Author: Farfaro, Nicolò  [Mazzaferro, Giorgio]

 Title: A discourse on  ancient and modern music

 Source: Rome, Biblioteca dell’ Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei e Corsiniana,  MS 36 E 30, f.62v-142v

Chapter  nineteen. That it is not appropriate to employ such delicate, tender, enervated and lascivious music in churches.

The Summa Homilia de Cantu says: “Singing was invented for this reason, according to Thomas, 22.9. article 1, in order to inspire the love of God in man, and, because the souls of men are affected by different melodies in different ways, as Boethius says in the prologue to his music treatise, singing was established in the Church in order to rouse a feeling of devotion in the soul of the infirm. However, if singing is purely for pleasure, it is not legitimate, as can be seen in the chapter cantantes, distinction 20, and according to Saint Augustine in the tenth book of his Confessions. Those that have to be avoided the most are those that invite the listener to acts of lasciviousness, because this goes against the intention of those who established the practice of singing.” [-f.63r-] The text continues a little further on: “If indeed they are so vane, that form of playing and singing goes against divine worship in two ways: firstly, because it does not invite the mind to devotion, but to vane thoughts, which is contrary to the practice of divine worship; secondly, because divine worship realised through singing and playing is falsified, because the worship of the Lord must occur only in the appropriate manner.” The Sacred Tridentine Council, in the twenty-second session, ordered the bishops to banish from church compositions which incorporated anything lascivious, whether be it in the vocal or instrumental parts. Let us read Plutarch, who shames us as Christians: “Music was cultivated and practised until that time only in temples, in which the praises of the gods and [-f.63v-] of eminent men are celebrated. However, in our time the variety of forms has expanded to such an extent, and it has diverged so much from the practice of the ancients, that there is no further mention or perception of discipline.” Dio Chrysostomus, in his thirty-third speech, as we said above, portrays Philip as wanting to learn only the music that was appropriate to the worship of his gods, banishing any effeminate and lascivious king from the towns that he would have ruled: “Nor would I like to learn all music, but I would like to play only the kithara or the lyre to accompany the hymns and the worship of the Gods. [signum] I would not want to hear others play on the flute or the kithara, [-f.64r-] nor sing languid and refined songs, nor embrace the evil enticements of corrupt speeches composed for the pleasure of the most uneducated. Moreover, first and foremost, one must banish all of this from one's own soul, then proceed to forbid [signum] high-pitched and unlawful songs, disallowed melodies and broken melodies consisting of graceless turns, and the variety of polyphony.” I do not know why we overlook the service and worship of God to such and extent, and, as if we lacked common sense, we do not consider whether such style of singing is commensurate to the decorum and greatness of such majesty, and to the respect and praise that is due to Him.[-f.64v-] Nor would I want that those who compose for the church and for holy worship should consider that they have performed their duty well every time that their compositions please the listeners, and command a large audience by whom they are greatly lauded and highly regarded, for they would be profoundly mistaken.

Chapter twenty. That musical compositions that please the crowd and receive their plaudit are not good.

It may appear a strange paradox, but it is entirely true that, when musical compositions are lauded [-f.65r-] by the crowd, such praise is a manifest sign that they are badly written, and that they deserve no praise at all, but reprehension. Aelianus, in his second book, chapter six, recounts that Hippomachus, seeing that the crowd applauded one of his students, hit him with a stick and said that, had he done something good, they would not have praised him. “As the surrounding crowd was applauding, Hippomachus hit him with a stick and said: “What you did was wrong and not as you should have done it. In fact, had you proffered something artful, such people would not have extolled you.” He meant that, those who create and produce something in the appropriate way, they do not have to seek the approval the crowd, but only of those who have some knowledge.” [-f.65v-] Further on, in the eighth chapter of the fourth book, he states: “The flautist Hippomachus, as one of his students performed against the rules of his art, and nevertheless was praised by the audience, he hit him with a stick and said: “You played wrongly, otherwise such people would not have applauded you.” Athaenaeus, book fourteen, chapter thirteen, said so very clearly: “In ancient times, to be praised by the crowd was proof of incompetence. For this reason, while some flute player was being applauded, Asopodorus, who was lingering in the proscenium, said: “What is this? It is obvious that [-f.66r-] something went wrong, as, otherwise, the crowd would not have liked him.” However, I am aware of the fact that some believe that it was Antigenides who said it.” Thus, he derides the vanity of those who gauge the excellence of their own compositions from their popularity among the populace. He continues: “Nowadays, artists think that being successful in the theatre is the greatest accolade of all.” Therefore, as Vitruvius recounts in the introduction to the seventh book of his treatise, “Aristophanes, asked for his opinion, ordered that the poet least liked by the crowd should be pronounced the winner.” [-f.66v-] This bad habit of composing according to the taste of the listener was responsible for the decadence of music. Pliny the younger, states in his second book: “At one time, theatre audiences taught musicians to develop an inappropriate musical style, but now I am lead to hope that our audience will inspire musicians to play and sing well.” The reason adduced by Pliny for this is that composer do not seek to observe the requirements of their art, but what pleases the audience, whoever they may be: “Everyone who writes to be popular will write what pleases the audience, as far as they can see it.” Who does not know that one who is ignorant cannot praise or criticise what one does not know and in which one has no expertise and theoretical knowledge? [-f.67r-] Plato says in the Theaethetus, speaking through Socrates, that someone who is not a musician cannot judge whether a lyre is tuned or not: “In fact, is he said that my lyre and yours were similarly tuned, would we rush to believe him, or would we ask him first whether he is a musician?” He then makes Theaethetus answer: “We would ask him first.” Socrates: “Should we find out that he is a musician, we would certainly believe him, but, if he were inexperienced in music, we would not. Theaetetus: “Precisely.” What assessment can an ignorant crowd may give of what they do not understand? Whoever trusts such praises is mad. Dio Chrysostomus, in his seventy-eighth speech, says: “Or will we say that he does not know that the praise comes from the crowd, and, if it comes from the crowd, that it comes from the uneducated? [-f.67v-] It is not at all likely that he would not know this. So, does it seem to you that a good flautist delights in his art, and he would feel arrogant when he is lauded by people who are not expert in the art of music? Would he feel proud when youngsters, swineherds and shepherds stand aroud him to admire and applaud him?Would he consider their praise worthy of his art? It is clear that that famous Theban flautist, who did not take much notice of the audience in the theatre or of the judges, inexperienced in playing the flute, and, albeit he was competing to win the prize, nevertheless did not dear to transgress even slightly the boundaries of decency in his rhythm, and said that he was playing for himself and for the Muses.” [-f.68r-] We can read the same words in Cicero's Brutus, ascribed to Antigenides and addressed to a student of his to whom nobody listened while he played. He says: “For this reason, the flautist Antigenides said to a student coldly received by the audience: “Sing form me and for the Muses.”” Valerius Maximus, in the third book, says: “The flautist Antigenidas said, in front of everyone, to a student of his of great success, but not well appreciated by the audience: “Sing for me and for the Muses.” This proves that perfect art devoid of the pimping of fortune does not lose its confidence, and it achieves the praise that it deserves through self-appreciation, even if does not win it from others.” The character of Lysias in Plato's Laches showed what is the praise that must be considered worthy of the person that receives it, when he said to Socrates: “The best praise, dear Socrates, is the one conferred to us by truthful men who themselves are worthy of praise in the same context in which they praise you.” The plaudit of the crowd and of the ignorant populace are nothing but vanity, as Saint Augustine says in the first book of his treatise on music: “What is the applause of the audience, what are all those theatrical trophies? Do they not seem to you of the kind that is placed under the control of fortune and the judgment of ignorant people?” I conclude by quoting Plato. In the second book of the Laws, he states; “Music should be judged on the basis of pleasure; not, however, of anybody's pleasure. On the contrary, I believe that the best music is the one that pleases the best and most learned persons, especially the music that delights a man who excels for his virtue and education.” For this reason, Plato says in the third book of the Republic that the authority to judge musical compositions was entrusted in Athens only to the most learned persons: “However, the power to assess, judge, and eventually condemn in such matters, had someone acted against the rules, was not assigned to the whistles or to the inept clamours of the audience, as it happens now, nor was the power to praise allotted to the applause and the roar of the crowd, but to men who excelled in this discipline.”

Chapter twenty-one. On the character of those who wants to be music practitioners.

Music and poetry were inseparably [-f.69v-] joined together in ancient times. Cicero, in the third book of the De oratore, says: “Once upon a time, those who were musicians were also poets.” Such person cannot be good at their profession, if they are not honest persons. Strabo, in the first book, states: “The first virtue of a poet and of a man is tightly linked to goodness. There can be no good poet, without a virtuous man existing beforehand.” Plato, in the seventh book of the Republic, while showing which characters suited different disciplines, said: “Nobody, if not anyone endowed with an outstanding character. The negative attitude towards philosophy arose precisely from this mistake, as we said above, namely, that it is not approached by persons of adequate worth. It has to be practised by their genuine sons, and not by illegitimate ones.” Someone of that ilk will not violate virtue in any way, [-f.70r-] as he stated in the tenth book of the Republic: “For this reason, it is not appropriate to neglect justice and the other virtues because of financial, institutional or political gains, or because of the allure of poetry.” Only the person who can temper the emotions of the soul with virtue shall be called an excellent and perfect musician, as he left written in the third book of the Republic: “We shall call the person who combines music with gymnastics in the most beautiful fashion, and applies such union to the soul, the most accomplished musician and most replete of sublime harmony, rather than someone who combines together the sounds of strings.” Hence, as Diogenes Laertius mentions in the sixth book, “Diogenes [-f.70v-] called to account musicians because they tuned the strings of the lyre appropriately, but embraced disorderly morals.” Plutarch, in his essay on moral progress, tells this story about Zeno: “While the Amoebeus was singing and playing the kithara on the stage, Zeno said to his pupils: “Let us go and discover thoroughly what harmony and music intestines, nerves, tongue and bones produce when they join reason, rhythm and order.”

