The Platonic Agenda of Monteverdi's Seconda Pratica: A Case Study from the Eighth Book of

Madrigals
Author(s): Geoffrey Chew
Source: Music Analysis, Vol. 12, No. 2 (Jul., 1993), pp. 147-168
Published by: Wiley
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/854270
Accessed: 01-05-2015 11:22 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/854270?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Music Analysis.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
GEOFFREY CHEW

THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF MONTEVERDI'S

SECONDA PRATICA: A CASE STUDY FROM THE
EIGHTH BOOK OF MADRIGALS

INTRODUCTION

Monteverdi's late works have often seemed difficult.As early as the

madrigalsof Book V, the elegantease ofthe madrigalsof Books III and IV,
which are generallyplaced at the centre of the Monteverdicanon, may
seem to have been jettisoned in favour of an over-ascetic,rationalist
aesthetics.And commentatorsoftenfind the compositionsin Book VIII
(1638) puzzlinglyfragmented.This is particularlytrue of the 'warlike'
pieces featuringwhat Monteverdicalls the genereconcitato,
which contain
lengthypassages articulatingchordsof G or C major forbars on end. The
clearly demarcated formal structureof the madrigals in this book is
interpretedby Gary Tomlinson, in his book on Monteverdi,in termsof a
new aesthetics,based on pictorialrepresentationand influencedby the
poet Marino:

Monteverdi's new mimetic method [as exemplifiedin the

Combattimento
di Tancredie Clorindaand the Book 7 madrigals]is ...
an ingeniousattempt
to turnthestaticMarinistemphasisofimageto
spirited ends.... It portrays
representational notan object,an image,
orevenan imageofan actionbuttheactionitself.1

I shall returnto the nature of the mimeticrepresentationemployed in

Book VIII by Monteverdibelow, whereI shall arguethatthe natureof the
patronage to which Monteverdi was respondingin the pieces in this
volume explainsmuch of the imagery,relatingthemto ancientratherthan
avant-gardemodels.2However,beforeI do thisit will be worthexamining
aspects of the formalconstructionof one of the Book VIII madrigals,'Hor
che'l ciel e la terra',in orderto testthe justiceof the commonlyaccepted
verdict.

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2,1993 147

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 GEOFFREY CHEW

TONAL TYPES, MELODIC DESCENTS AND THE LINKING OF

FORMAL SECTIONS, ILLUSTRATED IN 'HOR CHE'L CIEL'

On a previous occasion, I have used the term 'prototonality'to referto

Monteverdi'sstandardmethodsofgeneratingmusicalformin themusiche
composed in the first decade of the seventeenthcentury,almost a
generationearlierthan the publicationof Book VIII.3 Most typically,there
is a frameworkof long continuous diatonic stepwise descents in these
compositions,in one of the upper voices of a basic trio texture,however
many the voices for which the compositionmay be scored: a two-voice
texturewill implythe omissionof structurally essentialvoices, and a four-
or more-voicetexture,the addition of structurally redundantdoublings.
The procedureis illustratedin simple schematicform,since the descents
are not rendered'expressive'and remainalmost completelyschematic,in
the firstritornellofromAct I ofL'Orfeo(1607) (Ex. 1).
As Ex. 1 shows,such diatonicstepwisedescents,whichbreakback from
time to time,may in some pieces, at least, governmore than the surface
level of the music and generate 'prototonal' structuresanalogous to
Schenkerianbackgrounds:in music of the earlyseventeenthcenturythey
usually do this by articulating,at a more basic level, single 'elaborated'
(concealed) long-rangeperfect-fifth melodic descentsin one of the upper
voices that definethe dominantand finalof so-called 'tonal types'.4The
dominantis the upper limitof a perfectfifthof this type,and the final
becomes its lower limit.Here the elaboratedperfectfifthdescends, in the
movementas a whole, throughthe perfectfifthfromA (dominantof the
tonal type) to D (finalof the tonal type). (Incidentally,these perfect-fifth
descents may be abbreviatedin some compositions,notablythose in so-
called highclefs(chiavette).)
In schematicstructuressuch as these,and in the further elaborationsof
them that underlie longer compositions such as madrigals, form is
generatedby means of caesuras; and such caesuras are createdin various
ways. Subsidiary descents may cadence on notes other than the finalof the
dominating tonal type; these again normally fill perfectfifths,but also
prolong individual tones of the primarytonal type(see Ex. 1, ends of bs 2
and 3). The cadences articulatingsuch descents allude to 'foreign'tonal
typesby prolongingthe dominantor finalof those tonal types,and they
thus generateformratheras modulationdoes in tonal music, especiallyin
more extendedpieces. Anotherprocedurecapable ofgeneratingformis the
breakingback of the basic melodic descentaround whichthe composition
is constructed;this is anyhownecessaryif the melodic line is to remain
withinitsnormalrange.Such breakingback mayifthe composerwishesbe
put to expressiveuse; for example, the linear descent breaks back at the
midpointof 'O Mirtillo',fromBook V, and is the occasion therefor an
expressiveoutburst('O bellezza mortale!').
Thus Monteverdihad establishedproceduresin the firstdecade of the

