Nota Bene: Canadian Undergraduate Journal of Musicology

Volume 1 | Issue 1 Article 7

The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ

Repertoire
Aaron James
The University of Western Ontario

Recommended Citation
James, Aaron (2008) "The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ Repertoire," Nota Bene: Canadian Undergraduate Journal of
Musicology: Vol. 1: Iss. 1, Article 7.
Available at: http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/notabene/vol1/iss1/7
The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ Repertoire

This article is available in Nota Bene: Canadian Undergraduate Journal of Musicology: http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/notabene/vol1/iss1/7
 The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ
Repertoire

Aaron James
Year III - The University of Western Ontario

The historical association of the organ with Christian

church services means that much of the instrument’s
repertoire was originally intended to serve a functional,
liturgical purpose. Indeed, isolated from its
contemporaneous liturgical context, some historical organ
repertoire may appear to the modern musician as
“unintelligible” and “much…less rich in significance.”1 The
extant repertoire from seventeenth- and eighteenth-century
France is particularly extensive and provides a ready
example. In contrast to modern practice, in which the organ
generally accompanies congregational singing, the liturgy
of this period alternated unaccompanied singing with short
versets played by the organist. This meant that a liturgical
chant such as the Kyrie of the Mass Ordinary would be split
into several sections, with even-numbered sections being
sung by the choir and the remaining ones being replaced
by organ versets. This practice seems strange from a
modern perspective; it meant that lengthy and theologically
important sections of text would not be heard, since
instrumental music was played instead. However, this

1
Edward Higginbottom, “Organ music and the liturgy,” in The Cambridge
Companion to the Organ, edited by Nicholas Thistlethwaite and Geoffrey
Webber (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 130.
Nota Bene

alternatim performance of the mass was the prescribed

method of worship throughout the Catholic Church and
flourished in France from the 1400s into the early twentieth
century.2
The modern organist is most likely to encounter
alternatim practice in the collections of organ versets
published by Nicolas de Grigny and François Couperin,
which are the most widely performed of this repertoire.3
However, these two publications give a somewhat
problematic picture of performing practice at the time.
Grigny’s Livre d’orgue contains versets for a complete
organ mass and several Gregorian hymns sung during the
church year, while Couperin’s collection contains two
complete mass cycles. The seemingly straightforward
nature of these collections gives the impression that
alternatim practice was rather neat and tidy, with
prescribed places for the organ to intervene in the service.
In reality, alternatim practices differed greatly depending on
the geographical area in question, the ecclesiastical
jurisdiction of the church (cathedrals came under different
regulations from monastic communities, for example), and
the type of service being celebrated. Most misleading is the
idea that organists played previously composed music by a
single composer throughout the service – in fact, alternatim
performance was primarily an improvisatory practice.
Without the ability to improvise, no organist at a large
church could supply enough music to fulfill his daily duties.
The requirement of a royal mandate for publishing meant

2
Grove Music Online, s. v. “Organ Mass” (by Edward Higginbottom),
http://www.grovemusic.com (accessed 4 December 2007).
3
François Couperin, Two Masses for Organ (Mineola, N.Y.: Dover
Publications, 1994), and Nicolas de Grigny, Livre d’Orgue (Miami: Edwin F.
Kalmus, n. d.).

84
 The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ Repertoire

that printed music was scarce; more importantly, no

collection could supply pieces of an appropriate length and
style for every possible liturgical action. As organist of the
Parisian church of St. Merry, for example, the composer
Nicolas Lebègue would have played approximately 8,000
versets over the course of a year.4 The full complexity of
this liturgical tradition, therefore, is only partially revealed
by examining the extant organ literature.
Some of the best evidence for the expected role of the
organist comes from ecclesiastical documents known as
“ceremonials.” These documents prescribe the services at
which the organist was expected to be present and the
portions of each service in which the organ was expected
to be played. The Caeremoniale episcoporum of 1600 was
the most important such document; drafted in Rome and
approved by the Pope, it governed the celebration of the
liturgy throughout the Catholic world. In the spirit of the
liturgical reforms of the Counter-Reformation, it sought to
“win back defectors [to Protestantism] as well as to retain
the faithful by brilliant and sumptuous services.”5 This
ceremonial was also the first document to extend
legitimacy to the practice of alternatim performance at the
Mass and other liturgical offices. In it, we read that
alternatim performance was expected for the Kyrie, Gloria,
Sanctus, and Agnus Dei of the Mass Ordinary and for
hymns and canticles at the various daily Offices.6 This
position was considered fairly liberal for its time; church
authorities of a previous generation had been reluctant to

4
Higginbottom, “Organ music and the liturgy,” 140.
5
Benjamin van Wye, “Ritual Use of the Organ in France,” Journal of the
American Musicological Society 33, no. 2 (Summer 1980): 301.
6
Ibid.

