I think class structure was different during the 16th and 17th centuries and
indeed changed a lot during this period.
There was the nobility, and a small class of "artisans" - i.e. people with a
skill of some sort. The mass of the population were peasants with varying
degrees of literacy tied to the land. Overall during the period there was
a gradually emerging "middle class".
Professional musicians for better or worse belonged to the artisan class on
the whole. They relied on patronage from the better off who didn't always
pay them and often lived from hand to mouth.
The aristocracy and some of the clergy would have been wealthy and literate
enough to become competant amateur musicians.
But it is not something you can gereralize about.
Monica
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Digman" <magg...@sonic.net>
To: <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 9:20 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lutes and social classes historically.
Tobias Hume was not a member of the aristocracy. He was a mercenary
soldier and died penniless in a home for the destitute. At one point he
petitioned parliament for a pension complaining that he had been reduced
to eating weeds to stay alive.
I believe the ancestors of the violin family were originally considered
"folk" instruments.
Gary
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruno Correia" <bruno.l...@gmail.com>
To: "List LUTELIST" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 4:35 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lutes and social classes historically.
Dear Herbert,
2012/7/23 Herbert Ward <[1]wa...@physics.utexas.edu>
I have heard that the high cost of the lute and its strings
ensured that the lute historically was limited to the upper classes.
Perhaps not only but mostly to the upperclass.
How can we know this?
The high cost of instruments, strings and editions might be a good
indicative. The printed sources of lute music are not only very
demanding to play but in many cases are also dificult to understand if
you didn't have enough music culture (exposure to vocal polyphony). I
imagine that the lower class had little time to study such pieces and
perhaps not enough taste to appreciate it.
Do we know how many loaves of bread cost the
same as a set of strings in Renaissance Europe?
We don't. Just remember, breads were made at home (cheaper), strings by
the string maker (expensive).
Are surviving documents or iconography definitive on this issue?
I don't think so. They may be misleading as well.
Were all the composers either patronized by the upper
class or upper class themselves?
In fact many were. Kapsperger for instance, inherited a noble title but
was't wealthy, he was patronized by Italian academies and did get a
job during the Barberini papacy.
What instruments did the lower classes
have?
The guitar!!
Best wishes.
To get on or off this list see list information at
[2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
Bruno Correia
Pesquisador autonomo da pratica e interpretac,ao
historicamente informada no alaude e teorba.
Doutor em Praticas Interpretativas pela
Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro.
--
References
1. mailto:wa...@physics.utexas.edu
2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2197 / Virus Database: 2437/5147 - Release Date: 07/22/12
