A Dictionary of Music and Musicians/Vittoria, Tommaso

by James Russell Milne

VITTORIA, Tommaso Ludovico da—or, to give the name in its Latin form, Victoria, Thomas Ludovicus de—is, next to Palestrina, the greatest musician of the Roman school of the 16th century. Though Vittoria is assigned to the Roman school, that must not be understood as if he ever became a mere follower or imitator of Palestrina, as he is sometimes considered. He was Spanish by birth, and always remained Spanish in feeling; but, like Escobedo, Morales, Soto, etc., he made Rome the principal sphere of his activity. It is perhaps on this account that it is not usual to reckon a distinct Spanish school of music, as well as on account of the general affinity of style of these Spanish composers to their Roman contemporaries. We should not however forget that the Roman school itself was partly formed and largely influenced by these Spanish musicians. Palestrina, in whom the Roman school is practically summed up, must have learnt as much from his Spanish predecessors who held office in the Papal chapel, Escobedo and Morales, as from his immediate master Goudimel. If from Goudimel and older Netherlanders Palestrina learned his science, his familiarity with all the technicalities of his art, and if from Arcadelt he caught the gift of sweet and natural expressiveness, from the Spanish masters he acquired something of that depth of feeling which is their special characteristic. Proske, speaking of the Spaniard Morales, says 'the reform of the pure church style, which was afterwards perfected by Palestrina, is happily anticipated in many parts of the works of Morales, for his style is noble and dignified, and often penetrated with such depth of feeling as is hardly to be found in any other master' (Musica Divina, III. xiv.). Ambros too acknowledges that already in Morales 'there is developed out of the vigorous stem of Netherland art, that pure bloom of the higher ideal style, which we are accustomed to call Roman' (Bd. iii. 588). If it were not that Palestrina has so much overshadowed his predecessors and contemporaries, it would perhaps be more correct, especially when we take Vittoria into account, to speak of the Hispano-Roman school. We shall not be far wrong in attributing to Spanish influence that particular cast of the religious spirit which breathes out of Palestrina's music, and in considering generally that to the happy commixture of Spanish seriousness and gravity with Italian grace, softness and sweetness, is due that peculiar impression of heavenliness and angelic purity which has so often been noted as characteristic of the Palestrina style in its perfection. In connexion with this, we may also note the fact that it was the Spanish bishops, at the Council of Trent, who by their resistance to the exclusion of polyphonic music from the services, obtained the appointment of that celebrated commission which gave occasion to the composition of Palestrina's Missa Papae Marcelli.

It might almost be considered as a symbol of the close connexion of the Spanish music of the 16th century with Spanish religion that Avila, the birthplace of Saint Teresa, the most striking embodiment of the Spanish religious spirit, was also the birthplace of Vittoria, the noblest representative of Spanish music. The mystic-ascetical spirit peculiar to Spain is common to both. It is the expression of this spirit in Vittoria's music that vindicates his claim to an independent position of his own beside Palestrina, and redeems him from being considered a servile follower or imitator. In the preface to his edition of Vittoria's Missa pro Defunctis à 6^[1] Haberl casts doubt on the usually received opinion that Vittoria was born at Avila. Though Abulensis (i.e. of Avila) is found after Vittoria's name on the title-pages of all his published works, Haberl conjectures this to indicate that Vittoria was a priest of the diocese of Avila—Presbyter Abulensis—and that his real birthplace is Vittoria, whence he took his name, as Palestrina took his from Præneste. But the cases are not parallel, for Palestrina's name in all Latin titles and dedications always appears as Prænestinus, whereas Vittoria's name never appears as Victoriensis, but always T. L. de Victoria Abulensis. The cases are only parallel if we interpret Abulensis as we interpret Prænestinus, as signifying the place of birth; everything rather points to the conjecture that he was ordained priest in Rome. It is better therefore to adhere to the received opinion that he was born at Avila.^[2]

