De Profundis Clamavi ad te, Domine;

Domine exaudi vocem meam Fiant

aures tuae intendentes

in vocem depractionem meae.

Si iniquitates observaveris, Domine;

Domine quis sustenebit?

Quia apud te propitiatio est;

et propter legem tuam

sustinui te Domine.

Sustinuit anima mea in verbo ejus;

speravit anima mea in Domino.

A custodio maturina usque ad noctem,

speret Israel in Domino;

quia apud Dominum misericordia

et copiosa apud eum redemptio.

Et ipse redimet Israel

ex omnibus iniquitatibus ejus.

Gloria Patri et Filio

et Spiritu Sancto.

Sicut erat in principio,

et nunc et semper,

et in saecula saeculorum. Amen.

 

Out of the depths I have cried to you, Lord;

Lord, hear my voice.

Let your ears attend

to the voice of my calling.

If you, Lord, shall mark our iniquities;

Lord who shall abide it?

For there is a mercy with you;

and by reason of your law

I have waited for you Lord.

My soul has relied on His word;

my soul has hoped in the Lord.

From the morning watch even until night,

let Israel hope in the Lord;

for with the Lord there is mercy

and with him copious redemption.

And He shall redeem Israel

from all his iniquities.

Glory to the Father and the Son

and to the Holy Spirit.

As it was in the beginning,

is now, and always will be,

world without end. Amen.

[Hear the whole Josquin setting]

[Hear the whole Lassus setting]

Both Josquin des Prez and Orlando Lassus set Psalm 129, De Profundis Clamavi,

in a polyphonic vocal style. Both worked from the ancient cantus firmus, but produced

different effects which highlight their own conceptions of the text of the psalm. Lassus

produced his Penitential Psalms in 1559, nearly 40 years after the publication of Josquin's

setting of the same text. While one would expect that the earlier of the two settings would

be closer to the original cantus melody, in fact the reverse is true. The two compositions

differ not only in the treatment of the cantus firmus, but also in mode, texture, and both

melodic rhythm and phrasing. By exploring these differences, I hoped to gain a clearer

understanding not only of the stylistic and expressive devices employed by the two

composers, but also of their feelings towards the text.

The most obvious difference between the two pieces is evident in the key signature

of each. Josquin's setting is in E phrygian mode, and Lassus' is in D aeolian, or natural

minor, with one flat in the key signature. The difference between these two modes, which

are both minor, affects the cadences and harmonic choices that each composer can make.

The phrygian mode, with its progression of 1, b2, b3, 4, 5, b6, b7, is "spookier" and

more mysterious sounding than the aeolian (1, 2, b3, 4, 5, b6, b7). This is due entirely to

the phrygian's use of the flatted second degree, which sounds less resolved when used

cadentially and which does not occur in any other mode (excluding the yet-to-be-

acknowledged locrian). Because of the difference in modality, the two settings necessarily

have a different sonic quality.

The next thing that one notices about the two pieces is their structure. Josquin's

setting is divided into two parts, with the division occurring after "Domino". Lassus'

setting, in contrast, divides the entire psalm into sections which consist of one sentence of

text each, with the exception the sentence beginning "A custodio maturina...", in which he

changes the semicolon after "Domino" to a period and begins a new section on "Quia apud

Dominum...". By setting the phrases apart like this, Lassus increases the listener's ability

to focus on each section of text. It is interesting that he chose to create the internal phrase

division between "Domino" and Quia". This seems to be designed to not only increase the

focus on each half of the sentence, but also to separate the reply "for with the Lord there is

mercy" from being so specifically directed at Israel. By dividing the text here, he ends up

giving more weight to the more general connotations inherent in the text of the psalm.

It is important as well to consider the effect created by the relatively seamless

structure of the Josquin piece. Nearly all of his cadences sustain until one voice starts a

new phrase. A good example of this occurs in bar 17. While the tenor and bassus parts

cadence (9-8 in the tenor, 7-8 in the bassus, on the fourth scale degree), the superius part

chimes in on the second beat, creating a triadic sonority by adding a c to the two a's, but

starting the next line of text. The altus part follows one beat after the entrance of the

superius part, moving fairly closely parallel to it a third above. [EXAMPLE 1] (Josquin CD) The Lassus

setting, in contrast, has only one voice emerging out of the cadence. [EXAMPLE 2] (Lassus CD) The

divisions created by Lassus necessitate clear, "final" cadences at the end of each sentence,

while Josquin is free to continue the musical flow of his piece.

Another clear separation between the two text settings occurs in each composer's

application of polyphonic texture. The Josquin piece tends to oscillate between a full four

voice texture and two voices at once, usually the two lower voices or higher voices

together. Lassus, however, sets some of the phrases of the psalm for only three voices.

These two phrases, the fourth and the seventh, both are replies, beginning with "Quia".

The former means "for there is mercy with you" and the reply in the seventh phrase is "for

in the Lord there is mercy". What does this say about the aims of Lassus? I would argue

that this reduction of texture is intended to demonstrate some aspect of the relationship

between the congregation and the spiritual teacher(s) speaking in the psalm, and the clarity

of the sentiments expressed in the reply. It is intriguing that Josquin uses a very similar

technique in his setting of the first reply. Over a suspended d in the tenor, the altus and

then superius enter, and the texture remains basically in two voices, with some overlap

caused by the alternation of the two high parts with the two lower ones. [EXAMPLE 3] (Josquin CD)

Josquin, however, does not treat the second "quia" line the same way. This seems to be

because the second "reply" does not involve a different narrative voice. It is used in the

psalm as a statement of fact: "let Israel hope in the Lord; for [because] with the Lord there

is mercy..." His use of the lighter texture in the first reply, combined with the rising high

harmony, which creates a major tonality by following a unison c with an e and a g,

suggests an angelic response from on high. This is clearly not what is happening in the

second "reply", so he sets it in a fashion consistent with the general polyphonic texture.

Both composers use music to bring out aspects of specific words or phrases. For

instance, in Josquin's setting, the melodic line in all the parts descends by a fifth on the

word "profundis", meaning "depths".[EXAMPLE 4] Lassus uses similar effects. When

the text reaches "exaudi vocem meam" (hear my voice), the rhythmic pace of the melodic

lines in all the voices except the tenor becomes more rapid, with note values half of any that

came before. [EXAMPLE 5] In this way Lassus seems to be saying "hear my voice too- this is it" The

tenor does not change because it has the cantus firmus part.

The treatment of the cantus firmus in these two pieces is very different. Both

composers use the motives and the general melodic shape of the cantus as building blocks

for their respective settings. Lassus, however, almost always has one voice sing the cantus

part along with the added polyphony; while this role is usually taken by the tenor and/or

altus parts, it shifts to the discantus and quinta vox parts from time to time. This role is

generally steady throughout one complete section of his piece; however the cantus enters

very late in the "Gloria" section, and in the last section shifts from the highest part

(discantus I) to the tenor. Josquin does not feel compelled to have the cantus firmus run

through his whole piece, instead he will hint at it and elaborate on it freely in order to fit

his musical design. However, he tends to model his piece more closely on the cantus

firmus when there is a word with deep religious connotation, such as "Domine" and

"misericordia" his use of repeated notes is suggestive of the old church music at specific

points, imparting a weightiness to the musical setting that would otherwise be hidden by

musical complexity.

What does all this mean in relation to the text and the attitudes of the two

composers? It is clear that both composers intend to impart a serious, spiritual quality to

the music that accompanies this text. This makes sense, since the text itself is both. Even

though Lassus' setting involves heavy use of the cantus firmus, it does not sound archaic.

The rhythmic texture of Josquin's text does come across as more varied as a result both of

his elaboration rhythmically on the cantus and the variation required to make an essentially

continuous piece of music sound interesting. Nevertheless, both settings succeed in that

they lend both beauty and force to the words of the psalm.

Cds: Josquin: Motets and Chansons (Virgin disc)

Lassus: Psalmus Potentiales, disc 2