Tinctoris evidently followed the medieval orthographical convention in which the single letter ‘e’ stood for the classical diphthongs ‘ae/æ’ and ‘oe/œ’: this is the consistent usage not only of all three principal manuscripts of his collected writings (V = E-VAu 835 [olim 844], copied by Venceslaus Crispus, Naples, ? winter 1477/8 (see Ronald Woodley, ‘The Dating and Provenance of Valencia 835: A Suggested Revision’); BU = I-Bu 2573, copied by Venceslaus Crispus, Naples, c.1486–8 (see Christian Goursaud, ‘The Neapolitan Presentation Manuscripts of Tinctoris’s Music Theory: Valencia 835 and Bologna 2573’ (PhD dissertation, Birmingham City University, 2016; uk.bl.ethos.695288), 165–7); Br1 = B-Br II 4147 Mus., copied in ?Naples, c.1490) but also of the printed excerpts of De inventione et usu musice, produced under his supervision (see further below). The only source of any of Tinctoris’s writings to employ ‘æ’ is the printed edition (with which he had nothing to do) of his Terminorum musicæ diffinitorium ([Treviso: Gerardus de Lisa, 1494×5]; digital images of D-Mbs Rar. 3a at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0007/bsb00070089/images/; facs. of ? US-Wc ML31.H43g no. 20 Case, Monuments of Music and Music Literature in Facsimile, 2nd ser. (hereafter MMMLF II), 26, New York: Broude Brothers, 1966; facs. of D-GOl Mon.typ s.l.et a. 4o 00113 with Germ. trans. by Heinrich Bellermann and introd. by Peter Gülke, Leipzig: Deutscher Verlag für Musik, 1983) and its direct copy B-Br II 4149 Mus., fols. 32^r–40^r; see Cecilia Panti, Introduction to Iohannes Tinctoris, Diffinitorium musice: un dizionario di musica per Beatrice d’Aragona, ed. and Ital. trans. Panti (Florence: Edizioni del Galuzzo for Fondazione Ezio Franceschini, 2004), pp. lii, lxiii–lxiv. I have therefore used ‘e’ rather than ‘ae’ or ‘oe’ throughout for his writings and any others that used the same convention, and for expressions that are more medieval than classical or humanistic in character.

On Tinctoris’s consciousness of this issue, see Christopher Page, ‘Reading and Reminiscence: Tinctoris on the Beauty of Music’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 49 (1996): 1–31 at 11–16, 28–30.

Tinctoris, De ton., Prol.4; edited in Scriptorum de musica medii aevi novam seriem a Gerbertina alteram, ed. E. de Coussemaker, 4 vols. (Paris: A. Durand & Pedone-Lauriel, 1864–76; repr. Hildesheim, etc.: Georg Olms, 1987; hereafter CS), iv. 16; Johannis Tinctoris Opera theoretica, ed. Albertus Seay, 2 vols. in 3, Corpus scriptorum de musica, 22 (n.p.: American Institute of Musicology, 1975–8; hereafter Seay), i. 65. See also n. 96 below.

Where possible below I shall cite Tinctoris from the online editions in Johannes Tinctoris: Complete Theoretical Works (https://earlymusictheory.org/Tinctoris/ hereafter JT:CTW); see https://earlymusictheory.org/Tinctoris/texts/Notes/titles.html for abbreviated titles. In citations of Tinctoris and other early writers, books or parts will be abbreviated or if possible numbered with uppercase roman figures, chapters with lowercase roman figures, and lines, sentences, or other conventional subunits with arabic figures.

De ton. is not yet available in JT:CTW; I have edited the text here from the three MS sources, modernizing punctuation. Variants (ignoring ‘ae’): his V BU CS : hiis Br1 Seay | tum que MSS CS : tumque Seay. All translations are my own unless otherwise attributed.

Tinctoris may not have intended Prop. mus. to represent his ‘theoretical works’: his younger acquaintance Franchinus Gaforus entitled his own treatment of rhythmic proportions (deeply indebted to Tinctoris) Tractatus practicabilium proportionum [A treatise on practical proportions] (I-Bc A 69); revised as book IV of his Practica musice (Milan: Guillermus Le Signerre for Giovan Pietro Lomazzo, 30 Sept. 1496; facs., MMMLF II, 99, New York: Broude Brothers, 1979). Gaforus’s Theoricum opus musice discipline [Theoretical work on the discipline of music] (Naples: Francesco di Dino, 8 Oct. 1480; facs. of I-Bc A 70 with introd. by Cesarino Ruini, Musurgiana, 15, Lucca: Libreria Musicale Italiana, 1996) and Theorica musice (Milan: Philippus Mantegatius dictus Cassanus for Giovan Pietro Lomazzo, 15 Dec. 1492; facs., MMMLF II, 21, New York: Broude Brothers, 1967; trans. Walter Kreyszig as Franchino Gaffurio, The Theory of Music, Music Theory Translation Series, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1993) cover the proportions of pitch intervals only.

Proportions of pitch intervals: Prop. mus. I.v.5, I.vi.30–31, I.vi.36, I.vi.43–4; Diff. s.vv. ‘Diapason’, ‘Diapente’, ‘Diatessaron’, ‘Epygdous’; De contr. I.x.5–6. De ton., completed 6 November 1476, is later than any of Tinctoris’s other writings except De contr., completed 11 October 1477, and De inv. (see below).

Speculum musices: Exp. man. viii.20–21 (CS iv. 15b–16a; Seay i. 56).

See Leofranc Holford-Strevens, ‘The laudes musicae in Renaissance Music Treatises’, in Essays on Renaissance Music in Honour of David Fallows: Bon jour, bon mois et bonne estrenne, ed. Fabrice Fitch and Jacobijn Kiel (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 2011), 338–48 at 340–41.

Besides CS iv. 191b–200b, and Seay ii. 159–77, Comp. eff. is edited in Luisa Zanoncelli, Sulla estetica di Johannes Tinctoris: con edizione critica, traduzione e commentario del ‘Complexus effectuum musices’ ([Bologna]: Arnaldo Forni, 1979), 74–114, and Egidius Carlerius and Johannes Tinctoris, On the Dignity & the Effects of Music: Two Fifteenth-Century Treatises, ed. Reinhard Strohm and J. Donald Cullington, trans. Cullington, introd. Strohm, Institute of Advanced Musical Studies Study Texts, 2 (London: Institute of Advanced Musical Studies, King’s College London, 1996), 67–80. On the dating of Beatrice’s title, see Ronald Woodley, ‘Tinctoris’s Italian Translation of the Golden Fleece Statutes: A Text and a (Possible) Context’, Early Music History, 8 (1988): 173–244 at 181.

See Sean Gallagher, ‘Pater optime: Vergilian Allusion in Obrecht’s Mille quingentis’, The Journal of Musicology, 18 (2001): 406–57 at 445–51.

See Strohm, Introduction to Carlerius and Tinctoris, On the Dignity & the Effects, 10: ‘If it is permitted to use anachronistic terms for the sake of clarity, Tinctoris’s treatise is not about the “aesthetics” nor the “theory” nor even the “philosophy” of music, but about its “anthropology”.’

Ronald Woodley, ‘The Printing and Scope of Tinctoris’s Fragmentary Treatise De inventione et usu musice’, Early Music History, 5 (1985): 239–68 at 253 n. 47, observes, ‘to construe the title … simply as “On the Discovery and Practice of Music” does scant justice either to the work’s scope or to its author’s sensitivity to the nuances of the Latin language’; Rob C. Wegman, ‘Tinctoris’s Magnum Opus’, in Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. M. Jennifer Bloxam, Gioia Filocamo, and Leofranc Holford-Strevens, Épitome musical (Turnhout: Brepols, 2009), 771–82 at 771, translates ‘Concerning the Origins and Practice of Music’. But Tinctoris’s use of inventio in what survives of the text is consistently about ‘invention’, and ‘use’ or ‘employment’ describes his matter much more accurately than ‘practice’.

