----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Antonio Corona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 7:21 AM Subject: Re: Complete copy of the 6-course vihuela by Belchior Dias
> From what you tell, I can gather that your argument > rests mainly on identifying the eleventh hole in the > head as designed to be fitted with a peg. There lies > the problem. We don=B4t know if it was part of the > original design, which to me seems rather unlikely. We > dont know if at some point the instrument underwent a > conversion and an extra peg-hole was drilled. We don=B4t > know if the hole was ever fitted with a peg. We don=B4t > know if a misguided owner drilled this hole to hang > the instrument on the wall. There are too many "ifs" > to consider this hole (rather crude and ill-placed in > an instrument of such exquisite facture) as definitive > proof that the instrument was strung - if ever - with > six courses. This is why I consider that your case > rests on speculation to make its point; sadly, there > is no way we can take it as proof of the instrument=B4s > identity as a six-course vihuela. As a matter of > curiosity, I should like to quote what you yourself > state on your website: > > (Quote): "The inlay design on the peg head, however, > gives no "provision" for this additional peg and, as > we can see in both instruments, the peg holes are all > encircled in the rope-like purfling ornament which is > uniquely represented on the peg heads of both > instruments. Whether the lack of this "provision" is > conclusive enough evidence to say that the 11th peg > was added at a later stage (as a mean of conversion > from 5 to 6 courses) still remains the question to > answer." (end of quote). Dear Antonio, I don't think I am trying to hide the fact that I speculate here. I = think I put it quite clearly by simultaneously "disproving" my own theory on the nature and placement of the 11th hole. So there is no need to point out = the curiosities here. If you prefer a version of the "misguided owner's" = rusty nail in the wall, that's fine with me (I personally prefer a bullet = hole). Don't you think that speculation is one of the main tools for all of us = - in pursuing the truth. The interesting thing here is that your approach is largely based on = that of an academician (forgive and correct me if I'm not right but that's = how it seems to me after reading most of your articles) while mine is mostly = from the point of view of a maker. Yes, the Dias instrument is a masterpiece = of design and "of such exquisite facture", as you've rightly mentioned. I = know it for sure, believe me, I've made its copy! But it does have, if I can = put it that way, "irregularities" of its own, which most of the modern makers (myself included) wouldn't include in their work. The rope-like ornaments on the fingerboard, peg head face and in the = join of ribs at bottom block are all full of irregularities. I've checked it = many times, before gluing on the peg head veneer, where the drilled hole will come out and how far it will be from the mitred join of the purfling = along the centre line. I drilled the hole after the V-join at the other side = was completely shaped and with the triple purfling inlayed but there is an option to drill it before the inlay is done and this might be one of the = reasons why on the original Dias this same hole is shifted to the right (if one is looking from the rear). The pin hole at the upper edge of peg head has = come out=20 on the face side of it - very few of modern makers can allow themselves = such degree of "freedom". The fact that the 11th peg hole is misplaced a little bit to the left (looking from the face side of peg head), comes = out too close to the mitred join of the purfling and with its axis not exactly aligned with the two neighbouring pegs above (and with = the rest of the pegs) is NORMAL. Yes, normal not only in the context of the = way this particular instrument is made but most, if not all, surviving early = guitars, lutes, viols etc that I have come across, (I have worked in the two = largest collections of instruments in Russia: in St-Petersburg and in Moscow. I = also do restoration work on early plucked instruments on a daily basis). = Having said this, I do not claim absolute expertise: the learning process is ongoing ... I don't want to overload you and the listeners with countless examples = of "irregularities" here, it is far beyond the scope of this email. Look at = the way the peg holes are positioned on the E.0748 (in the end of C. = Gonzalez article in the publication, if you haven't got the drawing) - no way in = a straight line. Can you find any (virtually any!) original bridge, say on = the 16th - 17th century lute, in which string holes are drilled in line and with = their axes coinciding either to each other or to the soundboard plan - very = few! So, to sum up, the 11th peg hole in the Dias is a reality and has to be = treated on a serious basis. Even with its level of imprecision that is still far = beyond the=20 level of DIY skills of your "misguided owner". The way it appears today, = with degraded edges on the face side, may simply be because it was most = probably left abandoned from the time vihuelas went out of fashion in the early = 17th century. Why it managed to escape the attention of researchers (yourself included), I don't know. The presence of an unoriginal soundboard from the middle - late 