Jamie Croy EDITOR

Gordana Lazarevich SENIOR ASSOCIATE EDITOR

ASSOCIA TE EDITORS: Thomas Day Raymond Kennedy Ingram Marshall Susan Thiemann

Libby Rubin EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

ASSISTANT EDITORS: Jon Appleton Charles Dodge Walter Hilse David Josephson Raoul Orceyre S.J. Joel Sachs Judith Zessis

Edward A. Lippman FACULTY ADVISOR

Austin Clarkson EDITORIAL ADVISOR

f PUBLISHED

UNDER THE AEGIS OF The Music Department COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY New York

CORRESPONDING EDITORS

John Davis Joseph Dyer E. Southern

Thomas Walker John Baker

Gilbert Blount Robert Morin

Bonnie Blackburn Barbara Ham pton Richard Taruskin

J ames Bossert Jacob Opper

Winfried Kirsch Karl-Werner Gumpel

Gunther Massenkeil Henry Gibbons IV

Linda Good Vivian Safowitz

David Sheldon Rita Egger

Kathleen Adkins Philip Brett

Bernd Baselt John Schwartz, Jf.

Eberhard Klemm Theodor Gollner Patricia Kellogg

Margery Morgan Charles Lea

Lawrence Bennett Bruce Carr

James Chamblee John Collins

J.D. Bergsagel Horst Heussner

Philip Gossett George Nugent

Hubert Howe, Jf. L. Finscher

William Mahar Axel Helmer Wesley Vos

Franklin Perkins Jack Sorenson

Cecil Wilson Hans Conrad in

University of Arizona, Tucson, Ariz. Boston University, Boston, Mass. Brooklyn College, Brooklyn, N.Y. University of California, Berkeley, Calif. University of California, Davis, Calif. University of California, Los Angeles, Calif. University of California, Riverside, Calif. University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. City University of New York, N.Y. Columbia University, New York, N.Y. Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. Florida State University, Tallahassee, Fla. Joh. Wolf. Goethe-Universitat, Frankfurt a.M., Germany Universitat Freiburg, Freiburg LBr., Germany Johannes-Gutenberg-Universitat, Mainz, Germany Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill. Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind. Universitat Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. King's College, Cambridge, England Martin-Luther-Universitat, Halle-Wittenberg, East Germany University of Maryland, College Park, Md. Karl-Marx-Universitat, Leipzig, East Germany Universitat Munchen, Munchen, Germany University of Miami, Miami, Fla. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. Montana State University, Missoula, Mont. New York University, New York, N.Y. State University of New York, Buffalo, N.Y. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N.C. North Texas State University, Denton, Texas Oxford University, Oxford, England Philipps-Universitat, Marburg a.d. Lahn, Germany Princeton University, Princeton, N.J.

Universitat des Saarlandes, Saarbriicken, Germany Syracuse University, Syracuse, N.Y. Uppsala Universitet, Stockholm, Sweden Washington University, St. Louis, Mo.

University of Washington, Seattle, Wash. Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio Universitat Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

Communications to the corresponding editors should be ad-dressed care of the m.usie department of the university.

Copyright © 1965, Department of Music Columbia University, New York Printed in U.s.A.

EVENTS

133 seminars and lectures •

162 appointments

• 164 EDITORIAL

..

CHOU WEN -CHUNG 169

JOEL NEWMAN 175

AUSTIN CLARKSON 191

DAVID A. SHELDON 199

JULIA SUTTON 202

FRANKLIN ZIMMERMAN 208

REMBERT G. WEAKLAND, 210 O.S.B .

KONRAD WOLFF 211

Varese

ARTICLES

A gentleman's lute book: The tablature of Gabriello Fallamero

The 1965 revision of the U.S. copyright law

Report from Indiana: Inter-American conference of ethno-musicology and composition

DISSER TA TIONS

William Sherman Casey Printed English lute instruction books, 1568-1610

Stoddard Lincoln John Eccles: The last of a tradition

Sister Mary Joachim Holthaus, O.5.B. Beneventan notation in the Vatican manuscripts

Immanuel Willheim Johann Adolph Scheibe: German musical thought in transition

218 dissertations from abroad 221 dissertations received for review

BIBLIOGRAPHICA

221 Articles concerning music In non-musical journals, part II

THOMAS T. WATKINS 227

229 230

Fred Blum Music monographs in series publications received fellowships and scholarships •

•

A GENTLEMAN'S LUTE BOOK: THE TABLATURE OF GABRIELLO FALLAMERO Joel Newman

A MONG THE MANY musical volumes" given into the light" in 1584 by Venetian printing presses were items prophetic as Monteverdi's Canzonette a 3, influential as Marenzio's fourth book of five-part madrigals or the second edition of Galilei's Fronimo, and as ordinary as the subject of this study. 50 appar-ently uneventful is this tablature that it has never been described in detail, though it has been cited on occasion (Chilesotti 1889; De La Laurencie 1928:35; Boetticher 1954; Reese 1954:523; R.I.S.M. 1:323). Einstein had not examined the volume and could not list its contents completely in his revision of Vogel's madrigal bibliography (1946:51). The present article, begun as a footnote to this invaluable reference tool, was expanded after examination of the tablature made clear that it had some mod-estly distinctive qualities as well as typical ones. After all, the most everyday musical source deserves attention; such epheme-ral material-along with diaries, letters from one nobody to an-other, and cartoons-can play an essential role in our full under-standing of a historical period or process. Material of this kind may be seen as the grout in which are embedded the more out-standing tesserae of history's mosaic.

Nothing is known about the "gentleman" author or his dedi-catee, the Signora Livia Guasca Pozza, damma nobilissima Ales-sandrina. The references to their status are correct: the Falla-meri were an aristocratic family of the Piedmontese city, Ales-sandria, though they were not as well-known as the Guasco family (A. Guasco 1605; Bossola 1903).

The tablature's title page reads as follows: II primo libra de intavolatural da liuto, de motetti rice reate madrigali,1 et canzonette alia napolitana,1 a tre, et quattro voci, per cantare, etl sonare composte per Gabriel

JOEL NEWMAN is an associate professor of music at Columbia University.

175

Fallamero Gentilhuomo Allessandrino,1 Novamente posto in luce./ [device] I In Vinegia.! Appresso l'herede di Girolamo Scotto.! MDLXXXIIIJ.1

This ambiguously worded title formula raises several interest-ing questions. Is composte a boast, and would intavolate have been more accurate? A scholar has indicated that the volume's contents are "only intabulations" (Ward 1952:88), but the pres-ent examination will suggest that Fallamero plays a more im-portant role. Is the collection as comprehensive as the title promises? Is it as conservative as the presence of motetti and ricercate would suggest? Are all of the contents in tablature notation? The phrase per cantare et sonare is certainly an un-usual one in the context of Italian lutebooks. Listing the com-plete contents and examining each category in turn will serve to answer these and other questions.

Title and No. of Parts

1. In me tanto l'ardore (4) 2. Apariran per me Ie stelle (4) 3. U. ver l'aurora (5) 4. Tirsi morir volea (5) s. Madonna mia gentile (5) 6. Ma di chi debbo lamentarmi (4) 7. Sapi Signor che Lilia son io (5) 8. Per pian to la mia carne (4) 9. Quando la sera scaccia (5)

10. Liquide perle amor (5) 11. Partin) dunque (5) 12. Fera gentil (5) 13. Perche si streto, 2da parte (5) 14. Cantai hor piango (5) 15. Tengan dunque ver me, 2da parte (5) 16. Mentre la bella Dori (6) 17. Non ti sdegnar (6)

Composer2

de Monte Lasso

Marenzio

Ruffo Vinci Lasso

Marenzio

Rore

Lasso

A. Gabrieli

1 Copies are extant at the Austrian National Library, the University Li-brary at Genoa, and the British Museum in London (which now owns the copy formerly in the Hirsch Collection). I am grateful to the Viennese authorities for a microfilm of their copy.

2Titles and names have been modernized. Only information provided by Fallamero has been given here.

176

18.10 mi son giovinetta (4) D. Ferabosco 19. Livia gentil, voi sete tanto vaga 20. Poiche sei cosi sorte scropolusa 21. Preso son io nelle piu belle braccia 22. Canzonette d'amore 23. S'all'aparir di voi, fulgente stella 24. Vorria madonna fare, fare, fareti a sapere 25. 0 faccia che rallegri il paradiso 26. Siate avertiti, 0 voi cortesi am anti 27. Occhi leggiadri e cari 28. Amanti miei, poiche scontenti state 29. 10 son bell'e delicata 30. Vorria saper da voi, belle citelle 31. Chi mira gl'occhi tuoi 32. 10 son fenice & voi sete la fiamma 33. Nel vago lume de' bei vostri rai 34. Viver non posso senz'il mio bel sole 35. Gridate, gridate guerra 36. Amor se giusto sei 37. 10 vo morir non sia alcun 38. Mentr'io campai contento 39. Standomi un giorno (5) Lasso 40. Indi per alto mar, 2da parte (5) 41. In un boschetto, 3za parte (5) 42. Chiara fontana, 4ta parte (5) 43. Una strana fenice, 5ta parte (5) 44. Alfin vid'io, 6ta parte (5) 45. Si dolce d'amar voi (5) Striggio 46. Dolce mio ben (6) 47. Animam meam dilectam (5) Lasso 48. Congregamini, 2da parte (5) 49. Recercar del terzo tono Padovano 50. Recercar del ottavo tono 51. I dolci colli (6) Striggio 52. Et qual cervo ferito, 2da parte (6) 53. Anchor ch'io possa (6) 54. N asce la pena mia (6) 55. Anchor che col partir

Fallamero's anthology of forty-six numbers, exclusive of sepa-rate partes, comprises three distinct musical categories: lute arrangements of vocal favorites (Nos. 1-18, 39-48, 51-54), in-

177

tabulations of ensemble or keyboard ricercari (Nos. 49-50), and canzonette to the lute (Nos. 19-38 and 55). The first group-ing is the rule in Italian lutebooks, though the second type is less characteristic, since other lu tenists generally provided some of their own ricercari or fantasie, whereas Fallamero has merely intabulated works by another composer. As for the last category, it is unique to this tablature; these are the first can-zonette to the lute found in print. Had Fallamero added the phrase di diversi eccellentissimi musici after his motetti, ricer-cate, madrigali, his title page would have been clearer; but then he has carefully indicated each composer's name for all the se-lections in these elevated categories. The lighter canzonette alla napolitana, on the other hand, are given without any attribu-tions.