148 MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF MONTEVERDI'S SECOND PRA TICA

Ex. 1 RitornellofromL'Orfeo,withGraph IndicatingUnderlyingMelodic

Descents

- f I w Ol
iI
AllI
_
,f
I
. J-- ,O I-
--
SO.I

r 2
r r r_ Tr- jP

r/07

5j- 4 - 3 - -2-

A mld

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993 149

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 GEOFFREY CHEW

seventeenthcenturyfor reconcilingsatisfactorily coherentmusical struc-

turewitha considerabledegree of variety;and therewould be no obvious
reasons to justifyhis abandoningthem,even late in his career,when (as in
theseBook VIII pieces) he was seekingever-increasing musicalcontrast.
Monteverdi'ssettingof Petrarch'ssonnet 'Hor che'l ciel', one of the
most substantialcompositionsin Book VIII, is dividedintotwopartes,each
withnumeroussubdivisions.*Bars 1-58 of theprimaparteare governedas
a whole by an A minor tonal type.5(I shall use the terms 'major' and
'minor' to referto tonal typeswitha major or minorthirdabove the final,
respectively;they do not imply correspondencewith modem major or
minor scales. Nor do they adequately distinguish're-mi-fa'tonal types
from 'mi-fa-sol' tonal types, a refinementwhich does not affectthe
argumentin thisarticle.')The firstfourversesof the textset the scene, and
are set with a simple perfect-fifth melodic descent in the upper voices
bars
lastingtwenty-three (see Ex. 2a). This descentcloses on A, the finalof
the tonal type. With the exclamations'Veglio, penso, ardo', the upper-
voice registerrises an octave, over risingfourthsin the bass. But even this
ascent is based on a descendingperfectfourth,A-E, witha Bbneighbour
note to the A, whichcontributesto the suggestionof an imperfectclose in
a D minortonal type (see Ex. 2b). Then an expanded descent replicates
Ex. 2b, but it is transposeddown a fourthand thus once again articulates
the originalA minortonal type.It is constructedon the same exclamations
and over the same bass a fourthlower; it takes up the E goal and runs
down to a half-closeon B (bs 30-44: see Ex. 2c). Anotherdescent,now
alludingto an E minortonal type,takesup the B and runson to E (bs 45-
51: see Ex. 2d). The whole section closes with anotherreplication,this
time of Ex. 2d transposedup a fourthinto an A minortonal type,taking
up the E goal and continuingto A (bs 52-8: see Ex. 2e). These are
precisely the procedures adopted in earlier pieces: cadential descents
replicate one another,using variationaltechniques, and each cadential
descentproceedsfromthe note reachedthroughthepreviousone.
Withinthe continuousdescent underlyingthe whole of the firstfifty-
eight bars of this madrigal, clear formal divisions are created. The
descending line highlightsthe cadential caesuras at the ends of Ex. 3a,
c and d by breakingback an octave. And Monteverdiclearlyplanned bs
52-8 (graphedin Ex. 2e) as a transposedvariationof bs 42-51 (Ex. 2d);
and bs 30-41 (Ex. 2c) as a variationof bs 24-9, expanded to roughlytwice
the originallength(Ex. 2b). Example 2c shows thatthe bass G and C are
each prolongedwith simple 'applied' perfect-fifth descents,subordinated
to the overall progressionwhile each suggesting'foreign' tonal types.
However, the examples show also that other surfacefigurationis added:
the c~' in the middle voice at the beginningof the example, and the ci'
towardsthe end, are prolongedwithturnsinvolvingneighbournotes. And
* The text of this madrigaland its translationare given in an Appendix to Jeffrey
Kurtzman's articlebelow: see
p.193. Ed.

150 MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2,1993

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF MONTEVERDI'S SECOND PRA TICA

Ex. 2 Monteverdi,'Hor che'l ciel'

I -A dcscCnt h 1)-23 'A-inor tonl
t)n
underlyin

iiunidelying h 24- (')D-minor tonal t pc'

b) A-I dcseccn

F-

c) -B1dcscc itunderving bs 30-41 (A-minor tomnal

type')

1d)B- undCrILhin s 42-5 1 (

cCsCnCt -nofnortonal tNpc')

4-'.

) E
/_----,-
--un
7Z~
- X,

-
~
.
"
A i r
L
c) I-A >dC CI t1S5 2-8 (A-minor otoil t1vpc'1
crlilC g

A /) I I

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993 151

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 GEOFFREY CHEW

the fy over the bass d is prolonged with a diminished-fifth descent

essentiallysubordinateto the 'G minor'descentwhichensues.
The ensuingsectionof theprimaparte,fromb.59, withthe text'Guerra
e il mio stato',beginswithan abruptchange to a G major sonority,which
seems not to be preparedor established,eithermelodicallyor harmonically
and exceptional,way,in that
(thispassage is also constructedin a different,
it is not based on a continuous foregrounddescent but ratheron con-
tinuous arpeggiationsof a singlechord). In the terminologyof Christoph
Bernhard,the 'modulation by disjunction'which introducesthis section
may representa 'jump' (from'one authenticor plagal mode to anotherin
the middle of a composition').' But this term, while giving the dis-
continuityits due, over-emphasizesit, forthe sectionsare stilllinked:the
E-A descent in bs 52-8 prolongsits initiale2 by articulatingan A minor
triad, and descends as a whole to a prolongationof d articulatinga G
major triad at b.59 (see Ex. 3a). (Relationships between successive
sections,in which the finalof the second is one degree below that of the
first,occur in Monteverdiat least as earlyas 1607 in L'Orfeo; thus this
procedure,too, was farfromnew in Book VIII.) The structuralcadences in
thissectionare again based on thevariationprinciple:the first,at b.75, is a
B minor cadence (Ex. 3b), and is varied in transpositionas an E minor
cadence at the end (Ex. 3c). But instead of being linked togetherin a
continuousmelodic descentusing perfectfifths, as mighteasilyhave been
done accordingto traditionalprinciples(Ex. 3d), these descentsare each
abbreviatedto a minorthird;the continuousconnectionbetweenthem is
thus severed, and instead the G major sonorityis arpeggiatedto create
compensatinglinks(Ex. 3e).
These remarksillustratethe tonal types used in the compositionsof
Book VIII and the linksbetweenthem,viewed froman empiricalpoint of
view; admittedly,many of the pieces in the collectionhave a far simpler
structurethanthis.However,the tonal typesappear to be deployedalso for
symbolicreasons. Beforethesecan be accountedfor,some historicalissues
willrequirediscussion.

THE HABSBURG PATRONS OF BOOK VIII AND THEIR REQUIRE-

MENTS

In her thesisof 1989, MargaretMabbett has arguedthatBook VIII closely

reflectsthe musical taste of the courtsof the Habsburgs at Vienna and the
Gonzagas (who were related in marriageto the Habsburgs) at Mantua;8
and indeed Monteverdiwas denounced in an undated Venetiandocument
as a Habsburg agent and traitor.9 Both courtscultivatedmadrigalsscored
for large forces,with much varietyin texture.Unfortunately, the corres-
pondence of this stylewithnon-Venetianpatronagedoes not seem quite
straightforward, quite similarto much
since thesemadrigalsare stylistically

152 MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF MONTEVERDI'S SECOND PRA TICA

Ex. 3 Monteverdi,'Hor che'l ciel', primaparte

a) Tonal relationshipbetween bs 1-58 and 59ff.

