Approaches to Medieval and Renaissance Historiography

Approaches to Medieval and Renaissance Historiography

Evaluation of four collegiate histories of Western Music

M i k e l H i l l

May 2nd, 2013

“How do we make the study of music history tangibly relevant in the lives of our

students?”1 Melanie Lowe recently raised this question in her essay, “Teaching Music History

Today.” It is a question that finds significance in all levels of music history survey, especially to

studies of the Medieval and Renaissance periods. The teacher undoubtedly brings great zeal to

these chapters in the story of music. Yet they must also be aware that these periods seem

“impossibly remote from the experience of most college students.”2 Bridging the abyss between

enthusiastic pedagogue and suspicious pupil is a sizeable collection of textbooks and anthologies

ranging from Mark Bonds’ cursory work to the recent megalithic volume published by Oxford

University Press. Each textbook’s approach presents a variety of strengths and weaknesses. Since

there exists as many learning styles as there are students, this essay avoids promoting any single

textbook as a universal solution. What this essay does venture to lay out is a systematic

evaluation of four frequently used textbooks, their coverage of the Medieval and Renaissance

periods, and their effectiveness in relating this history to a largely ignorant student body.a

With no wish to detract from the task of actually teaching the material, I must comment

that evaluating these eminent (and extensive) historiographies was not an easy challenge. In

undertaking this mission, I was greatly assisted by Teaching Music History’s editor, Dr. Mary

Natvig. Together, we were able to identify five key elements that aid effective pedagogy: (a)

clarity of explanation, (b) balance of topical treatment, (c) inclusion of primary texts and musical

examples, (d) graphical support, and (e) discussion of social, religious, (etc.) contexts. These five

elements were used to construct a metric by which each textbook could be evaluated. Numerical

a The Textbooks evaluated in this study are:

Mark E. Bonds, A History of Music in Western Culture, (referred hereafter as Bonds) Burkholder, Grout, and Palisca, A History of Western Music, (referred hereafter as Burkholder) Christopher Gibbs and Richard Taruskin, The Oxford History of Western Music, (referred hereafter as Taruskin) Craig Wright and Bryan Simms, Music in Western Civilization, (referred hereafter as Wright)

A complete bibliography may be found in the Appendix

values were given on a scale from 0—5 on each aspect of the textbook’s treatment of a topic. For

example, Mark Bond’s explanation of the 16th century motet was evaluated as follows:

a b c d e 16th century motet 3 5 4 5 5

In this essay, the cumulative values of each textbook’s topical treatment are shown

graphically and compared to one another. The adoption of this numerical approach is by no

means infallible. The elements chosen and the subsequent method of evaluation is simply one

attempt to provide a systematic overview of a textbook’s effectiveness as a pedagogical aid. I

have approached the four textbooks mainly from the perspective of a current student of music

history. It may be that an experienced educator would take a much different approach. The depth

of this study is also hampered by the absence of a scientific study of how students effectively

learn music history. It is my definite hope that this essay would be a launching point towards a

more thorough and scientific evaluation of music historiography in collegiate textbooks.

Nevertheless, with these limitations in mind, what follows is a summary of the strengths and

weaknesses of each textbook in relation to the five questions that formed this study’s metric.

0

50

100

150

200

250

Bonds Burkholder Taruskin Wright

Is the Topic Explained Clearly?

Is the topic explained clearly?

Kenneth Nott, in his contribution to Teaching Music History, worries that in approaching

the Medieval and Renaissance periods, “There is so much material that is new and foreign to the

average student that many are overwhelmed and even decide early on that music history is

complex and confusing.”3 In light of this challenge, clarity and efficiency are of utmost

importance. Students need precise, readily accessible definitions and summaries in a language

that is sympathetic to an undergraduate vocabulary. The depth of explanation necessary will

vary considerably from the conservatory student on one side to the student at a liberal arts

college on the other. However, with many students bearing the weight of six or more classes per

semester it may be assumed that in the overall collegiate continuum, the student devotion to

historiography will be heavily skewed in the direction of brevity. Thus, a clear and short

treatment of a topic will, on the most part, be more conducive for the student studying for a test

than an exhaustive exposition.

In this respect, as shown below, all but the Taruskin scored admirably well.

Burkholder has taken special pains in the latest edition to provide for maximum readability.4

Sidebar notes on important concepts, highlighted terms, and clearly defined chapter headers all

combine to make the study of Burkholder’s text exceptionally straightforward. Wright, in turn,

consistently demonstrates superb clarity in his writing style, one that is both concise and

informative. Readability is somewhat diminished, however, in this text by the lack of sidebar

annotations and the use of compacted chapter headers. Bonds topical treatment is also clear but

very brief, appropriate for a single-semester survey course but problematic for a more in-depth

curriculum. For example, whereas Burkholder spends an entire 24-page chapter on renaissance

instrumental music, Bonds dedicates a mere seven pages to the subject.

Taruskin recently criticized the Bonds volume as, “following in the latest trends in

textbook publication, [it] has very little continuous text but consists in the main of bite-sized

verbal clumps.”5 True to his ideals, Taruskin’s work contains nothing bite-sized or in my

estimation, intelligible. It was simply a nightmare to evaluate and I certainly extend every

condolence to the student who is asked to study from it. To begin with, Taruskin’s use of

vocabulary is as baffling as it is comical. For example, after sending the student running to find

the dictionary definition of “panegyric” he introduces the clumsy header: “How to Do

Polyphony.”6 Aside from these frequent juxtapositions of academic jargon with colloquialisms,

Taruskin also has the habit of burying topic discussions in a mêlée of postmodern rhetoric. For

instance, in a section promisingly bearing the title, “formes fixes” Taruskin chooses instead to

spend six pages orating on the rise of the bourgeoisie in 13th century France before finally

arriving at a hazy explanation of the three song forms.7 Taruskin’s efforts to create a continuous

narrative and his post-modern approach are to be commended. However, in the current confines

of most collegiate syllabi, Taruskin’s demands for time and patience are simply not feasible.

29%

71%

Burkholder

24%

76%

Bonds

21%

79%

Taruskin

30%

70%

Wright

Perhaps, Taruskin’s work will only be appreciated in the future or, as one reviewer suggested,

“Like the Easter Island statues, the Taruskin/Gibbs book will . . . remain a puzzling artifact of a

long-dead culture.”8

Does the depth of explanation appear in a balanced proportion to the rest of the book’s

material?

Taken as a whole, the proportion of text dedicated to the Medieval and Renaissance

periods is minimal in comparison to the later periods. For practical reasons this is totally

understandable, there is simply not many extant materials from these periods on which to base a

narrative. Nonetheless, it is a pity because these two periods remain the most unknown to the

majority of students and yet their entire cosmos of Western music rests largely on the foundation

of these two eras. Below is a series of pie charts illustrating the proportion of text given to these

two periods.

In reference to the balance of treatment given to individual topics both Burkholder and Wright

score very well with Bonds trailing close behind. Only Taruskin’s approach invokes concern.

0

50

100

150

200

250


Does the Topic Appear in Balance to Other Material?

It must be conceded that this characteristic is difficult to judge. What one reviewer may find as a

sparse treatment, another may find verbose. For example, Bonds coverage of worship in the early

church was less than a paragraph compared to Burkholder’s two pages. However, Bonds’ entire

textbook is a third shorter in length than Burkholder’s and thus a more brusque treatment is to be

expected. In view of this, in marking down imbalances I focused on instances where an author

gave a full and lengthy treatment to one topic and gave a similar topic inadequate space. Such an

instance occurs in Burkholder where he devotes substantial time to the medieval vernacular song

but barely mentions Latin sacred and secular song (versus, conductus, and goliard) and provides

no musical examples, either in the text or accompanying anthology.9 While this imbalance is a

rare occurrence in Burkholder, in Taruskin it is much more prevalent. For example, while

Guillaume de Machaut receives eleven pages of discourse, Philippe de Vitry is briefly referenced

with virtually no accompanying biographical information. The same is true with Taruskin’s terse

mention of Franscesco Landini in comparison to his lengthy explanation of Du Fay’s Nuper

rosarum flores.10 Also in this context it must be noted that Taruskin devotes the least overall

time to the Medieval and Renaissance, as shown in the pie charts above.

0

50

100

150

200

250


Do Primary Texts and Scores Provide Complimentry Insight?

Do primary text and scores provide complimentary insight?

As a student, I find the inclusion of primary sources to be very helpful. Exploring

historical figures in their own words expands the scope of the textbook, allowing students to

form opinions based on original sources rather than merely the views of the textbook’s author(s).

In this category, each of the four textbooks fair generally the same with Wright showing a

slight advantage. Burkholder regularly includes partitioned “Source Readings,” some of which

are quite extensive. Bonds similarly provides “Primary Evidence.” Wright directs readers online

where they may read over sixty primary sources. Taruskin provides the largest amount of quotes

from primary sources but does not partition these as the other textbooks do. This maintains the

flow of Taruskin’s narrative but makes it difficult to study or to reference. Taruskin does provide

an excellent array of scores, perhaps the most of all the textbooks evaluated. The primary

shortcoming of Taruskin’s inclusion of music scores is the absence of supportive markings. This

is true for the other texts, with notable exceptions. It is quite helpful for explanations and

narratives to be supported by accompanying scores. Yet, on more than one occasion the

textbooks do not graphically indicate what the student is supposed to be looking for in the score.

Such is the case in Wright’s explanation of isorythm.11 He provides the score’s tenor line

containing the color and talea but does not offer an illustration of how the tenor line relates to

the original chant or to the motet’s complimentary voices. This is an exception to his otherwise

excellent approach such as in his demonstration showing the parallels of Perotin’s organum,

Viderunt omnes, and the construction of Notre Dame cathedral.12 The inclusion of musical scores

is helpful but it is not enough to make for a clear explanation without the addition of graphical

indicators. Each of the textbooks follow this guideline yet not with complete consistency.

Are illustrations (timelines, pictures, maps) provided to support textual content?

The contemporary textbook is a great deal more than a laborious exposition of prose.

Timelines, partitioned biographies, pictures, maps, and illustrations all support the learning

process and help to break up the monotony that endangers comprehension. Each of the four

textbooks evaluated display superior use of graphics, none showing any significant deficiencies.

The primary reason for a less than stellar review came by reason of poor organization. I found

that although graphically depicted, some outlines were more confusing than helpful such as

Taruskin’s pictorial portrayal of the development of the Motet.13 In this instance, four

manuscripts are shown but without modern notational translations and without any graphical

indication showing the original clausula and how it was used to construct the subsequent motet

form.

0

50

100

150

200

250


Are Illustrations Provided to Support Textual Content?

Timelines are included in all four texts, each with a slightly different format. I find the format

used by Bonds to be the most clear and helpful. The timeline is shown horizontal with musical

events above and historical events below. It seems that this format is more effective than the

vertical orientation adopted by both Burkholder and Taruskin. Wright’s timeline, while extensive

and in the horizontal orientation is somewhat crowded and oddly organized making its study

difficult.

Another excellent use of graphics in all four texts appeares in relation to instrumental

music. One of the intriguing aspects of Medieval and Renaissance music is the exotic array of

instruments that it contains. Burkholder takes advantage of this attribute, showing several finely

labeled depictions of period instruments such as the shawm, viola, and lute. Wright likewise

makes excellent use of period graphics showing multiple instruments. Bonds and Taruskin

devote significantly less time to the genre of instrumental music but nonetheless manage to

display several supportive examples of Renaissance instruments.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300


Is the Topic Related to a Broader Social Context?

Is the topic related in a broader context (historical, social, religious, etc.)?

In order to realize Melanie Lowe’s ambition to make “music history tangibly relevant in

the lives of our students,”14 it is absolutely vital that we relate the story of music in the context of

its historical, social, and religious environment. Patrick Macey relates that, “A survey of the

music of the Middle Ages and Renaissance will maintain a clear focus . . . if one keeps the

social context for music making to the fore.”15 Students, who are given an animated description

of the people and events that gave birth to music they are asked to study, will be far more likely

to engage with the subject’s material than otherwise. The approach to providing this context is

likely the most distinguishing factor differentiating the four textbooks. Bonds and Taruskin adopt

a mural-like approach while Burkholder and Wright paint individual portraits. The chart below

illustrates my conviction that Burkholder and Wright’s more intimate approach provides for a

better learning experience. However, certainly a variance of opinion exists on this point and this

must be taken into consideration when viewing these comparisons.

Bonds’ description of the Medieval and Renaissance periods is quite clear and in-depth.

However, he chooses to write a single extensive section for each period, placing them at the

forefront and then proceeding to the period’s musical aspects. The issue with this approach is

that the student, while given an excellent context for the period’s aesthetic, is disconnected from

this context immediately upon entry into the musical portion. For example, in Bonds introduction

to the Middle Ages he covers nearly a millennium in one section, beginning with the fall of

Rome until the dawn of the Renaissance.16 Thus, in the musical subsequent section, when the

student begins their study of 13th century polyphony in Paris, they must either recall or re-read

the section describing the historical context for this period. In contrast to this approach, Wright

describes historical and musical events in the same section, with only a brief historical prologue

beginning each chapter. Burkholder, in turn, further animates his text by frequently including

composer profiles. These bring the text alive, putting a face of the music being studied.

