Saving, Redistributing, Archiving 
Share: Facebook 
[*]Sabine Ehrmann-Herfort (ehrmann-herfort@dhi-roma.it) studied musicology, classical philology, and philosophy at the German universities of Tübingen and Freiburg im Breisgau, earning a doctoral degree in the field of musicology (Claudio Monteverdi. Die Grundbegriffe seines musiktheoretischen Denkens). She has held a fellowship at the German Historical Institute in Rome (Musicological Department) and positions in the musicological institutes of the Albert-Ludwigs-University in Freiburg and the University of Karlsruhe, and she is a scientific collaborator in the series “Handwörterbuch der musikalischen Terminologie” (published by Hans Heinrich Eggebrecht, afterward by Albrecht Riethmüller) for which she has written numerous monographs in the subject area “terminology of vocal music.” At present she serves as scientific collaborator and vice chair in the Musicological Department of the German Historical Institute in Rome. Her publications include Opera / Oper (1999); and “Claudio Monteverdis “tempo del’affetto del animo” und seine Folgen,” in Aspekte der Musik des Barock. Aufführungspraxis und Stil. Bericht über die Symposien der Internationalen Händel-Akademie Karlsruhe 2001 bis 2004, ed. Siegfried Schmalzriedt (2006). She has co-edited the following volumes: with Matthias Schnettger, Georg Friedrich Händel in Rom, Analecta musicologica 44 (2010); and with Silke Leopold, Migration und Identität. Wanderbewegungen und Kulturkontakte in der Musikgeschichte, Analecta musicologica 49 (2013).
[1] See Silke Leopold, Claudio Monteverdi und seine Zeit, 2nd ed. (Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 1993), 254; and Jeffrey Kurtzman, “Monteverdi’s Missing Sacred Music: Evidence and Conjectures,” in Muzykolog wobec świadectw źródłowych i dokumentów: księga pamiątkowa dedykowana Profesorowi Piotrowi Poźniakowi w 70. rocznicę urodzin/The Musicologist and Source Documentary Evidence: a Book of Essays in Honour of Professor Piotr Poźniak on his 70th Birthday, ed. by Zofia Fabiańska et al. (Kraków: Musica Iagellonica, 2009), 187–208.
[2] Dichiaratione della lettera stampata nel quinto libro de suoi madregali: “Perche essendo io al servitio di questa Serenissima Altezza, non sono padrone di quel tempo che tall’hora mi bisognerebbe. / ciò ha detto mio fratello, non solo per il carico de la musica tanto da chiesa quanto da camera che tiene, mà per altri servitij non ordinarij, essendo che (servendo a Gran Prencipe) la maggior parte del tempo si trova occupato hora in Tornei, hora in Balletti, hora in Comedie, & in varij concerti, & finalmente nello concertar le due Viole bastarde.” (Editor’s translation: “‘Since I am in the service of this Most Serene Highness, I am not the master of that time that would be required.’ This my brother said, not only because of the responsibility he has for music for the church and for the chamber, but for other extraordinary services, so that (serving a Great Prince), he finds himself the majority of the time occupied now in tourneys, now in balletti, now in comedies and in various concerts, and finally, in playing the two viole bastarde.” The Dichiaratione is published in Domenico de’ Paoli, ed., Claudio Monteverdi: Lettere, dediche e prefazioni (Rome, Edizioni de Santis, 1973), 394–404.
[3] Leopold, Claudio Monteverdi und seine Zeit, 254.
[4] For more on the tension between the theorist and composer see Lothar Schmidt, “Theoretikerautorität und Komponistenautorität von Tinctoris bis Monteverdi,” Autorität und Autoritäten in musikalischer Theorie, Komposition und Aufführung, ed. Laurenz Lütteken and Nicole Schwindt, Trossinger Jahrbuch für Renaissancemusik, vol. 3 (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 2004), 41–52.
