divided into four parts; but each pair of these is so closely connected that the Provençal principle of a division into two halves is fully borne out—the more so, as there were evidently only two different melodies, each of them being repeated. The instances are again very numerous. In the following stanza of Peire d’Alvernhe’s, the pedes and versus consist of two lines each: Pes 1. { Rossinhol, en son repaire { m’iras ma domna vezer, { Pes 2. { e digas lil meu afaire { et ill diguat del seu ver, Versus 1. { quem man sai—com lestai; { mas de mill sovenha, { Versus 2. { qui ges lai—per nuill plai { ab ri not retenha. The fourth and last combination occurs when the stanza consists of a frons and a cauda, that is to say, when the two parts are undivided in themselves, but when a new melodic and metrical period begins after a certain number of verses. This form shows the Provençal principle of a division into two parts more clearly than any of the others; but Dante, from his point of view, is also right in not approving of it, or rather in not acknowledging it as a division at all, seeing that there is no ‘repetitio unius odæ.’ One out of many examples of this phenomenon is a stanza of Bertrand de Born’s, where the frons and cauda consist of three lines each: { Autr’ escondig vos farai plus sobrier Frons { e no mi posc orar plus d’encombrier: { seu anc failli vas vos neis del pensar, { quant serem sol en chambr’o dins vergier, Cauda { faillam poder deves mon compaignier, { de tal guiza que nom posc’ ajudar. The end of the first and the beginning of the second musical and metrical phrase, as marked by the diesis or volta, was generally further strengthened by the conclusion of the grammatical sentence. In most of the numerous stanzas already quoted, the volta contains either a full stop or a semicolon, or at least a comma. The sentence is seldom carried on through the volta, though even the best troubadours were not always careful in applying this rule.