DESCRIPTION:
In Nomine a 4, for instrumental consort No. 2 & In Nomine a 5, for instrumental consort No. 5

Rose Consort of Viols

As the sixteenth century unfolded English musicians began to explore the possibilities opened up to them by the new, acoustically superior viols that had begun to appear on the continent earlier in the century. The new rage for purely instrumental (or consort) music inspired many composers of lesser and greater status, but none, perhaps, so strongly as William Byrd, who we can rightly claim to be one of the first to develop a style of instrumental composition wholly separate from the dominant vocal tradition. Of Byrd's many consort works, several are representatives of the native English In nomine tradition, so called because such works take the portion of John Taverner's earlier Gloria tibi trinitas Mass in which he sets the words "In nomine Domini" as their starting point. So influential was Taverner's work, which circulated as a purely instrumental piece, that for almost a hundred-and-fifty years Britishers continued to produce new works titled In nomine. Byrd began his own In nomine output with a pair of relatively early four-part works in the genre. While the first of these shows the marked influence of Taverner's own well- known model, the second is more purely Byrdian in tone and expression, and lovers of his music will find themselves on familiar ground indeed. Like the first four-part In nomine, the plainsong cantus firmus is given by the alto voice in the second, though now the whole-note rhythmic layout is not quite so unbending, and Byrd allows a few more hurried gestures in the middle of the piece to shorten the total duration to fifty-six (as opposed to fifty- nine) bars. The motivic material of the three added voices is far more concise and efficient than it is in the first In nomine-note, for instance, the exclusive, imitative use of a rising gesture throughout the opening twelve bars, followed immediately not by a passage of more freely composed music but rather by another imitative segment, this time on a typically Byrdian figure that bounces off a quarter-note rest and proceeds with three "pick-up-like" quarters a melodically leaping fashion. As this middle portion of the piece unfolds, that same quarter-note motive infects the cantus firmus, adding new depth to the imitative structure. Throughout this In nomine, tonality is more assured (in the modern sense) than it is in the first one, and after a strong V-I cadence to D in bar twelve there is no ambiguity about the underlying tonal scheme. Rather than provide a strong authentic cadence for the ending of so clearly-defined a work, Byrd chooses to instead give us a few wonderful measures of the major subdominant (G major) and a colorful 6-5 suspension before drawing a close.

----------------------------------------------------------

Two four-part and five three-part In Nomines are attributed to the English composer William Byrd (1543-1623). This form was a polyphonic work written for unspecified instrumental ensemble and was often a written by a younger composer to demonstrate technical mastery. This appears to be the case with Byrd's contributions, which appear to be quite early works.

Byrd's fifth five-part and last In Nomine is also his most celebrated. Technically masterful and compelling executed, it relies on fast rhythmic motion to move the listener's attention towards cadence points and climaxes. The polyphony frequently uses a homophonic texture, an unusual polyphonic device for the time.

Byrd quotes from an equally famous Parsons In Nomine (5/1), which also uses increasing speed and a chordal texture. Byrd's work, however, incorporates more unusual polyphony and rhythmic devices than does Parson's. [allmusic.com]

Art by John D. Graham