18th century conversion = into a five-course guitar has also played its role in diverting attention from = the research into the instrument's true identity. There were remarks about = the peg holes of the Jacquemart Andre vihuela, abandoned peg hole in the Quito vihuela's peg head and the missing corresponding hole in its bridge (which still needs to be reconciled with consistently precise historical information on nine- and eleven-string guitars / vihuelas and = ten and twelve pegs shown on some illustrations) but not on the 11th hole in = the Dias The centrally positioned hole has not yet been on the agenda of = organolagical studies either in relation to early guitars or, more crucially, = vihuelas. Among a fairly large number of surviving guitars I only came across two other cases of the hole positioned in the same place as that on the Dias (they are both illustrated on my web site) and one of them also has = eleven peg holes. The remarkably detailed painting of Doret shows us exactly how the = central peg system was utilised. It also shows how big "irregularities" in the placement of = pegs can be. If you want to dismiss all these cases too, on the "ifs" grounds that = you are proposing, then there is very little point to carry on with this sort of dialogue = any longer. Again, if my speculations do not work for you or anybody else (as of = your mentioning "we"), that's fine. If you prefer to call the Dias a guitar that's your choice. The era of identifying the true nature of this = instrument is only in its inception, not completion. > I should like to contrast this with another statement > on your web site: > > (Quote) "Neither of the 5-course configurations > presents any apparent problems with string spacing, at > least from the point of view of modern approach to the > reconstruction of early guitars and vihuelas, when > most of modern players seem to have been accustomed to > a rather wider spacing, both on nut and bridge, than > those found on original instruments. The adaptation of > the specifically lute-related "thumb-under" technique > to the vihuela by some players is also one of the > contributing factors here." (end of quote) Again, I'm open about my speculations here. My statement is not the = final word on the matter. It is in progress and will be replaced with revised (again to a certain degree) information when it is available. This was my original idea on the way the information on "The Vihuela and = Guitar Crossroads: looking for evidence" page is presented. It is, in a way, an on-going inner dialogue with myself. At present I can only tell you that if you take the bridge from the J.Pages 1802 guitar and place it on = the Dias, the outer string placement will fit almost precisely the necessary figure of 55 - 57mm of its supposedly original 1x1 + 5x2 (from my point = of view) configuration. > The lute-related spacing should not be dismissed > lightly, bearing in mind that the vihuela fulfilled > exactly the same musical functions as the lute, and we > have a testimony from Luis Venegas de Henestrosa > (1552)that it too was played thumb-under (he calls > thumb under "figueta extranjera" - placing the thumb > under the finger- as opposed to "figueta castellana" - > placing the finger under the thumb). There is no > "adaptation" of a technique at work here: playing the > vihuela thumb-under is perfectly justified in the > light of this evidence. Therefore, the criteria for > string spacing on historical lutes might prove to be > valid for the vihuela as well, and perhaps I should > add that, contrary to common belief, the lute was > widely played in Spain as well. I don't think for a skilful player it is really a problem to use either thumb-under or thumb-over technique, even on a rather tighter spacing of courses. My point here is in underlying a general tendency in approach = to constructing modern copies of vihuelas with similar values in the = spacing of courses to that of, say, a typical 6-course Renaissance lute. It is all = too clear from the most of available illustrations of the vihuela that the string band is fairly narrow, with strings running virtually parallel = from bridge to nut and that the right hand of the player is placed almost perpendicularly to it, in other words making it less likely for the use = of thumb-over technique, at least on a common ground. This was all already mentioned so many times before that hardly needs repeating. I believe = that the lute was played somewhat differently in Spain at the time, judging = from the illustrations that you may have come across with in your research. > In this same publication, in the article about the > organology of the vihuela, I stated (p. 16): "Malgr=E9 > l'estime et la reconaissance incontestables dont elle > jouissait, seuls trosi instruments ont surv=E9cu, =E0 > notre connaissance", and later on (p. 24): "on ne > connaisse que trois instruments =E0 avoir surv=E9cu". Joel > had the proofs of this article in time to let me know > if he disagreed on this point; I must surmise he > didn't. Furthermore, I should like to stress that Joel > said "seuls quatre instruments authentiques peuvent > etre ranges dans le type vihuela de mano", that is, in > the family of the vihuela. Joel did not state the Dias > guitar was, in fact a vihuela. Even the statement > later on: "Beaucoup le considerent encore comme une > guitare, bien qu'il possede de nombreuses > carateristiques du type vihuela", is