De inv. Prol.4 (JT:CTW): ‘ab eo tempore quo, abs te ex Leodio digressus, divino munere feliciter Neapolim regressus sum, tractatum quendam, cui De inventione et usu musice nomini ac titulo est, pervigili labore confeci’ (at the time when, having departed from you out of Liège, by divine favor I successfully returned to Naples, with sleepless toil I completed a treatise, whose name and title is On the invention and use of music).

Woodley, ‘Printing and Scope’, 241–5; on p. 245 the date is misconstrued as 27 Jan. Jeffrey Samuel Palenik, ‘The Early Career of Johannes Tinctoris: An Examination of the Music Theorist’s Northern Education and Development’ (PhD dissertation, Duke University, 2008; UMI 3383529), 53, referring to De inv. IV.v.75 (JT:CTW). See Vittorio Zacchino, ‘La Guerra di Otranto del 1480/1481: operazioni strategiche e militari’, in Otranto 1480: atti del Convegno internazionale di studio promosso in occasione del V centenario della caduta di Otranto ad opera dei turchi: Otranto, 19–23 maggio 1980, 2 vols., ed. Cosimo Damiano Fonseca (Galatina: Congedo, 1986), ii. 265–340, including the articles of capitulation at 335–6. The Turkish captain was Gedik Ahmet Paşa.

Woodley, ‘Printing and Scope’, 258.

We cannot assume, as Woodley does (‘Printing and Scope’, 247), that all five books were comparable in extent to books II (at least 20 chapters) and V (24): the printed chapters of books II–IV are parallel (one chapter on ‘invention’ followed by one on ‘use’, except that the two chapters of book II together correspond to the second in books III–IV), but they are chapters xix–xx of book II, viii–ix of book III, and iv–v of book IV. Woodley’s estimate of ‘at least one hundred chapters’ is probably excessive, but more than seventy is virtually certain.

See Karl Weinmann, Johannes Tinctoris und sein unbekannter Traktat ‘De inventione et usu musicae’: historisch-kritische Untersuchung (orig. Regensburg and Rome: F. Pustet, 1917; cited from repr. with introd. by Wilhelm Fischer, Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1961), 6. The text is on pp. 27–46, the annotations on p. 47. The incunabulum and Proske’s transcript are shelved together as D-Rp Th 33.

Woodley, ‘Printing and Scope’, 252.

Wegman, ‘Tinctoris’s Magnum Opus’, 774–5; he first made the discovery public in Rob C. Wegman, The Crisis of Music in Early Modern Europe, 1470–1530 (New York: Routledge, 2005), 53–4, 189–91.

This is a slight exaggeration: Quintilian and Boethius are cited at De inv. I.xi.5–6 (JT:CTW), and there are classical echoes in the poem ‘Cantores quibus ars vox quoque dulcis est’, II.vii.

Wegman, ‘Tinctoris’s Magnum Opus’, 777–8.

Palenik, ‘Early Career’, chap. 2, ‘The Keystone: De inventione et usu musicae’, pp. 51–128.

Page, ‘Reading and Reminiscence’, 7–11, 13–17, and passim. Eric Bianchi, ‘Scholars, Friends, Plagiarists: The Musician as Author in the Seventeenth Century’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 70 (2017): 61–128, appeared too late for me to engage with it here, but the culture of learning he delineates has many similarities with Tinctoris’s.

The translation is from Richard Challoner’s 18th-c. revision of the Douay/Rheims translation of the Vulgate.

Tinctoris, Comp. eff. vii.4 (Seay ii. 170, Strohm–Cullington, 70); De inv. I.v.41 (JT:CTW); Carlerius iv.82 (Strohm–Cullington, 43). CS iv. 194a, 196b, and Zanoncelli, 88, keep ‘et’.

Strohm, Introduction to Carlerius and Tinctoris, On the Dignity & the Effects, 11. See also Palenik, ‘Early Career’, 74.

Gallagher, ‘Pater optime’, 452–3. See also Palenik, ‘Early Career’, 77.

Biblia sacra iuxta Vulgatam versionem, ed. Robert Weber, 2 vols. (Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt, 1969), ii. 1864. The New Testament of Jesus Christ, translated faithfully into English out of the authentical Latin (Rheims: John Fogny, 1582; digital images of US-UP BS180 1582 v.3 at https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=kofWAAAAMAAJ), 651, has the corrected reading, so this must have been introduced into the Latin tradition earlier in the 16th c., certainly after the Novum Testamentum grece & latine in Academia Complutensi noviter impressum (Alcalá de Henares: Arnaldus Guillelmi de Brocario, pr. 1514, pub. 1521×2; digital images of E-Mn U 5887–91 at http://bdh-rd.bne.es/viewer.vm?id=0000013439, vol. v), sig. II^rC, where the correct Greek reading faces the uncorrected Latin. Protestant Bible translations in the 16th c. were made from the Greek, not the Latin, and therefore do not present the error.

S. Aureli Augustini Hipponensis episcopi Liber qui appellatur Speculum, et Liber de divinis Scripturis sive Speculum quod fertur S. Augustini, ed. Franz Weihrich, Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum, 12 (Vienna: C. Gerolds Sohn, 1887), 1–285 at 276. Glossa ordinaria to James 5:13, cue ‘Oret’; Nicholas of Lyra, postil to James 5:13, cue ‘Oret equo animo et psallat’, in Biblia cum Glosis ordinariis, et interlinearibus excerptis ex omnibus ferme Ecclesie sanctis doctoribus, simulque cum expositione Nicolai de Lyra (Venice: Paganino de’ Paganini, 1495; digital images of D-Mbs 2o Inc. c.a. 3180 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0004/bsb00048386/images/), fol. 1352^va. (I have chosen this as a convenient source of both the Glossa ordinaria and Nicholas of Lyra simultaneously.) NB: in Patrologia cursus completus, series latina, 217 vols. (Paris: Jacques-Paul Migne, 1841–55; hereafter PL), the quotation is ‘corrected’ three times (xxxiv. 1036 (Augustine’s Speculum); cix. 804, cxii. 1364), but ‘et’ is retained in six other cases (xvii. 758, lxxviii. 538, cxxxvi. 331, cxxxvii. 752, cxxxix. 1475, ccix. 211). The gloss from the Glossa ordinaria (traditionally attributed to Walafrid Strabo) in PL cxiv. 679 is abridged and does not show that the glossator read ‘et’ as the version in the 1495 Bible does.

For examples of branches of the tradition, see the comments (indicated by *) in JT:CTW to De inv. I.v.79 (= Comp. eff. xix.3), II.xix.3; for an interpolation, see Page, ‘Reading and Reminiscence’, 15 (De inv. I.v.44); for a mixture of direct quotation and paraphrase, De inv. I.v.75. Further instances below. I have only once (see para. 30 below) discovered Tinctoris deliberately recasting a source text in order to alter its emphasis or meaning, as Hans Baron shows Petrarch to have done: ‘Petrarch’s Secretum: Was it Revised – and Why?’, in his From Petrarch to Leonardo Bruni: Studies in Humanistic and Political Literature (University of Chicago Press for the Newberry Library, 1968), 51–101 at 54–5.

Wegman, ‘Tinctoris’s magnum opus’, 774, 776.

Page, ‘Reading and Reminiscence’, 14. See also Bianchi, ‘Scholars, Friends, Plagiarists’, 71–3.

Raffaele Brandolini, On Music and Poetry (De musica et poetica, 1513), ed. and trans. Ann E. Moyer with Marc Laureys, Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 232 (Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2001). See also [Aurelius] Lippus Brandolinus, De rei militaris litterarumque laudibus [On the praises of military matters and letters], F-Pn lat. 7860 (digital images at http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b9076947m); passages quoted by F. Alberto Gallo, Music in the Castle: Troubadours, Books, and Orators in Italian Courts of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Centuries, trans. Anna Herklotz and Kathryn Krug (University of Chicago Press, 1995), 105–11, esp. 107–9. The brothers Brandolini (both called ‘Lippus’ for their near-blindness) were of Florentine birth but educated in Naples; Aurelius moved to Rome in 1480, Raphael in 1495.

Strohm, Introduction to Carlerius and Tinctoris, On the Dignity & the Effects, 10–12; Palenik, ‘Early Career’, 73–4. In Ronald Woodley, ‘Tinctoris’s Family Origins: Some New Clues’, Journal of the Alamire Foundation, 5 (2013): 69–94 at 69 n. 3, I am credited with suggesting direct contact between Tinctoris and Carlerius during the four months in 1460 when Tinctoris was at Cambrai Cathedral, of which Carlerius was dean. This now looks less likely; in the 1450s and 1460s Carlerius divided his time between Cambrai and the Collège de Navarre in Paris, but he is not mentioned in the Cambrai chapter acts between 17 Nov. 1458 and 8 June 1461 (I am grateful to Alejandro Planchart for this information). Carlerius’s treatise was probably written not long before his death in 1472: Strohm, Introduction, 15. The two texts were linked not only in our time (by Strohm and Cullington) but in Tinctoris’s: they appear in succession in the most important secondary manuscript of Tinctoris’s writings, G = B-Gu 70, fols. 71^ra–73^va (Carlerius), 74^ra–77^vb (Tinctoris); copied by Br Anthony van Sint-Maartensdijk, Ghent, shortly before 8 Nov. 1503.

Wegman, ‘Tinctoris’s magnum opus’, 774–5, gives a table of comparison between Humbert and Tinctoris’s Comp. eff. and De inv. I.v. In the first printed edition of Humbert’s text, Expositio Umberti Generalis Magistri ordinis Predicatorum super Regulam beati Augustini episcopi; Expositio Hugonis de Sancto Victore super eandem Regulam beati Augustini (Hagenau: Joannes Rynman de Oringaw, 1506; digital images of US-V OE BX 2904.A75 1506 at http://digital.library.villanova.edu/Item/vudl:76077), chap. xlvii, sig. D^r–v, some clauses are omitted, but the most significant variant is the ascription of the enigmatic quotation ‘Oculos cordis attollit iubilus laudis’ to Gregory instead of Bernard (it cannot be found in either’s writings). For Ludolph and Torquemada I have consulted Expositio Ludolfi carthusiensis in Psalterium (Speyer: [Peter Drach], 1491; digital images of B-Gu Rés. 892 at http://books.google.be/books?vid=GENT900000177963), Prologue, sig. a iiij^v (no attribution of the Bernard/Gregory quotation); Joannis a Turrecremata … In Gratiani Decretorum primam doctissimi commentarii, 5 vols. (Venice: haeres Hieronymi Scoti, 1577–8), I.xcii, ‘In sancta’, ad 1, vol. i (digital images of E-Msi BH DER 2654 at https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IaXWwH1RQV4C), p. 610 (quotation ascribed to Bernard).

De inv. II.xx.2–6, 9–11 (JT:CTW).

Augustine, Sermones supposititii, Sermo cxciv.2 ‘De annunciatione Dominica’, PL xxxix. 2104–7 at 2105. Gratian, Decretum, pars tertia ‘De consecratione’, distinctio I.liv, in Decretum magistri Gratiani, ed. Emil Friedberg, Corpus iuris canonici, 1 (Leipzig: Bernhard Tauchnitz, 1879; online at http://geschichte.digitale-sammlungen.de/decretum-gratiani/online/angebot), 1307–8 at 1307. (Although Gratian cites canon xii of the ‘third’ Council of Toledo, it is now counted as the fourth.) Nicholas of Lyra, postil to Psalm 67:26, cues ‘Prevenerunt principes’, ‘Coniuncti psallentibus etc.’, in Biblia cum glosis … simulque cum expositione Nicolai de Lyra (1495), fol. 480^va.

De inv. I.xi.10–11 (JT:CTW).

Glossa ordinaria to Rev 5:12, in PL cxiv. 721, reading ‘Cognitionem omnium rerum’; see also Glossa ordinaria, cue ‘Sapientiam’, in Biblia cum glosis … simulque cum expositione Nicolai de Lyra (1495), fol. 1377^va.

Woodley, ‘Printing and Scope’, 268, n. to l. 268.

Petrus Lombardus, Sententiae III.xiv.3, in PL cxcii. 784, reading erroneously ‘Sic …’.

Richard of Middleton’s commentary on the Sentences was in the royal library of Naples: see Tammaro De Marinis, La biblioteca napoletana dei re d’Aragona, 4 vols. (Milan: Ulrico Hoepli, 1947–52), ii. 199 (inventory B, no. 393), 202 (C 60); unlike many of the books sold to Cardinal Georges I d’Amboise in 1502×4 (inventory C), this does not survive in the Bibliothèque nationale de France. But the sequence borrowed by Tinctoris does not appear in the commentary to Sententiae III.xiv: Clarissimi theologi Magistri Ricardi de Mediavilla … super quatuor libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi Quaestiones subtilissimae, ed. Ludovico Silvestri, 4 vols. (Brescia: n.p., 1591), iii. 126–52 (digital images of F-LYm SJ TH 123/6 at https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=h2FBROhwNTcC).

Thomas Aquinas, De veritate, q. 20 a. 4 s.c. 1, in S. Thomas de Aquino, Quaestiones disputatae de veritate: QQ. 13–20, Opera omnia iussu Leonis XIII edita, 22/2 (Rome: Ad Sanctae Sabinae, 1972; digital images of copy in F-Pn at http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k9483x), 580–81.

De inv. IV.iv.12–15 (JT:CTW). Lyra is left untranslated because Tinctoris uses it both for the ancient lyre and as the classicizing name for the modern lute, which he explicitly equates with the lyra, and its derivatives the viola, rebec, gittern, cittern, and the Turkish tambura.

Weinmann, Tinctoris, 47 n. 68.

Eratosthenis Carmina reliquiae, ed. Eduard Hiller (Leipzig: Teubner, 1872), 1–2.

Eratosthenes and Hyginus, Constellation Myths; with Aratus’s ‘Phaenomena’, trans. Robin Hard, Oxford World’s Classics (Oxford University Press, 2015), 23; see also Hard’s Introduction, esp. pp. xxiv–xxv. Ératosthène de Cyrène, Catastérismes, ed. Jordi Pàmias i Massana, Fr. trans. Arnaud Zucker, introd. Pàmias and Zucker, Collection des universités de France publiée sous le patronage de l’Association Guillaume Budé [hereafter Collection Budé] (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2013), 73, 75: ‘κατεσκευάσθη δὲ τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ὑπὸ Ἑρμοῦ ἐκ τῆς χελώνης καί τῶν Ἀπόλλωνος βοῶν’.

Isidore, Etymologiae, III.xxii.8, in Isidori Hispalensis episcopi Etymologiarum sive Originum libri XX, ed. W. M. Lindsay, 2 vols., Scriptorum classicorum bibliotheca Oxoniensis (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1911), i. [155–6]: ‘… inventam fuisse dicunt, hoc modo. Cum regrediens Nilus … (campis Isidore : terris Servius) … Quae cum putrefacta esset, … sonitum dedit. … speciem Mercurius lyram fecit et Orpheo tradidit’. Servius, commentary on Vergil, Georgics IV.463, in Servii grammatici qui feruntur In Vergilii carmina commentarii, ed. Georg Thiele and Hermann Hagen, 3 vols. in 4 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1881), iii/1. 355; Isidore’s debt to Servius is noted here.

Isidore cited: Comp. eff. xiv.3, xvi.11 (CS iv. 198a, b; Seay ii. 173, 174; Zanoncelli, 100, 102; Strohm–Cullington, 73, 74), De contr. Prol.7 (JT:CTW), De inv. I.v.69, III.viii.13 (JT:CTW); Servius cited: De inv. II.xix.41 (JT:CTW).

Hyginus, Poetic Astronomy II.vii.1, in Hygin, L’astronomie, ed. and Fr. trans. André Le Bœuffle, Collection Budé (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1983), 33: ‘Lyra inter sidera constituta est hac, ut Eratosthenes ait, de causa, quod initio a Mercurio facta de testudine, Orpheo est tradita’.

Leofranc Holford-Strevens, ‘Tinctoris on the Great Composers’, Plainsong & Medieval Music, 5 (1996): 193–9 at 194 n. 8, gives Tinctoris’s source as the so-called ‘Scholia Sangermanensia’ to the Aratus of Germanicus Caesar (a Latin translation of Aratus’ Phaenomena): Germanici Caesaris Aratea cum scholiis, ed. Alfred Breysig (Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1867), 150–51. This is very close to Isidore/Servius, but Tinctoris was using Isidore. Carl Robert, Prolegomena and Epimetrum I to Eratosthenis Catasterismorum reliquiae, ed. idem (Berlin: Weidmann, 1878), 24, 202 n. 2, argued that Eratosthenes was indeed the source of the passage in the ‘Scholia’, but the ‘Scholia’ were later shown to have been excerpted from the 8th-c. ‘interpolated recension’ of the complex Aratus Latinus, in which this is one of several passages derived from Isidore: see Ernst Maass, Prolegomena to Commentariorum in Aratum reliquiae, ed. Maass (Berlin: Weidmann, 1898), pp. xxxvii–xxxviii, 230–31; see also Pàmias and Zucker, Introduction to Ératosthène, Catastérismes, pp. lxxxiv–lxxxvii with n. 231.

De inv. IV.v.51–8 (JT:CTW), quoting Manilius, Astronomica I.324–9, ed. in M. Manilii Astronomicon, ed. A. E. Housman, 5 vols. (London: Grant Richards, 1903–30; repr. Cambridge University Press, 2011), i. 31; Manilius, Astronomica, ed. and trans. G. P. Goold, Loeb Classical Library, 469, rev. edn (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992), 30–31; M. Manilii Astronomica, ed. George P. Goold, rev. edn (Stuttgart and Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1998), 10.

L. D. Reynolds and N. G. Wilson, Scribes and Scholars: A Guide to the Transmission of Greek & Latin Literature, 4th edn (Oxford University Press, 2013), 137–9; see also Housman, introduction to Manilii Astronomicon, i, p. viii. The transcript made for Poggio still exists, though missing a leaf at the beginning: E-Mn 3678 [olim M 31] (digital images at http://bdh-rd.bne.es/viewer.vm?id=0000100797). In the diagnostic variant in line 328, fol. 4^r, it reads ‘Huic’.

15th-c. tradition: see Goold, Preface to Manilii Astronomica, pp. xxi–xxiv; of comparable influence to Poggio’s transcript was one made at Basel c.1435 (I-Vnm XII 69) of a 12th-c. MS belonging to Nicholas of Cusa (B-Br 10699), but their descendants were all copied in Italy. Vitéz: see H. W. Garrod, ‘Manilian Varieties’, The Classical Quarterly, 3 (1909), 54–9 at 54–5. Regiomontanus: see E. Zinner, Regiomontanus: His Life and Work, trans. E. Brown, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Mathematics, 1 (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1990), 238 n. 136; the date of the print is disputed but must be between 1472 and 1474. Regiomontanus had spent most of the 1460s in Italy as a member of the household of Cardinal Bessarion (a great humanist patron, especially of Greek studies) and was associated with Vitéz (a humanist and patron of astronomy and astrology) in 1467–9.

For full bibliographical data on 15th-c. editions of Manilius and other authors discussed below, see the Incunabula Short Title Catalogue (henceforth ISTC), http://data.cerl.org/istc/_search, browsing on authors’ names. For Manilius, I have consulted the copies M. Manilii Astronomicon (Nuremberg: Joannes de Regiomonte, [c.1473]; GB-Mr Incunables 3344), Marci Manlii poetae clarissimi Astronomicon (Bologna: Ugo Rugerius & Doninus Bertochus, 20 Mar. 1474; GB-Mr Incunables 3293), and M. Manilii Astronomicon (Naples: Jodocus Hoensteyn, [c.1476]; GB-Mr Incunables 3343); Leofranc Holford-Strevens informs me that GB-Ob Auct. O 5.17 (Bologna) reads ‘Huic’, contrary to what he writes in ‘Tinctoris on the Great Composers’, 195 n. 13. The Naples edition is evidently a reprint of Regiomontanus’s, reproducing even the elegiacs addressed to the reader after the end of the poem proper. The Bologna edition differs from Tinctoris’s quotation in the spelling ‘S/sydera’ and in the use of the ‘æ’ and ‘œ’ diphthongs (‘cœperat’, ‘cælestis’, ‘causæ’); it lacks the punctuation after ‘cornibus’ (l. 324) that appears in the print of De inv. but has punctuation after ‘honos’ (l. 329). Four 15th-c. Italian MSS are accessible to me: D-Mbs Clm 15743 (digital images at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0009/bsb00093135/images/), fol. 8^v, l. 328: ‘Huic’ (and many outright errors); E-Mn 4252 [olim M 175] (copied for Agostino Maffei (Verona 1431–1496 Rome); digital images at http://bdh-rd.bne.es/viewer.vm?id=0000108270), p. 14, l. 328: ‘Hinc’; I-Fl Plut. 30.15 (digital images at http://teca.bmlonline.it/ImageViewer/servlet/ImageViewer?idr=TECA0000353251), fol. [8]^r, l. 328: ‘Huic’; US-Bpr 4.Med.20 (dated Ferrara, 1461; digital images at http://archive.org/details/astronomiconlibe00mani), fol. 7^v, l. 328: ‘Huic’. The two Vossius MSS, NL-Lu VLO 3 and NL-Lu VLO 18, are both described as 15th-c. Italian in origin in Codices Vossiani Latini, ed. K. A. de Meyier, iii: Codices in octavo (Leiden: Universitaire Pers Leiden, 1977; online at http://hdl.handle.net/1887.1/item:122297), 8–10, 44–5.

See Evan A. MacCarthy, ‘Tinctoris and the Neapolitan eruditi’, Journal of the Alamire Foundation, 5 (2013): 41–67 at 64. [L]Aurentii Bonincontrii … In .C. Manilium commentum (Rome: n.p., 26 Oct. 1484; GB-Mr 16144; digital images of D-Mbs 2o Inc. c.a. 1476 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0007/bsb00072108/images/), fol. [21]^r–v. Cecil Grayson, ‘Bonincontri, Lorenzo’, in Dizionario biografico degli italiani (Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, 1960– ), xii. 209–11 (1971; online at http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/lorenzo-bonincontri_(Dizionario-Biografico)/). All the sources cited above read ‘manesque’ in l. 326, and none give the praenomen Gaius (Gaius Manilius, tribune of the people in 66 bc, is referred to in Cicero’s oration On Pompey’s Command). Bonincontri also extends the pericope one line further than Tinctoris, who would surely have followed suit if he had been working from the commented text.

Ronald Woodley, ‘Renaissance Music Theory as Literature: On Reading the Proportionale musices of Johannes Tinctoris’, Renaissance Studies, 1 (1987): 209–20. See also Leofranc Holford-Strevens, ‘Classicising the Unclassical: The Challenge of Music Theory’, in Brill’s Encyclopaedia of the Neo-Latin World, ed. Philip Ford, Jan Bloemendal, and Charles Fantazzi, i: Macropaedia (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 505–17 at 506–8.

Some of these are identified in Holford-Strevens, ‘Tinctoris on the Great Composers’, 194 n. 8, others in De contr. and De inv. (JT:CTW), passim.

De contr. III.viii.7 (JT:CTW, expected soon; for the Latin, see meanwhile Johannes Tinctoris, Proportionale musices; Liber de arte contrapuncti, ed. and Ital. trans. Gianluca D’Agostino (Florence: Edizioni del Galuzzo for Fondazione Ezio Franceschini, 2008; hereafter D’A), 378.

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, VII.xiv.1154b28–31, trans. Leonardo Bruni as Aristotelis Ethycorum liber ex Leonardo Aretino traductus ([Bologna: ? Ugo Rugerius, c.1475]; GB-Lbl G.7980), pp. [137–8]. Other editions to 1483: no title ([Strasburg: Johann Mentelin, before 10 April 1469]; GB-Lbl G.8005; digital images of D-Mbs 2o Inc. s.a. 96b at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0007/bsb00070900/images/), p. [123]; Aristotelis Philosophi Ethicorum ad Nicomachum liber (Rome: Conradus Sweynheym & Arnuldus Pannartz, 11 Jan. 1473; GB-Lbl IB.17205), p. [102]; n.t. ([Barcelona: Henricus Botel, Georgius vom Holtz, & Johannes Planck, c.1473]; GB-Lbl IB.52500), p. [157]; n.t. ([Valencia: Lambert Palmart, 1473×4]; GB-Lbl IB.52000), p. [156]. Capitalization and punctuation modernized; italics added to clarify Tinctoris’s manner of quotation. Neither of the Aragonese editions is now recorded in an Italian library (ISTC). The Rome edition omits ‘secundum’, making the passage less intelligible; the only other variants in this excerpt are the spellings ‘Variacio’ in Strasburg and ‘nequiciam’ in Strasburg and Valencia. Tinctoris’s use of ‘ac’ in his other citation (see n. 59 below) implies he depended on the Rome or Bologna edition. The garbled text of the Rome edition may explain Tinctoris’s distortion of Aristotle’s meaning.

Grosseteste: [Opera] Aristotelis cum commento maximi peripatetici Averois, 3 vols. in 8 parts (Venice: Andreas de Asula & Bartholomeus Alexandrinus, 1483), vol. iii/2 (digital images of D-Mbs 2o Inc. c.a. 1289-1,1 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0003/bsb00031029/images/), sig. [C 6]^rb: ‘“Transmutatio” autem “omnium dulcissimum” secundum poetam, propter maliciam quandam. Quemadmodum enim homo facile transmutabilis qui malus, et natura que indiget transmutatione; non enim simplex neque epiekes.’ Argyropulus: Ethica Aristotelica, Ioanne Argyropylo interprete (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 1 Sept. 1492; digital images of D-Mbs 2o Inc. c.a. 2680 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0004/bsb00046117/images/), sig. k3^v: ‘“Mutatio” vero “omnium dulcissimum est” secundum poetam, ob pravitatem quandam. Ut enim homo pravus facile est mutabilis, si et natura prava est <ea>, quae indiget mutatione. Non est enim simplex nec bona.” The missing ‘ea’ is supplied from (Florence: Nicolaus [Laurentii], [not after 1479]; GB-Lbl IB.27087), sig. [m.vi]^r.

De inv. I.v.74 (JT:CTW).

Arist. Eth. Nic. II.i.1103b8–9, Bruni trans. (Bologna), pp. [18–19]; (Strasburg), p. [23]; (Rome), p. [18]; (Barcelona), p. [37]; (Valencia), p. [31]. Capitalization and punctuation modernized; italics added to clarify Tinctoris’s manner of quotation. Variants: iisdem R Ba Bo : hiisdem S : hisdem V | ac R Bo : atque S Ba V | pulsatione R Ba V Bo : pulsacione S | cithare … citharedi R Bo : cythare … cytharedi S Ba V. Grosseteste, sig. A 3^vb: ‘Adhuc ex eisdem et per eadem et fit omnis virtus et corrumpitur, similiter autem et ars: ex citharizante enim et boni et mali fiunt cithariste’; Argyropulus, (Florence), sig. [b.vii]^v, (Rome), sig. [b6]^r–v: ‘Insuper ex eisdem et per eadem omnis virtus et ars similiter et fit et corrumpitur. Ex eo nanque quia pulsant citharam et boni et mali fiunt citharedi’.

De inv. IV.v.19 (JT:CTW).

Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca historica IV.xxv.2; trans. Poggio Bracciolini as Historiarum priscarum … liber primus [etc.] (Bologna: [Balthasar Azoguidus], 1472; GB-Mr Incunables 18325), fol. [62]^r; (Venice: Andreas Jacobi Katharensis, 31 Jan. 1477; GB-Mr Incunables 18389; digital images of D-Mbs 2o Inc. c.a. 474 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0005/bsb00052255/images/), sig. [.k.vi.]^r; (Venice: Thomas Alexandrinus, 25 Nov. 1481; digital images of D-Mbs 2o L. impr. c.n. mss. 70, Beibd. 2 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0004/bsb00047656/images/), sig. [m v]^r–v. Capitalization and punctuation modernized; italics added to clarify Tinctoris’s manner of quotation. The expression ‘praeceteris’ is given without word division in the first two editions, hyphenated ‘p(rae)-ceteris’ at line end in the third.

See Anthony Grafton, ‘Conflict and Harmony in the Collegium Gellianum’, in The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, ed. Leofranc Holford-Strevens and Amiel Vardi (Oxford University Press, 2004), 318–42, esp. 321–2.

De inv. III.ix.5–7 (JT:CTW).

Plutarch, Quaestiones romanae lv (277e–f); trans. Giovan Pietro d’Avenza as Plutarchi Problemata (Venice: Dominicus Siliprandus, [c.1477]; digital images of D-Mbs 4o Inc. c.a. 1117, Beibd. 2 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0006/bsb00061195/images/), sigs. [c 8]^v–d^r. Capitalization and punctuation modernized; italics added to clarify Tinctoris’s manner of quotation. The other edition printed before 1483 ([Ferrara: Andreas Belfortis, not before 1477]; GB-Lbl IA.25628.), sigs. [c 8]^v–e^r, is a reprint of the Venetian edition, including even the editor’s encomium of Siliprandus at the end; it gives the nonsensical punctuation ‘tangebantur: animi’.

See e.g. Andrew Barker, Greek Musical Writings, 2 vols. (Cambridge University Press, 1984–9), ii. 85–97.

De inv. III.ix.22–3 (JT:CTW).

Appian, Roman History VIII.ix.65–6 (295); trans. Pier Candido Decembrio as Appiani sophistę Alexandrini Romana historia, 2 vols. (Venice: Bernardus Pictor & Erhardus Ratdolt, 1477; GB-Mr Incunables 13836; digital images of D-Mbs 4o A. gr. b. 141-1 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0004/bsb00045740/images/), i, sigs. [a 7]^r, c 4^r, c 4^v. Capitalization and punctuation modernized; italics added to clarify Tinctoris’s manner of quotation. The earlier edition of Appian ([Venice]: Vindelinus de Spira, 1472) does not include the Punic Wars; see the ISTC record, http://data.cerl.org/istc/ia00931000.

Terence, Andria 114b: ‘Quid multis moror?’ Tinctoris has ‘verbis’ also in De contr. II.xxxi.7 (JT:CTW, expected soon; D’A 354, where the chapter is falsely numbered ‘xxx’ as in the MSS).

Comp. eff. xvi.7 (CS iv. 198b; Seay ii. 174; Zanoncelli, 102; Strohm–Cullington, 74), transcribed from the unique source for this passage, G, fol. 76^va. Variants: Thimotheus G : Thimoteus CS : Timotheus Seay | tibicen Zanoncelli : tubicen G CS Seay.

Dio Chrysostom, On Kingship I.1–2, trans. Gregorius Tiphernas as Dionis libellum De regno ([Venice: Christophorus Valdarfer, 1 Jan. 1469 × 9 Nov. 1471]; GB-Mr Incunables 11568, GB-Mr Incunables R68822; digital images of D-Mbs 4o Inc. s.a. 666 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0005/bsb00052280/images/), fol. [3]^r–v. Capitalization and punctuation modernized.

On the Orthios nomos, see Barker, Greek Musical Writings, i. 249–55, esp. 253; dictionary definitions of orthius and ὄρθιος are less well informed. ‘Orchum’ may be a misprint for ‘orthium’, although confusion between ‘t’ and ‘c’ is much harder in the humanistic script Tiphernas probably wrote than in gothic scripts; confusion between θ and χ in the Greek text he had before him is even less likely. However the corruption arose, it is probable that Tiphernas did not understand what he saw and so left it untranslated, as other humanists sometimes did (and cf. Grosseteste in n. 57 above).

Basil, Address to the Young viii.8, trans. Leonardo Bruni without title as appendix to Plutarchi tractatus [De liberis educandis], trans. Guarinus Veronensis (Parma: Andreas Portilia, 23 Sept. 1472), fols. [25]^r–[39]^r at [33]^v; I am grateful to Leofranc Holford-Strevens for communicating details of the copy GB-Ob Auct. Q 5.57 to me. Capitalization and punctuation modernized; italics added to clarify Tinctoris’s manner of quotation in De inv. Other editions to 1483: Magni Basilii De institutis et disciplinis iuvenum liber ([Venice: Paulus Butzbach & Georgius de Augusta, c.1471–2]; digital images of D-Mbs 8o Inc. s.a. 23s at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0004/bsb00047889/images/), fol. [6]^v; Magni Basilii De legendis poetis (Buda: A[ndreas] H[ess], [c.1473]; digital images of D-Eu 13/1 P III 771 at http://bvbm1.bib-bvb.de/webclient/DeliveryManager?custom_att_2=simple_viewer&pid=3670073), fol. ‘8/10’^r; Sancti Basilii De liberalibus studiis et ingenuis moribus ([Milan: Philippus de Lavagna, c.1474]; GB-Lu Inc. 11), p. ‘13’ (misprinted as [8]); Magni Basilii liber Ad iuvenes quantum ex gentilium libris ac litteris proficiant ([Nuremberg: Regiomontanus, c.1474]; digital images of D-Mbs 4o Inc. s.a. 1910, Beibd. 1 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0004/bsb00041360/images/), fol. ‘24’=[7]^r; another, typographically distinct edition of the latter (digital images of A-Wn 2.H.15. at http://data.onb.ac.at/dtl/5207039), fol. 7^r; Magni Basilii … De legendis libris secularibus opusculum ([Ulm: Johann Zainer, c.1478]; digital images of D-Mbs 4o Inc. s.a. 298 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0004/bsb00041362/images/), fol. [10]^r, dependent on the 2nd Nuremberg edition. Tinctoris cannot have used the Venice edition because it has the word order ‘aliquando cum Alexandri in convivio’ (Milan begins ‘aliquando cum in’, all the other editions ‘cum aliquando in’). The use of ‘quom’ in the Parma edition is not diagnostic, since this was Tinctoris’s consistent usage for cum (conjunction), and he might have altered what he had before him. For ‘comessationes’ (a common misspelling of comissationes influenced by comedo, to eat) Venice has ‘comensationes’, Buda ‘commessationes’, Milan ‘commessatores’, both Nuremberg editions and Ulm ‘comesatores’.

De contr. III.ix.7 (JT:CTW, expected soon; D’A 380): ‘musicum “divinum”, ut Demodocum ab Homero … dictum fuisse comperi’; Holford-Strevens, ‘Tinctoris on the Great Composers’, 193–5.

I-Fl Plut. 34.45 (digital images at http://teca.bmlonline.it/ImageViewer/servlet/ImageViewer?idr=TECA0000406515), fols. 47^v, 87^r. Capitalization and punctuation modernized; italics added to clarify Tinctoris’s manner of quotation. See Agostino Pertusi, Leonzio Pilato fra Petrarca e Boccaccio: le sue versioni omeriche negli autografi di Venezia e la cultura greca del primo Umanesimo (Venice and Rome: Istituto per la Collaborazione Culturale, 1964), esp. 154–5 (description of the MS), 522–9 (list of all Latin translations of Homer up to 1776). On fol. 82^v of the MS, the passage quoted in Holford-Strevens, ‘Tinctoris on the Great Composers’, 194, has the following variants: 186 hac : hic GB-Cu Mm III 4 | 188 vadit : vidit Cu : redit H-S. On the survival with progressive improvement of Pilatus’s translations up to the end of the 17th c., see Robin Sowerby, ‘The Homeric Versio latina’, Illinois Classical Studies, 21 (1996): 161–202, esp. 165–7 on an improved version of the Iliad ‘used, it seems, by Andronicus Callistus when he explicated Homer in the Florentine Academy during his sojourn there from 1471–75’. Pertusi, Leonzio Pilato, 531–63, discusses an improved Odyssey MS dated 18 Dec. 1398.

Odyssea Homeri a Francisco Griffolino Aretino in latinum translata: die lateinische Odyssee-Übersetzung des Francesco Griffolini, ed. Bernd Schneider and Christina Meckelnborg, Mittellateinische Studien und Texte, 43 (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 131, 191. Italics added to clarify Tinctoris’s manner of quotation. The characterization of Griffolini’s prose is Holford-Strevens’s.

Pertusi, Leonzio Pilato, 158–9.

His explanation of the prefix dy- ‘from “dya” with Greek y, which is “two”’ in De contr. I.iv.6 etc. (JT:CTW) is mistaken (‘two’ in Greek is dyo (δύο), and the prefix is di‑, not dy‑); and he forebore to give the Greek names of the notes, which he could easily have obtained from Boethius. See Holford-Strevens, ‘Tinctoris on the Great Composers’, 194: ‘Had Tinctoris known Greek, he would no doubt have informed us’; Holford-Strevens, ‘The laudes musicae’, 340: ‘he cannot have known Greek, or he would never have stopped displaying it’; Holford-Strevens, ‘Classicising the Unclassical’, 507: ‘he had no Greek, which he would have flaunted’.

This possibility was raised by Sean Gallagher and Evan MacCarthy separately in discussion after presentation of this material as conference papers.

Prop. mus. III.ii.21 (CS iv. 170b; Seay iia. 45). Variants: regio BU Br1 cet. : regis V : regio supple capelle regis Sicilie G. The book cited probably comprised a mixture of sacred and secular music, like the celebrated GB-Ob Canon. misc. 213 (which includes the Credo in question, K19), so would not have been in the royal chapel collection (pace G) but rather the royal library. It may have been the ‘Liber diversarum cantionum’ included among the books sent from the royal library to Lorenzo de’ Medici (possibly Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco rather than il Magnifico, as the list includes Appian; see the following note): De Marinis, Biblioteca napoletana, ii. 194 (B 72), 197 (B 153). The book of ‘canzoni et muttetti alla francese’ in the inventory of books sent from Ferrara in 1527 to Ferrante d’Aragona, duke of Calabria, in Valencia began with a chanson by Hayne van Ghizeghem and ended with one by Loÿset Compère, probably too late a repertoire to include a Credo by Binchois: Paolo Cherchi and Teresa De Robertis, ‘Un inventario della biblioteca aragonese’, Italia medioevale e umanistica, 33 (1990): 109–373 at 241 (no. 216); likewise the (necessarily different) book given away in 1523 ‘A Joan Michael, francese, cantor del signore Duca de Ferrara lo canzonero in francese’: Santiago López-Ríos, ‘A New Inventory of the Royal Aragonese Library of Naples’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 65 (2002): 201–43 at 240 (M2 8). Since the chansonnier sent to Valencia was labeled ‘Mottetti 3’, it is entirely possible that three distinct music books are attested in these disparate inventories, though each includes just one.

Appian: the Aragonese arms on fol. 1^r of E-VAu 617 [olim 830] (digital images at http://weblioteca.uv.es/cgi/view.pl?source=uv_ms_0617) are surmounted by a ducal coronet; the owner was probably Alfonso, duke of Calabria, who succeeded Ferrante as king in 1494. The text appears to have been copied from the printed edition of 1477, shoulder notes and all. See De Marinis, Biblioteca napoletana, ii. 12, 218 (G 514); Cherchi and De Robertis, ‘Inventario’, 212 (no. 155). The ‘Appianus Alexandrinus’ listed in De Marinis, Biblioteca napoletana, ii. 197 (B 153), may be either this volume or the one sold by King Federico’s widow in 1523: López-Ríos, ‘New Inventory’, 225 (M1 66).

Basil, Ad iuvenes religiosos liber quibus studiis opera danda sit, is in F-Pn lat. 1703 (digital images at http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b84467933), fols. 88^v–94^v; this MS was not originally copied for a member of the Aragonese royal family and is thought to have been confiscated after the ‘conspiracy of the barons’ in 1485–6: see the Bibliothèque nationale’s catalogue record, http://archivesetmanuscrits.bnf.fr/ead.html?id=FRBNFEAD000058871. (The ‘lecenceato’ indicated on fol. 100^v need not be Narciso Verduno but might be any licentiate of laws, such as Tinctoris himself was.) This book was lent to Lorenzo de’ Medici and later sold by King Federico to Georges I d’Amboise in 1501×4: De Marinis, Biblioteca napoletana, ii. 25, 200 (B 415), 202 (C 48).

Homer: ibid., ii. 189 (A 112): ‘Odissea, in papiro, traducta’; 197 (B 218): ‘Odyssea per Homeri eundem Franciscum [arretinum]’. The book is not known to survive.

See Martin Lowry, Nicholas Jenson and the Rise of Venetian Publishing in Renaissance Europe (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), 196 (table 7.3, average prices), 187 (‘6.4 lire to the ducat’); Allan W. Atlas, Music at the Aragonese Court of Naples (Cambridge University Press, 1985), 36–7 (range of known salaries, 43–300 ducats p.a.). I have made the cautious approximation of 100 ducats for Tinctoris’s (unrecorded) salary.

De inv. I.v.14–15, xi.7 (JT:CTW).

Woodley, ‘Printing and Scope’, 263, 267.

‘Nunc primum ex mss. Codicis eruti’: title page of Eusebii Pamphili Caesariensis episcopi Commentarii in Psalmos, ed. and Lat. trans. Bernard de Montfaucon, Collectio nova Patrum et scriptorum Graecorum, 1 (Paris: Claude Rigaud, 1707; digital images of US-NYp ZEL++ (Montfaucon …) v. 1 at https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5GdZAAAAYAAJ). See Michael J. Hollerich, ‘Eusebius’ Commentary on the Psalms and its Place in the Origins of Christian Biblical Scholarship’, in Eusebius of Caesarea: Tradition and Innovations, ed. Aaron Johnson and Jeremy Schott, Hellenic studies, 60 (Washington, D.C.: Center for Hellenic Studies, 2013): 151–67 (online at http://chs.harvard.edu/CHS/article/display/5874).

Lowry, Nicholas Jenson, 52–4.

Eusebius, Praeparatio evangelica XII.xx, xxii, trans. Georgius Trapezuntius as De evangelica praeparatione ([Venice]: Nicolaus Jenson, 1470; GB-Mr Incunables 15109; digital images of D-Mbs 2o Inc. c.a. 27m at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0005/bsb00052558/images/), XII.xiv, xvi, p. [241]. Later edns: ([Cologne: Ulrich Zell, not after 1473]; digital images of D-Mbs 2o Inc. s.a. 417 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0004/bsb00042002/images/), fols. [129]^v–[130]^r; ([Venice]: Leonhardus Aurl, 1473; GB-Mr Incunables 15366, GB-Mr Incunables R38260, GB-Mr Incunables R214384 [olim Christie 3 h 17]; digital images of D-Mbs 2o Inc. c.a. 208a at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0005/bsb00052561/images/), pp. [254–5]; (Treviso: Michael Manzolinus, 12 Jan. 1480; digital images of D-Mbs 2o Inc. c.a. 944 at http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0006/bsb00069240/images/), sig. niii.^r–v. Note that the two passages cited are on facing pages in the Zell and Aurl editions, over a page turn in Manzolinus. The only variation among the four editions in any of the passages here discussed is the consistent orthography in Zell of ‘‑ci‑’ for ‘‑ti‑’ and ‘e’ for ‘ae’. GB-Lbl Harley 4965 (http://www.bl.uk/catalogues/illuminatedmanuscripts/record.asp?MSID=8207&CollID=8&NStart=4965) is a manuscript copied in Florence for King Ferrante and dated 12 Aug. 1482 (quite late for it to have been used by Tinctoris, but another copy was already in the royal library on 19 Jan. 1481); see De Marinis, Biblioteca napoletana, ii. 69, 200 (B 406), 188 (A 51).

De inv. II.xx.7–8 (JT:CTW).

Eusebius, Praeparatio evangelica IX.i; Jenson, p. [169]; Zell, fol. [92]r; Aurl, p. [178]; Manzolinus, sig. [i v.]^r.

See Jean Bouffartigue and Michel Patillon, Introduction to Porphyre, De l’abstinence, ed. and Fr. trans. Bouffartigue, Patillon, and Alain Ph. Segonds with Luc Brisson, 3 vols., Collection Budé (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1977–95), i, pp. lxix–lxx, lxxv–lxxviii.

Comp. eff. v–vi, in Carlerius and Tinctoris, On the Dignity & the Effects, 54–5 (CS iv. 194, 196; Seay ii. 169–70; Zanoncelli, 86–8).

Woodley, ‘Printing and Scope’, 251.

Woodley, ‘Printing and Scope’, 257, 246. De inventione* is his designation for the unknown entire text.

See James Hankins, Introduction to Leonardo Bruni, History of the Florentine People, ed. and trans. idem, 3 vols., I Tatti Renaissance Library, 3, 16, 27 (Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press, 2001–7), i, pp. xiv–xix, esp. xvii–xviii; James Hankins, ‘Humanism and Music in Italy’, in The Cambridge History of Fifteenth-Century Music, ed. Anna Maria Busse Berger and Jesse Rodin (Cambridge University Press, 2015), 231–62 at 232. I do not accept Hankins’s argument, pp. 242–5, that Tinctoris adopted the tripartite humanistic schema; medieval writers regularly appealed to Old Testament precedents for contemporaneous practices and institutions, as Tinctoris did. Hankins, p. 245, rightly connects Tinctoris’s concept of musical progress to Cicero’s of oratorical progress. Reinhard Strohm, ‘Music, Humanism, and the Idea of a “Rebirth” of the Arts’, in Music as Concept and Practice in the Late Middle Ages, ed. Strohm and Bonnie J. Blackburn, The New Oxford History of Music, 3/1, new edn (Oxford University Press, 2001), 346–405, overestimates the evidence for ‘rebirth’ in music (as distinct from new excellence) but is valuable in other repects. Ancient arts could be concretely ‘reborn’ in architecture, sculpture, literature, and even script, but owing to lack of examples not in painting before the discovery in Rome of the Domus Aurea of ‘Titus’ (actually Nero) about 1480, or in musical composition before Vincenzo Galilei a century later published some 2nd-c. melodies by ‘Dionysios’ (now considered to be Mesomedes), supplied to him by Girolamo Mei: Dialogo della musica antica et moderna (Florence: Giorgio Marescotti, 1581; facs. with introd. by Fabio Fano, Rome: Reale Accademia d’Italia, 1934; facs., MMMLF II, 20, New York: Broude Brothers, 1967), 97. As Tinctoris observed, ‘Quibusquidem concordantiis licet veteres etiam musici … operosissime incubuerint, tamen qualiter eas ordinare componereque soliti sint nobis minime notum est.’ (Although the ancient musicians also have most painstakingly dwelt on these concords, nevertheless how they used to arrange and compose them is scarcely known to us.) De contr. Prol.12 (JT:CTW).

Johannes Gallicus, Ritus canendi vetustissimus et novus, in CS iv. 298a–396b at 299a: ‘Gallia namque me genuit et fecit cantorem.—Ytalia vero … grammaticum et musicum.’ See Claude V. Palisca, Humanism in Italian Renaissance Musical Thought (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1985), 7, 227, 280–83; Stefano Mengozzi, The Renaissance Reform of Medieval Music Theory: Guido of Arezzo between Myth and History (Cambridge University Press, 2010), chap. 6, ‘Normalizing the Humanist: Johannes Gallicus as a “follower of Guido”’, esp. 142–8, 150, 163.

Palisca, Humanism, 181–5. Strohm, ‘Music, Humanism, and “Rebirth”’, 364–5; cf. p. 2 above. Reinhard Strohm, The Rise of European Music, 1380–1500 (Cambridge University Press, 1993), 595. Leon Battista Alberti, On Painting, trans. Rocco Sinisgalli (Cambridge University Press, 2011), 63 with n. 62. See Adam Whittaker, ‘Musical Exemplarity in the Notational Treatises of Johannes Tinctoris (c.1435–1511)’ (PhD dissertation, Birmingham City University, 2015; uk.bl.ethos.695295), 47–65. Alexis Luko, ‘Tinctoris on varietas’, Early Music History, 27 (2008): 99–136 at 126–30, demonstrates a much more meaningful relationship between Tinctoris and On painting; Hankins, ‘Humanism and Music’, 243, connects De inventione to Alberti’s De re aedificatoria [On architecture].

False modesty: ‘inter musice professores minimus’: Exp. man. Prol.2 (CS iv. 1a; Seay i. 31), De punct. Prol.2 (JT:CTW); ‘eiusdem artis [sc. musice] professor minimus’: De imperf. Prol.2 (JT:CTW); ‘eorum qui musicam profitentur infimus’: Diff. Prol.2 (CS iv. 177b; p. 2 Panti); ‘inter musice professores suosque [sc. regis Ferdinandi] capellanos minimus’: Prop. mus. Prol.2 (CS iv. 153b; Seay iia. 9); ‘inter cantores regis Sicilie minimus’: De not. et paus. Prol.2 (JT:CTW); ‘inter musicos eius [sc. regis Ferdinandi] minimus’: De contr. Prol.2 (JT:CTW); ‘inter eos qui iura scientiasque mathematicas profitentur minimus’: De ton. Prol.2 (CS iv. 16b; Seay i. 65); ‘inter legum ac artium mathematicarum studiosos minimus’ De alt. Prol.2 (JT:CTW); ‘inter legum artiumque mathematicarum professores minimus’: Comp. eff. Prol.2 (CS iv. 191b; Seay ii. 165; Zanoncelli, 74; Strohm–Cullington, 67).

Self-assurance: e.g. Diff. Prol.13 (Panti, 4): ‘si in theoria musices pariter et praxi omnes nostri temporis cantores excedam aut excedar ab aliquo, tue ceterorumque in ipsa arte peritissimorum perspicientie discurrendum relinquo’ (whether I might excel all singers of our time in the theory of music as well as the practice or be excelled by anyone, I leave to be discussed by your knowledge and that of others most skilled in the art); see also De alt. iii (JT:CTW).

‘huic licet editioni, eo quod ardua sit, tum theologiam, tum philosophiam, tum poesim concernens, ingenium cantoris impar agnoscas, haud me vitii presumptionis profecto accusabis si non ignores in ardua tendere proprium esse virtutis’: Comp. eff. Prol.18 (CS iv. 192b; Seay ii. 166; Zanoncelli, 78; Strohm–Cullington, 68), transcribed from the unique source for this passage, Br1, fol. 125^rb. Variant: vitii edd. : vicii Br1.

Ronald Woodley, ‘Tinctoris’s Italian Translation of the Golden Fleece Statutes’, 236, 244. Cf. MacCarthy, ‘Tinctoris and the Neapolitan eruditi’, 42–4; Bianchi, ‘Scholars, friends, plagiarists’, 100.

MacCarthy, ‘Tinctoris and the Neapolitan eruditi’, esp. 43–4, 45–6. Instances of the word eruditi referred to: De contr. Prol.14 (JT:CTW); compare De contr. I.v.5, x.10, xv.5 (JT:CTW), II.xxxi.10 (JT:CTW, expected soon; D’A 354); De contr. II.xxii.7 (JT:CTW, expected soon; D’A 322), De inv. II.xx.21, III.viii.8, IV.v.48, 60, V.xxiv.23 (JT:CTW); De contr. II.xxxi.6 (JT:CTW, expected soon; D’A 354): ‘Et quis obsecro eruditorum pictorum visum delectare nitentium’ (And pray, which of the learned painters striving to delight the sight), De inv. IV.v.68 (JT:CTW): ‘viros quidem non minus litteris eruditos quam in cantibus expertos’ (men indeed no less learned in letters than accomplished in music).