Subject: Further to Re: Moravsky MS (CZ. Brno D 189) - a fresh tack! 2

From: Martyn Hodgson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 14:26:58 +0000 (UTC)

Dear Monica.
   Thanks for your latest of 31 Jan (below) and forgive the delay in
   replying - it's only today risen to the top of my current 'to do' list!
   I note what you say and will respond in due course. However, to enable
   me to do this properly, it will be helpful if you would now confirm
   precisely what your position is on the instrument(s) required for the
   pieces in this MS.  In my last of 29 Jan (- also below) I wrote:
   '- as I understand it from what you have written, your position is that
   the vast majority (about 98%) of
    the some 124 works for plucked instruments in this MS are for a six
   course gytarra and that just three
    are for a mandora (according to you a twelve course instrument with
   five fingered courses and seven
    free basses -  you stated that  "The mandora has seven unstopped
   basses" )'
   Is this a correct statement of your position?
   regards
   Martyn
   PS I copy this to the 'Baroque Lute' list since the mandora is a lute
   instrument - and a baroque lute to boot!
   =======================================================================
   ======
   ----- Forwarded Message -----
   From: Martyn Hodgson <[email-masked]>
   To: Monica Hall <[email-masked]>; VihuelaList
   <[email-masked]>; Baroque Lute List
   <[email-masked]>
   Sent: Monday, 29 January 2018, 17:01
   Subject: Moravsky MS (CZ Brno D189) - a fresh tack!
   Dear Monica,
   As you now know, I haven't yet replied to your latest open
   mailings since these had both ended by
   saying that you 'were going to leave it  for now' and I therefore took
   this as meaning I might soon
   expect something further.  Accordingly, not wishing to respond in a
   piecemeal and disjointed manner,
    I deliberately delayed replying and awaited your further thoughts.
   However, I shall do so now.
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ----------------------------------
   Regarding copying things to other lists, just to be quite clear, I
   generally copy things to other of
   Wayne's lists if they're relevant there. Hence why gallichon/mandora
   stuff (but usually not guitar)
   can find its way onto the lute lists (or, indeed, elsewhere) - it's not
   a fiendish plot of any kind!  But on
    with the motley..........
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ----------------------------
   Our exchanges of 'textual analysis' have clearly failed to persuade
   each other of our respective cases
     and therefore, to make any progress, another tack is now required:
   one more forensic perhaps and
   closer related to contemporary organological, musicological and source
   evidence.  Firstly though, to summarise our respective positions:
     - as I understand it from what you have written, your position is
   that the vast majority (about 98%) of
    the some 124 works for plucked instruments in this MS are for a six
   course gytarra and that just three
    are for a mandora (according to you a twelve course instrument with
   five fingered courses and seven
    free basses -  you stated that  "The mandora has seven unstopped
   basses" );
     - mine is that the 28 pieces notated with a sixth course are for
   mandora and that the remainder
   requiring just five courses are principally for gytarra (although, as I
   was at pains to point out earlier,
    any passably competent mandora player would easily be able to add a
   low sixth where suitable in the
    guitar pieces and similarly, in many cases, a guitarist would be able
   to play the errant low bass an
   octave up by employing the open third course). The couple of pieces
   which have the seven additional
    free basses notated also have a left hand fingered bass notated in the
   usual register and, whilst we've
    not discussed this so far, I believe these additional low course
   numberings are therefore simply later additions to these two pieces
   (note also that the scribe left off adding these low basses half way
    through the piece numbered 45! ).
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   -----------------------------------
   1. DATE OF D-189
   You stated that the MS could have been written  "anytime in the
   eighteenth century"  - but with no
    evidence for this assertion. I do, of course, understand why you
   favour such a  wide range of dates
   since it may help give some credence to employing a six course guitar
   (developed, in fact, only later
    in the eighteenth century) for all the plucked works in this
   collection
   However, others date the writing of this MS considerably earlier,
   including:
   James Tyler - 'early 18th century';
   Gary Boye - 'beginning of the 18th century';
   Ernst Pohlmann - 'um 1700' (around 1700);
   Jaroslav Pohanka (Principal editor of Musica Antiqua Bohemia) - 'vor
   1700 geschrieben' (written
    before 1700);
   My own dating (based on stylistic traits and the piece attributed  to
   C. Loschi) is 1700 to 1720.
   Accordingly, to summarise, the best date range estimate for compilation
   of this MS lies between 1690
    and 1720.
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ----------------------------------
   2. CALLICHON/MANDORA
   Around 70 extant historical mandoras/gallichons have been identified
   made between 1688 and 1780
   (most are listed in Dieter Kirsch's 'La mandora au XVIII siecle): the
   vast majority (97%) of these are six course instruments but a couple
   have more courses - one is 8 course and one 9 course . These two
    are both later eighteenth century and thus too late to be the sort of
   instruments originally employed
   for D-189.  Extant instruments also well reflect contemporary
   iconography showing the overwhelming predominance of the six course
   mandora; and similarly with extant tablatures - though a very few do
   contain some pieces for 8 or 9 course mandora (such as Univerzitna
   Kniznica Bratislava Ms 1092
   which contains galant/classical music c.1770 requiring a mandora with
   eight courses). Note that these mandoras basically had these few
   additional courses on the same peghead (like earlier lutes) and did
   not employ the much longer extensions as found in the theorbo, archlute
   or, for that matter, the arch/theorboed guitar known from the
   seventeenth century onwards.
   Historically, the upper five courses of the usual six course
   mandora/callichon were tuned in precisely
   the same intervals as those of the guitar. The mandora sixth course was
   commonly tuned a tone
   below the fifth (as, of course, found in D-189), or a third or a fourth
   below it. Tablatures show that the additional basses of the rare 8/9
   course instrument merely fill in the notes between the fifth course
   and the sixth a third or a fourth below it and do not extend the range
   any further downwards.
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   --------------------------
   3. ACCORDO GYTARRA ET MANDORA
   The tablature system with five lines on f.48v. between the first double
   bar lines gives octave tuning
   checks in the usual manner. It shows that the upper five courses of the
   gytarra and mandora were
    tuned in the same intervals with an extra course indicated below the
   line for the usual six course
   mandora of the period (the six course guitar not then being known). The
   telling example of the
   Rondeau (C. Loschi), originally for a six course instrument but later
   arranged for just five courses
   (Rondon 75), very well illustrates the differences required in
   intabulating the same work for the six
    course mandora and the five course gytarra.
   The staff after this has numbers below for an instrument with seven
   additional bass courses - but only
    two intabulated pieces out of a total of 124 works have had these
   numbers added. I therefore believe
    that this section was added later - perhaps when a novel theorboed
   guitar was acquired (again note
    that the scribe couldn't be bothered with adding these new low basses
   all the way through piece 45).
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ----------------------------
   4. SIX COURSE GUITAR IN BOHEMIA, MORAVIA AND AUSTRIA IN THE EIGHTEENTH
   CENTURY
   Six course guitars first appeared in Southern Spain in the 1760s and a
   little later in Italy in a six string
    form, but only appear in German speaking lands from the 1780s (the
   earliest extant one being by
    Michael Ignaz Stadlmann, Vienna 1787).  In c.1810. the Viennese
   guitarist Simon Molitor also tells us
    that around 1790 the guitar entered Austria 'where earlier it had been
   very rarely seen' and that at the
    same time a sixth string/course was added.
   As an aside, Molitor also tells of meeting a mandora player in Vienna
   (perhaps Joseph Zincke?)
    around 1800  (they were still around then!)  who said that he now used
   single strings instead of
   double courses since he found it easier to tune...........
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   -----------------------------
   5. CONCLUSIONS
   5.1. A multi-course theorboed mandora with twelve courses never existed
   and, indeed, even the rare mandoras with up to a maximum of three
   basses are not known in the period covered by the dating of
    D-189.  Accordingly, the most likely, and reasonable, identification
   of the couple of works for an
    instrument with seven extra basses is the arch/theorboed guitar.
   5.2. The six course guitar is not known in the period covered by this
   collection (est. 1690 - 1720) and
    thus could not have been the instrument employed for the pieces
   requiring a sixth course.
   5.3. The tuning chart  'Accordo Gytarra et Mandora' gives the octave
   checks for tuning instruments
   with up to six courses, and thus serves for the upper five courses of
   both the gytarra and the mandora
    - but only the mandora for the sixth course .
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ------------------------------------
   6. Finally, when I first came across this MS some years ago, I wondered
   if Gytarra (or Chytarra) might
    be a colloquial Bohemian/Moravian synonym for the Mandora. But there
   was no independent
   supporting evidence and, moreover, strongly against this proposition is
   the precise wording of
    'Accordo Gytarra et Mandora'  (ie tuning of gytarra AND
   mandora)  which requires two clearly different instruments - but both
   having the same basic tuning for five courses. As mentioned earlier, if
   it had
    said  ' Gytarra aliter Mandora'  (or similar) things might be
   different.......................
   regards
   Martyn
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ----------------------------------------
   PS Incidentally I don't know why the duet Boure (f. 69v) for Mandora 1
   and 2 does not employ the sixth course:  perhaps the composer preferred
   this particular piece with these instruments this way or
   maybe they didn't have two guitars available?  The last is not as daft
   as it may seem: at this time the mandora was immensely popular in this
   part of the world with almost all known mandora makers
    working in this area of Bohemia, Moravia, upper Austria and South
   Bavaria (roughly bounded by
    Wurzburg, Innsbruck, Linz and Prague) - see Kirsch.  MS sources with
   music for mandora outnumbe
   r those for guitar from this area.  Also note Molitor's report.
   Similarly, regarding f. 48r with the 'Fundamenta Gytarra',  this simply
   contains common thoeretical information for beginners as frequently