[5] It at least appeared close to being finished according to the preface to the Quinto libro dei madrigali, Studiosi lettori (1605): “Non vi maravigliate ch’io dia alle stampe questi Madrigali senza prima rispondere alle oppositioni, che fece l’Artusi contro alcune minime particelle d’essi, perche send’io al servigio di questa Serenissima Altezza di Mantoa non son patrone di quel tempo che tal’hora mi bisognarebbe: hò nondimeno scritta la risposta per far conoscere ch’io non faccio le mie cose à caso, & tosto che sia rescritta uscirà in luce portando in fronte il nome di seconda pratica, overo perfettione della moderna musica.” (Editor’s translation: “Do not be surprised that I give these madrigals to the press without first responding to the objections that Artusi made against some of their smallest features. Because I am at the service of this Serene Highness of Mantua, I am not master of that time that would be required; I have nevertheless written my response to let it be known that I do not create my things unmindfully, and as soon as it is rewritten, it will appear bearing at its head the title of SECOND PRACTICE, OR THE PERFECTION OF MODERN MUSIC.”) The preface is published in De’ Paoli, Lettere, dediche e prefazioni, 391–92. In the Dichiaratione (1607), the planned theoretical tract is also given this title, which arose as a reaction to the attacks made by Artusi in his L’Artusi overo delle imperfettioni della moderna musica. L’Artusi and the succeeding related treatises are available in a facsimile edition (Bologna: Arnaldo Forni Editore, 1968 and 2007). Nearly thirty years later, however, the title was identified as follows in a letter to Giovanni Battista Doni dated October 22, 1633: “Melodia, overo seconda pratica musicale.” In a letter dated February 2, 1634, presumably also written to Doni, the title was then simply called the “Seconda pratica.” For the two letters, see Claudio Monteverdi, Claudio Monteverdi: Lettere, ed. Éva Lax (Florence: Leo S. Olschki Editore, 1994), 200–6. In the interim period, Artusi had been converted from a former adversary to a supporter of Monteverdi. In 1633, the title began with the term “Melodia,” which was a buzzword at the time. The term “Seconda pratica” first appeared in Seconda parte dell’Artusi ouero Delle imperfettioni della moderna mvsica: Nella quale si tratta de’ molti abusi introdotti da i moderni Scrittori, & Compositori (Venice: Vincenti, 1603), 16, in the letter of the Academico Ottuso: “con tutto ciò tal forma di modulatione è communemente usata da tutti gli Moderni, massime che hanno abbracciata questa nova seconda pratica.” Key commentary in this regard is offered by Ulrich Siegele, “Cruda Amarilli, oder: Wie ist Monteverdis ‘seconda pratica’ satztechnisch zu verstehen?,” Claudio Monteverdi. Vom Madrigal zur Monodie, Musik-Konzepte 83/84 (Munich: edition text+kritik, 1994), 31–102 (reproduced in the present volume). See also Massimo Ossi, Divining the Oracle: Monteverdi’s Seconda Prattica (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003). In Cartella musicale nel canto figurato, fermo, & contrapunto (Venice: Vincenti, 1614), 18, Adriano Banchieri also speaks of a “Seconda pratica,” but in an entirely different sense as a second stage or chapter in learning to sing, entitled Seconda pratica et regola infallibile et facile, following upon his first stage or chapter, entitled Practica sopra la mano manca.
[6] “Das Denken ‘über’ Musik ist also ein Teil der ‘Sache selbst,’ nicht ein bloßer Appendix.” See Carl Dahlhaus, “Das ‘Verstehen’ von Musik und die Sprache der musikalischen Analyse,” in Musik und Verstehen. Aufsätze zur semiotischen Theorie, Ästhetik und Soziologie der musikalischen Rezeption, ed. Peter Faltin and Hans-Peter Reinecke (Cologne: Volk, 1973), 37–47 at 46.