85
Nota Bene

approve any use of the organ at all during the celebration

of the Mass.7 The Caeremoniale did, however, require that
the missing text of the chants be recited in an audible voice
while the organ verset was being played and particularly
commended the practice in which a chorister sang along
with the cantus firmus of the organ verset.8
Although the Caeremoniale episcoporum, published by
the Vatican, was intended to govern the use of the organ
throughout the entire Catholic Church, individual religious
jurisdictions published their own ceremonials, which
sometimes conflicted with the Roman standards. For
example, the Carmelite order of nuns had their own
ceremonial (the Caeremoniale divini officii secundum
ordinem fratrum B. Virginis Mariae de monte Carmeli of
1616) and by mid-century, the diocese of Paris had
developed its own idiosyncratic liturgical traditions (as
codified in the Caeremoniale Parisiense of 1662).9 The
different requirements of the various ceremonials are
reflected in the published repertoire of the period. For
example, Couperin’s Messe pour les paroisses (“Mass for
the Parishes”) includes a verset for the Benedictus, in
accordance with the 1662 Caeremoniale Parisiense, but his
Messe pour les convents (“Mass for the Convents”) omits
the Benedictus verset and includes one for the Elevation,
following the practice of the 1616 Carmelite ceremonial and
those of other religious houses.10

7
van Wye, “Ritual Use of the Organ in France,” 300.
8
Ibid., 302.
9
For a graphical representation of the similarities and differences between the
requirements of these three ceremonials, see Higginbottom, “Organ music and
the liturgy,” 134-5.
10
Edward Higginbottom, “French Classical organ music and the liturgy,”
Proceedings of the Royal Musicological Association 103 (1976-1977): 27.

86
 The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ Repertoire

The requirements of the various ceremonials implicitly

reveal a great deal about the musical characteristics of
organ versets in the early seventeenth century. For
example, the practice of singing the missing plainchant
during the performance of the organ verset clearly indicates
that the versets were composed in such a way as to give
particular prominence to the chant melody. The works of
Jehan Titelouze provide an early published example of this
style. In his two collections of versets, Hymnes de l’Église
(1623) and Le Magnificat (1626),11 each verset uses strict
counterpoint modelled after the style of polyphonic vocal
compositions. In Hymnes de l’Église, the tune of each
hymn is used as the subject of a point of imitation.
Furthermore, this melody is usually heard in long notes in
the bass as a cantus firmus. With the Magnificat, the
situation is slightly more complicated; the text is a canticle
sung at the daily office of Vespers12 and is sung not to a
strophic hymn melody but to one of many possible short
recitation formulae in each of the eight church modes,
which are repeated to fit the length of the text.13 These
recitation formulae are not well-suited to use as cantus firmi
in long notes, but Titelouze nevertheless works them into
his composition as the subject of points of imitation, in the
manner of a Renaissance paraphrase mass.
Titelouze’s compositions are the only surviving
examples of printed French organ music from the first half
11
Jehan Titelouze, Oeuvres complètes d’Orgue, in Archives des Maîtres de
l’Orgue des XVIe, XVIIe et XVIIIe Siècles, ed. Alexandre Guilmant and André
Pirro, vol. 1 (Paris: Durand et Fils, 1899, reprint: New York: Johnson Reprint
Corporation, 1972).
12
Higginbottom, “Organ music and the liturgy,” 135.
13
The eight tones for the Magnificat are found in The Liber usualis, edited by
the Benedictines of Solesmes (Tournai: Desclée, 1963).