The presence of motets seems a rather conservative retention of a practice standard in tablatures of the 1540's. Boetticher's article (1954) on Fallamero indicates that his is the last book to follow this custom. 3 However, the promised motets actually turn out to be but one composition in two partes, Animam meam dilectam tradidi, a work of Lasso's middle years.4 By listing "motets" before madrigals on his title page, Fallamero is only paying lip service to tradition. In fact, the heading on his Table of Contents is more accurate: Tavola delli madrigalil motetti ricercate, et canzonettel intavolate nel liuto da Gabriel Fallamero.5

The two ricercari (Exs. 1 and 2) are poly thematic specimens from Annibale Padovano's Libro primo de ricercari a quattro voci, printed in 1556. Ex. 1 Ricercar del ottava lana (No. 8)6

'His statement that this is the last tablature "das noch einem grosseren Be-stand von Motetten der Spatrenaissance verpflichtet ist" is certainly an exag-geration (1954).

'First printed in Paris in 1565 by Le Roy (Boetticher 1958). 'The extensive manuscript tablature Upsala University Library VH87 in-

cludes only two motets as does Genoa University Library F VII 1, a manu-script source with a remarkably similar repertoire to Fallamero (Hambreus 1961:46-53; Neri 1890).

6Cf. the modern edition in open score by N. Pierront and J.P. Hennebains, Paris, Editions de L'Oiseau Lyre, 1934, p. 62.

178

Ex. 2 Ricercar del ferzo fono (No. 11)' J : 4-,J _ ,J I : I f'

Annibale, a predecessor of Andrea Gabrieli's at San Marco, was second organist there from 1552 to 1563 and composed keyboard (or ensemble) music, madrigals, and liturgical pieces. Fallamero intabulated these pieces from the original partbooks without adding so much as a single ornament; however, his D-tuning results in a transposition up a fifth.

By selecting instrumental compositions first published twenty-eight years earlier, Fallamero may seem behind the times; but there are several indications that Padovano's music was not con-sidered old-fashioned in 1584. For one thing, his Libro Primo de Ricercari was to be reprinted four years later in 1588. Then too, no less a vanguard spirit than Vincenzo Galilei had the highest praise for Padovano in both the Fronimo (1568; 1584) and the Dialogo (1581).8 In the former Galilei included an intabulation of one of these ricercari (del settimo tono) that he writes is "the most beautiful perhaps of all that he has written" and "in truth, to my view, ... marvelous." (Del Valle de Paz 1933:1ff.) Further on in the book he names four of his contem-poraries who, in his opinion, compose as well as they perform. Padovano is cited first, then Merulo, Guami, and Luzzaschi.

There is a more important reason why it was not inconsistent for the century's chief spokesman against polyphony to espouse Padovano's strictly contrapuntal music. Instrumental music lagged behind the stylistic development undergone by 16th-cen-tury vocal music. The newly independent instrumental genre had only begun to make obeisance to the classic style of sys-

'ibid., p. 84. The editors have transformed the first measures to

'h rid d 1 : 1_ though their table of variants notes the composer's intention in both origi-nal editions. Needless to say, Fallamero does not bear them out.

8"1 say then that in our times there have been many excellent players, both of the lute and of the keyboard instruments, among whom some have indeed known how to play well and how to write well, or let us say how to compose well, for their instruments, as for the keyboard instrument an Annibale Pad-ovano ... " (Excerpts from the Dialogo translated in Strunk 1950:320.)

179

tematic imitation during the post-J osquin period at the time of the madrigal's supremacy and of the turn to denser textures representative of the music by Willaert, Gombert, and Rore-in short, during the "mannerist" period. The novel treatment of textures and dissonances, the insistent pictorial urge were all developed at the suggestion of the poetic texts. Since the text-less ricercar or fantasia had no need" to imitate nature," it was not touched for a long time by the mannerist style. In fact, these genres maintained their classic serenity and polyphonic spirit through decades of production by masters like Cavazzoni, Willaert, Buus, Segni, Padovano, and Merulo. Since it was un-derstood that these compositions did not share in the newer style, they were evaluated according to different criteria. Though Galilei outspokenly favored the vocal monody and simple "na-tive song" style over Flemish counterpoint, he felt that the re-tention of the latter in instrumental music was appropriate (Palisca 1960:359ff.).

Thirty madrigal intabulations constitute the heart of this an-thology. Besides individual compositions there are a few cyclic ones, three sonnets set in the usual two partes and an entire Petrarchan canzona, Standomi un giorno solo, in six. Lasso, whom Fallamero calls Rolando, predominates, along with Strig-gio and Marenzio. That great "hit" of the century, Ferabosco's 10 mi son giovinetta, first printed in 1542, is the oldest selec-tion. Chronologically next come the Lasso, Rore, and Striggio cullings, the latter's six-part pieces indicative of the new fash-ionableness of this texture in the 'sixties and 'seventies. Indeed, the first book of Striggio's six-part madrigals was re-issued no less than eight times; its most often intabulated item was Nasce la pena mia, perhaps the second most famous piece in this an-thology. John Ward's axiom that "the repertoire offered by a tablature is normally that of the particular decade in which it was printed" (1952:88) is certainly valid for this mixed bag of madrigals, and all the more so because of the Marenzio and Andrea Gabrieli items which had just been published in 1580. All four Marenzio gems were to be "transalpinized" by Thomas Watson in his pioneering English madrigalian publications of 1588 and 1590 (Kerman 1962:53-55, 59).

A manuscript tablature in the Genoa University Library, F VII 1, described by Achille Neri (1890:73-81) has a similar reper-toire of Lasso, Rore, Striggio, and Marenzio madrigals and shares Fallamero's Nos. 12, 18, 39-44, 46, 51, 53, and 54. Its

180

anonymous compiler informs us by means of an enormous title9

that the Marchese of San Sorlino (who is also the Duke of Nemours' brother) has been kind enough to allow him "to copy from all of his rarest tablatures." The Fallamero volume pres-ently in the Genoa University Library may possibly have be-longed to the Marchese's collection, which would explain the many correspondences noted above.

The canzonette in our tablature open up a chapter in the still largely unwritten history of Italian accompanied song. In spite of literary, pictorial, and archival evidence for the con-tinued practice of solo song in Italy-singing to the lute, "viu-ola," viola da gamba, lira da braccio, harpsichord, and organ-there are relatively few printed musical documents of the prac-tice extant.10 Early in the annals of music printing, Italian lute song appeared in the form of three books of frottole to the lute, but later with the flood of many-voiced madrigal publica-tions that began in the 1530's, the solo genre dwindled to a thin trickle, re-emerging in the century's final quarter in the sphere of native partsong, i.e., the canzonetta and halletto. Fallamero's was the first printed collection to include canzonette with a lute part in tablature, and it was soon followed by Simone Verovio's series and by collections by Quaglia ti, Vecchi, Bellasio, Gastoldi, and A. Ferrari.

The canzonetta style had first appeared with the work of Ferretti, Conversi, and Caimo published in the 1560's, though the term itself was not to be used until the next decade. Sty-listically, the canzonetta mediated between the villanella and the madrigal. "The more animated the villanella becomes motivi-cally, the more its fifths disappear and the more it tends to take the form of the canzonetta," is Einstein's characterization of the process by which it originated (1949 2:582). The twenty examples that Fallamero grouped at the center of his book are typically brief and strophic, with the vocal superius printed in mensural notation over the tablature (Plate 1). For the four-part pieces, the latter simply reduces the lower three voice parts,

9 Giardino di lntavolatura per il leuto delle piu rare madrigali et vilanelle et capriccio brandi volte et corante gagliarde pas et mezzo che il Principe II Sigr Marchese di San Sorlino fratello del Sigr Duca di Nemours mi ha fatto favore di lasciarmeli copiare sopra tutte Ie sue piu rare intavolature.

10 See the discussion in Newman 1962:186-193,210-211.

181

but the canzonette a 3 are completely intabulated so that they can be performed with or without the singer.

Of all the tablature's contents only these twenty pieces lack attributions. The five four-part canzonette are easily identifi-able as Orazio Vecchi's, from his Libro Primo first published in 1581Y Vecchi complained about this practice in his dedica-tion: "Since the greater part of these canzonets have been strewn around Italy under various composers' names, I have decided to make public by means of the printing press the fact that they are mine ... "12 Of the fifteen three-part composi-tions remaining, I have only been able to identify four. It should be noted that identification from the music itself is mandatory with this light verse, so many different versions use the same capoverso. A list of the identified canzonette with their sources and a thematic listing of the unidentified remainder follow:

Title and No. of Parts Composer or source

20. Poiche sei cosi sorte scropolusa(3) Anon.!3 22. Canzonette d' amore( 4) Vecchi 24. Vorria madonna fare (3) Anon.14 25. o faccia che rallegri il paradiso (3) Anon.14 27. Occhi leggiadri e cari (3) De Antiquis13 3l. Chi mira g1' occhi tuoi (4) Vecchi 32. 10 son fenice (4) Vecchi 33. N el vago lume (4) Vecchi 37. 10 vo morir non sia alcun (3) G. Fiorino15 38. Mentr'io campai contento (4) Vecchi

"Einstein had identified 10 son fenice in his Vogel reVISIOn (1946). Long before this, Oscar Chilesotti had reprinted Fallamero's No. 24, 26, and 38 (1889) and No. 32 and 35 (1891). He later published the part-song versions of No. 24, 26,35, and 38 (1925).

121 have taken this from the copy of the fifth impression, 1591, in the library of the Civico Museo Bibliographico Musicale, Bologna.

I3I1 secondo libro delle villanelle alia napolitana a 3 voci, de diversi musici di Barri; Raccolte per Joanne de Antiquis con alcune delle sue . .. 1574. Modern edition by S.A. Luciani, Rome, Instituto italiano per la storia della musica, 1941.

I4I1 terzo libro delle viollote alia napoletana de diversi con due moresche nuovamente stampata a 3 voci. Venice, A. Gardano, 1567.

"Gaspar Fiorino, La nobilita di Roma ... et Ie vilanelle a 3 voci ... Venice, G. Scotto, 1571.

182

INCIPITS OF CAJVTUS PARTS OF UNIDENTIFIED CANZONETTE

19. r r r I r r I r r .J 1-Li via gen til, "/.

li3 #,J r r I r r f' I f' r r I F r r I r F r 1-Pre - so son i 0, "/. nel Ie pili bel-

23. - ,1 I I • r .. o. .. I I S'al a pa - nr di vo i.

26. f' r r I L F J I J J (; I J 18 I I Sia - ver ti te, "/.