   found in tablature books from these lands. They generally (as
    with D-189) cover the generic principles of notation (tablature
   letters), time signatures, note values
   and tablature flags, ornaments, etc. and, as in this case, apply to all
   the plucked instruments
   represented in the following tablatures - here the mandora, gytarra,
   and theorboed guitar. Obviously, a seperate 'Fundamenta' page is not
   needed for each plucked instrument represented in the same MS!
   The practical information overleaf ('Accordo Gytarra et Mandora') gives
   the more specific information
    on tuning, etc.
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   --------------------------------------------
   PPS The dotted separation lines are an attempt to avoid Wayne's robot
   collapsing paragraphs etc in
    general circulation - we'll see if it
   works.....................................
   MH
   ====================================================================
   From: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
   To: VihuelaList <[email-masked]>
   Cc: Martyn Hodgson <[email-masked]>
   Sent: Wednesday, 31 January 2018, 20:41
   Subject: CZ-Bm D 189 unpicked
   Martyn â RE: CZ-Bm D 189 My Response to Your Message of 29th January
   I will try to to be concise and stick to the point. I have deleted
   sections from Martyn's message which I think are irrelevant and
   rearranged some of his comments to achieve a more logical appraisal of
   the  manuscript.
   1.    General Background
   The manuscript belonged to and was presumably copied by someone at the
   Benedictine Monastery in Rajhrad, a town in Brno-Country District in
   Moravia.  I have not been able to trace a detailed bibliographical
   description of it and  I have not been able to check RISM but even
   entries in RISM are not always reliable. I have not seen the manuscript
   myself and I don't think that Martyn has either. A copy, however good,
   still leaves a lot of unanswered questions. The manuscript includes,
   among other things, didactic material, arrangements of vocal and
   instrumental pieces by Lully, other vocal music, a sonata for trombone
   and music for viola da gamba. Some of the headings and text are in
   Latin, some in Czech or German. I don't know if anyone has identified
   any of the other pieces but it would be necessary to do this before
   deciding on a possible date for the manuscript.
   2.    Date
   Martyn's comment -
   "1. DATE OF D-189
   You stated that the MS could have been written "anytime in the
   eighteenth century" - but with no evidence for this assertion. I do, of
   course, understand why you favour such a wide range of dates since it
   may help give some credence to employing a six course guitar
   (developed, in fact, only later in the eighteenth century) for all the
   plucked works in this collection".
   My comment â
   I have NEVER suggested throughout this discussion that either of the
   tablature charts or any of the music in this manuscript are for 6-
   course early classical guitar. I pointed this out in my private e-mail
   to Martyn but he has ignored this and most of the rest of what I have
   said. This is a clear indication that he has not read my messages
   before replying to them.
   Martyn's comment -
   "However, others date the writing of this MS considerably earlier,
   including:James Tyler - 'early 18th century';Gary Boye - 'beginning of
   the 18th century';Ernst Pohlmann - 'um 1700' (around 1700); Jaroslav
   Pohanka (Principal editor of Musica Antiqua Bohemia) - 'vor 1700
   geschrieben' (written before 1700)".
   My comment -
   Pohlman and Pohanska's writings out of date and not entirely accurate.
   Tyler and Gary Boye are probably just copying what these previous
   writers have said.
   Martyn's comment â
   "My own dating (based on stylistic traits and the piece attributed to
   C. Loschi) is 1700 to 1720. Accordingly, to summarise, the best date
   range estimate for compilation of this MS lies between 1690 and 1720".
   My comment â
   You cannot date manuscripts in this way.  Losy died in 1721.  However,
   there is no reason to suppose that the manuscript was copied during his
   lifetime. Music by Corbetta was still being copied fifty years after
   his death. Likewise, Losy's music would still have been popular twenty,
   thirty or more years after his death. Stylistic traits are no guide to
   dating.  As somebody said recently on the Lute List
   "As a musicologist student, I learned that style criticism should be
   avoided because it cannot be valid evidence".
   There is nothing distinctively early 18th century about the music, most
   of which is quite trivial.
   Perhaps, Dear Martyn, you should do a course in Musicology!
   Ewa BieliÅska-Galas, the most recent person to refer to the manuscript,
   says in her article only that it is 18th century. She refers to it as a
   manuscript of music for the mandora and has indicated in her table that
   both versions of the Losy pieces are for mandora.
   3.    The Tablature charts
   f.48v    Fundamenta Gytarra
   In his message of 4th of January Martyn said
   "folio 48 â¦..gives elementary instructions for the five course guitar
   '
   Fundamenta Chytarra'".
   I pointed out that the heading is actually Fundamenta "Gytarra". This
   is the only instrument mentioned in the heading. I think Martyn is
   mistaken in claiming that these instructions are intended for a 5-
   course guitar.
   They are instructions on how to read tablature. The first segment
   between the double bars shows the open courses of a SIX- course
   instrument represented by letter "a".  These are clearly labeled  1-6
   in descending order with the "a" for sixth  open course placed below
   the tablature stave in the last bar.  This clearly refers to the
   "Gytarra"; no other instrument is mentioned. This is followed by
   segments illustrating the five stopped courses at the 1st-9th fret
   represented by the letter b-k. There are also the signs for ornaments,
   time signatures and note values.
   f.48v    Accordo Gytarra et Mandora
   Martyn's comment on this was  â
   "3. ACCORDO GYTARRA ET MANDORA
   The tablature system with five lines on f.48v. between the first double
   bar lines gives octave tuning checks in the usual manner.  It shows
   that the upper five courses of the gytarra and mandora were tuned in
   the same intervals with an extra course indicated below the line for
   the usual six course mandora of the period (the six course guitar not
   then being known)". â¦.. for the six course mandora and the five course
   gytarra. The staff after this has numbers below for an instrument with
   seven additional bass courses - but only two intabulated pieces out of
   a total of 124 works have had these numbers added. I therefore believe
   that this section was added later - perhaps when a novel theorboed
   guitar was acquired (again note that the scribe couldn't be bothered
   with adding these new low basses all the way through piece 45)".
   My comment â
   I think Martyn is mistaken. It is clear from the chart on f.48r that
   the "Gytarra" is a 6-course instrument. It may be synonymous with the
   6-
   course mandora which Martyn says was common at the time.  It is also
   clear that the section between the first two double bar lines on f.48v
   is a tuning check for the 6-course "Gytarra" on f.48r; the last bar
   shows that the open bass is tuned to the same note as the third course.
   The second section on the first stave shows the additional bass courses
   of the "Mandora" numbered 6-12 starting with G.
   The Aria on the second and third staves is an example of how the low
   basses are notated with figures below the stave. Without seeing the
   manuscript itself it is not possible to tell whether any of this was
   added at a later date but I don't think that it was because the Minuet
   which starts on the fourth stave continues on the next folio â f.49r.
   The copyist is unlikely to have left two staves blank before copying
   the minuet.
   I do think that the open basses may have been added to the piece on f.
   90r (I can't read the title) at a later date. They have only been added
   to the first part of the piece and seem  to overlap in places with the
   letters on the tablature stave.
   The material question is  - "What do the terms "Gytarra" and "Mandora"
   refer to in this context?"
   Martyn seems to think that as there are all these instruments in
   museums identified today as "mandoras" any mention of a "mandora" in
   any archival document must refer to an instrument of this kind.
   It ain't necessarily so.  There are often references in manuscripts and
   in literary texts to instruments, the identity of which is uncertain in
   the absence of illustrations or more detailed information.  What people
   called these things in the past may be different from the way we
   classify surviving specimens today.
   One  example that springs to mind is Mrs Jordan's "lute" which is
   apparently really a kind of "arch cittern".
   It seems to me that these two instruments may belong to a very broad
   genus of lute shaped instruments with added basses but their precise
   identity is uncertain.
   4.    The Music
   Martyn's comment â
   "Firstly though, to summarise our respective positions: - as I
   understand it from what you have written, your position is that the
   vast majority (about 98%) of the some 124 works for plucked instruments
   in this MS are for a six course gytarra and that just three are for a
   mandora" (according to you a twelve course instrument with five
   fingered courses and seven free basses - you stated that "The mandora
   has seven unstopped basses" );
   - mine is that the 28 pieces notated with a sixth course are for
   mandora and that the remainder requiring just five courses are
   principally for gytarra â¦.."
   My comment
   Looking through and playing the music â which took a considerable
   amount of time â a number of ideas occurred to me, some of which I
   discarded as I went along. What I said in my final message to the list
   was
   The pieces from f.48v-f.59v are for the "Gytarra"; those from f.60r-f.
   76r are for a 5-course "Mandora"; and those from f.76v-f.95r numbered
   1-
   56 are probably for 5-course guitar.
   Martyn said â
   "PS Incidentally I don't know why the duet Boure (f. 69v) for Mandora 1
   and 2 does not employ the sixth course: perhaps the composer preferred
   this particular piece with these instruments this way or maybe they
   didn't have two guitars available? "
   This is disingenious.  Martyn claimed that -
   "Simply overlooked is that the majority of pieces after F. 67 are in
   Keys wher e low G is at least as helpful as for the works on in the
   following keys of G, F. Cand D - BUT the scribe writes the G at the
   upper octave:"
   "a distinctive feature of the guitar, but not not of the period
   mandora, etc."
   My comment
   The material point is that this piece is clearly labeled as being for
   two "mandoras" and there are skips of a 7th in the bass line.  This is
   unavoidable on a 5-course instrument in the key of D major and all the
   pieces with this feature are in D major. It is not a feature only of
   the guitar. With this in mind it seems reasonable to assume that the 5-
   course pieces are for a 5-course "mandora" up to and including f.76r.
   The pieces which follow form a separate section.
   Martyn's comments on the six-course guitar in Eastern Europe are
   irrelevant as I have NEVER suggested that anything in the manuscript
   refers to a six-course guitar.
   5.    Conclusions

