GilesAnt wrote:You will probably know from your book that Palestrina is best known for a polyphonic style whereas your example is essentially homophonic. Taking your original middle part as the melody you have some large upward leaps in bar 2 which is uncharacteristic of Palestrina, hence my assumption that this was more like a hymn tune. Palestrina's melodic phrases are typically flowing in small scalic steps with occasional leaps, and never 4 upward leaps in succession (as far as I know).
In fact, according Jeppeson certain consecutive leaps are permitted. He mentions 4 different cases, being one of them the outlining of major or minor triads, usually in root position or second inversion. In bars 2 and 3 there's a C maj triad in with a doubled E but we can look at it in two different ways: a 1st inversion of a CMaj triad if we start on the E or a 2nd inversion of the same triad if starting on the G. Not sure if this way of thinking is valid or not.
GilesAnt wrote:Also if Palestrina is your model you will need to think differently about harmony. At this time (late 1500s) functional harmony was only gradually evolving from the earlier modal styles.
Yes, Jeppeson's book has an exhaustive first chapter about it.
GilesAnt wrote:@rbarata - fancy having another go at this. Suggest you use your middle line as a melody though. or just take what merlyn has done as your starting point.
Yes, why not?