28. 18 f' r J I j J I! J J J 4 r" r jd-A - man-ti mie - i, poi -che scon -

29. I f' r I r r F I-10 son bel-l'e de Ii ca - ta de la

30. 17 j± r r r I r -j I d J J I j J I-I . e Var-ria sa per da VOl, bel - Ie ci tel Ie

34. f' r r I p r J I J r" ) JU_ W J 18 I Vi ver non pos - so senz' il mia bel so Ie

35. I $ r f' I r r f' I r ,J r F 113 Gri - da te, Gri - da te, guer - ra, guerr

r rTFt:rrTIa r rTIZ -j Ie 113

01 "'" 36. A - mor se giu - sto se i com' al - cun

16 Not identical with a composItIOn with the same title in G. Zappasorgo's Napolitane a 3, Libro Primo, 1571. I am grateful to Luigi F, Tagliavini for checking the Zappasorgo volume for me.

17 Not identical with the piece so entitled in the Terzo libro delle Villotte (see note 14),

183

If after continued checking, these ten compositions still resist identification, the possibility that some or most of them are by the intabulator himself should be considered. Certainly, the dedicatory piece, Livia gentil, a tribute to Livia Guasca Pozza, ought to be assigned to Fallamero. A transcription is given here (Ex. 3) for comparison with the facsimile (Plate 1) and to illus-trate the simple homophonic style of these pieces. Is

Ex. 3 Livia gentil (No. 19) G. Fallamero (7)

Li - via gen - til, Li via gen - til, voi se te

tan - to va - ga, tan - to va - ga, Li via gen - til, VOl se te

tan - to va ga Ch'al ap - pa - rir del vo stro chia - TO vi-

so ne re - st'il - ni - to e con-qui so. so.

i *e in the original.

18Fallamero does not furnish transposition instructions of the kind found in the Petrucci frottola tablatures, the Verdelot-Willaert intabulations of 1536, and in some of the contents of the Bottrigari lute manuscript of 1574 (MacClintock 1956:179,186-190).

184

""'" Cf; til

tl-I--_:t_tI3.t.t:_-t---li-t-t-./t-:f.--I--:-+-tl- _f t-luia gcotiJt Lillia,gentil voi I: taDtO'Vaga tanto vaga Liuia gentll VOl fete taoto va-rf r f F f r f r f r f r

ga ch'31'apparir del uo(lro chiaro vi fo ne rdla il modo JuonitQ e conquifo

f ff f r f f r f --1-444f-f-l-Ot-- -&-- S" IT-- - '- ,----

-l- -+-t-l -;-+-t..L.- -}-- -i---rOT, i i } I +-+-J--J-+- . -+ -'1 i -T-J--+ --+-r----rl - oJ -- r 6+- -J- -tel-TTI-} } J 10 -J--OIOr- .- ----1-1{!'1 Citl f'O[cU1I1fJg,j 'I/unt·- nr/la Q...::.l'Jd'rfe d I {w It dotce Tlfo 'N..e It .onclo:

{( uJndo (" b"cca ride ouer {aue!l" Stncomc ['.11m2 mia cl4 me diulf4 1\e

Si ,be lluia gent;! ogn'/f1J "i c!Jiaf'lfa Ogn'unper U?, feruir Ii storz" bramm4 Tant'i dieua

,..... C/J Q\

f r ffFf f F f ! ijl-fr rfJ fff fr rr rr

Anchor checol partir 1' .. lma fi mora penfaodo di tornar'partir vurei taD to (on dulci Unto fon dulci ran to (on dolci gla ri-

off r oHI- --'+"':::-=-lHt1 :====----== -- :-d-c .. i!- ---.----- --+i-i- -T ---t--_ •• - . --- -----i-r-+ .i- • fS 5"4 -- ------------0- t-i- a-G -- -- -forni mie • LI L fIN E.

""0 .... I'D tv

I

A canzonetta version by Gaspar Fiorino of Rore's Anchor che col partire has been used to fill up two empty systems on the last page of the book (Plate 2). Perhaps it was originally planned as a twenty-first piece, closing off the canzonet group. It has lost its vocal line, though the text was retained. Based on two bits of music from this most famous madrigal (Ex. 4) and some snatches from its original verse, this inelegant reduction for popu-lar consumption indicates the existence in the Renaissance of an interest in the "instant" and oversimplified; it is a kind of "heart of the madrigal" (Ex. 5). Fallamero has used this partenza most appropriately as his volume's envoi.1 9

Ex. 4 Cipriano de Rore

n

j r 11 J J che col par - ti

j An cor re

taD - to son dol - ci gIl ri - tor TIl mei

Ex. 5 Anchor che col partir Gaspar Fiorino

A Canto of the original canzonetta

: II:) oj " An - cor che col par - tir l'al- rna si rna ra,

A A

OJ OJ I I t t I I r i---ri F -P- .- n

: : : Fallamero s mtabulatwD, No. 55

A

OJ --. ., rna - ra, Pen - san -do di tor - nar par - tir vor - re - i,_

A

oj i ., r t r i r r I r F f :

19This adds one more to the more than fifty settings and parodied versions listed by Ferand (1962:150-53). The source is Fronimo's La nobilta di Roma, 52.ff.

187

!

!

" : OJ " ..

- Tan to son dol - ci, tan - to son dol- ci

.. :

t.J l--t I' r i i/ ! r r r I i r f ..J J 1 .. .. : :

.. :

OJ gli ri - tor - ni mie - i i.

" I I 1':'1 :

t.J l i r I r r:e: I I I I

f:. f:. 1':'1 : :

In summary, our gentleman amateur has labored hard to ar-range a large quantity of music by fashionable Italian and ultremontane composers. His exertions and those of his fellow intabulators made it that much easier for contemporaries to familiarize themselves with vocal literature (in the absence of easily procurable scores) or to amuse themselves with the mor-ceaux choisis of the day. If it appears an extreme demand on the lute's powers to give it six-part pieces to play, we would do well to remember our daily usage of the piano as a medium for study, rehearsal, and pleasure; we often turn to it for help in "hearing" a six- or eight-part complex. The lute intabulation served these needs and perhaps one other, that of a seguente part with which to accompany or fill out the performances of many-voiced vocal works.

F allamero has taken care to provide arrangements of a variety (of types) of music. The only major genres he has slighted are the dances and canzoni. His tablature has the distinction of being the first collection in which the modest canzonette stand their ground with the complex creations of great madrigalists.

REFERENCES

BOETTICHER, WOLFGANG

1954 Fallamero. In Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Kassel und Basel, Vol. 3, col. 1757ff.

1958 O. di Lasso und seine Zeit. Kassel, Vol. 1, p. 206.

188

BOSSOLA, A.

1903 Donne illustri Alessandrine. Rivista di Storia, Arte, Archeologica della Provincia di Alessandria 12:25.

CHILESOTTI, OSCAR

1889 Saggio sulla melodia popolare del cinquecento, Milan. 1891 Lautenspieler des XVI. J ahrhunderts. Leipzig. 1925? Canzonette del secolo XVI. Milan.

DE LA LAURENCIE, LIONEL

1928 Les Luthistes. Paris.

DEL VALLE DE PAZ, GIACOMO

1933 Annibale Padovano nella storia della musica del cinque-cento. Turin.

EINSTEIN, ALFRED

1946 Italian Secular Vocal Music, etc. Music Library Asso-ciation Notes 4.

1949 The I talian Madrigal. Princeton.

FERAND, ERNEST T. 1962 Anchor che col partire; Die Schicksale eines beriihm ten

Madrigals. Festschrift K.G. Fellerers. Regensburg, pp. 137-154.

GUASCO, ANNIBALE

1605 Tela cangiante ... Opera morale (containing 3,110 madrigal poems). Milan.

HAMBRAEUS, BENGT

1961 Codex Carminum Gallicorum; une etude sur Ie ms. 87 de la Bibliotheque de l'Universite d'Upsala. Upsala.

KERMAN, JOSEPH

1962 The Elizabethan Madrigal. N.Y.

MACCUNTOCK, CAROL

1956 A Court Musician's Songbook: Modena Ms. C311. Journal of the American Musicological Society 9:177-185.

189

NERI, ACHILLE

1890 Un codice musicale del secolo XVI. In Studi Biblio-grafici e Letterari. Genoa.

NEWMAN, JOEL

1962 The Madrigals of Salamon de' Rossi. Unpublished PhD. disserta tion, Columbia University.

PALISCA, CLAUDE

1960 Vincenzo Galilei and some Links between "Pseudo-Monody" and Monody. Musical Quarterly 46:344-360.

REESE, GUSTAVE

1954 Music in the Renaissance. N.Y.

R.I.5.M. 1960 Repertoire international des sources musicales. Munich.

STRUNK, OLIVER

1950 Source Readings in Music History. N.Y.

WARD, JOHN

1952 The Use of Borrowed Material in 16th-Century In-strumental Music. Journal of the American Musicolo-gical Society 5:88-98.

190

THE 1965 REVISION OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW Austin Clarkson

NEXT TO INCOME TAX and jay-walking, the least unbroken law is surely that of copyright, if only because the copyright law presently in force was passed in 1909 and tailored to the Gutenberg, rather than to the Marconi, era. The drafters of the 1909 statute could not have foreseen that authors' rights would soon be threatened by juke boxes, microfilm, videotape recorders, communication satellites, and computerized storage and retrieval of information. They did not anticipate that within 50 years some works of authorship would be primarily fixed by magnetic tape or by a set of punched cards that program a computer. N or did they imagine that the notion of an "original" would be virtually smothered by a million Mona Lisa's, or that copying techniques would place "first editions" within the reach of everyone. Revision of the copyright law has had to accommo-date the technological blitz of the last half century, to right inequities, and to attempt to make some provision for the shape of things to come. I t may not be so very long before households with any cultural pretensions whatever subscribe to the Micro-film of the Month Club, or own cans of magnetic tape (for use on their home computer) marked The English Novel 1700-1950, and The Annual Supplement of New Music for 1995 (in four parts; one each for Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Asia).

The level of respect and recognition accorded by the members of a high culture to its finest and most valuable artifacts is inevitably mirrored in its copyright law. That the present u.s. copyright law has survived, coelacanthlike, so long attests to nothing more than that an immobilizing inertia afflicts some as-pects of culture; that it has been permitted to survive in such con-dition is a national, if not international, scandal. In past decades, rampant apathy, complacency, and criminal self-interest have successfully thwarted reform. And even now, the revision bill of 1965 is gravely threatened by the juke-box profiteers and their allies who object to paying royalties on recorded performances,

AUSTIN CLARKSON is an instructor of music at Columbia University.

