6 books about music

The essay “6 books about music” was written by Bl. Aurelius Augustine in 387 in Cassiciac (probably the current city of Cassago Brianza in Italy). The author examines complex issues of metrics, prosody, rhythm, and says that music and poetry elevate the human spirit to God. The teachings of the blessed Augustine's idea of ​​music in general comes from the ancient doctrine of the numerical structure of the cosmos: the laws of numbers are projected onto the laws of music. The treatise contains the famous definition of music: “Musica est scientia bene modulandi” (“Music is the science of good proportioning” or “Music is the science of modulating well”). In Book 1 blzh. Augustine explains in detail each part of this definition, laying out the basics of music. Books 2-5 contain the fundamental theory of rhythm (mainly poetic), which became the culminating point of the development of ancient metrics. Blzh. Augustine completely reworks the teachings of Latin grammars and connects the traditional rules of metrics with numerical patterns. This makes its rhythmology unique for the ancient era. He sets out the rules of metrics that follow from the principles established in Book 1 (for example, limiting the length of the foot to 4 syllables, the need to connect feet only of the same structure). The concept of a pause is also developed in detail. Book 6 contains the famous doctrine of perception, which influenced Western aesthetic thought, and is presented in the form of ratios of numbers of various ranks. Blzh. Augustine writes about how from the changeable numbers in lower things the soul ascends through contemplation to the unchangeable numbers that are in the most unchangeable truth. In the late Middle Ages, this book was often copied separately from the 5 books as an independent work. *The title of the work in Latin is De musica libri sex. See also: Six books about music (incomplete translation) Preface. St. John Chrysostom from the sixth discourse on Isaiah “If you want to see a spectacle, then, leaving the satanic one there, come to this spiritual one; if you want to listen to the lyre, then, leaving the singing there and straining the strength of your mind, come listen to this, awakening your thoughts, strengthening your mind. See how different sounds and separate strings from all sides raise one and completely harmonious singing to the excellent Artist - God. Just as some spiritual sound, consisting of various sounds, emits one harmonious song, praise to the Creator, so these strings sound on their own, and sound together with one another. And in order for you to find out how they sound on their own, strike the string of heaven with your thought, and you will hear how it makes great sounds and glorifies God. The prophet understood this and said: the heavens will tell of the glory of God, and the firmament will tell of the work of His hands (Ps. 18:2). From this string, go to the string of day and night, and you will see how they, too, produce sounds more pleasant than any lyre or harp, especially when someone who knows how to strike these strings. But how do you say they make sound? The sky has no lips, no tongue, no palate in the mouth, no teeth, no lips; How does it make sounds? What does the day say? There are no organs here that produce sounds, but the passage of the sun and the moon, day and night, the change of time. So that some of the more rude people, hearing this, do not doubt or become confused, listen to how the prophet himself tries to explain what was said. Having said that the heavens will tell about the glory of God, and that day pours out word to day, and night proclaims knowledge to night (Ps. 19:3), he did not stop there, but added: there are no dialects or languages ​​where their voices are not heard (v. 4). The meaning of his words is as follows: day and night and heaven not only have a voice, but also a voice that is more sonorous, clearer and stronger than the human voice. How and in what way? Listen to his words yourself: there are no dialects or languages ​​where their voices are not heard. What is this? Approval of the voice, praise of the sound. My voice is understandable to someone speaking the same language as me, but not to someone speaking another language; eg: when I speak Greek, then whoever knows this language will understand me; but a Scythian, a Thracian, a Moor, an Indian - no, because the difference in language does not allow my speech to be understandable to him. Also, when a Scythian or a Thracian speaks, I cannot understand him, and another - the language of another. In heaven, day and night, it’s not the same, but their voice is such that it is audible, understandable and clear to every language, every dialect, every people. Therefore, the prophet, having said that day pours out word to day, and night proclaims knowledge to night, added: there are no dialects or languages ​​where their voices are not heard. The meaning of these words is as follows: such is the dialect, such is the voice of day, night, heaven and all creatures, that all languages, all peoples understand their voice. There are no adverbs, he says, i.e. there is no people, no language, where the voice of heaven is not heard; but a Scythian, a Thracian, a Moor, an Indian, a Sauromatian, and every dialect, every language, every people can understand this voice. How and in what way? Now listen to this so that you will know how heaven speaks silently. When you see this beauty, greatness, position, constancy, brilliance, and, having reflected on all this in yourself, glorify the Creator, praise the Creator, then heaven gave a voice and brought glory to God through your tongue. This is the meaning of the words: the heavens will tell about the glory of God. How and in what way? Conquering the viewer with the beauty of its brilliance, one can marvel at the Creator. When you see such a creature, you say: glory to You, God, what a great body You created and placed in the middle! - then the heavens gave this glory, using your tongue and arousing wonder through your sight. So they silently give glory to God and everyone hears this voice. Since it is not possible to know this through hearing, but through sight and contemplation, everyone has the same vision, although the language is different, then the barbarians, the Scythians, the Thracians, the Moors, and the Indians hear this voice, that is, looking at such a miracle, amazed at the beauty, brilliance, grandeur and everything else that is in heaven, they bring glory to the Creator, if they think sensibly. The same must be said about both day and night. Just as the sky, arousing amazement in the viewer with its beauty, position, grandeur, brilliance, constancy of time, usefulness, activity and everything else, disposes him to glorify the Savior, so are night and day. When you notice the harmonious order of these times, how the day, having fulfilled its measure, does not strive to expel the night from its own limits, does not show any covetousness and, although it is brighter than it, does not try to occupy all the time, but retreats; in the same way, the night, having completed its course, gives way to the day, and this happens over the course of so many years, without any confusion or confusion, and the latter did not drive out the first and the first did not take away anything from the latter, although one is lighter, the other is darker - then again, marveling at the harmonious order, will you not give glory to God? Just as sisters who love one another, dividing their father’s inheritance by measure and weight, do not take the slightest part from each other, so night and day, dividing all the time between themselves, maintain such equality, without taking away the slightest part from each other, as you know from your own experience. Let the covetous and those who deprive brothers of their inheritance hear this; let them be ashamed of the harmonious order of times, the harmony of night and day, and be healed of their illness. Thus, day pours out word to day, and night to night proclaims knowledge, without uttering a voice, but with its order, harmony, equality and unhindered proportionality, louder than a trumpet, proclaiming the Creator not in just one corner of the universe, but wherever the sun illuminates the earth. These sounds are heard throughout the universe, since everywhere is the sky, everywhere is day, everywhere is night; and they spread their instruction over land and sea. Therefore, the prophet did not simply say: the heavens proclaim the glory of God, but: they will tell, i.e. They also teach others, have the human race as their disciples and are spread out in plain sight, like the greatest school, instead of books and letters, offering both the simple and the wise and everyone to contemplate the beauty of their nature, teaching what is contained in themselves, as if in a book, an account of the wisdom and power of God. So people not only with words, but also silently glorify God through others: that is why Christ said: so let your light shine before people, so that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven (Matthew 5:16). Just as someone, seeing the bright life of another, even if the living one is silent, gives glory to God, so in the same way, looking at the beauty of the sky, they glorify the Creator. That is why the prophet said: the heavens will tell of the glory of God, and the firmament will tell of the work of His hands. Day pours out word to day, and night to night proclaims knowledge. Understanding about your Creator. Chapter 1. That the principles of harmony are universal Augustine: Modus (measure) – what kind of foot is this? Here and below are the Greek names of the elements of poetry - stops, i.e. combinations of syllables forming certain rhythmic sequences Augustine: How many tenses does it consist of? By the number of times we mean the number of minimum periods of time, which in Greek are called “moras”. So, here Mo is one interval, dus is the second. Augustine: Bonus (kind) – which foot? License: Same as modus. Augustine: Does this mean that modus is the same as bonus? Augustine: Why then is she the same? Licensius: Because it is the same in sound, although different in meaning. Augustine: Do you therefore admit that the sound is the same when we say modus and bonus? Licensius: I see that they differ in the sound of the letters, but everything else is the same. Augustine: Well, when we pronounce the verb pone (put) and the adverb pone (behind), in addition to the fact that the meaning is different, doesn’t it seem to you that there is a difference in sound? Licensius: The difference is that the accent ( acumen ) is in different places. Augustine: What art is capable of recognizing this? Licencius: I usually hear about this from grammarians, and learned it from them; However, I don’t know whether what was said relates to the said art or was drawn from somewhere else. Augustine: We will see this later, but now I ask you this: if I strike a drum or a string twice, as quickly and as quickly as when we pronounce modus or bonus, will you recognize that your times are the same or not? Here St. Augustine shows us that the same principles underlie both poetry and music. If you replace sounds and syllables with strokes, then obviously the same applies to painting. If, for example, for military operations, then for army management. If - to elementary actions - then to any human activity, i.e. to management. If applied to a person’s thoughts, it refers to the science of sciences – virtue. It is in this that the true depth of the teaching of St. Augustine in the sixth book is revealed. Augustine: So you will call the foot a pyrrhic? Augustine: Did you learn the name of this foot from whom if not from the grammarian? Licensius: From him exactly. Augustine: Therefore, all such sounds will be judged by the grammarian. Or maybe you yourself learned about these accents, but only heard the name given to them from a grammarian? Augustine: And you dared to transfer the name that you learned from grammar to a subject that, by your own admission, does not belong to grammar? Licencius: I see that the name of the foot was not given on the basis of anything other than the length of time; if I am convinced that the same duration exists everywhere, why should I not dare to transfer this word to other objects? But even if other words should be used, even if the duration of the sounds is the same, this does not mean that they are not related to grammars; Why should I care about names if the subject matter is beyond doubt? Augustine: And I don't want that; nevertheless, since you see that there is an innumerable number of sounds in which certain meters can be observed and which, in our clear recognition, should not be attributed to grammar, do you not recognize that there is some other discipline that embraces everything that can be counted and artful in such sounds? Licencius: It seems probable to me. Augustine: What do you think its name is? After all, I suppose it is not new for you that a certain omnipotence of singing is usually attributed to the muses and, if I am not mistaken, it is what is called music. Licensius: And I think so. St. Augustine says that the basis of speech - and its highest manifestation - poetry - is based on the same principles as music. We know that the same principles are embedded in painting, since many terms of painting are described musically - scale, tempo, rhythm, sound, tone. Without a doubt, the same applies to calligraphy. So, all perfect types of human activity have a single basis and principles, therefore it is natural and indisputable to assert that all good activity has these principles, i.e. every virtue. A sin or a mistake is a violation of these principles. Since the transgression of God’s commandments is called sin, the common principles of painting, poetry, music and calligraphy are nothing more than an aesthetic expression of God’s commandments. The laws of harmony in wisdom and the arts stem from the will of the All-Wise Creator - and from the center of virtues, that is, the fulfillment of the commandments. Saint John Chrysostom writes: “In everything, in the eyes, in clothing, in the legs, and in the gait, either chastity or debauchery is revealed. Just as painters, mixing paints, draw the images they want, so exactly the movements of bodily members bring out the properties of the soul and present them to our eyes. That is why another wise man (Sirach) said, “A man’s robe and the laughter of his teeth and the foot of his foot will proclaim the same about him” (Sir. 19:27) (On Isaiah, ΙΙΙ, 8) The blessed one took the word modus – “measure” – as his initial word. This is not accidental, since God created everything by number and measure, according to the expression of the Holy Scriptures. And from measure and number he explores the foundations of human activity. In fact, any virtue is a measure and number, and exceeding this measure is the same sin as a deficiency. For example, exceeding the measure in food is the sin of gluttony, exceeding the measure of irritation is the sin of anger, exceeding the measure of grief is sadness, exceeding the measure of manifestation of goodness is vanity. At the same time, lack of moderation leads to suicidal exhaustion (gluttony), castration (fornication), cowardice (anger), absent-mindedness and lack of concern for others (love of money), stupidity (sadness) and carelessness (dejection), shame (vanity) and deliberate wallowing in vile vices (pride). The primary measure of music is time. The initial measure of painting, ikebana, calligraphy is two-dimensional space The primary measure of poetry is meaning. The initial measure of governing people is Christ - or rather, His image, which must be written both in an individual and in society - through the actions of the governed. A foot consisting of several tenses in music has a melodic element (banner) In painting, the foot is an object. In poetry, the foot is the word In calligraphy, it is a graphic element. In bonseki and landscape, this is a stone, tree or other element. In the art of war, this is a division In the art of management, this is an order. It is called a foot for a reason, but because it corresponds to human walking. The spiritual activity of man is called the “Way” by the Lord Jesus Christ. The path is traversed by the alternating movement of two legs. Each leg has a foot. In poetry, two feet form a meter, just as two steps form a measuring unit of length - a mile or a meter. Two banners in a znamenny chant make up a minimal chant Two graphic elements (key and phonetic) make up a hieroglyph Musical instruments all have two parts. The space of the Japanese koto and guqin is divided into two, two hands of a pianist, two hands of a violinist and guitarist, two hands of a flutist. This comes from the structure of human hands. Thus, we see that two human hands appeared for a reason, but because the principle of beauty and harmony of God is manifested in them. It is no coincidence that the commandments were given by God in two tablets; it is no coincidence that each beatitude has two parts: Blessed are the poor in spirit (first part) for they will be comforted (second part), and both of them constitute beatitude, and not just one. In the same way, in the art of management, orders streamline the activities of two groups of people, interconnect the people themselves into groups, which interconnection is the result of management. Chapter 2. What is music. What is modulation Augustine: However, let’s not worry about the name; Let us, if possible, diligently explore the essence and concept of this discipline, whatever it may be. Licenses: We explore. After all, I really want to know what it is in general. Augustine: Define music, then. Augustine: But of course you can approve my definition? Licensius: I'll try if you give it to me. Augustine: Music is the science of modulating well. (or good to measure) Isn't it? Licensius: Maybe so, if it becomes clear to me what modulation is. Augustine: Have you never heard the word “modulate” or, if you have heard it, it has only been applied to singing and dancing? Licensius: Exactly. But since I see that “modulate” comes from modus (measure), for in everything well done there must be a measure, and much in singing and dancing, although it gives pleasure, can be very bad, I would like to fully find out what modulation is after all - a word that almost alone contains the definition of such a great discipline. After all, what you should learn here is not something that any singer or actor knows. Augustine: Do not be confused by what was said above, that not only in music, but in everything, measure (modus) must be preserved, although modulation is spoken of only in relation to music. Don't you know that speech (dictio) is spoken of in the proper sense only in relation to the speaker? Licensius: I know this, but what is it for? Augustine: That's what. Even if your servant were completely uneducated and simple, would you not admit that he said something when he answered your question with even one word? Augustine: Therefore, he is also an orator? Augustine: So he did not make a speech when he said something, although we recognize that speech (dictio) comes from the verb “to utter” (dicere)? in the Slavic language the feedback “reschi” comes from “speech” Licenses: Acceptable. But even in this case I ask: what is this for? Augustine: So that you understand: modulation can refer to music alone, although the measure (modus), from which the word “modulation” is derived, can exist in other things: just as speech (dictio) in the proper sense is associated with orators, although everyone who speaks something uses speech, and although the word dictio comes from dicere. St. Augustine does not say that modulation applies only to music and does not apply to anything else. For further, in several books, he examines precisely modulation in speech using the example of poetry. He talks about the difference between modulated (i.e., made dependent on external measures and numbers) human activity and unmodulated (i.e., performed without permission). To the first, in a general sense, the name of virtue is attached, to the second - the concept of “sin,” that is, an act that distorts the measure. So if a turner distorts the dimensions of a part, they speak of an “error” - acceptable and unacceptable. The measure - or "mode" - of human activity is the Commandment of God. In art, it has as its icon what St. Augustine speaks about. In other words, the entire treatise of St. Augustine - using the example of music and poetry - is a treatise on Divine poetry - the perfect fulfillment of virtues, elevating it to the level of poetry and the science of sciences. At the same time, it shows the general essence of all arts. In the art of control, modulation is called fairness. The intervals and notes of the musician are the justice of the ruler in relation to both groups of people being united. Licensius: Now I understand. Augustine: Therefore, what you said next, namely, that there is a lot of bad things in singing and dancing, and therefore if you attach the word “modulation” to them, then almost divine discipline itself becomes bad - you said this very carefully. So, let’s first examine what “modulate” means, and then what “modulate well” means, for the word “well” was not in vain added to the definition. Finally, one cannot help but pay attention to the fact that the word “science” (scientia) was introduced into the definition, because thanks to these three words, if I am not mistaken, the definition turned out to be exhaustive. Comment: St. Augustine does not mean by the word “science” what this word means today. What is meant here is the experience and awareness that comes from accepting the truth through practice. Science in the sense of “learned”, and not in the sense of scientism, which belongs to the category of phantasms from the sixth chapter. Augustine: So, since we recognize that modulation gets its name from modus (measure), don't you think that only with respect to things that are in some kind of motion, we can worry that the measure will be exceeded or not achieved? In other words, if nothing moves, is there any fear that something will happen out of proportion? Comment: We are talking about a person as a thing constantly in motion, and that therefore exceeding and failing to achieve the measure (i.e., self-will) is in his fallen nature, the very fall of which occurred from the deprivation of measure - i.e. commandments of God. The very changeability of nature, obtained in the Fall, prompts him to destroy the commandments - i.e. measures. And that the accuracy of a measure is characteristic only of the unchangeable - i.e. God - and those who have achieved His peace - that is, immutability - people. In the Old Testament, God gave the measure in the form of a limit - not to exceed the measure. In the New – in the form of a Commandment to achieve measure. Apostle Paul: “If a person knows to do good and does not do it, it is a sin for him.” Excess of measure is worse than failure to achieve, since failure to achieve is a property of weakness, and excess is a property of strength and arrogance. Exceeding measures in managing people is injustice. lack of measure is connivance. Licence: No way. Comment: In no way will something happen out of measure that does not move. Augustine: Therefore, modulation is rightly called a certain experience (peritia) in movement, or, in any case, an experience by which something moves well. After all, one cannot say that something moves well if it does not observe the measure. Comment: knowledge of measure – i.e. virtue - is realized both in a person’s life and in his work only through experience - fulfilling the commandments, i.e. combining your actions with the measure. In the same way, an artist, in order to become experienced, draws a lot, and the more he draws, the more experience he gains. Thus, with training, a sword master gains the ability to control the movement of the sword, i.e. at any moment strike with the required force and at the required distance. In the art of management, justice, i.e. the measure is born from the experience of incurring punishment oneself. The unpunished does not have such a measure and cannot learn the art of managing people. Therefore, a wise person asks not for relief from punishment, but for merciful punishment - i.e. so that God would let us understand the necessary measure, but save us from experiencing the consequences of exceeding the measure in practice. And this is carried out through threats of punishment and prohibitions. The mind recognizes the measure in threats and prohibitions, but does not test it in action. Licence: Of course not. But it will be necessary to understand in turn what this modulation is in everything that happens well. Of course, I see that nothing happens well except when it moves well. Virtue: Fulfillment of God's commandments even by fallen man brings the fallen into moderation - i.e. into the property of immutability, i.e. to God's rest. Music: Good movement is all about the precise movement of the musician at the right moment in time, which produces sound as an icon of that perfect movement. The true measure - virtuous movement - in combination with the movements of other musicians reproduce many icons that form the iconostasis - the harmony of music. Painting: good movement - brushes, pencils - is similar to the movements of a musician, but as a trace-icon it leaves not a sound, but an image on the board. Many coordinated movements of several artists form paintings that combine with each other - the iconostasis - the harmony of painting Poetry: A good movement is a movement of meaning. Its true measure is the truth, which lies in the rhythm of words and the correspondence of words to deeds. Discrepancy between words and deeds – i.e. lies are like musical dissonance. Therefore, true poetry is always not only beautiful and melodic, correctly composed according to the laws of poetry, but also true in content. Calligraphy: A good movement is the movement of the brush as an extension of the hand. Its true measure is the accuracy of combining the form of a sign, sound and meaning. Many signs coordinated with each other form a calligraphic scroll - the harmony of calligraphy. Calligraphy is consistent not only with other scrolls, but also with space, representing a kind of compositional lamp that shows the composition of space, just as light shows objects in darkness. Ikebana: A good movement is the movement of the eyes along the stems. Its true measure is the accuracy of combining spatial forms and colors in a pictorial and calligraphic rhythm. The coordination of ikebana is similar to the coordination of calligraphy. Bonseki, landscape: Good movement of the viewer is such a movement of him between stones and trees that he experiences constant joy from the change in the landscape. Its true measure is the accuracy of the combination of spatial forms and sizes in poetic rhythm. Coordination of bonseki - with the cardinal directions, lighting, landscape. The art of management: Good movement is the consonant action of all control groups, without delay or haste. Its true measure is measured by fair rewards and the absence of punishments. It is consistent with the icon of Christ on the one hand - and with the state of soul (virtuous, vicious) of people. Augustine: What if all this happens through music, although the term "modulation" is applied more broadly, not without reason, to any kind of instrument? After all, I think you see that one thing is a processed object made of wood, silver or any other substance, and the other is the movement of the master when this object is processed. Comment: Thus, any master - embroidery, tailor, carpenter, turner - uses precisely this single principle of modulation in his craft. Licence: I agree that the difference is big. Augustine: So shall we really conclude that the master strives for movement for its own sake, and not for the sake of what he wants to process? Augustine: Yes. Well, if he began to move his members not for the sake of anything else, but only for the sake of their beautiful and appropriate movement, would we not say that his only business is dancing? Thus, dancing is a meaningless craft. The master, striving for results, moves harmoniously. It was not for nothing that they said about the Monk Paisius the Svyatogorets that he peels an orange so hard that you’ll stare at it. Licensius: Apparently so. Augustine: When, do you think, does a thing stand out from others and seem to dominate—either when it is sought for its own sake, or when it is sought for the sake of something else? Licencius: Who will deny that when it is sought for its own sake? Augustine: Now repeat what we said above about modulation: after all, we assumed that it is a kind of experience in movement, and then look where such a name is more appropriate: whether where the movement is, as it were, free, that is, where it is an object of aspiration in itself and pleases itself, or where it serves something; after all, we can say that everything that does not exist for its own sake, but is related to something else, serves Licens: Where it is an object of pursuit in itself. Augustine: Therefore, it is plausible that the science of modulation is the science of good movement, one in which it is an object of desire in itself, and therefore in itself pleasing. Licensius: Of course, that's probably true. This does not mean that the master, striving for a result, thereby deviates from the art of modulation. This means that the master’s movements themselves have independent value, although they lead to results. Virtue: Thus, any human deed has bliss in itself if it is done according to the commandments of God, and its goal is not to achieve a practical result, but to fulfill the commandment in itself. Therefore, the Monk Anthony of Optina said, “I would prefer to fail a task on the advice of my brother than to carry it out on my own will,” and Abba Dorotheos said, “in any task, nine parts are to fulfill God’s commandment, and only one part is to achieve the result of the task.” Music: The purpose of music is not to play it, but to play it. Its process is the result. Painting: A perfect painting is not a beautiful painting. A painting is only a preserved, frozen trace of the artist’s movements, crystallized music. Actually perfect painting occurs only during its process. Archery: Like ikebana, the point of archery is not to hit the target, but to experience space. The distances to it are like the strings of a musical instrument, the tension of the bow is like the settings of a musical instrument, and the bowstrings are like icons of the distance to the target. The shot is the reproduction of a precise modulated note after the bow-instrument has been drawn exactly to the measure of space. Landscape: Their meaning is not in the resulting landscape, but in modulating the consciousness and impressions of the spectators in the landscape, bringing the viewer to the rank and measure of movement. The art of management: The meaning of the art of management is not in achieving some indicators, profits, digital well-being, but in changing the relationship between management groups into Christlikeness. Every person and whole group of skillful management is made as Christ-like as possible. Welfare and prosperity are a necessary consequence of such assimilation, but not the goal. Chapter 3. What is “well modulated” and why is this concept included in the definition of music Augustine: Why is the word “good” added, if modulation itself cannot exist except under the condition of good movement? License: I don't know. And I don’t understand how it escaped me. After all, I was meaning to ask about this all along. Augustine: In general, no dispute could arise about this if we defined music as simply the science of modulation, discarding the word “good.” Licencius: Who will agree with this if you wish to explain it this way? Augustine: Music is the science of moving well. But “to move well” applies to everything that moves in accordance with the number, observing the values ​​of times and intervals (after all, this already gives pleasure and is therefore called, not without reason, modulation); however, it may happen that such size and correspondence to the number pleases when it is not necessary; for example, if someone who sings in the most pleasant way or if someone who dances gracefully wants to frolic, whereas, in essence, strictness is required of him, in this case he does not use modulation well, even if it in itself corresponds to the number, that is, he uses poorly, or incongruously, the movement that is in itself good, corresponding to the number. That's why one thing is to modulate and the other is to modulate well. After all, we must assume that modulation is relevant to any singer, as long as he does not make mistakes in the duration of words and sounds, while good modulation is related to the indicated free discipline, i.e., music. And if the indicated movement does not seem good to you for the reason that it is absurd, even if you recognize it as skillfully composed in accordance with the number, we will still remain with our opinion, and it should be followed everywhere, namely: a dispute about words should not bother us if the subject itself is clear enough; in the end we should not care whether we define music as a science to modulate or as a science to modulate well. Licencius: I also prefer to avoid and despise verbal strife, but I like the distinction you make. Comment: The measure for modulation is not something uniform and constant in all circumstances. Virtue: Some acts that are generally sins, such as murder, are, by the will of God, a virtue, and failure to do these acts is a sin. So Phinehas committed the murder of a man committing adultery with a Midianite woman, but he deserved the eternal blessing of God, and not condemnation. Music: A musician cannot play at the same tempo and rhythm, much less one invented by himself. He looks at the conductor (the singer - at the regent), who sets the beginning and end, rhythm, beat, silence and introduction. Good modulation – set by the conductor. Painting: An isographer cannot always paint in the same modulation. It is consistent with the theme, the size, the location of the future image, and the required strength of the image. Calligraphy: The calligrapher cannot spontaneously write and give signs any shape, but must be consistent with the meaning of the word, its location in the scroll and where the sign will be located. Ikebana: A master cannot do “ikebana” in the air, in the void. He must know where and when the bouquet will stand, in accordance with the place and time of production, even the weather and especially with those who will look at the bouquet. Bonseki and landscape: The arrangement of landscape elements is not a spontaneous construction, but depends on the purpose, terrain, and the number of people expected within the landscape. Art of War: The movement of troops cannot be carried out only according to the thoughts of the military leader, it must be in harmony with the movement of the enemy, with the weather, with the movement of other troops, etc. The art of management: There are no universal laws and rules of management. The control technique adopted once and for all is similar to the same rhythm for all musical works. This is bad modulation. Good modulation is adapting to the circumstances and properties of people and changing this technique. Virtue: Although there are statutes and definitions of asceticism, they are not the rigid framework of the Jewish legalists and should be applied depending on the place, time and condition of the people. This was expressed by the Lord in the famous “Sabbath for the sake of people, and not people for the sake of the Sabbath.” Chapter 4. Why the concept of science is included in the definition of music Augustine: It remains for us to find out why the word “science” is included in the definition. Licensius: I agree, for I remember that this is how it is required in order. Augustine: Answer me: does the voice of a nightingale seem to you to be well modulated in the spring season? After all, his singing corresponds to the number, and is very pleasant, and, if I am not mistaken, corresponds to the time. Augustine: Does this mean that the nightingale has experience in the said art? Augustine: You see, the word “science” is absolutely necessary. Augustine: Tell me, therefore, I ask you: don’t all those who sing well by instinct, that is, do it in accordance with the number and pleasantly, seem to you like this nightingale, although they cannot answer the question about the numbers or intervals of high and low voices? Licensius: I consider them exactly alike. Augustine: So what? Those who willingly listen to them without this science should not be likened to cattle, since we see that elephants, bears and some other species of animals are moved by singing, and birds rejoice at their voices (after all, without any external benefit for themselves, they would not be so wasteful and would not sing if they did not experience lust)? Licenses: I agree. But then this insult extends to almost the entire human race. Augustine: No, it's not what you think. After all, great men, although they do not know music, either want to merge with the crowd, not far removed from the beasts - and there are a huge number of them - and they do this very modestly and prudently (however, this is not the place to discuss this here), or they taste some very moderate pleasure after great worries, for the sake of relief and refreshment of the soul. Although it is something very modest to taste such pleasure from time to time, being even sometimes in its power is shameful and obscene. But what is your opinion? Can those who play flutes, citharas and similar instruments be compared to nightingales? Augustine: How do they differ? Licencius: The fact is that there I see some kind of art, but here only nature. Commentary: St. Augustine points out in this crucial passage that harmony is present in the world regardless of a person's training. The nightingale from birth seems to have been trained by God in an art that many people do not have. But only people can understand the power and meaning in this art - and thus see the wisdom of the Creator. The understanding of harmony, the rational perception of the divine music of Providence in creation consists of true science, which makes it possible to see the invisible God through consideration of the visible creation. Augustine: Your point is plausible. But you think that in the first case it is necessary to talk about art, even if the performers did this through only some kind of imitation. Licenses: Why not? After all, I see that in the arts, imitation is so important that without it they all almost completely disappear. Indeed: teachers make themselves role models - and this is what is called “teaching”. Comment: The dogma of icon veneration, indicating the correspondence of the Prototype (prototype) and the Image (type) is a universal law of the universe, and first of all, the law of science, as the teaching of knowledge. The Teacher is the Prototype, the student is the icon of the teacher, therefore there is no student higher than the Teacher, since the icon cannot be more perfect than the prototype. Accordingly, those who reject icons reject them into themselves, for only thanks to icons were they able to learn to speak and even walk. Augustine: But don’t you think that art is a kind of reason and that those who practice art use reason? Or do you think differently? Augustine: So, anyone who cannot use reason does not practice art? Licensius: And I agree with this. Comment: Neither painting, nor music, nor ikebana, nor any other art can have the goal of conveying emotions or self-expression. Their goal is the revelation of the Divine mind in the Providence of man. The same applies to virtue - no deed on this path achieves its goal if it does not correspond to the mind of God. The same applies to managing people - management for the sake of management itself, i.e. for the sake of the good state of the system, is not control or even reasonable, for the ship sails not in order to sail, but in order to reach the goal. The goal of all arts is the same - the achievement of God. Augustine: Don't you think that dumb animals, also called irrational, can use reason? Augustine. So, either you call magpies, parrots and ravens intelligent animals, or you are in vain in calling imitation an art. After all, we see that these birds can sing and pronounce a lot in a human way, and at the same time they do this only by imitation. Or do you think differently? Licencius: How you deduced all this and to what extent what you said has force against my answer, I still do not quite understand. Augustine: I asked you: in your opinion, do cithara players, flutists and similar people master the art, at least what they do when playing, they achieve by imitation? You answered yes. And what do you think, then, it would seem that almost all the arts are in danger of being supplanted by imitation. From this we can conclude that everyone who achieves something through imitation uses art, although perhaps not everyone who uses art has learned it through imitation. But if all imitation is art, and all art is reason, then all imitation is reason; meanwhile, an irrational animal does not use reason, therefore, it does not have art; and yet it is capable of imitation; therefore, art is not imitation. Comment: Secular art and art in general that does not put God at the forefront, does not relate to Him Alone as its source and giver and Teacher, and does not strive to achieve His goal - cannot be called not only art, but in general the activity of a rational being and is like bestiality. It is no coincidence that the figures of godless arts and figures of godless sciences and figures of godless government live extremely bestially. Licencius: I said that many arts come down to imitation, but without calling imitation itself an art. Augustine: So, in your opinion, those arts that are reduced to imitation are not reducible to reason? Licensius: No, I believe that they come down to both. Augustine: I don’t argue, but what do you consider science to be - in reason or in imitation? Licencius: And I also believe it in both. Augustine: So, you will attribute science to those birds that you do not refuse to imitate? Licenses: No. After all, science consists of both, and therefore it cannot consist of imitation alone. Augustine: . But in the mind alone, do you think, maybe? Licensius: Apparently, yes. Licencius: Therefore, you consider one to be art, the other to be science, since science can consist in reason alone, while art combines imitation with reason. Licensius: I don't see that it should. After all, I said that not all, but many arts come down to both reason and imitation. Augustine: So will you really call science even that which can be reduced to both at the same time, or will you attribute to it only the destiny of reason? Licencius: What prevents me from calling the case where imitation is combined with reason science? Augustine: Since we are now talking about the harp player and the flutist, that is, objects related to music, I want you to tell me: is it necessary to attribute to the body, that is, some kind of submission to the body, which these people accomplish by imitation? Licencius: I believe that imitation should be applied to both the soul and the body, despite the expression that you appropriately used, that is, the expression “submission of the body,” for the body can only submit to the soul. Commentary: St. Augustine focuses on this strange discussion for a reason, and it again relates to the dogma of icon veneration. The image correlates with the prototype not in itself, but in the mind of the one looking at it. If reason is absent, then the icon is also absent. Moreover, an absent mind can cause harm in the right way. So heretics, having the wrong mind, using the Holy Scriptures - the perfect icon of God the Word - destroyed souls and were the gates of hell. Painting: the teaching of painting is based on the unreasonable imitation of the movements of teachers, who, being devoid of meaning and only copying the environment, make senseless artists. The Art of Governance: Management training is built on the imitation of famous heads of state of the past. But for the most part their celebrity turns out to be the result of special conditions or rather of impudence and criminality than of wisdom. Understanding the motives of their actions is generally impossible, because it is almost completely unknown on the basis of what data certain decisions were made. Augustine: I see that you very carefully wished to attribute imitation not only to the body. But will you deny that science has nothing to do with the soul alone? Licensius: Who will deny this? So, you will by no means allow the science of the sound of strings and flutes to be attributed both to reason and to imitation. After all, you admitted that there is no imitation without a body, and science, in your words, is connected with only the soul. I must admit, this follows from what I agreed with you on. But so what? After all, a flutist will have science in his soul. After all, even when he imitates - and this, I believe, cannot happen without a body - what he embraces with his soul is not abolished. Augustine: It is not abolished, and I also do not claim that everyone who plays these instruments is devoid of science. But I argue that not everyone has it. After all, this question of ours is aimed at understanding, if possible, how correctly the concept of science is introduced into the definition of music we have given. If it is mastered by all those who play the flute, the lyre, and any other performers of this kind, then there is nothing baser, nothing more contemptible, than this discipline. Comment: unreasonable, passionate art defiles and humiliates not only the author, but also art itself, making it a despised discipline. This is what happened with the theater. So it happened with politics, which in the ancient times of the sages was the predominant place of virtue and wisdom, but has now become predominantly a dirty and criminal and despised business, so that the word "politician" has become a dirty word. However, take a very careful look so that it finally becomes clear what we have been struggling with for a long time. You, of course, have already admitted that science resides in only one soul. Licencius: Did I admit it? Augustine: Do you attribute the sensations of the ears to the soul, the body, or both? Licencius: I think it must be attributed to the soul. After all, on the basis that we sense something that is then entrusted to memory, we should not assume that memory is in the body. Augustine: This is perhaps a big, special question, and this is not the place to dwell on it here. Comment: St. Augustine is referring to the teaching of St. Macarius of Alexandria that a person’s memory is destroyed along with the death of the body, therefore the soul of the deceased is in the state of a newborn baby who does not remember anything that happened in his previous life. At the same time, he says that there is an exception to the rule - saints and especially martyrs, whose memory is God, therefore they remember everything even after repose. This also includes the conversation in the sixth book about “numbers in memory” that are constantly being destroyed. It is enough if I say that you cannot deny the existence of memory in animals. After all, after a year, swallows again visit their nests, and it was quite rightly said about goats: “They come home themselves, remembering everything, and they bring the younger ones.” (Virgil, Georgics, III, 316); And it is said about the dog (“Odyssey”, XVII, 291–319) that he recognized his owner, who had already been forgotten by his people. You can give, if you like, countless examples that confirm what I have said. Licencius: And I do not deny this, and I look forward to hearing what speaks in your favor. Augustine: What do you say about the one who ascribes science to the soul alone and denies it to all irrational animals, not positing it either in sensation or in memory (for sensation does not exist without a body, and at the same time animals also have sensation and memory)? Does he posit it in the intellect alone? Licencius: And in this respect I am waiting to see what speaks in your favor. Augustine: But this is this: everyone who follows sensation and entrusts to memory what pleases in it, setting their body in motion accordingly, brings in a certain ability of imitation; and all these people do not have science, although they clearly do a lot on the basis of their experience and training, when they express the object itself in words or actions, without, however, cognizing it through the intellect. And if reason shows that these are precisely these theatrical masters, I think you will have no doubts why you should deny them science, and therefore not attribute to them the possession of music, which is the science of modulation. Comment: all arts belong in the proper sense only to those who have the true mind - God's, i.e. Christians purified in soul and heart. The art of government belongs exclusively to them, since a non-Christian who governs people does not lead them to God through Christlikeness, but kills them through bestiality. Licensius: Explain this to me, let's see what its essence is. Augustine: I think you associate greater or lesser mobility of the fingers not with science, but with habit? Augustine: Because earlier you attributed science to the soul alone, and what was said is connected with the body, although the soul commands it. Comment: by body we mean the animal, the lower part of human consciousness. Licencius: But since the knowing soul commands this to the body, I think that it is rather necessary to connect it with the knowing soul than with the bodily members that obey it. Augustine: Don't you agree: it can happen that one person is superior to another in science and yet this second one, less experienced in it, moves his fingers much more easily and more quickly? Augustine: If faster and more agile movement is to be associated with science, then a person will be the more knowledgeable, the more he succeeds in such movement. Augustine: Now think about this. You have probably sometimes noticed that carpenters and similar craftsmen repeatedly hit with a saw or an ax in the very place where the soul intends to direct the blow, but we, trying to achieve the same thing, are not able to do this, for which they often ridicule us. Licensius: Yes, it is as you say. Augustine: But even though we are not able to do this, don’t we know exactly where we should have struck or how much we should have taken? Licenses: Often we don’t know, but often we do know. Augustine: Suppose, then, that someone knows everything that carpenters must do, and knows it perfectly, but in fact is less capable of it; despite this, he is able to advise much more resourcefully to those who work with the greatest ease, although they themselves are not able to judge. Doesn't that happen? Augustine: Consequently, not only the speed and ease of movement, but also the very measure of movement in the limbs should be attributed to habit rather than to science. For otherwise the one who uses his hands better would also be more experienced in science; If we apply this to flutes and citharas, then what is done with the fingers and members, since it is difficult for us, we would recognize as being accomplished rather thanks to science than thanks to habit and diligent imitation and reflection. Comment: The science of the body (habit) is different from the science of the mind (understanding through experience) Licenses: I have nothing to object to; after all, I am used to hearing that doctors, the most learned men, when cutting or bandaging members of any kind, performed with hand and iron, are often inferior to people less experienced in science; this type of treatment is called surgery, and the word itself quite clearly indicates the existence in the hands of a certain working skill of healing. Move on, having settled this question. Comment: St. Augustine talks about the difference between reason in understanding art and practice. This is the same thing that St. says. Andrei Kritsky “Consider Leah’s deed as one that is prolific, and Rachel’s understanding as one that is laborious.” Intelligence comes from intense practice, but practice without the direction of intelligence is meaningless. The direction of the mind is impossible in emptiness - but only by the Light of God. The direction of the mind towards the Light of God is called the Path in the Gospel, Christ says that the Path is He, and movement along this path is called imitation of Christ. Chapter 5. The Feeling of Music; Is it present by nature? Augustine: It remains, I think, to find, if it is possible for us, arts that give pleasure through the hands and that do not follow entirely science, but sensation and memory, mastering proper practice. However, perhaps you will tell me that it is possible for science to exist without practice and that then it is often greater than that of those people who are distinguished by practical skills, but that these people could not achieve such skill without any science. Licence: Let's get down to business. It's obvious what's needed. Augustine: Have you ever listened to this kind of actor with special attention? Licensius: Perhaps even more than I wanted. Augustine: Why do you think that an uneducated crowd often boos a flutist who performs trivial things, and, on the contrary, applauds a well-sung one, and the more pleasantly he sings, the more and more deeply they are moved? Should we assume that this happens among the common people thanks to the art of music? Augustine: Thanks to what? Licencius: I think this happens thanks to nature, which has given everyone a sense of hearing, through which they judge this. Comment: St. Augustine says that human nature (nature) has as an integral part the vision and knowledge of the Creator's mind embedded in creation. Thanks to this, any person, the most uneducated and ignorant, is able to distinguish bad music from beautiful music. Augustine: You're right. But now see if the flutist himself is endowed with this feeling. If so, then his judgment is capable of moving his fingers when he takes up the flute; and what has sounded successfully enough, as he wanted, he can notice and imprint in memory, training his fingers through repetition to fall into the proper places without hesitation and without error - it makes no difference whether he receives from another what he performs, or invents it himself, guided and approved by the nature in question. So, since memory follows sensation, and the limbs follow memory, being trained and prepared by practice, he performs when he wants, the better and the more pleasant, the more he reveals in everything that, as is known from the previous discussion, we have in common with animals, namely: the desire to imitate, sensation and memory. Do you have anything to argue against this? Licence: No, nothing. And I am impatient to find out what this discipline is, the knowledge of which is obviously very thinly protected from the coarsest souls. Comment: Inspiration and spiritual impulses, which artistic natures deify, if they do not have the source of understanding and vision of the mind of God, are animal instincts and the stronger they are, the more they gnaw at a person. That is why the most inspired and artistic natures suffer from the animal vices of fornication and drunkenness. Chapter 6. Theater singers do not know music Augustine: Little has been said, and I do not consider it possible to move on to an explanation of this discipline until we find out that actors are capable of bringing pleasure to the ears of the common people without this science, and that actors are by no means able to study and know music. Comment: This also applies to managing people. Politicians can, having no idea of ​​the mind of God and the science of government, carry out a rule that is pleasing to people, but because of this they cannot even begin to study and know the science of government. Licensius: It would be amazing if you did. Augustine: No, it's easy, but you need to be even more careful. Licencius: As far as I am aware, my attention since this conversation began has never been so intense as it is now, but I must admit that you have alerted me much more. Augustine: Thank you, although you help yourself more. So, please answer: does it seem to you that he knows what a gold solidus is, such a person who, wanting to sell it for a fair price, will value it at ten small coins? Licensius: Who will say that? Augustine: Now answer me, what should be valued more: what our understanding comprehends, or what is given to us by the random judgment of inexperienced people? Licencius: There is no doubt that the first is incomparably superior to everything else, which cannot even be recognized as something that belongs to us. Augustine: So, therefore, you will not deny that all science is contained in the understanding. Licencius: Who can deny it? Augustine: Consequently, music is there too. Licensius: I see that this follows from its definition. Augustine: Now tell me: don’t the applause of the crowd and all these theatrical awards seem to you like something that is in the power of fortune and depends on the judgment of inexperienced people? Licencius: I believe that nothing is more changeable and more dependent on chance, on the power of the crowd and its approval. Augustine: So would actors, if they knew music, sell their performances for such a price? Comment: This reasoning applies even more strongly to painting and politics. However, here it is necessary to distinguish between the sale of art for the purpose of enrichment and art as a means of livelihood. The apostles themselves, receiving wages for preaching the Gospel - the art of the arts - did not sell it, because they did so according to the commandment of Christ - “he who labors is worthy of food.” Licensius: This conclusion worries me a lot, although I can object to something. After all, the solid seller we were talking about cannot be compared with an actor. In fact: an actor, having received applause or some kind of monetary reward, does not lose the science through which he gave pleasure to the people, if only he has it; on the contrary, enriched with money and joyful from the praise of people, he returns home with science, the same as before, remaining safe and sound. Therefore, he would be stupid if he neglected these benefits; having rejected them, he would have become much more despicable and poorer, but having accepted them, he does not become any less learned for this. Augustine: Look, we have achieved at least in this respect what we wanted. After all, I am sure that you consider it much more significant for why we do something, and not for what we do. Augustine: Therefore, the one who performs or learns to perform only in order to receive praise from the people or from any person in general, does not he value such praise higher than performance? Licensius: I can't deny it. Comment: Therefore, a politician who is guided by the approval and disapproval of people does not know anything about the art of government. Augustine: Well, and whoever judges something badly, does it seem to you that he knows it? Licence: Not at all, unless it’s some kind of libertine. Augustine: Therefore, he who considers the worst to be the best undoubtedly has no knowledge of it. Augustine: So, if