This is a very interesting topic for a long discussion, and I am afraid not necessarily suitable for such a forum due to its natural constraints, but I will try to highlight just a few issues that may need some attention. In my explanations I will not try to undermine any one of existing theories, so please do not interpret my rhetorical questions as an attack on anyone. I am expressing only my views. Firstly, old doesn’t necessarily equal to outdated in musicology or history. I mentioned Thurston Dart not without a reason as his article from 1957 may prove to be more or less correct. So what has changed since then in our knowledge? The main argument against Dart’s theory comes from a discovered letter to Sir Robert Nauton dated on July 1619 written by Lord Herbert, in which he informs Sir Robert that Jacques Gaultier fled to England after „ haveing killed a brave French Gentleman in a most base fashion” (in a duel). Also there is an information that Herbert was involved in negotiations with Louis XIII, who was nagging English for Gaultier’s extradition. There seems to be nothing unusual that he participated in this process as he was an ambassador and diplomat, so this type of procedure would pertain to his duties anyway. The only question remains what was his attitude towards this situation. Did he feel endangered by his association with Gaultier? If Jacques Gaultier was a personae non gratae in high society why was he so well received by the king? Why was he well paid for his post as a court lutenist? Why was he appointed as personal teacher (an! d lutenist) to Queen Henrietta Maria? But not only at royal court he was welcomed. Sir Robert Kiligrew who lived in the very City of London who drew in diverse, cultural circle that included such renown personalities as John Donne, Francis Bacon, Nicholas Lanier, Cornelius Jacobszoon Drebbel, Constantijn Huygens and many others, welcomed also Jacques Gaultier. This is how Huygens describes one of such a soirees during which he admired Gaultiers playing: „The one to continue the feast (and how!) was Gaultier. The name only should be enough to underline his greatness sufficiently, were it not that, in the opinion of the English and without objections on my part, he raised himself above the Gaultiers. Heavenly Gods! With what passionate hands, right and left, did he succeed in lifting me out of my sense again and again.” Isn’t it strange to invite such a criminal to entertain high society which wouldn’t like a slightest association with low morals? Or maybe Gaultier was not seen as an outcast? What we know about Jacques Gaultier is that despite a period of non-payment (later reimbursed) Gaultier remained in royal service for several years with his reputation intact. So, it seems that the problem was not in Jacques social status and how he was received in society. Wasn’t Herbert present at least once at such a soiree? He was very interested in music and art in general. We know that when Herbert returned to London he became part of a literary circle that included Ben Jonson, Henry Carew and John Donne. Moreover John Donne was his mother’s friend and his own counsellor. Donne encouraged him in his studies and love of books. Herbert wrote an elegy on Donne in 1631 and was his ablest disciple. He loved poetry and wrote several poems. Also Francis Bacon was the friend of George Herbert the poet, and was also known to his brother. Wouldn’t Herbert be invited to such a party? Then, maybe it was Herbert’s personal problem? What was his character and how did he view people maybe very relevant here. Did Herbert view duel as a transgression? After reading his autobiography and his letters, two different pictures of his complicated personality emerge. One of a sensitive philosopher, another of a gallant aristocrat, individualist with a big temper. Some people complained that he was choleric and hasty, and these features almost led him to duels and other big problems. After quarrel with Lord Howard of Walden due to liberal drinking Herbert demanded satisfaction. The duel would have been fought had not the principals been arrested before they met. Another occasion for calamity raised at French court. M. de Luynes ( French king’s favorite) was little inclined to be influenced by such a galant demeanour of Lord Herbert. Very soon they quarrelled and Herbert demanded satisfaction again, but James I did not take kindly to the proposal (fortunately!!!). Is this possible then, that Herbert would despise Gaultier knowing his own inclinations? Now, we would have to dive into Herbert’s philosophy to undo this Gordian kn! ot. How did he regard religion that he proclaimed? As far as we know Lord Churbury developed his own system of beliefs know as Deism, however what is most adequate here, he treated it more from a standpoint of a philosopher. Ethics do not enter very materially into Lord Herbert’s philosophy, and in his sparse references, he inclines in spite of his eulogies of virtue, to a lax system of morals. He does not set himself up as an apologist for wicked men, but sin (he argues) is very often attributable to hereditary physical causes, to an inherent and irresistible propensity to vice. Herbert holds the sanguine belief that none are so wicked as to sin purposely. He urges men to pass over injuries done to themselves. Why then would he condemn Gaultier for infinity? Now, I will diverge to look at the music in his lute book. The initial inspection of the manuscript was performed by Miss Phyllis M. Giles (a librarian of Fitzwiliam museum). She stated that: „The paper used consists of 46 sheets and 2 half-sheets of paper with the signed watermark of Jacques Lebe, a papermaker of Troyes who died in 1616. Paper with this mark is found in use in France as late as 1626. The thiner paper used for pastedowns and flyleaves of the book has a different watermark, that of Edmond Denise, another papermaker of Troys. It appears likely that the whole book was put together and bound at the same time in France.” Therefore we can assume that Herbert bought a ready bound book in Paris with a thought of filling it later with some lute compositions he admired. The whole lute book is clearly divided into sections