"Come, let us observe what music gut and sinew, wood and bone, send forth when they partake of reason, proportion, and order." Strabo added, in the aforementioned passage, that musicians are teachers of a virtuous life, and that this is their profession. After saying that “those who have said something about poetry, he stated that poetry was the first form of philosophy, [-f.71r-] in answer to those who condemned it. He said: “The ancients, conversely, maintained that poetry was a kind of first philosophy, since, from an early age, it introduces us to the art of living, it teaches us customs and feelings, and it instructs us on our duty in a pleasant fashion. Those who came after maintained that only the poet himself is learned and wise. For this reason, since the beginning of the Greek civilisation, children were schooled in poetry, not for mere pleasure, but to develop a sense of chaste moderation. Thus, the musicians themselves who developed singing and the art of playing the lyre, claimed such virtue for themselves, and styled themselves as teachers and arbiters of morals.” Not without reason, therefore, Horace said, in the first epistle of the second book: “The poet shapes the tender and stuttering mouth of the child, he turns his ear away from obscene words even at a young age. Then he informs his heart with friendly teachings, he corrects his moodiness, envy and tantrums.” Such musical poets where the first to teach uncultured men, who lived the life of beasts, how to lead a human and civil life, as Horace himself said in his Ars Poetica: “Orpheus, the sacred interpreter of the gods, deterred those wild men who lived in forests from slaughter and disgusting foods. For this reason, he was said to be able to tame tigers and raging lions. Even Amphion, the builder of the walls of Thebes, was said to be able to move rocks with the sound of his lyre and to lead them wherever he wanted with his sweet prayer. [-f.72r-] This was once deemed to be wisdom, to distinguish the public from the private, the sacred from the profane, to prevent unregulated sexual commerce, to provide conjugal rights, to build towns, and to inscribe the laws in wooden tables. Thus, honour and fame came to be bestowed on poets and their poems. The ancients believed that a certain sign of the nature of the author was to be found in his works. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, in the first book of his Roman Antiquities, states: “[...] because they leave this opinion in the mind of those who undertake the reading of their histories, that they observed a philosophy of life that resembled their writings and their publications.” Plato [-f.72v-]requires that the musician's actions and the opinions correspond to their compositions, which means that moral virtues should be as well arranged together as are the consonances of his music. He says in the Laches: “When I hear someone discussing virtue or wisdom, someone who is a true man and worthy of such a conversation, I rejoice exceedingly, as I admire the fact that the the speaker and the subject are in such harmony and correspondence. And, indeed, such a man, it seems to me, is a musician, who produces the most suave harmony. He does not play the lyre or other playful instruments, but he weaves in real life a harmony of words and deeds in the Dorian mode, obviously, [-f.73r-] which is the true Greek harmony, and not in the Ionian, Phrygian or Lydian.” And, as Plato maintains in the Timaeus, music was gifted to man for no other reason than this one, not so that he may learn to use it to delight the senses, but in order to harmonise the dissonant passion of the soul through the practice of virtue. He says: “The general practice of music was granted to us for the sake of harmony, which has motions that correspond and are attuned to the motions of the soul. A wise music practitioner does not believe, as it generally occurs nowadays, that music was granted to us by the Muses to provide irrational pleasure, but as a tool to harmonise the dissonant revolutions of the soul, so that we may reduce them to coherent harmony.” [-f.73v-]

Caelius Rhodiginus, in the first chapter of the ninth book, said: “Plato believes that music was granted to men for a superior and loftier aim. In fact, as Music is responsible for harmonising a diverging multiplicity, it was not gifted to us by the gods so that we may abandon ourselves to pleasure and aural obsession, but so that, what disturbs the consonance and the harmony of the soul may be pacified and reduced to order through the soothing power of the pleasure that it produces.”

Chapter twenty-two. That the ancients held music in the highest esteem, and why it was censured in later times.

[-f.74r-] Throughout the time in which music was practised in conformity with its dignity and nobility, it was considered the worthiest and most excellent thing in the world. The ancients ascribed its creation to God. Virgil sang, in his third Ecloga, following Aratus' teaching: “The Muses were daughters of Jove.” Cicero, in the second book of the Laws, paid homage to these words by writing: “The Muses were born of Jove.” Hesiodus, in his Theogony wrote that God delighted in music: “Let us start from the Muses, who please the great soul of their father Jove on mount Olympus by singing hymns.” According to Diogenes Laertius, book eight, one of Pythagoras' main teachings [-f.74v-] was that harmony was not only virtue itself, but also God, so that everything drew its essence from it: “Virtue is harmony, health, everything that is good, and God itself. Therefore, everything exists through harmony.” Plutarch as well, in his treatise on music, ascribes to God the invention of music: “Music has to be revered as an invention of the gods.” A little further on, he continues: “Harmony is something great, divine, and to be worshipped, as Aristotle, Plato's pupil, confirms with these words: “In truth, harmony is celestial, his nature is divine, and beautiful.” Strabo, in the tenth book, went on to say: “Therefore, which also consists of dance, harmony and singing, draws us ourselves closer to God [-f.75r-] through the allure and beauty of its art for this very reason.” This is why Plato, and Pythagoras before him, called music philosophy, and argued with good reasons that the world was created and continues to exist through harmony, as they were certain that harmony is the work of God: “For this reason Plato, and before him the followers of Pythagoras, equated music with philosophy, as they argued that the entire universe is built on music and harmony. They believed genre of music to be the work of the gods. The same applies to the Muses and to Apollo, their leader, and to entire repertoire of songs that are used to celebrate the gods.” Saint Augustine talks about this in his twenty-eighth letter, where he said that our blessed Lord, in his generosity, [-f.75v-] gifted music to man, as a rational animal: “The prophet, who hard learned this by divine inspiration, said very accurately about God: “Who bringeth out their host by number”. Hence, Music, or the science and the senses required to compose well, was gifted to man who also has a rational soul, as a reminder of such important matter.” Hermes Trismegisus, in his Asclepius, wrote that divine goodness was kind enough to allow man to partake in music, so that the universe may not appear lacking, and also in order for man to praise and give thanks unto God, as He delights in harmony: [-f.76r-] “The heaven and its inhabitants delight in praises and reverence, and with good reason the choir of the Muses was sent down to humankind by the supreme deity, evidently in order to avoid that the earthly world would look rather desolate if it lacked the sweetness of musical sounds, but, especially, so that he, who is everything, or the father of everything, may be lauded by the new songs and praises of humankind. Thus he delights in celestial praises, frequent sacrifices, hymns and lauds, and in the most sweet sounds that imitate the celestial harmony.” If this is what the ancient gentiles believed, why will not we, who are Christians, strive to praise and thank, in the best way that we can imagine, [-f.76v-] that God who is continually lauded and blessed by the angels? The Holy Church assures of this completely in the Praefatia, with these words: “So, the heavenly virtues, the powers of the angels and of men sing to your glory without end saying: holy!” et cetera. Then, inspired by the harmony of the heavenly choirs, the Church begs the Divine Majesty to deign to listen to the voice of his faithful congregation together with the voices of the angels: “The angels, praise your majesty, the denominations adore it, the powers revere it with trembling deference, the heavens and the heavenly virtues unite to praise it together [-f.77r-] with the blessed jubilation of the Seraphim. We beg you to order that our voices as well may be admitted with theirs, and we say: holy, with supplicating admission,” et cetera. The divine goodness delights in the praises sung with the reverence and that fearful respect that is required. David sung thus: “Offer God a sacrifice of praise. The sacrifice of praise will do me honour.” Elsewhere, David sung: “They will sacrifice a sacrifice of praise. I shall praise the name of the Lord with a son, and I shall magnify him in my praise, and it will please God more than a new calf that sprouts horns and hooves.” However, as we have said, one must pay attention to the way in which this is done, as David himself teaches us: “Praise the Lord, [-f.77v-] for it is good to sing praises unto our God, for it is pleasant, and praise is comely.”

Chapter twenty-three. On the same topic.

One should not be surprised that, eventually, music came to be condemned and insulted by both the ancient and modern commentators, since in time it decayed so profoundly from its true being, and it became so much worse, that it damages humankind very gravely, instead of benefiting it. This is why, as Diodorus writes in the second book of his Antiquities, at chapter three, the Egyptians “not only consider music useless, but also harmful, as it enervates the spirits of men.” Dio [-f.78r-] Chrysostomus, in his second discourse, says: “In Egypt, it is not permitted write something in verse, nor there is any poetry at all. They know, in fact, that listening to poetry is like a poison that induces lasciviousness.” Diogenes Laertius writes: “Diogenes, in truth, neglected music, geometry, astrology and other similar disciplines as he deemed them useless and totally unnecessary.” Similarly, he said: “Great cities are built on wisdom, not music, but a single house cannot be by singing.” The same author, in his Life of Menedemus said that “the Cinics disregarded the study of geometry, music and everything else of that sort”, that “Bion [-f.78v-] considered the whole of music and geometry as a game, while, in his life of Zeno of Citium, he stated that “there is nothing more alien than poetry to the acquisition of science.” Aristotle, in the eighth book of his Politics, chapter five, on the subject of whether music should be learned or not, after chewing over the matter a long while, states, in the sixth chapter: “It is not hard to judge what is age-appropriate. [signum] First of all, since knowledge of such matters is necessary in order to be able to form an opinion on them, one must strive to achieve such knowledge in youth, but one must stop practising once one becomes of age, but limit oneself to judge such matters through the experience and knowledge achieved.” [-f.79r-] It was easy to answer those who besmirched music, by saying at what stage in life one should learn it and what sort of music one should devote oneself: “It is not difficult to respond to those who express condemnation for music and say that only depraved and lowly persons practise it, if we consider the age up to which it should be practised by those who are instructed in the civic virtues, and what melodies and rhythms one should learn, and, moreover, with what instruments it should be taught. The answer lays in the objections themselves.” Moreover, in order for us to comprehend how ingeniously Aristotle comprehended and debated the question as to whether music should be learned or not, and whether it be a true discipline or [-f.79v-] mere vanity, let us consider the beginning of his discussion: “There appears to be some uncertainty with regard to music, as many learn it purely for pleasure. The ancients, however, classed it among the disciplines, as nature's requirements, as it is often said, can be found laudably not only in serious occupations, but in pastimes.” He then adds: “For this reason, the ancients classed music as a discipline, not as a necessary area of learning, as it has nothing of the sort, nor as economically useful as literacy.” Further on, he continues: “What is the point of learning it without enjoying listening to others and being able to evaluate it, as the Lacedaemonians do? [signum] Why should one learn music without enjoying listening to others? We can consider this point on the basis of our ideas about the gods: Jupiter does not sing or play the kithara, according to the poets, but we consider those who do so as vulgar, and their actions not suited to a sober man, but to a joker.” He concludes, finally: “It is clear that its study should be reserved to children, and that they should be schooled in it.” However, if music is good and useful to life, why should children interrupt its study once they grow older? If it is not useful, but harmful, they ought not to practise it when they are very young, [-f.80v-] as bad habits become engrained more easily at that age. Hence, Socrates, who learned and practised it in his older years, was very wrong to do so. Moreover, if children have to learn music at an early age in order to be able to evaluate performances, and then abandon its practice when they grow older, since it is so difficult that barely the most learned cognoscenti managed to evaluate it, why should those who are able to do so be so many? It is clear that Aristotle spoke thus to spite Plato, his teacher whom he hated because of his unkind character, and in order to contrast his doctrine.

[-f.81r-] Chapter twenty-four. On the same topic.

