VWB - Verlag fr Wissenschaft und Bildung

Brenreiter
Florian Noetzel GmbH Verlag
Schott Music GmbH & Co. KG
Current Trends in Historical Musicology
Author(s): Claude V. Palisca
Source: The World of Music, Vol. 19, No. 3/4, in honour of Alain Danilou's 70th birthday
/ mlanges offerts Alain Danilou l'occasion de son 70me anniversaire (1977), pp. 134143
Published by: VWB - Verlag fr Wissenschaft und Bildung
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43560497
Accessed: 26-10-2016 12:25 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/43560497?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

VWB - Verlag fr Wissenschaft und Bildung, Brenreiter, Florian Noetzel GmbH

Verlag, Schott Music GmbH & Co. KG are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The World of Music

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Claude V. Palisca

Current Trends in Historical Musicology

There has been much self-examination lately concerning the purp

musicology and where it is headed, particulary in countries where i
advanced and flourishing. Many questions once thought resolved are being asked again, others for the first time. Are historical musicology and
ethnomusicology separate fields or parts of the same discipline? Does
musicology exist simply to inform the curious or is it a servant of the
performer, conductor, historian, critic, or anthropologist? What purpose is
served by so much intense research and writing of specialized studies as
we see today?
Current introspection is partly stimulated by technological advances that
have affected the researcher's mode of operation. Computers can handle
large quantities of data with ease and answer minute questions about
them, microfiche and microfilm reader-printers and facsimile editions
bring to the researcher the holdings of distant libraries; automated information access systems promise to deliver pages and facts to the researcher in minutes. This information explosion is both a blessing and a cause
for concern. When information is easily gathered, stored and analyzed,
the scholar is more than generously supplied; he is deluged with data.
He needs to know when to stop, to recognize the point of diminishing relevance.

Relevance has become a slogan in education partly becau

vements in information gathering and dissemination hav
tion of narrow specialities. Students, perhaps more pro

if some of these byways of scholarship are necessary

*) In this essay 1 have liberally interspersed passages from my section of Chap-

ter V, Aesthetics and the Science of Art .in Main Trends of Research in the Social

and Human Sciences, Part II, prepared for arid scheduled to be published by UNESCO
in 1977, wiht permission of the Publishing Division, the UNESCO Press. I am grateful to Professor Jacques Havet, editor of the volume, for obtaining this permission
and for his wise and sympathetic administration of the project.

134

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Illustrations of the Cantigas of Santa Maria.

135

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

They rightfully ask what is the relevance, indeed, of music history, the-

ory or ethnology. It is easier to justify ethnology, because it leads to

mutual understanding among the peoples of the world and because it

focuses on fleeting cultures whose music will soon be melted down in the
acculturation pot. Theory can be defended as necessary to the training
of composers and to the analysis of music that must be understood to be
properly performed. Simple, incomplete and naive as these answers are,
there is no parallel pragmatic answer for history of music.
Arthur Mendel in the first public address to the New York Congress
of the International Musicological Society in 1961 asked why we inquire
into the history of music. It is suggested, he said, that we do so to learn
from the past how to act in the future. He rejected this utilitarian explanation as note consistent with practice, since very few readers of history deal with the future; for example, composer make little use of
our knowledge of the music of the remote past. Mendel concluded that we
study history of music primarily "because we have a passion for understanding things, for being puzzled and solving our puzzles; because we are curious and will not be satisfied until our curiosity rest." '.
This answer will not satisfy everyone, since it could he objected that
there are too many things to understand, too many puzzles to solve; curiosity is insatiable. Must we transcribe and analyze every last extant motet of the 16th century? Must we know the provenance, scribes, history,
concordances, and attributions of every chanson manuscript? Is every

unconvered archival document, biographical fact, unpublished musical

work worth making public? To be sure, no one can ever predict which
fact or piece will become important in somebody's attempt to construct
a broad picture of music history. Yet a scholar, particularly a young scholar who has not yet carved out a corner of a field himself, must have some sense of priorities.