87
Nota Bene

of the seventeenth century, and so provide our only window

to the characteristics of alternatim versets of this period.
Indeed, the composer states in his preface that no organ
tablature had been printed within his lifetime.14 The only
earlier known book of French organ music is a collection of
anonymous versets published by Attaignant in 1531 –
almost a century earlier.15 This absence of printed material
can be attributed, as Yvonne Rokseth suggests, to the
practice of compiling manuscript collections of composed
organ versets.16 However, the lack of evidence for the
existence of such manuscript collections suggests that
improvisation was the accepted practice and that printed
examples by Titelouze and others are merely exempla of
this practice. In his preface to Hymnes de l’Église,
Titelouze states his hope that his volume will “be useful to
those who desire to play the organ”17 and adds that he was
spurred to publish his collection by the “volumes of
tablatures of all kinds of instruments printed in our French;
[but] it is beyond the recollection of men that any have
been printed for the organ . . . [despite] the fact that we
have increased its perfection in the last few years.”18 In
other words, he argues that the existence of printed organ
music is not a necessity for his French colleagues, but will
help to teach students and will demonstrate the “perfection”
achieved by the French school of organists and organ
builders.

14
van Wye, “Ritual Use of the Organ in France,” 299.
15
Ibid., 294.
16
Quoted in van Wye, “Ritual Use of the Organ in France,” 293.
17
Titelouze, op. cit., English translation in Harry W. Gay, Four French Organist-
Composers, 1549-1720 (Memphis: Memphis State University Press, 1975), 42.
18
Ibid., 43.

88
 The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ Repertoire

Titelouze’s rigorously contrapuntal style became

unfashionable by the end of the century. The increasing
secularization of the liturgy meant that versets often bore
no relation to the plainchant they were intended to replace,
and were instead modelled after contemporary dance
styles. Thus, the instructions of the ceremonials from the
beginning of the century became increasingly antiquated.
Couperin’s masses, for example, consist mainly of freely-
composed versets bearing no relation to plainsong, thus
making it impossible for the cantus firmus to be doubled by
a vocalist as described in the Caeremoniale episcoporum.
However, the style Titelouze established in Hymnes de
l’Église, with the cantus firmus in long notes usually played
by the organ pedals and strict counterpoint in the other
voices, was retained for certain key places in the liturgy
and became known as the plainchant en taille style
(“plainchant in the tenor” style). Here, the pedal line was
played on the Trompette, the most “brilliant and
penetrating” stop on the French organ of this period.19
(Since the Pedal Trompette sounded at 8’ pitch, it was
heard in the tenor register; the lowest sounding voice was
the bottom line of the manual part.) The use of the
plainchant en taille texture was intended to fulfill the
requirement of the Caeremoniale Parisiense that certain
versets in the Mass Ordinary cycle present the plainchant
in a pure, unornamented form20 – the first and last Kyrie,
the phrases “Et in terra pax,” “Qui tollis peccata mundi,”
and “In gloria Dei Patris” in the Gloria, the first Sanctus and
the first Agnus. By presenting these seven versets in
19
Fenner Douglass, The Language of the Classical French Organ: A Musical
Tradition before 1800 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995), 89.
20
van Wye, “Ritual Use of the Organ in France,” 321.

89
Nota Bene

plainchant en taille style, the organist ensured that the

plainchant melody would be clearly audible. This style of
verset continued to be popular for centuries after
Titelouze’s death and changed little; examples from as late
as the 19th century are essentially identical.21
Titelouze’s style also heralded a flexible approach to
performance practice that was typical of many later
composers. In the preface to Hymnes de l’Église, he
suggests that if his versets are too long, the organist can
“finish at some period towards the middle, several of which
I have marked to serve as an example.”22 This practice,
reminiscent of the toccatas of Frescobaldi, is not explicitly
endorsed by most later organist-composers, although the
Livre d’orgue of Nicolas Gigault23 contains several versets
which are designed so that the organist may end the piece
at two different places, depending on the mode of the chant
that is to follow. In his second collection, Le Magnificat,
Titelouze suggests that his versets for this canticle could
equally be applied to the Benedictus (not the movement of
the Mass Ordinary, but a canticle appointed for the office of
Lauds), which was sung to a similar recitation formula.24 He
writes: “I have added a second Deposuit potentes because
in the canticle “Benedictus” there are seven versets for
organ, and the Magnificat has only six; you may choose to

