Jamie Croy EDITOR

Gordana Lazarevich SENIOR ASSOCIATE EDITOR

ASSOCIA TE EDITORS: Thomas Day

Raymond Kennedy
Ingram Marshall
Susan Thiemann
Libby Rubin EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

ASSISTANT EDITORS: Jon Appleton

Charles Dodge
Walter Hilse
David Josephson
Raoul Orceyre S.J.
Joel Sachs
Judith Zessis

Edward A. Lippman FACULTY ADVISOR

Austin Clarkson EDITORIAL ADVISOR

f PUBLISHED
UNDER THE AEGIS OF The Music Department
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
New York
CORRESPONDING EDITORS

John Davis University of Arizona, Tucson, Ariz.

Joseph Dyer Boston University, Boston, Mass.
E. Southern Brooklyn College, Brooklyn, N.Y.
Thomas Walker University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
John Baker University of California, Davis, Calif.
Gilbert Blount University of California, Los Angeles, Calif.
Robert Morin University of California, Riverside, Calif.
Bonnie Blackburn University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill.
Barbara Ham pton City University of New York, N.Y.
Richard Taruskin Columbia University, New York, N.Y.
James Bossert Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.
Jacob Opper Florida State University, Tallahassee, Fla.
Winfried Kirsch Joh. Wolf. Goethe-Universitat, Frankfurt a.M., Germany
Karl-Werner Gumpel Universitat Freiburg, Freiburg LBr., Germany
Gunther Massenkeil Johannes-Gutenberg-Universitat, Mainz, Germany
Henry Gibbons IV Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
Linda Good University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii
Vivian Safowitz University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill.
David Sheldon Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind.
Rita Egger Universitat Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
Kathleen Adkins University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky.
Philip Brett King's College, Cambridge, England
Bernd Baselt Martin-Luther-Universitat, Halle-Wittenberg, East Germany
John Schwartz, Jf. University of Maryland, College Park, Md.
Eberhard Klemm Karl-Marx-Universitat, Leipzig, East Germany
Theodor Gollner Universitat Munchen, Munchen, Germany
Patricia Kellogg University of Miami, Miami, Fla.
Margery Morgan University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Charles Lea Montana State University, Missoula, Mont.
Lawrence Bennett New York University, New York, N.Y.
Bruce Carr State University of New York, Buffalo, N.Y.
James Chamblee University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N.C.
John Collins North Texas State University, Denton, Texas
J.D. Bergsagel Oxford University, Oxford, England
Horst Heussner Philipps-Universitat, Marburg a.d. Lahn, Germany
Philip Gossett Princeton University, Princeton, N.J.
George Nugent
Hubert Howe, Jf.
L. Finscher Universitat des Saarlandes, Saarbriicken, Germany
William Mahar Syracuse University, Syracuse, N.Y.
Axel Helmer Uppsala Universitet, Stockholm, Sweden
Wesley Vos Washington University, St. Louis, Mo.
Franklin Perkins
Jack Sorenson University of Washington, Seattle, Wash.
Cecil Wilson Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
Hans Conrad in Universitat Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

Communications to the corresponding editors should be ad-

dressed care of the m.usie department of the university.

Copyright © 1965, Department of Music

Columbia University, New York
Printed in U.s.A.
 EVENTS

133 seminars and lectures

• 162 appointments

• 164 EDITORIAL

CHOU WEN -CHUNG 169 Varese

ARTICLES

JOEL NEWMAN 175 A gentleman's lute book: The

tablature of Gabriello Fallamero
AUSTIN CLARKSON 191 The 1965 revision of the U.S.
copyright law
DAVID A. SHELDON 199 Report from Indiana: Inter-
American conference of ethno-
musicology and composition

DISSER TA TIONS

JULIA SUTTON 202 William Sherman Casey

Printed English lute instruction
books, 1568-1610
FRANKLIN ZIMMERMAN 208 Stoddard Lincoln
John Eccles: The last of a tradition
REMBERT G. WEAKLAND, 210 Sister Mary Joachim Holthaus, O.5.B.
. O.S.B . Beneventan notation in the Vatican
manuscripts
KONRAD WOLFF 211 Immanuel Willheim
Johann Adolph Scheibe: German
musical thought in transition

218 dissertations from abroad

221 dissertations received for review
 BIBLIOGRAPHICA

221 Articles concerning music In non-

musical journals, part II
THOMAS T. WATKINS 227 Fred Blum
Music monographs in series
229 publications received
230 fellowships and scholarships •

•
 A GENTLEMAN'S LUTE BOOK:
THE TABLATURE OF
GABRIELLO FALLAMERO
Joel Newman

A MONG THE MANY musical volumes" given into the light"

in 1584 by Venetian printing presses were items prophetic as
Monteverdi's Canzonette a 3, influential as Marenzio's fourth
book of five-part madrigals or the second edition of Galilei's
Fronimo, and as ordinary as the subject of this study. 50 appar-
ently uneventful is this tablature that it has never been described
in detail, though it has been cited on occasion (Chilesotti 1889;
De La Laurencie 1928:35; Boetticher 1954; Reese 1954:523;
R.I.S.M. 1:323). Einstein had not examined the volume and
could not list its contents completely in his revision of Vogel's
madrigal bibliography (1946:51). The present article, begun as
a footnote to this invaluable reference tool, was expanded after
examination of the tablature made clear that it had some mod-
estly distinctive qualities as well as typical ones. After all, the
most everyday musical source deserves attention; such epheme-
ral material-along with diaries, letters from one nobody to an-
other, and cartoons-can play an essential role in our full under-
standing of a historical period or process. Material of this kind
may be seen as the grout in which are embedded the more out-
standing tesserae of history's mosaic.
Nothing is known about the "gentleman" author or his dedi-
catee, the Signora Livia Guasca Pozza, damma nobilissima Ales-
sandrina. The references to their status are correct: the Falla-
meri were an aristocratic family of the Piedmontese city, Ales-
sandria, though they were not as well-known as the Guasco
family (A. Guasco 1605; Bossola 1903).
The tablature's title page reads as follows:
II primo libra de intavolatural da liuto, de
motetti rice reate madrigali,1 et canzonette
alia napolitana,1 a tre, et quattro voci, per
cantare, etl sonare composte per Gabriel

JOEL NEWMAN is an associate professor of music at Columbia University.

175
 Fallamero Gentilhuomo Allessandrino,1
Novamente posto in luce./ [device] I In
Vinegia.! Appresso l'herede di Girolamo
Scotto.! MDLXXXIIIJ.1
This ambiguously worded title formula raises several interest-
ing questions. Is composte a boast, and would intavolate have
been more accurate? A scholar has indicated that the volume's
contents are "only intabulations" (Ward 1952:88), but the pres-
ent examination will suggest that Fallamero plays a more im-
portant role. Is the collection as comprehensive as the title
promises? Is it as conservative as the presence of motetti and
ricercate would suggest? Are all of the contents in tablature
notation? The phrase per cantare et sonare is certainly an un-
usual one in the context of Italian lutebooks. Listing the com-
plete contents and examining each category in turn will serve
to answer these and other questions.
Title and No. of Parts Composer2

1. In me tanto l'ardore (4) de Monte

2. Apariran per me Ie stelle (4) Lasso
3. U. ver l'aurora (5)
4. Tirsi morir volea (5) Marenzio
s. Madonna mia gentile (5)
6. Ma di chi debbo lamentarmi (4) Ruffo
7. Sapi Signor che Lilia son io (5) Vinci
8. Per pian to la mia carne (4) Lasso
9. Quando la sera scaccia (5)
10. Liquide perle amor (5) Marenzio
11. Partin) dunque (5)
12. Fera gentil (5) Rore
13. Perche si streto, 2da parte (5)
14. Cantai hor piango (5) Lasso
15. Tengan dunque ver me, 2da parte (5)
16. Mentre la bella Dori (6) A. Gabrieli
17. Non ti sdegnar (6)

1 Copies are extant at the Austrian National Library, the University Li-
brary at Genoa, and the British Museum in London (which now owns the copy
formerly in the Hirsch Collection). I am grateful to the Viennese authorities
for a microfilm of their copy.
2Titles and names have been modernized. Only information provided by
Fallamero has been given here.

176
18.10 mi son giovinetta (4) D. Ferabosco
19. Livia gentil, voi sete tanto vaga
20. Poiche sei cosi sorte scropolusa
21. Preso son io nelle piu belle braccia
22. Canzonette d'amore
23. S'all'aparir di voi, fulgente stella
24. Vorria madonna fare, fare, fareti a sapere
25. 0 faccia che rallegri il paradiso
26. Siate avertiti, 0 voi cortesi am anti
27. Occhi leggiadri e cari
28. Amanti miei, poiche scontenti state
29. 10 son bell'e delicata
30. Vorria saper da voi, belle citelle
31. Chi mira gl'occhi tuoi
32. 10 son fenice & voi sete la fiamma
33. Nel vago lume de' bei vostri rai
34. Viver non posso senz'il mio bel sole
35. Gridate, gridate guerra
36. Amor se giusto sei
37. 10 vo morir non sia alcun
38. Mentr'io campai contento
39. Standomi un giorno (5) Lasso
40. Indi per alto mar, 2da parte (5)
41. In un boschetto, 3za parte (5)
42. Chiara fontana, 4ta parte (5)
43. Una strana fenice, 5ta parte (5)
44. Alfin vid'io, 6ta parte (5)
45. Si dolce d'amar voi (5) Striggio
46. Dolce mio ben (6)
47. Animam meam dilectam (5) Lasso
48. Congregamini, 2da parte (5)
49. Recercar del terzo tono Padovano
50. Recercar del ottavo tono
51. I dolci colli (6) Striggio
52. Et qual cervo ferito, 2da parte (6)
53. Anchor ch'io possa (6)
54. N asce la pena mia (6)
55. Anchor che col partir

Fallamero's anthology of forty-six numbers, exclusive of sepa-

rate partes, comprises three distinct musical categories: lute
arrangements of vocal favorites (Nos. 1-18, 39-48, 51-54), in-
177
tabulations of ensemble or keyboard ricercari (Nos. 49-50),
and canzonette to the lute (Nos. 19-38 and 55). The first group-
ing is the rule in Italian lutebooks, though the second type is
less characteristic, since other lu tenists generally provided some
of their own ricercari or fantasie, whereas Fallamero has
merely intabulated works by another composer. As for the last
category, it is unique to this tablature; these are the first can-
zonette to the lute found in print. Had Fallamero added the
phrase di diversi eccellentissimi musici after his motetti, ricer-
cate, madrigali, his title page would have been clearer; but then
he has carefully indicated each composer's name for all the se-
lections in these elevated categories. The lighter canzonette alla
napolitana, on the other hand, are given without any attribu-
tions.
The presence of motets seems a rather conservative retention
of a practice standard in tablatures of the 1540's. Boetticher's
article (1954) on Fallamero indicates that his is the last book to
follow this custom. 3 However, the promised motets actually
turn out to be but one composition in two partes, Animam
meam dilectam tradidi, a work of Lasso's middle years. 4 By
listing "motets" before madrigals on his title page, Fallamero
is only paying lip service to tradition. In fact, the heading on
his Table of Contents is more accurate: Tavola delli madrigalil
motetti ricercate, et canzonettel intavolate nel liuto da Gabriel
Fallamero.5
The two ricercari (Exs. 1 and 2) are poly thematic specimens
from Annibale Padovano's Libro primo de ricercari a quattro
voci, printed in 1556.
Ex. 1 Ricercar del ottava lana (No. 8)6

'His statement that this is the last tablature "das noch einem grosseren Be-
stand von Motetten der Spatrenaissance verpflichtet ist" is certainly an exag-
geration (1954).
'First printed in Paris in 1565 by Le Roy (Boetticher 1958).
'The extensive manuscript tablature Upsala University Library VH87 in-
cludes only two motets as does Genoa University Library F VII 1, a manu-
script source with a remarkably similar repertoire to Fallamero (Hambreus
1961:46-53; Neri 1890).
6Cf. the modern edition in open score by N. Pierront and J.P. Hennebains,
Paris, Editions de L'Oiseau Lyre, 1934, p. 62.