191

and by the "non-profiteers" on the fringes of the educational es-tablishment who self-righteously assert that all materials used for the moral, spiritual, and intellectual betterment of the populace should be donated free of charge.

Copyright law influences the entire intellectual health of the community. It not only affects writers, composers, performers, artists, scientists, teachers, and students, but in the modern world it plays an increasingly important role in international re-lations. As Abraham L. Kaminstein, Register of Copyrights, points out in the Preface to his Supplementary Report on the 1965 Revision Bill: "It is startling to realize, in an era when copyrighted materials are being disseminated instantaneously throughout the globe, that the United States has copyright re-lations with less than half of the world's nations. The injustice of this situation to authors here and abroad is obvious, but equally serious to our national interest is the lack of the cultural bridge between countries that copyright furnishes."l The fol-lowing digest of some leading aspects of the 1965 Copyright Law Revision Bill is presented in the belief that our readers have a large stake in seeing an equitable, honorable, and effec-tive copyright bill signed into law. Since the revision bill will almost certainly be taken up in the next session of Congress there is still time for interested individuals and groups to ac-quaint themselves with the bill and to make their opinions known on Capitol Hill.

Preparatory studies for the revision of the antiquated copy-right law were initiated in 1955 and resulted six years later in a report submitted by the Register of Copyrights. The report's more controversial recommendations stung hitherto lethargic parties into violent opposition. After another three years of dis-cussion, debate, hearings, and redrafting, the revision bill of 1964 was submitted for further comment. The final, legislative, phase began this year when Senator McClellan and Representa-tive Celler introduced the Copyright Law Revision Bill to the 89th Congress on February 4 for active consideration. The Reg-ister of Copyrights filed a supplementary report in May which

ICopyright Law Revision, Part 6; Supplementary Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law: 1965 Re-vision Bill. Washington, D.C., 1965, p. xv. (For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.s. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402. Price $1.00.)

192

summarizes the reViSIOn program and presents the bill in its most up-to-date form. The ensuing summary is made from this supplementary report with a view to interesting a readership concerned with matters musical and educational. Those who de-sire more complete information are urged to purchase the report itself. A. THE SUBJECT MATTER OF COPYRiGHT

1. The present reference to "all the writings of an author" as the general subject matter of copyright has been replaced by the phrase "original works of authorship." This phrase main-tains the established standards of originality without implying any further requirements of esthetic value, novelty, or ingenuity.

2. The revision bill takes a giant step forward by requiring that protected works be fixed in any tangible medium of ex-pression now known or later developed, from which works can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Improvisations and unrecorded performances would not be subject to statutory protection but would continue to be protected at common law un til such time as they are fixed. No particular form of fixation is required as long as the work is capable of being retrieved. A musical composition, for. example, would be copyrightable if it is written or recorded in words or any kind of visible notation, in Braille, on a phonograph disk, on a film sound track, on magnetic tape, or on punch cards. It will now be possible for composers of tape music, concrete music, and programs for a computer to copyright their works without having to reduce them, as is presently necessary, to some bogus musical script.

3. Another important change is the addition of a new cate-gory to the subject matter of copyright: "sound recordings." The revision bill distinguishes between sound recordings (copy-rightable works that result from the fixation of a series of sounds) and phonorecords (material objects in which sounds are fixed). Sound recordings as copyrightable works are therefore distinguished from any musical, literary, or dramatic works that are reproduced on phonorecords. Thus, a phonorecord (a disk or tape, for example) of a song would usually constitute a reproduction of two copyrighted works under the bill: the song and the sound recording of it. Where, on the other hand, the composition recorded is a work in the public domain, the phono-record would reproduce only one copyrighted work: the sound recording.

193

B. EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS UNDER COPYRIGHT

Limitation of the author's exclusive rights is, not surprisingly, the most disputed part of the revision bill and the one most affected by advancing technology. The basic legislative problem is to insure that the law provides the necessary monetary in-centive to write, produce, and publish creative works, while at the same time guarding against the danger that these works will not be disseminated and used as fully as they should be because of copyright restrictions. As shown by the iniquitous juke-box exemption, a particular use which at one time may have had little or no economic impact on the author's rights can assume tremendous importance in times to come. An author's righ ts cannot be tied to present technology so that his copy-right loses much of its value because of unforeseen technological advances.

The five basic exclusive rights granted the owner of a copy-right are the right (1) to reproduce the work in copies or pho-norecords; (2) to prepare derivative works based on the work; (3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public; (4) to perform the work publicly; and (5) to exhibit the work publicly.

A source of bitter contention between educational groups and authors and publishers has to do with the relative merits of "fair" or "free" use of copyrighted material by non-profit users such as teachers, librarians, and educational broadcasters. The unrestrained use of photocopying, recording, and other devices can go far beyond the recognized limits of "fair" use (as estab-lished by precedent) and may severely curtail the copyright owner's market for copies of his work. Even when the new media (such as non-profit broadcasting, linked computers, etc.) are not operated for profit, they may reach huge audiences and may be expected to displace the demand for authors' works by other users from whom copyright owners derive compensation. The drafters of the revision bill believe that reasonable adjust-ments between the legitimate interests of copyright owners and those of certain non-profit users are no doubt necessary, but they affirm that the day is past when any particular use of works should be exempted for the sole reason that it is "not for profit." Hence, the revision bill imposes no blanket "for profit" limita-tion on the right of public performance; exemptions from copy-right control are instead spelled out under a number of headings, such as fair use, face-to-face teaching activities, educational

194

broadcasting, religious services, et alia. 1. Fair use. The drafters of the revision had fond hopes of

at last spelling out the meaning of "fair use" so that it would be unnecessary to continue relying on the complex history of precedent. The 1964 version of the revision bill reads as follows in this regard:

The fair use of a copyrighted work to the extent reasonably nec-essary or incidental to a legitimate purpose such as criticism, com-ment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use, the factors to be con-sidered shall include: (1) the purpose and character of the use; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and sub-stantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Both sides reacted unfavorably to this language. The author-publisher groups feared that specific mention of uses such as "teaching, scholarship, or research" could be taken to imply that any use even remotely connected with these activities would be a "fair use," while educational groups objected seriously to re-strictive language such as "to the extent reasonably necessary or incidental to a legitimate purpose" and "the amount and sub-stantiality of the portion used." A group of educational organi-zations urged further that the bill adopt a new provision which would specify anum ber of teaching and scholarly activities as completely exempt from copyright control. In broad terms and with certain exceptions, the proposal would permit any teacher or other person or organization engaged in non-profit educational activities to make a single copy or record of an entire work, or a reasonable number of copies of "excerpts or quotations," for use in connection with those activities. It was argued that these privileges are a necessary part of good teaching and that it is unjustifiable to burden educators with the need to buy copies for limited use or to obtain advance clearances and pay royalties for making copies. Authors, publishers and other copyright owners reacted violently to these proposals on the ground that the market for their works would be severely diminished and that ultimately the economic incentive for the creation and pub-lication of the very works on which education depends would be destroyed. Agreement was evidently impossible to reach, so the drafters regretfully pared the provision down to the bare

195

clause that "the fair use of a copyrighted work is not an in-fringement of copyright."

The inability of the producers and users of copyright works to agree on a definition of fair use betrays a lamentable cleavage in our culture. The corrupting effect of evaluating activities ac-cording to whether or not one gains money by them and of the defensive attitude that educators are unappreciated and inade-quately rewarded have taken their toll of the respect we grant the work of authorship itself. It seems to me that the greatest concessions need to be made by the rank and file of professional non-profiteers who believe that because they are somehow serv-ing the public good, they should be exempted from the need to respect an author's rights. But as educators we should not have to appeal to some higher, even divine, right and hence to de-mand special treatment under earthly law. If educators have a score to settle with society (and there is plenty of evidence to show that they have) recompense should be levied on the culture as a whole. Educators must apprise everyone of his responsibil-ity to education and not ask authors and publishers to shoulder the collective guilt as scapegoats. If a society truly respects its education it will not only reward its authors for their work, it will ensure that only the best ideas are used and even pay pre-mium prices for them gladly. Society will surely regard its edu-cation more highly if its educators in turn respect their ma-terials enough to pay for them a t fair and honorable rates rather than scrambling for discount, wholesale, or even fire sale prices.

The Execu tive Board of the American Musicological Society recently reported to the Congress in favor of the fair use clause and opposed to the proposals of the educational association. Everyone who can should express himself on this issue to his Congressman.

2. Face-ta-face teaching activities. Performance or exhibi-tion of a work by instructors or pupils in the course of face-to-face teaching activities in a classroom or similar place normally devoted to instruction is exempted from copyright control. There is no limitation on the types of work covered by this ex-emption, which would mean that a teacher or student in a class-room situation would be free to read from copyrighted text ma-terial, to act out a dramatic work, or to perform a musical work, to perform a copyrighted motion picture by showing it to his class, or to exhibit copyrighted text or graphic material by means of projectors. No provision is made to exempt the copy-

196

ing by office duplicators of an entire work for classroom use. It won't be easy, but teachers will have to evolve a new attitude to copyrigh ted works if they wish to remain law-abiding citizens.

3. Educational broadcasting. Here is another area in which authors and publishers sharply oppose educational groups. Non-profit educational broadcasting is now reaching large audiences and the revision bill argues that these audiences are increasing rapidly, that as a medium for entertainment, recreation, and communication of information, a good deal of educational pro-gramming is indistinguishable from commercial programming, and that the time may come when many works will reach the public primarily through educational broadcasting. It concludes that the author's compensation should be determined by the number of people reached, and that it does not seem too much to ask that some of the money now going to support educational broadcasting activities be used to compensate authors and pub-lishers whose works are essential to those activities. Hence, the 1965 bill exempts educational broadcasting made primarily for reception in classrooms and as a regular part of systematic in-structional activities of a non-profit educational institution, but does not exempt transmissions intended for the enlightenment, edification, or instruction of the public at large. c. FEDERAL PRE-EMPTION AND DURATION OF COPYRIGHT

1. Single national system. Under the present law there is a dual system of protection of works: before publication they are protected under common law, whereas after publication they are protected under Federal statute. The revision would establish a single system of statutory protection for all works whether published or unpublished. The common law would continue to protect works (such as choreography and improvisations) up to the time they are fixed in tangible form, but thereafter they would be subject to exclusive Federal protection under the stat-ute even though they are never published or registered.

