Talk:Pérotin

message: An anon today added approximate birth and death dates (1160-1240).  We really know nothing about Pérotin's life, unless there is some recent research of which I'm not aware; we know he was an adult around 1197-1200, when he wrote his four-voice organum, and he probably collaborated with Philip the Chancellor, which couldn't have been before 1220, but beyond that nothing; if someone has a source giving these dates, or even better some justifaction for them, could you please post here?  Thanks, Antandrus  (talk) 18:26, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not change to "fl. 1197-1200," then?  Grove simply says "fl. c. 1200."  Badagnani 02:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion, "fl. c. 1197-1200" can be misleading... "fl. c. 1200" would be enough in this case, especially to avoid confusion... Selfinformation 22:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hum, I'm going to change it to fl. c. 1200 for now, as "fl. c." adds quite enough ambiguity as it is, no need to have a three year span in which he "flourished round about -ish". Mak (talk) 22:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pérotin's dates

message: I'm removing the statement "...and indeed it can be argued that Pérotin himself was a proto-minimalist."  On the contrary, Pérotin's polyphonic structures were the most complex pieces of music composed up to that point in the history.  If minimalism implies a deliberate paring-down or reduction of musical structure, then in an age when most music was still plainchant these compositions were ""maximal"", not minimal.  On the other hand, it's accurate to say that some minimalist composers of the 20th century drew inspiration from Pérotin's work.   
InnocuousPseudonym September 21, 2006
:Good call.  Badagnani 20:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pérotin and minimalism

message: Instead of a giant "needs more footnotes" banner at the top of the article, can we please have an indication of exactly which statements are being challenged and need footnotes?  Thanks, Antandrus  (talk) 13:58, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The banner is worthless without an indication of what needs an inline cite. In any case, anything tagged inline with  already puts the article in the appropriate maintenance category and makes the issue clear to the reader. Voceditenore (talk) 14:53, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "More footnotes"

message: I'm not sure Steve Reich belongs in this article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renfield (talk • contribs) 21:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Steve Reich

message: The first footnoted fact claims that Anonymous IV referred to Pérotin as "Magister Petronius" ("Pérotin the Master").
Should it not be "Magister Perotinus" instead of "Magister Petronius"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myers6609 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like a calssic exampel of dyxelsia ;-) I am certain that you are correct (Petronius is another guy entirely, the French form of whose name is "Pétrone", not "Pérotin"), and it should not be difficult to find that necessary source. I shall see what I can do!—Jerome Kohl (talk) 00:59, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

text: Beat me by a minute -- it should be Perotinus.  It's in the NG and everywhere else. Antandrus  (talk) 01:01, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably scrawled on fences around building sites, as well. Never mind. I have found the original, in chapters 2 and 6 of Anon IV's "De mensuris et discantu" (as styled by Gerbert and Coussemaker), if we need it.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 01:23, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Petronius? 

message: Page currently under revision. For earlier version see see here --Michael Goodyear ✐  ✉  16:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Upgrade 

message: This passage was added in 2013, without citing a source. While interesting it is mothballed here till a source can be identified. Editor notified.--Michael Goodyear ✐  ✉  22:57, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The above editor has provided an explanation that this is based purely on their own performance history, not sourced, and therefore OR. --Michael Goodyear ✐  ✉  12:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced material (mothball) 

message: The image used at the top of this page is not well sourced but is widely used to illustrate recordings of Perotin's music. --Michael Goodyear ✐  ✉  21:50, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Ought to have rung a bell!  Thanks for chasing down an ID. Sparafucil (talk) 10:55, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  It was quite a chase but I had my suspicions from the start, based on style. Interwesting that even a reputable source such as RILM would go along with this (I have notified them). --Michael Goodyear ✐  ✉  17:50, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images of Perotin 

message: I wish this were better captioned; it looks like the opening of Alleluia Nativitas gloriosae, one of several Alleluia verses attributed to Pérotin. Sparafucil (talk) 23:14, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not the opening, as given in the facsimile a little further along in the article.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 04:04, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: A little rusty here, but the pitches match, and rhythmic mode 3 is implied, yes? Sparafucil (talk) 06:15, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see the E on the downbeat in the triplum. Am I missing something?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 07:26, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing I don't miss under magnification too, but plica strokes can be vanishingly faint, or perhaps the source is not unique. We should probably ID this one. Sparafucil (talk) 09:38, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which "Alleluia"? 

message: …there have been speculative attempts to identify the composer with members of the Notre Dame administration. The two candidates that have been suggested as possible identities for Perotinus are the theologian Petrus Cantor (died 1197) and the Petrus who was Succentor of Notre Dame from at least 1207 until about 1238. Petrus Succentor has been suggested as more probable, in part on chronological grounds, and partly because of the succentor's role in overseeing the celebration of the liturgy in the cathedral (whose choir was dedicated 1182), but other authors have dismissed this as improbable. Comment: How does Tischler in 1950 express disagreement with Roesner 2001, unless this is backwards? Also, Tischler seems to be cited in _favor_ of the Succentor in previous text: "For instance he has been described as a sub-chanter there, and associated with a Petrus Succentor, but all evidence is circumstantial at best." 
This paragraph is still confusing, with Tischler cited for both the pro and con positions. Does he entertain the idea before "dismissing" it, or is he taking issue with Jenny, the only earlier reference? Is Petrus Cantor uncited? Sparafucil (talk) 02:01, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Noted. I will get to it. Just dealing with a few other issues on the page at the moment. --Michael Goodyear ✐  ✉  23:16, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Revised. I think it would be all too easy to overdo the identification. It is all circumstantial. Only Wright pushes a plausible identity, most others dismiss it. Roesner at best, toys with the thought, "is a possible candidate". --Michael Goodyear ✐  ✉  17:43, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Petrus Succentor 

message: This article is, of course, admirably researched and written, but the layout seems less than ideal, and a bit confusing. I've split the ambigious "Work" section into "Historical context" and "Music" but I'm thinking it should look something like this:
*Historical context 
** Notre Dame School 
**Magnus Liber
*Sources (the first paragraph and quote from the current Life, and problems of identification section)
*Identity (the rest of the current Life, and problems of identification section)
*Music
**Forms and style
**Compositions
*Works
The sources could perhaps be before the historical context section... - Aza24 (talk) 03:16, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Article layout

message: Organa were being sung until the early decades of the 14th century - Jacobus of Liège is among the sources for this. 217.254.40.190 (talk) 16:59, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disuse of Organa singing