8-8

tonal
h) D-B dcscent underlyngs 68-75 ('B-mninor
tylc't

C) (-Fdescent
E underlyin~g hs 87-96 ('-minor tonal type')

dt)Traditional link possihtc bt\twcinh) ind c) above

e) Actual links betweenI ) and c) throughthe G-nmaorsonority

5 - 5 5 -5

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993 153

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 GEOFFREY CHEW

of Monteverdi'ssacred outputforVenice, whichcannothave been written

forHabsburg patrons.Moreover,it is well knownthat the Combattimento
di Tancredie Clorindain Book VIII was itselfwrittenin the firstplace fora
Venetian patron. Nevertheless,as will become clear below, Habsburg
preferencesdo seem prominentin Book VIII, whichwas commissionedby
the Habsburg Emperor Ferdinand II. In February 1637, before the
publication of the volume, he died; Monteverdi altered the dedication
(dated 1 September1638) to referto FerdinandIII, his son and successor,
while alluding appreciativelyto the generosityof 'Ferdinand, the great
fatherof Your Majesty' who 'gave me somethingof an authoritative
passportforcommitting[thesecompositions]to the press'.'x(Table 1 gives
a chronologyofthe eventsmentionedin thisarticle.)

Table 1 Chronology

1600 G.M. Artusi,

L'Artusi(Venice:Vincenti)

1607 Monteverdi,Scherzimusicali(withG.C. Monteverdi,Dichiaratione)

1607 Monteverdi,
L'Orfeo

1618-48 YearsWar
The Thirty

1634 BattleofN$rdlingen

1635 Peace ofPrague

1636 at Regensburg
Electoralmeeting

(22 December:FerdinandErnstelectedKingoftheRomans)

1637 February: II dies

Ferdinand

1638 BookVIII published

dateofMonteverdi's
(1 September: dedication)

Several of the Book VIII madrigalspraise Ferdinand,and 'Ogni amante

e guerrier'specificallynames 'Fernando Ernesto' - that is, Ferdinand
Ernst,or Ferdinand III. It is usually assumed accordinglythatthe textof
thislattermadrigal,originallywrittenby Rinucciniin praiseof HenryIV of
France, had been revisedafterthe death of FerdinandII to agree withthe
new dedication. However, the assumptionis unnecessary.Ferdinand II

154 MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF 1MONTEVERDI'S SECOND PRA TICA

had been engaged in hostilitiescontinuouslysince the beginningof the

ThirtyYears War in 1618, and one ofhis chiefconcernsthroughouthis life
was the securingof the imperialsuccession forhis son. At the Battle of
NOrdlingenin 1634 the Swedes were decisivelydefeatedunder the future
FerdinandIII, alreadyKing of Hungary,who won greathonour.Indeed he
had won a lance-runningcontest,and withit greatpersonalpopularity,at
the age of nineteen:even beforethe 1630s, thishad been politicallyof the
greatestservice to Ferdinand II. NOirdlingenand the Peace of Prague
whichfollowedin 1635 at last broughtFerdinandII success in his aim. In
1636 he called a meetingof the imperialElectorsat Regensburg,and they
elected his son King of the Romans unanimouslyon 22 December of that
year,makinghis successionto the imperialtitlea formality afterhis father's
death. The occasional pieces in Monteverdi'sBook VIII as published fit
the requirementsof this Electoral meetingclosely,withtheirglorification
of arms, Ferdinand's dynasticties with Spain ('Io che nell'otio nacqui')
and the imperialcrown ('Altri canti d'Amor'), and, above all, with their
personal praise of the futureFerdinand III, includingreferencesto his
youthfulsuccess in arms ('Io che nell'otio nacqui'). Ferdinand II would
have requiredall thesethingsto be celebratedat themeeting."
If the majorityof the pieces in Book VIII are likelyto have been
composed or revisedforthe 1636 RegensburgElectoralmeeting,thenthey
should be construedas havingbeen intendedas an elaboratehomage to
FerdinandIII, even beforethe death of his father,and no revisionsof texts
or music would have been required afterthe elder Ferdinand's death.
Indeed the original purpose of the collection not only remained
appropriateafterthe accession ofFerdinandIII, but was enhancedby it.

THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF BOOK VIII

This line of reasoningthrowsinteresting

lighton Monteverdi'swell-known
commentsin the prefaceto Book VIII. He distinguishes'threeprincipal
passions ... of the soul, namely anger, moderation, and humility or
supplication',12 and maps these onto a threefoldscheme of genera,
concitato,temperatoand molle. In an importantrecent article, Barbara
Russano Hanning has shown thatthese threegenera are derivedfromthe
ancient and medieval Byzantine ethos theory of Boethius, Cleonides,
AristidesQuintilianusand Manuel Bryennius,via the sixteenth-century
writerGiorgio Valla; these writersmap a threefolddivision of ethos as
'diastaltic' (exciting), 'hesychastic' (moderate, soothing) and 'systaltic'
(depressing) onto the affectionsof elevation or fury,tranquillityand
dejection or excessive desire, respectively, and also onto a threefold tax-
onomy of genres - tragedy,paeans and lamentations.'3
Some of this older theory suggests that the diastaltic ethos, and its
opposite the systaltic, represent undesirable extremes between which the

