Discussion

[...of great value] to him were his compositions: and how, through him, a very large part of those things he had already composed—which had been almost buried—had come to light. And while we were discussing many things concerning Music and our friendship with good purpose, there happened to arrive a worthy and honored foreign gentleman, a friend of Master Adriano Adrian Willaert (c. 1490–1562), the influential Flemish composer and Choirmaster of St Mark’s., who had likewise come for the sake of visiting him. This man took great delight in Music, but above all else, he desired to hear discussion regarding the matters of the Art and the Science of music; for many years prior, he had studied Philosophy and had read many Greek and Latin authors who treated the subject of Music. His name was Desiderio, and he was of the Lombard nation, from Pavia. Now, after a long discussion together on various things—he having understood from what had been said who we were, the name of each of us, our surnames, our homelands, and our particular professions, just as we had come to know him fully and informed ourselves of his qualities and condition—this Gentleman turned toward us and began a new discussion in this manner:

DESIDERIO: Truly, Master Gioseffo, I believe—given the desire I have to resolve certain doubts that have been running through my mind for many years now, ever since I saw and studied your Harmonic Institutions Zarlino's Istituzioni harmoniche (1558), one of the most important music theory treatises of the Renaissance. along with many other books on Music—that I could not have encountered a better opportunity than the one I have encountered today. For, remembering many things, it seems to me that everything I read in many authors, and which I continually hear musicians mention, generates such confusion in my soul that I, for my part, do not know how to resolve many things regarding what I ought to hold and believe. And to tell you of one that makes me doubt greatly: I find that Pythagoras, denying that one could pass beyond the Quadrupla Quadrupla: An interval with a 4:1 ratio, equivalent to two octaves.—as you said in Chapter 2 of the Second Part of the aforementioned Institutions—did not agree that those intervals whose form is derived from numbers larger than the Quaternary The "Quaternary" or senario was the mystical number 4 (or 6 in Zarlino's later theory); Pythagoras believed only ratios using 1, 2, 3, and 4 could be consonant. were consonant. This opinion was held by many; for Euclid, the Prince of Mathematicians, in his Introduction to Music, clearly manifests such intervals, saying: Dissonant are those smaller than the Fourth: the Diesis, the Semitone, the Tone, the Minor Third, and the Major Third original Greek: "Διάφωνα δὲ τὰ ἐλάττονα τῶ Διατεσσάρων, Δίεσις, Ἡμιτόνιον, Τόνος, Τριημιτόνιον, Δίτονον". These words mean: But the Dissonant ones are those that are smaller than the Fourth: the Diesis, the Semitone, the Tone, the Trihemitone [minor third], the Ditone [major third]: he having said before: Therefore, the consonances are the Fourth, the Fifth, the Octave, and the like original Greek: "Σύμφωνα μ' οὖν ἐσὶν Διατεσσάρων, Διαπέντε, Διαπασῶν, καὶ τὰ ὅμοια"; that is: Thus the consonances are the Diatessaron, the Diapente, the Diapason, and others similar. And Aristoxenus, the ancient Musician, in the second book of the Musical Elements, says: that we sing many intervals that are smaller than the Fourth, but they are all dissonant. Ptolemy also, at the beginning of Chapter 10 of the first book of his Music, calls the Fourth by the name of the smallest and first consonance original Greek: "ἐλαχίστης, καὶ πρώτης συμφωνίας". From which it is clearly seen that such a thing was held as true among them. And because I see in practice, and understand from you Musicians, that the contrary is true, I do not know in what manner I can believe it. For if Pythagoras and the others who followed him denied such a thing, did they deny it simply as the words sound to us? It does not seem likely to me, given that Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans were learned men of great judgment and elevated genius, and they possessed good senses, as one can believe we do, by which they could certify for themselves whether the matter was in fact as they believed and held it; at which I marvel greatly. Therefore, I greatly desire to hear from you whence such a thing could arise, which to me is so difficult that I cannot help but call it an error whenever I remember it.

ADRIANO: For a long time now, I too have desired to understand this; since I firmly hold, as Signor Desiderio was saying, that the Ancients were deprived neither of the sense of hearing nor of judgment, but that they knew the good and the bad as well as we do. What do you say of this, Master Francesco? Do you also believe this to be true?

FRANCESCO: I hold it for certain that the Ancients had as much knowledge of the good and the bad as we have. And perhaps, as those who gave themselves over to speculation much more than we do, they had their senses more purified; but for what reason they did this, I would be very grateful to learn from Master Gioseffo.

CLAUDIO: Understanding this thing would also be a singular favor and contentment to me. And I praise God for having brought me to this place today.

GIOSEFFO: Signor Desiderio, although this matter is very difficult and a burden too heavy for my shoulders, and a thing...