Thanks Lex/Martin,
 
I've done a search of the literature to hand  and, in addition to the Bermudo 
extract and Ward's 1953 thesis, can only find a relevant reference in two 
FoMRHI Comms (30 and 1483) by Eph Segerman.
 
None of these sources are convincing either way:
 
1. On unison/octave basses 
 
Segerman understands the Bermudo extract as ' When describing the octaved 
fourth course of the new guitar, he (Bermudo) likens it to the lute or "vihuela 
de Flanders", implying that the vihuela de mano which he described throroughly 
at the same time did not have octave stringing'.  In my view Eph overstates his 
case (again) here - all this tells us is that the fourth course MAY have been 
unison on the vihuela de mano (as you've already pointed out).
 
2. On expense of unison stringing
 
I now see that the business about rich Spaniards affording unison stringing 
raised by Eph in Comm 30 (1976) relates to a unison doubled first course (not 
the basses).  The grounds for Eph's view seems to be that only the very wealthy 
(ie the 16thC Spanish) could afford firsts which had been through rigorous 
quality checks (with high wastage) to ensure uniformity - we know that this was 
sometimes given as the reason for single firsts and, indeed, seconds eg Burwell 
LB).
 
Eph gives no historical source in support of a doubled first (other than, of 
course, the existence of sufficient pegs - however,  the later 17thC guitar 
generally also had sufficient pegs fr a doubled first but here there IS 
historical evidence for using a single first).
 
 
3. Viola comparison
 
It's interesting to note that iconography of the Italian viola (some very good 
unlike that of the Spanish instrument) generally seems to show only sufficient 
pegs for a single first. Representations of the contemporary small four course 
guitar also shows instruments with pegs just for a single first.  It would not, 
therefore, be unreasonable to expect the Spanish 16thC vihuela with sufficient 
pegs to have a doubled first.  The 17thC guitar perhaps retained a spare peg 
for the option of loud strumming music in the same way bourdons cld be employed 
on both the 4th and 5th for such music.
 
 
In short, my take on all this is that a doubled first may well have been used 
on the 16thC(or even 4th) was employed and, indeed, it's probably more likely 
that the general stringing found in contemporary lutes and violas elsewhere 
would have been the norm.   But................
 
rgds
 
Martyn
 
 
 
 
 
 
Martin Shepherd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dear Martyn,

Like you I have never been very convinced by the "rich Spaniard" 
hypothesis. I also share your observation that the music looks just 
like lute music - both include many intabulations of great polyphonists 
like Josquin, just the sort of music which octaves are supposed to ruin 
(which of course they don't).

As far as I know, the evidence for unison stringing is sparse, to say 
the least. John Ward's (1955) PhD thesis makes some statement to the 
effect that unisons were used and this has become established "fact", 
even though I have never seen the evidence (if any) on which he based 
this assertion.

Pisador's tuning instructions imply a unison 4th course, but say nothing 
about the rest.

If anyone has more evidence, please share it!

Best wishes,

Martin

Martyn Hodgson wrote:

> 
>Not so much controversial perhaps but I'd be grateful for views on 16thC 6 
>course vihuela stringing. There's some evidence that the basses were, unlike 
>the contemporary lute, tuned in unisons but I wonder.................. 
> 
>Eph Segerman believes it was partly because the Spanish were so very rich in 
>the 16thC that they could afford expensive bass strings in pairs whereas 
>mortals in lesser favoured countries (ie everywhere else) had to make do with 
>octaves; this has always seemed a pretty rum explanation to me to me. If they 
>did, indeed, favour unison basses then perhaps the clue is in the music but, 
>to be frank, the texture etc seems much the same as contemporary Italian 
>tabulatures which employed octaves..........
> 
>Finally, what precise historical evidence is there for single or double firsts?
> 
>Martyn
> 
>
>
>Monica Hall wrote:
>I think everyone must have left the list in a huff.
>
>Pity really!
>
>Can't we think of some controversial comment to revive it?
>
>Monica
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Garry Bryan 
>To: 
>Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 6:12 PM
>Subject: RE: gee, it's cold in here ...
>
>
> 
>
>>Croatan was the name of a local Indian tribe. Roanoke was the "Lost
>> 
>>
>Colony".
> 
>
>>I doubt that the colonists possessed vihuelas, but I keep wondering if
>> 
>>
>someday,
> 
>
>>someone might unearth evidence of one in St. Augustine, Florida, which was
>>founded ( by the Spanish ) in the same time period the vihuela
>> 
>>
>flourished.
> 
>
>>Garry
>>
>>P.S. The story is that the colony vanished and that the word "CROATAN" was
>> 
>>
>found
> 
>
>>carved on a tree or something similar. There are many theories...
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: bill kilpatrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 12:49 PM
>>>To: Garry Bryan; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
>>>Subject: RE: gee, it's cold in here ...
>>>
>>>sorry, didn't see you ... it's so gloomy in here.
>>>
>>>wasn't coatan the name of an adjacent island carved
>>>into a tree? i thought the colony was called roanoke.
>>>
>>>--- Garry Bryan wrote:
>>> 
>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: bill kilpatrick
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>>Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 8:18 AM
>>>>>To: vihuela list
>>>>>Subject: gee, it's cold in here ...
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>where'd everyone go? ... weird - worse
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>>than roanoke ...
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>CROATAN
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>>:)
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>To get on or off this list see list information at
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>___________________________________________________________
>>>Yahoo! Messenger - want a free and easy way to contact your friends
>>> 
>>>
>online?
> 
>
>>>http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> 
>---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Messenger - want a free & easy way to contact your friends online? 
>--
>
>
> 
>





                
---------------------------------
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with 
Yahoo! Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos
--

Reply via email to