ABSTRACT
Howard Mayer Brown once suggested that in order to identify what is individual about a composer, we ought to concentrate on broad issues such as compositional strategies, habits, and practices rather than focusing on details that might just as well have been the work of an editor, publisher, or scribe as of the composer himself.6 Many such fundamental questions concerning Ockeghem’s borrowing proceduresinvolving both cantus firmus and polyphonic quotations-have yet to be addressed. Are his polyphonic quotations paraphrased, literal, or some combination of the two? Do they resemble or differ from his method of using a cantus firmus? Is he consistent in his use of polyphonic quotations? Are quotations used frequently throughout a mass or only occasionally? Do they involve the entire model or only small portions of it? Are some sections of a mass less likely to contain quotations than others, just as some sections often omit the cantus firmus? By examining these and similar questions, I hope to refine our understanding of his personal style, which in turn can help answer broader questions about musical borrowing. Is Ockeghem using his own model or someone else’s, as in the case of Missa Au travail suis? What can his borrowing procedures tell us about the model for Missa L’homme armé? Are there chronological implications for his borrowing practices? Can his borrowing practices help us to situate his masses with one another, at least relatively?