Solution of problems in which others besides musicologists have a

stake have obvious priority. Musicology must continue to benefit perform-

ers and conductors and through them their public. The rediscovery of
Bach in the early 19th century and since then of hundreds of other composers both earlier and later has revolutionized the repertory of concert

and recorded music. It has also created problems for performers who must

relive a practice buried in the past. At first it seemed that having cri-

tical editions that present the music in the state in which it left the composer's pen would provide the basis for the restoration of the authentic
sound of music. By now editions are common, but it has become evident

in the meantime that composers before the 19th century, at least, left
much to the taste and elaboration of the player.2 The past twenty years
have witnessed intense controversies about the proper performance stan-

dards for early, particularly of such details as notes inegales (notes in

the early 18th century written in equal values but intended to be played unequally), the proper way to play and sing embellishments, instrumental
accompaniment in sacred and secular vocal composition from the 14th to

136

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

the 16th centuries, the appropriate chordal realization of bass lines in the
baroque period, and many other similar questions. The simple answers
once accepted have given way to multiple answers, as instruction books
and other literary and musical documents have been read more carefully
and exhaustively. It is obvious now that several alternate solutions may
be equally authentic. To pass on to the performer these options in a way
that he can understand them and use them artfully remains a challenge
to musicology.3
Another obvious priority is to make available to the musical public the
means for understanding significant music of all traditions and cultures.
Being a relatively young field of university study, music has had to
guard its identity as a scholarly discipline jealously; so in most countries
it has failed to establish close ties with the public on lower levels of
education. The music scholar tends to operate in the hermetic atmos-

phere of libraries, institutes, and seminars and to communicate through spe-

cialized reviews. Few of his discoveries and interpretations leak out to

the general public. In earlier days, when the scholarly readership was

small, musicologists were compelled to appeal to the amateur if they

were to see their work in print. But today only a small proportion of active scholars write books of general interest.
This failure to address a larger public is paralleled by a declining interest in generalization, and this is true of ethnomusicologists as well as
historians. Werner Korte 4 attributed this trend to the disillusionment with

the products of the generation of musical Geisteswissenschaftler who

tried to carry out Willibald Gurlits aim of a synthetic Stilgeschichtesschreibung. As expounded in 1918, this synthesis united two directions:
1) Ausdrucksgeschichte , the intellectual history behind music, the interpretation of its content, and the clarification of cultural concepts; and
2) Problemgeschichte , the study of formal, artistic and stylistic concepts.
It led not to the synthesis Gurlitt envisioned but to unrestrained subjective reactions, the constructions of artistics style-types like Gesamtgotik,
a Formenlehre of stereotyped categories, and a general dilution of methodological rigor. Korte believed that this method reached a crisis in the
1930-50 period, and the reaction to it produced a resurgence of the factoriented research that Gurlitt tried to replace. There resulted the present
trend toward formal technical analysis on the one hand and philological,
document-oriented research on the other.

Friedrich Blume5 called the movement toward documentary and archival study Neo-Positivism and blamed it for the present isolation of schola
by specialization and location, the decline of international cooperation,
and the alienation of lay music lovers and general historians. While not
underestimating the importance of identifying watermarks and copyist
and their role in establishing a reliable chronology of Bach's works in t
past twenty-five years, he was fearful that this kind of research migh
become a fashion. If kept up, he warned, in the year 2000 we might hav
a history not of composers and theorists, but of copyists and scribes, n

137

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

of symphonies and masses, but of watermarks and Rastralen (staff-line

markers).

