In Spain in the 16th century the bajon was used to accompany chant although
what it seems to have been used for was to sound the appropriate pitch note
of each section so as to keep the singers on pitch. I think the plainchant
on Paul McCreech's recording of Victoria's Requiem is done in that way.
Monica
----- Original Message -----
From: "Guy Smith" <guy_m_sm...@comcast.net>
To: "'Ron Andrico'" <praelu...@hotmail.com>; <s.wa...@ntlworld.com>;
<howardpos...@ca.rr.com>
Cc: <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2009 5:58 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: another day at the office
FWIW, the serpent was invented by a French priest in 1590, and was
originally meant to accompany chant.
Guy
-----Original Message-----
From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On
Behalf
Of Ron Andrico
Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2009 4:39 AM
To: s.wa...@ntlworld.com; howardpos...@ca.rr.com
Cc: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [LUTE] Re: another day at the office
To All:
While I trust Monica's expert opinion that guitars were not likely
found in concerted church music in the early 17th century, there
actually is evidence of loud winds doubling voices in the early 16th
century. Leslie Korrick's article, 'Instrumental music in the early
16th-century Mass: new evidence' found in Early Music XVIII No. 3 1990,
has the relevant information. She points out that much of the
Protestant reformer's vitriol against music in church was in direct
response to trumpets, horns, shawms, bombards, etc. used in divine
worship.
[DT: Note the reference to an ancient article but facts is facts.]
I'm sure the results of the Council of Trent had some bearing on what
sort of instruments might be used in liturgical music up to
Monteverdi's time. To settle the matter of guitars in divine worship
during the early 17th century, I suppose one could look at musician's
payment records to spot a pattern or even a reference.
Ron Andrico
www.mignarda.com
> Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 11:00:55 +0000
> To: howardpos...@ca.rr.com
> CC: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> From: s.wa...@ntlworld.com
> Subject: [LUTE] Re: another day at the office
>
> howard posner wrote:
> > On Dec 18, 2009, at 3:43 AM, Monica Hall wrote:
> >
> >
> >> to which I would respond - is there any authority for David's
> >> proposition other than his own whim?
> >>
> >
> > I'm not sure what David's proposition is, but yours seems to be
> > something like, "there was no church in Italy in the first half of
> > the 17th century in which a guitar was ever used for continuo."
This
> > seems extreme enough to ask for some support.
> >
>
> How about the proposition that "there was no church in Italy in the
> first half of the17th century in which the singers all performed in
the
> nude?" Well.. who knows? But how likely is it?
> > That the guitar was considered (by absolutely everyone?) a secular,
> > even vulgar, instrument doesn't really get us anywhere. The same
was
> > true of the violin for a generation or two, but then became
perfectly
> > normal in church.
> >
> Any other examples of 'secular, even vulgar, instruments' becoming
> accepted in the church? (strohfiedel? bagpipe?)
> > It is not dispositive that the guitar is not mentioned in the
> > published books of liturgical music that represent a small part of
> > the music that was heard in churches. Absent some "guitarra taceat
> > in ecclesia" pronouncement from the Pope, we should keep an open
mind
> > about church practice.
> >
> Well, it's probably a virtue to keep an open mind on things but the
> evidence suggests that it is really rather unlikely that guitarists
> would be strumming along with the Vespers - and no evidence that they
did.
> >
> >
> >> But briefly I don't think that the guitar would have been used in
17th
> >> century Italian (or other) religious music intended to be
performed
> >> in a
> >> liturgical context. I can't see why it should be necessary.
> >>
> >
> > Necessary? Necessary??? NECESSARY??????
> >
>
> too much badinage with RT?
>
>
> > O, reason not the need! Our basest beggars
> > Are in the poorest thing superfluous.
> > Allow not nature more than nature needs,
> > Man's life is cheap as beast's.
> >
> > It's not NECESSARY to perform the 1610 Vespers at all, particularly
> > if you're not Catholic. It's not necessary (shudder) to use
> > theorbos, or any member of the lute family, if you do perform them.
> > It's not necessary for singers or instrumentalists to sing any
> > particular ornament, or a continuo player to voice a chord any
> > particular way, but what they do sing or play isn't wrong for being
> > unnecessary. "Necessary" is not relevant.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
__________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. [1]Sign up now.
--
References
1. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/
