Out of the whole corpus of the so-called Musici scriptores Graeci, the only texts to be translated into Latin, and therefore to be known in the West during the Middle Ages, were the two sections of the pseudo-Aristotelian Problems dealing with musical matters: the Questions on the Voice (Section 11) and the Questions of Harmonics (Section 19). This article tackles the two most relevant Latin translations of the latter, by Bartholomew of Messina and Theodore Gaza (13th and 15th cent. AD respectively), which stand out as turning points in the reception of this work. Bartholomew's translation was widespread in the main Italian and European cultural centres; it was through it that the text, which at that time was considered genuinely Aristotelian, was made accessible to medieval music theorists. Theodore's version, on the other hand, was meant to offer a style palatable to the humanists' more refined tastes; however, although undoubtedly more elegant than Bartholomew's somehow clumsy Latin, it failed to entirely replace it. A comparison of the two is provided here, in order to describe, on the one hand, their authors' different approaches to a text which is often arduous and even damaged in some points; on the other hand, to notice how their rendition of the Greek is in some cases affected by the musical culture of their own times.
Two Latin Translations of the Pseudo-Aristotelian Problems on Harmony (Section 19) Compared
Raffa M.
2024-01-01
Abstract
Out of the whole corpus of the so-called Musici scriptores Graeci, the only texts to be translated into Latin, and therefore to be known in the West during the Middle Ages, were the two sections of the pseudo-Aristotelian Problems dealing with musical matters: the Questions on the Voice (Section 11) and the Questions of Harmonics (Section 19). This article tackles the two most relevant Latin translations of the latter, by Bartholomew of Messina and Theodore Gaza (13th and 15th cent. AD respectively), which stand out as turning points in the reception of this work. Bartholomew's translation was widespread in the main Italian and European cultural centres; it was through it that the text, which at that time was considered genuinely Aristotelian, was made accessible to medieval music theorists. Theodore's version, on the other hand, was meant to offer a style palatable to the humanists' more refined tastes; however, although undoubtedly more elegant than Bartholomew's somehow clumsy Latin, it failed to entirely replace it. A comparison of the two is provided here, in order to describe, on the one hand, their authors' different approaches to a text which is often arduous and even damaged in some points; on the other hand, to notice how their rendition of the Greek is in some cases affected by the musical culture of their own times.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
