MUS267 – Reading Guide Week 5: Leach “Guillaume de Machaut”; Machaut Voir Dit excerpts

Name: Clara Eddleman-Hunley

Date: 10/29/21
GE and section: Annie Liu
To receive full credit on your reading guide you need only provide a thorough answer to the bolded
questions. Other questions are meant to help you navigate the reading(s). If you struggle with readings, I
highly suggest using the reading guides to help with comprehension.

Questions to consider:

Leach “Guillaume de Machaut”

*Remember to first survey the chapter: look for an introduction, a conclusion, subject headings, case
studies, etc. If there you see a clear introduction or conclusion, read those sections first to get a sense for
the overall purpose of the article.
- What are the two groups of sources that can give us a sense of Machaut’s life?

- What are the two main questions that Leach will investigate in this chapter? (hint: look for
this at the end of the introduction)
The author first asks what factual primary evidence of Machaut’s life survives, and then asks
what it tells readers/historians about Machaut.
- What is the purpose or goal of this chapter? What will Leach argue? (hint: look for this at
the end of the introduction)

Leach will argue that modern historians have far less factual evidence about the life of Machaut
then they claim to have, and therefore know much less about him in actuality. The author sets out
to piece together reliable sources about the composer’s life using some of Machaut’s original
work but mostly focusing on “factual documents”(which Leach states still need to be considered
in context).

- Briefly summarize the extant sources that contain Machaut’s work (how many manuscripts, what
they contain). Why does Leach believe these are not reliable sources for information about
Machaut’s own life?
 - What types of documents does Leach use to create a timeline of Machaut’s life and
employment? Would you say that Leach is creating a historical “narrative”? Why or why
not?
While Leach begins this chapter summarizing the extent of the manuscripts of Machaut, she
makes it clear that the happenings of these songs cannot be taken as fact, even if they feign
truthfulness or have modicums of autobiographic material from Machaut. The author mainly
focuses on the financial happenings of Machaut’s life to establish different relationships he had in
his career. She uses clerical benefices that describe grants given to Machaut through the church,
as well as bulls (papal edicts). Taxes and payments to Machaut from individuals also lend some
information. I wouldn’t use the term “narrative” to describe what Leach is doing. She is very
clear to indicate when something might be conjecture in relation to Machaut’s life and therefore
avoids many sources other scholars have used. Leach simply lays out every verifiable detail she
can to try to remain as objective as possible. Because of this, I wouldn’t describe her work as a
narrative, because it hardly tells a story of his life.

- Leach goes on to list her remaining questions. Do you have any remaining questions that
Leach does not list? Describe one way that you could continue the research Leach has
begun. This may come in the form of asking a question that Leach does not address, or
suggesting new ways to think about the materials Leach has already provided.
I would love to know more about the public’s reception and possible performance of his work at
the time. While it is known that he was employed by and was a powerful member of the church,
meaning those people must have enjoyed his work, it would be interesting to know if there is
more information about who performed his pieces, where and when they were performed, and
how they were perceived. I would attempt to find this evidence from other writers of the time,
while remaining considerate of the fact that any secondary source of the time would still have its
biases.

Voir Dit_Excerpt 1
- How does the author describe his love?
She is incredibly noble, full of virtue, devoid of vice, and beautiful beyond words.
- Who does the author meet as he is relaxing?
His bff
- Beginning at line 103, whose story is being recounted?
This story is from the author’s friend that sat down beside him in the shade.
- What does the lady send to the author, and why? What is the author’s opinion of it?
The lady sends a rondel telling him that she loves him and would essentially do anything for him and
chose him above anyone else. She does this when she hears that he has been ill and writing songs and
poetry. The author seems to be incredibly grateful for the poem, kissing it and holding it close to his
heart. He also mentions that it is very well composed and could not be any better of a poem.
 - How would you characterize the relationship between the Lady and the Lover? How do
they interact with one another? At this point in the story, what is their relationship based
on?
Their relationship seems full of mutual respect and longing to see one another. The Lover only
really hears about what the lady is like from two other men that describe her as the most heavenly
woman alive. She seems to mostly know about him from his poetic work. Their relationship is
based on these second-hand accounts, as well as a few letters exchanged back and forth
professing their longing for eachother.

Voir Dit_Excerpt 2
- In your own words, summarize the poetic “conversation” that occurs between the Lady and
the Lover.
The lover begins by explaining that he complains way too much to the Lady, but then goes on to
complain some more about how there is something he wants to request of her but won’t because
of principle. She basically tells him to stop complaining, and he finally tells her that it makes him
uncomfortable when she refers to him as her “sweet friend” in public, because he wants their love
to be a secret and it is more valuable to him in that way. She tells him she won’t do it anymore,
even though she would like people to know they were in love. He left her feeling much better, but
also sad that he had to depart.

- List 3 ways that you recognize an overlap between the secular and the sacred in this excerpt
of the Voir Dit. Be specific in your response and cite line numbers.
There seems to be an obvious allegory between The Lady and the Virgin Mary. The way in which people
talk about this character seem to allude to the fact that she is almost other worldly. For example, the Lady
is described as a “lady without peer,/ So worthy and wise that all the world/ would not suffice to praise/
[her] virtues or describe [her] beauty”(2657-2660). She is described in an other worldly sense, making her
seem less like a human and more like a saint. The lover later speaks of how he "[s]erved and attended her;
[…] worshipped her image, Paying it homage” (2882-2884). While this is something someone might do
for someone they dearly love, this language seems much more devotional. He idolizes her as people of the
time would idolize the Virgin Mary. The lover later finds his thoughts returning to the Lady more “[t]han
on any saint, woman or man”(2973). The allegory to Mary is further strengthened. To him she isn’t just
saint, she is even above that, as the Virgin Mary was at the time, sometimes referred to as the Queen of
Saints.