you convince me or show me that any actor does not show his abilities if he has them only to please the people, for the sake of profit and fame, then I will agree that every actor can master the science of music while remaining an actor. But if, as is very likely, there is no actor who does not believe and does not set money or fame as the goal of his profession, it will be necessary to admit either that actors do not know music, or that one needs to seek fame or any other random benefits from others more than one needs to seek understanding in oneself. Licencius: I see that since I agreed with what was said earlier, I must now agree with this. For it seems to me that it is impossible to find a person on the stage who would love his art for its own sake, and not for the sake of external benefits; after all, you’ll hardly find anything like this at the stadium. However, even if such a person exists or could be found, musicians should not be despised on this basis, but actors should be respected as an exception. That is why now, please, explain to me the essence of such a significant discipline, which can no longer be despised in my eyes. Chapter 7. Long and short in motion. Augustine: Let me explain. No, you'll explain. Indeed, I do nothing but ask you and find out. You are asking about all this - whatever it is - and what you are asking now, without knowing, you are asking in order to understand. When you answer, you explain yourself. So, I ask you, can anyone run both long and fast at the same time? Augustine: What about slow and fast? Augustine: So, some things are long, and others are slow. Augustine: Now I ask: what do you think is the opposite of longitude, just as slowness is the opposite of speed? Licensius: I can’t find the right word. I don’t see any opposite to longitude, except shortness. Just as what is called “long” is the opposite of “not long,” so if we don’t want to say “fast,” we instead say “slow,” which means nothing else. Augustine: Truly what you said. When we talk like this, nothing true will be lost. Indeed, if there is a word that you cannot find, then I either don’t know about it at all, or it doesn’t come to my mind right now. Comment: in Latin, “briefly” - breve is the opposite of another “longitude” - longe, as we will see later. For what reason will we move forward in the order in which this pair of opposites was named - long and short, slow and fast. And at the beginning we will study about longitude and shortness, if you like. Commentary: The important distinction between these two temporal concepts, which are the characteristic of movement and the measure of movement, is critical in any art. Augustine: Isn’t it obvious to you that what is called “long” (diu) means that it happens over a period of time (longum), and what is called “not long” means that it happens for a short (breve) time? Augustine: Therefore, a movement that takes two hours, for example, does not have double time than one that takes one hour? Licensius: Who will doubt this? Augustine: Consequently, when we say “long” and “short”, this in some way takes on a numerical dimension, so that one movement is related to another as two to one. That is, some movement seems to have a double number, while another is related to another movement as three is to two, that is, it has three parts of time, while others have two. It can also be accomplished by other numbers, so that there is no infinite and indefinite space, but everything has a certain number within them for movement. Or they have the same number - for example, one and one, two and two, three and three, four and four. Or not the same thing - for example, one and two, two and three, three and four. Or one and three, two and six. And every movement could embrace another movement through a dimension - a dimension in relation to itself. Licence: Explain more clearly. Augustine: In that case, let's go back to those hours - when they talked about one and two hours - and let's extend to everything that has been said about them, as we think, enough has been said. For you certainly cannot deny that one movement can be accomplished in one hour, and another in two. Augustine: What? Do you not recognize something else in two, and another in three? Augustine: And some in three, and others in four hours? And vice versa - some for one, and some for three? Or some for two, and others for six. Isn't it obvious? Augustine: Why, therefore, would not this also be obvious? I was talking about this when I said that two movements can have a certain number in them, either one to two, or two to three, three to four, one to three, two to six, and if you want to list any others. Knowing this, you have the opportunity to follow the others. Or seven to ten, or five to eight, and whatever they may be, in two movements having measured parts to each other, so that one can say about them “as much and as much,” or they would be equal in number, or one is greater and the other is less. Licensius: Now I understand and can agree with this. Comment: The essence of art is harmony. Harmony is ordering, composing according to certain characteristics or properties. The basis of order is numbers. The application of order to measure gives numbers as elements of harmony. Depending on the measure and on what properties the order is applied to, this or that art occurs. Virtue: the measure is the peace of God, the limits of nature, order is applied to the measure according to the property of compliance with the Commandments. Painting: the measure is space, order is applied to space by the property of color, numbers are formed from colored spots and lines. Music: time is the measure, order is applied to time according to the properties of sound, numbers are formed from notes. Poetry: The measure is time, order is applied to time according to the properties of articulate sounds - letters, numbers are formed from syllables. Calligraphy: The measure is space, order is applied to space according to the property of color. Numbers are formed from traits. Ikebana: The measure is three-dimensional space, order is applied to space according to the properties of solids. Numbers are formed from colors. Bonseki and landscape: The measure is three-dimensional space, order is applied to space according to the properties of solids. Numbers are formed from stones and landscape objects. Management of people: the measure is man, like the icon of Christ. Order to man - the icon of Christ - is applied according to the Ladder of St. John Climacus, numbers are formed from virtues and passions. Chapter 9. Rational (comprehensible, reasonable, rationabiles) and irrational (incomprehensible, irrationabiles) movement Augustine: I believe you understand that every size and measure is rightly preferred to immeasurability and uncertainty. Licensius: This is most obvious. Augustine: Consequently, the two movements, which, as has been said, have in themselves a certain numerical dimension, are preferred to those which do not have them. Licencius: And this is obvious, as is the following: those that have in themselves a certain certain measure, and also the size of which consists in number, are related to each other. Those who lack this cannot in any way be united by reason. The art of management: In this way, groups of an agreed number communicate with each other more reliably. Augustine: In that case, let’s call, if you like, those that are proportionate to each other rational, and those that lack this dimension irrational. Augustine: Then pay attention, does it not seem to you that there is greater agreement in those rational movements that are equal to each other than in those that are unequal? Licensius: Why doesn’t he introduce himself? Augustine: Next - unequal. Are they not others of which we can say how many times the portion of the larger of them is equal to or greater than the smaller? Like two and four. Or six or eight? And those about which the same cannot be said, as in such numbers: three and ten. Or four and eleven? Indeed, in the two above-mentioned numbers you will distinguish in the bifurcation of parts the equality of the greater and the lesser, and further, in the subsequent ones I named, the smaller differs from the larger by four times. But in these others, which are three to ten or four to eleven, we do not see any correspondence that their parts have with each other, about which we could say “they coincide,” but nothing like what is in the previous ones? Indeed, no part of the smaller is equal to any part of the larger, nor does the larger exceed the smaller by any number of times, so as to express this by some measure. And indeed, the number ten cannot be divided into three parts, nor eleven into four parts, someone would say. When I tell you to think about what their part is, I’m talking about clear ones (that is, wholes), without any addition, what are half, third, quarter, five, sixth, and so on. And not about three and a penny and all that kind of accuracy. Augustine: So, of these unequal rational movements, since I have shown two varieties of them with examples of numbers, which one will you prefer according to your reasoning? Is it not those in which such multiple division can occur, and not those in which it cannot? Licencius: According to reasoning, it seems fair to me to prefer those in which it can be said, as shown, how many times the greater is, or equal to or superior to, those in which this is not the case. Augustine: Correct. But don’t you also want us to give them names, so that when we mention them there will be the necessary order and we can speak more freely? Licensius: Of course I want to. Augustine: Let us then call those that we have preferred countable (connumeratos), those to which we have preferred them non-numerical (dinumeratos), for the sake of which the former are not counted in the only way, but are also measured and counted - which of them is greater, lesser or equal - not only by part but also by themselves. And these latter are calculated uniquely in themselves, because their equality or superiority is only measured and calculated from a part of them, but not by itself. Because it is impossible to say how many times the lesser has the greater, or how much the greater exceeds the less, how many times it includes both the greater and the lesser. Licensius: I accept this name, and as far as I can, I will remember it. Painting, ikebana, bonseki landscape design: This division is extremely important for understanding composition. Music, poetry: Numerical measures are the basis of the rhythmic structure of the measure and poetic size. The art of management, the art of war: For this very reason, each unit carries within itself a whole number of smaller units. Non-numerical movements correspond to an intersecting division of groups, when one group can belong to several supergroups. Chapter 10. Complicated and sesquetatory movement Augustine: Let us now see what divisions of those numbered there can be. And in fact, I think it's obvious. For there is one kind of numbers in which the lesser measures the greater by some number, that is, some number of it contains the greater, as we have already said about two and four, because we see that there are two in four two times, but which have a threefold, if not four, then we put six to two. If it is four times, then eight. Fivefold - if ten. There is another genus, in which the part by which the greater exceeds the less measures both. That is, a certain number of these parts have both greater and lesser, which is the case in the numbers that we considered - six and eight. Really. The part that exceeds the smaller is two, which, as you see, is four times in the octal number, and three times in the six-fold number, why these also move from which the movement occurs, and the numbers through which what we want to distinguish in the movements are illuminated, we will note and designate by names. Indeed, their difference will appear immediately, if I am not mistaken. In view of this, if it already seems to you, those where by multiplying the lesser the greater is obtained, let them be called compounded, the same - sesquetatory, the understanding of which is already advanced by the name. In fact, one and a half (sesque) is called when such a part is smaller than the larger, to the extent that it exceeds it. Indeed, if three is to two, then a third of its part exceeds the greater than the lesser; if four is to three, then a fourth; if five is to four, then a fifth, and so on. In the same sense, six is ​​to four, and eight is to six, and ten is to eight, and from where one can apply and explore this meaning to sequences of large numbers. It is not easy for me to give a name to this origin, unless most likely se-sque (the blessed Augustine further explains the untranslatable Latin concept, which is therefore abandoned), as if “se-absque”, that is, “without itself,” as for example, five to four, without a fifth of its part, the greater will become less. I’ll ask about these items – what do you think? Licencius: To me this sense of measurements and numbers seems to be the truest. And the titles you put into them seem appropriate to me as reminders of the things we have understood. And the origin of this name, which you have just outlined, is not absurd, even if it would certainly not be the one that followed who established this name. Chapter 11. Motion and number do not advance to infinity, but are held in a certain form Augustine: I approve and accept your idea. But doesn’t it seem to you that all these rational movements, that is, which in themselves have some dimension of numbers, can spread through numbers into infinity, if they are not in some sense held back and given some image and form? Indeed, as at the beginning I spoke about the most equal - one to one, two to two, three to three, four to four, and so on, if we follow, what will be the end if the numbers themselves have no end? And indeed, numbers are characterized by such power that everything that can be expressed is finite, while everything that cannot be expressed is infinite. And the same thing that happens to equals, pay attention, also happens to unequals, or compounded, or sequestered, or numbered, or uncountable. For if you add up one to two and want to remain in this multiplication, talking about one to three, one to four, one to five, and so on, there will be no end to it. Or just doubling, like one to two, two to four, four to eight, eight to sixteen, and so on, and there is no end to them either. So only tripling and only quadrupling, and whatever of them you want to experience, rush to infinity. The same goes for one-and-a-half: indeed, two to three, three to four, four to five, as we said: you will see that nothing interferes with the rest of the sequence, it does not collide with any end. Or do you want to persist in the same way, like two to three, four to six, eight to ten, ten to fifteen, and so on - no end is found in either that kind or others. If we talk about the uncountable, when from what has already been said can anyone understand that there is no end to the ascent of these steps? Isn't that what you think? Licensius: What can be said more truly than this? But I’m already looking forward to finding out the reason that, returning from infinity, prescribes a certain image and form that should not be violated. Comment: Numbers are not infinite, although they appear to be infinite. They are produced by infinity, but no matter how many numbers there are, they are finite, because finiteness is the most important property of any number. Augustine: And this, like everything else, you will learn from yourself when, if I ask, you answer in truth. So, the first thing I will ask you is, since we act from numerical movements, should we consider numbers through which certain and fixed laws appear to us? Those in which we believe there are movements worthy of attention and observation? Licensius: That's right. I believe nothing could be more decorous. Augustine: Therefore, from the very principle of numbers, as it appears, let us grasp the thought of this order and see how far we can delve into it from the strength of our mind, what would be the reason that no matter how much through infinity, as said, the number advances, certain articulations are made for people in counting, from which they turn back to the one, which is the beginning of numbers. For in counting we move from one to ten. And from there we return to one again, and also if you want to follow the decimal addition, in the same way as just now - you go - ten, twenty, thirty, forty - progression to a hundred. If the hundredth is one hundred, two hundred, three hundred - four hundred, in a thousand there is a joint from which it returns back. What else should we explore? You probably see what joints I’m talking about, the first of which is described by the rule of ten numbers. In fact, ten in tenths has units. So, hundreds have tens in tenths, and thousands have hundreds in tenths. And so on, whoever wants to count will do so as if by certain joints, as is predetermined in ten numbers. Or is there any other part of this that you don’t understand? Licencius: Everything is most obvious and true. St. Augustine draws attention to the fact that infinity is beyond all numbers. Moreover, by the very nature of numbers, increasing in size, they go through certain cycles limited to the power of ten, which constitute the limits of numbers, like certain concentric circles. This cyclical return of numbers is the reason for a certain cyclicity, the return to itself of every creation in its present state, which Ecclesiastes speaks of. These articulations lead to the scaling of art, i.e. Virtue: Fulfilling the commandments in small matters is very important, since in numerical joints it becomes large and great. Painting: It is impossible to paint a perfect picture in large pieces, on the scale of large objects. Each painting by the master is painted not with paints, but with paintings that consist of pictures, and are in perfect harmony within themselves and in relationships with other pictures and in general. Music: The notes are collected into a banner, the banner is collected into chants and kulisms, chants and kulisms are collected into similar ones, similar stichera are made up of stichera, stichera are collected into Divine services. At every level, at every joint, there must be harmony and combination both within its parts, and with the general, and with the great. And this harmony is similar at all levels of increase. Ikebana: Graceful curves form the petal, the petals form the corolla of the flower, the corolla, stem and leaves form the flower, the flowers are assembled into a composition. At every level, at every joint, there must be harmony and combination both within its parts, and with the general, and with the great. And this harmony is similar at all levels of increase. Bonseki and landscape: Grains of sand gather into dunes, stones gather into rocks, trees gather into a garden. Art of War: Skilled warriors are formed into units, units make up larger formations, up to an army. The harmonious union of the skill of warriors produces the strength of the unit, the harmonious action of the units produces a victorious union, disharmony in one small connection produces panic, mismatch and leads to defeat. Many military tactics are based precisely on introducing disharmony into units and formations. Management: Managing any number of people is not much different from managing yourself. The harmonization of each substructure has the same principles as the harmonization of an individual and the entire structure. The leader does not manage the entire structure, but only the layer of his subordinates located under him. The harmonization of this layer according to the Law of God leads to the fact that harmonization seems to grow right through the entire hierarchical structure. This harmonization is accomplished not by the powers of the mind or the talents of man, but solely by the blessing of God, which is why it is the main value of humanity. Therefore, before any task, blessing and prayer are required; the absence of prayer and blessing produces not only the destruction of harmony, but often death itself. This is how St. writes about it. Gregory Palamas: “But, they will say, many, even without frequently visiting church and indulging in the prayers performed there, not only have success in everyday affairs, but also enjoy wealth and fame and physical health. But let us consider that from this our life does not become very, very useful, and in our life there is a lot of inconstancy and adversity: because, without calling on God in every matter and without having assistance (or “help”) on His part, we give access to the evil one: and such access of his not only ruins our affairs, but also leads to an unfortunate end, and for the sake of insignificant things and pretexts, he brings people into such a great rage against each other that some became victims of the fratricidal sword, while others lived with the blood of their fellow tribesmen, staining their will and soul, or even the very hand that shed the blood. Because the mind that has departed from God becomes either bestial or demon-like and, having gone beyond the boundaries of nature, lusts for things alien to nature and does not know satiety in its greed: it gives itself entirely to carnal lusts and does not know the measure of pleasure. He wants to enjoy honor from everyone, but dishonors himself with his own deeds; wants everyone to flatter and approve and promote his plans, and if according to him they do not come true (because how could this be?), he is filled with indomitable rage; and the anger in him and aggressiveness towards his fellow tribe makes him like a snake, and thus a person becomes a murderer, and is likened to a murderer - Satan, the one who was created in the image and likeness of God. And there is one reason for all this: the retreat of the mind (soul) from the fear and memory of God and allowing access to the cooperation of the evil enemy (the devil). If we strengthen our soul in advance (“prokatasfalisometa”) in every case with praises of God and prayers, the adversary will have no place in us; together with him, the entire pack of evil surrounding him will be driven away. Accordingly, chastity and righteousness and meekness and humility will adorn (or: “govern”) our souls, and united with love with each other, we will live a peaceful life unbroken by civil strife, having in our midst, due to constant communication with Him, the King of the world, Christ. Therefore, every morning, before any work, God's Church beckons us to itself with sacred beats: because daily communication with God, through prayer and psalmody, calms all stormy impulses and directs them along the good path, restrains carnal passions, and dulls the selfish will and washes away pride, and takes away envy, and masters anger, and smoothes out rancor, and all bitterness and having removed the quarrel from the environment, instead he brings all virtue and goodness and prosperity to cities and houses and souls and bodies, and to those living in marriage and to those who have adopted the monastic way of life; and, in a word, it328 is the foundation and affirmation of all good things and the prevention and liberation from all evil and from every evil situation.” (53 omilia) Chapter 12. Why, moving from one to ten and returning from there to one became calculus Augustine: Now, as carefully as possible, we will examine why, after passing from one to ten, there is a return from there back to one. In this regard, I ask you, can something be the beginning of everything if it is not the beginning of something? Licenses: No way. Augustine: Then, what we call the end, can it be anything other than the end of any thing? License: This is also impossible. Augustine: What? Do you really believe that you can go from the beginning of something to the end differently than the middle? Augustine: Therefore, if something were everything, it would consist of a beginning, a middle and an end? Licenses: It appears so. Augustine: So, tell me now: the beginning, the middle and the end - in what number is it contained, in your opinion? Licencius: I suppose you want me to answer you that it is a triple number, since three is what you ask. Augustine: Also, this number, whatever it may be, cannot have an indivisible middle, like odd ones. For if it does, it cannot be divided into two identical parts, which we called characteristic of even numbers. The indivisible middle is one, the divisible is two. The middle in numbers is that from which both sides have equality in themselves. Is there anything incomprehensible that you are less inclined to follow? Licentius: No, everything is obvious to me, and while I am looking for the complete number, I find four first. Indeed, in two, how can one find those three through which the number is complete - that is, the beginning, the middle and the end? Augustine: This is the answer I wanted from you in every possible way, this is what the mind itself reveals. Then repeat the reflection from the very unit and reflection. You will see, of course, that in one there is neither a middle nor an end, because there is only a beginning, or because the beginning has neither a middle nor an end. Augustine: What then shall we say about the two? We cannot understand the beginning and the middle in them, because there cannot be a middle except where there is an end - or we cannot understand the beginning and the end, because it is impossible to come to the end as through the middle? Licencius: Convinces the mind to admit it. And what should I answer about this number, I am completely at a loss. Augustine: Look, could this number also be the beginning of numbers? Indeed, if it lacks a middle and an end, what, as you said, convinces the mind to recognize what remains, if not that it would also be a beginning? Or do you doubt recognizing two principles? Licensius: I absolutely doubt it. Augustine: It would be good if the two principles were based against each other. Now this is a different beginning from the first beginning. Somehow this doesn’t come from anything, but this comes from him. For one and one are two, and both of these principles are such that every number is from one, but since each occurs through multiplication and addition, the source of multiplication and addition is directly divided into two numbers (i.e., two terms or two factors), it turns out that one is found - this is the first beginning from which all numbers, but this (i.e. two) is another beginning through which all numbers. Unless you have any objections to it. The fact that certain two principles in any rank-order - the proper initial 1 and the derivative initial 2 - has an important role in human existence is uniquely expressed in the narrative of the book of Genesis about the creation of Adam and Eve. A certain uniqueness of Adam is expressed in the chromosome set of the husband - he has one Υ chromosome and one X, while his wife Eve has two X chromosomes. Through the combination the blessing of fruit bearing YX+XX is produced Augustine: All this is explored more subtly and mysteriously in the doctrine of numbers. From here we move as quickly as possible to the established object. So I'll ask. If you add one and two, how much do you get? Augustine: Therefore, these two principles of numbers, united with themselves, form a complete and perfect number. Augustine: What? In the count after one and two, what number should we put? Licenses: The same three. Augustine: Consequently, the same number, which consists of one and two, after both of them is co-located in order, so that no other can be inserted between them. Augustine: Then it is appropriate for you to see that this cannot be extended to any remaining numbers, so that any of them that are in the order of counting with each other, you get by adding them, so that the one that is made up of the two of them follows, and no other number is placed between them. Licencius: I also see that two and three, when combined with each other, add up to five, but after them comes not five, but four. Further, three and four add up to seven, and between four and seven in the order of numbers five and six. And the further I want to go, the greater the gap between them. Augustine: So, there is great agreement in the first three numbers. For we speak one, two and three, between which nothing can be placed. For one and two are three. Licensius: Definitely great. Augustine: What? Don’t you consider this worthy of any reflection, that this agreement is much closer and more united, so much more strongly extends to a certain unity, and a single something acts from many? Licensius: Many times yes! And I don’t know how, and I’m surprised, and I love the unity that you show me. Augustine: I will show a lot, but in any case, the combination and connection of things certainly reaches maximum unity, when both the middle corresponds to the edges, and the edges correspond to the middle (lit. “sympathize”, “comprehend”). Licencius: It is entirely proper that it should be so. Augustine: Pay attention to what we see in this connection. Indeed, when we say “one, two and three,” isn’t two superior to one, just as three is two? Augustine: Tell me then, in this comparison, how many times did I say “one”? Augustine: How many times three? Augustine: In that case, what is one, two and one in total? Augustine: Therefore, directly after these three will follow the fourth number and, of course, the comparison of the three numbers is divided by this proportion. This teaching of St. Augustine, rather strange for modern mathematics, reflects his integrity of his wisdom. When a mathematician looks at numbers, he looks only at the numbers themselves, experiencing something like schizophrenia or blindness. St. Augustine, seeing numbers, immediately sees harmony both within the number itself, and in the order of numbers, and in the number of numbers. In this triple harmony lies the secret of poetry, the secret of painting, and the secret of music, since in composition both the internal properties of objects (melodies, objects, words), and their order (determining feet and rhythm), and their quantity (forming a picture, verse, piece of music) are important. Get used to recognizing this comparison as much as possible, if only because this unity, which you said that you love, can produce in numbers that unity, the Greek name of which is “analogy”, and in our language (i.e. in Latin) it is called proportion, which name we will use, if you like, because it is inconvenient, unless absolutely necessary, to use Greek terms in Latin speech. These are the basics of icon painting. Proportion, analogy is the principle of prototype and image. Licensius: I am absolutely pleased, but continue with what you were about to say. Augustine: I will do so. Indeed, let us examine even more carefully what proportion is, and how much truth there is in the subject, and what place proportion has in this teaching. And the more you advance in knowledge, the more you will recognize its power and nature. But you certainly see that in the present there are enough of these three numbers, the agreement of which is amazing and the connection between them is impossible to confess otherwise than through a fourfold number. This is a perfect allusion to the dogma of the Church about the Trinity of God in the icon of the first three numbers and the fourfold nature of the Gospel. And also on the related visions of the Revelation of John the Theologian. As a result, they order the numbers after themselves in such a way that through their agreement, as far as you can understand, when they are most closely connected, it is directly achieved that not only one, two and three - but one, two, three and four are most kindly united in numerical progression. That is, the Mystery of the Holy Trinity is the source of harmony and existence of all creation, although it is located outside of it. Licence: I understand that in every possible way. Augustine: If you look closely at the rest, you will judge that the fourth number has nothing special that the other numbers lack, which would relate to the combination that I am talking about - just as from one to four would undoubtedly be a number and the most beautiful image of progression. We have come to an agreement, of course, that something is formed from many limits into a single one when the limits correspond to the middle and the middle corresponds to the limits. Augustine: Therefore, when we put one, two and three side by side, tell me, what are the middle and the limits? Licensius: I see that one and three are the limits, and two is the middle. Augustine: Then answer, what is made up of one and three? Augustine: What? How can two, which stand alone in the middle, except by themselves? So tell me also, two times two what will happen? Augustine: So, therefore, the middle corresponds to the limits and the limits correspond to the middle. Whence it is so exalted in three that after one and two it is placed, when from one and two it is composed, so it surpasses in four, which after one, two and three is considered when it consists of one and three or two times two, whose limits are with the middle and the middle with the limits in what in Greek is called “analogy”, in accordance with the proportion. Tell me if you understand both of these subjects. Licensius: I understand enough. Let's look at this reasoning in a little more detail. Numbers, according to the teachings of St. Augustine, are not homogeneous and monolithic. Each of them has a beginning, middle and end. Below he calls the middle the core, and the beginning and end the wings. Depending on what kind of nucleus - divisible or indivisible - the numbers have, they are classified as even or odd, that is, they themselves can be divided in half or not. If the two ends of a number added together give twice the middle, then they produce perfect agreement. Number one and number two do not have wings – i.e. represent a pure core. The number three seems to be divided into three parts. The first unit is the beginning, the second unit is the middle, the core, the third unit is the end. Taken together, the beginning (1) and the end (1) produce perfect agreement, being equal to twice the core (1). If we take all three numbers, one, two and three, as a whole, and in them we find the beginning - 1, the middle (2) - two, and the end - 3. And by folding the ends (1 and 3) we get a doubled middle (2). In this case, the beginning (1), being one number, and the end (3), being one number, when adding the number of numbers, give twice the middle (2), which is also one number. Thus, in all this there is a triple agreement - in internal composition, in order and in quantity - of the first three numbers, which is expressed through the number four, which in itself does not have any special properties, but in it lies the perfect agreement of the first three numbers. Augustine: Then let's touch on the remaining numbers, will there not be found in them those two properties that we talked about as features of four? Licensius: Come on. Really. If we compare two, three and four, then adding the extreme ones, we get six. This will also be the middle folded with itself, but after them not six, but five will follow. Next, I will compare three, four and five. The extremes form eight, and the double middle also leads to this, but between five and eight I see not one, but two numbers - six and seven. Also in this sense, the more I advance, the more the interval will increase. Augustine: I see that you understood and assimilated everything that was said. But so that we do not linger, pay clear attention to the most perfect progression from one to four, either from the point of view of odd and even numbers, since the first odd is three, and the first even is four, about which subject we talked a little before, or because one and two are the essence of the beginning and certain seeds of numbers, from which the third is composed, so that there are already three numbers, from the collection of which, through proportion (analogy), the tetrad is born and shines, and for this reason directly joins them, so that even these (four) they become, which is where we find the end of the progression of measure. The progression of St. Augustine has a completely different meaning from school progression. This is not the same ratio of two pairs of numbers, but the ratio of the internal harmony of numbers and their sequence in a series of numbers. Augustine: Very good. But don't you remember what we decided to find out in the end? Indeed, it has been suggested, as I think, whether we can somehow find out, when in this infinity of numbers the articulations (i.e., the bases of the counting system) of which numbers would be composed were determined, what is the reason why the very first articulation is in the tenth number, which through all the others is strengthened many times over, that is, why numbers, moving from one to ten, return back to one. Licensius: I remember clearly that because of this issue we have gone through so much, but I still don’t find what we could do to resolve this issue. If all our reflections really come down to this, then not only to ten, but to five the true and direct progression must be turned. Augustine: Then you do not see that from one, two, three and four, what sum is made? Licensius: I see, I already see, and I am surprised in every possible way, and I admit that I suddenly received a solution to the question. For one, two, three and four together will be ten. Augustine: Consequently, these four first numbers are found to have a more honorable sequence and connection than other numbers. Here St. Augustine draws attention to another harmonization of numbers - through sum. In this case, the fourth harmonization of four numbers gives the number ten. Chapter 13. About the beauty of proportioned movements to the extent that it is judged by sensations Augustine: It’s time to return now to the consideration and discussion of those movements that, in fact, belong to our discipline and for the sake of which we considered what seemed necessary to us from the field of numbers, that is, from another discipline. So, now I ask you why, to clarify, we took those movements within an hour, which, as reason showed, stand to each other in some kind of numerical ratio. If someone runs for an hour, and another for two, can you, without looking at the clock or at Clepsydra or in any other way marking the time, feel that one of these movements is simple, and the other is twice as large? And even if you couldn’t say it, such correspondence still pleases you and gives you some pleasure. Licencius: I can never feel that one is twice the size of the other. Augustine: Since, therefore, it cannot be denied that to the very essence of our discipline, that is, the science of modulating well, belongs all well-modulated movements, especially those that do not correlate with anything else, but in themselves conceal the goal of beauty and pleasure, while the mentioned movements - you answered my question correctly and correctly - cannot come into harmony with our sensations if they occur over a long time, maintaining graceful proportionality between periods of time, equal to an hour or more - since this is so, would it not be correct to say that music, as if emerging from the innermost recesses, has imprinted its traces on our sensations or on the things we perceive, and therefore would it not be correct to first study these traces, so that then it would be more convenient, without any error, to reach what I called the recesses, if only this is possible for us? Licensius: Correct, and I insist that we do it. Augustine: Let us leave these milestones placed outside our sensory ability and let us talk only about those short intervals that amuse us in singing and dancing, as far as our reason allows us. Or do you think that it is possible to explore differently the traces that this discipline, as has been said, left in our sensations and in the things accessible to our sensation? Licensius: I believe that this cannot be done otherwise. Book 2, which discusses the metrics of syllables and feet Chapter 1. Grammar and music. Authority and experience Augustine: So, pay careful attention, and accept now as if another beginning for our discussion. And first, answer, have you been well trained in what grammarians teach - the difference between short and long syllables, whether you know them or not, or do you prefer, regardless of knowledge or ignorance, that we study this subject as if we did not know it at all? So that we can have a basis to come to the necessary conclusion? What is better than if we accepted it out of habit, or if we were forced by the authority of someone else's conclusion? Licencius: Prefer simplicity to me, for it is not only reason that compels me to do so, but also ignorance of the syllables themselves (what would I dare to doubt?) Augustine: Then tell me, have you not noticed yourself that some syllables are pronounced quickly and briefly, while others are pronounced more slowly and longer? Licensius: I can’t deny it, I’m not deaf. Augustine: Then I want you to know that all that science, which is called “grammar” in Greek, and “literature” in Latin, is built on the preservation of custom, either only because reason teaches so subtly, or, for the most part, because many fools think so. So, for example, when you say cano (i.e. I sing) or, rather, put this word in a verse, you either pronounce it so that the first syllable is prolonged, or in the verse you put it in the place where this extension should be - the grammarian will keep you from doing this. Obviously - because he is the guardian of history, without providing any reason why this syllable should be shortened, except that it was so before us. From which grammarians compose books and discuss how these syllables should be used, long or short. Therefore, no matter which of them wins, authority wins. In the understanding of music, which includes the very dimension of logic and calculation of the voice, we do not care about anything, only that the syllable is shortened and lengthened in one place or another according to the reason for its modulation. Indeed, if in the place where two long syllables should be placed, you would put a word in which the first syllable is short, and through pronunciation you would make it long, the music would not be angry in any way, because the voices that should have reached the ears were those times that should have been in number. The grammarian orders this to be corrected, and he tells you to put that word, the first syllable of which would be long, according to the authority of the ancients, whose writings he keeps, as was said. Longitude and brevity are key musical and poetic characteristics of the syllable of all ancient languages. This distinction is preserved in Eastern languages, such as Japanese, but is lost in most European languages, so that only a few traces remain, such as the men-man fit-feet distinction in English. There were long and short syllables in the Church Slavonic language of St. Cyril and Methodius. The vowels b (as short O) and b (as short E) were used as short vowels; Big and Small Yus differed in length and shortness. Although this difference in longitude did not have an impact on the literature and language of the Russian people, in its essence - and especially in relation to painting, music and poetry, it retains its critical significance. This relationship exists even in Divine services, where there is a simple and a “pure”, i.e. double litany (translated as “length”) In the Holy Scriptures we also find a single and double interval of time in calculating the days of the week. So the first day of the week - Sunday - is also the eighth, thereby representing a certain long syllable after the six short syllables of the week, made up of the eighth and first day. We find this double and single in the art of arts - virtues, where in a mysterious form the long and short syllable are expressed in two important virtues of the soul - long-suffering (long syllable) and patience (short syllable), the first of which is the ability to endure the duration of grief without embarrassment, and the second is the change of pleasant circumstances into unpleasant ones. In a broader sense, the short and long syllables represent a certain universal order that we see at all levels. Most of the processes in the world have this pairing - of strong and weak halves - not opposite and fighting with each other, like the Taoist yin-yang, but combined as if in a Christian marriage, where the husband represents the strong half (long syllable), the wife represents the weak half (short syllable). Waves in the sea, gusts of wind, sound “attacks” and “falls”, even steps with the right (strong) and left (weak) legs, are a combination of a certain long and short interval. Here one can see a connection with the words of St. John of Damascus in "The Source of Knowledge" “Existing ον is the name for everything that exists. It is divided into the underlying ουςια (essence) and the predicate συμβεβηκος (literally reduced).” Essence is something most important, since it has existence in itself, and not in another. What is applied is that which cannot exist in itself, but is seen in connection with the essence. Essence is the subject, like substance. The appended is that which is seen in the essence, as in the subject. For example, honey and wax are essences, and figure, shape and color are appendages. The body is the essence, and its color is the appendix. The soul is the essence, and knowledge is the attached. The body is not in color, but color is in the body; not the soul is in knowledge, but knowledge is in the soul. And not copper and wax are in the image, but the image is in wax and copper. They don’t say body color, but body color. Not the soul of knowledge, but the knowledge of the soul. Not the wax of the image, but the image of the wax. And color, and knowledge, and image change, but the body, soul and wax remain the same, since the essence does not change. Moreover, the essence and substance of the body are one, but there are many colors. Likewise with everything else. The subject is the essence, the same thing that is seen in the subject, i.e. in essence, there is an appendix.” An example of which can be found in the word ον itself. Where the letter o is a kind of image of the essence, the ending ν determines the grammatical form - a kind of “reduced adjective”. In painting, the ratio of single and double spacing sets the rhythm of the picture. Of course, tripling and quadrupling are also possible (as in music), but the basis of rhythm is short and double intervals. In music, doubling and tripling intervals is the basis of rhythm. Let us remember what St. Augustine said about 1 and 2 as the basic kernels for all numbers. Obviously, long and short syllables are expressions of these two bases. A short syllable harmonizes everything by growth, a long syllable by multiplication. (via the possibility of splitting into two). Let us compare God’s blessing at creation to all living beings - “grow and multiply” In martial art, a short syllable is an attack, a long syllable is a defense, and the entire martial art consists of them. In the art of management, the short syllable is actions aimed at establishing rank, the long syllable is actions aimed at preserving and maintaining rank. Chapter 2. Human nature is designed to distinguish between numerical dimensions Augustine: That is why we, when we undertake an investigation of the essence of music, even if you do not know which syllables are short and which are long, we can still have no obstacle in this ignorance of yours, but be content with the fact that you paid attention and said that some syllables are short and others are long. Why now I’ll ask this: has the sound of poetry ever pleased you in any way? Licencius: Completely and constantly, since without pleasure I would almost never listen to poetry. Augustine: Therefore, if in a verse you heard, which you enjoyed, at a place in which there was no difference in meaning, you either lengthened the syllable or shortened it, would you be able to enjoy it in the same way? Licencius On the contrary, he could not even listen without indignation. Augustine: Therefore, there can be no doubt that in those sounds that you say give you pleasure, a certain numerical dimension brings pleasure. And when she becomes confused, she cannot give pleasure to the ears. The subject of the treatise is a study of the often unconscious perception of the universe embedded in human nature as a creation of the Divine Mind, which created everything in number and measure. Augustine: Tell me in this case, regarding the sound of the poems, what is the difference between the two, which I will say: Arma virumque cano, Troiae qui primus ab oris (the first verse of Virgil’s Aeneid: “I sing battles and men who are the first from the shores of Troy”) Troiae qui primis ab oris? (The verse is slightly changed to "who is the first from the shores of Troy." In Latin, both are correct, but there is a difference in the rhythmic structure, which St. Augustine himself will say.) Licensed To me, both sound the same because they are the same size. Augustine: It's because of my pronunciation. Or rather, because of a violation that grammarians call “barbarism.” In fact, primus has long and short syllables. In primis both syllables are long. But I shortened the endings in both, so that no violation came to your ears. For this reason, you should also experience this: when I pronounce a verse, do you feel which syllables are short and long, so that our established order of discussion can continue - I ask, and you answer. So, I will repeat again the same verse into which I put barbarism, and now I will prolong, as the grammarians command, the syllable that I previously shortened, so that your ears are not offended. Tell me if the meter of this verse will give you the same pleasure. Arma virumque cano, Troiae qui pri=mi=s ab oris Licencius Now I cannot deny, I don’t know why, that the deformation of sound is unpleasant to me. Augustine: Not unfair. Although barbarism no longer exists, there is still that violation that both grammar and music prohibit. Grammar - because the word whose last syllable is long is placed in the place where the short syllable should be located. Music is the same way, since some long syllable is in the place where it should be short, and the proper rhythm, which is supplied by the numerical dimension, is not performed. In view of this, if you already sufficiently distinguish that the feeling follows what the authority postulated, let us look at the very thing why in one case the sound of either long or short syllables gives pleasure, and in another case it is unpleasant, then what relates to longness and shortness. I think that you remember that we promised to undertake an explanation of this part. Licencius: I discerned this, and I remember this, and I am already attentively expecting what will follow. Disruptions in length and brevity in music and poetry cause unpleasant sensations, failures in longitude and brevity in painting cause disgust and boredom towards the picture. Disruptions in the longitude and brevity of the landscape and interiors cause painful sensations for the inhabitants. Failures in the length and brevity of Divine services and pleasing God cause despondency and fatigue. Failures in long-term actions on maintaining rank - and short-term actions on establishing rank - in management cause destruction of human relationships, and are felt regardless of whether people understand it. Failures in defense and attack in war cause disruption in communication between different units and ultimately defeat or heavy casualties. Chapter 3. In what numbers do syllables relate to themselves? Augustine Do you think we should begin to compare syllables with each other, and see which numbers contain themselves, as we have already had such a long discussion about movements? For everything that sounds is in motion. And the syllables sound. Or can any of this be rejected? Augustine: Consequently, when syllables are compared with each other, certain movements are compared with each other, in which certain numbers can be studied by the measure of the duration of times. Augustine: Then, therefore, can one syllable be compared with itself? Indeed, every comparison tends to be the same, unless you assume something different. Those. equality. When we compare, we look at how different what is being compared is from the same. Licenses I do not believe anything else. Augustine: What? One with one, or one or two with two or three, and so on in the multitude, why couldn’t they be compared with each other? Will you deny? Even when we are talking about unequal objects, comparison by its very definition is a determination of equality, sameness. It is interesting that the Russian word “difference” comes from the word “raz” - a synonym for “unit”. Licensius Who will deny this? Augustine: Then look again, any syllable is short and shortest in duration of sound and stops immediately after the beginning, but it occupies a certain space in time and has a certain measure of its own. Licensius What you say seems necessary. Comparison leads to the definition of a minimum measure - a “unit of measurement” in scientific terminology. This measure is the source and filling of everything. Augustine: Then tell me where we are counting from. Licenses From one, of course. Augustine: Therefore, it is not absurd that, as if the minimum space in time occupied by a short syllable, the ancients called the unit tempo. And from here we move from short to long. Augustine: Therefore, pay attention also to the fact that both in numbers from one to two there is a unit progression, so in syllables. Namely, when we move from a short syllable to a long one, the long one must have double tense. And also if the space occupied by a short syllable is correctly called unit time, then the space occupied by a long syllable is correctly called double time. Licensius: Of course, this is correct. Indeed, I believe that this is reasonably established. Seemingly elementary reasoning is very important for understanding what follows. Chapter 4. What is a foot and its connection with intervals Augustine: Let's move on. Now let's look at their combination. In fact, I’ll ask, what do you think is the logic by which one short syllable is added to another short syllable, and what these movements themselves would be called. For, if I’m not mistaken, you remember that in the previous speech we gave names to all movements that are combined with each other by different numbers. Licensius: I remember that we called them equal. For they have the same time in comparison with each other. St. Augustine draws attention to the most important point in all human affairs. When we attach something to an individual, we compare with it. Willingly or unwittingly. Combination and composition is a comparison with what already exists. Since the individual is obviously smaller than all the others, the comparison represents a certain path, movement, aspiration of everything towards the unit. Any object by its very existence seems to form this path. First comes the unit, as the measure of all things. Then two and other numbers appear, and a path is formed, like a comparison with one by reducing two to one. In painting this manifests itself as perspective. First, a unit appears - the vanishing point, then any object is compared with this vanishing point and, as it were, rushes towards it - diminishes - forming a path for the gaze and for thought. In music this manifests itself as melody. First, the unit appears - the tonic, then comes the melodic development, which must necessarily return to the same note (tonic), if it does not return to it, then the melody seems unfinished. In government, this is manifested in the Gospel as the Basic Law and the goal of the movement of society. Any action of the ruler should direct society to the Gospel, and people to Christ. In the landscape, this manifests itself as a cornerstone (“lord mountain” in the terms of Chinese painters), which itself, in the vast expanse, reveals the goal of the viewer’s feelings and thoughts. All other stones and objects rush towards it through comparison, forming paths or paths. Augustine: But where this combination of syllables is compared and has a certain numerical relationship within it, should it really remain without a name? Augustine: As you know, the ancients called this combination of sounds a foot. Obviously compared to two steps. One step is the first syllable, the second step is the second syllable. Here St. Augustine seems to be commenting on the first book, revealing the foundations more deeply, and in these foundations revealing new hidden foundations of harmony and order. It is interesting that this relationship between singular and dual is also characteristic of Chinese characters. At the level of the hieroglyph itself, it can be single (contain only one sign) or double (contain two signs, one of which is a “key”, the second is a “phonetic”). At the word level, Chinese words consist predominantly of either one morpheme, corresponding to one character, or two, corresponding to two. The three- or four-part words are a novelty, mostly representing European technical terms like "hydroelectric power station" or "thermostatic resistor". But one must carefully examine to what extent the mind allows the foot to be enlarged. For this reason, tell me first, in what sense are long and short syllables compared? Licencius: I think this combination stems from the kind of numbers that we called added (complicator). Because in them I see a simple and double combination, that is, one time interval in a short syllable to two time intervals in a long one. Augustine: What if we arrange it in such a way that the long syllable is pronounced first, and then the short syllable? Is it really because the order has been changed that the meaning of the combination of numbers is no longer valid? Indeed, if in that foot there are simple and double intervals, then in this foot there are double and simple ones. those. even if the long syllable takes precedence, by its nature it still strives for the short, and the short represents the foundation, the base. Augustine: What? In a foot of two long syllables, do not two double intervals of time correspond? Augustine: Then from what ratio is this combination derived? Licenses: Of those that we called equivalent (equal) Two syllables four are the feet Augustine: Let's continue. Now tell me first, from two short and two long syllables, how many combinations of feet can we produce? Here and below, for ease of understanding, a short syllable is designated by the number 1, a long syllable by the number 2. Licenses: Four. Really. The first of two short syllables is 11, the second of short and long is 12, the third of long and short is 21, the fourth of two long is 22. Although this seems like primitive combinatorics, what follows will show that intense attention must be paid to this. Augustine: Can't there be more than four tenses when two syllables are combined with each other? Licenses: No way. In fact, when syllables take on this image, that short has one time interval, and long has two, and when all syllables can be either long or short, by what agreement can two syllables compare and combine with each other to form a foot, if not as short and short, or short and long, or long and short, or long and long? Augustine: Say also how many time intervals the minimum foot of two syllables should have, and then how many the maximum. Licenses: This one is two, and this one is four. Augustine: Do you not see how the progression cannot help but pass to a quaternary number, either by footsteps or by time intervals? St. Augustine again returns to the idea that four is a perfect number containing the properties of three. Licencius: I see clearly, and I remember the meaning of what was said about numerical progression, and I understand the reason for this with pleasure Augustine: Therefore, would you not judge that since the feet consist of syllables, that is, divided and as if articulated movements inherent in sounds, and the syllables stretch out over time, there should also be a progression of the feet up to four syllables, so that as it has already reached the quaternary number, you also judge the feet and times themselves? Those. since there are four tenses in two long syllables, they may well be four short syllables. Next, St. Augustine will show where this principle stops. Licencius: I feel as clearly as you say, and I know this with perfect reason, and I demand repayment of the debt. Chapter 5. Feet of different sizes and their relationship to numbers Foot of three syllables of four tenses Augustine: So, the first thing that establishes the order itself is let’s see how many feet there can be of three syllables, as we have already found out together that out of two there are four. Augustine: Remember why we began the order from one short syllable, that is, the most single interval of time. Licencius: I remember that it is not proper for us to deviate from that law of number that pleases us, in which we began from one. Augustine: In that case, when in the feet of double syllables the one that consists of two short syllables is placed first (because according to the meaning it is proper to combine one time interval first before two), which then, in your opinion, should be the first of the three-syllable feet? Licencius: Which one if not the one that consists of three short syllables 111? Augustine: And how many time intervals does it take? Augustine: How then do its parts relate to each other? Indeed, every foot for the sake of this addition of numbers has two parts, which in themselves are correlated in a certain ratio. It is necessary that we remember what was said above - can we really divide this pile of three short syllables into two equal parts? Licenses: No way. Augustine: how is it divided? Licenses: I don’t see anything else, only if one part has one syllable, and the second - two 1–11, or the first – two, and the second – one 11–1. here and below, for ease of understanding, the hyphen shows the division of the feet in half. Augustine: Tell me also, what rule of numbers does this come from? Licensius: I think it is generated by combined numbers (complicatorum) What has been said about even and odd numbers, i.e. about the existence of a divisible and indivisible nucleus also applies to the combination of syllables in a foot, in which a short syllable plays the role of a unit. Augustine: Next, now pay attention to the following: how many variations can three syllables have, in which one is long and the rest are short, that is, how many stops they form - and answer if you find it. Licenses I see that one foot, which consists of a long and two short ones, consists of 211, but I do not find the other. Augustine: Doesn’t it also seem to you that the length of the three syllables that occupies the first place? Licensius: We didn’t enter into any agreement that two short syllables could be the first, and a long syllable the last 112? Augustine: Think about it, could there be a third option? Obviously, there are licenses. Indeed, this long syllable can be located among two short 121. Augustine: Look also, could there be a fourth? Licenses Absolutely cannot. Augustine: Can you already answer how many variants three syllables can form, containing one long and two short, that is, how many feet do they form? Licensius: Obviously, I can. Indeed, there are three options, and they form three feet. Augustine: What? Can't you figure out how these three feet can be ordered, or should you gradually lead to this? Licencius: So you don’t like the order from which variability itself is known? After all, at the beginning I put one long syllable and two short ones,211 from which two short and one long 112, and after - short and long and short. Augustine: Don’t you yourself dislike the order in which one goes from the first to the third, and from the third to the second? Isn't it better when from the first to the second, and from the second to the third? Licensius: Of course, I don’t like it, but what should I pay attention to in this case? Augustine: When in this tripartite distinction you placed first the foot, which in the first place has a long syllable 211, you felt the singularity of the longest syllable holding primacy (since it itself is alone here) and therefore should generate that order so that the first foot is where the first syllable is. Also, obviously, you should have made the second foot the one where this long syllable is the second 121, and the third - where the third is 112. Or do you still think that you need to stay in the order you named? Licencius: On the contrary, I will reject it without hesitation, and this order is better than it, unless there is an even better order that I do not know. Let us somewhat explain the most important reasoning, which has no idea in modern mathematics. The “unit” can be not only the smallest in size, but also the smallest in quantity. And with multiplicity, quantity takes precedence over size. In a stack of one long and two short syllables 211, the “cornerstone” is the long syllable, because although it is twice as long as the short one, it is one, and there are two short ones. Therefore, the order of Divine wisdom arranges feet of this kind not by short, but by long syllable. In painting this manifests itself most clearly. If there is a large and a small object in the picture, then the path begins from large to small. The eye first pays attention to a large object, then notices a small one - and a path is formed in time. If one small object is surrounded by larger ones, then the larger ones form a path to it. If one large object is surrounded by small ones, then the small objects form a path to it, because the eye automatically selects many objects first - then only one. In virtue, this is also manifested in the fact that the Gospel is at the same time extremely small, therefore it is a measure, and comparison with it is a way of belittling. But this belittlement occurs in an unusual way. Every great thing and great person compares itself with the Gospel, finds the Gospel infinitely greater and more majestic than itself, and from this comparison diminishes itself, thereby approaching the Gospel as small (in Latin small - pavlus, Paul), but since the Gospel is infinitely great, then, diminishing in the Gospel, it also increases in the Gospel. In Augustine’s teaching on the advantage of a long syllable, in this way one can find the Gospel “Everyone who exalts himself will humble himself, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” Augustine: Therefore, now tell me, by the rule of what numbers these feet are also divided, which are made up of these parts. Next, the blessed one pays special attention to the “evenness” and “oddness” of the feet, i.e. the presence of a divisible and indivisible nucleus. This is critical for understanding the rest, since the basis of harmony is not feet, but half-foots, in which these nuclei play a key rhythmic and harmonic role. Licencius: I believe that the first 2–11 and the last 11–2 are divided by the rule of equals, since both this into a long and two short syllables, and that into two short and a long syllables can be divided so that in each part there are two time intervals, and from this they would become equal. In the second foot, since the middle syllable has a longitude, it is dissected either in the first or in the last part - it is divided either into three and one 12-1, or into one and three time intervals 1-21, and also through this, in its division, it has a relation of folded (complicator) numbers. Recall that complicator numbers are two numbers where the larger one contains an integer number of the smaller ones. Augustine: I wish you to sort out on your own which feet should come after those we have discussed. For we first discussed four two-syllable feet, the order of which is derived from the number one, just as we ordered the short syllables. Where they have already begun to discuss three-syllable feet, which are more productive in terms of the number of feet. And we started with three short syllables, which was easy according to the above ratio of two short ones. Where and what could have followed, if not what we saw, how many forms form one long syllable and two short ones? We saw it. And as it should be, they ordered the three feet according to that first one. What comes next, you yourself should already see by the rank itself, if you discard everything insignificant and insignificant. Licensius: You are correct. Indeed, who does not see that those feet are already coming in which there is one short syllable, and the remaining two are long. In which the short syllable, since it is the only one, for the above reason determines the primacy, so that the first foot is the one where it is the first 122, the second - where the second is 212, the third - where the third and last is 221. In these feet, the short syllable again becomes a unit of measure, but this time as both smaller in number and smaller in size. Let us note that when moving from one type of foot to another, we seem to switch in a measuring unit from a short to a long syllable, and this dimension moves cyclically according to three properties: measure by brevity, measure by quantity, measure by brevity and quantity. Augustine: Consider, as I suppose, by what relations they are divided, from what parts they are composed. Licence: Of course I’ll look into it. Indeed, one that consists of one short and two long syllables cannot be divided otherwise, so that the first part has three time intervals, and which consists of a short and long syllable, and the last - two intervals, which consist of one long syllable.12–2 Why can’t it be divided into two parts so that the first part has 1 short syllable, and the second has two long syllables 1–22? Because here we are not talking about all possible parts of the foot, but the most important for harmony - even and odd divisions along even and odd nuclei. Here there is a certain mutual desire of the two halves for maximum equality, which is possible only with 12–2, and with 1–22 it is extremely “unfair”. Likewise, the third foot 221 pairs for the first in that it has a single division, but differs in that when that one is divided into three and two, and this one is dissected into two and three time intervals2–21. Indeed, the long syllable, which occupies first place, lasts two intervals, leaving a long and a short one, which makes up three time spaces. As for the middle foot, which has a middle short syllable, it undergoes a dual division, since the same short syllable can apply to both the first 21-2 and the last part 2-12. For this reason, time intervals are divided into two with three and three with two. For what reason the ratio of sesquetor numbers can be applied to these three stops. Let us recall that sequester numbers are where the greater differs from the less by one. For example, 2 and 3, 3 and 4, 4 and 5. Augustine: And have we already considered all the feet of three syllables or is there something else left? Licensius: I see there is only one left - which consists of three long syllables 222. Augustine: Then explain the division of her too. License: Dividing it into one syllable and two 2–22 – or into two and one 22–2. Time intervals are two and four or four and two. For this reason, in this stack the parts are added according to the relations of added (complicator) numbers Such double division feet are further designated with both division options - 2-2-2. Although the foot 2-2-2 has a long syllable in the middle, which itself is “even”, i.e. capable of division by the nucleus, but at the level of the foot we cannot divide syllables, which, whether long or short, remain indivisible. For this reason, the division of 2–2-2 feet is exactly the same as 1–1-1 feet, the difference is what the measuring unit is. In the last foot it is a short syllable, in foot 2-2-2 it is a long one. Chapter 6. Feet of four syllables Augustine: Now let us look successively at the feet of four syllables and their order, and now tell yourself which of them should be placed first, and apply the ratio of their division. Licensius: Obviously, four short syllables 11–11, which are divided into two binary parts, the ratio of equal numbers can be two and two time intervals. Augustine: You got the point. Then move forward yourself and follow the rest. I already believe there is no benefit in asking you every time when a short syllable should be removed one by one and a long one added in its place, until it comes to the feet consisting of all the long syllables. But when the short ones are depleted and the long ones are filled, how many options they form, and how many stops they generate, we need to think about it. Namely, how syllables make up a rank, when either a long or short syllable is unique among others, you have already explained everything about this above. But where there are two short and two long, which has not yet happened, according to what assessment should they take precedence? So, the essence of the whole discussion about feet is the search for the Cornerstone, a measuring unit, a certain foundation of pleasure, on which harmony is tied. Therefore, the blessed one especially pays attention to a new case - where a long and a short syllable have an equal number of more than one. But this case is solved very simply. Licensius: This is already obvious from the above. Because the short syllable, since it has one time interval, already retained greater unity than the long one, which has two. And for this reason, at the head and beginning of everything we will put that foot, which consists of short syllables. In cases where there are several different syllables, again the dimension of one determines the minimum. Thus, when there are many monks in a monastery, the most humble of them should be appointed abbot. It is not for nothing that the ancient Byzantine respectful attitude towards the commander is “your measure.” If there is a minimum quantity, then it is a priority. If they are equal in quantity, then minimum in size. In those cases when all the syllables are the same (1-1-1 and 2-2-2), there is no difference which one to use. Augustine: Therefore, it will not be difficult for you to list how many of these successive feet there are, and I will not ask, but listen and judge. Licensius: I will do it if I can. So, firstly, from the four short syllables one short one must be removed and instead the long one must be put in first place for the sake of the dignity of uniqueness. 2–1-11 Minimum quantity. This foot is divided into two in two ways: either long and three short, or a long one with a short one and two short ones. That is, either for two and three, or for three and two time intervals. It is obvious that with one long syllable with three short ones, all feet have an “indivisible” core, which, however, varies from foot to foot - and the results of dividing the feet are also unique in the combination of composition and position. A long syllable placed in second position forms a different foot, which is uniquely divided - that is, into three and two time intervals, so that the first part contains a short and long syllable, and the second - two short ones. Further, a long syllable placed in third place produces the following foot which is uniquely divided in the opposite way - so that the first part has two time intervals in two short syllables, and the second - three in a long and short one. The fourth foot is formed by the last long syllable, it is divided in two ways, just like the first. That is, either into two short syllables and a short one with a long one, or into three short ones and a long one, the syllable allows you to divide it like this, that is, into two and three or three and two time intervals. Yet these four feet, where with three short syllables one long one is composed, have a proportion by the ratio of the sesquetor numbers. Let me remind you that “proportion” St. Augustine does not call school proportion, but harmony resulting from the different relationships of two numbers, in this case characterizing the two halves of the foot. It follows that from four short syllables two are removed and instead we get two long ones. And let's see how many forms and feet there can be from two short and two long syllables. The first thing I see, therefore, is that it is necessary to put two short and two long syllables, since the order is more correct to start with the short ones. This same foot has a double division, so that either two short syllables hold the first part, and long ones to the last, or so that the first are two short and one long, and the last part contains one long. This “unfair” division again comes from the “indivisibility” of the central double syllable. There will be a different foot when these two short syllables, which we previously placed at the head, as the order itself decrees, should be placed together in the middle, Why not 1212 or 1221 or 2211? The same principle of “cornerstone” and minimum dimensionality. Here the measuring unit is formed not by one, but by two short syllables. The reason for this is below. and this foot is divided into three and three time intervals, indeed, the first part occupies a long and short syllable, and the last is short and long. When they are placed at the end, as follows in order, they form a foot with a double division, in which the first part would have two time intervals and one long syllable, and the last - four and a long with two short, or the first part - four intervals in two long syllables, and the last in two short - two. Of these three feet, the parts of the first and third are related to each other in terms of complicator (subjunctive) numbers, and the middle one has equal numbers. Then those two short syllables, which were supposed to be connected, are separated, of which the minimum separation, from which they should begin, is to have one long syllable between them, and the maximum separation is two long syllables. Here St. Augustine introduces another principle of harmony - the priority of combining what is akin to its separation, although he does not explain it. Moreover, the greater the distance between like and similar, the less priority, the less harmony this combination has. This is especially noticeable in management, where it is quite obvious that people of similar morals and customs feel better together and achieve success in their activities faster - whether they are monks in a monastery or murderers and rapists. Actually, heaven and hell - in this sense, are equally harmonious places - for saints and those who have destroyed themselves, respectively. But when there is one long between them, it can be in two ways, and generates two feet. The first of these methods is to have a short syllable at the head, and then a long one, then short and remaining long. Another way is to have short ones in the second and last places, and long ones in the first and third places. Then it will be long and short, long and short. The maximum separation is that in which there are two long syllables in the middle, one short one at the beginning, and the second at the very end. Please note that 2–1-1–2 is in the second highest order of harmony, and 1221 is in the last. And these three feet, in which the short syllables are considered separated, are divided into three and three time intervals, that is, the first of them into short and long and short and long, the second for long with short and long with short, the third is short with long and long with short. This is how six feet are formed from two short and two long syllables, differing from each other in the place where they are placed. All that remains is to remove three from the four short syllables and replace them with three long ones. And there will be one short syllable. And since there is one short one at the head, which will be followed by long ones, there will be one foot. And the one placed in second place is second. On the fourth - fourth. Of which four feet the first two are divided into three and four time intervals, the last two are four and three and all of them, based on their division into parts, have the ratio of sesquetor numbers. Indeed, the first foot has a beginning with a short and a long syllable, spanning three intervals, and the last one has two long syllables in four intervals. And in the second, the first part is a long and short syllable, that is, three intervals, the last part is two long, four intervals. The third in the first part has two long syllables, four intervals, in its last part it covers a short and a long syllable, that is, three intervals. In the fourth foot, in a similar way, the first part is formed by two long syllables, four intervals, and the last - a long and short syllable, three intervals. What remains is a foot of four syllables, in which all the short syllables have been removed, so that the foot consists of four long ones. It is divided into two and two long syllables in relation to equal numbers, that is, obviously, into four and four time intervals. This is what I wanted to explain on my own behalf. Now continue asking the rest. Chapter 7. Feet - the image of God's creation in number and measure Augustine: And I’ll ask. Have you thought sufficiently about this progression to a quaternary number, which, as far as it is shown in the numbers themselves, is also valid in these feet? This refers to the reflection of St. Augustine in the first book on the perfect progression from the number one to the number four. Licencius: I have experienced that this progression works just as true in feet as in numbers. Augustine: What? Just as feet are formed by linking syllables together, so by linking feet, shouldn’t there be something else that can no longer be called either syllables or feet? Licenses: In any case, it exists. Augustine: What do you think this could be? This is where the number of stops ends. There are no stops of five syllables, the reason for this is that the numbers are not infinite, but actually end at four, as a perfect number, revealing the strength and harmony of the first three. The next stage of harmonization is the formation of meter and verse from these feet. A visible manifestation of this principle is the abacus - a counting board in which there are only four counting stones in each rank. Also, the ancient Latin counting itself counted the numbers Ι ΙΙ ΙΙΙ ΙΙΙΙ, and then there was something else - V for five, as a sign of the end of counting. The same can be seen on a person’s hand, where four fingers are together and the fifth is separated from them. Augustine: What if someone wants to endlessly connect some feet, so that their measure does not come to an end? Unless the turn will have to pass to someone else due to a hoarse voice or some interrupting incident or due to the lapse of time? Can you call it verses that have twenty, thirty, or even a hundred or more feet, as the one who wants or is able to connect them with infinity wants? Licensius: No, not like that. I will not pay attention to where any foot is mixed with any other, nor will I call it a verse where many feet are connected in an infinite length. But, following a certain teaching, I will look at the type and number of feet, that is, which and how many feet make up a verse, and from this I will judge whether it pleases the ears. Augustine: But this certain teaching assigns a rule and measure to verses, not as anyone pleases, but compiled according to some reason. Licensius: Not otherwise. Because this is a teaching. It should and can be compiled according to reason. Augustine: Then we will examine this reason and follow it, if you wish. Indeed, if we look only at authority, we will get a verse that no one knows who wanted to call it a verse. Asclepiades, or Archilochus - the ancient poets, or Sappho the poetess, and others, whose names are also called varieties of poems, and who died before they became known. Indeed, the verse is called “Asclepiadic”, and “Archilochic”, and “Sapphic”, and the Greeks gave the names of six hundred other authors to various types of verses. From which it is not absurd to see the sin in the fact that whoever wants and how many stops he wants, puts them in whatever order he wants. Because since no one before him composed such an order and measure of feet, he is directly and rightly called the founder and disseminator of a new kind of poetry. Or do people have such permission, then they should explore through questions what, finally, they deserved, that for joining the feet, as they wished, the poems received their names and seem to be in their possession. Or do you think differently? Licencius: So it is as you say, and I completely agree that poetry was generated by reason before authority. I ask that we see this already. Chapter 8. About twenty-eight feet Augustine: Let us then see which feet are combined with each other, from here - what comes out of these combinations (for there is no one verse), and then we will discuss the whole meaning of the verses. But do you really think that we can properly follow the footsteps if we do not receive their names? Although they are honored from us by the rank that they could take names from their very order, for they can be called first, second, third, and so on in the same way. But since one should not despise the ancient names, and it is not easy to abandon the custom, unless there is some compelling reason, we will use those names of the feet that the Greeks established, and ours have already been used instead of the Latin ones. Which we will use without exploring the origin of their names. Because the last topic has a lot of chatter, but little benefit. For you will lose a little in speech, naming bread, wood or stone, if you do not know why they are called that. Licensius: Just as you say, I think it myself. The first foot is called Pyrrhic (1–1), of two short syllables and two time intervals, as in the word "fuga". Since we do not live in the cultural atmosphere of St. Augustine, and these names are not as common for us as for him - like tree, stone or bread - we will provide some information about them to make them easier to remember. Pyrrhic comes from “πυρριχη” - the war dance of the Spartans, which represented jumping, racing, and therefore could be translated as “jumping”, which corresponds to the rhythm 1–1, but has a deeper etymology, because πυρ is fire, and πυρριχος is bay, fiery red. The second is Iambic (1–2), from short and long, as in parens - three time intervals. Comes from the Greek ιαμβος, the meaning of which is derived from the obscene Greek mythology about which St. Augustine specifically did not want to talk about Divine wisdom in his treatise. We will assume the true etymology from ιαμα - healing, medicine The third is Trocheus or Trocheus (2–1), from long and short as in “meta”, three time intervals. Trochea has two synonymous names. Τροχος means circle, wheel, rapid rotation in a circle. Χορος means “choir”, people located and moving in a circle (cf. our “round dance”). This also includes χορτον – a round place for grazing cattle, from which the tennis “court” originated. Fourth – Spondium (2–2), of two long syllables, as in ‘aestas’, four time intervals The Greek σπονδη is a cup for ritual libations, as well as reconciliation, peace treaty, covenant - and the libation itself. Fifth – Tribrachium (1-1-1), of three short, as in ‘macula’, three time intervals Literally τρίβραχυς means “three short ones” – i.e. three short syllables, as well as “three short-lived, three fleeting.” The sixth is Dactyl (211), from a long and two short ones, as in “Maenalus”, four time intervals. Greek δάκτυλος "finger". This is taken from the anatomical structure of the finger itself, or because of the three phalanges - parts of the finger - one is longer than the other two, or because the last phalanx has a nail, and therefore represents something double. Seventh – Amphibrachium (1–2-1), from short, long and short, as in “carina”, four intervals Translated from Greek, “short on both sides,” which reflects the structure. Eighth – Anapest (1–1-2), from two short and long, as in, “Erato” four intervals This name is derived from αναπαιστος - reverse, returned, since its structure is the opposite of dactyl, but since παις is a child, then αναπαιδευω - re-education. Ninth – Bacchius (1–2-2), from short and two long, “Achates” five intervals Another foot, the name of which comes from the pagan god Bacchus - Dionysus, but quite possibly comes from βακτιριον - stick, rod, in the shape of a sharp tip 1 on a shaft 2-2. Tenth – Creticus or Amphimacrius (2–1-2), from long, short and long, as in “insula”, five intervals Κρητικος – “Cretan” size, or from κρηςερα – sieve for sifting, in shape. Amphimacrius literally means "long on both sides" Eleventh – Palimvakhiy (2–2-1), from two long and short, as in “natura”, five intervals Παλιν-βακχιος literally “Bacchius backwards to front” or “Bacchios backwards”, or “the other end of the rod” Twelfth – Moloss (2–2-2), of three long ones, as in “Aeneas”, six intervals Molossus is a dynasty of the ancient Greek kingdom of Epirus, after which the foot is named. Thirteenth – Prokeleumatic (11–11), of four short ones, as in “avicula”, four intervals Or comes from προ+κελευμα (forward+order) or from προκελευθος (leader), reflects a warlike character, cf. meaning pyrrhic The fourteenth is Paeon the first (2-1-11), from the first long and three short ones, as in “legitimus”, five intervals. Or from παιω - to beat, sting, or from παιωνιος - healing, doctor. Fifteenth – Peon second (12–11), from a second long and three short ones, as in “colonia”, five intervals Sixteenth – Paeon third (11–21), from the third long and three short, as in “Menedemus”, five intervals Seventeenth – Peon fourth (11-1-2), from a fourth long and three short, as in “celeritas”, five intervals Eighteenth – Ionian from small (from minor) or descending (11-2-2), from two short and two long, like “Diomedes”, six time intervals Obviously, from the name of the Greek region Ιωνα. Ion is the founder of Athens and of Greek civilization in general. Means "violet" and is purple in color. The nineteenth is Khoriamb (21–12), from a long, two short and a long, as in “armipotens”, six intervals. Obviously, it consists of a combination of the names trochee and iambic, The twentieth is Ionian from great (from major) or ascending (2-2-11), of two long and two short, as in “Iunonius”, six intervals. Obviously, by the name of the area - Ionian Greece. Twenty-one – Diyamb (12–12), from short and long, short and long, as in “propinquitas”, six intervals In name and in essence, “two iambics” The twenty-second is Dichoreus or Ditrocheus (21–21), from long and short, long and short, like cantilena, six intervals. By name and in essence there are two choreas and two trochaea. Twenty-third - Antispastus (12–21), from a short, two long and a short, like Saloninus - six intervals. Σπαστος – traction, stretching. Hence the spasm - cramp. Antispasm is stretching in different directions or directly from the Greek αντισπαστος - convulsive or limping. Twenty-fourth – Epitritus first (12–22), from the first short and three long, like sacerdotes, seven intervals. Literally means “on three”, i.e. foot consisting of three identical syllables + on top Twenty-fifth – Epitritus second (21–22), from the second short and three long, like conditores, seven intervals Twenty-sixth - third epithrite (22–12), from the third short and three long, like Demosthenes, seven intervals Twenty-seventh – Epitritus fourth (22–21), from the fourth short and three long, like Fescenninus, seven intervals The twenty-eighth – Dispondius (22–22) – of four long, like oratores, eight intervals. Both in name and in meaning these are “two spondia”. The great John of Damascus divided all virtues into certain steps - stupas-feet. Each of them has its own rhythmic structure, expressed in spiritual activity. In management, the foot is the person or thing being controlled. There are 28 poetic feet (although not all of them are considered suitable specifically for poetry). With two “proto-foots” consisting of one syllable - long or short - there are 30 of them. Here is a list (i.e. a copy) of the “Ladder” of St. Cyprian of Moscow, with an icon representation of its contents: So, what in book poetry is a poetic foot, in the Art of Arts is virtue. Just as a poem comes from the combination of written feet, so from the combination of the steps of St. John Climacus salvation occurs. In both cases, these combinations are not arbitrary or chaotic, but represent the task of art - poetry or asceticism. What kind of poems did St. write? John Climacus? He wrote eternal life, holiness and salvation - and not just as something given, as a certain state - precisely as poetry, as the greatest and most beautiful poem, because God, according to the Creed, is the Poet of heaven and earth, visible to all and invisible. Chapter 9. How the feet connect Licensius: That's all. Now, explore which ones go with which foot. Augustine: You yourself will easily understand this if you distinguish equality and sameness from inequality and dissimilarity. Licensius: There is no judge who does not distinguish this. Augustine: Therefore, this first thing should be followed most of all in the combination of feet, and in every possible way should not be deviated from this, unless there is a fair reason. Augustine: Therefore, you will not hesitate to connect with each other the feet of pyrrhic 1-1, and iambs 1-2, and trachea 2-1, which are also called trochees, nor spondii 2-2. And you will also perfectly combine with yourself, without any doubt, each of the other genera. For this is the pinnacle of equality when feet of the same gender and name follow each other. Or do you think differently? Licensius: I can’t imagine it any other way. Augustine: What? Wouldn't you approve of different feet being mixed by means of equality? For what could be more joyful to the ears when diversity knocks on them and equality is not unjustly taken away? The most important principle of harmony is that complete identity ideally preserves equality but destroys harmony. Therefore, even the Persons of the Holy Trinity are completely equal and Consubstantial, but at the same time non-identical, which St. Andrei Rublev beautifully depicted with poses, places and colors of vestments. Licenses: I approve enough. Augustine: What equality can different feet have if not the same measure? Licensius: I suppose so. Augustine: What? By what measure should they be compared, if not by the same time they take? Augustine: Then what kind of feet will you find of the same time, which you will tie together without damaging the ears? Licensius: It seems to me that these are successive feet. This is the most important theme in all human activity. And painting, and music and poetry, and the management of people, and the art of arts - virtue - having to do with object-foots, consist in nothing other than the harmonious and goal-reaching combination of these objects. And it is in HOW this is done that the core, the core of the essence of harmony consists. Below, in the sixth book, St. Augustine reveals that bliss consists in the desire for equalness. Therefore, feet equal in time, being different in rhythmic structure, find their bliss in combination with equal ones, and this bliss produces pleasure in poetry. Augustine: Right. But the subject still contains some questions. Indeed, while the Amphibrachian foot 1–2-1 has four temporal intervals, it is denied the possibility of mixing with the dactyl 2–1-1, or the anapest 1–1-2, or the spondium 2–2, or the proceleumatic 1–1-1–1. Indeed, these are all the feet of four intervals, and none of them is allowed to be mixed with it, but even this alone, if repeated and associated with itself, is not considered to correctly and lawfully follow the number. It is appropriate for us to discuss this opinion, whether it has a reason, so that it would behoove us to confirm and follow it. Licensius: I wish and really want to hear what follows next. For it is not without reason that I feel that when out of thirty feet discovered by reason, two are missing, it is the only one excluded from the order of numbers, although space in time extends to the same extent as the dactyl 2-1-1 and others that you have listed in a row, and which no one forbids connecting. Augustine: It also relates to this subject that you should be able to discern, by considering the other feet, how their parts (i.e. halves) relate to themselves. For from this you will see that it was not in vain that this one and strange minimum should be attached to the rest of the numbers. But when we think about this, we first need to remember these two names: “raising” (arsis) and “lowering” (thesis). For when the hand rises and falls in beating the rhythm, part of the foot appropriates the rise, and part - the fall. I am talking now about those parts about which enough was said above when we went through their order. For what reason, if you want to investigate this, begin to briefly evaluate the measures of the parts in all the feet, so that you understand why excommunication falls on this one. This is important in painting (raising is light, lowering is shadow), and in music (raising is forte, lowering is piano), and in virtue, and in management, where raising is a period of strength and activity, and lowering is a period of weakness and rest. Man by nature needs such periods, so the rhythmic structure is set not only by patience and long-suffering, but also by activity and rest. Violating them produces the same failure as breaking the commandments. Licencius: First of all, I see that pyrrhicium 1–1 has as many elevations as there are depressions. Spondium 2-2 as well as dactyl 2-1-1, anapest 1-1-2, proceleumatic 1-1-1-1, horiyamb 2-1-1-2, diyamb 1-2-1-2, dichoreus 2-1-2-1, antispastus 1-2-2-1 and dispondium 2-2-2-2 are divided according to the same principle. Indeed, the stress in them is dropped as many times as it is raised. Further, I see that iambic 1–2-2 has a single and double relationship, which is the same relationship observed in trochee 2–1 and in tribrachium 1–1-1 and in molossus 2–2-2 and in both ionics (1–1-2–2 2–2-1–1). And already this amphibrachium 1–2-1 rise and fall (in fact, I have to find another pair for it in order) supplies the ratio of one and three. But I don’t find another foot further, the parts of which would be related in this way. Here the rise and fall is measured not in the whole foot, but in each half into which the foot is divided. For example, dactyl is divided into 2 and 1–1, so both the long syllable 2 has one rise and fall, and the two short syllables have 1–1. Molossus is divided either 2/2–2 or 2–2/2, so it has one cycle of lowering and raising in the small part and two in the large part. Amphibrachium cannot divide a long syllable in half, so it is forced to divide either as 1/2–1 or as 1–2/1, therefore it has two options: Arsis – arsis-tesis-arsis That is for one rise there are three lowerings or for one lowering there are three rises. This is what is meant by the ratio of one and three. In fact, when I think about those where there is one short and two long ones, that is, Bacchius (1-2-2), Creticus 2-1-2 and Palimvachias 2-21-, I see in them the ratio of sesquatorial numbers in raising and lowering. The same relation exists in those four in which there is one long syllable and three short ones, which are called four peons in order. And there remain four epitritiums, similarly named in order, the rise and fall of which contain sesquater (one and a half) numbers. It is worth noting that St. Augustine further says that epitrites are unsuitable for poetry and are suitable only for oratory. Augustine: Therefore, it really seems to you that the reason why this foot is not included in the sequence of numerical voices is quite fair, because only its parts are so different from each other that one is single, and the second is triple? For I honor the proximity of those parts with approval to the extent that they are close to equality. So, in this rank of numbers, when we move from one to four, there is no closer for each foot than itself. Therefore, it should be approved first of all in the feet when they have parts equal to each other, from where the combination of simple and double would result into one and two. The sesquilter combination manifests itself in two and three, and sesquiteration - in three and four. Sesqui is a prefix meaning a pair of numbers, one of which is greater than the other by one. A word denoting a smaller number is added to this prefix. Alter - two, third - three, etc. Here St. Augustine touches on the principles of harmony of numerical order. Each of the first four numbers generates its own spectrum of harmonies, which form the rules by which the feet are combined to form poetry. Simple and triple, although legally contained by complicator numbers, do not retain rank in themselves, because we do not count three after one, but from one to three we need to insert two. This is the reason why it is believed that the foot amphibrachium 121 should be excluded from the combinations with others that we have talked about, and if you approve, then we will look at the rest. Licensius: I completely approve, because it is most obvious and fair. Chapter 11. On the principles of combining feet Augustine: Consequently, it will be desirable that no matter what syllables have equal feet, but if they occupy the same time intervals, then they can directly and without any harm mix with each other, with the only exception of amphibrachs 1-2-1. However, perhaps it is not unworthy to ask whether those feet are equally correctly mixed, which, although they have the same number of intervals, but do not agree in the same stress, which are formed by raising and lowering parts of the foot. Indeed, dactyl 2-1-1 and anapest 1-1-2 and spondium 2-2 not only occupy the same number of intervals, but also have the same stress, for in all of them the raising takes the same amount as the lowering. So, they mix with each other more fairly than any ionic 11–22 22–11 with other six-interval stops. And both ions, of course, receive emphasis on the simple part and the double part, namely, the two intervals correspond to four intervals. According to this rule, the Molosser 2-2-2 is combined with them. For others, indeed, triple intervals are required in raising and lowering. Consequently, even if all had legitimate accents, these three are indeed pronounced in a simple and double ratio (i.e., divided into two parts, one of which occupies 2 time intervals (called mora), and the second four), and the other four are pronounced in equal parts (i.e., divided into two parts of three moras). However, since the unequal rhythm causes this mixing, I don’t know whether it would not be fairer to abandon this mixing. Maybe you have something to add? Licensius: I have even less difficulty joining this. In fact, I can’t imagine how an unequal rhythm can not hurt feelings. If it hurts, in any case this confusion cannot be accepted without irritation. Augustine: However, you should know that the ancients decided that these feet can also be mixed, and from their mixing, poetry is created by composition. But lest you think this is pressure from authority, listen to one of these verses and see if it offends your ears. For if it in no way offends, but even gives pleasure, there will be no reason to disapprove of such a mixture. The verses to which I want to draw your attention are the following: "At consona quae sunt, nisi vocalibus aptes, Pars dimidium vocis opus proferet ex se: Pars muta soni comprimet ora molientum: Illis sonus obscurior impeditiorque, "Utcumque tamen promitur ore semicluso" (Terentian Maurus, “On Letters” (De litteris), 89–93 “And also consonances, which are, if not pleasant to pronounce, The part divided in half by the voice would bring from itself The silent part of the sound will compress the wavering lips His sound is darker and harder However, it is sent with half-closed lips.” What I have quoted is sufficient to make a judgment. I ask, tell me, do these lines really not bring any smoothness to your ears? Licensius: On the contrary, it does not seem to me that it would be possible to flow and sound more easily. Augustine: In this case, consider the feet, do you not really find in these five lines, regarding the feet, that the first two have one ionic 2-2-11, and the last three have a mixed dichoreus 21-21, although our sense enjoys the equality of their combination. Licensius: Since you paid attention to this, it’s easier for you to explain. Augustine: Why then do we hesitate to agree with the ancients, not because of their authority, but for the very reason for which they valued those feet that could be most intelligently mixed at the same time, even if they had different accents. Licensius: Let's move on. Indeed, this sound does not allow me to contradict in any way. Augustine: Then pay attention to the following verses: Chapter 12. The role of the sequence of short and long syllables Volo tandem tibi parcas, labor est in chartis, Et apertum ire per auras animum permittas. Placet hoc nam sapienter, remittere interdum Aciem rebus agendis decenter intentam. (the author of this verse is St. Augustine himself) Finally, I want to warn you, work is in charters (i.e. poems) And let the Spirit enter your open ears Anything is really wise, let go and return sometimes The acuteness of matters that need to be done with careful jealousy Licenses: This is also enough. Augustine: Especially for the reason that these poems are unfinished, since I composed them myself out of necessity. However, in these four lines I am also looking for the judgment of your feelings. Augustine: You judged well. Therefore, it must also be kept in mind that this correspondence in the feet that should be mixed should have no small significance, in addition to the equality of time intervals. For this has weight, if not universal, then at least not insignificant. Indeed, in all these feet there are six intervals, each foot can be assigned six times, so it is appropriate to ask the judges - the senses: Let the first example of the Molossian be for us: vir-tu-tes, Ionic from minor mode-ra-tas Ionic from major – con-ce-dere Augustine: Then relate it all to pronunciation. Better yet, accept my pronunciation, since the feeling will not be occupied with speech for the freest judgment. To represent the equality of the continuous number of times without insulting your ears, I will say the entire combination three times, that will be enough. Virtutes moderatas percipies, concedere benignitas civitasque volet iusta. Are your ears stumbling in equality and pleasantness with anything in the course of these feet? Augustine: Isn't something delightful? Although, on the other hand, what happens here is the proverb that everything that does not offend pleases. Licensius: I can’t say that I feel differently than you. Augustine: That is, you confirm that all these feet of six time intervals can directly connect and mix with each other. These three chapters contain important principles of private harmonies associated with sixfold feet, which are the basis of versification and, as a consequence, of any harmony Chapter 13. About the order in which the feet are combined Augustine: Aren't you afraid that someone will think that these feet can sound so equal only if they are composed in this particular order, but if you change the order, they will no longer be able to? Licensius: Something like that comes to mind, but it’s not difficult to find out. Augustine: Then do it when you have free time. You will find nothing less than that your feeling is caressed by the same equality in many forms. Licensius: I will do so. Although there is no one who would not have foreseen from this example that this would happen out of necessity. Augustine: You put it exactly. But it is already necessary that I rush to the proposed topic, with the addition of a beat, so that you can also judge whether something is lame. And so that you experience something in changing this order - in which we assumed that there would be no lameness, now change this order, and connect the same feet composed by me in any way you like, and let me pronounce them and clap the beat. Licensius: I want the first to be an ionic from the minor 11–2-2, the second an ionic from the major 2–2-11, the third horiyamb 21–12, the fourth diambus 12–12, the fifth antispastus 12–21, the sixth dichoreus 21–21, the seventh moloss 2–2-2 Augustine: Then attract your ears to the sound, and your eyes to the flapping of the hand, because the work of a moving hand is not heard, but seen. And pay extreme attention to how many time intervals are the pestilence in the rise, and how many in the decline. Licensius: I am ready for all this, as far as I am able. Augustine: Accept then this combination with your beating of the rhythm: Moderatas, concedere, percipies, benignitas, volet iusta, civitasque, virtutes. Licensius: I feel that there is some kind of limp in this clapping of the hand, as much in the raising as in the lowering. But for me it is quite surprising how those lines can be brought to the beat, the division of which is in the relation of simple and double, as is the case in both Ionics and Molossus. Augustine: Why do you judge this way, since they raise time intervals three times and deliver the same number? Licensius: For the sole reason that that long syllable, which in the Ionic from the major 2-2-11 and the Molosser 2-2-2 is the second, in the Ionic from the minor 11-2-2 the third, is divided by the clapping itself, so that as if two had time intervals, in one of its parts for raising, in the other for lowering it would divide, and also in these three intervals the raising and lowering alternate. This and the following reasoning are somewhat difficult to grasp, as is everything related to beating the rhythm - raising and lowering. Otherwise, we can say that we are talking about the need for internal symmetry in time intervals. Those. correct alternation, as if one mora were black and the other white. Accordingly, the most harmonious are those combinations of feet where this alternation is performed, and where two black or two white moras seem to be forced side by side, a painful destruction of harmony occurs, even if the time intervals coincide in quantity. This symmetry does not appear just like that, but is obviously closely connected with the first day of creation, when God Himself created this symmetry of time, dividing day and night (morning and evening) Augustine: No one can say or judge anything else about this. But why doesn’t that amphibrachium 1-2-1, which we, as if punished, exclude from our numerical sequence, also act in this way, mixed with the spondium 2-2 dactyl 2-11 and anapest 11-2, or counted with itself and combined in music? By the same reasoning, the middle syllable of this foot, which is long, could be divided by a beat, so that although the rise and fall rush in one interval, they would no longer be represented in one or three time intervals, but in two, if you do not have something to object to. Those. amphibrachium seems to perform this alternation when its middle long syllable is divided by the bar into two symmetrical moras - but in the opposite order. Licensius: I have nothing sensible to say, except that this also needs to be accepted. Augustine: Therefore, what should we think about the reason why something cannot happen in it that can happen in Molossus and Ionic? Or is it because the middle is equal to the sides? For in the number of pairs where the middle is equal to its sides, the first is found in the number of sixfold feet. Consequently, since two intervals in those six-syllable feet can be in the middle and two at the edges, in some way this middle one freely breaks up into wings, with which it is connected in the most kindly equality. But this will not happen in the amphibrach 1-2-1, where the middle and edges are unequal, because if in those there is one interval, in this one there are two. This means that in Ionics 11–2-2 2–2-11 and Molossus 2–2-2 the middle, resolving into edges, forms three time intervals, in which a middle equal to equal edges is formed, which is not the case in the amphibrachy 1–2-1. Licensius: It is as you say. And it is not undeservedly that the amphibrachs in this series offend the ears, but they delight. Those. in the feet of Ionic and Moloss, the symmetry of time intervals is preserved in the middle syllable, and in amphibrachy it is inverted. Chapter 14. Which foot can be combined with which Augustine: Let's move on. Now you yourself, starting from pyrrhic 1-1 and following the above train of thought, briefly explain, as far as you can, which feet should be mixed with which. Licensius: Pyrrhichium1–1 with none, because no other foot is found at the same interval. Iambic 1–2 can be combined with trochee 2–1, but for the sake of unequal beats the beat should be avoided, since one begins with a simple and the other with a double syllable. And at the same time, the symmetry of the mora is broken and they have different nuclei - and in the resulting calculation there are two nuclei with broken symmetry. Therefore, tribrachium 1-1-1 can be connected to both. Those. either with an iambic or with a trochee, since it can be divided after both 1 and 2. I see spondius 2–2 and dactyl 2–11 and anapest 11–2 and proceleumatic 11–11 as also capable of combining with each other, because they agree with each other not only in intervals, but also in tact. Since everything is divided after 2 mor. The excluded amphibrach 1-2-1 cannot be returned in any way, because the identity of its intervals does not help when the difference in the clapping of the bar is dissonant. Bacchius 12–2 with cretic 21–2 and peon first 21–11, second 12–11 and fourth 111–2. Because everyone can be separated after 3 time slots - mor. Palimvakhiy 2–21 intervals and rhythm obviously agree with the same creticus 2–12 and the first peons 2–111, the third 11–21 and the fourth 11–12. Because everyone can be separated after two pestilences. Consequently, the cretic is 2–1–2 to the first peon 2–1–1–1 and the fourth 1–1–1–2, since they can be divided into two and three intervals, and the remaining five-interval iambics can all be combined with themselves without any lameness. As for those that consist of six intervals, they are all in some kind of wonderful agreement with each other, this has already been discussed enough. Since they are not dissonant from each other in the beat, although the location of the syllables suggests some kind of separation - the equality of the sides with the middle plays such a big role. This equality makes it impossible for the symmetry of time intervals to break. Next are the feet of seven intervals, of which four are called epitrites, I find that the first 12–22 and the second 21–22 can be combined with themselves, because for both the division begins from three intervals, and therefore they do not disagree either in space time or in rhythm. Further, the third 22–12 and the fourth 22–21 are connected freely with each other, since they begin to separate in the same way after four intervals, therefore they are measured and rhythmized in the same way. What remains is an eight-interval foot called dispondium 22–22, which, like the pyrrhichium, has no equal. So, what you wanted from me, as much as I could, I did. Continue with the rest. Augustine: I will continue. But after such a long conversation, let’s rest a little and remember those poems that fatigue itself suggested to me, a little by chance. I finally want to warn you, work is in the scriptures, And so that you allow the spirit to open through your ears to enter It’s good and wise to rest occasionally Attention to sharpen according to the subject. Licensius: Absolutely as I wish, and I will freely follow. The above principles clearly apply to all human activity. In painting, where objects are analogues of the feet of poetry, this combination of feet makes up a combination of shapes and sizes of objects, as well as compositional solutions. In music, these are, without a doubt, combinations of rhythms. In landscape and interior, this is a combination of different spaces with objects, while the spaces and objects themselves can relate to each other like feet. In management, this undoubtedly concerns the combination of the rhythms of different processes, both occurring simultaneously and subsequent to each other. In virtue, this obviously refers to the rite of both Divine services and personal spiritual life, where a short syllable represents periods of tension, and a long one represents periods of rest, without which a person cannot be. Periods of tension are called “patience,” and periods of rest are called “comfort,” and God himself, according to the word of the Apostle Paul, is “the God of patience and consolation,” i.e. A poet who writes his own life together with a person, like poetry. Understanding these principles and applying them is obviously called the “royal way”, which is as varied for different people as the combinations of feet, meters and verses are varied (see below) Book 3, which discusses rhythm and meter Chapter 1. On the difference between rhythm and meter Augustine: The third speech decides, since enough has been said about friendship and the agreement of the feet, so that we can now see what is born from their union and continuation. That's why I'll ask you. firstly, when combining those feet that should be combined, would you be able to combine them into a certain limited number in which no definite end appears, as happens when symphonic scabellas (foot castanets for beating the rhythm) and cymbals are beaten, connected to themselves by a certain definite number with the delight of the ears, but however, so if you do not hear the flutes, you will in no way be able to notice anywhere how the addition of the feet occurs, and where the end returns to the head. Or if you want a hundred times or more, for as long as you like, you can continue to continuously connect pyrrhic or other friendly feet with each other. Licensius: I already understand and recognize the possibility of connecting some feet, in which it is determined up to how many feet it can progress and from there return back. Augustine: So you doubt the last type of addition of feet, and admit that it is far from the first, when you do not deny that there must be a certain discipline in the creation of poetry, and admit which of these types you always listen to with pleasure? Licencius: It is obvious that this is also what differs from the type stated above. Augustine: Therefore, since it is proper to distinguish by definition what is in reality divided, learn that this excellent kind of combination is called in Greek - rhythm, and this first one - meter. In Latin, this one can be called “number”, and this one can be called “dimension” or “measure”. But since these names are widespread in our country, and we must be careful not to have a split in terms, we will use the usual Greek ones. St. Augustine strongly discourages what the scientists did in their translation—to