Music has also been vilified and offended because of the debased morals of its practitioners. Juvenal, in his sixth Satire, wanting to show that women are so unrestrained and beastly lustful that, in order to satisfy their whims, they think nothing of throwing themselves at the most vile and infamous men in the world. He says: “You are taking as a wife who will be made a mother by the kitharists Echion and Glaphyrus, or by the pipe player Ambrose.” Capitolinus writes, astonished, that the emperor Pertinax was so foolish that he pretended not to care about the fact that his wife was in love with a kitharist. [-f.81v-]: “He was rather disinterested with regard to the modesty of his wife, as she was entertaining a relationship with a kitharist in public.” Vopiscus writes of the emperor Carinus that “he filled the palace with mimes, prostitutes, actors of pantomime, singers and pimps.” Consider the esteem in which singers were held, when they are listed alongside buffoons, prostitutes and ruffians. Let it be said that, with the understanding of the good and honoured musicians of our day, that those of ancient times were considered infamous, as they were devoted to gluttony and drinking. The Romans awarded musicians the privilege [-f.82r-] of being able to eat in the temple of Jove, as they played during their sacrifices, but, as they could no longer bear the impudence that they displayed in the temple, they were forced to throw them out and to prevent them from eating there any longer. Thus, they retired to Tivoli. However, as the Romans could not do without their playing, they were forced to have them back, but, since they obstinately refused to do so, it was necessary to get them drunk and to drive them back to Rome in a cart, as Livy recounts in the ninth book of the first ten, and Ovid in the sixth book of the Fasti. Thus, [-f.82v-] in order to cover up such shameful event, they obtained from the senate licence to walk around town with masks. Valerius Maximus, in the first chapter of the second book says: “The right to enjoy this privilege was allotted and the reason for the use of masks was to prevent the dishonour of their licentiousness being discovered.” Plutarch in his Problems, says: “As the cart took them for a ride none the wiser, because of the darkness of the night and their drunkenness, and it took them back to Rome without their noticing, [signum] it was established that they should walk around the city wearing those same clothes”, namely, in feminine attire. Athaenaeus, in the third chapter of the first book, On the famous gluttons, says about Philoxenus: “Clearchus states that Philoxenus, before having a bath, [-f.83r-] used to visit houses followed by servants bringing oil, wine, vinegar and other condiments. After entering a stranger's house he would garnish what had been cooked with extra condiments, would add some to those that required them, and then would lay down to eat. Once he travelled by boat to Ephesus. Having found a food shop empty, he asked why that was so, but, when he heard that everything had been sold for a wedding, he took a bath and then joined the banquet without having been invited. After the meal, he sang the wedding song that started with the words: “God of the most splendid nuptials” and was very appreciated by the whole wedding party. [-f.83v-] In fact, he was a Dithyrambic poet. Finally, the groom asked him: “Will you dine here tomorrow as well, Philoxenus?”, to which he answered: “I will, if nobody will sell me food.” A little further, Athaenaeus says: “Phaenias wrote that the poet Philoxenus of Cythera, who was extremely fond of culinary pleasures, once dined at the house of Dionysius. When he saw that a large gurnard had been placed in front of Dionysius, but a small one in his plate, he picked up his own and placed it near is ear. When Dionysius asked him why he had done so, he answered that he had written a poem on Galatea, Nereus' daughter, and he wanted to ask the fish some questions about it. Since, as he said, the fish did not answer his questions, because it was a young inhabitant of the sea and, for that reason, [-f.84-] could not have understood him, he maintained that the one placed in front of Dionysius was older, and, clearly, it could know what the answer to his questions. Thus, Dionysius burst out laughing and ordered the gurnard presented to him to be served to Philoxenus.” Anyone who wants to know how princes should treat musicians, should read Stephanus Gratianus' Forensic examinations, book four, chapter 615, number 47 to 61. The topic here is “whether something is due as a recompense for being entertained, and of the others, who with amusing acts, singing and dancing entertain and captivate the ear of their superiors, whether they may demand something as a reward for these entertainments, together with similar observations in said chapter [-f.84v-] 185 of the first volume, and in the same place in the Addition after the findings, of said volume, number 45, and according to Martin Colerus' On the execution of the trial, first part, chapter nine, number 12, where it discusses what is sufficient for such persons to have access to the food, drink and dresses of their masters, when there is no appreciation of pleasure, and the Book of entertainment expenses, 7 and the continuation on the dowry expenses, and Ulrich Zasius, Singular answers, chapter one, chapter 3, number 44. Hence, when Dionysius the elder enticed a certain expert musician to his court with magnificent promises, so that he may listen to him and his wonderful singing, As the musician sang excellently for several days, and the king was not paying him anything, he started to ask for his pay. Then, Dionysius told him that he had already paid him, pleasure in exchange for pleasure, since he [-f.85r-] had not enjoyed the musician's playing less than the musician had enjoyed singing for him. Paolus Manutius, in his book on proverbs, calls it to reap what ones has sowed. Plutarch, in his second book On Fortune and Brusonius, book nine, chapter two, taken from Aristotle's Ethics, book nine, says: “Even Philip of Macedonia, when he heard that his sun had sung learnedly in a certain place, reprehended him with these words: “Are you not ashamed that you are so good at such trivial occupations?” He meant that other arts are suitable for kings.” Plutarch, in his Life of Pericles says: “Someone lauded a musician in front of Cleomenes. He extolled the man with various praises, but he stressed that his greatest gift was to be the most eminent singer among the Greeks. Cleomenes, however, pointing at one of the onlookers, said: “But, by the Gods, this man established the right of garnishing food!” He despised, in fact, art [-f.85v-] aimed solely at pleasure. Such anecdote is also ascribed to Archidamus. Eridamidas, asked an opinion about a certain singer who had sung beautifully, said: “He is a great soother in a field of little importance.”He despised, in fact, a laborious art whose outcome was nothing except a certain inane and temporary little aural pleasure.” Plutarch, in his Sayings of the Spartans, adds: “The Cynic philosopher Antisthenes, after listening to Ismenias, a flautist from Thebes, said: “He is no man, since, were he an honest man, he would not be a flautist.” By saying this, he meant that musicians are of the same ilk as ointment sellers and providers of lowly pleasures.” Plutarch, in his Life of Pericles, says: “Archdamus, the son of Zeuxidamus, when someone lauded excessively a player of kithara and extolled his strength, [-f.86r-] said: “What praise shall you reserve for honest men, as you appreciate a player of kithara so much?”” The Cynic philosopher Diogenes wondered why those who tuned well the strings of the lyre conducted themselves so unseemly. Laertius, in the six book, says: “As the lyre was passed around in a banquet and the others sang one after the other according to the Greek custom, Gelon of Syracuse order that a horse should be brought to the table and he leapt on it with ease, showing that to do this was more suited to a king than playing the lyre.” Plutarch, in his Sayings of the kings, tells the story of how Antheas, king of the Scythes, having captured Ismenias, an eminent Theban flautist, in a war, ordered him to play. To the surprise of the onlookers, he himself sweared by the wind and his spear that he would hear more gladly the neighing of a horse.” Plutarch, in the Sayings of the Spartans, [-f.86v-] Brusonius, book four, chapter seventeen, and Caelius, book nine, say: “In truth, pleasures of this kind are unimportant, and they must be avoided. For this reason the Egyptians devoted no time at all to music, as they thought its daily practice damaging and dangerous to the young, as it would weaken the characters of men.” Diodorus of Sicily, in the sixth chapter of the first book, and Tiraquell, On Nobility, chapter thirty-four, number six, state: “Flautists, players of the kythara and the lyre and of other musical instruments at weddings and celebrations are called players in common parlance. They offer their services for a fee and are judged as lowly and worthless according to the decrees of the Church.” Plutarch, in his Sayings of the Spartans, says: “A Spartan, as a lyre [-f.87r-] was brought into a banquet, said: “Musical entertainment is not Spartan at all”. In the Aphorisms, he adds that, when Xerses wanted to punish the Babylonians for their rebellion, he forbid them to handle arms, but ordered them to sing and to learn to play the flute: “Xerxes, angry that the Babylonians had rebelled against him, after he took control of them again, he ordered them to banish the use of arms and to sing and play the flute instead.” Nevertheless, among us Christians, the musicians who compose and sing the Lord's praises must be honoured and held in great esteem, nor anyone should be ashamed to do so, whatever their status. In the Bible, [-f.87v-] in the second book of Kings, chapter six, we read that David, notwithstanding his being such a great prince and king, he still joined the other singers in song and dance before the Ark of the Lord, nor did he think that this was unsuitable to his royal majesty. When his wife Michal scolded him because of this, as she considered such practice vile, unworthy and not suited to his status, she was punished by God and she was rendered sterile, the greatest ignominy of all according to the Jews [-f.88r-]: “David played on instruments he held in his arms and danced with all his strength. He was girded with a linen ephod, and David and all the house of Israel brought the Ark of the testament of the Lord in jubilation and accompanied by the clanging of trumpets. And when the Ark of the Lord entered the City of David, Michal, daughter of Saul, looking through a window, saw king David jumping and dancing in front of the Lord, and she despised him in her heart. [signum] Michal, daughter of Saul, came out of to meet David and said: “How glorious was today the king of Israle, uncovering himself before the handmaids of his servants, and disrobed himself naked as if he were one of the buffons.” [-f.88v-] David replied to her: “Before the Lord, who chose me rather than your father and his entire house, and ordered me to be the leader of the people of the Lord in Israel and Judaea, I will make myself humbler than I have done and I will be more lowly in my own eyes, and with the handmaids of whom you spoke, I shall appear more glorious. Thus, Michal, daughter of Saul, had bore no child until the day of her death.”

Chapter twenty-five. That everyone should learn and practise music.

[-f.89r-] It is not surprising that the ancients disapproved of music and were doubtful as to whether it should be learned, as they were concerned about its effect of morality. In fact, they saw that it was so faulty and corrupted, that it was more of more noxious than beneficial to human life. Moreover, although they had their own hymns in honour of the Gods, this does not mean that they had a clear idea of how the Lord should be praised. However, since we do know, thanks to the Holy Scriptures, that it was always customary, ever since the beginning of the world, to praise and give thanks to the divine majesty for the blessings received by the holy fathers in the Old Testament, and in the New one by very holy persons and by Jesus Christ our Lord himself, we must praise and magnify Him with decorous reverence as much as we can and we are able to do. When Moses was freed from the captivity and persecution of the Pharaoh, he thanked the Lord with the canticle “Let us sing unto the Lord”, as one reads in the Book of Exodus, chapter fifteen. In the thirty-second chapter of Deuteronomy one reads another canticle, “Hear, o Heavens, what I say”. Delbora and Barach thanked the Lord for their victory with the canticle “You who deliberately removed from Israel your souls” [-f.90r-]. Hannah thanked the Lord for the birth of her son Samuel with the song “My heart rejoiced” in the first book of Kings, while, in the second book, we read David's lament on the death of King Saul and of Jonathan, “Consider, Israel, for those who died”, and at chapter twenty-two, David thanked the Lord for freeing him from Saul and from the hands of his enemies with the song “Lord, you are my stone”. In the first book of Chronicles, we read a song written in occasion of the ark, “O give thanks unto the Lord”, while Judith thanks the Lord after killing [-f.90v-] Holophernes with the song “Begin to sing to the Lord with drums”. There is an entire book of psalms composed and sung by king David, and some are contained in the book of Isaiah: “I shall confess to you, my Lord”, at chapter twenty-six; “City of our strength”; a song by Ezechiah, freed from his mortal illness, “I said in the middle of my days”. We can read the lamentations of Jeremiah for the servitude of the people of Israel, while the Book of Daniel contains the song of the three children, “Blessed are thou, Lord our God”. In the Book of Jonah, at chapter two, we find “I cried over my tribulation”; the Book of Habakkuk contains his song “O Lord, I heard you”. [-f.91r-] In the New Testament, we find the “My soul magnifies the Lord” in the first chapter of the Gospel of Luke, and the song of Simeon “Now you dismiss”. In the Gospel of Luke, we read that Jesus prayed the Lord with a hymn (“and after reciting the hymn”), and also in the Gospel of Mark (“and after reciting the hymn, they went out into the Mount of Olives”). Therefore, everyone must learn music and practise it in the worship of God. Nobody should be ashamed of doing so, be they who they may, if one is not ashamed of being a Christian. Moreover, I believe that, since every Christian is obliged to praise and thank [-f.91v-] the Lord, thus everyone is obliged to learn and practise music, mostly to the aforementioned aim, and, secondly, to uplift and moderate the spirit. Hence, I shall say, in accordance to Plato's thinking in the second book of The Laws, that who is ignorant of poetry and music does not deserve to be considered a person, and is classed among the ignorants with good reason: “However, animals lack the sense of order and disorder in their movements, to which, if well organised, has been given the name of rhythm and harmony. We, however, we have as companions in our gatherings gods who allotted to us the sweet and pleasant perception of rhythm and harmony, [-f.92r-] and who taught us melodies and styles of dancing. The word chorus is derived from the word charas, which means joy. Thus, it is clear that the Muses and Apollo provide the first means of education. An ignorant person, therefore, is someone who has no knowledge of dancing and musical poetry, while a learned person is someone who has been educated in both. We say that such discipline consists of choral, dancing and singing skills, and, therefore, someone who is educated has acquired the ability to sing and dance well.”