[7] In his methodological considerations with regard to conceptual history, Karl Heinz Stierle introduces the concept “meaning continuum” (Bedeutungskontinuum), which he contends is essential for changes in meaning to take place: “Es ist für die bedeutungsgeschichtliche Arbeit grundlegend, dass die neue Bedeutung nicht einfach eine Alternative zu einer alten Bedeutung ist, sondern ein Komplement zu einem vorgängigen Bedeutungskontinuum, das durch die neue Bedeutung nicht negiert, sondern nur modifiziert wird.” (Editor’s translation: “It is fundamental to the study of the history of meaning that a new meaning is not simply an alternative to an old meaning, but rather a complement to a previous meaning-continuum that is not negated by the new meaning, but rather only modified.”) Karl Heinz Stierle, “Historische Semantik und Geschichtlichkeit der Bedeutung,” in Historische Semantik und Begriffsgeschichte, ed. Reinhard Koselleck (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1978), 154–92 at 188. See also Frank Baasner, “Aufgaben einer Begriffsgeschichte,” in Der Begriff “sensibilité” im 18. Jahrhundert: Aufstieg und Niedergang eines Ideals (Heidelberg: Winter, 1988), 29–33.
[8] For more on the term “affect” as used by Clemens Risi, see “Die Opernbühne als Experimentalraum der Affekte: Überlegungen zum Affektbegriff bei Athanasius Kircher und Claudio Monteverdi,” in Kunstkammer, Laboratorium, Bühne: Schauplätze des Wissens im 17. Jahrhundert, ed. Helmar Schramm, Ludger Schwarte, Jan Lazardzig (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2003), 147–60.
[9] Claudio Monteverde à chi legge: “Havendo io considerato le nostre passioni, od’affettioni, del animo, essere tre le principali, cioè, Ira, Temperanza, & Humiltà ò supplicatione,… & come l’arte Musica lo notifica chiaramente in questi tre termini di concitato, molle, & temperato.” (Editor’s translation: “Having considered that our passions, or affections of the soul, are principally three, that is, anger, moderation, and humility or supplication,… and how the art of music makes them known clearly in these three terms: agitated, soft, and moderate.”) For interpretations of this preface, see Barbara Russano Hanning, “Monteverdi’s Three Genera: A Study in Terminology,” in Musical Humanism and its Legacy: Essays in Honor of Claude V. Palisca, ed. Nancy Kovaleff Baker and Barbara Russano Hanning (Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press, 1992), 145–70; reprinted in Richard Wistreich, ed., Monteverdi (Farnham, Surrey and Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate Publishing, 2011), 265–90; Jeffrey Kurtzman, “Monteverdi’s Changing Aesthetics: A Semiotic Perspective,” in Festa Musicologica: Essays in Honor of George J. Buelow, ed. Thomas J. Mathiesen and Benito V. Rivera (Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon Press, 1995), 233–55; and Ossi, Divining the Oracle, 189–210.
[10] Claudio Monteverde à chi legge: “per venire a maggior prova, diedi di piglio al divin Tasso, come poeta che esprime con ogni proprietà, & naturalezza con la sua oratione quelle passioni, che tende a voler descrivere & ritrovai la descrittione, che fa del combattimento di Tancredi con Clorinda, per haver io le due passioni co[n]trarie da mettere in ca[n]to Guerra cioè p[re]ghiera, & morte” (Author’s translation: “In order to have a larger space for experiment, I made use of the divine figure Tasso as a poet who expresses the affects he is seeking to describe with the greatest accuracy and also most naturally. Thus, for example, I tracked down the description of the battle of Tancredi with Clorinda in order to set to music the opposing affects of battle, prayer, and death.”)
[11] Martin Mulsow and Marcelo Stamm, eds., Konstellationsforschung (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2005), preface, 7.
[12] The foregoing is based on arguments originally presented in Sabine Ehrmann, Claudio Monteverdi: Die Grundbegriffe seines musiktheoretischen Denkens, Musikwissenschaftliche Studien 2 (Pfaffenweiler: Centaurus, 1989).
[13] See the letters dated May 1, 1627, May 7, 1627, May 22, 1627, May 24, 1627, June 5, 1627, and July 24, 1627, in Monteverdi, Lettere, ed. Lax, 150–60, 166–68. English translation in Claudio Monteverdi, The Letters of Claudio Monteverdi, ed. Denis Stevens, rev. ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 313–26, 342–46.
