All of this points up that they saw "copyright" completely differently
than we do. I found Tessa Murry's book on THomas Morley really helpful
in explaining the nuances of ownership of music in Elizabethan England.
Dear Martin and all:
Interesting point of view, and one that seems to be based upon the
theme that if the surviving evidence is scant, then we are obliged to
discount the premise. In in thesis, David Tayler posed a similar
question of how much of the surviving music, mostly in manuscript form,
can be firmly attributed to Dowland, and the answer was not much.
Of course Dowland composed for the lute - and he sang and he most
likely wore shoes although there is no firm evidence of any of the
above. But anyone who wades through the "collected works" will detect
a musical personality that emerges, mainly via signature riffs (such as
the Lachrimae motif) and cadential events.
Whether the actual notes written in ms or printed in his books were
those Dowland meant to write, we'll never know for sure. We do know
that all players took inspiration (or purloined tunes) from diverse
sources and I think the question might be stated, "where did Dowland
filch his source material for the surviving lute music that was written
down mostly by others?"
From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu <lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu> on behalf
of Martin Shepherd <mar...@luteshop.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 3:01 PM
To: Lute List
Subject: [LUTE] composed for the lute?
You might find my latest blog interesting:
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
To get on or off this list see list information at
Administrator THE LUTE SOCIETY OF AMERICA
PO Box 6499
Concord, CA 94524
925 / 686-5800