178
Ex. 2 Ricercar del ferzo fono (No. 11)' J
: 4-,J _,J I : I f'
Annibale, a predecessor of Andrea Gabrieli's at San Marco, was
second organist there from 1552 to 1563 and composed keyboard
(or ensemble) music, madrigals, and liturgical pieces. Fallamero
intabulated these pieces from the original partbooks without
adding so much as a single ornament; however, his D-tuning
results in a transposition up a fifth.
By selecting instrumental compositions first published twenty-
eight years earlier, Fallamero may seem behind the times; but
there are several indications that Padovano's music was not con-
sidered old-fashioned in 1584. For one thing, his Libro Primo
de Ricercari was to be reprinted four years later in 1588. Then
too, no less a vanguard spirit than Vincenzo Galilei had the
highest praise for Padovano in both the Fronimo (1568; 1584)
and the Dialogo (1581).8 In the former Galilei included an
intabulation of one of these ricercari (del settimo tono) that he
writes is "the most beautiful perhaps of all that he has written"
and "in truth, to my view, . . . marvelous." (Del Valle de Paz
1933:1ff.) Further on in the book he names four of his contem-
poraries who, in his opinion, compose as well as they perform.
Padovano is cited first, then Merulo, Guami, and Luzzaschi.
There is a more important reason why it was not inconsistent
for the century's chief spokesman against polyphony to espouse
Padovano's strictly contrapuntal music. Instrumental music
lagged behind the stylistic development undergone by 16th-cen-
tury vocal music. The newly independent instrumental genre
had only begun to make obeisance to the classic style of sys-

'ibid., p. 84. The editors have transformed the first measures to

'h rid d 1 : 1_
though their table of variants notes the composer's intention in both origi-
nal editions. Needless to say, Fallamero does not bear them out.
8"1 say then that in our times there have been many excellent players, both
of the lute and of the keyboard instruments, among whom some have indeed
known how to play well and how to write well, or let us say how to compose
well, for their instruments, as for the keyboard instrument an Annibale Pad-
ovano ... " (Excerpts from the Dialogo translated in Strunk 1950:320.)

179
tematic imitation during the post-J osquin period at the time
of the madrigal's supremacy and of the turn to denser textures
representative of the music by Willaert, Gombert, and Rore-
in short, during the "mannerist" period. The novel treatment
of textures and dissonances, the insistent pictorial urge were all
developed at the suggestion of the poetic texts. Since the text-
less ricercar or fantasia had no need" to imitate nature," it was
not touched for a long time by the mannerist style. In fact,
these genres maintained their classic serenity and polyphonic
spirit through decades of production by masters like Cavazzoni,
Willaert, Buus, Segni, Padovano, and Merulo. Since it was un-
derstood that these compositions did not share in the newer
style, they were evaluated according to different criteria. Though
Galilei outspokenly favored the vocal monody and simple "na-
tive song" style over Flemish counterpoint, he felt that the re-
tention of the latter in instrumental music was appropriate
(Palisca 1960:359ff.).
Thirty madrigal intabulations constitute the heart of this an-
thology. Besides individual compositions there are a few cyclic
ones, three sonnets set in the usual two partes and an entire
Petrarchan canzona, Standomi un giorno solo, in six. Lasso,
whom Fallamero calls Rolando, predominates, along with Strig-
gio and Marenzio. That great "hit" of the century, Ferabosco's
10 mi son giovinetta, first printed in 1542, is the oldest selec-
tion. Chronologically next come the Lasso, Rore, and Striggio
cullings, the latter's six-part pieces indicative of the new fash-
ionableness of this texture in the 'sixties and 'seventies. Indeed,
the first book of Striggio's six-part madrigals was re-issued no
less than eight times; its most often intabulated item was Nasce
la pena mia, perhaps the second most famous piece in this an-
thology. John Ward's axiom that "the repertoire offered by a
tablature is normally that of the particular decade in which it
was printed" (1952:88) is certainly valid for this mixed bag of
madrigals, and all the more so because of the Marenzio and
Andrea Gabrieli items which had just been published in 1580.
All four Marenzio gems were to be "transalpinized" by Thomas
Watson in his pioneering English madrigalian publications of
1588 and 1590 (Kerman 1962:53-55, 59).
A manuscript tablature in the Genoa University Library, F
VII 1, described by Achille Neri (1890:73-81) has a similar reper-
toire of Lasso, Rore, Striggio, and Marenzio madrigals and
shares Fallamero's Nos. 12, 18, 39-44, 46, 51, 53, and 54. Its
180
anonymous compiler informs us by means of an enormous title 9
that the Marchese of San Sorlino (who is also the Duke of
Nemours' brother) has been kind enough to allow him "to copy
from all of his rarest tablatures." The Fallamero volume pres-
ently in the Genoa University Library may possibly have be-
longed to the Marchese's collection, which would explain the
many correspondences noted above.
The canzonette in our tablature open up a chapter in the
still largely unwritten history of Italian accompanied song. In
spite of literary, pictorial, and archival evidence for the con-
tinued practice of solo song in Italy-singing to the lute, "viu-
ola," viola da gamba, lira da braccio, harpsichord, and organ-
there are relatively few printed musical documents of the prac-
tice extant. 10 Early in the annals of music printing, Italian
lute song appeared in the form of three books of frottole to the
lute, but later with the flood of many-voiced madrigal publica-
tions that began in the 1530's, the solo genre dwindled to a thin
trickle, re-emerging in the century's final quarter in the sphere
of native partsong, i.e., the canzonetta and halletto. Fallamero's
was the first printed collection to include canzonette with a lute
part in tablature, and it was soon followed by Simone Verovio's
series and by collections by Quaglia ti, Vecchi, Bellasio, Gastoldi,
and A. Ferrari.
The canzonetta style had first appeared with the work of
Ferretti, Conversi, and Caimo published in the 1560's, though
the term itself was not to be used until the next decade. Sty-
listically, the canzonetta mediated between the villanella and
the madrigal. "The more animated the villanella becomes motivi-
cally, the more its fifths disappear and the more it tends to take
the form of the canzonetta," is Einstein's characterization of
the process by which it originated (1949 2:582). The twenty
examples that Fallamero grouped at the center of his book are
typically brief and strophic, with the vocal superius printed
in mensural notation over the tablature (Plate 1). For the four-
part pieces, the latter simply reduces the lower three voice parts,

9 Giardino di lntavolatura per il leuto delle piu rare madrigali

et vilanelle et capriccio brandi volte et corante gagliarde pas et mezzo
che il Principe II Sigr Marchese di San Sorlino fratello del Sigr Duca
di Nemours mi ha fatto favore di lasciarmeli copiare sopra tutte Ie
sue piu rare intavolature.
10 See the discussion in Newman 1962:186-193,210-211.

181
but the canzonette a 3 are completely intabulated so that they
can be performed with or without the singer.
Of all the tablature's contents only these twenty pieces lack
attributions. The five four-part canzonette are easily identifi-
able as Orazio Vecchi's, from his Libro Primo first published in
1581Y Vecchi complained about this practice in his dedica-
tion: "Since the greater part of these canzonets have been
strewn around Italy under various composers' names, I have
decided to make public by means of the printing press the fact
that they are mine . . . "12 Of the fifteen three-part composi-
tions remaining, I have only been able to identify four. It should
be noted that identification from the music itself is mandatory
with this light verse, so many different versions use the same
capoverso. A list of the identified canzonette with their sources
and a thematic listing of the unidentified remainder follow:

Title and No. of Parts Composer or source

20. Poiche sei cosi sorte scropolusa(3) Anon.!3

22. Canzonette d' amore( 4) Vecchi
24. Vorria madonna fare (3) Anon.14
25. o faccia che rallegri il paradiso (3) Anon. 14
27. Occhi leggiadri e cari (3) De Antiquis13
3l. Chi mira g1' occhi tuoi (4) Vecchi
32. 10 son fenice (4) Vecchi
33. N el vago lume (4) Vecchi
37. 10 vo morir non sia alcun (3) G. Fiorino 15
38. Mentr'io campai contento (4) Vecchi

"Einstein had identified 10 son fenice in his Vogel reVISIOn (1946). Long
before this, Oscar Chilesotti had reprinted Fallamero's No. 24, 26, and 38 (1889)
and No. 32 and 35 (1891). He later published the part-song versions of No. 24,
26,35, and 38 (1925).
121 have taken this from the copy of the fifth impression, 1591, in the library

of the Civico Museo Bibliographico Musicale, Bologna.

I3I1 secondo libro delle villanelle alia napolitana a 3 voci, de diversi musici
di Barri; Raccolte per Joanne de Antiquis con alcune delle sue . .. 1574. Modern
edition by S.A. Luciani, Rome, Instituto italiano per la storia della musica, 1941.
I4I1 terzo libro delle viollote alia napoletana de diversi con due moresche
nuovamente stampata a 3 voci. Venice, A. Gardano, 1567.
"Gaspar Fiorino, La nobilita di Roma ... et Ie vilanelle a 3 voci ... Venice, G.
Scotto, 1571.

182
INCIPITS OF CAJVTUS PARTS OF UNIDENTIFIED CANZONETTE

19.
r r r Ir r Ir r
Li via gen til, "/.
.J 1-

li3
#,J
r r I r r f' I f' r r I F r r I r F r 1-
Pre - so son i 0, "/. nel Ie pili bel-

23. - ,1 I ..I •
I r . o.
I
S'al a pa - nr di vo i.

26.
18 f' r
I r IL F J IJ J (;
I IJ
Sia - ver ti te, "/.