The way out of this impasse is seen by many today in a return to the
individual work of art as the starting point of research and explanation.
The beginning and end of musicological studies lie in sympathetic and

critical examination and evaluation of the individual work of art , Lowin-

sky said 6. By this is not meant simply explication du texte, but, as Blume
described it, Geschichtliches Denken, which, he explained, means to
understand the meaning of the things that we encounter in history.7
What the nature of such explanation should be has been the subject
of some discussion recently. Joseph Kerman suggested that the ultimate
function of musicology is criticism. He saw criticism as the top rung of
a ladder to which the component disciplines of musicology lead. Each of
the things we (historical musicologists) do - paleography, transcription,
repertory studies, archival work, biography, bibliography, sociology, Auffhrungspraxis, schools and influences, theory, style analysis, individual
analysis - each of these things, which some scholar treats as an end in
itself, is treated as a step on a ladder.

A work is not understood in isolation but in context. The infinitely

laborious and infinitely diverting ascent of the musicologist should provide this context. It is not altogether clear if Kerman was speaking of
a musicologist-critic or a critic who uses the fruit of musicological research. The latter is strongly suggested by his definition of criticism as
the way of looking at art that tries to take into account the meaning it
conveys, the pleasure it initiates, and the values it assumes, for us today. 8 Lowinsky challenged Kerman's hierarchical view as debasing certain legitimate musicological tasks, such as archival studies or transcription, which may, for some scholar, be ends in themselves. While concurring with Kerman that scholars should be critics, he would not have
criticism ever part ways from style analysis. Paraphrasing Immanuel Kant,
Lowinsky argued: Stylistic analysis without criticism is blind, criticism
without stylistic analysis is empty ... For if stylistic analysis is understood
as the attempt to define a composition by describing the modes of behavior of its musical components, if criticism is understood to be the discernment and evaluation of the distinctive, individual traits of that com-

position, then the more the two are separated, the worse it will be for

either. *

Kerman's remarks were prompted by his observation that musicologists,

particularly Americans, were shying away from evaluative judgments about

music, that in their passion for objectivity they were neglecting to

react personally to the individual work. This depersonalization and de-

humanization of the research and reporting process has perhaps been more

characteristic of American scholarship than European. Nevertheless it

marks much of the post-Second-World-War scholarship throughout the

world.

138

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Along with the tendencies deplored by Blume and Korte must be counted the blind pursuit of the banner of style criticism. Manfred Bukofzer
had said : Style criticism must be recognized as the core of modern
musicology ... The description of the origin and development of styles,
their interrelationship, their transfer from one medium to another, is the
central task of musicology . 10
Whereas Bukofzer conceived of style contextually as related to the
world of ideas and he subordinated description to understanding, those
who followed the slorgan of style criticism sacrificed both context and ideas
for descriptive, often statistical, statements of what occurs in the
music of certain composers, genres, or periods. Excessive application
of statistical analysis has been criticized by Paul Henry Lang : To im-

pose abstraction upon experience is to fail as a creative scholar while

doing badly the work of science... ".

Objective description has often been strangely mated with subjective

interpretation. Historians who would disclaim allegiance to evolutionary
theories of musical development allow evolutionary habits of thought to
invade their writing, as Leo Treitler has shown.12 He found the image of
growth constantly evoked by such phrases as points to the future , he
was a pioneer with respect to... , shows greater mastery of ; or styles
are described as nascent and ripe or a mixture that rarely resulted
in a satisfying synthesis . Musicologists, Treitler observed, treat works as
examples of a collective, impersonal enterprise ... as manifestations
of an Idea, like the shadows in Plato's cave, whose value is measured

by the closeness with which they approximate their models, and whose
necessities are imposed from without .
Historians of music have relied since at least the 19th century, o

an evolutionary approach to explaining musical change, partly in response

to the impulse of Darwin, ut also because it is inviting to scale music,

a product of creative energy, to the model of biological growth and maturation. The evolutionary view was appealing to historians of music who
wanted to see changes in musical styles as a self-generating process
largely independent of social and intellectual change. Such a view was
particularly strong in England ( The Oxford History of Music, 1 901 -05)"
and is reflected in such histories as those of Gustave Reese (1954), 14

Donald Grout (1960)" and Richard Crocker (1966). 16 In Germany the history of genres (Kleine Handbcher der Musikgeschichte nach Gattungen)
1905-22)'7 were also representative of this trend. By comparison French

and Italian authors have been more aware of the role of social and intel-

lectual forces (for example, Nanie Bridgman, 1964). 18 The changing att

tudes are dramatically evident in comparing The New Oxford History (1954)lu
with the old one. The New , to which a number of French and German
authors have contributed, particularly in the volumes on the middle ages and

renaissance, show an awareness - if not always acute - of forces out-

side of music.