   Martyn's comment
   "5.1. A multi-course theorboed mandora with twelve courses never
   existed and, indeed, even the rare mandoras with up to a maximum of
   three basses are not known in the period covered by the dating of D-
   189. Accordingly, the most likely, and reasonable, identification of
   the couple of works for an instrument with seven extra basses is the
   arch/theorboed guitar".
   My comment â
   I think this is a very rash statement. The manuscript is undated. To
   claim that the instrument with seven extra bases is an arch/theorboed
   guitar is foolhardy.  References to the theorboed guitar are few and
   far between (are there any in Eastern Europe sources?) and often
   ambiguous.  It is not clear in many instances (including the
   Stradivarius patterns) whether instruments referred to as a chitarra
   atiorbata are lute shaped or figure of eight shaped. There was an
   interesting mention on the lute list of a "citara tiorbata" in a piece
   in P.P. Melli's Balletto del Ardito Gracioso (1616) which appears to
   be  a kind of cittern. One of the Stradivarius patterns is referred to
   as being for the "citara tiorbata".
   Clearly there were small lutes with up to seven basses aka mandoras.
   James Talbot's manuscript (GB:Och Ms.1187) dating from the end of the
   17th century includes a description of an instrument  owned by John
   Shore which Talbot refers to as "Mr Shore's abridgmt of Arch Lute".
   This had six courses on the fingerboard, the lowest octave strung, the
   third, fourth and fifth double strung in unison and the first and
   second, single strings, with seven single open basses descending
   stepwise from the lowest course.  Talbot supplies detailed
   specifications for the instrument.  The length of the strings on the
   fingerboard is given as 48.3 cms. and that of the open basses as 108.0
   cms.  He indicates that the first course is tuned to c'' which is
   compatible with the string length of 48.3 cms.  The instrument had
   nine frets. Donald Gill classifies this as an "arch-mandore". There is
   no reason why the copyist of CZ-Bm D 189 should not have owned an
   instrument of this kind and called it a "mandora".
   Martyn's comment â
   "5.2. The six course guitar is not known in the period covered by this
   collection (est. 1690 - 1720) and thus could not have been the
   instrument employed for the pieces requiring a sixth course".
   My comment â
   For the THIRD TIME - I have NEVER suggested that it was.
   Martyn's comment -
   "5.3. The tuning chart 'Accordo Gytarra et Mandora' gives the octave
   checks for tuning instruments with up to six courses, and thus serves
   for the upper five courses of both the gytarra and the mandora - but
   only the mandora for the sixth course".
   My comment â
   That is not their clearly stated purpose or what they actually
   illustrate.
   Finally, Dear Martyn â in my view it is ill-mannered of you to persist
   in copying your messages to the Baroque Lute List when it has caused
   problems for other people. Nothing you have to say is so important that
   it needs to appear twice and if you were hoping that someone else would
   join the fray to back you up you must have realized by now that they
   are not going to.  Perhaps I should start copying my messages as well â
   I wonder what Wayne would think of that if he knew what was going on.
   As ever
   Monica

   --

---

From: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 17:47:59 +0000 (GMT)

Dear Martyn

The message which you have attached below is NOT the message which I 
sent to the Vihuela List  on the 31st January.
I suggest you retrieve this from the Archives and ACTUALLY READ IT 
CAREFULLY.  It is the second down below your latest message.
Frankly I am not really interested in anything that you have to say 
about this as it is clear that you do not know what you are talking 
about. You are only interested in disseminating your own cranky ideas.

