Personally I think it would be better to confine the discussion to the
vihuela list where it was initiated. I don't think it is appropriate to
post extended character assassinations to a public discussion list so
my
response will focus an the manuscript itself.
This is just a summary of my views after spending some time studying it
over the last few days.
As far as I can see the manuscript is undated. It could have been
copied any time in the 18th century. It was probably copied over a
considerable period of time – it also includes vocal music and a piece
for trombone and bass. There are different sections to it.
Tuning Charts
f.48r Fundamenta Gytarra
This chart clearly indicates that this “Gytarra” has 5 stopped courses
tuned to the same intervals as the baroque guitar and one additional
unstopped bass tuned a tone below the 5th. This is not a 5-course
guitar; it is a 6-course instrument as I think Daniel pointed out in
his original message. Whether it is a figure of 8 shaped instrument at
all is another matter.
f.48v Accordo Gytarra et Mandora
The first section of this chart between the two double bar lines shows
the stringing of a six-course instrument not a five course one. This
is the same as the stringing for the “gytarra” shown on f.48r.
The second section between the two double bar lines shows the seven
unstopped courses of the mandora.
Your comment - 1. Tuning chart on f.48v: The basic tuning checks
('Accordo Gytarra et Mandora') given between the first double bar lines
are for a five course guitar and for a six course.
I think you are mistaken. They are not. Nothing in the chart is
intended to apply to a 5-course instrument. One of the instruments has
one unstopped bass; the other has seven. It is just possible that the
open basses are interchangeable between the two instruments.
Your comment - 2. The tuning for an extended bass 12 course instrument
refers to a guitar.
I disagree with you on several counts as I have tried to explain in
previous messages. I don't think it refers to a theorboed guitar. From
the heading it would appear that the first section relates to the
"Gytarra" and the second to the mandora.
Your comment - You appear to believe that there was a form of mandora
at this time (the early eighteenth century) with 'seven unstopped
courses'. In my long researches into the instrument I've come across
nothing to support this view and if you are really aware (rather than
merely simply asserting this for effect) of any evidence to the
contrary I'd be very grateful for it.
I don’t believe anything of the sort. I am just trying to understand
what this particular manuscript tells us about these two particular
instruments. I am not interested in asserting anything for effect.
Most of your research seems to be based on speculation. As the
manuscript is undated we don’t know what period it relates to. It could
have been copied any time from the early 17th century onwards. It
would be necessary to identify some of the other pieces, in particular
the vocal pieces, to try and arrive at a more specific date.
All that I said about the music was -
As far as the pieces are concerned, whether or not the unstopped sixth
course is used seems to depend on the key of the piece. Those on f.48v-
f.59v which use the sixth course are mostly in C major or keys without
sharps, whilst those from f. 60r –f.76v are in A major or D
major i.e. keys with sharps where there is no call for a low G.
>From f.76v the pieces are numbered starting with 1 which seems to
represent a new “campaign” of copying. None of them use the unstopped G
– they could be for 5-course guitar or whatever instrument you wish.
There is nothing that lends weight to your suggestion that the
"gytarra" is a figure of eight-shaped instrument. It is could be lute
shaped or figure of eight - we simply don't know.
Your response to this perfectly reasonable observation was
Surely you can't expect us to agree to this procrustean interpreation?
You singularly overlook the bulk of all the pieces also in C to F and
those in G and D from later in the MS. And I've already clearly
identified where the same (Losy?) piece was tellingly transcribed -
which surely disproves your suggestion: 'a single counter example ....
disproves a proposition......!']
(Does it? Since when?)
If any one suggests an explanation which is different from your own
preconceived ideas it is dismissed as “procrustean”. If anyone is
procrustean it is you. In truth it hadn’t occurred to you that there
might be another explanation, and rather than consider it with an open
mind you dismiss it in a patronising way. Your comment about Losy is
beside the point – I have clearly said that the pieces from f.76v may
be for 5-course guitar anyway.
I have been able to spend a bit more time looking at the music.
Summary
f.48v – f.57v Pieces with open 6th course in C major/A minor/F major/D
minor with two exceptions, one in G major, one in D major.
f.57v Ciacona in C major and Minuet in A minor f.60r also have no open
6th course.
f.60v – f.68v Pieces in A major No open 6th course
f.69r – f.69v Pieces in D major No open 6th course
f.70r - f.73v Pieces in G major No open 6th course
f.74r – f.76r Pieces in B flat major/G minor + different version of
Losy Rondo in C major with no open 6th course.
f.76v – f.96r Pieces numbered 1-56 in various keys with no open 6th
course.
f.96r Table of alfabeto chords.
Tuning chart for 5-course guitar
f.96v Aria for 5-course guitar with alfabeto incidentally combined with
French tablature.
When intabulating the music a key factor is the location of the bass
notes of the tonic and dominant of the key when cadencing. This
determines how you place the music on the fingerboard. There seems to
be a preference for placing the bass note of the dominant at a cadence
in the lowest sounding register so that the bass line rises a 4th
rather than falls a 5th.
You seem to think that the tablature charts must be interpreted in a
way that fits the music. This is an upside down approach. As far as I
am concerned they don’t relate to the 5-course guitar at all. There
are two instruments – call them what you like – one with a single open
bass, the other the other with seven. There is no obvious reason to
suppose that the music is intended for baroque guitar although there is
no reason why you shouldn’t play it on a baroque guitar if you wish.
A few other points from earlier posts
I said - As far as I can see nothing in the manuscript sheds any light
on the position of
the high octave strings in the 18th century.
-MH: I disagree - see numerous highly relevant observations both in
this, and earlier, notes]
None of you observation convince me or seem relevant. The fact that
the mandora didn’t have the high octave string on the thumb side tells
us nothing about the baroque guitar even if some of the music is
intended for it.
At some point I said - As far as I can recall I have never agreed that
eighteenth century placement of the octave strings might well not be
the same as the earlier seventeenth century usage. On the contrary the
fact that two mid-eighteenth century sources (Corette and Rousseau in
Dider ot’s Encyclopedie)- refer to the placement of the high octave
strings on the thumb side of a course suggests to me that this practice
persisted well into the eighteenth century whatever the style of the
music.
Your response was – Both late for comparison with D-189 and, further,
not guitar specilaists.
This is not particularly helpful observation. D-189 is undated. Corette
and Rousseau date from the mid 18th century and there is no reason to
suppose that what they say is not accurate.
I am going to have to leave it now.
Monica
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