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993 155

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 GEOFFREY CHEW

hesychasticshould moderate. Clearly,however,this is not Monteverdi's

intention:his prefacesuggestsratherthatthe fullrangeof affections should
be exploredin music. One would thereforeexpect,particularly in view of
the obviously programmatic'bellicose' style of some of the madrigali
that all threegenera should be clearlyexemplifiedin the music.
guerrieri,
Nevertheless,it mustbe admittedthatsome aspects of thistheoryof styles
are easier to relate to the music than others;and that the ways in which
boundaries are set between the various styles, especially between the
temperato and molle,are not easy to trace in everyinstance.The following
remarksshouldbe read withthisqualificationin mind.
For the concitatogenus,Monteverdirefersboth to Plato's injunctionto
'take thatharmoniathatwould fittingly imitatethe utterances... of a brave
man who is engaged in warfare',1' and to the suitabilityof the pyrrhic
rhythmfor the same purpose. Plato and ancient Greek music had long
been in his consciousness. Giulio Cesare Monteverdi,in the so-called
Dichiarationeappended to the Scherzimusicali,for example, had quoted
Plato as his brother'sauthorityin 1607;'" and Monteverdi'suse of Plato
had been a point at issue in the controversialattacks by Artusi at the
beginningof the century.' Moreover,Monteverdi'suse of ancient Greek
modes is fulsomelyattested (though in a confusingand unverifiable
account) by Giulio Strozziin the 1630 librettoto the Proserpinarapitaset
by Monteverdi."7
In the documentsclosestto the composerhimself,includingBook VIII,
the authorityof Plato is invokedto lend authoritative weightto the claim
thatin the secondapraticathe music is to be the servantof the textand not
vice versa. Yet the political aims outlined a moment ago for the
compositionsin Book VIII suggestthat Monteverdimay here have had
another, more politicallyfocused, use of Plato's ideas in mind. More
specifically,he may have envisaged a musical parallel to the mythical
Renaissanceimage ofAstraea.In a well-knownstudyin iconology,Frances
Yates has traced the use of this image as a symbolof empire,mainlyin
England; Astraeawas a personification of divineJustice,and her presence
had once blessed the earthduringthe Age of Gold.'" But she subsequently
withdrew to the constellation of Virgo in the stars. Her image in
Renaissance art signifiedher returnat last in the person of modem rulers
who would inauguratea new Age of Gold and a new just dispensation.
This image thus became a sign of the legitimacyand fitnessto rule of
imperialrulers.
For Book VIII, Plato seems to have supplied an equivalent mythical
image of the ideal statesmanshipunderlyingthe legitimacyof a rulerto
govern, in specifically musical terms. In the Republic (not the Rhetoricas
Monteverdi says'9), he describes the measures required if the ideal state is
to be purged of undesirable elements, imposing three specific technical
requirementson music in particularso thatit may servethese 'purgative'
ends.20 First, 'polyharmonic' instruments- those able to encompass wide

156 MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF MONTEVERDI'S SECOND PRA TICA

rangesand severalmodes, as well as wind instruments - mustbe rejected,

in favour of the lyre and kithara:the instrumentsof Apollo are to be
favouredover those of Marsyas.2' Secondly, on the matterof rhythm,he
asserts through Socrates that certain (unspecified) rhythmicfeet are
appropriate to liberality.22 And thirdly,drawing on traditionalethical
qualities linkedwiththe Greek modes, he proposes the eliminationof all
but the Dorian and Phrygianharmoniai,which alone can express the
sentimentsof a brave man who is freeand engagedin worksof peace, and
constrainedsince engagedin warfare,respectively.23
These requirementscorrespondpreciselyto the specificationsof the
Book VIII madrigalsas theywereprintedin thevolume,even thosesuch as
the Combattimento di Tancredie Clorindaand the Ballo delleingratewhich
are known or presumed to have been composed much earlier and for
patronsotherthanFerdinandII or FerdinandIII. Thus, in agreementwith
the first of the features specified by the Platonic Socrates, all the
accompanyinginstrumentsthat Monteverdi specifies are stringinstru-
ments: violins, viols and chitarrone,which presumablyrepresentthe
'instruments ofApollo'. Even the infernalscenes in the Ballo delleingrateat
the conclusion of Book VIII avoid the traditionaluse of trombones(as
used in L'Orfeo,forexample) or otherwind instruments.(It is significant
in the presentcontextthatthe originalversionof the Ballo delleingrateat
the Gonzaga weddingfestivities in 1608 is knownto have included wind
instrumentsas well as strings,as one would expect.24) The only instru-
mentalcontrastwithinthevolumeis betweendifferent stringensembles.
The rhythmicfiguresutilised in the collection, on the other hand,
reflecta contrast between 'warfare' and 'supplication' which roughly
correspondsto the affectionsassociated by Plato with the Phrygianand
Dorian harmoniairespectively.For these,Monteverdichooses the ancient
Greek pyrrhicand spondaic feet.In ancientGreek metre,the pyrrhicfoot
comprised two short syllables; pyrrhicas a poetic genre referredas
Monteverdihimselfsays to 'le saltationi,belliche,concitate',25and ancient
writerssuch as Ammianus Marcellinus among others (alluding to Plato
and supplyingthe details he omits) gloss these 'warlikedances' as the
demanding but essential basic militarytrainingto be undergone by
emperorsand nobles - and, significantly, the masteryof thisbasic training
is presentedby the ancientauthoritiesas a criterionof the fitnessof these
leaders to conduct militarycampaigns.26Ammianus Marcellinus, for
example, praisingthe education of the emperorJulian,says: 'When this
philosopher,in the capacity of a prince, was forced to practise basic
militarytrainingand learn the art of rhythmicmovementthroughthe
pyrrhic. . . he oftenused to referto Plato'.27 As is well known,Monteverdi
representsthe successionsof shortsyllablesmakingup pyrrhicfeetthrough
rapid semiquaverrepetitionsof the bass notes, as is illustratedin Plate 1,
and draws particularattentionto this method of representing the pyrrhic
rhythm.28 (MargaretMabbett has argued plausiblythat he is here taking

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993 157

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
0-4
oo Ar
oc~

. . .t3O-.
.. .r~o -______- , +-- - . AL_? . -
__
..UA-.

I
O
-awn- - -- _
_..-
..-. -P
"-we

f~E-Cf 4 rp !U!
&JW~~
..d A.
-?C -~
e tri ut db.
:?O=
.
""A - 2 - -" * optuq
Oi. ,L?
l,
0
L L
_ _. .
-.- - _ _- _-
__O, O
.. _br-o.
__
z>, ----,

xI
>I)
v,,-

t.. . .. . ...

