The Fifteenth Century Chanson:
As Enigmatic as a Black Hole
Owen Meyers
McGill University
2000
2
The performance of chansons in the fifteenth century lacks solid documentation, as a
black hole is the absence of light. Both are mysterious anomalies that are present in our world.
Is it more appropriate to accompany a singer with musical instruments, or to simply perform the
song with voices? This is the question raised by both Howard Mayer Brown and David Fallows
in their articles on the performance of a fifteenth-century chanson. The evidence in this area is
vague and, while Brown uses many pictures and Fallows uses written documents, one could
easily argue for either side. There are examples of chansons performed today with either voices
or instruments. One example is Gilles Binchois’ Dueil angoisseus, which Dominique Vellard
and the Ensemble Gilles Binchois perform with the use of musical instruments and voice. This
song is also performed by Christopher Page and the Gothic Voices, but with voices only. Both
versions are done very well, and support the arguments raised in the articles by Brown and
Fallows. With so little evidence available, it takes much analysis to come to a conclusion on the
proper performance procedure of a fifteenth-century chanson.
Brown argues that instruments should be used in the performance of a fifteenth-century
chanson. In his article, he provides evidence for “which combinations of voices and instruments
are most appropriate to the genre” (Brown, p. 90). The basic idea is that anything is possible,
which includes an all voice combination. The examples that Brown includes in his article are in
the form of pictures, tapestries and paintings. He believes this is the best evidence in deciding
how to perform the chansons. This gives Brown a perspective on the common practice of
performing chansons (Brown, p. 90). Brown’s idea of common practice refers to “real people
engaged in normal activities” (Brown, p. 91). The written documents of the time depict only the
extraordinary performances in which Brown is not interested.
The pictures provide an
alternative to documents and manuscripts. People generally base their performance on the
3
manuscript, but Brown thinks that this is not necessarily an accurate portrayal of the way the
music was performed during the fifteenth century (Brown, p. 121-2). By combining specific
pieces of evidence, Brown concludes that instrumental accompaniment is possible in a fifteenthcentury chanson.
In David Fallows’ article on the performance of a fifteenth-century chanson he says that
“voice and instruments in the polyphonic song repertoire [are] without clear documentation”
(Fallows, “Specific Information…”, p. 133). He argues that one should sing these chansons
without any instrumental accompaniment, and that there is no substantial evidence to prove that
it should be done any other way. Fallows tries to find information on the performing ensembles;
something that might “specify a particular work, identify performers, and say what those
performers did” (Fallows, p. 109). There is also the investigation of whether a particular piece of
music is monophonic, with improvised accompaniment, or composed polyphony (Fallows, p.
132). These two arguments relate to each other, for when a piece of music is monophonic it does
not necessarily qualify as a chanson. Therefore when a composition is polyphonic, one must
then deduce whether or not there is instrumental accompaniment. An interest in the ideal
performance is a key factor is Fallows’ choice of evidence (Fallows, p. 109). Fallows relies on
nine pieces of literature and documents from the period as evidence to support his first argument;
instruments do not accompany the vocalists (Fallows, p. 133-138). He relies heavily on the
Burgundian Court Ordinances of 1469 and Dufay’s will of 1474 (Fallows, p. 109-10). The
dismissal of pictures as useful pieces of evidence suggests a criticism of Brown’s article, which
relies heavily on paintings and pictures of the period (Fallows, p. 143). There is also the idea
that instruments did play polyphonic songs, but that voices and instruments are never mixed.
Finally, he provides evidence for voice and instruments performing together, but explains that it
4
is only for monophonic songs (Fallows, p. 143). In his article, Fallows predicts possible doubts
that might arise regarding his claim, and provides counter arguments for these. This way, both
sides of the argument are considered.
Yet in the end, Fallows stays faithful to the non-
instrumental performance.
Both common and contrasting themes arise in the comparison of the articles by Brown
and Fallows. The main difference is that Brown approves of instrumental accompaniment while
Fallows discourages it. However, the articles are reconcilable because Brown mentions that an
all-vocal performance is possible (Brown, p. 93), and Fallows says that it is feasible for
instruments and voice to perform the chansons together (Fallows, p. 142-3). In short, both agree
that the other way is a possibility.
Though they touch on similar points, the authors are
interested in different aspects of the performance. While Brown is looking for the everyday
occurrences, Fallows investigates the highest level of musicianship.
These views can be
justified, as there was likely a performance standard that everyone agreed upon during that
period. In today’s perspective one could think of comparing a professional symphony to a high
school band. Both groups have the same standard in mind, but one can create higher quality
music. Brown and Fallows are both very selective about the evidence they use. Brown uses
several paintings and pictures that show people playing musical instruments as evidence. In the
same way, Fallows relies solely on written documents from the period. The use of pictures by
Brown suggests his belief that they differentiate between monophony and polyphony. Fallows,
on the other hand, has no use for pictures because he believes that they might only represent
monophony (Fallows, p. 143). Though opposite in their sources of research, both authors are
successful in conveying their arguments.