with some blank pages in between. It is interesting though that first entries start with Italian and Polish composers (apart from Perichon who w! as dead by 1600 which suggests that Herbert had his music before buying a book). Then English music follows. Gaultiers appear quite late in the manuscript. Obviously pieces were copied from sheet music, but I doubt if they were kept very long in a drawer. This chronology could suggest that Gaultier’s pieces were copied not in Paris but rather in England (or Ireland). Now, we come to Van der Burgh letter. There are 2 explanations why he wrote this confusing invitation 1/ he mentions Enemond Gaultier who visited England that year according to miss Burwell 2/ Jacques Gaultier visited Holland exactly in 1630 and „Van der Burgh did not know that Huygens had met Gaultier on his visits to London in 1620, or perhaps despite hearing Gaultier at the Kiligrew family the two had not yet been formally introduced, so Jacques still needed a letter of introduction.” And Van den Burgh mentions Jacques in a letter of October 1630 - „ Je ne croy pas que Gaultier son passe par la Haye sans vous avoir laisse de ses merveilles. „ Some musicologists prefer the later explanation, others the former. One has to remember how ceremonial XVIIth century society was, and a formal introduction (which is absolutely foreign for us) was meticulously observed. However, we can not solve this at the moment until further evidence is found. As for Gaultier’s music I can’t see anything special (pointing to one or the other Gaultier) in pieces that Herbert copied for his book. It could be either Enemond, Jacques or Denis. There is a good LSA article on Courante, the dance which was much favoured by French baroque lutenists. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~lsa/publications/Editions/09-Gautier-Introduction.pdf I will finish my observations (which are just a scratch on a surface IMHO) with a short quotation from a preface to Paul O’Dette’s magnificent CD - „Lord Herbert of Cherbury’ lute book”. I trust in his sense of style which comes from enormous experience: „A large number of the French pieces in Lord Herbert’s manuscript are attributed just to Gaultier. For several reasons, Jacques Gaultier is the most likely candidate of the many lute playing Gaultiers.Lord Herbert was directly involved in negotiations with Louis XIII, who persistently lobbied for the English Gaultier’s extradition. His Courante Son adieu may have been a farewell to his homeland - it is not the same as the piece of the identical title by the more famous Vieux Gaultier.”
Best Jaroslaw > Wiadomość napisana przez Ron Andrico <praelu...@hotmail.com> w dniu > 04.02.2018, o godz. 21:32: > > It appears that there are two questions: 1) Were the pieces attributed > to Gaultier appearing in the Herbert ms by Jacques or by Ennemond? and > 2) Was the owner of the manuscript on terms of respect and goodwill > with Jacques? > > Obviously, we don't have solid evidence to answer the first question, > but there is sufficient evidence to suspect that Herbert of Cherbury > would have little to gain and much to lose through his public > association with Jacques Gaultier. I believe, and other players > believe that the stylistic similarity of at least some of the music in > question bears an affinity with the music of Ennemond Gaultier, with > its characteristic grace, elegance and deceptive simplicity. > > G pointed out that there was information outlining the relationship > with Jacques Gaultier and Herbert in Matthew Spring's The Lute in > Britain. But there is also a passage that points out the apparent > confusion of which Gaultier was which: > > "In August 1630, an unnamed lutenist was provided with a letter of > recommendation from the poet and diplomat Jacob van der Burgh, by way > of an introduction to Huygens...If this letter of introduction was > intended for Jacques Gaultier it seems odd that Van der Burgh does not > appear to be aware that Gaultier and Huygens were acquainted...An > alternative explanation is that this letter of introduction was for > Ennemond Gaultier who, according to the writer of the Burwell lute > tutor, visited England around this time. The Burwell tutor relates > that Ennemond was sent to represent Marie de Medici at the birth of her > grandson Charles II on 28 May 1630...And could the reference [in the > letter] to 'lute playing brothers' allude to other lutenists with the > name Gaultier rather than simply other professional players?" > - Matthew Spring, p. 136-137 > > RA > __________________________________________________________________ > > From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu <lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu> on behalf > of G. C. <kalei...@gmail.com> > Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2018 12:59 PM > To: Lutelist > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Cherbury lute book > > @ Google books, some more info on Jacques Gaultier from the 2013 > Utrecht lute symposium. Article by Matthew Spring starts on page > 120. > Unfortunately, the last few pages of the article are not displayed. > > [1]https://books.google.no/books?id=Aev6DAAAQBAJ&pg=PA125&lpg=PA125&dq= > > herbert+cherbury+and+ennemond+gaultier&source=bl&ots=KN8uwmojdg&sig=R-S > > jesWCKsqiVG-hz72_Klu7G_M&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiJ-Py3t4rZAhVC6lMKHY-nDY > UQ6AEIPzAH#v=onepage&q&f=true > G. > -- > References > 1. > [1]https://books.google.no/books?id=Aev6DAAAQBAJ&pg=PA125&lpg=PA125&dq= > herbert+cherbury+and+ennemond+gaultier&source=bl&ots=KN8uwmojdg&sig=R-S > jesWCKsqiVG-hz72_Klu7G_M&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiJ-Py3t4rZAhVC6lMKHY-nDY > UQ6AEIPzAH#v=onepage&q&f=true > To get on or off this list see list information at > [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > -- > > References > > 1. > https://books.google.no/books?id=Aev6DAAAQBAJ&pg=PA125&lpg=PA125&dq=herbert+cherbury+and+ennemond+gaultier&source=bl&ots=KN8uwmojdg&sig=R-SjesWCKsqiVG-hz72_Klu7G_M&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiJ-Py3t4rZAhVC6lMKHY-nDYUQ6AEIPzAH#v=onepage&q&f=true > 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