The precise date of Vittoria's birth has not been ascertained, but the known facts of his life lead us to place it about 1540. The first authentic information we have regarding him is his appointment in 1573 as Maestro di Cappella to the Collegium Germanicum, on its reorganisation under Gregory XIII. It is evident however that he must have been in Rome for some years previously. There can be little doubt that his whole musical training, as a composer at least, was received there. There is no trace of his having had to work himself free from the trammels of Netherland scholasticism, the stiffness of the earlier style, and what Baini calls the 'fiammingo squalore,' as Morales and even Palestrina had to do. He appears at once to have entered into the heritage of the new style, indicated by Morales, but first completely won by Palestrina in his Improperia and Marcellus mass. A pregnant remark by Ambros (iv. 71), implying that Palestrina owed his very superiority to the fact of his having had to struggle out of the Netherland fetters, suggests that it would perhaps have benefited Vittoria also to have passed through this experience. It gave Palestrina so thorough a command over all the resources of counter-point, canon and imitation, as enabled him to move with the most sovereign ease and boldness, and to give full rein to his imagination, in the midst of the most elaborate complexity of parts. Palestrina, starting from science, learned to make all science subservient to the expression of the religious feeling; Vittoria, starting from the religious feeling, and from the vantage-ground won by Palestrina, only used that amount of science which was necessary to give expression to his own religious earnestness. In comparison with Palestrina there is thus a certain limitation in his talent; he has not the same immense variety, boldness, and originality as Palestrina, though there is often a greater depth of individual expression. We do not know who was Vittoria's immediate master in composition; he was no pupil of Palestrina in the ordinary sense, but Palestrina was his only real master, and we know that he was bound to him in ties of close friendship and the greatest admiration. By this he must have largely profited. The artistic relation of the two might in some respects be considered parallel to that of Schubert and Beethoven. Vittoria is a sort of feminine counterpart of Palestrina, just as Schubert is of Beethoven. But the parallel does not hold good in other respects. There is nothing in Vittoria's case to correspond with the immense productivity of Schubert, unless MS. works of his should still be lying hid. Vittoria's first publication was (according to Haberl) in the year 1572, and consisted of a book of motets for 4 to 8 voices (Venice, Ant. Gardane). This is not often referred to, because its contents were afterwards reprinted with additions in 1583. Fétis does not mention it, but mentions instead a publication of 1576 to which I can find no other reference. The title as given by him is 'Liber primus, qui Missas, Psalmos, Magnificat, ad Virginem Dei Salutationes, aliaque complectitur 4, 5, 6, 8 voc. Venetiis, apud Angelum Gardanum 1576.' One would be inclined to think there is some confusion here, as two other books of Masses which appeared later, are entitled Liber Primus and Liber Secundus. It is possible that this publication may contain works afterwards republished in separate collections. Albert von Thimus, in making a score of Vittoria's 8-part motet 'Ave Regina,' for Schlesinger's 'Musica Sacra,' states that he could not find a copy of this publication in any German or French library.

