TREATISE ON COUNTERPOINT AND FUGUE (Parts 6 to 8)

Rigorous analysis of species counterpoint: first, second, and third. Rules, consonances, dissonances, pedagogical function, historical examples, and formative value.

PART VI – First Species of Counterpoint

VI.1 Note against note
VI.2 Permitted consonances
VI.3 Intervallic prohibitions
VI.4 Predominant contrary motion
VI.5 Melodic stability
VI.6 Regulated beginnings and endings
VI.7 Control of leaps
VI.8 Structural function
VI.9 Documented historical examples
VI.10 Common errors
VI.11 Formative value
VI.12 Historical use
VI.13 Relationship with other species

PART VII – Second Species of Counterpoint

VII.1 Two notes against one
VII.2 Dissonances on weak beats
VII.3 Controlled melodic motion
VII.4 Rhythmic function
VII.5 Implicit preparation
VII.6 Immediate resolution
VII.7 Linear fluency
VII.8 Historical practical examples
VII.9 Documented application
VII.10 Relationship with the first species
VII.11 Aural development
VII.12 Pedagogical use
VII.13 Transitional function

PART VIII – Third Species of Counterpoint

VIII.1 Four notes against one
VIII.2 Controlled dissonance
VIII.3 Predominant stepwise motion
VIII.4 Advanced rhythmic function
VIII.5 Melodic fluency
VIII.6 Avoidance of improper accents
VIII.7 Melodic direction
VIII.8 Historical examples
VIII.9 Technical difficulties
VIII.10 Formative value
VIII.11 Relationship with ornamentation
VIII.12 Actual use in works
VIII.13 Preparation for mixed species

Table of Counterpoint Characteristics: First, Second, and Third Species

These three species of Counterpoint form a progressive pedagogical system, not a literal reflection of the Renaissance repertory.

The model was systematized in the eighteenth century, abstracting principles from sixteenth-century vocal style.

Each species isolates a specific technical problem: consonance, transitory dissonance, and rhythmic fluency.

The progression I → II → III responds to formative needs rather than to historical compositional chronology.

DEVELOPMENT OF COUNTERPOINT THEORY OF THE FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD SPECIE

PART VI – First Species of Counterpoint

VI.1 Counterpoint: note against note

The first species of Counterpoint, according to the species method systematized in the eighteenth century, establishes a note-against-note relationship over a given cantus firmus.
This Counterpoint abstracts historical practices in order to isolate vertical intervallic control and to develop conscious horizontal independence.

VI.2 Counterpoint: permitted consonances

In the first species of Counterpoint, within the didactic strict style, perfect and imperfect consonances are employed and pedagogically hierarchized.
Imperfect consonances provide controlled variety, while perfect consonances ensure perceptible structural stability.

VI.3 Counterpoint: intervallic prohibitions

The Counterpoint of this species avoids consecutive parallels of fifths and octaves, following principles inherited from Renaissance theory.
The internal unison is severely restricted in order to preserve auditory independence between voices.

VI.4 Counterpoint: predominance of contrary motion

Counterpoint privileges contrary motion as a pedagogical resource to reinforce melodic autonomy.
Direct motion is admitted only under strict intervallic control, within the didactic framework.

VI.5 Counterpoint: melodic stability

The melodic line of Counterpoint maintains a stable profile, with a predominance of conjunct motion.
Leaps appear in limited form and are compensated, reflecting a pedagogical idealization of historical vocal practices.

VI.6 Counterpoint: regulated beginning and ending

Counterpoint begins with a perfect interval in order to establish initial formal stability.
The ending requires a perfect octave, preceded by contrary motion, ensuring a clear structural closure.

VI.7 Counterpoint: control of leaps

Counterpoint strictly regulates the frequency and size of melodic leaps.
Wide leaps require immediate compensation by step in the opposite direction.

VI.8 Counterpoint: structural function

The first species of Counterpoint fulfills a foundational structural function within the species method.
It provides the basic consonant framework for all subsequent development.

VI.9 Counterpoint: documented historical examples

In sixteenth-century vocal repertory, procedures compatible with this Counterpoint appear, though not organized explicitly by species.
Later theory systematizes preexisting practices, rather than reproducing them literally.

VI.10 Counterpoint: common errors

Frequent errors include hidden parallels, excessive leaps, and excessive melodic rigidity.
Counterpoint requires a balance between normative control and linear fluency.

VI.11 Counterpoint: formative value

This Counterpoint develops aural discipline, intervallic awareness, and structured horizontal thinking.
It constitutes the cognitive foundation of advanced polyphonic study.