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF MONTEVERDI'S SECOND PRA TICA

issue with the long held bass notes in similarpassages by the composer
Giovanni Giacomo Arrigoni,who also dedicatedworksto FerdinandIII in
the 1630s.29)
The spondaic foot,on the otherhand, whichMonteverdiopposes to the
pyrrhicas the rhythmappropriateto supplication,comprises two long
syllables (spondaic verse being composed entirelyof long syllables).
Strozzi's account of Monteverdi'suse of Greek music, alreadymentioned,
also notes the soothingeffectof spondaic metre.But the use of spondaic
rhythmis farless pointed- it is farless of a madrigalism,in otherwords-
thantheuse ofthe pyrrhic;it is not alwaysclear,in the absence oftherapid
repeatedsemiquavers,whetherMonteverdiintendeda referenceto it.30
The thirdaspect of these pieces to be considered- at somewhatmore
length than the instrumentationor rhythm- is their modality. It is
extraordinary that this has never been investigatedin Book VIII, in the
light of the featuresalready mentioned and of the unusually restricted
number of tonal typesemployed.All concitato'warlike'sectionsfeaturing
rapid repeatedsemiquavers(no doubt standingfor'pyrrhicrhythm')in the
madrigaliguerrieriof Book VIII are in G major or C majortonal types(that
is, withthe major thirdabove the final); apart fromthis,D minorand A
minor tonal types predominatethroughoutthe volume. The sections of
music usingthesetonal typesare generallymore subdued thanthoseusing
the major tonal types; it may be that theyare intendedto stand forthe
molle,'supplicatory'sections,and thattheirrhythmshould be regardedas
'spondaic'. And, beside these, the Combattimentodi Tancredi e Clorinda and
the firstsection of 'Io che nell'otio nacqui' have passages in a G minor
tonal type, with a single-flatsignature;indeed, tonal types with a flat
signatureoccur only here among the madrigaliguerrieri.31(In this way,
incidentally,thoughscarcelyintentionally, a major-minorbinaryopposition
of tonal typesis mapped on to the pyrrhic-spondaic binaryoppositionof
genera intendedby Monteverdi.)This choice of tonal types,too, appears
to followa Platonicprogramme.
Withinthe volume, the only internalevidence explicitlyrelatingtonal
typesto affectiveintentionoccurs in the Combattimento, in rubricswhich
are unfortunately omitted in Malipiero's edition. Three short ritornelli
precede the 'guerra',fromb.58, b.80 and b.106 respectively; the first,in a
G major tonal type,is headed 'passaggio bellicoso grave'; the second, in a
G minor tonal type with a single-flatsignature,is headed 'passaggio piui
ristretto',and this is repeated as the third(now headed simply'passagio
[sic]ristretto').The positioningoftheserubricsis shownin the facsimilein
Plate 2. Althoughthe workhad been performedin 1624, as Monteverdi
states in the preface, all the pieces in Book VIII would presumably have
been edited to agree with the programme of the volume and to harmonise
conflictingitems within it; one of the ways in which the piece was certainly
modified forthe occasion has already been noted above.
The same contrast of affectionsis probably intended in 'Io che nell'otio

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993 159

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 o-4
4--J

b1
4--J
r,n ylatimcn:adi Tancredie Clodrn 13 Violinj

P *-r.-
d C
TToCDeo
p.fondn
. ". . . .. .:1.Norr.ch..ne? C?iodctc,c
no
ncchb
d'dvnc
U cheCorind.
Tcncredi del
Trotto Th:carooprecr
crnalo.
b/)

C ? iffiio rift-et:o
rzs -9
ai-.c6t en

l.ca r e
etor
"
rzs f
Jpieg
o, igch'indi'
.
- .Jfim.e
-T.IT.*t
tnrgos

- . r-'-ua
lafrnal
Sp cndadelfofco
2,'h
[..u
* - * - *

Chedxrni foone,'choclla Grolge grida,Oru cheporre Pfincipiod -k f

Get
0 Corredoi (adLpore) < guGrrme mortCGarae morte
u
hnrai (dife) Io nonrifirodarlatifelei cerchieTrnma
-L j
NevolTancredich'cbbc
mitende.
;q .2pievedutoil
fuonrmio var cauallo e rende e impug vn I'atre
m -, ,*-
iLfrroacuto,&aguzan lorgoglo,e Iitraaccende.

4-J
ro ?-- fgobn
be lcotogrne

I
Z-
T".,*
-*
zffaggio
pitiLcto

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF MONTEVERDI'S SECOND PRA TICA

nacqui', the biographicalsecondaparte of the large piece in honour of

Ferdinand III, 'Ogni amante e guerrier'.This begins with a 'ristretto'
sectionin a G minortonal typewitha B6 signature,describinghis earlylife
of pastoral ease, which changes to a 'bellicoso grave' G major tonal type
with a B? signatureat the point where Love makes of the protagonistan
amanteguerrier and he becomes a bass virtuoso.The evidenceof thesetwo
pieces suggests,then, that the compromisebetween the G major and D
minortonal typeswhicha G minortonal typepresumablyoffersmayhave
correspondedto the temperato genus withinthe particularprogrammeof
Book VIII.
To understand the relationshipbetween these tonal types and the
Platonic harmoniai,sixteenth-century interpretations of the harmoniaineed
to be considered. For the sake of convenience,I quote the version of
GiovanniBardi, whichwas derivedfromthatof GirolamoMei, the princi-
pal contributorto an adequate understandingof the topic. Example 4
reproduces in tabular form Bardi's version of the Greek modes, from
Claude Palisca's translationof the Camerata documents.32 Example 4a
shows the harmoniai,that is, the different octave species, at theirproper
notatedpitches.The Dorian harmoniahas A as its mesi,the note whichin
Greek theoryrepresentsthe centralpoint of the tonal system,while the
Phrygianharmoniahas G; it seems to have been assumed by Monteverdiin
this volume that the mesj corresponded to the final in Renaissance
practice." Each of these two modes extendsthroughwhat one may term
'white-note'scales betweenA and a, and G and g, respectively;and thus
the ancient Dorian and Phrygianbecome assimilableto A minor and G
major tonal types respectively.In 'Hor che'l ciel', these two tonal types
dominate successively,as can be seen in Ex. 3. They provide the tonal
centresforsuccessivesectionsprojectingeach ofthe opposed affections.
Several pieces in the book are based on D minor and C major tonal
types;the low-clefG major tonal typeexemplifiedin the warlikepassages
in 'Hor che'l ciel' has a counterpartin a high-clefC major tonal typeof
some other pieces. Example 4a shows that these D minor and C major
tonal types represent,on the same basis as already outlined,the Hypo-
dorian and Hypophrygianmodes respectively;the use of these modes as
substitutesfor the Dorian and Phrygianis presumablyjustifiedby the
congruenceof the names, togetherwiththe assumptionusual at the period
that modes a perfectfifthapart, sharingthe same structureof tones and
semitoneswithinthe modal octave,should be regardedas authentic-plagal
counterpartsto one another.So withinBook VIII the Platonic two-mode
prescriptionis transmutedinto a four-modesystemwithhigh-clefand low-
clef equivalences, no doubt for the sake of variety.The same need for
varietyno doubt governs the choice of the subsidiary tonal types illustrated
in Exs 2 and 3 above, which seem not to bear any symbolic significance.
These arguments lead to a more problematic question. Example 4a
gives the octave-species of each mode, but (except in the case of the