21
Benjamin van Wye, “Gregorian influences in French Organ Music before the
‘Motu proprio,’” Journal of the American Musicological Society 27, no. 1 (Spring
1974): 5-6.
22
Titelouze, op. cit., in Gay, Four French Organist-Composers, 1549-1720, 43-
4.
23
Nicolas Gigault, Livre de Musique pour l’Orgue, in Archives des Maîtres de
l’Orgue des XVIe, XVIIe et XVIIIe Siècles, ed. Alexandre Guilmant and André
Pirro, vol. 4. (Paris: Durand et Fils, 1899, reprint: New York: Johnson Reprint
Corporation, 1972).
24
Higginbottom, “Organ music and the liturgy,” 134.

90
 The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ Repertoire

play whichever one you wish.”25 By providing two

alternative versets for the “Deposuit potentes,” Titelouze
allows the same music to serve for two canticles of different
lengths; the player would use both for the seven-verse
Benedictus and would have the option of using either in the
Magnificat.
Titelouze’s suggestions are illuminating for the
performer of this repertory; they point to the possibility that
versets labelled for one purpose could well have been used
for another. His versets seem to be designed for the
Magnificat, including text incipits in the score indicating
which section of the Magnificat corresponds to each verset,
but Titelouze’s preface suggests that his pieces could fit
other canticles as well. This practice of recasting versets for
one text to fit another may explain the near-total absence of
published settings of the Benedictus, the Nunc dimittis (a
canticle for the office of Compline), or the Propers of the
Mass.26 After all, Titelouze’s settings would have been
attractive to organists with less experience in improvisation;
if such organists worked at small parish churches with few
services per week, the repertoire of published versets could
be sufficient to meet their needs. Rather than improvising
new versets for the more obscure chants, they would be
attracted by Titelouze’s suggestion of reusing versets
designed for a different liturgical purpose. Titelouze
explicitly states in the introduction to Le Magnificat that he
has designed these versets to be easier to play than his
previous published collection, so as to be accessible to
“those who lack learning (since it is for them that I have

25
Titelouze, Oeuvres complètes d’Orgue, 96. Translation mine.
26
Higginbottom, “Organ music and the liturgy,” 134.

91
Nota Bene

made this volume).”27 The commercial success of

Titelouze’s works demonstrates that he appealed to this
audience quite successfully. Because later Parisian
organist-composers were even more liberal than Titelouze
in following ecclesiastical prescription, it is likely that organ
versets of this period could have been used in a wide
variety of liturgical contexts, not only the ones suggested
by their titles.
An examination of the livres d’orgue by French
composers from the later half of the century demonstrates
this great versatility. In the preface to his Premier livre
d’orgue, Nicolas Lebègue states that “the Verses in this
book can be played to all the Psalms and Canticles on all
the tones, even to Elevations of the Mass, and to
Offertories.”28 The book consists of a series of versets in
different modes, labelled not by their liturgical designation
but by their musical genre. The titles of the pieces, such as
“Fugue grave,” “Dialogue,” “Plein jeu,” or “Tierce en taille”
designate the conventional character, texture and
registration for each movement, but have no liturgical
significance. The pieces are intended for liturgical use but
are based entirely on secular models and have no
connection to plainchant. Clérambault’s frequently-
performed Livre d’Orgue is organized along similar lines; it
contains several pieces with no liturgical designation
grouped into suites on the first and second church tones.29
It has been suggested that Clérambault’s suites could be
27
Titelouze, Oeuvres complètes d’Orgue, 96. Translation mine.
28
Nicolas Lebègue, Oeuvres complètes d’Orgue, in Archives des Maîtres de
l’Orgue des XVIe, XVIIe et XVIIIe Siècles, ed. Alexandre Guilmant and André
Pirro, vol. 9 (Paris: Durand et Fils, 1899, reprint: New York: Johnson Reprint
Corporation, 1972), Translation in Douglass, The Language of the Classical
French Organ: A Musical Tradition before 1800, 195.
29
Louis-Nicolas de Clérambault, Livre d’Orgue (Miami: Edwin F. Kalmus, n.d.).