VI.12 Counterpoint: historical use

The first species of Counterpoint functioned as an implicit pedagogical model for centuries.
In the eighteenth century, it was formalized as a systematic didactic tool.

VI.13 Counterpoint: relationship to other species

This Counterpoint defines the general normative framework.
Subsequent species gradually expand this model without replacing it.

PART VII – Second Species of Counterpoint

VII.1 Counterpoint: two notes against one

The second species of Counterpoint, within the species method, introduces binary subdivision of the pulse.
This Counterpoint expands the temporal dimension while maintaining structural hierarchy.

VII.2 Counterpoint: dissonances on weak beats

In this Counterpoint, dissonance is permitted only on metrically weak beats and by conjunct motion.
Its function is transitory, not structural.

VII.3 Counterpoint: controlled melodic motion

Counterpoint maintains the predominance of conjunct motion with increased vigilance over leaps.
Linear continuity becomes a perceptual priority.

VII.4 Counterpoint: rhythmic function

The rhythmic function of Counterpoint articulates the discourse without expressive autonomy of its own.
Subdivision creates clear temporal direction.

VII.5 Counterpoint: implicit preparation

The preparation of dissonance recalls historical practices, but here it is implicit rather than formalized.
The consonant strong beat acts as sufficient support.

VII.6 Counterpoint: immediate resolution

Every dissonance in Counterpoint must resolve immediately by step.
This criterion distinguishes this species from later procedures.

VII.7 Counterpoint: linear fluency

Linear fluency constitutes the central objective of Counterpoint.
Lines advance with controlled naturalness, avoiding mechanical repetition.

VII.8 Counterpoint: historical practical examples

Renaissance motets display passing dissonances compatible with this Counterpoint, though not organized as exercises.
Theory abstracts a diverse historical practice.

VII.9 Counterpoint: documented application

The pedagogical application of this Counterpoint is consolidated in the eighteenth century.
Treatises establish it as a didactic standard.

VII.10 Counterpoint: relationship to the first species

This Counterpoint preserves the consonant rules of the first species.
It adds rhythmic mobility subordinate to structure.

VII.11 Counterpoint: aural development

Counterpoint develops internal rhythmic–melodic hearing.
The student learns to anticipate controlled resolutions.

VII.12 Counterpoint: pedagogical use

This Counterpoint introduces regulated dissonance progressively.
It functions as a technical bridge toward greater complexity.

VII.13 Counterpoint: transitional function

The transitional function of Counterpoint prepares denser subdivisions.
It leads naturally to the third species.

PART VIII – Third Species of Counterpoint

VIII.1 Counterpoint: four notes against one

The third species of Counterpoint, as a pedagogical model, establishes constant quaternary subdivision.
It does not describe literal repertory, but rather a didactic abstraction.

VIII.2 Counterpoint: controlled dissonance

In this Counterpoint, dissonance appears only on weak beats and by conjunct motion.
Immediate resolution is mandatory.

VIII.3 Counterpoint: predominance of conjunct motion

Counterpoint requires an almost absolute predominance of conjunct motion.
Leaps are exceptional and always compensated.

VIII.4 Counterpoint: advanced rhythmic function

The rhythmic function of Counterpoint becomes continuous and directional.
Constant subdivision generates perceptible linear momentum.

VIII.5 Counterpoint: melodic fluency

Melodic fluency constitutes the central objective of Counterpoint.
Lines maintain sustained continuity without fragmentation.

VIII.6 Counterpoint: avoidance of improper accents

Counterpoint avoids accenting dissonances in order to prevent excessive structural tension.
These remain subordinate to the melodic flow.

VIII.7 Counterpoint: melodic direction

The melodic direction of Counterpoint must be clearly recognizable.
Coherent arches are favored over erratic oscillations.

VIII.8 Counterpoint: historical examples

In late Renaissance repertory, procedures compatible with this Counterpoint appear, without explicit organization by species.
Practice precedes theory.

VIII.9 Counterpoint: technical difficulties

The principal difficulties of Counterpoint are rhythmic.
Common errors include involuntary accents and loss of direction.

VIII.10 Counterpoint: formative value

This Counterpoint develops advanced rhythmic precision and sustained internal hearing.
It consolidates conscious temporal discipline.

VIII.11 Counterpoint: relationship to ornamentation

Counterpoint is linked to controlled melodic ornamentation.
It anticipates later stylistic figures.

VIII.12 Counterpoint: real use in works

Counterpoint influences early vocal and instrumental writing.
Its historical use precedes its theoretical codification.

VIII.13 Counterpoint: preparation for mixed species

The third species of Counterpoint prepares complex combinations.
It develops rhythmic coordination indispensable for mixed species.