\documentstyle[12pt]{report}

\title{Comparison and Contrast of \\ the Bach Mass in B Minor \\ and \\
the Haydn {\em Missa in Tempore Belli}}
\author{George A. Madrid \\ \\ 21.60---Introduction to Music \\ with
Claudia vonCanon}
\date{October 24, 1988}

\newcommand{\mycolumn}[1]{\begin{minipage}[t]{2.25in} \rightskip = 0pt
	plus2em \pretolerance=1500 \tolerance=1500 {\scriptsize #1} \end{minipage}}
\newcommand{\firstcolumn}[1]{\mycolumn{ {\sc #1}}}
\newcommand{\translate}[2]{\vspace{.25in} \firstcolumn{#1} \hspace{.25in}
	\mycolumn{#2} \vspace{.12in}}

\begin{document}

\maketitle

The text of the Christian mass has probably been arranged by more
composers than any other single piece in musical history.  Much of the
reason for this is that the Church was one of the biggest patrons of the
arts for a great period of history.  Even in the Medieval period, the
clergy held much real economic power.  For this reason, much of the
music that is referred to generically as ``classical'' has a religious
motive behind its writing.  Since the text of the mass is a major part
of the celebration of christianity, composers were often commissioned to
set it to music.

The text of the mass lends itself well to the study of a period's music.
The reason for this is that it has remained unchanged for centuries.
The music will vary, but the words are the same.  It is especially
useful in the comparison of two periods or composers---since they were
working with the same materials, one can easily compare what they have
``built'' from them.

\paragraph{The recordings}The two composers Johann Sebastian Bach and
Joseph Haydn were not contemporaries.  They wrote during two distinct
periods in music.  Using two of their masses, one can compare not only
their thoughts about music but also their own interpretations of God.
This paper will do just that.  It will draw comparisons and contrasts
between Bach's Mass in B Minor and Haydn's {\em Missa in tempore
belli\/}.

Johann Sebastian Bach (1685--1750) wrote the Mass in B Minor in the
years between 1733 and about 1748. I will use the {\em Archiv
Produktion\/} version of the mass, recorded in February of 1985.  The
mass itself is performed by the Monteverdi Choir and the English Baroque
Soloists, conducted by John Eliot Gardiner.


Joseph Haydn (1732--1809) wrote the {\em Missa in tempore belli\/},
``Mass in times of war,'' in 1796--97, forty-six years after the death
of Bach.  The recording I used is the version published by {\em
Philips\/} on compact disc.  It is a live recording of a concert in
September of 1984.  It features the {\em Chor \& Symphonie-Orchester des
Bayerischen Rundfunks\/} under the direction of Leonard Bernstein.


In order to fully explore the masses to the greatest of his ability, the
writer will ``walk'' through them, line by line, correlating the mood of
the music and the composer's attitude toward the particular section
about which he is writing.



\translate{{\bf Kyrie}\, Kyrie eleison.  Christe eleison.  Kyrie
eleison.}{Lord, have mercy on us.  Christ, have mercy on us.  Lord, have
mercy on us.}


The two masses are difficult to compare using section-length as an
indicator because the difference between the pieces as a whole is so
great anyway.  For instance, the {\em Kyrie\/} is only five minutes long
in the Haydn mass, but it is a total of 18 minutes in the Mass in B
Minor.

The first thing that strikes me about the Haydn mass is the softness of
the beginning.  The softness builds, though, to a wonderful combination
of solo and choral pieces.  Musically, the Bach {\em Kyrie\/} is a
fugue.  It begins with a nice vocal introduction of the themes, followed
by an instrumental expansion of these themes.  The second part of the
{\em Kyrie\/}  is a soprano duet.  The last part is another fugue to the
Lord.  

In the Haydn {\em Kyrie\/}, there is a distinct lack of {\em Christe
eleison\/}'s; however, that singular phrase stands out quite distinctly
from the rest of the piece.  At that point the rhythm changes to a slow,
purposeful, monotonic, ``{\em Christe eleison\/}.''  This is a more
subtle praise of Christ.

The Bach {\em Kyrie\/} is  divided into three distinct parts.  Each of
these parts is dedicated to a particular aspect of God:  the first to
the Father, the second to the Son, and the last to the Holy Spirit.
Here, Bach sets a convention which he will follow for the rest of the
mass.  When addressing the Father, the music is strong and seems to
reach to the heavens.  The areas directed to Jesus Christ are generally
solos or duets and therefore, of a more personal nature.  The sections
for the Holy Spirit tend to be more mysterious sounding.  