To keep to chronological order, we should mention that in 1575 Vittoria was appointed choir-master of St. Apollinaris. According to Haberl however this was no new appointment (as represented in Proske and Ambros); the church being given for the use of the Collegium Germanicum. This post Vittoria appears to have held till 1589, during which time he published the following works: (1) A set of Magnificats with Antiphons B. V. M., Rome 1581; original title, 'Cantica B. V. vulgo Magnificat 4 voc. cum 4 Antiphones B. V. per annum 5 and 8 voc.' (2) A book of hymns for 4 voices to which is appended four Psalms for 8 voices, Rome 1581; original title, 'Hymni totius anni secundum S. Rom. Eccl. consuetudinem qui quatuor concinuntur vocibus, una cum quatuor Psalmis pro praecipuis festivitatibus, qui octo vocibus modulantur.' This was dedicated to Gregory XIII, and would appear to have been the first comprehensive work of the kind, preceding by several years Palestrina's book of Hymns, which was published in 1589. Proske gives five of these Hymns in the third volume of Musica Divina. If anything distinguishes Vittoria's Hymns from Palestrina's, it is a peculiar tenderness of expression with less elaboration. Perhaps Palestrina was stimulated to the composition of his Hymns by the example of Vittoria; the task must have been congenial to Vittoria, requiring strict subordination to the liturgical melody, with sufficient opportunity for free subjective expression. (3) A book of Motets for 4, 5, 6, 8 and 12 voices, Rome 1583. The original title would seem to show that this book contains all that was in the early publication of 1572 with much else, ('quae quidem nunc vero melius excussa, et alia quamplurima adjuncta noviter sunt impressa'). This book was reprinted several times. (4) Another book of Motets for all the feasts of the year was published at Rome in 1588. Editions of both appeared later as 'Cantiones Sacræ' at Dillinger and Frankfort. The second volume of Proske's Musica Divina contains fourteen of these Motets, with the addition of one which had remained in MS. Ambros remarks on the striking similarity ('doppelgängerische Aehnlichkeit') of many of Vittoria's Motets to those of Palestrina on the same texts, and yet with an essential difference. He notes in them, as Proske does, a certain passionateness of feeling, kept in check by devotion and humility. This passion is not always marked, as in the instance referred to by Ambros, by the almost immediate entrance of a counter-subject at the beginning of the piece, but its influence may be traced generally in the less strict adherence to exact imitation of parts, and a looser texture generally of part-writing. On the other hand there are none of those semi-dramatic traits and outward illustrations of words or ideas which are to be found in Palestrina. Vittoria is too much concerned with the expression of inward feeling, to care about the outward illustration of words or ideas. It may be said generally that in Vittoria there is a more complete subordination to purely liturgical considerations, while Palestrina has in view more general religious and artistic considerations, and hence in Vittoria there is nothing corresponding to Palestrina's Motets from the Song of Songs, or to that more animated style ('genus alacrior') which Palestrina professed to employ in these and other works.

To return to the enumeration of Vittoria's works: we have, (5) A First Book of Masses, published at Rome, 1583, dedicated to Philip II. of Spain, and containing nine masses—five à 4, two à 5, and two à 6. Of these, two four-part masses have been published by Proske, viz. 'quam gloriosum' and 'Simile est regnum'; and one by Eslava, 'Ave Maris stella.' (6) 'Officium Hebdomadæ Sanctæ,' Rome 1585, containing settings of the Improperia, the Lamentations, and the 'Turbæ' of the Passion. From this book are taken the eighteen Selectissimæ Modulationes published in vol. 4 of the 'Musica Divina.' The works above mentioned were published during Vittoria's stay in Rome. Until recently it was not known for certain that he had ever left Rome or given up his appointment there. Fétis indeed conjectured, on the ground of his last work being published in Madrid, that he had actually returned there.^[3] But it has since been ascertained from the Archives of the Royal Chapel at Madrid that in 1589 Vittoria was appointed Vice-Master of the Chapel (just established by Philip II.), under the Fleming Philip Rogier. Perhaps before leaving Italy, Vittoria had prepared for publication his second book of Masses, which appeared in 1592. It was dedicated to Cardinal Albert, son of the Empress Maria, and in the dedication the composer expresses his gratitude for the post of Chaplain to the Imperial Court. This book contains two masses à 4 with a 4-part 'Asperges' and 'Vidi Aquam,' two Masses à 5, one à 6, one à 8, and one Requiem Mass à 4. Of these, the 4-part 'Quarti toni,' the 5-part 'Trahe me post te,' the 6-part 'Vide Speciosam' are given by Proske, as also the two Antiphons. These Masses are on a smaller scale, and far less elaborate in technique than the more celebrated of Palestrina's. A good example for the comparison of technique is afforded by the 6-part 'Vidi Speciosam' of Vittoria and the 'Tu es Petrus' of Palestrina, the opening subjects of both, found also in the other movements, being so similar. Of Vittoria's Masses generally we may simply repeat the judgment of Proske—work and prayer, genius and humility are blended in them to perfect harmony.