28.
18 f'
A - man-ti
r J I j J I! J J J 4 r"
mie - i,
r jd-
poi -che scon -

29.
10 son bel-l'e de
I f'
Ii ca
r Ir r
- ta de
F I-
la

30. 17
j± r r r Ir .
Var-ria sa
I
per da
-j
e
VOl,
Id J J Ij
bel - Ie ci tel
J I-
Ie

34.
18 f' r r Ip I r J IJ r" ) JU_ W J
Vi ver non pos - so senz' il mia bel so Ie

35.
113
I$ r f' Ir r f' Ir ,J
r F
Gri - da te, Gri - da te, guer - ra, guerr

r rTFt:rrTIa r rTIZ Ie
-j
36. 01 "'"
113
A - mor se giu - sto se i com' al - cun

16 Not identical with a composItIOn with the same title in G.

Zappasorgo's Napolitane a 3, Libro Primo, 1571. I am grateful to
Luigi F, Tagliavini for checking the Zappasorgo volume for me.

17 Not identical with the piece so entitled in the Terzo libro

delle Villotte (see note 14),

183
If after continued checking, these ten compositions still resist
identification, the possibility that some or most of them are by
the intabulator himself should be considered. Certainly, the
dedicatory piece, Livia gentil, a tribute to Livia Guasca Pozza,
ought to be assigned to Fallamero. A transcription is given here
(Ex. 3) for comparison with the facsimile (Plate 1) and to illus-
trate the simple homophonic style of these pieces. Is

Ex. 3 Livia gentil (No. 19)

G. Fallamero (7)

Li - via gen - til, Li via gen - til, voi se te

tan - to va - ga, tan - to va - ga, Li via gen - til, VOl se te

tan - to va ga Ch'al ap - pa - rir del vo stro chia - TO vi-

so ne re - st'il - ni - to e con-qui so. so.

i
*e in the original.

18Fallamero does not furnish transposition instructions of the kind found in

the Petrucci frottola tablatures, the Verdelot-Willaert intabulations of 1536, and
in some of the contents of the Bottrigari lute manuscript of 1574 (MacClintock
1956:179,186-190).

184
 tl-I--_:t_tI3.t.t:_-t---li-t-t-./t-:f.--I--:-+-tl- _f t-
luia gcotiJt Lillia,gentil voi I: taDtO'Vaga tanto vaga Liuia gentll fete taoto va-

rf rf Ff r rf rf r
VOl

ga ch'31'appari r del uo(lro chiaro vi fo ne rdla il modo JuonitQ e conquifo

f ff f r f f r f
--1--'1
-+-l- -+-t-l
444f-f-l-Ot--
i
-;-+-t..L.-
-T-J--+
-&--
--+-r----rl
S"
-}-- -i---rOT, i i } I +-+-J--J-+-
-
IT-- -
.
'- ,----
oJ
-- r 6+- -J- -tel-TTI-} } J 10 -J--OIOr- . - ----1-
1{!'1 Citl f'O[cU1I1fJg,j 'I/unt·- nr/la {( uJndo (" b"cca ride ouer {aue!l" Si ,be lluia gent;! ogn'/f1J "i c!Jiaf'lfa
Q...::.l'Jd'rfe d I {w It dotce Tlfo Stncomc ['.11m2 mia cl4 me diulf4 Ogn'unpe r U?, feruir Ii storz" bramm4
""'"
Cf;
'N..e
til It .onclo: 1\e Tant'i dieua
,..... ""0
C/J
Q\ ....
I'D
tv

f r ffFf f F
!
f
ijl-
fr rfJ fff fr rr rr
Anchor checol partir 1'..lma fi mora penfaodo di tornar'partir vurei taD to (on dulci Unto fon dulci ran to (on dolci gla ri-

off r
- :-d-c
oHI-
-+i-i- -T
i-r-+ .i-
.. :====----== -
--'+"':::-=-lHt1
---t--_ •• -
• fS 5"4 - -
.- - -
-----------
i!- - - - . - - - - -
----- -

- 0 - t-i-
forni mie • L I L
a-G
f I N E.
-- -- -
 A canzonetta version by Gaspar Fiorino of Rore's Anchor che
col partire has been used to fill up two empty systems on the
last page of the book (Plate 2). Perhaps it was originally planned
as a twenty-first piece, closing off the canzonet group. It has
lost its vocal line, though the text was retained. Based on two
bits of music from this most famous madrigal (Ex. 4) and some
snatches from its original verse, this inelegant reduction for popu-
lar consumption indicates the existence in the Renaissance of an
interest in the "instant" and oversimplified; it is a kind of "heart
of the madrigal" (Ex. 5). Fallamero has used this partenza most
appropriately as his volume's envoi.1 9
Ex. 4
Cipriano de Rore

An
n

cor
j r
che
11 Jcol
J
par - ti re
j

taD - to son dol - ci gIl ri - tor TIl mei

Ex. 5 Anchor che col partir Gaspar Fiorino

Canto of the original canzonetta
A

:
II:) oj
An - cor che col par - tir l'al- rna si rna "
ra,

A A

OJ OJ I
-P-
I
.-
t t I
n
I r i--- ri F
: : :
Fallamero s mtabulatwD, No. 55

OJ --. .,
rna - ra, Pen - san -do di tor - nar par - tir vor - re - i,_

Ioj

:
i f
.,
r t r i r r I r F

19This adds one more to the more than fifty settings and parodied versions
listed by Ferand (1962:150-53). The source is Fronimo's La nobilta di Roma, 52.ff.

187
 "
OJ
:
Tan to son dol - ci, tan - "to son dol- ci
.
-
.

!
:
t.J

:
l--t
:
I' r i i/ ! r .. r ..
r I i r f ..J J 1

.
:
OJ
gli ri - tor - ni mie - i i.

I I 1':'1
"

!
:
t.J
l i r I

f:. r r:e:
I
f:.
I I I
1':'1
: :

In summary, our gentleman amateur has labored hard to ar-

range a large quantity of music by fashionable Italian and
ultremontane composers. His exertions and those of his fellow
intabulators made it that much easier for contemporaries to
familiarize themselves with vocal literature (in the absence of
easily procurable scores) or to amuse themselves with the mor-
ceaux choisis of the day. If it appears an extreme demand on
the lute's powers to give it six-part pieces to play, we would do
well to remember our daily usage of the piano as a medium for
study, rehearsal, and pleasure; we often turn to it for help in
"hearing" a six- or eight-part complex. The lute intabulation
served these needs and perhaps one other, that of a seguente
part with which to accompany or fill out the performances of
many-voiced vocal works.
F allamero has taken care to provide arrangements of a variety
(of types) of music. The only major genres he has slighted are
the dances and canzoni. His tablature has the distinction of
being the first collection in which the modest canzonette stand
their ground with the complex creations of great madrigalists.

REFERENCES

BOETTICHER, WOLFGANG
1954 Fallamero. In Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart.
Kassel und Basel, Vol. 3, col. 1757ff.
1958 O. di Lasso und seine Zeit. Kassel, Vol. 1, p. 206.
188
BOSSOLA, A.
1903 Donne illustri Alessandrine. Rivista di Storia, Arte,
Archeologica della Provincia di Alessandria 12:25.

CHILESOTTI, OSCAR
1889 Saggio sulla melodia popolare del cinquecento, Milan.
1891 Lautenspieler des XVI. J ahrhunderts. Leipzig.
1925? Canzonette del secolo XVI. Milan.

DE LA LAURENCIE, LIONEL
1928 Les Luthistes. Paris.

DEL VALLE DE PAZ, GIACOMO

1933 Annibale Padovano nella storia della musica del cinque-
cento. Turin.

EINSTEIN, ALFRED
1946 Italian Secular Vocal Music, etc. Music Library Asso-
ciation Notes 4.
1949 The I talian Madrigal. Princeton.

FERAND, ERNEST T.
1962 Anchor che col partire; Die Schicksale eines beriihm ten
Madrigals. Festschrift K.G. Fellerers. Regensburg, pp.
137-154.

GUASCO, ANNIBALE
1605 Tela cangiante . . . Opera morale (containing 3,110
madrigal poems). Milan.

HAMBRAEUS, BENGT
1961 Codex Carminum Gallicorum; une etude sur Ie ms.
87 de la Bibliotheque de l'Universite d'Upsala. Upsala.

KERMAN, JOSEPH
1962 The Elizabethan Madrigal. N.Y.

MACCUNTOCK, CAROL
1956 A Court Musician's Songbook: Modena Ms. C311.
Journal of the American Musicological Society 9:177-
185.
189
NERI, ACHILLE
1890 Un codice musicale del secolo XVI. In Studi Biblio-
grafici e Letterari. Genoa.

NEWMAN, JOEL
1962 The Madrigals of Salamon de' Rossi. Unpublished PhD.
disserta tion, Columbia University.

PALISCA, CLAUDE
1960 Vincenzo Galilei and some Links between "Pseudo-
Monody" and Monody. Musical Quarterly 46:344-360.

REESE, GUSTAVE
1954 Music in the Renaissance. N.Y.

R.I.5.M.
1960 Repertoire international des sources musicales. Munich.

STRUNK, OLIVER
1950 Source Readings in Music History. N.Y.

WARD, JOHN
1952 The Use of Borrowed Material in 16th-Century In-
strumental Music. Journal of the American Musicolo-
gical Society 5:88-98.

190
THE 1965 REVISION OF
THE U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW
Austin Clarkson

N E X T TO INCOME TAX and jay-walking, the least unbroken

law is surely that of copyright, if only because the copyright
law presently in force was passed in 1909 and tailored to the
Gutenberg, rather than to the Marconi, era. The drafters of the
1909 statute could not have foreseen that authors' rights would
soon be threatened by juke boxes, microfilm, videotape recorders,
communication satellites, and computerized storage and retrieval
of information. They did not anticipate that within 50 years
some works of authorship would be primarily fixed by magnetic
tape or by a set of punched cards that program a computer.
N or did they imagine that the notion of an "original" would be
virtually smothered by a million Mona Lisa's, or that copying
techniques would place "first editions" within the reach of
everyone. Revision of the copyright law has had to accommo-
date the technological blitz of the last half century, to right
inequities, and to attempt to make some provision for the shape
of things to come. I t may not be so very long before households
with any cultural pretensions whatever subscribe to the Micro-
film of the Month Club, or own cans of magnetic tape (for use
on their home computer) marked The English Novel 1700-1950,
and The Annual Supplement of New Music for 1995 (in four
parts; one each for Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Asia).
The level of respect and recognition accorded by the members
of a high culture to its finest and most valuable artifacts is
inevitably mirrored in its copyright law. That the present u.s.
copyright law has survived, coelacanthlike, so long attests to
nothing more than that an immobilizing inertia afflicts some as-
pects of culture; that it has been permitted to survive in such con-
dition is a national, if not international, scandal. In past decades,
rampant apathy, complacency, and criminal self-interest have
successfully thwarted reform. And even now, the revision bill of
1965 is gravely threatened by the juke-box profiteers and their
allies who object to paying royalties on recorded performances,

AUSTIN CLARKSON is an instructor of music at Columbia University.