confuse rhythm and number. You already understand, as I assume, how both names truly reflect their essence. Indeed, since this one rotates in certain feet and, if dissonant feet are mixed in, an error appears in it, it is correctly called rhythm, that is, number. But since the circulation of the feet itself has no measure, and it is not determined in how many feet a certain end will emit, for the sake of the lack of measure in the continuation it should not be called a meter. This one has both: it actually flows in certain steps, and is limited to a certain measure. So, it is not only a meter - for the sake of indicating the end, but also a rhythm - for the sake of a reasonable connection of the feet. Therefore, every meter is rhythm, but not every rhythm and meter. For the name of rhythm in music is also widespread, and this entire part of it, which refers to long and short syllables, should be called rhythm. But if we talk about names, it is impossible to say enough to please the learned and intelligent. Or do you think something contradictory or dubious about what I said? Licence: No, I completely agree. Thus, everything that has been considered so far relates to rhythm, i.e. how the feet and the corresponding objects and phenomena of other human activities are combined with each other. Those. it was a kind of “number”. The wise Solomon says that God created everything by measure and number. It is obvious that poetry, music and other aspects of human activity, including asceticism, as the art of arts, correlate with this Divine principle. Therefore, having said about the number-rhythm, we must also consider the measure-meter. Chapter 2. About two kinds of meters and which of them is called in verse Augustine: Therefore, now let's think about this together: is every verse a meter, so that every meter is also a verse? Licence: I think so, but I can’t find how to explain it. Augustine: Where did this feeling come from in you? And why does the question about names arise? Because we cannot answer the questioner as confidently as in relation to the essence of the subject, since things are planted in all minds together, names are introduced as anyone wants, and are most often used by custom or by whatever authority you want, from which there can also be a difference in languages, but in reality there cannot be a difference in the existence of things. In this case, accept from me what you yourself cannot answer for any reason, that not only verse, but also the meter of the ancients was named after the name of the feet. So, pay attention and answer - which already applies to you, for it is no longer a matter of names - is there a difference between the following two things: In the first case, a certain number of feet ends with a clear end so that there is nothing left where there would be a certain pronunciation before the end. In the second, it not only consists of a certain end, but also, before a certain end, emits in a certain place a certain division of it, as if formed from two members. Those. – is there a difference between a certain integral combination of feet and one that is divided into two parts, called members. The same universal principle of combining a foot of two halves, but at a different level of organization. Augustine: Therefore, pay attention to this example. Covering purple hair Hippocrene spring, Foam covers life-giving Usta-banks with water jets You will certainly notice that in the five lines above, the two parts of speech are demarcated in the same place, that is, in the foot Horiyamb 21-12, with which Bacchius 12-2 is connected, concluding the verse (and indeed, Horiyamb 21-12 and Bacchi 12-2 make up eleven feet), while the rest - with the exception of one, namely Ora iubis aquosis - do not have the same boundary of parts speech. Licensius: I see this, but I don’t understand what it refers to. Augustine: Because you understand that this meter seems to have no legal place where the part of speech would end before the end of the verse. Indeed, if this were so, all lines would also have an articulation in the same place, or there would rarely be lines that did not. Now in these eleven, six are like this, five are not like that. St. Augustine here touches on the most important topic of free composition, i.e. a composition that does not have strictly defined harmonic structures, the harmony in which is formed only from the whole, but which cannot be clearly divided into proportional parts. Licensius: I understand this, and I am waiting for the reason for this. Augustine: Pay attention then to the most famous verses: Arma virumque cano, Troiae qui primus ab oris. first verse of Virgil's Aeneid: “I sing battles and men who are the first from the shores of Troy” And in order not to linger, since the song is the most famous, study from this verse one by one until you want, you will find the end of the first part of the speech in the fifth half-foot, that is, in two feet and a half. Indeed, these verses consist of feet of quaternary tenses, which is why this end of the movement of the part of speech seems to be placed in the tenth tense, as if by law. Augustine: Therefore, you already understand that there is some difference between these two genera that we proposed in those examples. Namely, that another meter before closure does not have a definite and some kind of static articulation, as we discovered in these eleven lines. Others have it, as the fifth half-foot in the heroic meter sufficiently shows. Licensius: Now I understand what you are talking about. Augustine: It is also fitting that you should know that by the ancient scholars, who have the greatest authority, this first kind is not called verse, but it is defined and called verse, which seems to consist of two members united by a certain measure and meaning. But don’t worry too much about names, which, unless you hear from me or someone else, you will in no way be able to answer anyone who asks about them. But especially and most of all, pay attention to what reason teaches, such as the very thing that we now have in mind. For reason teaches that there is a difference between these two kinds, no matter what names they are called, and thus if you are asked, you will be able to answer perfectly, convinced of the truth itself. The same thing - if you don’t follow authority - you won’t be able to. Licensius: I already understand this, like an open book, and no matter how much you discuss what you convince me of so many times, I have already accepted. Augustine: Therefore, there are three names that I want you to remember and that we need to use to study the causes: rhythm, meter, verse. Which are so different that every meter is also a rhythm, but not every rhythm is also a meter. Then, every verse is also a meter, but also not every meter is a verse. Consequently, every verse has rhythm and meter. I think you already see the sequence. Licensius: I see it reasonably. Really. Clearer than the light. Chapter 3. About dual rhythms Augustine: So, let's begin to explore as much as we can, firstly, if you like, rhythm, in which there is no meter, whence - meter, where there is no verse, and then - the verse itself. Licensius: Truly so. Augustine: So, take the very head of the feet - pyrrhic 1-1, and create a rhythm from it. Licensius: So that I can do this, what must be the measure? Augustine: It is enough for you to stretch it (for we are doing this as an example) to ten feet. Indeed, even this number of feet is greater than the verse, which will be discussed in more detail in its place. A verse cannot exceed eight feet. Licensius: It’s good that you didn’t offer me many feet to combine. But you don’t seem to think that I remember how you completely showed the difference between grammar and music, when I answered you a long time ago that I have no knowledge of long and short syllables, which is transmitted from grammarians, unless you allow me to produce this rhythm not with poetry, but with some kind of beating of time. Indeed, I do not deny the ability of my ears to judge the measurement of a moment in time, but I don’t know at all what syllables should be lengthened or shortened, which is established by authority. Augustine: I admit that you have confessed your ignorance of your kind in the way you speak, in which grammar differs from music. Therefore, take from me an example of this kind: Ago celeriter agile quod ago tibi quod anima velit What I do is fast, agile, and I do for you whatever your heart desires. (verse by St. Augustine himself) So, by repeating this several times, you can achieve the length of the rhythm you want, although ten feet will be enough for an example. But let me ask you this. If someone tells you that this rhythm does not consist of pyrrhic 1–1, but proceleumatic 11–11, what will you answer? License: I don’t know at all. Indeed, where there are ten Pyrrhichians 1–1, there must be five Proceleumatians 11–11. And all the more doubts because we are discussing a rhythm that flows forever. For eleven pyrrhicians 1–1 or thirteen and any other odd number cannot have the whole number of proceleumatics 11–11. Consequently, if there is a definite end to where the rhythm moves, there at least we can speak of pyrrhic 1–1, and not prokeleumatics 11–11, when it flows in such a way that entire prokeleumatics are not found. Nowadays, the endless flow itself confuses our judgment, and even if we actually count the feet, then we are offered an even number of them, so there are ten of them. Augustine: Even with an odd number of pyrrhicians, 1-1 is not as obvious as you think. For what if the eleven proposed feet of pyrrhic are called a rhythm having five and a half proceleumatics? Can anyone really argue that we find a lot of stanzas in poetry that end in half a foot? Licensius: I have already said that I do not know what I can say about this problem. Augustine: Really? Don’t you even know that Pyrrhichium is superior to Proceleumatics? Since the proceleumatic consists of two pyrrhicians, just as one comes before two, and two before four, so the pyrrhic comes before the proceleumatic. Again, St. Augustine draws attention to the principle of singularity - the smallest in quantity comes first, then in size. At the level of the feet we were talking about syllables. At the level of rhythm we are talking about the feet. The same principle is universal at all levels of composition. Augustine: Therefore, when we fall into this duality, that in rhythm and meter there can be both pyrrhic and proceleumatic, to whom should we give primacy? The first, from which this one consists, or the last, from which this one does not consist? Licencius: No one will hesitate to give to the first. Augustine: Why then do you hesitate to answer the discussion of this subject, which should call this rhythm more pyrrhic than proceleumatic? Licensius: I have no doubt at all. It’s a shame that I didn’t immediately pay attention to such an obvious reason. Chapter 4. About feet that cannot create rhythm Augustine: Do you not see that for this reason we learn that there are certain feet that are not able to continue the rhythm continuously? Indeed, what was found about proceleumatics, which is promoted by the primacy of pyrrhic, the same about diamba 12-12, and about dichorea 21-21 and about dispondium 22-22, it seems, has been found. Unless you think otherwise. Licencius: How can I imagine otherwise, when for a proven reason I cannot reject what follows from it? Augustine: Then look at this, and compare, and also judge. Indeed, it turns out that sometimes there is such uncertainty that it is rather by beating the beat that one has to distinguish which foot the rhythm flows with. Those. consideration of the internal symmetry of the sea. So, if you want to flow with pyrrhic 1–1, you will have one ascent and one descent, if with proceleumatic 11–11, two and two, then the foot ends, and nothing will separate the foot from the continuation of the rhythm. Licencius: I want more strongly to hear the reason why some feet are incapable of this continuation. Augustine: And you’re doing the right thing. And to understand this better, think about the tribrachial foot 1-1-1. What can we answer if someone asserts, however, that this rhythm flows not with pyrrhic 1-1 or proceleumatic 11-11, but with tribrach 1-1-1. Licencius: I see that the judgment here is based on the beating of the beat, since the rhythm is called tribrachium if there is one in the rise and two in the delivery, that is, one and two syllables, or, on the contrary, two in the rise, one in the delivery. Augustine: You understand correctly. Then tell me, can pyrrhic 1-1 feet spondium 2-2 be combined with the pyrrhic rhythm and for what reason? Licencius: In no way, for there is no equality in the duration of the clapping of the bar, since the rise and placement in the pyrrhic 1–1 will hold a single time, while in the spondium the double time 2–2. Although the symmetry of time is not broken or confused as a whole, however, since the basis of harmony is half of the foot, there is a critical discord within these halves. In pyrrhichia the symmetry is distributed over two different half-foots, while in spondia it is completed within each of them. Augustine: Can spondium 2–2 then be combined with proceleumaticus 11–11? Augustine: What if they unite? And they will ask, is this a proceleumatic or spondian rhythm, what will you answer? Licensius: What can I award, except to give primacy to the spondium? For when this contradiction does not resolve the beating of the beat, because in double time it rises and falls, then what else remains for the one who is first in the very rank of feet to reign? Augustine: I think that you will follow reason enough to see and judge for yourself what follows from this. Again the same principle - the minimum is primary. Two syllables take precedence over four, although short syllables take precedence over long ones. Augustine: What else if not that the proceleumatic rhythm 11–11 cannot be mixed with any other foot? Since each foot can only mix at the same time, and cannot mix in any other way, it necessarily gives its name to the rhythm. And all those feet that consist of the same number of time are prior to it (proceleumatics 11–11). Those. the spondium2–2 rhythm can be mixed with the proceleumatic rhythm11–11, but the proceleumatic rhythm cannot be mixed with anything, since it is the last of its kind. And as soon as a spondium appears in the prokeleumatic rhythm, the rhythm becomes the spondium rhythm, since the spondium is “humbler” than the prokeleumatic due to the minimum number of syllables. And since the mind teaches those that are acquired first to give primacy, and from them rhythm is already called, the rhythm of the proceleumatic can no longer be mixed with any other four-time, but only the rhythms of the spondium 2–2, or the dactyl 2–11, or the anapest 11–2 remain. For amphibrachium 1-2-1 correctly moves away from this combination of numbers. Because within itself there is some malfunction in the symmetry of the pestilence, Licensius: I think so. Augustine: Therefore, now think about the iambic 1-2 rhythm in order, since the pyrrhic 1-1 and the proceleumatic 11-11, which is generated by the doubling of the pyrrhic, we have already discussed enough. Therefore, I want you to say which foot, in your opinion, should be added to it so that the iambic 1-2 rhythm retains its name. Licencius: Which one, if not the tribrachium, with whom both the time and the beat coincide, and who, being after him, cannot rule the kingdom? Again the same principle of Divine harmony: whoever is humbler and smaller rules. Of course, trochee 2–1 is also after it, and takes the same time, but the beat is not beaten with the same measure. Those. they have different symmetry in the half-stops. Augustine: Go ahead, look at the rhythm of the trocheus 2–1, and answer about it in the same way. Let us remind you that trocheus and trocheus are two names for one foot. Licensius: I’ll answer the same. Indeed, this can also be combined with the tribrachium 1-1-1 not only by the space of time, but also by beating the beat. Who doesn’t see that iambic 1–2 should be avoided? Which, even if it beats the beat in the same way, nevertheless stands out at the beginning of the mixing? This means that the sequences are identical, but the difference is in the first syllable. Augustine: Well? And what kind of spondic 2-2 rhythm can we combine with the foot? Licencius: Apparently he has the largest army. In fact, the dactyl 11–2 and the anapest 2–11 and the proceleumatic 11–11 have no obstacle to mixing into rhythm in any unequal timing, in any lameness of the beat, in any confusion at the beginning. The mention of the army and the kingdom in the composition of rhythms is not a beautiful rhetorical figure, but a direct indication of the areas of practical application of this harmony - that his teaching is equally useful for composing poetry, painting pictures and music - and for state affairs, military affairs - and the art of all arts - virtue, which is nothing more than warfare - warfare against the spirits of evil. Augustine: I already see that you can easily follow the rest of the order. For what reason, remove my questions. Or better - as if I asked you everything - answer briefly and clearly as you can, in what way each foot retains its name in rhythm, being mixed with others. Licence: I will answer. For there is no difficulty when the light of reason is sent first. Indeed, tribrachium 1-1-1 does not mix with anything, since all those equal to it in time are located before it. Anapest 2–11 can work with dactyl 11–2, since it is located after it, and flows equally with it in time and beat. And both are combined with proceleumatic 11–11 for the same reason. Already the creticus 2–1-2 with the bacchios 12–2 and from the peons with the first 2–1-11, the second 12–11 and the fourth 111–2 can be mixed. What I mean is that the cretic 212 itself is legitimately mixed with the feet of the five times that follow it, but not all have the same division. Because some are divided into two and three, others into three and two times. The cretic 212 itself can be divided in both ways, since the short middle is attached to any part. Thus, the dual division of the foot makes it possible to combine with any foot, since they are not divided differently than it. Palimvachiya 2–21, since its division begins with two times and ends with three, has a coincidence and combination with all peons, except the second 12–11. Moloss 2-2-2 consists of a trisyllable, from which the six-temporal feet begin first, which can also all be combined with each other, partly for the sake of the ratio of single and double, partly for the reason that the beating of the beat reveals to us through the division of long syllables, which partly coincide with the same time with each one, since in the sixfold number equal wings are on both sides of the middle. For some reason, both moloss2–2-2 and both ionics (1–1-2–2 and 2–2-1–1) not only in single and double, but also in equal parts strike after a third time. Hence it happens that all the six-time feet following the Molossus can be combined with all the feet of the same time located after them. And the only one left is antispast 12–21, which cannot be mixed with anything other than itself. Because the internal symmetry of the half-foot is unique. These are followed by four epitrites, of which the first 12–22 takes the second 21–22, third 22–12 – fourth 22–21, fourth 22–21– none. The dispondium 22–22 remains, as well as the only rhythm that has neither a subsequent nor a previous one. So, of all the feet, there are eight that do not mix with anyone else: pyrrichium 1-1, tribrachium 1-1-1, proceleumaticus 11-11, paeon fourth 111-2, antispastus 12-21, epithrite second 21-22 and fourth 22-21 and dispondium 22-22. The rest with those who come after them accept confusion with themselves, since the rhythm holds the name of the lesser in the sequence by which it is counted. This is what I believe you wanted from me, I have sufficiently revealed and clarified it. All you have to do is say what’s left. Chapter 5. Why there cannot be more than four syllables in a foot Augustine: No, not only for me, but also for you. Because these questions are for both of us. But what do you consider to be the remaining elements of rhythm? Should we not consider whether there is a certain dimension of feet which, although it does not exceed the eight times held by the dispondium 22–22, nevertheless exceeds the number of four syllables? Licence: I’ll ask – why? Augustine: Why are you asking me and not yourself? Or do you not see that, without any error or insult to the ears, or in what concerns the beating of time and the division of feet, or what concerns the passage of time, that instead of one long syllable, two short ones can be put? Licensius: Who denies this? Augustine: Therefore, therefore, instead of iambic 1-2 or trochee 2-1 we put tribrachium 1-1-1. And instead of spondium 2–2, dactyl 2–11 anapest 11–2 or proceleumatic 11–11, when either instead of its second long syllable, or instead of the first, we put two short syllables, or four instead of both. Augustine: Therefore, apply this also to some ionic, or some other four-syllable of the six-time feet, and instead of one long syllable, put two short ones? Indeed, does any measure destroy, or resist beating the rhythm? Licensing: None from any side. Augustine: Then think about how many syllables there will be. Licenses: I see that there will be five. Augustine: Surely you see what exceeds the number of four syllables. Augustine: What if instead of two long ones you put four short ones? Wouldn't one foot contain the required meter of six syllables? Augustine: Well, if we resolve all the long syllables of some epitrite into short ones, should there be any doubt that the result will be seven syllables? Augustine: What about the dispondium itself? Wouldn't it be eight if instead of all the long ones we put two short ones? Licensius: Most truly there is. Augustine: What then is the reason that we are forced to distinguish such polysyllabic feet for the reasons stated above, but recognize only the foot that fits into a number not exceeding four syllables? Doesn't this seem like a contradiction to you? Licensius: On the contrary, it’s big, and I don’t understand how it can be reconciled. Augustine: This is also easy if you ask yourself again whether it was reasonable between us that it was established shortly before, for the reason that pyrrhichium and proceleumatic clapping must be distinguished and separated, and there is no foot of legal division that does not form a rhythm, that is, from which rhythm is called. Licencius: This I remember, and I do not find why I would like to regret it. But why is that? Augustine: Because it is all these feet of four syllables, with the exception of the amphibrach, that form the rhythm, that is, they keep the beginning in the rhythm, and produce its application and name. These same feet, which have more than four syllables, can indeed be put in place of many of them, but they cannot form a rhythm on their own or give a name to the rhythm. Therefore, we do not believe that they can really be called feet. For what reason is this contradiction, which prompted us, I believe, has already been combined and consoled, since it allows us to put more syllables than four, instead of other feet, and not call it a foot, however, except for the one that forms the rhythm. For it is proper for a foot to be composed of syllables by a certain measure of progression. This same way of composition is accepted as the best, which consists in translating the quaternary from the very understanding of numbers. The limitation of eight feet comes from the fact that in fact all numbers end in four, as fulfilling the mystery of the Holy Trinity. The number five is a kind of extra-numerical boundary of numbers, the closure of the circle of the quaternary, as can be clearly seen on the human hand and on the abacus. The eight feet of verse come from the addition of two parts of four feet. So, a foot can have a maximum number of syllables - four long. When, instead of it, we make a short eight, since such space has in time, they can be placed instead of another foot. But since they exceed the legal progression, that is, the quaternary number, it is forbidden to put them together and generate rhythm - not by the sense of the ears, but by the law of teaching. If you are not ready to object. Licensius: Ready for good reason and already objecting. Indeed, what prevents the progression of the foot to eight syllables, when we see that the same number can be assumed in the rhythm? For I am not convinced that you say that others are accepted before them. No, this prompts me even more to ask, or to find out more accurately, why they do not accept their names, do not accept them, and are not placed before others. Augustine: It is not surprising that you were deceived by this, but the truth is easy to find out. Indeed, when I skip everything that was previously discussed about the quaternary number, why only before it there should be a progression of syllables, then allow me even then to agree with you and extend the length of the foot even to eight long syllables. Indeed, can you resist the possibility of being a foot of eight long syllables? For inevitably the foot will reach this number. For not only does it pass through those which consist only of short syllables, but also those which consist of long syllables. Whence it follows that if you again apply to it a law that is impossible to refuse, according to which you can put two short syllables instead of one long one, we must extend to sixteen syllables. Where if you decide again you want to increase the feet, we will reach thirty-two short syllables. According to this reasoning of yours, your feet will force you to endlessly produce, and again establish the law of this doubling of the number of short ones instead of long ones. And so there will be no measure. Licencius: Now I see the reason why we advance the foot only to the quaternary number of syllables. Instead of those legitimate feet, it is appropriate to put the feet of many syllables, while I do not deny the right to two short syllables to take the place of one long one. Chapter 6. Feet instead and feet together Augustine: Therefore, it is easy for you to see and agree that there are other feet instead of those that establish the beginning of rhythm, and others that are combined with them. Indeed, where instead of one long syllable short ones are generated, instead of the foot that controls the rhythm, we assume a different one. Would you like instead of an iambic 1–2 or a trocheus 2–1 a tribrachium 1–1–1 or instead of a spondee 2–2 a dactyl 11–2 or an anapest 2–11 or a proceleumatic 11–11. Where it does not coincide, they do not replace it, but mix with it inside the foot. With dactyl 11–2 – anapest 2–11, with any ionic 11–22 22–11 or diyamb 12–12 or dichoreus 21–21, and the rest in a similar way according to their properties – with others. Is that what you think, or does it seem false? Augustine: Answer then: Can those feet that are placed instead of others also create rhythm on their own? Augustine: Consequently, the five-syllable foot 11111 can create rhythm with its name, because it can be placed instead of bacchius 12–2 or creticus 2–1-2 or some kind of peon 2–1-11 12–11 11–21 11–1-2. Licence: Indeed, it cannot. After all, we no longer call it a foot if this progression is allowed only up to a quaternary number, as I remember. I’m saying that all those feet can be laid that can be laid. Augustine: I praise your thoroughness and vigilance in the accuracy of names. But just so you know, many people say that six-syllable feet can also be named, but, as I know, no one likes it anymore. And even those who want it, these long feet in rhythm or meter are denied the right to give birth to new rhythms and meters through their long syllables. So, they are not even given names. For this reason, the truest image of progression is one that only reaches four syllables. For all these feet, which cannot be divided into two, when united form a foot, and thus those which reach six syllables receive their name by transference from the feet of four syllables. Obviously - by replacing two long syllables with four short ones. They were in no way allowed to be favored for primacy in rhythm and meter. But when, instead of long ones, short syllables are doubled and the syllables increase even to seven and eight, as reason has already shown, no one stretches his foot to such a number. But since I see that any number of syllables greater than four appears before us, when instead of a long syllable we put two short ones, not together with the legal feet, but instead of them we can put them. Both the ability to create rhythm through ourselves and their aspiration to infinity are limited by the mind. And this discussion about rhythm is enough for us; let’s move on, if you like, to the meter. Chapter 7. On the principle of compiling the meter Augustine: In that case, tell me, what do you think - does meter come from feet, or feet from meter? Augustine: Do feet, being connected, form a meter, or do meters, being connected, form feet? Licencius: I already understand what you want to say, and I believe that the meter is formed from the connection of the feet. Augustine: Why do you think so? Licensius: Because you said that the foot is between rhythm and meter. While in rhythm the connection of feet cannot have a definite end, in meter it does. So it is known that this connection of feet is both rhythm and meter. But there is the infinite, and here the finite is formed. Augustine: Therefore, there is no meter in one foot? Augustine: What about one and a half feet? Augustine: Why? Maybe because since the meter consists of feet, anything less than two cannot be called “feet”. Augustine: Let us then take a closer look at those meters that I recalled a little earlier, and see what feet they consist of, for it is not proper for you to still remain in ignorance of this kind, which you should pay attention to. They are: I think this is enough for our purposes. You measure them and build what kind of feet they could have. Licence: I absolutely can’t. At least from those that, as I believe, should be measured, which are legally capable of being combined with each other. And I can't explore them. For if I put the trochee 2–1 first, then it will be followed by the iambic 1–2, which is equal in time to it, but the beat is not beaten in the same way. If the dactyl is 2–11, then it will not be followed by any that would be equal to it in time, if the horiyamb 21–12 is the same difficulty. For what remains does not correspond either in time or in the beating of the beat. Therefore, either this is not a meter, or what was investigated between us about the combination of feet is false. Indeed, I don’t find anything else I can say. Augustine: This is a real meter. Because it is larger than the foot, and has a definite end, and the verdict of the very ears testifies to this. For the rhythm of the movement would not have sounded so pleasantly equal, and the rhythm of the movement would not have been so precise, if there had not been a numerical sequence in it. Which wouldn't be perfect if there wasn't any music in the rest of it. I am amazed that you think that what was discussed between us was false, for there is nothing more definite than numbers, and more orderly than this recollection and compilation of feet. Indeed, from the very understanding of numbers, which in no way sins, what we clearly saw in them is expressed - both to the delight of the ears and to keep the rhythm at the beginning. But better listen to how I will often repeat Quae canitis sub antris, and with its rhythm I will delight your senses. And what will be different if we add a certain short syllable to the end of it, and repeat this one in the same way: Quae canitis sub antrisve? Licencius: Both are pleasing to the ear, but this latter makes me prefer it. The one to which you added a short syllable takes up more space and time because it has become longer. Augustine: What if I repeat this above-mentioned Quae canitis sub antris in such a way that after the end there is no pause? Will it lead you to the same pleasure? Licencius: On the contrary, I am offended by I don’t know what kind of lameness if you don’t make the last syllable longer than the rest of the long ones. Augustine: Therefore, if it either utters longer or is silent, doesn’t it seem to you that it occupies the same space of time? Licensius: What else could it be? Chapter 8. The role of pause in meter Augustine: You judged correctly. But tell me also, what do you think this space is like? Licensius: It is very difficult to measure. Augustine: True. Tell me, don’t you think that that short syllable measures him? If we add it, then you don’t want to either lengthen the last syllable or make some kind of pause in the repetition of this meter? Licensius: I completely agree. Indeed, when you pronounced and repeated the first, I myself repeated this last one with you, so in sensations both coincide in the length of time, when at the end the pause coincides with my two short syllables. Augustine: Therefore, it is appropriate for you to maintain such a space of silence that it must be within a meter. Therefore, when you find something missing in the rightful foot, you should understand that the lack must be compensated either by size or by a pause in number. Licensius: I already understood that, proceed to the rest. Augustine: I already see that we must ask about the measure of silence itself. And indeed, in this meter, where after the horiyamba 21–12 we recognize bacchios 12–2, but one mora is missing so that the horiyamba would have six times, the ears feel this most easily, and when repeated they are forced to invest the same space of silence as would be occupied by a short syllable. Also, if after the horiyamba 21–12 we put a spondium 2–2, then we have two periods of silence, which must be completed when the beginning is returned, for example, here: quae canitis fontem. Indeed, I think you already feel that silence is necessary so that when you return to your head, the beat will not be lame. But if I wanted to test what the measure of this silence is, and added one long syllable so that it became “quae canitis fontem vos” and also repeat this with the beating of the bar, you will see that this beating takes the same amount of time as it took in the previous one, when this third would have been placed after those two long syllables after the horiyamba. Hence the need to insert the silence of double time. And if after the choriamb 21–12 an iambic 1–2 is placed, as here: “quae canitis locos,” we understand that one must remain silent for three times, which, as studied, is added either through another iambic 1–2, or through a trochee 2–1 or a tribrachium 1–1–1. So it would be: "quae canitis locos bonos" or "quae canitis locos monte" or "quae canitis locos nemore". When they are added, then they are pleasing to the ears even without silence and move in equal repetition, and when we add the beating of the beat, it is discovered that these three feet occupy the same space as in silence. From this it is obvious that silence takes three times. Maybe after the horiyamba 21–12 even one long syllable can be placed so that four times are silent. Indeed, the horiyamb 21–12 can be divided in such a way that a simple and double relationship is achieved in raising and setting the beat. An example of this meter is “quae canitis res”. If you add to it or a long one and two short ones, or short and long and short, or two short and long, then you will complete the foot of six times, in which there is no desire to include a pause in the repetition. Quae canitis res pulchras, Quae canitis res in bona, Quae canitis res bonumve, Quae canitis res teneras, Quae canitis res modo bene. From knowledge and confirmation of this, I hope it is already quite obvious to you that silence cannot be less than one time, and it is not appropriate to be silent for more than four times. Indeed, this is the same progression about which much has already been said i.e. numbers from one to four. And in all feet, no time of raising or setting a beat takes more than four times. and there are no more than four raisings and four placings - the completion of numbers on four is a universal law of harmony. So, when something is sung or proclaimed, it has a definite end and more than one foot and its movement delights in the nature of the previously discussed concept of numbers, this is already a meter. And if something has less than two feet, then because it exceeds one, and silence is not thought without measure, but the listener, instead of two feet, receives from silence the debt that the foot owes him to make up for time. Because it takes the time of two stops until it returns to the head, i.e. beginning, since silence, defined and measured by interval, is also considered sound. But tell me, do you want to understand and agree with this? Licenses: Known and agree. Augustine: Do you believe me, or do you see through yourself that this is the truth? Licencius: I understand completely in myself that this is the truth, although you tell me. This is actually the teaching of all the holy fathers. They speak, inspired by the Divine Spirit, but internal confirmation of the truth of what is said in a person’s soul comes directly from God. Here is the secret of that apparent contradiction that St. Augustine says that there is no mediating nature between God and man, and St. Dionysius the Areopagite writes that it is impossible for a person to receive enlightenment from God other than through the heavenly and church hierarchy. The very action that initiates this enlightenment and knowledge comes from the hierarchy, but the internal action of enlightenment and understanding comes directly from God without intermediaries. These are all the sacraments. The priest serves the Liturgy, and without this Communion is impossible, but the very action of Communion occurs directly between God and man, without the mediation of a priest. Blessed Augustine himself says about this that when he speaks, it is like a sower - he does not know what effect his words will have, and only God performs all the action. Chapter 9. Verse consists of two parts Augustine: So now, since we have found where the meter begins, let's move on to find where it extends. Indeed, the meter begins from two feet, either in full sound or with silence, which fills the missing number. Therefore, it is again appropriate for you to look at that fourfold progression and tell me how far and how many feet we should stretch the meter? Licensius: It's easy. Indeed, reason sufficiently teaches that there are eight feet. Augustine: What? Don't you remember what we said that scientists call verse something that is composed of two members, measured and combined in a certain way? Augustine: Therefore, when it is not said that a verse consists of two feet, but that of two limbs, and when it is obvious that a verse is not composed of one foot, but of many, does not the fact itself show that the limb that forms the verse is longer than the foot? Augustine: And if the members of a verse are equal, cannot it be reversed that the first part, without discrimination, becomes the last, and the last first? Augustine: Therefore, when this does not happen, and sufficiently in the verse another member is revealed and distinguished with which it begins, and another with which it ends, we cannot find any other reason except that the members are unequal. Augustine: We talked about this before in the pyrrhic, if you like, in which, I hope, it is already obvious to you that there cannot be a member less than three times (mor), since this foot is before all others. Since pyrrhic 1-1 takes two times, the member of the verse must be larger than the foot, then three times follows. Augustine: Therefore, how many times can a minimum verse be? Licencius: I would say "six" if I did not remember what was said about the conversion. Those. that the two terms of a verse cannot be interchangeable and therefore equal. Therefore, it has seven times. Since a member cannot have less than three times, is it forbidden to have more? Augustine: You're right. But tell me how many feet of pyrrhichium make up seven times. Licenses: Three and a half. Augustine: Therefore, one period of silence is needed when returning to the beginning, so that the space of the foot can be filled. Licensius: According to reason, it is necessary. Augustine: This recalculated time will be? Augustine: And therefore, the minimum and also the first foot take two times. So the minimum and first verse cannot have less time than eight. Augustine: What is the maximum verse beyond which it is not appropriate to be? How many times should there be? Won't you see immediately if you pay attention to that progression of four numbers, which we have already talked about so many times? Licensius: I already understand that there cannot be a verse of more than thirty-two times. Augustine: What about the length of a meter? Do you think there should be more verse when the minimum meter is less than the minimum verse? Augustine: Therefore, when a meter begins with two feet, and a verse with four, or this one occupies the space of two feet, and the other four with the addition of silence, but the meter does not exceed eight feet, is it not necessary - since there is verse and meter - that it also not exceed the same number of feet? Augustine: On the other hand, when a verse would not be longer than thirty-two times, and the meter is the length of the verse, if the connection of two members would not have such a number as is commanded in the verse, but to such an extent it is certainly the end and should not be longer than the verse, is it not obvious that both the verse has eight feet, and the meter should not exceed thirty-two times? Augustine: Consequently, this space of time and this number of feet for the meter and for the verse is a certain common limit, beyond which neither should advance, any meter ends in quadruple feet from which it receives its beginning, and verse in quadruple time. So, while this relationship is preserved, the measures of quaternary increase communicate with the meter in feet, and the verse with the meter in tenses. Licensius: I understand and approve, and I agree and enjoy their agreement and harmony. Chapter 1. Indifference of the longitude of the last syllable of the meter Augustine: So, let's return to the discussion of meter, from the progression and length of which we will achieve together with you a certain property of verse, which we will need to discuss in its own place. But first I ask this: will you reject the opinion of the poets, as well as their judges, the grammarians, that it makes no difference whether the last syllable, which is the boundary of the meter, is long or short. Licensius: I completely reject it, because I see no reason in it. Augustine: Tell me, please, what is the minimum meter in pyrrhic. Licens: Three short syllables. Augustine: If it is repeated, how long should there be silence? Licensius: One tense, that is, the space of one short syllable. Augustine: Now, beat this meter not with your voice, but with tact. Augustine: Beat off the anapaest in the same way (11–2) Augustine: What difference do you see? Licenses: Absolutely none. Augustine: What? Can you name the reason why this happened? Licensius: That seems obvious enough. Indeed, what in that (pyrrhic meter) refers to silence, here refers to the production of the extreme syllable. Indeed, there, in the same measure, the last syllable, as here the long one, is struck by a beat, and after the same interval returns to the chapter. But it rests there until the space of the pyrrhic foot is fulfilled, and this one until the long syllable is fulfilled. So, in both there is the same slowdown, after which we return to the beginning. Augustine: So, it is not absurd to say that the last syllable of a meter is not relevant to the essence of the matter. For there is an end there, and silence will follow, as long as it takes in seven meters to reach the end. It would not be inappropriate here to recall that silence, for half an hour, about which St. John the Theologian speaks in the Revelation of the Lord. Indeed, God is a poet in everything – and in the destinies of humanity as well. Therefore, as if performing some kind of meter, He establishes at the end of time a certain silence for half an hour, as in a poem there is silence for the duration of a short syllable. Or do you think that in this case they should be discussing some kind of repetition and return to the beginning, and not just that it ends as if nothing will be said after it? Licensius: Already agree. We must accept that the extreme syllable can be indifferent. Augustine: Correct. But if it is associated with a pause, then it is considered an end, as if there is no sound that follows it to end it. And if, due to the large space of time, there is no difference between the syllables that occupy it, does not it follow from this that the very indifference of the last syllable, which for the sake of the large space of time seems to disappear, so that both the short and the long syllable are equally shown by your ears as long. Licensius: I see that this is a consequence. Chapter 2: The Importance of Tact in Distinguishing Meters Augustine: Don't you also see that when we speak, the minimum pyrrhic meter is three short syllables, when the space of time of one short syllable is occupied by silence, after which we return to the beginning, then there is no difference, whether we repeat this meter, or the feet of the anapest 11-2? Licencius: I got it before when I was beating the beat. Augustine: Therefore, shouldn’t there be some confusion here as to what kind of reason should be used to distinguish between them? Licensius: I think so too. Augustine: Tell me, do you see any other mind that could distinguish them, except that the minimum meter of pyrrhic is not what you imagined - not in three short syllables, but in five. For after a foot and also a half-foot, one must fulfill the measure of a foot mora (i.e., a time interval) equal to its half-foot and so return to the beginning. And that minimum meter in pyrrhic will not allow us to put it on par with the anapest, as has already been demonstrated, therefore, after two feet and a half-foot, this one time must be silent if we want to be without embarrassment. Licencius: Why then are not two pyrrhic the minimum meter in a pyrrhic? And isn’t it better to have four short syllables, after which there is no need for silence, than five after which it is necessary? Augustine: Be careful, otherwise you’ll dig up a proceleumatic here, just like the anapest came from it. Licensius: You're telling the truth. Augustine: Is this measure acceptable, then, in five short syllables and one period of silence? Augustine: It seemed to me that you forgot, as we said, how to distinguish in rhythm the flow of pyrrhic 1–1 or proceleumatic 11–11. Licensius: It's good that you paid attention. Indeed, we find out by beating the beat the difference between these sequences from each other, so I am no longer afraid of that proceleumatic 11–11, which I can distinguish from the pyrrhic by beating the beat. Augustine: Why then did you not see that this beating of the beat should again be added to these three short syllables, that is, the pyrrhic 1-1 and the half-foot, after which there should be one time of silence, from which the anapest 11-2 differs? The difference here is that in the pyrrhic meter there will be movements ↑↓↑ [pause], and in anapest ↑↓↑↓, i.e. The difference is again in the symmetry of time. Licencius: I already understand, I go back and confirm that the minimum meter in a pyrrhic is three short syllables, which, with the added silence, take two pyrrhic time. Augustine: Let your ears then experience this kind of sequence: Si aliqua, Bene vis, Bene dic, Bene fac, Animus, Si aliquid, Male vis, Male dic, Male fac, Animus, Medium est. (If you want something good, say good, do good, soul; if you want something evil, say evil, do evil, the soul is in the middle.) Licencius: The ears would have been tested enough, especially since I already remembered how they should beat the beat, and did not confuse the anapaest with the pyrrhic meter. Augustine: Look at this too: Si aliquid es, Age bene, Male qui agit,/ Nihil agit, Et ideo, Miser erit. (If you are something, act good; evil, which acts, acts nothing, and therefore will be pitiful) Licensius: These also sound pleasant, except for one place where the end of the third and the beginning of the fourth are combined. Augustine: This is exactly what I expected from your ears. For it is not in vain that the feeling is insulted when it expects that silence will not be inserted between any syllables, which expectation, while advancing, stumbles over the meeting of two consonants - t and n, which make the previous vowel long, and turn it into two tenses. This kind of grammar is called a “long positional syllable”. But for the sake of that indifference of the last syllable, no one condemns this meter, although it offends pure and strict ears, although without guilt. Indeed, look, please, what difference does it make if instead of “Male qui agit, Nihil agit” I say “Male qui agit, Homo perit”. (Whoever does evil, a person dies). Licensius: It is completely smooth and intact. Augustine: Let us then, for the sake of musical purity, consider what poets do not observe for the sake of ease of singing: how many times must we compensate with a pause for a meter where the syllables of a foot are missing, so many syllables of the pause must we put at the end, according to the law of numbers, which absolutely requires execution, so as not to return from the end to the beginning with an insult to the ears or a falsity of measure. But we concede of course that there are meters that end as if nothing should be said after them, in which case they can safely give pleasure with the last syllable - both short and long. For in the sequence of meters they are clearly accused of an error by the court of the ears, that there is no syllable that should be put last except that which by law and reason should be put. The same continuation would happen when the foot does not have the debt for which we get it. Licensius: I understand, and I greatly appreciate that you accompany with such examples that the feeling does not sense any infidelity. Chapter 3. Meters in order of feet. Pyrrhic meters Augustine: Then let us now go to the order in which tell me about pyrrhic: Licensius: What, if not that which flows most pleasantly and holistically? Augustine: What about these? Licensius: And I accept this continuation with pleasure. Augustine: Now look at three and a half feet: Licensius: These are also pleasant, if you insert the silence of one time. Augustine: What follows are four complete pyrrhic. Accept them and judge: Which would dwell in a person Licenses: In these also the measure is definite and pleasant. Augustine: Listen now to nine short syllables. Listen and judge: Malus etenim ea bona amat, An evil man loves and acts Licencius: And now there are five pyrrhicians? Augustine: Levicula fragilia bona, Qui amat homo, similiter habet. Insignificant fragile goods Which a person loves, also possesses. Licensius: That's already enough, now add a semi-stop. Vaga levia fragilia bona, Qui amat homo, similis erit eis. Wandering light fragile goods Whoever loves among people will be the same. Licenses: Enough up to here. And I’ve been waiting for the pyrrhic for six already. Vaga levicula fragilia bona, Qui adamat homo, similis erit eis. In wandering, insignificant light blessings, Whoever is in love will be the same. Licenses: Enough. Add a half-stop. Fluida levicula fragilia bona Quae adamat anima, similis erit eis The lightest fragile goods flowing away Whatever the soul loves will be the same for them. Licensius: Enough, and good. Add another half pyrrhium. Augustine: Levicula fragilia gracilia bona, Quae adamat animula, similis erit eis. Insignificant fragile skinny goods Any little soul in love will be like them. Licensius: Adds this half-foot, this one is already more elegant. Augustine: Vaga fluida levicula fragilia bona, Quae adamat animula, fit ea similis eis. Into the empty flowing lightest fragile blessings Which of the little souls is in love, may she be like them. This verse is not accidental; it anticipates the content of the sixth book - the most important. Licensius: I see there are eight feet left, so let’s avoid these smaller ones. At least your ears have confirmed with some natural dimension what you are pronouncing, however, I don’t want you to look for so many short syllables. Which, if I’m not mistaken, are more difficult to find combined in a word than if they could be mixed with long ones. Augustine: You are not mistaken in anything, but in order to confirm to you my joy that we were able to get so far, with great pleasure I will compile the meter that remains from this kind of pyrrhic Solida bona bonus amat, et ea qui amat habet. Itaque nec eget amor, et ea bona Deus est. He loves solid goods with a block and what he loves he owns. So, if love is not enough, and these blessings are God Licencius: This is the performance of the perfect meter pyrrhic. Next will follow iambic meters, of which one or two examples are enough for me in which I want to find the absence of interruption. Chapter 4. Iambic meters Augustine: I will obedience you. But how many of those have we already passed? Augustine: How many of those iambics do you think there will be? Licenses: Also fourteen. Augustine: Well, if I want to put tribrachs (1-1-1) instead of iambic (1-2), won’t the variations be more varied? Licencius: This is obvious, but I wish to hear these examples in only iambics, so that we do not waste time, for instead of a long syllable, we can easily put two short ones, as the teaching instructs. Augustine: I will do as you wish, and I highly appreciate that with your understanding you reduce my subsequent work. But prepare your ear for iambic meter. Licence: Ready, begin. Bonus vir et sapit bonum, Deum videre qui cupiscit, bonusque vivit, hic videobit. Bonum videre qui cupit diem, bonus sit hic, videobit et Deum. Bonum videre qui cupit diem illum, bonus sit hic, videobit et Deum illic. Beatus est bonus, fruens enim est Deo; malus miser, sed ipse poena fit sua. Beatus est videns Deum, nihil cupit plus; malus bonum foris requirit, hinc egestas. Beatus est videns Deum, nihil boni amplius; malus bonum foris requirit, hinc eget miser. Beatus est videns Deum, nihil boni amplius vult; malus foris bonum requirit, hinc egenus errat. Beatus est videns Deum, nihil boni amplius volet; malus foris bonum requirit, hinc eget miser bono. A good man and a good thinker And he lives well, He will see Him. Good to see who wishes the day May this one be good and see God. It is good to see whoever desires the day May this one be good, and may he also see God. Blessed and good, for he delights in God The evil one is pathetic, but he will receive his own punishment Blessed is he who sees God and desires nothing more The evil one seeks good from outside, therefore he is always in need. Blessed is the sight of God, nothing greater than this good. The evil one seeks good from outside, so the beggar is in need. Blessed is he who sees God; he does not want any greater good. The evil one seeks good from the outside, therefore he is mistaken in poverty. Blessed is he who sees God, he does not want anyone else's good The evil one seeks good from the outside, therefore he is mistaken, the beggar from good. Chapter 5. Trochic meter Licencius: This is followed by trocheus (2–1). Show me the trocheal meter, these already sound great. Augustine: I will create in the same way as iambic. Veritate facta cuncta sunt Veritate cuncta facta cerno. veritas manet, moventur ista. Veritate facta cernis omnia, veritas manet, moventur omnia. Veritate facta cernis ista cuncta, veritas tamen manet, moventur ista. Veritate facta cuncta cernis optime, veritas manet, moventur haec, sed ordine. Veritate facta cuncta cernis ordinata, veritas manet, novans movet quod innovatur. Veritate facta cuncta sunt, et ordinata sunt, veritas novat manens, moventur ut noventur haec. Veritate facta cuncta sunt, et ordinata cuncta, veritas manens novat, moventur ut noventur ista. The art of the Most High God. This world that you see. By truth all things were created Every creation is distinguished by the truth. Truth abides and moves her. You view every creation with truth. Truth abides, everything moves By the truth you discern all this creation The truth, however, abides, it moves By truth all things were created, you distinguish best, Truth abides and moves this, but in order. By truth you distinguish everything created by rank Truth abides, renewing moves what will be renewed All creation is true, and everything is in order, Truth renews by abiding; it will move to renew this. By truth all creation is, and all things are ordered, Truth abiding renews, it will move and renew. Licensius: I see that what follows is spondium 2–2. Indeed, Trochei (2–1) also pleased the ears. Augustine: Here are the spondium meters: qui erroris vinclum vicit. qui erroris vinclum iam vicit. Solus liber non falso vivit qui erroris vinclum iam devicit. Solus liber iure ac vere vivit qui erroris vinclum magnus devicit. Solus liber iure ac non falso vivit qui erroris vinclum funestum devicit. Solus liber iure ac vere magnus vivit qui erroris vinclum funestum iam devicit. Solus liber iure ac non falso magnus vivit qui erroris vinclum funestum prudens devicit. Solus liber iure ac non falso securus vivit qui erroris vinclum funestum prudens iam devicit. Solus liber iure ac non falso securus iam vivit qui erroris vinclum tetrum ac funestum prudens devicit Solus liber iure ac non falso securam vitam vivit qui erroris vinclum tetrum ac funestum One will truly be free Who overcomes the shackles of sin One is free and truly lives Who has already overcome the sin of shackles. One lives freely and not deceitfully Who has already removed the shackles of sin. Elin is free by the truth and lives by the truth Who has removed the great shackles of sin. One who lives freely with truth and lives untruthfully Who has removed the burial shackles of sin. One free by the truth and the great one lives by the truth Who has already removed the burial shackles of sin? One free by truth and not falsely great lives, Who prudently removed the burial shackles of sin. Alone lives freely with truth and without deceit, Who has prudently already removed the burial shackles of sin. Already living alone, freely with truth and truly safe Who prudently removed the painful and funeral shackles of sin. One lives a freely truthful and unfailingly safe life Who has prudently already removed the painful and funeral shackles of sin. Licencius: I also have nothing to ask about spondium 2–2. Let's go to tribrachium 1-1-1. Augustine: So be it. But when all four of the above mentioned feet produced fourteen meters, which are collected at fifty-six, more should be expected from the tribrachium. For when there is half a foot in spatia meter - in silence, the pause never lasts longer than one syllable. Here (in tribrachy) when we are silent, do you think that it is appropriate to remain silent here in the same way for the space of one short syllable, or can the pause last up to two short syllables? Because no one will doubt that he can have double division. And indeed, either it begins from one and ends with