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993 161

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 GEOFFREY CHEW

Ex. 4a) The Greek modes accordingto Bardi, fromDiscorsomandatoa

GiulioCaccinidettoRomanosoprala Musica antica,e'1cantarbene,Florence,
BibliotecaMarucelliana,MS A 287, tomo 1, f. 6r, as notated

T T S T T
"
Ipodorio I pofrigio Ipoly io Dorio Frigio

- *-M

Lyd io Mixolydio

b) The same version of the modes, as sounding (these diagramsfrom

Claude V. Palisca, The FlorentineCamerata: DocumentaryStudies and
[New Haven: Yale University
Translations Press, 1989])

Ipofligio Ipolydio Dorio Frigio

Ipodorio

M M

T S
Lydio Mixolydio

Dorian, whichis the centralmode withinthe system)it does not represent

the actual sounds of the notes constitutingeach mode, forthe systemis
also a system of tonoi,that is, levels of transposition.(The difference
between a harmoniaand a tonosis analogous to the differencebetween a
mode - the arrangementof tones and semitoneswithinan octave, say
major or minor- and a key- the pitchlevel at whicha mode is positioned,
say C or D.) Example 4b shows thatthe Dorian sounds betweenA and a,
at its notatedpitch;the Phrygianmode, on the otherhand, thoughnotated
between G and g, is transposedup a major third,and sounds between B

162 MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2,1993

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF MONTEVERDI'S SECOND PRATICA

and b. The sequence of notatedmodes fallsstepwisefromHypodorianto

Mixolydian,but the sequence of sounding modes rises stepwisethrough
the same sequence. If Monteverdihad been followingancient practice
literally,as interpreted
by his contemporaries,he would have intendedthe
warlikepassages to rise fromA minorto B major as sounding,ratherthan
to fallto G major,as theyare notated.
The idea thatlarge partsof these madrigals- all the warlikesections-
should be transposedup a major third,while the rest should remain at
pitch,may seem attractively symbolical,and mightseem to be supported
also by the notationalpeculiaritiesof these pieces in the originalpart-
books, whereseparatesectionsare usually (thoughnot withoutexception)
marked offwith barlines. But these sections are by no means all clearly
demarcated from one another; and in works such as 'Gira il nemico
insidioso' in this volume, the idea that Monteverdi's Hypodorian and
Hypophrygiancould have been intended to functionas super-lowclefs
ratherthannormalhighclefsseems out of the question,owingto the vocal
ranges that would be required. It must be concluded, therefore,that no
esoteric transpositionswere intended. The more general point may be
made, thathoweverclose any 'neoclassical' imitationremainsto its model,
it must at some point yield to modernpractice;and Monteverdiknew as
well as any modern scholar that pastiche of ancientpracticeis ultimately
impossible.It is here, then, that we encounterthe limitof Monteverdi's
neoclassicism.

CONCLUSION

Thus the aestheticand mimeticmodel on which Book VIII is principally

based - at least in its publishedform- is betterdescribedas neoclassical
than avant-garde;most specifically,it is Platonic ratherthan Marinist.In
these respects,it may well have been atypical of northernItalian taste.
Even for contemporarypatrons with neoclassical requirements,the
programmemay not have been generallyappropriate;the 1630 document
already quoted above suggests that Monteverdi was prepared in other
circumstancesto 're-create'otherGreek modes, the Phrygian,Lydian and
Mixolydian,no doubt usingothertonaltypes.34
But this conclusion in turn prompts some questions concerningthe
manner in which the collection was presented to the public. A facile
assumptionmightbe made thatMonteverdiwishedto make the collection
as widelyavailable as possible: it was afterall printedand thus availableto
anyone able and willingto pay forit, and one mightassume thatprinted
books by their very nature imply increased if not universal accessibility,
compared with manuscripts. The numerous performance indications also
seem to suggest that Monteverdi was clarifyingpossible difficultiesin the
collection for the uninitiated: these directions appear especially in the

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993 163

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 GEOFFREY CHEW

Combattimento di Tancredie Clorinda(forexample,'soave arcate', pizzicato

indications,or 'lunga voce in piano' over Clorinda's finalphrase35).Yet at
16 lire or more (the advertised price for this volume in Vincenti's
catalogues36) Book VIII was considerablymore expensivethan any other
collectionon the marketand roughlyfourtimesmore expensivethanmost
comparable madrigalcollections;it does not look like a volume that was
intendedor expectedto sell.
So althoughthe volume was printed,in importantrespectsits contents
have the characteristicsof a 'secret art for the initiated',perhaps even a
new musicareservata. Not onlythe function,but also the technicalfeatures
of the compositions in the volume are defined by the programmatic
requirementsof the noble patrons. As a gracefulcomplimentto these
patrons,theseare both advertisedand keptsecret:theyare hintedat by the
evident special status of the book and its contents,and the elaborate
performanceindicationsunderlinethe impressionthatthis repertoryis in
everyway out of the ordinary.Yet in a number of ways a full under-
standingof the repertoryis concealed fromthe profanumvulgus.And by
the same tokenbuyersof the volume are obliged to accept its contentson
the termsforcedupon themby the composerand thepatron.
Moreover, Monteverdiseems to be using the concept of the seconda
praticain the same - ultimatelymanipulative- way: it,too, is placed within
the service of an esoteric allegorical programme,and its prestige (the
reason, no doubt, forFerdinand's commissionin the firstplace) and that
of the Platonism of this programmereinforceone another.Theoretically
purelyoratoricaland rhetorical,the secondapraticawas now put to a rather
different use in the service of the classicizingflatteryof a noble patron.
This means thatany assumptionthatthe secondapraticawas finallydefined
duringthe firstdecade of the centurymay well require modification.By
the 1630s, Monteverdimayhave thoughtthe dissonancetechniqueusually
singledout as its essentialcomponentas less importantthan the esoteric,
Platonic - and thus politicallycharged- techniquesdesignedto flatterhis
noble patrons.