[14] Claudio Monteverdi, Lettere, ed. Lax, 75: “Invio a Vostra Signoria Illustrissima il Lamento d’Apollo.… Qui dove Amore incomincia a cantare, mi parrebbe bene che Vostra Signoria Illustrissima li agiongesse tre altri versetti di simile piede e simile senso aciò potessesi ripetere un’ altra volta la medesima aria, sperando che questo coloretto di questa poca allegrezza non fosse per far mal effetto, seguitando per contrario il passato affetto dolente d’Apollo, et poi andar seguitando, come sta mutando modo di parlare, l’armonia, come parimente fa l’oratione.” (Stevens translation, pp. 159–60: “I am sending Your Lordship the Lament of Apollo.… At the place where Amore begins to sing, I think it a good idea if Your Lordship were to add three more short verses of like metre and similar sentiment, so that the same tune could be repeated (hoping that this touch of gladness will not produce a bad effect when it follows—by way of contrast—Apollo’s previous doleful mood), and then go on as it stands, changing the manner of expression in the music, just as the text does.”
[15] A similar argument is offered in the letter dated May 7, 1627, when Monteverdi criticizes Narciso, in which numerous sopranos for the nymphs and numerous tenors for the shepherds are to take the stage.
[16] This quote originates from a letter dated January 6, 1617. Monteverdi, Lettere, 54.
[17] Monteverdi, Lettere, ed. Lax, 49: “Oltre di ciò ho visto li interlocutori essere Venti, Amoretti, Zeffiretti e Sirene, e per consequenza molti soprani faranno de bisogno; e s’aggionge di più che li Venti hanno a cantare, cioè li Zeffiri et li Boreali! Come, caro Signore, potrò io imittare il parlar de’ venti, se non parlano?! E come potrò io con il mezzo loro movere li affetti? Mosse l’Arianna per essere donna, e mosse parimente Orfeo per essere o[u?]mo, e non vento. Le armonie imittano loro medesime, e non con l’orazione, e li streppiti de’ venti, e il bellar del[l?]e pecore, il nitrire de’ cavalli e va discorrendo, ma non imitano il parlar de’ venti che non si trova!” (Stevens translation, p. 110: “In addition, I have noticed that the interlocutors are winds, Cupids, little Zephyrs, and Sirens: consequently many sopranos will be needed, and it can also be stated that the winds have to sing—that is, the Zephyrs and the Boreals. How, dear Sir, can I imitate the speech of the winds, if they do not speak? And how can I, by such means, move the passions? Ariadne moved us because she was a woman, and similarly Orpheus because he was a man, not a wind. Music can suggest, without any words, the noise of winds and the bleating of sheep, the neighing of horses, and so on and so forth; but it cannot imitate the speech of winds because no such thing exists.”) For more on the special context of the favola within the planned evening festivities of the Veglia, see Tim Carter, “Winds, Cupids, Little Zephyrs and Sirens: Monteverdi and Le nozze di Tetide (1616–1617),” Early Music 39, no. 4 (November 2011): 489–502.
[18] As he acknowledges in his letter dated October 22, 1633: Monteverdi, Lettere, ed. Lax, 202.
[19] “Melodiam ex tribus constare, oratione, harmonia, Rithmo.… Quin etiam consonum ipsum & dissonum eodem modo, quandoquidem Rithmus & Harmonia orationem sequuntur non ipsa oratio Rithmum & Harmoniam sequitur … quid vero loquendi modus ipsaq[ue] oratio non ne animi affectionem sequitur … orationem vero cetera quoq[ue] sequuntur.” In this matter, the Ferrarese court harpsichordist Luzzasco Luzzaschi—who is listed in the Dichiaratione as a master of the seconda pratica—appears to anticipate Giulio Cesare’s argument when he writes that the “nuova maniera” of his Libro Sesto compositions consists in the fact that the music honors poetry: “(come sua donna) riverisce, & honora.” For more on the interrelationships between the Artusi-Monteverdi controversy and the music of the Ferrarese court, see Peter Niedermüller, “Contrapunto” und “effetto”: Studien zu den Madrigalen Carlo Gesualdos, Abhandlungen zur Musikgeschichte 9 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001), 3.
[20] Markus Bandur, Handwörterbuch der musikalischen Terminologie, s.v. “Melodia.” vol. 27, 1998.
