Obviously, Ron, I wholeheartedly agree with your agreement with me. I
feel obliged to add a little clarification. Again, all, please keep in
mind that the following only represents my personal perspective on the
value of third-hand eyewitness accounts; I don't claim to speak for
anybody else.
I would contend that the passing from hand to hand (or ear to ear) of
any "eyewitness account" could be considered a decent working
definition of "rumor." Many rumors do have a kernel of truth in their
origin, and obviously, some sources are more credible than others.
However, as soon as that account passes outside of the hands of the
eyewitness with first-hand experience relaying his account to an
individual who then has second-hand knowledge of it, as the account
enters the realm of the third-hand, it *is* rumor even if based in
fact. Paul O'Dette himself (whose "Ancient Airs..." liner notes do
list the sources he used for all the pieces) refers to the existence of
a tablature original as "unconfirmed reports" (which would seem another
decent definition of rumor). O'Dette couldn't track down the original
at that time and concedes within those liner notes to recreating
tablatures for those six pieces from Chilesotti's staff-notation
version of the Codice in question.
As a biologist based in at least a little scholarship, I really do not
believe eyewitness accounts are anything upon which scholarship can be
based. Good eyewitness accounts can serve as an impetus for interested
scholars to do more work, but reference to the account itself is not a
good basis for scholarship. I don't even think publication of the
whole document is necessary for a tablature original of Chilesotti's
Codice to enter the realm of the scholarly. I would love to see a
brief study of the document with a few simple photographic facsimiles
appear in a reputable, peer-review publication like the LSA Journal,
Early Music, etc. That would be interesting, of much more value to the
scholarly community than any word-of-mouth eyewitness account, and
would solidly remove any rumor stigma associated with this bit of lute
folklore.
Best,
Eugene
At 06:30 AM 9/22/2008, Ron Andrico wrote:
Dear Eugene, Arthur & All:
Actually, Respighi's other major source for material for his
'Ancient Airs & Dances' suites was Chilesotti's _Lautenspieler des
XVI Jahrhunderts_, published in 1891. This volume contains 'guitar'
transcriptions of the bits by V. Galilei, Molinaro, Besard,
Gianoncelli, Boesset (via Marin, 1636), as well as a host of other
good composers of good lute music. The volume was reprinted by
Forni, Bologna at some unknown date, and is a worthy anthology ripe
for re-transcripiton into lute tablature.
As for the 'rumor' qualifications of the existence of Chilesotti's
other original ms., one has to agree with Eugene that, until
published, it remains folklore. We would all truly love to see the
evidence and encourage the Italian lutenist to make his story more
widely available.
Best wishes,
Ron Andrico
[1]www.mignarda.com
> Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 19:19:23 -0400
> To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Respighi
>
> Greetings Arthur et al.
>
> I very sincerely intended no disrespect in referring to the
existence of the original as a rumor. I have read these accounts
before. I do not know the lutenist referenced nor
the owner of the manuscript. I am also a biologist who deals with
wild things. Eyewitness accounts are why the Loch Ness monster isn't
on the books amongst those in my profession. I am not doubting what
the lutenist in question saw. It's only that I have not seen it,
have not seen this referenced in any known catalogues, have not had
any corroboration beyond this singular account, etc. Again, I very
sincerely intend absolutely no disrespect, but without more than a
single un-verifiable account, this particular book is rumor from my
perspective. I do not claim to speak from anybody else's
perspective.
>
> I am also very fully aware that Respighi drew from a great many
sources (Roncalli's guitar music, e.g.). Feel free to read again:
nowhere did I write nor intend to imply that Respighi only drew from
the Codice Lauten-Buch--nowehere did I write that whole of
Respighi's Ancient Airs could be located in Chilesotti's Codice
Lauten-Buch. Anybody who took me to mean that Chilesotti's Codice
Lauten-Buch was Respighi's sole source read far more in my brief
note than I'd actually written. Also, anybody who dedicates years to
a musicological wild goose chase based upon what a biologist/amateur
musician posts to a public electronic forum deserves to find nothing
at all.
>
> I also do not represent some kind of isolated, isolationist
"guitar world" any more than I do an even odder 6-course,
baroque-era mandolino world...or a pre-Chambure, speculative vihuela
world. Personally, I love everybody's music and wouldn't dare to
contain myself to one facet.
>
> Again, I intended no disrespect at all, but there is nothing I or
the interested public can confirm of tablature originals of
Chilesotti's Codice Lauten-Buch. That was my only point.
>
> Sincerely,
> Eugene
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Arthur Ness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sunday, September 21, 2008 6:07 pm
> Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Respighi
> To: "Eugene C. Braig IV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, List Lute
<lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> oooooooooooooooo
> > Dear Eugene,
> >
> > This common misunderstanding about the
> > Respighi Ancient Aires seems to surface from the guitar world
each
> > and every time the Respighi suites are mentioned! All you
> > do is send
> > readers on a wild goose chase looking for pieces that are NOT
in the
> > Codice Lauten-Buch.
> >
> > Can you imagine how frustrating it is to look through
> > 100 scores in an attempt to find a work that is not there?
> >
> > We've all done t.
> >
> > First--fast through. Nothing.
> > Slower. Nothing.
> > "But Eugene said they're there."
> > Once more--very slowly and carefully.
> > Damn! There's no
> > there there!
> >
> > All of the transcriptions used by Respighi come from SEVERAL
articles
> > on lute music published by Chilesotti in various places,
> > including some
> > rather obscure Italian music journals, which are particularly
> > troublesometo locate. The three suites (publ. 1917, 1923 and
> > 1931--after OC's death
> > in 1916) contain 24 pieces, and ONLY SIX are taken from the
Codice
> > Lauten-Buch! And the tablature for one of the six pieces
> > is reproduced
> > in Chilesotti's book in facsimile. So one would only have to
> > re-intabulate 5 of the pieces, because all of the others are
available
> > in the original tablatures, many in convenient facsimile
> > editions or
> > modern editions wth tablature.
> >
> > As for the "third-person rumors," I take exception elsewhere
in this
> > thread. I'd rather say they are not rumors, but an "eye-
> > witness account"
> > by a professional Italian lutenist who played a private
recital
> > in the
> > home of the manuscript's current owner in the late 1990s.
> > He is said to
> > have performed
> > directly directly from the original manuscript "Lauten-Buch."
> >
> > AJN
> > oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> > <<snip>>
> > | Best,
> > | Eugene
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > | To get on or off this list see list information at
> > | [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> > |
> >
> >
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Eugene C. Braig IV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "List Lute" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 2:36 PM
> > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Respighi
> >
> >
> > Because original tablature versions of the Chilesotti book
> > only appear
> > to
> > exist in occasionally-referenced, third-person rumors, I
> > believe Paul
> > O'Dette took a similar approach to his "Ancient Airs" recording:
> > re-intabulating from Chilesotti's staff-notation version.
--
References
1. http://www.mignarda.com/
2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
