Dear David, I believe their year started some time in March, not January. Decades normally involve ten years rather than five.
Just for the record, Sebastian Virdung mentions a 7-course lute in 1511, and I would date Osborn fb7 about 1630, which is a manuscript of music for a 7-course lute. The word diapason simply means octave, and is used by lutenists to refer to the extra courses on a lute. I would take the 7th course to be the first of these so-called diapasons. I don't think it matters whether or not a course is strung alongside or above the fingerboard for it to be described as a diapason. As I understand it, if it isn't one of the first six courses, it is a diapason. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Rastall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "garry bryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 9:19 PM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Wickhambrook Lute Manuscript - Age? > On Jun 20, 2006, at 10:14 AM, garry bryan wrote: > > > I recently acquired a copy of "The Wickhambrook Lute Manuscript" which > > was edited by a Daphne R. Stephens and published by Yale University in > > 1963. In the editorial section , the following statement is made: > > > > "From the notational standpoint, the absence of "diapasons" ( extra > > strings along the side of the fingerboard ), and an added seventh > > course,both of which became popular after 1595, confines the > > manuscript > > to the last decade of the 16th century." > > > > > > Now, in "Historical Lute Construction" ( Lundberg - published > > 2002 ), I > > read the following: > > > > ... Most 7-course lutes were probably built with points, at first > > rather > > narrow and then by the 1580s becoming wider." > > > > Maybe I'm misreading something, but it appears that the editor of "The > > Wickhambrook Lute Manuscript" and Robert Lundberg differ by a > > couple of > > decades regarding the 7th course. > > > Any comments on this? > > Apparently 7-course lutes were in use in the 1580's, but only became > popular after 1595, that is to say, beginning on January 1st, 1596. > On or before December 31st, 1595 they were being built, but they were > not popular. That's not to say that they were particularly UN- > popular, at least not from the notational standpoint anyway, the 7th > course, being clearly not a diapason as it does not lie alongside the > fingerboard. But they only came into popular use after 1595, that is > to say: that five-year period referred to as "the last decade of the > 16th century." Clearly then, one can deduce from this evidence that > the Wickhambrook MS could not possibly have been compiled after 1600. > > DR > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.rastallmusic.com > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