139

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Growing suspicion of the evolutionary principle has been accompanied

by loosening reliance on the Weltanschauung, an intellectual climate that
was once thought to determine artistic and cultural style. Such concepts
as Baroque, Romanticism, Classicism are being rethought, and although
they are retained as handy labels, there is little enthusiasm for the
generalities they represent. They are sometimes found to be alien to the
self-concepts of the periods they are purported to describe.
In place of these general concepts of cultural milieu, historians of music are lately exploring more concrete relationships. Alfred Einstein set
an example in reconstructing the social, literary, and political context
of the Italian madrigal collections, and another generation of scholars
is now examing with a close-up lens certain areas of this larger landscape, for example Lewis Lockwood and Anthony Newcomb in Ferrara, Don
Harran and Frank D'Accone in Florence. Interdisciplinary studies are losing their vague dilettantish flavor of the artistic commonwealth, exemplified by Curt Sachs, and establishing contacts through in-depth investigations of particular cultural centers or figures who are themselves protean in their activity, such as Johannes de Mris (Lawrence Gushee, 1969)2"
supported by intensive archival searches.
This movement toward probing the local substrat of musical culture
is accompanied by inquiries into the evidence for a period's own view
of itself. Bukofzer was one of the first to make extensive use of theo-

rists and to explain music in term of the composer's own concepts in his
book Music in the Baroque Era (1947) 21 and I chose to apply this method
even more rigorously in my book on the same period."
Another effective palliative to the earlier tendency to create evolutionary schemes has been a concentration upon the individual work. Multidimensional examination of individual artworks could lead not only
to better understanding of them but also to more solid grounds for generalization. Treitler (1966) 23 called for musical analysis in historical context . He viewed the process as containing a number of overlapping approaches: 1) a search for the significant form of a work, 2) a search for
values and schemata that condition apprehension of a work, 3) explanation, particularly causal, of the work in terms of past and contemporary practices and events outside the work, 4) investigation of the music's
function and environmental relations.

There is an important difference between this process and Kerman's

ladder. Musical analysis in historical context engages all the musicological
disciplines as coordinate and equal paths to the understanding of works
of art. They are not merely feeders to a higher function but the very
essence of the process.
The insistence upon historical context in analysis reflects a split that
developed between historians and theorists. Music theory and analysis are
taught in conservatories throughout the world mainly by composers.
In some countries, particularly England and the United States, this near
monopoly extends to universities. Germany, however, is rather exceptio-

140

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

nal in confifding theory teaching in the universities mainly to musicologists. Nevertheless it is safe to say that the major contributions to
music theory in the twentieth century have been made by persons not
trained as musicologists and who did or do not consider themselves
such. Among these are Heinrich Schenker, Georg Capellen, Bernhard
Ziehn, Arnold Schnberg, Paul Hindemith, Milton Babbitt, and Allen Forte.
On the other hand, several prominent music theorists, particularly among
those educated in Germany, were musicologically trained, for example
Ernest Kurth, Alfred Lorenz, and Felix Salzer. As long as a theorist limits
himself to explaining the music he knows exhaustively, as Schenker and
Lorenz did, or contemporary music, as with Babbitt, the problem of historical context is not raised. But when theorists apply categories tested and
found valid in one repertory to music distant in time from it, the often
introduce concepts and explanations quite alien to the mode of thinking
of the composer being analyzed. There are signs that this problem is being
recognized, and with the availability of treatises of the 16th, 17th, and 18th
centuries improving through photographic reprints, there in less excuse
now for historical naivet. Also universities are training professional theorists who have a solid grounding in history.
If music history and theory are becoming more interdependent, the division of musical scholarship into Western historical on the one hand
and ethnic, non-Western and folk on the other may be acknowledged as a
fait accompli. Nevertheless theorists of both disciplines continue to ex-