Chapter twenty-six. The same topic continues.

The ancients employed music not only [-f.92v-] in their religious hymns, but also to foster self-control. Much has been written to exalt the power of music on the human soul, but I cannot believe it to be as great as it is believed to be nowadays. On this subject, Filippo Pigafetta says in the introduction to a canzone by Giovanni Battista Elicona: “The opposite emotions produced in the soul by music and melody, and so exalted by the ancient authors, do not derive merely by the value and power of harmony, and by that combination and ordering of high and low notes [-f.93r-] in such a great variety of pitch, proportions and numbers, as it is commonly believed, since they act merely on the perception, to which every animal partakes. They derive, instead, from the union of melody and the effective expression of the words, uttered with sweet sounds and notes, in prose or singing verse. Such union persuades and moves the soul to different emotions, in such a way that one moves the soul, while the other one spurs the perception, which is the door and the entrance to the soul.” Therefore, I believe it to be a legend what they write about the orator Caius Graccus, namely, that, since he had an impetuous and forceful character, in order to avoid trespassing the boundaries suited to a good orator [-f.93v-] when he gave a speech, he kept by his side a servant musician, so that, when the servant felt that his master was becoming too fired up, he would contain and calm his mood by playing a sweet and subdued melody. Plutarch, in Caius' biography wrote: “Caius was a forceful and fierce man. He was often so elated when he gave a speech that he used to became so irritated that he resorted to insults and profanities, and such behaviour would often disrupt his speech. Thus, he contrived a remedy to this excess. He advisedly [-f.94r-] placed a servant behind himself when he gave a speech at the lectern, who, when he heard him became agitated and drawing the voice too much for the irritation, he would produce a note with a mouth organ able to produce sounds. Thus, Caius was warned and, so to speak, was called back from battle, thus keeping excessive temper and vehemence under control.” Valerius Maximus, in the tenth chapter of the eighth book, says not only that the servant would help contain his fervour, but that the instrument would regulate the pace of his speech to such an extent that, if the servant heard him speaking to slowly and relaxedly, he would invigorate and spur him on: “Every time that he gave a public speech, he had a servant placed behind him, who was experienced [-f.94v-] in the art of music. The servant discretely moulded the pace of his speech with the help of an ivory pipe by speeding it up when it was too relaxed and by slowing it down when it was too agitated, because the fire and impetus of his delivery did not allow him to be an accurate judge of such balance.” Gellius, in the eleventh chapter of the first book, says that the servant did not stand behind Graccus with a pipe. He maintains, instead, that he was hidden within the audience and produced a soft and soothing sounds in order to calm him down and contain his temper: “It is not true, as it is said commonly, that the servant who played the pipe stood behind him and that he soothed him or spurred him as appropriate by playing different melodies. [-f.95r-] In fact, what would be more absurd that a flautist should play different rhythms, melodies and warblings of different kind to Gracchus while he spoke, as if he was an actor dancing with bare feet? However, those who recorded this more reliably, say that the musician was hidden among the surrounding audience, and that he produced a rather low-pitched and soft sound in order to calm and sooth the powerful exuberance of his voice. I do not believe, in fact, that it is believable that the famous vehemence of Gracchus' delivery required any restorative stimulus or external encouragement. However, Marcus Cicero believes that this flautist was employed to both ends, namely, either to encourage [-f.95v-] his languishing and weak delivery with spurring sounds, or to contain his fierceness and truculence with soothing notes.” I am aware that Quintilian, in the sixteenth chapter of his Institutio Oratoria, writes that the orator must be musical, besides possessing other qualities: “Eloquence, through voice and enunciation, sings lofty subjects in a grand way, cheerful ones in a sweet way, restrained ones genly, and it matches the emotions of what it is said with every aspect of its art. With different inflections of the voice and with different types of enunciation, to use the same word, we pursue the anger or the pity of the judge. [signum] Let us limit ourselves at the moment with one example. [-f.96r-] Caius Graccus, the most prominent orator of his age, had a musician stand behind him while he gave a speech. The musician played a pipe, which is called a tonarium, which provided him the pitch that had to be applied to each part of the speech.” However, who can believe that a tale recounted in so many different ways, namely, that the same musician (who – it is necessary to believe – had to be at least as expert an orator as Gracchus in order to do well his duty) stood behind Graccus, while others say that he was hidden in the crowd. Were this true, there is no doubt that, unless the audience were deaf, they would have heard the sound produced by the musician, which, if Gracchus had to be vehement and passionate [-f.96v-] with a powerful delivery, would have had to be very loud. Hence, it is not believable that the audience would not chase him of the lectern in a shower of turnips. Nor it is strange if, in the end, he was beaten to death with sticks, despite his whistles, pipes, vocal instrument, tonarium or horn.

Chapter twenty-seven.

The ancient practice of singing at the table does not seem to me to be worthy of praise, albeit the ancients introduced it with good intentions, as Athenaeus writes in the second chapter of the fourteenth book: “It appears that most handed down this discipline (i.e. music) as a means of moral correction and for the moral good. All the ancients established in their laws and traditions that hymns to the gods would be sung at banquets, so that we may be encouraged by these to maintain our integrity and temperance. In fact, when the compositions were well wrought and the reason of divine worship was added, it seemed that more harmonious way of living was achieved.” The Greeks observed this tradition and had a lyre taken to the table to be passed around among the guests. Everyone was required to sing, and, should someone refuse, they would be considered not only rough and uneducated, but also ill-mannered, ignorant and unworthy of taking part in the banquet. [-f.97v-] This is what happened to Themistocles, as Cicero recounts in the first book of the Tusculan Disputations: “The Greeks believed that music believed that great erudition was inherent in singing and playing string instruments. Therefore, even Epaminondas, in my opinion the greatest leader of the Greek nation, is said to have been an extraordinary player of string instruments. And when Themistocles, several years later, refused to play the lyre in a banquet was considered rather uncultured. This is why Greece produced a great umber of musicians. Everyone learned music, and who was not educated in it was not considered sufficiently learned.” They took great care that the learned should do so, and not others. Athenaeus, in the tenth chapter of the third book, on the subject of the Cynics, says: [-f.98r-] “They do not take to heart what the divine Plato wrote in his Protagoras: “To discuss poetry would be like doing the same as what happens in the banquets of vulgar men who walk around the shops. In fact, since men of this sort cannot be by themselves during banquets or the sound of their own voice and conversation, they raise the price of lady flautists as they hire an alien voice for a large fee, although they did get together originally to hear their own voice. However, when the dining companions are elegant, good and learned men, you will not see in those banquets any ladies playing the flute or the harp, but you will notice that they are capable to enjoy their own company through their conversation without such nonsense and silly entertainments, [-f.98v-] talking and listening in turn, despite drinking large quantities of wine.” However, such words are silly and meaningless, because, once one has drunk a lot, rather than singing the glorious deeds of the heroes, one sings the song that Bacchus inspires one to sing. Plato, in the second book of the Laws, says: “The soul of drinkers inflamed by wine burns like iron on the flame, and they become less inhibited and more juvenile.” Despite Zeno of Citium being an austere philosopher, having drunk a great deal during a banquet, he dispensed [-f.99r-] with his seriousness and began acting like the others. Asked why he did so, he gave the answer reported by Diogenes Laertius in the seventh book: “Even though wolf-beans are bitter, they become sweeter if they are immersed in water.” I do not know if Plutarch knows what he is saying, when he says that the cup-bearer is so discerning of the guests' characters, that he alters the proportion of wine and water served to each of them, so that they may all be merry, any excess may be avoided, and no one would be more drunk than anyone else. He states, in the Banqueting Problems, first ten, Problem four: “Moreover, [-f.99v-] the leader of the banquet must be endowed with the knowledge of how the behaviour of the guest may vary while drinking wine, to what kind of annoyance they may become prone, and how they may be able to cope with drinking neat wine. In fact, different wines bear various proportions of different types of water, as the cup-bearers of kings, who add more or less water to the wine of different guests, know well, and the result is related to the character of each guest. Thus, the leader of the banquet must be know the different proportions of wine and water and must apply them scrupulously. Like a musician exploring the resonance of the strings of the kithara, for instance, he will enthuse and help relax different guests with the aid of wine, and will blend [-f.100r-] with a certain precision different characters into a euphonious harmony. Thus, he will pour the appropriate mixture of water and wine not according to a specific measure in the serving vessel, but on the circumstances of each time of serving and to the physical strength of each of the guests. However, if this is hard and onerous to do, the leader of the banquet will have to host banquets choosing the guests according to the differences between age and character. In fact, an old man will get drunk more quickly than a young one, an exuberant more than a quiet one, a thoughtful and melancholic more than a happy and brisk one, and someone who moves about without inhibitions more than a guest who sits back and relaxes. Someone who has gathered such information will preside over [-f.100v-] an elegant and orderly banquet much better than someone who does not know his guests. The arranging of the guests according to the strings of a kithara is silly and pointless rather than doctrine of a philosopher, such as Plutarch professed to be, not only because it is difficult to put into practice, but also because it is against civility, which does not entail that the wine of the guests should be watered down according to someone else's taste, nor that the quantities in their glasses should be measured. Homer portrays Achilles offering neat wine to his guests. Some commented that it was unseemly for a hero to drink it, but others answered that it was not appropriate or polite to offer the guests wine watered down.

[-f.101r-] Chapter twenty-eighth. The same topic continues.