Taruskin is somewhat of an outlier because he entirely disregards traditional

compartments of history. For example, the reader will not find a chapter header and description

of the Renaissance. Instead, Taruskin discusses “periodization” and how identified eras of

history are constructions of later historians and do not reflect reality.17 Taruskin is absolutely

correct but his unwillingness to adopt conventional labels makes his text doubly difficult to study

for students who are only familiar with a traditionally segmented history. Otherwise, Taruskin’s

weaving of historical context and musical events is remarkable. Regrettably, the length of his

narrative makes a complete reading of it practically impossible for the busy undergraduate and

unfortunately this is the only way the text can be completely effective.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200


Overview

Summary

It is difficult to proclaim any form of final judgment on these illustrious texts. These are

monuments of our academic world and an infinite amount of scholarship has been poured into

each one. Though I have been critical of Taruskin’s recent publication, I in no wise stand in a

place conducive to rebuke. I merely represent a student who finds difficulty in his novel

approach. I would definitely recommend Taruskin’s volume as an aid to graduate students and

faculty, though offering reservations about its use as a quick reference. It is truthfully intended to

be read more as a novel than as an encyclopedia. As for the other three volumes, I would highly

recommend Bonds as a resource for a music survey course at a liberal arts college. Though it

tends to be brief in its explanations and at time sparse in its coverage, its language is accessible

and it covers the essentials with both clarity and efficiency. The Wright and Burkholder have

become staples of my undergraduate studies and I can give the highest recommendation for both

of these as collegiate textbooks in more in-depth courses at universities and conservatories.

Below is a graphical summary, combining the scores from the individual elements discussed

above. I earnestly hope that this preliminary outline can provide the framework for a more

comprehensive study and pave the way for a more effective historiography.

Appendix

Bibliography

Bonds, Mark E., A History of Music in Western Culture, Upper Saddle River, NJ.:

Pearson Education, 2006, 2nd ed.

Burkholder, J. Peter, Donald J. Grout, and Claude V. Palisca, A History of Western

Music, New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2010, 8th ed.

Elliot, Robin, “Taruskin and Gibbs, Oxford History of Western Music (College Edition):”

Book review, Journal of Music History Pedagogy, Vol. 3, no. 2, (online), 195-201.

Lowe, Melanie, “Teaching Music History Today: Making Tangible Connections to Here

and Now,” Journal of Music History Pedagogy, Vol. 1, no. 1 (online), 45-59.

Natvig, Mary, ed. Teaching Music History, Burlington: Ashgate Publishing, 2002.

Taruskin, Richard and Christopher H. Gibbs, The Oxford History of Western Music, New

York: Oxford UP, 2013, college edition.

Wright, Craig and Bryan Simms, Music in Western Civilization, Boston: Schirmer

Cengage Learning, 2010, media update.

Notes

1 Melanie Lowe, “Teaching Music History Today: Making Tangible Connections to Here and Now,” Journal of

Music History Pedagogy, Vol. 1, no. 1 (online), 45. 2 Patrick Macey, “Providing Context: Teaching Medieval and Renaissance Music,” in Teaching Music History,

ed. Mary Natvig, Ashgate Publishing, 2002, 15. 3 Kenneth Nott, “Teaching Baroque Music to the Bright and Interested and Ignorant,” in Teaching Music

History, ed. Mary Natvig, Ashgate Publishing, 2002, 15. 4 J. Peter Burkholder, Donald J. Grout, and Claude V. Palisca, A History of Western Music, W.W. Norton and

Company, 2010, 8th ed., xxv. 5 Richard Taruskin, “Non-Nationalists and Other Nationalists,” quoted in a book review of Taruskin by Robin

Elliott. 6 Richard Taruskin and Christopher H. Gibbs, The Oxford History of Western Music, Oxford UP, 2013, college

edition, 36. 7 Ibid, 55-‐61. 8 Robin Elliott, “Taruskin and Gibbs, Oxford History of Western Music (College Edition):” Book review, Journal of

Music History Pedagogy, Vol. 3, no. 2, (online), 201. 9 J. Peter Burkholder, Donald J. Grout, and Claude V. Palisca, A History of Western Music, W.W. Norton and

Company, 2010, 8th ed., 71. 10 Richard Taruskin and Christopher H. Gibbs, The Oxford History of Western Music, Oxford UP, 2013, college

edition, 118,121-124. 11 Craig Wright and Bryan Simms, Music in Western Civilization, Schirmer Cengage Learning, 2010, media update,

84. 12 Ibid, 64-‐65. 13 Richard Taruskin and Christopher H. Gibbs, The Oxford History of Western Music, Oxford UP, 2013, college

edition, 81. 14 As quoted above. 15 Patrick Macey, “Providing Context: Teaching Medieval and Renaissance Music,” in Teaching Music History,

ed. Mary Natvig, Ashgate Publishing, 2002, 3. 16 Mark E. Bonds, A History of Music in Western Culture, Pearson Education, 2006, 2nd ed., 18-‐27. 17 Richard Taruskin and Christopher H. Gibbs, The Oxford History of Western Music, Oxford UP, 2013, college

edition, 124.

Approaches to Medieval and Renaissance Historiography

Documents

Transcript of Approaches to Medieval and Renaissance Historiography