191
and by the "non-profiteers" on the fringes of the educational es-
tablishment who self-righteously assert that all materials used for
the moral, spiritual, and intellectual betterment of the populace
should be donated free of charge.
Copyright law influences the entire intellectual health of the
community. It not only affects writers, composers, performers,
artists, scientists, teachers, and students, but in the modern
world it plays an increasingly important role in international re-
lations. As Abraham L. Kaminstein, Register of Copyrights,
points out in the Preface to his Supplementary Report on the
1965 Revision Bill: "It is startling to realize, in an era when
copyrighted materials are being disseminated instantaneously
throughout the globe, that the United States has copyright re-
lations with less than half of the world's nations. The injustice
of this situation to authors here and abroad is obvious, but
equally serious to our national interest is the lack of the cultural
bridge between countries that copyright furnishes."l The fol-
lowing digest of some leading aspects of the 1965 Copyright
Law Revision Bill is presented in the belief that our readers
have a large stake in seeing an equitable, honorable, and effec-
tive copyright bill signed into law. Since the revision bill will
almost certainly be taken up in the next session of Congress
there is still time for interested individuals and groups to ac-
quaint themselves with the bill and to make their opinions
known on Capitol Hill.
Preparatory studies for the revision of the antiquated copy-
right law were initiated in 1955 and resulted six years later in a
report submitted by the Register of Copyrights. The report's
more controversial recommendations stung hitherto lethargic
parties into violent opposition. After another three years of dis-
cussion, debate, hearings, and redrafting, the revision bill of
1964 was submitted for further comment. The final, legislative,
phase began this year when Senator McClellan and Representa-
tive Celler introduced the Copyright Law Revision Bill to the
89th Congress on February 4 for active consideration. The Reg-
ister of Copyrights filed a supplementary report in May which

ICopyright Law Revision, Part 6; Supplementary Report of the Register

of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law: 1965 Re-
vision Bill. Washington, D.C., 1965, p. xv. (For sale by the Superintendent of
Documents, U.s. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402. Price
$1.00.)

192
summarizes the reViSIOn program and presents the bill in its
most up-to-date form. The ensuing summary is made from this
supplementary report with a view to interesting a readership
concerned with matters musical and educational. Those who de-
sire more complete information are urged to purchase the report
itself.
A. THE SUBJECT MATTER OF COPYRiGHT
1. The present reference to "all the writings of an author" as
the general subject matter of copyright has been replaced by
the phrase "original works of authorship." This phrase main-
tains the established standards of originality without implying
any further requirements of esthetic value, novelty, or ingenuity.
2. The revision bill takes a giant step forward by requiring
that protected works be fixed in any tangible medium of ex-
pression now known or later developed, from which works can
be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either
directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Improvisations
and unrecorded performances would not be subject to statutory
protection but would continue to be protected at common law
un til such time as they are fixed. No particular form of fixation
is required as long as the work is capable of being retrieved. A
musical composition, for. example, would be copyrightable if it
is written or recorded in words or any kind of visible notation,
in Braille, on a phonograph disk, on a film sound track, on
magnetic tape, or on punch cards. It will now be possible for
composers of tape music, concrete music, and programs for a
computer to copyright their works without having to reduce
them, as is presently necessary, to some bogus musical script.
3. Another important change is the addition of a new cate-
gory to the subject matter of copyright: "sound recordings."
The revision bill distinguishes between sound recordings (copy-
rightable works that result from the fixation of a series of
sounds) and phonorecords (material objects in which sounds are
fixed). Sound recordings as copyrightable works are therefore
distinguished from any musical, literary, or dramatic works
that are reproduced on phonorecords. Thus, a phonorecord (a
disk or tape, for example) of a song would usually constitute a
reproduction of two copyrighted works under the bill: the song
and the sound recording of it. Where, on the other hand, the
composition recorded is a work in the public domain, the phono-
record would reproduce only one copyrighted work: the sound
recording.
193
B. EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS UNDER COPYRIGHT
Limitation of the author's exclusive rights is, not surprisingly,
the most disputed part of the revision bill and the one most
affected by advancing technology. The basic legislative problem
is to insure that the law provides the necessary monetary in-
centive to write, produce, and publish creative works, while at
the same time guarding against the danger that these works
will not be disseminated and used as fully as they should be
because of copyright restrictions. As shown by the iniquitous
juke-box exemption, a particular use which at one time may
have had little or no economic impact on the author's rights can
assume tremendous importance in times to come. An author's
righ ts cannot be tied to present technology so that his copy-
right loses much of its value because of unforeseen technological
advances.
The five basic exclusive rights granted the owner of a copy-
right are the right (1) to reproduce the work in copies or pho-
norecords; (2) to prepare derivative works based on the work;
(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the
public; (4) to perform the work publicly; and (5) to exhibit
the work publicly.
A source of bitter contention between educational groups and
authors and publishers has to do with the relative merits of
"fair" or "free" use of copyrighted material by non-profit users
such as teachers, librarians, and educational broadcasters. The
unrestrained use of photocopying, recording, and other devices
can go far beyond the recognized limits of "fair" use (as estab-
lished by precedent) and may severely curtail the copyright
owner's market for copies of his work. Even when the new
media (such as non-profit broadcasting, linked computers, etc.)
are not operated for profit, they may reach huge audiences and
may be expected to displace the demand for authors' works by
other users from whom copyright owners derive compensation.
The drafters of the revision bill believe that reasonable adjust-
ments between the legitimate interests of copyright owners and
those of certain non-profit users are no doubt necessary, but they
affirm that the day is past when any particular use of works
should be exempted for the sole reason that it is "not for profit."
Hence, the revision bill imposes no blanket "for profit" limita-
tion on the right of public performance; exemptions from copy-
right control are instead spelled out under a number of headings,
such as fair use, face-to-face teaching activities, educational
194
broadcasting, religious services, et alia.
1. Fair use. The drafters of the revision had fond hopes of
at last spelling out the meaning of "fair use" so that it would
be unnecessary to continue relying on the complex history of
precedent. The 1964 version of the revision bill reads as follows
in this regard:

The fair use of a copyrighted work to the extent reasonably nec-

essary or incidental to a legitimate purpose such as criticism, com-
ment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research is not an
infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made
of a work in any particular case is a fair use, the factors to be con-
sidered shall include: (1) the purpose and character of the use;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and sub-
stantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work
as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market
for or value of the copyrighted work.

Both sides reacted unfavorably to this language. The author-

publisher groups feared that specific mention of uses such as
"teaching, scholarship, or research" could be taken to imply that
any use even remotely connected with these activities would be
a "fair use," while educational groups objected seriously to re-
strictive language such as "to the extent reasonably necessary
or incidental to a legitimate purpose" and "the amount and sub-
stantiality of the portion used." A group of educational organi-
zations urged further that the bill adopt a new provision which
would specify anum ber of teaching and scholarly activities as
completely exempt from copyright control. In broad terms and
with certain exceptions, the proposal would permit any teacher
or other person or organization engaged in non-profit educational
activities to make a single copy or record of an entire work, or
a reasonable number of copies of "excerpts or quotations," for
use in connection with those activities. It was argued that these
privileges are a necessary part of good teaching and that it is
unjustifiable to burden educators with the need to buy copies
for limited use or to obtain advance clearances and pay royalties
for making copies. Authors, publishers and other copyright
owners reacted violently to these proposals on the ground that
the market for their works would be severely diminished and
that ultimately the economic incentive for the creation and pub-
lication of the very works on which education depends would
be destroyed. Agreement was evidently impossible to reach, so
the drafters regretfully pared the provision down to the bare
195
clause that "the fair use of a copyrighted work is not an in-
fringement of copyright."
The inability of the producers and users of copyright works
to agree on a definition of fair use betrays a lamentable cleavage
in our culture. The corrupting effect of evaluating activities ac-
cording to whether or not one gains money by them and of the
defensive attitude that educators are unappreciated and inade-
quately rewarded have taken their toll of the respect we grant
the work of authorship itself. It seems to me that the greatest
concessions need to be made by the rank and file of professional
non-profiteers who believe that because they are somehow serv-
ing the public good, they should be exempted from the need to
respect an author's rights. But as educators we should not have
to appeal to some higher, even divine, right and hence to de-
mand special treatment under earthly law. If educators have a
score to settle with society (and there is plenty of evidence to
show that they have) recompense should be levied on the culture
as a whole. Educators must apprise everyone of his responsibil-
ity to education and not ask authors and publishers to shoulder
the collective guilt as scapegoats. If a society truly respects its
education it will not only reward its authors for their work, it
will ensure that only the best ideas are used and even pay pre-
mium prices for them gladly. Society will surely regard its edu-
cation more highly if its educators in turn respect their ma-
terials enough to pay for them a t fair and honorable rates rather
than scrambling for discount, wholesale, or even fire sale prices.
The Execu tive Board of the American Musicological Society
recently reported to the Congress in favor of the fair use clause
and opposed to the proposals of the educational association.
Everyone who can should express himself on this issue to his
Congressman.
2. Face-ta-face teaching activities. Performance or exhibi-
tion of a work by instructors or pupils in the course of face-to-
face teaching activities in a classroom or similar place normally
devoted to instruction is exempted from copyright control.
There is no limitation on the types of work covered by this ex-
emption, which would mean that a teacher or student in a class-
room situation would be free to read from copyrighted text ma-
terial, to act out a dramatic work, or to perform a musical work,
to perform a copyrighted motion picture by showing it to his
class, or to exhibit copyrighted text or graphic material by
means of projectors. No provision is made to exempt the copy-
196
ing by office duplicators of an entire work for classroom use. It
won't be easy, but teachers will have to evolve a new attitude to
copyrigh ted works if they wish to remain law-abiding citizens.
3. Educational broadcasting. Here is another area in which
authors and publishers sharply oppose educational groups. Non-
profit educational broadcasting is now reaching large audiences
and the revision bill argues that these audiences are increasing
rapidly, that as a medium for entertainment, recreation, and
communication of information, a good deal of educational pro-
gramming is indistinguishable from commercial programming,
and that the time may come when many works will reach the
public primarily through educational broadcasting. It concludes
that the author's compensation should be determined by the
number of people reached, and that it does not seem too much
to ask that some of the money now going to support educational
broadcasting activities be used to compensate authors and pub-
lishers whose works are essential to those activities. Hence, the
1965 bill exempts educational broadcasting made primarily for
reception in classrooms and as a regular part of systematic in-
structional activities of a non-profit educational institution, but
does not exempt transmissions intended for the enlightenment,
edification, or instruction of the public at large.
c. FEDERAL PRE-EMPTION AND DURATION OF COPYRIGHT
1. Single national system. Under the present law there is a
dual system of protection of works: before publication they are
protected under common law, whereas after publication they
are protected under Federal statute. The revision would establish
a single system of statutory protection for all works whether
published or unpublished. The common law would continue to
protect works (such as choreography and improvisations) up to
the time they are fixed in tangible form, but thereafter they
would be subject to exclusive Federal protection under the stat-
ute even though they are never published or registered.
2. Duration of copyright in works created after the new law's
effective date. The present term of copyright is 28 years from
first publication or registration, renewable for a second period of
28 years. With respect to works created after it comes into ef-
fect, the bill would provide for a term of the author's life plus
50 years, in order to bring it into line with the copyright term
in most countries. "Joint works" would be protected for the life
of the second author to die plus 50 years after his death. For
anonymous works, pseudonymous works, and works made for
197
hire, the term would generally be 75 years from publication,
with a maximum limit of 100 years from creation of the work.
3. Duration of copyright in pre-existing works under com-
mon law protection. An unpublished work still under common
law protection when the statute comes into effect would be
brought under the statute and given the same term of copyright
as that applicable to works created after the effective date.
4. Duration of subsisting copyrights. For copyrights still in
their first term when the new law comes into effect, the bill
would retain the present renewal provisions but would extend
the length of the renewal term from 28 to 47 years (making a
total term of 75 years from publication or registration). For
copyrigh ts in their renewal term the total term would also be
extended to 75 years.

