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

to do. Glareano was of this opinion, where, [first book, chapter eight in marg.]
describing the intervals, he says: “The Tritone is a harsh sort of fourth and it is totally
unsuited to the Diatonic genus.” In fact, although he was knowledgeable about music
and a very good humanist, nevertheless he did not have that culture and grasp of these
matter that many believe that he had. Therefore, he cannot be entrusted with such
authority. Therefore, I have to believe that the Tritone and the Semidiapente are
excluded from the Diatonic genus, moreover, I believe that many prefer this genus
than with the other because the harsh intervals are more suited to the genus that is
harsher than the others [[for instance, secondarily because there are small intervals in
it naturally, although they are not uncompounded but divided by others. For this
reason I said that both of them suited the Diatonic.]]
[--] Whether the Diatonic is natural and the other two genera are artificial
After we have seen what the nature and the order of the three genera is, it is
appropriate to consider the origin of each and their main properties and qualities. First
of all, that nature itself is invented the Diatonic is agreed by everyone, because one
can see that it is used commonly by everyone and that every simple peasant and rough
shepherd who sings a song of his uses the Diatonic rather than any other genus. This, I
believe, occurs in countries and among all nations with little variation, because one
should not believe that everywhere everyone who has not been trained in the art of
singing sings exactly the same intervals and the same species of Diatonic, because
nature delights of variety in every thing that belongs to her, as we shall see in the
different traditions of the nations and in the very different languages that peoples use.
Moreover, one can here some variety in the common songs which are sung, because
sometimes one hears the larger semitone instead of the smaller one, although this is
not enough for the melody to be able to be called chromatic, if that is the only
Semitone. Therefore, the Diatonic is the most ancient of all, as the authors state as
well. The second to be invented was the Chromatic, which is as much harder and
subtler than the Diatonic as this is harder and subtler than the Enharmonic. Nor
anyone can state as certain that it is used or it has ever been used by any nation as the
natural genus. Finally, the Enharmonic is a thoroughly Greek invention, albeit it is
also very ancient in origin, because it was found even in Homeric times [--]
(according to the ancients) and before the Trojan War. Nevertheless, one must believe
that it is more recent than the Chromatic, which is attributed to Timotheus, as we shall
see soon. Therefore, the Enharmonic was a Greek invention and for this reason
Plutarch, following the report of Aristoxenus, as I believe, calls the music practised by
Pindar and by the others of that most florid and uncorrupted era [kala kai ellenika
mousike], which means “the beautiful and Greek music.” However, it has to be noted
that Aristoxenus, I believe, quoted by Plutarch maintains that a genus is not older that
the other one by its own nature, but as to human practice and as to the occasion which
presents itself. Therefore, just as the Diatonic can be sung by everyone with a little
study and natural predisposition, thus the Chromatic requires greater artistry and
application. Theon, following Aristoxenus authority says: [to de diatonon genos
aploun ti kai gennaion kai mallon kata physin], which means that “the Diatonic genus
has something of the simple, masculine and more akin ton nature which caused it to
precede the others for this reason.” [--] The ancients say commonly about the
diatonic that it is rather harsh and rather rustic, and, as Aristides says, that it has
something of the “masculine and austere,” [arrenopon kai austeroteron]. He writes
that the Chromatic is “very sweet and suited to laments” [hediston te kai goeron], and