Abstract
In considering authorial attributions of fifteenth- and sixteenth-century compositions, musicologists have drawn upon musical, historical, and biographical factors to contest ascriptions in the sources, as well as to assign authorship to anonymously transmitted pieces. Such conclusions are often grounded in value judgments concerning the aesthetic quality of the items in question, with scholars defending their Renaissance artist-composers from flawed creations or claiming celebrated works in order to raise the status of underappreciated masters. The endeavour threatens constantly to falter on ideological grounds and to devolve into circular argumentation. A possible way out of the hermeneutic circle of this canon-building process is offered by statistical examination of low-level contrapuntal features, which may not have been consciously manipulated by composers but rather betray their individual hands at a detailed level. Prime examples of this type of underlying technical characteristic include rhythmic...
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have