press dissatisfaction with this condition. Historical musicologists have

been reproached for failing to take advantage of ethnomusicological methods and insights. Handschin already in 1949 complained that it is strange that after the appearance of musical psychology and ethnology the
historical branch of musicology should have continued its progress at first
as if nothing had happened. >>24 Frank LI. Harrison suggested one direction that historians of music might take in contributing to the recreation
of the music of the past: It becomes no less essential to re-create as
far as possible the function, social meaning, and manner of performance
of every type of musical work than to establish the notes of the musical
text that make the re-creation possible ... Looked at in this way, it is the
function of all musicology to be in fact ethnomusicology 25.
Charles Seeger has been the most eloquent pleader for a unified musicology and for the application of systematic method developed in the study of non-Western music to contemporary music of the West, not only
art music but the total musical scene in all levels of the culture. The soo-

ner Western music-historians take off their blindness of

- as practically all other Western historians have done upon the history of non-Western music (and their own
musics, which are now ethnomusicological data) and the

Europophilism
and go to work
popular and folk
ethnomusicolo-

gists (hopefully, anthropological as well as musicological, and some of

them non-Westerners) summon the courage to go to work upon the ethno-

musicology of the music of the West, dealing with it as a whole - its

141

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

professional as well as its popular and folk idioms - the better it will be

for all concerned 26.

Handschin also voiced dissatisfaction with the parochialism of Euro-

pean scholars, urging them to focus their studies not so much on music
as on musical man: What, then, is the true object of musicology? It is
nothing but man, who, standing in a certain location in space and time,
impresses his artistic striving in an appropriate music; thus man in his
musical activity, man artistically forming something that he leaves behind
to posterity "

Franois Lesure has reinforced this thought: The final goal would
be, evidently, to discover what the musical tells us about man that is
different from what language, religion, or law teaches us about him ."
Some worthwhile goals, we have seen, have been proposed. Each of them
is in a different way limited. Style criticism is essentially descriptive and
analytical and prone to generalization: it most often bypasses the important
question: why - why is the work in the form that it is described? Evaluative criticism is basically snobbish; it excludes, when we want entries
into the unknown. On the other hand, in the pursuit of sociological, anthropological knowledge, in seeking to know man, we lose sight of the quality
of the musical experience. Finally, the recretion of historical music through
performance offers up often engaging fresh music but without the context
that would render it meaningful.

Besides, most of these stated goals of musicology close their circuits

within the scholarly and professional community. If we are to admit a
larger public into our learned discussion, we must proceed from them to a
goal that is fundamentally educational: the explanation of music in its
human context. Our primary aim should be to contribute to the understanding of musical works, whether great or small, popular or esoteric, so long
as they are honest, authentic, unique products of man's creativity. Musicology can put in the hands of anyone who cares the tools for an informed,
critical experience of music. Thus musicology is indissolubly bound up

with education and the world of music-making.

') Arthur Mendel, Evidence and Explanation, Report, IMS Congress, II, New
York. 1961, p. 4.

2) See Arthur Mendel, The Services of Musicology to the Practical Musicians .

in Some Aspects of Musicology. New York : The Liberal Arts Press, 1957, pp. 3-18.
J) See Luigi Ferdinando Tagliavini, Prassi esecutiva e metodo musicologico . Kon-

gress Bericht, Internationale Gesellschaft ff Musikwissenschaft, I, Salzburg, 1964.

pp. 19-24.

4) Werner F. Krte, Struktur und Modell als Information in der Musikwissenschaft.