The date of Vittoria's death is uncertain. He held his post in the Royal Chapel until 1602, when he was succeeded by Bernard Clavijo, a celebrated organist. He can scarcely have died in that year, since he wrote funeral music for the Empress Maria, who died in 1603. The title of this his last important work is:—'Officium Defunctorum sex vocibus, in obitu et obsequiis Sacræ Imperatricis,' Madrid 1605. It was dedicated to the Princess Margaret, daughter of the Empress, and consists of a 6-part 'Missa pro defunctis,' a 6-part 'Versa est in luctum,' a 6-part Responsorium, 'Libera,' and a 4-part Lectio 'Tædet anima.' This work is universally described as the crown of all the works of the master, 'the greatest triumph of his genius.' [See further, Requiem, vol. iii. p. 109b.] Though all the movements are based on the liturgical Canto Fermo, the music has a surprisingly modern character, its effect depending more on the succession of powerful and expressive harmonies than on the mere melodious movement of the parts. Technically considered, it is a marvellous blending of old independent movement of parts, with modern dissonances and progressions. Spiritually considered, it is a wonderful expression of poignant personal sorrow, chastened by religious contemplation and devotion. It is the spirit of devout mourning, holy fear, religious awe before the Divine Judge, which here comes to expression. There is no attempt to depict realistically the outward terrors of the last day, as in some modern Requiems.^[4] In Vittoria's work it is simply the individual soul realising its dependence on the Divine mercy. We may suppose him to have composed it in something of the same spirit in which the Emperor Charles V. in his cloister, assisted at his own obsequies. From this profound religious realism may have come the unusual animation of style specially noticeable in the Offertorium, the Cum Sanctis, and the Trio of the Libera, 'Tremens factus sum'—the animation of the deepest religious earnestness; and it is perhaps characteristic of the difference between Palestrina and Vittoria, that in the one case it was the composition of the Song of Songs, in the other of the Requiem, which called forth a similar change of style in the two composers. Ambros says this sublime funeral music vindicates for Vittoria the nearest place to Palestrina, but the effect of this judgment is somewhat neutralised by his afterwards bracketing him with Anerio and Soriano, as all much on the same level below Palestrina. It is a mistake perhaps to arrange composers simply up and down, in a straight line as it were, of merit. Some composers, who come short of the universality of spirit of the very greatest composers, may yet have some conspicuous points of superiority of their own, may contribute some new elements to the spiritual side of art, if not to the technical, which warrant their being classed with the greatest. If Palestrina is superior to Vittoria, as Beethoven is to Schubert, yet as Schubert has many points of excellence which form a fitting complement to those of Beethoven, so Vittoria has certain points of excellence more characteristic and more valuable than those of Anerio and Soriano, which mark him out as the fitting complement to Palestrina. If Vittoria has not the science, the variety, the boldness, the perfect originality of Palestrina, yet in him depth of feeling comes to more direct and immediate expression. In Palestrina there may be said to be the perfect equilibrium of art and religious feeling an equilibrium outwardly manifested in the natural flow of his melody, the pure diatonic character of his harmony, and the consummate art of his part-writing all conveying the impression of passionless purity. In Vittoria this equilibrium is slightly disturbed in favour of religious feeling; as if in the Spaniard, feeling must manifest itself, even when it sacrifices itself to art and to religion. The result is an impression of tender earnestness, so that if, as Ambros says, the strains of Palestrina are messengers from a higher and eternal world, the like strains of Vittoria are rather the responsive utterances of saintly souls on earth.

[ J. R. M. ]

1. F. X. Haberl. Domkapellmeister of Ratisbon.
2. There is however the case of one prominent musician which would lend some support to Haberl's conjecture if there were any other evidence in support of it. It has been recently ascertained that the real name of Ludovico Viadana was Ludovico Grossi, and that he was born at Viadana, and not at Lodi as hitherto assumed.
3. Ambros attached no value to this conjecture (see note at foot of p. 72. Band IV).
4. We are not disparaging the more realistic tendency of modern art, for the sake of exalting the purer Idealism of ancient art; for even realism may be sublimed into the highest idealism, as in the case of Beethoven's Missa Solennis. On the other hand, in all progress of art, there is a loss as well as a gain a fact which is too often forgotten by the leaders of so-called progressive art.