{"title":"尚蒂利手稿缺席的第一次收集","authors":"M. Bent","doi":"10.1017/S0961137116000103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Chantilly manuscript, probably compiled in the 1410s, is thought to have lost an original first sestern early in its history, as the folio numbers start at 13. Because the table of contents matches the order of pieces in the manuscript and starts with the present first item and at fol. 13, it has been assumed that it post-dates the sestern's loss. But the folio numbers were added to that table not by its original hand, but by a later (Italian) one, and that same hand wrote the foliation for the manuscript; table and foliation were therefore almost certainly provided in the same operation. If the table of contents was post factum, why is its foliation in a hand different from the incipits? This article argues that the table of contents was in fact prescriptive, drawn up by a different (French) person before the contents were copied, and that the foliation was added both to the index and the body of the manuscript after copying, allowing for a new planned gathering to be added at the beginning, perhaps including the two Cordier rondeaux. This was never completed; what we have is what there was, and nothing was lost. This hypothesis raises further questions about the codicological and chronological relation of the Cordier songs to the index, to that planned gathering, and to the early history of the manuscript, questions to which provisional answers are suggested.","PeriodicalId":41539,"journal":{"name":"Plainsong & Medieval Music","volume":"26 1","pages":"19 - 36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0961137116000103","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The absent first gathering of the Chantilly manuscript\",\"authors\":\"M. Bent\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0961137116000103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Chantilly manuscript, probably compiled in the 1410s, is thought to have lost an original first sestern early in its history, as the folio numbers start at 13. Because the table of contents matches the order of pieces in the manuscript and starts with the present first item and at fol. 13, it has been assumed that it post-dates the sestern's loss. But the folio numbers were added to that table not by its original hand, but by a later (Italian) one, and that same hand wrote the foliation for the manuscript; table and foliation were therefore almost certainly provided in the same operation. If the table of contents was post factum, why is its foliation in a hand different from the incipits? This article argues that the table of contents was in fact prescriptive, drawn up by a different (French) person before the contents were copied, and that the foliation was added both to the index and the body of the manuscript after copying, allowing for a new planned gathering to be added at the beginning, perhaps including the two Cordier rondeaux. This was never completed; what we have is what there was, and nothing was lost. This hypothesis raises further questions about the codicological and chronological relation of the Cordier songs to the index, to that planned gathering, and to the early history of the manuscript, questions to which provisional answers are suggested.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41539,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Plainsong & Medieval Music\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"19 - 36\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0961137116000103\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Plainsong & Medieval Music\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0961137116000103\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plainsong & Medieval Music","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0961137116000103","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The absent first gathering of the Chantilly manuscript
ABSTRACT The Chantilly manuscript, probably compiled in the 1410s, is thought to have lost an original first sestern early in its history, as the folio numbers start at 13. Because the table of contents matches the order of pieces in the manuscript and starts with the present first item and at fol. 13, it has been assumed that it post-dates the sestern's loss. But the folio numbers were added to that table not by its original hand, but by a later (Italian) one, and that same hand wrote the foliation for the manuscript; table and foliation were therefore almost certainly provided in the same operation. If the table of contents was post factum, why is its foliation in a hand different from the incipits? This article argues that the table of contents was in fact prescriptive, drawn up by a different (French) person before the contents were copied, and that the foliation was added both to the index and the body of the manuscript after copying, allowing for a new planned gathering to be added at the beginning, perhaps including the two Cordier rondeaux. This was never completed; what we have is what there was, and nothing was lost. This hypothesis raises further questions about the codicological and chronological relation of the Cordier songs to the index, to that planned gathering, and to the early history of the manuscript, questions to which provisional answers are suggested.
期刊介绍:
Plainsong & Medieval Music is published twice a year in association with the Plainsong and Medieval Music Society and Cantus Planus, study group of the International Musicological Society. It covers the entire spectrum of medieval music: Eastern and Western chant, secular lyric, music theory, palaeography, performance practice, and medieval polyphony, both sacred and secular, as well as the history of musical institutions. The chronological scope of the journal extends from late antiquity to the early Renaissance and to the present day in the case of chant. In addition to book reviews in each issue, a comprehensive bibliography of chant research and a discography of recent and re-issued plainchant recordings appear annually.