Dear Ed, Martyn, and All,
As you lecture on this painting, and until now, I have only given
it an
admirative, but casual look, may I formulate a few questions about
the
significance of the stringing and the fretting, about which you
may be able to
enlighten me?
The fretting appears to be equal and not stepped (which is quite
different from
Dowland's indications), but is this significant of typical
stringing of the
time?
It could be that zooming in alters the perspective and gives too
much
importance to this detail which the painter might have considered
insignificant; but it might also have been highly significant of
the practise
of the time (around 1533), but not necessarily of good practise,
as it was
deemed by those knowledgeable in luting.
The detail, as you say, is indeed extraordinary, which tends to
give the
(possibly mistaken?) impression that the painting of the lute
might be almost
as accurate as a photograph. Although, photographic accuracy is
not necessarily
informative per se, as the lute could still be painted from
memory (doubtful?)
or an example of just one man's stringing, or even a lute strung
up as a
painter's prop and not for playing; but in any case, certain
details of
instruments in the painting (musical or otherwise) could have
been focussed on
(at the expense of others), tweaked or altered, to conform with
the complex
primary symbolic message conveyed.
For example, it seems to have been established that some of the
instruments are
misaligned, as possible symbols of impending chaos, or aligned to
the date of
Good Friday 1533.
"But cleaning of the picture has established that each one of the
instruments
to the right of the celestial globe - a cylindrical shepherd's
dial, two
quadrants, a polyhedral sundial and a torquetum - are all
curiously misaligned
for use in a northerly latitude. This is unlikely to have been an
oversight on
the artist's part, since one of his closest friends in London was
the
astronomer Nikolaus Kratzer (...)"
"The misaligned instruments are surely emblems of chaos, of the
heavens out of
joint. The fact that they were intended to be read symbolically
is suggested by
the generally encrypted nature of the whole painting and
confirmed by the lute
with a broken string on the shelf below (...)"
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/art-holbeins-inner-game-1291477.html
That the musical instruments are defective, in that one string of
the lute is
broken and one of the flutes are missing from the case of flutes
is evident;
but might it not also be possible that Holbein expected the
would-be viewer
(just as for the sundial) to recognize that this instrument was
not ideally
strung, according to the principles of the time (i.e. if those
principles were
already the same as those at J. Dowland's time, around 1610)?
I note that the frets (fre t1 to fret 8), apart from being double,
would appear
to be almost equal in thickness.
At the same time, it would appear that the strings are set as
high as
possible in relation to the bridge-holes. Could this raised string
height have
been used to compensate for the resulting raised fret height at
fret 8 (due
to the equal fretting)?
The presence of both these features together, could argue against
the
likelihood that the lute was fretted with unequal frets, and that
the painter
had simply abstracted away from this; but possibly indicates that
the painter
is "describing" an actual lute strung in this particular way;
although if we
accept
that, can we be sure that this was a general practise at that
time (1533), or
just one man's "lazy" habits, or more interestingly a pattern
that those in the
know would recognize as a badly strung lute which would be
difficult to play.
If significant, this certainly would not correspond to the later
suggestion by
Dowland (as pointed out by Martyn Hodgson), in John Dowland's
'OTHER
NECESSARIE Observations....' Varietie (1610). Here Dowland
relates fret sizes
to strings of the lute,
Fret 1 and 2: countertenor ie 4th course
3 and 4: as Great Meanes ie 3rd
5 and 6: as Small Meanes ie 2nd
7, 8 and 9: as Trebles ie 1st
(PS I wrote the whole of this message, but then realised there
was a flaw in my
reasoning. If the general tendency around 1533 was to have equal
frets, and
this called for raised strings at the bridge, why not simply make
the bridge
higher? The raised strings at the bridge would have to be
compensating for
something that was not expected when the lute was given its
bridge.
Indeed, I used this solution on my Renaissance lute when I first
added loaded
strings, as their large movement tended to touch the frets. Thus
perhaps the
expected
fretting by the lute maker was frets decreasing in thickness, and
the raising
at the bridge a compensation for the present "poor" equal
fretting.
I also agree with you Ed, that the strings appear rather thin,
particularly
relative to the lute holes, and even the smalles treble string,
might be thinner
than the 0.42 postulated by Martin Shepherd, as being the
smallest possible
string at the time (if not made from gut strips); but I would
point out that
some of these features, thin strings, for example, might also have
been chosen
by the artist to underline the fragility of the harmony they
represent, and
the bolder
thickness of the transverse frets might then have served to
contrast this.
In this case the pattern chosen, equal thick frets and thin
strings (possibly
both not ideal), might have been there to underline a symbolism,
which is also
present in so many other structural elements in the painting,
rather than
significant of a general practise.
These are just my attempts at organising my thoughts and perhaps
simply show my
ignorance; indeed, perhaps I am the only one to see the fretting
as equal; or
many of you use equal fretting for a lute that has a particular
problem (I seem
to remember that might be the case), if so please do excuse my
"balbutiements".
Regards
Anthony
----- Message d'origine ----
De : Ed Durbrow <edurb...@sea.plala.or.jp>
À : LuteNet list <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Envoyé le : Sam 5 février 2011, 3h 32min 30s
Objet : [LUTE] Re: Google Art project
I missed the beginning of this thread. Luckily I checked the link.
Wow!
I'm so happy to have this link. What detail! I use this picture in
my
academic lecture class at Saitama U. (not teaching one this year
or
next unfortunately). It is always good for two or three 90 minute
lectures, what with all the tangents I go off on.
Those are quite thin strings on that lute. I wonder if he was
using
carbon fiber. :-)
[3][1]http://www.googleartproject.com/museums/nationalgallery/the-am
bas
sadors
Ed Durbrow
Saitama, Japan
[2]http://www.musicianspage.com/musicians/9688/
[3]http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/
--
References
1.
http://www.googleartproject.com/museums/nationalgallery/the-ambas
2. http://www.musicianspage.com/musicians/9688/
3. http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