Re copying things to the Baroque Lute list - when I signed up I 
received a message saying that cross-posting was not allowed. I don't 
think that anyone on this list is interested in anything you have to 
say and I hope that they will ignore it. Personally I don't want to 
receive three copies of every message you see fit 
to send. I may query this with Wayne if you persist. 

As ever

Monica

From: Martyn Hodgson <[email-masked]>
   To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>; VihuelaList
   <[email-masked]>; Baroque Lute List
   <[email-masked]>
   Sent: Friday, 9 February 2018, 14:26
   Subject: Further to Re: Moravsky MS (CZ. Brno D 189) - a fresh 
tack! 
2
   Dear Monica.
   Thanks for your latest of 31 Jan (below) and forgive the delay in
   replying - it's only today risen to the top of my current 'to do' 
list!
   I note what you say and will respond in due course. However, to 
enable
   me to do this properly, it will be helpful if you would now confirm
   precisely what your position is on the instrument(s) required for 
the
   pieces in this MS.  In my last of 29 Jan (- also below) I wrote:
   '- as I understand it from what you have written, your position is 
that
   the vast majority (about 98%) of
    the some 124 works for plucked instruments in this MS are for a six
   course gytarra and that just three
    are for a mandora (according to you a twelve course instrument with
   five fingered courses and seven
    free basses -  you stated that  "The mandora has seven unstopped
   basses" )'
   Is this a correct statement of your position?
   regards
   Martyn
   PS I copy this to the 'Baroque Lute' list since the mandora is a 
lute
   instrument - and a baroque lute to boot!
   
   ----- Forwarded Message -----
   From: Martyn Hodgson <[email-masked]>
   To: Monica Hall <[email-masked]>; VihuelaList
   <[email-masked]>; Baroque Lute List
   <[email-masked]>
   Sent: Monday, 29 January 2018, 17:01
   Subject: Moravsky MS (CZ Brno D189) - a fresh tack!
   Dear Monica,
   As you now know, I haven't yet replied to your latest open
   mailings since these had both ended by
   saying that you 'were going to leave it  for now' and I therefore 
took
   
   can find its way onto the lute lists (or, indeed, elsewhere) - it's 
not
   
   closer related to contemporary organological, musicological and 
source
   requiring just five courses are principally for gytarra (although, 
as I
    guitar pieces and similarly, in many cases, a guitarist would be 
able
    free basses notated also have a left hand fingered bass notated in 
the
   
   since it may help give some credence to employing a six course 
guitar
   My own dating (based on stylistic traits and the piece attributed  
to
   Accordingly, to summarise, the best date range estimate for 
compilation
   
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ----------------------------------
   2. CALLICHON/MANDORA
   Around 70 extant historical mandoras/gallichons have been identified
   made between 1688 and 1780
   (most are listed in Dieter Kirsch's 'La mandora au XVIII siecle): 
the
   vast majority (97%) of these are six course instruments but a couple
   have more courses - one is 8 course and one 9 course . These two
    are both later eighteenth century and thus too late to be the sort 
of
   instruments originally employed
   for D-189.  Extant instruments also well reflect contemporary
   iconography showing the overwhelming predominance of the six course
   mandora; and similarly with extant tablatures - though a very few do
   contain some pieces for 8 or 9 course mandora (such as Univerzitna
   Kniznica Bratislava Ms 1092
   which contains galant/classical music c.1770 requiring a mandora 
with
   eight courses). Note that these mandoras basically had these few
   additional courses on the same peghead (like earlier lutes) and did
   not employ the much longer extensions as found in the theorbo, 
archlute
   or, for that matter, the arch/theorboed guitar known from the
   seventeenth century onwards.
   Historically, the upper five courses of the usual six course
   mandora/callichon were tuned in precisely
   the same intervals as those of the guitar. The mandora sixth course 
was
   commonly tuned a tone
   below the fifth (as, of course, found in D-189), or a third or a 
fourth
   below it. Tablatures show that the additional basses of the rare 8/9
   course instrument merely fill in the notes between the fifth course
   and the sixth a third or a fourth below it and do not extend the 
range
   any further downwards.
   
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   --------------------------
   3. ACCORDO GYTARRA ET MANDORA
   The tablature system with five lines on f.48v. between the first 
double
   bar lines gives octave tuning
   checks in the usual manner. It shows that the upper five courses of 
the
   gytarra and mandora were
    tuned in the same intervals with an extra course indicated below 
the
   line for the usual six course
   mandora of the period (the six course guitar not then being known). 
The
   telling example of the
   Rondeau (C. Loschi), originally for a six course instrument but 
later
   arranged for just five courses
   (Rondon 75), very well illustrates the differences required in
   intabulating the same work for the six
    course mandora and the five course gytarra.
   The staff after this has numbers below for an instrument with seven
   additional bass courses - but only
    two intabulated pieces out of a total of 124 works have had these
   numbers added. I therefore believe
    that this section was added later - perhaps when a novel theorboed
   guitar was acquired (again note
    that the scribe couldn't be bothered with adding these new low 
basses
   all the way through piece 45).
   
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ----------------------------
   4. SIX COURSE GUITAR IN BOHEMIA, MORAVIA AND AUSTRIA IN THE 
EIGHTEENTH
   CENTURY
   Six course guitars first appeared in Southern Spain in the 1760s 
and 
a
   little later in Italy in a six string
    form, but only appear in German speaking lands from the 1780s (the
   earliest extant one being by
    Michael Ignaz Stadlmann, Vienna 1787).  In c.1810. the Viennese
   guitarist Simon Molitor also tells us
    that around 1790 the guitar entered Austria 'where earlier it had 
been
   very rarely seen' and that at the
    same time a sixth string/course was added.
   As an aside, Molitor also tells of meeting a mandora player in 
Vienna
   (perhaps Joseph Zincke?)
    around 1800  (they were still around then!)  who said that he now 
used
   single strings instead of
   double courses since he found it easier to tune...........
   
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   -----------------------------
   5. CONCLUSIONS
   5.1. A multi-course theorboed mandora with twelve courses never 
existed
   and, indeed, even the rare mandoras with up to a maximum of three
   basses are not known in the period covered by the dating of
    D-189.  Accordingly, the most likely, and reasonable, 
identification
   of the couple of works for an
    instrument with seven extra basses is the arch/theorboed guitar.
   5.2. The six course guitar is not known in the period covered by 
this
   collection (est. 1690 - 1720) and
    thus could not have been the instrument employed for the pieces
   requiring a sixth course.
   5.3. The tuning chart  'Accordo Gytarra et Mandora' gives the octave
   checks for tuning instruments
   with up to six courses, and thus serves for the upper five courses 
of
   both the gytarra and the mandora
    - but only the mandora for the sixth course .
   
