For some reason I didn't get your original message but for what it is worth
these are my thoughts ...
Lex Eisenhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is an interesting parallel to the rapid decline of alfabeto song
after
1630. At about the same time the first instructions appeared for the use
of the guitar in BC (Foscarini, Corbetta).
Should we suppose that the practice of an all-battuto (alfabeto)
accompaniment style has survived?
There are (almost) no books with alfabeto from any other country
than Italy, and the Italian alfabeto manuals from the second half of the
17th century are poor, rehashed versions of earlier editions, almost
without
exception. They were only printed in Rome and Venice, probably in small
numbers, serving a local demand. Alfabeto (in print) clearly was past its
prime.
The short answer to that is that what has survived in print is only a tip
of the iceberg. And what is printed commercially reflects the economic
situation at the time and place. Italy was apparently in economic decline
in the second half of the 17th century. Also it may have been that the kind
of songs which are included in these books had gone out of fashion rather
than the manner of accompanying them. Surely the same is true of the songs
which don't have alfabeto?
And if you have been reading Cory Gavito's dissertation I wouldn't read too
much into what he says.
The exercises in the books by Corbetta et al include examples showing which
alfabeto chords match the the notes of the bass part e.g. The Regola per
sonar sopra la parte on p.70 on Corbetta's are surely intended to help the
player devise a strummed accompaniment. It is also self-evident that the
accompaniments to the vocal pieces in Corbetta's Guitarre royale of 1671 are
intended to be mostly strummed. Why else should he put the note values on
the stave rather than above it?
The same is true of Matteis - the first lesson which Schollars ought to
learn by heart - simply the standard chords and some of his accompaniments
and exercises are mostly strummed. that on p.23 for example.
However, some players may have been able to realize an accompaniment,
departing from the bass (and losing considerably in volume, while plucking
part of the harmonies).
Of course but that doesn't mean that they didn't vary the kind of
accompaniment which they provided.
Matteis (1680): 'The guitar was never so much in use & credit as it is at
this day, & finding it improved to so great a perfection, it is my present
design to make it company for other Instruments. Every body knows it to be
an imperfect Instrument & yet finding upon experience how agreeable a part
it bears in a consort I have composed severall Pieces both for ye practice
&
information of those that would make use of it with ye Harpsichord, Lute,
Theorbo or Bass-Viol.'
Note that he suggests that it should be used with the bass viol amongst
other things.............
Campion (1716): '.one is not prejudiced against the guitar without reason.
I
acknowledge, along with everyone, that it is not as strong of harmony as
the
harpsichord or the theorbo. However, I believe that it is sufficient to
accompany one voice.'
That is the point - the guitar is more suitable for accompanying the voice
or in small groups. I would agree with Martin today that the guitar is
often added to the continuo groups inappropriately.
I have even heard it included in Handel!
They both did not include all-battuto accompaniments in their
instructions, and the BC manuals from this time (Sanz, Grenerin, de
Murcia)
take the bass as the main reference.
Murcia wasn't printed until 1714. The point is that they didn't need to
include instructions on how to strum an accompaniment. Spaniards didn't
need this kind of instruction. Their objective was something different.
There are large numbers of manuscripts with Castilian or Catalan cifras.
Note also that the each of the tonos in the Cancionero de Marin is preceded
by a note indicating the passacalles to be (presumably) strummed between the
verses. If you have only seen the modern edition you may not be aware of
that.
It seems that using the guitar for
plain battuto had become quite much a matter of genre, kept for old exotic
dances (ruggieros, ciacconas etc.) and a very specific (mainly archaic)
song
repertoire.
I wonder if it did come to mind at all to add the strumming of
a
guitar to ensemble performance. Just like this was not usual in Church
music
(well, in Spain and South America of course they did...). There is a
tantalizing lack of notated examples, eye-witness reports and iconography
from the second half of the century, with regard to the role of the guitar
in ensemble.
Today it is often supposed that the guitar was added to
ensembles, for rhythm and colour, with reference to unwritten traditions.
What solid historical information is there to support this?
This depends on how diligently you have searched the surviving
documentation.
Monica
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
---------------------------------
Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox.
--