NOTES

1. Gary Tomlinson,Monteverdi and the End of the Renaissance(Berkeley:

UniversityofCalifornia
Press,1987),p.203.
2. It shouldof coursebe pointedout thatneoclassicismand avantgardismare
not necessarily
mutually eitherin the earlyseventeenth
exclusivecategories,
centuryorat anyotherperiod.
3. See 'The Perfections of Modern Music: ConsecutiveFifthsand Tonal
Coherencein Monteverdi', MusicAnalysis, Vol. 8, No.3 (October1989),
pp.247-74.The termshouldnot be construedas an attemptto viewpre-
Baroquemusicteleologically,in termsof the featureswhichcorrespond to

164 MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF MONTEVERDI'S SECOND PRA TICA

those of major-minortonal music, but representsan effortto finda termfor

the structuraluse of tonalitywhichis not opposed, eitherin a historicalsense
or in a systematicsense,to the conceptof 'modality'.
4. The referenceis to the concept borrowedby Harold Powers fromSiegfried
Hermelink in 'Tonal Types and Modal Categories in Renaissance
Polyphony',Journalof the AmericanMusicologicalSociety,Vol. 34 (1981),
pp.428-70.
5. The referencesin this articleare to the bars (unnumberedin the edition) in
Malipiero's Collected Edition, thoughthereare numerousdeficienciesin his
editionofBook VIII.
6. See Cristle Collins Judd, 'Modal Types and Ut, Re, Mi Tonalities: Tonal
Coherence in Sacred Vocal Polyphonyfrom about 1500', Journalof the
AmericanMusicological Society,Vol. 45, No.3 (1992), pp.428-67.
7. See Eva Linfield, 'Modulatory Techniques in Seventeenth-Century Music:
Schiitz, a Case in Point', in thisissue ofMusic Analysis,p.213, note 3.
8. 'The Italian Madrigal, 1620-1655' (Diss., Universityof London, 1989); see
Vol. 1, Chapter 10 ('The Vienna-Mantua Connection'), passim,especially
pp.238-50.
9. See JonathanGlixon, 'Was Monteverdia Traitor?',Music and Letters, Vol. 72
(1991), pp.404-6. The documentrefersto 'Claudio Monteverdi... who has
said thathe stillhopes to see the Eagle rule thisPiazza in place of the symbol
of St. Mark': 'Claudio MonteverdeCremonese ... il quale ha hauto dire,che
ancora spera veder un'aquila dominar questa piazza in loco de l'insegna di
San Marco'.
10. The originalreads: 'Ferdinando,il granGenitoredella MaestaiVostra,... mi
haiconcedutoquasi vn authoreuolepassaportoper fidarlealla Stampa'.
11. I wish to thank Steven Saunders and David Hiley for help with references
concerningthe Regensburgmeeting.The primarycontemporary source is Le
quattrorelationisequitein Ratisbona nelli tempisottonotati(Vienna, 1637);
accounts of the proceedingscontinuedto be printedin German throughthe
seventeenthand eighteenthcenturies.See also HerbertSiefert,Die Oper am
WienerKaiserhofim 17. Jahrhundert (Tutzing: Schneider, 1985); Claudia
B6hm, 'Theatrali anluf3lich der Kr6nungenin der 6sterreichischen Linie der
Casa d'Austria 1627-1764' (Diss., Universityof Vienna, 1986); Feste in
Regensburg von der Reformation bis in die Gegenwart,ed. Karl Moeseneder
(Regensburg: Mittelbayerische Druckerei- und Verlagsgesellschaft,1986),
especiallyBurgi Knorr, 'Die Wahl von FerdinandIII. zum R6mischenK6nig
1636', ibid.,pp.175-8, and ChristineLindner,'Die Kr6nungFerdinandsIII.
zum R6mischen K6nig 1636', ibid., pp.179-82; and Theophil Antonicek,
Musik und italienischePoesie am Hofe Kaiser Ferdinands III. (Vienna:
OsterreichischeAkademie der Wissenschaften,1990). Steven Saunders
informsme that Monteverdiis not mentionedby name in the records of
paymentsforthe Regensburgevents(as are Habsburg household musicians)
but that paymentsof this type would have been made fromthe privypurse
and would have been unrecorded.

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2,1993 165

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 GEOFFREYCHEW

12. The originalreads: 'Havendo io consideratole nostrepassioni, od'affettioni,

del animo, essere tre le principali,cioe, Ira, Temperanza, & Humiltai6
supplicatione... '. The textis editedby Sabine Ehrmann,ClaudioMonteverdi:
Die Grundbegriffe seinesmusiktheoretischenDenkens(Pfaffenweiler: Centaurus-
Verlagsgesellschaft, 1989), p.143, as her documentMVE 3. For referencesto
other reprintsand editions of the relevantMonteverdi texts, see Barbara
Russano Hanning,'Monteverdi'sThree Genera' (referencedin note 13).
13. See Barbara Russano Hanning, 'Monteverdi's Three Genera: A Study in
Terminology',Musical Humanismand Its Legacy:Essaysin HonorofClaude V.
Palisca, ed. Nancy K. Baker and Barbara R. Hanning (Stuyvesant,NY:
PendragonPress, 1992), pp.145-70; the articlewas givenin an earlierversion
as 'Coming to Terms with Monteverdi's Genera', at the American
Musicological Society57thAnnual Meeting (Chicago, 1991). See also Gerald
Drebes, 'MonteverdisKontrastprinzip, die Vorrede zu seinem 8. Madrigal-
buch und das Genere concitato',Musiktheorie, Vol. 6 (1991), pp.29-42.
14. Plato, Republic399a: zrqvapatovatv 1f Ev ze noettxl
E&KEtvqvr
'Kaxtn R
tpacEtovTog
Sv6pEto K R~t av ittrtqoatro
Ev nTo Patc Epyao-ta upEcovzow
zE KaItnpoGWSta ... Kat ohXXrvau Ev ZE Kciirt
[l Pto,
0Ooyyoog EtprvtlCq
oak' Ev EKou~)to npate ovrog ... '; Monteverdiquotes the beginningof this
extractin Ficino's Latin translation:'Suscipe Harmoniamillam quae ut decet
imitaturfortiter euntis in prelium,voces atque accentus' (Ehrmann,Claudio
Monteverdi, p. 143).
15. The text mentions Plato among other things as the authorityfor the
constructionof melodia from text, harmonia and rhythm('sara la sua
compositionegiudicatanel compostodella melodia,del che parlandoPlatone,
dice queste parole, Melodiam ex tribus constare, oratione, harmonia,
Rithmo'). Ehrmann,ClaudioMonteverdi, pp. 131, 136.
16. See G.M. Artusi,L'Artusi(Venice: Vincenti,1600).
17. The documentis printedin the MonteverdiCollected Edition: Tuttile operedi
Claudio Monteverdi,ed. G. Malipiero, Vol. 17 (Venice: Fondazione Giorgio
Cini, 1966), p.36. It mentions the 'Dorian', 'Phrygian', 'Aeolian' and
'Lydian' modes, withoutmakingclearwhatthesemightbe in thiscontext.
18. Frances A. Yates, Astraea: The Imperial Theme in the SixteenthCentury
(London: Routledgeand Kegan Paul, 1975).
19. See the prefaceto Book VIII, passim.The reasons forMonteverdi'sslip are
unclear,but it can hardlyhave been intentional.
20. See Plato, Republic,399-400.
21. Republic, 399c-d: 'OuK apa ... 7noo)oppSt6g y ou6E navaptovtol fltv
eo~Fyt ev at; wat;& - 'Katlac(Ytvv... Tti ; ri a(cXkrza
r o auo,onoto
napUeetS
Ut;t
v
noXtv; Tzo o nToKuoop60To ov, KWt auza r?
Rncavapovta a(Ao zry1avet ovTz ttgigtqt; ... Aupa qot- ... Kat tOKxap
6r
ettneat, Kat K~a
noXtyv ... Ou.ev ye ... Katvov notoUetv ...
XprlL
KptvovrEg tov K?atT~ zo AncoAXovog opyava rtpoMapouou TE Kat
Tov
Anco2),o
opyaVov': 'In our songs and melodies, we shall not want
EEaVO)
of notes or a panharmonicscale ... But what do you say to flute-
multiplicity