two (1–11), or, on the contrary, starting from two, it ends with one (11–1). Why will it be necessary to produce twenty and one meters. Licensius: Absolutely right. Indeed, the tribrachium meters begin with four short syllables, so that we remain silent for two times. Where are there already five, where one is silent. The third is six, where nothing should be silent, the fourth is seven, where again two times you need to be silent, from where eight, where one, the sixth nine, where none. Continuing to add one at a time until we reach twenty-four syllables, which are eight tribrachs, in any case there will be twenty-one meters. Augustine: You followed the fastest reasoning. But don’t you judge that I need to provide examples of each, or regarding those that we get by adding to these first four feet, it is enough to offer a reasoning? Licensius: I’ve already had enough reasoning. Augustine: I don’t need anything else, just like you. However, since you already know very well that in pyrrhic meters 1–1 a modified tribrachic beat can be struck, then I ask whether the first pyrrhic meter 1–1 can also have a tribrach meter 1–1-1. Licencius: It cannot, for the meter must be greater than the foot. Augustine: And about the second meter of pyrrhic? Licencius: Indeed, it can. Four short syllables are two pyrrhic, and a tribrach is a foot and half a foot, only there is no pause, but here we need to be silent for two times. Augustine: Consequently, with a modified beat, in pyrrhic meters you will also find tribrach meters up to sixteen syllables, that is, up to five tribrachs and half a foot, with which it must end. The rest you can either construct with your voice or other beats yourself. If, however, you judge that even now you should examine numbers with the sense of your ears. Licensius: I’ll do it and see, but now let’s look at the rest. Augustine: Then comes dactyl 2–11, which is divided in half. Or do you think otherwise? Licensius: On the contrary, it is so. Augustine: What part of it then can be in silence? Licenses: Of course, half. Augustine: What if after dactyl 2–11 we add trocheus 2–1, and someone wants to remain silent for one time, which must be filled in a short syllable of the dactyl? What do we answer? Because we cannot say that it is impossible to have less than half a foot of silence. Because the reason that we discussed concerns the subject that there cannot be a pause of more, and not less than half a foot. Therefore, there is certainly a pause of less than half a foot in the choriamba when the bacchanal follows, and this is exemplified in the verse Fonticolae puellae. Because, as you know, we have a pause of a short syllable to fulfill six tenses. Augustine: Then if the trocheus 2–1 is assigned to the dactyl 2–11, will it not allow us to remain silent for one time? Licensius: I am forced to admit. Augustine: What would compel you if you remembered the above? You are in this position because you have forgotten the demonstration of the indifference of the last syllable, and how the ears take over the last long syllable, even if it is short, when there is an interval to continue it. Licensius: I already understand. Indeed, in any case, if the last syllable is short, then when silence remains, the ears perceive it as a long syllable, as we learned for the above reason and in the example. Nothing prevents placing trochea 2–1 or spondium 2–2 after dactyl 2–11. Thus, when repetition should destroy silence, one long syllable is appropriate after dactyl 2–11 to assume in which we are silent the space of double time. Augustine: What if pyrrhic 1–1 is placed after dactyl 2–11, would it be correct, do you think? Licence: Not correct. Indeed, either it or iambic 1–2 makes no difference, although it can be taken instead of iambic, for the sake of the fact that the ears make its last syllable long. Iambic 1–2 is not appropriate to be placed after dactyl 2–11, for the sake of distinguishing between the rising and falling of the beat, of which neither one nor the other is appropriate to have three tenses in the dactyl. Who won't understand this? Chapter 9. Anapest meters and bacchios Augustine: Excellent and consistent in every way. But what do you think about anapest? Does he have the same mind? Licensius: Exactly the same. Augustine: So, then, if you like, let's look at Bacchae 1-2-2. And tell me what his first meter is. Licencius: I believe that it has four syllables, one short and three long, of which the first two refer to Bacchius, and the last one to the beginning of the foot that can be laid with Bacchius, so that what remains due to him would be in silence. However, I want to test this with my own ears in another example. Augustine: It’s easy to offer an example, but I think that I could give you pleasure with this meter, as the above could. Indeed, these feet of five and also seven times do not move as pleasantly as those that are either divided into equal parts into a single and a double, or into a double and a single; such is the difference between the sesquetor movements and the equal or complementary movements, which we sufficiently discussed in the first book. So, these feet, namely the five and seven times, since they are rejected by the poets, and since they freely accept eloquence, it seems easier to present to you in an example what you postulated. Indeed, this is the essence: Laborat magister docens tardos (The teacher works, teaching the stupid). When we close it in a circle and insert the silence of the triple time, you feel so much easier, so after the three feet I put a long syllable, from the beginning of the cretic 2-1-2, which can be placed with the bacchium 1-2-2. But I did not give you an example for the first meter, that is, four syllables, because one foot will not be sufficient to console your feelings, since even after it you would have to remain silent for a long syllable. Now I will pay what I owe, as well as myself, and I will repeat so that you feel in my silence three times: Labor nullus, Amor magnus _ _ _ Labor nullus, Amor magnus (No work when love is great) Licencius: It is obvious enough that these feet are only suitable for eloquence, and there is no point in going any further in examples. Augustine: You speak truly. But do you think that when there is silence, only one syllable should be placed after bacchi? Licencius: This is not so, but it is also short and long, which is the first half-foot of the same Bacchium. Because if we are allowed to begin a criticism on the basis that it can be posited with the Bacchium, how much more are we allowed to do this with the Bacchium itself, and especially since we do not even consider the entire part of the criticism to be equal in time to the first part of the Bacchium. Chapter 10. Meters of other feet Augustine: Therefore, if you wish, I will listen and judge, and you yourself go through the rest, and examine in all the remaining feet what is added to the full foot, and with what silence the latter is completed. Licensius: I think the shortest and easiest remains. Indeed, what is said about the Bacchie can also be said about the second paeon 12–11. After the critic 2-1-2, it is appropriate to put one long syllable, and iambic 1-2, and spondium 2-2, so that either three times are silent, or two or one. What is said about that, in the first 2–1-11 and in the last peon 11–1-2 falls (for the sake of dual division). Already after palimvakhia 2–21 it is appropriate to compose either one syllable or spondium, for this reason in the seventh meter there are either three times silent or one. The same condition for the third peon 11–21. Where sensibly spondium and anapest are legally combined. After the molossus 2-2-2, which refers to its division, we either add one long to four, or we put two, so that two times are silent. But since it has been explored by both feeling and reason that it joins in order to all the six-time feet, then after it there will be a place and an iambus 1–2, and three then there will be three times of proper silence, there will be a cretic 2–1-2 and one time of silence. The same condition will be for the bacchium 12–2. And if we resolve the first long syllable kretik 2-1-2, and the second long bacchia 1-2-2 into two short syllables, the same will happen for the fourth peon 11-1-2. What is said about the Molossus 2-2-2, I will say the same about the other six-time feet. Already the proceleumatic, I think, returns again to the other feet of the four times, except if after it we place three short syllables. And this is the same if we put the anapest 1-2-1, since the last short syllable before the pause is perceived as long. The first epitritus 12–22 is directly conjugated with the iambic 1–2, and the bacchiem 12–2 and with the cretic 2–1-2 and with the fourth paeon 11–1-2. The same is said about the second epithrite, when there should be silence for four or two times. The two remaining epitrites 22–12 and 22–21 can be directly followed by spondium 2–2 and molossus 2–2-2. Since the first long syllable is spondium, and the first or second syllables of molossus 2-2-2 allows resolution into two short syllables. Consequently, in those meters there will be either three times of silence or one. Dispondium 22–22 remains, after which if we put spondium 2–2, it will be necessary to remain silent for four times, if moloss 2–2-2 then two, while it remains possible to resolve a long syllable into two short ones, either in spondium 2–2 or in moloss 2–2-2, except for the last sdlsha. This is what I wanted me to go through. If you don't need to fix anything for sure. An argument that seems extremely specifically poetic—concerning exclusively the long-dead art of writing Latin and Greek poetry. However, from all of the above it follows that there are common principles of harmony for all types of human activity. And this list of meters, rather boring at first glance, opens the way to deep and meaningful reflection on pictorial composition, and on musical rhythmic structure, and on architectural forms, and, of course, on the art of management and the rite of worship, and finally, the very “rhythm” of ascetic life. Chapter 11. About private discrepancies in meters Augustine: No, it’s not I who will correct it, but you yourself, when you add your ear to the reasoning. Indeed, I ask you, or when I say and beat this meter: Verus optimorum; (True superior) Veritatis inops: (deprived of truth): Will the third one accept your feeling as joyfully as the first ones? And it will be easy to judge this if you repeat and take the necessary pauses. Licensius: It is obvious that the former accept it with joy, but the latter accepts it sadly. Augustine: Therefore, it is wrong to put iambic 1-2 after dichorea 21–21. Augustine: But according to feeling, it can be correctly placed after the other feet of each of this meters, when, with the rank of inserted pauses of silence, we will repeat Licensius: I feel what you say and confirm. Augustine: Also, see if anything offends you when, when inserting the silence of two tenses, this meter is repeated stumblingly. Do they really sound like these? The good reign in the good. The pure reign in every possible way. Licensius: No, these are both smooth and pleasant, the same is absurd. Augustine: Consequently, we will know about the meters of six temporary feet - that dichoria 21–21 for iambic 1–2, and antispastus 12–21 for spondium 2–2 are evil. Licence: We will accept it reasonably. Augustine: What? Wouldn't you confirm the reason why this is so if you pay attention to the raising and setting when beating a beat in the two parts of a divided foot, so that if whichever in that syllable is the middle - or one, or two - either joins one half - the first or the last, or is divided into both? Here St. Augustine again returns to the important topic of the relationship between the nuclei of numbers - even and odd - with the symmetry of time measures. In this case, the central syllable of the word acts as the “core” of the number corresponding to the number of tenses of the foot. As already mentioned, if this nucleus does not divide - i.e. equals 1, then it can be attached to any half of the foot. If it is divided, then its two parts are distributed to both halves. Licencius: I know this, and this is true, but what does this have to do with the matter? Augustine: Think further about what I am talking about, and then you will more easily see what you are looking for. I think it is obvious to you that some feet are without middle syllables, like pyrrhic 1-1, and other binary syllables, while others - in which the middle part coincides in time either with the first part, or the last, or both, or none. The first, as in the anapest 11–2, or in the palimvachia 2–2-1, or in the first paeon 2–1-11. The last one - as in dactyl 2–11 or in bacchie 1–2-2 or in the fourth paeon 11–1-2. Or in both, as in tribrachium 1–1-1, or in molossus 2–2-2, or in choriamba 21–12, or in any ionica 11–2-2, 2–2-11 in no way - as in the cretic 2-1-2 or in the second paeonia 1-2-11 and the third 11-2-1, or in the diamba 12-12, dichorea 21-21, antispasto 12-21. Indeed, if the feet can be divided into three equal parts, the middle part in them coincides with the first and last. Those who cannot, either with the first only, or with the last, or with none at all. Licensius: I know this too, and I expect where it will lead. Augustine: Where else, if not for you to see that this is precisely why iambic 1–2 after dichorea 21–21 with silence are poorly combined here, because it (dichorea) has a middle and is neither equal to the first part nor to the last, and therefore does not agree in the raising and lowering of the beat? those. in the symmetry of time. This can also be understood about spondium 2–2, which in a similar way after anti-spas 12–21 does not like to be combined with silence. Or do you have something to say against this? Licensius: Me? Nothing at all. Moreover, this insult that is caused to the ears, with such a combination of these feet, would turn into a pleasantness that delights the ear, when, after the other six times of the feet, these feet were delivered with silence. You really console me with examples of other feet with silence, no matter how they sound, even after iambic dichorea, or after spondium antispastos, when silence is required - upon notification of feelings, I most certainly confirm and praise. Augustine: I won’t object to you. It is enough for me, however, that this combination, when comparing identical numbers, but of a worse sound, offends the ear, as you say, because it is rejected by it, although the essence of the stops is of the same kind, which, if ended with those half-stops, we admit that they produce a more pleasant effect, and should not be rejected. But doesn’t it seem to you that, according to this reasoning, it is not appropriate to include iambic 1–2 with silence after the second epitritus 21–22? Indeed, in this foot, the iambic thus occupies the middle place, which is not equal in time to either the first or the last part, as well as neither the first nor the last part. Licensius: I think I will follow this reflection. Chapter 12. Total number of meters Augustine: Then, if you wish, tell me further the number of all the meters that we have already discussed, that is, those that begin from their complete feet, and are concluded either by their complete feet, so that silence is not inserted when returning to the beginning, or by incomplete feet with silence, which, however, reason teaches to bring into correspondence in such a way that their number ranges from two incomplete feet even to eight complete ones, but not exceeding thirty-two times. Licensius: You impose great labor on me, but there is, however, a reward for labor. But, I remember, a little earlier we had already walked up to seventy-seven meters from pyrrhichium to tribrachium, when the feet of double syllables each gave birth to fourteen, of which the total would be fifty-six. Tribrachium is twenty and one, for the sake of equal division. To these, therefore, seventy-seven meters we add twenty-four meters of dactyl, and the same number of anapest. For they are complete, if they are spoken without a pause, when the meter begins at two and goes even to eight feet, they give birth to seven meters. If we add feet with silence, when the meter starts from one foot and half foot up to seven and a half - seven meters per foot. And there will already be one hundred and five. Bacchius cannot produce his meter up to eight feet, and at the same time not exceed thirty-two times, and no foot of five times, but they can reach up to six. This means that Bacchius and the second paeon, equal not only in time, but also in division, each produce five meters from two to six stops, when complete stops without silence. With silence, also starting with one foot and half, and reaching five and a half feet, they produce five meters with the last long syllable and with the last long with a short one. In total, each person produces fifteen feet, and together, therefore, thirty. And it will be all one hundred and thirty-five meters. Kretik2-1-2 and the feet that are equally divided with it, the first and fourth peon, since after them one long syllable, and iambic and spondium and anapest, can be relied upon, reach up to seventy-five meters. For each of the three feet without silence gives birth to five meters, and with silence another twenty, which in total, as said, are seventy and five. Which, when added to the previous sum, produces two hundred and ten. Palimvakhiy 2-2-1 and the third peon corresponding to it by division, give birth to five whole meters, without silence, with silence - five with one long syllable at the end, five - with a spondium, five - with an anapest. Let’s add them to the large sum and we get two hundred and fifty meters in total. Molossus and the other feet of the six times, of which there are seven together, form forty meters in whole feet, but in silence, since after each of them one can put one long syllable, or iambic, or spondius, or anapest, or bacchius, or creticus 2-1-2, or paeon four, each produces twenty and eight meters, of which all together there will be one hundred and ninety-six, which with the previous meters produce only two hundred and twenty-four meters, but eight must be subtracted from them, since after dichorea the iambic and after the antispastus the spondium become evil. The rest are two hundred and sixty, which, added to the great sum, produce four hundred and sixty-six meters. The rank of proceleumatic has no other feet that correspond to it, due to the half-foot that must be placed after it. Indeed, it can be followed by one long syllable with silence - as after the dactyl and its related feet - and two long syllables, or three short syllables and one time must be silent, which occurs from the fact that the extreme short is taken instead of long. Whole epitrites generate three meters each, starting with a meter of two feet, and ending with four, for if you add a fifth, you will exceed thirty-two times, which is not appropriate. With silence, the first and second epitritus produce three meters with the last iambic, three with Bacchius, three with creticus 2-1-2, three with the fourth paeon, of which there will be thirty with those three who are without silence. The third and fourth epitrites with silence generate three meters, with spondium - three, and three - with anapest, three - with molossus, three - with ionic minor, three - with horiyamb, of which there will be a total of thirty and six with those that are generated without silence. Therefore, all epitrites produce sixty and six meters. Which with twenty-one meters of proceleumatics, added to the above sum, produces five hundred and fifty and three. What remains is the dispondium, which generates a whole three, with silence - with a spondium three, and three with an anapest, and three with a molossus, three with an ionic minor, three with a choriamb, which in total with those three whole meters will amount to eighteen. The total will be five hundred and seventy and one meters. Thus, the entire variety of harmonic compositions is based on 571 meters, which, forming combinations with each other in verse, lead to almost innumerable options, but still limited Chapter 13. How to determine the meter of a verse Augustine: They would indeed be if it weren’t for the need to remove those three meters in which the added iambic is poorly placed after the second epitrite. But you did a good job, why already tell me how this meter touches your ears: Three times you see how in the east Crossroads rotating fire. Augustine: Can you tell what feet it is made of? Licensius: I can’t, and I don’t even find how it corresponds to my measurement. Because I will put either a pyrrhic, or an anapest, or a third peon at the head, then the rest does not correspond to the meter, B I also find that if you put a kretik2-1-2 after the third peon, there will be a long syllable left, which the kretik2-1-2 does not allow you to put after it, but even this meter cannot consist of these feet correctly, even if you insert the silence of three times, and now there is no silence, but when repeated it still delights the ear. Augustine: So, see if it is not appropriate to start from pyrrhic 1-1, from where we measure dichoreus 21-21, then spondium 2-2, which completes the times, of which there are two at the beginning. The beginning may also contain an anapest 11–2, from which diamb 12–12 is measured, so that the last long syllable, combined with the four times of anapest 11–2, completes the six times that agree with the diamb, from which you can understand that parts of the feet are placed not only at the end, but also at the beginning of the meter. Augustine: What? If I remove one outer long syllable and this will be the meter: Don't you notice that the silence is repeated twice? From what is it obvious that some part of the foot can be placed at the beginning of the meter, some at the end, and some in silence? Licensius: And this is obvious. Augustine: But it may happen that if you measure the integrity of dichorea21-21 in this meter, - indeed, if the diambus and anapest are placed first, and you think that the father of the foot should be placed at the beginning of it, which already has four tenses, two remain in debt and therefore are silent at the end. From which we learn that a meter can begin with a part of a foot and end with a full foot, but never without silence. Licensius: And I have already seen this. Augustine: What? Can you measure this meter and tell what feet it consists of? Iam satis terris nivis, atque dirae Grandinis misit Pater, et rubente Dextera sacras iaculatus arces The earth is already covered with snow and the father sent a terrible hail and The sacred walls are thrown in red on the right (Horace, second ode 1–3) Licencius: I can put the creticus 2–1-2 at the head, and measure the remaining two with six time feet, one ionic from the major 22–11, the other dichoreic 21–21, and keep silent one time, which is added to the creticus 2–1-2, so that the six times are replenished. Augustine: Something is missing in your reasoning. Indeed, when dichoreus comes at the end, the remaining silence, the last syllable of which is short, is taken instead of long. Licence: On the contrary, I confirm. Augustine: Therefore, one should not put dichorea at the end, if there is no silence in the repetition of the sequence, isn’t it already felt that the epithrite of the second 21–22, and not the dichorea 21–21? Licensius: Obviously so. Then how is this meter measured? I don't know. Chapter 14. About meters with partial stops Augustine: Pay attention, therefore, whether it sounds good when I pronounce it this way, that after the first three syllables there is one time of silence. Because in the end there is nothing left so that, according to the rules, there could be dichoreus there. St. Augustine here means a pause in the middle of a verse. Namely: Iam satis_terris nivis, atque dirae Licensius: Sounds most pleasant. Augustine: This means that we are already adding to art that not only at the end, but also before the end one can remain silent when it is appropriate. Then it is appropriate when something that should fill the time of a foot is either wrong to be silent at the end because of the short last syllable, as in what I said, or when two incomplete feet are composed, one at the beginning and the other at the end, as this is: Gentiles nostros_ inter oberrat equos_ Our loved ones wander between horses. (Terentian, “On Meter”, 6, 379) You felt, I believe, that I paused at two times after five long syllables, and in the same way at the end one must remain silent when the meter returns to the beginning. For if you measure this meter according to the law of six times, you will have the first spondium 2-2, the second molossus 2-2-2, the third horiyamb 21-12, the fourth anapest 1-2-1. Spondius2-2 therefore needs two times to be replenished to the foot of six times, and anapest1-2-1 also, and thus after the molossus there will be two silences before the end and two after the anapest at the end. If you measure according to the law of four times, one long syllable will be at the beginning, from where we measure two spondiums 2–2, from where two dactyls 2–11, and the meter concludes with one long syllable. Then we will be silent for two times after the Spondian twins2-2, before the end, and two at the end, so that both feet are fulfilled, of which we placed two parts at the beginning and at the end. Sometimes what two incomplete feet should have at the beginning and at the end is so much given over to silence at the end, so as not to overstep the division into the two spaces of the foot, as in these two verses: Silvae laborantes, geluque Flumina constiterint acuto Forests barely stand, and rivers Shackled tightly by severe frost. Of these, the first begins with palimvakhia 2–21, from where it flows into molossus 2–2-2, and ends with bacchiem 12–2. Consequently, two times are silent, of which when you give one to Bacchium 12–2, and the second to Palimvachium 2–21, six times will be replenished in both. The second verse begins with dactyl 2–11, from where it moves into horiyamb 21–12, and ends with bacchy 12–2, therefore, three times must be silent, of which we assign one to bacchy 12–2, and two to dactyl 2–11, so that all have six times. But that which should perform the last foot is placed at the beginning. Your ears won't allow you to do otherwise. And it is not surprising, because during repetition, what was previously the last is added to the beginning. Here it is appropriate to recall the Gospel “The firsts will be last and last firsts,” which suggests that the wisdom of Blessed Augustine and his majestic mind does not contemplate anything other than the Gospel light. And so in this meter when it says “Flumina constiterint acuto” since in any case three times must be completed by sewing, if you do not want to remain silent, but give them to the voice, they could be rewarded through iambic 1-2, and through trochee 2-1, and through tribrachium 1-1-1, since they all have three times. But in no way can the feeling itself allow them to be returned through trochee, since in trochee the first syllable is long and the last is short. The first one should sound like the last bacchanalian - i.e. briefly, and not long, which is the first in dactyl. This can be explained through the following example: Flumina constiterint acuto gelu. Flumina constiterint acute gelida. Flumina constiterint in alta nocte. Streams are bound by sharp frost The streams are bound by sharp ice Streams are bound in the height of the night Who will doubt that the first two are pleasantly repeated, but this third is in no way? Also, if each foot lacks one time for completeness, if you want to give them to the voice, the feeling will not allow them to be combined into one long syllable, truly wonderful justice. For what must be returned separately cannot be combined, and cannot even be simply put together. For what reason in this meter: Silvae laborantes, geluque if you add one long one instead of silence at the end, as here: Silvae laborantes gelu duro (The forests are tired of the severe frost), the ears will not approve the way they approve when we say “Silvae laborantes gelu et frigore” (The forests are tired of the frost and cold). What will you feel most sufficiently if you repeat each phrase separately? It is also not proper, when two incomplete feet are placed, to place the larger one at the beginning and not at the end. Indeed, and this condemns the ear, as if you said Optimum tempus adest tandem The best tense is added at the end, in which the first foot would be creticus 2-1-2, the second horiyamb 21-12, the third spondee 2-2, and three times we will be silent, of which two must fill up to six times the last spondee, and one - the first creticus 2-1-2. And if you say “Tandem tempus adest optimum” in this way. At the end, time adds the best, then who will not feel that if you insert the same pause of three times, this is repeated most pleasantly? Therefore, either it is appropriate for the end of an incomplete foot to be the same space as there is at the beginning, as in: Silvae laborantes, geluque, or to put the smaller one at the beginning, and at the end the larger one - as in this: Flumina constiterint acuto. And this is not unfair, because where there is equality, there is no disagreement, and where the number is unpaired, if we move from the least to the most, as is the case in counting, the order itself produces agreement. From which it consistently follows that the feet from which we begin the movement turn out to be less than full if silence is inserted in two places, that is, before the end and at the end. Before the end, it remains silent for as long as the last foot should be. There is the same amount at the end as at the beginning, since the middle extends to the end, but from the end it must return to the beginning. If both pauses must be the same, there is no contradiction in being silent as much before the end as at the end. It is appropriate to remain silent only if the pair of speech is not destroyed somewhere. In the same numbers that are not formed by words, but either by a certain pulse or breathing, or even by the tongue itself, in this case there is no difference, so that after this there should still be silence by voice or emphasis. Nowadays, only for the reasons stated above, silence is introduced as a matter of law. For what reason, a meter can begin with two incomplete feet only if there is not less than one and a half feet in both connected spaces. Indeed, we said above that then two incomplete feet are correctly placed, when what should be in both does not cross the space of dividing the foot in half, for which example: Montes acuti Mountains are sharp, where either at the end there are three times we need to be silent, or one time after the spondium and two at the end. For otherwise this meter cannot coincide with the measurement. Chapter 15. About silence necessary and by choice Let it also be in our teaching that when we are silent before the end, so that the pairedness of speech is not destroyed by a short syllable, so that, according to this often recalled rule, the feeling does not perceive it as a long one when silence sets in. So, in this meter Montibus acutis (Horam sharp), we cannot remain silent for one time after the dactyl 2–11, which we could after the spondium 2–2 in the previous meter, because it is no longer the dactyl that is heard, but the cretic 2–1-2, and also the meter itself seems to consist not of two incomplete feet, as we showed by the measure, but of a complete dichoria with the last spondium, returning two time of silence at the end. But it should also be noted that in the initial incomplete steps, or there at the beginning, what is due is compensated through silence, as in Iam satis terris nivis atque dirae (The earth has already been saturated with snow and frost) or at the end, as in “segetes meus labor” (sowing my labor). In incomplete stops, which are placed at the end, either the necessary pause is placed there, as in Ite igitur Camoenae, or in some middle place, as in Ver blandum viget arvis, adest hospes hirundo (VARRONE, Sat. Men. fr. 89.) (pleasant spring gives life to the fields, gives hospitality to the swallow). For one time, which is missing in the last Bacchie 12–2, must be silent either after all the numbers, or after the first in order of the Molossian foot 2–2-2, or after the second ionic from the minor 11–2-2. As for incomplete feet placed in the middle, except there the lack cannot be returned by silence, as in: Tuba terribilem sonitum dedit aere curvo The trumpet made a terrible sound as it twisted into the air. For if we measure this meter in such a way that we put the anapest 11–2 first, the second any ionic in five syllables, namely, a long one is resolved, or the first or last is resolved into two short ones, the third is a horiyamb 21–12, the last is a bacchius 12–2, three times will be missing. One must be returned at the end of the bacchium, and two to the first anapest, to make six. But this entire space of three times can be silent in the end. And if you start from a whole foot, you begin, measure the first five syllables with some kind of ionic, the horiyamb 21–12 will follow, from where you won’t find a whole foot, therefore the time of one long syllable will have to be silent, which if counted, you will get another horiyamb 21–12, and the concluding meter bacchiy 12–2 will remain, which should be silent at the end for one time. Now I think it’s time to review when there should be silence in the middle places, either to restore the time that should be at the end, or because there should be silence there. But sometimes there is no need to remain silent in the middle, when you can simply measure with another meter, like the one we just gave as an example. But sometimes it is necessary, like here: Vernat temperies, aurae tepent, sunt deliciae Warmth comes to life with spring, the air is warm, the essence is tender. It is already obvious that this number can be passed in steps of either quaternary or sixfold times. If quaternary, then you need to be silent for one time after the eighth syllable and at the end for two. For it is measured as follows: the first spondium 2–2, the second dactyl 2–11, the third spondium 2–2, the fourth dactyl 2–11 with silence for a long syllable, since after a short one it is not appropriate, the fifth spondium 2–2, the sixth dactyl 2–11, after which the number ends a long syllable, two times of which must be silent at the end. If we measure the meter in feet of six times, then the first will be molossus 2–2-2, the second ionic from the minor 11–2-2, the third creticus 2–1-2, which would become dichorean 21–21, if we add the silence of one time, the fourth ionic from the major 2–2-11 and a long syllable at the end, after which there should be silence for four times. It could be different, so that one long syllable is placed at the beginning, followed by an ionic from the major 2-2-11, whence Molossus 2-2-2, whence Bacchius 12-2, which would become an antispasto 12-21 with the addition of one time silence, at the end the meter would be closed with a choriamb 21-12, so that four times of silence at the end were given when one long syllable stands at the beginning. But this measurement is rejected by the ears, because the pair of feet placed at the beginning, although they do not pass through the median (the middle of the meter), are incorrectly given silence after the full foot. And although we know how much is needed, it is not grasped by feeling, so that such space is silent, so that there is no less in silence than in sound. Because when the voice passes most of the foot, the smaller part that remains flows easily everywhere. For what reason measure what we put in this example: There is one necessary, as we would say, dimension, if after the tenth syllable there is silence for one time, and four at the end, and there is another, if you want to be silent for two times after the sixth syllable, one after the eleventh, and two at the end, so that at the beginning there would be a spondium 2-2, followed by a horiyamb 21-12, the third spondium 2-2 would include the silence of two times, so that it would turn out or molossus or ionic from the minor, the fourth Bacchian 12–2 with the silence of one time attached to it would form an antispastus 12–21, after the fifth horiyamba 21–12 the number would end in the voice, and two times of silence at the end are given to the spondium 2–2 placed at the beginning. There is also something else. For if you want, you will be silent for one time after the sixth syllable, and one after the tenth, after the eleventh in the same way, and two at the end, so that you get the first spondius 2-2, the second horimbus 21-12, the third palimbakhia 2-21, which would become an antispastus 12-21 with one time of silence added to it, the fourth spondius 2-2 will be a dichoreus 21-21, with one time attached, and one time with closing silence, the number of the last choriamb 21–12 closes, so that we are silent two times at the end, which belong to the first spondium 2–2. There is also a third dimension, if after the first spondium 2–2 there is silence for one time, and the rest will follow as in the previous case, except that at the end of this meter there will be silence for one time, since that spondium that remains placed at the beginning, followed by one time of silence becomes palimvachium 2–21, so that the silence at the end does not owe it more than one time. From where you can already see the types of silences inserted into the meter, which of them is necessary, which of them is optional. Necessary silence is when something must be replenished at the feet. By choice, when the feet are full and intact. And what is said above, that there should not be a pause of more than four times, is said about the necessary silence where the duty of times is fulfilled. Indeed, in those pauses that we called “by choice”, both the foot is allowed to sound and remain silent, so if we do this at equal intervals, then there will no longer be a meter, but a rhythm, because there is no end from which we must return to the beginning. Why, if, for example, you want to change the silence so that after the first foot there is a pause of the other foot, this will not be preserved with constant reversal of the meter. It is allowed, through variability, to produce whatever numbered silences you want, up to the legal time of the meter, as in this piermer: Nobis verum in promptu est, tu si verum dicis. Нам воистину принимать, тебе если истинну глаголешь. It is allowed here to be silent for four times after the first spondium2-2, and another four after the next two: after the final three, nothing will be silent, because thirty-two times (the maximum size of the meter) have already been completed. But it is much better, and just as fair, if either at the end, or in the middle and end, there is silence for so many times that what is extracted could form one foot, as here: Nobis verum in promptu est, tu dic verum. This should also be maintained in the meters of the other feet, that is, to pay tribute with the necessary silence either at the end or in the middle, so that the feet are replenished, but it is not appropriate to remain silent for more than the part of the foot that is occupied by raising and placing (in beating the beat). Silence by choice can coincide with both parts of the feet and whole feet, as we showed with the above examples. But let this be the end of the discussion of the reasons for inserting pauses. This complex and at first glance obscure teaching about the place of pauses in meters has a connection with painting, speaking about the meaningful harmonious place of open spaces in the picture, with music - speaking about pauses in parties and their relationships with each other, in management - speaking about the necessary rest and days off, in calligraphy - speaking about the relationship between the spaces of a blank sheet and the features of a hieroglyph. Chapter 16. About mixing feet and combining meters Now let's talk a little about mixing feet and combining their meters. For much has been said about this when we examined which feet can be mixed with each other. And something about what relates to the combination of meters was said when we began to talk about poetry. For the feet are united and mixed with themselves according to the rules that we discovered in the second speech (book). Here we need to find out what kind of meters are already famous by poets, have their own authors and inventors, from which certain laws seem to prohibit us from deviating. For it is not proper, they say, that when they have created them for some reason, they should change anything in them, even if we could according to our own reason and without insulting the ears. The reason for this is conveyed not by art, but by history, and therefore is more taken on faith than known by the mind. For if Faliscus - I don’t know who it is - composed such meters as this sounds: Quando flagella ligas, ita liga, Vitis et ulmus uti simul eant When you tie whips, tie them like that, So that the twigs and vines are as one. 7 – SETTIMIO SERENO, attr. Terenziano, De metris 2001; G.L. 6, 385; MARIO VITTORINO, Ars gramm. , in G.L. 6, 122, 16–17; SERVIO, In Verg. Aen. 4, 291. we cannot know why, but thus we must believe what we hear and read. Here there is something relevant to our teaching, whether to believe that this meter consists of three dactyls 2–11, and the last pyrrhic 1–1, as many ignoramuses in music think, because they do not understand that pyrrhic 1–1 cannot be placed after dactyl 2–11, or - as reason teaches - that the first foot in this meter will be a horiyamb 21-12, the second - an ionic, where a long syllable in any of them is resolved into short ones, the last one is iambic 1-2, after which there is silence for three times, which even semi-learned people can feel if from a scientist, according to the law, it is proclaimed and slammed. For this is how nature and general feeling judge what the norm of teaching would prescribe. However, what that poet wanted - for these numbers to remain motionless when we use this meter - must be observed, because it does not deceive the ear, although in the same way it would not deceive if instead of horiyamba 21-12 we put diyamb 12-12, or the ionik itself 11-2-2 2-2-11 in no way resolved into short syllables, or anything else that coincides. Consequently, nothing will change in this meter, because it is not for this reason that we avoid inequality, but because we respect authority. Reason teaches sensibly that some meters should be fixed, that is, nothing should be changed in them, as this very one is, about which we have said enough, while others are movable, in which it is allowed to place other feet instead of others. Like here: Troiae qui primus ab oris, arma virumque cano. Indeed, here, instead of spondium 2–2, anapest 2–11 can be placed in any place. Other meters are not entirely motionless and not entirely mobile, as here: Pendeat ex humeris dulcis chelys Et numeros edat varios, quibus Assonet omne virens late nemus, Et tortis errans qui flexibus Let the sweet helis (kind of lyre) hang from your shoulders And let him publish different numbers, with which May it be in tune with all the groves green in the distance and bendable wandering which is flexible 8 – POMPONIO, attr. Terenziano, De metris 2135–41: G.L. 6, 389; MARIO VITTORINO, Ars gramm., in G.L. 6, 115, 15–17. For you see that here you can put both sponds and dactyls everywhere, except for the last foot, which the author of the meter always wants to be a dactyl. And in the same three kinds you see something healthy in authority. What concerns only the mind in the mixing of the feet about what the judge feels, one should know that there are those parts of the feet that are more pleasantly placed after certain feet with remaining silence, like iambic1-2 after dichorea21-21 and also the second epitrite21-22, and spondium2-2 after antispastus12-21. And after other feet, evil is combined if mixed with them. Indeed, it is obvious that iambic 1–2 after molossus 2–2-2 the benefit is due, as this example shows, with the repetition of silence at the end for three times: Ver blandum viret floribus Spring pleasant green flowers And if instead of Molossus 2-2-2 you put dichoreus 21-21 first, so that there is Vere terra viret floribus In spring the earth turns green with flowers hearing rejects it and condemns it. This in other examples is easy to discover when exploring with feeling. There is a meaning, and it is really clear, that when feet that combine with each other copulate, at the end only those parts of the feet should be added that coincide with all the feet in that sequence of combinations, so that some kind of disagreement does not arise between friends. But what is more worthy of surprise is that although spondius2-2 and diamb12-12, and dichoreus21-21 together pleasantly end the meter, however, when two of these three feet are in the same sequence, either alone or combined with other suitable ones, as the feeling testifies, spondium2-2 cannot be relied upon at the end. For who will doubt that the ears freely accept the repetition of this line: There is no thing to be afraid of. Timenda res, iam timere noli The thing you need to be afraid of, don't be afraid anymore, then I don’t want to hear it anywhere except in prose. And it is no less absurd if you add anything else anywhere, such as Molossus2-2-2 in this way: Vir fortis, timenda res, iam timere noli A strong husband, don’t be afraid of terrible things Timenda res, vir fortis, iam timere noli Timenda res, iam timere vir fortis noli The reason for this absurdity is that the foot diyamb12–12 can beat with rhythm and in a ratio of two to one, like dichoreus 21–21 - and one to two. The two parts of the spondium 2-2 are equal in essence, but when its halves are attracted to the first and to the last, some disagreement arises, and for this reason admiration is repelled. No less a miracle is produced by the antispasm, which, if not mixed with any other foot or mixed with only one diambus, then allows the iambic to end the meter, and if combined with others, in no way. And when instead of diyamba there is dichorey - also for the sake of dichorey itself, which I am not at all surprised at. But why he refuses to allow the same three-time stops with other six-footed feet, I don’t know. The reason for this may be much deeper than we can discover or extract ourselves, but I will try to show with examples that this is so. Indeed, these two meters: potestate potentium placet The power of power pleases. No one will be double-minded that each individually is pleasantly repeated with the silence of the three times at the end. And these with the same silence are unpleasant: Potestate praeclara placet. Pleased with clear power Potestate tibi multum placet. Your power pleases you a lot Potestate iam tibi sic placet. My power already pleases you so much Potestate multum tibi placet. Your power pleases you a lot Potestatis magnitudo placet. Power is pleased with greatness. That which relates to feeling has performed its service in this matter and has shown what it accepts and what it rejects, but the reason why this is so must be consulted with reason. And in such darkness I don’t see anything other than the fact that antispast12–21 with diyamb12–12, the first part divided in half has a common one. Indeed, both begin from short and long (12). The last one (21) with dichorea 21-21, for both end with a long and a short one. So the antispastus, either with itself being combined with the first half or with diyamb, with which the same community has, allows an iambic at the end of the meter, and would allow it with dichoreus if dichoreus were combined with such an ending, but does not tolerate others, since it is not connected with them by a similar coincidence. Chapter 17. About the circulation of the meter As for the combination of meters, it is enough to see in the present that different meters can be combined with each other, which only coincide with each other by beating the beat, that is, raising and lowering. Thus, the symmetry of time is key for combining different meters with each other. It is she who, like some connecting elements, seems to attract meters, allowing them to combine, or repels them - in some semblance of the poles of magnets. They differ either in quantity - when larger ones are combined with smaller ones, which is the essence of the verses: Iam satis terris nivis atque dirae Dextera sacras iaculatus arces, 9 – ORAZIO, Odi 1, 2, 1–4. Indeed, you see that below there is a fourth verse, which ends with one choriamb and one long syllable at the end, and it is less than the first three, which are equal to each other. Or in stops like this: 10 – ORAZIO, Odi 1, 5, 3–4. Surely you will determine that of these two, the upper one consists of spondium 2–2 and horiyamba 21–12, and a long last syllable, which must be to complete the six times of the spondium, this last one of spondium 2–2 and horiyamba 21–12, and the last two short syllables, which also complete six times with the first spondium. Consequently, they are equal at times, but in their feet they maintain some difference. There is another difference in their combination, that some are combined in such a way that they do not allow any silence to be inserted between themselves, like the last two, while others prescribe some kind of silence among themselves, like these: Vides ut alta stet nive candidum Soracte, nec iam sustineant onus 11 – ORAZIO, Odi 1, 9, 1–4. Indeed, if they are repeated one at a time, the first two at the end require silence for one time, the third - two, the fourth - three. In combination, they encourage silence, moving from the first to the second one time, from the second to the third - two, from the third to the fourth - three. From the fourth, if you return to the first, you will remain silent for a while. But what is the meaning of returning to the first, the same is to another such combination of transition. We directly call this kind of combination “whirling” (circulation), which in Greek is called a period. The circle therefore cannot be smaller than consisting of two members, that is, two meters. And no more wish for those who even pass up to four members. Therefore, it allows a minimum of two members, a middle of three members, and a maximum of four members. They are called in Greek διχωλος τριχωλος τετρααχωλος (two-chrome, trichrome and four-chrome). Since we will carefully discuss this type in our conversation about poetry, that’s enough for now. I already judge sensibly that you understand that meters are countless genders, of which five hundred and sixty-eight we found when examples of meters with a pause not at the end were given, and when counting we did not take into account the resolution of one long syllable into two short ones, which increases their number fourfold Since a meter consists of at least two feet, and each foot can have a long syllable, and this long syllable can turn into two short ones, the result is a combination of options when doubling a syllable: And thus - an increase of 4 times. . And if you also want to add all the meters with inserted silence, and all with the mixing of feet, and all the resolutions of long syllables into short ones to combine by number, then it will turn out so much that you probably won’t even find a name for this number. Thus, the rhythmic structure of harmony in all human affairs is immense - although it has its own strict and definite internal laws. When to this are added color in painting and melody (pitch) in music, painting and the properties of surfaces in architecture, the internal harmony of trees, stones and ponds in the landscape, the martial art of units and the warriors themselves in military affairs, the personal qualities and properties of employees in the theory of management, writing styles in calligraphy - and the Divine commandments in the art of arts - good deeds - then nothing but the exclamation “Thou hast created all things with wisdom” - can't happen. But these examples that we have proposed and those that we could still offer, although poets have approved them for use, and are combined with hearing by nature, however, if you do not recommend them to the ears of a trained and experienced person in pronunciation, feeling and hearing would not be stronger than human nature postulates, they will not be able to truly judge what we have discussed. But let’s take a break from the details, and from here we’ll start talking about the poems themselves. Chapter 1. Definition of Verse Augustine: What is verse, there was a dispute between ancient scientists with no small struggle, but not without fruit. Indeed, the meaning was found, and recorded for the notice of subsequent generations, being established not only by serious and clear authority, but also by reason. Meanwhile, you should pay attention to a certain difference between rhythm and meter, that every meter is rhythm, but not every rhythm is meter. For every legal connection of feet is countable, since it has a meter, and cannot not have a number in any way - that is, not be a rhythm. But since it is not the same thing to move without a definite end, even if with the same feet, or to also move with the same legal feet but to a definite end, these two types had to differ in names, so that this first rhythm would be separate already by name, and this other would be called both rhythm and meter. On the other hand, since among the numbers that are concluded by a definite end, that is, from meters, some are in which there is no reasonable division, while others are in which there is definitely one, it is necessary that this difference be marked by names. Therefore, that kind of rhythm where this reason does not exist is, in the proper sense, called meter. And the one where there is one is called a verse. The origin of this name will be shown to us by reason itself, most likely when we move further. But do not think that it is prescribed so that these verses would not be allowed to be called meter. But it is different when a name is used in approval of similarity, and different when we proclaim this name in essence. But let us finish for now with the recollection of names in which, as we have already said, the competition of debaters and the authority of antiquity completely reign. This reasoning of St. Augustine about the names - rhythm, meter and verse, in which verse is both rhythm and meter, meter - and rhythm, but not verse, and rhythm is neither meter nor verse, completely coincides with the teaching of St. Dionysius the Areopagite about the three heavenly hierarchies - which are all called angels (as everything is called rhythm), although angels belong to the third heavenly hierarchy, as well as heavenly powers (although in the proper sense of the Forces belongs to the second heavenly hierarchy), but not all angels are called Seraphim, Thrones, etc. This coincidence is obviously not accidental, and the ascent from the less perfect to the more perfect hierarchies of St. Dionysius is completely similar to the ascension in perfection from rhythm to verse. The rest of the time, if you like, according to our custom, we explore in search of meaning according to the direction of reason. Since even those ancient authors did not rule as if the poems did not have integrity and perfection by nature, but through reflection they acquired them and noted them with titles, so that we too would know. Chapter 2. On the harmony of verse Therefore, the first thing I will ask you is whether this is the kind of foot that delights the ear, in which those two parts, one of which is in raising, the other in lowering, would respond with the elegance of numbers? Licensius: I am already convinced of this in advance and have discovered it. Augustine: What? Should meter, resulting from the union of feet, be considered to belong to the class of things incapable of division? After all, an indivisible thing cannot extend in time, and it would be absurd, wouldn’t it, to think that something that consists of divisible feet is indivisible? Licensius: I just can’t help but accept such a division. Augustine: And everything that accepts division, isn’t it more beautiful when its parts are consistent with a certain equality, which if you destroy, they become dissonant? Licence: No doubt. Augustine: What? Who is the author of the most equal division of numbers? Isn't it two? St. Augustine points out that numbers give rise to certain special harmonic principles, which are perceived by us as beauty. Here is an important principle - the number two, by its rank, gives rise to the operation of division. Thus, numbers do not exist separately from operations on them, but each number generates its own operation, which seems to be part of its family. It can even be said that numbers can generate several operations. For example, if the number two gives rise to both division in half and the principle of division in general (since it allows numbers to be divided in general). Augustine: Then, if we have found a foot divided into two harmonious parts and thus delights the ears, if we also acquire a meter of this kind, is it not right to prefer it to those who do not have this? Chapter 3. On the interaction of parts of a verse Augustine: Absolutely sane. Why already answer the following: When in all parts measurable by time, something precedes, something follows, something begins, something completes, don’t you see something between the part that precedes and begins - and the one that follows and which should complete the insertion? Licensius: I admit that I need to interject. Augustine: Tell me then what is inserted between these two parts of the verse, of which one is: (Virgil, Aeneid, book 3, art. 549 cornua velatarum obvertimus antemnarum “The yards carrying the load of sails, we turned) For if not like the poet obvertimus, but if you pronounce the verse like this: Cornua velatarum vertimus antennarum, is it not more often that the beginning is made by repetition? which part would be the first and which would be the last? For the verse will not become less if you say it like this: Vertimus antennarum cornua velatarum. Licensius: I clearly see how the beginning itself is formed. Augustine: Do you understand what needs to be avoided? Licencius: Then see if we have avoided this enough. One part of the verse is also preceding: Arma virumque cano, the other following: “Troiae qui primus ab oris” which differ very much from each other, so that if you reverse the order and thus say: “Troiae qui primus ab oris, arma virumque cano”, it is necessary to measure with different feet. Augustine: Also see if this reasoning is useful in other cases. Indeed, how the first part is measured in “Arma virumque cano,” you will recognize it here: Italiam fato. Littora multum ille et. Vi superum saevae. Multa quoque et bello. Inferretque deos. Albanique patres." (St. Augustine lists the following verses in order) And no matter how much you want to follow the others, you will find that all the first parts of each verse are of the same dimension, that is, articulated with a fifth half-foot. It is very rare that this is not the case. So the last parts are no less equal to each other: roiae qui primus ab oris. Profugus Lavinaque venit. Passus dum conderet urbem. Latio genus unde Latinum. Augustine: So, the heroic verse is divided into two parts - five and seven half-stops, which, it should be noted, in total consist of six stops of quaternary time. And without the harmonious combination of two members, without this or without