1
!!" #$ $
$" %" " &’ " (
$$ ) * +
" # % ,"
# % # + " $ $
$ - " " $" " " $ -
% . "
# #" $ % %
$ $
/
$
% $ $" % # 0 1
" % # $$
2 $ " 2
# 3 $$
4
$ "
# % 5 6
7
% $
# 5 6) 8
$" # %
%# "
5 6 05961
:
;#"
" %$ #
% # " #$ <
(# " % %
$" % # 3
= 5 6 3 5 6
"
>
" # % "
$ % # %
? - ( # # "
1
Susan McClary speaks about the “seventeenth-century-interregnum”, whose memory was “expunged” by
tonality of the Enlightenment epoch (in: Towards a History of Harmonic Tonality, in: Towards Tonality, Leuven
2007, p. 117). I am in total agreement with her on this point, but doubt whether the term “interregnum” is the
most suitable one. The 17th century seems to be an interregnum if we look at it from the perspective of tonal
ideology. If we try to understand it from its own point of view, it reveals its own logical system and becomes – if
we preserve the picture – a long-lasting kingdom with its own laws.
2 The Renaissance also remains the point of orientation in the arts.
3 I should like to refer here to two important articles by Markus Jans, ‘Alle gegen Eine. Satzmodelle in Note-
gegen-Note-Sätzen des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts’ in Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis, 10,
(Winterthur, 1987), pp. 101–120 and ‘Modale "Harmonik". Beobachtungen und Fragen zur Logik der
Klangverbindungen im 16. und frühen 17. Jahrhundert’ in Basler Jahrbuch für historische Musikpraxis,
(Winterthur, 1993), pp. 167-188.
4 Even at the end of the century, as in Georg Muffat, Regulae concentuum partiturae, ed. by Bettina Hoffmann
und Stefano Lorenzetti (Bologna – Roma: Associazione Clavicembalistica Bolognese, 1991) 1-bis
5 Rolf Dammann, Der Musikbegriff im deutschen Barock (Laaber, 1995), p. 195.