A commentary: Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina

MISSA: ECCE SACERDOS MAGNUS

This work, being one of Palestrinas first Missals, he used the basic interweaving of the four voices;
soprano, alto, tenor and bass. Using at the time notation of minims, crotchets, the occasional quaver,
breves and semibreves, the music is consistently fugal I structure, each part creating a common
pattern that is passed around; the use of the titles phrase Ecce Sacerdos Magnus throughout the
staple sections of the mass is one of these fugal features, being swapped through each sector of the
Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus and Agnus Dei, but typically doesnt appear in the secondary half of
the Sanctus, the Benedictus, which is mainly due to it being written for trium vocum (Soprano, Alto
and Tenor; the higher and more semi-choral voices of the choir), but nonetheless, these trium vocum
are a common addition to music of the medieval period, usually to create a dulled or undulating effect;
to create a softer tone.

Along-side the fugal form of the mass, Palestrina employed the quasi-atonal effect by using the key
signature of C-major, but instead of using this solely, he created a perfectly-cadenced atmosphere by
using the dominant key and using accidentals instead. By doing this, a doubly bright picture is created
in the head of the audience, and using this double-talk, a latent solemnity exists. Apart from the use
of key signature to change the emotions evoked by the piece, tie signature was also used to change
tempo, as there is none indicated; thus, it is implied that each part of the piece remains at the same
tempo, but must adopt the same groupings in a different time signature, quickening the pace.

There are numerous eccentric time signatures used in the entire work, but the most common are
3
and timing, the latter being the frequent time adjuster. They are often paired together, the former
4
being a somewhat ponderous two (it is normally counted in four), and the secondary creating the
faster tempo. An example of this is emulated through the change in the latter third of the Sanctus
(bar 86 to be exact), when we move to the lively Hosanna in excelsis!. An interesting effect is created
6
at the end of the Benedictus in the Hosanna, due to it being grouped in 4 , but in terms of the musical
3 3 3
structure, it should be treated as 2 or 4 + 4 (this being for counting sake and for syntaxial appeal). A
certain bounce will be accordingly effective through the use of division in the bars. The music suggests
an appropriate level of movement, and so too should it be applied in both mood and pace.

In individual sections, the piece is best known for its suspicious lack of incoherence, and this being said
we can state that each part does flow on from one another. This is not dissimilar of the rest of
Palestrinas works, but the surprising modernism that falls between the lines of this work is
astonishing, for this musics archaic foundations have been built upon so effectively by the clever and
subtle usage of it by composers such as Palestrina. Ominously enough, we can see where the preceding
Baroque period gained influence for cadence points, dual-timing and key signatures, but soon they did
adopt the usage of inflection and ornamentation, and moved on from the ancient notation to begin
using spiraling passing notes to create afflictive harmonies and discordance. But now that we observe
one of the early Missals of Palestrina, we can see the obvious points of blatant similarity between the
music of then and the music of now.

SEAN QUINN 2016