2. Duration of copyright in works created after the new law's effective date. The present term of copyright is 28 years from first publication or registration, renewable for a second period of 28 years. With respect to works created after it comes into ef-fect, the bill would provide for a term of the author's life plus 50 years, in order to bring it into line with the copyright term in most countries. "Joint works" would be protected for the life of the second author to die plus 50 years after his death. For anonymous works, pseudonymous works, and works made for

197

hire, the term would generally be 75 years from publication, with a maximum limit of 100 years from creation of the work.

3. Duration of copyright in pre-existing works under com-mon law protection. An unpublished work still under common law protection when the statute comes into effect would be brought under the statute and given the same term of copyright as that applicable to works created after the effective date.

4. Duration of subsisting copyrights. For copyrights still in their first term when the new law comes into effect, the bill would retain the present renewal provisions but would extend the length of the renewal term from 28 to 47 years (making a total term of 75 years from publication or registration). For copyrigh ts in their renewal term the total term would also be extended to 75 years.

198

REPOR T FROM INDIANA: Inter-American Conference of Ethnomusicology and Composition David A. Sheldon

LE GROWING AWARENESS of the contributions of our neigh-bors in Latin America to the fields of musical composition and scholarship, as well as the sincere desire for active hemispheric cooperation and exchange in these areas, is indeed apparent in the work of the Latin American Music Center and the Archives of Traditional Music on the Bloomington campus of Indiana University. It comes as no surprise, then, that this University should take on the ambitious task of serving as host to the Fourth General Assembly of the Inter-American Music Coun-cil (CIDEM), the First Inter-American Composers Seminar, and the Second Inter-American Conference on Ethnomusicology. These meetings, which took place April 24-28 and involved over 110 participants and observers, were held in conjunction with the Third Spring Festival of Music of the Americas presented by the Latin American Music Center of Indiana University. Besides Indiana University and CIDEM, the other sponsoring institutions were the Music Division of the Pan-American Union and the National Music Council of the United States.

CIDEM, founded no more than a decade ago, has already been very active in establishing educational and research pro-grams involving both North and Latin America. The First Inter-American Conference on Ethnomusicology was held two years ago in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, the papers from which were published by the Pan-American Union. At the suggestion of Dr. George List, Director of the Archives of Traditional Music at Indiana University, it was decided at that first meet-ing to hold the second conference at Indiana University in 1965. In calling together a joint meeting with the First Inter-Ameri-can Composers Seminar, the chief goal in the planners' minds

DA VID A. SHELDON is a doctoral student and graduate assistant in musi-cology at Indiana University.

199

was to create an atmosphere where related problems could be discussed on an interdisciplinary, as well as inter-American, basis. In addition, there seemed to be the hope that the mere physical contact and active participation of the delegates might transcend political and professional boundaries, thus achieving a common understanding with regard to basic issues facing both groups. The director of the Latin American Music Center at Indiana University and general chairman and planner for the entire conference, Professor Juan Orrego-Salas, feels that if he is fortunate enough to participate in the planning of another joint meeting of this nature, he would like to see it expanded to represent music education, historical musicology, and the views of professional performers.

Such a full program does pose many problems as evidenced by this conference. Because of the inevitable limitations of time, the composers, seminars and ethnomusicology conferences were unfortunately conducted simultaneously during the four-day period in which papers were given, except for one joint meeting of both groups. An invaluable aid to the delegates in-terested in both areas was the printed copies (in Spanish and in English) of all the papers made available to the delegates before the respective sessions. A sincere attempt was made to overcome the language barriers during the round table discus-sions by having simultaneous translation with the aid of trans-lators and earphones. For the most part successful, much was yet lost in the more rapid exchanges between participants.

The discussion topics for the Composers Seminar centered around problems facing the contemporary composer of the Americas. Specific topics were: "The Performance of New Mu-sic," "The Training of the Composer," "The Public and Live Mu-sic," and "State and Private Aid to Music." A general consensus of opinion arose from these sessions that the basic problem of the contemporary composer lay in the area of the education of the public. While the composers from Latin American countries were fairly well represented, major figures from North America were disappointingly few since most of those invited were unable to attend.

In this respect the ethnomusicologists were in a much bet-ter position. Representing the United States with papers were Frank Gillis, Charles Haywood, George List, Alan Merriam, Bruno N ettl, and Charles Seeger. Also participating were Bar-bara Krader, John Mueller, Willard Rhodes, and Nicolas Slonim-

200

•

•

•

sky. Special mention should be made of Frank Gillis, Associate Director of the Archives of Traditional Music at Indiana Uni-versity, who served as general chairman and host for all the ethnomusicology sessions. Gilbert Chase and Rae Korson, al-though listed in the program as participants, were unable to attend.

Of the sixteen papers given in the ethnomusicology confer-ence (including the two given at the joint session), ten were presented by delegates from Latin American countries. Most of the Latin American ethnomusicologists who gave papers at the first conference held in 1963 were again present. Some new-comers were Manuel Danneman (Chile), Flor de Maria Rodri-guez (Uruguay), and L. H. Correa de Azevedo (Brazil, now in Paris for UNESCO).

The general theme of the ethnomusicology conference was Acculturation and Musical Traditions in the United States and Latin America. This writer felt that the papers given by eth-nom usicologists from the United States, especially those on North American subjects, were distinguished by a somewhat more sophisticated and highly developed methodology than were those given by the delegates from Latin American countries. In addi-tion, it was often evident in the papers dealing with Latin American music that research had been conducted in virtually unplowed ground. While such pioneering is obviously necessary and must be begun by someone, this situation had the usual result of producing papers with very broad scopes and very tentative conclusions. On the other hand, although they might not have the advantage of the scholarly traditions in musicology and the social sciences to the extent that we do in this country, the Latin American ethnomusicologists showed that they are quite capable of scholarship of a very high calibre. It is a pleasure to know that Indiana University plans to publish in English all of the papers given at the Inter-American Conference .

201

William Sherman Casey Printed English lute instruction books, 1568-1610

Ann Arbor: University Microfilms 60-2514)' 1960. (pos. film $3.15; Michigan diss.)

Julia Sutton

(UM order no. University of

Toward the latter part of the 16th century, England's artistic riches crowded one upon another in such profusion as to produce one of the most remarkable creative explosions in our history. Not least among the exalted arts of the time was that of the lutenist whose "sweet song," attested to by innumerable poets, still provides us with some of the loveliest sounds in the lute repertoire. More mundane, perhaps, but of importance as contributions to and manifestations of the great popularity of the lute, were the lute instruction books printed in Eng-land during this period. William Casey, in his two-volume study, sur-veys the five extant self-instructors published between 1568 and 1610 and includes a transcription of the music in the fourth book.

The five books published between 1568 and 1610 are:

1. Le Roy, Adrian. A Briefe and Easie Instruction to Learne the Tableture to Conducte and Dispose Thy Hande unto the Lute. Translated by J. Alford Londoner. London: John Kyngston for James Roubothum, 1568. '

2. Le Roy, Adrian. A Briefe and Plaine Instruction to Set All Musicke of Eight Divers Tunes in Tableture for the Lute, and A Briefe Instruction How to Play on the Lute by Tablatorie, to Conduct and Dispose Thy Hand unto the Lute, with Certaine Easie Lessons for That Purpose . ... And Also a Third Booke Containing Divers New Excellent Tunes. Translated by F. Ke., Gentleman. London: James Rowbothome, 1574.

3. Barley, William. A New Booke of Tabliture, Conteining Sundrie Easie and Familiar Instructions, Shewing Howe to Attaine to the Instruments, As the Lute, Orpharion, and Bandora: Together with Divers New Lessons to Each of These Instruments. London: William Barley, 1596.

'The music from this work appears in Adrian Le Roy, Fantasies et Danses from A briefe and Easye Instruction (1568), ed. Pierre Jansen (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, 1962). The original volume in French is lost.

202

•

•

4. Robinson, Thomas. The Schoole of Musicke: Wherein is Taught, the Perfect Method, of True Fingering of the Lute, Pandora, Orpharion, and Viol de Gamba; with most infallible generall rules, both easie and delightful/. London: printed by Thomas Este for Simon Waterson, 1603.

5. Dowland, Robert. Varietie of Lute Lessons, London: Thomas Adams, 1610. This contains two instructional sections: J ean-Baptiste Besard's "Necessarie Observations Belonging to the Lute and Lute Playing," trans. R. Dowland; and John Dowland's "Other Necessarie Observations Belonging to the Lute."2

It should be stated at the outset that Casey's interest is more peda-gogic than scholarly. As an amateur guitarist and teacher, he explains, he has chosen to make a compendium of the instructions in the five publications in order to provide a lute tutor for the contemporary player (i.e., guitarist with an interest in old music). His decision to transcribe Robinson's music was also dictated by considerations of its practicability for beginners. Furthermore, the transcription is for gui-tar rather than lute.

There is no question that the inclusion of Robinson's music in the second volume marks Dr. Casey's most important contribution. Robin-son's life is hardly known to us, but we do know that he was in the service of the Earl of Exeter and the court of Elsinore. His music re-flects this high professional standing. 3 The Schoole of Musicke con-tains 38 delightful and characteristic pieces (6 for lu te duet), always skillfully and idiomatically written, always charming; some indeed are outstanding. The complex yet lovely Fantasie for Two Lutes, the exer-cise in simple chords (Griffe His Delight), the setting of Row Well Ye Mariners, and others among the dances or variations on grounds are worthy of inclusion among the finest of the lute repertoire. We may note here that ties with the virginal repertoire of the same period are very close.

Dr. Casey's transcription methods are on the whole highly com-mendable. His was undoubtedly a labor of love, for his copying of the tablature along with the transcription (a procedure recommended but not always followed by modern scholars) represents countless hours of work. Highly accurate, certainly musical, he carries out a most praise-worthy goal of providing an edition which at once preserves the poly-phonic nature of the music (about which all instructors of the period are in complete agreement) and is entirely playable. Praises for bring-ing this music out in a good modern edition are certainly in order. It is really too bad that the title of the thesis gives no hint of the emphasis on Robinson and the inclusion of his music. This, I am sure, is why

2Facsimile edition by Schott (London, 1958). 30ther works by Robinson are Medulla Musicke ... transposed to the lute

(London, 1603), now lost; New Citharen Lessons (London, 1609).

203

Richard Alexander Harmon does not list Casey's work in his article on Robinson (MGG 11:584-85).