that, there will be no verse. In all of them, reason has already shown what must be observed, that it was impossible to put the first part instead of the last and the last instead of the first. If there is something else, it is no longer called verse, but obscenity (abuse). There is also rhythm and meter, of this kind, they are extremely rarely inserted into long songs in verses that are suitable in structure, and this cannot be said that it does not decorate, which is the same thing that I cited a little earlier: Cornua velatarum vertimus antennarum. (Blessed Augustine refers to the possibility of interchanging the first and second parts of a verse) For which reason it seems to me that a verse is not called a verse, as some believe, because from a certain end it returns to the chapter in the same number. Because this name would also apply to those that repeat themselves and return to the beginning. Indeed, this is also common for those meters that are not poetry. But it is more likely that the name acquires itself from the opposite, as grammarians call it, putting a word where the letter r is not put, as lucror or conqueror. So those meters that correspond to two terms, of which none, by good law, is put in place of the other, and therefore cannot be rearranged, are called verses. But whether you approve of the origin of the name or reject it, or find something else, or together with me neglect this kind of questions, now let’s finish here. For when an object is clearly enough identified by its name, there is no need to worry about its source. Unless you want to add something to this. Licensius: I’m completely okay, but let’s move on. The verse, consisting of two members, is completely similar to the vision of St. Anthony the Great, when an Angel showed him the monastic order, consisting of alternating prayer (the larger member of the verse) and work (the smaller member of the verse). The same division can be seen in the Divine Service (the liturgical order before the Liturgy and the Liturgy), in the Liturgy itself (Proskomedia and the Liturgy proper), in the Liturgy itself (Liturgy of the Catechumens and Liturgy of the Faithful). The same division is seen in the Holy Scriptures - the Old Testament (the larger part of the verse) and the New Testament (the smaller part of the verse), in icon painting (sketches and preparation for icon painting with mixing paints, priming, etc. - and painting itself), in engineering (designing is the first part of the verse, making a structure is the second part of the verse) and in everything else. Chapter 4. About the boundaries of verse Augustine: Then we must find the boundaries of the verse. Indeed, they too must be marked and designated by some kind of difference, or rather, reason itself wants this. Or would you rather not have the end appear after a certain number of rotations of the meter without disturbing the equality of times, than to be mixed with other parts that do not produce the end? Licensius: Who doubts that this is better? What is more obvious than this? Augustine: Think, therefore, did the poets also rightly want spondium 2–2 to be the obligatory ending of the heroic verse? Indeed, in some five places you can choose to put either it or dactyl 2–11, but in the end - nothing but spondium. Indeed, when instead of a spondium 2–2 at the end they put a trochae 2–1 because the last short syllable is indistinguishable from a long one, we have said enough about this in meter. But according to them, the sixfold iambic 1–2 will either not be a verse, or will be without end. Both are absurd. Indeed, none of the most learned people or average or even beginning scholars doubted that this verse: Phaselus ille quem videtis hospites - and everything that is in words of the same numerical format. And the most serious authorities - because the most experienced - believed that it is impossible to assume an indefinite end in a verse. Licensius: You are telling the truth. Therefore, I approve that it is necessary to look for a different mark for this boundary, and do not confirm the one that is supposed to be in the spondium. Augustine: What? Will you doubt that in any case it should be either in the foot, or in the difference in tenses, or in both of them? Licensius: And how to find out? Augustine: Which will you choose from these three? But I, since the very fact that a verse should not end later than it should be relates to the measure of time, I believe that this mark of the boundary of a verse should be taken in no other way than from time. Or do you want something else? Licenses: No, I agree. Augustine: Do you also see that when this time cannot give any other difference than that one is longer and another is shorter, and the end of a verse is that it should not continue any further, the mark of the end of the verse must be placed in the shortest time? Licensius: I see, but what does “this time” refer to? Augustine: To the point that the time difference does not always mean only shortness and longitude. Will you not deny that summer and winter are different times, or will you place their difference in duration, and not in warmth and cold, or humidity and dryness, or anything else of this kind? Licencius: I understand this, and I agree that the marking of the boundary of the verse that we are looking for should be produced by the shortness of time. Augustine: Then pay attention to this verse: Roma, Roma, cerne quanta sit deum benignitas, which is called the trocheum, and measure it, and also answer what you can say about its members and the number of feet. Licencius: About the feet, I will immediately answer easily, for it is obvious that there are seven and a half of them. As for the members, it is not clear enough to me, because I see that the period of speech is limited in many places. However, I think that this division is in the eighth half-foot, so that the preceding member is Roma, Roma, cerne quanta, and the subsequent sit deum benignitas. Augustine: And how many half-stops does it have? Augustine: The mind itself guides you. For since there is nothing better than equality, it is appropriate to grasp it in division by sex, but if there can be less, you need to find her neighbor in order to deviate not far from equality. those. if the number of half-stops is not divided in half, then the neighboring one is taken - this type of division, let me remind you, is generated by the rank of the number three. Now, since this verse has only fifteen half feet, it cannot be more equal than to divide by eight and seven. Indeed, we see the same neighborhood in seven and eight. But this is not how the mark of the end is preserved in a shorter time, as reason itself prescribed to preserve it. Those. the first term of the verse must always be longer in time than the second, because when the meter is cyclically repeated, consciousness itself will put the mark of the verse after the shorter term. Indeed, if the verse were like this: Roma cerne quanta sit tibi deum benignitas So that a member begins in these seven half-stops: Roma cerne quanta sit and ends in these eight - tibi deum benignitas, a half-foot verse could not complete, for eight half-stops produce four whole feet. So a certain deformation would begin, such that we would not measure in the last term the same feet as in the first, and the first term would end more with the mark of the shortest time, that is, a half-foot, than the last, which this end should in truth be. Indeed, in these there would be three trochaea (trochea 2–1) and a half: Roma (2–1) cerne (2–1) quanta(2–1) sit (2) , and in this one there would be up to four iambs (1–2) – tibi(1–2) deum (1–2) benignitas (1–2 1–2). Nowadays we get trochae in both terms and the verse ends in a half-foot, so that the shortest length holds the mark of the end... Indeed, the essence in the first is four Roma, Roma cerne quanta 2–1 2–1 2–1 2–1, while in the last there are three and a half sit deum benignitas. Or are you ready to object? Licence: Absolutely nothing, and I readily agree. Augustine: Then, if you please, let us consider those laws unshakable, so that in neither of the two terms relating to the division of a verse there is a deficiency, as there is a deficiency here: Cornua velatarum obvertimus antennarum And so that the very equality of the members does not produce a reversible, so to speak, division into parts, as it does here: Cornua velatarum vertimus antennarum. And so that when we avoid this reversibility, the terms do not differ too much from each other, but as far as possible they are equalized by the nearest numbers in the series, so that we do not say that it is possible to divide in such a way that at the beginning there are eight half-stops in the first term: Cornua velatarum vertimus And then there are four half-stops in the last one, i.e. antennarum. And so that the last of the members does not have a pair of half feet, like this one: tibi deum benignitas, so that when the verse ends with a full foot, the mark of the end of the verse does not disappear in a short time. Licensius: I accept all this, and will commemorate it as much as I can. Chapter 5. About heroic verse Augustine: So, since we are careful that the verse does not end with a full foot, in your opinion, how should we measure heroic verse, so that we fulfill both this law of members and preserve this boundary mark? Licensius: I see that there are only twelve half-stops. And since, due to the treatment that must be avoided, the members cannot have six half-stops, and it is impossible to differ greatly from each other so that there are three and nine or nine and three, and it is impossible to give a pair of half-stops to the last member, so that it turns out to be eight and four or four and eight, so that the verse does not end with a full foot, it is necessary to divide into five and seven or seven and five half-stops. Indeed, these numbers are also the closest unpaired ones, and these terms are certainly closer to themselves than they would be in a quaternary and octal number. In confirmation of this, I see that the separation of speech always ends in the fifth half-foot, as in the first verse of Virgil: Arma virumque cano and in the second: Italiam fato and in the third: Littora multum ille et and in the fourth also: Vi superum saevae: and also from here to the very end of the song. Augustine: You speak the truth. But you must also see with what feet to measure, so that nothing from the already unshakably established law is destroyed. Licencius: Although reason reveals this sufficiently, the novelty confuses me. For we cannot achieve anything of this kind except the foot spondium 2-2 and dactyl 2-1-1, and there is almost no one, even the most uneducated, who would not have heard of this, even if they could do less than this. Consequently, if now I want to follow this custom, that law of ending must be abolished, for the first term ends with a half-foot, and the next one with a full foot. But it should be the other way around. But since it is most wicked to throw away this law, and I have already learned in numbers that you can start from an incomplete foot, it remains for us to recognize that here is not a dactyl2-11 with a spondium2-2, but an anapest1-2-1. So the verse begins with a long one syllable, from where two feet or spondia2-2 or anapest1-2-1 - or both together - make up the first. Then again three other feet or anapests 1-2-1 or any other suitable one instead of spondium 2-2 or all and at the end one syllable with which the verse legally ends. Can you confirm this? Augustine: I also judge that this is more correct, but it is not so easy to convince people of this. For such is the power of custom that when it becomes ancient, even if generated by a false opinion, nothing can be more hostile to the truth. Indeed, in the verse that should be composed, there is no difference what to place in this gender - anapest 1-2-1 with dactyl 2-11 or spondium 2-2. For measuring, it is more reasonable not to say what is closer to the ears, but what is closer to the mind, true and determined by reason, and not to learn from an unreasonable opinion, and we were not the first to invent this, but many in ancient times paid attention to this ingrained custom. Therefore, if you read those who, in Greek or Latin, have become the most learned in this discipline, those who hear will certainly not be surprised, although they will reject imbecility when it is demanded for the hard reason of human custom that which is not accepted by reason and the authority of truth, which is more perfect for every person and nothing can be preferable. Therefore we do not seek from the authority of the ancients how to continue or shorten syllables, and in the manner in which the words we now speak are used, so we use them. Since in this kind of thing there is a certain amount of laziness to follow the old rule, and permission to establish a new one, so the measurement of a verse must be thought of as an established human custom, and not as an eternal law, since we first perceive its measured length naturally, with our ears, and only then justify it by rational reflection on numbers, and everyone recognizes that it is better that the end ends with a mark than with other meters, and that such an end must be marked by a short time, which makes it obvious because it defines the longitude of time and somehow freezes it. Chapter 6. About equal parts of verse Augustine: And when this is so, how can its last member be limited if not by a full foot? The first member must either be a complete foot, as in this trocheic: Roma, Roma, cerne quanta sit deum benignitas, or a proper part of the foot, as in the heroic: “Arma virumque cano, Troiae qui primus ab oris.” Therefore, since all doubts have already been removed, if you wish, measure this verse too, and answer me about his members and feet: Phaselus ille quem videtis, hospites. Licencius: I already see that its members are distributed in five and seven half-stops. So the first would be Phaselus ille, the last quem videtis, hospites. I consider the feet to be iambics. Augustine: But I ask - don't you care at all that the verse does not end with a full foot? Licensius: You’re telling the truth, but I don’t know what to do. For who does not see that in heroic verse one must begin with a half-foot? And if this is so, then in order for it to legally end with a half-foot, we no longer measure the verse in iambic 1–2, but in trocheus 2–1. Augustine: It is so, as you say, but look what you think you should answer about the verse that is called asclepiadic: Maecenas atavis edite regibus/ Indeed, the division of speech ends in the sixth syllable, and not inconsistently, but is preserved in almost all verses of this kind. So its first member is Maecenas atavis: the second is edite regibus, the reason for which cannot be doubted. For if you measure the feet of quaternary time in it, there will be five in the first and in the last term four half-foots. The law forbids the last member of the pair to consist of half feet, rather than for the verse to end with a full foot. It remains for us to assume that the feet are six times, from which it will be that both terms include three half-foots. Indeed, when the preceding term ends with a whole foot, it must begin with two long syllables. Therefore, the entire verse is divided by the horiyamb 21–12, as the subsequent and also another horiyamb, the last term begins, the verse is concluded with a half-foot in two short syllables, for so many times, together with the spondium placed at the head, will fulfill the foot of six times. If you don't have anything to add. Licensius: On the contrary, nothing. Augustine: So you agree that both terms consist of the same number of half-stops? Licensius: Why should I not agree? For here we cannot talk about conversion, when the last term can be put in place of the previous one, so that the first becomes the last, because the same law of the foot will not remain. Therefore, there is no reason to deny the equal number of half feet in the terms of a verse of this kind, when without any force of address this equality can be maintained, while the law of marking the end is fulfilled when the verse does not end with a full foot, which must certainly be fulfilled. I completely agree. Chapter 7. About harmony (verses) of the second order Augustine: You look at the very essence of the matter, so reason already discovers that there are two kinds of verses, one in which the members have the same number of half-foots, the other in which there is unpairedness in the members. If you like, let us carefully examine how this unpairedness of feet correlates with the same pairing, which is quite obscure, but can be explained by the rather subtle meaning of the numbers. Indeed, I’ll ask you, when I say “two” and “three,” how many numbers did I say? Blessed Augustine's further reasoning is extremely important because it reveals the principle of composing compositions from compositions, harmonies from harmonies, armies from armies, poems from poems, paintings from paintings, affairs from affairs, management from administrations. This area is practically inaccessible to human understanding and practically never occurs in practice, therefore it requires special effort of the human mind even in its basics. License: Two without a doubt. Augustine: Therefore, two is one number, and three is one number, and any other if we name it. Licensius: That's right. Augustine: Doesn’t it seem to you from this that one number can be correlated without absurdity with any number? Because no one can say that the number “one” is two, but it is certain that “two” is one number. In a similar way, the same can be rightly said that three is one, and four is one. Augustine: Pay attention also to something else: tell me, three taken twice, how much do they give? Augustine: Then six and three are the same thing? Augustine: Now I want you to answer how much is four taken three times. Augustine: You also see twelve is more than four. Licensius: And much, obviously. Augustine: In order not to linger, you should already indicate the rule: from two and hence any numbers you like, if you make two, the smaller, multiplied by the larger, necessarily surpasses it. Licensius: Who will doubt this? For what is so small in the multitude of numbers than two? However, if you multiply a thousand by it, it will exceed a thousand so much that it becomes double. Augustine: You speak the truth, but put one, and whatever greater number you like from here, and no matter how much you work, multiplying the smaller by the larger, will it thus surpass the larger? Licencius: Not so, but less is comparable to more. Indeed, if you take one twice, it becomes two. And by multiplying one tenfold we get ten. And taking one a thousand times - a thousand. And multiplying through any other number, they must become equal. Augustine: So, one has a certain equality with the other numbers, not that any number is, but also that multiplied with any number produces the same thing. Licensius: This is quite obvious. Augustine: Let's move on. Pay attention to the number of half-stops with which unequal members are formed in verses, and you will discover with the same mind a certain wonderful equality, which we have already discussed. Indeed, as I think, the minimum unequal verse in two terms has half-stops four and three, as here: Hospes ille quem vides, of which the first member of this is: Hospes ille, can be cut into two equal parts of two half-foots. The second is quem vides, so divided that one part has two half-foots, the other one. That it is, as if two and two were, the law of that equality, which we have talked about enough, which one has with all numbers. From which it turns out that the first term is divided in the same way as the next one. So where there are four and five half-stops, as in this: Roma, Roma, cerne quanta sit, is not so approved, and therefore is considered more like meter than verse, since such unequal terms cannot in any way relate to the law of division of equal terms. You will agree, as I think, that the four half-foot of the first term Roma, Roma can be divided into two, but the last five cerne quanta sit into two and three half-foot are divided, where no justice will create equality. Those. in the first type of division, one can replace two, due to some affinity with all numbers, but in the second, neither two - three nor three - two can replace. For five half feet cannot in any way become the same as four because of two and three. As we found in a shorter verse that three half-foots, for the sake of one and two, hold the same space as four extend. Or is there something you didn’t follow or don’t agree with? Licensius: On the contrary, everything is clear and justified. Augustine: Let's move on. Now let us think about the five and three half feet, which is the essence of the verse: Phaselus ille quem vides, and let us see how this inequality legitimately maintains a certain equality. Indeed, everyone agrees that this type is not only meter, but also verse. So, when you cut the first member into two and three half-foot, and the second into two and one, and connect the parts, you will find equality in both, since in the first member we have two, and in the second two parts remain, one of three half-foot, from the first member, the other - one from the last. Consequently, we unite them more sociably, since one has a community with everyone. And the sum of one and three is four. That there is as much as two and two. So, through such a division, five and three half-steps also come to agreement. But answer me, did you understand this? Licencius: So truly I say. The most important idea of ​​St. Augustine here is that the verse, although it has a one-dimensional spatial and temporal execution, however, in each of its parts it correlates with both previous and subsequent ones, as if interacting and harmonizing with feet that have already sounded, but remain in memory, and even with future ones that have not yet sounded, as if when you touched the string, sounds that had already sounded sounded and came from the future that do not yet exist. This applies to music, painting, military art, the art of government and virtue. This interaction occurs, of course, not on canvas, not in the air, not in the landscape, but inside the human soul and consciousness. Chapter 8. On heroic verse and derivative harmony Augustine: Then the next in line in the study are five and seven half-foots, which are the essence of those two most famous verses, which the people call heroic and iambic, also both sixfold. Indeed, is divided in such a way that its first member is Arma virumque cano, which is five half feet and the second is Troiae qui primus ab oris which is seven half feet. And Phaselus ille quem videtis, hospites, the first term has Phaselus ille, in five half-stops, the second in seven - quem videtis, hospites. Но такова та благородность, которая трудится в этом законе равности. For when we divide the above five half-foot into two and three, and the last seven into three and four, three parts equal to three half-foot will agree with themselves. But if the remaining two coincided in such a way that one of them consisted of one half-foot, and the other of five, they would be united by this law, according to which one can be combined with all numbers, and in total they would give six, which is also equal to three and three. Now, since two and four are discovered, they will also give a six-fold sum, but no law of equality would force two as much as four, when here they seem to be combined by necessity. If no one tells you, it is certain that it is enough to obey the rule of equality so that three and three, like two and four, form six. И не считаю, что такую мысль надо прогонять, ибо и в этом есть некая равность. But it is absolutely nothing that five and three half-foot correspond to greater agreement than five and seven. For even the name of this verse is not the same as those of those, and yet you see that not only do the combinations of one and three give the same amount as in two and two, but also the parts are in many ways more consonant when one and three are combined, for the sake of this friendship of one with all other numbers, than when two and four are combined, as in these verses. Or is there something you don't understand? Licensius: Everything is completely clear. But I don’t know, for some reason, it’s unpleasant for me that these six-fold verses, being more famous than other varieties, are even said to occupy a certain primacy in verse, while having less agreement in their members than those verses with a darker fame. The expression about the brighter and darker glory of different verses corresponds to the teaching of St. Dionysius the Areopagite about the lighter and darker glory of the heavenly powers depending on the hierarchy and even within the hierarchy itself. The correspondence between the hierarchy of verses, which St. Augustine speaks about further, and the hierarchy of heavenly powers - and the Church hierarchy - is quite obvious. Initiation into the church hierarchy occurs depending on a person’s deeds - those who have served well will earn a degree for themselves - according to the Apostle Paul. Thus, ordering one’s own life and bringing it into harmony with the Divine commandments seems to rebuild the human soul, changing its rank, and raising it in the hierarchy, making it a kind of more glorious and harmonious verse. Augustine: Be complacent, because I will show you such an agreement in them, which alone of all were honored to have, so that you can see that they are not unfairly preferred. But since we need to discuss this longer, although more pleasantly, we will leave this for the end, so that when we have talked enough, as it seems to us, about other things, having already freed ourselves from all worries, we move on to the depth of what we need to explore Licensius: I agree with that. But I already want it to be clarified what we started with, so that I can easily hear the rest. Augustine: Compared to what we have already discussed, this will be more pleasant than you expect. Chapter 9. About the eightfold feet Augustine: So, think now whether the equality required of a verse is revealed in two terms, of which the first would have six half-steps, the other seven. Indeed, after five and seven half-stops, this obviously needs to be discussed. An example of this: Roma, cerne quanta sit deum benignitas (MARIO VITTORINO, Ars gramm., in G.L. 52, 34.) Licencius: I see that the first term can be divided into two parts, which would have three half-stops, while the second - three and four. Why are six half feet connected equal, but three and four are seven, and the number is not equal to them. But if we consider that the part with four half-foot is divisible into two and two, and the parts with three - into two and one, we will count, combining the parts with two we get a total of four, while connecting those where there are two in one, one in the other, we will accept as if they also give four, for the sake of the agreement of one with other numbers. And together there will be eight, which exceeds the sixfold sum even more than when there were seven. Августин: Так и есть, как ты говоришь. And therefore, when this kind of combination is separated from the law of verses, pay attention that the order already rules about those members that the first has eight half-foots, and the second has seven. This combination has what we are looking for. Indeed, connecting the first part of the first term part with the larger part of the last, the division of which is closer, then since both have four half-stops, I get a total of eight. Остается, значит, четыре полустопы в первом, три же – в последнем члене. Соединив две там и две здесь – будет четыре. There remain again two - there, and one - here, which, according to the law of coincidence, since the remaining part is one, are in some way summed up instead of four. И так уже своей общей восьмеричностью соответствуют первой восьмеричности. Licencius: But why have I not heard an example of such a verse? Августин: Потому что редко вспоминается. Однако чтобы ты не полагал, что в этом месте ты не думал об упущении, вот: Roma, Roma, cerne quanta sit deum benignitas, Optimus beatus ille qui procul negotio. Почему уже посмотри и на соединение девяти и семи полустоп, которого пример : Vir optimus beatus ille qui procul negotio. Licencius: His agreement is easier to understand: For the first member is divided into four and five, the last into three and four half-foots. Hence the smaller part of the former with the larger part of the latter when combined form the number eight. И большая часть первого с меньшей второго также восемь. Indeed, in that connection there are four and four, in this there are five and three half-foots. From which it follows that if five is divided into two and three half-foots, and three into two and one, if divided, there is a different coincidence of two with two and one with three, why one is combined with other numbers according to the above-mentioned law. But if my mind serves me correctly, there is nothing more left for us to explore in the combination of feet. For we have already reached eight feet, which number verses are not allowed to exceed, as we have learned enough. Why am I already asking you to reveal the secret of those sixfold verses, heroic and iambic and tracheic, to which you both attracted and delighted my attention. Chapter 10. On the deep harmony of sixfold verses Augustine: I will do so. No, this will be done by the mind itself, which you and I have in common. But I ask - don’t you remember what we said when we discussed the meter - and the feeling itself confirmed to us that those feet whose parts are sesquetornous (that is, differ by one), or two and three, like the cretus or paeons, or three and four, like the epitrites, are excluded by poets for the sake of less beauty of sound, leaving them as more suitable for decorating the severity of prose, when they seem to tie the conclusion? Licensius: I remember, but what follows from this? Augustine: The first thing I want us to understand is that in the feet of this kind, separated according to the teaching of the poets, nothing remains except those that correspond to the same (i.e. one to one) like spondium 2–2, or those that correspond to two (i.e. one to two), or those that correspond to both parts, like choriamb 21–12. Augustine: But if this is material for poets and attached to eloquence is hostile to poetry, then there is no verse except those that are composed of this kind of feet. Licenses: I agree. For I see that great poems are written in verses other than lyric verse, but for what reason I do not know. Those. The harmony of great and large-scale affairs, although it is built on the same principle as the harmony of small affairs, however, has different rhythmic forms. Augustine: Don't rush. We are already discussing the superiority of the sixfold verses, and the first thing I want to show you, if I can, is that there are no more suitable in the sixfold verses than these most famous ones, of which one is heroic which is measured by spondium 2–2 and dactyl 2–11, and according to the most precise reason – by spondium 2–2 and anapest 1–2-1. The other is called iambic and in the same sense is trocheal. Indeed, I think that it is obvious to you that if short syllables are not inserted, then the space of sound is in some way affected by long syllables. Also, if the short ones are not diluted by the long ones, they become cut off and seem to tremble, and in no case are they fused, at least they please the ears with the equality of time. For the same reason, uniform rhythmic structures such as bridge supports parallel to the horizon plane in painting are considered a gross mistake in composition. For some reason, those verses that have six pyrrhicians or six proceleumatics do not reach the dignity of the heroic, nor those that have six tribrachians - the trocheic. This also includes why in these verses, which reason itself prefers to all others, that if its members are connected in a different way, changing places, then we will have to measure the entire verse with different feet. So they are more irreversible - I will call it that - than those that consist of either all short or all long syllables. And therefore, in this alloy of members, either five and seven half-stops or seven and five are ordered - and there is nothing between them. For in no way can a verse turn over in them without such a connection that it will already flow in different steps. In the same cases, if the beginning of the song is verses in which the first members would have five half-foots, it is not appropriate for them to be mixed with those in which the first members have seven half-foots, for this led to the need to turn everything around. Because any permutation does not cause the connection of the feet.. But, however, heroic poems very rarely allow the insertion of spondiums, which is practically not used in our recent times. Trocheic or iambic, when it allows you to insert a foot in some place, however, in songs of this kind it has resolution in all short syllables, which is considered the dumbest. Because it returns again to uniform rhythmic structures a la all pyrrhic. Consequently, when the feet of epitritus are removed from the law of sixfold feet, not only because they are more suitable for eloquence, but also because if there are six of them, they will exceed thirty-two times, just like dispondium. When we remove the feet of the five times, because they too are freer and more captivated by rhetoric, the Molossus and other feet of the six times, although they would flourish most charmingly in the poem, are excluded from this number of times, which we are now discussing. What remains are the verses of all short syllables that either have pyrrhic 1–1, or proceleumatic 11–11, or tribrach 1–1–1. And all the long ones - which consist of spondees2-2. Which, although they are classified as a hexadecimal measure, differ in value and ability to be fused from those that consist of short and long syllables, and therefore from those that can be rearranged much less, are removed as necessary. Chapter 11. On the dignity of poems with anapest But one may ask: Why is it considered that the best verses are the six-fold ones, in which, upon subtle examination, the anapest 1-2-1 is measured, and those in which the trochae are found, than if dactyl or iambic were found there. This is an inference without prejudice, since we are now starting from numbers. If the verse is like this: “Troiae qui primus ab oris arma virumque cano or this kind: Qui procul malo pius beatus ille”, and both of them do not lose their hexadecimality, they do not lack an alloy of long and short syllables, and cannot be rearranged, and in both of them the members are so ordered that the parts of speech are distinguished in the fifth and seventh half-foot. Why then is it considered that they are better in this form: Beatus ille qui procul pius malo? I would answer this question more easily and more clearly, that it probably happened that they were the first to attract attention and are remembered more often, or if this is not by chance, I think that it looks better when a heroic verse ends with two long syllables than with two short and long ones, since the ears are more comfortable in long syllables. The same second verse in the last half-foot would preferably have a long syllable rather than a short one. The question is that whichever of them would be elected first would, of necessity, take away from the other the place that he could occupy for his structure. For what reason, if the best is considered the one whose example It would be foolish to transform it into another genus, such as Troiae qui primus ab oris, arma virumque cano. The same should be thought about the trocheal species. Indeed, if "Beatus ille qui procul negotio" 6 is more revered - ΗORAZIO, Epod. 2, 1., who would prefer such a gender as Qui procul negotio beatus ille. Which is completely inappropriate to happen. However, if someone heard and created such verses, it is obvious that he would have created other types of sixfold verses, of which these are better. They, therefore, the most beautiful of all sixfold, could not both maintain their integrity against the opinions of people. Indeed, in the trocheic gender, not only in the sixfold gender, but starting from the smallest even to the maximum magnitude, which has eight feet, the poets have established that it is possible to mix all the feet of the four tenses that fit the number. And the Greeks also combine feet longer than those mentioned, then in the first and third places and so on, if the verse begins from a half-foot, and if from a whole trochea, then in the second and fourth places, and so on, observing intervals. And in order for the distortion to become tolerable, not each foot should be divided by the beating of the beat into two parts, of which one is an ascent, and the second is set, but one foot is ascending - the other is supplied, whence it is called six-fold trimeter, and the beating of the beat returned to the division of epitrites. Those. In a regular verse of equal time, the foot is divided into two parts - an ascending beat and a descending beat. When feet of different times are mixed in, separating the feet themselves will not work that way, so the feet themselves are considered ascending and descending. And the meter becomes not six measures, each of which has half a foot of lowering and raising, but only three, where the foot rises, the foot falls three times. In relation to the symmetry of time, this means nothing more than what happened during the time of Joshua and King Hezekiah of the sun stopping and moving backward - i.e. and such incredible events that violate the general rule of symmetry also turn out to be decorous and melodic - at a higher level. But if it were at least constantly maintained, although the feet of epithrite relate more to eloquence than to poetry, then it would already turn out that this is not a six-fold verse, but a tertiary one, so that this equality of numbers would not be destroyed in any way. Nowadays, the feet of the four times, as many as are placed in the mentioned places, are no longer allowed not only to be placed in each verse, but where anyone wants them and how many they want. Our ancients could not even preserve the very intervals of places where there should be mixed feet of this kind. Therefore, in this kind of verses, both in the distortions themselves and in the correct legal composition, the poets followed, which should be awarded according to their desire, so that verses similar to those tied to eloquence would only be in fables. But having already said enough about why these six-fold verses are more noble, let us now look and see why the six-fold verses themselves are better than others composed in any other number of feet. Unless you have something against what we discussed. Licensius: On the contrary, I agree. And I really want to know about the equality of members that you promised me a little earlier, if this is now on the way. Chapter 12. On the quadratic harmony of heroic verse Augustine: So let it be so. So answer me, do you think that any longitude can be cut into as many parts as you like? Licensius: For me this is quite convincing. And I think that you can’t even doubt this, because every longitude, which is called a line, has its division into two parts, and through this it is also divided into two lines. And since these two lines themselves also have this division, each line doubles, and the same thing happens to them - quite obviously. So, no matter how short the length in any part, it can be cut. Here we are already talking about the reversal of harmony - not the minimal unit by the growth of numbers opens harmony, but the unit line opens numbers through dividing itself into parts - which has a direct relationship to music, since this is how musical intervals are constructed - through dividing a unit string into parts. Augustine: Fast and accurate. Why now consider whether it would seem right to you if I extended all longitude to latitude, which rises from it itself, so as to have the same value as the width of a square. For if the width follows less or more than the length of the line from which it comes, it will not be, and if not so, it will become nothing other than a square. Licencius: I understand and agree - for what is truer? Augustine: This will already follow, as I think you can see for yourself, that if instead of a line in length, ordered rows of counting stones are placed, will this length not reach the shape of a square otherwise, if not through the same number by which the counting stones will be multiplied, as for example, if you put two stones, you will not form a square until you add two more in width. If there are three, then six must be added, but at the same time divided into three parts so that there are two rows of similar ones in width, but if they are added to the length, no figure will be formed. For a figure cannot be formed without longitude. The same proportion should be used to think about other numbers, for just as two doubled and three tripled form the figure of a square, so four are quadrupled, five are quadrupled, six are sixfold, and in the same way in others there is no limitation. Licensius: It is also reasonable and obvious. Augustine: Pay attention now to whether time has any length. Licencius: Who doubts that there is no time without any length? Augustine: What? Can there be a verse if it does not hold any length of time? Licensius: On the contrary, it is necessary to hold. Augustine: What should we put in this length instead of pebbles? Are they feet, which are necessarily divided into two parts, or is it better to have half-foots themselves, which occur in one lift or set? Licensius: I think that half-stops are more suitable instead of pebbles. Augustine: Let's move on. Now remind me of the short member of heroic verse, how many half-stops does it have? Augustine: Give me an example. License: Arma virumque cano. Augustine: What else do you want, if not for the other seven half-feet to coincide with these five feet in some kind of equality? Augustine: What? Couldn't seven half-steps sing a certain verse by themselves? Licence: Indeed they can. Indeed, the first half-stop and the minimum verse, counted with the final silence, have the same number. Augustine: You're right. But how can this verse be divided into two terms? Licencius: I think four and three half-stops. Augustine: So lead these parts one at a time to the law of the square, and see what forms four times four. Augustine: What three times three? Augustine: How much is the total? Augustine: Consequently, seven half-foot, since they can have two terms, each term in relation to the squares, form the number twenty-five, and this is one part of the heroic verse. Augustine: In this case, the other part, which has five half-steps, since it cannot be divided into two terms, and must be harmonized by some kind of equality, should not it be brought into the square as a whole? The point is that, according to the first superficial rules and norms, what is incompatible and inharmonious with each other turns out to be much more harmonious and appropriate at deeper levels of interaction and combination of parts. This is important not only for understanding music, poetry, harmony, etc. but also to understand why submission to God’s Providence is appropriate, despite the fact that at a superficial glance what is happening seems sorrowful, dissonant, sudden and even meaningless. Human desires and expectations are like simple harmonic and melodic connections, which, although they do exist, are completely different from the deeper internal connections available to, say, angels. An example of which is the unconditional superiority of angelic singing over anything that a person can ever come up with. The depth of Providence is infinite in its power, having only the limitation of contemplation in the finitude of the contemplator himself. Therefore, the Providence of God is verses that fill and permeate the universe, written in meters completely incomprehensible to people, connected by deep harmonic connections that are completely incomprehensible to the human mind. The only thing that is comprehensible about them is a certain accessibility of their beauty, the greater, the deeper and the more melodic, the purer and more modest the eye of the mind looking at them. Among the many-eyed cherubim, nature itself is intended for continuous contemplation of these incomprehensible beauties and harmony, justice and mercy of God’s destinies, the unfolding of which before these minds causes them to seem to have involuntary and inevitable exclamations of “Holy! Holy! Holy is the Lord God of hosts!”, and day and night have no rest, because day and night the most harmonious events of Providence are continuously taking place and are revealed with ever new depth for contemplatives. Licencius: I can’t think of anything else, and I already understand such a wonderful equality. For five multiplied by five equals twenty-five. And therefore, these verses are not undeservedly more remarkable and famous than other sixfold verses, for it is difficult to say how much and what kind of equality would lie between them in unequal terms. Chapter 13. Conclusion. On the cyclical nature of poetry Augustine: Therefore, you were not disappointed by my promise? Or better yet, the very reason that we both followed did not disappoint us. Therefore, since we already need to somehow end this conversation, you can probably discern that if the meters were innumerable, the verse also could not exist if, composed of two terms, it limited itself either from the same number of half-stops, but not reversible, as in: Maecenas atavis edite regibus, or an unequal number of half-stops, but also connected by some kind of equality, as there would be four and three, or five and three, or five and seven, or six and seven, or eight and seven, or seven and nine. For from a complete foot a trocheal verse of the type Optimus beatus ille qui procul negotio can be arranged in verse and incompletely, like: Vir optimus beatus ille qui procul negotio It is by no means possible to limit oneself to anything other than incomplete. But these incomplete feet, or whole half-foots, must have, like the one I have now placed, or a foot divided less than in half, as in that choriambic with the last two short syllables: Maecenas atavis edite regibus, Either divided more than in half, as in his chapter, the first two long syllables, or at the end of another choriambic bacchi, of which there is an example: Te domus Evandri, te sedes celsa Latini 7 – ENNIO, Ann. fr. inc. sedis. So, all these incomplete stops are called half stops. Nowadays, not only are poems written in such verses, in which one kind is retained, as are the verses of epic poets, or even comic ones, but lyrical poets also write cyclic ones, which in Greek are called periods περιοδοι, not only by those meters that are not governed by the law of verse, but also by verses. Indeed, this verse of Flaccus (Horace): Nox erat, et coelo fulgebat luna sereno 8 – ORAZIO, Epod. 15, 1–2. The couplet is looped and consists of verses. In which two verses cannot coincide with themselves unless they both refer to the feet of sixfold times. Indeed, the measure of heroic verse is not in harmony with the measure of iambic or trochaic verse, because those feet are divided into the same number of parts, and these into double ones. Consequently, both will be fixated either with any meter that is not verse, like those discussed above when we talked about the meters themselves, or only with the verses that are now being talked about, or with both verses and fused meters, which is what this is: Diffugere nives, redeunt iam gramina campis, 9 – ORAZIO, Odi 4, 7, 1–2. Whatever the order of placing a verse with other meters, or larger terms with smaller ones, nothing interferes with the pleasure of the ear, as long as it is not shorter than a cycle and more than four terms are looped. But already, you don’t have any objection, let there be an end to this reasoning, so that next time we can wisely, as far as we can, move on to that part of music that belongs to the number of times, from those traces of it that can be felt, to the bed itself, where it is alien to any corporeality. Chapter 1. About the height of divine harmony Augustine: We spent quite a long time and even quite childishly in five books, following the traces of numbers in the duration of time. This playfulness of ours will certainly be excused by a well-disposed person for the sake of labor who has performed his service. We believed that it should be undertaken for no other reason, so that young people or people of any age to whom God has given a good mind, not hastily, but as if by certain steps, from sensory sensations and carnal letters, are raised by the guidance of reason to that which is not easy to grasp, to grasp with the unchangeable truth of love the One God and Lord of all things, Who stands before the minds of men without any intermediate intervention of any nature. There is no contradiction here with St. Dionysius the Areopagite, who teaches that in the hierarchy lower beings receive Divine knowledge - purification, enlightenment and sanctification through the higher ones, and not a contradiction with St. Gregory Palamas, who teaches that all creation, including the highest heavenly powers themselves, receives all Divine gifts through the Only Heavenly Door - the Blessed Virgin. The book of St. Augustine is precisely this enlightenment of the lower ones - the readers, through the higher ones - Blessed Augustine, as a bishop and theologian, i.e. action of hierarchy. But receiving enlightenment through the hierarchy, the spirit cleaves with love to God Himself directly. Hierarchy produces a kind of “closure” of the spirit to God, just as someone would bring a blind kitten to its mother’s teats. The blind kitten himself could not find them and would die of hunger, but he himself feeds directly from the mother, and not from the one who brought him. Therefore, even the greatest sinner, upon conversion, is united directly with God, as David says, “Unto You alone have I sinned and done evil before You,” and the wicked Ahab, who cried after receiving the sentence, immediately received consolation through the prophet that God saw his tears - but learned about it through the prophet. So God Himself saw the tears of Hezekiah, and God Himself gave him life, but St. Hezekiah received enlightenment and consolation and purification through the hierarchy - i.e. Prophet Isaiah. And those who read these books will find that we are friends of both poets and grammarians, not because of election, but because of necessity to go. When he reaches this book, if, as I hope and sincerely pray, our God and Lord directs our intention and will, moves on to what is tense and intense, then he will understand what expensive acquisition comes from the cheap path. Therefore, we, not being particularly strong ourselves, preferred to travel this path with weak minds, rather than constantly fall with small wings in the freest air. Thus, the judge will accuse us of nothing or of little, if only he is one of the spiritual men. Indeed, if external crowds from the schools of the stupidest languages ​​accidentally stumble upon these books, carrying thunderous applause of vulgar joy, they will either reject everyone, or decide that they have had enough of those five books. This same book, in which is the fruit of those, will either be discarded as unnecessary, or put aside as superfluous. The rest, who have not been taught these most necessary things, if they have been imbued with the purity of the Christian sacraments, shining with the highest love for the One and True God, having flown through everything childish, I beg in a brotherly manner - so that they do not descend again to him (i.e. children), and when they begin to work here, mourning their stiffness, not knowing that having worked hard on the way and tired their legs, they can fly over the incomprehensible, screaming at themselves. Those. Christians may not understand stops, moras, numbers and arithmetic, but through prayer and good living they will reach their destination much faster, i.e. in the realm of Divine order and serene order in blissful peace than those who go thinking about numbers and music. But Blessed Augustine chose to take the second path in order to show the weak (i.e., those weak in faith) that their favorite numbers, laws and beauties of poetry have One Source - God. If those who read, due to weakness or lack of training, cannot pass through these steps, and do not have any wings of piety with which they could fly over the incomprehensible, let them not absorb incomprehensible conversations into themselves, but grow their wings with the commandments of the most saving religion in the nest of Christ’s faith, by which wings they are carried, they will avoid the labor and dust of this road, spurred on more by love for the fatherland itself than for the tortuous ones ways to him. For this is written for those who are trained in worldly literacy and are entangled in great errors, and good talent is wasted on nonsense, not knowing what they love in it. If we paid attention to this, we would see how to avoid these snares, and where the most beautiful and safe place is. Chapter 2. About the first and second spheres of harmony Augustine: So, my friend and interlocutor, if you wish, answer me now, so that we can move from the corporeal to the incorporeal: when we recite the verse “Deus creator omnium” (Initial words of the spiritual hymn of Ambrose of Milan) - those four iambs of which it consists, where do you think its twelve times are located - either only in the audible sound, or also in the sense of the listener, which relates to the ears, or also in the action of the speaker, or, finally, since this is a well-known verse, also in our memory, where should we recognize the existence of this number “twelve”? Licensius: In all of this, I suppose. Augustine: And nowhere else? Licencius: I don’t see what else would remain, except some inner and higher force that would produce them. Augustine: I’m not asking about something that needs to be guessed at. Therefore, if these four species appear to you in such a way that you do not see any other species that is equally obvious, let us distinguish them from each other and see whether each of them separately can exist without the others. After all, it seems to me that you cannot deny that in some place there can be a sound that vibrates the air with the same degrees and measures - whether due to the fall of a drop or some other impact of bodies - where there is no one to hear it. If this is so, since the sound itself has these numbers, is there any other of the four kinds of numbers there than the first? Licensius: I don’t see that there was any other one. Here St. Augustine raises one important topic - do numbers exist without a counting person, i.e. without reason? Augustine: . And what is the second type of numbers, which is in the sensation of the hearer? Can it exist if nothing sounds? I do not ask whether the ears have the ability to perceive when something sounds - for the absence of sound does not cause concern; after all, even in the absence of sound they differ from the deaf. The second important question is: does sound exist without a hearer? After all, the movement of air, which consists of a change in pressure, exists, but is it sound if there is no one who hears? I ask: do the ears have these numbers when nothing sounds? After all, it is one thing to have numbers, and another to hear a numerical sound. The reverse question to the previous one, together with which they form a single whole. Indeed: if you touch a sensitive place of the body with your finger, then with each touch, thanks to the sense of touch, a number will be felt, and as soon as it is felt, the one who feels it is not deprived of it; However, if there is no touch, whether there is not a faculty of sensation, but a number present in the sentient, the question is raised about this. Licencius: It is not easy for me to admit that the sensory faculty is deprived of such numbers that are in it, even when something has not yet sounded. After all, otherwise she would not have rejoiced at their agreement and would not have been unpleasantly surprised by their incoherence. In other words, the very thing by which we, based not on reason, but on nature, approve or dislike when something sounds, I call the number of that sentient faculty. After all, this ability of approval and disapproval does not arise in my ears when I hear a sound, since the ears are equally affected by both good and bad sounds. Augustine: Try to keep these two things minimally mixed. If the same verse is pronounced sometimes faster, sometimes longer, it necessarily takes more than the same period of time, although the ratio of the feet is preserved. If he in itself delights our ears, then this is done by the same power, thanks to which we accept the consonant and reject the absurd. The shortness of time felt in the difference between fast and long verse exists only as long as the sound affects the ears. Another important aspect is that numbers do not exist in phenomena in themselves, but in their relationships with each other. And this is true, since numbers are a measure of quantity and order, and both presuppose the existence of an interacting set. Below, the saint says that numbers themselves are born from one through love. Accordingly, numbers determine the interaction of many with each other, and without such interaction they do not exist. In other words, the numerical measures of a short and long syllable are produced by the love of the short for the long and the long for the short and their combination with the love of the hearer. Consequently, when sound affects the ears, their state cannot in any way be the same as what happens when sound does not affect the ears. After all, “hearing” and “not hearing” differ in the same way as “hearing this voice” and “hearing another” differ. So, this state does not extend beyond the limits of a given sound and does not contract within these limits, for it is a measure of the very sound that causes it. The measure, therefore, is different in iambic, and different in tribrachy; more drawn-out - in a more drawn-out iambic, shorter - in a shorter one, and none at all - with silence. And since this state is generated by numbers in the voice, it itself must be numerical. And it cannot exist without the presence of a sound producing it, since it is like a trace imprinted in water - such a trace is not formed before you apply a given body, and it is not preserved if you take away this body. Here we must remember that when St. Cyril and Methodius were offered to create a Slavic alphabet, they strenuously refused, saying that such an idea should be called “air-headed,” i.e. stupidity, because it’s the same as writing on water. St. Augustine reveals these deep words, showing what the difficulty is - the difficulty in creating this very measure, depicted by a letter, so that it clearly correlates with sound. The letter is a kind of soul or meaning of the pronounced sound. In the same way, hieroglyphic calligraphy is connected with ikebana - the hieroglyph is the trace, meaning, soul of words, and the objects themselves, which is written on water - i.e. on the consciousness poured into the form of a leaf while looking at how flowers are placed in water. On the contrary, that natural - so to speak, judging - ability present