\translate{{\bf Gloria}\, Gloria in excelsis Deo.  Et in terra pax
hominibus bonae voluntatis.}{Glory be to God on high.  And on earth
peace to men of good will.}


In the first measures of the {\em Gloria\/}, Haydn comes on strong,
really driving home the glory of God.  After all, that is the whole
purpose of the {\em Gloria\/}.  Four measures later, however, he changes
the dynamics of the piece to {\em piano\/} for the soft supplication of
peace on earth.

Bach handles these first two phrases of the {\em Gloria\/} in about the
same way.  His {\em Gloria\/} is fast and strong.  This is followed by a
change in tempo to one of my favorite parts of the mass.  Bach's
rendition of the {\em et in terra pax\/} oozes with tranquility.  It is
made serene by the abundant use of soprano sequences.  At many points,
the soprano will sing a long sequence, backed solely by the \newpage
\noindent tenors. This is very nice.  The trumpets throughout this
section of the {\em Gloria\/} seem to herald the coming of the Lord.

\translate{Laudamus te, benedicimus te, adoramus te, glorificamus te.}{We
praise Thee; we bless Thee; we adore Thee; we glorify Thee.}

I didn't like the Bach version of these lines.  Quite frankly I found it
repetitive and boring.  It should not have been a solo.  The words are
``We praise'' and it should have been a choral piece for this reason as
well as since it was directed toward God, not Christ.

The Haydn rendition was nice.  The first three parts were all variations
on the same theme.  Only the {\em glorificamus} was different, relating
back to the idea of ``glory to God'' which is central to the {\em
Gloria\/}.

\translate{Gratias agimus tibi propter magnam gloriam tuam.  Domine Deus,
rex coelestis, Deus Pater omnipotens.  Domine Fili unigenite, Jesu
Christe, altissime.  Domine Deus, Agnus Dei, Filius Patris.}{We give
Thee thanks for your great glory.  Lord God, heavenly King, the almighty
Father.  O Lord, the only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, Most High Lord
God, Lamb of God, Son of the Father.}

In the Haydn ``name-calling'', the names of Christ are all repeated or
set off from the rest by instrumentals.  This is another example of
Haydn's more subtle praise of Christ, expressing his idea that the mass
is praising God, but is more of a celebration of Christ.

The {\em gratias agimus} of the Bach mass was wonderful.  It was one
great crescendo of words and music.  As the sound of the chorus grew
more intricate, the music of the trumpets grew more glorious, until
finally, I could {\em feel} the chorus giving thanks to the great Glory
that surrounded them.  This section of the Bach mass was very poetic.

Another example of Bach's poetry comes in the next section of the {\em
Gloria\/}.  Though all the names for God are different, they all
``overlap'' in the music.  The tenor and soprano echo each other
tonally, but they sing different words.  The lyrics and melody intertwine
forming an elaborate tapestry of the many facets of the one great God.

\translate{Qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis.  Qui tollis peccata
mundi, suscipe deprecationem nostram.  Qui sedes ad dextram Patris,
miserere nobis.}{Thou who takest away the sins of the world, have mercy
upon us.  Thou who takest away the sins of the world, receive our
prayer.  Thou who sittest at the right hand of the Father, have mercy
upon us.}

In the Haydn rendering, the bass leads the rest of the chorus through
this supplication of mercy.  Haydn's use of volume is of note here.  At
times, the song is quite loud---a fierce begging of forgiveness.  It
becomes quite soft toward the end of the movement.  Phrases such as {\em
peccata mundi\/} are quiet out of shame for our sins.

The Bach interpretation of the first two phrases is very soft.  Once
again, the composer tries to hide our sins, but he knows that nothing
can be hidden from the Lord, and so he begs for mercy.

The last sentence is directed toward the Son of God, and so Bach uses a
nice alto solo here to address Christ in a more personal manner.  Once
again, he follows his convention of dealing with Christ on a more {\em
human} level.

\translate{Quoniam tu solus Sanctus, tu solus Dominus, tu solus
Altissimus, Jesu Christe.  Cum Sancto Spiritu in gloria Dei Patris.
Amen}{For Thou alone art the Holy One.  Thou alone art the Lord.  Thou,
Jesus Christ, alone art the Most High.  With the Holy Spirit in the
glory of God the Father.  Amen}

The Haydn rendition of this is a glorious cheerful praise of Christ.
After this, Haydn seizes on a chance to play with polyphony to a greater
extent then in the rest of the mass.  Since the word ``Amen'' is pretty
well understood by the listener, it is not necessary that the piece be
as easily comprehended; therefore, the difficulty of fathoming the
polyphonic structure can be disregarded.

Bach chooses to break this part into a separate piece for each sentence.
The first of these is a bass solo.  Once again, he addresses Christ more
personally.  This piece moves into the second of the two sections which
can only be called a ``celebration'' of the Holy Spirit.  This third
aspect of God is something practically untouched by Haydn.  Using a
combinations of violin and trumpet solos to tie everything together,
Bach paints a picture of a wonderful spirit behind the voices of the
chorus.


\translate{{\bf Credo}\, Credo in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem,
factorem coeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium.  Et in unum
Dominum, Jesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum et ex Patre natum ante
omnia saecula.  Deum de Deo, lumen de lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero,
genitum, non factum, consubstantialem Patri, per quem omnia facta sunt.
Qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit de
coelis.}{I believe in one God, the Father almighty, Maker of heaven and
earth and of all things visible and invisible.  And in one Lord Jesus
Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all
worlds.  God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not
made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were
made.  Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven}

Haydn seems to downplay the first part of the {\em Credo\/}.  It is
short.  He says almost nothing more than once and breaks into polyphony,
each voice saying a different phrase, in an effort to get this first
part over with.  

Bach expounds greatly on these sections.  He begins by repeating the
first sentence over and over again in a fugue.  By doing this he presses
the main idea of the whole {\em Credo\/}, that there is only one God.
After stressing this, he moves on to discuss God's different aspects.

Bach uses an interesting notation here, using a note that I can only
describe as a ``double whole'' note.  Perhaps he did this to stress the
``slowness'' of this part of the {\em Credo\/}.

The first aspect that Bach discusses is the Father aspect.  As usual, he
does so in a fugue---hard for the human ear to understand, but simple for
a God.  He then moves into a duet dedicated to Christ---easier for the
human ear of Jesus.  I am amazed at the way Bach can ``fit'' music
together.  Of the two singers, one always lags about a measure behind,
yet the harmony is still there.

\translate{Et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria virgine et home
factus est.  Crucifixus etiam pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato, passus et
sepultus est.}{And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary
and was made man.  And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate.
He suffered and was buried.}

Haydn makes this whole section quite ominous, telling the whole story
of Christ.  I loved this.  The first 16 measures of voice were all
variations on the same rhythmic motif, yet each conveys a definite mood.
The haunting bass singing about the mystery of the immaculate
conception is another example of the bass used when referring to the Holy
Spirit.  The use of bass continues through the rest of the segment.

The Bach rendition of this part was as poetic as many of the other
segments of the Bach mass.  Through the whole section about {\em
Crucifixus est\/}, one can hear the footsteps of Christ as he makes his
way to Calgary.  Also, Bach and Haydn both use decrescendoes at the end
to bury Christ.

\translate{Et resurrexit tertia die secundum scripturas.  Et ascendit in
coelum, sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris, et iterum venturus est cum gloria
judicare vivos et mortuos, cujus regni non erit finis.  Et in Spiritum
Sanctus, Dominum et vivificantem, qui ex Patre Filioque procedit; qui
cum Patre et Filio simul adoratur et conglorificatur; qui locutus est
per Prophetas.  Et unam sanctam catholicam et apostolicam ecclesiam.
Confiteor unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum.  Et exspecto
resurrectionem mortuorum et vitam venturi saeculi.  Amen.}{And the third
day he rose again according to the scriptures.  And ascended into
heaven.  And sitteth on the right hand of the Father.  And he shall come
again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead; whose kingdom
shall have no end.  And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver
of Life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, who with the Father
and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake by the
Prophets. And I believe in one Catholic and Apostolic Church.  I
acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins.  And I look for the
Resurrection of the dead, and the Life of the world to come. Amen.}

After burying Christ with decrescendoes, both composers resurrect Christ
with style---loud, bold scales from Haydn, long phrases on one syllable
from Bach.  Haydn really rushes through the rest of the {\em Credo\/}.
He goes {\em piano\/} to hide the part about the sins again.  Also, he
really expands upon the Life Everlasting in the end of his {\em
Credo\/} breaking into polyphony again.  It seems that Haydn really
seems to like polyphony, (but he avoids it in order to make the words
more clear) because he uses it whenever he can get away with it.

Bach moves from the resurrection into the rest of the beliefs,
developing them more that Haydn.  He ``upplays'' the Holy Spirit more
with a long aria in bass.  Following this comes a tempo change to add
real mystery to the afterlife, but when he finally mentions it, i.e., it
``arrives,'' it sounds glorious.  \nopagebreak One can hear the trumpets of the
cherubim.


\translate{{\bf Sanctus}\, Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus Dominus Deus
Sabaoth.  Pleni sunt coeli et terra gloria ejus.  Osanna in
excelsis}{Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God of hosts.  Heaven and earth are full
of Thy glory.  Hosanna in the highest.}

The Haydn {\em Sanctus\/} is very solemn, having a strong homophonic
nature.  The strings are the guiding force through the {\em Sanctus\/}
with their soft recurrent theme to keep the music interesting.  It is
fascinating how the theme repeats at different pitches and yet always
harmonizes with the melody.  In the {\em pleni sunt\/}, Haydn actually
tries to make the listener see the glory in the highest.  This
continues right through the loud, high {\em Osanna\/}.