198
REPOR T FROM INDIANA:
Inter-American Conference of
Ethnomusicology and Composition
David A. Sheldon

L E GROWING AWARENESS of the contributions of our neigh-

bors in Latin America to the fields of musical composition and
scholarship, as well as the sincere desire for active hemispheric
cooperation and exchange in these areas, is indeed apparent in
the work of the Latin American Music Center and the Archives
of Traditional Music on the Bloomington campus of Indiana
University. It comes as no surprise, then, that this University
should take on the ambitious task of serving as host to the
Fourth General Assembly of the Inter-American Music Coun-
cil (CIDEM), the First Inter-American Composers Seminar,
and the Second Inter-American Conference on Ethnomusicology.
These meetings, which took place April 24-28 and involved over
110 participants and observers, were held in conjunction with
the Third Spring Festival of Music of the Americas presented
by the Latin American Music Center of Indiana University.
Besides Indiana University and CIDEM, the other sponsoring
institutions were the Music Division of the Pan-American
Union and the National Music Council of the United States.
CIDEM, founded no more than a decade ago, has already
been very active in establishing educational and research pro-
grams involving both North and Latin America. The First Inter-
American Conference on Ethnomusicology was held two years
ago in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, the papers from which
were published by the Pan-American Union. At the suggestion
of Dr. George List, Director of the Archives of Traditional
Music at Indiana University, it was decided at that first meet-
ing to hold the second conference at Indiana University in 1965.
In calling together a joint meeting with the First Inter-Ameri-
can Composers Seminar, the chief goal in the planners' minds

DA VID A. SHELDON is a doctoral student and graduate assistant in musi-

cology at Indiana University.

199
was to create an atmosphere where related problems could be
discussed on an interdisciplinary, as well as inter-American,
basis. In addition, there seemed to be the hope that the mere
physical contact and active participation of the delegates might
transcend political and professional boundaries, thus achieving
a common understanding with regard to basic issues facing both
groups. The director of the Latin American Music Center at
Indiana University and general chairman and planner for the
entire conference, Professor Juan Orrego-Salas, feels that if he
is fortunate enough to participate in the planning of another
joint meeting of this nature, he would like to see it expanded
to represent music education, historical musicology, and the
views of professional performers.
Such a full program does pose many problems as evidenced
by this conference. Because of the inevitable limitations of
time, the composers, seminars and ethnomusicology conferences
were unfortunately conducted simultaneously during the four-
day period in which papers were given, except for one joint
meeting of both groups. An invaluable aid to the delegates in-
terested in both areas was the printed copies (in Spanish and
in English) of all the papers made available to the delegates
before the respective sessions. A sincere attempt was made to
overcome the language barriers during the round table discus-
sions by having simultaneous translation with the aid of trans-
lators and earphones. For the most part successful, much was
yet lost in the more rapid exchanges between participants.
The discussion topics for the Composers Seminar centered
around problems facing the contemporary composer of the
Americas. Specific topics were: "The Performance of New Mu-
sic," "The Training of the Composer," "The Public and Live Mu-
sic," and "State and Private Aid to Music." A general consensus
of opinion arose from these sessions that the basic problem of the
contemporary composer lay in the area of the education of the
public. While the composers from Latin American countries were
fairly well represented, major figures from North America were
disappointingly few since most of those invited were unable to
attend.
In this respect the ethnomusicologists were in a much bet-
ter position. Representing the United States with papers were
Frank Gillis, Charles Haywood, George List, Alan Merriam,
Bruno N ettl, and Charles Seeger. Also participating were Bar-
bara Krader, John Mueller, Willard Rhodes, and Nicolas Slonim-
200
 sky. Special mention should be made of Frank Gillis, Associate
Director of the Archives of Traditional Music at Indiana Uni-
versity, who served as general chairman and host for all the
ethnomusicology sessions. Gilbert Chase and Rae Korson, al-
though listed in the program as participants, were unable to
attend.
Of the sixteen papers given in the ethnomusicology confer-
ence (including the two given at the joint session), ten were
• presented by delegates from Latin American countries. Most of
the Latin American ethnomusicologists who gave papers at the
first conference held in 1963 were again present. Some new-
• comers were Manuel Danneman (Chile), Flor de Maria Rodri-
guez (Uruguay), and L. H. Correa de Azevedo (Brazil, now in
Paris for UNESCO).
The general theme of the ethnomusicology conference was
Acculturation and Musical Traditions in the United States and
Latin America. This writer felt that the papers given by eth-
nom usicologists from the United States, especially those on North
American subjects, were distinguished by a somewhat more
sophisticated and highly developed methodology than were those
given by the delegates from Latin American countries. In addi-
tion, it was often evident in the papers dealing with Latin
American music that research had been conducted in virtually
unplowed ground. While such pioneering is obviously necessary
and must be begun by someone, this situation had the usual
result of producing papers with very broad scopes and very
tentative conclusions. On the other hand, although they might
not have the advantage of the scholarly traditions in musicology
and the social sciences to the extent that we do in this country,
the Latin American ethnomusicologists showed that they are
quite capable of scholarship of a very high calibre. It is a pleasure
to know that Indiana University plans to publish in English all
of the papers given at the Inter-American Conference .

201
William Sherman Casey
Printed English lute instruction
books, 1568-1610
Ann Arbor: University Microfilms (UM order no.
60-2514)' 1960. (pos. film $3.15; University of
Michigan diss.)
•

Julia Sutton •
Toward the latter part of the 16th century, England's artistic riches
crowded one upon another in such profusion as to produce one of the
most remarkable creative explosions in our history. Not least among
the exalted arts of the time was that of the lutenist whose "sweet
song," attested to by innumerable poets, still provides us with some
of the loveliest sounds in the lute repertoire. More mundane, perhaps,
but of importance as contributions to and manifestations of the great
popularity of the lute, were the lute instruction books printed in Eng-
land during this period. William Casey, in his two-volume study, sur-
veys the five extant self-instructors published between 1568 and 1610
and includes a transcription of the music in the fourth book.
The five books published between 1568 and 1610 are:

1. Le Roy, Adrian. A Briefe and Easie Instruction to Learne the

Tableture to Conducte and Dispose Thy Hande unto the Lute.
Translated by J. Alford Londoner. London: John Kyngston for
James Roubothum, 1568. '
2. Le Roy, Adrian. A Briefe and Plaine Instruction to Set All Musicke
of Eight Divers Tunes in Tableture for the Lute, and A Briefe
Instruction How to Play on the Lute by Tablatorie, to Conduct
and Dispose Thy Hand unto the Lute, with Certaine Easie Lessons
for That Purpose . ... And Also a Third Booke Containing Divers
New Excellent Tunes. Translated by F. Ke., Gentleman. London:
James Rowbothome, 1574.
3. Barley, William. A New Booke of Tabliture, Conteining Sundrie
Easie and Familiar Instructions, Shewing Howe to Attaine to the
Instruments, As the Lute, Orpharion, and Bandora: Together
with Divers New Lessons to Each of These Instruments. London:
William Barley, 1596.

'The music from this work appears in Adrian Le Roy, Fantasies

et Danses from A briefe and Easye Instruction (1568), ed. Pierre
Jansen (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, 1962).
The original volume in French is lost.

202
 4. Robinson, Thomas. The Schoole of Musicke: Wherein is Taught,
the Perfect Method, of True Fingering of the Lute, Pandora,
Orpharion, and Viol de Gamba; with most infallible generall
rules, both easie and delightful/. London: printed by Thomas
Este for Simon Waterson, 1603.
5. Dowland, Robert. Varietie of Lute Lessons, London: Thomas
Adams, 1610. This contains two instructional sections: J ean-
Baptiste Besard's "Necessarie Observations Belonging to the
Lute and Lute Playing," trans. R. Dowland; and John Dowland's
"Other Necessarie Observations Belonging to the Lute."2

It should be stated at the outset that Casey's interest is more peda-

gogic than scholarly. As an amateur guitarist and teacher, he explains,
he has chosen to make a compendium of the instructions in the five
publications in order to provide a lute tutor for the contemporary
player (i.e., guitarist with an interest in old music). His decision to
transcribe Robinson's music was also dictated by considerations of its
practicability for beginners. Furthermore, the transcription is for gui-
tar rather than lute.
There is no question that the inclusion of Robinson's music in the
second volume marks Dr. Casey's most important contribution. Robin-
son's life is hardly known to us, but we do know that he was in the
service of the Earl of Exeter and the court of Elsinore. His music re-
flects this high professional standing. 3 The Schoole of Musicke con-
tains 38 delightful and characteristic pieces (6 for lu te duet), always
skillfully and idiomatically written, always charming; some indeed are
outstanding. The complex yet lovely Fantasie for Two Lutes, the exer-
cise in simple chords (Griffe His Delight), the setting of Row Well
Ye Mariners, and others among the dances or variations on grounds
are worthy of inclusion among the finest of the lute repertoire. We
may note here that ties with the virginal repertoire of the same period
are very close.
Dr. Casey's transcription methods are on the whole highly com-
mendable. His was undoubtedly a labor of love, for his copying of the
tablature along with the transcription (a procedure recommended but
not always followed by modern scholars) represents countless hours of
work. Highly accurate, certainly musical, he carries out a most praise-
worthy goal of providing an edition which at once preserves the poly-
phonic nature of the music (about which all instructors of the period
are in complete agreement) and is entirely playable. Praises for bring-
ing this music out in a good modern edition are certainly in order. It is
really too bad that the title of the thesis gives no hint of the emphasis
on Robinson and the inclusion of his music. This, I am sure, is why

2Facsimile edition by Schott (London, 1958).

30ther works by Robinson are Medulla Musicke . . . transposed to the lute
(London, 1603), now lost; New Citharen Lessons (London, 1609).