in the ears does not cease to exist in silence, and it is not sound that instills it in us, but rather it is perceived by it, approved or disapproved. That is why, if I am not mistaken, it is necessary to distinguish between these two things, recognizing that the numbers located in the indicated faculty of the ears are brought in by sound and taken away by silence. The silence of silence plays the role of water that cleanses and washes everything. Thus, silence and silence cleanse the soul and consciousness from the numbers of perception applied to it. Therefore, the holy ascetics moved away from noise and the world, and even physical noise, they loved silence above all else to such an extent that St. Arseny the Great considered the rustling of the reeds in the wind an unbearable violation, and the Monk Daniel of Skete composed all asceticism in silence and non-covetousness. Hence the conclusion is that the numbers that are in the sound itself can exist without those that are in the hearing faculty, while these latter cannot exist without the former. So, the first sphere of harmony is the relationship-love of creation among themselves, expressed in a combination of order and quantity and perceived by consciousness as a relationship of numbers. The second sphere of harmony is the ability within a person to recognize and recognize the first sphere of harmony. Chapter 3. The third and fourth spheres of harmony Augustine: Pay attention also to that third kind of numbers, which is in the very use and in the action of the utterer, and see whether such numbers can exist without those that exist in memory. After all, silently, to ourselves, we can generate certain numbers in our thoughts at the same time intervals in which they are generated by voice. These numbers are evidently involved in some action of the soul; Since this third type of numbers does not produce any sound externally and does not affect the ears, it is clear that this type of numbers can exist without the first two, one of which is in the sound, and the other in the hearer when he hears it. But whether this type of numbers exists without the assistance of memory, we pose the question about this. However, if the numbers that we find in the beats of the pulse are generated by the soul, the question has already been resolved; after all, it is clear that they exist in action, and memory has nothing to do with it. If in this case there is doubt whether the indicated numbers are really the creation of the active soul, then, of course, there is no longer any doubt about those that we generate with sighs - they are numbers for intervals of time, and the soul produces them in such a way that they are capable of varying in a variety of ways depending on our will, and at the same time do not require the assistance of memory for their implementation. Licencius: It seems to me that this type of numbers can exist without these other three. Although I have no doubt that, depending on the constitution, various pulse beats and also breathing intervals can be obtained, nevertheless, who will dare to deny that they occur as a result of the action of the soul? Even though, depending on the difference in bodies, the movement was faster for some and slower for others, it is nothing without the presence of an active soul. The third sphere of harmony is located in the depths of the human soul and is capable of itself producing numerical relations of quantity and order - i.e. form love in objects. Augustine: Consider, therefore, the fourth type, that is, those numbers that are in memory: after all, if we bring them to light through memory, and having indulged in other thoughts, we again leave them, as it were, in their innermost hiding places, it seems to me that it is no secret that they can exist without others. Licencius: I have no doubt that they exist without others; however, if they were not heard, they could not be transmitted to memory, and therefore, although they are preserved when they disappear, they are imprinted in memory due to the fact that they precede them. Chapter 4. The fifth sphere of harmony Augustine: I have no objection to you and would be ready to ask you which of these four types you consider to be ahead of all, if I had not noticed that during our conversation, I don’t know where we got another fifth type of numbers, which consists in the natural judgment of the sensory faculty - when we are pleased by the equality of numbers and offended by its violation. For I do not reject what you saw, that our feeling without some numbers inside it would in no way be able to act. Or do you think that such great power belongs to one of these four types? Licencius: I believe that this fifth species must be distinguished from all others. Thus, there is one thing - the sound that is bestowed by the body, the other is hearing, which the soul experiences in the body under the influence of sounds, third - the generation of numbers longer or shorter, fifth - judgment about all of them, as if according to some natural law. Augustine: Now tell me: which of the five species comes first? Licensius: I think the fifth one. Here St. Augustine reveals a certain cruciformity even of the soul itself, speaking below about the correspondence of the five senses. The four types of numbers are connected at the center - the internal judging ability. Of the senses themselves, vision seems to be the most important for the others, because having heard something, or felt or smelled, we immediately direct our eyes there, and judge the object with our eyes. Augustine: You think correctly: after all, this species could not judge others if it did not occupy first place. But then I will ask further, which of the other four do you approve of most? Licencius: Of course, the one that lies in memory, for I see that there numbers are more durable than those that sound, are heard or are created in action. Augustine: You place, therefore, created numbers above creative ones, for you recently said that numbers in memory are imprinted in it by other numbers. Licensius: I would not like to rank them higher. But at the same time, I don’t see how one can not rank the more durable over the less durable. Augustine: Don't let that bother you. After all, what is not destroyed for a longer time should not be preferred to what is destroyed in a shorter time, as is done in relation to the eternal and temporary. Indeed: health that lasts one day is, of course, better than illness that lasts many days. And if we compare what is desirable, then one day of reading is better than many days of writing, because one and the same thing is read in a day, but written over many days. Likewise, the numbers that are in memory, although they remain longer than those through which they are imprinted, should not be placed higher than those that we ourselves generate - not in the body, but in the soul. Both pass: some by stopping, others by being forgotten. Those that we ourselves create, even when we have not yet ceased our activity, are abolished by the sequence of those that follow them: the first, disappearing, give way to the second, the second to the third, and so on, the preceding to the subsequent, until, finally, the cessation of the activity itself destroys the latter. When forgotten, many numbers are erased from memory immediately, albeit gradually; for they do not remain unharmed for long. For example, to say that what does not remain in memory after a year is already diminished after a year, although such diminishment is not felt. And it is not without reason that they conclude from this: since no earlier than a year later the whole disappears, this serves as an indication that the disappearance begins from the very moment when this whole is imprinted in memory. Hence the often repeated expression - “tenuite memini” (“vaguely remember”) - when we repeat something after a certain time, remembering it before the whole has completely slipped from our memory. That is why both types of numbers are mortal. Nevertheless, the creative numbers are rightfully placed above the created ones. Licence: I agree and approve. Augustine: It now remains to consider the other three types of numbers and find out which of them is the best, which should be preferred to the others. This order is not a sign of a linear relationship, but rather a temporary order. The four points of the sign of the cross are not a straight line, but in time they are performed in a strict order, which partly corresponds to the four kinds of numbers of St. Augustine Licensius: It's not easy. After all, if we adhere to the rule that creating numbers should be placed before those being created, I am forced to give the palm to the sounding numbers, for we feel them by hearing them, and by feeling them, we experience their influence. Therefore, they create those numbers that are in the faculty of hearing when we hear them, and, in turn, the numbers that we have in sensation create others that are in memory; in comparison with these created by them, they are rightly given preference. But here, since both sensation and memory belong to the soul, it does not bother me that one, which is in the soul, can be preferred to the other, which is in the soul. Another thing that confuses me is how can sound numbers, which are obviously corporeal or somehow exist in the body, be valued higher than those that are in the soul when we sense. And further, it is difficult for me why they should not be valued higher, since they create, and they are created by them. Augustine: What is more surprising is that the body is able to produce something in the soul. Perhaps it would not have been able to produce this if, under the influence of the first sin, the body, which the soul animated and directed without any fatigue and with the greatest ease, had not changed for the worse, falling into corruption and death, although it has the beauty of its kind and thereby sufficiently proclaims the dignity of the soul, where neither sorrow nor illness remains without the deserved honor of some beauty. And the supreme Wisdom of God deigned to lift this wound through the most amazing and inexpressible sacrament, when He took upon Himself a man without sin, but not without the condition of sinners, for He wished to be born, suffer and die according to human nature. Nothing - for the sake of their merits, but with the most excellent goodness, so that we would rather beware of the pride to which we completely deservedly fell into our condition, than the humiliation which He undeservedly accepted, and so that with a calm soul we would repay our debt to death, since He, without being owed, was able to endure it for our sake (explanations of everything more hidden and deep in this sacrament can be found in saints and better teachers than I). Therefore it is not surprising that the soul, acting in mortal flesh, should feel bodily influences. Therefore, it is not surprising if the soul, acting in a mortal body, experiences influences from bodies. And one should not think that since it is better than the body, everything that happens in it is better than what happens in the body. After all, I think, in your opinion, truth should be preferred to lies? Licensius: Who doubts that? Augustine: And is the tree seen in a dream really true? Augustine: And yet its form is in the soul, while the form of the tree, which we actually see, originated in the body. That is why, even though the truth was better than a lie, and the soul was better than the body, nevertheless, the truth in the body was better than a lie in the soul. But it is better because there is truth, and not because it is in the body. Likewise, the false is worse because it is a lie, and not because it is in the soul. Do you have anything to say against this? Augustine: Listen to something else that is even closer to the point. You will not deny that what is proper is better than what is not. Licensius: I am convinced of it. Augustine: But clothing that is appropriate for a woman may not be appropriate for a man. Who will hesitate about this? Licensius: This is also obvious. Augustine: What if this form of numbers is proper in the sounds that reach the ears, and is improper in the soul when it senses them and is affected by them? Wouldn't that be quite surprising? Augustine: Why do we hesitate to prefer sonorous and bodily numbers to those that are obtained from them, although they arise in the soul, which is better than the body? After all, we prefer some numbers over others, the creator over the created, and not the body over the soul. After all, bodies are better the more they are permeated with these numbers. The soul, being deprived of the numbers that it receives from the body, becomes better, since it turns away from bodily sensations and is transformed by the divine numbers of wisdom. Here it is very important to make a distinction between the teaching of St. Augustine about the divine numbers of wisdom and the Kabbalistic about numbers as the focus of the pantheistic forces that govern the universe, including God. St. Augustine reveals the order and harmony of Divine Providence in the internal properties and relationships of numbers for humans. These are some external manifestations of order that correspond to the Divine care of Providence, but are not Him, and in themselves have no meaning or strength or meaning. Just as feet, meters and verses are some kind of “children’s toys” for understanding certain internal numbers, according to Blessed Augustine, so the numbers themselves are children’s toys for the human mind, in which it, through the mind of logic, cognizes the order and sequence of Providence and learns beauty and harmony, in which health and bliss consist. So the Holy Scripture says: “I have turned my heart to know, to search, and to seek wisdom and number” (Ecclesiastes 7:26). These words cannot at all be attributed to the numbers with which the disgrace of theaters is announced; they, as I am sure, must be attributed to those numbers that the soul does not receive from the body, but rather imprints on the body itself, having received from the Most High God. How this happens is not the place to discuss here. The numbers in the theater and in his treatise are the same in size, but different in meaning. Chapter 5. About feelings and health Nevertheless, in order for it not to happen that arboreal life turns out to be better than ours, because it does not accept numbers that need to be felt from the body (for it has no feelings), one must carefully consider whether “hearing” is really nothing more than receiving something from the body into the soul? But it would be complete madness to turn the soul into material for a craftsman body. Isn't the soul more valuable than the body? And in every way the craftsman is more valuable than the material. Therefore, in no way is the soul given over as matter to the artisan body. But this would be so if the body acted on it by certain numbers. Consequently, when we hear, numbers from those that we recognize in sound are not produced in the soul. Or will you reject something? Licensius: What then happens in hearing? Augustine: Whatever it is, we most likely cannot explain it now, or even discover it. But will this really raise doubts that the soul is better than the body? Or if we admit this, could we, through the action of the body and the introduction of numbers, subordinate the soul to it, since it produces, and she is matter, from which and into which a certain number is produced? If we believe in this, we will necessarily believe that the soul is worse than the body. And who can come up with a more pitiful and despicable faith? And in this state of affairs, I will still try, as far as God deigns to judge, guess and discern what is in the depths. But if, due to the weakness of one or both of us, the result is less than we would like, then either we ourselves will explore it again in a more serene state, or we will leave what needs to be explored to more intelligent people, or with a calm heart we will leave it hidden. But for this reason we cannot let go of the more definite. Licencius: I will hold this without hesitation if I can, but I do not want the hidden to remain impenetrable to us. Augustine: I’ll say right away what I feel. You either follow me, or even go forward if you can, when you notice that I hesitate and hesitate. For I think that the soul cannot animate the body except by deliberate action. And I believe that he does not tolerate anything from him, but creates with him and in him, like a servant, subject to divine dominion. Sometimes, however, he acts with ease, sometimes with difficulty, as much as the greater or lesser dignity of his bodily nature gives him. Consequently, everything corporeal that is brought into this body or taken out is not in the soul, but in the body itself something happens that either resists or agrees with the action of the soul. And therefore, when it encounters hostility, and most difficultly pulls the matter under its control onto the path of its affairs, it attracts more attention because of the difficulty in action, which difficulty for the sake of attention, when it cannot be hidden, is called sorrow or labor. When the body agrees to what is being introduced, or is directed in the same direction, it easier to pave the way in its action. And this action of hers, which coincides with the bodily one, is directed outside the body, since it is moved to attention for the sake of something coming from outside, for the sake of coincidence it feels pleasure. And when that which renews the body’s needs is missing, then need will follow. And the difficulty of this action when it causes more attention, then such an action of the body is no longer hidden and is revealed as hunger and thirst. When more is added than required, their weight creates a difficulty in action, and this does not go unnoticed, and when such an action is no longer hidden, the heaviness is felt. We are talking about the suffering that is caused by both lack of food and overeating. Attention also acts when the overflow erupts - if gently, then with pleasure, if sharply - with pain. Also, painful confusion in the body is accompanied by attention, trying to help in dissolution and spreading, and when this action is not hidden, it is said to endure pain and suffering. And in order not to talk about this for a long time, it seems to me that when the soul feels in the body, it suffers from nothing other than the riveting of attention by its passions to action, and does not hide these actions, making them easy due to coincidence, or difficult due to discrepancy, and all this is called “feeling.” But this feeling, at a time when we feel nothing, is still inside us, its instrument is the body, which is fused with the soul so that, with attention to the suffering of the body, it is ready to act so that like joins like, and drives away what is harmful. Further, as I think, it produces a certain glow in the eyes, a certain purest and most mobile airiness in the ears, a certain evaporation in the nostrils, moisture in the lips, a certain earthiness in the touches, as if it were clay. In any case of connection - either in this or in another distribution, the soul then acts with silence if everything that is inside it moves in the unity of integrity, as if in family harmony. When something is attached to it, which, as I have already said, through otherness (i.e., another harmony, disharmony, for example, when a different melody is added) affects the body, causing actions of attention, in the appropriate places, like instruments. Then it is said that we see or hear or smell or taste or touch. By which actions, when there is agreement, one freely combines, and when there is disagreement, one is overcome by grief. I think that these actions of bodily passions manifest the soul when it feels, but it does not accept these passions. Therefore, when in the present the question is asked about the numbers of sound and the sense of the ears is announced in doubt, it is not appropriate to continue wandering through lengthy reasoning. So let us turn again to the subject of speech and see whether the sound does something in the ears. Or will you reject it? Licensius: I won’t reject anything. Augustine: What? Don't you agree that the ears are animate members of the body? Augustine: Therefore, when that which is like air in this member would be moved by the stress of air, that soul which in silence sprouted the body of the ear with the movement of life until this sound, do we believe that it can either stop from the work of movement with which it animates, or in the same way move the moved external air to its ears, which it moved before the sound penetrated inside? Licencius: Nothing appears but another movement. Augustine: Therefore, this “otherwise to move” should not be recognized as “produce” and not “endure”? Augustine: Therefore, it is not absurd to believe that a special movement of the soul, or an action or accomplishment, or any other more convenient name, can be designated, can, is not hidden, although it feels. These same actions are applied either to the previous sufferings of the body, as happens when those forms interrupt the light of our eyes, or sound flows into the ears, or smell enters the nostrils, tastes enter the palate, or the rest of the body has some solid and corporeal objects moved from the outside, or in the body itself something migrates or passes from place to place, or the whole body itself moves under its own weight of discomfort, all these are actions by which the soul clings to the previous passions of the body, who love the sympathetic soul and insult the resisting one. When something suffers from these actions, it suffers from itself, and not from the body. But she arranges herself smoothly to the body, and therefore less than herself, because the body is always less than she. When he turns away from his Lord to his servant, he necessarily loses. When he turns away from his slave to his Lord, he, of necessity, acquires and offers the same servant the easiest life, and for this, minimal labor and care, to which, for the sake of supreme peace, he is not tormented by any attention - as the normal state of the body is health. Then our soul does not pay any attention to the body, not because nothing is happening, but because there is nothing easier. Indeed, in all our affairs we pay attention to them as much as they are more difficult to accomplish. This same health will then be firmer and more certain, when this body will be restored to its former stability without a doubt in its time and in its order, which of its resurrection we already believe in savingly and fully understand. For it is fitting for the soul to both be subject to the Higher and to rule over the lower. Above it there is One God, below it there is only the body, if we mean every soul in general. And therefore, he cannot exist at all without the Lord, just as he cannot excel without a servant. And since her Lord is greater than she, so is her servant less. Why does one who strives towards the Lord know that she is eternal and higher than she thinks, and that through her her servant himself is higher in his kind. Rejecting the Lord and striving for a carnal servant, driven by lust, she sympathizes with the movement that shows him and decreases, although not as much as the servant himself, at least as much as possible, due to the height of nature. And the body itself, after seducing the mistress, becomes much smaller than it was, since she was larger before the seduction. For this reason, having become mortal and perishable, the body is already controlled with great difficulty and attention. This brings him into sin, that he values ​​the pleasure of the flesh, since it attracts attention to matter, than health itself, since it acts without attracting attention. And it is not surprising if he embraces hardship, since he prefers care to serenity. When he turns to the Lord, even greater care arises, so as not to be rejected, until he calms down from the impulse to bodily cares, curbing himself with daily habit, and sowing himself with restless memories of turning to Him, and with such calming movements that he withdraws from the external, produces the peace of inner freedom, which is designated by the Sabbath, and so recognizes that only God is its Lord, Who alone is in the highest serves freedom. These carnal movements can begin when he wants, but he cannot destroy them when he wants. For the punishment for sin is not in his power, as sin itself is. The truly great thing is the soul itself, and it no longer remains able to suppress its dissolute movements within itself. For she is healthier when she sins, and after sin, according to the Divine law, having become weaker, she is less able to bear what she has done. “I am a damned man: who will deliver me from the body of this death? I thank my God Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Rom.7:24-25). Consequently, the movement of the soul, which retains its aspiration and does not disappear, is called being in memory. And when the mind is directed to something else, it is as if the previous movement was not in the mind, and if it is not first destroyed, it is renewed in its likeness in some neighborhood. Those. movements of the mind produce in memory certain semblances of features that are destroyed over time if they are not renewed by similar movements. But I want to know if anything motivates you to be against it? Licencius: What you said seems plausible to me and I would not risk resisting. Augustine: Therefore, since well-being is the movement of the body against the movement that acts on it, don’t you conclude that we do not feel the cutting of bones, nails and hair, not because they do not have life in all of us, for, no different from other members, they continue to be, and feed, and grow, and show their strength in sowing their branches. What the blessed one said is identical to the modern teaching on feedback in automatic systems. But since they are permeated with air, that is, with the element of mobility, less freely than is necessary for the soul to cause a movement as rapid as that against which it is felt. And although we understand the same life in trees and other plants, in no way can we prefer it not only to our own, which is superior in intelligence, but also to the same animals. For there is another thing - to feel nothing from the highest hardness, and another - from perfect health. Indeed, there are no instruments that move against the suffering of the body, but here there is suffering itself. Licence: I approve and agree. Chapter 6. The order of types of numbers and their names Augustine: Return with me to the subject of our inquiry and answer; I'm talking about three types of numbers, of which one is in memory, the other is in what is to be felt, and the third is in sound. Which one do you think is superior? Licensius: I place sound lower than the other two, which are and seem to live in the soul. But regarding these last two species, which one is superior, I am not sure. Unless we admit that the numbers that are contained in the activity [of the soul] must be preferred to those that, as we said, are in memory, for some are creators, and others are created by them; on the same basis, the numbers that are in the soul while we hear the sound must be placed above those that are obtained from them in memory, as it has long seemed to me. Augustine: I do not consider your answer absurd, but since you were talking about the fact that those numbers that must be felt are the actions of the soul, I ask you how do you distinguish them from those numbers that we notice in the activity [of the soul], even when in silence, without being aware of the former, the soul generates something in accordance with numbers at certain intervals of time? Isn’t it true that the first are the numbers of the soul moving towards its body, and those that must be heard are the numbers of the soul’s movement contrary to the passions of its body? Licencius: I accept this distinction. Augustine: How? Do you think it is possible to remain of the opinion that those numbers that are towards the body are considered more excellent than those that move contrary to the passions of the body? Licencius: Those that exist in silence seem to me more noble than those that arise not only in connection with the body, but also in connection with the passive states of the body. Augustine: I see that we have distinguished five kinds of numbers and ordered them according to their degrees of dignity. Now, if you like, let’s give each one a suitable name, so that in the future we won’t have to use more words than the number of things. Augustine: Let the first numbers be called judgmental (judiciales), the second - moving forward (progressores), the third - moving towards (occursores), the fourth - contents in memory (recordabiles), the fifth - sounding (sonantes). These names and the essence of these numbers contain the image reproduced by the sign of the cross. Movement of the hand to the forehead - numbers contained in memory. Movement of the hand towards the belly - sounding (sensual) numbers. Movement of the hand to the right shoulder - moving forward. Movement of the hand to the left shoulder - moving towards. The fifths are the judging numbers - since they are hidden, they are not produced by touch, but are located in the center of the cross. Of course, this does not mean that the sign of the cross is performed for the sake of these numbers. The sign of the cross is an image of the Cross of Christ. But the Cross of Christ Himself, healing fallen human nature, without any doubt, in its form and action, corresponds to this nature, of which the mentioned saints are a part. Augustine numbers. Licenses: I remember and will use them freely. Chapter 7. Are judging numbers immortal? Augustine: Now be careful and tell me which of these numbers seem immortal to you. Or do you think that they all disappear and die in their own time? Licencius: I recognize only those who judge as immortal; the rest, as I see, either pass away as they arise, or are destroyed by oblivion in memory. Augustine: Are you sure of the immortality of the first, as well as of the frailty of the others? Or maybe we should try harder to find out if they really are immortal? Licensius: Of course, we need to find out. Augustine: So, tell me: when I pronounce a verse a little faster or longer, observing, however, the law of correspondence between simple and double feet, do I not offend the judgment of your sensation by some irregularity? Augustine: Does this mean that the sound produced by faster and fluent syllables can take longer than it sounds? Licence: How is this possible! Augustine: Therefore, if these judging numbers were held by the bridle of time within the same limits in which the sounding numbers were contained, could they lay claim to a judgment about those sounding numbers, which, despite their greater duration, are nevertheless based on the same iambic law? Augustine: Therefore, those numbers that play a primary role in judgment are not subject to the duration of time? Licenses: It is quite clear that no. Augustine: You're right. But if they do not obey, then, no matter how long the iambic sounds may be at the proper intervals, these numbers would still be applicable to them when judging them; meanwhile, if I uttered a syllable that lasted (I won’t take a larger value!) the same amount of time as it takes to take three steps, and then another syllable that lasted twice as long, and so on I built equally extended iambs, the law of simple and double foot would still be observed, but the natural judgment that was discussed would no longer be able to apply when estimating such quantities. Isn't it? Licensius: I cannot deny that it is so; because my point of view is clear. Augustine: Are these judging numbers, therefore, covered by some kind of temporary boundaries beyond which they cannot go, and they are not capable of judging everything that goes beyond these boundaries? And if they are covered, then I don’t see how they can be immortal. A similar phenomenon occurs in painting - a person can easily find the middle of a small segment or even a third with an inner sense of proportion, but if the segment exceeds the field of view, then it is no longer possible to find its middle. The same goes for management – ​​it’s easy to budget for a small amount, but as the amounts increase, the confusion increases dramatically. This occurs, as has already been said, not simply from the limitations of nature, but from the natural property of the human soul - love for the small and modest, so that the small is everywhere and always more akin to man than the grandiose. For the same reason, small animals and children evoke particularly touching feelings and emotions, while large animals even evoke fear. Licensius: And I don’t see what to answer. But although I am no longer so sure of their immortality, I still do not understand how their mortality is deduced from this. For it may happen that they are always able to judge any periods of time about which they can judge, since, unlike other numbers, I cannot say that they are erased by oblivion, or exist as long as sound exists, or extend as far as those numbers that are called occursores extend, or while they act, or as far as those numbers that we called progressores extend; after all, both of them disappear along with the time of their action, and these judging numbers, although I do not know whether they reside in the soul, however, probably reside in the very nature of man, ready to judge what is proposed, even if they change, starting from a certain brevity to a certain length, approving what is in accordance with the number and condemning what is inconsistent. Augustine: You, of course, admit that some people are more quickly offended by unstable numbers, others more slowly, and the majority can judge the bad only by comparing them with the perfect, having heard both those who agree and those who disagree. Augustine: Where do you think this difference comes from, if not from nature or exercise or both? Augustine: I ask, therefore, can it happen that one person is able to judge large periods of time, approving of them, and another is not? Licensius: I think it can happen. Augustine: Well, if someone who is not capable begins to practice and succeeds, then will he be able to? Licenses: . He can. Augustine: Can such people go so far as to evaluate even longer periods of time, hours, days, or even months or years, related to each other as 1:2, unless, of course, sleep interferes with them, that is, they comprehend them with the indicated judging ability and count them like iambs, beating time? Augustine: Why can't they, if not because every animate being in its own kind, in accordance with the universal proportion, is endowed with its own sense of place and time, so that if its body in comparison with the universe has such and such a size and forms such a part of it, then its durability in comparison with the world age is the same and forms the same part of it? St. Augustine speaks about the unity of space and time and their connection with human nature. Likewise the sentient faculty corresponds to its action, and the motion of the universe of which it is a part acts in corresponding proportion. So the world, containing everything, is great - in the divine scriptures it is often called heaven and earth; if all its parts decrease proportionally from such and such a value, or if they increase proportionally, it will nevertheless remain the same size, for not a single segment of space and time is large in itself, but is large in comparison with something smaller; and, conversely, nothing is small in itself, but in comparison with something greater. That is why, if human nature for actions in carnal life is endowed with such a sensing ability, which is not able to judge periods of time greater than that required for practical life, then since such a human nature is mortal, I believe that the sensing ability is mortal. It is not for nothing that habit is called a kind of second or artificially created nature. And when we judge things of this kind, we see as if some new sensory abilities acquired through habit and disappearing when another habit appears. Chapter 8. Other numbers are examined from the point of view of the numbers of judges Augustine: But whatever properties these judging numbers may have, they are certainly the reason why we doubt or find it difficult to find out whether they are mortal. About the other four species there is not even a question that they are mortal; even if the judging numbers do not cover some numbers that go beyond their jurisdiction, yet the very types of these numbers are subject to their investigation. After all, the numbers called progressors, when they strive for some numerically expressible action in the body, are modified under the hidden influence of the numbers of judges. In fact: what restrains us when walking from unequal steps, or when hammering from unequal intervals between blows, or when eating and drinking from uneven movements of the jaws, or, finally, when sculpting from unequal movements of the fingers - not to list numerous other actions - is what restrains us, forcing us, when intending to accomplish something through bodily members, to avoid unequal movements and silently instilling in us a certain equality is something judgmental, inspiring the thought of the Creator of a living being, God, who should be considered the cause of all correspondence and agreement. And the numbers, called counter numbers (occursores), which, of course, do not act on their own, but depending on the passive states of the body, they appear before the court of the judging numbers and are judged by them to the extent that the memory is capable of preserving their intervals. After all, the number that is contained in time intervals cannot be judged by us in any way unless memory helps us in this. Indeed: in any short syllable, since it both begins and ends, its beginning sounds at one time, and its end at another. Consequently, the syllable itself stretches over some small period of time and from its beginning through its middle goes to the end. Thus the mind discovers that both spatial and temporal intervals are capable of infinite division, and therefore in not a single syllable is the end heard along with its beginning. When hearing, therefore, even the shortest syllable, if memory did not come to our aid and if at that moment when not the beginning, but the end of the syllable sounds, this movement that arose when the very beginning sounded did not remain in the soul, we would not be able to say that we heard it. That is why, when very often we are busy with other thoughts, it seems to us that we did not hear those talking in our presence - not because the soul did not then generate numbers called occurrenceores, but because as a result of attention to another, the impulse of movement immediately fades away. When, over a longer period of time, a sound strikes that is not subdivided by any divisions, and another is combined with it, twice as large or of the same duration, then attention to the continuously following sound suppresses the movement of the soul that was obtained from attention to the past and disappearing sound when it stopped, that is, it does not remain in memory. That is why these judging numbers (with the exception of the numbers called progressores) cannot judge numbers contained in certain periods of time except if memory brings them up like a maidservant. But is it really necessary to believe that the judging numbers themselves extend over a certain period of time? However, there is a difference in what periods of time we forget or keep in memory what these numbers judge. After all, even in the physical forms themselves, visible to the eye, we cannot judge the round and the quadrangular, or any other definite volume, and generally cannot feel them without rotating them before our eyes; but if what is seen on one side is forgotten when they look at the other, then the intention of the beholder does not achieve the goal at all, for here too there is a certain duration of time, the change of which the memory must vigilantly monitor. Movement itself is memory. The starting point is the beginning of memory, the ending point is the preservation of memory. If the beginning is not in memory, the movement does not occur (for a person), even if its end is in memory. And the moment when attention remembers the movement is its beginning. So the beginning is the combination of three - attention, object and memory. The object is the brush, attention is the ink, memory is the board. The trace remains only when three of them are connected. In a similar way, the human soul, looking at the board (memory), paint and ink attracts attention, through this attention it forms in the soul the image of what is depicted. As for the numbers stored in memory, it is much more obvious that we judge them through the numbers of the judges, when memory itself brings them to judgment. After all, if numbers, called occurrenceores, are judged when they are proposed by memory, much more do those numbers turn out to be living in memory itself, to which, as if at rest, we return by memory after considering other objects. When a person looks at a certain object, then his memory - i.e. a board with inscribed numbers, combined with this image, returns like a certain sound - a certain tone of strings, which the image touches like a finger, and consciousness perceives these tones, comparing them with those already heard once and stored in other layers of memory, which are connected to each other, like leaves in a book. After all, what else do we do when we remember, if not in some way look for what we have put aside? Memory is turning over the pages of a book - not by reading the letters, but by the harmonies of sounds that these sheets produce according to the stones written on the pillars of voices. With a harmonious combination, memory occurs. With dissonance - no. Hence all the associative memorization techniques. Regarding something similar, a movement of the soul returns to consciousness, which has not completely died out, and this is what is called recollection. Over time, the pages of the book seem to become cleared, what is written fades and is erased, and the strings lose their tension over time. And remembering is a private consonance, something close, but quiet and uncertain. Thus we generate numbers either in thought alone, or in those movements of the members that we once generated. The very movements of our members are recorded on the sheets of the internal memory book and sound in consonances or dissonances. And we know that they did not come for the first time, but returned to thoughts, because when they are entrusted to memory, they are found with difficulty, and we need some kind of pre-instruction that we could follow: when this difficulty is overcome, the numbers themselves are properly revealed to the will, in accordance with their times and order - and with such ease that even when we think about something else, the more strongly imprinted ones are realized, as if of their own initiative, and we don't feel them as new. There is also something else why, it seems to me, we feel that the current movement of the soul has already happened once, that is, a memory is taking place: when we remember the recent movements of the action that we have now, they are, of course, more vivid if we compare them with more distant ones, recalled in the inner light, and such recognition is recognition and recollection. Consequently, these numbers, stored in memory, are judged by the same judging numbers, but never alone, but with the participation of the active ones, or those that are called occursores, or both, bringing them to light as if from their hiding places and remembering them again, as if restoring what had already been destroyed. Thus, if numbers called occursores are the subject of judgment to the extent that memory has brought them closer to judging numbers, then numbers stored in memory can be the subject of judgment through numbers called occurrenceores and revealing them, with the difference that for sensible numbers (occursores) it is necessary for memory to represent, as it were, fresh traces of these elusive numbers, and numbers stored in memory, when we judge them, hearing them, they restore, as if in their freshness, the same traces when numbers disappear, called occurrenceores. Why talk further about sounding numbers, since they are judged by means of felt numbers (occursores)? Who hears them? And if they sound where they are not heard, who will doubt that we cannot judge them? Of course, with the assistance of the same memory, on the basis of judging numbers, we judge both the sounds that reach us through the ears and the visible movements in dances. Chapter 9. About the numbers superior to those who judge Augustine: And since this is so, let's try, if we can, to go through the judging numbers and see if there are any larger ones. For although we do not see the space of time in them, they nevertheless join those who must be judged and occupy the space of time. Not all are like this, but those that can be articulated (i.e., differentiated) in the heart. Unless you have something to say against it. Licencius: I am impressed by the great strength and power of these judging numbers. For they seem to me to be related to the service of all the senses. Then I don’t know if it’s possible to find numbers superior to them. Augustine: It won’t be worse if we investigate it more carefully. Either we will find higher ones in a person’s soul, or we will confirm that these are the best in it, if only it is illuminated that no numbers in it obscure others. For it is one thing not to exist, and another thing to not be able to be found, either by us or by any people. But I believe that when the verse “Deus Creator Omnium” proposed by us is sung, we hear it by those counter (occursores) numbers, and recognize it by the remembered (recordabili) and is proclaimed progressive and pleasure is given by those who judge, and other unknowns are evaluated and about the pleasure itself they pronounce those judging numbers as if some kind of judgment, while other most mysterious numbers make a more definite opinion. Or does it seem to you that enjoying the feeling and judging with the mind are one and the same thing? Licensius: These are different things, definitely. But first of all, the title confuses me. Why is it better not to call those numbers in which reason is judging, rather than those in which there is pleasure? And hence I am afraid that this assessment of reason is only a more attentive judgment of themselves (the judging numbers) about themselves. That numbers in pleasure are not different, and numbers are different in reason, but the same ones judge those that act in the body, when, as demonstrated above, memory offers them. In a different way - about ourselves, more distant from the body and purer. Augustine: Don't worry about names. Because that's the point. They put into them what they want, not what is natural. As for the second, you just don’t want to accept two numbers. If I'm not mistaken, what holds you back is that they too are driven by the soul. But pay attention to the fact that in forward moving numbers (progressive) the same soul moves the body and moves the body, and in counter (occursive) it goes towards in passions, and in remembered ones, until they disappear somehow, as if it itself flows in movements. In all this, which must be countable and distinguishable, we create a single nature, that is, the movement and actions of the soul. Why, if one thing is to endure movement from the body, which becomes a feeling, another thing is to move oneself towards the body, which becomes movement, another thing is that from the very movements in the soul it took place and continues, another thing is to remember, another thing is to approve, another thing is to reject these movements, either when they are first discovered, or when they are perceived by memory, which corresponds in the delight of the coincidence of such actions and in the insult of the absurdity. And another thing is to make a judgment about whether they delight in goodness, which is done by reason. It is necessary for us to understand - do these two genera exist as much as those three? And if it seems to us correctly, if the feeling of pleasure itself were not permeated by some numbers, it could in no way approve of equal intervals and reject confusion. The reason clearly appears why we could not judge this imposed pleasure in any way without some even more life-giving numbers located within ourselves. If this is true, then it already turns out that five kinds of numbers are found in the soul, to which if you add bodily ones, which we call sounding, you will know six kinds of numbers, ordered in a hierarchy. Now, if you like, we will call those who seemed to us to occupy the first place sensual (sensuales), and the name of judges, as the most honorable, is accepted by those who are open as the highest. This new most honorable rank of internal numbers, since it comes directly from God, obviously corresponds to the bow in the sign of the cross I also believe that the name of the sounding ones should be changed, since if they are called bodily, it will more obviously indicate that they are present in dances and in other visible movements. If, of course, you approve of what was said. Licensius: I completely approve. All this seems both true and obvious to me. I gladly accept corrections to these names. Chapter 10. How the mind judges music Augustine: Let's move on. Now look at the power and ability of the mind, as far as we can see from its works. For he, I will say the most powerful thing that relates to the matter of his perception, firstly, must reflect on himself with a good modulation (measure), and in a kind of free movement, penetrate to the end of his beauty. Where does he see something different in the movement of the body - that varies in the shortness and duration of time, and how much more or less it would be, something else - the rhythm (percussion) of local spaces in certain stages of speed and slowness. When this division is made into time intervals - intervals of measure, then in the human sense, by precise adjustment, it produces different numbers, and their gender and order will follow even to the measure of verses. Finally, reason pays attention to the fact that in all this, which must be measured, perfect, felt, retained, the soul, the head of which is the mind itself, should act and separate all these mental numbers from the bodily ones. And of course, the mind could neither pay attention to all this, nor distinguish, nor even directly calculate without any of its internal numbers, and the judgment seat of the internal rank submits them to other numbers. And now, when he expresses his desires with his very pleasure, which at the right moments of time carefully weighs, and with such numbers, which must be given in moderation, and asks - “What do we love in sensual numbers?” Is there anything else other than pairing and equally measured intervals? Or would that foot pyrrhichium, or spondium, or anapest, or dactyl, or proceleumatic, or dispondium, please us if their divisions did not correspond to the equality of one of its parts - the other part? What kind of beauty do iambics, trochae, tribrachiums have, if not that which, with its smaller part, divides its larger part into two equal parts? And then the feet of the six times, don’t they sound more affectionate and more festive than others from another source, if not from the legal division into two? Namely, either into two identical parts, having three times, or into one simple part of equals, and the other double, that is, so that the larger one would have two smaller ones. And with the same measure it divides into equal parts, cutting and measuring two times, four times into two? And what about those feet of the fivefold and sevenfold times? Why do they turn out to be more suitable for oratory than for poetry, if not because their smaller part does not divide the larger equally? And why are they themselves, in their rank, taken to the number of times, if not because in five times the smaller pair has as many two parts as the larger three? And in seven, does the smaller three have as many halves as the larger four? So in all the feet there is no smallest part, marked by the division of some measure, which could not somehow correspond equally to the others. Further, in the connection of feet - or when this connection spreads into free unlimitedness, as in rhythm - or stops at some specific end, as in meter, or is distributed into two members commensurate with each other by some law, as in poetry, how else is foot friendly with foot, if not by equality? From where both the moloss and the middle long syllables of the ionic, not by cutting, but by the very gesture of pronouncing and beating a beat, can be distributed into two paired movements, when the entire foot also corresponds to three times, when it joins the others, separated by the same measure, why, if not by the prevailing law of equality? Namely, what are equal in their wings to two times, when the foot itself would be of two times? Why can’t the same happen with the amphibrachium, when combined with the other feet of the four times, if not because there is no equality observed there with a double middle and single wings? Why is it that during intervals of silence the feeling is not offended by any change, if not according to the same law of equality, since although there is no sound, the proper space of time is fulfilled? Why is the last short syllable silently perceived as long - not by the determination of the mind, but by the examination of nature presiding in the ears? Why, if not because sound travels longer in space time according to the same law of equality? So the nature of hearing and silence makes it possible to produce a syllable beyond two tenses, and also to make up for it with sound, which silence can make up for? When a syllable occupies less than two times, although a space of silence remains, a certain breaking of equality occurs, because there cannot be equality in less than two. Already in the very equality of the members that change in that ring, which the Greeks call a period, and by which the verse is formed, how does the same equality return more mysteriously, if in the ring the shorter member corresponds to the larger one with equal feet and beating the beat, and in the verse the most mysterious co-understanding of numbers appears, so that although unequal members are united, it is nevertheless found that they have the force of equality? So, the mind asks a question, and the carnal pleasure of the soul, which defended its lot to judge, answers - when it is stroked in the space of time by the equality of numbers, or it would hear that two syllables are equal, or it could happen that one of them would be pronounced longer, not to the extent of a long syllable, but somewhat beyond it, which also surpasses its friend. Is it possible to deny that it may well be that she does not feel this in pleasure, and can rejoice at the unequal as if it were equal? What is more stupid than this error and inequality? Which is why we are exhorted to turn away from joy about something that only imitates equality, and if equality were to be fulfilled, we would not be able to understand. No, on the contrary, we can certainly understand what is not being performed. And yet we cannot deny that, to the extent that they imitate equality, they are beautiful in their kind and in their rank. Chapter 11. The difference between lower and higher numbers Consequently, we should not look towards evil at what is below us, and at ourselves, for we are between what is below us and what is above us. So let us submit to God and the Lord our Helper. So that we are not offended by the low, let us enjoy only the high. Pleasure is like a certain weight, something that the soul considers important. Pleasure tunes the soul. Where your treasure is, there your heart will be. And where there is pleasure, there is treasure. And where the heart is, there is bliss or misfortune. What is most excellent, if not that in which there is the highest, unshakable and unchangeable equality? Where there is no time because there is no variability? And from whence times are produced and ordered and modified by the manifestation of eternity, while by the rotation of the heavens they return to themselves and the celestial bodies return to their state, by days and months and years and five years and other stellar spheres, subject to the laws of equality and unity and orderliness. Thus, those belonging to the earth are associated with the heavenly ones, and the circles of their times with the sequence of numbers are like songs of the universe. Much in them seems disordered and confused to us, because we attach our conclusions to their order, not knowing what Divine Providence brings into them in caring for us. So, if someone, for example, in the most excellent and most beautiful palaces stands in one certain corner as a statue, then he cannot feel the beauty of the entire work, of which he himself is a part. And the order of the strategic arrangement of the universe is not visible to the warriors in formation. And in any poem, as long as the syllables sound, they live and feel as long as they do, and in no way can their number and the beauty of the combination of actions be pleasing, since they cannot completely review and approve of them, since they themselves are produced and completed from the passage. Thus, God ordered the sinner to shame, but not shamefully. Shame is a matter of will, and by destroying the universe, which was possessed by obedience to the commandments of God, the sinner by his fate is put in order, so that he who does not want to move according to the law, is himself set in motion by the law. What is legal is, in any case, fair, and what is fair, in any case, is not done outrageously. Because even in our evil deeds, God’s deeds are good. Indeed, a person is as good as a person. Adultery is evil - to the extent that it is adultery. Many people are born from adultery, and this is how God’s good work comes from evil human deeds. A similar reasoning is found in another of Augustine’s works, “On True Religion”: “Thus, everything, according to its design and purpose, is ordered in the beauty of the universal. Therefore, what we are horrified in part, when considered as a whole, is very pleasing. For you cannot judge a building by examining only one corner of it, a person only by his hair, a person who speaks correctly only by his gestures, or the phases of the moon only by how it has changed in three days. So if we want to judge correctly, then we must consider as a whole that which is lower, because it is perfect as a whole, consisting of imperfect parts (regardless of whether the beautiful is perceived in position or in movement)” (De vera religione. 40, 76). 2 Reflecting on the verses of the psalm (Ps. CXXXVIII. 7), Augustine expresses the same thought in “Confessions” (V. 2, 2): “You see them (sinners. - A.T.) and order [even these] shadows. And behold: everything is beautiful with them, even though they are ugly”; We also find it in his largest work, “On the City of God” (XI. 23, 1): “...for as a picture is beautiful with the color black put in its place, so is the whole world (if anyone could look at it) beautiful, even with sinners, although, considered in themselves, they are ugly in their shame.” (Tashcian's commentary Thus, we will return to what was proposed, for the sake of which all this was said. These numbers of the mind surpass others in beauty. If we further distance ourselves from them, when we turn towards the body, the numbers moving forward (progressores) no longer modify the sensual numbers, which inversely, with the movements of the body, accomplish the sensual (i.e., accessible to the senses) beauties of times, which, while sounding on the way, produce counter (occursores) numbers, which the soul, withdrawing all impulses, seems to multiply in itself and create remembered numbers, which its power is called memory - some great help in the most troublesome matters of this life. So, these movements of the soul, whatever of them the memory retains, which move against the passions of the body, are called “fantasies” in Greek, and I do not find how best to call them in Latin. And the imaginary life consists in holding them instead of those known and perceived, and such a life is the entrance of sin. But when these movements collide with each other and, as it were, boil, with different and opposing winds of intentions, they produce one movement after another, not actually impressed from feeling and given from reactions to bodily passions, but as images of images - to which we give the name of phantasms. Because I know my father, whom I often saw, in one way, and my grandfather, whom I have never seen, in another way. The first of this is fantasy, the second is phantasm. The first I find in my memory, the last in the movement of my mind, born of what memory stores. But it is difficult to both find out and explain how they are born. Yet, I think, if I had never seen the human body, I could not in any way imagine it by thinking about visible forms. But what I make of what I see, I make of memory. And again, it is one thing to find a fantasy in memory and another thing to create a fantasy from memory. And soul power can also do all this. We also find a similar reasoning of Augustine in his treatise “On the Trinity”: “... when I want to talk about Carthage, I look in myself for what to say, and in myself I discover the fantasy of Carthage. But I perceived it through the body, i.e. through bodily sensation, since I was present in Carthage with my body, and I saw it, and perceived it, and remembered it so that I could discover in myself the corresponding word whenever I wanted to talk about it. For its very fantasy in my memory is this word (not the three-syllable sound when it is called Carthage, or when I from time to time think about the name itself to myself, but what I distinguish in my soul when I pronounce this trisyllable out loud, and even before I say it). Likewise, when I want to talk about Alexandria, whom I have never seen, a fantasy of her immediately arises in me. For since I heard from many and was convinced that this was a great city (as far as it was possible to tell me about it), I, as much as I could, created its image in my soul; and before I utter the five syllables that make up the name, known to almost everyone, I already have a word corresponding to it. And yet, if I could produce this image before the eyes of people who know Alexandria, then, undoubtedly, everyone would say: “No, this is not Alexandria.” If they said: “Yes, this is Alexandria”; I would be very surprised, because, contemplating it in my soul, i.e. his image or picture, I still did not know him, and only believed those who saw this city” (De Trinitate. VIII. 6, 9) Thus, in relation to passions, fantasy is false sensations, false pleasures generated by objects of passion, the falsity of which lies in an incorrect assessment and failure of the judging sense. Fantasies are generated in the soul itself regarding what is stored in memory. Thus, the pleasure of eating food is a fantasy, and the desire for gluttony is a fantasy. The pleasure of gluttony gives rise to the desire for gluttony, and the desire for gluttony produces the pleasure of gluttony (as an incorrect assessment of the sensations of eating food). These two forms of lies seem to be fixated on each other and plunge the soul into an endless whirlpool of lies and the ceaseless generation of sin. But the greatest mistake is to mistake even true phantasms for knowledge, Scientism consists entirely of phantasms, because it explains unknown phenomena through the imagination - for example, electric current as a flow of electron balls. Although in both kinds it is not absurd to say that we know, that is, whether we felt it or imagined it. After all, I'm not afraid to say that I have a father and a grandfather. But I would be mad if I said that they are actually held in my mind by fantasy or phantasm. Thus, scientists, imagining phantasms, believe that they hold within themselves the laws of the universe in the form of theories and formulas. But some follow them so recklessly that the only basis for their false opinions is fantasies or fantasies - instead of things known by sense. This is the essence of the digital virtual world. So, we must resist them as much as possible, and not adjust our minds to them in such a way that we perceive our thinking about them as understanding. Resistance to scientific theories, rather than diligently inventing them, is the path to truth. Therefore, if numbers of this kind, produced by temporary things, appearing in the soul, have their own beauty, even if they continue after what produced them has passed, yet this beauty is despised by Divine Providence, because it is formed by our mortality, given as a punishment, which we most justly deserve by God's Law. In which, however, It does not abandon us so that we cannot be healed and turn from the pleasures of the carnal senses to the outstretched right hand of His mercy. Because such pleasure strongly records in memory what slimy feelings bring. And this custom of the soul, created with the flesh through carnal passions, is called “flesh” by the Holy Scriptures. “With my mind I serve the law of God, with my flesh the law of sin” (Rom 7, 25.) But when the mind rises to the spiritual and is fixed and abides there, the desire of this custom is broken, and little by little weakening, it is destroyed. For when we follow it, it becomes greater, and not completely, of course, disappears, but decreases when we restrain it. So, with a decisive retreat from every dissolute movement, where the defect of the spiritual being lies, and with the restoration of enjoyment of the numbers of the mind, our whole life turns to God, giving numbers of health to the body, without taking pleasure from it. What happens when the outer man decays, although there has been a change in him for the better. Chapter 12. About eternal numbers Augustine: But memory records not only the carnal movements of the soul, the numbers of which we have already spoken about above, but also spiritual ones, about which I will say a little. The simpler they are, the less they require words, but more peace of mind. That definite and constant equality which we did not find in sensible numbers, but perceived as shadowed and transitory, and would not take our breath away in them if it had not been noticed elsewhere. This is “somewhere else” not in the space of places and times. Indeed, some crawl away, while others pass. So, what do you think - “Where?” - I ask. Answer, if you can. For not in the forms of bodies, which you will never dare to call equal due to constant fluidity, or in time intervals, in which we do not know, there would be something escaping from feeling, any longer or shorter than it should be. So, I ask, where do you think there should be this equality, that upon examination we wish that certain bodies or movements of bodies were equal, but upon careful reflection we do not dare to believe them? Licensius: I believe that where there is superiority over the body. But whether in the soul itself or above it, I don’t know. Augustine: Therefore, if we look for that rhythmic or metrical art which is used when making verses, are there certain pure numbers by which verses are produced? Licensius: I can’t think of anything else. Augustine: What would these numbers be like, in your opinion - transient along with the verses, or remaining in permanence? Licensius: Obviously staying. Augustine: Therefore, we must agree, from certain numbers that remain in constancy, certain transitory ones are formed? Licencius: Reason persuades me to agree with this. Augustine: What? Do you think otherwise that this art is an artificial influence on the soul? Augustine: Do you believe that such an action also exists in those who are inexperienced in this art? Augustine: What? And the one who forgot him? Licencius: And the same is not in him, because this one is unskilled, even if he was once skillful. Augustine: What? What if someone reminds him through questioning? Do you think these numbers will come to him from the one who asks, or from himself inside in his mind he moves, returning to what was lost? Licencius: I believe that it acts on its own. Augustine: And about those syllables that are shortened or prolonged, if the end goes beyond the limits, will he be reminded of this through questioning, do you think? After all, some syllables are short, while others are long, according to ancient custom and the consent of people? Indeed, if by nature or science this had been completely fixed and stable, then learned people today would not have lengthened some syllables that the ancients shortened, or would not have shortened those that they lengthened. Licencius: I believe this may be the case, since no matter how much or what falls out, the memory can be restored to memory through questions. Augustine: It’s wonderful if you think that if someone starts questioning you, they will remind you of what you ate a year ago. Licensius: I admit that I won’t be able to remember, and I no longer think about the syllables, the internal space of which, that this can be returned with questions. Augustine: Why is that? if not because in that name called “Italy” the first syllable was shortened by the will of some people, and now instead continues by the will of others? And so that one and two do not become three, and how twice one does not become two, none of the dead could do, and none of the living could do, and none of the following could do. Licensius: Nothing is more obvious. Augustine: What then, if in the same way as one or two were most clearly examined, we should ask about everything else that relates to these numbers of one who is ignorant, not because he has forgotten, but because he has never learned? Don't you think that he can also know all this art - with the exception of the length of syllables? Licencius: Who doubts this? Augustine: Therefore, do you think he would of himself advance in such a way that these numbers would impress themselves on his mind and produce the effect called art? Or did the questioner give them to him? Licencius: I believe that he acts in the same way from himself as from the questioner, for he realizes the truth when he answers. Augustine: Then tell me further, do these numbers, which are being asked about, seem changeable to you? Augustine: Therefore, you will not deny that they are eternal? Licensius: I suppose so. Augustine: What? Is there any internal fear of some kind of inequality? Licensius: There is nothing safer than their equality. Augustine: Then where, should we believe, the soul is given the eternal and unchangeable, if not from the One eternal and unchangeable God? Licencius: I don’t see how it would be appropriate to believe in anything else. Augustine: What? Consequently, isn’t it obvious that the one who moves himself towards God with questions in order to know the unchangeable truth, if he does not keep this very movement in his memory, will not be able to peer into it? Chapter 13. On the retreat of the soul from higher equality Augustine: Then I wonder how he comes so down from the contemplation of objects of this kind that he needs another to restore his memory? Or should we rather believe that the spirit needs to peer into something in order to return to contemplation? Licensius: I think so. Augustine: Let us see, if you like, what it is that could capture attention so that it turns away from the contemplation of unchanging and supreme equality. Indeed, I don’t see more than three options. Either the spirit turns to something equal to what it turns away from, either to the higher or to the lower. Licencius: I must explore the other two options, for I cannot imagine what could be higher than eternal equality. Augustine: So you imagine something equal to this equality? And yet it’s different? Licence: I can’t imagine that either. Augustine: It remains, therefore, that we examine the lower. But doesn’t the soul itself meet you first, which definitely recognizes that equality and immutability, and recognizes itself as changeable by the very fact that it peers first at one thing and then at another? And thus, following first one, then the other, it acts with the variability of time, which does not exist in eternity and immutability? Augustine: Therefore, this action or movement of the soul, by which it understands the eternal, and considers everything temporal to be lower - even in itself - and recognizes that it should strive for the highest, and not for the lower, does not it seem prudent to you? Augustine: What? Isn't it less necessary to think about the fact that at the same time it is not infused with eternal things, but has the knowledge that it should be a universe? Licencius: I already ask that we think this over as best we can and find out where this thirst comes from. Augustine: You will easily see this if you pay attention to what objects we tend to most direct the soul and bring out great care. I think about those that we love a lot. Or do you think differently? Licence: I don’t think anything else. Augustine: Tell me, I ask you, can we love anything other than the beautiful? Indeed, even if someone seems to love vile things, which in Greek is popularly called “saprophilia” (love of rottenness), this nevertheless contains the meaning of how much less beautiful this rotten thing is than what is desired by many. Obviously, no one will love something that offends the senses by being ugly. Licensius: It is as you say. Augustine: Consequently, numbers are pleasing for the beauty of the desire for equality in which we have already shown the desire. For this is not only in that beauty that relates to the ears and is found in the movement of the body, but in the visible forms themselves, in which beauty is already more commonly spoken of. Or do you think that there is another equality than numerical equality, when paired pairs correspond to double members, which, taken one by one, occupy a middle place to serve those that are equal intervals in both wings? Licensius: I believe nothing else. Augustine: What is it that we strive for in the most visible light, which has the beginning of all colors - indeed, color also delights us in the form of bodies - what, therefore, is different in the light and colors of the beautiful, if not what corresponds to our eyes? For we turn away from extreme radiance, and do not want to look into extreme darkness, just as we recoil from very loud sounds, and do not like those who are mumbling. What consists not in time intervals, but in the very power of sound, where light is like numbers, of which silence is the opposite, like darkness is the opposite of flowers. Consequently, when we rush to the consonant measure of our nature and spit out the discordant, which, however, we recognize as corresponding to other animals, do we not also legitimately rejoice at that certain equality when, by the most mysterious measures, we recognize the distribution of equal to equal? The same thing should be noticed in aromas and stench, and in the sense of touch, which takes a long time to express clearly, but is easier to experience. For in these feelings nothing but equality and similarity can please us. Where there is equality or similarity, there is number. There is nothing so equal or similar than one and one - don’t you have something to add to this? What is now known about the human sense organs completely confirms this teaching of St. Augustine. Thus, the human eye has two types of light-sensitive elements - “cones” and “rods”, each of which operates on the principle of equality to a certain level of illumination. The human sense of smell operates on the principle of selecting from the stream of inhaled molecules and matching these molecules with certain forms and receptors that produce the feeling. Taste buds act in a similar way. The sound is perceived by the auricular spiral cochlea, sections of which operate in resonance (i.e. equality) with one or another sound frequency. Licence: I completely agree. Augustine: What? Doesn’t the above reasoning convince us that the soul acts within itself, and does not suffer from the body (submit to the body) Licensius: Persuades sensibly, Augustine: Consequently, the love of moving towards the rebellious passions of one’s body turns the soul away from the contemplation of eternal objects, distracting its attention with concern for sensual pleasures. The true state of a person is complete harmony of body and soul, like a kind of orchestra that has a single mood and produces a single symphony. In the Fall, the bodily instruments of this orchestra received a different tune - to the melody of death. And now two melodies play in a person, the spiritual one for eternal life, the physical one for eternal death, together producing a cacophony - a nuisance. A person chooses which melody to listen to - and in order to hear one of them, he must silence the other. So the saints, in order to hear the spiritual music of eternal life, forced the physical music to remain silent. Those who have chosen the pleasures of this world silence spiritual music, which is unpleasant and hateful to them, since it is dissonant with the beloved music of bodily pleasures, the end of which is eternal death. And this is produced by counter (occursor) numbers. The soul is turned away by the desire to act on the body and creates anxiety; this is produced by progressive numbers. They turn away fantasies, as well as phantasms, and this is done by remembered numbers. The emptiest love for the knowledge of such matters turns one away from the eternal. i.e. Scientism is a false knowledge of vanity. And this is done by sensual numbers, which are introduced inside like certain rules for the exultation of the art of imitation, it is about secular art - painting, sculpture and theater, which make up their exultation in the degree of counterfeiting of reality. and from them curiosity is born by the very name of torture, showing hostility to peace in the original etymology curiositas - curiosity - from cura - care, care, anxiety – and the truth is darkened by vanity. Love of self-indulgence, which turns away from the truth, comes from pride, with which vice the soul prefers to imitate God rather than serve God. It is correctly said in Scripture that the beginning of a person’s pride is apostasy from the Lord (Sir. 10:14) and the beginning of all sin is pride (Sir. 10:15). And it is not possible to better demonstrate what pride is than what was said there: Why are the earth and ashes proud? As in the belly of a monster his womb (Sir 10:9-10). For when the soul in itself is nothing (otherwise it would not be changeable and would not tolerate flaws in being), then whatever it is, it is such from God, by Whom it remains in its rank, and by His presence it grows in the mind and conscience. This is the “good womb” of the soul. When it is inflated with pride, it spreads outward - and, better to say, it becomes empty, that is, it becomes less and less. Going outside is nothing more than throwing out your insides, that is, placing yourself far from God - not by the space of place, but by the action of the mind.” Judas and Arius sat down with their entrails spilling out for this very reason. In the same way, this is why fame-lovers and proud people expose to the surface what ordinary people keep - the secrets of their family, the secrets of their personal lives. This is where the mania for throwing one's pearls before swine comes from. Hence the appetite of the soul - to have other souls under it in power. Not domestic animals, which is permitted by the divine court, but rational souls, that is, their neighbors, and under the same law they share a common lot and have a common lot. A proud soul longs to influence them, and this action seems to it so much more superior than the influence on bodies, as every soul is better than every body. But only God can act on rational souls not through bodies but through himself. However, sinners are in such a state that they want it to be possible for their soul to act in some way on other souls, by designating movements either through bodies or through natural signs, such as facial expressions or gestures, or through perception, such as the essence of words. It's about actors, politicians, sectarians and psychologists. Indeed, both those who command and those who obey act by signs, and if there is anything else before command and submission, then soul to soul or from soul to it act in some way. It is fair to follow this, so that those who with pride want to surpass others, do not command either their parts of the soul or their bodies without labor and suffering, and are burdened partly by their stupidity, partly by their mortal members. And therefore, by these numbers and movements, with which souls influence souls, they are turned away by the desire for honor and glory from looking at His purity and genuine truth. For God alone honors the soul, making in secret before Him blessed the one who lives righteously and piously. So, the actions that the soul gives about the souls attached to it and subordinated to it are similar to progressive numbers, for it acts on them as on its body. The same movements that it reveals, wanting to annex and subjugate others, are relied on in occursor numbers. For she acts as if in her feelings, striving for those who move from outside to become one with her, and what cannot be attached is driven away. And in both these movements memory participates, and makes them remembered or recorded in a similar way in fantasies and fantasies, acting like the most disorderly effervescence of yeast. Therefore, the Lord in the Gospel called the condition of the Pharisees and scribes leaven. There are also numbers similar to those who judge, who feel what moves in these actions conveniently or inconveniently, which I would also not refuse to call sensual, since it is by sensual signs that souls influence souls. When the soul is filled with so many and such intentions, is it surprising that it turns away from contemplating the truth? And indeed - to the extent that he comes to life from them - he sees her, but since she has not yet defeated them, she does not remain to abide in her. From which it happens that at the same time the soul cannot know what it should be in - and remain. But you probably have objections? Licencius: Nothing that would dare to contradict. Chapter 14. How the path to God opens in the mortal harmony of temporary beauty Augustine: What remains then? Since we have explored as best we can the defilement or burdening of the soul, let us now see what its action is commanded by God, so that, purified and forgiven, it turns to peace and enters into the joy of its Lord. Augustine: What else do you think I need to say, when the Divine Scriptures preach in so many books and with such power and holiness that they demand nothing from us except that we love God and our Lord with all our hearts and with all our souls and with all our minds, and that we love our neighbor as ourselves? Therefore, if we attribute the movement and numbers of all human actions to this end, we will undoubtedly be purified. Or do you think otherwise? Licensius: Nothing else really. But as short as it is to hear, it is so difficult and difficult to do. Augustine: What is easy then? Or love colors and voices, and cookies, and roses, and flexible and soft bodies? Is it easy for the soul to love them, in whom it seeks nothing but equality and similarity, and after a little careful consideration, in them the edge of the shadow and trace of this similarity is barely recognized. Is it difficult to love God? In which, no matter how much you think - and, moreover, thinking flawedly and weakly - you will not imagine anything unequal, nothing unlike yourself, nothing contained in place, nothing changing over time? Or is it easy to erect stone buildings and rejoice in the continuation of the existence of things of this kind, in which, if the numbers are pleasing (for I don’t find anything else), what can be called equal and similar in them, so as not to mock the teachings of reason? And if this is so, then why does it fall with a crooked curve from that true equality to this pseudo-equality and erect earthly machines on its ruins? This is not what is promised to those who know no fall. “For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” So, love for earthly things requires great work and care. For what the soul seeks in him - that is, constancy and eternity - does not find, since the lowest beauty is accomplished through the passing of affairs, and what in it imitates constancy is sent down from the Highest God through the soul, since beauty of the same kind is first changed by time, and therefore by time and place. So, since there is a commandment from the Lord through John the Apostle - what we should love and what we should not. Do not love, he says, the world, because everything in the world is the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life (lit. worldly ambition) (1 Jn 2:15-16). But what kind of person do you think of a person who relates all those numbers that are from the body, against the passions of the body and which of them are contained by memory - not to carnal pleasure, but only to the health of the body, but all those that act from the combination of souls, or that are manifested in connection, and which of those that are infused into memory - not to his proud exaltation, but to the benefit of the soul itself? Also, those who in both kinds, like measurers and researchers of others, preside over the feelings - apply not for pride or destructive curiosity, but for the necessary approval or disapproval? Doesn't it work in all these numbers without falling into any traps? From where he chooses the health of the body in order not to stumble, and calls upon all those actions of souls on souls for the benefit of his neighbor, which he is commanded for the sake of the bonds of the general law of nature to love as if he were himself. Licencius: You are preaching a certain great and most philanthropic man. Augustine: Therefore, it is not numbers, which are beautiful within the mind and in their own way, that defile the soul, but the love of the base. Which, when now in the low is not equality, about which enough has been said in the previous work, but loves its order, and loses its own order, but nevertheless the order of creation does not appear, since it is there, and in such a state it is where it is, and how it is there - everything is most ordered from God. For it is one thing to maintain order, and another to maintain order. The soul maintains order when with all of itself it loves that which is higher than itself, that is, God, and friendly souls as itself. And with this virtue it undoubtedly orders what is lower than it, and is not polluted by those below it. What pollutes it is not evil, because the body is the creation of God, and is adorned with its beauty, albeit the lowest. But this beauty is despised for the sake of the dignity of the soul, just as the dignity of gold is contaminated by mixing even the purest silver. Therefore, no matter what numbers arise from our punitive mortality, we do not reject them from the construction of Divine Providence, since in their own way they are beautiful. But let us not love them, as if through enjoying them we would become blessed. Therefore, since they are temporary, like a board in a stream, we will neither throw them away as if they were burdensome, nor cherish them as if they were established forever, but we will maintain abstinence in good use. From loving our neighbor as much as is commanded, we will take a definite step in grasping God, so that we are not only held by His rites, but also unshakably and most definitely maintain our rank. Surely the soul does not love order, as even those sensory numbers testify to? Why then is the first foot a pyrrhic, the second an iambic, the third a trocheus, and so on? But you are correct in saying that this order follows more reason than feeling. What then, is it not given by sensible numbers, that when, for example, eight long syllables take the same amount of time as sixteen short ones, yet in the same space we expect more that the short ones will be mixed up than the long ones? When the mind judges this feeling and proclaims that the feet of the proceleumatic are equal to the feet of the spondium, it sensibly gains nothing other than the power of order, since long syllables, if not compared with short ones, are not debts. Not vice versa - short ones without comparison with long ones are not short, and therefore iambic verse, pronounced as long as you like, will not lose the rule of simple and double, nor will it lose its name. If, in addition, the verse, which consists of pyrrhic feet 1–1, extends the sounding times of the syllables, then in size it will become a spondiac 2–2, if you consulted not with grammar, but with music. Also, if there were a verse of dactyl 2-11 or anapest 1-2-1, since they are perceived from the comparison of mixed long and short syllables, no matter how long they are pronounced, they retain their name. And why are additions of half-stops at the beginning not preserved according to the same law as at the end, and not every half-foot comes to completion, even if it corresponds to the beating of the rhythm? Why are there more often two short syllables at the end than one long one? Isn't this measured by the feeling itself? Indeed, in this equality the number is not lost, but this or that is held by the bonds of order. And go through the rest for a long time to the same meaning, extending in numbers of times. But without a doubt, the feeling itself is disgusted by the visible forms themselves, when either bending in the wrong direction, or head down, or similar inequality, while maintaining the equality of the parts, perversity is rejected. Finally, in all our feelings and deeds, when they are many and unusual, and therefore unpleasant, we ascend with our desire, as if by certain steps, and so at first we are tolerant, then we freely accept, do we not retain pleasure in order, and then we receive corruption not in order, we retain pleasure, and vice versa - we turn away, if the first is with the middle, and the average with the last is not united in accordance? For whatever reason, let us not place our joy either in the pleasure of the flesh, or in the honors and praises of men, below in the study of what is externally in contact with our bodies, having God within us, where without a doubt everything that we love exists and is unchangeable. And let it be that when the temporary comes to us, we are not entangled by it, and when everything that is outside the body departs, without a feeling of sorrow. The body itself, either without sorrow at all, or without a feeling of grave sorrow, will be taken away and given over to death to reshape its nature. Indeed, the attention of the soul to a part of the body attracts restless matters, and neglects the universal law of love for a particular matter, which, however, itself cannot be alienated from the universality over which God reigns. So he who does not love the laws gives himself over to the laws. Chapter 15. About cleansing the soul from temporary But if we think about incorporeal and incorporeal matters in the same measure, thinking a lot and carefully, and at the same time we set in motion temporary numbers in any movement of the body, easily, sensibly and most usefully, or while walking or singing psalms, they pass by us in ignorance, although they would not have been there if we were inactive. If we are captured by our internal phantasms, they pass in a similar way, with our action insensibility, how much more and how much more permanent will it be when this corruptible has put on incorruptibility and this dead has put on immortality” (1 Cor 15:33), that is, as I will say this more simply, when God will give life to our dead bodies, as the Apostle says, for the sake of the spirit that is in us (Rom 8:11 ). How much, therefore, then, paying more attention to the One God and the purest truth, as it is said “face to face” (1 Cor 13:12), will we not feel any anxiety from the numbers with which we move our bodies, and will we rejoice? If one must not believe for sure that the soul, being able to rejoice in that which is good through it, in that which itself is good, cannot rejoice. But this action by which the soul itself, with the help of God and its Lord, extracts itself from the love of the lowest beauties, fighting against its internal armed customs and killing them, in that triumphant victory in itself over those aerial powers that hate and puncture the thirsty, flies to its stability and the firmness of God, doesn’t it seem to you that this is the very process that is called forging? (the second translation option is a virtue called moderation) Licence: I acknowledge and understand. Augustine: What? When he is perfected in this path, and eternal joy is already present in it and is seized by the edge, of course, is the loss of temporary affairs or any death still terrible for someone who sensibly says to his closest friends, “It is good for me to be allowed to be with Christ, but to remain in the flesh is more necessary for your sake” (Phil. 1:23–24) Augustine: And also this action of his, which is not harmed by any opposition or death, what can be called anything other than firmness (fortitudo)? Augustine: Even then, its very order, in which it no longer serves anyone except the One God, is not compared with anything except the purest souls, and does not desire to dominate anything except the animality of nature and the body, what kind of virtue does this seem to you? Licencius: Who would not think that this is righteousness? Augustine: You are right. Chapter 16. About the highest good Augustine: And I will ask you, when we have established between us above that prudence by which the soul understands where it should be, by which it attracts itself to God through forging (moderation), that is, turning to God of love, which is called caritas (pure love-aspiration, in contrast to amor - love-thirst of possession), and through aversion to this world, which is also accompanied by strength and truth, do you think that when the soul moves on to the fruit? of her attraction and attempt - perfect holiness, when the revival of her body and the removal from the memory of crowds of phantasms will also be completed, and she will begin to live by the One God and will be filled with the One God, which the Divine promises us in this way: “Beloved, now we are the sons of God, and it has not yet been revealed what we will be. We know that when He reveals Him, we will be like Him, until we see Him as He is” 1 John 3:2. I ask, then, do you think that these real virtues we mentioned will be there too? Licencius: I do not see that when that which prudence resists has passed away, how prudence could remain. Which does not choose what to follow except from the opposite. Or forging-abstinence, since love cannot turn away, unless from the opposite, Or a fortress that does not endure - unless the opposite. Or righteousness, which does not reveal the thirst for equality with the most blessed souls and domination over the lower nature, if not in opposite phenomena, that is, if it has not yet achieved the very thing it longs for. Augustine: Your answer is not at all absurd, and I am not unaware that some scientists have argued so. But I, on the advice of the Books, which no authority surpasses, receive what is said: “Taste and see that the Lord is good” (Ps 33:9). What the Apostle Peter also represents: “Be as delicious as you can, for the Lord is good” (1 Peter 2:3). I think that this is what is accomplished in these virtues, which by their very conversion cleanse the soul. For the love of temporal things would not be driven out except by some pleasantness of the eternal. When the coming to that which is sung “The sons of mankind in the shelter of your wing will hope, they will be drunk with the fatness of your house and the flow of your sweetness to drink, as if you have a fountain of life” (Ps. 35:8-10) is completed. a certain rapture will follow, which name, as it seems to me, denotes the oblivion of those worldly vanities and phantasms. He seals the rest and says: “In your light we will see light; add your mercy to those who guide you” (Ps. 35:10-11). In the light, i.e. - in accepting Christ, Who is the Wisdom of God, and is called Light so many times. Where, therefore, it is said “we will see” and “leading you”, it is impossible to deny the future where prudence exists. Or is it possible to see and know the true good of the soul where there is no prudence? Augustine: What? Can there be rule of heart without righteousness? Licencius: I admit that righteousness is more accurately designated by this name. Augustine: What, then, does the prophet pay attention to when he further sings “And thy truth with a right heart?” "(Ps. 35.11) Augustine: Here again, let us remember, if you like, that we have sufficiently discussed above how the soul becomes weary with pride in certain actions of its power and, neglecting the universal law in what it should do, falls into certain actions of its own, which is called “departing from God.” Licensius: I remember truly. Augustine: When, therefore, you act in such a way as to never love it again, does it not seem to you that you have nailed your love to God, and live from all impurity in the most moderate and firmest and safest way? Licensius: Sounds great. Augustine: Then look at how the prophet adds this too, saying, “Let not the foot of pride come to me” (Ps. 35:22). For the descent itself is called a foot, or signifies the fall, from which the soul, moving through patience to God, lives forever. License: I accept and will follow. Augustine: So, all that remains is the fortress. But just as forging-moderation acts against the fall which consists in free will, so strength acts against strength, which is also known when the less strong would be overturned by someone and pitifully thrown away. Scripture rightly has the habit of denoting this power by the name of the hand... But who, in this case, is trying to bring in this power, if not sinners? Then, when through this very thing the soul is strengthened and retains God’s firmness, and cannot be killed in any way from anywhere, then it bears a certain stable and, so to speak, unsurpassable strength, which, if you don’t mind, it is correct to call fortress or firmness. And it is precisely this, I think, that is called when it is further added “let the hand of the sinner move me” (Ps 35:12) But whatever should be understood by these words - either this or that, will you deny that in that perfection and bliss the soul is formed to look at the truth and remain spotless, and cannot tolerate any anxiety, and is subordinate to God alone, and rules over the rest of nature? Licencius: On the contrary, I do not see that there could be anything more perfect and blessed. (here St. Augustine edited his work and removed a very high passage that he himself had written earlier. St. Augustine wrote this book all his life, finishing it just before the transition to eternity, and therefore it is quite natural to expect that this part was written by a saint who was already contemplating this eternity and had already grasped that eternal joy that he speaks of above. We can guess that we are talking about the correspondence of prudence, moderation, righteousness and strength to the virtues contemplation, sanctification, dispassion and order. The fact that these virtues even in name coincide with what St. Dionysius the Areopagite says in the “Heavenly Hierarchy”, as about the content and essence of eternal life through the sacraments of the heavenly hierarchy, unknown to anyone except those belonging to this rank of the hierarchy, also indicates that Blessed Augustine was a participant in the same revelations of God as St. Dionysius. Areopagite and simply closed them to the readers of his book on mature reflection. And naturally, not otherwise than according to Divine instructions - in the likeness of St. John the Theologian - “hide this, do not write.” This is confirmed by the sudden abrupt end of the book - “we need not talk, but do”) Augustine: Consequently, these virtues of hers - contemplation, sanctification, dispassion, order - are either four perfect and highest virtues, or these are certain powers of eternity and eternal life that should be expected. However, we need to work not on names, when deeds coincide, but instead on these virtues themselves, in which the soul, established in which through labor, gains benefit. Augustine: Let us remember what is most relevant to the understanding of this conversation, that everything happens through the Providence of God, by which He created everything and reigns over everything, so that although the sinful and defiled soul moves in numbers and moves numbers to the deepest corruption of the flesh, the numbers of which can certainly be less and less beautiful, but in depth they cannot be devoid of beauty. God is extremely good and extremely righteous. And no one hates beauty, which is produced even by condemnation of the soul or by apostasy or impenitence. Number begins from one, and is beautiful by equality and similarity and is united by order. Therefore, everyone recognizes that there is no nature that would not be what it is, would not desire unity and union with those like it as much as it can, and also maintain its rank in space and time, or maintain its health in the weight of the body. It is appropriate to confess that everything, no matter what, and no matter how much there was, was created and composed from a single beginning through His equality and a similar image of Divine goodness, which is united between Him alone and from One to One, most lovingly, so to speak, by love. That is why we offer this verse: a saying valuable not only for its sound numbers for the ears, but much more for its salvation and truth for the soul. Unless, of course, you are shaken by the stubbornness (to put it mildly) of those who deny the possibility of becoming something out of nothing, when it is said that Almighty God created it. Or can a carpenter, using rational numbers, which are contained in his art, produce sensory numbers, which are contained in the skill of his work, and sensory progressive numbers of movement - sensory numbers, to which intervals of time already belong, and with them the visible forms of a tree are created, and when nature serves the nourishing God with numerical intervals of places and deeds, the tree itself cannot come from the earth and other elements, and the latter itself cannot be from nothing? On the contrary, tree place numbers must be preceded by time numbers. For there is no kind of plant that, after a certain dimension of time, would not be formed instead of its seed and would not germinate and would not go out into the atmosphere and would not wear out the leaves and would not further harden and either through the fruit or the most secret numbers of the tree itself would return the power to its seed, how much more then are the bodies of animals, in which the intervals of members of equal number bring much more to the eye? Or can all this come from non-existence from the elements of the elements, but the elements themselves cannot be created from non-existence? And among them all, the most rejected and insignificant is the earth. Which, firstly, has a general appearance of a body in which certain numbers are combined and unity and order are combined. Here we mean not only the earth as a planet or the forms of the earth - mountains, hills, but first of all man, who is nothing more than the earth, the most humble and humiliated element. That is why it is said to Adam: “As you are the earth, you will go back to the earth.” Man is nothing more than the most humble and last in appearance and essence of nature - the dust of the earth, to whom the humble God, looking upon humility, bestowed the highest - His Image and Likeness. Then, from some indivisible mark, it needs to stretch, no matter how small the particle is and no matter how many there are, thirdly, it is collected in width, and fourthly, in the height of which the body is made. Where, then, does this mode of progression from the first to the fourth come from? Whence comes the equality of the parts that are related in longitude and latitude and height? Those. Why are they measured by the same measure and not by different measures? Where does a certain rationality come from (for that is how I prefer to call the analogy) that length has a relation to an indivisible mark, and similarly latitude to longitude and height to latitude? Where, I ask, does all this come in order, if not from that highest and also eternal principle of numbers and similarity and equality? And also if you take all this from the earth, there will be nothing left. Thus, Almighty God created the earth, and the earth was created out of nothing. What's next? The very images by which the earth is also distinguished from other elements, do not they show something united, and no part of it is detached from the general, and by the union and agreement of the same parts it occupies a kind of lowest foundation? It is interesting that in the hieroglyphic system of elements Fire火 Water 水 Wood 木 Metal 金 Earth 土 All hieroglyphs, except earth 土, contain the sign “man” 人. And only “earth” does not have it, obviously, because man is “as you are the earth.” And the shape of the sign 土 also has a certain lowest base. On top of which the nature of the waters is based, and itself shining with unity, the most beautiful and brightest for the sake of greater similarity of the parts, and thereby will preserve the place of order and its well-being. What can we say about the nature of air, which shines much more easily with unity in connection, and as much beautiful water as that of earth, and just as much higher in prosperity? What can we say about the highest surrounding sky, which is limited by the entire universe of visible bodies and is the pinnacle of contemplation of them and also surpasses the well-being of the place? Such is everything that we calculate by the service of the carnal sense, and no matter what is seen in them in a certain state, originating from local numbers, unless they are preceded by internal and silent numbers of time, which are in motion, cannot but accept those numbers, nor have them. That is why “time travel” and quantum leaps supposedly back in time are phantasmagoric nonsense, since the numbers of time determine the numbers of place. And changing the numbers of time would lead to changing the numbers of place - i.e. destruction of nature itself. The life force, serving the Lord of all affairs, precedes and modifies those movements of time intervals, not having time numerical intervals as its numbers, but by the power of time serving it. Beyond which the rational and mental numbers of blessed and holy souls, the law of God Himself, without which a leaf will not fall from the tree and by Whom the hairs of our head are all counted, without the intervention of another nature, even to earthly and hellish (internal) are lawfully sent Those and the same times at moving intervals are preceded and modified by the vital force, serving the Lord of the affairs of all, not the temporal name of the separated intervals of their numbers, but the power serving time, higher than the “rational and intelligent numbers of blessed souls and saints directly, without the mediation of any other nature, send even to earth and hell the Law of God itself, without which a leaf will not fall from the tree, and our hairs on our heads will be counted. That's how much I could and how much I could bring with you. If anyone reads our conversation, transmitted to the letters, let them know that it was written rather for many weak people than for those who, following the authority of the Two Testaments, revere the One Supreme God, the Co-essential and unchangeable Trinity, and bow to Her with faith, hope and love. For they are purified not by the flickering of human prejudices, but by the burning and most solid fire of love. We, although we are not ignorant of how heretics lure people with their minds and the desecration of false science, with firmer thoughts we enter those paths that holy men did not deign to pay attention to their soaring. However, they would not have dared to do this if they had not seen many of the best children of the Mother Catholic Church, who, through childhood study, conversation and research, produced sufficient skill, and, of necessity, did the due driving away of heretics. From the essay “Rethinking” (“Retractations”) about “Six Books on Music” (Retractationes. 1 book, chapter 11) 1. From where, as I mentioned above, I wrote “Six Books on Music”, of which I consider the sixth to be the best, since in it the subject turns in dignity to how from physical and spiritual, but changeable numbers, one can reach the unchangeable ones, which themselves are already in the most unchangeable Truth, and are the essence of that “invisible of God”, which becomes knowable through consideration of the visible creation. Those who cannot understand this, but nevertheless live from the faith of Christ, will still move on to this more definitely and more happily after this life. Who can understand if they do not have the faith of Christ, who is the only Mediator of God and men, will perish with all his wisdom. 2. In this book, what I said, “Bodily numbers are so much better, how much more numerous they are by such numbers, but the soul, which through the body takes due care, becomes better when it turns itself away from carnal sensations, and is transformed by the numbers of Wisdom,” this should not be accepted as if future bodily numbers and in bodies would not be indestructible and spiritual, when they will be much more suitable and beautiful, or that their soul will not feel when it will be much more better, and will take better care of them. For her current task of turning away from the carnal senses to that which must be perceived with the mind comes from the fact that she is now weak and is not able to cleave to both by looking closely. And now in those bodily feelings there is a hidden bait, how long can the soul be tempted to the ugliest pleasure. Then she will be so strong and perfect that she will not be turned away from the contemplation of Wisdom by physical numbers, and will feel them so much that she will not be tempted by them, and will not become better from moving away from them, but will be so good and upright that they can neither hide from her nor capture her. 3. Also, what I said “This same health will then be most solid and sure when this body is restored to its former stability without a doubt in its time and in its order,” one should not think in this way when reading, as if there would not be in the future a better body than before in paradise among people, so that it will no longer need the support of the bodily supplies with which it is nourished, but it should be accepted by the former stability, and so will not suffer from any diseases from the body, as could not suffer before sin. 4. In another place: “So, love for earthly things requires great work and care. For what the soul seeks in him - that is, constancy and eternity - does not find, since the lowest beauty is achieved through the passing of affairs, and what in it imitates constancy - this is sent down from the Highest God through the soul, since beauty of the same kind is first changed by time, and therefore by time and place. These words must be understood in the same sense that it is impossible to comprehend lower beauty except in the bodies of all people and animals, which when they live by the sense of the body, the mind is clearly darkened. This darkening of the mind by sensual numbers and lower beauties is the essence of secular painting and music. This, of course, does not deny the existence of good secular paintings and music, which through sensory numbers are capable of conveying the eternal, but in this action they are not the same as icons and liturgical singing. In this same sensual beauty, constancy is so imitated that the same bodies remain in their connection. But to the extent that they remain in this connection, it descends into them from the highest God through the soul. The soul itself holds the connection so that it is not resolved and it is not poured out, which we see in the bodies of animals during the exodus of the soul. Those. the preservation of the body by the internal connections of the dust that makes up the body is an imitation of permanence. Imitation, because due to constant destruction and the need to replenish it through food and drink, the ashes are constantly in motion, and permanence is only imitated. Wed. dynamic and static stability in physics. Perhaps this is precisely what is connected with the incredible fast for modern man by the reverend fathers of antiquity, who could not eat for forty days or one prosphora a week, which fast everyone recognized as exclusively the work of God. Sanctification, bringing the body itself through the soul into an unchangeable composition, reduced the need for a constant influx of new dust. It is with this that the strange request of the elder St. Simeon of Divnogorsk is connected - to bless him not to eat earthly food at all. This also includes the fact that the Most Holy Virgin in the Holy of Holies was fed not earthly, but angelic food. The incorruption of holy relics also corresponds to this rite of stopping the change of the body, stabilizing its composition - a harbinger of future eternal incorruptible life. If the lower beauty in all bodies is understood, then this saying already implies that the world itself is all alive, since in itself, as in those, the constancy that descends through the soul from the Supreme God is imitated. But for this world to be alive, as Plato and many other philosophers believe, I definitely could not find either through reason or know through conviction the authority of the Divine Scriptures. In this he agrees with Dionysius the Areopagite “Therefore, all inanimate things, in their existence, participate in this essence, because the existence of everything lies in the existence of the Divine; animate beings participate in the life-giving power of the Divine that exceeds all life; verbal and spiritual beings participate in His self-perfect and most perfect wisdom, which surpasses every word and concept.” (On the heavenly hierarchy, 4.1) What St. Gregory Palamas says that all creation is alive, since God is the Life-Giver and does not create anything dead, then this corresponds to what was said by St. Dionysius and Blessed Augustine, since Blessed Augustine means by “living” (animalium) the possession of a soul (anima), and in this regard the world is not living, as inanimate, but as a creation of God and as having a hierarchical connection with the existence of God according to St. Dionysius, it lives, i.e. exists. However, St. Augustine here carefully neither recognizes the world as animate nor denies it, thereby showing his caution and distrust of himself, which constitutes a distinctive sign of holiness and is evidence of the reliability of his thoughts. Therefore, I said something that could be taken for this, as in the book “On the Immortality of the Soul” it was unintentionally said, as I noticed (“On the Immortality of the Soul”, 15.24) Not that I admit this is a lie, but since it is impossible to understand for sure whether this world is animate. But it is healthy and unshakable and undoubtedly must reject that our God is not the God of this world, whether he had a soul or not. Because if there was one, then the One who created it is our God. If there is none, then there cannot be any god, much less ours. St. Augustine means that pagan philosophers represented the pagan gods as the various actions of this universal soul, and declared the world soul itself to be God, which he speaks about in detail in The City of God. However, we most truly believe, even if it is not known to anyone, that there is, however, a spiritual and animated force, even if the world were not alive. What power serves God in the holy angels for the beautification and government of the world. In the name of the holy angels we proclaim the entire holy spiritual creation, established by God in a secret and hidden sacrament. Wed St. Dionysius the Areopagite - “Now, in my opinion, we should investigate why theologians call all heavenly beings Angels (Ps. 102:20; Matt. XXV, 31), while when explaining the rank of supermundane beings, they actually call the rank of Angels the last rank, which finally concludes the Divine heavenly Hierarchy, and above it they place the ranks of Archangels, Principalities, Powers, Powers, and other higher beings mentioned in Holy Scripture. I think that in every degree of the Holy Order, the higher ranks have the light and powers of the lower ranks, but the latter do not have what belongs to the higher ones. That is why theologians call the holiest ranks of the highest beings Angels; for these also reveal and communicate to us the original Divine light. On the contrary, there is no reason to call the last rank of heavenly minds Principalities, or Thrones, or Seraphim: because it does not have what belongs to these higher powers. Just as he raises our Most Holy Hierarchs to the light that he himself received from God, so these highest all-holy powers raise the last rank of the Angelic Hierarchy to God. Perhaps someone will say that the name of Angel is common to all heavenly powers because they are all more or less involved in the Divine and the light communicated from Him, but in order for our teaching to be clearer, we will reverently consider the high properties of each heavenly order, as they are revealed in Scripture.” (“On the heavenly hierarchy, chapter 5). He has a similar judgment about the name of the Heavenly Powers - common to all heavenly hierarchies. In general, the teaching of St. Augustine corresponds so exactly to St. Dionysius the Areopagite, that it is impossible not to recognize one of the two - either Blessed Augustine is well acquainted with his writings - or was a contemplator of the same sacraments. However, one does not exclude the other. But Holy Scripture is not in the habit of using the name “soul” to designate angelic spirits. Where in the place that at the end of this book I said, “the rational and intelligent numbers of blessed and holy souls directly, without the mediation of any other nature, convey even to earth and hell the Law of God itself, without which a leaf will not fall from the tree, and our hairs on our heads are counted,” I do not see how, according to the Holy Scriptures, the name of spirits can be put, since it belongs only to holy angels, but that they have souls, as far as I remember, I have never read anywhere in divine conversations.