MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528002756 · doi:10.33137/rr.v39i2.26857

The Inaudible Music of the Renaissance: From Marsilio Ficino to Robert Fludd

2016· article· en· W2528002756 on OpenAlex
Roseen Giles

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMersenne primeMusicalThe RenaissanceArtArt historyHumanitiesInterpretation (philosophy)PhilosophyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article revaluates the significance of musical treatises written by the Ficinian physician Robert Fludd (1574–1637). By reconsidering the implications of Fludd’s interpretation of Marsilio Ficino’s musical philosophy, I propose that his “reconstruction” of the Renaissance outlook in the seventeenth century is not merely a backward-looking oddity, but is rather indicative of a long-standing and pervasive history of inaudible music (i.e., the “silent” harmony of the universe and of the human body). Music played a central role in Fludd’s polemics with the scientists Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) and Marin Mersenne (1588–1648), regarding not the composition of art music but rather the understanding of the composition of the universe itself. The societal tensions evident in Fludd’s musical books reveal that it is not only musical practice but also broad scientific, medical, and philosophical conceptions of sound that comprise musical understanding in the early seventeenth century. Cet article propose de réévaluer la signification des traités de musique du médecin ficinien Robert Fludd (1574–1637). En reconsidérant ce qu’implique l’interprétation par Fludd de la philosophie musicale de Marsile Ficin, il avance que cette « reconstruction » d’une perspective issue de la Renaissance au XVIIe siècle ne correspond pas seulement à un excentrique retour en arrière; elle réfère plutôt à la longue et omniprésente histoire de cette musique inaudible qu’est l’harmonie des sphères (comprise comme harmonie silencieuse de l’univers et du corps humain). La musique a en effet joué un rôle important dans les échanges polémiques entre Fludd, Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) et Marin Mersenne (1588–1648), qui ne portent pas tant sur la composition musicale que sur la compréhension de la composition de l’univers lui-même. Les tensions sociétales, bien perceptibles dans les traités de musique de Fludd, montrent qu’au delà de la pratique musicale, c’est une conception scientifique générale, médicale et philosophique qu’engage la pensée musicale du début du XVIIe siècle.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it