Talk:Angelus ad Virginem (Anonymous)

From ChoralWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Another version of this (with the correct spelling of the title) is at Angelus ad Virginem. Is there any agreed policy on when something is classed as Traditional rather than Anonymous? I would have expected 'Trad.' usually to be only melodies, and harmonised works by an unknown hand to be 'Anon.' (In the latter case there clearly is a single composer, we just don't know who; in the former case the melody may have developed gradually over generations.) MCollett 12:55, 26 November 2007 (PST)

Hi Matthew. There is no such policy but I have now merged the pages, keeping the composer as "Anonymous" on the basis that that title has the correct spelling! I don't have any particularly strong views one way or the other but at least the pages have been merged now. Regards --Bobnotts talk 15:24, 26 November 2007 (PST)
I don't think we've spelled it out, but to me 'traditional' implies oral transmission and possible collective authorship as opposed to a single author unnamed by the scribe of an identifiable written source. The 'folksy' variations among the old sources do make this a borderline case! Richard Mix (talk) 06:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)


For an interesting usage of Angelus ad Virginem in an anthem, see C. V. Stanford's "Blessed are the dead", available on CPDL.Patterson 01:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

The opening phrase does have some resemblance to Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord (Charles Villiers Stanford), which may only be coincidental. Richard Mix (talk) 06:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Anonymous versus Traditional

Using traditional to refer to a melody, and anonymous to refer to a particular harmonization inscribed by an individual, is the best basis to distinguish between traditional and anonymous I've heard! -- Vaarky 02:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)