Those who know the effects of wine are aware of the fact that singing does not contain the powerful effects of wine, since singing is the first reaction of someone who is inebriated, which the reason why the Muses are portrayed traditionally as companions of Bacchus. Tibullus, in the seventh elegy of the first book, says, on the subject of wine: “That drink taught man to bend their voices in song and to move their unaware limbs to precise movements.” Maximus of Tyre, in his eleventh discourse, states: “[...] just like others are inebriated after drinking wine, which is why they leap about, sing and dance.” Athenaeus, in the thirtieth chapter of the first book, says: [-f.101v-] “They enjoyed drinking wine so much that they sang, danced and did everything that intoxicated persons do.” Plutarch himself, in the Banqueting Problems, first ten, Problem one, says: “At first, who drinks moderately is moved to hum a melody, laugh, and finally jump around.” Someone in this condition, however, is not drawn to sing of Diana's chaste nature, but, rather, of Venus' lasciviousness. For this reason, Saint Paul detested excessive drinking: “Do not become drunk on wine, which leads to lasciviousness.” If the ancients introduced singing at the table to moderate and preserve good moral habits, and if in the beginning the habit of singing sacred and virtuous songs was effective in maintain moral standards, later, little by little and because of human malice,

[-f.102r-] the guard against shamelessness was relaxed, and it became usual to sing immoral and lascivious songs, although those who professed to be more virtuous than others used to hide their faces to show their embarrassment when such lascivious songs were sung. Gellius, in the ninth chapter of the nineteenth book, says that a certain Julian, a Spanish rethorician, went to a banquet where many sung various amorous songs. To avoid interrupting the conversation and being accused of being uneducated and rude, he sang some verses about a young man after saying: “Please, allow me to cover my face with my robe, as Socrates is said to have done when giving a risqué speech, and know that even our more ancient poets, who lived before those whom you mentioned, delighted in erotic and lascivious poetry.” Then, he sat back, covered his face and sang some verses by the ancient poet Valerius Edituus with a rather sweet tone of voice.” Plutarch writes that Plato advised those who were drunk and quick-tempered to look at themselves in the mirror, so that they would be ashamed of themselves when they looked at their angry face and at their actions: “Equally, [Plato] used to teach and advise those who were angry to look at their face in a mirror, so that they may avoid those faults by looking at their own deformed face.” Plutarch adds that the Spartans “when they celebrated their own festivals, they used [-f.103r-] to force some peasants, whom they called Helots, to drink as much as they could. They then they ordered them to be brought blind drunk to a banquet of youngsters, so that they would be horrified by their disgraceful state and thought of it as an ugly display.” Other writers of better judgement said that singing is not appropriate while dining, as it produces an adverse, rather than positive, effect. Euripides was one of such writers. This is confirmed by Plutarch, in his Advice on marriage, who says: “Euripides rightly criticises those who play the lyre during drinking parties. Music should be applied to soothe tempers and the pain of mourning, and those who enjoy pleasures must not abandon themselves to singing.” Euripides' verses are in his Medea, and they are spoken by the Nurse: “If one said that the ancients were foolish [-f.103v-] and not at all wise, they would be right. In fact, their music introduced hymns into their gatherings, their drinking sessions and their banquets. No man has found a way to remedy with song the Stygian grief, whence deaths and adversities of fate destroy families. On the contrary, while it is advantageous to cure such misfortunes with music, who would stretch their soaring voice in vain in front of a lavish banquet? Of itself, in fact, the splendid banquet laying before them offers them delight.” Therefore, as we read [-f.104r-] in the same author in his Banquet of the seven wise man, the Egyptian tradition of was the best one: “This is the function of the human skeleton that the Egyptians often lay out in their banquets, to remind us that we shall be similar to it in a short time.”

Chapter twenty-nine. The same topic continues.

The pleasure of such singing and larking about during banquets marred to such an extent the Romans' morals , thanks to which they progressed so far, that they fell into vice and they went into decline. Livy, in the ninth book, says: “The seed of foreign luxury was introduced into Rome from the troops posted in Asia. Then women playing the kithara and of the sambuca, as well as playful entertainments at the table [-f.103v-] were added to their banquets.” Maximus of Tyre was quite right to criticise Homer, that ignorant improviser exalted by others against every evidence, when he portrays Ulixes regarding drinking, eating and listening to a performance of the Girometta as happiness: “I ask you, Ulixes, wisest among men, do you think that pleasure consists in a table overflowing with songs and foods, in full cups, in the abundance of wine? To this let us add the poems that he sang, the battle of Achilles and the one about Ulixes from Ithaca, or the hollow horse, inside which the first Greeks entered Troy and conquered it. This will seem to your mind beautiful above all things. [-f.105r-] You are too good at praising a vulgar pleasure, or most wise Ulixes, the sort of pleasure of the kind that a barbarian who has just left Babylon would praise. You praise this, being used to large banquets, with liberal quantities of wine and improvised poems? You, who, while abroad, prefer the jolly lotus flower and the songs of the sirens? Or perhaps Homer seems to him to have meant something better, which he can immediately grasp, than what they sound? In fact, who, despite the provision of abundant food and large cups of wine, prompts his guest to be moved by the sweetest song of a poet among such kind of pleasures, recounts without a doubt a respectable banquet, where the pleasure is transferred from the depraved [-f.105v-] to the honourable, and from the belly to the ears. Nevertheless, it is not sufficient to feed the ears inconsiderately and shamelessly on the musical sounds of pipes and string instruments and on the noisy clamour of a gathering, but it is necessary to call upon the assistance of an art able to prepare an aural banquet with a certain comfortable harmony. Where shall we seek such harmony? I would not want to deny that I delight in the elegance that, reaching our ears from the melodies of the flutes, strings, or any other musical instrument, offers to us a most agreeable harmony, although I suspect that such a music may not offer us a sufficiently balanced pleasure. What is vile, irrational or even mute, does not enthuse the soul with much pleasure, [-f.106r-] but, if one wants to compare the pleasure that derives from music with the one that is produced by conversation, I believe that one will find that conversations are of a similar nature as food, while music is comparable to smell. In fact, the nature of several foods is that they nourish most fruitfully, while an odour, in comparison, is something impure that contains scant nutritional value. Therefore, ears must be fed on a nutritious diet, which means that the odours of music must be banished, while, conversely, the nourishment of conversation, according to this comparison, must be welcomed and encouraged.” Virgil, who was not able to proceed in his poem in any other way but by following the light of the poems of Homer, wanted to introduce a singer in the banquet of Dido and Aeneas, but he did not make him sing a song [-f.106v-] about the times, the place and the audience, but about far-fetched topics. Virgil says, in the first book of the Aeneis: “Long-haired Iopas, the pupil of the most excellet Atlas, performs on his golder lyre. He sings about the vagrant Moon, about the labours of the sun, the origin of mankind and of animals, about water and fire, about the stars, Arcturus, the rainy Hyades, and the Larger and Smaller Bear, why the sun in winter hurries so much to dive into the ocean and what delay slows down the long nights in winter.” Homer, in the eight book of the Odyssey, at Alcinous' table, where he sat accompanied by his wife and his young daughter, makes Demodochus sing about the adultery of Mars and Venus: “He began to sing about the love of Mars and crowned Venus, How they first made love in Hephaestus' house.” [-f.107r-] He tells the entire story with no hint of disapproval and condemnation, but deliberately stoking in the listeners the desire to imitate their actions by making Apollo say to Mercury: “Mercury, son of Jove, messenger and bestower of good tides, Would you have like to sleep in bed tied with strong chains alongside golden Venus?” Mercury, the messenger, replied to him: “Oh, if only this were so, long-throwing king Apollo! I would have chains around me three times the size of those, and all of you, Gods and Goddesses, would look in on us, but I would be sleeping alongside golden Venus.” It would have been much more appropriate for Iopa to sing Demodochus' song and vice versa. [-f.107v-] It is, therefore, credible that singer of Clytemnestra, wife of Agamemnon, would sing another kind of songs, if it is true what they write, namely, that until she listened to him, she remained always faithful, but when he was taken away from her, she immediately fell pray of adultery.

Chapter thirty. The same topic continues.

As we are discussing the ancients' practice of singing at the table, we shall describe how they observed the tradition of singing one after the other and what was the name that they gave to this sort of singing. Plutarch, in his Banqueting Problems, first ten, first Problem, writes that, [-f.108r-] as many neglected and overlooked this tradition, and many did not study music in depth, as not all the guest were able to sing, the lyre was passed on from one guest to another until it came into the hands of someone who could sing. For this reason, the kind of songs sung then was named 'oblique songs', as it was not sung according to the order in which the guests were seated. The aforementioned author says that opinions differ as to why they were called 'oblique songs'. Some believe that they were sung in this order, namely, the first guest laying in the first triclinium did not, after singing, [-f.108v-] pass the crown of myrtle to the second one, laying next to him, and, similarly, the second did not pass it to the third one, but sent it to the first one of the second triclinium. It was then passed to the first person of the third triclinium and so on in this order. This is why they were named 'oblique verses', because of this transverse pattern. The same author, in the short essay entitled “Whether drinking should be done in silence”, says: “Hey, good man, is this not about Bacchus? In fact, perhaps it is not attractive nor suited to a banquet [-f.109r-] that someone should sing those songs called skolia, with the great cup placed in the middle and crowns that our God Bacchus, our true liberator, bestowed onto the guests individually. However, some say that such songs were not of an obscure kind, but that, at first, the guests sang all together a song to the god, then another song started, which was sung in turn as they received a bow of myrtle that they called Asarcon, from the fact that the recipient would start singing after another one had stopped. After a little while, a lyre was passed around, and those who were expert musicians played it skilfully, while those who were not competent in music were overlooked. This song was planely called a skolion, because it was not very easy to perform and not everyone participated in the performance. [-f.109v-] Nevertheless, I am aware that other have another opinion, namely, that the myrtle crown mentioned above was not passed from bed to bed, and that the first to sing used to pass it to the first of the second bed, and the latter then to the first of the third bed, and then the second of the first bed to the second of the second bed, and so on. Thus, the song took its name from the varied way in which the myrtle was passed around.” Others maintain that this song took its name from the fact that the senses are obnubilated after a good drinking session and the drinker is not quite conscious or unconscious, but, also, because, [-f.110r-] when they sang, as it was said, under the influence of wine, their songs were ramshackle and incoherent. Other say it was customary to sing three sorts of songs. One was sung by all the guests together, another one by each one in order, and the third one was sung by the most excellent and able musician at the banquet, so the skolion was the name of this sort of song. Aristoxenus and others say that not everybody used to sing, but only those who were expert and learned musicians did so, and that the song took its name because a strict order of performance was not observed.

[-f.110v-] Chapter thirty-one. The ancients employed music in almost all of their performances.

As it was said, not only the ancients rated music above everything else, but it appears that they could not do anything without it. However, since in more recent times it did not rated so highly, Marsilio Ficino thought it appropriate to defend Plato for having held it in such high esteem, by stating in his commentary to the third of the Laws: “Nobody should be amazed that Plato shows a high consideration for games and, particularly, for the study of music, in this passage and often in others, because they have a great influence [-f.111r-] on the soul, both in private and public life. In fact, the such studies were clearly very popular and familiar to everyone, and what is embraced by everyone continually has no less power over the soul than air has on the body.” The ancient Greeks employed music to embolden their soldiers in battle, so that they would attack the enemy with greater daring and courage, and also so that they would not scatter, driven by their passion and enthusiasm. Pausanias, in the fifth book, says: “The Lacedaemonians enter the battle accompanied by the melodies of the flutes and the soft tunes of the lyre, rather than by the clangour of the trumpets.” Athenaeus, in the fourth chapter of the fourteenth book says, talking about the [-f.111v-] populations of Lydia: “When the Lydian enter the battle, they lay out the battle line with flutes and pipes, according to Herodotus.” Valerius Maximus says of the Spartans: “The troops of that same city never entered the battle before they drew from their soul the ardour of the encouragement with the sound of the flutes and the rhythm of the anapaest, with a lively and insistent sound, as they were been spurred to attack the enemy courageously.” Plutarch, in his Sayings of the Spartans, writes: “Why do the Spartans enter the battle accompanied by the sound of the flutes? Because, he said, whenever they march rhythmically to those melodies, it is clear how dedicated [-f.112r-] and strong they are.” Gellius, in the second chapter of the first book, says that the Lacaedemonians fought to the sound of the flutes, while the Cretans did the same accompanied by the kithara. He adds that, as Herodotus recounts, Alyattes, king of the Lydians, “had lyre-players and flautists play curing battle in the war against the Milesians.” Plutarch, in his Life of Lycurgus, writes that the king of the Spartans ordered the flautists to play the rhythmic hymn to Castor on their pipe, while he started marching a paean. Thus, their appearance was magnificent and formidable as they marched rhythmically to the accompaniment of the flutes, with their orderly lines. They were not perturbed, but marched cheerfully into battle led by the sounds of the instruments.” [-f.112v-] For this reason, as Plutarch continues, Lycurgus offered a sacrifice to the Muses before entering the battle: “In fact, the king offered a sacrifice to the Muses just before he started to fight, as he wanted to remind them of his discipline and decisions, so that they may assist him promptly in the trials of battle and rendered the actions of the fighters worthy of memory.” Cicero, in the second book of his Tusculan Disputations, mentioned this other custom: “[...] I am talking about our soldiers, not of the Spartan army, which advanced to the rhythmic sound of the pipe, and that was always spurred into battle to the accompaniment of the anapaestic beat.” This type of music [-f.113r-] possessed a certain power to inspiration and incitement, as Plutarch says in the passage quoted above: “The art of singing and declaiming poems was so as pursued as the excellence and brilliance in public speaking, as those melodies stirred a level of belligerence and courage that would have made one almost mad with courage. In fact, if one looks at the sort of Spartan poems that were sung in battle to the accompaniment of the pipe, one will agree with Terpander and Pindar, who associated military valour with music.” In Plutarch's [-f.113v-] Life of Cleomenes, Leonidas is asked his opinion on the poet Tirtaeus. This is his answer: “He is good at enthusing the soul of the young, as they run into battle moved by his poems as if possessed by a kind of fury.”

Chapter thirty-two. The same topic continues.

Ancient philosophers deemed that our soul consists of harmony. Macrobius, in his commentary on the Dream of Scipio, book one, chapter nine, says: “Plato said that the soul is essence endowed with autonomous movement, Xenocrates said that is number endowed with autonomous movement, Pythagoras [-f.114r-] and Philolaus said that it consisted of harmony, while Asclepiades said that the actions of the five senses worked in harmony together.” Aristoxenus said that the human body contained harmony and that it moved according to musical proportion, as Cicero writes in the first book of the Tusculan Disputations: “Next, Aristoxenus, both musician and philosopher, said that the body contained a certain tension similar to the one that occurs in the voice and in musical instruments, which is called harmony, and that the nature and shape of the body produced different movements akin to musical sounds.” The ancients believed that the skies rotated according to harmonic proportions, hence they produced the sweetest harmony. [-f.114v-] They also accompanied the dead to their burial to the accompaniment of music. Macrobius, in the passage quoted above, says: “The laws and traditions of many peoples stipulated that the dead should be taken in a procession to their burial, in the belief that, after death, the body returned to the origin of the sweetness of music, which is heaven.” The Romans called siticines those who sand at funerals, because the buried were called siti. Cicero, in the second book of the Laws, says: “Those who are buried are called siti.” Gellius, in the second chapter of the twentieth book, states: “However, we find in Ateus Capito's miscellany we find that the musicians that perform in presence of siti, namely, the dead and the buried, are called siticines, [-f.115r-] and that they had a particular type of trumpet, which differed from the sort of instruments played by other wind players.” However, they were also called simply flautists (tibicines), as one reads in Dio Chrysostomus' forty-ninth speech, where he says that Ismenias, a most famous flautist, was indignant that they were called flautists. He says: “They say that Ismenias used to be outraged that the siticines were called flautists, which I do not find worthy of indignation, because, as it seems to me, the siticines to not offend or disrespect the dead. [-f.115v-] The Jews also practised this sort of music, as we find in Saint Matthew's Gospel, chapter nine. “When Jesus came to the ruler's house and saw flute players and an agitated crowd, he said: “Go away, as the young woman is not dead, but asleep.” The lugubrious chants that were sung at funerals were called dirges. Some ascribe their invention to the poet Simonides, other to Midas, king of Phrygia. Cicero, in the second book of the Laws, maintains that, this sort of music would be performed after the funeral speeches given on the death of great and noble men: [-f.116r-] “The achievements of noble men ought to be remembered in a meeting. They will be followed by some singing to the flute named dirge (naenia), a word with which the Greeks indicate funereal sung laments.” This was the last ceremony in a funeral. Diomedes says: “Among the Romans, the last and final mournful song that is sung in honour of the dead person is called a naenia.” Festus states: “A naenia is an eulogistic song performed to the flute in a funeral to praise the dead.” It appears that the song was sung by a group of women, whose leader was called praefica. [-f.116v-] Nonius Marcellus says: “A naenia is an inelegant and unrefined song sung by a hired woman, called a praefica, to those who were not close family of the dead.” Varro, in the fourth book of his treatise On the virtue of the Roman people, says: “It was customary to sing the lament (naenia) to the accompaniment of the flute.” One must also note that the word naenia is not always interpreted in the aforementioned way. For instance, in the twenty-eighth ode Horace's third book of poems, he says: “The night will be celebrated with an appropriate song.” In this case, the word naenia means the last song sung by the guests, because their last song rather resembles [-f.117r-] howling and whispering than a good song aptly performed, as they lost the ability to pronounce the letter r, as the saying goes, because of their protracted drinking. Ascentius explains the aforementioned passage in the following way: “Wisdom is banished at the beginning of a drinking session, then the drinkers sing a song appropriate to the feast day, then a hunting song in honour of Diana, then a licentious one in honor of Venus, and, finally, once reason and voice are dead and buried, the song turns into a naenia, or a howling similar to a crying _ _ , not because they are sad, but because they are drunk.” See the Matteo Bonfini's annotation forty-two. [-f.117v-] Others said that the birth of a child should be accompanied by tears, because he enters a world of misery, but death should be celebrated with songs, because one leaves pain behind. Dio Chrysostomus, in his twenty-third discourse, says: “Another poet, not in private, but publicly in a theatre competition, suggested that a newborn should be welcomed with laments, because of the evils into which he was born. He believed, instead that someone who died and was free of anxieties, should be buried with joy and jubilation.”

Chapter thirty-three. The same topic continues.

If one wanted to discuss [-f.118r-] all the occasions in which music was performed and the different songs sung by particular artists, since everyone of them had a specific and particular style, there would be too much to say. However, I will say that music was celebrated with good reason, as the ancients saw that it had a powerful effect not only on the soul, but also on the body itself. It is very well known that the bit of the tarantula is healed by singing and dancing. They say, also, that Thales of Candia used to cure physical illness by singing. Gellius, in the thirteen chapter of the fourth book, says: “Most trust the handed-down belief that the acute pain of gout in the hip [-f.118v-] is reduced with the sound of a flute playing gentle melodies. I have also found written, in one Theophrastus' books entitled On inspiration, that the playing of an able and melodious flautist cures the bite of vipers. Democritus' book entitled On deadly infections contains the observation that many human diseases are cured by means of the sound of a flautist, as there is a close affinity between the mind and the body, and, consequently, between the illnesses that affect the body and the mind and their cures. Plutarch writes that Asclepiades cured hallucinations with harmonious music and the deaf with the trumpet. [-f.119r-] Pythagoras and Damon cured the drunks with music, Empedocles the frenzied and Socrates someone possessed. However, it is beyond doubt what is written in the Bible about Saul, namely, that, as he had angered the Lord, he was tormented intimately by spirit of the devil, and that he found no respite to his pain, except when he heard the sweet and melodious notes of the saintly musician David. These are the words in the Book of Kings, chapter sixteen: “So, whenever the spirit of the Lord possessed Saul, then David picked up the kithara and plucked it with his hand. Thus, he revided Saul, who felt better, [-f.119v-] as the evil spirit receded from him.” Aelian, in the twenty-third chapter of the fourth book, writes about Clinias, follower of Pythagoras, that “he was of extremely high morals and, as to his studies, a follower of Pythagoras. If he felt himself succumbing to ire and falling rapidly foul of anger, he started to tune the kithara and to play it straight away, before those feelings overpowered him. Thus, he would regain control of his mind. To those who asked him why he did that, he replied: “Because it helps to calm me down.” Pythagoras managed to contain [-f.120r-] the beastly ire of a young man who wanted to burn down the house of a lover of his by singing some spondaic verses, while the philosopher Empedocles calmed the anger of a man and stopped him from committing suicide. For this reason and many others the ancients held music in such high esteem. Hence, it seems appropriate that I should quote the opinions of some authors. Quintilian, in the sixteenth chapter of the first book of the Institutio Oratoria says: “Who does not know that music, of which I shall speak first, was not only studied, but revered to such an extent in ancient times that musicians themselves were regarded [-f.120v-] as poets and philosophers? I will leave aside others except Orpheus and Linus, both of whom were born of gods. The former, as it has been recorded for posterity, could melt the hearts of boorish and uneducated men with the admiration that he inspired and draw after him wild beasts, rocks and woods. Timagenes also states that music was the oldest of the liberal arts. Proof of this is the account of the most famous poets, in whose works the praises of the heroes and of the gods were sung in sumptuous banquets to the accompaniment of the kithara. Does not [-f.121r-] Iopas, the Vergilian bard, sing of the wandering moon and of the labours of the sun, and so on? Thus, that most eminent of poets demonstrated that music is connected with the knowledge of the divine, and, on this basis, it will be necessary even for an orator to be competent in music, if, as we said earlier, even this field of knowledge that was annexed to philosophy after it was abandoned by us orators, was once ours, and there can be no perfect eloquence without knowledge of such disciplines. Let there be no doubt that those most famous for their wisdom studied music. Pythagoras and his followers [-f.121v-] repeated the idea already accepted from the earliest time that the universe itself is built on the principles that were later followed in the construction of the lyre, and not content with ascribing to it the union of discordant elements that they call harmony, they ascribed sound to it as well. In fact, Plato, in several other works, but particularly in the Timeus, can be understood only by those who have absorbed the discipline of music. What should I say about the philosophers, whose leader, Socrates, was not ashamed to be taught to play the lyre when he was already old? It is recorder that the greatest military leaders were expert players of the flute and of the lyre, and that the army of the Lacedaemonians was enthused by the playing of music. Whatever else is the use of horns and trumpets [-f.122r-] in our legions? The louder their playing is, the higher the glory of Rome in war rises above others. Not without reason, therefore, Plato believed music to be necessary to the citizen, or politician, as he calls him, and the leaders of the school that appears to be the most severe, in some aspects, and the most austere of all, in others, were of the opinion that some wise men would pay some attention to these studies. Lycurgus, author of the most strict laws in Sparta, appreciated the study of music. Moreover, even nature seems to have donated music to us as a gift to help us tolerate fatigue more easily. Singing spurs on the rowers in the galley, [-f.122v-] and not only in the activities in which the efforts are unified by a preceding cheerful voice, but even individual workers find solace in a song, however artless.[signum] The practice of passing around the lyre in a banquet hailed from such high esteem for music, and when Themistocles confessed that he was not able to play that instrument, he was considered rather uneducated, to use Cicero's words. However the music of the flute and of the lyre was traditionally present even in the banquets of the most ancient Romans, while the verses of the Salii have a melody. As all of these traditions were created by King Numa, they constitute proof that not even those who appear to be belligerent and uneducated devoted as much attention to music

[-f.123r-] as that age permitted. Finally, a Greek proverb also declares that those who are not learned are far removed from the Muses and from the Graces. But now, do let us discuss what may gain an orator from music specifically. Music is divided into two branches, one related to the voice, and one related to the body, and precise, specific rules for each part are required. The musician Aristoxenus divides the remit of the voice into rhythm, melody and meter. Of these, the former consists of measure, the latter of voice and pitch. Is knowledge of all of these necessary to the orator? [signum] I would like, for the benefit of the less expert characterised by a heavier Muse, as they say, to remove all doubt with regard to the usefulness of music. They will concede, surely, that an orator must read poetry. [-f.123v-] However, will poems be read without knowing their music? If, nevertheless, someone is so mentally blind that may question the validity of learning music with regard to other kinds of poetry, they will accept that lyric poets cannot be read without such knowledge. I would have to discuss this further, were I the first to justify the study of music as something new, but, since the importance of the study of music has lasted since Chiron and Achilles until our day in everyone's view, except of those who despise a legitimate discipline, I should attempt to cast doubt on it by means of the urgency of my defence.”

Chapter thirty-four. The same topic continues.

Polibius, in the fourth book, writes that true music must be useful to the whole of humanity, [-f.124r-] and he demonstrates this by saying that Arcadians, who, despite being a Greek population, were most bloodthirsty and heinous, became civilised, pleasant and principled thanks to the introduction of music. Hence, everyone was bound to learn it by law. On the contrary, the Cyneteans became barbaric, wild and cruel because they stopped cultivating it. He says: “It is clear that Music (I am talking now about true music) is useful to the whole of humanity, and it is not true at all what Ephorus said in the introduction to this Histories, namely, that music was invented to deceive and cheat humankind. [-f.124v-] Nor it is to be believed that the ancient Cretans and Lacedaemonians introduced the flute and rhythmic strains instead of the trumpet on the battlefield without good reason, or that the Arcadians, a people who lead austere and hard lives, held music in such great esteem in their public life that they wanted to make it necessary not only for children, but also for young men up to the age of thirty, to practise it. It is well known, in fact, that only young Arcadian children from the youngest age were bound by law to sing hymns and paeans, which which, according to their national tradition, they used to praise the heroes, the gods and each local divinity. [-f.125r-] Then, they were instructed in the art of Philoxenus and Timotheus,

they performed in yearly singing and dancing competitions in honour of Bacchus, the boys in special junior contests, and the men in adult rallies. The whole of their life revolved around music, not because they delighted in listening to musical works, but because they performed to each other in turn. Thus, it is not shameful for them that someone should be ignorant of some aspect of another discipline, but none of them can be uneducated in the field of music, because they are forced to learn it, nor can they admit to be ignorant in it, because this is considered very shameful for them. Finally, young men present performances [-f.125v-] in theatre and as part of a chorus every year at public expense for the entertainment of their fellow citizens. It seem to me that their forefathers were very wise to introduce these practices, not as mere entertainment and frolics, but because they understood the constant hard work of their people in agriculture and the hardship and roughness of their life, and also the sourness of their character, which is connected to the cold and dismal environmental conditions, since it is necessary that our character is moulded by the circumstances into which we are born. It is clear, in fact, that climatic differences determine the differences between populations with regard to traditions, appearance, colour of the skin and practices. [-f.126r-] Thus, the Arcadians, wanting to render their national character more placid and tractable, as it seemed to be too savage and harsh in itself, at first introduced all the practices that we mentioned above, then several ceremonial sacrifices attended by both men and women, and finally the singing and dancing of young men and women. They did all this so that what was naturally rather harsh in their character would be softened and made calmer by habit and tradition. Conversely, as the Cinetheans began to despise such traditions after neglecting them for a while, traditions that were absolutely essential to them as they lived in the coldest part of Arcadia, they turned to such greed and ambition, and, in a short space of time, [-f.126v-] they became so savage that they committed greater atrocities and barbarities than the people of any other Greek city.” The Arcadians, therefore, were proud of the fact that they were outstanding musicians. Hence, when Virgil said in the seventh eclogue, when wanted to celebrate Thyrsis and Corydon as excellent singers: “They were both Arcadians, equally good at singing, and ready to answer to each other.” Arcadians were considered extremely learned in the field of music, as the same poet wrote in the last eclogue: “Arcadians, he said, you will sing this song to our mountains, as only Arcadians can sing.” [-f.127r-] Macrobius, in his commentary on the Dream of Scipio, book two, chapter three, states: “For this reason, in this life everyone's soul is captivated by musical sounds, as not only those who are educated, but every savage population devotes itself to music to inspire courage or to relax into its wanton pleasure, because the soul transfers to the body the memory of music, which it knew in heaven. Thus, music is concerned with soothing, as there is no heart so wild and savage that would not be moved by it. This is the origin, I believe, [-f.127v-] of the myths of Orpheus and Amphion, of which the former drew behind himself wild beasts and the latter large boulders as well, because they were the first, perhaps, to drive to the perception of pleasure irrational barbarians or people unmoved by any emotion and as cold as a stone. Thus, every facet of the spirit is governed and lead by music, as, for instance, a fanfare is played at in battle during the attack and retreat phase to raise and calm the spirits of the fighters. “Music can induce sleep and awaken,” it can raise worries and placate them, it can inspire ire and forgiveness, and it can also cure illnesses, and this is why those who apply remedies to the sick are said to sing to them. It is no wonder that music has such great power among men, when nightingales, swans and other birds sing [-f.128r-] as if they were master musicians, many birds and animals that inhabit the earth and the sea are trapped in nets beguiled by singing, and the pipes of the shepherds soothes the flocks in their pastures. It is not strange, since we said earlier that origins of music, into which it is woven, are embedded in the soul of the universe. The soul of the universe itself gives life to all living beings, and “hence comes the descent of men, animals and birds, and the marvels that the sea contains under its marbled surface,”

It follows the rule of nature that every living being is attracted by music, because the heavenly spirit that gives life to the universe drew its origin from music.”

[-f.128v-] Chapter thirty-five.

Maximus of Tyre, in his twenty-first speech, says: “What would we say that this universal music that surrounds the spirit but an educational tool to temper the emotions of the soul? In fact, it soothes excessively elevated spirits and passions as by means of a spell, while it raises and focuses languishing and depressed spirits. Music, for instance, is very effective to soothe grief, cure pain, mending a broken heart, and lifting the weight of sadness. [-f.129r-] It is the perfect accompaniment to religious sacrifices, a good friend at a banquet, and a great leader in war. It is very apt to enliven a party wittily and to create excitement in the celebrations of Dionysus, it sanctifies secret sacrifices, and it tempers the morals of the citizens. Thus, the study of the flute civilised the savage Boeotians. Thus, the Lacedaemonians were emboldened by Tirtaeus' poems and the inhabitants of Argos by the songs of Telesilla. Anacreon pacified Policrates for the inhabitants of Samos, and he associated Policrates' reign in his poems with the tyrant's love of Smerdis and Bathyllus, his hair, and the flutes. Shall we refer to more ancient times? The famous Orpheus, son of Oeagrus and Calliopes, [-f.129v-] was born in Thracia on the mount Pangaion. The Thracian people of Odryssa lived on that mount. They were thieves and hostile to strangers, but, tamed by the sweetness of his singing, they followed Orphaeus and gladly accepted him as their leader. Their land was covered in oaks and populated by Maenads, as poets ascribed to them a vile obsession with inanimate bodies, that Music took away from them. There was another most noble player of the kithara. He lived in Boeotia, but he did not move stones with his playing, as the myth goes. How could a wall be built by these means? Instead, by using a rhythmic and paced accompaniment, he collected the strongest men in Boeotia into a battle line and he surrounded [-f.130r-] Thebes with an impregnable wall, similar to the one that Lycurgus built for the Spartans when he established the flute as the commander of the battle. They listened to it, and they later transferred to the battlefield the law of the dance. Themistocles held the same flute and drove the Athenians to their ships, as he played. Some rowed and others fought, but both emerged victorious. It is recorded that the Eleusinian goddesses applauded the sound of this choir. The same flute built monuments to that victory, trophies both in Sparta and in Athens, both at sea and on land, inscribed with the most beautiful epigrams. The Spartans won with this choir, under Leonidas' leadership. However, what need is there to celebrate [-f.130v-] music with a long speech and to exaggerate its value, when it is already clear enough that it offers perfect relaxation and peace, that it is a great companion in war, that it is a model citizen, and a most skilled nurturer of children? The hearing is, in fact the fastest of the senses at transmitting its perception to the soul, while it makes it responsive to its impulses and directs it towards the same emotional reactions. Thus, while the souls that have no experience of music snatch any semblance of pleasure for themselves, they will never follow the law correctly. In fact, despite the fact that they call their own pleasure music, their mere use of that name does not make it that their aim is the same as that of true musicians.” The ancients praised true and good music in many ways, [-f.131r-]just as they criticised and condemned false music when they encountered it. Moreover, had they heard the music of our day and how it is performed, they would detest and abhor it even more than the music of their own times. They would be right to do so, not only because music nowadays is much more enervated, corny and lascivious, but also because it has many other faults. For instance, it is sung with an inarticulate and mumbling voice that resembles animal calls. rather than being the expression of someone endowed with reason, [-f.131v-] while most singers are considered those who, being naturally endowed with a beautiful and easy disposition of voice and chest, offer so much pleasure and delight to the ear of their listeners, by way of long passaggi, trills, groppi, repeated notes, sighing, raising of the voice and other ways of holding and producing it, ways and are enervated and lascivious, but are considered as special effects and ornaments, that the listeners are left satisfied and very fulfilled, as they believe that music has reached [-f.132r-] its highest perfection and that it would be impossible to better it further. The cause of this is their ignorance, for they do not know the nature of true music, nor do they have the perfect mastery of it that the ancients had, since, in those days, the melody was not deformed through imitation and perfidie, nor through forced passages, repetitions, or in many other ways, as it was said. On the contrary, verses were sung simply and in conformity with their nature, so that everyone could understand the words with appreciation, the rhythm, and the meter of the verse, as it fell in time with the sound, whether it was a short or long syllable.

Chapter thirty-six. The same topic continues.

I believe that the habit of lingering on certain syllables in this way was borne of those who dreamed up different sort of pitches and note values where two would have been sufficient, namely, one for the short syllable and one for the long one, that would require a time no longer than the time needed to utter them. In fact, singing and composing well does not consist [-f.133r-] in laying out the voice in an attractive and beautiful manner, but in fitting the consonances and pairing them in a way that is proportionate to the words, according to the tone in which one wants to compose. In fact, to give free hand to singers so that they may show the lay-out of their voice would mean to give consideration to the voice of the musician, rather than to music itself. Let singers do what they know and can do, but they will never reach the perfection of birdsong. This is why, I believe, Athenaeus, in the thirteen chapter of the ninth book, says: “Chamaeleon writes that music was invented by the ancients [-f.133-] from the observation of the birds that used to sing in the wilderness, and musicians established music in imitation of them.” Leaving aside other birds, who will achieve the sweetness of tone and the artistry of the nightingale's song? Pliny the Elder wrote on this subject: “Firstly, what a large voice in a body so small, and what defiant spirit! Secondly, the sound is modulated and produced with singular and perfect musicianship. At once the sound is extended with a single breath, now it is varied by dropping it, now it is characterised by separate breaths, now it is joined together with by twisting the breathing, it is sent forth, [-f.134r-] it is called back, it is darkened suddenly, at times it mumbles with itself, it is full, low-pitched, high-pitched, fast, slow, vibrant when it suits it, very high, medium, very low. In brief, that small little beak can master all the wonders that human artistry has invented through the exquisite contortions of the flutes.” There is also another very notable fault in modern music, namely, that there is no difference between the kind of music suitable to serenade a lady and the kind appropriate to serve the majesty of God in church, which is a contemptible abuse, and one that is unworthy of Christian virtue. Nor should one say that such sort of music [-f.133v-] is more effective to raise our minds from earth to heaven, as this will never be the effect of effeminate, mushy and lascivious music, which is sung with the same affectation. I shall never be persuaded that His Divine Majesty will be pleased to receive his praises sung by the angels and by the saintly David with decorum and in ways that are appropriate and respectful towards God, as much as humanity is able to do, when they are sung by persons, and particularly by eunuchs, who cannot produce a virile and devout song, but only an effeminate and enervated one, in accordance with their own nature. Moreover, if one considers our Lord's [-f.135r-] care towards his Church, when he saw that it behaved badly and did not observe the decency that it should have maintained, for instance, when he ejected those who desecrated it and said that the church was the home of prayer. Let us know think what kind of prayer is ours, if it follows the current vogue. It is no use to say that it can be tolerated, because it entices people to attend church, because one must reply that “one must not do ill to achieve good”. It is true that a very large number of people convene in the church of Saint Apollinaire, where it is said that [-f.135v-] the most refined singing in the world is to be found, but a keen observer would see that all of those people flock to it not because they are devout, or to attend the holy services held by the church, but only to listen to the music. This is completely evident from the fact that everybody leaves after a motet is sung after the Magnificat, since it is common knowledge that there is no more singing after that. Thus, the church is left empty, as people do not wait till the end of the Vespers. I pray to God that, just as He remedied the indecency of the hymns of the ancients with holy simplicity, thus one day He may want to correct such singing, in order that it may match the required decency. [-f.136r-]

Chapter thirty-seven. That composing in the style of the ancients is extremely difficult, and almost impossible to do.

Since, as it was said, music is an extremely difficult discipline, it follows that it is also very difficult to rediscover how to compose in the Dorian, Phrygian and Lydian tone, and in their dependent and subjugal tones, as well as in the [-f.136v-] Enharmonic tone, if even the ancients, who were more competent than we are in music and closer in time to that age, did not have the courage to do so. Nor do I believe that the chromatic tone may be about to be rediscovered, albeit it is easier, as it has been abandoned for such a long time that we can barely have knowledge of it. Nor do I believe that the Dithyramb may shed much light on it, apart from providing a certain general idea, which, however, cannot be of use to understand the details of the matter, although I believe that it would be also very difficult to restore [-f.137r-] this genre in terms of the way in which it was sung. It may well be that I am mistaken, and that ignorance makes me believe difficult what others endowed with exquisite mind and learning believe to be easy. Allow me to say, however, that I will be convinced of this when I see enharmonic and chromatic compositions. For the time being, I cannot be convinced that the harpsichord makers who split the keys of the diatonic genus are competent enough to revive such genres, firstly because they are not educated and learned enough to know what music is. Dio Chrysostomus [-f.137v-] made this point very well in the twenty-sixth discourse: “Who is inexperienced in music and untrained in singing, harmony and consonance, as well as their rules and laws, will not be able to provide good and documented opinion on music and on musicians' works.” What do these people know about the difference between the tone and the semitone, and between the semitone and the diesis, or how many dieses constitute one tone? If they do not have this knowledge, as “knowledge is to understand something through its causes”, how will they be able to move from half a diesis to half a diesis and then to the semitone? The second reason that underpins my opinion on this matter is this. If such measurements of the intervals excruciated the ears of the ancients, [-f.138r-] when music was in its prime, and they were very learned persons, how will someone barely able to read dare to attempt such a task? If, in the enharmonic genus, one moves from half a diesis to another half a diesis and then to a ditone, which adds up to two tones and a minor semitone, or diesis, which contains the ratio 4:3, and if, in the chromatic genus, one moves from the diesis to the apotome, and the to the trihemitone, which adds up to two tones and a diesis, I cannot see how compositions containing such intervals may be written with ease. Moreover, not one such composition [-f.138v-] has been seen to this day. Also, albeit one moves from the b flat to the b natural in the diatonic genus within the same composition and from a cadence to another, it seems to me that this is not sufficient to say that one has moved out of the tone, as all the cadences belong to the diatonic tone itself. Our musicians are mistaken when the want to create different sorts of tones from such cadences, as they are not different tones, but different cadences, as we said, of the same diatonic tone. However, I will state agree that one moves from one tone to another, when I see that one moves from the diatonic to the chromatic, [-f.139r-] or from the chromatic to the enharmonic. However, this has to be demonstrated in practice, and not merely with words, and to do so is much harder than it is commonly believed, even if they are perfectly familiar with the nature of such tones. Aristotle, in the seventh chapter of the eighth book of his Politics, says that the Dithyramb is in the Phrygian, rather than Dorian tone, and that Philoxenus, an excellent musician of that age, wanted to transfer it to the Dorian, but, that, despite all of his knowledge and intelligence, he was never able to do so: “The Dithyramb clearly seems to be in the Phrygian tone, and those who are knowledgeable [-f.139v-] about such matters offer several proofs, among which is the fact that Philoxenus embarked on a mission to transfer a play that he was writing as Dithyramb to the Dorian mode, but was unable to do so, but it was dragged back to the Phrygian, which suited it the most, by the power of its nature.” I will say in conclusion that, without any knowledge of the music of the ancients, nobody will be able to understand and assess the quality of modern music, since ancient musicians were much more discerning than we are in this matter. Thus, [-f.140r-] one will be able to assess competently the quality of contemporary music by considering what music they considered good and what music they considered bad. However, such matters cannot be understood by someone who does not what music is, since this is absolutely essential. Plato used to say: “It is necessary to know that what is said is something.” Aristotle, in the second chapter of the third book of his Metaphysics, states: “We know individual things through general definitions.” Finally, Cicero, in the third book of his treatise On duties, says: “Anything that is gathered by reason [-f.140v-]on a specific matter must proceed from a definition, in order that one may understand what it is that is being discussed.” Thus, since, as I said, Saint Augustine defined music as the art of composing well, and, since he stated how that must be understood well, who wants to talk about it with competence will have to consider well this definition in the first place.

[-f.141r-] Index of the chapters.

Chapter one. Music is extremely difficult and it can be barely understood by the most learned. Page 1

Chapter two. Ancient music had its own laws, which nobody was allowed to transgress, in order to preserve its decorum and and of good traditions. Page 4

Chapter Three. That music has the power to alter the spirit and provoke the emotions. If it is good inspires the soul to the good, if it is bad to the bad. Page 7

Chapter Four. How these laws of music were broken and spoiled, and how musicians acquired the freedom to compose as they pleased. Page 11

Chapter Five. How learned and reputable persons deplored the miserable state of music and berated the musicians of their times, damning their [-f.141v-] corrupt compositions. Page 15

Chapter Six. The sort of music employed by the ancients. Page 20

Chapter Seven. On the fact that modern music has a greater number of imperfections than the ancient one, and that they are much graver. Page 24

Chapter eight. Continuation of the same topic. Page 29

Chapter nine. The same topic continues. Page 33

Chapter ten. On accents. Page 37

Chapter eleven. On the recitative style. Page 40

Chapter twelve. On the musical air. Page 43

Chapter thirteen. On beating time. Page 44

Chapter fourteen. On the tones and on what they are. Page 47

Chapter fifteen. Whether it is easy to reform the style of singing in our days and to imitate the one of the ancients. Page 50

Chapter sixteen. The same subject continues. Page 54

Chapter seventeen. That it is very difficult to have precise knowledge of [-f.142r-] musical matters and to pass judgement on them. Page 57

Chapter eighteen. That modern music is too effeminate, enervated and lascivious. Page 59

Chapter nineteen. That it is not appropriate to employ such delicate, tender, enervated and lascivious music in churches. Page 62

Chapter twenty. That musical compositions that please the crowd and receive their plaudit are not good. Page 64

Chapter twenty-one. On the character of those who wants to be music practitioners. Page 69

Chapter twenty-two. That the ancients held music in the highest esteem, and why it was censured in later times. Page 69

Chapter twenty-three. On the same topic. Page 73

Chapter twenty-four. On the same topic. Page 81

Chapter twenty-five. That everyone should learn and [-f.142v-]practise music. Page 88

Chapter twenty-six. The same topic continues. Page 92

Chapter twenty-seven. Page 96

Chapter twenty-eighth. The same topic continues. Page 101

Chapter twenty-nine. The same topic continues. Page 104

Chapter thirty. The same topic continues. Page 107

Chapter thirty-one. The ancients employed music in almost all of their performances. Page110

Chapter thirty-two. The same topic continues. Page 113

Chapter thirty-three. The same topic continues. Page 117

Chapter thirty-four. The same topic continues. Page 123

Chapter thirty-five. Page 128

Chapter thirty-six. The same topic continues. Page 132

Chapter thirty-seven. That composing in the style of the ancients is extremely difficult, and almost impossible to do. Page <136>