In the Bach {\em Sanctus\/}, the triplets seem like the choirs of angels
singing the praises of God.  The sustained notes add to this effect.
Measures 40--43 are especially nice---the alternation of the tremors and
song between parts is lovely.  Bach's {\em pleni sunt\/} is quite rich
in sound.  Each part is doing something very different to show the
various aspects of God's glory.  This glory becomes even more obvious in
the {\em Osanna\/} with its eight singing parts.  Having so many parts
it is very hard to follow and almost impossible to understand.  I like
the way the top four parts are strongly polyphonic and the other four
and almost homophonic.  It creates a nice effect.

\translate{Benedictus, qui venit in nomine Domini.  Osanna in
excelsis.}{Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord.  Hosanna
in the highest.}

Haydn does some nice poetry in this section of the mass.  As the song
progresses, one can hear the steps of ``He that comes.''  He follows
this with down scales, implying a completion.    

Bach directs the {\em Benedictus\/} more toward Christ; after all, it is
about Him.  Once again, he follows his convention---it is a tenor solo.
After the {\em Benedictus\/}, he repeats the {\em Osanna\/}.




\translate{{\bf Agnus Dei}\, Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi,
miserere nobis.  Dona nobis pacem.}{Lamb of God, who takest away the
sins of the world, have mercy on us.  Grant us peace.}

The Bach version of the {\em Agnus Dei\/} is treated as a appeal to
Christ, and so it is an Alto solo building to the choral {\em dona nobis
pacem\/} at end the mass.


The Haydn version is homophonic ``to the max.''  It is very solemn and
full of respect for the Lord.  One can feel the music, especially the
accompaniment, building to a climax.  Hearing the tympany in this
section, echoing the sounds of war behind the pleas for peace, one can
see why this is the ``{\em missa in tempore belli\/}.''  This is also
stressed by the two minute long supplication of peace at the end.

\paragraph{Conclusion}
Haydn and Bach wrote for different periods.  What was ``in vogue''
during one's time may have been total ``gag-o-rama'' in the other's.
Bach was a writer in the Baroque period while Haydn was writing at the
onset of the Classical, so there are many inherent differences in their
music.  Also, even  though they were both working with the same
material---the mass text---they produced quite different pieces.  Much of
this difference resulted from what their ideas were about God.

Bach seems to be a writer of the {\em prima pratica\/}, the words of the
mass were not all that important.  The music came first.  After all, a
God  could certainly understand the words no matter how complex the
arrangement.  Haydn, on the other hand, is a writer of the {\em segunda
pratica\/}, the words of the mass were not to be sacrificed for the
intricacy of the music. As such, the Bach mass is very polyphonic---much
of it is fugues.  The Haydn mass is almost totally homophonic, or at
least imitatively polyphonic.  Haydn only slips into complex polyphony
when the words are totally obvious, either by context or just general
knowledge.  Examples are the {\em vitam venturi saeculi. Amen} in the
{\em Credo\/}, and anywhere where the mass text contains ``Amen.''

The attitudes of the two composers to the aspects of the Holy Trinity
are reflected through their music.  Haydn's mass tends to praise God
quite openly, but praises Jesus more subtly.  He recognizes that the
mass is mostly about Jesus Christ.  Haydn scarcely recognizes the parts
of the mass text which relate to the Holy Spirit.  Bach, on the other
hand, recognizes the importance of every part of the Holy Trinity.  He
has a different sort of music for dealing with each one.  When referring
to the Father, Bach generally uses a highly polyphonic, strong musical
style.  It is grand and worthy of a god.  His music for Jesus, however,
is of a different flavor.  It is never more than a duet, and is usually
very soft.  It is as if Bach recognizes the Son of God as a human, and
therefore, he addresses him as such.  The Holy Spirit is acknowledged
with mysterious polyphony.  It is usually strong in bass to accent the
``low-level'' (in engineering terminology) at which the Spirit operates.


So one can see that these two masses of Bach and Haydn, reflect not only
differences in the musical styles of their times, but also in their
ideas about God.  Bach's use of the solo when ``talking'' to Jesus,
Haydn's more subtle praise of Christ, all of these are reflections on
their beliefs in God.  Also, their musical styles were different, Haydn
was writing at the advent of the {\em segunda pratica\/} while Bach was
producing magnificent fugues to reflect the ideas of the {\em prima
pratica\/} which was flourishing at his time.  Masses are particularly
nice instruments for the comparison of these two composers, or any
composers, because it has remained unchanged for so long.






\end{document}