Unfortunately, the transcription of the tablature into modern gui-tar notation (E tuning) rather than lute (G tuning) is questionable today not only from a scholarly but from a musical point of view. 4

It caters to the outdated notion that the lute is an esoteric, dead in-strument and fails to recognize or encourage the renaissance it is so deservedly enjoying. While it is always difficult for the editor to make decisions with regard to transcription procedures and while the results are always easy to criticize, Dr. Casey would have done well to have read the lengthy discussions on the subject in Le Luth et sa musique 5

and to have given more weight to the fact that recent editions of lute music are all in the original tuning. As it is, guitarists may thank him • for adding fine music to their literature; lutenists, while awaiting David Lumsden's forthcoming publication of a lute transcription,6 will have to be satisfied with the tablature placed above the guitar music (they may also read the music in the bass clef, transposed up one octave, with a change of key signature).

Among minor points of criticism, one may wonder why Dr. Casey chooses to change some of Robinson's spellings (e.g., "gigue" in the original has become" jig," and" almaigne" is converted to "allemande"), but not others (Robinson's "fantasie" is kept), or why he chooses to omit some of the music of Robinson's "Rules to instruct you to sing" (the music omitted is for viol and voice). This author would have liked to see unusual positions and courses indicated in the modern notation, a technique employed by some modern transcribers,' but this is a matter of personal preference. Nevertheless, Casey's omission in the transcription of fingerings given by Robinson is puzzling.

In the first volume of his thesis, the five self-instructors are intro-duced first, together with a careful and rather lengthy explanati0n of the tablature and the reasons for transcribing it for guitar. Then we launch into the meat of the prose text: an extensive compendium of the instructions, with numerous examples culled from the originals transcribed together with the tablature. The various books' recom-mendations on choice of instruments, their stringing, fretting, and

4Casey justifies his use of the E tuning by citing Edmund Fellowes' trans-position of the lute songs "down in many instances" in The English School of Lutenist Song Writers (London, 1920-1932), suggesting that the actual pitch of most lutes was lower than concert G. Arthur Mendel, "Pitch in the 16th and Early 17th Centuries," Musical Quarterly 24:28ff., 199ff., 336ff., 575ff., presents contradictory evidence in these masterly essays which should certainly have been taken into account.

sJean Jacquot, ed. (Paris, 1958). With library cataloguing systems as slow as they are, however, it may be that Dr. Casey's access to this valuable book was blocked even as la te as 1960.

6Announced in Le Luth et sa musique, p. 34l. 7E.g., David Lumsden, ed., English Lute Music (16th Century) (London, 1963).

204

..

tuning are covered, as are Le Roy's very specific instructions on the intabulation of vocal music. The chief matter in all the books is finger-ing technique for both hands (it is worth noting that the tutors are all in substantial agreement here), and each point is clearly explained. A search for hints in the tutors as to performance practices (dynamics, ornaments) predictably turns up very little, though Robinson is more explicit than the others. There follows a frankly superficial survey of the music in the lute books of Le Roy, Barley, and R. Dowland; and finally, there is a fairly extensive analysis of Robinson's music .

Certainly anyone wishing specific instructions on lute playing will do well to read Casey. His survey is arranged in a logical, straightfor-ward manner, and many of the best examples and exercises to be found in all the books are included. It is with Volume 1, however, that one may have the greatest quarrel, for the scholar will look in vain here for an exact comparison of the tutors (as in a chart, for instance), for an explanation of historical developments or influences, for any biographi-cal information on authors or composers (even Robinson gets no bio-graphical notice), or for any discussion of musical trends, types, or sources for the music.

The title of the thesis is ambiguous, for it suggests that the five lute instructors published in England were of English origin. Actually, only one of the five, Thomas Robinson's, is of English provenance (I am referring to the instructions, not to the music). Dr. Casey, while duly taking note of the foreign origins of the other four, draws no con-clusions therefrom about historical priority or musical influences up-on England. Although he states quite properly that Nos. 1, 2, and 3 of the instructors are all translations of Le Roy's first instruction book (thus reducing the real number of books to three), he does not ask why Le Roy should have been popular for so 10ng.8 No effort whatsoever is made to locate the source of the major instructional portion of No.5 (J.B. Besard's "Necessarie Observations Belonging to the Lute and Lute Playing"), about which there is no mystery and which could have been obtained quite easily.9 One would also have thought that since extensive quotes are taken from Besard's copious instructions, an a t-tempt might have been made to judge Dowland's accuracy in translat-ing and in copying the examples, yet there is nothing on this point. lo

BFor complete information on Le Roy's instruction books, see Adrian Le Roy, Premier livre de tabulature de luth (1551), eds. Andre Souris and Richard de Morcourt (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, 1960) with a historical introduction by Jean Jacquot and a list of concordances by Daniel Heartz.

9Dowland's translation is from Besard's De Modo in testudine libel/us, the instructional portion of his gigantic Thesaurus harmonicus (Cologne, 1603).

lOThe translation is indeed very close to the original and only a few minor changes of fingering were made in the examples. Cf. Julia Sutton, "The Lute instructions in Jean-Baptiste Besard's Novus partus (1617)," Musical Quar-terly 51:345-62.

205

It must indeed be of some significance that the tablature imported into England at this time was French and that the technique was interna-tional, but nothing is said of it.n To put it briefly, no questions are asked which move beyond the realm of the factual material in the texts orwhich would serve to place them in historical context.

Small errors of scholarship may also be noted in this section. The reference to p. 2 on p. 27 is to p. 22. Pavane is consistently misspelled as "pavanne," although a number of acceptable variant spellings could have been used. The case for the terms "crotchet," "minim," etc., in an American thesis is also dubious; if authenticity were in order at this point, the original instructions would be all we would need.

Setting aside the cursory summaries of the musical contents of Le Roy, Barley, and Dowland, we turn to the discussion of Thomas Robin-son's music. Here Casey's pedagogical point of view provides us with a good analysis of the pieces in order of difficulty. He goes into their technical requirements (works calling primarily for single notes, those employing chords or high positions), and then gives us some insight into the various forms in the collection (psalms, variations upon grounds, dance structures such as binary or varied binary [double] types), and a look at modality versus tonality, and key schemes. Beyond this, as was said above, we are not taken.

The author's scholarship here is casually hit-or-miss, for though he claims to have done no work on sources, this is not quite true. For ex-ample, he recognizes that the variations on the hexachord are typical, citing the six examples in the Fitzwilliam Virginal Book as proof; he is aware that Robinson's Spanish Pavin employs the same melody as Bull's (Fitz., Vol. 2),12 and that Robinson's Coe From My Win-dow is to the same tune found in several settings in the same source. A few hours' more work with the same collection would have told him that Robinson's Twenty Waies Upon the Bels [sic] is based on ex-actly the same two-note motive as Byrd's The Bells (Fitz., Vol. 1); that the Passamezzo Calliard is constructed over the same bass as the paired Passamezzo Pavana and Cagliarda Passamezzo of Byrd and also of Peter Philips (both in Fitz., Vol. 1); and that this bass is in

l1Besard, for example, grew up in Burgundy, studied for a number of years in Rome, and subsequently published in Cologne and Augsburg. His written language was Latin, his tablature French. Diana Poulton, "La Technique du jeu du luth en France et en Angleterre," Le Luth et sa musique, pp. 107-119, says, " ... Ie succes de la "Breve et facile instruction" ... de Le Roy [in England] et Ie fait qu'elle demeura l'ouvrage classique sur Ie luth, en differents traduc-tions, jusqu'au debut du xvrre siecle, montre qu'elle devait decrire la tech-nique communement en usage." Karl Scheit, "Ce que nous enseignent les traites de luth des environs de 1600," Le Luth et sa musique, pp. 93-105, discusses Robinson, Besard, and Waissel, pointing ou t more similarities than differences.

12AIl references are to the edition by J.A. Fuller Maitland and W. Barclay Squire (Breitkopf and Hartel, 1899; reprinted by Dover Publications, N.Y. 1963).

206

fact the popular Pasamezzo antico. 13 He would also have learned that Robinson's Robin is to the Greenwood Gone is to the same tune used by Munday (Robin, Fitz., Vol. 1) and Farnaby (Bonny Sweet Robin, Fitz., Vol. 2). Had he checked a little further on the Spanish Pavin, he would have found that not only the melody bu t the bass, a variant of the folia, is identical with Bull's and that melody and bass to-gether were commonly known as the PavanigliaY Other concord-ances are immediately suggested by a quick survey of the indexes of the virginal books of the time. IS

The bibliography reflects the lacunae in the study. Even in English there are major omissions (e.g., Bukofzer's Music in the Baroque Era or any of the literature on virginal music), but the lack of foreign references is almost complete (e.g., all the pertinent articles in La Musique Instrumentale de la Renaissance,16 the entries in MGG which had appeared prior to 1960). In short, this is an uneven piece of work, lacking not all but many of the normal appurtenances of schol-arship.

The chief problem is that Casey has really attempted to handle two theses: a study of lute instruction books published in Elizabethan England and a study and transcription of Thomas Robinson's Schoole of Musick. As it is, both are incomplete. The practical performer can benefit (if he is a guitarist) from the work Casey has done; the scholar will have to await further studies.

l3Reese, Music in the Renaissance (New York, 1954), 864ff., discusses the" passamezzo pavans" of the English school at this time.

14Reese, ibid., p. 865. See also Diana Poulton, "Notes on the Spanish Pavan," The Lute Society lournaI3:5-16, in which she gives a long list of concordances.

lSHans F. Redlich, "Virginal Music," Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Eric Blom, 9:4-19.

16Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (Paris, 1955).

JULIA SUTTON received her Ph.D. in musicology from the Eastman School of Music. She is presently an instructor at Queens College.

207

Stoddard Lincoln John Eccles: The last of a tradition

1963 unpublished diss., Oxford University.

Franklin Zimmerman

The value of the work appearing recently under this somewhat ro-mantically subtitled caption can best be summed up by saying that it fills a long-felt need for a study in depth of an important composer of the post-Purcellian schoo!. Moreover, it fills the need through expert handling of an enormous amount of detail, much of which is the result of original research and analysis. Its total worth is such that it is cer-tain to be an important item in the bibliographies of future scholars of English music of the late 17th and early 18th centuries.

Placing Eccles in the as-yet-seldom-researched hiatus between the periods of Purcell and Handel in the history of English music, Mr. Lincoln first sorts out a few genealogical problems, then sets to work on his main task: to discover Eccles' significance in native musical de-velopments in London during the post-Purcellian twilight and to diag-nose the ills which brought these developments to nothing. Reflecting upon the aesthetic interworkings of earlier English musical and poetical traditions, he formulates and substantiates the notion that it has been the awkwardness of the English language when sung which has imposed upon musician and lyric poet their most difficult problems. For the music dramatist with classical ideals these problems have been virtually insurmountable.

