Hi Howard,
The only
caveat I'd add is that if you conclude Vivaldi intended, say, a
gallichon in D because the music lies well under the hands on that
instrument, you have to first assume that Vivaldi had a practical
familiarity with the instrument of the sort that almost had to be
acquired by playing it.
I agree, though I wouldn't propose something like a gallichon in D
as a possibility only because of the way the music falls under the
hands. I'd see that as more of a final check, once the historical
circumstantial context and the rest has been worked out. Where
was he when he was writing? When? Who was he writing for?
What did they (likely) play? Is there anything that makes that
instrument an absolute impossibility? etc.
I've found it more than a little dangerous to assume a certain
target instrument because of particular things that may seem
idiomatic to that instrument. In the early mandolin world, for
instance, its quite common for people to claim idiomatic superiority
in arguing for one mandolin variant/tuning or another... while their
opponent claims many of the same things for their argument.
Mostly, we are what we know, and its very hard to pull that out
of the equation. As a violinist, many things look like violin chords
to me... though they may ultimately not be.
This is actually one of the problems with the simpler Vivaldi leuto
pieces... they are so simple as to be generally playable (and even
somewhat idiomatic) on a wide range of different instruments.
I was able to hack my way through them on all manner of unfamiliar
tunings when I was exploring various options years ago...
I'm also not convinced that a huge amount of familiarity beyond the
basic animal would have been required. He clearly wrote reasonably
well for a very broad range of instruments, and I don't imagine that he
was expert on all of them. Its clear that his pupils at the Pieta
played
numerous instruments, and I presume he must have as well, or at
least had a "composers understanding", or the ability to gain it
quickly.
In any case, I guess I wouldn't expect him to throw up his hands in
the face of a possible commission on an unfamiliar instrument.
It's possible that Vivaldi was on intimate terms with the lute and
its variants. It's equally possible that he wasn't, but understood
that there were different sorts of lutes in different places, and
didn't worry about exactly what instrument played his solos. If he
wrote a part for a lute tuned in D minor or a gallichon in D in
Prague, he could scarcely have expected someone back in Venice to use
the same instrument.
Agreed. In reading about Vivaldi, he seems very much focused on
where his next commission is coming from, and I rather doubt that
he expected many of his smaller compositions to have much shelf-
life beyond the immediate paycheck. Why else would he write
for "violini in tromba marina" for crying out loud?! His
correspondences are often about money. In one well-known
letter he asks his correspondent "do you still play the mandolino"...
possibly picking around for a commission. He bragged fairly
openly about being able to spin these compositions out quickly
(like overnight) with relatively little effort.
I guess I see him taking a much more practical approach... "OK... I've
got the Dresden court coming... oh yeah.. they have that great German
lutenist... so let it be in D-minor.... lets see, what are the open
courses"...
or "Yes, I will write a set of [simple] trios for you... Mr... how do
you say...
Wrtby... what is that curious "lute" you play... ah yes... tuned like an
archlute without the top course... very good... how will you be paying?"
Not that either of these things happened, necessarily, just that they
could have. Flip rampant speculation, of course.
But.. I prattle on...
Eric
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