[21] Letter of October 22, 1633. See Ossi, Divining the Oracle, 31–32.
[22] See Monteverdi’s letter of February 2, 1634 in Lettere, ed. Lax, 203–6.
[23] Joachim Steinheuer, Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, s.v. “Artusi, Giovanni Maria.”
[24] For example, Dichiaratione della lettera stampata nel quinto libro.
[25] Steinheuer, s.v. “Artusi, Giovanni Maria.”
[26] Claude V. Palisca, “Die Jahrzehnte um 1600 in Italien,” in Italienische Musiktheorie im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert: Antikenrezeption und Satzlehre, ed. F. Alberto Gallo, Renate Groth, Claude V. Palisca, Frieder Rempp, “Geschichte der Musiktheorie” 7 (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1989), 221–306 at 277: “Hier dringt frischer Wind in ein geschlossenes System, hier wird Kontrapunkt gelehrt in Übereinstimmung mit der Praxis der Gegenwart.” (Author’s translation: “Here, a fresh wind blows into a closed system: counterpoint is taught in accordance with present-day practice.”)
[27] Palisca describes the diversity and plurality of norms in “Die Jahrzehnte um 1600 in Italien,” 281–87.
[28] “Hora mò il moderno compositore, per porgere diletto alla maggior parte (essendo il suo proprio fine) meglio considerando, cerca imitare un perfetto Oratore che spiegar voglia dotta & bene istessa oratione.” (Author’s translation: “But now the modern composer—reflecting exactly on how to give pleasure to the majority of his listeners (this being his proper aim)—tries to imitate the perfect speaker who is able to present his performance in an erudite and optimal manner.”) Banchieri then follows with a quotation from Cicero: “Optimus Orator est vir canorus, qui in dicendo animus [recte animos] aodienctium [recte audientium] delectat, & permouet.” (Editor’s translation: “The best orator is a man with a melodious voice, who in speaking delights and moves the minds of his listeners.”) Adriano Banchieri, Moderna pratica musicale (Venice: Vincenti, 1613), 165–66; reprint in Adriano Banchieri, Cartella musicale (Bologna: Libreria Editrice Forni, 1968), 161–248.
[29] Monteverdi thus renders judgement about the singer Adriana Basile, among others, on the basis of such criteria. This is confirmed by his letter to Cardinal Ferdinando Gonzaga of January 22, 1611: “Ogni venere di sera si fà musica nella Sala de’ Specchi. Viene a cantare in concerto la signora Andriana, et così fatta forza e particolar grazia dà alle composizioni aportando così fatto diletto al senso, che quasi novo teatro divien quel loco.” (Author’s translation: “Every Friday evening some music is performed in the hall of mirrors. Signora Adriana comes to sing and she gives so much power and grace to the compositions and so much pleasure to the senses that this place seems to change into a new theater.”) Naturally, this letter, which contains a great deal of rhetoric, was also strongly influenced by personal interests, as Monteverdi hoped to reconcile the ill feelings between Cardinal Ferdinando Gonzaga and Adriana Basile. Claudio Monteverdi, Lettere, ed. Lax, 33.
[30] For explanatory remarks concerning Combattimento di Tancredi et Clorinda, see Ehrmann, Claudio Monteverdi: Die Grundbegriffe, 147.
[31] Letter of May 1, 1627. In this letter, the “intermedi per comedia grande” and “una comedia cantata che tanto vol dire come un poema” are placed in opposition. See Monteverdi, Lettere, ed. Lax, 151. Perhaps exaggerating this maxim, Doni, disparaging Monteverdi in a letter to Marin Mersenne dated July 7, 1638, claims that the poet Rinuccini contributed more than Monteverdi to the beauty of the Lamento d’Arianna. See Ossi, Divining the Oracle, 191.
[32] Leopold, Claudio Monteverdi und seine Zeit, 152–53.
[33] See Ulrich Mosch, “Ein neuer ‘Hörwinkel,” in Europäische Musikgeschichte, ed. Sabine Ehrmann-Herfort, Ludwig Finscher, and Giselher Schubert (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 2002), 2:1310–11.