166 MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE PLATONIC AGENDA OF MONTEVERDI'S SECOND PRATICA

makers and flute-players? Would you admit them into our State when you
reflectthat in this compositeuse of harmonythe fluteis worse than all the
stringedinstrumentsput together;even the panharmonicmusic is only an
imitationof the flute?... There remain then only the lyre and the harp
[kithara]foruse in the city... The preferring of Apollo and his instruments
to Marsyas and his instruments is not at all strange'(translationby Benjamin
Jowett).
22. Republic,399e: 'Etnowevovyap 6iq za t; aptoviat; av ptv Etq to nEpt
pu0po;g, UpqrotaKoXOgamzong&tC1)mEtyV tlEMtavzoS6;acX pafoEt,cacaXPito0
pubiomg;t6EIv KOo1to ZE at OXv6pEto ZtvEgExto-tV ...': 'Next in order to
harmonies, rhythms will naturallyfollow, for we ought not to seek out
of
complex systems metre, or metres of everykind, but ratherto discover
what rhythmsare the expression of a courageous and harmonious life'
(translationby BenjaminJowett).
23. See originaltextin note 14 above.
24. See A. Solerti,Gli alboridel melodramma (Turin, 1903, repr.Bologna: Forni,
1976), Vol. 2, p.249; the descriptionof the 1608 performanceincludes the
following: '. . . dirimpetto a quello [palco] se ne vedeva un altro di forma
eguale, in cui stava un grannumerodi musicicon istromentidiversida corda
e da fiato'. For otherhypothesesconcerningrevisionsof the Ballo forBook
VIII, see Mabbett, 'The ItalianMadrigal',Vol. 1, pp.242-3.
25. Ehrmann,ClaudioMonteverdi, p.144 (fromthe Book VIII preface).
26. AmmianusMarcellinusxvi.5.10 (referring to eventsin theyear356).
27. Original:'Cum exercereproludia disciplinaecastrensisphilosophuscogeretur
ut princeps, artemque modulatius incedendi per pyrrichamconcinentibus
disceretfistulis,vetus illud proverbium"clitellaebovi sunt impositae;plane
non est nostrumonus" Platonemcrebronominansexclamabat'.
28. Monteverdi,prefaceto Book VIII: 'Et perchea primoprincipio(in particolare
a quali toccava sonare il basso continuo) il dover tanpellaresopra ad una
corda sedici volte in una battutagli pareva pili tosto farcosa da riso che da
lode, perci6 riducevano ad una percossa sola durante una battuta tal
multiplicita,& in guisa di far udire il piricchio piede facevano udire il
spondeo, & levavano la similitudineal orationeconcitata.Perci6 aviso dover
esser sonato il basso continuocon gli suoi compagnamenti,nel modo & forma
il tal genereche sta scritto...'. Ehrmann,ClaudioMonteverdi, p.145.
29. 'The ItalianMadrigal',Vol. 1, pp.241-2.
30. Massimo Michele Ossi has suggested that the two rhythmsare used in
conjunction with one another in Book VIII: see 'Claudio Monteverdi's
Concertato Technique and Its Role in the Development of His Musical
Thought' (Diss., HarvardUniversity,1989).
31. Some pieces have non-traditionalclef-combinations, and (a related matter)
anomalous wide ranges.Indeed in 'Dolcissimo uscignolo',fromthe madrigali
amorosi,the Canto voice, in a high-clefG2 clef, has the rubric 'canto in
tuono', to discouragea downwardtransposition whichwould leave the Basso,
in a low-clefF4 clef,impossiblylow in pitch.This point further reinforcesthe

MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993 167

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 GEOFFREY CHEW

suggestionmade in this articlethat therecan be no question of classicizing

modal transpositions in Book VIII.
32. See Claude V. Palisca, The FlorentineCamerata: DocumentaryStudies and
Translations(New Haven: Yale UniversityPress, 1989), p.88.
33. This is only a shortstep fromMei's assumption'that the fourthstep of an
octave species was alwaysitsmese' (Palisca, ibid.,p.85).
34. See above, note 17.
35. Wronglypositionedin Malipiero's Collected Editionversion.
36. See Vincenti'scataloguesfromvariousdates in the firsthalfof the centuryin
Oscar Mischiati,Indici,cataloghie avvisideglieditorie libraimusicaliitalianidal
1591 al 1798 (Florence, 1984).

168 MUSIC ANALYSIS 12:2, 1993

This content downloaded from 142.109.1.196 on Fri, 01 May 2015 11:22:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions