[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Denis Gaultier

[Jean-Marie Poirier]

   No Andreas I never suggested that Denis could pass his cousin's pieces
   as his own. My theory is that Denis could have transposed some of his
   cousin's pieces into d minor to have them published, acknowledging
   their authorship, to save them from being transmitted with faults, full
   stop!

   If you read my article in the bulletin of Société Française de Luth or
   in the Lute from the English Lute Society you will see what I mean ;-)!

   All the best,

   Jean-Marie

   Le 10 déc. 2017 à 12:55, Andreas Schlegel <[1]lute.cor...@sunrise.ch> a
   écrit :

     Hello,

   Different levels are now confused:

   1. Ennemond lived during the times of the Vieil ton, the Accords
   nouveaux and the Nouvel accord ordinaire.

   We have many pieces which can be attributed to him in Vieil ton, only a
   few compositions in accords nouveaux which can doubtless attributed to
   him (but many could be written by him), and we have some works in the
   Nouvel accord ordinaire. But for all tunings we have many, many pieces
   attributed to a not specified Gaultier - and specially in the Nouvel
   accord ordinaire many contradictionary attributions by contemporary
   sources.

   The attribution is one of the questions which can only be solved if we
   compare carefully all versions in all sources. This work of comparing
   all versions is nearly done by François-Pierre and I hope that his
   splendid work will be published soon. But we have to leave the open
   questions as open questions, if there are no very string reasons to
   attribute a piece to a certain Gaultier.

   2. Jean-Marie Poirier suggested in his „answer" to G.C.'s question „So
   did Denis could pass on works of Ennemond as being his own and not only
   transcribing them from vieil ton and getting huge credit from D.", that
   this could be the case.

   This suggestion is the point which has to be refused.

   And François-Pierre Goy's contribution focusses on that point, the
   question of transcriptions from one tuning to an other and on how Denis
   Gaultier was seen by contemporary persons.

   Andreas

   Am 10.12.2017 um 12:13 schrieb Jean-Marie Poirier
   <[2]jmpoiri...@wanadoo.fr>:

   Hi to all,
   Interesting point of view from François-Pierre Goy, which doesn't
   surprise me at all ;-) !
   As Goran wrote, there is no place for a "confrontation" or anything of
   the sort, so let me simply underline what my intimate belief is :
   there is quie a significant corpus of music in manuscripts in old
   tuning attributed to "Gaultier", whatever spelling they may have chosen
   at the time,
   and starting from this observation I started to ask mlyself serious
   questions about Old Gaultier's music in d minor tuning.
   His (estimated) date of birth and known date of death, make him an
   almost exact contemporary of Robert Ballard who did not leave a single
   piece in d minor tuning,
   and only a few pieces in a transitional tuning, included the 1631
   anthology published by the royal printer Pierre Ballard, his brother.
   In the article Goran refers to, I tried to put facts on my intuition,
   showing that the continued connection of Old Gaultir and the Queen
   Mother
   may be one reason why he was not represented in the Ballard editions,
   as Ballard was the officila riyal printer and Marie de Medicis,
   whose opposition to Richelieu eventually resulted in her exile, so that
   she was obviously not well regarded by the King and his entourage.
   Gaultier's retirement in his native Dauphiné, after the Queen's death,
   is another argument pointing to his relative isolation and estrangement
   from the dominant
   currents in lute fashions whiich gradually led to the adoption of one
   of the transitional tunings, the d minor tuning, as the  new norm.
   Of course, I can be objected that the name Gautier could apply to
   different persons... Intuition and musical feeling can and will come to
   the rescue then, plus
   a few more objective facts.
   For instance, some people tend to attribute the Gaultier pieces in
   Cherbury to Jacques because he was a resident in England at the time.
   This is a bit too fast and too simple in my opinion : Cherbury visited
   France twice and he was there when Jacques Gaultier murdered a
   gentleman and had to
   run away from the country to avoid a certain death penalty. Cherbury
   belonged to the aristocratic circles and was very critical of
   Gaultier's criminal act.
   It is difficult to imagine he would copy so many pieces in his
   manuscript by a man he despised openly... As Ennemeond was already in
   Paris, serving the
   Queen mother, at the time Cherbury was in Paris for the second time. It
   does not seem far fetched to think he had access to some of his music
   then and chose
   to copy that in his book.
   Anyway, whatever the conclusions may be, I think this question about
   Vieux Gaultier, is worth asking and this period (first half of the
   century) is far from having
   delivered all its secrets !
   Best wishes to all,
   Jean-Marie Poirier
   --------------

      Hi,
      Â
      I don't think one can accuse Denis of having "hijacked" or "passed
     on
      works by Ennemond as his own". On the contrary, he was careful to
      distinguish their respective works in the Livre de tablature (for
     which
      he took a privilege as early as December 1669
      ([1][3]http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b90632544/f89.item),
     but which
      appeared only after his death. Most confusions in the attributions
     are
      due to people who copied the pieces into their lute books, often
     years
      after their composition, and also that the editors of the CNRS
     Vieux
      Gaultier volume included in their edition everything they found
      attributed to him at least once, without questioning the
     accurateness
      of the attributions.
      Â
      As to Ennemond's pieces being transcribed from earlier tunings,
     this
      undoubtedly occurred for one of them, but not necessarily for many
      more. When I studied the repertoire in accords nouveaux, almost
     thirty
      years ago, I was surprised to find how few pieces had versions in
     both
      old tuning and accords nouveaux or in both accords nouveaux and
     d-minor
      tuning. Of course, many sources have been lost, but none of those
     which
      has reappeared since has contradicted this notion. Add to this that
     the
      d-minor tuning must have appeared shortly before 1638, when the
     first
      pieces on this tuning appeared, and that Ennemond lived until 1651
     and
      had thus time to compose in this tuning.
      Â
      I would understand Smith's sentence, as he speaks of "fine" music,
     as
      expressing rather his personal appreciation. But there are ways to
     know
      how Denis Gaultier was appreciated by his contemporaries.
      1) Both Gaultiers are the only identified composers whose works
     were
      copied, in addition to their own works, by three
     lutenists-composers
      whose hand may be identified with confidence in lute manuscripts:
      Charles Mouton, Henry de Launay and Pierre Dubut le fils (the
     latter
      has also copied works by his father) ; Julien Blouin, by whom only
     a
      few works are known and who on the contrary copied works by a
     greater
      number of composers, made a complete copy of the "Pieces de luth"
     in
      one of his manuscripts, adding to them pieces by various other
      composers.
      2) But the manuscript "La rhà�torique des dieux" has been
     designed as
      "un assemblage des plus belles pià�ces de luth de l'illustre
     Denis
      Gaultier", even if at least one piece by Ennemond seems to have
     slipped
      among them (there is no proof that Denis had any role in the choice
     of
      the pieces).
      3) Likewise, Pierre Baudouin de Montarcis (the one mentioned in the
      preface of the Livre de tablature) refers to Denis as "l'Orfà�e
     de
      notre siecle", but ignores Ennemond (see
      [2][4]http://msl.cat/revista/56%20Goy.pdf, pp. 87-92).
      4) Three tombeaux were dedicated to Denis in addition to the one he
      wrote for himself: by Jacques Gallot, Charles Mouton and a lost one
     by
      his pupil Marianne Plantier. No tombeau appears to have been
     dedicated
      to Old Gaultier.
      Â
      Thus, it would seem that on one hand, the output of Ennemond and
     Denis
      may have been more or less considered as a whole by 17th-century
      lutenists, as their pieces are often mingled in the manuscripts,
     often
      without a clear attribution to either of them, or with conflicting
      attributions, and on the other hand, there really was a high regard
     for
      Denis in the second half of the century, maybe from people who knew
     him
      and had heard him in person.
      Â
      Best wishes,
      Â
      Franà�ois-Pierre Goy
      Â
      Â
      02.12.2017, 23:39, "G. C." :
        Â Â Â Claude Chauvel:
        Â Â Â We may also recall the anecdote told by burlesque
     D'Assoucy,
        in which
        Â Â Â old Gaultier was given a good thrashing by the people 
of
     his
        village
        Â Â Â who, "catching sight of the dusky face of this
     blackamoor" ,
        mistook
        Â Â Â him for the werewolf... The man's appearance : a surly
     yet
        sensual
        Â Â Â fellow, independent-minded, even slightly 
misanthropic,
        conscious of
        Â Â Â his art and refusing any subservience, he was often
     caustic
        about his
        Â Â Â colleagues such as his cousin Denis whom he thought
     "fitt to
        goe along
        Â Â Â with a buriall".
        Â Â Â ... However a hundred or so of his [Ennemond's] pieces
     have
        survived -
        Â Â Â all of them written in the OLD TUNE and collected in
     several
        Â Â Â manuscripts from the early XVIIth century; ... it was
     not
        until 1672
        Â Â Â that fifteen of old Gaultier's best pieces were 
engraved
     in
        the Livre
        Â Â Â de Tablature compiled by his cousin Denis ; these 
pieces
     were
        to figure
        Â Â Â high up among the best ones in many collections of
     German
        origin well
        Â Â Â into the XVIIIth century.
        Â Â Â [1988] CD Booklet Astree E 8703
        Â Â Â On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 9:30 PM, Jean-Marie Poirier
        Â Â Â
        Â Â Â :-D !!!
           > Le 2 dà�c. 2017 à 20:40, G. C. a 
à�crit :
        Â Â Â >
        Â Â Â > So did Denis pass on works of Ennemond as being his
     own, and
        not
        Â Â Â only
        Â Â Â > transcribing them from vieil tone and getting huge
     credit
        from D.
        Â Â Â A.
        Â Â Â > Smith 40 years ago for that?
        Â Â Â >
        Â Â Â > --
        Â Â Â >
        Â Â Â >
     References
      1. [5]http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b90632544/f89.item)
      2. [6]http://msl.cat/revista/56 Goy.pdf
     To get on or off this list see list information at
     [7]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   Andreas Schlegel
   Eckstr. 6
   CH-5737 Menziken
   Festnetz +41 (0)62 771 47 07
   Mobile +41 (0)78 646 87 63
   [8]lute.cor...@sunrise.ch

   --

References

   1. mailto:lute.cor...@sunrise.ch
   2. mailto:jmpoiri...@wanadoo.fr
   3. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b90632544/f89.item
   4. http://msl.cat/revista/56 Goy.pdf
   5. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b90632544/f89.item
   6. http://msl.cat/revista/56
   7. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   8. mailto:lute.cor...@sunrise.ch