Archiv fr Musikwissenschaft, XXI. 1964, pp. 1-22.

) Friedrich Blume. Historische Musikforschung in der Gegenwart, Acta Musicologica, XL, 1968, pp. 8-21.

*) Edward E. Lowinsky, Tonality and Atonality in Sixteenth-Century Music. Berkeley

and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1961, p. 72
Friedrich Blume, no. cit.. p. 16.

142

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

8) Joseph Kerman, A Profile for American Musicology , Journal of the American

Musicological Society , XVIII, 1965, pp. 62-63.
T Edward E. Lowinsky, Character and Purposes of American Musicology; a Reply
to Joseph Kerman , Journal of the American Musicological Society, XVIII, 1965, p. 224.

,0) Manfred Bukofzer, The Place of Musicology in American Institutions of Higher

Learning. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1957, pp. 21,31.
n) Paul Henry Lang, Editorial. Musical Quarterly, L, 1964, p. 219.
12) Leo Treitler, On Historical Criticism , Musical Quarterly, LIU, 1967, pp. 188-205.
i3) The Oxford History of Music. Ed. W. H. Hadow, 7 vols. London: Oxford University
Press, 1901-1905.

,4) Gustave Reese, Music in the Renaissance. New York: W. W Norton, 1954, rev.
ed., 1959.

,s) Donald J. Grout, A History of Western Music. New York: W. W. Norton, 1960.

,6) Richard L. Crocker, A History of Musical Style. New York: McGraw Hill, 1966.
,7) Kleine Handbcher der Musikgeschichte nach Gattungen. Ed. Hermann Kretzschmar, 14 vols. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Hrtel, 1905-22.
I8) Nanie Bridgman, La vie musicale au quattrocento. Paris: Gallimard, 1964.
,9) The New Oxford History of Music. Ed. Dom Anselm Hughes and Gerald Abraham.
London: Oxford University Press, 1954M) Lawrence Gushee, New Sources for the Biography of Johannes de Mris , Journal of the Amer icon Musicological Society, XXII, 1969, pp 3-26.
2l) Manfred Bukofzer, Music in the Baroque Era. New York: W. W. Norton, 1947.
Claude V. Palisca, Baroque Music. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1968.
") Leo Treitler. Music Analysis in an Historical Context , College Music Symposium, VI, 1966, pp. 75-88.

24) Curieux que, aprs l'avnement de la psychologie et de l'ethnologie musicales,

la branche historique de la musicologie ait d'abord continu sa marche, comme si
rien ne s'tait pass . Jacques Handschin, Musicologie et musique , Kongress Bericht, IMG. Basel, 1949, p. 14.
2S) Frank LI. Harrison, American Musicology and the European Tradition , in Harrison, Hood and Palisca, Musicology. Englewoods Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1963, pp. 79f.
J6) Charles Seeger, Foreword in James W. Pruett, ed., Studies in Musicology. Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1969, p. xii.
27) Was ist dann aber das wirkliche Obiect der Musikwissenchaft? Es ist nichts
anderes als der Mensch, der, an einer bestimmten Stelle des Raumes und der Zeit

stehend, sein knstlerisches Streben in einer ihm gemssen Musik ausprgt, also der
Mensch in seiner musikalischen Bettigung, der knstlerisch gestaltende Mensch, der
Nachwelt die Erzeugnisse seiner Gestaltung hinterlsst . Jacques Handschin, Der
Arbeitsbereich del Musikwissenschaft , Gedenkschrift J. Handschin. Bern, Stuttgart:
P. Haupt, 1957, p. 24. .

28) Le but suprme serait videmment de dcouvrir ce que le musical nous enseigne de l'homme, qui soit diffrent de ce que le langage, la religion ou le droit nous
apprend de lui . Francois Lesure, Musicologie >, in Encyclopdie de la musique. Paris: Fasquelle. 1961, III, pp. 268f.

143

This content downloaded from 193.140.167.26 on Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:25:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms