Author: Doni, Giovanni Battista - manuscripts of italian music theory ...

interval of the Diapason, five in the one of the Diapente and four in the one of the
diatessaron (this is indicated by their names), and wanting that art should imitate
nature, as it was reasonable, they used the tetrachords in these two man-made genera.
However, Ptolemy, in the [[book]] twelfth chapter of the first book of his Harmonics
defined [[that]] the Genus of Harmony as nothing but a certain [[proportion]]
[position corr. supra lin.] which the notes which constitute the Diatessaron have with
each other. Cleonides, in his Introduction (wrongly attributed in some texts to Euclid)
[Aristides Quintilianus and, equally, Proclus in his Commentary on the Timaeus and
Pappus in his Introduction (which is almost the same as Cleonides') in marg.] say
more succinctly that the Genus is a certain and specific division of the Tetrachord.
[This is the real reason why the ancients constituted the variety and difference of the
genera within the Diatessaron, rather than because they considered it the first and last
of the consonances as Salinas maintains in the first chapter of the third book in marg.]
They were called genera with reason, because they contain many species within
themselves, although the Enharmonic has only one, which does not matter, because it
is not necessary, as the logics know well, that every genus should contain within itself
many species. Thus, we see that there are two genera of animals, the Rational and the
Irrational, the first one has no other specie than man, while the second has almost an
infinite number. Now, it is not difficult to conjecture why the enharmonic is
[monoeides] or of just one species, it is possible that this derived from the fact that
they wanted to keep it more well regarded and in higher reputation [--] by
keeping it simpler and uniform, or because, given its subtlety and minuteness of
intervals, was hardly capable of other divisions. [However, these genera proceed just
as all the ancient say, namely, Aristoxenus, Ptolemy, Nicomachus, Aristides
Quintilianus, Pappus, Cleonides, Proclus [Bacchius add. supra lin.] on Plato's
Timaeus. [[Now]] The Diatonic proceeds in his four voices of the Tetrachord in this
way: first there is a semitone and then two tones one after the other going from the
low register to the high register as one has always to proceed. The Chromatic moves
through two Semitones or half tones and a semiditone (minor third), which was called
trihemitone by the ancients, namely made of three uncompounded semitones. The
word uncompounded refers to an interval which is not divided in that particular genus.
[As Aristides states, as well as Boethius in his first book, and others in marg.] The
Enharmonic proceeds through two Dieses or quarters of a tone and a Ditone (major
third) uncompounded.
Which Melodies are said soft and which hard [[chapter]] and what is called thick and
not thick. Chapter
Ptolemy says, in the mentioned chapter, that the first division of the genera is done
into soft and hard. It seems to me that this is the best way to express what they call
[syntonon] that with the term 'combination of sounds', as other do, since this words
means more a style of timing fast and furious that what the Greeks mean. As soft
Genera they intended the genera that [--] contain intervals which are smaller
than the ordinary, such as the Chromatic and the Enharmonic, while as hard genus
they meant one that has intervals that are no smaller and minute than those that are
sung naturally, so the hard genus comes to be the Diatonic. [[Then]] we must know
[see Ptolemy in the chapter quoted in marg.] that what the Greeks call [pyknon],
namely think, dense, busy, or made up of small intervals, it is typical of the Chromatic
and Enharmonic, because it is not part of the Diatonic. They used to call thick [as
Aristoxenus says and Aristides after him, and the others in marg.] (we ill use this