats’, JC, 321–34
  • L. Litterick: ‘Chansons for Three and Four Voices’, JC, 335–91
  • L.F. Bernstein: ‘Chansons for Five and Six Voices’, JC, 393–422
  • R. Sherr: ‘Three Settings of Italian Texts and Two Secular Motets’, JC, 423–30
  • J. Milsom: ‘Analysing Josquin’, JC, 431–84
  • P. Macey: ‘Josquin and Musical Rhetoric: Miserere mei, Deus and Other Motets’, JC, 485–530
  • W. Elders: ‘Symbolism in the Sacred Music of Josquin’, JC, 531–68
  • D. Fallows: ‘Afterword: Thoughts for the Future’, JC, 569–78
  • P. Urquhart: ‘List of Works; Discography’, JC, 579–639
  • O. Bluteau: ‘De Josquin a Passereau: Quatre chansons en leur temps’, Musurgia, 7 (2000), 7–18
  • A.-E. Ceulemans: ‘Les messes L’Homme armée de Josquin des Prez’, Musurgia, 7 (2000), 29–43
  • A. Coeurdevey: ‘Josquin des Pres, Nymphes des bois: Deploration sur la mort de Johannes Ockeghem: de l’etude des sources a l’analyse’, Musurgia, 7 (2000), 49–81
  • S. Czajkowski: ‘“Stabat mater” Josquina des Prés w nieznanei kopii wawelskiej z początku XVIII wieku’, Muzyka, 45 (2000), 59–65
  • D. Ens: ‘Josquin Desprez’ “Deploration de Iohan. Ockeghem”’, Musik & Asthetik, no.4 (2000), 45–58
  • A. Fiumara: ‘Escobedo’s Missa Philippus Rex Hispanie: a Spanish Descendant of Josquin’s Hercules Mass’, EMc, 28 (2000), 50–62
  • E. Jas: ‘The Dating and Chronology of the Works of Josquin des Prez’, Musicology and its Sister Disciplines: Past, Present, Future, ed. D. Greer, I. Rumbold, and J. King (Oxford, 2000), 464–7
  • A. Roth: ‘Judocus de Kessalia and Judocus de Pratis’, Recercare, 12 (2000), 23–51
  • A. Tacaille, S. Dumont, and D. Janela: ‘La Chanson polyphonique de la Renaissance’, Musurgia, 7 (2000), 19–47
  • A. Tacaille: ‘La reference multiple au corpus gregorien: Explorations du lien a travers les motets “tour de force” de l’ecole franco-flamande’, Histoire, humanisme et hymnologie: Melangies offerts au professeur Edith Weber, ed. L. Jambou and P. Guillot (Paris, 2000), 389–405
  • J. van Benthem: ‘“Kommst in die ersten Kreise!”: Josquins Missa L’ami Baudichon-Ihre Originalgestalt und ihre Überlieferung in Petruccis Missarum Josquin Liber Secundus’, Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, 25 (2001), [J3]71–83
  • J. van Benthem: ‘La magie des cris trenchantz: Comment le vray trésorier de musique échappe a la trappe du tres terrible satrappe’, Théorie et analyse musicales: 1450–1650, ed. B.J. Blackburn and A.-E. Ceulemans (Louvain 2001), 119–47
  • D. J. Burn: ‘“Nam erit haec quoque laus eorum” Imitation, Competition and the “L’homme armé” Tradition’, RdM, 87 (2001), 249–87
  • W. Elders: ‘Da faam van Josquin des Prez, jub leven en postuum’, Een muziekgeschiedenis der Nederlanden, ed. L.P. Grijp and others (Kapellen, Belguim, 2001), 122–7
  • D. Fallows: ‘Petrucci’s Canti Volumes: Scope and Repertory’, Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, 25 (2001), 39–52
  • D. Fallows: ‘Who Composed Mille regretz?’, Essays on Music and Culture in Honor of Herbert Kellman, ed. B. Haggh (Paris, 2001), 241–52
  • W. Frobenius: ‘Josquins Chanson Plus nulz regretz: Quellenkritik und Analyse’, Musik und Szene: Festchrift für Werner Braun zum 75 Geburtstag (Saarbrücken, 2001), 431–55
  • B. Haggh: ‘Du Fay and Josquin at the Collegiate Church of St. Gudila’, RBM, 55 (2001), 41–52
  • W. Kirsch: ‘Das Bild des Beters im Zeitalter des Humanismus: Zu einigen “Pater noster-Ave Maria” – Vertonungen von Josquin Despres bis Orlando di Lasso’, Quellenstudium und musikalische Analyse: Festschrift Martin Just zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. P. Niedermüller, C. Urcheguía, and O. Wiener (Wurzburg, 2001), 83–106
  • H. Meconi: ‘Josquin and Musical Reputation’, Essays on Music and Culture in Honor of Herbert Kellman, ed. B. Haggh (Paris, 2001), pp, 280–97
  • S. Mengozzi: ‘Josquinian Voices and Guidonian Listeners’, Essays on Music and Culture in Honor of Herbert Kellman, ed. B. Haggh (Paris, 2001), 253–79
  • P. Merkley: ‘Josquin Desprez in Ferrara’, JM, 18 (2001), 544–83
  • J. Noble: ‘The Genealogies of Christ and Their Musical Settings’, Essays on Music and Culture in Honor of Herbert Kellman, ed. B. Haggh (Paris, 2001), 197–208
  • M. Picker: ‘A Spurious Motet of Josquin, a Chanson by Gombert, and Some Related Works: a Case Study in Contrafactum and Parody’, Quellenstudium und musikalische Analyse: Festschrift Martin Just zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. P. Niedermüller, C. Urcheguía, and O. Wiener (Würzburg, 2001), 33–45 [Tulerunt dominum meum; Lugebat David Absalom]
  • S. Rohringer: ‘Zum Kyrie aus Josquin des Prez’ Missa L’homme armé sexti toni: Überlegungen zu einem Begriff der “Harmonik” bezüglich der Musik des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts’, Musiktheorie zwischen Historie und Semantik: Dresden 2001, 279–90
  • R. Sherr: ‘Josquin’s Red Nose’, Essays on Music and Culture in Honor of Herbert Kellman, ed. B. Haggh (Paris, 2001), 209–40 [Credo Chaschun me crie (de rouges nez)]
  • R. Sherr: ‘Petrucci and the Problem of Planxit autem David’, Venezia 1501: Petrucci e la stampa musicale: Venice 2001, 351–73
  • L. Lockwood: ‘Petrucci’s Edition of Josquin’s Missa Hercules Dux Ferrarie’, Venezia 1501: Petrucci e la stampa musicale: Venice 2001, 391–5
  • J. Thomas: ‘The Core Motet Repertory of 16th-Century Europe: a View of Renaissance Musical Culture’, Essays in Music and Culture in Honor of Herbert Kellman, ed. B. Haggh (Paris, 2001), 335–76
  • C. J. Westendorf: ‘Josquin in the Early German Baroque: Seth Calvisius’ Parody of Praeter rerum seriem’, Essays on Music and Culture in Honor of Herbert Kellman, ed. B. Haggh (Paris, 2001), 298–310
  • C. Wright: The Maze and the Warrior: Symbols in Architecture, Theology, and Music (Cambridge, MA, 2001)
  • M. Bent: ‘Diatonic Ficta Revisited: Josquin’s Ave Maria in Context’, Counterpoint, Composition and Musica Ficta (New York and London, 2002), 199–217
  • T.M. Borgerding: ‘Sic ego te diligebam: Music, Homoeroticism and the Sacred in Early Modern Europe’, Gender, Sexuality and Early Music, ed. T.M. Borgerding (New York, 2002), 249–63 [Planxit autem David]
  • D. Fallows: ‘French and Italian Pronunciation in Josquin’s Motets,’ Regards Croisés: Musiques, musiciens, artistes et voyageurs entre France et Italie au XVe siècle, ed. N. Guidobaldi (Paris, 2002), p. 105–18
  • D. Fallows: ‘Josquin and Trent 91: Thoughts on Omnium bonorum plena and His Activities in the 1470s’, Manoscritti di polifonia nel quattrocento Europeo: Trent 2002, 205–11
  • D. Lawrence: ‘Mudarra’s Instrumental Glosas: Imitation and Homage in a Spanish Style’, Encomium musicæ: Essays in Memory of Robert J. Snow, ed. D. Crawford and G.G. Wagstaff (Hillsdale, 2002), 305–19
  • L. Lockwood, ed.: A Ferrarese Chansonnier: Roma, Biblioteca casanatense 2856, ‘Canzoniere di Isabella d’Este’ (Lucca, 2002)
  • P. Macey: ‘A Musical Detective Story: Josquin’s Motet Cycle for the Sforza Rulers of Milan’, American Choral Review, 44 (2002), 1–8 [Vultum tuum]
  • J. Milsom: ‘Josquin and Jacquet: a New Tudor Source?’, TVNM, 52 (2002), 111–31 [Stabat mater]
  • J. Milsom: ‘Sense and Sound in Richafort’s Requiem’, EMc, 30 (2002), 447–63
  • B. Nelson: ‘A “Parody” on Josquin’s Inviolata in Barcelona 1967: an Unknown Mass by Philippe Verdelot?’, JRMA, 127 (2002), 153–90
  • S.P. Schlagel: ‘The Liber selectarum cantionum and the “German Josquin Renaissance”’, JM, 19 (2002), 564–615
  • M. Zywietz: ‘Fortdauerndes Mittelalter und Humanismus: Die 24stimmige Psalm-motette Qui habitat in adiutorio Altissimi von Josquin Desprez’, Ars und Scientia im Mittelalter und in der Frühen Neuzeit, ed. C. Dietl and D. Helschinger (Tübingen and Basel, 2002), 215–34
  • P. C. Chagas: ‘Information and Polyphony: Spectral and Temporal Transformation in the Motets of Josquin des Prez’, Musical Semiotics Revisited, ed. E. Tarasti (Helsinki, 2003), 411–21
  • P. W. Christoffersen: ‘Hvad enhver kordreng skal kunne: Betragtning af motetten Ut Phebi radiis af Josquin Desprez’, Musik og Forskning, 28 (2003), 97–118
  • D. Fallows: ‘What Happened to El grillo’, EMc, 21 (2003), 390–98
  • C. Fiore: Josquin des Prez (Palermo, 2003)
  • B. Haggh: ‘Charles de Clerc, Seigneur de Bouvekercke, and Two Manuscripts: Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale de Belgique, MS 215–216, and Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale, MS VI E 40’, Yearbook of the Alamire Foundation, 5 (2003), 185–202 [Stabat mater]
  • P. Urquhart: ‘Forbidden Intervals in Josquin: Evidence from the Alamire Sources’, Yearbook of the Alamire Foundation, 5 (2003), 233–45
  • D. Fallows: ‘Alamire as a Composer’, Yearbook of the Alamire Foundation, 5 (2003), 247–58 [La Spagna]
  • M. Picker: ‘The Alamire Scriptorium and the Dissemination of the ‘New’ Franco-Flemish Chanson in the Early Sixteenth Century’, Yearbook of the Alamire Foundation, 5 (2003), 285–98
  • W. Elders: ‘The Masses of Josquin in the Manuscripts of the Burgundian-Habsburg Court: a Preliminary Report’, Yearbook of the Alamire Foundation, 5 (2003), 325–35
  • K. Kreitner: ‘Ave festiva ferculis and Josquin’s Spanish Reputation’, JRMA, 128 (2003), 1–29
  • P. Macey: ‘An Expressive Detail in Josquin’s Nimphes, nappés, EMc, 31 (2003), 401–11
  • H. Meconi: Pierre de la Rue and Musical Life at the Habsburg-Burgundian Court (Oxford, 2003)
  • E. Ostrem: ‘Luther, Josquin and des fincken gesang’, The Arts and the Cultural Heritage of Martin Luther, ed. E. Ostrem, J. Fleischer, and N.H. Petersen (Copenhagen, 2003), 51–79
  • J. Rifkin: ‘Munich, Milan, and a Marian Motet: Dating Josquin’s Ave Maria … virgo serena’, JAMS, 56 (2003), 239–350
  • T. Schmidt-Beste: Textdeklamation in der Motette des 15. Jahrhunderts (Turnhout, 2003)
  • P. Higgins: ‘The Apotheosis of Josquin des Prez and Other Mythologies of Musical Genius’, JAMS, 57 (2004), 443–510
  • T. R. McKinney: ‘“Affectus mire hercules ubique expressit”: Heinrich Glarean on Text and Tone in Josquin’s Planxit autem David’, Theoria: Historical Aspects of Music Theory, 11 (2004), 1–34
  • M.J. Mouser: ‘Petrucci and His Shadow: a Case Study of Reception History’, FAM, 51 (2004), 19–52
  • K. Pietschmann: ‘Die Sängergraffiti auf der Cantoria der Sixtinischen Kapelle zwischen Selbstglorifizierung und memorialer Frömmigkeit’, AnMc, 33 (2004), 81–99
  • C. Reynolds: ‘Interpreting and Dating Josquin’s Missa Hercules dux ferrariae’, Early Musical Borrrowing, ed. H. Meconi (New York, 2004), 91–110
  • P. Urquhart: ‘Another Impolitic Observaton on Absalon, fili mi’, JM, 21 (2004), 343–80
  • M. Zywietz: ‘Dulces exuviae: Die Vergil-Vertonungen des Josquin des Prez’, AMw, 61 (2004), 245–54
  • C. Berger: ‘Glareans äolischer Modus und das Kyrie aus Josquins Missa De beata virgine’, Trossinger Jahrbuch für Renaissancemusik, 5 (2005), 161–76
  • T.J. Dickey: ‘Rethinking the Siena Choirbook: a New Date and Implications for its Musical Contents’, EMH, 24 (2005), 1–52
  • D. Fallows: ‘Josquin and Popular Songs’, Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, 29 (2005), 161–71
  • L. Lockwood: ‘From Josquin des Prez to Cipriano de Rore: Tradition and Transformation in Sixteenth-Century Ferrarese Musical Culture’, Phaethon’s Children: the Este Court and its Culture in Early Modern Ferrara, ed. D. Looney and D. Shemek (Ithaca, NY, 2005), 253–67
  • J. Milsom: ‘“Imitatio”, “Intertextuality”, and Early Music’, Citation and Authority in Medieval and Renaissance Musical Culture: Learning from the Learned, ed. S. Clark and E.E. Leach (Woodbridge, 2005), 141–51
  • J. Rodin: ‘Finishing Josquin’s “Unfinished” Mass: A Case of Stylistic Imitation in the Cappella Sistina’, JM, 22 (2005), 412–53 [Missa ‘L’homme armé’ super voces musicales]
  • A. Pfisterer: ‘Zum Verhältnis der Fortuna-Messen von Josquin und Obrecht’, Mf, 58 (2005), 267–73
  • K. Schiltz: ‘“Magis est ingenij ostentatio quam auditum reficiens adeo iucunditas”: Glareans Umgang mid Rätselkanons”, Trossinger Jahrbuch für Renaissancemusik, 5 (2005), 213–33
  • R.C. Wegman: The Crisis of Music in Early Modern Europe, 1470–1530 (London, 2005)
  • R.C. Wegman: ‘Musical Offerings in the Renaissance’, EMc, 33 (2005), 425–37
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Ist Josquins Dulces exuvie eine Motette?’, TVNM, 56 (2006), 77–95
  • X. Bisaro: ‘Le motet In illo tempore assumpsit Jesus de Josquin: de l’economie du salut a l’economie de l’ecoute’, Analyse musicale, no.54 (2006), 33–9
  • A.M. Cummings: ‘The Motet’, European Music 1520–1640, ed. J. Haar (Woodbridge, 2006), 130–56
  • K. van Orden: ‘Chanson and Air’, European Music 1520–1640, ed. J. Haar (Woodbridge, 2006), 193–224
  • M. Hund: ‘Fresh Light on Josquin Dascanio’s Enigmatic El grillo’, TVNM, 56 (2006), 5–16
  • J. Rodin: ‘A Josquin Substitution’, EMc, 34 (2006), 249–57 [Missa ‘L’homme armé’ super voces musicales]
  • D.J. Rothenberg: ‘The Marian Symbolism of Spring, ca. 1200–ca. 1500: Two Case Studies’, JAMS, 59 (2006), 319–98 [Victimae paschali laudes/D’ung aultre amer]
  • S.P. Schlagel: ‘A Credible (Mis)Attribution to Josquin in Hans Ott’s Novum et insigne opus musicum: Contemporary Perceptions, Modern Conceptions, and the Case of Veni sancte spiritus’, TVNM, 56 (2006), 97–126
  • S.P. Schlagel, ed.: Si placet Parts for Motets by Josquin and his Contemporaries, RRMR, 146 (Middleton, WI, 2006)
  • J. van Benthem: ‘Jak skomponować motet ku czci Dziewicy: Josquin des Prez i jego motet Illibata Dei virgo nutrix’, Muzyka, 52 (2007), 3–30
  • B.J. Blackburn: ‘Two Treasure Chests of Canonic Antiquities: the Collections of Hermann Finck and Lodovico Zacconi’, Canons and Canonic Techniques, 14th–16th Centuries: Theory, Practice, and Reception History, ed. K. Schiltz and B.J. Blackburn (Leuven and Dudley, MA, 2007), 303–38
  • J.E. Cumming: ‘From Chapel Choirbook to Print Partbook and Back Again’, Cappelle musicali fra corte, stato e chiesa nell’Italia del Rinascimento, ed. F. Piperno, G. Biagi Ravenni and A. Chegai (Florence, 2007), 373–403
  • P. Higgins: ‘Lamenting “Our Master and Good Father”: Intertextuality and Creative Patrilineage in Musical Tributes by and for Johannes Ockeghem’, Tod in Musik und Kultur: zum 500. Todestags Philipps des Schönen, ed. S. Gasch and B. Lodes (Tutzing, 2007), 277–314
  • P.A. Merkley and L.M. Matthews: ‘Aspects of Sacred Music and the Network of Patrons at Court during the Time of Ercole d’Este’, Cappelle musicali fra corte, stato e chiesa nell’Italia del Rinascimento, ed. F. Piperno, G. Biagi Ravenni, and A. Chegai (Florence, 2007), 193–229 [Virgo salutiferi]
  • S. Rice: ‘Resonances of Josquin in Later Inviolata Settings’, Canons and Canonic Techniques, 14th–16th Centuries: Theory, Practice, and Reception History, ed. K. Schiltz and B.J. Blackburn (Leuven and Dudley, MA, 2007), 197–220
  • P. Urquhart: ‘The Persistence of Exact Canon throughout the Sixteenth Century’, Canons and Canonic Techniques, 14th–16th Centuries: Theory, Practice, and Reception History, ed. K. Schiltz and B.J. Blackburn (Leuven and Dudley, MA, 2007), 171–96
  • J. van Benthem: ‘O Mater Dei, Memento Mei. Annotations sur les structures symboliques de quatorze motets mariaux de Josquin des Prez’, Musique, théologie et sacré, d’Oresme à Érasme, ed. A. Coeurdevey and P. Vendrix (Ambronay, 2008), 231–89
  • L. Candelaria: The Rosary Cantoral: Ritual and Social Design in a Chantbook from Early Renaissance Toledo (Rochester, NY, 2008)
  • J. E. Cumming: ‘From Variety to Repetition: the Birth of Imitative Polyphony’, Yearbook of the Alamire Foundation, 6 (2008), 21–44
  • W. Elders: ‘Josquin in the Sources of Spain: an Evaluation of Two Unique Evaluations’, ‘Recevez ce mien petit labeur’: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Ignace Bossuyt, ed. M. Delaere and P. Berge (Leuven, 2008), 61–70
  • E. Jas: ‘Josquin, Willaert, and Douleur me bat’, ‘Recevez ce mien petit labeur’: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Ignace Bossuyt, ed. M. Delaere and P. Berge (Leuven, 2008), 119–30
  • L. Lütteken: ‘Die Entstehung der musikalischen Geschichte: Historisierung und ästhetische Praxis am Beispiel Josquins’, ‘Recevez ce mien petit labeur’: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Ignace Bossuyt, ed. M. Delaere and P. Berge (Leuven, 2008), 163–78
  • W. Elders: ‘Le symbolisme dans la musique sacrée des XVe et XVIe siècles’, Musique, théologie et sacré, d’Oresme à Érasme, ed. A. Coeurdevey and P. Vendrix (Ambronay, 2008), 97–147
  • V. Koutsobina: ‘Readings of Poetry – Readings of Music: Intertextuality in Josquin’s Je me complains de mon amy’, EMc, 36 (2008), 67–78
  • J. Rifkin: ‘Who Really Composed Mille regretz?’, Quomodo cantabimus canticum? Studies in Honor of Edward H. Roesner, ed. D.B. Cannata, G.I. Currie, R.C. Mueller, J.L. Nádas (Middleton, WI, 2008), 187–208
  • J. Rodin: ‘“When in Rome…” What Josquin Learned in the Sistine Chapel’, JAMS, 61 (2008), 307–72
  • R.C. Wegman: ‘Ockeghem, Brumel, Josquin: New Documents in Troyes’, EMc, 36 (2008), 203–17
  • R.C. Wegman: ‘The Other Josquin’, TVNM, 58 (2008), 33–68 [Inter natos mulierum]
  • T. Dumitrescu: ‘Reconstructing and Repositioning Regis’s Ave Maria … virgo serena’, EMc, 37 (2009), 73–88
  • W. Elders: ‘A New Case of Number Symbolism in Josquin?’, EMc, 37 (2009), 21–6 [Stabat mater]
  • D. Fallows: Josquin (Turnhout, 2009)
  • D. Fallows: ‘Josquin and “Il n’est plaisir”’, EMc, 37 (2009), 3–8
  • E. Jas: ‘What’s in a Quote? Josquin’s (?) Jubilate deo, omnis terra Reconsidered’, EMc, 37 (2009), 9–19
  • J. Kiel: ‘A 16th-century Manuscript in Regensburg’, EMc, 37 (2009), 49–59 [Salve regina 5v]
  • V. Koutsobina: ‘Le Brung’s Six-Voice Si vous n’avez aultre desir: a Musical “Response” to a Poetic Practice’, TVNM, 59 (2009), 25–44 [N’esse pas ung grant desplaisir]
  • L. Lockwood: ‘“It’s True that Josquin Composes Better…”: the Short Unhappy Life of Gian de Artiganova’, Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. G. Filocamo and M.J. Bloxam (Turnhout, 2009), 201–16
  • D. Fallows: ‘The Contents of the Herdringen Scores’, Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. G. Filocamo and M.J. Bloxam (Turnhout, 2009), 217–32
  • A. Tacaille: ‘Notes sur la copie des messes de Josquin des Prés dans un manuscrit italien de la fin du XVIe siècle’, Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. G. Filocamo and M.J. Bloxam (Turnhout, 2009), 335–50
  • W. Elders: ‘Perfect Fifths and the Holy Virgin’s Immaculate Conception: On Ficta in Josquin’s 5-Part Inviolata’, Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. G. Filocamo and M.J. Bloxam (Turnhout, 2009), 403–11
  • P. Macey: ‘Josquin and Champion: Conflicting Attributions for the Psalm Motet De profundis clamavi’, Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. G. Filocamo and M.J. Bloxam (Turnhout, 2009), 453–68
  • J. Thomas: ‘Absalon fili mi, Josquin, and the French Royal Court: Attribution, Authenticity, Context, and Conjecture’, Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. G. Filocamo and M.J. Bloxam (Turnhout, 2009), 477–89
  • J. Milsom: ‘Josquin and the Act of Self-Quotation: The Case of Plusieurs regretz’, Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. G. Filocamo and M.J. Bloxam (Turnhout, 2009), 521–32
  • E. Jas: ‘Multivoiced Canons Attributed to Josquin’, Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. G. Filocamo and M.J. Bloxam (Turnhout, 2009), 593–603
  • J.J. Dean: ‘Josquin’s Teaching: Ignored and Lost Sources’, Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. G. Filocamo and M.J. Bloxam (Turnhout, 2009), 741–50
  • G. McDonald: ‘Josquin’s Musical Cricket: El grillo as Humanist Parody’, AcM, 81 (2009), 39–53
  • J. Rifkin: ‘Compere, “Des Pres,” and the Choirmasters of Cambrai: Omnium bonorum plena Reconsidered’, AcM, 81 (2009), 55–73
  • J. Rodin: ‘A “Most Laudable Competition”? Hearing and Composing the Beata Virgine Masses of Josquin and Brumel’, TVNM 59 (2009), 3–24
  • J. Rodin: ‘When Josquin Became Josquin’, AcM, 81 (2009), 23–38 [Bergerette savoysienne]
  • L. Perkins: ‘Josquin’s Qui habitat and the Psalm Motets’, JM, 26 (2009), 512–65
  • J.P. d’Alvarenga: ‘Some Notes on the Reception of Josquin and of Northern Idioms in Portuguese Music and Culture’, Journal of the Alamire Foundation, 2 (2010), 69–89
Page of
Florence, Biblioteca Riccardiana
Page of
G. Reese: Music in the Renaissance (New York, 1954, 2/1959)
Page of
Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France
Page of
Regensburg, Bischöfliche Zentralbibliothek, Proske-Musikbibliothek
Page of
Rome, Biblioteca Vallicelliana
Page of
C. Burney: A General History of Music from the Earliest Ages to the Present Period (London, 1776-89); ed. F. Mercer (London, 1935/R) [p. nos. refer to this edn]
Page of
Annales musicologiques
Page of
Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft
Page of
Journal of the American Musicological Society
Page of
Ulm, Von Schermar'sche Familienstiftung, Bibliothek
Page of
Cambrai, Médiathèque Municipale
Page of
Cividale del Friuli, Duomo (Parrocchia di S Maria Assunta), Archivio Capitolare
Page of
Fontes artis musicae
Page of
Leiden, Museum Lakenhal
Page of
Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Musiksammlung
Page of
Basle, Universität Basel, Öffentliche Bibliothek, Musikabteilung
Page of
Budapest, Országos Széchényi Könyvtár
Page of
Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Dipartimento Musica
Page of
Zürich, Zentralbibliothek
Page of
Musica disciplina
Page of
Rokycany, Okresní Muzeum
Page of
Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale Albert 1er/Koninlijke Bibliotheek Albert I, Section de la Musique
Page of
Revue belge de musicologie
Page of
Lille, Bibliothèque Municipale Jean Levy
Page of
Analecta musicologica
Page of
E. Vander Straeten: La musique aux Pays-Bas avantle XIXe siècle
Page of
Deutsches Jahrbuch der Musikwissenschaft
Page of
St Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Handschriftenabteilung
Page of
Kassel, Gesamthochschul-Bibliothek, Landesbibliothek und Murhardsche Bibliothek, Musiksammlung
Page of
Warsaw, Biblioteka Narodowa
Page of
Florence, Conservatorio Statale di Musica Luigi Cherubini
Page of
Journal of the Royal Musical Association
Page of
Musical Times
Page of
Nuova rivista musicale italiana
Page of
Beiträge zur Musikwissenschaft
Page of
Uppsala, Universitetsbiblioteket
Page of
Proceedings of the Musical Association
Page of
Eisenach, Stadtarchiv, Bibliothek
Page of
Journal of the Lute Society of America
Page of
Toledo, Catedral, Archivo y Biblioteca Capítulares
Page of
Current Musicology
Page of
Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek
Page of
Jena, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, Thüringer Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek
Page of
Leipzig, Karl-Marx-Universität, Universitätsbibliothek, Bibliotheca Albertina
Page of
Segovia, Catedral, Archivo Capitular
Page of
Music Review
Page of
Die Musikforschung
Page of
Hamburg, Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Carl von Ossietzky, Musiksammlung
Page of
Acta musicologica
Page of
Arnsberg-Herdringen, Schlossbibliothek (Bibliotheca Fürstenbergiana) [in D-Au]
Page of
The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians
Page of
Heilbronn, Stadtarchiv
Page of
Regensburg, Fürst Thurn und Taxis Hofbibliothek
Page of
Journal of Musicological Research
Page of
Archiv für Musikwissenschaft
Page of
Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana
Page of
Rostock, Universität, Universitätsbibliothek
Page of
Note d'archivio per la storia musicale
Page of
Barcelona, S.E. Catedra Basiclica, Arixiu
Page of
International Musicological Society: Congress Report [1930-]
Page of
Journal of Musicology
Page of
Munich, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Universitätsbibliothek, Abteilung Handschriften, Nachlässe, Alte Drucke
Page of
Rome, Pontificio Istituto di Musica Sacra, Biblioteca
Page of
Klagenfurt, Landesarchiv
Page of
Verona, Accademia Filarmonica, Biblioteca e Archivio
Page of
Rivista italiana di musicologia
Page of
Gotha, Forschungs- und Landesbibliothek, Musiksammlung
Page of
Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association
Page of
Bologna, Civico Museo Bibliografico Musicale
Page of
Milan, Capitolo Metropolitano, Biblioteca e Archivio
Page of
Nuremberg, Germanisches National-Museum, Bibliothek
Page of
Tarazona, Catedral, Archivo Capitular
Page of
Gdańsk, Polska Akademia Nauk, Biblioteka Gdańska
Page of
Music & Letters
Page of
A.W. Ambros: Geschichte der Musik (Leipzig, 1862-82/R)
Page of
London, British Library
Page of
Augsburg, Staats- und Stadtbibliothek
Page of
Allgemeine (deutsche) Musik-Zeitung/Musikzeitung (1874-1943)
Page of
Early Music History
Page of
Early Music
Page of
Hradec Králové, Muzeum Východńich Čech
Page of
Halle, Martin-Luther-Universität, Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen-Anhalt
Page of
F.-J. Fétis: Biographie universelle des musiciens
Page of
Revue de musicologie
Page of
Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin - Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Musikabteilung
Page of
Erlangen, Universitätsbibliothek
Page of
Rome, Biblioteca Casanatense, sezione Musica
Page of
Renaissance News
Page of
Plainsong and Medieval Music
Page of
Copenhagen, Kongelige Bibliotek
Page of
Journal of Music Theory
Page of
Music Analysis
Page of
Tijdschrift van de Vereniging voor Nederlandse muziekgeschiedenis [and earlier variants]
Page of
Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana
Page of
Lüneburg, Ratsbücherei, Musikabteilung
Page of
Dresden, Sächsische Landesbibliothek - Staats- und Universitäts-Bibliothek, Musikabteilung
Page of
International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music
Page of
Berlin, Geheimes Staatsarchiv, Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz
Page of
Musical Quarterly
Page of
Verona, Biblioteca Capitolare
Page of
Zwickau, Ratsschulbibliothek, Wissenschaftliche Bibliothek
Page of
Etudes grégoriennes
Page of
Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana
Page of
Leiden, Gemeentearchief
Page of
Revista de musicología
Page of
L. Lockwood: Music in Renaissance Ferrara (Oxford, 1984)