not conclusive, > stating instead merely that the Dias guitar shares > certain characteristics with the vihuela, again, Joel > does not state that this instrument might be a > vihuela. > > Perhaps it would be interesting to mention what Carlos > Gonz=E1lez, author of the article about the Chambure > vihuela, "La vihuela anonyme du Mus=E9e de la musique de > Paris", in the same publication, has to say about this > matter (p. 63): "La 'd=E9couverte' de E.0748 par J. > Dugot constituerait un troisi=E8me exemplaire de cet > type d'instrument. Les nombreuses similitudes existent > entre ce dernier et celui de Dias, compte tenue de sa > date de construction (Lisbonne, 1580), ouvrent la port > a l'hypoth=E8se d'un quatri=E8me exemplaire de vihuela". > In other words, Carlos recognizes that there might be > enough similitudes between the Chambure vihuela and > the Dias quitar to postulate an hypothesis. Again, you > will not find a definive statement about the Dias > instrument being a vihuela. Carlos and Joel are > referring to certain characteristics of construction > and not to the stringing. Bearing in mind that what > distinguishes a vihuela from a a guitar was precisely > the stringing, I see no reason to consider this > hypothesis as supporting evidence for the case of the > six-course vihuela. I'm not seeking for support of any kind for my attribution of the Dias = to a vihuela (if you think that was what I meant) in quoting J.Dugot's = remarks.=20 It is absolutely clear to me that both J. Dugot and C. Gonzalez are = mainly=20 referring to the similarities in the construction of the bodies, not = identities. I only wanted to say that if this mentioning will initiate more = concentrated=20 research on such an important instrument as the Dias in relation to the = historic construction of the vihuela (as it did for me already from J.Dugot's = first publication of the E.0748 in 1997), it is more than welcome. If you = think that Carlos Gonzalez' mentioning of "...la vihuela-guitare de Dias ..." is = only to do=20 with its alternative naming (of your preferred "5-course guitar" version = of it), I'm happy to leave it like this. You probably know best what he meant. > During most of the sixteenth century both the > five-course and six-course instruments were called > vihuelas, and it is precisely in 1580 that we find > evidence of the new playing technique associated with > the newly "developed guitar", the rasgueado. Miguel > S=E1nchez de Lima complains in his _Arte poetica en > romance_ that "everything that is usually sung and > played nowadays is in the strung fashion, and nothing > is sung or played with understanding", and in the next > year Mateo Flecha, the composer, complained of the > common mob in his ensalada La Viuda, mentioning that > "it stretches its neck rather towards the ting ting of > a guitar than towards that which is marvellously > delicate." Evidence of this kind suggests that by this > time five-course instruments called guitars were > proliferating alongside the new playing > technique. Bearing in mind the changing usage at the > time, you could perhaps argue that the Dias instrument > might have been called a five-course vihuela; I prefer > to consider it a guitar for the above reasons. It is > precisely in this light that we should understand the > hypothesis postulated by Joel and Carlos. These > considerations, again, have no bearing on the > speculation that the Dias instrument could be a > six-course vihuela. > > I still think that the usual stringing was 1x1 and > 4x2. The single first is quite common and the fact > that you have ten pegs does not mean all ten of them > were used. Compare with certain lutes and with baroque > guitars which have a peg that does not accomodate a > second first string. You obviously mean that in the reference sources the number of pegs or, = to be more exact, peg holes was also either ten or twelve (but not nine or = eleven!), if I follow the logic of your thought correctly? My point is that if the = four-course guitar seems to have been largely constructed as having only seven pegs = (as most available illustrations show, including everybody's favourite = drawing by=20 Jacque Cellier) then there is a high degree of probability that the next = step in the=20 development of the guitar followed by the addition of one double course. = Hence=20 the mentioning of nine and eleven strings in the sources under question. > As I mentioned above, I rather doubt that the first > course was double, but then, if you want to pursue > this line of reasoning, you should be able to prove > that six-course vihuelas, fitted with twelve pegs, > were strung 6x2. I very much doubt you can, while > there is evidence that a single first was used for the > six-course vihuela. Take, for example, the eleven > string viola from Barcelona you quoted from my article > > In conclusion, I remain unconvinced of the identity of > the Dias instrument as a six-course vihuela and, while > it may be feasible to call it a five-course vihuela, I > rather think, taking into account the time when it was > made, and the changes that were occuring at that > point, that its most probable function was to serve as > a five-course guitar. Enough was said above already, so there is no point in repeating it. I wish that you remain happy with your version of the Dias, as I am, for = the time being, with mine. Best regards, Alexander Batov www.vihuelademano.com --
