Always interested in words and their origins, I read David's post with
pleasure, as usual. I was puzzled, though, about the word "viola," which in
classical Latin refers to a flower (the violet). "Viola" in English and
other languages seems to come from an identical word in Provençal, which my
Italian dictionary says is "di etimologia incerta" but which an ancient
Webster's I have (from the 1920s) speculates may be from the Latin "vivus"
(lively), though a newer dictionary says it is probably from "vitulari" (to
be joyful--I know I would be joyful if I had a vihuela). In Spanish the
diphthong "ue" frequently replaces a stressed "o" in Latin (e.g., bonum >
bueno), and I am supposing that the "h," which is silent in Spanish, simply
serves to separate a triphthong into two separate syllables. If so, that
orthographic convention explains how "vihuela" came from "viola." I am
wondering whether any native Spanish speaker on our list can confirm my
supposition and, since Provençal was the language of the troubadours from
the 11th to the 13th centuries, how old the viola/vihuela actually is. By
how much does it predate the Renaissance?
Appreciative of any information,
Stephen Arndt
--------------------------------------------------
From: "David Tayler" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 7:52 PM
To: "lute-cs.dartmouth.edu" <[email protected]>
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Francesco and flat back lute?
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