203
Richard Alexander Harmon does not list Casey's work in his article
on Robinson (MGG 11:584-85).
Unfortunately, the transcription of the tablature into modern gui-
tar notation (E tuning) rather than lute (G tuning) is questionable
today not only from a scholarly but from a musical point of view. 4
It caters to the outdated notion that the lute is an esoteric, dead in-
strument and fails to recognize or encourage the renaissance it is so
deservedly enjoying. While it is always difficult for the editor to make
decisions with regard to transcription procedures and while the results
are always easy to criticize, Dr. Casey would have done well to have
read the lengthy discussions on the subject in Le Luth et sa musique 5
and to have given more weight to the fact that recent editions of lute
music are all in the original tuning. As it is, guitarists may thank him •
for adding fine music to their literature; lutenists, while awaiting
David Lumsden's forthcoming publication of a lute transcription,6
will have to be satisfied with the tablature placed above the guitar
music (they may also read the music in the bass clef, transposed up
one octave, with a change of key signature).
Among minor points of criticism, one may wonder why Dr. Casey
chooses to change some of Robinson's spellings (e.g., "gigue" in the
original has become" jig," and" almaigne" is converted to "allemande"),
but not others (Robinson's "fantasie" is kept), or why he chooses to
omit some of the music of Robinson's "Rules to instruct you to sing"
(the music omitted is for viol and voice). This author would have liked
to see unusual positions and courses indicated in the modern notation,
a technique employed by some modern transcribers,' but this is a
matter of personal preference. Nevertheless, Casey's omission in the
transcription of fingerings given by Robinson is puzzling.
In the first volume of his thesis, the five self-instructors are intro-
duced first, together with a careful and rather lengthy explanati0n of
the tablature and the reasons for transcribing it for guitar. Then we
launch into the meat of the prose text: an extensive compendium of
the instructions, with numerous examples culled from the originals
transcribed together with the tablature. The various books' recom-
mendations on choice of instruments, their stringing, fretting, and

4Casey justifies his use of the E tuning by citing Edmund Fellowes' trans-
position of the lute songs "down in many instances" in The English School of
Lutenist Song Writers (London, 1920-1932), suggesting that the actual pitch
of most lutes was lower than concert G. Arthur Mendel, "Pitch in the 16th and
Early 17th Centuries," Musical Quarterly 24:28ff., 199ff., 336ff., 575ff., presents
contradictory evidence in these masterly essays which should certainly have
been taken into account.
sJean Jacquot, ed. (Paris, 1958). With library cataloguing systems as slow
as they are, however, it may be that Dr. Casey's access to this valuable book
was blocked even as la te as 1960.
6Announced in Le Luth et sa musique, p. 34l.
7E.g., David Lumsden, ed., English Lute Music (16th Century) (London, 1963).

204
 tuning are covered, as are Le Roy's very specific instructions on the
intabulation of vocal music. The chief matter in all the books is finger-
ing technique for both hands (it is worth noting that the tutors are all
in substantial agreement here), and each point is clearly explained. A
search for hints in the tutors as to performance practices (dynamics,
ornaments) predictably turns up very little, though Robinson is more
explicit than the others. There follows a frankly superficial survey of
the music in the lute books of Le Roy, Barley, and R. Dowland; and
. finally, there is a fairly extensive analysis of Robinson's music .
Certainly anyone wishing specific instructions on lute playing will
do well to read Casey. His survey is arranged in a logical, straightfor-
ward manner, and many of the best examples and exercises to be found
in all the books are included. It is with Volume 1, however, that one
may have the greatest quarrel, for the scholar will look in vain here for
an exact comparison of the tutors (as in a chart, for instance), for an
explanation of historical developments or influences, for any biographi-
cal information on authors or composers (even Robinson gets no bio-
graphical notice), or for any discussion of musical trends, types, or
sources for the music.
The title of the thesis is ambiguous, for it suggests that the five lute
instructors published in England were of English origin. Actually, only
one of the five, Thomas Robinson's, is of English provenance (I am
referring to the instructions, not to the music). Dr. Casey, while duly
taking note of the foreign origins of the other four, draws no con-
clusions therefrom about historical priority or musical influences up-
on England. Although he states quite properly that Nos. 1, 2, and 3 of
the instructors are all translations of Le Roy's first instruction book
(thus reducing the real number of books to three), he does not ask why
Le Roy should have been popular for so 10ng. 8 No effort whatsoever
is made to locate the source of the major instructional portion of No.5
(J.B. Besard's "Necessarie Observations Belonging to the Lute and
Lute Playing"), about which there is no mystery and which could have
been obtained quite easily.9 One would also have thought that since
extensive quotes are taken from Besard's copious instructions, an a t-
tempt might have been made to judge Dowland's accuracy in translat-
ing and in copying the examples, yet there is nothing on this point. lo

BFor complete information on Le Roy's instruction books, see Adrian Le

Roy, Premier livre de tabulature de luth (1551), eds. Andre Souris and Richard
de Morcourt (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, 1960) with
a historical introduction by Jean Jacquot and a list of concordances by Daniel
Heartz.
9Dowland's translation is from Besard's De Modo in testudine libel/us,
the instructional portion of his gigantic Thesaurus harmonicus (Cologne, 1603).
lOThe translation is indeed very close to the original and only a few minor
changes of fingering were made in the examples. Cf. Julia Sutton, "The Lute
instructions in Jean-Baptiste Besard's Novus partus (1617)," Musical Quar-
terly 51:345-62.

205
It must indeed be of some significance that the tablature imported into
England at this time was French and that the technique was interna-
tional, but nothing is said of it.n To put it briefly, no questions are
asked which move beyond the realm of the factual material in the texts
orwhich would serve to place them in historical context.
Small errors of scholarship may also be noted in this section. The
reference to p. 2 on p. 27 is to p. 22. Pavane is consistently misspelled
as "pavanne," although a number of acceptable variant spellings could
have been used. The case for the terms "crotchet," "minim," etc., in
an American thesis is also dubious; if authenticity were in order at
this point, the original instructions would be all we would need.
Setting aside the cursory summaries of the musical contents of Le
Roy, Barley, and Dowland, we turn to the discussion of Thomas Robin-
son's music. Here Casey's pedagogical point of view provides us with
a good analysis of the pieces in order of difficulty. He goes into their
technical requirements (works calling primarily for single notes, those
employing chords or high positions), and then gives us some insight
into the various forms in the collection (psalms, variations upon grounds,
dance structures such as binary or varied binary [double] types), and
a look at modality versus tonality, and key schemes. Beyond this, as
was said above, we are not taken.
The author's scholarship here is casually hit-or-miss, for though he
claims to have done no work on sources, this is not quite true. For ex-
ample, he recognizes that the variations on the hexachord are typical,
citing the six examples in the Fitzwilliam Virginal Book as proof; he
is aware that Robinson's Spanish Pavin employs the same melody
as Bull's (Fitz., Vol. 2),12 and that Robinson's Coe From My Win-
dow is to the same tune found in several settings in the same source.
A few hours' more work with the same collection would have told him
that Robinson's Twenty Waies Upon the Bels [sic] is based on ex-
actly the same two-note motive as Byrd's The Bells (Fitz., Vol. 1);
that the Passamezzo Calliard is constructed over the same bass as
the paired Passamezzo Pavana and Cagliarda Passamezzo of Byrd and
also of Peter Philips (both in Fitz., Vol. 1); and that this bass is in

l1Besard, for example, grew up in Burgundy, studied for a number of years

in Rome, and subsequently published in Cologne and Augsburg. His written
language was Latin, his tablature French. Diana Poulton, "La Technique du jeu
du luth en France et en Angleterre," Le Luth et sa musique, pp. 107-119, says,
" ... Ie succes de la "Breve et facile instruction" . . . de Le Roy [in England]
et Ie fait qu'elle demeura l'ouvrage classique sur Ie luth, en differents traduc-
tions, jusqu'au debut du xvrr e siecle, montre qu'elle devait decrire la tech-
nique communement en usage." Karl Scheit, "Ce que nous enseignent les traites
de luth des environs de 1600," Le Luth et sa musique, pp. 93-105, discusses
Robinson, Besard, and Waissel, pointing ou t more similarities than differences.
12AIl references are to the edition by J.A. Fuller Maitland and W. Barclay
Squire (Breitkopf and Hartel, 1899; reprinted by Dover Publications, N.Y.
1963).

206
fact the popular Pasamezzo antico. 13 He would also have learned that
Robinson's Robin is to the Greenwood Gone is to the same tune used
by Munday (Robin, Fitz., Vol. 1) and Farnaby (Bonny Sweet Robin,
Fitz., Vol. 2). Had he checked a little further on the Spanish Pavin,
he would have found that not only the melody bu t the bass, a variant
of the folia, is identical with Bull's and that melody and bass to-
gether were commonly known as the PavanigliaY Other concord-
ances are immediately suggested by a quick survey of the indexes of the
virginal books of the time. IS
The bibliography reflects the lacunae in the study. Even in English
there are major omissions (e.g., Bukofzer's Music in the Baroque Era
or any of the literature on virginal music), but the lack of foreign
references is almost complete (e.g., all the pertinent articles in La
Musique Instrumentale de la Renaissance,16 the entries in MGG
which had appeared prior to 1960). In short, this is an uneven piece of
work, lacking not all but many of the normal appurtenances of schol-
arship.
The chief problem is that Casey has really attempted to handle two
theses: a study of lute instruction books published in Elizabethan
England and a study and transcription of Thomas Robinson's Schoole
of Musick. As it is, both are incomplete. The practical performer can
benefit (if he is a guitarist) from the work Casey has done; the scholar
will have to await further studies.

l3Reese, Music in the Renaissance (New York, 1954), 864ff., discusses

the" passamezzo pavans" of the English school at this time.
14Reese, ibid., p. 865. See also Diana Poulton, "Notes on the Spanish Pavan,"
The Lute Society lournaI3:5-16, in which she gives a long list of concordances.
lSHans F. Redlich, "Virginal Music," Grove's Dictionary of Music and
Musicians, ed. Eric Blom, 9:4-19.
16Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (Paris, 1955).

JULIA SUTTON received her Ph.D. in musicology from the Eastman School of Music.
She is presently an instructor at Queens College.

207
Stoddard Lincoln
John Eccles: The last of a tradition

1963 unpublished diss., Oxford University.

Franklin Zimmerman

The value of the work appearing recently under this somewhat ro-
mantically subtitled caption can best be summed up by saying that it
fills a long-felt need for a study in depth of an important composer of
the post-Purcellian schoo!. Moreover, it fills the need through expert
handling of an enormous amount of detail, much of which is the result
of original research and analysis. Its total worth is such that it is cer-
tain to be an important item in the bibliographies of future scholars
of English music of the late 17th and early 18th centuries.
Placing Eccles in the as-yet-seldom-researched hiatus between the
periods of Purcell and Handel in the history of English music, Mr.
Lincoln first sorts out a few genealogical problems, then sets to work
on his main task: to discover Eccles' significance in native musical de-
velopments in London during the post-Purcellian twilight and to diag-
nose the ills which brought these developments to nothing. Reflecting
upon the aesthetic interworkings of earlier English musical and poetical
traditions, he formulates and substantiates the notion that it has
been the awkwardness of the English language when sung which has
imposed upon musician and lyric poet their most difficult problems.
For the music dramatist with classical ideals these problems have been
virtually insurmountable.
Comparing the achievements and methods of Henry Lawes to those
of Lully, Mr. Lincoln then traces the development of the rhetorical
style of the Lawes brothers, following it up to the late 1670's when
Pietro Reggio appeared in England to introduce Italianate melismas,
both structural and illustrative. (While it is true that Purcell did first
begin to use vocal melismas about this time, I wonder if it can be main-
tained that such were then new in England. The works of Coperario,
Laniere, and Walter Porter, to name only a few of the composers
figuring chiefly in Vincent Duckles' massive research into the history
of florid song in England, certainly seem to prove otherwise.) These ...
investigations lead naturally to the main theme of the thesis, that is,
the origins and development of that strange aesthetic creature, the
English dramatic opera, which found its stride only with Purcell and
his contemporaries and lost it with their passing. Its companion form,
the English play with incidental music, also comes in for full and de-
tailed investigation, so that the stage is well set for the arrival of
208
 Eccles on the scene in the spring of 1693.
The remainder of the dissertation traces his adventures in this
strange demi-world of the London theatres, leaving unturned no stone,
unanalyzed no plot, song, or masque which might yield any clue as to
the source of the difficulties under which dramatic composers and poets
labored with less and less success at each turning of the way. Eccles
and Congreve, Motteux and O'Urfey, even the actors Betterton and
Mrs. Bracegirdle at last gave way before the nemesis which had un-
done Purcell and was soon to give Handel good cause to try his giant's
strength. The dissertation ends with a study of Semele, Eccles and
Congreve's joint handiwork, which could have saved the English tra-
dition and even might have. But far be it from me to divulge the fatal
• flaw or expose the villain of the piece, thus spoiling the prospective
reader's fun in following the thorough, enormously detailed sleuthing
Mr. Lindoln has done to find his conclusions.
For originality of research, musical analysis, and historical insight,
Mr. Lincoln can hardly be faulted, for it is a superb dissertation. His
readers might have been a little more careful in criticizing matters of
prose style, and there are moments-sometimes rather long ones-when
the "thetic line" disappears in the underbrush. But the author very
clearly can see the forest as well as the trees and should be given every
encouragement to publish a somewhat emmended, but nevertheless
definitive, monograph on Eccles as soon as possible. Such a publication
would fill a real need and fill it well.

FRANKLIN ZIMMERMAN received his PhD. at U.s.c. and is presently Professor

of Music, Dartmouth College. He is the author of Henry Purcell: An Analytical
Catalogue of His Music .

...

209
Sister Mary Joachim Holtaus, O.S.B.
Beneventan Notation in the
Vatican Manuscripts

Ann Arbor: University Microfilms (UM order no.

62-6065), 1962. (230p., pos. film $3.15; University
of Southern California diss.)

Rembert C. Weakland, O. S. B. •

To anyone working in the field of Gregorian chant the need for spe-
cialized studies in the various notations is apparent. For the pioneer
chant scholars of the last century, the important manuscripts were
those in the chironomic notation and especially those written in St.
Gall notation. Their interest in the later diastematic notation was
limited, since they used these manuscripts only as a control for the
melodic readings of the earlier manuscripts. Today we are more aware
of the need to look into the precise problems of these later manuscripts,
especially during the crucial period of transition from chironomic to
diastematic notation. Sister Joachim's dissertation deals with a Bene-
ventan manuscript from precisely that delicate period.
Beneventan notation was from its inception somewhat diastematic
in character but like the Beneventan script was a unique, localized
style. The first study of the musical sources of the notation was made
by H.M. Bannister in his monumental study, Monumenti vaticani di
paleografia musicale latina, 2 vol., Leipzig, 1913. A more exhaustive
study appeared in Volume 15 of the Pa/eographie musicale under the
title "Etude sur la notation beneventaine," pp. 7l-16l. Since the date
of publication of that Volume in 1935, little has been added to our
knowledge.
In the first two of the six chapters of her dissertation, Sister Joachim
traces the history of Beneventan script, relying in large measure on
E.A. Loew's now famous study, The Beneventan Script, Oxford, 1914.
Chapters 3 and 4 ("Evolution of Beneventan Notation: A Study" and
"Manuscripts with Beneventan notation found in the Vatican Li-
brary," respectively) are for the most part a resume of the two works •
on notation cited above. She has listed here, however, not only the
Vatican library number for each manuscript but the film number of
the St. Louis microfilm collection of the Vatican manuscripts. In the
fourth chapter she examines 46 of 51 Vatican manuscripts with Bene-
ventan notation and makes special reference to 26 manuscripts from
which facsimiles are reproduced in an appendix. These reproductions
210
 are, unfortunately, not too clear. The excessive quotes from the two
secondary sources cited earlier are perhaps the chief weakness in the
study. It has caused the author to slip into some strange citations:
Lucques for Lucca (p. 4), Lipsia for Leipzig (p. 21), Bibliotheque Na-
tionale de Florence (p. 31, footnote 34), and so on.
Chapter 5 is devoted to an examination of 18 plates from the
manuscript Vat. lat. 6082, a missale plenum from the 12th century.
An index to this Gradual is found in Appendix A and the plates in
Appendix B. The study is not a comprehensive analysis of each of
the neumes and the various forms each neume takes in the manuscript
bu t a select reference to some of the melodic differences between the
Beneventan version on the plate and the Vatican Gradual. Occasional
neumes of interest are pointed out. No attempt was made to compare
this manuscript with the two Beneventan Graduals already published
and indexed in Volumes 14 and 15 of the Pa/eographie musicale. Such
a comparison, both with regard to contents and musical notation,
would have added much to the dissertation.
Many of the plates in the Appendix are of interest in that they also
contain examples of those manuscripts written in central Italy with
non-Beneventan text but with a musical notation borrowed from the
Beneventan. The importance of these manuscripts indicates a fertile
area for subsequent studies.

REMBERT G. WEAKLAND, O.S.B. is coadjutor archabbot of St. Vincent Archabbey

and chancellor of St. Vincent College.

[manuel Willheim
Johann Adolph Scheibe: German
musical thought in transition

Ann Arbor: University Microfilms (UM order no.

63-5159), 1963. (299p., pas. film $4.10; University
of Illinois diss.)

Konrad Wolff
•
When composers double as writers, or vice versa, they usually create
complications for posterity. Johann Friedrich Reichardt, for instance,
is known to students of music history as one of the founders of the
German lied and to students of literary history as the principal target

211
of Goethe and Schiller's satirical Xenien. Very rarely do the readers
or even the authors of the one kind of history know about Reichardt's
figuring in the other. It is therefore fortunate that the author of this
dissertation on Scheibe (1708-1778), in addition to his musicological
background, is schooled in German literature and in aesthetics. Scheibe
was a respectable composer and a leading musical journalist. He also
contributed much to the philosophy of the arts in general, both in
Germany (where he grew up) and in Denmark (where he lived during
the last thirty-eight years of his life). His best-known work, Der Cri-
tische Musicus, was originally conceived as a parallel to Johann
Christoph Gottsched's Versuch einer critischen Dichtkunst of 1730.
Gottsched, who was the most respected German author of the time
and the leading authority on literature, had been Scheibe's teacher in
..
Leipzig. His book was based on the so-called "rationalist" principles
of 17th-century French drama. This was what Scheibe tried to trans-
late into musical criticism, but with time, as Willheim demonstrates,
he became increasingly less dependent on Gottsched's system.
To the music student of our time, Scheibe is mainly known for his
"most unfortunate" (p. 240) controversy over the music of J.5. Bach.
Scheibe accused him of an "overloaded (schwulstig) and confused
style"l as well as an "excess of art." He also objected to Bach's cus-
tom of writing out embellishments in actual notes, which, Scheibe said,
made the melody unintelligible besides depriving it of harmonic beauty.
He concluded by judging that with all due respect for Bach's tremen-
dous care and effort, his compositions were contrary both to Nature
and to Reason.
Scheibe's attack created a sensation. While Bach himself did not
reply, one of his admirers, J. Abraham Birnbaum, Leipzig professor
of rhetoric, wrote a forceful defense. Further emphasis was given the
battle by two famous musical authors, Mattheson and Mizler,2 who
opened their journals to Scheibe and Birnbaum, respectively, for the
continuation of the fencing match.
The most unfortunate part of the quarrel was that Scheibe was pre-
vented by the publicity of the affair from admitting that he had done
Bach an injustice; however, in 1739 he did pay full tribute to the
Italian Concerto.
It is hard to conceive how a good musician such as Scheibe could
ever have been deaf to the values of Bach's music, considering that

IHis speaking of Bach as the "Lohenstein of music" shows Scheibe's de-

pendence on Gottsched who used to say the same thing of all contemporary
writers he disliked. Lohenstein was a "schwulstig" writer of the 17th •
century. Cf. Scherer-Walzel, Geschichte der deutschen Literatur, (3d ed., Ber-
lin, 1921), p. 309.
2Although he devotes a whole chapter to Mizler (69ff.), Willheim does not
mention the significant fact that Gottsched contributed articles on music(!) to
Mizler's journal. This may have been one of the reasons for Scheibe's dislike of
Mizler and for his gradual estrangement from Gottsched.

212
 during Scheibe's student years in Leipzig he had heard the master him-
self play. Willheim investigates the personal relations between Bach
and Scheibe thoroughly and arrives at the convincing conclusion that
there was no personal feud (as some Bach biographers believe). Never-
theless, it is quite possible that the young man, not being of a most
generous disposition (a defect he shared with all the writers of his
time), either consciously or unconsciously tried to get even with the
one member of the older generation with whom he could never hope to
compete.
Willheim is objective enough to sympathize with Scheibe's criticism
that Bach wrote too unvocally. Even if true, to blame Bach on this
account is as narrowminded a reproach as the opposite one by Niigeli
• who some eighty years later blamed Mozart for writing too vocally.
To understand the problem one must remember that instrumental
music, to which this criticism principally relates, was just then com-
ing into its own. The great Lessing explained in 1767 3 that an instru-
mental composer must be much more than a composer of vocal music
and must always be prepared to give his best, since no text can come
to his aid and fill the gaps in the expressive quality of the music.
Willheim regards Scheibe's initial aesthetic approach as deriving
from Gottsched, that is, as essentially French. In a slightly oversimpli-
fied outline (20ff.) he describes the French style in music as vocal and
expressive, centering on adagio pieces, in contrast to the Italian style
of sensuous and lyric instrumental music in which the accent is on the
allegro type. French music is characterized as rationalist-with refer-
ence to Cartesianism rather than the Enlightenment (p. 51)-and
I talian music, as unphilosophical. Then Willheim shows that Scheibe
gradually added the new idea of the century, Nature, to Gottsched's
standards of French classical drama. 4 To Scheibe, the element of
Nature in music was Melody (p. 100), whereas Harmony represented
the Art of illuminating the melody and nothing more; when he blames
Bach for showing" too much art," he is referring to the fact that in
Bach's music the harmony follows its own laws.
Later, in the chapter on rhetoric (p. 157), Willheim incidentally
refers to Bach's occasional habit of expressing a variety of emotions
throughout a cantata text by presenting the same melody in various
figurations. However, this was just one of Bach's numerous ways of
uniting the different parts of the same composition. Quite as frequent-
ly, he proceeds by harmonic means. The Second Partita is marked by
the cyclic use of the dominant ninth chord and the Goldberg Variations,
by the identity of the harmonic progressions and the harmonic rhythm
without any help from melodic motifs.5

3Cf. the review of Voltaire's Semiramis in Lessings Werke, Georg Wit-

towski, ed. Hamburgische Dramaturgie 5:12-17, (Leipzig, 1911).
4Cf. Pope (1711): "First follow Nature . . . at once the source, and end,
and test of Art."
'Certain authors have seen a melodic motif in the bass line. This is not so;
the aria is homophonic, and the bass is just a bass.