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ------------------------------------
   6. Finally, when I first came across this MS some years ago, I 
wondered
   if Gytarra (or Chytarra) might
    be a colloquial Bohemian/Moravian synonym for the Mandora. But 
there
   was no independent
   supporting evidence and, moreover, strongly against this 
proposition 
is
   the precise wording of
    'Accordo Gytarra et Mandora'  (ie tuning of gytarra AND
   mandora)  which requires two clearly different instruments - but 
both
   having the same basic tuning for five courses. As mentioned 
earlier, 
if
   it had
    said  ' Gytarra aliter Mandora'  (or similar) things might be
   different.......................
   regards
   Martyn
   
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ----------------------------------------
   PS Incidentally I don't know why the duet Boure (f. 69v) for 
Mandora 
1
   and 2 does not employ the sixth course:  perhaps the composer 
preferred
   this particular piece with these instruments this way or
   maybe they didn't have two guitars available?  The last is not as 
daft
   as it may seem: at this time the mandora was immensely popular in 
this
   part of the world with almost all known mandora makers
    working in this area of Bohemia, Moravia, upper Austria and South
   Bavaria (roughly bounded by
    Wurzburg, Innsbruck, Linz and Prague) - see Kirsch.  MS sources 
with
   music for mandora outnumbe
   r those for guitar from this area.  Also note Molitor's report.
   Similarly, regarding f. 48r with the 'Fundamenta Gytarra',  this 
simply
   contains common thoeretical information for beginners as frequently
   found in tablature books from these lands. They generally (as
    with D-189) cover the generic principles of notation (tablature
   letters), time signatures, note values
   and tablature flags, ornaments, etc. and, as in this case, apply to 
all
   the plucked instruments
   represented in the following tablatures - here the mandora, gytarra,
   and theorboed guitar. Obviously, a seperate 'Fundamenta' page is not
   needed for each plucked instrument represented in the same MS!
   The practical information overleaf ('Accordo Gytarra et Mandora') 
gives
   the more specific information
    on tuning, etc.
   
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   --------------------------------------------
   PPS The dotted separation lines are an attempt to avoid Wayne's 
robot
   collapsing paragraphs etc in
    general circulation - we'll see if it
   works.....................................
   MH
   ====================================================================
   From: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
   To: VihuelaList <[email-masked]>
   Cc: Martyn Hodgson <[email-masked]>
   Sent: Wednesday, 31 January 2018, 20:41
   Subject: CZ-Bm D 189 unpicked
   Martyn â RE: CZ-Bm D 189 My Response to Your Message of 29th 
January
   I will try to to be concise and stick to the point. I have deleted
   sections from Martyn's message which I think are irrelevant and
   rearranged some of his comments to achieve a more logical appraisal 
of
   the  manuscript.
   1.    General Background
   The manuscript belonged to and was presumably copied by someone at 
the
   Benedictine Monastery in Rajhrad, a town in Brno-Country District in
   Moravia.  I have not been able to trace a detailed bibliographical
   description of it and  I have not been able to check RISM but even
   entries in RISM are not always reliable. I have not seen the 
manuscript
   myself and I don't think that Martyn has either. A copy, however 
good,
   still leaves a lot of unanswered questions. The manuscript includes,
   among other things, didactic material, arrangements of vocal and
   instrumental pieces by Lully, other vocal music, a sonata for 
trombone
   and music for viola da gamba. Some of the headings and text are in
   Latin, some in Czech or German. I don't know if anyone has 
identified
   any of the other pieces but it would be necessary to do this before
   deciding on a possible date for the manuscript.
   2.    Date
   Martyn's comment -
   "1. DATE OF D-189
   You stated that the MS could have been written "anytime in the
   eighteenth century" - but with no evidence for this assertion. I 
do, 
of
   course, understand why you favour such a wide range of dates since 
it
   may help give some credence to employing a six course guitar
   (developed, in fact, only later in the eighteenth century) for all 
the
   plucked works in this collection".
   My comment â
   I have NEVER suggested throughout this discussion that either of the
   tablature charts or any of the music in this manuscript are for 6-
   course early classical guitar. I pointed this out in my private e-
mail
   to Martyn but he has ignored this and most of the rest of what I 
have
   said. This is a clear indication that he has not read my messages
   before replying to them.
   Martyn's comment -
   "However, others date the writing of this MS considerably earlier,
   including:James Tyler - 'early 18th century';Gary Boye - 'beginning 
of
   the 18th century';Ernst Pohlmann - 'um 1700' (around 1700); Jaroslav
   Pohanka (Principal editor of Musica Antiqua Bohemia) - 'vor 1700
   geschrieben' (written before 1700)".
   My comment -
   Pohlman and Pohanska's writings out of date and not entirely 
accurate.
   Tyler and Gary Boye are probably just copying what these previous
   writers have said.
   Martyn's comment â
   "My own dating (based on stylistic traits and the piece attributed 
to
   C. Loschi) is 1700 to 1720. Accordingly, to summarise, the best date
   range estimate for compilation of this MS lies between 1690 and 
1720".
   My comment â
   You cannot date manuscripts in this way.  Losy died in 1721.  
However,
   there is no reason to suppose that the manuscript was copied during 
his
   lifetime. Music by Corbetta was still being copied fifty years after
   his death. Likewise, Losy's music would still have been popular 
twenty,
   thirty or more years after his death. Stylistic traits are no guide 
to
   dating.  As somebody said recently on the Lute List
   "As a musicologist student, I learned that style criticism should be
   avoided because it cannot be valid evidence".
   There is nothing distinctively early 18th century about the music, 
most
   of which is quite trivial.
   Perhaps, Dear Martyn, you should do a course in Musicology!
   Ewa BieliÅska-Galas, the most recent person to refer to the 
manuscript,
   says in her article only that it is 18th century. She refers to it 
as a
   manuscript of music for the mandora and has indicated in her table 
that
   both versions of the Losy pieces are for mandora.
   3.    The Tablature charts
   f.48v    Fundamenta Gytarra
   In his message of 4th of January Martyn said
   "folio 48 â¦..gives elementary instructions for the five course 
guitar
   '
   Fundamenta Chytarra'".
   I pointed out that the heading is actually Fundamenta "Gytarra". 
This
   is the only instrument mentioned in the heading. I think Martyn is
   mistaken in claiming that these instructions are intended for a 5-
   course guitar.
   They are instructions on how to read tablature. The first segment
   between the double bars shows the open courses of a SIX- course
   instrument represented by letter "a".  These are clearly labeled  1-
6
   in descending order with the "a" for sixth  open course placed below
   the tablature stave in the last bar.  This clearly refers to the
   "Gytarra"; no other instrument is mentioned. This is followed by
   segments illustrating the five stopped courses at the 1st-9th fret
   represented by the letter b-k. There are also the signs for 
ornaments,
   time signatures and note values.
   f.48v    Accordo Gytarra et Mandora
   Martyn's comment on this was  â
   "3. ACCORDO GYTARRA ET MANDORA
   The tablature system with five lines on f.48v. between the first 
double
   bar lines gives octave tuning checks in the usual manner.  It shows
   that the upper five courses of the gytarra and mandora were tuned in
   the same intervals with an extra course indicated below the line for
   the usual six course mandora of the period (the six course guitar 
not
   then being known)". â¦.. for the six course mandora and the five 
course
   gytarra. The staff after this has numbers below for an instrument 
with
   seven additional bass courses - but only two intabulated pieces out 
of
   a total of 124 works have had these numbers added. I therefore 
believe
   that this section was added later - perhaps when a novel theorboed
   guitar was acquired (again note that the scribe couldn't be bothered
   with adding these new low basses all the way through piece 45)".
   My comment â
   I think Martyn is mistaken. It is clear from the chart on f.48r that
   the "Gytarra" is a 6-course instrument. It may be synonymous with 
the
   6-
   course mandora which Martyn says was common at the time.  It is also
   clear that the section between the first two double bar lines on f.
48v
   is a tuning check for the 6-course "Gytarra" on f.48r; the last bar
   shows that the open bass is tuned to the same note as the third 
course.
   The second section on the first stave shows the additional bass 
courses
   of the "Mandora" numbered 6-12 starting with G.
   The Aria on the second and third staves is an example of how the low
   basses are notated with figures below the stave. Without seeing the
   manuscript itself it is not possible to tell whether any of this was
   added at a later date but I don't think that it was because the 
Minuet
   which starts on the fourth stave continues on the next folio â f.
49r.
   The copyist is unlikely to have left two staves blank before copying
   the minuet.
   I do think that the open basses may have been added to the piece on 
f.
   90r (I can't read the title) at a later date. They have only been 
added
   to the first part of the piece and seem  to overlap in places with 
the
   letters on the tablature stave.
   The material question is  - "What do the terms "Gytarra" and 
"Mandora"
   refer to in this context?"
   Martyn seems to think that as there are all these instruments in
   museums identified today as "mandoras" any mention of a "mandora" in
   any archival document must refer to an instrument of this kind.
   It ain't necessarily so.  There are often references in manuscripts 
and
   in literary texts to instruments, the identity of which is 
uncertain 
in
   the absence of illustrations or more detailed information.  What 
people
   called these things in the past may be different from the way we
   classify surviving specimens today.
   One  example that springs to mind is Mrs Jordan's "lute" which is
   apparently really a kind of "arch cittern".
   It seems to me that these two instruments may belong to a very broad
   genus of lute shaped instruments with added basses but their precise
   identity is uncertain.
   4.    The Music
   Martyn's comment â
   "Firstly though, to summarise our respective positions: - as I
   understand it from what you have written, your position is that the
   vast majority (about 98%) of the some 124 works for plucked 
instruments
   in this MS are for a six course gytarra and that just three are for 
a
   mandora" (according to you a twelve course instrument with five
   fingered courses and seven free basses - you stated that "The 
mandora
   has seven unstopped basses" );
   - mine is that the 28 pieces notated with a sixth course are for
   mandora and that the remainder requiring just five courses are
   principally for gytarra â¦.."
   My comment
   Looking through and playing the music â which took a considerable
   amount of time â a number of ideas occurred to me, some of which I
   discarded as I went along. What I said in my final message to the 
list
   was
   The pieces from f.48v-f.59v are for the "Gytarra"; those from f.60r-
f.
   76r are for a 5-course "Mandora"; and those from f.76v-f.95r 
numbered
   1-
   56 are probably for 5-course guitar.
   Martyn said â
   "PS Incidentally I don't know why the duet Boure (f. 69v) for 
Mandora 1
   and 2 does not employ the sixth course: perhaps the composer 
preferred
   this particular piece with these instruments this way or maybe they
   didn't have two guitars available? "
   This is disingenious.  Martyn claimed that -
   "Simply overlooked is that the majority of pieces after F. 67 are in
   Keys wher e low G is at least as helpful as for the works on in the
   following keys of G, F. Cand D - BUT the scribe writes the G at the
   upper octave:"
   "a distinctive feature of the guitar, but not not of the period
   mandora, etc."
   My comment
   The material point is that this piece is clearly labeled as being 
for
   two "mandoras" and there are skips of a 7th in the bass line.  This 
is
   unavoidable on a 5-course instrument in the key of D major and all 
the
   pieces with this feature are in D major. It is not a feature only of
   the guitar. With this in mind it seems reasonable to assume that 
the 
5-
   course pieces are for a 5-course "mandora" up to and including f.
76r.
   The pieces which follow form a separate section.
   Martyn's comments on the six-course guitar in Eastern Europe are
   irrelevant as I have NEVER suggested that anything in the manuscript
   refers to a six-course guitar.
   5.    Conclusions