Comparing the achievements and methods of Henry Lawes to those of Lully, Mr. Lincoln then traces the development of the rhetorical style of the Lawes brothers, following it up to the late 1670's when Pietro Reggio appeared in England to introduce Italianate melismas, both structural and illustrative. (While it is true that Purcell did first begin to use vocal melismas about this time, I wonder if it can be main-tained that such were then new in England. The works of Coperario, Laniere, and Walter Porter, to name only a few of the composers figuring chiefly in Vincent Duckles' massive research into the history of florid song in England, certainly seem to prove otherwise.) These investigations lead naturally to the main theme of the thesis, that is, the origins and development of that strange aesthetic creature, the English dramatic opera, which found its stride only with Purcell and his contemporaries and lost it with their passing. Its companion form, the English play with incidental music, also comes in for full and de-tailed investigation, so that the stage is well set for the arrival of

208

...

•

...

Eccles on the scene in the spring of 1693. The remainder of the dissertation traces his adventures in this

strange demi-world of the London theatres, leaving unturned no stone, unanalyzed no plot, song, or masque which might yield any clue as to the source of the difficulties under which dramatic composers and poets labored with less and less success at each turning of the way. Eccles and Congreve, Motteux and O'Urfey, even the actors Betterton and Mrs. Bracegirdle at last gave way before the nemesis which had un-done Purcell and was soon to give Handel good cause to try his giant's strength. The dissertation ends with a study of Semele, Eccles and Congreve's joint handiwork, which could have saved the English tra-dition and even might have. But far be it from me to divulge the fatal flaw or expose the villain of the piece, thus spoiling the prospective reader's fun in following the thorough, enormously detailed sleuthing Mr. Lindoln has done to find his conclusions.

For originality of research, musical analysis, and historical insight, Mr. Lincoln can hardly be faulted, for it is a superb dissertation. His readers might have been a little more careful in criticizing matters of prose style, and there are moments-sometimes rather long ones-when the "thetic line" disappears in the underbrush. But the author very clearly can see the forest as well as the trees and should be given every encouragement to publish a somewhat emmended, but nevertheless definitive, monograph on Eccles as soon as possible. Such a publication would fill a real need and fill it well.

FRANKLIN ZIMMERMAN received his PhD. at U.s.c. and is presently Professor of Music, Dartmouth College. He is the author of Henry Purcell: An Analytical Catalogue of His Music .

209

Sister Mary Joachim Holtaus, O.S.B. Beneventan Notation in the Vatican Manuscripts

Ann Arbor: University Microfilms (UM order no. 62-6065), 1962. (230p., pos. film $3.15; University of Southern California diss.)

Rembert C. Weakland, O. S. B.

To anyone working in the field of Gregorian chant the need for spe-cialized studies in the various notations is apparent. For the pioneer chant scholars of the last century, the important manuscripts were those in the chironomic notation and especially those written in St. Gall notation. Their interest in the later diastematic notation was limited, since they used these manuscripts only as a control for the melodic readings of the earlier manuscripts. Today we are more aware of the need to look into the precise problems of these later manuscripts, especially during the crucial period of transition from chironomic to diastematic notation. Sister Joachim's dissertation deals with a Bene-ventan manuscript from precisely that delicate period.

Beneventan notation was from its inception somewhat diastematic in character but like the Beneventan script was a unique, localized style. The first study of the musical sources of the notation was made by H.M. Bannister in his monumental study, Monumenti vaticani di paleografia musicale latina, 2 vol., Leipzig, 1913. A more exhaustive study appeared in Volume 15 of the Pa/eographie musicale under the title "Etude sur la notation beneventaine," pp. 7l-16l. Since the date of publication of that Volume in 1935, little has been added to our knowledge.

In the first two of the six chapters of her dissertation, Sister Joachim traces the history of Beneventan script, relying in large measure on E.A. Loew's now famous study, The Beneventan Script, Oxford, 1914. Chapters 3 and 4 ("Evolution of Beneventan Notation: A Study" and "Manuscripts with Beneventan notation found in the Vatican Li-brary," respectively) are for the most part a resume of the two works on notation cited above. She has listed here, however, not only the Vatican library number for each manuscript but the film number of the St. Louis microfilm collection of the Vatican manuscripts. In the fourth chapter she examines 46 of 51 Vatican manuscripts with Bene-ventan notation and makes special reference to 26 manuscripts from which facsimiles are reproduced in an appendix. These reproductions

210

•

•

•

are, unfortunately, not too clear. The excessive quotes from the two secondary sources cited earlier are perhaps the chief weakness in the study. It has caused the author to slip into some strange citations: Lucques for Lucca (p. 4), Lipsia for Leipzig (p. 21), Bibliotheque Na-tionale de Florence (p. 31, footnote 34), and so on.

Chapter 5 is devoted to an examination of 18 plates from the manuscript Vat. lat. 6082, a missale plenum from the 12th century. An index to this Gradual is found in Appendix A and the plates in Appendix B. The study is not a comprehensive analysis of each of the neumes and the various forms each neume takes in the manuscript bu t a select reference to some of the melodic differences between the Beneventan version on the plate and the Vatican Gradual. Occasional neumes of interest are pointed out. No attempt was made to compare this manuscript with the two Beneventan Graduals already published and indexed in Volumes 14 and 15 of the Pa/eographie musicale. Such a comparison, both with regard to contents and musical notation, would have added much to the dissertation.

Many of the plates in the Appendix are of interest in that they also contain examples of those manuscripts written in central Italy with non-Beneventan text but with a musical notation borrowed from the Beneventan. The importance of these manuscripts indicates a fertile area for subsequent studies.

REMBERT G. WEAKLAND, O.S.B. is coadjutor archabbot of St. Vincent Archabbey and chancellor of St. Vincent College.

[manuel Willheim Johann Adolph Scheibe: German musical thought in transition

Ann Arbor: University Microfilms (UM order no. 63-5159), 1963. (299p., pas. film $4.10; University of Illinois diss.)

Konrad Wolff

When composers double as writers, or vice versa, they usually create complications for posterity. Johann Friedrich Reichardt, for instance, is known to students of music history as one of the founders of the German lied and to students of literary history as the principal target

211

of Goethe and Schiller's satirical Xenien. Very rarely do the readers or even the authors of the one kind of history know about Reichardt's figuring in the other. It is therefore fortunate that the author of this dissertation on Scheibe (1708-1778), in addition to his musicological background, is schooled in German literature and in aesthetics. Scheibe was a respectable composer and a leading musical journalist. He also contributed much to the philosophy of the arts in general, both in Germany (where he grew up) and in Denmark (where he lived during the last thirty-eight years of his life). His best-known work, Der Cri-tische Musicus, was originally conceived as a parallel to Johann Christoph Gottsched's Versuch einer critischen Dichtkunst of 1730. Gottsched, who was the most respected German author of the time and the leading authority on literature, had been Scheibe's teacher in Leipzig. His book was based on the so-called "rationalist" principles of 17th-century French drama. This was what Scheibe tried to trans-late into musical criticism, but with time, as Willheim demonstrates, he became increasingly less dependent on Gottsched's system.

To the music student of our time, Scheibe is mainly known for his "most unfortunate" (p. 240) controversy over the music of J.5. Bach. Scheibe accused him of an "overloaded (schwulstig) and confused style"l as well as an "excess of art." He also objected to Bach's cus-tom of writing out embellishments in actual notes, which, Scheibe said, made the melody unintelligible besides depriving it of harmonic beauty. He concluded by judging that with all due respect for Bach's tremen-dous care and effort, his compositions were contrary both to Nature and to Reason.

Scheibe's attack created a sensation. While Bach himself did not reply, one of his admirers, J. Abraham Birnbaum, Leipzig professor of rhetoric, wrote a forceful defense. Further emphasis was given the battle by two famous musical authors, Mattheson and Mizler,2 who opened their journals to Scheibe and Birnbaum, respectively, for the continuation of the fencing match.

The most unfortunate part of the quarrel was that Scheibe was pre-vented by the publicity of the affair from admitting that he had done Bach an injustice; however, in 1739 he did pay full tribute to the Italian Concerto.

It is hard to conceive how a good musician such as Scheibe could ever have been deaf to the values of Bach's music, considering that

IHis speaking of Bach as the "Lohenstein of music" shows Scheibe's de-pendence on Gottsched who used to say the same thing of all contemporary writers he disliked. Lohenstein was a "schwulstig" writer of the 17th century. Cf. Scherer-Walzel, Geschichte der deutschen Literatur, (3d ed., Ber-lin, 1921), p. 309.

2Although he devotes a whole chapter to Mizler (69ff.), Willheim does not mention the significant fact that Gottsched contributed articles on music(!) to Mizler's journal. This may have been one of the reasons for Scheibe's dislike of Mizler and for his gradual estrangement from Gottsched.

212

..

•

•

during Scheibe's student years in Leipzig he had heard the master him-self play. Willheim investigates the personal relations between Bach and Scheibe thoroughly and arrives at the convincing conclusion that there was no personal feud (as some Bach biographers believe). Never-theless, it is quite possible that the young man, not being of a most generous disposition (a defect he shared with all the writers of his time), either consciously or unconsciously tried to get even with the one member of the older generation with whom he could never hope to compete.

Willheim is objective enough to sympathize with Scheibe's criticism that Bach wrote too unvocally. Even if true, to blame Bach on this account is as narrowminded a reproach as the opposite one by Niigeli who some eighty years later blamed Mozart for writing too vocally. To understand the problem one must remember that instrumental music, to which this criticism principally relates, was just then com-ing into its own. The great Lessing explained in 17673 that an instru-mental composer must be much more than a composer of vocal music and must always be prepared to give his best, since no text can come to his aid and fill the gaps in the expressive quality of the music.

Willheim regards Scheibe's initial aesthetic approach as deriving from Gottsched, that is, as essentially French. In a slightly oversimpli-fied outline (20ff.) he describes the French style in music as vocal and expressive, centering on adagio pieces, in contrast to the Italian style of sensuous and lyric instrumental music in which the accent is on the allegro type. French music is characterized as rationalist-with refer-ence to Cartesianism rather than the Enlightenment (p. 51)-and I talian music, as unphilosophical. Then Willheim shows that Scheibe gradually added the new idea of the century, Nature, to Gottsched's standards of French classical drama. 4 To Scheibe, the element of Nature in music was Melody (p. 100), whereas Harmony represented the Art of illuminating the melody and nothing more; when he blames Bach for showing" too much art," he is referring to the fact that in Bach's music the harmony follows its own laws.

Later, in the chapter on rhetoric (p. 157), Willheim incidentally refers to Bach's occasional habit of expressing a variety of emotions throughout a cantata text by presenting the same melody in various figurations. However, this was just one of Bach's numerous ways of uniting the different parts of the same composition. Quite as frequent-ly, he proceeds by harmonic means. The Second Partita is marked by the cyclic use of the dominant ninth chord and the Goldberg Variations, by the identity of the harmonic progressions and the harmonic rhythm without any help from melodic motifs.5

3Cf. the review of Voltaire's Semiramis in Lessings Werke, Georg Wit-towski, ed. Hamburgische Dramaturgie 5:12-17, (Leipzig, 1911).

4Cf. Pope (1711): "First follow Nature ... at once the source, and end, and test of Art."

'Certain authors have seen a melodic motif in the bass line. This is not so; the aria is homophonic, and the bass is just a bass.

213

For this, Schiebe had no ear, though he was not insensitive to har-mony as a means of expression. Willheim prints in the Appendix a recitative from Scheibe's cantata, Ariadne, which shows an amazing pre-romantic use of tritone progressions and dissonances. 6 The ap-preciation of harmonic logic as a thing of beauty (as for instance in the works of Corelli and Vivaldi) was beyond his comprehension; here, ex-pected harmonic progressions are judiciously mixed with mild surprises, and the result resembles one of Horace's or Cicero's well-shaped sen-tences. Bach added individual expression to this system by using dissonances and alterations whenever required, but he did not abandon the grammar of directed harmony for the sake of expressiveness as did Scheibe in his recitative.

Willheim neglects this aspect, and we should have liked more help from him from a strictly musical viewpoint. He does give us an in-teresting expose of how Scheibe, by underlining melodic inspiration as a primary source of composing, in fact transcended the Affektenlehre. This is followed by a discussion of rhetorical figures, ways of writing (Schreibarten), national styles and types of music.

Willheim's report on Scheibe's doctrine of rhetoric is, on the whole, one of the best parts of the dissertation. Differently from Mattheson/ Scheibe speaks of rhetoric only for the present a tion of single phrases and not for the organization of a composition as a whole. In addition to strictly rhetorical figures, he also mentions three musical ones: tran-situs, syncopatio, and ligatura.

Scheibe's distinction between three different styles (Schreibarten) contains a few original points. He recognizes (129ff.), first of all, the elevated style (splendorous music appropriate for festive occasions or grand subjects), then the intermediate style (meaningful, pleasant, and flowing, but also intelligent}8 and finally the low style which has its rightful place in the pastoral Schaferspiel (of which later Goethe produced several examples). Willheim then deals with the tradi-tional genres (Gattungen) of music as described by Scheibe, whom he justly blames for neglecting the chamber style. In the account of na-tional styles, Willheim, without much support in Scheibe's writings,

6It always seems to me that German music was fully ready for Romanti-cism by 1750, when the eruption of Classicism halted this evolution for a great number of years. Figures like c.P.E. Bach and Scheibe, who combined artistic and literary productions, resemble Berlioz and Schumann in this respect, and are in contrast to Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and Schubert.

7Cf. Hans Lenneberg's translation of much of Der vollkommene Cape 11-meister (not quoted by Willheim) in Journal of Music Theory 2:47-84, 193-236 (1958).

8"exceedingly clear, lively, fluent, and yet perspicacious," in Willheim's ren-dering.

214

..

•

•

classifies the Polonaise or Polacca 9 as part of Polish music. By 1720 this dance had, in fact, become as international as the minuet. In this chap-ter, I missed a reference to Georg Muffat's epoch-making Florilegium of 1696-97.

The most progressive part of Scheibe's theories, and the climax of Willheim's dissertation, occurs in the section dealing with operatic reci-tatives. In this field Scheibe was several steps ahead of everybody else. It is entirely possible that Gluck-who may have met Scheibe in Co-penhagen in 1747 (p. 203)-was influenced by Scheibe's concepts. (It would be a worthwhile task to compare Scheibe and Gluck's operatic ideas in detail.) The highest possible compliment was paid to Scheibe's views in 1767 when Lessing quoted them extensively in his review of Voltaire's Semiramis (p. 208) .

Willheim's book is solid and informative as far as it goes. There are some editorial flaws in it, from typographical errors and unintended repetitions (one sentence appears twice, on pages 199 and 200) to mis-translations. Most of the essential passages from Scheibe's writings are fully quoted in German and then translated. Willheim translates "sie [die Natur] zu erhalten, ja so gar in bessern Stand zu setzen" by "to support it, to improve it," whereas it really means "to preserve it, and even repair it." (p. 101). On p. 95 he quotes Scheibe's assertion that symphonies must be judged by the fire of their invention and that it may happen that a composer, by force of trying to match the differ-ent parts skillfully, deprives himself of his spontaneous spark. "Man intersuche also nur, ... ob alle Satze gehorig mit einander iiberein-stimmen, und ob dahero den Komponisten vielleicht das Feuer verlassen ha t." This means: "All that is necessary is to find out ... whether the different movements hang together properly, and whether, for this reason (my italics), the fire has perhaps deserted the composer." "Da-hero" can not mean anything else but an emphatic "for this reason." It is not correctly rendered in Willheim's translation: "One must ob-serve ... whether all movements are properly in agreement with one another, and whether the composer, perchance, has lost his fire in sub-sequent movements." There is no justification at all for adding the last three words, since the fire can have deserted the composer right in the beginning by force of his trying to make all movements "hang together properly." "Bewegungen," used by Scheibe as a technical term in two continuous sentences, is translated once by "movements" and once by "emotions" (p. 96). To use "motions" or "moving forces" both times would have preserved the thought expressed in the original Ger-man.

Shortcomings in the organization of the book disturb the reader. While respecting Willheim's reason for relegating the Bach contro-versy to the very end, I still think that it should have come at least

9Willheim (p. 148) speaks of the Polacca in the First Brandenburg Con-certo, but Bach's name for the section in question was Poloinesse. Willheim does not mention the more typical Polonaise from Bach's Sixth French Suite.

215

before the discussion of opera (after Chapter VII), and perhaps even earlier. When I reached p. 100 ("When Scheibe attacked Bach for fail-ing to keep music natural, or for an excess of art, Bach's friend and protagonist Magister Abraham Birnbaum rushed to his defense"), I felt that I had to turn at once to the concluding chapter and read that whole story first.

I t is also confusing to the reader that W illheim is frequently at odds with chronology. In the Introduction, he immediately starts out with Kant, goes back to Thomasius, follows this by discussing first Gott-sched and his generation, then Lessing (in the 1760's), and then speaks of the Scheibe of 1730. There are similarly confusing presentations to be found throughout the dissertation, for instance, in the (otherwise excellent) brief history of rhetoric during which Aristotle, Opitz • (1624), Quintilian, and Burmeister (1606) are mentioned in this order.

My knowledge of the literature is not extensive enough to enable me to give a list of works which Willheim ought to have consulted, but it is certainly a serious matter that he did not incorporate in his re-search the excellent and thorough study of Scheibe by Max Graf in Composer and Critic, (W.W. Norton, 1947), pp. 77-85. Since Will-heim's dissertation was written, a new and important study of Johann Friedrich Reichardt by Werner Salmen (Atlantis Verlag, 1963) merits investigation, for the two musician-journalists had much in common, including the curious habit of contributing to their own journals pseu-donymous letters on controversial subjects.

On general aesthetics Willheim's sources are largely second- or even third-hand. I particularly object to the extensive use he makes of Windelband's philosophy textbook of 1891 which, despite the many editions it subsequently received, has always largely remained a collec-tion of the philosophical blind spots of German academic intelligentsia in .Wilhelmine times. Willheim is not personally close enough to the great men of whom he speaks. He pairs Lessing and Winckelmann (p. 16) and Moses Mendelssohn and Reichardt (p. 88) as though they were friends and/or equals. Preferring modern textbooks to contem-porary sources, he writes with a regrettable lack of color. In describing the Swiss aestheticians of the middle of the century, for instance, he relies almost exclusively on Cassirer (p. 15). How much inner truth, lucidity, and fire could have been gathered for this chapter from Goethe's detailed expose of their theories, as well as of their personali-ties, in the seventh book of Dichtung und Wahrheit! And how refresh-ingly does Goethe describe his visit with old Gottsched in Leipzig!

This leads me to the most serious defect of the dissertation: Scheibe does not come alive in it. We do not learn what he looked like or what his personal habits were. We are not informed that he was married for the last thirty-nine years of his life. We learn about his character only incidentally; yet his character plays a big role in explaining some of his actions, just as in the case of Reichardt. Willheim, for instance, uncritically swallows Scheibe's account of how he founded Der Critische Musicus together with Telemann who figured as a silent partner of sorts. But this account, for which there is no supporting evidence

216

whatever, was only written after Telemann's death! Can we trust Scheibe? Ruhnke (Hans Albrecht in Memoriam, Barenreiter, 1962) doubts it seriously. Or take the fact that Scheibe, at the end of his life, enrolled as a Freemason, a fact which Willheim does not even mention. His collection of melodies to Freemason songs (1776) became very popular (the title page is reproduced in MGG 4:893). Was he sincere, or was it just another cultural fashion he thought he had to adopt? In any case, we ought to know more about Scheibe's religious beliefs. In his youth Leipzig was a battleground between the pietists and the antipietists (to which Bach belonged); this would presumably also throw additional light on some of Scheibe's aesthetic and ethical utter-ances.!O

More than anything, we should like to know Scheibe better as a com-poser. Willheim discusses the recitative given in the Appendix with thoroughness and sensitivity, but there is much more to know about this man whose oeuvre C.F .0. Schubart said contained "quite a few works having a claim to immortality. Few composers knew how to write recitatives in so masterly a fashion; his arias too are full of lovely passages, and his choruses full-sounding and strong."

According to the article on Scheibe in MGG (by Caroline Bergner and Hans Gunter Hoke), three flute sonatas, other cantatas, and "songs for piano"(?) by Scheibe are in existence. If and when Willheim's dis-sertation is published-and I hope it will be-every interested reader will be grateful if the author were to include the maximum of avail-able information on these works as well as an analysis of their charac-ter, style, and form. The artistic creations by theorists and critics, apart from their potential intrinsic value, constitute a most important test of the theories and criticisms voiced by their authors. To quote Pope once more: "Let such teach others who themselves excel."

lOThe religious element is also neglected in Willheim's resume of French aesthetics. Malebranche's objections to art expressing passions, for instance, belong to the most important ideas of the time; yet Willheim fails to include them.

KONRAD WOLFF, German born, holds an M.A. in musicology from Columbia. He is on the advanced piano faculty at Peabody Conservatory.

217