The performance by Vellard and the Ensemble Gilles Binchois favours instrumental
5
accompaniment. The cantus is executed by a female voice in the first performance and a wooden
flute in the second. A bowed instrument plays the tenor line and a plucked instrument is on the
contratenor. The plucked instrument re-articulates the tied notes. This three-voice version of
Dueil angoisseus, with a contratenor from the Trent codices, represents a possible method used
to perform the piece. The contratenor part helps to change the texture of the song and to create
different rhythms and moods (Fallows, notes to Mon Souverain Desir, p. 10). Therefore, the
correct instrument must be assigned to this line to get the appropriate effect. The small ensemble
of compatible instruments allows the text of the poem to come through clearly. Each line is
distinct from the others making the meaning of the text, as well as the melody line, clear. The
two lower lines fill in the accompaniment and allow the cantus to be projected (Fallows, p. 10).
The use of a small ensemble also creates an airy and sorrowful texture. This suits the poetic
verses, which deal with the poet’s thoughts of anguish, sadness, and death. Only one verse is
actually sung in this performance, which takes away from the meaning of the text. Vellard’s
reasoning might have come from the need for a short piece of music. This version of Dueil
angoisseus is an excellent illustration of the pro-instrumental argument.
A four-voice version of Dueil angoisseus by Page and the Gothic Voices does not use
instruments. Page assigns a soprano singer to the cantus line while three men fill out the tenor
and contratenor parts. As in Vellard’s performance, the tied notes are re-articulated. The fourvoice version of this song uses two contratenor lines. These lines often blend, and the clarity is
lost. With the large number of voices, the song often sounds too full to be classified as a
fifteenth-century performance. Every verse of the poem is sung in the all voice format, which, as
there are several verses, makes for a long and monotonous song. The pro-voice claim makes its
point in this version of the chanson.
6
Each article suits the performance of a specific piece. In Brown’s article, which supports
instrumental accompaniment, Vellard’s performance is preferred as it uses the combination of
voice and musical instruments. The specific grouping used is a bowed instrument, a plucked
instrument and a voice. This matches Brown’s example of the two instruments accompanying a
solo voice (Brown, p. 112). On the other hand, Page’s performance corresponds to Fallows’
article. Both favour the all-vocal performance, but there is one inconsistency. Page adds text to
the lower voices and changes their rhythm, which contradicts what Fallows wrote in his article.
Fallows says that “it seems more than likely that singing voices were indeed what Deschamps
meant” (Fallows, “Specific Information…”, p. 138). In light of Page’s inconsistency, Vellard’s
performance is more historically justified.
My favourite performance is by Vellard and the Ensemble Gilles Binchois. I found that
the instruments added an extra texture to the song that the voice could not. There is more clarity
between the different lines because each instrument contrasts with the other in timbre. I like the
instrumental version because I am an instrument player, not a singer. Consequently, I find the
performance easier to follow and more interesting. The shorter version of the song is another
bonus because it is difficult for me to maintain a long attention span when listening to a
fifteenth-century chanson. I also found that the instrumental arrangement suited the text better
than the all voice performance. It is both subtle and effective.
Since the evidence is supportive of both instrumental and vocal performances of
fifteenth-century chansons, either argument can be justified. Brown makes a good case for
instrumental accompaniment by using pictures, and Vellard and the Ensemble Gilles Binchois
illustrate this idea with their performance of Dueil angoisseus. Fallows prefers an all voice
performance of the fifteenth-century chanson and argues this in this article.
The vocal
7
performance of Binchois’ song by Page and the Gothic Voices portrays Fallows’ opinion.
Though this second performance is unauthentic because of the text used in the lower voices, both
versions are historically justified. When justifying these performances, however, the criteria
involved may seem enigmatic. Therefore, the solution is to produce a semi-authentic replication
by collecting the pieces of evidence that are available and to execute one’s musical tastes.
8
Bibliography
Brown, Howard Mayer. “Instruments and Voices in the Fifteenth-Century Chanson.” In Current
Thought in Musicology, ed. John W. Grubbs. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1976.
Pp. 89-138.
Fallows, David. “Specific Information on the Ensembles for Composed Polyphony, 1400-1474.”
In Studies in the Performance of Late Medieval Music, ed. Stanley Boorman. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1983. Pp. 109-110, 131-144.
Page, Christopher, dir. of Gothic Voices. The Castle of Fair Welcome: Courtly Songs of the
Later Fifteenth Century. Notes by Christopher Page. Hyperion A66194. 1986.
Vellard, Dominique, dir. of Ensemble Gilles Binchois. Mon Souverain Desir: Gilles Binchois,
Chansons. Notes by David Fallows. Virgin Veritas 7243 5 4285 2 1. 1998.