   Martyn's comment
   "5.1. A multi-course theorboed mandora with twelve courses never
   existed and, indeed, even the rare mandoras with up to a maximum of
   three basses are not known in the period covered by the dating of D-
   189. Accordingly, the most likely, and reasonable, identification of
   the couple of works for an instrument with seven extra basses is the
   arch/theorboed guitar".
   My comment â
   I think this is a very rash statement. The manuscript is undated. To
   claim that the instrument with seven extra bases is an 
arch/theorboed
   guitar is foolhardy.  References to the theorboed guitar are few and
   far between (are there any in Eastern Europe sources?) and often
   ambiguous.  It is not clear in many instances (including the
   Stradivarius patterns) whether instruments referred to as a chitarra
   atiorbata are lute shaped or figure of eight shaped. There was an
   interesting mention on the lute list of a "citara tiorbata" in a 
piece
   in P.P. Melli's Balletto del Ardito Gracioso (1616) which appears to
   be  a kind of cittern. One of the Stradivarius patterns is referred 
to
   as being for the "citara tiorbata".
   Clearly there were small lutes with up to seven basses aka mandoras.
   James Talbot's manuscript (GB:Och Ms.1187) dating from the end of 
the
   17th century includes a description of an instrument  owned by John
   Shore which Talbot refers to as "Mr Shore's abridgmt of Arch Lute".
   This had six courses on the fingerboard, the lowest octave strung, 
the
   third, fourth and fifth double strung in unison and the first and
   second, single strings, with seven single open basses descending
   stepwise from the lowest course.  Talbot supplies detailed
   specifications for the instrument.  The length of the strings on the
   fingerboard is given as 48.3 cms. and that of the open basses as 
108.0
   cms.  He indicates that the first course is tuned to c'' which is
   compatible with the string length of 48.3 cms.  The instrument had
   nine frets. Donald Gill classifies this as an "arch-mandore". There 
is
   no reason why the copyist of CZ-Bm D 189 should not have owned an
   instrument of this kind and called it a "mandora".
   Martyn's comment â
   "5.2. The six course guitar is not known in the period covered by 
this
   collection (est. 1690 - 1720) and thus could not have been the
   instrument employed for the pieces requiring a sixth course".
   My comment â
   For the THIRD TIME - I have NEVER suggested that it was.
   Martyn's comment -
   "5.3. The tuning chart 'Accordo Gytarra et Mandora' gives the octave
   checks for tuning instruments with up to six courses, and thus 
serves
   for the upper five courses of both the gytarra and the mandora - but
   only the mandora for the sixth course".
   My comment â
   That is not their clearly stated purpose or what they actually
   illustrate.
   Finally, Dear Martyn â in my view it is ill-mannered of you to 
persist
   in copying your messages to the Baroque Lute List when it has caused
   problems for other people. Nothing you have to say is so important 
that
   it needs to appear twice and if you were hoping that someone else 
would
   join the fray to back you up you must have realized by now that they
   are not going to.  Perhaps I should start copying my messages as 
well â
   I wonder what Wayne would think of that if he knew what was going 
on.
   As ever
   Monica

   --

To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

---

From: Martyn Hodgson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2018 10:07:49 +0000 (UTC)

Dear Monica,
   Your earlier message of 31 Jan is, in fact, below - simply scroll down
   to find it......
   Rather than this Trumpesque bluster and obfuscation would you now
   please
   simply and, is it too much to hope, politely answer the direct question
   put to you.
   As carefully explained, this will provide you with the opportunity to
   properly
   clarify your precise position over the instruments required for the
   pieces in this
   MS and will then enable a constructive reply to be composed.
   Here's the relevant question again:
   '- as I understand it from what you have written, your position
   is that the vast
   majority (about 98%) of  the some 124 works for plucked instruments in
   this MS
   are for a six course gytarra and that just three are for a mandora
   (according to
   you a twelve course instrument with  five fingered courses and
   seven free
   basses -  you stated that  "The mandora has seven unstopped basses" )'
   Is this still a correct statement of your position?
   regards
   Martyn
   PS I copy this to the 'Baroque Lute' list since the mandora is a lute
   family
   instrument ( - and a baroque lute to boot!) and such messages are
   therefore
   entirely relevant on that list.  If the mandora were a guitar I
   wouldn't.
     __________________________________________________________________

   From: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
   To: [email-masked]; "[email-masked]"
   <[email-masked]>
   Sent: Friday, 9 February 2018, 17:39
   Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Further to Re: Moravsky MS (CZ. Brno D 189)
   - a fresh tack! 2
   Dear Martyn
   The message which you have attached below is NOT the message which I
   sent to the Vihuela List  on the 31st January.
   I suggest you retrieve this from the Archives and ACTUALLY READ IT
   CAREFULLY.  It is the second down below your latest message.
   Frankly I am not really interested in anything that you have to say
   about this as it is clear that you do not know what you are talking
   about. You are only interested in disseminating your own cranky ideas.
   Re copying things to the Baroque Lute list - when I signed up I
   received a message saying that cross-posting was not allowed. I don't
   think that anyone on that list  interested in anything you have to
   say.  I don't want to receive three copies of every message you see fit
   to send. I may query this with Wayne if you persist.
   As ever
   Monica
   ----Original Message----
   From: [1][email-masked]
   Date: 09/02/2018 16:43
   To: "[2][email-masked]"<[3][email-masked]>
   Subj: [VIHUELA] Re: Further to Re: Moravsky MS (CZ. Brno D 189) - a
   fresh tack! 2
   From: Martyn Hodgson <[4][email-masked]>
     To: "[5][email-masked]" <[6][email-masked]>;
   VihuelaList
     <[7][email-masked]>; Baroque Lute List
     <[8][email-masked]>
     Sent: Friday, 9 February 2018, 14:26
     Subject: Further to Re: Moravsky MS (CZ. Brno D 189) - a fresh tack!
   2
    Dear Monica.
   Thanks for your latest of 31 Jan (below) and forgive the delay in
   replying - it's only today risen to the top of my current 'to do' list!
   I note what you say and will respond in due course. However, to
   enable me to do this properly, it will be helpful if you would now
   confirm precisely what your position is on the instrument(s) required
   for the pieces in this MS.
   In my last of 29 Jan (- also below) I wrote:
     '- as I understand it from what you have written, your position is
   that the vast majority (about 98%) of the some 124 works for plucked
   instruments in this MS are for a six course gytarra and that just
   three
   are for a mandora (according to you a twelve course instrument with
   five fingered courses and seven free basses -  you stated that  "The
   mandora has seven unstopped basses" )'
     Is this a correct statement of your position?
     regards
     Martyn
     PS I copy this to the 'Baroque Lute' list since the mandora is a
   lute   instrument - and a baroque lute to boot!

   =================================================================
     ----- Forwarded Message -----
     From: Martyn Hodgson <[9][email-masked]>
     To: Monica Hall <[10][email-masked]>; VihuelaList
     <[11][email-masked]>; Baroque Lute List
     <[12][email-masked]>
     Sent: Monday, 29 January 2018, 17:01
     Subject: Moravsky MS (CZ Brno D189) - a fresh tack!
     Dear Monica,
     As you now know, I haven't yet replied to your latest open
     mailings since these had both ended by saying that you
    'were going to leave it  for now' and I therefore took this as
   meaning I might soon expect something further.  Accordingly,
   not wishing to respond in a piecemeal and disjointed manner,
   I deliberately delayed replying and awaited your further thoughts.
   However, I shall do so now.

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
     Regarding copying things to other lists, just to be quite clear, I
     generally copy things to other of   Wayne's lists if they're
   relevant
   there. Hence why gallichon/mandora stuff (but usually not guitar)
    can find its way onto the lute lists (or, indeed, elsewhere) - it's
   not a fiendish plot of any kind!  But on with the motley..........

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
     Our exchanges of 'textual analysis' have clearly failed to persuade
     each other of our respective cases   and therefore, to make any
   progress, another tack is now required: one more forensic perhaps
   and closer related to contemporary organological, musicological and
   source evidence.  Firstly though, to summarise our respective
   positions:
       - as I understand it from what you have written, your position is
     that the vast majority (about 98%) of the some 124 works for plucked
   instruments in this MS are for a six course gytarra and that just
   three
   are for a mandora (according to you a twelve course instrument with
   five fingered courses and seven  free basses -  you stated that  "The
    mandora has seven unstopped basses" );
       - mine is that the 28 pieces notated with a sixth course are for
     mandora and that the remainder requiring just five courses are
   principally
   for gytarra (although,as I was at pains to point out earlier, any
   passably
   competent mandora player would easily be able to add a low sixth where
   suitable in the guitar pieces and similarly, in many cases, a guitarist
   would
   be able to play the errant low bass an  octave up by employing the open
    third course). The couple of pieces which have the seven
   additional free
    basses notated also have a left hand fingered bass notated
   in the usual
    register and, whilst we've not discussed this so far, I believe these
   additional
   low course numberings are therefore simply later additions to these two
   pieces
    (note also that the scribe left off adding these low basses half
   way through
   the piece numbered 45! ).

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    1. DATE OF D-189
    You stated that the MS could have been written  "anytime in
   the eighteenth
   century"  - but with no  evidence for this assertion. I do, of course,
   understand
   why you favour such a  wide range of dates since it may help give some
   credence to employing a six course guitar (developed, in fact, only
   later in the
   eighteenth century) for all the plucked works in this collection
   However, others date the writing of this MS considerably
   earlier, including:
   James Tyler - 'early 18th century';
   Gary Boye - 'beginning of the 18th century';
   Ernst Pohlmann - 'um 1700' (around 1700);
   Jaroslav Pohanka (Principal editor of Musica Antiqua Bohemia) -
   'vor1700
   geschrieben' (written  before 1700);
   My own dating (based on stylistic traits and the piece attributed
   to C. Loschi) is 1700 to 1720.
   Accordingly, to summarise, the best date range estimate
   for compilation of this
   MS lies between 1690and 1720.

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
     2. CALLICHON/MANDORA
     Around 70 extant historical mandoras/gallichons have been identified
     made between 1688 and 1780   (most are listed in Dieter Kirsch's 'La
   mandora au XVIII siecle): the vast majority (97%) of these are six
   course
   instruments but a couple have more courses - one is 8 course and one
   9 course . These two are both later eighteenth century and thus too
   late
   to be the sort of instruments originally employed for D-189.  Extant
   instruments
   also well reflect contemporary iconography showing the overwhelming
   predominance of the six course mandora; and similarly with extant
   tablatures
   - though a very few do contain some pieces for 8 or 9 course mandora
   (such as Univerzitna   Kniznica Bratislava Ms 1092 which contains
   galant/classical music c.1770 requiring a mandora with eight courses).
   Note that these mandoras basically had these few additional courses on
   the
   same peghead (like earlier lutes) and did not employ the much longer
    extensions as found in the theorbo, archlute or, for that matter, the
   arch/theorboed guitar known from the seventeenth century onwards.
     Historically, the upper five courses of the usual six
   course mandora/callichon
   were tuned in precisely the same intervals as those of the guitar. The
   mandora
   sixth course was commonly tuned a tone below the fifth (as, of course,
   found
   in D-189), or a third or a fourth below it. Tablatures show that the
   additional
   basses of the rare 8/9 course instrument merely fill in the notes
   between the
   fifth course and the sixth a third or a fourth below it and do not
   extend the range
   any further downwards.

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
     3. ACCORDO GYTARRA ET MANDORA
     The tablature system with five lines on f.48v. between the
   first double bar
   lines gives octave tuning checks in the usual manner. It shows that the
   upper
   five courses of the gytarra and mandora were  tuned in the same
   intervals with
   an extra course indicated below the line for the usual six
   course mandora of the
   period (the six course guitar not then being known). The telling
   example of the
   Rondeau (C. Loschi), originally for a six course instrument
   but later arranged for
   just five courses (Rondon 75), very well illustrates the differences
   required in
   intabulating the same work for the six  course mandora and the five
   course gytarra.
   The staff after this has numbers below for an instrument with
   seven additional bass
   courses - but only two intabulated pieces out of a total of 124 works
   have had these
    numbers added. I therefore believe that this section was added later -
   perhaps
   when a novel theorboed guitar was acquired (again note that the scribe
   couldn't be
   bothered with adding these new low basses all the way through piece
   45).

     4. SIX COURSE GUITAR IN BOHEMIA, MORAVIA AND AUSTRIA IN THE
   EIGHTEENTH   CENTURY
     Six course guitars first appeared in Southern Spain in the 1760s
   and a little later
   in Italy in a six string form, but only appear in German speaking lands
   from the
   1780s (the earliest extant one being by Michael Ignaz Stadlmann, Vienna
   1787).
   In c.1810. the Viennese guitarist Simon Molitor also tells us that
   around 1790 the
   guitar entered Austria 'where earlier it had been very rarely seen' and
   that at the
   same time a sixth string/course was added.
     As an aside, Molitor also tells of meeting a mandora player
   inVienna (perhaps
   Joseph Zincke?) around 1800  (they were still around then!)  who said
   that he now
   used  single strings instead of  double courses since he found it
   easier to tune...........

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
     5. CONCLUSIONS
     5.1. A multi-course theorboed mandora with twelve courses
   never existed
     and, indeed, even the rare mandoras with up to a maximum of
   three basses are
   not known in the period covered by the dating of  D-189.  Accordingly,
   the most
   likely, and reasonable, identification of the couple of works for an
   instrument with
   seven extra basses is the arch/theorboed guitar.
     5.2. The six course guitar is not known in the period covered
   by this collection
   (est. 1690 - 1720) and thus could not have been the instrument employed
   for the
   pieces requiring a sixth course.
     5.3. The tuning chart  'Accordo Gytarra et Mandora' gives the
   octave checks for
   tuning instruments with up to six courses, and thus serves for the
   upper five courses
   of both the gytarra and the mandora  - but only the mandora for the
   sixth course .

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   6. Finally, when I first came across this MS some years ago,
   I wondered if Gytarra
   (or Chytarra) might be a colloquial Bohemian/Moravian synonym for the
   Mandora.
   But there was no independent supporting evidence and, moreover,
   strongly against
   this proposition is the precise wording of 'Accordo Gytarra et
   Mandora'  (ie tuning
   of gytarra AND mandora)  which requires two clearly different
   instruments - but both
   having the same basic tuning for five courses. As mentioned
   earlier, if it had said
    ' Gytarra aliter Mandora'  (or similar) things might
   be different.......................
     regards
     Martyn
     ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   --
    PS Incidentally I don't know why the duet Boure (f. 69v) for Mandora
   1  and 2 does not employ the sixth course:  perhaps the composer
   preferred   this particular piece with these instruments this way or
     maybe they didn't have two guitars available?  The last is not as
   daft   as it may seem: at this time the mandora was immensely popular
   in
   this   part of the world with almost all known mandora makers  working
   in
   this area of Bohemia, Moravia, upper Austria and South Bavaria (roughly
    bounded by Wurzburg, Innsbruck, Linz and Prague) - see Kirsch.
   MS sources with   music for mandora outnumber those for guitar from
   this
   area.  Also note Molitor's report.
     Similarly, regarding f. 48r with the 'Fundamenta Gytarra',
   this simply
     contains common thoeretical information for beginners as frequently
     found in tablature books from these lands. They generally (as with
   D-189)
   cover the generic principles of notation (tablature letters), time
   signatures,
   note values   and tablature flags, ornaments, etc. and, as in this
   case, apply to
   all the plucked instruments represented in the following tablatures -
   here the
   mandora, gytarra, and theorboed guitar. Obviously, a seperate
   'Fundamenta'
   page is not needed for each plucked instrument represented in the same
   MS!
     The practical information overleaf ('Accordo Gytarra et
   Mandora') gives the
   more specific information on tuning, etc.

     MH
     From: "[13][email-masked]" <[14][email-masked]>
     To: VihuelaList <[15][email-masked]>
     Cc: Martyn Hodgson <[16][email-masked]>
     Martyn Ã ¢ RE: CZ-Bm D 189 My Response to Your Message of 29th
     eighteenth century" - but with no evidence for this assertion. I do,
     My comment Ã ¢
     Martyn's comment Ã ¢
     My comment Ã ¢
     Ewa BieliÃ
   ska-Galas, the most recent person to refer to the
     "folio 48 Ã ¢Ã ¦..gives elementary instructions for the five course
     Martyn's comment on this was  Ã ¢
     then being known)". Ã ¢Ã ¦.. for the six course mandora and the five
     My comment Ã ¢
     which starts on the fourth stave continues on the next folio Ã ¢ f.
     in literary texts to instruments, the identity of which is uncertain
     Martyn's comment Ã ¢
     principally for gytarra Ã ¢Ã ¦.."
     Looking through and playing the music Ã ¢ which took a considerable
     amount of time Ã ¢ a number of ideas occurred to me, some of which I
     Martyn said Ã ¢
     the guitar. With this in mind it seems reasonable to assume that the
     My comment Ã ¢
     Martyn's comment Ã ¢
     My comment Ã ¢
     My comment Ã ¢
     Finally, Dear Martyn Ã ¢ in my view it is ill-mannered of you to
   well Ã ¢
   [17]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:[email-masked]
   2. mailto:[email-masked]
   3. mailto:[email-masked]
   4. mailto:[email-masked]
   5. mailto:[email-masked]
   6. mailto:[email-masked]
   7. mailto:[email-masked]
   8. mailto:[email-masked]
   9. mailto:[email-masked]
  10. mailto:[email-masked]
  11. mailto:[email-masked]
  12. mailto:[email-masked]
  13. mailto:[email-masked]
  14. mailto:[email-masked]
  15. mailto:[email-masked]
  16. mailto:[email-masked]
  17. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html