213
 For this, Schiebe had no ear, though he was not insensitive to har-
mony as a means of expression. Willheim prints in the Appendix a
recitative from Scheibe's cantata, Ariadne, which shows an amazing
pre-romantic use of tritone progressions and dissonances. 6 The ap-
preciation of harmonic logic as a thing of beauty (as for instance in the
works of Corelli and Vivaldi) was beyond his comprehension; here, ex-
pected harmonic progressions are judiciously mixed with mild surprises,
and the result resembles one of Horace's or Cicero's well-shaped sen-
tences. Bach added individual expression to this system by using
dissonances and alterations whenever required, but he did not abandon
the grammar of directed harmony for the sake of expressiveness as did
Scheibe in his recitative.
Willheim neglects this aspect, and we should have liked more help
from him from a strictly musical viewpoint. He does give us an in-
teresting expose of how Scheibe, by underlining melodic inspiration as
a primary source of composing, in fact transcended the Affektenlehre.
This is followed by a discussion of rhetorical figures, ways of writing
(Schreibarten), national styles and types of music.
Willheim's report on Scheibe's doctrine of rhetoric is, on the whole,
one of the best parts of the dissertation. Differently from Mattheson/
Scheibe speaks of rhetoric only for the present a tion of single phrases
and not for the organization of a composition as a whole. In addition to
strictly rhetorical figures, he also mentions three musical ones: tran-
situs, syncopatio, and ligatura.
Scheibe's distinction between three different styles (Schreibarten)
contains a few original points. He recognizes (129ff.), first of all, the
elevated style (splendorous music appropriate for festive occasions or
grand subjects), then the intermediate style (meaningful, pleasant,
and flowing, but also intelligent}8 and finally the low style which has
its rightful place in the pastoral Schaferspiel (of which later Goethe
produced several examples). Willheim then deals with the tradi-
tional genres (Gattungen) of music as described by Scheibe, whom he
justly blames for neglecting the chamber style. In the account of na-
tional styles, Willheim, without much support in Scheibe's writings,

6It always seems to me that German music was fully ready for Romanti-
cism by 1750, when the eruption of Classicism halted this evolution for a great
number of years. Figures like c.P.E. Bach and Scheibe, who combined artistic
and literary productions, resemble Berlioz and Schumann in this respect, and
are in contrast to Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and Schubert.
.
7Cf. Hans Lenneberg's translation of much of Der vollkommene Cape 11-
meister (not quoted by Willheim) in Journal of Music Theory 2:47-84, 193-
236 (1958).
8"exceedingly clear, lively, fluent, and yet perspicacious," in Willheim's ren-
dering.

214
 classifies the Polonaise or Polacca 9 as part of Polish music. By 1720 this
dance had, in fact, become as international as the minuet. In this chap-
ter, I missed a reference to Georg Muffat's epoch-making Florilegium
of 1696-97.
The most progressive part of Scheibe's theories, and the climax of
Willheim's dissertation, occurs in the section dealing with operatic reci-
tatives. In this field Scheibe was several steps ahead of everybody else.
It is entirely possible that Gluck-who may have met Scheibe in Co-
penhagen in 1747 (p. 203)-was influenced by Scheibe's concepts. (It
would be a worthwhile task to compare Scheibe and Gluck's operatic
ideas in detail.) The highest possible compliment was paid to Scheibe's
views in 1767 when Lessing quoted them extensively in his review of
• Voltaire's Semiramis (p. 208) .
Willheim's book is solid and informative as far as it goes. There are
some editorial flaws in it, from typographical errors and unintended
repetitions (one sentence appears twice, on pages 199 and 200) to mis-
translations. Most of the essential passages from Scheibe's writings
are fully quoted in German and then translated. Willheim translates
"sie [die Natur] zu erhalten, ja so gar in bessern Stand zu setzen" by
"to support it, to improve it," whereas it really means "to preserve
it, and even repair it." (p. 101). On p. 95 he quotes Scheibe's assertion
that symphonies must be judged by the fire of their invention and that
it may happen that a composer, by force of trying to match the differ-
ent parts skillfully, deprives himself of his spontaneous spark. "Man
intersuche also nur, . . . ob alle Satze gehorig mit einander iiberein-
stimmen, und ob dahero den Komponisten vielleicht das Feuer verlassen
ha t." This means: "All that is necessary is to find out . . . whether the
different movements hang together properly, and whether, for this
reason (my italics), the fire has perhaps deserted the composer." "Da-
hero" can not mean anything else but an emphatic "for this reason."
It is not correctly rendered in Willheim's translation: "One must ob-
serve . . . whether all movements are properly in agreement with one
another, and whether the composer, perchance, has lost his fire in sub-
sequent movements." There is no justification at all for adding the
last three words, since the fire can have deserted the composer right
in the beginning by force of his trying to make all movements "hang
together properly." "Bewegungen," used by Scheibe as a technical term
in two continuous sentences, is translated once by "movements" and
once by "emotions" (p. 96). To use "motions" or "moving forces" both
• times would have preserved the thought expressed in the original Ger-
man.
Shortcomings in the organization of the book disturb the reader.
While respecting Willheim's reason for relegating the Bach contro-
versy to the very end, I still think that it should have come at least

9Willheim (p. 148) speaks of the Polacca in the First Brandenburg Con-
certo, but Bach's name for the section in question was Poloinesse. Willheim
does not mention the more typical Polonaise from Bach's Sixth French Suite.

215
before the discussion of opera (after Chapter VII), and perhaps even
earlier. When I reached p. 100 ("When Scheibe attacked Bach for fail-
ing to keep music natural, or for an excess of art, Bach's friend and
protagonist Magister Abraham Birnbaum rushed to his defense"), I
felt that I had to turn at once to the concluding chapter and read
that whole story first.
I t is also confusing to the reader that W illheim is frequently at odds
with chronology. In the Introduction, he immediately starts out with
Kant, goes back to Thomasius, follows this by discussing first Gott-
sched and his generation, then Lessing (in the 1760's), and then speaks
of the Scheibe of 1730. There are similarly confusing presentations to
be found throughout the dissertation, for instance, in the (otherwise
excellent) brief history of rhetoric during which Aristotle, Opitz •
(1624), Quintilian, and Burmeister (1606) are mentioned in this order.
My knowledge of the literature is not extensive enough to enable
me to give a list of works which Willheim ought to have consulted, but
it is certainly a serious matter that he did not incorporate in his re-
search the excellent and thorough study of Scheibe by Max Graf in
Composer and Critic, (W.W. Norton, 1947), pp. 77-85. Since Will-
heim's dissertation was written, a new and important study of Johann
Friedrich Reichardt by Werner Salmen (Atlantis Verlag, 1963) merits
investigation, for the two musician-journalists had much in common,
including the curious habit of contributing to their own journals pseu-
donymous letters on controversial subjects.
On general aesthetics Willheim's sources are largely second- or even
third-hand. I particularly object to the extensive use he makes of
Windelband's philosophy textbook of 1891 which, despite the many
editions it subsequently received, has always largely remained a collec-
tion of the philosophical blind spots of German academic intelligentsia
in .Wilhelmine times. Willheim is not personally close enough to the
great men of whom he speaks. He pairs Lessing and Winckelmann
(p. 16) and Moses Mendelssohn and Reichardt (p. 88) as though they
were friends and/or equals. Preferring modern textbooks to contem-
porary sources, he writes with a regrettable lack of color. In describing
the Swiss aestheticians of the middle of the century, for instance, he
relies almost exclusively on Cassirer (p. 15). How much inner truth,
lucidity, and fire could have been gathered for this chapter from
Goethe's detailed expose of their theories, as well as of their personali-
ties, in the seventh book of Dichtung und Wahrheit! And how refresh-
ingly does Goethe describe his visit with old Gottsched in Leipzig!
This leads me to the most serious defect of the dissertation: Scheibe
does not come alive in it. We do not learn what he looked like or what
his personal habits were. We are not informed that he was married
for the last thirty-nine years of his life. We learn about his character
only incidentally; yet his character plays a big role in explaining some
of his actions, just as in the case of Reichardt. Willheim, for instance,
uncritically swallows Scheibe's account of how he founded Der Critische
Musicus together with Telemann who figured as a silent partner of
sorts. But this account, for which there is no supporting evidence

216
whatever, was only written after Telemann's death! Can we trust
Scheibe? Ruhnke (Hans Albrecht in Memoriam, Barenreiter, 1962)
doubts it seriously. Or take the fact that Scheibe, at the end of his life,
enrolled as a Freemason, a fact which Willheim does not even mention.
His collection of melodies to Freemason songs (1776) became very
popular (the title page is reproduced in MGG 4:893). Was he sincere,
or was it just another cultural fashion he thought he had to adopt? In
any case, we ought to know more about Scheibe's religious beliefs. In
his youth Leipzig was a battleground between the pietists and the
antipietists (to which Bach belonged); this would presumably also
throw additional light on some of Scheibe's aesthetic and ethical utter-
ances.!O
More than anything, we should like to know Scheibe better as a com-
poser. Willheim discusses the recitative given in the Appendix with
thoroughness and sensitivity, but there is much more to know about
this man whose oeuvre C.F .0. Schubart said contained "quite a few
works having a claim to immortality. Few composers knew how to
write recitatives in so masterly a fashion; his arias too are full of lovely
passages, and his choruses full-sounding and strong."
According to the article on Scheibe in MGG (by Caroline Bergner
and Hans Gunter Hoke), three flute sonatas, other cantatas, and "songs
for piano"(?) by Scheibe are in existence. If and when Willheim's dis-
sertation is published-and I hope it will be-every interested reader
will be grateful if the author were to include the maximum of avail-
able information on these works as well as an analysis of their charac-
ter, style, and form. The artistic creations by theorists and critics, apart
from their potential intrinsic value, constitute a most important test of
the theories and criticisms voiced by their authors. To quote Pope once
more: "Let such teach others who themselves excel."

lOThe religious element is also neglected in Willheim's resume of French

aesthetics. Malebranche's objections to art expressing passions, for instance,
belong to the most important ideas of the time; yet Willheim fails to include
them.

KONRAD WOLFF, German born, holds an M.A. in musicology from Columbia. He

is on the advanced piano faculty at Peabody Conservatory.

217