From an organological point of view, I have a slightly different
   opinion.
   The word "viola" means string instrument in the renaissance, and
   gradually changes its meaning to "bowed string instrument"
   towards the end of the renaissance. It maintains this latter meaning
   through the first half of the seventeenth century.
   The word vihuela similarly means "string instrument", and "da mano" is
   added to differentiate it from the bowed versions. Vihuela is viola in
   Spanish.
   Francesco's instructions exactly parallel the countless numbers of
   instructions that are designed along the principle of "ogni sorte."
   Thus, Cabezon's instructions that his pieces for keyboard can also be
   played on the harp or lute seem at first to be hard to imagine, but of
   course the player was perfectly capable of making any arrangement of
   the music necessary.
   Francesco's works could therefore be easily adapted to any string
   instrument, just as members of the lute list are making fabulous
   arrangements today.

   Musicologists in the 70s through the 90s erroneously interpreted the
   generic word viola and viol in musical editions to refer to the modern
   type of viola, as well as the viola da gamba. This distinction clearly
   does not apply to renaissance and early baroque music. Instruments in
   the renaissance came in many shapes and sizes; indeed, there are very
   few bowed string instruments that looks alike. The flat backed lute or
   vihuela also show this diversity of form.

   The good news is that you can play Francesco on the lute or vihuela da
   mano, or any of the instruments in between, or even make arrangements
   for solo viol, viol consort or viol duos.
   Not to mention the members of the violin family, all of which were in
   use in the 16th century.

   Generally speaking, it is important to remember that there were many
   more types of instruments than word or terms to categorize them. So
   terms like lute and viola have always a double meaning; one contextual
   and one general. Francesco may of course had a precise, contextual
   meaning in mind, but it was more likely that he wanted everyone to play
   his music, as was the custom of the time.

   Tinctoris (De invention) refers to bowed viola (note the persistent use
   of the adjective bowed) with strings stretched in a such a way that the
   bow can touch any single string.
   Lanfranco, writing in Scintille di musica (Brescia, 1533) describes
   four sizes of Violette da Arco (!!) senza tasti: Soprano, Contraalto,
   Tenore and Basso. This shows that the entire violin family was well
   developed by the early 16th century.
   (Lanfranco's writings are of interest for information on lutes and
   citterns as well)
   The earliest versions of these instruments generally had three strings.
   These instruments were played alongside the members of the viol family,
   whereas nowadays they are relegated to to baroque music.
   dt
   At 12:20 PM 8/17/2010, you wrote:

     Dear lutenists,
     didn't Francesco da Milano play also a flat back lute, "viola" or
     something
     like that. Perhaps the Neapolitian tabulature was connected to that
     instrument?
     Years ago there was some discussion also here, if memory serves...,
     not
     often does, though... ;-)
     But what is the latest "educated guess" (=science) of his flat back
     lute?
     Any recent analysis?
     Arto
     To get on or off this list see list information at
     [1]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

Reply via email to