Musicologie Médiévale

Resources for medieval musicology and liturgy

Collectae glossae in De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii Martiani Capellae (Liber IX). Cambridge, Corpus Christi College Library, Ms. 153 et 330 (22 pages - dépôt HAL 14 novembre 2013)

Le Neuvième livre du De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii de Martianus Capella (fin IVe - Ve s.) occupe une place particulière dans l’histoire de la théorie de la musique du Haut Moyen-Age en ce qu’il forme l’une des toutes premières réceptions médiévales de l’héritage gréco-latin en matière de musique. Ce texte a fait l’objet d’un abondant commentaire (dont le Ps.-Dunchad ou Martin de Laon, Jean Scot Érigène et Rémi d’Auxerre). La présente collection de gloses est transmise par deux copies (Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, Ms. 153 et 330) dont la plus ancienne (Ms. 330) peut être datée de la fin du ixe siècle. Cette collection, dont certaines entrées témoignent de la réception du de Institutione musica de Boèce, participe partiellement du corpus de gloses connu par ailleurs.

http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00904643

Views: 272

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of Musicologie Médiévale to add comments!

Join Musicologie Médiévale

Comment by Oliver Gerlach on December 10, 2013 at 7:51

I beg your pardon for my late answer.

Honestly I enjoyed very much this conference, and we altogether made a very fine volume.

Especially your essay about the Byzantine synthesis is very original, but exactly for this reason I have also some questions. I am not sure that this is the place and I also do not feel very comfortable to wait, until Christian Meyer is ready to pass through my comments.

If it is okay for you, I would like to ask my questions in a separate discussion of the group "Meloi and the microtones" (the inscription is just a formality made by the provider ning, not by me). If you prefer another place, just let me know, but I think your comparatistic approach matches perfectly with the topic of this group.

Comment by pavlos erevnidis on December 2, 2013 at 17:42

And one more accurate dated reference about “the inventors” of Dorian [etc.] modes. This is also a good coincidence for me here to make two corrections of an older text of mine: “‘In the name of the Mode’: Intervallic Content, Nomenclature and Numbering of the Modes,” Papers Read at the 12th Meeting of the IMS Study Group CANTUS PLANUS, Lillafüred, Hungary, 2004. Aug. 23-28 (Budapest, 2006):

 

In p. 95 instead of: “Should we use the Aristoxenian diagram of division, known also from Boethius, where a tone is represented by 12 unities …”

please read

“Should we illustrate the basic principle of the Aristoxenian diagram of division, known also from Boethius, where a whole tone is represented by 12 unities (as described also at the Anonymus III [see Najock (ed.) 1975, p. 15-16] and Hagiopolítes [see Raasted (ed.) 1983, p. 72-73]), …”

 

and in p. 103 instead of: “Bryènnios’ case is more clear. In his discussion of the relations of the species of melody, when he reaches the eighth species he does not call it Hyper-mixolydion but Hypo-mixolydion. He characteristically states: …”

please read:

“Bryénnios, in relation to the species of melody (i.e. échoi for him) is giving an alternative (for him, but “different” in relation to our common belief of the) numbering of échoi, namely that the 1 to 4 of the numbers has to be attributed to the authentic and the 5 to 8 to the plagals (see Jonker (ed.) 1970, p. 314.6-20 and p. 316.28-34), and calls the eighth as Hyper-mixolýdion. Note that in the Hagiopolítes the Schémata of Diapasón are numbered from 2 to 8 (Raasted (ed.) 1983, p. 63-64), not from 1 to 7. Earlier, in Bryénnios’ discussion of the tónoi, when he reaches the fourth tónos i.e., ‘the Dórios after the nation that invented this specie of melody of it (από του έθνους του ευρόντος το είδος της μελωδίας αυτού),’ he states that this certain Dórios can also be called Hypo-mixolýdios. He characteristically states: …”

 

 

I’ll return to these cases in the future. Notice again the reference to the pattern of the “invention” of the ethnic names of the modes/tónoi/toni/trópoi to the relative peoples. And one more explicative comment: I used here (and only here) the terms modes, tropoi, tonoi intentionally invariably, a) because I am not so sure that Modes (Trópoi/Tónoi, Échoi, Alhan etc.) in relation to scale, centonization, formulaism etc. were mutual exclusive phenomena even from the times of their Babylonian counterparts, and b) in my view, every single case is different. Correct questions are not What is Tónoi? What is Trópoi, but Where Tónoi? Where Trópoi? When Trópoi? When Tónoi? Where “Trópoi or Tónoi”? When “Trópoi or Tónoi”? When “Tónoi and Trópoi”? Where “Tónoi and Trópoi”? etc. As for their position at the medieval music (and the relative topics, as intervals etc.), I think that it would be wiser to wait the new editions of Hagiopolites and Alia Musica.

Comment by Oliver Gerlach on November 28, 2013 at 9:09

:D But thanks anyway for shandying around, dear Tristram, Gentleman.

Comment by pavlos erevnidis on November 27, 2013 at 20:19

Instead of “In such a case there wasn’t a need for my second post.”

read: “If it was, there wasn’t a need for my second post.”

Comment by pavlos erevnidis on November 27, 2013 at 14:48

In order to perform our intertextual duty in accordance with the glosses on the tribal names of the Modes like the “DORIUS quem inveniuntur Dores”:

 In a later Greek treatise attributed to Damaskenos, there is passage with a similar “pattern of explanation.” Its German translation (in the edition: Die Erotapokriseis des Pseudo-Johannes Damaskenos zum Kirchengesang, G. Wolfram and C. Hannick, Wien 1997, p. 95) is:  “Die Hauptbezeichnungen der acht Echoi wurden von kunstfertigen Männern, nämlich Lydiern und Phrygiern, erfunden.”

And a note: When I posted my “clarification” to my first post here which referred on two on-line editions (of Leiden, Voss. Lat. F. 48, initially accessible from the November of 2008 and of the Köln 193, accessible from 2010), the response by Oliver hadn’t released. In such a case there wasn’t a need for my second post. But these are the problems of any indirect communication. Apologies for the chaotic situation took place due to my first sloppy post here.

Comment by Oliver Gerlach on November 25, 2013 at 7:20

This is what I tried to say with the publication. It is a diplomatic edition of Martianus and of the classical commentaries of this text, including Remigius and John Scotus. Only the window „Glossen“ has a direct transcription of those glosses of the Köln manuscript (which are very short concerning the scribe of liber IX, at least in comparison with the other libri). I like this online edition of Munich. Thank you for communicating the link!

Mariken Teeuwen made a strict edition of the Leiden manuscript without combining any further editions or readings of other sources. By the way, Isaac Vossius and his library is a very interesting part of European history (see the articles by Astrid Balsem (Collecting the Ultimate Scholar’s Library: The Bibliotheca Vossiana), the latin manuscrips were partly "taken" from the collection of Queen Cristina of Sweden, now Vat. reg. lat.).

But I was more concerned about the Martianus’ description of the lesser perfect system (Mariken Teeuwen is right, that especially musicologists tend to underestimate this treatise which was nearly as popular as Boethius during the Carolingian renaissance). Even John Scotus Eriugena did not understand the connection between the enharmonic, chromatic and the diatonic species, although he connected them accurately.

Comment by pavlos erevnidis on November 24, 2013 at 20:25

To avoid misunderstanding. The Leiden, UB, Vossianus Latinus Folio 48 does not contain the works of John the Scot and Remi. As for the commentaries of Köln 193 : this is another topic.

Comment by Oliver Gerlach on November 24, 2013 at 8:38

That edition is not Mariken Teeuwen, but one of its own:

Martiano Capella, Remigius d’Auxerre & Johannes Scotus Eriugena, 2010. Die Glossen zu Martianus Capella im Codex 193 der Kölner Dombibliothek M. Isépy & B. Posselt, eds., Köln.

Hopefully they will add soon Christian Meyer's which is really following this manuscript, where liber IX was added by a later hand. Rather interesting is the diagram on page 201r-201v (there is only an unfinished sketch on the very last page of Vossianus latinus folio 48). But this one comes close to Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, clm 14729, fol. 220r (published in facsimile by Meyer and by Atkinson).

Comment by pavlos erevnidis on November 21, 2013 at 20:34

Together with the online edition of the material of Remi of Auxerre and John Scottus Eriugena (and the Anonymus glossator of course) of the Leiden, UB, Vossianus Latinus Folio 48 by M. Teeuwen (accessible from the November of 2008), one can have a look at another digital edition (together with the facsimile again, and accessible from 2010) of the “same” material, according to the Köln Dombibliothek 193 at

 http://www.martianus.mueze.lmu.de/martianus/tbl.html

Partnership

and your logo here...

We need other partners :

© 2017   Created by Dominique Gatté.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service