such voluptuous phrases of the Vulgate as the following:
Fasciculus myrrhae dilectus meus mihi. Fulcite
me floribus, stipate me malis, quia amore langueo.
Vulnerasti cor meum, soror, sponsa mea. This
was the period when Italy was ringing with the secular
sweetnesses of Tasso’s
Aminta and of
Guarini’s
Pastor fido; when the devotion
of the cloister was becoming languorous and soft;
when the cult of the Virgin was assuming the extravagant
proportions satirized by Pascal; finally, when manners
were affecting a tone of swooning piety blent with
sensuous luxuriousness. Palestrina’s setting
of the Canticle and of the Hymn to Mary provided the
public with music which, according to the taste of
that epoch, transferred terrestrial emotions into the
regions of paradisal bliss, and justified the definition
of music as the
Lamento dell’amore o la preghiera
agli dei. The great creator of a new ecclesiastical
style, the ‘imitator of nature,’ as Vincenzo
Galilei styled him, the ‘prince of music,’
as his epitaph proclaimed him, lent his genius to
an art, vacillating between mundane sensuality and
celestial rapture, which, however innocently developed
by him in the sphere of music, was symptomatic of
the most unhealthy tendencies of his race and age.
While singing these madrigals and these motetts the
youth of either sex were no longer reminded, it is
true, of tavern ditties or dance measures. But
the emotions of luxurious delight or passionate ecstasy
deep in their own natures were drawn forth, and sanctified
by application to the language of effeminate devotion.
I have dwelt upon these two sets of compositions,
rather than upon the masses of strictly and severely
ecclesiastical music which Palestrina produced with
inexhaustible industry, partly because they appear
to have been extraordinarily popular, and partly because
they illustrate those tendencies in art and manners
which the sentimental school of Bolognese painters
attempted to embody. They belong to that religious
sphere which the Jesuit Order occupied, governed,
and administered upon the lines of their prescribed
discipline. These considerations are not merely
irrelevant. The specific qualities of Italian
music for the next two centuries were undoubtedly
determined by the atmosphere of sensuous pietism in
which it flourished, at the very time when German music
was striking far other roots in the Chorales of the
Reformation epoch. What Palestrina effected was
to substitute in Church music the clear and melodious
manner of the secular madrigal for the heavy and scholastic
science of the Flemish school, and to produce masterpieces
of religious art in his motetts on the Canticles which
confounded the lines of demarcation between pious
and profane expression. He taught music to utter
the emotions of the heart; but those emotions in his
land and race were already tending in religion toward
the sentimental and voluptuous.