92
 The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ Repertoire

used for cycles of the Magnificat,30 but since they contain

seven versets rather than six, it seems likely that the suites
could also be designed with the Benedictus in mind. André
Raison’s Livre d’Orgue contains five Mass cycles, but he
notes in the preface that “the 5 Masses can serve also for
the Magnificat for those who do not need a Mass.”31 The
performer can produce a usable Magnificat cycle from
Raison’s masses by dividing each mass into three suites
for a total of fifteen Magnificats.
The prefaces to these livres d’orgue give a good idea
of their intended function. Many of the composers go to
great lengths to demonstrate the versatility of their
compositions, and several specifically address themselves
to the less experienced player. For instance, Lebègue,
likely aware that poorly trained organists would be playing
his works, urges his readers to play them “with the correct
combinations of stops and the proper tempo for each piece;
and particularly to practice them, so that they will know
them well enough to play them, for the music will then show
to greater advantage and have infinitely more grace.”32
Others, reminded perhaps of Titelouze’s desire to
demonstrate the “perfection” of the French school, seem to
consider their works more as exempla of their style of
composition. Jacques Boyvin in particular includes in his

30
Higginbottom, “Organ music and the liturgy,” 138.
31
André Raison, Livre d’Orgue, in Archives des Maîtres de l’Orgue des XVIe,
XVIIe et XVIIIe Siècles, ed. Alexandre Guilmant and André Pirro, vol. 2 (Paris:
Durand et Fils, 1899, reprint: New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1972).
Translation mine.
32
Nicolas Lebègue, Oeuvres complètes d’Orgue, English translation in
Douglass, The Language of the Classical French Organ: A Musical Tradition
before 1800, 195.

93
Nota Bene

Livre d’Orgue a table of French registrations, since his

book “could fall into the hands of foreign musicians.”33
Although several printed collections from this period
survive, there are very few manuscript sources offering an
idea of local performance practices. The recent discovery
of the so-called Livre d’orgue de Montréal, however,
represents the largest single manuscript source of organ
music from this period.34 The manuscript was brought to
Canada from Paris by the priest Jean Girard, a
schoolteacher who became the organist at the Montréal
church of Notre Dame, then a small parish church.35
Sixteen of the pieces in the manuscript were later identified
as being by Nicolas Lebègue, but the remaining ones are
of unidentified authorship. The contents of the manuscript
correspond well with the contents of published livres
d’orgue of this period; the manuscript contains six masses,
settings of the Magnificat and Te Deum (a hymn for the
office of Matins), and a variety of versets with no liturgical
designation. Since Girard was not primarily a musician, it
seems likely that he lacked advanced training as an
organist and may have used the collection of versets as an
alternative to improvising at each service. Because the
manuscript contains 398 pieces, he would likely have found
this number sufficient for his needs (particularly combined
33
Jacques Boyvin, Oeuvres complètes d’Orgue, in Archives des Maîtres de
l’Orgue des XVIe, XVIIe et XVIIIe Siècles, ed. Alexandre Guilmant and André
Pirro, vol. 6 (Paris: Durand et Fils, 1899, reprint: New York: Johnson Reprint
Corporation, 1972). English translation in Douglass, The Language of the
Classical French Organ: A Musical Tradition before 1800, 202.
34
Le livre d’orgue de Montréal, 17th-century music manuscript, facsimile
reproduction of the manuscript deposited in the Fonds Girouard de la
Fondation Lionel-Groulx in 1950 (Montreal: Foundation Lionel-Groulx, 1981).
35
Jiyoung Lee, “Livre d’Orgue de Montréal: Classical French Organ
Performance Practice” (D.M.A. diss., University of California at Los Angeles,
2003), 1.

94
 The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ Repertoire

with two volumes of works by Nivers, also in his

possession).36 The mass settings in the book are even
looser in structure than is typical of the period; only one
contains any reference to plainsong, the remainder being
essentially extended suites in a single church tone.37
Both printed and manuscript sources of seventeenth-
century French organ music, therefore, are representations
of a larger oral tradition based on improvisation. As
practiced by a master of the style like Couperin, the organ
mass was not a compositional genre but an improvisational
practice followed by generations of organists throughout
France. However, the absence of standardized musical
training for organists prompted the greatest practitioners of
the art to write notated examples for educational purposes.
These “frozen improvisations” provide a valuable window
into liturgical practices of the time. Contrary to the rather
strict requirements of Catholic ceremonials, most
contemporary organists seem to have taken great freedom
with their versets; they were willing to introduce material
from secular dance styles or reuse the same pieces in
different liturgical contexts. The contemporary practice of
performing this repertoire in a recital context is often
historically inaccurate. For example, a common approach
to this music is to perform a complete Mass cycle by a
single composer as though it were a complete work in
itself, a type of performance which has no precedent in
seventeenth-century practices. In reality, alternatim
performance was governed by a complex set of

