ae FRANCO. 
authors of the “ Hiftoire Litteraire de la France’? had feen,. 
they a would: not hav 
e fixed him at Liege, nor would 
wh 
oe implicitly: fiw them, have been led into 
Mocks rt tells us that Franco fupported the funétions of 
a office of fc scien or preceptor, by a great 
kno and ac quired as much celebrity by his 
eee as fences “ * Scent tia literarum et mo 
clarus.”? He ve 
iC. 
e fludies with sas begat that he never neglecte 
his more important con 
the teftimon of “Sine ebert, his rags alae he had 
acquired great reputation for his learning in 1 fi 
it is certain that he had written concern ae 
of the circle before the month of Februa ary 1055, at res 
time Heriman, archbifhop of Cologne, to whom he dedicated 
his work, died. 
Franco lived at leaft till Auguft 1083, for he at time 
filled the charge of {cholaftic of the cathedral of Lie 
Amon many works which Fran anco i is faid t to have 
ped 
"e3 
eo & 
pro- 
Thefe writers add, that there can be 
Magifter Franco being the fame as the {cholattic of that 
name 3_or that another ters, entitled 
‘“¢ Magiftri Franconis Mufica,’ i 
“ ‘ Compendium de Wilcante, tribus capitibus,’’ in the fame 
f 
fas} 
ror 
oc 
fy 
OQ 
pet 
as 
98.5 
ro 
me 
xj 
3 
f=] 
Q 
(] 
s 
Ee 
z 
S 
ace whoc im © Scholafticus Leodienfis 
Eeleie, of the enn ck of Liege, natione Theutonicus, and 
a German, tells us, that “he very learned im the ho 
feriptures 3 a great phieiophe. ieee arithmetician, 
(computifta;)”’ and that he dedicated fe se = his works 
to the archbifhop of Cologne: fuch as his ua- 
dratura Circuli;?? «* De Computo Beceiatico ~ alia 
plura;’? but he fpecifies none of the mufical writings of 
Franco, who, according to this biographer, flourifhed under 
the — Henry IIL. ro6o. \ 
mention hon ees which we can find of Franco 
as a ae mufic in any treatife on the fubje& is in the 
#6 (cae in Arte Mufice planex,’? by Marchetto da. 
caaake written in the year 1274, who fays that the agree-_ 
t of different melodies, according to Magifter Franco, 
ar rete difcant (* difcantu Laue Magiftrum: 
Franconem, eft diverforum cantum confonantia: Ex.- cod.. 
Leics Num. 5322.”) He likewife cites him in his. « Po- 
um de mufica menturatas’? as an inventor of the four firft 
mmufical characters. (Muratori Antiq. Med. JEvi Diflert. . 
24. tom. ii. Padre Martini, tom. i. om. it. 
-p- 189. Gerb. 
p- 124.) And this would kave bi fufficiently early to. 
t fund of reli- finish 
and preferved i in the Bod- 
leian library at Oxford, is by the fame author, as well as the. 
have ftript John. de Muris of the. honour of their invention, 
dhe chofen to iel mia with it. ae is next in point. 
of time mentione n de Muris hi »and in a : 
of the Bodleian nea {Digby 9°) afcribed to T homas, 
or John o wkibury, which, it is fai 
There 
vented by Franco; “ De figuris inventis a Fra cone.” 
Franchinus Gaforius, Pract. Mufice, lib. ii. c. 5. -— 
im twice as author of the time-table ; and afcribes to him, 
ib. iti « t letion counterpoint, by his 
contrivance of moving in different melodies at the fame time : 
neaning his invention ufical chara&ters fcr meafure. 
O tryman rley, Annotations to Intro- 
du€tion, fays that * Franco was the moft ancient 
is hands.” e feems only to have feen a commen= 
tary on his treatife by Robert de Handlo, and to kn 
nothing of his age ane country. Ro Handlo wrote 
commentary on the “ Mufica Menfurabilis of Franco,’” 
1326. (See ‘Tanner, p. 376.) And this-is even an earlier 
period than was afligned to the invention ie) thofe who had 
iven i Joh Muris. An enfe raft, “ Briefe 
difcourfe of the true ufe of charaGtering the degrees in Mea- 
: p- 1. who appears i a to have 
furable peavey 1614,” 
en no 
four firtt fimple notes of menfurable mufic ; but, unluckily, . 
calls him Franchinus de Colonia, confounding him with 
Franchinus Gafurius. 
Critical exa€tnefs, with refpe&t to dates, rames, or facts... 
was not yet much practifed in writing.upon the arts; and . 
Morley, the beft author who had written exprefsly on mufic,. 
in our language, fince the invention of printing, took many: 
things upon truft ; and though he gave a long lift of prac-- 
tical muficians, hore works’ us had confulted, he never had 
feen the writings of Guido, nor does he quote a fingle manu-- 
{cript treatife throughout ns introduction, which indeed is-. 
ee aad more dida¢tic than hiftorical. : 
We have been the more folicitous to: ae the exiftenc: 
of Franco, and the time w en rifh 
fobecal ed. 
bi this v 
itfelf, of which we obta ined a. peek from the Bo 
library at Oxford ( 
ort, but celebrated tract, aie fi x chapters-s: 
nitions of. the ter : 
2S Gears or reprofentation of ee 2 
founds. 3.. ‘Of lig ature:,, or com notes.. 4. Of refts> 
ifferent concord ufed in Aoi 
peepee of.founds. - 
Beethius,.and the praétice by: 
whom he Bae. into a philofopher.. ‘ The : 
ecclefiaftical tropes or modes,’’ he adds, .“* had been fettled 
by, St..Gregory.”? Franco, therefore, only -inteuds to. 
treat. 
