Le vestigia di un perduto trattato teorico-musicale nel ms. Bruxelles, Bibliothèque royale de Belgique, II 785

At first, the paper illustrates the general features of the manuscript Bruxelles, Bibliothèque royale de Belgique, II 785. The manuscript is a 15th century Italian com-pilation of music theory comprising an anonymous short text, Antonius de Luca’s Ars cantus figurati, Marchetto da Padova’s Lucidarium, the Cum notum sit, and a fragment from Nicolò Burzio’s Florum libellus. Previous hypothesis about the making, copyist, age and geographical origin of the manuscript are presented and discussed. Secondly, the paper focuses on the first text of the collection (f. 1rv), that includes basic defi-nitions of music, musicus, mensural polyphony and plainchant, and a vehement ex-pression of disapproval against unidentified and still shadowy ’music haters‘. Formerly believed to be a preface written by the compiler and first owner of the manuscript, it is instead proven to be a fragment from a lost late 14th or early 15th century treatise by an unknown ecclesiastic. Linguistic idiosyncrasies, source...

At first, the paper illustrates the general features of the manuscript Bruxelles, Bibliothèque royale de Belgique, II 785. The manuscript is a 15th century Italian com-pilation of music theory comprising an anonymous short text, Antonius de Luca’s Ars cantus figurati, Marchetto da Padova’s Lucidarium, the Cum notum sit, and a fragment from Nicolò Burzio’s Florum libellus. Previous hypothesis about the making, copyist, age and geographical origin of the manuscript are presented and discussed. Secondly, the paper focuses on the first text of the collection (f. 1rv), that includes basic defi-nitions of music, musicus, mensural polyphony and plainchant, and a vehement ex-pression of disapproval against unidentified and still shadowy ’music haters‘. Formerly believed to be a preface written by the compiler and first owner of the manuscript, it is instead proven to be a fragment from a lost late 14th or early 15th century treatise by an unknown ecclesiastic. Linguistic idiosyncrasies, sources and musical contents are examined, in order to outline the profile of the author. The critical edition of the fragment is presented in the appendix.