36
Lee, “Livre d’Orgue de Montréal: Classical French Organ Performance
Practice,” 1.
37
Ibid., 11.

95
Nota Bene

relationships that often permitted an extremely flexible

approach to liturgical performance.

96
 The Liturgical Function of French Baroque Organ Repertoire

Works Cited

Boyvin, Jacques. Oeuvres complètes d’Orgue. In Archives des Maîtres de

l’Orgue des XVIe, XVIIe et XVIIIe Siècles, ed. Alexandre Guilmant and
André Pirro, vol. 6. Paris: Durand et Fils, 1899. Reprint: New York:
Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1972.

de Clérambault, Louis-Nicolas. Livre d’Orgue. Miami: Edwin F. Kalmus,

n.d.

Couperin, François. Two Masses for Organ. Mineola, N.Y.: Dover

Publications, 1994.

Douglass, Fenner. The Language of the Classical French Organ: A

Musical Tradition before 1800. Expanded edition. New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1995.

Gay, Harry W. Four French Organist-Composers, 1549-1720. Memphis:

Memphis State University Press, 1975.

Gigault, Nicolas. Livre de Musique pour l’Orgue. In Archives des Maîtres

de l’Orgue des XVIe, XVIIe et XVIIIe Siècles, ed. Alexandre Guilmant
and André Pirro, vol. 4. Paris: Durand et Fils, 1899. Reprint: New York:
Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1972.

de Grigny, Nicolas. Livre d’Orgue. Miami: Edwin F. Kalmus, n.d.

Higginbottom, Edward. “French Classical organ music and the liturgy.”

Proceedings of the Royal Musicological Association 103 (1976-1977):
19-40.

---. S.v. “Organ Mass.” Grove Music Online http://www.grovemusic.com

(accessed 4 December 2007).

---. “Organ music and the liturgy.” In The Cambridge Companion to the
Organ, edited by Nicholas Thistlethwaite and Geoffrey Webber.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

97
 Nota Bene

Lebègue, Nicolas. Oeuvres complètes d’Orgue. In Archives des Maîtres

de l’Orgue des XVIe, XVIIe et XVIIIe Siècles, ed. Alexandre Guilmant
and André Pirro, vol. 9. Paris: Durand et Fils, 1899. Reprint: New York:
Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1972.

Lee, Jiyoung. “Livre d’Orgue de Montréal: Classical French Organ

Performance Practice.” DMA diss., University of California at Los
Angeles, 2003.

Le livre d’orgue de Montréal. 17th-century music manuscript, facsimile

reproduction of the manuscript deposited in the Fonds Girouard de la
Fondation Lionel-Groulx in 1950. Montreal: Foundation Lionel-Groulx,
1981.

The Liber usualis, edited by the Benedictines of Solesmes. Tournai:

Desclée, 1963.

Raison, André. Livre d’Orgue. In Archives des Maîtres de l’Orgue des

XVIe, XVIIe et XVIIIe Siècles, ed. Alexandre Guilmant and André Pirro,
vol. 2. Paris: Durand et Fils, 1899. Reprint: New York: Johnson Reprint
Corporation, 1972.

Titelouze, Jehan. Oeuvres complètes d’Orgue. In Archives des Maîtres de

l’Orgue des XVIe, XVIIe et XVIIIe Siècles, ed. Alexandre Guilmant and
André Pirro, vol. 1. Paris: Durand et Fils, 1899. Reprint: New York:
Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1972.

van Wye, Benjamin. “Gregorian Influences in French Music before the

‘Motu proprio.’” Journal of the American Musicological Society 27, no. 1
(Spring 1974): 1-24

---. “Ritual Use of the Organ in France.” Journal of the American

Musicological Society 33, no. 2 (Summer 1980): 287-325.

98